Real Coffee with Scott Adams - June 02, 2022


Episode 1762 Scott Adams： Let's Talk About Funny Things In The Headlines And Enjoy A Beverage


Summary


Transcript

00:00:00.520 Bum bum bum. Good morning everybody and welcome to the Highlight of Civilization
00:00:07.820 Minus One. Today I might be a little off my game but it's only because the news is
00:00:17.540 serving up repeats. Does it seem to you that the news is sort of like yesterday's
00:00:23.060 news or just more of it? Well we'll talk about that. But will that stop us from
00:00:29.360 boosting your dopamine? No. Or how about your oxytocin? No. That's going to get a
00:00:35.960 little boost too. And all you need to take it to the next level is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker
00:00:43.320 gels or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask. A vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite beverage.
00:00:51.220 I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure. It's the dopamine hit of the day. You can feel it. Can you feel the tingle? Here it comes. Here it comes. It's a simultaneous sip. Go.
00:01:08.660 Ah. Yeah. Yeah. Well I guess the big news that we haven't talked about in this format yet
00:01:28.840 is the Amber Heard Johnny Depp verdict. You all know that the verdict went Johnny Depp's way
00:01:36.220 mostly. So it turns out that people who were not Amber Heard said bad things about
00:01:43.460 Johnny Depp so he gets some money for that while somebody who was not Johnny Depp said
00:01:49.560 some bad stuff about Amber Heard and so she'll get some money for that but less. And then we've
00:01:56.940 also determined that she's a narcissist and he might be a different kind of narcissist. And
00:02:03.760 then we got all confused about that and decided, well, maybe it's just about these two people.
00:02:11.200 I personally don't think this is going to have a gigantic impact on the Me Too movement.
00:02:18.600 I could be wrong. But I think it's just going to be, it's going to look like a one-off case.
00:02:24.400 However, it does give language to the amber turds of the world. So knowing that as we do that she's
00:02:35.580 not alone, she's not the only one who has her personality diagnosis, isn't it nice that when
00:02:42.980 you're trying to inform somebody for the first time that somebody has this, let's say a constellation
00:02:49.940 of symptoms, you could say, oh, you know, it's like Amber Heard. She was diagnosed with a set of
00:02:56.820 symptoms. And so if you remember what she was like, that's what this is. Somebody who lies and
00:03:03.680 you know, makes it all about herself and gaslights and all that. And then people will kind of
00:03:08.820 understand. Because until you put a name to something, people don't really store it. They don't really
00:03:15.540 store concepts, but they'll store Amber Heard. And every time you refer to her now, you're like, okay.
00:03:22.000 But here's where it got confusing. Because I guess both the defense and the prosecution,
00:03:27.200 if you can call it that, in a civil suit, they both said that the other was a narcissist
00:03:35.540 narcissist at one point. But there's two types. The Johnny Depp narcissist probably just likes attention,
00:03:44.260 as a lot of people do. That's sort of the benign kind. And then the other kind is the dangerous
00:03:54.360 kind, the Amber Heard kind. Allegedly, if her psychiatrist, if the one who testified is cracked,
00:04:03.040 and she's in that personality constellation, then she's a type you need to run away from.
00:04:14.000 So, here are some things we learned. Number one, I would expect that they're saying that Amber
00:04:22.360 doesn't have the money to pay the judgment. But I think that only depends until she does her next
00:04:30.440 movie. And she's already slated for one. You know, she was in Aquaman, right? The Aquaman movie.
00:04:37.880 But now she's, I think she's going to be in another one. It's called, let's look at it,
00:04:43.800 Aquiturd and the Jury Pool. I think it's called Aquiturd and the Jury Pool. Okay, that's one we
00:04:52.440 worked on on the locals platform last night. YouTube, if you like it. It wasn't my original joke.
00:04:59.580 All right. And Johnny Depp said he was humbled by the decision. And Amber Heard said she was
00:05:13.680 disappointed with what this verdict means for other women. And I was thinking to myself,
00:05:18.600 what does this verdict mean for other women? Because that's sort of subjective, isn't it?
00:05:24.860 I feel like what we learned from this is you can't lie and abuse a man and get away with
00:05:31.580 it every single time. At least sometimes. It might be rare. But every now and then, somebody's
00:05:39.900 going to throw away his whole life just to make a point. And I'm glad that Johnny Depp set that
00:05:48.560 standard. So maybe what it disappointed what this verdict means for other women. So certainly there
00:05:59.580 will be cases where women are not taken seriously. And then that would be tragic. But you know there's
00:06:08.020 going to be the other kind, too, where somebody should not have been taken seriously. But they were. But
00:06:13.940 maybe now they won't be. Because somebody will say, hey, are you Amber Hearding me? Because I've seen
00:06:19.640 this before. So it's going to go both ways.
