« Real Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 242 Scott Adams: Fentanyl, Flake, Canada and Other Stuff

2018-10-01 | 🔗

Topics: 

  • Fentanyl, mainly from China, and 49,000 OD deaths last year
  • Public companies in California can no longer have all male boards
  • Rosie O’Donnell accused of anti-gay slur
  • Gillum staffer’s shirt advocating assassination of President Trump
  • President Trump’s Trade deal strategy is working
  • Negotiating hard with your friends…doesn’t break anything
  • Kavanaugh’s “temperament”…is that a sexist accusation?
  • Incentive’s to leave home aren’t as strong as they used to be

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 242 Scott Adams: Fentanyl, Flake, Canada and Other Stuff appeared first on Dilbert Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Hello James, hello, done Ogress, Tyler and flee in here. I hope all of you are having a good day my days now so good I'll tell you about a minute. So let's talk about sentinel, but before we do. Please join me for the simultaneous grab your copy, mugger beverage, bring it to your lips.
So you ve heard a sentinel you'd, say painkiller powerful painkiller. But this is a very small margin between killing your pain and killing the person as Old friend at all is the number one drug overdose killer in the United States. I think seventy two thousand people died of drug overdoses last year in the United States. Seventy two thousand people. Seventy two thousand people died of a drug overdose in the United States last year, sentinel number one cause by far sentinels the top cause. I believe it was the cause of princes death. I believe it was the cause of Michael Jackson, stuff.
And the interesting thing is that China is apparently the main source of the illegal flow? Now that's what the United States as China says, not so much, but you sort of expect that now, when the president tweeted back in August, that China was the major source of sentinel and he called on China to do more. Actually, I think referred to. It is almost a form of warfare or, or some people have now Other country was shipping. Something too. there was killing, was safe. Thirty thousand dollars, thirty thousand people a year. Doesn't that looks like a war, because believe Vietnam only took fifty thousand american lives or latin. Many more were injured, but I think they are.
Higher Vietnam WAR killed. Fifty thousand Americans sentinel from China from China probably kill five times, have any airy bowling son. You say I wasn't. Where the tests were killed Eric Bowling son so yesterday morning, my periscope. I think many of you saw me and at the end of the periscope and after that I got a text message and the text message said it. Was a nine one. One call
another limits on my verizon. Yesterday, I got a call and after the nine, when one word for my ex wife who told me that my steps on. The little boy that I raised from each of two- was dead. He died last night were maybe
We mourn yesterday were not sure in his bed from what appears to be a fence, an old overdose. The coroner's found offence in all patch on his arm. If you don't know what offence in all patches, I didn't either the little patch spent this big for a small but says the postage stamp and is very popular now among attics little patch they put on the shoulder. If he's a continuous flow of sentinel. Now that may not have been the actual thing they killed him it could be that he was also trying to guess annex. So we we have, some information is trying to score sums Annex now, if you dont know this topic, you're lucky.
Buzz annex is mostly counterfeit. Others. Annex of the kids are doing the attic. So doing does not really, its combinations of other drugs. That people are passing off. His annex and close to one hundred percent of them are fake. One of them, prime ingredients that are in this figs Annex are sentinel soldiers fairly good likelihood that my steps on Justin now deceased probably got two doses of friendly yesterday. Now we weren't surprised, Because it had been a long battle with addiction, since he was fourteen, he had a very bad editing tree. What use fourteen from bicycle Jackson and he was wearing helmet, but who stole ban accident
And whose behaviour changed after the acid he lost, he's already lost his ability to make good decisions, I'm ever big great decisions, but he lost his impulse control it lost. Is he lost his fear. And in California, if you reach a certain size physically the teenagers a certain size. If you tell them to do something they dont do it. You have certain recourse, but California, you don't have much. So you can't physically restrained somebody, and you also kick
keep them from getting drugs, so somebody would really have to want to get better and he never wanted to get better from the time he started doing drugs. You wanted to do more drugs and that's all he wanted. He is quality of life. He didn't think was good enough for a variety of reasons. It didn't have anything to do with lifestyle, so I got to watch my dead blue bloated son taken out the stretcher. in front of his mother and biological Father and because the long California, there is actually nothing that we could do.
now another states. I understand that you can actually commit somebody you can. You can have an essentially locked up in some got her or rehab facility and if they drive walk out. I just couldn't, but in California, if again wants to walk out the door, they just KEN and he would ended You re a few? Well, so If I don't see myself for a while know why so Sentinel, mostly from China, understand, probably killed my son yesterday. My stepson, So as we negotiating with China- and I hope we can- we can do something about that problem.
I understand China's doing a little bit in terms of controlling some of the instrumentation used to make these drugs etc. But here's my opinion. at this level of problem. If we, the United States now which chinese executives are behind this- and I would ask that we do Now we probably know which specific pharmaceutical companies are making the drug because are made by a bit their made by actual legitimate incorporated type companies in China, but they of course know that there's big league engine, I'm sure of that good for their profits, but if we know who those chinese executives are, I would like to call for their execution. now in China. If you mess up, you know you're, a chinese executive of a company in you. Let's say you
do something where you steal some money here. You cross the government in some way, they'll actually just take it out and kill each other I'm not even sure they have due process in in the usual way, so I'd like to offer to China to President she who I do respect, that's her to give him first first chance to take here the problem himself. If he don't, I think we can hold China responsible for perhaps thirty thousand deaths per year in this country, so in a very real way. We are at war with China serve an indirect way, not with a government per se. But I would be in favour of our,
see I or are dark intelligence people going after those executives directly, even at the at the price of substantial international problems. So I'm calling for the the death of the executives of those chinese companies who were believe are not doing enough. who have all the details. If it turns out that they are doing enough or or governments probably can tell the difference, they can probably tell the difference between trying and not trying, but if they're not trying, I think presidencies should for the benefit of international relations for the better.
Of being a being aim, legitimate, international power, I think presidency needs to start executing people in his own country. If he does, I think it would be a great step, and if he doesn't, I would be in favour of our country directly executing chinese citizens now, ideally, we don't want to get caught own, but I'm pretty sure we know how to kill people without getting caught. So those folks who may be directly or indirectly responsible for the death of my stepson, I'd like to see you die in I'll, see what I can do to make that happen.
So I'm just a little bit more or less, never talk about some other headlines, because life does go on the The other observation is that I think Jordan Petersen says this He talks about the complexity of life and how, as as if it's getting harder to navigate is just more complicated, Peter Certain people in society are being left behind their being left behind, and my step son was one he was not well equipped to deal with. The modern world, but if you ever saw him with drugs in him, you knew that once he had the drugs in the drugs were his personality. He didn't really have an independent personality and then he took drugs the drug
were him yummy, he sorted became the drugs and he would be almost a monster. He was. He was eighteen, I am so if you don't have any personal experience with copyright addiction doesn't look like anything else. You ve ever seen. It turns people into walking zombies who acquire we are not in their own mind and are not in control of their actions. Somebody says is murder its murder to kill chinese executives of pharmaceutical companies just because they're killing thirty thousand fucking people in this country year. Thirty thousand thirty thousand roughly.
Yeah, maybe more than that might be less than that. But do I want to kill somebody who might be responsible for a thirty thousand american deaths a year? Did I do? Yes? I do legally legally or illegally. I do want them dead and so, I want the government now you have my support. If you kill them and you get caught, you have my support for what s worth, which is much. I have said enough about the topic in change topics. California, just passed some kind of law that requires that public companies that are housed in California, their home base can no longer have all male boards.
care? Have all male boards in California fewer public company in Europe I headquarters in California, and I had to reactions that reaction. Number one would be good to have more. Gender diversely sounds like a good eye. Reaction number to qualify. He is really there, I guess the Vanguard of the Democrat Party, wouldn't you say if you said name one one state that you think Democrat it would be California, California. So the Democrats have this branding Evelyn, she's going on in which they try. Leave for all people, but the practical reality is that their very female focused so that the democratic,
Party Democrats are basically a party of women who also include other people. And you see a law passed in California,. The says we're gonna make sure by law that you diverse, oh your boards by gender, which again I think gender diversification is a very good thing. Let's have some more of that, but my question is this: what do black men think when they hear this? If you're a black male Democrats were hispanic male democrat what do you think of the fact that the law just required?
women to be on board, but not you not there's no requirement for ethnic diversity. Why not now might be just a practical problem. It could be just you just be too to do there are too many ethnicity is. How can we possibly do it? Let's start somewhere, Maybe we want to get that, but he's gotta start somewhere that this would all be good reasons for at least rationalizations for four. Why The focus is on women, but I'm not really talking about that. My my larger, what about that is. How can Democrats. Possibly when another up a national election when their priorities are so clearly woman focused ends, it appears.
they completely ignoring a huge part of their base, which is black Americans, Hispanic, Americans, etc. So I see That is a real problem. Then, at the same time, Rose you Donal prominent Democratic, prominent into proper. Heard mention gay slurs about Graham Lindsey Ground, so rose you dial, Addison Dewitt said some entitled antigay slur Rose you dont know, as a member of the opium poppy Q community. So it's not the same if it comes from her right, so you can say that, Somebody is that in the community makes a slower about somebody in the community is sounds the same as if somebody outside the community makes us. So I want me that case, but it did make me think that
I'm having trouble remembering the last time I saw a conservative make it antigay slur. and maybe you could be just my filters offs I'll make. This is more of a question than than a statement, Doesn't it seem to you, that conservatives and Republicans and tromp supporters don't make antigay slurs. Now I don't mean that is an absolute some. I'm talking about public discourse, I'm not talking about what a basis in private. Obviously, people are anti everything in private
but it made me think when, when Rosier Donna was accused of making an antigay slur, which again I don't think it's a big deal, because she's she's bar the algae Bt Q in in crowd, so that's not the same kind of insulting would be if it came from the outside, but it made me think conservatives dont really give a rat's ass about the entire engender preference thing. I don't think I've ever met a conservative whose They antigay things in the past three four years somewhere that It feels like, as of issue, just disappeared, so you wouldn't we're. Looking at all the bad news, consider the Good NEWS.
I understand that the given so candidate gingham, who is running for what's with you ready for running for running forward. Of Florida right, one of his staffers, got fired for wearing a shirt about the assassination of president. From now. Of course, it makes sense that you're going to fire your staffer for wearing assured the advocates assassination of the present so, now this is no criticism of given for having staffer. That thinks, like a lot of other people and no criticism that a fire, this never forgotten over the line. The part of the story that is just jawdropping is that the staffer war that were there should, in the first place
imagine imagine being so deeply in your bubble that you think you can put a shirt on advocating the assassination of the President of the United States. It in public in the people was a yeah that guy, so. It tells you how deeply deluded people aren't you. People are deluding on both sides is not is not limited to one side. But when you see it like that in such stark relief, it astonishing I saw you headline says that Steve Baron was specula. hearing about who might run against a trumpet and twenty twenty and I didn't read all headline because the the summary the summary gave away the story, but they
Some areas that still Van and is predicting that often body might be the one the Democrats run against Trump now I found that amusing. Here's why I don't think, there's a smallest chance. The baron things have not he's gonna run against Trump. I don't think he actually thinks there's any chance ask eleven, but the fact that banning put that out there just he sort o pushed over ninety four as the the banner the standard bearer for the Democrats is kind of hilarious views on Delmore Skype, hilarious because, to the extent two degree the people believed him. Believed that they were serious it would, it would raise ever not profile,
and there's nothing? There is less likely for the Democrats than to have another white male be their standard bearer. There isn't there isn't the slightest chance that everybody can ever be the candidate for the Democrats least none twenty twenty? Who knows what happens in twenty years I was just all areas and smart and I gotta say there was there was like one of the most clever moves to put off a knotty out there as the as a standard bearer for the other two we'll start by Canada. You some big news. Canada has agreed to a deal. So now we have you're with Mexico on trade. We have a deal with him than trade, I believe I told you earlier on that the order of things is that we would do
you know what you ve done: Mexico in Canada you showed you have demonstrated. it is no longer a one off because a stout now they ve done it twice, and I think they have also done South Korea. So correct me. If I'm wrong, I think Japan is close. Have we completed somebody fact checking on here as the Trumpet administration completed three or four. Or trade deals, some thinking, Mexico, Canada, South Korea, and then Japan Other nor Japan is that's done, we're still working, but what I predicted was there. Tromp would start living up these deals. You do the easy ones. First, China. Of course it's gonna be that the big one we would expect that one to be last, but he will he will continue proving.
Through example. Then new deals can be made. So the fact that Mexico, Canada in South Korea, have all made deals and The United States is characterizing them as better deals than before, and here's the weird part that believe the Other countries are also characterizing. Them is better deals because they have to even if it's not a better deal for Mexico, even if it's not a better deal for Canada, even if it's not a better deal for South Korea, one of those governments gonna tell their own people. They're gonna tell their own people. I did a good job for you. My own. people, I made a new deal with the United States and its better for us, even if it isn't so the way this has to go is that every country is going to see that the countries that worked with us and came to,
Better deal are telling the world that working with us in coming to a better deal is better, for them is not just better for the United States is better for them. Is it true, too complicated? it would be impossible for us to now, and even We read news. We wouldn't believe it is just too complicated to now. Many of these deals are good for any of the countries involved there all sort of a wait and see, but on the persuasion level, both sides are going to claim victory because s what politicians do now, if you, if you ve cracked up you a dozen trade deals in which, every time we do it both sides, the united states and whoever we're dealing with. Does a public statement says man, I'm sure glad we did. new deal with the United States because it's better, it's better for our people to its different. But it's better. What's that due to the politics
in China, no China doesn't have to watch is politics in exactly the same way that a republic does or democracy does, but they still have to care, because if there, if their democracy, I'm sorry if their economy suffers and that the people start, believing that all you have to do is what these other countries just make a deal because nobody in China is really is gonna. Understand the complexity of the chinese trade deals, All I know is welcome in Mexico made a deal that they say it's better Canada, baby, Viewless, EU, maybe the old Sunday. They say it's better. The great Britain they say it's better. What is wrong with arch our leadership when everybody else can make it. with the United States and proclaim it was an improvement. Why can't China do that now
worse. None of this is real because we Don't know what an improvement looks like we really don't. We can hope it's better. We can improve it in the margins. We really don't know how any of this plays out, but politically China is. It is in this sort of vice right now, that's how that the Trump Administration has a vice vases closing and unless I'm missing something major, I dont see anything that would make it easier for China going forward I see a lot of stuff, that's gonna make it harder. I mean I I see nothing but more pressure on China until until we have a deal, So I would say that trumps strategy, which everybody called crazy, is certainly starting. The pan out
now here's the here's, the criticism that I just saw on Twitter and our readers tweet so, here a criticism on twitter from random user J Jav, the Rand. it says surreal watching Trump COLT followers. That's all of you here. The Trump cult followers most of you anyway, trash Canada while swooning over Trump Kim love affair. So here's a criticism. This is this is one of the best criticisms I've seen so keep in mind. This is one of the best they don't have anything better than us. That's the point: it's their best criticism and read it again that the Trump cult of followers cult see Welty are trashing care,
our friend, while swooning over the Trump and Kim and North Korea is a sort of a friend of me. Now I tweeted back as you might imagine. I would I tweeted back and said to J J D, which approach which, broach, gets you better trade deals in a d nuclear rise, Corinthians Peninsula being too nice to Canada and to mean to Kim Goddess the opposite. Figure out this puzzle and will let you in the cult after the hazy, obviously so here's the thing Lead tromp understands that for some reason their people didn't understand, and I think this has to be attributed to the difference.
Tuna government, mentality and diplomats mentality, so tromp was hired in large part because he would bring a new negotiating business persons perspective to the job as opposed Diplomatic politically correct perspective that was very clearly laid out. That was his proposition. I will not be politically correct I will not be the friendly diplomats. You're used to I'm gonna. Kick some ass. I'm gonna get some deals, but wait, I'm not a bad guy, because until on pursuing a system which is better, for everybody, I'm not I'm not looking for a goal, which is to be happy here to have you d, better trade deals per se, I'm looking for a system a system is that we compete as hard as we can.
Friendly competition, and we say what we're doing we say we're trying to get the best deal. We can you, Canada. We expect you to, She like wounded animals. We expected into the hardest negotiating. You can get the best deal. You can and screw us as hard as you can. That's always. Back to view and we're gonna be doing the same and this system where we both fight as hard as we can honestly and above board, get you to a better place. Capitalism. Compare that to what this too, Peter believed, which is that it was more important to say to stay friendly with our friends, Canada. Then it was to have a better trade deal, the both Canada and the United States thinks is better, or at least they say they think it's better one tromp new,
is that negotiating hard with your friends with your friends doesn't break anything if you're honest and you laid out in your above board and you're, not you're, not a jerk. about it and you negotiate hard with your friends. Your five. What do you do with your enemies? The ones who have nuke pointed at you. do you do what diplomats in the past, on which a say, oh yeah, I daresay it S. Shoes they look at us, we get nukes we're gonna nuke. You do, of course, trumped up a little bit of that too. to frame things and make sure you're a credible threat, but as soon as the credible threat was established, he quickly moved to these smarter reproach. Which is why the heck would we be enemies with a country that has nuclear weapons who wants to be an enemy
Somebody was nuclear weapons and by the way we don't anything on North Korea. We just want to stop Their nuclear weapons as that's it so Trump friends of our enemies. Negotiated hard with our friends. That's what businessperson does? What does a diplomat? Do the opposite? A diplomat. Does the opposite: what do the opposite? Dennis bad trade deals and nuclear confrontation so unfairly certain at this point, I feel confident sameness, president round, if you stop today, your little at sea
gets another conservative on the court. Weathers calving are someone else if, after that, after the second springboard nomination, if he left office today, if you just so, you know I'll engulfing, just Google, I believe in Gulf here, probably would be the most important president in the last hundred years, if only because he brought a systems approach and a sort of a business perspective to the job, and once you ve seen it, you can't unseen it. In other words, every president who follows this, president is gonna have to answer To this, every president, who doesn't negotiate hard with an ally country, is going to have some explaining to do because trumpeter showed it works. Every country that keeps
being less a belligerent somebody who has nukes Russia, China, North Korea, they ve got some expire, to do because now we saw a truck knew it the other way, and it looks like there is also better so tromp did more than I am more than whatever you're watching in terms of the economy. The those things are good you know you did more than the things he's doing with international relationships is much more than that he brought a way of thinking and approach. A different system me, a business persons friendly competition frame to it once you ve seen it. You can never unseen it and it's never been there before we ve never seen before. Now we ve seen it its permanent. Let me give you an example: of Nixon went to China. Those of you know your history. No, that Nixon was
most bad ass anticommunist president. He was. Super hard on China, but when he had an opening to go visit and maybe get things moving in the right direction, he was the perfect person to do it. Because he was so empty China that it was credible when he said: hey, something's changed and now we can now. Maybe I better relations. So what as soon as Nixon did that you can't on it, Everybody now understands that, being the Nixon hard ass before you decide to to get friendly is a model that works, because now we ve seen it can't unseen it. What did tromp do with North Korea, he did the he did the Richard Nixon play. Why did he use usually written x and play with North Korea? We're gonna we're gonna, be there Tajikistan, you than anybody ever been. Unless you
be friends will thus be friends, Why did you know that would work? Well, one reason is Nixon. Did it because he already sought once you see it, it's part of that part of the toolbox. So tromp as having tools to the tool box in the same way, Nixon added a tool to the toolbox? So even if Nixon Window for of flames in terms of his reputation and other things is bad for the economy through their losses. Add things about Nixon, obviously, but that one tool they he introduced into the system is permanent and in Trump, is doing the same with a set of tools. let's talk about just like all of you know the Jeff Lake, He has the most ironic, perfect name in the simulation like you is going to vote for a cabinet?
but at the last minute he cited with Chris cool. His friend and Democrat and sided with other Democrat. to ask for one week investigation now he was asked, I believe, on sixty minutes. If he could have done this, had he not been retiring and flakes said away you said all the incentives or against it. If you want to keep your job, you actually can't do what you think is right. He said that directly. Clearly and unambiguously said now. I would not have done this except that leaving the job. Think about that. The only person who made a difference was the guy was leaving. This this whole battle over the not than nation. In the end, down to the one person who was leaving because now personally,
the only honest broker. Don't say why you all about lake and now he's got his haters, but here was the only honest player in this whole saga and he said directly that even he wouldn't have been honest, except that he's already equip. Nothing to lose the only honest person what the hell does that tell you about her system. There was one honest person, but here's the Good NEWS. There were several hundred liars who it turns out didn't, have any power because they couldn't get their way there was only one person who mattered just one person, one person who didn't get mission, so thank you. Jeff Lake. I am in favour of the one week delay because I think that its reasonable now
A lot of people say, I know, is reasonable sounding, but there the delay the delay in its really just a trick. Just like, given, jungle is playing the president. Do you know you're? U suckers, don't you see this place? It's just a trick. L! Yes, it is and it is a delay, but they also paynton themselves in a corner by saying that a week is only need. You have there been saying from those start. You just need a week. I Newsweek, so the president gave him a week. What did they say? They say of course. Of course they say they say we might not belong. so they need some out to be able to say that the press narrowed They say he narrow another say he's narrowing the investigation to which I say don't you have a marrow that investigation
the day that you say it's all gonna take a week even narrow the investigation, because Everybody knows you can't do anything and weak except talk the same people. You talk to ask a few extra questions, so the Democrats, by pushing forward this completely ridiculous standard. There's something could be deeply investigated and weak because they did it once before, with Anita Hill Trump just accepted their standard said all right I'll take you weak nothing's happened. Well, let me say: that's not it
Evidence prediction because something could happen there, so they're always was surprises, but I think that even if a new allegation came up new thing that people would discount it as being too nakedly political, so I think the present has a pretty good chance of just getting through the weaken in getting his nomination done will see. I'm sorry but now and now, of course, the goalposts and moved to the question of whether Cavenaugh allied in his testimony on the little stuff because if you lie than the little stuff under oath lying under oath is disqualified, but here's the thing. Lying under oath about things that would simply embarrass other people for no good reason and are not central to the main point of the main points of the proceedings.
Doesn't look disqualifying to me. And I would say this if if the parties were reversed and and. judge was thirty. Five years of exemplary in incredible judge, Fair lived yet lived a life that people would wanna model all that was true and the only thing you had to say about em in light of some trivial stuff, like must say the meaning of the yearbook statements or how much he drank If those are the only things he lied about- or maybe some trivial stuff like that, Then they wouldn't matter. One party was the wooden matter. What the what the situation was. I'd say this just as matter
indeed, it is true that a few lie under oath about immaterial parts. You don't really get the same chain treatment as if you lie about material things, so I would say that the things that he is accused of lying about clearly are immaterial. Somebody was prompted me to say something about. Oh, oh temperament, so the word temperament is being used law that was used against President Trump saying he had a bad temperament and that's being using its Cavenaugh because he got you get got pretty worked up yet we worked up about the during his question and the question I ask is this: who The society has largely agreed, even if you don't agree, but society is sort of the consent
This is at the word hysterical. When applied to any woman is sexes, and I would agree with that. That feels like a fair statement. If we also accept that some people don't know it gets, consider sexist, so they're, probably lotta people use the word hysterical that are not thinking of unnecessary in the sexes way, but they need to catch up, right people. It is one of those words that was based on hysterectomy. Now it's has to do with women So historically, it's it's a insulting term for women, and I would agree that that's true, But what I am asking is this When do we ever see women accused of a bad temperament of resuming it feels like temperament, is the word that people use against men because you say
Well he's gonna bad temperament and he is big. Is a mail so is all but dangerous, be afraid that temperaments so I would suggest that, while his hysteria, hysterical is insulting sexist word and you probably should use it if any woman is a subject that were, but I would suggest the same thing about the word temperament for men. If here, if you saying that Trump as a bad temper Meant cabinet has a bad temperament. Do we ever see that apply to a woman, and I care murmuring time seeing their word applied to own now, maybe worse, words that you may use the bee word and other worse words that were sexist in their own way bless YO. Let's, let's have a fair standard.
Goodbye control- let's have a fair standard about use words of summer sexist, maybe others are to. Let's keep that in mind. I hears here's my most controversial, but least important point. The day I tweeted round a little graph, they showed that the percentage of young people who are still living at home, spiked around to set two thousand seven, two thousand eight. Now, of course, the the cause of the initial spike is the economy, imploded. And so it was harder, especially at the lower end of the jobs market. To get jobs so makes perfect sense that the number of people staying home skyrocketed in two thousand eight but it also, coincidentally, two thousand seven is when the Iphone came out. So the-
increase of people living on the start of a man as both the Iphone and the bad economy, and I think the bad economy was, of course, of course, the main reason for the spike. So nobody is questioning the main but even as the economy improved in all Obama lovers will tell you that in the last four years of the Obama administration, things going better still, that doesn't mean that people at the lower end doesn't mean people at the lower end are getting jobs. They may still not beginning jobs that are good enough to move at the manor house. So get it, and I understand that the economy is the major variable causing the initial gigantic shift, but here's my hypothesis and when I made the tweet
I had hoped that people would see it as a provocative question and not some sign that I had made a conclusion about the one and only variable being iphones but of course, people over interpreted it than the the trolls came after me salami. Let me clarify: Here's, my hypothesis and all you just uses anecdote. I realize anecdotes, don't extend the world, but just to just to paint the picture here. So when I moved to california- and I had a no honey. I rented a one room where no window like literally a windowless room and about From that I shared with for other people, I think or something down the hall and that's all I could afford.
Because moving out of the house wasn't optional, I was definitely go over there at the house and I work very hard because I didn't like being in a windowless room and so my life improved through hard work and do you know I took classes, and I I took training courses that I did everything that I could do to to be able to afford slightly better places until Given the very place very nice place now- and I was- I was asking myself what what it was that caused me to work through that tough situation, better situation and part of it is the pain, there's a degree of pain that being poor. inflicts on you, because you have no source of entertainment. You don't have any connection, you can't date, you know, if you don't have money, and you also don't have a smartphone-
Here you know, have a social life. If you don't have a car, smartphone or money. You know your young, you don't have anything its painful and your work as hard as you can, and you put up with lot to get out of this situation and into a better one. Now compare that two Messiah twentysomething who, because of the job prospects, has left the house yet and they ve got their smartphone, smartphone is importing to them. A form of. or social life, it's insanely stimulating it it it's designed to stimulate the same things as drugs and their getting just a continuous, flow of Bamborough, bear this feels good. While they're sitting home there We even have to shop. Mom is making dinner, so they go from there. the other nice room in their house pro, we with our own bathroom play with their
on all day more makes dinner. You can use We use mom scar word as car or you can get around youth Neuber. You can data huntin, tinder, you don't need any money as a tender day. Seeing what couple drinks, Sir, Suddenly, the the the motivation were seeking pleasure and avoiding pain when from we are when I was a kid to really extreme motivation to a kid today is going to have to leave a worse situation to get to a better one right. Let one is a mistake: I said that exactly opposite a kid today, with a smartphone living, a home has a pretty good quality of life and if we know anything about human behavior, it's that friction causes people to do less of something,
and and rewards clasp cause people to do more of something now: every person exactly at the same time and in the same way, but it's true in general. So my hypothesis is this that even as the economy improves and even if the economy approves for the lower end, the people who couldn't be the house that there will never get back to the level we were because in the age of the smartphone motivation is just sucked down the because there are already getting so much reward without working, so they should the other incentives should be to milk it as much as possible. So, of course, that will be different from ever every person in every situation, but as a general average, the incentive to leave home is far less than ever was that we should make a difference.
I believe that's all I want to talk about today. If you didn't see the Kanye now named it ye that little clip of him talking at the end of Saturday night live you should. I don't have much to say about that day off, but I will. I will go now because I'm looking at my incoming messages- and I need to make some funeral plans for my step, son- and I will talk to you all tomorrow-.
Transcript generated on 2020-10-21.