People think verifying if someone is “right” means asking an “expert” or checking Snopes for a yes or no.
Real verification comes from outcomes. If someone claims gravity pulls mass toward Earth’s center, drop a ball and see. Don’t just ask the professor if gravity exists.
I’m baffled why we keep believing people who are constantly wrong.
Like predicting we will run out of oil in 20 years, then 20 years pass, and it hasn’t. You shouldn’t trust that person anymore. But we do.
Or claiming an education reform will improve test scores, but scores plummet.
Or claiming tariffs will skyrocket inflation, and it doesn’t. Stop trusting them.
Or invading a foreign country will protect us from a threat and it turns out the threat was a lie.
Or that a healthcare reform will reduce our costs, but they increase.
They keep being wrong. But they keep getting invited back to make predictions!
Experts and models don’t matter. What happened does.
This applies to all sides.
To be clear: Being wrong once isn’t a life sentence. That’s unfair. That would prevent learning.
But making the same prediction for years, getting proven wrong repeatedly, never apologizing, then doubling down on the disproven claim? That’s unforgivable.
It’s insanity.
I see it every time I make the mistake of turning on the news: The same career-long failures doubling down, moving goalposts.
They think we’re stupid. And given how we keep listening, they might be right.
—
This is why it’s so stupid to debate these things - yet that is almost all you see in political talks.
It’s two idiots debating some untestable prediction about the future that may never come. They yell at each other claiming they are certain of what will happen in the future… then idiotically they never come back to test what actually happened.
They just move on to the next pointless argument.
But, betting solves this.
Anytime someone is trying to debate you about something… ask them to frame it into a testable bet instead.
You’ll find that in almost all cases, the debate will disappear. Becauase they aren’t looking for truth. They are looking for a safe fight. A nerf warriror. They want to pretend they are in battle but without any real risk.
They just want to _feel_ like they are right.
They don’t actually care if they are factually right.
And when they get to make policies that we all have to live with, we all suffer.
Amen! Should have bet you about the real estate market 🤣🤣
As a generality I agree with what you are stating. We do have a real life example going on right now that we can pick apart and debate... but at this point I am siding with the "wrong" side.
Lets look at the populist socialist running for NYC mayor Mamdani. Everything he is purposing has been tried and failed, and all the experts are claiming that its only going to make NYC "worse". But the question becomes "worse" then what? Greatest disparity in income? Too expensive for required workers to live in and travel into (Thinking teachers, garbage men, etc...) So then the wrong idea is to attempt a form of socialism in NYC... but if its already in a death cycle does it hurt to try an idea that is from "left field"? I agree socialism will not work country wide... but in a big city? Does it hurt to try?
Personally 🍿 I cannot wait for it to work and then see them building a wall to keep out the rift raft...
I dont know the right answer, but what is currently going on a big D circle of corruption destroying the city... does it matter if its a different big D corrupt attempt at fixing the city? What is the worst that happens? It spirals faster, or maybe it stops the bleeding? IDK but we are about to find out!