David keeps citing economic facts and questions, and Scott Adams keeps saying, "Let's get to the psychology..." No, no, no. Let's not. Let's deal with economic facts, not your perceptions.
I don’t understand why Dave assumes rich people are putting there money into savings accounts and not investing it in the market, their own businesses, etc.
Paul B do you have a link to this “admission”? I’m pretty sure you’re just misunderstanding what “savings” means in the context of running a business. Business leaders and the rich don’t hide their money under the mattress for a reason, and they aren’t keeping their money in low interest banks either without cause. They need a certain level of fluidity to run the business, of course, but that isn’t effected by the tax rate. In other words, I’m skeptical it’s as you guys are simplistically making it out to be, like the rich are just squirreling away all their extra tax money because as everyone knows, they’re greedy bastards.
This guy is one of the most post modern people I’ve ever seen. His argument is basically that the reality of what people have doesn’t matter. All that matters is what people *think* they have. 🤦🏻♂️
In many respects that is true. The average person in the 1st world today is safer and better standard of living than 99.9% of history yet are often still miserable.
Jocko Jonson but the crux of your argument is that people actually ARE safer. This is an objective fact. His argument is that it doesn’t matter if people get no real benefit from a tax cut. As long as they think they do, then that’s enough.
mastercilander Lol really? We’re talking about the amount of money you get from a tax cut, not the effect of cell phone use on the developing brain, or complicated fluid dynamics. You can easily find out how much money you get from a tax cut. This is not rocket science, it’s not even earth science 😂. You can look at your paycheck and see how much money you got, you can look on a website and see how much benefit you got from the tax cut. Adams is saying that despite all this, what matters is that people “feel” like they have more money (which isn’t even proven) and thus they spend more..money they don’t have I guess. Even though they have all the information right in front of them to know they don’t have any more money.
Creslin321 Creslin321 I understand what mastercilander is saying about Adams (not the sophistication part) and there is evidence of his theory to a certain point. It's the same reasons people in poorer states constantly vote against their own interests because they don't understand what these policies will do to them. HOWEVER, you are completely right as to where these things aren't hard to understand with a little more education on topics that affect them. People will point to the stock market and say they're doing well even if they have no stock themselves. Corporate media and politicians (Republicans, corporate Democrats) rely heavily on this lack of understanding from the common people and prey on their feelings.
I largely disagree with Scott Adams, but he was much more reasonable in this debate than I had come to expect from him lately. Good job by David having a decent discussion with the opposition. Better then Jesse Lee Peterson for sure
J A Yes, the man who said that the flow of money into the economy is not as important of a factor as the optimism the middle class has about the next year is not an idiot or delusional; rather, he’s a “divergent thinker”. Ah, yes, this is what centrism feels like *huffs opium*
Adams is fine. I don’t think he’s a focused or seasoned debater. If I had to guess he probably got into politics because of Obama or Trump. It’s kind of like when I talk current events with my family or a girlfriend. He mostly says things that are not well thought out or backed by evidence. Every once in a while he gives me a good idea or two to write down and go get data for, which makes my argument better for the future. He ignores the fact that the wall itself is NOT OBVIOUS, and NOT proven effective. To even GET TO his argument he would have to prove the wall effective and worth the money.
BlackPhillip ya, and Scott is pretty open minded. If they flame Scott this bad as an observer of persuasion I don’t see how we can have an legitimate conversations in politics
@@BlackPhillip666 david doesn't have fans, he has listeners. The subscribers of this channel are not cult members contrary to some of the bizarre subcultures on youtube.
Scott Adams was too nice to you Mr. Pakman! Your arguments were well put together and almost persuasive, but your smug demeanor made this hard to watch. You can tell it amuses Scott Adams how naive and confident David Pakman is. It’s always entertaining when someone is clueless and so sure that they are right.
I think next to the famous phrase "Confidence Fairy" there should be a picture of Scott in the dictionary. I'm so glad someone finally challenges him on his supply-side economic views.
This dude is legit crazy. Motivated reasoning is an understatement. Scott, the reason your analogies keep failing and why you hate analogies so much, is because your logic is critically failing you.
1st, 1% is not $1000 to a guy that made $100,000,000- it's $1,000,000. 2nd, the rich guy won't put it in the bank, he'll invest it in his business or in other businesses.
"2nd, the rich guy won't put it in the bank, he'll invest it in his business or in other businesses." I know you certainly wish that was the case but I would love for you to empirically show that. Also, just because he invest in his business doesn't mean that that's the best way to stimulate the economy.
he's pretty clear about those things having no scientific viability. If something made you feel better or you thought it made you think clearer etc. would you stop doing it until "science proved it"? Thinking your mindset makes no difference because its hard to prove scientifically is kind of disregarding things we know about whats its like to be a person. Above all else, these things harm no one and I can't see how visualizing positive things could hurt you.
Thanks David for being a level-headed voice on the left, willing to engage in civil cross-isle dialog and not being prone toward ad hominem and other emotive devices. Everything missing in today's political sphere. In sharp contrast to, for example, TYT.
I make 50k a year. I get $250 a month more than I did before the tax cut. My tax refund will be double from last year. That 250 pays for my monthly health insurance premium. I in effect got free health care by a simple tax cut. Anyone who tells you it was a tax cut for the rich is lying to you.
@@apoc519 With Democrat votes they wont expire. Republicans will want to renew the cuts. If democrats care about middle class tax cuts it shouldnt be an issue, right.
@@apoc519 Ok, then what is the point in saying that the cuts will expire. You want them to expire anyway. Republicans passed it in the first place. I woukd rather have less taxes for 6 years than no cuts at all and hopefully the cuts are renewed.
The thing David isn't getting is that it's not an either-or. You can work on the border and overstays at the same time. The border issue is solved just by keeping people out, whereas the overstays is more complex. A lock on your door is useful for keeping burglars out but doesn't do much for your abusive spouse who is already in the house. That is a different problem requiring a different solution and both concerns are important, and you can even say one is more important than the other, but you wouldn't leave your door unlocked just cuz you have internal problems as well. And really, 100% of illegal immigrants cause crime if you consider the act of illegal entry a crime, which I would say it is since there exist legitimate modes of entry for people like refugees. You can say more resources should be spent streamlining that process, but even in the best case scenario, the U.S. is not a battered women's shelter and it's simply not possible or desirable to take on all the world's problems. In fact, doing so hurts the host countries by removing people who would stand and oppose the sort of policies that led to them fleeing in the first place. You're giving them a release valve when you really need to get them to stay and fight to protect their home and kick out the abusive spouses there.
