Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2390 CWSA 02⧸20⧸24

00:00:00.000 Do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do.

00:00:03.540 Ra-pa-pa-pa-pa. 0.99

00:00:06.920 Good morning, everybody, and welcome

00:00:08.780 to the highlight of human civilization.

00:00:11.860 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.

00:00:13.960 It is quite controversial today.

00:00:15.980 If you'd like to take your experience up to levels

00:00:18.600 that nobody can even understand,

00:00:20.280 unless they have a web telescope or something like that,

00:00:24.140 all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass,

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 1.00

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 0.98

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 1.00

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. 0.85

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 0.99

00:16:33.260 deny their erections as being important to it. And then of course, if you've seen, uh, many of the 0.99

00:16:39.740 protesters, um, you might've started with an erection, but once you looked at them, totally 0.93

00:16:45.660 denied, denied. Uh, when I was looking at the, uh, the New York city, the New York city police 0.84

00:16:53.600 department dance troupe, uh, all female, um, I felt like my erection was denied because I was already 0.94

00:17:01.500 to be excited by them, but nope, erection denied. So that's what you got going for you. All right. 0.97

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 1.00

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 0.97

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, 0.93

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, 0.99

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 0.98

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 0.98

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 1.00

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

00:36:50.360 for any reason you want. No exceptions.

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, 1.00

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. 0.99

00:41:23.620 Now, what photo do you think they always pick when they want me to look like an idiot? 1.00

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 1.00

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.

00:42:42.280 How many of you believe that really happened?

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.

00:43:16.860 Does that sound like the first thing I said?

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. 0.93

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 0.98

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 0.62

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, 0.82

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 0.89

01:00:28.660 with it, the Iraq model. Somebody told you you should go to war. Our media amplified it. We 1.00

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. 0.95

01:01:23.700 Hitler just ruins everything. And to quote Norm MacDonald, the more I hear about that guy, 0.91

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 0.88

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, 0.60

01:02:53.600 I get more Hitler examples. So Hitler ruins everything. So Hitler is so much in our consciousness 0.55

01:02:59.260 that we can't make decisions if it's anything that would violate the history of Hitler. And that's 0.71

01:03:05.840 really limiting. But we also have the... We never did a peace deal with Pol Pot. 0.85

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. 0.92

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 0.94

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% 0.61

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 0.99

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 0.95

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. 1.00

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.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - February 20, 2024

Episode 2390 CWSA 02⧸20⧸24

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript