Episode 1321 Scott Adams: Kids in Cubicles at the Border, Musk Robs the Poor to Colonize Mars According to Bernie, and More
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Elon Musk catching heat from Bernie for colonizing space
Arbitrator for congress to break gridlock?
2/3 of public say we have a border crisis
Homeland Security: Border closed...except for lone children
Will the migrant crisis help or hurt our economy?
The Dilberito's flaw
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
It's time for the best part of the entire day so far.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Well, you knew that, didn't you?
And, and, this time, wow, it's going to be good.
Yeah, it'll be the best simultaneous sip all day long, guaranteed.
And all you need is a cup or a bag of glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug of glass, a vessel of any kind.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip, and it's going to happen now.
Go. Best one ever.
I know that's what you're saying at home.
Well, I had a hypothesis not too long ago that a very attractive woman could go in public without a mask and would not be asked to put one on.
Just because it's an attractive woman.
And Christine and I went to Safeway to buy some groceries last night and didn't notice until we got to the cashier that I had worn my mask the entire time, but she had never worn her mask the entire time she was in the grocery store.
Nobody asked her to put a mask on.
She gets up to the cashier, and the cashier is the first person Who notices she's not wearing a mask and says something.
And the cashier says, oh, you're not wearing a mask.
You'll need to put a mask on.
And we didn't have an extra one with them.
And I said, do you have one?
I thought they might have spares or something.
And they didn't. So Christina, of course, says, oh, you know, I'm sorry, I'll go get my mask from the car or I'll go wait in the car because I was just checking out anyway.
And the cashier looks at her and he goes, eh, don't bother.
Have you ever seen that in your entire life?
He just looks at her and goes, eh, don't bother.
But at the same time, the six-foot distance thing apparently has been removed from my grocery store.
It looks like they're going to the three-foot kind of situation, which you sort of do automatically because your cart's in the way.
So I suppose that was a humble brag.
And transparently so.
But it was so funny to see that hypothesis tested.
Do you know how long I would have gotten away maskless?
I wouldn't have gotten past the entry.
I would have walked past the chips and somebody said, hold on, you need to cover up a lot of that.
And not just for COVID either.
Alright, Elon Musk is getting some Heat from Bernie Sanders and others because he tweeted about collecting resources to get humanity to the stars.
And people said, whoa, what about all the people here on Earth who need help?
What about them?
Bernie Sanders says.
Shouldn't you be helping the people right here on Earth instead of using all these resources to go to Mars?
And so I was prompted to do a little informal survey, the non-scientific type on Twitter.
I asked people, where do billionaires get their money?
Do they, choice A, steal it from the poor?
Because, you know, if you want money, the poor is where you go.
Or, did they create it out of nothing?
Well, nothing gets created out of nothing.
As far as we know. But it's closer to that, right?
Why is it that Bernie deserves some of that money that Elon Musk created out of nothing?
I don't know what that argument is, but I would make the following argument.
Colonizing space It's the only way that we stay non-Chinese.
Because China is going to colonize space.
If we don't get there first and have a controlling presence in space, whoever owns space owns Earth.
Because if you have the high ground, you militarily basically control Earth.
And I don't know if that's 100 years from now, But why would you let that happen?
If the United States could keep technical supremacy and make sure that we don't lose space, that might be the most important thing that's happening right now.
I would guess that what Elon is doing, in terms of the value to humanity for the next...
What Elon is doing is a million times more important than everything Bernie has ever done.
It's not even close.
In terms of service to humanity, these two are not on the same plane.
Bernie's service to humanity is pretty good, actually.
I would rank him as a productive member of society.
Certainly in terms of moving the arguments and changing how we think about things.
But in terms of doing actual stuff that got done, I think Musk is the big winner there.
Andres Beckhaus tweeted that colonizing Mars might be the best way to protect Earth in case somebody like Bernie Sanders ever becomes president.
And Andres cleverly says, as long as we keep all the colonization ships on Mars, an Earth run by people like Bernie Sanders will never be able to build one.
So they'll never be able to get to Mars and cause any trouble, because their technology will never be able to get to Mars.
And the reason that's funny is because it sort of makes sense that if we don't escape to Mars, we will be doomed by anything that happens on Earth.
So it turns out that Trump, at least reportedly...
Is planning to come back in two or three months with his own media platform.
Yay! How much fun are we going to have when Trump comes back with his own media platform?
Now, I don't know what that will look like, but I have to think it's a video-based something.
Maybe you can post things, maybe you can tweet on it, or whatever is the equivalent of tweeting.
So, we'll all be waiting for that.
That'll be fun. Kind of makes you wonder who would be part of that platform, doesn't it?
Because I don't know if it can happen in two or three months, because I haven't heard of anybody who's been approached.
Have you? If you've been approached by whatever this new platform is to be part of it, unless it's just Trump himself, which is entirely possible, but if anybody's been approached to be part of any kind of a Trump media thing, let me know. Tweet at me or DM me or something.
Here's an idea that will sound crazy.
Until you think about it.
Are you ready? This will sound like the worst idea, and then it's just going to sort of sit there for a while until it sounds good to you.
You know how in business, when you sign a contract, it's fairly common.
Snickers! Quiet over there.
It's fairly common in business to sign a contract with a clause in it that says, if you have a dispute, it will be solved by mediation.
Now, mediation I've got to do something about my dog.
All right, wake up.
Yeah, there we go. Now, mediation means that you're going to get a result from a mediator, somebody who does that for a living, that will not make either side happy in all likelihood, right?
It might make one of them happy and the other unhappy, but it's probably going to be some middle ground compromise sort of thing.
No, I didn't throw the Kleenex box at her.
I just wanted her to hear it.
So, here's my crazy idea.
We're watching the Democrats and Republicans be unable to govern...
Because now they have arbitration.
So it's called arbitration, yes.
And so the Democrats and the Republicans can't get anything done because they don't want to vote for the other side.
And therefore not much can get done.
What would happen if we had a mediator?
Or an arbitrator?
Somebody who would say, alright, this is an important issue.
I'll take one that we haven't dealt with as much.
Let's say transportation, some kind of a infrastructure bill.
Alright, just to pick something that's maybe upcoming.
What would happen if the Democrats and Republicans just couldn't decide?
They just couldn't decide.
So what do you do? Just have no bill?
That doesn't work. Because that's where we are now, right?
Just nothing happens. But what would happen if the Democrats and Republicans, under some trigger, say, all right, we can't work this out?
And just give it to the arbitrator and say, this is what we think.
The other side says, this is what we think.
But here's the key.
The Democrats and Republicans would have to agree in advance to accept the decision.
And then suddenly, Somebody says, basically, Joe Manchin.
Basically, he's the arbitrator, right?
Joe Manchin gets to decide because he's the only one who will cross lines.
Now, okay, here's the question I'm anticipating.
Who elects the mediators or the arbitrators?
Because then you'd have a situation where all of our elected representatives would be neutered, and an unelected person would make the decision.
But wait. It's not a problem.
Because the elected people would be selecting.
They would have selected the arbitrator.
So it's a process by which the elected people decide in advance that this is how they'll make a decision.
But it would still be the elected people who had created the system that created the outcome.
It would just be a reasonable person making the decision.
Who is neither Democrat nor Republican in terms of bias.
Watch how that idea sounds batshit crazy when you first hear it, and it's gonna sort of gnaw you over time.
Because as long as the Democrats and Republicans both agree to let the arbitrator arbitrate, it would work.
And I'm seeing in the comments there's like a real hesitation.
Somebody says it's not constitutional?
I disagree. You could make it constitutional simply by having the Republicans and Democrats agree to abide by it.
Because they could simply change their mind and that gives them full control.
So they don't have to.
They would just agree to it.
Now how is that different than You know, the stuff getting worked out in committee.
It's not a lot different, right?
So watch how that one gets better over time.
So on my ongoing series of Trump will look better every day, that he's gone, did you know that the Trump administration did allow photojournalists into the juvenile migrant detention centers, but Biden does not?
Think about that. The Trump administration, with their so-called kids in cages, allowed the journalists to come in and take pictures and interview people and stuff.
And Biden's not doing that.
That's basically the Uyghur concentration camp situation, right?
Do we have more photos of Uyghur concentration camps or of these migrant detention facilities for children?
Yeah, I saw the Project Veritas video and there's some other photographs that came out today.
And it seems that they're being kept in these clear plastic-sided containers.
But they're not boxes because they have an open top.
They're kind of cubicles, if you look at them.
They're cubicles with a door.
And I thought to myself, wait a minute.
If we're keeping kids in cubicles at the same time that Remote office work is becoming a big thing.
Aren't there hundreds of thousands of empty cubicles just sitting there in rented space with nobody in them?
Why can't we put those kids in cubicles?
Do you feel me? In all seriousness, is there any reason we can't use office space that's been abandoned?
They've got bathrooms. They've got containers called cubicles.
And what would be funniest about that is we can all complain about kids in cages, justifiably.
We can all complain about kids in boxes, kids in any kind of custody.
We can all complain about that.
But what would happen...
If those kids were put in a modern office building in cubicles.
Right? Now you don't need a door on every cubicle as long as you're guarding the exterior exits.
I feel as if you could put kids in cubicles and it would end the problem because we wouldn't be able to complain that living in cubicles was inhumane.
You could give each kid their own cubicle.
We probably have plenty of them.
Now, I'm just, you know, I don't think anything like this will happen, but putting kids in hotels doesn't seem like the right answer, does it?
Because that's what they're doing now.
They're putting them in hotels.
But I suppose a hotel has a shower, so that's an advantage.
All right. A Rasmussen poll says two-thirds of the public say we have a border crisis.
Two-thirds of the public.
Now, I don't think I've ever seen a president fail harder than this, have you?
Do we have any history of a president coming into office, implementing a policy, the immigration policy in this case, and failing spectacularly in the first 30 to 60 days?
Has that ever happened?
What would be another example of a worst start for a president?
Can you think of one? Because presidents usually start off pretty well, right?
Usually the first honeymoon period.
Somebody says Bush, but what did Bush do in the first 30 to 60 days?
I don't think anybody's had a worse start.
This might be the...
Oh, 9-11?
Was 9-11 in the first two months of Bush?
I don't know. Alright, here's a question that you think we ought to know the answer to, but according to social media, the final word on everything, we don't.
So, I saw these tweets going around this morning about Israel's outcomes, and if you look at the Israeli data, Vaccinations versus outcomes.
It seems pretty clear that the vaccinations started and then the hospitalizations and deaths plunged as soon as they started getting enough people vaccinated.
So you say to yourself, well, it obviously works.
Because the vaccinations came, the deaths and the hospitalizations plunged.
What else do you need to know?
Well, I thought that that sounded pretty good.
And especially because the rate of vaccinations within different age groups seems to map perfectly to show that the more vaccinated you are, the faster the curve falls.
Just like you'd expect.
But... But it didn't take long for people to say, well, here's my chart of other countries who have exactly the same curve and they're not vaccinating much at all.
To which I say, damn it!
Damn it! Again?
We actually...
Is it true that we can't tell if the vaccinations are working?
And that we'll never know When I say we'll never know, I don't mean that science won't decide that they know, but I feel the public has already made a move and said, it doesn't matter what data you show us, we're just not going to believe those vaccinations made any difference.
Yeah, I think I would agree with the commenter who was saying it's a little too soon.
I feel as if we should know for sure in two months, right?
But, as somebody pointed out, The Spanish flu went away, and they didn't have the vaccine.
So why did it go away?
Apparently it was not because of herd immunity.
We don't know why the Spanish flu went away, and here's the kicker.
We don't know why any virus goes away, which was the most amazing thing I learned early on in the pandemic, that we don't know why the seasonal flu goes away.
It just does. Now the only thing that makes sense is that some people have some natural immunity for one reason or another.
I can't think of any other reason that a virus would go away without immunity and without a vaccination.
But... Do you believe that we don't have data yet to know that vaccinations work?
We were able to...
Apparently we can measure the amount of antibodies...
I mean, it certainly looks like we can measure it, but a number of people showed me graphs where other countries that are not doing much, actually the United States, is not doing as well on vaccinations, but our curve looks the same.
So how do you explain that?
How do you explain that countries not vaccinating are also having a big drop at about the same time?
The amount of stuff we don't know about this is just stunning.
I heard somebody who knew what they were talking about, a doctor, told me that one of the problems with counting the regular seasonal flu, influenza deaths, are that we count them as an influenza death if it's sort of the last thing that happened before they died.
So if somebody gets influenza...
And then the influenza is taken care of, but a few days later they die of, let's say, something related.
Maybe it's pneumonia or something.
That that would get counted as an influenza death.
Even if they died with no influenza in them, the thought is that they were weakened to the point where it's the proximate cause.
But does that make sense?
Because here's another way to look at it.
It seems to me that anybody who dies...
I'll take an average 80-year-old person.
Aren't they dying for all the reasons?
They're dying for all the reasons.
One of the reasons is they didn't eat well during their entire life.
Didn't have a good diet. Another reason is they didn't exercise enough.
Another reason is that they were born with a certain genetic...
Genetic propensity for things.
And then there were all the decisions they made during their life.
Did they smoke cigarettes?
Did they do this?
Or did they do that? Don't you need every one of those things to happen on top of the influenza in order to kill a person?
But because the last thing you saw was the influenza, we say that's the thing that killed you.
But if you would say removed...
Any of the other major parts I mentioned, let's say you had always eaten well, if you went back in time and changed that variable, and now you're thin, but you're older.
Do you still die?
When you still die, If you wouldn't, then it wasn't the influenza that killed you, right?
It was your bad diet over years and years.
Or your lack of exercise, or you didn't take your vitamin D, or whatever.
So it seems to me illogical to say that the last thing that happened, sort of the final straw, is the one that broke the camel's back.
It's just the one that happened last.
It's not like a car accident where the car accident definitely killed you, right?
And it's not like cancer, necessarily, because the cancer kills you.
I suppose you could argue that your lifestyle might have contributed to that, too.
And then there's a question of whether you can count this stuff.
I saw a tweet this morning that somebody claiming we already know that half a million extra people died in 2020, but I don't think we know that.
I feel like we don't know the death count for 2020, but if anybody has that link, send it to me.
I think that's estimated. So here's the other factor.
Have you ever noticed that if you can't find your phone or your keys, where are they always?
The thing you can't find, where is it always?
It's always in the last place you look.
Right? If you can't find your keys, it's in the last place you would look.
In the last place you do look.
Now, of course, I'm being silly, because if you find your keys, that is the last place you look.
You don't need to look anymore.
You found your keys. And so, how many people...
Who are, let's say, within a year of dying, get the influenza, and then, because just the order of things, death comes after.
Do you know it's harder to die first and then get the influenza after you're dead?
I'm no doctor, but I think that's a safe sentence.
So suppose it's flu season, and people are going to get the flu.
Old people, some of them get the flu within a few weeks of a death, but maybe they were going to die anyway.
And the flu maybe pushed it up a few days or a few weeks, I don't know.
But is that really the cause of death?
If you were only a few weeks away from death?
Because it seems to me that just the coincidental timing of people getting the flu and then they were going to die anyway I feel like that would get a little over-counting going on, but I'm not sure.
So the quality of our data on everything from influenza to masks to distancing to vaccinations, we're at a point where we don't believe anything, and maybe we don't.
And I don't think influenza, the regular influenza, is even based on death certificates.
I think it's some kind of weird estimate.
All right, apparently Biden's Department of Homeland Security Secretary insists that the border is closed and it's under control except for lone children.
So that's the Biden administration says that it's closed except for lone children.
So the question I ask you is, why?
Why does the Biden administration not want adults to come in?
Is it because he's racist?
Because it seems pretty racist to close your border and not let one brown person in who's an adult?
Come on. Are there any white people you're keeping out from crossing the southern border?
Well, a few maybe who came from Europe and tried to get in that way.
But, mostly...
Biden is keeping the brown people from crossing the border, and I don't think we can ignore that.
Of course, that's what would be sad if it were Trump.
Yeah, it's ageism.
It's ageism. Exactly.
That's exactly what it is. Now, how would you regard the Joe Biden kids in cubicles problem If the press had been able to report on it, and if Biden had been completely transparent about how bad it was, I feel as if I would have taken that completely differently.
Imagine, if you will, that Biden had said exactly the opposite of what he said, which is, yeah, you know, because I said we were going to be kind to children, it totally causes more children to come here unaccompanied.
That's all on me.
But the alternative is worse.
And I'm going to show you what we're doing.
We're not prepared.
I wish we were.
It's going to get ugly down there.
But we're going to prepare as fast as we can.
So we're going to let the photojournalists and the journalists talk to everybody.
You see how bad it is?
It's as bad as you think it is.
Take a picture. We're working as hard as we can to fix it.
I feel like that would have felt different to me.
That would have felt like we've got a bad problem and nobody has a good idea or the immediate resources for solving it.
And then I would say, okay, at least that's honest.
Maybe I wouldn't have played it that way.
But at least it's honest, right?
I'll take that. But it feels like Biden has given us a bad situation and then on top of it made it non-transparent.
Oh, that's not good.
That's not good. All right.
Southern states should form a sanctuary coalition, somebody's saying, to fix this themselves.
I don't know how they do that.
Somebody says, boy, you are easy.
Well, don't get me wrong.
I think that Trump's policy on the border was the smart one, and it feels like we're going to end up back there eventually.
So I do think...
Well, let me say it right out loud.
I'll say out loud what people don't want to say.
If we don't make it really hard for children...
Too many of them will come, and that won't be good for them either.
So I'll say what most adults don't want to say is we have to probably make it really, really bad for kids.
Otherwise, the situation gets out of control.
Unfortunately, we live in a cruel world, and having boundaries and borders and rules and laws and stuff like that, We don't really have an option for that stuff.
It's not like you can just accept them or not accept them.
We need to be able to say out loud, and by the way, if I were president, I would say that out loud.
I would say it just the way I'm saying now.
I would say, look, we want to be good to kids, but we need to make it hard on them.
Otherwise, we'll have a worse situation.
Now, one of the things that I wonder about is whether this migrant crisis is going to hurt us or help us.
Don't you assume that tens of thousands of unaccompanied miners crossing the border, you kind of assume it's bad, don't you, for the economy?
But I don't know.
I actually don't know.
It might not be.
Because And I think I would need a little help on the economics decision here.
Let's say that humans have different economic values.
If an 80-year-old immigrant came across the border, I would say, that's going to be expensive, because the 80-year-old is not going to work, probably, but might have health problems, might be a burden.
But what happens if a 14-year-old comes across the border?
A 14-year-old probably has a good chance of learning English well enough by the time they're an adult.
They're probably going to get an upgrade in education.
And the odds of them becoming productive citizens is pretty good.
You know, most countries need an influx of young people, no matter how they get them, or else your economy stalls out.
So we don't have a choice of having lots of young people, and you can either give birth to them or bring them in from immigration.
But young people are like gold.
As humans go, as human beings go, Mexico sent us their best.
I think that's the truth.
You know, Trump is famous for saying they're not sending their best.
That's the adults.
Because the adults include cartel members and stuff like that.
Now, I disagree with Trump that they're not sending their best.
I very much disagree with that.
He's certainly true that their criminal elements are coming across the border.
But I think actually Mexico is sending their best in this one sense, that the adults who are coming, don't count the cartel members and the MS-13, but the adults who are coming to work are the boldest, They're the ones who can make it.
They're the risk-takers, the entrepreneurs.
We might accidentally be siphoning off Mexico's most valuable asset, which is their best people.
Now, not best in terms of educational attainment, but that's maybe, you know, one generation away.
So I'm just going to ask the question, is there an economist out there who's looked at the question specifically, if you were to take the children and they were the only migrants, would you come out ahead or behind?
Now keep in mind that each of these migrants will go stay with somebody, so they're not going to be homeless, for the most part.
They'll be taken care of by some kind of entity, and we'll see.
They're from Central America, not Mexico for the most part.
Yeah, I should add that correction.
They're more from Central America than Mexico.
That is correct. Thank you for that.
Thank you for that upgrade.
Who pays the schools for them?
So here's where you need the economists.
So certainly the children will create some costs.
There'll be some extra healthcare costs.
There'll be school costs.
There'll be a burden in a number of ways.
So the question is not that they present costs.
It's obvious that they do.
The question is, will they create more benefit than they've added in costs?
And I would say it should be no different than our own children, right?
We send our own children to school.
It costs money. I'm paying for your children to go to school.
Why is it fair that I'm paying for your children to go to school?
So maybe you might pay for somebody else's children to go to school too, and as will I. I just don't know if this is economic plus or minus.
If you think you know the answer to this, I'll bet you don't.
I bet you don't. Remember, we don't know if masks work.
I mean, I think they do.
But the state of our data is just terrible.
We're arguing about masks and social distancing and lockdowns in schools.
We're arguing about vaccines now, of all things.
We're arguing about everything.
So, do you think that you know That migrant children are economically negative?
Because I will take that bet, without seeing what the economists say, you know, sight unseen, I will take the bet that the children are almost always, on an average, are almost always positive economically.
I don't know. Now, I do know that it's terrible for the Central American countries, because the Central American countries, I was watching, was it the leader of, I forget, one of the Central American countries, was saying that their product is exporting people.
They don't have a functioning economy, because if you're exporting your people, That's your worst situation.
So their best, brightest, healthiest, youngest people are all leaving.
That's bad.
That's really bad.
So, how could it be true?
I suppose it could be true.
But you've got a situation where if it's bad for where they're leaving, that they're leaving, isn't that because they have an economic value?
That's the whole point, right?
They have a future economic value that's quite substantial.
So I think we should make a big distinction between taking the Central American kids, which might be like free money.
It might be free money.
It just doesn't feel like it.
Taking adults? Well, they're going to start taking jobs and such.
That's a different situation.
And some of them are criminals, and some of them are older, and blah, blah, blah.
Now, I suppose the chain migration is still an issue, so I don't know how you calculate that, because the young kids will eventually be able to do some chain migration of their relatives, I guess.
I think that's the way it is.
Alright, my dog's snoring too loudly.
Somebody says legal only.
Yeah, so legal would be the first choice.
But in effect, the Biden administration has legalized unattended migrant children.
So in effect, it's legal.
It's just not technically legal.
Somebody's saying that Fauci says Trump people don't like educated people.
I think that's kind of true.
That's kind of true.
I do think that Trump supporters don't trust experts and academics and elites and Harvard graduates, etc.
It's not a universal thing, but I think there's something to that.
Okay, I saw an insensitive joke that I can't decide if it's racist.
So I'm going to recount it, and then this will be your test case.
Is the following joke funny and actually supports the migrants?
Or is it making fun of the migrants and therefore is racist?
And here's the joke, and I won't tell you who said it, Because in case you think he's racist, he doesn't need any more trouble, right?
So somebody you know from social media said that the kids in cages, because they all have this foil, aluminum foil-looking blankets, and he said that it was making all the kids look like gas station burritos.
I just don't know how to respond to that one, because I laughed as soon as I realized, oh yeah, a burrito is wrapped in that tin foil thing, and there's pictures of all these kids wrapped in tin foil, and they're from South America, or they're from Central America, so you think to yourself, burrito?
But is that racist?
Tell me. Is it racist?
Or is it just offensive?
Where's that line between offensive and racist?
Because I will tell you that I'm pretty sure the person who said it was not in favor of any children of any kind suffering in any way.
So certainly nobody had any bad feelings about the children.
And I don't think anybody had any racial animosity.
But it's right on the line there, isn't it?
It's sort of right on the line of, you hear it and you go, I don't know if I would have said that in public.
The only reason I can say it in public is that I'm talking about it.
If I just said it as a joke, I think I'd have to pay for that probably.
Somebody says gas stations sell burritos.
I think the ones with, yeah, I think they do actually.
It depends on your gas station.
Alright, well at least people are laughing at it.
You don't want to laugh at any group who are suffering.
But I don't know if the children are all that suffering.
One of the questions that's never asked is, are the migrant children who are in these containers...
Let's say it even lasts for a week.
However long it lasts.
It's only supposed to be 72 hours.
But let's say it lasts a week. What was their life like before they got in that cage?
How many of them are actually happier in the cage?
I mean, nobody wants to stay in the cage forever.
But how many of them are actually physically better fed, warmer, safer from crime, than they were every day of their life until they got in the cage?
Again, I'm not pro-cage, right?
I'm just saying... If you're using your elite, let's say you're using your elite American filter to say, my God, if I left my current life and had to be wrapped in tinfoil and laying on a mattress in a container next to the border, that would be the worst day ever for me.
But that's not them.
I think they're going from a horrible situation, which is why they came here, to a situation which looks horrible by our standards, but might not be that bad compared to where they were a week ago.
So I'm not saying that the cages are humane or that they're good.
I think we should all just have a general feeling that you don't want to put kids in containers.
You don't want to put kids in jail of any kind, right?
If you can avoid it.
But maybe you can't avoid it.
If you can't avoid it, you can't avoid it.
Somebody says the conditions for those kids might be better than boot camp.
Might be. I'd say definitely.
Don't you think that a typical volunteer military person...
Who goes through boot camp has a worse time in boot camp in terms of physical comfort than any of the migrants who are kept in cages for three days.
Again, don't want anybody in a cage.
It's just, we've got to put it in perspective.
So the perfect situation would be that we treated everybody humanely, but somehow everybody believed we didn't.
So the ideal situation is to let reality and persuasion decouple.
Treat the kids humanely, but tell everybody it's a living hell, and they better not come.
All right. Somebody's making a bad pun.
Instead of quesadillas, kids ideas.
All right. Let's not be offensive.
Somebody's calling them AOC burritos.
You're right on the edge of being racist by modern standards.
So far you're just being offensive.
And by the way, I try to make this distinction.
Rarely do you see a comment that's actually racist.
Even the ones that people are getting cancelled, etc.
We've come to believe that offensive, something that bothers somebody, is also racist.
But I would argue they're rarely the same.
I would say that most times, most of the things that people say that they get cancelled for are meant to be offensive slash funny.
They're not meant to change the law to racism or It's not meant to discriminate.
It's not meant to make anybody's life worse.
It's just offensive, like a lot of humor is.
Somebody said, what happened to the dill burrito?
The dill burrito was a A burrito I made years ago and tried to mark it because it had all the vitamins and minerals you needed for the day.
But there were a few problems.
Number one, the food industry is crooked, and so when we would go on a shelf, There was a certain company who shall remain nameless who would send their people in to put their products in front of it.
So we would actually sell zero units because nobody would even know it was in the store.
So we got into 7-Eleven and Costco and Walmart and we got into all the big stores but nobody ever saw it.
Yeah, you're making a good guess in the comments.
And the other problem is that the product didn't have the repeat customers that we hoped because the product itself made you repeat.
Oh, did it make you repeat?
You know, this is sort of a classic thing.
Of course, we tested them all.
And I think everybody who tested the prototypes said, oh, these are tasty.
And then we would go off and have intestinal distress.
But you kind of think it's just you, right?
Like, you don't think it's the product.
You think, oh, maybe my body doesn't respond to the spicy food or something.
But the feedback from the customers was that this...
The feedback from the customers said,
apparently, this product made you fart more than any product of all time. *laughter* Somehow, this product got all the way through the testing.
We all ate it and tested it.
And we all had the same experience.
Privately and individually, we all had the worst heart attack you've ever had in your life.
But I think all of us individually didn't talk about it.
And we just figured, well, it's just my body.
It's just one of those things.
Didn't really think it was a quality of the product so much.
Just thought it was something about me.
Then you put it out there.
Basically, you could eat that thing once and you destroy all your furniture.
That's one of my best failures.
Of all my failures, I think I like that one the best.
Because it's so ridiculous.
Oh, God. That's all I've got.
We could probably just feed those dill burritos to pigs to make methane.
I think we could fuel a major city with two dill burritos and a couple of pigs, and you'd have all the methane you ever needed.
