New episodes every other Saturday. Subscribe wherever you listen.
Subscribe on YouTubeAnd we are live and back for another week of the fake problems podcast.
What's up dog?
How much dude?
Got some follow ups for us to kick it off.
I got one.
Okay, that's what it's.
So last week on our monthly, sometimes longer than monthly podcast,
I claimed that Michael Jackson was chemically castrated as a child.
Yeah.
Don't know where I heard that.
I think I just thought I knew it.
So I started doing some research and still conflicting evidence on whether he was castrated or not.
I found one article that claimed we should put these rumors to rest because there's evidence that he was not castrated.
The main thing they cite is that he could grow facial hair, which I don't know.
I don't know if you're chemically castrated that automatically means you can't grow facial hair.
Well, fun thing.
Well, I guess if you're chemically castrated.
So your testicles produce the most of your testosterone, but your adrenal glands do produce some.
Hence why women can have, they do have testosterone in their bodies.
So it's that argument, there could be an argument for that your adrenal could produce enough to wear facial hairs attached to that.
Yeah, that doesn't feel like an end all be all.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I'm claim.
Oh, God.
That's a horrible sound.
Is there a, you'll get there.
We got time.
I, they don't have much else.
They're, they just say no doubt his father was tough on him, but he probably didn't castrate him.
There's no, it sounds like a big.
Oh, the other thing they said the, the autopsy said his balls were normal, which, which does the autopsy actually say then do we have access to the autopsy?
I don't know.
Who has access to that?
I don't know.
This article is by IMDB.
It feels like IMDB is writing this.
Actually, no, it's, it's cited on IMDB and then it led me to a different article.
Really?
It's the latest one.
It's from 2024.
Okay.
It's kind of crazy.
People are writing about that.
Yeah.
But after looking a little deeper, the, these all came from Michael Jackson, doctor, saying pretty much claiming with confidence that he was chemically castrated and saying that his father gave him injections at the age of 12.
Yeah.
To cure his acne and make his voice stay high pitched.
And he kind of just stated it matter, effectively.
So one thing that, whatever these situations present themselves on, there's two sides talking about these things.
I always think, what is the incentive for a doctor to be releasing that information?
Does that do anything for him to be saying, no, yeah, he was chemically castrated?
It's a good question.
That doctor, as you knew, I just found out he was convicted of manslaughter for giving Michael Jackson the drug that killed him.
I guess an incentive could be trying, I don't know if he said these before or after his conviction, but maybe trying to like clear his reputation as like, I'm looking out for Michael Jackson.
By like, shitting on his father and bringing white to all the abuse that was brought on him.
Yeah, it's a good, it could be.
But I guess you could ask the other side, what's the incentive of trying to clear Joe Jackson's name and say?
Yeah, which is, which pretty universally known as a shitty guy.
Yeah.
Which, why?
Why would you be going, no, Joe Jackson didn't do that level of abuse.
He just beat the shit up and like threw him in the fireplace and shit.
Yeah.
Like, I don't know.
And the article was like, let's put these rumors to rest.
That's like, why?
Yeah, who gives it?
At the end of the day.
Did we have enough of these castration rumors?
Like, no one thinks that.
It's been hurting the Jackson's.
We gotta stop this.
Which also, are any of the other siblings alive?
Isn't Janet Jackson still alive?
I have no idea.
Yeah, I don't follow any of the other Jackson's.
I don't know what happened to the rest of that family.
Because there's a lot of them.
They have the Jackson five.
I don't know anything about them.
Huh.
You maybe asked them, was he chemical castrated?
Yeah.
Because straight to the source.
This one's kind of disappointing.
I don't know.
I don't know what to think.
See, like, there's a lot of loose claims of stuff.
There's no way to really like validate.
The loose claims on both sides.
Yeah, like, how do you validate?
I would lean towards the doctor.
But then also the fact that he has some legal case involved with this.
And he could be trying to protect his name.
And that adds a layer of like, okay, maybe it's not true.
But I feel less confident about the people going,
Joe Jackson didn't do this.
And saying like, he'd never grew facial hair.
And those are the reasons.
I feel like anytime there's a rumor like this,
there's some article that comes out and it's like, guys stop.
This isn't true.
That's like a guarantee anytime there's something like this.
Yeah.
Which, who are those people?
I don't know what I'm doing now.
I don't know.
When we've talked about before, I like, I don't understand how people coming on like YouTube videos.
But to be the person who's leading the charge on a topic like that on the internet.
Yeah.
And that's next level from a YouTube commenter.
Yeah, I'm really curious about the autopsy.
Yeah, that's actually released.
Do autopsy typically get released as public knowledge?
Do you typically check the balls?
I guess you probably check everything.
I have no, truly I have no idea what goes down when they're doing an autopsy.
I guess it depends on the thing too right.
Like if they die from a car accident, they probably look at things differently.
Then I'm someone die from like prop and all or drug overdose.
I don't know.
I don't think we'll find an answer to this.
Yeah.
Maybe we'll talk about that.
I'll follow up on his autopsy sometime.
That's fine with me.
Any other follow-ups?
No.
All right.
Shall we get into it?
Absolutely.
First easy quick one.
I guess this goes for everyone, but I've just seen it because I'm looking for girls on
Bumble not guys.
But people putting their full name, like literally if I put my full name on a dating app,
which then people could find you way easier in terms of different social media platforms
or other information.
You can just go get a background check on people.
If you have their full name, you can just go some are even free.
You just go on a website and find people's information.
Like usually they're address, their phone number.
And to think that people are just doing that, maybe it's just you know,
tech ignorance, like they're just not really savvy.
Yeah, they're just not worried about their security.
Well, I was leaning more towards, they have no idea the implications of like putting
your full name on a dating app.
Oh sure.
And also like I feel like guys can be pretty creepy and to have just like be having that.
If your last name's on there, I'm going to look up your Facebook at least.
Probably.
How about their LinkedIn?
Probably not because that tells you if you looked at their profile.
Yeah.
You can turn on anonymous though because I've definitely done that.
Really?
Where I've, because I, I thought you needed like the premium subscription for that.
Well, that's a good question because I know that the premium goes,
Hey, here's all these people who looked at your stuff.
And if you get premium, supposedly you don't lock that.
I don't have premium.
But there is an option in your own LinkedIn that anonymizes you doing any movement.
Oh, that's nice.
Yeah, because I've used it before.
I hope it works well because I've used it to like, I'm hired a new company.
I go look at people I'm working with profiles, but I'm not like necessarily adding them.
Like I'll be looking like the CEO and like some other departments.
You like that.
So yeah, I hope it's fine.
Yeah, kind of, that's kind of a bullshit feature that they just tell everyone you looked at their profile.
Yeah.
I think there's an option turned off again because that, that would make it, it makes me feel so creepy.
Yeah.
If I'm like, well, that's why I don't go on LinkedIn very often.
I mean, either, it's usually when I'm hired somewhere, but there are people who use that like social media, like like a Facebook, which is very...
It sucks.
Yeah.
It's weird.
There's like people like hitting on people on LinkedIn.
That's crazy.
Yeah.
They were told you about, you know, you probably get tons of messages on LinkedIn about like whether it be job offers or random shit or like some consulting firm or someone trying to rope you into it.
Like ranging from pyramid scheme stuff to legitimate job offer stuff.
I've had that and everything in between.
But there's been a couple of times where like a girl salesman, a woman salesman reaches out to me who's like a younger attraction.
And is like messaging me, trying to entice me to like, like using like smiley faces and like using stuff that like flirty.
Yeah.
And it's using her hotness.
Truly.
But it's so...
It's like the same, it works on people who go to strip clubs and like think the strippers like them.
If you're not that guy and you see it, at least for me, I'm like, this is so gross.
She's going to employ me.
Yeah, dude.
It's like, what the fuck?
It's like sending hearts and smiley faces in LinkedIn chats being like, yeah, I'll be so grateful.
That's not...
That's never happened to me.
I've had it happen the thing two times.
That's nuts.
Yeah.
And it's just like, it feels so meant for like a casual dating app.
And it's on LinkedIn and it's just so...
I don't know.
How do you pull so hard, dude?
It's not that's not pulling.
I think that only happens to you.
No.
There's no way.
And I don't think that it's not like that, girls.
That's not about...
I think she likes you.
Fuck off.
It was actually legitimate like message of being like, yes, you want to hook up.
Fuck.
Well, next time it comes around, I'll start.
I'll start doing it.
All right.
Majority will is democracy.
Oh, God.
If...
Hit me.
If 51% wants something that happens, what if 51% of people don't want birth, control, made, or want slavery?
Is the problem with democracy.
Which gets touchy.
Because I get the point of democracy.
But when you start to drill into it a little bit further, you still have the majority of people really know that.
And you know, the difference can be 51%, 49%.
Yeah.
And that works on every level of that stuff.
So is it then that we're just...
We're okay with what the majority believes in general.
And we don't necessarily consider the lesser.
I mean, the majority is better than the minority who are ruling.
And even if the minority is so close, though.
Again, be like 49% versus 51%.
Then the 51% get their way and 49% don't.
Yeah.
I don't see a better option.
Yeah.
I guess like no one's gonna get...
You can't have a system where everyone gets what they want.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I think democracy is probably the best thing we have right now.
It's just a weird situation where if suddenly...
And you know, this has happened throughout history where certain areas of places wanted worse things.
Like slavery is a good example.
Like the majority of the South wanted...
Well, it's actually way more complex than that.
But there was a time where the South threw a bunch of bullshit wanted.
They wanted a society that allowed slavery.
Yeah. And it's mostly the ruling class in the South wanted that.
Not necessarily the...
It's complex in terms of...
Most people didn't have slaves.
A lot of the...
Rector people did have slaves.
And then the poor people viewed themselves as if slaves got their freedom.
Then they would no longer have anybody beneath them.
Which I want to convey to you guys.
I mean, that's...
Mean not good in itself.
But a lot of people were fighting for more that black people wouldn't be just able to...
They have some level of...
Something over somebody.
Yeah, which is fucked up.
But a lot of it was not about like, we want to keep our slaves.
It was like, I just can't have...
I can't lose this.
Is the one thing...
Is that anything that...
Yeah.
So...
But...
Belling is back.
In a situation where a country goes, yes, we want...
You know, women have no rights or their slavery.
If the majority wants that, then it just happens.
Yeah, that's nuts.
I guess I'd hope nowadays, at least in our country,
that would never happen.
Because the social stigma against those things is so strong.
Yeah.
But I guess things can change.
Yeah, I think, you know,
the points for democracy is that I think more people are good than bad.
And that's why places like America can end up existing.
Yeah, that wasn't the case then you would want a minority good people in control.
Yeah.
Which is also really hard to find.
Well, that just never happens.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, the more you concentrate power,
whether being one person, ten people, hundred people,
the worse it typically gets.
Because humanity is so complex that one person's needs is typically...
Whether they understand other people's needs or not,
it's just people are self-serving in that way.
Not to say it's...
Because I feel like selfish gets put in those contexts,
but it's like, people typically take care of themselves first
and then take care of people.
And so other people's views typically come second.
It's just by default.
Yeah.
Everyone votes selfishly pretty much.
For sure.
Which you should though.
It's like, you are living this life.
Yeah.
And make sure that your needs are met.
And then most people, when they do have their needs met,
they want to help out.
Then you can think of other things.
Yeah.
So is democracy a bet that most people are good
or is it more of a bet that if you force people into a system
such that the only way they can get a benefit of it,
out of it is working with other people
and like spreading the power around, that's the best option.
Instead, instead of being able to like circumvent
or like not care about other people and get what they want.
Can you say it again?
Yeah, I'm so happy.
No, no, I just couldn't fully grasp.
I feel like there's just a structure in place
where you have to appease more people.
Okay.
And that's good.
If you force people to do that,
like you're still kind of acting selfishly,
but you need to cater to more people to get what you want,
versus sure.
I don't know, just seizing power, I guess,
or however that would work if the minority rules.
Yeah.
I guess in a perfect place it would be,
because in America, we have the electoral college
and then we also have all the stuff that comes with each side.
Like a lot of people vote where they pick one thing
that a side advocates for,
and then they don't know the hundreds of terrible things that they do.
I'm not advocating for either side.
I think that it's like more than not,
people feel similar on a lot of issues.
And there's various few that people feel divided on.
And then those are then used to cause the splits
as opposed to working with each other.
And it's, but most people cooperate on most things.
I think there's like that,
I'm not arguing against democracy,
but democracy puts people in a place where it makes people think
that they disagree on most things.
And certainly with the media too.
Yeah, and then that's why it's like all the country's so split in so many ways.
It's like, there's split on maybe a handful of issues,
and it causes such a divide,
and it causes people to think that right and left
the values of the people who identify like that are so far different.
And then it creates for the people in power to make it seem like
you need us to kind of make this work.
You need the democracy in place to make this work.
Otherwise, if we don't have this thing keeping it together,
then you're going to have so many differences between each other
that everything will fall apart.
My theory obviously,
I have those no real example of those things, I guess.
How about when a candidate changes one of their views
because of like the pressure from the people?
I feel like that's a good thing.
If they stick to it, which obviously they don't always do that.
Yeah.
But like if someone's way too far right,
and they realize I'm not going to win this election,
if I stay this way, I'm going to come towards the middle a little bit.
Sure.
People shit on those people for like changing their views,
but I think that's a good thing.
No, I would say that's good.
I just...
So if it allows social pressure to be applied in democracy.
I guess the question after that is why do you need that person
making the rules for you?
If we need to pressure someone,
I feel like there's this understanding,
or not even understanding, but this notion that like the senator you elect,
or the president you elect,
or that they are a different kind of human being,
via more altruistic,
or they're better managed to control people.
And it's through those means that I think it's distorted that like,
yes, if we pressure someone to thinking one way, that's fine.
But it's like, why do we have then the first place
where people are dictating things?
Like, why do we have leaders?
Yeah.
Or like, why aren't a lot of things carried out by private interest?
Which...
You can make the argument that those things are directly involved with private interest.
And that is people at the general level.
And then the more you scale up where people are in position of power over people,
then they have less...
They're going to be less interested in your values just by default,
no matter who they are,
because they get farther and farther away from the direct connection to the person.
And I'm not...
I don't know if we have a better system.
I'm just saying it gets to a point...
We're seeing the monster of it right now,
where it gets...
It gets to a point where people are exposed to the size where it starts to get even farther from human.
And then eventually it goes...
Well, I'm not saying it's going to go back to historical, like,
kings ruling over large parts of the world,
but the United States is kind of that right now.
We are the superpower.
We are the thing policing the world.
Team America world police.
Exactly.
I mean, it is that.
I mean, I think you need leaders in one way or another.
I feel like that's inevitable.
Like, if you don't formalize it, it'll happen some other way.
Yeah.
So I think it's better to orchestrate it the way we do.
I don't know.
I feel like I've gotten us into a government thing right now.
I did not...
It's a sanctioned government session.
All right, that's fine.
I think the point I would make against that would be that the people leading us...
Do you want it in a system where the people leading you don't necessarily have any incentive to do good by you?
Being the government.
They're going to get paid regardless of what you do.
Or do you want a leader being someone who, in order to survive,
they need you to consume what they are producing.
Truly.
How do you drive that, the latter situation?
Because it isn't that what we try to do anyway in our government.
We want those people to be beholden to our wants.
And they're supposed to represent their constituency.
But they don't always.
So how do we force them to represent us?
Well, they use the government to circumvent the true...
They stay in office for longer times of through manipulation in government
where, as opposed to like the company, whatever company will truly die if you just stop going...
I don't support you.
If you stop supporting Donald Trump right now, it's not going to make a difference.
I know he's already in.
But even if you stop supporting his center...
Don't peg me as a Trump supporter.
It's out there.
But it's one of those things where they have more power to stay there than a private interest does by a landslide.
I could see that.
And a business has to stay afloat.
It has to make a profit and to do that it has to provide value.
Yeah, it's a symbiotic relationship with person and business.
How do you do that with government though?
You can't.
Because they have total power of...
The power of force is what they use.
And so when it starts to get away from truly using it to prevent violence between private interests,
then it becomes...
They use it for many other things.
Whether it be staying in office, finding wars on their places, and benefiting themselves in the system.
But can we vote them out if we don't like them?
Yeah, but then they have stuff like Jerry Mandarin and other tactics that kind of like...
They find...
They're deep in there and they have tools.
They find their way to use government to not allow...
Call it true democracy happen.
And it's...
Democracy even back in like the Roman times has a history of that where...
You still end up with people staying in power that people necessarily don't want.
Yeah.
But again...
But how do we...
What's the alternative?
Well, we still need law enforcement and protections around property rights and harming of private interests.
But beyond that, I don't think we need as many things happening with government and regulations as we think.
There's this law in history of us thinking that regulations solve problems and...
It's typically the markets have solved them walled before the government.
And then they just create a regulation around it and go, look what the government did.
And it's...
It's just like this false sense that if we don't have the government, we're all lost.
Without the government, we're all gonna...
Everyone's gonna be crazy and lost.
It's like the only reason the government works so well is because it has this foundation,
an extremely heavy large foundation of free market enterprise that props it up.
I mean, lemme mind this context, the government by definition cannot create value.
All they do is they take money and they put it in other places.
They don't create anything.
They take money that is extracted.
You can say extorted from people and they put it somewhere else.
Like taxpayer dollars?
Well, what about...
I mean, that goes to roads, bridges...
Right, but the values created by private interests.
The money they use...
Sure, they contract to companies.
Right, but I'm saying the taxpayer money extracted.
So, it's your taxpayer.
The money you generate, you generate value through your interaction with a company.
That's how those things have worked.
Sure, yeah.
The government then goes, okay, give us that money and we'll put it over here.
They're just moving value around.
They're not creating value through some mutual transaction.
And it's through those means that systems kind of...
So, what if I want to fix a road in my neighborhood?
What's the difference between...
I pay a company to do it, or I pay the government to do it?
Isn't that... are those both creating value?
Well, the government wouldn't be doing it.
There's no...
The government would hire a company that's a private interest.
So, they just be taking your money in.
But I could pay a company and then they could subcontract to someone else.
Sure, but the return on your dollar would be substantially less through the government.
You would pay...
Why should that?
Because of the corruption that exists.
I talk about the welfare thing a while ago.
I know you point out that's an old study, but you can find a countless example of your dollar going in this taxpayer dollar
and it getting returned at like 30 to 50 cents on the dollar.
I fully believe that.
Yeah.
I don't know if I'm fully on board that they can't create any value.
Well, they can't, by definition, because they're not...
The value is created from your human labor.
And they're truly taking the outcome of your human labor being the taxpayer.
But they provide benefits.
So, like you said, property rights.
No one can just take my house.
Yeah, that...
Because there's a governmental system I have the title to this property.
Without the government, that doesn't exist.
That's like a service.
Well, that's...
I guess value in the context I'm talking about is...
That again is taking value and funding those things.
I'm not arguing against that.
We still need law enforcement.
Yeah, I know.
But I'm just confused on the definition of value, I guess.
Well, there's something...
Because what if I hired like my own private security?
Yeah.
That's value, right?
Yeah.
So, couldn't you argue that the government providing that security is me paying money to them
and then providing a service to me?
I guess...
Yeah, I see what you're saying.
I guess it's just the delusion is more of the issue then.
But it's...
I guess they're...
It's fully on board with the delusion.
Yeah.
Because I've read this so many times before,
and now that you're posing this, it's kind of falling apart of the whole idea that
we have some agreements that me and the company that I'm working for.
I'm generating value, so they are paying me.
So, think of the money in that situation as the value that...
As a result of that mutual interaction, as opposed to my interaction with the government,
is they take the money from me and they put it towards something else,
whether it be roads or whatever it is.
But there's not...
Other than taking the money and hiring someone, they're not doing anything, I guess, is the point.
But there's lots of companies that do that.
Yeah.
And in those contexts, I would go...
Like, I'm getting new blinds in my house.
Yeah.
And I put in a request for a quote.
Some company comes out here.
They're basically just a retailer.
Like, they don't make blinds, they don't do anything.
They just give a quote.
Then they go to some vendor and buy the blinds, get them shipped, and install them.
I guess that's a service they provide.
And there's tons of companies that are just...
They use other companies.
Totally.
I guess when we start talking about those, the things that are truly used to orchestrate money in that way,
the value they provide would be substantially more than a government.
Going back to the dilution thing in terms of...
I think it's like a very poorly run business.
Yeah.
It's a great way of putting it.
And they have no incentive to stay afloat like a normal business.
As opposed to these retailers you're talking about, they have an incentive to do a good job
because they want to stay in business.
Even though for too high, no one's going to buy.
So they got it.
So it's all on the market.
And I guess the point is that the difference of efficiency is so much larger than people think
between a private retailer and a government moving stuff around
that it makes such a good case against government not being involved in any of those things.
Because everyone loses so much money.
And even aside from like them putting the money in building roads or whatever,
they also do things like waging wars that we don't need.
So it's like things that on a scale of harm to humanity,
it's so much larger than you hiring a private retailer or someone
or even privatizing roads to some degree of building that.
That the consequence from using the government shitty run version of a company is so large
that people are like, once you kind of lay out, when your tax dollar goes in there
and they throw it somewhere else and 70% of your tax dollar goes to,
we're over here keeping poor people locked in somewhere in the state.
It's like, why would you ever choose that company?
Yeah.
And I think to Europe to make your argument,
if you have a business that literally couldn't stay afloat without having massive amounts of power like the government,
I would argue that that business doesn't provide value.
If it can't survive on its own.
Yeah.
I mean, thanks for bolstering or not, maybe not enough value.
Yeah.
I mean, there's a long history of industries that should have died a long time ago
that government has chosen to keep them up because of their typically getting paid money
by those companies.
And government is just one of those itself, except it's subsidized by taxpayers and by force.
Because we have, again, if you'd stop paying your taxes, you'll go to prison.
So, at the cornerstone of all of this, it is the idea of the availability of choice
where in the government version, you don't have a choice.
In the private version, you do have a choice of what you're picking.
And the more you let the privatized free market version go, the better things get.
In terms of cost, choices, efficiency, innovations that change entire levels of industry,
those things happen through private interest, not through government.
Right.
I guess, my only other thought, I just don't have a capacity to answer this question.
But like that, the extreme inefficiency of the government,
is that a price you have to pay for just having a government.
Like, is there even an efficient way to do it?
Because you can't get rid of it.
No, not you need it.
I think not arguing for that.
The most libertarian person would agree you still need a government.
I guess there's an anarchist.
I think the place to really start in all of this is that you should stop government interaction with business.
Start there.
They cannot have influence on companies, other than protecting property rights.
If a company owns a piece of land and someone's threatening the building or threatening the people inside,
the government can come and use law enforcement to stop that.
But they should not be allowed to build regulation, telecoms, how to operate, subsidize companies, subsidize products.
We've already lived through the example of how bad that can happen.
And Adam Smith wrote, well, the nation's like the late 1700s.
The things he describes in that book still can predict market outcomes today.
And he was predicting the market outcomes of feudalism through price control.
So when there's fiefdoms and there's people controlling the prices of corn and wheat and all these things,
it translates directly to today.
But the government's just filling the blank of whatever can or Lord is ruling over the land.
Yeah.
When they control things...
There's a lot of evidence that that's really bad, right?
Price controls.
Yes.
I mean, you're just forcing markets into places that it will react somehow.
Yeah.
There's this notion that the government has a better understanding of how businesses work.
And so when they apply stuff than reality...
Yeah, right.
Because the market isn't anyone's opinion.
It's just what happens.
It's supply-meeting demand always.
It's some company offering something, some person wanting something, in some form.
And it's them meeting together, and that's the most efficient way of that evolution.
Not through the government going, I think I know it's right for this area.
And even if someone, a politician, whatever is going, I think I know it's right here.
I'm going to save people.
That one's wrong, but most of them are just doing it because it helps them by creating regulation or creating a thing.
It's some...
Regardless of the intention, it's not good.
And the intention is usually bad anyway.
Yeah.
And you know, Hitler had great intentions.
It's like...
It's just...
We need everyone's intentions are great from their point of view.
Yeah, dude.
Most people think they're doing the right thing.
Or they're working with the best information they have to do the right thing in their heads.
That's another interesting thing.
There's been studies done on the worst of criminals.
Yeah.
None of them think they're bad people.
Yeah.
They all think they're...
Maybe there's psychopaths that just don't have any feelings.
But like horrible mob bosses.
Like none of them...
They're all like, I was doing the best I could.
Yeah.
After machine gunning people.
Yeah.
And so, I mean, you know, Stalin isn't another great example of someone who thought...
Like the whole idea of communism is like utopia.
The end point is...
No.
Everyone's needs are met.
It's running the best it's ever run.
And Stalin...
And then I'm on top of all of it.
Well, dude, Stalin and Hitler both thought that this is going to help people.
Like their ideas is like this is the right thing for humanity.
And it just gets so lost immediately through the more you try to control other people
and what they're doing and different races and ethnicities.
It's worse.
More control is worse.
I'm telling you.
There's a long history.
I'm on board.
So, I should probably get off the soapbox.
Let it free.
I'm telling you, man.
I mean, I can go on, on, on, on.
But you also look at the history of like the second you let free markets start to happen.
And how it has changed humanity in the span of our record of history.
And to argue that more control was the results of this or we need more control on this,
it's pretty nuts, dude.
If you go back a hundred years to what humans are living in compared to what we're doing right now,
these are results of free markets.
They're not results of government.
We can podcast.
Dude.
It's a free market.
Yes.
It's just no one can stop us.
We're going to use our good intentions to solve everything from this podcast.
But anyway, yeah, I can talk on and on about that stuff because it's...
No, that was beautiful.
Thanks.
I mean, good input, too.
Nice.
You're gonna suck in each other's dick so I can't.
All right.
I'm the next one.
Why does James Bond always get the flashiest car?
Isn't he a spy?
He always has like some fucking...
What's got to have that cool alter ego?
True.
That's like Bruce Wayne.
But...
Well, he...
Okay, hall hall.
Back up here.
Bruce Wayne's a known billionaire public figure because he comes from the family of billionaires.
Yeah.
James Bond's supposed to be a spy.
But he's also kind of a celebrity.
Yeah, do people know...
I'm not super familiar with James Bond, dude.
Okay.
Everyone know who he is.
Do they recognize him on the street?
No.
Like James Bond.
No, I mean, well, the whole...
The iteration of James Bond is like, it's different agents.
So like 007 is like a...
There's been other 007s.
So as time has gone on...
It's been other actors.
No, no, like in the world.
In the world, it's like 007 has been a new guy.
Like they go...
MI6 goes through agents over time.
But 007 is like the top agent.
So the top guy at the time is the 007.
Yeah.
But I guess the point I'm trying to make is that like...
In every James Bond movie, since I've only seen like the Pierce...
I've seen some Sean Connery, but Pierce Brosnan onwards.
So like Daniel Craig, Pierce Brosnan.
They're like the most flashy dudes ever.
And it just goes against everything that is like espionage.
I think they just have so much confidence from being a badass.
They just have to be flashy.
Do they?
Well, I guess...
Yeah, well, does it...
Like cover ever get blown?
Like could their cover be blown from living their lifestyle?
Yes.
Well, okay.
So I think of like Casino Royale.
Have you seen Casino Royale?
I have no thing.
I've seen like two of the Daniel Craig ones.
So that's the first Daniel Craig one, which is phenomenal James Bond movie.
But he's...
It's all the one where Adele was having on the soundtrack.
Ooh, I think it might be Skyfall.
That's totally Skyfall.
Yeah, yeah.
So in the first one, the beginning is...
You know, Mads Michelson is the actor.
He's like the bad guy in that one.
But he's supposed to be this top end poker player.
So I get the image there to your point of like I need to...
He's supposed to be this guy playing a really high stakes poker game.
He only goes on a cover for awesome people.
I mean, it seems that way.
But it's like...
That one makes sense to me.
But I think either in Skyfall or the latest one,
he's not like a high end dude,
but he's driving around in a BMW i8, which is like...
No.
...a few people in the world have that car.
And it's like...
Who is the...
It's like drawing attention.
It's simply not how we run SP&O.
Yeah.
It's like...
Maybe they are doing that, but it just seems like the most inefficient way of doing it,
like, spine on people, be like...
The guy that stands out the most, put them next to the person you're supposed to be spying on.
Well, doesn't he...
Doesn't he kind of need to attract attention of these super high profile villains?
I don't know.
I don't think so.
He has to get close to them, right?
Uh, I don't think.
So maybe he rolls up in a flashy car and they're like, who is this guy?
Like the casino royale one I get.
But like, the...
Is Skyfall with Javier Bardem?
Yeah.
I don't remember this.
His face all like fucked up.
You know what I'm talking about?
He's like a plate in his face,
because he got like blown up and then at some point he takes out his face like folds in.
It's either the second or the last one or Skyfall.
But that one...
He doesn't need to get close to Javier Bardem.
It's just like a crazy person on an island.
And he's still being flashy.
So I might...
I might really...
He can't help himself.
He's the ultimate badass.
And at the same time, you watch those movies like it's so cool.
It's so cool.
It's amazing stuff.
Yeah.
It's just peak male energy, I think.
Yeah.
I think that's probably just it.
Because in one of them too, not casino royale, he has this Mercedes Jeep thing
that only ever existed for like one automate.
He just always has these cars that are like only as the billionaires would have one of these things.
And he's just driving around like an African slum.
And it's like...
It's like...
What the fuck?
Does the agency provide that for him?
Because they have what's his name?
It's even worse.
That'd be funny if like...
Dude, you have to be discreet.
And he just picks the most flashy things to do his business.
Would be.
But it's always like some car that comes with all of these modifications that are so...
Like it has guns in the car and stuff.
But it's also a car...
It's not like a Honda Civic.
Which that would make more sense.
Like give him a Honda Civic and be hilarious.
If he had a Honda Civic, just rigged up.
Or like a fucking like a Pinto.
Just like some absolute beater of a car.
Like a fucking like a cutlass.
I'm picturing it.
I don't think I want to watch that movie.
Same.
Yeah.
I want to see him in a sick car.
Yeah.
The more we talk about it, it is more about the flash.
Where I'm like, oh, it looks so cool.
And you know, I mean, talk about being one of the best bonds, Daniel Craig.
Maybe it's just a thing because it's our James Bond growing up.
But like, he's a beast.
He's so good, man.
Anyway, I used to be a man in a woman's body.
But then, and then I was born.
I heard that.
I think, whoa, wait, what?
Oh, that's hilarious.
That's amazing.
Yeah, I heard that somewhere.
I was like, I got to write that down.
Now, this pet, he was just too basic.
Person texting, hey, what's up.
And then just not responding.
I have this, I have this.
I might cut.
Wait.
So you say they text you.
They text me.
You respond.
Then they don't respond.
Just absolute ghost.
Yeah.
I'll probably cut this.
But remember, I mentioned some potential podcast collaborators, some friends I knew that have a podcast.
Yeah, yeah.
Oh, the same guy has texted me.
I have not initiated conversation.
The same guy has texted me three times now with the first conversation was, hey, how's it going?
A little bit of ketchup.
And then when I got to like the, no, do you want to like, we need to just go get food or chill, but then also talk about the
popsicle stuff and then nothing.
Month goes by.
Text me, hey, man, how's it going?
We continue to have the same conversation about what we're doing in life.
And I'm like, should I call him out?
Yeah.
And I don't.
And then I'm like, okay, dude.
And then it goes me again.
And it happened again.
I just didn't respond.
He reached out.
And I was like, we can't keep doing that.
Yeah, I'm just, I'm fucking over at this point.
I'm not going to try this again.
It kind of just gives the alert that he's like so busy and then thought of you as an afterthought and threw a message out there.
And then just didn't have time.
But it's like, which is super annoying.
Just close the conversation.
Just say I don't have like anything to make that fucking call at that point.
Yeah.
It's just, dude, and it's funny too, because I have another friend who, I won't get into specifics around him,
because then it might give away his identity.
You don't know him.
But he texted me.
He's like, hey, man, I just heard the song.
I was thinking of you because we should go to a lot of electronic concerts together.
He's like, dude, you want to hang sometimes soon?
He's like, yeah, I'm busy for the rest of this week, but like next week.
And then just no response.
Like, just don't lead me on.
You're getting your hopes crushed.
And at this point, there are no hopes because these people have, like, a trends of doing this.
So I'm just like, I expect it to some degree, but I'm like, you're losing faith.
Yeah, I've lost a long time ago in certain friends.
Damn.
Which, that is, I have some friends like that.
It breaks my heart, because I used to be very close to them.
So that's the, yes.
We played, like, text tag, I guess.
Yeah.
I just, if I'm the initiator, I get it if you don't respond.
But if you're reaching out and going, hey, man, let's go do something.
And you get me going like, okay, all right, here's my piece of my schedule.
Let's put something together.
And then you just stop responding.
Yeah, that feels like meeting someone when you're drunk.
And you're like, dude, we got to hang out.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And you know it's not going to happen.
True.
And I think there's an understanding there where you're drunk.
Yeah, I just get over text like deliberately.
Yes.
To have sober intentions way worse.
Yeah.
So pet peeve.
For sure.
Valid peeve.
What time are we at?
I've got 18 minutes.
All right.
Jared, for, oh, this is fucking weird.
I saw this one.
I have a lot of questions.
Keep going.
Okay.
So Jared from Subway, we all know got in prison for being a petafile.
During his court cases, one of his, what do you call it?
One of his cases against, like, I guess it was, it was trying to claim some level of insanity charge where he was saying that
when he lost all the weight because he obviously had some level of food addiction that he lost all the weight and that food addiction transferred to his addiction for wanting to have sex with children.
And that is to be looked at as a mental health issue and not necessarily like just for the things he did.
It's wild.
Yes.
Indeed wild.
The way, I think the way you wrote it.
Yeah.
I'll read it.
I put Jared from Subway said when he lost the weight his appetite for food shifted to children.
It's crazy.
Yeah.
Which.
Okay.
Okay.
When I, I looked this up and I couldn't find it.
Where did you see this?
I think in, there's a, there's a Jared Floyd will document here on HBO a bit ago that I watched.
And I think I got it from that.
Really?
Yeah.
It was a pretty awesome die.
I mean, it's fucked up, but it's pretty good documentary.
That's insane.
Yeah.
You know, and also would.
He's, so he's pleading mental health.
Like he's pleading, saying, like, that, like, wouldn't every petafile do that?
Then, like, I was born with this.
I can't help it.
Yeah.
I think that's used in a lot of those cases.
Is that there's, they, they put it the light of sexual abuse as a child and that these behaviors
are in a friction, not necessarily like a choice.
Which I don't, I got it, he's in prison.
So I got to mention that doesn't stand up ever in a court of law.
But it is an interesting, one, petafile is bad.
I hope we all agree on that.
I'm not advocating for.
For petfile.
I'm just saying that.
I think a lot of those people are like, example, you and me.
When you, you're a heterosexual man, you have a girlfriend.
There is a sexual impulse you have towards women, right?
You're like, oh, I'm sexually attracted to women.
There's no choose, there's no choosing there.
Like you're not going, I'm going to choose that I like men today or I like goats or,
you know, like something.
It's like you have this thing, you're attracted to that.
And there's no like undoing whatever that is.
I think most people have that to do it.
So if that wiring gets crisscrossed by sexual abuse when you're younger and it's pointing
towards children, I get that of like, those people aren't, a lot of those people I would
imagine are not being taking pleasure in what they're doing to the, like there's probably
a lot of bad things associated around having, like having this urge that you have to act
on in that way.
I think the have to act is where that goes off the rails.
Yeah.
Yes.
Totally.
It is probably one of the darkest things about humanity that still exists is a pedophilia.
Yeah.
Especially when it gets into like, you know, super young people and people doing that
and fucked up shit.
Which I would hope at some point that just gets snuffed out.
But as long as people are like sexually abusing children, it just keeps that cycle going.
If you have that, so is there evidence that it comes from being abused that you then
have that urge to abuse kids?
I think there's higher rates of people becoming that if they are sexually abused.
And that was that because, well, they're all also often sexually abused by relatives.
Yeah.
Usually something you know.
So could you make the case that it's not because of the abuse, but it's genetic?
Like they were pretty disposed to have that.
I couldn't say, you know, I don't have the evidence to say no to that.
Sure.
But also, there's something, when you're a kid and you're growing up and you're trying
to like wrestle with the idea of what you interpret as love.
My mom works in this field, not in pedophilia, obviously.
But like she has been directing preschools for a long time now.
And the school she works has specific science around the stuff that has allowed them to
be really successful in like raising kids that are very well.
You'd call them great kids, I guess, is the way it put it.
Where in terms of their understanding in her school and these things is that you are a
kid and whatever attention you're receiving, you interpret that as love.
So like if my dad hits me, you register that as this is care.
And so how is that possible?
Because you're kind of like a sponge to some degree of there's no like inherent definition
of love.
Hence why like when people have distant fathers and then they search for relationships
in those form when they're older like a very distant partner, it's because you have
interpreted that as what care is.
Is someone treating you that way?
And it locks into some degree.
So when question on that, when people, if you grow up in your father's beating you every
night, don't those people kind of grow up and be like, fuck my dad?
Like fuck that guy?
Oh yeah, but then they usually do like subconsciously they still interpret that as love.
Yeah, that's the argument.
Is that even you could be on the surface level being like, yeah, my dad was a giant piece
of shit, but you're more likely than the guy who was not abused to beat your child.
Unfortunately.
Yeah, I mean, I totally believe that like what you, the things you saw from your dad,
you are likely to bring forward.
And it's hope as you can just tweak it a little bit.
And they do replicate those things when they're not genetic too.
So when you have someone who's a mentor in your life coming and do the same things to
you, you're more than likely to repeat that behavior.
And I'm not saying you can't undo that, but it's very hard to work that out.
And it takes a lot of intention through mental health stuff and behavior change to like,
if you're beating your children to undo that and get to a place of, this is not the right thing,
it takes a lot of work.
Yeah, even like getting abused sexually as a kid, that would...
Well, that, that means like another level too.
Yeah, the touch just, I don't even know how you like to just think about it.
I feel like it takes a lot of awareness to be like, I should go to therapy and fix this.
Yeah.
And most people probably don't.
And awareness and, dude, if you've been sexually abused and you're building up the
courage to go talk to someone about this, that alone of like putting...
Because I gotta imagine a lot of those people that I'm scared to go to therapy.
Yeah, I don't have anything horrible that's happened.
That's what I'm saying.
Imagine having been...
Because most of those people don't tell anyone.
Yeah.
And some of them literally forget.
Yeah.
Like they were black at that.
They repress it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So it's like, to your point, it's so hard for those people to get help that it continues
to live.
So that stays on a trust.
Yes.
And then it continues.
And the cycle continues.
But one can make the argument that we probably have less of it than we ever had in the
world now because of the majority of...
Do you think that's true?
Yeah, I think the majority of developed nations have said that those things are bad.
As opposed to...
You go farther back.
I mean...
I feel like sex trafficking is still really, really bad though.
Like in terms of the numbers of it happening around the world.
I don't know though.
I don't know though.
I don't have the stats.
Yeah, I would just say that it's probably...
If we look...
I don't have numbers either.
But if we looked at like rates of sexual abuse and physical abuse, they've just probably
dropped substantially since like the past 100, 200 years where...
I thought I inclined to believe that.
Yeah.
I just think that there's...
There was a time where the world...
Those things were just fine.
If you sexually abused your child or beat your child, the law wasn't coming after you.
Same thing how women were like...
You could beat the shit out of your wife.
And no law enforcement...
They don't give a shit.
So it's like the farther you go back, people just don't care.
Mostly because they don't have time to even think about those things.
They're like...
It's harder.
Yeah, it's like if I don't get this farm and these crops done, I'm gonna die and all
of my family's gonna die.
We don't have time to talk about kids being physically abused.
No one gives a shit.
And now when people have more money and more time in their needs or mad, they go, we should
probably treat our kids better.
That's all...
I mean, go on government.
Brants again.
But he can't get away from it.
The child labor stuff is the same thing where people go, look, regulation and
soul child labor, but it was actually...
When people could afford the time to have their kids go home and...
Not work is when people stop...
Start going.
Most people don't want their kids working.
So when they can afford it, they let...
They needed the help.
It's like...
It literally used to be, have as many kids as you can to help you with the farm.
Yeah.
And so it's...
It's through better kids or a tool.
It's very easy.
And so it's through better life that these things happen.
You know, it's through when we get more and we're happier, it's like through those things
we go, oh yeah, we probably shouldn't hit our kids, we shouldn't have them working.
Sexual abuse is bad.
It's through us all being better.
An economist quoted that the one way to solve mass pollution, which is also done by
like India and China at the highest degree right now, because government has entire control
and there's no real, they just do whatever.
Is that make the poorest countries richer, because people care about the environment when
they know they have a good life.
Yeah.
And that's just it.
It's like when you have the capacity, like, oh, I would love it to look nicer here,
then you start caring about the environment.
It's not when you're extremely poor, living in mud, we're like, yeah, climate change.
We got to take care of that.
Yeah.
So I would love to get a new shade of paint in my house, but I have fucking rats.
There's bigger problems.
Exactly.
So there's an interesting psychologist that when I was in college, this guy Abraham Maslow
who developed this thing called the hierarchy of needs, which at the very bottom, I don't
know, it's just like, you know, at the bottom is food and water.
And it's like until you have those met, you can't work your way up the pyramid, which
you got the top of self actualization, which is like, you becoming one and peaceful with
everything and you want to help everybody.
What a luxury.
You essentially are like a Jesus at the top.
You're like, I just got you.
You've just ascended to this place where you are this all good thing that because everything
you have is met.
All you want to do is spread it because you realize how good it is.
And it's true.
The more you have all those things met, the more you want to help.
Obviously, there's the exceptions to that rule of, you know, hang on.
But I'm just thinking of the stereotypical billionaire who just wants more money.
Well, and there's probably a need that isn't met.
Yes.
Right?
Maybe he missed it along the ladder to the top.
That would be the archeological thing going on.
Yeah, because the bottom is food, shelter, water.
And then the top two tiers are self-esteem.
Love.
And so it's like, the argument against those guys would be, yeah, they don't have the top
two met at all.
They're feeling a void.
Yes.
They're using physical material things to fill steps in that hierarchy.
But when you have all those things met, you can point to a lot of examples of people having
those men doing a lot of good for people.
And you go, when people are happy, and they're truly happy, and they have food, water, good
self-esteem, love in their life, happiness, they typically spread it.
And that's, it becomes a focus of their life.
At the very least, just reputationally.
Like, even if maybe your intentions aren't super peer, but you can be like, I should
probably give some a way just to, I mean, you talk about societal pressure earlier.
The pressure to do good is not a bad thing.
It's not.
No, I'm all for it.
It's just when, when force is involved, I think that it might have more consequences.
If you're going, you have to donate.
It's going to cause more problems.
It's, have is not good, but should.
Should.
Should.
And when people can, you know, turn it, if someone's doing bad things, and people go,
yeah, it's not great.
Aside from doing violence upon people, most people stop doing those things.
Most people want to be a part of the thing going on.
So anyway, what time are we at?
Five minutes.
We'll do one quick one.
Uh, buh buh buh.
Feel like a fraud for talking about other people's work even from books.
Do you?
Okay.
This is a question for you, because I feel this way a lot.
Whenever I'm talking about certain things that I've learned, I feel like somewhat of a
fraud.
Like, I haven't had the original thought.
So I feel like I'm tough to have an original thought.
Yeah.
And I, and that I understand, but I still have this.
I feel like I'm taking something.
If I'm like, Hey, this idea about economics or this idea about like working out, I feel
like, because I'm not, if I'm not going this person said this or this person said this,
I feel like I'm just like taking credit for someone's work to something.
Oh, I do that all the time.
Me too.
Say a joke I heard in a social setting and no one's heard it before.
And then I was like, Granger's so funny.
Yeah.
It's not.
I feel that.
It's also hard like only like PhDs doing the studies are the ones who come up with the
original thought.
Yeah.
It's something I definitely struggle with where I'm like, should I say it?
Because when I say it, I might feel like I'm, and maybe it's more of like a, I think
spreading a study is totally cool.
You can be like, this benefited me.
I want to share it with you.
And it benefits the person who made it too.
If it's their work.
True.
So I mean, I share stuff from, I feel guilty about sharing stuff I heard on podcasts.
Oh, which I do all the time.
And because that's like two layers removed then.
Yeah.
You didn't even read an actual study.
You just heard someone talk about a study.
Yeah.
Yeah, especially when we say it on this podcast too, where it's like we have taken from
another podcast and put it on this podcast.
You hear someone you're like, oh, that's awesome.
Let's talk about it on the podcast.
It's like, oh, this was already talked about on the podcast.
Yeah.
But then there's the whole thing of like, you think in comedy in general, the amount
of jokes that happen at the same time that people aren't actually stealing just because
it's common things to think about.
And it's like, oh, yeah, well, that's all such a, I guess.
It's just as big.
There's this need to feel original.
Well, I want to be the guy who thought of this.
And if I'm not that, I am nothing but a copycat or a cheat.
Yeah.
It's a false feeling, I should say, you know, but I'd say it's a valid feeling.
I guess I say false in the feeling of like, I don't think the person that it's coming
from would feel that I am being a copycat or a cheat if I am like saying something about
a study or anything like that.
The only thing where that's really true is comedy.
Like you can't just steal people's jokes.
Yeah.
I mean, or I mean, you make your men too.
So if I rewrote someone's like empirical work in a field and published it, that, you
know, that would be definitely, someone could be like, yeah, you just, I already did that.
Yeah.
And that does happen.
Yeah.
People definitely cheat.
But all right, maybe one.
Oh, okay.
Funny one will end on exposure therapy for boobs.
Okay.
You know what exposure therapy is?
Expose yourself to a fear.
Yeah.
And it helps you overcome it.
Yeah.
So if you went to a therapist to specialized in desensitization, which is I think mostly
is exposure therapy, or like pure skin or snakes or spiders or heights, and they put
that person incrementally building situations with more and more exposure to that.
If you just go to a therapist and go, I'm terrified of boobs.
Here, let me show you.
Well, like, could, could the, could it exist that they put you to the hack for free boobs
all the time?
A hack for free boobs is the title of this podcast.
That's a great title.
Yes.
I mean, you made it original thought.
Hell yeah.
I wonder if you could swing that though.
And go the other way.
The fear of penises.
How common is exposure therapy?
Enough to where I read about in college through my psyched degree and stuff like that.
I don't know.
If I said I was afraid of snakes, what would they do?
Locking a box with snakes.
No, no, no.
I think it's a slow build.
So they'll like, like, they start hissing at you.
You're just there.
They're just slowly.
They start dressing up as a snake like a mascot outfit.
We're joking about that, but I truly think that it, one, it depends on your level of fear.
So if it's like, if you see a picture of a snake and you have a fear, it's a lot more
than if you're in a room with seven snakes and you're like, oh my god.
And so they should be scared.
Right.
Right.
That'd be bad to get rid of them.
I guess the point I'm making is that it, depending on how scared you are, they'll probably
start with like pictures of snakes, sounds of snakes.
They'll literally work you up to an actual situation with the snake.
And there's, there is evidence to suggest that you do get to a point through familiarity
where you just arm or K with this thing that doesn't present an immediate danger, which
snakes, you can make an argument for that they could.
Yeah, I feel like a better, like, a gorgophobia.
You're scared of going outside.
That one you should overcome.
There's no benefit to being scared of going outside.
Yeah.
And I think it's an interesting thing that science has like with exposure therapy is describing
something that I think most people know is that facing your fears does usually outcome
to you being less afraid.
Not going the other direction.
If you go away from your fears, you're more likely going to build more fear of the thing.
And exposure therapy is just literally leaning that direction away that's not overwhelming.
Yeah.
So boobs.
If I go, I'm terrified of boobs.
They'd be like, no way you're scared of boobs.
Everyone loves boobs.
Well, that's a good question.
First, is anyone actually scared of boobs?
There's got to be a gay guy out there.
Hate's boobs.
I feel like gay guys can just look at boobs though and they're like, that's fine.
Oh, you're representing all gay people now, huh?
There's got to be, I mean, I have first and heard gay guys describe girls with gynas
as disgusting.
That one I can understand.
Also, I can understand.
But I got to believe there's a gay guy out there who's like, oh, boobs.
Which is also just hilarious.
That someone out there's like, boobs.
Yeah.
Wake up like in a cold sweat in the middle of the night.
Oh, boobs.
Really awesome.
Yeah.
But, you know, another fun follow up.
Look up.
What's the crazy exposure therapy that someone's done with boobs later?
Yeah.
Project.
Go Google boobs.
All right.
On that note, good place to end it.
Yeah.
All right.
Till next time, folks.
Bye.