things. I know they've seeded clouds. I mean there are certainly parts of it that are real, but whatever is happening, I don't know if we know. We don't know what's new.

No, no, no. Hell no. Call me skeptical. I wouldn't rule out anything at this current, my current worldview is that you can't really rule out anything anymore. But yeah, you know, it's probably something like here's my best guess. There's probably something like chemtrails, meaning that there's something real at the base of it. But I'll bet you that most of the things that people see in the sky and they believe to be chemtrails are just water vapor from jets. How many of you would accept that there might be something to the claim but that most of what we see and most, you could use your own definition of most, but most of it is just imagining you see it? Would you agree with that even if there's something real at the base? There might be something real. I mean there's nothing that rules it out really. You couldn't disprove it anyway.

Okay, so President Trump was talking to Laura Ingraham yesterday I guess. It was a nice piece. You should watch it if you can find it. And Trump was defending the so-called H-1B visas. So those are the ones that we use to, as Trump would say, bring in talent. But through the America First people depending on which ones you're talking to might say hey we have enough talent here why would you bring even one person into the country to take an American job. The answer would be whether you buy the answer or not the answer would be oh we do not have enough talented trained people for every kind of job. So in some cases when you bring people over, you're going to have to, you know, it'll take a while to train Americans or you're going to have to bring somebody from the country that invested such as the South Korean battery company. At least in the short run, they might have to bring their own people because they know how to make batteries and we don't. But we're better off bringing the, you know, onshoring the company. That would be the better long-term play.

So Trump is in favor of using them where you can't easily find or train workers and if you had those workers we would be ahead. How many of you agree with that take that there is such a thing as a worker shortage for some specialty jobs and there probably a lot of them would be specialty? And that you can't really just take the homeless and train them to make microchips? How many think you can take the homeless and just train them as hard as you can until they know how to make microchips? AI microchips.

All right, so I'm exaggerating a little bit. You couldn't do it with the homeless. But how many think you could just take, let's say, good engineers from American schools and teach them to do really anything, just anything at all? Well, you could do that, but would there be enough? And would there be enough people who wanted to be trained in that specific thing?

So I can completely understand the two sides because the two sides have reasonably good arguments. Reasonably good arguments. I mean certainly the side that says, "Damn it, you could always find an American to do these jobs. Don't let in one other person." I get that. I understand that argument very well. And then the people who say, "But if you tried, Scott, if you tried to keep out 100% of the non-citizens and you tried to simply train people in America to do these jobs, you would fail. It would be impractical." That's actually a really good argument. If you spent any time in the real world, it's hard to find anybody who's trained to do anything, just anything, you know, much less some specialty high-tech thing that we just shipped in from South Korea. Where are you going to find somebody who could do that?

And then you say, "But you can train people because we have some of the smartest, most educated people." Yes, you can, but there's friction. It might take you a while or you might need to get these specialized workers to work there for a couple years while they're training. But why would they do that if they know they're going to get fired in a couple of years? So in the real world, it's sort of really hard to get anybody who's trained to do anything. And then you add on top of it that it has to be trained in a specific thing in a specific amount of time. It's really hard.

So I think both arguments are substantial. And I guess I lean toward Trump has a common sense view of the world. I think we agree on that, right? So the question is, which of these two takes fits what you would call common sense? I feel like Trump has got the high ground here. And I hope I'm not just being a team player because you have to watch out for that, right? I feel like he just has a stronger case because it's sort of aspirational that you could train Americans to do all these jobs. I love the aspiration and I love the confidence that that shows in American workers. I just don't think in the real world you could actual