« Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 244 Scott Adams: Kavanaugh, Taxes, Chinese Fentanyl, the Anti-Male Party

2018-10-03 | 🔗


  • Chinese Fentanyl, what’re America’s options?
  • NYT article: Trump’s parents legally reduced their tax burden!
    • Helped his Dad cheat on his taxes…at the age of two?
  • Shocking news stories, that aren’t
  • Lying in the business world is required for the success of capitalism
    • Can you meet my deadline?
    • Total cost of proposed project?
    • Your product versus the quality of the competitor’s product
  • Political lies versus business lies
  • Democrats evil but extremely clever “recusal play” against Kavanaugh
  • The women-centric political party versus the party of protectors and prosperity

The post Episode 244 Scott Adams: Kavanaugh, Taxes, Chinese Fentanyl, the Anti-Male Party appeared first on Dilbert Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Apparent bump bump bump on pp, pom, pom, pom, pom, pom Obama. Phone come on in there come on in here turns out. There's lots of talk about today. Hey how about that and you're in time, for yes, the simultaneous sip it hasn't been a good week, but maybe things will get better and if you have your mug, your glass, your vessel, your chalice filled with your favorite beverage. You've got time come on over here and join me for the simultaneous up it happens. Now. Ah, let's talk about chinese fentanyl
As you know, my step son died from what we presume to be a fentanyl, a fentanyl overdose. seems that a lot or even most fentanyl comes from China from a chinese pharmaceutical labs which apparently the The government has investigated an knows who those labs were now the problem, is you say to yourself wait a minute, if we know who the fentanyl labs are and they're sending all these drugs from China who the great? When I talk about China, I'm just going to call them. Fentanyl China, just two words now so Fentanyl China, which is the primary effect that they have in the United States, is tens of thousands of Americans every year these labs will send us stuff when we and then there's law enforcement closes them down in China
But at least one person on Twitter says the problem is that the chinese government will seize the equipment and then sell it to the lab and then the other lab, opens up and start selling fentanyl. so I don't know if that a universal problem or something that happened a few times or one time, I'm not sure how pervasive that is but I had suggested online that the owners of the labs be the first thing that comes up in a google search. if you do a search on shady more fentanyl or China, you should see the names of the fentanyl labs. Ceo, is the owners. I would like.
See them publicly shamed for being the mass murderers that they are now. If that doesn't work, if we can't get Google to include that at the top of the the rankings- and I imagine that would be a problem since they do what China tells him to do- here's another here's another suggestion. If it's true that we can determine even as an estimate, the chinese but these are sending x amount of fentanyl and that fentanyl has Street value of x, hundreds of millions of dollars and if we can sometimes determine the percentage of people being killed in America, however, many 10s of thousands 10s of thousands per year are being killed by Fentanyl China. Then I would say we should include that in our. just throw that out? There was a suggestion. Perhaps if China causes S7
billion dollars worth of drug problems? We should just add that to their turf, just just toss that on once a year will take in inventory those things which we have investigated and found to chinese fentanyl, if they send us a billion dollars of fentanyl, we not a billion dollars to their bill. We just added to that era. and we don't even will show in the evidence but just added to the tariff. If we determine that ten or twenty or thirty thousand Americans in a year were killed by chinese fentanyl. Even if we don't know exactly which dose came from where if we can estimate it and say that, let's say ten or twenty thousand Americans were killed by terminal. Let's, let's put a value on a human life. Let's say it's human life was worth. I don't know. Hundred million dollars.
and then just multiply one hundred million dollars times twenty thousand, it's pretty big number and they just added to the bill. so. I think we should at least raise this possibility in the negotiations. We should say if you can't stop the sentinel, we'll just bill you for it in will also try to kill those owners of those labs. Now it might be that we don't need to kill any lab owners in China? I'm talking about extra legal hunting down given a shot of their own fentanyl sort of situation, but we might not have to do that 'cause. It could be that the chinese Gov closes down the lab and even executes the owners as soon as we tell them about them, it might be that the chinese government does,
I want these labs anymore than we do. It's just sort of a whack, a mole situation as possible, but I think we should build. We should see the faces of the owners and we should try to kill him if the chinese government isn't, we should definitely do it on their soil, that's my suggestion. Now you say to yourself my God, my god, you can't disrespect the sovereignty of China and kill chinese citizens on chinese soil, to which I say, China is killing twenty thirty thousand people a year with their fentanyl. Can we kill a few lab owners on their soil we weekend. Yes, we can and if somebody says hey, there are a lot of suspicious deaths of these lab orders
like they're all dying of fentanyl overdoses, because if you can catch one of these lab owners, Well, you know what will kill him fentanyl just give him a couple of shots of fentanyl and walk away. That should do it so that's enough on fentanyl, let's talk about the headlines, there's, a big New York Times story. Forty I don't know whole bunch of pages fifteen thousand words in which they have dug through ancient. tax returns and they have determined- and I know this is going to be hard to believe from any of you. the New York Times as determined that the Trump business going back to his friend the Father?
The Trump organization has aggressively, and I I don't know how to tell you this they've aggressively tried to reduce their tax burden. It's true, I knew this day was coming when the anti trappers would finally find something so terrible that they could take down the president. Yes, ladies and gentleman, it's true the trump or Visitation has tried aggressive tactics to reduce their tax burden. Now you might say to yourself wait a minute, isn't that one hundred percent of every company that can afford an accountant- and I say yes- yes, it is but- The names are not trump. Now we're all of the things that they did legal by today's standards. Well, here's the first problem,
Are we and I don't know the answer, this question so just make it a question. Are we judging what happened back then decades ago by the standards of today? I hope not But there might be things that you couldn't do today that were more. Or standard practice back then. Second thing, I wonder, your summer tax advice. I once heard I'm somebody who understood taxes, a friend of mine once had an ambiguous situation. There were two ways to calculate: instead which is an under the rules of the IRS, is seemed as if Both of them were accurate. Another words they were both supported by IRS rules, one of them. He calculated would cost him a lot more money turn the other way he calculated it, and so he asked his friend who knew about taxes. He said if there are two ways to calculate it and they both seem supportable by the.
press rules which way should I use, and the expert said, use the one that, where you pay the least axis is that you don't need Decide, which of those ambiguous rules is the slightly better one. just have to have a reason and I've got to say: ok well, use the one that cost me the least amount of money. Now is it prove that if the IRS had into some of these tax avoidance techniques that the Trump family use is it. Is it possible that they would have said yeah. This is check, Klay true, but not well. We had in mind probably pro I probably the IRS. If they really dug into it, they could find find some things that were check Basically, it looks like they follow the rules, but this is not the way we imagine. These rules should work. That's the most common,
situation in the world. Every time is any kind of a tax change. All the big corporations like wait a minute. If I open a company in and Ireland and have fun with through there is a photo of my headquarters in Estonia and I've got a couple of you know Carville companies- I can move that money, that's just normal business. Now what happens when a when the IRS determines the? U of use the rules and stretch them br. and what they were intended to be stretched to what happens to the company. That does that the pair five or they just have to do with the other way. It's not jail time because of somebody did something. That said, at least supportable by a real live accountant. Who's willing to sign it and say Yeah! I'm going to sign this, I'm going to put my name in my reputation as as a tax preparer as an accountant, probably a big accounting company, all side this, because
at least as a good argument for it. So if his taxes- Are in the opinion of the New York Times reporters and some experts? They talk too. If those experts in today, two thousand and eighteen, look back at those decades. Old mechanisms for reducing were limited in taxes, and they say that sketchy that would be illegal. That's sort have a normal situation, because a big company is going to do enough stuff, that they know the gray area stuff, the vague stuff, the places where they stretch the rules a little bit. It is hard to find and if the, if the IRS doesn't actually Lou Lou ask for the for the for the details of those things literally look at it a lot of people, don't know that an IRS audit typically is not an audit on everything you've done, they tend to focus on something.
so they might, they might order you on is the business you claimed an actual home business, but they won't necessarily audit you and the rest of your return. I suppose if it was a lot of fraud going on on the one thing that they found, they might look further, but they tend to limit. It so in a big company anytime, you've got any the gray area anytime. Your accountant says you know you could do this and you can also do this- and this one would save you a lot of money. What would happen if I get caught doing this sketchy one, well, we have an argument- and our argument goes like this- that we can do this sketchy thing because of this is this is So this, if you have an argument nobody's going to jail, you might pay a fine. but it's sort of normal business companies pay fines all the time and they do. Which things until they get caught, and so I think so, let's talk about the politics,
but in terms of a way to attack the president, I think the people who already thought he had tax problems- and you know there was sketchy stuff there. It gives them something to talk about, but it's really sort of an extension of what they were talking about anyway, right And for the people who voted for Trump, raise your hands, raise your hands, because I can see all of you how many of you are pretty new, that the Trump Organization both currently and historically did everything it could to avoid taxes and there's some of those things might be questionable to the IRS, but here's, the big bot, all of it, went through professional account,
and all of it got signed off on somewhere in this mix. There are professional accountants who don't work for the Trump organization who looked at all this and said it's it's a stretch, you know this is this. One is a little bit of a gray area, but yeah. This is legal according to the technical rules, so we're going to we're going to try it and see what happens. So I don't think the tax story is going to change minds, because people who supported the president. It was already baked in that ever everything that you hear now will not threaten the president legally Because he wasn't the one who even knew the details, You're literally, he didn't know that it's fair to say that he didn't know the details when he was two years old and Fred Trump was
pulling him money. You know the way the New York Times Rice at is, that is a Donald Trump was helping his father sheet on taxes when he was two so Donald Trump was helping his father cheat on taxes when Donald Trump was two, so I don't think there's any legal risk and I think the political risk is there's a tell
there's a big tell in the New York Times story that made me laugh out loud when I saw it, I needed a good laugh this week. There's a I don't have the exact quote, but they're in the story says that they went through a hundred thousand documents. Can you imagine that the the New York Times reporters and whoever they they hell? It had helping them? They went through a hundred thousand documents. What's left out of that story, they went through a hundred thousand documents, and found stuff about those taxes. Let me tell you: what's left out of that story, how many of the one hundred thousand documents many difference? Were there two pages? Is it possible that Maybe two pages had something on him. That was any of any importance. Why do they have to tell us? I went through one hundred thousand documents I'll tell you why? Because it's a really big number
and if you say we went through a hundred thousand documents, it sounds like your proof is really good. Well, how much? How much more certain can you be? There were a hundred thousand documents. So the hundred thousand documents thing without any prince to how many of those documents made any difference at all is just pure manipulation. That's not reporting, that's manipulation of of the reader, I was going to another topic. So now This is a great breaking story, headline shocking news: some shocking news is being reported that the president may have been behind the payments to Stormy Daniels. I know I know, you're thinking what I'm thinking? What? the chances We didn't know that,
we didn't know that the president might have talked to Michael Cohen. Something to do with the payments, the stormy Daniels. What what are you kidding me and and what about the fact that the president said something that wasn't true about an alleged affair with a porn star, really really you think the president may have shaded the truth when asked on in public about an affair with the poor, star. That is alleged to happen while his wife was pregnant. We didn't see that coming. I actually heard the news and I thought to myself: uh uh, that's news
and so it it kind of got to the larger question of line, because we're talking we're talking about Kevin Hall and the, and the implication is that Cavanaugh is going to be at the top judge or a top judges. Can fourth and and if you live than anything during the his testimonies. If he lied on anything, it makes them on trustworthy and you have to have the most trustworthy people in Supreme Court goes the argument, but Imagine this imagine if they'd sent the cabin off Miss Kavanaugh. did your family ever own, a pet. Yes, we did. We had a a dog named fluffy.
Cavanaugh is fluffy still with us. No fluffy fluff is not with us anymore. Miss Kavanagh did fluffy die, or did you tell your children? That's something else happened to fluffy in cabin or be like you know. Well, yeah, he didn't exactly die. Fluffy went to a farm He went to a farm where he's very happy talking to other dogs running around all day with other dogs forever in eternity he's in a farm now obviously I'm joking, because everybody lies to their kids, about where their dog dying, if the kids are young and Well, what level do you say The lie is trivial.
If the man is asked in front of the world and his family and his children? Did you drink too much? What do we expect him to say I'll. Tell I'll tell you what I wanted to say no, I want him to. I want him to minimize that, because It didn't really matter to the point, in my opinion, at least not in a way that changes anything uh, so a little bit of lying, I'm! Ok with that. Frankly, so let me say that I'll say it is clearly as possible if Kavanaugh or the next judge, that the Democrats maybe put up there. If any judge in the future lies about stuff that isn't terribly important, and you know it might have been nursing, so it's better just to lie about it. Ok, with that, I will not feel bad when the Supreme Court
images ruling on some important thing because they lied about their dog or they lied about how many beers? Yet I will not have any prob Now, let's talk about lying in general. Think about where Trump came from Trump came from the business world, in the business world. Do people lie? Do people lie in the business world? Well, if you have any experience in the business world in and I do you will now without lying capitalism wouldn't even work lying? And you know we don't like to teach teach the kids us we don't like to say it out loud, but the entire capitalist system, really depends on lying
now the lying comes in many forms. The lying might look like this. Yes, we can totally meet your deadline when you know you can't, but once they get a little bit pregnant you'll be able to make some excuses. still get the deal so lying about deadlines. It's almost universal, How about lying about your total cost? You're the vendor, you're selling a software system, the hardware system into a big company? Do you tell them all the costs? Do you tell them what is likely to cost for the upgrades? Unless they ask, do you tell them What will happen if something breaks? Do you really disclose all the costs, or are you sort of lying to get the job and then once you've got the job? It's too hard for them to get rid of you? So it's easier for you to orbit overcharge for changes um. What about every advertisement? What about marketing? Have you ever seen them an advertisement that said here's our new product?
we compared it to all the other products and frankly, our competitor makes a lower cost product is better and you should buy that. But we have one that's almost as good, that would be honest and that would be the way most people should market if there was anything like honesty in the in the capitalist world, so I contend. The lying is a central ingredient to what is the the capitalist Engin. If there were not enough lying, they would not, they would be less buying. Let me say that again, if we didn't have so much of in capitalism we wouldn't have as much buying and if people didn't buy as much the system kind of doesn't work. So Trump comes from a world in which you always lie about your product. Always
it's a valid. The most universal thing you've ever done, you can see is like hey. Is your building a pretty good building or is it the greatest building ever is that people should die to live there? Is that the best building you've ever seen, which one do business people say so Trump brings this. Let's say the capitalist business ethic into government, which is that you are allowed to lie about anything You're allowed to lie about anything. You can say the competition is doing terrible things that maybe they're not. You can say that yours will cost less than the competition when maybe
exactly. But if you didn't do all those things, it would be hard to persuade people forward and we see that the president's persuasion is very effective. Now I've said in the past that the president is always as far as I can tell, there may be other than might be some exceptional there, but I haven't seen on he's always directionally accurate and by directionally accurate. I mean that even if he's not technically accurate, he he's moving our minds in the right direction that you would want for president. So, for example, if the and says this economy is the best. It's ever been, and then people do some fact checking and they say it's not the. best. It's ever been remember that one year under Obama is now you would say well technically, let's score, that is a lie. Here's how I scored like capitalism. Yes, it is an exaggeration
of your success. It's a minimization of the people who are your competitors? If you will, it is exactly how capitalism is built: capitalism works really well his ring the same technique here. What it did was. It is sort of it increased. The total stockpile of lying in government is it. You know it's no secret. The senators and congresspeople and candidates is no so secret that they, all lie, but they they generally tried to lie in ways that you can get away with it a little bit hoping nobody notices. That sort of thing you know the political lies are sort of like sheepish lies well a little bit of a safe quickly hope nobody notices, so you don't want to be a liar as a elected official
but the overlying helps a little bit, so you've got a little bit of lying going on Trump comes in with the capitalism ethic. which is that it's absolutely ok, to lie about absolutely everything all the time I about how good your employees are, how you'll meet the deadline. You lie about your prospects for the future. You lie about the fact that the reorganization is coming and everybody
to be fired. I mean it's a big lying in surprise and it needs to be that way because of people stop doing. That would stop being persuaded to do stuff and you need people to buy stuff. We need people to make deals, you need them to believe the b s yeah and I think what Trump did is shocked the system by taking what works perfectly in capitalism. Complete a hundred percent exaggeration hyperbole out right lies to drive the Cabela's engine, brought it over the government, but instead of the profit motive. He has to make America great again motive right. Everything you do in capitalism is for profit within the lawyer, trying to stay within the law as much as possible, but profit, it's a single purpose of every lie. You tell right
so you're not lying randomly you're not lying for no good reason. You're lying for profit and as long as people just lie for profit capitalism. Drugs along okay, likewise in the government, as long as the things Trump says, are inspiring people to invest their inspiring inspiring. ISIS to quit, because if it let's say he's even lied to Isas, he told ISIS that he was it'll? Destroy them he's never going to leave here is going to crush them to degrees that they believed he would be better at it than the last people. That's the motivating for ISIS. Is that a bad lie saying that you might be more powerful against ISIS? Then? Maybe even you think you might be. That's not a bad life. That's a really good lie. It's a capitalism!
and Vali. It moves moves, the bar where you want it, not tored profit, but toward making America safer and greater again. So you got that, let's change the Subject a little bit here, I'm going to give some credit to the Democrats for persuasion for more for strategy. I guess than persuasion this is sort of gray area. Alan Dershowitz pointed out on Twitter that Laurence Tribe, a prominent lawyer and Anti trumper wrote an article Washington Post, I think, or New York Times, one of those in which Laurence tribe described a a strategy for blocking Kavanaugh that was pure evil. just pure evil and at the same time I said to myself. Okay, if
I'm, going to be objective and I'm going to separate the morality from the tool, the tool is Pretty darn clever, it's evil, yeah, it's totally evil and it's bad for the system could destroy the whole country. Is that bad, but it might work and here's the technique. The idea is that in a general way. He gives a lot more detail, but in a general way any organizations such, the ACLU, if they would announce their opposition to Kavanaugh, there are the type of entity that ends up at this reprime. A lot. So if you knew that the ACL had come out strongly against Cavanaugh, you could not expect Cavanaugh to stay on that case. If the ACL are, you ever came
front of them, Cavanaugh would have to recuse because he had, he had been an enemy or they had been an enemy to his nomination. Now The idea of tribes idea was that if enough entities oppose him publicly, then he would have to recuse himself from any decisions when they came for him and he would be such a Woon did potential jurist that there's no point in nominating or there's no point in putting them on the court because he will only be able to. You know be like a part time part time. Justice, 'cause he'll have to recuse himself from so many things, because all these people post them- and I thought to Myself- ok, that is pure evil, but I don't know if it won't work. I mean uh.
The one thing you can say about the Democrats anymore. Here's what you can't say about the Democrats, anymore, they're, afraid to fight. You know if you're if you're going to be real keeping it real as we used to say keeping it real one and one of the things that was the big criticism of the Democrats as they weren't they just didn't, have enough fight in them, but holy cow. This Kavanaugh thing is changing my mind about that right, there's a lot of fight in the,
Russian collusion thing, that's a lot of flight, so you you gotta, give a plus for effort. I mean the Democrats in terms of stepping it up for the the power of the of the persuasion and the the lower the level that they're willing to go to is sort of a ten minutes kind of a ten they're. Talking about everything from you know. Well, the current target every every means of removing trump, so you get all given that they they have some funny and they don't have good strategies that so here's the catch they've taken the fight
to a situation. The cabin a situation in which the president has two ways to win and probably no way to lose so they've chosen as their final bad and battle ground, maybe not final, but they've chosen as their major battleground the only situation I can think of and which Trump wins both ways and here's how you you'll hear other people talking about this. Now I think I was talking about it early, but now it's it's sort of a common, by the way. Did anybody say this before Maine I assume so, but for some reason I never heard it from a pundit until I said it- and it goes like this if If Trump gets Kavanaugh in even Woon did even with a bad reputation. It still unambiguously a wind and it's a giant wind, but if
if Cavanaugh doesn't get in if he is thwarted by this level of machinations, your let's say nothing new comes out, but you still thwarted Republicans we'll just go nuts and you think it's going to be a red like you've, never seen in your life, At this point it would really be if Kavanaugh is thwarted by this kind of claim. It would look like a proposed system change
engine the United States. There would really be rewriting the constitution. Re writing. Are you know in in a fact, because, even though the constitution allows everything that's happening, it would feel like we're. Treating the constitution differently. So, in effect, would be like a a re write because of the print the the Senate would not be in the advise and consent. They would just be in some weird b l team fights kinda thing where they just make stuff up: that's a completely different system and advise and consent. So the the Democrats, the Republicans, if there's one thing republicans don't like and the will motivate them is activist judges and somebody tried to mess with the system. Republicans, like
the system. If you mess with the whole system as opposed to just getting a result, they don't like. Let me say it more clearly, if republicans see a result in politics that they don't like, but they also recognize that the system was followed. You know everything was constitutional. Nobody broke any laws, they're going to accept it with little resistance, but they're going to accept that and they're gonna. You know fight to change in the future, but there again they're going to respect the system. If Republicans get a result, they don't want. Because somebody broke the system, which is look, looks like what's happening in part of the system. Is you know innocent until proven guilty or in the in the political job category? Not that standard, not not in the Simpson toll Beyonder in beyond a doubt and not just propose,
hundreds of evidence. But you know you need some corroboration. That's the solid kind, if you don't have that. That's a pretty big change in how things have been done and it would be a permanent change. That's very motivating for Republicans. They don't like they don't like some group of voters, Democrats changing the system without permission and then getting a result I don't like so Trump wins with the red Wave and Trump wins. If he gets Kavanaugh and doesn't get a red wave 'cause, I think I actually think Trump could function with a split Congress. If it that way so Democrats tons of fight tearable strategy, they picked the wrong fight alright So others, the other story, that's related to the New York Times story about Trump's taxes. Is that
Gleefully CNN is reporting that at blows the story of Trump as a self made businessman and the myth he borrowed a million dollars and turned it into ten billion, or something and they're saying this proves that he actually got to. You know hundreds of millions from his other to which I say well. Are you giving me, all of the news doesn't feel like news: does it? Is there any you didn't know he got tons of money from his father? I don't think there's any trump supporter who read that and said what are you? giving Maine? Are you telling me his net worth? Is not ten billion dollars are you telling Maine We got a lot of money and a great start from his rich father, what but who's I think that conversation, nobody
literally nobody so I've I've described what happened mostly yesterday as the kitchen sink, So the the if you're, not american, there's there's an American saying called throwing the kitchen sink at it means you've, tried everything else and there's just nothing left to throw. You know. Everything in the kitchen was already been thrown, so you have to like pull the kitchen sink out and throw that that's like the last thing. You've got left and it felt like that yesterday didn't remember I've I've taught you that being on the edge of doom, looks almost identical or can to being on the edge of complete victory. Right, almost doom and almost complete victory can look exactly the same, and this might be one of those situations. 'cause on one hand it looks
oh, my god. There's all this new reporting this horrible stuff about President Trump and then you with all the reports is like. Well, we kind of we kind of suspected. He tried to avoid This is, I think we knew he got more money from his parents because because remember, he's a capitalist and he lies about everything. Now. What did President Trump get out of exaggerating his his business success? Well, got him on the apprentice and it made him President of United States. Is he the dummy? Oh, my god that dumb old President Trump, he managed to spin a story into the
and see. I feel like that was pretty good play right, because if there's one thing I can teach you is that the person who sells the best is the best. Let me say that again, the person who sells the best is the best. The the person who can sell is the most powerful Morse useful. The most has the most utility and while other people were learning, may be different business stuff we're having different experiences. He Trump was becoming the best promoters, salesperson brand manager of all time was that a good strategy. obviously yes does he not only succeeded himself, but he brought that same bag of skills to the presidency,
and he's selling the heck out of the United States, you know that's what he's doing he's acting as a salesperson for the United States and he's selling the heck out of it. It is here a fling, some feathers sure, but he's selling the heck out of it
For let's talk about so I've talked before about how the Democrats have become somewhat a woman centric party, meaning that their primary interest and the the democrat side is the interest of women and they've largely just thrown black people under the bus. You know Hispanics on the bus, they've kind of thrown everybody under the bus except web at now. Again, I'm not saying that's good or bad. It might be a really good thing that there's a major political party, that's concentrated on on the on the preferences of women. That might be a really healthy thing, so I don't have a an opinion about that. I'm just describing- and I had I had tried- tried to describe Republicans as being about protecting women,
but I think it would be fair, more fair to say that the Republicans are the Party of protection. So republicans are strong on you know: anti crime, strong on law enforcement and that's really a protection thing- is strong on defense. That sort of a protection thing, and this protection applies to
both men and women publicans are strong on immigration. That's a protection thing! The president talks about the risk of rape. Does he exaggerate, of course, on everything he does? But rape is a specific female risk, any talk not exclusively, but it's primarily a female rest and any talks about protection of men and women protection he's not against gays is fine with me gay marriage at etc. So it's about protection, if you're, an american male or female it's about protection and in this world man are seen as protectors. Again, I'm not saying all men are protectors. I'm not saying that women are not also protectors, but it's
brand wise men are good eggs? Let me let me put it to you this way, how often does. What is a woman, the victim of a man when other men in the room. Well, sometimes you might have these rare cases where there's some kind of a group rape situation, but generally speaking of for a woman to be victimized, she's usually means to me and in the. company of one man right. If there's more than one man in the room, she safer not more dangerous, because the other man act as a protection against those. The one man who's whose problematic so Trump is, has sort of a protection mode, and he talked to he did. He said what you're not supposed to say at the rally. He said explicitly that we're in a situation where it's start,
to get dangerous for your sons and your husband's as they might be the the recipient of uncorroborated accusations, and that could be devastating for them as well as anybody who loves them and the media acted like he wasn't allowed to say that it wasn't. It wasn't fair to say that that men matter, it's fair to say black this matter, but it seems to be unfair to say that men and boys matter He wasn't saying they matter more than anybody else. He wasn't saying: let's stop worrying about other people. He was saying that man matter that's uh you just saying that men matter too, and there was pushback on that there was pushback
on the notion that men might matter to think about that, and so it seems to me that the framing this developing you know things are evolving every day, but it feels like the frame is involved. That's evolving is that the Democratic Party is not pro woman exclusively there. Also anti, so the Democrats are unambiguously anti male and don't even try to hide it anymore, which is sort of shocking, and this president is willing to call be us on it. It's like you, they're, not even hiding the fact that they're anti male, how much, still like to hear me say that, because I think it has, it has moved the needle has moved from, let's fight to get to what's good for women, yeah, that the fight for contraceptive contraception, fighting for concert, contraception or having to pay for
is not anti male, in fact, manner, probably better off. If that's your point of view better better off in women too. fighting for abortion doesn't feel- anti male, because the what is aborted is at least potentially mail and potentially female in equal numbers. It's more about what's good for women, but I feel, like we've left that Levelup the Democrats have and they've extended it too. general anti male feeling. Now I'm not going to say that the president has no. yo no influence on that I mean his approach. I had made it easy for the Democrats to frame man's as the demons
Let's, let's see it for what it is right. It feels like the Democrat brand has turned from pro woman to anti male. Where is the republican brand is still protection and prosperity really the two peas protection and prosperity. When you say because you know the Democrats have specific protection, related things are trying to protect the the factory workers are trying to protect workers, we're trying to protect people physically now. I think the Democrats would argue way where the protection group, because were more more about climate change, that's protecting and we're protecting the environment and that's protected. It doesn't feel
same feels just in terms of the persuasion. The way we the way we see it and register it just feels like Democrats are anti male now an they no longer trying to hide it, which makes it increasingly embarrassing to be a man in the Democratic Party yeah. and I was thinking the other day that those look for the unintended consequences of things, and it seems to me that when black lives matter became a popular slogan, You know a lot of people would try to respond to that and say well all lives matter, and they thought that was sort of a a higher ground maneuver. But in fact it was a trap because if you say all lives matter, you're short, refuting the point that black lives matter, even though you're not, but it can be argued that way so therefore, you're racing
so it's sort of a genius slogan, because you either agreed with it or they could pay you as a racist and it was very effective but at the same time the unintended consequence of having Societal acceptance of the phrase, all black societal acceptance, of the fact that black lives better the ability to call out one group and say these. This group matters kinda, may it is safe for Trump to say mad matter. yeah, I'm not even sure he could have said that before black lives matter, so you can say men matter and you're also saving people.
Who are willing to come forward and say what's wrong with being white, what's wrong with being a man. What what do I have to apologize for that because somebody else gonna going to benefit? Let's talk about, I shouldn't: do right on the edge of throwing my career away, and I'm wondering if I should I'm going to wait, wait for another day to do that? No reason to do that this week anyway, the interface sap interface by when hub, we have a new version which, by the way,
don't have the new version of the interface by when hub app. Let me show you what it looks like uh, it's, a big upgrade and you'll need to upgrade your current version to use this with people with a new version. So let me just show you know so well what the app doesn't. Let that allows you to either be an expert or to find an expert. If you want to be an expert, you just say I'll. Take credit cards are all take crypto, and you know you select that you just say your price and put in your key words in your bio takes about sixty seconds to become an expert. You can be an expert in whatever you want to be gardening could be, technology could be anything. Could be doctoring an if you want to find it expert you just click the top and put in a search term, so I'm going to look for french tutor, so it looks like a french tutor was recently,
could be any kind of a tutor, but look there's one So right now, there's a french tutor. There's online right now named or or Boone, and for forty dollars per hour. I could all I have to do is push a button and for forty dollars an hour, I have a french tutor now, if you have a kid who's taking French and you did not take French and you need somebody, to to to them. You could be making dinner just call this up, put the phone on the kitchen table and have your kids sit there, while you're making dinner and they're getting right now. Imagine this for every kind of skill. Imagine that there's anything you can learn anything you can learn anything just by finding. Somebody will tell it to you right at that moment for the for a price It is forty dollars tutors tutors can play a lot more than forty dollars an hour. So if you could get
A forty dollars an hour tutor depending on the part of the country. You know the rich parts of the country have expensive tutors in theaters can be sixty five dollars an hour. They can pretty pretty expensive and the one of the things that we're fixing in the upgrade is that we didn't have a fully functioning system. Where, if you couldn't find somebody, you would be notified when they were online and now. and now you will be so. If you say you were looking for a french tutor, but they weren't available to somebody was already talking to them. You could set it to give you a notification when the french tutor was back online,
all right, so the world will be changing quite a bit and you can hear a lot more in the coming days about the app but just to make things interesting. If you would like to talk to me right after this is over I'm going to go online, as an expert lips right now on the interface app you could find. by by my name or by cartooning or persuasion, I'm going to accept both when tokens which you get for free just from signing up. So it wouldn't even question anything to call me because we give you some free when tokens. Those are our own cryptic so you could just use those and call me and I'm going to set my hourly rate at one hundred dollars, so you're going to pay twenty five dollars. If you want to talk to Maine
and I'm going to go online. Alright, I'm online I'm going to hang up from this periscope and if anybody wants to call me an try out the interface by win hub app, you can do that right now, interface by one hub. It's in the app stores, it's a free, download and calling me would be free. The first time 'cause you get some free tokens just for signing up so we'll see who calls first and I'll talk to you later bye.