00:06:23.000 So the thing that I love about this is that the so-called defamation was not even written
00:06:38.020 by Amber Heard. There's a report that the ACLU wrote the opinion piece, right? So assuming that's
00:06:50.200 true, that the ACLU wrote the opinion piece. So she got sued and dragged for something that
00:06:58.200 the ACLU wrote that was false. Now, she had to approve it, of course, I imagine. I assume.
00:07:06.840 So she's still guilty. But it's weird that they were the ones who wrote it. And then Johnny
00:07:14.160 Depp's problem was that his own lawyer called Heard's accusations about domestic abuse a hoax.
00:07:27.760 So Johnny Depp actually lost $2 million because his lawyer called what she had accused him of
00:07:34.320 as a hoax. Now, I'm guessing that means that some of the factual stuff must have stood.
00:07:40.400 Because otherwise, the hoax thing would be closer to true.
00:07:47.520 Now, here's the question. Is hoax a word that you would have seen before 2016?
00:07:56.880 I feel like that word has just permeated everything, hasn't it?
00:08:02.560 Doesn't that seem like a coincidence?
00:08:03.920 I don't know if hoax is a word that you see in this sort of illegal proceeding.
00:08:13.120 Well, let's talk about Elon Musk, because everything's related to him. So I guess he told his Tesla
00:08:18.400 employees that they've got to come into the office 40 hours a week. He said, anyone who wishes to do
00:08:26.240 remote work must be in the office for a minimum, and I mean minimum, of 40 hours per week or depart Tesla.
00:08:36.320 And he says, it's less than we ask of the factory workers, blah, blah, blah.
00:08:40.640 And so he's real specific. Like, it's got to be your actual office with the people you work in.
00:08:46.400 It can't be a satellite office.
00:08:52.320 Now, somebody says, why?
00:08:55.520 Here's the problem. If you were to ask employees, you know, what's your best situation? What makes you most productive?
00:09:04.160 They would probably all say, or most of them would say, working at home, or at least not being in the office.
00:09:11.120 That's what they'd say. But you do lose all that casual contact and other stuff. And I kind of agree with Musk.
00:09:20.080 I don't think you can get anything great done with remote work. I think remote work is good for
00:09:27.200 steady state stuff. Maybe do the things that you know how to do. I think it's way less good for
00:09:35.120 getting something changed or improved or radical improvement or cannibalizing what you have to
00:09:42.320 brainstorm up something new. Yeah, iterating, all the iterating. Everything's just slower and
00:09:50.640 less risky, I guess. And then you don't create any human bonds. It doesn't bond to the company as much,
00:09:59.040 yet the energy is different. So I guess I'm going to agree with him. So I hate it from the perspective of the
00:10:07.840 employees. What makes them comfortable is probably working at home. But what makes the company they work for
00:10:14.560 successful, so they can have good retirement accounts or whatever it is they give them,
00:10:19.280 probably going to work. So I love watching CNN try to explain Biden's record. They've kind of given up.
00:10:34.400 Have you noticed that? Like even CNN has just completely given up on Biden because it would
00:10:41.440 be embarrassing to try to support him. But they do still wave their hands at his accomplishments.
00:10:47.760 So here are three things named in the CNN opinion piece today as his accomplishments. It doesn't even
00:10:56.560 matter who said it because these are like the standard things. So one accomplishment is that
00:11:03.120 employment levels are good. Employment levels are good. What do you think? Is that a good Biden
00:11:11.520 accomplishment? Well, shouldn't you have to compare that to what it would be if he were not on the job?
00:11:19.840 And I ask you this, what exactly was it that Biden did that affected employment levels?
00:11:28.640 Can you give me an example of what Biden did that affected employment levels?
00:11:33.840 Because I know he did all of the checks that people got during the pandemic, but that hurt
00:11:43.520 employment, didn't it? Because people were getting free money, so they didn't want jobs.
00:11:49.120 So I know what he did that reduced the number of people working. He gave them free money. And I'm not
00:11:56.000 saying he shouldn't have. I'm not anti that. We know he shut down some energy stuff. So that should have
00:12:05.600 worked the other direction. Inflation. I don't know. Gas prices. I'm trying to think of anything he did
00:12:16.400 that wasn't anti-worker. Raise taxes. I don't know. Tried to.
00:12:25.680 So I guess, oh, here's one. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. So presumably that would have
00:12:31.120 been good for employment, but I don't know how much of that is actually happening yet. Anything?
00:12:37.600 And so the first one, employment levels, I think would have been about the same no matter who was president.
00:12:44.160 Am I right? Don't you think Trump would have had pretty good employment levels? I mean, maybe a
00:12:51.920 little better, but they'd be in the same range. So one of Biden's successes was just going to happen
00:12:58.480 no matter who was president. The other one is the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. You know,
00:13:04.720 there's nothing that the public cares less about than a Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. Do you
00:13:10.720 know what the public thinks about that? That it's a gigantic example of corruption and incompetence?
00:13:18.720 And that even yet, they think pork. As soon as you say it, they think pork. So if one of your
00:13:24.720 accomplishments is to get something done that sounds to the public like something that shouldn't have
00:13:30.160 been done, even though it should have been done, but it sounds like something that shouldn't have been
00:13:35.840 done. Some big old pork spending thing. Now let me ask you in the comments, how many of you have
00:13:42.400 benefited so far in a way that you can see some building or some infrastructure from the Bipartisan
00:13:49.920 Infrastructure Bill? So as of today, how many of you can see the impact of it? Anybody?
00:13:57.760 Is there any like construction near you that you can say, well, there's that infrastructure bill?
00:14:05.760 Now, I think probably there's a great deal of spending and activity going on,
00:14:11.360 but I don't know of any. So if you can't think of any, any way that it affects you,
00:14:18.160 I can't imagine you'd vote based on it. So he's got the employment levels that were just going to be
00:14:23.920 what they were going to be. The infrastructure bill that doesn't seem to affect anybody
00:14:30.000 for reasons that are hard to understand. It's a big deal. My guess is that it is actually affecting
00:14:37.360 lots of us. But since the nature of it is it's all distributed into little projects, you just don't
00:14:43.520 know. You just see that your roads are getting fixed. Or you see that there's something getting
00:14:48.880 built over there. But you don't really know. And then he gets credit for leading the Western
00:14:56.960 alliance against Russia. To which I say, should he have done that? Can you take credit for leading
00:15:06.480 the Western alliance against Russia? He lost that war. I mean, they're losing the war, right?
00:15:13.840 Didn't Russia get what it what it primarily said it wanted? And it looks like they'll probably be
00:15:19.920 able to hold it. So those are his three things that are touted as his successes. And then the things
00:15:29.760 that he says he's the Biden says he's somewhat helpless about are inflation, baby formula stuff,
00:15:35.520 gas prices, the stuff you really, really notice. Oh, you notice baby formula. I'm not even trying to feed
00:15:44.720 a baby. So personally, the baby formula thing didn't hit me in my cupboard. But even hearing about it
00:15:54.960 is traumatic. Did anybody have this experience? I've not even been involved around a baby baby,
00:16:03.280 even as a stepdad. I've not been around a baby who was needing formula, because I came in later.
00:16:09.920 So I've never even been in that situation. And when I hear babies not getting food,
00:16:18.320 like it sets off every alarm in my brain, like my brain is on fire, like must fix that problem right
00:16:25.360 away. You know, because we've evolved to make that problem number one, feed a baby. Like it's about
00:16:34.080 the most basic thing that we were designed to do by evolution or whatever. And so when that's not
00:16:40.720 getting done, that's not like not noticing the bipartisan infrastructure bill. That's like
00:16:48.000 catches your body on fire. And gas prices are doing the same thing and inflation is doing the same thing.
00:16:54.560 So I decided to look at inflation in other countries to see, all right, are other countries
00:17:02.400 having a big inflation problem? And the answer is yes. It looks like inflation is in fact a global
00:17:09.040 problem. There's still a big difference in inflation. There are some are way worse than others.
00:17:15.280 But the United States doesn't seem to be like an outlier. But here's the question. Would all of those
00:17:25.520 other countries be having inflation if the United States were not? Aren't we sort of connected to
00:17:33.680 everything? I get that we're all having the supply chain problem. So that part is not the United States.
00:17:39.920 But yeah, it just feels like the United States, you know, sneezes and everybody gets a cold sort of
00:17:50.480 thing. I feel like maybe we're causing inflation just because we're such a big drag on the economy
00:17:56.640 that whatever we're doing makes everybody else have a have a reaction. But here are the things we can
00:18:04.720 conclude. Number one, there's definitely inflation everywhere. And it doesn't seem to be really
00:18:15.200 clear what the pattern is. Except that, you know, some obvious things are making inflation. So here,
00:18:22.720 if you Google, why is US inflation so high? This will make you crazy. I actually do this. Just Google,
00:18:32.320 why is US inflation so high? What do you think it'll say? Do you think it'll say because the government,
00:18:38.720 you know, you know, printed too much money? Here's what it says. It says, this is Google's answer.
00:18:46.960 Experts say there are three main factors currently fueling much of the price growth,
00:18:52.160 sharply raising labor costs, energy prices, and interest rates. And it says each one pushes the
00:19:01.520 cost of everyday consumer goods higher, blah, blah, blah. Now, wait a minute.
00:19:05.920 That wasn't an answer. Let me say it again. Just listen for this. It sounds like it's an answer,
00:19:15.760 but it's not even an answer. Yeah. Why is there inflation? Because there's sharply rising labor
00:19:22.480 costs. No, sharply raising labor costs are inflation and energy costs and interest rates, all that. So
00:19:31.280 basically, they just defined what inflation is. They didn't give you any reason. So the question
00:19:39.440 was, why is there inflation? And they completely avoid the question of why. Now, they could have said
00:19:46.000 experts disagree on the reason, if that's true. But if you were trying to learn why there's inflation in
00:19:55.440 the United States and you Googled it, you would get Google's official answer that is absolutely just
00:20:03.280 misdirection. Am I right? Now, I don't think that the answer is always as political as we make it. It's
00:20:11.280 not always Trump's fault. It's not always Biden's fault, right? You know, we leap to those models. But
00:20:17.760 it's definitely not telling you anything that, what is it that causes prices to be higher? Well,
00:20:23.680 it's the higher prices. So if you hadn't Googled that, there it is. The thing that causes prices
00:20:31.440 to be higher is the higher prices. And also, if you're not following along closely, the higher prices
00:20:38.800 will cause the inflation. But also, the inflation will cause the higher prices. I don't know how we'll
00:20:43.680 ever stop. That's some helpful stuff right there. Well, no one's to blame if it's just, hey, prices
00:20:53.120 went up. What can you do? Speaking of prices, so the EU and the UK, I guess they've passed some
00:21:02.160 kind of laws or rules or something that's going to block insurance companies from insuring Russian oil
00:21:08.240 shipments. Remember, I always tell you, if you want to predict where things are going,
00:21:15.280 just look at the insurance companies. Because they're the ones who have to get it right.
00:21:20.000 They have to predict risk. So the insurance companies have decided that shipping Russian oil,
00:21:26.240 well, at least the government has decided that the insurance companies will decide this,
00:21:30.000 is too risky. Or it's too sanctioned. So I don't know if this means that, you know, Lloyd's of London
00:21:39.520 will be out of the game. But does that mean that some sketchy North Korean insurance company won't fill
00:21:47.360 in the blanks? And would that insurance even be accepted? I don't know. So I would keep an eye on this
00:21:57.040 space. Because insurance could just be, you know, the most predictive thing like it usually is.
00:22:05.520 Because things you can't insure just don't happen. Or they're not going to happen at the same rate or
00:22:10.480 pace or, you know, it's not going to be a growing thing anymore if you can't insure it. So
00:22:18.160 this could be like a major turning point in Russia's fortunes. And if it is, and I think that would still
00:22:26.240 be a stretch. But if it is a turning point, it'll be yet another example where if you were watching
00:22:32.400 the insurance industry, it gave you a warning ahead of time.
00:22:40.160 Yes, these are Scott and Opics.
00:22:45.200 All right.
00:22:45.520 What is a woman? Is that, is the documentary out? The documentary What is a Woman? You know,
00:23:00.240 the thing about that kind of content, the whole trans, what is a woman and everything,
00:23:06.400 is that that stuff, yeah, it's Matt Welsh's thing. I'm sure I'll watch that. Because I think the
00:23:11.840 entertainment factor will be high. But we're not learning anything from this kind of discussion,
00:23:18.880 are we? I mean, it's just, it's just something to get our blood flowing and get us clicking.
00:23:28.720 So I don't think it changes anything. But I'm sure it'll be interesting.
00:23:33.200 One of the things I like is when he puts ordinary people on the spot,
00:23:36.000 Matt Walsh and gets them to, or Walsh, and gets them to explain their opinions. That's always good.
00:23:45.040 All right.
00:23:47.920 So now this Sussman story is being framed as a big nothing by the Democrats.
00:23:54.560 So because the attorney who was working for Clinton got off,
00:23:58.960 so because he's not, you know, going to have any legal consequence, they're ignoring the bigger part
00:24:06.480 of the story, which is that in the process of this trial, we learned that Hillary Clinton was,
00:24:12.400 in fact, behind this, this major Russia collusion hoax. And somehow that part of the story
00:24:21.120 can be just disappeared, because they could make you look at the other part of the story and say,
00:24:27.120 well, there was nothing criminal. No crimes happened. See you, sucker. But we don't even know if no crimes
00:24:34.000 happened. We just know that a jury in Washington, D.C. decided not to convict. That's all we know,
00:24:41.360 which is very different from knowing no crimes happened. Yeah. So watching this thing get disappeared
00:24:48.640 is pretty shocking. All right. Now, am I wrong to say that the news is not serving up anything new?
00:25:00.080 Because it's a slow week, right? So what does 2024 look like to you, everybody? Who do you think is
00:25:09.600 going to be running in 2024? Give me your matchup. So after the primaries are done, and they're down to
00:25:17.040 the final two? A lot of people saying DeSantis over on the locals platform. Over on YouTube, what say you?
00:25:27.040 Give us your predictions. All right. You think it'll be Trump and Buttigieg?
00:25:37.040 All right. People are not so sure over there. A lot of people saying DeSantis.
00:25:42.400 But that depends entirely on whether Trump runs.
00:25:47.840 Trump-Adams? Not likely. All right. Newsom. Gavin Newsom? Maybe. Especially if he loses for governor.
00:25:56.480 You know, losing the governorship of California would be one thing that would put him in the running for president.
00:26:06.480 Yeah, I could see it being Gavin Newsom and Trump. Oh, that would be interesting. Oh, imagine that.
00:26:20.000 Because of the family connections. You've got Don Jr. with Kimberly Guilfoyle. Had been married to Newsom.
00:26:33.040 That would be an ugly, ugly situation. Now remember what Elon Musk said, and I've said this too,
00:26:41.360 that reality tends to bend toward the most interesting, the most entertaining outcome from the observer's
00:26:49.600 perspective. Not from the people who are in it. It doesn't entertain them at all. But from the
00:26:54.720 observer's perspective, it always goes toward whatever's the most interesting. And the most interesting
00:27:00.880 would be Gavin Newsom versus Trump. That would be the most interesting. Wouldn't it?
00:27:10.880 Because I feel that the Hillary
00:27:15.760 redo would just be another Trump victory. And it wouldn't, I don't know, it wouldn't feel fresh.
00:27:22.880 2020 was not a case of the most interesting. All right, let me ask you this.
00:27:37.440 Imagine these two scenarios and you're Trump and you get to pick one. And you have the benefit of
00:27:43.280 hindsight. But only as much hindsight as we have today. And here are your two choices. You can win a
00:27:51.280 second term outright, if you're Trump. And you can just serve the second term. But your second term
00:27:58.720 is going to look a lot like Joe Biden's second term, even if you did different policies. Because
00:28:05.520 things sort of suck. Right? So probably things would look kind of not so awesome. It wouldn't look the
00:28:14.000 way it looks now. I mean, Ukraine could look completely different. And energy and gas price could look
00:28:20.000 completely different. But it's not going to look like a great year. Wouldn't you say?
00:28:26.800 Afghanistan, yeah, we don't know what would have happened there. So we'll never know what would
00:28:32.400 have looked like. But I don't think that this year was going to be like a great year. Or this,
00:28:38.320 you know, these four years. So now compare this to Joe Biden coming in and wrecking everything.
00:28:44.880 And then Trump biding his time and coming back and fixing everything that he fixed the first time and
00:28:52.560 then expanding on that. Yeah, Taiwan could get interesting fast. So the question is, for Trump's legacy,
00:29:06.560 is he better off to win two terms consecutively or to let Biden really, really ruin one term?
00:29:16.080 And then Trump comes back and triumphantly fixes it and shows that he should not have been defeated
00:29:21.040 in the first place. And, you know, maybe there was some skullduggery that had an impact.
00:29:26.640 You have to wonder. You have to wonder. Because it's completely unpredictable. You know, you could
00:29:35.280 say that, oh, Trump would have done all the right things if he'd been in office so we wouldn't be in
00:29:39.760 this mess now. Maybe. Maybe. But he might have done other things that were worse. You don't know.
00:29:46.080 Well, there's no way to know. Yeah. Trump's too controversial. I think so. All right.
00:30:00.880 People, is there another topic that I have not broached that needs to be?
00:30:06.720 Because I don't think there's much happening right now. China? But what's new about China?
00:30:24.560 Taiwan? Yeah. I don't know if there's anything new about Taiwan either. Taiwan airspace? Well,
00:30:31.840 you know China's going to be testing Taiwan's airspace like crazy. All right. Let me give you
00:30:40.800 one idea for a gun control and see if you would be willing to consider it. It goes like this.
00:30:48.560 Instead of negotiating just with gun control, yes or no, you throw in child safety and say,
00:30:55.440 all right, it's a child safety bill and the age of buying certain weapons will just be part of the
00:31:02.480 discussion. But it'd also be how to protect them from social media, how to protect them from, I don't
00:31:09.840 bad schools. So you can come up with several things that are for protecting children. The problem is
00:31:16.800 if you throw in abortion, then the whole thing becomes useless. So you'd have to hold abortion out.
00:31:23.840 But if you made a set of child-related policies and said, look, the reason that you know this won't be
00:31:33.920 a slippery slope is that it's related to children and we're hitting a number of things. It's not about
00:31:41.600 guns. It's about children. So yes, there might be a slippery slope toward protecting children.
00:31:48.160 So that's the slippery slope everybody wants, right? Unless you get too nanny state. But if there are
00:31:55.520 obvious things that would protect children, just obvious things, most people are down for the obvious
00:32:02.400 stuff. So if you could throw together more than one topic and say, look, if you're going to take
00:32:14.160 something as important from the right as any kind of gun control, even if the only thing you're doing
00:32:22.240 is limiting the age of your first purchase of, you know, an AR, let's say, even if that's all you're
00:32:28.080 doing, it's too far. But if it's part of a bigger bill just for the kids, it doesn't feel the same, does it?
00:32:37.920 It would be hard to vote against the Save the Kids bill. So I'm sympathetic to the argument that says
00:32:49.520 you have to be an absolutist about gun rights. Because if they see weakness, they'll chip away.
00:32:56.000 That's not crazy. So if you're saying to yourself, Scott, I prefer our current situation where it's just
00:33:02.880 a logjam. Well, keep in mind, it might not stay that way. Because I don't know how many more
00:33:12.480 school shootings it would take before a few more Republicans are going to crack. So things are
00:33:19.520 probably going to change. I don't know if you can stop things from changing. So if you know things are
00:33:26.080 going to change, your best play is to manage the change to the to the minimum change necessary,
00:33:33.040 maybe if that's what you want. So it's sort of a if you believe it's going to happen anyway,
00:33:42.320 then you're not dealing with a slippery slope problem. You're dealing with steering the slippery
00:33:47.760 slope. Because maybe that's all you can do, because it's going to happen anyway.
00:33:51.760 And the things that we can be sure, well, as much as you can be sure of anything,
00:33:59.120 there will be more mass shootings. Don't you feel that that's just easy, unfortunately, to say?
00:34:05.600 There will be more of them. And there will be probably a greater rate of them. And probably
00:34:11.120 there will be a new one that shocks us in ways we didn't even know we could be shocked. I mean,
00:34:17.440 I feel as if, you know, there's a whole level that hasn't been hit yet, and somebody's going to try
00:34:23.600 to hit it. Meaning, you know, worst thing ever. And sooner or later, some Republicans are just going
00:34:31.360 to have to crack. So you either manage the change, or you let the change manage you, I think.
00:34:37.360 You think Vegas did that? Maybe. I think there's 60 dead in Vegas, right? And I don't think it changed
00:34:46.240 anything, did it? The Vegas shooting didn't change anything? Yeah, but you know what's different
00:34:58.720 about the Vegas shooting? Because it was adults. It's the school shootings that activate people.
00:35:06.720 You're not going to activate a Republican politician by a bunch of adults getting killed.
00:35:16.960 That probably won't activate them. They're going to need to hear something else. Now, let me give you
00:35:24.640 my provocative thoughts that I get criticized for saying something was a thought experiment,
00:35:34.960 when it didn't fit some scientific, scientific rigor. But I've said this before, and I don't mean it
00:35:44.800 exactly as a joke. I heard that there's never been a mass shooting done by an NRA member. Is that true?
00:35:54.640 Now, I'm sure there have been murders, probably. But there's no mass shooting by an NRA member.
00:36:01.120 Now, let's say that's true. Now, number two, have there been any mass shootings by women?
00:36:07.680 Yes or no? Have there been any mass shootings by women?
00:36:13.840 Somebody says yes, but it's rare. Right? It's rare. So,
00:36:20.000 now here's the interesting one. How many of the mass shootings were, let's say, left-leaning,
00:36:34.320 would have registered Democrat, versus right-leaning, and if they had registered,
00:36:39.360 it would have been Republican? What would you say?
00:36:42.560 What percentage do you think is left versus right-leaning? All right, your numbers are all
00:36:50.720 over the place, and display your bias. I don't know the answer, but let's say it's 50-50.
00:36:58.080 Can we say 50-50 just to talk about it? It might be 70-30, but the point will be the same.
00:37:04.960 The point will be the same. Suppose Republicans suggested that if you're a registered Democrat,
00:37:19.120 and you have to be registered before you can buy a gun. So I'm just brainstorming something that
00:37:24.080 would be more funny than practical. You have to be registered, but if you register as a Democrat,
00:37:31.440 you're not allowed to buy an AR until you're 25. But if you register Republican,
00:37:41.840 or you join the NRA, how about that? How about that? You want to get the NRA on your side?
00:37:53.520 Pass a law that says you can't buy an AR under age 25 unless you're in the NRA.
00:38:07.840 And maybe you have to be there for a year or something.
00:38:10.560 Now, here's what's interesting about it.
00:38:20.960 Do you think the NRA would be able to say that?
00:38:25.280 Do you think they would be able to say, hey, we'll get way more members.
00:38:30.880 This promotes our idea that people who join the NRA become responsible gun users.
00:38:36.800 You like your shooters incompetent. Okay, there's that.
00:38:44.320 But let's go the other way. Forget about the NRA. That's too polarizing.
00:38:48.720 Suppose, suppose Republicans just said we will help Democrats ban guns for Democrats.
00:38:58.720 Here's the argument. It would not stop Republican problems.
00:39:06.320 But what if it stopped half of the problems?
00:39:10.960 Why would Democrats turn down a half measure that would solve half the problem,
00:39:19.600 if it's the only thing they can get?
00:39:21.040 Now, this idea will grow on you a little bit.
00:39:26.560 Now, you have to compare it to getting nothing done.
00:39:29.840 So here I'm going to make the assumption that nothing will get done of any consequence.
00:39:35.760 But suppose Republicans literally said,
00:39:39.760 you can't buy a gun under the age of 25 unless you're a registered Republican.
00:39:44.560 And here's the deal. We know that that still allows
00:39:47.120 some mass shootings for registered Republicans.
00:39:51.680 But if half of them, half of all mass shootings are Democrats,
00:39:58.160 you can at least cut them in half.
00:40:00.640 So who would be against something that everybody could agree on?
00:40:05.840 Because Republicans would laugh and agree that
00:40:10.800 limiting Democrats from having guns until they knew how to use them is just a smart idea.
00:40:17.680 It would be so funny that I think Republicans would vote for it just because it's funny.
