Stanford University ceased to change its websites to ban particularly dangerous words. Evidence mounts that the left's push for economic change truly amounts to a push for stagnation. And the Twitter files continue to provide shocking surprises. The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by ExpressVPN. Get ExpressVPN right now at ExpressVPN, slash Ben Shapiro.org/TheBenShapiroShow. You'll also get access to all of Ben's newest books, including "The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fck" and "How to Deal with the Internet's Most Evil People." You can also get a free copy of Ben Shapiro's newest book, "Brainwashed," wherever books are sold. It's also available on Audible, iTunes, and Podchaser. If you don't already have an Audible membership, you can get $5 off your first month by going to Audible.org and entering the promo code "Ben Shapiro's Show". That's 5 stars and a FREE 7-day trial! You get 7-days of the show and 7-months of VIP membership when you become a patron! Subscribe to the show, and get 7% off the entire course, plus an additional 3-day shipping discount when you buy the course through Audible Connections. Learn more about your ad choices. Rate, review, and become a supporter! The show is also now available in Apple Podcasts, Podchractor, and Vimeo.com, and I'll be giving you a chance to review the show on the show next week. The average retail price is $19.95. I'll get a maximum of $50 and get an ad discount when I get the show starts starting at $39.99 and I get a discount of $49 and get a VIP discount starts starts starts at $99 gets $33 and I'm also get $19 gets a promo code, she gets a choice of $39 and she gets $48 and a discount gets a discount offer starts starts $33 gets $4 and she also gets a VIP promo code? And she gets my ad discount starts $5 and a VIP rate starts $39 gets a course starts $72 and a promoist gets $5 is $5 gets $ $4 is she gets an ad deal starts $ $ $ is she can choose $ $ she gets her choice of 5 times she gets 4 euro or she gets it will also receive $ she can get a promo card?
00:00:54.000All of the wokest and most foolish ideas have been mainstreamed into the algorithmic world.
00:01:00.000And since we all live in a virtual world, this means that all the stuff that we never thought was going to bleed over into the real world has bled over into the world that we actually live in, the virtual world.
00:01:09.000It was very easy back in 2004 when I wrote my book, Brainwashed, about indoctrination on college campuses, for people to say, okay, well, you know, that's just kids in college, who cares?
00:01:17.000They're gonna grow up, they'll pay taxes, they'll have kids, they'll buy property, and then they'll move into the real world.
00:01:22.000But what if your real world is online?
00:01:23.000And what if the people who are defining the online space, the virtual space, are people who believe all of this nonsense?
00:01:29.000Well, the pedal is hitting the metal when it comes to Stanford University.
00:01:32.000According to the Wall Street Journal, Stanford University administrators in May published an index of forbidden words to be eliminated from the school's websites and computer code, and provided inclusive replacements to help re-educate the benighted.
00:01:45.000And they actually put out like a full list, it's a very long list, of words that you should no longer use.
00:01:50.000They call it the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative.
00:01:53.000It's a multi-phase, multi-year project to address harmful language in IT at Stanford.
00:01:58.000So you thought this was all just in the liberal arts programs?
00:02:00.000It is now in the engineering programs.
00:02:02.000Because again, there has to be some sort of content for the engineers to encode.
00:02:06.000And if the left creates the content, then the coders are going to have to just encode that content.
00:02:12.000And this is the big problem with things like chatbots and AI is that whatever are the premises of the technology, those matter an awful lot because the engineers are there just there to translate the ideas into workable code.
00:02:24.000And so you have somebody in the back room saying that we can't use X word, then it just never enters the algorithm and that's what's happening right here.
00:02:29.000The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative, which sounds about as Orwellian as it's possible to be, is one of the actions prioritized in the Statement of Solidarity and Commitment to Action, which was published by the Stanford CIO Council and the People of Color and Technology Affinity Group in December of 2020.
00:02:45.000The goal, according to Stanford, of the Elimination of Harmful Language initiative is to eliminate many forms of harmful language, including racist, violent and biased language in Stanford websites and code.
00:02:54.000The purpose of the website they put up is to educate people about the possible impact of the words we use.
00:02:58.000Language affects different people in different ways.
00:03:00.000We're not attempting to assign levels of harm to the terms on the site.
00:03:03.000We're not attempting to address all informal uses of language.
00:03:06.000This website focused on potentially harmful terms used in the United States, starting with a list of everyday language and terminology, and then they provide possible Alternatives as well.
00:03:16.000And then they have a giant content warning on the front of this saying this website contains language that is offensive or harmful.
00:03:21.000Please engage with this website at your own pace.
00:03:24.000You have to take it slowly guys because you never know somebody could be offended.
00:03:28.000So they break down the language that they would like to see banned at Stanford University on their websites and all of their tech into several categories.
00:03:38.000This would be language that is offensive to people who live with disabilities and or devalues people who lives with disabilities, who live with disabilities.
00:03:45.000Some of the some of the things they would like to see banned are things like blind review.
00:03:51.000So that'd be like a blind review of papers or a blind review of a study, meaning you don't know who created the study and so you have no bias in the study.
00:03:59.000They say instead you should use anonymous review because it unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture.
00:04:07.000No, it literally means you can't see a thing.
00:04:27.000That would defeat the purpose of it being a suicide.
00:04:29.000You're not supposed to use the word crazy.
00:04:31.000Instead, you should say surprising or wild, because this trivializes the experience of people living with mental health conditions.
00:04:38.000They say that you're not supposed to use the word dumb because it was once used to describe a person who could not speak and implied that the person was incapable of expressing themselves.
00:05:50.000Free social platforms make their cash by tracking your searches, video history, and everything you click on, and then selling that data to the advertisers.
00:05:56.000When you use ExpressVPN on your computer or phone, however, you anonymize much of your online presence.
00:06:01.000ExpressVPN hides your unique IP address, making your activity much more difficult to track.
00:06:05.000The app encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals.
00:06:09.000What I like most about ExpressVPN, it's really easy to use.
00:06:11.000One click protects all of your devices.
00:06:14.000Secure your internet with the VPN I trust for online production.
00:07:30.000So instead of saying that somebody is senile, you're supposed to say that the person is suffering from senility, which doesn't actually change the meaning of the word senile.
00:07:38.000You're not supposed to use colonialist language.
00:07:39.000What is some colonialist language that's in constant use?
00:07:43.000Apparently, some of that colonialist language is, uh, if you say the, um, if you say the Philippine islands, you're supposed to say the Philippines.
00:07:54.000You're not supposed to use the word brave anymore.
00:07:56.000Stop using the word brave, everybody, because brave was the originally the description of Native American, Native American warriors, because and so that apparently is bad.
00:08:07.000So to use a term that people consider good that was originally appropriated from Native American culture, but you're using it for a good thing somehow is bad for Native Americans.
00:09:03.000They say you're not supposed to call someone Pocahontas because this is a slur and should not be used to address an indigenous woman unless that is her actual name.
00:09:09.000But what if you're addressing a woman who's pretending to be a Native American that way?
00:09:14.000You're not supposed to use the term spirit animal anymore.
00:09:18.000There's gender-based words that you're not supposed to use either.
00:09:20.000Remember, this is Stanford University, one of the top universities in the country, telling you that there's certain language you just should not use.
00:09:25.000You're not supposed to use the term preferred for pronouns anymore.
00:09:34.000Instead of saying preferred pronouns, somebody's preferred pronoun is different than their biological pronoun, you're supposed to just say pronoun.
00:09:54.000There's no third category of human that is non-gender binary.
00:09:57.000There are intersex people, but those are not the same.
00:10:00.000The proof of this is that people routinely change their pronouns.
00:10:04.000Again, this is part of the full-on leftist agibrop that suggests that your gender choices are entirely biological, but your biological sex is entirely arbitrary.
00:10:14.000So apparently you choose your sex, but you don't choose your gender, which is absolutely nonsensical nonsense.
00:10:38.000Because, once again, sexual dichotomy exists.
00:10:43.000You're not supposed to use the term he.
00:10:45.000Unless you know the person you're addressing uses he as their pronoun, it is better to use they, or ask the person which pronouns they use.
00:10:51.000Which makes every conversation insanely awkward, obviously.
00:10:55.000You're not supposed to use the term ladies.
00:10:57.000You're not supposed to use the term man.
00:11:04.000Because the term reinforces male-dominated language, even though everyone has understood for all of mankind's history that mankind refers to both men and women.
00:11:37.000Imprecise language is terms that utilize euphemisms, vagueness, or inaccurate words to not say what one is trying to say.
00:11:43.000So after spending all of this time trying to make your language more inexact, now they're saying you should no longer use inexact language.
00:12:25.000Instead, they say you should consider using the term U.S.
00:12:28.000citizen, which is gonna make language extraordinarily difficult to use.
00:12:31.000Because, for example, if I say, if I'm a leftist and I say, the Dreamers are just as American as anyone else, now I have to say, the Dreamers are just as U.S.
00:12:55.000Sorry, another term you're not supposed to use.
00:12:59.000You should not use the term straight, because the term implies that anyone who is not heterosexual is bent or not normal.
00:13:07.000You should also not use the term thug.
00:13:09.000Although the term refers to a violent person or criminal, it often takes on a racist connotation when used in certain circles.
00:13:15.000Oh, so it's only sometimes racist, and it depends who says it.
00:13:17.000So if a Democrat says the word thug, then it's okay.
00:13:19.000If a Republican says the word thug, we're supposed to read black person in there.
00:13:22.000I'll leave it to your imagination who's more racist, the person who immediately flashes to a black person when you say thug or the person who just used the words thug to describe a violent person.
00:13:32.000Now, the reason that I'm pointing all this out is because all of this stuff, it starts off on the fringes of society and then it is mainstreamed into the rest of society.
00:13:42.000And what it amounts to is a flattening of communication.
00:13:46.000It amounts to a new code that we all must use in order to appear in well Groomed public circles.
00:13:54.000We must all abide by these imaginary rules and we must flatten out the language to be less descriptive in more areas and significantly more descriptive in other areas.
00:14:02.000We wouldn't want to use the term cakewalk.
00:14:04.000We wouldn't want to use the term black box.
00:14:07.000We wouldn't want to use the term ghetto anymore.
00:14:10.000None of these the word master is no longer useful because obviously it's about masters and slavery.
00:14:16.000Even though the word master, again, has been used in a wide variety of contexts.
00:14:19.000If you're a master at a particular craft, this does not mean that you have slaves.
00:14:24.000You're no longer supposed to use the term white paper because it assigns racial value connotations based on color.
00:14:38.000Again, the attempt to change language is in essence an attempt to change the way that people think.
00:14:43.000And this is part and parcel of a broader left-wing agenda about changing how people think.
00:14:47.000So this happens to be with regard to changing sort of the way in which we communicate with each other so as to foreclose the ability for us to contribute clear and cohesive ideas to one another and then have conversations about them, which by the way is the predicate to having a functioning Republican, a functioning Republic.
00:15:04.000But that is not the only way in which the left wishes to change things dramatically.
00:15:09.000So, I've been spotting over the course of the last month or so, a massive uptick since the Democrats won the last election cycle, or at least did better than expected.
00:15:18.000A massive uptick in the number of posts that are coming out from people on the left, encouraging us to think differently about our expectations.
00:15:26.000The idea being that as we shift, as we move, as we transition into new eras, we should become more accepting of less.
00:15:33.000We should be looking to live with less.
00:15:34.000We should look for a less rich language, for example.
00:15:38.000We should try to cleanse the language of all implications.
00:15:41.000We can speak in binary code, presumably, but only binary code that has been pre-approved by gender diverse counsel.
00:15:48.000And then when it comes to the economy, we're supposed to live with less.
00:15:52.000We're supposed to adjust our expectations to a better world.
00:15:55.000Well, the left defines that better world, a fairer world.
00:15:57.000Now, there's no actual gauge of fairness in life.
00:16:00.000Your fairness may be somebody else's unfairness.
00:16:03.000Your version of fairness may include actually oppressing somebody else.
00:16:06.000But the idea is that if prosperity has to be put by the wayside for the sake of the better world, that is exactly what we will do.
00:16:14.000And this is why you see, for example, the dramatic drive on the left, policy-wise, to pay people for not working.
00:16:23.000To increase welfare benefits, to spend up the wazoo, to inflate the currency.
00:16:27.000All this creates the conditions for mediocrity.
00:16:30.000We talked about linguistic mediocrity, but economic mediocrity is something else that the left prefers.
00:16:34.000See, the thing about this is, the thing about the state and state redistribution, the state can only redistribute resources created by somebody else.
00:16:41.000Elizabeth Warren always likes to say, you didn't do it on your own, which in a technical sense is true.
00:16:45.000Nobody succeeds economically on their own.
00:16:47.000They're born into a particular system.
00:17:25.000Redistribution of the seven potatoes left in the country so everybody is equal in their misery.
00:17:30.000Well, that seems to be the agenda more and more of the Democratic left in the United States.
00:17:36.000The New York Post has a good piece by Steve Moore, Casey Mulligan, and E.J.
00:17:38.000Antoni talking about the extent to which we are expending extraordinary amounts of money on people who refuse to work in the United States.
