Episode 1518 Scott Adams - Start Your Day Right With the Simultaneous Sip
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: ----------- - Let's Go Brandon! - Keith Olbermann's vaccine video spittle - Football games new traditional chant - The battle for Taiwan - Spot the CNN Fake News that's 100% true - Persuasion by anecdote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
Today is going to be a good day. Maybe not for every one of you, but statistically speaking, 99.99 percent of you could have a good day. But you know, some people, not so much. But you, you're going to be good. And why? Well, because you were wise enough, smart enough, and good-looking enough to arr…
View segment →the day. There's a thing that you've been putting off. You know you need to do it. Just do it. Just do it today and watch what happens. And now all you need to enjoy this morning to the maximum extent is a copper margarita glass, a tankard, chalice, or stein, a canteen, jug, or flask, a vessel of a…
View segment →ook here. From Russia: "You often argue that X isn't bad because we already do some version of X, but this ignores the possibility—yes, the thing we're already doing is also bad and should be gotten rid of." This is a little too generic, Mauricio. I understand your point, but you need to connect tha…
View segment →was part of the marches. A lot of women and a lot of men too marched because they're worried about their so-called abortion rights, and they don't want to lose them in the Supreme Court, because I guess there's some cases that are coming up that'll challenge Roe v. Wade. Somebody's got a very cool…
View segment →I even involved in this question? It's much more credible if women make the decision. Doesn't mean it's right. Doesn't mean it's wrong. And it doesn't take away your right to participate. I don't want to take your right to participate in any question. I'm just saying if you want the most credible ou…
View segment →afraid. That's the only reason you get it, right? I mean, you might not be very afraid, but let's say at least concerned. Because whether you get vaccinated or don't get vaccinated, it's all based on fear. The fear is the only thing that's making any of it happen. He thinks one side is operating on…
View segment →about MSNBC? Do they report that every time? No, probably not. So what happens when Fox News reports it every time? It guarantees it's going to happen, right? Is it really news? Is it newsworthy that people are chanting this? Well, the first time, maybe. Even the second time, it might be newsworthy,…
View segment →s together. I don't know if this is practical. This is just brainstorming, so don't be too critical. Take this as what I call the bad idea or the bad version. The bad version just makes you maybe think of a better version, right? So I'm just stimulating your thinking process. It goes like this: How…
View segment →'re definitely surveying vaccinated and unvaccinated people. That's definitely happening. They're just not counting every single person, but statistically they just do a sample, and that's all they need. All right, so the fake news is this: being twice as likely to get reinfected. So they've compar…
View segment →t answer. He was a jerk to the employees so he wouldn't be asked to help them move someday. Maintaining pressure. Boom. Somebody got it. Not very stacked. Somebody got it. The answer is that's how he learned it. He was brought up by chefs that abused him. And then he said, so that's why I do it. An…
View segment →it happened. This poll says it worked. This poll says that the news successfully convinced a big part of the public to switch over into worrying. What was it that made them switch? What persuasion got them to switch? Was it the data? Did people switch sides because of the data? Was it the argument,…
View segment →anized around it. But in 20 years you're just going to be on an electric something, and maybe even your car will be less useful. I think there's going to be all kinds of changes in housing. I think that the economy will be fine, and I think that AI will not kill us all. I think it will help us. Now…
View segment →at's new? What is new on this story? I don't see anything new on this story. What's causing it? Okay, yeah, I think the government—I don't trust the government on this, but we'll see. All right, let's keep an eye on that. And let's go Brandon. Let's go Brandon. And by the way, it would be hilarious…
View segment →Today is going to be a good day. Maybe not for every one of you, but statistically speaking, 99.99 percent of you could have a good day. But you know, some people, not so much. But you, you're going to be good. And why? Well, because you were wise enough, smart enough, and good-looking enough to arrive on time to watch the—what? That's right—the simultaneous sip.
I know it's almost too good to believe. Imagine your luck. I mean, if the rest of your day goes as well as this has gone so far, wow, the things you can get done today. It could be a good one.
There's something that you've been thinking about doing. I'm talking to you right now. Look at me. Look at me. I know you're doing other things. You're exercising. You're taking a walk. You're doing some housework. But look at me. Look at me. There's something that you were planning to do or wanted to do that you're hesitant about, and you're thinking to yourself, I don't even know why I don't want to do it. Like, I sort of have reasons, but I don't know why exactly I don't want to do that thing. I should make that phone call. I should invite that friend. I should ask that person out. And I should apply for that job. Do it. Just do it today. Do it today, because I said today is a good day to do it. You don't need a better reason. Today is a good day to do it. Just do it. You'll be fine.
Will you be embarrassed? Uh, maybe. Get a good story out of it. Will you succeed? I don't know. Does it matter? Nope. Nope, doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if you succeed. Do you know what matters? That you tried. That's it. That's your system. The system is you try. So do that today.
We'll get to the simultaneous sip, but I wanted to leave you with that. Today's the day. There's a thing that you've been putting off. You know you need to do it. Just do it. Just do it today and watch what happens.
And now all you need to enjoy this morning to the maximum extent is a copper margarita glass, a tankard, chalice, or stein, a canteen, jug, or flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now.
Oh yeah. Now you feel the fortification. You needed that little extra push to do that thing.
All right, I missed a comment. I'm going to look here. From Russia: "You often argue that X isn't bad because we already do some version of X, but this ignores the possibility—yes, the thing we're already doing is also bad and should be gotten rid of." This is a little too generic, Mauricio. I understand your point, but you need to connect that to a specific topic and then I can deal with it more effectively. But I understand the point.
Alyssa Milano was part of the marches. A lot of women and a lot of men too marched because they're worried about their so-called abortion rights, and they don't want to lose them in the Supreme Court, because I guess there's some cases that are coming up that'll challenge Roe v. Wade.
Somebody's got a very cool 3D world. That's very cool. Anyway, so Alyssa Milano was a speaker. Now you may not be on her team. You know, she identifies with the left. Maybe you're on the right. You're saying to yourself, I don't like that Alyssa Milano. But I gotta tell you, she's good at what she does. And again, I like to compliment people I disagree with. I'm not saying I disagree with her. I'm just saying I'm going to give her a compliment. In this case I've disagreed with her on other stuff. But here's her argument, and she said this, and I quote, in a speech: "I can't believe how a handful of men"—talking about the Supreme Court—"I can't believe how a handful of men are successfully taking 50 years of rights away from women and how our Supreme Court, packed with abusers, is just gonna sit by and let it all happen."
Now, forget about whether you agree with her. I know you don't agree with her in many cases. Most of you probably don't. If you're watching this, you probably don't. Maybe you do. But just look at the persuasion. Here's the argument that doesn't work. We have a right to abortion. Does that argument move anybody? We've got a right. It's our right. Not really. How about "it's our bodies"? It's better, because everybody responds to that. Oh, it's our bodies. But we also know that the government does control our bodies, and we like it that way. We do. The government controls your body. Always has. And we like it that way. So it isn't really ever your body, your choice. You don't live in that world.
The government decides if you go to war. The government decides if you're free or you're in jail, because they make the laws. And if you don't follow them, they decide you're in jail, and then they put you in jail. You don't have control over your body. You want control over your body, maybe, but you don't have it. Not even close, right? So although the argument can be persuasive, it doesn't make any sense, because we gave away our rights to our body when we decided to have a government, basically. If they can draft you, they control your body. Now, I agree with you that you'd like less of it. Are we all on the same page? We'd all like less of that, right? There's nobody who's arguing, give the government more control over my body. No, nobody's on that side. I'm just saying you're already there. So the argument intellectually kind of fails, but persuasively I think it does work. It just doesn't work as well as what Alyssa Milano did.
What she did that really works—this is the best argument against the current situation. So she's arguing that it's men taking things away from women. Now, do you know how the psychology of humans works? Let's say if you were to compare these two things: which is the stronger psychological impulse, the impulse to not lose something you think you have, or the desire to get something that you want? Which is the stronger of the two? Not wanting to lose something you already have versus "Hey, I'd like a new thing. That'd be great." Yeah, the not losing something is the stronger one.
So notice how she phrases this in terms of a bunch of men taking things away from women. That's not bad, persuasion-wise. I'm not taking your stand on abortion. Can everybody understand that you're not going to hear my opinion on abortion? Because my opinion agrees with part of what she said—not the ultimate decision, but the part where she says why are men involved in deciding what women do with their bodies? That's pretty strong. It's the argument that I use for staying out of the whole thing.
If Alyssa Milano says to me—hey, Scott Adams, this is unlikely—but if she were to say to me, "Scott Adams, why are you even involved in this question?" I would say, good point. Good point. Why am I even involved in this question? It's much more credible if women make the decision. Doesn't mean it's right. Doesn't mean it's wrong. And it doesn't take away your right to participate. I don't want to take your right to participate in any question. I'm just saying if you want the most credible outcome, it would be women deciding what women do with their bodies, even if there were lots of disagreement on that. It would be the most credible outcome. So that's a good attack vector, I think. I don't know if she'll be successful or what's going to happen to the Supreme Court, but that's good persuasion. It's good persuasion.
Here's a tip for you. Ignore the absolutists. This will be one of the most useful tips you'll ever hear. Ignore the absolutists. What's an absolutist? That's somebody who argues that things just are or they are not, and there's nothing about risk or maybe. There's no ambiguity. There's no uncertainty about data. Anybody who's got an absolute point of view, just ignore them. They're not even humans, basically. They're just NPCs. They're just programmed to walk around and say yes or no. Yeah, that's all they got.
Let me give you an example. And sorry, Locals—there's somebody on Locals who did this, and I don't mean to insult you personally, although that's probably going to happen. So I'm probably going to lose one subscriber on Locals today, maybe more. It goes like this: I just saw a meme that says the vaccines don't stop infections, therefore what good are they? Vaccines don't stop infections, therefore what good are they? That's an absolute. Do you believe that vaccines don't reduce any infections? Because that's not the case. We know that pretty definitively, that people who are vaccinated are way less likely to get infected. They do get infected, though. So it doesn't work as a statement of fact that getting vaccinated protects you from infection. But if you treat that as an absolute—yeah, I'm saying the meme again. I'll read you the meme. It's from a tweet from Anthony Brian Logan. He says, "CDC Director Rochelle Walensky says that the vaccine cannot prevent transmission. So why are all these pro-vaxxers saying it can? Huh? If the CDC director says that the vaccines cannot prevent infections, why take it?"
Well, that's the absolutist view. There's nothing you do because it's absolute. Do you wear your seatbelt because the odds are better with it than without it? Does anybody think that a seatbelt has never killed anybody? I'm sure it has. It's just not as common. So as soon as you're dealing with somebody who says, oh, if the vaccine doesn't stop every transmission, it has no value, you can't talk to people like that. Don't talk to people who talk in absolutes. There's nothing you can do with that. Just walk away. I'm not even sure that they're real people. You know, if we're in a simulation, they seem to be the ones that are non-player characters, if you know what I mean.
Keith Olbermann has a video out. He's trying to get more people vaccinated. If you don't know Keith Olbermann, let's just say that his entertainment value is extreme. He's not the most rational person I've ever seen, but his entertainment value is pretty high. And in his new video, he's saying that we should stop saying that there are people who are vaccine hesitant, because that's too kind to them, says Keith Olbermann. He says instead we should call them morons, snowflakes, and that they're afraid. They're afraid. That's why they don't get the vaccine. They're afraid. They're afraid.
What's wrong with that? What's wrong with it is that every decision about the vaccine or not vaccine is because people are afraid. That's the only reason you get it, right? I mean, you might not be very afraid, but let's say at least concerned. Because whether you get vaccinated or don't get vaccinated, it's all based on fear. The fear is the only thing that's making any of it happen. He thinks one side is operating on fear. That's everybody. That's Keith Olbermann. He's literally afraid that other people won't get vaccines. It's all fear. There's no non-fear opinion involved in any of this right now. You might not have much fear, but if you had zero fear, you wouldn't even be involved in the conversation.
Anyway, the most important question about his video—and I think Twitter user Angela pointed this out—what we'd like to know is whether the spittle that Keith Olbermann was producing in this rant, was it foaming? Was it just straight spittle? It was a little rabid foaming, I think. That's the important question.
All right. Well, most of you probably saw this story, which is the funny story of the day. That apparently at sporting events all over the country, a lot of the spectators are starting a chant. What's the chant? I think you already know the chant. It's "Fuck Joe Biden," except they use the full word. And I guess there was a NASCAR race in Alabama's Talladega Speedway, and the winner was a fellow named Brandon Brown. He was being interviewed afterwards, and the chant broke out: "Fuck Joe Biden! Fuck Joe Biden!" And the interviewer—and I still don't know yet if the interviewer was completely aware of what the real chant was—but the interviewer very cleverly, because it was live TV, said, "Look, they're chanting 'Let's Go Brandon!'" No, wait. What do you say? It was "Let's Go Brandon."
Now that's hilarious, because you know we've all had that Yanny and Laurel experience. So when you first hear that, you think to yourself, maybe it was. Maybe that is what they're saying, because I've been fooled by all these other audio illusions. Maybe that's what they're saying. But I'm going to say, because I don't know the answer yet—maybe somebody here knows the answer to the question of whether the interviewer knew exactly what they were doing, or did the interviewer actually think that the chant was something about the race car driver? Does anybody know? I haven't seen—oh, she laughed. Oh, the interviewer is laughing. Well, okay, maybe that's the giveaway.
But here's the part I love about the story. What makes this spread? What makes it spread is that Fox News reports it, right? If Fox News keeps reporting every time there's a stadium that erupts in this chant—and they do, they do report it every time—does CNN report it every time? I don't think so. How about MSNBC? Do they report that every time? No, probably not. So what happens when Fox News reports it every time? It guarantees it's going to happen, right? Is it really news? Is it newsworthy that people are chanting this? Well, the first time, maybe. Even the second time, it might be newsworthy, you know, if it's some specific kind of event. But watching Fox News make this happen and pretend that they're just covering the news—no, they're making the news. Fox News is making this happen, and then the reporting of it. It's a great circular kind of business model. Let's make something happen, and then we'll report it, and we don't even have to spend money researching. We'll just listen to the video and say, oh, there's a report. Got another report there. Got another article out of that.
All right, so I'm not even criticizing Fox News. I just think it's funny. I think it's hilarious that they're doing it.
In slightly more serious news, the battle for Taiwan has started. Here's the report. So it's not unusual for China to send aircraft into Taiwan's airspace just to sort of keep them on notice that China says we own you. But the number that they sent has just skyrocketed. So China sent 20 aircraft into Taiwan's space, I guess yesterday, and then later a bunch more. So nearly 80 planes, including fighter jets and bombers—80 Chinese aircraft, including fighter jets and bombers—80 in one day violated the Taiwan airspace, according to Taiwan. What do you make of that?
Now, obviously it's because of Biden's weakness. Does anybody disagree with that? Somewhat obviously because of Biden's weakness, they have to probe it. So is it smart for China to probe for a weakness? Yeah, it is smart. I mean, given that their goal is to get Taiwan under their control eventually, it's very smart. But be careful what you wish for. Be careful what you wish for.
If all of you heard the phrase "a Pyrrhic victory"—P-Y-R-R-H-I-C—how many of you have heard the phrase "a Pyrrhic victory"? So this is a pretty well-informed crowd, especially over on Locals. On Locals every one of you say yes. Really? Holy cow. Oh, even on YouTube. Wow. I don't know. Does this mean that I have a more educated audience than the average? I can't believe that this would be mostly yeses with a generic audience. Can you? Am I being surprised for no reason, or is this actually surprising? It's almost all yeses on two different platforms. Maybe the no people aren't weighing in, but I'll be damned. I really thought that that was going to be closer to like 20 percent of you would know what that meant.
All right. Well, surprising, but also good news. It's good news that you all know that. So a Pyrrhic victory, if there's one person who doesn't know, it means that you might win the battle, but you've degraded your army so much in winning the battle that you're going to lose the war, because you don't have enough left after the battle to maintain and keep things.
And imagine if you will China militarily taking over Taiwan. Let's just game this out in our heads. Imagine that China militarily attacks Taiwan. What's the United States do? What do we do? Well, I'm sure we'd arrange our assets, our military assets. But would we fire at mainland China? I don't think so. I don't think that we would get into a shooting war with China, because it could—there's just no way you could win, and there's nothing like winning that that would look like that. I think what we would do is just take out China's economy for a hundred years. I think China's economy would suffer for a hundred years if they take Taiwan. Now, that might be worth it. They might say, you know, we think in terms of thousands of years, so 100 years to get Taiwan back under our control, yeah, let's do it. Maybe. I mean, I don't know. I can't get into the minds of the Chinese leadership. But I think that it would be impossible for an American business to do any business with China if they were militarily taking over Taiwan. Who disagrees?
So just that statement: that the moment that China actually fired on Taiwan militarily and it was actually war, from that moment on and for the next hundred years, you couldn't be an American company going to do business in China. And even the ones that are there would have to pull out. Then they'd have to. Now your iPhone is going to suffer for a long time, because they won't be able to assemble it. But so that's the first thing that China has to worry about. It would guarantee crashing their economy. Does anybody think it wouldn't guarantee a crash of China's economy? Because the rest of the world would just turn on them. Does anybody think that's wrong? Disagree with me if you have reason, because you don't think we would just keep doing business as usual. "Well, we lost Taiwan. I sure wish that hadn't happened." Yeah, China's economy is already fragile, but I think this is the further guarantee that China is unsafe for business.
Imagine considering doing business in China when you know that they sent 80 warplanes into Taiwan airspace. You're the CEO of some big company, and you're trying to decide whether to move into China to do manufacturing. You can't do it. Just the fact that they're threatening at this level means that China is a potential war zone, at least economically. And then, you know, if it's economically, you can't really move anything there. They won't be able to get any parts, and everything will fall apart. No energy, etc.
So as I've told you many times, the economy turns on one thing primarily. As long as you have enough resources, there's one thing that makes the economy run. What is it? What is the one thing that makes an economy work, as long as you have enough resources? Expectations. Psychology. Confidence. Yeah, it's the mental part. China has lost the base requirement for a good economy. The base requirement—and there's no exception to this—is some level of trust. You've got to have some trust, some certainty, some confidence. It's all gone. China has burned all of their business capital, their psychological capital. It's all gone now. There's nobody who is a reasonable person who follows world events who thinks it wouldn't be too risky to go into China and do business there, because it's way too risky now. Not maybe so much 20 years ago, but right now, way too risky. And that psychological problem is just getting bigger.
And what is the one thing that the United States would need to guarantee that we take China's economy down without firing a shot? Which president would get you that result? Which president gets you not a single shot fired and China is just dismantled? Only one person on earth—probably only one person on earth—could get that done. If China makes a stronger move for Taiwan, Trump's your next president. I mean, I don't know how you could. That's it. It's over. If China wants to make Trump get a second term, just fire a real missile into Taiwan. Just one. And he's president, and he's going to come for you. He's coming for you. And this time he's going to have the whole country behind him, at least in terms of China. You know, he'll be as divisive as ever in general, but when it comes to China, the whole country's going to be behind him.
And what happens if the generals say, I don't think you should do this economic warfare. It might turn into something bad. Nope. Now, would it be a Pyrrhic victory for the United States? Maybe that's the risk. So that's why you need a Trump to manage what would be kind of a delicate process, which is how do you get our economy to still work if China's economy is going down? They're kind of connected, right? So how do you do that?
Let me throw out an idea. Are you ready for a wild brainstorming idea? You ready? I'm going to tie a couple things together. I don't know if this is practical. This is just brainstorming, so don't be too critical. Take this as what I call the bad idea or the bad version. The bad version just makes you maybe think of a better version, right? So I'm just stimulating your thinking process. It goes like this: How could we manufacture things in the United States cheaply enough that we could compete with whatever was happening in China? Two ways.
Number one, as I see over in the Locals platform where we're well educated on this: robots. You can build with robots just as cheaply in America as you can in China. Do you know why? Because a robot costs the same if China buys a robot. It costs the same as if we buy a robot. And the robot works all night, and it makes you your stuff. So you get kind of close to the same cost. And you also eliminate the shipping. You eliminate all the time problems and the shipping, because it's made locally now. So robots is part of it. What I'd like to see is more of that. But we don't want to robotize too quickly, do we? You know, you don't want to go full robot, because that would wipe out American jobs as well. Yeah, unions are going to have a problem with it. So robots are part of the answer.
But we've got a million immigrants coming in. If we took those million immigrants and said you can come into the United States but only into these following zones—their manufacturing zones—and in these special manufacturing zones where you're welcome, you know, we'd like to know who you are and know who we're getting. We don't want the criminals. But we've got a lot of immigrants. They're not Americans, and we're not going to hold them to the same minimum wage. You can come live here, and you can even stay in factory housing, because it's better than whatever you had going when you left. And maybe you can take some English classes. Maybe you can work your way up to some kind of a plan where you could become a citizen, or maybe your kids can become citizens or something. So some kind of path.
Somebody says, be like slave owners. No, you want to do this as humanely as possible, and you want to give them a path in which they solve our problem while we solve their problem. Do you know what our problem is? China. Our problem is China. If we can solve China, and what it brings us is a million immigrants who work and produce things for Americans at low cost, and so they solve our biggest geopolitical problem. They bring youth into the country, because we need it for the long run. You got to bring lots of young people in. They bring in workers who, within their special zones, don't have any minimum wage, but they can still live a decent life while they're learning English and maybe preparing for some more substantial job.
Now the key would be that they could do this legally, but they couldn't leave the zone. So you'd have to have some control over that. But you'd want to make it work well enough that people didn't want to leave, because if they leave the zone, they're just going to get a low-paying job somewhere else. So if you had a good, safe area with maybe even some healthcare from the companies—not from the government, from the companies—somebody says that's a modern plantation. Compared to the alternative, right? So what you're saying is, gosh, you would be building a system that sounds like the company's store. Historically this has been a bad model. Am I right? Historically what I'm explaining would have been a bad idea. It would have just turned into sweatshops and slave labor.
But what's different about 2021? You just put cameras everywhere. Yeah, you just say, okay, if you're a company and you're going to hire these immigrants at less than a minimum wage, you have a responsibility to really be monitored. And that would be different in 2021. We could guarantee that these companies are watched very carefully to make sure that they don't become a place where their people are stuck forever and they owe money. It's a ghetto, any of that stuff. So the companies would have to make sure that the living spaces are well maintained. That'll be inexpensive. They'd have to make sure that the working conditions are human and that they get paid enough that they're not trapped there forever. You know, they have some way out.
Somebody says, here it comes to the deplatforming. All right, so I'm looking at your comments, and I see lots of "now they'll want reparations." Sounds like Dubai. I doubt it, because I don't think Dubai is worried too much about the working conditions of the immigrants. This sounds like something that would not take human motivation into account. I believe the opposite of that. I believe that this model relies on human motivation being exactly what it is. In other words, the only way to make this work is to make it more advantageous for immigrants to go through this process than to avoid it. Right? That's the key. Yeah, you'd have to design the process so that the people who are subject to it say, yeah, I'd prefer it. It's way better than the alternative, because the alternative, I don't know what's going to happen to me. But here I've got a definite job that's better.
We are past that point. Yeah. Now if you're thinking that I think this is practical and we could start this up tomorrow and stuff—not so much right now. It's not like the Uyghur camps. I guess people would be able to leave and go home anytime they wanted. They just couldn't leave and come into the country.
All right, here's CNN giving you some fake news with numbers. I'm going to read you what CNN said and see if you can tell me what's the fake news part of this. All right, here's the test. CNN says, quote, "A CDC study published in August suggested that people that got COVID-19 in 2020 and didn't get a vaccine were more than twice as likely to be reinfected—to get COVID a second time in May or June of 2021—compared with people who were fully vaccinated."
So you can get COVID if you're vaccinated. All right, you can get COVID if you're vaccinated. Everybody knows that, right? We're all—we all know that the vaccine doesn't completely stop it. It reduces the odds way, way down. So the odds of getting it if you're vaccinated are way down. Most of you don't know that. Most of you think that the odds of getting it is about the same if you're vaccinated or unvaccinated. It's not even close, right? Did you know that? How many of you didn't know that? Is there anybody here who thought that the odds of getting it were about the same if you're vaccinated or not vaccinated? Yeah, you'll see people telling me I'm wrong. Go research that. I won't argue it here. Just go research that, and watch that the other people in the feed are telling you that you're wrong.
Yeah, see, the thing that makes you think I'm wrong is a statistic that's misleading. And this is the statistic that says that in some places more vaccinated people are coming in with infection than unvaccinated. Right? So that's what you're thinking. There are these places that more vaccinated people have it than unvaccinated. That's not the statistic you should be looking at. That's misleading. And here's why. I'll give you the simple explanation. Once everybody is vaccinated—let's say in a town, just look at a town. Everybody gets vaccinated. What percentage of the people who get COVID are vaccinated? All of them. Yeah, 100 percent of the people who get COVID would also be vaccinated, because everybody's vaccinated. So the more vaccinations you have, you're guaranteed—given that you can still get it—you're guaranteed that most people who get it will be vaccinated. But that doesn't change the statistic that your odds of getting it at all are way, way lower if you're vaccinated.
Now, maybe not in the long term. In the long term maybe we're all going to get it, right? But you'd rather be vaccinated if you do. Well, maybe you don't. I won't say that you'd rather. I'll say that the scientists are telling you you'd be better off that way. But you make your own decision.
Crawley says you can't know that they aren't tracking vaccinated cases. Yes, sir. Yeah, they're not tracking everybody who got vaccinated, but they're definitely surveying vaccinated and unvaccinated people. That's definitely happening. They're just not counting every single person, but statistically they just do a sample, and that's all they need.
All right, so the fake news is this: being twice as likely to get reinfected. So they've compared if you had natural immunity—you've already been infected—compared to only vaccinated but you've never had it. All right, so those are the comparisons: natural immunity to vaccinated. And the claim here on CNN is that you're more than twice as likely to get reinfected if you've only been infected as opposed to been vaccinated. Is that real news or fake news? That's fake news. That's true. It's fake news. That's 100 percent true. Is that a possibility? Can you have fake news that's 100 percent true at the same time? Because this—I believe the statistics are true, but why is it fake the way it's presented?
Let's say your risk of getting a deadly disease—something besides COVID. God, my nose always itches when I'm in public. This is like—it's a psychological thing. So half the time when I'm doing this, it's not because of my allergies. It's because I get this psychological itch on my nose when I'm in public. Here's why it's fake news. Let's say—take the example of your risk of being killed by a terrorist. Let's say your personal risk of being killed by a terrorist is one in 100 million. I don't know what the real number is, but let's say it's 100 million. That's your risk. And then you double it. You double it. Is that a story? Your risk of being killed by a terrorist just doubled. It's not a story, because your risk was so low that doubling it didn't make really any difference at all.
So when CNN says your risk of getting reinfected if you've got natural immunity, how many people is that like, and how big of a difference is that? Is this really a difference we have to care about? Because when they report "doubled," if you hear that something involving your health has a double risk, you should act upon that immediately, right? You don't want to double your risk of anything. So immediately take action. But what if the doubling didn't make any difference? Like it still rounds to zero. Then take action and the other doesn't. And they're both true. If the risk is so small, doubling doesn't matter, so you don't take action. So they're trying to make you take action by reporting the doubling without telling you what the absolute difference is, right? That's fake news that just happens to be completely accurate. Just fake.
Apparently there's some big healthcare shortage, a healthcare worker shortage that's not directly related to COVID. Did you know that? This came as a surprise to me. So apparently even before the pandemic there was this sort of a crisis for healthcare employees. And at least based on the reporting, it's not clear why. We don't know exactly why. We've had nursing shortages for ages. Yeah. And here's what I don't understand about it. Nursing is a pretty good job, isn't it? Did that change? I always thought that these healthcare jobs were good jobs. Somebody says OnlyFans pays better. Working conditions.
Here's my guess. I believe that there's a culture within the medical community for self-abuse which turns into systemic abuse for all healthcare workers. Am I wrong? No, I'm not directly involved in that world, but what I observe is the hours are just crazy. I mean, lots of you work long hours. I do that myself. But I feel like the healthcare workers are in a whole different level of abuse. And I think that abuse comes from having a lot of doctors in charge who are used to the crazy hours. And if I did it, you have to do it.
Let me tell you a conversation I had years ago with a chef for my restaurant. So I had a restaurant years ago, and the chef was just a bastard. He was just a jerk to all the other employees. Just a serious, serious bad personality and made everybody want to quit. So I had lunch with him, and I said, why are you acting like the biggest jerk in the world when obviously you could just not do it? Like, what is motivating you? And he told me this. It was intentional. It wasn't baked into his personality at birth or anything. He was intentionally being the worst person he could be on the job. Why? Why? Why did the chef tell me directly—all right, I'm not reading between the lines. Told me directly why he was a jerk and a horrible person to all the employees. Why?
I'm looking at your comments. Weed out the weak. Unites the employees to make them work harder. Motivate them. None of this is right, by the way. Because they're immigrants. He's racist. He was Black, by the way, so he wasn't racist. Well, I mean, not in the usual way anyway. He wouldn't be asked to help them move. That's the best answer. He was a jerk to the employees so he wouldn't be asked to help them move someday. Maintaining pressure. Boom. Somebody got it. Not very stacked. Somebody got it.
The answer is that's how he learned it. He was brought up by chefs that abused him. And then he said, so that's why I do it. And then I said, but you know it's not a good idea. You don't think it's a good idea, do you? You don't think it works. So if you know it doesn't work, why would you do it? And he said, because that's how we learned. And then I said again, yeah, I'm hearing you. I'm hearing you about the part that that's why you learned. But as of today you can quite clearly see this is a bad idea. You know, people are quitting. I'm having this lunch with you. Everything's going to—and it's all because of your personality. Now you see that, right? And given that it's not your natural personality—it's a put-on personality you're doing intentionally—wouldn't you consider changing that? Maybe doing it differently. And he said, it's not the way I was taught. That's not the way I was taught. He didn't have any reason for it. He was just taught that way.
So now let's get back to the doctors. Do you think the doctors who often become administrators or at least have a big influence on the culture of the workplace—do you think a doctor who got terribly abused when they were going through their whatever, do you think that doctor is saying to us, you know, those long hours were so bad for me in so many ways and really unhealthy. And I am a health worker, and that was unhealthy. Clearly lack of sleep is unhealthy. Everybody understands that. So because I know I went through it and it's bad, I will now correct this as best I can and make sure all of my employees get enough sleep. Do you think that's happening? I'll bet not. I'll bet what's happening is, hey, I went through this, so you're going to go through this. I'll bet that's the problem.
Now it's speculation, right? I'm only speculating, so I can easily be wrong. I'm not committed to this opinion, but it's kind of the only thing that—not that people wouldn't talk about necessarily. Yeah, I think it's the culture. Just a guess.
All right. Apparently climate change—there's a big change in public opinion according to a new poll. For the first time, a majority of Americans now believe that the US is facing consequences of a warming world. Have you felt that change? Actually I thought—I didn't know the percentage until today—but this is the first time that a majority of Americans believe climate change is real. Does that feel right? Did you know this is the first time a majority thought that? Now that's different than thinking it's a problem that you need to solve, right? So it's slightly different to say that we should solve it or what resources you should put in to solve it. But just that it's a problem.
Now remember that people like Bjørn Lomborg and Michael Shellenberger will teach you that the warming world might help more than it hurts, and we just don't know. Definitely a risk, because we don't know. But there's no reason to think it'll be worse. The most reasonable take is probably it's going to be better than it was. Right? I don't know what that meme was supposed to apply to, but over on Locals somebody posted a meme that says "dick is everywhere, chemistry isn't." I'm like, I think that was relevant to the conversation, but I'm not going to tell you whether you should believe or not believe in climate change. But it's interesting that the world does now.
What was it that convinced people? What changed recently? What changed? Let me tell you what changed. Do you remember that—I forget how we heard it, but I think it was CNN's head saying that they were going to push climate change like crazy and that they were intentionally going to brainwash the public into making climate change a big issue. The news industry told you that directly: we're going to go persuade the public on climate change. And then it happened. This poll says it worked. This poll says that the news successfully convinced a big part of the public to switch over into worrying.
What was it that made them switch? What persuasion got them to switch? Was it the data? Did people switch sides because of the data? Was it the argument, the facts? Was it the facts and argument and the logic and the science? Was it Greta? Nope. Nope. It was the anecdotes. It was all the stories in the news about there's this place with a drought, there's this place with a record this or record that. And they convinced you with anecdotes. What do anecdotes prove about climate change? Like, what does a specific storm or a specific hurricane or a specific drought—what does that tell you about climate change? Nothing. Nothing.
So you got persuaded when they stopped using facts and they stopped using science. Then you got persuaded. Not you, but the public. So what is this that I've been saying for a while? Maybe some of you can confirm this. Have I not been saying that whoever is doing the persuasion on climate change isn't doing a good job? They just started doing a good job. Do you know how they moved from doing a bad job to a good job? Trump. They took Trump's technique. They took the anecdote and sold it to the public, because the public buys anecdotes. That's why they're selling you the anecdotal guy didn't get the vaccination and he died. Because the news has finally learned that facts and reason don't move the public, and they're in the job of manipulating the public. They're not in the job of informing. And so they made that adjustment. And so you're going to see more and more anecdote, because that persuades. Science and facts, even if it's right, it doesn't persuade.
So watching this happen in real time—because remember the old story of Babe Ruth, baseball player who famously pointed to the fence he was going to hit the home run over and then hit a home run over that fence. You know, famous kind of thing. Larry Bird—if you watched sports, Larry Bird is one of the greatest basketball players, and there's a famous story I was just watching on YouTube where he would tell people what he was gonna do before he did it. Like crazy stuff. At one point he told people that he was going to do a fadeaway three-pointer and land in the opposite team's trainer's lap. Let me say this again. During a game, during the game, Larry Bird called and told the opponents where he was going to stand, how he was going to take the shot, and there was going to be a fadeaway shot where after he shoots, his body goes backwards, and then he was going to land in the lap of the trainer of the other team. He took the ball, went to that spot, drained a three-pointer, and fell into the trainer's lap. That actually happened. And by the way, it wasn't even a unique moment in Larry Bird's life. You have to watch the highlights of all the Larry Bird greatest moments. It is unbelievable. It's amazing.
He would call the most crazy things. True story: one day he told—he was winning some series, and he said he was going to play at least three quarters of the next game left-handed. Left-handed. He was a right-handed player. He scored 27 points left-handed. He called it. He told the other team he was going to play left-handed. They only had to guard one hand. He made their guarding twice as easy by telling them I'm not even going to use this hand for three quarters. He scored 27 points. Now if you don't follow sports, that's like a lot of points left-handed.
All right, so the news just did the same thing. They said we're going to change people's opinions on climate change, and we're going to do it this year. They just did it. They just did it.
I'm seeing some comments about Scott says investment isn't about right and wrong. Is Apple and Tesla too big to fail? What do you mean by is Apple and Tesla too big to fail? Nothing's too big to fail. I don't know what the question means. If you mean in an economic sense, no, there's nothing that's too big to fail. You just have to look at the likelihood. The likelihood is that they won't fail. No, no time soon anyway. All right. Yeah, Sears failed. Nothing lasts forever until it does, I guess.
The climate change polls you are citing are false. That could be. That could be. I will take that comment in the spirit in which it's offered. Yeah, any poll you see—except for Rasmussen, who tends to be pretty darn good. I quote them a lot. But yeah, just a generic poll from some entity that you're not familiar with, yeah, you have to be skeptical.
All right, I believe we have reached the end of our productive morning. Does anybody feel better now? I told you things were going to start looking up.
Have I followed the recent stories about Havana syndrome? I don't know how recent you mean, but Jen Psaki brought up the bleach thing last week and no one corrected her. Just amazing. Amazing. No, I'm not following if there's something new about the Havana syndrome, but I assume that it's more not finding it.
Oh, I've seen some links to the Larry Bird stuff on YouTube. You sip after I leave. My god, your golden age delusion is it. Let me make a quick argument for the golden age. Number one, nuclear war among superpowers I think is over, because it's unwinnable and everybody knows it. So I think world wars are probably over in the shooting sense. We'll have lots of cyber stuff, but we'll get that under control. The mRNA platform shows promise for curing all kinds of stuff, including cancer, right?
So because of the pandemic, here are the things that will change. And maybe would not have changed without the pandemic. Commuting and working in the office, right? It's one of the worst things in a lot of people's life, was having to commute and working in a terrible office. That's gone forever, in the sense that you at least have options. You know, I mean, you could work for a company that doesn't require it or a company that does, but you have an option now way more than you ever had. So I think commuting changes.
If you're following the electric bicycle market, it's way bigger than you think, meaning the impact on society. So the quality of batteries and the price and the power of batteries got to the point where having a battery assist on your bicycle allows you to go 100 miles on a bicycle pretty easily. I mean, it still takes some time, but it's pretty easy. And it's going to change everything. You don't know it yet, because we haven't organized around it. But in 20 years you're just going to be on an electric something, and maybe even your car will be less useful.
I think there's going to be all kinds of changes in housing. I think that the economy will be fine, and I think that AI will not kill us all. I think it will help us. Now there's a risk of AI killing us all, so I mean that's a real risk. We have to manage it. But I think we saw it far enough in advance.
E-bikes made in China. Yeah, yeah. I mean, if anybody wants to call me out for buying Chinese products, you're on the wrong page. All right? I'm not the guy telling you that you or I or anybody else has to stop buying all Chinese-made products. I'm not telling you that. That would be bad for American companies too. What I'm telling you is that moving new business there is done, and that's all it takes to end China.
So those are some of the things happening. I would say that most of what's happening is positive, even if it doesn't look that way. Remember, the news is only going to tell you what's bad news. So Afghanistan is over. The Middle East looks like more peace than we've ever had because of Abraham Accords. Iran weirdly isn't making a lot of noise right now, is it? But why is Iran so quiet? Anybody? What's happening with Iran? It's too quiet, right? Almost like something's gonna happen, like a deal maybe. It feels like the calm before some kind of an agreement.
Newsom. Scott love him. So this is a comment on YouTube in all capitals: "Newsom Scott love him." Okay, that's not even close to true. Yeah, Israel has said that they will unilaterally take care of Iran, which I imagine makes Iran more afraid and not less. I've got a feeling that Iran would like a world in which the United States would talk Israel out of attacking, but apparently that's not going to happen, because Israel just said, okay, we're just going to do what we need to do. That could take care of the problem, because I'm sure that their intelligence on Iran is pretty darn good by now.
Yeah, still waiting for an e-bike stream. Well, I did an e-bike. Yeah, I guess I should do more of an e-bike stream. I should strap my phone to the bike and take a ride for you all.
Haitian caravans. Yeah, we've talked about that. There's more coming, like a lot more coming.
All right, just looking at your comments. The news about the Havana syndrome—well, let me check that while I'm here. So many of you are asking me about the Savannah. I'm sorry, Havana syndrome. So there's some new news that involves the Biden administration. So one hour ago: looking into reports of sensory attacks. They believe they're closer to understanding. There's nothing new here, is there? What's new? What is new on this story? I don't see anything new on this story. What's causing it? Okay, yeah, I think the government—I don't trust the government on this, but we'll see.
All right, let's keep an eye on that. And let's go Brandon. Let's go Brandon. And by the way, it would be hilarious if in places where you couldn't be shouting "Fuck Biden," if instead you started chanting "Let's Go Brandon" and everybody knew what you meant. It would be funny.
All right, goodbye YouTube. I'll see you tomorrow.
today is gonna be well it's gonna be a good day maybe not for every one of you but statistically speaking 99.99 percent of you could have a good day but uh you know some people not so much but you you're going to be good and why well because you were wise enough smart enough and good looking enough to arrive on time to watch the what that's right the simultaneous sip i know it's almost too good to believe imagine your luck i mean if the rest of your day goes as well as this has gone so far wow the things you can get done today could be a good one there's something that you've been thinking about doing i'm talking to you right now look at me look at me i know you're doing other things you're exercising you're taking a walk you're doing some housework but look at me look at me there's something that you were planning to do or wanted to do that you're hesitant about and you're thinking to yourself i don't even know why i don't want to do it like i sort of have reasons but i don't know why exactly i don't want to do that thing i i should make that phone call i should invite that friend i should ask that person now and i should i should apply for that job do it just do it today do it today because i said today is a good day to do it you don't need a better reason today is a good day to do it just do it you'll be fine will you be embarrassed uh maybe get a good story out of it will you succeed i don't know does it matter nope nope doesn't matter it doesn't matter if you succeed do you know what matters that you tried that's it that's your system the system is you try so do that today we'll get to the simultaneous sip but i wanted to leave you that today's the day there's a thing that you've been putting off you know you need to do it just do it just do it today and watch what happens and now all you need to enjoy this morning to the maximum extent is a copper margarita glass of tankard chalice or stein a canteen jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine of the day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous but it happens now go oh yeah now you feel the fortification you needed that little extra push to do that thing all right i missed a comment i'm going to look here from russia you often argue that x isn't bad because we already do some version of x but this ignores the possibility yes the thing we're already doing is also bad and should be gotten this little too generic mauricio i understand your point but you need to connect that to a specific topic and then i can deal with it more effectively but i understand the point um alyssa milano was part of the uh i guess the marches a lot of women and a lot of men too marched because they're worried about their uh so-called abortion rights and they don't want to lose them in the supreme court because i guess there's some cases that are coming up that'll challenge roe v s rovery suede oh somebody's got uh very cool somebody's watching me in a 3d world that's very cool um anyway so alyssa milano was a speaker now you may not be on her team you know she identifies with the left maybe you're on the right you're saying you're saying to yourself i don't like that alyssa milano but i gotta tell you she's good at what she does and again i like to compliment people i disagree with i'm not saying i disagree with her i'm just saying i'm going to give her a compliment in this case i've disagreed with her on other other stuff but here's her argument and she said this and i quote in a speech i can't believe how a handful of men talking about the supreme court i can't believe how a handful of men are successfully taking 50 years of rights away from women and how our supreme court packed with abusers is just gonna sit by and let it all happen now forget about whether you agree with her right i i know you don't agree with her in many cases right most of you probably don't if you're if you're on this uh if you're watching this you probably don't maybe you do but just look at the persuasion here's the argument that doesn't work we have a right to abortion does that argument move anybody we've got a right it's our right not really how about even it's our bodies better it's better because everybody responds to that right oh it's our bodies but we also know that the government does control our bodies and we like it that way we do the government controls your body always has and we like it that way so it isn't really ever it's never your body you know your your choice you don't live in that world the government decides if you go to war the government decides if you're free or you're in jail because they make the laws and if you don't follow them they decided you're in jail and then they put you in jail you don't have control over your body you want control over your body maybe but you don't have it not even close right so although although the argument can be persuasive it doesn't make any sense because we are we we gave away our rights to our body when we decided to have a government basically if they can draft you if they can draft you they control your body now i agree with you that you'd like less of it are we all on the same page we'd all like less of that right there's nobody there's nobody who's arguing give give the government more control over my body no nobody's on that side i'm just saying you're already there so the argument intellectually kind of fails but persuasively i think it does work it just doesn't work as well as what alyssa milano did what elizablano did that really works this is the best argument against uh the current situation so she's arguing that it's men taking things away from women now do you know how the the psychology of humans works when they have let's say if you were to compare these two things which is the stronger psychological impulse the impulse to not lose something you think you have or the desire to guess something that you want which is the stronger of the two not wanting to lose something you already have versus hey i'd like a new thing that'd be great yeah the the the not losing something is the stronger one so notice how she puts she she phrases this in terms of uh a bunch of men taking things away from women that's not bad persuasion wise i'm not taking your stand on abortion can everybody understand that you're not going to hear my opinion on abortion because my opinion agrees with part of what she said not not the ultimate decision but the part where she says why are men involved in deciding what women do with their bodies that's pretty strong it's the argument that i use for staying out of the whole thing if melissa alano says to me hey scott adams this is unlikely but if she were to say to me scott adams why are you even involved in this question i would say good point good point why am i even involved in this question i i would it's much more credible if women make the decision doesn't mean it's right doesn't mean it's wrong and it doesn't take away your right to participate i don't want to take your right to participate in any question i'm just saying if you want the most credible outcome it would be women deciding what women do with their bodies even if there were lots of disagreement on that it would be the most credible outcome so that's a good good attack vector i think i don't know if she'll be successful or or what's going to happen to the supreme court um but that's good persuasion it's good persuasion here's a tip for you ignore the absolutists this will be one of the most useful tips you'll ever hear ignore the absolutists what's an absolutist that's somebody who argues that things just are or they are not and there's nothing about risk or maybe there's no there's no ambiguity there's no you know uncertainty about data anybody who's got an absolute point of view just ignore them they're not even humans basically they're they're just npcs they're just programmed to walk around say yes no yeah that's all they got let me give you an example um and sorry locals there's somebody on locals who did this and don't mean to insult you personally although that's probably gonna happen um so i'm probably going to lose one subscriber on locals today maybe more goes like this i just saw a mean that says the vaccines don't stop infections therefore what good are they vaccines don't stop infections therefore what good are they that's an absolute do you believe that vaccines don't reduce any infections because that's not the case we know that pretty definitively that people who are vaccinated are way less likely to get infected they do get infected though so it doesn't work as a statement of fact that getting vaccinated protects you from infection but if you treat that as it was an absolute yeah i'm saying the meme again i'll read you the meme it's from uh it's a tweet from anthony brian logan he says cdc director richelle walensky says that the vaccine cannot prevent transmission so why are all these pro-vaxxers saying it can huh if the cdc director says that the vaccines cannot prevent infections why take it well that's that's the absolutist view there's nothing you do because it's absolute do you you wear your seatbelt because the odds are better with it than without it does anybody think that a sea bill has never killed anybody i'm sure it has it's just it's not as common so as soon as you're dealing with somebody who says oh if the vaccine doesn't stop every transmission has no value you can't talk to people like that don't talk to people who talk in absolutes there's nothing you can do with that just walk away i'm not even sure that they're real people you know if we're a simulation they seem to be the ones that are non-player characters if you know what i mean keith oliverman has a video out he's trying to get more people vaccinated if you don't know keith olbermann let's just say that his entertainment value is extreme he's he's not the most rational person i've ever seen but his entertainment value pretty high and uh in his new video he's he's saying that we that we should stop saying that their people are vaccine hesitant because that's too kind to them says keith olbermann he says instead we should call them morons snowflakes snowflakes and that they're afraid they're afraid that's why they don't get the vaccine they're afraid they're afraid what's wrong with that what's wrong with it is that every decision about the vaccine or not vaccine is because people are afraid that's the only reason you get it right i mean you might not be very afraid but let's say at least concerned because whether you get vaccinated or don't get vaccinated it's all based on fear the fear is the only thing that's making any of it happen he thinks one side is operating on fear that's everybody that's keith olbermann he's literally afraid that other people won't give vaccines it's all fear there's no non-fear opinion involved in any of this right now you might not have much fear but if you had zero fear you wouldn't even be involved in the conversation anyway the most important question about his video and i i think twitter user angela pointed this out uh what we'd like to know is whether the spittle that keith olbermann was producing in this rant was it foaming was it just straight spittle it was a little rabid foaming i think that's the important question all right well most of you probably saw this story which is the funny story of the day that apparently at sporting events all over the country a lot of the spectators are starting a chant what's the chance i think you already know the chant it's uh f joe biden except they use the full word and i guess there was a nascar uh race in alabama's telediga speedway and uh the winner was a fellow named brandon brown he was being interviewed afterwards and the chance broke out f joe biden f joe biden and the the interviewer and i don't i still don't know yet if the interviewer was completely aware of what the real chat was but the interviewer very cleverly because it was live tv said look they're they're chanting uh go brandon no wait what do you say it was uh let's go brandon so let's go brandon now uh that's hilarious because you know we've all had that lonnie and uh laurel and yani experience so when you first hear that you think yourself maybe it was maybe that is what they're saying because i've been fooled by all these other uh audio illusions maybe that's what they're saying but uh i'm not i'm gonna say because i don't know the answer yet maybe maybe somebody here knows the answer to the question of whether the interviewer knew exactly what they were doing or did the interviewer actually think that the chant was something about the race race car driver um does anybody know i i haven't seen oh she laughed oh the interviewer is laughing well okay maybe that's the giveaway but here's the part i love about the story what makes this spread what makes it spread is that fox news reports it right if fox news keeps reporting every time there's a stadium that erupts in this chant and they do they do report it every time does cnn report it every time i don't think so how about msnbc do they report that every time no probably not so what happens when fox news reports it every time it guarantees it's going to happen right is it really news is it newsworthy that people are chanting this well the first time maybe even the second time and it might be newsworthy you know if it's a some specific kind of event but watching fox news make this happen and pretend that it's they're just covering the news no they're making the news fox news is making this happen and then the reporting of it it's a great circular kind of business model let's make something happen and then we'll report it and we don't even have to spend money researching we'll just listen to the video and say oh there's a report got another report there got another article out of that all right so uh and i'm not i'm not even criticizing fox news i just think it's funny i think it's hilarious that they're doing it um in the slightly more serious news the battle for taiwan has started here's the report so it's not unusual for china to send aircraft into taiwan's airspace just to sort of keep them on notice that china says we own you but the number that they sent has just skyrocketed so china sent 20 aircraft into taiwan's space uh i guess yesterday and then later a bunch more so nearly 80 planes including fighter jets and bombers 80 chinese aircraft including fighter jets and bombers 80 in one day violated the taiwan airspace according to taiwan what do you make of that now obviously it's because of biden's weakness does anybody disagree with that somewhat obviously because of biden's weakness they have to probe it so is it smart for china to you know probe for a weakness yeah it is smart i mean given that their goal is to you know get taiwan under the control eventually is very smart but be careful what you wish for be careful what you wish for if all of you heard the phrase a pyrrhic victory p-y-r-r-h-i-a-c how many of you have heard the phrase a pyrrhic victory so this is a pretty well-informed crowd especially especially over on on locals on locals every one of you say yes really holy cow oh even even on youtube wow i don't know if does this mean that i have a more educated audience than the average i can't believe that this would be mostly yes's with a generic audience can you am i being surprised for no reason or is this actually surprising it's almost all yeses on two different platforms maybe the no people aren't weighing in but i'll be damned i really thought that that was going to be closer to like 20 of you would know what that meant all right well surprising but also good news it's good news that you all know that so a pyrrhic victory if there's one person who doesn't know it means that you might win the battle but you've degraded your army so much in winning the battle that you're going to lose the war because you don't have enough left after the battle to to maintain and keep things and imagine if you will china militarily taking over taiwan let's just game this out in our heads imagine that china militarily attacks taiwan what's the united states do what do we do well i'm sure we'd you know arrange our assets our military assets but would we fire at mainland china i don't think so i don't think that we would get into a shooting war with china because it could there's just no way i can you could win and there's nothing like winning that that would look like that i think what we would do is just take out china's economy for a hundred years i think china's economy would suffer for a hundred years if they take taiwan now that might be worth it they might say you know we we think in terms of thousands of years so 100 years to get taiwan back under our control yeah let's do it maybe i mean i don't i can't get into the minds of the chinese leadership but i think that it would be impossible for an american business to do any business with china if they were militarily taking over taiwan who disagrees so just that statement that the moment that china actually fired on taiwan militarily and and it was actually war from that moment on and for the next hundred years you couldn't be an american company going to do business in china and even the ones that are there would have to pull out then they'd have to now your iphone is going to suffer for a long time because they won't be able to assemble it but so that's the first thing that china has to worry about it would guarantee crashing their economy does anybody think it wouldn't guarantee a crash of china's economy because the rest of the world would just turn on does anybody think that's wrong disagree with me if if you have reason because you don't think we would just keep doing business do you just business as usual uh well we lost taiwan i sure wish that hadn't happened yeah china's economy is already fragile but i think this is the further guarantee that china is unsafe for business imagine considering doing business in china when you know that they send 80 warplanes into taiwan airspace you're the ceo of some big company and you're trying to decide whether to move into china to do manufacturing you can't do it just the fact that they're threatening at this level means that china is a potential war zone at least economically and then you know if it's economically you can't really move anything there they won't be able to get any parts and everything will fall apart no energy etc so as i've told you many times the economy turns on one thing primarily as long as you have enough resources there's one thing that makes the economy run what is it what is the one thing that makes an economy work as long as you have enough resources expectations psychology confidence yeah it's the mental part china has lost the base requirement for a good economy the base requirement and there's no exception to this is some level of trust you've got to have some trust some certainty some confidence it's all gone china has burned all of their business capital their psychological capital it's all gone now there's nobody who is a reasonable person who follows you know world events who thinks it wouldn't be too risky to go into china and do business there because it's way too risky now not maybe not so much 20 years ago but right now way too risky and that psychological problem is just getting bigger and what is the one thing that the united states would need to guarantee that we um take china's economy down without firing a shot which which president would get you that result which president gets you not a single shot fired and china is just dismantled only one person on earth probably probably only one person on earth could get that done if china makes a stronger move for taiwan trump's your next president i mean i don't know how you could that's it it's over if china wants to make trump you know get a second term just just fire a real missile into taiwan just one and he's president and he's going to come for you he's coming for you and this time he's going to have the whole country behind him at least in terms of china you know he'll be as divisive as ever in general but when it comes to china whole country's going to be behind him and what happens if the generals say i don't think you should do this economic warfare it might turn into something bad nope now would it be a pyrrhic victory for the united states maybe that's the risk so that's why you need a trump to manage what would be kind of a delicate process which is how do you get our economy to still work if a china's if china's economy is going down they're kind of connected right so how do you do that let me throw out an idea are you ready for a wild brainstorming idea you ready i'm going to tie a couple things together i don't know if this is practical this is just brainstorming so don't be too critical take this as what i call the bad idea or the bad version the bad version just makes you maybe think of a better version right so i'm just stimulating your thinking process goes like this how could we manufacture things in the united states cheaply enough that we could compete with whatever was happening in china two ways number one as i see over in the locals platform where we're well educated on this robots you can build with robots just as cheaply in america as you can in china do you know why because a robot costs the same if china buys a robot it costs the same as if we buy a robot and the robot works all night and it makes you your stuff so you come to you get kind of close to the same cost and you also eliminate the shipping you eliminate all the time problems and the shipping because it's made locally now so robots is part of it what i'd like to see is you know more of that but we don't want to robotize too quickly do we you know you want to you don't want to go full robot because that would wipe out american jobs as well yeah unions unions are going to have a problem with it so robots are part of the answer but they're oh stop getting ahead of me mike damn you over on youtube mike getting way ahead of me all right that's where i'm going we've got a million immigrants coming in if we took those million immigrants and said you can come into the united states but only only into these following zones their manufacturing zones and in these special manufacturing zones where you're welcome you know we'd like to know who you are and uh you know know who we're getting right we don't want the criminals but we're going to be we got a lot of immigrants they're not americans and we're not going to hold them to the same minimum wage you can come live here and you can even stay in factory housing because it's better than whatever you had going when you left and you maybe you can take some uh english classes maybe you can work your way up to some kind of a plan where you could become a citizen or maybe your kids can become citizens or something so some kind of somebody says be like slave owners no you want to do this as humanely as possible and you want to give them a path in which they solve our problem while we solve their problem do you know what our problem is china our problem is china if we can solve china and what it brings us is a million immigrants who work and produce things for americans at low cost and so they solve our biggest you know geopolitical problem they bring youth into the country because we need it for the long run you got to bring lots of young people in they bring in workers who in within their special zones don't have any minimum wage but they can still live in a decent life while they're learning english and maybe preparing for some more substantial job now the key would be that they could do this legally but they couldn't leave the zone so you'd have to have some control over that but you'd want to make it um work well enough that people didn't want to leave because if they leave the zone they're just going to get a you know a low paying job somewhere else so if you had a you know a good safe area with maybe maybe even some health care from the companies not from the government from the companies somebody says that's a modern plantation compared to the alternative right so what you're saying is gosh you would be building a system that sounds like the you know the company's store you know historically this has been a bad model am i right historically what i'm explaining would have been a bad idea do we all agree with that that historically what i'm suggesting would have always been a bad idea it would have just turned into sweatshops and slave labor but what's different about 2021 you just put cameras everywhere yeah you just say okay if you're a company and you're gonna hire these immigrants at less than a minimum wage you have a responsibility to really be monitored in this and that would be different in 2021 we could guarantee that these companies are watched very carefully to make sure that they don't become a place where you know their people are stuck forever and you know they're they owe money it's a ghetto any of that stuff so the companies would have to make sure that the living spaces are are well maintained that'll be inexpensive they'd have to make sure that the working conditions are human and that they get paid enough that they're not trapped there forever you know they have some way out somebody says here it comes to the d-platforming all right so i'm looking at your um comments and i see lots of now to know they'll want reparations um sounds like dubai i doubt it because i don't think dubai is worried too much about the working conditions of the immigrants um this sounds like something that would not take human motivation into account i believe the opposite of that i believe that this model um relies on human motivation being exactly what it is in other words the only way to make this work is to make it more advantageous for immigrants to go through this process than to avoid it right that's the key yeah you'd have to design the process so that the people who are subject to say yeah i'd prefer it it's way better than the alternative because the alternative i don't know what's going to happen to me but here i've got a definite job that's better we are past that point yeah now if you're if you think that i think this is practical and we could you know start this up tomorrow and stuff not so much right now it's not like the uyghur camp i guess people would be able to to leave and go home anytime they wanted they just couldn't leave and come into the country all right here's a cnn giving you some fake news with numbers i'm going to read you what cnn said and see if you can tell me what's the fake news part of this all right here's the test cnn says quote a cdc study published in august suggested that people that got covered 19 in 2020 and didn't get a vaccine were more than twice as likely to be re-infected to get covert a second time in may or june of 2021 compared with people who were fully vaccinated so you can get covet if you vaccinated all right you can get covent if you're vaccinated everybody knows that right we're all we all know that the vaccine doesn't completely stop it it reduces the odds way way down so the odds of getting it if you're vaccinated or way down most of you don't know that most of you think that the odds of getting it is about the same if you're vaccinated or unvaccinated it's not even close right did you know that how many of you didn't know that is there anybody here who thought that the odds of getting it were about the same if you're vaccinated or not vaccinated yeah you'll see people telling me i'm wrong go go research that i won't argue it here just go research that and watch that the other people in the feed are telling you that you're wrong yeah see the the thing that makes you think i'm wrong is a statistic that's misleading and this the statistic that says that in some places more vaccinated people are coming in with infection than unvaccinated right so that's what you're thinking there are these places that more vaccinated people have it than unvaccinated that's not the statistic you should be looking at that's that's misleading and here's why i'll give you the simple explanation once everybody is vaccinated let's say in a town just look at a town everybody gets vaccinated what percentage of the people who get coveted are vaccinated all of them yeah 100 of the people who get coven would also be vaccinated because everybody's vaccinated so the more vaccinations you have you're guaranteed given that you can still get it you're guaranteed that most people who get it will be vaccinated but that doesn't change the statistic that your odds of getting it at all are way way lower if you're vaccinated now maybe not in the long term in the long term maybe we're all going to get it right but you'd rather be vaccinated if you do well maybe you don't i won't say that you'd rather i'll say that i'll say that uh the scientists are telling you you'd be better off that way but you make your own decision um crawley says at crowley says you can't know that they aren't they aren't tracking vaccinated cases yes sir yeah they're not tracking everybody who got vaccinated but they're definitely surveying vaccinated and unvaccinated people that's definitely happening they're just not counting every single person but statistically they just do a sample and that's all they need all right so the the fake news is this being twice as likely to get reinfected so they've compared if you had natural immunity you've already been affected compared to only vaccinated but you've never had it all right so those are the comparisons natural immunity to vaccinated and the claim here on cnn is that you're more than twice as likely to get reinfected if you've only been infected as opposed to been vaccinated is that real news or fake news that's fake news that's true it's fake news that's 100 true is that a possibility can you have fake news that's 100 true at the same time because this i believe the statistics are true but why is it fake the way it's presented let's say uh your risk of uh your risk of getting a deadly disease something besides covet god my nose always rich itches when i'm in public this is like it's a psychological thing so half the time when i'm doing this it's not because of my allergies it's because i get this psychological itch on my nose when i'm in public here's why it's fake news let's say take the example of your risk of being killed by a terrorist let's say your personal risk of being killed by a terrorist is one in 10 billion that's not that's that's not right let's say uh one in let's say it's 1 in 100 million i don't know what the real number is but let's say it's 100 million that's your risk and then you double it you double it is that a story your risk of being killed by a terrorist just doubled it's not a story because your risk was so low that doubling it didn't make really any difference at all so when cnn says your risk of getting re-infected if you've got natural immunity how many people is that like and how big of a difference is that is this really a difference we have to care about because when they report doubled if you if you hear that something involving your health has a double risk you should act upon that immediately right you don't want to double your risk of anything so immediately take action but what if the doubling didn't make any difference like it still rounds to zero then take action and the other doesn't and they're both true if the risk is so small doubling doesn't matter so you don't take action so they're trying to make you take action by reporting the doubling without telling you what the absolute difference is right that's fake news that just happens to be completely accurate just fake apparently there's some big health care shortage a health care worker shortage that's not directly related to covet did you know that this came as a surprise to me so apparently even before the pandemic there was this sort of a crisis for healthcare employees and at least based on the reporting it's not clear why we don't know exactly why we've had nursing shortages for ages yeah and here's what i don't understand about it nursing is a pretty good job isn't it did that change i i always thought that these healthcare jobs were good jobs somebody says only fans pays better working conditions here's my guess i believe that there's a culture within the medical community for self-abuse which turns into systemic abuse for all health care workers am i wrong no i'm not directly involved in that world but what i observe is the hours are just crazy i mean lots of you work long hours i do that myself but i feel like the health care workers are in a whole different level of abuse and i think that abuse comes from you know having a lot of doctors in charge who are used to the crazy hours and if i did it you have to do it let me tell you a conversation i had years ago with a chef for my restaurant so i had a restaurant years ago and the chef was uh just a bastard he was just a jerk to all the other employees just a serious serious bad bad personality and made everybody want to quit so i had lunch with him and i said why are you acting like the biggest jerk in the world when obviously you could just not do it like what is motivating you and he told me this it was intentional it wasn't you know baked into his personality at birth or anything he was intentionally being the worst person he could be on the job why why why did the the chef tell me directly all right i'm not reading between the lines told me directly why he was a jerk and a horrible person to all the employees why i'm looking at your comments uh weed out the week unites the employees to make them work harder motivate them none of this is right by the way uh because they're immigrants he's racist he was black by the way so he wasn't racist well i mean not in the usual way anyway he wouldn't be asked to help them move that's the best answer he was a jerk to the employees so he wouldn't be asked to help them move someday maintaining pressure boom somebody got it uh not very stacked somebody got it the answer is that's how he learned it he was brought up by chefs that abused them and then he said so that's why i do it and then i said but you know it's not a good idea you don't think it's a good idea do you you don't think it works so if you know it doesn't work why would you do it and he said because that's how we learned and then i said again yeah i'm hearing you i'm hearing you about the part that that's why you learned but as of today you can quite clearly see this is a bad idea you know people are quitting i'm having this lunch with you everything's going to and it's all because of your personality now you see that right and given that it's not your natural personality it's a it's a put on personality you're doing intentionally wouldn't you consider changing that maybe doing it differently and he said it's not the way i was taught that's not the way i was taught he didn't have any reason for it he was just taught that way so now let's get back to the doctors do you think the doctors who often become administrators or at least have a big influence on you know the culture of the workplace do you think a doctor who got terribly abused when they were going through their whatever do you think that doctor is saying to us you know that those long hours were so bad for me in so many ways and really unhealthy and i am a health health worker and that was unhealthy clearly lack of sleep is unhealthy everybody understands that so because i know i went through it and it's bad i will now correct this as best i can and make sure all of my employees get enough sleep do you think that's happening i'll bet not i'll bet what's happening is hey i went through this so you're going to go through this i'll bet that's the problem now it's speculation right i'm only speculating so you know i can easily be wrong i'm not committed to this opinion but it's kind of it's kind of the only thing that not that people wouldn't talk about necessarily yeah i think it's the culture just a guess all right um apparently climate change there's a big change in public opinion according to a new poll for the first time a majority of americans now believe that the us is facing consequences of a warming world have you felt that change actually i thought i didn't know the percentage until today but this is the first time that a majority of americans believe climate change is real does that feel right did you know this is the first time a majority thought that now that's different than thinking it's a problem that you need to solve right so it's slightly different to say that we should solve it or what resources you should put in to solve it but just that it's a problem now remember that people like uh you know bjorn lomborg and michael schellenberger will will teach you that the warming world might help more than it hurts and we just don't know definitely a risk because we don't know but there's no reason to think it'll be worse the the the most reasonable take is probably is going to be better than it was right uh i don't know what that mean was supposed to apply to but over on locals somebody's supposed to be meme that says dick is everywhere chemistry isn't i'm like i think that was relevant to the conversation but um so i'm not going to tell you whether you should believe or not believe in climate change um but it's interesting that the world does now what was it that convinced people what changed recently what changed let me tell you what changed do you remember that i forget how we heard it but i think it was cnn's head saying that they were going to push climate change like crazy and that they were intentionally going to brainwash the public into making climate change that are a big issue the news industry told you that directly we're going to go persuade the public on climate change and then it happened the this poll says it worked this poll says that the news successfully convinced a big part of the public to switch over into worrying what was it that made them switch what persuasion got them to switch was it the data did people switch sides because of the data was it the argument the facts was it the facts and argument and the logic and the science was it greta nope nope it was the anecdotes it was all the stories in the news about there's this place with a drought there's this place with a record this or record that and they convinced you with anecdotes what do anecdotes prove about climate change like what does a specific storm or a specific hurricane or a specific drought what does that tell you about climate change nothing nothing so you got persuaded when they stopped using facts and they stopped using science you then you got persuaded not you but the public so uh what what is this that i've been saying for a while maybe some of you can confirm this have i not been saying that whoever is doing the persuasion on climate change isn't doing a good job they just started doing a good job do you know what how they moved from doing a bad job to a good job trump they took trump's technique they took the anecdote and sold it to the public because the public buys anecdotes that's why they're selling you the anecdotal guy didn't get the vaccination and he died because the news has finally learned that facts and reason don't move the public and they're in the job of manipulating the public they're not in the job of informing and so they made that adjustment and so you're going to see more and more anecdote because that persuades science and facts even if it's right it doesn't persuade so watching this happen in real time because remember you know you know the old story of babe ruth baseball player who famously pointed to the fence he was going to hit the home run over and then hit a home run over that fence you know famous kind of thing larry bird if you if you watched uh sports larry bird is one of the greatest basketball players and there's a famous story i was just watching on youtube where he would he would tell people what he was gonna do before he did it like crazy stuff at one point he he told people that he was going to do a fade away three-pointer and land in the opposite team's trainer's lap let me say this again during a game during the game larry bird called and told the opponents where he was going to stand how he was going to take the shot and there was going to be a fade away shot where after he shoots his body goes backwards and then he was going to land in the lap of the trainer of the other team he took the ball went to that spot drained a three-pointer and fell into the trainer's lap that actually happened and by the way it wasn't even a unique moment in larry bird's life you have to watch the the highly clips of all the larry bird greatest moments it is unbelievable it's amazing he would call the most the most crazy things true story one day he told he was they were winning some series and he said he was going to play at least three quarters of the next game left-handed left-handed he was a right-handed player he scored 27 points left-handed he called it he told the other team he was going to play left-handed they only had to guard one hand he made their guarding twice as easy by telling them i'm not even going to use his hand for three quarters he scored 27 points now if you don't follow sports that's like a lot of points left-handed all right so the news did just did the same thing they said we're going to change people's opinions on climate change and we're going to do it this year they just did it they just did it i'm seeing some comments about scott says investment isn't about right and wrong uh is apple and tesla too big to fail what do you mean by is apple and tesla too big to fail nothing's too big to fail i don't know what the question means if you mean an economic sense no there's nothing that's too big to fail you just have to look at the likelihood the likelihood is that they won't fail no no time soon anyway all right um yeah sears failed nothing lasts forever until it does i guess um so um the climate change polls you are citing are false that could be that could be i i will take that comment uh in the spirit in which it's offered yeah any poll you see uh except for rasmussen who tends to be pretty darn good i quote them a lot but yeah just a generic poll from some some entity that you're not familiar with yeah you have to be skeptical all right i believe we have reached the end of our productive morning um does anybody feel better now i told you things were going to start looking up have i followed the recent stories about havana syndrome i don't know how recent you mean but oh jen saki brought up the bleach oak last week and no one corrected her just amazing amazing uh no i'm not following if there's something new new about the havana syndrome but i assume that it's more not finding it oh i've seen some leaks links to the larry bird stuff on youtube you sip after i leave my god your golden age delusion is it let me make let me make a quick argument for the golden age number one nuclear let's say war among superpowers i think is over because it's unwinnable and everybody knows it so i think world wars are probably over in the shooting sense we'll have lots of cyber stuff but we'll get that under control the mrna platform shows promise for curing all kinds of stuff including cancer right so because of the pandemic here are the things that will change all right and maybe would not have changed without the pandemic um commuting and working in the office right it's one of the worst things in a lot of people's life was having to commute and working in a terrible office that's gone forever in the sense that you at least have options you know i mean you could work for a company that doesn't require it or a company that does but you have an option now way more than you ever had so i think commuting changes uh if you're following the electric bicycle market it's way bigger than you think meaning the the impact on society so the quality of batteries and the price and and the power of batteries got to the point where having a battery assist on your bicycle allows you to go 100 miles on a bicycle pretty easily i mean it still takes some time but it's pretty easy and it's going to change everything you don't know it yet because we we haven't organized around it but in 20 years you're just going to be on an electric something and maybe even your car will be less useful i think there's going to be all kinds of changes in housing i think that the economy will be fine and i think that um ai will not kill us all i think it will help us now there's a risk of ai killing us all so i mean that's a real risk we have to manage it but i think we saw it far enough in advance e-bikes made in china yeah yeah i mean if anybody wants to call me out for buying chinese products you're on the wrong page all right i'm not the guy telling you that you or i or anybody else has to stop buying all chinese-made products i'm not telling you that that would be bad for american companies too what i'm telling you is that moving new business there is done and that's all it takes to to end china um so those are some of the things happening i would say that most of what's happening is positive even if it doesn't look that way remember the news is only going to tell you what's bad news so afghanistan is over the middle east looks like you know more peace than we've ever had because of abraham accords iran weirdly isn't making a lot of noise right now is it but why is iran so quiet anybody what's happening with iran it's too quiet right almost like something's gonna happen like a deal maybe it feels like the calm before some kind of a agreement newsom scott love him so this is a comment on youtube in all capitals newsom scott love him okay that's not even close to true uh yeah israel has uh said that they will unilaterally take care of iran which i imagine makes iran more afraid and not less i've got a feeling that iran would like a world in which the united states would talk or israel out of attacking but apparently that's not going to happen because israel just said okay we're just going to do what we need to do that could take care of the problem because i'm sure that their intelligence on iran is pretty darn good by now um yeah still waiting for an e-bike stream well i did a e-bike yeah i guess i should do more of an e-bike stream i should strap my phone to the bike and take a ride for you all right uh haitian caravans yeah we've talked about that there's more coming like a lot more coming um all right uh just looking at your comments the news about the havana syndrome uh well let me check that while i'm here so so many of you are asking me about the savannah i'm sorry havana syndrome so there's some new news that involves the biden administration so one hour ago looking into reports uh sensory attacks they believe they're closer to understanding uh there's nothing new here is there what's new what is new on this story i don't see anything new on this story um what's causing it okay yeah i think the government i don't i don't trust the government on this but we'll see all right let's keep an eye on that and let's go brandon let's go brandon and by the way it would be hilarious if in places where you couldn't be shouting f biden if instead you started chanting let's go brandon and everybody knew what you meant it would be funny all right goodbye youtube i'll see you tomorrow
today is gonna be
well it's gonna be a good day
maybe not for every one of you
but statistically speaking
99.99 percent of you could have a good
day
but uh you know
some people not so much but you you're
going to be good and why well because
you were wise enough smart enough and
good looking enough
to arrive on time to watch the what
that's right the simultaneous sip i know
it's almost too good to believe
imagine your luck
i mean if the rest of your day goes as
well as this has gone so far
wow
the things you can get done today
could be a good one
there's something that you've been
thinking about doing
i'm talking to you right now
look at me look at me
i know you're doing other things you're
exercising you're taking a walk you're
doing some housework but look at me look
at me
there's something that you were planning
to do
or wanted to do
that you're hesitant about
and you're thinking to yourself i don't
even know why i don't want to do it like
i sort of have reasons
but i don't know why exactly i don't
want to do that thing i i should make
that phone call i should invite that
friend i should ask that person now and
i should i should apply for that job
do it
just do it today
do it today because i said today is a
good day to do it
you don't need a better reason
today is a good day to do it
just do it
you'll be fine
will you be embarrassed uh maybe
get a good story out of it will you
succeed i don't know
does it matter nope
nope doesn't matter it doesn't matter if
you succeed do you know what matters
that you tried
that's it that's your system
the system is
you try
so do that today
we'll get to the simultaneous sip
but i wanted to leave you that today's
the day there's a thing that you've been
putting off you know you need to do it
just do it just do it today and watch
what happens
and now
all you need to enjoy this morning to
the maximum extent is a copper margarita
glass of tankard chalice or stein a
canteen jugger flask a vessel of any
kind fill it with your favorite liquid
i like coffee
and join me now
for the unparalleled pleasure
the dopamine of the day the thing that
makes everything better it's called the
simultaneous but it happens now go
oh yeah
now you feel the fortification you
needed
that little extra push to do that thing
all right i missed a comment i'm going
to look here from russia
you often argue that x isn't bad because
we already do some version of x but this
ignores the possibility yes the thing
we're already doing is also bad and
should be gotten
this little too generic mauricio i
understand your point but you need to
connect that to a specific topic and
then i can deal with it more effectively
but i understand the point
um alyssa milano was part of the uh
i guess the marches a lot of women and a
lot of men too
marched because they're worried about
their uh
so-called abortion rights
and they don't want to lose them in the
supreme court because i guess there's
some cases that are coming up that'll
challenge
roe v s rovery suede oh somebody's got
uh
very cool somebody's watching me in
a 3d world
that's very cool
um
anyway so alyssa milano was a speaker
now
you may not be on her team
you know she identifies with the left
maybe you're on the right you're saying
you're saying to yourself
i don't like that alyssa milano
but i gotta tell you she's good at what
she does
and again i like to compliment people i
disagree with i'm not saying i disagree
with her i'm just saying i'm going to
give her a compliment in this case i've
disagreed with her on other other stuff
but here's her argument
and she said this and i quote in a
speech i can't believe how a handful of
men
talking about the supreme court i can't
believe how a handful of men are
successfully taking 50 years of rights
away from women
and how our supreme court
packed with abusers
is just gonna sit by and let it all
happen
now forget about whether you agree with
her right
i i know you don't agree with her in
many cases right most of you probably
don't if you're if you're on this uh if
you're watching this you probably don't
maybe you do
but
just look at the persuasion
here's the argument that doesn't work
we have a right to abortion
does that argument move anybody we've
got a right it's our right
not really
how about even it's our bodies
better
it's better because everybody responds
to that right oh it's our bodies
but we also know that the government
does control our bodies and we like it
that way
we do
the government controls your body always
has
and we like it that way
so it isn't really ever it's never your
body you know your your choice
you don't live in that world the
government decides if you go to war
the government decides if you're free or
you're in jail
because they make the laws and if you
don't follow them they decided you're in
jail and then they put you in jail you
don't have control over your body
you want control over your body
maybe
but you don't have it not even close
right
so although although the argument can be
persuasive it doesn't make any sense
because we are we we gave away our
rights to our body
when we decided to have a government
basically if they can draft you
if they can draft you they control your
body
now i agree with you that you'd like
less of it are we all on the same page
we'd all like less of that right there's
nobody there's nobody who's arguing give
give the government more control over my
body no nobody's on that side i'm just
saying you're already there
so the argument intellectually kind of
fails but persuasively i think it does
work
it just doesn't work as well as
what alyssa milano did what elizablano
did that really works
this is the best argument against
uh the current situation so she's
arguing that it's men taking things away
from women
now do you know how the the psychology
of humans works
when they have let's say
if you were to compare these two things
which is the stronger psychological
impulse
the impulse to not lose something you
think you have
or the desire to guess something that
you want which is the stronger of the
two
not wanting to lose something you
already have
versus hey i'd like a new thing that'd
be great
yeah the the the not losing something is
the stronger one
so notice how she puts she she phrases
this in terms of
uh a bunch of men
taking things away from
women that's not bad
persuasion wise i'm not taking your
stand on abortion can everybody
understand that
you're not going to hear my opinion on
abortion
because my opinion
agrees with part of what she said
not
not the ultimate decision but the part
where she says why are men involved in
deciding what women do with their bodies
that's pretty strong it's the argument
that i use for staying out of the whole
thing if melissa alano says to me hey
scott adams
this is unlikely but if she were to say
to me
scott adams why are you even involved in
this question
i would say
good point good point why am i even
involved in this question
i i would it's much more credible
if women make the decision doesn't mean
it's right
doesn't mean it's wrong and it doesn't
take away your right to participate i
don't want to take your right to
participate
in any question
i'm just saying if you want the most
credible outcome
it would be women deciding what women do
with their bodies
even if there were lots of disagreement
on that it would be the most credible
outcome
so that's a good good attack vector i
think
i don't know if she'll be successful or
or what's going to happen to the supreme
court
um but
that's good persuasion it's good
persuasion
here's a tip for you
ignore the absolutists
this will be one of the most useful tips
you'll ever hear
ignore the absolutists what's an
absolutist that's somebody who argues
that things just are
or they are not
and there's nothing about risk or maybe
there's no there's no ambiguity there's
no you know uncertainty about data
anybody who's got an absolute point of
view
just ignore them
they're not even humans basically
they're they're just npcs they're just
programmed to walk around say yes
no
yeah that's all they got let me give you
an example
um and sorry locals there's somebody on
locals who did this and
don't mean to insult you personally
although that's probably gonna happen
um so i'm probably going to lose one
subscriber on locals today
maybe more
goes like this
i just saw a mean that says the vaccines
don't stop infections
therefore what good are they
vaccines don't stop
infections
therefore what good are they
that's an absolute
do you believe that
vaccines don't reduce any infections
because that's not the case
we know that pretty definitively
that people who are vaccinated are way
less likely to get infected they do get
infected though
so it doesn't work as a
statement of fact
that getting vaccinated protects you
from
infection but if you treat that as it
was an absolute
yeah i'm saying the meme again
i'll read you the meme
it's from uh it's a tweet from anthony
brian logan he says cdc director
richelle walensky says that the vaccine
cannot
prevent transmission
so why are all these pro-vaxxers saying
it can
huh
if the cdc director says
that the
vaccines cannot prevent infections why
take it
well that's that's the absolutist view
there's nothing you do because it's
absolute
do you
you wear your seatbelt because
the odds are better with it than without
it
does anybody think that a sea bill has
never killed anybody i'm sure it has
it's just it's not as common
so as soon as you're dealing with
somebody who says
oh
if the vaccine doesn't stop every
transmission
has no value
you can't talk to people like that
don't talk to people who talk in
absolutes there's nothing you can do
with that just walk away i'm not even
sure that they're real people
you know if we're a simulation they seem
to be the ones that
are non-player characters if you know
what i mean
keith oliverman has a
video out he's trying to get more people
vaccinated
if you don't know keith olbermann
let's just say that his entertainment
value
is extreme
he's he's not the most
rational person i've ever seen but his
entertainment value
pretty high
and uh
in his new video he's he's saying that
we
that
we should stop saying that their people
are vaccine hesitant because that's too
kind to them says keith olbermann he
says instead we should call them morons
snowflakes snowflakes and that they're
afraid they're afraid
that's why they don't get the vaccine
they're afraid they're afraid
what's wrong with that
what's wrong with it is that every
decision about the vaccine or not
vaccine is because people are afraid
that's the only reason you get it right
i mean you might not be very afraid
but let's say at least concerned
because whether you get vaccinated or
don't get vaccinated it's all based on
fear
the fear is the only thing that's making
any of it happen
he thinks one side is operating on fear
that's everybody
that's keith olbermann he's literally
afraid that other people won't give
vaccines it's all fear
there's no non-fear opinion involved in
any of this
right now you might not have much fear
but if you had zero fear you wouldn't
even be involved in the conversation
anyway the most important question about
his video and i i think twitter user
angela
pointed this out
uh what we'd like to know is whether the
spittle that keith olbermann was
producing in this rant
was it foaming
was it just straight spittle
it was a little rabid
foaming i think that's the important
question
all right well most of you probably saw
this story which is the funny story of
the day that apparently at sporting
events all over the country
a lot of
the spectators are starting a chant
what's the chance
i think you already know the chant it's
uh f joe biden
except they use the full word
and i guess there was a
nascar
uh race in alabama's
telediga speedway
and uh
the winner was a fellow named brandon
brown he was being interviewed
afterwards and the chance broke out
f joe biden
f joe biden
and the
the interviewer
and i don't i still don't know yet if
the interviewer was completely aware
of what the real chat was but the
interviewer very cleverly because it was
live tv
said look they're
they're chanting uh
go brandon
no wait what do you say it was uh let's
go brandon
so let's go brandon
now
uh that's hilarious because you know
we've all had that lonnie and uh
laurel and yani experience
so when you first hear that you think
yourself
maybe it was
maybe that is what they're saying
because i've been fooled by all these
other
uh audio illusions maybe that's what
they're saying
but
uh
i'm not i'm gonna say because i don't
know the answer yet maybe maybe somebody
here knows the answer to the question
of whether the interviewer knew exactly
what they were doing
or did the interviewer actually think
that the chant was something about the
race race car driver
um
does anybody know
i i haven't seen oh she laughed
oh the interviewer is laughing
well okay maybe that's the giveaway
but here's the part i love about the
story
what makes this spread
what makes it spread is that fox news
reports it
right
if fox news keeps reporting every time
there's a stadium that erupts in this
chant
and they do
they do report it every time does cnn
report it every time
i don't think so
how about msnbc do they report that
every time
no probably not
so what happens when fox news reports it
every time
it guarantees it's going to happen
right
is it really news
is it newsworthy that people are
chanting this well the first time
maybe even the second time and it might
be newsworthy you know if it's a some
specific kind of event
but watching fox news make this happen
and pretend that it's they're just
covering the news
no they're making the news
fox news is making this happen
and then the reporting of it it's a
great circular kind of business model
let's make something happen
and then we'll report it
and we don't even have to spend money
researching
we'll just listen to the video and say
oh there's a report
got another report there
got another article out of that
all right so uh and i'm not i'm not even
criticizing fox news i just think it's
funny i think it's hilarious that
they're doing it
um
in the slightly more serious news the
battle for taiwan has started
here's the report
so it's not unusual for china to send
aircraft into taiwan's airspace just to
sort of
keep them on notice that china says we
own you
but the number that they sent has just
skyrocketed
so china sent 20 aircraft
into taiwan's space uh i guess yesterday
and then later a bunch more so nearly 80
planes including fighter jets and
bombers
80 chinese aircraft including fighter
jets and bombers
80
in one day
violated
the taiwan airspace according to taiwan
what do you make of that
now obviously it's because of biden's
weakness does anybody disagree with that
somewhat obviously because of biden's
weakness they have to probe it
so is it smart for china to you know
probe for a weakness
yeah it is smart i mean given that their
goal is to
you know get taiwan under the control
eventually
is very smart
but
be careful what you wish for
be careful what you wish for
if all of you heard the phrase a pyrrhic
victory
p-y-r-r-h-i-a-c
how many of you have heard the phrase
a pyrrhic
victory
so this is a pretty well-informed crowd
especially
especially over on
on locals on locals every one of you say
yes
really
holy cow
oh even even on youtube
wow
i don't know if does this mean that i
have a more educated
audience than
the average i can't believe that this
would be mostly yes's
with a generic audience
can you
am i being surprised for no reason or is
this actually surprising it's almost all
yeses on two different platforms
maybe the no people aren't weighing in
but
i'll be damned
i really thought that that was going to
be closer to like 20 of you would know
what that meant all right well
surprising but also
good news
it's good news that you all know that
so
a pyrrhic victory if there's one person
who doesn't know it means that you might
win the battle but you've degraded your
army so much in winning the battle
that you're going to lose the war
because you don't have enough left after
the battle to to maintain and keep
things
and imagine if you will
china militarily taking over taiwan
let's just game this out in our heads
imagine that china militarily attacks
taiwan
what's the united states do
what do we do
well i'm sure we'd you know arrange our
assets our military assets but would we
fire at mainland china
i don't think so
i don't think that we would get into a
shooting war with china because it could
there's just no way i can you could win
and there's nothing like winning
that that would look like that
i think what we would do is just take
out china's economy
for a hundred years
i think china's economy
would suffer for a hundred years if they
take taiwan now that might be worth it
they might say you know
we we think in terms of thousands of
years so 100 years to get taiwan back
under our control yeah let's do it maybe
i mean i don't i can't get into the
minds of the chinese
leadership
but
i think that it would be impossible for
an american business to do any business
with china if they were militarily
taking over taiwan who disagrees
so just that statement
that the moment that china actually
fired on taiwan militarily
and and it was actually war from that
moment on and for the next hundred years
you couldn't be an american company
going to do business in china
and even the ones that are there would
have to pull out then they'd have to
now your iphone is
going to suffer for a long time because
they won't be able to assemble it
but
so that's the first thing that china has
to worry about it would guarantee
crashing their economy does anybody
think it wouldn't
guarantee
a crash of china's economy because the
rest of the world would just turn on
does anybody think that's wrong
disagree with me if if you
have reason
because you don't think we would just
keep doing business do you just
business as usual uh well we lost taiwan
i sure wish that hadn't happened
yeah china's economy is already fragile
but i think this is the further
guarantee that china is unsafe for
business
imagine considering doing business in
china
when you know that they send 80
warplanes into taiwan airspace
you're the ceo of some big company
and you're trying to decide whether to
move into china to do manufacturing
you can't do it
just the fact that they're
threatening at this level
means that china is a potential war zone
at least economically and then you know
if it's economically you can't really
move anything there
they won't be able to get any parts and
everything will fall apart no energy etc
so
as i've told you many times the economy
turns on one thing primarily as long as
you have enough resources there's one
thing that makes the economy run what is
it
what is the one thing that makes an
economy work
as long as you have enough resources
expectations
psychology
confidence yeah it's the mental part
china
has lost
the base requirement
for a good economy
the base requirement and there's no
exception to this
is some level of trust
you've got to have
some trust some certainty
some confidence
it's all gone
china has burned all of their business
capital
their psychological capital it's all
gone now
there's nobody who is a reasonable
person who follows you know world events
who thinks it wouldn't be too risky to
go into china and do business there
because it's way too risky now
not maybe not so much 20 years ago but
right now way too risky
and
that psychological problem is just
getting bigger
and
what is the one thing that the united
states would need
to guarantee that we
um take china's economy down without
firing a shot
which
which president would get you that
result
which president gets you
not a single shot fired
and china is just dismantled
only one person on earth probably
probably only one person on earth could
get that done
if china makes a stronger move for
taiwan
trump's your next president
i mean i don't know how you could
that's it
it's over
if china wants to make trump
you know get a second term
just just fire a real missile into
taiwan just one
and he's president
and he's going to come for you
he's coming for you
and this time
he's going to have the whole country
behind him
at least in terms of china you know
he'll be as divisive as ever in general
but when it comes to china
whole country's going to be behind him
and what happens if the generals say i
don't think you should do this economic
warfare it might turn into something bad
nope
now would it be a pyrrhic victory for
the united states
maybe
that's the risk
so that's why you need a trump
to manage what would be kind of a
delicate process
which is how do you get our economy to
still work if a china's if china's
economy is going down they're kind of
connected right
so how do you do that
let me throw out an idea
are you ready for a wild brainstorming
idea you ready
i'm going to tie a couple things
together i don't know if this is
practical this is just brainstorming so
don't be too critical
take this as what i call the bad idea
or the bad version
the bad version
just makes you maybe think of a better
version right so i'm just stimulating
your thinking process goes like this
how could we manufacture things in the
united states
cheaply enough
that we could compete with whatever was
happening in china
two ways
number one as i see over in the locals
platform where we're well educated on
this
robots
you can build with robots just as
cheaply in america as you can in china
do you know why
because a robot costs the same
if china buys a robot it costs the same
as if we buy a robot and the robot works
all night
and it makes you your stuff
so you come to you get kind of close to
the same
cost and you also eliminate the shipping
you eliminate all the time problems and
the shipping because it's made locally
now
so robots is part of it
what i'd like to see
is you know more of that but we don't
want to robotize
too quickly do we
you know you want to you don't want to
go full robot because that would wipe
out american jobs as well
yeah unions unions are going to have a
problem with it
so robots are part of the answer but
they're
oh stop getting ahead of me mike
damn you
over on youtube
mike
getting way ahead of me
all right that's where i'm going we've
got a million immigrants coming in
if we took those million immigrants and
said
you can come into the united states but
only
only
into these following zones
their manufacturing zones
and in these special manufacturing zones
where you're welcome
you know we'd like to know who you are
and uh you know
know who we're getting right we don't
want the criminals but we're going to be
we got a lot of immigrants they're not
americans and we're not going to hold
them to the same
minimum wage
you can come live here and you can even
stay in factory housing
because it's better than whatever you
had going when you left and you maybe
you can take some uh english classes
maybe you can work your way up to some
kind of a plan where you could become a
citizen or maybe your kids can become
citizens or something
so some kind of somebody says
be like slave owners
no you want to do this as humanely as
possible
and you want to give them a path
in which they solve our problem
while we solve their problem
do you know what our problem is
china
our problem is china
if we can solve china
and what it brings us is a million
immigrants who work
and produce things for
americans at low cost
and
so they solve our biggest you know
geopolitical problem
they bring youth into the country
because we need it for the long run you
got to bring lots of young people in
they bring in workers who
in within their special zones don't have
any minimum wage
but they can still live in a decent life
while they're learning english and maybe
preparing for
some more substantial job now the key
would be
that
they could do this legally
but they couldn't leave the zone
so you'd have to have some control over
that but you'd want to make it um work
well enough that people didn't want to
leave
because if they leave the zone they're
just going to get a you know a low
paying job somewhere else
so if you had a you know a good safe
area with maybe maybe even some health
care from the companies not from the
government from the companies
somebody says that's a modern plantation
compared to the alternative
right
so what you're saying is gosh you would
be building a system that sounds
like the you know the company's store
you know historically this has been a
bad model am i right
historically what i'm explaining would
have been a bad idea do we all agree
with that
that historically
what i'm suggesting would have always
been a bad idea it would have just
turned into sweatshops and
slave labor but what's different about
2021
you just put cameras everywhere
yeah you just say okay if you're a
company and you're gonna hire these
immigrants at less than a minimum wage
you have a responsibility to really be
monitored in this
and that would be different
in 2021 we could guarantee that these
companies are watched very carefully
to make sure that they don't become a
place where you know their people are
stuck forever and
you know they're they owe money it's a
ghetto
any of that stuff so the companies would
have to make sure that the living spaces
are are well maintained
that'll be inexpensive
they'd have to make sure that the
working conditions are human
and that they get paid enough
that they're not trapped there forever
you know they have some way out
somebody says here it comes to the
d-platforming
all right so i'm looking at your um
comments
and i see lots of now
to know they'll want reparations
um
sounds like dubai i doubt it because i
don't think dubai is worried too much
about the working conditions of the
immigrants
um this sounds like something that would
not take human motivation into account i
believe the opposite of that i believe
that this model um
relies on human motivation being exactly
what it is in other words the only way
to make this work
is to make it more advantageous for
immigrants to go through this process
than to avoid it
right that's the key yeah you'd have to
design the process so that the people
who are subject to say yeah i'd prefer
it it's way better than the alternative
because the alternative i don't know
what's going to happen to me but here
i've got a definite job that's better
[Laughter]
we are past that point
yeah now if you're if you think that i
think this is practical and we could you
know start this up tomorrow and stuff
not so much
right now it's not like the uyghur camp
i guess people would be able to to leave
and go home anytime they wanted they
just couldn't leave and come into the
country
all right
here's a cnn
giving you some fake news with numbers
i'm going to read you what cnn said and
see if you can tell me what's the fake
news part of this all right
here's the test cnn says quote a cdc
study published in august
suggested that people that got covered
19 in
2020
and didn't get a vaccine
were more than twice as likely to be
re-infected to get covert a second time
in
may or june
of 2021
compared with people who
were fully vaccinated so you can get
covet if you vaccinated
all right
you can get covent if you're vaccinated
everybody knows that right we're all we
all know that the vaccine doesn't
completely stop it it reduces the odds
way way down
so the odds of getting it if you're
vaccinated or way down most of you don't
know that
most of you think that the odds of
getting it is about the same if you're
vaccinated or unvaccinated
it's not even close
right did you know that how many of you
didn't know that is there anybody here
who thought
that the odds of getting it were about
the same if you're vaccinated or not
vaccinated
yeah you'll see people telling me i'm
wrong go
go research that i won't argue it here
just go research that
and watch that the other people in the
feed are telling you that you're wrong
yeah
see the the thing that makes you think
i'm wrong is a statistic that's
misleading
and this the statistic that says that in
some places
more vaccinated people are coming in
with infection
than unvaccinated right
so that's what you're thinking there are
these places that more vaccinated people
have it
than unvaccinated
that's not the statistic you should be
looking at
that's that's misleading
and here's why i'll give you the simple
explanation
once everybody is vaccinated let's say
in a town
just look at a town everybody gets
vaccinated
what percentage of the people who get
coveted are vaccinated
all of them
yeah 100 of the people who get coven
would also be vaccinated because
everybody's vaccinated so the more
vaccinations you have
you're guaranteed given that you can
still get it
you're guaranteed that most people who
get it will be vaccinated
but that doesn't change the statistic
that your odds of getting it at all are
way way lower if you're vaccinated
now maybe not in the long term in the
long term maybe we're all going to get
it right
but you'd rather be vaccinated if you do
well
maybe you don't i won't say that you'd
rather i'll say that
i'll say that uh
the scientists are telling you you'd be
better off that way
but you make your own decision
um
crawley says at crowley says you can't
know that they aren't they aren't
tracking vaccinated cases yes sir
yeah
they're not tracking everybody who got
vaccinated
but they're definitely surveying
vaccinated and unvaccinated people
that's definitely happening
they're just not counting every single
person but statistically they just do a
sample and that's all they need
all right
so
the the fake news is this
being twice as likely to get reinfected
so they've compared if you had natural
immunity you've already been affected
compared to only vaccinated but you've
never had it all right so those are the
comparisons
natural immunity
to vaccinated and the claim here on cnn
is that you're more than twice as likely
to get reinfected
if you've only been infected
as opposed to been vaccinated
is that real news or fake news
that's fake news that's true
it's fake news
that's 100 true
is that a possibility can you have fake
news that's 100 true at the same time
because this i believe the statistics
are true
but why is it fake
the way it's presented
let's say uh your risk of uh
your risk of getting a deadly disease
something besides covet god my nose
always rich itches when i'm in public
this is like it's a psychological thing
so half the time when i'm doing this
it's not because of
my allergies it's because i get this
psychological itch on my nose when i'm
in public
here's why it's fake news let's say take
the example of
your risk of
being killed by a terrorist
let's say your personal risk of being
killed by a terrorist is one in 10
billion
that's not that's that's not right let's
say
uh one in
let's say it's 1 in 100 million i don't
know what the real number is but let's
say it's 100 million that's your risk
and then you double it
you double it
is that a story
your risk of being killed by a terrorist
just doubled
it's not a story
because your risk was so low that
doubling it didn't make really any
difference at all
so
when cnn says your risk of getting
re-infected
if you've got natural immunity
how many people is that
like and how big of a difference is that
is this really a difference we have to
care about because when they report
doubled
if you if you hear that something
involving your health
has a double risk
you should act upon that immediately
right
you don't want to double your risk of
anything so immediately take action
but what if the doubling didn't make any
difference
like it still rounds to zero
then
take action and the other doesn't and
they're both true
if the risk is so small doubling doesn't
matter
so you don't take action
so they're trying to make you take
action
by reporting the doubling without
telling you what the absolute difference
is
right that's fake news
that just happens to be
completely accurate
just fake
apparently there's some big health care
shortage a health care worker shortage
that's not
directly related to covet did you know
that
this came as a surprise to me so
apparently even before the pandemic
there was this
sort of a crisis
for healthcare employees
and
at least based on the reporting it's not
clear why
we don't know exactly why
we've had nursing shortages for ages
yeah and here's what i don't understand
about it nursing is a pretty good job
isn't it
did that change
i i always thought that
these healthcare jobs were good jobs
somebody says only fans pays better
working conditions
here's my guess
i believe that there's a culture
within the medical community
for self-abuse
which turns into
systemic abuse for all health care
workers
am i wrong
no i'm not directly involved in that
world but what i observe is the hours
are just crazy
i mean lots of you work long hours i do
that myself
but i feel like the health care workers
are in a whole different level
of abuse
and i think that abuse comes from
you know having a lot of doctors in
charge who are used to the crazy hours
and if i did it you have to do it let me
tell you a conversation i had years ago
with a chef
for my restaurant so i had a restaurant
years ago
and the chef was uh just a bastard
he was just a jerk to all the other
employees just a serious serious bad bad
personality and made everybody want to
quit
so i had lunch with him and i said
why are you acting like the biggest jerk
in the world
when obviously you could just not do it
like what is motivating you
and he told me this
it was intentional
it wasn't you know baked into his
personality at birth or anything he was
intentionally being the worst person he
could be
on the job why
why
why did the the chef tell me directly
all right i'm not reading between the
lines
told me directly
why he was a jerk and a horrible person
to all the employees why
i'm looking at your comments uh
weed out the week unites the employees
to make them work harder
motivate them none of this is right by
the way uh because they're immigrants
he's racist he was black by the way so
he wasn't racist
well i mean
not in the usual way anyway
he wouldn't be asked to help them move
that's the best answer he was a jerk to
the employees so he wouldn't be asked to
help them move someday
maintaining pressure
boom somebody got it
uh not very stacked
somebody got it the answer is
that's how he learned it
he was brought up by chefs that abused
them
and then he said so that's why i do it
and then i said but you know it's not a
good idea
you don't think it's a good idea do you
you don't think it works
so if you know it doesn't work
why would you do it
and he said
because that's how we learned
and then i said again
yeah i'm hearing you i'm hearing you
about the part that that's why you
learned
but as of today
you can quite clearly see
this is a bad idea you know people are
quitting
i'm having this lunch with you
everything's going to and it's all
because of your personality now you see
that right and given that it's not your
natural personality it's a it's a put on
personality you're doing intentionally
wouldn't you consider changing that
maybe doing it differently
and he said
it's not the way i was taught
that's not the way i was taught
he didn't have any reason for it
he was just taught that way
so now let's get back to the doctors
do you think the doctors who often
become administrators or at least have a
big influence on you know the culture of
the workplace do you think a doctor who
got terribly abused when they were going
through their whatever
do you think that doctor is saying to us
you know
that those long hours were so bad for me
in so many ways and really unhealthy and
i am a health health worker and that was
unhealthy clearly lack of sleep is
unhealthy everybody understands that so
because i know i went through it and
it's bad
i will now correct this as best i can
and make sure all of my employees get
enough sleep
do you think that's happening
i'll bet not
i'll bet what's happening is hey i went
through this so you're going to go
through this
i'll bet that's the problem now it's
speculation right i'm only speculating
so you know i can easily be wrong i'm
not committed to this opinion
but it's kind of
it's kind of the only thing that not
that people wouldn't talk about
necessarily
yeah i think it's the culture
just a guess
all right um
apparently climate change
there's a big change in public opinion
according to a new poll
for the first time a majority of
americans now believe
that the us is facing consequences of a
warming world
have you felt that change
actually i thought i didn't know the
percentage until today but this is the
first time
that a majority of americans believe
climate change is real
does that feel right
did you know this is the first time a
majority thought that
now that's different than thinking it's
a problem
that you need to solve right so it's
slightly different
to say that we should solve it or what
resources you should put in to solve it
but just that it's a problem
now remember that people like uh you
know bjorn lomborg and
michael schellenberger will will teach
you
that the warming world might help more
than it hurts and we just don't know
definitely a risk because we don't know
but there's no reason to think it'll be
worse
the the
the most reasonable take is
probably is going to be better than it
was
right
uh
i don't know what that mean was supposed
to apply to but over on locals
somebody's supposed to be meme that says
dick is everywhere chemistry isn't
i'm like
i think that was relevant to the
conversation but
um
so i'm not going to tell you whether you
should believe or not believe in climate
change um
but
it's interesting that the world does now
what was it that convinced people
what changed
recently what changed
let me tell you what changed
do you remember that
i forget how we heard it but i think it
was cnn's
head
saying that they were going to push
climate change like crazy
and that they were intentionally going
to brainwash the public
into making climate change that are a
big issue
the news industry told you that directly
we're going to go persuade the public
on climate change
and then it happened
the this poll says it worked
this poll says that the news
successfully convinced
a big part of the public
to switch over into worrying what was it
that made them switch
what persuasion
got them to switch
was it
the data
did people switch sides because of the
data
was it the argument the facts
was it the facts and argument and the
logic and the science
was it greta
nope
nope
it was the anecdotes
it was all the stories in the news about
there's this place with a drought
there's this place with a record this or
record that
and they convinced you with anecdotes
what do anecdotes prove about climate
change like what does a specific
storm or a specific hurricane or a
specific drought
what does that tell you about climate
change
nothing
nothing
so you got persuaded
when they stopped using facts
and they stopped using science
you then you got persuaded not you
but the public
so uh what what is this that i've been
saying for a while maybe some of you
can confirm this have i not been saying
that whoever is doing the persuasion on
climate change isn't doing a good job
they just started doing a good job
do you know what how they
moved from doing a bad job to a good job
trump
they took trump's technique
they took the anecdote and sold it to
the public because the public buys
anecdotes
that's why they're selling you the
anecdotal
guy didn't get the vaccination and he
died
because the news has finally learned
that facts and reason don't move the
public
and they're in the job of manipulating
the public they're not in the job of
informing
and so they made that adjustment
and so you're going to see more and more
anecdote
because that persuades
science and facts
even if it's right it doesn't persuade
so watching this happen in real time
because remember you know you know the
old story of babe ruth baseball player
who famously pointed to the fence he was
going to hit the home run over and then
hit a home run over that fence you know
famous kind of thing
larry bird
if you if you watched uh sports larry
bird is one of the greatest basketball
players
and there's a famous story i was just
watching on youtube where he would he
would tell people what he was gonna do
before he did it
like crazy stuff
at one point he he told people that he
was going to do
a fade away three-pointer and land in
the opposite team's trainer's lap
let me say this again during a game
during the game
larry bird
called and told the opponents
where he was going to stand
how he was going to take the shot and
there was going to be a fade away shot
where after he shoots his body goes
backwards and then he was going to land
in the lap
of the trainer of the other team
he took the ball
went to that spot
drained a three-pointer and fell into
the trainer's lap
that actually happened
and by the way it wasn't even a unique
moment in larry bird's life you have to
watch the the highly clips of all the
larry bird greatest moments
it is unbelievable
it's amazing he would call the most the
most crazy things true story
one day he told he was they were winning
some series and he said he was going to
play at least three quarters of the next
game left-handed
left-handed
he was a right-handed player
he scored 27 points
left-handed he called it
he told the other team he was going to
play left-handed they only had to guard
one hand
he made their guarding
twice as easy
by telling them i'm not even going to
use his hand
for three quarters he scored
27 points now if you don't follow sports
that's like a lot of points
left-handed
all right
so the news did just did the same thing
they said we're going to change people's
opinions on climate change and we're
going to do it this year
they just did it
they just did it
i'm seeing some comments about
scott says investment isn't about right
and wrong
uh is apple and tesla too big to fail
what do you mean by is apple and tesla
too big to fail nothing's too big to
fail
i don't know what the question means
if you mean an economic sense no there's
nothing that's too big to fail you just
have to look at the likelihood
the likelihood is that they won't fail
no no time soon anyway
all right
um yeah sears failed
nothing lasts forever
until it does i guess
um
so
um
the climate change polls you are citing
are false that could be
that could be
i i will take that comment uh
in the spirit in which it's offered yeah
any poll you see
uh except for rasmussen
who tends to be
pretty darn good i quote them a lot
but yeah just a generic poll from some
some entity that you're not familiar
with yeah you have to be skeptical
all right i believe we have reached
the end of our productive morning
um does anybody feel better now
i told you things were going to start
looking up
have i followed the recent stories about
havana syndrome i don't know how recent
you mean
but
oh jen saki brought up the bleach oak
last week
and no one corrected her just amazing
amazing
uh no i'm not following if there's
something new new about the havana
syndrome but i assume that it's more not
finding it
oh i've seen some leaks
links
to the larry bird stuff on youtube
you sip after i leave my god
your golden age delusion
is it
let me make let me make a quick argument
for the golden age
number one
nuclear let's say war among superpowers
i think is over
because it's unwinnable and everybody
knows it so i think world wars are
probably over in the
shooting sense we'll have lots of cyber
stuff but we'll get that under control
the mrna platform
shows promise for curing all kinds of
stuff including cancer
right
so
because of the pandemic here are the
things that will change
all right
and maybe would not have changed without
the pandemic
um
commuting and working in the office
right it's one of the worst things in a
lot of people's life was having to
commute and working in a terrible office
that's gone forever in the sense that
you at least have options
you know i mean you could work for a
company that doesn't require it or a
company that does but you have an option
now way more than you ever had so i
think commuting
changes
uh if you're following the electric
bicycle market
it's way bigger than you think
meaning the the impact on society
so the quality of batteries and the
price and and the power of batteries got
to the point
where having a battery assist on your
bicycle
allows you to go 100 miles on a bicycle
pretty easily i mean it still takes some
time but it's pretty easy
and
it's going to change everything you
don't know it yet because we we haven't
organized around it but in 20 years
you're just going to be on an electric
something
and maybe even your car will be less
useful
i think there's going to be all kinds of
changes in housing i think that
the economy will be fine
and
i think that
um
ai will not kill us all i think it will
help us
now there's a risk of ai killing us all
so i mean that's a real risk we have to
manage it but i think we saw it far
enough in advance
e-bikes made in china yeah yeah i mean
if anybody wants to call me out
for buying chinese products you're on
the wrong page
all right i'm not the guy telling you
that you or i or anybody else has to
stop buying
all chinese-made products i'm not
telling you that that would be bad for
american companies too
what i'm telling you is that moving new
business there is done and that's all it
takes to to end china
um
so those are some of the things
happening i would say that most of
what's happening
is positive even if it doesn't look that
way remember the news is only going to
tell you what's bad news
so afghanistan is over the middle east
looks like you know more peace than
we've ever had because of abraham
accords
iran
weirdly isn't making a lot of noise
right now is it
but why is iran so quiet
anybody
what's happening with iran
it's too quiet right
almost like something's gonna happen
like a deal maybe
it feels like the calm before some kind
of a
agreement
newsom
scott love him
so this is a comment on youtube in all
capitals newsom scott love him
okay that's not even close to true
uh yeah israel has uh said that they
will unilaterally take care of iran
which i imagine makes iran more afraid
and not less
i've got a feeling that iran would like
a world in which the united states would
talk or israel out of attacking but
apparently that's not going to happen
because israel just said okay we're just
going to do what we need to do
that
could take care of the problem
because i'm sure that their intelligence
on iran is pretty darn good by now
um
yeah
still waiting for an e-bike stream well
i did a e-bike
yeah i guess i should do more of an
e-bike stream i should strap my phone to
the bike and take a ride for you
all right uh haitian caravans yeah we've
talked about that
there's more coming like a lot more
coming
um
all right
uh just looking at your comments the
news about the havana syndrome
uh
well let me check that while i'm here so
so many of you are asking me about the
savannah
i'm sorry havana
syndrome
so there's some new news that involves
the
biden administration
so one hour ago
looking into reports uh sensory attacks
they believe they're closer to
understanding
uh there's nothing new here is there
what's new
what is new
on this story i don't see anything new
on this story
um what's causing it
okay
yeah i think the government i don't i
don't trust the government on this but
we'll see all right let's keep an eye on
that and let's go brandon
let's go brandon
and by the way
it would be hilarious
if in places where you couldn't be
shouting
f biden
if instead you started chanting let's go
brandon and everybody knew what you
meant
it would be funny all right goodbye
youtube i'll see you tomorrow
