Episode 2976 CWSA 10/02/25

Just in time.

We've got a podcast.

We're getting ready here.

But first, I thought I would check my stocks because uh several months ago, well, actually, it was during the bottom of the pandemic.

I I did something I don't usually do, you know, and I advised against it actually, but I did it.

I put uh an unusually large amount of investment in one company.

Now, I don't recommend that.

It's a bad idea.

But uh let me check on it to see who it was.

The company was called, you've heard of it.

It's called Tesla.

Oh, up 100%.

Uh how's the rest of your stocks doing?

SPY up a little bit.

All right.

So, the general market's up a little bit.

That's looking good.

Let me get your comments working here and then we got a show to do that.

that you're going to love.

Trust me, you'll love it.

You'll love it.

Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and you've never had a better time.

But if you'd like to take a chance on elevating your experience this morning to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains.

All you need for that is a copper mug or a glass of tanker shells to a canteen jugger flask.

A vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

It's called the simultaneous sip.

And it goes like this.

Well, you want to hear about the weirdest thing ever?

Are you ready for this?

Do you remember that at the beginning of yesterday's show, I decided to be a little bit vulnerable and opened up my test results for my testosterone levels, which is important to see that they're as low as possible.

um for cancer reasons.

You don't want high testosterone if you have cancer because the cancer just eats the testosterone.

So you want to lower your testosterone depending on I suppose which cancer you have.

U but for mine I wanted as close to zero as possible.

And do you remember that I opened up the test results while I was looking at it.

I basically read it to you and I could see that it had jumped up to the middle of the range, which would mean I'm which would mean that the meds weren't working and uh and I was basically going to die faster than I was hoping.

Now, how many of you saw me do that live?

I'm not imagining that, right?

I did that live right in front of you and I was looking at it and I was just reading it, right?

Here's the fun part.

That doesn't exist.

That test that I looked at in detail and had an opinion and it changed my whole day.

That doesn't exist.

Cuz when I when I talked to my doctor by Zoom later that same day, um he said the you know, no, your testosterone's effectively zero.

The meds are working, you know, the way they were supposed to.

And I said, "No, they're not." I mean, I looked at it myself.

So, I called it up and it was not only were the numbers completely different, but even the presentation of the graph wasn't the same.

So, what happened?

Did I Did I hallucinate while I was completely awake and talking to you on live stream?

Did I Did I literally just hallucinate what I saw?

I don't know.

Or was it some kind of preliminary number because the number was just coming in and did they update it?

Um maybe from the old number to the new number or something.

I don't know.

But the good news and the bad news is that the meds were doing exactly what they were supposed to do to lower my testosterone to what they consider full castration levels.

However, the bad news is since my PSA spiked, it means the meds uh the meds are doing what they were supposed to do, but my cancer's already figured out a workaround.

So, it's it's essentially producing probably producing some something that doesn't measure as testosterone, but has a similar impact.

So according to Grock, who I'm not sure I should believe in these situations, I'm pretty much dead unless we figure out a new solution.

So I don't have a solution at the moment.

But I also don't know how bad it is.

So that's why I got to get scanned.

Once I get scanned, then you'll actually see did anything get worse.

If nothing got worse, then I'm fine.

Uh but if I'm suddenly filled with extra tumors, which I might be, uh it means we don't have a solution.

But there there are some options.

So I'll I'll keep you filled in.

You want some good news?

You ready for some good news?

Um the Cambridge uh I guess Cambridge their uh one of their sciency parts of their university uh figured out how to make an organic um solar panel.

So they use some exotic organic material and uh here's how efficient it is.

It's nearly one one.

You know how if you shine sunlight on a regular solar panel and it used to be they could get you know they could convert 10% of the light to energy and they get better and better it was like oh 20%.

Now I think the best ones correct me if I'm wrong are maybe approaching 30% conversion to energy.

These organic ones are close to 100%.

which means you you could put organic panels.

I'm making this part up, but you know, just to to tell you how uh uh unlikely it is.

It means that if you put these panels around the walls of your room and then you turned on the lights, the lights would create enough energy to power the lights.

Not 100%, but it might be like 98% of all the energy you need to power the lights, maybe.

Now, uh, all of these solar breakthroughs because there seems like there's one every day, but you're you're not going to see them on the market.

Um, this is probably a 5 to 10 years away if they can do it at all.

You know, because it's tough tough to manufacture these exotic things.

It would take years to figure out how to make a factory to make it.

You'd have you'd have to test it to see if it lasts as long and it's economical.

So, it would take forever to actually reach the market.

But imagine if it worked and solar panels could get to something like um unity I think they call it where it it just captures all the energy.

We might get there.

So that's maybe good news.

And my question is which of the climate models has uh modeled that in five to 10 years solar panels will be nearly 100% efficient and easier to make because there would be no there would be no exotic materials.

You wouldn't have to get anything from China.

So which which of the climate models had that?

If this one thing turns out to be true plus battery storage so that your your light can be used any time.

um they'll change everything and it's just one thing that science is working on.

The other thing that could change everything is these small ollow like um uh nuclear power plants, you know, the modular ones.

So the government is now all about uh approving these uh sort of a standardized smaller nuclear power plants.

As soon as they start building a few of those, that changes everything.

So, you've got unlimited fusion energy on the way.

Actually, one or two plants have actually been approved for building fusion.

They're they're so close to it that they think they should start building the thing.

So, you're going to have fusion.

You can have small nuclear that's a new version of nuclear, but not fusion.

And you might have these uh insane solar panels.

And probably all of it looks to be hitting in the 10 to 15 year range would be my guess because it just takes a while.

But in 10 to 15 years, if we could move to that, then even if climate change was a problem, I don't think it is, but even if it is, we're going to be in good shape with energy.

We we might find that even if climate isn't the problem many people thought it was, and I think that's where we'll end up on climate.

Uh it will still be the greatest boon to humanity that we took energy costs from way too expensive to oh now it's practically a commodity.

You're going to need that energy to be a commodity in the age of robots and self-driving cars and AI.

So for all the wrong reasons, we might be moving really quickly in the right direction because the climate change people are going to love these new sources of energy.

the AI and robot people are going to say there's no limit to how much energy we need so you better do everything.

So suddenly for completely different reasons the entire planet was on the same page about energy future energy meaning that left and right would say yes we would prefer a world where we have all this clean nuclear and finally you know we make the the uh let's say the economic argument for solar we solve it in 15 years you know with batteries so that you don't have the you know can't watch your TV at night problem and battery technology is having these huge um huge advantages too.

All right, here's some more good news.

Uh you ready for this?

This one's got it really good.

Um apparently according to Fizz or Wilborn Nobles III is writing about this.

There's a small school um in which they they can put uh kids in this school and the way they teach is they teach them how brains work.

So they teach them you know what to do to maximize your brain.

Just think about that to they teach young kids how to manage and maximize their own brain.

So they teach them how to think critically.

Um but they do a whole bunch of other exercises where they just learn sort of about their believe it or not their amygdala and they do projects on how the brain works and by fourth or fifth grade they're doing that stuff and uh they do they have to do illustrations of how the brain works and how how people learn and social and emotional regulation.

But here's the thing.

Apparently, they they've already demonstrated, although it's, you know, smaller samples, but they've demonstrated that they can get more of their kids uh into a college and get a college degree than the regular schools.

But here's the fun part.

their their low economic students, their poorest students uh handily exceed the college um the the college success of the richer students in regular schools.

Let me say that again.

They have already built a model and demonstrated it in the real world in which the the way they teach the kids is really teaching them how to learn.

not just learning, they're teaching them how to learn at a level I've never seen before.

I've never seen this level.

And they've proven and it works.

And they've they've basically erased income as the major factor in how you do in life.

Income when you're born.

So basically, you don't have to be a, you know, a JD Vance genius to go from low income to Harvard to vice president.

At the moment, that's what it takes.

You know, you've got to be unusually smart to to get past that low income barrier and into something else.

Uh but apparently, you could just randomly select people and and teach them, right?

And they would become superstars.

Now, you know why I'm so excited about that?

This is what I've been working on for years.

That's what my books are.

Let's see.

You can see most of them.

The uh the four books on the top of my shelf are written so that a 14-year-old and up and I I make sure that I write it with the kind of language that a 14-year-old can follow easily and but it works for adults because adults like simple writing as well.

And it's written to teach you how to think.

Reframe your brain teaches you how to reframe.

How valuable is that if you were a teenager to learn how to reframe all your experiences and see examples of it?

Life-changing.

Uh when Biggley is is teaching you persuasion instead of just logic.

So you can see why persuasion rules and our common sense gets overruled.

How valuable would that be if you learned that at 14?

Invaluable.

How about the loser thing where it teaches you how to avoid the bad dumb arguments?

Well, that's exactly what you need to know how to do.

Imagine learning that at 14.

And then, you know, my seminal book, How to Failed Almost Everything and Still Win Big is really the um I I I believe it's the most influential book in his genre for teaching you how to go from nothing to something, whatever your success looks like in your mind.

Now, again, that was written specifically for a 14-year-old and up.

And uh so I'm I'm all in on this concept that if you teach people how to think, then they can carve right through any income or other barriers.

Doesn't matter what your race is, doesn't matter what your gender is, probably doesn't matter too much what your age is, you'll be able to carve right through it.

I I'll bet you I'll bet you if you even had a prison record, but you mastered all three of my books, you'd probably be fine even with a prison record.

So, that's how powerful this stuff is.

And when I see it, um, when I see a version of it, obviously it's not based on my work, but when I see a a a likeminded version of this working for young kids in fourth and fifth grade and uh elevating the poor kids above the rich kids, not just equal, well above, just by teaching them, right?

So exciting.

Probably this is probably the most exciting thing that I've seen in years on any domain.

There's nothing I've seen more exciting than this.

So, good on them.

This is also why I like King Randall's work.

Um, he wanted to come and visit me and I didn't know if I'm healthy enough to do that, but I might I might uh see if he wants to stop by and do a do a podcast.

Uh anyway, he's King Grand Randle is a uh younish black man who has a school for young kids, most of them black, but they don't have to be.

There's at least one white kid in there.

And he's simply teaching them life skills that you wouldn't normally get, which would make you more confident.

And you would just have all kinds of advantages.

You learn etiquette.

You know, if you're a poor kid, imagine being a poor kid and learning, you know, which fork to use and where to put your napkin and stuff like that.

If you couldn't do that, that's the cap on your success right there.

If you didn't know how to eat with proper people who could be your mentor, invest in you, hire you.

If you didn't know how to eat in a way that the other person says, "Oh, this person knows etiquette." If you didn't know that, that that would be a cap.

you're you're done.

You don't get a better job than somebody who can't eat in public.

That's it.

So, what King Randall does is amazing, and I' I'd love to uh tell you more about that at some point.

All right.

Um, so Open AI, the company is uh that's the company that's beyond chat GBT.

their valuation is apparently $500 billion.

Now, now the way you calculate that is because uh some of the current and former employees are already selling stock on the secondary market.

So, it's you you can't publicly buy the stock, but you can do it privately.

And uh they have sold 6.6 billion worth of shares.

That means that some number of current and former OpenAI people probably made you know some people at the top 100 million maybe they made 500 million for one person.

Uh I don't feel like they earned that.

Do you you if somebody already earned a billion dollars like and they've cashed it out and then you know it's just their money forever now it can never go away.

Did they really earn that for the six months they might have worked there?

I don't know.

Well, probably they had to work longer to get vested.

I'm surprised to have invested but maybe they really had to offer them good deals.

Well, Tesla, like I said, is up 100% uh since the day that Tim Walsh was uh publicly celebrating the drop in Tesla stock.

So, if you if you went with Tim Walsh's opinion about Tesla, you missed a 100% gain.

And you know, I I own some of the stock as I said.

So, you shouldn't listen to me when it comes to um investments in general.

If it's about an individual company, the only thing you should listen to me about is that diversification is good.

That's it.

That that's the only thing you should take from me.

That's just like a fact and you should bank on it.

Diversification is good.

Um but anyway, so uh yeah.

Tim Wallace continues to be uh the the worst public figure in the world.

Anyway, and so I guess uh um Elon bought a billion dollars of Tesla stock last week or something and it made a made a big impression because it showed that he was confident in the stock and uh we'll see.

But speaking of stock, did you know that there's a movement mostly from the entirely from the uh political right to boycott Netflix?

Uh and Elon Musk is the biggest name in that.

Betty Johnson was talking about it.

So Benny Johnson was explaining why people like Elon and and others are uh not too happy with Netflix's content because as Benny explains that Netflix is sexualizing children by packaging explicit graphic radical sex topics as children's entertainment.

Now, I'm not going to name the titles that have been coming up as the the ones that are inappropriate, but use your imagination.

All right?

If if these entirely reasonable people, Benny Johnson, Elon Musk, tons of other people, if these entirely re reasonable people have looked at these titles, and they have, and said, "No freaking way you're going to put that in my house cuz my kids can turn on Netflix and just see it." And in fact, not just see it, it would be served up to them specifically.

So, um, and then apparently, uh, Elon, posted that 100% of Netflix employees donations are to the Democratic Party.

Well, I knew that already, but when you think of this topic, it's a sort of especially meaningful, isn't it?

Um, but apparently they've lost Netflix has lost 15 billion in market value since uh people started cancing subscriptions.

Now, I've got mixed feelings on this one.

I'm not a huge fan of boycots.

Not a huge fan because, you know, in effect, that's why I'm cancelled because somebody decided somebody decided on your behalf that you shouldn't see Dilbert in newspapers.

You didn't get to decide that.

Is that a good model that the people who are the customers had no say whatsoever in whether I was cancelled?

Worldwide books and you know not the books I've republished but the original publisher all cancelled.

Um so I'm I've got a little bit of uh mixed feelings.

But on the other hand I also have that uh what we call the internet dad energy.

Meaning that if I had young kids in the house, I would cancel it today.

Everybody Everybody know where I'm coming from?

If I had any young kids in my house, I would cancel Netflix for sure.

But I don't.

So, I also am going to start monitoring to see if there's even one thing I can watch on Netflix that I want to watch cuz usually not.

But something might come back.

So, I don't know.

I'm not sure which way I'll go on that, but I guarantee if you if I had a kid in the house, even one kid, no way.

There's no way I would let a kid watch that material.

Um, so the uh the uh the meme story just keeps getting better and better.

So, you know the meme story which is Hakee Jeff was shown in a a Trump passed around meme where he had a sombrero and a a big fake must, you know, Mexican mustache.

And uh there there are three of them now that all have them in that, you know, one of them includes Trump playing them as the mariachi band.

Now, the beautiful part about the third one, I think it was the third one in the same vein, is that if you've got Trump wearing the hat and playing mariachi music, is Trump making fun of Mexicans?

Cuz he's wearing the hat.

He's wearing the hat.

And I think he even has did he have a mustache?

I don't remember.

I think no mustache, but he's wearing the hat.

So, he put himself in the meme in you know, almost exactly the same context as Jeff.

You don't put yourself in the meme if the meme isn't, you know, meant to be a racial insult.

So, that that makes it even more fun and uh and interesting.

But Caitlyn Collins, CN C CNN's Caitlyn Collins, uh, is talking about how apparently the White House has been playing the memes on a loop over the loudspeaker in the White House for the press corp.

They're not not only are they not running away from it, they're doubling down, they're tripling down, and they're playing it on the white and the White House speakers.

Now, I could not be happier about this because CNN, one of their hosts, uh already called it a racist video.

And uh I think it was Caitlyn who said they simply don't care about the criticism.

I guess they just figured it out.

They just figured out that uh the Republicans are in breakout mode.

Breakout mode.

They had been contained by charges of racism.

It was the most powerful, you know, the most powerful product that the Democrats had.

They didn't have arguments.

They didn't have good candidates.

They didn't have policies.

They didn't have a track record.

They didn't have anything.

They had this one thing, this psychological wall that they built that if you did something they didn't like and it really didn't even matter, they could make a story that it was being racist.

Oh, you want to uh lower taxes?

Oh, well, that's obviously going to affect the, you know, the brown community more than the white community.

So, I guess that's pretty racist.

So, they could do it with anything.

But by Trump and company going directly at it, like in instead of running away from it, running toward it and saying, "All right, we're going to we're going to mock this.

We're going to make a joke out of it." It totally worked.

So, Republicans have just experienced breakout.

I think the Charlie Kirk thing um changed everything.

You know, I didn't I didn't know at the time that it would, but in my opinion, it changed everything.

And what it did was it changed people from all right, I'm still on steroids at the moment, so if your fouryear-old is listening, cover up the ears.

I think I think the Charlie Kirk thing went from we have a preference that you would not be saying these things about us.

Now it's you.

It's you.

We're go we're going right at you.

And you see it in a lot of domains.

You're seeing it with the so-called black fatigue uh theme that's going around.

And you're definitely seeing it with the Mexican sombrero.

Although I remind you that I'll bet you will never find a single Mexican who's honest who would say that that bothered them.

You won't even find one.

So, it's a fake everything is racist thing that CNN and MSNBC does, but now it's now it's just a joke.

And I and I believe that this creates the model going forward that every time they do the stupid racist thing where they torture the topic until it looks like they can make it racist, you just turn them into a meme.

And then when they complain, my god, you're even more racist because you turned it into a meme.

What do you do then?

Turn it into a meme.

And when they complain more, what do you do?

Turn it into a meme.

So, good luck, guys.

Well, I told you that there was a uh that Minneapolis had 50% of the immigrants had some kind of criminal, you know, outstanding criminal behavior.

But I didn't realize that 50% of them had committed immigration fraud.

New York Post is reporting.

So apparently the former uh director of USCIS, some kind of Biden uh department, created a parole program that funneled unfeted military age migrants into Minneapolis, establishing an Islamic enclave.

Yeah, that was a good idea, Biden.

Let's uh let's funnel the unvetted military age migrants.

um they have some kind of a parole program uh and create an Islamic enclave.

Great idea.

Um I'm going to say more about that in a minute, but I'm going to go through this topic to get there.

Um according to the uh postmillennial, 53% of Americans, there's a new Pew Research poll, 53% Americans think that not having kids is bad for the nation.

only 53% think that it's a bad idea to not have enough kids.

Do they understand what happens if you don't have enough kids?

Does any are there really that many people who don't understand that if you don't have many kids, we're all dead or the country is dead?

You people don't really understand that which is weird.

I think uh you know my entire life I was told that we were overpopulated and we better have fewer kids.

So I think a lot of people have just been brainwashed in the you know we're overpop populated climate change stuff.

So think about think about how dangerous climate change has been that it actually talked an entire civilization into killing itself by not reproducing at replacement rates.

That actually is happening.

And you know, it's not all climate change, but I'll bet it's, you know, a third of it.

Um, so what happens?

What happens if you don't have replacement rates for your own population and at the same time you have a immigration system that is allowing in a lot of people from other countries?

Well, depends what countries.

If it's uh say a lot of people are coming in from England because they want to get away from their repressive uh government over there, probably they would assimilate pretty quickly.

Um there would be high education in that group.

Probably be fine.

That that would be one way to compensate for low birth rates.

Um what if your people came in from an Islamic country, which there are lots of them.

Well, that too would be okay if you kept that number lowish and they were distributed around the country so that you know they just assimilated.

It might take longer, but you know that'd be okay.

But what would be the worst thing you could do?

The worst thing you could do is have a low population.

uh naturally your your native population is not reproducing while you're bringing in a lot of Islamic people and putting them in places where they will form caliphates effectively.

They'll they'll uh they'll push for electing all their own people because you don't need to have you don't have to have a majority in like look at New York City.

Uh look at England, look at London.

You don't need a majority.

you just need that majority to all vote the same way, that minority to vote the same way and then you control politics.

So the Islamic model where um you really don't change religions.

So that's a non uh since you you could actually be murdered by your own people if you change religions.

It kind of locks you in to not assimilating because literally for some people it would mean death.

Um, also if you put them in one place like this Minneapolis model, you are designing a system that guarantees in the long run we become an Islamic country.

It's guaranteed because the Islamic thing is not about the people per se.

It's about a I'll call it a mind virus.

You could call it a religion that doesn't that is not compatible with other religions, but I'm going to call it a mind virus.

The mind virus, if you put enough people who have the same mind virus in the same place, they will eventually take over your country little bit at a time.

But we currently have a system which it looks like the Trump administration is trying to undo.

But the Biden administration had in place uh an entire system which guaranteed we would become an Islamic country.

Because if you simply brought in all kinds of different people at let's say the same rate, let's say 10% of your people coming in were uh from Mexico, 10% from other South America, 10% from Europe, 10% from Islamic countries.

What would you end up with?

You would end up with an Islamic country.

10% 10% probably would get you to an Islamic country.

And I think that would be by design.

Now, not necessarily by intentional design.

It's just that if you looked at it on paper, you'd say, let's see, the locals are not reproducing and they're bringing in uh a lot of people.

Many of them will just assimilate.

But hm, 10% might be the ones who by their own preference would not want to assimilate.

If you bring a if you bring a Mexican into America and he wants to live in in America and have American kids, do you think they want to assimilate?

Absolutely.

Absolutely they want to.

I mean, they might want to hold on to some of their, you know, Hispanic traditions, of course, but they want to be mostly American.

Do the Do the Islamic immigrants have the same intention andor ambition?

I feel like their system is a different system and it's more about making their host country more like them.

Would you agree?

I don't I don't know of any situation in which a Mexican immigrant even once has tried to make America more like Mexico except you know unless they started a Mexican restaurant but those are fun right they're not even trying to resist assimilation they come here to assimilate but if you told me that the Islamic immigrants came here to assimilate I would call you a liar because I don't I think that's true.

So, we have a system that guarantees we would be Islamic and only only the Republicans can unwind it, if it's even possible.

I think there's still time.

I think we can save ourselves, but I do not think Europe um acted fast enough.

I think Europe's dead, not dead.

They'll be Islamic eventually.

Well, um, Steve Mallaloy and I saw this post by Amuse.

Um, in 2007, El Gore warned that the Arctic would be ice free by 2014.

How'd he do?

Well, it's now 2025 and, uh, 500,000 square kilometers more ice have been added.

That's about as wrong as you could possibly be.

That's about as wrong as you can be.

Um, and the new news is that according to Israel, uh, Greta and her little flotillaa, I think there are about 50 boats heading with what they claim is food for Hamas.

And, uh, some documents were found in Hamas's possession, um, or abandoned by them, I guess.

And the documents suggested that Hamas is funding the flotilla and probably organizing it, too.

And the reason for it is, you know, to make Israel look bad.

And uh one of the reasons, you know, that they are not genuinely uh intending to deliver food and that the food delivery thing is a fake is that Israel already offered a way to offload that food in Italy where where it's not a political event and then Italy had already offered to ship the rest of it to Israel and uh Gaza.

So, so they have a way to get all of the food to Hamas and they've turned it down because they want they want to make the political statement of being, you know, turned down when they reach the border, I guess.

So, uh, Greta went from the the wonder kid of climate change, which was of course a gigantic scam as far as we can tell, to being scammed by Hamas because she's not smart enough to figure out who funded her.

And uh now she's just a dupe of a terrorist organization.

So she went from being the most destructive person on earth by pushing climate change.

That would me literally that makes her the most destructive person on earth to uh being duped by a terrorist organization.

So uh I don't know how Wikipedia is going to write that up, but I think Groipedia might get it right if you know what I mean.

Anyway, but it's possible that all data is fake, so maybe that whole story is made up.

You know, anything from a war zone, you can't totally trust it.

So, if Israel said, "Oh, we found these documents which coincidentally are right on the nose." Do you believe it?

Now, I read it to you like it's a fact.

Should you believe uh Israel that that they found this thing that's just perfect?

It's right on the nose.

Oh, isn't that perfect that they found that the flotillo was funded by Hamas?

Now, I I don't know if it was or wasn't.

But would you believe it because it's reported?

The answer is you should not believe it because it was reported.

It's exactly the kind of fake that gets made up during a war.

It's exactly what gets made up during a war.

Was this made up?

I don't know.

I I want to believe it's true because it makes a good story, but a little too good.

It's a little too good.

A little too on the nose.

So, I'm going to say that all data is fake and probably that.

Um, but we'll see if if there's followup or we see the documents and somebody I don't know, somebody confirms the documents are real somehow, I'll change my mind.

But right now, I'm leaning toward no.

Probably not true.

Well, there's a new poll that says uh one in three Americans now think political violence might be necessary.

Now, all data is fake and most polls have some problems, too.

Do you believe any poll that that has this high percentage of people that say that violence might be necessary?

Do do you believe Let's I'll give some details.

Uh let's see.

Yeah, the support for violence is rising faster among Democrats, jumping from 12% thought violence might sometimes be necessary for politics to 28% in just 18 months.

And they probably did this after Charlie Kirk was assassinated.

Imag imagine the number uh among Democrats going up for violence after Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

I mean, just try to hold that in your head for a second.

Wow.

I mean, now I believe that the this poll was taken after he was assassinated, but I don't have a confirmation of it.

So, NPR is writing about this if you want to follow up.

Um, and let's see.

I guess uh Republicans, well, Republicans still slightly outpace them at 31%.

So 28% of Democrats, that's way up.

Um and then independents aren't too far behind.

25% of them, 25%.

Say, uh violence is all right.

Well, the 28% as you know is close to my magical 25% which I say 25% of people in every poll, no matter what the topic is, no matter who does the poll, no matter who answers it, 25% of the respondents will have the most bad stupid answer that is possible.

And this is it.

Here's what I think.

I think if you call somebody and the only thing that they have to worry about is what they say on the phone, they say, "Oh yeah, it's time to time to get violent." That's what you say if you're answering a poll question.

Because you might want that answer to be there.

You might be a troll.

You might be just trolling, right?

But what happens if you go to your neighbor and say, "Go to your Democrat neighbor and say, "All right, it's go time.

uh grab your gun and meet me in the street because we got to start shooting the bad guys.

What happens next?

That guy who said, "Yeah, violence would be good idea." He realizes that he doesn't own a gun.

If he goes out in the street, he will be opposed to the people who have all the guns.

So, do you think that that guy is going to be in favor of violence if violence was a real option both in both directions?

I've got a feeling that that 28% are just full of You know, a few of them are going to be Antifa types that that would do violence and they're just crazy and broken and, you know, they're they're just broken people.

But the average ordinary Democrat, they might say yes in a poll, they're not going to say yes if if there are gunshots outside.

You know, they're they're suddenly going to realize they're unarmed, except for the criminals, I guess, who will just be robbing the people who are trying to do something political.

Anyway, so I don't I don't believe that poll.

I don't believe it on the Democrat side.

I don't believe it on the Republican side.

I don't believe the independents.

I think it's The data is fake.

Well, the Ryder Cup ended yesterday.

That's a big golfing thing where various countries compete against other countries.

Um, I guess Europe won it.

And uh but the big story is that a uh a New York New York PD police detective uh snuck in.

And the way he did it was uh wearing his full uh his full uh police uniform with guns and everything and he talked his way into the highly secured area where Trump was where Trump was.

He talked his way in without credentials just by saying he was working on Trump's uh security.

Do you know how they found out he had a weapon?

Cuz he accidentally dropped a clip.

Somebody noticed he dropped a clip of bullets on the ground and they're like, "Oh, hold on.

Hold on.

Maybe we need to talk to you again." Now, as far as we can tell, he was just a a cop who wanted to get into the the show.

So, he might have been just a Trump fan and he didn't have a ticket.

And he thought, "Oh, this would be a clever way to get up close." And uh magazine, not a clip.

All right, we'll call it a magazine, not a clip.

The the news story called it a clip.

So, I was just I was clipping their clip, but we'll we'll go with the real gun gun people.

A magazine, not a clip.

All right.

Um, anyway, he got kicked out.

But the question is, if it was that easy to get in with a loaded gun or or a gun, uh, how much security does Trump really have?

Does make you wonder.

So this is the kind of story that tells me that if if the dictator took over one day and the citizens, you know, by a majority wanted to take out that dictator, they could get to him.

You know, the the security just would do a lesser job and yeah, they could get to him.

Well, the Super Bowl has now their uh halftime entertainment, which is always controversy.

and they chose a fellow named Bad Bunny.

Now, Bad Bunny, I think, does most of his music in Spanish.

So, that's the first American provocation going on right there.

Uh, but secondly, he wears a dress.

He's sort of a crossdresser.

I don't know if he's non-binary or what he is, but but he likes wearing dresses.

And uh some thinking is that is it I don't know if this part is true but is Jay-Z and his production company are they in charge of the Super Bowl um the entertainment for the Super Bowl?

Uh because I some so some thought that Jay-Z was just sort of messing with, you know, messing with America by doing the what he might think is the worst uh you know the worst choice for the Republican part of the world.

So, uh, but and then, uh, the reason that Bad Bunny had was not doing any shows in America, he's going to make this one exception for the Super Bowl, but he wasn't doing that because he was worried that, uh, ICE would attend to his shows because there would be a large Hispanic uh, population going to his shows.

And he's worried that ICE would sort of stand outside and start arresting people and deporting them.

So, he canled all of his US shows.

Uh, oh, that happened a while ago.

Um, so what do you think the US is going to do about that?

Well, Corey uh Luwendowski, who is part of uh Homeland um security, he says that yeah, ICE will definitely be at the game.

Uh he said there's no place that is a safe haven for people in this country illegally.

not the Super Bowl and nowhere else.

We will find you.

We will apprehend you.

We will put you in a detention facility and we will deport you.

So know that there's a very real situation under this administration which is completely contrary to what how it used to be.

Now, when you first heard that Bad Bunny was concerned and, you know, good Democrats were also concerned that ICE might be at the Super Bowl uh getting uh Bad Bunny's fans and deported them.

Didn't you sort of automatically think, oh well, you don't want to ruin the Super Bowl, so uh ICE will not be there because it, you know, it it just seems like the wrong do domain for that kind of action.

But but once again, uh the Trump administration breaks through a wall and basically says, "Oh yeah, we're going to be at the Super Bowl all day long.

We're going to deport anybody we can get our hands on that, you know, is the right person to deport." And I got to say, every time Trump does something that's more baller than you thought he would do, because obviously he would approve of this, um it doesn't make me like him less.

It doesn't.

So acting strong al I've said this before but I'll say it again.

Acting strong will hurt you in the short run because there's always somebody who's you know totally offended by the strong actions and it's it's going to this is the beginning of the end.

You know they always think that everything strong turns into something even worse.

But in the long term, and there's some there's a new uh poll out so showing that uh Trump's popularity is is going pretty far down.

I would argue that that is the mark of a change leader.

If you're a big change kind of a leader, you probably have uh high polling numbers to get elected.

That's why you got elected.

You had high approval numbers on day one.

Everybody's, you know, optimistic, high high numbers.

But as you start doing the things that hurt, because it always hurts to do that much change, the more change you introduce and the faster you introduce it, and nobody's introduced more change than Trump is, faster or more, your your popularity should drop quite a bit in the short run.

If the things that you do work out, then half the people who said, "Oh, no.

Tariffs are a mistake, well, suddenly they go, "Okay, I guess I was wrong about tariffs." But not until the long run.

If closing the border looks cruel in the short run, but a few years go by and everybody on both sides says, "Yeah, that had to be done." You're going to forget about all the anecdotal little stories of the the hairdresser who got deported.

Maybe you didn't like that one.

All you remember is that there was one president who closed the border when the others couldn't or didn't or wouldn't.

So, in general, if you had the best president you could ever imagine, the most logical um path for his approval would be to start high.

Yay, you won the election.

You're going to do all these things we want you to do.

Oh, wait.

You're going a little bit too hard.

Oh.

Oh, I wouldn't have done it that way.

Oh.

Oh, maybe if I reduce my approval, you'll you'll back off a little bit.

Oh, I like nine out of 10en things you're doing, but I don't like that 10 thing.

Oh, oh, and your approval, if you're a big change leader, which Trump is, should drop precipitously because people are thinking about that one thing in the news that bothered them that one day.

over time if the things that Trump does work out and to me they look like they will 5 10 years from now he would be the highest rated president of all time.

So if you're worried about these you know momentary drops in his popularity it would have to drop a lot more before it would be even an indication of bad news.

All it is now is an indication of people having short-term thinking.

That's that's all it's telling you.

is not telling you anything about Trump.

It's telling you, oh, people think short-term.

The news has to do the what's the problem of the day?

Of course, it goes down.

It would it would be anybody.

All right.

The government's closed for the second day in a row.

Oh.

Oh.

Oh, no.

What am I going to do with the the government shutdown of unnecessary services?

I I need some unnecessary services.

Oh.

Oh.

Okay.

Are any of you affected in any way by the shutdown of the government in any way?

Uh, so far not me.

Um, I'm sure it'll affect somebody, but I don't know who.

Um, but there is some thought that the uh the shutdown is going to resonate a little bit better for the Republicans than for the Democrats.

So, I don't know if that's true, but that's what people are saying.

They're some are calling it the Schumer shutdown, but of course the Democrats are trying to say it's a Republican shutdown.

Um, here's what I'm liking about it.

As I told you, uh, I say no more money to the government if both sides are lying about the budget.

Both sides are lying about the budget.

both sides are just lying through their asses by omission and by leaving out context.

So, but as as things are developing, uh it appears that the GOP lie is the good one.

It's the one that's working because the GOP lie is that they're making it all about um giving free health care to illegal people.

Is that true?

Is it true that that the money that the Democrats want primarily could be thought of as free money for health care for illegal aliens?

Well, that's not true, but it's a little bit true.

It's not true because they're not technically illegal.

The ones who are here on asylum um could still get the services, but they're not technically illegal because they came in through asylum.

But if you're Republican, you don't count them as legal because you know the asylum claim is fake for 98% of them.

Maybe if you were real, but 98% of them are lying to get a temporary legal status.

A Republican would say that that's just an illegal alien.

I I might use a different word for it, but if they lied on on their asylum application, they're an illegal alien.

So, the Republicans can reasonably and sort of honestly say that uh there would be more health care if um this the case would be if a asylum seeker who is technically legal, but according to any common sense Republican opinion, that's an illegal person.

They've done two They've done two illegal things.

One is in they're in the country illegally in in the Republican opinion, but also they lied to get in here.

Two crimes.

They're double illegal.

They're more illegal than the illegals.

They would be more illegal than somebody who just snuck over the border because they did two things.

Cave in illegally and lied about it.

That's two.

So, at the same time that the Democrats are saying, "No, no, they're lying.

It's a lie.

We're not we're not going to fund any illegals.

We're funding the people who pretend to be legal." That's completely different.

So CNN can call the Republicans liars, which they do, at the same time that they are forced to do a deep dive as Jake Tapper did to find out, okay, what what really is going on here?

Um, and uh, the deep dive is not helping Democrats cuz once you do the deep dive, you see that the the Republican framing of this that it's to fund illegal aliens is not correct.

It is not correct.

But the truth is just as bad, which is which is kind of genius.

Uh, if there's anything I've ever taught you about persuasion is that you can, and it's not always unethical.

Usually, it is, but not always.

You can tell a story that's persuasive as hell.

It's not exactly accurate.

And you could be doing it in the service of the country.

In other words, it could be good for the country if it gets you the funding you want, the services you want, etc.

But maybe maybe there was a little shaving of the context if you know what I mean.

So because the critics have to explain why it's not true that the funding is for illegal aliens, in the process of explaining it, they end up defending the Republican view accidentally.

It's kind of freaking genius.

So if people believe the Republican view on face, the Republicans win.

But if they don't believe it and they also drill down to find out what is true, Republicans win a second time because nobody's going to like the fact that just because they came in and illegally said that they're asylum seekers, they get free healthcare.

Nobody's going to like that.

All right.

I guess Ake Jeff went on CNN.

Uh Eric Dhy noticed this and uh so Jake Tapper was going through this uh you know this well and he goes uh he so he reads Jeff the provision so that Jeff can see that in reality people who are nonitizens now Jake would make the he would correctly make the distinction that the asylum seekers are nonsitizens but not technically illegal.

So he reads the provision that says that that group would get uh healthcare and then Jeff says uh let's say uh here's what he reads.

He goes Jeffrey's called it a lie but then Tapper says it's a lie.

So he agrees with him it's a lie that illegals are going to get healthcare with us.

He goes, "But you support what you support does bring back funding for emergency Medicaid to hospitals, which pays for undocumented immigrants and a provision for people seeking asylum and temporary protected status, non-citizens.

Why even include that?" So Jake is saying, "Why would you even put that in there when you know that's going to stop everything?" I don't even know what the other things are.

Do you?

I've only heard of one topic that they want to fund and it doesn't sound like a good idea.

Are there other parts that that trillion or dollars is going to go to and just nobody wants to mention it?

Republicans don't mention it and the Democrats don't mention either.

Well, if they don't mention it, I guess it comes down to this one thing.

And uh to Tapper's credit, although he called it a lie technically, he did also support why it's a perfectly good point that the Republicans are making.

It's a perfectly good point.

If they don't want to fund people who are non-citizens, that's that's the choice the voters.

And then uh anyway, so Jeff didn't have much of an answer to that.

He doesn't have much of an answer to anything.

All right, it gets better.

So, the White House um I guess they had to furlow their social media manager because of the shutdown.

So, instead of not having their social media manager, uh operate from the White House.

The White House did one of the funniest things I've ever seen.

They they announced uh in a post, "Our social media manager was furoughed, but making America great again isn't." So they show So they show a meme that apparently was made by the people who were the the backup staff, you know, the ones who were not the good social media managers.

And so they intentionally made the meme have all the wrong fonts, a terrible design, you know, super simplistic, a little eagle in the corner that's just, you know, too on the nose.

And hey, Cat.

Uh, but they made the meme.

so hilariously bad.

It It looked like something you would made on the first day that Power.

Point was invented.

You know, somebody said, "Hey, Power.

Point, what's that?

What's it do?" All right, watch this.

I'll grab these images and I'll put them all together and I'll put all these different fonts and and it'll just be a mess.

So, if you didn't get the joke that they intentionally designed it poorly, wasn't funny at all.

But once you realize that they intentionally made it funny, it's definitely intentional.

They intentionally made it bad.

It's freaking It's just great.

It's really funny.

And then you look at the comments then people who got the joke rolled in and they played with the meme themselves.

One of them put a little sombrero on the eagle.

I mean just just great stuff.

So I reposted that on X.

If you want to look at it, it's definitely worth a look.

But uh A+ to the White House.

Probably the social media managers were part of designing that.

But it's brilliant.

It's just brilliant.

I saw a post from Cynical Publius, one of my favorite follows.

Um he said that fat generals is merely the latest 8020 issue the Democrats have decided to sport on the 20% side.

Have you heard anybody complain about uh the secretary of war saying that the general shouldn't be fat?

I haven't heard anybody complain about it.

It is another 8020.

We do want our generals not to look fat.

I do.

I want that.

I mean, it's not my number one problem in the world, but yeah, I I want my generals to not be fat.

So, good call.

Once again, Democrats on the 20% side.

All right, we talked about that.

So, Harvard has hired a drag queen uh as a visiting professor.

The drag queen's uh stage name is Lahore Vagistan.

Sorry, cat accident.

No, no, don't.

No.

Roman, don't knock over the microphone.

You can be at my lab.

You can be over here.

It's fun to be in my lap.

Okay.

Uh, so here are the the classes that their drag queen visiting professor is going to teach.

One is queer ethnog ethnography.

So if you wanted a queer ethnography class in Harvard, you could get one now from a from a drag queen named Lahore Vajistan.

But that's not all.

Uh you can als you can also attend a class at Harvard called Rue Politics, Drag, Race, and Desire.

And that will be in the spring semester.

Now you tell me Is Harvard trolling or did they really think this was a good idea for their brand and for the students?

What is going on with this?

To me, that's just funny.

It's just funny that they would destroy themselves.

Uh I would like to uh keep an uh an updated uh estimate of what the value of a Harvard education was and is.

I would say a few years ago, very few years ago, the value of a Harvard education could be um in the millions.

You know, if you looked at lifetime earnings, even though it would be expensive to go there, probably one of the best investments you could ever make because of your lifetime earnings.

I would so I would say a uh Harvard education would probably have been worth $20 million over a lifetime.

I mean really really valuable.

Um current value of a Harvard degree.

Uh updating my estimates.

Uh see carry the three.

Uh $200.

$200.

Current value of a Harvard degree.

Did you know that uh Joy Reid went to Harvard?

Yeah.

Mhm.

And uh Joy Reid was uh just on a uh show and wokeness spotted this and uh she said when my mother came from Guyana she realized is not a land of opportunity for people like us.

Was she talking about America being not a land of opportunity?

I believe she was saying that America was not the land of opportunity she thought it was.

Um, as end wokeness points out, the average salary in Guyana was $5,200 a year, and Joy Reed came here and earned $3 million a year at MSNBC.

So, let's say, put it all together.

Her mother's from Guyana, which means they came to this country well after slavery was done.

So, was not part of the slavery.

Uh, but she earned $3 million probably on the backs of white men who didn't get into Harvard because she did and didn't get a job at NBS NBC because she did.

So, question, does Joy Reed owe me reparations?

because she didn't she didn't uh she wasn't part of the legacy of slavery, but she was part of the legacy of denying white men jobs.

So, do the math.

Does she owe me reparations?

I went through, let's say, I I I lost my first career because I was a white man.

I lost my second career because I was a white man.

I lost my third career because I'm a white man.

She got on the the rocket ship to the top through Harvard, which of course considered her ethnicity, and then MSNBC, which of course considered her gender and her ethnicity.

So, she owes me reparations, right?

All right.

Well, get back to me on that.

Um, do you know Rick Caruso, the developer guy?

I think at one point he ran for mayor against Karen Bass but did not win.

So he was on the all-in pod um event and he was talking on stage with the all-in pod guys and he said quote we are spending in the city of Los Angeles $900,000 per homeless person that we're moving from the streets.

Chimath said 900,000 per year because Chimath is unusually smart and that that immediately looked like a sketchy number.

So So he's like 900,000 per year, you know, kind of kind of challenging him to back that up.

Caruso said, "Yeah." Jimoth said, "Oh my god." Uh so I looked it up on Grock to find out if that $900,000 estimate was real.

It's not.

There's no number like that.

Yeah.

And so remember I tell you all data that matters is fake.

Uh that's presumably fake data.

I think Chamoth saw it right away, but you know, they didn't have didn't have the the ability to do a deep dive, but uh I guess I'll ask you guys.

Um Jason, you you might be listening, but uh do a little do a little search on that.

See see if you can update that number.

If it's true, if you can back it up, that would be really interesting.

But Grock is not aware of any.

It gave lots of details of what they are spending.

It was nowhere near that number.

It was still big, but more like a few hundred thousand.

So probably fake.

Um, Trump just signed some executive order that they say will uh, according to the postmillennial, it will supercharge pediatric cancer research with AI.

Now, that's a good idea.

So I think it's mostly an AI related thing, but they want to direct the AI at looking at all the apparently they have immense amounts of cancer data that would be relevant to childhood, but they don't really have an excellent way to see what that data means, which is strange.

I would think that they would have, but apparently they're going to fix that.

Um, and you know what I say, faster, please.

Cuz if they fix it for children, well, you know, they're not going to be working on prostate cancer for children.

But, uh, they might they might learn something about cancer that could be useful, keep me alive a few more years.

Here's some more good news.

Um, the US Department of Energy is, uh, going to take a 5% ownership stake in Lithium America's Corp., which I didn't know this, but apparently Lithium America's Corp.

owns uh rights to look for lithium in a giant uh a what do you call it when a volcano is dead, but it's that big volcano hole.

Well, anyway, the volcano the the uh non-active volcano apparently has the largest lithium deposits in the world in America.

So America has the largest lithium deposit in the world.

The only thing we don't have is the efficient way to get it legally.

So the US department takes a 5% ownership which presumably will help them get the uh get the resources and the approvals and the regulations that they need.

Now my question is this.

How many how many companies has the US taken an equity position in?

Intel and there was another one.

Few.

I I feel like we already have uh taken the value of something that will easily be a few hundred billion dollars.

Maybe not right away, but fairly easily will be worth a few hundred million billion dollars.

A few hundred billion dollars.

And it makes me wonder since I like this model where the government takes a small piece of equity in return for being a more let's say active participant in the company's success where the government makes a difference.

I kind of like it.

Kind of like it.

And it makes you wonder if we could get to paying off the entire debt that way.

Cats.

Um, so I feel like we could get to a trillion dollars in equity with maybe half a dozen more deals.

That would all make sense.

That would make sense for the company.

They'd make sense for the government.

And it wouldn't be fascist because they would just have a little equity.

Just a taste.

I feel like we couldn't pay off the entire $37 trillion debt, but we would at least get on the the ride that can go up, whereas taxes can't go up that much.

You know what I mean?

So, if you check in in five years and the government has taken a bunch of equity, in five years that equity may have doubled in value, it may have tripled in value because of the government's.

So we may have found a way to pay off 5 trillion without raising taxes.

I mean just think about it.

the this model of if you add tariffs to taking equity suddenly you have two um it's not you know the tariffs I understand often come from the domestic uh importers um but still it's it's creating a nondirectly tax way to you know take a bite out of that uh um debt maybe that could be good news I do like the I do like the government taking equity if it's a small part anything over 10% would start that would be bothersome but up to about 10% yeah sometimes all right um the the lithium America stocks already went up 130% I think just on announcements or suspicions of the deal I don't know if we're already part of that because if we already had our deal.

Did we already get the upside or did the upside happen before the the equity was granted?

I don't know.

But Trump picking up free money for the country.

I will never I'll never dislike that.

Well, as you know, there's all these drone sightings over in Europe.

So now we've had and they think it might be Russian drones, but now uh we've seen Denmark and Estonia and Poland and Romania and now the latest uh is Germany got some drones that they can't identify and didn't shoot down, but they look like they were surveilling important infrastructure.

So what do you think this is?

Is it possible that each of these countries is just saying domestic drones, but they don't know what they're seeing?

So, they're just imagining that it's, you know, more of a Russia problem because everything's a Russia problem.

Or is Putin showing NATO that NATO has no air defense?

Because if it is Putin, he is in fact country by country proving that they have no air defense.

Now, you notice that France um is not on the list yet.

Would France have a more robust air defense and maybe that's why they haven't been challenged with drones?

What about England?

Does England have a little bit better air defense?

Because if if uh Putin knew that uh these would be easy targets with no air defense, let's call it uh I'll just name them again.

Uh what is it?

Uh Estonian, Germany, and Denmark and uh Romania and Poland.

I don't imagine that their air defenses would be as robust as say France or England.

Is that fair to say?

I don't think Germany had a robust air defense.

So, it could be that what Putin is doing is uh he's he's preparing for negotiations.

That's one possibility.

And the one way you could do that is to show the weakness of NATO as an ability to fight because if NATO doesn't know it can fight and win in and it's it's going to be an air battle.

If there's any battle at all, it'll be in the air.

If if Russia can prove that to NATO, look, I'm going to prove to you that you could not defend against our attacks.

You can't even you can't even detect our drones for, let's say, four out of five of your NATO countries, right?

That would be a somewhat brilliant persuasion because you wouldn't have to even know for sure it was Russia, right?

All you'd have to know is that all these countries can't control their airspace.

And those countries have to think about that.

Oh, damn.

We can't we don't have any control over our airspace.

None.

And that's being proven every day.

The other possibility is that uh Putin is collecting data for an attack and uh so he's looking at where they can attack the best because remember uh Trump has now authorized long-term or long range attacks by uh Ukraine in deep into Russia to go after their critical infrastructure like their energy infrastructure in particular.

Remember I told you that the Ukraine war was going to turn into two things.

A robot war on the front line, drones being robots, um but also ground robots.

And that instead of trying to kill people, the robots would try to kill the energy production in Russia.

And they'd only have to get about 20% of it before Russia would have to make a deal because because that would be 20% would be cataclysmic.

So it could be um could be that Russia is just stiffening up um because of that.

So, the uh courts in Germany have uh backed surveilling of the far-right, what they call the far-right anti-immigration uh group, the AFD.

So, that would be the right-wing uh group that's picking up uh influence in Germany.

But if um because they're accused as a group, you know, not every person in the group, but but as a group, they've been accused of saying uh saying things that were directed against the human dignity of foreigners, in particular asylum seekers, as quote ethnic strangers.

So because the far right was saying that the people coming in with immigration were so different from the Germans that that was causing a problem in Germany.

Um so I guess just saying that they're ethnic strangers was enough to authorize a surveillance of all of the all of the phones of everybody in the party.

I think I think that's what it's saying.

Now, what would happen if somebody like me went to Germany?

Would I be automatically breaking a law because of things I had said?

Like even during this podcast, would Germany say, "Oh, here's your social media thing.

Uh, you can't say that because you uh you may have insulted strangers in your in your own way.

Would I be in trouble or would I be automatically surveiled if I entered the country because I had a background of saying hm not every kind of immigration is good for the country just you know common sensical things which is what their their far right is doing just common sense I don't know but they uh anyway um here's what I made about the AFD.

I believe that they're in selfdefense mode, not political mode.

Now, it's political, of course, but when they're saying um this immigration coming in, this isn't like uh let's argue about tax rates or something.

They're saying that we're dead if you keep doing this.

We're we're just dead.

So, from their perspective, they're they're engaged not in politics as much as literally self-defense.

And you know what I say about self-defense?

There are no rules in self-defense.

Self-defense doesn't have rules.

There's no morality rule.

There's no ethic rule.

There's just self-defense.

And it's one of those things that it takes you a moment to realize that that's true.

No.

If somebody's gonna kill you or your family right now, but the only way you could stop it is something that someone else would call unethical, that's not a boundary.

Save your family.

Self-defense does not have to be gated by right or wrong.

So that's what the political right in Germany understands, that they're involved in self-defense when it comes to immigration.

the the people in charge apparently think it's a political or uh wokeness or rudeness or bad behavior thing.

Not when it's self-defense.

That would be true if it were not self-defense.

If if people were saying, "No, we just don't like them because, you know, they whatever they say." if if it wasn't to to protect their lives and you know their their country as as Germany um then then you could argue this is you know this is bad behavior.

You know we don't insult people and call them different and call them strangers just cuz they're different.

I I wouldn't be in favor of that.

I mean I like free speech but I wouldn't be in favor of that particular brand of it.

Um, but once it becomes self-defense, which is what this clearly is at this point, is clearly self-defense, then no, I think the political right doesn't have to apologize for anything.

They have to stay out of jail.

I don't know how they're going to do that, but they don't have to apologize.

Meanwhile, at the Tulsa State Fair, apparently they've got drones and all kinds of AI and um and facial detection so that you can you can have uh they'll take a picture of your child.

Uh so if your child gets separated from you, they can almost instantly find it with a drone or something else.

Uh which I kind of like.

I I kind of like that you that you could go there and not worry about losing your kid, you know, if you if you split up.

And I like that, you know, it'd be much harder for somebody to try to kidnap your kid or get your kid out of the park if the kid had been IDed before then.

So, I can see why they'd like it.

And they also say that they will catch people who have uh outstanding warrants.

But, uh, it's super creepy.

super super creepy because it's not just the kids.

They're going to they're going to take everybody's face.

So, you know, there there's there goes your privacy at the fair.

Would you go to the fair if you knew that it would cost you your privacy?

Probably because the only reason people go to the fair is that their kids are bugging them.

I don't think people go to the fair for any other reason than their kids kids are bugging them.

At least that's the local fair here.

That would be true.

Yeah.

Let's see.

Oh, that was my last story.

It went a little long.

Sorry I went long.

I hope you enjoyed it.

Anyway, I'm going to talk uh privately to the members of locals.

My beloved members of locals.

Don't you wish you were beloved?

My goodness.

Uh all right, everybody.

See you tomorrow.

Same time, same place.

and local supporters.

I'll be private with You

Just in time. We've got a podcast. We're

getting ready here. But first, I thought

I would check my stocks because uh

several months ago, well, actually, it

was during the bottom of the pandemic. I

I did something I don't usually do, you

know, and I advised against it actually,

but I did it. I put uh an unusually

large amount of investment in one

company. Now, I don't recommend that.

It's a bad idea. But uh let me check on

it to see who it was. The company was

called, you've heard of it. It's called

Tesla.

Oh,

up 100%.

Uh how's the rest of your stocks doing?

SPY up a little bit. All right. So, the

general market's up a little bit. That's

looking good. Let me get your comments

working here and then we got a show to

do that. that you're going to love.

Trust me, you'll love it. You'll love

it.

[Music]

Good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and

you've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to take a chance on elevating

your experience this morning to levels

that nobody can even understand with

their tiny shiny human brains. All you

need for that is a copper mug or a glass

of tanker shells to a canteen jugger

flask. A vessel of any kind. Fill it

with your favorite liquid. I like

coffee. And join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of

the day, the thing that makes everything

better. It's called the simultaneous

sip. And it goes like this.

Well, you want to hear about the

weirdest thing ever? Are you ready for

this? Do you remember that at the

beginning of yesterday's show, I decided

to be a little bit vulnerable and opened

up my test results for my testosterone

levels, which is important to see that

they're as low as possible. um for

cancer reasons. You don't want high

testosterone if you have cancer because

the cancer just eats the testosterone.

So you want to lower your testosterone

depending on I suppose which cancer you

have. U but for mine I wanted as close

to zero as possible. And do you remember

that I opened up the test results while

I was looking at it. I basically read it

to you and I could see that it had

jumped up to the middle of the range,

which would mean I'm

which would mean that the meds weren't

working and uh and I was basically going

to die faster than I was hoping. Now,

how many of you saw me do that live?

I'm not imagining that, right? I did

that live right in front of you and I

was looking at it and I was just reading

it, right? Here's the fun part. That

doesn't exist.

That test that I looked at in detail

and had an opinion and it changed my

whole day. That doesn't exist. Cuz when

I when I talked to my doctor by Zoom

later that same day,

um he said the you know, no, your

testosterone's effectively zero. The

meds are working, you know, the way they

were supposed to. And I said, "No,

they're not." I mean, I looked at it

myself. So, I called it up and it was

not only were the numbers completely

different, but even the presentation of

the graph wasn't the same.

So, what happened? Did I Did I

hallucinate

while I was completely awake and talking

to you on live stream? Did I Did I

literally just hallucinate what I saw? I

don't know. Or was it some kind of

preliminary number because the number

was just coming in and did they update

it? Um maybe from the old number to the

new number or something. I don't know.

But

the good news and the bad news is that

the meds were doing exactly what they

were supposed to do to lower my

testosterone to what they consider full

castration levels. However, the bad news

is since my PSA spiked, it means the

meds uh the meds are doing what they

were supposed to do, but my cancer's

already figured out a workaround. So,

it's it's essentially

producing

probably producing some something that

doesn't measure as testosterone, but has

a similar impact. So according to Grock,

who I'm not sure I should believe in

these situations, I'm pretty much dead

unless we figure out a new solution. So

I don't have a solution at the moment.

But I also don't know how bad it is. So

that's why I got to get scanned. Once I

get scanned, then you'll actually see

did anything get worse. If nothing got

worse, then I'm fine. Uh but if I'm

suddenly filled with extra tumors, which

I might be, uh it means we don't have a

solution. But there there are some

options. So I'll I'll keep you filled

in. You want some good news?

You ready for some good news? Um the

Cambridge uh

I guess Cambridge their uh one of their

sciency parts of their university

uh figured out how to make an organic um

solar panel. So they use some exotic

organic material and uh here's how

efficient it is. It's nearly one one.

You know how if you shine sunlight on a

regular solar panel and it used to be

they could get you know they could

convert 10% of the light to energy and

they get better and better it was like

oh 20%. Now I think the best ones

correct me if I'm wrong are maybe

approaching 30% conversion to energy.

These organic ones are close to 100%.

which means you you could put organic

panels. I'm making this part up, but you

know, just to to tell you how uh uh

unlikely it is. It means that if you put

these panels around the walls of your

room and then you turned on the lights,

the lights would create enough energy to

power the lights.

Not 100%, but it might be like 98% of

all the energy you need to power the

lights, maybe. Now, uh, all of these

solar breakthroughs because there seems

like there's one every day, but you're

you're not going to see them on the

market. Um, this is probably a 5 to 10

years away if they can do it at all. You

know, because it's tough tough to

manufacture these exotic things. It

would take years to figure out how to

make a factory to make it. You'd have

you'd have to test it to see if it lasts

as long and it's economical. So, it

would take forever to actually reach the

market. But imagine if it worked and

solar panels could get to something like

um unity I think they call it where it

it just captures all the energy.

We might get there. So that's maybe good

news.

And my question is which of the climate

models has uh modeled that in five to 10

years solar panels will be nearly 100%

efficient and easier to make because

there would be no there would be no

exotic materials. You wouldn't have to

get anything from China. So which which

of the climate models had that? If this

one thing turns out to be true plus

battery storage so that your your light

can be used any time. um

they'll change everything and it's just

one thing that science is working on.

The other thing that could change

everything is these small ollow like um

uh nuclear power plants, you know, the

modular ones. So the government is now

all about uh approving these uh sort of

a standardized

smaller nuclear power plants. As soon as

they start building a few of those, that

changes everything. So, you've got

unlimited fusion energy on the way.

Actually, one or two plants have

actually been approved for building

fusion. They're they're so close to it

that they think they should start

building the thing. So, you're going to

have fusion. You can have small nuclear

that's a new version of nuclear, but not

fusion. And you might have these uh

insane solar panels. And probably all of

it looks to be hitting in the 10 to 15

year range would be my guess because it

just takes a while. But in 10 to 15

years, if we could move to that, then

even if climate change was a problem, I

don't think it is, but even if it is,

we're going to be in good shape with

energy. We we might find that even if

climate isn't the problem many people

thought it was, and I think that's where

we'll end up on climate. Uh it will

still be the greatest boon to humanity

that we took energy costs from way too

expensive to oh now it's practically a

commodity. You're going to need that

energy to be a commodity in the age of

robots and self-driving cars and AI. So

for all the wrong reasons, we might be

moving really quickly in the right

direction because the climate change

people are going to love these new

sources of energy. the AI and robot

people are going to say there's no limit

to how much energy we need so you better

do everything. So suddenly for

completely different reasons

the entire planet was on the same page

about energy

future energy meaning that left and

right would say yes we would prefer a

world where we have all this clean

nuclear and finally you know we make the

the uh let's say the economic argument

for solar we solve it in 15 years you

know with batteries so that you don't

have the you know can't watch your TV at

night problem

and battery technology is having these

huge um huge advantages too. All right,

here's some more good news.

Uh you ready for this? This one's got it

really good. Um apparently according to

Fizz or Wilborn Nobles III is writing

about this. There's a small school um in

which

they they can put uh kids in this school

and the way they teach is they teach

them how brains work. So they teach them

you know what to do to maximize your

brain. Just think about that to they

teach young kids how to manage and

maximize their own brain. So they teach

them how to think critically. Um but

they do a whole bunch of other exercises

where they just learn sort of about

their believe it or not their amygdala

and they do projects on how the brain

works and by fourth or fifth grade

they're doing that stuff and uh they do

they have to do illustrations of how the

brain works and how how people learn and

social and emotional regulation. But

here's the thing. Apparently, they

they've already demonstrated, although

it's, you know, smaller samples, but

they've demonstrated that they can get

more of their kids uh into a college and

get a college degree than the regular

schools. But here's the fun part. their

their low economic students, their

poorest students

uh handily exceed the college um the the

college success of the richer students

in regular schools. Let me say that

again. They have already built a model

and demonstrated it in the real world in

which the the way they teach the kids is

really teaching them how to learn. not

just learning, they're teaching them how

to learn at a level I've never seen

before. I've never seen this level. And

they've proven and it works. And they've

they've basically erased

income

as the major factor in how you do in

life. Income when you're born. So

basically, you don't have to be a, you

know, a JD Vance genius to go from low

income to Harvard to vice president.

At the moment, that's what it takes. You

know, you've got to be unusually smart

to to get past that low income barrier

and into something else. Uh but

apparently, you could just randomly

select people and and teach them, right?

And they would become superstars. Now,

you know why I'm so excited about that?

This is what I've been working on for

years. That's what my books are. Let's

see. You can see most of them. The uh

the four books on the top of my shelf

are written so that a 14-year-old and up

and I I make sure that I write it with

the kind of language that a 14-year-old

can follow easily and but it works for

adults because adults like simple

writing as well. And it's written to

teach you how to think. Reframe your

brain teaches you how to reframe. How

valuable is that if you were a teenager

to learn how to reframe all your

experiences and see examples of it?

Life-changing. Uh when Biggley is is

teaching you persuasion instead of just

logic. So you can see why persuasion

rules and our common sense gets

overruled. How valuable would that be if

you learned that at 14? Invaluable.

How about the loser thing where it

teaches you how to avoid the bad dumb

arguments? Well, that's exactly what you

need to know how to do. Imagine learning

that at 14. And then, you know, my

seminal book, How to Failed Almost

Everything and Still Win Big is really

the um I I I believe it's the most

influential book in his genre for

teaching you how to go from nothing to

something, whatever your success looks

like in your mind. Now, again, that was

written specifically for a 14-year-old

and up. And uh so I'm I'm all in on this

concept that if you teach people how to

think, then they can carve right through

any income or other barriers. Doesn't

matter what your race is, doesn't matter

what your gender is, probably doesn't

matter too much what your age is, you'll

be able to carve right through it. I

I'll bet you I'll bet you if you even

had a prison record, but you mastered

all three of my books, you'd probably be

fine even with a prison record. So,

that's how powerful this stuff is. And

when I see it, um, when I see a version

of it, obviously it's not based on my

work, but when I see a a a likeminded

version of this working for young kids

in fourth and fifth grade and uh

elevating the poor kids above the rich

kids, not just equal, well above, just

by teaching them, right? So exciting.

Probably this is probably the most

exciting thing

that I've seen in years on any domain.

There's nothing I've seen more exciting

than this.

So, good on them. This is also why I

like King Randall's work. Um, he wanted

to come and visit me and I didn't know

if I'm healthy enough to do that, but I

might

I might uh see if he wants to stop by

and do a do a podcast.

Uh anyway, he's King Grand Randle is a

uh younish black man who has a school

for young kids, most of them black, but

they don't have to be. There's at least

one white kid in there. And he's simply

teaching them life skills that you

wouldn't normally get,

which would make you more confident. And

you would just have all kinds of

advantages. You learn etiquette. You

know, if you're a poor kid, imagine

being a poor kid and learning, you know,

which fork to use and where to put your

napkin and stuff like that. If you

couldn't do that, that's the cap on your

success right there. If you didn't know

how to eat with proper people who could

be your mentor, invest in you, hire you.

If you didn't know how to eat in a way

that the other person says, "Oh, this

person knows etiquette." If you didn't

know that, that that would be a cap.

you're you're done. You don't get a

better job than somebody who can't eat

in public. That's it. So, what King

Randall does is amazing, and I' I'd love

to uh tell you more about that at some

point.

All right. Um,

[Music]

so Open AI, the company is uh that's the

company that's beyond chat GBT. their

valuation is apparently $500 billion.

Now, now the way you calculate that is

because uh some of the current and

former employees are already selling

stock on the secondary market. So, it's

you you can't publicly buy the stock,

but you can do it privately. And uh they

have sold 6.6 billion worth of shares.

That means

that some number of current and former

OpenAI people probably made you know

some people at the top 100 million

maybe they made 500 million for one

person.

Uh

I don't feel like they earned that. Do

you you if somebody already earned a

billion dollars like and they've cashed

it out and then you know it's just their

money forever now it can never go away.

Did they really earn that

for the six months they might have

worked there? I don't know. Well,

probably they had to work longer to get

vested. I'm surprised to have invested

but maybe they really had to offer them

good deals.

Well, Tesla, like I said, is up 100% uh

since the day that Tim Walsh was uh

publicly celebrating the drop in Tesla

stock. So, if you if you went with Tim

Walsh's opinion about Tesla, you missed

a 100% gain.

And you know, I I own some of the stock

as I said. So, you shouldn't listen to

me when it comes to um investments in

general. If it's about an individual

company, the only thing you should

listen to me about is that

diversification is good. That's it. That

that's the only thing you should take

from me. That's just like a fact and you

should bank on it. Diversification

is good. Um

but anyway, so uh yeah.

Tim Wallace continues to be uh the the

worst public figure in the world.

Anyway,

and so I guess uh um Elon bought a

billion dollars of Tesla stock last week

or something and it made a made a big

impression because it showed that he was

confident in the stock and uh we'll see.

But speaking of stock, did you know that

there's a movement mostly from the

entirely from the uh political right to

boycott Netflix? Uh and Elon Musk is the

biggest name in that. Betty Johnson was

talking about it. So Benny Johnson was

explaining why people like Elon and and

others are uh not too happy with

Netflix's content because as Benny

explains that Netflix is sexualizing

children by packaging explicit graphic

radical sex topics as children's

entertainment.

Now, I'm not going to name the titles

that have been coming up as the the ones

that are inappropriate, but use your

imagination. All right? If if these

entirely reasonable people, Benny

Johnson, Elon Musk, tons of other

people, if these entirely re reasonable

people have looked at these titles, and

they have, and said, "No freaking way

you're going to put that in my house cuz

my kids can turn on Netflix and just see

it." And in fact, not just see it, it

would be served up to them specifically.

So,

um, and then apparently, uh, Elon,

posted that 100% of Netflix employees

donations are to the Democratic Party.

Well, I knew that already, but when you

think of this topic, it's a sort of

especially meaningful, isn't it? Um, but

apparently they've lost Netflix has lost

15 billion in market value since uh

people started cancing subscriptions.

Now, I've got mixed feelings on this

one. I'm not a huge fan of boycots. Not

a huge fan because, you know, in effect,

that's why I'm cancelled because

somebody decided somebody decided on

your behalf that you shouldn't see

Dilbert in newspapers. You didn't get to

decide that. Is that a good model that

the people who are the customers had no

say whatsoever in whether I was

cancelled? Worldwide books and you know

not the books I've republished but the

original publisher all cancelled.

Um so I'm I've got a little bit of uh

mixed feelings. But on the other hand I

also have that uh what we call the

internet dad energy. Meaning that if I

had young kids in the house, I would

cancel it today.

Everybody Everybody know where I'm

coming from? If I had any young kids in

my house, I would cancel Netflix

for sure. But I don't.

So,

I also am going to start monitoring to

see if there's even one thing I can

watch on Netflix that I want to watch

cuz usually not. But something might

come back. So, I don't know. I'm not

sure which way I'll go on that, but I

guarantee if you if I had a kid in the

house, even one kid, no way. There's no

way I would let a kid watch that

material.

Um, so the uh

the uh the meme story just keeps getting

better and better.

So, you know the meme story which is

Hakee Jeff was shown in a a Trump passed

around meme where he had a sombrero and

a a big fake must, you know, Mexican

mustache. And uh there there are three

of them now that all have them in that,

you know, one of them includes Trump

playing them as the mariachi band. Now,

the beautiful part about the third one,

I think it was the third one in the same

vein, is that if you've got Trump

wearing the hat and playing mariachi

music, is Trump making fun of Mexicans?

Cuz he's wearing the hat.

He's wearing the hat. And I think he

even has did he have a mustache? I don't

remember. I think no mustache, but he's

wearing the hat. So, he put himself in

the meme

in you know, almost exactly the same

context as Jeff. You don't put yourself

in the meme if the meme isn't, you know,

meant to be a racial insult.

So, that that makes it even more fun and

uh and interesting. But Caitlyn Collins,

CN C CNN's Caitlyn Collins, uh, is

talking about how apparently the White

House has been playing the memes on a

loop over the loudspeaker in the White

House for the press corp.

They're not not only are they not

running away from it, they're doubling

down, they're tripling down, and they're

playing it on the white and the White

House speakers. Now, I could not be

happier about this because CNN, one of

their hosts, uh already called it a

racist video. And uh I think it was

Caitlyn who said they simply don't care

about the criticism.

I guess they just figured it out. They

just figured out that uh the Republicans

are in breakout mode. Breakout mode.

They had been contained by charges of

racism. It was the most powerful, you

know, the most powerful product that the

Democrats had. They didn't have

arguments. They didn't have good

candidates. They didn't have policies.

They didn't have a track record. They

didn't have anything. They had this one

thing, this psychological

wall that they built that if you did

something they didn't like and it really

didn't even matter, they could make a

story that it was being racist. Oh, you

want to uh lower taxes? Oh, well, that's

obviously going to affect the, you know,

the brown community more than the white

community. So, I guess that's pretty

racist. So, they could do it with

anything. But by Trump and company going

directly at it, like in instead of

running away from it, running toward it

and saying, "All right, we're going to

we're going to mock this. We're going to

make a joke out of it." It totally

worked. So, Republicans have just

experienced

breakout.

I think the Charlie Kirk thing um

changed everything. You know, I didn't I

didn't know at the time that it would,

but in my opinion, it changed

everything. And what it did was it

changed people from all right, I'm still

on steroids at the moment, so if your

fouryear-old is listening, cover up the

ears. I think I think the Charlie Kirk

thing went from we have a preference

that you would not be saying these

things about us. Now it's you.

It's you. We're go we're going

right at you. And you see it in a lot of

domains.

You're seeing it with the so-called

black fatigue

uh theme that's going around. And you're

definitely seeing it with the Mexican

sombrero. Although I remind you that

I'll bet you will never find a single

Mexican who's honest who would say that

that bothered them. You won't even find

one. So, it's a fake everything is

racist thing that CNN and MSNBC does,

but now it's now it's just a joke. And I

and I believe that this creates the

model going forward that every time they

do the stupid racist thing where they

torture the topic until it looks like

they can make it racist, you just turn

them into a meme. And then when they

complain, my god, you're even more

racist because you turned it into a

meme. What do you do then? Turn it into

a meme. And when they complain more,

what do you do? Turn it into a meme.

So, good luck, guys.

Well, I told you that there was a uh

that Minneapolis had 50% of the

immigrants had some kind of criminal,

you know, outstanding criminal behavior.

But I didn't realize that 50% of them

had committed immigration fraud. New

York Post is reporting. So apparently

the former uh director of USCIS,

some kind of Biden

uh department, created a parole program

that funneled unfeted military age

migrants into Minneapolis, establishing

an Islamic enclave.

Yeah, that was a good idea, Biden. Let's

uh let's funnel the unvetted military

age migrants.

um

they have some kind of a parole program

uh and create an Islamic enclave. Great

idea.

Um I'm going to say more about that in a

minute, but I'm going to go through this

topic to get there. Um according to the

uh postmillennial, 53% of Americans,

there's a new Pew Research poll, 53%

Americans think that not having kids is

bad for the nation.

only 53%

think that it's a bad idea to not have

enough kids. Do they understand what

happens if you don't have enough kids?

Does any are there really that many

people who don't understand

that if you don't have many kids, we're

all dead or the country is dead? You

people don't really understand that

which is weird. I think uh you know my

entire life I was told that we were

overpopulated and we better have fewer

kids. So I think a lot of people have

just been brainwashed in the you know

we're overpop populated climate change

stuff. So think about think about how

dangerous climate change has been that

it actually talked an entire

civilization into killing itself by not

reproducing at replacement rates. That

actually is happening. And you know,

it's not all climate change, but I'll

bet it's, you know, a third of it.

Um,

so what happens?

What happens if you don't have

replacement rates for your own

population and at the same time you have

a immigration system that is allowing in

a lot of people from other countries?

Well, depends what countries. If it's uh

say a lot of people are coming in from

England because they want to get away

from their repressive uh government over

there, probably they would assimilate

pretty quickly. Um there would be high

education in that group. Probably be

fine. That that would be one way to

compensate for low birth rates. Um what

if your people came in from an Islamic

country, which there are lots of them.

Well, that too would be okay if you kept

that number lowish and they were

distributed around the country so that

you know they just assimilated. It might

take longer, but you know that'd be

okay. But what would be the worst thing

you could do? The worst thing you could

do is have a low population.

uh naturally your your native population

is not reproducing while you're bringing

in a lot of Islamic people and putting

them in places where they will form

caliphates

effectively. They'll they'll uh they'll

push for electing all their own people

because you don't need to have you don't

have to have a majority in like look at

New York City. Uh look at England, look

at London. You don't need a majority.

you just need that majority to all vote

the same way, that minority to vote the

same way and then you control politics.

So the Islamic model where um you really

don't change religions. So that's a non

uh since you you could actually be

murdered by your own people if you

change religions. It kind of locks you

in to not assimilating

because literally for some people it

would mean death. Um, also if you put

them in one place like this Minneapolis

model, you are designing a system that

guarantees in the long run we become an

Islamic country.

It's guaranteed because the Islamic

thing is not about the people per se.

It's about a I'll call it a mind virus.

You could call it a religion that

doesn't that is not compatible with

other religions, but I'm going to call

it a mind virus. The mind virus, if you

put enough people who have the same mind

virus in the same place, they will

eventually take over your country little

bit at a time. But we currently have a

system which it looks like the Trump

administration is trying to undo. But

the Biden administration had in place uh

an entire system which guaranteed we

would become an Islamic country. Because

if you simply brought in all kinds of

different people at let's say the same

rate, let's say 10% of your people

coming in were uh from Mexico, 10% from

other South America, 10% from Europe,

10% from Islamic countries. What would

you end up with? You would end up with

an Islamic country. 10% 10% probably

would get you to an Islamic country. And

I think that would be by design. Now,

not necessarily

by intentional design. It's just that if

you looked at it on paper, you'd say,

let's see, the locals are not

reproducing

and they're bringing in uh a lot of

people. Many of them will just

assimilate. But hm, 10% might be the

ones who by their own preference would

not want to assimilate. If you bring a

if you bring a Mexican into America and

he wants to live in in America and have

American kids, do you think they want to

assimilate?

Absolutely. Absolutely they want to. I

mean, they might want to hold on to some

of their, you know, Hispanic traditions,

of course, but they want to be mostly

American. Do the Do the Islamic

immigrants have the same intention andor

ambition?

I feel like their system is a different

system and it's more about making their

host country more like them. Would you

agree? I don't I don't know of any

situation in which a Mexican immigrant

even once has tried to make America more

like Mexico

except you know unless they started a

Mexican restaurant but those are fun

right they're not even trying to resist

assimilation they come here to

assimilate but if you told me that the

Islamic immigrants came here to

assimilate I would call you a liar

because I don't I think that's true. So,

we have a system that guarantees we

would be Islamic and only only the

Republicans can unwind it, if it's even

possible. I think there's still time. I

think we can save ourselves, but I do

not think Europe um acted fast enough. I

think Europe's dead, not dead. They'll

be Islamic

eventually.

Well, um, Steve Mallaloy and I saw this

post by Amuse. Um, in 2007, El Gore

warned that the Arctic would be ice free

by 2014.

How'd he do? Well, it's now 2025 and,

uh, 500,000 square kilometers more ice

have been added. That's about as wrong

as you could possibly be.

That's about as wrong as you can be. Um,

and the new news is that according to

Israel, uh, Greta and her little

flotillaa, I think there are about 50

boats heading with what they claim is

food for Hamas.

And, uh, some documents were found in

Hamas's possession, um, or abandoned by

them, I guess. And the documents

suggested that Hamas is funding the

flotilla and probably organizing it,

too. And the reason for it is, you know,

to make Israel look bad. And uh one of

the reasons, you know, that they are not

genuinely

uh intending to deliver food and that

the food delivery thing is a fake is

that Israel already offered a way to

offload that food in Italy where where

it's not a political event and then

Italy had already offered to ship the

rest of it to Israel and uh Gaza. So, so

they have a way to get all of the food

to Hamas and they've turned it down

because they want they want to make the

political statement of being, you know,

turned down when they reach the border,

I guess. So, uh, Greta went from the the

wonder kid of climate change, which was

of course a gigantic scam as far as we

can tell, to being scammed by Hamas

because she's not smart enough to figure

out who funded her. And uh now she's

just a dupe of a terrorist organization.

So she went from being the most

destructive person on earth by pushing

climate change. That would me literally

that makes her the most destructive

person on earth to uh being duped by a

terrorist organization.

So uh I don't know how Wikipedia is

going to write that up, but I think

Groipedia might get it right if you know

what I mean.

Anyway, but it's possible that all data

is fake, so maybe that whole story is

made up. You know, anything from a war

zone, you can't totally trust it. So, if

Israel said, "Oh, we found these

documents which coincidentally are right

on the nose."

Do you believe it?

Now, I read it to you like it's a fact.

Should you believe uh Israel

that that they found this thing that's

just perfect? It's right on the nose.

Oh, isn't that perfect that they found

that the flotillo was funded by Hamas?

Now, I I don't know if it was or wasn't.

But would you believe it because it's

reported?

The answer is you should not believe it

because it was reported. It's exactly

the kind of fake that gets made

up during a war. It's exactly what gets

made up during a war. Was this made up?

I don't know. I I want to believe it's

true because it makes a good story, but

a little too good. It's a little too

good. A little too on the nose. So, I'm

going to say that all data is fake and

probably that. Um, but we'll see if if

there's followup or we see the documents

and somebody I don't know, somebody

confirms the documents are real somehow,

I'll change my mind. But right now, I'm

leaning toward no. Probably not true.

Well, there's a new poll that says uh

one in three Americans now think

political violence might be necessary.

Now, all data is fake and most polls

have some problems, too. Do you believe

any poll

that that has this high percentage of

people that say that violence might be

necessary? Do do you believe Let's I'll

give some details. Uh let's see. Yeah,

the support for violence is rising

faster among Democrats, jumping from 12%

thought violence might sometimes be

necessary for politics to 28% in just 18

months. And they probably did this after

Charlie Kirk was assassinated.

Imag imagine the number uh among

Democrats going up for violence after

Charlie Kirk is assassinated. I mean,

just try to hold that in your head for a

second. Wow. I mean, now I believe that

the this poll was taken after he was

assassinated, but I don't have a

confirmation of it. So, NPR is writing

about this if you want to follow up. Um,

and let's see. I guess uh Republicans,

well, Republicans still slightly outpace

them at 31%. So 28% of Democrats, that's

way up. Um and then independents aren't

too far behind. 25% of them, 25%.

Say, uh violence is all right. Well, the

28% as you know is close to my magical

25% which I say 25% of people in every

poll, no matter what the topic is, no

matter who does the poll, no matter who

answers it, 25% of the respondents will

have the most bad stupid answer

that is possible. And this is it. Here's

what I think. I think if you call

somebody and the only thing that they

have to worry about is what they say on

the phone,

they say, "Oh yeah, it's time to time to

get violent." That's what you say if

you're answering a poll question.

Because you might want that answer to be

there. You might be a troll. You might

be just trolling, right? But what

happens if you go to your neighbor and

say, "Go to your Democrat neighbor and

say, "All right, it's go time. uh grab

your gun and meet me in the street

because we got to start shooting the bad

guys.

What happens next? That guy who said,

"Yeah, violence would be good idea." He

realizes that he doesn't own a gun.

If he goes out in the street, he will be

opposed to the people who have all the

guns.

So, do you think that that guy is going

to be in favor of violence if violence

was a real option both in both

directions? I've got a feeling that that

28% are just full of You know, a

few of them are going to be Antifa types

that that would do violence and they're

just crazy and broken and, you know,

they're they're just broken people. But

the average ordinary Democrat,

they might say yes in a poll,

they're not going to say yes if if there

are gunshots outside. You know, they're

they're suddenly going to realize

they're unarmed,

except for the criminals, I guess, who

will just be robbing the people who are

trying to do something political.

Anyway, so I don't I don't believe that

poll. I don't believe it on the Democrat

side. I don't believe it on the

Republican side. I don't believe the

independents.

I think it's The data is fake.

Well, the Ryder Cup ended yesterday.

That's a big golfing thing where various

countries compete against other

countries. Um, I guess Europe won it.

And uh but the big story is that a uh a

New York New York PD police detective

uh snuck in.

And the way he did it was uh wearing his

full uh his full uh police uniform with

guns and everything and he talked his

way into the highly secured area where

Trump was where Trump was. He talked his

way in without credentials just by

saying he was working on Trump's uh

security. Do you know how they found out

he had a weapon? Cuz he accidentally

dropped a clip. Somebody noticed he

dropped a clip of bullets on the ground

and they're like, "Oh, hold on. Hold on.

Maybe we need to talk to you again."

Now, as far as we can tell, he was just

a a cop who wanted to get into the the

show. So, he might have been just a

Trump fan and he didn't have a ticket.

And he thought, "Oh, this would be a

clever way to get up close." And uh

magazine, not a clip. All right, we'll

call it a magazine, not a clip. The the

news story called it a clip. So, I was

just I was clipping their clip, but

we'll we'll go with the real gun gun

people. A magazine, not a clip.

All right. Um,

anyway, he got kicked out. But the

question is, if it was that easy to get

in with a loaded gun or or a gun, uh,

how much security does Trump really

have? Does make you wonder. So this is

the kind of story that tells me that if

if the dictator took over one day and

the citizens, you know, by a majority

wanted to take out that dictator, they

could get to him.

You know, the the security just would do

a lesser job and yeah, they could get to

him.

Well, the Super Bowl has now their uh

halftime entertainment, which is always

controversy. and they chose a fellow

named Bad Bunny. Now, Bad Bunny, I

think, does most of his music in

Spanish. So, that's the first American

provocation going on right there. Uh,

but secondly, he wears a dress. He's

sort of a crossdresser. I don't know if

he's non-binary or what he is, but but

he likes wearing dresses. And uh some

thinking is that is it I don't know if

this part is true but is Jay-Z and his

production company are they in charge of

the Super Bowl um the entertainment for

the Super Bowl? Uh because I some so

some thought that Jay-Z was just sort of

messing with, you know, messing with

America by doing the what he might think

is the worst

uh you know the worst choice for the

Republican part of the world.

So, uh, but and then, uh, the reason

that Bad Bunny had was not doing any

shows in America, he's going to make

this one exception for the Super Bowl,

but he wasn't doing that because he was

worried that, uh, ICE would attend to

his shows because there would be a large

Hispanic uh, population going to his

shows. And he's worried that ICE would

sort of stand outside and start

arresting people and deporting them. So,

he canled all of his US shows. Uh, oh,

that happened a while ago. Um, so what

do you think the US is going to do about

that? Well, Corey uh Luwendowski,

who is part of uh Homeland um security,

he says that yeah, ICE will definitely

be at the game.

Uh he said there's no place that is a

safe haven for people in this country

illegally. not the Super Bowl and

nowhere else. We will find you. We will

apprehend you. We will put you in a

detention facility and we will deport

you. So know that there's a very real

situation under this administration

which is completely contrary to what how

it used to be. Now, when you first heard

that Bad Bunny was concerned and, you

know, good Democrats were also concerned

that ICE might be at the Super Bowl uh

getting uh Bad Bunny's fans and deported

them. Didn't you sort of automatically

think, oh well, you don't want to ruin

the Super Bowl, so uh ICE will not be

there because it, you know, it it just

seems like the wrong do domain for that

kind of action. But but once again, uh

the Trump administration breaks through

a wall and basically says, "Oh yeah,

we're going to be at the Super Bowl all

day long. We're going to deport anybody

we can get our hands on that, you know,

is the right person to deport." And I

got to say, every time Trump does

something that's more baller than you

thought he would do, because obviously

he would approve of this, um it doesn't

make me like him less.

It doesn't.

So acting strong al I've said this

before but I'll say it again. Acting

strong will hurt you in the short run

because there's always somebody who's

you know totally offended by the strong

actions and it's it's going to this is

the beginning of the end. You know they

always think that everything strong

turns into something even worse. But in

the long term, and there's some there's

a new uh poll out so showing that uh

Trump's popularity is is going pretty

far down.

I would argue that that is the mark of a

change leader. If you're a big change

kind of a leader, you probably have uh

high polling numbers to get elected.

That's why you got elected. You had high

approval numbers on day one.

Everybody's, you know, optimistic, high

high numbers. But as you start doing the

things that hurt, because it always

hurts to do that much change, the more

change you introduce and the faster you

introduce it, and nobody's introduced

more change than Trump is, faster or

more, your your popularity should drop

quite a bit in the short run. If the

things that you do work out, then half

the people who said, "Oh, no. Tariffs

are a mistake, well, suddenly they go,

"Okay, I guess I was wrong about

tariffs." But not until the long run. If

closing the border looks cruel in the

short run, but a few years go by and

everybody on both sides says, "Yeah,

that had to be done." You're going to

forget about all the anecdotal little

stories of the the hairdresser who got

deported. Maybe you didn't like that

one. All you remember is that there was

one president who closed the border when

the others couldn't or didn't or

wouldn't.

So, in general, if you had the best

president you could ever imagine, the

most logical um path for his approval

would be to start high. Yay, you won the

election. You're going to do all these

things we want you to do. Oh, wait.

You're going a little bit too hard. Oh.

Oh, I wouldn't have done it that way.

Oh. Oh, maybe if I reduce my approval,

you'll you'll back off a little bit. Oh,

I like nine out of 10en things you're

doing, but I don't like that 10 thing.

Oh, oh, and your approval, if you're a

big change leader, which Trump is,

should drop precipitously

because people are thinking about that

one thing in the news that bothered them

that one day. over time if the things

that Trump does work out and to me they

look like they will

5 10 years from now he would be the

highest rated president of all time. So

if you're worried about these you know

momentary drops in his popularity it

would have to drop a lot more before it

would be even an indication of bad news.

All it is now is an indication of people

having short-term thinking. That's

that's all it's telling you. is not

telling you anything about Trump. It's

telling you, oh, people think

short-term. The news has to do the

what's the problem of the day? Of

course, it goes down. It would it would

be anybody. All right. The government's

closed for the second day in a row. Oh.

Oh. Oh, no. What am I going to do with

the the government shutdown of

unnecessary services? I I need some

unnecessary services. Oh. Oh. Okay. Are

any of you affected in any way by the

shutdown of the government in any way?

Uh, so far not me. Um, I'm sure it'll

affect somebody, but I don't know who.

Um,

but there is some thought that the uh

the shutdown is going to resonate a

little bit better for the Republicans

than for the Democrats. So, I don't know

if that's true, but that's what people

are saying. They're some are calling it

the Schumer shutdown, but of course the

Democrats are trying to say it's a

Republican shutdown.

Um,

here's what I'm liking about it. As I

told you, uh, I say no more money to the

government if both sides are lying about

the budget. Both sides are lying about

the budget. both sides are just lying

through their asses by omission and by

leaving out context. So, but as as

things are developing, uh it appears

that the GOP lie is the good one. It's

the one that's working because the GOP

lie is that they're making it all about

um giving free health care to illegal

people. Is that true? Is it true that

that the money that the Democrats want

primarily could be thought of as free

money for health care for illegal

aliens? Well, that's not true,

but it's a little bit true. It's not

true because they're not technically

illegal. The ones who are here on asylum

um could still get the services, but

they're not technically illegal because

they came in through asylum. But if

you're Republican, you don't count them

as legal because you know the asylum

claim is fake for 98% of them. Maybe if

you were real, but 98% of them are lying

to get a temporary legal status.

A Republican

would say that that's just an illegal

alien. I I might use a different word

for it, but if they lied on on their

asylum application, they're an illegal

alien. So, the Republicans can

reasonably and sort of honestly

say that uh there would be more health

care if um this the case would be if a

asylum seeker who is technically legal,

but according to any common sense

Republican opinion, that's an illegal

person. They've done two They've done

two illegal things. One is in they're in

the country illegally in in the

Republican opinion, but also they lied

to get in here. Two crimes. They're

double illegal. They're more illegal

than the illegals. They would be more

illegal than somebody who just snuck

over the border because they did two

things. Cave in illegally and lied about

it. That's two. So,

at the same time that the Democrats are

saying, "No, no, they're lying. It's a

lie. We're not we're not going to fund

any illegals. We're funding the people

who pretend to be legal." That's

completely different.

So CNN can call the Republicans liars,

which they do, at the same time that

they are forced to do a deep dive as

Jake Tapper did to find out, okay, what

what really is going on here? Um,

and uh, the deep dive is not helping

Democrats cuz once you do the deep dive,

you see that the the Republican framing

of this that it's to fund illegal aliens

is not correct. It is not correct. But

the truth is just as bad,

which is which is kind of genius. Uh, if

there's anything I've ever taught you

about persuasion is that you can,

and it's not always unethical. Usually,

it is, but not always. You can tell a

story that's persuasive as hell. It's

not exactly accurate. And you could be

doing it in the service of the country.

In other words, it could be good for the

country if it gets you the funding you

want, the services you want, etc. But

maybe maybe there was a little shaving

of the context if you know what I mean.

So because the critics have to explain

why it's not true that the funding is

for illegal aliens, in the process of

explaining it, they end up defending the

Republican view accidentally. It's kind

of freaking genius. So if people believe

the Republican view on face, the

Republicans win. But if they don't

believe it and they also drill down to

find out what is true, Republicans win a

second time

because nobody's going to like the fact

that just because they came in and

illegally said that they're asylum

seekers, they get free healthcare.

Nobody's going to like that.

All right. I guess Ake Jeff went on CNN.

Uh Eric Dhy noticed this and uh so Jake

Tapper was going through this uh you

know this well and he goes uh he so he

reads Jeff the provision so that Jeff

can see that in reality people who are

nonitizens now Jake would make the he

would correctly make the distinction

that the asylum seekers are nonsitizens

but not technically illegal.

So he reads the provision that says that

that group would get uh healthcare and

then Jeff says uh

let's say uh here's what he reads. He

goes Jeffrey's called it a lie but then

Tapper says it's a lie. So he agrees

with him it's a lie that illegals are

going to get healthcare with us. He

goes, "But you support what you support

does bring back funding for emergency

Medicaid to hospitals, which pays for

undocumented immigrants and a provision

for people seeking asylum and temporary

protected status, non-citizens. Why even

include that?" So Jake is saying, "Why

would you even put that in there when

you know that's going to stop

everything?"

I don't even know what the other things

are. Do you? I've only heard of one

topic that they want to fund and it

doesn't sound like a good idea. Are

there other parts that that trillion or

dollars is going to go to and just

nobody wants to mention it? Republicans

don't mention it and the Democrats don't

mention either. Well, if they don't

mention it, I guess it comes down to

this one thing. And uh to Tapper's

credit, although he called it a lie

technically,

he did also support why it's a perfectly

good point that the Republicans are

making. It's a perfectly good point. If

they don't want to fund people who are

non-citizens,

that's that's the choice the voters.

And then uh

anyway, so Jeff didn't have much of an

answer to that. He doesn't have much of

an answer to anything.

All right, it gets better. So, the White

House um I guess they had to furlow

their social media manager because of

the shutdown. So, instead of not having

their social media manager, uh operate

from the White House. The White House

did one of the funniest things I've ever

seen. They they announced uh in a post,

"Our social media manager was furoughed,

but making America great again isn't."

So they show

So they show a meme that apparently was

made by the people who were the the

backup staff, you know, the ones who

were not the good social media managers.

And so they intentionally made the meme

have all the wrong fonts, a terrible

design, you know, super simplistic, a

little eagle in the corner that's just,

you know, too on the nose. And

hey, Cat. Uh, but they made the meme. so

hilariously bad. It It looked like

something you would made on the first

day that PowerPoint was invented. You

know, somebody said, "Hey, PowerPoint,

what's that? What's it do?" All right,

watch this. I'll grab these images and

I'll put them all together and I'll put

all these different fonts and and it'll

just be a mess. So, if you didn't get

the joke that they intentionally

designed it poorly,

wasn't funny at all. But once you

realize that they intentionally made it

funny, it's definitely intentional. They

intentionally made it bad. It's freaking

It's just great. It's really funny. And

then you look at the comments then

people who got the joke rolled in and

they played with the meme themselves.

One of them put a little sombrero on the

eagle.

I mean just just great stuff. So I

reposted that on X. If you want to look

at it, it's definitely worth a look. But

uh A+ to the White House. Probably the

social media managers were part of

designing that. But it's brilliant. It's

just brilliant.

I saw a post from Cynical Publius, one

of my favorite follows. Um he said that

fat generals is merely the latest 8020

issue the Democrats have decided to

sport on the 20% side.

Have you heard anybody

complain about uh the secretary of war

saying that the general shouldn't be

fat? I haven't heard anybody complain

about it. It is another 8020. We do want

our generals not to look fat. I do. I

want that. I mean, it's not my number

one problem in the world, but yeah, I I

want my generals to not be fat.

So, good call. Once again, Democrats on

the 20% side.

All right, we talked about that. So,

Harvard

has hired a drag queen uh as a visiting

professor. The drag queen's uh stage

name is Lahore Vagistan.

Sorry, cat accident. No, no, don't. No.

Roman, don't knock over the microphone.

You can be at my lab. You can be over

here. It's fun to be in my lap. Okay.

Uh, so here are the the classes that

their drag queen visiting professor is

going to teach.

One is queer ethnog ethnography.

So if you wanted a queer ethnography

class in Harvard, you could get one now

from a from a drag queen named Lahore

Vajistan. But that's not all. Uh you can

als

you can also attend a class at Harvard

called Rue Politics, Drag, Race, and

Desire. And that will be in the spring

semester.

Now you tell me

Is Harvard trolling

or did they really think this was a good

idea for their brand and for the

students? What is going on with this? To

me, that's just funny. It's just funny

that they would destroy themselves.

Uh I would like to uh keep an uh an

updated uh estimate of what the value of

a Harvard education was and is. I would

say a few years ago, very few years ago,

the value of a Harvard education could

be um in the millions. You know, if you

looked at lifetime earnings, even though

it would be expensive to go there,

probably one of the best investments you

could ever make because of your lifetime

earnings. I would so I would say a uh

Harvard education would probably have

been worth

$20 million

over a lifetime. I mean really really

valuable. Um current value of a Harvard

degree. Uh updating my estimates. Uh see

carry the three. Uh $200.

$200.

Current value of a Harvard degree. Did

you know that uh Joy Reid went to

Harvard? Yeah. Mhm. And uh Joy Reid was

uh just on a uh show and wokeness

spotted this and uh she said when my

mother came from Guyana she realized is

not a land of opportunity for people

like us.

Was she talking about America being not

a land of opportunity? I believe she was

saying that America was not the land of

opportunity she thought it was. Um, as

end wokeness points out, the average

salary in Guyana was $5,200 a year, and

Joy Reed came here and earned $3 million

a year at MSNBC.

So, let's say, put it all together. Her

mother's from Guyana, which means they

came to this country well after slavery

was done.

So, was not part of the slavery. Uh, but

she earned $3 million probably on the

backs of white men who didn't get into

Harvard because she did and didn't get a

job at NBS NBC because she did. So,

question, does Joy Reed owe me

reparations?

because she didn't she didn't uh she

wasn't part of the legacy of slavery,

but she was part of the legacy of

denying white men jobs.

So, do the math. Does she owe me

reparations?

I went through, let's say, I I I lost my

first career because I was a white man.

I lost my second career because I was a

white man. I lost my third career

because I'm a white man.

She got on the the rocket ship to the

top through Harvard, which of course

considered her ethnicity, and then

MSNBC, which of course considered her

gender and her ethnicity. So, she owes

me reparations, right?

All right. Well, get back to me on that.

Um, do you know Rick Caruso, the

developer guy? I think at one point he

ran for mayor against Karen Bass but did

not win. So he was on the all-in pod um

event and he was talking on stage with

the all-in pod guys and he said quote we

are spending in the city of Los Angeles

$900,000 per homeless person that we're

moving from the streets. Chimath said

900,000 per year because Chimath is

unusually smart and that that

immediately looked like a sketchy

number. So So he's like 900,000 per

year, you know, kind of kind of

challenging him to back that up. Caruso

said, "Yeah." Jimoth said, "Oh my god."

Uh so I looked it up on Grock to find

out if that $900,000 estimate was real.

It's not.

There's no number like that. Yeah.

And so remember I tell you all data that

matters is fake. Uh that's presumably

fake data. I think Chamoth saw it right

away, but you know, they didn't have

didn't have the the ability to do a deep

dive, but uh I guess I'll ask you guys.

Um Jason, you you might be listening,

but uh do a little do a little search on

that. See see if you can update that

number. If it's true, if you can back it

up, that would be really interesting.

But Grock is not aware of any. It gave

lots of details of what they are

spending. It was nowhere near that

number. It was still big, but more like

a few hundred thousand.

So probably fake.

Um, Trump just signed some executive

order that they say will uh, according

to the postmillennial, it will

supercharge pediatric cancer research

with AI.

Now, that's a good idea. So I think it's

mostly an AI related thing, but they

want to direct the AI at looking at all

the apparently they have immense amounts

of cancer data that would be relevant to

childhood, but they don't really have an

excellent way to see what that data

means, which is strange. I would think

that they would have, but apparently

they're going to fix that. Um, and you

know what I say,

faster, please.

Cuz if they fix it for children, well,

you know, they're not going to be

working on prostate cancer for children.

But, uh, they might they might learn

something about cancer that could be

useful, keep me alive a few more years.

Here's some more good news. Um, the US

Department of Energy is, uh, going to

take a 5% ownership stake in Lithium

America's Corp.,

which I didn't know this, but apparently

Lithium America's Corp. owns uh rights

to look for lithium in a giant uh a what

do you call it when a volcano is dead,

but it's that big volcano hole. Well,

anyway, the volcano the the uh

non-active volcano apparently has the

largest lithium deposits in the world in

America. So America has the largest

lithium deposit in the world.

The only thing we don't have is the

efficient way to get it legally.

So the US department takes a 5%

ownership which presumably will help

them get the uh get the resources and

the approvals and the regulations that

they need. Now my question is this. How

many how many companies has the US taken

an equity position in? Intel

and there was another one. Few. I I feel

like we already have uh taken the value

of something that will easily be a few

hundred billion dollars. Maybe not right

away, but fairly easily will be worth a

few hundred million billion dollars. A

few hundred billion dollars. And it

makes me wonder since I like this model

where the government takes a small piece

of equity in return for being a more

let's say active participant in the

company's success where the government

makes a difference. I kind of like it.

Kind of like it. And it makes you wonder

if we could get to paying off the entire

debt that way.

Cats. Um, so I feel like we could get to

a trillion dollars in equity with maybe

half a dozen more deals. That would all

make sense. That would make sense for

the company. They'd make sense for the

government. And it wouldn't be fascist

because they would just have a little

equity. Just a taste.

I feel like

we couldn't pay off the entire $37

trillion debt, but we would at least get

on the the ride that can go up, whereas

taxes can't go up that much. You know

what I mean? So, if you check in in five

years and the government has taken a

bunch of equity, in five years that

equity may have doubled in value, it may

have tripled in value because of the

government's. So we may have found a way

to pay off 5 trillion

without raising taxes. I mean just think

about it. the this model of if you add

tariffs to taking equity suddenly you

have two um it's not you know the

tariffs I understand often come from the

domestic uh importers um but still it's

it's creating a nondirectly tax way to

you know take a bite out of that uh um

debt maybe that could be good news I do

like the I do like the government taking

equity if it's a small part anything

over 10%

would start that would be bothersome but

up to about 10% yeah sometimes

all right um the the lithium America

stocks already went up 130% I think just

on announcements or suspicions of the

deal I don't know if we're already part

of that because if we already had our

deal.

Did we already get the upside or did the

upside happen before the the equity was

granted? I don't know. But Trump picking

up free money for the country. I will

never I'll never dislike that.

Well, as you know, there's all these

drone sightings over in Europe. So now

we've had and they think it might be

Russian drones, but now uh we've seen

Denmark and Estonia and Poland and

Romania and now the latest uh is Germany

got some drones that they can't identify

and didn't shoot down, but they look

like they were surveilling important

infrastructure.

So what do you think this is? Is it

possible that each of these countries is

just saying domestic drones, but they

don't know what they're seeing? So,

they're just imagining that it's, you

know, more of a Russia problem because

everything's a Russia problem. Or is

Putin showing NATO that NATO has no air

defense?

Because if it is Putin, he is in fact

country by country proving that they

have no air defense.

Now, you notice that France

um is not on the list yet.

Would France have a more robust air

defense and maybe that's why they

haven't been challenged with drones?

What about England? Does England have a

little bit better air defense? Because

if if uh Putin knew that uh these would

be easy targets with no air defense,

let's call it uh I'll just name them

again. Uh

what is it? Uh Estonian, Germany, and

Denmark and uh Romania and Poland. I

don't imagine that their air defenses

would be as robust as say France or

England. Is that fair to say? I don't

think Germany had a robust air defense.

So, it could be that what Putin is doing

is uh he's he's preparing for

negotiations. That's one possibility.

And the one way you could do that is to

show the weakness of NATO as an ability

to fight because if NATO doesn't know it

can fight and win in and it's it's going

to be an air battle. If there's any

battle at all, it'll be in the air. If

if Russia can prove that to NATO, look,

I'm going to prove to you that you could

not defend against our attacks. You

can't even you can't even detect our

drones for, let's say, four out of five

of your NATO countries, right? That

would be a somewhat brilliant persuasion

because you wouldn't have to even know

for sure it was Russia, right? All you'd

have to know is that all these countries

can't control their airspace. And those

countries have to think about that. Oh,

damn. We can't we don't have any control

over our airspace. None. And that's

being proven every day. The other

possibility is that uh Putin is

collecting data for an attack

and uh so he's looking at where they can

attack the best because remember uh

Trump has now authorized long-term or

long range attacks by uh Ukraine in deep

into Russia to go after their critical

infrastructure like their energy

infrastructure in particular. Remember I

told you that the Ukraine war was going

to turn into two things. A robot war on

the front line, drones being robots, um

but also ground robots. And that instead

of trying to kill people, the robots

would try to kill the energy production

in Russia. And they'd only have to get

about 20% of it before Russia would have

to make a deal because because that

would be 20% would be cataclysmic.

So it could be

um

could be that Russia is just stiffening

up um because of that.

So, the uh courts in Germany have uh

backed surveilling of the far-right,

what they call the far-right

anti-immigration

uh group, the AFD. So, that would be the

right-wing uh group that's picking up uh

influence in Germany. But if um because

they're accused as a group, you know,

not every person in the group, but but

as a group, they've been accused of

saying uh saying things that were

directed against the human dignity of

foreigners, in particular asylum

seekers, as quote ethnic strangers.

So because the far right was saying that

the people coming in with immigration

were so different from the Germans that

that was causing a problem in Germany.

Um so I guess just saying that they're

ethnic strangers was enough to authorize

a surveillance of all of the all of the

phones of everybody in the party.

I think I think that's what it's saying.

Now, what would happen if somebody like

me went to Germany?

Would I be automatically

breaking a law because of things I had

said? Like even during this podcast,

would Germany say, "Oh, here's your

social media thing. Uh, you can't say

that because you uh you may have

insulted strangers in your in your own

way.

Would I be in trouble or would I be

automatically surveiled if I entered the

country because I had a background of

saying hm not every kind of immigration

is good for the country just you know

common sensical things which is what

their their far right is doing just

common sense

I don't know but they uh

anyway um

here's what I made about the AFD. I

believe that they're in selfdefense

mode, not political mode. Now, it's

political, of course, but when they're

saying um this immigration coming in,

this isn't like uh let's argue about tax

rates or something. They're saying that

we're dead if you keep doing this. We're

we're just dead.

So, from their perspective, they're

they're engaged not in politics as much

as literally self-defense. And you know

what I say about self-defense?

There are no rules in self-defense.

Self-defense doesn't have rules. There's

no morality rule. There's no ethic rule.

There's just self-defense.

And it's one of those things that it

takes you a moment to realize that

that's true. No. If somebody's gonna

kill you or your family right now, but

the only way you could stop it is

something that someone else would call

unethical, that's not a boundary. Save

your family. Self-defense

does not have to be gated by right or

wrong. So that's what the political

right in Germany understands, that

they're involved in self-defense when it

comes to immigration.

the the people in charge apparently

think it's a political or uh wokeness or

rudeness or bad behavior thing. Not when

it's self-defense.

That would be true if it were not

self-defense. If if people were saying,

"No, we just don't like them because,

you know, they whatever they say." if if

it wasn't to to protect their lives and

you know their their country as as

Germany

um then then you could argue this is you

know this is bad behavior. You know we

don't insult people and call them

different and call them strangers just

cuz they're different. I I wouldn't be

in favor of that. I mean I like free

speech but I wouldn't be in favor of

that particular brand of it. Um, but

once it becomes self-defense,

which is what this clearly is at this

point, is clearly self-defense, then no,

I think the political right doesn't have

to apologize for anything. They have to

stay out of jail. I don't know how

they're going to do that, but they don't

have to apologize.

Meanwhile, at the Tulsa State Fair,

apparently they've got drones and all

kinds of AI and um and facial detection

so that you can you can have uh they'll

take a picture of your child. Uh so if

your child gets separated from you, they

can almost instantly find it with a

drone or something else. Uh which I kind

of like. I I kind of like that you that

you could go there and not worry about

losing your kid, you know, if you if you

split up. And I like that, you know,

it'd be much harder for somebody to try

to kidnap your kid or get your kid out

of the park if the kid had been IDed

before then. So, I can see why they'd

like it. And they also say that they

will catch people who have uh

outstanding warrants. But, uh, it's

super creepy.

super super creepy because it's not just

the kids. They're going to they're going

to take everybody's face. So,

you know, there there's there goes your

privacy at the fair. Would you go to the

fair if you knew that it would cost you

your privacy?

Probably because the only reason people

go to the fair is that their kids are

bugging them.

I don't think people go to the fair for

any other reason than their kids kids

are bugging them. At least that's the

local fair here. That would be true.

Yeah. Let's see. Oh, that was my

last story. It went a little long. Sorry

I went long. I hope you enjoyed it.

Anyway, I'm going to talk uh privately

to the members of locals. My beloved

members of locals. Don't you wish you

were beloved? My goodness. Uh all right,

everybody. See you tomorrow. Same time,

same place. and local supporters. I'll

be private with You