Bob Schwartz

Tag: Trump

Trump said he slashed prices by 600%. I asked AI if that is possible.

“I negotiated directly with the drug companies and foreign nations, which were taken advantage of our country for many decades to slash prices on drugs and pharmaceuticals by as much as 400, 500 and even 600 percent.”
Trump, December 17, 2025 and other times

Your next steps

  • If they make a simple mistake and own it quickly → consider proceeding but stay alert for other errors
  • If they can’t admit the error or get defensive → serious credibility problem
  • Either way, do additional due diligence — verify other claims they’ve made independently

Bottom line: If someone asking for your money, business, or trust can’t get basic facts right (or won’t admit when they’re wrong), that’s your cue to either walk away or scrutinize everything else much more carefully.
Claude AI


Bob:

Someone said he had slashed prices by 600%. Is that possible?

Claude:

No, that’s not mathematically possible in any meaningful way.

When you reduce a price by a percentage, you’re taking away that percentage of the original price. A 100% reduction would bring the price to zero (you’ve reduced it by the entire amount).

If you tried to reduce by 600%, you’d be subtracting 6 times the original price, which would give you a negative price — meaning you’d somehow be paying customers to take the product.

Bob:

What should I say to someone who claims to slash prices by 600%?

Claude:

Here are some approaches depending on the context:

If it’s casual conversation:

  • Just let it slide — they clearly mean prices are very low, and you understood the point
  • Make a light joke: “So you’re paying me to buy it?” with a smile
  • Gently clarify: “You mean 60% off? That’s a great deal!”

If it’s a business/professional setting:

  • Politely ask for clarification: “Just to make sure I understand — do you mean prices are reduced by 60%, or that they’re now 1/6th of the original?”
  • Focus on the actual numbers: “What’s the new price compared to the old one?” (sidesteps the percentage issue entirely)

If it’s advertising/marketing:

  • For a formal complaint: Point out that “reductions over 100% are mathematically impossible” and ask for accurate pricing information
  • If you’re a colleague: Privately mention “Hey, I think you meant 60% — the ad says 600% which doesn’t work mathematically”

The diplomatic approach:
Give them an easy out: “I think there might be a typo — did you mean 60% off or maybe prices are 1/6th of what they were?”

Most people make this mistake innocently (typo, brain slip, or genuine confusion), so gentle correction or just ignoring it is usually the way to go unless accuracy really matters in that situation.

Bob:

What if it is a business or professional setting, where someone making the claim is asking you to give them something of value—your business, your money, your endorsement, your approval, your trust?

Claude:

In that case, this is a serious red flag and you should address it directly. Here’s why and how:

Why it matters:
This reveals one of three problems, all concerning:

  1. They don’t understand basic math — raises questions about competence
  2. They’re being careless with facts — suggests poor attention to detail
  3. They’re hoping you won’t notice — potential dishonesty

Any of these should make you pause before giving them your money, business, or endorsement.

How to address it:

Be direct but professional:

  • “I notice you said you’ve reduced prices by 600%. That’s mathematically impossible — you can only reduce by up to 100%. Can you clarify what you actually mean?”
  • Wait for their response and watch how they handle being corrected

What their response tells you:

  • Good sign: “Oh! Sorry, I meant 60% — my mistake” (owns it quickly)
  • Concerning: Defensiveness, doubling down, or vague deflection
  • Red flag: “Well, you know what I mean” or dismissing your concern

Your next steps:

  • If they make a simple mistake and own it quickly → consider proceeding but stay alert for other errors
  • If they can’t admit the error or get defensive → serious credibility problem
  • Either way, do additional due diligence — verify other claims they’ve made independently

Bottom line: If someone asking for your money, business, or trust can’t get basic facts right (or won’t admit when they’re wrong), that’s your cue to either walk away or scrutinize everything else much more carefully.


To Understand America 2025, Read Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland

We had the best education. We went to school every day. I only took the regular course. Reeling and Writhing to begin with. Then the different branches of Arithmetic—Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision.
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland

Read Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland now. Again if it’s been a while, and definitely now if for the first time.

Lewis Carroll (born Charles Dodgson, 1832-1898) was famously creative as a mathematician and logician. He wove puzzles and tortured logic all through his book Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

Puzzles and tortured logic are a major component of America in 2025.

The leadership and the citizens of Wonderland are variously tyrannical, illogical, stupid, or just plain bizarre. Alice literally does not fit in. While she is only a child, she has more sense than everyone she meets combined.

If I had a news network I’d suspend the futile attempts to explain what’s going on and would instead read aloud one chapter from Alice in Wonderland every day. It would be more constructive and more fun than listening to their trying to make sense of the nonsensical.

Trump’s posts and speeches seem to be taken straight from Alice in Wonderland:

For example:

We must have a trial. Really this morning I have nothing to do. With no jury or judge I’ll be Judge. I’ll be jury. I’ll try the whole cause and condemn you to death.

We’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad. A dog growls when it’s angry and wags its tail when it’s pleased. Now I growl when I’m pleased and wag my tail when I’m angry. Therefore I’m mad.

Be what you would seem to be. Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.

You have no right to think. Just about as much right as pigs have to fly. I give you fair warning either you or your head must be off. Take your choice!

We had the best education. We went to school every day. I only took the regular course. Reeling and Writhing to begin with. Then the different branches of Arithmetic—Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision.

Trump has so far managed to keep all doors into his life closed—except the one marked “E”

Many people have things to hide. Many of those people hide them with lies, distractions, obscurities, payoffs, threats or punishments.

Even some, maybe many, of his supporters suspect that Trump has things to hide, though those supporters may think he, good man that he is, is hiding them for good reasons.

Trump has managed to hide things or explain away whatever was seen as inconsequential or often as fake.

He knows, and those who know him know, that the door marked “E” is turning out to be a challenge. Which explains how much effort has gone into to keeping it closed and blocking the view.

In criminal law, when a defendant or witness invokes the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, the instruction to the jury is that it may not infer guilt from that silence.

In life outside the courtroom, when someone tries to block the view of what actually happened, we do infer something from it. There is some possibility, we reasonably think, that blocking the view means that someone is hiding something.

The door marked “E” is opening a crack. We may see more if the congressional demand for complete FBI files is complied with, but there are many possible and likely obstacles to that.

Trump has managed to keep all other doors into his life closed so far, and has been very successful at it. If and when we get this door opened and see it all, we may be both astonished and unsurprised.

If and when.

American churches: No more sidelines about Trump

“We realize, hey, our churches and the people in our churches have been duped by this guy and so rather than hope someone else will clean up the problem, what we’ve seen is a lot of pastors respond with, you know what, I’m going to jump in and I’m going to be a part of the solution.”
Robb Ryerse in Arkansas, Christian pastor and former Republican, one of 30 Christian white clergy so far running as Democrats in the midterm elections.

Churches in America have taken different positions regarding Trump.

Some have vigorously supported him, going so far as to say he is an anointed savior for the nation. Trump does, after all, sell his own God Bless the USA Bible.

Some, particularly black churches, have vigorously opposed him.

Most churches have stayed on the sidelines. The main reason is that in this divided society, congregations often include supporters and opponents. In those congregations, the position is that the church serves as an elevated neutral ground, not a battlefield, interested in promoting and effectuating the highest principles of Jesus and the Gospels. Whether or not those principles are being advanced or decimated in the public sphere by the chief public executive. Whether or not the tax dollars of congregants are being used to help or hurt people. Besides, a divisive message might send some congregants running away.

From the Guardian:


‘Trump is inconsistent with Christian principles’: why the Democratic party is seeing a rise of white clergy candidates
From Texas and Iowa to Arkansas, faith leaders are wading into politics to counter the rise of Christian nationalism

David Smith
Sat 15 Nov 2025

He grew up on a farm in Indiana, the son of a factory worker and eldest of five children. He studied at Liberty, a Christian university founded by the conservative pastor and televangelist Jerry Falwell, and recalls wearing a T-shirt expressing opposition to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

Two decades later, Justin Douglas is running for the US Congress – as a Democrat.

He is among around 30 Christian white clergy – pastors, seminary students and other faith leaders – known to be potential Democratic candidates in next year’s midterm elections, including a dozen who are already in the race. While stressing the separation of church and state, many say that on a personal level their faith is calling them into the political arena….

In Arkansas, Robb Ryerse, a Christian pastor and former Republican, is mounting a challenge to representative Steve Womack, adopting the slogan “Faith, Family & Freedom” – rhetoric more commonly found in Republican campaign literature.

Ryerse, 50, from Springdale, Arkansas, said: “I joke sometimes that the two people who have changed my life more than any others are Jesus and Donald Trump, for very different reasons. Donald Trump is absolutely inconsistent with Christian principles of love and compassion, justice, looking out for the poor, meeting the needs of the marginalized.

“But Donald Trump has also used and been used by so many evangelical leaders who want political power. He has used them to validate him to their followers and they have used him to further their agenda, which has been a Christian nationalist culture war on the United States, which I think is bad for both the church and for the country.”

White clergy are deciding to run for office, Ryerse believes, in part as a response to the rise of Christian nationalism and the reality that, according to a Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) survey, Trump won 85% of the white evangelical vote in last year’s presidential election.

Ryerse said: “We realize, hey, our churches and the people in our churches have been duped by this guy and so rather than hope someone else will clean up the problem, what we’ve seen is a lot of pastors respond with, you know what, I’m going to jump in and I’m going to be a part of the solution.

“On a more positive note, there’s also that notion we need to do something for the common good. There’s so much alignment between what I believe personally is good for my neighbor, what it means to love my neighbor, and how that aligns with what public policy ought to be.”


An appreciation of Zelensky

Volodymyr Zelesnky became president of Ukraine in 2019.

In that time, American civic and political leadership has gone from terrible to okay to even more terrible. Meanwhile, Zelensky has led a country besieged by an overwhelming malevolent force with unyielding courage, intelligence and—it seems a strange but true characteristic to include—style. Not unlike Churchill.

Zelensky has given his people courage under the worst circumstances and has impressed other hard-to-impress world leaders. On the flip side, if people are known by the enemies they make, both Putin and Trump hate him. Because of his courage, intelligence, and in the case of Trump, definitely style.

Whether or not America and its opposition party, the Democrats, have or can find a Zelensky, it would definitely help. Unyielding courage, intelligence and style in the face of overwhelming malevolent force. That’s the ticket.

Snake in the Oval Office, attracted by all the gold?

When considering why this snake would appear on the president’s desk in the Oval Office, I concluded that it might be all the gold there that attracted it.

I asked Claude whether snakes are attracted to gold, the color or the metal. Claude replied:


No, snakes are not attracted to gold in either form.

Snakes lack the visual systems and cognitive processing to be drawn to specific colors like gold. Their color vision varies by species, but they don’t show preference for shiny or yellow objects.

They’re also not attracted to the metal itself. Snakes respond primarily to heat signatures (via infrared sensing in some species), chemical cues, and vibrations when hunting or navigating. Gold has no special thermal, chemical, or vibrational properties that would interest them.

The myth likely stems from old tales of snakes guarding treasure, which were metaphorical or served storytelling purposes rather than reflecting snake behavior.


I didn’t know that mythical snakes were said to guard treasures.

I do know a famous biblical story about snakes, a devilish snake that appears in a perfect setting and ruins everything.

As for storytelling, I am as capable of telling/making up stories as the ancients. In this case, there is a snake in the Oval Office, presumably attracted to all the gold that the president has kept adding to it.

President, Oval Office, gold, snakes. Pretty good story.

© 2025 Bob Schwartz

First Covid, then AI, then Trump: What else are we not ready for?

“Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.”

Five years. First Covid. Then AI. Then Trump returns.

Were we ready? Are we ready yet?

It has been a mixed bag.

Ready for Covid? Science worked miracles in quickly developing Covid vaccines, saving countless lives. On the other hand, a number of people refused to comply with the most basic social guidelines, resulting in illness and death for uncounted millions. As an unreadiness bonus, many of those same people are now trying to end all vaccines, so that not only Covid but many other long-controlled diseases can get out of control.

Ready for AI? The vast majority of people don’t understand AI, beyond some applications they find useful or stocks to invest in. AI is a profound phenomenon, with tremendous upside and downside. Some who talk about the possibilities and perils know what they are talking about; many don’t. Meanwhile, AI rolls on, like Covid did, with few ready to address it knowledgeably and intelligently.

Ready for Trump? Monty Python said, “Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.” They were so right. It is confounding that having already experienced ten years of Trump before his return in 2025 (he announced his presidential run in 2015), including four years as president (10,000 certified lies), four more years as an angry and disgruntled loser, hardly anybody seems really ready to effectively respond. Maybe we should ask those same scientists who responded so brilliantly to Covid to create a Trump vaccine. Except that their research funding has been cut and vaccines are disfavored in some quarters.

The big point is that after Covid, AI and Trump, there is something else coming, something else we are not ready for. We don’t need to know exactly what that is, as if we could. We do have to train to be able to resiliently and effectively take on whatever it is. That is the ultimate readiness.

© 2025 Bob Schwartz

O Canada: An unprecedented musical moment of Neil Young + The Band + Joni Mitchell

It is a day to honor Canada.

The Toronto Blue Jays begin the World Series against the Dodgers.

Trump has another temper tantrum over Canada:

Trump says all Canada trade talks ‘terminated’ over ad criticising tariffs
US president accuses Canada of ‘egregious behaviour’ after release of ad featuring Ronald Reagan criticising tariffs
Guardian

I’ve written about the irreplaceable place of Canadian artists in popular music:

Without Canadian artists where would we be?

To honor the Blue Jays, the Trump tantrum, etc., I offer a once-in-a-generation musical moment.

Martin Scorcese’s The Last Waltz (1978) is a documentary about the last performance of The Band, accompanied by many musical friends, at Winterland in San Francisco. The movie begins with the words “This film should be played loud!” and it should be.

The Band, all but one of them Canadians, were joined by two other legendary Canadians, Neil Young and Joni Mitchell.

Here are Neil Young, The Band and Joni Mitchell performing Young’s Helpless.

Trump only needs ONE of the nine universities to accept the higher education compact

At this moment, six of the nine universities who were offered the White House deal to get money in exchange for losing control of their schools have turned it down. Only the University of Arizona, Vanderbilt University and the University of Texas are still considering it. Today is a deadline, so by the time you read this, there may be more decisions made.

Strategically, while the White House would be happy with all or most of the schools accepting the agreement, Trump can be okay if only one university accepts. Here’s why:

The accepting school or schools will be showered—flooded—with federal money in ridiculous amounts. Meanwhile, the schools that rejected the offer will see funds dry up. This will serve as a terrorizing demonstration, a tactic that Trump continues to use in a variety of domains, global and domestic. Not just a high-powered version of carrot and stick. A threat, a warning, of what could happen to those who don’t comply with whatever the latest demand is.

To use the coarse language that Trump sometimes uses in public, and probably uses frequently in private, he wants to show resistant universities that he is not fucking around. He isn’t.

No Kings: 1776 and now

Pulling down the statue of Mad King George III at Bowling Green, New York City, July 9,1776 (painting by William Walcutt, 1854).