Episode 2390 CWSA 02⧸20⧸24
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 12 minutes
Words per Minute
151.29546
Summary
In this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, Scott talks about the dangers of artificial intelligence and the impact of social media on our perception of reality. He also talks about how social media is changing the way we see the world, and why we should be worried about it.
Transcript
00:00:15.980
If you'd like to take your experience up to levels
00:00:20.280
unless they have a web telescope or something like that,
00:00:26.500
a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug or flask,
00:00:28.960
vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the
00:00:34.400
unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's
00:00:37.600
called the simultaneous sip and happens now. Go. Oh, that's a good sip. I hate to say every day
00:00:50.200
that it's better than usual, but every day is better than average. Yeah. I've been chewing that
00:00:57.480
for a while. Well, the X platform is going to start labeling AI generated images. How does it know?
00:01:07.220
How does I, do you think X will automatically know an AI generated image? Because it might be a way to
00:01:14.520
know. But I suppose if they find them manually, they can label them. But that's good news. I have,
00:01:22.180
however, stopped believing any image and even video. Have you done that yet? I've still fallen
00:01:30.940
for a few. So I can't say that I'm pure. I've fallen for a few hoaxes just recently. You have videos that
00:01:39.060
weren't real, pictures that weren't real. But I think I'm doing better at telling myself,
00:01:46.660
this might not be real. This could be AI. It's a real, it's a skill, really. You have to just train
00:01:53.540
yourself to just assume that because you see it and hear it, it doesn't mean anything. It doesn't
00:01:58.940
mean anything just because you saw it and heard it with your own ears and your own eyes. Well, one of
00:02:04.680
our big telescopes got us a picture of Uranus. And here it is. It's a picture of Uranus.
00:02:16.040
Now, I haven't seen this since I sat on a photocopier back in the 80s and took a picture of Uranus. Well,
00:02:26.960
my ears, but it looked exactly like that is what I'm saying. Probably because of all the bleaching.
00:02:36.160
Anyway, here's the good news. Here's just an update. I told you this already, but I did a little
00:02:42.700
unscientific poll on X. And I asked people how many people had quit or cut down on alcohol
00:02:50.520
because they heard from me or somebody else that alcohol is poison. And so far, it's up to about
00:02:58.440
20,000 people. What? So over 40,000 people answered the poll, but 40% of them or so said they cut
00:03:12.220
down or completely eliminated alcohol recently because they heard alcohol is poison. You know,
00:03:19.460
a little reframe that I've been using. And I'm kind of blown away. Quitters. Somebody's calling
00:03:28.860
them quitters. I'm kind of blown away by the impact that social media can have in a positive way.
00:03:35.720
You know, we always talk about all the bad stuff social media is doing. But this looks like a fairly
00:03:42.200
concrete example of where 20,000 people improve their lives and their health because of something on the
00:03:50.240
internet. That's pretty awesome. Well, it was also in my book, a couple of books, actually.
00:03:57.480
Reframe Your Brain, if you want to learn how to reframe the other parts of your life, I recommend my
00:04:01.600
new book, Reframe Your Brain. It's available on Amazon. All right. And other places.
00:04:08.780
There's a study that shows ultra-high processed foods. We'll get to the political stuff. I like
00:04:16.840
to start with the palate cleansers because, you know, you can't take too much serious political
00:04:21.080
news all at once. Yeah. I like to tip-toe into it a little bit. Get you a little bit wet, so to speak.
00:04:29.200
Anyway, there's a study that says ultra-high processed foods are associated with lower muscle
00:04:34.780
growth. So you'll have fewer muscles if you're eating a lot of processed foods, which could
00:04:42.460
explain a lot, couldn't it? How much do you think of everything that's going on politically and
00:04:49.420
economically and otherwise? How much of you think is because of our ideas, like our intellectual
00:04:57.040
curiosity and our genuine differences and opinions, how much is that? And how much is a chemical
00:05:04.800
shift that's happening because of the food and God knows what else? The social media, the
00:05:12.420
medicines, who knows? But isn't there something missing from this story? Suppose it's true, and
00:05:20.080
we can't trust every, you know, I don't trust too many of the nutrition studies, but suppose
00:05:25.160
it's true. I mean, it seems like it would be, right? Ultra-processed foods, you can't grow
00:05:31.380
muscle as well as if you ate protein. Seems obvious. But wouldn't there also be a corresponding
00:05:37.080
drop in testosterone? Now, that's a question, but I think it's a good question. If you study
00:05:43.980
people who had more muscles for any reason, either because they exercised more or they
00:05:50.280
ate better, wouldn't they have more testosterone, the boys? Does that track? More muscles pretty
00:05:59.300
much always means more testosterone. And aren't we seeing a gigantic drop in testosterone in modern
00:06:06.320
males? And isn't the percentage of processed foods in our diet, has it not risen every year since we
00:06:15.540
started seeing the decline in testosterone? It's probably that, wouldn't you say? It's almost
00:06:22.100
certainly the food. I mean, it might be pollution a little bit too, but I feel like the food is the
00:06:31.060
most direct thing that's happening to your body every year. So what, what, how is it that we decide
00:06:39.260
what is an emergency? This might be the biggest emergency in the history of the Republic, that
00:06:46.740
our food sources are tainted to the point where it's changing our personalities and our ability to
00:06:52.040
succeed. It probably changed in the entire family structure, because I would imagine that testosterone
00:06:58.680
is, you know, gives you a certain set of outcomes socially. And if you change that level, you
00:07:06.120
probably get different outcomes, such as more trans, more binary. I'm wondering if, if social media
00:07:14.100
isn't as much to blame for the growth in trans and non-binary stuff as maybe the food supply. Makes you
00:07:23.040
wonder, because I, I'm going to go out on a limb again and say that I think something drastically
00:07:30.240
happened with the food supply around the time of the pandemic. And it's just observational. It's not
00:07:38.240
based on any study. Something changed. And I wonder if something large changed, such as there was a
00:07:45.680
shortage, you know, maybe there's a substitution of some pesticides. I'm just guessing. Was there a
00:07:51.100
substitution of any additive or chemical or preservative? Was there anything that was in, in shortage that
00:07:57.760
got replaced and maybe it wasn't as tested as carefully because we didn't want to limit the food
00:08:02.880
supply? Yeah. I just wonder. So, uh, the Daily Show continues to be funny, um, even when they're mocking
00:08:13.980
people I like, uh, which is the ultimate test, uh, if you could have a good laugh at your own team
00:08:21.640
getting mocked, that's a pretty good product. You know, a humor product that makes you laugh at your
00:08:28.000
own behavior and your own preferences. That's good. And I think the Daily Show is hitting that. Um,
00:08:36.260
however, uh, he, uh, I think John Stewart may not have full access to the real world of news because since he
00:08:48.920
was last doing this job, I think he may have missed the degree to which the news is siloed because it wasn't
00:08:57.800
always like this. So it could be that he doesn't know he's missing a part of the story. I think he
00:09:04.560
might just genuinely not know, uh, cause I don't think he wants to do that intentionally. So for
00:09:09.720
example, um, John Stewart was mocking, uh, Tucker Carlson's reporting from Moscow because standing in,
00:09:18.540
you know, some grocery stores in Moscow or showing their subway system isn't really indicative of the
00:09:25.180
rest of Moscow or the rest of Russia. We all knew that, right? You knew that Moscow wasn't telling
00:09:31.440
anything about the rest, the rest of the country. And we also knew that in order to have these good
00:09:37.820
things that Russia, that Russia has at least in one place, uh, and maybe two places, St. Petersburg,
00:09:43.700
I hear is pretty awesome. But what you give up is that you have to live in a repressive regime.
