Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1974 Scott Adams： Let's Say Goodbye To A Crappy Year And Talk About All The Fake News

00:00:00.000 Happy 2022. Is there anybody who wants to do 2022 all over again?

00:00:07.280 No, no, nobody. But 2023, I am optimistic. Oh yeah, we'll have a little inflation,

00:00:15.260 a few problems, but it's going to look good. Now, do you think we can launch 2023

00:00:22.200 with a simultaneous SIP in such a way that it's even better than you expect? I think we can.

00:00:29.400 And all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or a stein,

00:00:33.500 a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:40.260 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day,

00:00:44.860 the thing that makes everything better, especially 2023. It's called the simultaneous SIP.

00:00:51.000 It's the last one for this crappy year. Go.

00:00:59.400 Ah, now that's the way to go to the new year. That's the way to do it.

00:01:06.420 All right. I saw a tweet today about a study that suggests that mental illness can be spread by social media.

00:01:14.960 Do you believe that? Do you believe that mental illness?

00:01:22.120 Now, I'm not talking about just, let me clarify.

00:01:26.420 I'm not talking about the experience of using social media that has, you know, depression and mental health issues.

00:01:33.460 I'm not talking about that.

00:01:34.380 I'm talking about somebody has a specific mental illness and then they make a bunch of TikTok videos because TikTok is what they looked at.

00:01:44.960 And then other people who watch the person who has the mental illness come to believe they have it, too.

00:01:51.500 And then they adopt it as their identity.

00:01:53.960 They don't just have a medical problem, but they are that person.

00:01:57.260 They're the person with it.

00:01:59.300 And apparently Tourette's is one of them.

00:02:02.000 That people are watching influencers with Tourette's and their parents have to take them to the doctor because they act like they have Tourette's.

00:02:10.940 Do you believe it?

00:02:13.060 Does that sound like a real thing to you?

00:02:16.860 Do the really test on it.

00:02:18.800 Really?

00:02:20.700 Really?

00:02:22.040 It passes the really test.

00:02:23.520 Yeah, I was tricking you because usually when I do the really test, I'm going to debunk it.

00:02:30.360 No, this totally passes the really test.

00:02:33.120 Really?

00:02:33.740 Somebody sees social media and they copy it?

00:02:36.100 Yes.

00:02:37.260 Yes, very easy to believe.

00:02:38.960 Have you seen the videos of dogs imitating the illnesses of their masters?

00:02:45.460 Did you even know that was a thing?

00:02:47.720 Apparently it is.

00:02:48.620 There are a number of videos, you can see them on social media, where if the owner gets a limp, you know, they hurt their foot and they're limping, the dog will adopt the limp as long as the person has it.

00:03:01.440 That's a real thing.

00:03:02.980 So you don't think that that happens to people too?

00:03:05.220 Now, maybe those videos are pranks or hoaxes or something, but the general concept is that people do adopt other people's mannerisms.

00:03:19.220 It's pretty automatic.

00:03:21.580 Let's talk about Trump's tax returns.

00:03:23.560 Well, the walls are closing in.

00:03:29.800 The walls are closing in.

00:03:31.360 Finally, finally the Democrats get what they've long hoped for.

00:03:38.940 If we could only get his tax returns, it'll be like the Rosetta Stone.

00:03:43.520 It will unlock the financial crimes throughout his empire.

00:03:48.280 Finally, we'll find out all the bad things he's been doing all along.

00:03:53.960 And now we know.

00:03:55.680 Allow me to mention some of the bad, bad things we found on his taxes.

00:04:05.420 Number one, he made large charitable donations.

00:04:09.920 I know, I know, I know.

00:04:14.900 You used to like him.

00:04:16.540 A lot of you, you were like pro-Trump.

00:04:18.980 You're like, I used to like him.

00:04:21.120 Are you serious?

00:04:22.720 He made large charitable donations?

00:04:27.080 Well, the story is that they were so large that there's some question about whether they're substantiated.

00:04:33.740 But am I wrong that they used to mock him for not making enough of a charitable contribution?

00:04:40.660 Aren't they mocking him both ways?

00:04:42.980 Once when he didn't have much and now he has a lot.

00:04:46.560 And they're mocking him both ways.

00:04:48.960 Pick one.

00:04:50.300 Pick one.

00:04:52.160 How about this?

00:04:53.940 Oh my God, this is terrible.

00:04:57.280 The Trump Organization has lots of overseas businesses.

00:05:01.740 And one of them has a, I can barely even say it,

00:05:06.520 a bank account in China.

00:05:09.920 There's a bank account in China.

00:05:13.200 Of course, it was fully disclosed when Trump ran for president.

00:05:18.820 So it's not a new bank account.

00:05:21.380 It's one he fully disclosed when he ran for president.

00:05:28.020 It's just associated with some business over there.

00:05:30.880 There's no suggestion that there's anything wrong with it.

00:05:32.920 But it still made it a headline in CNN.

00:05:38.640 So CNN treated it as a headline before basically saying there's nothing to the story.

00:05:45.380 How about this?

00:05:46.580 Trump made small loans to his children and they paid back interest and the interest was in round dollar amounts.

00:06:01.860 So they're concerned that he may have been trying to dodge gift taxes.

00:06:17.460 That's like the smallest financial crime of all time, trying to dodge gift taxes.

00:06:31.100 Now, there's no indication that what he did is illegal.

00:06:33.360 That's a different story because everybody tries to dodge taxes, but you dodge them in all the ways that are legal and available.

00:06:44.640 So there's no indication it's illegal.

00:06:47.580 Just it raises a question.

00:06:50.320 It raises a question.

00:06:51.220 Then there's his helicopter revenue and expenses exactly matched.

00:06:58.860 Why does he have helicopter revenue?

00:07:01.660 Was he renting his helicopter out?

00:07:04.920 And the fact that they exactly matched, which is statistically pretty close to impossible.

00:07:12.140 Do you think maybe they just said to me, it sounds like somebody said operate the helicopter at at zero profit.

00:07:22.080 And so somebody just, you know, played around to the numbers until it was exactly the same.

00:07:28.280 It doesn't mean any of the deductions were illegal.

00:07:31.500 That's not suggested by anything.

00:07:33.740 It's just that the numbers were the same.

00:07:36.020 Now, it's suspicious, but also it's not a crime.

00:07:41.080 All right.

00:07:45.220 There's, oh, oh, this is bad.

00:07:47.820 There's no sign that he donated his presidential salary to any charity like he said he would.

00:07:53.320 I think one year maybe it showed and the other year's not.

00:07:57.920 So that's grounds for impeachment.

00:08:01.120 He said he'd donate his charity.

00:08:02.600 But in the context of losing millions of dollars, at least on paper, he did not.

00:08:10.200 So do with that what you will.

00:08:15.100 All right.

00:08:15.780 Here's your financial tip for the day.

00:08:19.580 You're going to see lots of articles discussing Trump's taxes and the losses that he's had from 2015 through 2020.

00:08:29.400 Apparently, he had tens of millions of losses each of those years on paper.

00:08:33.580 If you hear anybody discuss it or writing about it, and they do not mention also, in addition to that, what his cash flow is, you should never listen to that person again.

00:08:50.340 Because here's like basic financial information.

00:08:53.140 If you have a real estate-related empire, the laws are crafted so there's lots of stuff you could write off so that on paper you might look like you have losses, but you're still making money in the sense that there's more cash coming in than going out.

00:09:10.980 Now, when Warren Buffett buys a company, does he look at the income statement, the way the reporters are, to find out if it's a good company?

00:09:23.140 Nope.

00:09:24.620 Nope, he doesn't look at the income statement.

00:09:27.080 So Warren Buffett, he looks at both, but he's primarily interested in the cash flow.

00:09:33.720 So the best investor in the world buys companies because they have good cash flow, even if on paper they've written off enough artificial stuff like depreciation, etc.

00:09:44.160 So it looks like zero.

00:09:45.880 That's like a really good investment.

00:09:48.520 So just think about this.

00:09:49.960 Just hold it in your head that all these people are talking about his tax returns, and so far, so far, not one person has mentioned cash flow.

00:10:02.240 Just hold that in your head.

00:10:04.380 It's the only thing that matters.

00:10:06.560 Well, that's an exaggeration.

00:10:08.460 It's the main thing that tells you if he was running his business well, I mean successfully.

00:10:13.720 It's the main thing.

00:10:15.980 It's not even in any of the stories.

00:10:19.480 All right?

00:10:20.040 Can I get a confirmation from those of you who have economic, financial educations?

00:10:26.560 Everybody who has the same education is on the same page.

00:10:29.920 It's not a debatable point that the journalists don't even know what financials are supposed to look like, and they're talking about them.

00:10:42.360 They don't have any idea that they're not even on the right page, literally not on the right page.

00:10:47.260 If the page they're looking at is income, and the page they're not looking at is cash flow, they're literally on the wrong page.

00:10:58.780 There's your news business right there.

00:11:03.260 All right.

00:11:05.000 Then apparently, I think we already knew this, he wrote off his payments to Stormy Daniels, to which I say,

00:11:11.520 and, and, why wouldn't you?

00:11:17.400 It was literally a business expense.

00:11:20.400 Right? 0.94

00:11:21.360 It wasn't the amount he paid to have sex with her. 0.97

00:11:24.420 It was the amount he paid to make sure that he could run for office.

00:11:28.460 So it was some kind of a, either a, it was either a campaign expense or a business expense.

00:11:33.420 So, I mean, I would have tried it.

00:11:35.760 The worst thing that could happen is they say, you know, you don't get that deduction.

00:11:40.460 But you don't go to jail for that one.

00:11:43.340 Here's a good tax tip that you should not take my advice on.

00:11:48.700 If your accountants do your return, and the accountant tells you, yeah, we could try that,

00:11:55.040 you're not going to go to jail for that.

00:11:57.720 It means there's an argument, and an expert said, yeah, it might be a gray area, but let's try it.

00:12:03.660 You can always try the gray area.

00:12:05.260 It is totally not illegal to assert your interpretation of things.

00:12:11.900 You don't go to jail for that.

00:12:13.160 You might pay extra taxes if they disagree, and there might be a penalty.

00:12:16.980 But you don't go to jail for that.

00:12:18.460 That's not, that's not illegal, per se.

00:12:23.840 Yeah, you do go to jail if you don't pay.

00:12:25.840 That is true.

00:12:26.400 All right, well, you all know that Andrew Tate and his brother were picked up by police.

00:12:34.860 I don't want to say arrested, because I don't think they are.

00:12:37.780 They're detained.

00:12:39.980 And now the update is they're detained for 30 days.

00:12:44.080 What is the caution I give you on all Romanian news?

00:12:48.320 Don't believe any of it.

00:12:49.540 Just assume everything out of this story is fake, until maybe later.

00:12:56.600 But at the moment, just assume it's all fake.

00:12:59.300 So what does it mean to say he's detained for 30 days?

00:13:02.720 I have no idea.

00:13:05.120 Detained?

00:13:06.200 Do you think he's in a prison cell with the other prisoners?

00:13:10.800 I'm going to guess not.

00:13:12.560 It's possible.

00:13:13.940 I'm going to guess not.

00:13:15.000 I think detained might suggest he's not in the same facility with regular prisoners.

00:13:21.500 Because I don't think he's arrested.

00:13:24.240 And I don't know if there's no charges.

00:13:27.300 What does it mean to be detained?

00:13:30.380 Yeah, maybe they took his passport, maybe something like that.

00:13:33.560 So I'm not exactly sure what it means.

00:13:36.420 And you shouldn't believe anything about it at this point.

00:13:40.060 Yeah.

00:13:40.440 And innocent until proven guilty.

00:13:42.540 We don't know what's going on over there.

00:13:45.000 But one reason that I think he won't be convicted of anything is that any evidence is already tainted.

00:13:56.240 It's tainted.

00:13:58.960 The evidence.

00:14:01.260 It's got taint all over it.

00:14:03.960 It's very tainted.

00:14:05.520 All right.

00:14:06.940 Here's a little fact I didn't know.

00:14:08.620 But apparently, did you know that the police in Romania are really well paid?

00:14:14.980 How many of you knew that?

00:14:17.020 It's sort of surprising, right?

00:14:18.880 Like Romania, you think it's not going to be high.

00:14:21.040 But apparently, at least 22 members of the Romanian Police Department are driving Bugattis.

00:14:26.480 So, I'm just waiting for a reaction to that.

00:14:36.000 If you didn't know, Andrew Taint allegedly owns 22 Bugatti sports cars.

00:14:41.240 But I have a feeling that the police are driving those Bugattis. 0.99

00:14:48.400 And if they're not, what the hell is the point of being corrupt?

00:14:51.380 What is the point of being in the most corrupt country, in the most corrupt police force?

00:14:58.320 Probably.

00:14:58.960 I'm just guessing.

00:15:00.000 Don't really know that, but just guessing.

00:15:02.400 If you can't drive a Bugatti now and then from somebody that you've targeted.

00:15:09.120 So, yeah, he's been detainted.

00:15:13.000 They're detainted.

00:15:14.380 All right.

00:15:14.620 Let's talk about Ray Epps.

00:15:16.840 So, the original 845-page final report from the January 6th committee made no mention of Ray Epps,

00:15:26.420 even though they interviewed him, and even though he was the subject of the most interest

00:15:31.880 by, I don't know, 30 or 40% of the public.

00:15:35.620 The single thing we wanted to know the most, a segment of the public, no mention.

00:15:41.500 But, now we're getting some transcripts.

00:15:46.700 Would it surprise you to know that the transcripts are being interpreted just like it's two movies

00:15:54.400 playing on one screen, and everybody's seeing what they want?

00:15:58.900 So, there's something in there, in the transcript, that says he told his nephew that he was in the front,

00:16:05.340 and he, quote, orchestrated some part of the event.

00:16:09.360 So, that means he is a FBI fed, right?

00:16:14.380 Now, he was asked directly, you know, did you talk to the FBI?

00:16:20.520 Are you a federal agent?

00:16:22.300 You know, did you work for the CIA and the intelligence agencies, police force?

00:16:26.620 So, they did ask him those questions.

00:16:29.600 But, isn't it interesting that the FBI wouldn't answer the question?

00:16:35.940 Because he said, no, he doesn't work for the FBI.

00:16:39.420 But, when Christopher Wray was asked if he works for the FBI, he wouldn't answer.

00:16:46.180 Now, is that only because he doesn't want to answer the next time he's asked,

00:16:50.760 because the next one might actually be somebody who does work for the FBI?

00:16:53.600 Is he just laying down the law, the rule that we don't answer that question?

00:16:59.320 Is that what Wray was doing?

00:17:01.440 Maybe.

00:17:02.620 I mean, that wouldn't be crazy.

00:17:05.340 But, it sure looked like the FBI had a different opinion of whether he worked for them.

00:17:09.700 Or, maybe Wray didn't know.

00:17:12.280 And, you know, it's possible he didn't know, one way or the other.

00:17:15.240 He's an asset, not an employee.

00:17:18.680 Yeah, we know he was not an employee.

00:17:21.920 That part we know.

00:17:24.080 So, if I say working for them, I meant, you know, not directly.

00:17:29.780 Well, so, I read the transcripts and I did not see evidence that

00:17:34.400 that Ray Epps was a Fed.

00:17:40.760 What did you see?

00:17:42.580 Did you see, when you read it, did you see evidence that he was a Fed?

00:17:46.240 Tell me your interpretation.

00:17:49.240 I'm not saying that he is or not.

00:17:50.940 I'm saying that the transcript, the transcript didn't really shed light on that.

00:17:58.900 Why'd you get so quiet?

00:18:00.660 I thought I was going to get quick answers to this.

00:18:04.660 Didn't clear it up.

00:18:05.540 It didn't clear it up.

00:18:06.480 That's true.

00:18:07.520 It didn't clear it up, but it also did not provide any evidence

00:18:10.560 that he was anything but a concerned citizen.

00:18:13.640 So, if I had to bet at this point, I don't know, it's kind of a coin flip for me.

00:18:20.960 I would say there's no direct evidence, but even though he's innocent until proven guilty,

00:18:29.540 and so far that would make him perfectly innocent,

00:18:32.120 we do have a couple of questions, don't we?

00:18:36.140 Question number one, why was he not arrested?

00:18:40.040 When he's the most clearly guilty person at the whole event, you know, well documented?

00:18:45.820 There was no answer for that, was there?

00:18:47.360 Now, is that Ray Epps' problem, that he wasn't arrested?

00:18:52.540 Is that something that Ray Epps needs to answer to?

00:18:55.020 No.

00:18:55.900 No.

00:18:56.280 That's the government needs to answer that question, why he wasn't arrested.

00:18:59.600 Now, what's the second question?

00:19:01.400 Why couldn't Ray say, no, he's not an asset?

00:19:05.800 Why couldn't he answer that question?

00:19:07.900 Don't know.

00:19:08.440 Well, but those are three things, because he was left out of the final report until people asked for it.

00:19:20.780 He wasn't arrested, and Ray refused to say he wasn't an asset.

00:19:27.540 So, all of our suspicion is on the side of the government.

00:19:31.820 Is the government innocent until proven guilty?

00:19:34.400 No.

00:19:36.480 Only Ray Epps is innocent until proven guilty.

00:19:39.300 So, I declare Ray Epps, under the Constitution of the United States, totally innocent, just like the Tates are totally innocent, but in a different country, until proven guilty. 0.74

00:19:52.900 But let's talk about that government.

00:19:55.340 Government is guilty.

00:19:58.120 Guilty.

00:19:59.440 Because they're not giving us transparency, and they're clearly covering something up.

00:20:04.040 I don't know what.

00:20:05.460 But you should assume the worst.

00:20:08.400 As a reasonable citizen, you should say, effectively, effectively the government confirmed it.

00:20:16.160 Which is different from saying they confirmed it.

00:20:18.620 Say, effectively they did, by failing to be transparent.

00:20:22.720 A failure to be transparent, and a clear unwillingness to be transparent, has to be interpreted as a confession.

00:20:30.900 Which doesn't mean it is, but it also, you know, the same way, the citizen might actually be guilty.

00:20:40.120 But your system has to assume the, you have to assume the citizen's innocent, and you have to assume your government is guilty.

00:20:47.680 When they act guilty.

00:20:49.360 Right?

00:20:49.560 If they weren't acting guilty, then there's nothing to suspect.

00:20:53.100 But we should start talking that way.

00:20:57.320 Instead of saying, I know EPS is an asset.

00:21:02.320 You don't know that.

00:21:04.160 That doesn't sound persuasive.

00:21:06.280 Instead say, the government has effectively confirmed it.

00:21:10.520 By not addressing it.

00:21:12.860 Done.

00:21:14.220 There's nothing else you need to say.

00:21:15.840 You don't have to show your work.

00:21:17.880 You don't have to show your evidence.

00:21:19.320 You don't have to make an argument.

00:21:20.920 Just say, the government has chosen not to give us transparency.

00:21:25.240 You have to, as a practical matter, treat that as a confession.

00:21:31.700 Try it.

00:21:33.500 All right.

00:21:36.920 So I was seeing a year-end review about fentanyl, and it was mentioning all the fentanyl deaths, etc.

00:21:43.740 Which we talk about too much, unfortunately.

00:21:46.940 But at this point, consistent with my theme, give me one good reason the United States has not flattened the cartels.

00:21:57.580 One reason.

00:22:00.060 Don't have enough money?

00:22:01.700 No, that's not a reason.

00:22:02.800 We have plenty of money for war. 0.67

00:22:04.960 We've never run out of, no, we've never, we've never, corruption, there we go.

00:22:09.080 Corruption is the only explanation.

00:22:12.740 Let me say that again.

00:22:14.500 The reason that the United States has not moved militarily against the cartels, we're down to only one reason.

00:22:21.900 Right?

00:22:22.160 If we had not exhausted all other possible reasons, then I wouldn't say that.

00:22:27.900 But we've exhausted, we've exhausted, do people, do the, does the government understand it's a huge problem?

00:22:35.440 Yes.

00:22:35.780 Yes.

00:22:36.220 Yes.

00:22:36.860 So there's no question about how big the problem is.

00:22:39.920 Do they think that these deaths are, you know, relatively accurately counted?

00:22:46.800 Yes.

00:22:47.620 I mean, maybe not within 10 or 20%, but enough to make decisions, right?

00:22:52.780 So we have accurate information.

00:22:55.380 We know the problem is growing.

00:22:57.720 We know that our government knows its problem, and one of the biggest ones.

00:23:02.300 They know the voters want to deal with.

00:23:04.100 They know how to start wars, and they know how to flatten the cartels, and they know where it's coming from.

00:23:12.260 Give me any reason we're not doing it except corruption.

00:23:15.680 It has to be corruption.

00:23:17.760 Right?

00:23:17.840 Now, again, if your government gave you a different explanation, well, then I would weigh that and say, okay, I don't know one way or another, but they've explained it, and that is their obligation.

00:23:29.820 So I would be tentatively supportive if they had a reason that passed the sniff test.

00:23:37.980 But they're not giving a reason.

00:23:40.520 They're not giving a reason.

00:23:42.020 If they don't give you a reason, you have to assume corruption, because that's the default.

00:23:50.520 Remember, the government is guilty unless they're transparent.

00:23:54.160 So if you suspect that corruption is the problem, and they don't do anything to, you know, talk you out of it, that has to be your working hypothesis.

00:24:06.180 As a practical matter, the government has said that they're too corrupt to deal with it by their actions.

00:24:12.960 I'm not blaming any specific person, but it's obvious that corruption is the problem.

00:24:18.760 Because there is no other offered explanation.

00:24:23.120 No other explanation.

00:24:24.920 Now let's talk about banning TikTok.

00:24:28.140 Does everyone in the government know it's a problem?

00:24:30.660 Yes.

00:24:31.680 Do they know how to stop it?

00:24:33.300 Easily.

00:24:34.400 Executive order.

00:24:35.820 Tomorrow.

00:24:36.140 Tomorrow.

00:24:37.080 Is anybody, even one person arguing, that we should not ban it in the United States?

00:24:42.440 A politician.

00:24:44.000 Nope.

00:24:44.900 Not one.

00:24:46.040 There's not a single person on the other side of the debate.

00:24:49.780 And yet, it's not happening.

00:24:52.820 Is there any explanation other than corruption?

