Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1775 Scott Adams： Today I Will Settle The Gun Control Debate In A Way You Didn't See Coming

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to not only the highlight of civilization,

00:00:10.620 Coffee with Scott Adams, but I think you can tell already if you're watching this as opposed

00:00:16.440 to listening to it, that it's special for another reason. It's laundry day. That's why I'm wearing

00:00:23.340 this green t-shirt, which I think you'll agree does not accentuate my eyes in a way that

00:00:29.760 really should. But other than that, and one other special thing, tomorrow, I'm looking

00:00:38.540 at humorous memes going by on the locals platform at the same time. Tomorrow is a very special

00:00:45.500 live stream. It is number 1776, also known as 1776, also known as freedom. So should we

00:00:58.180 do something special for that? Well, you think about that, and so will I. But in the meantime,

00:01:02.840 let's take it up a notch with a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or Chelsea Stein, a canteen

00:01:07.960 jug or flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite freedom-loving beverage.

00:01:14.880 I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine here of the day, the

00:01:24.700 thing that's going to make everything feel better. It's called the simultaneous sip. Watch this

00:01:30.480 set your body into an electric, pulsating, gyrating, throbbing pleasure zone that you've never

00:01:37.940 experienced before. Go. You were already there. Somebody says they were already there, and

00:01:47.800 I think that's the way it should be. The moment it's even approaching, you should feel yourself

00:01:56.140 starting to get into the mood. Well, Elon Musk made news today by tweeting. I guess I should just

00:02:03.840 start every live stream with that. Elon Musk made some news today by tweeting and then fill

00:02:09.680 in the blank. Today's fill in the blank is he voted for Republican, I guess in a special election

00:02:17.060 in Texas, the Republican one. And that's supposed to mean something. And the news is that Trump

00:02:25.640 still has influence on the Republican Party. But Musk also tweeted that he's leaning toward

00:02:34.100 DeSantis for his presidential preference. Leaning toward DeSantis. To which I say, did he just

00:02:43.600 end Trump's presidential chances for running again? So I think it all comes down to, does DeSantis

00:02:53.160 run? I think at this point, if Elon Musk says he would vote for DeSantis, and if DeSantis ran,

00:03:04.440 I think he'd run. I think he'd win. What do you think? Now, don't tell me what you think should

00:03:12.580 happen, because you might have a preference of what happens. But what do you think would

00:03:17.060 happen? Trump, let's say a primary, Trump versus DeSantis straight up. Because I'm wondering

00:03:26.980 who, DeSantis could sell himself as the younger, less controversial version of a Trump-like

00:03:41.640 Republican. How isn't that a good package? I guess he's just not as interesting. But he's

00:03:49.040 getting good at that, too. You have to admit, I would say one of my complaints, if you could

00:03:54.860 call it that, maybe a criticism, of earlier DeSantis is he wasn't interesting. When I heard

00:04:01.680 him talk, it was like, standard stuff by a standard-looking guy. So he just didn't jump

00:04:09.100 out. But as governor, he's done a whole bunch of stuff and had a bunch of quotable lines. And he

00:04:17.340 does. Now he's getting the whole provocation thing a little bit better, you know, getting

00:04:22.760 attention. All right. So if DeSantis and Trump ran straight up in a primary, nobody else is in it.

00:04:32.240 So you seem a little bit split. I'm looking at the audience coming in, the comments. And there's

00:04:40.700 not a clear opinion of who would win that. And I think that's the right opinion. I think

00:04:48.440 the right opinion is, there's no way to call that one, is there? But I will stand by this.

00:04:55.080 Here's my prediction. If DeSantis runs, probably it will only be because Trump didn't. Because

00:05:05.000 it would feel like a suicide mission, to some extent. Running against Trump, as opposed to

00:05:12.540 waiting four years and running without Trump, you know, in the mix. I would wait four years. I'd

00:05:20.260 get out of the way of the buzzsaw. Because you imagine, I mean, Trump would just savage DeSantis

00:05:26.520 in a primary. It would be. But it would be quite a divisive thing. I don't think, I don't know.

00:05:38.260 I think my take on DeSantis is that he is a smart risk taker. Would you say that's a fair assessment?

00:05:50.260 He seems to be real good on the risk management. Like, what's the risk? What's the benefit?

00:05:56.200 Because he's done some things that look closer to the risk line than you're used to. Like, he feeds

00:06:03.280 the base better than other people. And as close as he's been flying, you know, to the sun, he has not

00:06:09.580 touched the sun yet. Could we say that? I think we could say that. And actually, that's the most

00:06:15.440 impressive thing about him so far, is he has the best ratio of close to the sun without actually

00:06:23.360 touching the sun. So, you know, who knows if that means it's more dangerous or he's just better at it.

00:06:29.900 So, that's subjective. All right. Yeah, he doesn't have the Trump dance moves. That's true.

00:06:36.640 All right. We'll keep an eye on that. So, there's some news that might be fake news about fake news.

00:06:45.860 This could be a double fake news. So, I only saw it from one source. I would want to see this from

00:06:52.040 another source. So, I'm going to put the big question mark on this one. And allegedly, there's

00:06:58.920 some insider reports that the Biden administration would be disciplining the Department of Homeland

00:07:07.260 Security, you know, the Border Patrol agents who are on horses, who are accused of whipping the

00:07:13.540 immigrants coming across the border. Now, the photographic evidence completely exonerates them 1.00

00:07:22.060 as they were whipping their horses in a way that you control these specific kind of horses,

00:07:28.800 right? So, they have this big... Is it even a whip? I'm not even sure if you call it a whip,

00:07:34.500 right? Or is it just the reins? It's the reins, right? Yeah. So, they have the extra long reins

00:07:39.800 that they can sort of, you know, control the horse with. So, I believe the real story is they were

00:07:45.900 controlling the horse, but if you saw it from the wrong angle, it would look like they were aiming at the

00:07:52.020 the immigrants. So, the base of fake news is that they were whipping the immigrants. So, that's 0.91

00:08:02.140 where the fake news started. But now there's a report that the people who did not whip any immigrants

00:08:08.120 at all are going to be disciplined, or at least they'll be, you know, part of an investigation or

00:08:13.700 something. And I thought to myself, I'm not sure if that story is true. This might be fake news about

00:08:20.440 the fake news. So, you know what you should think about this? Nothing, because there's not

00:08:28.080 enough substance study of this. It's literally fake news about fake news. Let's just forget

00:08:32.920 that one, like it didn't even happen. Or that's just like an appetizer or something. All right,

00:08:39.040 here's an interesting story. And it's going to cause me to be able to completely solve a gun control

00:08:52.560 debate in this country. Would you like me to do that? Who would like me to reframe the gun debate

00:09:00.760 in this country and just completely solve it? And by solve it, I mean come up with an answer that both

00:09:06.100 Democrats and Republicans would say, you know, well, that's not perfect. But you know, I think

00:09:13.780 you're on to something. That's something we could agree on. Do you think I could do it? Challenge

00:09:19.820 me. Can I come up with a solution that would be loved by both Democrats and Republicans? It's

00:09:27.700 impossible. It's impossible. Can't be done. All right. So, I was looking at a tweet by Claire

00:09:35.780 Lehmann. And it showed a graph where it showed the number of gun, the gun ownership per capita

00:09:43.700 of a number of major countries. And then on one, so on one axis was the number of guns,

00:09:52.340 you know, per thousand people. The other axis was the number of murders per thousand people.

00:09:57.900 So, everything's per capita, right? You know, adjusted for population. And it showed that,

00:10:04.260 you know, there's a big clump of countries, the majority of them were all down there in the lower,

00:10:10.160 lower area, where they had the fewest guns and the fewest murders. And then way up in the right,

00:10:18.460 completely an outlier from all this, you know, other civilized countries, was the United States.

00:10:24.320 Far and away the most guns. Far and away the most murders. And so, Michael, and the point of it was

00:10:36.340 to show that the more guns you have, the more murders you have. I presume that was the point of

00:10:41.900 it. I'm not a mind reader, but I would think that would be the point of publishing that, right?

00:10:47.520 Now, first of all, do you believe that that's true? Do you believe the data is true? I think it's true,

00:10:53.820 isn't it? On a per capita basis. Now, remember, we're not, we weren't, we weren't comparing to

00:11:01.700 every country in the world. It was sort of the, you know, the closer to the peer group.

00:11:09.780 All right. Well, murders, yeah, murder is not equal to guns, but I, maybe I misstated what the,

00:11:17.320 one of the axes was. But the point is that we have the most guns and the murder rate is

00:11:25.140 high. And most of that's guns. So, all right, so that's the starting point. And then I saw that

00:11:32.260 retweeted by Michael Shermer. And he noted that he's been arguing that, you know, how could you argue

00:11:38.760 against the point that, I guess, Michael Shermer has made before a number of times? I take that in

00:11:46.640 context. That his case is that the more gun ownership there is, the more murder there is.

00:11:54.360 So, he was sort of boosting this by saying, here you go. You know, what other, what other

00:12:02.560 explanation is there? So, what other explanation is there? Has he made his case? Does the data speak

00:12:09.680 for itself? I mean, if, if that data were true, would you accept the fact that even though you might,

00:12:18.880 now, hold on for a second before we go any further, let me tell you, don't try to anticipate what my

00:12:24.440 opinion is yet. Don't try to anticipate what my opinion is yet. Because you'll just get all twisted

00:12:31.880 up. So, just, just go with me. Okay. Just, just take the trip. It's just a journey. Enjoy the journey.

00:12:40.620 All right. So, what's interesting about Michael Shermer is I've, I've read his stuff for a long time.

