Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can'tf I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Coblt podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (00:06):
It's the John Coblt Show. Lou Penrose sitting in for
John Coblt. This week, California State Senator Tony Strickland says
that maybe it's time to send the high speed rail
back to the voters now. The number is ninety billion dollars.
It will cost more than ninety billion dollars to build
a high speed rail from San Francisco to Palmdale, and.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
Authority officials tell me today they are confident the state
will meet that goal, but critics say the state would
be better off spending that money in much more needed areas.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
And one of those critics is California State Senator Tony Strickland,
who joins us on KFI. Senator, thanks so much for
coming on. I can't believe we're still talking about this.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
No, it's amazing, Lou. My dad always taught me as
a kid, if you dig a hole for yourself, the
best way they get out of that hole is to
stop digging. And it is unbelievable. This is the most
egregious public project, probably in world history, and passed it.
It's remind all the listeners it was passed and they
(01:05):
sold it to the people of California as a thirty
three billion dollar project that'll be done by twenty twenty
and it would go from Los Angeles to San Francisco.
Now the overall cost they said ninety billion, that was
just for a segment of it. The overall cost is
now over one hundred and twenty eight billion dollars and
done by two thousand and thirty eight and climbing. And
(01:25):
so I think it's about time that we pulled the
plug on the high speed rail. And at the very least,
I think we should pull the plug, but at the
very least we should put it back to the voters
because it's nowhere near what they agreed to. They agreed
San Francisco Los Angeles for a thirty three billion, and
now it's we're said to Bakersfield and another segment, Gilroy
(01:45):
the Palmdell for one hundred and twenty eight billion. I
would venture to say most of the supporters and most
of California's would not vote for a project that it's
that expensive. And to put that in perspective, that's more
expensive than an entire state budget was ten years ago
by far, and so we're talking about one project more
expensive than the whole state budget was just less than
(02:08):
ten years ago. And I think it's about timely we
pulled the plug on this project.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
Even you know, I was interested in these numbers.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
I mean, even at thirty three billion dollars, how many
people need to go because not that everybody is going
to go high speed rail from LA to San Francisco.
People will still fly Southwest, will still be there, and
not everybody is only in.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Some people that live in Fresno will go to San
Francisco and not.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Take the rail.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
So it never really penciled down to me as an
absolute necessity.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Yet everybody was so excited about or at least Democrats
were so.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Excited about it at the time, and it sounded flashy
and we're not even close and.
Speaker 4 (02:47):
Now at that time, yeah, at that time. I was
in Sacramelo twelve years ago when it passed, and it
was the last vote I did when I left the Senate,
and I said, at the time, they couldn't tell you
how much a ticket it would costs. These are basic
questions that you ask if you do any building project, well,
how much will it cost? They don't know how long
(03:08):
will it take to get from San Francisco to Los Angeles,
for example, it can be very high speed rail or
high speed if you have eleven stops, and so they
can't answer the basic questions. At that time, I said,
you know, my boy was like three or four years old,
and I said, when he goes to college, they're going
to have the train from the middle of nowhere in
the Central Valley to another part of the middle of nowhere,
(03:30):
the Central Valley when I jump off to college. Fast forward.
He's going to college next year. And it's proficient that
I said that. But the problem is we suddenly laid
down one track. I thought we'd be further along than
we are. We spent all this money on consultants and
everything else. In fact, the House Oversight Committee has now
launched an investigation investigating the people who run the high
(03:52):
speed rail about costs and ridership estimates. That they were misrepresented,
and so the oversights there. Homer from Kentucky is now
leading hearings, and you're going to get more information out
on how they've waste the money. The only thing high
Speed about this is the way in the high speed
they waste our taxpayer money.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Is there anything that can be done with the segments
that are already built?
Speaker 1 (04:17):
I mean, is there anything? How does the boat There's
a Valley feel about?
Speaker 4 (04:21):
I mean, most of the segments have not been built,
and I would argue that it would be better to
defund this. They're dedicating a billion dollars a year out
of the Captain's Great Fund. It's a little slush fund
that they have, and they're still running about a ten
billion dollars to thirteen billion dollar deficit moving forward. What
I would rather do is to spend that money and
(04:41):
lower our gas tax. But even if it's not lowering
the gas tax for of everybody in California, which is
my proposal, we have a lost several ready projects throughout
the state of California, whether in Southern California to get
ready for the Olympics and also the World Cup, or
in Northern California or Central California. We have a lot
of important investments in and infrastructure that we can invest in
(05:02):
that'll be better for the people of California than this
one project. This one project is as proposed to the
people in California will never be built, and everybody in
Sacramento knows it will never be built. And that's why
I'm pushing really hard to try to get it defunded.
And I would encourage our listeners call your state center,
call your assembly member, and say enough enough, stop wasting
(05:23):
our money on this high speed rail and let's move
that money to things that are more important for the
people of California. And also call Governor Newsom's office and say,
please pull the plug on this high speed rail. My
guess is whoever the next governor is will pull the
plug on this project if not done before.
Speaker 3 (05:42):
We're talking with California State Senator Tony Strickland Orange County
Coast of Orange County Ken is there any opportunity to
like auction off what it has been built and the
zoning rights for the easements, Maybe like a private company
can make some use out of.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
It, turn it into a.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
It's particulars, we should get something out of it.
Speaker 4 (06:06):
Well, maybe you use materials, but you're assuming that those
billions of dollars that we've spent went to materials. A
lot of it went to consulting and studies. In fact,
the state just passed another study for seven hundred thousand dollars.
This has been the most steady thing in the world.
At some point, you got to take action and build it.
And the problem is they've been studying it to death.
(06:27):
They've been buying up the different parts of the property,
and they really haven't laid down the track. So again,
I believe there's other projects that you can use, you know,
water projects. Uh, there's other highway projects throughout the state
of California that are shovel ready. They will be better
for Californians than this one project. And again, the cost
of this one project is more than the entire state
(06:48):
budget was this lested ten years ago. And I'm telling
you right now, we have too many needs in California,
from energy needs and to public safety. We didn't find
Proposition thirty six that pass seventy percent of the vote
in all fifty eight counties to keep California safe. You know,
those are the better things to spend money on and
(07:09):
lower our gas tax. You know, we need to make
sure California is more affordable. And again, money can be
better spent on a lot of other things that are
better than this one project. And we need to pull
the plug on this project.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
Senator Tony Strickland, thanks so much, always good to catch
up with you appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
Man, a boondoggle.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
If this isn't a boondoggle, what is the definition of
a boon doggle.
Speaker 4 (07:30):
Yeah. If your listeners want a way in, they could
go to my website. Just google Senator Tony Strickland District
thirty six and I would love to hear from I
would love to hear from your listeners.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
I appreciate it. Center, Senator Tony Strickland.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
All right, when we come back, we'll get into some
of the details of where this is and where it
could possibly go. And it really doesn't look like a
whole lot that can be done. I think the Senator
is quite correct. Most of the money was spent on
hearings and studies and consultants. Lou Penrod in for John
Coblt on the John Coblt Show on KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
Loup Penrose in for John Coblt this week, So twenty
thirty nine, that's the new date, and ninety billion dollars
for the two stops or the two runs that are
already been established for the high speed rail. So the
dreams of being somewhere in downtown LA or somewhere in
(08:32):
an area of Los Angeles that's accessible to us all
and then taking getting on this fast, lightning, fast, silver,
shiny train and being all comfortable, no homeless people, no weirdos,
no maniacs, sitting down with a cup of coffee and bleep,
and just like that you wind up in San Francisco
(08:54):
in time for lunch.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
That's the way it was sold. It always sounds more
magical than it ever is.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Then they were never able to make it happen, and
I knew that this was not going to be a
hit when as you heard Senator Tony Strickland just say, there,
they never were able to tell us what the ticket
would cost, which is.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
The only thing I want to know now I get it.
Speaker 3 (09:17):
A ticket to go on a high speed rail ride
from Los Angeles to San Francisco direct in twenty ten
is going to be different than twenty twenty, and it's
going to be different than twenty twenty five. But I
can adjust for inflation, like I can reasonably figure out
how much it's gonna cost me.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
And compare it to a flight.
Speaker 3 (09:42):
So I never figured out, like, if we don't know
how much it's going to cost for me to do it,
why would you want to build it.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
So Strickland says, we need to pull the plug on
the whole thing.
Speaker 6 (09:57):
We need to pull the plug on the high speed rail.
At the very least, let's send it back to the
voters and let them decide if they want to spend billions,
over one hundred billion dollars on.
Speaker 3 (10:09):
It's interesting how much money we waste in infrastructure in
the state. And the dream is that people will want
to be using public transportation. And I have lived in
southern California since nineteen ninety and it's always been a
car culture.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
People love to take their cars out, people love to
drive it. Just there's no way to subway underneath it.
There's no way to high speed rail over it.
Speaker 3 (10:35):
Nobody ever wants to put a monorail in the median,
Nobody ever wants a double deck the highway. The tall
roads never work out. It's always too expensive. It's it's
always been the same story.
Speaker 7 (10:52):
And it never goes anywhere.
Speaker 3 (10:54):
And now but people so badly want it to be
a way that it will never be that. They're able
to events voters, and they were able to get money
and start the project and make it sound so supersonic.
The train high speed trained to Las Vegas had a
far higher likelihood of ever happening, and that was private.
(11:16):
This is a private idea even that hasn't happened yet.
I don't know when it's ever going to happen. I
don't know where I have to drive to to park
my car. I think I have to go all the
way to Palmdale Ranchabukumonga. I don't know, but like it's
far away to start the journey. And again, this is
a private idea, and it was all kinds of problems
(11:38):
to get the necessary permits and all the environmental impact
reports and whatever lizard you were driving over out in
the desert. It was studied literally since I started working
for Members of Congress in two thousand and Here we
are at twenty twenty five, and we're not a whole lot.
(11:59):
Don't think we're a whole lot closer to a high
speed rail. And that's to Las Vegas, where people go.
People want to go every weekend. Every time I've ever
gone to Vegas, it's a jam on Sunday, it's a
jam on Friday. I guarantee you we're going into a
holiday weekend. And everybody says nobody's going to Vegas anymore,
But go out there and take a look at the
(12:20):
fifteen on Monday afternoon, going out there on Thursday. They're
all going somewhere near Vegas, that's for sure, if they're
not going to Vegas itself. So that would make sense
to put all those people, because you really don't need
your car in Vegas anyway. So of all places, it
makes sense to have a high speed rail to Las Vegas.
Speaker 7 (12:42):
And that's not built, and.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
I don't know how much that's gonna cost, and I
wouldn't do it every time because sometimes you go to
Vegas and then you find yourself going down to Lake
Havasu or going somewhere up like we need to be mobile.
So this whole concept doesn't work and never works for California.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
But people continue to try and try and try.
Speaker 7 (13:05):
High speed rail.
Speaker 8 (13:06):
Yes that the Chinese and the Japanese have, they use
it to move goods across their country. So a high
speed rail system that move goods would be better than
a high speed rail system that transported people. High speed
rail is a necessity to keep up with the Chinese.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Why do people always want to be like the Chinese?
Why do policymakers always want us to be like the
Japanese and the Chinese? Why do we have to model
our transportation society and transportation culture after what the Chinese do,
or frankly, what the Europeans do. I constantly hear this,
(13:47):
we should have high speed rail like they do in Japan.
Maybe the Japanese want to drive cars. Do you know
who really wants to not be like the Chinese? The Chinese.
You know what the Chinese people would rather do drive
a Buick, the hottest make of American car, The hottest
make of any car in China among the well to
(14:09):
do set.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Is an American Buick. Did you know that.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
Some nostalgia about the time that Buick was a hot
car and what was going on in Chinese culture at
the time. But for whatever reason, that make is a
big deal. So the Chinese don't want to be on
high speed rails, They don't want mass transportation.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
They all want want to be tooling around China and
a Buick.
Speaker 3 (14:36):
And yet I'm constantly told how we need to be
like other countries. We need to model infrastructure like they
do in Europe. Why in Europe so many people want
to drive cars so badly that so much of the
economies of some of these Western European countries are funded
(14:56):
by the outrageous taxes that.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
The government's place on automobile ownership.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Like it's it's actually it's a function of the of
the income to the treasuries of these countries. Because people
as soon as somebody actually starts making a good living
in Europe, the first thing they want to do is
buy themselves a car, because it's a huge luxury in
some of these Western European countries. So because the governments
(15:26):
there know that if you want to buy a car,
you must have some buckspal so they I mean, they
tax the hell out of you, and they tax the hell.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Out of you on insurance and automobile registration.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
But the individuals in Western Europe, they really want to
be like Americans.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
They want to drive a car.
Speaker 3 (15:44):
People in Switzerland, Italy, France, they want to be like
people in California.
Speaker 1 (15:48):
Hop in your car and go.
Speaker 3 (15:51):
I think there's nothing that equals freedom more than the
ability to hop in your car and go and instead
of widening the freeways, building more freeways, making the freeways better,
more lit less, potholes, better maintained.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
Right, if you want to do instead of doing an
ei R.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
An environmental impact report on the high speed rail going
through the Central Valley, why don't you study a new
way to blacktop a freeway, right, or some new product
for the roads in downtown Los Angeles, Like that should
(16:36):
be the study. How do we make the motorist in
Los Angeles more comfortable? How do we make the motorists
in Los Angeles safer? How do we move cars more quickly? Again,
that's for the limited years. I believe that we will
be driving our cars. I really think that the big
(16:57):
thing that's going to come that will change everything. And
I mean this changes everything, and it will have negative
effects too. But I think the self driving car puts
to bed the high speed rail forever. It eliminates mass
transit buses, all that stuff, those little trolleys to go
(17:18):
from where you park your car to get into LAX.
Those things will probably still exist. That actually does make sense.
What they're doing down there at LAX, I think makes
a little bit more sense.
Speaker 7 (17:27):
But they are going to have to figure.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Out a way to get self driving cars in and
out of there more efficiently, or let the self driving
cars design the roads for us.
Speaker 7 (17:37):
They seem to know a lot more, all.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
Right, when we come back speaking of cars, So, the
seven year car loan is now a thing. I remember
when most financial analysts and like personal finance consultants and
advisors on CNBC and on television telling you to pay
off your car within three years, don't buy a car
that you can't pay off in three years, and the
(18:00):
idea of a five year Carlan forty eight month Carlan,
they said, was devastating to your ability.
Speaker 7 (18:06):
To save and get ahead.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
Now the seven year car loans a thing.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
The seven year car Loan country culture in car Country,
Los Angeles.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
We'll talk about it next.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
Lou Penrose in for John Cobelt on KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 5 (18:20):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
The John Cobelt Show. Loup Penrose in for John Cobelt.
All this week. The high speed rail project now the
updated date and numbers ninety billion dollars twenty thirty nine,
and it's not going from La to San Francisco not
even close now. To put it in perspective, when originally passed,
(18:46):
it was supposed to cost thirty three billion dollars and
it would be ready to go from LA to San
Francisco in twenty twenty five years ago.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
So the prospect does not look good.
Speaker 3 (18:59):
It doesn't look like you're taking the high speed rail
to San Francisco anytime soon.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
You're gonna have to buy a car.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
New numbers out from Blueberg Bloomberg shows that either cars
are becoming too expensive or people's salaries are not keeping
up with inflation. Either way, they are now offering seven
year loans on a car.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
A seven year car loan.
Speaker 3 (19:28):
Now, the advocate say, it makes monthly payments manageable, but
it adds thousands of dollars to the total cost of
your car. So out of I mean just out of
the gate, I don't recommend you take out a seven
year car loan. I really don't recommend you take out
a five year car loan. Your car loan is keeping
(19:49):
you broke. Your car loan is way too expensive. The
average car payment on a car loan in Los Angeles today,
according to the industry experts, is five hundred and twenty
dollars a month, five hundred and that's average five hundred
and twenty dollars a month for a five year car loan.
(20:16):
That's too expensive. That's way too expensive. I don't know
how much you make, but you can't afford that. I mean,
I'm not going to.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
Go through the whole Susie Ormy. You know, rich dad,
poor dad, millionaire next door.
Speaker 4 (20:37):
Right.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
All these financial gurus out there who are all correct,
and you who don't follow them are wrong. But if
you had five hundred and twenty dollars a month extra
and you invested it over the years that you drove
a car to work, like from the ages of twenty
five to fifty five, you'd be looking at something along
(21:01):
the lines of you invested it in like an index
fund stock like stocks, you're looking at like four point
one million dollars. So you could if you could afford
a five hundred and twenty dollars a month average car payment,
then you could be a millionaire at the age of
(21:24):
fifty five in exchange. So I hope you like the
new car smell, but it just it doesn't make out
financial sense to finance a car over seven years. But
now more and more people are doing it, and they're
just factoring it in to their to their monthly life.
So a couple of things that's bad financial planning. You
(21:44):
can do that if you want. There's a lot of
bad financial planning that goes on out there. People finance boats,
they finance cars, they finance a lot of things.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
You can do whatever you want.
Speaker 3 (21:56):
There's plenty of resources out there to tell you what
you're doing is wrong and make the case for it,
and then you can choose to live a financially thoughtful
life or a financially foolish life.
Speaker 1 (22:08):
But it's not just foolishness in finance.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
There is an argument to be made that salaries have
just not kept up. I mean I see this all
the time in real estate in southern California.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
And I'm not a real estate expert.
Speaker 3 (22:27):
I did work for a lobbying firm that advocated on
behalf of multi family housing, so I know a thing
or two about the real estate market. And I mean,
you can't swing a dead cat in Los Angeles County
without hitting a realtor.
Speaker 1 (22:41):
So I know a lot of people in that business
and just you.
Speaker 3 (22:46):
Know, thoughtful conversation because people talk about the affordability of
Southern California all the time, and how expensive the housing
market is and how expensive it is. And I know
people that are young and they're looking for houses to
live in areas of San Diego, Oceanside, Orange County, areas
like to Leega in San Clemente, Mission Viejo and Orange County.
(23:09):
And then you get into like areas near your Belinda
and Diamond Bard. People trying to not have to drive
out to Corona every day of their lives to be
able to work in North Orange County, Buena Park, Anaheim,
and they just find themselves spending their lives on the
road in traffic because there's no rail, burning fuel in
(23:33):
a car that's costing them five hundred and twenty dollars
a month to drive. So the numbers on this are
pretty interesting and they're pretty striking.
Speaker 1 (23:44):
Now follow me on this. In nineteen eighty, the average salary.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
In Los Angeles was about twenty thousand dollars a year.
The average starter home in Los Angeles in nineteen eighty
about sixty thousand dollars a year. It's actually scot it's
more like seventy two. Its skewed up because of some
areas along the coast. But for the purposes of my math,
let's just do the twenty and sixty thing. So average
(24:13):
salary twenty thousand dollars a year, average first home, two
bedroom to bath, small yard, sixty thousand dollars a year.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
Three times.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
Now that's you know, hard to get a sixty thousand
dollars house on a twenty thousand dollars salary.
Speaker 1 (24:28):
But you could do it. What do you mean could?
People did it? Our parents did it. People did it.
They saved.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
There was a thing called saving for a house. There
are people who put off going on vacation because they
were saving for a house. Oh and so and so
going to be out the lake this this summer, and
no o, they're saving for a house. People used to
actually save for a house, and they would save a
down payment for a house.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
Which you could do if you were really focused.
Speaker 3 (24:52):
You could save a down payment on a sixty thousand
dollars house and calculate the house payments and if you
save a little more, the house payments will be less.
And the expectation is you weren't gonna be making twenty
thousand dollars.
Speaker 1 (25:03):
Your whole life. Your salary would.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
Go up, and people did it, and they did it
all across southern California. Now fast forward forty five years,
Like the average salary is sixty to seventy thousand dollars,
But let's stick with the sixty thousand dollars number just
for the purposes of my math. Sixty thousand dollars three
times as much the average starter home nine hundred thousand dollars.
(25:36):
There's no way, no chance you could save it. And
now they want twenty percent down. There's no way you're
gonna save a down payment on a nine hundred thousand
dollars house making sixty thousand dollars a year. I would argue,
if both you and your wife both made sixty thousand
dollars a year, you are you're not gonna save a
down payment.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
Making bringing in one hundred and twenty thousand.
Speaker 7 (25:57):
Dollars a year.
Speaker 3 (25:59):
I don't n one hundred thousand dollars house. So yeah,
things have gone up in value. Everything is going to
except for our salaries. So that little factor, I think
is something that we if we're gonna have like a
political bitch, that is that's it's one that is a
(26:20):
nonpartisan that is that all Republicans, Democrats and independents can
agree upon. I think that our wages having kept up
with our life compared to the past. Lou Penrose info
John Cobelt on The John Cobelt Show on KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 5 (26:37):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
The John Cobalt Show.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
Lou Penrose Info John coblt This week coming up following
the News at three, doctor Wendy Walsh.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
Will join us.
Speaker 3 (26:51):
Because everybody is talking about the decision Travis Kelce to
propose to Taylor Swift and apparently she said yes, and
my goodness, everybody stopped talking. Everybody at the White House
stopped talking. The White House was having a press conference.
(27:13):
President Trump was talking about all kinds of things. They
had to interrupt him and say, hey, we got to
get your reaction to the really big story.
Speaker 7 (27:19):
Well, I wish him a lot of love.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
Yeah, I think it's I think he said a great player.
Speaker 3 (27:26):
I think he's a great guy, and I think that
she's a terrific person.
Speaker 7 (27:30):
So I wish him a lot of love.
Speaker 3 (27:32):
The reaction on CNN, I think was my favorite. They
broke out into songs so colossal, breaking yours into CNN.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
It's a love story.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
And baby, she just said yes, pop.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
Eye con Taylor Swift and her football star boyfriend Travis
Kelsey are engaged.
Speaker 1 (27:49):
Oh my goodness. How about that?
Speaker 3 (27:52):
Well two years after they started dating, so following the
rules there of close.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
To eighteen months the need to be a ring and
a date.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Fox News broke briefly away from their continuing coverage of
the Trump Cabinet meeting to report that Taylor Swift was engaged.
Speaker 1 (28:09):
Travis Kelsey's also engaged. It's interesting who leads usually.
Speaker 7 (28:17):
Right, it's they're engaged.
Speaker 3 (28:22):
I mean, I guess that tells you that they think
Taylor Swift is the bigger name. Eighteen carrot diamond set
in a yellow gold setting, kind of an emerald cut setting.
They estimate the value of the ring at five hundred
and fifty thousand dollars. The Ralph Lauren dress that she's
(28:43):
wearing in the Instagram photo retails for four hundred dollars
and is sold out. Everybody wants to have that dress.
I don't know where the photo was taken. A lot
of flowers, but everybody's excited about Travis Kelsey and Taylor Swift. Hey, look,
I think this is great. I think these two are
(29:04):
a fit. They look good together. I don't know them.
It's interesting that so many are so happy for them
and none of us know who they are. Well, we've
not heard from Donna kelce We've not heard from Jason Kelcey.
Speaker 1 (29:19):
We've not heard from any of the Swift family.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
You would think we would wait before we got excited
for them. We'd wait to find out if their families are.
Speaker 7 (29:27):
Excited for them.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
I suspect they are all very happy, but it The
reaction has been nothing short of spectacular in both the
world of pop culture and sports. I mean, they broke
in live on ESPN two, So this crosses a lot
of platforms. Big, big, big, big story, and I think
(29:51):
it's great.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
The day.
Speaker 7 (29:56):
Is the same day that a study.
Speaker 3 (29:58):
Came out US Census Bureau reports that by the year
twenty thirty, half of US women between the ages of
twenty five and forty four will be single.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
And that's a milestone.
Speaker 3 (30:14):
And so that study came out earlier this morning, and
then sometime midday today, the announcement that Travis Kelcey and
Taylor Swift were engaged to be married.
Speaker 1 (30:24):
Now they're both thirty five. She turns thirty six in December.
Speaker 3 (30:28):
He turns thirty six in October, so they're very close
in age but both thirty five, and this could signal
a cultural change among young women to decide to actually
be more like Taylor and be married. So we'll talk
(30:48):
with doctor Wendy Walsh about that. I have so many
questions for doctor Wendy Walsh on this one.
Speaker 1 (30:53):
Why this one is so big for us?
Speaker 4 (30:56):
I get it.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
Royal weddings are big because money is no object.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
So you want to see what a money is no
object kind of wedding would look like, and royal weddings
fit that bill. I guess in America this is the
equivalent of a royal wedding, So we'll see.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
I would argue you could sell pay per view and
watch this wedding and make more money than any single thing.
Speaker 3 (31:24):
It's reportedly going to be Kelsey's last year for the
Kansas City Chiefs, so that would be let's see twelve seasons,
and this is her twelfth studio album, so they had
that going on. They look very happy. A lot of
people are panning the announcement. They say that it's it
(31:45):
wasn't as glamorous as it should be because they're just
in regular clothes. He's in white pants with a blue
golf shirt and she's in a four hundred dollar Ralph
Lauren dress.
Speaker 4 (31:55):
Not so.
Speaker 3 (31:57):
Casual, but I guess if your tailor swift, that's just
it's an ordinary day to dress up a big flower display.
Speaker 7 (32:05):
But they both look.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
Pretty happy, and this could mark a trend because they
all do what Taylor does. So if the Swifties all
want to do everything Taylor does now, maybe they'll reconsider marriage.
Since the trend was going in the opposite direction, young
women or women between the ages of twenty five and
forty four all leaning toward not the at least half
of them by twenty thirty would not be married and
(32:28):
not looking to get married.
Speaker 7 (32:29):
So this could change course. And also it is.
Speaker 3 (32:33):
Nice that now Taylor can write songs about being married
and have that.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
That's been her whole thing.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
The reason that she's so popular and the reason the
Aras tours were so good for her was because people
grew up.
Speaker 7 (32:47):
With her songs.
Speaker 3 (32:50):
And I mean, I'm not a Swiftie, but I understand
music being relatable. We've all had bands that write songs
where their lyrics lyrics fit our lives, and for so
many young people in America, men and women, these these
songs spoke to them.
Speaker 1 (33:07):
So good for her.
Speaker 3 (33:09):
And the aristour was a revisiting of those years, so
it was a bit nostalgic. And now she's into a
whole new chapter of her life, and I suspect she
will maintain that ability to communicate her thoughts and all
her experiences in song.
Speaker 7 (33:29):
So that'll be interesting to see.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
We'll know more about what's going on in that house
than we would if we if they did a podcast.
Lou Penrose if of John Coblt on The John Coblt
Show on KFI AM six forty live everywhere on the
iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
Hey, you've been listening to the John Cobalt Show podcast.
You can always hear the show live on KFI AM
six forty from one to four pm every Monday through Friday,
and of course anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.