Real Coffee with Scott Adams - September 18, 2025


Episode 2962 CWSA 09⧸18⧸25


Episode Stats


Length

1 hour and 16 minutes

Words per minute

142.20166

Word count

10,878

Sentence count

12

Harmful content

Misogyny

7

sentences flagged

Hate speech

11

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Join me for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine buzzer-beater, as I discuss the latest news involving the French first lady and the president of France, and some of my favorite news stories of the past week.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 come on in it's time for us to reframe the world that's right we're going to reframe the whole
00:00:08.240 world today i got my comic done for the day but we couldn't load it up to x today yet
00:00:17.600 some kind of technical problem i think it's on their side not mine but i'll try again later
00:00:24.320 all right i'm gonna get my comments coming and then we got the show of shows
00:00:28.960 often described as the best thing that has ever happened to the world
00:00:35.760 guaranteed
00:00:40.080 see let's move that over there yeah that's looking good
00:00:53.520 all right are you ready if you're ready i'm ready
00:00:58.000 good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization it's called
00:01:04.640 coffee with scott adams and you've never had a better time but if you'd like to take a chance
00:01:10.880 on elevating your experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny
00:01:16.960 human brains all you need for that is a copper mug or a glass of tanker gels with steiner canteen
00:01:23.520 jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for
00:01:30.560 the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine here today the thing that makes everything better it's called
00:01:35.440 the simultaneous sip it happens now go
00:01:44.080 i'm trying something different with my lighting today so we'll see if that works
00:01:50.640 all right uh i wonder if there's any science that says that coffee is good for you oh here's some
00:02:00.880 um it turns out there's a new study that says that people who drink coffee
00:02:06.240 have more favorable body composition and inflammatory profiles all right well there's nobody more
00:02:14.240 inflammatory than me so i drink extra coffee just to tamp it down a little bit oh there he goes there he
00:02:21.440 goes he's being inflammatory sip all right well by far my favorite story of the day is that uh uh french 0.80
00:02:33.840 president uh emmanuel macron and his wife um they're gonna you you know that uh candace owens accused uh
00:02:44.720 bridget macron of being born a man uh and believes that he's still a man because i guess that's the way it
00:02:52.640 works and uh so the news is that uh macron and his wife are going to present photographic and scientific
00:03:02.640 evidence to a u.s court to prove the french first lady is in fact a woman
00:03:08.240 photographic evidence and scientific evidence that she's in fact a woman all right now
00:03:20.560 i've i've never quite bought into the idea that she was a man 0.55
00:03:24.320 i was amused by the whole thing and and i was amazed at how much evidence that candace could come 1.00
00:03:32.240 up with that definitely look like it's possible i don't know if you've gone down that rabbit hole at
00:03:39.280 all but if you listen to candace for 30 minutes talking about this you will go away thinking it's
00:03:45.200 real but that's the documentary effect you know if you're if you're exposed to one point of view for
00:03:52.160 half an hour you're probably going to be convinced you know that's all it takes is one point of view
00:03:58.800 with now no counterpoint for half an hour and almost always you'll think it's true
00:04:06.240 so i will say that it's a it's a persuasive argument candace makes that my 0.76
00:04:15.040 my own let's say gut feeling and common sense says probably not probably not but i think it's possible
00:04:22.640 yeah so the fact that she's going to give photographic evidence what exactly would the 0.99
00:04:28.320 photograph be of is is bridget macron gonna be
00:04:37.440 i just have this image of bridget macron she's at home and she's like all right
00:04:43.680 oh i'll do my best french accent i'll try to no that's not french i won't do a french accent
00:04:50.400 all right i need some pictures for the court
00:04:52.720 click click click almost click click click yeah there it is wow that's beautiful so
00:05:08.640 can we um i don't maybe it's just me but i i like to look at these things from the entertainment
00:05:15.600 perspective if you do it from the entertainment perspective and you realize that
00:05:22.800 that candace owens is making the the wife of the president of france take pictures of her genitalia 0.74
00:05:30.800 standing ovation
00:05:36.000 standing ovation okay and this
00:05:44.560 i don't know if any of it's true i'm guessing it's not
00:05:48.240 but
00:05:48.560 but but there's not much that's funnier than making her take a picture of her junk
00:05:59.200 all right good job candace
00:06:03.600 and other news uh you know that meta has these new uh glasses that have all kinds of functions
00:06:10.880 and i guess they can project a screen on the glasses themselves that people will barely know you're
00:06:17.760 looking at and uh i saw a review somebody who had tried a number of these different you know uh
00:06:25.600 enhanced reality glasses had said that it's the best one you've seen and it's actually kind of awesome
00:06:33.760 it costs about 800 um what do regular glasses cost if you bought regular glasses
00:06:45.120 um if it's like a designer pair this is several hundred dollars isn't it a designer pair so i don't
00:06:52.800 know maybe maybe people will buy a free hundred dollars if they can make those glasses prescription
00:06:59.520 yeah i didn't see in the story that they can do that but i said they can right do you think that
00:07:06.000 they would make them prescription it would be very disappointing if the only thing that glasses
00:07:12.480 couldn't do is correct your vision i feel like it ought to be able to do that
00:07:18.800 however if it really works the odds of me trying it down to some point are pretty pretty good
00:07:24.800 but apparently you can slightly detect when somebody's not paying attention to you so let me ask you
00:07:32.880 this how happy would you be to spend time with a friend who has those glasses on and you don't really
00:07:40.320 know if they're watching a tv show while you're talking to them because apparently you can have all kinds
00:07:47.600 of content in the glasses uh i wouldn't like it at all i i don't think i would want to spend time
00:07:54.720 having a conversation with somebody who was wearing those glasses because i would just assume that
00:08:00.000 they're distracted you know even if i couldn't tell so i think that's the big question the big question
00:08:06.400 will be the social element to that all right so um you know how everybody's got a podcast these days
00:08:16.880 there's millions of podcasts and it's kind of hard to get attention you know for your your one podcast
00:08:23.200 and um so people do a lot of teasing uh for example i'm i'll be on the jesse lee pearson show on
00:08:33.280 friday so that's a tease but the best tease i ever saw for a podcast comes from pierce morgan so uh there
00:08:42.640 was a a post on x that said that journalist don lemon is showing a picture of him and they said he's
00:08:50.240 waiting for his interview with pierce morgan and then pierce uh reposts it the picture of don lemon
00:08:58.240 and him waiting for the interview uh and he and he just says four words these are the most clever
00:09:07.280 four words you'll ever use to tease somebody about your upcoming podcast and i quote it didn't go well
00:09:14.400 now how am i not going to watch that are you kidding me finding out that a don lemon interview
00:09:22.720 with pierce morgan didn't go well that's genius that is so good pierce you nailed it
00:09:32.000 there is a 100 chance i'm going to watch that because of what you said about it it didn't go well
00:09:38.320 that's just the best the best tea is well the fed cut the interest rate 25 points which really is
00:09:47.760 0.25 and they think there might be a few more cuts this year maybe another in 2026 and if you're
00:09:55.360 an economics nerd you might recognize that although inflation is not quite where we want it to be
00:10:02.080 it's 2.6 but uh wouldn't it be good to get it down to two however the job market is starting to soften
00:10:11.360 and you usually have those two competing things you know you don't want the interest rates high
00:10:17.200 if you're trying to make sure jobs are good but um if you jack up the interest rates too much
00:10:25.440 then you might cause some inflation because it might goose the economy and make it too hot
00:10:31.680 but the fed has decided to lean toward improving employment uh as opposed to perfectly optimizing
00:10:40.240 inflation is that the right choice well um i guess we'll always argue whether it could have been sooner
00:10:47.200 but it does seem it does seem like a responsible position in my opinion well we have to talk about
00:10:56.240 jimmy kimmel don't we how many of you were wondering what my take would be on jimmy kimmel
00:11:03.840 was there any point where you said all right i gotta i gotta see what this guy says
00:11:08.400 i guess adam carolla has not yet weighed in publicly um i will definitely watch that whatever whatever
00:11:15.120 adam has to say about it because you know they they have a history from the man show
00:11:21.200 and he is also a professional comedian type so what do you say all right i'm going to start
00:11:28.000 with the conclusion and then we'll talk about it right um i'm on jimmy kimmel's side
00:11:36.160 sorry i'm in his side now do would i like some revenge yes
00:11:45.120 yes i would enjoy that but that doesn't mean i get it that doesn't mean i should pursue it doesn't
00:11:50.640 mean the world's a better place if if it happens yeah i'd like a little schadenfreude because remember
00:11:56.880 i got cancelled i get cancelled for something i said very similar do i think i should have been
00:12:03.600 cancelled nope do i think roseanne should have been cancelled nope and i'm not going to change my mind
00:12:11.600 because it's jimmy kimmel did he say something offensive and incorrect yeah did it make the world
00:12:19.280 the worst place probably um but let's talk about all the things there are a lot of elements to this
00:12:28.000 but uh i would be very hypocritical if i were to be opposed to free speech all right so just as a review
00:12:37.600 um the the only speech that's not legal uh would be inciting violence and you know immediately
00:12:47.440 it's not even illegal to incite violence over time you know with some cumulative effect which is what the
00:12:54.560 democrats have done the cumulative effect of all the hill or hill or hitler stuff is that it incites
00:13:00.720 violence but the law does not recognize cumulative effect it only it's only what do you what did you
00:13:07.600 say just right now and did it cause somebody to do some violence right now now that would be illegal
00:13:13.680 and it's not because of the speech it's because you'd be inciting violence what's the violence that's
00:13:18.160 the illegal part the inciting it so that's your little uh little background there uh the the best
00:13:29.200 joke i've heard about it so far was from joel pollack who posted on x first they came for the bad
00:13:36.080 comedians i was laughing out loud at that this morning first they came for the bad comedians
00:13:43.840 anyway a lot of people are speculating because we're suspicious people we never believe anything in
00:13:50.720 the news is real a lot of people are saying that uh jimmy kimmel's bosses abc news i guess ultimately
00:13:58.560 um not abc news but uh um disney who owns abc who owns the show etc so some people are saying that uh
00:14:11.040 they probably wanted to cancel them anyway because the show probably loses a ton of money so you know
00:14:17.360 maybe it really was a business decision having nothing to do with anything except it was an opportunity
00:14:24.000 to get rid of a expensive asset maybe i don't know i i would guess that it's not unrelated meaning that
00:14:33.040 if you were making a billion dollars a year for abc do you think they would cancel now let me ask you
00:14:40.000 if he made a profit of one billion dollars per year for his corporate owners do you think they would
00:14:48.320 have said oh that's that's a bad thing you did we got to get rid of you i would say not a chance if he 0.85
00:14:55.760 was losing money every week and it looked like there was no chance i was going to reverse would they
00:15:02.800 possibly find a convenient reason to get rid of them maybe well it might not be enough yeah they might
00:15:13.920 all right so i wouldn't rule that out at all yeah that's certainly you know follow the money always
00:15:18.880 works so i wouldn't say it's the only reason but it's probably in there somewhere um let's see what
00:15:28.160 else we got here so he what he said was he he implied and i i guess some people said it was you know satire
00:15:36.960 or parody or parody or something but it didn't look like it to me it looked like he was uh
00:15:42.160 intentionally saying they believe that some maga person was responsible for killing uh
00:15:50.400 kirk and that's by the time he said it that was known with pretty high level of certainty that that
00:15:58.960 was not the case and the person who did it is almost certainly i put it at 95 98 percent
00:16:06.960 that it's a left learning leaning person who just hated uh hated the trump administration and charlie in
00:16:13.600 particular so here's the question how in the world is it legal for the trump administration
00:16:23.520 the government to put pressure on a private industry to maybe cancel somebody which would look like
00:16:32.320 a violation of free speech right now here's what would be a violation of free speech if the president
00:16:39.360 said abc if you don't fire this guy and shut him up um i will punish you in some specific way 0.78
00:16:48.960 that would be completely illegal everybody understands that right if the government tells you you can't
00:16:55.360 talk that's illegal that would not be allowing free speech but suppose as fcc chairman brendan carr explains
00:17:08.000 he was on hannity i think explaining this the fcc has a very specific job within the government and what
00:17:15.760 it does is that uh it's responsible for making sure that the public airwaves which are limited by nature
00:17:23.440 right there's not infinite um tv networks they're they're just you know the the uh there's not enough
00:17:31.120 room on the airwaves for much more than we have so because it's a public good the the major networks uh
00:17:41.600 abc nbc cbs they operate at the pleasure of the government now that's different from almost anything else
00:17:53.200 so if if uh fox news said something that the government didn't like the government has no
00:18:00.480 role with fox news because fox news is cable so cable is not using a limited public good which is the
00:18:10.560 airwaves because the airwaves are limited but abc nbc cbs if they if they violate what is the phrase the
00:18:19.760 public interest the public interest the public interest if they violate the public interest then
00:18:27.280 the fcc could act and that could include potentially removing their license
00:18:33.280 um so what do you what do you think the courts would say let's say that went to the supreme court
00:18:42.000 do you think they'd say that's not that has nothing to do with freedom of speech
00:18:45.680 the fcc's job is to say hey that thing you're doing is either in the public interest or it's not
00:18:54.800 so if you said that's not in the public interest would you be violating free speech
00:19:00.720 i feel like not i feel like that wouldn't be a violation of free speech but only if you're
00:19:08.320 talking about abc nbc cbs because the fcc specifically has the responsibility to make
00:19:15.680 sure they don't get down the line and what they're accused of is a pattern so it's not just this one
00:19:22.000 thing it's a pattern of misinformation political especially now is that a good enough reason
00:19:31.120 to pressure him to come off there although and let me say this if the government is pressuring somebody
00:19:38.880 even if it's not stated but it's obvious let's say the entity wants to do a big merger and i think
00:19:44.880 that's part of what's going on here um the the entities involved don't want to make the government
00:19:51.200 mad and the government's making it pretty clear that they don't like this uh jimmy kimmel situation
00:19:58.640 so does the government have to say directly if you keep him on we'll punish you you know that now
00:20:06.400 remember the absentee is a special case but just talking generally if a government said to somebody
00:20:11.840 uh you should quiet down or else uh we won't approve whatever it is you asked for next
00:20:19.440 but if they say it directly now that i got this from grok by the way you all know that i'm not a
00:20:25.440 lawyer right so anything i say that sounds like a legal opinion probably wrong so do your own research
00:20:34.800 on this one i'd say but i'll do my best right so if the government uh makes a direct threat if you
00:20:44.240 you know outside of the fcc that's a special case but if they made a direct threat shut up or we'll
00:20:50.480 do bad things for you that's totally illegal that would be absolutely a violation of free speech but
00:20:56.400 what if they don't make a direct threat but you just think they're the kind of people that would get
00:21:03.840 revenge i don't know because at some point it's just an opinion suppose the president said it's my
00:21:14.160 opinion that kimmel should be fired doesn't he have the right to just have an opinion if he said
00:21:22.800 you should fire him or i'll punish you totally illegal totally illegal but if he just said it's my 0.71
00:21:30.000 opinion they should get rid of him the country better be a better place is that illegal
00:21:37.520 it's sort of a weird gray area isn't it because especially with trump you kind of say to yourself
00:21:43.680 well i mean he's clearly not going to be friendly with him when they come to get some approval from
00:21:49.840 the government right would you expect the trump administration to be fully cooperative
00:21:57.280 with an entity that wasn't doing what they wanted in a fairly what they might consider an important
00:22:04.000 way i don't know that would be a i don't know if that kind of case has ever been tested
00:22:12.000 but uh some lawyer will tell me somebody will fill me in all right so the part i don't know is if
00:22:21.120 uh brendan carr the fcc chairman has a solid enough argument that in the special case that's the fcc doing
00:22:30.160 his job to make sure that the public interest is being met does this meet the standard of violating
00:22:37.120 the public interest well maybe not because some people would say uh he's a comedian and it is completely
00:22:47.440 legal to lie it is completely legal to lie in the service of a joke or just entertaining the public
00:22:55.440 you're allowed to lie unfortunately i mean it has to be that way because otherwise everybody would be in
00:23:01.120 jail if he made it illegal to lie there'd be nobody left so it has to be that way um
00:23:09.040 um so so so i don't know the answer to the fcc part if it turns out that that's completely ordinary
00:23:19.600 then i might alter my opinion but as a uh humorist slash cartoonist who has been cancelled for something
00:23:27.760 i said uh i'm not going to be in favor of it in fact uh my preference is that conservatives defend
00:23:37.680 kimmel on free speech um now we might encourage him you know because remember that this is private
00:23:45.280 companies private companies can fire anybody for whatever reason they want so the private company
00:23:50.960 is in you know completely clear territory it's just a business decision so can't can't go after them
00:23:59.360 but i think the world would be a little better and it would change the news cycle in a way that would
00:24:06.800 really flip the minds of the uh the democrats i think we should support him and just say nope we do not
00:24:15.200 want to go down the path of getting somebody fired now keep in mind i don't believe that fcc uh chair 0.74
00:24:24.480 brendan carr i don't believe he would be taking these moves unless he knew that at least the base
00:24:31.520 would be happy with it would you agree do you think the fcc would would put any pressure on on kimmel
00:24:41.200 unless the public felt the same way no no there's not really any chance of that because remember he's
00:24:50.880 operating quote in the public interest if the public had no interest i mean i'm using interest
00:24:58.160 differently here but if the public said we don't care he said that that doesn't bother us at all
00:25:04.880 if they had said that well then there'd be no reason for the fcc to be involved and i'd have a
00:25:10.000 problem with it but the fact that there are a lot of people almost entirely on the political right
00:25:16.960 who say yeah yeah that guy's got to be punished and it looks like there's a
00:25:21.200 there's sort of a you know special case here where maybe he could be or at least pressure could be
00:25:27.040 put on go ahead and do it because we like the revenge and we like the schadenfreude i like the
00:25:32.560 revenge about aside from roseanne there's nobody who likes this more than i do right there's nobody who
00:25:42.720 likes it more than i do but i asked grok if jimmy kimmel ever mocked me for getting canceled
00:25:49.920 because i didn't know a lot of people did and grok says no i i need a fact check on that is it true
00:25:59.360 that jimmy kimmel never mocked me for getting canceled a lot of people did you know public figures
00:26:06.400 but uh i'll ask separately maybe somebody can so grok says no says there's no evidence that he ever
00:26:13.600 mentioned me at all which counts because that was a national story and if he just wanted to pound on
00:26:21.200 some conservative types there i was i mean i was an easy i was an easy victim but if he said to
00:26:30.080 himself and i don't know this this would be purely mind-reading speculation if he said to himself you
00:26:36.720 know what i'm not going to go after a humorist i don't know if he did that but if that's the
00:26:43.520 reason he didn't mention it i would respect that and i'm going to return the favor i don't want to live
00:26:50.720 in a world where jokes are punished you'd have to be a really bad joke for me to do it so i know this is
00:26:59.600 very unpopular but if you want to be on the side of the angels i think we gotta give him a pass
00:27:08.800 i don't think it'll make a difference you know i i suspect that this is a you know decision they're
00:27:14.320 not going to reverse and i also don't think there's any chance that the majority of the political right
00:27:21.600 will say yeah give him a pass because i don't think people are thinking at it beyond the revenge
00:27:26.640 you know the revenge level and by the way like i say i'm totally in favor of revenge and um
00:27:34.480 mutually assured destruction so that there's a little balance and stuff totally in favor of that
00:27:39.840 i enjoy it it feels good but it's not the world i want to live in i don't want to live in that world
00:27:46.720 so even though um i believe i was treated unfairly in a similar situation
00:27:53.440 um i just can't live in that world so that's my take all right here's what um i mentioned this uh
00:28:04.960 when i was on tucker's uh show the other day there's something different about the lies that are being
00:28:12.560 told today compared to the old times and it used to be that if you said oh that reagan is hitler
00:28:19.280 people understood that as just hyperbole they didn't think oh he's actually hitler but when
00:28:27.280 you're doing it 24 hours a day hitler hitler hitler and every time you turn on cnn or msnbc
00:28:34.000 every time somebody's comparing them to hitlers or nazis you should assume that young people who are 0.91
00:28:41.040 exposed to that and it's all they know and they're not watching fox news or just watching those networks
00:28:46.960 of course some of them would reach the point of violence because they'd think well you know
00:28:54.000 everybody thinks they're hitler as far as i can tell so if i take care of hitler i'm fine so
00:29:01.920 the laws as they were written were about uh slander you can't do slander but you can lie
00:29:09.920 and you can you know exaggerate and insult and all those other things so if the cumulative effect
00:29:18.800 of wall-to-wall hitler accusations creates a situation where violence is guaranteed
00:29:25.600 is that inciting violence the answer is not legally no because it has to be immediate there's no such
00:29:32.320 thing as a cumulative you know over time a lot of people did a lot of things and the cumulative effect
00:29:39.760 was that somebody got killed charlie kirk in particular that's not illegal should it be
00:29:47.920 well it makes me wonder because when you know our free speech rules were created
00:29:54.560 this wasn't really an option there was no such thing as mass brainwashing that was coordinated through
00:30:00.640 the government and the in my opinion and uh the news networks so it's a it's a danger of free speech
00:30:10.320 that simply didn't exist at least at this level uh until fairly recently in history so there might
00:30:18.160 be something we need to rethink about that but in general i'm i'm gonna i'm gonna be biased toward
00:30:23.920 free speech if there's any gray areas this one's a gray area so i'm biased toward free speech
00:30:30.640 um let's see what else um
00:30:40.240 shoot
00:30:43.840 so what kibble actually said might be a little different from what people are imagining you know
00:30:51.920 uh he said uh he said the maggot people were trying hard to make it look like they were not
00:31:01.840 responsible for it but you can interpret that two ways one he's saying that maggot is responsible for
00:31:08.560 killing charlie kirk but would you take that seriously the other way you can interpret those exact words
00:31:16.960 words is that he's not saying maggot was responsible he's only saying that they're trying to make sure
00:31:23.040 you know they're not responsible that's not so bad so do you cancel somebody because they said something
00:31:31.120 that could be taken two ways you see this gets a little personal at this point something that can be interpreted
00:31:38.480 differently than it was intended is that how you get canceled that's what roseanne got canceled 1.00
00:31:44.640 roseanne got canceled not for what she thought or what she said you know that right it wasn't for what
00:31:50.880 she thought wasn't what she said it was what other people misinterpreted as her intention got canceled for that
00:32:00.480 i would argue that although i was intentionally trying to cause some trouble i was trying to do it for a
00:32:08.080 positive uh purpose including for black america but because people chose to interpret what i said a little
00:32:17.280 bit out of context because the larger context was you know dei etc um should i be canceled because someone
00:32:25.920 else interpreted what i said in a way that's not the way i intended it is that good enough reason to be
00:32:33.600 canceled i don't know but there's some chance and i wouldn't know because i'm not i can't read his mind
00:32:40.240 there's some chance that kimmel was trying to walk close to the line but he wasn't quite not quite
00:32:48.320 you know blaming maga for maybe doing it um looking at a comment it's the fact that he ignored the horror
00:32:57.200 and instead went political um that's just something you don't like that's not why you lose a job
00:33:07.600 i i get what you're saying that he wasn't showing the uh no actually i think he did at some point
00:33:14.400 i believe he did at some point um say the right words about the horror i think he did actually just
00:33:21.040 a different day um i saw that dave portnoy weighed in on this and he said it's not canceling its
00:33:29.680 consequences and that would be true if we're only looking at a business decision and or the fcc doing
00:33:37.360 its job for the public interest if you think that getting rid of him is a public interest
00:33:43.840 so but i do think that dave is you know sort of leaving out that the fcc is part of the government
00:33:52.800 and you don't ever want the government trying to directly or indirectly you know impinge on free
00:33:59.120 speech um but i understand what uh dave is saying so he's not wrong that it's primarily it's a consequence
00:34:07.280 situation more than a more than a free speech situation but if it's got a little bit of free speech in it
00:34:14.160 i'm still going to go with the free speech you know if you say well scott it's 90 he was a dick 0.91
00:34:20.880 okay if it's 10 free speech i'm going to still be biased for the free speech
00:34:26.240 um eric swalwell uh was defending kimmel um but of course the democrats feel they have to swear
00:34:39.280 and they're so bad at it listen to this swearing from eric swalwell so he's talking about kimmel
00:34:44.880 and sort of defending him for his free speech but he says it this way quote he's a fucking comedian 0.90
00:34:52.160 now eric let me give you a little advice swearing is is good if you use it right
00:35:04.560 like you know trump is just an expert at swearing in a way that people will laugh
00:35:09.600 when he swears doing a rally speech people laugh because he puts it in just the right place you
00:35:16.000 know you don't expect it etc and um he's also used it to make a really important point
00:35:23.200 so you know okay trump's not kidding about this one it's perfect use of cursing but swalwell's just
00:35:32.240 sort of randomly throwing it in a post he's a fucking comedian you know what would have worked 0.90
00:35:38.320 just as well he's a comedian do you think that adding the f word made his point better do you
00:35:48.160 think it made him look tougher did it make him look stronger did it make him look like a better
00:35:53.760 better politician didn't do any of that no that was just a mistake in communication and i it's like
00:36:01.120 i feel like they don't even understand the point that you can definitely get away with some swearing
00:36:08.160 if you're a little bit wise about when you do it this is not wise it's not even close to wise
00:36:17.200 so uh i responded to eric swalwell who said he's an effing comedian
00:36:22.400 by responding and i said so is roseanne and then i said do cartoonists count you know depending if you
00:36:29.680 call me a comedian or not um let me let me give you a little micro lesson now
00:36:38.160 something i've been meaning to discuss trump has a technique that i don't think i've ever talked
00:36:44.800 about and it's really really good it's really good and i've never seen anybody use it so this is one of
00:36:52.800 the most persuasive things he does and he does it sort of all the time it goes like this he always favors
00:37:02.560 strength over getting something necessarily done so for example um when he says uh i'm going to do this
00:37:12.960 with immigration and then maybe the court blocks him and let's say it blocks him totally he doesn't
00:37:18.960 win in an appeal that would be him acting strong but he got blocked what you remember about that
00:37:28.080 is the strength and then the next thing comes up and once again he takes the most i don't want to say
00:37:34.400 extreme because that's the wrong thing but the strongest that the firmest strongest take i will
00:37:41.040 send the national guard into your city to stop crime that's the strong take now suppose it never worked
00:37:49.120 suppose uh you know the courts or something else blocked him from doing it what you would remember
00:37:56.960 is how strong he was in trying to stop crime and i can give you a hundred more examples that he always
00:38:04.400 takes the strong point of view even if the odds of that succeeding are low because then you remember
00:38:12.480 the strength and the reason that that's so important is that whenever the new thing comes up whatever the
00:38:17.920 new thing is you're going to respect how hard he's going to go at it and that's going to modify how you
00:38:24.720 respond and probably in a way that's good for trump so um framing yourself as always the strong one
00:38:33.440 in the conversation the strong one in politics that really works that and if i were to advise somebody
00:38:42.640 say all right do you want to be right about everything do you want everything you try to do to work
00:38:49.840 or do you want to be seen as somebody who is stronger than a typical president now the risk is you
00:38:56.720 get called an authoritarian and all that which we see happening that's a risk
00:39:02.080 but uh i would say that the the supporters of trump are probably triggered more by the strength
00:39:09.440 because you want to know that the person who's got your back you know the one who who literally has
00:39:14.240 your back you want to think he's the strongest person so if you said to me who do you want protecting
00:39:21.040 you uh because this president he tried to do something with i don't know social security reform and it didn't work
00:39:31.200 it wouldn't bother me at all but if he told me he did he did strong things on the border strong
00:39:38.400 things in the city about crime you know he went after other countries that weren't paying their their
00:39:44.640 dues uh i'm going to see a lot of strength and that is really really good persuasion even when stuff
00:39:52.720 doesn't work out it's still the right play that's the part people don't know the ordinary person would say
00:39:58.240 i'm only going to try to do this if i've got a pretty good chance of succeeding he doesn't need
00:40:03.680 to do that he can try things that don't have a high chance of succeeding as long as it shows how
00:40:10.320 strong he is does that make sense i don't think this would work for most people but it's definitely
00:40:17.360 working for him all right uh according to the daily collar news foundation that impact is writing about
00:40:24.880 this uh i guess democrats are a little bit divided now over whether they should whether they should
00:40:31.840 keep using incendiary rhetoric and calling um the trump administration people uh nazis and hiller
00:40:41.600 uh but george takai you remember him sulu from the original star trek um he says that uh trump
00:40:49.760 employing the quote nazi playbook to exploit charlie kirk's assassination bright bars writing about that
00:40:56.560 paul boys and uh can you imagine being george takai and that that's the same week that charlie kirk is
00:41:07.200 assassinated probably because of people like george takai let me say it directly people like george takai
00:41:15.040 cumulatively not him specifically but cumulatively they caused the death of charlie kirk does anybody
00:41:22.320 even doubt that do you believe that there was any chance charlie kirk would have been assassinated
00:41:28.720 any chance if democrats didn't talk that way do you think they would have said i don't like his
00:41:35.040 policies and he would have been shot i don't i don't think there's any chance that i think they had
00:41:41.040 to not like the policies but also think everybody thinks he's sailor i think i you know this would be
00:41:46.720 popular i'll do this so it will be funny to watch them make the same mistake over and over but it's
00:41:56.720 not funny if it causes somebody else to take a shot um you know the news blaze media got a hold of i
00:42:05.360 guess they were first to look at it a report by a private entity who is the capital research center
00:42:13.280 and they did a study on george soros and his funding machine so it i guess it mapped out all the nodes
00:42:22.560 and you know where the money's coming and how much and stuff like that now that would be it's a 95
00:42:28.160 page report and apparently that's going to be turned over to the trump administration who also
00:42:35.600 said they wanted to do some research on the soros funding stuff
00:42:40.240 i guess also uh there's some talk about antifa being uh designated as a terrorist organization
00:42:50.240 that hasn't happened yet but uh remember i said trump is famous for taking the strong position
00:42:56.800 well what would be stronger than designated antifa as a terrorist organization now suppose it doesn't
00:43:04.960 work out like somehow he has to back up from that would it be a mistake nope it wouldn't be a mistake
00:43:12.480 even if he doesn't doesn't end up getting that done it wouldn't be a mistake because everybody would say
00:43:18.480 man that's strength he's going hard at at the people who need to to get a little pressure on him
00:43:27.200 well israel has completed the iron beam system um i don't think it's fully implemented in the idf but
00:43:34.240 technology wise it's passed its tests the iron beam is a laser that will shoot down drones now as you
00:43:42.800 know lasers don't work as well on cloudy or rainy days but israel would also still have the iron dome 0.76
00:43:49.360 which shoots up missiles to knock down other missiles but we are now we're now solidly in the domain of
00:43:59.840 uh lasers shooting down stuff uh scott uh you got canceled for telling the truth but kimmel was lying
00:44:16.800 yeah that's not really the important part that's not how analogies work analogies work when there's just
00:44:23.520 one thing that they have in common that this you know can tell a story and the one thing is that
00:44:31.280 if you're both comedians that's it lying is not against the law i don't like it i wish there would be
00:44:39.760 less of it but it's not against the law and so even if he does something i find very objectionable
00:44:47.360 well and he did uh it's not objectionable in the free speech sense unfortunately you know or maybe
00:44:55.360 fortunately um anyway this uh beam um
00:45:02.720 i understand uh somebody can give me a fact check if i'm wrong about this but my understanding is that
00:45:09.440 uh if the us is involved in maybe funding the development of weapons in israel that what israel
00:45:16.960 develops remember they're super high tech uh whatever they develop has some kind of licensing or
00:45:24.240 or the us has the ability to use it too so i don't know about that for sure that's that's just the
00:45:30.320 information i have right now but uh it's possible that israel just developed one of the best weapons
00:45:38.640 we'll ever have for defending the united states if that happened then that would be on the plus side
00:45:46.320 of arguing why funding israel makes sense if they happen to have a technical weapons development
00:45:53.840 industry that's in any way in any pockets is better than ours and we have a deal where if we funded it
00:46:01.760 we have access to some of that technology that might be a gigantic benefit for the united states
00:46:08.480 so if you're looking at all the pluses and minuses i'm generally not in favor of funding other
00:46:14.800 countries for anything i mean i'm just not in favor of it but uh you can't argue if that's true that we
00:46:22.080 would get that technology you can't argue that we don't get anything out of it
00:46:27.680 in uh uh what's her name um kamala harris she's got her new book out and she is she's saying in her book
00:46:37.600 that tim waltz was not her first choice for a running mate her first choice was pete buddha judge
00:46:43.920 because as she said quote he is a sincere public servant with the rare talent of being able to frame
00:46:50.320 liberal arguments in a way that makes it possible for conservatives to hear them
00:46:55.040 um is that what you think do you think pete buddha judge has that rare talent to frame arguments so
00:47:03.840 conservatives can hear them wrong that's not even a little bit true i've listened to a lot of pete
00:47:12.000 buddha judge do you think he frames things in a way that conservatives go you know
00:47:16.480 uh huh oh wow wow i had the opposite opinion but now that i heard pete uh buddha judge explain it with
00:47:26.080 his you know his golden tongue um i've changed my mind that was pretty good argument there pete no
00:47:34.160 i don't think you'll find anyone who says oh you know pete buddha judge changed my mind on that topic
00:47:43.920 i don't know kamala harris she's funny well trump's approval level doesn't look so good
00:47:52.000 but i'm not sure i care he's not going to run for office again um and it's kind of normal that the
00:47:59.840 more somebody gets is on the job as president he's going to do so many things that everyone is going
00:48:07.600 to find at least one thing that they're not crazy about so i don't know it just feels normal that no
00:48:14.240 matter who the president is at this point yeah they're probably going to be a dip um no surprise i
00:48:21.760 i'm not worried about that the hill is reporting that um according to a uh walton family foundation
00:48:32.560 gallup poll that just came out um only 35 percent of respondents are satisfied with the state of k
00:48:41.440 through 12 education in the united states 35 percent now that would probably be the 35
00:48:49.360 whose kids are in good schools don't you think um i have a question is is the problem with schools
00:48:58.960 excuse me is the problem with schools because they are a mess is it the teachers is it the lack of uh
00:49:08.320 let's say physical resources
00:49:10.160 students i feel like it's the other students what do you think i feel like um you know 65 percent of the
00:49:21.680 schools have just enough troublemakers that it ruins the whole experience for everybody
00:49:30.000 now i do think that in many cases that teachers are
00:49:33.440 bad but i don't think the teachers could help if the class has too many troublemakers in it
00:49:42.720 you know troublemakers
00:49:45.840 what do you think and it seems to me that private schools um solve for that because the only people
00:49:52.800 who go to private schools are the people whose parents think that's going to work and
00:49:57.680 uh it generally gets you a less troublemaking group of people and i i feel like the private
00:50:04.560 school would kick you out if you were a troublemaker whereas the the public school would have you know
00:50:10.480 more of an obligation to keep you even if you're a little bit of a troublemaker but what is the
00:50:15.600 problem is it mostly the other people the other students um imagine imagine if you will
00:50:24.480 i spend a lot of time imagining uh what it would be like to be a poor black student do you do that
00:50:32.880 maybe that's weird but i literally i spend a lot of time and always have wondering could you escape
00:50:40.720 that trap so let's say you're born into a poor single single parent situation and you go to school and
00:50:50.640 um 70 of the people in the class don't care about graduating don't care about their grades don't
00:50:57.520 care about their future and they're just causing trouble can you escape that can you use your you
00:51:06.000 know let's say you've got good character and you're smart enough you're smart enough that you should do
00:51:11.200 well in life is that going to be enough if if you don't have the resources or wherewithal to go to a
00:51:17.360 private school and you had to stay there could you possibly get a good outcome if 70 of the students
00:51:25.120 just came to cause trouble i would think there's not a chance not a chance at all so the first problem
00:51:36.400 with what you have to do to solve any problems you have to figure out what the actual base problem is
00:51:43.040 some of it has to be the teachers but it does seem to me that as long as the students beyond a
00:51:50.080 certain percentage of the class are troublemakers it wouldn't matter who your who your teacher is
00:51:55.280 there's no way you could overcome that so now it could be that in the old days let's say when i was a kid
00:52:04.960 capital punishment was still okay i had a teacher who would beat you with a baseball bat
00:52:11.440 if you got it in line like an actual baseball bat kept it you know kept it in the he actually kept
00:52:17.440 it in the class and uh he would have fist fights uh he was pretty strong he had this big monkey muscular
00:52:27.360 body and he would have fist fights with kids and i'll tell you we were pretty well behaved after a couple
00:52:36.240 of uh bouts of violence and in a small town back in those days if if you if a parent found out that
00:52:45.040 the teacher punched a child the first thing they would ask is what do you do that's the first question
00:52:52.320 what do you do and then he would tell them and they'd say uh all right well i don't love the fact
00:52:57.200 that you punched him but he had it coming you know some version of that and that unfortunately and i'm not
00:53:03.040 saying that's you know all good i mean you you can have some childhood ptsd from that um but generally
00:53:11.600 speaking forget about that one teacher he was extreme but generally speaking there was just more
00:53:18.320 discipline and it helped everybody in the class now i don't think we should necessarily go back to the
00:53:25.120 old ways but somehow you have to solve for the fact that not everybody in the room has the same goal
00:53:33.200 which is to learn you know you got to solve that before you have any chance with amex platinum access
00:53:41.280 to exclusive amex pre-sale tickets can score you a spot track side so being a fan for life turns into the
00:53:47.520 trip of a lifetime that's the powerful backing of amex pre-sale tickets for future events subject
00:53:52.880 to availability and vary by race terms and conditions apply learn more at amex.ca why annex all right
00:54:00.960 and then back to my original point if your only problem was that you were poor and you had a single
00:54:07.680 mother but once you went to school everything worked smoothly i think you could you could do great i
00:54:16.560 i think nothing would stop you under just those minimum conditions as long as school is good
00:54:23.200 you've got a way out that's the way it's supposed to work right it's supposed to be that you can work
00:54:27.600 your way out of poverty by working hard and going to school developing a skill tyson food said it's going to
00:54:35.120 halt the use of high fructose corn syrup which many people say is not healthy uh the hill is reporting on
00:54:43.280 this um and they also apparently they already on the roast they're going to halt the use of sucralose
00:54:51.680 that's a preservative i guess and they're they've already removed petroleum-based synthetic dyes
00:54:58.560 how many of you knew you were eating oil that petroleum based synthetic dyes were in your food you're actually
00:55:09.040 eating oil right or is it processed to the point where that's an unfair thing to say
00:55:18.720 um so i think what's going to happen uh is that rfk jr etc is creating a situation where all the big
00:55:27.840 companies are going to have to act and if everybody has to act then presumably there will be industries and
00:55:36.560 products that pop up to be alternatives to whatever the ingredients are that seem to be unhealthy
00:55:42.720 if only one company wanted to switch to a healthier alternative it might not be enough to make an
00:55:49.040 industry out of the alternative but if everybody kind of needs to because it'd be too much pressure
00:55:54.400 from the public and rfk jr then suddenly it's a big money situation to to get healthier and people might
00:56:03.680 produce that product for you so i feel like everything's working going in the right direction
00:56:09.440 on food it's just going to take a while
00:56:14.880 i saw a post by siki chen on x siki is uh in in the tech world he's well known in the tech world
00:56:26.080 he said i've lived in the united states for almost 42 years i've been alive and never had people be
00:56:31.040 openly racist to me until i heard from all the people either openly on x or privately in dms
00:56:37.920 hurling racist abuse at me for switching to the republican party and he says eye-opening
00:56:46.160 now that's shocking that is shocking all right um
00:56:53.440 so
00:56:59.760 so apparently the day before i saw this uh daniel greenfield wrote about this that uh the day
00:57:07.200 before charlie kirk was assassinated there was a free speech ranking in a fire survey fire being the
00:57:15.440 name of the company or the name of the entity fire a fire survey of 68 000 college students a whole bunch
00:57:21.680 of universities and revealed that one in three students believed uh believe that using violence to stop a speaker
00:57:28.960 they disagreed with on campus was acceptable one in three people thought violence was acceptable
00:57:38.560 to stop people from saying things you don't like violence one in three now here's my take i don't believe
00:57:47.680 that survey do you do you think that's true that sounds a lot like something that college students
00:57:56.480 say in answer to a survey it doesn't sound like something they do
00:58:03.200 so you know if you say to me uh do you think uh young people whose brains are not developed and they
00:58:10.800 like causing trouble and you know maybe they like using a little hyperbole i feel like it's something you
00:58:17.200 say on a survey if you're young
00:58:21.760 that isn't really something you believe or if or if you were in the situation you wouldn't do any violence
00:58:28.640 so i feel like
00:58:31.040 it's alarming and i would certainly keep an eye on it i wouldn't i wouldn't completely discount it
00:58:36.480 i could be wrong
00:58:38.880 it's happened but i'm not entirely sure that's telling us what we think
00:58:42.560 it's fake remember all data is fake um i told you that the us is going to overhaul the citizenship
00:58:50.880 test did you know that the citizenship was 100 questions but you only get 10 of them
00:58:58.320 so they randomly picked 10 of the questions but you would have to study all 100 to make sure you can get
00:59:06.720 most of them right so so used to be the only need to get a six out of ten
00:59:12.720 right uh but now you'll need 12 correct out of 20.
00:59:20.560 and i looked at the questions and i'm happy to say i think i could pass it
00:59:27.360 but if you had 128 facts that you had to learn and you only had to get 12 out of 20 right
00:59:35.760 how how long would you have to study before you could nail that you'd probably have to well not
00:59:41.440 probably you'd have to understand english otherwise you wouldn't be able to understand the test
00:59:47.280 and i guess it's a verbal test it's not even written somebody somebody just asks you 10 questions and then
00:59:53.280 checks it off but
00:59:56.480 i don't know what was there really some reason that we had to add 28 questions i don't know
01:00:02.880 know but there's probably a good reason for it um so according to just the news ben whedon already
01:00:13.600 2 million illegal uh residents have left the country 400 000 directly deported and then 1.6 million
01:00:23.680 self-deporting you know when i heard this whole self-deporting thing you know the commercials you
01:00:30.000 see on tv with christy gnome and she's saying you know if you leave now there's a chance we would let
01:00:36.080 you back in but if you don't leave and we have to get rid of you you'll never come back so some number
01:00:42.960 of people are self-deporting way more than i thought i i thought everybody would just hang tight
01:00:49.360 and try to ride it out you know try to hide from the law until there's a new new president or something
01:00:55.200 but that is if these numbers are right and you know there's always a question about that if really
01:01:02.480 1.6 million people left on their own on top of 400 000 deported wouldn't you call that a really good job
01:01:11.840 because remember the at least the 400 000 are not all but a lot of them are the worst i don't know what 0.64
01:01:20.240 percentage i don't think it's very high percentage actually but if they got a lot of the bad people first
01:01:27.280 i don't know that feels very successful i would give a i would give a high mark for that number of people in six months
01:01:35.200 um david sachs as you know he's in the administration he's got portfolio of crypto and i think ai and he
01:01:46.880 says that there's big news from china and that huawei their big tech company over there has introduced a
01:01:54.080 new ai chip that's going to compete with nvidia here we thought we were all awesome in the united states
01:02:01.120 because we had better chips so we could get better ai and you know rule the world but huawei is uh
01:02:08.240 competing now their chips are not as good as nvidia and people are saying things like well it's going to
01:02:15.680 be a long time before they can catch up we don't know that we don't know how long it'll take them to
01:02:22.080 catch up they've already figured out how to architect their lesser chips so that they act like better
01:02:29.280 chips they just use more of them and they can you know approximate nvidia they can't get there but
01:02:36.080 they can get close so china is not really desperate for our chips and they're doing essentially what
01:02:44.320 we're doing by trying to do better at mining rare earth so that we don't have to depend on them
01:02:50.720 well they're doing the same thing but what they're doing is building a chip building industry now
01:02:56.160 um the problem is that huawei will start selling its ai chips to other countries and if china is the
01:03:07.840 one providing the ai tech and not the united states then those countries are going to be a little bit
01:03:15.200 under the thumb of china because they will depend on china for their technology and they have to have ai 1.00
01:03:21.520 because everybody will have to have it so david sachs is warning us that maybe we should look at
01:03:29.600 loosening up our sales to the non-china companies so that they don't buy from china which seems
01:03:37.520 commonsensical i would i would say that on the surface that makes sense
01:03:41.360 um but i would also say that in general i feel like it's more likely that china will match nvidia
01:03:51.840 in a few short years than the chances that they won't um there's just too much too much riding on it
01:03:59.840 and they'll do everything from bribery to blackmail to outright ip theft and i don't know is it impossible
01:04:08.960 for them to just get one of the nvidia chips and look at the you know look at the architecture and copy
01:04:15.760 it is that not possible or is it the software well even that they could copy so i'm gonna i'm gonna bet
01:04:24.480 that china will surprise us in how quickly they reach parity if not more to nvidia
01:04:32.160 did you lock the front door check close the garage door yep installed window sensors smoke
01:04:40.800 sensors and hd cameras with night vision no and you set up credit card transaction alerts a secure vpn
01:04:46.320 for a private connection and continuous monitoring for our personal info on the dark web uh i'm looking
01:04:51.920 into it stress less about security choose security solutions from telus for peace of mind at home
01:04:57.680 and online visit telus.com total security to learn more conditions apply well ukraine has attacked yet
01:05:06.480 another uh refinery in uh in russia this is a gas prom refinery in bashkatorstan russia so it's 1300
01:05:18.080 kilometers from the front line so they're going pretty deep into russia and they use scores of
01:05:23.440 drones and they had a direct hit on the facility now i don't know how much of it was destroyed or
01:05:28.000 whether it stopped operation but i was wondering remember i've told you that i was guessing that if
01:05:33.680 ukraine could take out 20 that was my own estimate of the refining capacity or the energy resources in
01:05:42.400 russia that russia that russia's economy would uh be in such trouble that they might want to
01:05:48.960 you know do a peace deal well according to uh whatever it was i was reading that i didn't write
01:05:57.520 down the source um they may have already just expert projections indicate that sustained disruptions to 40
01:06:05.840 or 50 of the capacity could tip the balance so i said 20 would put him in trouble the experts say 40 to 50
01:06:16.720 guess what they're at
01:06:20.080 so how much of that have they disrupted so far um if i wrote it down i think it was like 17 20
01:06:28.800 something like that yeah 17 to 24 so it's possible that there that ukraine is halfway
01:06:36.400 and there's nothing that would stop them from getting to 40 or 50 but they're already halfway
01:06:41.600 to the number that would collapse um the russian economy now it's i would say it's obvious that
01:06:48.800 that's the strategy because they don't really have any chance of winning you know a direct military
01:06:55.840 battle but they could definitely take out 40 to 50 percent of their refinery capacity and then things
01:07:05.040 things get pretty uh get pretty sketchy assuming any of those numbers are real
01:07:13.200 now obviously russia would up their uh up their response so you can't predict that that would give
01:07:20.000 ukraine any victory or anything but it might make russia sufficiently incentivized to at least talk peace we'll see
01:07:32.240 um california legislature i can't even believe this passed a bill to create subsidies for
01:07:41.120 news entities for media the media entities and uh it's because governor newsom thinks
01:07:48.960 that the media entities in california need a little boost now how do you interpret that uh this is
01:07:57.600 being reported by just the news how do you how do you understand that except for a way for the governor
01:08:04.640 to control the news uh if you want your subsidy you better do you know positive reporting about me
01:08:13.600 or do you think it's just another way um for the government to launder money do you think that
01:08:21.920 there's anybody who's like a good friend or relative perhaps of newsom who might be a recipient of some
01:08:28.960 of those subsidies well that's the way it usually goes on the democrat side if you hear they've created
01:08:34.800 any kind of funding or subsidies for anything the first thing you could know is that that money is
01:08:41.600 going to go to their cronies and people are going to give some of it back to the politicians who who
01:08:46.400 created that law so i would say every part of this looks dirty to me
01:08:53.280 well the pope has weighed in he's slamming elon musk for what he calls obscene greed
01:08:58.800 he said uh talk about money he said if that is the only thing that has any value anymore then we're
01:09:04.880 in big trouble he pointed out uh the continuous wider income gap he said uh yesterday there was
01:09:11.600 the news that uh elon musk is going to be the first trillionaire in the world and then he says what does
01:09:17.600 that mean and um so he thinks that's bad if the only thing that has any value anymore we're in trouble
01:09:24.320 blah blah um now i don't want to criticize the pope but i would point out that the pope's expertise
01:09:34.960 does not seem to extend to the business world let me explain what the trillion dollars is all about
01:09:42.080 the trillion dollars is not what he's going to spend on buying what better t-shirts
01:09:47.840 elon musk wears basically a t-shirt and jeans every single day like what was he spending his
01:09:55.520 trillion on is it because he he has a private jet that he flies around that would be a necessity
01:10:02.800 for anyone who has that many businesses if you have more than one business and you're a global
01:10:09.280 kind of a company and uh you need to run businesses in different places and you've got
01:10:15.600 yeah private plane is just business there's nothing wrong with that and it's not like he
01:10:21.760 even has a mansion or anything he doesn't have a mansion i don't know if he ever will he seems
01:10:26.560 uninterested in that kind of stuff so elon musk is the least consumer driven person i've ever seen
01:10:35.280 you know steve jobs you know arguably was in that domain but i think it's a complete misunderstanding
01:10:43.040 that the trillion dollars is just his money no it's not the trillion dollars is the value of spacex and
01:10:52.640 you know tesla and his other companies he's building robots and going to mars and you know solving all
01:10:58.800 these uh physical problems with uh um the the brain chip thing uh that trillion dollars is almost
01:11:09.680 i'd say 98 for the public good he only does companies that are for the public good he's not
01:11:19.920 making a video game although he might someday the the things he does are so obviously good for the
01:11:29.200 country if not the world at the very least it makes the u.s more competitive but it bothers me a little
01:11:38.160 that the pope would weigh in on this and be so wrong about understanding the general situation
01:11:44.960 i want elon musk to have two trillion dollars because his history is that he invests every
01:11:51.600 penny he makes now that that's how he got to where he is he invests it all so pope come on come on pope
01:12:01.520 all right i saw an estimate and tech explorer andrew zinn is writing that according to the wto ai might
01:12:13.120 boost global trade values by at least 40 percent so so that would be a gigantic you know improvement in
01:12:22.240 in business do you believe that do you believe that the wto can do a believable credible estimate
01:12:31.040 about how much ai will boost global trade let's see how well i've trained you do you believe that's
01:12:38.560 that's something they can estimate no this is as ridiculous as the climate models
01:12:46.000 no there's no such thing as estimating the temperature in 20 years that's not a thing i mean
01:12:52.240 not credibly doing it and it's not a thing that you can figure out how ai will boost global trade
01:12:59.280 please really really nobody knows what ai is going to do it might be better than that it might be worse
01:13:07.200 but nobody knows an estimate god all right nobody can legitimately estimate that sort of thing and
01:13:16.240 once you learn that it will help you a lot because there's a tendency if all these experts say well we
01:13:22.400 we estimated this thing we estimated this thing you say yourself well experts estimated a thing that
01:13:28.800 sounds pretty good to me um but generally when experts are estimating a thing the odds that they
01:13:35.600 know what they're doing and the estimate is credible very low it's very low all right that's all i got to
01:13:43.360 say today i've got my cat in my lap who has been enjoying the show more than you because the cat likes
01:13:52.000 it when i'm busy doing something else and he's just laying on my lap so gary i'm done now with the main
01:13:59.840 show and i'm going to go private with the uh beloved very beloved local subscribers and the rest of you
01:14:08.800 thanks for joining um and we'll be back tomorrow same time same place all right locals i'm coming at you in 30 seconds
01:14:21.360 30 seconds starting
01:14:29.840 it's
01:14:42.880 you
01:14:59.840 Thank you.
01:15:29.840 Thank you.
01:15:59.840 Thank you.