Episode 1328 Scott Adams - Arguments For and Against Vaccine Passports, Everstuck Ship, And Trump Fun

hey everybody come on in come on in it's time for coffee with scott adams the best place to be at the best time in the entire world yeah a lot of people think there are better places to be they're not really this is the best place to be and every one of you know it because you're here you could be anywhere well you could be watching anything but no you're here because you know that you can have the best time of your entire day and all you need is a couple of bubble glass tank or jealous times canteen jungle flash vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine of the day thing that makes everything better except apparently that big ship that's stuck in the zoo as canal but let's see if we can get that out yeah i think the simultaneous sip has the power to dislodge shipping vessels from canals go i feel they're wiggling right now yep oh hold on i feel it coming loose it's coming loose well let's talk about all the stories yes let's talk about that big old ship so the name of the ship humorously is the evergreen isn't that kind of perfect because the story became an evergreen and evergreen is like it never goes away every day you wake up and still a ship stuck in the suez canal and you're not going to be able to wipe your ass if it stays there much longer uh so if so this morning the news was that it yeah at least one part of it got free and everybody's thinking yay if one part of it is free it's not going to take long to get the other part free is it except they let the wind blow it back into its stuck position and i ask you this is the wind around the suez canal sort of a special kind of wind is it the kind of wind that targets specific ships because it seems to me that a suez canal that is filled with shipping uh ships shipping that's why they call them ships they probably figured out the whole wind thing by now right but yet i'm not hearing that the wind has disrupted his shipping all over the world seems to be just this little evergreen ship gets a little extra wind i feel and that's not right so i won't make any other jokes uh had some good ones but they're not for the public um but that ship is not quite out yet the wind blew it back back into a stuck position and i do love i do love the simplicity of the story as somebody said on twitter all of our other stories are too complicated they have lots of variables but this one's great you can sum it up easily ship stuck needed unstuck that's it all right uh trump made news again a couple ways uh he attended i guess he crashed a wedding at mar-a-lago and there's a video of him uh sort of talking about himself and talking about uh the government and it wasn't until the very end that he says something to the bride and groom you could tell he got a big applause it was it was a friendly trump crowd as you might imagine they had a wedding at mar-a-lago they were probably pro-trump and uh but the way it's being portrayed out of context is that he was rude and boorish and crashed a wedding and talked about himself and forgot about the bridegroom and then left nothing like that happened exactly the opposite he showed up at a wedding thrilled the the wedding people they had the wedding of of all time the most memorable wedding you could possibly have because trump showed up and gave a speech unexpectedly all right so the bride and groom probably had like the best story ever but it yeah exactly it got rhubarb so that story got totally rhubarb if you cut off the last part it looks like he never even addressed the uh the uh bride and groom all right uh trump is also saying he's gonna visit the border this is why he was the fun president visiting the border is just the best thing you could possibly do when the sitting president is not visiting the border during a crisis so if the ex-president visits the border before the sitting president sort of makes the sitting president look not so strong on that issue if you know what i mean so that's a good play by trump persuasion wise good play so um the george floyd trial is starting today i guess and have you noticed how one story ends and then there's always another one that just backfills it perfectly why isn't there ever a day i guess there were a few without trump in the winter in which it seemed like there wasn't much news but it's kind of weird how the news always has a big story in the pipeline the the timing of it is a little suspicious you know sometimes there are two at a time but they really make sure that pipeline is filled which sort of suggests to me that if we had a time when there wasn't much happening that the news would make something out of nothing huh they wouldn't do that would they make something out of nothing just to make news maybe they would and how would we know how would we know if there was a real issue and we were just reading the news and seeing a real issue or the news business had created an issue that otherwise you wouldn't have even cared about or known about or had any impact you know whatever so you start to see the the pattern that the news is pretty much artificial at least in terms of how you feel about it so the things you feel about the strongest aren't necessarily the important things that happen so the news no longer reports what's important per se they report what's going to get the best audience well in there's a publication called real clear investigations they're reporting about uh this little county in montana missoula only a hundred and twenty thousand people in the whole whole area and uh they did a a full audit of the mail in ballots now apparently other audits have been sample audits i wasn't aware of that so when larger places are audited they can't count them all because there would be too many so they pick a sample and just count those now i have questions did you know that first of all that the other mail-in ballot audits were samples and not actually just counting all the ballots i didn't know that so that's interesting but here's my second question what do we know about how they picked the sample who exactly gave them the sample did the auditors go into a big room you know full of ballots and say all right we're just going to randomly you know and how would you do it how would you randomly select ballots because even if you went and said i'll just randomly pick the man of this pile in this pile probably it wouldn't be random would it because that's not even close to random right i mean mathematically statistically even if you weren't trying to take them from the same place you couldn't guarantee it was random it wouldn't be possible so i ask you this question were the people who audited the ballots the same ones who decided which ones to audit in other words did they do the randomness or i'm just going to put that out there because i don't know the answer and let me let me tell you that no core has found any widespread fraud no court has a as a ruling of any widespread fraud in the election right it's a it's a big lie it's a big lie i'm saying that so i can stay on social media now on with the story so the question is do the people who have done sample representative audits of big places were was the sample given to them by the same people who organized the election or did they somehow get to pick it and if they picked it how in the world did they know it was representative and do you want a representative sample because i don't think you want a representative sample do you don't you want you don't you assume that if there's a problem it's probably not going to be evenly spread so wouldn't a representative sample of ballots eliminate the possibility of finding fraud because you could find some but you say it's hardly anything this this one sample that we got from this one town he had a problem but it's just one but it's also the only one you checked in that town because it was a representative sample so if you do a representative sample doesn't that guarantee or almost guarantee just math-wise and statistically that you wouldn't find any fraud am i wrong about that it sort of calls into question whether any audits have been done at all in any way that would matter so i'll just put it as a question it's not an accusation because that would get me kicked off of social media so i have no reason to believe that any audits were insufficient i simply have a gap in my understanding of how they could possibly pick iran you know some representative sample that actually meant something but anyway back to this little missoula place so they did an audit in which because it was a smaller place and there were volunteers and they got approval to do it they could look at every single one so i believe this might be the only place that every ballot was checked maybe you know fact check me on that and here's what they found uh there were enough irregularities that could have changed the election like easily that there were so many in a place where elections were often close that it was way beyond the point let me see i'm seeing some answers about the samples um see uh okay i don't see an answer i want to read but some people are addressing the sample size question so again i i put that out there as a question not an accusation i don't know how it could be representative but maybe it is um so what they found is that out of uh 72 000 million votes 4 600 of them were without envelopes six point three percent of all votes of the mail-in votes not of all votes but six percent of the mail-in votes didn't have envelopes which means that legally they should not have been counted but they were um and what's more according to this is from the article according to auditors county employees claimed that during the post-election audit some of the envelopes may have been double counted so might even be a higher number of missing envelopes but they don't know that for sure and and apparently there were some postmark issues as well so fact check me on this will you just fact check me number one is the story even true all right like i don't trust anything like maybe this story didn't even happen maybe there's no place called missoula right i mean anything's possible in 2021.

so first of all is the story even true i don't know i don't know i don't even know how to know but if it were true is it the only place they've ever checked and it's also completely problematic i hate using that word i'm gonna i'm gonna erase that word and back up like i never used it before um the only place you checked there was a problem is that true so there is a missoula in montana at least that's well that part i was pretty confident about but uh was there really an election somebody says yeah you know i gotta say i gotta say this certainly raises some questions but like i said the courts have shown no proof of widespread fraud uh jack bosovic had the a great prank tweet this morning and uh here's the setup as you know there are a bunch of anti-fog people who are counter-protesting some i guess some republican types some conservative types who were protesting something anyways the antifa people were throwing rocks through the cars of anything that had a flag on it or the trucks usually and so there was some some of that kind of violence and destruction and uh and jack tweeted tongue-in-cheek armed antifa antifa insurrectionists attempted to overthrow the oregon state capitol today now of course that's a joke on the capital riots where anything that looks like a protest you know could be construed by the fake media as a as an insurrection mike baker corresponded to the new york times not understanding that this was a joke tweets about it the tweet below is getting a lot of traction but is it even close to being true yeah which is often the case with jokes they're not that close to being true um the crowd of anti-fascist activists gathering in front of the capital to protest a planned right-wing event there was no attempted overthrow yes there was no attempted overthrow good to know so we have that clarification of a prank um breaking news i don't know if he knew this but 25 percent of people polled on any topic our idiots have you ever noticed that it doesn't matter what the question is if it's on politics anyway any question on politics 25 of the country is going to be on the dumb side it doesn't even matter what the question is and i and i wonder is it the same people every time or is it just always a coincidence that about 25 of the people will disagree on things no matter what they are or is it always the 20 same 25 percent who just don't understand anything makes you wonder i imagine it's different people but it's a funny question so here's in case in point rasmussen is uh reporting about the support for voter id laws so apparently back in 2018 so not that long ago the support for voter id laws among white people was 67 to 74 among blacks it was 55 to 69 and other non-whites uh well that's interesting it's much higher 76 to 82.

uh and so among all voters the range was 67 to 75 but the current average is 75.

so in other words the support for voter id laws has climbed substantially a lot more people are in favor of it but i go back to my question 25 of the country is not in favor of knowing who voted what's wrong with them what's wrong with them so um so i see somebody saying that scott believes polls again uh well i'm reading the rasmussen polls the rasmussen polls at least on the presidential stuff that i follow i don't know about anything else but on the presidential stuff they've been one of the closest pollsters consistently so following a pollster that is consistently one of the best is not exactly being too stupid following the polls that come out prior to an election which you know are fake polls would be sort of dumb all right so you can't say polls or polls some of them are just obviously fake all the time now as i've been telling you lately i've decided to self-identify as black and i decided i haven't explained that well enough because some people still think it's a joke but it's not number one i agree literally no joke being completely serious i agree with the concept that people can self-identify let me give you an example let's say somebody is technically bisexual at least in their own mind they they would consider themselves bisexual but let's say they just have more of an affinity for the gay lifestyle spend more time there have more gay friends than stray friends and just decide to identify as gay but maybe technically in their mind they know that they could go the other way if they wanted to so should they be allowed to identify as gay when sort of technically maybe they're not so much completely gay as bi but they have an affinity for that lifestyle i say yes i say yes because they would certainly be treated as gay they would be living the life you know etc so i say yes likewise as you know i've been pro-transgender everything and should those folks be allowed to live the life and identify with the group that they want because of an affinity for it technically if you looked at their dna right you'd say well technically this isn't the the group that we would have put you in but if you have an affinity for that group it's where you it's where you feel you live and belong and how you're going to be treated in life i'm okay with that i feel that's a reasonable a reasonable thing and so based on that same standard which i've accepted as reasonable and likewise i accept that if somebody is a 25 you know genetically black that if they identify as just black we accept that right because same reason you know their their lifestyle their their interests the way they're treated might be more in one group so yeah identify that way even if technically somebody else might argue you shouldn't be so here's why i've decided to self-identify as black number one i like to be on a winning team i like to be in the winning team who's winning well i would say black americans are starting to finally like really getting a getting a little bit of purchase right finally after you know hundreds of years it does look like the you know black situation is doing pretty well largely because of activism whereas the white situation is sort of decreasing wouldn't you say now i'm not i'm not putting a value judgment on that i'm just saying if you observe it it looks like that so i like being on the winning team number two i'm told by science that all of us have african roots now if it's truly we all have african roots if you look at the full arc of human evolution most of the time i've been african in other words my my family ancestry probably spent more time african than they did in europe so i say i say genetically i've got an argument there i've also lost two careers for my race i've told you that too many times i lost my banking career because i was white and was told that directly by the way i'm not i'm not reading between the lines boss told me that i lost my telecom career because i was white again my boss told me directly you're white we can't promote you and i would say that my current career as a you know cartoonist and now public commentator i probably lost i'd say a third to a half of my potential income to race because if i talked about trump in any positive way that made me look like a white supremacist people don't buy my books et cetera so i've lost two two careers completely because of my race and my current one is probably down by a third or so because of my race now you tell me who do i have more affinity with people who are uh who are discriminated against for race or people who are not i have i have way more affinity with people who have been discriminated against for race and by the way that's not a joke that's literally true i do have more affinity for anybody discriminated against by race that's how it works if something happens to you that happened to somebody else you you have some appreciation for it that's how it works and then um and i've also done more work for to benefit the black community than any other so i would say that's my affinity group and that's what i choose all right here's a little issue that i saw in a cartoon but it's actually a pretty good point we're making a big deal and should about asian american violence because we don't want any of that we don't want any of that bias and discrimination in our country so we started out with black lives matter you know my group but now we're we're sort of talking about asian americans being discriminated and we're very close very close to saying asian american lives matter we're going to get to the point where they all matter except for these white supremacist lives so it'll be interesting to see how the asian-american thing has an influence on the black lives matter thing or if they just always live separately but it seems like one would influence the other i told you that the news is all artificial and what you consider the biggest story is often completely irrelevant and what you consider no story at all is often the biggest thing happening here's a good example i would argue that the biggest thing that's going to come out of the coronavirus thing is the death of public schools because the teachers unions have overreached right the teachers unions have overreached and if you're not following uh let's see you should be following corey d'angelos on twitter because uh he he's sort of the only one who seems to be consistently reporting on the all the changes that are happening but today we're hearing that west virginia governor jim justice just signed this year's most expensive bill to fund students instead of systems now that's happening all over the place a bunch of different states especially where they have republican control are giving us deciding that the funding will follow the student so the student can go to whatever school they want private or public and it won't just go to the school instead i think the teachers unions have destroyed public education as a monopoly it looks like they overreached and destroyed it now as you know the teachers unions are the biggest source of systemic racism and i don't think enough of my people are talking about this but it's the biggest source and it might be on the way to self-solving in other words the pandemic may have solved the biggest form of systemic racism in the country i don't think there's a bigger story than that i i propose to you that this is the biggest story in the country and it's basically you know one guy who's tweeting about it it's the biggest story like this is the one that moves the planet this one moves civilization the entire future of the united states compared to let's say our competition with china is really really dependent on this biggest story in the country completely ignored it's not even you won't find it on any website you'd have to follow somebody on twitter to even know it's happening also from rasmussen 76 percent of folks say that gun gun ownership is a constitutional right 76 percent say gun ownership is a constitutional right that makes about 25 percent 24 25 idiots right because you could argue that something shouldn't be in the constitution but it's hard to argue it's not there uh it's another one of those examples where 25 you can always count on them to be wrong on everything all right here's my new section which will cause you all to get worked up are you ready are you ready for some some fighting ready for some intellectual fighting come on here it comes here it comes here's the red meat coming out all right i call this section am i wrong or are you frightened am i wrong or are you frightened and here's the concept behind it an ordinary intelligent person will make ordinary intelligent and reasonable decisions when when their emotions are not involved if you take that same reasonable person who's got perfect perfectly average abilities and common sense and reasoning and you put that person in a stressful scary situation how good is their reasoning now not good right so your ability to reason gets switched off as your emotions go higher as you get angrier as you get more frightened as you're worried as you're more anxious your your sense of reason just switches off does anybody doubt that we we all agree with that right so if you have a situation let's say hypothetically there was a situation where there was somebody you knew who had a really good track record of being reasonable and often right a very reasonable person and then you're comparing that to that reasonable person to another one who's just as reasonable two very reasonable people they're often right see things clearly now we're to make one tweak they're both reasonable they're both usually right but one of them is now really scared one's really frightened now they start to disagree on a topic one is not frightened and is reasonable most of the time one is pretty scared and they have different opinions now who's right which one of them is more likely to have the right opinion because remember same intelligence same information but one of them is scared and one of them isn't yeah the calm person statistically you should expect that the calm person has the advantage now let's talk about vaccine passports i'm not afraid of vaccine passports now you should you might argue that i should be and we'll talk about that in a minute but as a statement of fact i'm not even a little bit concerned about them but the people who disagree with my opinion which i'll state in a minute those people are really really concerned like they're really scared now a lot of people are saying the following comment scott i like your opinions in general but wow you're all over the place on these vaccine passports because you think maybe it should be a good idea and you're way off on this one you've got a lot of stuff right but you're way off on this vaccine passport thing so i ask you this step back for a moment i have no fear of it whatsoever which doesn't mean i'm right right that doesn't mean i'm right i'm just saying i have no fear and you've watched me for however long you've watched me and you thought that i was reasonable until now but here's an object where you have a topic where you have a lot of fear and now where our opinions are different what do you think is going on what do you think is going on here is the problem that you're afraid and it's affecting your judgment or is this one of those times when different from my pattern i'm just way off i'm way off in a bad opinion which of those is more likely all right i'm going to read some of the comments to my tweet this morning and i'm going to tell you what i think of their reasoning okay so here are the people who are disagreeing with me so i've said that vaccine passports will be fine now it doesn't mean it'll make anything better i'm just not afraid of them and here's my argument we already have driver's licenses right did the the putting your name into a database and giving you a driver's license did that ruin your life somehow or or did it just make it safer to drive didn't really hurt much if you get a mortgage you have to show your taxes was that a slippery slope to losing your health care information no no um and how about your health care information has anybody gotten access to that do we have laws that keep your health care stuff private has anybody gotten access to you know most of it we're talking about just the vaccination part but has anybody gotten access to the whole database yet not yet not yet i mean i suppose it's a risk but not yet so we live in a world in which the government has often put these restrictions on us to put us in a database and know something about us right now the big argument that i've heard from i guess this is from naomi wolf so she's quite famous for being a skeptic on some of the coronavirus stuff and the first thing i would say is beware of skeptics skeptics are you know valuable got to have them i am one but there's a skeptic trap and you should be aware of it the skeptic trap goes like this once you become the skeptic it's hard not to be the skeptic and you're going to want to have at least a win in your skeptical thing so it's it's the there's a bias that would affect you know the ivor cummins of the world skeptic um alex berenson skeptic about some aspects of the coronavirus in both cases and naomi dr naomi wolf also a skeptic now here's my problem with skeptics once you're known as the famous skeptic and you're getting a lot of attention and reward for being that famous skeptic you kind of need to be right meaning that even if you're wrong you need to be right whereas somebody who hasn't committed that forcefully to the position and i would argue that i haven't i've been all over the place on different coronavirus stuff so i don't feel like i would be labeled as a skeptic or labeled as a believer i'm somewhere in the middle so i would argue that if you're somewhere in the middle you're less likely to be influenced by the bias of needing to be right about something big but if you're out there all the time being the skeptic you kind of have that really big bias and just be aware of that now does that mean that any of them are wrong no no i'm not telling you that any of them are wrong on anything i'm not sure i would know but just have that little bit of you know knowledge in the back your head that once you're the skeptic person you got a little extra bias there all right so just be careful about that and i'm sure that that that the same concept would apply to me uh whenever i've committed to a position so be aware of it here are some comments about people who are against the vaccine passport i won't read their names i'll just talk about the comment itself all right it's discrimination against the free will of the people who do not want to get vaccinated is that true would it be discriminating against we'll say that the freedom i think is the point the freedom of the people who do not want to get vaccinated that's true it definitely discriminates against their freedom but isn't that true of a driver's license isn't that true getting a loan people who don't have tax returns can't go on is it true of travel you can't travel anywhere unless you have a passport so this is a true statement it discriminates against your freedom but that's not a reason because we do it all the time so the society all of his civilization the entire civilization is built on restricting your freedom that's what it is you don't build a civilization to give people freedom all of civilization is a restriction of freedom and it's but it's designed to be a wise restriction it restricts the things that you'd want to restrict this is just another one of them so i don't think you can i don't think it is a reasonable to disagree with it in concept as as a reduction of freedom because all of civilization is a reduction of freedom you can't drive your car on the sidewalk they built a road to restrict where you drive the car it's all restrictions all right let's let's do some more reasons the the us government couldn't execute this in a way that so there's a practical element to it so somebody says it might be impractical that's a good point if your argument is that we can't get it up in time somebody else argued that a lot of people got vaccinated without showing id so what do those people do if you got vaccinated but you didn't show idea at the time but your name is still in the system right if you got vaccinated or not so there might be some practical limitations to it which are perfectly that would be a good skeptical comment if you just can't do it that's a reason not to do it it just can't be done so if it's not accurate then yeah of course it's a problem but i don't know that for sure and the argument about it is usually not on the practical level there are some arguments um once the system uh and the precedent exists factions within the government can take them and bend them in their own purposes ah now we're getting to the real good stuff so the problem is that once you have a platform and this is dr naomi wolf's argument that once you have a platform where there's something about you in this case the vaccination or not is in the database and that's going to restrict you from let's say businesses or travel or or government things once you have that system they can add anything to that system can't they they can add anything to that next thing you know maybe the next thing they add to it you don't like so much even if you think the vaccination thing is a good idea slippery slope isn't it do you know what else is a slippery slope computers if we allow ourselves to have computers somebody's going to put some information in those databases now we're not going to like it or how about driver's licenses there's a database of your driver's license that has your weight your address your height your eye color your hair color i think couldn't they use and and then it's also used to restrict what you can and cannot do so if you don't have id of some sort you can't fly you can't do a lot of stuff so couldn't they take the driver's license platform because it's just a database and add stuff to it see where i'm going i don't think we should have driver's licenses because that database could be expanded into a social credit system couldn't it do you know what else could be expanded into a social credit system any database it's just the database yes you can put bad things in the database you could put good things in the database but you don't get rid of databases because somebody could misuse it so could somebody misuse this system yes they could misuse every system that's not a reason not to do it you have to weigh the you know the risk against the benefits right um so here's my uh best argument by of why i'm not worried number one it might be impractical like once they roll it out the odds of it working i don't know might be impractical so it might might never even be a problem number two um i believe that transparency and market competition is all you need to make sure that it doesn't go too far now everything goes too far before it gets pulled back right so things do go too far and then get pulled back so we might find that this will go too far and get pulled back but as long as uh let's let's work it through let's say the government says you can't travel unless you have a vaccination same as now i i traveled recently and i couldn't do it without getting a test that goes in the database that the airline can see that says i got a negative cova test what's the difference between that the current situation that i'm in a database saying i got a cova test or one that says i got a vaccination it's the same damn test i mean it's the same process right once you're in the system so were people complaining that the airlines required you to get a test because once you have that platform that allows the the airlines to know if you got a test they could add things to the platform so when you're talking about the vaccination platform you already have one the platform already was built it was for the tests whether you got tested or not so i don't think the flight thing is anything because it's just the current situation that seems to be no big deal what about individual businesses let's say you need a vaccination to go to a basketball game where the seats are filled let's say that's the case and let's say that the public says hey i'm going to boycott your basketball game because of this rule if enough people boycott it what's going to happen well they either won't have the game or they'll change the rule or some time will pass and we don't need the vaccinations right so the the public response and market competition is gonna kind of take care of this i think as long as you've got to have lots of visibility the problem i think would be a lack of visibility now in america do you think that we could take this to the next level of social what is it that china has the social credit system where you have to do a whole bunch of things right or else you get in their database as a bad person we're not too far from that now are we we have a social credit database did you know that did you know you're already in a social credit database in the united states well one of them is your credit score literally your credit score right that is a social credit how how trustworthy are you do you pay back your debts we have that it already exists that's just one form of it we also have this thing called the internet which you've probably heard of you can go on the internet on social media and you can find out quite a bit about people and you can find out how good or bad they are fairly reliably by looking at their social media background so i would argue that the woke-ism is a social credit system i don't even know if it would be worse if we turned it into a database now i'm not in favor of that turning into a database but the current system is pretty damn bad the the wokeness stuff is pretty pretty bad i would say we do have a social credit system so you're worried about the thing that's already here i suppose it could get worse but it's here you already have it all right so let me read a couple more reasons here just to show you the types of objections um all right i want to see some good comments here from david uh reboy so here's a somebody i know to be a higher level thinker and commentator on twitter so this would be a better a better quality of objection says my objection isn't uh even really related to the vaccine the passport infrastructure will encourage private companies of every kind to engage in an emerging social credit system right now um again that could be i i suppose you could see it going that way but what would be the next thing that got added what exactly would be the next thing in the progression somebody says poison is bad for your health thank you um somebody's saying i'm framing travel by uh international standards not domestic that's right but the point stays the same that because international travel is a big enough thing that that's a fair example um how long is immunity yeah somebody's asking a good question how long does immunity last so if you got vaccinated does that really mean anything i supposed to be a date on there so um here's what i feel like a lot of people are saying that this feels like a slippery slope and it reminds you of nazi germany every time you see yourself saying wait a minute that reminds me of nazi germany there should be a flag that goes off in your head wait a minute why am i always reminded of nazi germany every time there's a political conversation it's because it's the weird extreme that's in all of our minds it's not because everything is like that so just being reminded of something else is not a reason if you are reminded of nazi germany you are probably looking at this with fright as opposed to reason now let me say as carefully as i can you could all be right and i could be wrong nothing rules that out right so if you're hearing me say i'm right right right and you're all wrong you shouldn't be hearing that and what i'm saying is that i'm not seeing any reason to be afraid because it looks like normal business to me it just doesn't seem that extreme as long as you have market competition as long as you have visibility as long as the public can get its way and it can if it pushes hard enough i'm not especially afraid of it so yes i wouldn't worry about nuremberg and nazis and hitler every every time you look around a corner hitler is not under the bed hitler is not under the bed do you remember when the coronavirus was first hitting and a lot of people thought that it would be the end of our supply chains and civilization would crumble and i was telling you no no no don't be operating on fear logically we will adjust and we'll figure out how to get you food and then we did just that we figured out how to adjust we took the risks we needed to take we got everybody fed for the most part so just keep in mind that when you've been the most frightened is when you've made the worst decisions so if there's somebody that you think has been right before and they're not frightened by the current topic maybe you should give them a little bit more credibility than you should even give yourself if you're operating from fear doesn't mean you're wrong by the way fear is a good thing but just play the statistics all right the ex-cdc chief says he does think that the kova 19 came or the coronavirus came from some lab now um his argument i hadn't heard before and it goes like this that it's actually hard to get a an animal virus to be compatible with a human and even if it trans even if it gets to a human it tends not to be very viral because it's not a very effective virus but i guess the way that you can make an animal virus really really bad for humans is to expose it to human cells in a lab and you get the virus basically trained you know or to evolve if you will or to mutate i guess until it is really really bad for humans and the speculation here and i think you'd have to call it sort of educated statistical reasoning is that it's unlikely that this thing could have as quickly become so viral unless there was some yeah weaponization happened now the weaponization doesn't mean that they intended anything to get out so that's a separate question but but the statistics of it according to dr redfield cdc head is that it's unlikely that in the time frames we're talking about a natural thing could have become this viral it would have had to be stepped up they say and and added a little bit of zing in a human way um but i would add to that that doesn't make it impossible it just makes it unlikely okay so just know that we live in a world where unlikely things do happen fairly regularly more than you'd expect but that's a good argument i'm going to say that's a solid argument i love this story about ted cruz going to visit the uh the biden cages and the all the kids that are in there and uh there's the video of the the worker who's trying to stop him from filming i think that's sort of a rupaur video and here's why what you're watching is you know i think ted cruz is probably using his phone camera uh he's talking to somebody who's trying to stand in front of him and stop him from filming the people are in the cages or the boxes the biden boxes and the part that's left out is the reason that she's trying to stop it right and i feel like there should have been two reasons one of the reasons i believe is valid which is there's a privacy reason and i believe that if you're just filming people uh and you can see their faces in a world of facial recognition that does sort of put those people in a in let's say a more vulnerable spot if their faces get into a database because somebody took a picture of it so i'm going to say that that part was actually reasonably uh responsible but then the other part is are they just trying to stop embarrassment and that's not valid because we do get to see this right that we should be able to see this we can't fix it unless the public gets excited about it so uh a plus to senator cruz for excellent theatrics and politics as well i think that was exactly the right thing to do what he did bring bring a bunch of senators in elbow your way in there don't take don't take no for an answer don't let anybody stop you if you have a moral authority to do what you're doing and he did he had moral authority which is greater than their authority and he took it he just he basically just expressed moral authority and got away with it very good very very good work i would say and good for the country we wanted to see that um all right that is pretty much what i want to talk about somebody says the faces are blurred before broadcast yeah if if you're being responsible and the pictures that i did see they were blurred but what the worker could not know is whether ted cruz would do that and that's fair right now if it had been a let's say a professional news crew you might have had a little more certainty that they would um agree to and actually blur out the faces but was ted cruz going to go through all the editing of blurring out you know dozens of faces probably not probably not somebody says do illegals get a right to privacy but here i would question the use of the word right and my answer is probably not i mean i assume that if you're not a legal citizen you don't have all the same protections maybe you do actually maybe you do i guess i'm not enough of a lawyer to know the answer that maybe you do but i don't think it's the right question the reason that privacy um is even an expectation is because all of us think it's something that people should have like regardless of what the law is we all kind of think people should get some privacy so i don't think that whatever the law is or the constitution should be the guiding principle in this case because there's there's a moral law on top of that that's just bigger it's just bigger um once they're on u.s soil then they do somebody says we should all have privacy and also vaccine passports okay well the thing with privacy and the thing with all of my arguments is that if you ever see any of them as absolutes the problem's on your end because i don't present anything as an absolute privacy is good but also restricting what people can do so that you can have a functioning civilization is also good they can both be good right you could have you could have times when you're trading one for the other there's nothing wrong with that somebody says moral laws have no place outside of religion well moral laws don't maybe but but acting in a moral way you could take away the word law if you like but acting in a moral way is just something we should expect of each other it doesn't have to be on the books privacy is a form of public restriction that's correct good point that's right if you have privacy you're restricting me from that information now i'm not saying that's wrong i'm just saying that there is no such thing as just freedom to have a civilization it's all about restriction that's what makes it a civilization is restriction mind your own business somebody says that's a that's a perfectly perfectly reasonable statement so if somebody says you know our philosophy or our point of view should be everybody just mind your own business if you could be consistent on that you'd have something the trouble is it's not one of those things you can be consistent on because we really can't mind our own business and live in the same physical place you could try but it couldn't possibly work um oh so there's a there's a great fake news story about i guess a couple of rappers or hip-hoppers or whatever is the the best word musical lacks uh or creating a satan-based sneaker with a drop of human blood in each sneaker to which somebody on twitter asked do you really think there's a drop of human blood in each of those sneakers i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it's one of the best marketing schemes you'll ever see because we're all talking about it but i don't think there's a drop of blood in every sneaker i mean anything's possible but i'm just gonna say i don't really think there's a drop of blood no sneakers um yeah weirdos all right uh i don't know how many of those satanic sneakers are going to sell but they certainly did a good job in letting us know they're out there all right i'm just looking at some of your comments all right that's all i got for now um today i'm going to start recording the audio book which is actually a re-recording because another artist did the original so this will be the first time i'll be recording my own book how to fail almost everything and still win big it'll take months before you can actually buy it but next three days i'm gonna be leaving here and recording all day in the studio and uh i hope that you like the audiobook when it's done and i will talk to you later all right um pre-sale uh not for the audiobook yet i'll tell you when it's available all right that's all for now and i'll talk to you later

hey everybody come on in come on in it's

time

for coffee with scott adams the best

place to be

at the best time in the entire world

yeah a lot of people think there are

better places to be

they're not really this is the best

place to be

and every one of you know it because

you're here you could be anywhere

well you could be watching anything but

no

you're here because you know that you

can have the best time

of your entire day and all you need is a

couple of bubble glass tank or jealous

times canteen jungle flash vessel of any

kind fill it with your favorite liquid

i like coffee and join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure the dopamine of

the day thing that makes

everything better except apparently that

big ship that's stuck in the zoo as

canal

but let's see if we can get that out

yeah

i think the simultaneous sip has the

power to dislodge

shipping vessels from canals go

i feel they're wiggling right now yep oh

hold on

i feel it coming loose it's coming loose

well let's talk about all the stories

yes let's talk about that big old ship

so the name of the ship

humorously is the evergreen

isn't that kind of perfect because the

story became an evergreen

and evergreen is like it never goes away

every day you wake up and

still a ship stuck in the suez canal and

you're not going to be able to wipe your

ass if it stays there much longer

uh so if so this morning

the news was that it yeah at least one

part of it got free

and everybody's thinking yay if one part

of it is free

it's not going to take long to get the

other part free is it

except they let the wind blow it back

into

its stuck position and i ask you this

is the wind around the suez canal

sort of a special kind of wind is it the

kind of wind that targets

specific ships because it seems to me

that

a suez canal that is filled with

shipping

uh ships shipping that's why they call

them ships

they probably figured out the whole wind

thing by now

right but yet i'm not hearing that the

wind has disrupted his shipping all over

the world

seems to be just this little evergreen

ship gets a little extra wind

i feel and that's not right

so i won't make any other jokes uh had

some good ones but they're not for the

public

um but that ship is not quite out yet

the wind blew it back

back into a stuck position and i do love

i do love the simplicity of the story as

somebody said on twitter

all of our other stories are too

complicated they have lots of variables

but this one's great you can sum it up

easily

ship stuck needed unstuck

that's it all right uh trump made news

again

a couple ways uh he attended i guess he

crashed a wedding at mar-a-lago

and there's a video of him uh sort of

talking about himself and talking about

uh

the government and it wasn't until the

very end that he says something to the

bride and groom

you could tell he got a big applause it

was it was a friendly trump crowd

as you might imagine they had a wedding

at mar-a-lago they were probably

pro-trump

and uh but the way it's being portrayed

out of context

is that he was rude and boorish and

crashed a wedding and talked about

himself and forgot about the bridegroom

and then left

[Laughter]

nothing like that happened exactly the

opposite

he showed up at a wedding thrilled the

the wedding people

they had the wedding of of all time the

most memorable wedding you could

possibly have

because trump showed up and gave a

speech unexpectedly

all right so the bride and groom

probably had like the best story ever

but it yeah exactly it got rhubarb so

that story got totally rhubarb

if you cut off the last part it looks

like he never even addressed

the uh the uh bride and groom

all right uh trump is also saying he's

gonna visit the border

this is why he was the fun president

visiting the border is just the best

thing you could possibly do

when the sitting president is not

visiting the border during

a crisis so if the ex-president visits

the border before the sitting president

sort of makes the sitting president look

not so strong on that issue if you know

what i mean

so that's a good play by trump

persuasion wise

good play so

um the george floyd trial is starting

today i guess and have you noticed how

one story ends and then there's always

another one that just backfills it

perfectly

why isn't there ever a day i guess there

were a few without trump

in the winter in which it seemed like

there wasn't much news but it's kind of

weird how the news always has a big

story

in the pipeline the the timing of it is

a little suspicious

you know sometimes there are two at a

time but they really make sure that

pipeline is filled

which sort of suggests to me that if we

had a time when there wasn't much

happening

that the news would make something out

of nothing

huh they wouldn't do that would they

make something out of nothing just to

make news maybe they would and how would

we know

how would we know if there was a real

issue and we were just reading the news

and seeing a real issue

or the news business had created an

issue

that otherwise you wouldn't have even

cared about or known about or had any

impact

you know whatever so you start to see

the the pattern that the news is pretty

much

artificial at least in terms of how you

feel about it

so the things you feel about the

strongest

aren't necessarily the important things

that happen so the news no longer

reports what's important

per se they report what's going to get

the best audience

well in there's a publication called

real clear investigations

they're reporting about uh this little

county in montana

missoula only a hundred and twenty

thousand people in the whole

whole area and uh they did

a a full audit of the mail in ballots

now apparently other audits have been

sample

audits i wasn't aware of that so when

larger places are audited

they can't count them all because there

would be too many so they pick a sample

and just count those

now i have questions

did you know that first of all that the

other mail-in ballot audits

were samples and not actually just

counting all the ballots

i didn't know that so that's interesting

but here's my second question

what do we know about how they picked

the sample

who exactly gave them the sample

did the auditors go into a big room

you know full of ballots and say all

right we're just going to randomly you

know

and how would you do it how would you

randomly

select ballots because even if you went

and said i'll just randomly pick the man

of this pile in this pile

probably it wouldn't be random would it

because that's not even close to random

right i mean mathematically

statistically

even if you weren't trying to take them

from the same place

you couldn't guarantee it was random it

wouldn't be possible

so i ask you this question were the

people who

audited the ballots the same ones who

decided

which ones to audit in other words did

they do the randomness

or i'm just going to put that out there

because i don't know the answer

and let me let me tell you that

no core has found any widespread fraud

no court has a as a ruling of any

widespread fraud

in the election right it's a it's a big

lie

it's a big lie i'm saying that so i can

stay on social media

now on with the story so the question is

do the people who have done sample

representative audits of

big places were was the sample

given to them by the same people who

organized the election

or did they somehow get to pick it and

if they picked it

how in the world did they know it was

representative

and do you want a representative sample

because i don't think you want a

representative sample do you

don't you want you don't you assume that

if there's

a problem it's probably not going to be

evenly spread

so wouldn't a representative sample of

ballots

eliminate the possibility of finding

fraud

because you could find some but you say

it's hardly anything

this this one sample that we got from

this one

town he had a problem but it's just one

but it's also the only one you checked

in that town because it was a

representative sample

so if you do a representative sample

doesn't that

guarantee or almost guarantee just

math-wise and statistically that you

wouldn't find any fraud

am i wrong about that

it sort of calls into question whether

any audits have been done at all

in any way that would matter so i'll

just

put it as a question it's not an

accusation

because that would get me kicked off of

social media so i have no reason to

believe that any audits were

insufficient

i simply have a gap in my understanding

of how they could possibly pick iran you

know

some representative sample that actually

meant something

but anyway back to this little missoula

place

so they did an audit in which because it

was a smaller place

and there were volunteers and they got

approval to do it

they could look at every single one so i

believe this might be the only place

that every ballot was checked maybe you

know

fact check me on that and here's what

they found

uh there were enough irregularities that

could have changed the election

like easily that there were so many

in a place where elections were often

close

that it was way beyond the point

let me see i'm seeing some answers about

the samples

um see uh okay i don't see an answer i

want to read

but some people are addressing the

sample size question

so again i i put that out there as a

question not an accusation

i don't know how it could be

representative but maybe it is

um so what they found is that out of uh

72 000 million votes 4 600 of them

were without envelopes

six point three percent of all votes

of the mail-in votes not of all votes

but six percent of the mail-in votes

didn't have envelopes

which means that legally they should not

have been counted

but they were

um and what's more

according to this is from the article

according to auditors county employees

claimed that during the post-election

audit

some of the envelopes may have been

double counted

so might even be a higher number of

missing envelopes but they don't know

that for sure

and and apparently there were some

postmark

issues as well so

fact check me on this will you just fact

check me number one

is the story even true all right like

i don't trust anything like maybe this

story didn't even happen

maybe there's no place called missoula

right i mean

anything's possible in 2021. so first of

all is the story even true

i don't know i don't know i don't even

know how to know

but if it were true is it the only place

they've ever checked

and it's also completely

problematic i hate using that word i'm

gonna

i'm gonna erase that word and back up

like i never used it before

um the only place you checked

there was a problem is that true

so there is a missoula in montana at

least that's

well that part i was pretty confident

about but uh

was there really an election somebody

says yeah you know

i gotta say i gotta say this certainly

raises some questions

but like i said the courts have shown no

proof

of widespread fraud uh jack bosovic had

the

a great prank tweet this morning

and uh here's the setup as you know

there are a bunch of anti-fog people who

are counter-protesting

some i guess

some republican types some conservative

types who were protesting something

anyways the antifa people were throwing

rocks through the cars of anything that

had a flag on it

or the trucks usually and so there was

some

some of that kind of violence and

destruction

and uh and jack

tweeted tongue-in-cheek armed antifa

antifa insurrectionists attempted to

overthrow the oregon state capitol today

now of course that's a joke on the

capital riots where anything that looks

like a protest

you know could be construed by the fake

media as a

as an insurrection mike baker

corresponded to the new york times

not understanding that this was a joke

tweets about it the tweet below is

getting a lot of traction

but is it even close to being true yeah

which is

often the case with jokes they're not

that close to being true

um the crowd of anti-fascist

activists gathering in front of the

capital to protest

a planned right-wing event there was no

attempted overthrow

yes there was no attempted overthrow

good to know so we have that

clarification of a prank

um breaking news i don't know if he knew

this but 25 percent of people polled on

any topic our idiots

have you ever noticed that it doesn't

matter what the question is

if it's on politics anyway any question

on politics

25 of the country is going to be on the

dumb side

it doesn't even matter what the question

is and i and i wonder

is it the same people every time

or is it just always a coincidence that

about 25

of the people will disagree on things

no matter what they are or is it always

the 20 same 25 percent who just don't

understand anything

makes you wonder i imagine it's

different people but

it's a funny question so here's in case

in point

rasmussen is uh reporting about the

support for voter id laws

so apparently back in 2018 so not that

long ago

the support for voter id laws among

white

people was 67 to 74

among blacks it was 55 to 69

and other non-whites uh well that's

interesting it's much higher 76 to 82.

uh and so among all voters

the range was 67 to 75

but the current average is 75.

so in other words the support for voter

id laws has

climbed substantially a lot more people

are in favor of it

but i go back to my question 25

of the country is not in favor of

knowing who voted

what's wrong with them what's wrong with

them

so um so i

see somebody saying that scott believes

polls again uh well i'm reading the

rasmussen polls

the rasmussen polls at least on the

presidential stuff that i follow

i don't know about anything else but on

the presidential stuff they've been one

of the closest

pollsters consistently

so following a pollster that is

consistently

one of the best is not exactly

being too stupid following the polls

that come out prior to an election which

you know

are fake polls would be sort of dumb

all right so you can't say polls or

polls some of them are just obviously

fake all the time

now as i've been telling you lately i've

decided to self-identify as black

and i decided i haven't explained that

well enough because some people still

think it's a joke

but it's not number one

i agree literally no joke

being completely serious i agree with

the concept that people can

self-identify

let me give you an example let's say

somebody is

technically bisexual at least

in their own mind they they would

consider themselves bisexual

but let's say they just have more of an

affinity for the gay lifestyle

spend more time there have more gay

friends than stray friends

and just decide to identify as gay

but maybe technically in their mind they

know that they could go the other way if

they wanted to

so should they be allowed to identify as

gay when sort of technically maybe

they're not so much

completely gay as bi but they have an

affinity for that lifestyle

i say yes i say yes because they would

certainly be treated as gay

they would be living the life you know

etc so i say yes

likewise as you know i've been

pro-transgender

everything and should those folks be

allowed to

live the life and identify with the

group that they want

because of an affinity for it

technically

if you looked at their dna right you'd

say well technically

this isn't the the group that we would

have put you in but if you have an

affinity for that group it's where you

it's where you feel you live and belong

and how you're going to be treated in

life i'm okay with that

i feel that's a reasonable a reasonable

thing

and so based on that same standard which

i've accepted as reasonable

and likewise i accept that if somebody

is a

25 you know genetically

black that if they identify as just

black

we accept that right because same reason

you know their their lifestyle

their their interests the way they're

treated might be more in one group so

yeah

identify that way even if technically

somebody else might argue you shouldn't

be

so here's why i've decided to

self-identify as black number one i like

to be on a winning team

i like to be in the winning team who's

winning

well i would say black americans are

starting to finally

like really getting a getting a little

bit of purchase right

finally after you know hundreds of years

it does look like

the you know black situation is doing

pretty well

largely because of activism

whereas the white situation is sort of

decreasing

wouldn't you say now i'm not i'm not

putting a value judgment on that i'm

just saying if you observe it it looks

like that

so i like being on the winning team

number two

i'm told by science that all of us have

african roots now if it's truly we all

have african roots

if you look at the full arc of human

evolution

most of the time i've been african in

other words my

my family ancestry probably spent more

time

african than they did in europe so

i say i say genetically i've got an

argument there

i've also lost two careers for my race

i've told you that too many times i lost

my banking career because i was white

and was told that directly by the way

i'm not i'm not

reading between the lines boss told me

that i lost my telecom career because i

was white again my boss told me directly

you're white we can't promote you and i

would say that my current career

as a you know cartoonist and now public

commentator

i probably lost i'd say a third

to a half of my potential income to race

because if i talked about trump in any

positive way

that made me look like a white

supremacist people don't buy my books

et cetera so i've lost two two careers

completely

because of my race and my current one is

probably down by a third or so

because of my race now you tell me who

do

i have more affinity with people who are

uh who are discriminated against for

race

or people who are not i have

i have way more affinity with people who

have been discriminated against

for race and by the way that's not a

joke

that's literally true i do have more

affinity for anybody discriminated

against by race

that's how it works if something happens

to you that happened to somebody else

you

you have some appreciation for it that's

how it works

and then um and i've also done more work

for to benefit the black community than

any other so i would say that's my

affinity group and that's what i choose

all right here's a little issue that i

saw in a cartoon

but it's actually a pretty good point

we're making a big deal and

should about asian american violence

because we don't want

any of that we don't want any of that

bias and discrimination in our country

so we started out with black lives

matter

you know my group but now we're we're

sort of talking about

asian americans being discriminated and

we're very close

very close to saying asian american

lives matter

we're going to get to the point where

they all matter except for

these white supremacist lives

so it'll be interesting to see how the

asian-american thing

has an influence on the black lives

matter thing or if they just always live

separately

but it seems like one would influence

the other

i told you that the news is all

artificial

and what you consider the biggest story

is often completely irrelevant

and what you consider no story at all is

often the biggest thing happening

here's a good example i would argue

that the biggest thing that's going to

come out of the coronavirus thing

is the death of public schools because

the teachers unions have overreached

right the teachers unions have

overreached

and if you're not following uh

let's see you should be following corey

d'angelos on twitter because uh he

he's sort of the only one who seems to

be consistently reporting on the all the

changes that are happening but today

we're hearing that west virginia

governor

jim justice just signed this year's most

expensive bill

to fund students instead of systems now

that's happening all over the place

a bunch of different states especially

where they have republican control

are giving us deciding that the funding

will follow the student

so the student can go to whatever school

they want private or public

and it won't just go to the school

instead

i think the teachers unions have

destroyed public

education as a monopoly

it looks like they overreached and

destroyed it now

as you know the teachers unions are the

biggest

source of systemic racism

and i don't think enough of my people

are talking about this but

it's the biggest source and it might be

on the way to self-solving

in other words the pandemic may have

solved the biggest form

of systemic racism in the country i

don't think there's a bigger

story than that i i

propose to you that this is the biggest

story in the country

and it's basically you know one guy

who's tweeting about it it's the biggest

story

like this is the one that moves the

planet this one moves

civilization the entire future of the

united states

compared to let's say our competition

with china

is really really dependent on this

biggest story in the country completely

ignored

it's not even you won't find it on any

website

you'd have to follow somebody on twitter

to even know it's happening

also from rasmussen 76 percent of

folks say that gun gun ownership is a

constitutional right

76 percent say gun ownership is a

constitutional right

that makes about 25 percent 24

25 idiots

right because you could argue that

something shouldn't be in the

constitution

but it's hard to argue it's not there uh

it's another one of those examples where

25 you can always count on them to be

wrong on everything

all right here's my new section which

will cause you all to get worked up are

you ready

are you ready for some some fighting

ready for some intellectual fighting

come on here it comes

here it comes here's the red meat

coming out all right i call this section

am i wrong

or are you frightened am i wrong

or are you frightened and here's the

concept behind it

an ordinary intelligent person will make

ordinary intelligent

and reasonable decisions when

when their emotions are not involved

if you take that same reasonable person

who's got

perfect perfectly average abilities and

common sense and reasoning

and you put that person in a stressful

scary situation

how good is their reasoning now

not good right so your ability to reason

gets switched off as your emotions go

higher

as you get angrier as you get more

frightened

as you're worried as you're more anxious

your

your sense of reason just switches off

does anybody doubt that we we all agree

with that right

so if you have a situation let's say

hypothetically there was a situation

where there was somebody you knew

who had a really good track record of

being

reasonable and often right a very

reasonable person

and then you're comparing that to that

reasonable person to another one who's

just as reasonable

two very reasonable people they're often

right

see things clearly now we're to make one

tweak

they're both reasonable they're both

usually right

but one of them is now really scared

one's really frightened now they start

to disagree on a topic

one is not frightened and is reasonable

most of the time

one is pretty scared and they have

different opinions now who's right

which one of them is more likely to have

the right opinion

because remember same intelligence same

information

but one of them is scared and one of

them isn't

yeah the calm person statistically

you should expect that the calm person

has the advantage

now let's talk about vaccine passports

i'm not afraid of vaccine passports

now you should you might argue that i

should be and we'll talk about that in a

minute

but as a statement of fact i'm not even

a little bit concerned about them

but the people who disagree with my

opinion which i'll state in a minute

those people are really really concerned

like they're really scared now

a lot of people are saying the following

comment scott i like your opinions in

general but

wow you're all over the place on these

vaccine passports

because you think maybe it should be a

good idea

and you're way off on this one you've

got a lot of stuff right but you're way

off on this vaccine passport thing

so i ask you this step back for a moment

i have no fear of it whatsoever which

doesn't mean i'm right

right that doesn't mean i'm right i'm

just saying i have no fear

and you've watched me for however long

you've watched me and you thought that i

was reasonable until now

but here's an object where you have a

topic where you have a lot of fear

and now where our opinions are different

what do you think is going on

what do you think is going on here is

the problem that you're afraid

and it's affecting your judgment or

is this one of those times when

different from my pattern

i'm just way off i'm way off in a bad

opinion which of those is more likely

all right i'm going to read some of the

comments to my tweet this morning

and i'm going to tell you what i think

of their reasoning

okay so here are the people who are

disagreeing with me so i've said that

vaccine passports will be fine now it

doesn't mean

it'll make anything better i'm just not

afraid of them

and here's my argument we already have

driver's licenses right

did the the putting your name into a

database and giving you a driver's

license

did that ruin your life somehow or

or did it just make it safer to drive

didn't really hurt much if you get a

mortgage you have to show your taxes

was that a slippery slope to losing your

health care information

no no um and how about your health care

information has anybody

gotten access to that do we have laws

that keep your health care stuff

private has anybody gotten access to you

know most of it we're talking about just

the vaccination part

but has anybody gotten access to the

whole database yet

not yet not yet i mean i suppose it's a

risk

but not yet so we live in a world in

which the government has

often put these restrictions on us to

put us in a database

and know something about us right now

the big argument that i've heard from i

guess this is from naomi wolf

so she's quite famous for being a

skeptic

on some of the coronavirus stuff and the

first thing i would say

is beware of skeptics skeptics are

you know valuable got to have them i am

one

but there's a skeptic trap and you

should be aware of it

the skeptic trap goes like this once you

become the skeptic

it's hard not to be the skeptic and

you're going to want to have at least a

win

in your skeptical thing so it's it's the

there's a bias that would affect you

know the ivor cummins of the world

skeptic um alex berenson

skeptic about some aspects of the

coronavirus in both cases

and naomi dr naomi wolf also a skeptic

now here's my problem with skeptics once

you're known

as the famous skeptic and you're getting

a lot of attention

and reward for being that famous skeptic

you kind of need to be right meaning

that even if you're wrong you need to be

right

whereas somebody who hasn't committed

that forcefully to the position

and i would argue that i haven't i've

been all over the place on different

coronavirus stuff

so i don't feel like i would be labeled

as a skeptic

or labeled as a believer i'm somewhere

in the middle

so i would argue that if you're

somewhere in the middle you're less

likely to be

influenced by the bias of needing to be

right about something big

but if you're out there all the time

being the skeptic you kind of have that

really big bias

and just be aware of that now does that

mean that any of them are wrong

no no i'm not telling you that any of

them are wrong on anything

i'm not sure i would know but

just have that little bit of you know

knowledge in the back your head that

once you're the skeptic person

you got a little extra bias there

all right so just be careful about that

and i'm sure that that

that the same concept would apply to me

uh whenever i've committed to a position

so be aware of it here are some comments

about people who are

against the vaccine passport i won't

read their names

i'll just talk about the comment itself

all right

it's discrimination against the free

will of the people who do not want to

get vaccinated

is that true would it be discriminating

against

we'll say that the freedom i think is

the point the freedom of the people who

do not want to get vaccinated

that's true it definitely discriminates

against their freedom but isn't that

true of a driver's license

isn't that true getting a loan people

who don't have tax returns can't go on

is it true of travel you can't travel

anywhere unless you have a passport

so this is a true statement it

discriminates against your freedom

but that's not a reason because we do it

all the time

so the society all of his civilization

the entire civilization is built on

restricting your freedom

that's what it is you don't build a

civilization to give people freedom

all of civilization is a restriction of

freedom

and it's but it's designed to be a wise

restriction

it restricts the things that you'd want

to restrict this is just another one of

them

so i don't think you can i don't think

it is a

reasonable to disagree with it in

concept

as as a reduction of freedom because all

of civilization is a reduction of

freedom

you can't drive your car on the sidewalk

they built a road

to restrict where you drive the car it's

all restrictions

all right let's let's do some more

reasons

the the us government couldn't execute

this in a way that

so there's a practical element to it so

somebody says it might be impractical

that's a good point if your argument is

that

we can't get it up in time somebody else

argued that a lot of people got

vaccinated without

showing id so what do those people do

if you got vaccinated but you didn't

show idea at the time

but your name is still in the system

right if you got vaccinated or not

so there might be some practical

limitations to it which are perfectly

that would be a good skeptical

comment if you just can't do it

that's a reason not to do it it just

can't be done

so if it's not accurate then yeah

of course it's a problem but i don't

know that for sure and the argument

about it

is usually not on the practical level

there are some arguments

um once the system uh and the precedent

exists factions within the government

can take them

and bend them in their own purposes ah

now we're getting to the real good stuff

so the problem is that once you have a

platform and this is dr naomi wolf's

argument

that once you have a platform where

there's something about you in this case

the vaccination or not

is in the database and that's going to

restrict you from let's say businesses

or travel

or or government things once you have

that system

they can add anything to that system

can't they

they can add anything to that next thing

you know

maybe the next thing they add to it you

don't like so much

even if you think the vaccination thing

is a good idea

slippery slope isn't it

do you know what else is a slippery

slope

computers if we allow ourselves to have

computers somebody's going to put some

information in those databases

now we're not going to like it or how

about

driver's licenses there's a database

of your driver's license that has your

weight

your address your height your

eye color your hair color i think

couldn't they use and and then it's also

used to restrict what you can and cannot

do

so if you don't have id of some sort you

can't fly you can't do a lot of stuff

so couldn't they take the driver's

license platform

because it's just a database and add

stuff to it

see where i'm going i don't think we

should have driver's licenses

because that database could be expanded

into a social credit

system couldn't it do you know what else

could be expanded into a social credit

system

any database it's just the database

yes you can put bad things in the

database

you could put good things in the

database but you don't get rid of

databases

because somebody could misuse it so

could somebody misuse this system

yes they could misuse every

system that's not a reason not to do it

you have to weigh the you know the risk

against the benefits right

um so here's my

uh best argument by of why i'm not

worried

number one it might be impractical like

once they roll it out the odds of it

working i don't know

might be impractical so it might might

never even be a problem

number two um i believe that

transparency

and market competition is all you need

to make sure that it doesn't go too far

now everything goes too far

before it gets pulled back right so

things do go too far and then get pulled

back

so we might find that this will go too

far and get pulled back

but as long as uh let's

let's work it through let's say the

government says you can't travel

unless you have a vaccination

same as now i i traveled recently and i

couldn't do it without getting a test

that goes in the database that the

airline can see

that says i got a negative cova test

what's the difference between that

the current situation that i'm in a

database saying i got a cova test

or one that says i got a vaccination

it's the same damn test

i mean it's the same process right once

you're in the system

so were people complaining that the

airlines required you to get a test

because once you have that platform that

allows the

the airlines to know if you got a test

they could add things to the platform so

when you're talking about the

vaccination platform

you already have one the platform

already was built it was for the tests

whether you got tested or not so i don't

think the flight thing

is anything because it's just the

current situation that seems to be

no big deal what about individual

businesses

let's say you need a vaccination to go

to a basketball game

where the seats are filled let's say

that's the case

and let's say that the public says hey

i'm going to boycott your basketball

game because of this rule

if enough people boycott it what's going

to happen

well they either won't have the game or

they'll change the rule or

some time will pass and we don't need

the vaccinations right

so the the public response and market

competition

is gonna kind of take care of this i

think as long as you've got to have lots

of visibility

the problem i think would be a lack of

visibility

now in america do you think that we

could take this to the next level of

social what is it that china has the

social credit

system where you have to do a whole

bunch of things right

or else you get in their database as a

bad person

we're not too far from that now are we

we have a social credit database

did you know that did you know you're

already in a social credit database in

the united states

well one of them is your credit score

literally your credit score

right that is a social credit how how

trustworthy are you

do you pay back your debts we have that

it already exists that's just one form

of it

we also have this thing called the

internet which you've probably heard of

you can go on the internet on social

media and you can find out

quite a bit about people and you can

find out how good or bad they are

fairly reliably by looking at their

social media

background so i would argue that

the woke-ism is a social credit system

i don't even know if it would be worse

if we turned it into a database

now i'm not in favor of that turning

into a database but the current system

is pretty damn bad the the wokeness

stuff

is pretty pretty bad i would say we do

have a social credit

system so you're worried about the thing

that's already here

i suppose it could get worse but

it's here you already have it

all right so let me read a couple more

reasons here just to

show you the types of objections

um all right

i want to see some good comments here

from david uh reboy so

here's a somebody i know to be a higher

level

thinker and commentator on twitter so

this would be a better

a better quality of objection says my

objection isn't

uh even really related to the vaccine

the passport infrastructure will

encourage private companies of every

kind to engage in an emerging

social credit system right now

um again that could be

i i suppose you could see it going that

way but what would be the next thing

that got added

what exactly would be the next thing in

the

progression

somebody says poison is bad for your

health thank you

um somebody's saying i'm framing travel

by uh international standards not

domestic that's right

but the point stays the same that

because international travel is a big

enough thing

that that's a fair example um

how long is immunity yeah somebody's

asking a good question how long does

immunity last

so if you got vaccinated does that

really mean anything i supposed to be a

date on there

so um here's what i

feel like a lot of people are saying

that this feels like a slippery slope

and it reminds you of nazi germany

every time you see yourself saying wait

a minute that reminds me of nazi germany

there should be a flag that goes off in

your head

wait a minute why am i always reminded

of nazi germany every time there's a

political conversation

it's because it's the weird extreme

that's in all of our minds it's not

because everything is like that

so just being reminded of something else

is not a reason

if you are reminded of nazi germany you

are probably

looking at this with fright as opposed

to

reason now let me say as carefully as i

can

you could all be right and i could be

wrong

nothing rules that out right so if

you're hearing me say i'm

right right right and you're all wrong

you shouldn't be hearing that

and what i'm saying is that i'm not

seeing any reason to be afraid because

it looks like normal business to me

it just doesn't seem that extreme as

long as you have market competition

as long as you have visibility as long

as the public

can get its way and it can if it pushes

hard enough

i'm not especially afraid of it so

yes i wouldn't worry about nuremberg and

nazis and hitler every every time you

look around a corner

hitler is not under the bed hitler is

not under the bed

do you remember when the coronavirus was

first hitting and a lot of people

thought that it would be the end of our

supply chains and

civilization would crumble and i was

telling you

no no no don't be operating on fear

logically we will adjust and we'll

figure out how to get you food

and then we did just that we figured out

how to adjust

we took the risks we needed to take we

got everybody

fed for the most part so just keep in

mind

that when you've been the most

frightened is when you've made the worst

decisions so if there's somebody that

you think has been right before

and they're not frightened by the

current topic

maybe you should give them a little bit

more credibility

than you should even give yourself if

you're operating from fear

doesn't mean you're wrong by the way

fear is a good thing but just play the

statistics

all right

the ex-cdc chief says he does think that

the

kova 19 came or the coronavirus

came from some lab now

um his argument i hadn't heard before

and it goes like this

that it's actually hard to get a

an animal virus to be compatible with a

human

and even if it trans even if it gets to

a human

it tends not to be very viral

because it's not a very effective virus

but

i guess the way that you can make an

animal virus really really bad for

humans

is to expose it to human cells in a

lab and you get the virus basically

trained

you know or to evolve if you will or to

mutate i guess

until it is really really bad for humans

and the speculation here and i think

you'd have to call it

sort of educated statistical reasoning

is that it's unlikely that this thing

could have

as quickly become so viral unless there

was some

yeah weaponization happened now the

weaponization

doesn't mean that they intended anything

to get out so that's a separate question

but but the statistics of it according

to

dr redfield cdc head

is that it's unlikely that in the time

frames we're talking about a natural

thing could have become this

viral it would have had to be stepped up

they say

and and added a little bit of zing in a

human way

um but i would add to that that doesn't

make it impossible

it just makes it unlikely okay so just

know that we live in a world where

unlikely things do happen fairly

regularly more than you'd expect

but that's a good argument i'm going to

say that's a solid argument

i love this story about ted cruz going

to visit the uh

the biden cages and the all the kids

that are in there

and uh there's the video of the

the worker who's trying to stop him from

filming i think that's sort of a rupaur

video and here's why what you're

watching is

you know i think ted cruz is probably

using his phone camera

uh he's talking to somebody who's trying

to stand in front of him and stop him

from filming

the people are in the cages or the boxes

the biden boxes

and the part that's left out

is the reason that she's trying to stop

it

right and i feel like there should have

been two reasons

one of the reasons i believe is valid

which is there's a privacy reason

and i believe that if you're just

filming people uh

and you can see their faces in a world

of

facial recognition that does sort of put

those people in a

in let's say a more vulnerable spot if

their faces get into a database because

somebody took a picture of it so i'm

going to say that that part was actually

reasonably uh responsible

but then the other part is are they just

trying to stop embarrassment

and that's not valid because we do get

to see this

right that we should be able to see this

we can't fix it unless the public gets

excited about it so uh a plus

to senator cruz for excellent theatrics

and politics as well

i think that was exactly the right thing

to do what he did bring bring a bunch of

senators in

elbow your way in there don't take don't

take no for an answer

don't let anybody stop you if you have a

moral

authority to do what you're doing and he

did he had moral authority which is

greater than their authority and he took

it

he just he basically just expressed

moral authority and got away with it

very good

very very good work i would say and good

for the country

we wanted to see that um

all right that is pretty much what i

want to talk about

somebody says the faces are blurred

before broadcast yeah if

if you're being responsible and the

pictures that i did see

they were blurred but what the worker

could not know

is whether ted cruz would do that and

that's fair right

now if it had been a let's say a

professional news crew

you might have had a little more

certainty that they would um

agree to and actually blur out the faces

but was ted cruz going to go through all

the editing of blurring out

you know dozens of faces probably not

probably not

somebody says do illegals get a right to

privacy

but here i would question the use of the

word right

and my answer is probably not i mean i

assume that if you're not

a legal citizen you don't have all the

same protections maybe you do

actually maybe you do i guess i'm not

enough of a lawyer to know the answer

that

maybe you do but i don't think it's the

right question

the reason that privacy um is even an

expectation is because all of us think

it's something that

people should have like regardless of

what the law

is we all kind of think people

should get some privacy so i don't think

that whatever the law is or the

constitution

should be the guiding principle in this

case because there's there's a moral law

on top of that that's just bigger

it's just bigger um

once they're on u.s soil then they do

somebody says

we should all have privacy and also

vaccine passports

okay well the thing with privacy

and the thing with all of my arguments

is that if you ever see any of them as

absolutes

the problem's on your end because i

don't present anything as an absolute

privacy is good but also

restricting what people can do so that

you can have a functioning civilization

is also good they can both be good

right you could have you could have

times when you're trading one for the

other

there's nothing wrong with that

somebody says moral laws have no place

outside of religion

well moral laws don't

maybe but but acting in a moral way

you could take away the word law if you

like but acting in a moral way

is just something we should expect of

each other

it doesn't have to be on the books

privacy is a form of public restriction

that's correct good point

that's right if you have privacy you're

restricting me

from that information now i'm not saying

that's wrong

i'm just saying that there is no such

thing as

just freedom to have a civilization

it's all about restriction that's what

makes it a civilization is restriction

mind your own business somebody says

that's a that's a perfectly perfectly

reasonable statement

so if somebody says you know our

philosophy or our point of view should

be everybody just mind your own business

if you could be consistent on that you'd

have something

the trouble is it's not one of those

things you can be consistent on

because we really can't mind our own

business and

live in the same physical place you

could try

but it couldn't possibly work

um oh so there's a

there's a great fake news story about i

guess a couple of

rappers or hip-hoppers or whatever is

the the best word

musical lacks uh or creating a

satan-based sneaker with a drop of human

blood in each

sneaker to which somebody on twitter

asked

do you really think there's a drop of

human blood in each of those sneakers

i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that

it's one of the best marketing schemes

you'll ever see because we're all

talking about it

but i don't think there's a drop of

blood in every sneaker

i mean anything's possible but i'm just

gonna say

i don't really think there's a drop of

blood no sneakers

um yeah weirdos

all right uh i don't know how many of

those satanic sneakers are going to sell

but they certainly did a good job in

letting us know they're out there

all right i'm just looking at some of

your comments all right that's all i got

for now um

today i'm going to start recording the

audio book

which is actually a re-recording because

another artist did the original

so this will be the first time i'll be

recording my own book how to fail

almost everything and still win big

it'll take months before you can

actually buy it

but next three days i'm gonna be leaving

here and

recording all day in the studio and uh

i hope that you like the audiobook when

it's done

and i will talk to you later

all right um pre-sale

uh not for the audiobook yet i'll tell

you when it's available

all right that's all for now and i'll

talk to you later