December 29, 2025 • 36 mins
The John Kobylt Show Hour 3 (12/29) - Lou Penrose fills in for John. Congressman Kevin Kiley comes on the show to talk about Gov. Gavin Newsom dropping his lawsuit regarding federal funding for CA's high speed rail. Lou says that the economy is doing well. What's this billionaire tax in California?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can't find AM six forty. You're listening to the John
Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Lou Penrose sitting in for John Cobelt this week. Good
to have you along with US. Congressman Kevin Kylie put
out a statement today and it reads Governor Newsom has
finally acknowledged reality. In seventeen years, no track has been laid,
while the projected cost has exploded to one hundred and
twenty eight billion dollars. I didn't know that's one twenty
(00:27):
eight now. The original project was under thirty. This is
an extraordinary failure of planning and accountability. Our federal transportation
dollars should be used when they actually can make a difference,
like fixing our roads and investing in regional and local
transit that Californians can depend on every day. It is
well pass time to wind this project down and redirect
(00:51):
funding away from a train system that may never be
built toward real transportation needs.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Congressman Kevin Kylee will join us here in a moment.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
But he's absolutely right. It's okay to admit it didn't work.
Like it's okay. The money's gone. There's no way to
get it back. A lot of people had jobs building
things that were part of a training system.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
But they're not even close. Like there aren't any rails.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
There are like pylons, And maybe we can do something
with the pylons, I don't know, maybe we can make
something clever out of them, or tournaments of standing art
art in public places. I don't know, the world's most
expensive art. And we'll just look at it as a
monument of why you don't let government do big things,
because government run by Democrats in California cannot do big things.
Speaker 3 (01:40):
So we need to stop.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
And we're not talking about a little bit of money.
We're talking about billions of dollars. I remember at the time,
and I don't remember when this was, but there was
a person that I think was the chief information officer
or the public information officer for the High Speed Rail
Authority was a lecturer at Chapman University in Orange down
(02:05):
in Orange County, and I was guest lecturing there for
his class in political science, and I got some time
talking with him and even he who was literally on
the High Speed roll Authority.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
So yeah, it's gonna take a lot longer than we thought.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
Congressman Kevin Kylie joins us, Well, Congressman, I guess the
first question is were you surprised that the governor has
withdrawn the lawsuit?
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Well, I guess I'm not surprised in the sense of
the lawsuit clearly lacked Barritt and it was a total stunt.
And so that's kind of how Newsome operates. Sometimes he
does something purely to put out a press release or
to say he's doing something, or to look like he's
you know, fighting back in some way, even though he
knows it's not going anywhere. So you know, he always
(02:53):
counts on the initial press release getting more attention than
his decision to back down. We've seen many, many examples
of that. So yeah, in that sense, I'm not surprised. Obviously,
the left that had no Barritt news you know, the
Newsom has asked for billions of dollars in funding for
a project that has resulted in absolutely nothing getting built.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
I think you're right by the way, the governing by
headline is really kind of his mo and that's why
it's important to have you on on days like today,
because he will get the headline we're suing the Trump
administration by golly, and we might make sure the headline
is just as big. That the lawsuit had to be
withdrawn because it was just ridiculous.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
Where where are we with respect to the federal dollars?
Speaker 4 (03:37):
Though?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
What was he asking for that was different than the
money that's already been allocated for the original high speed
real project.
Speaker 4 (03:45):
Well, he was asking that the funds that we are
cutting off and that we are calling back will instead
continue to be used for high speed rail. So we
did this compliance review starting towards the ginning of the year.
I had introduced a bill to cut off all federal funding,
but I was with Sean Duffy when we announced this
actually Union station there in La. So the Department of
(04:09):
Transportation then did this compliance review and found that the
state was not in compliance with the terms of the
federal grant, namely because they had not built a train
and the grant was to build a train. And so
the DOOT audit found that there was no viable path
forward for the project, and so at that point the
federal funds will cut off and do some brands of
court and said no, no, we want to keep that money.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
So one hundred and twenty eight billion dollars spent already
not one track, laid a bunch of pylons out in
the middle of nowhere.
Speaker 3 (04:39):
As a taxpayer, people.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Are furious about this, But also it's hard, right when
you work in Washington. Billions and billions and hundreds of
billions is a different phenomenon than to the average person
who thinks one hundred and twenty eight billion dollars that's
an awful lot of money, no matter how you slice it.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Is there anything recoverable going forward?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Is there any way we can get something out of
this in exchange for that money? Can we can we
lease it out or privatize it and sell it off
or anything.
Speaker 4 (05:12):
Yeah, So I think there are three things. Like Number
one is just to make sure that we don't spend
one hundred and twenty billion dollars more. That's right now,
that's good to.
Speaker 3 (05:19):
Stop right, Stop digging where you're in the hole.
Speaker 4 (05:21):
Stop digging, it's right, exactly, Stop digging. Let's use that
money where it's needed on our roads and so forth.
Number two, the funds that have been awarded but not
yet deployed can be caught back. So that's what we're doing.
It's about four point three billion dollars or so. That
that we're going to be actually getting back and we're
arguing that this should stay with California, but it should
(05:43):
be used on things like that, like our roads and
where it's actually needed. And then yes, I think for
that which has been you know, worked on already. Wherever
you can salvage have some salvage value, then obviously you
want to pursue that in whatever way you can. But
the most important thing is that we don't continue throwing
good money after that.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
Yeah, I think that's right.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Any word from the governor's office, from his press office,
a reaction to this at all.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
I don't know have they issued anything.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
I haven't seen.
Speaker 4 (06:13):
Anything anything, which is like you know what they usually do, right,
They do the press release saying we're doing something, and
then radio silence when they you know, have to admit
it was all this bluster.
Speaker 3 (06:25):
Congressman Kevin Kyley, always good to check to check in
with you.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
I appreciate you giving us opportunity to amplify this end
of the story. And as we as you say, we
continue on just patching up write the mistake that was
made by making sure we don't throw any more good
money after bad and the money that's clawed back goes
to use to something we actually drive on every day.
Speaker 4 (06:44):
But I appreciate you absolutely. Yeah, we'll keep fighting this
and you know, hopefully this project will will wind down
very soon.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Congressman Kevin Kylie, all right, So when we come back,
we have to talk about this a little bit. There
is apprehension to ever admit error in politics, and I
understand that because why would you go in front of
a microphone if you're an elected official and admit you're wrong.
You just go radio silence on it. But it really
isn't good for the taxpayer. And it is okay to
(07:16):
come up with an idea, an expensive one, win the argument,
win the vote, get the you know, get the project
going with the support of the people, and then realizing
that it isn't working, and then course correct like that
can be done too.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
It happens in business all the time.
Speaker 2 (07:31):
It's called failing forward, and here it just seems that
the governor's office and Democrats in California.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
Refuse to fail forward on this.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
High speed rail project. We'll talk about it a little
bit coming up next. Loup Penrose in for John Cobelt
on The John coblt Show on KFI Am six forty
Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 5 (07:51):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Loup Penrose for John Cobelt. Good to have you along
with us. I'll be in for John Cobelt all this week.
Speaker 6 (08:05):
Hey Lou, love your show.
Speaker 7 (08:07):
You know, in the world I grew up in, somebody
would be going to jail if every penny of those
billions of dollars by the governor, by the state, legislation,
by somebody, by some nonprofit, if every penny cannot be
accounted for, somebody would be going to jail in the
America I grew up in.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
Yeah, I appreciate the call, and I understand your frustration.
This is why you can't have.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Democrats, socialists or progressives in charge of big projects because
in the world you grew up in and the world
you just described, in the real world, it wouldn't have
happened this way because the people that are funding the
project would be holding every step accountable. But when it's
government money, what's the difference. So let's think about it.
(08:55):
If you're in charge of the concrete building the high
speed rail and you've got a contract to build these pylons,
and you're thinking, well, wait a minute, though you don't
have the money for the rail yet, and you don't
even know what city we're going, doesn't matter.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
Pour the concrete. You'll get paid.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
You're gonna pour the concrete and collect your check and
get paid. You're gonna hire your your workers and pour
the concrete and get paid right the same go.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
And that's every part of the project. Everybody.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
The designers, they get paid well, like the architects or
the engineers or whoever designs a rail system. They're gonna
submit the blueprints and the renderings and send you an
invoice and it's government money, so pay them. Like no
one says, well, we're not doing very well. This is
not on budget, and now it's smaller and it won't
be efficient. Like no one's there to stop it and
(09:46):
say let's stop doing this. Because everybody's advocating for their
own advocacy groups, the unions that hire the contractors, they're advocating. Now, no,
let's get going. Come on, we were promised to rail project.
Let's go, let's go, let's go. Let's get these people
to work and their thing. As long as a California
union worker got paid. It's to the good, even though
(10:07):
the work that he did is for naught. He got paid, right,
same goes for the people that are advocating for the
planning and the people that are advocating for the designs,
and the people that are advocating for the publicity, and
the people hired to advocate to go to Democrats in
DC and lobby for more money for the project, and
(10:27):
the environmentalists that are out there saying this is going
to be so great, this will take so many cars
off the road, we'll all be able to.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
Breathe a lot cleaner.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Like they're all hired and they're all doing their job
and they're all getting paid. And the environmentalists that are
excited that when the rail is there, which it never
will be, they're excited that there'll be fewer cars on
the road, and they don't talk to the spent guys
who are just excited to be done with the day.
All right, put on the forms, concrete strial, let's go
(10:54):
to the next one.
Speaker 3 (10:56):
They're not working together to see this project go forward.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
Because it's not in their interest to do it, because.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
It's government money.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
And that's why we need to disabuse ourselves of this
idea that government can do things well.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
It can't.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
If it could have been done well, private people would
have done it with private dollars because they would have
been profit involved.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
And this brings me to the next thing I want
to talk about a little bit. This is like the.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
Third weekend in a row that the Los Angeles Times
in the opinion section on Sunday had a piece by
some idiot that is trying to make the case that
Trump's economic numbers that came out this week are not good.
Like Trump had three great weeks in a row.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
I don't even know if they were a week apart,
but there were three great numbers.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
There was inflation that came down much lower than everyone
thought it was going to be, and then the gross
domestic product the GDP was way higher than it was
expected to be. It was supposed to be three point three,
came in four point three. Now, I don't want to
bore you with economics, but I know a thing or
two about this.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
A one point increase.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
In the gross domestic product of the United States is
a lot of money.
Speaker 3 (12:12):
What are we north of twenty six trillion.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Dollars in GDP? So if it grew by three point
three percent. I'd be impressed, but it grew by four
point three percent and they were expecting three point three percent,
so that's not small.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
And then there are labor jobless claims, which is the.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Amount of people filing for unemployment insurance benefits that went down,
so more people are at work. So the economy's working,
the plan is working. And of course, if you're a
trump pater, you hate that. And if you're an economist
and a Trump pater, you write a letter to the
Los Angeles Times or write an essay explaining that, yeah,
(12:52):
it's good normally, but right now it's not good.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
And so this is the latest one from Sunday. Whose
economy is it? More than ever, it belongs.
Speaker 3 (13:01):
To the rich.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
According to Bank of America analysts, since this spring, spending
by the highest earning third of Americans has been soaring,
while the middle and lower income households have stagnated. So
they're trying to make the case that yeah, I mean,
the economy's good, but only for people that have money.
People that have no money, that are living paycheck to paycheck,
(13:23):
the economy is not doing anything for them. And of
course this is spin because if you're living paycheck to paycheck.
It doesn't matter if Trump is president and it's the
best economy in a generation, or Biden's president and inflation
is at nine percent, It doesn't matter. Like your life
is not impacted at all. You're in Nowhere's Bill, like
nothing's happening. You need to course correct yourself. It doesn't
(13:46):
matter who's president. It doesn't matter if it's a Republican
or a Democrat.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
It doesn't matter what.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
The political philosophy of the day of that Republican party is.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Is it right of center?
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Is it are the Democrats becoming more socialists, more progressive?
None of that matters if you're living paycheck to paycheck, Like,
don't give me this. People living paycheck to paycheck and
not benefited from Trump's economy.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
No, no question, that's true. But you're never going to
be affected by good economic policy. That's on you.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
You're not supposed to live paycheck to paycheck, so stop
living paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
There's nothing a government can do to stop.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
You from bad behavior, bad choices, or just bad planning.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
And there's nothing wrong with saying that.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
I'm like so bored with this constant criticism of millionaires
and billionaires.
Speaker 3 (14:36):
That's the new narrative.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Now that's the new You know, you had Elizabeth Warren
out there almost every day.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
Trump's millionaire and billionaire friends are doing well, but the
rest of us are struggling. Stop struggling.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Do something else, work harder, change your behavior, do anything else.
If you're struggling under an economy where everybody else is
doing well, then you're the problem, not the president, because
there's nothing Elizabeth Warren can do to help you. If
you're living paycheck at paycheck that there's no no amount
(15:08):
of childcare tax credit that's gonna affect your lot in life,
you need to fix it, and that often requires difficult choices,
especially if you're in deep I saw a social media
post of a woman who is now pregnant, young woman,
(15:29):
and she does not she's a server, so she doesn't
qualify for medical but doesn't make enough money for private insurance,
and where she works they don't offer medical. But she
does make good money. I mean she made decent money,
like more than the average income of Los Angeles. I
don't know what restaurant she works at, probably a steakhouse.
Speaker 3 (15:50):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
She was a cutie pie and I'm sure, I'm sure
she got good tips. But now she's knocked up and
she was shopping healthcare costs and she couldn't find anything
like under seven hundred was a month at a premium.
And I'm watching this thinking, lady, how much do you
think health insurance costs?
Speaker 3 (16:06):
What do you think the rest of us are paying?
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Who told you to start a family as a server
if you can't afford seven hundred dollars a month in insurance?
And she's doing that whole progressive line you know about
how it's is not fair and she works hard and
the hardest working people and blah blah blah, blah blah.
What do you think the rest of us are? You
think we don't work hard? But some of us have
(16:31):
our act.
Speaker 3 (16:31):
Together, and some of us are insisting on living paycheck
to paycheck.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Now, if something should befall you, something happens, you break
your leg and you're a I don't know, an Olympic
runner for a living, I don't know what you do
if some mishap occurs and you're down and out.
Speaker 3 (16:49):
We have systems for that, right.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
We have social welfare systems, a safety net so that
you don't wind up on the I get it, the
Somalis are stealing.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
It all, but it's still there for you. Hopefully, let's
beak at all the illegal supported.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
There should be more, but nevertheless, we have social systems,
but those are temporary. Then you've got to figure out
what to do with your bum leg to make a living.
But you still have to make a living, like nobody
from Washington is going to come and rescue you. If
you're in this bottom fifth of the economy that isn't
benefiting from an expansion of the gross domestic product or
(17:25):
benefiting from lower interest rates, because I get it, you're
paycheck the paycheck and I'm buying a house. But that's
not like it wouldn't matter if the interest rates were
three percent or nine percent if you're living paycheck the paycheck.
So don't come to me and say it's it's good, lou,
but it really isn't that good. Because the least among us,
(17:46):
the millionaires and billionaires, are doing fine. But you know
those people that are struggling, they're still struggling, right, they
always will be. So not falling for the trap you
set up, nice, try swinging a miss. If John Cobelt
on the John Cobolt Show on KFI AM six forty
live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 5 (18:07):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM sixty.
Speaker 3 (18:13):
Lou Penrose sitting in for John Coblt.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Good to be with you on a Monday talking about
this Los Angeles Times opinion piece about the economy.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
The economy is clearly doing well by all ways we
measure it traditionally. Now, I get it. The stock market
is not everything.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Wall Street isn't main Street. I get all that, but
we tend to use the same metrics. Certainly at the
stock market were below the level it was when Trump
took golf is, everybody would be criticizing his handling of
the economy, even though nobody owns any stock.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
Very few Americans hold that much in stock.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
Right, if unemployment applications were going up, people will be
criticizing the administration, and right, lil rightly so if inflation
was not coming under control, if the gross domestic product
was contracting.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
But it's not. The opposite is happening. So these are
very good numbers.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
And now the Los Angeles Times and their opinion people,
they're all spinning it. Whose economy is it, and it
goes on. Since the top twenty percent of households are
measured by income, measured by income own eighty seven percent
of directly held equities, stock market gains tend to disproportionately
benefit the higher income cohort. By contrast, they're almost thirty
(19:35):
percent of lower income households appear to be living.
Speaker 3 (19:37):
Paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Well, that's always true, and that's never not going to
be true. And there's nothing the government can do to
make lower income households into millionaires. And why are you
mad at the millionaires for holding as much of the
directly held equities possible.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
That's what you do, right, What would the first thing?
A guy wins the lottery.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
Right, and they hire an investment advisor, what's the first
thing they tell them? Invest If you don't have any money,
you're not going to invest. So stop doing the things
that keep you poor and start doing the things that.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
The wealthy you're doing.
Speaker 8 (20:16):
Everybody I know lives paycheck to paycheck. The more you make,
the more you spend. I put so much on my
four oh one K that I could have extra spending money,
But yes, I deprive of myself of the extra spending money,
and yes, I live paycheck to paycheck. That's my own doing.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
Yeah, I appreciate the call a little correction.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
You're not spending by investing, So when they say living
paycheck to paycheck, they mean people are consuming one hundred
percent of their paycheck. They're not investing in themselves. They're
not investing in education or training. They're not investing in
their retirement, which is what a four to oh one
k is, and from the way they make it sound,
(20:52):
they're not even investing in quality of life. It'd be
one thing if you were you know, uh, Devil make
care playboy, right, you live paycheck to paycheck, but you
were just going out to find restaurants and nice hotels
and pretty ladies and gambling. The people that the La
Times is talking about living paycheck to paycheck are a
(21:13):
ley miserab.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
That's the way they make it sound.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
So there's no I guess my point is there's no
good economy or a bad economy that's going to affect
change to that, so don't start bellyaching about it.
Speaker 9 (21:26):
It sounds like that server's not married. What she needs
to do is get get baby daddy to marry her
or draw up legal documents and make him responsible for
the insurance and child support. They do this all wrong.
Speaker 3 (21:41):
Yeah, they do everything wrong right.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
My brother has five children and two daughters, and he
had when when they were in their late teens early twenties,
and they would come to him with their problems. He
I remember him getting very frustrated and he would say,
you know, if you insist on doing things backwards, I
really can't help you. If you insist on doing life
(22:04):
out of order, then my advice won't work. And my
wife and I still chuckle about that, but it really
is a great.
Speaker 3 (22:11):
Wave of understanding.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
Right when you talk to kids, if they insist on
living life wrong, then there's no advice I can do
I can offer that helps you.
Speaker 3 (22:21):
Same thing here.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
If you insist on living paycheck to paycheck for your
whole life and nothing nothing, you don't seem to know
yourself that this is not the way to live a life,
then there's nothing that a economic policy out of any
administration can do for you that's gonna correct your misery.
Speaker 6 (22:44):
KFI Radio, if you're listening to this madness that's going
on in California, chances are probably seventy to eighty percent
you're the reason because you voted for him, California. You're
the one who voted for this governor.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
Yeah, I appreciate the call.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
It is okay to say, hey, if the economy is
not working in California and you voted for the governor,
then you deserve to live like this.
Speaker 3 (23:11):
It's okay.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
It isn't really a long term solution that that argument
should last a quarter, like a little more than a month,
for less than a half a year, because it is
what it is right. If socialists win, if progressives win,
and people that are living paycheck to patrick stay in
(23:32):
their lot in life, then what that means is, as
the alternative party, we are not selling We're not coming
up with solutions for them, we're not attracting them. It's
very easy for Democrats to stay in power in California.
They go to their base and say, we promise to
give you more money, we promise to give you more welfare,
(23:54):
we promise to give you more tax credits for more children.
Whatever it is that you want, we promise to give
it to you. And then they don't get it, and
their lot in life is dissolves and their quality of
life dissolves. And then they say well, it's because the
millionaires and the billionaires are not paying their fair share.
So help me pass this initiative. Help me pass this
(24:17):
new tax on billionaires.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
Did you hear this? This is a new one.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Help me put it to the millionaires in billionaires and
stick it to them, because if they paid their fair share,
then I, as a Democrat lawmaker, would have more money
and then I could give it to you. And isn't
that what you want? And Democrat voters fall for this
over and over and over again. So it is up
(24:41):
to Republicans and independents or any center right candidate to
say that's not working, it's not working for you. We
need to embrace millionaires and billionaires. We want millionaires and billionaires.
We want them paying a We want them to expand
their millionaire status and their billionaire status so they're paying
a larger percentage, or rather a smaller percentage of a
(25:03):
larger pie.
Speaker 3 (25:05):
Millionaires and billionaires.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Are your friend if you're poor, because they're the ones
that pay for the teachers.
Speaker 3 (25:10):
They're the ones that pay for the police. They're the
ones that pay for the firefighters. They're the ones that
pay for the social services. They're the ones funding the government.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
If you have needs from a government, then you should
embrace the millionaires and billionaires because they're the ones that bought.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
It for you. If you're on Section eight housing, thank
a millionaire.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
If you're getting a if you have reduced energy bill,
if you're paying reduced rate on your energy bill, a
low income rate, thank a millionaire.
Speaker 6 (25:41):
Right.
Speaker 3 (25:41):
If you're getting reduced cost or no cost school lunch,
thank a millionaire because they're footing the bill.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
Lou Penrose in for John Cobelt on the John Cobelt
Show on kf I Am six forty live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 5 (25:56):
You're listening to John cobelts on demand from KIF sixty.
Speaker 2 (26:02):
Loupenrose and for John Cobalt on the John Cobalt Show.
I'll be in for John all this week, and it's
good to be with you, all right.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
So the billionaire tax, this is the next thing. Now.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
We were talking in the last segment about the Los
Angeles Times and their opinion piece now for the third
week in a row, or how to someone submit an
opinion piece that basically blames millionaires and billionaires for all
the problems of the bottom twenty percent of the earners.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Somehow, it's their fall.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
And of course Democrat lawmakers and Sacramento have to agree.
So the best way to make things even is to
take from the billionaires.
Speaker 10 (26:38):
Are proposed one time five percent tax on California's billionaires
as some of them considering a move.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Out of state. Imagine that five percent. Gosh or golly.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
If you're Philip rivers, five percent, which five percent of
a billion dollars.
Speaker 3 (26:58):
Is imagine writing that check. You better believe I'd move.
Speaker 10 (27:01):
I proposed one time five percent tax on California's billionaires
as some of them considering a move out of state.
According to reporting from The New York Times, tech venture
capitalist Peter Thiel and co founder of Google Larry Page
are considering cutting or reducing their ties to California by
the end of the year.
