Bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump hello, Austin and sparkles and Joanne, and everybody come on in here if you're prepared- and I think you probably are- you might already have your beverage if you have a beverage like I have a beverage ha ha. You know what comes next and it's good, although it's really good bitcoin, seven thousand. Well, I hope not, but maybe, and now the simultaneous hip. So you know how I like to talk about the news: that's not in the news at the negative space

so sometimes you have to look at the news and then sometimes you have to look at what is suspiciously not in the news and see if it means anything. Does it mean anything that IRAN is not in the news now, there was You remember, they made some threatening noise about the straits of four, and suddenly, a retired military people said well that would take about five minutes to clear out their entire navy, but is it my imagination word that which should have been an enormous story. Dama all the headlines, just sort. Nobody cared with

They can speak us, seven, not being news. I'm blocking, however, Christie is might take. A minute seems unlockable so it seems to me that we might have a strategy for a that. Looks like this and all articulated to the way, I'm not sure I can say articulate anymore, but I will talk about in a way that makes it look like a strategy, because if I were in charge this is what my strategy would be. My strategy would look like this Jeyran or n Korea or any of the countries that we have trouble with um,

we don't hate you a fact we like to help you out, but here be a trading partner and we can't let you be part of the international commerce. If you you know criminals, essentially if you're, aiding terrorists of that sort of thing, So it's nothing personal, and you can do whatever you want to do with that. We're just not going to allow international trade to happen with you and just d personalize. It says nothing about anything except you're, not you're. Not above the bar. That's the minimum bar to be part of the international finance and trade relationship. It looks like that's what we're doing it looks like we're. Just strangling their economy in. Or particular hurry. Doesn't matter? If you know,

A year five years doesn't much matter so is to be that Randy is going to start making noise about the let's talk, so I would expect to see pretty soon so expect to see you here make some kind of noise about hey. Maybe we can get past this, maybe there's something we can do here. That doesn't mean that it would be easy to negotiate anything we can live with, but I'm expecting them to at least make is, is about being reasonable in part because we're not making very loud noises about that gives them some space. You know just a little bit of space to say: hey what are we talk? Now, on a periscope either yesterday or the day before, I can't remember- I talked at a news story that turns out to be fake news, at least that's my current thinking, and that was that China hacked him.

His email. Now you might know that CNN is reporting that they look for a, information from the FBI and the FBI said nope. We do not confirm that, and so CNN is reporting. It didn't happen now, that's still I suppose some wiggle room that could be lying or they don't know what somebody else knows or something like that. But yeah the whole courtesy copy of her emails to China. Is apparently fake, apparently thank now that doesn't mean that the bunking of the story is right: either we live in a world where you can never tell, but personally

I'm going to treat it as fake news and offer my periscope retraction of anything. I said about chinese hacking of her over email um. Now, let's talk about Desantis and what everybody talking about in the headlines, so locations like the hill and CNN are painting him as a terrible racist and their evidence goes as follows. That he's running against an african American banned from in Florida and Name Gillum in that he is said to unfortunate things one. He said he doesn't want, the voters to monkey up the good results. So they're, getting with policies etc under the Trump administration and people say wave

monkey up isn't even the term and you would never say monkey if it weren't black guy, so it must be obviously racist. Now, on top of that, apparently and CNN came up with this- I don't know if they, the first come up with the video but there's video of enter is also in public, referring to his opposition gillum, as articulate. Now. Most of you know that art Well is one of those words that racist used to use to act, surprised that there was a black person who could sound smart. So generally speaking, when? U sees Famous white person call any black person, articulate your flag, goes off and says: poop poop poop, that's a little racist

so we have two bits of evidence. The dissenters is racist. Those two things now let me say as clearly as possible he is a dumb the We can be sure about that at least right. So, It's pretty dumb to use that word, articulate at the least so that's the minimum that he is is pretty dumb to use that word He's pretty dumb to make monkey references in this day and age. In that context, now. Is it racist or I'll talk about that neck but at a minimum it was dumb, why do I say it's dumb, if you're arguing with me. It means you're, not watching the news. You walked right into a trap now if walk into a trap. That's an obvious trap,

You can still blame the person who laid the trap, sure You know nothing would have happened without the trap, but if you See the trap- and you walk right into it, you're a dumb, ass, ok, so sorry, the minimum that dissenters has to explain is: why is a dumb ass is minimum level of explaining and that's not done mind. Reading that's based on the fact he did things which I will We considered obvious mistakes. There are things I have done. Had I bet in my right mind and in that situation, so, let's not defend everything he's done at the very least that he was a dumb ass twice. But let's talk about the the. Is that those are signs that he is a racist suppose uh the sent us has

instead of articulate suppose he had said my candidate is very persuasive in talking about his socialist policies, Would you have considered that racists. Say that he is very persuasive well, you might not know unless you look it up there persuasive is it's a synonym for articulate is one of the words that is a replacement for it so it's not the concept, that's the problem as he could have easily said. You know. Opponent he's a smart guy is very persuasive, he does a good. Representing his side, but you know I have other opinions blah that would not have sounded racist, but the actual choice of the specific word

is given as a signal that he is, this is the important part his x are saying that he. Intentionally used use that word as a dog dog, whistle racist secret dog, whistle. And that he also said monkey as sort of a secret dog whistled. Now, let's, work through the thinking of his critics ring to his critics. He was Intentionally using those words to let people who were voters, know the following things and correct me. If I'm wrong about this, so the critics theory of Desantis is the he was thinking privately Is reading his mind and they're saying you know well really? This is what he was thinking so his critics, he was obviously thinking.

The sounding like an obvious big old racist would if get more votes, just let that marinate for a moment does Santa says. Critics believe that in his private thoughts he was thinking you know, I'm not sure people can tell my critic. Is black I'd better, send some secret dog whistles and if I do also, the kind of secret dog whistles that are the obvious kinds. Not the really super secret ones. I'll send the ones that are so obvious that it will be a headline news and I'll be called a racist. From now all the rest of my life, but yeah that could work. I think I'm going to get some extra votes by outing myself as a giant racist while I'm running for governor in and have

Here, visibility and the connection to President trump- I don't see the downside in this. Ok, I'm going to go with the plan. And then he executed his plan. Two. Get more votes bye. Framing himself, a huge racist and wait for it. Here's the best part he's. Framed himself as an inarticulate, racist to get more votes. That's what his critics think he did Now, as I said, no matter what he was thinking internally. We can. Including was certainly the. But was he random, I mean is dumb and there is dumber than a stone. Alright, it's dumb to use those words 'cause, I think anybody his age. His level of experience should have known to avoid, though

those phrases and words, even though there are common words and phrases should have been smart enough to avoid them. He wasn't. But was he that dumb, they he thought his voters couldn't tell who is running against a black guy in the. Here to slip in some clues. Pretty sure they saw pictures of his opponent However, dumb you think his voters are, I'm most positive. They notice that he was a white guy running against the black guy. Did he need to tell them but wait Critics are saying more than that they're not saying no, no he's not just telling us his opponent is black. It's more than that he's also telling us his opponent is smart. Because that's what articulate means articulate means really good with words, your persuasive you're smart

you can't really be articulate without also being smart right. Those are loser joined so by talking about his opponent as being smart, an african American in a country that just had eight years of an african american president and kind like them. You know it's sort of a good place to be right now, if you're running for office frankly, so he thought that calling himself The critics believe that Desantis thought they make himself look like in inarticulate idiot would somehow get him more votes because his voters are even dumber than he is or something like that. So I can defend. I know somebody by tomorrow They'll be a headline in the hill saying cartoonist defends racist. I'm not doing that what I'm saying is. I don't know

What is thinking. For his. Obviously, he chose to words that are clearly a mistake based on the based on the fact that there was a bad result and based on the fact that you- and I probably would have seen it coming in- would have avoided it. I mean I certainly would have now uh huh. There will, he was, somebody says, he's going to win, no matter what who's who's actually has in the polling. I don't actually know that. Let me let me update one more thing: I completely agree that there was a time in history that if a white person said a black person was articulate, it was nothing but right. List. Certainly there was a time in history that was completely true. But when you're running against the candidate, who

absolutely belongs where he is which is running for governor. He earned it. He earned it in every way. You can earn that sort of thing. And in that situation, running for governor. A major state again someone who I believe a Gillum has a hell of a resume right doesn't have military he's got he's, got like this great resume he's been a mayor when call somebody who is reached that level of success Arctic. Let I don't know It means the same thing. You know at what point do you just modernize, your thinking to the point where it is just another way to call somebody a good presentative of their team. You know their teams policy so you don't agree with because our is one of those one of the few words and again let me just say as clear as possible a dumb for using that word, there's no way that there's no way to defend it right, but I'm just walking

The fact that society has is evolving. And sometimes you have to stop and say, ok or things the same as they were or do we need to update our thinking and what time testing is that when you bring off of eight years of a black president. You've got a guy with all kinds of qualifications running for governor who has a good chance of winning. I suppose I don't know what the polls. But if you call that guy articulate it It just means that you don't want to give him a real compliment, but you need to say something that sounds polite, something that's obviously true, which is he's a good representative of the policies, and it might be just that now to go past that into imagine, I'm going to get into the good part. Now somebody says boring topic, no, just wait for the good part, it's coming up. Here's the good part

I suppose it's true that on some automatic, conscious level, that the in that dissenters chose was either of those words. Either there monkey it up or articulate. Suppose you said to yourself the reason, he chose those words is that he was sort of sub consciously influenced by the fact that he, so maybe lives in our race- is part of the country and he's running against african american men. So suppose you suppose it wasn't conscious if it if it wasn't conscious is

still a racist. Can you be an unconscious racist? Here's? My answer to that? Can you be an unconscious racist? The answer is yes, because one hundred percent of people are one hundred percent of people of every color. Every type are reflexively racist, meaning unconscious. Not thinking about it is just a reflex to be good people in the year? Twenty eighteen is not. Abandon the fact that your brain is a bad pattern, recognition machine, which is what it is. Your brain looks for patterns and then, x on those patterns, but it's not very good at it. I'm writing a book about this by the way we're not really good at recognizing patterns accurately. We just see and we say aah every time I

somebody with a hat they give me a dirty. Look people with hats. Hey me, I hate people with hats, right. That's not a real pattern. It's just something that you thought you notice. So it is, Impossible on the reflexive level, ' where everybody's brain is just a pattern, recognition machine. Where we all evolved with the natural instinct to prefer the people who look the most like us, if you've got a twin, you like that twin better than anybody else. If you've got a family, probably like them better than anybody else, and they probably look a little bit like you. You even married people who sort of look like you, so the most normal thing for a human being, is to prefer people who look a little bit more like themselves than than different. So is Desantis a refill, serve sort of automatic,

Racist on an unconscious level- yes, of course, just Everyone of you, just like Gil amiss, just like every single They all have a normal. Now the test is whether you can think past it Can you use your higher levels of thinking what what little we have to a better person than to be a person who judges based on patterns. What are the people who are who are saying that Disentis is a horrible racist doing. There, judging on a pattern. So there's, in a pattern, somebody just said in the comments arguing against my, play that we tend to like people who look like us. So

just mention that my girlfriend Christine that looks nothing like my quote: rat. Okay, that's true! This is a general statement, but here's the thing the thing that makes people good people or bad people is not whether they were born with bad pattern. Recognition, because that would just be all of us the. The higher level thinking the better person, the more moral or ethical behavior is can you notice, when you're doing it and then avoid it. Now to send this. There's no evidence that he's an actual racist, There is evidence that he's a dumbass who used words that make him look like one. There's, definitely evidence that there may also be evidence that he was subconsciously, influenced. 'cause he's running against the in Africa American man,

Somehow these words just sort of are more likely to come to your mind because you have you have a mind that just works that way, Let me let me give you my example, and I've talked about this before and I think it's relevant I've known over my adult life? That, whenever I'm talking to someone who is black. The odds of me having to use the word black as a color for something in the environment or something that happens. Naturally, in the conversation approach is one hundred percent Ann can't figure out why that is other than I'm unconsciously influenced by the fact. I'm talking to somebody who's black, and I can't tell you how many times I've caught myself and try to work around the word you know yeah if you're playing checkers you know, do you want or say? Do you want the white pieces of the black pieces? It feels like.

You know there are one million reasons that you would say the word black just talking about the environment, and I can't tell you How many times I'm in that car. Patient and I think to myself. Ok, the word going to come out of my mouth now is black Just talking about you know the color of my phone case, but why And I actually catch myself and I say it might what I've said this, except when I'm we do so many black what I've thought of even this conversation with this line of reasoning, and the answer is maybe not we left, we might actually be influenced by environment. What we're looking at? What we're thinking of thinking about the context, all that stuff all seeps into your choice of words and it's sort of automatic, so here's the bottom this. If we are mind reading based on people's choice of words-

that are otherwise words that have you know normal meanings, such as the monkey reference on the articulate reference. If, I think that those are good enough for us to terms of the inner thoughts, the morality, the ethical behavior? higher moral reason of the senator we're just being idiots. We can certainly say, because it's a way of normal minds, work that there's a good chance that is. He chose those words because he is running as a black candidate and vocabulary seeps into your thinking which is not an indication of how he would act. It's not an indication of what you thinks is how he should be it's not an indication of his own self image, is not an indication of that he's going to teach his kids to be racist. It's not an indication that sending any secret bat whistles to the racist. It's not indication of any that

is an indication that, when you enter a topic and that's your context, You tend to introduce words that are sort of about that topic and you do it automatically, still a dumbass for you. Those words no defending how smart it was. Okay, but to go the extra level and say therefore, in his inner thoughts, which we cannot see, we judge him to be a racist. I ask you: would you want to be judged by that same standard? Not about racism necessarily, but should you be punished because other People believe you have inner thoughts that are bad. Is that the world you want to live in. I certainly would like to live in a world where, if people do bad things, they they might have consequences.

But if you want to live in a world where thinking bad things in someone else's opinion,. Someone else's opinion of your personal inner thoughts. There you have not expressed. If you want to be judged by that standard, I suggest we've got big problems. Just get rid of the insulter. Alright, so did anything I say there uh sound reasonable. Oh, let's talk about sloppy Carl Bernstein Bernstein, There are too many people in the news with steam or staying in their last name, because I have a terrible time remembering which it is, is it Feinstein? Is it finds teams that Bernstein? Is it Bernstein

I think it's Tina in both cases, So, let's. And by the way, if you were just watching this out contacts, you would say my god think that guy must be Anti semitic or something cuz he's making fun of with jewish last names. So if you saw anything out of context, you would make assumptions about Maine but I think most of you know that I've mispronounced just about everybody's last name on this periscope and at one point or another. So let's look at the president's tweets uh I want to see the Bernstein tweet In there's, a lot of tweeting going on here, he's been busy bear with me.

It looks like you gave Jeff Sucker Burg, a nickname, little Jeff Z, so here's a tweet from three hours ago, President, the hatred in extreme bias of me by a CNN has how did their thinking and made them unable to function? As I've always said this, going on for a long time, little z within meeting soccer, Burger Jack, Zuckerberg. Has done a terrible job his raising suck eighteen t should fire him to save credibility at should fire of what they'll.

There's a there's a story from eleven hours ago about Connie. W says Trump wants to be the greatest polite president for black Americans. That's in bright bar. I could read that article on where's. He got so many tweets. Almost all of his tweets rebels about CNN for a while there are here it is and then is being torn apart from within based on there being caught in a major lie and refusing to admit the mistake, sloppy Carl Bernstein a man who lives in the past and like you degenerate fool, making up story, story is left out all over the country. Well, that's literally true fake news. So he's calling Carl Bernstein sloppy girl,

Bernstein and lives in the past and thinks, like you, degenerate fool. That's probably now uh huh, I thought of The no my first impression was hey he's re using is re using as insults, because I thought Michael Moore was sloppy and I thought Steve Bannon was sloppy for now. Karl burns Dean is, sloppy. So not only did Carl get insulted, but he got it a third hand in Seoul yeah. You can see them, you can imagine. This is observation of the president getting tweeting? Thank, I gotta give this guy a nickname, alright. How that how crummy Carl now there's no good he's now fresh, nickname, I'm going to give him a stale, nickname I'm going to give him.

Nickname they used to belong to Michael Moore and Steve Ban and live with that sloppy Carl Bernstein. So. Alright. What's what else is going on so N Korea is getting interesting, so the path North Korea probably looks like this because North Korea and the United is, are not as belligerent as before, meaning that the President and Kim Jong Moon at least seemed to have some kind of chemistry. We are able to withstand the little bumps of the negotiation, Aledo will withdraw from this or you're not being serious. Because the relationship of looks incredible so right now

China is allegedly being soft on Korea because it puts pressure on the United States, and maybe that has to do with trade negotiations, so Trump is sorted in North Korea off the table by saying that he has no reason to spend a bunch of money on a war games, he'd, it looks like he's going to negotiate a trade deal with China first to take that off the table and then get back to North Korea, but before he can get the to the table. He probably has to be a candidate of Canada to the table. It looks like a release. The reporting from the Trump Administration is that things might be close, but let me close with can So if we get Mexico and Canada on Board for trade that maybe you get something going in Europe and then China will have more of a.

More of a difficulty explaining why they're the odd country out? Why is it China? It's own citizens, will ask it hey, is a nobody that this is the only China can't reach an agreement? Is it because we're asking for too much or is it because we're being unreasonable and it's hurting us so I think you see with a squeeze play from both sides. So you see President Trump and president. She in China, two very capable negotiators who are using every tool at their disposal to get an advantage, and it's kind of interesting. It's kind of interesting all right. Let's skews Maine uh,

Because of NEO Imperialism, you know what I see: words like that NEO Imperialism there some words that just signal to me that somebody is not a clear thinker the labeling stuff always is always like a it's like a flag If someone is calling somebody a fascist or races during NEO imperialist any of those sort of generic labels, The usually that's, not a deep thinker, whoever slapping those labels on let me ask you something about socialism, so I I'm change my criticism from CNN to Fox NEWS now, because unfair I'm affair pundit sometimes- and let's talk about Fox NEWS

now I did. I criticize them for making a big deal out of the tragedy with forget her first name tibbits. The woman killed by someone who is illegal, and I argued, as did her, although I believe on Fox NEWS, they're focusing on this one crime comes off as racist, because you can have opinions on the border if you're, focusing on an anecdote is because you're doing it to persuade Molly tibbets. Yes, thank you. Doing it to persuade and you're doing it to persuade because of their racial difference, So to me, it's a to focus too much on any anecdote whatever it is,. But it's also very effective, so for being honest, and you know I like to sometimes

Remove the ethical consideration from the tool, so you can see them clearly individually. It's probably pretty persuade have to hammer on that one example. Now I see the three question marks are you saying is just. Let me be more clear because I may have been a little unclear. It comes off as racist. So I'm not saying that I can see in the inner thoughts of anybody you made any decisions on Fox NEWS, so nothing like that's happening, so I'm not assuming that in their inner thoughts that they are racists. What I am saying is that, like using the word, articulate a like using the word, the own monkey,

if you're running against african american man. You should know that anybody is going to see this as a little better racist. So I think that was bad programming choice, but Persuasion right, so I don't like it for all the ethical moral, your reasons but as of persuasion, persuasion method, it probably is effective and I don't like that but here's the other complaint about Fox NEWS lately, and I'm seeing them going at going after the Bernie. Let's say the Bernie proteges, the Alexandra Cortez last name. I can't remember Alexandra back up a Casio Alexandra, Ocasio Cortez got it. So I see fox.

After her and other people who have some socials leading socialist, leading and calling them or timeliness and simplifying there, there, positions to that degree just feels illegitimate. This is just persuasion is not reporting. Now, if the opinion piece of people do it, I get that, but so here's my question to you it is now. This is a serious question for most of you who believe that Alexandra and Bernie and even Gillum those of you who would label them socialists, I have a quiz, for you is uber socialist,

because what what over does is, allow many people to share a car. No, it's an organized process for doing that with a driver who actually ownership, but it is there is a way to share resources is uber a socialist idea. Does anybody think that. It's voluntary, so it's ok, ok is social. Now socialists is voluntary. Somebody says clear: Not no, no, ok! So those are the answers. I thought I would get so you would all agree that Sharing resources is not socialist.

Zuber does it. You know you do it in lots of different contexts where people share resources. You know if you go to hotel, let's a shared resource, lots of people. Say in the same hotel all right. Somebody just said hotels same time I did so. Let me ask you this suppose. Was one of these socialists came up with the following plan. Are you ready for this suppose they came up with a plan, for single payer healthcare, but they said it's optional- so the only people have to be in the plan where everywhere is universal health care. Are there roughly half of the country who think it's a good idea and the other. I can do whatever they want. They can use the free market. They cannot have anything, do whatever they want.

Would you be would be okay. With that, if if there was a single payer plan and the only hold on here? The best part and the only people who paid for it including any any debt. Yet in curd, where the people who opted in. Would you be ok with a half, let's say one slash, two socialists, ocean where you don't have to be part of it and you don't have to pay for it and if it goes wrong. It says nothing on you. As long You can get your private insurance and your private health care. Would you care if half the company chose a public option that was only siloed off to half of the country Somebody says it's still state socialism, so it's bad but that's not a reason. You have to give a reason

because in this scenario, the socialist silo. Would be competing in the same country against the free market. So if the ok did a better job. Those people would be completely free to just jump over. It would be in the free market. It doesn't work well So let us let us spend for a moment the question of whether it would work 'cause, I don't think we know exact I don't know exactly why I wouldn't work, but I'm testing your thinking now when somebody says that's fantasyland, keep in mind. This is a mental exercise, I'm not as thing that a thing that will happen, but I'm testing your definition of socialism. Is if your definition of socialism it, is that, as long as you have a choice of being in it or not, you're ok

It's also a question of whether the government is involved or not. So go to another level. Let's say that the government is not part of this. Let's say That the socialist themselves self organized so that way, ever is in charge of it is not the government of the United States, but maybe just some management entity kind of like you know, Kaiser Kaiser, HMO and. In it's just siloed off and they have universal healthcare, but they also pay for it, so their taxes would so I load off and they pay more for their taxes to pay for their own healthcare, but the other half of the country doesn't have anything to do with it. It's not. Your government. Doesn't all of this, not your money. It will never be your money under those conditions. Would you say that that is socialism? I don't think so. So here's

point when you label something socialist: it just Sweeps it off the table, because it elections, with every other socialist thing in the past that didn't work. It conflates it with communism that didn't work at all other kinds of things that didn't work instead of completing it with say the fact that european countries have universal healthcare plenty of plenty of situations where we share resources to lower costs. So there are new components of socialism that work in all kinds of situations, the components right? So if you could take away the bad components of socialism and keep the good parts which are in this case the good part would be. Everybody has health care, but other people in that silo that are supporting them might have higher taxes, but they would be okay with that. Here's, the key the people paying the high,

their taxes in this scenario would be ok with it they're doing it voluntarily so that the people in their silo can have healthcare. Is a socialist. I don't know. Can you get the real Scott back in the somebody think of it out of character today? What you've described is just a private insurance group. Well it's a private insurance group in which everybody who joins the group gets insurance, even if they can't afford it so a private insurance group still or is everybody to pay a premium? so I'm suggesting that even if you can't pay anything, you can still join that group and just give free healthcare pay. No taxes at all

the people who will pay, for you are the people who are also So in the group and uh so believe that their taxes should go to pay for other people. It's all voluntary. You are conflating issue. Man uh, I might be, but This is a mental experiment, so I don't know what you mean. So if you have, if you could be more specific, About what I have conflated, you may have a point. I just don't know what it is yeah so. The the main point is: if you take away two things, the requirement, in other words you're not forced to do. It and it's not necessarily the government that you elected- that's the boss of it all and it doesn't cost you anything under those conditions. Do you care if there's some socialism If you don't care about over because they don't

it's not the government, you do you don't have to use over. Dale has possessed Scott said things, some of you. Some of you are having a knee jerk reaction to The idea that there might be some way to give people the things that other people would call social. Without hurting anybody. So I described Linda be practical, you know probably isn't, but the fact is it wouldn't be all of your requirements for you not being involved in socials. The guarantee, yes, is somebody says the problem is the guarantee. So if the government is giving you Healthcare there's sort of a guarantee? They can just raise taxes if they need to. But I'm saying that if you UK

also make a rule that says the only people who ever pay those raise taxes of the people who opted in the other people don't have to so in a hypothetical world that wouldn't be a problem. Where does the money come from in this example? It would come from the taxes of the people who opted in, but not the taxes of the people who did not opt in so you would just have a different tax rate. For people who opted in or not no one rides uber for free right. I'm not saying uber is like this Huber is an example of something with a shared resource. The uber example was just to show you that You could have a shared resource without the other elements of the coercion or the government, and you know, can you put together the good parts of socialism without the bad parts.

Definitely not practical. I'm not sure why, but I'm not also arguing that it's practical is a prison. Prison, socialist, no is a prison socialist. Somebody asked. Let's see the government runs the prison and you don't have a choice about going in the that. That's a very clever question. Uhm yeah analogies are. You can see that the analogies are bad, the the Venezuela example it drives me crazy. Because Venezuela compared to America is sort of like me, comparing uber to health care. If you're trying to make a specific point, as I did with Uber, which is hey, there's a shared resource is the only

to the analogy, but then people get caught up in the bowl wait a minute. Oh uber has an app that's different health care like. No, no, no, that's not even the point. I'm not talking that all I'm not the uber is exactly like healthcare there's just one part of it that I'm making an analogy just the shared resource part Likewise, with Venezuela, when I hear Anybody say Venezuela is failing, because there are socialists, I say to myself They are socialist and they or failing, but I feel like we need to dig into this a little bit more right, because there Clearly, european countries were a little bit socialist that are working out. Could be that everything, Venezuela work except privatizing businesses, for example. I don't know if that's true, but it could be,

that was wrong with Venezuela or some specific things. It's not it's not all of socialism in every every possible thing. That's what, does your vendors well is not failing because they have universal Healthcare, for example, is failing, I think mostly, is failing, because the promised privatizing the businesses, but my friend They don't follow events in Venezuela, so I don't know uh. Europe has been socialist on the backs of America. That's a good point. We do. We do subsidize Europe by being effectively their their military. You know on top of their own military. Somebody said if uber is not bad as well as got

it's the dumbest thing anybody's ever sent a microscope. So after I just gave a whole description of how analogies cannot be used to compare you know to to say the two things of the same. Somebody says: are you one day all of me? Some Just just gets out years of Scott. You saying that over and others were the same things. How dumb can you read. No, I'm not saying that. But you can argue it all day. Long just don't involve me because I'm not part of that conversation, so those of you who are having imagined- conversations in your head in which year are against the thing you imagine that I said knock yourself out, Hitler was a socialist here. Are things I hate

as their stupid sit Heller. Is a socialist KKK used to be Democrats? Those two things are so friggin down that when I hear them my brain to both our biggest struggles inside my head, those things can be true without having any relevance to today. Alright, just no relevance, It is not true that, because Denmark, as socialized medicine, they're right on the verge of creating the holocaust. So to say that the killer was a socialist announces were socialist. It doesn't tell you anything, it doesn't tell you anything, except that the Hiller himself was your terrible monster.

And the fact that the KKK may have been started by Democrats are mostly Democrats. I don't care because the past is gone. The past doesn't exist, you know it if somebody is eighteen and they register as a Democrat, do I hold it against them, that in nineteen I don't know thirty or whenever there was some who was also a Democrat who was in the KKK? Do I hold that against an eighteen year old who signing up to be a Democrat because they want health care and don't want to pay for it? I mean it's ridiculous to bring that into the future oops somebody said Pope Dale, which made me think of the Pope. How many of you think the Pope can keep his job under the?

controversy of the there's, a semi credible allegation that he knew about child abuse, at least in one case it was soft on it. That's a bad choice, words. How many think the Pope can keep his job. I'm just looking for your comments here is a little bit behind yeah, I've got people here say the movers Heller and okay here is older. Yeah just stop using Hitler and Engine KKK history to to make any point about. Twenty eighteen is remarkable: socialist tend to be a

authoritarian. That might even be true, but it's not relevant. Those of you who have reflexive problems well, let me get nugget into that again. So nobody thinks the Pope is going to have to lose his job. It looks like, but then that is bad for the brand, very bad for the brands and with the pope. Isn't there a complaint that he hasn't spoken out about the controversy somewhat directly 'cause he's been accused of something pretty specific, and I don't know that he's spoken on the topic. Yet Pope is a social.

Every time. Let me tell you every time somebody gets called the socialist. I think the person saying it is not is not a credible they're. Not You know if you say there is an element of socialism, you don't like or didn't work or we know does work. I think that's valid, but just to say socialism, Socialists yeah, that I think that's the the rights version of racist. You know when the is out of ammo they'll, say to the right: IRL, races, and when the right is out of ammo, they called the left. Socials is just for the of ammo thing to say.

Socialism eventually requires force, yeah full socialism. What eventually require force, but I've never heard Anybody suggest such a thing. You know even the people who are talking about socialism. I think you have to see them as Trump like persuaders, who know that asking for the something like fuller socialism, which would include income, equality and such which you can, only do at gunpoint the people asking for that stuff. They appear to as negotiators who really want healthcare and education. And this seems to Maine that if America wants to be great,

that we should have at least as good an education and healthcare system as other countries. If we, if we don't have as good a systems as other countries, and you could argue whether we do or not, but in terms of coverage, we have a worse system yeah. We can't be that great without figuring out how to do those things. Now. I think you can get. There was something that looks more like innovation. So I'd like to get to the point where everybody has health care, everybody has free education or close to it because of the way we innovate and not because the government made you do it or major taxes. Higher

does capitalism require force, of course. So as so somebody said that socialism is eventually requires government force and then somebody else said. Doesn't capitalism require force, of course, the men You are the system that only exists, because if you got outside of the system, the government would literally kill you. You are in a system at the end of the barrel of a gun. You don't get a choice about paying your taxes uh. What's my prediction on the Pope I was asking of you, because I wanted to get a read on the public feeling about him in this If you had said oh he's, gotta go he's gotta go then I would have said well, that's probably how other people are feeling too and released. There would be enough conservatives who think that it would be hard for him to be a kredible. Pope

but very few of you said he needs to go yeah I mean some people did, but it seems like, the predominant opinion was there yeah, whatever yeah, let let the Catholics work it out, and the fact that there wasn't much caring, meaning there wasn't much emotion around on it here leads me to believe that the Pope will stay in office. So there's my prediction, my prediction is that there isn't enough emotional concerned about this. To remove him from office which is different from I'm, not giving you an opinion about whether he should be removed, that's up to the religion, you know, I'm not catholic, so I don't have a boat

there certainly have every right to be represented by whoever they want, but my guess is: there's not enough emotion around this to force him out of office uh. They do forgive. I'm not sure, I'm not sure the forgiving cakes and until there's some apologizing and some recognizing before you did role. So we don't have that yet. My followership is not the public correct, but you would expect that the

Conservatives would be the the tip of the spear in terms of being angry at the pope for this particular offense, because the people on the right tend to make a big deal about and should about child abuse. So if the people on the right are Concerned- and when I say if not concerned- I mean not at a highly, motional level they're just concerned that I'd say he's fine, I'm going to sign off now, we've gone long enough and I will say thanks for listening and I'll talk to you all later.