Episode 1649 Scott Adams: Mandates Dropping, Our President is Not Mentally Capable, Putin is Trapped
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
67% say cancel culture is out of control
Cognitive test for President Biden
Rumble $100 Million offer to Joe Rogan
Clawing back our rights, ending mandates
President Putin's Ukraine options
Fusion, nuclear power solve climate change
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
And the best moment of the best experience of the day.
Right now, it's gone.
It's gone. But it was pretty good while it lasted.
Hey, how would you like to take it up a level?
And I think we need to drink our morning toast to the truckers.
How about it? Anybody in for the truckers?
Let's support the truckers, support the citizens who want to end the mandate.
Let us claw back our rights.
Claw them back, I say.
Now, you might say, claw them back?
I never left them. Well, whatever you want to call it.
Let's get things back to normal.
And we're going to make the government do it for us.
But first, all you need is a cup, a mug, a glass, a tanker, a chelsea, a canteen, a jug, a 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 of the day, the thing that makes everything better, even the mandates, eventually.
We'll get there. Join me now for the unparalleled sip.
Go. Yeah, it is the best part of your day.
That's right. That's right, it is.
So, let's talk about all the things that are happening.
Rasmussen had a poll, which again, I think it delves deeply into understanding the psychology of the human mind.
Most polls just tell you some data, but not this one.
This one goes a little deeper.
It asks two questions, three actually, but two that I care about.
And I talked about the ABC suspension of Whoopi Goldberg and how many people agreed with this suspension.
Before I tell you the answer, how many people, a cross-section of the country, America, how many of them thought ABC should suspend Whoopi?
What is your guess? 25%.
The answer was 54%.
Are you a little shocked by that?
Does that sound wrong?
54% thought she should be suspended?
For what? Having a historical...
..a historical imperfection in her understanding?
What? 54% think you should be cancelled for that?
Well, does it get crazier?
Wait for it. Wait for it.
You don't think it gets crazier?
Oh, it does.
Same poll...
Rasmussen also. Same poll.
Actually, I think they asked them at the same time, but actually, I don't know for that for sure.
But the question was asked also, do you think cancel culture has gotten out of control?
Now, remember that 54% of the people who answered said that Whoopi should be suspended.
And then they asked, has cancel culture gotten out of control?
And 67% said yes.
So two-thirds of the country thinks this cancel culture has gone too far, while 54% think that Whoopi should get canceled.
Wait, what? How can both of those things be true?
But there's human beings for you.
So what does it really come down to?
It really comes down to, do you like Whoopi Goldberg?
Or are you on her team, basically?
It has more about politics than her, I think.
So people are happy to cancel people who are on their team.
Right? If somebody's on your own team, you don't want them canceled.
But if they're on the other team, you're all about cancel culture, aren't you?
Not you specifically, but apparently the public.
Now, this brings me to me.
And I would like to say something to some of you.
Many of you have already blocked and canceled.
How many of you have tried to cancel me in the last two years for my opinions?
A lot. A lot of my audience has tried to cancel me for a difference of opinion.
Literally a difference of opinion.
Now, much of the thoughts about me are based on something that never happened.
So most of what people are mad about me are literally things that didn't happen.
So every day somebody says, well, why were you so pro-mandate?
And I'd say, that never happened.
I don't even know who you're talking about.
And they'd say, you were really pushing those masks.
And I'd say, that never happened.
I've talked about them.
I've never promoted them.
About, you pushed, you really...
You're in the bag for the vaccine makers, to which I say, who are you talking about?
That literally never happened.
But, doesn't matter, I still get cancelled.
So I've lost 25%, something like that, of my audience just because they disagreed with that opinion.
So when you're criticizing the other people for canceling, just be aware that it's not always the other people canceling, right?
There's a whole lot of canceling going on, and it's basically just people you disagree with at this point.
I'm not even sure canceling is real.
Let me go further.
I don't think cancellation even happens.
I think it's just team play.
And if a team can get away with it, they do.
And if a team can't get away with it, they don't.
But there's no cancel culture.
There's just people trying to cancel each other, and sometimes it works.
So there's no good and bad people when it comes to canceling.
Everybody's bad. That's my opinion.
Biden is being asked to take a cognitive test.
And I guess nearly 40 Republicans, including Ronnie Jackson, who used to be the president's physician, Trump's physician, they're all bringing it up.
And even James Rosen asked the question.
I like how he asks it.
He goes, I'd like to raise a delicate subject, but with utmost respect for your life accomplishments and the high office you hold.
That's about as well as you can ask that question.
Think about what it's like to ask the President of the United States in public if he's mentally incapable.
That's a pretty delicate thing, isn't it?
But look at the... I don't know how much time he spent on the lead-up to the question, but I'll bet he spends a lot of time.
I'd like to raise a delicate subject, but with the utmost respect for your life accomplishments and the high office you hold.
Now that is how to ask a question.
That is how you ask that question.
Nicely done, James Rosen.
He said, a poll released this morning by Politico, a morning consult, found that 49% of registered voters, remember, this isn't just Republicans, but 49% of registered voters disagreeing with the statement that Joe Biden is mentally fit.
And when Rosen asked Biden why he thought so many people believed that, Biden responded, I have no idea.
That feels like a confirmation.
I have no idea. I feel as though a mentally fit person could have answered that question a little more capably, a little bit better.
For example, they might have said, oh, that's mostly politics and people believing things out of context.
I might have said, yeah, you can make anybody look ridiculous with video edits.
You might say, oh, I think my age is starting to show a little bit, but my decision-making is still solid.
You're all in good shape.
There are so many ways to answer that question, but I have no idea is the only one that makes it sound like it's true, that he's mentally incapable.
So he picked that one.
And why is it that we've gone this long without a cognitive test of the president?
Now, what would the percentage of the public need to be that strongly suspected the president was not mentally fit?
What percentage of the public should pretty much automatically trigger that kind of a test?
25? 25 might be too low, because I think you could get 25% of anybody to attack any president, right?
About 50%.
If 50% of the public was concerned about the president's mental health, don't you think that should trigger a cognitive test?
Now, maybe 50% based on three different polls or something like that.
But shouldn't we have some kind of a standard?
I'm not even sure 40% is high enough.
Because 40% ends up being really close to the political party number.
You need to get a bunch of people from the other team, or I don't think it counts.
And at 54%, you're getting a bunch of Democrats, right?
I think. Unless it's just all independents, I suppose.
But I think 50% should be our cutoff for automatic cognitive tests.
And why can't we make that a standard?
It doesn't have to be a law.
But, you know, there are certain standards such as presidents give you their tax returns and things like that.
So we do have things that are just standards we agree are reasonable.
And I would like to put it out there that if you're over 50% In national polls.
Maybe you need three polls, just to make sure you don't have an outlier poll.
But let's say if you have three polls that put you over 50%, automatic cognitive test.
Who would disagree with that?
And by the way, it should apply if it's Trump, it should apply if it's anybody.
I'm not taking sides.
Does anybody disagree with that?
Now, I'd like to remind you that prior to Trump running the first time, I always said that we shouldn't have presidents that old.
So I was never in favor of anyone Trump's age being president.
I'm just not in favor of that.
But it happens.
You disagree. Bradley disagrees.
Interesting. Oh, how about test everybody over the age of 75?
Well, you know, I'm not sure that's necessary.
I used the example of Chris Wallace yesterday.
I was amazed to find out he was 75.
Do you think Chris Wallace needs a cognitive test?
You know, joking aside...
Okay, joking aside, though.
Come on! I know, you're being political now.
But joking aside, he doesn't need a cognitive test.
I don't think so. Well, okay, maybe you think so.
All right. Let's see what else is going on here.
So Rumble, the competitor to YouTube, this free speech kind of entity, I guess I should disclose that because Rumble partnered with locals, I think I have some kind of shares of something.
So I have some kind of conflict of interest in this that you should be aware of.
But Rumble has offered $100 million to Joe Rogan if he leaves Spotify and goes to their platform.
Now, how smart is that offer?
Now, you know that Spotify is being asked to fire Joe Rogan, and it's a lot of pressure, etc.
But how smart is that offer?
Assuming that they can come up with $100 million.
I don't know how they do that, but I suppose if Joe Rogan wanted to come over, they could raise $100 million pretty easily.
Yeah, it's like the smartest thing you've seen today.
Because if Joe Rogan says no, then Rumble got a whole bunch of free publicity.
If he says yes, then it's even better.
It couldn't get much better than this.
I know Dave Rubin was part of the decision.
I don't know who else was part of it.
But I always say this about Dave Rubin.
He does a lot of smart stuff, if you haven't noticed.
He's somewhat consistently on the smart side of things.
So I'm not surprised he was in the room when this idea came about.
It was just a smart thing.
You can't lose with that offer.
So I saw a number that I don't believe.
Somebody tell me if this is...
Just do a fact check on there because the tweet didn't have a source.
I saw a tweet that said 90,000 trucks have registered for the convoy in D.C. Is that even possible?
I don't believe 90,000.
Do you? It was his idea?
I'm seeing somebody say it was Dave Rubin's idea.
I would not be surprised.
Okay.
So 90,000 truckers, is that real?
No. I don't think so.
But let's say there are a lot of them.
Meanwhile, there are trucker convoys all over the place.
You can read all about them.
But if you thought this trucker convoy thing was going to be brief and then go away, apparently not.
Apparently the trucker thing is just growing.
And it's growing internationally.
And this is what I call productive pressure.
This is productive pressure.
It's a great time to be alive, honestly.
I think this is a good lesson for the children who are watching it.
It's a tough time to be a kid, masks and all.
Really tough time to be a kid.
But one of the things the kids are going to get out of this is watching the adults navigate this situation.
And what we hope they're watching, we hope, is they're watching the adults fight like hell to claw back their rights, especially for the kids.
Now, you hope the kids remember this, don't you?
Don't you hope they remember this?
Because these truckers are fighting for them, and they're fighting against their governments, what they think are oppressive requirements, and they're putting the energy into it.
This is the best fight you will ever see, because both sides are trying to protect the public.
Now, you could argue one side is being too political.
The side, in this case, not being Democrat or Republican, but the side being anybody who wants the mandates in place.
More Democrats than Republicans.
But what is better than a fight where everybody's trying to win the best outcome for the public?
That's really good. That's productive.
So this is the kind of protest that is nothing but productive.
The government requires this kind of public involvement to do what it probably wants to do, which is get back to something like normal.
But we need to push it.
It's not going to happen on its own.
Do you know what governments are really good at?
Creating new rules and policies.
They're good at creating new ones.
You know what they're bad at?
Ending anything. Right?
Bad at ending Vietnam.
Bad at ending Afghanistan.
Bad at ending anything.
I think you'd all agree with that.
Governments are good at starting, bad at ending.
Do you know who's good at ending things?
The public. Right.
So what you're seeing, on one hand, it looks like some kind of a fight.
There's some kind of fight happening between the governments and the people.
That's not exactly what's happening.
It's not exactly what's happening.
I think another filter on this is that it's a handoff.
Basically, the government needs the public to do what the public is doing, push hard, so that the politicians have the cover to do what they probably want to do, which is get back to normal.
Now, I've never believed the politicians want us to be oppressed forever for nefarious reasons.
And if anybody has that opinion, it's not just your rank-and-file members of Congress.
They're not thinking that.
So, if some do, they're not the ones who matter for this.
So... I think we should be seeing this as sort of two parts working together.
Our government being a good starter, our public being a good finisher, and the government is starting to hand off.
As you see the dominoes falling, you know, one state after another announcing the end of mandates, you're starting to see the handoff.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
So we should see it as a fight only to the extent that you have to fight for freedom, but it's not a fight against each other.
That's one of the things we all have to understand, and I think we do, because these protests have been largely peaceful, right?
So this is brother against brother, sister against sister.
This is not a fight-fight.
This is a handoff.
And if you treat it as a handoff...
It's the public that can claw back their rights, not the government.
The government can't give us our rights back.
We have to go get it. And now it's time.
The hardest part was waiting, wasn't it?
The hardest part was waiting for the right moment.
Because if you start too soon, you lose your credibility.
If infections are going through the roof and you're trying to get back your rights, well, it's a weaker argument.
Even if you think the mandates didn't work, it's still a weaker argument because other people think they did.
So finally, finally, the data is in the point in Omicron and vaccinations and all that other stuff.
Finally, we reached the point where the public can take the handoff.
And they are. They stepped up.
So you're seeing something that looks like a fight, which is, in my opinion, everything working the way it's supposed to work.
It's working exactly the way it's supposed to work, and it looks like it's on schedule somewhat, meaning that in the next several weeks, we're going to see big changes of getting back to normal, just the way it should work.
So if you're feeling down about any of this, it's all heading in the right direction.
And it's not going to stop.
So the public have taken control exactly as they were supposed to do.
This is everything working the way it's supposed to work.
Just slower than you want it.
It's just slower. That's the only problem.
Well, one of my favorite hobbies, as I said before, is watching Ben Shapiro annihilate people's bad arguments.
And here's one that just made me laugh.
So, you know, there's the...
Is it Flores?
The gentleman who's challenging the fact that the NFL coaches are all white while 70% of the players are black.
And if you hear that...
Statistic, without any context, you'd say to yourself, well, that's a pretty obvious discrimination.
And if they can fix it in basketball, basketball has roughly a good number of black coaches that seems to make more sense with the number of black players.
So Ben Shapiro tweets in response to, you know, why aren't there...
If 70% of the players are black, why don't we have any black coaches?
And Ben Shapiro tweets, 70% of NFL players are black.
What are the odds? Because he was responding to a tweet that said, what are the odds?
Now, here's the beautiful part about this.
Ben doesn't need to complete the argument, because it just sits there complete the way it is.
Here's the complete argument.
Either both things are racist or neither.
It's either racist that 70% of players are black.
How in the world does that happen by accident?
Or it's racist that we have no black coaches.
Again, how the hell does that happen by accident?
Right? So here's the problem.
You can't have it both ways.
You can't have it both ways if you're even trying to be smart.
The only way you can try to be smart is to say they're either both racist Or they're not.
Both not. You just can't have it both ways.
You can't have, hey, there's nothing to see here.
70% of the athletes are black.
And then, you know, there's nothing to see here.
It just doesn't work.
So I think if Shapiro took the argument further, he would get into, hey, you're racist territory.
But just putting it out there is just hilarious.
Like, the argument doesn't need to be completed.
It could just lay there and let people deal with it.
Anyway, that always amuses me.
More about Ukraine.
Was I one of the first people you saw, and I can't remember if I read it first, so this is just one of those cases I need you to check my memory.
Was I one of the first people to say Putin is really screwed because he can't attack and he can't not attack?
Like, he doesn't have any options.
I guess other people must have said that.
But I'm starting to see that as more of a mainstream opinion, that I think Biden's winning, right?
It looks like Biden actually played this, maybe.
I mean, it's way too early to know.
But at the moment, it looks like the Biden administration may have played this perfectly.
Now, I don't know. That's not to say that Trump or somebody else wouldn't have done better.
We don't know that. But at this point, it looks like Putin really can't attack.
It looks like we've made such a clear price for that that it would be crazy.
Now, one of the things that you forget about is that Russia requires chips.
They require microchips and they require a lot of specialized equipment that maybe they could get from China, but they'd wish they hadn't.
So the argument is that Putin either needs to be, let's say, a little buddy of America or a little buddy of China.
Because it's, you know, it's just the...
I don't need to give you the whole reasons.
But by the time we get into space, Russia is going to want to have a partner.
And at least some thinking, I read this morning, and I forgot who wrote it, but there's at least one school of thought that says that Putin would prefer to be allied with the United States.
What do you think of that?
What do you think of the, and I think this would just be more speculation, do you think it's true that if Putin had a choice, he would rather have a strong association with the United States compared to China?
Now, I suppose you'd want a strong association with both, I guess.
But Russia has more in common with China, somebody saying.
I don't know. I don't think so.
Because I think culture is closer to the US, and that matters more.
And race, too, frankly.
You hate to say that race is in every single story, but it's pretty much in every single story.
I think that the Russians just have more feel for the United States.
I'm guessing. Governing philosophy is similar.
I don't know. I'm not sure that that binds any two countries.
Any chance we could be allies with China?
I don't think so. I don't think culturally that's going to work.
Not in the short run. All right, well, so I would say again that we have a situation here where Putin requires a creative exit strategy.
And a creative exit strategy would look roughly like this.
Making it look like he got something but not giving him anything.
Or it could be giving him something in return for some other thing that has nothing to do with Ukraine.
So it seems to me that the real deal may not ever be known by the public.
Much like the Cuban Missile...
Are there any historians here?
Historians, please help me out.
My understanding is that the Cuban Missile Deal was a secret deal.
That's true, right? What the public thought the deal was is not what the actual deal was.
There was a deal behind the scenes.
So, will we ever know what the deal is?
And should we? I'm not sure we should.
You're incorrect, Scott, John Cook says.
Incorrect that it was a secret deal?
Say more about that if you're sure about it.
But the point is, whether the Cuban Missile Crisis was secret or not, we could certainly make secret deals.
And I think we have to get creative now, and I would love to know what's being bandied about.
The thing we would want most, I think, is some help against China in the future.
So we gave up missiles in Turkey, but I think there was more than that we gave up.
I think there was even a deeper secret than the missiles in Turkey.
I think that was the fake-out part.
All right. So anyway, we'll see what happens there, but I think something creative might come out of that that might be positive.
Meanwhile, NBC is on track for the lowest Winter Olympics ratings of all time.
Yay. Are any of you watching even one event in the Winter Olympics, which I call the Thanks for the Fentanyl Olympics?
Nope, nope, nope.
I will not click on a link.
I won't even turn on my TV so that it accidentally tunes to that network as I'm flipping through the channels.
Does anybody flip through channels anymore?
Is that even a thing? I just use apps.
I don't flip through channels anymore.
Yeah, I don't have channels either.
I just have apps. They're two very old colleagues that are very much still in charge and must keep the farm before Russia.
Now, you know, you think that Biden and Putin both have to be gone before we could be friends with Russia?
Maybe. But I think they're both flexible enough.
If it made sense. So, how about a hand for the public?
So what has the public done recently?
Well, the public is tearing down the mandate walls.
It looks like the public has told NBC to go fuck themselves if they're going to cover the Olympics.
That's the public.
That is not our government.
That is the American public doing what's right for fentanyl, for the Uyghurs, for our economy, because of the Wuhan lab, potentially.
And this is the public talking.
So the public has decided.
And how about the cancellation of Joe Rogan?
Do you think that'll happen?
Nope. Nope.
Won't happen. Do you know why Joe Rogan won't be cancelled?
The public. The public.
Yeah, the public seems to be taking charge of the country.
Am I wrong? The public has decided that Joe Rogan will either stay or get a raise.
Am I right? The public has decided Joe Rogan is either going to stay at Spotify or he's going to get a raise.
That's it. The public has decided the mandates are coming down.
They're coming down. The public has decided we didn't want to be in Afghanistan, no matter what it took, basically.
We got out. The public has made a lot of decisions this year, and they're not bad.
They're not bad. So good for the public.
I'm watching some very, very bad political analysis happening, and I have to call it out, and this is where I get cancelled by my own audience.
Please stop saying, oh, Democrats, I guess the science changed, because now you want to get rid of the mandates, or the masks anyway.
Does that make sense? To make fun of the Democrats and say, oh, I guess the science was different last week when you wanted masks, but now the science has changed.
Does that make sense? No.
No, it doesn't make sense.
The data changed.
The data changed.
The science didn't change.
You know, whether the science is good or bad, it never changed.
The data changed.
And when the data changes, do you keep the same decision?
Of course not. So if all you're seeing is people saying, oh, it looks like Omicron's a new game, vaccinations have hit a certain rate, natural immunity has hit a certain rate, we're all going to get it, Omicron seems to blast through everything, all of the data is different.
All the data might be wrong.
That's another problem. But...
Please, please.
I hate when people who largely agree with me have bad arguments because I feel like it makes me look bad.
And I do think that you all need to protect your brand or your reputation because it's important.
And I'd like to do the same.
I hate it when people act as if time doesn't exist.
There is a time to do something and a time not to do it.
And if you do it when the time is right, that doesn't mean you were wrong to not do it when the time was wrong.
Now, you could argue that it was always the time to do it, blah, blah, blah.
But don't ignore the fact that the reason things are different is because the data is all different.
That's something you shouldn't ignore.
And how about...
So here's how we're seeing it.
We're seeing... The Youngkin was wrong, but now he's right, according to the Democrats.
No. Youngkin made a decision when the data was almost overwhelmingly clear that we needed to reduce the mandates.
He did it a little bit early.
Other people waited a few weeks.
And then they said, oh yeah, it looks like we're safe.
I don't really think that's a flip-flop.
Now, I do think that the politicians are reacting to public demand, don't you?
Of course. So public demand is a new fact.
That's a new fact.
And part of the science, which we've always asked the experts to look at, is to look at all the factors.
Don't look at just the virus.
Look at, you know, the social impact, the economic impact, the mental health impact, all that, right?
So one of the new factors is the public opinion.
If public opinion changed, that is a perfectly good reason for governments to change.
We shouldn't be criticizing them for changing when we cause them to do the change.
That's what we wanted.
That was the whole point of it.
All right. Fusion.
Yet again, another story about a breakthrough in fusion.
This one from the UK. They more than doubled the previous record for generating and sustaining nuclear fusion.
Now, doubled doesn't mean that they're an economic break-even, but again, it's an engineering problem.
Climate change is kind of solved.
I might be the only person who's willing to say that out loud.
Climate change as a problem that's going to destroy the world is already solved.
Now we have to implement it.
But the solution is nuclear, traditional nuclear, but the better type.
Modular nuclear, so you get the economics down.
And then fusion eventually.
These might all be 10, 20-year things, but that's fine.
We'll be fine. And we also have the ability to remediate whatever damage happens between now and the time that we have plenty of nuclear power.
So if you look at the things that have been solved in the recent last years, we've all been so busy just fighting for our lives in this COVID world that here are a few things that you lose sight of.
Climate change basically solved.
And why was it solved?
Because opinions changed.
Now, technology changed too, but mostly opinions about traditional nuclear development.
Why did the opinions change?
Well, Michael Schellenberger was a big reason, maybe the biggest reason.
Mark Schneider, big reason, very big reason.
You know, I helped, you helped.
That was the people.
Do you think that the government made a solution to climate?
Nope. Greta Thunberg, a citizen, made a big deal about it.
And then people like you and I, separately, whether we were worried about climate change or not, were making a big deal about your, you know, nuclear needs to be part of the mix, no matter what you think.
Because we just need the energy.
We can't run out of energy. So you need it.
So the public solved climate change, not the scientists.
Think about that.
It wasn't the scientists that solved climate change.
Of course, the scientists have to build the nuclear reactors.
They're not irrelevant.
But in terms of the movement of the strategy of the country, that was the people.
The government did not convince the people.
Did you see that happening?
It wasn't the government that convinced the people to do nuclear.
That never happened. It was literally the people who convinced the government.
And that happened really in the last two years, I'd say.
That is remarkable.
It's like freaking unbelievable.
The biggest problem in the world, the public solved it directly by changing our opinions on the one thing that could have solved it.
So that's happening.
Now, what is the outcome of the pandemic?
What? One of the outcomes of the pandemic is we really got a lot smarter about a lot of stuff.
So we can mourn our losses.
Let's not lose sight that we lost a lot of people.
But we learned a lot.
And we probably will be able to get on top of maybe not just the common cold, maybe flus, Maybe we've got a whole new set of tools for everything.
I mean, medically, we're way ahead.
If the only thing that came of this was dropping the state restriction about telehealth, I mean, that's pretty huge.
There's a bunch of huge benefits that came out of the pandemic, in the same way the huge benefits come out of a war.
You don't want the war, but you do get radar out of it.
You get a bunch of developments.
You get the nuclear bomb, if you like that.
So we've got pandemics going in the right way.
How about homeschooling?
Are you watching Corey DeAngelis just kill it?
I mean, he's just killing it, spreading the homeschool message and reporting it back and building up public support.
So who was behind homeschooling?
So what is the biggest threat?
Let's say, what is the biggest cause of systemic racism?
Biggest cause of systemic racism?
The schools. The schools are bad.
If we had good schools everywhere, then no matter what bad situation you were born into, your odds of having a strategy out would be pretty good.
Just pay attention in school.
Do your homework. You'll be fine.
But we don't have that. So now, who solved the problem of the schools being crappy?
Well, it's not solved, but the public took over.
Because the teachers' unions, the Democrats, etc., just weren't going to get it done.
So the people decided that they would keep pushing for these fund the student instead of the system.
And state after state after state, and Corey DeAngelis is a big part of this, I think, are lining them up and knocking them down.
So there are more states, almost every day, there's a new state introducing legislation or passing legislation to put funding in the hands of the kids so they can take their money and go to a private or just a non-public school.
So the public did that.
So the public...
Is working on, and there's lots of progress, on a solution to systemic racism.
Now, let me play fair.
Do you mind? Would you give me permission to say something good about, let's say, who you think is the other side, in all likelihood, based on my audience?
Why did we solve this school problem?
Well, mostly just to get better schools.
And less CRT and all that stuff.
But I'm not sure if we hadn't had the Black Lives movement, Black Lives Matter, I'm not sure that we would have had as much energy to fix the school system.
So again, whether you're pro or con the Black Lives Matter messaging...
It was the public. It was the public saying, hey, we think there's a big systemic problem.
And then who solved it?
The public. It wasn't even the politicians.
I mean, so far it looks like the public just pushing the politicians to fix the schools, which are the biggest source of racism.
So we are in a really weird time right now.
And the weird time is this.
We've fixed just about everything.
Or it's on the way to being fixed.
This is one of the most optimistic moments in history I've ever seen.
But we, you know, because of the nature of the news, it's all doom and gloom and we've lost our rights and Russia's going to war and stuff.
But wow, are we heading in the right direction on everything.
And we're freaking killing it as human beings.
We just can't see it because we're right in the middle of it.
Is mocking an effective form of persuasion?
Yes, it is. Yeah, so I'm not going to say that everything's fixed.
I'm going to say that the public is moving in the right direction on just about everything.
Except, you know, the cancel culture is out of control.
But I do think the public stepped up and saved Joe Rogan.
And I think the public...
May have to take control of cancellations, too.
But I think the market may be taking care of that itself.
How long ago was it that there could not have been a $100 million offer from another platform for Joe Rogan?
Think about that.
Was it only maybe...
I don't know when Rumble started, but probably they weren't big enough or didn't have enough...
That I would say two years ago, Joe Rogan would have had no competing platform, possibly.
But now he does.
So he's protected because not only has the public, in a way, the public is what created these alternative platforms because they couldn't have succeeded without a big public energy toward them.
And so the public found a way to push industry to create safe spaces that you can get cancelled and still go make money.
So that's a big deal.
Now, here's a topic that I saw in the news, that the government has recovered some many millions of dollars that were stolen.
Was it 6 billion?
That were stolen of Bitcoin.
To which you probably all said to yourself, what?
How can you recover stolen Bitcoin?
You ever wonder that?
Because what about all that privacy?
Now, Was it 3 billion?
3 billion they recovered?
So whatever the number was, it was some big number they recovered.
But here's the part that surprised me.
How did anybody ever think that crypto was going to be private?
Why did we ever think that?
Because as long as you know who the human is who has the crypto account, you can just force them to give you the password.
Right? There's some amount of jail...
That will make anybody give you a password.
So, did we ever really have any kind of privacy?
Because the government, if they have a reason, they can ask for it.
If they don't have a reason, well, what's the difference?
You hack the PC that accesses the wall, yeah.
There's got to be...
I'll bet there are several ways to get at somebody's crypto.
And the government has the best one.
They can control the human being, and then you control everything.
All right. Well, I still think the big push for Bitcoin in particular is going to be when the public decides that you have to have some of it in your portfolio.
How far are we from that?
So this is the reason that I hold it.
I hold it just as a diversification thing, so it's a small part of the portfolio.
But the reason I hold it is that there's going to be a day, and it'll happen probably in one year, where all the financial analysts will start saying the same thing.
Well, we don't know what's going to happen with crypto, but if you don't have some, you better get some.
Just a little bit, in case it becomes the only thing you can spend.
Because one possibility, you know, this is sort of the...
The prepper in me?
There is at least one possibility that someday regular money will suddenly dissolve one way or another, and the only thing you have left is crypto.
That could happen. Now, I don't think the odds of that are very high, but that's why you diversify.
You're trying to take care of all the smaller odds.
You're not trying to take care of one big one.
30 grand for one bitcoin, yeah.
But that doesn't mean anything, because you can buy fractional Bitcoin.
So Nassim Taleb has a black paper on Bitcoin and predicts it will crash.
Well, how hard is that to predict?
Let me make a prediction about a financial instrument.
It doesn't even matter which one it is.
I predict it will someday crash.
Because I'm magic.
Do you know what else will someday crash?
Everything. Do you think the market will someday crash?
Yeah, of course. Do you think every company will someday crash?
So far. All of them.
Gold? Sure. Someday.
I think everything crashes.
So I don't consider Nassim Taleb to be my, let's say, he's not my guiding star.
Your mileage might differ.
Yeah, there could be something that takes out the internet, but not cash money, that's true.
But you want to be protected either way.
Crypto will eventually be hacked as computing power increases, you say.
I don't know.
Will the Joe Rogan stuff backfire on the cancelled crowd?
I don't think it'll backfire.
I think it just won't work.
You know, we should also talk about people who are partially cancelled.
Because I consider myself partially cancelled.
If you were to Google me...
If you didn't know anything about me, what do you think you would find out about me if you Googled me?
Think about this question.
You had no prior conception.
You'd never heard of me, never heard my name.
Then you go online and you say, let's figure out who this guy's about, what he's about.
And they Google me.
It's going to say I'm a right-wing MAGA supporter.
Those two things are not true.
It's going to say that I'm a misogynist because of something taken out of context.
Right? Do you know what's the only thing it won't say?
It won't say I'm a racist.
Because so far, somehow I've managed to not fall into any of those traps.
As far as I know, I don't think there's anything on the internet that would say that.
Now, usually those are something taken out of context or whatever, but I don't think I even said anything that could be taken out of context, amazingly.
Amazingly. It's hard to do.
But amazingly.
So I think I'm only being accused of other things.
You milk toast.
All right.
So I would say that I'm cancelled in the sense that my public reputation is destroyed.
If I didn't already have, you know, a career so I don't have to worry about money, I couldn't get a job.
Do you know how hard it would be to get a job with my social media record?
It'd be pretty hard. I don't think any employer would want to take me on, you know, unless it was somebody who mistakenly thought that the accusations were true and they liked it.
What brand is your shirt?
I think it's an untuck it. Now, can you see?
What does that say? Yeah, untuck it.
I couldn't remember for a moment.
You can get a job of your skills.
Well, I'm exaggerating a little bit, but my point is, can you imagine any human resources group looking at my public record And saying, we've got to get this guy on board?
I don't think it would happen.
Maybe a CEO could do it, but the HR department would say, it looks like trouble.
Yeah, I could work for my pillow and my slippers.
Did you keep the vans or did you buy shoes for adults?
I kept the vans.
Actually, it was complimented on them.
I've never been complimented on my footwear before, but randomly complimented.
All right. Oh, I could merchandise T-shirts and coffee.
That's not a bad idea.
I should do T-shirt merchandising.
All right. That's all for now.
I've got to go do some things.
And... I hope you're buying into my concept that things are really, really heading in the right direction.
We're not there. A lot of work to do, but the work is getting done.
