3. What Does It Mean to Be a “Hard Worker”? | No Stupid… — Transcript

Wow, you really have lowered your expectations, haven't you? That's why I'm so happy. I'm Angela Duckworth, and I'm Steven Dubner. I'm a psychologist at Penn, and I run an educational nonprofit called Character Lab. You also wrote the book Grit, yes, and I am a writer and I host a podcast called Freakonomics Radio. And you wrote the book Freakonomics, among quite a few others. I did, and you and I became friends. We did, and we discovered that both of us really like to ask each other questions. And there's only one rule. The rule is there are no stupid questions today. No stupid questions. How do you know if you're a hard worker? You come up with a few salient examples, right? You think of your wife lazy? No. She's not. You think of me super lazy? Angela Duckworth never does anything. Also, why do happiness levels tend to start dropping around age 16 and not rise again until our late 40s? To be precise, it's about 47 to 48, and I only say that because I'm 49, and so this matters a lot to me. Steven, I have a personal question for you, and I want you to be honest. Are you a hard worker? I like that question because it's, first of all, feels like a trick. Second of all, it is something I think about a lot, but I think about it in terms of did I work as hard as I was capable of working, not like did I do a lot. Okay, so scale from 1 to 10, Steven Dubner, am I a hard worker compared to myself and my potential or compared to like the universe of people? Let's go with universe of people. So compared to the universe of people, I'm going to give myself 8.7. So out of 100 people, you would be like harder working than 86 of them. And then, yeah, there's people in front of you that I ridicule for working too hard, the other people, workaholics. Okay, and then what about compared to how hard you could work? I'm going to say 8.6. Yes, that's right. Yeah, in other words, I feel like I could be, you know, in the top 10%, maybe top 5%. I could work harder, but I don't always push it as hard as I can. But I'm curious why you're asking this question, because you don't really care about how hard I work. Well, I'm asking you in part because it's a question I ask to measure grit. Being a hard worker predicts success outcomes, and I have, after 15 years of measuring whether someone's a hard worker by asking them, are you a hard worker? Well, does that work, asking them that question? I wouldn't think so. Well, kind of. You know, if somebody says, yeah, I'm absolutely a hard worker, then all things being equal, it is more likely that they're going to achieve something than not. There isn't grotesque inflation. There's certainly possibility of faking. I mean, remember, I'm a researcher, so usually when I'm asking people, it's not because I'm hiring them, right? So there's less of an incentive to fake with somebody who's, you know, not holding your future in their hands. But you still are like holding a clipboard or some equivalent thereof, right? You're an authority figure. Well, there's something else people do that's not flat-out faking, and it's called social desirability bias. We like to appear in ways that are socially desirable, actually not only because we think people with clipboards are watching us or that anyone else is watching us, but turns out there's kind of a form of social desirability bias where you don't want to look bad to yourself. People don't like to think badly of themselves. They just don't want to reckon in the most honest way with all their flaws and faults. So there's all kinds of reasons why we might inflate our scores on something like, on a scale from 1 to 10, how hard a worker are you? Now, how much of this is what's it called, illusory superiority, whatever, the Lake Wobegon effect, right? Oh yeah, optimistic bias, right? So how much of it is a legitimate poor assessment because we think we're better than we are? A lot of this does fall into that category, that at some subconscious level, we just don't want to think about ourselves in a negative way. We might actually think we're being accurate, but we're just fooling ourselves because we would like to think that we're hard workers. And how much of this is about, is it called reference bias? Is that what you people call this? Yeah, I'm kind of obsessed with this. Another reason why, you know, are you a hard worker is not a perfect question, and that is the following. Can I just say before you explain, I love that your question today is a question that you think is prima facie a bad question. No, I do. I'm serious. It makes it more fun to learn that the question was thought to be poor, but now you're going to tell us why it's good that it's a poor question. Yeah, well, at least I got to tell you why it's interesting. So when I ask you, are you a hard worker, I think what immediately comes to mind is, like you said, compared to whom? And you might say like the universe of people. In fact, you did. But guess what, Steven? You cannot conjure up the universe of people. That would be more than 7 billion, right? You cannot imagine what the distribution of humanity looks like and then place yourself somewhere in that distribution. What really you do is you come up with a few salient examples. You think of your wife lazy? No, she's not. You think of me super lazy? Angela Duckworth never does anything. You're like, let me revise my score, 9.9. But you can see how these numbers move around, right? And reference bias refers to the bias of having a given arbitrary frame of comparison that is idiosyncratic. And so you think you're comparing yourself to the universe of all people, but you're not. You're comparing yourself to a very small number of people. And if you choose a comparison set that happens to be super hardworking, then you're going to have artificially lower responses. One of my favorite studies on this is an international study of personality. Okay, and the personality trait that's being studied is conscientiousness. Now, some countries, one might argue, are a little more conscientious in general, and I'm not biased because of my Asian, some would say that the Far East, that the Chinese, the Koreans, and the Japanese on questions like are you a hard worker, are you dependable, are you punctual, are you orderly, that they might do better. Well, the least conscientious people in the world by self-report are exactly those people from the Far East. And the authors of the study said, look, it's theoretically possible that all of our stereotypes are 100% wrong, but it's also possible that these individuals from these cultures have such high standards for hard work and being orderly and the trains running on time that they have given themselves lower answers. Is asking about how hard you work a particularly incisive or insightful question? If you want to measure reference bias, are you really going to learn a lot about a person by how much they may deviate from the norm by that question? I don't know that, you know, are you a hard worker, like how good it is on its own. But there is something you can do with asking someone if they're a hard worker, and that is to give them little vignettes, little stories of other people, like this person wakes up at 5:00 in the morning and then they start working at 7:00. And you can manipulate the heck out of people. Well, no, it's not a manipulation. You ask them to then rate the person in the story. So you give them a series of stories, and then you can tell what their frame of reference is with some precision. But you can kind of get at whether this person is rating hard, like are they a strict rater or do they have really lax standards? Because when you give them a certain story, you know, one person might say, like, yeah, that person sounds like a seven out of 10, and another person might say, slacker, two out of 10. So the are you a hard worker question coupled with asking the person to rate hypothetical others can get you a little closer. All right, so let's say take a room of 100 people. I randomize them, and for half of them, I give them examples of people who are demonstrably hard workers. This person gets up at 4 a.m., and the other ones I give stories that are demonstrably not.

host a podcast called Freakonomics radio and you wrote the book Freakonomics among quite a few others I did and you and I became friends we did and we discovered that both of us really like to ask each other questions and there's

only one rule the rule is there are Noid questions today on no stupid questions how do you know if you're a hard worker you come up with a few Salient examples right you think of your wife lazy no

she's not you think of me super lazy andyw Duckworth never does anything also why do happiness levels tend to start dropping around age 16 and not rise again until our late 40s to be precise it's about 47 to 48 and I I only say

that cuz I'm 49 and so this matters lot to me Stephen I have a personal question for you and I want you to be honest are you a hard worker I like that question because it's first of all feels like a

trick second of all it is something I think about a lot but I think about it in terms of did I work as hard as I was capable of working not like did I do a lot okay so scale from 1 to 10

Steven DB am I a hard worker compared to myself and my potential or compared to like the universe of people let's go with Universe of people so compared to the universe of people I'm going to give myself 8.7 so out of 100 people you would be

like harder working than 866 of them and then yeah there's people in front of you that I ridicule for working too hard the other people Workaholics okay and then what about compared to how hard you could work I'm going to say 8.6

yes that's right yeah in other words I feel like I could be you know in the top 10% maybe top 5% I could work harder but I don't always push it as hard as I can but I'm curious why you're asking this

question because you don't really care about how hard I work well I'm asking you in part because it's a question I ask to measure grit being a hard worker predicts success outcomes and I have after 15 years of measuring whether

someone's a hard worker by asking them are you a hard worker well does that work asking them that question I wouldn't think so well kind of you know if somebody says yeah I'm absolutely a hard worker then all things being equal

it is more likely that they're going to achieve something then not there isn't grotesque inflation there's certainly possibility of Faking I mean remember I'm a researcher so usually when I'm asking people it's not because I'm hiring them right so there's less of an

incentive to fake with somebody who's you know not holding your future in their hands but you still are like holding a clipboard or some equivalent thereof right you're an authority figure well there's something else people do that's not flat out faking and it it's

called social desirability bias we like to appear in ways that are socially desirable actually not only because we think people with clipboards are watching us or that anyone else is watching us but turns out there's kind of a form of social desirability bias

where you you don't want to look bad to yourself people don't like to think badly of themselves they just don't want to reckon in the most honest way with all their flaws and faults so there's all kinds of reasons why we might

inflate our scores on something like on a scale from 1 to 10 how hard a worker are you now how much of this is what's it called illusory superiority whatever the lake wagon effect right oh yeah optimistic bias right so how much of it

is a legitimate poor assessment because we think we're better than we are a lot of this does fall into that category that at some subconscious level we just don't want to think about ourselves in a negative way we might actually think

we're being accurate but we're just fooling ourselves CU we would like to think that we're hard workers and how much of this is about is it called reference bias is that what your people call this yeah I'm kind of obsessed with

this other reason why you know are you a hard worker is not a perfect question and that is the following can I just say before you explain I love that your question today is a question that you think is prima fascia a bad question no

I do I'm serious it makes it more fun to learn that the question was thought to be poor but now you're going to tell us why it's good that it's a poor question yeah well at least I'll got to tell you

why it's interesting so when I ask you are you a hard worker I think what immediately comes to mind is like you said compared to whom and you might say like the universe of people in fact you did but guess what Stephen you cannot

conter up the universe of people that would be more than 7 billion right you cannot imagine what the distribution of humanity looks like and then Place yourself somewhere in that distribution what really you do is you come up with a

few Salient examples you think of your wife lazy no she's not you think of me super lazy Angie Duckworth never does anything you're like you're like let me revise my score 9.9 but you can see how these numbers

move around right and reference bias refers to the bias of having a given arbitrary frame of comparison that is idiosyncratic and so you think you're comparing yourself to the universe of all people but you're not you're comparing yourself to a very small

number of people and if you choose a comparison set that happens to be super hardworking then you're going to have artificially lower responses one of my favorite studies on this is international study of Personality okay and the personality trait that's being

studied is conscientiousness now some countries one might argue are a little more conscientious in general and I'm not biased because of my Asian some would say that the Far East that the Chinese the Koreans and the Japanese on

questions like are you a hard worker are you Dependable are you punctual are you orderly that they might do better well the least conscientious people in the world by self-report are exactly those people from the Far East and the authors

of the study said look it's theoretically possible that all of our stereotypes are 100% wrong but it's also possible that these individuals from these cultures have such high standards for hard work and being orderly and the trains running on time that they have

given them themselves lower answers is asking about how hard you work a particularly incisive or insightful question if you want to measure reference bias are you really going to learn a lot about a person by how much they may deviate from the norm by that

question I don't know that you know are you a hard worker like how good it is on its own but there is something you can do with asking someone if they're a hard worker and that is to give them little

vignettes little stories of other people like this person wakes up at 5:00 in the morning and then they start working at 7:00 and you can manipulate the heck out of people well no it's not a manipulation you ask them to then rate

the person in the story so you give them series of stories and then you can tell what their frame of reference is with some Precision but you can kind of get at whether this person is raiding hard like are they a strict Raider or do they

have really lack standards because when you give them a certain story you know one person might say like yeah that person sounds like a seven out of 10 and another person might say slacker two out of 10 so the are you a hard worker

question coupled with asking the person to rate hypothetical others can get you a little closer all right so let's say take a room of a 100 people I randomize them and for half of them I give them examples of people who are demonstrably

hard workers this person gets up at for da and the other ones I give stories that are demonstrably not hard workers then I have these two sets of 50 people do a task do I see their assessment of

other people's hard work rub off in any way and how well they perform ah so you've designed an experiment where you're kind of trying to Prime if you will or like encourage hard work or not hard work by giving them different

comparison sets right you know I'm not not sure but I I am guessing that if you give people examples of really hard workers that if they feel like those people you've described are similar to them and the hard work is within their

grasp it's something they can do then you'll get them to work harder but on the contrary if you have given them kind of Out Of Reach example like do you know how hard Gandhi worked on this like let

me tell you how hard Gandhi worked on this task they just lie down and take a nap they just give up you know you've held out these examples that actually diminish their confidence that they could do as well so reference bias it

can get complicated fast am I wrong to think of it as essentially relativity it is a kind of bias that comes out of Relativity I actually think that whenever anybody makes any kind of statement like was it a good restaurant

how was the movie was it a good day that actually there's always a frame of reference I mean it doesn't mean anything to say something without a comparison and all reference bias is saying is that times those frames of

comparison those references can be different depending on the person and that's why we get these kind of paradoxical results was Albert Einstein ever asked how hard a worker he was do you think I wish he were I don't know

and I don't know what Albert Einstein would say I will say he was actually like a you know not so bad psychologist so he might have had the psychological insight to know that his standards of hard work might be different than others

I love he was once asked to explain the theory of relativity to someone who didn't know or care about science at all so this is what he reportedly said he probably didn't say this but someone says he want said he said well when you

sit with a nice girl for two hours you think it's only a minute but when you sit on a hot stove for a minute you think it's two hours that's relativ i' no way said that I don't know I will

tell you this in a book I'm reading about Jewish history how Jews changed the world it's said that five Jews changed how we see the world most sign ific l so Moses said the law is everything and then Jesus said Love is

Everything Mark said money is everything Freud said sex is everything and Einstein said everything is [Laughter] relative still to come on no stupid questions of course science says that we can actually derive pleasure from anticipated future rewards oh yeah the

vacation you haven't had yet is way better than the one you just had always [Applause] [Music] Angela Duckworth Steven Dubner here's my question for you today it's about happiness which is an interesting and weirdly contentious subject in a way

because people disagree about what makes happiness and you don't think about happiness the way many people do many people think of happiness is kind of you know goal number one in life and your father told you hell no I don't care if

you're happy be successful yeah I mostly care about achievement as a psychologist and as the daughter of my father but I will tell you I grew up in the positive psychology Center that's where I did my PhD so you can ask me a happiness

question all right so different disciplines look at happiness in different ways different disciplines call it different things but happiness seems to be a word a lot of them have landed on there's really three aspects of happiness that are widely used one is

life satisfaction and then the second is positive emotion like feeling energetic or joyful now I know those sound like the same thing but life satisfaction is thinking that your life is good so overall you would say oh I wouldn't want

to trade my life with anothers whereas this kind of positive emotion thing is quite literally feeling positively and and those aren't exactly the same thing but the third aspect of happiness is actually very different and that is the

absence of negative emotions so the absence of anxiety and depression worry and so forth so anyway those are three aspects economists tend to think about life satisfaction more and there are several economists who've been working on this for many years David

blanchflower who's been one of The Economist studying this recently published a paper the latest and a long line and he talks about the happiness curve and if you look at the curve it's a gigantic U like a smile and basically

it starts measuring happiness at age 16 and that's when people are the happiest in these data at least and then it drops and drops and drops and drops and then it turns again at about age 50 yeah and

to be precise I think it's about 47 to 48 and I only say that cuz I'm 49 so this matters a lot to me okay so you're in for Good Times ahead so here's the question if you believe the happiness

curve and that our happiness basically drops from teenagerhood until kind of whatever you want to call age 50 middle age late middle age middle middle age and then it swings really hard upward for a long time if you do believe that

why do you think that is the case is it that there are things happening in there is it adjustments is it habituation you're the olist tell us what so I've seen this work by blanch flower and I will tell you that it's very thorough I

think there's good reason to believe it's real so generally what blanch flower is using is survey data self-report usually the phrasing is how satisfied are you with your life I think it may be because as you hit that

midlife period you're may be under a combination of family stress cuz parenting is not easy and work stress and could it be that age 48 to 52 is when many parents are seeing their teenagers move out of the house that is

a possibility these samples don't only include married adults but yes one of the findings from Marriage research is that you know so many married couples with children fear the empty nest syndrome but actually on average people tend to be happier once they've sort of

gotten over the initial crying of your last kid being dropped off to college I think there are other explanations though that's what I want to hear yeah so blanch flower doesn't actually say that he knows and I think that's right

to be humble about okay look there's this u-shaped happiness curve but nobody really knows for sure what's going on I want to suggest that when you're in the beginning of Life and this is what I think might account for the downward

slope and happiness until you reach your late 40s you are striving you are trying to attain goals maybe that you're not reaching and if you think about what happiness is it's the achieving of the goals that you set and there are two

ways to do that right one is to achieve those goals and the other one is to have lower goals so maybe the higher expectations that we have for what we hope for in life earlier that accounts for why we're downward sloping until a

certain point and then we kind of reckon with what's possible and then we're happier can I ask you to unpack that a tiny bit are you saying it's that there's just less gap between kind of our dream and reality or that we settle

that we habituate and become more accept in of what we've got even if it wasn't what we hoped it might be well that's a pretty nuanced distinction but I I agree there's kind of setting lower goals not having high expectations for your life

and then alternatively there's keeping those high expectations but having this distanced perspective like very Zen about the fact that you miss those goals but I think either way what it says is that the kind of increasing happiness that you are predicted to experience in

your 50s and your 60s and so forth are not because you're actually objectively doing better but because in some way you have subjectively changed the targets themselves are you suggesting and I think there is research that suggests this that young people are

unrealistically optimistic and even if the answer to that is yes can you really say that it is unwisely because maybe one of the things that you need a surplus of when you're starting out is optimism because in fact it can be hard

there is a psychologist who I love named Don Moore he's like a judgment decision-making scientist and he believes that not only the young but people of all ages can be recklessly optimistic and he thinks that this overconfidence is actually a problem I

mean when he says this entrepreneurs just leap out of the woodwork and they say you know you got to be optimistic to get anything done and I think Don Moore would say no it's just better to be accurate and he has some experimental

evidence to support that I think that these high aspirations that young people have like rose tinted movies in their head about what their wedding is going to be like and how their children are going to be beautiful and perfect and

all these projections into the future which are probably a little naive I think you could ask the question whether they are really unwise or not I do think that if you reach higher you'll get farther but you might be less happy

doing it so let me ask you this since we see that measured happiness is very high at 16 and since you're talking about Reckless optimism is a feature of that age how can you explain then the relatively very high and increasing suicide rate or

maybe it does explain it maybe it's that the cohort that are prone toward Suicidal Thoughts are those who see that gap between expectations in reality well first of all I don't want to say that optimism is inherently Reckless some

would say that it's Reckless I wouldn't use exactly that language I might amend your question to say look if young people have these optimistic aspirations we explained increasing rates of suicide and depression and I think that's an excellent question that's the question I

meant to ask I really don't think anyone knows I mean I think the mystery of increasing rates of anxiety depression and suicide are still exactly that a mystery one hypothesis that has been Advanced is the same hypothesis that's

been Advanced for why a lot of other people who are not just young adults or adolescents are unhappy and that is that we do have this ratcheting up of expectations and so there is this Gap gap between what we're achieving and our

aspirations not because we're achieving less we're probably achieving more I mean we're learning more we're having in some cases higher quality experiences but our aspirations are growing faster than our objective achievements by the way another possibility Stephen is that

the people who are happier are just different from the people who are depressed and they're both growing in number and the middle is getting carved out if you do believe these data what do you do with it let's say you're

a 16year old person let's say you're 50-year-old person let's say you're a 75y old person by the way happiness does start to decline when you're older a lot of people around you are dying your own health is not doing so well but if you

see that big u in front of you okay if you're 16 or if you're in the middle of the UPS slope how do you kind of hack that happiness curve what do you do with that information so let's start with the

16 R cuz I have one so what would I say to one condolences oh she's so wonderful she's actually a shockingly happy 16-year-old she's all over the data that's right she's at the top of the curve she just doesn't know what's ahead

also we should say the teenager can be happy while making the parents miserable yeah I think what teenagers experience is actually like high highs and low lows and there's a lot of scientific evidence for that too I'm a university Professor

so I see lots of 18 to 22y olds who have their fair share of enst and they kind of are experiencing I think the decrease in happiness they have memories of being Carefree children and I think that downward slope my guess is kind of

feeling the difference between what it was and what it is today we're very sensitive to changes and so to feel that everything was so simple then and you could eat an ice cream cone without guilt and they're all of a sudden

burdened with the weighty responsibilities of adulthood you know their first career choices their first disappointments professionally or maybe major ones romantically when you're sad it's just it's really hard to be convinced that you'll ever not be sad so

I like to tell young people who are in emotional turmoil or experiencing the decrease in their emotional well-being that life is long and that they won't feel exactly this way forever well let's say you're at the bottom right now right

technically you're about there so how do you like exploit the oncoming you know onslaught of Happiness you're about to experience I mean other than just looking forward which of course science says that we can actually derive pleasure from anticipated future rewards

yeah the vacation you haven't had yet is way better than the one you just had always right exactly so aside from anticipating the future I mean this kind of shift in your mindset from like oh what's going to happen what could I do

what haven't I yet done to like life is complicated and there's a lot to be grateful for I know that blanchflower and his colleagues do suggest that one potential reason for the upswing in happiness around midlife is that you've

seen people that you grew up with having really bad fortune dying and whatnot as you said your gratitude May kind of start to kick in a little bit more I mean the cynical interpretation of that is is it's all downward social

comparison you look at people who like oh my gosh I can't believe that happened and that somehow makes you feel better I mean just having some perspective right and that is something that 16-year-olds God bless them do not yet have an

abundance the wide angle lens on life that allows you to appreciate a good cup of coffee and wow nothing went wrong today wow you really have lowered your expectations haven't you I guess that's why I'm so happy so let me ask you one last question

let's say that someone listening to this just wants to optimize their happiness no matter how old they are no matter what circumstances they're in one thing that strikes me about looking at the curve is it feels too imprecise to see

it grouped just by year of age right but if I'm 52 and supposed to be at like the bottom of my happiness about to climb that doesn't really relate to the things that actually happen dayto day so how

would you suggest people try to get rid of the things that make them unhappy and increase the ones that work anytime you see a pretty graph that has like a nice U or a line I mean you know it's an

average so it's not exactly the same curve for everyone but I think more to the point what can I do to actually make my slope a little more steep or make my inflection point happen now and not a

year from now I think the key to so much of our emotional wellbeing is a tension so for example if I think of what happened in the last 24 hours I mean gosh the mental landscape is vast attention is Central because I can

choose to either think of all the things that happened that were good or I can choose to think about things that were bad and if I make no choice at all the default is to actually think of negative

things and that is why one of the most reliable interventions to increase happiness is called the three blessings exercise and you simply think of three good things that happened usually in the last 24 hours and you rattle them off

I've gotten so good at it I can do it usually in like 10 or 15 seconds you know Lucy Amanda the avocado is ripe wait just naming your children fulfills the three that's what you're saying yeah I know you're going to say that's like

kind of a cheat or how is that but yeah when I bring my kids to mind I'm like Lucy's healthy Amanda finished her midterms and yeah I mentioned the avocado I don't want to put that on the same like level as my children but it

was a miracle of God that the avocado was actually not too ripe and not under and so yeah now just so you know that avocado is probably grown in Mexico where the avocado ranch is run by a criminal cartel killing and extorting

innocent people I've got blood on my hands but if that makes you happy Angela that's fine there you go focusing on the negative Steven you so much to learn no stupid questions is part of the Freakonomics radio network this episode

was produced by me Rebecca Lee Douglas Stephen actually talks at greater length about blood avocados in in last week's episode episode 2 so check that out if you haven't already and now here's a fact check of today's conversations in

the first half of the episode Steven references a quote about the theory of relativity that's often attributed to Einstein when you sit with a nice girl for 2 hours you think it's only a minute but when you sit on a hot stove for a

minute you think it's 2 hours that's relativity Angela said that there was no way that Einstein said that but a 1929 piece from The New York Times report reports that when Einstein's secretary was being bombarded with questions about

relativity Einstein shared this quick little narrative as a way to communicate the theory to interviewers the story is more of an anecdote not a direct quote but there are several versions of it in circulation from the time period later

on in the episode step and Angela discussed Reckless optimism and the work of psychologist Don Moore Reckless is probably too strong a word for how more perceives optimism but he does conclude that optimism doesn't improve performance that doesn't mean that

pessimism is better Moore's experiments found that pessimistic mindsets didn't improve outcomes either instead like Angela mentioned he says that realism is the most desirable lens for achievement that doesn't mean that optimism is never beneficial meta analyses have shown that

it's linked to psychological well-being and negatively correlated with depression and anxiety so I guess stay optimistic about life in general but realistic when it comes to perform performance goals I'm not super optimistic that's realistic that's it for the fact check and by the way Steven

and Angela usually drop lots of references to books academic studies specific researchers and we provide links to all of them at freakonomics.com nsq no stupid questions is produced by Freakonomics radio and Stitcher our staff includes Allison craiglow Greg

rippen James Foster and Karen Wallace our theme song is and she was by Talking Heads special thanks to David burn and Warner Chapel Music if you'd like to listen to our show ad free subscribe to Stitcher premium you can also follow us

on Instagram and Twitter at nsq show and on Facebook at nsq show thanks for [Music] [Applause] listening I'm operating under the premise that there's no such thing as a stupid question I think that's an excellent premise I could argue with

it Stitcher