00:09:52.160
Now, is that a good point? Does, did Tucker sort of leave out that in order to have these good
00:10:01.200
things that Russia allegedly has, at least in two cities, um, that you have to put up with a repressive
00:10:06.940
regime? Well, I think, uh, I think you don't have to leave it out or put it in because I thought it
00:10:14.120
was obvious. I thought everybody knew what Russia is. Everybody knows what Putin is. You don't have to
00:10:20.560
say it every time he's mentioned, do you? Is that necessary? We're kind of all on the same page
00:10:25.600
here. Um, but, um, it was fun, you know, I think it was fun and fair to see Tucker get mocked for maybe
00:10:34.100
not mentioning that the rest of Russia wasn't looking so good and that there's some repressive
00:10:39.620
regime stuff. However, um, John Stewart cites us as this example that there were hundreds of Navalny
00:10:47.960
supporters who were arrested, hundreds of Navalny supporters who were arrested. What did he leave
00:10:53.720
out? Yeah. So, so John Stewart is correct in mocking Tucker for leaving out that you have to put up with
00:11:05.440
the suppression and the rest of Russia maybe doesn't look so good as Moscow. But then he left
00:11:11.900
out that the Navalny supporters who were rounded up were mostly let out the same day with a small fine.
00:11:20.260
That was about it. Whereas, uh, 1300, uh, over 1300 January 6th people have been arrested
00:11:27.660
under the Biden regime. That's way worse. How in the world could you compare hundreds of people
00:11:35.340
arrested and fined and released with 1300 people arrested and put in jail for purely political
00:11:41.800
reasons? One of them is much worse. And I think that's somewhat pointedly left out. Now I would
00:11:50.060
imagine that John Stewart believes the news that says that the January 6th people broke a bunch of
00:11:56.240
laws and they were trying to do an insurrection. So that's completely different. Do you think he
00:12:01.740
really believes that? Do you think somebody as smart as John Stewart believes that an insurrection
00:12:06.760
happened on January 6th? I'm going to say no. Uh, I, I feel like I think he can be, I think he can be
00:12:16.500
saved, but we'll see. He clearly doesn't have that filter working, but that doesn't mean it couldn't
00:12:24.140
work in the future. How in the world would he not notice that our, their government has been
00:12:29.520
weaponized at the very time that the Trump, um, prosecutions are, are just obviously government
00:12:36.620
weaponized against one person? Yeah. Well, against the party, really. How do you not notice that?
00:12:44.320
It's the most obvious thing in the news. It's the top headline that something super, super unfair
00:12:50.840
happened. Hmm. All right. Elizabeth Warren was on some podcast and, uh, she was asked by the host,
00:12:57.420
uh, essentially, why do you, why do you think people still miss the Trump economy? Like what,
00:13:04.920
what is it that they think that they liked about the Trump economy? And he acted confused. He's like,
00:13:11.060
why, you know, yeah. And he did to, to his credit, the podcaster said, you know, you can't count the
00:13:18.340
pandemic because that happened everywhere. But before the pandemic, people thought Trump was
00:13:22.540
doing okay. What's up with that? And Elizabeth Warren, uh, her, her body language went just full
00:13:32.580
crazy. It went, I, I, I, I just don't know. And she tried to explain it this way, that she doesn't
00:13:40.740
know how narratives get formed. Really? Really? You don't understand how narratives get formed and
00:13:49.560
you're a Senator. It's literally all you do. That's her whole job forming narratives. And then
00:13:57.780
she formed a narrative for us to show us how it's done while telling us she doesn't know how narratives
00:14:03.500
are formed. No, it's people like her saying, saying stuff. That's how it's done. And, uh, she has a good
00:14:12.480
example of liar eyes. You know, her eyes go wide when she's telling you what she, what she said that she
00:14:18.980
doesn't know, know how narratives are formed. Her eyes got big. Well, I, I don't even know how
00:14:24.580
narratives get formed. Well, once you see the wide eyed liar face thing, you'll see it everywhere.
00:14:32.480
It just makes you laugh when you see it because you look for it. It makes it fun. It makes it more
00:14:36.680
fun to watch the liars when you look for the eyes to go wide and the mouth not to match.
00:14:40.720
Um, and then, then she speculated that the real problem was that maybe the poll questions were
00:14:49.140
poorly formed, right? The, the reason that people thought they had more money wasn't because prices
00:14:58.340
are legitimately higher and every single person can notice it because it's the most obvious thing in
00:15:03.740
your entire experience. The prices are higher. She thinks it might be a poorly formed poll question.
00:15:09.720
And there's also some mystery about how narratives get formed.
00:15:14.580
Now combine those two ridiculous answers with, with the body language. I don't know how, I don't,
00:15:21.960
I don't know how, I don't, I don't even know how, I don't even know how narratives get formed. I,
00:15:27.980
I think it was some kind of a, probably some kind of a poll. I don't know. I don't know.
00:15:32.340
Maybe they asked the question wrong. You have to see the video to, to know that my mocking
00:15:39.400
impression of her is right on. Anyway, the news is all funny when you can see the gears of the
00:15:45.060
machine. Well, I had this realization, uh, in the last hour that, uh, the 2024, uh, election has come
00:15:55.920
down to the election dire deniers versus the erection deniers. Let me say it again. Cause I
00:16:03.640
want it to sink in a little bit. The entire 2024 contest is the election deniers versus the erection
00:16:11.140
deniers. That's not bad. Come on. That's pretty good. Yeah. So not only do the Democrats, uh, not mind
00:16:24.440
that people born with, uh, penises are competing on women's teams, uh, the trans, but they would
00:16:33.260
deny their erections as being important to it. And then of course, if you've seen, uh, many of the
00:16:39.740
protesters, um, you might've started with an erection, but once you looked at them, totally
00:16:45.660
denied, denied. Uh, when I was looking at the, uh, the New York city, the New York city police
00:16:53.600
department dance troupe, uh, all female, um, I felt like my erection was denied because I was already
00:17:01.500
to be excited by them, but nope, erection denied. So that's what you got going for you. All right.
00:17:09.840
Um, so talking about the news is awkward when you are the news because I was trending most of this
00:17:18.800
morning. Am I still trending on X? Somebody take a look. Am I still trending? I was trending all
00:17:25.120
morning. Uh, and it's funny because here's, here's who I was trending with, uh, Nate Silver. I was
00:17:32.520
trending with the widow of Navalny and Kevin O'Leary, who's saying some of the same things I was saying
00:17:38.820
and me. Now, you know, Nate Silver and Kevin O'Leary were in the news because Nate Silver was saying,
00:17:48.480
uh, Biden should probably bow out unless he's able to campaign like a normal person.
00:17:58.120
And, you know, that's sort of a big deal because nobody thinks he's a Republican.
