Episode 2589 CWSA 09/06/24

comments and uh then we'll have a show boy will it be good hey what's happening there we go good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization it's called coffee with Scott Adams and I'm pretty sure you've never had a better time but if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains all you need is a cup or mug or glass a tanker chel orstein a canteen jugar flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparallel pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes everything better it's called the d z go it just gets better every time well there's a lot of news so I'm going to run right through it and we're going to get to some fun economic analyses of the two candidates in ways that you will understand for the first time ever economics is hard I will simplify it for you well the FBI has rated several uh homes of the the AIDS of Mayor Adams in New York City according to blaze media and we don't know why yet but if the FBI is all over the mayor and all over the top AIDS there's something coming down and keep in mind that it's probably Democrats investigating Democrats so whatever it is it must be really bad I wonder does anybody even have a guess what that would be about I have a hypothesis that if the FBI wanted to jail any May mayor in America it would take about 10 minutes of Investigation to find out that they' done sketchy things with taxpayers money so why would they pick this particular one so my question is is this the one mayor that they've got some dirt on or is there something they don't like about this mayor was he about to endorse Trump I mean what's going on here there's something that we don't know on top of the something we don't know about what the alleged crimes are so this story has layers is what I'm saying if the only thing you find out is that there's a crime and somebody's looking into it I feel like we're going to be missing at least a layer or two you know what I mean because I don't think that they have a process of going after crime because it's a crime and I told you to watch the uh there's a show on Netflix called Wyatt her and the cowboy Wars it's based on real real facts of the real Wyatt her and a war with some cowboys and when you learn that the country has always had a crooked Department of Justice and always had CR crooked politics and the News was always fake it really blows your mind to see that nothing changed since the 1800s well Poland has an anti-tank robot so it's a robot that goes near a tank and then blows up I don't think tanks are going to be too useful for very long and now that we've got uh flying drones that look like dragons with fire breathing fire and uh now a robot that will blow up a tank I'm guessing that the cost of the robot that blows up the tank is much less than the tank itself so that be the end of Tanks I saw Tim Cook on some interview saying something that I was not aware of completely and it goes like this you think that the reason we do Manufacturing in China is because the cost of Labor is low turns out that hasn't been true for a long time the I'm sure the cost of Labor is lower than America but there would be other countries where it's even far lower so they don't go to China because the the wages are low because they could get lower wages in a lot of places they go there because the China have a massive uh educational advantage in how to build a factory because building a factory is its special skill uh especially if you're building an assembly line and you're building the the Robotics and the you know the manufacturing techniques that go into the building it's not the building it's the manufacturing techniques so apparently the whole uh skill of tooling up a manufacturing site is something that there's there are tons of Chinese citizens who have been trained to do it and in America you could put them all in one room so there's a skill in building manufacturing sites that we don't have and we're in trouble how much difference does it make oh I don't know let's let let's ask lucky farmer who uh is a young billionaire type who's building a defense defense business himself with more high-tech defense stuff like drones and whatnot but uh he says the United States says if we were to get in a war we only have three weeks of ammunition after three weeks of war the United States would have to say hey um I got an idea would you guys like to startop stop fighting because we're on a weapons yeah we well we have the weapons we just don't have the the things that go in them you know like rockets and you know we don't have any missiles and Rockets and bullets left but you say to yourself well we could make more right nope we don't have the manufacturing capability to make more more ammunition at all like it's not like you can make the factory work harder there's no Factory and if there is a factory it depends on China for parts no we can't make weapons if we started a war we'd lose for sure unless we went Nuclear So basically the only weapons we have that work are nuclear because everything else we just run out of them in three weeks oh well um here's some good good news the uh NOAA the National Organization of atmospher Association of a-holes or something I don't know but it's a group that does the weather forec um the climate forecasting for the federal government and they've ordered a new hundred million high performance computer to help them with their uh their predictions H let me see if I understand this story their predictions are currently perfect or perfect enough that you would spend billions of dollars maybe trillions uh to believe them and operate under the assumption that you know the climate's getting warmer and the CO2 is causing it so if you know that and you know it so certainly that the entire American economy is based on it why do they need a new computer if they already know the answer strange strange unexpected hard to explain thing so everything is correct already but for $100 million we can make it correct although it's correct already and what about those elections um just today I saw probably six to 10 stories about something about election Integrity that somebody was looking to tighten up to which I said to myself what why would you need to tighten up an election in so many different ways when it's already perfectly safe and not rigged and we can audit it from top to bottom it it's almost like the people who are the closest to it don't think it's perfectly secure huh I'm trying to reconcile why we need a new computer for the predictions about the climate that we already know are right and we got to fix fix a 100 different things in the election that we already knew was not in need of any correction H it's almost like the news just makes stuff up well what about that story about those Venezuelan prisons that uh Trump says they're emptying the prisons and the prisoners are coming up here but the regular news the fake news the regular fake news says there's no evidence to support that and he doesn't offer any well well let me tell you the closest thing we have to evidence like that in 2022 uh Breitbart had a story it reported by Randy Clark and it said there was a uh so this is 2022 there there was a Department of Homeland Security intelligence report um that was received by the board of Patrol and the report is that Breitbart Texas you know the Texas office of brart got the look at it so this would not be a public document it would be a reporter for Breitbart says they got to look at a document and the report uh indicates that the Venezuelan government um under Maduro uh is purposely freeing inmates so the report is that they would talk to Venezuelans and they would find out that they had in fact been in Venezuelan jails and they seem to have been really least now there's a part missing the part that's missing is there is no indication that Venezuela is releasing prisoners for the purpose of coming to the United States there seems to be evidence according to One Source now that's not enough for me if you're saying that one source is enough you haven't been paying attention too much you should probably never take one source so even though One Source that doesn't have any credibility problems that I'm aware of uh it's just a good idea to have a second source so it's a one- source story and the one- source story doesn't go to the second question whether the Venezuelans are doing it intentionally but does that matter once again Trump is directionally correct even if he's not technically correct so he might not be technically correct that they're intentional emptying the prison prison so that those people can come to America and get them out of the country it might be correct that they have some reason to reduce the prison population for whatever reason um and that some of them went to America so I would say that Trump is correct enough in a trumpian you know directionally true statement that there are prisoners people who were in Jail recently for pretty bad crimes did in fact come to America how many well he's probably exaggerating that but how many would it take before you were pretty worried about it so there is more evidence that the so-called Venezuelan G gangs conquering territory is a real thing uh we just don't know the details and the extent of it but it does seem that Venezuelan gangs are conquering territory in the United States here's a story that uh I don't know what's the most outrageous story of the day but in Great Britain in the UK they're looking to uh since their prisons appear to be full uh and they're going to be jailing a lot more people because of their new anti-free speech laws they're looking to maybe um rent space in Estonian jails which have lots of space so the Estonian in jails are just plenty of space they're not full and they've decided that they'll ship some of their prisoners there maybe I think that's unconfirmed but one of the plans is they might ship their prisoners to Estonia now what's wrong with that story let me tell you what's wrong with that story if you heard that estonia's prisons have lots of room what's the best way to play this what's your first thought whoa Estonian prisons have plenty of room we could put our prisoners in the Estonian prison okay that's the way the UK is going now I don't know if they'll do it but they're definitely considering it here's how I would have played it hey Scott did you know that the Estonian prisons are largely empty Watch How I play this why why what why are the Estonian prisons large empty did they did they overbuild their prisons no no but why are some of them empty does their Department of Justice not work no it works pretty well yeah no they have a pretty good system so what are they doing that is not producing criminals because you should be asking more questions about that so the question you should not be asking Estonia is can we use your prison space no you should ask what did you do right that you don't have to put your citizens in prison what did you do right because do you know what the answer is do you know what the estonians do right almost everything Estonia is this this this weird little country that just got to be sort of a special case in the world where for whatever reason their leadership are rational I know you didn't see that coming did you you could vote by an app you just open your app and you can vote Estonia is one of the you know best internets pretty low crime Estonia is killing it the only problem Estonia has is they don't want Russia to conquer him which is always a risk but no let's ask why they don't have people in the jail let's ask if we can use their jail space that is the loser approach all right now the story about that uh school shooter that the father bought him the rifle for Christmas after he had been already talked to uh by the FBI for threatening a school shooting so it looks like the father might be in some legal trouble for buying a deadly weapon for somebody who had been interviewed by the FBI as a potential school shooter so well I mean everything about this story just screams what is wrong with this country at the moment Well author Gad sad writing in Newsweek uh saying that K Harris and her campaign are hoping you turn your brain off and use your emotions to pick your candidate because keris doesn't have as many you know detailed plans so the thinking is that they have to sell sort of the vibe or the feeling and and Gad gives some examples of that and uh he's arguing that uh you know we should maybe use our sense of reason and uh not be taken in by the emotional appeal to which I say Gad you are halfway there he's halfway there so he understands that the other side is not being reasonable that's halfway there until you understand that no voters make make decisions based on reason you're just going to be confused and annoyed by everything you see because it won't make sense now nobody uses reasons to vote it is true that some ideas are better than other ideas and people will mention those things and talk about them but it's not why they vote why they vote is some mix of how somebody makes them feel their Charisma whether they're the same you know race as you whether you just feel safe it's just the irrational stuff and then we rationalize it after the fact so why' you vote for him or her well I like that tax policy no that's not why you voted it just isn't we we all have reasons including me I'll give you a reason for why I voted but I'm also aware that I would have voted that way if I had to make up different reason re so whatever it is that drives any of our decisions is always irrational once you realize that everything makes sense well you know that story about tenet media allegedly taking money from Russia and hiding it and hiring some conservative commentators to be under their Banner on at least uh just on the uh You.

Tube site and um part of that is story is that expanded into everybody accusing everybody of being a foreign agent so I I jokingly said yesterday on X I was feeling bad because nobody had put me on a list of potential foreign influences and no no sooner had I done that than I hear that there's a spaces going on talking about me being a uh an Israeli asset or something and I thinking to myself well that didn't take long that didn't take long at all by the way I'm not a re I'm not an Israeli asset um I don't even support their government you know they're on their own I just observe simply observing and uh so some people say uh what was Putin up to you know why would why would Russia try to you know fund these people if it looks like there was no effort to change them um editorially so there doesn't seem to be any evidence whatsoever that Tim P or uh Benny Johnson um or uh or Dave Rubin changed any of their opinions because of where their funding came from there's no evidence of that and I doubt it happened um but Lauren Chen one of the owners with her husband I guess of tenant media there people are reporting that she seemed to be creating some division among the conservative world but I would note that there tends to be at the moment a huge amount of division in the Pro Trump side of the world more than I've ever seen maybe probably more than I've ever seen and you have to ask yourself did that happen on its own and then Putin was asked who he prefers in the American election um well let me give you some work up to this I saw a post yesterday from J black who's just apparently a Democrat and uh he uses this technique on his post you've seen it before where somebody really wants to emphasize how dumb you are they'll put their sentence with a period after each word you know what I mean so if I said you period are period not period well period informed like Not only would I be making a statement but I'd really be calling you an idiot with all the periods it's like you are so dumb I have to speak slowly so J black did that um he wanted me to know how dumb I am and maybe some of you so he said and I'll quote I'll say this slowly so Maga can understand it if period r period want period your period candidate period to period b period elected period Then he period shouldn't period be elected period so the idea is that you know if Trump is supported by Putin that should be enough I mean that should be enough by itself to tell you not to vote for Trump because of all that Putin support I mean that's obvious isn't it I mean how much more obvious Could It Be I'm going to say it with periods it's period obvious period Well a few hours after Jay said that Putin endorsed Harris so uh several million people danced on the uh the living grave of J black for being the most obnoxious wrong person on the internet let me give you this advice we're all wrong sometimes and we're all a little arrogant sometimes don't combine them don't be arrogant and exactly terribly wrong you can do one or the other and probably get away with it just don't combine them don't combine them Jay anyway so um so that happened I saw Jessica tarlo on the five say that the the influencers like Tim Po were getting $400,000 per month from Russia now I have not looked into it but I'm going to bet a very large amount of money that they did not get paid $400,000 a month a piece does anybody want to take the other side of that bet I hate watching the news and thinking okay I don't even have to research that to know that's not true no it's not true that any paid them $400,000 a month and especially and not asking them to change their opinions whatsoever which appears to be the case no I don't think so all anyway um so conservatives are divided and I think there's lots of forces from the outside that are doing that but I don't know if it's all Russia or just happens on its own um I find figured out with a little help why is the polls that should all look the same let's say presidential polls uh if they're all done scientifically and appropriately they should all be pretty similar but sometimes they're not and here's one reason why not so the pollsters can determine how to wait their results so for example they can ask a bunch of people and they could you know find out that they had accidentally talked to too many people in one party and they could either just report it say well you know we had too many people in one party but here's what we got well that wouldn't really tell you anything because you expect the people in one party to vote one way predictably so if you were to take that approach that would suggest you were not interested in a real answer but rather were interested in influencing what people thought about the situation so that'd be the opposite of a poll it would be persuasion another way you could await them is by the percentage of people who voted in the most recent election so you could say well in 2020 the total votes were this percentage Democrat and that percentage Republican so you could use that and that wouldn't be a bad assumption would it that there would be roughly the same mix as there was in the most recent election wouldn't change that much in a few years so that's a reasonable way here's a but here's another way you could do it you could wait it by um likely voters so you could balance it by the correct number of Democrats to Republicans to Independents but then you've got a problem because The Independents are not really Independents are they so couldn't you accidentally have gotten a whole bunch of Independents who really are just Democrats they just don't like to say they're Democrats so you wouldn't necessarily know that would you you wouldn't know if you accidentally talk to too many Democrats they just happen to call themselves uh Independents because half the country is calling themselves Independence so that's the problem um so you can wait it by likely voters you can do it by 2020 mix or you could not wait them at all how different do you think those answers would be pretty different yeah quite different so here's my question are these polls telling you what is or is their selection of what assumptions they make really the whole poll was there any even was there any reason to even talk to the public because once you made an assumption about you know what you're waiting would be you kind of already knew how it was going to come out by the Assumption so as a person who used to collect information for corporate bosses for many years that was my job let me tell you it's always the assumptions that determine the result the public believes it's the data nope if it were the data everybody would get the same answer and if they didn't they would know why pretty quickly it's like oh you you wrote that data down wrong look here's the real data you got that wrong no it's the assumptions it's the same thing with climate change polling and climate change have the same problem the person who makes the assumptions decides what the outcome will be it's not the data all right Jordan Peterson is predicting that uh Biden is going to quit in a few weeks uh so that we can have quote Vice president kacen kamla as the first US Dei Barbie president wellow Jordan Peterson don't hold back tell us tell us what you're really feeling here I feel like you're you're just holding back too much well I would add to that what others have added to it I think by now that maybe the reason Hunter decided to wrap up his uh situation and plead guilty without saying he's actually guilty in that weird legal away that uh maybe he just wants to wrap things up so his he'll his father will have time to Pardon him before he leaves from office and I think that is a reasonably good prediction um I don't think it's 100% but if I had to make a small bet on it I would bet that he will quit in time to give c hereis a boost for having already been the first black woman president so we might get one of those kind of through the back door um Biden was giving a little uh rally speech in favor of uh of Harris and he he said out loud that the inflation reduction Act was really just a fake and it was really the green New Deal Bill basically and it didn't wasn't really to reduce any inflation so uh how long do we wait between the time that you know the Democrats make claims that the news supports to the to the point where the Democrats themselves can just say well you know actually we made all that up it wasn't wasn't even about inflation reduction now it's not that we didn't figure it out but when I say we I mean the people who really paid attention to the news but the average voter probably thought hey look at that them reducing inflation good job Biden um I saw Peter St an he's on he's on X um he's got some videos on various topics PhD and he was noting that uh weak men and single women tend to vote uh left and not just because of abortion but because they do it in other countries as well no matter what the abortion laws are so we men and single women tend to vote Democratic here and left in other countries why is that well it seems to be evolutionary and it seems to go like this if you feel personally weak then you're worried about what's in your immediate environment does that make sense that makes sense right if you feel personally vulnerable you barely can walk outside because your environment is dangerous so the first thing that you'd want to fix is your environment when you walk outside so you'd want to make sure nobody had guns and you'd want to make sure all the poor people got fed so they don't need to rob you and you would make a bunch of assumptions that might lean yeah lean left um if you are Republican and you're either a strong man or a married woman who would feel like she has some protection you would say I don't need the government to protect me like on my own property because I'm married and you know I got a strong husband I've got the protection but I am worried about the country so Republicans and strong men and married women tend to be more concerned about people coming across the border and women seem to be more concerned about you know what's in their immediate environment in terms of what what they should be afraid of so that feels to me like there's something to it I don't know if they got exactly the right genetic explanation but I do feel it can't be a coincidence that people who feel weak and unprotected are looking for the government to immediately give them some protection makes sense um we got some new economic reports I'm seeing them described in different ways uh Julia Pollock said uh the jobs report is very much in line with expectations um it's all boring it's you everything's sort of in the general area that we thought it would be a little bit more a little bit less um I think there was another job report that got the July job report I think got uh revised down again of course anyway there's uh I think I would describe the report as somewhat anemic um so somewhat expected but anemic which means that we'll probably get a rate cut which would be good for the stock market but don't make any Investments because of me I'm not really good at investment advice um how many of you have heard of a historian who predicts the the outcome of elections in the United States and he's been right pretty much every time his name is Alan lickman and he's got this 13o uh true or false questions that will tell you who's going to get elected and he says right now that ad and a 13 go in favor of Harris so that his thing which has never been wrong um is saying there's a strong signal for Harris to get elected do you believe it he's got 13 questions it's been right every time eight and a 13 go for Harris so she'll get elected do you have any questions about that maybe the questions would be what are those 13 questions have you ever heard the 13 questions and if I told you the 13 questions do you think you would still be confident that this is a good prediction method let's find out all right so here are the things that would be positive for the uh let's call it the incumbent let's call it comma the incumbent um if the White House Party gains seats in the House in the midterm all right so that that didn't happen so that would be negative to um the White House Party in in office um the incumbent president is running well I would say that's not the case it was when it was Biden but it's not the case now so that so that would be two that I would score against them I believe Ellen lickman scored this for Harris because she would be like the incumbent I say she's not the incumbent you the polls changed immediately as soon as she got in her mix of people who supported her changed her policies she says they going to be different so I don't think she's the incumbent and beyond that I think that Trump was a little bit of an incumbent once too so I don't think this one applies and if it does apply it leans in my opinion toward Trump next one is the White House Party avoided a primary so the reason behind this is if they avoided a primary it's because their candidate was so strong did the Democrats avoid a primary yes was it because their candidate is so strong no no they they GED the system so you can't give this one to Harris and say she was so strong we well we didn't even need a primary really no that didn't happen she went in despite being weak so this one doesn't count uh how about a third c a third party candidate is running so that would be usually good for who the who was in the white house except the only Third Party candidate with any any weight just decided to join the Trump team so how do you weigh this do you say RFK Jr counts as a benefit for Harris when he joined the Trump team no this one is completely irrelevant in our in this weird situation how about the short-term economy is strong is it it depends who you ask in my opinion is weak but I know that other people Democrats would say oh it's pretty strong right now no it's completely weak if you talk to people they'll say everything costs too much and it's not easy to get a job that sounds weak things are too expensive and you can't get a job so that one looks like it goes for it Trump's way how about the growth of the long-term economy has been as strong as the last two terms well again this is a weird one because the pandemic but it doesn't look like our growth is impressive so I don't think that works in their favor um if the White House has enacted major national policy changes that would go in favor of the White House but shouldn't you say that the major national policy changes are popular because we have a national policy change on Ukraine that were balls to the wall and it's unpopular we have uh you know support for Israel that's pretty mixed so and then there's that infrastructure thing that nobody's seen anything happen from so I don't really think there's anything positive that was a major national policy change so that doesn't seem to apply how about there's no social unrest oh I don't know what do you call January 6ers being locked up and you know complete division in the country and some people are asking for reparations and some people are looking for a new country to move to I would say there's plenty of social unrest but it's not on the streets because Republicans get hunted so they can't be on the streets so that seems not applicable uh there is no scandal in the white house what are you talking about the the whole Ukraine Hunter Biden uh you know uh and the whole cover up the whole cover up of Biden's cognitive ability these are gigantic scandals gigantic scandals and I think I think the historian sort of discounted it how about uh the incumbent Party candidate has Charisma well to his credit the historian did say that Trump has the Charisma and kamla is not the charisma candidate so that that one he gave to Trump uh how about the Challenger is uncharismatic no again that one goes to Trump because he's charismatic how about the White House had foreign policy success what was the White House's foreign policy success opening the Border war in Ukraine or not helping Israel enough I don't see any big foreign policy success or how about leaving Afghanistan how about uh the White House had foreign policy failure well I think they got some failures here's how I read this there are 13 indicators in favor of trump or they're inapplicable they're either inapplicable or they favor Trump now do you remember what I told you about data versus assumptions the data is in favor of KL Harris 8 and of 13 but how did you you get the data it's all based on assumptions and the assumptions are whack they're I I mean they're not any worse than any other voter's assumptions but it's just one person's assumptions and and I look at it I go well I'm one person I pay attention I look at the news I don't see any of these as being the right assumptions they all look like the wrong assumptions to me so how could it be that I have so many questions about this and yet it accurately predicted who would win the White House a whole bunch of times in a row how do you explain that well I have a hypothesis do you remember when James Carville told the Clinton campaign uh the Bill Clinton campaign it's the economy stupid he said basically just ignore everything else people are going to vote on the economy and then it was true that was the most important part well one of his 13 things is that the short-term economy looks good it could be that the person who wins is the one who has the best argument about the economy and that's the whole game it might be that you didn't need 13 you just needed one and you didn't need the historian you need just needed James Carville to say it's it's the economy stupid well well well but about the the social unrisked Scandal of the Charisma well no it's it's the economy stupid well what about the who had a primary contest third about what about a third party candidate running what what about the no it's it's it's the economy stupid it's the economy stupid so I'm going to take Carville over the historian uh KL Harris said out loud yesterday that she will sign a reparation bill this fills me with deep hatred deep hatred there are other things that I say oh that would be a problem um you know this might not work out for me you know I don't like higher taxes for example but this one fills me with hate I just hate her guts and I hate anybody who would be in favor of this why because your problems are not magic and special it is there is there any Legacy of slavery that is impacted current black Americans yes absolutely systemic racism completely real but I don't care because I've got problems too everybody I know has problems some have health problems some were abused as children some had parents who were addicts some uh just were in the wrong place at the wrong time some were born in bad parts of the world your problems are not special and magical they're real they're real and if you want to say the government caused it I'd say sure I just don't care and that is not an argument that I need to pay for it you you can make your little uh you know academic argument that connects all the dots and I can look at it in a piece of paper and I'll say yes I get that that dot yep that does connect those dots are all connected you've made your point but I don't care and there's no reason I should care because nobody has magic special problems we all got problems I would take having the legacy of slavery if the tradeoff was that I got free college and I was 6'4 and look good you know handsome healthy 6 fo4 free college I'll take that thank you very much yeah I'll take that and we don't see a lot of people uh pretending to be uh White to get into college do we no we don't and do you think that the asian-americans should be paying some reparations when the only impact that black people have had on their lives since you know they came in after slavery was a done deal the only impact had on their lives is that they got fewer jobs and they were victims of crime and now they're going to pay the black black Americans for something they had no connection to and indeed it should be paid the other direction no no this is dumb divisive terrible illogical evil and I hate you if you're looking at this as a reason to take my money that I worked for under a system that I was told that if I did all the right things I'd get to keep my money and now Harris is making it very clear that if I do all the right things I still have to give the money to people who didn't now there are other reasons people don't succeed but I'm not buying into this at all no you cannot make me think that one group of people had special magical problems and therefore I have to give them my money nope there's no argument that connects that dot 88 corporate leaders just back to KL Harris including James Murdoch the former CEO of 21st Century Fox and an heir to the Murdoch family media Empire H so that would mean that everybody on the left leaning side of the news is in favor of KL Harris but also the the primary major entity that would be potentially on the other side is in favor of KL Harris at least in terms of ownership of the Fox network there would be plenty of individual opinions that will vary of course that's not good now here's the question if you were a stockholder of any of these 88 corporations would you be happy that they just uh volunteered you to make less money because they decided to back the one who's going to tax them the most you idiots yeah here here's my advice for company leaders you got two choices that don't make you look like the biggest ath yet in the world one stay completely out of it I would use as my example Jeff Bezos I imagine Jeff Bezos has strong opinions about things political I'm quite impressed at the degree to which he's managed to stay out of it now of course Amazon like every company is going to have some wokeness and Dei and stuff it's somewh unavoidable in the corporate world at the moment but I'm not even sure I could tell you what Jeff bezos's personal opinion is and Zuckerberg also told you he was going to stay out of it this time what do I think about those two leaders excellent I only need you to make money so my stocks go up and the country does well and your employees get paid and then they can buy things from me that's all I need I don't need you advocating for you to play pay more taxes I don't need the fiduciary leader of the thing I invested in to be saying in public you know I'd like to give some of my money away um not for any particular reason it's just uh I don't know I just thought I should back this candidate was going to take more of my money and therefore your money I can't even believe that these idiots would sign up for the we're