For coffee was got Alice S party your day guaranteed and if its, not double your coffee back and you like coffee, so everybody wins. If you like us to really exceed your expectations- and I think it will, all you need is a cupboard, Mugger Glass, a tanker jealousy live again to inject a flask of vessel of every kind fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dupe obedient to the day. The thing makes everything better skull. The simultaneous zip and, I hope, you're ready now. Well, if that wasn't enough excitement for you, you can see that there's gonna be a white boy presentation later. Yes, the US is that good, let's talk about it,

the things in my ongoing segment of Joe Biden evolving into Donald Trump. We now have Biden playing golf while there is a crisis on the border. So remember every time you see. Just evolving into a version of Trump. Just remember, told you. I was gonna happen once before a dead now, since we know from the project veritable undercover video. We know the CNN, at least according to their technical director who, caught on camera,. We know that they actively try to make joke. I didn't look like he is eating vital and young and and fit, and that they said it out loud to you directly said we're trying to make him look like he's the guy, and I have to compliment whoever dress

something for the photoshoot, because you don't see him golfing. I don't know if there's any photo, I don't know. If there's any video is there any video of him actually golfing cuz I like to see a swing. If you know what I mean, but my compliments to the wardrobe Propagandist he looks really good, there's a photograph of happiness and are really flattering golf. Health at the looks and new in china- and you know if I'm gonna be objective there is. There is a thing that Joe Biden does very well, which is he's a pretty good role model for fitness. I believe, is better a lifelong exercise or keeps his weight under control. Even has it you gotta be met. That's that's not nothin.

I wish we had more present, who have sort of eight fitness by us, but is funny because we know that this is a sort of a staged propaganda, candid thing, but a stalwart I I don't mind when our leaders I did all whether president doesnt staged thing to look strong athletic. That's why that's good technic actually. What about this argument? You know the argument against letting kids use was a private schools Is that if you lose the funding from the public schools, the public funding to let it followed the students and they got a private schools- they'll be less funding for what's left behind, so the public schools will fall apart. So goes the argument if.

let money flow to the private ones. I would like to challenge that that theory, here's the assumption where I think we may differ. Obviously, math is math. If money moves away from the public schools, Zella less money, that does it Like problem right so so far, that's not crazy, but there's differences assumption. My assumption is that the only thing keeping massive extra funding of schools, both from private individuals, billionaires endowed whatever's as well as government, probably could put it more. I think like keeps anybody from play more into the school system. Is As what what smart person pouring money into an unbroken system, they can't be faxed, nobody right. So there you would be forgiven for believing that water.

our money we have as a fixed part. if we move some of that opium. Less left over here, certainly true in the short run, but it seems to me that, because of teachers, unions they ve created is broken and unfavourable system, the public schools and their preventing competition, because the union is also strong like an prevent anybody from competing, whether they can just get the laws changed in such which they do so here's the thing. It seems to me that we live in a country where we could get unlimited funding for Lesabre start up education projects, because so many people wanted Such obvious public good that I think billion years, we just open their wallets. The only thing that they lack is something to fund.

which says where doesn't it? Wouldn't you first assumption be that schools are under funded and of course they are, but there is a very good reason if you put more money into the Add schools apparently doesn't make that much difference. Cuz the other system is broken, so without competition it wouldn't matter how much money you put into it. Nobody has really an incentive to compete. There is no competition, and that's because the teacher. inside so just summarizing the the difference between Save the left's the left's philosophy and the rights said this before, but you'll see it in all. Our different topics is the left likes to assume that matters is a zero sum game, meaning that there is a fixed.

Of wealth or resources, and if I have some of it, that simply you care of so if I have some that takes away what could about yours, that's not what the right tends to think the right tends to approach things from a perspective of abundance, which is there is never a limited, out of anything. You can make more how you would make more money for funding. Schools is by giving them better things to fund their Zoe way to make more for everybody but The right seems to think that even a thing, the left seems to think the limited amount we gotta get hours, everything falls bark, there is the most alarming thing that's happening today that were acting like it's not alarming. I have now heard. three high end attorneys, who understand the legal defence world.

Three of them so far- and I think Dershowitz was one predicting that the facts of the Matter Robert Barnes, is another and it was just another one. I saw people really know what they're talking about something that is unlikely that the facts of the case and the law will be used to decide the outcome, and that It's how the I guess, how the jars feel you know they. The emotional impact of the whole thing is certainly meaning greater than eighty percent chance. Correct people know what I'm talking about. Not me. I don't know what I'm talking about, but there's an eighty percent chance that there is an american citizen, an american citizen who is. innocent until proven guilty and were sitting here like it's. Ok, with a complete knowledge that there's an eighty percent chance there you go

Jail for at least twelve years because he's a white male now you're gonna save yourself us now. Why is because he frickin killed a guy on video. That's go going to jail if he goes to jail because he building right in front of us. I get that right does completely legitimate point of view. We may not be technically exactly what happened. Did you kind of need to know a state of mind and such, but certainly we watched, we watched something that the professionals have deemed homicide and I'm not arguing. That is obvious, Certainly, the human actions has something to do with it, but still you have to support the system right It's not always about the person you can imagine there are cases where you just need to punish some person bend a rule to do it, but can you can you break

the system in this case and just say? Well, apparently, this wouldn't be the one time this happens. Obviously, but why are we ok with this? Why is it ok, because- and I have to be more careful about their separate say this Abner assailant Shovin is innocent or guilty. That's actually irrelevant my point, my point, that his innocence or guilt won't be part of what. Some in jail or not, is just not part of the decision. that ain't right. So what will be part of the decision. If not the law and the facts, again this is, in my opinion, this is people were in the law. I don't talk about if there How can it be used. A racial outcome, and how is it not really? How is this?

I don't want to use the l word cuz as soon as you use the lyc and you don't. You know that that word, that is, that it becomes a hold of distraction, but clearly the entire world is watching him getting ready to go to jail for twelve or more years. because he's a white male He might also, let me be very careful. He might also be completely guilt. I think the prosecution men putting their case But that's not why he's going to jail for, according the people know what they're talking about they're, not even to look at that they're just gonna vote on how they feel. How is that? Ok.

I guess we just eleven alternative right, nobody's gonna, better idea, and some so would you say: well, ok, here's my theory. The only reason that's ok is that we ve been brainwashed. That's my theory that you would not put up with this, for Second, yes, the. If the media had not told you to do it not directly, but the media has created a situation where the skies guilty and just requires them to be punished right and that and that narrow existed long before we even saw the defences case long before What we saw the prosecutions case, which I assert again is very strong, so unless it is another, essence of anything. Prosecution made a good case. It's just not going to be used to decide as rape. I'm not call that

don't want to do, but so here is interesting. Things are now we know. We know this and by the way fact check me in this following think, as I will follow the vaccination started closely. My understanding is that the James Ay Vaccinations sort of being pulled back. Temporarily, while they're looking into whether its causing some exotic or rare blood problems, but apparently The state of our data and reporting is so bad that we, I don't know if it's rare, apparently it's hard to tell whose. having what kind reactions now I hate to be a conspiracy theorist theorist. He lied hockey. I love to be a conspiracy there's. If I could be one thing, it would be a conspiracy terraced, so I kind of like it. Here's my conspiracy theory,

We ve got billions of dollars a stake in these vaccinations. I guess the government is paying it, but billions of dollars. and we ve got three competitors right: three, big pharmaceutical competitors to them. Our making this a marinade, newer kind of vaccination It requires two shots. Would you rather have something that's newer and you require two shots or Something has been around so long. We understand the risks a little better in terms of the technology, not the specific shop with technology. And the need one which are those, do you like better, whilst obvious right, if you You can take the one. That's always worked forever. And the only need one right. Here's a Bahrain in fact check the people who are getting the the second shot and having all the symptoms,

The J J without doesnt have those side effects right. Can I get a fact check on it. When I say side effects, I mean the the feeling of the flu and, like you got knocked out and stuff, and people are saying that the other vaccinations had some side effects to. We just don't know if they're significant, alright, so on paper. The J J shot would be better because it's one better one shot and so too because it doesn't have the side effects that might make elucidate work, better Does this not new technology, although I acknowledge the new technology might be way better, but still So you just seven when less visit all right. So what are the odds that the proper J J is having a real. To remain with us do

who is the biggest, I think just be visually, seems like. Who would be the biggest funder of the news will be pharmaceuticals? What, though, the biggest funders in the news, because they by advertising to lose? And so the news has: they can decide. Basically, now it doesn't look like it if you're just consuming the news, it doesn't look like they took beside. It looks like them just reporting the new the new says the change anything has a problem, the new Who is this just a fax, no propaganda? Your right just effects problem has been raised, Jane, Jane, looking Do it a little bit more reporting a little bit more reporting on that hey? Did you notice a little bit more reporting do you see the subtle difference between paid propaganda and the same is happening by the way? I'm just saying, could you tell the difference?

between just reporting the news. And deciding that you wanted to kill one of the shots, because the other two companies spend more on advertising which, by the way, I don't know, if that's the case, I doubt that's exactly the case. But my problem is, I used to live in a world where I could run. This out, I can just said myself. I don't live in a world where some company is gonna, start false room. Where's about another company plant stories. the media just so they can sell more vaccinations I certainly don't live in a world where something like that you I do. I do I'm not making claim, there's there's no no allegation being made here, I'm just saying we live in a world where you see this new say is the coincidence that the unambiguously best shot?

just got ruled out by the media, that a coincidence it could be nothing but the news I have no information there was suggest. This is anything but exactly what's happening. Sides spotted some problems. Science is cautious. Science pull back, science is looking into it That's all we now, but man, we don't live in a world where you can just assume that's what's happening. We do live in a world where billion dollars under on the table? If you can place it's brand new media, what what would you do if you work for a big company and you personally could just get insanely rich? If just just you could get a few friendly reporters to just boost the whole story and maybe see if it is backed up by the other one single have them

either because I've come to all you gotta do is give somebody story. That's completely true, hey reporter, this is totally trail, you can check yourself. We ve seen some those with side effects with our competitors. Vaccination. Do you think this is a story or package it out for you, so you don't even have to do much research people, to talk to hear the data in the source, and here it is a good story. Wouldn't it. Other world works stories are planted, they're not and do not always found Bigger controversy about whether you should wear masks after vaccination doctor, He says that since you could still, get the virus even vaccinate, and that means you can still in theory, spread the virus. Does anybody who has can spread and therefore going to vaccination. Doktor felt she says is no excuse not to wear a mask.

While Doktor James Butter, Korea, who appeared on Fox NEWS, argues us. You said that, because of that argument, Doktor felt she is probably the number one entire vex her in the country boom refrained boom. Here's this argument, ducked doktor, J Butter couriers. It is that, because vouchers telling people they still have to wear, masks he's kind telling them they're, not gonna, get enough benefit from the vaccination. It is also a kind of saying- maybe I'm not saying this, but if you are conspiracy theorist. You are already worry that these vaccinations aren't even real the real. By the way, I wouldn't worry about them, not being real. But it plays into every fear, if you you'll have to wear a mask Don't you say to yourself duck affair:

you, ve been wrong about masks before maybe once or twice. so everything about this is like a caution flag to people who are already clashes. This is a pretty good argument, is also good refrain. So, by refraining from she has the the obstacle, the vaccinations and then showing a perfectly solid arguments, for that would be the case. Well done. Persuasion was now speculate, but why doktor felt she might be saying We need masks, I think other people probably say to seize, not allowed, but why would he say that one of the possible those who would say that what many of you were saying no way I'm not gonna were mask after I get a vaccination.

great great, well, reasoned number, one doktor feta cheese job is not to make. You happy snub this job description. So if he had a choice, if you have a keeping one extra person to live because of his heel type type track of the day. Versus twenty million people are unhappy, and God knows what happens, because that he is gonna pick the thing that he gets measured out and how many people you but alive, so he's not exactly not exactly. He is completely the wrong person to give you advise you get that right. If you're a Democrat, you think he's exactly the right person he's the expert and me if you're, not an epoch, Embryology. Just people get a cab come after you, but you know who I would rather make that decision. Nate silver

Now you get a lot of crap because you said something about the statistics of the pandemic and people say you're not you're, not a epidemiologist you're, not virological. So what are you saying about this? Now he's a guy who knows risk management, it's a risk management question with lots of variables You're fallacies job is not to manage all the variable, so it gives you advise. Why should you do you should ignore? It is the wrong person. Suppose you're having a ass, a brain, tumor. And the gardener from across the street comes over in Sofia, her Jabba brain tumor. Have you considered new stuffing weeds in your ear, He wouldn't really listen to your gardener you gardener my view very wise about the role of tightens the guard.

There is not really. You should give you advice about your brain tumor. And I would argue the doktor felt she is exactly the wrong person to give you advice about wearing unmask, because He sort of not allowed to consider all the variables he's sort of the medical guy, so you just kept be can't look at the whole risk management. Quality of life situations, just the wrong guy. You should know that, which is nothing nothing about him as a person is just not the right job. For this. Here is how you would make this decision when we walk in three so Is the real reason that we want? asks on everybody, because the non vaccinated wisdom They say: oh yeah, there's no passports yet yeah. I had my vaccination. I can go to the bar.

Don't worry, I had my vaccination so. You have to worry because remember felt? She already told us masks, don't work well, they really meant early on in the pandemic was that there are enough of them. We know how she has lied once really big lie about the value of masks. He may say he was Mister So we'll let him have that, but we know he was wrong because he changed his mind or maybe was right, the first time, whatever village miserliness right. He was wrong one of those times and so he might be just telling people to wear masks, because it's the only way you can tell without without passports. The only way you can tell that the that the people were not vaccinated are also where I'm at

We don't really know the risk of transmitting right. As everybody told you, what is it? What is the percentage risk that a vaccinated person could catch the virus? now, we know that it can happen, but then we also know that you have to have a pretty good dose of it to spread it, and we know that the super spreaders are most of the spread. How many super spread. Will there ever be, who had the vaccination. And if they were a super, better means could be a special case with no immune system or something but the other we're gonna be trouble, I'm right! So I don't think you can figure out what makes sense here and you're gonna end up defaulting to a lifestyle decision. Opinion you will never have enough data to know

It is wiser, unwise to wear masks one sure vaccinated, but You have no data. Is certainly not obvious that it would make a difference. Maybe there's a low risk? I think you can bet there must be some risk. I feel as if. A very solidly in the don't wear a mask after your vote next day, the camp, but I don't think, we can now yo YO stop using here a hunter, your ear, you just don't know. Everything we know suggests that masking after vaccination might approach just dumb right, but you have to be careful your common sense. can be misleading. See that around here is a trend this happening. I would say that if you have you no economics and business models, you understand how business models work. they even see the future? You can predict things goes. Economics can be kind to predict predictable in sums.

Here's a trend that is happening? It's it's a really big deal. This following trend, if you're not watching this you're really gonna be blind cited by what what can happen really quickly Alex like this there's a subscription service for author Sub stack, have you heard of it yet this is pretty big deal. It's a real big deal. Actually, it's called subsidy So if your daughter, you can work there and at least at the moment some of those notable authors, people have brought an audience with them, are making up to half a million a year by charging subscription for their regular writing. At the same time, New York Times and was rejected, writers are somewhere in a hundred and twenty thousand per year ring the sub stack writers.

Can write anything they walk there, but there must be some terms. A service that they can exceed they couldn't go I'm not I'm sure, but in terms of your standard, other platform, censorship. Other in terms of somebody telling them from the top like like a c o saying this is what you get to cover, and this is your narrative that have that so subs ACT, because his way more profitable than working for one of these propaganda legacy, platforms is gonna suck off all of well when we say that definitely might. Absorb all the best writers, because why would you work for one fifth away you can earn so sub stack is due to suck all the people away from the ad based businesses surfing advertising based business you're real trouble, you're, not

will the higher talent and without that beer you're dead. Similarly There's a situation where the Youtube, so you too busy add revenue plus you could subscribe. But if you're a creator make you stuff for Youtube, you would make a small fry. Of what the same creator would make a locals. So I put a lot of my content that you don't see here, most of that micro, lessons and success and persuasion and stuff tenderness and wonder I put those on. Opel's because if I only put them on Youtube, be you're just a fraction of the same financial impact and. Now you to a better response because they have a subscription service. If you The consumer of youtube- and you should be it's like the best Leia

right as much as I complain about Youtube for you, this is that as a platform in the Service- oh, my god, it's good! It's like just the best late, the best, but is not so good. If you have to watch the ads. oh for my money, it's one of the few things is just so totally worth the subscription. However, that does not help alter the creators as much. That's that's just good for the people, So I highly recommend Youtube: if you are a consumer for creators, they might be able to do a little better than some other platform locals being beaten. One. I would recommend, because that's where I am By the way, full disclosure- I have a small equity stake locals to see eye to eye. barely we're having a mass shooting just about every day. Now. And even the way more the last year and last year was crazy.

I don't know how much of this is, because the pandemic right, don't know how much of this is because the police baby pulling back it's hard to know exactly was behind but I'll tell you one thing this: definitely behind it and experts. You talk about this all the time. The copycat copycat people, Imagine a world where all the news wasn't covering these mass shootings all the time. All people even think of to do. If you didn't know there was such a thing as a mass shootings lose happen one day and you had some kind of feelings of violence. What would you do. Why you would even think of it is its is pressed into our heads to the point. Where is literally the first thing, you think I've if you have a bad day, Now we, we have to know what's happening, so you can not cover it.

I would certainly make some kind of law this as the only coverages. This tested statistics and none of the coverage is human. So there you just couldn't show any footage of the event. All you can show is the box score. Three people dead, suspected Bow Tuesday. and they leave. You know, what's going on baby, was cities and etc see you wouldn't be in the dark, but you wouldn't be encouraging it the same way. It could be that the shooter you have video games may, having made maybe have an effect on people's psychology as well.

but man we're we're in a situation where the news basically causes these mass shootings. Let me say it again: the news causes the mass shootings now. One of the things that confuses people is the difference between legal responsibility and cause and effect caused by the fact that just physics this cause this was this cause. That's. Legal responsibility can be out this whole separate thing right, so in terms of who is responsible for shooting people is the person with the gun from the legal standpoint. If all Looking at is the law we all agree is the person with it. was the one responsible, but if you like, a chain of cause and effect outside the context of law is the news.

Numerous makes the mass shootings and then the news cover them and the news ex more money, and then they generate another London, so looseness basically supports. Right to see what else would I go on, Rob Everson who writes about human nature- he's a good follow on Twitter, Rob Anderson. So look for him, and he's talking about a new survey that come out. This had conservative women talk about who's the happiest. You know, conservatives, liberals, men and women. And the top line result is conservative. Women are particularly blissful. Forty, Don't say they are very happy that makes them slightly happier than conservative men so bolsters. women and preserve the men fairly happy compared to the average?

and significantly happier than liberal women, so that the preferred, unless but the unhappy us, our liberal men. Only a fifth of liberal men consider themselves very happy. Are you surprised. Now I was trying to think before I got out here today. I was thinking I should prefer. talk about at least what the possible reasons are. I can at least mentioned a few areas, but you know stymied me, there were too many reasons. There are so many reasons why this must be true that I got tired listening. Sawyer Severe, say Loki. You're not wrong. I think there is

we literally no Joe, probably a scientifically valid difference between the testosterone levels of conservative, verses, liberal man And I don't think that's I think that would actually hold up, like literally and we know that your testosterone level and influences your happiness is a direct. So. that might be part of it. Let me speculate on some other possible cause. This is just speculation, so we're just being you would just be Eddie. It's pretending where scientists, okay, so don't take any of this- Seriously, one possibility is that conservatives are more likely to follow traditional gender roles. Yak, said a read aloud about that. Now. You might know that I consider myself left of Bernie on especially the social issues.

and I certainly don't feel like anybody should ever be pressure to do any traditional gender roles. Like I don't want anybody to feel any pressure for traditional generals, if that's not your thing, you, you know you you don't fit into that. I am all for you just do follow. What makes you happy so no suggestion that you should do this just say: there's a good chance that this is one of the keys to happiness. And my take on it is that whatever guess you closest to your biological, Evolutionary truth is what makes you happiest I mean by that is, if you are on the path to work towards finding a mate, creating creating new people and taking care of them. that will always like some kind of a satisfying happy thing. Now, the there's lots of trials and tribulations

she'll, feel like you have meaning, etc, but again now, but he's doing that just might be more of that happening on the conservative side and it might just connect them a little bit more closely with their biological reality perfectly optional, but my work course religion. The US seems to be a difference in religious city, and while I am not religious myself, there is no doubt that it makes people happy. It's a I'm pro religion very pro religion, because I observe that makes people happy. Why would I deny anybody happiness? Here's another possibility, tinder tender, You know the tender is ruining the world for young people right. Oh now, young people fairly, the top one or two percent of good looking men have a great time,

It's all the other ones who were not getting a date. So if some like tinder and let's say online. All these fine people, is allowing pretty much all women to simply pick the the most exceptional men and ignore everybody else,. Should we not have a massive problem with male loneliness and would it not be? Let's say more pronounced in the, shall we say less, muscular part of the world. Would that be fair did? Do you think that people could tell the difference between a if EU trumps supporter and eight may be didn't quite gonna the gym military support? Or do you think of your flipping on tender? You can pick out the ones with the most testosterone

I shit like there might be some kind of a correlation there because, but I do think that I do think if you did a scientific experiment where he just said: here's a bunch of male faces. just tell us which ones have the most testosterone. I think people could do it better than a chance was yes. So if it's true, then again you can factor. those that are often true but observational. It feels like it could be that concern. Men are more likely to have a little the especially young people. lecture testosterone and maybe when you're flippant and Philip and through tender, you can say it, and maybe they get more dates. Maybe again fact beyond that: if there is any way, let me right so by here's my favour one I made this will not just for fun. Imagine you are planning a party here. The party planter.

and there are two, let's say groups- people you hang out with, but you don't want to mix them together, so you get the party you invite one of these groups war. or the other, but you're not gonna have the same party because it will work. And let me describe these two groups. You tell me which one you invite your party one group, believes that America is a toxic wasteland of bigotry, that's it's a race, gender and sexual orientation. So if you invite that group, that's what you get there which will remain nameless thanks America's a great place to pursue happiness, because everyone is equal under the law. Now your PA, it has to have one of those two groups which one do you think would make a better party, so

I feel like the really good and somewhat obvious reasons why Liberal men are the unhappiness ever rebellion and I don't think it's funny laughing other there's something about the situations funny? but when you get to the individual person whose dying of loneliness and doesn't know why? That's not funny, I mean that the thus legitimately a big big problem, so I don't want to minimize the problem, but we do kind of know what the problem is. I think we know what this horses Are you the way board? Are you ready? Ok, I believe that one of the problems, the liberals, have the conservatives have less of it again base different but serve generality. Is that sometimes- and maybe I should like to take this liberal versus conservative- registering a patchwork,

different ways of looking at the world. If there are two ways to look at the success- and this is just a slice of success rate- not now now the frame something for you. Wouldn't you believe you're a common sense and the way your brain is organised doesn't make sense. In order to succeed, does Make sense that you should understand the facts as well as good? How could that not be true? Better command, you have of reality and the facts the more like. Well you'll be successful. How many of you agree with this statement? The better you understand the facts, the more successful we ll be say the covets, if you agree with that, because as a little bit of a problem with that as logical was that sounds. You can't tell what the facts are. Didn't you used to think you? Could you used to think you could tell

tax now in a world that doesn't exist but, like I pathetic a world, are you are, you could actually tell what was true. That would be a pretty good strategy for success. The more you know about was true than the more you can crafts. The re strategy that makes perfect sense, But you don't within that world, you have it, extravagant for world it just doesn't exist. How many more times do you have to see in the last twelve months that the facts change right in front of you? What you what was true yesterday. Just isn't true today. So if you use what's true as your main filter. You're just gonna, run into a wall over and over again, sometimes it'll, work great but it'll, be a lot of walls. Hey you're, irrational set yourself, I don't know why this thing works, but it seems to works just keep doing or what are the actually using to determine you should do the other really have any.

because your life is mostly this stuff. Where you test suffering, you observe what happened. If you walked out, of wonder of your house and every day a baseball hit you in the head, but you couldn't figure Where I was coming from or why it always hit you ned when you walked out one door but not the other, wouldn't you still stopped walk out that door you wouldn't have a randomized gold standard trial that is scientifically valid, based off make decision So I wonder always hurt you and the other door. Doesn't we're gonna, do what works. Without knowing anything about the facts. So if sell you just on the concept first now let me show you some examples, because it tells you see some examples. This is just nonsense. Here are some examples here, somebody True, as far as we know, The bigotry exists in the United States, especially well, that's what we're talking about

Bigotry exists and influences the outcomes of things. and that is unfair. That feels like those effects in the United States, bigotry existed influences outcomes. It is unfair. So this was true, so suppose. you bill a strategy around was true. How would that work out for you. oh, you would be miserable and you would probably be directing your attentions and wrong places, but you'll be working on fact, Space D worked on what works. Instead, let me give you example without be acting as if you can try your own destiny by your actions that true, do you control your own destiny by your actions. Feels like us, only a little bedroom right. Well, Oh yeah somewhat, but what about all these other things? There was a pretty big right I'm not saying is true that you control your future by your actions

What I'm saying is that everybody who believes its true gets a better outcome. You gonna start to see it right, follow What is true throws you completely off the path of success following what You're simply acting like is true, which is a: U control. Your own outcomes will make you act in that way and you're gonna get pretty good results. Let me give you another one. This might be true that you're not the best at a given task. So I say: there's something you gonna be doing this true you're, not one of the good ones at this thing. So if you, if you is your strategy, a basin was true, you're gonna be going it. low confidence and what does that protect while low confidence prediction, low performance. But suppose, instead of dealing with. What's true that you're bad this, whatever this thing

You say to yourself: I'm gonna exceed expectations. You just tell yourself that yeah, I'm totally can exceed expectations. I mean a nail at this time. Is it true? Well, there's no truth or factor it whatsoever something in your head, but it would make you performed better. A little bit of evidence waken me down and you might perform better than you expected so again if used. If you start your strategy based on the facts and was true, you you just run off the trail you just imagine a world is true is very useful. Here's another here's a fact. So Its can't prove God exists, Aureole on hold up. There are lots of different religions so for this example, less egg that, as I and scant prove that somebody else's religion exists, we get the care proves somebody else's.

Gently exists years this fine, so the facts are, the science can prove somebody else's. Religion exists. but is also true that religion mix people happy definitely religion makes people happy, makes them more successful. I think they live longer and healthier. I believe that the Sciences completely cancer, about that, so should you go with what's true, which is, I can't do a science experiment and find me some God, so I don't know if I can deal with them. But what I suppose you just go with what works. Seven generations in your family, Worship- God they all did great. So you do it and it works so great that we give you another one.

The same unions, are good for workers and we should support them, doesn't have done completely reasonable. Now I don't want to get into too much the year. The Oregon enough, These are good or bad, but I was a most people. Most Americans would say: unions have a role and they made the world better especial. For workers so isn't in fact the EU good for workers, and we should support them and if you took that is a fact. You'd have a certain set of policies, but here There's another view Teachers, unions, teachers unions, don't work because their opponents are children The only union. there has as its opponents children you, you can't take the teachers unions a throw them with the argument in which its adults against adults.

The teachers unions zeal we want. Where is it also, the teachers unions, whose opponents are literally children. That's not where you want a union on a union or having the power perforce, let's say that The company on one side and then they their workers, you they get together to equal the force Then you ve got a nice competitive, yo, productive, compare, five situation- everybody gets what they want. That's not the teachers, unions, the teachers, unions or their training, the children as the enemy stuff ere, I know technically the other. I, with their bosses for raises that's not how it works out. So here's my point:

every time you get stuck in what are the facts? You're, probably leaving out some options. That might be better. No two situations are alike. Clearly, there are plenty of cases where you should just follow the facts. Maybe you can recognize them when you see them, but my point is that, following the facts of slave Ashley is a loser strategy, because you don't know the facts and believing you do is what leads you over the cliff. I one more story here. Maybe too. Washington examiner Writer, eddies scary Ursus, guys I see a are white scary, is writing about how the media is treating the Dante Right, tragic, shooting and death.

You all know the story right, that's the one where the police officer mistook a taser for an gun and killed the sky. When. attempt hoping today's room buckle, And so. Columbia, University, professor rap, Sarah Seo. She waited on it. I guess in the New York Times and she's said, that's traffic stops should not, the harrowing or dangerous experiences, but too often they are for people of color. And you she proposed that if somehow we just a camera had picked up his license plate just set of a ticket then he never would have been stopped and there never would have been in the opportunity for anybody to her. Is that a good idea? Well, as Eddie Scarry points out? That's not equally covering the whole context you write? The context is that he

The only reason there was a problem, he had a warrant, an arrest warrant. I think a weapon was involved in the arrest warrant. I gamer what the it was four and he resisted arrest, and then there was a tragic mistake of the confusion of the the taser. So Is it is fair to say that if, if we, could have changed things police wise. We would have gotten a better result. So, as any scary rights, you know the idea that right ended up dead because of expired car tax, which was the original reason for polio over. I guess, and even though he did it wasn't expired, adjust was person replace somebody about an air freshener that nobody believes has anything to do that. But why do you

Take you guys shots. Do you think you got shot because he got stopped or did he get shot because he resisted arrest? Which of those is the truth? Well, you can argue about this all day, long and obviously. I needed everything to happen. The way it did for it to go the way it did. But let me suggest this every time but he says to me: there's no way to the Deuce police funding and still get a good result. I always feel like that's a limit of imagination. I do not believe that it would be impossible to defend the police you in some percentage, not all the police, of course, but I do think you, you get a whole bunch of technical advantages to the lower the economics of it and get rid of danger. Let me give you a specific example suppose you said to Detroit

this picture city, where there's a gun, violence and police, stopping people. You say Detroit we're going to let the big car manufacturers who want to build self driving cars bid for years. And then there just gonna sort of on the roads and they'll be able to put their own self driving cars air. Maybe phasing in overtime, whatever it is and in Detroit will become the test. Bed for OPEC company saves Tesla. but it could be any big car company and an Tesla will own Detroit and eventually franchise, have the franchise that, if you want to call a car like Neuber, it's gonna be a Tesla and that's all there is the gist of the city and the advantages that the cars will be network, so that you know everything. Knows where everything is doesn't bump and everything. So under those situation, how would you,

Haven't traffic stop because the self driving cars will never be pulled over for a traffic violation. So the entire reason for upon somebody over is gone What are the odds? The Sunday will have self driving cars, a hundred percent. There's no chance. That's not gonna happen. What are the odds that someday we'll only have self driving cars. Well, that might take longer, but it's one hundred percent. I don't think there's any chance that we're going to let perfectly safe self driving cars on the road with your crazy, organic. You know defective humans driving, that's crazy. You know, maybe cars will be in recreational areas, Do not use them for basic transportation in the future. There's no chance! That's gonna happen in the future, so that maybe twenty years away, but suppose we just sped up and said: let everybody

Car company adopted city- maybe you start with one block or whatever make that just the self driving a car you area than you expand evidently on the city, What the car manufacturers and, by the way the car manufacturer could be Apple computer could be Google right because a lot of people who can we make and self driving cars you just say you on the city, but you also have to do all the transportation you gotta make an affordable and you just have eliminated traffic stops. How do you arrest somebody's gonna arrest warrant? If you don't stop over the car,

well, I somewhat tongue in cheek said the police could have override button and just make your car drive to the police station, so you can be used safely, get together the car without trouble. I don't think literally walk the car to drive to the police station, but a good good night. I heard some people say that will never have such driving cars everywhere because it could get hacked and then you. What would happen then forget. I would just say that every new technology has the same kind of problem.

Every new technology I used to work in a bake when the very first eighty items were being introduced and the argument against them was nobody's gonna trust these machines with their money and, of course, items everywhere, I'm sure when the aeroplanes were invented. Well, I now think he was well. You never gonna have like an industry of travel by airplane because no way you can make an aeroplane save right or you long mosque. You never could have rocket the shoots up. Loads is payroll. Payload apparel sort of animals is to. Gun noises payload and then comes back down somehow stays upright until it lands on a platform in the ocean. That's not gonna were but does.

yeah self driving cars or are guaranteed. You just was just how long it will take in flying cars are guaranteed to, but not all batteries are cost effective and their almost their flying. Cars are pretty much here just a little bit more in battery efficiency, which is guaranteed and you have. Flying cars that the laws will be hard for. Nothing is under present. You say: well, ok, that's true back that up to ninety percent. You know self driving cars going to change everything. Imagine if you can just go on vacation anywhere, you want in the United States or you wherever you are. You just tell the card it goes on like you. I have this rule that if I'm driving a car I'm not on vacation,

Fortunately, if you happen to be the the oldest adult male with whatever group your travelling with, You're usually get to be the one drive a car and any I'm driving a car, I'm not on vacation, I'm just workin, let's just a job. That's where I draw the line. If I have to drive a car, that's work, that's not a vacation. I thus offer me I'll talk to you tomorrow.