Speaker 1: You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from kf I
Speaker 1: AM six forty. Let's go, we go it please Tale
Speaker 1: you can do it out guy, KI am six forty
Speaker 1: Bill Handle.
Speaker 2: It is a Monday morning, November third lot going on today.
Speaker 1: To say the least, what do we do have going on? Well?
Speaker 2: Saturday is thanksgrilling Neil and I are broadcasting his show
Speaker 2: from the Wild Fork Food Store and Lagoon and Miguel,
Speaker 2: So let's check that out and don't forget on a Friday,
Speaker 2: it's ask Handle anything and boy, there is some fun
Speaker 2: questions there. So if you want to ask Handle, let's
Speaker 2: be anything that's anything, go to the iHeartRadio app during
Speaker 2: the show and click on the Bill Handle show up
Speaker 2: right hand corner microphone and record your question, which I.
Speaker 1: Theoretically answer every Friday. I actually I do.
Speaker 2: Hey, today is a big day because today the Trump
Speaker 2: Administry is facing that deadline to report to the federal
Speaker 2: judges snap food stamp order. It's at noon today and
Speaker 2: it's requiring the administration to update the federal judge who
Speaker 2: last week ordered the Agriculture Department to disperse the SNAP
Speaker 2: funds Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds food stamps. Tens of
Speaker 2: millions of Americans are without their November SNAP benefits. Over
Speaker 2: forty million Americans need governmental help to eat. They are
Speaker 2: food insecure. The shame of it is this country, one
Speaker 2: of the wealthiest countries on the planet, is not feeding
Speaker 2: its own people. We have a system where people just
Speaker 2: don't eat, which I find insane. And what's happening. A
Speaker 2: story that came out of NBC News Texas, California stadium
Speaker 2: parking lots were jammed mass distribution sites where people were
Speaker 2: picking up the food bank stores. Food banks are out.
Speaker 2: If you look at the video, it's insane. So SNAP
Speaker 2: expected to run dry.
Speaker 1: It has.
Speaker 2: A lot of state governments are trying to fill in,
Speaker 2: but the president said any state that tries to fill
Speaker 2: in taking the place of SNAP, he will cut their money.
Speaker 1: I don't get that. One. Explain that to me.
Speaker 2: I mean, for those of you that are pro Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: and I understand there's lots of you, and you have
Speaker 2: good reasons to be that way. I mean, I understand
Speaker 2: your philosophy versus the other side, But explain the philosophy
Speaker 2: when states come in and spend their own money to
Speaker 2: feed people, the government says, then we're not going to
Speaker 2: give you money. We're not going to either reimburse which
Speaker 2: there are governmental programs, or we're going to make sure
Speaker 2: that it's miserable for you. And what it is, as
Speaker 2: Neil pointed out correctly, I think and handle on the news,
Speaker 2: is that these people are.
Speaker 1: Pawns of the government. And the argument is on both sides.
Speaker 2: You can say, of Democrats, it's more important for you
Speaker 2: to deal with the Obamacare, the extension of Obamacare versus
Speaker 2: feeding people.
Speaker 1: How dare you do that?
Speaker 2: Republicans are saying exactly the opposite. I mean, it is
Speaker 2: a political football that's going back and forth, ping pong ball. Actually,
Speaker 2: and so the judge of lawsuits were filed twenty five
Speaker 2: states filed lawsuits, I might add, saying that these funds
Speaker 2: have to be dispersed, and they have to be dispersed.
Speaker 1: Now. Now the government says, we don't have that money.
Speaker 2: It's eight billion dollars a year a month than all
Speaker 2: we have is five billion. And so the judge says,
Speaker 2: then release that five billion dollars. At least that's something.
Speaker 2: And interestingly enough, the Trump administration, this is what Donald
Speaker 2: Trump said, I think it was yesterday or Saturday. We
Speaker 2: have to wait until the courts figure this out before
Speaker 2: we release the money. Well, the problem is there's money
Speaker 2: in that account for emergencies for exactly this sort of thing,
Speaker 2: except the Trump administration is arguing legally that money is
Speaker 2: supposed to be reserved only for situations like natural disasters.
Speaker 2: Running out of STAP money is not a natural disaster.
Speaker 1: You could argue that.
Speaker 2: Now, on the other hand, where the Armed services got
Speaker 2: their paycheck where reserve money didn't exist, the government argued
Speaker 2: that that was okay. And here is the bottom line.
Speaker 2: It is more important to pay the military, which by
Speaker 2: the way, I think is hugely important. Don't misunderstand. Not
Speaker 2: to pay the military is insane as far as I'm concerned.
Speaker 2: But they're okay with people not having enough money to eat,
Speaker 2: which actually floors me.
Speaker 1: I mean, I just don't get it. I don't get
Speaker 1: any of this.
Speaker 2: I am just stunned for the government to say, well,
Speaker 2: we don't know if legally we're allowed to do this.
Speaker 1: Are you kidding?
Speaker 2: You know, it's interesting that the president thinks he has
Speaker 2: ultimate insane power on anything else. Wakes up in the morning,
Speaker 2: I'm going to tariff, I'm going to change the tariff.
Speaker 1: I'm going to do all this over here, and you go,
Speaker 1: but but Congress doesn't let you. It's not the law.
Speaker 1: I don't care what the law says. I am going
Speaker 1: to do this, except when it comes to food stamps.
Speaker 2: Now I have to figure out the judges and the
Speaker 2: courts have to tell me whether I have the ability
Speaker 2: to do this. And all you do is point to
Speaker 2: that provision emergency funding. Well, we don't know what emergency
Speaker 2: really means. You know, it's natural disaster, it's not Is
Speaker 2: it an earthquake? Is that a hurricane? You know, we
Speaker 2: really don't know. Emergency. Well, i'll tell you right now.
Speaker 2: Forty million people not getting enough to eat, in my opinion,
Speaker 2: is true emergency. Having people having kids not have breakfast
Speaker 2: this morning or tomorrow morning, that's an emergency. And even
Speaker 2: with states scrambling to try to get money into the
Speaker 2: system so the kids can eat, President comes down and says,
Speaker 2: if the states get involved.
Speaker 1: In doing this, I'm going to nail the states. I
Speaker 1: mean that one. I have a very hard time with.
Speaker 1: I really, do you know.
Speaker 2: I get the President arguing in terms of ice and
Speaker 2: the power he has to arrest or not arrest people,
Speaker 2: and to go forward. I get the argument there, I
Speaker 2: truly do. I don't get this argument. I do not
Speaker 2: get this argument with holding money so people don't have
Speaker 2: enough to eat.
Speaker 1: Explain that one to me, please.
Speaker 2: And the White House was asked for comment and it
Speaker 2: deferred to the Office of Management and Budget, which gave
Speaker 2: no comment.
Speaker 1: Hopefully this thing ends very very quickly.
Speaker 2: Unfortunately, right now the Republicans the Democrats are at an impasse,
Speaker 2: all right, and we are waiting for Petros to join
Speaker 2: us because Petros, of course one of the sports casters, extraordinary,
Speaker 2: probably one of the well I love Petros and he's
Speaker 2: on a five seven LA sports. Is he there yet
Speaker 2: as we're working, or I'm going to have to pretend
Speaker 2: I know what I'm talking about?
Speaker 3: Is there?
Speaker 1: Oh? There you are, Petros? Good morning, God Bell, how
Speaker 1: are you. I'm good, Thanks for joining us. I know
Speaker 1: you're kind of busy this morning.
Speaker 2: I have one question I want to ask you that
Speaker 2: you know I'm not the maven of sports. You and I, well,
Speaker 2: you have made a lot of fun with me over
Speaker 2: the years about how I know so little about it.
Speaker 2: But correct me if I'm wrong on this one. First
Speaker 2: of all, the game Saturday's game was the first full
Speaker 2: baseball game that I've watched on TV in probably fifty years.
Speaker 2: I am not a baseball you know. That's a long time.
Speaker 2: I've seen bits and pieces, but this was the whole game.
Speaker 2: Correct me if I'm wrong on this one. The Blue
Speaker 2: Jays outplayed the Dodgers throughout the entire series. They were
Speaker 2: just a better team. And yet of course they lost.
Speaker 2: And I'm saying because lightning in a bottle in a
Speaker 2: few instances, would you respond to that?
Speaker 3: Well, that was some narrative from some of the bitter
Speaker 3: Canadian types from the Toronto side of it after the game,
Speaker 3: because the Dodgers just did hit well throughout, I mean
Speaker 3: ever since the second half of that extra innings game
Speaker 3: all the way through. They just did not have the
Speaker 3: offense that they normally have. And you could say that
Speaker 3: the Blue Jays were stingy. You can say that the
Speaker 3: Blue Jays were tough. You could say that the Blue
Speaker 3: Jays were very stubborn as far as letting the Dodgers
Speaker 3: have any kind of pausetive feelings or big innings. But
Speaker 3: I don't know if you can say that the better
Speaker 3: team because they have it's a seven game series. You
Speaker 3: have to win four games, as you know, to win
Speaker 3: the championship. Of course, Dodgers won four. I mean they
Speaker 3: won four games.
Speaker 2: But let me ask you this, if you have how
Speaker 2: much much would you say, is well go back to
Speaker 2: lightning in a bottle where if you're looking at it
Speaker 2: big picture.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm wrong on this because Colono brought this up too.
Speaker 2: Hey, you win, you win, You can call it whatever
Speaker 2: you want, and you win, and that's the better team.
Speaker 2: But okay, yeah, that can be an argument, and certain
Speaker 2: less with the Jay say so in terms of magic moments,
Speaker 2: I've heard a game for the Ages series of the Ages.
Speaker 2: You want to comment on that, and do you buy that?
Speaker 3: Yeah? I think that As we've kind of watched this
Speaker 3: Dodger team over the years, our perspective has kind of
Speaker 3: been skewed because you see things, especially in the last
Speaker 3: couple of years, that you just don't see in baseball
Speaker 3: that no one's ever seen a guy like shohey Otani
Speaker 3: do what he's doing. And it's really hard to compare
Speaker 3: it to anything because it's not something that's really ever
Speaker 3: happened before. So that alone, that part of it alone
Speaker 3: is pretty astounding. And then the factor in what Yoshinobu
Speaker 3: Yamamoto did, which pitchers don't really do anymore, go on
Speaker 3: no rest and get out there and look ice cold
Speaker 3: even though they're in the toughest situation that you can
Speaker 3: imagine in sports. That's the kind of stuff that made
Speaker 3: it really special. And then an eighteen inning game, like
Speaker 3: you said, an extra innings game. I mean, I understand
Speaker 3: your perspective about the better team, but I work in
Speaker 3: football and deal with coaches after losses all the time,
Speaker 3: and everybody always says, well, if only this happened, if
Speaker 3: only this happened, But what about this this was? I mean,
Speaker 3: the margins are really, really, really said when you're trying
Speaker 3: for a championship, and we saw that very much throughout
Speaker 3: the series.
Speaker 2: When are they ever going to return to a player,
Speaker 2: a pitcher doing all nine innings. It's you know, when
Speaker 2: I started watching baseball. To give you an idea, the
Speaker 2: last time I actually watched the game, watched the game
Speaker 2: and went to a game and actually knew who the
Speaker 2: players were. It was Don Drysdale, Sandy Cofax. With the pitchers,
Speaker 2: Jim Gillian was first, Mary Wills was shortstop. Seriously, that's
Speaker 2: when I knew all the Dodgers. So it's been a
Speaker 2: couple of years, but Dodgers, but pitchers went went nine
Speaker 2: innings unless they were thrown out and just and just imploding.
Speaker 1: Why do they do that anymore?
Speaker 3: Well, this guy Yamamoto had a pension for doing it
Speaker 3: in Japan, and then all of a sudden he was
Speaker 3: able to do it this year. But it doesn't happen
Speaker 3: anymore because pitchers throw a lot harder all the time
Speaker 3: than they used to. They are always searching for something
Speaker 3: they call spin right now or velocity, and that leads
Speaker 3: to more tired arms. It leads to a lot more surgeries,
Speaker 3: Tommy John surgery. A lot of these guys have Tommy
Speaker 3: John surgery before their career even gets started, when they're young.
Speaker 3: And I think it's the pressure that we put on
Speaker 3: the arms of the pitcher playing year round that they
Speaker 3: play year round baseball, you know, in youth baseball now,
Speaker 3: and it tires them out, and everything's just become a
Speaker 3: lot more specialized. And the real answer, probably deep down,
Speaker 3: is that everybody's a lot softer than they used to be.
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, I'll buy that. And you know, short of
Speaker 2: either a no hitter or a perfect game. You're just
Speaker 2: not going to see a pitcher go all the way.
Speaker 2: Is that correct?
Speaker 3: You just well you see it, but it just happens
Speaker 3: a lot less, probably seventy five percent less the time
Speaker 3: that's used to Although maybe with the way that Y'a
Speaker 3: Mamoto performed in this World Series, maybe you'll see a
Speaker 3: trend go back to that. I mean, we've had baseball
Speaker 3: for over one hundred years, and trends kind of change
Speaker 3: and things kind of move, and we end up going
Speaker 3: back to a lot of stuff. It happens in football too.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 2: I know you're going to be really business warning covering
Speaker 2: what is happening. I just want to quickly remind you
Speaker 2: don't forget your can of gasoline and your matches, Okay,
Speaker 2: enjoy yourself.
Speaker 3: All right, Well I have that, and yeah I have that,
Speaker 3: and I also have my hairspray and my liners. So
Speaker 3: we're good.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're all good. Petros. Thanks for taking the time.
Speaker 3: Take take care anytime. Bill. I'm here for you whatever
Speaker 3: you want.
Speaker 1: I know, I love it, love having you on. I
Speaker 1: don't know why we don't do enough.
Speaker 3: Of that that Bill I've to handle on the news.
Speaker 3: I'll come back.
Speaker 1: I love it. I love it when you do.
Speaker 2: All right, so Petro so well, they'll be all day
Speaker 2: coverage today on AM five to seven LAS Sports, and
Speaker 2: obviously LA is celebrating in a very big, big way.
Speaker 2: I'm not because you know, eh, but this is a
Speaker 2: big deal. Okay, I wanna yeah, don't a big.
Speaker 1: Deal, bill it is, but you know it's a big deal.
Speaker 1: When the Lakers win, it's a big deal. I'm just
Speaker 1: not in. I'm just not into that stuff. To be fair,
Speaker 1: the Lakers haven't won much in a while, so no, when.
Speaker 2: The Lakers did win, that was another one when they
Speaker 2: were the dynasty that absolutely dominated the NBA or the
Speaker 2: LFB or the s whatever. Okay, Now, guess who's coming
Speaker 2: to town for the Prop fifty vote, and that is
Speaker 2: going to be the federal overseers.
Speaker 1: Federal election monitors are coming.
Speaker 2: The Department of Justice deploying election monitors to five California
Speaker 2: counties on election day.
Speaker 1: This was announced on.
Speaker 2: Friday, and why it's to quote insure transparency, ballot security,
Speaker 2: and compliance with federal law. Now, while that seems outrageous,
Speaker 2: doesn't it. Oh my god, look what the feds are doing.
Speaker 2: They're going to oversee our election by the way, it
Speaker 2: happens a whole lot, believe me. And this one is
Speaker 2: because the Republicans, actually the California Republican Party actually requested
Speaker 2: election monitors and the Feds are going, yeah, that'll work.
Speaker 2: We're going to come in and oversee the Prop fifty elections. Now,
Speaker 2: keep in mind that this is not lightning in a bottle.
Speaker 2: This is not an outlier. It happens all the time
Speaker 2: when federal judges order it, sometimes state judges, when requests
Speaker 2: are made and Department of Justice goes forward.
Speaker 1: It happens.
Speaker 2: But now it's simply the political the political backlash. I'll
Speaker 2: tell you what I have not heard yet, and I
Speaker 2: don't know whether we're going to hear it. Maybe it's
Speaker 2: good news. I have not heard from any Republican for
Speaker 2: source at this point saying if Prop fifty wins, it's
Speaker 2: a rigged election. I have not heard that. I guess
Speaker 2: that's good news, isn't it that we're staying away from
Speaker 2: that point? Now, what are they going to do?
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 2: What does observing mean? Does that mean overseeing the counting?
Speaker 2: Does that mean only day of the election. Again, we
Speaker 2: don't know at this point, and there have been just
Speaker 2: it's been a long track record of civil rights violations
Speaker 2: that the Department of Justice has been monitoring.
Speaker 1: Now here, it's not a civil rights violation.
Speaker 2: I think anybody's arguing that it's just the numbers, And
Speaker 2: why is it such a big deal that the FEDS
Speaker 2: want to oversee and make sure that this election is
Speaker 2: I guess legitimate. Is because the whole concept of Prop.
Speaker 2: Fifty is in response to what Texas did in in
Speaker 2: terms of redistricting at the request of President Trump. Texas
Speaker 2: was not going to redistrict until President Trump said to Texas, redistrict,
Speaker 2: take this legislature, state legislature, which is Republican, changed.
Speaker 1: The rules or not.
Speaker 2: In the case of Texas, it wasn't a rule change,
Speaker 2: it was changed your procedure, your policy to redistrict to
Speaker 2: create more Republican seats. And California is fighting that directly
Speaker 2: with Prop fifty, saying that it's rules now, that it's
Speaker 2: procedure that's in law has to be changed to enable
Speaker 2: California to do exactly what Texas did. It is become
Speaker 2: a political football. Now has it become a political football
Speaker 2: in terms of a fair election? I have not heard that.
Speaker 2: I have not heard that I think to the credit
Speaker 2: of everybody. I think it's just a legitimate political fight
Speaker 2: where the Republicans are arguing, we keep our redistricting plan
Speaker 2: exactly the same it is in law, and the Democrats
Speaker 2: are saying, wait a minute, we have to fight fire
Speaker 2: with fire if the Republicans are doing that in Texas
Speaker 2: and other Southern states, and we've got to do the
Speaker 2: same thing.
Speaker 1: Otherwise we've lost. Otherwise, it's guaranteed.
Speaker 2: That there will virtually always be a Republican majority because
Speaker 2: the way the restricting redistriction works is so horrific. The
Speaker 2: California model makes all the sense in the world. California
Speaker 2: has an independent commission because of the the history of jerrymandering.
Speaker 2: You ever seen jerry mannering is you look at a
Speaker 2: map of a district and it makes no sense whatsoever.
Speaker 2: It goes in and out, and the little peninsulas and
Speaker 2: a little seems like islands, and just I mean, it's horrible,
Speaker 2: and that has been going on forever. Well, we in
Speaker 2: Californias the proposition that says we're going to take that
Speaker 2: away from the legislature. We're going to give the redistricting
Speaker 2: based on the census. Every ten years. We're going to
Speaker 2: give this independent commission. They're going to be the ones
Speaker 2: to redistrict and they have to be looking at it objectively.
Speaker 2: There'll be Republicans on an equal number of Democrats, and
Speaker 2: there'll be other leaders and they'll I don't even know
Speaker 2: the makeup of that commission, but it's not political. Where
Speaker 2: in Texas and other states they don't have that independent
Speaker 2: commission so they can change the rules day and night.
Speaker 2: That's what Prop fifty is about, is taking away the
Speaker 2: independent commission, bringing back to the legislature which can fight
Speaker 2: fire with fire. And that's what's happening in Prop fifty
Speaker 2: and the Feds, I mean obviously the Republican, the Republican,
Speaker 2: the administration which is Republican. At President Trump specifically, who
Speaker 2: asked the redistricting to happen, he is not a big fan.
Speaker 1: Of what California is about to do.
Speaker 2: By the Prop fifty is going to pass, overwhelming him, Amlichino.
Speaker 2: Right now, it is going to happen. Okay, here is say,
Speaker 2: maybe a sign of the times. Car repossessions are at
Speaker 2: a fifteen year high. Does that mean there's an economic recession?
Speaker 2: Because usually you know it makes sense car repos are
Speaker 2: going up, up, up, which means the recession has to
Speaker 2: be on top of us, not.
Speaker 1: Necessarily, not necessarily.
Speaker 2: Two point two million cars already repossessed this year, expecting
Speaker 2: to be passed three million by the end of the year.
Speaker 2: And so here are the debates. Economists are debating like crazy,
Speaker 2: does this number of car repossessions and the fact that
Speaker 2: they are growing, does that signal deeper trouble for the economy.
Speaker 2: Alan Jen who's an economics professor at the University of
Speaker 2: San Diego, really looks into this and he says, some
Speaker 2: people think that we're headed for a recession. Other people
Speaker 2: think that will remain positive. But we're growing only very slowly.
Speaker 2: And he says, and this is his position, and rising
Speaker 2: repossessions do not necessarily mean a recession is coming. But
Speaker 2: all it does show is the economy is slowing. That
Speaker 2: means it's still growing, but it is slowing. And the
Speaker 2: slowing part of it mainly is jobs and wages. If
Speaker 2: people aren't getting raises or new jobs, they could be
Speaker 2: impacted in terms of their ability to make payments, particularly
Speaker 2: with the cost of other products increasing.
Speaker 1: YEA a little complicated here.
Speaker 2: There are a lot of moving pieces on this one,
Speaker 2: and of course the pandemic is involved like crazy, as
Speaker 2: it does with everything.
Speaker 1: So here's what's going on.
Speaker 2: Inflation is continuing to drive up price of housing and food.
Speaker 2: It was to a point a couple of years ago
Speaker 2: where wages were increasing at a greater rate than inflation.
Speaker 2: It is turned around again where inflation is beating wages
Speaker 2: and households because of the cost of food and housing
Speaker 2: are simply pushing car payments lower on the list of priority.
Speaker 1: You got to live someplace and you have to eat.
Speaker 2: Now getting a car, keeping a car, how do you
Speaker 2: go to work, Well, you can figure out another way
Speaker 2: of going to work. You can take the bus, you
Speaker 2: can carpool, you can do whatever. You can't carpool with
Speaker 2: food or housing. And so Jin traces us back to
Speaker 2: the pandemic where we had extra savings and we're spending
Speaker 2: big ticket items and not really paying attention to prices
Speaker 2: or interest rates. Because when you have a pile of
Speaker 2: money that you're saving, guess what, You're not going to
Speaker 2: really pay attention to the cost of things or the
Speaker 2: interest rates. So a lot of car buyers ended up underwater.
Speaker 2: I get this call all the time on handle on
Speaker 2: the law. My car has been totaled. But they tell
Speaker 2: me I owe more money than the car is worth.
Speaker 2: You bet you do. A lot of car buyers ended
Speaker 2: up underwater. So what happens is what do people do,
Speaker 2: and they don't care about their credit. They walk away
Speaker 2: from the car. Just walk away because at the end
Speaker 2: of all, at the end of it all, if the
Speaker 2: car is worth less than is worth less than the
Speaker 2: amount you owe, but you might as well walk away.
Speaker 1: And a lot of people are doing that.
Speaker 3: Today.
Speaker 2: The average price of a new car in the US
Speaker 2: is over fifty thousand dollars for the first time ever.
Speaker 2: I can you imagine the average price of a car
Speaker 2: is over fifty thousand dollars? I mean, you know, I
Speaker 2: just look at that and I go, that's almost impossible. Now,
Speaker 2: Jin said, it's too soon to tell whether the repos
Speaker 2: will continue to climb or to start to level off.
Speaker 2: But here is the main issue here, and here's the
Speaker 2: equation we have to look at very very careful. When
Speaker 2: Americans can't make payments on something as essential as a car,
Speaker 2: which is the way they get to work, this is
Speaker 2: a sure sign of financial stress. Is housing too expensive? Well,
Speaker 2: particularly here in southern California where housing is ridiculous, the
Speaker 2: cost of food that's going up and people are noticing that.
Speaker 2: And that's the and this may cost the Republicans during
Speaker 2: the mid terms because they won on the inflation issue,
Speaker 2: they won on the cost we are going to bring
Speaker 2: the cost down and have not been.
Speaker 1: Able to keep their word on that one through their fault.
Speaker 2: You know, there's so many issues that any one group
Speaker 2: that says I'm going to do this, I'm going to
Speaker 2: bring the cost down, that's not true. Or any one
Speaker 2: group that's blamed for cost going up, that's not true either.
Speaker 1: It's a lot more complicated than that.
Speaker 2: Now, during the past downturns, spikes in the car repos
Speaker 2: have coincided with job losses. And if you add AI
Speaker 2: and the unemployment figures that are hitting across the country
Speaker 2: and me talking more.
Speaker 1: A little bit more about AI later on.
Speaker 2: Kind of a fun topic with AI death threats that
Speaker 2: I enjoy death threats as a topic.
Speaker 1: It's just something that's fun.
Speaker 2: The point is is are we looking at an economy
Speaker 2: that is going down? I think we are, but the
Speaker 2: jury is out. KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 1: You've been listening to the Bill handle show.
Speaker 2: Catch my Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
Speaker 2: and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app