going to back the one who wants to take more of our money now I get that you know the argument is more than just taxes but if you're the CEO of a publicly traded company I feel like you should pay attention to the taxes and maybe not the other issues that would be my advice otherwise you were in the wrong jobs my friends you should all be you should all be removed honestly the boards of each of these companies should remove them uh imagine that you were a leader of one of these 88 countries companies and you just endorsed haris and you didn't need to it was optional you could have just said we're staying out of it don't you think that that automatically cost them business because the Republicans would say all right if I have a choice I will no longer buy from your company because I wanted you just to make money but now you're if I give you money you're going to be using it to destroy the country as I see it so if I were the board I would remove all 88 of them and I would do it right away I mean I wouldn't even wait till the end of the day I would say look you are absolutely free to endorse anybody you want as long as you're not working here because if you're working here you're just crushing our our Revenue potential Forever by the way bud light is not catching up so yeah that's uh 88 boards that should be meeting today and should be removing every one of these people I just don't think people in corporations should be backing backing any candidate now I'm here this is going to sound inconsistent but if they'd backed the candidate who wanted to lower their taxes I would back off because I would say okay that that does feel like you're getting into politics but not really because you're really into just lowering your own taxes and that's your job you're supposed to be trying to lower your taxes so if so if a if a CEO or CFO says we like the one who's going to lower our taxes fine that's like not even political that's just your taxes I I wouldn't even think about not shopping there for that reason maybe Democrats would but I I doubt that too according to Zero Hedge this uh the jobs that people are getting are mostly going to foreign born workers so the foreign born workers were up 635,000 in jobs in August while native born were down 1.3 million now you're going to say to yourself that's terrible because the foreign born people are getting all the jobs but I would hedge it this way why did they get the jobs remember it's foreign born it's not just undocumented we're not talking about the people who walked across the border with the clothes on their back foreign born quite often means that you're a technical expert or a doctor or a scientist and you came to America because it's a better opportunity well of course they're employed because they're here because they have those skills that are in high demand so without knowing if the quote foreign born workers are mostly people who walked across the border with nothing including an education and English ability or people who were fluent in two or three languages and had a skill stack like you can't believe and they would just rather work in America to which I say come on in more the better so it's not really clear that they're taking American jobs it might have been there weren't Americans for those jobs we don't know so I say that could be good and it could be bad and we can't tell well Trump trump was asked about child care at an event I think the other day and some say his answer was incoherent um I would agree with that I think he's got some idea like you know using uh tariffs to pay for it or something I don't know but it doesn't sound like a real plan so I'm I'm not going to you and say oh he's got the good plan I don't think I don't think he's got a plan um but here's my way I would approach it I would approach healthc care the way I would approach a number of other topics like transportation for example insurance if you were to design a city from scratch with the understanding that only the federal government would have any regulatory or law authority over it you this would be similar to Trump's idea of using federal land to build some cities if you built a city from scratch one of the things you could do is you could design away the cost of child care now I'm going to give you the bad version of how to do that just so you could kind of understand it conceptually but don't don't argue too much about the details I'm just trying to sell you on the idea that you could design away a lot of expense right so suppose you had a new community and a facility that is owned by the public in which uh you could drop off your kid or your pet you could drop your dog off and there would be somebody there to watch it but they'd be mostly volunteers so if you're lonely and retired or unemployed at the moment or you're single and it's your day off and you just want to be around people in a productive way you could go there and you could help out or you could just work out on some gym equipment that's there but maybe they want to you know keep the males away from the kids but you'd have video everywhere there would be no dark Corners no closets that anybody could go into no matter what so that if anybody tried anything that was inappropriate with a child it would be like any public space if you saw somebody doing something inappropriate with a child in let's say a restaurant you would immediately intervene so it doesn't happen there so if you create a situation where there are a few paid employees and somebody at the door to make sure that nobody gets in unless they're they're vetted somehow you could create a situation where there's just a natural collection of people who are meeting each other sometimes bonding even and they could create a social life they could get some oxytocin they'd have purpose they'd have a place to go they'd have a schedule things that people are really really going to need especially as the robots start taking our productive work so you may say to yourself but Scott I have this or that complaint about that situation to which I say don't worry about the details the only point is we're not organized in a way that we could lower that cost but we could it seems very doable now let's take rent how can you lower the cost of rent well one way would be there are a lot of seniors who have extra rooms empty nests spouses died and there should be far more of a effort to get them a college age roommate who can't pay for rent but they might be able to help out with some chores and you know if you fall down and die they'll call the 911 so there's just a whole bunch of ways you could organize that would take away expenses what about the expense of Transportation well if you design your city so that you get the self-driving taxes if you need them but mostly you can walk everywhere you want if you had bicycle paths from every house to every school you could completely eliminate driving kids to school and buses they could just take their electric skateboard or bicycle and just park it at the school and come back right so you can think of a hundred different ways that you could just drive the cost of living down to practically nothing and your quality of living would be through the roof I always use my college experience as my example my college experience was the on paper the worst living condition I was in this you know tiny little room with a roommate for the first couple years and you know had to share a bathroom and you know there's no kitchen there you got to walk through the snow to get food on paper it's the worst place but because it was designed to give me everything I needed and it surrounded me with people I wanted to associate with it was the best experience I've ever had there's nothing in my life that will ever come close to that but I think we could do that for adults I think you create a situation where you just met a bunch of awesome people without any effort at all because they were just there and you were doing something in common all right so I think there's nobody's got a good plan for child care uh let's talk about the Trump economic plan um I asked Gro to summarize it so it may have missed a few things but so he wants to reduce the corporate tax rate from 21 to 15% keris wants to raise it um but Trump also wants to put a uh tariff a lot of uh stuff coming into the country now how many of you think you understand tariffs how many of you think an economist can tell you if a tariff is a good idea or a bad idea how many of you think that it sort of depends you know you could see it could be a good idea in some cases bad in others but that we could do the math and we could know that how many think you can know it well here's what you need to know there are two reasons for a tariff the good reason for a tariff is that there's some country that's trying to destroy an entire industry in your country so because the country is behind it not just the company selling Goods the country is behind it like China they could uh subsidize the product until nobody would ever buy an American car because they seem too expensive so we'd all have Chinese cars and then we would have no car industry and then China would slowly start raising the prices because it's the only place you can buy a car from China so in that case tariffs are not about what you paid extra for the car although it might end up in your price for your car what it is is a way to keep your entire industry from being destroyed now when they when people talk about uh tariffs what is the dumbass thing they say I'm I'm going to do it with a a stupid face so that the next time you hear it you can remember my stupid face it goes like this a tariff a tariff is a tax on the consumer a tariff is a tax on the consumer is it what do you think is it tax on the consumer it can be in the sense that uh if you raise the if you raise the cost on a foreign producer they might say well you're still going to have to buy it because you can't get it anywhere else so I guess we'll just raise the price so it depends whether you had a choice so let me give you an example if China was trying to sell table salt in the United States at 10% of what Americans make table salt for if America makes it I don't know just making this up then we should we should put a tariff on them but would you pay more for salt no you wouldn't no because the Tariff would take the foreign price up to about the domestic price or maybe higher if it's higher than the domestic price you just say oh well just buy them B and salt like I always did there's no difference in your price now you do lose the opportunity to get the lower price but there's nothing to be passed on to you you're simply not buying Chinese salt because why would you same price as the Morton salt and it's Chinese and well you might as well give it to America now let's say it's a different situation it's not something like salt that you can get anywhere let's say it's a specific component or material that if you didn't get it from China you could couldn't even build the thing you want to build with their material well in that case if you put a tariff on it you're just paying for it yeah because they're going to say all right where else are you going to get this and you'd say uh okay good point there's literally nowhere else I can get it so how about you pay whatever we charge you I guess I have to so the first thing you need to know is that it completely depends on what product of this if if you if you're saying in general it's good or in general it's bad well you're just stupid all right it's not in general good or in general bad it depends entirely upon the specific thing that's being tariffed so so remember this the first thing you need to know is it depends if you had options if you have plenty of options then your price doesn't go up at all it's just that that company doesn't do business in the United States it's too expensive if you have to buy it then the government shouldn't put the Tariff on it does that make sense if we do it right there wouldn't be any tariff on something that you had to buy so there' be no cost to pass on did you already understand that how many of you already understood that before I explained it because tariffs are kind of wonky and confusing and then you get to the um a tariff to defend an industry here's what they never calculate when the people tell you SC so they'll just pass along the price it's just like a tax on the consumer it's just going to pass along the price did they calculate what it cost the United States to get rid of the car industry because that's kind of big if you lose the entire automobile industry and the only way you could have kept it was was some tariffs did they include the cost of losing the entire automobile industry and all that pay and all the things that those people would have bought and they might have bought more things from you whatever it is that you're selling no they don't no they don't and that cost is enormous and they just sort of act like that's not part of the question no losing an entire industry is the question it's not the oh there was a little tax it was the Tariff was a little tax that got passed on to the consumer no that's the dumb view right the sophisticated view is you're protecting an entire industry in some cases because the value of the industry is critical to America in that case even if you paid a little more it'd be worth it so if you put a if you put it on something that you have to get it's a bad idea if you put it on something that you could get at the same price from America it's a great idea if you put a tariff on something that would destroy an entire industry in America if you don't do it it's a great idea so on balance are tariffs good ideas or bad ideas well in the political realm we deal with tariffs the way we deal with people stupidly so let let me give you an example um there was a Democrat once who did some bad things and therefore all Democrats are bad that's how we look at Teri that uh well there's one situation I could think of where a tariff would be bad which would be a tariff on a good that we couldn't get anywhere else and so the prices passed on to us yeah don't do that one don't do that one this is not hard you just don't do that one so I'm in favor of tariffs because a country has to have them to protect itself from uh protect its important industries all right um let's see what else um Trump wants to do an emergency declaration to drastically increase nuclear energy production so he would get rid of some regulations and be faster about approving new things Etc but also approving new drilling so he'd be a emergency declaration to get the government organized and just very quickly getting our energy production up that is exactly right that is 100% economically logically geopolitically correct all good so he wants to eliminate 10 redu 10 regulations for every new one he wants to get Elon Musk working on efficiency of the government that could be amazing just copy Estonia and um let's see uh Sovereign wealth fund so Trump wants to use the tariffs he wants to use the money he gets from the tariffs to create a sovereign wealth fund now what that is is a fund that's managed by a country so that's the Sovereign part so other countries have these um and uh it could be used for infrastructure and other national projects okay I mean it would depend what the other projects are I guess but in concept that sounds okay um Trump wants to Spur the economic growth of course and close the make the borders secure and lower the crime and he wants to put a bunch into to R&D uh offering 100% bonus depreciation for new manufacturing investment right so these are good things now by the way Harris has some good things too so it's it's not all good things compared to bad things they both got some things um but here's my problem with analyzing economic plans if part of your plan is growth and part of your plan is uh tax changes which of those two things can somebody measure easily well maybe not easily but if you're an analyst you could look at the change in taxes and you could make some assumptions about revenue and then you could say Okay Trump's plan will do this to the deficit and KL Harris's will do this to the deficit do you think somebody did that yes they did I'm not going to name names but if you see somebody say the Trump plan will uh uh increase the deficit by $4 trillion or something and the Harris plan will increase the deficit by 1 point something trillion are we done oh no one of them increases the debt more than the other so we're done right you don't want the one that increases the debt or do you here's something I learned in Corporate America you only manage to the things you can measure you can measure predict what the tax income will be if you just make assumptions that everything else will be the same if everything else is the same and the only thing you did is change the taxes you could kind of calculate what the tax uh gains would be but here's what you can't calculate the offsetting benefit is the growth so if you cut your taxes more aggressively to get more growth where's that they don't even calculate it so if you see somebody say that Trump would add to the deficit more than KLA Harris they're only looking at half of the equation they're just looking at a direct tax cut how much would you collect but that's not the game the game is that the taxes should be modified to get you the optimum growth number so if you're not looking at the total benefits of the growth over time you know looking at like a 10year uh period Then you haven't even you haven't even done the math yet if the only thing you're looking at is the direct tax change you're looking at a publication that's either selling you propaganda or they don't know how to do their job because the growth part's the important part you just leave that out Trump isn't saying cut your taxes just to make them less he's saying cut them so you spur the economy in all these variety of ways you got to measure the spurred economy now if you say it won't move at all I mean I'd have to hear that argument but if if you think it wouldn't change the economy at all I mean that's hard to believe but if you believe that I I suppose you should state that all right Harris has a plan of uh some kind of price gouging control on food and maybe meds and of course um nobody thinks that the price gouging thing is a good idea uh now I well let me modify that if there's real price gouging then I think we'd all be in favor of doing something about it but I don't think they're going to find evidence that in the food business you might find that there was a little bit during the pandemic but I think I think the uh free market keeps their margins to a relatively uh reasonable level she wants to do stuff for housing giving $225,000 and down payment assistance and blah blah for started homes that might be good again there's a tendency to just look what it costs and not a tendency to look at the economic benefit of it um she wants to put a cap on insulin prices that's probably not too different than what Trump was doing Child Care credits she wants to improve those so it makes it look like she wants to do more for um child care I mean at the very least she'd increase the tax credits um tax policies increase the corporate tax to 28 from 21 that would make your stock market Fall in value which make you feel less wealthy which would make you spend less so you got to calculate that which they don't of course um then some kind of a tax deduction for startup businesses so they'd get a $50,000 right off as long as they made money eventually um I like it in concept I don't know if there if a lot of people would change their behavior because of it but you know my My Philosophy is if you need to solve a problem and we do you know how to grow faster um if you've got an idea that could work well let's try it you know the downside isn't you know death so maybe this would make a difference uh so I'd be willing to try it you know it wouldn't matter who suggested it if it doesn't work pull it back you know you'll know in a year is it worth a year of this probably it might be worth a year there's going to be you know cheating and graft and all that stuff corruption but you'll know in a year um and then she's then Harris has to figure out how to be different from Biden I guess that's important all right ladies and gentlemen the most important thing you need to know is if you get the dber 2025 calendar the desk calendar which is available now there would be no tariff because it's made in the United States yeah no tariff made in the United States um for the first time and uh because it's more expensive to make it in the United States I had to cut out the publisher and cut out amazon.com and cut out the bookstores now you can only get it from one website um and if you go to dilbert.com you can find the link to buy it's right at the top and um we're not going to make a wall calendar this year there wasn't as much demand for those I know some of you will miss it but it'll just be the daily and to make it even better there are comics on both sides of each day double the comics you've ever seen in a dwor comic and if you pay a little more for shipping maybe that should take this thing out of it and I say if you're going to buy more than one it'll make your shipping cost look a lot more affordable so that's happening um that's all I got for you today and um I'm going to talk to locals people privately uh hope you learned something did everybody learn anything about economics today let me ask you this question before I go was there anything I said about their tariffs or anything else that you said oh I never saw it that way before salt mines in the USA I don't know if do we have any salt mines in the USA we might not why are they buying our Farmland well if I had to guess it's for food um here's the thing with China if we got in a war with China we wouldn't have ammunition in three weeks but they wouldn't have food in three weeks we're really not going to get in a war with China yeah yeah I feel like China is the pretend adversary like we're pretending that war is an option it's not an option war is war with China is not an option it's just not an option we we've got to stop pretending like it might happen no no what one of the sides would have to want it at least a little bit before you can consider neither side wants it even a little bit under any situation under any scenario at all it's it's zero and zero you don't get a war in that case so I'm not worried about war with China it's the lowest risk we have period all right well I'm going to go talk to the locals people thanks for joining on x and You.

Tube and Rumble you're all awesome I'll see you tomorrow but it's going to take 30 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e for

comments and uh then we'll have a show

boy will it be

good hey what's

happening there we

[Music]

go good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization it's

called coffee with Scott Adams and I'm

pretty sure you've never had a better

time but if you'd like to take this

experience up to levels that nobody can

even understand with their tiny shiny

human brains all you need is a cup or

mug or glass a tanker chel orstein a

canteen jugar flask a vessel of any kind

fill it with your favorite liquid I like

coffee and join me now for the

unparallel pleasure the dopamine hit of

the day the thing that makes everything

better it's called the d z

go it just gets better every time well

there's a lot of news so I'm going to

run right through it and we're going to

get to some fun economic analyses of the

two candidates in ways that you will

understand for the first time ever

economics is hard I will simplify it for

you well the FBI has rated several uh

homes of the the AIDS of Mayor Adams in

New York City according to blaze media

and we don't know why yet but if the FBI

is all over the mayor and all over the

top AIDS there's something coming

down and keep in mind that it's probably

Democrats investigating Democrats so

whatever it is it must be really bad I

wonder does anybody even have a guess

what that would be

about I have a

hypothesis that if the FBI wanted to

jail any May mayor in

America it would take about 10 minutes

of Investigation to find out that they'

done sketchy things

with taxpayers

money so why would they pick this

particular

one so my question is is this the one

mayor that they've got some dirt on or

is there something they don't like about

this mayor was he about to endorse Trump

I mean what's going on here there's

something that we don't

know on top of the something we don't

know about what the alleged crimes are

so this story has layers is what I'm

saying if the only thing you find out is

that there's a crime and somebody's

looking into it I feel like we're going

to be missing at least a layer or two

you know what I mean because I don't

think that they have a process of going

after crime because it's a

crime and I told you to watch the uh

there's a show on Netflix called Wyatt

her and the cowboy Wars it's based on

real real facts of the real Wyatt her

and a war with some cowboys and when you

learn that the country has always had a

crooked Department of Justice and always

had CR crooked politics and the News was

always fake it really blows your mind to

see that nothing changed since the

1800s well Poland has an anti-tank robot

so it's a robot that goes near a tank

and then blows

up I don't think tanks are going to be

too useful for very long and now that

we've got uh flying drones that look

like dragons with fire breathing fire

and uh now a robot that will blow up a

tank I'm guessing that the cost of the

robot that blows up the tank is much

less than the tank itself so that be the

end of

Tanks I saw Tim Cook on some interview

saying something that I was not aware of

completely and it goes like this you

think that the reason we do

Manufacturing in China is because the

cost of Labor is

low turns out that hasn't been true for

a long

time the I'm sure the cost of Labor is

lower than America but there would be

other countries where it's even far

lower so they don't go to China because

the the wages are

low because they could get lower wages

in a lot of places they go there because

the China have a massive uh educational

advantage in how to build a

factory because building a factory is

its special skill uh especially if

you're building an assembly line and

you're building the the Robotics and the

you know the manufacturing techniques

that go into the building it's not the

building

it's the manufacturing techniques so

apparently the whole uh skill of tooling

up a manufacturing site is something

that there's there are tons of Chinese

citizens who have been trained to do it

and in America you could put them all in

one room so there's a skill in building

manufacturing sites that we don't have

and we're in trouble how much difference

does it make oh I don't know let's let

let's ask lucky

farmer who uh is a young billionaire

type who's building a defense defense

business himself with more high-tech

defense stuff like drones and whatnot

but uh he says the United States says if

we were to get in a war we only have

three weeks of

ammunition after three weeks of war the

United States would have to say hey um I

got an idea would you guys like to

startop stop fighting because we're on a

weapons

yeah we well we have the weapons we just

don't have the the things that go in

them you know like rockets and you know

we don't have any missiles and Rockets

and bullets

left but you say to yourself well we

could make more

right

nope we don't have the manufacturing

capability to make more more

ammunition at all like it's not like you

can make the factory work harder there's

no Factory and if there is a factory it

depends on China for

parts no we can't make weapons if we

started a war we'd lose for sure unless

we went

Nuclear So basically the only weapons we

have that work are nuclear because

everything else we just run out of them

in three weeks oh

well um here's some good good news the

uh NOAA the National Organization of

atmospher Association of a-holes or

something I don't know but it's a group

that does the weather forec um the

climate

forecasting for the federal government

and they've ordered a new hundred

million high performance computer to

help them with their uh their

predictions H let me see if I understand

this

story their predictions are currently

perfect or perfect enough that you would

spend billions of dollars maybe

trillions uh to believe them and operate

under the assumption that you know the

climate's getting warmer and the CO2 is

causing it so if you know that and you

know it so certainly that the entire

American economy is based on

it why do they need a new

computer if they already know the

answer strange strange unexpected hard

to explain thing so everything is

correct

already but for $100 million we can make

it

correct although it's correct

already and what about those

elections um just today I saw probably

six to 10 stories about something about

election Integrity that somebody was

looking to tighten up to which I said to

myself what

why would you need to tighten up an

election in so many different ways when

it's already

perfectly safe and not rigged and we can

audit it from top to

bottom it it's almost like the people

who are the closest to it don't think

it's perfectly

secure huh I'm trying to reconcile why

we need a new computer for the

predictions about the climate that we

already know are right and we got to fix

fix a 100 different things in the

election that we already knew was not in

need of any correction H it's almost

like the news just makes stuff

up well what about that story about

those Venezuelan prisons that uh Trump

says they're emptying the prisons and

the prisoners are coming up here but the

regular news the fake news the regular

fake news says there's no evidence to

support that and he doesn't offer any

well well let me tell you the closest

thing we have to evidence like that in

2022 uh Breitbart had a story it

reported by Randy

Clark and it said there was a uh so this

is 2022 there there was a Department of

Homeland Security intelligence

report um that was received by the board

of

Patrol and the report is that Breitbart

Texas you know the Texas office of brart

got the look at it

so this would not be a public document

it would be a reporter for Breitbart

says they got to look at a

document and the report uh indicates

that the Venezuelan government um under

Maduro uh is purposely freeing

inmates so the report is that they would

talk to Venezuelans and they would find

out that they had in fact been in

Venezuelan jails and they seem to have

been really least now there's a part

missing the part that's missing is there

is no indication that Venezuela is

releasing prisoners for the purpose of

coming to the United States there seems

to be evidence according to One Source

now that's not enough for me if you're

saying that one source is enough you

haven't been paying attention too much

you should probably never take one

source so even though One

Source that doesn't have any credibility

problems that I'm aware

of uh it's just a good idea to have a

second source so it's a one- source

story and the one- source story doesn't

go to the second question whether the

Venezuelans are doing it intentionally

but does that

matter once again Trump is directionally

correct even if he's not technically

correct so he might not be technically

correct that they're intentional

emptying the prison prison so that those

people can come to America and get them

out of the country it might be correct

that they have some reason to reduce the

prison

population for whatever

reason um and that some of them went to

America so I would say that Trump is

correct enough in a trumpian you know

directionally true statement that there

are prisoners people who were in Jail

recently for pretty bad crimes did in

fact come to America how many well he's

probably exaggerating that

but how many would it

take before you were pretty worried

about it so there is more evidence that

the so-called Venezuelan G gangs

conquering territory is a real thing uh

we just don't know the details and the

extent of it but it does seem that

Venezuelan gangs are conquering

territory in the United States

here's a story that uh I don't know

what's the most outrageous story of the

day but in Great Britain in the UK

they're looking to uh since their

prisons appear to be

full uh and they're going to be jailing

a lot more people because of their new

anti-free speech laws they're looking to

maybe um rent space in Estonian jails

which have lots of space so the Estonian

in jails are just plenty of space

they're not

full and they've decided that they'll

ship some of their prisoners there maybe

I think that's unconfirmed but one of

the plans is they might ship their

prisoners to

Estonia now what's wrong with that

story let me tell you what's wrong with

that

story if you heard that estonia's

prisons have lots of

room what's the best way to play this

what's your first thought whoa Estonian

prisons have plenty of room we could put

our prisoners in the Estonian prison

okay that's the way the UK is going now

I don't know if they'll do it but

they're definitely considering it here's

how I would have played it hey Scott did

you know that the Estonian prisons are

largely empty Watch How I play

this

why why

what why are the Estonian prisons large

empty did they did they overbuild their

prisons no

no but why are some of them empty does

their Department of Justice not work no

it works pretty well yeah no they have a

pretty good

system so what are they doing that is

not producing

criminals because you should be asking

more questions about

that so the question you should not be

asking Estonia is can we use your prison

space no you should ask what did you do

right that you don't have to put your

citizens in prison what did you do right

because do you know what the answer is

do you know what the estonians do

right almost

everything Estonia is this this this

weird little country that just got to be

sort of a special case in the world

where for whatever reason their

leadership are

rational I know you didn't see that

coming did you you could vote by an

app you just open your app and you can

vote Estonia is one of the you know best

internets pretty low

crime Estonia is killing it the only

problem Estonia has is they don't want

Russia to conquer him which is always a

risk but no let's ask why they don't

have people in the jail let's ask if we

can use their jail space that is the

loser

approach all right now the story about

that uh school shooter that the father

bought him the rifle for Christmas after

he had been already talked to uh by the

FBI for threatening a school

shooting so it looks like the father

might be in some legal trouble for

buying a deadly weapon for somebody who

had been interviewed by the

FBI as a potential school

shooter

[Music]

so well I mean everything about this

story just screams what is wrong with

this country at the

moment Well author Gad sad writing in

Newsweek uh saying that K Harris and her

campaign are hoping you turn your brain

off and use your emotions to pick your

candidate because keris doesn't have as

many you know detailed plans so the

thinking is that they have to sell sort

of the vibe or the feeling and and Gad

gives some examples of that and uh he's

arguing that uh you know we should maybe

use our sense of

reason and uh not be taken in by the

emotional appeal to which I say Gad you

are halfway

there he's halfway there so he

understands that the other side is not

being reasonable that's halfway there

until you understand that no voters make

make decisions based on reason you're

just going to be confused and annoyed by

everything you see because it won't make

sense now nobody uses reasons to

vote it is true that some ideas are

better than other ideas and people will

mention those things and talk about them

but it's not why they

vote why they vote is some mix of how

somebody makes them feel their Charisma

whether they're the same you know race

as you whether you just feel safe it's

just the irrational stuff and then we

rationalize it after the fact so why'

you vote for him or her well I like that

tax policy no that's not why you

voted it just isn't we we all have

reasons including me I'll give you a

reason for why I voted but I'm also

aware that I would have voted that way

if I had to make up different reason re

so whatever it is that drives any of our

decisions is always

irrational once you realize that

everything makes

sense well you know that story about

tenet media allegedly taking money from

Russia and hiding it and hiring some

conservative commentators to be under

their Banner on at least uh just on the

uh YouTube site

and um part of that is story is that

expanded into everybody accusing

everybody of being a foreign

agent so I I jokingly said yesterday on

X I was feeling bad because nobody had

put me on a list of potential foreign

influences and no no sooner had I done

that than I hear that there's a spaces

going on talking about me being a uh an

Israeli asset or something and I

thinking to myself

well that didn't take

long that didn't take long at all by the

way I'm not a re I'm not an Israeli

asset um I don't even support their

government you know they're on their own

I just observe simply

observing and

uh

so some people

say uh what was Putin up to you know why

would why would Russia try to you know

fund these people if it looks like there

was no effort to change them um

editorially so there doesn't seem to be

any evidence whatsoever that Tim P or uh

Benny Johnson um or uh or Dave Rubin

changed any of their opinions because of

where their funding came from there's no

evidence of that and I doubt it

happened um but Lauren Chen one of the

owners with her husband I guess of

tenant media

there people are reporting that she

seemed to be creating some division

among the conservative world but I would

note that there tends to be at the

moment a huge amount of division in the

Pro Trump side of the world more than

I've ever seen maybe probably more than

I've ever seen and you have to ask

yourself did that happen on its

own and then Putin was asked who he

prefers in the American election

um well let me give you some work up to

this I saw a post yesterday from J black

who's just apparently a

Democrat and uh he uses this technique

on his post you've seen it before where

somebody really wants to emphasize how

dumb you are they'll put their sentence

with a period after each

word you know what I mean so if I said

you period are period not period well

period

informed like Not only would I be making

a statement but I'd really be calling

you an idiot with all the periods it's

like you are so dumb I have to speak

slowly so J black did that um he wanted

me to know how dumb I am and maybe some

of you so he said and I'll quote I'll

say this slowly so Maga can understand

it if period r period want period your

period candidate period to period b

period elected period Then he period

shouldn't period be elected

period so the idea is that you know if

Trump is supported by

Putin that should be enough I mean that

should be enough by itself to tell you

not to vote for Trump because of all

that Putin support I mean that's obvious

isn't it I mean how much more obvious

Could It Be I'm going to say it with

periods it's period obvious

period Well a few hours after Jay said

that Putin endorsed

Harris

so uh several million people danced on

the uh the living grave of J black for

being the most obnoxious wrong person on

the

internet let me give you this advice

we're all wrong

sometimes and we're all a little

arrogant sometimes don't combine them

don't be arrogant and exactly terribly

wrong you can do one or the other and

probably get away with it just don't

combine them don't combine them Jay

anyway so um so that happened I saw

Jessica tarlo on the five say that the

the influencers like Tim Po were getting

$400,000 per month from

Russia now I have not looked into it but

I'm going to bet a very large amount of

money that they did not get paid

$400,000 a month a

piece does anybody want to take the

other side of that

bet I hate watching the news and

thinking okay I don't even have to

research that to know that's not true no

it's not true that any paid them

$400,000 a month and especially and not

asking them to change their opinions

whatsoever which appears to be the

case no I don't think so all

anyway

um so conservatives are divided and I

think there's lots of forces from the

outside that are doing that but I don't

know if it's all Russia or just happens

on its

own um I find figured out with a little

help why is the polls that should all

look the same let's say presidential

polls uh if they're all done

scientifically and appropriately they

should all be pretty similar but

sometimes they're not and here's one

reason why

not so the pollsters can determine how

to wait their results so for example

they can ask a bunch of people and they

could you know find out that they had

accidentally talked to too many people

in one party and they could either just

report it say well you know we had too

many people in one party but here's what

we got well that wouldn't really tell

you anything because you expect the

people in one party to vote one way

predictably so if you were to take that

approach that would suggest you were not

interested in a real answer but rather

were interested in influencing what

people thought about the situation so

that'd be the opposite of a poll it

would be persuasion another way you

could await them is by the percentage of

people who voted in the most recent

election so you could say well in

2020 the total votes were this

percentage Democrat and that percentage

Republican so you could use that and

that wouldn't be a bad assumption would

it that there would be roughly the same

mix as there was in the most recent

election wouldn't change that much in a

few years so that's a reasonable way

here's a but here's another way you

could do it you could wait it by um

likely

voters so you could balance it by the

correct number of Democrats to

Republicans to

Independents but then you've got a

problem because The Independents are not

really Independents are they so couldn't

you accidentally have gotten a whole

bunch of Independents who really are

just Democrats they just don't like to

say they're Democrats so you wouldn't

necessarily know that would you you

wouldn't know if you accidentally talk

to too many Democrats they just happen

to call themselves uh Independents

because half the country is calling

themselves

Independence so that's the problem

um so you can wait it by likely

voters you can do it by 2020 mix or you

could not wait them at all how different

do you think those answers would be

pretty different yeah quite different so

here's my

question are these polls telling you

what is or is their selection of what

assumptions they make really the whole

poll was there any even was there any

reason to even talk to the public

because once you made an assumption

about you know what you're waiting would

be you kind of already knew how it was

going to come out by the

Assumption so as a person who used to

collect information for corporate bosses

for many years that was my job let me

tell you it's always the assumptions

that determine the result the public

believes it's the data

nope if it were the data everybody would

get the same answer and if they didn't

they would know why pretty quickly it's

like oh you you wrote that data down

wrong look here's the real data you got

that wrong no it's the assumptions it's

the same thing with climate change

polling and climate change have the same

problem the person who makes the

assumptions decides what the outcome

will be it's not the

data all

right Jordan Peterson is predicting that

uh Biden is going to quit in a few weeks

uh so that we can have quote Vice

president kacen kamla as the first US

Dei Barbie president

wellow Jordan Peterson don't hold back

tell us tell us what you're really

feeling here I feel like you're you're

just holding back too much well I would

add to that what others have added to it

I think by now that maybe the reason

Hunter decided to wrap up his uh

situation and plead guilty without

saying he's actually guilty in that

weird legal away that uh maybe he just

wants to wrap things up so his he'll his

father will have time to Pardon him

before he leaves from office and I think

that is a reasonably good

prediction um I don't think it's

100% but if I had to make a small bet on

it I would bet that he will quit in time

to give c hereis a boost for having

already been the first black woman

president

so we might get one of

those kind of through the back

door um Biden was giving a little uh

rally speech in favor of uh of Harris

and he he said out loud that the

inflation reduction Act was really just

a fake and it was really the green New

Deal Bill basically and it didn't wasn't

really to reduce any

inflation so uh how long do we wait

between the time that you know the

Democrats make claims that the news

supports to the to the point where the

Democrats themselves can just say well

you know actually we made all that up it

wasn't wasn't even about inflation

reduction now it's not that we didn't

figure it out but when I say we I mean

the people who really paid attention to

the news but the average voter probably

thought hey look at that them reducing

inflation good job

Biden um I saw Peter St an he's on he's

on X um he's got some videos on various

topics

PhD and he was noting that uh weak men

and single women tend to vote uh left

and not just because of

abortion but because they do it in other

countries as well no matter what the

abortion laws are so we men and single

women tend to vote Democratic here and

left in other countries why is that well

it seems to be

evolutionary and it seems to go like

this if you feel personally

weak then you're worried about what's in

your immediate

environment does that make sense that

makes sense right if you feel personally

vulnerable you barely can walk outside

because your environment is dangerous so

the first thing that you'd want to

fix is your environment when you walk

outside so you'd want to make sure

nobody had guns and you'd want to make

sure all the poor people got fed so they

don't need to rob you and you would make

a bunch of assumptions that might lean

yeah lean left um if you are Republican

and you're either a strong man or a

married woman who would feel like she

has some protection you would say I

don't need the government to protect me

like on my own property because I'm

married and you know I got a strong

husband I've got the protection but I am

worried about the

country so Republicans and strong men

and married women tend to be more

concerned about people coming across the

border and women seem to be more

concerned about you know what's in their

immediate environment in terms of what

what they should be afraid

of so that feels to me like there's

something to it I don't know if they got

exactly the right genetic explanation

but I do feel it can't be a coincidence

that people who feel weak and

unprotected are looking for the

government to immediately give them some

protection makes

sense um we got some new economic

reports I'm seeing them described in

different ways

uh Julia Pollock said uh the jobs report

is very much in line with

expectations um it's all boring it's you

everything's sort of in the general area

that we thought it would be a little bit

more a little bit less um I think there

was another job report that got the July

job report I think got uh revised down

again of

course anyway there's uh I think I would

describe the report as somewhat anemic

um so somewhat expected but anemic which

means that we'll probably get a rate cut

which would be good for the stock

market but don't make any Investments

because of me I'm not really good at

investment

advice um how many of you have heard of

a historian who predicts the the outcome

of elections in the United States and

he's been right pretty much every time

his name is Alan lickman and he's got

this 13o uh true or false questions that

will tell you who's going to get elected

and he says right now that ad and a 13

go in favor of

Harris so that his thing which has never

been

wrong um is saying there's a strong

signal for Harris to get elected do you

believe it he's got 13 questions it's

been right every

time eight and a 13 go for Harris so

she'll get

elected do you have any questions about

that maybe the questions would be what

are those 13

questions have you ever heard the 13

questions and if I told you the 13

questions do you think you would still

be confident that this is a good

prediction

method let's find

out all

right so here are the things that would

be positive for the uh let's call it the

incumbent let's call it comma the

incumbent um if the White House Party

gains seats in the House in the midterm

all right so that that didn't happen so

that would be negative to um the White

House Party in in office um the

incumbent president is

running well I would say that's not the

case it was when it was Biden but it's

not the case now so that so that would

be two that I would score against them I

believe Ellen lickman scored this for

Harris because she would be like the

incumbent I say she's not the incumbent

you the polls changed immediately as

soon as she got in her mix of people who

supported her changed her policies she

says they going to be

different so I don't think she's the

incumbent and beyond that I think that

Trump was a little bit of an incumbent

once too

so I don't think this one applies and if

it does apply it leans in my opinion

toward Trump next one is the White House

Party avoided a

primary so the reason behind this is if

they avoided a primary it's because

their candidate was so

strong did the Democrats avoid a primary

yes was it because their candidate is so

strong

no no they they GED the system so you

can't give this one to Harris and say

she was so strong we well we didn't even

need a primary really no that didn't

happen she went in despite being weak so

this one doesn't

count uh how about a third c a third

party candidate is

running so that would be usually good

for who the who was in the white house

except the only Third Party candidate

with any any weight just decided to join

the Trump team

so how do you weigh this do you say RFK

Jr counts as a benefit for Harris when

he joined the Trump team no this one is

completely irrelevant in our in this

weird situation how about the short-term

economy is

strong is

it it depends who you ask in my opinion

is weak but I know that other people

Democrats would say oh it's pretty

strong right now no it's completely weak

if you talk to people they'll say

everything costs too much and it's not

easy to get a

job that sounds weak things are too

expensive and you can't get a

job so that one looks like it goes for

it Trump's way how about the growth of

the long-term economy has been as strong

as the last two

terms well again this is a weird one

because the pandemic but it doesn't look

like our growth is impressive so I don't

think that works in their

favor um if the White House has enacted

major national policy changes that would

go in favor of the White House but

shouldn't you say that the major

national policy changes are popular

because we have a national policy change

on Ukraine that were balls to the wall

and it's

unpopular we have uh you know support

for Israel that's pretty

mixed so and then there's that

infrastructure thing that nobody's seen

anything happen

from so I don't really think there's

anything positive that was a major

national policy change so that doesn't

seem to apply how about there's no

social

unrest oh I don't know what do you call

January 6ers being locked up and you

know complete division in the country

and some people are asking for

reparations and some people are looking

for a new country to move to I would say

there's plenty of social unrest but it's

not on the streets because Republicans

get hunted so they can't be on the

streets so that seems not applicable uh

there is no scandal in the white

house what are you talking

about the the whole Ukraine Hunter Biden

uh you know uh and the whole cover up

the whole cover up of Biden's cognitive

ability these are gigantic scandals

gigantic scandals and I think I think

the historian sort of discounted it how

about uh the incumbent Party candidate

has

Charisma well to his credit the

historian did say that Trump has the

Charisma and kamla is not the charisma

candidate so that that one he gave to

Trump uh how about the Challenger is

uncharismatic no again that one goes to

Trump because he's

charismatic how about the White House

had foreign policy

success what was the White House's

foreign policy success opening the

Border war in Ukraine or not helping

Israel

enough I don't see any big foreign

policy success or how about leaving

Afghanistan how about uh the White House

had foreign policy failure well I think

they got some failures here's how I read

this there are 13 indicators in favor of

trump or they're

inapplicable they're either inapplicable

or they favor Trump now do you remember

what I told you about data versus

assumptions the data is in favor of KL

Harris 8 and of 13 but how did you you

get the data it's all based on

assumptions and the assumptions are

whack they're I I mean they're not any

worse than any other voter's assumptions

but it's just one person's

assumptions and and I look at it I go

well I'm one person I pay attention I

look at the

news I don't see any of these as being

the right assumptions they all look like

the wrong assumptions to me

so how could it be that I have so many

questions about this and yet it

accurately predicted who would win the

White House a whole bunch of times in a

row how do you explain that well I have

a

hypothesis do you remember when James

Carville told the Clinton campaign uh

the Bill Clinton campaign it's the

economy

stupid he said basically just ignore

everything else people are going to vote

on the economy and then it was true that

was the most important part well one of

his 13 things is that the short-term

economy looks

good it could be that the person who

wins is the one who has the best

argument about the economy and that's

the whole game it might be that you

didn't need 13 you just needed one and

you didn't need the historian you need

just needed James Carville to say it's

it's the economy stupid well well well

but about the the social unrisked

Scandal of the Charisma well no it's

it's the economy stupid well what about

the who had a primary contest third

about what about a third party candidate

running what what about the no it's it's

it's the economy stupid it's the economy

stupid so I'm going to take Carville

over the

historian uh KL Harris said out loud

yesterday that she will sign a

reparation bill this fills me with deep

hatred deep hatred there are other

things that I say oh that would be a

problem um you know this might not work

out for me you know I don't like higher

taxes for example but this one fills me

with

hate I just hate her

guts and I hate anybody who would be in

favor of this why because your problems

are not magic and

special it is there is there any Legacy

of slavery that is impacted current

black Americans yes absolutely systemic

racism completely

real but I don't care because I've got

problems too everybody I know has

problems some have health problems some

were abused as children some had parents

who were addicts some uh just were in

the wrong place at the wrong time some

were born in bad parts of the

world your problems are not special and

magical they're real they're real and if

you want to say the government caused it

I'd say sure I just don't care and that

is not an argument that I need to

pay for

it you you can make your little uh you

know academic argument that connects all

the dots and I can look at it in a piece

of paper and I'll say yes I get that

that dot yep that does connect those

dots are all connected you've made your

point but I don't care and there's no

reason I should care because nobody has

magic special problems we all

got

problems I would take having the legacy

of slavery if the tradeoff was that I

got free college and I was 6'4 and look

good you know handsome healthy 6 fo4

free college I'll take that thank you

very much yeah I'll take

that and we don't see a lot of people uh

pretending to be uh White to get into

college do we no we don't and do you

think that the asian-americans should be

paying some reparations when the

only impact that black people have had

on their lives since you know they came

in after slavery was a done deal the

only impact had on their lives is that

they got fewer jobs and they were

victims of crime and now they're going

to pay the black black Americans for

something they had no connection to and

indeed it should be paid the other

direction

no no this is dumb

divisive terrible

illogical evil and I hate you if

you're looking at this as a reason to

take my money that I worked for under a

system that I was told that if I did all

the right things I'd get to keep my

money and now Harris is making it very

clear that if I do all the right things

I still have to give the money to people

who

didn't now there are other reasons

people don't succeed but I'm not buying

into this at all no you cannot make me

think that one group of people had

special magical problems and therefore I

have to give them my money nope there's

no argument that connects that

dot 88 corporate leaders just back to KL

Harris including James Murdoch the

former CEO of 21st Century Fox and an

heir to the Murdoch family media Empire

H so that would mean that everybody on

the left leaning side of the news is in

favor of KL Harris but also the the

primary major entity that would be

potentially on the other side is in

favor of KL

Harris at least in terms of ownership of

the Fox network there would be plenty of

individual opinions that will vary of

course that's not good now here's the

question if you were a stockholder of

any of these 88

corporations would you be happy that

they just uh volunteered you to make

less money because they decided to back

the one who's going to tax them the

most you

idiots yeah here here's my

advice for company

leaders you got two choices that don't

make you look like the biggest ath yet

in the world one stay completely out of

it I would use as my example Jeff

Bezos I imagine Jeff Bezos has strong

opinions about things political

I'm quite impressed at the degree to

which he's managed to stay out of it now

of course Amazon like every company is

going to have some wokeness and Dei and

stuff it's somewh unavoidable in the

corporate world at the moment but I'm

not even sure I could tell you what Jeff

bezos's personal opinion is and

Zuckerberg also told you he was going to

stay out of

it this time what do I think about those

two leaders excellent I only need you to

make money so my stocks go up and the

country does well and your employees get

paid and then they can buy things from

me that's all I need I don't need you

advocating for you to play pay more

taxes I don't need the fiduciary leader

of the thing I invested in to be saying

in public you know I'd like to give some

of my money away um not for any

particular reason it's just uh I don't

know I just thought I should back this

candidate was going to take more of my

money and therefore your money I can't

even believe that these idiots would

sign up for the we're going to back the

one who wants to take more of our money

now I

get that you know the argument is more

than just

taxes but if you're the CEO of a

publicly traded

company I feel like you should pay

attention to the taxes and maybe not the

other issues that would be my advice

otherwise you were in the wrong jobs my

friends you should all be you should all

be removed honestly the boards of each

of these companies should remove

them uh imagine that you were a leader

of one of these 88 countries companies

and you just endorsed haris and you

didn't need to it was optional you could

have just said we're staying out of

it don't you think that that

automatically cost them business because

the Republicans would say all right if I

have a choice

I will no longer buy from your company

because I wanted you just to make money

but now you're if I give you money

you're going to be using it to destroy

the country as I see

it so if I were the board I would remove

all 88 of them and I would do it right

away I mean I wouldn't even wait till

the end of the day I would say look you

are absolutely free to endorse anybody

you want as long as you're not working

here because if you're working here

you're just crushing our our Revenue

potential Forever by the way bud light

is not catching up so yeah that's uh 88

boards that should be meeting today and

should be removing every one of these

people I just don't think people in

corporations should be

backing backing any candidate now I'm

here this is going to sound

inconsistent but if they'd backed the

candidate who wanted to lower their

taxes I would back off because I would

say okay that that does feel like you're

getting into politics but not really

because you're really into just lowering

your own taxes and that's your job

you're supposed to be trying to lower

your taxes so if so if a if a CEO or CFO

says we like the one who's going to

lower our taxes fine that's like not

even political that's just your

taxes I I wouldn't even think about not

shopping there for that

reason maybe Democrats would but I I

doubt that

too according to Zero Hedge this uh the

jobs that people are getting are mostly

going to foreign born workers so the

foreign born workers were up 635,000 in

jobs in August while native born were

down 1.3

million now you're going to say to

yourself that's

terrible because the foreign born people

are getting all the jobs but I would

hedge it this way

why did they get the

jobs remember it's foreign born it's not

just undocumented we're not talking

about the people who walked across the

border with the clothes on their back

foreign

born quite often means that you're a

technical expert or a doctor or a

scientist and you came to America

because it's a better opportunity well

of course they're

employed because they're here because

they have those skills that are in high

demand so without knowing if the quote

foreign born workers are mostly people

who walked across the border with

nothing including an education and

English ability or people who were

fluent in two or three languages and had

a skill stack like you can't believe and

they would just rather work in America

to which I say come on in more the

better so it's not really clear that

they're taking American jobs it might

have been there weren't Americans for

those jobs we don't know so I say that

could be good and it could be bad and we

can't tell well Trump trump was asked

about child care at an event I think the

other day and some say his answer was

incoherent um I would agree with that I

think he's got some idea like you know

using uh tariffs to pay for it or

something I don't know but it doesn't

sound like a real plan so I'm I'm not

going to you and say oh he's

got the good plan I don't think I don't

think he's got a plan um but here's my

way I would approach

it I would approach healthc care the way

I would approach a number of other

topics like transportation for example

insurance if you were to design a city

from

scratch with the understanding that only

the federal government would have any

regulatory or law authority over it you

this would be similar to Trump's idea of

using federal land to build some cities

if you built a city from scratch one of

the things you could do is you could

design away the cost of child care now

I'm going to give you the bad version of

how to do that just so you could kind of

understand it conceptually but don't

don't argue too much about the details

I'm just trying to sell you on the idea

that you could design away a lot of

expense right so suppose you had a new

community and a facility that is owned

by the public in which uh you could drop

off your kid or your pet you could drop

your dog

off and there would be somebody there to

watch it but they'd be mostly

volunteers so if you're lonely and

retired or unemployed at the moment or

you're single and it's your day off and

you just want to be around people in a

productive way you could go there and

you could help out or you could just

work out on some gym equipment that's

there but maybe they want to you know

keep the males away from the kids but

you'd have video everywhere there would

be no dark Corners no closets that

anybody could go into no matter what so

that if anybody tried anything that was

inappropriate with a child it would be

like any public space if you saw

somebody doing something inappropriate

with a child in let's say a restaurant

you would immediately intervene so it

doesn't happen there so if you create a

situation where there are a few paid

employees and somebody at the door to

make sure that nobody gets in unless

they're they're vetted somehow you could

create a situation where there's just a

natural collection of people who are

meeting each other sometimes bonding

even and they could create a social life

they could get some oxytocin they'd have

purpose they'd have a place to go they'd

have a schedule things that people are

really really going to need especially

as the robots start taking our

productive work so you may say to

yourself but Scott I have this or that

complaint about that situation to which

I say don't worry about the details the

only point is we're not organized in a

way that we could lower that cost but we

could it seems very doable now let's

take

rent how can you lower the cost of rent

well one way would be there are a lot of

seniors who have extra rooms empty nests

spouses died and there should be far

more of a effort to get them a college

age roommate who can't pay for rent but

they might be able to help out with some

chores and you know if you fall down and

die they'll call the

911 so there's just a whole bunch of

ways you could organize that would take

away expenses what about the expense of

Transportation well if you design your

city so that you get the self-driving

taxes if you need them but mostly you

can walk everywhere you want if you had

bicycle paths from every house to every

school you could completely eliminate

driving kids to school and buses they

could just take their electric

skateboard or bicycle and just park it

at the school and come back right so you

can think of a hundred different ways

that you could just drive the cost of

living down to practically nothing and

your quality of living would be through

the roof I always use my college

experience as my example my college

experience was the on paper the worst

living condition I was in this you know

tiny little room with a roommate for the

first couple

years and you know had to share a

bathroom and you know there's no kitchen

there you got to walk through the snow

to get food on paper it's the worst

place but because it was designed to

give me everything I needed and it

surrounded me with people I wanted to

associate with it was the best

experience I've ever had there's nothing

in my life that will ever come close to

that but I think we could do that for

adults I think you create a situation

where you just met a bunch of awesome

people without any effort at all because

they were just there and you were doing

something in

common all right so I think there's

nobody's got a good plan for child care

uh let's talk about the Trump economic

plan um I asked Gro to summarize it so

it may have missed a few things but so

he wants to reduce the corporate tax

rate from 21 to

15% keris wants to raise

it um but Trump also wants to put a uh

tariff a lot of uh stuff coming into the

country now how many of you think you

understand tariffs how many of you think

an economist can tell you if a tariff is

a good idea or a bad idea how many of

you think that it sort of depends you

know you could see it could be a good

idea in some cases bad in others but

that we could do the math and we could

know that how many think you can know

it well here's what you need to know

there are two reasons for a

tariff the good reason for a tariff is

that there's some country that's trying

to destroy an entire industry in your

country so because the country is behind

it not just the company selling Goods

the country is behind it like China they

could uh subsidize the

product until nobody would ever buy an

American car because they seem too

expensive so we'd all have Chinese cars

and then we would have no car industry

and then China would slowly start

raising the prices because it's the only

place you can buy a car from China so in

that case tariffs are not about what you

paid extra for the car although it might

end up in your price for your car what

it is is a way to keep your entire

industry from being

destroyed now when they when people talk

about uh tariffs what is the dumbass

thing they say I'm I'm going to do it

with a a stupid

face so that the next time you hear it

you can remember my stupid face it goes

like this a tariff a tariff is a tax on

the consumer a tariff is a tax on the

consumer is

it what do you think is it tax on the

consumer it can be in the sense that uh

if you raise the if you raise the cost

on a foreign

producer they might say well you're

still going to have to buy it because

you can't get it anywhere else so I

guess we'll just raise the

price so it depends whether you had a

choice so let me give you an example if

China was trying to sell table salt in

the United States at 10% of what

Americans make table salt for if America

makes it I don't know just making this

up then we should we should put a tariff

on them but would you pay more for

salt no you wouldn't no because the

Tariff would take the foreign price up

to about the domestic price or maybe

higher if it's higher than the domestic

price you just say oh well just buy them

B and salt like I always did there's no

difference in your price now you do lose

the opportunity to get the lower price

but there's nothing to be passed on to

you you're simply not buying Chinese

salt because why would you same price as

the Morton salt and it's Chinese and

well you might as well give it to

America now let's say it's a different

situation it's not something like salt

that you can get anywhere let's say it's

a specific component or

material that if you didn't get it from

China you could couldn't even build the

thing you want to build with their

material well in that case if you put a

tariff on it you're just paying for it

yeah because they're going to say all

right where else are you going to get

this and you'd say uh okay good point

there's literally nowhere else I can get

it so how about you pay whatever we

charge

you I guess I have to

so the first thing you need to know is

that it completely depends on what

product of this if if you if you're

saying in general it's good or in

general it's bad well you're just stupid

all right it's not in general good or in

general bad it depends entirely upon the

specific thing that's being tariffed so

so remember this the first thing you

need to know is it depends if you had

options if you have plenty of options

then your price doesn't go up at all

it's just that that company doesn't do

business in the United States it's too

expensive if you have to buy it then the

government shouldn't put the Tariff on

it does that make sense if we do it

right there wouldn't be any tariff on

something that you had to buy so there'

be no cost to pass

on did you already understand that how

many of you already understood that

before I explained it because tariffs

are kind of wonky and confusing and then

you get to the um a tariff to defend an

industry here's what they never

calculate when the people tell you SC so

they'll just pass along the price it's

just like a tax on the consumer it's

just going to pass along the

price did they calculate what it cost

the United States to get rid of the car

industry because that's kind of big if

you lose the entire automobile

industry and the only way you could have

kept it was was some tariffs did they

include the cost of losing the entire

automobile industry and all that pay and

all the things that those people would

have bought and they might have bought

more things from you whatever it is that

you're selling no they don't no they

don't and that cost is enormous and they

just sort of act like that's not part of

the question no losing an entire

industry is the question it's not the oh

there was a little tax it was the Tariff

was a little tax that got passed on to

the consumer no that's the dumb view

right the sophisticated view is you're

protecting an entire industry in some

cases because the value of the industry

is critical to America in that case even

if you paid a little more it'd be worth

it so if you put a if you put it on

something that you have to get it's a

bad idea if you put it on something that

you could get at the same price from

America it's a great idea if you put a

tariff on something that would destroy

an entire industry in America if you

don't do it it's a great idea so on

balance are tariffs good ideas or bad

ideas well in the political realm we

deal with tariffs the way we deal with

people stupidly so let let me give you

an

example um there was a Democrat once who

did some bad things and therefore all

Democrats are

bad that's how we look at

Teri that uh well there's one situation

I could think of where a tariff would be

bad which would be a tariff on a good

that we couldn't get anywhere else and

so the prices passed on to us yeah don't

do that one don't do that

one this is not hard you just don't do

that

one so I'm in favor of tariffs because a

country has to have them to protect

itself from uh protect its important

industries all right

um let's see what

else um Trump wants to do an emergency

declaration

to drastically increase nuclear energy

production so he would get rid of some

regulations and be faster about

approving new things Etc but also

approving new drilling so he'd be a

emergency declaration to get the

government organized and just very

quickly getting our energy production up

that is exactly right that is 100%

economically logically

geopolitically correct all good so he

wants to eliminate 10 redu 10

regulations for every new one he wants

to get Elon Musk working on efficiency

of the government that could be amazing

just copy Estonia and

um let's see uh Sovereign wealth fund so

Trump wants to use the tariffs he wants

to use the money he gets from the

tariffs to create a sovereign wealth

fund now what that is is a fund that's

managed by a country so that's the

Sovereign part so other countries have

these um and uh it could be used for

infrastructure and other national

projects okay I mean it would depend

what the other projects are I guess but

in concept that sounds okay um Trump

wants to Spur the economic growth of

course and close the make the borders

secure and lower the crime and he wants

to put a bunch into to

R&D uh offering 100% bonus depreciation

for new manufacturing investment right

so these are good things now by the way

Harris has some good things too so it's

it's not all good things compared to bad

things they both got some

things um but here's my problem with

analyzing economic plans if part of your

plan is growth and part of your plan is

uh tax

changes which of those two things can

somebody measure easily well maybe not

easily but if you're an analyst you

could look at the change in taxes and

you could make some assumptions about

revenue and then you could say Okay

Trump's plan will do this to the deficit

and KL Harris's will do this to the

deficit do you think somebody did that

yes they

did I'm not going to name names but if

you see somebody say the Trump plan will

uh uh increase the deficit by $4

trillion or something and the Harris

plan will increase the deficit by 1

point something trillion are we done oh

no one of them increases the debt more

than the other so we're done right you

don't want the one that increases the

debt or do you here's something I

learned in Corporate

America you only manage to the things

you can measure you can measure

predict what the tax income will be if

you just make assumptions that

everything else will be the same if

everything else is the same and the only

thing you did is change the taxes you

could kind of calculate what the tax uh

gains would be but here's what you can't

calculate the offsetting benefit is the

growth so if you cut your taxes more

aggressively to get more growth where's

that they don't even calculate it so if

you see somebody say that Trump would

add to the deficit more than KLA Harris

they're only looking at half of the

equation they're just looking at a

direct tax cut how much would you

collect but that's not the game the game

is that the taxes should be modified to

get you the optimum growth number so if

you're not looking at the total benefits

of the growth over time you know looking

at like a 10year uh period Then you

haven't even you haven't even done the

math yet if the only thing you're

looking at is the direct tax change

you're looking at a publication that's

either selling you

propaganda or they don't know how to do

their

job because the growth part's the

important part you just leave that

out Trump isn't saying cut your taxes

just to make them less he's saying cut

them so you spur the economy in all

these variety of ways you got to measure

the spurred economy now if you say it

won't move at all I mean I'd have to

hear that argument but if if you think

it wouldn't change the economy at all I

mean that's hard to believe but if you

believe that I I suppose you should

state

that all right Harris has a plan of uh

some kind of price gouging control on

food and maybe meds and of course um

nobody thinks that the price gouging

thing is a good idea uh now I well

let me modify that if there's real price

gouging then I think we'd all be in

favor of doing something about it but I

don't think they're going to find

evidence that in the food business you

might find that there was a little bit

during the pandemic but I think I think

the uh free market keeps their margins

to a relatively uh reasonable level she

wants to do stuff for housing giving

$225,000 and down payment assistance and

blah blah for started homes that might

be good

again there's a tendency to just look

what it costs and not a tendency to look

at the economic benefit of

it um she wants to put a cap on insulin

prices that's probably not too different

than what Trump was doing Child Care

credits she wants to improve those so it

makes it look like she wants to do more

for um child care I mean at the very

least she'd increase the tax credits um

tax

policies increase the corporate tax to

28 from 21 that would make your stock

market Fall in value which make you feel

less wealthy which would make you spend

less so you got to calculate that which

they don't of

course um then some kind of a tax

deduction for startup businesses so

they'd get a

$50,000 right off as long as they made

money

eventually um

I like it in concept I don't know if

there if a lot of people would change

their behavior because of it but you

know my My Philosophy is if you need to

solve a problem and we do you know how

to grow faster um if you've got an idea

that could work well let's try it you

know the downside isn't you know death

so maybe this would make a difference

uh so I'd be willing to try it you know

it wouldn't matter who suggested it if

it doesn't work pull it

back you know you'll know in a year is

it worth a year of this probably it

might be worth a year there's going to

be you know cheating and graft and all

that stuff corruption but you'll know in

a

year

um and then she's then Harris has to

figure out how to be different from

Biden I guess that's important all right

ladies and

gentlemen the most important thing you

need to know is if you get the dber 2025

calendar the desk calendar which is

available now there would be no tariff

because it's made in the United States

yeah no tariff made in the United States

um for the first time and uh because

it's more expensive to make it in the

United States I had to cut out the

publisher and cut out amazon.com and cut

out the bookstores now you can only get

it from one

website um and if you go to dilbert.com

you can find the link to buy it's right

at the top and um we're not going to

make a wall calendar this

year there wasn't as much demand for

those I know some of you will miss it

but it'll just be the daily and to make

it even better there are comics on both

sides of each day double the comics

you've ever seen in a dwor comic and if

you pay a little more for shipping maybe

that should take this thing out of it

and I say if you're going to buy more

than one it'll make your shipping cost

look a lot more

affordable so that's

happening um that's all I got for you

today and um I'm going to talk to locals

people

privately uh hope you learned something

did everybody learn anything about

economics today let me ask you this

question before I go was there anything

I said about

their tariffs or anything else that you

said oh I never saw it that way

before salt mines in the USA I don't

know if do we have any salt mines in the

USA we might

not why are they buying our

Farmland well if I had to guess it's for

food um here's the thing with China

if we got in a war with China we

wouldn't have ammunition in three weeks

but they wouldn't have food in three

weeks we're really not going to get in a

war with

China yeah yeah I feel like China is the

pretend adversary like we're pretending

that war is an option it's not an option

war is war with China is not an option

it's just not an

option we we've got to stop pretending

like it might happen no no what one of

the sides would have to want it at least

a little bit before you can consider

neither side wants it even a little bit

under any situation under any scenario

at all it's it's zero and zero you don't

get a war in that

case so I'm not worried about war with

China it's the lowest risk we have

period all right well I'm going to go

talk to the locals people thanks for

joining on x and YouTube and Rumble

you're all awesome I'll see you

tomorrow but it's going to take

30

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e for