00:24:57.660 If they have one, I invite them to give it to me and I will weigh it.

00:25:01.780 So, for example, if they said, yeah, I know what you're saying, but then China would retaliate, I might say, hmm, I don't know, that might be a good reason or not.

00:25:12.080 But at least there's a reason.

00:25:13.880 At least there's a reason.

00:25:15.160 So then I could at least say, well, it could be incompetence, could be fear, you know, at least it's possible.

00:25:23.060 But we don't have any explanation, no explanation.

00:25:29.080 It has to be corruption.

00:25:31.240 And again, I could be wrong, but it has to be your operating hypothesis.

00:25:36.140 The operating hypothesis is that it's corruption, even if it isn't.

00:25:41.060 Yeah, there's what else is going on here.

00:25:50.360 So here's a story that the local subscribers have already heard.

00:25:55.820 But if you don't mind, I'll sort of summarize it for the rest of you.

00:25:59.640 You know that, or maybe you didn't know, that maybe a week ago I tweeted that you should never debate Elon Musk on Twitter.

00:26:11.060 And then within the week I found myself in what looked like a debate with Elon Musk on Twitter

00:26:16.340 about whether the WEF and Bill Gates really wanted to decrease the population of Earth.

00:26:24.220 I say no, and it's crazy to imagine that they did.

00:26:29.440 What they want to do is decrease the rate of growth, which is perfectly sensible if the way you're doing it

00:26:36.200 is by making people richer and healthier, which actually does reduce their population growth.

00:26:42.480 So Elon Musk weighed in where I was questioning whether there's really an elite group of people

00:26:53.100 planning these bad things.

00:26:55.540 And Elon Musk said this, and I said that the people on the right believe that the WEF wants to depopulate.

00:27:03.400 So it's a hoax that the right believes.

00:27:05.860 And Elon Musk replied, this is neither a right nor a left issue.

00:27:10.180 And then he said about me, run antivirus software in your brain.

00:27:16.080 What?

00:27:17.080 What?

00:27:17.300 And as I told the local subscribers last night, when I saw that Elon Musk had insulted me on

00:27:28.600 Twitter, I thought, well, I mean, how many people are going to see it anyway?

00:27:32.620 And so I checked his user count.

00:27:36.440 124 million people.

00:27:39.560 124 million people. 1.00

00:27:40.740 And every member of the press watched him call me a dipshit. 0.97

00:27:45.340 How was your day? 0.99

00:27:49.140 How did 2022 end for you?

00:27:53.540 Well, that's how it went for me. 0.91

00:27:57.080 Now, and to top it off, not only did he dunk on me and call me a dipshit, in a manner of speaking,

00:28:06.180 but he did it a week after I said, you should never argue with, you should never debate Elon Musk on Twitter.

00:28:17.300 Now, there's an ending to the story that's more favorable to me. 0.90

00:28:23.060 But as I told the locals people, I encourage you to accept the fake news version of the story, because it's really fucking funny. 0.76

00:28:32.900 Sorry, trying not to swear as much.

00:28:34.980 2023, no more swearing.

00:28:36.760 I think it's hilarious, that version of the story, that I said you should never do it, and then I did it, and then he slapped me down.

00:28:47.020 That would just be so perfect.

00:28:49.400 So, by all means, accept that version of the story.

00:28:53.380 If you'd like to know technically what actually happened, he had misinterpreted my comment to be about left and right when it was closer to the opposite, meaning that, as I explained to him.

00:29:08.140 My entire point was that the left has a number of hoaxes, like the drinking bleach hoax, but hoaxes are not limited to one side, and that the right has their own hoaxes, and the belief that Bill Gates wants to depopulate the earth is at the top of the list of an obvious, well, I call it obvious hoax.

00:29:29.800 We'll talk about that.

00:29:33.120 So, that was my point.

00:29:34.200 Anyway, once I clarified it on Twitter, then Musk confirmed, in his opinion, that the WEF was not an Illuminati trying to do any of these bad things.

00:29:48.060 In other words, completely agreed with me, and that what you see is just the bubbling up of lots of individuals doing individual things.

00:29:58.480 Now, and they said the reason he didn't go to Davos is they thought it would be boring.

00:30:04.200 That's the only reason he turned down the invitation.

00:30:08.900 So, the real story is that Elon Musk completely agreed with me that there's nobody who has power who is trying to depopulate the earth.

00:30:21.580 Now, but he did say that it's a widespread opinion, that there are lots of people, environmentalists and stuff, who do want fewer people on the planet.

00:30:31.580 But that was not my point, although I think I was a little unclear, so that's on me.

00:30:37.940 But my point was that nobody in power has that opinion, which I thought I said directly, but then I reread it, and I left a little wiggle room in the way I wrote it.

00:30:47.660 So, do you think, how many of you believe there's a video of Bill Gates at a TED Talk in which he said he wants to reduce the population of earth by 10 to 20% because of climate change?

00:31:11.400 How many of you believe that actually exists?

00:31:16.960 Because somebody sent it to me today and said, here it is.

00:31:21.420 And then I watched the video, and what do you think I saw when I watched the video?

00:31:26.180 Did it say that?

00:31:27.880 No.

00:31:28.300 This entire thing is because people can't tell the difference between reducing the rate of growth, a good thing, versus reducing the number of people, a very, very bad thing.

00:31:42.980 So, it's only reading comprehension, or in this case, listening comprehension.

00:31:48.740 And here's how you should have known that nobody meant to decrease the number of people on the planet.

00:31:54.560 Here's the test for that.

00:31:56.720 Nobody would say that.

00:31:58.300 Nobody would say that, like, directly.

00:32:03.260 And even the people you think are saying it, because Alex Epstein sent me a list of people who are influential thought leaders, who, he says, do, in fact, think there are too many people.

00:32:15.680 And so, I read their quotes, and it's true.

00:32:18.940 There are all these influential environmentalist names you've even heard.

00:32:22.500 So, they're influential enough that you've actually heard their names.

00:32:25.000 Who are saying directly, Earth can't sustain this many people.

00:32:29.120 So, that means they want to decrease the number of people, right?

00:32:34.580 They didn't really say that.

00:32:36.920 Now, I'm not saying they don't believe it, but the examples given were, for example, Michael Mann had a quote sometime that he thought we were already beyond the carrying capacity of the Earth.

00:32:49.620 But he didn't say, therefore, reduce the number of people.

00:32:53.740 That's an assumption.

00:32:57.220 Because I could say the same thing.

00:32:58.800 I think we're beyond the carrying capacity of the Earth.

00:33:03.320 But that's different from reducing the number of people who are here.

00:33:07.140 I don't want to do that.

00:33:08.820 I don't want to give people vaccinations so they die, so there are fewer of them.

00:33:13.340 That would be crazy.

00:33:16.140 So, the first thing you need to know is that anybody who says there are too many people, that's not the same as saying I want to reduce the number of them.

00:33:23.880 It says there's a huge problem.

00:33:25.960 Two ways to deal with it.

00:33:27.160 One is the way we've always dealt with it, which is innovate a way out of it.

00:33:32.140 And the other way is, I suppose, murdering a billion people.

00:33:36.680 Do you think anybody was suggesting murdering a billion people?

00:33:40.740 Because a number of people actually think that they were.

00:33:43.740 Yeah, I'm seeing it, yes.

00:33:45.140 People say, yes, I think they were actually.

00:33:47.200 I think they were actually in public, publicly, saying they want to murder, you know, maybe with bad vaccinations or something.

00:33:56.120 Murder a billion people.

00:33:58.920 Really?

00:34:00.240 Really?

