Episode 3020 CWSA 11/16/25

Come on in.

Oh, a recruiter has contacted me.

Alicia wants to recruit me to work with Accenture.

Am I still open to work?

No, I'm not available to work for you.

But thanks for asking.

Let me make sure that we've got everything we want working here.

Then we'll have some fun.

Yep, we got a good cat picture.

We got a show.

We're live streaming.

Oh my goodness.

It's such such a good day.

I hope you're having a great day.

You ready for this?

All the lazy podcasters are sleeping in and watching me.

Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of Human Civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adamson.

You've never had a better time.

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

All you need for that would be a copper mug or a glass or tanker gels a canteen jugger flask vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

The dopamine hit of the day thing makes everything better.

It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens.

That's right.

Now, extraordinary.

Oh, the lengths we go through for the perfect sip, but it works every time.

So, uh, I'll give you an update.

Probably I'll I'll give the same update a few times till everybody hears it.

Um, I'm no longer personally drawing the Dilbra comic strip because both my hands are blown out now.

My right hand is a focal donian.

My left hand is semi paralyzed with whatever cancer problem I'm having at the moment.

Maybe it gets better.

Probably not.

I don't know.

We'll see.

But as of yesterday, uh, Dilbert is, uh, being drawn by, it's it's still written by me, so it's 100% 100% written by me, but my art director, um, will be doing all of the drawing instead of just finishing the art.

She is capable of doing it all.

And now she is.

And yes, I did give her a raise.

I know.

I know you're wondering.

All right.

Turns out that uh according to medicine, I guess that's some kind of publication, uh coffee consumption lowers your risk of rotator cuff injury.

H So if you're drinking coffee, you have less chance of a rotator cuff injury.

Now, is all of their medical advice just for Jeffrey Tubin or just this one?

All right, I'll just leave that there for you.

You you can complete the complete the joke.

What the What the Oh my god, there there's something on my desk.

What What is this?

Oh my god.

Oh, it's the Dilbert calendar for 2026.

The best thing you could ever have on your desk.

That's right.

It's available now.

You could go to Amazon and buy it right now.

It's got comics on the front.

It's got comics on the back.

It's got comics on the box.

How many more comics do you need, people?

That's right.

Only on Amazon.

America.

It's got to be the US version of Amazon.

Get it now.

They are approximately, and I swear I'm not making this up, they're approximately one-third sold out in November.

So, if you know anything about calendars, if your calendar is one-third sold out at the first half of November, there will be some question whether there'll be enough of them by mid December.

So, I would go fast if I were you.

Well, I love when Trump talks about his windmills and about climate change being a hoax.

Do you remember how dumb we thought uh no how dumb the Democrats believed Trump was because he thought that climate change was a hoax?

That one thing besides the the fine people hoax, but that one thing was really the most damaging thing outside of the, you know, the other hoaxes, I guess.

Uh but now when he says it, it almost doesn't make news.

I mean, he's the president, so they still report it.

But wouldn't that be a big deal if some other president said that climate change was a hoax, but now he just says it and people just go, "All right, next question.

I guess it's a hoax according to you." All right.

So, he Trump has successfully, and I can't even imagine he got to this point, but it's pretty impressive.

He's gotten to the point where he beat down the public and he he wore people out until he can simply say it's a hoax.

Maybe they push back a little bit to, you know, get some clarification.

But now that's our that's our reality.

Our reality is our president thinks it's a hoax and he's got some evidence to back his opinion.

And did you ever think we'd get to this point?

you know, because because I was on the sort of on the hoax page the whole time, although I don't think I used that word early on.

Uh, definitely use it now.

Do you remember, I don't know how old some of you are, but do you remember when we used to use science to figure out what was true and what wasn't true?

Is anybody old enough to remember that?

If if we didn't know if, you know, let's say climate change was a problem or not a problem, just to pick one example, what we would do is we would rely on science because the one thing we knew for sure is that if you're trying to figure out what's real and what's not real, science is really the only way to go.

Am I right?

And then somewhere somewhere during one of the Trump terms, you can pick which one you like, uh, science became so discredited that the thought of using science to figure out what's true seems a little dumb now, doesn't it?

It doesn't just seem like sometimes it doesn't work.

Now, it actually seems dumb because if you were to just do the math of how often science is is operating in the pursuit of taking your money and screwing you and giving somebody else power, that's way more than the number of times science tells you the truth, isn't it?

Am I wrong about that?

Am I subjective?

Of course.

My subjective impression is that science is in 2025.

Science is usually used to mislead, to market, to sell, to get elected, to scare somebody.

But how often is it used to find out reality?

Now and then, but it's not really the right tool, is it?

It's not even the right tool for figuring out reality.

Well, it should be, but the way we use it, we abuse it.

So, um there's a clip of Eric Swallwell uh demanding that Cash Patel promised that he won't be investigating.

I guess there about 60 people in Congress that Cash might want to investigate.

And he said, "Will," so uh Swallwell says in this hearing, "will you recuse yourself from investigating the 60 individuals, including myself, that you identified as government gangsters?" And Cash Patel says, "No, I I'm I'm starting to really like the the Cash Patel fast answers.

Will you do this with these 60 people?" No.

Moving on.

Now, does it seem weird to you that all of these people got caught with mortgage fraud?

Allegedly.

So, allegedly, Leticia James, Adam Schiff, and now Eric Swall, what are the odds they would all be involved in in a similar kind of mortgage fraud?

Is there some kind of class you take when you become a Democrat?

You're like, "Okay, I'm registering as a Democrat.

All right, here's your here's your documentation that'll teach you how to, you know, cheat on your taxes, maybe your insurance, but definitely on your mortgages.

Definitely on the mortgages.

So, Derek Swallwell, he's uh doing great.

He's my representative, in case you wondered.

So, he's just doing great.

Um, so there's a uh allegedly a new Epstein bombshell they're calling it.

Is are the Epstein bombshells ever bombshells?

It doesn't feel like it, does it?

I feel like every day or two there's an Epstein bombshell that will tell us what we already knew.

All right, what's this one?

Well, apparently Glain Maxwell's lawyer is accusing Representative Jamie Rascin, who you know as one of the quote designated liars.

So, he's one of the ones that I always say if they have a really big lie to tell you and not a normalsized one, they have a really big one to tell, they bring out the designated liars.

Swallwell, Schiff, apparently Leticia James and Raskin, but apparently he was involved in some kind of uh, you know, leaked emails.

I talked about this yesterday.

And, uh, the article I read about it says big names are now officially in the crosshairs.

Do you believe that?

Do you believe we've finally got to the point where the big names are in trouble and any minute now they're going to be named and handcuffed and taken off to jail?

None of that's going to happen.

Is it?

I don't expect anything to happen.

I mean, that's what we're used to.

We We've been trained to expect nothing.

So, I expect nothing.

I'd like to be surprised.

As you know, the folks on the right, the political right, the MAGA and Maha and people like that, they've got a little bit of a I don't know what to call it, drama.

It's more like other people are creating the drama.

But I'm talking about Trump and Marjorie Taylor Green and Thomas Massie and Tucker Carlson, etc.

And I bring it up because Matt Gates had an interesting post today.

Matt Gates said, "I love Trump, MTG, Massie Tucker, and even uh and even those I feel are too accommodating to the worst decisions made by Israel's government." Now, this is Matt Gates.

Um he says, "I won't be baited into attacking friends and leaders in our movement because some people disagree on some things.

Not only do I completely agree with Matt Gates on his philosophy, which is you can't tell me you can't tell me who to like, you can't tell me who to talk to.

You can't tell me what to think when I talk to them.

That's not on the table.

That is just not on the table.

You know, you do you, I do me.

But no, you don't tell me who to like.

That's that's not one of the options.

Um, and I'm going to add Matt Gates to my list.

So, I would have said the same about MTG and Trump and Massie and Tucker, but I'll throw Matt Gates on there.

You don't get to tell me if I can talk with Matt Gates, right?

That's not up to you.

That's just up to me.

All right.

Um, so I was watching uh who I don't know his first name, but one of the Kennedy cousins, Schllothberg, is running for some office.

And part of his running for office is he's throwing his is it his cousin or his uncle, whatever RFK Jr.

is to him.

Throwing RFK Jr.

under the bus for what Schlloberg I think would consider some nonscientific opinions.

Non-scientific.

So I saw Libby Evans um was I think the host for this or was she writing about it for postmillennial?

Anyway, this is what Schlloberg said.

Quote, uh, Trump represents a threat unlike any other," unquote, and that that necessitates quote new and creative ways of fighting back.

Oh, no.

Is he another one of these fighting back people?

I don't have any policies, but if I say the word fight often enough, you might go away with the impression that I'm a fighter.

So, we're going to fight fight fight fight.

Did anybody anybody change their opinion based on how many times I use the word fight?

Not enough.

Fight fight fight.

Now, anything?

How many times do I have to say fight before you change your opinion of my opinion?

Fight.

Fight.

Fight.

Fight.

Fight.

Fight.

I think I think that's enough.

Yeah.

Anyway, um here's uh when asked if Trump is a fascist, because of course you have to ask that question.

Um Scholasper said that uh there are historical analoges.

Historical analoges.

In other words, yeah, he's he's saying that Trump is a fascist.

Now, similar to my earlier conversation where I said that uh when Trump talks about windmills and climate change being a hoax, it sounded crazy when he first said it, you know, a decade ago and now it doesn't.

Now it sounds Yeah, it just sounds like that's an opinion and probably a correct one in my opinion.

But fascist seems like it's also aged out.

Does anybody have that feeling yet?

Well, it used to be that if I saw a Democrat calling Trump a fascist, I would say to myself, "Oh, here's something I might want to address.

Maybe maybe I need to point out all the ways in which he's not a fascist.

Maybe I need to dig into the definition of a fascist.

Make sure this fits." But now when I hear some new politician call Trump a fascist, do you do you know my first impression is?

Oh, he's a idiot.

And that's it.

I don't think I need to defend Trump.

I don't think I need to introduce a new definition.

I don't think I need to, you know, host a debate.

I don't think I need to send a post.

I just look at him and go, "Oh, you poor bastard.

You poor bastard.

You're a idiot.

Now, does anybody have that same feeling where you've gone from I must argue against this to why would you even argue that?

Who would even argue that?

It's so stupid.

It's literally just stupid.

There there's no other thing to say about it.

What What's the second thing you're going to say about it?

Well, stupid.

No, that was the first thing you said.

What would be the second thing you would say about it?

Stupid.

How about stupid?

There's nothing else to say.

It's just stupid.

All right, Schlloberg, good luck.

Anyway, um now and this is just mind-blowing.

This is another story, but Adam Schiff was on some event where he's talking and this is Adam Schiff.

If you're following politics enough to know who Adam Schiff even is, this will blow your mind.

I'm not making this up.

I I don't think it's AI, pretty sure.

Uh but this is a real thing that happened recently.

So Schiff said in public, he said this, we have to get past the quote ruinous idea of making presidents unsuccessful because of politics.

What?

And quote, "Stop viewing each other as our enemy." Wait a minute.

That is Adam Schiff, the guy who's trying to ruin a presidency.

What?

And and the only way he can say this in public is because he's confident that people don't know what he said 10 minutes ago or yesterday or one minute ago or ever or ever.

The only way he can say that in public is because he knows that nobody's going to look it up.

Nobody's going to compare it to what he did.

But of course, you know, if you're watching X and you have, if you follow any accounts on the right, you know, there's going to be a compilation clip of him doing whatever it is he says you shouldn't do.

Now, I haven't seen it yet, but you know, it's coming because the the right is really good at that.

Now, Western Lensman, who is a really good account for you to follow, had a number of good stories today.

So, I will just recommend them.

It's two words.

Western lensman.

Just a good follow.

Has has about many as many uh followers as I have.

So, it's grown organically because it does a good job.

Whoever runs it.

Um Scott Galloway.

You know Scott Galloway?

You've seen him.

Famous author, entrepreneur.

Um I sometimes refer to myself as the poor man's Scott Galloway.

literally the poor man's cuz he's done really well financially.

But he was on Bill Maher's show.

He had some uh alarming stats.

45% of men from the ages of 18 to 24 have never asked a woman out in person.

45% of men have never asked a woman out in person.

Maybe that's not as bad as it sounds.

Is that as bad as it sounds?

Because if you're asking them out, not in person, but they say yes, don't you end up in the same place?

If you say, "Hey, read my text.

You know, let's go to the movies tonight." It's kind of the same.

Now, I get that someone who learns how to approach somebody is going to be better off in life than someone who's afraid of approaching someone.

I get that.

But is it that much of a difference?

To me, it just seems like younger people have you different tools.

So, the tools they use are online because that's the tools they have.

I don't know how how big a problem that is, but it certainly we're losing the ability to approach people and that might have a well even that might make no difference in the long run because the whole process of selling is going to fall to AI, won't it?

So, if your AI is doing all the selling for, let's say, non-dating reasons, do you even need to learn that skill?

It might be a useless skill.

It's so unpredictable.

What's going to happen in two to five years?

So unpredictable.

And also, Scott Galloway says 63% of men under the age of 30 are not even pursuing a relationship.

Wait, what?

Nearly twothirds of men under the age of 30 are not even trying.

Not even trying.

Well, here I would add some context again.

In my day, you know, when I was a youngster, um, everybody sort of assumed that their their path would involve, you know, some romantic family kind of a thing.

Um, so we were all kind of uh oriented toward making that happen.

But suppose it's 2025 and all you need to do is have access or contact with a lot of people and sooner or later you'll like one, they'll like you back, you'll be in good shape.

So when you say pursuing a relationship, my old guy question is this.

If there's anybody young enough to answer the question, do young people pursue or do they just exist?

This is a serious question, by the way.

I don't know the answer.

Do young people pursue relationships as much as they used to.

Or do they just say, "No, I'm I'm going to do this thing.

I'll probably be some people.

Some of the people I meet might turn into something." But is that pursuing a relationship if you're just putting yourself in a situation?

I don't know.

I feel like just the way we do things is different.

So comparing it to the old days might not be as valid as it used to be.

Um I would point however that my books will solve most of these problems.

Uh those of you who have read my books in the comments uh can you confirm for me so that the other people can see it confirm for me that if you had read my books uh reframe your brain or win bigly or how to win at almost everything and still how to fail almost everything and still win big.

If you had if you had read any of those three books would you not be socially more adept and more successful?

You would.

Yeah, they're written for that purpose.

They're designed to they're actually designed to fill the gap that Scott Galloway is talking about, which is you can fill any gap.

Not a specific gap, but any gap.

You can learn how to learn how to talk to somebody, learn how to get past embarrassment, learn how to enter a room and own it.

Those are pretty valuable skills.

So, if you think there's no way to learn it because there's something about the world that changed, not really.

you there just three books you can read uh reframe your brain win bigly and uh how to fill almost everything and still win big they will fix you all right so this leads me to my most fun story of the day uh how many of you know who billionaire venture capitalist Bill Aman is that name ring the bell so I wouldn't I wouldn't call him a conservative or Republican but he certainly went from deep democrat to h maybe I should rethink this whole thing.

I I think I'd call him an independent, but I don't want to, you know, I don't want to be the one who labels him.

So, apparently he had uh he had a suggestion for how to meet a young woman, and this is based on his dating experience.

All right.

Now, here's what you need to know about Bill Aman.

If Grock is not lying to me, he's 6'3.

He has perfect hair and he has almost modellike male good looks.

Went to Harvard, is a billionaire.

And he's going to teach you he's he's going to teach you how to pick up women.

And here's here's what he teaches you because he thinks it's about the line that you use.

So, not entirely that, you know, it's also the having the guts to go up up to somebody.

That would be at least half of it.

But he says, use this question.

He says, I would ask quote, "May I meet you before engaging further?

I almost never got a no." All right, let's get back to the real world.

Uh how how many of you live in the real world?

Anybody?

Most of you.

Oh, most of most of you live in the actual reality.

In your experience, how many handsome 6 foot three billionaires with perfect hair get turned down when they introduce themselves in a public place?

Has that ever happened in the in the history of in the history of male and female interaction?

Has that ever happened?

So, I don't know if Bill Aman is not aware of his own, you know, his own situation because sometimes we're not aware of ourselves, right?

Yeah.

It's easier to see somebody else than it is to see yourself.

But that's kind of funny.

Now, I would go further and say that may I meet you might be one of the worst pickup lines I've ever heard.

And indeed, the reason I saw it at all is that there was some young man who had read this advice and he he tried it out at a bar.

Now, he didn't tell us what he looks like, but I'm just going to guess.

Probably not 6'3 with perfect hair and a billion dollars and handsome.

Probably not.

Probably not.

Anyway, he not only got turned down when he used that line, he got mocked mercilessly and the and the women that were with the one he targeted for his approach, uh, they all just like laughed until they cried at him while standing right in front of him.

Now, you see the problem?

All right, let me tell you what's wrong with this line.

May I meet you will work for every 6'3 billionaire with good hair.

It'll work for all of them.

Why?

Because the woman doesn't care what you say.

He if you have all that other stuff working for you and you know plus he's an interested guy.

I mean he has the whole package, right?

So so it shouldn't be any surprise that no matter what he says it works.

But here's what's wrong with what he says.

He's asking for permission.

How many of you ladies got the ick when you heard that he asked for permission to meet you?

It's not permission to go to your house.

It's not permission to, I don't know, hug you.

It's not permission to rifle through your purse.

It's permission to simply say who you are and ask who the other person is.

That is so ick.

Am I wrong?

Ladies, back me up.

Back me up.

Now, but so while I say it's ick and weak, um wouldn't it be a lot stronger to just say, "Hi, I'm Bill Aman." How would that not work?

Hi, my name's Bill.

That would work every time.

That would work a 100% of the time.

Anyway, so my advice is just go introduce yourself if you're that handsome.

It'll all work out.

All right.

Uh, may I meet you?

Uh, robot surgeons.

We talked about that.

We don't need to talk about robot surgeons anymore.

Uh, Duruitz is fun to check in with every now and then when there's a a legal story.

And this uh Epstein thing just never goes away.

And Durowitz uh was Epstein's lawyer at one point in the saga.

And Epstein points out uh that one of the reasons potentially doesn't know for sure because he doesn't read minds.

But one of the reasons that Trump might not want the Epstein files released is how easily they're misinterpreted.

And of course, we've all said that, right?

That's exactly what I've said.

You know, maybe it's because he doesn't want them misinterpreted.

But what Epstein I'm sorry, what Duruititz adds that I was less capable of doing is some examples.

If you had some specific examples where you know that a true thing got misinterpreted as a false thing, well, that would be a pretty strong argument for not releasing the files.

And apparently there are two examples.

Uh, one of them is, uh, that the at least the news, the mainstream news and the pundits, they refer to Epstein as a convict convicted, quote, a convicted, um, P word.

I'm not even going to use the word.

You know what I'm talking about.

But, uh, Duritz points out he's never been convicted of that.

There's no conviction on that charge.

So, was he convicted of something bad?

Yes.

But was it that?

It was not.

Now, I'm not going to make the mistake that some people made to act like one of these crimes is the one that's not as bad as the other one.

Cuz as soon as you do that, all the stupid trolls go, "Oh, wow.

Wow.

Oh, you're saying that this one's okay?

You're you're excusing these crimes?" No, I'm not.

No, no, I'm not.

You You can have that conversation.

I'm not even in the conversation.

I I refuse to even use the words like in the same paragraph.

I'm so out of that conversation.

And the reason is because I don't want to be misinterpreted.

Do you remember when Megan Kelly uh said something about the specifics of the charges?

And I'm not going to repeat it because I can't even repeat what Megan Kelly said, which I believe was technically legally accurate because I would get misinterpreted too.

just like she did.

So, you just can't you can't really get near the topic without being misinterpreted because everybody's waiting to bounce.

Um, and then there's also the other example of the V Virginia Guffrey.

She's the one who tragically passed away recently and apparently she had said she'd never met Trump and yet the rumors are that she spent hours with him.

Now, how do you do a story about a woman who said she never met him and not mention that?

Right now, here I think Dersuitz is assuming that the truth is that he never met her because I think Dersuitz makes the same claim that he didn't I don't know if he said he didn't meet her, but but Dersuit says, you know, nothing happened, but he had been accused as well.

So, we have several examples of people who were accused of things in that domain.

But as far as we know, no proof that they did anything.

So would that be enough of a reason, if you're Trump, would that be enough of a reason to keep those files from being released?

That's a tough one because I think most of you would say, "I don't care about your stupid argument, Scott.

In this particular situation, you just have to release everything." Well, what about this?

Nope.

release everything.

But what about the No, you just have to release everything.

And maybe that's the only way we get past it.

But I will tell you, if we release everything, there's something like a 100% chance it will destroy lives uh of men uh who may not have done the worst thing that they're accused of doing.

You know, you could argue why were you even involved?

You know, why did you even know these people?

Separate argument.

But uh yeah, no secrets, lol.

Anyway, just so you know, there is a strong argument for not releasing them, even if there's nothing critical of Trump in them.

There's a new book by uh author Barry Leavine about Epstein.

He was talking to Smerish today on CNN.

I like Smerish.

Um, and he was talking about uh what was it that Epstein meant in a 2011 email that we now have access to?

And in that email, I guess Epstein said, "The dog that hasn't barked is Trump." Now, how in the world are we supposed to know what that means?

The dog that hasn't barked is Trump.

Really?

How many different things could that mean?

Like if you made a list of what it might mean, how long would the list be?

Pretty long, right?

Pretty long.

Pretty long.

Anyway, um so the author Barry Lavine says he suspects that Epstein was saying he was 75% there in believing that Trump might have been the whistleblower.

So his assumption is that it was something about Trump being the one who blew the whistle so to speak on uh on Epstein's bad behavior.

So uh we don't have confirmation of that.

But so so this would suggest that Epstein and Trump really were not, at least at the time of these emails, were more like mortal enemies than friends, wouldn't you say?

because you'd have to be sort of a mortal enemy or or just a criminal, I guess.

You know, if you just assumed Trump wanted to stay on the right side of the law uh and he cared about the uh the victims, then you would say he was just doing what a what an adult should do in that situation.

I don't know.

We'll never know.

And then there's the story about I guess Epstein was stealing some some of the women that were working at the Mara Lago spa.

He was trying to I don't know if he was what would you call it?

Uh grooming them.

And then there was a story about uh they were both fighting over the same piece of real estate uh near Mara Lago.

So now we've got the was he the whistleblower?

Maybe yes, maybe no.

Um and we've got the he was stealing staff.

That would have been bad.

And then we have the real estate thing which might have been the worst of all the things in terms of how angry they were at each other because there would be bigger money involved.

So are we getting closer to understand what happened?

It doesn't feel like it, does it?

If you looked at what you knew, I don't know, a year ago or something and then compare it to what you know now with all these revelations, has anything changed?

Is there anything about your opinion of this whole situation that's now different?

H I don't know.

Like I feel like maybe a few few blanks got filled in but not really important ones.

I don't know.

We'll never know.

Um meanwhile here here's one of these evergreen stories that just will never go away.

Uh, apparently the British government is being accused of withholding data that might link COVID jabs to excess deaths and that allegedly the reason that the government would do that is it would lead it would lead to distress or danger or anger.

Distress or anger.

The te the telegraph is reporting on this.

Uh, what do you think?

Disclosed TV is also writing about this on axe now.

Is that new?

Would you consider that news?

Or were you already for so long, many months or years, already on the page of, oh yeah, you know, there's some data that shows maybe it was more bad than good.

The the trouble is, as I often say, there's no data you can trust on the pandemic.

Let me say that again.

There's no data you can trust.

There's lots of data, but there's no there's no data you can trust on the pandemic.

You can't trust that it was safe.

Can't trust it was unsafe.

Can't trust it was safe for some people.

Can't trust that it was unsafe for some people.

There's actually nothing you can trust when it comes to the data about the pandemic.

So, I see a story like that and I go, "Well, yeah, there'll be 50 more of those.

I don't know what's true." Meanwhile, as you know, Trump is suing the BBC for maybe up to a billion dollars for for editing one of his interviews.

And uh I saw I think it was on I think it was on Fox the list of the people he successfully sued so far.

So You.

Tube he got 26 million.

Trump did.

Meta$25 million.

Um I don't know when he sued X but he got 10 million.

That had to be was that before Elon took over?

I don't remember that actually.

CBS you got for 16 million and Disney 69.

Is that real?

Did you really get a 69 million from Disney?

69.

Oh my goodness.

Uh, and you know, I have mixed feelings about this.

Mixed feelings.

On one hand, I don't really want my government suing my media.

You know what I mean?

That's that's sort of a little bit icky.

Uh you don't want that.

On the other hand, don't you want to live in a world where the media is afraid of going after somebody unless they really have the goods?

They can't just make up.

Wouldn't you like to live in a world where they can't just make up?

Because that's the current world.

They just make up.

So, I do think that this is a valuable uh push back.

You know, if you want if you could live in a perfect world, nobody would sue anybody for anything because nobody would tell a lie.

But if they're gonna lie, I would rather live in a world where there's a consequence to that so that they don't come after me with their lie.

So I do feel that Trump is in a way, well, not even in a way, in a very direct sense, he's protecting uh his base.

Now, is that the only reason he's doing it?

I doubt it.

I mean, like everything else, there's always five reasons for doing anything.

One of those reasons is free money.

Maybe he's just doing it because he gets some money.

That's okay.

Our system allows that.

You It might not be the only reason.

I'd like to think that it's part of him creating some kind of a push back structure that would benefit him, but it will also benefit the rest of us.

Because if BBC went after me, well, well, I'll give you this example.

If the BBC um somehow falsely edited an interview with me, would I be able to use this story, the fact that Trump sued them?

And I I'm going to project forward that they settle.

Would that help me?

Would I be better off if Trump had successfully sued them for doing the same crime, editing something without permission?

probably it would help.

So, so I think that's good.

Well, down in Mexico, apparently the Gen Z part of the population has been surrounded and trying to occupy their government building there.

Uh they are not too happy with their current government, Shine Ball, President Shine Ball.

And uh so they've created a multi-day protest in Mexico City.

And uh as you know, I don't have to explain this to you, the the way that you conquer a major country such as Mexico is you get some people and you sort of wander around in one of the buildings.

What?

Two of the buildings?

No, no, no.

You don't need to do it in two buildings.

What are you crazy?

Like why would you even do that?

No, you can conquer the whole country by simply wandering around in one government building.

Again, not two.

You don't need two buildings.

That would be crazy.

Just one.

You need one building.

Wandering around, boom, the whole country falls, right?

That's what the Democrats taught me.

They taught me that that's an insurrection.

I think that's the word they use.

An insurrection.

And it's just you can do it just by wandering around.

Now, this has nothing to do with the many many color revolutions that our own intelligence people have uh forced upon other countries such as Mexico.

Um so even though it looks in every way like America is behind it, why would you think that?

Just because it looks exactly like it.

Yeah, it looks exactly like it.

maybe we're behind it.

So, that's happening.

Um, and um, some some say that the point of the protests is not just general unhappiness with the government, but a specific unhappiness that the government is actually run by the cartels.

Do you think that's something that the locals can fix?

Well, they could if they got rid of the government, which I believe you do by wandering around in an empty building on the weekend.

Well, they're trying.

Um, and a lot of people think the president is in league with the cartels, so that's that's really the main part of it.

They don't want to be run and owned by the cartels.

According to uh uh Wall Street Apes, big account on X that you should follow, Wall Street Apes, there's a senator from Mexico who was recently on Fox News and uh talking about how Mexico is basically a cartel narco country.

Um so the claim was that the president of Mexico basically just works for the cartels.

That's the claim.

Uh was funded by the cartels.

uh is not just the president of the country.

Uh oh, it's not just the president, but there's an entire group of Mexican politicians that are collectly referred to as their narco politicians and that Mexico is a narco state.

And that if you imagine it's anything but that, nothing makes sense.

But if you imagine it's a narco state and that the cartels are in charge and they just put a a front person up that happens to be uh a very pleasant woman that uh that's probably uh it's a cartel situation.

All right.

Um and then the Mexican president um has apparently asked for some military intervention.

Right.

So, we'll we'll see.

The part we don't know, and maybe we'll never know, is what does Trump know about the president of Mexico?

What does the president of Mexico know about what Trump knows about her?

Is it a salvageable situation where somehow you can remove the cartel influence and keep the person?

That doesn't seem like it would work.

So, is Trump trying to get rid of the president, a color revolution, that's what you'd call that, or is he trying to, you know, nurse the situation forward and, you know, find any kind of advantage that might move us forward?

I don't know exactly what we're trying to do or even what's possible down there.

Anyway, we'll see.

Um, down where I live, California, the one county over, Santa Clara, they just had a special election and they raised their own taxes to 9.75%.

That that's a um that's only sales tax, right?

Yeah, that's sales tax.

How how would you like a sales tax of 9.75 on top of estate tax?

What is the California state tax right now?

The highest?

Is it 12 11 12?

What's the highest California state tax?

Put it in the comments.

And then the federal would be something like 37 37 4757.

2/3 of what I earn goes directly to Gavin Newsome for his hair gel.

So how happy am I about that?

Well, right after we're done here, I'm going to have to get a second job to try to pay for all that hair gel.

Do you remember when uh Trump first talked about tariffs?

Uh that uh even smart people couldn't decide if they were a good idea or a bad idea.

Do you remember that?

And I I think I alone I only remember me probably other people did the same thing, but I remember saying we're not going to ever know if this worked.

That's just not how anything works.

The the way economics works is you usually don't even know if the thing worked.

You just you might know the outcome, but you don't know is it because of that or what's going to happen anyway.

So here's the most surprising study.

John Carney and Breitbart News is writing about this.

Someone did a big analysis.

they call a sweeping new analysis to find out if the in the history of tariffs, you know, the 150 year history of tariffs in the United States, if they have created um have they created inflation or decreased it?

What would you say?

Before I tell you the answer historically, have tariffs increased inflation or decreased it?

Now, that's an easy question, right?

Simple question.

If if you raise the cost of something, which is what a tariff does.

It raises the cost of something.

How does it not create inflation?

Right?

There's only one only one way it can go.

If you do a thing that absolutely by its design increases the cost of everybody involved, which is what a tariff does.

Uh not everybody, just depends who decides to absorb it.

But how could it be anything except inflationary?

I thought the question was how badly it would be inflationary.

Didn't you?

Maybe you didn't think of it that way.

I never thought in terms of is it inflationary or not?

I always thought, well, it might not be that inflationary and if we get other benefits, the benefits might outweigh the, you know, inflationary part.

But it turns out according to John Carney Brebar News that uh this there was a big study that showed actually it reduces it reduces inflation if you look at the whole 150 years.

So he's not looking at just what Trump did.

They're looking at the history of of that.

Do you believe that?

and that the entire time uh allegedly even the smartest economists and smartest analysts were getting this wrong and that there's actually a there's a reason.

So, it's not random.

There's actually a reason why it reduces inflation.

I'm not sure I understood the reason honestly.

Um but I I'll tell you what the article says.

So this is on John John Carney.

If he if he doesn't explain it well enough for you to understand, then that's on you and John, not on me at all.

But uh John is writing that the researchers approach was ingenious.

Rather than trying to parse recent decades of limited tariff variation, uh they exploited massive swings in tariff policy across centuries using these shifts as a natural experiment to understand cause and effect.

Are you sold?

Did that sell you?

Well, I'm going to say it didn't really sell me on that, but I kind of sort of almost a little bit understand the point of it that if you look at the big picture, you get a different answer than if you look at any micro part of the picture.

That part makes sense, but no.

Yeah, I'm seeing in the comments, you're not buying it at all, are you?

I'm not buying this at all.

All right, I think I'm with you.

I I'm not buying the expert opinion here.

Uh I do still think that the open question is how much it changes anything.

If the how much it changes anything isn't that much, then that's all you need.

Anyway, um you know, I keep telling you Ukraine is becoming a robot only war.

Here's some more evidence of that.

Um, so there's an article I just read uh somewhere that said the ubiquity of precision weapons.

I wish I knew who said this.

I'm just stealing their good work right now.

I apologize.

But uh there are so many precision weapons that if you were to look at the uh if you look at the front line from the the sky, you wouldn't see much of any concentration of forces because as soon as you put anything out there that has size, you know, like a tank or any kind of a vehicle, it just blows up.

