Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 929 Scott Adams： The Green New Deal is Dead. Joe Biden Still Hiding. Carl Stories.

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, come on in, it's time for coffee with Scott Adams, and the simultaneous

00:00:28.040 day is it? Best part of your day, no doubt about it. We got lots of fun stories today. Sometimes

00:00:37.080 the stories are sad, sometimes they're fun. Today is more fun than sad. Let's go with

00:00:43.380 that. You can watch sad stuff on the other channels. You know, you've got plenty of sad

00:00:49.980 stuff. We'll come here for the optimism. Glass is half full. Speaking of a glass, if you'd

00:00:56.880 like to enjoy the simultaneous sip, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or

00:01:02.160 chalice or a cider, a canteen drink or a flask, a vessel of any kind, and fill it with your

00:01:05.260 favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine

00:01:11.800 of the day, the thing that makes everything, including the frickin' pandemic, better. It's

00:01:18.200 called the simultaneous sip. Go. Better every time, just like I promised you. All right,

00:01:31.620 we got fun stories, all kinds of fun stories. There was a wonderful little human moment from

00:01:39.720 Andrew Cuomo, Governor Cuomo of New York. And he was telling the story. So he's got three

00:01:47.180 daughters. I think at least two of them are teenagers. And he was telling the story about

00:01:52.400 how they're at home and they're watching the news. And he saw the news of another governor

00:01:57.660 of Maryland, Larry Hogan, talking about how Larry Hogan had cleverly acquired a bunch of test

00:02:04.040 kids from South Korea. And Governor Cuomo, who's like the talk of the town, and he's really

00:02:11.600 got the highest profile of any politician who has a good reputation. He's like the star

00:02:17.160 of the show. So it's, you know, Andrew Cuomo. He's really, he's just killing it in the public

00:02:22.040 opinion, taking charge. He's a leader. And his daughter turns to him and says, why didn't

00:02:28.720 you do that? And then, and then as Andrew Cuomo tells the story, and then his other daughter

00:02:39.080 says, yeah, that looked pretty smart. Why didn't you do that? Now, when he tells the story,

00:02:46.760 he's practically crying because he feels guilty, because it just diminished him so much. Like,

00:02:53.400 you know, you have to know that, you know, even though he's going through a tough time with,

00:02:58.100 with all of it, you have to know that he at least felt he was important. At the very least,

00:03:05.960 he thought, well, it's a tragedy. And, you know, nothing about this is good. But at least

00:03:11.340 I'm killing it. You know, I'm just killing it. And everybody says so. And then his daughters

00:03:15.880 go, yeah, when do you think of that?

00:03:19.860 Now, as I often say, there's one criticism that just always works, which is if you do

00:03:33.720 something that's right, you should have done it sooner. And if somebody else does something

00:03:38.620 right, you know, this is sort of the cousin of that. If somebody else does something right,

00:03:43.680 well, why didn't you do that? Well, why didn't you think of that last week? So there's,

00:03:47.920 there's some criticisms that are just universal. You can apply them to every situation. Like,

00:03:53.660 no matter how much you did right, well, why didn't you do it sooner?

00:03:56.960 Sure. So I love that story. But it's also, it's, it also, because it was so human,

00:04:09.520 it also highlights why Andrew Cuomo was so popular at the moment. Because this is one of those

00:04:16.340 occasions in history where you need somebody who's just really, really human. Because the

00:04:22.760 people need to know that they're leaders, you know, are sort of understand them, they're human

00:04:26.900 too, they feel your pain, etc. So I think Andrew Cuomo might be like a perfect leader in the perfect

00:04:32.920 situation. But what's also funny about this is that the, if many of you have watched the interviews

00:04:41.960 in which his brother, Chris Cuomo of CNN, was doing with his brother. And one of the dynamics of

00:04:48.460 those interviews that made them so interesting, in my opinion, they were great television, you know,

00:04:52.720 people complained, blah, blah, blah. But it was great television, just on entertainment alone,

00:04:58.440 because it gave you two levels. We were getting the news, important news. And at the same time,

00:05:04.520 we were seeing this brother dynamic, which I found fascinating. Fascinating because both of the

00:05:10.460 brothers were operating at such a high level, right? Normally, it wouldn't be this interesting.

00:05:14.880 But when you've got somebody who's like a, you know, top anchor on CNN, the governor during an

00:05:20.260 emergency, and the brothers. I mean, it was just sort of cool. So you could say it was stunt casting,

00:05:27.400 but it was still interesting. But here's what I found the most interesting about it. The dynamic that

00:05:32.000 they displayed on screen was sort of a competitive sibling thing. So they were always competing.

00:05:38.380 And they would mock each other. And, you know, it would be sort of like a sports trash talk,

00:05:45.540 which is what made it fun. But here's the best part. So imagine these brothers compete with each

00:05:52.240 other to be the, you know, the alpha of whatever the situation is. And Chris Cuomo is in the position

00:06:01.780 of being the inferior brother. And when I say the inferior brother, I mean, just in this situation,

00:06:08.380 the person who is the governor and the leader and the role model of all governors everywhere is sort

00:06:15.320 of the star of this situation. But the person who's simply asking him questions is not the star.

00:06:23.780 If you had asked me, you know, two months ago, who is the more famous Cuomo, I might have said Chris

00:06:30.080 Cuomo, because everybody sees him on CNN, but not everybody pays attention to the governor of New York.

00:06:36.180 But at the moment, that's reversed. So you've got this great dynamic of the children. And I thought to

00:06:42.840 myself, well, is there anything that Chris Cuomo could do that would fix this situation, where instead

00:06:51.940 of his brother is the most famous person during the coronavirus situation? What is there that Chris

00:06:58.340 Cuomo could do that would make him more of the story and less of the person

00:07:05.800 asking about the story, which is not so noble? Oh, I've got an idea. How about Chris Cuomo becomes the

00:07:15.700 most famous person who has coronavirus? Could that be more perfect? The one and only thing that Chris

00:07:25.040 Cuomo could have done to, you know, to level up with his brother who was just killing it is to become the

00:07:31.640 most famous person with coronavirus and start filming from his basement. And he becomes the story.

00:07:39.540 So he crossed the line from talking about the story to becoming the biggest, one of the biggest

00:07:44.620 elements in the whole country. Biggest in the sense of attention, not in the importance. Everybody who has

00:07:51.260 the coronavirus is equally important. All right. A leading US model, the one that everybody talks about

00:07:59.500 for the coronavirus deaths, it just inched up from 60,000 to 66,000. There's a little clause in the

00:08:06.660 sentence here that I had not noticed before. I'm going to plug in my iPad, which sometimes causes me

00:08:13.520 to drop off. So if my iPad goes blank for a while, that's technical difficulty. All right.

00:08:21.440 So it inched up from 60,000 to 66,000. But here's what I had never known before, that that death toll

00:08:29.140 is by August. So by the end of August. And I'm thinking to myself, is that the end of the death?

00:08:37.720 Because we've been using this 60,000 number as the number of deaths. Didn't you think that's what

00:08:43.880 that meant? Isn't the whole point of predicting the number of deaths, that you're predicting the

00:08:50.900 number of deaths? What am I missing when they predict the number of deaths, but it's not the

00:08:58.240 number of deaths? Because the number of deaths is all the people who are going to die, not the people

00:09:03.480 who are going to die by the end of August. What's that all about? And when we compare the proposed

00:09:11.160 or predicted deaths from coronavirus to the annual flu, do we say we'll compare it to the annual

00:09:19.020 flu up to the end of August? Is that what we do? Now, with the annual flu, maybe that does make sense

00:09:25.860 because the regular flu kind of peters out in the summer, right? So if you were to measure,

00:09:30.600 measure, the regular flu, maybe measuring it through the end of August gets you 98% of what you need.

00:09:37.940 But with the coronavirus, we're already talking about the second and third wave and coming back

00:09:43.000 next year. If the best estimate is 66,000 by the end of August, isn't it a safe bet that the total

00:09:52.960 is going to be over 100,000? Do a fact check on me, please. Am I incorrect that if the model says 66,000

00:10:02.940 by the end of August, it almost certainly means over 100,000 overall? I mean, what would this second

00:10:10.460 wave be if not that? And why are we even talking about getting a vaccine 18 months from now, unless

00:10:18.840 we believe that 18 months from now, this thing will still be killing people? If it's not killing

00:10:23.940 people in 18 months, why are we even talking about a vaccine? So obviously, it's going to kill people for

00:10:29.460 at least 18 months, and longer, because it would take, you know, not everybody's going to be

00:10:34.300 inoculated on day one. So what would happen to how we understand this, if it definitely, absolutely

00:10:41.960 is going to be over 100,000 deaths? Doesn't that start to change how people feel? I'd asked Adam,

00:10:50.920 Adam Townsend, on Twitter, to give me a number just in his own opinion, because he's on the

00:10:57.840 anti-alarmist side of the debate, I guess you'd say. And his view is that, you know, while it might

00:11:06.760 be bad, it's not so bad that it matches the amount of pain we're putting on the economy. I don't want

00:11:14.500 to characterize his opinion, but let's just say that he's on the opinion that it won't be as bad

00:11:20.440 as the bad case. And I asked him, what would change his mind? What death number would convince him

00:11:31.100 that this was actually a big deal? So he's in the camp, and it's really, I really hate characterizing

00:11:38.000 anybody else's opinion, because it's fairly nuanced. And I don't think it's easy to characterize

00:11:43.600 a nuanced opinion, but it is fair to say he's in the anti-alarmist camp. Let's just say that.

00:11:50.760 So I said, what would move you from the anti-alarmist into the, oh, I guess the alarmists were right

00:11:57.120 after all. How many deaths? And I believe he said 200,000. And I thought, reasonable. That's reasonable. 0.98

00:12:06.700 You know, I think a reasonable, you could disagree with this, but subjectively, and from a personal

00:12:13.720 opinion, if it was under 200,000 deaths, then maybe you could conclude that you shouldn't have

00:12:20.620 closed the economy. Except that if it was 200 deaths with the, 200,000 deaths with the economy

00:12:26.940 closed for a long time, it really indicates it would have been a million if you hadn't closed it,

00:12:33.340 right? Sort of. Maybe half a million, at which point it makes sense that it looks like closing

00:12:39.900 the economy made sense. Anyway, keep an eye on that. But that end of August thing threw me because

00:12:46.960 I don't think that's been accurately reported.

00:12:53.480 Here's a, just change of pace for a moment. So yesterday in my evening periscope, I outlined

00:12:59.360 a plan for a digital free college, which would involve making a new major, which would be a sort

00:13:07.920 of a life strategy major. It would, it would be comprised of all the subcategories that make

00:13:15.660 you more effective. I'll just give you some examples. So learning, say, persuasion, communication,

00:13:20.680 economics, business management, design, 20 other things. So the idea was you could create a major

00:13:30.600 that's digital and online. If you had a search engine like a Yelp for classes, they can find you

00:13:38.420 the class online from all the different platforms that have online teaching. And then you could just

00:13:43.460 say, oh, this is my major. Go to the search engine, pick the class that you like based on ratings.

00:13:49.640 Oh, this is the good class. They're all the same class, but some of them are just better than

00:13:54.200 others. So you pick the good one. And it might only cost you a few bucks. And so therefore you have

00:14:00.160 basically free college. And it might only take a year. So it might be a one year college degree.

00:14:07.700 And then you get the government to say, give it some accreditation. And you're good to go.

00:14:14.240 And I would argue that if you could give me, and I said this last night, so I'll say it

00:14:19.200 in case somebody missed it. I'm going to make a provocative claim. If you were to let me design

00:14:25.200 that major, I could design a major and then present it to, and I'll just pick for, you know,

00:14:32.380 social reasons. It's obvious why I'll do this. If you said, okay, Scott, take your college major

00:14:38.000 and you can have a hundred, let's say low income black kids from America, and you can run them 0.84

00:14:44.300 through this major. And then we'll compare them to people who've got to pick their own major,

00:14:49.300 made their way in life a different way. Maybe they went to college. Maybe they didn't go to any

00:14:53.880 college because they couldn't afford it. You know, the online one was basically free and so cheap.

00:14:58.200 So compare them. Now, subtract from your comparison, anybody went into a STEM field or

00:15:05.060 became a doctor or a lawyer. I'm talking about the people who are preparing for a life that could

00:15:09.580 be an entrepreneur working in a big company where they train you to be something specific. I'm talking

00:15:15.720 about all the generalists. If you were to compare the generalists who go their own way to the generalist

00:15:21.660 I would train with this, you know, new proposed college major that would be sort of the standard

00:15:28.580 major for the people who don't go into specialized fields. I would propose that if you come back in

00:15:33.620 10 years after they've completed their, let's say it's a one year degree, that they would on average be

00:15:39.820 earning far more than the control group. So, so this is my, this is my provocative claim that you could

00:15:48.460 create this major that would give better performance. Now, here's the new point as of

00:15:53.300 today. I don't want to, don't want to just reiterate what I said yesterday. I've often said that the way

00:15:58.900 you can tell a good idea from a bad idea is if in its bad form, before it's even, before it's even,

00:16:06.240 you know, engineered to be good, if in its bad form it already gets people to do something with their

00:16:12.700 bodies. And it's the body test. So, for example, let's say you design a comic strip, and you decide to

00:16:20.940 become a, to become a cartoonist, and you show your friends some comics that you've made. If your friends

00:16:27.040 look at the comics and say, hey, this is great, you should try to do something with this, you have nothing.

00:16:32.420 Because they haven't really done anything, they just, they just talked, and of course they were expected to say

00:16:36.760 something nice. But, if you give some, give your friends some comics and say, what do you think?

00:16:42.360 You know, do you think I could make a career out of this? And your friend says, oh, these are great.

00:16:47.020 Can I make a copy of this? I want to send it to my friend. That passes the body test. Because in order

00:16:53.380 to make a copy and send it to your friend, yeah, your body has to be involved. So, if you create a product

00:16:59.080 which involves somebody's body spontaneously, you don't have to ask them to do anything, they just

00:17:05.540 volunteer to use their body to do something with this product, you've got a product.

00:17:12.120 All right, so it's one of the most reliable indicators of something that would be good

00:17:16.340 is if bodies are moving in some way. And of course, the Dilbert comic, that was the tell,

00:17:24.240 is that people were literally physically cutting them out of the newspaper, and physically putting

00:17:28.520 them on the refrigerator, or the cubicle wall. So it was the physicality of it that was the predictor.

00:17:34.140 So, after I did my little demonstration about how college could be free, this morning I got

00:17:43.920 on Twitter and I saw that Donovan Loomis, who's been on my Periscopes, had taken my whiteboard

00:17:50.700 that I just sort of scratched the ideas on and turned it into a proper graphic flowchart. Now,

00:17:58.500 in order to take my whiteboard and turn it into a proper graphic that he then tweeted, he had to

00:18:05.640 involve his body. He had to, you know, be looking at the one thing and typing physically, probably a lot

00:18:12.640 of arranging things to get it just right, playing with the fonts. So, if you can come up with an idea

00:18:18.820 that causes somebody on the other side of the planet, and literally, Donovan's in South Korea,

00:18:24.280 so he's literally on the other side of the planet, if on the other side of the planet, somebody's body

00:18:28.980 is moving, like literally, physically, the body is doing something, that is a really strong indicator

00:18:36.540 of something that will grab other people's attention as well. So, it's out there now, and let's see if

00:18:42.440 the idea moves any more bodies, and I'll let you know how that goes. Apparently, Trump ordered the

00:18:50.560 U.S. Navy to shoot down any Iranian gunboats that harass our fleet. So, I guess the Iranians are 1.00

00:18:59.020 trying to, you know, take their gunboats too close to our boats, and now that Trump has just said to

00:19:05.580 just basically kill them. Just kill them. Now, is that the right decision from our Commander-in-Chief?

00:19:13.520 If the Iranian gunboats keep doing this, just kill them all. I think so. I think so. 1.00

00:19:20.200 And I would be disappointed. Well, that's the wrong word. I would expect Iran to keep doing it, 1.00

00:19:29.660 right? Because they sort of have to test that. So, don't you sort of expect that in the next few

00:19:36.060 days, you're going to hear that one of our ships obliterated at least one, might be more than one,

00:19:43.160 but don't you think we're going to obliterate at least one Iranian gunboat? Because we sort of have to, 0.98

00:19:49.040 right? You know, if they keep it up at this point, I mean, it's an order from the Commander-in-Chief,

00:19:55.360 so they have to. All right.

00:19:57.140 The funniest account on Twitter, at least at the moment, is the Joe Biden insult bot. If you have

00:20:10.260 not experienced the fake account called the Joe Biden insult bot, you really need to. The way it

00:20:19.120 works is, if you tweet at it, it's a real person, not a bot. But if you tweet at the account,

00:20:26.860 it will insult you in the form of a Joe Biden insult, which are all just crazy talk. And it's

00:20:33.220 the funniest freaking thing you've ever seen in your life. I'm going to read you a few of them.

00:20:36.760 Now, these might not come across as so funny when I read them. They'll give you a flavor of them.

00:20:41.740 And there's something about reading them all in the list that makes you giggle to the point where

00:20:47.220 it hurts. All right. So this is from the Joe Biden insult. These are just various tweets. Here's

00:20:54.020 one. Take it to the bank, you cobblestone crunching gravy guzzler. Here's another. That's some real

00:21:01.700 potato skin, you yellow snow-eaten corn snake. Here's a go amble in some bramble, you dribble-mouthed

00:21:09.640 scuttle flipper. Go on, get, you horse jack-and-tricorner hat thief. Easy on the mustard,

00:21:16.760 you gravel-scratching clam fister. Take the slow boat to Tinseltown, you Piccadillon grass gobbler. 0.99

00:21:24.600 You jello-handed. So I tweeted this yesterday. You should just follow this account. It's pretty,

00:21:33.220 pretty darn funny. Now, the thing that makes this funny demonstrates a principle of humor. I was going

00:21:41.440 to do a humor lesson around this, but I'll give you the quick version, which is that one of the things

00:21:48.360 that makes things funny, and here's like one of the most illuminating rules you'll ever hear. This

00:21:56.400 will be really looking behind the curtain of reality a little bit, and then behind the curtain

00:22:01.280 is behind the curtain, and it goes like this. The main thing that makes somebody laugh at a joke

00:22:07.940 is that there's a logic to it that doesn't make sense, but it still makes sense.

00:22:14.960 So the best jokes are there's sort of kind of a joke logic, and you get what the joke logic is,

00:22:23.080 and you're trying to reconcile it in your brain with real logic, but you can't get there.

00:22:28.080 So it's near logic, but not quite. And your brain, the thing that triggers the laugh reflex

00:22:34.520 is that your brain can't fit it into logic. It recognizes it as logic, but can't make it logical.

00:22:41.840 So those are the, roughly speaking, those are the requirements. It feels logical emotionally,

00:22:47.380 but it's not. And your brain knows it, and then you have this conflict, and then it fights it out

00:22:54.240 in your head, and it causes a laugh reflex. Buzz Killington jokes, right? So when you read these,

00:23:02.860 what makes them funny, I think, is that the author of these found a format that you could very easily

00:23:11.920 fill in new words, and it's the same joke form, and it always works. And what makes it works is that

00:23:18.500 all the words in the sentence don't work together, but they feel as if they make sense, but they don't.

00:23:24.980 So let me read you a few with that in mind. So the rule is that your brain sort of feels like

00:23:31.660 it makes sense, but it doesn't. Here's one. Easy on the mustard, you gravel-scratching-clam-fister. 0.99

00:23:42.100 So your brain is trying to figure out what mustard and gravel-scratching-clam-fister

00:23:48.900 have in common, and the answer is nothing. But your brain can't accept that because it understands

00:23:54.940 the sentence. Get it? You understood the sentence, but it also doesn't make any sense at all. So

00:24:01.420 that's exactly the, what would you call it, the formula. You understand it, and it doesn't make

00:24:09.540 sense at the same time. So that's probably one of the strongest rules of humor. All right.

00:24:18.880 All right. I saw this story in the New York Post, and I swear I've never loved my country

00:24:27.060 more than this. You know, I'm quite patriotic, you know, down to the DNA level, but there are

00:24:33.640 moments, there are moments when you love your country, like more than just a citizen loves

00:24:39.380 their country. There are moments when you're not just loving your country, but you're in love

00:24:45.780 with your country. Do you know what I mean? Like, it goes that extra level where you say,

00:24:50.480 I don't just like the United States and appreciate its system of government. I think I love it.

00:24:57.820 And that happened when I read this headline in the New York Post. De Blasio's social distancing

00:25:06.020 tip line, that's the one where you can call in and say, I saw somebody who's not socially

00:25:11.140 distancing. So de Blasio's social distancing tip line flooded with penis photos and Hitler memes.

00:25:23.980 I've never loved my country more. I swear to God, there's just moments like this where I just

00:25:30.680 fucking love this country. So that's the most American protest I've ever heard of.

00:25:39.980 What could be more American than de Blasio, the mayor of New York, basically asked his

00:25:46.580 citizens to rat on each other? And the New Yorkers flood his tip line with penis photos? 0.96

00:25:54.780 And Hitler memes. Now the Hitler memes being, you know, calling de Blasio Hitler.

00:26:02.020 Oh God, I love this country. I really do.

00:26:04.720 Oh, sorry. That was so funny. I just can't stand it anymore. All right. I have, you know,

00:26:23.000 I tell you, nothing gives me more encouragement about the future of the United States than stuff

00:26:28.060 like this. Like, as much as I don't think it's a good idea to be protesting the social isolation,

00:26:34.660 I love the fact that we are. Like, I can't separate the fact, I can't separate the fact in my head

00:26:41.640 that we should not be gathering in groups without masks to protest social distancing. We just shouldn't

00:26:48.840 be doing that. At the other hand, I love the fact that we are. I can't, I can't separate those

00:26:54.100 thoughts. I can hold them both. Anyway, the canaries in the coal mine for what I would call

00:27:03.300 the left-leaning world, and I've said this before, Michael Moore, Bill Maher, maybe Matt Taibbi,

00:27:10.640 you can think of a few more. These are people who would be the first to realize that their own side

00:27:17.240 was full of crap, if it is. Now, if it's not, of course they won't. But I would call them the people

00:27:26.040 who are most likely to be able to call out their own side for being wrong. Now, on the conservative

00:27:31.720 side, I would say maybe Tucker Carlson and Greg Duffield would be similar on the, you know,

00:27:40.600 more right-leaning news in the sense that they would be among the first who would call out their

00:27:48.400 own side for being dumb if they saw something that was dumb. So there are several people that I just

00:27:54.440 watch for a leading indicator. Because if Tucker goes hard in a direction, it kind of predicts,

00:28:02.340 doesn't it? It kind of predicts where things might go. And likewise, if Bill Maher or Taibbi or

00:28:13.040 Michael Moore make a change, it also, I think, signals something. And so that brings us to the

00:28:20.680 Michael Moore-backed documentary. So he's the executive producer, not the talent in it, of this

00:28:26.640 Planet of the Humans documentary. Now, I mentioned it, but I had not seen it until last night. I saw

00:28:34.240 it all but the last 10 minutes, and I don't think I missed anything in the last 10 minutes. But here's

00:28:40.580 the basic thrust of it. So it's somebody that Michael Moore decided to back, you know, as executive

00:28:46.560 director. And the essence of it is that the green technologies are all bunk, and that it's just

00:28:54.440 smoke and mirrors, and it's really not real, that it can never replace fossil. It mostly depends on

00:29:00.780 fossil. You still need fossil. You still need your electrical lines. You can't really get off the grid.

00:29:06.760 It doesn't work when it's rainy. It's hard to dispose of them. The solar panels only work for 10 years.

00:29:14.260 They're big, you know, big solar plants that were built with great fanfare that are being taken down,

00:29:19.460 a different kind of solar. So basically, the documentary essentially completely eviscerates

00:29:29.780 the economic argument, or even the moral argument, for green energy. And one of the biggest things

00:29:39.000 that I learned, and I didn't know this, was that we have a huge green, so-called green energy in biomass.

00:29:48.420 I didn't know anything about this. Did you know that there are, I don't know, hundreds or hundreds of

00:29:53.720 biomass electrical generators around the country? And the reason that they use biomass is that it's

00:30:01.720 sort of right on the border of being, is this renewable? It's renewable because it's trees,

00:30:08.100 but it uses so many trees that I don't think you could renew them. So it's sort of an anti-renewable

00:30:15.360 thing that people call renewable, because you can argue that you can grow a new tree, but I don't know

00:30:20.600 if you could argue that you can grow them fast enough. So that part was missing.

00:30:26.040 And so here's some of my overall comments on this. Number one, I think this ends any chance of the

00:30:37.620 Green New Deal. I think it's over. And I think it's the second biggest story of the year, because

00:30:43.100 it's not coronavirus. But the second biggest story of the year is that when Michael Moore turns

00:30:48.180 in a fairly full-throated way against standard green energies, solar and biomass and windmills,

00:31:00.340 when Michael Moore goes, that's the end of it, isn't it? Because AOC can argue all day long that

00:31:10.060 it's a good idea, and the whole argument is going to turn into this. Did you see Michael Moore's

00:31:16.300 documentary, you know, the one he backed? That's the whole argument. The Green New Deal is actually

00:31:22.360 dead. It's completely dead. Now, you could have argued that maybe it was dead anyway, because of

00:31:27.800 the coronavirus, because we spent all our money, so we couldn't do much about it. And, you know,

00:31:34.560 maybe we stopped trusting long-term prediction models because of the coronavirus, which would make

00:31:41.180 people more skeptical of climate change models. So I was thinking that Green New Deal might have

00:31:47.780 been dead anyway, and then the Michael Moore documentary comes along, and by itself it would

00:31:53.240 have killed the Green New Deal. But if you add it all together, this is the biggest story that's not

00:31:59.400 being covered. The Green New Deal is just totally dead. Now, how credible is the documentary?

00:32:07.560 And now, here's the bad news. The bad news is it's not very credible at all. So if you're looking at

00:32:14.820 the quality and credibility of the documentary itself, I would say it's very low. Very low. And

00:32:20.940 I'll give you some specific reasons for that. But nonetheless, because it exists, and because the

00:32:28.040 general thrust of it, I think, is probably accurate, the general thrust of it is that the green energies

00:32:33.660 are not as promising as the people promoting them would like you to believe. And the general thrust

00:32:40.640 is that a lot of the people pushing green technologies are in there for the money. It makes the case that

00:32:45.480 Al Gore is the bad guy. Can you believe that? A Michael Moore film, backed film, makes the case that

00:32:54.980 Al Gore only did it for the money. That's all bullshit. I mean, that's, I'm paraphrasing, but that's the

00:33:02.120 sense I got from it. You know, I watched it, and I thought the movie was telling me that Al Gore was a

00:33:08.500 fraud. He did it for the money, and that the technologies that are being pushed just can't

00:33:13.560 work, and he made lots of money off pushing them. That's what, that's not my allegation. I think

00:33:18.520 that's what the film is saying. But here's why the film lacks credibility. I'll just give you some

00:33:25.280 examples. Imagine, if you will, somebody makes an entire documentary about green energy, and not once

00:33:32.960 mentions nuclear power. I mean, seriously. There is a comparison of fossil fuels to these traditional

00:33:43.120 green energies, an entire movie about energy, and they don't mention nuclear power. Do you know why

00:33:52.140 they don't mention nuclear power? It's because they know it's the answer, and they can't go that

00:33:58.600 far, I think. Now, I can't read minds, so when somebody says something like I just said, your

00:34:05.840 first thought should be, well, you're not reading their mind. You don't know they think that, and of

00:34:10.640 course I don't. But what would be your other explanation for why people who are, let's say, getting

00:34:17.340 red-pilled on their own, people who thought these green technologies were the bomb, and now they're

00:34:23.120 saying, okay, we were fooled, maybe they're not the answer. How would those people do an entire

00:34:28.460 documentary on energy production, and not even mention nuclear? What's the other reason they

00:34:37.720 would not mention it? I can't think of one. The only reason I can think of, and again, it's speculation,

00:34:42.800 because I can't read their minds. My speculation is that they're either convinced or leaning toward

00:34:50.800 it being the answer, and they can't say that. Because if you're Michael Moore, it's a big stretch

00:34:58.720 to say, did you know solar power isn't what you thought it was? That's a big movement. Now, he's been

00:35:05.180 pacing his side, doing things they agree with for years and years and years, so maybe he can lead them.

00:35:11.420 Maybe he's exactly the right, maybe this is Nixon can go to China sort of thing. Maybe Michael Moore is

00:35:18.140 the only person who could convince him solar and wind are not the answer. But could even Michael Moore

00:35:25.300 take them all the way past that to nuclear? I don't think he could. And maybe one can speculate

00:35:34.140 that he would be smart enough to know that, and may have just said, you know, that's a fight for another

00:35:39.840 day. So it's so conspicuous by its absence, you know that it had to be a conversation that the

00:35:47.040 filmmaker had, probably with Michael Moore at some point, where they said, you know, the only way I'm

00:35:54.140 going to be able to do this is to just not mention nuclear energy like it doesn't exist, because then

00:35:59.260 at least I can make a clean argument without that getting in the way. So it could have been just a

00:36:07.060 filmmaker decision. But it's so obviously missing that it destroys the credibility of the entire

00:36:13.360 operation. The other thing that it's missing is any kind of an economic comparison that would be

00:36:20.400 credible. So while it is true to say, hey, these solar powers only last 10 years,

00:36:26.520 they're hard in terms of waste, etc. I'd still like to see the comparison. Just because the solar

00:36:34.000 has downsides, that's true of every option. Just simply pointing out that there are downsides to

00:36:41.040 green energy doesn't get me all the way to, and therefore it's not a good deal. I can't get there.

00:36:48.380 All I know is that it has some downsides. So no credibility for the economics of it. Simply it's

00:36:56.020 saying that it has problems, and we already knew that. Here's another problem. It used, as some of

00:37:02.340 its examples, it went to some green energy promoted concerts. And the concerts were billed as being

00:37:10.460 sort of off the grid and using solar power to power the concert. But when the documentary maker went

00:37:17.500 behind the scenes, he learned that they had backup generators, and they needed them because it wasn't

00:37:23.740 sunny all the time. So the backup generators were to fill in for the times it wasn't sunny.

00:37:29.660 And so the filmmaker is sort of concluding that maybe a lot of these green energy things are frauds,

00:37:35.060 because behind the stage, literally behind the stage, was a backup generator using, in that case,

00:37:42.260 biomass, but it wasn't enough. I think they had to use fossil fuels or something.

00:37:45.700 And I would say that is totally illegitimate. So using those examples as examples of why green 0.95

00:37:53.780 energy is maybe a fraud, completely illegitimate. Because nobody makes the claim that you could

00:38:00.280 do a concert on solar panels. Nobody makes that claim. So to debunk a claim that nobody's making

00:38:07.300 and to throw it in the mix, I don't think that's honest. That really detracts from your credibility.

00:38:14.900 So I would say that whether or not you can put on a concert with solar panels doesn't really tell you

00:38:22.740 whether a permanent installation in which solar is part of the answer could ever be economical.

00:38:29.800 So he doesn't really close the gap to finish the economic arguments. That's a big problem.

00:38:35.220 Here's one that's really big, in my opinion. He shows Elon Musk claiming that his Ginga factory

00:38:44.960 would be 100% green energy self-sufficient. And then to debunk that claim from Elon, who said

00:38:54.180 they had accomplished 100% green energy, he shows that the Ginga factory is actually connected

00:39:02.180 by wires to the regular grid. And so his conclusion is, well, you must not be 100% green energy,

00:39:09.920 you know, using your solar or whatever locally, if you have to be connected to the grid.

00:39:17.100 And somebody's saying batteries, etc. Right? So here's what's missing. If you were completely

00:39:25.240 self-sufficient with 100% green energy, you would still be connected to the grid, that

00:39:31.260 one does not preclude the other. Why would you be connected to the regular grid if you

00:39:36.940 were making 100% of your own energy? Well, if you'd looked into it even this much, you would

00:39:43.480 know that there are several reasons that potentially that's true. Number one, if you say that you

00:39:49.240 can produce 100% of your energy, what do you do with the extra? Right? Did Elon Musk ever

00:39:57.920 make the claim that they were producing exactly 100% of their energy, as in they don't need

00:40:04.060 any extra from the outside ever, but they also don't make any extra? Did he make that claim?

00:40:10.580 Did he make the claim that every day, no matter what's happening with the sun, the exact amount

00:40:15.000 of energy they're making is just the amount they need? No, he never made that claim. And

00:40:20.360 if you can't make exactly the amount you need every day, what do you do? Well, if you're

00:40:26.220 making too much every day, you connect to the grid and sell it back to them. That's how

00:40:32.420 it works. The panels on my house are not off the grid. The panels on my house go directly

00:40:38.320 into the grid. I sell them electricity, essentially, by just giving them electricity. And then they

00:40:44.760 measure how much I give them. And then I use their electricity off the grid for my household

00:40:51.020 appliances. But they say, oh, we won't charge you the full price because you gave us some

00:40:56.320 free solar panel energy, you know, separately. That's how it works. So if the Gigafactory is

00:41:04.280 like anybody else who uses solar panels, they have to be connected to the grid. That's how

00:41:10.140 it works. You give your energy to the grid. And that helps balance out the load at the

00:41:15.900 grid. And then the grid gives you a consistent amount back, including at night. Here's another

00:41:23.900 reason that they could be attached to the grid, even if they had their own power. How do you

00:41:29.080 build the plant in the first place? This plant is out in the middle of nothing. How did they

00:41:34.920 construct it if they didn't have power? Well, I would think the very first thing you would

00:41:40.900 do is you say, well, I'm going to build this giant facility in the middle of nowhere. I'd

00:41:45.680 better get me some electricity. First thing you do is run a connection from the power grid

00:41:50.940 to, you know, build your solar plants in your factory, right? So it could be just left over

00:41:56.420 from when they did construction. And why would you take it away? Once you built it, you can

00:42:01.980 just leave it there in case you need it. Could be built there as just a backup. What

00:42:06.200 if, even if they're getting 100% of their energy from solar panels, what if they said

00:42:11.460 to themselves, you know, it might break someday. Someday it might stop working. So why don't

00:42:17.520 we have a backup to the grid, which we needed to build anyway during the construction phase?

00:42:22.840 So my point is, we don't know why Tesla is connected to the grid, but we do know there's

00:42:28.720 a whole bunch of explanations that are far more likely than it's all a fraud, right?

00:42:37.080 Here's, so given that nuclear wasn't mentioned and these other comparisons were just really

00:42:44.520 sketchy, I'd have to say it's not credible, but it's still going to be very persuasive in

00:42:49.680 the larger argument. I saw a very clever, presumably fake campaign ad for Joe Biden. Now the really

00:43:02.120 good fakes, the ones that the trolls are putting together, are the ones that are so close to

00:43:08.800 reality. Somebody says, you debunked nothing? Who says I debunked nothing? Now are you telling

00:43:19.980 me that a energy documentary, a documentary about energy that doesn't mention nuclear, you're

00:43:26.640 saying that I haven't debunked it? That alone debunks it. You know, all the rest is just gravy.

00:43:32.300 So I don't know what you're watching if you think that wasn't debunked. That's pretty debunked.

00:43:35.960 Anyway, there's a campaign ad that I think is put together by trolls and it said, it just

00:43:43.500 shows Joe Biden and there's like this glow coming from his chest where his heart would

00:43:47.800 be. And the words of the poster say, his brains? No, his heart. And people thought it might

00:43:56.360 have been a real campaign ad and that they were giving up on Joe Biden's brain being a selling

00:44:02.100 point. And they were just going with, he's a nice guy. He's got a good heart. But that

00:44:07.160 again, fits the category of a little bit too on the nose. This campaign ad looks a little

00:44:14.960 bit too close to what his critics would say, that his brain doesn't work. So I rated this

00:44:21.120 as probably a troll thing. And then people said that if you click on it, it goes to a broken

00:44:26.220 link. So I still think it was a, yeah, it had to be a parody. But look for the parodies that

00:44:31.960 are so close to what you think would be true, that that's what makes them clever.

00:44:38.920 I guess there's a whole bunch of new rumors about Bill Gates and the World Health Organization

00:44:45.000 and the Wuhan lab and, you know, the virus having gained a function and stuff. I would

00:44:50.640 say none of that's likely to be true. So you can ignore all that. But Bill Gates sure is

00:44:56.880 the subject of a lot of conspiracy theories. CNN is reporting, quote, the quiet abandonment

00:45:05.520 of hydroxychloroquine on Fox Network because the studies are not giving it enough support.

00:45:13.460 So CNN is sort of mocking Fox News for making a big deal about the hydroxychloroquine, but

00:45:19.220 getting really quiet about it as the new studies come out, if you know what I mean.

00:45:23.060 But this latest study, or at least one of them, I don't think they're testing it necessarily

00:45:32.220 with the zinc. There may be one test where they did. But I don't know if they're giving

00:45:37.160 it to people early on, and they're also giving it with them azithromycin and the zinc. So

00:45:42.960 be careful when you're looking at the hydroxychloroquine tests, because they're not apples to apples.

00:45:49.220 The ones that work have the three drugs, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc. I should say the

00:45:58.620 ones that are reported anecdotally, not confirmed, but seem to be effective. The ones that seem

00:46:05.720 not to work at all, and maybe it's even bad for people, tend to be the hydroxychloroquine alone

00:46:11.020 or with azithromycin. But because the zinc is presumed to be the magic ingredient, the

00:46:17.580 thing that works with the hydroxychloroquine, that if you tested one without the other, you

00:46:22.780 wouldn't actually be testing what you need to test. It's good to test everything, but presumably

00:46:28.760 you would get a bad result if you didn't include it with the zinc, and that's what we saw. But

00:46:33.980 there might be at least one where the zinc was there, and they still didn't get a good result.

00:46:37.800 So I'm a little unclear about where we are on that. I'm going to keep my 60-40 odds. Based

00:46:46.740 on early, undependable reporting, I'm going to say there's probably a 60% chance it's not

00:46:54.200 effective, and a 40% chance it is. Just my read of how it feels without solid information

00:47:03.980 at this point. Apparently Kim Jong-un is not dead, or if he is, North Korea is not aware of it,

00:47:10.860 because they seem to be just doing business as usual. So there's no sign in North Korea that

00:47:16.020 there's anything like Kim Jong-un died, or even break dead. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.

00:47:22.860 We haven't seen him in a while, but it's actually not that uncommon to have wild rumors that just are

00:47:28.880 crazy. It turned out to be false. As is, you could expect this to happen. So the Israelis 1.00

00:47:39.600 were shipping various aid, medical aid and food and stuff to some of the Palestinian authority,

00:47:47.900 and they were trying to help out. And what of course happened? Immediately, immediately the rumor

00:47:55.200 spread that the Israelis were not really trying to help, that they were putting virus on the stuff 0.93

00:48:01.460 that they were shipping to the Palestinians, because they really wanted to infect the Palestinians. 0.99

00:48:07.760 Now, it just doesn't help to, it just doesn't pay to try to help the world, does it?

00:48:14.660 Bill Gates wakes up every day and just tries to help the world. And then he's accused of being

00:48:20.920 basically the devil. Israel is just trying to help the Palestinian authority, and they get accused of

00:48:30.240 trying to kill them. I feel like doing good deeds just doesn't pay too much. All right, let's talk

00:48:39.960 about the president's temporary ban on immigration. Apparently 79% of the American adults are in favor

00:48:48.200 of it. And why wouldn't they be? Makes sense. So I think the president not only is doing at least

00:48:54.880 something right-ish, I'm not sure who's getting banned and who's not, it's a little unclear at this

00:49:00.160 point. But certainly we should be looking at tightening that up during the coronavirus. But here's the clever

00:49:05.720 part. It baits Joe Biden into giving an opinion. What exactly will Joe Biden say to the Trump plan of

00:49:19.780 temporarily halting immigration because it might be dangerous and we need the jobs in this country?

00:49:25.620 It kind of puts Joe Biden in a trap, right? Because you can make a case, you can make a case for it,

00:49:32.400 but I don't know if Joe Biden can. You'd have to work pretty hard to make an elegant argument for

00:49:38.520 why you would want to do the opposite of what the president is doing, because Joe Biden has to

00:49:43.380 take the opposite. He has to pick the opposite. Oh, yeah, maybe he'll just call him racist. Go back to

00:49:48.660 the oldies. Let's see. Apparently there's an idea floating around that the Democrats need to

00:50:01.280 counter President Trump's coronavirus briefings because they're too much like a campaign. And so the thought

00:50:10.300 was that Biden could create a shadow cabinet and then they would take turns, each of them debunking

00:50:17.260 whatever the president says during his briefing. I've ranked that as possibly the worst idea I've ever heard.

00:50:23.760 There's so many bad things about that idea that I'm really hoping they do it because, first of all,

00:50:32.940 they're going to disappear compared to the president. The president brings the show. The best they could

00:50:39.320 do is have some talking head in front of a camera saying, are you lying about everything like they do

00:50:44.260 after the State of the Union? Well, nobody's going to care. Nobody's going to care. And if you,

00:50:52.440 and if they're this shadow cabinet, everybody's going to be talking about the cabinet choices.

00:50:58.280 So it's just going to give the president new targets. There's a new study, provocative it is,

00:51:05.440 provocative I say. I'm not sure I believe it and other people are questioning it too. So the new study

00:51:10.880 disputes the finding of a new study that suggests, oh, Fox News disputes this. All right. So there's

00:51:20.540 a study, but Fox News disputes it and says it's a weak study, not real. And the study alleges that

00:51:27.760 regular viewers of the Hannity show were more likely to die from coronavirus than those who preferred

00:51:34.260 Tucker Carlson's tonight. And their reasoning was that Tucker was early in warning that it was a

00:51:40.640 real problem. And allegedly Hannity was less early in being as serious as Tucker was, and that it

00:51:48.860 actually killed, and that some of Hannity's people died because they got bad advice from watching his

00:51:57.620 show. Now, when Fox News says they dispute the findings, I think you could really dispute those

00:52:04.040 findings. People are saying in the comments, as I was going to say myself, that you have to be careful

00:52:12.000 there might be a demographic difference. You know, the Tucker viewers might be younger. You know, so you

00:52:18.320 can imagine there would be lots of reasons why there'd be difference. But I also think a lot of people

00:52:24.440 watch both. A lot of people, you know, I just don't think you could, you can pick out that difference.

00:52:30.620 But, let's say it's true. What if it were?

00:52:38.000 Even Scott was hooked by hydroxy. Yeah, this will be the part where everybody redefines what I said so

00:52:43.760 that I could be wrong. And watch the evolution of this. Watch people claim with their false memories

00:52:51.840 that I said hydroxychloroquine was the answer. I never said that. Now, you won't be able to find it

00:52:58.420 anywhere. But you will remember that I did. It just didn't happen. Every time that I talked about

00:53:03.520 it, I was always clear to say, you know, we're optimistic, we're hopeful, but we don't have

00:53:08.860 studies. Where am I right now? Pretty much the same. I'm optimistic, I'm hopeful, we don't have

00:53:16.160 studies. But I'm putting a percentage on it now because we have more negative anecdotal. So I think

00:53:21.680 it's like a 60-40. 40% chance of it working. If you're an optimist, pretty good. Pretty good.

00:53:29.180 So if you're already telling me that I'm wrong or that I've changed my mind, you are misinformed.

00:53:35.640 It is true that I've probably shifted the percentage of my optimism, but it's not like it was ever 100

00:53:42.520 or anywhere near it. I mean, it was never, I would say I probably moved from 80 to 60%. Or no, 80. I probably

00:53:49.760 moved from 60 to 40. My own assessment. But that was well within the, you know, the uncertainty range.

00:54:00.700 All right. What else we got going on here? Well, if it's true, let's say it was true. Let's say that

00:54:11.560 studies support the fact that people who were warned early about the seriousness of the coronavirus

00:54:18.140 were more likely to survive. Would that not, would that not indicate that I had saved a number of lives?

00:54:26.540 Would it? Wouldn't you say that I was the first one who said, close those flights from China? And I probably

00:54:33.780 was the first earliest pundit, except for Jack Posobiec, who said close travel from China because

00:54:41.660 it's serious. Or until we find out how serious it is, but it looks serious. And if people who watched

00:54:49.220 my Periscope took that seriously, is it possible that I saved lives? Well, according to the study,

00:54:57.900 which doesn't sound too credible, maybe, you know, if, if a hundred thousand people watched

00:55:03.700 my Periscope and got a, uh, a more, a bigger scare about it and therefore acted more, more

00:55:10.520 social, social, isolatingly, maybe, maybe I saved some of your lives, but I'm not sure these

00:55:16.780 studies will hold up. All right. Um, apparently, uh, Russia has got an interesting situation going

00:55:26.360 down there because I guess Russia is not doing the greatest job of informing its people or taking

00:55:31.940 care of the coronavirus and, uh, Putin's popularity, which is usually sky high has fallen to 63%.

00:55:40.320 So it's normally in the higher sixties or seventies. And so, uh, given that, um, you wonder if, uh,

00:55:52.280 Putin's actually vulnerable, probably not, but I'll bet you this coronavirus does change some regimes.

00:55:59.820 I would guess that the coronavirus situation will change who runs some countries. Eventually, we don't

00:56:06.480 know which one. So, um, we're starting to see what I call the Carl stories. So a few days ago, I tweeted

00:56:15.200 this. I said, in about a week, prepare for nonstop stories of the press like this quote, Carl protested the

00:56:21.860 economic shutdown. He did not wear a mask. Now, Carl is dead. And so is his grandma. Don't be Carl

00:56:26.960 because you know, they're coming. Well, headline today, John McDaniel, age 60 of Marion County,

00:56:33.780 died April 15th at a hospital, blah, blah, blah. He has, he had made several posts about the

00:56:39.400 coronavirus on Facebook last month before testing positive. This is from this guy's, uh, Facebook

00:56:47.240 posts quote, does anybody have the guts to say this COVID-19 is a political ploy asking for a friend

00:56:54.960 prove me wrong? And then he got it. And then he died. So that's your first Carl story. You are going

00:57:03.420 to see so many Carl stories in the next week. You're going to be tired of them. Here's a question I

00:57:10.320 have. Uh, the reason for closing immigration is because we have so many people at work. And the theory 0.96

00:57:15.520 is that Americans could do those jobs of the immigrants. I've never seen any evidence of 0.87

00:57:20.680 that. I would say that the statement that Americans can take the jobs that the immigrants would not be 0.97

00:57:27.740 doing if they're not allowed to come into work. I would say there's no evidence of that. I've seen

00:57:32.480 evidence against it, but I've never seen evidence is true. And here's what I mean. If you take the

00:57:37.880 skilled technical workers, um, the reason that skilled technical workers are hired from overseas

00:57:44.900 is not because they're cheaper. I mean, they might be, I don't know if they are or not, but that's not

00:57:50.860 why you do it. You do it because you can't find enough. In Silicon Valley, finding somebody with

00:57:57.360 technical skills is getting really hard, or at least it was during the, during the, uh, uh, better

00:58:04.120 times. Now, uh, so this might be the only time when we don't need any more skilled workers for a few

00:58:11.060 months, assuming that some of the skilled workers got laid off. But in general, the reason that we have

00:58:18.320 skilled workers come in is that they add to the economy. So if you bring in a skilled worker,

00:58:23.560 a technical worker, I would say they add more to the economy for everybody than they subtract.

00:58:28.920 But what about the ones who are, you know, working on the farms and doing dishwashers and stuff like

00:58:33.720 that? Well, here's my, here's my experience. Somebody says they are paid less. Uh, um, but that's not

00:58:43.120 the reason you do it. The reason you do it is because you can't, you can't find enough technical

00:58:47.700 workers. Uh, that's a bonus. If you, if you can find a way to pay them less, that would be a bonus.

00:58:53.560 Um, in my experience, running a restaurant, you can't find non-Mexican workers. You can't find

00:59:02.180 American citizens to do a lot of jobs. They would rather just not have a job. So if you said to the

00:59:08.340 Mexican immigrants, well, your choice is to have no job or you can have this backbreaking labor, 1.00

00:59:13.960 the Mexican immigrant will say, yeah, backbreaking labor. That's exactly why I came here. I came here

00:59:18.880 to do backbreaking labor. Of course I'll take that job. And then they'll take that job.

00:59:23.120 If you say to an American, and this is my experience, right? So this is just anecdotal,

00:59:28.320 but I would be looking for anybody to give me a counterfactual. If you say to the typical American,

00:59:34.360 um, Hey, I got this, you know, this job for you, it's backbreaking labor, you know, but maybe it

00:59:39.720 could turn into something better. The average American who is unemployed and is only qualified 0.98

00:59:44.620 for that job will say some version of this. Nah, I think I'll wait and see if I can get something

00:59:50.200 better. So if you think you can get Americans to take those jobs, well, good luck. I think what 0.74

01:00:00.060 you'll find is that Americans will prefer unemployment to working those jobs. That's my

01:00:05.740 experience. My experience is that they will prefer unemployment. Now somebody says, pay them!

01:00:10.900 Exclamation mark. Thank you. So, so somebody who has an understanding of economics says, yeah,

01:00:18.040 the reason Americans don't take those jobs is they don't pay well. Now the reason they don't 0.99

01:00:23.020 pay well, of course, is that if they did, then the cost of your food would, you know, be far

01:00:29.820 higher. Maybe that's the better solution. But in any case, uh, you're just trading one problem

01:00:36.240 for another, but we should be aware of that. Uh, in the short run, while the, because the

01:00:43.140 wages would not be going up that much in the short run, I just think farms and other places

01:00:48.240 who require backbreaking labor are not going to be able to find Americans to do it. Americans

01:00:53.520 don't do backbreaking labor if they have an option of, of, you know, staying on their mother's 0.84

01:01:00.400 couch and eating their mother's cooking. We just don't do it. That's been my experience.

01:01:06.220 experience. Um, there's a, a so-called, uh, uh, the White House bureau chief for the

01:01:16.320 Washington Post, Philip, Philip Rucker. He's claimed, even yesterday, he claimed that Trump

01:01:22.040 showed solidarity with neo-Nazis in Charlottesville. Literally the opposite of what happened. This

01:01:28.140 is a bureau chief for the Washington Post and is somehow not aware of the most debunked fake

01:01:35.240 news of all time. It is the most thoroughly, completely debunked. All you have to do is

01:01:43.000 look at the record. You just have to look at the transcript. That's it. There's no judgment.

01:01:48.300 There's no opinion. You just have to look at it. There it is debunked. And the white, and 0.99

01:01:53.360 the, the White House bureau chief for the Washington Post was not aware of that or decided to act

01:01:58.800 like he didn't know. So, uh, uh, Joel Pollack in Breitbart, uh, pointed that out and corrected

01:02:07.180 the record yet again. How many times do we have to correct that record? All right. Well,

01:02:14.620 I think I've talked about all the amazing things I want to talk about. Uh, and we're still trying

01:02:20.180 to figure out if, uh, so there's a new report that says maybe the first person who had coronavirus

01:02:26.180 was much earlier than we thought, which would indicate maybe there's more widespread

01:02:31.020 infection than we thought. Maybe it started back in January, which would have given it enough time

01:02:36.340 to be more widespread than we think it is. I don't believe anything at this point. You know,

01:02:42.180 maybe, maybe it's true, but I also can't distinguish between that and, uh, you know, just, there's

01:02:52.940 a handful of people who have it and it just took a while to catch on. I can't tell the difference.

01:02:57.340 So I don't know if this story means anything or not. Anyway, Trump uses the word plague. Yeah,

01:03:03.880 I like it. Uh, outed his source. Who outed his source? All right. Just looking at your comments

01:03:14.280 before I sign off. Don't forget our welfare state. Okay. Thank you. I won't. Some think

01:03:21.080 that Philip Rucker is aware about lying. I don't think so. If I had to bet on it, and neither

01:03:27.700 of us know because we don't know what he's thinking. If I had to bet, I would bet that Philip

01:03:32.720 Rucker does not know that he was promoting the biggest debunked hoax in politics. I'll

01:03:40.340 bet he does not know. And it's based on this, the silos of information. How much do you think

01:03:46.900 Philip Rucker has listened to this periscope? I would say zero times. How many times has Phil

01:03:53.680 Rucker read Breitbart? At least before, before today, because he's probably reading it today

01:04:00.380 because there's an article about him. But before today, how much time did he spend reading

01:04:04.480 Breitbart? Zero. Now, if you didn't follow me, you didn't follow Breitbart. Steve Cortez

01:04:10.960 was talking about it until CNN kicked him off the air. They unhired him for talking about

01:04:17.180 debunking the songs. So even if Philip Rucker watched CNN, where there was like a full-time

01:04:24.120 debunker, they removed the full-time debunker quickly, just so he didn't actually give anybody

01:04:29.160 any information. So if you were a conservative, I'll give you this concrete example. If you

01:04:36.240 were a conservative and you watched the new Michael Morbeck movie about green energy being

01:04:41.960 largely BS, did you already know that? And the answer is, if you're a conservative, probably

01:04:50.240 yes. Because when I watched it, I was surprised at how many biomass plants there were, that part

01:04:55.200 I didn't know about. But I wasn't surprised at all to hear that the economics of solar and

01:05:01.720 wind, et cetera, are not promising. I knew that because I've been exposed to news on the

01:05:09.260 left. I've been exposed to news on the right. But suppose you'd been only exposed to news

01:05:13.820 news on the left. What would you have ever seen that would have ever told you that this

01:05:20.960 green energy is maybe overrated? Nothing. Because there are no reports like that on the

01:05:25.620 left. So I would say that people like Phil Rucker, I think, actually are just not informed

01:05:36.000 of everything that the people on the right think is common sense because they've seen it so many

01:05:41.700 times. I mean, how many times have you, because most of you are Trump supporters watching this,

01:05:46.120 how many times have you seen an article that says basically what the Michael Moore documentary

01:05:53.400 said, that the green energy is not such a great deal? Most of you, right? Probably almost every

01:05:59.380 one of you. How many people on the left have ever seen that, have ever seen any article that

01:06:07.020 suggested that green energy is not real? Probably not. So if you ask me, does Philip Rucker know

01:06:14.100 that he is promoting the most debunked, most easily debunked non-fact in the world? My answer is

01:06:21.500 probably not. He probably has never been exposed to that fact. Very easily you could easily imagine

01:06:28.860 that. So that's my opinion. All right. That's all I got for now. And tonight, I'll talk to you

01:06:42.600 tonight. Oh, I went overtime tonight. I went longer than I want. So I'll let you know when my interview

01:06:47.980 with Dan Crenshaw is live. I don't have time for that, but as soon as it is, I'll tweet it. So I did

01:06:55.900 get, I was on Dan Crenshaw's podcast. I think it went well. We had a good conversation and I think

01:07:02.160 you might like it. All right. I'll talk to you later.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - April 22, 2020

Episode 929 Scott Adams： The Green New Deal is Dead. Joe Biden Still Hiding. Carl Stories.

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript