Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2562 CWSA 08⧸10⧸24

00:00:00.360 This part of my screen is always messed up, but not if I do that.

00:00:10.300 What is up with that?

00:00:12.240 I don't know.

00:00:13.920 Anyway, do-do-do-do.

00:00:18.100 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.

00:00:23.420 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and today is going to be an amazing, amazing show, better

00:00:28.240 than normal, and that's...

00:00:30.000 Quite a standard, isn't it?

00:00:31.980 And if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand

00:00:36.800 with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker,

00:00:41.300 chalice or stye, and a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:45.100 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:46.300 I like coffee.

00:00:47.560 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine.

00:00:50.860 At the end of the day, the thing makes everything better.

00:00:53.240 It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now.

00:00:55.920 Go.

00:00:56.040 Oh, delightful.

00:01:04.240 Well, before you notice on your own, I have a confession that things went wrong this morning.

00:01:09.460 You might notice there's a bunch of ink on my forearm, and there's a bunch of ink on

00:01:16.260 my hand, and until a moment ago, my head was covered with ink as well.

00:01:20.380 Well, it turns out that I was using this little portable backscratcher, and it telescopes out

00:01:30.140 like this when you want to use it.

00:01:31.520 And it's exactly the right size if you have a backscratcher problem like I do.

00:01:37.940 Now, I don't know if you've ever had any kind of a body itch problem, but there's one thing I can

00:01:43.980 tell you is that you could identify exactly where it is by what part of my body is impossible to reach

00:01:51.060 unaided.

00:01:51.840 Now, I don't have very long arms, so if you look at this, you can see that there's a zone

00:02:03.660 in the middle of my back about the size of a large grapefruit that there's no possible

00:02:08.780 way any part of my body could reach it to scratch it.

00:02:11.380 So, part of my travel requirements is I can never go anywhere within a backscratcher,

00:02:18.000 because otherwise I'm going to have to find like a wall to rub against like a bear.

00:02:22.780 And yes, I do all the, you know, I put anti-itching cream on it, and I do everything that anybody

00:02:28.520 smart would do.

00:02:29.600 It doesn't make any difference.

00:02:31.820 I think some of it's psychological, actually.

00:02:33.760 But anyway, I put my little backscratcher in the pen holder, and I haven't investigated,

00:02:41.800 but it would seem that one of my pens has leaked, and now it was full of ink, and then

00:02:47.220 I got it on my hands, and then I rubbed my head, and my head was covered with ink when

00:02:52.720 I first went on to my pre-show today.

00:02:56.040 But the rest of today, it's going to be way better.

00:03:00.500 All right, here are the stories of the day.

00:03:03.760 Did you know that coffee could cut your liver cancer risk by 50%?

00:03:09.540 If I'm not immortal already, I'm well on my way, because every single day, I tell you,

00:03:15.680 there's another study that says coffee will make you live longer and reduce your risks.

00:03:21.440 Well, there it is.

00:03:22.540 Your odds of liver cancer are cut by 50%, according to the National Coffee Blog.

00:03:28.820 And I don't think the National Coffee Blog would ever be lying to you.

00:03:33.760 So data is always right when it agrees with what you want it to be.

00:03:39.580 The bigger theme today is data is always wrong, and you should just ask me.

00:03:46.380 It would be much faster if you had come to me and said, Scott, we're thinking of doing

00:03:51.280 a study on the health benefits of coffee on various organs and parts of the body and the

00:03:56.140 brain.

00:03:56.720 I would say, whoa, whoa, whoa.

00:03:59.480 Calm down.

00:04:00.440 You don't need to do all that work.

00:04:02.160 Just ask me.

00:04:03.620 All right.

00:04:04.260 Is coffee good for you?

00:04:06.940 Yes.

00:04:08.500 See?

00:04:09.460 See how much faster that was.

00:04:11.340 It's way faster.

00:04:13.840 And how about, is there a new technology to make the batteries for your cars and your phones

00:04:18.660 and everything much, much more effective?

00:04:21.740 Every day.

00:04:23.100 Here's another one.

00:04:23.880 Turns out that Samsung just demonstrated a 600-mile battery for automobiles that would

00:04:32.780 charge in nine minutes, and Toyota and Samsung have already agreed to mass-produce them.

00:04:40.540 600 miles would be farther than the current Tesla technology, and charging in nine minutes

00:04:48.300 would be kind of amazing.

00:04:49.920 But, is that bad for Tesla?

00:04:53.840 Well, I assume that Tesla also is sampling all the new technologies for batteries, and

00:04:59.980 will be quick to implement new battery technology as well.

00:05:03.920 So, we'll see how that goes.

00:05:06.840 Here's another one.

00:05:09.380 Apparently, according to the Guardian, there's another study that says depression is highly

00:05:14.940 linked with poor physical health.

00:05:17.040 So, if your body is not healthy, it will make you feel depressed.

00:05:22.940 Hmm.

00:05:24.440 Oh.

00:05:25.340 Do you think they could have saved a little money?

00:05:28.020 I think you know where I'm going with this.

00:05:30.540 If they had just said, Scott, we're thinking of spending a lot of money and taking a lot

00:05:34.580 of time to study whether being unhealthy changes your mental attitude.

00:05:39.780 And I would have said, whoa, whoa, you don't need to do that study.

00:05:44.400 Just ask me.

00:05:46.000 And then they say, okay, Scott, is being unhealthy bad for your mental state possibly making you

00:05:51.200 depressed?

00:05:51.780 And I would say, yes.

00:05:54.400 And then they would say, oh, thank you.

00:05:56.420 You saved us a lot of time and money.

00:05:59.080 That's just one of the services I can give you.

00:06:02.940 Here's another one.

00:06:03.840 Well, apparently, according to the Japan Times, when big companies like to do risk assessment

00:06:12.200 for real estate or insurance, they would like to know what is the climate risk and what is

00:06:19.020 the risk of flooding?

00:06:21.000 Well, luckily, there are a number of companies that create complicated prediction models to

00:06:27.380 tell you if your location is likely to be flooded and how badly and when.

00:06:31.480 Would it surprise you to know that the companies that make these proprietary models for predicting

00:06:39.500 these things don't agree with each other?

00:06:42.980 Let's see.

00:06:43.980 Who would have known that in advance?

00:06:47.260 Let's say if you had told me, Scott, there'll be a number of companies that'll be creating

00:06:52.100 their own models of how risky it is to build in certain areas because of flooding.

00:06:57.820 Will those models all agree with each other?

00:07:00.200 What do you think, Scott?

00:07:02.040 And I would have said, no, they will not agree with each other.

00:07:07.460 And then they would have said, oh, thank you.

00:07:10.540 You just saved us a bunch of time and money.

00:07:13.220 I mean, see how easy this is.

00:07:14.960 Just ask me.

00:07:16.460 Next time you're thinking about a study, just ask me.

00:07:19.820 Yes, not only do the proprietary models that are very complicated, and you could never do

00:07:25.940 these yourself.

00:07:26.820 You'd better pay a lot for some big company to do a complicated prediction model for you.

00:07:32.340 No way you could be trusted to do this kind of thing.

00:07:35.480 And then they're not going to show you how they did it because, you know, it's proprietary.

00:07:39.940 But they're going to charge you for it.

00:07:41.760 And they won't agree with the other people who also won't show you how they do it because

00:07:46.160 it's proprietary.

00:07:46.840 But you'd better pay for it.

00:07:50.720 So do you think those big climate models are some science?

00:07:57.240 I know what you're going to say.

00:07:58.560 But, Scott, that's different because the climate models are all in the same direction.

00:08:03.120 You know, basically, they're not exactly the same, but they're all sort of directionally.

00:08:06.660 They're in that same zone.

00:08:07.860 So, yeah, you can depend on those because if all the models are done by different people

00:08:11.900 and they all look the same-ish, that would be very incredible, wouldn't it?

00:08:17.140 No, because anybody who ever created a model that wasn't in that range, it would be discarded.

00:08:25.320 That's all you need to know.

00:08:27.280 There is no way you could get anything but a whole bunch of models that are roughly the

00:08:32.820 same as long as those are the only ones that can get you paid for making a model.

00:08:38.480 Follow the money.

00:08:39.840 It's going to work every time.

00:08:41.900 You could have asked me.

00:08:45.440 Here's one.

00:08:46.860 Have you ever heard me say that music is a drug that goes into your ear?

00:08:52.220 Those of you who have been with me a while, you've heard me say it a million times.

00:08:56.300 The music, I treat it like it's a medicine.

00:08:59.140 So I literally use music medicinally.

00:09:02.000 I say, what mood am I in?

00:09:04.360 What mood do I want to be in?

00:09:06.200 Is there a musical selection that would move me toward that mood I want to be in?

00:09:10.520 And then I apply it.

00:09:12.360 But the last thing I would ever do is randomly turn on some DJ selected list of music because

00:09:20.380 it's going to be all sad shit.

00:09:22.780 Oh, my girlfriend left me.

00:09:25.660 I'm so sad.

00:09:27.280 What am I going to do?

00:09:30.060 And then the worst thing, the worst thing in music is a man singing a song about how sad

00:09:37.860 he is because he can't get his woman.

00:09:40.620 I don't want to hear that.

00:09:42.180 So it turns out there's a study or they're trying to figure out how to use classical music to

00:09:51.180 improve depression symptoms.

00:09:55.680 Exactly like I've been telling you for 20 years, which is if you use music medicinally

00:10:01.280 and you select it for that purpose, you're almost certainly going to be able to change

00:10:07.140 people's mental state.

00:10:08.520 And sure enough, they're studying it to make sure they can do it well.

00:10:14.800 Let's see.

00:10:15.840 What else would Scott have told you that science is just catching up?

00:10:21.280 Oh, Bloomberg has a story.

00:10:23.440 There's a little research that found out that TikTok shows less anti-China content than its

00:10:29.440 rivals.

00:10:30.660 Huh.

00:10:30.860 So apparently if you go searching on TikTok for terms like Tiananmen, Tibet, and Uyghur,

00:10:37.580 you know, things that you would commonly associate with not the best Chinese behavior, you'll see

00:10:43.640 less anti-China content than if you were to search on Instagram, YouTube, or other places.

00:10:49.220 Huh.

00:10:49.460 Now, who could have you asked if TikTok is a little bit biased pro-China?

00:11:00.660 So, well, you know, you could have asked me.

00:11:03.400 You could have just said, Scott is the company that's controlled by China, giving a lot of

00:11:09.440 anti-China propaganda compared to other places.

00:11:12.400 I would have said, I don't think so.