Speaker 2 (27:17):
Yeah, that's pretty easy to do. You can just set
up a residence in Puerto Rico. Then you wouldn't have
to be any tax. But of course, of course the
earners are going to leave. They're not going to just
sit here and let government that's running a debt take
money away from people that are showing a profit. And
I think there hasn't been enough done to celebrate what
(27:42):
millionaires and billionaires do in capitalism. There's been a lot
done to try and drag them down. Democrats use them
as their whipping boy. They're the pinata. They're the reason
that you're broke. They're the reason that you're struggling. They're
the reason that you don't make enup because millionaires and
billionaires are having a good time and somehow they're doing
it on your back. And you don't like your lot
(28:05):
in life. You don't like the car the hand that
was dealt to you. You don't have the energy or
the guts to go change the direction of your own
family tree. So you listen to a Democrat that says
it's somebody else's fault. You'd be richer, you'd be happier,
you'd be married to a prettier girl if it would
not for the millionaires and billionaires, right, and they sold
(28:27):
people on it, and it must work because I see,
at least on the national stage, democrats continuing with this
narrative that the millionaires and billionaires are not paying their
fair share when the reality is they're paying just.
Speaker 3 (28:40):
About all of it.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
Like they're paying just about all of it, And now
they want to put a one time hit of five
percent on millionaires and billionaires. Let me try and sell
this to you as best I can. We need more
millionaires and billionaires.
Speaker 3 (29:00):
Not less. We want people to become millionaires in billionaires.
Speaker 2 (29:05):
We want people to be so wildly successful in what
they do that they have such profit that they can
private jet to Aspen and they can take a private
jet that uses all kinds of jet fuel and adds
to the carbon footprint just to go have their daughter
go and meet with Mickey Mouse.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
I mean, we.
Speaker 2 (29:24):
Want just obnoxious levels of wealth in this country, so
much wealth, because until you have more millionaires and billionaires,
you can't have more teachers. Until there are more millionaires
and billionaires and more private jets, there aren't more cops.
That's how we get police and fire and emergency responders
(29:48):
and teachers and nurses. Incredibly successful millionaires and billionaires, So
stop picking on them and thank them for having the
skill to show a profit while the government's running a debt.
I just think there needs to be a real paradigm
shift in attitude, and it's pretty easy to get there
(30:12):
when you realize that all the social services that the
least among us on the ladder of society, right, the
lowest income bracket.
Speaker 3 (30:22):
They're the ones that consume the services. The millionaires and
billionaires are.
Speaker 2 (30:25):
Paying for the services. I'm going to get a Thank
a Billionaire t shirt because of.
Speaker 3 (30:30):
This proposed tax.
Speaker 10 (30:31):
If it acted, it would generate about one hundred billion
dollars in revenue from the state's roughly two hundred billionaires.
The tax is supported by labor and healthcare groups. The
aim would be.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
To labor and healthcare groups. Now why is that labor?
What's going on? Healthcare groups?
Speaker 2 (30:45):
I get they're sick of taking, you know, eighty cents
on the dollar, so I get it. Healthcare groups are
getting screwed by the legal aliens getting free healthcare. So
you're not getting reimbursed anywhere you were anywhere near what
you should be.
Speaker 6 (31:00):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
And the state's telling you you should be happy for
what you get. But the labor groups, why are you mad?
Speaker 2 (31:06):
It's the millionaires and billionaires that hire you, So you
might want to rethink that.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Stop listening to your labor council.
Speaker 10 (31:15):
The tax is supported by labor and healthcare groups. The
aim would be to make up for a thirty billion
dollar healthcare funding shortfall due to federal Medicaid cuts.
Speaker 3 (31:23):
Oh, the federal Medicaid cuts. I see.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
It wouldn't be because we are giving healthcare to illegals, right,
So it's the federal government's fault. Always somebody else's fault.
And you see the way the entire story is designed.
It's just a one time five percent. What's a five
percent that's a nickel compared to a dollar bill.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
Lou what's five percent of a billion dollars?
Speaker 6 (31:46):
Right?
Speaker 3 (31:46):
One time five percent?
Speaker 2 (31:48):
Only once, only one time five you know, five percent hit?
Speaker 3 (31:51):
And oh, it's supported by labor and healthcare. Everybody loves
those people. They're just the hard workers and the nice
people will take care. Labor and healthcare support it.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
And you know, there's only a couple of billionaires, so's
if they don't like it.
Speaker 3 (32:09):
There's only a few of them, right.
Speaker 2 (32:11):
They make it sound so logical that we should take
from people showing a profit and give it to the
state that's running a deficit.
Speaker 10 (32:18):
The aim would be to make up for a thirty
billion dollar healthcare funding shortfall due to federal Medicaid cuts.
The proposal needs around eight hundred and seventy five thousand
signatures to make it out of the November ballot.
Speaker 3 (32:29):
Then it would be up to the.
Speaker 10 (32:30):
Voters to decide whether or not to slap California's billionaires
with the one time tax.
Speaker 3 (32:35):
Yeah, slap the billionaires. Oh my goodness.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
All right, we are going down a wrong path by
demonizing successful people. We are a capitalist society. We love success,
we embrace success. We're not the country that gets mad
at people for driving the Rolls Royce down the boulevard.
We wish we drove the Rolls Royce down the boulevard.
We are a nation that invented lifestyles of the rich
(33:01):
and famous.
Speaker 3 (33:02):
We watched the Kardashians. I mean, come on, stop pretending
that we hate millionaires and billionaires.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
We end v millionaires and billionaires, especially ones that are
self made. Those are the best stories. And Democrats want
you to be mad at them because they mismanaged the
Sacramento budget and want you to be on their side
to punish them.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
For having the nerve to be a billionaire. It's just
terrible thinking.
Speaker 2 (33:29):
It's disastrous because it will never end right if this passes,
or if this even gets on the ballot, it becomes
a moral question because then it's like, well, there's a
healthcare shortfall because of the illegals, So we.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
Had to tax the billionaires one time five percent.
Speaker 2 (33:46):
The ones that were foolish enough to stay in California
and didn't bolt for Florida, they got hit. Many will leave,
so certainly they're not going to get anywhere near the
amount that they planned on getting. But then the next
it'll be, well, you know, we don't have enough funding
for school, and that's not fair, so let's hit the
millionaires and billionaires with another one time five percent hit,
(34:09):
because it's im moral to leave the kids without money
when people who were sick were without money, and we
backfilled the money with the maynaire the billionaire at tax.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
You see, it never ends.
