Episode 1583 Scott Adams: The Political Left is Starting to Wake Up From its Zombie Trance
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
AOC unaware of smash & grab robberies
Patriot Front march in DC
CNN fired Chris Cuomo
President Trump's comment on General Milley
Why does U.S. not accept natural immunity?
Climate change looks fixed
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to Coffee with Scott Adams.
You made it. Good job.
Now, a lot of you, you may not succeed at a lot of things for the rest of the day, but today, whoa, whoa, yeah, today you nailed it.
And we're going to take it up another notch because having the best day that anybody's ever had in the history of the universe is good.
But it's just a starting point.
Watch what we do now.
And all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
You could even use your hands briefly.
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 better except Timothy.
There, his comments. I don't know, I can't help you.
And it's going to happen right now, and watch it make you tingle everywhere.
Go. No, not true.
I didn't feel a tingle in my fingernails, so probably I exaggerated that a little bit.
You can feel it in my hair and every other atom of my being, but there was one fingernail.
It was the damaged one.
I couldn't feel it, so I'm sorry if I exaggerated that.
Well, some terrible news from the Antwerp Zoo in Belgium.
I hate to start with the bad news, but two hippos tested positive for coronavirus at the Antwerp Zoo.
When I read this...
My first thought was that probably the cheetahs at the zoo are just going to treat it as a mild cold, but I do worry about the hippos.
Cheetahs probably just shake it off.
But the hippos, you know what I mean.
Comorbidity. Anyway, here's my favorite tiny story of the day.
It's a tiny story, but I feel like it's telling us...
Something's coming. I feel as though there's some foreshadowing in this story.
And it goes like this.
Apparently AOC, when asked about all the smash-and-grab robberies, was not aware that they're happening.
She said, quote, a lot of these allegations of organized retail theft are not actually panning out.
AOC said in an interview with the Washington Times last week.
I believe it's a Walgreens in California cited it.
What? So here's why this is a big story.
It's not a big story because politician didn't know something.
It's not a big story because politician lied.
Those would be ordinary stories.
It's a big story because who in the world does not realize that AOC's plan for creating a new world in which human incentives are ignored is not working out so well.
Not working out so well.
So the fact that she is ignoring something that everybody can see with her plain eyes, I mean, anybody who lives in the city is seeing this quite clearly, at least in a blue city.
So the fact that she's denying it's even happening has got to be noticed by her base.
That's the important part.
It wouldn't mean anything if, you know, Republicans were mocking AOC yet again for the billionth time.
But I feel like she's crossed a line here where even her own side is going to say, but I'm watching a smash and grab.
Or, I just went to Nordstrom and the shelves are empty.
You know, aren't they all going to notice that Now, maybe they'll just never see this news because it was in the Washington Times, so they're not going to necessarily see it.
But I feel like it's the beginning of a crack in the two-movie model.
I've been telling you since 2015 or so that we're watching two movies, but they're playing at the same time on one screen.
We're both looking at exactly the same stuff, or similar stuff, and completely different movies in our heads of what's going on.
But I feel like they're starting to converge.
The only thing that could stop them from blending and merging at this point is Trump coming back.
As soon as Trump comes back, it's boom, two movies again.
But at the moment, he's just out of the spotlight enough...
That the two movies are starting to merge.
Now, not a lot, right?
I'm talking about signs of something to coming.
They're definitely not merged.
But I feel like the weight of the world is starting to nudge them in that direction.
We'll talk a little bit more about that.
And I asked on Twitter, but I already saw the answer on the locals.
I said, has anyone called the Bidens Build Back Better Bill a smash and grab?
But apparently that was an obvious joke.
Am I right? You've already seen that one?
I hadn't seen it yet, but it's sort of an obvious joke.
Have you all seen that one?
I'm sure it's out there. Anyway, speaking of the fake news and the two movies, how many of you saw on social media video clips of a group of alleged right-wingers called the Patriot Front, all in matching uniforms and disguises with masks and matching hats, marching in Washington, D.C. with a bunch of American flags and stuff?
How many saw that?
Right. Now, when you saw it, did you say to yourself, first thought, first thought when you saw it, hey, there's a bunch of right-wing people dressed alike.
It's another Charlottesville.
How many of you thought that?
Nobody. Nobody.
And if you went to CNN and then Fox News to find out about this group...
What'd you find? Because it's all over social media if you consume any of the content on the right.
It's all over the place.
So go to CNN and see that story about the Patriot Front who all came out of a bunch of matching U-Haul vans and then got back in them and left.
Did you see the story on CNN's website?
No. No.
Fact check me on this, but I don't think CNN even covered the story.
Why not? Why wouldn't they cover a story like that?
So I went to Fox News.
I thought, oh, okay. So CNN's going to try to ignore it because it's so obviously fake.
So I went to CNN to at least see the debunk because I figured...
I'm sorry. I went to Fox News because I thought Fox News would have some skepticism about it.
It's not there. Now, fact check me on this.
Check it right now.
I don't believe either CNN or Fox News are even covering it.
So, did it happen?
Did it happen? No, it doesn't matter that there's no violence.
It just means what matters is that it's a scary bunch of people.
There's nothing on Fox and there's nothing on CNN. Explain that.
Why? Because, you know, Fox News would at least have a story that says it's obviously fake, right?
Where is it? Where is the story?
Did it even happen?
Because if it's not being covered in the two most well-known news sites, did it even happen?
Was there an event?
And even if there wasn't an event, wouldn't it still be a story that so many people thought there was an event that didn't happen?
How in the world is this not being covered?
Somebody says Microsoft covered it.
You mean MSNBC? Somebody saw live streaming.
Who has the talking stick?
I don't know what that means.
Daily Beast and Business Insider covered it.
So, do you remember my rule that if CNN and Fox News treat it the same, that means something?
Fox News and CNN treated this the same by ignoring it.
What's that mean?
Because they didn't even report it as a mystery.
You know, I would get, like, if they didn't know who was behind it and they're looking into it, that would make sense.
But how do you not report that you're looking into it?
Or that it's a mystery?
Or that it's a question? Just saw that Scott is on Gateway Pundit this morning.
Am I? What's it say about me on Gateway Pundit this morning?
So, but here's my main point about this alleged Patriot Front group.
You want to hear the good news?
Nobody believed it.
Now, take yourself mentally back four years ago.
Just in your mind, just go back four years ago.
Imagine the same event looking exactly the same.
Does everybody believe it?
Uh-huh. Four years ago, everybody would have believed that that was a real group...
Marching. What do you believe today?
Today? Nobody believed it.
It was so unbelievable, it didn't make the news.
It was so unbelievable, it didn't make CNN or Fox News.
That's how unbelievable it was.
Oh, another truth bomb.
Okay, that's what Gateway Pundit's talking about.
One of my tweets or something.
Okay, I'll take a look at that.
Thank you for that.
So I would say that this is another indicator similar to the AOC pretending she doesn't know there's any smash and grabs going on, of any size anyway.
The Patriot Front thing plus the AOC thing is suggesting to me that the credibility of the hoaxes is starting to decrease.
It looks like the left is not as uncritically believing everything that happens, or everything they're told.
I believe that the left has gained skepticism, possibly for the first time.
Uh... Hmm...
All right. Yeah, most people were blaming the Lincoln Project.
I don't know that the Lincoln Project was behind it necessarily, but the fact that that's your first instinct shows that we've all grown up, haven't we?
Think about how your awareness of how the world really works has changed since the era of Trump.
The way you think of reality itself, what you think of the news and how true it is, what you think of the narratives, completely different.
And I would argue that we've inoculated ourselves maybe better than other countries.
Now, I'm not your big international expert, but I'm going to put this out here.
You know, we sometimes like to talk about American exceptionalism, Which I generally reject as being just a little bit too, we're awesome.
But there are some things that are unique to America, the Second Amendment chief among them, that I think does make us different.
But here's another one.
I feel like America is now way ahead of the curve for understanding propaganda and its effect on people.
Now, I don't know that. It could turn out that Denmark is way ahead of us or something.
I wouldn't know. But I feel as though the age of complete information warfare, where misinformation being fed into other adversarial countries, is going to be World War III. Brainwashing.
And I feel like America inoculated itself with the Trump experiment.
Because the Trump, let's say, experience, the Trump experience caused so much fake news in the United States, coming from official sources, that the citizens of this country learned that news is fake, or can be, or is narrative, and all those things.
And I don't think we knew that five years ago.
Like, as a country, we didn't know it.
We suspected it.
You know, people talked about it.
But we didn't know it.
Now we know it. Now we know we shouldn't trust our own sources, even American seemingly patriotic entities such as our intelligence agencies.
We know we can't trust them.
I think this is the best possible spin on the situation, which I like to give you anyway.
I think... The United States will be the most inoculated country when the future waves of enormous fake news start washing over the rest of the world, as they will, or probably have.
But I think this is healthy in a weird way.
Nobody would have asked for it, but if you survive it, you get stronger, right?
I think we survived the worst fake news attack ever.
That any country in the modern world recently has seen, I think.
Yeah, the next question, as Guy is saying on Locals, the next question is, has it always been this way?
Has it always been this way?
And my guess is it has, but the targets were different.
Meaning that the public has always been brainwashed to be patriotic, for example, but we haven't been brainwashed to be divisive against each other.
We've been brainwashed to be on the same team, brainwashed to be consumers, brainwashed to like capitalism, brainwashed to like freedom, brainwashed to like everything that's American.
So we certainly have always been brainwashed, and certainly the news has bias toward that brainwashing, but I'm not sure any of that was negative.
Was it? Steve is saying, read Mark Twain on the news.
Yeah, the news has always been full of BS, but I think the BS before might have been just more entertainment BS as opposed to dividing the country BS.
But I would imagine that the journalism of yore was pretty darn bad.
John Adams says democracy never lasts long.
Well, that's because we're not a democracy.
That's probably why we are a republic.
Yeah, let's get those bike paths.
Good comment. All right, as you all know, CNN finally fired Chris Cuomo, their biggest star, whose show appeared between Aaron Burnett and Don Lemon.
Wink, wink. Those of you on YouTube have no idea why that's funny, but the people and locals are already laughing.
And I guess there was some more information that came out and blah, blah, blah.
But Chris Cuomo was the top-rated star, as Fox News liked to proddingly say.
He was their only star.
I still laugh at that.
Fox News' characterization of their competitors, they only had one star and he had to get fired.
Their best guy.
Well, they just lost their best guy.
He got fired for being awful.
I'm sure he will emerge and be fine.
But I think CNN had to do what they had to do.
So there's not much of a story there except that Look at the difference of the cast of characters when 2014 rolls around.
Think about how many people were the main people you were listening to back in the beginning of the Trump presidential era.
So many of them are gone, cancelled.
That's a lot of cancelling.
Now here's another one. How many dynasties did Trump destroy?
How many dynasties did he destroy?
Well, he destroyed the Bush dynasty by taking out Jeb.
He ended that line.
He took out the Clinton dynasty by beating Clinton.
And depending on your point of view, he may have taken out the Cuomo dynasty.
Just simply by existing, you know, and causing them to, you know, sort of be on the other team, which puts heat on them, which, you know, creates an indirect series of events that probably took out another dynasty.
I think Trump has taken out three American dynasties.
The McCain family, maybe.
Am I right? Cheney, I don't know.
And Romney, nah, not so much.
They weren't dynasties. But who has destroyed three dynasties before?
And who taught us about fake news?
I'll tell you, the legacy of Trump is unparalleled at this point.
You know, I don't think historians will ever give him credit for teaching us about fake news.
But he did.
It's probably one of the greatest accomplishments of any president.
Teaching us about reality.
It's the first time anybody told us what reality actually looked like.
All right. You may have seen a clip, and if you haven't, I recommend it, of Trump.
I guess he crashed a wedding at Mar-a-Lago, and he was giving a speech, and he was talking about General Milley and about the Afghanistan pullout and how he had conversations with Milley, and Milley was telling him it would be cheaper to leave all the assets there than to take him out.
And Trump talked about the wisdom of that a little bit, and at the end of that story, Trump said, and I'm going to swear a little bit, send the children away, send the children away.
I'm just quoting Trump.
Then Trump said, on video to a full room of people about General Milley, who was his top general at the time, he said, quote, that's when I realized he was a fucking idiot.
I'm in love.
Trump, you're so much trouble.
You're so much trouble.
Why do you make me love you?
Why? I mean, he's got flaws.
I've seen them. I'm not blind to his flaws.
He's an expensive president.
You get some good stuff, but it's going to be expensive.
But... Stop making me love you.
I want to simply make a decision about politics.
I want to look at your policy stuff.
I'd like to compare your policy preferences to your competition and come to some kind of an objective risk management decision about which political side has a better plan for each individual topic.
That's what I want to do.
That's what I would like to do.
But he makes it impossible by saying of his top general, that's when I realized he was a fucking idiot.
Because I was thinking those exact words.
That General Milley looks like a fucking idiot.
I mean, he looks like one, and he seems to act like one, and Trump has said it now, so if it agrees with me, it must be brilliant.
That's my philosophy.
And I just want to talk about Trump.
I don't want to love him.
Stop making me love you.
And I guess there's something about the boldness of that statement combined with the complete inappropriateness of it, combined with the complete truth of it.
He's the only person in politics who can put that many layers together in one sentence.
It's really unparalleled.
I think history is going to be way kinder to Trump than we will be in our lifetimes.
The thing that he doesn't get credit for is that he's the best communicator.
I mean, there are things that I criticize he should have said better, etc., but damn, I don't think anybody's better overall if you're looking at the total average.
That guy can communicate.
All right. Even on CNN, Smirconish's show...
They seem to be taking a, I'll say an opinion or a point of view, I'm not sure they would say it of themselves, but that natural immunity, there's not a good reason to treat natural immunity, if you've been infected by COVID, different from being vaccinated, because in fact it might be better than being vaccinated.
And I guess the Europeans are not doing that.
So even in Germany, where things are going to get pretty rough with your passports, etc., even in Germany, apparently, you can just say you already were infected and you're still good.
Why are we not doing that in the United States?
I don't even know the reason, do you?
So you've got your science that would say it would be fine.
You've got your...
Is it just money?
Because I can't think of anything else it would be, right?
Or is it a practical question?
Because it's harder to demonstrate who already had it, right?
Because I don't know, can you get a passport for having been infected in the past, or is it just the honor system?
So I suspect in the United States it might have more to do with the fact that people would lie and just say they were infected.
Because they would, right? Hello, America.
So I suspect that our difference has nothing to do with science and everything to do with how do you create a practical standard that can actually work.
But the net effect of that would be that we have the dumbest policy in the world.
The dumbest policy.
We'd be discriminating against the people who had the least reason to be discriminated against.
You know, if you were to be logical, you'd say, okay, the people with natural immunity are at the top of the heap, and they have the most access of anybody.
Next down would be somebody with two vaccinations, or three, I guess.
Next down would be two.
But wouldn't you rank them that way if you were just doing it logically, right?
So it must be some kind of practical thing.
But the Biden administration is not explaining it in any way that the public can be happy with it.
So if they can't explain why they're doing it, you have to assume corruption.
That's my rule. If your government does something that doesn't make sense to you, and everybody can see that they haven't explained why they're doing it, and the public is clearly confused, your default has to assume corruption.
So the news should be reporting...
That if they're not explaining their thinking, if they're not explaining their thinking, it has to be a default assumption of corruption.
Just like with the rapid tests, do I have any proof that corruption is the reason that America was so slow to get volume, low-priced rapid tests?
I don't have any proof, but it's the default assumption because there's no other explanation.
So, default assumption that there's something crooked going on.
Here's the thing that is the least surprising thing in the world, but it's so stupid.
Apparently, there exists and has been found an alternative Mueller report that may be worse for Trump.
Really? So apparently the fucking assholes who put together the Mueller report created a second one that was worse for Trump and hid it away, and now I guess it's going to be useful.
Because for a lot of good reasons, they didn't want to put the provocative stuff in the final report.
So now we get a whole new series of the Steele dossier, Russia collusion...
And the Mueller report.
It's coming back.
Oh, my God.
It's coming back. I don't even know what to say about that.
Except maybe we should have predicted it.
That there would be an alternative Mueller report.
Are you frickin' kidding me?
The alternative Mueller report.
All right. Here's something.
I want to test to see how many of you are aware of this.
According to official sources, so this is not your personal opinion, right?
So don't give me your personal opinion.
Tell me what you think the official people say.
Is CO2 emissions from humans, is it rising?
Is CO2 rising in the world?
Yes or no? Don't give me your own opinions.
Give me the official one from science.
The scientific official opinion.
Go. All right.
Locals seems to have all the same opinion, but I'm not going to tell you on YouTube.
On YouTube, I'm saying yes, no, yes, yes.
Let's wait for some more.
On locals, I will tell you, they all say it's not going up.
Most of them. I'm saying no's.
Yeah, what's the official one, not your own opinion?
Forget your own opinion.
What's the official word on CO2? I'm saying yeses and noes, yeses and noes.
All right. You should all be following Michael Schellenberger on Twitter because he's the only person putting any of this in context.
Bjorn Lomborg is doing a good job.
He focuses a little more on the economic part of it.
But Schellenberger does the best job of putting all this stuff in context.
So really, for the first time, you can sort of understand what's going on.
So if you read Schellenberger...
You're going to finally, finally feel like you understand the situation with climate change.
Here's what he says.
Today, fresh tweet.
He says, most people think global carbon emissions have been rising.
I thought that.
I mean, I thought it until, you know, I think a week ago or so.
I thought they were rising.
He says, but new data shows they actually declined over the last decade.
I think natural gas is the reason replacing coal in a lot of places.
And then he says, Shelton Berger says, emissions must still decline further.
In other words, if we just kept them the same...
Because the emissions are already kind of high.
According to climate scientists, they're high.
And if you just kept them the same, or even if it just went down a little bit, it would still be enough to raise the temperature.
But... But...
The temperature rise would be more likely, based on this new data, to be in the 2.5 to 3 centigrade range, far less than the much feared 6 degree centigrade prediction.
So already the official word on climate change, not me making stuff up, not me being a conspiracy theorist, just data, Says that the warming will happen, and it will cause disruption, according to them.
This is not me talking.
But it will be in that 2.5 to 3 degree centigrade range.
Did you know...
Let's put that in perspective, as Michael Schellenberger goes on.
He says, did you know that warming is better...
I'm paraphrasing here. Did you know that warming is better than cooling for the planet, right?
Warming would cause a bunch of problems, but cooling would cause a bunch of problems, too.
And we don't really live in a world where the temperature stays the same, like forever.
It's either going to go up or down.
So it looks like it's going to go up.
Is that more good or more bad?
Well, let's talk to a Yale economist, William Nordhaus, who won the Nobel Prize in 2018, so that's a recent win.
He calculated the optimum temperature rise when accounting for both the costs and the benefits.
Because rising temperatures also give you more plants, better farming.
There's more land to farm.
It becomes farmable when it wasn't.
So those are the benefits.
And then the negatives would be rising sea levels and maybe more storms and stuff.
So when he calculates all of the possible bad stuff with all the possible good stuff, He finds that the ideal temperature rise to get the most benefits would be a little bit more than what's predicted to happen.
This is the first time I've heard that.
Based on the most current information we have, and then a Yale economist's Nobel Prize winner calculating the cost and the benefits...
It would be better if it got a little warmer.
Better economically.
Better in terms of life quality.
Better in terms of number of people dying.
We've actually overshot the mark already.
Climate change is over.
It was the biggest problem in the world like six months ago.
Ah!
Ah!
Turns out it's just done.
Ah!
Now, how confident am I of this?
Well, not, right?
If anybody's confident about a long-range economic prediction, they shouldn't be.
But I'll tell you, from the beginning, I've always thought that this would fall into the Adam's Law of slow-moving disasters.
If you've got a disaster that's coming but it's moving slowly and you've got lots of time to adjust and come up with remediation, we're really good at that as a species, human beings.
As long as we have a warning, we're really good at it.
Oh, you fucking asshole.
Goodbye. Scott's finally waking up.
Scott's finally waking up.
You fucking idiot.
I am not waking up.
Jesus Christ.
I'd use her. Scott's finally waking up to the opinion he's always had.
I don't know. I think the problem is the binaries.
I call them the binaries.
The binaries are the people who believe that there are only two opinions.
And that's it. So if I don't agree with you completely with your opinion, I've got to be in that other one opinion.
So my opinion is, yeah, the people are probably making the planet warmer, but it's hard to know if that'll be good or bad.
That's always been my opinion.
Always. It's never changed once.
And yet, the binaries are like, well, I don't recognize his opinion to be exactly mine, so therefore...
Therefore, it must be somebody else's opinion.
Jeez, it's so boring to deal with the NPCs every day.
All right, so if you were worried about the golden age coming, we've got fusion is being funded at the highest levels ever, fusion energy, because it has been reduced to an engineering problem, meaning that the odds of us, maybe in 20 years, by having unlimited cheap energy...
Really good. The odds of us being destroyed by climate change?
Really small. Really small.
Climate change I think looks fixed.
I would even argue that our great division in this country may be well on the way to fixing itself.
Now, as soon as Trump gets back in, things might change.
So, you know, all bets are off.
But at the moment, I think the left has, you know, you can tell by the polls, they realize that Trump wasn't the problem.
It was their own news sources.
Now, not all of them, and it's happened.
Scott is pretty woke up.
All right, you're goodbye.
Where is that?
Oh, you got away from me before I could block you.
Damn you. All right, so we got that.
It could be that the mRNA technology, and along with a number of other breakthroughs, are making cancer look like it's completely defeatable.
I mean, these are things happening right now.
My only concern is that World War III has already started, depending on who you talk to.
World War III, China versus the United States, and maybe others.
Meaning that it's already a cyber war, and it's already happening in space, mostly in the cyber sense, on satellites.
And once we get to space, it'll be full-on war.
Because it has to be.
Because humans always fight over territory, and space has a lot of territory.
Uh... So, going to fix AIDS, too?
I just saw there's a pill that...
You can buy a pill for AIDS now that will reduce your virus to undetectable.
Did you know that? Now, I don't know if it works for everybody, but you can buy a pill that reduces your AIDS to non-detectable.
It's just a pill. I just saw an advertisement for it.
What the hell? So I'm also wondering about Fauci's technique.
So I used to praise the gay activists because they made everybody worried about AIDS when, really, maybe just gay people should have been worried about it.
Because I still don't know...
I still have never met a heterosexual person with AIDS. And when you hear about famous people, I won't name names, but if you hear about a famous heterosexual who got AIDS, I'm just going to hypothesize that maybe they weren't always with women every time.
Just put that out there.
So I think that strategy-wise, and was Fauci part of this?
Do a fact check on me. But strategy-wise, they were very smart.
Because if they'd said there's a gay problem in those days, could they have got funding?
If it was only a gay problem?
You know, remember, these were darker days in the United States.
I don't think they could have gotten funding.
I think they had to make it everybody's problem.
Now you come to the coronavirus.
Do kids have a risk?
Not much. Do healthy, younger people with no comorbidities have a problem?
Not much. But you have to make it everybody's problem to fix it for the people whose problem it is.
Older people, comorbidities, etc.
It looks like the same play, doesn't it?
To make it look like everybody's problem...
So that everybody will get on board with funding the solution, or whatever you need to do for the solution, for something less than the majority.
It looks like the same play.
I'm not even going to put a moral judgment on it.
I'm just going to say it looks the same to me.
And it looks like it worked in both cases.
And when I say worked, I mean got the attention that...
Would maybe solve the problem.
So there's a real ethical question involved in all of this stuff, because they may have done what worked, but maybe not ethically.
And then you've got a dilemma.
It's like, well, I like that it worked.
I like that the gay community of the world is not being wiped out while we stand on the sidelines and ignore it.
Because that could have happened, right?
I mean, that could have happened pretty easily.
But instead, maybe we were the victims of hyperbole and maybe scared more than some of us needed to be.
And that created the action that got the solution for the gay community.
And I'm happy about that.
I'm happy about the outcome.
But it feels a little unethical, the way we got there, right?
So... There's that.
Jesse Kelly asked this question.
I know this is going to get me in trouble.
He said, why do the vaccinated need to be protected from the unvaccinated?
Now, the cleverness of that is that that was never the question, exactly.
It's more about why do the unvaccinated get their rights suppressed under our current situation?
And is there anybody who doesn't now...
What the logic of keeping the vaccinated from the unvaccinated is?
Is there anybody who doesn't know the official reason?
You know, this is not my opinion per se.
But do you actually not know why that is?
A number of you say that you don't know.
The answer is that if you put a bunch of unvaccinated people anywhere, it increases hospitalizations.
That's the whole story. It wouldn't matter if you put the unvaccinated people with vaccinated people or anybody else.
You put unvaccinated people together, you get more virus.
Now, I'm not saying that that's a reason for restricting them, because I'm anti-mandate.
Let me say that clearly.
At this point in time, with the current situation, risks and benefits, I don't see the mandate being right for America.
But I don't doubt math.
If you put people without vaccinations together, you're going to get more virus than if you only put vaccinated people together.
Does anybody disagree?
Does anybody disagree with the math of it?
Forget about what's right, because I think we're all on the same page about no mandates, probably, if you're watching this.
I just want to see your...
So has it been proven?
It doesn't need to be proven.
There's nothing to prove. If you put unvaccinated people in a room, they have a greater risk than vaccinated people.
That's no question, is it?
Is there anybody who doubts that?
If you had two rooms full of people, one who are all vaccinated and one of all unvaccinated...
And you hadn't checked them for virus yet.
So in both cases, there could be a virus, right?
So you've got a room of fully vaccinated people.
You can still have a virus and still transmit it.
And you've got one of no vaccinated people in it.
You can still transmit the virus.
Which one would... Which one, if you came back in a week, which one would have infected more people?
Some of you are going to say, well, we don't know.
The data is unclear on that.
And, you know, anybody who says data is unclear, I'm already biased in your favor.
But the data we have, correct or not, is that the vaccinated group would have no hospitalizations when you're done.
How many would disagree with that statement?
That if you had that study, you know, two rooms, one with only vaccinated and one with only unvaccinated, wouldn't it be true that if you infected both rooms and come back in a week...
The vaccinated people would have essentially zero hospitalizations.
I don't know how much spread, but zero hospitalizations.
Whereas the other group would have some.
Anybody disagree with that statement?
So I see people disagree, and I respect the disagreement because all the information we get seems to be sketchy, right?
As soon as you say, I saw some information and therefore my opinion is final, that's not very smart.
We don't live in a world where I saw some reliable information and therefore my opinion makes any sense anymore.
It used to. But now our data is so unreliable on everything that as soon as you say, yeah, I saw some data and therefore I made a decision, I think you've departed reason.
Unless you put a statistical figure on it, like, well, 50-50, but I went this way.
So, I would say that the answer is clear.
You shouldn't act surprised.
The answer is clear.
That unvaccinated people in the community are more likely to be hospitalized.
And that's it. So it's not really a mystery.
But if you wanted to doubt that the data is accurate, well, I have some sympathy for that.
I have some appreciation for anybody who says every data is wrong.
Oh, let me tell you what really pisses me off.
Because I know this is in my future.
Let's say any situation arises, and there's going to be part of the country that says, no, the government is lying.
Right? It doesn't matter what the topic is.
There's going to be some segment that says, nope, the government's lying.
So don't believe them.
Now, does the government lie about every single thing?
Well, no. I'm not everything.
It lies a lot, but not at every single thing.
So if you and I disagree about what a good prediction would look like in a given situation, and let's say I say, well, I think the government is right this time because independent experts agree, whatever I say.
Let's say I side with the government's point of view on a particular question.
There will always be some people on the other side who took the other position.
I hate it when that side is right.
I hate it when the people who don't look at any of the data, don't look at any of the argument, they just say, you know, it's coming from the government, so it's probably a lie.
And then it turns out they're right.
I frickin' hate that.
I hate that so much.
Because it's me being wrong for the wrong reason, right?
Yeah, track record.
But I don't think the track record is like 100% lies.
I don't think so.
I hope not. But a lot, sure.
Malcolm Gladwell's blink.
I think that got a little debunked, that blink concept.
The vaccinated transmit as much as the unvaccinated.
Now, Lucy... So Lucy's got a statement here that says the vaccinated transmit as much as the vaccinated...
Now, the official word is that that's debunked and untrue, which is different from whether it is actually untrue.
You get that, right?
But be aware of what the official word is.
The official word is that vaccinated people don't even have the virus as long.
So if you're vaccinated, maybe you could spread it just as much for a day.
But if you're unvaccinated, you can spread it that same amount for, let's say, three days.
I'm making up the numbers.
But do you get that, Lucy?
That, according to the official word, there would be a really big difference, but not at any moment.
So there could be a moment in time when the vaccinated and unvaccinated person who's infected could be exactly the same, for a moment.
But that moment only lasts a little while for the vaccinated because they resolve it faster, and it lasts longer for the unvaccinated.
Does everybody get that? Now, I'm not saying it's true.
That's different, because that would be believing the data.
I'm just saying what the data says, that that's the official word, right?
Everybody? So look in the comments, Lucy, and you'll see.
Now, I believe that where that belief came from is the studies that said that the vaccinated people who got infected had as much viral stuff, you know, that they were expelling as unvaccinated.
And I think that's true.
It just doesn't last as long.
And that's a big, big difference, how long it lasts.
All right. So now I'm gaslighting and goalposts moving.
Now, why would you pay a subscription fee to listen to me if you think any of that's true?
In fact, I just did a comic exactly about you.
The comic I just wrote is about people accusing me of moving the goalposts when nothing like that has ever happened.
It's the most common thing I get is, you're moving the goalposts.
I don't think I ever have once.
Vaccine breakthrough cases have been rising.
Well, they should. They should.
Don't you think that the vax breakthrough cases should be rising, even if the government is completely right about what vaccinations are at the moment?
Addison's comment, I agree with.
So at the moment, it looks increasingly clear that Omicron is a super mild version, right?
How many of you who are vaccinated or even unvaccinated have thought to yourself, if you could get some of that Omicron, you would go get it today?
Like, if you could infect yourself and you knew it was the Omicron, wouldn't you do it today?
Now, don't take any medical advice from me, please, please, please.
Do not, do not, do not, do not take medical advice from a cartoonist.
Some of you would die if you tried that technique.
Let me be clear.
If you try to intentionally infect yourself, some of you are going to die.
That's just going to happen.
So don't take my advice.
But personally, just what, you know, given the...
Let's say incomplete nature of data, so you can never know what's the right choice.
But if you said to me, Scott, I can guarantee I can give you some of this Omicron stuff, and it will make you naturally immune to all the rest of it, and you're already vaccinated, so there's not much risk.
If that was the proposition, and it looks like it might be, yeah, I would sign up for that.
I would do it today.
I wouldn't even wait. I'd say, can I have that by lunchtime?
Give me that Omicron. Give it to me hard.
All of us are going to die, Maggie says.
Good philosophy? Sure.
Let me give you a trick to get you out of your temporary depression.
Maybe I've told you this before, but this will be gigantic for some of you.
You ready? Do you ever have a day when you're just so unhappy and sad you think you could just kill yourself?
You have. Now, fortunately, most of us just have that fleeting thought and it's not actualized.
But let's say you have one of those days when you say, damn it, it's just not worth it.
Here's what you do. Redefine it this way.
Say to yourself, you know...
Suppose I did plan to end it all, and this was my last day.
How would I act differently if it were my last day?
Well, you wouldn't have to worry about getting embarrassed, would you?
Suppose you could live one day of your life with no risk of embarrassment.
You don't even worry about, let's say, exceeding the speed limit.
You just stop worrying about what people think of you.
You just imagine what it would be like if you were going to be gone tomorrow.
Just gone, gone. Like dead gone.
And watch how that changes your everything.
That sadness that you had will start to turn into a superpower.
You can reframe it as a power.
Because when you're in a bad mood...
You can do all the things that you wouldn't have done before.
Don't do anything that would kill you.
Don't do anything that will lose all your money or be irreversible.
Don't do irreversible things.
But do things that just were a stretch.
Scare yourself. Scare the shit out of yourself.
Walk up to that person you know is going to turn you down and ask them on a date.
And then when they turn you down, because maybe they will.
How do you feel? Well, you don't feel bad if you're going to die tomorrow.
Like, hopefully you're not going to die tomorrow and that's not your plan.
But frame it that way.
Just allow yourself to feel it's the last day on Earth.
It changes everything.
It's a really good trick. I use it all the time.
And it's amazing.
You will thank me.
Yes, it's like the movie A Wonderful Life, in a sense, yes.
Scott, in all capitals, explained why the death counts are up since vaccines and other treatments.
Is that a mystery to anybody?
Why would the death counts be up at the same time that vaccines are more fully implemented?
Can anybody answer that?
Because there's more infection.
Was that hard? If there's more infection...
There's more death no matter what you're doing about it.
Why did World War II kill more people than your neighbors arguing about their trash cans?
Because it was World War II. It's not like arguing with your neighbor.
If infections go through the roof, the death count's going up no matter what.
It doesn't matter how many people are infected.
Right, and everybody's vaccinated.
Once you get everybody vaccinated, then if you die, you're dying vaccinated.
So, yeah, it might be a counting problem as well.
Then why more infections?
The reason there's more infection is we're in a pandemic and we don't have anything that stops it.
We know that we wanted vaccines to stop it, but they don't do that.
Which doesn't mean that the vaccines are necessarily useless.
They just don't stop it cold.
So... Pretty wrong, Scott.
Natural immunity does.
Natural immunity does what?
Because apparently there are people with natural immunity who have gotten it twice.
Are you aware of that? That's the thing.
So they probably were immunocompromised or something.
Yes, and we're all not sitting at home.
That's true.
There's more interaction.
Deeply depressed from a loss, suffering 10 years ago.
What do you do about somebody who had a loss 10 years ago and can't get over it?
I don't have a quick answer for that.
Yes, I did predict that they would...
If anybody doesn't know this, I did predict at the beginning...
When Project Warp Speed was first announced, I did predict it would fail to create a vaccine that actually stopped the coronavirus.
And the reason I predicted it was not because I'm so smart.
It's because all of the experts who had worked in that field said, we've been working on this for decades, and we're not even close.
So we're definitely not going to do it in a year.
And I thought, well, if everybody working in the field says they can't do it and they don't know how to do it, Probably they're right.
Sometimes the Wright brothers, the rogues are right.
But if you wanted to place a bet, you should usually bet against the rogue exception people.
Sometimes they're right, and then it makes big news and you remember them forever.
But not usually. Usually they're dead wrong, the people who are the skeptics and the resistors and such.
Why do we have more deaths with us having vaccines first?
We just answered that.
Because there's just more virus.
And unfortunately, the vaccines don't prevent you from dying entirely.
they just reduce it.
Let's see.
Wow, a lot of comments today.
Have you noticed that there's a tremendous amount of energy that just ramped up The trolls came out, the paid trolls that always attack anybody who says anything about Trump.
So the trolls are out, but my YouTube traffic doubled just in the last, you know, I don't know, few weeks.
So something happened where the world was sort of sleepy over the summer, and then just everything took off, just the energy.
Is it because of the weather? Could be.
Alright, that's about all I have to say today.
I'm going to turn off YouTube.
I'm going to say a few more words to the locals crowd.