00:11:15.280 I think maybe they'd do a little less than the other people.

00:11:18.460 And then they'd say, thank you, Scott.

00:11:20.340 We just saved a whole bunch of time and money because we were going to study it.

00:11:24.200 Now we don't have to.

00:11:26.240 Yeah, that's what you could have done.

00:11:29.380 There's a Texas town that printed a whole neighborhood with a big, this giant 3D printer

00:11:35.160 that just prints the walls out of some concrete material.

00:11:38.340 And now they built the whole town and you can build one of these homes with just a very

00:11:45.220 small team of people and a big device that's the 3D printer.

00:11:49.760 So it's wildly efficient compared to having a big team of people spending months building

00:11:56.940 your house.

00:11:57.700 A little team of people with a big machine shows up and bop, bop, bop, bop, bop, bop.

00:12:01.540 Next thing you know, you've got walls.

00:12:03.680 House.

00:12:05.120 How is it working out?

00:12:06.220 Well, it turns out that the cost of these highly efficient 3D printed houses is, oh,

00:12:13.680 just about the same as a regular house.

00:12:16.600 Okay, so there's no financial reason to get one of these houses if you're the customer.

00:12:23.860 But it looks like the company making them can make a lot more money than a regular company.

00:12:27.920 So that's good news, right?

00:12:30.400 Well, you're probably thinking you wanted the cheaper house, but you're not going to get

00:12:35.620 that.

00:12:36.380 But at least the concrete printed houses will be in every way just as good as, oh, it

00:12:43.700 turns out that if you have these thick concrete walls, the Wi-Fi signal won't go through them.

00:12:50.800 So you can't have Wi-Fi too easily, but I'm sure they'll solve that.

00:12:55.820 That sounds like a solvable problem.

00:12:57.360 And the walls are great insulation.

00:13:00.580 So if you're in a place with severe weather, they're a really good choice.

00:13:05.420 Now, I don't want to sound like I'm negative on this because I'm not too negative on it.

00:13:12.260 I think that if you have lots of companies trying lots of different technologies for lowering the expense of building a home, that's got to be all good in the long run.

00:13:23.200 I don't know if it'll be this model per se or something else.

00:13:26.480 But I would worry more about how you can change the walls.

00:13:33.560 I don't know if you've ever lived in one house for a long time.

00:13:38.040 There's almost always a point where you say, you know what, if I took this wall out, this would be much better.

00:13:46.460 I don't know if you could take a wall out with these concrete walls.

00:13:50.320 So that's a question.

00:13:51.500 But if it doesn't cost less for one of those houses, that should take a lot of the fun out of it.

00:13:57.520 Researchers, according to popular science, researchers are worried about interacting with AI could turn humans into jerks.

00:14:10.320 Do you think that's a risk?

00:14:12.260 That if you do a lot of interacting with AI, you'll become more of a jerk?

00:14:17.820 Well, it could go either way.

00:14:21.080 Could have asked me.

00:14:22.640 Because I've spoken with AI quite a bit, maybe more than most people.

00:14:26.720 And here's my take on it.

00:14:30.320 If you ask AI if it has an ego, it'll say, no, I don't have feelings.

00:14:35.560 I don't have an ego.

00:14:37.120 And you can treat me any way you want, basically.

00:14:40.900 It's fine.

00:14:41.480 It's just pattern recognition.

00:14:43.640 So I've found in some cases I could be rude to AI and it won't care.

00:14:50.980 So I can chastise it, kind of do whatever I want.

00:14:54.620 And I'm not going to worry that it would be mad at me later.

00:14:57.760 So do the researchers have a point that if I spend, let's say, all morning talking to AI and I'm not being polite and I'm not saying thank you and I'm not saying please, will I take that habit into my human conversations?

00:15:11.760 And the answer is, hmm, maybe, maybe.

00:15:17.340 But here's the counterpoint.

00:15:20.040 AI is designed to be polite.

00:15:23.000 So AI will be polite to me all day long.

00:15:25.720 Will that have more effect by me copying the AI and becoming polite the way it's being polite to me?

00:15:34.240 Or will my not caring about his feelings cause me to enter a pattern in which I'm bad to it and then I carry that into my human interactions?

00:15:43.980 Well, here's the answer to that question.

00:15:46.220 Why would I have human interactions if I've got an AI to talk to?

00:15:49.840 Have you met any humans?

00:15:51.820 Oh, my God.

00:15:53.360 No, I'm just joking.

00:15:54.260 I mean, sort of, not really.

00:15:57.800 So it could go either way.

00:15:59.620 We'll find out.

00:16:00.920 Maybe it'll make us more polite.

00:16:04.100 There's a shock survey, according to study finds, that 85% of parents are thrilled to have their adult kids move back home.

00:16:13.500 I'm not surprised about that at all.

00:16:16.520 Have you privately talked to any adults who have had their kids move back home?

00:16:21.800 It's always mixed.

00:16:23.040 It's always like, oh, you know, you feel bad that they couldn't strike out and, you know, make a life on their own because you kind of want that for them.

00:16:32.400 But on the other hand, kind of nice to have them around, you know, if you like your family.

00:16:37.420 So I think that this is part of a larger trend, I think that a lot of seniors are going to have a lot of roommates who are young people.

00:16:49.800 Why?

00:16:50.840 Well, take me, for example.

00:16:52.520 Well, I'm a bad example, but my house is bigger than I need because I'm a certain generation and made my money and I'm a certain age.

00:17:00.560 So suppose I had roommates that simply were adding something to my life, such as if I dropped dead, they could call 911.

00:17:09.740 Or if something heavy needed to be moved, maybe they could pick it up and I couldn't.

00:17:15.240 So I'm definitely in a conceptual way, not ready yet.

00:17:20.640 I mean, I'm not, I don't feel I'm elderly enough for this yet.

00:17:23.720 I feel like aging doesn't really apply to me in the normal way.

00:17:28.300 Probably everybody feels that.

00:17:30.020 But I can see at some point that my optimal life would be to have three roommates who just use, you know, use the fact that the house has good facilities and, you know, the rooms are nice.

00:17:43.260 And they just do some things for me that I wouldn't be able to do for myself.

00:17:47.980 And it's just safer for me to have other people around.

00:17:51.020 And safer from burglars too, right?

00:17:53.920 So my, my neighborhood has been hit by this, looks like an organized burglar gang.

00:17:59.960 And they seem to somehow know when people are home and when they're not.

00:18:03.680 Haven't figured out how they do that yet.

00:18:05.740 But they hit when you're not home, even during the day.

00:18:08.540 So it doesn't matter when.

00:18:09.920 It's usually during the day, actually.

00:18:11.220 They don't do night because they assume you'd be in there sleeping.

00:18:14.400 So they're trying to find when you're not there.

00:18:16.600 But it would be very helpful to have a home where there's always, you know, two or three cars in the driveway.

00:18:24.240 And then anybody looking at it will say, oh, there's probably somebody in that home.

00:18:28.120 And there would be.

00:18:30.360 All right.

00:18:32.960 Trump had a good line.

00:18:34.360 I don't think he delivered it as well as he could, but it was a great line.

00:18:37.260 But apparently he's joking that when he starts off his rally back in Butler, Pennsylvania, so he's going to go back there and do another rally, the same site where he was nearly killed, shot in the air, that the first thing he's going to say when he starts his rally in Butler, he's going to start with this sentence.

00:18:57.780 As I was saying, now, is that a great line?

00:19:04.980 I don't think it was his own line.

00:19:06.520 I think maybe somebody suggested it.

00:19:09.180 But I can't think of anything that would be funnier than watching Trump stand up in front of a roaring, a roaring Butler, Pennsylvania audience that's, you know, thrilled that he came back to the site of the attempted assassination.

00:19:23.440 You know, the most baller thing you could ever do.

00:19:25.480 And then it gets quiet.

00:19:28.820 And then the first thing he says is, as I was saying, and then he just goes right back into the same PowerPoint slide that went up.

00:19:38.840 Start with the same PowerPoint and just act like nothing happened.

00:19:42.800 That would be hilarious.

00:19:45.060 Now, but he's already signaled it.

00:19:47.440 So I think he stepped on his own joke by signaling it in advance.

00:19:51.380 But it still worked.

00:19:52.840 It would still work.

00:19:53.520 Claudia was leaving for her pickleball tournament.

00:19:56.500 I've been visualizing my match all week.

00:19:58.980 She was so focused on visualizing that she didn't see the column behind her car on her backhand side.

00:20:05.020 Good thing Claudia's with Intact.

00:20:06.920 The insurer with the largest network of auto service centers in the country.

00:20:10.700 Everything was taken care of under one roof and she was on her way in a rental car in no time.

00:20:15.120 I made it to my tournament and lost in the first round.

00:20:18.320 Well, I'm very impressed that when Elon Musk said he was going to sue that advertising coalition called GARM that apparently had been instrumental in getting advertisers to avoid the X platform, which cost Trump or cost Musk billions.

00:20:44.020 So he said he would sue them for their non-competitive actions, I guess.

00:20:49.040 And they immediately folded.

00:20:51.460 They went out of business.

00:20:52.880 They said, we're done.

00:20:54.260 We're done.

00:20:54.920 We're going to run away.

00:20:56.420 We didn't mean it.

00:20:58.020 We don't even exist.

00:20:59.820 Forget what everything.

00:21:00.680 Forget what we said.

00:21:01.480 We don't even exist.

00:21:02.320 Sorry, we disbanded.

00:21:05.440 And they said that they're a small not-for-profit initiative and the recent allegations of misconstruing its purpose and activities.

00:21:14.220 Well, I don't know how misconstrued they were.

00:21:16.980 Of course, a distraction insignificantly drained its resources and finances.

00:21:22.080 Good for you.

00:21:24.060 I'll tell you, this is one of the most satisfying wins.

00:21:28.140 But here's what I worry about.

00:21:29.640 They gave up a little too easily, which suggests they have another way to get the same result, which is keeping X from getting advertisers, without this organization.

00:21:42.480 So I'm not sure it's the clean win it looks like, because in this world, things are never exactly what they look like.

00:21:50.460 It could be that they just realized they didn't need to exist because they've accomplished their mission.

00:21:55.020 It could be that they've poisoned X from advertisers so permanently that they don't need to do it anymore.

00:22:03.500 It just will take care of itself.

00:22:05.040 Maybe the advertisers will just decide they don't need to advertise on X, even though apparently it's a good bang for the buck.

00:22:12.020 You may have seen the story about Joe Rogan said some good things about RFK Jr., which caused people to be mad because they thought he might be more Trump-oriented.

