S5181 - COVID Unemployment ENDS For 7.5M People Igniting Fear Of Economic Meltdown, The Great Reset Is NOW
COVID Unemployment ENDS For 7.5M People Igniting Fear Of Economic Meltdown, The Great Reset Is HERE. Many conservatives think that the end to unemployment benefits will end the labor shortage but that is just not correct.
Many people have quit their jobs over personal reasons like family and career path. While the extended Biden benefits certainly played a role is some people refusing to get a job much of the great resignation is due to personal philosophy.
Republicans still don't seem to understand what's happening culturally and its a safe bet that with the end of the eviction moratorium the economy may be facing total meltdown
#Biden
#Democrats
#Republicans
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Today is September 8th, 2021, and our first story.
Unemployment benefits from the federal government ended on Monday, and 7.5 million people are now worried they're not going to receive their benefits.
Some conservatives think that this is good because it'll end the labor shortage, but I don't think that's true, and we've got evidence to back it up.
In our next story, Joe Rogan questions whether he should sue CNN for saying he ingested livestock medicine.
That's right, Aaron Burnett said it, and it's just not true.
And in our last story, Peter Boghossian, philosophy professor at Portland State, has resigned, saying that the university has given up on being intellectual and teaching people, and just embraces ideology.
If you like the show, leave a good review, give us five stars, share the show with your friend.
And now, let's get into the first story.
It's hard to say whether this is good news or bad news.
But you may have heard on Monday, 7 million people lost their COVID benefits.
Now, if you're somebody who was receiving these benefit checks, you think it's bad news.
I mean, you needed that money to pay your bills.
You needed it to prepare and budget properly.
And now the money's gone.
All the while, many of these states still have restrictions.
And the media is saying it's only going to get worse.
If you're someone who did not receive these benefits, you may think it's good news.
I mean, we're in a massive labor shortage.
People gotta get back to work, and a lot of people aren't working because of these benefits.
But I don't know.
I don't know if it's easy to say it's good news or bad news, because you could say it's good news, but then what about the people who need it and their jobs aren't coming back?
All in all, I think it's fair to say, at least in my opinion, it's bad news.
Why?
I'm not convinced simply because the benefits ended, people will go out looking for work.
I mean, look at this from MSNBC.
Federal unemployment benefit expansions expired at the worst time.
State unemployment benefit agencies aren't picking up the slack, nor are Democrats.
The perspective from the establishment left is that people should keep getting the free money regardless.
And let me ask you, do you think that the people who are exploiting the system and not looking for work are all of a sudden going to be like, guess I'll get a job?
I think some, maybe.
But maybe it's a bit pessimistic of me to say many probably won't.
And I think the Great Resignation, as they call it, which is persisting, has little to do with unemployment benefits.
That's right.
Major labor shortages because of massive job openings.
People don't want to work.
Period.
And I don't think the money is going to change that.
I think people are just choosing not to work right now.
Something's happening.
Perhaps a kind of great reset.
I'm not entirely sure, but it's not just labor shortages, because labor shortages begets something else.
Food shortages.
And I'll tell you, I had quite a bit of fun, and I mean that somewhat facetiously.
Google searching, closed, comma, shortage.
And then pulling up all of these stories.
This was one of the easier ones for me, my friend.
Sometimes, I'm digging around fact-checking, trying to understand the ramifications of what's happening.
This time, Google search closed comma shortage, and what do you get?
Wow.
Every few hours, a new story about businesses, DMVs, schools shutting down because of labor shortage, restaurants shutting down because of food shortages, dealerships struggling to get cars because of chip shortages, products in short supply at retailers because of chip shortages.
And maybe it has something to do with labor shortages.
Maybe it has something to do with COVID benefits, but I'm not entirely convinced.
No, what I think may end up happening is all of these people who just lose money means they will be spending less money, money they don't have.
And that means the economy will continue to stay in its downward trajectory, to put it simply.
When you take a look at some of these shortages, I mean, many of it comes from overseas.
So it's hard to know exactly how this will play out.
Many conservatives have said to me, you know what?
This is going to be good because people will get jobs.
And that's the big statement from Ted Cruz.
Oh, you're worried about your benefits?
Go get a job.
We got a record amount of job openings, 10.9 million.
But I don't think it matters.
Because people don't care.
But, but, but, we'll see.
I could be wrong about this.
I don't want to be overly pessimistic.
The eviction moratorium was, once again, ruled illegal.
So now you'll get, if you want to live somewhere, you gotta work, you gotta pay your bills, and there's no more benefits, so maybe people will start getting jobs.
Maybe it's just that simple.
Or maybe people who built a routine around not working will refuse.
Let's take a look at the latest news and break down what's happening.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com.
Become a member in order to get access to exclusive members-only segments of the TimCast IRL podcast, as well as an ad-free experience on all of our news stories.
Don't forget to like this video, share this video, subscribe to this channel.
Sharing really is the most important and powerful thing you can do.
It helps us beat CNN in the ratings.
All the shares going around have a massive impact, so please share the video.
Let's take a look at the latest news.
First, from MSNBC.
Getting a little bit of that left perspective, let's see how they view the loss of federal unemployment benefits.
They write, the COVID-19 pandemic hasn't exactly produced a lot of good news in the last year and
a half. One glaring exception has been a massive reduction of poverty in the US,
a bright spot that is dimming rapidly. A July analysis from the Urban Institute found the slew
of federal aid Congress has allocated since March did more than just keep people afloat during the
pandemic. Instead, the combination of direct stimulus funding, state level aid and other
measures managed to reduce the number of Americans living in poverty by 45% compared to 20.
2018 dropping to a projected 7.7 percent this year from 13.9 percent in 2018. Hey, that sounds fantastic
That sounds really really good But what about all of the people whose standard of living is being rapidly diminished by a collapsing economy?
How about all of the locations, the businesses that have been forced to shut down by restrictions, and now middle class individuals may now find themselves just above the poverty line?
You see how it works?
Oh, and I'll show you all the stories.
Yes, you've lifted many people up, but how many people have been dragged down?
And you think the wealthy top 1% were hurt by this?
Wrong.
They weren't.
It was the middle class, the working class, the mom-and-pop shops.
The wealth disparity is only getting worse.
What'd they say?
Unless Democrats move quickly, though, those gains will be a statistical blip.
As of Monday, 7.5 million people lost their federal pandemic unemployment benefits, according to the Century Foundation's estimates.
Millions are now leaning on a reduced unemployment check from the state.
All as landlords are moving quickly to take advantage of the end of a federal eviction moratorium.
Hey, surprise, surprise.
People thought they didn't have to pay rent.
Just because the government slams the economy doesn't mean it's the landlord's fault.
They've still got to maintain the building.
You've got to pay the bills.
You've got to pay for repairs.
You've got to pay for, you know, HVAC and damage to the property.
Being a landlord doesn't mean you just get free money.
But a good landlord, I think, would try and split the costs understanding the hardships, for sure.
It didn't have to be this way.
Instead, it was a choice from Congress, so they say, and the White House to let the three unemployment programs tucked inside the CARES Act expire.
The end of the $300 boost to benefits?
Reduced from its original 600 will be the most visible change for people still able to collect unemployment checks from their state government.
But the end of the two other programs will have a much harsher impact.
The first, the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program, allowed people who had depleted their state benefits to continue to collect aid.
The second, The Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Program gave access to unemployment benefits for freelancers, contractors, people in the entertainment industry, and others who might not normally qualify.
The latter is especially concerning for the people whose industries have yet to fully recover from the pandemic.
For example, those that are linked to live entertainment or travel.
As the Delta variant continues its spread, and as the case numbers continue to tick up, we're seeing major events such as Jazz Fest in New Orleans get cancelled again.
That's more turmoil for workers who have already had a rough year and a half.
And that's a point that I think is important.
Just because they're getting rid of these benefits doesn't mean people are going to be able to just walk into any job.
I'm not going to go to a jazz musician and say, learn to code.
Hey, the tech sector's got no shortage.
No, you can't do that.
Professional entertainment industry, the jobs that still aren't coming back in full swing, these people are hurting.
It's not a one-size-fits-all policy.
So ultimately, I think this is just going to be a punch in the gut to the economy.
There are some conservatives and Republicans who argue that ending these benefits is a good thing for the country that is in the middle of a labor shortage.
But the evidence says otherwise.
Half of the states ended their unemployment boosts early during the summer, and according to the Wall Street Journal and economists, saw no corresponding boost in hiring.
Worse.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics' jobs report for August showed the U.S.
economy adding only 235,000 jobs compared to the 720,000 they had expected.
It's also less than the 340,000 new initial jobless claims that were reported Thursday.
Taken together, that means even as the job market lags, we're preparing to see a decline in consumer spending as the unemployment benefits expire.
So let's break this down, my friends.
Not every industry has reopened.
Spending is going to go down.
We've already seen tons of red states end these benefits.
Still, not a massive spike in job creation across the board.
In these states, we may have seen some blips.
Ultimately, people have less money to spend, less money to circulate in the economy, businesses make less, and then... Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
unidentified
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet-and-greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
Because I gotta tell you, even with all this happening, job openings soar to 10.9 million as companies struggle to fill positions.
Oh, you thought it was bad last month!
Let's play a little game.
How about this?
10.1 million job openings reported in August, a record.
And they filled 970,000 or so jobs.
So people were like, wow, big, big jobs numbers.
But more job openings.
You thought that was bad?
bed? 10.9 and only 235,000 jobs filled? Yikes.
Actually seems like things are not doing too well.
And to make matters worse, the New York Times reports the U.S.
could default on its debt in October, Janet Yellen warns.
That's right, the U.S.
has been liquidating assets to pay off its debts.
Isn't this fun, watching the gradual collapse of the United States?
So they say, gradually then suddenly, as it were.
Now, I don't know if it's the absolute end, but it certainly seems like things are just getting worse.
Maybe I could be optimistic and just say, like, the end of benefits means people will get their jobs back, but I believe that's not being genuine.
Like I mentioned, and MSNBC points out, there's still many events that are not reopening.
And more importantly, in places like New York, we're seeing people report business going down because of the vaccine mandates.
Government restrictions are still harming people's ability to work.
Now, let's say you have a business in New York and you can't reopen for some reason or another.
Or business goes way down because of these mandates?
Well, you're not going to be making money, are you?
And you're not going to be able to get any benefits, either.
You going to be able to pay your landlord?
Perhaps not.
But there's a lot to go through here, my friends.
The Great Resignation, in my opinion, explains a lot about what we're seeing.
And I think it explains why it's not going to be so simple.
You can't just expect people to say, oh, need money?
Oh, go work!
Because if that was the case, they'd be doing it anyway.
Many of the stories that we saw during the unemployment benefits, you had people saying things like, oh, I'm not working because I didn't feel like it.
Okay, maybe overly simplistic, but there were some stories where you're like, hey, wait a minute.
This person's not out of a job because they lost their job.
They decided to just walk out of their job, quit their job, and just take the benefits.
Or, got fired, but people certainly had an opportunity to work.
10.9 million job openings?
Hey, they're still receiving these benefits.
Why didn't they go take these jobs?
Not everybody was receiving the benefits at the time, as I pointed out earlier.
So we can see this from Inc.
The great resignation is here, and it's real.
People are quitting their jobs at a higher-than-usual rate.
What can businesses do to keep their workers?
They say, according to U.S.
Department of Labor, during the months of April, May, and June, a total of 11.5 million workers quit their jobs.
Recent studies indicate that it's likely not over.
A survey of over 30,000 workers connected by Microsoft found 41% are considering quitting.
The number jumps to 54% when Gen Z is considered alone.
Gallup found that 48% of employees are actively searching for new opportunities.
And Perseo reported 38% of those that they surveyed planned to make a change in the next six months.
Between April, May, and June, we lost, on average, about three million jobs per month.
Three million resignations.
And how many jobs did we add?
A couple million?
So for every job we lose, for every three jobs lost, one job gained?
It sounds like things will be bad.
Now again, perhaps, you know, people will get desperate without these benefits and they'll take whatever jobs they can, but I don't think that solves for the great resignation.
I think people are just deciding they want to quit.
For any organization to lose even a third of its workforce would be downright devastating.
The impact on small and medium enterprises, where finding departments of one is not unusual, Will be especially severe.
As with any potential crisis, addressing the situation is best achieved once one understands what is causing it.
The issues driving the Great Resignation, while multiple, are mostly variations on a theme.
According to a survey conducted by LinkedIn, 74% of those surveyed indicated that the time spent at home, either during shutdowns or working remotely, during the pandemic, had caused them to rethink their current work situation.
A great many over half in several surveys cite stress and burnout in their current position as a reason for looking elsewhere.
Others point to dissatisfaction and even fear caused by knee-jerk cost-cutting actions by their current employer in response to COVID-19-related business slowdowns as a reason for bolting, with many finding fundamental unfairness in holds on promotions, frozen merit increases, and indiscriminate layoffs which impacted poor performers and stars equally.
Particularly as they watched executive leadership refuse to participate in the pain.
Still, others made evaluations, both with heart and head, around the true economics of a two-income household, determining the benefits no longer outweighed the costs.
Some finally took the leap and started a dream business.
Many have simply had it with being undervalued and unheard by toxic, narcissistic managers.
Finally, fully a third stated concerns with their personal safety and having to return to an on-site position, while the pandemic still rages.
So with all this going on, what can a typical small enterprise do to stem the tide?
Particularly as larger, better-funded corporate competitors compete for the same smaller pool?
Well, they say, first, care.
But let me point something out.
You've seen the videos.
You've seen the photos.
Recently I saw a viral photo of someone pulling up to a drive-thru at McDonald's and a sign on the McDonald's drive-thru speaker says, Everybody Quit.
Sorry.
Now hold on there a minute.
If you quit your job, you don't get benefits.
The Great Resignation is not about getting free money from the government.
That's overly simplistic.
Perhaps, you know, I've made incorrect statements in the past by thinking it was that simple.
Reading these stories now and realizing why people are quitting It's not so much about money.
I do think it's fair to say, though, let's be real.
Giving people free money means they have less incentive to do the job properly, and depending on how they can get the benefits, even if they do quit, a lot of people decided not to look for work because they were getting benefits.
To put it mildly, people quit all the time.
They might say, my manager is a dick, I'm out!
And then they quit.
And then they say, wow, I'm broke, I need money.
Some people lose their jobs because of COVID, right?
Let's be real.
COVID happens, restrictions fall in place, business shuts down.
Someone says, yo, I lost my job.
What do I do?
And the federal government says, well, freelancers, everybody, here you go.
Here's benefits.
And then they say, you know, these restaurants are reopening, but I'm all right.
I'm getting these benefits.
So that actually may be the case.
That people refuse to look for work simply because You got the money coming in.
And honestly, for a lot of people, the unemployment benefits were more than they would have made if they went to these jobs.
So I do think it's fair to point out some people will return.
But then looking at the Great Resignation, something has changed.
There's been a major shift in priorities for a lot of people.
Perhaps the fear has ignited something in people that they once lost.
Wanting to be with their families.
Wanting to be with their kids.
Regardless, I don't think it's so simple just to say that an end of benefits from the government is going to solve all of these problems.
It may fix things.
Now, Republicans certainly think so.
From the Daily Mail.
Get a job?
Ted Cruz's response to article claiming jobless Americans have few options after 7 million lost their benefits.
The conservative lawmaker shared an Associated Press article on an unemployment stipend drying up on Twitter, saying, uh, get a job?
There are millions of vacancies and small businesses across the nation are desperate for workers.
And I absolutely empathize and sympathize with this, and I think everyone should, including conservatives.
Imagine this.
You and your husband or wife, your significant other, You wake up early in the morning, send your kids off to school, call the babysitter or drop the kid off at daycare, and then the dad goes to his job at an accounting firm, and the wife goes to the hospital where she's a nurse or something like that.
And then there is a remote worker mandate for the dad.
And maybe nurse isn't a good example, but the mom and the dad have office jobs.
And all of a sudden now, they're working remote.
All of a sudden now, they're spending time with baby.
All of a sudden now, they are able to pick up their kids because they can meet their deadlines working remotely, not being in the office.
All of a sudden they say to themselves, you know what?
I want to be with my family.
I don't like being at the office.
I like this routine.
And I gotta be honest.
One of the most important things for children is to be with their parents and see the work they're doing.
I think it's absolutely fantastic.
Then comes the great resignation.
The labor shortage isn't just about people not having money.
It's about people re-evaluating what they're doing.
And I think there is a lot of good here.
And maybe, to be completely honest, There is some value in sacrificing economic growth for the return to the strong family structure, which in turn can heal the economy and set us back on the right course.
That's something I think conservatives need to consider.
Many of the people saying, I don't want to go back to work, are saying that because they want to be with their kids and their families.
And boy, is that a good thing, especially when you see how awful it is for these kids to be in these schools.
So maybe, All of these really awful things happening at schools actually just alighted into the tunnel.
Why?
It's creating pressure.
Pressure on the kids to say, I don't want to be in this school.
Pressure on the parents to say, it's time to have you homeschooled.
Pressure on our entire society for parents to take responsibility for homeschooling their kids, creating school pods where local communities hire a teacher themselves, all pitching, and that teacher teaches the kids in a group setting.
And for parents to say, I want to be there for my kids.
I'm not saying it's absolute.
There's still a lot of families that are hurt by this because some people are running mom-and-pop shops and without employees, it ain't gonna work.
So it's a complicated problem.
I don't think the situation will be solved immediately, but I will say the optimism here is despite all of the bad things we're hearing, You gotta admit, it is kind of awesome to think that parents will now be spending more time with their children, taking responsibility for raising them.
Many of these kids are already getting pulled out of the indoctrination centers.
Homeschooling is up by like 25%.
And how many videos did we see of people going on TV and their kids walking in the background?
And I'm like, it's funny and it's awesome.
I want people's kids to see them working.
Here at Timcast, we encourage people to bring their kids and be responsible, don't have your kid mucking up the place.
But I want these kids to see how the world works and learn from their parents and spend more time with them.
I think that's very important.
And that's awesome, to be completely honest.
Now what happens in the end?
The challenge, I suppose, is that the standard of living for a lot of people will go down by some metrics, but I gotta wax philosophical a little bit here.
If we give up our new 2021 car, trade it in for something used, I get it, used cars are particularly expensive, but if we reduce our material possessions, and that's bad for the economy, Is it better for America that people will spend more time with their families?
I certainly think so.
To me, this looks like a great opportunity to strengthen the family unit, which is really, really good for us across the board, setting us back on a good track towards making a better economy in the future.
I'll put it this way.
For me personally, I would prefer to be around friends and family than to have a new car, than to have a better car, than to have access to the club or to go to the movies.
I remember we were talking about religion with Yossi Gestetner, who's a commentator and he's Jewish, and he was talking about the Sabbath.
And how, once a week, the family gets together, turns off all TVs, computers, phones, and they talk to each other, and they have dinner, and I was like, man, that is powerful stuff.
It's amazing.
Families should be doing this.
I see a light at the end of the tunnel here.
I really, really do.
And admittedly, there's a lot of bad that's gonna happen.
No joke.
But I don't know what else to say.
I feel like the economic crisis is here, and it will get worse, and it's going to be bad for a lot of people.
But let's focus on what we can do to pull out of the tailspin in a positive way.
There's a lot going on.
A lot of people don't understand the Great Reset.
And Ink also brings this up, talking about, you know, why people are quitting.
But we'll move on from this one, because I want to get into the work stuff.
Check this out.
A 74-year-old donut shop in Detroit has temporarily shut because of a staff shortage, as well as soaring ingredient costs, a report says.
This one's big.
It combines the food crisis and the labor crisis.
I'm sad to see it, man.
See, this is the other thing, too.
We don't want to lose out our institutions.
I can talk about all the good that we're going to see by families being together, but come on, a 74-year-old donut shop?
I mean, that's a, that's a rad thing.
Think about the grandparents, who come with their kids and say, when I was a kid, my dad brought me here, and this place, you know, he remembers going there on opening day, and now I'm going to bring you here, son, and then the kids, like, son, my grandpa brought me, your grandfather brought me here, and they come as a family.
These are, these are, these are still really good things, but, but take a look at this.
I got so many here.
Chew on this from the Gazette.
Parlor City closes Marion location because of staffing shortage.
Oh, that's a bummer.
Here we go.
Teacher staff shortages shut down three more Kentucky school districts.
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
And then you can just Google search closed food shortage.
Abilene's chili restaurants closed Monday.
That bumps me out.
Nando's closes 45 restaurants.
That's in the UK.
Where's the beef?
Shortages of food packaging force restaurants to cut hours.
It is happening, my friends.
It is the Great Reset.
And you know what else?
It's also the VAX mandates.
Over 20% of deployable Seattle police may be fired if they don't get the vaccine soon.
There we go.
There we go.
It's happening.
The Great Reset.
You know, we can sit here and complain.
And I think there's important things.
You know, we mock complaining, like, oh, people are just whining on the internet.
No, complaining can be important.
You know, telling people about problems and saying we should focus on them, address them, it's fine.
Complaining or issuing warnings, I think it's good to tell people where we have problems.
But I think right now what we're seeing is Well, manufactured.
That doesn't mean to say that the outcome is intentional.
It's just that the mandates, the lockdowns, the benefits, all the things that have happened so far have just served a great reset of global capitalism.
Is it all bad?
You know, I've long thought about this, and I've talked to a lot of people about this.
We've even mentioned it to, say, Alex Jones, for instance, on the IRL podcast.
It is bad when they destroy someone's life.
It is bad that many families who were planning for their futures have now lost their businesses, lost their jobs, have become dependent on government.
But it's not all bad.
I'm not a fan of materialism.
I'm not a fan of this idea of people making their life around objects and status.
No, I think experience, friends and family are what's most important.
I was watching a lot of 30 Rock.
What a great show.
And there's an old trope that no one ever said they wished they worked more on their deathbed.
I mean, typically people say they wish they spent more time with family.
I think what they're really saying when people are on their deathbed is, I wish my family were here with me now.
Because people make sacrifices for their family.
They worked more to help their family.
And it's easy to look back and say, if only I wasn't working so much, I would have spent more time with my family.
And it's like, yeah, but maybe you needed that money.
Maybe you needed those resources to give your family a better life.
Watching 30 Rock was funny because, I think it's in the first season, Jack Donaghy, who's played by Alec Baldwin, has a heart attack and then says, you know, I wish I worked.
I had a realization I should have worked more.
And I love it.
It's funny.
I don't think work is bad.
I don't think it's bad to want to do right by your family.
I do think we have a problem here in the U.S.
where we have too many narcissists.
And that's why they want to get in media and they want to be influencers and bloggers.
They want easy money for little work.
But I think working hard is good when you're thinking about things that are important, making a better life for your family.
And I'll tell you what, you know what I don't like?
Universities and colleges.
And now we're seeing this pressure put upon us, where parents gotta pull their kids out of school.
Isn't that a good thing?
These kids are being, you know, put in cubicles, they're putting masks on them, and then they're giving them strange social experiences, and teaching them creepy things, and parents are saying, I don't want them in this anymore.
That's a good thing.
Take your kids out of these schools.
Then the parents are working remotely, spending more time with their kids.
Come on, these are good, good things.
Then you've got the issue of these big cities.
I gotta be honest with you.
We drove through West Virginia.
I saw a lot of the places where rural America and middle America live and how they live.
And they are not the wasteful monsters of pollution like people in big cities.
Sorry, it's just true.
You might live in a city, you might like the show, but I'm gonna call you out right now because I did it too.
Look, when I lived in the big city, we waste water, we flush it down the toilet, we have plastic wrappings on everything, and people everywhere do.
Don't get me wrong.
But now, we compost more, we grow our own food, we grow our own eggs.
We're substantially more self-sufficient out here in a more rural area.
I don't want to pretend like we're in, you know, like the middle of nowhere.
We're an hour from DC, though we are, you know, You know kind of out there.
We have a lot of land.
It's it's it's it's absolutely amazing and Seeing the trees and the mountains driving for five minutes and going to the Shenandoah or the top of a mountain It is absolutely incredible So here's what I see The creepiness of the Great Reset and the Davos Group and what they want with this global homogenization of critical race theory, it's nasty stuff.
But a lot of it's backfiring.
And people are now getting out.
People are moving to Texas, of all places.
And that's good.
In a lot of ways.
And it's bad in some ways.
But when people move out to the middle of nowhere, I think it'll change you.
You live in a big city.
You're gonna be like, why would anyone need a gun?
We gotta ban them.
What do you think happens when you take that person and you put them in the middle of West Virginia and they encounter some wild animals?
They're gonna be like, I'm gonna go buy a gun.
Or some creepy person is on their property and there's no cops to call.
I think people are a product of their environment in many ways.
And I think people will change getting out of these cities.
I think the city's decentralizing is good.
I think it decentralizes a lot of the power of these big cities in government.
And I think as bad as everything is happening, we should look at the bright side of all of this.
Sure, it's been bad for a lot of people.
And I think there are nasty authoritarians who are pushing these policies.
But I'll tell you this, you think the Davos group is happy to hear that people are getting back to their families, having, instilling family values in their kids, taking their kids out of schools?
I'm sure they're not happy about it.
Because that doesn't work the way they planned it out.
In the end, we're gonna see people being more responsible, more sustainable, teaching their kids real, real values.
Teaching their kids?
Homeschooling, homeschooling, man.
And all in all, I say, OK, I'm going to look on the bright side of this one.
And you know what?
They can try and get you down.
They can act like you're a chicken in a chicken coop, and they just treat you like some kind of fodder, or a number, or a statistic.
But in the end, make sure you take care of yourself.
Some people are addicted, they won't leave these cities, so they will sit and wallow in the despotism.
But a lot of people are waking up to this.
I have a lot of friends, I tell you, who have gone full-on woke Biden rage.
And they're just angry all the time.
But I should say this more often, I have a lot of people who are waking up to this stuff.
Normies, who are all of a sudden saying, what is going on?
What am I doing?
What are they doing?
This is crazy!
And saying, I want experiences in life, not stuff.
I don't want to be wasteful.
I don't want to go to the city and climb to the penthouse and just consume.
No, people are like, I want to feel, I want to see, I want to explore.
And that's better for everybody, especially when it means more time for your kids.
But, I guess let me know what you think in the comments, and I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8pm over at youtube.com slash timcastirl.
Well thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Yes.
Joe should also sue tons of other outlets that published lies claiming that he was ingesting horse dewormer.
Because the big difference between horse dewormer and medication prescribed by your doctor But of course, I'm sure you heard the news that this past week or so, Joe Rogan announced he had COVID and that he was throwing the kitchen sink at it.
He was getting monoclonal antibodies, which is what they gave Trump.
It's the Regeneron's treatment.
He was taking Z-Pak as well as ivermectin.
Well, all of these outlets immediately came out and started saying that Ivermectin was horse dewormer, which is technically the truth, the best kind of the truth.
You know we love technicalities here.
I'm kidding, by the way.
They were saying that, you know, Joe Rogan takes Ivermectin, comma, a horse dewormer.
Or they would say, Joe Rogan takes horse dewormer Ivermectin.
Just because an animal can take a medicine that's used across the board doesn't mean that's solely what the medicine is.
But more importantly, just because ivermectin is in a specific treatment doesn't mean that every single treatment is the same one.
That is to say, These media outlets knowingly published lies or had reckless disregard for the truth when they claimed that Joe Rogan was ingesting horse dewormer.
That is to imply that they were saying Joe Rogan went to Tractor Supply and bought horse paste.
Well, Joe on his show said, should I sue CNN, or do I have to?
It was a question, and let's be real.
I don't think Joe is seriously saying he will sue CNN.
But I want to take this opportunity to seriously say, Joe, yes, please, sue all of them.
I'm not even kidding.
I mean, look, one of the challenges we face today with the media and their lies, over and over, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, is that regular people don't have the time, energy, resources to actually go up against these companies.
Joe is one of the few people who has substantial resources.
Now, I know, I know.
Perhaps it's just a waste of time in the long run.
And maybe, you know, I'm not gonna fault Joe for not suing them.
I don't know.
Ultimately, it's like, it'd be great if he did.
But imagine being able to just write a check to a lawyer and be like, take care of it.
I know it's not that simple, but for a lot of regular people seeing the smears, and not even necessarily regular people, but there's a lot of people who are in media who don't have nearly the opportunity and the resources to do something like this.
I get it, Joe's a busy guy.
I'm not gonna pretend like he's not, you know, his time is not consumed.
But there is still an advantage he has that many others don't.
And so long as people don't sue for reckless disregard for the truth, these companies will keep publishing the garbage lies over and over again.
Now, I saw this story and I wondered to myself, when did CNN say that Joe Rogan was taking horse dewormer?
And it turns out it was a personality on Don Lemon's show.
So here's the challenge.
I don't know if you can actually sue CNN for that.
You might have to sue the person himself because You can go on a show and you're responsible.
I mean, I guess there's tons of technicalities and legal arguments.
So, theoretically, Joe, he could, I mean, you could sue a ham sandwich.
Doesn't mean you're gonna win, right?
But I think Joe should.
This doctor, and I have the articles from The Wrap, this doctor claimed that everything that Joe did was wrong.
And this is the big problem with these lunatics, all right?
With these liars in media.
Let me point out a few things.
We mentioned this a little the other day on the show, but I want to say a few things so you understand how important it is that we be honest about ivermectin, among any other medical treatment.
CNN has a doctor come on their show saying, monoclonal antibodies.
That's wrong, Joe Rogan.
You're not supposed to get that.
That's for certain other people.
Z-Pak, that's not antiviral, it's an antibiotic.
That won't work.
Hydroxychloroquine, that's not gonna work.
Ivermectin, that's not gonna work.
Get vaccinated.
The problem is, whatever Joe did, he's COVID negative.
So who is this guy to come out and say everything Joe did was wrong?
Now, I'll be completely honest.
I think the monoclonal antibodies, which is authorized by the FDA, is likely what helped Joe recover very, very quickly.
I can't speak for the other medications, but they're all there.
There's a few things you need to understand.
One, Joe has come out and said these were prescribed by a doctor, and he had talked to multiple doctors who had given him this prescription.
I'm not gonna come out and tell you to do anything.
I don't know.
Go to your doctor.
Now, isn't it funny?
How many people say to me, they're like, Tim, doctors don't know.
Certainly, Joe had doctors.
Would you agree or disagree with them?
I'm not a medical expert.
I can tell you this, though.
The danger of CNN and what YouTube allows and blocks.
This is what's shocking.
99% of people suffering river blindness are in poor African communities and they need ivermectin for the parasites that they get when there's flies that bite you and then they get infected with it.
It's insane.
They lay their baby.
Oh man, parasites.
Well, the World Health Organization says Ivermectin is an essential drug in treating this.
What do you think is going to happen with the media coming out across the board slamming Ivermectin?
Falsely.
You now have poor rural communities in Africa.
And these people aren't, look, they may be uneducated, but they're not stupid.
There's a difference.
They may have a lack of access to knowledge, but they're not stupid.
They will be discerning.
They will be untrustworthy.
And if they see this information or rumors spread, What happens when they start saying, why are the UN people coming and giving us horse medicine?
What's happening?
All of the media is saying it's horse medicine.
And then what are we supposed to do?
The problem is, when a doctor prescribes something, and CNN comes out and says it's dangerous, or these other outlets say it's horse dewormer, or these fake news stories appear saying it's causing blindness itself.
No joke.
The Oklahoma hoax.
We had Zed Jelani on the show last night.
A real journalist, by the way.
And he was like, when we heard the story that there was rural Oklahoma hospitals overrun with gunshot victims because people were eating horse paste, taking up beds, he is like, I'm gonna call them and ask them what's going on.
Fake news.
Across the board, fake news.
But think about this.
When you have this story come out, saying, this guy was like, the worst I saw was a guy who was losing his vision.
Now you have river blindness.
What happens if these people start getting wind of these stories in the American press?
Which they can.
I mean, there's a lot of people in Kenya.
Kenya has the iHub.
I don't know if iHub's still there.
I haven't checked it out.
But they have a big technological center.
They're going to be spreading this information around, and they're going to say, look, this thing they're trying to give you, it actually makes people blind.
It doesn't, by the way.
It's an essential drug, says the World Health Organization.
It is not authorized for treating COVID.
So I can't speak to the doctors who prescribed it to Joe Rogan.
That's between him and his doctors.
But the media lies are causing serious problems and distrust.
What I can say is...
The CDC and the FDA say there's not sufficient evidence yet that this is working.
And people come back to me and they say, Tim, there's 63 studies and meta-analysis of all these other studies.
And I'm like, first of all, I am not a researcher in this capacity.
Second of all, I've read studies contradicting these claims and it seems like either you can believe it's a grand conspiracy or the data isn't sufficient.
Now, Joe Rogan on his show, this is important, said that one of the reasons people think ivermectin is not getting approved by the FDA is that it would screw with the emergency use authorization of the vaccines.
This idea is easily debunked in two ways.
One, the Pfizer vaccine community, specifically, is FDA approved.
There is now an FDA approved treatment, which would, what, negate other EUAs?
Not necessarily.
Just because something gets approved doesn't mean you lose the emergency use authorization immediately.
I don't know exactly how that would play out.
Also, people have mentioned that Community isn't actually available as a branded label, and it's legally distinct.
I don't know what that means, necessarily, so I can't really tell you, but I can say this.
If there was sufficient evidence that ivermectin did work, the FDA need only give it an emergency use authorization.
That's it.
That would not be full approval.
Monoclonal antibodies has emergency use authorization.
It does not negate the EUA for the vaccines.
So this idea that that's the only reason they're not doing it doesn't make sense.
Now I suppose you can go back and say, profit motive!
Ivermectin is cheap!
Perhaps.
Then you're just getting into speculation.
And while I'm not a big fan of big pharma and massive multinational corporations, and I sympathize with the idea they're just trying to exploit the American people, you'd then have to say that there's revol— like, you get really into the nitty-gritty of the revolving door policies of government, and then I'm like, we're starting to make a lot of assumptions here.
Is it possible that the data is insufficient?
And what that means is if a doctor does, if there's a big push to prescribe something that doesn't necessarily work or we don't know it works, could that then stop people from taking things that do work?
Maybe monoclonal antibodies?
Look, I'm not a doctor.
I have no idea.
There's so much conflicting data.
That's why I typically, people are like, Tim, you're wrong about this, you're wrong about that.
I'm like, yep, you're right, I'm wrong.
I'm wrong about everything.
I'm not a doctor, I don't know.
All I am is a media person who parses through the lies and the fake news.
So that's why I'm skeptical of everything.
I'm not gonna believe, you know, one person because I know the other person's a liar.
Two guys walk up to me, one guy says, you know, free pizza.
The other guy says, it's not free pizza.
I'm gonna be like, well, this guy's lying to me.
It doesn't mean I just trust the other guy.
You know, there's other things to consider.
So far be it for me to tell you.
I'll tell you this, Joe Rogan says doctors prescribed it and...
Whether you like it or not, right?
It wasn't horse dewormer.
So here's the story.
I mean, the gist of the story is very, very simple.
Rogan said, bro, do I have to sue CNN after a guest jokingly called him old horseworm Rogan?
So we get the story, but let me give you the context, right?
That's about it.
Joe, you should, okay?
Check this out.
From the rap, CNN medical analyst debunks Joe Rogan's crazy home COVID treatments.
He's promoting kind of a crazy jumble, Dr. Jonathan Reiner said of the podcast host.
Now this I find fascinating.
He's promoting it?
Or is he telling the truth?
The question, I suppose, is, did Joe Rogan go to doctors demanding this medication?
Or did Joe Rogan go to these doctors and say, what should we do?
And the doctors recommended certain medications.
So is Joe promoting it by simply saying his doctors prescribed it?
You see, the problem, they say, I'll tell you what really frustrates me.
CNN medical analyst debunks Joe Rogan's home COVID treatments.
What?
He got prescribed this stuff.
He went to a Walgreens or whatever to pick it up.
How is that debunking anything?
Joe, sue these people, CNN and The Wrap.
Look at this.
From The Wrap, Joe Rogan reveals he has COVID, and yes, he's taking horse medicine ivermectin.
That is a false statement of fact.
There is horse medicine ivermectin, and there is human medicine ivermectin.
And that's between Joe and his doctor.
As I stated, the FDA is warned against this.
The CDC explicitly says not to prescribe this.
If doctors are, well then, I don't know what to tell you.
Doctors are going to prescribe what they want to prescribe, I guess.
You know, as I've pointed out, and begrudgingly have to clarify in every circumstance because we are getting into the nitty-gritty here, the FDA's warning on ivermectin is that the formulation for horses is not the same as the formulation for humans, as easily proven by the fact that it comes in a tube of paste, which is flavored like apples, and human ivermectin comes as little tablets you get from a pharmacy.
they're clearly not the same formulation. They may both have the active ingredient ivermectin,
but the issue is the animal stuff is not human grade, and more importantly, you should probably
get a prescription for whatever medication you're going to be taking. There's some
over-the-counter stuff. Clearly, ivermectin is not over-the-counter for humans.
There's just differences.
We don't give dogs grapes.
And I'll do this correction, actually, for you.
I kept saying dog medicine, ibuprofen.
Well, it is true you can give dogs a small dose of ibuprofen.
Very small.
Many people have said, Tim, it's toxic to give dogs ibuprofen.
It's easy to give dogs too much.
So, for the most part, I read that they typically would do aspirin.
Okay.
Point taken.
We don't go around saying that people are going to bodegas in New York and requesting dog medicine for their pain.
It's aspirin.
People take aspirin.
It's not dog medicine.
Now, what would happen if... Are we going to play that game where I see, you know, some celebrity taking an aspirin and I say, Celebrity A was witnessed ingesting dog medicine on the streets.
Boy, has she fallen.
You think you're going to get away with that?
You think a judge is going to be like, well, it is the truth.
Yeah, nice try.
They're gonna be like, okay, clearly that was just a regular bottle of aspirin and not dog medicine.
Joe Rogan clearly went to the doctor for a prescription.
Sue them all.
Here's what the guy at CNN said.
He said, quote, this is the doctor, Reiner.
He said he received monoclonal antibodies.
It's really not indicated for him.
It's indicated for people with mild to moderate symptoms at high risk of progression.
It doesn't seem like that's him.
Reiner continued.
He said he took steroids, prednisone.
That's only indicated for hospitalized patients on oxygen therapy.
And finally, he said he took azithromycin, an antibiotic, which doesn't work for viral illnesses.
We know that.
After picking apart why Rogan's choices were likely ineffective.
Rainer then went on to slam the podcast host for the danger he's putting other people in by advocating for the unproven treatments.
He's promoting kind of a crazy jumble of, you know, sort of folk remedies and internet prescribed drugs.
It's, again, dangerous now.
He should have more sense after encountering the disease, and again, I hope he does well and gets well quickly.
He's not helping matters when he promotes this sort of nonsense therapeutic mix.
It's entirely possible none of these things did anything for Joe Rogan.
And that's the reality.
Joe is an extremely fit man.
Oh, I believe he's 52.
I don't know his exact age.
And it's possible that Joe is just healthy.
You guys see that viral story where it's like healthy 16-year-old with COVID and the kid was 300 pounds?
Yeah, that's not healthy.
Joe is healthy.
Now, once you're over 40, you have a much higher risk factor for COVID.
This is true.
Some people apparently are asymptomatic and they're fine.
Some people get smacked like a Mack truck when they get this stuff.
We've had people on the podcast, young people, who are like, it was brutal and it was like a seriously bad illness.
And I'm like, okay, you know, I get it.
Joe may just be a healthy guy.
And so he got medications, but he probably eats right.
I mean, I think we know he eats right because we see him posting his video of his steaks and things like that.
He exercises quite a bit, and he's a fit guy.
So he probably, I think he probably would have done fine regardless, but considering age is a factor in COVID risk, you know, maybe he wanted to be safe.
It's entirely possible that out of all of this, Joe just healed.
The problem now is, in the desperation to debunk a doctor's prescription, you end up with a story that debunks the narrative from CNN.
If they want to come out and tell people not to do this stuff, you need to be honest about it and give people real reasons and explain to them what the FDA and CDC is actually saying and what the science actually says.
Then you need to ask specific questions and then defer to others to make the choices they think make sense for them.
When you come out immediately and say it's horse dewormer and Joe's crazy and then Joe gets better, congratulations, you debunked yourself.
Debunked yourself.
So what I say is, always find a trusted doctor.
Don't take it from me.
But let me tell you what they're doing.
This viral tweet.
4,194 retweets.
I think it actually has more than that.
4,000 quote tweets.
DJ Ekman says, Ivermectin apparently sterilizes the majority of men that take it.
Why isn't Twitter flagging this one?
Ivermectin, according to this study, has some people who prescribed it ended up with lower sperm counts.
Yeah, it was 385 people in one area.
We don't know exactly.
It's probably spurious correlation, but it's one microscopic study, and it's poorly done, to put it mildly.
Now, I'll take it for what it's worth, but I'll say this.
One study of 385 people does not a good science make.
You know, truth is far from here.
With Ivermectin, there are many, many, many studies.
There's a lot of data coming out of a lot of countries.
However, as I've talked to many people about this, I've pointed out there are contradictory studies.
And I sat down, and I pulled them up, and I'm like, hey, this one says this is not true.
This one's saying, in this randomized, oh, those studies are no good.
I'm like, but there's, here's like 50 studies saying they found no conclusive evidence.
You see, the risk I see there is telling people to take a medication that might do nothing could convince them to not do things that might actually help them.
In the case of Joe Rogan, monoclonal antibodies seems to work, so it's good that he took it.
Throwing the kitchen sink at it?
Okay.
I guess the idea they're saying is that, well, it's fine to prescribe it because it's not going to cause very serious effects or whatever if prescribed in low doses or something, so who cares anyway?
And I'm like, well, I understand this fear.
One, that people will eat a tube of horse paste because people are dumb.
But what are you going to do about that?
Are we really becoming a nation of putting warning labels on literally everything?
I guess so.
Warning, caution, coffee hot.
I mean, that story is something else.
But yeah, the coffee was hot.
It was boiling.
The McDonald's coffee, you know that story?
Are we gonna put labels on seatbelts?
Are we gonna mandate safety for every single person?
Yo, people should not be eating horse paste.
But there are dumb people.
So it's simple.
We simply say, ivermectin is a World Health Organization essential drug for treating parasites and river blindness, not approved by the FDA or authorized for use in treating COVID because they feel the data is insufficient.
There is some promising data, but it's not so far conclusive.
Oxford has a study right now and they've found promising results that may ultimately result in something positive.
I don't know what else to tell you other than, as much as I can distrust the mainstream media, as much as I can distrust the hyper-partisans, I can tell you this.
If you go to the CDC website, and I have numerous times, and I've pulled it up, they're not making things up, okay?
I mean, look, I'll put it this way, maybe I don't know, but look.
People talk about adverse reactions.
It's literally on the Pfizer vaccine label.
The CDC and the FDA are not hiding that from you.
It's the media that's lying.
So when I go, and again, not a big fan of government institutions just blindly trusting them.
But I don't know what you do if, like, who do you choose to trust and what do you choose to trust?
I'm not going to just blindly trust random people on the internet.
So I put it this way.
I go to the media and I see all this garbage and all these lies.
I go to the CDC website and what do I see?
Here's a list of adverse reactions.
Here's a list of counterindications.
Here's a list of ingredients.
And I'm like, okay.
Well, all right.
What am I supposed to say?
It's like if you have allergies, you know, be careful.
If you're allergic to glycol and certain things like that, they tell you outright.
Now there is some contradictory information where, like, I think it's the FDA saying that the vaccine is considered safe for pregnant women.
But when you look at the Pfizer FDA approval insert, it says there's not sufficient data to make conclusions about the risk.
So there is some nuance there in that some people are concerned the FDA saying it's safe is premature.
What they're actually saying, if you dig into it, is there's not sufficient data to indicate any risks.
So they're operating under the assumption that it's fine because in animal trials they've not seen any negative effects.
But we don't have long-term studies on humans because, well, it is a new thing.
Ultimately, it comes down to this.
The media lies all the time.
Because they do, it breeds this distrust, and people then, hearing confirmation bias, will choose to trust those who are telling them what they know to be true.
And I get it.
If someone comes out and says, Hey, look, Donald Trump didn't do that.
The media is lying.
People will be like, Okay, I know they're lying because I watched a video of Trump.
This person told me the truth.
I'm going to trust them.
But this person then comes out and says something off topic or irrelevant, talking about some kind of medicine.
And people say, well, they were right about that.
One other thing, I choose to trust them.
It's still the Gell-Mann amnesia effect, interestingly.
There's an inversion of it.
If you're not familiar, the Gell-Mann amnesia effect is basically, you open up your newspaper, And it says a story like Donald Trump does, you know,
Donald Trump throws food into pond in humiliating, you know, mockery of Japanese culture. And
then you're like, wait a minute, that's not true. In the full video, Shinzo Abe of Japan did
it first. Trump was just following suit.
They're lying. Then you turn the page and it says, you know, Syria, airstrikes,
children dead. And you're like, wow, that must be true.
The Gell-Mann amnesia effect is basically that when you read a news story about something in which you know the truth, you call them out as liars.
Then you read a news story from the same outlet and assume it's telling the truth.
You see there, that's an issue.
And, uh, yeah, I think we're all victim to it.
It's hard to know what's true, even from these news outlets.
But then there's a kind of an inversion to it.
Because you've revealed, you've been exposed to the realities of these media outlets, when you do find someone is telling the truth, you turn the page and assume other stories are the truth as well.
So this could be described as not an amnesia effect, but a... I don't know how you describe it.
Someone come up with a name for it.
You open up a news article and there is something Donald Trump did not Humiliate, you know, or make a mockery of Japanese culture.
Shinzo Abe did it first, and you go, yes, I saw that video.
Thank you for telling me the truth.
Turn the page, and then it says something about medication, and you go, wow, I didn't know that.
Still just trusting it.
Now, the issue here is that CNN has news.
That's true and correct.
So does the New York Times.
Imagine someone opening up the New York Times, and it says, you know, Donald Trump does backflip, and you're like, yeah, I saw the video.
Then you turn the page and say, well, that was true.
This must be true, too.
It's not the case.
You've got to fact-check.
You've got to do your best.
And, ultimately, it's damn near impossible.
Because I ask you to trust TimCast.com.
And we're not always right, but I have a strict policy on making sure we correct things and issue updates and make those corrections visible and all that stuff.
So, ultimately, look.
The media lies all the time.
At the end of the day, the only thing I can say is, find a doctor you know and trust.
Joe did.
Get a prescription from them and follow their instructions because the internet people, we don't got it.
The media companies, they don't got it.
And I know this stuff trickles down to doctors too because they're human, but you got to find someone you trust to be knowledgeable and having information on this.
Some people tell me, Tim, but doctors, you know, they don't know much and they're reading the news too and blah, blah, blah.
And I'm like, you got to find the doctor.
Don't tell me that if Joe Rogan can find doctors who'll prescribe him whatever, you know, that these doctors don't exist.
Whether they're right or wrong.
I'll end by saying this.
The CDC does come out and say, you know, do not prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
They're concerned about severe illness and overdoses of Ivermectin products, which have increased in 2021.
They say the FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for prevention or treatments of COVID-19.
Clinical trials and observational studies to evaluate the use of ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19 have not yielded sufficient evidence to recommend its use, according to the CDC Health Advisory.
Before the pandemic, there were 3,600 outpatient retail pharmacy prescriptions for ivermectin per week.
From March 16, 2019 to March 13, 2020, ivermectin prescriptions reached a peak of 39,000 in the week ending January 8, after a brief drop.
Ivermectin prescriptions reached more than 88,000 for the week ending August 13, 2021.
And they say there's neurological effects, hypertension, and gastrointestinal symptoms, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, for overdose.
I mean, overdose is serious, but I'm not gonna have the answers other than to just read, you know, CDC publications.
I will say, though, At least we can admit, right?
Wouldn't there be an issue if doctors are mass prescribing a placebo, effectively, if it's not doing anything and has some risk of side effects?
I think that's a fair point, but I'm not going to pretend that ivermectin is horse dewormer.
I'm not going to lie to you about it.
I'm going to say, take it from a doctor, not from me.
Thanks for hanging out.
I'll see y'all at 1 p.m.
on this channel in the next segment.
To be honest, I'm surprised this did not happen sooner.
Portland State philosophy professor Peter Boghossian has announced his resignation, saying, my university sacrificed ideas for ideology, so today I quit.
This has been true for a long time.
Not just Portland State, but most universities.
I mean, we saw what happened at Evergreen with Brett Weinstein.
We saw what happened with, I think it was Mizzou, where that one professor was like, can we get some muscle over here?
Trying to shut down a journalist.
This is a long time coming, and I'm surprised anybody still remains at many of these jobs.
Now, there is something to be said here.
First, let me just tell you who Peter is.
He's one of the creators, or actors, in the Sokal Squared hoax.
Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay, and Helen Pluckrose created fake Scientific articles in the Humanities and submitted them and many got approved.
One of them was just like, they changed some of the words in Mein Kampf and turned it into feminist buzzwords and it gets approved.
Showing that a lot of these ideologies are the same, except for many of the proper nouns.
Well, now he's quitting.
Universities are broken, my friend.
I made a joke on Twitter.
It's kind of not even a joke.
I said, imagine hating your kids so much, you send them to college.
It's time to wake up, parents.
And I'm sick of sitting here, saying what I say, and then hearing from working-class regular Americans who watch this show saying, can't wait to send my kids to college.
Oh, is it because you're sending your kids to STEM?
You think that's gonna help them?
My friends, send your kids to trade school.
They'll make more money, they'll have no debt, they'll be happier.
Or do something else for them.
College ain't it.
Now, okay, I guess if you want to be a lawyer or a doctor or literally work in academia, then college makes sense.
But it's shocking to me.
There are a lot of technical degrees, I suppose.
You'll want to go into college for, you know, some kind of STEM degree, but at this point, is it really worth it?
Seeing the good teachers quit.
What's left?
You will send your children to these indoctrination centers, and they'll come back despising you.
Because there are prerequisites.
There's a funny meme, where it's a webcomic.
These people are sitting in class, and one guy whispers, the teacher says, and that's why white men are evil, and the man whispers and says, I thought this was calculus class, and the guy goes, this is calculus.
Welcome to Critical Race Praxis, which is basically everywhere.
You will go to learn a math problem and they'll say, John is a white man who was stopped by the police 13 times this year, while Andre is a black man stopped 392.
What percentage increase between the two...
That's what you're getting.
Now, I know that problem specifically is a reference to grade schools, but of course, these universities, you're not going to be free from the insanity.
Take a look at what happened with, uh, I think it was, it was Nick Christakis.
What's his name?
Or, uh, maybe I'm getting the name wrong.
But there's that famous viral video from years ago of a young woman saying, college is not about creating a space for an intellectual environment, it's about creating a safe family or something.
Or she's like, it's not about creating an environment to learn, it's about creating a safe place for us to... No, no, no.
College is where you're supposed to be learning these subject matter, these majors, becoming a specialist in some capacity.
They don't do that.
But by all means, condemn your kids.
It really, really, really is frustrating for me to watch when I see people on Twitter being like, you know, conservatives even being like, you know, I just want to make sure I can get my kids in college.
Why?
Have you been paying attention to anything we've been talking about?
Apparently not.
You know, I know a lot of people who went to college who are good people and smart people, challenging the laws and manipulations.
But for what?
Look, maybe college has meant something a decade ago or two decades ago, but there are major changes happening right now, and for this, we are seeing the good professors quit from the Daily Mail.
Peter Boghossian has taught philosophy at Portland State University for the past decade.
In the letter below, sent this morning to the university's provost, he explains why he's resigning, saying, Dear Provost Susan Jeffords, I'm writing to you today to resign as assistant professor of philosophy at Portland State University.
Over the last decade, it has been my privilege to teach at the university.
My specialties are critical thinking, ethics, and the Socratic method.
And I teach classes like science and pseudoscience, and the philosophy of education.
But in addition to exploring classic philosophers and traditional texts, I've invited a wide range of guest lecturers to address my classes, from flat earthers, to Christian apologists, to global climate change skeptics, to Occupy Wall Street advocates.
I'm proud of my work.
I invited those speakers not because I agreed with their worldviews, but primarily because I didn't.
From those messy and difficult conversations, I've seen the best of what our students can achieve.
Questioning beliefs while respecting believers, staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances, and even changing their minds.
I never once believed, nor do I now, that the purpose of instruction was to lead my students to a particular conclusion.
Rather, I sought to create the conditions for rigorous thought, to help them to gain the tools to hunt and furrow for their own conclusions.
This is why I became a teacher and why I love teaching.
But brick by brick, the university has made this kind of intellectual exploration impossible.
It has transformed a bastion of free inquiry into a social justice factory whose only inputs were race, gender, and victimhood, and whose only outputs were grievance and division.
Students at Portland State are not being taught to think.
Rather, they are being trained to mimic the moral certainty of ideologues.
Faculty and administrators have abdicated the university's truth-seeking mission and instead drive intolerance of divergent beliefs and opinions.
This has created a culture of offense, where students are now afraid to speak openly and honestly.
We'll read on in a second, but I'll interject some points here.
I'm surprised it took this long, as I stated in the beginning, because it was several years ago that I sat down with Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay, and Helen Pluckrose and we had a conversation about what was going on.
But you know what?
Maybe I shouldn't be surprised.
Now the reason I say this is because I had a debate with Peter Boghossian about the origins of all of his wacky wokeism.
My view is that social media manipulation and algorithms have created this world.
Peter Boghossian's view is that it started in the universities with critical race theory in the late 70s and 80s.
I believe he's wrong.
I mean, obviously, critical race theory started in the universities.
But what we're seeing in wokeism is not just critical race theory.
Though it certainly has adopted many of its tenets, it's something else.
It's an amalgam.
It's some beast.
But I think this whole thing proves me right in the debate, Peter.
Would love to have you on the show and talk about it.
The ideas existed for a long time.
The ideas were shared for a long time.
But in a university environment where people like you, Peter, allow free inquiry, these ideas did not flourish.
They've been around since the late 70s and 80s, and only now, in 2020, we're seeing it get so bad.
2021, I mean to say the decade, but in 2021 now, you're resigning?
Yes, because what I think is actually happening is that social media created the atmosphere, the environment for which these ideas flourish and spread.
The ideas are stupid!
You have to be a weak fool to believe the lies espoused by these people.
So I'll tell you this.
Derrick Bell, critical race theorist.
When he advocated for Plessy vs. Ferguson, separate but equal, regular people in universities seeing those ideas challenged them.
Why?
Because they had good professors.
But something changed.
Now the good professors are leaving.
Barry Weiss leaves the New York Times.
Peter Boghossian leaves Portland State.
Why now and why not 30 years ago when the ideas were being propagated?
Well, perhaps you could argue that it took some time for these ideas to bubble up and gain momentum.
That's true.
But then why not in the 90s, in the 2000s, when Derrick Bell was giving his speech on why he supported segregation?
Why now?
Social media.
You see, the New York Times wasn't talking about critical theory, racism, whiteness until the advent of social media, when LexisNexis saw the massive spike.
Now, there is an argument, and I'll attempt to steal man, Peter Boghossian's side on this one, considering he's not here, that once the young people who grew up indoctrinated by these ideas became teachers.
So, you have the critical race theorists in the 80s.
These kids grow up and become academics themselves.
Now it's the 90s.
Now they're teaching 10 times as many people.
Those kids then teach 10 times as many people.
And then exponential outpouring results in the New York Times hiring young people who all of a sudden are interested in these ideas.
I don't think that's it. Which what my argument here is, while it may be true that critical race
theory and and critical praxis and woke ism intersectionality in schools probably did have
an exponential growth. The New York Times had no reason to embrace these ideas when 80% of
their market does not care for it. The New York Times had no reason to embrace these ideas when
You see?
To put it mildly, just because a bunch of millennials getting out of college believe this psychobabble doesn't mean the New York Times is going to be like, well, most of our readership is in their mid to late 40s.
Let's pander to the Millennials!
Now, you could argue they started hiring Millennials, and the Millennials started writing articles about racism and xenophobia and whiteness, but that doesn't explain how the Gen Xers and Boomers running the New York Times would just abdicate responsibility and their moral standing to Millennial interns!
So I'll tell you what happened in the late 2000s as to why we saw LexisNexis showing that all of these news outlets started adopting critical race theory, wokeness, and intersectionality.
Algorithms.
You've heard me say it a million times.
And this to me, and I believe this is why, this explains why Peter Bogosian is only resigning now.
Here's what happened.
And forgive me if you've heard this explanation, but it bears repeating, it's important.
With the rise of Facebook, predominantly Facebook, people who interacted with some content were fed more of the same.
People would share specific content because it triggered their emotions.
As we know from a lot of research and a great video by CGP Grey called This Video Will Make You Angry, I think it's called something like that, the most powerful emotion on the internet is rage.
So what happened?
Well, in the mid-2000s, the bloggers that started emerging that got the most traffic were those writing about things to make you angry.
So let's say you saw on Facebook, racism.
Well, we all hate racism, right?
Except for racists.
So you'd click it, and you'd be like, I'm angry about this racism, that's not fun.
Then someone else would write about sexism.
And you'd click it, because hey, sexism is bad too.
But then, someone discovered something.
It's not just Racism articles being X and sexism articles being Y, and then you get X plus Y in terms of your... So let's say someone writes a racism article, someone else writes a sexism article, and then someone writes a racist sexist article.
Like, about racism and sexism.
It's not X plus Y views.
It's something different, but it's more akin to X times Y views.
To put it simply, intersectionality, which started to come up first predominantly with these YouTubers, functions because Writing about two keywords is more likely to be algorithmically fed to people than anything else.
Why, then, millennials?
Because they were the ones using this new tech.
It wasn't the universities.
The ideas existed.
Once the platforms were created, and the algorithms existed that sought to exploit these feelings of anger and injustice and a lack of purpose, outlets emerged like Mike.com, which initially, according to one expose, was like pro-Ron Paul.
But then what did they see?
When you combined all of these rage keywords, you got more traffic.
Because now instead of reaching one subculture, you reach all of them.
An exponential boost because with the more views you get, the more likely Facebook is to recommend it to people who are uninitiated and don't know about these things.
So it's more akin to X times Y views.
In fact, the more keywords you scram in there, trans women of color attacked by police, proof that Black Lives Matter is the reason for abolishing the police, they put all those things in the headline, and then it's A times B times C times D times E times F, and boom!
The money was pouring in, business was a booming, and that's why the New York Times, Huffington Post, all of these places started shifting very heavily into these narratives.
Now, to be fair, Huffington Post always was pretty much there.
But why would Gen Xers, who are very offensive in their comedy, Boomers, even more offensive in their comedy, start pandering to this woke ideology?
Money to be made.
So I'll say this, and then we'll get back to Peter's letter.
Why is it that only now Peter Boghossian is quitting?
When?
Peter himself has said these ideas have been bubbling up universities since the late 70s and 80s.
Because of the algorithmic manipulation, this ideology existed and was able To find a place to latch onto.
That's why I'm not a fan of railing on critical race theory exclusively.
Look, Chris Rufo does a great job, James Lindell does a great job, but they talk about critical race theory and they ignore critical gender theory.
They ignore intersectionality and wokeism in general, which is a broad overarching umbrella of a bunch of insanity.
Critical Race Theory is specifically about critical theory, Marxist ideas, and the oppressed versus oppressor in race.
But that doesn't explain cancel culture.
That doesn't explain the gender theory.
It doesn't explain the takeover of these institutions.
No.
It's all about oppressed and oppressor generally, but more importantly, it's about tribal power.
And they use the oppressed oppressor thing for gain.
Marxism is probably a better way to put it.
So, that's why I think Peter is wrong in this regard, and that's why I think only now he's resigning.
The expansion of social media, their power, and what's happening is young people being indoctrinated by these tech communication systems.
Schools can say whatever they want.
For that matter, If it were true that this started in the universities and became more pronounced there, why didn't the Socratic method persist, right?
Certainly, if you have a school that's teaching people critical race theory, and you have professors teaching the Socratic method, why is not the philosophy of the great thinkers the more dominant ideology?
I certainly think it has the merit, and I think the other ideas are lacking and nonsensical.
It's because the Socratic method doesn't make you money on these big tech platforms.
The Socratic method doesn't generate investment.
No.
Rage bait does.
Peter says, I noticed signs of the illiberalism that has now fully swallowed the academy quite early during my time at Portland State.
I witnessed students refusing to engage with different points of view.
Questions from faculty at diversity trainings that challenged approved narratives were instantly dismissed.
Those who asked for evidence to justify new institutional policies were accused of microaggressions.
And professors were accused of bigotry for assigning canonical texts written by philosophers who happened to have been European and male.
At first, I didn't realize how systemic this was, and I believed I could question this new culture.
So I began asking questions.
What is the evidence that trigger warnings and safe spaces contribute to student learning?
Why should racial consciousness be the lens through which we view our role as educators?
How did we decide that cultural appropriation is immoral?
Unlike my colleagues, I asked these questions loud and in public.
I decided to study the new values that were engulfing Portland State and so many other educational institutions.
Values that sound wonderful, like diversity, equity, and inclusion, but might actually be just the opposite.
The more I read the primary source material produced by critical theorists, the more I suspected that their conclusions reflected the postulates of an ideology, not insights based on evidence.
And again, and I'll stop here again.
Once again, I believe this is more evidence to my theory, my hypothesis, that the internet made this.
You can be in school and surrounded by people saying x equals 1.
But then you can go turn on the news and they say X equals 2.
And what's more important?
Well, it could depend, honestly.
I think there's a combination of factors here, but I think the greater culture has more power.
People who are in college look up to celebrities.
They want to be like other people.
They want to be famous.
They want to be respected in their careers.
So what's more important?
Their social media feeds.
Their greater circle.
Sure, you can sit down in a classroom and have a feminist teacher tell you that, you know, men are misogynists, all men are misogynists, or whatever.
But when you go on Facebook, what you're seeing from your friends becomes your reality.
And if you see nothing but police brutality videos, you'll believe the cops are all evil.
If you see nothing but stories of racism, you'll think the country is evil and racist.
Your friends can say a lot of things, but it's the worldview that's generated through the algorithms that will impact what you believe is true and correct.
And then when you do, and there is a dissonance between the real world and your algorithmic reality, you'll become angry and violent when it's challenged.
So I think that explains it more.
Now, this is where it gets crazy.
Peter Boghossian goes on to say that he was accused of a student in 2016-2017 and was investigated under Title IX.
Apparently, the investigators had been asking his students if he had been beating his wife and children.
These people are cult members.
They have no morals.
They were taught no morals.
That has nothing to do with critical race theory.
No, let's be honest.
Nothing in Kimberlé Crenshaw's writings, as far as I know, I haven't read every single bit, but my understanding of critical race theory, they don't say, throw away all semblance of honest, rational thought.
No, they claim to be rational thinkers.
The rage.
The rage.
That's what I've long been questioning.
Why the rage?
Have you noticed it?
The infection that's sweeping across people in the United States and around the world, to be honest.
The anger, the hatred, the bloodlust, the people demanding that Joe Rogan die of COVID on Twitter.
What is wrong with these people?
There are people in my own family who have just become rage monsters that you dare say anything and they scream.
Are universities teaching people to be hateful and just flip tables and bang and smash windows?
I don't believe so.
I believe they do contribute to indoctrination.
And I believe it's because universities are profit-generating machines that saw what young people wanted and gave it to them.
I'll give you another example.
With Kimberly Crenshaw, Derrick Bell, Ibram Kendi, Robin DiAngelo, and all these other weirdos, and universities, and teaching, and speaking.
Why didn't this happen sooner?
Why is it that professors challenge their students, and the students are the ones saying, it's not about an intellectual space, it's about a family!
Because they're getting the ideas from social media, not from professors who challenge them.
Although there are many professors who don't.
And these people are in a cult.
They've been indoctrinated on social media.
They revel in being angry, vile monsters.
Because you get clicks for it.
You get rewarded for it.
Going on social media and calling someone a name gets you retweets.
So they do it.
And then in the real life, they do it more.
It is social media algorithmic psychosis.
That's why it's all happening now.
And that's why I think Peter Bogosian finally couldn't take it.
And that's why somebody was willing to lie.
Why?
How many hate crime hoaxes have we seen?
Are universities teaching these kids to do this?
Perhaps.
In the ethos of there's no truth but power, some university professors probably do teach their kids this.
Or maybe it's that they're watching it work on social media.
And they want a piece of the pie.
In the end, Peter Bogosian says, This is not the outcome I wanted, but I feel morally obligated to make this choice.
For ten years, I have taught my students the importance of living by your principles.
One of mine is to defend our system of liberal education from those who seek to destroy it.
Who would I be if I didn't?
Sincerely, Peter Boghossian.
I think it's bad news because we need Peter Boghossian at these schools pushing back.
But universities are corrupted.
So I'll say it again.
Imagine hating your children so much that you send them to college.
Imagine hating your children so much that you send them to college.