00:18:02.440
And, uh, of course, you know why Navalny's widow's in the news. I guess she got banned on X, but then
00:18:09.840
reinstated. I don't know what that was about. And then Kevin O'Leary made a lot of news by saying that,
00:18:15.200
uh, investors should stay away from New York city. Now, why was I in the news? Does anybody know? Oh,
00:18:24.600
still there. Does anybody know why I was in the news? If you look, if you click on me to see what
00:18:34.460
news I'm making is mostly my own posts because my own posts go to the top because I get a little
00:18:40.760
traffic. Um, but I was targeted by the professional class of trolls. And, uh, now that we've heard the
00:18:49.960
whole, uh, Mike Benz explanation of how censorship works, you, you can see the trolls as part of the
00:18:57.280
censorship, um, process. So the way it works, if you're not familiar with this, and we learned this
00:19:03.220
in 2016, but they're back. The Democrats do in fact organize trolls so that, um, they will attack
00:19:11.380
individuals like me. And it's done to reduce your, reduce your reputation basically, or to discourage
00:19:19.660
you from using the platform because it's so unpleasant. It doesn't work as well with me
00:19:25.980
because I like the attention. I think the whole point of it is I'm supposed to feel bad,
00:19:34.280
you know, because they say terrible things about me and they insult me. We'll talk about that. But,
00:19:40.300
uh, I'm such a narcissist that I wake up and I go, Hey, I'm trending on X. It's going to be a good day.
00:19:47.340
There were two hip pieces about me today. Today alone, they were just, I was in the news in two
00:19:54.180
other ways. And I kept thinking, huh, nice. So it's not working quite the way they hoped.
00:20:00.920
Uh, and of course I'm monetizing it. So, so I'm trying to get them spun up as much as I can
00:20:07.740
because, uh, as if they engage with in the comments, uh, then I get more money. So I want to get them
00:20:14.360
going. Um, but here's how it works. The organized trolls apparently have a, have me on a list.
00:20:23.060
So, uh, X allows you to create lists and there's one with about 300 trolls on it who just follow
00:20:29.900
each other. And then when I guess the word goes out and then they all attack at the same time.
00:20:35.760
So it's organized for sure. It's not accidental. And they all, and they all have a certain theme
00:20:40.640
and it goes like this. They usually do not attack the content of any of my opinions. They don't go
00:20:48.440
after content. They usually somewhat obviously misinterpret something so they can go after me
00:20:55.160
personally for a reputational thing or, you know, you're dumb or you're conceited or something like
00:21:01.160
that. So in this case, when I had posted that, um, I was going to cancel any plans to go to New York
00:21:07.100
City because of New York City's bad business environment as proven by the Trump prosecutions.
00:21:14.300
Um, how did you interpret that? Now, how did normal people interpret it when I said I was going to
00:21:22.380
no longer do any business with New York City? I'm guessing that you interpreted it the right way.
00:21:29.020
I'm guessing that you said, well, obviously he knows that his, his one activities will not crash
00:21:37.520
the city. Did anybody think that I believed that posting, I wasn't going to go to New York City.
00:21:45.100
Does anybody think that I believed that would really take down New York City? That, that that was my plan
00:21:50.720
to remove my, my own expenses from New York City, take down the city? Well, that's what the trolls are
00:21:56.660
believing. Now they don't actually believe that, of course, but, but they came in with, uh, their
00:22:02.180
mocking. Oh, oh, I guess that trip he wasn't really going to go on is going to, is canceled now. Or, oh, I
00:22:10.500
guess, I guess the, the Dilbert Convention is canceled in New York City. Now, in order to even mock me that
00:22:18.720
way, they have to pretend that they're, they're not understanding that I was just showing support. I'm just
00:22:25.600
one of the people, right? That if there's a trucker today, and I guess this is part of the story too,
00:22:32.960
if there's a trucker that decides not to take a load to New York City, is it because the trucker
00:22:38.320
believes that his one truck will destroy New York City? And if he tweets, I'm not going to pick up a
00:22:44.340
load for New York City, is it because he thinks this will take down the city? Or is it just what
00:22:49.840
people do? They show their support for different things. And they do hope that other people maybe
00:22:56.260
could be influenced by it. Now, what part of that is insane? Now, here's the other thing you need to
00:23:02.640
know. It's probably not because of that opinion. That's not why they come after me. They come after
00:23:08.600
me either opportunistically, which is anytime they've got a good reason to do it. But importantly,
00:23:14.300
they don't come after me when I make a good point on, let's say, an important topic.
00:23:20.920
When I do that, they ignore that one because they don't want to give it attention. So they want to
00:23:25.500
bring the energy only to my, my one post that they can act like they're mocking it for some good reason,
00:23:31.100
the silliest one. There was nothing less important that I did yesterday than say that I wasn't going to
00:23:37.280
do business with New York City. There's nothing less important. Everything else I tweeted about was a
00:23:43.780
more consequential political thing. So they always go after you personally. It looks like they have a
00:23:50.940
personality map for each person they attack in addition to some kind of a heat map to know who
00:23:58.240
to attack. Now, in my case, they've decided that the thing that will work the best on me is to say that
00:24:06.160
I'm unimportant and already canceled or that nobody cares and nobody pays attention. So while they were
00:24:14.300
telling me that nobody cares about what my opinion is, they sent such an army of people to say they
00:24:19.540
don't care what my opinion is that I was trending on X, which made everybody care about my opinion
00:24:25.260
because when it's trending on X, you get curious. So if I could get more true election going,
00:24:33.820
this is really good for my income and my exposure. So cha-ching. All right. Somebody named David
00:24:43.020
Thornton criticized me for saying, now, and I love this. You'll notice this with a lot of my criticisms,
00:24:51.540
and maybe you've already noticed. When people criticize my posts on X, they don't say what's wrong with it.
00:24:58.060
They just show it. And then they act like everybody knows. So one of the ones that I got mocked for is
00:25:06.960
David Thornton. I don't know who he is. But he wrote a big article and included me in it because it's the
00:25:13.620
political season. So you want to throw everybody in there, you can trash. And I tweeted that I didn't
00:25:19.900
think Putin was any more evil than John Brennan or Biden and the CIA, you know, collectively, the blob.
00:25:28.600
Now, he posted that and commented it like it's obviously crazy. No, I'm going to double down on that.
00:25:36.240
No, there's no indication that I can say that Putin is more evil than the United States, you know,
00:25:43.840
the folks that are in power. I don't see it. Now you're going to say to me, but Scott, do you not
00:25:50.160
know the brutal, terrible things that Putin did? I know every one of them. I didn't miss any.
00:25:57.420
I didn't miss any. Am I saying that Putin is a good guy? No. No, I'm not saying that Putin is a good
00:26:05.000
guy. Nothing like that. I'm not even close to that. I'm saying he's evil as clearly as I can.
00:26:12.640
I'm just saying these other people are in the same category as far as I can tell.
00:26:18.200
What, you think our CIA never killed anybody? You think our presidents never ordered a hit on
00:26:23.480
anybody? Of course they did. Of course they did. So, and I guess there's some other article about me
00:26:33.160
in Newsweek. So when it comes to New York City, I say keep on not trucking. Apparently, there's some
00:26:41.100
Nikki Haley announcement today. Has that happened yet? Has anybody seen a Nikki Haley announcement or
00:26:47.200
speech? Some are speculating that because she's 23 points down in the South Carolina upcoming race,
00:26:56.500
is that today? Is that today? Is South Carolina today?
00:27:04.380
Yes. So it would be the obvious day that she bows out if she doesn't win. However, I would like to
00:27:11.060
offer this other possibility. Just to scare you. What is the real reason that Nikki Haley is running?
00:27:20.500
What's the real reason? Is it to win or to get rid of Trump? If it's to win, it didn't really look
00:27:35.200
like that was going to happen unless Trump was in jail. If it's to simply prevent Trump from getting
00:27:40.840
in office, what would happen if she ran third party? Because the no labels group doesn't have
00:27:48.560
a candidate and they're looking for one. Wouldn't that cost Trump the election? Because there would
00:27:57.700
be Republicans who would say, well, I'll use Nikki Haley as my protest vote. You know, since it's there,
00:28:06.580
I'll just use her as my protest vote. Because I won't want to vote. I don't want to not vote.
00:28:13.420
Do you think there's any chance that that's the play? To move her to a third party? Because that
00:28:18.720
would end her in politics. She'd be done in politics if she ran third party. Wouldn't she? I think that
00:28:24.380
would finish her unless she tried to re-register as a Democrat someday. I don't know. I'm not going to
00:28:31.060
predict that will happen. But the fact that it's an opportunity that would definitely get rid of
00:28:36.200
Trump. Let's say somebody wanted to get out of politics and become a CEO of a major defense
00:28:42.820
contractor. Suppose that's what you wanted to do because that's where the big money is. And you
00:28:47.720
just had to do one thing to get that. And the only thing you had to do is run as a third party so Trump
00:28:54.260
doesn't get elected. You don't have to win. You just have to run. And then two years later, you're the
00:29:01.100
CEO of a major defense contractor. See, that's what I worry about. And again, I'm not accusing her of
00:29:06.640
that. I'm not saying that's the plan. I'm not predicting it. I'm just saying that's the stuff you
00:29:12.100
got to worry about. Because it's sort of laying there right in front of you as an obvious play.
00:29:18.360
They might not do it. But it's laying right there as just a super obvious play. We'll see.
00:29:25.220
Rasmussen is saying that Trump is six points over Biden in an election if it's just one-on-one.
00:29:35.640
But that's not as good as it was in December, where Trump led by 10 points in the same poll.
00:29:42.440
So do you expect that whoever is running the polls will be tied in November like they always are?
00:29:49.900
Yeah. I don't know if it'll be tied, but it'll tighten. So I don't think people take polls
00:29:58.480
seriously until they go to vote. Because I think in this phase, they're actually picking among
00:30:07.820
imaginary choices. They don't have to concentrate on real choices. So the imaginary choice is that
00:30:17.540
Biden is healthy and functional and all that. But I think when you get right there, people are going
00:30:26.220
to just line up by party like they always do. And it won't matter if Biden is, he could have one foot
00:30:32.940
in the grave like he does now. It wouldn't matter. They'll just vote for the party in the end.
00:30:37.520
Well, there's a news story that Bob Menendez, the famous Bob Menendez, who is a senator who had some
00:30:42.940
gold bars that allegedly were bribes. Apparently, there's an old girlfriend mistress who said that when
00:30:51.460
she was seeing him back in 2007, 15 years ago, before the FBI found out about his gold bars, that he had
00:30:59.700
giant piles of cash that he would show off showing her. So apparently, the allegation would be that
00:31:07.400
gold bar Bob has been a massive thief taking bribes for at least 15 years, and so brazenly that he
00:31:16.160
showed it to his girlfriend, the big piles of cash. And now he's got gold bars and money sewed into his
00:31:22.160
suits and stuff. Now, let me ask you, do you think that his co-workers were not fully aware of this?
00:31:29.940
Doesn't it mean they're all doing it? Or that there are enough of them doing it that they could
00:31:37.600
cover this up or they didn't want to single him out? I mean, I think the real story here is that
00:31:42.680
there's no way, there's no way the Democrats were unaware that he was doing this. How could they
00:31:50.340
possibly be unaware of this? Yeah. So it makes me wonder how many members of the Senate are just
00:31:59.340
brazenly taking gigantic kickbacks. He's not the only one. I'd love to know the names of the others.
00:32:09.180
Well, there's a story that Gen Z's, that 93% of them say they flaked out on an interview,
00:32:20.000
meaning that they had one scheduled and they just didn't go. Not only that,
00:32:25.160
87% of Gen Z's who made it through interviews and got the job and signed the contract didn't show up.
00:32:41.800
87% have done that at least once. Get a job and not show up. Have you ever done that?
00:32:49.240
Did you ever get a job and not show up? I have. I did. My first adult job. I'll tell you why.
00:33:04.700
And I'm going to give you some, the best career advice you'll ever get. All right, here's my story.
00:33:10.620
I graduated college and traded my old car for a one-way ticket to California.
00:33:15.100
And flew out and slept in a sleeping bag on my brother's couch and got a job at a big bank.
00:33:24.900
You know, I just went, I just walked in and interviewed and they offered me a low-level,
00:33:30.240
entry-level job. And I accepted because I didn't have any money. And if I didn't get a paycheck in
00:33:38.260
two weeks, well, I wasn't sure how I was going to eat. You know, probably more than two weeks,
00:33:43.340
but not much more. So I took that job because I didn't know if I'd ever get another one.
00:33:49.400
I'd never applied for jobs as an adult. And I thought, I don't know how rare this is.
00:33:54.360
Maybe I'll never get another job offer. So before I was to report to work the next week,
00:34:02.140
I was asked by an ex-girlfriend to fly up and see her in San Francisco, which I did.
00:34:07.200
And in San Francisco, I looked around and it looked like a nicer place. There was less smog.
00:34:13.960
It just seemed like a, you know, fewer, I don't know, fewer bad things. Just more good things,
00:34:20.740
fewer bad things. And so my ex-girlfriend at the time said, you know, you should live in San Francisco.
00:34:28.260
Don't live where you got that job. So I said, hmm, all right.
00:34:34.640
So I said, the only way I could do this is if I apply for a job on Monday, because I was only going
00:34:40.320
to be there one more day. And I get a job the same day I apply for it. That's the only way I can stay.
00:34:46.640
So I stood in line at a bank, Crocker Bank it was, in San Francisco. I just stood in line.
00:34:52.640
And I got up to the teller line and said, I'd like a job here.
00:34:55.600
And the teller said, just a moment. Got the boss. The boss hired me immediately.
00:35:04.960
Because they didn't get too many people who had my qualifications. You know, I had a good
00:35:09.500
college degree in economics. So there are too many people, there are not too many people with a BA
00:35:14.640
in economics who apply for a job as a teller, you know, a teller in the bank. So they immediately
00:35:20.200
hired me. And I quit my first job before I showed up. Now, here's the lesson I would like to give all
00:35:29.980
of you. You don't owe anything to your employer. And you definitely don't owe anything to an employer
00:35:36.560
that you've never worked a single day for. Do you think either of those employers would have had any
00:35:42.880
trouble firing me if something changed between the Thursday they hired me and the Monday I was
00:35:49.780
supposed to report to work? If something had material changed in their situation, do you think
00:35:54.860
they wouldn't have fired me? Of course they would. That's the rules. Those are the rules. If you play
00:36:02.100
by the same rules that the employers play by, there's no shame in that. No shame in that at all.
00:36:08.180
I'm seeing somebody say horrible advice. Here's the advice more specifically. You should definitely do
00:36:15.680
what you commit to do. In fact, that's some advice I gave you yesterday. You should definitely
00:36:21.160
commit to do what you said you would do. As a general rule, that's one of your best rules in life.
00:36:28.320
However, when you commit to work for a corporation, you're accepting the full set of that.
00:36:36.440
So committing to work is accepting the model, not just the job. That's important. You're accepting the
00:36:43.200
model of a free market decision. That model gives you complete freedom to quit anytime you want
00:36:55.520
Right? Now that's the model that they were in. The employer was in the model, I can fire you for
00:37:00.680
anything, anytime I want. I accepted their model, and then I used the model as it exists. That's very
00:37:07.740
different than when you have a relationship with somebody, or you want one, and you're going to do
00:37:13.480
something for an individual. When you say you're going to do something for an individual, you better
00:37:19.880
do it, even if it hurts, even if it's hard, even if you don't want to. If it's for a person, a human
00:37:27.760
being, you should crawl over hawk holes to do it, even if you change your mind. If it's for an entity
00:37:35.380
that's part of a game that's called the free market, within capitalism, and you're playing
00:37:42.020
by the same rules they are, you get to use all the rules. You don't have to, you don't have to leave
00:37:47.060
some of the rules behind. I don't recommend breaking the law, and I don't recommend doing anything
00:37:52.820
unethical. This was not unethical, because it's within the known rules, and it's the way they would
00:37:59.500
have cheated you. All right, so be good to people, but corporations don't get the same consideration.
00:38:07.280
All right, let's see, what else is going on here? Oh, I'd like to show you how the photo editor
00:38:14.660
is usually the person who's in charge of the story. So if you're not familiar with how this works, a
00:38:21.340
journalist will write a story, and a publication will say, yes, we liked it. Then the editor will add
00:38:26.980
usually the title. So this is important to know. The title in publications is almost always the
00:38:34.860
editor, not the writer. So don't blame the writer when the title is not matching the story. The writer
00:38:42.820
didn't do that. But the photo editor also has independence. So if I write a story and it gets
00:38:49.680
accepted by a publication, they might add a picture to it, but I don't know what it's going to be.
00:38:54.560
And maybe even the editor doesn't notice. I'm not even sure the editor gets involved. They probably
00:39:00.320
do, but I don't know. So here's a picture that appeared in The Hill, and it doesn't even matter
00:39:07.040
what the story is. It doesn't matter what the story is. I'm just going to show you the picture they,
00:39:12.280
what did they pick for Trump's picture, and what did they pick for Hillary's picture?
00:39:16.860
Okay? So just look at the, think about the photo editor who could have chosen any picture
00:39:25.500
for Trump and any picture for Hillary. Here's the ones they picked. Trump looks like this calm
00:39:32.920
executive, and Hillary, they gave her the idiot picture. Trump looking calm, Hillary looking like,
00:39:43.040
now, do you think that's an accident? No, it's not. No. No, whoever picked the photos knew exactly
00:39:51.980
what they were doing, at least on a subconscious level. You know, they knew that one looked good
00:39:55.980
and one looked bad. Let me tell you how they did it to me, they meaning the media. So I think I've
00:40:03.660
told this story before, but it's a good one. Many years ago, I was the subject of the Playboy
00:40:08.880
interview, back when that was a prestigious thing. If they chose you to be in the Playboy
00:40:14.620
interview, you know, it was like Jimmy Carter was in it. A lot of famous people were in it,
00:40:19.120
so it was sort of a big deal. But here's what you don't know. If you've ever seen the Playboy
00:40:26.300
interview, at the bottom of the first page, they'll have a series of photos of the interview
00:40:31.300
subject in different poses. And it looks like they were photographed while they were in the
00:40:37.280
interview talking. Except what you don't know is that the photographer comes on a different day
00:40:42.440
than the interviewer. So the interviewer talks to you, talks to you, and you're done. Then another
00:40:48.880
day, the photographer comes, and the photographer says, can you act like you were having a conversation?
00:40:55.340
So I go, what do you mean? He goes, you know, use your hands and just go like this.
00:41:01.680
So I go through a bunch of scenarios where I'm just pretending to talk. So I'm literally not even
00:41:08.460
saying anything. I'm just going, you know, and I'm exaggerating a little bit because, you know,
00:41:14.300
I'm giving them lots of choices. Well, unfortunately, one of the things, one of my poses,
00:41:20.620
and I'm going to try to duplicate it, looked roughly like this.
00:41:23.620
Now, what photo do you think they always pick when they want me to look like an idiot?
00:41:32.360
They pick the idiot photo. And the funny part is, it wasn't even a real photo. It didn't happen in
00:41:38.300
real life. I was actually pretending to talk. And they just caught the weirdest, the weirdest angle
00:41:45.220
of it. You've probably seen the photo. I'll bet you've actually seen it. It's so ubiquitous.
00:41:49.980
And there are lots to choose from. They don't have to choose that one. So learn to spot the,
00:41:55.300
when the photo editor has an opinion of his or her own. There's a new study out rocking the internet
00:42:02.220
saying that the COVID shots do in fact have health implications. And my God, were people taking a
00:42:10.500
victory lap. Oh, the victory laps. Yeah. People were saying, I told you, I told you those shots have
00:42:19.160
health implications. It was a range of things, including myocarditis. And people said, hey,
00:42:25.100
hey, who didn't know that, huh? We all knew that. It's about time the science caught up.
00:42:31.100
So now we have proof. It's a very large study. People say it's credible. And it absolutely shows
00:42:37.740
that the shots were associated with negative, some negative health implications.
00:42:49.140
Do you think that happened? No, that didn't happen.
00:42:55.020
It's widely reported. And it's all over social media. But it didn't actually happen.
00:43:01.440
Do you know what did happen? There was a study about the shots and about the health outcomes.
00:43:11.140
And it did, in fact, find that there were negative outcomes associated with the shot.
00:43:18.520
Is there any difference between the first way I said it and the second way I said it?
00:43:26.000
Is there anything missing? Anything missing from the story? Oh, there it is.
00:43:30.760
And the locals, somebody found the picture of me doing that. You know, but none of those are the
00:43:38.800
I think what happened was the photographer had extra photos and they put them in like a photo bank
00:43:46.240
where anybody can use them. I think they get some money if they do. So, oh, there it is. Yeah,
00:43:51.020
there's somebody found my douchebag photo. Yeah.
00:43:58.140
Anyway, so here's what happened with that study. There was a study. It did show there were very
00:44:03.660
clearly there were bad health implications that are associated with the shot. And so is that pro shot
00:44:09.200
or anti shot? Does that does that prove that the anti vaccination people were right?
00:44:14.580
Is that what you're hearing? What's missing? What's missing from the story? No control group. Thank you
00:44:24.900
very much. Yes. Did you see anywhere in the story that said that the people who got the shot
00:44:32.080
had worse outcomes than the people who didn't get the shot? Nope. You did not. Now, I'm not saying
00:44:41.240
that the shot was good for you. I don't know. All I know is all the studies are ridiculous.
00:44:47.800
All the studies are ridiculous. They're none of them are credible or believable or even by their
00:44:53.540
design. They look like they're not even designed to be believable. So now, but this, like most things,
00:45:00.980
divided the world into two movies. This will be used forever by the people who were sure the
00:45:06.480
vaccinations were more bad than good as proof that it's more bad than good, although the study has
00:45:11.500
nothing to say on that issue. It actually doesn't even compare it to getting COVID without a shot.
00:45:18.180
It's not even a comparison. And people like me will say, well, they told us from the very beginning
00:45:25.140
that the vaccination would have side effects. Is there anybody who didn't know that?
00:45:29.760
I thought we were all informed from day one that some people would have negative effects because
00:45:37.820
they always do. It's the nature of vaccinations or shots, if you want to call it that. All right.
00:45:44.760
So some of you, let me poll you here in the comments. Are some of you completely unaware
00:45:50.420
that all shots have negative consequences for some people? There's somebody who didn't know that?
00:45:57.580
Interesting. I thought that was just common knowledge. Now, you know, that's true of every
00:46:05.220
medicine, right? There's probably no important medicine that's ever been improved that didn't
00:46:11.220
have negative impacts for somebody. That's the most basic understanding of medicine you could ever
00:46:16.600
have. Yeah, exactly. The reason the VAERS database exists is that the most common thing in the world is
00:46:23.980
that somebody has bad outcomes from everything. Yeah. Anyway, let's talk about Trump in New York State and
00:46:32.740
his gazillion-brazillion-dollar judgment. And Turley points out that because New York has this weird
00:46:40.840
rule where you can't appeal until you've paid the fine. Is it called a fine or a finding, maybe?
00:46:49.940
Or judgment. So if you don't pay the judgment, you can't even appeal it. So given the interest
00:46:58.700
and all that, at the very least, it will cost Trump many millions of dollars, even if he wins the
00:47:06.020
appeal. It will cost him many millions of dollars, plus maybe the entire company will go under.
00:47:15.060
You know, it could be bad. I don't think so. But... And so I look at this situation, and here's the
00:47:22.620
things we know. We know the judge made a ruling that no reasonable person thinks is reasonable. Would you
00:47:29.180
agree? No reasonable person who understands that banks routinely do this. Now, the Democrats are
00:47:36.980
pretending that they don't know it's normal to exaggerate your assets, and that the bank doesn't care, really.
00:47:44.500
So if you insist that you don't know that's normal business, then it looks normal, I guess. But
00:47:53.240
everybody else who actually understands how anything works in the real world and knows that, as Kevin
00:47:58.700
O'Leary points out, every developer would be in jail. Every developer exaggerates the value of their
00:48:07.400
properties as normal business practice, always. And then the bank says, okay, we'll ignore you, and we'll
00:48:13.880
check ourselves, and then they do business. So I would say it's obvious to any informed observer who
00:48:21.220
is not being super political that the judge did something that doesn't even look like an attempt
00:48:26.460
to be fair or reasonable. It looks like no attempt was made for anything but punishment,
00:48:33.460
especially when you believe that the punishment happens before the appeal.
00:48:37.400
I mean, so, and then you add that the DA campaigned on getting Trump, and then looked into some way to get him
00:48:49.940
after being elected. And then we hear that the prosecutors may have had something to do with
00:48:56.340
the Biden administration, and maybe there was some coordination, and maybe Soros is behind putting
00:49:02.560
them all in, and maybe he's coordinating with the White House. To me, this is just a crime.
00:49:09.040
What I see is a coordinated, RICO-like enterprise in which people literally coordinated to take out a
00:49:16.980
political person. And to me, the judge, the DA, and whoever coordinated it in the White House should be in jail.
00:49:26.420
Is that unreasonable? I feel like I'm saying something that's not even controversial, that they should all be in
00:49:35.900
jail. Because based on the reporting, they've all obviously committed a crime. It's an obvious crime.
00:49:44.380
Could it be more obvious? I mean, I'm a little confused. It's obvious that the DA targeted him first and then
00:49:53.700
look for a crime. It's obvious that they coordinated. It's obvious that the other DAs are coordinating.
00:50:00.060
It's obvious that Soros is funding them all. It's obvious that Soros, you know, Alexander, at least, is real
00:50:06.920
tight with, you know, the Democrat leadership that would coordinate all these dirty tricks. And it's obvious that the
00:50:12.960
judge didn't do anything that a real judge should have done. It's all obvious. It's a gigantic RICO crime. And do you
00:50:20.760
know why nothing will happen? Because these are the same people who have all the control. If you're in
00:50:28.720
control, you can do this. Now, let me ask again. Do you think that Biden, given that he would be the top
00:50:37.940
of the snake in this situation, and our system, are they worse than Putin? No, it's a tie. They're both a
00:50:47.120
10 out of 10. This is as evil as you could possibly get. They're destroying a man in slow motion just to keep him
00:50:54.680
out of the race. So, yes, I think I'd like to see Trump win by a big enough number to get past the obvious cheating
00:51:05.340
that's coming. And I say it's obvious because if they can do this whole RICO thing right in front of you, then obviously they can
00:51:12.700
rig the election right in front of you. Is that fair? If the DA, the judge, and whoever coordinated at the White
00:51:21.640
House have not already been arrested, then they can do anything. There's no limit. This is proof that
00:51:30.040
there's no limit. They can literally do anything. Because if you control the prosecutors, what are you going
00:51:37.040
to do? And apparently they control them in the areas that it matters. How ridiculous are things? Well, 70%
00:51:46.880
of New York voters say Biden is not fit to serve another term. And here's the good news and the bad
00:51:55.320
news. The bad news is we might have a president that three quarters of the, or 86%, depending on the poll,
00:52:02.660
believe is too old to do the job. On the positive side, it's pretty obvious that the president is not
00:52:09.980
important to the process. Right? If the president were really important to the process of running the
00:52:20.500
country, we'd know it. And it's obvious that he's not. So the best thing I like about this is not that
00:52:28.980
the president is not part of the process, or important to it. But that is obvious now. It's
00:52:34.720
obvious that whoever's in charge is clearly not Biden. Now, he might be in charge of saying whether
00:52:41.700
he's running again. He might actually be too stubborn to say no to that, even if people are pushing him.
00:52:48.020
But probably everything else, geopolitically, I don't think he's in charge. And I think it's pretty
00:52:53.360
obvious. Because even the bad guys wouldn't run somebody who's so declined in capability. They
00:53:02.440
wouldn't run him if they wanted just, you know, somebody to back him. They would still want somebody
00:53:07.480
capable to back him. And they'd want somebody who would win. So, yeah, I think they're having a
00:53:14.860
massive problem just getting Biden to cooperate at the moment. And it's probably because of his own
00:53:20.280
legal problems. But I'm always speculating. All right. Nate Silver is pointing out the, as I said,
00:53:28.160
the absurdity that if Biden can't even run a normal campaign, it's a little too much to ask
00:53:35.820
that you should vote for him. And I think that's fair. And by the way, why is that trending?
00:53:42.840
Why is it trending that Nate Silver said that if you're too feeble to campaign or to give a speech
00:53:50.020
on the Super Bowl, that maybe you should not run for office? Why is that trending?
00:53:55.680
Just hold this in your mind. It's trending because he's not a Republican. And he said something that
00:54:03.100
was both true and obviously true. And that caused so much trouble that he said something that's not
00:54:11.160
just true. It's really obviously true to everybody. And you're not allowed to say that.
00:54:17.060
So, can you imagine that anybody would trend because they pointed out that, let's say,
00:54:26.940
you need rainfall to grow crops? Nobody trends for that. How about if you stay in the sun too long
00:54:34.660
without sunscreen, you'll get a sunburn? Nobody ever trends for saying that. You only trend
00:54:41.900
trend if you're, I don't know if he's a Democrat, he could be independent, but he's not a Republican.
00:54:48.920
You only trend if you're not a Republican and you say something that's both obvious and true to
00:54:53.080
everybody. Now, just hold that in your mind, the absurdity that trending means saying something
00:55:01.440
that's true and obvious. This is the same reason I trended. This is the same reason I got canceled
00:55:07.520
because they said something true and obvious. It makes a lot of trouble. All right.
00:55:16.160
Joe Rogan saying that he thinks Newsom's in waiting and, you know, the party's going to slot him in
00:55:21.760
there before the elections. How many of you agree with that prediction that it's obvious that Newsom
00:55:30.680
has already selected? Well, they're signaling it as strongly as they can. Like, I don't think they
00:55:36.460
could signal that any harder, but it might also be more opportunistic than a defined done deal.
00:55:46.920
I don't think it's a done deal because I don't think Biden's agreed to leave.
00:55:52.040
I think it's definitely the backup plan. So I feel confident in saying that smart people and maybe
00:56:01.320
most of them in the Democrat party would feel more comfortable with Gavin Newsom running.
00:56:07.680
But I really think that Biden is just holding out and that that's the whole problem they're having,
00:56:13.800
which is hilarious. Yeah. I'm seeing the comments prompting me that Ann Coulter's running another
00:56:25.300
victory lap. Do you remember when she went on Bill Maher in 2015 or so and said that Trump would win
00:56:33.520
and everybody mocked her? And it became like this viral thing of her being mocked. And then more
00:56:38.680
recently, a few days ago, she went on and said, we do know something about the shooter in the
00:56:43.780
Kansas City because they didn't say the race. So we know it's not white. Well, when it was confirmed
00:56:52.800
that it was in fact a black shooter, suspected, she did another victory lap of being mocked for
00:57:01.820
something that was both true. In this case, the first prediction wasn't so obvious, but this one was
00:57:08.660
both obvious and then it was true. And why did Ann Coulter trend? Did she trend because she said
00:57:18.820
something crazy? Nope. She said something that was both obvious and true. And everybody got really mad
00:57:27.180
because it was both obvious and true. All right. So Assange was too unwell to make his own extradition
00:57:38.260
hearing today in Great Britain. And I don't know if that means he'll be extradited or not, but I'll remind
00:57:45.080
you that he was not pardoned under Trump or Biden. So there's something that prevents Republicans from
00:57:54.880
freeing him. And there's something that prevents Democrats. What do you suppose that is? The CIA saying
00:58:03.380
you better not do it. So I don't know the real story of Assange. I believe that there's a story below the
00:58:09.860
story that we don't know about. Would you agree? There's a story below the story. And here's my best
00:58:16.640
guess. I think the CIA wants to make sure that if anybody gives up their secrets, they die.
00:58:25.160
I think that's the whole story. I think that it doesn't matter if he was like a journalist or wasn't
00:58:32.620
a journalist. I don't think it matters if he was from another country or not. I don't think it matters
00:58:37.440
if he was accused of some sex crimes that were withdrawn. I don't think it matters. I don't
00:58:46.780
think it matters if it helped the country. I don't think it matters if it hurt the country.
00:58:50.560
I don't think it matters if it caused some people to get killed. I think what matters is the CIA
00:58:58.920
can't have a situation where you can out them with secret information and live.
00:59:07.200
So I'm not even sure it's about Assange. I feel like it's entirely about making sure that nobody
00:59:14.400
else does this. So I think he's just the sacrificial goat to the CIA. Just a guess. Because I can't
00:59:22.520
understand why Trump was so quiet on this. He just sort of ignored it. And he was definitely
00:59:30.460
being asked. And he just ignored it. The only thing I can think of is that he was afraid of the CIA's
00:59:36.000
stuff. All right. David Sachs is having an ongoing discussion with the pro-Ukrainian funding group,
00:59:48.080
and he's anti-funding, and thinks we should wrap up that war. I'm very close to, if not identical,
00:59:55.180
to his opinion. And here's what that debate has turned into. Some people say that Iraq,
01:00:03.900
everything you need to know, can be learned from Hitler. And that if you appease Hitler,
01:00:10.480
like Chamberlain, Neville Chamberlain, you are just inviting him to attack more countries,
01:00:16.840
and it's never good to appease. You should go as hard as you could as soon as there's any attacking
01:00:22.300
of other countries. So that would be the Hitler model of how to act. But we also have, competing
01:00:28.660
with it, the Iraq model. Somebody told you you should go to war. Our media amplified it. We
01:00:36.780
believed our government. We believed the media. We went to war. And then later we found out a giant
01:00:41.440
mistake, no weapons of mass destruction. Now, both of those live in our consciousness as the models
01:00:48.660
that define us. Sachs has, seems closer to the Iraq model, and he's mentioned it a few times,
01:00:58.360
as in, if you don't know you should go there, you know, you're probably being lied to,
01:01:02.760
and it's probably a waste of money. And his critics are pushing the Hitler model that he's an appeaser,
01:01:10.220
and Putin will just take over Poland if he finds that it's easy to do this.
01:01:14.400
So let me give you my take on this. First of all, Hitler ruins everything.
01:01:23.700
Hitler just ruins everything. And to quote Norm MacDonald, the more I hear about that guy,
01:01:32.060
the less I like him. Yep, the more I hear about Hitler, the less I like him. That's a Norm MacDonald
01:01:39.600
joke. But here's the thing. History doesn't always follow Hitler. You all know that, right?
01:01:49.480
Hitler doesn't predict everything. In fact, could you give me a fact check? I can't think of another
01:01:56.820
famous example in modern history, let's say the last hundred years, in which appeasement led
01:02:02.980
immediately to you being invaded. Are there other examples of that? Where somebody just pointedly did
01:02:11.620
a peace deal and then immediately, no, outside of Hitler. What are the other examples?
01:02:18.040
What are the examples? Gaddafi? Gaddafi? Stalin? But what's the example? Yeah. So I'm not so good
01:02:39.380
with history. Finland? But Finland was Hitler. Yeah, see, when I ask for non-Hitler examples,
01:02:53.600
I get more Hitler examples. So Hitler ruins everything. So Hitler is so much in our consciousness
01:02:59.260
that we can't make decisions if it's anything that would violate the history of Hitler. And that's
01:03:05.840
really limiting. But we also have the... We never did a peace deal with Pol Pot.
01:03:16.640
Genghis Khan. I'm not sure any of us are good with history. All right. So we've got two models.
01:03:22.940
Which one is right? Let me tell you how to do the analysis. If you have one model that's the Hitler
01:03:29.000
model, and you don't know if it's predictive or not, and you've got another model that's the Iraq model,
01:03:35.360
and you don't know if it's predictive or not, because history doesn't repeat,
01:03:41.720
would you like me to prove that history doesn't repeat? Because you have two models that are
01:03:48.600
conflicting. One where being aggressive made sense, and one where it didn't. So which one is the history
01:03:55.160
that repeats? And the answer is neither. History can't repeat. Because you're always starting from a new
01:04:02.540
place with new people and new situation, new variables. There's no such thing as history
01:04:07.460
repeating. You just think it does because we're bad at pattern recognition. So if you picked a pattern
01:04:13.860
that happened to be consistent with what actually happens, you think you're a genius. Well, that's a
01:04:20.220
pattern. I've seen that pattern before. But other people saw other patterns, and those didn't happen,
01:04:27.180
and it still didn't stop them from thinking history repeats. Here's what history really does.
01:04:34.900
History gives you infinite different examples, and then you can go find the one that agrees with what
01:04:39.920
you think is going to happen. History is a confirmation bias machine, just like the internet. If you do your
01:04:49.960
own research, let me predict what will happen. You're going to find some research that agrees
01:04:56.460
with the opinion you already had, just like everybody else. Yeah. History is the worst way to
01:05:02.400
decide what to do, because it's nothing but misleading and confirmation bias and talking yourself into
01:05:08.080
something that didn't make sense. So if you have two models, one where funding makes sense and the other
01:05:14.200
where funding doesn't make sense, what should you do? You don't fund. This is, if you think I'm giving
01:05:24.080
you an opinion about Ukraine, I'm not. I could give you that separately. I'm giving you an opinion
01:05:31.140
about how decisions are made. Sachs has the correct model. So it's not about Ukraine. It's not about
01:05:40.880
Russia. It's not about Hitler. It's not about Iraq. It's about how to make a decision. The way you make
01:05:47.560
a decision is if you can't possibly put odds on which way something's going to go, you don't spend
01:05:55.020
money on it, because they're both, you know, potentially like existential threats. You know,
01:06:02.500
not doing it, you know, continuing with the war could be an existential threat.
01:06:07.080
Making peace could be an existential threat, depending on which history you decide to pick
01:06:13.580
to be your confirmation bias. So if you really can't, you just don't have any way to put any
01:06:20.420
odds on what's going to happen, you don't pay for it. That's the most basic decision-making rule
01:06:27.900
you'll ever hear. And by the way, I'll bet a lot of you have been in this situation. I'll bet you have,
01:06:33.460
where you didn't know what was true, and then you paid for it. Don't do that. If it's really a guess,
01:06:40.720
don't pay. Now, here would be an exception. Suppose there was some situation where there was a 1%
01:06:48.540
chance, you know, it'd be the end of the world. Should you pay to get rid of a 1% chance it's the
01:06:54.960
end of the world? Maybe. That might make a lot of sense. For example, paying to avoid an asteroid
01:07:02.120
hitting the Earth or a meteor. You know, maybe there's a 1% chance it'll happen. Should we pay
01:07:08.380
to reduce it to zero if we could? Maybe yes. Because that would be an expected value calculation.
01:07:17.140
You'd say, well, there's only a 1% chance it ends at Earth. So you'd multiply 1% times,
01:07:22.480
if you wanted to do people, times 8 billion people. If you wanted to do money, you'd do it
01:07:26.880
by all the wealth of the Earth that would disappear. And you'd say, well, a 1% chance of losing a
01:07:31.900
quadrillion, quadrillion dollars is still going to be a quadrillion dollars. So if we spend less
01:07:37.580
than a quadrillion dollars to make that risk zero, it looks like a good decision. But that doesn't work
01:07:43.820
when the risk of sending the meteor up is as incalculable as the risk of stopping the
01:07:53.180
meteor, if it's the same as a risk or incalculable as the risk of hitting the Earth, then you don't
01:07:59.760
spend the money. Because you cannot determine that spending the money gives you a better risk.
01:08:04.320
Does that make sense? If you're looking at one risk, yes or no, then it does make sense to spend
01:08:12.840
the money to get rid of all the risk. It could, or it could. But if you have two complete unknowns,
01:08:19.920
like which way to go with a war, that's a complete unknown. You really, really can't predict that.
01:08:26.320
In that case, you'd never spend the money, unless there's some other variable that's bigger.
01:08:32.240
Now, I realize that one of the variables is we have to look like we protect the people we say
01:08:38.020
we're going to protect. But again, that's sort of a gray area, isn't it? Now, certainly if somebody
01:08:45.500
attacks the country and they're an ally, giving them arms and some protection is exactly the obvious
01:08:52.620
thing you would do. But Ukraine is a little non-obvious what's the best play here. If I'm going to do
01:09:00.060
something that's best for the Ukrainian people, is that continuing to give them weapons? Or is that
01:09:07.140
saying, okay, now we're done. Now we're going to talk to Putin. We're going to end it here, even if
01:09:12.900
you don't like how much land he gets, because it just needs to be over. So anyway,
01:09:21.860
yeah, if we could predict, exactly. If you could predict, you would win every war. The reason that
01:09:31.840
mutually assured destruction works so well is that you can predict completely that any one of us in the
01:09:40.560
big country is releasing a nuke. You don't have to wonder if that's bad news. Your country is not going
01:09:46.720
to have a good day if that happens, right? So that one's easy. Don't nuke. How about in this
01:09:53.620
situation? Nope. How about in this situation? Nope. Because it's easy. Every time you use one,
01:10:00.400
you're dead. That's easy. But this Ukrainian one, I would argue, the best friend we could be to the
01:10:07.600
Ukrainian people is to end the war. That's a powerful argument. Sometimes being a friend means
01:10:15.500
tough love, right? Tough love in this case is you just lost the war. Let's deal with that.
01:10:23.300
You just lost, right? So that's what being a friend looks like sometimes. Sometimes being a
01:10:31.860
friend is telling you the thing you didn't want to hear. And so I think we have to be a little bit
01:10:36.800
cautious about what it means to be a reliable ally, because I'm not so sure we've been a reliable
01:10:43.200
ally to Ukraine so far. So far. So tough love could be a better thing than anything.
01:10:54.120
All right. No belief history. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a conclusion of the best live
01:10:59.360
stream you're going to see today. Thanks for joining on X and YouTube and the Rumble platform.
01:11:05.000
I'm coming to you from the Rumble studio, by the way. So it allows me to seamlessly broadcast to all the
01:11:10.900
platforms. It's pretty good, isn't it? Let me ask you this over on the other, the three platforms.
01:11:18.080
It's pretty good quality, isn't it? Good picture. And it's seamless. I'm going to all three platforms.
01:11:24.960
I haven't had a, I think I had one day I had to reboot it or something. That was about it. So that's
01:11:30.440
really good for a new technology. Very impressed. So good work on the Rumble studio. If you're not using
01:11:36.280
the Rumble studio to do your podcasting, I don't know why you wouldn't. There doesn't seem to be a
01:11:41.780
downside. You don't need an engineer because it's just a browser page. You just go and click some
01:11:47.960
things and you're good to go. So you don't need to buy a third machine, another machine. You don't
01:11:52.840
have to buy new software. You just go to the browser page and then you can get, you know, as many extra
01:11:59.300
platforms as you want. Same amount of work. No extra work. You just click a couple extra buttons.
01:12:04.400
So the Rumble studio, take a look at it. Thanks for joining. See you tomorrow.