All Episodes
April 4, 2020 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
38:20
Episode 891 Scott Adams: Sip and Learn

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Content: Listen to scientists, the WHO and other experts? Cell phone location tracking for disease control Fired Navy captain protecting his crew? Checklist to Identify who is safest for return to work The Daily Show misleading compilation clip mocking FOX News --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody Maui, MKJ, Maui is one of my favorite places in the world Hey, Matthias and Phil and the rest of you, come on in.
It's time for Coffee with Scott Adams.
Yes, it's the simultaneous shelter in place.
Thank you for that suggestion, Quinn.
And today, we're going to enjoy the simultaneous hip, and it doesn't require a lot of preparation.
It really doesn't.
All you need...
Is it a cup or a mug or a glass of tank or gels or stein, a canteen drink or flask, a vessel of any kind?
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything, including the pandemic, so much better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Go. Mmm.
I can feel the death rates falling.
Places all over the world.
All right, let's talk about some stuff.
I was seeing a quote from Joe Biden that says, quote, We need to lead the way with science.
So he was criticizing the president and saying that we'd be better off if we listened to science a little bit more.
Science told us that face masks don't work.
The virus cannot be transferred from human to human, and there's no reason to close travel from China.
So, what is the lesson here exactly?
Should we listen to experts?
Because certainly you have to listen to some of the experts, because it's not as if they're wrong about all things all the time, and they only have to be right once.
If you don't listen to them, you're dead.
So we're in sort of a tough bind here, aren't we?
Imagine how the world would look different if everything that the scientists and the experts had told us had turned down to be right on.
And just everything they said just was right on.
What would that mean for, let's say, climate change?
Just imagine if we had gone through this experience, and we're still going through it, but we can already determine that when we get to the end of it, we're not going to be trusting experts as much as you might like, because the experts failed us in spectacular fashion.
I mean, really. When people make lists of how experts failed us as a public, this is going to be in the top three.
No matter what happens, whether it's as big as the experts said or not as big, what's already happened, especially with the face mask thing, that was so damaging to the whole scientific trust situation.
So I think what we found is that even if experts know the answer, even if they know the right answer, You can't trust them to tell you the right answer.
Because that's what we learned.
Because they might be managing other requirements.
They might have some loyalty to another country.
Let's say China. They might be politicians.
They might be paid off by some industry.
They might be trying to prevent hoarding.
They might be trying to manage your expectations.
They might be trying to manage their career because they don't want to be wrong.
It's worse to be wrong.
Or it's okay to be wrong, but you don't want to be wrong in the other direction.
So you can imagine a whole bunch of reasons why the experts would know the right answer but not tell you.
So that's an extra risk.
It's not as easy as listen to the experts because you don't know if they have the same incentive you do.
You don't know if you're talking to the right experts.
Certainly I think we can conclude that before this coronavirus stuff, most people, I think, would have expected the World Health Organization to be credible experts.
I mean, I didn't know anything about them.
But if you had said to me, oh, there's a worldwide organization, it's called the World Health Organization, and here's their mission, I would have said, oh, yeah, you can trust those guys.
I mean, why wouldn't you?
Obviously, they're working for World Health.
Obviously, they have experts.
They're not going to say things that other experts disagree with, not in public anyway.
Why wouldn't you trust the World Health Organization?
But of course it turns out that they were just lying completely.
We don't know what they knew or didn't know, but we know that they gave us bad information.
So I think if you're a proponent of the Green New Deal, and you're trying to convince people that the scientists and the experts got it right, and that there's a massive risk for climate change, independent of whether there is or is not a massive risk, We non-experts have to trust the experts, but can we?
I mean, with this experience fresh in your mind, would you trust a climate change expert?
Now, there are different domains and different levels of evidence, and one has decades of research, and one was sort of a fog of war, new things.
So I don't say they're even comparable.
But I'm just talking about the psychology of the public.
Is the psychology of the public such that we're going to believe whatever the next experts tell us, no matter who those experts are, no matter what the domain is?
I think we're kind of spoiled, right?
I think we got a little bit ruined in terms of our trust of experts by this experience.
And that's got to bleed over into other categories.
There's no way that that doesn't influence how you think about the next thing.
All right. So here's a little insight on the toilet paper shortage, and I have a solution for it.
That's right. I have a solution for the toilet paper shortage.
Are you ready? It goes like this.
So the first thing, and this was a good insight, and I don't know why I didn't think of this myself, but it's so obvious once you hear it.
In a normal world, people are using the bathrooms at work, and they're using the bathrooms at home.
It turns out that the suppliers of toilet paper are different for the industrial market where you get this really bad toilet paper that goes in your stalls at work versus the home market where it's a little more upscale and, you know, that stuff.
So it's different manufacturers with different supply chains.
And what happened was a lot of people went from one of those supply chains to the other by staying home.
So what's happening is that it's not one supply chain for toilet paper.
There are two separate ones.
One for the industrial market and one for the home market.
And the industrial market presumably has plenty of capacity because fewer people are going to work, but it doesn't fill in for the other market.
So they can't just flip it over and say, oh, now we'll just ship it to your grocery store.
It's not even the same kind of toilet paper.
It doesn't fit the same rolls and stuff.
So that's one of the problems. But, that said, I believe I could still fix it.
And here's how.
Bear with me now. Now, if you're new to my periscopes, I should warn you not to take anything I say too seriously.
So if anybody's new, don't take me too seriously.
The rest of you know what's coming.
So here's how I would solve it.
And it goes like this. Presumably there are people who have extra toilet paper.
Right? Because that's what hoarding is.
So there are some people who have way too much.
And there are some people who didn't get enough.
Now, how would you normally solve that?
Well, normally you'd solve that with some kind of a market system where the people who know they got too much could sell it out of markup or a profit to people who didn't get enough.
And then over time it would solve itself because if that market became efficient, then the people who had too much Wouldn't worry about selling a little bit of it because they can always buy it back.
Worst case scenario, they sell it into the free market.
Later they have to buy it back.
Maybe they pay a few extra bucks, but they get their toilet paper.
So if you had a market for individuals Selling toilet paper, and if that market were efficient, which is the big, that's the hard part.
You're getting everybody to agree that it's a real market and they'll really sell stuff.
And so here is my suggestion.
Somebody says he's a cartoonist.
I'm a cartoonist with a degree in economics and an MBA and 16 years of financial experience in modern corporate America.
But if you'd like to say just a cartoonist, that's fine too.
So here's my suggestion.
To create a market for toilet paper, consumer to consumer, using two apps that already exist and are free.
So nothing needs to be invented.
There are two apps that could create this market today, and they're free.
You can download them now.
Nobody has to do anything. But here's the trick.
You know how cryptocurrencies are kind of worth nothing at the moment?
You know, Bitcoin sells the value, but a lot of the The lesser cryptocurrencies, they just sort of became vanishingly small.
Well, in order to have a good currency, it would be ideal to have it backed with some physical good.
Some people say that the dollar was better when it was backed by gold.
But at least the dollar is still backed by the faith of the government, so the government will always accept it for taxes.
So as long as your currency is backed by something...
It can maintain its value.
It's a cryptocurrency that's not backed by anything but psychology that can disappear.
So here's the suggestion.
My cryptocurrency for my startup, WenHub, is called the Wen, W-H-E-N. So it exists and you can trade it.
And I've decided that I'm going to back it with a physical good.
So from this point on, one Wen...
is equal to one roll of standard toilet paper.
Now, it only works if everybody agrees it's true.
The moment anybody says, no, I just don't like that, then it doesn't work.
But if everybody agreed that one when equaled one toilet paper, then you could trade them.
But suppose you don't want to trade in cryptocurrencies, you want to trade in money.
I still got you covered. So here's what you could do.
You could go on the Interface by OneHub app.
That's the one my startup makes.
And you could be any kind of an expert, but you don't have to be an expert.
You could go onto the app and say your job description is hashtag toilet paper and then put your zip code.
I'm just brainstorming here.
None of this is really practical.
So don't worry about this actually happening.
I'm just thinking you through, right?
So you go to the Interface by OneHub app.
And you can put in your zip code and toilet paper.
Then somebody who needs toilet paper in your zip code so that there's no shipping costs, you could just drive it over and deliver it.
