Episode 251 Scott Adams: North Korea, Climate Change, Guilty Until Innocent
Date: 2018-10-08 | Duration: 1:01:57
Topics
MSM’s presentation of global warming is fraudulent President Trump’s rally comments… Democrats are the party of crime Democrats are bringing you Socialism-Venezuela Dr. Drew on Interface app yesterday Increasing postal fees from China to pay for fighting Fentanyl Jordan Peterson clarified his Kavanaugh statement Kanye is off Twitter Was the Pete Davidson SNL skit, telling Kanye to “stay in his lane”? Pompeo and Chairman Kim big smiles photo
I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a "boss" somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I'm trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.
See all of my Periscope videos here…
https://www.pscp.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1nAKERDOwylGL
Find my WhenHub Interface app here…
https://interface.whenhub.com
## Transcript
## [The Simultaneous Sip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=15s)
Hey everybody, I forgot you were there. Come on in. It’s time to get your coffee. Some people call this delicious beverage "coffee," but I don’t know where they grew up. Where I grew up, it’s "caw-fee," and it’s delicious. It’s time for all of us to enjoy a simultaneous sip of the beverage of our choice. It doesn't have to be coffee, but coffee is the best. Join me now for the simultaneous sip.
Ah, well, there was a prediction I didn't make that I should have. It goes like this: I should have said the other day—I was thinking of doing it and I thought, "Yeah, I'm not sure I want to do it"—President Trump is having such a good week that the anti-Trump media is going to have to go back to their old bag of tricks.
## [The Fraudulent Presentation of Climate Change](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=78s)
Sure enough, their old bag of tricks: climate change. There are big headlines on climate change. If we do not totally reverse things by 2030, there will be grievous harm to the world. I guess this news was going to happen anyway because the IPCC issued a report, but it’s kind of weird that the report comes out exactly at the time the Kavanaugh thing is done. Have you noticed the consistency of the news? If there’s a slow news time, there’s always a story that just plops right in. We haven't heard much about Russia lately. Do you remember Mueller?
I don't know whether we should worry about climate change this time or not. I will tell you that the way it’s presented, once again, is fraudulent. I'm talking about the way the news presents it, not the science. For the basic science, I assume if you add CO2 to a closed system, the temperature will go up. I would imagine that’s certain enough that we could call that science; we could call that true. But the projections are the hard part, with a lot of variables in play.
## [The Opportunity Cost of Climate Policy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=140s)
Here is the part that’s completely illegitimate, and every time I point it out, you should say to yourself, "Oh my God, why wasn't that obvious before you pointed it out?" It goes like this: the world doesn't have one decision to make. Climate change is not the one thing we have to figure out. If you spend all of your money, or some trillions of your money, on climate change, you won't have money for the other stuff.
When they say climate change could cause us to have a trillion dollars of problems, you have to weigh that against what else you would do with that trillion dollars. Would you give everybody healthcare? Would you win a war? Would you make sure that a comet heading toward the Earth didn't get us? Would you have more defense against a pandemic? Would you build your borders so that you can protect them? You’ve got other things to do with this money.
Somebody called it the "opportunity cost." That is correct. I call this a "half-pinion." If the only thing you’ve looked at is the cost of doing nothing—and in this case, you may have looked at the benefits of doing something—but you’re not looking at the opportunity cost, the trillion-plus dollars of things you could have been doing instead. What would be better? Would it be better to remediate, to relocate people, to build more water facilities?
## [Reforesting the Sahara](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=205s)
Suppose we took a trillion dollars and put it into reforesting the Sahara, which apparently we know how to do now. Believe it or not, we know how to reforest deserts. That’s a real thing. If you were to reforest the Sahara, my understanding is that it would cool down that region, and that region has a lot to do with the hurricanes that form in the Atlantic.
If your problem from global warming is too many hurricanes—and that’s just one of the several gigantic problems predicted—what if you spent the same amount of money getting rid of the source of the hurricanes? I don't know what would happen, but the point is there are lots of ways to spend the money. If we're not keeping that in mind, we're only looking at half of the situation.
## [The Democrats' Coalition Conflict](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=326s)
The Democrats are trying to do two things that look like they would be hard to do. One is they’re trying to paint themselves as the party of "believing women." Believing women is specifically in the context of accusations about sexual assaults. Believing women is good, but it sounds a lot like "guilty until proven innocent," or it can slide into that.
If you’re trying to form a party that is a coalition of women and minorities—which seems to be the Democrats' brand—is "believing women," which gets very close to guilty until proven innocent, good for African Americans? You could make an argument that it’s good for everybody, but does it feel that way? If you were Black—and I’m not, so it’s dangerous for me to say how you think—I’ll just put it in the form of a question: If you were Black and your biggest issue is that the police are blaming you for stuff you didn't do, how is that compatible with changing the thrust of the Democratic Party into "guilty until proven innocent"?
If you’re Black, do you want to be in the "guilty until proven innocent" party? That feels like exactly the opposite of Black Lives Matter, doesn't it? It feels like the Democrats have said women are going to be the primary focus of their persuasion, but I don't know if these things are compatible. If my biggest issue were police pulling me over and accusing me of things I didn't do, that feels exactly the opposite of their current thrust. I don't know how they hold the Black vote. We'll see.
## [Branding the "Party of Crime"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=509s)
I was amused watching the President's rally speech in Kansas. He tried to label the Democrats as the "Party of Crime." It’s very clever. You could make an argument the other way, but it’s clever branding because immigration is about crime, and being tough on crime is the Republican thing. I had been saying they were the "Party of Hate" for several months, but that’s probably not as good as the "Party of Crime."
"Party of Hate" isn't as immediately agreeable to people because of how they’re already primed; Democrats would just say Republicans hate minorities. The advantage of "Party of Crime" is that you don't think of Republicans as being pro-crime. They are so "follow the rules." They are strong on police, strong on military, and strong on borders. If anything, the criticism is that they’re too strong against it. Calling the Democrats the "Party of Crime" is actually pretty effective. We'll see if it sticks.
## ["Socialism Venezuela" - Sticky Persuasion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=695s)
The President always likes to use visual language. He likes to brand things in provocative ways because that makes it sticky. It makes it repeatable and turns it into a soundbite. He was talking about how the Democrats want to bring you socialism. Talking about a concept is not very powerful. Saying "Socialism is bad, capitalism is good" is too abstract.
But visual things that have an existing hook in your brain can be powerful. President Trump goes, "And the Democrats, they want to bring you Socialism-Venezuela." He almost made "Socialism" and "Venezuela" like a hyphenated new word. He puts his hand out with "Venezuela," and I can't stop saying it. It is so freaking sticky. Say it with me: "The Democrats are bringing you Socialism-Venezuela." You can’t get that out of your head. He puts a visual on it, he makes it memorable, and sometimes he makes it a little bit wrong so you criticize him for it, but you’re still thinking about it.
## [Dr. Drew and the Interface App](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=757s)
Yesterday, Dr. Drew went on my startup's app, the Interface by WhenHub app. It’s where anybody can contact an expert and get an immediate video call. The expert sets the price and says when they’re available. Dr. Drew was taking calls yesterday. I think I was his first call. I had a paid call with Dr. Drew and I asked a number of questions that I would never ask my own doctor.
I realized something during the call: do you feel your doctor is rushing you sometimes? Most doctors do the best they can not to make you feel that way, but because of the system, you know the doctor is being paid by the call, not by the time. You’re always conscious that the doctor wants to get to the next one because there are people waiting. Your sense of politeness makes you want to be rushed.
But with the Interface app, because the doctor is charging by the minute, I wasn't rushed. I don't think the doctor would care if I spent more time because he's being paid for it. I found myself asking questions about things I'd always been curious about but were not an immediate problem. I got amazing information from one of the most knowledgeable medical people on the planet for a very reasonable price.
## [On-Demand Experts for News](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=940s)
We're having this big discussion about memory in the press right now. I have a friend, Carmen Simon, who wrote the book *Impossible to Ignore*. It’s a book about memory. Wouldn't it be great if you were a journalist or a blogger writing about the Kavanaugh thing and Dr. Ford's memory, and you could just pick up the app, find an expert on memory, and have a live call with a published PhD expert in the field?
The way news is covered could change because of this. Every time a plane goes down, the press looks for an aviation expert. Wouldn't it be great if they just picked up the app and found a pilot who has flown that very plane? People ask how to invest—the app is supported by a cryptocurrency we created called the "WHEN." If you own the WHEN and the app does well, the token is likely to go up in value due to demand, though we don't call it an "investment" in the legal sense.
## [Using Postage to Fight Fentanyl](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=1187s)
I talked about an idea yesterday: increase the postage that China has to pay to mail a package to the United States. Use that extra money to buy fentanyl detectors so we can check all the mail coming from China. Fentanyl from China’s illegal drug labs is probably killing 30,000 people a year, including my stepson this latest week.
Is it practical to increase postage? I’d love to ask an expert on the app about international postage exchange rates. We’re entering a "Golden Age" where physical problems are mostly solved and we now have information problems. This postage idea is a perfect example.
The best part about the idea is that it puts the spotlight on China for being bad international citizens. It’s not even about the money; it’s about having a story ready-made for the media. It shames China into doing more to stop the fentanyl war. They really don't want us talking about how many tens of thousands of people they’re killing here because it affects trade negotiations. It stiffens the spine of US citizens. China is a "frenemy"—we coordinate on North Korea and trade, but we have issues with intellectual property. If the US population thinks of them as "Fentanyl China," which they should, the President has more negotiating power.
## [The Case for the Death Penalty for Fentanyl Dealers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=1806s)
I lost my stepson this week. He was eighteen. Another friend his age died the next day. This is why you raise the question of postage or branding China as the source.
Regarding the border, I don't know how much a wall stops fentanyl because it's so small you could hold a bottle in your hand that could wipe out a city. However, I heard a fentanyl dealer was protected because of sanctuary city laws. I’ve stayed out of the sanctuary city conversation because I’m emotionally and socially bonded to the immigrant population in California, but if it’s protecting fentanyl dealers, I’m changing my opinion.
We need to start executing major fentanyl dealers. I am absolutely pro-execution for big dealers, not the local street users. If you use a gun to kill a hundred people, you get executed. Fentanyl kills hundreds. I could pull that lever so easily and I wouldn't even feel a little bit bad. It would be a good day for me. Actually, that’s a really good argument *against* the death penalty—the fact that I could do it with joy. I can see it from both sides.
## [Jordan Peterson and the 48-Hour Rule](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=2115s)
Jordan Peterson floated the idea that Kavanaugh should be sworn in and then voluntarily quit to rehabilitate his reputation. I and many others questioned that. Quitting would look guilty. To his credit, Peterson clarified in a follow-up tweet that it was a thought experiment.
I have a "48-Hour Rule." If someone says something ambiguous or provocative, give them 48 hours to clarify before you judge them. Don't put your own interpretation on an ambiguous statement and then blame them for your interpretation. Peterson clarified, and the clarification was accepted. He was thinking in public. Most people shouldn't think in public, but he’s earned the right to do that. He’s an international treasure because he sticks to facts and logic rather than being strictly "Left" or "Right."
## [Kanye West and Creative Destruction](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=2547s)
Kanye is off Twitter. Keep in mind, to understand Kanye, you have to use the Trump model. Trump did all the things smart people said he shouldn't do, and it worked because he was doing things that worked for *Trump*. Kanye can do things that wouldn't work for anyone else.
Kanye lives in a state of continuous creation, and you can't create without destroying. When Kanye destroys his social media, he's also creating. If a regular politician did that, they’d just be destroying a useful asset. But for a creator extraordinaire, destruction and construction are tied.
## ["Stay in Your Lane" is Loserthink](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=2791s)
I saw the *Saturday Night Live* skit where Pete Davidson mocked Kanye. Davidson is a really funny guy; he made me laugh even though I completely disagreed with his point. But he used what I call "loserthink." He said Kanye should "stay in his lane" because he’s a musical genius, not a historian.
Would I be talking to you right now if I took that advice? There are 2,000 people watching me right now because I didn't stay in my lane. Every day, someone tells me that something I wrote—usually *How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big* or *Win Bigly*—changed their life. None of that happens if I stay in my lane. President Trump wouldn't be President if he stayed in his lane. "Stay in your lane" is the worst advice you could ever give a genius. Whatever made someone successful in one thing probably has some spillover.
## [Presidents for the Times](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=3036s)
I’ve said that Obama was a good fit for the time he was President—a calm voice when the economy was on the edge. I think Trump is the best fit for now because the economy is screaming and we need someone who takes risks.
But what happens when the economy is strong and external threats are gone, yet we still have health care issues, opioids, and urban blight? We have the money; what we're missing are *ideas*. Congress doesn't come up with good ideas. In that situation, do you need an Obama or a Trump? Maybe not. You might need someone like Kanye—someone who can change the national mind and add diversification to how we’re thinking. Before you dismiss Kanye, consider that he’s offering the thing we don't have: creative destruction.
## [North Korea Progress](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjqz0z_q1w&t=3342s)
North Korea has agreed to work on the details of letting inspectors in. I want to show you a picture of Mike Pompeo and Kim Jong Un. Look at the smiles on these two guys. Look at the way they’re looking at each other. This is not hard science, but when I saw that, I said to myself, "The deal is done."
I don't mean the details—those could take three years—but the main thing. They look like two people who have a secret they can't wait to tell you. I believe the thing that will break the logjam is an agreement to end the war. There is a technical standing state of war, and Kim is asking for a declaration of an end to hostilities. That’s a completely reasonable thing to ask for because it makes it harder for a President to attack.
Kim has already shifted the propaganda in the North from "we need nukes to be great" to "we used our nukes to end the war and get prosperity." It’s a perfect setup. He can say the nukes got the US to the table and made them equals. If he pulls this through, he deserves to share a Nobel Peace Prize.
That’s all for now. I’ll talk to you later.