Episode 877 Scott Adams: Simultaneously Sip With Calming Words From Your Favorite Cartoonist

Date: 2020-03-28 | Duration: 1:09:09

Topics

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Content: Connecting suppliers with need: http://ProjectN95.com NYT article on Russian and Chinese malign actors Did POLITICO report Chinese propaganda as fact? CNN fact-checking TRICK VP Pence hospital supplies analysis Economists versus Doctors Suggestion: Nobody pays rent or mortgage for 3 months Raman Spectrometer modified to ID COVID-19 by saliva Potential of the TrumpPills

If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:14]

hey everybody come on in this is your source for the least gloomy opinions on the corona virus that you will ever see oh it's bad it's plenty bad and it's gonna be bad for a little while but there is also reason for optimism and hope and we can find a little way to feel good no matter what's happening because that's who we are that's how we roll there may be bad things in the world but that doesn't mean you have to feel bad not all the time not until you absolutely have to and for most of us we don't absolutely have to yet and one of the ways to make things better is with the simultaneous it but it doesn't take much all you need is a cup or a margaret glass of tank or challenger stein the canteen trigger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me down for the unparalleled pleasure that dopamine the end of the day the the thing that makes everything including a pandemic better

[1:16]

everything including a pandemic better it's called the simultaneous it and it's happening right now go yeah you know everything's better it's weird you know you think it's not gonna work then you take the sip and everything's a little bit better I mean not 80% better but you know you can feel it 1 2 percent I think you could feel let's let's talk about all the things there are many things and we will talk about them number one I continue to get messages from people in all manner of ways asking how to connect with potential buyers in some cases they have sources of masks and other protective equipment so I'll tell you at the top of this the the website to go to is a project and 95 now that's ad 95 as in the masks that

[2:16]

now that's ad 95 as in the masks that are in 95 types but it's not just masks so it's other protective stuff is in there and they are collecting people who have stuff to offer to sell and sources with buyers I don't I don't have any opinion of how well it works or anything like that I haven't used it but that's the government's preferred website for that stuff hilariously people sent me two articles today one was an article from the New York Times talking about all the Chinese and Russian disinformation so apparently the Russians and the Chinese have decided that in the middle of a pandemic this would be the good time to start damaging rumors for the United States tea couple it's time to decouple and Russia if we can decouple from your asses let's do that too because it seems that you were a Millian actor I like using that word

[3:17]

a Millian actor I like using that word when you hear people on TV saying I think there are a malign actor and every time I hear that I say is that even the right word are they maligning are they malign a bowl are they some of whom aligned is a right to say they're maligned actors why is that sound wrong that's what I say every time we hear that then I said I'm going to say that in public and see what happens but I digress so I'm reading the stories in the New York Times talking about all the Chinese disinformation and Russian disinformation and then it looks like the Russians might be laying a little bit low because they don't want to start any rumors that once once the pandemic is worse for them they don't want to start any rumors in the world that would blow back on them and then their own citizens would think it was true so they're being a little careful now who knows if you read the New York Times article about what Russian spies are thinking can you really believe that yes the New York Times is accurately

[4:18]

yes the New York Times is accurately reporting the internal thoughts of spies Russian spies who are by proof fashion liars by profession and the New York Times is reporting it like yeah we know what they're thinking yeah the Russians decided to hold off a little bit what how could you possibly know that you couldn't possibly know that that is the fakest of ridiculous fake booze I've ever read oh no it's not there's more so the Chinese disinformation seems well established because the actual diplomats were doing it and they were doing it in public you know the diplomats were saying well yeah I think it's some American service person who brought us that virus it wasn't so so while I'm reading the New York Times report about all these Chinese and other disinformation than somebody else said via Politico report saying that the the so-called Trump pills the hydroxychloroquine probably doesn't

[5:21]

the hydroxychloroquine probably doesn't work okay so Politico is reporting it probably doesn't work and one of the main pieces of information in it was from a Chinese use of University who said in their small test it looked like it didn't work but you know it does work it's a weird coincidence but the Chinese University I this I don't what are the odds of this really but quite a coincidence that the stuff that's widely available and practically free because it's so inexpensive that that stuff doesn't work but the things that are expensive and only made in China a couple other drugs show a lot of promise according to the Chinese study now in my opinion that just looks like Chinese disinformation but Politico reports it like it's a fact without without questioning it in the context of but of course everything China tells us is false but we're not going to mention that in the context of

[6:22]

going to mention that in the context of this one very important piece of information which could be transformative in terms of you know how we treat the virus transformative either way transformative that these pills don't work at all or transformative that they do there's one of the biggest questions of the world and they report it and of a Chinese source which obviously is government controlled it's a it's a university in China without the context that we're receiving a blizzard of disinformation and we know it we're not guessing and we see it it's in public their diplomats are actually saying it right in public so Politico what's going on here what's going on is is the Politico article actually for a disinformation now I'm not going to make an accusation that the that the publication or that the writer of it was knowingly you know accepting money from a Chinese source nothing like

[7:23]

money from a Chinese source nothing like that I'm not making that kind of observation I'm just saying that as an objective reader it reads exactly like it was written by China now that could be a coincidence but but we're in an environment where you really can't trust any publication in the press you can't trust anyone you can't trust anything our government says and you can't trust anything anybody and the other government says I don't even think you can trust doctors at this point as you know at least completely I'm still gonna trust doctors more than I trust anybody else all things being equal but I'm gonna you know I'm gonna favor local doctors right you know doctors in the United States I'm gonna say well yeah of all of everybody we're talking about let's say this if you were to rank the credibility of all of the players on the stage right now I would say American doctors would be top every politician

[8:24]

doctors would be top every politician would be just ridiculous at this point doesn't matter what country you're talking about and all the foreign sources what be they scientists or governments or diplomats are completely non credible just completely so there's some kind of let's talk about the hydroxyl chloroquine so the the set up that the anti-trump press is trying to establish is the Trump is over selling this thing and he's too enthusiastic despite the fact that every single time he mentions that he says we don't know if it's going to work I mean every time he says that and how more accurate could you be what could be more accurate than I have a good feeling about it it's not scientifically demonstrated in in the scientific ways it might work it might not but I feel good about it I don't feel that's inaccurate but you know you can always question whether the optimism

[9:25]

can always question whether the optimism is getting ahead of the reality but his job unlike you know unlike maybe your job the president's job is also managing our psychology so if the president gave us some false hope let's just say hypothetically hypothetically if the president gave us a little bit of false hope on this one thing but we still come out okay after the fact you know let's let's say some other technologies and I'll talk about that let's say testing or blood serum or something else ended up being the thing that saves us at the end of this five years later when you look back will you say that the president had made a big mistake by suggesting that the hydroxychloroquine he was enthusiastic about while also saying it might or might not work and it's we don't have a definitive test would that be wrong I actually don't know the answer to that question because if it made us feel better even if it

[10:26]

if it made us feel better even if it were at inaccurate but we also got to a good result isn't the best world that you feel confident and you get a good result because then you're feeling better and then you're also getting a good outcome now suppose that you give us false hope and then we you know made gigantic decisions based on it I don't think that's going to happen because I think the whole point of waiting a few weeks is that we're pretty sure we'll have better visibility on this drug and other options so I don't think there's an option of getting it wrong in other words making a big go back to work decision before dr. Falchi says yeah I think that's a good idea and I don't see that happening if it did I'd have some big questions but I think well now in a few weeks if this is a good bat or not yeah and we'll go with it so don't believe anybody and I'll tell you that my head was just shaking what I was reading Politico because it did read like I'm not accusing them I'm

[11:30]

did read like I'm not accusing them I'm just saying that it read to my my eyes and my mind like the Chinese government wrote it I swear to god it just read like that but I'm not saying they did all right um we're here are things to not believe so given this blizzard of disinformation the following things you should not believe number one anonymous reports from hospitals or hospital staff I would believe at least you know I would still put it in context but if it's person who names himself and names the place and then tells you something about it that might be pretty reasonable but even online you can see the icy exchanges of people chatting on Twitter where somebody will say my my brother's cousin reports that this hospital is in deep trouble and then somebody else will say I got a friend there he says just the opposite there's you know they're

[12:30]

opposite there's you know they're they're impacted but they're fine so all the anecdotal reports are completely non credible and I suspect some number these are actually foreign disinformation you know you have you have to assume well let me put it this way if you were China or Russia and your water the United States to have all the wrong information so we get a bad result wouldn't you promote anecdotal stories of one unsourced person who said my hospital is crashing you are right so I feel like that would be that the most obvious thing a foreign entity would do is to send an anecdote that doesn't have good sourcing around and trying to promote it so I wouldn't believe that any of the anecdotes and the other story that I think you should great skepticism about but could be true so remember when I tell you to doubt his story that doesn't mean it's not true there just means you can't believe it's true it doesn't have the requisite

[13:32]

true it doesn't have the requisite credibility about it which you should have just accepted as an uncritical fact it doesn't have that so the other category is the younger persons who die from the coronavirus which is not to say that young people not dying I would assume that it's happening I assume young people are also dying somewhere in the world and some rate but any individual story you see about that I wouldn't trust it at all for the obvious reason than it's anecdotal it's not any kind of a scientific study but more to the point it's too easy to fake and it's exactly what somebody would fake so and it's also too easy to be wrong because if somebody has an unexpected you know death and also has the coronavirus you know how is that going to be reported well unexpected death of course I didn't do an autopsy nobody's doing autopsies so I don't really know it was a coronavirus versus

[14:34]

really know it was a coronavirus versus underlying heart condition but I'm gonna report it as a corona virus because yeah this guy's 45 got the corona virus suffered greatly from the symptoms died what's the cause of death well might be underlying conditions but nobody's going to do an autopsy especially on young people so don't believe any anecdotes about it they're scary and they might be true but don't believe them so there's some and again here's some more stuff that's you shouldn't totally believe but it looks promising Rishi you what era reports very preliminary studies of five critically ill patients who tried the blood serum approached the convalescent I'm sorry the cons less of the plasma approach which is you take the antibodies from recovery people and stick them into sick people the end of the five critically ill on ventilators they remember you've seen

[15:35]

ventilators they remember you've seen other reporting that I also don't believe that once you get on the ventilator you're basically dead you know it'll keep you alive for a little while basically there's no coming back haven't you all seen those stories so the story is to suggest it wouldn't matter how many ventilators you had because once you're on there it's basically just a fast path to dying anyway I don't believe it I just don't believe those stories and I've seen a lot but here's some counter counter evidence which is also not credible as as everything we're hearing is not credible but says of 405 people who are on ventilators basically stabilized it went home and it says all five stabilized but three are at home and need an RCT Audra was on a respirator or some sort so at least in the very small anecdotal sense we're seeing this convalescent plasma having an effect not scientifically demonstrated but because we have past

[16:38]

demonstrated but because we have past experience with this technique and it's being used in a way that's sufficiently similar to ways that's been used successfully in the past you know with you you would expect that it would have great potential now here's the thing how much of this blood can you get how many people have recovered and do you have access to them well that's what the that's what Ian was helping us with with the visualization I've talked about before but I saw this little piece in the in an article about it that said this that made me feel very happy if it's true again again if it's true literally everything I say today you should just append in your mind if it's true biggest true and it says that antibodies can be replicated in large quantities whoa here's a one sentence that might be

[17:39]

whoa here's a one sentence that might be the most important sentence you've ever heard in your life might be probably not right because I things that probably not world right now you are all guessing the world is good but listen to this sentence given that we know there's high high medical confidence that we'll get at least some good outcome from the convalescent plasma but the limitation of course is finding enough people who have recovered who are willing to give their blood and how long does that take and how do you get at the right places right those are the questions you ask and then there's this one sentence antibodies can be replicated in large quantities which means you only need it from one person all you need is one person who's got some good antibodies and if I'm reading this correctly I don't know enough of the science to know if this is a you know just a straight fact or optimism but some sciency person said antibodies can be replicated in large quantities

[18:40]

can be replicated in large quantities are can we just whip up barrels of this stuff by replicating it from one original source somebody says that seems wrong I'm saying a gas I'm seeing definition of recovered I'm just looking at your comments so let me let me say big if true you know the old joke it's big if it's true if that's true that looks really promising doesn't it really promising there's some other promising things coming to let's say a rag on let me rag on and see it in a little bit more so this is how CNN is fact-checking the president and they have a trick that they're using over and over again and once you start seeing it you'll just see it everywhere and the trick goes like this the president will say the sky is blue whatever just whatever fact and see an annual

[19:42]

just whatever fact and see an annual report that the president said the sky is red and here's why that's wrong and you'll say to yourself oh wait a minute that doesn't even have anything to do with the president said I just saw the president's statement that your fact-checking and then I read your fact check but they're not even the same topic what's going on here and the reason it works is because you read it quickly and if you read it quickly it looks like they fact-checked them but they're not even on the same point let me give it now I know that sounds like an exaggeration right it doesn't sound like an exaggeration Oh like how could they do something so blatantly say president says the sky is blue and then quote him quote him saying the sky is blue and then the next sentence say the president says the sky is red and it's not true now you don't think that's real right you think I'm exaggerating well let me read you the exact quote from the fact check on CNN and you tell me if my

[20:43]

check on CNN and you tell me if my example was an alive ok so here's here's what the president said and then I'll tell you what the fact checkers as CNN said so they said of the president first of all multiple times throughout Friday's press briefing the president claims the current situation was unprecedented and unforeseen does that does that true is this situation unprecedented well yeah right we have literally never been in this situation so they're saying he claims it was unprecedented but is that does that even slightly untrue that where we are is unprecedented are you really fact-checking that then the next word was unforeseen all right so okay so now we're into a stronger point was it unforeseen because that's something you can really fact check right so but keep in mind that

[21:44]

right so but keep in mind that unprecedented and unforeseen our CNN's own words if you're gonna fact jack you have to fact-check the president's words so don't be fooled by CNN putting their own interpretation on his words and then fact-checking their interpretation because that's a normal trick so then they go on they say according to trump and here's the actual quote nobody was prepared for this is at the end of the sentence right now is it true that quote nobody was prepared for this yeah yeah that's true there's no country that was prepared for this that's that's just the fact isn't it we were not prepared China was not prepared at least not prepared enough so that's just true nobody was prepared for this not even past presidents he added here's the quote in all fairness to all former presidents none of them ever thought a thing like this could happen

[22:44]

thought a thing like this could happen all right so the claim is that he understands the inner thoughts of former presidents now you know that I always say nobody can read anybody in these minds so you're always just inferring and imagining what other people are thinking but would it be fair to say of all the former presidents that none of them not one of them ever thought a thing like this could happen well we don't know what they thought but we do know what they did did any of the former presidents act in a way that would suggest they thought a thing like this could happen I don't think so because if Obama had acted in a way that he thought this a thing like this could happen wouldn't we be ready what does it mean what would it mean if if Obama did think a thing like this could happen and then he didn't do anything about it so I've made this point before that you know if

[23:45]

made this point before that you know if you say you believe that a truck is coming down the road if you're willing to walk in front of it anyway did you really believe it you know do you believe a truck is coming at you if you walk right in front of it that's the opposite of believing a truck is coming at you assuming you want to live if you believe a truck is coming at you you get out of the road did we see Obama get out of the road when he saw the truck coming out of the truck of this case being a pandemic they he certainly could have seen things well apparently he wasn't prepared it's not like the president dismantled Obama's preparation or let's be non-political it's not like oh boy dismantled Bush's preparation because there wasn't any or Clinton's or the other Bush nobody was prepared of presidents alright here's the key thing alright so here's the so the president President Trump makes a statement about former presidents and what they believed

[24:47]

former presidents and what they believed based on what they did which is nothing he could be right he could be wrong but it's sort of in the FairPoint category that if they didn't act on it it's hard to conclude that they believed it right that's a fair point even though you don't know their internal thoughts all right so so Trump's entire quote the CNN is fact-checking his statements about what past presidents knew that's the topic what did past presidents know and believe here's the fact check this is false says CNN and then it says here's why the US intelligence community what what that's a different topic and public health experts had warned for years that the country was at risk from a pandemic experts had also warned that we could face shortages and critical medical shortages etc now is that fact check

[25:48]

shortages etc now is that fact check even related to the president's statement because the president said that the former presidents didn't think he could happen and that's based on an observable objective fact that they did not prepare for it now we don't know what they thought what we do know they didn't prepare so that's what Trump was talking about and then the fact checkers talked about the US intelligence community and the public health experts well they're fact is true but it's not even the same topic it looks like the same intelligence community and public experts have been warning president after president after president and nobody acted on it not Trump not Obama not Bush not Clinton nobody acted on it so what the president said is none of these presidents act which you infer therefore they didn't think it was really a risk they needed to deal with but at the same time it could be perfectly true that the that

[26:49]

could be perfectly true that the that members of maybe not every one of them but members of the intelligence community and health health community had been saying it's a big problem they can both be true this fact check is so freakin false it's offensive all right let's evaluate the president's performance lately in his in his press conferences about the corona virus I'm not I'm not happy with it being honest you know the president goes out there and there's a lot to like about it I like the fact that he does it I like the fact that he he looks you know very literally and you know I think he's doing the the presidential thing well in general I think the president need the the public needs to hear from him I like the fact that he chews up lots of time there because the more you see your leader talking about it and the you know just makes you feel a little more confident the more they communicate with you so there's there's a whole bunch I like about it but I think the president

[27:50]

like about it but I think the president he just has this impulse you know I can't I don't know what's his inner thoughts are but he seems to be drawn toward spending a little bit too much time freelancing on the facts if if I can say that he's freelancing on the facts which makes it too easy for the anti-trump staff to do these sometimes real and as in this obvious example completely fake the fact-checking and I think it just erodes people's confidence in their leader in a way that isn't necessary so I think I'd like to see you know as much or more of Trump being a leader and talking about things but yeah he just needs a little bit more control on making factual statements about anything medical you know on one hand I'd like to hear him

[28:52]

on one hand I'd like to hear him wrestling with the medical stuff because in so doing he you know he informs us that he's heard all the arguments and they you know he's he's getting he's getting a view of the full field so that's good so I like knowing he can speak to the the facts in a lot of different ways and you know it's clear that he's well informed but his propensity to just put his own little optimistic spin on things just doesn't work in this this context and we can't pretend it does I can't say it bothers me but if it's bothering other people maybe we can tighten that up a little bit hey let's see I had a question about Mike Pence and this is more of a question because it looks like there's a problem here but I don't have all the facts it's real easy to be you know sitting on the sidelines and judging the players but the players have more

[29:52]

players but the players have more information than you do so sometimes that's hard this is one of those cases so I'm going to unconfident Lee criticized pence because I don't have enough information to know I'm right about this but enough to be alarmed and it says I think yesterday he said that they were going to work hard to contact the hospitals and and collect more detailed information about what what supplies they have you know what they're short of and what's in the pipeline basically all the things I've been asking for and all of us have been asking for because it's such a big question and he said that they they had begun a fairly big project to contact all the hospitals and I thought to myself I got two problems with that number one it sounds like it just started which feels like something that should have been a week ago now I'm gonna I'm gonna die on the following Hill if we're criticizing people in in a big ol fog of war emergency for not doing the right thing soon enough it's

[30:54]

doing the right thing soon enough it's just the weakest most useless criticism because everything should have been done sooner all the time all the good stuff so it's just great hindsight to say you should have done this earlier so it could be true that it should have been done earlier but I just don't feel that these are these should be criticisms that were really you know laying on people because people are doing the best they can and it's just a tough situation and people are gonna be late on some stuff and you know making bad guesses and I think we just have to forgive that if they're well-intentioned that are qualified you know they're trying they're putting energy into it they're adjusting that's all I asked for anyway so with all that context which was too much here's what if feels like pen said have done which is there should already be a website where all the hospitals can self-report and pens could have said here's the name of the website and all you hospitals because I every single hospital is

[31:55]

because I every single hospital is watching the press conference right there's no such thing as a hospital where the administration is not paying attention to what pence is doing so pence could just say here's our website we're not going to go ask you what you got just go to this website and fill in what you got why you need wouldn't that be faster because the first thing it was happened is that the hospitals who maybe were not in dire need maybe wouldn't go to the website and they also wouldn't matter so they would just be out of the process but the people who did have a dire need are far more likely to say oh you know we're in dire need we'll do everything we'll take all phone calls will check everything we'll go to that website and then all the people our suppliers would be able to find them so and then also the public would have some reporting so we know which areas need stuff and the government could move things around for them Stockwell's etc so I guess the question is why are we starting now to collect the most valuable information that we could ever have except for who's

[32:57]

that we could ever have except for who's infected I guess and and why do we do it this way it feels like the hard way now it could be that there are only since I don't know much about this so I'm not going to say this is a criticism it's more of a question it could be the thoroughly I don't know 25 hospitals that are the ones that really make a difference so maybe you just call 25 hospitals and it's you know half a day and you're really getting direct good information from somebody who's tries to lie to you but you nail them down yeah so it's entirely possible the Pence's process is exactly what they should do if it's a small number of hospitals so it's just a question let's say I I put this thought experiment on Twitter to see what people would say and it goes like this so I'll give it to you let's say you've got a world-class doctors and you've got world-class economists and they're there working

[33:58]

economists and they're there working together as a team to decide when to open the economy you know back up and send people back to work etc and have it how to deal with a whole pandemic basically who would you believe like whose advice should you take if they disagree let's say the Economist listen to the doctors and then the economists say it let's go this direction whatever that is we'll go this direction and say the doctors listen to The Economist and the doctors say we should go this direction which of the two because they have different way let's say both groups are you not unanimous all the economists are on one side all the doctors are another and they've looked at the same data they've looked at the same data who do you believe now I got lots of opinions and of course everybody tried to cheat on the question human nature so everybody tries to cheat and they're like well the doctor is smarter than the economist no that's not the question

[34:59]

economist no that's not the question thank you no yeah just stick with the question if they're equally smart and then they both looked into it you know who do you trust here's my opinion I'm not very confident in this opinion but I'll put it out there for you to wrestle with I believe that it is easier for a doctor to explain everything that needs to be known to an economist than it is for an economist to explain everything that needs to be understood to a doctor and I would base my decision on that because remember in my in my thought experiment all the economists and the doctors are well-intentioned and equally brilliant and accomplished right so there's no difference in their quality of the human just different domains that they've specialized in and I can be talked out of this opinion but here's my feeling and here's another thought experiment if you say to a doctor a medical professional who has worked their entire life to keep people alive you know one on one I mean really

[36:02]

alive you know one on one I mean really personal life and death stuff and that's their life it's a commitment it's that do no harm it's the oath and it's just baked in and you're a doctor and then you have this proposition here's the proposition if you open the economy quickly there will be a whole bunch of people dying fairly soon and will have their names this is the important part the people who die from from the coronavirus will know their names will see their stories will see their faces so these are the people you know conceptually these people are going to die and we'll know exactly who they were roughly compared to if we let's say we open up the economy whatever prematurely looks like it's just premature we open up the economy and then the economists say I guarantee you that you know or let's say we keep the economy closed and the economist says I can't give you the names of people who

[37:02]

can't give you the names of people who died but given this level of economic dislocation this level of unemployment I think 20,000 people will die but we'll never know which ones they were or why because it'll just be sort of lost in the bigger picture but but if they died of the corona virus we'll know their names their faces we'll hear from their families it'll be real now you're a doctor and you've lived your whole life doing person-to-person saving lives and helping people which one are you bias toward are you biased toward exciting the 10,000 people who have games and faces and real stories or are you biased toward let's say just to make it interesting let's say the economist had a pretty good case that you know if you lock everything down 20,000 people will die let's say twice as many but you won't ever know their names which way this is dr. Gao well if human nature

[38:03]

well if human nature I gotta plug this in before I lose you if you if human nature is the way I imagined it to be the doctor should be strongly biased towards saving 10,000 compared to a conceptual opinion from an economist that you don't really know if they're right or wrong but it looks like it could be 20,000 but we'll never know their names which way do you go I think the doctor goes for the ten thousands who have names intermediate and you can really identify them and you know that you killed them or didn't order to help them I think so here's the thing I believe a doctor a good doctor can summarize everything they know into a little package that an economist could look at and say okay I'll take your little package I'll incorporate it with my vast knowledge of understanding how all the parts of the economy are connected because let's face it well let me give you a concrete example let's say the doctor comes and says we have three treatments two of them look like they

[39:05]

treatments two of them look like they have really good possibilities and it might save 60% of the people but we think that this many people will get infected and here's the risk and here's the downside of the the meds I think a doctor could tell the full doctor story if it was the right doctor and they communicate well and put it in a little package then an economist wouldn't know all the background of it but would have everything they needed from the doctor and of course keeping working with the doctor to know that they understood the little package that the doctor presented to them to plug into the bigger package of the economy I don't believe there's any situation in which an economist could do the reverse which has put everything they know into a little package and say okay doctor here's everything we know about economics take your vast knowledge of the situation and plug my economic module into your database I don't think that can be done as evidence of that there are so many different economic plans different by people who have at

[40:06]

plans different by people who have at least a little bit of knowledge of this stuff let me let me give you some so we so the so Congress passed you know whatever that care relief package is and it's got a whole bunch of details of things we're doing and all the pundits are coming in and saying hey this part's bad and this parts that giveaway the sports charity and this part is unfair are they right well maybe a little bit right but compare a few different approaches so Steve Cortes writing today so you could go see his suggestion and you should follow Steve Cortes anyway because he's a great voice and all this stuff so it's Cortes COR tes I believe and it's so he talked about an idea for suspending taxes on the middle class so if you're middle-class whatever that cutoff is that you would just not have to pay taxes for a while now Steve of

[41:07]

to pay taxes for a while now Steve of course has a background and you know business and and this very field so when he has an opinion yeah more inclined to take it seriously than somebody who was a you know a musician for example but even I with you know I got a degree in economics and an MBA and I don't know if that's a good idea I can't tell is that a good idea because my immediate thought was well that'd be good for people with paychecks but what about self-employed people who were in the same income there's no taxes to save right they're not saving anything because they're not making anything so they weren't paying any taxes for three months so you have that fairness thing and do you get everybody here's another one so joe biden suggests three months of rent forgiveness is that a good idea I don't know I mean and again I have a pretty good background in this stuff and I don't know I really don't my own idea went like this there for three months nobody would pay

[42:07]

nobody would pay for for nobody would pay rent nobody would pay mortgage and nobody would pay any of the like the big three of you know energy well maybe big four or five and nobody would pay like the the monthly bills of you know energy and come your I know your Wi-Fi you're following or whatever and that what I would do is at the end of three months everything would just turn back on for rent and mortgage you just start paying after three months so the banks would still get you know all their money except for the three months they missed but they still get it all it would just be deferred three months so all they misses the interest for the three months and and the and they're thinking is this the anybody who is a landlord is probably but not necessarily in better shape than the renters meaning that if the landlord is the one who gets it in the neck you're probably better

[43:08]

it in the neck you're probably better off societally on average even though not every case than the individual renters you know getting screwed for three months right you know so if you're trying to say well what's a little bit better a little bit better is screwing the landlords not the tenants what are the landlord's really screwed because remember they'll still get you know the money turns back on in three months and they'll be back in business if you're rich enough to be a landlord can you handle three months of no income well you probably can if you're not paying the mortgage because remember the landlord might have a mortgage too and they don't have to pay it so imagine you're a landlord you stop getting rent but your health care your health care continues your you know your power your electricity and you don't pay for them could you give could you get by maybe so yeah real estate taxes might have to be suspended etc so again I can't evaluate

[44:10]

suspended etc so again I can't evaluate these plans because there are too many moving parts and you know you'd really have to dig deeply and it would take you know a PhD thesis to tease out any knowledge about anything but here was the simplest plan I heard this is somebody else's plan give $3,000 to everybody regardless of anything and then for those who had a good year a year from now you know people who still made money and we're still rich despite all of this they would just have to give it back at tax time so there would be a hundred percent you know pay back of the $3,000 but only if he had a good year if you were rich last year but you lost everything this year you still give you a three thousand and then at the end when you go pay taxes if you still made up if you made up the difference and more well maybe you give it back but if you just got killed this year and didn't make any money well then you don't so what could be fairer or faster than just

[45:11]

what could be fairer or faster than just blazing a bunch of money out to every single pocket and then say okay if you're rich you didn't deserve it it's like a three month or several month free loan but what's a free loan worth when interest rates are zero not much so you would be giving some rich people free loans for three months but how much does a rich person care about a few months of not paying interest on three thousand dollars it's it's irrelevant it's completely irrelevant to a rich person so the rich people would just say oh that's a check I didn't need and at tax time that they'd say okay accountant you you're gonna have to give that back wouldn't that work I'd like to see somebody who's smarter than me and that's a lot of people on this topic especially evaluate my plan of just we just all everybody just stops paying rent and mortgage it doesn't matter what your what your income bracket is for three months just everybody stops and

[46:12]

three months just everybody stops and then and then the things I don't know if I said this but I'll say it again the things like your energy bill you would have to pay them back but they would just translate it into a loan in other words after the three months is up they charge you what what you owe for the new month but a little you know five percent on top of it to make up eventually for the three months so you can just turn all of your monthly bills into effectively alone I feels like that would be something right how afraid would you be for the next three months let me just put this out here and you can tell me in the comments how worried would you be for your own safety and you know getting through this if you knew you didn't have to pay for any of your main bills for three months you didn't have to pay for any of them and you got you know a thousand dollars a person per month or whatever for food basically food is all you need to buy

[47:14]

basically food is all you need to buy right because almost everything else is sort of being pushed off nobody's taking a vacation nobody's you're not even buying school supplies basically all of your expenses went to practically nothing you're just watching television stay at home a little bit of an exaggeration but you know what I mean
here's a one of the most interesting things I've seen so a congressman was contacted by a doctor who who in collaboration with the University and by the way this is just something I know from because I know that the people involved who have seen this letter it's this is not news or anything but probably should be so there's a doctor I won't name names but there's a congressman who got it contacted by dr. who in collaboration with the University of South Florida has figured out how to use something called a Raman spectrometer and I want to spell

[48:15]

a Raman spectrometer and I want to spell that because if anybody's listening and they're familiar with this equipment this is kind of important so it's a Ramen spectrometer RA M as in Mary a and as a neighbor Raymond normally used for whatever this is B and C panels and laboratories right so it's an existing device it already is what apparently widely used in laboratories and and this doctor has modified it to identify the kovin 19 in saliva or other biological samples the claim is that it would provide a result in five minutes no chemistry needed just dispose of the sample when it's done five minutes no chemistry throw the sample away when you're done and all he asks is a thousand saliva samples so he can test the system now does this device work and is it the answer to everything well if you're a betting person I think the president said this about about hydrochloric Li if

[49:17]

said this about about hydrochloric Li if you're looking at any one thing you should bet against it right but we have you know a growing portfolio of things that I definitely wouldn't bet against every one of them and it would only take a few of them to really move the curve here so this is one of them so I'll just tell you that there if anybody knows how to get somebody a thousand saliva samples you know tweet at me and maybe maybe I can I can connect them but think about the potential of this and this just comes out of nowhere like who was it you know which one of us was thinking you know there are probably some devices that are already widespread that can be modified to make five-minute tests for Kove in 1900 who thought that was coming right who predicted that except that we can all predict that human ingenuity would just be you know just ramped up like crazy like we've never seen I think that's what we're seeing so I'll just

[50:18]

that's what we're seeing so I'll just put that out there as just one more thing that looks positive here are the other positive things there was it Abbot I think Abbott the laboratory now has a device a tabletop device that can get your testing down to under 15 minutes so you can find out before you go home amazing how quickly can they make these things well they're already in production so and apparently a lot of them the blood serum thing shows promise as I mentioned and then the Trump bills will the Hydra let's talk about how likely it is that the Trump pills which is what I call the hydroxy cleric as if through Mason's ink when when given together how likely is it that they will work let us update our opinions the worst people in the world are going around this week and misinterpreting what other people said to blame them for being wrong in the past if you're doing that you're just

[51:20]

past if you're doing that you're just the worst person in the world you're useless you don't understand what an emergency is you don't understand your role in it it's not that right so let me evolve and clarify my opinions about the potential of the Trump pills that hydroxychloroquine in particular it goes like this there is no credible scientific evidence that it works all right if you've said that I think you're on the same side as every smarter scientists in the world there is no credible you know controlled study that says it works now there are studies that st. work and in China the one disinformation probably study says it doesn't work but none of them are quite the quality and the credibility that would make me say oh yeah that looks pretty good we're not there and I would say you should not believe any any smallish

[52:21]

should not believe any any smallish tests coming out of another country we're in such massive massive state of fraud and disinformation that if you hear that elbonia had a 40-person study all 40 of them are playing professional basketball two days later just don't believe it which doesn't mean it's not true yeah so the French studies in particular is what I'm referring to so there are studies but you should really really put your maximum skepticism on every study right now but here there's some things we know that can help you make a decision even without certainty what we know is that in this country doctors are almost uniformly at least everyone I've heard from is they're prescribing hydroxychloroquine or they're taking it prophylactically because they're working on the front lines now just because basically every doctor

[53:25]

now just because basically every doctor that we've heard from as excellence the drug is taking it does that mean it works no it doesn't but it does mean that all the people who are smarter than us all the doctors have looked at what they can look at they've you know they've surveyed the landscape talked to the other doctors and made a judgment and their judgment is well downside isn't that big but what if it works you know maybe it works so the fact that they're all using it is not proof now what about the fact that basically every country that can be horrid this drug is because that's the case India's stopped export you know I think most countries are trying to hold their own supply close what does that tell you well it tells you at least at the government level after the benefit of all the evidence albian on scientific much of it anecdotal a lot of it from the China experience etc that all of the government's think it's important enough to protect it and

[54:25]

it's important enough to protect it and I don't think they're just doing it because they don't want to run out of rheumatoid arthritis or malaria drugs because that you know those are the other uses there's some other other use too lupus i think and i don't think that they're hoarding it and protecting it just because of lupus and arthritis people who need it it looks like there's a fairly widespread opinion of the people most qualified to make this decision that they think there's at least enough here to hoard it and then what about the anecdotal reports so in my case I know somebody who was in really bad shape who got the drug and within 24 hours it was was obviously better now I don't be an all better I mean you know something like 20-30 percent better the next day and that it continued and you know then the full recovery so but that's anecdotal and there are lots of other people who have the story of you know this grandmother

[55:26]

the story of you know this grandmother did this she was on death's door and you know she took the pills and now she's fine but you can't really believe all the anecdotal stuff what you can look at is that all the anecdotal stuff is in the same direction so with the exception of and fact check me on this I believe there is one strong piece of evidence against the Hydra hydroxychloroquine and that's the disinformation study from China so you just don't count that one but all of the anecdotal information I think is positive and and and the dog that isn't barking is that what do we not know by now would we not have also anecdotal reports of let's say a doctor in New Jersey I'm just making this up but 1/3 net bite now be a doctor in New Jersey who had treated 10 people with that drug and three of them died or it didn't make any difference or he didn't notice anything that was you know look

[56:27]

notice anything that was you know look like a recovery wouldn't we have some reports of it not working Inuk notably the only report of it not working is the one we know we can't trust I think that's what's I think that's what doctors are doing that plus the fact that the you know for a short term use the the downside is low if it works it might save your life and lots of other lives so that's all we know and I'll bookend it by saying there's no credible evidence that it works that's what the president says that's what the experts say that's what I say there is evidence but it's just not not quite where we need it so it could be nothing however these other things that are coming on from the you know the blood stuff and the testing are just so positive that we have maybe I would say we have probably five different paths for success meeting several different

[57:29]

for success meeting several different ways of testing several different drugs you know maybe we'll find out that we can test DNA and find out who's more susceptible we saw some evidence and I don't think this is credible either all right so take this with a grain of salt - but there were two studies showing that you know 60 to 80 percent of the people who died from the corona virus were also quite overweight is that true is it true that if you're not overweight your risk of dying is you know like small you know relatively wouldn't that be nice to do I don't think we entrust a that any of that to be true New York Times had an article today saying hey you know what you know it feels like wearing the mask might make a difference now this was in response to the World Health Organization saying you know if you don't have symptoms don't wear a mask you don't need that

[58:30]

you don't need that and of course everybody was a lick of common sense said something like this wait a minute if there is such a thing as asymptomatic spreading and it's one of the biggest problems and we know that the mask stops things from being projected at it for your mouth how in the world could they not work that's right because the asymptomatic spreader is still spreading through the mouth and if you've got a barrier over the mouth that keeps the distance the things spread lower and a very you know even even bad barriers apparently cut the virus by 75% in in what scenario does that not make sense to do it you know and there's some suggestion that Japan and South Korea went massively to the masks and it made a difference I don't think we know that yet but certainly you know anecdotally it's and commonsensical II but it took the New York Times to say you know maybe there's a reason you should wear a mask and I'm thinking my

[59:32]

should wear a mask and I'm thinking my god my god the quality of information and reporting is so bad that the greatest you know newspaper in the world like took that today to tell you you know yeah maybe a barrier over thing would slow it down really we had to wait till today for that somebody in the comments is talking about smokers why is that we don't have the data on the on the demographics and the situation for the people who died doesn't that bother you I feel as though we are being lied to well let me let me say this as clear as possible our government the United States is lying to us just grotesquely they're lying to us about the usefulness of masks probably because it was a shortage I think they're lying to us about the potential for the hydroxychloroquine probably because they don't want us to hoard it I think that they are wrong about some things and

[1:00:34]

they are wrong about some things and misleading about some things taking their best guess on some things it may turn out to be wrong I think that the here's what I feel confident about at least in our country the government and the experts I believe all of their intentions are good so in other words I'm not too bothered by the government of the United States lying to me to prevent a hoarding of a valuable good I don't love it I'm not comfortable with it it hurts I might you know for myself I'd rather know the truth but if you're saying what's good for the country I don't know stopping people from hoarding a vital good it's kind of important so if your government is lying to you with good intentions and that's let's just let's be honest that's exactly what's happening your government is lying to you massively with good intentions

[1:01:37]

I can't hate that but I wouldn't believe any other government because they do not have good intentions about us but basically everybody is lying to you or stupid and I think that that's just yeah I mean look at the New York Times and it's it's just a stupid that it took so long for them to say that all right see what else I got here my my health club so the club I usually go to for working out my gym to center around a notice and I'm wondering how common this is they're offering two options for their members now the club is closed of course but they say you know they would like to keep their staff employed as long as possible and they've offered this option which i think is kind of brilliant they said you can just keep paying your dues and they would appreciate it because that's how they get that's the only way they can pay their staff doing the thing but they've offered this option you can you can drop your dues to zero just by asking just go to the website click it and say I want to pay

[1:02:38]

website click it and say I want to pay zero or you can drop it by 50% so that some of the burden is off of you but you still help to pay the employees now I know what you're going to say is this really going to the employees or is this more about the owners and the business that are in big trouble right now and the answer is I don't know but I do love the fact that they gave all of us three choices how can I hate that one of my choices does not pay them any money like how can I get mad at that one of my choices is to help their employees who I know in many cases and like and would like to help and the other option is I just pay full price and help them ride it out now because I can you know have them wherewithal all I've decided to pay full price so I'm just gonna pay full price because this this gym and health club has been good to me for 125 years I do genuinely like you know many of their employees I know them personally quite

[1:03:39]

employees I know them personally quite well in a number of cases and so I'll just pay full price but it really makes it easier for me to do that because they made it easy for me to pay zero or easy for me to pay fifty so from a psychological community you know greater good perspective this feels kind of enlightened I mean I don't know that they could have done this any better then than this this is really good I would recommend that other health clubs that are in the same situation there must be a lot of them should at least take a look at this idea because the way it makes me feel is just totally right how it were for everybody well we can be optimistic but certainly good try I I think that's what we've got for now I feel like there was one other thing that I promised somebody I would talk about today and I want to make sure I didn't miss it hold on
on just check and check and checking and I think I've I think I got all my you know

[1:04:43]

think I've I think I got all my you know my points all right oh yes one more point just to clarify something there's a discussion about whether our hospitals or any of them are over capacity or are they handling larell the reports we're getting is that even the most impacted hospitals are still not over capacity meaning they're there kind of close to capacity but they're not over and as was pointed out that in the 2018 flu hospitals were also over capacity for a little while so it's not unusual for the just the regular flu to make a hospital over capacity but then somebody else who was smarter than me and all the other people talking about this said the following in 2018 when there was a regular flu they had not also canceled all of the surgeries that were optional so you're comparing an apple to an orange if you're looking at two at the regular flu cause some over capacity and

[1:05:45]

regular flu cause some over capacity and that's a fact I believe that's a fact at some hospitals but I believe those save hospitals we're still doing a full schedule of all their surgeries you know in all their other business and that's not the case today the hospitals basically wiped the clean the table clean of all the normal business the stuff you could put off and there's still a capacity that is completely different completely different than being at capacity with the over capacity with the regular flu while you're also still doing your full menu of other stuff all right I just want to put that out there and say we're going to be great the the level of human ingenuity and focus and good intentions on this is phenomenal when it's over we're all going to be very proud to be Americans to be humans and we're going to be proud of what we did because basically basically all right I'm sorry I was

[1:06:49]

basically all right I'm sorry I was gonna sign off but somebody said something in the comments that's that are fighting words so so you got me for another minute so I made an analogy on Twitter to make a point and people who say to me Scott you're always saying analogies are bad and you made an analogy therefore that's loser think let me defend it here was the analogy there was more of a thought experiment if you were standing on the beach and you saw coming toward you a 200-foot wave a tsunami and you saw it you're not you're not wondering if it's coming you're just looking at it oh that's a 200-foot wall of water coming right at me what it should be your reaction should be your reaction be oh oh I think I'm gonna be dead or should you reaction be I'm fine because I'm dry you see what I did there I'm dry now I'm fine yeah there's a

[1:07:50]

I'm dry now I'm fine yeah there's a 200-foot tsunami coming right at me and I can see it I don't have to wonder if it's coming it's right there but I'm fine because I'm dry now everybody hears that nose well that's stupid because the tsunami is gonna kill you in a moment so you'd better worry now of course I'm helping people to think through their bad thinking when they look at oh the virus has not overwhelmed the United States yet I just want you to understand it doesn't mean anything the fact that it hasn't overwhelmed us yet doesn't tell you anything doesn't tell you think you're still dry but that doesn't mean you're safe now it could be and this would be a legitimate complaint that if you don't believe that the scientists are right that there's any tsunami coming at you well that would be fine that would be an actual legitimate opinion that could be right or wrong and we'll find out later it is not a legitimate opinion to say

[1:08:50]

it is not a legitimate opinion to say well I'm dry now so I guess everybody was wrong now if that's looser think I don't know what what isn't and I'll talk to you tonight at 7 o'clock Pacific 10:00 p.m. Eastern have a great day