Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty and now he.
Speaker 1: Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3: We're taking them out by the thousands. We're being obstructed.
Speaker 3: It's very unfair what's happening because the court system is
Speaker 3: being it's very unfair. So we're getting them out. It's
Speaker 3: a very difficult thing with the courts because the courts
Speaker 3: have all of a sudden out of nowhere, they said,
Speaker 3: maybe you have to have trials, trials. We're going to
Speaker 3: have five million trials. Doesn't work. Doesn't work. You wouldn't
Speaker 3: have a country left. But hopefully the Supreme Court will
Speaker 3: save it. But what they've done is a very very
Speaker 3: serious thing.
Speaker 2: So how was how was the Deporter in chief, Barack Obama,
Speaker 2: who deported so many people? Did he get him out
Speaker 2: without having a trial for everybody? The new process that
Speaker 2: we're talking about now, was it?
Speaker 1: A lot of that was they were apprehended at the border. Okay,
Speaker 1: he did like the immediate quickie deportation, which is which
Speaker 1: is different for reasons. I mean, we could argue about
Speaker 1: whether it ought to be or not, but so those
Speaker 1: differences part of it.
Speaker 2: Biden opened up the border, let gazillions of the biggest
Speaker 2: migration in human history happen. People got well deep into
Speaker 2: the country for years. Then it's a different thing. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So within a certain geographic distance from the border,
Speaker 1: that rules change because you're not apprehended. Then you're living here.
Speaker 1: It's again, we could argue about whether that's appropriate or not,
Speaker 1: but that's the way it is.
Speaker 2: So then you qualify as a person in the United
Speaker 2: States as the Constitution.
Speaker 1: Called it, right exactly. You're not just caught sneaking across
Speaker 1: the border, your person living here under the jurisdiction. Blah
Speaker 1: blah blah. So anyway, Trump was explaining why they've gone
Speaker 1: with various alternative plans to get people out of the country,
Speaker 1: including self deportation. Next clip here with Michael.
Speaker 3: So, we're going to have a self deportation where they
Speaker 3: deport themselves out of our country, and we'll work with them,
Speaker 3: and we're going to try and if we think they're good.
Speaker 1: They have you know, the people we want in.
Speaker 3: Our country, they're going to come back into our country.
Speaker 1: Will give them a little easier route, and then the
Speaker 1: world's most glam Department of Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome,
Speaker 1: explaining further.
Speaker 4: We spend about seventeen thousand dollars arresting, detaining, and deporting
Speaker 4: an illegal alien right now today, If we have the
Speaker 4: opportunity to purchase a plane ticket and send someone home
Speaker 4: with a stipend like this, it saves US thousands and
Speaker 4: thousands of dollars, and it also is a much safer
Speaker 4: situation for officers and for those in communities.
Speaker 2: Yeah, somebody said it costs like forty five hundred dollars
Speaker 2: to send them out on average.
Speaker 1: This Stephen Miller, and I thought that was part of
Speaker 1: that same clip. But it doesn't matter. Stephen Miller pointed
Speaker 1: out that over the course of a lifetime or multiple years,
Speaker 1: with public benefits and education and the rest of it,
Speaker 1: could easily cost the American taxpayer a million dollars.
Speaker 2: Oh, no, doubt, No, I don't have any quid about that.
Speaker 2: But why does it even cost forty five hundred dollars
Speaker 2: on average? I could fly first class to anywhere in
Speaker 2: the world for forty five hundred dollars.
Speaker 1: You have to, you know, arrest them and hold them
Speaker 1: and feed them and get them to the airport. And
Speaker 1: blah blah blah. It's just labor costs, among other things,
Speaker 1: facilities costs. I think it's the process of getting them out,
Speaker 1: not just the physical you know, transportation of getting them
Speaker 1: from here to there. Yeah, so I thought that was
Speaker 1: that was interesting and the Supreme Court will rule on this.
Speaker 1: But the whole look, we'll buy a plane ticket, will
Speaker 1: give you a thousand dollars, fill out to paperwork. Maybe
Speaker 1: you can come back some day. It's not going to
Speaker 1: get everybody out, but if it helps, it helps well.
Speaker 2: On the Fox interview, I saw her with this morning
Speaker 2: looking fantastic. Probably shouldn't comment on that, that probably makes me misogynists,
Speaker 2: But yeah.
Speaker 1: I think that was wildly you know.
Speaker 2: Although on the other hand, she didn't put all that
Speaker 2: time and effort into that long hair to make it
Speaker 2: look like that to not have it be noticed. That's
Speaker 2: not an accident. It looks lip gloss. Yes, So me
Speaker 2: noticing it makes me a bad person, that's correct. Yes. Anyway,
Speaker 2: I think she said one person so far has taking
Speaker 2: us up on this, so one.
Speaker 1: Total, one ay longest journey, single step look it up. Huh.
Speaker 1: I kind of like this because the quotes from Trump
Speaker 1: forty one please from ABC News Michael.
Speaker 5: The Trump administration says they've deported one hundred and fifty
Speaker 5: thousand people since January, far short of the pace needed
Speaker 5: to remove the tens of millions the president promised. Trump
Speaker 5: today blaming required immigration hearings for slowing down his plan.
Speaker 3: The courts have all of a sudden, out of nowhere,
Speaker 3: they said, uh, maybe you have to have trials, trials.
Speaker 2: We're going to have five million trials.
Speaker 3: Doesn't work.
Speaker 1: Doesn't work. So this is a beautiful Oh it is.
Speaker 1: It's a beautiful example. It's like the best one ever
Speaker 1: of the Cloward Pivens strategy that was sixties radicals. You know,
Speaker 1: adhere to. The idea is you make the other side
Speaker 1: live up to their own rules. You insist even as
Speaker 1: you are breaking every rule you can think of. You
Speaker 1: constantly make the other side live up to their own
Speaker 1: rules and principles, and then you overload the system to
Speaker 1: the point that it breaks. This is the absolute classic
Speaker 1: example of that. Biden for whatever bizarro reasons or you know,
Speaker 1: he was so incoherent, maybe it was his progressive aids
Speaker 1: or pushing him to do this, but they let in
Speaker 1: so many people so quickly. The systems that exist to
Speaker 1: get people out again are completely overwhelmed. It's like, you know,
Speaker 1: after the tsunami in Japan, that giant flood that ruined
Speaker 1: the Fukushima reactor, that flood of immigrants is just it.
Speaker 1: We're drowning in it. And so then the left is saying, no, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: you have these principles, you have these procedures. You have
Speaker 1: to follow your principles. Having drowned the system.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a tough one. It is completely undoable. Five
Speaker 2: million trials, more like fifteen million to try to get
Speaker 2: people out. So yeah, it's I don't know what the
Speaker 2: answer is that this. Well there is an answer, and
Speaker 2: national reviews written about it, and it's been talked about
Speaker 2: for decades. It's been talking about our entire radio career.
Speaker 2: If you had Everify, where people couldn't hire you unless
Speaker 2: you could prove your you've got the paperwork in your ear,
Speaker 2: people would leave because you wouldn't be able to have
Speaker 2: a job.
Speaker 1: Somebody pointed out via email the other day that, well,
Speaker 1: you have to have employers that are willing to use
Speaker 1: the everify. Oh yeah, I tell you what if they
Speaker 1: don't to enforce it, we enforce the law on them too.
Speaker 1: Absolutely hammer them. You're running some sort of chicken killing
Speaker 1: plant in the middle of Iowa and you're not filling
Speaker 1: the filling out your paperwork, mining your p's and q's. Huh,
Speaker 1: we'll shut you down.
Speaker 2: What do you do for a living?
Speaker 1: I work at a chick and kill and I murdered
Speaker 1: chickens and hack them apart. That's what they do.
Speaker 2: It is.
Speaker 1: We're going to meat processing facility. You murder chickens and
Speaker 1: hack them apart. It's okay.
Speaker 2: I like chicken.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm a carnivore. Speaking of getting back to the
Speaker 1: questions and overwhelming the system and that sort of thing.
Speaker 2: Murdered chickens and act them apart.
Speaker 1: Eric track Suit see from a story Oregon frequent correspondent
Speaker 1: rights Dear Joe, kudos for your herculean and fair minded
Speaker 1: analysis of what Trump said in response to Kristen Welker's
Speaker 1: question over the weekend. But even given those numbers that
Speaker 1: you're talking about, don't you need to uphold the Constitution
Speaker 1: of the United States? As president? And he says the
Speaker 1: presidential three as follows. Eric says, I do solemnly swear
Speaker 1: or for him that I will faithfully execute the office
Speaker 1: of President of the United States, and I will, to
Speaker 1: the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the
Speaker 1: Constitution of the United States. Not to put too fine
Speaker 1: a point on it, I might suggest that having given
Speaker 1: this oath twice, President Trump could have come up with
Speaker 1: a better answer than I don't know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't. I don't know if he was trolling.
Speaker 2: It worked, I mean because it got lots of headlines,
Speaker 2: because he could have so easily said I'll uphold the Constitution.
Speaker 2: But as always, it needs to be interpreted as to
Speaker 2: what the Constitution means. It's always been that way it
Speaker 2: is today, and I think it means something different than
Speaker 2: you do.
Speaker 1: Eric, You're one hundred percent right. He could have come
Speaker 1: up with a better explanation, But that's Trump. It makes
Speaker 1: me insane because he does such a poor job of
Speaker 1: explaining what he's talking about so frequently. And as a
Speaker 1: guy who has criticized Trump. In fact, my last sentence
Speaker 1: criticized Trump, he meant exactly what Jack was saying. He meant,
Speaker 1: you are trying to, in the fashion of the Cloward
Speaker 1: pivot strategy, which I was just talking about, trying to
Speaker 1: hold me to your conception of the rules to prevent
Speaker 1: me from solving the problem you have caused. That is
Speaker 1: what he meant in his answer to the evil and
Speaker 1: disingenuous and horrific christin welker horrific. I'm being charitable. I
Speaker 1: emerged chickens and I hacked them into pieces.
Speaker 2: That's what I do.
Speaker 1: And I'm a wardsmith. And so he's trying to say, no,
Speaker 1: you're not going to trap me into agreeing with your
Speaker 1: premise that I have to adhere to the Constitution in
Speaker 1: the ways you have just set forth. But he's not
Speaker 1: a good enough litigator of his own point of view
Speaker 1: to express it like that, so he goes without, Oh, no,
Speaker 1: we'll have to see, we'll follow the Supreme Court, which
Speaker 1: is saying yes, but we've got great lawyers looking at it.
Speaker 1: So that answer was only unsatisfactory if A you're a
Speaker 1: stickler for Trump, you know, being a better communicator, or
Speaker 1: B you're wilfully misinterpreting what he was saying. I believe that, amen,
Speaker 1: hell ya.
Speaker 2: So what do you think is going to happen with
Speaker 2: the millions and millions of people that got in illegally
Speaker 2: that the vast majority of people in this country including Democrats,
Speaker 2: won't boot it out. They're gonna stay.
Speaker 1: Most of them, A lot of them are. Yeah. I
Speaker 1: think the question is how many can we get out
Speaker 1: and buy what procedures? And I don't know the answer
Speaker 1: to that question. That's one of the reasons that the
Speaker 1: radicals use the strategy I was describing, because it works
Speaker 1: real well.
Speaker 2: How about the majority end up staying.
Speaker 1: You end up, for instance, getting millions and millions and
Speaker 1: millions of people in the city of Chicago where I
Speaker 1: grew up, right outside the city, but dependent on the government.
Speaker 1: You've overloaded the system. Now all of those people will
Speaker 1: not eat or be able to medicate themselves. They don't
Speaker 1: even feed their own damn children. How are you going
Speaker 1: to reform the government now they've overwhelmed the system to
Speaker 1: break it. It works. It's evil and insidious and non American,
Speaker 1: but it works. So yeah, we're in a hell of
Speaker 1: spot right now. What the answer is I don't know.
Speaker 1: But Trump and company are working on it pretty hard.
Speaker 2: That's interesting. This story is not over.
Speaker 1: I think they are doing great, if somewhat controversial work.
Speaker 1: I hope they can stay on the right side of
Speaker 1: the law. On the other hand, the whole tariffs on
Speaker 1: movies is ludicrous. It's practically hilarious. It's impossible. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's intellectual property with no set value. If I made
Speaker 1: a movie in Ireland today and Francis Corsese made a
Speaker 1: movie in Ireland today, what are you gonna tear If
Speaker 1: from the same nobody's gonna see my day movie, it'd
Speaker 1: be garbage. Trust me, I don't know the first thing
Speaker 1: about me. Well, I think you need a story anyway.
Speaker 1: So it's just it's utterly unworkable. It's silly. Well, you'd
Speaker 1: have to tax the profits after Oh lord, you know
Speaker 1: nothing about Hollywood accounting. I could write, direct, star in,
Speaker 1: and film a movie and own ninety eight percent of
Speaker 1: it and the studio that owned two percent would find
Speaker 1: a way to get all of the profits. That is
Speaker 1: what makes Hollywood go round. So yeah, it's utterly unworkable.
Speaker 1: The Alcatraz thing is hilarious. It's just trolling.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's one hundred percent trolling. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1: But the immigration stuff, they're doing the work that needs
Speaker 1: to be done, and they're they're working against the real odds.
Speaker 1: Tough hearts.
Speaker 2: Yeah, AI coming for a lot of people's jobs. As
Speaker 2: we've talked about AI coming for our jobs. It looks
Speaker 2: like got a good example of that, among other thing.
Speaker 2: You stay here, do.
Speaker 1: You guys say this?
Speaker 6: Trump just shocked Hollywood by announcing on tariff on all
Speaker 6: movies and TV shows made in foreign lands. And be
Speaker 6: fun seeing the next Lord of the Rings filmed in
Speaker 6: bay on New Jersey.
Speaker 2: Hey, look at billb movies. We'll gonnoray got a mine merrita.
Speaker 2: So you mentioned this last segment, but the the one
Speaker 2: hundred percent tariff on foreign movies because we're gonna make
Speaker 2: a movie's American again. And John Voight, the one of
Speaker 2: the few conservative Hollywood types, came out yes day and said, yeah,
Speaker 2: he's gonna help lead the charge to make a movies
Speaker 2: American again. This is all is this? Does everybody know
Speaker 2: this is trolling? Or I mean, because this isn't gonna
Speaker 2: do anything?
Speaker 1: Not exactly Voight, by the way, who's eighty six years old.
Speaker 2: I didn't realize that he's almost like a bad age. Okay.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So the problem is there are a bunch of
Speaker 1: foreign countries that offer huge tax incentives to make the
Speaker 1: movies in their country instead of the United States. And
Speaker 1: so Trump says, well, we'll see about that we'll put
Speaker 1: huge tariffs on them, and the movie business is saying, like,
Speaker 1: thanks for your concern, but uh, how about tax incentives
Speaker 1: here in the US wouldn't be easier, and so that's
Speaker 1: probably the direction.
Speaker 2: Okay, okay, okay, Well I get that different topic also
Speaker 2: the entertainment world, where I.
Speaker 1: Don't know why you'd offer tax incentives to movies and
Speaker 1: not your local plumbing contractor. But we can discuss that
Speaker 1: another time.
Speaker 2: And that's a good point. Yesterday we were talking about
Speaker 2: AI Ai me continuing after I die from this cold
Speaker 2: that I've had for oh going on a month. No way,
Speaker 2: you can just take my voice in all the many
Speaker 2: words I've said over thirty years and AI can fashion
Speaker 2: it together and whatever it needs to say. Well, that
Speaker 2: is actually happening. So I was watching the NBA last night.
Speaker 2: I'm a big NBA fan. Great first round games last night,
Speaker 2: two upsets, fantastic stuff. But one of the most famous
Speaker 2: announcers in all of modern NBA history, Jim Fagan of NBC.
Speaker 2: He no longer is with us, but the NBA is
Speaker 2: using clips of him to create voiceovers to continue to
Speaker 2: have the voice of the nineties NBA today. Here's a clip.
Speaker 7: Now, the NBA on NBC is bad. See you this
Speaker 7: October for the NBA season tip off.
Speaker 2: I want munch of that. I don't know if a
Speaker 2: I had to play any role. They surely he said
Speaker 2: that like eight million times so, but either way, that's
Speaker 2: gonna be fairly common.
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, I'm sure they could craft him saying
Speaker 1: the Lakers. Well, the Lakers aren't taking on anybody except
Speaker 1: that the local golf course. But you know, whatever, the
Speaker 1: Nuts take on the Nuggets Tuesday Night winner take all?
Speaker 1: Sure you though? He's with God?
Speaker 2: Now, I was thinking of the great Don Pardo of
Speaker 2: Saturday Night Live, who did the voice of that for
Speaker 2: like the first forty seven years of their fifty year
Speaker 2: history or whatever. They could have him continue, and you know,
Speaker 2: with whatever new hosts are on there, that'll probably become
Speaker 2: a thing. Yeah, big deal in eliminate a handful of
Speaker 2: announcer jobs.
Speaker 1: But why not? Yeah, Well, they're talking in Movieland about
Speaker 1: having no actors eventually and just a CGI generated AI
Speaker 1: generated folks right actors on the screen.
Speaker 2: I don't know. We'll have to see it in action
Speaker 2: to see if we like it or not. I don't know,
Speaker 2: you're gonna tell us why Medicaid sucks at some point.
Speaker 1: That's a bit of a oversimplification, but although it's accurate,
Speaker 1: Yes it does. It's a scam. It's a giant scam.
Speaker 1: It goes around wearing the clothes of this is just
Speaker 1: a little government help for the poor to get the
Speaker 1: medical care they need. Poor pregnant women so their babies
Speaker 1: are healthy. That's all we're doing here. It's become this
Speaker 1: giant like money trading scam where the states exploit this
Speaker 1: you know, sub law of a sub rule of medicaid
Speaker 1: and get this much money in exchange, and if they
Speaker 1: use that money for this to get even more money,
Speaker 1: and it turns out healthy, lazy, grown men are getting
Speaker 1: way more than poor pregnant ladies.
Speaker 2: Really, Oh, I don't like that story. So we got
Speaker 2: a lot on the way to stay here. If you
Speaker 2: missed a segment, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 1: Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3: But it sort of represents something that's both horrible and
Speaker 3: beautiful and strong and miserable. Week It's got a lot
Speaker 3: of it's got a lot of qualities that are interesting,
Speaker 3: and I.
Speaker 1: Think they make a point.
Speaker 2: I think he's talking about me horrible, strong, miserable week
Speaker 2: and everyone knows it. Thank you very much. How you
Speaker 2: doing today, Good glad to hear it.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot here trying to figure out exactly
Speaker 1: how to corral all this information. I should have figured
Speaker 1: this out earlier, but I just came across something really
Speaker 1: interesting about how do you explain the current battle over
Speaker 1: Medicaid reform? Maybe you'll just start here, a couple of folks.
Speaker 2: I want to make sure everybody understands what's going on here.
Speaker 2: So when you turn sixty five, you get government healthcare.
Speaker 2: At that point, you get medical care, medical care sixty five.
Speaker 2: Medicaid is for the super poor, down and out right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, originally like one percent of the population, now much much, much,
Speaker 1: much more. So let me just lay this out and
Speaker 1: we'll stick with this through the weeks to come, in
Speaker 1: a way that I promise won't be boring and wonky.
Speaker 1: But it's such an enormous problem. The Wall Street Journal
Speaker 1: is at the editorial board. I was talking about how
Speaker 1: the Republicans are trying to reform Medicaid and they haven't
Speaker 1: even rolled out a draft Medicaid bill, but Democrats and
Speaker 1: the media allies are already pounded on them for snatching
Speaker 1: healthcare from millions of poor people, which just goes to
Speaker 1: show you, and you'll understand at the end of this
Speaker 1: how incredibly dishonest politics is. And Republicans would be making
Speaker 1: a terrible blunder to let that intimidate them from fixing
Speaker 1: the program, especially winding down free federal money for able
Speaker 1: bodied men on Medicaid, which is a huge part of it.
Speaker 1: So here's the one idea that they're working with, is
Speaker 1: imposing sanity on the way federal Medicaid money flows to
Speaker 1: the states. Here's the core dysfunction, writes the editorial Board.
Speaker 1: The Feds pick up roughly fifty to seventy seven percent
Speaker 1: of the tab, depending on the state, for pregnant women,
Speaker 1: the disabled, and other low income populations, so between half
Speaker 1: and three quarters. But the Feds pay ninety percent for
Speaker 1: prime age adults, all eligible under the Affordable Care Act,
Speaker 1: Obamacare's Medicaid expansion. You remember all the talk about the
Speaker 1: Medicaid expansion and the money to states, and most of
Speaker 1: us scratched our heads and weren't sure what to make
Speaker 1: of it. And blue states said yes, and red states
Speaker 1: said no. And we're accused of neglecting their citizens for saying.
Speaker 2: That, and critics said this was just an attempt to
Speaker 2: get universal health care going, which is what it looks like.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly, so again, the feds paid ninety percent. If
Speaker 1: I'm a thirty two year old male, smoking pot, living
Speaker 1: in my parents' basement, in porn, watching porn, refusing to work,
Speaker 1: collecting fake disability whatever.
Speaker 2: Probably got a one man bun of some sort, probably
Speaker 2: man bund.
Speaker 1: They pay ninety percent for my medicaid expansion the federal
Speaker 1: government does. The enhanced funding was a Democratic bribe debate
Speaker 1: states into expanding their programs under Obamacare. That it also
Speaker 1: contradicted the founding purpose of Medicaid, which was to help
Speaker 1: the poor. Now you you can't find voters who think
Speaker 1: the federal government should be giving their scarce healthy sources
Speaker 1: to working age men over poor children and pregnant women.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants that, But that's where we are because that's
Speaker 1: what the perverse financing formula encourages. The states can grab
Speaker 1: more federal dollars if they sign up more prime age adults.
Speaker 1: But if you try to reform this, Chuck Schumer is
Speaker 1: going to get on the steps of the Capitol and
Speaker 1: with crocodile tears in his eyes, talk about how you're
Speaker 1: trying to starve poor babies right. Twenty twenty two study
Speaker 1: from the Mercada Center looked at the spending growth patterns
Speaker 1: and states that took the expansion money compared with those
Speaker 1: that didn't. It found quote strong evidence in Medicaid expansion
Speaker 1: states of a shift of financial resources away from certain
Speaker 1: vulnerable and roly populations, the most notable being from low
Speaker 1: income children. And the GOP can make a really strong
Speaker 1: argument that fixing this bias in federal payments is shoring
Speaker 1: up the program to serve the vulnerable much better. It's
Speaker 1: not trying to take it away from them. It's the
Speaker 1: opposite about it, opposite of that. But you know how
Speaker 1: politics works. It's easy to scare people. It's way easier
Speaker 1: to scare them than to explain to them. There are
Speaker 1: ten states, including Florida and Texas, that have declined the
Speaker 1: federal government's Medicaid expansion bait, but just ten, and some
Speaker 1: are talking about part time work requirements if you're on medicaid,
Speaker 1: to go after improper payments and call it good, but
Speaker 1: you really have to restructure the entire thing. Obamacare was
Speaker 1: everything its critics said it was.
Speaker 2: But it's so galling, and I know it is for
Speaker 2: a lot of you. It's just, you know, you get
Speaker 2: up and you go to work in the idea that
Speaker 2: there's somebody out there suck it off your tax money
Speaker 2: with a smile on their face.
Speaker 1: It's just so galling. Yeah, I know, I know. I've
Speaker 1: got some more figures on on Medicaid's expansion, but I
Speaker 1: can't find them. It has to do with watching your pot,
Speaker 1: smoking your porn. No, no, no, no, we're past that part.
Speaker 1: It has to do with, oh damn it. I thought
Speaker 1: I had it handy. The extent to which Social Security
Speaker 1: is self supporting, and how much it's grown beyond the
Speaker 1: self supporting part. Self supporting meaning we're all kicking in money, right,
Speaker 1: we all know that, right, But it does get subs
Speaker 1: these from the federal government because we don't have enough
Speaker 1: workers for the old people, blah blahlah. And then you
Speaker 1: have Medicare, which has grown much much, much more in
Speaker 1: relation to how self supporting it is. And then you
Speaker 1: have Medicaid, which is exploded as a drag on the
Speaker 1: federal budget way beyond any you know, supporting self supporting
Speaker 1: nature it has. I will find those numbers for you
Speaker 1: that they're astonishing. But if you're talking about entitlement reform,
Speaker 1: you've got to start with Medicaid then move on to Medicare.
Speaker 1: But that's a different kettle of fish. So just you know,
Speaker 1: if there's a takeaway, enjoy the absolute dishonest demagoguery of
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party as they're claiming Republicans are trying to snatch,
Speaker 1: you know, infant formula out of the mouths of babes right.
Speaker 2: The whole health care thing, as we all know, it's
Speaker 2: just so because I'm been going to the doctor a
Speaker 2: fair amount being sick right now, and you know, I'm
Speaker 2: gonna get a bill for next week. I'll get a
Speaker 2: bill and it'll be eighty bucks or it'll be eight
Speaker 2: hundred bucks. I don't have any idea, and I don't
Speaker 2: have any idea if I actually have to pay it
Speaker 2: or not. And maybe I'll pay it or maybe I
Speaker 2: won't pay it, and hope it goes away, and maybe
Speaker 2: it does go away, because sometimes they do, or maybe
Speaker 2: then you get a letter saying we're gonna turn it
Speaker 2: over to collections. Because you don't have any idea if
Speaker 2: you're supposed to pay it or not. Just the whole
Speaker 2: thing is so random and I never have any I
Speaker 2: never know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, it's absolutely terrible. So I guess you know
Speaker 1: that's your takeaway. And I will find those stats if
Speaker 1: I possibly can and bring them to you because it's
Speaker 1: so revealing. Yes, discouraging. Quick word from our friends at
Speaker 1: Prize Picks. Oh my gosh. You like the sports, you
Speaker 1: think you know what you're talking about. Turn your sports
Speaker 1: predictions into cash money. All you have to do is
Speaker 1: pick two players, at least two players, and say, hey,
Speaker 1: the stats projection, they're gonna do better than that or
Speaker 1: worse than that. You can be two to six players.
Speaker 1: You can even combine sports. One basketball guy you think's
Speaker 1: gonna go off one baseball guy.
Speaker 2: Did you have more or less on Jalen Brunson meeting?
Speaker 2: What missing wide open layups to win the game last night?
Speaker 2: For the to Mix and Men? Did he get bailed
Speaker 2: out by the rest of the team? Otherwise he would
Speaker 2: have been the goat of goats in New York City.
Speaker 1: Prize Pick's the best way to get action on sports
Speaker 1: and more than thirty states, including California, Texas, and Georgia,
Speaker 1: withdrawals are fast, safe and scare some hitting your account
Speaker 1: as little as fifteen minutes. Fabulous. Download the prize picks
Speaker 1: at today. Use the coat Armstrong. They'll give you a
Speaker 1: fifty bucks instantly after you play just a five dollar
Speaker 1: lineup for the first time. That's the code Armstrong to
Speaker 1: get fifty dollars instantly after you play your first five
Speaker 1: dollars lineup. It's fun, seazy, simple prize picks. Run your game, right.
Speaker 2: I know you're I know you're a hater on the NBA.
Speaker 2: I like the NBA, but it is amazing how many.
Speaker 1: No no, no, no, no, no no, you slenderous bastard.
Speaker 1: I just don't care.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, it's a saving I don't know. But uh,
Speaker 2: it's amazing how many games come down to like the
Speaker 2: last minute. I mean, you know, you watch for three
Speaker 2: hours and then so many games it's just who can
Speaker 2: do their thing in the last minute, like all the
Speaker 2: time and it works.
Speaker 1: I was a kid and my dad said to me,
Speaker 1: there's no point in watching the first three quarters.
Speaker 2: Shoe you have you have to enjoy the play of
Speaker 2: it otherwise. It's right. Yeah, it's the reason I don't
Speaker 2: get soccer because I don't. I've never played soccer. I
Speaker 2: don't understand. I don't understand the play so because there's
Speaker 2: no scoring, I get nothing out of it. You have
Speaker 2: enjoy the playing of the NBA game because if you
Speaker 2: just want the result, well you might as well just
Speaker 2: watch the last minute, like your dad said.
Speaker 1: By the way, for the record, this will be a
Speaker 1: minority opinion. But I am a courageous man, Jack, and
Speaker 1: do not fear being in the minority. A playoff hockey
Speaker 1: makes playoff basketball look like middle school chess tournaments.
Speaker 2: Hockey. All right, about the hockey, Well, the few times
Speaker 2: I've ever gotten into hockey, it is fantastic. Why is
Speaker 2: that not caught on more? Is because it just doesn't
Speaker 2: translate to television as well.
Speaker 1: That's the half of it. The second half of it
Speaker 1: is enough people don't understand like the rules of it,
Speaker 1: and the rules are really super easy to understand. Give
Speaker 1: me five minutes, you'll enjoy hockey. Puck in the net, well,
Speaker 1: that's a lot of one of the that's really the
Speaker 1: key rule. Yes, there are some minor rules, though they
Speaker 1: confuse people. Why'd they just whistle the puck? And why
Speaker 1: are they stopping and going down to that end. Now
Speaker 1: people get confused, they get discouraged, And yes, if you
Speaker 1: don't know the game, it's a little harder to fire
Speaker 1: on TV live in a stadium hockey aspect, akill.
Speaker 2: I'm not a hockey fan, and I would say that
Speaker 2: in person hockey is the best. It's absolutely fantastic, and
Speaker 2: the crowds are fantastic too. All right, we got a
Speaker 2: lot more of a I was uplate at the met gala.
Speaker 2: That's why I've got this cough Medicashians and I wore
Speaker 2: my statue of Liberty outfit. And there's really something more
Speaker 2: in the way I stay here.
Speaker 8: And A wave flipped a suspected human smuggling boat carrying
Speaker 8: at least sixteen people off the California Coast. The boat
Speaker 8: washing ashore around six point thirty this morning on Tory
Speaker 8: Pine State Beach near San Diego.
Speaker 9: Authority say at least three people were killed. Four more
Speaker 9: rushed to the hospital. First responders searching for at least
Speaker 9: nine missing. The twelve foot vessel is called a Ponga boat.
Speaker 9: It's designed for fishing, but commonly used by smugglers slipping
Speaker 9: people past the border.
Speaker 2: WOW lot for ways to try to get people in
Speaker 2: that's how badly people want to come into the United States.
Speaker 2: Yet we have people marching in the streets about how
Speaker 2: awful it is to be here.
Speaker 1: Yes, I suggest a change of location.
Speaker 2: Perhaps I'm looking at our Twitter feed. A couple of
Speaker 2: things I wanted to mention. I retweeted the great James
Speaker 2: Lindsay yesterday, who had a happy birthday, shout out to
Speaker 2: Karl Marx with this funny meme. A quote from Karl Marx,
Speaker 2: who I guess it was his birthday yesterday. A quote
Speaker 2: from Karl Marx. I don't know if I'd ever heard
Speaker 2: this before. My object in life is to dethrone God
Speaker 2: and destroy capitalism. Lindsay's response was, don't care, get a job,
Speaker 2: no kidding.
Speaker 1: Speaking of memes and communists in California, this was one
Speaker 1: of my favorite. The French have given up on high
Speaker 1: speed rail in California. The French because there's too much bureaucracy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that should hurt, that should make us, that should
Speaker 2: make us go.
Speaker 1: They're gonna help build one in North Africa instead, saying
Speaker 1: the region was quote less politically dysfunctional. That is a quote.
Speaker 2: But my favorite thing I tweeted out over the weekend
Speaker 2: was the footage. If you've seen the footage of the
Speaker 2: humanoid robot losing its s there in the factory. Oh,
Speaker 2: you gotta go to our twitter feed and look that out.
Speaker 2: I tweeted, whoa, here's the future. A robot losing its ass.
Speaker 2: But the thing starts flailing around with its arms and legs,
Speaker 2: kicking and throwing, and everybody's running away from it. I mean,
Speaker 2: it would have taken your.
Speaker 1: Head off, oh even hit you.
Speaker 2: And some of the responses to the tweet were pretty
Speaker 2: funny and things that you have said very, very many times.
Speaker 2: It obviously was wanting to get our vital human juices,
Speaker 2: among other things. Keep a baseball hat handy when working
Speaker 2: with a robot. So this is the future. Thank god,
Speaker 2: I'm old you deal with it.
Speaker 1: Have a baseball hat, handy baseball bat.
Speaker 2: Oh I'm sorry if I said hat.
Speaker 1: Oh wow, it's flailing like a lunatic.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, it just lost its mind.
Speaker 1: It's human sized and like built of hard plastic. Or
Speaker 1: the scientists are trying desperately to corral it.
Speaker 2: That robot's request was denied for getting their birthday off,
Speaker 2: so it begins. Many people retweeted, which I agree.
Speaker 1: Yeah, kidding.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Oh, and then this this was a common theme
Speaker 2: now the debate. How about one hundred men versus a
Speaker 2: berserk robot.
Speaker 1: Well, the thing seem to be restrained on some sort
Speaker 1: of robot gallows, which helps but for now, but did
Speaker 1: the next time exactly? Yeah, if it was turned loose,
Speaker 1: plays we'd all be chopped up like little things that
Speaker 1: are chopped up.
Speaker 2: And it kind of reminds me. Elon did an interview
Speaker 2: the other day. I meant to play the audio of
Speaker 2: it where he said, this year they're going to release
Speaker 2: the fully self driving Tesla update where it can drive
Speaker 2: you know, autonomous sealy without you in it or not.
Speaker 2: And so we're getting closer and closer to a lot
Speaker 2: of these cars, robots, whatever, completely being on their own.
Speaker 2: And I just, I just I think there's gonna be
Speaker 2: I don't understand how it gets through lawsuit America, That's
Speaker 2: what I want to watch. I don't understand how you
Speaker 2: get past the first time one of those robots swings
Speaker 2: its arm, hits somebody in the head, and the company
Speaker 2: gets sued for five billion dollars and so nobody can
Speaker 2: even try it anymore. Right now, Are we gonna fix that?
Speaker 1: So literally, the Tesla is self driving if you're not
Speaker 1: in it, so it can come pick you up.
Speaker 2: That's what Elon said the other day. I don't believe
Speaker 2: it's gonna happen for a variety of reasons, including what
Speaker 2: I mean, how can we have a world where kids
Speaker 2: can't run on the playground if it ran yesterday because
Speaker 2: of the liability. But we're gonna have, you know, fully
Speaker 2: automated robots or cars driving around and the risks that
Speaker 2: come with I just don't see how the math works
Speaker 2: on that unless we redo our our tort system or something.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that is absolutely true. Does tech have good enough
Speaker 1: lobbyists to redo our horrific tort system here in the country.
Speaker 1: I don't know, Jack.
Speaker 9: If you'll take get that update on your Tesla, you
Speaker 9: got to sit in the back seat and just wave
Speaker 9: to people as you go down the highway, And.
Speaker 2: Oh, I would love it if it worked. I just
Speaker 2: don't think it's ready yet. The newer Tesla is like
Speaker 2: my my twenty four Cyberbeast. They moved to sonar, a
Speaker 2: sonar like thing from just the video cameras that they
Speaker 2: that I have on my twenty one Tesla, and I
Speaker 2: don't know if it's a step forward or backwards. A
Speaker 2: lot of people think it was a step backwards. It's
Speaker 2: weird looking at the screen. It looks like the sort
Speaker 2: of sonar thing you've seen in movies, with the wiggly
Speaker 2: lines and everything like that. Yeah, it's supposed to be, Yeah,
Speaker 2: supposed to be a step toward autonomous vehicles.
Speaker 1: But it's just it's just never gonna work.
Speaker 2: The first one crashes, you know, runs over an eight
Speaker 2: year old girl in a crosswalk, and I just feel
Speaker 2: like it's over and it'll never come back.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know. They have lobbyists, they have lawyers. Sir,
Speaker 1: there have been I hate the specificity of your example.
Speaker 1: I get why you did it, but there have been
Speaker 1: three hundred and four eight year old girls run over
Speaker 1: by human beings this year. So this we're saving many,
Speaker 1: many little girls. Sorry about this one. You know, they'll
Speaker 1: they'll make that argument.
Speaker 2: I think that's the most interesting angle of the whole thing.
Speaker 2: I don't understand how it works in modern I just
Speaker 2: read a great piece on Twitter, a breakdown of how
Speaker 2: that whole thing works with juries and judges and corporations,
Speaker 2: and then corporations have to go extra safe to try
Speaker 2: to protect themselves and then you can't have this and
Speaker 2: you can't have that, and the reactions.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's such a mess, as we all know. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's one of the great challenges to our economy. If
Speaker 1: we were to and this is you know, pipe dream,
Speaker 1: and if we were to get serious tort reform in
Speaker 1: this country, just make it much more reasonable like it
Speaker 1: was I don't know thirty years ago. The explosion in
Speaker 1: economic activity would stun you. It would take place in
Speaker 1: ways and places you never would have imagined.
Speaker 2: You can't have a real playground in your park because
Speaker 2: of the liability, but we're gonna have cars and robots
Speaker 2: going around on their own. It just I don't see
Speaker 2: how it fits together.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's probably worthwhile to mention once again. German
Speaker 1: insurance companies insisted to the German government moron's the Germans
Speaker 1: next hour. By the way, they've got a crazy situation
Speaker 1: going on politically right now, a couple of different crazy situations.
Speaker 1: But their insurance companies actually went to the government and said, look,
Speaker 1: you've made life so safe for German children. They have
Speaker 1: no idea what risk is. They have no idea how
Speaker 1: to figure out how much risk to take or how
Speaker 1: to manage it, and so they're getting in all sorts
Speaker 1: of crazy accidents and injuries because they're veal calves. You've
Speaker 1: got to let kids be kids. The insurance companies said that.
Speaker 2: On the other hand, if I'm working at some sort
Speaker 2: of factory and my boss says, we got this new robot. Robot,
Speaker 2: it's fantastic and it swings its arm and takes my
Speaker 2: eye out, a little compensation for it?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, granted, yeah, I Removing robots is very different
Speaker 1: from overleas safe playgrounds. Jack.
Speaker 2: You can't just say, well, robots being robots, what are
Speaker 2: you gonna do if Frank will take you? Yeah, well,
Speaker 2: we'll see, and maybe that's the future. We'll be surrounded
Speaker 2: by flailing robots losing their s. Good stuff next hour.
Speaker 1: If you can't hang around, grab it via podcast later
Speaker 1: on Armstrong and Getty on demand. You can subscribe or
Speaker 1: follow wherever you like to get podcasts Armstrong and Getty