Speaker 1: All right, let's get into emails for the week, remember, you can email info at David
Pakman dot com. If you have something to say, please use the email address
sparingly because if you use it a lot, your emails will get auto flagged into
the trash. Unfortunately, I was actually. We were updating our system the other day and
we actually have close to 100 different people that email us so much that their emails are
just being auto filtered. So don't be one of those folks. Send an occasional message
if you have something to say. First one actually comes from from Facebook and says, Could you
be any more delusional? You constantly spew propaganda and claims that are easily disproved,
easily proven false. Then you never retract your a pathetic joke. I have to congratulate this person.
Speaker 2: It seems Speaker 1: almost like a legal
requirement that if you send right wing hate mail, Speaker 2: you mix up your and the contraction
Speaker 1: for you are y0u apostrophe Ari. This person actually got the right.
Speaker 2: You are here Speaker 1: and they really should be commended for
that. Now, everything else they say is, of course, untrue. They don't cite anything that I was wrong
about or correct me. They're also wrong that we never retract. In fact, when I'm made aware
that we got something wrong on the show, Speaker 2: I will usually open
Speaker 1: the following show and actually just say, Hey, I got something wrong yesterday,
and here's what it was. I apologize. Speaker 2: Here's what here's what it is.
Speaker 1: OK, next one from Chris Chris says vaccine hesitancy in other countries. David,
sir, I've recently read there is vaccine hesitancy in other parts of the world. I realized that in
America, most of the hesitancy is politically based. What is your opinion of this phenomenon
in other countries? Love your show! Listen daily paid subscriber. Keep up the great work.
It's different in different countries. We've talked about vaccine hesitancy, for example in
Speaker 2: France versus in Speaker 1: Italy and in other countries as
Speaker 2: well. In in some places, it is Speaker 1: political as influenced by what's
going on in the United States. So there are other countries where folks have been convinced
by the rantings of American right wingers about it's authoritarian, it's oppressive,
all of this different stuff, and they've just sort of gone with that. There is also a pretty
Speaker 2: sizable anti big pharma Speaker 1: sentiment in in some other countries
that drives vaccine hesitancy. And, you know, in the United States, we talked about this with
Nicholas Christakis two weeks ago before the COVID Speaker 2: vaccines in the
Speaker 1: United States. You had a anti-vax on the left and you also had it on the right.
The left wing anti-vax tended to be motivated by distrust of big pharma.
I don't trust big corporations. The anti-vax on the right tended to be dominated by I
don't trust the government. Meaning if a school requires my kid to be vaccinated,
I don't trust that or whatever the case may be. Speaker 2: And so you had a kind of
Speaker 1: crossover of anti-vax from Speaker 2: left and right in the
Speaker 1: United States. COVID anti-vax Speaker 2: is overwhelmingly
Speaker 1: right wing. There it's it still exists on the left. Jordan Klepper recently
did some interesting interviews with some folks in the L.A. area, and they don't seem
particularly right wing. They seem Speaker 2: more distrustful
Speaker 1: of vaccines along the sort of like reiki homeopathy herbs type thing, which is more
more of a left wing thing. And you see that more in other countries as well. You see that in Italy,
we see that in France as well. So the answer to
what drives anti-vax in other countries is Speaker 2: it depends on which country, and
Speaker 1: there's a little bit of everything floating around. A next email came from P P,
who says, Hey David. I was wondering if you could shed some
Speaker 2: light on this Speaker 1: new
Speaker 2: Foushee Bill Gates Speaker 1: email
Speaker 2: thread that Alex Speaker 1: Jones and Glenn Beck are
Speaker 2: saying is a smoking gun, Speaker 1: that COVID
Speaker 2: was a product of gain Speaker 1: of function
Speaker 2: research and then Speaker 1: them, along with Moderna,
had the vaccine Speaker 2: created six months
Speaker 1: before the virus came out and released it on purpose
and all kind of wacky stuff. Yeah, I can't. Speaker 2: Unfortunately, I can't shed any
Speaker 1: light into that. That sounds like five or six different conspiracy theories
blended together into a smoothie of sorts. And I have no idea how they all come together.
I've never even heard of them put together into one conspiracy like that. One thing I
Speaker 2: think is is important to Speaker 1: consider is if the conspiracy
is so confusing that you can't even really come up with plausible motive linking all of these groups
Speaker 2: together. Like, as I've said many Speaker 1: times before,
finding motive alone does not prove a conspiracy theory. But if you can't even find
Speaker 2: motive or understand Speaker 1: it or even really understand what
the theory is. Be skeptical of the people that are telling you that this is the way that things are.
Austin wrote in about Trump's weird sniff and says, David, I haven't heard you bring this up
yet. But another one of Trump's big tells is that sniff thing he does after almost every sentence.
Very annoying and a pretty good indicator. He's spinning another yarn. Keep it up. But
I've never seen the Trump sniffing as a signal that he's lying because he sniffs almost all the
time. Now you might say, Well, yeah, but David, he's lying almost all the time. But even when
he says inconsequential things, Speaker 2: I see the sniff more
Speaker 1: of like as a tic or maybe something related to medication he takes or something like
that. And it is notable he'll say, You know, I got home and Melania said to me, Sir, you were on TV.
And then there's the sniff there. For me, it's less about lying. It just seems to be a verbal
thing that Trump does maybe, maybe related to medication, but it never seemed specifically
like a lie signal. The Big Lie signals I've identified are. He claims someone called him sir.
Like when the infamous story, the one that's the obvious lie. When he said, You know,
when I came into office, a general came to me and said, Sir, we have no ammunition.
Speaker 2: We're out of bullets from Obama. Speaker 1: And I told them, Well, let's buy more
like, that story couldn't have happened. That's a lie. The other one is, he says, and it's really a
shame. You know, he'll say, well, 100000 dead Speaker 2: people voted and they took
Speaker 1: they took Michigan and Pennsylvania and Arizona from me.
Speaker 2: And it's really a shame. It's really a Speaker 1: shame. That's a sign that he's lying.
And then the other one is and it should never happen again, or we can't let it happen again.
Speaker 2: They they took the Speaker 1: election with an
insurrection on November 3rd, and we can't let it happen again. He's lying when he uses that one.
Speaker 2: And also many, many others. Speaker 1: But the sniff one for me.
That's a different category. Leslie wrote in with a nonpolitical question. This is
actually a really good question. Leslie says, Hey, David, love the show would appreciate your input
if a group of people go on vacation together, would you split the cost of the vacation rental
per person or per bedroom? I've always subscribed to per person, but I've discovered recently a
friend uses the per bedroom Speaker 2: calculation when
Speaker 1: divided per bedroom. The single friend pays more for their room than the couple.
In my mind, all other parts of the rental home and its amenities would be considered equal.
Speaker 2: So why not the bedrooms Speaker 1: in your opinion, which is correct?
You could really go either way with this, you know, if
Speaker 2: one let's Speaker 1: imagine not a vacation rental,
but let's imagine an apartment, right? Because it's a vacation rental, you don't usually pay
for electricity, water utilities, etc. Speaker 2: If you're renting an apartment
and you've got Speaker 1: a couple
sharing a room and then a single person sharing a room, it seems reasonable to me
Speaker 2: that you would Speaker 1: say, OK, in terms of space,
we have a room and you have a room, so that would Speaker 2: be split equally, even though it's
Speaker 1: two people versus one. But you would adjust for the
Speaker 2: fact that utilities Speaker 1: are going to be higher
for the two people. And how I Speaker 2: do that, how you do
Speaker 1: that, I don't know. You say, Well, we will pay. I guess you just save. The utilities are
paid separately, will pay two thirds of the utilities, but half of the rent. That seems
Speaker 2: reasonable mathematically Speaker 1: on a vacation. I think I
would take a totally different approach, quite frankly, and it's who proposes it and honestly,
who makes more money. You know, there's a lot of situations I've been in where it's sort of like if
someone, if someone is financially better off and says, I'm the one renting, I'm renting this house
either way. Come on and you know, give me throw me 100 bucks or, you know, whatever the case may be.
That's often the way it actually goes less than on a per person or per bedroom basis.
Speaker 2: But as a Speaker 1: general thing on a on a
vacation rental, I lean heavily on per bedroom per bedroom. Let me know what you think. Evan wrote in
Speaker 2: and says conservative Speaker 1: hypocrisy about natural
immunity. David, Sir, I see many conservatives and vaccine skeptics espousing the use of monoclonal
antibodies to treat COVID, such as Dennis Prager or your more recent segment on Joe Rogan
supporting it. This seems very counterintuitive to their baseless theory that so-called natural
immunity is better than vaccine immunity. Is it not hypocritical that they are so against
a vaccine that will strengthen the immune system against COVID, but are willing to take a different
drug that also strengthens your immune system against COVID? I understand the drugs and their
effects are different, but from their perspective of so-called natural immunity, they are still
unnatural substances you're putting into your Speaker 2: body to fight off the virus.
Speaker 1: Of course. Speaker 2: Yeah, monoclonal antibodies.
Speaker 1: You listen when they say they don't trust the vaccine, but they trust the antibodies.
The Pfizer vaccine is now fully approved, whereas the antibodies are only approved via
emergency use, so it's a lower standard. Number two, when they say, I don't trust Big Pharma.
The monoclonal antibodies are also made by Big Pharma, and they are far more profitable,
and I think about $2000 per treatment than, you know, a 15 to 30 dollar vaccine.
Speaker 2: So the money argument Speaker 1: also doesn't make sense.
And yes, in a sense, you are. You are generating immunity, not simply by fighting off the virus,
Speaker 2: but via the Speaker 1: integration of
other antibodies that you didn't create into your body. So it is absolutely hypocritical
along those lines as well. Very, very good point. Speaker 2: And what's the answer? The
answer is they don't actually care. Speaker 1: They're just against the vaccine
because all the arguments they make against it fall apart. When you
see that they're doing Speaker 2: monoclonal
antibodies or other big pharma Speaker 1: treatments or things
that are not actually FDA Speaker 2: approved either.
Speaker 1: James wrote in and says Congressman Nunez was on the evening edit on Fox, and my job
practically dropped. They were complaining about Hunter Biden making money with China,
and now he shouldn't be allowed to fly on Air Force One, and he was trading with the enemy.
These are the same people that had no problem with the Kushner's, making
hundreds of millions of dollars while working in the White House and Ivanka being granted
Speaker 2: trademarks by the Chinese government. Speaker 1: My advice on this?
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden stuff is Speaker 1: do not even and just just ignore it.
Like I don't. I don't really know what they're saying now about Hunter. I know
some right wingers right to me and say, David, you should be talking about Hunter under his no
involvement with the Biden administration. And of course, all of the criticisms of Hunter apply AI.
Speaker 2: But maybe not all, but close to Speaker 1: all of the criticisms of Hunter
apply certainly to Jared and a bunker at minimum, if not also to
Speaker 2: Don Jr. and Eric Trump. Speaker 1: They don't apply to Baron.
I guess that's that would be the exception. And Tiffany, everybody
Speaker 2: forgets about it. Yeah, just Speaker 1: I wouldn't even pay attention,
quite frankly. A Zach from Orlando has a crazy story. And says just wanted to share a story I
overheard while at the office yesterday. For context, I work in Orlando and occasionally
have to visit the corporate office in Tampa. When I arrived, I overheard our CEO and CFO
complaining about the traffic on I-4 and how it's all part of Biden's America. You see, David,
according to these highly overpaid Speaker 2: executives, ever since
Speaker 1: Biden got into office, nobody wants to work, since nobody wants to work.
There's less truck drivers on the road. That would be fewer since there. There's fewer truck drivers
on the road. Trucking companies have to hire people with less experience, although I thought
nobody wanted to work. And finally, since there are more inexperienced truck drivers on the road,
there's more traffic. Ah, because by virtue of being less experienced, they drive more slowly, I
guess, makes sense, right? Couldn't possibly have anything to do with our crumbling infrastructure.
Poor public transit options, et cetera. Speaker 2: Nope. All Biden's fault.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's pretty full on. I mean, that's wackier. It's so specific.
Speaker 2: And it's sort of a problem. Speaker 1: How do I even say it's an explanation
in search of a problem? Sort of. I don't even know Speaker 2: how to say it fully.
Speaker 1: But that's really wacky. And Zach, I'm really sorry that you're working around that,
that that kind of nonsense. Hopefully, it's not like that every day. Thanks for
all of your emails. You can send yours to info at David Pakman dot com. And
we've got a great bonus show planned for you today. You can sign up at join Packman dot
Speaker 3: com, and otherwise, we'll be back Unidentified: with you on Monday.