Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

This is an interesting argument coming from Bezos. Bezos basically argues that taxing regular workers doesn't really contribute to the tax base, so they should be exempted. Joe Rogan seems to agree with him. The argument is pretty simple: that money means a hell of a lot more to... show more

Joe Rogan Podcast News

2,022,593 subscribers

67,170 views • 24 days ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

19 Comments

DJ Kinjo24 days ago

Yup you used to have to make at least a million a year to even qualify for taxes… but how about we just stop forcing taxes upon the citizens???

Blad24 days ago

Secondly: At what point do American citizens no longer have to invest in the proposition that is the United States? Seems to reinforce the emerging thought that the elites know more than the citizenry and all decisions should be deferred to them.

Scott A. Baker24 days ago

I have to disagree. This is what leads to entitlement. I think everybody should be taxed the same flat rate. No exemptions. That way everyone has skin in the game. When it's your money, you're a lot more cautious about how it's spent than when it's some rich guy you don't know.

laan990124 days ago

Should treat like corporate taxes, tax on income after all expenses (groceries, rent, etc). Why tax the average Joe right off the top?

Corn pop 🫡🇺🇸24 days ago

Bezos is running cover because he knows the lunatics are after him. Warren buffet and bill gates always say same stuff it just keeps people off their ass Buy me not paying taxes I’m in

papabearapps24 days ago

I agree and so should their 7k tax returns for all their kids! WTF is all of that? They barely pay tax and some of the largest beneficiaries of tax returns! 🤬👀🫡🇺🇸😇

Ryan24 days ago

It’s a false argument. Wages are inflated due to the taxes being paid from them. Same thing for commerce, the price of goods are inflated due to the taxes expected to be paid from the profit earned. If no taxes then the gross wage & gross profit would equal the current taxes “net wage” & “net profit”.

Lemur Theory24 days ago

All taxes should go away. Only tax that make even close to sense is sales on optional things, anything thats not healthy food(fruit/veg/meats), cheaper to mid priced cells/cars/homes, baby supplies...every other sale could be taxed and called something like "optionals tax".

Terry Mitchell24 days ago

Bezos making very good sense on this issue. I have to agree with him on that. Sounds good to me.

Carter6824 days ago

The standard deduction should be not based on how much it actually costs to do more than survive. It should be based on thriving. Everyone has a share but the scale is limiting anyone not making more than the median right now. Raise it substantially

Eleanor Ratcliffe24 days ago

Makes sense . More money to spend more growth .

Beastmode24 days ago

Seems like someone heard my call for eliminating income tax

Vanilla Tom🍦24 days ago

He’s right

Jesse Scharer24 days ago

A fraud problem and a spending problem

CaptainHaystacks24 days ago

the next logical step is "no taxation, no representation"

Lakshmi Balasubramani24 days ago

+1

Harry Franklin24 days ago

Fine. Then your right to vote is revoked. We have already reached the tipping point where more people pay nothing in actual Federal income taxes than those who do.

wherryj24 days ago

There is also the Laffer Curve (which communists think is fake) that shows that after a certain level of taxation, people will go out of their way to reduce their tax burden, thereby decreasing overall tax revenue even at higher tax rates.

Drewapotamus24 days ago

“Struggling” low income workers are net tax recipients who have no tax burden as they steal others money through subsidized programs. Kids at my son’s day care go for free (even though their moms don’t work) we get to pay $1600/month. The only “fair” tax would be flat

Related Videos

🇺🇸‼️ Bezos says low earners should NOT pay taxes at all, but especially since it’s only 3% of all tax income to the government! “A nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year pays more than $12K a year in taxes. Does that really make sense? That’s $1K a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything. We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington. It should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense.” He’s right … absolutely

🇺🇸‼️ Bezos says low earners should NOT pay taxes at all, but especially since it’s only 3% of all tax income to the government! “A nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year pays more than $12K a year in taxes. Does that really make sense? That’s $1K a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything. We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington. It should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense.” He’s right … absolutely

Lord Bebo

34,684 views • 4 months ago

Jeff Bezos makes a powerful case for ZERO taxes on hard-working, low-income Americans. He said the government shouldn’t be asking a nurse in Queens making $75,000 to send ANY money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology instead. BEZOS: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than $12,000 a year in taxes.” “Does that really make sense?” “So people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens NOT pay taxes?” “Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year paying more than $1,000 a month in taxes?” “That’s $1,000 a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” “And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%!” “We can find 3%. So we don’t have...it’s a small amount of money for the government. You know that.” “And the more I thought about it, to me, it’s kind of absurd that we’re doing this.” “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology!” “It really makes no sense.”

Jeff Bezos makes a powerful case for ZERO taxes on hard-working, low-income Americans. He said the government shouldn’t be asking a nurse in Queens making $75,000 to send ANY money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology instead. BEZOS: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than $12,000 a year in taxes.” “Does that really make sense?” “So people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens NOT pay taxes?” “Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year paying more than $1,000 a month in taxes?” “That’s $1,000 a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” “And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%!” “We can find 3%. So we don’t have...it’s a small amount of money for the government. You know that.” “And the more I thought about it, to me, it’s kind of absurd that we’re doing this.” “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology!” “It really makes no sense.”

Overton

18,589 views • 4 months ago

NAILED IT: Jeff Bezos: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year pays more than $12K a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?” “So people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens NOT pay taxes? At all!” “Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year paying more than $1K a month in taxes?” “That’s $1K a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” “And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%.” “We can find 3%. So we don’t have... it’s a small amount of money for the government. You know that. And the more I thought about it, to me, it’s kind of absurd that we’re doing this.” “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense.” Exactly!

NAILED IT: Jeff Bezos: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year pays more than $12K a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?” “So people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens NOT pay taxes? At all!” “Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year paying more than $1K a month in taxes?” “That’s $1K a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” “And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%.” “We can find 3%. So we don’t have... it’s a small amount of money for the government. You know that. And the more I thought about it, to me, it’s kind of absurd that we’re doing this.” “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense.” Exactly!

RedWave Press

2,762,675 views • 4 months ago

HOLY CRAP 🚨: Jeff Bezos: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year pays more than $12K a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?” “So people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens NOT pay taxes? At all!” “Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year paying more than $1K a month in taxes?” “That’s $1K a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” “And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%.” “We can find 3%. So we don’t have... it’s a small amount of money for the government. You know that. And the more I thought about it, to me, it’s kind of absurd that we’re doing this.” “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense.” Exactly!

HOLY CRAP 🚨: Jeff Bezos: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year pays more than $12K a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?” “So people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens NOT pay taxes? At all!” “Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75K a year paying more than $1K a month in taxes?” “That’s $1K a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” “And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%.” “We can find 3%. So we don’t have... it’s a small amount of money for the government. You know that. And the more I thought about it, to me, it’s kind of absurd that we’re doing this.” “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington — they should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense.” Exactly!

Dr Charlie Ward

2,383,114 views • 1 month ago

Jeff Bezos was asked whether the rich should pay more. He answered with a number for the poor. Bezos: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than $12,000 a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?” He translated it into the unit people actually live in. Bezos: “That’s $1,000 a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” At her kitchen table a thousand a month is the emergency fund, the down payment, the year of night classes. It is the distance between building something and holding on. In Washington the same thousand disappears without leaving a mark. Bezos: “The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%. We can find 3%.” Half the working population is taxed to produce three cents on the dollar. The revenue is symbolic and the cost is not. She is the worst place in the country you could choose to collect from. The collection continues on schedule. Bezos: “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington. They should be sending her an apology.” An apology is a sentiment. He followed it with a number. Bezos: “I think it should be 0. I don’t think it should be 3%, I think it should be 0. So we would be making it more progressive that way.” Zero has been affordable this entire time. Everyone who campaigns on fairness leads with the top instead. The top is where the attention is. Her rent is where the relief would land. Bezos: “We don’t have a revenue problem in this country. We already have the most progressive tax system in the world.” Every proposal to fix fairness begins with a shortage the numbers never show. Bezos: “The top 1% of taxpayers pay 40% of all the tax revenue.” The wealth people want taxed next sits in companies nobody sold. A founder’s stake is a claim on what those companies will produce. That claim pays for the factories, the labs, and every salary inside them. Taxing it as income means selling the factory to fund a single year of spending. Ownership grows for everyone attached to it. Cash is gone by the next budget cycle. One of them has an owner. The other has a department. Bezos: “The vilification is the thing that’s just a distraction.” The anger is a substitute for policy. It lets you feel like a participant in fairness while nothing reaches her rent. The three percent holds up the premise. A country that let her keep it would admit it never needed her money. Zero was always affordable. It took the man they cast as the villain to say it out loud.

Jeff Bezos was asked whether the rich should pay more. He answered with a number for the poor. Bezos: “A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than $12,000 a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?” He translated it into the unit people actually live in. Bezos: “That’s $1,000 a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything.” At her kitchen table a thousand a month is the emergency fund, the down payment, the year of night classes. It is the distance between building something and holding on. In Washington the same thousand disappears without leaving a mark. Bezos: “The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It’s only 3%. We can find 3%.” Half the working population is taxed to produce three cents on the dollar. The revenue is symbolic and the cost is not. She is the worst place in the country you could choose to collect from. The collection continues on schedule. Bezos: “We shouldn’t be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington. They should be sending her an apology.” An apology is a sentiment. He followed it with a number. Bezos: “I think it should be 0. I don’t think it should be 3%, I think it should be 0. So we would be making it more progressive that way.” Zero has been affordable this entire time. Everyone who campaigns on fairness leads with the top instead. The top is where the attention is. Her rent is where the relief would land. Bezos: “We don’t have a revenue problem in this country. We already have the most progressive tax system in the world.” Every proposal to fix fairness begins with a shortage the numbers never show. Bezos: “The top 1% of taxpayers pay 40% of all the tax revenue.” The wealth people want taxed next sits in companies nobody sold. A founder’s stake is a claim on what those companies will produce. That claim pays for the factories, the labs, and every salary inside them. Taxing it as income means selling the factory to fund a single year of spending. Ownership grows for everyone attached to it. Cash is gone by the next budget cycle. One of them has an owner. The other has a department. Bezos: “The vilification is the thing that’s just a distraction.” The anger is a substitute for policy. It lets you feel like a participant in fairness while nothing reaches her rent. The three percent holds up the premise. A country that let her keep it would admit it never needed her money. Zero was always affordable. It took the man they cast as the villain to say it out loud.

Dustin

1,464,615 views • 1 month ago

Let us never forget this fundamental truth: The state has no source of money other than the money people earn themselves. If the state wishes to spend more, it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more. And it is no good thinking that someone else will pay—that "someone else" is you. There is no such thing as public money, there is only taxpayers' money. Prosperity won't come by inventing more and more lavish public expenditure programs. You don't grow richer by ordering another chequebook from the bank. No nation ever grew more prosperous by taxing its citizens beyond their capacity to pay. We have a duty to make sure that every penny piece we raise in taxation is spent wisely and well.

Let us never forget this fundamental truth: The state has no source of money other than the money people earn themselves. If the state wishes to spend more, it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more. And it is no good thinking that someone else will pay—that "someone else" is you. There is no such thing as public money, there is only taxpayers' money. Prosperity won't come by inventing more and more lavish public expenditure programs. You don't grow richer by ordering another chequebook from the bank. No nation ever grew more prosperous by taxing its citizens beyond their capacity to pay. We have a duty to make sure that every penny piece we raise in taxation is spent wisely and well.

Margaret Thatcher

337,080 views • 9 months ago

This man is pestering a couple who are playing with their dogs on an open lot of grass next to his home. He is pretty arrogant and even claims to know the chief of police. What made him so angry, and does he have a point that they should not be there? He seems to be the only one who is bothered.

This man is pestering a couple who are playing with their dogs on an open lot of grass next to his home. He is pretty arrogant and even claims to know the chief of police. What made him so angry, and does he have a point that they should not be there? He seems to be the only one who is bothered.

Suzee Q

72,826 views • 6 months ago

DSA Co-Chair Megan Romer says "We believe in taxing the hell out of millionaires." She then struggles to explain what that actually means: Remnick: "What does 'taxing the hell out of them' mean?" Romer: "Yeah. You know, again, I don't have, like, a solid…" Remnick: "But shouldn't you?" Romer: "Ummmmm, that's a good question." Remnick: "If you're the co-chair of the DSA, shouldn't you be more specific than just taxing the hell out of something? What exactly do you mean?" Romer: "So again, it's democracy, right?…" This is the Democrat party 'Big Tent.'

DSA Co-Chair Megan Romer says "We believe in taxing the hell out of millionaires." She then struggles to explain what that actually means: Remnick: "What does 'taxing the hell out of them' mean?" Romer: "Yeah. You know, again, I don't have, like, a solid…" Remnick: "But shouldn't you?" Romer: "Ummmmm, that's a good question." Remnick: "If you're the co-chair of the DSA, shouldn't you be more specific than just taxing the hell out of something? What exactly do you mean?" Romer: "So again, it's democracy, right?…" This is the Democrat party 'Big Tent.'

Western Lensman

3,155,143 views • 1 month ago

Jeff Bezos says the bottom half of income earners are being asked to do something he finds completely absurd and reveals his fix "A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than a year in taxes. Does that really make sense? Some people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens not pay taxes? At all. Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year paying more than $1,000 a month in taxes? That's $1,000 a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything." "And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It's only 3%. We can find 3%. So we don't have — it's a small amount of money for the government." "To me, it's kind of absurd that we're doing this. We shouldn't be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington. They should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense."

Jeff Bezos says the bottom half of income earners are being asked to do something he finds completely absurd and reveals his fix "A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than a year in taxes. Does that really make sense? Some people talk about making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens not pay taxes? At all. Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year paying more than $1,000 a month in taxes? That's $1,000 a month that could help with rent or groceries or anything." "And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3% of the taxes. It's only 3%. We can find 3%. So we don't have — it's a small amount of money for the government." "To me, it's kind of absurd that we're doing this. We shouldn't be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington. They should be sending her an apology. It really makes no sense."

Rad

315,530 views • 3 months ago

Democrat Congressman Ro Khanna argued to me that wealthy people need to pay more tax and use it to fund so called "free" programs. I posed a very simple question: What does the government do better than private enterprise? His answer claimed that NASA does more than Elon Musk, that the military does better than private enterprise (which is nonsensical since no private version exists to compare it with) and that Operation Warp Speed was evidence of government doing better than private enterprise. Again, this was nonsense in my view because not only do I disagree with the outcomes of OWS but it was free enterprise working with government. My final view: If the government asked me to look at their books and analyze their business, I’d tell them that "You not only need to be shut down, you need to be arrested because you are so incompetent you should be jailed for it." You can watch the full episode on my X page or

Democrat Congressman Ro Khanna argued to me that wealthy people need to pay more tax and use it to fund so called "free" programs. I posed a very simple question: What does the government do better than private enterprise? His answer claimed that NASA does more than Elon Musk, that the military does better than private enterprise (which is nonsensical since no private version exists to compare it with) and that Operation Warp Speed was evidence of government doing better than private enterprise. Again, this was nonsense in my view because not only do I disagree with the outcomes of OWS but it was free enterprise working with government. My final view: If the government asked me to look at their books and analyze their business, I’d tell them that "You not only need to be shut down, you need to be arrested because you are so incompetent you should be jailed for it." You can watch the full episode on my X page or

Robby Starbuck

331,265 views • 6 months ago

The idea that government is providing you anything is completely false It has no money of its own Thatcher, 1983: “The state has no source of money other than the money people earn themselves If the state wishes to spend more, it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more And it’s no good thinking that someone else will pay That someone else is you There is no such thing as public money. There is only taxpayers’ money”

The idea that government is providing you anything is completely false It has no money of its own Thatcher, 1983: “The state has no source of money other than the money people earn themselves If the state wishes to spend more, it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more And it’s no good thinking that someone else will pay That someone else is you There is no such thing as public money. There is only taxpayers’ money”

X Freeze

15,020 views • 1 month ago

ELON: CITIZEN JOURNALISTS OFTEN KNOW MORE THAN LEGACY JOURNALISTS “I think the media is a driver of misinformation much more than the media would like to admit that they are. In a lot of cases, it is the average citizen that knows more than the journalist. Very often, when I see an article about something that I know a lot about, they get a lot wrong. It's the best interpretation of someone who doesn't really understand what's going on in the industry. If somebody is actually an expert in the field, and was actually there and then writes about their experience, I think that's going to be better than a journalist.” Source: Interview with the BBC, April 2023

ELON: CITIZEN JOURNALISTS OFTEN KNOW MORE THAN LEGACY JOURNALISTS “I think the media is a driver of misinformation much more than the media would like to admit that they are. In a lot of cases, it is the average citizen that knows more than the journalist. Very often, when I see an article about something that I know a lot about, they get a lot wrong. It's the best interpretation of someone who doesn't really understand what's going on in the industry. If somebody is actually an expert in the field, and was actually there and then writes about their experience, I think that's going to be better than a journalist.” Source: Interview with the BBC, April 2023

Mario Nawfal

2,325,806 views • 1 year ago

Franklin Roosevelt is one of those presidents whose reputation seems almost impossible to separate from the mythology surrounding him. He led the country through two enormous crises, served longer than any other president, and fundamentally changed what Americans expected their federal government to do. But that enormous legacy is exactly what makes FDR so interesting to study. His presidency raises questions that go far beyond Roosevelt himself, namely, how much power should a president have during a national emergency, and how much should Americans be willing to give up in exchange for government action? He initiated a permanent transformation of the relationship between citizens and Washington. More than eight decades later, his legacy still remains one of empowering the federal government far more than any president should, and of doing more lasting harm than good to the country through his overreaching programs.

Franklin Roosevelt is one of those presidents whose reputation seems almost impossible to separate from the mythology surrounding him. He led the country through two enormous crises, served longer than any other president, and fundamentally changed what Americans expected their federal government to do. But that enormous legacy is exactly what makes FDR so interesting to study. His presidency raises questions that go far beyond Roosevelt himself, namely, how much power should a president have during a national emergency, and how much should Americans be willing to give up in exchange for government action? He initiated a permanent transformation of the relationship between citizens and Washington. More than eight decades later, his legacy still remains one of empowering the federal government far more than any president should, and of doing more lasting harm than good to the country through his overreaching programs.

Declaration of Memes

14,718 views • 1 month ago

The moment Charlie Kirk died, Joe Rogan predicted the left would celebrate his death — and he was right. “There’s gonna be a lot of people celebrating this. It’s so scary. It’s so dangerous, too — to celebrate or to in any way encourage this kind of behavior from human beings. He’s not a violent guy. He’s talking. Talking to people on college campuses. Wasn’t even particularly rude. He tried to be pretty reasonable with people.” CHARLIE SHEEN: “Everything I saw seemed reasonable.” JOE ROGAN: “He’s a very intelligent guy. Whether you agree with him or don’t, and there’s a lot of stuff that I didn’t agree with him on. That’s fine. You’re allowed to disagree with people without celebrating the fact they got shot.” CHARLIE SHEEN: “But you can’t disrespect his passion.” JOE ROGAN: “Yeah. Well, what you’re supposed to do with a guy like that if you’re opposing him is debate him. Have a conversation where your argument is more compelling than his. That’s what people should be celebrating. Discourse. We used to do that.” Instead of murdering political opponents, Sheen challenged the left: “Do some homework and bring it to the table.”

The moment Charlie Kirk died, Joe Rogan predicted the left would celebrate his death — and he was right. “There’s gonna be a lot of people celebrating this. It’s so scary. It’s so dangerous, too — to celebrate or to in any way encourage this kind of behavior from human beings. He’s not a violent guy. He’s talking. Talking to people on college campuses. Wasn’t even particularly rude. He tried to be pretty reasonable with people.” CHARLIE SHEEN: “Everything I saw seemed reasonable.” JOE ROGAN: “He’s a very intelligent guy. Whether you agree with him or don’t, and there’s a lot of stuff that I didn’t agree with him on. That’s fine. You’re allowed to disagree with people without celebrating the fact they got shot.” CHARLIE SHEEN: “But you can’t disrespect his passion.” JOE ROGAN: “Yeah. Well, what you’re supposed to do with a guy like that if you’re opposing him is debate him. Have a conversation where your argument is more compelling than his. That’s what people should be celebrating. Discourse. We used to do that.” Instead of murdering political opponents, Sheen challenged the left: “Do some homework and bring it to the table.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

614,291 views • 1 year ago

🐊The algae was never really the issue. People often say they want things fixed. Until someone fixes them. Then the argument shifts to whether they should have been touched at all. Which raises a question: Why are we sometimes more comfortable with decline than with change? 🤔 That's the underlying fight. They drained the Reflection Pool, cleaned it, and gave it a fresh look. Now the fight isn't about the water — it's about whether it should have been touched at all. And by whom. The shade of Old Glory blue. The destained stone. The change itself. Shut out the usual partisan noise for a moment. Why are we sometimes more comfortable with visible decline than with any attempt at renewal? Is this really about preserving history... Or is it resistance to change itself? The battle lines are drawn. Pick a side and weigh in on history in the making. At what point does "protecting the past" become fear of the future?👀 Think about it. The ancient battle between: preservation and renewal. Now that I think about it, that’s much more interesting mystery than the shade of blue. 🤣🔵

🐊The algae was never really the issue. People often say they want things fixed. Until someone fixes them. Then the argument shifts to whether they should have been touched at all. Which raises a question: Why are we sometimes more comfortable with decline than with change? 🤔 That's the underlying fight. They drained the Reflection Pool, cleaned it, and gave it a fresh look. Now the fight isn't about the water — it's about whether it should have been touched at all. And by whom. The shade of Old Glory blue. The destained stone. The change itself. Shut out the usual partisan noise for a moment. Why are we sometimes more comfortable with visible decline than with any attempt at renewal? Is this really about preserving history... Or is it resistance to change itself? The battle lines are drawn. Pick a side and weigh in on history in the making. At what point does "protecting the past" become fear of the future?👀 Think about it. The ancient battle between: preservation and renewal. Now that I think about it, that’s much more interesting mystery than the shade of blue. 🤣🔵

Tosca Austen

23,268 views • 4 months ago

Jay Z says that "battling" and beef doesn't need to be a part of hip hop culture anymore as it does more harm than good 🚨 "I don't know if it’s worth it at this point […] I guess I'm going to say it, I don't know if battling needs to be part of the culture any more."

Jay Z says that "battling" and beef doesn't need to be a part of hip hop culture anymore as it does more harm than good 🚨 "I don't know if it’s worth it at this point […] I guess I'm going to say it, I don't know if battling needs to be part of the culture any more."

Hip Hop All Day

681,816 views • 6 months ago

ELON: A FUTURE WITH HUMANS IS MORE INTERESTING THAN A WORLD OF ROCKS “Any AI that is trying to understand the universe would want to see how humanity develops in the future, or that AI is not adhering to its mission. I’m not saying the AI will necessarily adhere to its mission, but if it does, a future where it sees the outcome of humanity is more interesting than a future where there are just a bunch of rocks.” Source: Cheeky Pint Podcast Elon Musk

ELON: A FUTURE WITH HUMANS IS MORE INTERESTING THAN A WORLD OF ROCKS “Any AI that is trying to understand the universe would want to see how humanity develops in the future, or that AI is not adhering to its mission. I’m not saying the AI will necessarily adhere to its mission, but if it does, a future where it sees the outcome of humanity is more interesting than a future where there are just a bunch of rocks.” Source: Cheeky Pint Podcast Elon Musk

Mario Nawfal

32,356 views • 8 months ago

New: Annie Jacobsen on Rogan "Extraterrestrial beings [are] certainly going to be a lot more [intelligent] than us. It wouldn't be visible to our spectrum." ~AJ "A lot of really legitimate-thinker people that didn't have an opinion about [UFOs] before, [are now] more open to the idea." ~AJ (Most of the full segment (cued up in the replies) is AJ expressing her skepticism, leaning towards government deception and disinformation, and her disinterest in the UFO subject. But this was interesting.) ~ Annie Jacobsen: "I find the most interesting concept is something that Jacques Vallée explained to me. This has to be a decade ago, where he said, 'The problem with UFOs is they're not a military problem; they're an intelligence-community problem,' for precisely the reason you're talking about. "Like, if you're actually talking about extraterrestrial beings, their certainly going to be a lot more [intelligent] than us, and certainly if they got here. And that's where I think a lot of that idea of invisibility. And again, that's like - I'm using the word poetically - comes up, right? That an extraterrestrial being would be, would be intel(ligent). You know, it wouldn't be visible to our spectrum. It's not like hardware, like military hardware." Rogan: "Right. What is your take on all these videos then, of these objects? You think these things are some top-secret military program?" AJ: "I mean, I've seen them, but again, I enter into it... You know, sometimes when you have a bias, and mine is certainly biased towards disinformation. So I'm just totally aware of it. And it's also...it's not that interesting to me. It just actually really isn't. I've got all these other serious interests. "But I do call up people I know who might have a more interesting take than me, who do not have the horse in the race of absolutely being convinced that aliens are among us. So, I would, for example, I'll call up fighter pilots and talk to them, or I'll talk to someone, an astronaut who is on the ISS, Jeff Ashby, who's married to my cousin Mary. "And it's interesting to hear them talk about the possibility. And these are people who do look at the objects more, also sometimes from their military-training background. And I will say that there has been a shift from 15, 18 years ago when I first wrote 'Area 51' and was reporting it, where it was definitely like a like a stigmatized subject. To a lot of really legitimate thinker people that didn't have an opinion about it before, being more open to the idea. And that kind of thing I find really interesting. Those are conversations I like having." Rogan: "Well, that really changed with the New York Times article, right?" AJ: "I don't know because I felt like that article was written by a lot of, and interviewed a lot of, people who already were very serious believers." Rogan: "Yes, but it was in the New York Times."

New: Annie Jacobsen on Rogan "Extraterrestrial beings [are] certainly going to be a lot more [intelligent] than us. It wouldn't be visible to our spectrum." ~AJ "A lot of really legitimate-thinker people that didn't have an opinion about [UFOs] before, [are now] more open to the idea." ~AJ (Most of the full segment (cued up in the replies) is AJ expressing her skepticism, leaning towards government deception and disinformation, and her disinterest in the UFO subject. But this was interesting.) ~ Annie Jacobsen: "I find the most interesting concept is something that Jacques Vallée explained to me. This has to be a decade ago, where he said, 'The problem with UFOs is they're not a military problem; they're an intelligence-community problem,' for precisely the reason you're talking about. "Like, if you're actually talking about extraterrestrial beings, their certainly going to be a lot more [intelligent] than us, and certainly if they got here. And that's where I think a lot of that idea of invisibility. And again, that's like - I'm using the word poetically - comes up, right? That an extraterrestrial being would be, would be intel(ligent). You know, it wouldn't be visible to our spectrum. It's not like hardware, like military hardware." Rogan: "Right. What is your take on all these videos then, of these objects? You think these things are some top-secret military program?" AJ: "I mean, I've seen them, but again, I enter into it... You know, sometimes when you have a bias, and mine is certainly biased towards disinformation. So I'm just totally aware of it. And it's also...it's not that interesting to me. It just actually really isn't. I've got all these other serious interests. "But I do call up people I know who might have a more interesting take than me, who do not have the horse in the race of absolutely being convinced that aliens are among us. So, I would, for example, I'll call up fighter pilots and talk to them, or I'll talk to someone, an astronaut who is on the ISS, Jeff Ashby, who's married to my cousin Mary. "And it's interesting to hear them talk about the possibility. And these are people who do look at the objects more, also sometimes from their military-training background. And I will say that there has been a shift from 15, 18 years ago when I first wrote 'Area 51' and was reporting it, where it was definitely like a like a stigmatized subject. To a lot of really legitimate thinker people that didn't have an opinion about it before, being more open to the idea. And that kind of thing I find really interesting. Those are conversations I like having." Rogan: "Well, that really changed with the New York Times article, right?" AJ: "I don't know because I felt like that article was written by a lot of, and interviewed a lot of, people who already were very serious believers." Rogan: "Yes, but it was in the New York Times."

Joe Murgia

24,876 views • 2 months ago