00:12:46.740 And he is, I would say, uniquely data and logic oriented. Which is different from saying I always

00:12:56.120 agree with his takes. But he's always very, look at the data, look at the logic, you know, escape from

00:13:03.720 the politics of it. So, he's very good in terms of trying to be reasonable. I would put him in the,

00:13:10.240 you know, the serious people category. People you should pay attention to. And he says,

00:13:16.740 he just looks at this and says, you know, duh, basically. The most gun ownership, the most

00:13:22.880 murderers by far. How in the world does he, has he not made his case?

00:13:30.320 And he said, what else could it be? And he listed some other possibilities. You know,

00:13:34.520 is it racism? Is it, is it, uh, something else?

00:13:39.480 To which I answered and accidentally realized that I had solved the gun debate. And I responded

00:13:48.260 to his tweet this way and said, it's obviously systemic racism. That chart is literally showing

00:13:59.240 you systemic racism, which is caused by the school, the school system, which is caused by the

00:14:07.420 teachers' unions. That chart shows that. Let me prove it to you in, if you don't, if you

00:14:15.440 don't follow that chain, let me make the case in 10 seconds, right? Here's a 10-second argument

00:14:22.920 to make the case that that chart is showing you systemic racism. 10 seconds. I think I can

00:14:31.020 to attend, maybe 15. Imagine if for the last 30 years, the school system had produced, uh, just as

00:14:41.800 good black students as every other group. In other words, everybody had a good education, which is very

00:14:49.320 much not the case for the past, however many decades you want to go, 50 years, whatever. Just imagine,

00:14:55.900 it's just a thought experiment. I'm done. I'm done. I just proved that that graph is from systemic

00:15:04.960 racism. Because here's what you just did. In your own mind, you just connected all the doubts. You

00:15:09.440 just said, okay, wait a minute. If the teachers' unions had not prevented competition for decades,

00:15:19.120 wouldn't we have better education for everybody? Because the free market system and competition 0.59

00:15:24.660 would have, you know, helped us along? The answer is yes. Now, we may not have reached something

00:15:30.720 that you would call equality, but imagine if just everybody got a better education.

00:15:37.420 Now, don't you think that there's a pretty direct correlation between your level of education

00:15:43.720 and your economics and your likelihood to murder somebody? Yes, of course. And so I asked,

00:15:54.040 what would that gun chart look like if you separated it by race in the United States? Suppose you said the

00:16:03.540 United States is two countries. It's the black population. Just look at it separately, as if the 0.99

00:16:10.260 United States is just the black population of the United States. And then say, what is the gun violence

00:16:16.320 rate in that community? It would be off the chart. And then say, all right, let's look at the everything but black 1.00

00:16:24.480 community, just to simplify, right? And you say, what is the gun rate there? And it's way lower.

00:16:31.420 So really, the United States is not one average. It's basically it operates like two countries in this

00:16:39.000 specific example. Now, why is it the United States would have off the chart black gun violence? Well, 0.70

00:16:47.940 if you were a racist, you would say, well, there's something wrong with black people. 0.98

00:16:53.160 Right? Because you're a racist, you'd say that, right? But isn't it a little bit more likely that if 1.00

00:17:00.980 everybody had a good education, you wouldn't see anything like that? Seriously. Even if there are

00:17:08.540 some racists watching, even if there are some racists watching this, you know who you are.

00:17:14.120 You would admit that if everybody had a good education, everybody, the gun violence wouldn't look

00:17:24.080 anything like it looks in the United States. Who disagrees with that? Now, you know, there's no

00:17:31.320 quick fix to that. But here's the thing. Where could the left and the right completely come together

00:17:37.260 on gun violence? If you improved education, it would go away.

00:17:44.120 Right? And let's just agree that systemic racism exists and that its primary foundational source,

00:17:53.980 you know, the thing that fuels it more than anything, is the lack of good educational paths

00:18:00.420 to success for everybody. Right? So how in the world does the left and the right not agree that

00:18:10.080 if you fix everybody's education, all of these other problems get better. What does the left think is the

00:18:20.620 problem with the right? Let's say climate change. Pick any topic. The left would say, well, the problem

00:18:26.260 with the right is that they're not educated enough about the risks of climate change. That's what the left

00:18:31.980 would say about the right. So wouldn't the left want better education? Because by their view, that would

00:18:38.760 get them more of what they want. There'd be more citizens who believe what they believe. Now, you might

00:18:44.160 say it could go the opposite way. But you still want more education. So no matter where you think the

00:18:50.460 education takes you, everybody believes it's good. So it's like the one thing, the one thing everybody agrees on

00:18:58.940 also solves all the other problems. You just have to sort of think it through why that is the case.

00:19:07.660 So imagine you had a candidate running for president who just said half of what Joe Biden says and half of

00:19:14.860 what Trump says. I'm imagining an imaginary president. What Joe Biden says, sort of laughably, is,

00:19:22.960 you know these big problems? There's nothing we can do about it. What am I going to do about inflation?

00:19:28.940 I'm not Putin. So the half that's Joe Biden is, you know, what can you do about it? Somebody else caused this.

00:19:36.900 It wasn't my fault. You know, and then the half that's Trump is that he can do things that even, you know,

00:19:44.540 are not doable. It's like, I'll make the economy zoom and, you know, everything will be great.

00:19:50.900 So you've got the, you know, ridiculous optimist in Trump and you've got the, you know, can't do it 0.96

00:19:58.220 in Biden. Suppose you put them together and you created the following candidate. You know, 0.97

00:20:06.020 there's almost nothing you can do about systemic racism today. I've got to be honest with you.

00:20:11.660 There's almost nothing you can do about what's already here. And you can try really hard and I think

00:20:17.180 we should, but you're not going to move it very much because once somebody is 45 and, you know,

00:20:24.960 their life has been sort of carved pretty hard into the rocks, you can't change it much. But here's

00:20:31.800 where we can all agree. How about we just put all of our combined left and right disagreeing energy

00:20:38.780 into fixing schools for everybody, whatever it takes. Let's just make it a national conversation.

00:20:44.640 If it's something about the teachers unions, then that's on the table. If it's something about

00:20:49.620 something else, that's on the table too. So why don't we just take all of our disagreements and

00:20:54.560 say, you know, there isn't a damn thing you can do about it today, but I bet we can fix it for the

00:20:59.720 next generation and just make it a next generation effort. Say, you know, sorry, sorry about your

00:21:07.980 generation. If we could fix it easily, we'd be willing to do it. But nobody has really a good

00:21:17.620 idea how to like fix some things easily. But could you fix the schools? That feels like the most doable

00:21:24.360 thing for an advanced civilization, you know, a successful country, give or take our debt.

00:21:32.180 It seems like that's well within our ability to fix education for everybody. And then, you know,

00:21:41.220 then at least you have an argument that you're doing something about violence. It's not going to

00:21:45.960 help this generation as much. But at least you could say you're doing something and you found some way

00:21:50.460 to come together. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is where you fix everything at the same time.

00:21:56.980 You're welcome. I saw a little video and it looked like it came from TikTok. It was up, but it was on

00:22:06.300 Twitter. And I didn't, I didn't see who to credit exactly. But there was this sort of a man on the

00:22:11.880 street interview in which someone I took to be probably associated with the right based on the

00:22:17.780 context was asking people who appeared to be associated with the left based on context if they supported bodily

00:22:26.200 autonomy. And I think it was being asked that some kind of an abortion rally, pro-abortion rally.

00:22:33.340 And so the people on the left were saying, yes, bodily autonomy, my body, you know, keep your

00:22:39.900 government away from my body. It's my body. And then the second question was what they thought about

00:22:46.660 vaccine mandates. And would they say that's the same argument that, you know, stay away from my body

00:22:54.960 would apply to abortion. But would they take their argument and say, stay away from my body 0.79

00:23:01.200 with your vaccinations. And you have to watch the looks on the faces of the people being asked the

00:23:11.840 question. Their facial expression is almost better than what they say, which ends up being closer to

00:23:20.340 the nonsense that it should be. And you, I've told you before that there's a cognitive dissonance look.

00:23:29.540 And until you've seen it a number of times, you can't recognize it. But once you have seen it a

00:23:34.340 number of times, you spot it right away. And it's when you see somebody's brain just reboot.

00:23:40.540 It's like, for a moment, they go blank. And their brain just stops. It's almost like, huh?

00:23:47.780 And then whatever comes out next, after the, huh? Is just nonsense. It's just, I think I retweeted it,

00:23:56.780 so you can see it in my Twitter feed today. But it's sort of hilarious. And you can even,

00:24:03.900 you can even abstract this from politics, right? I'm only like marginally interested in the fact

00:24:11.680 that the content here is politics. What's really interesting is legitimately they're triggered

00:24:19.860 into cognitive dissonance. And I think there was one of them that almost slithered out by saying,

00:24:30.220 well, one was an emergency, but no. No. That's not really an argument against not having bodily

00:24:41.160 autonomy, right? Now, my take on this, the whole bodily autonomy, is that nobody has ever had it.

00:24:51.140 It's just an illusion if you think you have any bodily autonomy. Because the government can make

00:24:56.420 your body do anything it wants. Because they have guns. You don't have any bodily autonomy.

00:25:02.540 You can't go do a crime with your body. I can't go rub my body against your body just because I want

00:25:09.160 to. I don't have any bodily autonomy. Now, that said, I would still like to have as much as I

00:25:21.060 could get. Like, if it's, if it's only about me, I want as much as I can get. But sometimes it's not

00:25:28.200 about just me. Unfortunately.

00:25:34.180 Jason Riley writing for the Wall Street Journal, I think, I guess it would be an opinion piece,

00:25:41.320 but it was so factual that it's hard to say. Suggests that we should raise the immigration caps

00:25:48.240 because there's going to be a massive, already is, massive worker shortage. Now, he's talking about

00:25:53.920 the more qualified workers, the immigrants who often become entrepreneurs in STEM areas, etc.