Speaker 6 (34:21):
Right.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Once you start subsidizing inefficiency with efficiency in the form
of theft, which is effectively what this is, then it becomes.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
A moral not to do it to every constituency group.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
And the problem with socialism as it is, as it's
been said by the late great Margaret Thatcher so brilliantly,
is effect eventually you run out of other people's money.
It's easy to throw out other people's money, it's easy
to go after other people's money, it's easy to demonize
other people's money. What do they need two houses for?
What do they need a private jet for? How much
(34:56):
is enough?
Speaker 4 (34:57):
How?
Speaker 2 (34:57):
You hear this all the time, and that's it's a
very dangerous path to go down. Because you are allowed
to become wealthy in the United States. We encourage you
to become wealthy. The tax code is designed to advance you.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
You know why. You know why that is. You know
why we write the tax code that it's designed to
advance you. So there's more opportunity to keep more of
your own money.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
It's to keep you out of poverty. Poverty is expensive
for government. We don't want you broke, We don't want
you living paycheck to paycheck. So we designed a tax
code that lifts you up if you take advantage of
it and you stay out of poverty. And then, and
only then, if you want to charitably, you can give
(35:44):
back and help other people.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
It's the only way it works.
Speaker 2 (35:47):
Lou Penrose on KFI AM six forty live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (35:52):
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 monk Monday
through Friday, and of course anytime on demand on the
iHeartRadio app.
Can't find AM six forty. You're listening to the John
Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Lou Penrose sitting in for John Cobelt this week. Good
to have you along with US. Congressman Kevin Kylie put
out a statement today and it reads Governor Newsom has
finally acknowledged reality. In seventeen years, no track has been laid,
while the projected cost has exploded to one hundred and
twenty eight billion dollars. I didn't know that's one twenty
(00:27):
eight now. The original project was under thirty. This is
an extraordinary failure of planning and accountability. Our federal transportation
dollars should be used when they actually can make a difference,
like fixing our roads and investing in regional and local
transit that Californians can depend on every day. It is
well pass time to wind this project down and redirect
(00:51):
funding away from a train system that may never be
built toward real transportation needs.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Congressman Kevin Kylee will join us here in a moment.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
But he's absolutely right. It's okay to admit it didn't work.
Like it's okay. The money's gone. There's no way to
get it back. A lot of people had jobs building
things that were part of a training system.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
But they're not even close. Like there aren't any rails.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
There are like pylons, And maybe we can do something
with the pylons, I don't know, maybe we can make
something clever out of them, or tournaments of standing art
art in public places. I don't know, the world's most
expensive art. And we'll just look at it as a
monument of why you don't let government do big things,
because government run by Democrats in California cannot do big things.
Speaker 3 (01:40):
So we need to stop.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
And we're not talking about a little bit of money.
We're talking about billions of dollars. I remember at the time,
and I don't remember when this was, but there was
a person that I think was the chief information officer
or the public information officer for the High Speed Rail
Authority was a lecturer at Chapman University in Orange down
(02:05):
in Orange County, and I was guest lecturing there for
his class in political science, and I got some time
talking with him and even he who was literally on
the High Speed roll Authority.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
So yeah, it's gonna take a lot longer than we thought.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
Congressman Kevin Kylie joins us, Well, Congressman, I guess the
first question is were you surprised that the governor has
withdrawn the lawsuit?
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Well, I guess I'm not surprised in the sense of
the lawsuit clearly lacked Barritt and it was a total stunt.
And so that's kind of how Newsome operates. Sometimes he
does something purely to put out a press release or
to say he's doing something, or to look like he's
you know, fighting back in some way, even though he
knows it's not going anywhere. So you know, he always
(02:53):
counts on the initial press release getting more attention than
his decision to back down. We've seen many, many examples
of that. So yeah, in that sense, I'm not surprised. Obviously,
the left that had no Barritt news you know, the
Newsom has asked for billions of dollars in funding for
a project that has resulted in absolutely nothing getting built.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
I think you're right by the way, the governing by
headline is really kind of his mo and that's why
it's important to have you on on days like today,
because he will get the headline we're suing the Trump
administration by golly, and we might make sure the headline
is just as big. That the lawsuit had to be
withdrawn because it was just ridiculous.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
Where where are we with respect to the federal dollars?
Speaker 4 (03:37):
Though?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
What was he asking for that was different than the
money that's already been allocated for the original high speed
real project.
Speaker 4 (03:45):
Well, he was asking that the funds that we are
cutting off and that we are calling back will instead
continue to be used for high speed rail. So we
did this compliance review starting towards the ginning of the year.
I had introduced a bill to cut off all federal funding,
but I was with Sean Duffy when we announced this
actually Union station there in La. So the Department of
(04:09):
Transportation then did this compliance review and found that the
state was not in compliance with the terms of the
federal grant, namely because they had not built a train
and the grant was to build a train. And so
the DOOT audit found that there was no viable path
forward for the project, and so at that point the
federal funds will cut off and do some brands of
court and said no, no, we want to keep that money.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
So one hundred and twenty eight billion dollars spent already
not one track, laid a bunch of pylons out in
the middle of nowhere.
Speaker 3 (04:39):
As a taxpayer, people.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Are furious about this, But also it's hard, right when
you work in Washington. Billions and billions and hundreds of
billions is a different phenomenon than to the average person
who thinks one hundred and twenty eight billion dollars that's
an awful lot of money, no matter how you slice it.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Is there anything recoverable going forward?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Is there any way we can get something out of
this in exchange for that money? Can we can we
lease it out or privatize it and sell it off
or anything.
Speaker 4 (05:12):
Yeah, So I think there are three things. Like Number
one is just to make sure that we don't spend
one hundred and twenty billion dollars more. That's right now,
that's good to.
Speaker 3 (05:19):
Stop right, Stop digging where you're in the hole.
Speaker 4 (05:21):
Stop digging, it's right, exactly, Stop digging. Let's use that
money where it's needed on our roads and so forth.
Number two, the funds that have been awarded but not
yet deployed can be caught back. So that's what we're doing.
It's about four point three billion dollars or so. That
that we're going to be actually getting back and we're
arguing that this should stay with California, but it should
(05:43):
be used on things like that, like our roads and
where it's actually needed. And then yes, I think for
that which has been you know, worked on already. Wherever
you can salvage have some salvage value, then obviously you
want to pursue that in whatever way you can. But
the most important thing is that we don't continue throwing
good money after that.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
Yeah, I think that's right.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Any word from the governor's office, from his press office,
a reaction to this at all.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
I don't know have they issued anything.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
I haven't seen.
Speaker 4 (06:13):
Anything anything, which is like you know what they usually do, right,
They do the press release saying we're doing something, and
then radio silence when they you know, have to admit
it was all this bluster.
Speaker 3 (06:25):
Congressman Kevin Kyley, always good to check to check in
with you.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
I appreciate you giving us opportunity to amplify this end
of the story. And as we as you say, we
continue on just patching up write the mistake that was
made by making sure we don't throw any more good
money after bad and the money that's clawed back goes
to use to something we actually drive on every day.
Speaker 4 (06:44):
But I appreciate you absolutely. Yeah, we'll keep fighting this
and you know, hopefully this project will will wind down
very soon.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Congressman Kevin Kylie, all right, So when we come back,
we have to talk about this a little bit. There
is apprehension to ever admit error in politics, and I
understand that because why would you go in front of
a microphone if you're an elected official and admit you're wrong.
You just go radio silence on it. But it really
isn't good for the taxpayer. And it is okay to
(07:16):
come up with an idea, an expensive one, win the argument,
win the vote, get the you know, get the project
going with the support of the people, and then realizing
that it isn't working, and then course correct like that
can be done too.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
It happens in business all the time.
Speaker 2 (07:31):
It's called failing forward, and here it just seems that
the governor's office and Democrats in California.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
Refuse to fail forward on this.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
High speed rail project. We'll talk about it a little
bit coming up next. Loup Penrose in for John Cobelt
on The John coblt Show on KFI Am six forty
Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 5 (07:51):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Loup Penrose for John Cobelt. Good to have you along
with us. I'll be in for John Cobelt all this week.
Speaker 6 (08:05):
Hey Lou, love your show.
Speaker 7 (08:07):
You know, in the world I grew up in, somebody
would be going to jail if every penny of those
billions of dollars by the governor, by the state, legislation,
by somebody, by some nonprofit, if every penny cannot be
accounted for, somebody would be going to jail in the
America I grew up in.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
Yeah, I appreciate the call, and I understand your frustration.
This is why you can't have.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Democrats, socialists or progressives in charge of big projects because
in the world you grew up in and the world
you just described, in the real world, it wouldn't have
happened this way because the people that are funding the
project would be holding every step accountable. But when it's
government money, what's the difference. So let's think about it.
(08:55):
If you're in charge of the concrete building the high
speed rail and you've got a contract to build these pylons,
and you're thinking, well, wait a minute, though you don't
have the money for the rail yet, and you don't
even know what city we're going, doesn't matter.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
Pour the concrete. You'll get paid.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
You're gonna pour the concrete and collect your check and
get paid. You're gonna hire your your workers and pour
the concrete and get paid right the same go.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
And that's every part of the project. Everybody.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
The designers, they get paid well, like the architects or
the engineers or whoever designs a rail system. They're gonna
submit the blueprints and the renderings and send you an
invoice and it's government money, so pay them. Like no
one says, well, we're not doing very well. This is
not on budget, and now it's smaller and it won't
be efficient. Like no one's there to stop it and
(09:46):
say let's stop doing this. Because everybody's advocating for their
own advocacy groups, the unions that hire the contractors, they're advocating. Now, no,
let's get going. Come on, we were promised to rail project.
Let's go, let's go, let's go. Let's get these people
to work and their thing. As long as a California
union worker got paid. It's to the good, even though
(10:07):
the work that he did is for naught. He got paid, right,
same goes for the people that are advocating for the
planning and the people that are advocating for the designs,
and the people that are advocating for the publicity, and
the people hired to advocate to go to Democrats in
DC and lobby for more money for the project, and
(10:27):
the environmentalists that are out there saying this is going
to be so great, this will take so many cars
off the road, we'll all be able to.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
Breathe a lot cleaner.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Like they're all hired and they're all doing their job
and they're all getting paid. And the environmentalists that are
excited that when the rail is there, which it never
will be, they're excited that there'll be fewer cars on
the road, and they don't talk to the spent guys
who are just excited to be done with the day.
All right, put on the forms, concrete strial, let's go
(10:54):
to the next one.
Speaker 3 (10:56):
They're not working together to see this project go forward.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
Because it's not in their interest to do it, because.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
It's government money.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
And that's why we need to disabuse ourselves of this
idea that government can do things well.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
It can't.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
If it could have been done well, private people would
have done it with private dollars because they would have
been profit involved.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
And this brings me to the next thing I want
to talk about a little bit. This is like the.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
Third weekend in a row that the Los Angeles Times
in the opinion section on Sunday had a piece by
some idiot that is trying to make the case that
Trump's economic numbers that came out this week are not good.
Like Trump had three great weeks in a row.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
I don't even know if they were a week apart,
but there were three great numbers.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
There was inflation that came down much lower than everyone
thought it was going to be, and then the gross
domestic product the GDP was way higher than it was
expected to be. It was supposed to be three point three,
came in four point three. Now, I don't want to
bore you with economics, but I know a thing or
two about this.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
A one point increase.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
In the gross domestic product of the United States is
a lot of money.