00:40:24.080 Right?
00:40:26.880 Now, I'm sure it's unconstitutional, illegal and impractical in some way.
00:40:32.160 But as you think through it, it sort of helps you clarify what actually is going on here.
00:40:39.440 If the Democrats wanted to reduce the number of people who were getting hurt,
00:40:44.480 they would take that deal.
00:40:47.760 Right?
00:40:48.880 So that's what the thought experiment does.
00:40:51.360 The thought experiment tells you that people were lying.
00:40:56.320 Because you can create a situation where they're getting 50% of what they want
00:41:01.920 and you're comparing it to getting nothing.
00:41:05.680 And people won't take.
00:41:06.720 People won't take the 50% because they didn't really want a solution.
00:41:12.160 Even though it's half.
00:41:15.520 A rational person will take half a solution over no solution.
00:41:20.000 Am I right?
00:41:20.640 So I think that it would expose the thinking on the left that they're making political points
00:41:29.520 and they're not attempting to do anything that's practical in the real world.
00:41:33.520 Because if Republicans said, hey, let's solve half the problem.
00:41:40.240 We're on board in solving your half of the problem.
00:41:42.880 And as far as our half, you know, that's more complicated.
00:41:46.320 Nobody has a solution for that.
00:41:47.760 But let's solve half of it.
00:41:49.280 All right.
00:41:57.920 Now, let me ask you.
00:42:01.920 When I first brought that idea up, and you thought, okay, it's stupid, but it's funny.
00:42:08.400 And the more I talked about it, the better it sounded, didn't it?
00:42:15.360 Seriously.
00:42:16.240 Right?
00:42:16.960 Right?
00:42:17.200 It sounded a little bit better than you thought it would.
00:42:21.200 But I surprised you a little bit there.
00:42:25.840 Okay, not everybody.
00:42:27.600 Some of you not sold at all.
00:42:30.320 Now, here's the difference between you and me.
00:42:36.320 I would have done this.
00:42:38.240 Like, if I were a Republican in Congress, I actually, literally would have done this.
00:42:42.720 I would have introduced a bill, and of course, it wouldn't get passed.
00:42:47.440 But I would have clarified people's thinking in the process.
00:42:50.720 And I would have said, look, we already showed you don't want to have fewer dead people.
00:42:56.000 If you ever want to have fewer dead people, join us, and we'll work something out.
00:42:59.440 But you just proved you don't want that.
00:43:01.760 So I would have done it.
00:43:02.800 I would have done it just to make the point.
00:43:09.360 I would be the grandstanding senator.
00:43:13.880 That's why you don't want me in Congress.
00:43:16.320 You don't want me in the Senate especially.
00:43:18.560 Because I'd just be grandstanding all the time.
00:43:22.560 I'd never stop.
00:43:23.520 All he knows about is California, LOL.
00:43:32.320 Well, I did grow up in upstate New York.
00:43:36.140 So I do know a little bit about a little bit.
00:43:38.840 It legitimizes gun control for one side, then the other side also gets banned.
00:43:48.580 Maybe.
00:43:49.100 But the thing is, if it worked, imagine if it worked.
00:44:02.140 Imagine if there was a ban just on Democrat gun sales, and it immediately decreased the
00:44:09.720 number of mass shootings by 50%.
00:44:11.960 Because it should, right?
00:44:15.620 Or something like that.
00:44:17.440 Because that would be the number that were roughly in that category.
00:44:22.820 So wouldn't it look like the problem had been solved so that you didn't need to have more
00:44:30.440 gun control because it would look like it was heading in the right direction and everybody
00:44:33.700 would take a victory lap?
00:44:34.720 Slippery slope.
00:44:42.180 So the Tulsa shooting, there was another mass shooting.
00:44:48.040 But was it the wrong ethnicity, somebody saying?
00:44:51.400 So it disappeared.
00:45:04.720 Yes, we covered the Depp verdict.
00:45:12.740 All right.
00:45:19.340 What's the history on him confiscation?
00:45:22.980 So apparently, I saw a report today that the red flag laws in Florida are working somewhat
00:45:33.540 robustly.
00:45:35.020 And there were quite a number of examples where when you hear the example, you say to yourself,
00:45:39.920 oh, yeah, that's somebody who should have their gun taken away.
00:45:42.900 You know, usually it's somebody who's made an actual threat against, like, real people.
00:45:47.560 Like, yeah, I'm going to do something bad to that class.
00:45:52.440 And I don't know what the law says in terms of when you get your rights back.
00:45:59.200 But every example that I heard, I said to myself, okay, I could live with that.
00:46:07.140 I just don't know if they're permanent.
00:46:09.460 Permanent would be more of a problem.
00:46:13.800 Hey, good picture.
00:46:14.820 Good picture.
00:46:17.560 All right.
00:46:25.620 Let me think of an offer you can't refuse, okay?
00:46:29.320 Rights are inalienable.
00:46:32.800 No, they're not.
00:46:35.200 Your rights can be alienated.
00:46:38.360 Is that the right way to say it?
00:46:40.720 What would be the way to say you don't have inalienable rights?
00:46:44.900 Rights, I will alienate your rights?
00:46:50.620 I don't know.
00:46:51.220 That's weird talk.
00:46:52.400 That's weird talk.
00:46:54.840 But I always have to explain this to people like I'm the only person in the world who ever heard it or something.
00:47:02.000 You can do anything until the government tells you you can't.
00:47:08.320 And it doesn't matter if they're wrong.
00:47:10.980 It just matters if they have guns.
00:47:13.480 And then they can make you do anything they want.
00:47:15.720 So you could argue what your right ought to be.
00:47:19.240 That's not going to help you.
00:47:23.340 Rights are given by the creator.
00:47:24.940 Are they?
00:47:27.880 Are they?
00:47:29.160 Are they given or are they just here?
00:47:32.340 Like, people who don't believe in a creator, do they have no rights?
00:47:37.440 Or they just don't know where they came from?
00:47:41.680 Now, the whole question of your rights,
00:47:45.520 it's a nonsense conversation.
00:47:48.160 There is only power.
00:47:51.140 There are no rights.
00:47:52.340 If somebody with power decides you can't do something,
00:47:57.040 you can't do it.
00:47:58.760 I mean, without penalty.
00:48:01.200 So where's your inalienable rights there?
00:48:07.060 If somebody can put you in jail,
00:48:10.380 you don't have any rights.
00:48:14.980 So it tends to be just a power struggle.
00:48:18.280 And then we try to dress up the power struggle
00:48:21.160 by saying we're giving people their inalienable rights.
00:48:25.620 But governments only give people the rights
00:48:28.360 that they think are not going to hurt the government.
00:48:33.360 Or at least not hurt it too badly.
00:48:35.040 Now, I get that if you were going to make an argument in court
00:48:43.680 or an argument to the public
00:48:46.100 saying stuff like your rights are God-given
00:48:48.840 and they're inalienable,
00:48:50.920 that's good rhetoric.
00:48:53.380 But it has no application to the real world.
00:48:57.140 And the real world,
00:48:58.620 if nobody's going to punish you for doing something,
00:49:01.880 well, you can do it.
00:49:03.040 And if somebody is going to punish you for doing it,
00:49:07.160 well, good luck.
00:49:09.960 That's sort of the beginning and the end of your rights.
00:49:15.260 Somebody says incorrect.
00:49:18.720 Tell me why.
00:49:26.380 No.
00:49:26.900 Somebody is characterizing me.
00:49:32.280 So here's how you know
00:49:33.440 that you're not understanding it.
00:49:36.200 If you're rewording,
00:49:37.540 if you have to reword what I say,
00:49:39.960 you're probably rewording it into something weird
00:49:43.240 so you can explain why you disagree with it.
00:49:46.800 If you simply use what I say,
00:49:49.960 it doesn't look like what you said.
00:49:51.660 So I did not say whether your rights exist
00:49:57.940 or something in some philosophical way.
00:50:01.620 I'm saying that whether you have
00:50:03.200 the philosophical right to rights
00:50:08.060 or a God-given set of rights,
00:50:11.320 it's all irrelevant.
00:50:14.240 What's relevant is you can do stuff
00:50:16.400 that doesn't get you punished
00:50:17.760 and the other stuff you better not do
00:50:20.420 or you better figure out how to get away with it.
00:50:24.300 But no, this whole inalienable rights is great.
00:50:28.220 It just has no application to your real life.
00:50:33.220 James here lives by the hobo's code
00:50:35.340 and I respect that.
00:50:38.220 I don't know what the hobo's code is
00:50:40.840 but if hobo's have a code,
00:50:44.260 I have to think that they developed it over time
00:50:46.440 and probably goes well
00:50:47.860 with the whole train-hopping lifestyle.
00:50:52.140 And for example,
00:50:53.980 what would the hobo's code say
00:50:55.660 about a ham sandwich?
00:50:58.920 And if a hobo finds a ham sandwich,
00:51:02.740 is said hobo obligated to share it
00:51:06.300 or scarf it as soon as possible
00:51:08.960 so nobody else can get it.
00:51:11.240 I don't know.
00:51:13.120 All right, well,
00:51:14.140 I got nothing else going on here
00:51:16.160 because it's a slow news day
00:51:17.440 but tomorrow will be awesome.
00:51:19.040 I will leave you only with this thought.
00:51:21.900 You probably will find yourself feeling
00:51:24.340 a little bit better today
00:51:26.760 than you imagined.
00:51:29.340 That's not an accident.
00:51:31.760 And tomorrow,
00:51:33.180 you're going to feel even better.
00:51:35.080 And that's not an accident.
00:51:36.000 So come back for
00:51:38.140 Coffee with Scott Adams
00:51:39.340 in the morning,
00:51:40.220 same place,
00:51:40.800 same time.
00:51:42.260 And I'll see you
00:51:43.080 later, YouTube.