00:34:00.780 You think Bill Gates stood in public and said he wants to, like, murder a billion people?

00:34:06.000 And it wasn't a headline or anything.

00:34:07.180 All right.

00:34:09.760 So, and then I got into this weird conversation with this user RogerThat on Twitter, where he sends me the video of Bill Gates very clearly talking about reducing the growth of population.

00:34:27.240 And then he says, there it is.

00:34:29.120 He wants to reduce the actual population by 10 to 15%.

00:34:32.520 And I said, but your video says the opposite, very clearly, that he's not talking about total population.

00:34:40.120 Now, how do I know that he's not talking about total population?

00:34:44.760 Because nobody would, nobody would, nobody would say that at a TED Talk.

00:34:52.260 And if they did, it's all we'd be talking about.

00:34:55.580 It didn't happen.

00:34:57.420 He talked about the growth rate.

00:34:59.460 And it was very clear.

00:35:00.700 All right.

00:35:09.480 Yeah, let's see.

00:35:14.660 So here are some of the environmentalists, the thought leaders who are pushing the idea that there are too many people, which is close to, it's close to wanting to reduce the population.

00:35:25.820 But it is different.

00:35:27.920 Still, they're worth mentioning.

00:35:29.140 So here are some of the names.

00:35:30.140 See if you've heard of them.

00:35:32.360 McKibben, environmentalist, McKibben.

00:35:36.040 How about Michael Mann?

00:35:38.760 Probably heard of him.

00:35:41.080 Ehrlich, leading ecologist.

00:35:44.820 So far, I've heard of all these people.

00:35:47.640 A leading energy thinker named Lovins.

00:35:49.760 I don't know Lovins, but I'll take it.

00:35:52.600 Now, the counterpoint here is that these are influential thought leaders.

00:35:57.480 And they will have impact on regular leaders.

00:36:00.640 So there is actually, like, a legitimate movement to depopulate.

00:36:07.180 Have they had any influence on an actual leader?

00:36:10.980 Is there any leader who also wants to depopulate the earth?

00:36:15.200 No.

00:36:17.640 No, no, there's not.

00:36:19.100 I mean, nobody says it.

00:36:21.760 No, granted, it doesn't say it.

00:36:23.420 So there's no elected official.

00:36:26.840 No elected official buys into the population decline idea.

00:36:32.700 Do you know why there's no elected official who buys it, even though there are all these semi-experts who are saying it?

00:36:39.660 Why can't the politician not buy it?

00:36:45.600 It would be impossible to be an elected leader who says there needs to be fewer of you guys, the people that elected me.

00:36:54.720 You can't get elected that way.

00:36:58.620 It would be impossible to be a serious leader and say, instead of trying to feed you all, I'm going to try to reduce the number of you.

00:37:09.160 No leader can do that.

00:37:10.640 The one-child policy was about reducing growth.

00:37:16.960 Again, every time you're confused, it's the same confusion.

00:37:21.740 You always confuse growth with reducing the absolute number.

00:37:28.180 There's nobody who's ever tried to reduce the absolute number.

00:37:31.440 Now, the point that people make is, Scott, Scott, Scott, you're not seeing the forest for the trees.

00:37:47.460 Because look at all these policies.

00:37:49.540 You got your vaccination policy. 0.76

00:37:52.140 Some will say that that was meant to kill people.

00:37:54.880 You got your abortion to reduce the population. 0.93

00:37:58.360 You got your legalized euthanasia to reduce the population, et cetera.

00:38:10.580 Fentanyl to reduce the population.

00:38:14.020 But doesn't that leave out some examples?

00:38:17.740 Do you think in the recent years our government has done nothing to feed us and keep us alive?

00:38:24.240 That is their main job.

00:38:25.840 Mostly the government is feeding us and keeping us alive and educating us.

00:38:30.900 I mean, maybe poorly, but, you know, 99% of everything the government does is to keep you alive.

00:38:37.520 If 1% of those things are about managing growth rate, that's really far away from saying there's a pattern of reducing the number of people.

00:38:49.680 That's not even in the same zip code.

00:38:51.640 Didn't you say no economist is for reducing growth of population?

00:39:00.860 No.

00:39:01.640 Every economist wants to manage growth rates.

00:39:06.260 Zero economists want the current number of people to shrink from its current level.

00:39:11.960 Do you see how hard this is?

00:39:13.640 Because right there was a perfect example.

00:39:16.280 There's somebody once again confused growth rate with absolute growth.

00:39:20.740 It's always the same.

00:39:22.300 Everybody who thinks they're disagreeing with me is just confusing growth rate with number.

00:39:28.460 There's nothing else happening.

00:39:30.200 You think there's some kind of an argument about interpretation.

00:39:33.500 You think there's, you know, you think I haven't done my research.

00:39:37.820 There's nothing like that's happening.

00:39:39.680 It's only that.

00:39:41.280 You've confused growth rate with the number of people.

00:39:44.520 You get that right, and everything you read will make sense again.

00:39:48.740 All the things you think look like a conspiracy, they just will dissolve as soon as you say, oh, they're talking about growth rate.

00:39:55.860 I get it now.

00:39:56.820 That's it.

00:39:57.520 It fixes it.

00:39:58.200 Why is Scott investing so much time to debunk the WF conspiracy theories?

00:40:06.480 Excellent question.

00:40:07.600 I have an excellent answer.

00:40:09.860 Why do I do things that my followers won't like, whereas it would be easy to agree to them?

00:40:17.600 I could make much more money by agreeing with you.

00:40:20.540 You all know that, right?

00:40:22.160 If I wanted to make money, all I'd have to do is listen to what Ben Shapiro says, and then listen to any other smart Republican, and wherever they both agree, I would just say those things.

00:40:37.680 Because, you know, if Ben Shapiro agrees with it, and, you know, at least one other Republican, I'm just randomly picking people who are smart, right?

00:40:45.040 And I just do that.

00:40:48.120 And I'll just say what they both agree with.

00:40:50.240 I would never be wrong, according to my audience, and I would have a massive audience.

00:40:57.720 Very easy.

00:40:59.120 Simple to do.

00:41:01.000 Why don't I do it?

00:41:02.920 Because it's not a public good.

00:41:05.240 It would be entertaining, but it wouldn't be a public good.

00:41:08.860 I'm kind of at that place where if there's not a public good associated with my work, I'm just not interested.

00:41:15.040 It has to have some bigger meaning to it.

00:41:17.540 So the bigger meaning is this.

00:41:18.720 I'm trying to create a small army of critical thinkers who are a level above the public.

00:41:29.400 Because if I can create enough of you, then you will also teach other people, and maybe we're better at sorting out what's real and what's not.

00:41:38.060 So that's why I do it.

00:41:41.400 And the WEF thing is the most important one, probably, on the right, because the right needs to understand that they're also suffering from hoaxes of their own.

00:41:52.340 They're not just being hoaxed by the other side.

00:41:54.920 They're hoaxing themselves.

00:41:56.720 And they're hoaxing themselves pretty hard.

00:41:58.760 Both sides do that, of course.

00:41:59.960 So there's a level of awareness thing.

00:42:04.080 If your level of awareness is my team is right, and here are all my reasons, and the other team is wrong, you're not at a high enough level of awareness.

00:42:15.460 I need to get you up to a level where you realize both sides get easily hoaxed, including me.

00:42:22.460 You know, you've seen me hoaxed in real time, have you not?

00:42:26.960 Right?

00:42:27.220 Covington Kids, perfect example.

00:42:30.400 I got hoaxed.

00:42:32.280 Right?

00:42:32.620 So there's nothing about your IQ or your knowledge or anything.

00:42:36.960 And even the reading comprehension thing is motivated reading.

00:42:40.580 It's probably not actual comprehension.

00:42:44.100 It's a motivated way to read something so you just sort of see what you want to see.

00:42:47.520 So as long as you realize that it's happening to you, then you're a little bit better protected.

00:42:54.160 So the answer is, if I can't convince you you've been duped on the WEF thing, you're going to be exposed and vulnerable.

00:43:05.500 And it makes you look like you don't understand basic things.

00:43:09.540 And then nobody's going to take you seriously when you're talking about something you do understand.

00:43:13.940 Right?

00:43:14.420 So the same thing with the tax returns.

00:43:19.240 If I see somebody talking about Trump's tax returns without mentioning cash flow, I will never take that person seriously again.

00:43:27.820 Never.

00:43:28.720 And I'm trying to avoid that for you.

00:43:30.920 Because honestly, when I hear somebody talking about the WEF trying to reduce the population,

00:43:36.600 I discount the next thing you say before I even hear it.

00:43:40.300 I don't want that for you.

00:43:41.460 I want you to be strong arguers.

00:43:45.220 Now, a strong argument is that there are a number of policies that collectively are reducing reproduction, which is bad.

00:43:56.440 Now, that's a smart argument.

00:43:58.480 You can say, whoa, whoa, whoa.

00:43:59.580 So, like, all these things were individually decided, I get it.

00:44:03.280 But if you put them all together, it's going to destroy our country.

00:44:06.640 Good argument.

00:44:08.060 And I'm totally on board with that, by the way.

00:44:10.420 The collective policies are a very damning situation and would need to be corrected.

00:44:17.200 I think we will correct them.

00:44:18.260 But it's a complete waste of time to say that because Klaus Schwab talks like a Nazi.

00:44:25.120 Let me just say it, right?

00:44:26.540 I have no reason to think Klaus Schwab is a bad guy.

00:44:29.740 I think he's just an engineer and an economist.

00:44:33.460 That's his background.

00:44:34.360 And he has a Germanic kind of accent.

00:44:37.700 He's Austrian, maybe.

00:44:39.540 And our brains just translate that into every World War II movie we've ever seen.

00:44:45.240 So he must be bad because he sounds like, oh, he's Swiss. 1.00

00:44:50.300 That's interesting.

00:44:52.260 But he has that accent that, to our ears, sounds like something's up.

00:44:56.500 He sounds exactly like a Bond villain.

00:44:58.620 Thank you.

00:44:59.460 He sounds exactly like a Bond villain.

00:45:01.360 Now, I think it's unfair to hold that against him.

00:45:06.160 Wouldn't you agree?

00:45:07.900 It's pretty unfair to hold that against him, if that's what's happening, and I'm sure it is.

00:45:12.480 Like, I don't think anybody's consciously doing it.

00:45:15.140 But subconsciously?

00:45:16.500 Of course.

00:45:18.500 99% of all of our political talk is about Hitler.

00:45:22.740 So if a guy actually acts just like Hitler, I mean, that's hyperbole.

00:45:27.140 But if he talks in a way that totally reminds you of Hitler, there's no way that you talk about Hitler all year long,

00:45:36.320 and then once the one guy who actually does act like Hitler, the way he talks, that's the guy you're going to trust.

00:45:43.040 That'll be the only time you don't bring Hitler thinking into your...

00:45:46.360 No.

00:45:47.260 It's obvious that this is a Hitler bias. 0.89

00:45:51.060 How many would agree?

00:45:52.560 How many would agree that you don't even have to do a study?

00:45:55.500 It's obvious that the Klaus Schwab thing, it's a Hitler problem. 0.94

00:46:00.180 And it's not his fault.

00:46:02.180 Totally not his fault.

00:46:04.420 Yeah.

00:46:05.000 A lot of people are agreeing with that.

00:46:07.000 Because we're humans.

00:46:09.240 And it affects me as much as you, right?

00:46:11.660 I'm not, like, superior creature.

00:46:15.480 We're all influenced by things they sound like.

00:46:17.580 In fact, this is one of the most, this is almost the key hypnosis lesson.

00:46:24.140 Some people ask me, where can I learn hypnosis?

00:46:26.760 Here's 25% of everything you need to know about hypnosis.

00:46:31.080 If you pair two ideas together, they start bleeding into each other.

00:46:37.000 There you go.

00:46:37.740 That's 25% of everything you learn in hypnosis.

00:46:41.520 Because most of hypnosis is introducing thoughts that have a predictable impact on your other thoughts.

00:46:50.220 So it's about marrying concepts, right?

00:46:53.640 So when I look at this situation and say, okay, there's no way you can't think about Hiller when he talks.

00:46:59.780 It's just too much in their heads all the time.

00:47:02.300 So there isn't any chance you're not affected by that.

00:47:05.580 Same with me, right?

00:47:07.100 There's no chance.

00:47:09.340 Let me tell you my opinion.

00:47:11.080 I think the WEF is totally sketchy, and I'm not in favor of it.

00:47:17.720 Do you know what my good reasons are?

00:47:22.420 Anybody?

00:47:23.120 What do you think are my good reasons for not trusting the WEF?

00:47:30.920 Actually, I think they are transparent.

00:47:32.840 They're fairly transparent.

00:47:33.960 They publish their work.

00:47:37.980 It's because he sounds like Hiller.

00:47:40.480 Yeah.

00:47:41.880 I'm completely aware of it.

00:47:44.220 Right?

00:47:44.620 You could be aware of your bias, and it doesn't help you at all.

00:47:48.000 That's one of the weird things about hypnosis.

00:47:49.960 You can tell somebody what you're going to do to them, and it still works.

00:47:54.040 Because the brain is just a machine.

00:47:55.900 You push the right button, you get the right result.

00:47:58.160 It doesn't matter if you knew it or you didn't want it to happen.

00:48:00.780 It's going to happen anyway.

00:48:01.800 It's just a machine.

00:48:04.560 So, anyway.

00:48:08.080 But even though I think the organization is sketchy,

00:48:10.420 I'm aware that I don't have evidence to prove it.

00:48:13.100 However, I do generally disagree with any entity that's getting between any existing entities.

00:48:21.220 Like, on a very meta level, you want the fewest number of people to interfere with your country and your business.

00:48:28.800 On the other hand, is it crazy that the most influential people should get to know each other?

00:48:38.420 You know, you could imagine that would turn bad.

00:48:40.800 You know, they would collude or something.

00:48:42.100 But I feel like there's going to be more benefit than cost.

00:48:46.940 So, conceptually, there's an argument for it.

00:48:51.140 But I'm generally opposed to anybody getting between me and my government.

00:48:55.860 So, that's good enough reason to object to them.

00:48:59.440 But I wouldn't object to everything they say.

00:49:02.240 They might come up with something.

00:49:04.140 All right.

00:49:04.300 Here's the scariest thing that I was completely unaware of.

00:49:08.620 You know that factcheck.org exists to fact-check stuff.

00:49:14.040 What is your experience with factcheck.org?

00:49:16.560 Has it been a good, objective fact-checker?

00:49:20.420 Has that been your experience?

00:49:25.900 Yeah, no experience, most of you.

00:49:27.960 Well, everybody has an opinion on the fact-checkers.

00:49:31.220 Well, I found out today that they have a subgroup or a product within that entity called News Feed Defenders.

00:49:42.200 And they say it's our new media literacy game teaches players, and they mean students,

00:49:48.180 how to detect and disregard information and misinformation in today's chaotic environment.

