Episode 648 Scott Adams - Gun Crimes, #FentanylChina

bubble bowl hey everybody come on in here what fun it's another episode of coffee with Scott Adams and that features coffee and Scott Adams now you're not either one of those things you're not coffee and you're not Scott Adams but you can join long doesn't take much to participate all you need is a couple of your glasses time to tell us attacker mr.

plastic canteen a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee enjoyed me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes everything better the silently - you said go boom ha ha good stuff so the president tweeted and I'm paraphrasing to Iran but after their missile launch failed and their rocket blew up on the on the launch pad the president tweeted that the United States had nothing to do with it and he hopes they figure out what went wrong now I have to admit even I am not sure what's going on with that except that I like it the US had nothing to do with it and hope you figure it out now I'll tell you what that leaves as a possibility that Israel had something to do with it but I thought it was interesting that the president said out loud that we had nothing to do with it because I thought to myself would it be better if they thought maybe we did or at least if they you know at least they thought it was a possibility wouldn't that be better for us but I suspect that they still have to look because they don't believe him so even though he says the United States had nothing to do with it they're not going to believe it so they're still going to look for any sign that we did it's here's what this felt like and then maybe over interpreting this do you remember the big breakthrough with Kim jong-un was when the president went funny so when he tweeted at him purely you know joking insults and that got Kim jong-un to kind of deal with the president on a human level where they joked at each other they insulted each other and they said I let's you crazy guy you big old Orange crazy guy let's just get together and it looks like the president's trying to play that same play I can't imagine it working in Iran because it's a different personality but he's basically tweeted something playful you know in a sense I mean it's it's provocative and it's challenging but when he says the US had nothing to do with it we hope you figure it out of course you're gonna read that and say he's kind of just joking and jabbing them at the same time it looks a lot like when he was calling Kim jong-un little Rocket Man it feels like it feels like he's trying to humanize something that is otherwise you know statecraft and and political and and all those things that have not produced anything like a solution so yeah it's it's it's a little mocking that's a little sarcastic perhaps and you know if it had been anybody but Iran it probably would have gotten more of a more of a response in kind so if he can get around to match him so he's you know he's he's putting something out there and essentially seeing if they'll match it and what they would match is his tone and his tone is sort of you know that it's a game and we're playing long and this is not the end of the world and you know let let's put it in perspective sort of thing might be useful we'll say it's worth putting it out there just just to find out what happens do you remember how much trouble well let's say how many what would be the best word not trouble I guess it was trouble how much trouble the president caused when early in his administration he said or was it before he got elected that he said he wanted to put a ban on Muslim immigration but there's a second part of that a ban on Muslim immigration what he meant was from certain countries that came out later well maybe he didn't mean that maybe he just meant we're gonna put a ban on Muslim immigration until and it was the second part that was the important part until we figure out what's going on here and everybody said racist racist because they always leave the second part out until we figure out what's going on and I remember thinking to myself you know there's one situation where bigotry is allowed if not encouraged and that's in the military so in our in our regular a sane society and business life and personal lives we try to drive out all forms of bigotry and we pretty much all agree you know ninety five percent of the public would agree that getting rid of bigotry in every business social you know everyday experience you know school you name it you want to get rid of all that bigotry but there's an exception the military the military is specifically allowed to discriminate like crazy if it makes sense now they still have to support it for example women typically cannot lift as much as men and there may be some other physical differences so the military discriminates against women the military discriminates against short men the military discriminates against men and women I assume who have physical disabilities because it could have some impact on safety so you see that the military is a the nation machine and it's the one place where we say alright you know if they need to discriminate because it gives them some statistical advantage that's the one place we'll let it happen now of course historically there was also a discrimination against African Americans in the military but that did not prove out to be useful in other words it was a it was discrimination that didn't have the benefit of science behind it there was you know it wasn't supportable and so in a way but my main point is if the military can support the reason for their bigotry meaning that there's some actual safety you know risk management thing involved they can get away with it it's one place that that you can discriminate and so what the president said we're gonna be an immigration from Muslim countries until we figure out what's going on I saw that as a military homeland decision which was bigotry but it was the kind that as long as the second part was acknowledged until you figure out what's going on I thought that was fair because we didn't we don't know what's going on and when did you see where I'm taking this by the way I withhold your judgment until you see where this is having all right and then when the administration in the public weighed in they said no no you can't ban an entire culture even if you think you don't know what's going on and when the government dug into it and the public weighed in and the pundits weighed in the decision ended up let's put some restrictions on countries that can't properly vet their citizens some of them would be Muslim countries some would not be North Korea for example so so it ended up morphing into something that that was a little bit easier to swallow because those countries that had good records were still allowed in now here's where I'm taking us we had yet another mass shooting yesterday and of course there are lots of conversations about changing the laws and he and let me let me toss out a possibility you're ready for this I guess I felt like trouble today some days you wake up and you say I think I'm going to cross in trouble so here's me causing some trouble maybe we're at the point where we should consider banning gun sales to white men under the age of 50 until we figure out what's going on let that sink in for a little bit if you were ever in favor of the Muslim country banned because we didn't quite know what was going on and we couldn't vet you know we didn't know how to protect against that risk and we thought well temporarily temporarily let's use bigotry that's what we did the country collectively used bigotry said all right if you're from this area you're from the Muslim country we will abandon you until we figured it out and it looks like we did figure now we figured out that if we could check their records we can still be safe enough so here we have the situation where for whatever reason youngish white men keep getting high-powered rifles and killing a lot of people and so I'm just gonna put it out there what would happen if we just said you can't buy a gun if you're a white male under 50 until we figure out what's going on right now I wouldn't want that to be a permanent situation would you of course not of course not you wouldn't want that to be permanent but you certainly want to figure out what's going on and so now I know that nobody would ever take that that example seriously but I can tell you that as a you know a white male I probably would have been willing to live with it until we figured out what's going on May do not live with it for more than a year but I wouldn't mind trying it out now here's another suggestion by the way if you're new to this periscope you should know context wise I like to throw out two bad ideas because sometimes they they spur your thinking to think of something related that's a good idea so I'm going to give you some more bad ideas just like that last one you don't need to tell me it's a bad idea that's obvious to me it's bad in the sense that you could never get society to agree to it but here are some other some other bad ideas suppose you passed the law that says you can you can buy a gun under the following conditions you ready here so here's a proposed gun control law you can buy a gun if you were a current owner of a gun so in other words if you already own a gun a legal firearm you have the right to buy another one so if you already own one you can get another one now we might put some limit on I don't know is there any limit on the number of guns you can have I don't think so because there are collectors would buy quite a few guns but let's say if you already own a gun you can buy another one because whatever danger you were going to cause well you already had a tool for it so it's probably not the new gun that makes that much difference here's another one you can buy a gun if you're not a current owner of a gun you can also buy a gun if you've been a member of the NRA for three years I picked three is sort of a generic number if you've been paying dues to the NRA and I have never owned a gun legally at the end of the three years you can apply for a gun you still have to pass the background checks and stuff but three years of being an NRA paid person means you will at least have been exposed to best practices it means that you're it means that you were thinking about it three years before you got the gun which should reduce the number of people who or having a mental breakdown in this month they got crazy and this month they decided to buy government this month they decided to go kill people if you if you decided three years ago that's probably tells you that it has more to do with a long term desired over the firearm here's another one if you are a member or X number of law enforcement or the military you can buy a gun so again if you're just joining of throwing out bad ideas for how you could tweak gun control alright I'm not claiming any of these are good ideas I'm throwing out ideas they might suggest something that is a better idea so I would say that if you're law enforcement or military you've earned the right to own a gun I mean everybody has the right because the Second Amendment but it would probably be a safer situation they probably could get a gun yeah so just consider that one but this women can buy guns just always if you're a woman the rules don't apply if you're female then you're over 18 you can buy a gun how about that and it would only apply to men the restrictions how about this some occupations can buy a gun let's say you're a security guard or you know some kind of job that requires it you could buy a gun how about if you're male and over 50 you can buy a gun now maybe it's not 50 maybe it's 40 whatever but suppose that if you're male and you're over 50 you could buy a gun if you're under 50 the other restrictions come into play or how about this you can buy a gun if someone vouches for you who's in one of these other categories so if you're a man a man under 50 you can buy a gun unless you get the agreement or signature from somebody in law enforcement somebody ex-military a woman or somebody over 50 again these are not a good ideas just throwing out different ideas things you haven't heard before the so anyway those are some ideas I thought I'd throw out but what I'm the only thing I want to introduce is the idea that when it comes to death and security bigotry is allowed then it's allowed in this particular case what I'm suggesting is bigotry against people who look like me right I'm literally suggesting that we look at young white men and say maybe they should be carved down as a special special category maybe we should do something about it all right here's a challenge to you the Second Amendment proponents of which I am one so I'm Pro cup by the way in case in case that gets lost in this I'm I'm 100% Pireaus Second Amendment and gun but I'm also pro do what makes sense etc so if you're pro-gun here's what I think is a requirement for you you have to ask yourself how many American deaths are you willing to put up with for that right if you can't answer that question then I would suggest that you don't have an opinion you don't have an opinion because you've got to be able to say I like the Second Amendment and I like this set of laws or no set of laws whatever it is if you're willing to say that's what you like you can't stop the conversation there that's not a full opinion the full opinion is I like all these rights and what I'm willing to give up is that X number of people will be slaughtered by guns per year in order for me to have these right if you can't say that in direct language you have you don't have an argument so it's not that you're right or you're wrong it's that you're only pretending to be part of the conversation and you're not you're now saying anything so let me let me go first I'm in favor of the Second Amendment I could accept up to 20,000 gun deaths per year name one person who's never said that before name one person years and years of gun conversations name one person who ever gave you a full opinion until I just did it's the first one you've never seen an opinion on guns until I just gave you one that's it now how many people actually die from guns per years about twice that right so that's that's my line in the sand I'm pro-gun up to about 20,000 accidental or murder deaths per year that right is worth that much to me now of course it's easy to say if you're not the one getting shot and you're not the one whose family is dying I that and I'm sure I would change my opinion the very moment somebody close to me got shot so would you we understand that but that I gave you the first full opinion you've ever heard on guns I want the second many Amendment and I'm willing to to put up with 20,000 gun deaths a year that half of where we are damn in other words I'm willing to try some stuff to see if we can get that down and if trying some of that stuff put a little restriction on guns I'd be willing to try it now I might want to try it for a while and if it doesn't work stop trying it but we should certainly be experimenting our way towards getting to another level now how much did that mess with your minds because every one of you on here has a as a real opinion on gun deaths let's see you do yours all right I gave you a number twenty thousand gun deaths a year that's my price for the Second Amendment that's what I'm willing to pay of course it's easy for me right because I'm not the one dying you know I'm trading off twenty thousand lives of mostly strangers for me to have the right to own a gun that's my price if you can't say your actual opinion out loud shut up actually that's my new rule if you if you put out an opinion on gun ownership and you're not willing to say what your price is how many people dead per year I don't want to hear it you don't have actually anything like an opinion all you have is blather well I have one gun so that's my challenge to you so there was a straight Pride Parade Milo you nah police I guess was the head of ceremony you sir whatever parade master maybe and of course the whole thing was just sort of a a walking troll right I don't know that straight people need any parades so I'm not sure exactly what the objectives of the organizers were except to have some fun get some attention maybe they had a point to make I don't know what it was but here's my point about this so however long ago it was that there was the first black pride event or when black pride was being used as a phrase probably made sense because it was a time in our history that maybe you know maybe let's say acknowledging pride and who you are could have been an important step to getting society to the next place likewise when the gay pride parade became a thing probably very useful probably useful for you know the LGBTQ community to say hey we're fine in society that needs to change we have pride in who we are how about you society changing instead of us that was probably important but I feel as though we've society has evolved and improved to the point where pride feels like a wrong word does it why would you take pride in something you had nothing to do with how much how much of your your good work was involved in you being born the way you are how much work did I do before I was born to arrange my DNA so that I could be the person that I was born s none why should I take pride why do you take pride in someone else's work like I've never understood that I didn't I put no effort into Who I am in terms of my genetic makeup I didn't put any work into that even my parents barely did any work I'm sure they enjoyed it when they made me but the point is pride is just the wrong word I feel like we should understand the world free of pride because what is it that what is the fundamental thing that makes white supremacy ridiculous it's the thing that makes white supremacy ridiculous is that people who are the white supremacist if they exist by the way again I've never met one I do not know even one person who would identify as a white supremacist even you know even if they didn't use the words I've never met anybody who would make an argument of white supremacy I just don't even I've never met that person ever and you know I would've right I mean I hang around with a lot of Republicans and said I've just never met even one person who privately would have those opinions but let's say they exist it doesn't make any sense to have pride in other people's accomplishments because the whole point of of the white supremacist is you know yay white people invented a bunch of stuff but not you not you you didn't invent anything people who share your pigmentation invented things and you're taking credit for that are you taking pride in what other people did how the hell's that work how about how about working on yourself period don't take pride in what strangers did for god sakes that's the dumbest thing in the world anyway enough on that I'm just saying that we should probably acknowledge that we will we would be in a better place if we didn't try to take pride in things that we had nothing to do with certainly you should not feel guilty or bad for who you are but you also had nothing to do with that it's not your fault and it's also not something to be proud of it just is you just happen to be whatever you are I just happen to be whatever I am can't we be good with that I mean I I can give the full respect to anybody yeah as long as we're playing playing within the rules of society that should be enough respect should be the thing not pride all right Ellie Alexander was tweeting yesterday that there are 340 thousand Chinese students in the US did you know that 340 thousand active Chinese are citizens who are students in the United States now that's probably a good thing because it it transports our culture and you know our capitalist beliefs and stuff probably translates that over to China and it may be in the long run the absent value when keeping us from warrants and such but I put out the following suggestion which again might be a bad idea but one I hadn't heard before why don't we ship home one Chinese student for every fentanyl overdose death now some of you who say wait wait you can't do that because then there would be no Chinese students left and we would lose the benefit of you know that the cross-cultural exposure and I wouldn't want to lose that but here's the thing after we had shipped home the 50,000 50,000 Chinese student which would be a 50,000 then of 340 thousand after we shipped on fifty thousand of them how much is fentanyl do you think they would ship us after that well the people who have the money in the connections to get to school in the United States I have to think of the people who have a little more influence in China than the average person I have to think it's money people who can afford send somebody over here my guess is that after we sent home with 50,000 students they would say maybe we shouldn't send so much fentanyl to the United States and don't believe anything you hear about China is working on reducing the fentanyl they're not they know the name of the person who is doing it there's one person who is in charge of the whole deal apparently he's like the main fentanyl guy they know his name they know where he lives he's still alive as long as he's alive they're not doing anything so anything else you hear is nothing it's just garbage congressman max rose out of New York is sponsoring some legislation to put sanctions on Chinese pharmaceutical companies because of fentanyl I back that so if you want to follow somebody on Twitter who's actually doing something useful look for max Rose I don't have his Twitter name but he'll pop right up if you search max Rose so he's my new favorite politician I'm hearing a lot of people say that it's irrelevant if we go after China because somebody else will make the fence and all if they stop doing it and that the it's really the responsibility of the person taking it and that we should you just focus on personal responsibility the people saying that don't know anything about addiction they don't know anything about free will they don't know anything about how people work if you believe and they don't know how to solve problems if you believe that it's personal responsibility end of story if you want to take fentanyl and die go ahead and do it then you don't understand how the brain works you don't understand how addiction works you don't understand how much of the world works but the most important thing is that you don't understand the solutions and causes don't have to be connected for example there's a burglary and crime problem in this country meaning that there are such things as people who robbed your house now how do you deal with that because the responsibility for the decision to rob your house is the robber shouldn't they take personal responsibility and not rob your house well yes they should will they no they won't so does it help to know whose fault it is no no it doesn't help you at all to know that the fault is the criminals because they're not going to fix it likewise the addicts are going to have a tough time fixing it themselves so when you're worried about being robbed you lock your door so you do something even though the personal responsibility is with the robber but they're not going to change so you have to do what you can do likewise you need to push on the dealers and try to shut them down and try to execute them as you as the opportunities arise because it might not change the situation but it will certainly change how the situation is viewed it will certainly change how we think about it if you see bodies dropping of the dealers your goodness you're going to think of fentanyl differently it will inform you for example just just the higher visibility will tell people that the real fentanyl problem is not people deciding to take fentanyl a lot of it is people who think they're taking some other drug like xanax but it's actually a pill that's been pressed by a dealer and it's got fentanyl in there and none of the active ingredients in sanics that's how people are getting killed so you have to go out after the pill pill pressors and execute them alright so I'm seeing discussions in the news about you know Joe Biden's forgetfulness and and ignoring of the facts and making up stories and stuff and then people of course are comparing that to you president getting his facts wrong and failing the fact-checking 11,000 times as they're saying hey is there something wrong with President Trump because of his age to which I say I don't know that he's doing any more of it than he was doing before in other words I don't know that President Trump is departing from the facts in a bigger way than he ever has before I don't know maybe we should keep an eye on it but they're all at that age Biden Bernie less so warned but Trump well I think we have to look at that I feel like that's a fair thing to look at you know what I want to suggest this idea if you're running for president in your over a certain age let's say the age of 70 I'll just pick that as a random age if you're over the age of 17 you're running for president here's what I'd like to see I like you to tell me the three family members that you trust to to validate that you still have your faculties so in other words if you're running for president you're over 70 I want you to name three people that the press have access to who are also close to you on a regular basis so if you're president Trump you might say okay here's the thing you talked to Ivanka talk to Jared talk to Don jr.

or whatever so whoever is three people are could be family members and have the the press have access to them so that they can ask all right you're watching them do you think there's anything we need to worry about but also those three should have direct access to the physician of the of the candidate so that they can give their personal opinion to the physician without without it being public so I would like to see now you're saying to yourself oh yeah but they're family members they're not going to say anything maybe maybe maybe they wouldn't say anything they might not say anything publicly but I'll bet you a family member would say something to the doctor because if a family member sees the President of the United States doing things that seem out of character I think a family member is gonna say okay I love my father but you know the country's at risk and I think you could count on family members to of course be biased in favor of their loved one but they're the only ones who might know they might be the only ones who really are close enough to know so I feel like we need some kind of a system in which there's a known set of people watching the candidate over the age of 70 and that they could be queried on a regular basis and say Ari have you seen anything is there anything different I don't know if that would help but I'd like to throw out that as an idea maybe somebody has a better idea so what I I just wanted to say this about Biden why is it that the Democrats have one primary complaint about Trump there's one thing that they say well it's not a primary complaint but it's the one that's true the one complaint that they have about Trump that even his supporters would say well okay that's true is that he departs from the facts in other words even if you're a trump supporter certainly you've noticed that the eleven thousand departures from from the fact-checking now you might say to yourself okay at least two thousand of those are fake news and he really did not depart in a real way from the facts that's probably true so probably 2000 of the 11,000 are not real because that's the world we live in but that would still leave you 9,000 facts that he departed from now most of that cyberbully and exaggeration and typical typical politicking but what's interesting is if that was the biggest problem and it's the one you hear the most people say he's a liar he lies president Trump can't stop lying if that was your biggest complaint why the hell would you would you run Joe Biden against that you can't think of anybody would be a worst matchup Kenny Biden is literally famous for that flaw he's actually famous for just making stuff up why would you run the one person who doesn't have an advantage in the category that's the one you care about the most it's it's exactly the wrong person precisely the wrong person if you took 7 billion people on the planet Earth and set yourself up who would be the worst person to run against Trump if what you care about are the lies who's the worst it would be Joe Biden you can't think of anybody who is more famous for alive so I think you have to ask yourself who's making the decisions over there I doubt there's anybody on the Democrat side who actually wants them to get the nomination including maybe people on his team I have this feeling and again I have no facts to back this up so this is just speculation my speculation is that even the people who work for Biden on the campaign at this point are hoping he doesn't get the nomination I feel like that's the case that there's probably nobody even close to him who wants him to get it at this point all right yeah Obama's not even coming out for him Biden is there to provide cover for worst candidates somebody's saying I don't know you know the interesting thing about a second term of Trump is that when Trump was originally running for president we had we had worries of things he might do and the the entire attack against President Trump or candidate Trump the entire attack fell in the category of things he we worried that he would do well we worry he will people up and put them in concentration camps we worry that he will deport 14 million people we worry that he'll do this is that started a nuclear war but now they by the time election rolls around we will have had four years of really getting to know what he is likely to do and not likely to do and it doesn't look anything like what people expected now they're gonna twist it and say oh but we knew he would create these concentration camps and sure enough he's putting children in cages just like we told you would happen really it's the same cage as Obama was using literally Obama built them I'm not sure that matters people will still use it if they can so the slaughter meter is that a hundred percent so there's nobody you in the race who could beat Trump and I don't even know at this point if anybody on the Democrat side thinks they can win which is interesting because the polls are just so out the polls show so clearly that everybody can beat him but does anybody believe those polls do you believe those polls yeah so I think so I think the first election 2016 was about what people imagined Trump would do the reelection campaign is going to base be based on what they imagined that he did think about that the the first election was people imagining what he would do if he got elected and now we have four years of hoaxes and so the reelection campaign is already focusing on the things that people imagined he did that he didn't do like the fine people hoax right the putting children in cages you know they imagined that that there was some option to that or they imagined that Obama didn't do it there's it's an entire imaginary scenario of what we imagined he said this now we imagined he called people shitholes even though it didn't happen we we imagined that you said this that didn't happen so it's an entire imagination based campaign isn't that always the case for every re-election campaign ever you know it's a fair question but I don't know if we've had this much imagination about what actually happened I think we we've had more and more difference of agreement you know the more common reelection is you know you change the tax rate and look what happened that's not imagination or you attack this country and look how it turned out that's not really imagination but this this election is almost entirely imagination based oh let me let me tell you about something that is kind of exciting in terms of understanding the future I ran into a startup they've been around for a few years called teachable so you can find them at at teachable teachable just like it sounds and they allow people to use their tools to create a class so unusually on one topic so one topic class you could put it on their website and you can set your own price and then people buy it and download it online now what's what's interesting about them is that they're already making tens of millions of dollars in revenue so it's it's a serious company with serious revenue they've been added several years and the quality of the courses is really high because for an obvious reason they just announced that one of their creators in other words one person who might have been a team created one class content that made five hundred and fifty thousand dollars in one day let that sink in there was one creator who made one class I don't even know what the what the topic was doesn't matter made one topic class they made over half a million dollars in one day one day now when you hear that how many people heard that and said to themselves uh I think maybe I'll try making a class but it's not easy you know it's not like you can just say I think I'll put a Power.

Point together because they've raised they've raised the bar about what would look like a proper class partly because you use their you use their tools so it sort of guarantees you have a good format and stuff but once you reach a point where you can make that much money by selling content online what is the big change the big change is who it attracts because Hollywood is going to start noticing if you if I said to you hey guys I'm gonna start an online school and you can add content to it you'd say hey that's great I could make you maybe a few thousand dollars and I would attract people like you know you and people like me who could put together a little class with a Power.

Point thing and we try to solve for a few hundred or a few thousand dollars but that wouldn't be a change the world kind of a situation but suddenly you hear that one creator made half a million dollars in one day now I'm sure that that creator put a lot of work probably a lot of money into creating that class content it probably was quite impressive I don't think it's Power.

Point exactly but it's some kind of presentation format and suddenly don't you think people in Hollywood just said ah what are you telling me that I could pull together a team I get a content person the presenter somebody to view the graphics and will really just kill this thing will make will figure out what's the most valuable class that people would buy and we'll make some content and we'll make a half a million dollars in a day because that's what's going to happen you're right on the on the cusp of the big teams that the corporate entity is saying oh this is where the money is I'm gonna stop making movies I'm gonna start making class content and the next thing you need which I think will come naturally is a credit accreditation I believe that you'll see something like teachable or some other company in that business who eventually puts together enough classes that they can create a college major the first major I'd like to see is something I would call life strategy I've said this before but it's worth reiterating I would like to see the federal government create a set of requirements for types of classes that you could take online and you would learn life strategies now life strategies would be everything from you'd learn about persuasion public speaking had to be a good communicator how to write well maybe you'd learn Spanish if you live in California so maybe you'd learn how to program a website etc so I'm talking about skills that you could really use in the workplace but then that they affect your life as well so if somebody went to it got a major in life strategies they would be they would be fairly qualified for a lot of different jobs that then they would have to be trained for specifically but that's the current situation so I would like to see the federal government accredit a series of classes that they call a life major or life strategies major and and make that a thing so that you could go to college for a few hundred dollars by just downloading content that's gonna happen it's gonna happen so look for that all right it's not all I got it's Sunday it's a holiday and you want to go do other things I know you do so let's go do other things somebody says why does the government need to be involved that's a fair question so I don't know enough about this topic but who is it who does accreditation for colleges so the problem is you need some entity that everybody trusts at least trust enough you know nobody trusts the government entirely but trust enough to say that if the government says anybody who takes this set of courses gets a BA in life strategy that would probably be enough that corporations would say alright well you've gotten a BA in life strategy the federal government said that's a Thane and I'm looking at the courses and hell yes I would like to hire somebody who had studied this set of courses because they're they're gonna be pretty powerful so uh alright we'll get rid of this troll goodbye troll somebody says I don't think accrediting organizations are a government strategy you might be right but whoever whoever does the accreditation if they don't want to do it the federal government could all right there's nothing stopping them from doing it they could certainly do it if they wanted to and indeed if the government doesn't want to do it I would do it so if somebody wanted to create an online set of courses that they wanted to call life strategy I would I would be willing to endorse it if it were if it were a bag of classes I thought were good yeah Warren Buffett could endorse a set of classes Bill Gates could endorse a set of classes Elon Musk wouldn't you take if he'll on musk said I would hire somebody who took this set of courses wouldn't you take that seriously now of course in the technical world he needs people who are engineers and have technical courses but even Tesla must be hiring a lot of people for non-technical jobs if you on musk said anybody who takes this set of courses we we will take seriously at Tesla that would mean a lot that would mean locked um all right that's all I got for now and I will talk to you tomorrow

bubble bowl hey everybody come on in

here

what fun it's another episode of coffee

with Scott Adams and that features

coffee and Scott Adams now you're not

either one of those things you're not

coffee and you're not Scott Adams but

you can join long doesn't take much to

participate all you need is a couple of

your glasses time to tell us attacker

mr. plastic canteen a vessel of any kind

fill it with your favorite liquid I like

coffee enjoyed me now for the

unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit

of the day the thing that makes

everything better

the silently - you said go boom ha ha

good stuff so the president tweeted and

I'm paraphrasing to Iran but after their

missile launch failed and their rocket

blew up on the on the launch pad

the president tweeted that the United

States had nothing to do with it and he

hopes they figure out what went wrong

now I have to admit even I am not sure

what's going on with that except that I

like it

the US had nothing to do with it and

hope you figure it out now I'll tell you

what that leaves as a possibility that

Israel had something to do with it but I

thought it was interesting that the

president said out loud that we had

nothing to do with it because I thought

to myself would it be better if they

thought maybe we did or at least if they

you know at least they thought it was a

possibility wouldn't that be better for

us but I suspect that they still have to

look because they don't believe him so

even though he says the United States

had nothing to do with it they're not

going to believe it so they're still

going to look for any sign that we did

it's here's what this felt like and then

maybe over interpreting this do you

remember the big breakthrough with Kim

jong-un was when the president went

funny so when he tweeted at him purely

you know joking insults and that got Kim

jong-un to kind of deal with the

president on a human level where they

joked at each other they insulted each

other and they said I let's you crazy

guy you big old Orange crazy guy let's

just get together and it looks like the

president's trying to play that same

play I can't imagine it working in Iran

because it's a different personality but

he's basically tweeted something playful

you know in a sense I mean it's it's

provocative and it's challenging but

when he says the US had nothing to do

with it we hope you figure it out of

course you're gonna read that and say

he's kind of just joking and jabbing

them at the same time it looks a lot

like when he was calling Kim jong-un

little Rocket Man it feels like it feels

like he's trying to humanize something

that is otherwise you know statecraft

and and political and and all those

things that have not produced anything

like a solution so yeah it's it's it's a

little mocking that's a little sarcastic

perhaps and you know if it had been

anybody but Iran it probably would have

gotten more of a more of a response in

kind so if he can get around to match

him so he's you know he's he's putting

something out there and essentially

seeing if they'll match it and what they

would match is his tone and his tone is

sort of you know that it's a game and

we're playing long and this is not the

end of the world and you know let let's

put it in perspective sort of thing

might be useful we'll say it's worth

putting it out there just just to find

out what happens do you remember how

much trouble

well let's say how many what would be

the best word not trouble I guess it was

trouble how much trouble the president

caused when early in his administration

he said or was it before he got elected

that he said he wanted to put a ban on

Muslim immigration but there's a second

part of that a ban on Muslim immigration

what he meant was from certain countries

that came out later well maybe he didn't

mean that maybe he just meant we're

gonna put a ban on Muslim immigration

until and it was the second part that

was the important part until we figure

out what's going on here and everybody

said racist racist because they always

leave the second part out until we

figure out what's going on and I

remember thinking to myself you know

there's one situation where bigotry is

allowed if not encouraged and that's in

the military so in our in our regular a

sane society and business life and

personal lives we try to drive out all

forms of bigotry and we pretty much all

agree you know ninety five percent of

the public would agree that getting rid

of bigotry in every business social you

know everyday experience you know school

you name it you want to get rid of all

that bigotry but there's an exception

the military the military is

specifically allowed to discriminate

like crazy if it makes sense now they

still have to support it for example

women typically cannot lift as much as

men and there may be some other physical

differences so the military

discriminates against women the military

discriminates against short men the

military discriminates against men and

women I assume who have physical

disabilities because it could have some

impact on safety so you see that the

military is a

the nation machine and it's the one

place where we say alright you know if

they need to discriminate because it

gives them some statistical advantage

that's the one place we'll let it happen

now of course historically there was

also a discrimination against African

Americans in the military but that did

not prove out to be useful in other

words it was a it was discrimination

that didn't have the benefit of science

behind it there was you know it wasn't

supportable and so in a way but my main

point is if the military can support the

reason for their bigotry meaning that

there's some actual safety you know risk

management thing involved they can get

away with it it's one place that that

you can discriminate and so what the

president said we're gonna be an

immigration from Muslim countries until

we figure out what's going on I saw that

as a military homeland decision which

was bigotry but it was the kind that as

long as the second part was acknowledged

until you figure out what's going on I

thought that was fair because we didn't

we don't know what's going on and when

did you see where I'm taking this by the

way I withhold your judgment until you

see where this is having all right and

then when the administration in the

public weighed in they said no no you

can't ban an entire culture even if you

think you don't know what's going on and

when the government dug into it and the

public weighed in and the pundits

weighed in the decision ended up let's

put some restrictions on countries that

can't properly vet their citizens some

of them would be Muslim countries some

would not be North Korea for example so

so it ended up morphing into something

that that was a little bit easier to

swallow because those countries that had

good records were still allowed in now

here's where I'm taking us

we had yet another mass shooting

yesterday and of course there are lots

of conversations about changing the laws

and he and let me let me toss out a

possibility you're ready for this I

guess I felt like trouble today some

days you wake up and you say I think I'm

going to cross in trouble so here's me

causing some trouble maybe we're at the

point where we should consider banning

gun sales to white men under the age of

50 until we figure out what's going on

let that sink in for a little bit if you

were ever in favor of the Muslim country

banned because we didn't quite know what

was going on and we couldn't vet you

know we didn't know how to protect

against that risk and we thought well

temporarily temporarily let's use

bigotry that's what we did the country

collectively used bigotry said all right

if you're from this area you're from the

Muslim country we will abandon you until

we figured it out and it looks like we

did figure now we figured out that if we

could check their records we can still

be safe enough so here we have the

situation where for whatever reason

youngish white men keep getting

high-powered rifles and killing a lot of

people and so I'm just gonna put it out

there what would happen if we just said

you can't buy a gun if you're a white

male under 50 until we figure out what's

going on right now I wouldn't want that

to be a permanent situation would you of

course not of course not you wouldn't

want that to be permanent but you

certainly want to figure out what's

going on and so now I know that nobody

would ever take that that example

seriously but I can tell you that as a

you know a white male I probably would

have been willing to live with it until

we figured out what's going on May

do not live with it for more than a year

but I wouldn't mind trying it out now

here's another suggestion by the way if

you're new to this periscope you should

know context wise I like to throw out

two bad ideas because sometimes they

they spur your thinking to think of

something related that's a good idea so

I'm going to give you some more bad

ideas just like that last one you don't

need to tell me it's a bad idea that's

obvious to me it's bad in the sense that

you could never get society to agree to

it but here are some other some other

bad ideas suppose you passed the law

that says you can you can buy a gun

under the following conditions you ready

here so here's a proposed gun control

law you can buy a gun if you were a

current owner of a gun so in other words

if you already own a gun a legal firearm

you have the right to buy another one so

if you already own one you can get

another one

now we might put some limit on I don't

know is there any limit on the number of

guns you can have I don't think so

because there are collectors would buy

quite a few guns but let's say if you

already own a gun you can buy another

one because whatever danger you were

going to cause well you already had a

tool for it so it's probably not the new

gun that makes that much difference

here's another one you can buy a gun if

you're not a current owner of a gun you

can also buy a gun if you've been a

member of the NRA for three years

I picked three is sort of a generic

number if you've been paying dues to the

NRA and I have never owned a gun legally

at the end of the three years you can

apply for a gun you still have to pass

the background checks and stuff but

three years of being an NRA paid person

means you will at least have been

exposed to best practices it means that

you're it means that you were thinking

about it three years before you got the

gun which should reduce the number of

people who

or having a mental breakdown in this

month they got crazy and this month they

decided to buy government this month

they decided to go kill people if you if

you decided three years ago

that's probably tells you that it has

more to do with a long term desired over

the firearm here's another one if you

are a member or X number of law

enforcement or the military you can buy

a gun

so again if you're just joining of

throwing out bad ideas for how you could

tweak gun control alright I'm not

claiming any of these are good ideas I'm

throwing out ideas they might suggest

something that is a better idea

so I would say that if you're law

enforcement or military you've earned

the right to own a gun I mean everybody

has the right because the Second

Amendment but it would probably be a

safer situation they probably could get

a gun yeah so just consider that one but

this women can buy guns just always if

you're a woman the rules don't apply if

you're female then you're over 18 you

can buy a gun how about that and it

would only apply to men the restrictions

how about this some occupations can buy

a gun let's say you're a security guard

or you know some kind of job that

requires it you could buy a gun how

about if you're male and over 50 you can

buy a gun now maybe it's not 50 maybe

it's 40 whatever but suppose that if

you're male and you're over 50 you could

buy a gun if you're under 50 the other

restrictions come into play or how about

this you can buy a gun

if someone vouches for you who's in one

of these other categories so if you're a

man a man under 50 you can buy a gun

unless you get the agreement or

signature from somebody in law

enforcement

somebody ex-military a woman or somebody

over 50 again these are not a good ideas

just throwing out different ideas things

you haven't heard before the so anyway

those are some ideas I thought I'd throw

out but what I'm the only thing I want

to introduce is the idea that when it

comes to death and security bigotry is

allowed then it's allowed in this

particular case what I'm suggesting is

bigotry against people who look like me

right I'm literally suggesting that we

look at young white men and say maybe

they should be carved down as a special

special category maybe we should do

something about it all right here's a

challenge to you the Second Amendment

proponents of which I am one so I'm Pro

cup by the way in case in case that gets

lost in this I'm I'm 100% Pireaus Second

Amendment and gun but I'm also pro do

what makes sense

etc so if you're pro-gun here's what I

think is a requirement for you you have

to ask yourself how many American deaths

are you willing to put up with for that

right if you can't answer that question

then I would suggest that you don't have

an opinion you don't have an opinion

because you've got to be able to say I

like the Second Amendment and I like

this set of laws or no set of laws

whatever it is if you're willing to say

that's what you like you can't stop the

conversation there that's not a full

opinion the full opinion is I like all

these rights and what I'm willing to

give up is that X number of people will

be slaughtered by guns per year in order

for me to have these right if you can't

say that in direct language you have you

don't have an argument so it's not that

you're right or you're wrong

it's that you're only pretending to be

part of the conversation and you're not

you're now saying anything so let me let

me go first I'm in favor of the Second

Amendment I could accept up to 20,000

gun deaths per year name one person

who's never said that before

name one person years and years of gun

conversations name one person who ever

gave you a full opinion until I just did

it's the first one you've never seen an

opinion on guns until I just gave you

one that's it

now how many people actually die from

guns per years about twice that right so

that's that's my line in the sand

I'm pro-gun up to about 20,000

accidental or murder deaths per year

that right is worth that much to me now

of course it's easy to say if you're not

the one getting shot and you're not the

one whose family is dying I that and I'm

sure I would change my opinion the very

moment somebody close to me got shot so

would you we understand that but that I

gave you the first full opinion you've

ever heard on guns I want the second

many Amendment and I'm willing to to put

up with 20,000 gun deaths a year that

half of where we are damn in other words

I'm willing to try some stuff to see if

we can get that down and if trying some

of that stuff put a little restriction

on guns I'd be willing to try it now I

might want to try it for a while and if

it doesn't work

stop trying it but we should certainly

be experimenting our way towards getting

to another level now how much did that

mess with your minds because every one

of you on here has a as a real opinion

on gun deaths

let's see you do yours all right I gave

you a number twenty thousand gun deaths

a year that's my price for the Second

Amendment that's what I'm willing to pay

of course it's easy for me right because

I'm not the one dying you know I'm

trading off twenty thousand lives of

mostly strangers for me to have the

right to own a gun that's my price if

you can't say your actual opinion out

loud shut up

actually that's my new rule if

you if you put out an opinion on gun

ownership and you're not willing to say

what your price is how many people dead

per year I don't want to hear it you

don't have actually anything like an

opinion all you have is blather well I

have one gun so that's my challenge to

you so there was a straight Pride Parade

Milo you nah police I guess was the head

of ceremony you sir whatever parade

master maybe and of course the whole

thing was just sort of a a walking troll

right

I don't know that straight people need

any parades so I'm not sure exactly what

the objectives of the organizers were

except to have some fun get some

attention maybe they had a point to make

I don't know what it was but here's my

point about this so however long ago it

was that there was the first black pride

event or when black pride was being used

as a phrase probably made sense because

it was a time in our history that maybe

you know maybe let's say acknowledging

pride and who you are could have been an

important step to getting society to the

next place likewise when the gay pride

parade became a thing probably very

useful probably useful for you know the

LGBTQ community to say hey we're fine in

society that needs to change

we have pride in who we are how about

you society changing instead of us that

was probably important but I feel as

though we've society has evolved and

improved to the point where pride feels

like a wrong word does it why would you

take pride in something you had nothing

to do with how much how much of your

your good work was involved in you being

born the way you are how much work did I

do before I was born to arrange my DNA

so that I could be the person that I was

born s none why should I take pride

why do you take pride in someone else's

work like I've never understood that I

didn't I put no effort into Who I am in

terms of my genetic makeup I didn't put

any work into that even my parents

barely did any work I'm sure they

enjoyed it when they made me but the

point is pride is just the wrong word I

feel like we should understand the world

free of pride because what is it that

what is the fundamental thing that makes

white supremacy ridiculous it's the

thing that makes white supremacy

ridiculous is that people who are the

white supremacist if they exist by the

way again I've never met one I do not

know even one person who would identify

as a white supremacist even you know

even if they didn't use the words I've

never met anybody who would make an

argument of white supremacy I just don't

even I've never met that person ever and

you know I would've right I mean I hang

around with a lot of Republicans and

said I've just never met even one person

who privately would have those opinions

but let's say they exist it doesn't make

any sense to have pride in other

people's accomplishments because the

whole point of of the white supremacist

is you know yay white people invented a

bunch of stuff but not you not you you

didn't invent anything people who share

your pigmentation invented things and

you're taking credit for that are you

taking pride in what other people did

how the hell's that work how about how

about working on yourself period don't

take pride in what strangers did for god

sakes that's the dumbest thing in the

world anyway enough on that I'm just

saying that we should probably

acknowledge that we will we would be in

a better place if we didn't try to take

pride in things that we had nothing to

do with

certainly you should not feel guilty or

bad for who you are but you also had

nothing to do with that it's not your

fault and it's also not something to be

proud of it just is you just happen to

be whatever you are I just happen to be

whatever I am can't we be good with that

I mean I I can give the full respect to

anybody

yeah as long as we're playing playing

within the rules of society that should

be enough respect should be the thing

not pride all right Ellie Alexander was

tweeting yesterday that there are 340

thousand Chinese students in the US did

you know that 340 thousand active

Chinese are citizens who are students in

the United States now that's probably a

good thing because it it transports our

culture and you know our capitalist

beliefs and stuff probably translates

that over to China and it may be in the

long run the absent value when keeping

us from warrants and such but I put out

the following suggestion which again

might be a bad idea but one I hadn't

heard before

why don't we ship home one Chinese

student for every fentanyl overdose

death now some of you who say wait wait

you can't do that because then there

would be no Chinese students left and we

would lose the benefit of you know that

the cross-cultural exposure and I

wouldn't want to lose that but here's

the thing after we had shipped home the

50,000 50,000 Chinese student which

would be a 50,000 then of 340 thousand

after we shipped on fifty thousand of

them how much is fentanyl do you think

they would ship us after that well the

people who have the money in the

connections to get to school in the

United States I have to think of the

people who have a little more influence

in China than the average person I have

to think it's money people who can

afford

send somebody over here my guess is that

after we sent home with 50,000 students

they would say maybe we shouldn't send

so much fentanyl to the United States

and don't believe anything you hear

about China is working on reducing the

fentanyl they're not they know the name

of the person who is doing it there's

one person who is in charge of the whole

deal apparently he's like the main

fentanyl guy they know his name they

know where he lives he's still alive as

long as he's alive they're not doing

anything so anything else you hear is

nothing it's just garbage

congressman max rose out of New York is

sponsoring some legislation to put

sanctions on Chinese pharmaceutical

companies because of fentanyl I back

that so if you want to follow somebody

on Twitter who's actually doing

something useful look for max Rose I

don't have his Twitter name but he'll

pop right up if you search max Rose so

he's my new favorite politician I'm

hearing a lot of people say that it's

irrelevant if we go after China because

somebody else will make the fence and

all if they stop doing it and that the

it's really the responsibility of the

person taking it and that we should you

just focus on personal responsibility

the people saying that don't know

anything about addiction they don't know

anything about free will they don't know

anything about how people work if you

believe and they don't know how to solve

problems if you believe that it's

personal responsibility end of story if

you want to take fentanyl and die go

ahead and do it

then you don't understand how the brain

works you don't understand how addiction

works you don't understand how much of

the world works but the most important

thing is that you don't understand the

solutions

and causes don't have to be connected

for example there's a burglary and crime

problem in this country meaning that

there are such things as people who

robbed your house now how do you deal

with that because the responsibility for

the decision to rob your house is the

robber shouldn't they take personal

responsibility and not rob your house

well yes they should

will they no they won't so does it help

to know whose fault it is no no it

doesn't help you at all to know that the

fault is the criminals because they're

not going to fix it

likewise the addicts are going to have a

tough time fixing it themselves so when

you're worried about being robbed you

lock your door so you do something even

though the personal responsibility is

with the robber but they're not going to

change so you have to do what you can do

likewise you need to push on the dealers

and try to shut them down and try to

execute them as you as the opportunities

arise because it might not change the

situation but it will certainly change

how the situation is viewed it will

certainly change how we think about it

if you see bodies dropping of the

dealers your goodness you're going to

think of fentanyl differently it will

inform you for example just just the

higher visibility will tell people that

the real fentanyl problem is not people

deciding to take fentanyl a lot of it is

people who think they're taking some

other drug like xanax but it's actually

a pill that's been pressed by a dealer

and it's got fentanyl in there and none

of the active ingredients in sanics

that's how people are getting killed so

you have to go out after the pill pill

pressors and execute them alright so I'm

seeing discussions in the news about you

know Joe Biden's forgetfulness and and

ignoring of the facts and making up

stories and stuff and then people of

course are comparing that to you

president

getting his facts wrong and failing the

fact-checking 11,000 times as they're

saying hey is there something wrong with

President Trump because of his age to

which I say I don't know that he's doing

any more of it than he was doing before

in other words I don't know that

President Trump is departing from the

facts in a bigger way than he ever has

before I don't know maybe we should keep

an eye on it but they're all at that age

Biden Bernie less so warned but Trump

well I think we have to look at that I

feel like that's a fair thing to look at

you know what I want to suggest this

idea if you're running for president in

your over a certain age let's say the

age of 70 I'll just pick that as a

random age if you're over the age of 17

you're running for president here's what

I'd like to see I like you to tell me

the three family members that you trust

to to validate that you still have your

faculties so in other words if you're

running for president you're over 70 I

want you to name three people that the

press have access to who are also close

to you on a regular basis so if you're

president Trump you might say okay

here's the thing you talked to Ivanka

talk to Jared talk to Don jr. or

whatever so whoever is three people are

could be family members and have the the

press have access to them so that they

can ask all right you're watching them

do you think there's anything we need to

worry about but also those three should

have direct access to the physician of

the of the candidate so that they can

give their personal opinion to the

physician without without it being

public so I would like to see now you're

saying to yourself oh yeah but they're

family members they're not going to say

anything maybe maybe maybe they wouldn't

say anything they might not say anything

publicly but I'll bet you a family

member would say something to the doctor

because if a family member sees the

President of the United States doing

things that seem out of character I

think a family member is gonna say okay

I love my father but you know the

country's at risk and I think you could

count on family members to of course be

biased in favor of their loved one but

they're the only ones who might know

they might be the only ones who really

are close enough to know so I feel like

we need some kind of a system in which

there's a known set of people watching

the candidate over the age of 70 and

that they could be queried on a regular

basis and say Ari have you seen anything

is there anything different I don't know

if that would help

but I'd like to throw out that as an

idea maybe somebody has a better idea so

what I I just wanted to say this about

Biden why is it that the Democrats have

one primary complaint about Trump

there's one thing that they say well

it's not a primary complaint but it's

the one that's true the one complaint

that they have about Trump that even his

supporters would say well okay that's

true is that he departs from the facts

in other words even if you're a trump

supporter certainly you've noticed that

the eleven thousand departures from from

the fact-checking

now you might say to yourself okay at

least two thousand of those are fake

news and he really did not depart in a

real way from the facts that's probably

true so probably 2000 of the 11,000 are

not real because that's the world we

live in but that would still leave you

9,000 facts that he departed from now

most of that cyberbully and exaggeration

and typical typical politicking but

what's interesting is if that was the

biggest problem and it's the one you

hear the most people say he's a liar he

lies president Trump can't stop lying if

that was your biggest complaint why the

hell would you would you run Joe Biden

against that you can't think of anybody

would be a worst matchup Kenny Biden is

literally famous for that flaw he's

actually famous for just making stuff up

why would you run the one person who

doesn't have an advantage in the

category that's the one you care about

the most

it's it's exactly the wrong person

precisely the wrong person if you took 7

billion people on the planet Earth and

set yourself up who would be the worst

person to run against Trump if what you

care about are the lies who's the worst

it would be Joe Biden you can't think of

anybody who is more famous for alive so

I think you have to ask yourself who's

making the decisions over there I doubt

there's anybody on the Democrat side who

actually wants them to get the

nomination including maybe people on his

team I have this feeling and again I

have no facts to back this up so this is

just speculation my speculation is that

even the people who work for Biden on

the campaign at this point are hoping he

doesn't get the nomination

I feel like that's the case that there's

probably nobody even close to him who

wants him to get it at this point all

right

yeah Obama's not even coming out for him

Biden is there to provide cover for

worst candidates somebody's saying I

don't know you know the interesting

thing about a second term of Trump is

that when Trump was originally running

for president we had we had worries of

things he might do and the the entire

attack against President Trump or

candidate Trump the entire attack fell

in the category of things he we worried

that he would do well we worry he will

people up and put them in concentration

camps we worry that he will deport 14

million people we worry that he'll do

this is that started a nuclear war but

now they by the time election rolls

around we will have had four years of

really getting to know what he is likely

to do and not likely to do and it

doesn't look anything like what people

expected now they're gonna twist it and

say oh but we knew he would create these

concentration camps and sure enough he's

putting children in cages just like we

told you would happen really it's the

same cage as Obama was using literally

Obama built them I'm not sure that

matters people will still use it if they

can so the slaughter meter is that a

hundred percent so there's nobody you in

the race who could beat Trump and I

don't even know at this point if anybody

on the Democrat side thinks they can win

which is interesting because the polls

are just so out the polls show so

clearly that everybody can beat him but

does anybody believe those polls do you

believe those polls yeah so I think so I

think the first election 2016 was about

what people imagined Trump would do the

reelection campaign is going to base be

based on what they imagined that he did

think about that the the first election

was people imagining what he would do if

he got elected and now we have four

years of hoaxes and so the reelection

campaign is already focusing on the

things that people imagined he did that

he didn't do like the fine people hoax

right the putting children in cages you

know they imagined that that there was

some option to that or they imagined

that Obama didn't do it

there's it's an entire imaginary

scenario of what we imagined he said

this now we imagined he called people

shitholes even though it didn't happen

we we imagined that you said this that

didn't happen so it's an entire

imagination based campaign isn't that

always the case for every re-election

campaign ever you know it's a fair

question but I don't know if we've had

this much imagination about what

actually happened I think we we've had

more and more difference of agreement

you know the more common reelection is

you know you change the tax rate and

look what happened that's not

imagination or you attack this country

and look how it turned out that's not

really imagination but this this

election is almost entirely imagination

based oh let me let me tell you about

something that is kind of exciting in

terms of understanding the future I ran

into a startup they've been around for a

few years called teachable so you can

find them at at teachable teachable just

like it sounds and they allow people to

use their tools to create a class so

unusually on one topic so one topic

class you could put it on their website

and you can set your own price and then

people buy it and download it online now

what's what's interesting about them is

that they're already making tens of

millions of dollars in revenue so it's

it's a serious company with serious

revenue they've been added several years

and the quality of the courses is really

high because for an obvious reason they

just announced that one of their

creators in other words one person who

might have been a team created one class

content that made five hundred and fifty

thousand dollars in one day let that

sink in

there was one creator who made one class

I don't even know what the what the

topic was doesn't matter made one topic

class they made over half a million

dollars in one day one day now when you

hear that how many people heard that and

said to themselves

uh I think maybe I'll try making a class

but it's not easy you know it's not like

you can just say I think I'll put a

PowerPoint together because they've

raised they've raised the bar about what

would look like a proper class partly

because you use their you use their

tools so it sort of guarantees you have

a good format and stuff but once you

reach a point where you can make that

much money by selling content online

what is the big change the big change is

who it attracts because Hollywood is

going to start noticing if you if I said

to you hey guys I'm gonna start an

online school and you can add content to

it you'd say hey that's great I could

make you maybe a few thousand dollars

and I would attract people like you know

you and people like me who could put

together a little class with a

PowerPoint thing and we try to solve for

a few hundred or a few thousand dollars

but that wouldn't be a change the world

kind of a situation but suddenly you

hear that one creator made half a

million dollars in one day now I'm sure

that that creator put a lot of work

probably a lot of money into creating

that class content it probably was quite

impressive

I don't think it's PowerPoint exactly

but it's some kind of presentation

format and suddenly don't you think

people in Hollywood just said ah what

are you telling me that I could pull

together a team I get a content person

the presenter somebody to view the

graphics and will really just kill this

thing will make will figure out what's

the most valuable class that people

would buy and we'll make some content

and we'll make a half a million dollars

in a day because that's what's going to

happen you're right on the on the cusp

of the big teams that the corporate

entity is saying

oh this is where the money is I'm gonna

stop making movies I'm gonna start

making class content and the next thing

you need which I think will come

naturally is a credit accreditation I

believe that you'll see something like

teachable or some other company in that

business who eventually puts together

enough classes that they can create a

college major

the first major I'd like to see is

something I would call life strategy

I've said this before but it's worth

reiterating I would like to see the

federal government create a set of

requirements for types of classes that

you could take online and you would

learn life strategies now life

strategies would be everything from

you'd learn about persuasion public

speaking had to be a good communicator

how to write well maybe you'd learn

Spanish if you live in California so

maybe you'd learn how to program a

website etc so I'm talking about skills

that you could really use in the

workplace but then that they affect your

life as well so if somebody went to it

got a major in life strategies they

would be they would be fairly qualified

for a lot of different jobs that then

they would have to be trained for

specifically but that's the current

situation so I would like to see the

federal government accredit a series of

classes that they call a life major or

life strategies major and and make that

a thing so that you could go to college

for a few hundred dollars by just

downloading content that's gonna happen

it's gonna happen so look for that all

right it's not all I got

it's Sunday it's a holiday and you want

to go do other things I know you do so

let's go do other things somebody says

why does the government need to be

involved that's a fair question

so I don't know enough about this topic

but who is it who does accreditation for

colleges so the problem is you need some

entity that everybody trusts at least

trust enough you know nobody trusts the

government entirely but trust enough to

say that if the government says anybody

who takes this set of courses gets a BA

in life strategy that would probably be

enough that corporations would say

alright well you've gotten a BA in life

strategy the federal government said

that's a Thane and I'm looking at the

courses and hell yes I would like to

hire somebody who had studied this set

of courses because they're they're gonna

be pretty powerful so uh alright we'll

get rid of this troll

goodbye troll somebody says I don't

think accrediting organizations are a

government strategy you might be right

but whoever whoever does the

accreditation if they don't want to do

it the federal government could all

right there's nothing stopping them from

doing it they could certainly do it if

they wanted to and indeed if the

government doesn't want to do it I would

do it so if somebody wanted to create an

online set of courses that they wanted

to call life strategy I would I would be

willing to endorse it if it were if it

were a bag of classes I thought were

good yeah Warren Buffett could endorse a

set of classes

Bill Gates could endorse a set of

classes Elon Musk wouldn't you take if

he'll on musk said I would hire somebody

who took this set of courses wouldn't

you take that seriously now of course in

the technical world he needs people who

are engineers and have technical courses

but even Tesla must be hiring a lot of

people for non-technical jobs if you on

musk said anybody who takes this set of

courses we we will take seriously at

Tesla that would mean a lot that would

mean locked

um all right that's all I got for now

and I will talk to you tomorrow