He is absolutely wrong about republicans not having a problem with legal immigration. What happened to the asylum seekers from Guatemala? Were they allowed to begin the process of obtaining LEGAL REFUGEE status? Or were they turned away?
@@oneloveonebeing That is one of their policies that actually makes sense to me. I mean, why bring in people inferior(mainly in terms of education and job training) to what you already have at home? I am not saying I support it(I mean, many of these people are probably going to die now that they´ve been turned away), but it makes sense.
Although I am team Sam 100%, I was disappointed with Sam in that podcast (which I listened to last night). Since then I've been researching SA, (for benefit of doubt), it only cemented my initial thought, he's pretty much "psycho babbling)... I do hope he and Sam get together again for round two! This is my first meet with
There are 2500 billionaires in the world that are currently hoarding a combined wealth of 7 trillion dollars. Adding to that bucket of wealth via tax cuts does absolutely nothing to contribute to the circular flow of production and consumption of the real economy.
AndyB this makes so much sense they already have SOOOOO much money. and they haven’t done shit with it. what makes us think giving them more would suddenly change their behavior. they already have so much money they don’t know what to do with it. #expropriate
Also, his argument about overstayed visas automatically assumes that immigrants staying past their visa's expiration is a problem at all. How is it a problem? You have to make a case for that before assuming we all agree, because we don't. How is that a problem for everyday working-class people in the US? Also also, a border wall has proven to be an ineffective solution. If you TRULY want immigrants to come here legally, you would devote funds and manpower to processing them legally. You only talk about a wall if you have no interest in immigrants coming here.
@@lavia5521 What?? It doesn't matter which banks money is in! Unless someone stuffs a mattress, all money that does not go into to the public sector circulates within the private sector. I don't know wealthy people who stuff their mattresses.
@@changingworld2 Which banks do matter. It appears you are quite ignorant. The rich hoard their money. Sometimes in foreign banks, not mattresses... You are quite laughable.
@@lavia5521 Foreign banks exist to perform exactly the same way as America banks (to make more money from investment capital). American currency is used by successful foreign banks as capital to fund American industry and U.S. government debt. If a foreign bank has higher interest rates (and is considered a stable risk) , many wealthy people will invest with these banks, but the money is still U.S. dollars and useless without a paid exchange. Foreign banks rarely find it valuable to exchange the currency, then invest in other countries when the foreign dollars can already diversify their global portfolios without the added cost of an exchange. Research shows banks with foreign investors are global and the money is invested in the US by these banks.
I am reminded of the Titanic. The young man says he knows for sure that he is right because he has all the details, all the facts, while in the mean time the old man says things are not getting better and we need to try something controversial to change coarse just a little bit. One says more of the same, and the other says we need to try something different. One is a college instructor, the other is a very successful private entrepreneur. One has very little life experience, the other is very experienced. I know from 65 years of living in California that the State is changing. It has gone from the conservative mentality of my youth to an unopposed liberal agenda of today. Young people of today have no basis of comparison on which to understand the trends that leadership has imposes on the population. This young man spouts off facts and information based on inexperience and fails to understand that his sources are not precise. The old man is saying all sources of information are biased and you must trust your personal experiences. By the time the young man personally experiences the loss of his college teaching job to a illegal alien/immigration it will be too late to save our way of life. The world is a very dangerous place and it will destroy you if you let it. Our leadership lives behind walls and all sorts of security. In the old days this was not the case. The trend is for more security for the leadership and more of the same for everyone else. If the leadership had to depend on a wall for their personal safety then there would be a demilitarized zone along Mexico's border to match that of North and South Korea.
Right around the six minute mark Mr. Adams basically flat out stated that most people don't independently determine economical outlooks beyond what is reported in the news. To me that sounded like "Most people are ignorant on the finer points of the economy so who cares if I spread misinformation?"
David Pakman should debate a border security expert on the wall. Everyone responsible for border security agrees with Trump over the wall. Armchair experts like David Pakman hates this and thinks it's a bad idea.
Credit card companies LOVE optimism. Oh...you'll pay this down before your 0% interest rate expires in 12 months and jumps to 18%. And even if its 18%...I'm confident you can knock that out in 15 to 22 years. GO GET EM SON!
Wow, David absolutely obliterated each and every single one of Scott Adams's points. This was truly a master class in picking out logical fallacies and showing them exactly where they went wrong. There are areas where I criticize David quite a bit, but this interview was great. Thanks!
@Nika D I've criticized David more often than I've praised him, but Scott Adams had almost no logically-valid points. It was really embarrassing for me just watching him try to back up his points. David made that very clear through his follow-up questions and explanations of his faulty logic.
The reason Scott Adams thinks metaphors are useless is because he is terrible at them. Clearly he thinks anything HE can't think of is "impossible," so how could he ever believe in the power of the metaphor?
I see no real difference between his point and David's. The way human beings behave isn't really a science. Saying "in theory" the middle class getting tax cuts should stimulate the economy more isn't any more scientific than what Scott is saying. The absolutely monstrous economy under Trump pre-COVID doesn't really dispute this. Although I'll admit its way too hard to measure what caused what in any given instance because the US is way too complicated.
"I made a terrible analogy, therefore that's why i dislike analogies.." Perfectly encapsulates his (and the entire GOP's) logic: "i dislike what i don't understand"
I can predict how this is going to go. Debating Scott Adams is like trying to punch your way through a wall of jello - It just squishes around your arm and doesn't really move. He spews out a bunch of words that approximate the shape of the topic, but never really says much.
News flash, the tax cut wasn’t for the rich... unless you consider $75K - $200K household income “rich”. In this country, that’s very average and in some liberal parts, almost poor to living paycheck to paycheck... I fall into that category and my tax cut will be around 5% reduction, or roughly $7,500 dollars. I get so tired of hearing about the tax cut being for the wealthy... Do you know why the poor won’t have a tax cut..??? BECAUSE THEY DON’T PAY ANY TAXES TO BEGIN WITH!
David is stuck on the political aspects rather than the complexities and differences of the subject to say nothing of scrambled thought processes...Scott is spot on.
Watching David for the first time, I noticed he interrupted his guests numerous times for the sake of arguing. I admire that Scott could listen to this for so long. Not a subscriber. And not a trump hater. Give the guy his wall for the good of the country and quit the piddling Point arguments.
It's a slat-wall-fence, a veritable mural! It's practically as multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and melting-pot-like as can be! In fact, it seems we should put a more monocultural wall in front of that wall, so we can keep it out of our...multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and melting-pot-like country?
To say that Donald Trump wouldn’t want to solve 2/3rds of the illegal immigration problem is ludicrous. If you think he’s doing it for political reasons, then it would make more since that he’s solving more of the problem than less.
Scott Adams is a sophist, so he believes that emotions points to truths. He sides with Trump because of the way Trump makes people feel. So for example, although Trump may act immoral on a specific policy, supporters still feel the policy may lead to a positive outcome, so therefore: Trump acting out immoral was a good thing, because of the positive outcome. The problem with this line of thinking is when it comes to ethics and morality. It runs into problems. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophist
Whatever your politics maybe we can all agree that a podcast host should allow their guest to speak more than the host speaks? Can ... Can we agree with that?
@Captain 7 Captain 7, I am on the right, I am conservative, and i didn't think the original comment here was necessary, nor did I agree with it, but yours is absolutely horrible. it is so detrimental to honest discussion. Please don't do that.
i couldnt watch any, david is to painful with his pseudo smart mentality, he's a clerk and he is fine as one but he's not a worker or wealth generator type, yet he wants the spoils of the workers, the wealthy etc. poor modern clerks, so miss educated.
@@jonfolz There are some days I love Trump, there are days really disagree with his actions. I do not like the term "Trump Supporter", cause I don't think that is a good description, unless if it means ppl who portray to agree with him no matter what. I under "Israel supporter", because that's an issue, not a person. Do you have a politician that you wouldn't preface "I don't agree with everything they do"? Also, can you tell me specific lies Trump has said that you consider harmful? Specifically, not his normal NY attitude embellishments. And can you tell me what he has done which makes you feel ppl associated with him must walk away with a stench of hate? I mean policy wise, things that affect the ppl. i'm really asking, because what I am trying to figure out is people on the right and people on the left have such a polarize view of reality. I get it to some degree, but it's so shatter today, I'm just trying to understand why. I do appreciate you responding to captain 7 with dignity, not just insults normally incited by such a stupid comment as his (assuming it's a guy).
The fact that all of Pakmans fans are insulting scott in the top comments is a pretty good indicator that Pakman got clowned somewhere in this interview. Gonna have to watch now.
@@daapdary An ad hominem is attacking your character over your argument. Your argument is that you are triggered by grammar, not their point. Why do you think being offended by the accurate label will get you anthing?
@@lavia5521 First I was "triggered", now I'm "offended", which are failed attempts at mind-reading. Apparently, you think being triggered and offended invalidates my original comment, which is a non-sequitur.
Scott adams is actually a pretty level headed and rational person. He makes some logical errors here I think, and I think Pakman gets the better of him ultimately, but hes a better sparring partner than like 90% of trumpoids out there, as he can actually stick to the point rather than getting distracted with random emotional tangents.
David--there is a huge difference between the Visa overstays and the border crossers. The Visa overstays have passports and have been vetted by the US gov't. The border crossers have not been vetted. There are no MS-13 among the Visa overstays. The Known Criminals that have been booted out of the country 1,2,5 times do not come back in on a visa.
Sam literally everyone in left wing comment sections experience so much cognitive dissonance. Almost Everyone in the comments can’t rationalize their opinions it’s crazy. Instead they call the opposition names and call it a day. This is why people are leaving the left and you’re shitty “blue wave” never happened.
^^ LOL at this guy's logic: "literally everyone..." immediately followed by "Almost Everyone..." is not only contradictory to your own point, it's factually incorrect and based on nothing (you should grab a dictionary and look up "literally", BTW). Then, after a string of ad hominem attacks, follows it up with a complaint about ad hominem attacks. Wow. Just brilliant work there, pal.
Don't SSleep well u seem too pussy to @ me so what’s ur issue? That I find that leftists have bad arguments? My first sentence is obviously a hyperbole only an ape wouldn’t be able to figure that out. The fact that u think playing grammar police disproves anything I said amuses me😂. It cannot be an ad hominem if I am not counter arguing moron. There it is again, leftists using terms they don’t understand. If you said i made insults you would’ve been right, but u didn’t, did you? Anyway ur comment perfectly proves my point so thanks for that lmao😭
@@DTGee64 Intelligence can mean many different things. There are a lot of talented creative types who hold loony opinions. It's not uncommon. Adams, to me, falls into a category of celebrities who try to stay relevant by saying outrageous things to keep themselves in the headlines. It's a category in which I'd include Kanye, Roseanne, and indeed Trump himself. Typically people like this are talented and once had legitimate careers (not including Trump, who's always been a fraud) but they're past their sell-by date and desperate for attention.
@@jrd33 I know he's not. It was a joke based on a conversation Jordan had with Sam Harris a while back where he said something close to objective truth doesn't matter, it matters if what you believe to be true leads to living to reproduce or some such nonsense.
hahahahaha - He is the most disingenuous interview I've ever heard. He has no interest other than winning. Representing his true feelings and talking honestly are of no interest to him whatsoever - much like his fave president.
Beware of Scott Adams, number one trump cheerleader. Self proclaimed master persuader. He's just counting on trump to grow his 150 million into a billion.
Bradelberry most the rich do not earn it from their own hard work. The average pay of a CEO is 318x the amount of the average income. Do you thing the average CEO is working 318x as hard?
leviathan rising the rich actively try to find ways to not pay taxes either through tax loopholes, storing their money on off shore accounts, or lobby politicians to pass tax cuts. They should pay more so so much of the taxes don’t have to be payed by the middle class. There is a reason the middle class is shrinking every year and income inequality get worse by the year. Hey out of your conservative libertarian bubble.
@@windmaster118 no. But the ceo is 318x more important to a large corp than the avg worker.... If one of the average workers sucks it will hardly affect the company. If the CEO sucks it could destroy the company.
Scott Adams should be charged with assault. That wasn't a fair fight. Come on Scott. Bad analogies and doesn't understand that people overstaying their Visa is a separate issue than border security. However you feel about the wall. You can't deny logic. I mean, I guess you can.
4:36 No David . When you put 1000$ in the bank it doesn’t just sleep there and wait till you pick it up. It goes out to work and create things in the economy until you need it . Why did you bring a psychologist to argue with you about economics? You just wanted to feel good about yourself?
@@maggievw1166 its unfortunate .He should have brought a practicing economist eg thomas sowell,peter schiff if he wanted to discuss economics with a right winger . This guy seems very weak on the relevant topics.
@@tjti2631 I agree that Sowell would have been better, but that would have been the proverbial gun in a knife fight.They were looking at the situation through very different filters,; persuasion vs. ideology. Made for a rather messy discussion, one in which confirmation bias was the onlookers only valid solution as neither made a compelling argument..
yeah, no. when you put $1000 in the bank you get a shitty 1% interest if you're lucky. meanwhile the bank gambles with it and makes a shitload, which they then payout in bonuses to executives.
This is my first time meeting Pakman, I'm definitely interested and impressed enough to sub Good debater, well informed, armed and attacks accordingly!
If you own a bicycle company that make a a product on the higher end of quality. If you made a $1,000,000 in profit, paid $300,000 in taxes. Now you get a tax cut and you only pay $150,000. in taxes, you have absolutely no motivation to higher more workers. You will simply save that money. The only thing that will get you to higher more employees is to have more people who can afford your bicycles. If you put a dollar in the hands of a worker, that dollar gets spent over and over - put it in the hands of the rich and they hoard it. Even worse, the billionaires invest it it into buying our legislators and literally have their accountants dictate legislation that allows them to hoard more wealth.. Wake the fuck up people
David keeps citing economic facts and questions, and Scott Adams keeps saying, "Let's get to the psychology..."
No, no, no. Let's not. Let's deal with economic facts, not your perceptions.
Economy = psychology
@@matteo8413 economics is a result of sociology which in turn is the result of multiple psychology's (the human population).
I don’t understand why Dave assumes rich people are putting there money into savings accounts and not investing it in the market, their own businesses, etc.
Most economic indicators are incredible now though and have been for a few years ...
Paul B do you have a link to this “admission”? I’m pretty sure you’re just misunderstanding what “savings” means in the context of running a business. Business leaders and the rich don’t hide their money under the mattress for a reason, and they aren’t keeping their money in low interest banks either without cause. They need a certain level of fluidity to run the business, of course, but that isn’t effected by the tax rate. In other words, I’m skeptical it’s as you guys are simplistically making it out to be, like the rich are just squirreling away all their extra tax money because as everyone knows, they’re greedy bastards.
This guy is one of the most post modern people I’ve ever seen. His argument is basically that the reality of what people have doesn’t matter. All that matters is what people *think* they have.
🤦🏻♂️
Exactly!
In many respects that is true. The average person in the 1st world today is safer and better standard of living than 99.9% of history yet are often still miserable.
Jocko Jonson but the crux of your argument is that people actually ARE safer. This is an objective fact.
His argument is that it doesn’t matter if people get no real benefit from a tax cut. As long as they think they do, then that’s enough.
mastercilander Lol really? We’re talking about the amount of money you get from a tax cut, not the effect of cell phone use on the developing brain, or complicated fluid dynamics.
You can easily find out how much money you get from a tax cut. This is not rocket science, it’s not even earth science 😂. You can look at your paycheck and see how much money you got, you can look on a website and see how much benefit you got from the tax cut.
Adams is saying that despite all this, what matters is that people “feel” like they have more money (which isn’t even proven) and thus they spend more..money they don’t have I guess. Even though they have all the information right in front of them to know they don’t have any more money.
Creslin321 Creslin321 I understand what mastercilander is saying about Adams (not the sophistication part) and there is evidence of his theory to a certain point. It's the same reasons people in poorer states constantly vote against their own interests because they don't understand what these policies will do to them.
HOWEVER, you are completely right as to where these things aren't hard to understand with a little more education on topics that affect them. People will point to the stock market and say they're doing well even if they have no stock themselves. Corporate media and politicians (Republicans, corporate Democrats) rely heavily on this lack of understanding from the common people and prey on their feelings.
I largely disagree with Scott Adams, but he was much more reasonable in this debate than I had come to expect from him lately. Good job by David having a decent discussion with the opposition. Better then Jesse Lee Peterson for sure
Scott is just as liberal as David is.
BETA!
I get that most of you guys are shitting on Adams but I actually enjoyed this interview and would gladly encourage Adams to return as a guest.
J A agreed
J A Yes, the man who said that the flow of money into the economy is not as important of a factor as the optimism the middle class has about the next year is not an idiot or delusional; rather, he’s a “divergent thinker”. Ah, yes, this is what centrism feels like *huffs opium*
Enfant Des I detest the fact that a large percentage of DP fans are as toxic as you.
DkwonX *opium fumes heading straight to the dome, vision hazy* political alignment chart man, you are a Tanky at heart... *passes out*
Enfant Des Lmao You’ve got it all figured out huh
Adams is fine. I don’t think he’s a focused or seasoned debater. If I had to guess he probably got into politics because of Obama or Trump. It’s kind of like when I talk current events with my family or a girlfriend. He mostly says things that are not well thought out or backed by evidence. Every once in a while he gives me a good idea or two to write down and go get data for, which makes my argument better for the future.
He ignores the fact that the wall itself is NOT OBVIOUS, and NOT proven effective. To even GET TO his argument he would have to prove the wall effective and worth the money.
Well said, my thoughts exactly!
Man Dave is a formidable interviewer. I would make sure I have my shit together before going on his show!
For someone who hates analogies, Scott Adams sure as hell loves trotting them out.
He hates them because his are easy to dismantle.
He's a shit that wants to profit from his bubble.
He doesn't hate them. He says they're OK for explaining, but terrible for persuading. Which seems to be true to me.
@@kwahujakquai6726 he lost like 50% of his income for supporting Trump. Don't think he's making a dime off of this
This is how progressives should talk about economics. This is so great!
Can you point me to an episode where David does less mind-reading?
Howyounotknow I doubt you will find one. But I’m sure all his viewers will point you to part 1 of this interview, or any of his other videos
David and his fans got outclassed.
BlackPhillip ya, and Scott is pretty open minded. If they flame Scott this bad as an observer of persuasion I don’t see how we can have an legitimate conversations in politics
he hasnt done shit
@@BlackPhillip666 david doesn't have fans, he has listeners. The subscribers of this channel are not cult members contrary to some of the bizarre subcultures on youtube.
A good civil conversation.
aralsea1 Pun intended?
Who else is here after the recent events?
Scott Adams was too nice to you Mr. Pakman! Your arguments were well put together and almost persuasive, but your smug demeanor made this hard to watch. You can tell it amuses Scott Adams how naive and confident David Pakman is. It’s always entertaining when someone is clueless and so sure that they are right.
that's exactly why Scott was smiling when answering some of those questions.
You can taste the irony in your post
I think next to the famous phrase "Confidence Fairy" there should be a picture of Scott in the dictionary. I'm so glad someone finally challenges him on his supply-side economic views.
Supply-side and demand-side economics are both about trying to increase confidence, both even consider it the most important part of the economy.
This Scott dude was overwhelmed!!!!
Scott Adam's is crazy. Listening to him defend trump on Sam Harris's podcast was insufferable.
He's not crazy. He's shamelessly disingenuous.
Hilbert's Inn what’s he trying to achieve?
@@MrMusic238 Attention, most likely. But in any case, who the fuck cares?
@@hilbertsinn6886 not me, I don't give a fuck!!
lol and dumbass sam harris couldn’t debunk his bullshit “maybe he hypnotize me.” what an idio.
I am glad to see Adams getting some pushback.
why? hes way smarter than soy chugging david. hes a female
Usually peoples own minds push back and say...no scott. Don't say that. Dont think that. That's stuoid
This dude is legit crazy. Motivated reasoning is an understatement.
Scott, the reason your analogies keep failing and why you hate analogies so much, is because your logic is critically failing you.
Adam's claim to being a master of persuasion isn't unfounded.
It's made me disagree with everything he says.
The leader in home-runs is also the leader in strike-outs
if you strongly disagree with Scott its because you aren't used to thinking about things you don't believe. He's extremely reasonable and logical
"The investment class"? Never heard it called that before. It is called capitalists where I am from.
1st, 1% is not $1000 to a guy that made $100,000,000- it's $1,000,000. 2nd, the rich guy won't put it in the bank, he'll invest it in his business or in other businesses.
True. It was hilarious to hear Pakman talking about 'the rich" putting money in a "savings account".
"2nd, the rich guy won't put it in the bank, he'll invest it in his business or in other businesses."
I know you certainly wish that was the case but I would love for you to empirically show that. Also, just because he invest in his business doesn't mean that that's the best way to stimulate the economy.
Adams believes in stuff like manifestations and The Secret...which I think speaks volumes
This makes sense.
he's pretty clear about those things having no scientific viability. If something made you feel better or you thought it made you think clearer etc. would you stop doing it until "science proved it"? Thinking your mindset makes no difference because its hard to prove scientifically is kind of disregarding things we know about whats its like to be a person. Above all else, these things harm no one and I can't see how visualizing positive things could hurt you.
Thanks David for being a level-headed voice on the left, willing to engage in civil cross-isle dialog and not being prone toward ad hominem and other emotive devices. Everything missing in today's political sphere. In sharp contrast to, for example, TYT.
“Level-headed”
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
I make 50k a year. I get $250 a month more than I did before the tax cut. My tax refund will be double from last year. That 250 pays for my monthly health insurance premium.
I in effect got free health care by a simple tax cut. Anyone who tells you it was a tax cut for the rich is lying to you.
After 2025, all individual tax cuts are set to expire. At the same time, corporate rate cuts are made permanent under the bill
@@apoc519 With Democrat votes they wont expire. Republicans will want to renew the cuts. If democrats care about middle class tax cuts it shouldnt be an issue, right.
Democrats don't want tax cuts. Higher taxes, less out of pocket in the long run by not paying healthcare premiums, etc. That's what Democrats want
@@apoc519 Ok, then what is the point in saying that the cuts will expire. You want them to expire anyway. Republicans passed it in the first place. I woukd rather have less taxes for 6 years than no cuts at all and hopefully the cuts are renewed.
If Rs are in power it will be renewed. If D's let them expire then the Rs get free points slamming them for raising your taxes. It's a win win for Rs
David, crossing the border illegally IS committing a crime! Whoosh!
the standard deduction doubled under Trump for most middle class families, its not just about rates and it wasn't just the top rate that went down.
Correct, but David conveniently leaves that part out.
The thing David isn't getting is that it's not an either-or. You can work on the border and overstays at the same time. The border issue is solved just by keeping people out, whereas the overstays is more complex. A lock on your door is useful for keeping burglars out but doesn't do much for your abusive spouse who is already in the house. That is a different problem requiring a different solution and both concerns are important, and you can even say one is more important than the other, but you wouldn't leave your door unlocked just cuz you have internal problems as well.
And really, 100% of illegal immigrants cause crime if you consider the act of illegal entry a crime, which I would say it is since there exist legitimate modes of entry for people like refugees. You can say more resources should be spent streamlining that process, but even in the best case scenario, the U.S. is not a battered women's shelter and it's simply not possible or desirable to take on all the world's problems. In fact, doing so hurts the host countries by removing people who would stand and oppose the sort of policies that led to them fleeing in the first place. You're giving them a release valve when you really need to get them to stay and fight to protect their home and kick out the abusive spouses there.
Scott Adam's hates analogies... proceeds to use analogies.
He is absolutely wrong about republicans not having a problem with legal immigration.
What happened to the asylum seekers from Guatemala? Were they allowed to begin the process of obtaining LEGAL REFUGEE status? Or were they turned away?
abstractfacts don’t have a problem with EUROPEAN immigration and highly educated asian people that’s about it
@@oneloveonebeing That is one of their policies that actually makes sense to me. I mean, why bring in people inferior(mainly in terms of education and job training) to what you already have at home? I am not saying I support it(I mean, many of these people are probably going to die now that they´ve been turned away), but it makes sense.
Actual asylum seekers go to ports of entry.
David did well, much better than Sam Harris who I guess didn't realise Scott is arguing in bad faith
Although I am team Sam 100%, I was disappointed with Sam in that podcast (which I listened to last night). Since then I've been researching SA, (for benefit of doubt), it only cemented my initial thought, he's pretty much "psycho babbling)... I do hope he and Sam get together again for round two! This is my first meet with
There are 2500 billionaires in the world that are currently hoarding a combined wealth of 7 trillion dollars. Adding to that bucket of wealth via tax cuts does absolutely nothing to contribute to the circular flow of production and consumption of the real economy.
AndyB this makes so much sense they already have SOOOOO much money. and they haven’t done shit with it. what makes us think giving them more would suddenly change their behavior. they already have so much money they don’t know what to do with it. #expropriate
Think it indicates kind of brain damage to conflate wealth in the world with US tax reform.
Hey no one is talking about ladders.
It would be that short, and we can use ladders now in the spots that there is a fence. We also have border patrol.
Or tunnels, which already are a problem. Everyone knows you could never, ever dig under something.
Also, his argument about overstayed visas automatically assumes that immigrants staying past their visa's expiration is a problem at all. How is it a problem? You have to make a case for that before assuming we all agree, because we don't. How is that a problem for everyday working-class people in the US?
Also also, a border wall has proven to be an ineffective solution. If you TRULY want immigrants to come here legally, you would devote funds and manpower to processing them legally. You only talk about a wall if you have no interest in immigrants coming here.
Wait, wealthy people put money in a bank and it sits there???? The bank loans this money out as capital!!!
You think the average person is using the same investment banks as the rich elite? Lol
@@lavia5521 What?? It doesn't matter which banks money is in! Unless someone stuffs a mattress, all money that does not go into to the public sector circulates within the private sector. I don't know wealthy people who stuff their mattresses.
@@changingworld2 Which banks do matter.
It appears you are quite ignorant.
The rich hoard their money. Sometimes in foreign banks, not mattresses...
You are quite laughable.
@@lavia5521 Foreign banks exist to perform exactly the same way as America banks (to make more money from investment capital). American currency is used by successful foreign banks as capital to fund American industry and U.S. government debt. If a foreign bank has higher interest rates (and is considered a stable risk) , many wealthy people will invest with these banks, but the money is still U.S. dollars and useless without a paid exchange. Foreign banks rarely find it valuable to exchange the currency, then invest in other countries when the foreign dollars can already diversify their global portfolios without the added cost of an exchange. Research shows banks with foreign investors are global and the money is invested in the US by these banks.
@@changingworld2 Tax havens do not do the same thing.
Are you ignorant or disingenuous?
Parkman just interrupts all the time.
Scott has a good view point and a pleasing personality. He is right on every point he made. Good guest.
I am reminded of the Titanic. The young man says he knows for sure that he is right because he has all the details, all the facts, while in the mean time the old man says things are not getting better and we need to try something controversial to change coarse just a little bit. One says more of the same, and the other says we need to try something different. One is a college instructor, the other is a very successful private entrepreneur. One has very little life experience, the other is very experienced.
I know from 65 years of living in California that the State is changing. It has gone from the conservative mentality of my youth to an unopposed liberal agenda of today. Young people of today have no basis of comparison on which to understand the trends that leadership has imposes on the population. This young man spouts off facts and information based on inexperience and fails to understand that his sources are not precise. The old man is saying all sources of information are biased and you must trust your personal experiences. By the time the young man personally experiences the loss of his college teaching job to a illegal alien/immigration it will be too late to save our way of life.
The world is a very dangerous place and it will destroy you if you let it. Our leadership lives behind walls and all sorts of security. In the old days this was not the case. The trend is for more security for the leadership and more of the same for everyone else. If the leadership had to depend on a wall for their personal safety then there would be a demilitarized zone along Mexico's border to match that of North and South Korea.
Right around the six minute mark Mr. Adams basically flat out stated that most people don't independently determine economical outlooks beyond what is reported in the news. To me that sounded like "Most people are ignorant on the finer points of the economy so who cares if I spread misinformation?"
Nah dude, he was making a valid point and you are mocking him for no reason. That's what the Shapiro fanboys do, not us.
David Pakman should debate a border security expert on the wall.
Everyone responsible for border security agrees with Trump over the wall. Armchair experts like David Pakman hates this and thinks it's a bad idea.
Everyone responsible for border security agrees with Trump over the wall ---- really? not one single person thinks its bs?
Solid debate, ill give Scott Adams credit for holding a good debate, compared to his tweets, but man Pakman is a good debater.
Optimism IS the single most important factor in driving the economy. Scott's right.
Optimism only creates bubbles in economies. It’s not a real economy. It’s hype, just like Donald Trump.
Credit card companies LOVE optimism.
Oh...you'll pay this down before your 0% interest rate expires in 12 months and jumps to 18%.
And even if its 18%...I'm confident you can knock that out in 15 to 22 years.
GO GET EM SON!
Wow, David absolutely obliterated each and every single one of Scott Adams's points. This was truly a master class in picking out logical fallacies and showing them exactly where they went wrong. There are areas where I criticize David quite a bit, but this interview was great. Thanks!
@Nika D I've criticized David more often than I've praised him, but Scott Adams had almost no logically-valid points. It was really embarrassing for me just watching him try to back up his points. David made that very clear through his follow-up questions and explanations of his faulty logic.
Scott’s so right. 1 screen, two movies. Crazy sauce.
David’s opinion has clearly been assigned
Where is part one?
behind the (pay)wall?
keedt nice
The entire podcast is free on his website, it's on the show for today
Part one
Dilbert's Scott Adams: Is Trump Responsible for Economic Chaos?
ruclips.net/video/tkDg2YmxzDQ/видео.html
The reason Scott Adams thinks metaphors are useless is because he is terrible at them. Clearly he thinks anything HE can't think of is "impossible," so how could he ever believe in the power of the metaphor?
One of your best debates David, good job.
David lost this one
@@Pordan507 wtf do you mean? Pakman stomped him hard.
@@Red-rj7sr David got destroyed, wasn't even close. Makes sense since Adams is way smarter.
Tax cuts benefited ALL Americans (as an average), not just the rich ... what's David babbling about?
07:10 the conversation should’ve ended there. I can’t point to any evidence of benefits, but just the IDEA of them makes me FEEL good. 💀
Tsuka 2104 thats a nice man of straw yeh got there.
I see no real difference between his point and David's. The way human beings behave isn't really a science. Saying "in theory" the middle class getting tax cuts should stimulate the economy more isn't any more scientific than what Scott is saying. The absolutely monstrous economy under Trump pre-COVID doesn't really dispute this. Although I'll admit its way too hard to measure what caused what in any given instance because the US is way too complicated.
@@sandcastledxthe rich just don’t wanna taxes that’s it
David pakman owned
I feel optimistic in my opinion that Scott Adam's is ignorant.
My optimism is stimulating the Economy.
You're welcome.
Well played, sir.
I always thought the Dilbert comic was wasn't funny, and now I know why.
‘…Israel’s wall is also fence, a lot of people don’t know that.’ 🤣
David Pakman is 10 x more intelligent Scott Adams .
And a LOT less racist 😂
"I made a terrible analogy, therefore that's why i dislike analogies.."
Perfectly encapsulates his (and the entire GOP's) logic: "i dislike what i don't understand"
Completely agree!
How is the economy now, Feb 2020?...Outstanding. Trump 2020
Just following up....how's the economy in May 2020?
I can predict how this is going to go. Debating Scott Adams is like trying to punch your way through a wall of jello - It just squishes around your arm and doesn't really move. He spews out a bunch of words that approximate the shape of the topic, but never really says much.
thats how i felt reading this comment
News flash, the tax cut wasn’t for the rich... unless you consider $75K - $200K household income “rich”. In this country, that’s very average and in some liberal parts, almost poor to living paycheck to paycheck...
I fall into that category and my tax cut will be around 5% reduction, or roughly $7,500 dollars.
I get so tired of hearing about the tax cut being for the wealthy...
Do you know why the poor won’t have a tax cut..??? BECAUSE THEY DON’T PAY ANY TAXES TO BEGIN WITH!
David is stuck on the political aspects rather than the complexities and differences of the subject to say nothing of scrambled thought processes...Scott is spot on.
Watching David for the first time, I noticed he interrupted his guests numerous times for the sake of arguing. I admire that Scott could listen to this for so long. Not a subscriber. And not a trump hater. Give the guy his wall for the good of the country and quit the piddling Point arguments.
its not a wall david its a fence
It's a slat-wall-fence, a veritable mural! It's practically as multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and melting-pot-like as can be! In fact, it seems we should put a more monocultural wall in front of that wall, so we can keep it out of our...multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and melting-pot-like country?
The US has the most generous immigration and refugee program in the world. If you want to slag a country for not welcoming others, look to Japan.
To say that Donald Trump wouldn’t want to solve 2/3rds of the illegal immigration problem is ludicrous. If you think he’s doing it for political reasons, then it would make more since that he’s solving more of the problem than less.
Scott Adams is a sophist, so he believes that emotions points to truths. He sides with Trump because of the way Trump makes people feel. So for example, although Trump may act immoral on a specific policy, supporters still feel the policy may lead to a positive outcome, so therefore: Trump acting out immoral was a good thing, because of the positive outcome. The problem with this line of thinking is when it comes to ethics and morality. It runs into problems.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophist
He's a sophist, and a POS. I don't buy his act for a minute. But he's doing well conning the MAGA crowd.
Whatever your politics maybe we can all agree that a podcast host should allow their guest to speak more than the host speaks? Can ... Can we agree with that?
Nah, if the guest constantly says incorrect things, its the hosts job to refute it.
I can't watch this whole interview, the pseudo intellectualism of Adams is too much to handle
Ironically, this is how I feel about 99% of comments on youtube videos, regardless of a left or right channel.
@Captain 7 Captain 7, I am on the right, I am conservative, and i didn't think the original comment here was necessary, nor did I agree with it, but yours is absolutely horrible. it is so detrimental to honest discussion. Please don't do that.
i couldnt watch any, david is to painful with his pseudo smart mentality, he's a clerk and he is fine as one but he's not a worker or wealth generator type, yet he wants the spoils of the workers, the wealthy etc.
poor modern clerks, so miss educated.
@@jonfolz There are some days I love Trump, there are days really disagree with his actions. I do not like the term "Trump Supporter", cause I don't think that is a good description, unless if it means ppl who portray to agree with him no matter what. I under "Israel supporter", because that's an issue, not a person. Do you have a politician that you wouldn't preface "I don't agree with everything they do"? Also, can you tell me specific lies Trump has said that you consider harmful? Specifically, not his normal NY attitude embellishments. And can you tell me what he has done which makes you feel ppl associated with him must walk away with a stench of hate? I mean policy wise, things that affect the ppl. i'm really asking, because what I am trying to figure out is people on the right and people on the left have such a polarize view of reality. I get it to some degree, but it's so shatter today, I'm just trying to understand why. I do appreciate you responding to captain 7 with dignity, not just insults normally incited by such a stupid comment as his (assuming it's a guy).
@@leviathanrising9763 Unless you're here to crown someone Miss Education, you really ought to spell it mis-education. You are an idiot.
The fact that all of Pakmans fans are insulting scott in the top comments is a pretty good indicator that Pakman got clowned somewhere in this interview. Gonna have to watch now.
I'm a phycology expert I stayed at the Holiday inn Express and I draw comics.
Let's all listen to "poo shoveler", who can't punctuate, can't spell and ignores warnings from RUclips's automatic spell-checker.
@@daapdary Lil triggered there aren't ya bud
@@lavia5521 Do you know what an ad hominem fallacy is?
@@daapdary An ad hominem is attacking your character over your argument.
Your argument is that you are triggered by grammar, not their point.
Why do you think being offended by the accurate label will get you anthing?
@@lavia5521 First I was "triggered", now I'm "offended", which are failed attempts at mind-reading. Apparently, you think being triggered and offended invalidates my original comment, which is a non-sequitur.
Love Scott battling these guys.
Scott adams is actually a pretty level headed and rational person. He makes some logical errors here I think, and I think Pakman gets the better of him ultimately, but hes a better sparring partner than like 90% of trumpoids out there, as he can actually stick to the point rather than getting distracted with random emotional tangents.
but you're OK with the 90% of the Biden Pooper Scoopers....
David--there is a huge difference between the Visa overstays and the border crossers. The Visa overstays have passports and have been vetted by the US gov't. The border crossers have not been vetted. There are no MS-13 among the Visa overstays. The Known Criminals that have been booted out of the country 1,2,5 times do not come back in on a visa.
So much hating here without giving arguments.
@@Sam-cp6so Which questions
did he dogde?
Sam if all you got from him was “Republicans good and Democrats bad” then you’re ideologically possessed.
Sam literally everyone in left wing comment sections experience so much cognitive dissonance. Almost Everyone in the comments can’t rationalize their opinions it’s crazy. Instead they call the opposition names and call it a day. This is why people are leaving the left and you’re shitty “blue wave” never happened.
^^ LOL at this guy's logic:
"literally everyone..." immediately followed by "Almost Everyone..." is not only contradictory to your own point, it's factually incorrect and based on nothing (you should grab a dictionary and look up "literally", BTW). Then, after a string of ad hominem attacks, follows it up with a complaint about ad hominem attacks. Wow. Just brilliant work there, pal.
Don't SSleep well u seem too pussy to @ me so what’s ur issue? That I find that leftists have bad arguments? My first sentence is obviously a hyperbole only an ape wouldn’t be able to figure that out. The fact that u think playing grammar police disproves anything I said amuses me😂. It cannot be an ad hominem if I am not counter arguing moron. There it is again, leftists using terms they don’t understand. If you said i made insults you would’ve been right, but u didn’t, did you? Anyway ur comment perfectly proves my point so thanks for that lmao😭
The problem with starving people is that they just aren't optimistic enough.
Has this guy heard AOC's rebuttal to Trump? She laid out how Republicans weren't just fighting illegal immigration but legal immigration, too.
99.9% of the comments authors including DP will never come close to the wealth and life accomplishments of Scott Adams.
Looks like Scott is as intelligent as Dilbert is funny....
YMMV, but I always liked the Dilbert comic strip.
I do too but Dilberts creator is a letdown politically
@@Kylopod That must mean Scott is a pretty smart dude.
@@DTGee64 Intelligence can mean many different things. There are a lot of talented creative types who hold loony opinions. It's not uncommon. Adams, to me, falls into a category of celebrities who try to stay relevant by saying outrageous things to keep themselves in the headlines. It's a category in which I'd include Kanye, Roseanne, and indeed Trump himself. Typically people like this are talented and once had legitimate careers (not including Trump, who's always been a fraud) but they're past their sell-by date and desperate for attention.
In other words, highly intelligent since Adams made millions from Dilbert
I think Donald Trump started excellent job persuading Adams.
Scott went to the Jordan Peterson school of economics, "It doesn't matter if the economy is good as long as you psychologically BELIEVE it's good."
Well, that's pretty much how the stock markets work, at least. And Peterson is not an economist.
@@jrd33 I know he's not. It was a joke based on a conversation Jordan had with Sam Harris a while back where he said something close to objective truth doesn't matter, it matters if what you believe to be true leads to living to reproduce or some such nonsense.
lol record low unemployment anyone who WANTS to work can
@@jrd33 dont bother with far lefties like these guys - even liberals mock Pakman
David, Sir, I love how you can debate people without being nasty.
What’s up with right-wingers and pseudo-intellectuals?
What makes him a pseudo intellectual? He seems to be giving logical justifications for his statements.
Thelogicalape yea david debate some people to the left of you
If walls or barriers are bad or immoral then why not tear down the current fencing on the US / Mexico border.
I think Scott Adam has the superior argument here.
andy patch blahhhhhh hahahahaha
Obviously 🙄
Ur mum gay
andy patch he does but all these npcs are just going to use ad homnems instead of giving an actual argument🤦🏽♂️
Are we seriously having to explain how trickle down economics doesn't work in 2019????
So to Scott Adams it’s actually feelings not facts...hmm...
hahahahaha - He is the most disingenuous interview I've ever heard. He has no interest other than winning.
Representing his true feelings and talking honestly are of no interest to him whatsoever - much like his fave president.
Politics is feeling over fact mostly
Oh God give it up Dellbert.
It's clear that Scott doesn't understand what structural engineers actually do.
A lot of people in the comments who disagree with Scott are posting insults, but they are not posting arguments.
Great Scott!
You’ve got to give it to David for having a semi reasonable conversation with a pre programmed wall
I think he held out pretty well against David's critical interview style. Much better than others I have seen.
@@vladimirputin110 nah I'm not American so now you look kind of racist
What’s worse than one Dave Rubin? Two Scott Adams.
David was kind of decimated here
Scott Adams is very impressive, very intelligent reasoning.
The level of Trump Derangement Syndrome in the comments is an 11. LMFAO
Bill the Cat ... You can just call it "Trump Syndrome." We all know Trump = Derangement. No need to be redundant. ;-)
Mak Way wow great comeback..
@@giovalladares1022 It's not a comeback. He's merely emphasizing what an absolute mess Drumpf is.
Jen Kem which is only furthering the point of the original post. Trump derangement syndrome. Talk about cognitive dissonance.
@@giovalladares1022 liberals INVENTED the term Obama Derangement Syndrome....why are you stealing from liberals?.....not creative enough?
Scott Adams, Shut Up And Dooddle... LOL
To be fair, he's not really even good at that. I've never heard a person say "Wow, I can't wait for that new Dilbert comic in Sunday's paper."
Yes, to me he's psycho babbling
I admire Scott Adams patience.
Beware of Scott Adams, number one trump cheerleader. Self proclaimed master persuader. He's just counting on trump to grow his 150 million into a billion.
The poor and middle class spend money. The rich hoard it to themselves.
The rich are greedy for wanting to keep the money they earn. The poor and middle class are righteous for wanting it for themselves.
Bradelberry most the rich do not earn it from their own hard work. The average pay of a CEO is 318x the amount of the average income. Do you thing the average CEO is working 318x as hard?
nope, the rich pay all the taxes and give you talentless kids your jobs, just be gratefull. its all your good for.
leviathan rising the rich actively try to find ways to not pay taxes either through tax loopholes, storing their money on off shore accounts, or lobby politicians to pass tax cuts.
They should pay more so so much of the taxes don’t have to be payed by the middle class. There is a reason the middle class is shrinking every year and income inequality get worse by the year. Hey out of your conservative libertarian bubble.
@@windmaster118 no. But the ceo is 318x more important to a large corp than the avg worker.... If one of the average workers sucks it will hardly affect the company. If the CEO sucks it could destroy the company.
Scott Adams should be charged with assault. That wasn't a fair fight. Come on Scott. Bad analogies and doesn't understand that people overstaying their Visa is a separate issue than border security. However you feel about the wall. You can't deny logic. I mean, I guess you can.
4:36 No David . When you put 1000$ in the bank it doesn’t just sleep there and wait till you pick it up. It goes out to work and create things in the economy until you need it . Why did you bring a psychologist to argue with you about economics? You just wanted to feel good about yourself?
Actually, Scott Adams has a degree in economics, www.imdb.com/name/nm0011346/bio
@@maggievw1166 its unfortunate .He should have brought a practicing economist eg thomas sowell,peter schiff if he wanted to discuss economics with a right winger . This guy seems very weak on the relevant topics.
@@tjti2631 I agree that Sowell would have been better, but that would have been the proverbial gun in a knife fight.They were looking at the situation through very different filters,; persuasion vs. ideology. Made for a rather messy discussion, one in which confirmation bias was the onlookers only valid solution as neither made a compelling argument..
Maggie VW I strongly agree
yeah, no. when you put $1000 in the bank you get a shitty 1% interest if you're lucky. meanwhile the bank gambles with it and makes a shitload, which they then payout in bonuses to executives.
What most people don't know is that engineers are better economists than economists
Scott lost this debate, I'm surprised. He usually fields question better on his Periscope.
Back when Scott could criticize Trump for something. Simpler times for the cult.
This is my first time meeting Pakman, I'm definitely interested and impressed enough to sub
Good debater, well informed, armed and attacks accordingly!
If you own a bicycle company that make a a product on the higher end of quality. If you made a $1,000,000 in profit, paid $300,000 in taxes. Now you get a tax cut and you only pay $150,000. in taxes, you have absolutely no motivation to higher more workers. You will simply save that money. The only thing that will get you to higher more employees is to have more people who can afford your bicycles. If you put a dollar in the hands of a worker, that dollar gets spent over and over - put it in the hands of the rich and they hoard it. Even worse, the billionaires invest it it into buying our legislators and literally have their accountants dictate legislation that allows them to hoard more wealth.. Wake the fuck up people