The the other side has such good drones now that 100% of everything you put in the war zone blows up.

Like all of it.

So if you were to look at the war zone, it would be kind of empty.

Just think about that.

That any other war zone in the history of war, let's say World War I or uh if you could fly over it and look down at what was happening, you would see that both sides are really concentrated like a whole bunch of people in a in a trench and then beyond that there are a whole bunch of other people and beyond that a whole bunch of other people.

But it' be a lot of people.

There's not a lot of people now on the front lines is it's mostly and it's not even not a lot of people.

It's also not assets because a 100% of the assets blow up too.

So you can't put a person there and you can't put an asset there.

It all just blows up.

So it's this weird like empty zone.

And um I would remind you that was my prediction from a long time ago.

That's where it's all going, people.

Now, I believe there was a reframe that I was going to give you that I skipped right over, but it's exactly the time to give you this reframe from my book, Reframe Your Brain, the best book ever written, according to everybody.

Everybody says it.

Everybody.

All right, here's one of my favorites.

Um, did you ever and you'll notice that some of these reframes hit the same point but from a different direction.

Um, there's one giant sacrifice more.

All right.

So, this might sound familiar, but I haven't taken it from this approach point from this.

I haven't taken it from the ladies tea before.

Now, I'm just making that up.

All right.

Have you ever been in a situation where you thought to yourself, "No one wants to talk to you because you're boring." Has anybody ever had that thought?

Uh, I don't think anybody even wants to talk to me.

I really don't have anything to say.

Nothing to add to the conversation.

Well, let me reframe that.

Instead of thinking that maybe nobody wants to talk to you because you're boring, you should understand that what makes anybody want to talk to anybody is that they show interest in the person talking.

The moment you think that a conversation is about a real highquality exchange of ideas, then you don't know what a conversation is.

Sometimes some highquality ideas get exchanged, but that's not what they're for.

That that's not what the conversation's for.

It's about how you make each other feel.

That's that's your goal.

Your goal is to make the other person feel good.

And the way you do that, and it works every time, is to show genuine interest in whatever they got going on.

People love it when you show interest in them.

Do you know why they love it when you show interest in them?

It's how I started.

And I said, "No one wants to talk to me because I'm boring." You're not the one person thinking that.

Everybody at the party's thinking that.

They're all thinking that maybe I'm a little boring or maybe I already said that or but you can all solve your problem the same way just by asking more questions about the other person and acting interested.

Now, ideally, you're not acting right.

You should be able to find a way to be interested in somebody's life.

you know, you might have to you might have to guide them into some subtopic that's better for both of you, but no, you can uh always find a way to be mutually interested.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, brings us to the top of the hour.

You know what I haven't done in a long time is take questions.

Um, I thought this would be an awesome time to do that.

I'll just do one or two and probably more from locals.

Uh just because they're I have the locals stuff highlighted so it's easier to see.

All right.

Anybody have any questions over at Locals?

You guys have all asked me all your questions for years.

Uh factories suppressed.

Well, we don't really know, but surely there there are suppressed factories in Ukraine.

Uh, yep.

The Dale Carnegie course is how to make people like you.

Exactly.

So, take the Dale Carnegie course.

Uh, so are US factories have been suppressed by the foreign ownership?

Maybe.

How do you talk to woke libs?

I don't.

I try to just avoid it.

Uh, what's the definition of an NPC?

A non-player character like in a video game.

All right, what else we got here?

Um, wind friends.

Has Carl the flies family sought revenge?

Well, I don't know.

I believe they're building tunnels under my house.

Does the universe owe you?

Yes, it does.

Would tariffs decrease demand?

So, no inflation.

That would be one of many effects.

Yes.

If it decreased demand, it would decrease inflation.

That is correct.

But there are lots of other, you know, gives and takes.

There's not the only thing happening.

All right.

Uh, you're the luckiest guy ever, so the universe doesn't owe you.

Well, that's okay, too.

Being the luckiest guy ever.

What is the best form of Sergio asks, "What's the best form of exercise?" Okay, you're just joking with me.

We we have a running joke that the best form of exercise is swimming because it's so obvious.

Trump's greatest accomplishment.

What is Trump's greatest accomplishment?

Well, good question.

The reason that's such a hard question, what what are Trump's greatest accomplishments is he's not done yet.

So if the only thing you took was whatever comes out of Maha and then you said well Maja wouldn't happen without MEGA then you would you know assign some of those benefits and it could be something as important as you know cutting chronic illness in half.

If if Trump's willingness to work with RFK Jr.

cut childhood chronic illness in half, what would be bigger than that?

That'd be hard to beat, but you don't know if it's going to happen.

So, with Trump, he's got a whole bunch of things brewing that if they happen, such as peace in the Middle East, uh they'd be the biggest things ever.

You know, the the Abraham Accords growing to extra countries.

Don't know if it'll happen, but my god, if it did, what what level of accomplishment is that?

It's like he doesn't have words.

So, there are a whole bunch of things Trump has going on.

that you could very easily individually think that's the most amazing thing.

Hey, I got a package.

All right, what else you got going on?

Yeah, I'm I'm only doing a little extra because it's Sunday.

Some of you are doing your Sunday exercise and Sunday chores, and you said to yourself, "Oh, is he done early today?" Because I just wanted to finish my chores while he's still yaking.

So, I'm yakking a little bit while you finish up your chores or your exercise, whatever it is.

Uh, the hemp bill.

Yeah, I haven't really looked into it.

The the trouble is if I look into the hemp bill in detail, I don't feel like I'd still understand it.

It's that's very much you'd have to know legislation and you'd have to know the law and you'd have to know probably agg to even evaluate whether it was a good idea or a bad idea as a stance.

So I feel like I'd be a little out of my depth there.

Uh um same as soil and green.

Yeah.

Best simulation minted name.

Uh, government.

All right.

What is that with my name on it?

What health apps does Scott use on his Apple Watch?

Uh, none.

So, I have the Apple Where is it?

somewhere around here.

I have an Apple Watch that disappeared.

Um, so I I have looked at the health apps, so I know what they are, but honestly, they don't look that useful.

Uh, work ethic.

You know what?

I, you know, I love it.

I love it when people give me credit for a good work ethic because that that's what I would be most proud of is that uh it's just that that that would be the thing I have the most pride in before this it would have been working full-time and getting my MBA at the same time.

very proud of that because of the level of difficulty involved.

Um, and how much, you know, how much pain you're willing to put up with to get ahead.

To me, those are good markers of, you know, who you are and how it's going to go.

So, um, but to finish my point, um, what you see as my work ethic is because you're filtering my experience through your brain.

If you filtered it through my brain, it wouldn't look uh as impressive.

Does anybody know why?

In my brain, the working is um something I enjoy.

When I'm sitting here at 4 in the morning, and some of you are like, "Oh, I never want to get up at 4 in the morning." I'm drinking coffee.

I'm petting my cats.

Sometimes I'm having a great time at 4 in the morning, but it's work.

And then when I go live, I absolutely love the time that I'm talking live.

Like right now, like the the rest of my day could be pretty good.

Might be pretty good, but might probably won't be this good that I get to talk to what how many people?

Uh 300,000 five.

So maybe you know several thousand people at the same time.

and and I I can uh fool myself into thinking that this has some value to the world.

You know, I'm not just talking into the void, but rather I'm testing out some ideas and some reframes.

And if any of the ideas of the reframes are good, maybe they take on a life of their own.

So, it's always good to have something brewing in your life that does the following thing.

It gives you discipline, which is what my getting up every day does for me.

Gives me discipline.

Um, and a variety of other things.

I mean, discipline is just one of them.

So, uh, what you see is a insane work ethic.

And what I see is that I've I've managed to turn my job into my hobby into my passion.

So, if you've listened to uh Scott Galloway and some other people have said the same thing, you you don't want to start with passion and then work it into a job, you can do it.

Well, it's pretty hard.

But if you start at, you know, a really good job and then you can convert that into a passion, well, now you got something.

Now you got something.

So you're you're largely seeing me doing exactly what I want to do, but you're interpreting it as work because it might feel like work to you.

To me, it's not work.

For example, when I'm organizing my notes of like what I'm going to say in a certain topic, that's not work.

I I'm actually thinking how you'll receive it and I'm thinking how I'll say it.

And I'm thinking, "Oh, will this will this change how you look at it?" I just deeply enjoy that.

There's nothing about that that feels like work.

Every part of that feels like entertainment to me as much as using X.

You know, when I use X, I'm not thinking work.

I'm thinking, "Oh, this would be fun to say or somebody would like to hear this, or you know, this might be viral or something." But, uh, none of it feels like work.

and and the podcast is like like that.

It's kind of fun.

Anyway, I hope that was a decent answer because I get I might get a little bit too much credit for my work ethic.

It is.

I do have an impressive work ethic.

So, I'm going to say that that's true, but maybe not maybe not as good as you think it is.

It is pretty good, though.

When people tell you to take the day off to I know people tell me to take the day off, it's like do you not understand?

Day off doesn't help me.

Day on helps me, not day off.

How would you persuade an artificial super intelligence that humans are worth keeping around?

Why would I do that?

I'm going to persuade the super intelligence to keep me around as its boss.

The rest of you, well, you're going to have to find out your g have to work out your own scam.

Good luck with that.

Uh, bed early, drink coffee.

Notified you of a serious issue with your heart.

Interesting.

Interesting.

Ah, all right.

What did Michael Sally say?

MTG is falling off the deep end like Tucker Cana.

She lost any remaining credibility on the view.

Ah, we don't care what that person says.

All right, the Apple Watch.

Yeah, I need to write you some more comics today.

Most vantage person on the planet.

You might be.

All right.

You want an 807 sip?

I think you got one.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, this will conclude our show for the day.

Uh, I'm going to talk to the locals people privately just just for a minute.

The rest of you will Oh.

Huh.

Come on in.

Oh, a recruiter has contacted me. Alicia

wants to recruit me to work with

Accenture. Am I still open to work? No,

I'm not available to work for you. But

thanks for asking.

Let me make sure that we've got

everything we want working here.

Then we'll have some fun. Yep, we got a

good cat picture. We got a show. We're

live streaming. Oh my goodness. It's

such such a good day.

I hope you're having a great day.

You ready for this? All the lazy

podcasters are sleeping in and watching

me.

Good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of Human Civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adamson.

You've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to take a chance on elevating

your experience up to levels that nobody

can even understand with their tiny

shiny human brains.

All you need for that would be a

copper mug or a glass or tanker gels a

canteen jugger flask vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid. I

like coffee. And join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure. The dopamine hit

of the day thing makes everything

better. It's called the simultaneous sip

and it happens. That's right. Now,

extraordinary.

Oh, the lengths we go through for the

perfect sip, but it works every time.

So, uh, I'll give you an update.

Probably I'll I'll give the same update

a few times till everybody hears it. Um,

I'm no longer personally drawing the

Dilbra comic strip because both my hands

are blown out now. My right hand is a

focal donian. My left hand is semi

paralyzed with whatever cancer problem

I'm having at the moment. Maybe it gets

better. Probably not. I don't know.

We'll see. But as of yesterday,

uh, Dilbert is, uh, being drawn by, it's

it's still written by me, so it's 100%

100% written by me, but my art director,

um, will be doing all of the drawing

instead of just finishing the art. She

is capable of doing it all. And now she

is.

And yes, I did give her a raise. I know.

I know you're wondering.

[gasps]

All right. Turns out that uh according

to medicine, I guess that's some kind of

publication, uh coffee consumption

lowers your risk of rotator cuff injury.

H So if you're drinking coffee,

you have less chance of a rotator cuff

injury.

Now, is all of their medical advice just

for Jeffrey Tubin

or just this one?

All right, I'll just leave that there

for you. You you can complete the

complete the joke. What the What the Oh

my god, there there's something on my

desk.

What What is this? Oh my god. Oh, it's

the Dilbert calendar for 2026. The best

thing you could ever have on your desk.

That's right. It's available now. You

could go to Amazon and buy it right now.

It's got comics on the front. It's got

comics on the back. It's got comics on

the box.

How many more comics do you need,

people? That's right. Only on Amazon.

America. It's got to be the US version

of Amazon. Get it now. They are

approximately, and I swear I'm not

making this up, they're approximately

one-third sold out in November.

So, if you know anything about

calendars, if your calendar is one-third

sold out at the first half of November,

there will be some question whether

there'll be enough of them by mid

December. So, I would go fast if I were

you. Well, I love when Trump talks about

his windmills and about climate change

being a hoax. Do you remember how dumb

we thought uh no how dumb the Democrats

believed Trump was because he thought

that climate change was a hoax?

That one thing besides the the fine

people hoax, but that one thing

was really the most damaging thing

outside of the, you know, the other

hoaxes, I guess. Uh but now when he says

it, it almost doesn't make news. I mean,

he's the president, so they still report

it. But wouldn't that be a big deal if

some other president said that climate

change was a hoax,

but now [clears throat] he just says it

and people just go, "All right, next

question. I guess it's a hoax according

to you." All right. So, he Trump has

successfully, and I can't even imagine

he got to this point, but it's pretty

impressive. He's gotten to the point

where he beat down the public and he he

wore people out until he can simply say

it's a hoax. Maybe they push back a

little bit to, you know, get some

clarification.

But now that's our that's our reality.

Our reality is our president thinks it's

a hoax and he's got some evidence to

back his opinion.

And did you ever think we'd get to this

point? you know, because because I was

on the sort of on the hoax page the

whole time, although I don't think I

used that word early on. Uh, definitely

use it now.

Do you remember, I don't know how old

some of you are, but do you remember

when we used to use science to figure

out what was true and what wasn't true?

Is anybody old enough to remember that?

If if we didn't know if, you know, let's

say climate change was a problem or not

a problem, just to pick one example,

what we would do is we would rely on

science

because the one thing we knew for sure

is that if you're trying to figure out

what's real and what's not real, science

is really the only way to go. Am I

right?

And then somewhere

somewhere [snorts] during one of the

Trump terms, you can pick which one you

like, uh, science became so discredited

that the thought of using science to

figure out what's true

seems a little dumb now, doesn't it?

It doesn't just seem like sometimes it

doesn't work. [clears throat] Now, it

actually seems dumb because

if you were to just do the math of how

often science is is operating in the

pursuit of taking your money and

screwing you and giving somebody else

power, that's way more than the number

of times science tells you the truth,

isn't it? Am I wrong about that? Am I

subjective? Of course. My subjective

impression is that science is in 2025.

Science is usually used to mislead,

to market, to sell, to get elected, to

scare somebody. But how often is it used

to find out reality?

Now and then, but it's not really the

right tool, is it? It's not even the

right tool for figuring out reality.

Well, it should be, but the way we use

it, we abuse it. So,

um there's a clip of Eric Swallwell

uh demanding that Cash Patel

promised that he won't be investigating.

I guess there about 60 people in

Congress that Cash might want to

investigate. And he said, "Will," so uh

Swallwell says in this hearing, "will

you recuse yourself from investigating

the 60 individuals, including myself,

that you identified as government

gangsters?" And Cash Patel says, "No,

I I'm I'm starting to really like the

the Cash Patel fast answers.

Will you do this with these 60 people?"

No. Moving on.

Now, does it seem weird to you that all

of these people got caught with mortgage

fraud? Allegedly.

So, allegedly, Leticia James, Adam

Schiff, and now Eric Swall,

what are the odds they would all be

involved in in a similar kind of

mortgage fraud? Is there some kind of

class you take when you become a

Democrat? You're like, "Okay, I'm

registering as a Democrat. All right,

here's your here's your documentation

that'll teach you how to, you know,

cheat on your taxes,

maybe your insurance, but definitely on

your mortgages. Definitely on the

mortgages. So, Derek Swallwell,

he's uh doing great. He's my

representative, in case you wondered.

So, he's just doing great.

Um, so there's a uh allegedly a new

Epstein bombshell they're calling it. Is

are the Epstein bombshells ever

bombshells?

It doesn't feel like it, does it? I feel

like every day or two there's an Epstein

bombshell

that will tell us what we already knew.

All right, what's this one? Well,

apparently Glain Maxwell's lawyer is

accusing Representative Jamie Rascin,

who you know as one of the quote

designated liars. So, he's one of the

ones that I always say if they have a

really big lie to tell you and not a

normalsized one, they have a really big

one to tell, they bring out the

designated liars. Swallwell, Schiff,

apparently Leticia James and Raskin, but

apparently he was involved in some kind

of uh, you know, leaked emails. I talked

about this yesterday. And, uh,

the article I read about it says big

names are now officially in the

crosshairs.

Do you believe that? [laughter]

Do you believe we've finally got to the

point where the big names are in trouble

and any minute now they're going to be

named and handcuffed and taken off to

jail? None of that's going to happen. Is

it? I don't expect anything to happen. I

mean, that's what we're used to. We

We've been trained to expect nothing.

So, I expect nothing. I'd like to be

surprised.

As you know, the folks on the right, the

political right, the MAGA and Maha and

people like that, they've got a little

bit of a I don't know what to call it,

drama.

It's more like other people are creating

the drama. But I'm talking about Trump

and Marjorie Taylor Green and Thomas

Massie and Tucker Carlson, etc. And I

bring it up because Matt Gates had an

interesting post today. Matt Gates said,

"I love Trump, MTG, Massie Tucker, and

even uh and even those I feel are too

accommodating to the worst decisions

made by Israel's government." Now, this

is Matt Gates. Um he says, "I won't be

baited into attacking friends and

leaders in our movement because some

people disagree on some things. Not only

do I completely agree with Matt Gates on

his philosophy, which is you can't tell

me you can't tell me who to like,

[laughter]

you can't tell me who to talk to. You

can't tell me what to think when I talk

to them. That's not on the table. That

is just not on the table. You know, you

do you, I do me. But no, you don't tell

me who to like. [laughter]

That's that's not one of the options.

Um, and I'm going to add Matt Gates to

my list. So, I would have said the same

about MTG and Trump and Massie and

Tucker, but I'll throw Matt Gates on

there. You don't get to tell me if I can

talk with Matt Gates,

right? That's not up to you. That's just

up to me.

All right. Um,

so I was watching uh who I don't know

his first name, but one of the Kennedy

cousins, Schllothberg, is running for

some office. And part of his running for

office is he's throwing his is it his

cousin or his uncle, whatever RFK Jr. is

to him. Throwing RFK Jr. under the bus

for what Schlloberg I think would

consider some nonscientific opinions.

Non-scientific.

So I saw Libby Evans um was I think the

host for this or was she writing about

it for postmillennial? Anyway, this is

what Schlloberg said. Quote, uh, Trump

represents a threat unlike any other,"

unquote, and that that necessitates

quote new and creative ways of fighting

back. Oh, no. Is he another one of these

fighting back people? I don't have any

policies, but if I say the word fight

often enough, you might go away with the

impression that I'm a fighter. So, we're

going to fight fight fight fight.

Did anybody anybody change their opinion

based on how many times I use the word

fight? Not enough. Fight fight fight.

Now, anything? How many times do I have

to say fight before you change your

opinion of my opinion? Fight. Fight.

Fight. Fight. Fight. Fight. I think I

think that's enough. Yeah.

Anyway, um here's uh when asked if Trump

is a fascist, because of course you have

to ask that question.

Um Scholasper said that uh there are

historical analoges.

Historical analoges. In other words,

yeah, he's he's saying that Trump is a

fascist.

Now, similar to my earlier conversation

where I said that uh when Trump talks

about windmills and climate change being

a hoax, it sounded crazy when he first

said it, you know, a decade ago and now

it doesn't. Now it sounds

Yeah, it just sounds like that's an

opinion and probably a correct one in my

opinion. But

fascist

seems like it's also aged out. Does

anybody have that feeling yet? Well, it

used to be that if I saw a Democrat

calling Trump a fascist, I would say to

myself, "Oh, here's something I might

want to address. Maybe maybe I need to

point out all the ways in which he's not

a fascist. Maybe I need to dig into the

definition of a fascist. Make sure this

fits."

But now when I hear some new politician

call Trump a fascist, do you do you know

my first impression is? Oh, he's a

idiot. And that's it. I don't

think I need to defend Trump. I don't

think I need to introduce a new

definition. I don't think I need to, you

know, host a debate. I don't think I

need to send a post.

I just look at him and go, "Oh, you poor

bastard. You poor bastard. You're a

idiot.

Now, does anybody have that same feeling

where you've gone from I must argue

against this to why would you even argue

that? Who would even argue that? It's so

stupid. It's literally just stupid.

There there's no other thing to say

about it. What What's the second thing

you're going to say about it? Well,

stupid. No, that was the first thing you

said. What would be the second thing you

would say about it?

Stupid. How about stupid? There's

nothing else to say. It's just

stupid. All right, Schlloberg, good

luck.

Anyway, um now and this is just

mind-blowing. This is another story, but

Adam Schiff was on some event where he's

talking and this is Adam Schiff. If

you're following politics enough to know

who Adam Schiff even is,

this will blow your mind. I'm not making

this up. I I don't think it's AI, pretty

sure. Uh but this is a real thing that

happened recently. So Schiff said in

public, he said this, we have to get

past the quote ruinous idea of making

presidents unsuccessful because of

politics. What? And quote, "Stop viewing

each other as our enemy."

Wait a minute. That is Adam Schiff, the

guy who's trying to ruin a presidency.

What? And and the only way he can say

this in public

is because he's confident that people

don't know what he said 10 minutes ago

or yesterday or one minute ago or ever

or ever. The only way he can say that in

public is because he knows that nobody's

going to look it up. Nobody's going to

compare it to what he did. But of

course, you know, if you're watching X

and you have, if you follow any accounts

on the right, you know, there's going to

be a compilation clip of him doing

whatever it is he says you shouldn't do.

Now, I haven't seen it yet, but you

know, it's coming because the the right

is really good at that. Now, Western

Lensman, who is a really good account

for you to follow, had a number of good

stories today. So, I will just recommend

them. It's two words. Western lensman.

Just a good follow. Has has about many

as many uh followers as I have. So, it's

grown organically because it does a good

job. Whoever runs it.

Um Scott Galloway. You know Scott

Galloway? You've seen him. Famous

author, entrepreneur. Um I sometimes

refer to myself as the poor man's Scott

Galloway.

literally the poor man's cuz he's done

really well financially.

But he was on Bill Maher's show. He had

some uh alarming stats. 45% of men

from the ages of 18 to 24 have never

asked a woman out in person.

45% of men have never asked a woman out

in person. Maybe that's not as bad as it

sounds.

Is that as bad as it sounds? Because if

you're asking them out, not in person,

but they say yes, don't you end up in

the same place?

If you say, "Hey, read my text. You

know, let's go to the movies tonight."

It's kind of the same. Now, I get that

someone who learns how to approach

somebody is going to be better off in

life than someone who's afraid of

approaching someone. I get that. But is

it that much of a difference? To me, it

just seems like younger people have you

different tools. So, the tools they use

are online because that's the tools they

have. I don't know how how big a problem

that is, but it certainly we're losing

the ability to approach people and that

might have a well even that might make

no difference in the long run because

the whole process of selling is going to

fall to AI, won't it?

So, if your AI is doing all the selling

for, let's say, non-dating reasons, do

you even need to learn that skill? It

might be a useless skill. It's so

unpredictable. What's going to happen in

two to five years? So unpredictable. And

also, Scott Galloway says 63% of men

under the age of 30 are not even

pursuing a relationship.

Wait, what? Nearly twothirds of men

under the age of 30 are not even trying.

Not even trying. Well, here I would add

some context again.

In my day, you know, when I was a

youngster, um, everybody sort of assumed

that their their path would involve, you

know, some romantic family kind of a

thing. Um, so we were all kind of uh

oriented toward making that happen. But

suppose it's 2025

and all you need to do is have access or

contact with a lot of people and sooner

or later you'll like one, they'll like

you back, you'll be in good shape. So

when you say pursuing a relationship,

my old guy question is this. If there's

anybody young enough to answer the

question, do young people pursue or do

they just exist? This is a serious

question, by the way. I don't know the

answer. Do young people pursue

relationships as much as they used to.

Or do they just say, "No, I'm I'm going

to do this thing. I'll probably be some

people. Some of the people I meet might

turn into something." But is that

pursuing a relationship if you're just

putting yourself in a situation?

I don't know. I feel like just the way

we do things is different. So comparing

it to the old days might not be as valid

as it used to be.

Um I would point however that my books

will solve most of these problems.

Uh those of you who have read my books

in the comments uh can you confirm for

me so that the other people can see it

confirm for me that if you had read my

books uh reframe your brain

or win bigly or how to win at almost

everything and still how to fail almost

everything and still win big. If you had

if you had read any of those three books

would you not be socially more adept and

more successful? You would. Yeah,

they're written for that purpose.

They're designed to they're actually

designed to fill the gap that Scott

Galloway is talking about, which is you

can fill any gap. Not a specific gap,

but any gap. You can learn how to learn

how to talk to somebody, learn how to

get past embarrassment,

learn how to enter a room and own it.

Those are pretty valuable skills. So, if

you think there's no way to learn it

because there's something about the

world that changed, not really. you

there just three books you can read uh

reframe your brain win bigly and uh how

to fill almost everything and still win

big they will fix you all right so this

leads me to my most fun story of the day

uh how many of you know who billionaire

venture capitalist Bill Aman is that

name ring the bell so I wouldn't I

wouldn't call him a conservative or

Republican but he certainly went from

deep democrat to h maybe I should

rethink this whole thing. I

[clears throat] I think I'd call him an

independent, but I don't want to, you

know, I don't want to be the one who

labels him. So, apparently he had uh he

had a suggestion for how to meet a young

woman, and this is based on his dating

experience. All right. Now, here's what

you need to know about Bill Aman.

If Grock is not lying to me, he's 6'3.

He has perfect hair

and he has almost modellike male good

looks.

Went to Harvard,

is a billionaire.

And he's going to teach you [laughter]

he's he's

going [clears throat] to teach you how

to pick up women. [laughter]

And here's

here's [clears throat] what he teaches

you because he thinks it's about the

line that you use. So, not entirely

that, you know, it's also the having the

guts to go up up to somebody. That would

be at least half of it. But he says, use

this question. He says, I would ask

quote, "May I meet you before engaging

further? I almost never got a no."

All right, let's get back to the real

world.

Uh how how many of you live in the real

world? Anybody? Most of you. Oh, most of

most of you live in the actual reality.

In your experience, how many handsome 6

foot three billionaires with perfect

hair [laughter]

get turned down when they introduce

themselves in a public place? Has that

ever happened in the in the history of

in the history of male and female

interaction? Has that ever happened?

[laughter]

So, [clears throat] I don't know if Bill

Aman is not aware of his own, you know,

his own situation because sometimes

we're not aware of ourselves, right?

Yeah. It's easier to see somebody else

than it is to see yourself. But that's

kind of funny. Now, I would go further

and say that may I meet you might be one

of the worst pickup lines I've ever

heard. And indeed, the reason I saw it

at all is that there was some young man

who had read this advice and he

[laughter]

he tried [clears throat] it out at a

bar. Now, he didn't tell us what he

looks like, but I'm just going to guess.

Probably not 6'3 with perfect hair and a

billion dollars and handsome. Probably

not. Probably not. Anyway, he not only

got turned down when he used that line,

he got mocked mercilessly and the and

the women that were with the one he

targeted for his approach, uh, they all

just like laughed until they cried at

him while standing right in front of

him.

Now,

[laughter]

you see the problem? All right, let me

tell you what's wrong with this line.

May I meet you will work for every 6'3

billionaire with good hair. It'll work

for all of them. Why? Because the woman

doesn't care what you say. He if you

have all that other stuff working for

you and you know plus he's an interested

guy. I mean he has the whole package,

right? So so it shouldn't be any

surprise that no matter what he says it

works. But here's what's wrong with what

he says.

He's asking for permission.

[snorts]

How many of you ladies got the ick when

you heard that he asked for permission

to meet you? It's not permission to go

to your house. It's not permission to, I

don't know, hug you. It's not permission

to rifle through your purse.

It's permission to simply say who you

are and ask who the other person is.

That is so ick. Am I wrong? Ladies, back

me up.

Back me up. Now, but so while I say it's

ick and weak,

um wouldn't it be a lot stronger to just

say, "Hi, I'm Bill Aman."

How would that not work?

Hi, my name's Bill. That would work

every time.

[clears throat] That would work a 100%

of the time. Anyway, so my advice is

just go introduce yourself if you're

that handsome. It'll all work out.

All right. Uh,

may I meet you? Uh,

robot surgeons. We talked about that. We

don't need to talk about robot surgeons

anymore.

Uh, Duruitz is fun to check in with

every now and then when there's a a

legal story. And this uh Epstein thing

just never goes away. And Durowitz uh

was Epstein's lawyer at one point in the

saga. And Epstein points out

uh that one of the reasons potentially

doesn't know for sure because he doesn't

read minds.

But one of the reasons that Trump might

not want the Epstein files released is

how easily they're misinterpreted.

And of course, we've all said that,

right? That's exactly what I've said.

You know, maybe it's because he doesn't

want them misinterpreted.

But what Epstein I'm sorry, what

Duruititz adds that I was less capable

of doing is some examples. If you had

some specific examples where you know

that a true thing got misinterpreted as

a false thing, well, that would be a

pretty strong argument for not releasing

the files. And apparently there are two

examples. Uh, one of them is, uh, that

the at least the news, the mainstream

news and the pundits, they refer to

Epstein as a convict convicted, quote, a

convicted,

um, P word. I'm not even going to use

the word. You know what I'm talking

about. But, uh, Duritz points out he's

never been convicted of that. There's no

conviction on that charge.

So, was he convicted of something bad?

Yes. But was it that? It was not. Now,

I'm not going to make the mistake

that some people made to act like one of

these crimes is the one that's not as

bad as the other one. Cuz as soon as you

do that, all the stupid trolls go, "Oh,

wow. Wow. Oh, you're saying that this

one's okay? You're you're excusing these

crimes?" No, I'm not. No, no, I'm not.

You You can have that conversation. I'm

not even in the conversation.

I I refuse to even use the words like in

the same paragraph. I'm so out of that

conversation. And the reason is because

I don't want to be misinterpreted.

Do you remember when Megan Kelly uh said

something about the specifics of the

charges? And I'm not going to repeat it

because I can't even repeat

what Megan Kelly said, which I believe

was technically legally accurate because

I would get misinterpreted too. just

like she did. So, you just can't you

can't really get near the topic without

being misinterpreted because everybody's

waiting to bounce. Um, and then there's

also the other example of the V Virginia

Guffrey. She's the one who tragically

passed away recently and apparently she

had said she'd never met Trump and yet

the rumors are that she spent hours with

him. Now, how do you do a story about a

woman who said she never met him and not

mention that? Right now, here I think

Dersuitz is assuming that the truth is

that he never met her because I think

Dersuitz makes the same claim that he

didn't I don't know if he said he didn't

meet her, but but Dersuit says, you

know, nothing happened, but he had been

accused as well. So, we have several

examples of people who were accused of

things in that domain.

But as far as we know, no proof that

they did anything. So would that be

enough of a reason, if you're Trump,

would that be enough of a reason to keep

those files from being released?

That's a tough one because I think most

of you would say, "I don't care about

your stupid argument, Scott.

In this particular situation, you just

have to release everything." Well, what

about this? Nope. release everything.

But what about the No, you just have to

release everything. And maybe that's the

only way we get past it. But I will tell

you, if we release everything, there's

something like a 100% chance it will

destroy lives

uh of men uh who may not have done the

worst thing that they're accused of

doing. You know, you could argue why

were you even involved? You know, why

did you even know these people? Separate

argument. But uh yeah, no secrets, lol.

Anyway, just so you know, there is a

strong argument for not releasing them,

even if there's nothing critical of

Trump in them.

There's a new book by uh author Barry

Leavine about Epstein. He was talking to

Smerish today on CNN. I like Smerish.

Um, and he was talking about uh what was

it that Epstein meant in a 2011 email

that we now have access to? And in that

email,

I guess Epstein said, "The dog that

hasn't barked is Trump." Now, how in the

world are we supposed to know what that

means? The dog that hasn't barked is

Trump. Really? [laughter]

How many different things could that

mean? Like if you made a list of what it

might mean, how long would the list be?

Pretty long, right?

Pretty long. Pretty long. Anyway, um so

the author Barry Lavine says he suspects

that Epstein was saying he was 75% there

in believing that Trump might have been

the whistleblower. So his assumption is

that it was something about Trump being

the one who blew the whistle so to speak

on uh on Epstein's bad behavior. So

uh we don't have confirmation of that.

But so so this would suggest that

Epstein and Trump really were not, at

least at the time of these emails, were

more like mortal enemies than friends,

wouldn't you say? because you'd have to

be sort of a mortal enemy

or or just a criminal, I guess. You

know, if you just assumed Trump wanted

to stay on the right side of the law uh

and he cared about the uh the victims,

then you would say he was just doing

what a what an adult should do in that

situation.

I don't know. We'll never know. And then

there's the story about I guess Epstein

was stealing some some of the women that

were working at the Mara Lago spa. He

was trying to I don't know if he was

what would you call it? Uh grooming

them. And then there was a story about

uh they were both fighting over the same

piece of real estate

uh near Mara Lago. So now we've got the

was he the whistleblower?

Maybe yes, maybe no. Um and we've got

the he was stealing staff. That would

have been bad. And then we have the real

estate thing which might have been the

worst of all the things in terms of how

angry they were at each other because

there would be bigger money involved.

So are we getting closer to understand

what happened? It doesn't feel like it,

does it?

[clears throat] If you looked at what

you knew, I don't know, a year ago or

something and then compare it to what

you know now with all these revelations,

has anything changed? Is there anything

about your opinion of this whole

situation that's now different?

H I don't know. Like I feel like maybe a

few few blanks got filled in but not

really important ones.

I don't know. We'll never know. Um

meanwhile here here's one of these

evergreen stories that just will never

go away. Uh, apparently the British

government is being accused of

withholding data that might link COVID

jabs to excess deaths and that allegedly

the reason that the government would do

that is it would lead it would lead to

distress or danger or anger. Distress or

anger. The te the telegraph is reporting

on this. Uh,

what do you think? Disclosed TV is also

writing about this on axe

now. Is that new?

Would you consider that news?

Or were you already for so long, many

months or years, already on the page of,

oh yeah, you know, there's some data

that shows maybe it was more bad than

good. The the trouble is, as I often

say, there's no data you can trust on

the pandemic.

Let me say that again. There's no data

you can trust. There's lots of data, but

there's no there's no data you can trust

on the pandemic. You can't trust that it

was safe. Can't trust it was unsafe.

Can't trust it was safe for some people.

Can't trust that it was unsafe for some

people. There's actually nothing you can

trust when it comes to the data about

the pandemic. So, I see a story like

that and I go, "Well, yeah, there'll be

50 more of those. I don't know what's

true." Meanwhile, as you know, Trump is

suing the BBC for maybe up to a billion

dollars for for editing one of his

interviews. And uh I saw I think it was

on I think it was on Fox the list of the

people he successfully sued so far. So

YouTube he got 26 million. Trump did.

Meta$25 million. Um I don't know when he

sued X but he got 10 million. That had

to be

was that before Elon took over? I don't

remember that actually. CBS you got for

16 million and Disney 69. Is that real?

Did you really get a 69 million from

Disney? [laughter] 69.

Oh my goodness. Uh,

and you know, I have mixed feelings

about this. Mixed feelings. On one hand,

I don't really want my government suing

my media.

You know what I mean? That's that's sort

of a little bit icky. Uh you don't want

that. On the other hand, don't you want

to live in a world where the media is

afraid of going after somebody unless

they really have the goods? They can't

just make up. Wouldn't you like to

live in a world where they can't just

make up? Because that's the current

world. They just make up. So, I do

think that this is a valuable

uh push back.

You know, if you want if you could live

in a perfect world, nobody would sue

anybody for anything because nobody

would tell a lie. But if they're gonna

lie, I would rather live in a world

where there's a consequence to that so

that they don't come after me with their

lie. So I do feel that Trump is in a

way, well, not even in a way, in a very

direct sense, he's protecting uh his

base. Now, is that the only reason he's

doing it? I doubt it. I mean, like

everything else, there's always five

reasons for doing anything. One of those

reasons is free money. Maybe he's just

doing it because he gets some money.

That's okay. Our system allows that. You

It might not be the only reason. I'd

like to think that it's part of him

creating some kind of a push back

structure that would benefit him, but it

will also benefit the rest of us.

Because if BBC went after me, well,

well, I'll give you this example. If the

BBC

um somehow falsely edited an interview

with me,

would I be able to use this story, the

fact that Trump sued them? And I I'm

going to project forward that they

settle.

Would that help me? Would I be better

off if Trump had successfully sued them

for doing the same crime, editing

something without permission?

probably it would help. So, so I think

that's good. Well, down in Mexico,

apparently the Gen Z part of the

population has been surrounded and

trying to occupy their government

building there. Uh they are not too

happy with their current government,

Shine Ball, President Shine Ball. And uh

so they've created a multi-day protest

in Mexico City. And uh as you know, I

don't have to explain this to you, the

the way that you conquer a major country

such as Mexico is you get some people

and you sort of wander around in one of

the buildings.

What? Two of the buildings? No, no, no.

You don't need to do it in two

buildings. What are you crazy? Like why

would you even do that? No, you can

conquer the whole country by simply

wandering around in one government

building.

Again, not two. You don't need two

buildings. That would be crazy. Just

one. You need one building. Wandering

around, boom, the whole country falls,

right? That's what the Democrats taught

me. They taught me that that's an

insurrection. I think that's the word

they use. An insurrection.

And it's just you can do it just by

wandering around. Now, this has nothing

to do with the many many color

revolutions that our own intelligence

people have uh forced upon other

countries such as Mexico. Um so even

though it looks in every way

like America is behind it,

why would you think that?

Just because it looks exactly like it.

Yeah, it looks exactly like it. maybe

we're behind it. So, that's happening.

Um,

and um, some some say that the point of

the protests is not just general

unhappiness with the government, but a

specific unhappiness that the government

is actually run by the cartels.

Do you think that's something that the

locals can fix?

Well, they could if they got rid of the

government, which I believe you do by

wandering around in an empty building on

the weekend. Well, they're trying.

Um, and a lot of people think the

president is in league with the cartels,

so that's that's really the main part of

it. They don't want to be run and owned

by the cartels.

According to uh

uh Wall Street Apes, big account on X

that you should follow, Wall Street

Apes, there's a senator from Mexico who

was recently on Fox News and uh talking

about how Mexico is basically a cartel

narco country. Um so the claim was that

the president of Mexico basically just

works for the cartels. That's the claim.

Uh was funded by the cartels. uh is not

just the president of the country. Uh

oh, it's not just the president, but

there's an entire group of Mexican

politicians

that are collectly referred to as their

narco politicians and that Mexico is a

narco state. And that if you imagine

it's anything but that, nothing makes

sense. But if you imagine it's a narco

state and that the cartels are in charge

and they just put a a front person up

that happens to be uh a very pleasant

woman

that uh that's probably uh it's a cartel

situation.

All right. Um

and then the Mexican president um has

apparently asked for some military

intervention. Right.

So, we'll we'll see. The part we don't

know, and maybe we'll never know, is

what does Trump know about the president

of Mexico? What does the president of

Mexico know about what Trump knows about

her?

Is it a salvageable situation where

somehow you can remove the cartel

influence and keep the person? That

doesn't seem like it would work.

So, is Trump trying to get rid of the

president, a color revolution, that's

what you'd call that, or is he trying

to, you know, nurse the situation

forward and, you know, find any kind of

advantage that might move us forward?

I don't know exactly what we're trying

to do or even what's possible down

there. Anyway, we'll see.

Um,

down where I live, California, the one

county over, Santa Clara, they just had

a special election and they raised their

own taxes to 9.75%.

That that's a

um that's only sales tax, right? Yeah,

that's sales tax.

How how would you like a sales tax of

9.75

on top of estate tax? What is the

California state tax right now? The

highest? Is it

12 11 12? What's the highest California

state tax? Put it in the comments. And

then the federal would be something like

37

37 4757.

2/3

of what I earn goes directly to Gavin

Newsome for his hair gel.

So how happy am I about that? Well,

right after we're done here, I'm going

to have to get a second job to try to

pay for all that hair gel.

Do you remember when uh Trump first

talked about tariffs?

Uh that uh even smart people couldn't

decide if they were a good idea or a bad

idea. Do you remember that?

And I I think I alone I only remember me

probably other people did the same

thing, but I remember saying we're not

going to ever know if this worked.

That's just not how anything works. The

the way economics works is you usually

don't even know if the thing worked. You

just you might know the outcome, but you

don't know is it because of that or

what's going to happen anyway. So here's

the most surprising study. John Carney

and Breitbart News is writing about

this.

Someone did a big analysis. they call a

sweeping new analysis to find out if the

in the history of tariffs, you know, the

150 year history of tariffs in the

United States, if they have created

um have they created inflation or

decreased it? What would you say? Before

I tell you the answer

historically, have tariffs increased

inflation

or decreased it? Now, that's an easy

question, right? Simple question. If if

you raise the cost of something, which

is what a tariff does. It raises the

cost of something. How does it not

create inflation?

Right? There's only one only one way it

can go. If you do a thing that

absolutely by its design increases the

cost of everybody involved, which is

what a tariff does. Uh not everybody,

just depends who decides to absorb it.

But

how could it be anything except

inflationary?

I thought the question was how badly it

would be inflationary.

Didn't you? Maybe you didn't think of it

that way. I never thought in terms of is

it inflationary or not? I always

thought, well, it might not be that

inflationary and if we get other

benefits, the benefits might outweigh

the, you know, inflationary part. But it

turns out according to John Carney

Brebar News that uh this there was a big

study that showed actually it reduces it

reduces inflation

if you look at the whole 150 years. So

he's not looking at just what Trump did.

They're looking at the history of of

that. Do you believe that?

and that the entire time uh allegedly

even the smartest economists and

smartest analysts were getting this

wrong and that there's actually a

there's a reason. So, it's not random.

There's actually a reason why it reduces

inflation. I'm not sure I understood the

reason honestly. Um but I I'll tell you

what the article says. So this is on

John John Carney. If he if he doesn't

explain it well enough for you to

understand, then that's on you and John,

not on me at all. [laughter]

But uh John is writing that the

researchers approach was ingenious.

Rather than trying to parse recent

decades of limited tariff variation,

uh they exploited massive swings in

tariff policy across centuries using

these shifts as a natural experiment to

understand cause and effect.

Are you sold?

Did that sell you?

Well, [laughter]

[clears throat]

I'm going to say it didn't really sell

me on that, but I kind of sort of almost

a little bit understand the point of it

that if you look at the big picture, you

get a different answer than if you look

at any micro part of the picture. That

part makes sense, but no. Yeah, I'm

seeing in the comments, you're not

buying it at all, are you? I'm not

buying this at all. All right, I think

I'm with you. I I'm not buying the

expert opinion here. Uh I do still think

that the open question is how much it

changes anything.

If the how much it changes anything

isn't that much, then that's all you

need.

Anyway, um you know, I keep telling you

Ukraine is becoming a robot only war.

Here's some more evidence of that.

Um,

so there's an article I just read uh

somewhere that said the ubiquity of

precision weapons. I wish I knew who

said this. I'm just stealing their good

work right now. I apologize. But uh

there are so many precision weapons that

if you were to look at the uh if you

look at the front line from the the sky,

you wouldn't see much of any

concentration of forces

because as soon as you put anything out

there that has size, you know, like a

tank or any kind of a vehicle, it just

blows up. The the other side has such

good drones now that 100% of everything

you put in the war zone blows up. Like

all of it. So if you were to look at the

war zone, it would be kind of empty.

Just think about that. That

any other war zone in the history of

war, let's say World War I or uh if you

could fly over it and look down at what

was happening, you would see that both

sides are really concentrated like a

whole bunch of people in a in a trench

and then beyond that there are a whole

bunch of other people and beyond that a

whole bunch of other people. But it' be

a lot of people.

There's not a lot of people now on the

front lines is it's mostly and it's not

even not a lot of people. It's also not

assets because a 100% of the assets blow

up too. So you can't put a person there

and you can't put an asset there. It all

just blows up. So it's this weird like

empty zone.

And um I would remind you that was my

prediction from a long time ago.

That's where it's all going, people.

Now, I believe there was a reframe that

I was going to give you that I skipped

right over, but it's exactly the time to

give you this reframe from my book,

Reframe Your Brain, the best book ever

written,

according to everybody. Everybody says

it.

Everybody. All right, here's one of my

favorites.

Um, did you ever and you'll notice that

some of these reframes hit the same

point but from a different direction.

Um, there's one giant sacrifice more.

All right. So, this might sound

familiar, but I haven't taken it from

this approach point from this. I haven't

taken it from the ladies tea before.

Now, I'm just making that up. All right.

Have you ever been in a situation where

you thought to yourself, "No one wants

to talk to you because you're boring."

Has anybody ever had that thought? Uh, I

don't think anybody even wants to talk

to me. I really don't have anything to

say. Nothing to add to the conversation.

Well,

let me reframe that. Instead of thinking

that maybe nobody wants to talk to you

because you're boring, you should

understand that what makes anybody want

to talk to anybody

is that they show interest in the person

talking. The moment you think that a

conversation is about a real highquality

exchange of ideas, then you don't know

what a conversation is.

Sometimes some highquality ideas get

exchanged, but that's not what they're

for. That that's not what the

conversation's for. It's about how you

make each other feel.

That's that's your goal. Your goal is to

make the other person feel good. And the

way you do that, and it works every

time, is to show genuine interest in

whatever they got going on. People love

it when you show interest in them. Do

you know why they love it when you show

interest in them?

It's how I started. And I said, "No one

wants to talk to me because I'm boring."

You're not the one person thinking that.

Everybody at the party's thinking that.

They're all thinking that maybe I'm a

little boring or maybe I already said

that or but you can all solve your

problem the same way just by asking more

questions about the other person and

acting interested. Now, ideally, you're

not acting right. You should be able to

find a way to be interested in

somebody's life. you know, you might

have to you might have to guide them

into some subtopic that's better for

both of you, but no, you can uh always

find a way to be mutually interested.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, brings

us to the top of the hour. You know what

I haven't done in a long time is take

questions.

Um, I thought this would be an awesome

time to do that. I'll just do one or two

and probably more from locals.

Uh just because they're I have the

locals stuff highlighted so it's easier

to see. All right. Anybody have any

questions over at Locals? You guys have

all asked me all your questions for

years.

Uh factories suppressed.

Well, we don't really know, but surely

there there are suppressed factories in

Ukraine.

Uh, yep. The Dale Carnegie course is how

to make people like you. Exactly.

So, take the Dale Carnegie course.

Uh,

so are US factories have been suppressed

by the foreign ownership? Maybe.

How do you talk to woke libs?

I don't. [laughter] I try to just avoid

it.

Uh, what's the definition of an NPC? A

non-player character

like in a video game.

All right, what else we got here?

Um,

wind friends.

Has Carl the flies family sought

revenge? Well, I don't know. I believe

they're building tunnels under my house.

Does the universe owe you? Yes, it does.

Would tariffs decrease demand? So, no

inflation.

That would be one of many effects. Yes.

If it decreased demand, it would

decrease inflation. That is correct. But

there are lots of other, you know, gives

and takes. There's not the only thing

happening.

All right.

Uh,

you're the luckiest guy ever, so the

universe doesn't owe you. Well, that's

okay, too.

Being the luckiest guy ever.

What is the best form of

Sergio asks,

"What's the best form of exercise?"

Okay, you're just joking with me. We we

have a running joke that the best form

of exercise is swimming because it's so

obvious.

Trump's greatest accomplishment.

What is Trump's greatest accomplishment?

Well,

good question. The reason that's such a

hard question, what what are Trump's

greatest accomplishments is he's not

done yet. So if the only thing you took

was whatever comes out of Maha and then

you said well Maja wouldn't happen

without MEGA then you would you know

assign some of those benefits and it

could be something as important as you

know cutting chronic illness in half. If

if Trump's

willingness to work with RFK Jr. cut

childhood chronic illness in half,

what would be bigger than that?

That'd be hard to beat, but you don't

know if it's going to happen. So, with

Trump, he's got a whole bunch of things

brewing that if they happen, such as

peace in the Middle East, uh they'd be

the biggest things ever. You know, the

the Abraham Accords growing to extra

countries. Don't know if it'll happen,

but my god, if it did,

what what level of accomplishment is

that? It's like he doesn't have words.

So, there are a whole bunch of things

Trump has going on.

that you could very easily individually

think that's the most amazing thing.

Hey, I got a package.

All right, what else you got going on?

Yeah, I'm I'm only doing a little extra

because it's Sunday. Some of you are

doing your Sunday exercise and Sunday

chores, and you said to yourself, "Oh,

is he done early today?" Because I just

wanted to finish my chores while he's

still yaking. So, I'm yakking a little

bit while you finish up your chores or

your exercise, whatever it is.

Uh, the hemp bill.

Yeah, I haven't really looked into it.

The the trouble is if I look into the

hemp bill in detail, I don't feel like

I'd still understand it. It's that's

very much you'd have to know legislation

and you'd have to know the law and you'd

have to know probably agg to even

evaluate whether it was a good idea or a

bad idea as a stance. So I feel like I'd

be a little out of my depth there.

Uh

um same as soil and green. Yeah.

Best simulation minted name.

Uh,

government.

All right. What is that with my name on

it?

What health apps does Scott use on his

Apple Watch? Uh, none. [laughter]

So, I have the Apple Where is it?

somewhere around here. I have an Apple

Watch

that disappeared.

Um,

so I I have looked at the health apps,

so I know what they are, but honestly,

they don't look that useful.

Uh,

work ethic. You know what? I, you know,

I love it.

I love it when people give me credit for

a good work ethic because that that's

what I would be most proud of is that uh

it's just that that that would be the

thing I have the most pride in before

this it would have been working

full-time and getting my MBA at the same

time. very proud of that because of the

level of difficulty involved. Um, and

how much, you know, how much pain you're

willing to put up with to get ahead. To

me, those are good markers of, you know,

who you are and how it's going to go.

So,

um, but to finish my point, um, what you

see as my work ethic is because you're

filtering my experience through your

brain. If you filtered it through my

brain, it wouldn't look uh as

impressive.

Does anybody know why? In my brain, the

working is um something I enjoy. When

I'm sitting here at 4 in the morning,

and some of you are like, "Oh, I never

want to get up at 4 in the morning." I'm

drinking coffee. I'm petting my cats.

Sometimes I'm having a great time at 4

in the morning, but it's work. And then

when I go live, I absolutely love the

time that I'm talking live. Like right

now, like the the rest of my day could

be pretty good. Might be pretty good,

but might probably won't be this good

that I get to talk to

what how many people?

Uh 300,000

five. So maybe

you know several thousand people at the

same time. and and I I can uh fool

myself into thinking that this has some

value to the world. You know, I'm not

just talking into the void, but rather

I'm testing out some ideas and some

reframes. And if any of the ideas of the

reframes are good,

maybe they take on a life of their own.

So, it's always good to have something

brewing in your life that does the

following thing. It gives you

discipline,

which is what my getting up every day

does for me. Gives me discipline.

Um,

and a variety of other things. I mean,

discipline is just one of them. So, uh,

what you see is a insane work ethic. And

what I see is that I've I've managed to

turn my job into my hobby into my

passion. [laughter]

So, if you've listened to uh Scott

Galloway and some other people have said

the same thing, you you don't want to

start with passion and then work it into

a job, you can do it. Well, it's pretty

hard. But if you start at, you know, a

really good job and then you can convert

that into a passion, well, now you got

something.

Now you got something. So you're you're

largely seeing me doing exactly what I

want to do, but you're interpreting it

as work because it might feel like work

to you. To me, it's not work. For

example,

when I'm organizing my notes of like

what I'm going to say in a certain

topic, that's not work.

I I'm actually thinking how you'll

receive it and I'm thinking how I'll say

it. And I'm thinking, "Oh, will this

will this change how you look at it?" I

just deeply enjoy that. There's nothing

about that that feels like work. Every

part of that feels like entertainment to

me as much as using X. You know, when I

use X, I'm not thinking work. I'm

thinking, "Oh, this would be fun to say

or somebody would like to hear this, or

you know, this might be viral or

something." But, uh, none of it feels

like work. and and the podcast is like

like that.

It's kind of fun.

Anyway, I hope that was a decent answer

because I get I might get a little bit

too much credit for my work ethic. It

is. I do have an impressive work ethic.

So, I'm going to say that that's true,

but maybe not

maybe not as good as you think it is.

[laughter]

It is pretty good, though.

When people tell you to take the day off

to I know people tell me to take the day

off, it's like do you not understand?

Day off doesn't help me. Day on helps

me, not day off.

How would you persuade an artificial

super intelligence that humans are worth

keeping around? Why would I do that? I'm

going to persuade the super intelligence

to keep me around

as its boss.

The rest of you, well, you're going to

have to find out your g have to work out

your own scam. [laughter]

Good luck with that.

Uh,

bed early, drink coffee.

Notified you of a serious issue with

your heart. Interesting.

Interesting.

Ah,

all right. What did Michael Sally say?

MTG is falling off the deep end like

Tucker Cana. She lost any remaining

credibility on the view. Ah, we don't

care what that person says.

All right, the Apple Watch. Yeah,

I need to write you some more comics

today.

Most vantage person on the planet. You

might be.

All right. You want an 807 sip? I think

you got one. All right, ladies and

gentlemen, this will conclude our show

for the day. Uh, I'm going to talk to

the locals people privately just just

for a minute. The rest of you

will Oh. Huh.