00:26:01.560 So, he's saying we should do more of that. And that the, that the two-year pause or so from the

00:26:07.480 pandemic, where we were not bringing in these highly qualified immigrants, probably is going to show up 1.00

00:26:13.300 in the economy. That, that we had a two-year pause where probably our most qualified group of

00:26:21.680 entrepreneurs, the ones who come in already qualified from another country, they, they didn't get to do their

00:26:30.620 thing for two years. That might actually have a big impact on our economy down the road. 0.89

00:26:35.960 And you suggested that we do, we do more of it. Now, I would go back to my argument, and this would

00:26:43.120 be so easy for somebody like DeSantis to take an argument like this. Because the, one of the big things

00:26:51.220 that Trump got completely wrong with the border argument is that once he won the nomination,

00:26:56.160 he should have said what I say, which is, let's have an economic opinion about who to let in,

00:27:04.660 and have the ability to control it, so that when there's an opinion about who to let in and how

00:27:10.420 many, and it changes, we can just change it. That argument would be so easy to win. Imagine being on

00:27:18.700 stage and trying to argue against that. Well, my, my opinion is that we should let the economist tell us

00:27:24.680 how many people to come in for the best interest of the country, and then have enough control to make

00:27:30.720 that happen. What the hell are you going to say to that? Well, really, that's a racist idea.

00:27:39.040 To which I'd say, well, can you explain which race in the United States is not in favor of

00:27:46.180 a better economy in the United States that would include them? I mean, it's really just a killer 0.86

00:27:54.540 end of discussion argument. All you have to do is frame it, right? And you're done. It's almost the

00:28:01.920 easiest, it's probably the easiest argument you could ever win in politics, in my opinion. You just

00:28:08.960 take the emotion out of it. You know, you want Republicans to say, you know what? We've really

00:28:14.860 gotten, you know, great benefits from immigration. Let's, let's have some more of that. But we really want to

00:28:20.880 do it the Republican way. And the Republican way is to control the parts that we need to control and let the

00:28:31.200 free market do the rest. It's just so easy to sell. It's just so frustrating watching nobody make the most

00:28:40.140 obvious argument there. All right, so what else is happening? Kimberly Guilfoyle reportedly got $60,000

00:28:53.260 for basically just introducing Don Jr. at, I think, a January 6 rally or something. I don't know what it

00:29:01.020 was. It was a while ago. And people are suggesting that she was overpaid. What do you think? Do you

00:29:12.280 think she was overpaid $60,000 just to introduce Don Jr.? Nope. No, nobody who understands the speaker's

00:29:23.020 market would say she was overpaid. Here's the thing that the news, and I saw David Axelrod

00:29:30.220 said something like, you know, I wonder what that is per word. Do you think, do you think when they

00:29:37.060 hired her or agreed to pay this, do you think that what they thought they were buying were her words?

00:29:45.420 That's not what they're buying. Let me explain how this market works. And it's funny because David

00:29:50.660 Axelrod knows how this market works. So I guess it was a clever way to frame it for political points or

00:29:58.180 something. But David Axelrod knows that on the speaker's circuit, they pay for the personality,

00:30:06.540 the name recognition. You're more likely to go someplace where Kimberly Guilfoyle will be in

00:30:14.320 person. No matter what she does, you're more likely to want to go there if she's going to be there.

00:30:20.480 And if Don Jr. is going to be there, you're more likely to go. And if they're both going to be

00:30:26.900 there, you're a little bit more than twice as likely to go, because then you might see the

00:30:32.380 interaction and that would be even more interesting. So if you are the organizers, what are you really

00:30:38.580 paying Kimberly Guilfoyle for? Well, you're sort of paying her for, you know, the name recognition

00:30:45.220 so that you can say, hey, she'll be here, so bring the crowds. But you're kind of paying her

00:30:51.640 an inconvenience fee, meaning that she almost certainly has somewhere else to be that day.

00:30:58.880 And it's not easy to, you know, pack up and, you know, probably you've got hair and makeup and,

00:31:05.280 you know, outfit and what are you going to say? You got to get there. It's a pretty big commitment

00:31:10.820 to get your ass somewhere and stand in front of a big crowd and do a thing. And in my opinion, 0.98

00:31:18.980 under those circumstances, the specific circumstances that she was like exactly the right person to be

00:31:25.040 doing the exactly right thing at that time, $60,000, I'd say she did a good job in negotiating.

00:31:32.240 That's all. She just did a good job in negotiating. So Don Lemon was talking to Biden's spokesperson,

00:31:46.540 Karine Jean-Pierre, and Don Lemon was actually giving her a hard time, which I guess is the

00:31:53.400 first part of the big story. So CNN's new chief reportedly wants them to start reporting the news

00:32:03.160 straight without the bias. Now, I don't know how Don Lemon's going to pull that off, but he did,

00:32:10.900 to his credit, to his credit, so I'll give him credit, we're due. He did push her a bit and he asked

00:32:19.460 this question directly and he wasn't smiling when he said it. He said, does the president have the

00:32:25.840 stamina, physically and mentally, do you think to continue on after 2024? Now, what is the, if you're

00:32:34.260 the spokesperson for the president and CNN asks you, does your boss have the stamina physically and

00:32:41.340 mentally? What is the only right answer to that question? Yes. What does it mean if you say anything

00:32:52.840 else? How would you interpret any other words that did not include Y-E-S? Well, I would interpret it as

00:33:07.040 no. Here's what she said. The first thing out of her mouth was, that is not a question that we

00:33:15.640 should even be asking. Oh, God. Oh, God. Oh, it makes me laugh. Oh, look at it. The question is so

00:33:25.360 silly. Can you look at the sincere smile on my face? I mean, look at me. It's to laugh. It's to laugh. 0.96

00:33:32.020 It's to laugh. It's so funny. Look, because look at the sincerity. I mean, I've got sincerity all

00:33:37.780 over my face. With this smile, I think this puts it in context, doesn't it? You know, would I be

00:33:45.260 smiling like this all sincerely, unless I honestly believe what I was saying? He is so physically and

00:33:53.220 mentally fit? Let me tell you another thing. Let me tell you another thing. Let me tell you another

00:34:00.880 thing. He, he, he's the president. The president's schedule, like a spittle, I'm so excited about the

00:34:10.020 president's schedule. It's so much more than mine. Let me tell you, compared to the president,

00:34:15.580 Biden, it's like I sleep under my desk. It's like, I don't even show up. I do so little work

00:34:22.560 compared to Biden. You should be asking me why I even get paid. Because, because he's like this

00:34:31.560 energy ball. He's like the sun. He's like the sun. And, you know, compared to me, I'd be like,

00:34:38.180 I don't know, a mosquito or something. Like, I'm nothing compared to him, to his greatness and his

00:34:47.240 energy. He's the greatest man of all time. And really. And see. So, why can't we just report

00:35:03.020 that the president's spokesperson just confirmed that she does not believe he is, has the stamina

00:35:10.340 physically and mentally to continue on after 2024? Because that's what she said. I don't care what

00:35:19.360 you tell me you think she said. I don't know what you're hallucinating she said. But she just

00:35:26.940 confirmed that he's not up to the job. And to her credit, do you know why she confirmed

00:35:34.100 it? Because even though she's being paid to lie, she couldn't pull this one off. It made

00:35:43.600 me like her. Honestly. Like, when I saw that she couldn't answer the question, like it was

00:35:50.400 so ridiculously painful hard, I realized that it's because she's probably honest.

00:35:58.220 I'm just guessing. I mean, I don't know her. But I worry that her natural personality might be honest.

00:36:05.640 Like, maybe she doesn't lie to her friends. You know, doesn't lie to her romantic partners or 1.00

00:36:11.980 whatever. She might be honest. Imagine being an honest person and being put in that job.

00:36:17.880 Well, that would be like a living hell. And she looked like she was being tortured.

00:36:24.820 Well, she answered that question. Anyway.

00:36:33.200 So, according to economist Julia Pollack in a tweet, the Fed is finally beginning to do

00:36:41.000 quantitative tightening today. So that $9 trillion balance sheet is going to start coming down

00:36:46.460 and dragging inflation down with it. Here's the way I like to summarize all stories about

00:36:55.120 inflation and about the Fed. Because sometimes when the economists talk, it's a little complicated,

00:37:02.600 hard to follow. So let me just break this down. There's something called the Fed that you don't

00:37:09.160 understand, that does something with money you don't understand, that causes the quantitativeness

00:37:15.740 of the supply of the inflation trend to mitigate over, I don't know, they just do things and then

00:37:26.840 things happen. I'm pretty sure nobody even understands economics. It does feel a little like astrology.

00:37:33.160 And I remember, I won't name names, but there was someone I knew who went to school to be a chiropractor

00:37:44.560 and learned that there were a number of things that chiropractors could do that would make a

00:37:51.600 difference and help people. But the chiropractic school went a little bit beyond the things that

00:37:58.720 seemed to have good data backing them up. You know, things like curing the common cold and

00:38:04.920 your cancer and every other damn thing. And eventually, when he had been completely trained 0.84

00:38:12.020 as a chiropractor, he said to himself, I can't do this for a living. It's too bogus. So he actually

00:38:19.100 completed the training and said, I can't even do this. Now, even though, and let me be clear,

00:38:27.000 there do appear to be parts of chiropractic that are valuable and medically supported and all that.

00:38:35.540 But you do hear stories of chiropractors with claims that are just so obviously not true.

00:38:46.520 Anyway, so when I studied economics in college, I got to the point where I learned enough about

00:38:55.880 economics to think that most of what I saw was guessing, because things are too complicated

00:39:02.720 to really predict well. And so the more you know about your own field, the less credibility it has.

00:39:11.100 Have you ever noticed that? Everything looks good until you learn about it. And then you're like,

00:39:16.380 that Russian army sure looks good. Well, let's take a closer look. Although, to their credit, 1.00

00:39:25.700 they did win. So it does look like Russia is just solidly winning. And what would you say of the

00:39:38.740 U.S. strategy? Can we be pleased with our strategy? Could it be said that Russia won and NATO won,

00:39:51.520 but Ukraine lost? Could that be said? Because NATO sort of had to push back a little bit, right?

00:40:00.440 Even if it's this indirect way by supporting them? No? You don't think NATO needed to show that it had a

00:40:10.400 little bit of backbone to make it harder for Russia to expand? But I suppose you could say that

00:40:18.640 Russia always thought that Ukraine was part of it, so it's not an expansion, except depending on your

00:40:26.020 point of view. NATO lost, too. Yeah, maybe so. Although NATO is gaining members.

00:40:37.540 Yeah, it's an interesting argument. I heard the argument that we made a mistake, we, the West,

00:40:44.120 made a mistake challenging Putin because we should have understood history and understood that Russia

00:40:50.960 Russia is an imperialist country and they would never, they would never accept anybody, you know, 0.97

00:40:57.060 moving into their sort of territory that maybe they thought they should influence. To which I said to

00:41:03.620 myself, well, by that standard, you should let everybody who has bad behavior do it, because if you

00:41:11.040 don't, they'll be mad. I don't know. Maybe, maybe it depends how many nukes you have that changes the

00:41:19.060 calculation. By the way, I saw a meme of showing, I think it was Hiroshima after, after it had been

00:41:28.500 nuked, and then showing it today. So you see, in one picture, it's rubble, and then today it's,

00:41:35.280 you know, a gleaming city. And then it showed Detroit, the same year as Hiroshima, you know, a bustling

00:41:43.000 city. And then it shows Detroit today, not looking so good. And I'm thinking, uh, that's in one lifetime.

00:41:52.360 That's in one lifetime.

00:41:57.160 Yeah, so I see some people saying their chiropractors have helped them. That is, that is certainly true.

00:42:02.860 All right. I believe that's all that's happening today. Were there any stories I forgot about?

00:42:12.620 Now, um, there's one other way that the left and the right can come together. I forgot this one.

00:42:17.920 Now, it's, it's a smaller way, but I think every little, every little way that the left and right

00:42:22.260 can come together is, is useful. So one of the things that the, uh, the left wants is they want,

00:42:30.320 um, less gun violence. They also want, uh, in many cases, young people to be able to transition

00:42:39.740 from, uh, do you say transition their gender? Or is it, I'm not sure, I'm never sure if I'm using

00:42:49.160 the right words. But, uh, so the people on the left are more favorable toward younger people

00:42:55.320 transitioning. And here's the question I ask. How many mass murders have been committed

00:43:03.900 by someone who was trans? I think it's zero. So correct me if I'm wrong on the math. The 1.00

00:43:13.540 more people who are trans, the fewer murders per capita. Follow that logic? No, that doesn't 1.00

00:43:24.020 make sense at all. I'm not serious. How many people thought I was serious? Oh, don't get

00:43:32.160 serious on me. Okay. You're talking about, uh, suicides. That's serious. All right. Um, yeah,

00:43:46.300 it is remarkable that a community that small percentage-wise is having such a big impact

00:43:54.580 on our, on our psyche. And did you see the controversy of, I guess, um, I think, uh, Ben Shapiro

00:44:04.620 and Matt Walsh were mad at Fox News for running a piece that was, uh, if I would characterize it,

00:44:12.780 it would be pro-trans, I guess, and pro-trans for young kids. So it was a story about a, uh,

00:44:21.500 young kid who at five years old or even, even before, uh, so the kid is now identifying as male

00:44:30.200 and has transitioned. So we'll say he, but, but allegedly knew he was the wrong gender, uh, before he

00:44:41.240 could speak or something like that. Because the parents said, yes, he was obviously uncomfortable

00:44:47.220 in girls' clothing and stuff like that. Now, as some people have pointed out, there are quite

00:44:56.140 a few, uh, boys who were kind of fluid at that age and then it gets sorted out later. So can

00:45:04.120 you really tell what somebody's gender identity is at that age? Here's where I'm going to really

00:45:12.840 make you mad. I think you can sometimes. But here's the problem. How would you know you're

00:45:22.100 right? You don't have a way to know you're right. Uh, so let me say it again. If it's true,

00:45:28.900 true, if you, if you accept the notion that people are, you know, born in the wrong, they're

00:45:36.920 misgendered or whatever the word is, if you buy that notion that it's something that an adult

00:45:42.560 can later understand and make their own decision, if you buy that as a legitimate path, which I

00:45:51.580 do, because once you're an adult, make your own decisions. But that doesn't mean that it's

00:45:57.420 not always there. So by, by my way of thinking, sometimes at five, you know, but sometimes you

00:46:08.980 think, you know, and you're wrong. And then they just, you know, they're just normal fluid kids who

00:46:15.980 settle on, you know, the gender that they look. So would you disagree with my assessment that if it's 0.95

00:46:25.160 true that they will always be, let's say there's a five-year-old and if you could see the future,

00:46:30.640 if you didn't do anything, you know, if you just ignored it, they would grow up to be somebody who

00:46:36.300 as an adult says, you know, I'm going to have this transition. You know, it's, it's always been with

00:46:41.140 me. Nothing ever changed. I'm going to, I'm going to see if I can solve my problem with this transition.

00:46:46.620 Don't you think it was there when they were five? Because I do. I think it was there when they

00:46:53.700 were five. I just think you can't accurately identify it. I'm really interested in the people

00:47:02.000 saying, I saw a no. Are there people on here who think that's not biological? Are there some,

00:47:11.080 are there some people who think that's a hundred percent social construct? Really?

00:47:21.300 Because I don't think there's any chance of that. You know, I, here's, here's the sort of thing that

00:47:28.100 influences me on this. Did you ever see the show about the two twins who were separated at birth?

00:47:35.120 And it was two guys who both grew up and without knowing anything about each other,

00:47:39.740 literally separated at birth. They, they learned that they had a twin and then they decided to get

00:47:45.120 together and they had both grown up to become firemen. Now that would be quite a coincidence,

00:47:51.620 right? They both grew up to be firemen in different places, raised by different parents,

00:47:56.220 didn't know each other. I think they both showed up in suspenders. I think they, they bought the same

00:48:02.940 gift for each other. And there were a whole bunch of other things that they did that looked like

00:48:07.320 lifestyle choices that were identical. And they were raised completely differently without knowing

00:48:13.480 each other. Now, does that suggest that even really things that look like lifestyle choices

00:48:21.700 are baked in when you're born? I think it does. I think it does. You know, there, there are things

00:48:28.660 about me now that are clearly were obvious when I was five years old. When I was five years old,

00:48:35.140 I wanted to be a cartoonist. Like there's just some things that just don't change. Like it's just

00:48:41.260 baked into you and you know, I'm, I mean, I wanted to be a creative person. I think that's the part

00:48:46.620 that was baked in, not the cartoonist specifically, but doesn't mean biological. Well, what I'm saying

00:48:56.280 is that there does seem to be people who have a physical sex situation that differs from their

00:49:08.120 internal view. Would you agree that that's true? Would everybody agree that there are real people

00:49:14.440 who without society causing it, their, their brain feels one gender, but their body looks another? 0.81

00:49:23.400 Do you agree that they exist? I think they exist. Yeah. I mean, there are plenty of people who say

00:49:31.120 they are those people. I have no reason to doubt it. So I think they exist, but a lot of you say no.

00:49:37.020 Interesting. And on YouTube, a lot of people are saying no, that they think that that doesn't exist.

00:49:43.140 Interesting. I think you're completely wrong,

00:49:46.200 but I don't completely dismiss it because it's in the category of things that, well,

00:49:53.820 maybe, I mean, I think you're wrong. I do think that, I do think that that's the sort of difference

00:50:01.260 that could be baked in. Well, let me, let me tell you how easily that could be true.

00:50:08.600 Would you agree that you're, the chemistry when you're being formed, you know, the specific

00:50:16.740 chemistry would influence whether you're male or female? Like, or maybe that's too strong because

00:50:25.180 that's just the sperm and the egg. But if you, if you were to change the chemistry in which the sperm

00:50:31.080 and the egg were incubating, you could cause them to be more masculine and more feminine,

00:50:37.580 right? I think that's true. So even though their chromosomes are what the chromosomes are,

00:50:44.240 you can influence how masculine or how feminine they are within their, within their sex, right?

00:50:52.700 So if that's true, could you imagine a situation in which the chemistry was not the same all the way

00:50:59.780 through? In other words, could you imagine a case where the brain was forming after the genitals

00:51:07.660 or the other way around? That the, the brain part that influences your sexuality gets formed first

00:51:17.100 and then maybe your body chemistry is changes before your, I don't know, or something like that.

00:51:22.780 So I'm just, I'm just speculating that one could imagine that there are people who don't have the

00:51:28.660 same body chemistry all the way through pregnancy and that there might be some kind of a radical 0.68

00:51:34.360 change that would cause you to start developing one way and then finish developing another way

00:51:41.260 and be sort of a blended situation and then have to choose which one makes you happier, you know,

00:51:50.600 to, or, or not choose. I suppose that's a choice as well. All right. So enough about that.

00:51:57.800 Enough about that.

00:52:04.420 Can you imagine a person with impulsive violence that is unaffected by education?

00:52:10.760 Yes, but they're, they're the exception.

00:52:16.220 All right. That's enough for now. I'll talk to you, YouTube, tomorrow. Clearly one of the best

00:52:21.780 live streams you've ever seen. Not as good as yesterday, but one of the best. One of the best.

00:52:27.640 And tomorrow? Oh, wow. It's going to be great. Bye for now.

00:52:31.260 Bye for now.

00:52:34.040 Bye for now.

00:52:37.000 Bye for now.

00:52:39.660 Bye for now.

00:52:40.980 Bye for now.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - June 15, 2022

Episode 1775 Scott Adams： Today I Will Settle The Gun Control Debate In A Way You Didn't See Coming

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript