Bump bump on my property, Ibew local phone- hey Joe hey everybody come on in here- I am using a different device to broadcast. Let's see if we can fix that problem of the orientation- and I also won't turn my camera around and have you look out. The window looks the same as last time: hey Eric, hey you Shelton, Hey Richard and Ivan, come on in here. You know what time it is. Yes, you do it's time for the simultaneous ip and if you've got a mug, a cup of glass of vessel aside a container of any kind shall we call it a chalice, raise your container.

With your favorite liquids, I like coffee and join me for the simultaneous hip. Yes, so which devices I'm using a different Ipad will see if that makes a difference on the orientation problem. Now where to start um Somebody yesterday was pointing out that health care costs are skewed toward the end of life so you end up spending most of your health care money for final year or two of life, because that's when all the expensive stuff happens, when they're keeping you alive, and somebody said well, you know what if there was some kind of,

some kind of legal doctor assisted suicide. Then people could leave if they wanted to leave earlier. Now, of course, that's a problem because you can't have people just dying, because I want to because you get abuse is and stuff but it made me realize that in this country we already have complete the legal end of life suicide. To deliver on that did you know that it is completely legal to take your own life at the end of at the end of your life. If you got, no, not much time left. We just don't call it suicide, we call it hospice care or palliative care So if somebody is only got I will say a week left couple weeks left and there's just nothing. You can do

you have the option of drugging them until they're, not conscious and not feeding them anymore so. If you make somebody not conscious 'cause they're drugged up and you don't feed them, that's suicide because the person has agreed agreed so I think we should get out of the headset of saying we're not going allow suicide at the end of life. You know unless they in super pain we're already way past there. It is all Freddy universally legal and accepted that we can kill people. At the end of their life with their with their agreement. They have to agree to it. It's just just call it a different name, and we do it the hard way we make them wait and suffer and make everybody suffered, wait and pay a lot of money.

But we literally have an end of life to suicide program right now and I've I've watched a number of people go through it so. I've observed this first hand. We kill people with their agreement, in the last week or two of their life simply by knocking him out with drugs and not feeding him by choice. They choose us, it's not something. They were surprised by and then they have a right Ultimately, I guess relatively painless death, but it seems cruel to me So all I'm saying is: if we're thinking it's not it's not right. To allow suicide we're way past that we already do it. We just don't do it well, all right! Um, Somebody reported recently that there was a rise in hate crimes. Now, of course, there's always a political

umbrella over any kind of conversation like that. Because somebody tried trying to make a point and they'll say something like well rise in hate crime must be because of President Trump, for example. So usually these things have a political, but once again watch for this trend. This, the a trend when you see a report about an increase in violence of hate crimes, whether it's people left or people on the right look to see if the summary is supported, examples that you can see 'cause it almost never is I'm going to be. Never is because I've never seen it I'm saying almost just because maybe somebody did it once, but even if Look at the examples you wouldn't know if, the same way they measured it before our people more play two more likely to report it in the report.

The somebody was passing around his head? He cried was up seventeen percent and then buried way down in the article yeah you have to actually follow a link to you to get there, Buried way down in the article is that they added a whole bunch of reporting entities. Now maybe they didn't add enough entities to make up for the seventeen percent, but they never did any out of a calculation to let us know if that was the case. So indeed the report that said hate crime was up. Seventeen percent did not demonstrate that the owner did. The article itself did not demonstrate that fact. Demonstrate that it could have been up and it could have been down. Either one of those was possible based on what they presented in terms of evidence. So beware of additional fake news reports, uh yeah, look out from the fake news reports

hate crimes are up because it's probably the way they're majoring in it, and it's probably Anna Context, and it's probably not supported by any kind of summary. So just be careful that was Now we have a story about. Millenia our first lady, who is apparently instrumental in getting some kind of national some high level aid fire Somebody named mirror Ricardo? Now, of course, because she was the first lady and not an elected official makes a great headline story, because people couldn't jabber about it and say blah blah blah. First lady, this gossip gossip gossip. What is she doing? Making national. National security decisions about personnel, etc. Here's my take,

on the line here controversy. If it's even laughed under noticed. Let me say this without cursing, if you're, dumb enough to cross the first lady if you're, dumb enough to get on the first lady's bad side, you're too stupid for the job. It doesn't matter. What else you can do? It doesn't matter what else you're doing right if you're, dumb enough to piss off the first lady you gotta go You gotta go. Because of the first lady you're, just not smart enough for the job. Secondly, If anybody had a free punch, it's Mulanya has our first lady put up with Moreshet, then well, Michelle Obama put up

a lot of shittu? So first, ladies, do put up with a lot of ship. That's a fact formal idea pull up with a lot of shit. I mean she is put up with shit from her own team from the Other team I mean Malia has put up with a lot without a lot of complaining right. If anybody had a free punch, it's uh Alright, can you imagine her going to her husband and saying I'm only asking you for one thing she's, probably asking for more than one thing, but my feeling is that if she to the president and said I don't ask for a lot, I'm not asking for a lot, but I want this one thing: that's the end of the story right and should be perfectly happy with that situation. Now. I saw a tweet.

This is it looks like it's. A screen grab from Fox news. And it showed the radical new democratic ideas and it shows these new faces in the house with uh go kertes being the one we know the best, but these are other freshman far left, apparently Democrats, and the radical new democratic ideas. No, this is a Fox news summary, but I think it's accurate. They're, saying for bullet points, these is radical. New democrats want free let's roll free, care for all. Abolish ice some kind of a new deal for the environment. I guess a green new deal now. Your first impression of all these things is: that's all crazy, every bit of this as crazy

it doesn't, it doesn't conform to anything, you know is possible or practical or realistic right. So therefore you should you can just dismiss them, because their points are so so aggressively, I'm in practice so you can just dismiss them right. What are we doing right now we're talking about Who are we not talking about Everybody was boring ideas. People were not talking about. Are the people who were wait for it? The Democrats were not talking about Are all the Democrats who were not smart enough to do this, their shocking US Who does this remind you of

remind you of when you see such a a big ask. This is a gigantic ask free college for all my god. How much would that cost free healthcare for everybody? Thirty, two trillion dollars a ball, choice. That's crazy, green new deal. I don't even it is, but it's probably bad for the economy. If you're saying to yourself This is all impractical, bad ideas. You or being manipulated they're taking the Trump playbook. Moving the technique from the right to the left and employing it with chilling efficiency. So remember, I always make a big deal when I'm talking about President Trump, Separating the technique from the practicality from the fact

king from the morality he does is helpful to to look at the technique. Separate from all those other things you can see is the technique is good or bad the technique as fracking good. It's good. That's good technique. 'cause we're talking about her. How many times have I talked about a Octavia Cortez, whose name I still can't remember a lot now. Let me take you back to the time that candidate Trump said he wanted to deport. Fourteen million people was that possible no, it was not. Is it more crazy to say you're going to deport fourteen million people or is it more easy to say: you'll get free college, which is more crazy there. They are both crazy, but there directionally pleasing

they're, directionally pleasing and it matches a lot of their brace. It gets enerji. It gets all of your attention. And why is it that we're focusing on this group. The reason we're talking about them is because our proposals are impractical, that's the magic if they made it practical suggestions. It would look like this. You know I'd like to see more people in college. The most we could do is maybe crank that up to percent a year, but You know over twenty years that be forty percent. That would sound like something practical, Do you get any attention? If you talk in practical terms, you tonight not so somebody saying so stop talking about them. That's the point. We can't If I could stop talking about them, I would also have to say they don't have good technique,

look how easily I stopped talking about them, I can't their technique makes me Talk about them because it made everybody else, talk about him, and I'm the one who talks about what everybody's talking about right? The reason Trump's technique works with the media, is because, when he says something this crazy sounding, they have to talk about it and, if everybody's talking about it. What am I going to do? I'm going to talk about it? So don't be surprised when that group makes more headway than you thought, it was a great story out of the hill about a Texas County saw this who had nineteen there were nineteen african american women who ran to be judges in this one county, nineteen african american women ran to be judges and out in nineteen all night team galactic.

All. Ninety, so but I was saying how CNN keeps saying that president. Oh, it's coincidence that the president keeps criticizing female black people, and I guess there were three of them that they Why is it that the president keeps criticizing black women? I made the comment. It's it's. Good news, and you think, because the doesn't doesn't criticize you until you reach a certain level of success right, the president isn't calling people out too or just voters. See that voter over there that voter voted for Clinton. I hate that voter. He doesn't do that. You have to be a successful. Politician: the business person who's made a billion dollars. You have to be.

Senator you've got to be a judge, you've gotta, be you've, gotta, be pretty or a reporter for CNN in a very successful career. If you can get there, so I'm just going to besides that point. We it's so easy to miss, the positive news, if president of the United States is criticizing a lot of black women. Lately is because black women are killing it. They are doing great nineteen black women and have nineteen got elected to judge jobs. These are good jobs anyway. I thought that something worthy of pointing out when we get all caught up, calling each other racists and you know you lose sight of the fact that you know

below the level of the political discourse. Things are pretty much improving everywhere, all the time as a general rule just about everything is improving, but slowly, It's only moments like this, where you get something. That's just quite obviously, you know big step forward now I tweet it yesterday and it got a lot of retweets, so it must have been clever and well. Here's what I said if you've never heard of the quote that this comes from, don't give me full credit for it, because I'm borrowing, somebody else is famous quote this a little different, but I don't remember what it was and I'm applying it. Our current situation- and I said this. America. Is one country divided by a common language? One slash two thing:

nationalist means patriots and the other half thinks it means racist word thinking now. My point of that was that, even though we speak the same language, we found a way to to disagree on other same language like even The word means so half of the discussion in the country. Right now is whether the word nationalist means a patriotic person who prefers their country over others or a damn white nationalist. Those are not very close Those two things are not very similar in meaning and when I put that out there, the response I got from from people who you know were were feeling the same thing. The most frequent response I got was well. Our definition is the one. That's right. Our definition

This is the one in the dictionary, therefore, we're right if you're thinking anything like that, if you're thinking, my definition of the word is right, You are not even in the right game. That's totally the wrong question. The question of who is right is completely irrelevant you, can't be right when people are making up their own meaning for words. If, if I've decided that going to call the president of the United States a camel, and I say I know I know definition in the dictionary is a camel us. You know over the hump and usually in the desert, but I choose to use the word to mean the President of the United States, I'm just going to call him. King Now you can't tell me I'm wrong, because if you look in the dictionary- camel is an animal. It's not the president. United states 'cause. I

just told you, I'm adding my own definition to the word. It doesn't add anything. There's no logic here I haven't made a point, I should not be winning any arguments by simply putting a new meaning to a word. Now it gets more devious, when you assign a new meaning to a word somebody's already using so that's what he Democrats have done and weirdly it's somewhat successful from the persuasion person perspective, it has been. I think some was successful. Arbitrarily say when you say nationalist, you really mean racist

if there's any word well, I guess I guess the I guess the Republicans do. The same thing so when Democrats say they would like democratic socialism they're talking about the kind of democratic socialism you see in Europe in countries that, if you ask them, if they're happy, they would say yes, so so really that's what the Democrats are asking about, but then the Republicans do the same trick on them and say: oh you mean communism, or you mean socialism like the real socialism. That's totally socialism with no capitalism, that's not what they mean. They mean a capitalist, democratic, slightly more socialist in a couple of areas like healthcare and education, you could argue about whether that's a good or bad thing to have. Oh, you

and as well right. So it actually. Thank you. That's a perfect example. So when the Democrats say we like free Healthcare, you know in some little democratic socialism. We can see that that seems to work in Europe. So It's a functioning system in Europe, but Venezuela had a whole different situation, had a dictator. So what the Republicans will do is say oh you mean like Venezuela, so the Republicans turned democratic socialist, which we can see works because it's working in Europe they turn it into that which is a completely different situation. So the Democrats are just giving it back with this nationalist Lynn. Right

so here's my recommendation, don't get into arguments with people who are defining words differently. I call that word thinking if somebody is trying to win an argument by changing the definition of a word. They are not involved in facts that are not involved in reason: they're not they're, not involved in any kind of the rational part of the world. Now, if you want to talk to somebody, who's not involved in any rash discussion. Well, just know what you're getting into you're, not getting into a station where one of you is going to win, because the other. Is not even on the same playing field: they're, not attempting to do anything with logic or reason.

I think they're just trying to use a word. He maybe if I change the definition of the word I'll get in the back door and maybe I'll convince people by changing what words mean. There's no point in engaging anybody on that level. Benioff compared using Facebook too, at least cigarette addiction. Interesting now I haven't seen that quote, but if I take your word for it anonymous commenter that mark then ' off, ceo and founder of sales force has compared Facebook connection, and I I would imagine that would be true of social media addiction just in general to a cigarette addiction. I would say add that, to the reasons I like Mark Betty off that guy's the real deal, he could be the president some day by the way, if MARC Benioff,

runs for president. As a Democrat he's going to be the president. I've never heard him say he had any interest in it, so I don't know if he does or not, but I want you to hear it here. First, if MARC Benioff, CEO of Salesforce ever decides to run for president, he will be the president. You could take that to the bank, but I've never heard him say he's interested. Us a reason why well I've I spent a little bit of time talking with him personally, so I got a sense of the and I've also been watching watching him for a long time his he is capable. Probably his ability to show empathy. His intelligence is success.

This consistency. I'm not aware of any scandals, I'm sure if he ran for president. Somebody would find one or manufacture one, you know his work is charitable. He's turned a major corporation into a giving machine with his one percent one percent, one percent thing, so sales forces already sort of a hybrid company, because it's a capitalist country, but it's based on a very strong principle of giving away some percentage of that to the people who need it and is an empathetic character, meaning you can tell cares you remember Benny off as a guy who I forget, if he initiated, I think he initiated a check within his company to make sure that women were not under paid and he found out that to his horror,

in his own company? There were actually a number of examples in which he was convinced. The women were underpaid and he just in one in one swoop he listed all of it and he didn't adjust the men down. He adjusted the women up. Now that had to be really expensive. And I don't know if the way you measure these things is really fair. Alright 'cause there's always the how much experience did you have and all that, but you didn't care you just adjusted it anyway. That's a guy who can win

that dude can't win. When Democrats are expecting women he's, he has been a so pro women that he's actually got a better track record with women than most women do and- and he also has more choice of capabilities than just about anybody else. So he's he's a trump like character in terms of persuasion and business Accu Band, but without without the provocative parts. If you took, if you took president Trump and removed the provocative parts, you know the I guess the the risky stuff. If you took that out, it kinda gets Benny off and then the office, probably one of the small.

Other people you'll ever meet so IQ wise is also pins and needle you know it's funny. I've been saying that the democrats- never run an adult white male, but I also was not considering somebody like He would be the exception. He would be like the the the trump like exception where you're up before, if you said, could somebody run for president, it would never held a government job. If you ask me that question just in general, I would say, can I don't think so. I think you have to have a little bit of government experience before you can be the president, but then the exception to the rule was president Trump, So, there's something about his personality that makes the rules that count. Likewise, I've said that the Democrats

are never going to be happy with a adult white male candidate because of the nature of the the mixture of their coalition, but Benioff would be the exception. He does have the capability that he could break through that, like it wasn't even there. Change. How would you handle identity politics better than anybody else is handled out? Probably right. We don't need to get into too many details on that, because I suspect he is not planning to run so we don't need. We don't need to make a big deal about that. Hum talk about rom, you mean the manual

I have not run a manual, he wouldn't remember it because it was just a random meeting, but I shook his hand once who yeah, I don't have much to say about rob, don't know enough about North Korea. We've talked about that everything's going fine in North Korea. The news is, porting it like- maybe it isn't, but it's exactly where we should expect to be at this stage. Let's talk about the Middle EAST, I did a an afternoon. I did an afternoon periscope on the Middle EAST, I don't know how many of you have seen it, but I had suggested that the that the elements are lining up for something maybe to happen in the Middle EAST. That would be good and I guess the

This minister has resigned over the fact that Then then, Yahoo and Hamas are talking about a cease fire and the defense minister, I think, wanted to be more hardcore and and go after the fighters. And remember I was telling you yesterday that Imos needs in order for MOSS to change its current mode, which it seems important for anything else to happen. They need to have something that could identify as a win and the reason the defense Minister is quitting is because he says it looks like we're letting Hamas win and the mosses celebrating 'cause. They think that

Defense, minister quitting is an indication that they're winning. Now you don't want to get ahead of yourself at any of this Middle EAST stuff. 'cause. The odds of peace in the Middle EAST are probably small, no matter what, but I've made the argument that were closer to being able to get peace, then, maybe has ever been the case because unique characters that are involved right now. The leaders that are involved how they would work with each other, the incentives, the fact translucent losing money and looks like it will just get worse forever. Ever Israel's getting forever? There's, no way anything going to go? Well, you might as well just make a deal now. You've got the right characters. You've got Saudi Arabia's, probably flexible. At the moment, so there might be a way to make a grand deal, and here so here's another persuasion tip.

This will be one of the most valuable persuasion, tips, you'll ever see and it fits in with the Octavia Cortez Persuasion points I was making. If you had a choice, of making either a deal for Israel and have some kind of a you know. Military situation. You know some kind of a cease fire or some kind of a piece. If your choice was to see, if you can get that, just that, just Israel and Hamas no not fighting, should you go for it? Well, if that's the only thing, that's the only chance you have, maybe you should but compare. That too trying to make a grand plan where everybody is getting something and giving something from Yemen to Saudi a bill to a ran to the nuclear deal to Syria to Russia to look at a company here. This is how many countries, if you

could make a deal for all of those things for a grand plan, which would be more likely to happen, which is more likely the little one just a Monson in Israel. Or this big Middle EAST complicated messy. I can't imagine how all these elements could ever be the effects which ones more likely. If you said A simple one is the more likely you don't understand. Persuasion the big one is more likely the big impossible. One is more likely Why? Because some things that are big and impossible take all of our attention. We, we think the things are going to happen if you're talking big when you take something that could be small You make it gigantic, then you have everybody's attention and you have.

Everybody trying to figure out how to make it work and everybody is working toward a common thing. If you keep it small people can ignore it, they can wait for it to go away. Etcetera, so the big win in the Middle EAST might be, and I'm not predicting this I'm just saying we're closer than we've ever been to something like like a good situation in the Middle EAST. It could be that by making it gigantic, like a grand deal instead of a little deal, that's just at Israel, and or a little deal. That's just Yemen will stop funding the sides Evan or a little deal, that's just ran. One should stay out of north, or or a little deal like well, what's? What's Russia keep on doing with Syria or a little deal see there whole bunch of little deals. Little those kind of hard because you have

The option of just it's a little deal I'll think about something else, but if you make it a grand plan to solve all of that stuff at once, just just everybody put on the table. What are the things, I have to have one of the things you'd give up one of the things you'd give see. If you can make a grand deal, Ashton Kutcher all right.

What gigantic thing would bring the US together war, I'm let Maine and I'm not. Obviously I don't hope that happens, but let me tell you something that is confusing a lot of people. People keep asking Maine. How can the president be persuasive if his his well, the way people say at the critics, usually as they say? How could trump be persuasive if he hasn't persuaded Maine and he hasn't persuaded, hasn't persuaded fifty to sixty percent of the public, how can you be persuasive if your approval is only forty two percent? The majority of people are not persuaded Scott. How can you call that persuasive here's? How We no longer live in a world in which you can persuade the other team.

We don't live in that world anymore and there's a reason is because once Nology allowed us to measure how effects of headlines in the news were affecting clicks and those clicks affect profits. What's the news became sort of a team. Sport where they would never literally never try to understand the other side. You lost the ability, probably forever we lost the ability for anybody to persuade the other team. It is longer a thing to persuade the other team will never happen again. Maybe the only thing you can persuade the only thing that's in play is your own side. So if you

Get to ninety percent approval within your own team. You should be considered the most persuasive person in the world if anybody could do that on the other team going forward in the past. You know in the past both teams have popular people right, but if the, if the Democrats can get any candidate and twenty twenty to get to a ninety percent approval within their own party, I'm gonna say that person is really persuasive. Bernie only got half of his own side

Clinton, God most of her side, and she got you know more more votes even than Trump, but there were a whole lot of people on her side. Really. Still wanted Bernie Son Young eat. That was a special case where she had the money and the name and everything. But if you take that stuff out, I don't think it's going to be common for anybody to even persuade ninety percent of their own side anymore.

That's sort of the standard I got in the back and forth on twitter about my predictive abilities and one of the predictions that my critic called out is that he said I'll have. To paraphrase this 'cause, I don't have it, but you said that I had claimed that when the election happened, that the temperature would go down and that the hysteria would go down and my critics at ha ha that's clearly not the case. The hysteria has not gotten less and therefore your prediction that once the election happened, the hysteria would subside. You are wrong, there's more hysteria than ever, so I guess you're wrong, to which I responded. During the election, people thought that there were going to be, and I'm not making this up. You remember it right. People thought they were going to be concentration camps for gays when President Trump got elected.

That was an actual belief. Clearly, that's not going to happen. There were people who thought the the entire economy would crash and they were entering a depression. I don't see anybody worried about that anymore. People thought that the president would start a nuclear war. It looks like the opposite is happening. He might be the safest president. We've ever had look at North Korea, for example. People thought that it would be crazy if he went into these trade wars because then we'd be in some terrible trade war problem, not doesn't seem to be a problem at all. People thought that Rovers Wade would be overturned well. I can't say that it it will never be impacted, but I think people guys now that, even if it did it would just get kicked back to the states and that the conservatives on the

really really really like president, so the odds of it changing are actually kinda low. It might- and you know, the people in the left have a perfectly reasonable reason to be worried if that's their priority, but the odds of it are kind of low right select lower now than it really was, although I think some people would disagree about that. So, if you look at today, what are the things that people are worked up about today compared to during the election? This is the best predictions I've ever made were not worried about concentration camps were not worried about depressions were not worried about nuclear war were were poor. I don't even know how worried we are about climate change. It's probably the same, but it's not really so much because Trump did or did not do anything. It's just that, there's nothing you can do so. I would are.

That the things we will work up, oh and then what about russian collusion? Remember russian collusion was there was some certainty that the president was actually more aligned with Russia than with United States. That was a real belief. I don't think that's a belief anymore. Do you? Do you think that even the president's critics still believe that he's working with Putin? I don't think so, because the evidence says failed to materialize, so it might be true. The people are still emotionally worked up, but look the things they're worried about, don't check the headlines here, the headlines.

Compare these headlines to concentration camps, depressions and nuclear war. There was the things we worried about for now. Here are the headlines. New White House fury comes from the first lady, the top story. The top story on CNN is that the first lady didn't like somebody who worked at the White House Right and my wrong about that. That's the top story. Now yeah somebody mentioned the wildfires in the wildfires are gigantic problem. But it's not really a president trump problem right. He didn't he didn't really, because that, let's look at some of the the other big stories Don Lemon says. There's chaos in the White House because of money- I guess that's the store, there's the top stories thank

at that. These are your top worries in the country. Is that Melania was being to somebody in the White House all or some other top stories? The the singer named Pink, thanks husband has a warning for wild fired looters. That's the top story. There's a a husband of a of a singing rock star was warning people not to loot, that's it or some other top stories, there's a lot of vote counting in Florida and all the right people who want a good result. So, let's look at even the Florida story. What's what's the biggest like problem, you know with the the election. Is that Florida look sketchy,

and what is but what's happening right. It's easy to look at just the negative, but what's happened in Florida. Florida is causing us to all's scream at the top of our lungs that we want the same thing. How weird is that in Florida you have to two size that are violently agreeing that every legal vote has to be counted. If your biggest problem, is two people yelling at each other, the same thing hey, I like the color green, oh yeah. Well, I like the color green too, that's our biggest The right now, people violently yelling at each other. All the legal votes should be included. If that's your problem, you're in a pretty good place, let's look at some other

top stories? Nothing yeah, I mean basically, nothing. The others are crime stories. Local crime. No, give me give me a fact check. Have I made the case that these things people were afraid of during the election did not materialize and things were complaining about, and yet our emotions are still at the tent. I will agree with that. Emotionally we're still at ten and ten, but the blooms, were worried about our absolute bullshit, the complete bullshit problems? What about the caravan right, the care of no matter which way it went, was

probably somewhat unimportant right. We don't need, we don't need more crime than we have to have, and we have to have rules and, and all of the discussion about it is important, But it's not important, like nuclear war is not important. Important, like a depression. Because no matter what was going to happen with this caravan probably would have led to some tightening an improvement in the border. Probably just didn't make that much difference. Those are our biggest problems. Not much of a problem you know I well do you know why health care is the top concern. Health care is the top concern. Because most of the other big problems got solved or other way to being solved. We're not about ISIS? So we can talk about healthcare, we're not talking about the economy. Not talking about jobs

I'm talking there's a lot of things. We're not talking about anymore, simply because. They're being handled quite well all right, uh, by the way. Am I wrong about this? Am I wrong that the problems that we were worried about, mostly the other side worried about during the election were gigantic world ending problems and with the stuff we're talking about now is Melonia didn't like somebody in the White House, I mean these are fundamentally different levels of problems now that the fentanyl

still huge and there are. There is some government actions that looks productive in that way, but we were talking about those things during the election and and that's not really a political problem to begin with, look at other things we're talking about we're talking about yeah prison reform yeah. These are just all positive things. Nineteen african, Eric and women Ranford judge jobs in one county and nineteen Anna nineteen black women won their elections in Texas. I don't know if I can say that enough. Games, yeah, I'm going say it. Three. Nineteen Nineteen black woman ran for Judge jobs in Texas and uh. Contain one I could just say

all day. Long like I just love the sound of it. You know if that's not a positive sign sign for the country, what the hell is yeah, if anything, we're gonna be talking about. You know how other people can compete with that kind of success. You gotta give it to black women there, killing it they're killing it. So how about some props, for

all right, so there's a polar bear story. Prison reform is not happening. They get trained to work, but nobody hires them. Well, it's a. I think. Prison reform is one of the toughest things you could ever tackle, which is also it's a good sign that we're tackling it. It means that other problems have reached a level where there you can put resources into this really intractable, tough problem, and I think it's like everything else. You try some stuff, you just push forward, see what works, what doesn't use if any of the work she keep pushin.

Well, let's get rid of the racist, all right yeah! You know I'm looking at your comments, and I heard some celebrity homes burned down in California. Yeah, that's the sort of it's it's bothersome to May and probably to Most of you that we talk about celebrity homes being burned down in California, and I get you know, there's an obvious reason. Why that's a story and you can't stop it, but you know there are 10s of thousands of people who can't afford they can't afford to rebuild and it's a major set back in their life and they are not celebrities so for the dozen or so celebrities we've heard of who lose their homes. Those are all the ones who can afford to rebuild they'll, just build nicer places in different different places

Oh, the light is already for California yeah you, I've been working with with Bill Pulte and you'll see some more of that. In a few weeks you can see some more coming from us on what to do with the the blighted and cleared land and in urban areas seems to me that the question of how do you build economically, so the people can have a high quality life and low cost. How do you? How do you make a good building that you could live in for a low low price? It feels like that's important everywhere now, because look you've got all these natural disasters were after it's done you need to rebuild, and a lot of the people who are rebuilding are not the rich people, so wouldn't it be great if we had the technology for rebuilding, there was very super efficient and low cost. If you look at the people were coming across the border,

what would you what, with the immigration look like if the people south of border had ways to build really cool efficient, low cost homes that that makes the cost of living much less or would they be more inclined to stay where they are because they could build their own home with? And if a you know, an like it, for example. So it seems to me that this big question of how do you could design a low cost life so that people, will never will have. High incomes can still have a great life like the middle class used to when I grew up, we didn't have much income, but we still had compared to what you could have today, pretty good life right. You didn't take that much money to have a reasonable job. My father worked in the post office

but just a clerk who stands at the post office window and with the odd jobs in the he worked, some painting and nights and weekends and stuff. He worked pretty hard, and my mother was a little bit, but with that, low, low level of income, we had open house yeah. We had uh cars that work most of the time and that world is going away Yeah, maybe it's tone tiny homes with solar panels on the roof well, I don't even know that they need to be tiny, so I think the tiny part is somewhat irrelevant to. I think we could build homes that are literally kits and that it's like legos and you could snap it together and that one person in theory you could create a home of the one person can build with their with their own two hands just snap it together

You could make it so the directions are clear and things can only go together. One way here, let me give you one example of how much improvement you could make with home. Building the materials for building homes always come in standard sizes, yeah like a floor panel might be one foot by one foot the lumber, is exactly the same length all the time if you were to if you were to build a home in which your design required you not to cut anything, you just buy everything off. The shelf in the year lumber is this long? So that LISA. The rooms are either this or twice this year, probably snapper together pretty quickly now the current materials. Maybe that's not the best idea, but if you design the Tyrael so that by their design were meant to snap together, I've got a feeling. You could make a snap together home and it would be

inexpensive and maybe better than other hopes, it doesn't have to be worse. 'cause, it costs less. It could be better, They already have manufactured homes, but if you've watched the process, it requires heavy equipment. You need a crane. You've got to transport this house. And then the house that's built in the factory is built by probably your union type labor and lots of overhead and expense. What? If you got rid of all that you can get rid of the factory you can get rid of all the labor? You can have this the parts made in the factories and sent directly to the site, and then the people just assemble there was a Sears home that was like this forty years ago. So imagine how much better we could do if we use that process today with modern everything we know about modern construction and materials and

three d printers. You know I I've. Imagine, for example, that you've got it. You just imagine this model you've got a home, the you've designed the community so that you have all the things a community needs, so you've got your people the same age, you've designed as well as good security. You've got people. Basically all your social needs are met. So you want to design the community first, not just the house but then imagine that the house, all of the building blocks stuff, is a kit. You can pick it up together and then all the little stuff like the knobs and the faucets and the door. Knobs is all 3d printed on site. So that all the little metal stuff in plastic stuff in the parts in the connectors and stuff. You just printed on site

So the only thing that gets shipped to the site is the stuff that comes in standard kitten. Sized forms you snapped together when you're ready to put in the door knobs with 3d printer, makes you some door knobs you snap them on all right more on that later and I'll talk to you all another time see you later,