00:49:52.860 Now, they've actually turned it into a class lesson, and they have a teacher's guide.

00:50:04.760 Do you think that the tips that I give you for responding fake news,

00:50:10.440 which, if I may pat myself on the back, I'll ask you for your opinion,

00:50:14.400 but I think I've done a really good job of giving you, you know, the checklist of things to look for for fake news?

00:50:23.480 Do you think the things on my checklist of fake news, which you've seen work over and over again?

00:50:28.640 How many times have you seen my checklist hit a home run over and over again?

00:50:34.100 It spots fake news really well.

00:50:36.680 Do you think that those are on the lesson plan?

00:50:40.480 No.

00:50:41.340 Let me tell you what the lesson plan focuses on.

00:50:44.260 Are you ready for this?

00:50:45.980 All right, I'm going to ask you to do something here before I talk.

00:50:48.880 I need you to go like this.

00:50:51.600 Because if there's anybody near you, they're going to be caught up in the spray.

00:50:55.620 Because your head is going to explode.

00:50:58.180 Right? 0.59

00:50:59.300 Ready?

00:51:00.020 Everybody, hold your head.

00:51:03.220 They're focusing on recommending that you check the credibility of the source.

00:51:07.680 Check the credibility of the source. 0.99

00:51:35.960 This thing needs to die. 1.00

00:51:37.680 Is there anything I need to say about that? 0.97

00:51:43.620 But really, do I need to add anything to this?

00:51:49.180 Check the credibility of the source.

00:51:53.060 It's how brainwashing happens.

00:51:57.400 They're pretending to be a news literacy organization, and it's literally a brainwashing organization.

00:52:04.320 Do you think that they would tell you if you check CNN, and it was on CNN, do you think this lesson for children would say, oh, that's not a credible source?

00:52:18.140 Or would they say, oh, that's a credible news organization?

00:52:23.420 Which do you think it would be?

00:52:24.660 Which do you think it would be?

00:52:26.060 Just guess.

00:52:27.940 Yeah.

00:52:28.220 This could not be more opposite of what you need for a healthy society.

00:52:34.440 And then I read through some of the other tips, and some of them were just so generic.

00:52:40.100 Like, don't trust an anonymous source.

00:52:42.860 Not bad.

00:52:44.440 Don't trust an anonymous source.

00:52:46.820 Because that actually is completely useful, and that would work.

00:52:50.600 You know, that's true for left and right.

00:52:52.620 It's not political at all.

00:52:54.180 And I've said it the same.

00:52:55.880 That's a good one.

00:52:58.000 But it's pretty much just that and check the source.

00:53:02.280 Now, have you seen my, how many of you have read my book, Loser Think?

00:53:08.680 So, Loser Think is a book that's written, you know, a high schooler could easily handle it.

00:53:14.220 It's written at like a sixth grade level of sentence style. 0.99

00:53:18.140 But Loser Think is a book which teaches you in far more detail how to identify bullshit. 0.98

00:53:25.020 Now, let me give you one example. 0.97

00:53:26.480 One of my ways to identify it is, if CNN and Fox News both exist, which they do,

00:53:34.240 and one of them says the thing is true and it happened,

00:53:38.060 and the other one says it never happened, it didn't happen.

00:53:45.060 Right?

00:53:45.420 If both of them say it happened, but maybe they have a different spin on the importance of it

00:53:50.120 or the interpretation, then it happened.

00:53:52.820 If they both say it happened, it probably happened.

00:53:54.900 They could be wrong.

00:53:55.520 But at least it's not because of biased reporting.

00:53:58.760 It's because, you know, it's hard to know.

00:54:01.440 But if they both say it happened, there's not bias happening on that part.

00:54:07.640 Do you think news feed defenders would tell their students that if CNN says it's true,

00:54:15.560 but Fox News and Breitbart say it's not, it's probably not true?

00:54:20.480 Do you think they teach the students that?

00:54:23.060 Because that would be a good lesson.

00:54:24.360 And it would also be true in reverse, that if Fox News says it's true,

00:54:29.820 and CNN says that never happened, I would doubt it.

00:54:34.360 I would doubt it.

00:54:35.100 Your tribe is your vibe, cringely embarrassed.

00:54:49.440 Your water just broke.

00:54:51.580 Really?

00:54:53.140 Is that true?

00:54:55.040 Bam Bam says your water just broke.

00:54:56.860 If it's a boy, name is Scott.

00:55:03.820 Does everybody agree?

00:55:06.320 I feel if your water breaks while you're watching Coffee with Scott Adams,

00:55:11.000 that that boy should be Scott.

00:55:14.960 And if it's a girl, Scottina.

00:55:18.540 Scottina.

00:55:19.100 That's my recommendation.

00:55:25.840 All right.

00:55:27.220 Well, ladies and gentlemen, let us close the year 2022 with some positive thoughts.

00:55:37.400 Rob Reiner made good movies.

00:55:51.220 Let's see.

00:55:52.260 What else can we say positive?

00:55:54.440 Is there anybody else you want me to say something positive about?

00:55:57.680 Do you want to challenge me to say something positive about, like, whoever the worst people are?

00:56:01.680 Give me somebody terrible.

00:56:05.580 Kamala Harris.

00:56:07.300 She's in the game.

00:56:09.360 That's the best I can do.

00:56:11.540 Keith Oldberman.

00:56:13.080 My greatest challenge.

00:56:15.600 Keith Oldberman is good at getting attention.

00:56:19.180 Justin Trudeau.

00:56:22.840 Makes Castro look good.

00:56:26.000 All right.

00:56:26.400 Schiff.

00:56:26.740 Reminds you not to stick the Q-tip too far into your ear.

00:56:35.620 All right.

00:56:35.840 Who else?

00:56:36.860 Sam Bankman-Fried.

00:56:41.540 Reminds us to be careful with our money.

00:56:44.500 Go.

00:56:46.060 I can't do Hiller.

00:56:47.660 No.

00:56:48.340 Good try.

00:56:49.420 Good try.

00:56:50.660 Barbara Walters.

00:56:51.760 Yeah, she passed away.

00:56:52.720 We like her.

00:56:53.600 Zelensky.

00:56:54.040 Zelensky has excellent fashion when it comes to T-shirts.

00:57:01.260 I think he's a little too green, but I get why he does it.

00:57:04.620 I think he should go more of the blues, the grays, but well-dressed.

00:57:09.040 Well-dressed.

00:57:10.260 Sticks and Hammer.

00:57:11.200 Very successful show.

00:57:14.220 Does excellent content.

00:57:17.960 Greta.

00:57:19.420 Greta is a witty tweeter. 1.00

00:57:22.460 Klaus Schwab.

00:57:23.220 He's an economist and an engineer.

00:57:32.220 Good for him.

00:57:35.240 Hillary.

00:57:36.000 Oh, you're challenging me now.

00:57:38.940 Hillary.

00:57:39.500 Good thing that Hillary. 1.00

00:57:40.860 She's not running for president again. 0.98

00:57:44.620 Ye.

00:57:45.600 Ye makes great music.

00:57:48.940 Epstein.

00:57:51.740 Okay, that was a tough one.

00:57:53.680 Epstein. 0.98

00:57:55.740 He was nice enough to kill himself. 0.77

00:57:58.440 Or did he? 0.98

00:58:03.200 All right.

00:58:04.460 Chairman Xi.

00:58:06.140 Uh.

00:58:08.180 Uh.

00:58:08.700 Uh.

00:58:10.080 All right.

00:58:10.820 Pass.

00:58:12.120 All right.

00:58:12.800 So I would like to reiterate my appreciation for all of you, quite genuinely.

00:58:19.820 And.

00:58:22.660 Uh.

00:58:23.060 I hope you all have a great New Year's celebration.

00:58:31.020 And.

00:58:32.340 I hope you'll see me in the morning.

00:58:34.620 But if I don't see you in the morning, I'll understand.

00:58:38.800 I'll understand.

00:58:40.680 And has anybody made any New Year's resolutions?

00:58:43.580 And if not, I'd like to make some suggestions.

00:58:50.840 Here's a New Year's resolution for you.

00:58:54.480 Read one self-help book.

00:58:57.260 Doesn't have to be mine.

00:58:59.180 Right.

00:58:59.440 The best one in the world is mine.

00:59:01.860 Had to fail at almost everything and still win big.

00:59:04.460 But it doesn't have to be mine.

00:59:06.680 So I'm going to say that your New Year's resolution is to read at least one self-help book.

00:59:12.780 More if you can.

00:59:14.000 And here's why.

00:59:14.980 When you do something, that's who you are.

00:59:19.980 Thinking about something doesn't make you that person.

00:59:23.160 Doing something, that's who you are.

00:59:25.300 If you read a self-help book, what does that make you?

00:59:30.220 What does it make you if you read a book on self-help?

00:59:34.820 It makes you a seeker.

00:59:36.740 You are a seeker of better ways.

00:59:40.400 You are a seeker of better systems.

00:59:42.660 You are a seeker of better performance.

00:59:44.980 And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the biggest change that you could ever make to benefit your life.

00:59:53.280 It's not what you think or what you plan.

00:59:56.320 It's what you do.

00:59:58.100 If you want to be a seeker, because a seeker is who's going to build a talent stack.

01:00:02.880 A seeker is going to work through their own illusions. 1.00

01:00:06.000 A seeker is going to find out what really works and what doesn't. 1.00

01:00:09.180 A seeker is going to build a talent stack.

01:00:12.900 So don't think about being one.

01:00:15.500 Be one.

01:00:16.820 It's a very low bar.

01:00:19.800 And it's like an entry level toward a full self-improvement path.

01:00:25.360 But do the easiest thing first.

01:00:27.960 One book that you wanted to read anyway.

01:00:30.920 Maybe you get a trip or something.

01:00:33.900 It doesn't have to be like every weekend.

01:00:36.120 Just one book.

01:00:37.180 Now, my book is a perfect toilet book.

01:00:40.860 I write them that way, actually, intentionally.

01:00:43.100 So every chapter is about one bowel movement long.

01:00:48.240 That's good engineering.

01:00:51.040 And so you could just leave it in your bathroom and read a chapter a day and you'd be done in a few months.

01:00:57.900 And your life would change.

01:00:59.680 Now, my experience has been that successful people often are reading books on success.

01:01:08.300 Have you noticed how many successful people, and this is my exact story.

01:01:13.740 When I was young, I said to myself, all right, my family doesn't have riches, so I'm not starting with any advantage.

01:01:21.920 And I thought, okay, how do people succeed if they have nothing to start with?

01:01:26.660 And so I thought, well, there must be people who know how to do this, because people have done it.

01:01:32.140 So I would read everything I could.

01:01:35.280 Like every time I saw a book that was like how to get rich or be more effective, I would read it.

01:01:41.340 And usually it doesn't take long, because you can glean the big picture fairly quickly.

01:01:46.600 You can read it from newspaper articles and stuff.

01:01:48.920 So as a life experience, the most satisfying and useful thing you could ever do is to not think of yourself as a seeker, but to become one.

01:02:04.960 One book.

01:02:06.380 Not mine.

01:02:07.220 It doesn't have to be mine, but that would be a good start.

01:02:10.120 Just read one self-help book.

01:02:11.880 And if it works for you, like if you say, my goodness, that actually looks like it could make a difference, then read a second one.

01:02:21.600 If the first one doesn't do anything for you, probably books aren't going to be your thing, right?

01:02:27.620 But if you read a book on self-help and you think, I got like two really good ideas out of that, read another book.

01:02:37.600 It's going to be two more.

01:02:38.440 I'm not totally sold on rich dad, poor dad, because the author is hawking silver.

01:02:49.680 Remember what I told you about how topics bleed over into other topics?

01:02:55.100 Because I don't think it's ethical to sell gold or silver, to be a promoter of them, because they're not really predictable assets.

01:03:03.600 I wouldn't mind if he promoted the index fund.

01:03:08.740 Index fund is just good hygiene for your investments.

01:03:14.020 But commodities, even if it turns out to be right, even if it turns out to be right, that's a credibility hit, because he's accepting money to do the commercials.

01:03:27.480 So that puts you in a different category of credibility.

01:03:32.480 So I wouldn't put that one on my list.

01:03:34.500 However, a lot of people have read it and said they got good stuff out of it, so use your own judgment.

01:03:43.740 Ego is the Enemy by Ryan Holiday.

01:03:46.800 Have you ever heard me say that?

01:03:48.800 Ego is the enemy?

01:03:50.520 You know where that comes from, right?

01:03:54.800 I think that came from me, but I don't know.

01:03:58.300 Maybe there was somebody who said it before both of us.

01:04:01.260 But I think, did Plato said that?

01:04:03.860 The Stoics said that?

01:04:05.300 Did they say it exactly that way?

01:04:07.060 Ego is the Enemy?

01:04:11.380 Or Dune said it.

01:04:12.700 Aristotle said it.

01:04:14.900 Yeah.

01:04:15.140 Now, I'm sure that lots of people have said you should manage your ego, but did they actually say your ego is your enemy?

01:04:23.940 Because that's what I say.

01:04:26.640 Oh, they do.

01:04:27.540 They say it exactly.

01:04:29.200 Do you ever, I always wonder if, you know, 30 years ago I heard that somewhere and then I thought I invented it myself.

01:04:37.780 Because you really can't tell.

01:04:40.820 Diogenes said it.

01:04:41.760 Jimmy Jones said it too.

01:04:42.740 I guess a lot of people said it.

01:04:48.100 All religion says it.

01:04:49.320 Yeah, not as directly with those words though.

01:04:52.600 All right.

01:04:53.700 All right.

01:04:54.600 It's an old idea, of course.

01:04:56.420 It was only the phrasing of it I was questioning.

01:05:02.540 All right.

01:05:06.760 Ladies and gentlemen,

01:05:07.620 this concludes the best live stream you've ever seen in 2022.

01:05:14.940 Probably we'll keep up the excellence tomorrow.

01:05:21.020 You listen to me, what does that make you?

01:05:23.860 The smartest person in your family, for starters.

01:05:27.120 All right.

01:05:30.260 I'm going to say goodbye to YouTube and I'm going to talk to local subscribers a little bit more.

01:05:36.640 Bye for now.

01:05:37.140 Bye for now.

01:05:44.620 Bye.

01:05:44.940 Bye.

01:05:45.280 Bye.

01:05:45.680 Bye.

01:05:45.960 Bye.

01:05:46.320 Bye.

01:05:46.620 Bye.

01:05:50.100 Bye.

01:05:50.460 Bye.

01:05:54.720 Bye.

01:05:57.440 Bye.

01:05:57.760 Bye.

01:05:58.260 Bye.

01:05:58.460 Bye.

01:05:59.040 Bye.

01:05:59.260 Bye.

01:06:02.200 Bye.

01:06:02.780 Bye.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - December 31, 2022

Episode 1974 Scott Adams： Let's Say Goodbye To A Crappy Year And Talk About All The Fake News

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript