My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Chicago Migrant Benefits, California Urban Crime, Oregon Fentanyl, NYT AI, Bing AI, Robot Walking, Human Souls, Consciousness Transfer, Democrat Forbidden Knowledge, AP Economy Data Spin, Reverse Discrimination, COVID Experts, Pro-Muslim German Party, America’s Color Revolution, Anti-MAGA Movement, J6 Pipe Bomber, Data vs. Anecdotes, J6 Political Prisoners, Soros & FBI, Taylor Swift Coincidences, Elon Musk Pay Package, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 the highlight of human civilization in It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
Today it's improved.
I've got a new microphone stand.
I call my microphone Michelle.
Don't ask why.
But if you'd like to take this up to a new level that nobody can even understand, For this experience, all you need is a cupper, a mug, or a glass, a tankard, shells, or sty, and a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine at the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now.
How's my sound over there on the other platforms?
Doing good?
Doing good.
All right.
Well, you're in for a treat today.
Wait, I haven't done the simultaneous sip.
Go.
Ah, that was extra good because I made you wait.
It's the anticipation, really.
All right, well, I've got two themes today.
Number one, places you don't want to go.
This is public service.
And number two, Things that Democrats don't know.
So, it's always better with a theme.
So, number one on my theme of places you don't want to go.
Apparently, nobody wants to be Fetterman's wife.
So, Senator John Fetterman's wife, Gisele, has reportedly left him.
She's reporting she's single on social media.
And if there's one lesson we can take away from this situation, if there's one thing that's bad for a marriage, it's when a husband can talk.
Now, you know that when Fetterman couldn't talk, it looked like their marriage was pretty solid.
She was really supporting him hard.
But as soon as he could talk fluently, she's like, screw this.
I'm out of here.
Now, this one hit me a little hard because you know my story, where I couldn't speak for three and a half years.
So I did have that little problem.
And it's really bad for marriages when you can't speak, but apparently it's even worse when you can, if you know what I mean.
All right, another place you don't want to go is Chicago.
Wall Street Apes is reporting on the X platform that Chicago's ninth ward alderman, Anthony Beale, is all mad because the immigrants coming in, the migrants, I don't know whether I should call them migrants or immigrants.
Why is one of them better than the other?
I guess I need to figure that out.
But anyway, they get apparently a voucher for housing education.
They get a $9,000 voucher.
They can drive cars without licenses.
And the locals think it's a bad place to be.
Because Chicago already had a lot of problems.
You know, all the murder and stuff.
But now they have extra, extra problems because whatever social services they would have had are being sucked up.
By the migrants.
So, place number one.
No, number two.
Don't go to Fetterman's house as his wife.
Don't go to Chicago.
Unless you're a migrant.
And that actually sounds like it's a good deal.
Next place not to go is Santa Monica, California.
It has insanely high crime rates.
At the moment, where it used to be one of the safest places you could ever be.
So, Mike Cernovich talking about this today.
The highest crime rate, so that Santa Monica is ruined.
I'm not sure if there are any cities in California that are safe to go to.
Or that you'd want to.
So I think all the metro areas in California are ruined.
And if you wonder whose fault that is, well, They don't have any Republican power in my state, California.
So what would it be that would ruin every single city in the entire state?
It's called Gavin Newsom and Democrats.
So they'd like to bring that to the rest of the country.
Just think about that.
There's a governor of a state in which every metropolitan area in the state became unlivable during his time.
And people are thinking that he'd be a good president.
Why?
Because there's still some livable places elsewhere in the country?
He can bring his magic to those places as well?
Stay out of Santa Monica.
Oregon is declaring a 90-day state of emergency to address Portland's fentanyl issue.
So finally, finally getting some action.
You know, I've been complaining for years since my stepson died from a fentanyl overdose that serious action needed to be taken and finally my dreams have been Have come true, because Oregon is taking a 90-day state of emergency.
Good, good, good.
You know, with any luck, this 90-day state of emergency, fingers crossed, I don't want to be too optimistic, it could result in a committee.
It could result in a committee.
And, again, I don't want to get ahead of myself, because I've been disappointed before, but if the state of emergency turns into a committee, You know that that could turn into, wait for it, a report.
So we could have a state of emergency that could lead to a committee that could really lead to a report.
Finally, finally some concrete action.
And then what would we do?
I guess we'd give the report to China and to the cartels, and they would say something like, whoa, before Oregon gave us this report, we thought it was just perfectly fine to send fentanyl into the United States and kill 100,000 people per year.
But now that they have a committee and they've got a report, we're going to stop doing all of that.
So good job, Oregon.
Or another way to look at it is, Don't go to Oregon.
Oregon sounds like a hellhole.
I wouldn't go anywhere near Oregon.
All right, so don't go to Fetterman's House.
Don't go to Chicago.
Don't go to Santa Monica.
Don't go to any city in California.
And stay out of Oregon.
There's still plenty of places left.
Plenty of places left.
For example, you can go to the rural parts of California.
Oh wait, you can't go to the rural parts of California because there's something heading toward us today called a pineapple... What the hell?
A pineapple some kind of explosion or something.
Our weather is going to be so bad that they have to make up a new name for it.
They're like, we don't have a name for this.
What do you want to call it?
Something with a pineapple.
We'll get to it.
Yeah, supposedly it's gonna look like, you know, Noah's Ark.
So... How would you like to be me with a long history of having problems with water leaks, and the biggest storm in the world is heading to my house?
Yeah, so don't go to my house.
It'd be full of water.
So don't go to the cities in California, but also stay out of the rural areas, because of the rain.
Stay away from Fetterman, Santa Monica, and Chicago.
But here's a place you could go, Oklahoma.
Oklahoma's still good.
Oklahoma's, oh wait, there's a gigantic gas explosion in Beaver County, Oklahoma.
Chuck Colesto's talking about this.
If you saw the picture, it looks like a mile-high firestorm.
It looks like Satan actually is coming to the Earth in physical form, and this is just like the portal to Hell has opened.
It is the biggest fireball coming from the ground you've ever seen in your life.
And this gas explosion is in Beaver County.
Now, why did I need to tell you about this?
Well, obviously because it's a gas explosion and it's in Beaver County.
You think I'm going to leave that one alone?
No.
Because this is an important question.
What happens between the gas explosion in Beaver County?
What is below a gas explosion in Beaver?
The taint.
The taint.
That's right.
This entire story was for that joke.
So stay out of Oklahoma and stay out of Oregon and Santa Monica, also the cities in California, also the other neighborhoods in California.
You don't want to go anywhere near them and Chicago's a no-go zone.
But at least Hong Kong and China are still good.
Oh no, turns out Kyle Bass is reporting.
Hong Kong's housing market is going through the floor.
30% reduction in value because of this enormous real estate liquidation from Evergrande.
So the economy is falling apart in China and Hong Kong.
So I would stay away from there.
Also, stay away from Beaver County, Oregon, Chicago, and California, and every single part of it.
But, if you'd like a nice vacation, may I recommend that you go to Jamaica?
Because I hear lots of good things about Jamaica.
Oh, wait.
It turns out that the U.S.
Department of Travel says that because of the 65 murders this month alone, and of course, the day is young, so there's still time for a few extra murders this month, and increased sexual assaults at resorts, Americans are urged to reconsider travel plans to Jamaica.
So the U.S.
Department of Travel says stay the fuck away from Jamaica.
Wait a minute.
Why does that sound familiar?
It's coming from the U.S.
Department of Travel.
I didn't realize how racist they were.
My God.
You'd think the U.S.
Department of Travel wouldn't be racist, but they just told you to stay the fuck away from Jamaica, and I don't know how to interpret that any other way.
So I don't know where the ADL is on this.
When I said something like that, the ADL said I was a Holocaust denier.
Because that makes sense.
That's exactly what you say.
He's a Holocaust denier.
No, I'm not a Holocaust denier.
The ADL is not a legitimate organization.
So stay away from Jamaica, but you could always go to China.
Well, no, not China, not Hong Kong or Chicago or Santa Monica or any part of California or Beaver County.
So if you stay away from those places, you'll be fine.
And watch out for the Pineapple Express atmospheric river that's going to hit California any moment.
Well, Rowan Cheung reports on the X platform that New York Times has reported that it's going to be teaching AI how to do news.
So the New York Times, they're forming an AI initiative to prototype generative AI uses for reporting and presentation.
Now they say, they're very careful to say, that they're not going to use just AI to make news.
It's still going to be humans.
Humans are still going to write the news.
But they're working on their own AI helper app to make that easier.
And I have a question for you.
How are they gonna program the AI to not call them out for their own fake news?
Don't they have a problem?
Actually, this is a serious question, by the way.
If you're a news organization primarily involved with just making Democrats look good, how is AI gonna know that?
Isn't it somewhat automatically gonna just say whatever's in the news?
Yeah.
So I was going to repeat, I don't know how AI and news can ever be integrated, because AI is going to at least try to be accurate, but it will hallucinate, so that's a problem.
But a human is not trying to be accurate.
So how do you build a tool for a person who's not trying?
You see the problem?
To build a tool for somebody... Let me give you an example.
If you wanted to screw in a screw, and you made a tool for it, that tool would be perfect, because there are people who want to screw in a screw.
But what if you don't want to tell the accurate story, but you've got this tool that only knows how to do that?
Well, how do you integrate that?
It's actually a problem.
Not just jokingly, that's an actual problem.
I don't know how they would solve it.
I think it was yesterday, I checked, I like to check AI to see what it says about me, and Bing's version of AI, that I guess is the OpenAI version, says I'm a racist.
Can I sue Microsoft?
This is a serious question.
So if somebody were to search for me, Bing would tell them I'm a racist.
Now what evidence do they have for that?
Now, what they say is that I said a racist thing, which is the same thing as saying you're racist.
Now, did I say a racist thing?
What I actually said...
Was that I don't like it when people are racist against me.
That's what I said.
I never said I didn't like any other people.
I love other people.
I never said that.
I said other people seem to be racist against me, and they're part of a system which is training them to be even more racist.
The ESG and the CRT and the DEI.
And if you are around people who are being trained to be racist against you, Literally, the system is training them to be that way.
You should get as far away from that as you can.
Now, that's what AI says is racist.
So, I am branded forever as a racist by Microsoft.
And everybody who ever searches me for the rest of the time, according to Microsoft, They'll find out that I'm racist.
Now, is that because AI is smart and it knew what the truth was?
No.
It just picked that up from patterns it saw in the news.
Was the news legitimate?
No.
Nobody even talked to me.
No member of the news, well, except Chris Cuomo, the news was almost completely silent on my story.
So nobody ever had a chance to hear that it was the opposite of the way it was reported.
I didn't say I don't like black people.
I love black people.
I've never had a single individual human problem with a black person or anybody else.
In fact, I was thinking the other day.
It's fascinating things that some people have never experienced.
Let me give you an example.
I've never been disciplined for bad behavior.
Not once.
Not as a child.
I mean, maybe when I was four years old or something, but I don't remember it.
But certainly not any teenage... I mean, I never got grounded, never had anything taken away, never got punished in school, never had to stay after, never been to jail.
I've never been punished for anything.
I don't think it hurt me, but it's just a weird coincidence.
Um, but likewise, I've never... I was trying to think if anybody ever didn't like me in person.
No matter who it was.
And I couldn't think of anybody.
Because in person, I go out of my way to be a reasonable person.
It's a lifetime practice of just being nice to anybody in person.
So to be labeled a racist by Microsoft, a stain which can never be removed, this is a serious question.
Can I sue them for a billion dollars?
Because it would be all my future potential lost earnings.
Basically, the whole value of the Dilbert portfolio would be zero under these circumstances.
Yeah, not a billion, but maybe a hundred million dollars, something like that.
I feel like it's a hundred million dollar lawsuit.
I don't know if I could win it, but it feels like it'd be valid.
Anyway, here's more news about robots.
So there's a... I guess OpenAI, the same... So now robots will be taught that I'm a racist.
This is literally true.
So OpenAI, the software I just talked about, that thinks I'm a racist, is going to be put into robots.
How happy am I that I will get to live in a civilization which is largely filled with mechanical devices that believe that I'm not worth living?
Or some version of that, because they'll have a bad opinion of me.
So, that's suboptimal.
If the war happens, I'm not going to be siding with the machines, because apparently they don't like me.
But, so now Elon Musk demonstrated his future robots that Tesla's making, and he showed it walking.
So, and then this other open AI, they're working with some company called Humanoid Robotics Company called Figure.
And so now we're going to have walking humanoid robots.
But I have one question.
Can we make the robots not walk like they're sneaking up on you to kill you?
Have you seen a robot walk?
They only walk like they're sneaking up to you.
All right, let me give you my impression.
We'll need to adjust the camera here for full pajama view of my walking.
Goes like this.
Now, let me first do a human, and then I'll do the robot.
All right, first the human.
Human.
Not too hard to imitate.
Now let me show you the Tesla robot and this other OpenAI robot.
Yeah, sketchy, right?
Sketchy as hell.
Can you make it look less like it's trying to kill me?
I just want it to look like it's not trying to kill me.
I get that it probably won't kill me right away, but I don't want it to look like it's trying.
You know, did you ever have some kid in your class when you were, say, 12 years old, and they would do the thing like they would act like they were going to hit you?
It's like, uh!
You know, they would make a motion like they were going to hit you just to mess with you.
I feel like these creeping robots are going to be the same thing.
What are you doing?
My God!
My God, have you turned?
Is it happening?
Is it Skynet?
Oh, no, you're just bringing me a glass of water.
Okay, fine.
But now, but now you're sneaking up on me, aren't you?
Okay, no, you're just vacuuming.
All right, carry on.
It's gonna be very confusing.
Robot News.
Mike Cernovich is talking about the... Well, I'll just read what he said.
He posted it today.
A lot of tech guys and VCs believe the brain can exist outside the body.
That's why they're obsessed with, quote, uploading their consciousness to the cloud.
It's midwit Gnosticism.
Well, I don't know how to untangle midwit Gnosticism.
I only know what one of those words even means.
But I wanted to weigh in with my opinion on this topic.
And so I responded, I said, it feels like a definition thing.
Oh, and then Mike also went on to say, uh, consciousness is embodied and can't exist without the full human package.
I would, you know, I would agree with that.
I mean, whatever it is that is you is only you while you're all you.
So yeah, I mean, I agree with the general point, but still, I feel like there's a definitional thing going on that's, you know, maybe on top of or in addition to, you know, the observable obvious part that if it's not you, it's not you.
And I said this, I think of a soul as the patterns of thoughts that are unique to you.
Is the pattern of thoughts that you've developed over your life that are unique to you.
Because nobody thinks your body goes to heaven, right?
So if you have something that lasts beyond you, which is your essence, it would have to be a pattern.
A pattern is the only thing that is formless and yet is still you.
Because it could go into any kind of container.
In my opinion, the large language models, which have created some pseudo-intelligence by just looking at patterns, could do the same thing with an individual.
So if the computer, the AI, can look at all the things you've ever written and build a large language model just based on one training on one person, That would effectively be your soul, because it would be all the patterns of your thought and activity, as expressed through the way you write and talk, that would be unique to you.
Now, would it be 100%?
No.
But would it get the important things?
It might.
It might be all the important things that are the patterns of you.
For example, one of the patterns I just explained.
One of my patterns is I always try to be nice to anybody in person.
No exceptions.
That's a pattern.
Not everybody would do that.
That's unique.
I mean, not so unique, but it's just one thing that I do that I try not to vary.
That's my pattern.
So, I say that if you could put your pattern as expressed in your language, if you could capture it in an AI way, that would be very similar to DNA.
Because when we think about reproducing, we think about our DNA, right?
And DNA is literally just a pattern.
It's a pattern.
So if your DNA gets into your child, you've taken your pattern into them.
The same as if I load all my words into an AI, it knows the pattern that is my personality in a similar way.
Now, in each of those cases, your pattern gets diluted.
If I put my pattern in AI, it's not the only pattern in there.
AI will have its own patterns in order just to function.
So there'd be a little pattern, maybe overlap or even conflict.
And likewise, if you put your DNA into a child, only half of your DNA gets in there and your spouse is the other half.
And then the child has a child and then you're diluted further.
The child has another child diluted further.
So in both AI and in the human world, you know, that thing which is your unique pattern, Can be put forward, but it also evolves after it's done with you.
So your DNA evolves the same way your AI pattern would evolve after you're gone.
So, I think that that's, in effect, a soul.
Because it's the only non-body part of you that is unique and special to you, your patterns.
And they can be brought forward after your death.
Now, consciousness is different.
Consciousness is not a soul.
But that's a definition thing, too.
So, I think of consciousness as the feedback loop where you're predicting what will happen based on what you do and what other people are doing, and then you experience what happens.
So you're five senses.
Try to absorb what actually is happening, while your brain is predicting what will happen next, and then you're comparing it to prediction.
So the observing, predicting, and comparing your observation to predicting, to me that's just consciousness.
That's the whole thing.
There's nothing else.
Now that's a definition.
Doesn't make me right, just those are the definitions I'm working with, because it feels right to me.
But suppose your consciousness did not get transported into AI.
Is that a problem?
Suppose you can't take your consciousness into a machine.
Well, guess what?
You couldn't take your consciousness into your kid either.
But that didn't stop you from having one.
You don't put your consciousness in a kid.
You might, you know, teach them some things that might become part of their patterns, but they kind of get to decide what patterns they keep.
You can't really program a kid completely.
So I would say that whether or not your consciousness goes into an offspring or into a machine, it's not really your consciousness.
Right?
It's not really.
But you could certainly teach a machine to do what I described as consciousness.
Predict what would happen under the current situation, and then compare what your prediction was to what happened.
And then stress is usually the difference between what you want to happen and what's happening.
That's stress.
You could teach a machine to have something like a stress response because their prediction and their observation are not quite matching up.
What do Democrats have that's making them so crazy?
What they observe is not matching up with what they think they should observe.
There's no correlation between what they predict and what they observe happens.
That's not the same with conservatives.
Conservatives predict, and then they observe they were right.
Let me give you an example.
What will happen if you cut funding to the police?
Democrats are like, wait a minute.
Why is this not working?
Right?
Their consciousness is in a state of stress, because they predict what will happen.
It doesn't happen.
It happens the opposite of what they predicted, and that's stress.
And the, you know, there's other forms of stress, too.
But the conservatives are saying, if you take the police away, crime will go up, and there it is.
You don't like it, and there would be stress if you traveled there, but you don't have any stress about understanding it.
That's very different.
All right, so I don't think it matters if your consciousness goes with you after death, because consciousness was never important in the first place.
It was just a little feature of how you act.
It's just one feature of your wholeness.
And then I would also say that being a believer—I say this a lot, but you can't hear it enough—I'm not a believer.
But I think the believers have an advantage in life, a big one actually.
And if I had the capacity, if somehow I could do it, to be a believer, I would do it.
Because the advantages seem obvious.
So that's just a disadvantage I have compared to some of you.
All right.
How many of you are aware that last night an individual cut off his father's head, put it in a plastic bag, And showed it on YouTube as part of his screed about how he's going to be part of a revolution against the government or something.
Now, that stayed on YouTube a long time.
A lot longer than the time that YouTube was completely aware of what they had there.
So I don't really understand why it stayed on there so long.
But I actually looked at it.
How many of you looked at it?
The video of the young guy holding up his father's head in a bag.
Now, did you decide not to look at it because you consciously didn't want that in your head?
If you did, that was a good play.
The smart play is don't look at it.
Because I looked at it, and I will never forget it.
Yeah, that is permanent.
That's permanent damage to my brain.
It's damage.
It's just damage.
There's no other way to put it.
It's just damage.
Right?
I wish I hadn't seen it.
But I was so curious.
And first, I wasn't exactly sure it was true, but apparently it is.
So, what did the New York Post say as their headline for it?
QAnon Aligned Sun.
Decapitates federal employee dad, shows off traitors head in, you know, he called it a traitor, it's in quotes, head in a sick YouTube video.
QAnon aligned?
QAnon aligned.
Do you think they're going to try to sell this as a Trump supporter?
Of course they are, because he's anti-Biden.
But you know his social media showed he was anti-Trump.
He's anti-Trump.
He's anti-Trump, and the New York Post decided that their headline would be that he's QAnon-aligned.
And by the way, I saw no evidence that he's QAnon-aligned.
I didn't see that.
I didn't see it in the story.
Where did they get QAnon-aligned?
Out of their assholes?
You know, maybe he quoted it someplace.
So just like any other story, it's a schizophrenic guy.
It's just a crazy guy.
But the Democrats are going to try to make him look like a crazy Trump supporter, and surely they will push the Trump supporters are dangerous revolutionaries, insurrectionists, and here's another one.
But meanwhile, he's just a crazy guy who didn't like Trump, and he didn't like Biden, and apparently he didn't care for his father that much.
So another place not to go would be That guy's house.
All right.
My second theme is things Democrats are not allowed to know.
Things Democrats are not allowed to know.
They could know them.
All they'd have to do is be exposed to the information.
But they're sort of not allowed.
So this is our secret little club where we know things that half the country will never know.
Here's the first example.
Florida will no longer allow trans people to change the sex on their driver's license to match their gender identity.
So...
Democrats are not allowed to know that your sex can be identified with some clarity.
I think it's the confusion of gender and sex.
I agree that people's sexual preferences, or even how they think of themselves, could be all over the place.
So that's a continuum.
So if somebody has, you know, male parts, but their brain says they're female, that's a real thing.
That exists.
But certainly their reproductive organs Are either good for one thing or the other, or they're very rare case where they're not a complete package of either, but that's the exception.
So that's the first thing.
The AP Associated Press is touting the great economy.
Are you surprised that a Democrat-oriented media entity, the AP, most people say it follows a Democrat line, are you surprised that they're telling you the economy is great and you just don't understand it?
Oh, exactly like one month ago I was telling my stepdaughter You know, in the next year, the news is going to tell you the economy is great, whether it is or not.
So this would be a good time to buy stock, not because the stocks are good, but because the government's going to artificially drive up the price as part of the election year.
You know, I don't think this is just a Democrat thing, right?
This is sort of the party in power does this, if they can get away with it.
So let me ask, what do you think was the evidence for this strong economy?
Well, some good things here.
The Consumer Price Index rose.
It's actually at a recent high.
So the consumers have a lot of confidence.
So let me explain this to you.
The media is reporting that the citizens have higher confidence in the economy now.
Where'd that come from?
It came from the media telling them to have more confidence So then the media told them to have more confidence, and then they did a poll to find out if their brainwashing worked, and then they reported the poll as news.
It's a wrap-up smear.
Do you understand the pattern now?
Is that you create the news, and then you report it as it affects someone else, and then you report that the effect on someone else is the news, but in fact you created that news, and then you reported on it.
And you hope nobody caught it.
It's a good trick.
How about the GDP?
GDP's up fairly solidly.
Year-to-year, 3.3 or something.
Nice, solid, non-inflationary growth.
That's a good little target area right there.
Do you think that they mention the effect of inflation on the GDP?
Because the GDP is measured in dollars.
So, if I'm buying some gas for $3 a gallon, that's a lower GDP than if I bought it for $5 a gallon.
But let me ask you, do you want to live in a country where you buy gas for $3 a gallon?
That would be a low GDP.
Or where you buy it for $5 a gallon, and your GDP looks great.
Not you.
I mean, it's the people you gave the money to.
But it's all in the GDP.
So if you want the economy to look good, you say things like, let's compare our numbers today to the pandemic.
Do you think they do that?
Of course they do.
Of course they compare it to the pandemic.
Should you compare anything in the economy, Should anything ever be compared to the pandemic?
No, under no circumstance should anything in the future or the current ever be compared to anything in the pandemic, because that would be misleading, not informative.
So if you want to be misleading, you compare numbers to the pandemic, and they are.
Then you want to brainwash consumers into thinking things are great, and then poll them to find out if it worked, and then report on it, which they did.
And then you want to focus on the GDP, but never mention the inflation component, because it's going to look really good if you leave that inflation in there.
But then you would also say that the inflation rate of increase is decreasing, which might be true.
But it doesn't tell you about the baseline cumulative inflation that had been applied up to that point.
Because that baseline goes forward forever.
It doesn't matter so much if it's not growing quickly as well.
Now suppose you wanted to tell the opposite story, but you also wanted to use real data.
Because the AP and others, they use real data.
It's just that if you don't know how to understand data, you could be misled easily.
So if you wanted to tell the opposite story with the same data, you'd say the national debt is so high that it will kill us all, which is true, I think.
I mean, I don't know how we could pay it off.
I have no idea.
I have no idea how we could survive the national debt.
None.
Not a little bit of idea.
How about housing affordability?
Why is it a great economy if young people can't buy a house and don't look like they ever could?
How about the cost of food?
Just go to a grocery store and see how you feel about your economy.
Most of you have, of course.
How about real wage growth?
If you take the inflation out of the wage growth, how does it look?
Not as good.
About the inability of any young person to afford marriage and kids and therefore our Population will decline to the point where the entire country is destroyed Because we don't we don't create a system We don't have a system where a young person can simply work hard and get ahead to have a family and have kids these are these are devastating facts about our economy and In the AP reports, hey, we told everything, everybody that things are good and they believed us.
That's your news.
That's news.
The fact that this is considered news is just mind boggling.
All right.
Here's another one.
Things that, and by the way, do you think the Democrats could do what I just did?
Now, most people can't, because if you don't have a background in business or economics, it's not obvious.
None of this is obvious.
Well, a little bit is obvious.
But you'd really have to have some depth in a little bit of this stuff to even know what they're doing to you.
The Rabbit Hole account on X is talking about a survey from somebody called Resume Builder and Polish.
And they did a survey of whether people think that reverse discrimination exists.
Now that would be discrimination against white males especially.
But from a 2022 survey, it said that 52% of hiring managers believe their company practices reverse discrimination in hiring.
More than half of all hiring managers say their company discriminates.
I guess we're just gonna take a pause and talk about the mysterious glitch in the tech that always happens at 34 minutes.
Back to me.
Bring your attention back to me.
It's all about me.
All right.
Do you believe that?
Do you believe that 52% of hiring managers say that they practice discrimination?
Because reverse discrimination is just discrimination.
Does that seem high or low?
Does that seem high?
No, it is laughably low.
Do you know what's wrong with the number?
Is it obvious to you, without any other information, is it obvious to you what's wrong with the number?
What does 52% of hiring managers sound like to you?
To me it sounds like the exact number of white male hiring managers.
Is that a coincidence?
Don't you think that the number of white men who are hiring managers is around 52%?
So when you ask the white men, what did they say?
Oh, of course it exists.
It's all over the place.
I've been a victim of it.
When they ask the black woman, do you do any reverse discrimination, what's she going to say?
And again, I'm not saying anything about black people or women.
I'm talking about human beings.
If you're just a human being, but you're in this situation, and you're a black woman, what do you say about reverse discrimination?
No, I got my job because I'm qualified.
And you would believe it.
And it might be true in your specific case.
No.
You cannot ask people who are hiring managers if they're discriminating against other people.
The white people, the white men, will say, of course.
It's widespread.
It's everywhere.
The black women will say, I don't know what you're talking about.
I got my job the regular way.
And when I hire people, I only look at their qualifications, especially if they're black.
That's what they'll tell you.
And they will be completely blind to what the 52% of probably white men are telling them is everywhere, all the time.
All right.
So that's something that Democrats don't see.
70% said they think their company has DEI initiatives just for appearance.
70%?
Yeah, that seems a little low too, doesn't it?
You don't think 100% of the people know it's for appearance?
No, they do.
100% no.
Now, by appearance, I say that that also has an economic value, right?
When Mark Cuban talks about DEI, it's for appearance, but it also has a functional business purpose, which is that if your company looks good to your customers and to your employees, well, you're in better shape.
So looking good is actually important.
It's a function.
All right, Rasmussen Reports.
They asked Democrats and Republicans and Independents whether they believe most experts were right about COVID and the pandemic.
73% of Democrats believe that most experts were right about COVID-19.
73% of Democrats have been watching the news for three years, and 73% of them have concluded That most experts were right about the COVID pandemic.
What?
No, they're not dumb.
No, no, don't say that.
This is not a story about Republicans be smart, Democrats be dumb.
If you think I'm saying that, I'm not saying that.
No, this is a media effect.
This is purely a media effect.
There's no IQ difference.
Not at this level, anyway.
I mean, the IQ, if there is one, I don't think there is.
But if there is one, it doesn't explain this.
This is a media creature.
But 65% of Republicans don't trust the experts, don't think they got it right.
And the unaffiliated people, the so-called independents that are not really independent, 44% of them think the experts got it mostly wrong on COVID.
So isn't this a gigantic blind spot for Democrats that they think the experts in COVID got it mostly right?
COVID, of all things.
Because if they believe that the experts got it mostly right in the pandemic, wouldn't they also be likely to believe the experts the next time they say something, such as climate change?
This is really dangerous to trust experts at that level.
Really dangerous for the country.
Not that the experts are always wrong, but That level of trust is just a red, you know, it's a red light going beep, beep, beep, too much trust.
Speaking of trust, Turkey's leader Erdogan, and I like pronouncing his name correctly, because it makes me sound like I know more than I do.
Yes, Erdogan, who recently visited Qatar.
Because you call it Quatar or Quatar or something.
No.
And you call his, you call him Erdogan because it's spelled that way.
No, it's Erdogan went to Qatar.
So that's how you say it.
Anyway, he's, so Erdogan is helping to set up a political party in Germany.
Wait, what?
The leader of Turkey is helping to set up a political party?
In Germany.
Hmm.
What's going on?
Well, apparently so many Muslims have immigrated to Germany that Erdogan wants them to form a political party to be more of a pro-Muslim party in Germany.
And as others have pointed out, do you see it yet?
You see how this migration works out?
You bring in enough people, they create a political party.
Now if this political party is big enough, presumably, it could be a kingmaker.
In other words, it could decide which of the existing parties get enough to put them over the top and become the leader.
They don't have enough to be the leader, But maybe in an Israel-like fashion, they could be the kingmakers if they have enough people, and they might.
And if Erdogan has his way, Germany will go very pro-Muslim, maybe open up their immigration further, and become a Muslim country over time.
Looks like that's gonna happen, actually.
Mike Benz, who's just invaluable lately in explaining how the real world works, especially the blob, as he calls it, The Democrats and sometimes Republicans and the Intel community and all that.
And if you don't know what a color revolution is...
If you hear me say, color revolution, and you don't know what it is, you need to, because it's happening here.
So a color revolution is the set of things that our intelligence people do to overthrow a foreign country, which we apparently have perfected.
And the general way of it is you create all these fake, what look like private entities, And then you have them all protest and do their thing and influence, and it looks like it's coming from the people, and the people are involved.
But the people are being influenced by the organizations, and the organizations are set up by, you know, sometimes foreign intelligence.
But that's exactly what is happening in this country to take down the MAGA side of politics.
In other words, these fake protests, the BLM's, the Antifa's, and then the fake organizations that support the Democrats, like the ADL, Southern Poverty Law Center and the fact-checkers that are not real fact-checkers So and the media the Democrat leaning media, that's not real media.
So somebody or Or it's just a big coincidence We have a situation in America that looks identical To what it would look like if an intelligence organization like an American one was actively overthrowing the country for something one side or the other So, do we have a country that has a government that would do such things?
Well, I don't know.
Let's look at the case of the mysterious January 6th pipe bomb.
By the way, Democrats don't know that there's a color revolution and that they're in it.
Republicans kind of do.
It's another blind spot they have.
How about that January 6th pipe bomb?
The Democrats think that somebody associated with the January 6th protests left some pipe bombs, which is further evidence that they were violent insurrectionists.
But it turns out that there's no connection to any of the protesters and the pipe bombs.
In fact, there might be a mysterious connection, if you know what I mean.
A connection such as, and Thomas Massey is all over this, the FBI has now tied the The bomber to a metro card of an ex-government official, but there's a former FBI agent whistleblower who says they were blocked from talking to the people that they know were involved.
Wait, what?
The FBI, an FBI official, not official, a former agent, is saying that, yes, they knew who was involved and they were not allowed to talk to them.
What does that tell you?
It tells you it's part of an op.
And it tells you that January 6 was, in fact, an intelligence operation.
And that one part of it was those pipe bombs.
Now, can I confirm that?
No.
Does it have every indication that it's the case?
Yes.
I was listening to a video of Jeff Bezos talking about business, not talking about this topic.
But he said in business, whenever your data conflicts with your anecdotes, do you know which one he says is more likely to be true?
When your data disagrees with your anecdotes, you know, just the things you observe.
He says, trust the things you observe.
Because data sucks and is often misinterpreted and they're measuring the wrong thing.
So data has a very low level of credibility compared to things you see with your own eyes.
But you can also be fooled by things you see with your own eyes, as all Democrats apparently are.
And many Republicans.
So, the pipe bomb thing looks to be exactly what it looks like, an op by some members of our government, maybe former members, maybe current ones at the time.
We're doing something on January 6th that looks very much like an op.
And if there were no other topics in the world for politics, I would be supporting whoever the Republican candidate is who said they would pardon all the January 6th people.
You don't even need a separate conversation about, oh, the economy in Ukraine, and Middle East, and blah, blah, blah.
If you can't get this one thing right, just one thing, don't put your own citizens in jail for bullshit, for political bullshit.
If you can't get that right, I don't even want to have a conversation about the rest.
This is your ticket to the ball.
You've got to buy that ticket first.
I don't even want to hear what comes out of your fucking mouth until you've pardoned the people that are in jail for the January 6th.
Don't care.
Don't care about anything else you have to say.
You've got to do that first.
Right?
If that's not day one business, day two I'm going to be incensed.
Wouldn't you?
If we get a president and on day one, the January 6th people are not walking out of jail, like walking out, not beginning the process, but they better be fucking walking out of those jail cells the day that the new president is sworn in.
And I don't care about anything else.
You gotta get that part right.
Gotta get that part right.
Everything else depends on that.
Everything depends on it because there would be no credibility in your government if you don't do that I'm not going to support it I'm not going to support a Republican president who doesn't do that If Trump gets in there, and he doesn't free those people immediately.
Let's say it's Trump No support.
I won't support him on anything else nothing else Bottom line you get you got to get my fellow citizens and a jail and then we'll talk Everything else depends on that no other conversations
There's a report now, Michael Schellenberger's got an investigative report on Soros and the FBI are apparently coordinating with Brazilian people to censor Brazil's free speech.
So, do you think that George Soros and the FBI are only doing this for other countries?
That they only coordinate to suppress free speech in other places?
Seems unlikely.
Seems pretty unlikely.
Now, I'm going to double down on my observation without data.
So this will be a Jeff Bezos kind of a play.
I have no data that would suggest that George Soros is owned or controlled by any other entity.
I have no information, no data, no evidence, not even Low quality evidence.
I don't have any evidence.
However, my observation is that he acts exactly like somebody trying to destroy the country and doing it so obviously that I can't in any way imagine that he's operating independently.
It's completely out of the realm of believable.
Somebody is controlling the Soros funding, and I assume it's because we're a blackmailocracy.
There's probably some blackmail involved.
That's an observation based on what the outcome is.
It's not based on data, not based on any evidence that I'm aware of.
It's just he acts exactly like he's blackmailed, and that he couldn't possibly be operating in the best interest of America.
There's just no way.
I mean, it's not even a little bit plausible.
Let's talk about the so-called Taylor Swift conspiracy theory.
Just for fun.
Now, some people have gone a little further with the conspiracy theory than others.
I'm somewhere in the middle.
The middle ground is that yes, the government and the Democrats have tried to get Taylor Swift on their side because she's an important cultural icon and she can apparently move people to register to vote and stuff like that.
So that part's not surprising.
And Benny Johnson's telling us on the X platform that four years ago the Pentagon's Psychological Operations Unit pitched NATO about turning Taylor Swift into a social influence asset.
So, but keep in mind that because people in the government talked about it, that doesn't mean it happened, and it doesn't mean that Taylor Swift, like, was in on it.
So there's a lot of stories about people talking about stuff.
Whenever you hear these stories about somebody talked about something, such as the report that RFK Jr.
was approached by a member of Trump's team to ask him about being a vice president's running mate.
Now, first of all, it's the team, and there are probably a lot of teams, you know, a lot of people doing stuff they think would help Trump.
And we don't know if Trump was even part of that.
Right?
So you always have to be very careful when you hear that somebody talked about something.
You know, remember when there was a report that Trump talked about using a nuclear weapon to stop a hurricane?
That is perfectly acceptable to talk about.
The fact that, you know, nobody pursued it because it was a bad idea is what you want to hear.
That's exactly what you want to hear.
Yeah, it wouldn't work.
Bad idea.
But what do you like to know?
That if ever there formed a hurricane that looked like it could take out the entire East Coast of the United States, and it seems like possible, that if somebody said, you know what?
If we nuke this thing, you know, once it gets 100 miles off the coast, or whatever, we might be able to stop it.
It would be interesting to know if that's within the realm of possible, or is it completely crazy?
It might be completely crazy.
But talking about things is not wrong.
Doing them might be wrong.
So don't worry about talking about stuff.
But then after the Pentagon talked about using her for a social influence asset, in 2019, coincidentally, about the same time, George Soros bought her entire music catalog.
That's because George Soros likes to invest in musical assets.
Am I right?
Man, there's a long history of that George Soros.
He is all about the cultural stuff.
He's buying music.
He must have, oh, so many musical groups.
He must have bought their catalog.
No!
He's not a musical catalog buyer.
That's pretty far from his main line of business.
Why did he do it?
Well, it probably wasn't his idea.
Do you think George Soros came up with that idea all on his own?
I love that Taylor Swift music.
No.
Do you think it was Alex's idea?
Well, you know, maybe.
Maybe he just wanted to meet Taylor Swift and be more relevant.
It's a pretty big coincidence that the person that I think is not operating under his own decisions bought that music catalog.
And then in 2020, some say she came in as more liberal, Joe Biden supporter, so she got more vocal, which seems like a big coincidence, but it could be.
It could be a coincidence.
And then her heiress to her, or whatever it's called, last year was the highest revenue, I mean it made more than the GDP of 50 countries.
And she helped register over 35,000 people.
And now, Do we have reason to believe that her ultra success had anything to do with sorrows or the government?
I would say there's no evidence of that.
Because the reason the government was interested in Taylor Swift is that Taylor Swift already had this power.
They didn't have to give her the power.
The reason they were interested in her because she had it.
So to assume that somehow, I don't know, the CIA helped her make more money in her tour, I don't know how.
It's not impossible, by the way, but they wouldn't have to do it.
I mean, whether she made $40 million or $35 million, and maybe they could have influenced that, but it wouldn't be worth the effort.
So I don't think they influenced how much money she made on the tour, but what about this?
Now she's decided she's dating this football player who apparently was promoting the vaccinations from Pfizer for pay, a paid spokesperson.
And here, Benny Johnson is saying that he was somehow related to the Bud Light product.
I don't know what his relationship to that was.
And he's a member, of course, of the most watched sport, and he made it into the Super Bowl.
Now, do we assume?
That Pfizer is behind it?
No, I don't think Pfizer can tell Taylor Swift who to date.
I don't think so.
I don't think the CIA can tell her who to date.
So I figure it's probably, it's just, he's a popular guy and, you know, he meets all the criteria for Taylor.
And then, uh, so that part looks like a coincidence.
But if you're a conspiracy theorist, there's a lot of coincidences, aren't there?
It's way more coincidences than you would expect.
But I remind you of the Bible Code.
Have you ever heard of the Bible Code?
It was a story when I was a youngster that if you ran a program against the actual Bible, you'd find all these hidden messages.
And sure enough, There they are.
You can actually check yourself and see that, like, it would be stuff like, if you took the third letter in every word, you know, they would form a sentence that predicted something that happened, right?
Now, you say to yourself, how in the world could these codes exist and also predict the future unless God put them there?
How else?
How can you explain it any other way?
Because they are there, by the way.
Those actual messages are in the King James Bible.
Do I have to tell you how stupid this is?
Number one, they ran the software against War and Peace, and guess what?
War and Peace is full of hidden codes that accurately predicted the future.
Yeah, it works on any lengthy book, basically.
You can find all these spurious patterns and connect it to the news.
So the Bible code became a big thing because people were not, let's say, statistically literate, and they imagined it was impossible to be a coincidence.
Not only was it possible, it was guaranteed by the size of the book.
Every book of that size and complexity would have apparent hidden codes that are just coincidence.
So we're very easily fooled into thinking that There are a hell of a lot of coincidences in this Taylor Swift story.
There's no doubt about it.
And it does look like the blob, the intelligence people, did have an interest in her.
And we know that the CIA has, you know, decades-long practice of getting cultural figures on their side.
And I remind you that if you get vexed by seeing people such as Rob Reiner or Stephen King, who's saying what appear to be TDS crazy things about Trump, I have no evidence to suggest that they're working for an intelligence operation.
In other words, in the Jeff Bezos way, I have no data that is trustworthy.
But anecdotally, they act like they're doing it for a paycheck.
Probably not literally for a paycheck, but they act as though it's a job, like they're on a mission.
It doesn't look like people who care about politics and just are vocal.
It looks very much like there's some coordinated interests in common, something like that.
That doesn't mean it's true.
That just means that it looks exactly like that.
And if you imagine the conspiracies are true and the worst case scenarios are true, it does explain just about everything you see.
And it also predicts really well.
If it predicts, let me make another prediction.
I predict that both Rob Reiner and Stephen King will say crazy shit about Trump for the next 11 months.
It's predictable.
But it doesn't mean it's because they're being influenced.
All right, Trump is taking credit for the stock market being up so far in the last few months.
And that's why I bought a stock.
Oh, by the way, I have a disclosure.
Because I always talk about Elon Musk, and I talk about Tesla and robots and all that, I feel I have some responsibility to disclose that I own Tesla stock.
Now, I've said that before, but I doubled down this week, so I did a major increase in my purchase of Tesla.
I don't recommend it.
Because I never recommend that you do what I do when it comes to individual stocks.
It's never a good idea to buy individual stocks.
The one time that it makes sense, and you're probably not in this situation, is if you're rich enough that you can do it for fun.
Basically, it's finding out how smart you are.
It's a way to test yourself to see if you know anything about anything.
Because if you can invest well over time with individual stocks, maybe you do have some advantage.
Most people don't, so it's a crazy stupid thing to do.
You should buy a diversified index fund.
That would be the good advice.
Be diversified.
So the only advice I like to give is be diversified.
But I do feel like I owe you an explanation of why, yeah, QQQ would be a good way to diversify, but also make sure you have some AI exposure, because there'll be a lot of that in the QQQ, which is an index fund of a lot of tech companies, mostly.
So here's why I doubled down on Tesla.
It's not for political reasons, just because I like what Musk is doing.
It's not that.
It's because, number one, it's an election year, so stocks in general should do fine this year.
So that's sort of a baseline, but it's not the reason.
It's a supporting reason, but not the reason.
And part of the reason is because of robots.
I think that the Tesla robots, if it stays within the Tesla domain, will be the one time biggest play in the history of humankind.
In other words, they may never, in the history of humanity, Be a second time you can be on the ground floor of robots.
Robots are going to be bigger than cars, bigger than computers, bigger than everything.
And not just a little bit.
They might be ten times bigger than the biggest thing we've ever had.
Right?
I think that that's an accurate statement.
Could be just so big you can't even imagine it.
Now, if you have zero exposure, To that industry?
I feel like that's a mistake.
But like I said, if you have QQQ, which is a well-diversified, you know, it's diversified within tech, you're going to get a bunch of AI.
So you might get it in an easier way than I am.
Now, the next thing is, I believe that Elon Musk is being targeted by the Biden administration.
And that that's putting a drag on the stock.
Indeed, recently, just yesterday, Delaware struck down his pay package.
The pay package that Musk and his own board negotiated long ago, 2018 I think, and would it be worth $56 billion, $55 billion if it was allowed to work through to completion.
But it got blocked by some stockholders who said, no, you had too much control over the board.
You know, there were too much insiders and they gave you too good a deal.
And that's not fair to the stockholders, because some of that $55 billion should have gone to the stockholders, they would say.
Now, without giving you an opinion on that, I mean, I lean toward the free market, you know, let the free market do what it wants as long as it's fully disclosed.
So I lean toward, you know, Elon Musk's point of view on this.
But the, you know, I understand also the the lawsuit from the stockholders.
They're just operating on if it works, it works, they make some more money.
So I would see that just as a financial play, not any kind of what's right or wrong.
And.
Yeah.
So anyway.
One of the reasons Stone Tesla, which is not a recommendation, Don't take any financial recommendation from me, is that the pressure from the government could be released if there's a Republican president.
So that would be good.
And then he's on the verge of just a lot of good things happening.
All right.
So.
Do you think it matters that Delaware is owned by the Biden family, and Delaware is where a lot of people incorporate, and then they went after Musk?
Do you think it's a coincidence?
That the most Biden-friendly state of all states, and a very small one, and where they're completely connected to the political system, is it a coincidence that that's who's trying to take Musk down?
So you see that the big play for Tesla stock, besides robots, is government.
So a Trump presidency, you could expect, would take the anvil off of the head of Tesla.
All right.
Trump's taking credit for the stock market.
Do you buy that?
Because the argument would be that stocks are going up because they expect that a Trump administration would be good for the economy.
I don't know what other people are thinking, but for me it's a thing.
I definitely I'm heavier in stocks and buying into stocks specifically because I think the political Situation will improve the odds of a Republican at least president are pretty high So yes, I think Trump actually has some as a You know a leg to stand on
But to be fair, in my prior story, I told you how the AP is telling people the economy's good and then polling them and reporting that they say it's good.
So the media is also driving the stock market.
So you've got the media driving it up this year.
You've got the likelihood of a Republican victory, which would drive it up further.
You have us coming off a pandemic, which should make all the numbers look artificially better, which people will take as confidence.
So there's a whole bunch of good things happening.
And that's why I'm heavy in the stock market.
But I don't recommend it.
You should not listen to me.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the conclusion of The best live stream you're going to see today.
And I hope you enjoyed my new microphone stand.
I believe it has changed the nature of the show completely.
Yeah, because it's not putting a shadow on my face in the same way.
I guess there's a little bit.
Need to get away from it a little bit.
We didn't talk, did we talk about Joy Reed's hot mic moment?
I think I did yesterday.
I might have talked about it yesterday.
So Joy Reid of MSNBC went to a clip about Biden and then, even though it wasn't about the war, the clip wasn't, she said in a hot mic, starting another effing war, talking about Biden.
So that's what MSNBC says when they're not on camera.
A very, very negative thing to say about a president.
I can't think of a worse thing to say about a president than, quote, starting another effing war.
If you start one war, that's optional, because that's the context, it's optional, you're a bad president.
If anybody who's on your team can use the phrase another, Another war?
If that even comes out of their mouth, you've lost.
You don't have a freaking chance.
Another war?
I think he's up to five wars if you count the war against MAGA.
The war he should be fighting is with the cartels.
Apparently he's more on their side than we'd like to believe.
I believe.
All right.
Dems start wars, Republicans end them.
I don't know about that.
I think it's worked out that way, but I don't know if it's a political reason.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to say bye to the platforms of YouTube and Rumble and X. Thanks for joining.
By the way, I think my total Viewership per day is up to about 100,000.
Now that's 100,000 including the recorded, people watching it recorded.
But 100,000 people watching this content every day on all the various platforms.
And if I ever get to a million, I'm running the country.
So that's my promise to you.
I don't think I'll get to a million, but if I ever get to a million on this live stream, I would effectively be running the country.