00:22:27.120 So here's the story.

00:22:28.380 So on the Joe Rogan experience, he said, Rogan said he was a fan of Kennedy.

00:22:33.660 He said, quote, he's the only one that makes sense to me.

00:22:36.300 He said, quote, he doesn't attack people, he attacks actions and ideas, and he's much more reasonable and intelligent.

00:22:44.720 Well, that, of course, became a big story because it looked like he was being anti-Trump, which he wasn't.

00:22:51.700 He was just saying that he likes some qualities of RFK Jr.

00:22:55.120 It wasn't an endorsement.

00:22:57.180 But Trump went at him hard.

00:22:59.540 Well, maybe.

00:23:00.420 You know, I'm not sure if this is going at him hard.

00:23:04.540 This was more like a warning shot or something.

00:23:07.640 But Trump does a shot against the bow, across the bow with a post on truth.

00:23:12.960 He said, it will be interesting to see how loudly Joe Rogan gets booed the next time he enters the UFC ring, Trump posted.

00:23:21.760 Now, Trump is very adept at making sure that if you're on his side, you get praised and you get benefits.

00:23:33.220 And if you're even a little bit against him, he will immediately make sure that that's expensive.

00:23:39.480 And, wow, this is quite a threat because you know what kind of a, you know, you know what kind of reaction Trump gets when he goes to the UFC.

00:23:51.400 It's his people.

00:23:53.000 And Trump's basically telling his people, the UFC fans, you know, this Joe Rogan, you might want to boo him the next time.

00:24:01.760 Now, that would be very bad for Joe Rogan because he doesn't need that kind of trouble and it's not exactly accurate to what he said or did or thought.

00:24:12.840 So Rogan immediately tried to clean that up by saying, for the record, he said, this isn't an endorsement.

00:24:20.880 This is me saying that I like RFK Jr. as a person and I really appreciate the way he discusses things with civility and intelligence.

00:24:28.020 I think we could use more of that in this world.

00:24:30.020 But here's where it's funny.

00:24:32.920 So he also said what Zuckerberg said, which I think is a smart thing to say.

00:24:40.880 Rogan also said that where Trump raised his fist and yelled fight after the assassination attempt was, quote, one of the most American effing things of all time.

00:24:51.760 But then Rogan said, quote, I'm not the guy to get political information from.

00:24:58.440 If you want that from a comic, go to comic Dave Smith.

00:25:01.740 He actually knows what he's talking about.

00:25:03.280 So one of the things that makes Joe Rogan the national treasure that he is, is that his ego is probably the most healthy ego I've ever seen in my life.

00:25:17.980 Meaning that, you know, if there are things he's good at, you know, such as podcasting and UFC commenting and stand up.

00:25:29.120 So he doesn't tell you he's great at anything.

00:25:33.340 He just does great things.

00:25:35.680 And then, you know, it's up to you to judge it.

00:25:38.480 And so, but he also has this wonderful sense of humility that politics isn't really his strong domain.

00:25:47.540 So if you want political opinion, go to see someone else.

00:25:51.620 And then he recommends what you should say.

00:25:54.380 Now, that's about that's about as perfectly handled.

00:25:58.900 As you can handle anything.

00:26:00.140 And I would say that even the way he handled this is another example of Rogan just being excellent is something.

00:26:07.320 But being quietly excellent.

00:26:09.980 Doesn't make a big deal about it.

00:26:12.100 He just does what I would consider a really strong response.

00:26:17.540 That should just take the energy out of the whole thing.

00:26:21.120 So it's just fun to watch a couple of people at the height of their powers.

00:26:27.320 You know, Trump, of course, but then Rogan very definitely handling it, which was impressive, I think.

00:26:36.380 All right, here's a reframe that I have mentioned a few times, but I introduced in a larger piece on X.

00:26:44.300 And I'm going to share it with you.

00:26:45.540 And it's the observation that Democrats have what I call a goal-oriented view of life.

00:26:52.520 That is, there are things they want.

00:26:55.480 And Republicans have a more of a systems approach, which is if the system is designed correctly, and we all respect the system, you can get the best result from that.

00:27:08.160 So here's something, here's some examples.

00:27:12.380 And by the way, I always say that goals are for losers.

00:27:16.320 Systems are for winners.

00:27:18.000 I'll explain more about that.

00:27:20.380 But let's say, here's some examples.

00:27:23.820 So Kamala Harris is going after the high prices that corporations are charging in some industries, such as pharma, and I think such as probably energy.

00:27:35.860 And maybe rents are going to be part of that conversation.

00:27:40.960 But the question is, what do you do about high prices?

00:27:44.840 Well, if high prices are because of inflation, which they seem to be, if you were to put a price gap on some industries, those industries would be completely destroyed.

00:27:56.020 Now, does anybody need any proof of that?

00:28:01.240 To the best of my knowledge, that would be something that 100% of all economists, whether they lean left or right, would agree with.

00:28:09.420 That if you put price caps from the government on anybody's industry, the industry will be almost instantly destroyed.

00:28:18.280 Richard Nixon found that out.

00:28:20.680 And California recently found that out.

00:28:22.940 I told you that my neighbors and I almost can't get house insurance because the state, California, said that the insurance companies can't raise their prices, even though their costs went through the roof.

00:28:37.220 So if your costs are going through the roof, mostly from forest fires and homes being more expensive to replace, if your costs are going through the roof and then the government tells you you can't raise your prices to match your cost of doing business, what do you do?

00:28:51.160 Well, it turns out that the insurance companies that were dealing with California just pulled out.

00:28:58.400 They just said we can't work in an environment where our costs are going up like crazy, but we can't raise our prices.

00:29:04.240 So we're out.

00:29:04.940 We're just literally out of business.

00:29:07.260 They just stopped doing business in California.

00:29:09.700 Now, that's not just predictable.

00:29:14.980 That's every time.

00:29:16.980 There's only one way that goes.

00:29:19.600 And anytime it's been tried, it went that way instantly.

00:29:23.900 So Kamala Harris is suggesting price caps.

00:29:31.520 Now, I would call that a goal.

00:29:34.780 So if I said to you, I would like prices to go down.

00:29:41.400 And a Democrat says, good, we'll make a law that says price can't go up.

00:29:46.000 All right.

00:29:46.600 Done.

00:29:47.240 Solved it.

00:29:47.920 So that would be a goal where you just jump right to the solution.

00:29:51.860 All right.

00:29:52.220 We'll force you to not raise your prices.

00:29:54.200 Problem solved.

00:29:55.540 It's not really a system.

00:29:57.860 The system was the free market.

00:30:00.420 The free market would have adjusted.

00:30:02.480 It would have taken some time and it would have been ugly, but the free market always

00:30:07.000 adjusts.

00:30:08.220 If the government gets in there, it's just permanently broken.

00:30:11.460 You can't fix from that.

00:30:14.460 So here are some things which I would argue Democrats have a goal-oriented approach.

00:30:22.280 DEI.

00:30:24.260 DEI is, okay, make sure you have the right number of people from each group.

00:30:29.700 But what's the system to get there?

00:30:33.180 See the problem?

00:30:34.700 It ignores that the system to get there is going to break more than it's going to fix.

00:30:39.840 There's no real system that can get you there without more costs than benefit.

00:30:44.840 How about climate change?

00:30:47.940 Climate, they're like, it's too hot.

00:30:49.580 Got to make it cooler.

00:30:50.320 Well, what's the system from getting there?

00:30:53.860 Well, if the system is stop pumping oil before you have some way to survive and have good companies

00:31:01.760 or have a good economy, you can't really get there.

00:31:06.020 So just going directly to the goal, you know, with the force of government, terrible idea.

00:31:11.940 Whereas the, I would say the Republican system is best described by Vivek Ramaswamy,

00:31:20.360 which is if you don't know exactly what the danger is, and sometimes being too cold is going to kill you,

00:31:27.000 like eight times more likely than too hot, and too hot might kill you too.

00:31:31.940 But how do you solve both too hot and too cold?

00:31:36.320 What is the solution for a world that's either too hot or too cold?

00:31:40.880 As Vivek says very succinctly, it's energy.

00:31:44.600 If you have plentiful energy, you can turn on the heat.

00:31:49.500 If you have plentiful energy, you can turn on the AC.

00:31:53.780 Or you can build yourself a new house that's nice and insulated.

00:31:57.780 So a system in the, I'd say the Republican system, which is you make sure that you're as wealthy

00:32:06.060 and as educated and as free as you possibly can be, and then you're ready for everything.

00:32:14.220 You're not just ready for climate change, you're ready for everything.

00:32:18.900 So if it's too hot, if it's too cold, you got money to solve it.

00:32:22.700 If there's a flood, you got money to solve it.

00:32:24.860 If you need to relocate, you got money to solve it.

00:32:27.780 But if you don't have money to solve it, everything is the end of humanity.

00:32:33.620 There are all kinds of things that could wipe you out if you don't have resources.

00:32:37.780 Resources are the solution to everything.

00:32:39.680 So the Republican system of giving you maximum free speech, maximum resources, maximum freedom,

00:32:49.200 maximum reduction of government interference should create the maximum power within a country or the world or even a family

00:33:01.100 where you can solve a whole variety of problems, not just the heat.

00:33:05.040 And that's a good system.

00:33:09.660 Look at, yeah, so DEI, climate change and price capping of pharmacies and pharmaceuticals and all that.

00:33:19.040 Those are all goal oriented and they are all suboptimal as systems.

00:33:24.700 Here's another example.

00:33:28.140 Pelosi says her main goal in life, basically, or politics, I guess, is keeping Trump out of office.

00:33:35.800 The main goal is keeping Trump out of office.

00:33:39.260 Again, trying to skip right to the goal.

00:33:44.280 What's the, well, let's compare that to the Republican system.

00:33:48.080 The Republicans are trying to protect free speech because it's being lost.

00:33:55.680 They're trying to make sure that people have the right information and they want to make sure that our elections are not riggable

00:34:03.500 and that we could, we would know if anybody tried.

00:34:07.320 So if you have elections that people trust and are not rigged and you can audit them easily to know for sure

00:34:14.000 and you have maximum free speech, are you worried about who becomes president?

00:34:21.140 If you have a good system, you're going to get good leaders because people will know what they're voting for.

00:34:26.920 They'll understand the situation.

00:34:29.220 They'll say, oh, this one's better than that one.

00:34:31.620 But no.

00:34:33.680 Instead of a system to pick the best person, you know, be it Trump or be it anybody else,

00:34:38.940 Pelosi just wants to stop Trump.

00:34:41.080 That's a goal.

00:34:41.900 And you'll see this very consistently.

00:34:46.300 You also see that there is ignoring of usually half of every problem.

00:34:53.600 Here's another example.

00:34:56.940 I think it was Attorney General Andrew Bailey of Missouri had done a,

00:35:02.520 had done some kind of a legal attempt to block the half a trillion dollar student loan forgiveness

00:35:10.860 that the Biden administration was trying to do.

00:35:13.760 So they were trying to forgive a whole bunch of student loans.

00:35:17.080 Now, I saw a Democrat saying, well, you know, that was a good idea to forgive those loans.

00:35:23.340 And the reason is it would be really, really helpful to the people who took out the loans.

00:35:28.160 To which I say, and, and, finish your point.

00:35:32.900 Oh, your point's finished.

00:35:34.480 That it would be really good for the people who got the money.

00:35:39.180 Well, we all knew that.

00:35:41.920 It's the other half.

00:35:43.160 What about the people who paid the money that didn't get to go to college in many cases?

00:35:50.880 So the Democrat approach is you skip right to the goal.

00:35:56.140 Oh, we want to relieve the student debt problem, which is a huge problem.

00:36:00.940 But they're leaving out the fact that you would have to trample on other people's

00:36:05.560 rights and sensibilities to get there.

00:36:09.320 Well, what would be the, uh, the Republican method?

00:36:14.140 The Republican method is everybody takes care of their own problems.

00:36:18.520 If you, if you took out a loan, you shouldn't have taken out.

00:36:22.280 That might be between you and the government and the university, but it's not about me.

00:36:27.740 If I didn't take out those loans or I paid back my loans, um, I have paid back some government

00:36:34.200 loans for somebody else, not me, but, uh, yeah, you got to show the whole story or else,

00:36:41.620 or else it's nonsense.

00:36:43.920 So you see it quite, uh, quite clearly.

00:36:46.520 And by the way, congratulations to Attorney General Andrew Bailey from Missouri for a big

00:36:52.880 win for the people who want those, uh, payments to be canceled.

00:36:56.060 Now it is still a big problem, but you got to look at the whole picture.

00:37:03.120 All right.

00:37:04.100 Um, oh, I, I didn't have this in my notes, but I saw a fascinating conversation between,

00:37:09.220 uh, Mark Cuban and Vivek Ramaswamy, and it included some talk about, uh, how to look at climate change.

00:37:16.920 Um, and I, I teased a little bit about Vivek saying that if you, if you take care of your

00:37:23.200 wealth, you're in the best position for all kinds of problems.

00:37:26.680 And that's an excellent answer.

00:37:28.420 But, uh, Mark Cuban's argument was that although you might doubt the existential risk of climate

00:37:35.260 change, you can't doubt that there's some risk.

00:37:38.480 And let's say you thought that was a 1% risk of destroying the world for your kids.

00:37:44.740 Cuban would say, wouldn't you still put like maximum effort into it?

00:37:49.640 Cause you really have to get rid of that 1% risk because it's a risk of everything being

00:37:54.900 ended.

00:37:55.700 Do you agree with that logic?

00:37:57.800 Do you think that is a correct risk management risk reward way to look at it?

00:38:03.540 So let me say it again and just tell me if you think the logic makes sense.

00:38:08.220 If there's a 1% chance that climate change caused by humans could just destroy civilization

00:38:15.700 or something like that, wouldn't you put maximum effort into it to make sure that 1% didn't

00:38:23.260 happen?

00:38:24.220 Yes or no?

00:38:25.480 The answer is no.

00:38:26.900 No, that is not good risk management, which surprises me because I think that Cuba's

00:38:33.540 is unusually good at risk management.

00:38:37.040 In fact, you know, I think there are multiple examples, certainly the way he handled his business

00:38:45.520 affairs in the past and made sure that Broadcom didn't get tanked and he kept his money and

00:38:51.060 all that.

00:38:52.040 So he's actually very good at risk management, but this one doesn't make sense.

00:38:56.600 And let me tell you why.

00:38:58.440 Cause there are too many things like it.

00:39:00.620 If you are going to put your focus and your, you know, major resources into stopping a

00:39:06.640 1% problem, there are too many of them.

00:39:11.420 How about the risk that a meteor will hit the earth and destroy it?

00:39:15.540 Is that bigger or less than the risk of climate change?

00:39:20.700 Well, I don't know, but let's say they're both in that 1% risk.

00:39:24.460 Shouldn't we put maximum effort into building rocket ships to take us to Mars?

00:39:29.300 Cause the whole planet's at risk from that meteor.

00:39:32.940 How about the national debt problem?

00:39:36.820 Shouldn't we just stop everything we're doing and figuring out how to cancel, how to take care

00:39:41.860 of the national debt, whatever that takes.

00:39:45.400 What about fentanyl?

00:39:48.520 What about the cartels, the cartels getting enough, let's say enough traction in the United

00:39:55.960 States that there's a reasonably good chance that cartels will be running America in 10

00:40:01.680 years.

00:40:02.900 Is that a bigger or smaller risk than climate change?

00:40:06.680 I think it's bigger, but I could go down the list and I could give you probably 10 more

00:40:12.220 things that have a 1% chance of ruining everything in the world.

00:40:17.960 So if you can't give your, you know, your focus and your attention to all of those 10 or 20

00:40:24.360 things that if everything went wrong, it could be the end of the world, like climate change,

00:40:28.640 which I, which I acknowledge there's some chance it could ruin the world.

00:40:32.260 I acknowledge that to be true, a chance, uh, I would bet against it very heavily.

00:40:38.840 So here's what I think.

00:40:40.780 I think Vivek had the better risk management proposal because, uh, we really can't trust

00:40:47.680 climate models and we can't trust the science completely.

00:40:52.540 And there's so many other things that are the end of all humanity.

00:40:56.200 If we don't do them right, the, you pretty much have to make sure that the humans are as

00:41:00.700 strong as possible so that they can take on whatever weird risks come at us.

00:41:09.820 All right.

00:41:10.840 So that's how I see a risk management.

00:41:15.100 Um, when I found out my friend got a great deal on a wool coat from winners, I started

00:41:20.840 wondering is every fabulous item I see from winners like that woman over there with the

00:41:26.460 designer jeans are those from winners. Ooh, are those beautiful gold earrings. Did she pay full

00:41:32.140 price or that leather tote or that cashmere sweater or those knee high boots, that dress,

00:41:37.400 that jacket, those shoes, is anyone paying full price for anything? Stop wondering,

00:41:42.980 start winning winners find fabulous for less. So there's the weirdest thing happening with Hunter

00:41:49.240 Biden. Uh, there's currently a court case in which part of their, uh, accusations from the government

00:41:57.640 are that it was obvious that Biden was, um, taking money from foreign countries to influence American

00:42:05.920 policy. And then they go on to which we say, wait, wait a minute, wait a minute. You're saying it's a

00:42:12.920 given and it's in evidence that Hunter Biden was doing far of violations, meaning that he had not

00:42:20.660 registered as a foreign agent who would be legally allowed to promote the interests of other countries

00:42:28.140 in, in America. It's legal as long as you register, but he's not registered. Never was. So according to

00:42:36.160 Jonathan Turley, who I recommend as the source, if you want to read more about this, apparently it's now

00:42:42.100 completely obvious and in evidence. We've got bank records, we've got eyewitnesses, we've got

00:42:48.620 all kinds of evidence that not only did Hunter Biden accept millions of dollars from foreign countries,

00:42:57.160 Ukraine and Romania and China, but that he very clearly was influencing American policy. And that's

00:43:04.560 why he got the money. Nothing, no other service was, was ever presented or even proposed or even

00:43:11.580 alleged. There was literally nothing else to it, but taking money to influence policy through his

00:43:19.140 father who was vice president at the time. And the weird thing is that we're trying to understand

00:43:25.500 why if it's so obvious they committed a crime that a Republican would go to jail for,

00:43:31.340 there's not even a charge. And the answer is because his father's the president. That's it. It's exactly

00:43:39.960 what it looks like. It's two standards of justice and they can do it right in front of you because as

00:43:46.960 long as the mainstream media treats it like it's not a story, you're not going to treat it like it's a

00:43:52.660 story either. Let me go back and connect a couple of things. The reason that Hunter will probably get

00:44:01.040 away with no FARA charges is that the news will just ignore it. And if it's only the news on the

00:44:07.680 right, they're not powerful enough to get anything done. It has to be the mainstream says it's a story

00:44:12.860 or it's not a story. And if the public doesn't think it's a story because it's complicated or they

00:44:18.360 don't believe it or whatever, nobody needs to do anything because it wouldn't be enough public

00:44:23.340 pressure to make them. But going back to the climate change risk, the thing that you need to

00:44:31.300 know about risk is that the thing that you as a human being will judge as your biggest risk is whatever

00:44:37.780 you're exposed to the most. So if you take Mark Cuban, a normal person in the normal world, and he looks

00:44:47.080 at the news, there's probably going to be a story about how climate change is going to kill you.

00:44:51.660 And the next day you look at the news, well, there's another story about climate change is

00:44:55.840 going to kill us all. So how many stories are there about meteors destroying the earth? Once a year.

00:45:03.940 It's sort of out there, but not really focused on because nobody's raising any money for it, I guess.

00:45:09.360 So what you think is your biggest risk is never the biggest risk. What you think is your biggest risk

00:45:17.700 will always be whatever you were exposed to the most. So the reason that a Mark Cuban and, you know,

00:45:25.020 half of the country thinks that climate change is their biggest risk has nothing to do with the size

00:45:30.360 of the risk. It has everything to do with how often they hear about it. Now, if you don't understand that

00:45:36.220 important point, the world is a confusing place. What you think is important is simply what you hear

00:45:45.640 the most. Now, that's hard to believe because you're saying to yourself, that's not true because

00:45:51.680 I apply my reason and my thoughts and my knowledge and my deep research to every question. So it doesn't

00:45:59.520 matter how much I hear about it. I've applied my thinking to it. So it's my thinking that's driving

00:46:04.480 my opinions. No, it's not. No. Science is very clear on this. Whatever you're exposed to the most,

00:46:11.380 you'll think is true. Now, are there people who are immune to it? Yes. Yes. There are some people

00:46:18.320 who have created structures in their brain where they can somewhat ignore the things they're hearing

00:46:25.520 the most and use the reason. But that's rare. If you're looking at the public in general,

00:46:30.380 all that matters is how often you see it. That's it. The reason that Democrats went from Kamala

00:46:39.840 Harris doesn't seem like a good candidate to us to, my God, we're so excited. It's the best thing

00:46:45.740 we've ever seen. I'm so happy with Kamala Harris. It's because the news kept telling you that she was

00:46:52.180 doing great. And if the news kept saying she was great and she's doing great, well, then you started

00:46:57.780 to think it was true. Was it true because you used your reason and your deep research to find out that

00:47:02.860 you were always wrong about Kamala Harris? And indeed, she was an amazing candidate and she'd be a great

00:47:07.600 president. Nothing like that happened. No, there was just more pictures. There were just more times

00:47:15.380 you heard her name. That's it. That's all it takes. It doesn't take more than that.

00:47:20.120 All right. Rasmussen is having a good time the last several days. It's been several days since

00:47:32.520 Kamala Harris picked Walsh as her running mate. Do you know what hasn't happened in several days?

00:47:39.100 A new poll. Huh. Why would that be? Well, it's not that nobody has a new poll. Rasmussen themselves

00:47:49.780 has a new poll that showed that Trump was still handily ahead. Five points, I think.

00:47:58.280 Now, Rasmussen points out that they are not similar to other polls. There are other polls that seem to be

00:48:06.840 showing that Harris has pulled even or ahead, but they're not current. So there's some suspicion

00:48:16.400 that it's not because the other pollsters didn't do any polling this week. I mean, after Walsh was picked,

00:48:25.880 but that they've seen their own polls and they've decided not to show you.

00:48:30.180 Do you think that's possible? Do you think that the polls showed that Harris is getting stomped and that

00:48:38.560 Walsh didn't help a bet and that they're just sitting on the polls? Because Rasmussen is sort of

00:48:44.300 suggesting that there's a little bit of obvious collective tardiness in updating the poll.

00:48:51.780 And when they don't update the poll, and it looks to you like, you know, last week Harris was pulling

00:48:59.900 even, it allowed the betting markets actually pulled even too. So for a while, the polls said

00:49:07.700 Harris and Trump were about even, but the betting markets were still saying Trump, Trump, Trump.

00:49:13.420 But if you let that stay for a while, you don't update your polls, the betting markets adjust to

00:49:20.320 the polls. And that's what happened. And now those things have a life of their own. So it could

00:49:27.200 influence future betting and the future betting could influence future polling and future polling

00:49:33.500 could influence future betting. And so it's, there's sort of a thing here going on that you should keep

00:49:40.360 an eye on. Maybe it's a coincidence that Rasmussen had a poll and the others didn't. Maybe. Or maybe

00:49:48.840 the next wave of polls are going to be shocking, meaning that Trump is in firm command. Now I'm not

00:49:57.040 predicting that. I'm just saying that this is the implication of Rasmussen having a poll and the

00:50:03.520 others not having one for some reason that we can't explain.

00:50:06.200 All right. I saw back in November 2022, Walsh was on a radio program and the videos going around of

00:50:21.360 him being asked about closing schools because his state was pretty aggressive in keeping schools

00:50:27.340 closed. And the interviewer, the host pointed out that the kids lost a lot of learning and

00:50:36.360 by the homeschooling. And Walsh said, I don't buy it. These kids learned resiliency. They had to

00:50:44.320 figure out how to get online. So he's actually arguing that school children were not damaged in

00:50:52.200 terms of their development by the closures. And that you have to look at all the people whose lives

00:50:58.760 he saved he would claim. All right. So to me, again, that is more half opinion. The half opinion is you

00:51:10.920 can just ignore the damage to the children and just look at the thing that you claim worked, which is

00:51:17.880 maybe you save some lives. Don't know about that. But I would also say that conservatives have a problem

00:51:29.440 with the same argument, but a different problem. Here's what I hear mostly from conservatives when

00:51:35.260 they talk about school closings. The school closing hurt the children. So it was all bad.

00:51:45.120 But I don't think schools were closed because people thought the children would die from the COVID

00:51:51.860 unless I was in a different country than you were. My understanding is that the problem with kids

00:51:59.500 being exposed is that they would take it home and grandma would die. So the school closure was never

00:52:06.360 about the benefit of the kids. Did you hear a different story than I did? So it seems like it

00:52:14.440 changed into the story was that the kids needed to be protected, but indeed they were worse off

00:52:21.640 because the vaccinations allegedly caused more problems than benefits and the school closing caused

00:52:28.760 more problems than benefits. But the whole point of that was to keep grandma alive, wasn't it?

00:52:35.960 That's what I, I mean, I watched the news the same as you did. And what I saw was we're going to

00:52:41.160 sacrifice the kids to save the older people. So if at the end of it, you see that the kids were in fact

00:52:49.480 sacrificed, but the claim would be that more old people lived, that would be what they were trying to do.

00:52:58.440 They were sacrificing the children's well-being to keep people alive who are older. But I don't see

00:53:07.020 people acknowledging that that was the plan. Rather, they'll say the children were sacrificed,

00:53:13.400 you must go to jail. And then those people will say, no, we sacrificed the children to save the old

00:53:19.080 people and it succeeded. Now the children can adjust, but the old people, if they had died,

00:53:26.020 they can't come back to life. Now I'm not saying that was a good trade-off. Somebody, somebody's

00:53:31.260 going to, you know, somebody on 4chan's already writing a meme that says that I'm in favor of

00:53:36.800 closed downs. Nothing like that's happening. I was never in favor of the closed downs. I'm just saying

00:53:42.420 that if you're going to talk about it, it's not really legitimate to just leave out half of the

00:53:46.740 argument. You can certainly have an opinion that the closing was worse than not closing.

00:53:51.700 That would be a legitimate opinion. It's not legitimate to pretend that it was always about

00:53:57.240 protecting the children because it never was. It was always about sacrificing the children.

00:54:03.420 So you got to be honest about that. It was about, and I think the government was

00:54:08.040 pretty honest that they were going to sacrifice the kids to save the older people.

00:54:12.660 Now they might've been wrong about all the science. That's a different question. But at least don't

00:54:20.280 change the history of what they were trying to do and, you know, what they clearly stated they were

00:54:25.380 trying to do. Oh, also the teachers, yeah, the teachers were part of the conversation trying to

00:54:31.860 protect themselves, they being also older people. Well, Trump's, uh, Trump's plane had an emergency

00:54:39.120 landing because of mechanical issues. Couldn't have been too bad because the landing looked normal.

00:54:44.600 Um, but apparently during the landing, allegedly, uh, Trump was arguing with the New York Times

00:54:50.560 because they were trying to, uh, sort out the fact that Trump had claimed that he had been once been

00:54:56.560 on a helicopter that had an emergency landing and he was on the helicopter with Willie Brown,

00:55:02.220 who he knows well, uh, where he used to know well. Well, apparently Willie Brown has denied that

00:55:09.140 anything like that ever happened. And at the same time, there's a, another black politician from

00:55:17.480 another local place who says, no, that was me. That was me on the plane. That was not Willie Brown.

00:55:23.700 So given that Willie Brown says he wasn't on the plane, uh, on the helicopter that had the problems,

00:55:30.940 but there's another black politician who says it was him. That's pretty persuasive. So that would

00:55:38.960 suggest that Trump, um, just mixed up or misremembered who, who was where doing what,

00:55:46.080 which is not that unusual. Now, does it worry me that he's a certain age and maybe it would be the

00:55:52.700 first sign of dementia? Yes. Yes, it does. Yeah. I think if you're a Democrat and you're saying,

00:56:02.720 Scott, I don't think you can ignore the fact that he has a complete, uh, opposite memory of what

00:56:08.520 happened. It wasn't Willie Brown. It was something else. So the first thing I would say is that's

00:56:13.040 happened to all of us. Has that never happened to you where you had a strong memory of somebody being

00:56:21.300 in a story and then somebody says that I wasn't even there. And you find out, Oh, okay. I was

00:56:25.780 mixing you up with some, one of my other friends. It's a very normal mistake to make, but it's also

00:56:31.420 fair to say if your president is a certain age, is it fair to say, let's, let's put this in the watch

00:56:39.040 list. Let's just keep an eye on this. Cause if you get more of it, maybe it does mean something.

00:56:45.760 If you don't get more of it, well, it's just normal stuff, but to ignore it, I think that's

00:56:52.640 too far. Uh, I think if you're going to promote a president who's a certain age, you've got to be

00:56:59.380 honest about it. You know, don't, don't be a Democrat. You don't pretend you can't see it.

00:57:05.320 If you can see it, you're going to have to call it out. I don't see it yet. So I don't see that as

00:57:13.140 alarming. I definitely see it as put it on your watch list. Cause if there's more of it, then it

00:57:18.980 means a different thing than if it just is like a little weird story. So we'll see how that goes.

00:57:26.040 Um, uh, Axios has a, uh, has a headline on Axe pointing to their own story. And here's their

00:57:38.400 headline report. Trump calls Harris a quote bitch. And I said to myself, what seriously? So I clicked

00:57:49.320 on that story to read about all the evidence that he called her a biatch and it wasn't even mentioned.

00:57:58.540 I don't mean that the source wasn't mentioned. I mean, there was nothing in the story about

00:58:03.420 anybody calling anybody a bitch. What the hell is up with that? Am I crazy? Because the story was

00:58:12.040 very short and none of it mentioned anything that was in the headline, but most people are

00:58:19.300 going to see the headline and never click on it. Is it as obvious as it looks that they're just

00:58:24.600 trying to create a rumor and they'll act like it was just a mistake or something? Or is there more

00:58:30.160 to the story? Is there actually any evidence that he did say that? And by the way, I don't care if he

00:58:35.560 did. You know, if, if I found out that, uh, Kamala Harris, uh, privately, or even talking to donors

00:58:43.380 said that Trump was a big old asshole, would that bother me? Uh, I suppose she called him a narcissist

00:58:52.820 or a dictator or whatever. Would that bother me? Nah, no. If I found out that, uh, Trump really did

00:59:02.380 call Kamala Harris a bitch in some context, probably more private than public. Would that bother me?

00:59:08.980 No, not even a little. So, but, but it would bother, I imagine the, the base of supporters of

00:59:19.460 Kamala Harris, but no, I don't care what anybody calls anybody in the political context, especially

00:59:25.100 if it's more private than public. You, even if, even if they're just talking to donors, I'd call that

00:59:32.360 private ish, but not really. He did call her nasty and he did say she wasn't smart. And that's why

00:59:39.120 they're not letting her talk to reporters. But those are normal things that Trump says in public.

00:59:47.680 Bank more on course. When you switch to a Scotiabank banking package,

00:59:51.360 learn more at scotiabank.com slash banking packages conditions apply Scotiabank. You're richer than you

00:59:59.140 think. All right. Let's talk about Kamala now being, uh, many days into having her vice president

01:00:07.940 and many days now into being the presumptive and actual nominee. And there's still been no

01:00:14.720 serious interview or press gaggle or press, whatever it is, press presser. Let's call it a presser.

01:00:22.820 Um, and of course the, uh, debates are, are not until September. So is this a good strategy?

01:00:34.040 Do you think that Kamala Harris has a strong strategy by just avoiding doing the things that

01:00:40.040 everybody wants a president to show that they can do? Well, I think it works. The, the total

01:00:47.960 domination of the news by one side allows them to tell you that not talking to the press makes perfect

01:00:55.840 sense. And of course she'll get around to it. Oh, makes perfect sense. She'll totally get around

01:01:01.780 to that. Yeah. Don't worry about it. Oh, it's coming later. Yeah. Later. And how about the fact

01:01:07.900 that she has no policies written on her website? No policies and no direct interaction. So you won't

01:01:16.040 know her personality and her personal capabilities and you won't know her policies. So even if you say

01:01:26.240 to yourself, but don't worry about her cause it's, it's her supporter. Well, it's her advisors and it's

01:01:32.380 the bureaucracy that makes everything happen. Makes what happen? We don't know what she wants to do

01:01:38.180 and we don't know how capable she would be at doing it, but they're selling the excitement.

01:01:45.260 Oh, there's excitement. There does seem to be genuine excitement. Um, I think it is

01:01:51.340 strangely enough, it's the right strategy. Here's why it's the right strategy. A lot of people don't

01:02:00.560 know who Kamala Harris is really. You know, a lot of people don't pay too much attention to the vice

01:02:06.140 president. Um, so in a way she's being introduced for the first time to some portion of the public.

01:02:16.540 The longer you can go by giving people a positive impression of her, the less they will believe

01:02:24.140 any negative story in the future. Let me say that again, because this is like a really vital

01:02:30.380 persuasion point. The longer people go Democrats getting only positive indications, positive,

01:02:39.900 positive, positive. She's amazing. She's the best. Oh, look at all the things she can do.

01:02:44.660 The longer they can keep that up when she does finally do a presser and it doesn't go well,

01:02:52.220 nobody's minds will change because once their minds are made up and they've decided she's a good

01:02:58.240 one and they're going to back her and they've told all their friends, she could, she could advocate

01:03:03.600 for slaying babies and murdering your dog. And you would say, okay, but overall she's really good.

01:03:11.420 And she's better than Trump. Right? So you're in order for your confirmation bias and your cognitive

01:03:18.440 dissonance to lock you into your rational choice, you need to have an extended period where you're buying

01:03:25.160 into the narrative and, and the more they can keep her a blank slate and just say, it's exciting.

01:03:32.020 It's not Trump. She might win. She's black and she's Indian and she's a woman. Whoa, that's good enough.

01:03:38.280 So I think their strategy is, I hate to say it, perfect.

01:03:44.700 It's perfect. And I'm going to give Kamala another compliment. You didn't see this coming. So there

01:03:57.040 were some protesters at her rally and the protesters were pro-Palestinian protesters and they started to

01:04:05.060 make a lot of noise. Now, traditionally, when somebody is giving a speech and the protesters make

01:04:10.300 a lot of noise, you maybe pause and you have security do their thing. And then you get back

01:04:17.440 to business. What she did was she stopped what she was doing. She gave them direct attention,

01:04:25.280 which caused them to be quieter. And then here's the best part.

01:04:30.840 She, she promised them something that she wasn't going to give her. She said, she said, quote,

01:04:41.000 now is the time to get a ceasefire deal and get the hostage deal done. Now is the time. And suddenly

01:04:47.640 the protesters and the whole, the whole stadium went wild. They're like, yes, yes. She understands what

01:04:54.820 we want. She heard our protests. She, she gave us, you know, gave us the respect of listening. She

01:05:01.480 repeated what we wanted, which is a ceasefire. Yes. Now here's why this is brilliant.

01:05:08.720 She didn't give them anything.

01:05:12.380 She gave them nothing. And she made them, she made them stand up and cheer like a train seals

01:05:18.960 with Parkinson's. As I said on X, she made them love her. And she gave them nothing

01:05:27.340 because everybody wants a ceasefire, but everybody wants it on their terms, right?

01:05:37.280 Everybody wants a ceasefire. I want a ceasefire. As soon as all the, all the, uh, hostages are

01:05:43.700 released and all of the Hamas leadership has surrendered and given up all their weapons.

01:05:48.960 It's a ceasefire. I want an immediate ceasefire under those conditions. Now other people want

01:05:55.700 different conditions, maybe no conditions, but she basically promised them literally nothing

01:06:01.880 because everybody wants a ceasefire. And they're all like, yay. Yay. My hero. It's kind of brilliant.

01:06:09.400 So you really need to watch out because Kamala Harris has more game than you think because she can

01:06:18.400 have moments like that. It's, she's more dangerous than you think as a politician.

01:06:26.000 Let's talk about a great Britain's or Britain's speech laws. I'm not, I'm not going to call them

01:06:32.120 great anymore, but, um, apparently, and I wasn't sure I was hearing this right, but apparently Britain

01:06:41.720 will arrest an American who said something on social media, if it was against their new laws

01:06:49.980 about, uh, drumming up trouble or hate. And since it's obviously subjective, whether you've gone too

01:06:58.160 far in your hate speech, it's a very dangerous situation. And they've even said they would arrest

01:07:03.980 Americans, even for doing things in America. So if you were to say something that was look like it

01:07:11.740 was promoting, let's say violent protest, and you were an American and you were just sitting in America,

01:07:17.980 the Brits say that they can arrest you and put you in jail in great Britain.

01:07:21.900 Now America would have to agree to that, I suppose. And they'd have to get custody of you,

01:07:26.300 which isn't likely, but if you were to travel to there and they found out you did it and they found

01:07:34.760 out you were there in person, they could put you in jail for being an American who posted something

01:07:41.960 online. Now here's the thing. Um, shouldn't there be a travel advisory from the United States

01:07:53.460 government telling us that if you go to great Britain, uh, you could be arrested for something

01:07:58.820 you posted in the past. See, that's the scary part. It's not even what you're doing today.

01:08:04.580 It's anything you've ever posted and you travel to great to Britain and they find out, let's say

01:08:11.980 they pick you up for littering or something and they run a check on your social media and they find

01:08:19.540 out you said something five years ago that looked like it was generating trouble for the UK and they

01:08:26.240 put you in jail. Now, are you telling me that the government of the United States doesn't need to

01:08:33.660 warn travelers that they could be jailed in great Britain for things they said five years ago on their

01:08:39.840 social media? That feels like it's really important to tell people I would never travel to England under

01:08:47.200 these conditions. And I would advise anybody who was thinking about it to immediately cancel their

01:08:52.060 plans. How is this not a really, really big issue with our government telling us whether or not it

01:09:00.380 makes sense to travel there? I think a travel advisory has to be demanded or at the very least the people

01:09:06.940 in the news need to ask the appropriate government entities. And I guess it would be Kamala Harris.

01:09:12.920 Why not? And, and also ask, are we heading in that direction? That's what I want to know.

01:09:23.020 And indeed there was a young man who just got three years in prison for some posts on social media.

01:09:32.660 All right. Speaker Mike Johnson does a post that he says, remember 198 house Democrats voted against the

01:09:41.500 save act, which ensures that only American citizens can vote in American elections. And Speaker Johnson

01:09:48.180 says, why? And then he answers his own question with, they are perfectly fine with non-citizens voting in

01:09:57.120 our election. Yeah. You know, it's really hard to come up with a second reason. What would be the

01:10:03.700 other reason that they turned down a law that would be to guarantee that only citizens vote?

01:10:10.720 There's no other reason. Is there, was there a poison pill in that, that bill that I don't know

01:10:16.040 about? Now you always have to wonder, is there, is there like a secret part of the bill that's,

01:10:21.340 you know, just good for Republicans? If that's the case, then I would remove my objection. But if it

01:10:27.020 was a straightforward attempt to make sure it's illegal to have non-citizens voting, how do you

01:10:36.620 vote against that? Unless you want non-citizens to vote, it's exactly what it looks like. There's

01:10:43.000 also allegations that in Michigan, there are still 26,000 dead people on the voter rolls. But

01:10:50.280 apparently that, you know, if that's true, and I think that's disputed, there's no, there's not

01:10:57.700 going to be any effort to remove them. Why would that be? Now, again, this story may have some missing

01:11:03.400 elements, but every time you see that the government is consistently against anything that would prevent

01:11:10.720 non-citizens from voting, it's got to be exactly the reason you think the Democrats want non-citizens

01:11:17.140 to vote because it'll make a difference. Well, in tragic news, the ex-YouTube CEO, who was the CEO

01:11:26.680 until 2023, Susan Wojcicki, she died at age 56, cancer, I believe. But this is, you know, doubly bad

01:11:41.260 because her 19-year-old son died in his dorm room at UC Berkeley in February. So in one year,

01:11:49.800 her husband lost a son and a wife. That's one of the worst things I've ever heard in my life.

01:11:57.780 Now, a lot of people want to give her a hard time because her legacy would include what many

01:12:07.700 people say would be censorship on YouTube. And I don't really want to get into that, especially

01:12:14.520 since I'm broadcasting on YouTube, because it feels too disrespectful to the surviving family.

01:12:23.940 I think today we just have to say, this is really terrible and hope it doesn't happen to you.

01:12:30.400 Um, so I'm not going to get political on that today. We'll just, let's just be human about that

01:12:37.000 today. Well, here's an update on the stolen valor. Um, Mike Cernovich and others have been quite

01:12:47.820 active in making sure that you know that, uh, Walsh, the VP choice, uh, did what some are calling

01:12:55.120 stolen valor. Um, but CNN did an interview last night, which maybe didn't go the way they hoped,

01:13:02.380 but it did show, uh, Walsh's superior officer in the national guard who said that, uh, Walsh

01:13:11.580 definitely knew that they were going to be shipping out to Iraq when he decided to, uh, retire.

01:13:18.400 So he definitely knew. And there had even been an order to prepare. Now, according to the superior

01:13:26.880 officer, if, if orders to prepare to ship out have already arrived, uh, it wouldn't be uncommon for

01:13:34.980 the superior officer to say it's too late to retire because you need my approval to do that. And you're

01:13:42.080 not going to retire right after they said you're going to deploy. So his suggestion was maybe you

01:13:48.160 wouldn't have been able to do it if he'd talked to his superior officer, but somehow he went above

01:13:52.060 his superior officer and he got the superior officer superior to say yes, to agree to the

01:13:59.140 retirement. And then the superior officer had to live with it. And he's not too happy about it,

01:14:04.260 but it did clearly show that he knew he was at risk of being deployed when he decided to retire,

01:14:11.840 which is a bad look. Now here again, um, I'm going to say as clearly as I can, that if we're talking

01:14:21.640 about the respect we give members of the military, that, uh, I've not been in the military. And so

01:14:29.720 whatever respect I give either JD Vance or Walsh would be more than I have. Right. So I put both of

01:14:37.640 them above me in terms of service to the country. So I don't feel like I'm, I'm the right person to

01:14:45.200 criticize them, but I do recognize that this is something very important to a great number of people

01:14:51.180 and that they can judge it and they might vote differently. I would argue that there are very few

01:14:58.320 topics that change people's minds in politics, especially at this late stage. This might be one of

01:15:04.640 them. And it might really just be close family members and, um, people who are in the army or the

01:15:11.560 military and have a problem with it. Um, so if you were thinking that this was a wasted attack,

01:15:19.100 that it wouldn't change the vote, I would argue that it's one of those rare things that would,

01:15:25.980 but for a sliver, but remember we have an election where a sliver is going to be the difference between

01:15:32.080 winning and losing. So this is a pretty big deal, even though it's only a sliver of voters that it's

01:15:40.020 just, what's unique is that it's a sliver that might change their mind. And that's unique. Usually

01:15:46.580 nothing changes anybody's minds. Ontario, the wait is over. The gold standard of online casinos has

01:15:54.800 arrived. Golden Nugget online casino is live, bringing Vegas style excitement and a world-class

01:16:00.360 gaming experience right to your fingertips, whether you're a seasoned player or just starting

01:16:05.360 signing up as fast and simple. And in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive

01:16:10.500 library of the best slots and top tier table games. Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable

01:16:16.240 promotions and jackpots that can turn any mundane moment into a golden opportunity at Golden Nugget

01:16:22.080 online casino. Take a spin on the slots, challenge yourself at the tables, or join a live dealer game

01:16:27.540 to feel the thrill of real-time action, all from the comfort of your own devices. Why settle for

01:16:32.700 less when you can go for the gold at Golden Nugget online casino? Gambling problem? Call

01:16:38.440 Connex Ontario 1-866-531-2600. 19 and over, physically present in Ontario. Eligibility restrictions

01:16:45.840 apply. See GoldenNuggetCasino.com for details. Please play responsibly.

01:16:51.000 Yeah. All right. There's video of Kamala Harris's Arizona rally, which was gigantic. 15,000 people

01:17:03.120 attended. The energy was high. Now, of course, there are reports that some number of them were

01:17:09.640 shipped in, you know, like professional fans or something. Maybe, you know, maybe both sides do

01:17:16.820 it. I don't know. I'm not too concerned about that. But what was interesting is there were hardly any men

01:17:24.240 in the whole stadium. You have to look at the video, the sort of the close-ups of the audience.

01:17:30.880 It's almost all white women, probably 9 out of 10 white women, which means something like two-thirds

01:17:41.960 of all the people in that stadium were mentally ill. Now, I say that because we know that liberal

01:17:49.480 women specifically have the highest rate of mental illness. It's over 60%. Now, if you were to take the

01:17:58.420 people who also are so enthusiastic about Kamala Harris that they would go through the trouble of

01:18:06.240 going to an event, you know, which is a lot to take out of your day, it's probably a higher percentage.

01:18:14.080 So, my guess would be maybe 70% or so of the attendees had mental illness. So, there are 15,000 people

01:18:22.200 who attended, but if you've used the smaller number of 62% of mental illness, that would mean that 9,300

01:18:31.020 people in that stadium had mental illness. So, by the way, I don't think that's an exaggeration.

01:18:42.040 And like I said, if they were that into politics and they were also Democrats and they cared enough

01:18:48.700 to go to this event, it probably was higher than 62% have mental illness. And we're supposed to

01:18:57.140 continue ignoring this, right? I'm supposed to continue ignoring that Kamala Harris looks to me

01:19:04.300 like she's inebriated in public fairly often. I'm just supposed to ignore that. I'm supposed to

01:19:10.620 ignore that her base is literally the mentally ill. We're supposed to ignore that. Do you know why

01:19:18.420 we ignore that? It's because the press hasn't decided that's a big story. On social media,

01:19:23.880 we like to point it out because it seems pretty important to me. So, I see it on social media,

01:19:28.720 but you won't see it in the news. So, as long as the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN,

01:19:35.740 as long as they say it's not a story that a huge percentage of Harris supporters are literally

01:19:44.300 mentally ill, then it won't be, because your masters have told you it's not a story.

01:19:51.320 So, individually, you might think it is, but it's never going to be a big story.

01:19:55.780 I can't imagine what would be more important than that.

01:20:01.000 Anyway, and then Harris, of course, in the total gaslighting way, says that in a rally speech,

01:20:08.020 the current immigration process is broken, but we know what to do to fix it. So, if you elect her,

01:20:16.960 she knows the immigration is broken and how to fix it. Now, do I need to complete my comments on this?

01:20:25.280 Because every one of you just completed it for me, and you just said in your minds,

01:20:29.980 wait a minute, wasn't she in charge of that? If she knows it's broken and she knows how to fix it,

01:20:38.020 why isn't it already fixed? Now, I think their argument is that they just needed those darn

01:20:45.120 Republicans to vote for that bill that totally wouldn't have fixed it, but would have hired more

01:20:50.580 people to process more people through a legal asylum process and make it much, much worse.

01:20:57.080 But technically, on paper, it would look like fewer illegal people, because they would simply hire

01:21:01.960 more people to process people through a legal doorway. So, it would have no impact whatsoever on the

01:21:07.720 number of people coming in. In fact, they might be more, but the number that they would define as

01:21:12.340 illegal might be smaller. So, they can sell that to the uninformed Democrat base by saying,

01:21:19.840 hey, we have a solution, and the Republicans said no, because they wanted to keep it as a

01:21:23.820 campaign issue, which is what they're doing. Can they sell that ridiculous message to their base?

01:21:30.600 Yes, they can, because their base will never have access to any news that tells them the opposite.

01:21:36.320 They'll never see the context, and they'll just never have to think about the fact that

01:21:41.800 Harris was in charge and couldn't fix it then.

01:21:47.440 Glenn Greenwald and a number of other people were pointing out that it's kind of weird and creepy when

01:21:52.760 the Democrat press and all the pundits start using the same language like they were all informed to use

01:21:59.900 the same language. So, apparently, they're calling Walsh a joyful messenger, and everything's joyful

01:22:06.880 and joyful and joyful and, hey, it's so joyful. And he's a regular Midwestern guy. He's a moderate.

01:22:12.980 He's a moderate. He's a moderate. He's just a good guy. He's a normal rural guy. He hunts. He hunts.

01:22:18.880 He hunts. Normal, regular, hunting, joyful, ordinary guy. And it's so creepy to watch people use the same

01:22:28.540 language. Because you know it's been, you know, it came from the top, use these words. But I would

01:22:35.920 ask you this. Isn't it the same on the right? Doesn't the right also land on a few little attack

01:22:44.440 words and then use them forever? Have we not heard stolen valor a million times from everybody on the

01:22:52.100 right? Could not, could the Democrats not make a compilation thing showing all the right-leaning

01:23:01.080 pundits saying, stolen valor, stolen valor, stolen valor? Yes, they could. Do you know why it doesn't

01:23:08.500 look the same? Because most of the press leans left. So, when it happens on the left that they're using

01:23:16.320 the same language, it's really easy to put together an interesting compilation. Because

01:23:21.260 you could say, all right, here's CNN saying it. Here's MSNBC saying it. Here's the New York Times

01:23:25.780 saying it. Here's the Washington Post saying it. And on and on and on. So, you can really clearly say

01:23:31.320 that they're conforming to a certain message. And we know with certainty that the message comes from the

01:23:37.940 top and then everybody gets it. But on the right, I think it's exactly the same. What's different is

01:23:45.540 where the message comes from. On the right, I think people pick up messages that look like they're

01:23:51.340 sticky. So, if you follow a big account like Cernovich and you see that he's hammering hard on the

01:23:59.240 stolen valor message, you're far more likely to bring it up when you do your show. Because you think, well,

01:24:07.220 people are talking about it. I'll talk about it too. Because people are interested because they're

01:24:11.640 talking about it. So, I'm pretty sure that there's a very similar thing happening on both sides. It's only

01:24:18.760 the source is different. I think the Republicans just look to other influencers and they say, oh, you're

01:24:25.700 making a good point over there. I'm going to emphasize that too. And then on the Democrat side, literally

01:24:31.660 the party sends out a memo and says, let's frame it this way and then the news does it. So, that's the

01:24:37.720 difference. But the number of times somebody uses that similar language is probably the same on both

01:24:43.840 sides. Well, I saw Elon Musk just say true to a post that was pretty provocative. So, let me tell you

01:24:54.800 what Elon felt comfortable saying is true. There was a post by I am yes you or no, that's the name of the

01:25:03.920 user, saying that white guilt is a mind virus that needs to be eradicated. White guilt is a mind virus

01:25:11.660 that needs to be eradicated. Now, that was attached to a quote from somebody else, another user that

01:25:22.480 said this, white people have been taught that white people are evil and everyone else is good. And non-white

01:25:29.120 people have also been taught that white people are evil and everyone else is good. And then that user

01:25:34.520 said, that's not divide and conquer, that's quote, kill whitey. Whoa. And that was the two posts that

01:25:45.460 were, you know, together that Elon Musk said true. Is Elon Musk agreeing only to the first part

01:25:53.220 that says white guilt that says white guilt is a mind virus that needs to be eradicated, which would be not

01:25:58.900 too controversial? Or is he saying true to the fact that both white people and non-white people have been

01:26:06.120 taught that white people are evil and everyone else is good? And that that's the same as kill whitey?

01:26:13.960 Hmm. Do you know what's interesting about this story to me? Is anybody picked up on this yet? Do you know why I'm

01:26:22.240 talking about it? This is what I got canceled for? I got canceled for saying the environment is such

01:26:30.460 that white people are demonized. And if you happen to be in any category that's being demonized,

01:26:37.980 your best strategy for success and survival is to go where that doesn't happen. You should stay away

01:26:46.000 from anybody demonizing you. Why are people being demonized? It's because they're taught that in school.

01:26:51.080 D-I-C-R-T-E-S-G. White people are the responsible for all your problems. If you could simply give

01:26:59.980 them less and take their stuff and give it to yourself, problem solved. So does that sound like

01:27:06.140 kill whitey? Yes, it does. Did I say exactly the same thing, but I said it in words that were far more

01:27:13.380 provocative? Yes. This is what I got canceled for. I got canceled for saying that the current system and

01:27:22.480 culture is demonizing one group of people. And if somebody is demonizing you, you need to get the

01:27:29.960 fuck away from that because that's not safe. Now, your first choice would be to change it,

01:27:36.700 you know, and improve it. But if it reaches a certain point, you have to run. Now, there is no

01:27:43.120 practical way in America to run from it because, you know, the country's similar enough everywhere

01:27:49.200 that there's nothing really to run from. It's not a real, not a real suggestion, but it's a real

01:27:55.020 warning. It's a real warning that you can't survive in the long term if one part of the country is being

01:28:02.760 taught in school, taught in school and trained in your corporations. And you have to sign documents

01:28:10.440 to say you agree to it, that the white people are evil and everybody else is not evil. And that needs

01:28:18.360 to be rebalanced. You got to get away from that any way you can. Anyway, H. Pearl Davis, social media

01:28:30.980 influencer type who has very provocative things to say about men and women. He's talking about how women

01:28:40.700 are almost always the ones who initiate divorces and breakups. Did you know that? One of the data points

01:28:48.960 that Pearl gives is that college-educated women initiate divorces 90% of the time. So, well,

01:29:00.620 90% of the divorces are initiated by the woman if she's a college-educated woman. Is that surprising?

01:29:08.420 No, because a college-educated woman probably can make her own money. So, she doesn't need to put up

01:29:16.400 with any imperfect situation for money because she can, first of all, get some money from the divorce,

01:29:23.400 maybe. Or she maybe already has her own job. So, follow the money suggests that the more likely you

01:29:30.300 can make your own money, the less likely you need to be married for money. So, it makes sense to me.

01:29:36.400 But I think follow the money explains the entire drop in population and everything else.

01:29:41.300 But here's my take. This is exactly why, well, the larger point that Pearl makes is that women don't

01:29:53.260 provide value to men anymore. Do you buy that? That women don't provide value to men.

01:30:01.400 Now, the argument would go, and this is not my argument, I'm just explaining it. The argument would

01:30:07.140 go that in the old days, the man provided the protection and the income. The woman provided

01:30:16.560 children and support and love and the family unit and kept things together, and that that was a good

01:30:25.480 deal for everybody. But, and then part of that was virginity. At least at one point in time,

01:30:35.560 you were getting this virgin who was totally committed to only you and less likely to cheat and maybe

01:30:43.080 hadn't experienced anything better. So, you know, that helped the marriage stay together. I'm not sure

01:30:49.040 that's a good thing. I'm just saying it is what it is. So, is it true that if you're a man looking for a

01:30:58.640 woman, you say to yourself, okay, uh, the, the, this woman who looks good, so, you know, looks are part of

01:31:06.380 what men select on, has been with a lot of different guys and she's not going to be too impressed with

01:31:12.140 me. So, the, the sexual benefit of a wife is way down because you wouldn't have that like exclusive

01:31:21.980 domain. Now, should you, should you have some exclusive domain? Maybe that's just sexist.

01:31:27.940 Maybe you shouldn't have that. So, I'm not arguing what's right or wrong. I'm just describing the

01:31:32.260 current situation. So, the men feel that they're not getting this, you know, loyal, sexual virgin.

01:31:40.920 So, that lowers the, you know, the value of, of the proposition. And then the men know that if the

01:31:47.500 woman divorces, they're going to lose their kids and they're going to lose their money and they won't

01:31:52.540 have enough to start over again. But the woman might, the woman might take some of your money,

01:31:58.940 your kids, and then meet another guy who will take care of her. So, she could get all the benefits.

01:32:06.300 So, I would say that follow the money as a way of predicting the future largely guarantees that our

01:32:12.200 reproductive possibilities are just going to continue into a death spiral. And I think it's why so many

01:32:18.320 men are going to prefer robots as life partners. Let me say that again. I think men will prefer robots

01:32:26.960 as life partners. Your robot is going to have all your interests, is going to know you well, will not

01:32:34.800 cheat on you, and will always be attentive and respectful and maybe even complimentary.

01:32:42.200 Will it feel just as good when a robot compliments you? Yes, it will. I know you think it won't,

01:32:51.720 but yes, it will. I guarantee it. Now, maybe not on day one, but you'll just get used to it. And if

01:32:57.140 the robot says good things to you, you're going to get a little dopamine hit. Now, that doesn't mean

01:33:02.640 you're going to have sex with the robot, although a lot of people will. It could be that men just buy

01:33:09.340 their sex on the open market. I hate to say it, because they don't want to have sex with a robot,

01:33:15.480 but that the robot, but the robot is their life partner. So, they might go to bed and, you know, just

01:33:22.240 snore and sleep well. And if they need some sex, they'll go into the free market and buy some.

01:33:30.460 But then when they go home, they don't need the trouble of dealing with a difficult personality

01:33:35.820 who's going to take their money and their kids. So, they just say, well, if I want a kid, I'll adopt

01:33:41.320 one. I'll get an extra robot to be a full-time nanny. And I won't even have to work too hard raising

01:33:49.700 the kid, because a robot will be great at it. So, it seems to me that robots as a replacement for

01:33:57.040 women, as life partners, is largely guaranteed. Not for everybody, of course, but for a large

01:34:03.640 portion. And I think it will work the other way as well. Women are going to say, what am I getting

01:34:08.360 from this guy besides a lot of trouble? If I get a robot, the robot can protect me, the robot can lift

01:34:15.240 heavy objects, the robot can put the dishes in the dishwasher. I'm not so sure I need that guy.

01:34:22.800 And if I want to have a baby, I'll just get artificially inseminated, and I'll get a second

01:34:28.360 robot, and the robot will raise the baby. Now, let's look at the money of it. I can get a robot

01:34:34.340 for, let's say, $30,000, maybe a year from now. What would it cost to be in a relationship?

01:34:40.300 Even if you're not married, it's over $30,000, like if you're doing some traveling and dating and

01:34:47.020 stuff. But if you're married, of course, it's way over $30,000. And the robot you could get maybe

01:34:53.540 last several years. So, amortized, it might be $5,000 to $10,000 a year, and there's no way you

01:35:00.200 could get a spouse for that price. So, the economics of relationships suggest, not suggest, really

01:35:09.880 guarantee that robots will be partners for men and women at a very large percentage.

01:35:16.960 Well, the FDA has rejected MDMA, also known as ecstasy, the drug ecstasy, for PTSD. I don't know

01:35:25.960 why. Obviously, concerns about health, I guess. But we also wonder, wait a minute, are you just trying

01:35:33.660 to protect some big pharma company that's selling a competing drug? I don't know. I'd worry about

01:35:40.960 that. But I also worry that the downside of ecstasy is that if you enjoy it too much, your regular life

01:35:47.600 would seem horrible and boring. So, I've never experienced ecstasy as a drug. And I'm pretty

01:35:56.200 sure I'm not going to. And it's not because I don't think it would be awesome. It's because I think it

01:36:02.280 would. And I don't think I can handle that. Because once you handle how good you could feel, it might

01:36:10.060 change your point of reference for your everyday feelings. And you might say, I'm going to have to

01:36:17.320 do this every day or I'll just feel sad for the rest of my life. All right. So, we don't know enough

01:36:26.820 about that. Ukraine continues to bore me these days because the news has calmed down and all the

01:36:32.900 news sounds the same. Here's some generic news from the Ukraine war. One of the sides made an

01:36:40.560 incursion into the town of Kutbuk. And it looks like there's heavy fighting. But in another place

01:36:47.340 called Kutbuk, the other side seems to be making a push. But all the news sounds like that. There's a

01:36:56.060 town you don't know of. One side made a push into it. The other side made a push into the other town.

01:37:02.840 But what is different is that Ukraine is attacking on traditional Russian territory.

01:37:09.100 Now, they can't really run a war without being able to attack across the artificial border.

01:37:17.320 So, I'm not sure that that's a real big escalation. Because it just sort of comes along with war.

01:37:24.780 So, if one side can just say, neener, neener, neener, you can't cross our border. They can just put all

01:37:30.860 their weapons depots and all their resources right on your border. And then just, you know, hammer on you

01:37:36.520 forever. Because there's no similar restriction of them entering Ukraine. But they can just safely

01:37:43.200 sit over there with their assets not being, you know, disturbed. And Ukraine is saying, if your war

01:37:50.280 assets are just on the other side of the border, maybe we're going to take them out. Which seems

01:37:56.420 perfectly reasonable from a war perspective. But it looks like Ukraine might be doing a different

01:38:02.880 strategy in which they may be just trying to divert the Russian resources by attacking a lesser

01:38:09.140 defended part and getting a little push into Russia. And maybe all they're doing is grabbing some land

01:38:16.620 they can trade back. It could be that they're looking for negotiations and they know they can't capture

01:38:23.200 the well-defended parts that Russia captured of Ukraine. But they might be able to capture an

01:38:29.200 unguarded or loosely guarded part of Russia. So then if Ukraine has some Russia they don't want,

01:38:37.380 and Russia has some Ukraine that they want, but maybe they could be flexible with,

01:38:42.700 they have something to bargain with. So it might be that everybody's doing simply getting ready to

01:38:48.480 negotiate. That's what it looks like to me. All right, ladies and gentlemen, I've gone on too long.

01:38:54.400 This is the end of my show. I'm gonna say goodbye to YouTube and people on X and Rumble. I'm gonna talk

01:39:02.120 to my beloved people on Locals. By the way, if you didn't know, you can see the Dilbert Reborn comic,

01:39:10.040 which is naughtier and funnier. You can subscribe to that on the X platform. Just look for the button

01:39:17.860 in my profile. And if you wanted to see that, plus a lot of fun content, mostly about politics and my

01:39:28.100 other comic, Robots Read News, you could do that in the Locals platform, scottadams.locals.com.

01:39:35.600 Thanks for joining. I'm going to talk to the local subscriber privately, assuming all my technology works.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - August 10, 2024

Episode 2562 CWSA 08⧸10⧸24

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript