S19.E34: Kevin O'Leary; Adam Schiff; Tavis Smiley

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Quote

Bill opens this week's episode interviewing Canadian businessman Kevin O'Leary. For the panel, he's joined by Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff and talk show host Tavis Smiley.

Original air date 2021.11.12

[Mr. R0b0t]

I actually enjoyed the conversation with O'Leary and was hoping Bill would point out how much Tesla has gotten in government subsidies (approx $4.9 billion give or take) to fund some of his ventures.  

I enjoyed both panelists and the discussions this week, but would have liked to hear even more, especially from Smiley.  As a former prosecutor I would have liked to hear Schiff's perspective on the goings on in the courtroom for the Rittenhouse case.

[Poohbear617]

I admit i havenever seen Shark Tank and now know i definitely will not in the future.  I found Mr. O Leary to be a colossal prick.  Smug and an exampke of the reason for the saying Eat The Rich.

Saying taxes.was the only reason for colonists coming to this countey...complaining about taxes on billionaires and multibillion dollar.corporations.  i thought he was.supposed to be smart but he showed no comprehension aboutpeople living paycheck to paycheck and trying to make ends meet.

 

I had heard enough when he said that we are having supply problems because other countries.have.not bounced back from covid or ae still in lockdown.  Yes,  but i bet those.countries.have had fewer covid deaths while our countryhad managers in meat packing plants taking bets on who would covid and Lt. GOV it was worth dying to get the economy started again.

I looked up O Leary and as i suspected...he s not self made .so i doubt he ever worked a truy hard job.  Why are those kind of people always seem to lack empathy.

[arachne]

I was pleasantly surprised to see Adam Schiff on the panel, as opposed to being the opening guest. (Of course it's not such a lengthy commute for him.) He should have been more critical of the DOJ though. Time is not on the side of his Jan. 6 committee. 

At first I appreciated Bill's final New Rule about Mark Zuckerberg's insidious new Meta-verse -- yes, we do need to preserve some kind of analog reality. And then halfway thru, Bill made it all about "incels" who won't "get laid." (Referring only to men of course. 🙄) I'll never expect him to understand why there may be other reasons for celibacy. But even if such men were to (ahem) get lucky, the big question remains: What next?

[iMonrey]

Bill actually did a fairly good job pushing back against O'Leary about his stupid phone, and his definition of being rich.

The panel discussion was on point and relevant but lacked clear solutions. We just got the same old platitudes about people needing to vote, which Bill keeps pointing out will be useless if state legislatures overturn the results. And while I agree we're living in frightening times when congress members get death threats for voting for infrastructure, simply saying "we need to stop hating each other" isn't going to accomplish anything. We need to get to the root cause of that hate and I really don't know how to fix institutionalized propaganda machines or how to stop the spread of misinformation.

After such a serious discussion, when Bill stopped to do the mid-show gag about knock-off products, you could tell his heart wasn't really in it.

[sugarbaker design]

53 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

Bill actually did a fairly good job pushing back against O'Leary about his stupid phone, and his definition of being rich.

And his version of American history!

[vesperholly]

6 hours ago, arachne said:

And then halfway thru, Bill made it all about "incels" who won't "get laid." (Referring only to men of course. 🙄) I'll never expect him to understand why there may be other reasons for celibacy.

The "in" portion of "incel" means involuntary. If one has an actual reason for being voluntarily celibate, that's way different.

I agreed with most of the new rule, but it's really weak to reduce the argument against a digital life down to loser incels not getting laid. There are so many more things that the internet ruins, not just sex.

Bill missed a great connect back to his earlier "stop the hate" point, because when people live entirely online, they get to choose their neighbors and increasingly choose to exist in a self-reinforcing echo chamber where it's incredibly easy to develop hate toward others who aren't like them. The internet basically fomented Jan 6, and look at the demonization of non-masked or unvaccinated people today (before this gets dragged off-topic, I am not anti-vaxx). They even talked about Republicans getting death threats over voting for a infrastructure bill! Social media gives crazies a disproportionately large megaphone. THIS is the danger, not undersexed beta males.

Edited November 13, 2021 by vesperholly

[DoctorAtomic]

2 hours ago, vesperholly said:

The "in" portion of "incel" means involuntary. If one has an actual reason for being voluntarily celibate, that's way different.

I agreed with most of the new rule, but it's really weak to reduce the argument against a digital life down to loser incels not getting laid. There are so many more things that the internet ruins, not just sex.

That's true, but there's a not negligible portion of gun violence attributed to incels. There was a great article I read years and years ago called 'You are not entitled to a hot chick'. I feel like I dreamed it because I can never find it. It was fantastic. That's really the kernel of the incels. It's actually not involuntary; it's that they think they're owed something that they aren't. "Incel" just became a colloquialism. Not surprisingly, they're white. 

Bill brought it up on the show earlier not as explicit. The bag from Illinois who killed the guys in the Kenosha protest. That's an incel. 

It's the social interaction that's the issue, and yes, for 20somethings, often that's centered around sex. I think Bill was underscoring the getting laid as part of the joke. It's the 'get out of the house' that's the fundamental point. Getting into a virtual reality is going to make these people even more dangerous. Like Bill was saying at the end - you want to be a hero? Clean up, go out, and talk to a girl. 

[BrownBear2012]

Why am I not surprised that Bill did not bring up "cancel culture" in the context of the parents that want to ban and burn books in the school libraries that they deem inappropriate for their children...seems like he would have pounced on that since he's been obsessed with "cancel culture" all season but alas, he only is obsessed with it when it pertains to the "liberals".

[iMonrey]

I often ask myself why I still watch this show, and I think it's mostly because Bill is still on point when it comes to prescient warnings about what's to come. He was right about Trump winning the election in 2016, he was right about Trump not conceding the election in 2020 and he's right about the coming storm in 2024. And it drives me nuts that pols like Adam Schiff seem so complacent even as he admits that Kevin McCarthy must never become speaker of the House. That's almost certainly going to happen in the midterms and I want members of Congress like Adam Schiff tell me what they plan to do to stop that.

[Thomas Crown]

Kevin O'Leary is a smug SOB. I was a bit disappointed that Bill didn't take a shot at O'Leary's failed attempt at pulling a Trump when he ran for leadership of the Conservative party in Canada a couple of years ago. In a truly Bizarro world we've would have gotten another 4 years of Trump and O'Leary as Prime Minster of Canada. Ugh. That being said, O'Leary is no idiot and in the interviews that I've seen, he has a pretty good grasp of business/economic policies.  He's not wrong when he pointed out that all the gov't stimulus programs around the world have created a huge bubble in asset classes and fuelled the stock market to record highs.  With rates is still very low and the inflation that we are seeing now, it's not going to be pretty when the bubble bursts on the stock and the real estate market when it eventually happens. 

The brief discussion on Capitalism was interesting and I wished that it would have continued on the panel.  Yes Capitalism is the best economic system that could have happened, but it does have a dark side and we are witnessing it right now with the huge wealth inequality, the environment being exploited in favor of profits and corporations having way too much control/influence over government policies regardless of which party is in control. 

 

[BrownBear2012]

I didn't watch the show but I heard that he Bill actually said "both sides do it" when it comes to violence and threats...is this true? Did he really say that? And did anyone push back on this? I mean, really??? Only the Republicans are making kill videos about murdering a Congressional Democrat, only Republicans are sending out the phone numbers of Congressional Republicans that voted for the infrastructure bill so they could be terrorized with threatening phone calls. How is it that Bill actually says stuff like this now? 

Edited November 15, 2021 by BrownBear2012

[ICantDoThatDave]

On 11/13/2021 at 11:46 AM, arachne said:

And then halfway thru, Bill made it all about "incels" who won't "get laid." (Referring only to men of course. 🙄) 

fwiw, I think he was only pointing out that *they* exist, & are the ones likely to get violent.  I think he was just saying that it's A Thing.  I didn't get the impression he was saying the condition was only men, or that some people have other reasons for celibacy, or that "Incel" was even necessarily bad.

I saw him pointing out that the self-proclaimed "Incels" are a potential threat: A Thing.  A Thing people need to be aware of, because they exist.  Dismissing them is dangerous.  Ignoring they exist, dismissing them for being stupid, or even making fun of their reasons to exist, no matter how legitimate those reasons may be to make fun of them... no matter what one thinks of them, is dangerous.  'Cause they exist. And they are dangerous.

Edited November 18, 2021 by ICantDoThatDave

[heatherchandler]

On 11/15/2021 at 3:18 PM, BrownBear2012 said:

I didn't watch the show but I heard that he Bill actually said "both sides do it" when it comes to violence and threats...is this true? Did he really say that? And did anyone push back on this? I mean, really??? Only the Republicans are making kill videos about murdering a Congressional Democrat, only Republicans are sending out the phone numbers of Congressional Republicans that voted for the infrastructure bill so they could be terrorized with threatening phone calls. How is it that Bill actually says stuff like this now? 

As Bill said, it’s both sides.  From the LA Times:

Dozens of cases of people threatening to kill Democratic and Republican lawmakers have been brought in federal court in the last five years. Threatening a federal official is a felony punishable by a fine and up to six years in prison.

Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) for months carried a concealed weapon and scanned the street before leaving his home, after a man called and emailed in December saying he was going to slit the congressman’s throat, skin him alive and kill his family.

 

[Hanahope]

18 hours ago, ICantDoThatDave said:

'Cause they exist. And they are dangerous.

They are only dangerous because of our gun culture and police that refuse to do anything about them due to politics.