Speaker 1: Why from Baal Heartland and the crossroads of America.
Speaker 2: It's Tony Katz today. So the economy shed twenty three
Speaker 2: thousand jobs in July. It missed the expectations, and the
Speaker 2: market said that's cool, and you said something, it's cool
Speaker 2: by us. We're fine with it. We're good with it,
Speaker 2: no problem. As a matter of fact, we'll go up
Speaker 2: Tony Katz, Tony Katz today, Good to be with you.
Speaker 2: There are reasons, though, there are reasons, including, of course,
Speaker 2: inflation and rate hikes. Doctor Mattwell joined as economist at
Speaker 2: the University of Indianapolis. I started to understand this one early,
Speaker 2: but I want to understand what's in the jobs report. First,
Speaker 2: you took a look at it. We've got jobs report,
Speaker 2: We've got unemployment numbers. Walk me through what the report says,
Speaker 2: the Job's report, and what it says to you.
Speaker 1: Okay, Well, I'm going to start off by telling you
Speaker 1: that the headline is bad. And just like the other
Speaker 1: day we talked about this. You know, headlines are bad,
Speaker 1: but when you look under the hood, it's actually good
Speaker 1: for the economy, believe it or not. So let's start
Speaker 1: with the headline minus twenty three thousand jobs, which is
Speaker 1: really interesting because the expectation is plus eight eighty thousand,
Speaker 1: so this was one hundred thousand job myths. That's a
Speaker 1: big deal. But let's now start looking underneath the hood.
Speaker 1: Unemployment rate dropped from four point two to four point
Speaker 1: one percent. That's good, okay, Now for the bad. The
Speaker 1: only reason to drop is because the participation rate declined.
Speaker 1: Fewer people are looking for jobs. Fewer people are in
Speaker 1: the workforce. Now more bad news for you. Tony, May
Speaker 1: and June were revised down by one hundred and three
Speaker 1: thousand jobs, so people didn't get employed this quarter. Argue
Speaker 1: this month, two big revisions. I mean, there's a lot
Speaker 1: going on there that's not good. But there is a
Speaker 1: good part to this. The private industry gained thirty thousand jobs,
Speaker 1: so there was a growth in private and the government
Speaker 1: lost fifty three thousand. This was all government job loss,
Speaker 1: so as far as the market's concerned, good Again, back
Speaker 1: to the same scene we've been talking about. Government is contracting,
Speaker 1: private industry is growing, and if you look across the board,
Speaker 1: there's some pretty good information in this. I mean, construction
Speaker 1: twenty two thousand jobs up, durable goods manufacturing eighteen thousand
Speaker 1: jobs up, Transportation warehousing ten thousand jobs up. I mean,
Speaker 1: there is good news in this report for the private economy,
Speaker 1: and wages didn't grow that much. I know, again that
Speaker 1: sounds bad, but there's a story behind this and why
Speaker 1: this job's report is loved by the market.
Speaker 2: So I've with you on the government stuff, and I
Speaker 2: have discussed this now in a couple of places. Your
Speaker 2: point that GDP gross domestic product one point five percent
Speaker 2: bad headline. But if government spending juices GDP, we had
Speaker 2: less government spend, which is good for us the taxpayer.
Speaker 2: It just makes the GDP number look worse. But when
Speaker 2: you look as you describe it, under the hood, things
Speaker 2: on some fundamentals, specifically manufacturing, very very solid. But when
Speaker 2: I took a look at market response and I watched
Speaker 2: the futures go up one hundred points in a blink
Speaker 2: of an eye after this report came out, it became
Speaker 2: pretty clear to me. And I feel like all this
Speaker 2: talking together has finally gotten me some level of degree,
Speaker 2: maybe only in associates, but still them on my way
Speaker 2: that what they saw is the job market might be weaker.
Speaker 2: So those in the federal Reserve who are thinking about
Speaker 2: rate hikes to tamp down and tamper down inflation. Might
Speaker 2: think twice and no rate hikes is where the market
Speaker 2: wants to be true or false.
Speaker 1: Uh close, tony close, I'm giving you a B, not
Speaker 1: an A.
Speaker 2: Yeah, teacher, ever.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. Well, every time someone gets the bad grade,
Speaker 1: that's what they tell me. You're very close. The reason
Speaker 1: was the unemployment rate drop. So it's not that the
Speaker 1: job market is bad, it's that the wage growth is
Speaker 1: not exorbitant. Wage growth would indicate inflation. So the bad
Speaker 1: part where you're correct is in quotes, wage inflation is
Speaker 1: not there. And the unemployment rate stayed at four point one,
Speaker 1: I mean four to two to four to one, so
Speaker 1: we didn't have hot unemployment. If we had significantly increasing unemployment,
Speaker 1: there would be pressure on the SAD to cut rates.
Speaker 1: There's inflation, which seems to be in this case moderate
Speaker 1: not outrageous. Moderate, which is less pressure to increase rates.
Speaker 1: So the said, here's what happened this morning. In the markets,
Speaker 1: there is a fifty seven percent chance that said was
Speaker 1: going to do a rate hike in September. There's stuff
Speaker 1: on Wall Street and the options market in futures, the
Speaker 1: market that predicts this that went down as soon as
Speaker 1: this came out. As soon as it came out the
Speaker 1: news on the unemployment, that probability dropped from fifty seven
Speaker 1: percent to forty seven percent. So the headline is this
Speaker 1: inflation argues for a hike, employment argues against it, and
Speaker 1: this morning the employment won.
Speaker 2: Talking to doctor Matt will the economist from the University
Speaker 2: of Indianapolis, So when you talk about winning this back
Speaker 2: and forth, this seems to be a non scientific struggle.
Speaker 2: This only seems to be a reaction struggle. Am I
Speaker 2: right about that?
Speaker 1: Oh? Absolutely, that's exactly what's happening.
Speaker 2: So the reaction from Wall Street was that the lack
Speaker 2: of of labor participation, which would show us that we
Speaker 2: don't have wage inflation, means that everything is getting better.
Speaker 1: Yes, But your phrase reaction is why you might get
Speaker 1: an aus on this now, because what happened is it's
Speaker 1: the reaction to the latest piece of news. You and
Speaker 1: I the other day talked about the PCE very high, CPI,
Speaker 1: eh okay, PPI terrible. That was Then today's news is, look,
Speaker 1: unemployment is pretty flat. That's good. Wage increase not going
Speaker 1: through the roof. So what happened here is today's most
Speaker 1: immediate current news reaction is okay, inflation under control, no
Speaker 1: rate change. So that's what the market saw. The latest reaction.
Speaker 1: Now you know, something could happen tomorrow and completely changed
Speaker 1: the game again. But this is what the market's doing
Speaker 1: with the news that got today. Okay, unemployment's fine, wage inflacement,
Speaker 1: inflation is reasonable, no reason to overreact here. So the
Speaker 1: Fed again only a forty four percent chance they're going
Speaker 1: to do a rate increase. Now the market likes that.
Speaker 1: The market liked it so much that as soon as
Speaker 1: they got that information, the futures jump. Nasdaq futures immediately
Speaker 1: went up one point one percent. S and T future
Speaker 1: is one up half a percent instantly, instantly on the
Speaker 1: news coming out. And the tenure treasury, which you talked about,
Speaker 1: the tenure treasury sell eight BIPs, eight bases points down
Speaker 1: the four point one six or the two year treasury
Speaker 1: I mean, and the ten year also went down to
Speaker 1: four point six to one immediately reaction lower treasury rates.
Speaker 1: Market bumped both Nasdaq and S and P across the board.
Speaker 1: The market loves this.
Speaker 2: Can discuss something else that I'm surprised I haven't heard
Speaker 2: from bet since the Treasury Secretary or President Trump that
Speaker 2: the US trade deficit contracted. It went to seventy three
Speaker 2: point three billion in June from seventy seven point six
Speaker 2: billion in May. That story just came out earlier this week.
Speaker 2: Everything about tariffs is about trade deficits, that somehow trade
Speaker 2: deficits are the end of civilization. I don't believe that
Speaker 2: they are. I believe it's a bad reason to implement
Speaker 2: tariffs as a concept. Does this trade deficit going down not?
Speaker 2: Does that have an effect on people, on how people
Speaker 2: see the market, manufacturing, futures, etc. No.
Speaker 1: When you say people, if you're talking about Wall Street
Speaker 1: and financial experts, No, because actually what you saw was
Speaker 1: a blip. The trade deficit has been growing since tariff
Speaker 1: institution has been stabilized, and this is exactly what I
Speaker 1: consider a good thing. Again, I'm a fan of trade deficits.
Speaker 1: I'm not against them because to cause foreign direct investment,
Speaker 1: we buy lots of cheap crap from overseas, and those
Speaker 1: dollars that we spend flow back into the United States
Speaker 1: in the form of investing in our country, which is
Speaker 1: how you grow your economy. So I've got lots of
Speaker 1: research on this. I'm a fan of these trade deficits,
Speaker 1: so I don't think he made a comment about it
Speaker 1: because it was just a blip. And if he here's
Speaker 1: the big deal if he were to bring up the topic, Tony,
Speaker 1: the secret between you and me. If he were to
Speaker 1: bring that topic up, then everyone would start talking about Wait,
Speaker 1: the trade deficits have been growing significantly since you put
Speaker 1: the terrorists in place, So I think he wants to
Speaker 1: avoid that topic altogether.
Speaker 2: Talking to doctor Matt Will, economists at the University of Indianapolis,
Speaker 2: let's continue the conversation if we would, if we can,
Speaker 2: because I have mentioned that there have been a couple
Speaker 2: of FED governors before this report came out today and
Speaker 2: the market is making their bet. A couple of FED
Speaker 2: governors have said it's time for a rate increase. The
Speaker 2: inflation is not down, we need a rate hike. Are
Speaker 2: are they correct? Does this report change them at all?
Speaker 1: It changes them? They're correct that inflation isn't gone, but
Speaker 1: their solution is wrong, and this report gives wash some
Speaker 1: time to adjust. And this is where it gets that
Speaker 1: complex assets thing again. They had a legitimate point, do
Speaker 1: you want to camp down inflation? And one of the
Speaker 1: tools you do it is to increase rates. Well, when
Speaker 1: you increase rates, that's going to decrease investment because money
Speaker 1: costs more. So that's a you know, one of the
Speaker 1: things Trump always argues against me. But there's another way
Speaker 1: to control inflation, and that's what Warsh is trying to do.
Speaker 1: He's slowly moving the ship. He Slowly's got this commission going.
Speaker 1: It's going to look at selling assets off the balance sheet.
Speaker 1: Good for him. So he's working on that, and this
Speaker 1: report gives him cover. It gives him more time to
Speaker 1: let his political technique, his little commission do its job,
Speaker 1: because he's going to be able to say to these
Speaker 1: three governors, Okay, hold on, can't you see look unemployment flat,
Speaker 1: no reason to increase rates. Everything's wonderful right now, people
Speaker 1: go back into your corner. So I think this buys
Speaker 1: him time to not worry about the whole rape situation
Speaker 1: while he gets his ducks in line to do a
Speaker 1: huge asset sale. And I think he's going to pull
Speaker 1: it off. I'm confident, I'm patient, and I think he's
Speaker 1: going to succeed.
Speaker 2: I want to see it happen, like I want to
Speaker 2: see how that plays out. But there were some other
Speaker 2: things that happen I want people to be aware of
Speaker 2: in the market, and you've been making mention of this.
Speaker 2: We've talked often about layoffs, right, a lot of layoffs
Speaker 2: in Tech Wall Sheet Journal, discussing the fact that the
Speaker 2: new data shows that job cuts are down forty one
Speaker 2: percent so far this year, which would make one believe that, Okay,
Speaker 2: we've done enough cutting. Let's actually see if our AI
Speaker 2: investments increased productivity. Maybe we just really need these people.
Speaker 2: There's only so much you can cut. We saw have
Speaker 2: a business to run, products to sell, et cetera. But
Speaker 2: within this is the recognition that software is getting the living,
Speaker 2: not kicked out of it. That when we talk all
Speaker 2: about the technology and AI transforming the economy and all
Speaker 2: that jazz software, I don't know if they mean software
Speaker 2: as a service or software in general is getting slapped around.
Speaker 2: What is happening in that in that sector?
Speaker 1: Well, I like what you said. You said productivity, and
Speaker 1: we've seen in fact, today's report had a two percent
Speaker 1: increase in productivity. So that is a side benefit at
Speaker 1: a consequence the main benefit of AI. So what's happening
Speaker 1: And you're right, it's SaaS as a service, software as
Speaker 1: a service, I should say. And what's happening is companies
Speaker 1: like work Day and Salesforce and Adobe, and we talked
Speaker 1: about the other day, IBM while sixty nine billion dollars
Speaker 1: in value in one single day because there's software got killed.
Speaker 1: So what's happening is AI is replacing software. I'll give
Speaker 1: you my own personal example. I've got to put together
Speaker 1: this schedule of classes for students. It takes forever to
Speaker 1: go through all the gyrations and the formulas, and I
Speaker 1: now have an AI that can do it in minutes
Speaker 1: compared todays. There's software on the market that does that. Well,
Speaker 1: the people that sell that software, they're not selling the software.
Speaker 1: I can just turn on my AI, tell it what
Speaker 1: I want, and it gives me the same output. That
Speaker 1: is what's happening to companies like Workday and Salesforce and
Speaker 1: Adobe and IBM. They're getting beaten down because people can
Speaker 1: go on their computer on their phone and get the
Speaker 1: same output quality that they were getting from a piece
Speaker 1: of software that costs them a fortune just two years ago.
Speaker 2: How does this play into overall tech sector? Are there
Speaker 2: companies that care about their software products or are they
Speaker 2: willing to sacrifice at all to the h on the
Speaker 2: altar of AI because it's the only thing that matters.
Speaker 1: You know what, I don't like this phrase, but I
Speaker 1: have to use it. It's a massive paradigm shift that phrase.
Speaker 2: You're right about that.
Speaker 1: You know again, I don't like using that phrase, but
Speaker 1: that's what's happening. It's what companies are doing. Is it's
Speaker 1: literally Shoepayer's creative destruction that you and I have talked
Speaker 1: about before. This whole software industry is being upended. It's
Speaker 1: not going to disappear, it's going to reformulate. So people
Speaker 1: companies that are willing to say, okay, we're going to
Speaker 1: look at this differently. So instead of hiring IBM to
Speaker 1: write some software, I'm going to hire a bunch of
Speaker 1: AI experts and they're going to develop prompts and custom
Speaker 1: gems and custom GPPs, and they're going to create these
Speaker 1: AI environment so that any one of my lower level
Speaker 1: employees can do the same thing that that software was
Speaker 1: doing before at a cheaper price. So they're really transforming
Speaker 1: their businesses away from reliance on software which is static.
Speaker 1: You've got to buy updates. You know, it has bugs. Yeah,
Speaker 1: AI is not perfect, but it can do the job
Speaker 1: much easier, quicker, and with less overhead. So companies are
Speaker 1: just transform they still have to do the same thing, Tony.
Speaker 1: You still got to edit your audio and your videos,
Speaker 1: and you've got to get them published on your various platforms. Well,
Speaker 1: now the AI is going to alleviate your need to
Speaker 1: buy a bunch of software to do that.
Speaker 2: Doctor Matt Well, economists at the University of Indianapolis. I
Speaker 2: appreciate you taking the time to be with us more
Speaker 2: to get to this is Tony Katz. Today is the
Speaker 2: ongoing war in Iran having an impact and negative impact
Speaker 2: upon the US economy.
Speaker 3: Oil energy prices are a little bit inflated, but we
Speaker 3: could say that way less that people expected. But we're
Speaker 3: mindful of the fact that gasoline prices are high, and
Speaker 3: we're making many steps to help reduce the stress of
Speaker 3: that for people.
Speaker 2: Can we come over here? The answer is yes. I
Speaker 2: mean I like Kevin Hassett a lot. National Economic Council Director,
Speaker 2: I like them a lot. But that's were saying a
Speaker 2: little bit, a bit of a thing. With the energy prices,
Speaker 2: we still have barrel price up today, Tony Katz. Tony
Speaker 2: Katz today. God's always great to be with you, Thanks
Speaker 2: for having me here. The number is not going anywhere
Speaker 2: because there's no deal with Iran. There's no deal with Iran.
Speaker 2: Iran wanted to have a deal where no US or
Speaker 2: Israeli tankers could go through the strait. Okay, okay, sure,
Speaker 2: sure that's that's that's fantastic. Then there's the story that
Speaker 2: a deal with a Ran over her moves may require
Speaker 2: a compromise from Trump. This is Newsmax with the article
Speaker 2: he divides the world into winners and losers, and this
Speaker 2: would make him a loser according to one expert, and
Speaker 2: that is that image would be intolerable for him. So
Speaker 2: this is about levels of control and whether or not
Speaker 2: the Iranian regime can still have any control the way
Speaker 2: the Iranians want to see it. They control one route,
Speaker 2: oman controls another route, and so therefore there's still the
Speaker 2: people who make the decisions on who goes through. The Iranians,
Speaker 2: in their entire methodology of negotiation is never ever, ever,
Speaker 2: ever relent. Never keep up the heartache, up, keep up
Speaker 2: the hassle. The other side relents because they just grow
Speaker 2: tired of it, and you win. That's their methodology. Which
Speaker 2: is why I have stated from the beginning the only
Speaker 2: answer is the end of the regime, because it's the
Speaker 2: only way anything can be done. And all I'm doing,
Speaker 2: I mean, I knew this before Trump put anything out
Speaker 2: on social media years ago. He put out on social media.
Speaker 2: Iran never won a war, never lost a negotiation. That's
Speaker 2: exactly what's happening here. And so if we want to
Speaker 2: talk about how President Trump looks like he lost every day,
Speaker 2: it's like, oh, we got We're gonna get to a
Speaker 2: deal soon soon. I think we could see something soon.
Speaker 2: And he was in the Oval yesterday talking about how
Speaker 2: we saw oil prices down to numbers no one thought
Speaker 2: they could be this loan and we'll get there again soon.
Speaker 2: You're telling me about what happened yesterday. I want to
Speaker 2: know what's gonna happen today and what's gonna happen tomorrow.
Speaker 2: Those oil prices are what I'm talking about. You can't
Speaker 2: sell well three months ago it was only a dollar
Speaker 2: eighty five a gallon, or two months ago it is
Speaker 2: only a dollar eighty five a gallon in Iowa. That
Speaker 2: doesn't move anybody. And every time you say well soon,
Speaker 2: well soon, as I have argued, I think he looks
Speaker 2: weak and who is advising him on this because he
Speaker 2: doesn't want to look that way. Ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever.
Speaker 2: If you want to argue, mister President, that you can
Speaker 2: string this out for forever, you plenty of patients. Great,
Speaker 2: that's a position of strength. But don't tell us a
Speaker 2: deal'll be soon. You know, when the Iranians come to
Speaker 2: us and they beg forgiveness and they surrender, we'll have
Speaker 2: a deal. Than just go wait for them to learn
Speaker 2: their lesson. We've got all the time in the world.
Speaker 2: It's all on them. That would be a position of strength.
Speaker 2: This is Tony Katz today. So the way this was
Speaker 2: described was unhinged, which is a term you see often.
Speaker 2: It was OutKick putting out a post, and then Fox
Speaker 2: News with Jones OutKick putting out the article Meghan Rapino
Speaker 2: goes on an unhinged rant. Unhinged usually means screaming and
Speaker 2: yelling and out of someone's mind. Well, I don't think
Speaker 2: Megan Rapino is screaming or yelling here. She's just out
Speaker 2: of her mind. Tony Katz. Tony Katz today is so
Speaker 2: good to be with you, guys. Find everything I do
Speaker 2: at Tony kats dot com. Don't forget to grab the
Speaker 2: videos on YouTube and rumble a Tony Katz go and
Speaker 2: subscribe right now. Meghan Rapino, the soccer player who is
Speaker 2: beyond a leftist? Who is I would argue in this
Speaker 2: bit of audio I'm going to share with you, is
Speaker 2: going to prove it hateful. We're talking about a hateful
Speaker 2: person here. I would also argue, dishonest person. She's the
Speaker 2: one who took the knee in solidarity with Colin Kaepernick
Speaker 2: for the national anthem. Colin Kaepernick didn't even do it
Speaker 2: in solidarity with Colin Kaepernick. He wanted attention. He got attention.
Speaker 2: Didn't get a job in the NFL, but he got attention.
Speaker 2: When Dave should said of Colin Kaepernick, he didn't need
Speaker 2: to do that. His belly was full, but he did
Speaker 2: that for us, No, he did not. Dave has it
Speaker 2: completely wrong. Don't tell me. I can't tell Dave Schappell
Speaker 2: he's got it wrong. When he's wrong, he's wrong when
Speaker 2: he's right. I've agreed many times when he has said
Speaker 2: something I haven't thought of, I said, doubt say, that's amazing.
Speaker 2: But he's wrong on this. He doesn't have it anywhere
Speaker 2: close and he can engage with me in all the
Speaker 2: race this and you don't understand that he wants. In
Speaker 2: the end, I do understand, He's just wrong. Colin Kaepernick
Speaker 2: did nothing for anyone else, and no one is stronger
Speaker 2: for it. He did not even take a stand by
Speaker 2: taking a knee. Not a conversation for another day. Meghan
Speaker 2: Rapino believes, in all of her radical leftism that men
Speaker 2: can be women and trans women which are men, can
Speaker 2: be in women's sports. And this is her argument against
Speaker 2: Sophie Cunningham of the Indiana Fever and Riley Gaines, the
Speaker 2: swimmer who took on the madness of was it Mia
Speaker 2: Thomas or whatever his name was, and the swimmers and
Speaker 2: really has made this a front and center issue as
Speaker 2: it should be. Again, I will state we're talking about
Speaker 2: a culture war here that has to be won. It
Speaker 2: is a culture war. I accept the terms. We win,
Speaker 2: they lose. That's that because it's far more than just
Speaker 2: about whether or not a man is in women's sports.
Speaker 2: It is about a society written large, of course it is.
Speaker 2: It's about the idea of normalcy. And can I tell
Speaker 2: you I have put out videos about this where I've
Speaker 2: discussed Sophie Cunningham being normal and the amount of people
Speaker 2: who come at me, Why in the world would you
Speaker 2: call it normal? What other people are not normal? Who
Speaker 2: are you to decide what normal is? Sophie Cunningham said,
Speaker 2: girls sports are for girls and if we can't call
Speaker 2: that normal, we can't call anything normal. And I think
Speaker 2: you understand that that's the objective. The objective is to
Speaker 2: end the concept of normalcy. Everything is up to debate,
Speaker 2: everything can be questioned, everything can be seen as okay
Speaker 2: or acceptable. That is a total lack of standards. And
Speaker 2: the answer is no, not going to have that society.
Speaker 2: And I get that it puts people like us on
Speaker 2: the ounce with these other people and they want to
Speaker 2: be very violent about it, and they control a lot
Speaker 2: of the institutions. And my answer is game on, let's
Speaker 2: go do this thing. It's a culture war. We win,
Speaker 2: they lose. That's that men are not women and men
Speaker 2: are not welcome in women's sports. Don't care if you
Speaker 2: like it, don't care if you're happy about it, don't
Speaker 2: care if you cry, and don't scream to me that
Speaker 2: it's going to lead to you committing suicide. Because with
Speaker 2: all due respect. A guy who has spent some time
Speaker 2: being suicidal myself doesn't make me an expert, not an
Speaker 2: expert in what makes someone suicidal. I can only tell
Speaker 2: you where I was in my twenties. Also at nine
Speaker 2: eight eight. That is the suicide prevention hotline. I never called.
Speaker 2: I never did that, but if you need to, you should.
Speaker 2: It gets better, it can, It takes work. I'm right here. Oh.
Speaker 2: My twenties were a miserable experience, and the depression took
Speaker 2: me while into my thirties until I started to figure
Speaker 2: out that first of all, I wasn't crazy. I was
Speaker 2: just doing things that could in no way provide me happiness.
Speaker 2: Why wasn't I changing the things that I was doing?
Speaker 2: Which is the whole point that I only speak from
Speaker 2: a personal experience here, I'll let an expert discuss from
Speaker 2: an expert's position. Happiness does not come from without, It
Speaker 2: only comes from within. So if somebody is miserable with
Speaker 2: who they are, me, lying to them is not going
Speaker 2: to help them. Lying will make me miserable. What I
Speaker 2: learned about myself is that I was lying all the time.
Speaker 2: They weren't big lives, they weren't at landishlies. I wasn't
Speaker 2: lying about a job, or I wasn't lying to my wife.
Speaker 2: I was lying about being unhappy. I was lying about
Speaker 2: everything being fine. There were these small little things and
Speaker 2: when I stopped, when I stopped lying, and there's a
Speaker 2: multiplicity of things. I won't get into everything. I swear
Speaker 2: to you, in an instant, it got better. It required
Speaker 2: more honesty. Honesty is certainly tough. What I found is
Speaker 2: it's a tough that I like. It's a tough that's
Speaker 2: good because it's clarifying. When you lie, you can't fix
Speaker 2: the thing. When you're honest, you can fix the thing,
Speaker 2: or at least come to accept the thing, whatever that
Speaker 2: thing in your head is or the thing I'm in
Speaker 2: front of you, et cetera. That's better. I've always said,
Speaker 2: you know, in my contract negotiations, for example, I don't understand.
Speaker 2: And this has happened in multiple companies. It's happened for years.
Speaker 2: You've dealt with this kind of stuff. These people who
Speaker 2: want to they're having a negotiation, they're still kind of
Speaker 2: playing a game, and well, where do you see yourself?
Speaker 1: And what do you want?
Speaker 2: Dude? You know what I provide? How much? Here's what
Speaker 2: I want boom. Or here's your offer, boom, here's my
Speaker 2: counter boom. Can we be done. We can finish this
Speaker 2: in ten minutes and then go have lunch. Don't you
Speaker 2: want to have lunch. I hear they have truffle fries.
Speaker 2: Let's go get some truffle fries. Who doesn't love some
Speaker 2: truffle fries. I love them, by the way. I'll take
Speaker 2: regular fries, sure, but if they're truffle fries, I'll be like,
Speaker 2: I'll give those a go, and if I don't like them,
Speaker 2: I'll get the regular fries. That's right, I'll order both
Speaker 2: and then see which one I want. That's the kind
Speaker 2: of man I am. Ten minutes, that's all I need.
Speaker 2: I don't need the game. Well, Tony, we really value you,
Speaker 2: but you have to understand the situation that we're in.
Speaker 2: How much I don't know about you. I don't need
Speaker 2: any of the rest. I don't need any of that
Speaker 2: of that kind of stuff. And I swear to you
Speaker 2: that the changing of this mindset has has further solidified this.
Speaker 2: I mean, I accept the fact that for some people
Speaker 2: it's jarring and off putting. I accept, but I also
Speaker 2: accept that that's part of the deal. But since in
Speaker 2: the overall it works for me so well, it's part
Speaker 2: of the deal. I accept this. It doesn't mean that
Speaker 2: there aren't moments where I'm unhappy, and I can talk
Speaker 2: to you about a million things where I have real
Speaker 2: issues with satisfaction right, But I don't think I'm so
Speaker 2: different in that regard from other people. But one of
Speaker 2: the things that I do know, going back to Megan Rapino,
Speaker 2: is that if I have to be told, or if
Speaker 2: I'm going to be told that I have to lie
Speaker 2: and call a man a woman, I'm going to go
Speaker 2: back to lying. And I can't do that because being
Speaker 2: a liar and lying to myself and lying to others
Speaker 2: made me miserable, made me depressed, and made me think
Speaker 2: about ending my own life. I'm not doing that for
Speaker 2: Megan Rapino. Screw you, honey, I don't. I refuse to
Speaker 2: care about your feelings more than I care about my feelings.
Speaker 2: You don't care about my feelings at all. I think
Speaker 2: my feelings matter. I don't think I should be rude
Speaker 2: to you, or rude to somebody else who's going through
Speaker 2: gendernysphor you and having this mental issue. I don't think
Speaker 2: I should be mean I think we should be considerate
Speaker 2: and kind and decent and loving. Of course I do,
Speaker 2: but don't ask me to lie to satisfy somebody else's lie.
Speaker 2: I'm not doing that. I won't be a part of that.
Speaker 2: And thus, from a personal perspective, I believe in this
Speaker 2: culture war. But if you were to take my perspective
Speaker 2: out of it, I believe in the culture war because
Speaker 2: there are young girls being told they have to take
Speaker 2: a backseat to boys, and the answer is no, never
Speaker 2: mind that the boy thinks they're a girl, and society
Speaker 2: wants us to buy in to this madness. I'm not
Speaker 2: buying into mental illness. I'm not buying into wholesale lying
Speaker 2: where everybody buys into the lie. Absolutely not a culture
Speaker 2: war worth fighting, and we have to win. Meghan Rappino
Speaker 2: is angry with Sophie Cunningham for saying the most normal
Speaker 2: thing in the world girl sports are for girls, Angry
Speaker 2: with Riley Gaines for being supportive of girls in girl
Speaker 2: sports and girls alone and fighting for it. And so
Speaker 2: she goes on this ranch. She's looking right into the
Speaker 2: camera doing a little podcast thing. They called it unhinged,
Speaker 2: and I'm like, no, just wrong. Maybe unhinged.
Speaker 4: Listen, I want to address the controversy that is happening
Speaker 4: right now around on trans women in sports. As you know,
Speaker 4: I've talked about this a lot and will continue to
Speaker 4: keep talking about this.
Speaker 2: I don't know Sophie.
Speaker 4: So I can only project what I see about her
Speaker 4: beliefs based on her actions and seeing a picture of
Speaker 4: her with Riley Gaines after the game told me everything
Speaker 4: I need to know about what's happening. Riley Gaines has
Speaker 4: made it her life's mission to exclude trans people from
Speaker 4: public life. She's directly tied to the Heritage Foundation, the
Speaker 4: authors of Project twenty twenty five and now twenty twenty six.
Speaker 2: We can stop there. That is nonsense, Project twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty Sex All this stuff was always ridiculous stuff.
Speaker 2: The Heritage Foundation has plenty of problems. Megan Rapino, that
Speaker 2: ain't it, but the exclusion of trans people. She's been
Speaker 2: clear and focused about keeping women only in women's sports.
Speaker 2: This is this is a lie, and it gets bigger.
Speaker 4: Who have now published a report that suggests that they
Speaker 4: want to repeal Title nine, the very piece of legislation
Speaker 4: that allowed athletes like Sophie and myself to compete in sports.
Speaker 4: Sophie has claimed both to love trans people and support
Speaker 4: Title nine, and this is where I think the accountability
Speaker 4: with having a major platform is extremely important. You can
Speaker 4: hear it even in the language being used, that the
Speaker 4: root of trans exclusion is to protect young girls from men.
Speaker 4: To be clear, I would love to have that conversation
Speaker 4: and it's much needed in this country. But it frames
Speaker 4: the conversation as if we're protecting young girls from men
Speaker 4: being in WNBA locker rooms not happening. It villainizes trans
Speaker 4: girls as if they're somehow magically older than their peers
Speaker 4: or are men, when in reality they are also young girls.
Speaker 2: No, they're not. That's a lie. She's just lying. She's
Speaker 2: flat out lying, as clear as can be. Also, if
Speaker 2: men can be in women's sports, here's a Megan Rappino,
Speaker 2: formerly of the US women's soccer team, talking about the
Speaker 2: importance of Title nine, which is about funding women's sports.
Speaker 2: If men can be in women's sports, there's no need
Speaker 2: for Title nine. Don't get angry with me at Riley Gaines.
Speaker 2: She's the one who's actually engaged in a protection of
Speaker 2: Title nine. You're the one who wants to destroy it.
Speaker 2: If Title nine is about women's sports and making sure
Speaker 2: that there's a proper funding and you want men to
Speaker 2: be in women's sports, there's no need for Title nine
Speaker 2: because there is no women's sports the end. But if
Speaker 2: you believe that men who say they're women are women,
Speaker 2: well then you're just a liar. You're just wrong. And
Speaker 2: that's where the culture war is kid and that's what
Speaker 2: we're fighting. That's it right there. So is she unhinged? No,
Speaker 2: she's just a liar.
Speaker 4: These laws are excluding kids, kids from playing youth sports.
Speaker 4: If we want to have a conversation around elite sports,
Speaker 4: there are effective policies that have been in place for
Speaker 4: many years that no one noticed because they worked. So
Speaker 4: if anybody is taking these talking points as legit or
Speaker 4: believing they're protecting young girls in sports, I just have
Speaker 4: to ask are you serious?
Speaker 2: Yes, we're all serious. The question is, Megan Rapino, why
Speaker 2: do you hate girls? We're talking about kids in sports.
Speaker 2: So you are in favor of children being mutilated in
Speaker 2: terms of these top surgeries and bottom surgeries. You're in
Speaker 2: favor of confusing children. You're in favor of lying to children.
Speaker 2: You're in favor of chemical castration of children. Where does
Speaker 2: it end for you? Are you serious? Can you imagine
Speaker 2: that that's how she actually thinks? It's an intellectual conversation?
Speaker 2: Are you serious? For real? Seriously? I don't know. You
Speaker 2: could add your own in there as well. That's not unhinged.
Speaker 2: Well maybe it's a little unhinged. But she is a liar,
Speaker 2: She is lying, and what she favors is downright dangerous.
Speaker 2: We have to win, they have to lose. Girls. Sports
Speaker 2: are for girls. This is Tony Katz today. Is Putin
Speaker 2: looking to test NATO? US intel reports say maybe Wall
Speaker 2: Street Journal with this report Tony Katz, Tony Katz today,
Speaker 2: Why would anybody put anything past Vladimir Putin? US intel
Speaker 2: fines putin contest nadoes resolved with limited incursion. I think
Speaker 2: Russia has bigger issues. They would do this to try
Speaker 2: and get the US to waste time, money, resources doing
Speaker 2: this on the behest of whom one would assume, China,
Speaker 2: and no one should ever leave that out of their thinking.
Speaker 2: But right now there's a story that Ukraine doesn't have
Speaker 2: any missiles left to fire at Russia. I don't know
Speaker 2: if that's one hundred percent sure. Not Again, all these
Speaker 2: stories you never know. But with the Ukraine working so
Speaker 2: well on the drone tech and the US working with
Speaker 2: them now on the drone tech, this has been bad
Speaker 2: stuff for Russia. Russia within a few years could engage
Speaker 2: some of these scenarios. Does Vladimir Putin have a few
Speaker 2: more years?
Speaker 1: There's all.
Speaker 2: This is one of those reports where you go, huh,
Speaker 2: I have questions. Find everything at Tony Kats dot com.
Speaker 2: I'll catch you Monday. Everyone, take care,