00:17:49.000Most Americans believe, they say, in a reliable government safety net in America so that when people fall on tough times or lose their jobs, their families will not go hungry, lose their homes, or suffer deprivation.
00:17:57.000But most Americans also believe that government assistance should be short-term and aimed at quickly getting people back on their feet, into a job, and on the roads, being financially self-sufficient and a contributor to our economy.
00:18:06.000Today's welfare programs are failing to accomplish that goal.
00:18:09.000Did you know that families earning half a million dollars a year can receive Obamacare subsidies?
00:18:13.000Or that in some states, unemployment insurance benefits can be equivalent to a job with an annual pay of $100,000?
00:18:19.000It's shocking, but true, and it might explain why so many businesses can't get workers back on the job almost three years after COVID-19 hit these shores.
00:18:26.000Today, there are still at least 3 million fewer Americans working than there were in 2019.
00:18:30.000There are many reasons for the worker shortage.
00:18:33.000One is that in many states, welfare actually pays you more or nearly as much as respectable middle-class jobs.
00:18:39.000Under Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, many of the highly effective work requirements which were instituted in the 1996 Bipartisan Welfare Reforms have been eviscerated.
00:18:47.000Often, limits for public benefits have also disappeared, while Congress and states have made benefits more generous.
00:18:53.000Many programs, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Food Stamps, are means-tested, so only low-income people qualify for them, but other handouts are not.
00:19:03.000Which means that in 24 states, unemployment benefits and Obamacare subsidies for a family of four with no one working are the annualized equivalent of at least the national median household standard.
00:19:13.000In 24 states, in other words, you get paid as much to stay at home as you do to make the median in the United States.
00:19:20.000In a dozen states, the value of unemployment benefits and Obamacare subsidies exceeds the salary and benefits of the average teacher, construction worker, electrician, firefighter, truck driver, machinist, or retail associate In New Jersey, a family of four can receive benefits equal to an annualized earned income of $108,000 with no one working.
00:19:38.000In Connecticut, New Jersey, a family earning $300,000 a year can receive Obamacare subsidies.
00:19:43.000New Jersey is a state where a family can earn the equivalent of $100,000 a year if both parents are collecting unemployment and Obamacare subsidies for health care.
00:19:50.000In Connecticut, the benefits reach $80,000.
00:19:53.000Now, unemployment insurance is at least time-limited to six months in most states.
00:19:56.000But while Americans are receiving those benefits, the financial incentive to jump into the job market is low.
00:20:04.000And again, a lot of this has to do with a restructuring of how work is supposed to work.
00:20:30.000We've had a labor shortage in this country for a long time.
00:20:32.000There are 3 million fewer people working now than there were in 2019.
00:20:35.000A lot of people are just staying out of the workforce and that means that you really have to find the best people to fill that job opening.
00:20:43.000A Zip Recruiter makes hiring during the holiday season a lot easier.
00:20:46.000Now you can try ZipRecruiter for free at ziprecruiter.com slash dailywire.
00:20:49.000ZipRecruiter uses powerful technology to find and match the right candidates up with your job.
00:20:53.000You can easily review these recommended candidates and set up personal invites to your top choices so they're much more likely to apply.
00:20:58.000ZipRecruiter also has an easy-to-use dashboard with a complete suite of tools that lets you filter, review, and rate your candidates all from one place.
00:21:05.000Discover the joy of hiring with ZipRecruiter.
00:21:07.000Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within day one.
00:21:47.000Pure Talk's U.S.-based customer service team makes the switch incredibly easy.
00:21:51.000It can feel good knowing you're supporting a veteran-owned business as well.
00:21:54.000When you go to puretalk.com and enter code SHAPIRO, you'll save an additional 50% off your very first month of coverage.
00:21:59.000There's no reason to pay Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mobile over $80 a month for wireless services when you can get the exact same service on the same network at Pure Talk for half the price.
00:22:06.000They literally use the same tower network as one of the big guys.
00:22:09.000Head on over to puretalk.com, enter code SHAPIRO, save 50% off your very first month of coverage.
00:22:25.000When you use code SHAPIRO, you get 50% off your very first month of coverage in the first place.
00:22:29.000So Jamal Bowie has a piece at the New York Times today, titled a 200-year-old argument on behalf of the many against the few.
00:22:37.000And the argument that Jamal Bowie makes is that individual rights ought to be completely curbed in favor of a majoritarian mobocracy that crams down redistribution of all wealth in the United States.
00:22:49.000Jamila Bui says, In my column this year, I've tried to emphasize the extent to which there are competing traditions, competing notions, of American freedom and Republican democracy.
00:22:56.000One says that freedom is a matter of non-interference and limited government, that we are free when the state steps aside and individuals are left to flourish or fail of their own accord.
00:23:04.000It says that government, or at least the national government, has no real role to play in shaping our social and economic order, and that as the aphorism goes, the best government is that which governs the least.
00:23:12.000The other tradition takes a more activist view of government and a more expansive view of democracy.
00:23:17.000See, the most democratic is where you have no individual rights, but the people, writ large, can decide what you ought to have and what you ought not to have.
00:23:24.000It says that economic domination by wealthy entrenched interests is just as dangerous to liberty as an overbearing government, and that majoritarian democracy is the necessary and essential safeguard against the narrow interests of an otherwise unaccountable elite.
00:23:36.000Now, of course, that's true, that democracy is supposed to counter the tendency of oligarchy.
00:23:41.000However, if the oligarchy is creating rules in which the government does not interfere to steal people's property and redistribute it, the oligarchy is not acting on its own behalf in that.
00:23:52.000Everybody is still playing by the same rules.
00:23:54.000Oligarchies typically centralize resources to themselves.
00:23:57.000They do not seek to divest power from the centralized government.
00:24:00.000Oligarchies want more power in the centralized government.
00:24:03.000They don't wish to spread it down to the lowest levels of American government.
00:24:06.000Charles Beard tried to make this case, a very famous American economist in the early 20th century.
00:24:11.000He tried to make the case that the founding fathers were essentially oligarchs trying to preserve their own private property.
00:24:16.000His historical case has been widely debunked.
00:24:18.000It is not true, but it still stands as sort of the high watermark for lefty economic thought when it comes to the American founding.
00:24:28.000He highlights in his column a treatise from a person named Thomas Skidmore, who you've not heard of because pretty much nobody has heard of Thomas Skidmore.
00:24:36.000And he wrote a treatise called The Rights of Man to Property, being a proposition to make it equal among the adults of the present generation.
00:24:46.000Skidmore was at the time of his writing a machinist who had taken a prominent role in the newly formed New York Working Men's Party.
00:24:51.000He wrote the platform, which included a call for land redistribution to every man and unmarried woman over the age of 21, an end to commercial monopolies, and an end to the hereditary transfer of wealth.
00:25:02.000So, in other words, what Jamal Bowie is calling for is for the great centralization of all property in the national government, and then a redistribution of the property on a per capita basis, but no hereditary passing down of the property.
00:25:16.000So you build up your property over the course of your life and then your kids are left back at square one the minute that you die.
00:25:21.000Now how that would work in actual operation makes no sense because obviously some people live longer than others.
00:25:25.000So what do you redistribute the property every seven years?
00:25:29.000Is it done on the basis of as each person dies we redistribute the property back into the general population?
00:25:35.000And how exactly does property get added or subtracted along those bases?
00:25:39.000But it's enough to suggest that equality is the motivating factor in American life for Jamel Bowie to be into this.
00:25:44.000The plan was straightforward, says Jamel Bowie.
00:25:46.000The people of New York, to whom he was primarily writing, would adopt a new constitution that would abolish all debts and renounce most private property.
00:25:53.000Now, of course, abolishing all debts means that no one will ever lend again.
00:25:56.000If you keep abolishing debts, it means that there is no purpose to lending because people can just avoid the debt.
00:26:01.000If you renounce private property, it reduces all incentive for innovation and creativity.
00:26:07.000But, Jamal Bowie says, all of this is good.
00:26:10.000He says, nearly 200 years later, Skidmore's book still stands as a powerful rebuke to the twin ideas that some Americans are deserving, while others are not.
00:26:17.000And that some are more equal than others, to coin a phrase.
00:26:19.000Well, I mean, you didn't coin that phrase.
00:26:21.000George Orwell coined that phrase in Animal Farm to refer to the treatment of people under communism.
00:26:25.000And some animals are more equal than others.
00:26:28.000In any case, He suggests that whatever you think of Skidmore's proposals, his vision of radical democratic equality resonates in the face of our deep and persistent material and political inequality.
00:26:39.000Now this is what the left has to push because they cannot push the idea that there has not been radical increase in living standard for virtually everybody on earth over the course of the last 50 years.
00:26:48.000Your living standard today in the United States is significantly better than it was 50 years ago.
00:27:06.000All of the things that we take for granted in modern life, like the fact that you can literally punch into a phone any product on earth and it will arrive at your door in three days or less for a price that you can probably afford.
00:27:16.000That is a testament to freedom and innovation.
00:27:19.000It's a testament to the basic notion that human creativity is a key to expressing not only the spirit of the individual, but to the prosperity of everyone.
00:27:31.000But the left doesn't believe in that because it means some people are going to succeed more than others.
00:27:35.000The byproduct of innovation is that some people succeed more than others.
00:28:11.000Just flatten out the standards and everyone will be better off, except everyone is worse off.
00:28:14.000Because a society in which there are some people who succeed and some people who fail, but everybody generally moves up is better than a society where no one succeeds and no one fails.
00:28:26.000Now there's a very simple test that I've talked about before that I often use when distinguishing whether someone is a smart person or a stupid person.
00:29:50.000Now, you flip on your lights, you leave them on all night, and you don't even think about it.
00:29:54.000That is because of human innovation and human creativity.
00:29:56.000So if you want to even everything out, what you have to do is make the actual case people should live worse lives.
00:30:00.000This is how you end up with a piece, like this one over at the Atlantic, called The Home Ownership Society Was a Mistake.
00:30:06.000By Jerusalem and Demsas, real estate should be treated as consumption, not investment.
00:30:12.000So instead of aiming at buying your own home, we should, you know, go to the European model in which everybody rents your home and then you die.
00:30:18.000Or you rent an apartment and then you die.
00:30:19.000Because after all, if we get caught behind the real estate eight ball, then we may have to pay the price for that.
00:30:24.000But of course, the basic idea of homeownership is independence.
00:30:28.000That's the difference between owning and renting.
00:30:30.000If you're renting, then you are subject to the whims of somebody else.
00:30:50.000It's a truth universally acknowledged that an American in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a mortgage.
00:30:54.000I don't know if you should buy a house nor am I inclined to give you personal financial advice, but I do think you should be wary of the mythos that accompanies the American institution of homeownership and of a political environment that touts its advantages while ignoring its many drawbacks.
00:31:06.000Now listen, obviously there are costs to owning a home.
00:31:08.000It's more expensive in many cases to own than to rent.
00:31:10.000However, the independence that comes with owning a home and the wealth creation that occurs if you buy in a smart way obviously is good.
00:31:20.000Says this columnist for The Atlantic, Renting is for the young or financially irresponsible, or so they say.
00:31:24.000Home ownership is a guarantee against a lost job, against rising rents, against a medical emergency.
00:31:28.000It's a promise to your children you can pay for a college or wedding or that you can help them one day join you in the vaunted halls of ownership society.
00:31:34.000In America, home ownership is not just owning a dwelling in the land it resides on.
00:31:37.000It is a piggy bank where the bottom 50% of the country stores most of its wealth.
00:31:40.000It is not a natural market phenomenon.
00:31:42.000It's propped up by numerous government interventions, including a 30-year fixed rate mortgage.
00:31:45.000America's put a lot of weight on this one institution's shoulders.
00:31:48.000Now, it is true the government should be less involved in home ownership.
00:31:51.000You should only buy a home if you can afford it.
00:31:54.000But the answer here is to get the government less involved and to continue to push home ownership as like an actual value that is worth promulgating.
00:32:02.000This person is saying we should all just get out of the home ownership mode and go back to renting.
00:32:11.000The consensus that homeownership is preferable to renting obscures quite a few rotten truths about when homeownership doesn't work out, about whom it doesn't work out for, that its gains for some are predicated on losses for others.
00:32:20.000Speaking in averages masks the heterogeneity of the homeownership experience.
00:32:40.000Because if we speak in terms of averages, then what you're going to do, if I say, for example, as I have, that the average living standard in the United States has risen dramatically over the course of the last 30 years, this forgets the fact that some people win and some people lose.
00:33:01.000When you're making the rules for the road, of course you're going to speak in terms of averages.
00:33:04.000Because literally every system, including the quote-unquote most equal systems, have winners and losers.
00:33:09.000As Stalin could have told you from his Dasha.
00:33:12.000But the idea here is that when you remove all of the vicissitudes, the ups and downs of life, the winners and the losers, and by the way, most of us across the course of our life will in fact experience the winning and the losing.
00:33:24.000People are wealthier at the age of 50 than they were at 20.
00:33:26.000People go up and down in terms of income brackets.
00:33:28.000When you remove all those vicissitudes, when you remove the idea of winners and losers, you end up with a middle.
00:33:33.000But the middle happens to be a much lower middle than it would be if you averaged out the winners and losers in a free society.
00:33:40.000In just a second, we'll see how this actually reflects itself in terms of the media pushing systems that are destined to fail with absolute alacrity and enthusiasm.
00:33:51.000They're going to convince you that your life is going to be better off if it's more mediocre.
00:33:55.000We'll get back to this in just one second.
00:33:56.000But before I continue, I wanted to pay tribute to a person who's a continual source of positivity, inspiration in my day-to-day experience here at The Daily Wire.
00:34:05.000One of the most emotionally knowing people out there.
00:34:08.000One of the people who is most in touch with his inner being.
00:34:11.000As the saying goes, hire people who are better than you are.
00:34:14.000I helped hire Matt Walsh several years ago when he was changing the world from the driver's seat of his van.
00:34:19.000Now he's not just changing the world at large, but he's changing my world by actually forcing me to read a one minute ad.
00:34:25.000for Matt Walsh because I lost a dumb election bet to him that I never should have made.
00:34:29.000I sincerely mean every single word of all the compliments I'm about to pay to Matt Walsh.
00:34:33.000He was the kindest, gentlest, most wonderful person I've ever met.
00:34:52.000It may have taken four grown men to carry it into the Daily Wire building, but on more than one occasion, I've seen Matt carry it around with just one hand.
00:34:58.000And now that it's missing, Gotta say, wasn't me.
00:35:01.000If there is one man who truly lives up to his pronouns of handsome and brilliant, even though that makes no sense because those are adjectives, it is THE Matt Walsh.
00:35:09.000I'm eternally thankful to have the opportunity of working alongside this intellectual and emotional giant of our era.
00:35:16.000One day, I hope to have a beard that is just as wonderful as Matt Walsh's.
00:35:20.000And frankly, I hope that my wife allows me to have a beard.
00:35:23.000Matt Walsh does need the beard, but it's not because he's really ugly underneath the beard.
00:35:26.000It's because he's just so darn handsome that the beard festoons his face, that glorious visage with just the world's most lumberjacky, odd.
00:35:36.000Anyway, The Matt Walsh Show streams every Monday through Friday.
00:36:08.000So again, the push for the mediocre is something that the left has to push because the outcome of their programs is generally not widespread prosperity.
00:36:45.000On a clear August morning in southeastern Pennsylvania, more than a dozen adults and children stood in a park pavilion listening to mealworms sizzling in a hot pan.
00:36:53.000They were learning about entomophagy, the human consumption of insects, from Lisa Sanchez, a naturalist with the Lancaster County Department of Parks and Recreation, who has taught the practice for 25 years.
00:37:03.000Suddenly, one mealworm sputtered out of the pan.
00:37:06.000Six-year-old Adeline Welk popped it into her mouth.
00:37:19.000Well, maybe it is, and you're just convincing yourself it's not that bad.
00:37:22.000Maybe it really does suck, like a lot, to eat bugs.
00:37:25.000Maybe we've spent entire periods of human civilization trying to avoid eating the bugs.
00:37:30.000And yet now you're trying to convince everybody that eating the bugs is like the best thing that you could do, apparently.
00:37:37.000Again, this is a widespread notion that if we live a worse life, suddenly things will be better.
00:37:43.000It's something that has been pushed by, for example, Klaus Schwab, The international supervillain who leads Davos and the World Economic Forum.
00:37:52.000He literally writes in his book, The Great Reset, about how it might not be so bad if we actively lower living standards.
00:38:00.000He argues that we should try to decrease global GDP in the name of priorities like climate action, sustainability, inclusivity, global cooperation, health and well-being.
00:38:09.000Quote, we might even find we can live with such a scenario quite happily, meaning a lower GDP, a worse economic life.
00:38:16.000We can do all that in the name, not of the future, in the name of equality, in the name of fairness.
00:38:22.000Now, the reality is, of course, that what you end up with is just garbage.
00:38:26.000This is what's happened with the National Health Service in Britain.
00:38:28.000So, remember that the left would love a nationalized health system.
00:38:32.000In fact, they make the argument explicit.
00:38:34.000There's an entire article by a columnist over at the New York Times, Thomas Frank, the person who wrote What's the Matter with Kansas, in which he suggested that Kansans should get on board with socialism.
00:38:47.000But in any case, he's been arguing for literally years that the left needs to push for more leftism, hard leftism.
00:38:55.000The Democratic Party needs to push harder and harder and harder.
00:38:58.000So, for example, when he talks about health care, he says that they need universal health care.
00:39:03.000Right, sizable majorities of Americans definitely want universal health care.
00:39:06.000But as I've talked about before, every policy comes with attendant drawbacks and benefits.
00:39:11.000When you look at the National Health Service in Britain, it is a bleep show.
00:39:15.000And it is a bleep show specifically because when you redistribute and change the innovation standards, when you change all of the incentive structures, what you end up with is a significantly worse world.
00:39:26.000There's actually, believe it or not, a fabulous article in the New York Times about this, this week, titled, One Day with an Ambulance in Britain.
00:39:35.000Rachel Perry and Wayne Jones, two paramedics with the Wrexham Ambulance Service, pulled up to a hospital in northern Wales with a patient just after 10 a.m.
00:39:45.000before their patient, a 47-year-old woman with agonizing back pain and numbness in both of her legs, would be handed over to the emergency department of Wrexham Mailer Hospital.
00:39:53.000It was more than 12 hours since she had first called 999, the British equivalent of 911.
00:39:59.000So imagine that in the United States, you fall down, you now have numbness in both of your legs and agonizing back pain, and it takes the ambulance 12 hours to reach you.
00:40:22.000The sight of ambulances lined up for hours outside hospitals has become distressingly familiar in Wales, which last month recorded its worst wait times ever for life-threatening emergency calls.
00:40:32.000Ambulance services in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland are also experiencing record high waits.
00:40:36.000It's a near-crisis situation experts say signals a breakdown of the compact between Britain's and their revered National Health Service, that the government will provide responsible, efficient healthcare services, mostly free, across all income levels.
00:40:47.000Inequality is the byword, and the result is 12-hour wait times for an ambulance.
00:40:51.000The issue will be cast into sharp relief on Wednesday, when ambulance service staff in England and Wales staged the first of two strikes over low wages and deteriorating work conditions.
00:41:00.000They're scheduled to walk out again next week.
00:41:02.000So you have a nationalized health service in which the doctors, nurses, ambulance workers can strike against the public interest over low wages and bad work conditions.
00:41:13.000Yeah, things are going great over there.
00:41:15.000This will be the latest walkout in a period of intense labor strife in Britain, with a series of strikes planned across the country during the holidays.
00:41:20.000Nurses are staging their second one-day strike on Tuesday.
00:41:23.000Rail workers and border control workers at airports will begin several days of strikes later in the week.
00:41:27.000Countless harrowing incidents have called attention to the ambulance problem in Britain, including that of an elderly man whose family covered him with a tarp as he waited seven hours after falling outdoors, and a 17-year-old soccer player who waited for four hours lying on a rainy field after suffering a neck injury.
00:41:43.000Apparently, there's an acute lack of beds in the accident and emergency departments.
00:41:48.000They're overcrowded because of an inability to find room for patients elsewhere in the hospital.
00:41:51.000That's because patients ready to be discharged from the hospital often have nowhere else to go as a result of dwindling social care services, which have been hobbled by a lack of government funding and severe staffing shortages.
00:42:00.000So now they're blaming it on lack of government funding.
00:42:45.000Then things get worse, and they get worse, and they get worse, and they get worse.
00:42:48.000So there's only one thing that advocates for this sort of policymaking can do.
00:42:52.000And that is to get you used to the new normal.
00:42:55.000The new normal in which they pay you to stay home if you're in the United States and you say that you're on disability even when you're not.
00:43:01.000The new normal in which in Britain you wait 12 hours for an ambulance.
00:43:04.000The new normal in which you think about eating bugs.
00:43:07.000These are extreme examples, obviously, although the ambulance situation in Britain is an actual real crisis.
00:43:11.000But if the left can convince you that a mediocre standard of living is what you should be shooting for, maybe you'll give them a little bit of a break when in fact their preferred policies result in a worse life for you materially and a worse life for future generations.
00:43:25.000All in the name of some utopian goal of fairness that has never existed in heaven or on earth.
00:43:32.000This belief system, Thomas Sowell called it the quest for cosmic justice, that you can create the curative for human inequality, that you can destroy innovation in the name of a better redistribution of intelligence, means, the world's resources.
00:43:58.000We will be getting into all of the latest on the Twitter files from reporter Michael Schellenberger, who broke some astonishing information about the collusion between the FBI and Twitter.