So somebody with your zip code has it, and you just call them up on the app and say, hey, I'll buy some of your toilet paper.
How much is it? And they say, 20 bucks.
You know, it's a markup. Twenty bucks.
And you say, okay, can you leave it on my front doorstep?
And I will pay you through the app.
Because the app lets you tip.
So if the guy says, yeah, it's twenty bucks, you can say, alright.
And you send him twenty bucks right through the app.
And it could be cash, or it could be cryptocurrency.
You just get to choose. Now, there's another app.
Also free. In which you can watch the guy deliver on a map.
So let's say the guy says, okay, I'll bring it over and leave it on your front door, and I'll send you a link, and you can watch me drive over.
So you don't have to worry about somebody stealing it once it's left on the doorstep, because you don't want to touch them, right?
Social distancing. So the other app is called Approach.
It's also in the stores.
It's also free. And you could, if you wanted, you could add your name to the app.
That's five bucks a month. But you don't have to.
So you just use it for free.
So you make your deal on the interface by WinHub app.
And you say, when it's delivered, I'll tip you through the app for your toilet paper.
And... I'll be able to watch you on a map in the Approach app as you're coming to my house so that I'll know when it's there and I'll be able to take it in without somebody stealing it.
Huh? So, one when is equal one roll of toilet paper.
Now, it's not currently worth that, but all we'd have to do is agree that it does.
You simply would have to all agree.
That's it. You just agree that it's equal this, and it is.
It's completely a psychological phenomenon.
So, if you want to solve the toilet paper crisis, one WEN equals one toilet paper, or just create a market that uses regular money, and use any kind of app.
You don't have to use my app, right?
You could use Venmo, but the interface by WenHub app allows you to discover.
If you use Venmo, you're not going to be able to find somebody to pay.
You'd have to somehow find them another way.
But, if you use my app, people can just put in their zip code and toilet paper, and you just search for it that way, and you're like, okay, there's a guy three blocks away that'll sell me a roll.
So, I'm not terribly serious about that, but I am serious about the fact that if you created a market, if you created an efficient market, it would be solved tomorrow.
And it would also open up the possibility that your workplace could sell their extra toilet paper, right?
Because the workplace market isn't really impacted.
Because that's a different chain.
So you could just create a market for buying the toilet paper from companies that have too much.
And somebody could just go in and say, I'm not selling any product today, but I'll sell you my toilet paper.
I'm not using it. Alright, so enough of that.
So apparently...
There are companies that do have access to your phone location, and it depends which app they're using for that, because some of your apps already, you've given it approval to track your location.
So there are third parties that can get that randomized information.
They can't tell it's you, but they can tell that somebody is around there.
And I guess they could track all the phones that went to spring break, and then they could track them as they left spring break and went back and infected the rest of the country.
And so that technology's really got some future.
My guess is that by the time we have the next pandemic, that there will be apps that tell you when you're close to people, and apps that will tell you who you've connected with recently so they can do contact tracing.
So I think your phone will be your primary virus healthcare device by the time the next pandemic rolls around.
Apparently Russia is already using their public cameras and facial recognition to bust people for not socially isolating.
So that technology, I expect, will be much more robust by the next pandemic, too.
So you can actually get to the point with existing technology, you would just have to decide to use it, basically, because we already have facial recognition and cameras and phones and stuff.
You would just have to decide to use it.
But if you did...
You could probably solve a pandemic without drugs.
Right? If you knew everything about everybody's location and you knew who exactly, like exactly, who was next to who and when, I think you don't even need drugs.
I think you just say, whoa, pandemic, we just found 10,000 people who had some kind of association.
You 10,000, you've got to stay home for two weeks.
That's it. And then it's over.
You just carve out this big area and say, yeah, we know exactly what's happening there.
You just stay away from these people.
That may be oversimplifying, but in theory, you could solve it with just information and no drugs.
So, you know that story about the...
The Navy captain who wrote the memo and showed it to too many people about his crew not being sufficiently protected from coronavirus, and the Navy fired him.
So the firing offense was that he took his communication outside the naval appropriate chain of command.
And I agree with that.
I have to say, You know, emotionally, I agree with the captain who was just trying to protect his ship.
But there is something to be said for the rule of order in the military, and he violated it quite grossly, and that was the obvious outcome.
Now, the weird part about it, as Mark Schneider pointed out, and I didn't even catch, you probably saw some of the video of the crew of the ship Gathering en masse to clap and cheer the captain after he had left the ship.
But here's the thing.
The entire issue was about the people in the ship being exposed to the coronavirus and not being safe.
And the captain who gets fired for bringing up this issue becomes the focal reason for That everybody in the ship gathered in a large, confined space, shoulder to shoulder, and probably killed a few of them, you know, statistically speaking.
So there's a story within the story about what the hell is going wrong with this ship, and if the captain was okay with everybody meeting in a large, tight group to say goodbye to him, then maybe he needed to be fired.
Because it seems to me that what he should have been doing, even as he was exiting the ship, is saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, get out of this crowd.
The whole point is I'm trying to protect you idiots.
How about not standing in a tight crowd to wish me good luck, because that's the opposite of what I got fired for.
I'm trying to protect you.
Don't stand in a big crowd to wish me well.
So... That's weird.
All right. Can you calculate for me, or can anybody, based on what we know already?
Now, maybe you and I can't calculate it, but I think this can be calculated, albeit with numbers that are subject to change.
But I tweeted this earlier.
Can you calculate the coronavirus risk of death for the following person?
A 35-year-old American, non-smoker, average weight, not overweight, not underweight, no known underlying health conditions, who practices social distancing, wears a face mask, commutes to work alone, and let's say has some space at work to also socially distance.
And let's say that that person doesn't have any vulnerable people living in the house that they go back to.
What are the odds of a death happening because this person goes back to work?
Can we calculate it?
Sorry, I'm looking weird.
It seems to me that we should be able to calculate that, right?
And what would that risk be?
And then who gets to decide if that risk is acceptable?
Is it the government? At this point, yes.
So I would like to see that calculation made, first of all, because what do I tell you over and over and over again?
The things which are not measured are not managed.
So if we're trying to manage this crisis, but we can't measure the individual risk of this kind of person versus this kind of person, then we're not managing.
So if we are managing...
I think the task force should be able to say, at some point, maybe it's a little premature, they should be able to say, look, we've calculated the risk, and if you fall into this category, you're fine.
Go back to work, we'll monitor it, maybe we'll try one metro area first, or something like that.
So I did a first draft.
So I tweeted this around.
You can see this. It's fresh at the top of my Twitter feed.
I know you can't see here, but just a sense of what it is.
So what it is, this is my first draft, just to get the ball rolling in terms of what we need.
So as I've told you a million times, the coronavirus situation is a participation factor.
Sport. You're not a spectator.
So if there's any idea you have, anything you can do, anything you can do to make people safer or better, go do it.
Don't wait around for somebody to tell you it's your job.
It's your job. If you can do it, it's your job in an emergency.
So one of the things that I'm especially good at, if I do say so myself, because I have a lifetime of practice, is simplifying complicated stuff.
I've said this before, but if there's one thing that I have a skill in that actually is above average to the average person, I have a whole bunch of skills that are just sort of pretty good but not world class.
I don't draw better than grade drawers or anything.
But I think I might have one skill that is a little bit special, meaning that there wouldn't be many people in a group of a thousand who could do this better than I could do it.
And that is simplifying a complicated thing.
And a lot of it has to do with the fact that it's been my full-time job for 40 years.
Because in my day job, I used to simplify financial analyses for management.
So I was always simplifying complicated things.
And then, of course, as a cartoonist and as an author, that is mostly about simplification, too.
So I thought I would use my special skills...
To simplify the question of how to get people back to work.
And so here's the checklist.
So some of them have no's next to them, some of them yes.
So if there's a no next to it, it means you can't go back to work yet.
Let's say in the first phase.
So all of these would mean you could not go back to work, right?
So anything on this list means you're not in the first phase but going back to work.
If you're over 60 and female...
Or over 50 and male.
Now the difference is that males have a much greater risk and age is a factor.
So these two would have similar risk.
A woman over 60 would have roughly...
And again, this is a first draft.
I would need an expert to tell me how to tweak this exactly.
But if you're a woman and you're over 60...
You're in the high risk group.
But if you're a male and you're over 50, you're already starting to get into the high risk because men have a high risk.
So if you're over 60 and female or over 50 and male, stay home on the first one.
If you've got diabetes, you're a smoker or an ex-smoker, you've got hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cancer that's not in full remission.
I think there's a difference, right?
I think if you have cancer versus...
Cancer survivor, there's got to be a difference there.
So if you have any of those conditions, that would be no, you can't go back to work.
But then I would add some more things that are more about your situation.
So the first ones are more about who you are.
And then the second group is about your situation.
So if you need public transportation to commute, maybe you don't get to go in the first phase.
So in other words, if you walk to work or ride your bike or drive your car by yourself, Then that would be considered okay.
But if you had to get on a crowded transport, maybe not in the first phase.
Is there anybody vulnerable living with you?
If you come home from work and you bring something with you, is there anybody vulnerable and old at your house?
If not, maybe you're okay.
Is there any reason you can't wear a face mask at work?
I can't think of a situation, but there must be, where for some reason you can't wear a face mask.
I don't know what that would be. So if you can, that's good.
If you can't, maybe not in the first phase.
And then the other one would be if the hospitals near you are at capacity.
So if you're in an area where your hospitals still look like they're not going to be slammed too hard, that would be a factor as well.
And then two things would allow you to go back to work for sure, is if you had confirmed antibodies, maybe you have to get tested twice.
Again, this is what the experts would tweak.
Let's say you've got confirmed antibodies and you've been tested twice, and let's say there's X number of days that have gone by, so then you're fine.
Doesn't matter what else is true, you're fine.
Or if you have essential services, so that would be the other factor.
So it really comes down to one page.
That you could put on a website or something, and you could have people say, all right, under threat of jailing for perjury, I fill out my form.
If it's a no, but I think it shouldn't be, I should be able to compensate with a doctor's note.
So, for example, let's say on the checklist it said, I don't know, hypertension.
But I go to my doctor and I say, look, I've got hypertension, but it's like just barely, and I'm 35, and everything else is good.
I just barely have a little hypertension.
Well, the doctor might say, okay, you know the risks.
It is a little more risk, but not much.
I'm going to prove it.
So you need some mechanism for a doctor to override the checklist for the gray areas.
But that's my plan. So I would like to see the administration come up with something similarly simple.
It doesn't...
Oh, yes.
Somebody in the comments says, I do not have BMI. And that is just an oversight.
So I'm going to fix that and republish it.
Yeah, so weight.
Weight is the other factor, your body mass index.
So thank you for that.
That is exactly why I put it up as a draft, so that you could do that.
Somebody says, too complicated?
Well, I don't think a checklist is complicated, because it's just yes-no.
Do you have this condition?
Yes or no? I don't think it could get easier than that.
You don't have to do any research.
Like, there's no human being who couldn't answer this easily just by looking at it.
You don't have to go talk to a doctor.
You don't have to do anything. Do I have diabetes?
Yes or no? Is that simple?
Yes, your location is important, but primarily...
Yeah, actually, that's true.
So if it's a hot spot or not.
I don't know how you'd define that.
So I'll add that to...
I was going to say that you could have that covered by how much impact the hospitals have.
But that's probably another variable.
You know, you want the hospitals to not be impacted, but also not to be a hotspot, ideally.
All right. So, The Daily Show sent around a clever little clip in which they clipped together all of the Fox News hosts Who are saying the wrong things about the coronavirus early on.
So it was all the people who said, ah, it's just the flu and don't worry about it and go about your business and go out to dinner.
And when you see all the clips together, it's pretty damning.
Pretty damning. But here's the thing.
Where's the compilation clips of all the experts who are wrong too?
Because you're sort of missing the context, right?
A little bit of context missing?
Yes, it is true that many of the personalities on Fox News said things early on that turned out to be just dead wrong.
So it's fair to show that in a compilation, but it's not fair to show it unless you also include in the compilation that the top experts, the World Health Organization, Dr.
Fauci, information we were getting from China, all of it was wrong.
So, yes, the people who were not doctors were wrong.
Do you know who else was wrong?
The doctors.
Yeah, give us some context.
How about the fact that everybody was wrong?
Everybody was wrong. There weren't any smart people.
Here's a challenge to you, The Daily Show.
Put together a clip of all the people who were right.
Who's going to be on it?
Mike Cernovich, me, Jack Posobiec.
Is that the compilation clip you want of all the people who are right early?
That's not the compilation clip you're going to show on The Daily Show, because it's not going to support your point.
So, as much as I like the compilation clips, the humorous ones, they are funny, so I'll give them that.
But this could not be more misleading.
Basically, it was fog of war, and nobody had the right answer early on.
And those of us who did, well, you know, somebody was going to be right.
You can never know if you were right for the right reasons.
You can only know that some people are right and some people are wrong, no matter what the prediction is, no matter what the topic is.
Somebody's going to be right, because there are so many people making different predictions.
But it doesn't mean they're right for the right reasons.
It just means that people were all over the board and somebody was going to be right.
So, I try not to let myself get too big of a head if I'm ever right about any of these things.
Because I never know why I'm right, really.
You just know that you were. Okay.
How many of you have lost weight during the pandemic?
I think I've lost around 8 or 9 pounds.
And I was trying to gain weight.
I was actually trying to put on a few extra pounds because I thought, especially at my age, if I get some kind of a health issue, it's good to have just a little extra weight.
You don't want to go all the way to an overweight condition because that's worse.
But being underweight at a certain age is not really good.
You want a little cushion in case something goes wrong.
So I was trying to gain weight.
I ended up losing about nine pounds only because I'm eating so well, you know, just healthy food, and I'm exercising diligently.
So I'm doing all the things I'm supposed to be doing, and I can't even gain weight by trying.
Taiwan had the right answer two months before you.
They probably had a lot better information.
I think we were getting bad information from China.
They may have had better information.
Michael Savage was right at the same time as me, you're saying.
Yeah, so imagine that compilation clip.
The compilation clip of the people who were right.
Nobody's going to put that together.
Let me make a prediction.
You're never going to see the compilation clip of the people who are right early.
Because that group doesn't have good PR, if you know what I mean.
All right. I think that's all I got for today.
Somebody's back up to 300 push-ups a day.
Damn, you're going to be a beast.
A beast! Somebody says gained weight.
Well, some of you have, you're isolating with somebody who's a good chef.
If you're isolating with somebody who's a good chef, that's going to be tough.
Can't go to gym?
Yeah. You know, I don't think there's anything better than taking a long walk for your general health.
You know, I'm a lifelong exerciser, and I've I've spent lots of time trying to understand the best techniques and stuff.
And I've probably tried most of the ways you can exercise.
So I've at least sampled just about every sport, every kind of exercise.
And I've got to tell you, the one that just always stands out is a long walk at any age.
If you're younger, maybe you walk further.
But it's the most gentle, compatible with your biological nature.
It's what your body evolved for.
It's just always good, and you don't get injured, typically.
So what I'm wondering is, there's so many people who are taking walks now, because it's one of the few things that's available to you.
I'm wondering how many people will get hooked on it.
Because I'm definitely hooked.
I used to like to, you know, drive to the gym and stuff.
But at this point, every time I take a walk on a nice, sunny, cool day that's perfect for walking, I feel great.
I sleep great, feel great, don't have any stress.
I mean, really, it's transformative fairly quickly.
Somebody said, how long? Where I walk, there are usually hills, and they're pretty steep.
So I might do two to four miles.
It just depends how I feel.
Dr. Andrew Weil says walking is the best exercise.
I think that's just got to be true.
Gaining muscle is different from gaining fat, of course.
It's hard to walk around in the city.
Yeah, it might be hard to walk around in the city because of trying to avoid people.
Out here, there's no traffic.
There's no cars.
And you can walk for a long time without being on the same side of the road as somebody.
In my neighborhood, there's always somebody out walking, you know, walking a dog or something.
But people cross the street.
So I haven't crossed somebody on a sidewalk who was on the same side of the street as me in weeks.
Probably two weeks I haven't been on the same sidewalk with somebody.
I just cross the road when somebody's coming.
Alright, that's all for me.
And I'll talk to you at 10pm Eastern, 7pm Pacific for your evening swaddle time.
Best part of the day that isn't the morning.
Alright, that's all for now.
Export Selection