Speaker 3 (12:12):
What are we north of twenty six trillion.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Dollars in GDP? So if it grew by three point
three percent. I'd be impressed, but it grew by four
point three percent and they were expecting three point three percent,
so that's not small.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
And then there are labor jobless claims, which is the.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Amount of people filing for unemployment insurance benefits that went down,
so more people are at work. So the economy's working,
the plan is working. And of course, if you're a
trump pater, you hate that. And if you're an economist
and a Trump pater, you write a letter to the
Los Angeles Times or write an essay explaining that, yeah,
(12:52):
it's good normally, but right now it's not good.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
And so this is the latest one from Sunday. Whose
economy is it? More than ever, it belongs.
Speaker 3 (13:01):
To the rich.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
According to Bank of America analysts, since this spring, spending
by the highest earning third of Americans has been soaring,
while the middle and lower income households have stagnated. So
they're trying to make the case that yeah, I mean,
the economy's good, but only for people that have money.
People that have no money, that are living paycheck to paycheck,
(13:23):
the economy is not doing anything for them. And of
course this is spin because if you're living paycheck to paycheck.
It doesn't matter if Trump is president and it's the
best economy in a generation, or Biden's president and inflation
is at nine percent, It doesn't matter. Like your life
is not impacted at all. You're in Nowhere's Bill, like
nothing's happening. You need to course correct yourself. It doesn't
(13:46):
matter who's president. It doesn't matter if it's a Republican
or a Democrat.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
It doesn't matter what.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
The political philosophy of the day of that Republican party is.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Is it right of center?
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Is it are the Democrats becoming more socialists, more progressive?
None of that matters if you're living paycheck to paycheck, Like,
don't give me this. People living paycheck to paycheck and
not benefited from Trump's economy.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
No, no question, that's true. But you're never going to
be affected by good economic policy. That's on you.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
You're not supposed to live paycheck to paycheck, so stop
living paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
There's nothing a government can do to stop.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
You from bad behavior, bad choices, or just bad planning.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
And there's nothing wrong with saying that.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
I'm like so bored with this constant criticism of millionaires
and billionaires.
Speaker 3 (14:36):
That's the new narrative.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Now that's the new You know, you had Elizabeth Warren
out there almost every day.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
Trump's millionaire and billionaire friends are doing well, but the
rest of us are struggling. Stop struggling.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Do something else, work harder, change your behavior, do anything else.
If you're struggling under an economy where everybody else is
doing well, then you're the problem, not the president, because
there's nothing Elizabeth Warren can do to help you. If
you're living paycheck at paycheck that there's no no amount
(15:08):
of childcare tax credit that's gonna affect your lot in life,
you need to fix it, and that often requires difficult choices,
especially if you're in deep I saw a social media
post of a woman who is now pregnant, young woman,
(15:29):
and she does not she's a server, so she doesn't
qualify for medical but doesn't make enough money for private insurance,
and where she works they don't offer medical. But she
does make good money. I mean she made decent money,
like more than the average income of Los Angeles. I
don't know what restaurant she works at, probably a steakhouse.
Speaker 3 (15:50):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
She was a cutie pie and I'm sure, I'm sure
she got good tips. But now she's knocked up and
she was shopping healthcare costs and she couldn't find anything
like under seven hundred was a month at a premium.
And I'm watching this thinking, lady, how much do you
think health insurance costs?
Speaker 3 (16:06):
What do you think the rest of us are paying?
Speaker 2 (16:09):
Who told you to start a family as a server
if you can't afford seven hundred dollars a month in insurance?
And she's doing that whole progressive line you know about
how it's is not fair and she works hard and
the hardest working people and blah blah blah, blah blah.
What do you think the rest of us are? You
think we don't work hard? But some of us have
(16:31):
our act.
Speaker 3 (16:31):
Together, and some of us are insisting on living paycheck
to paycheck.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Now, if something should befall you, something happens, you break
your leg and you're a I don't know, an Olympic
runner for a living, I don't know what you do
if some mishap occurs and you're down and out.
Speaker 3 (16:49):
We have systems for that, right.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
We have social welfare systems, a safety net so that
you don't wind up on the I get it, the
Somalis are stealing.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
It all, but it's still there for you. Hopefully, let's
beak at all the illegal supported.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
There should be more, but nevertheless, we have social systems,
but those are temporary. Then you've got to figure out
what to do with your bum leg to make a living.
But you still have to make a living, like nobody
from Washington is going to come and rescue you. If
you're in this bottom fifth of the economy that isn't
benefiting from an expansion of the gross domestic product or
(17:25):
benefiting from lower interest rates, because I get it, you're
paycheck the paycheck and I'm buying a house. But that's
not like it wouldn't matter if the interest rates were
three percent or nine percent if you're living paycheck the paycheck.
So don't come to me and say it's it's good, lou,
but it really isn't that good. Because the least among us,
(17:46):
the millionaires and billionaires, are doing fine. But you know
those people that are struggling, they're still struggling, right, they
always will be. So not falling for the trap you
set up, nice, try swinging a miss. If John Cobelt
on the John Cobolt Show on KFI AM six forty
live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 5 (18:07):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM sixty.
Speaker 3 (18:13):
Lou Penrose sitting in for John Coblt.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Good to be with you on a Monday talking about
this Los Angeles Times opinion piece about the economy.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
The economy is clearly doing well by all ways we
measure it traditionally. Now, I get it. The stock market
is not everything.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Wall Street isn't main Street. I get all that, but
we tend to use the same metrics. Certainly at the
stock market were below the level it was when Trump
took golf is, everybody would be criticizing his handling of
the economy, even though nobody owns any stock.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
Very few Americans hold that much in stock.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
Right, if unemployment applications were going up, people will be
criticizing the administration, and right, lil rightly so if inflation
was not coming under control, if the gross domestic product
was contracting.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
But it's not. The opposite is happening. So these are
very good numbers.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
And now the Los Angeles Times and their opinion people,
they're all spinning it. Whose economy is it, and it
goes on. Since the top twenty percent of households are
measured by income, measured by income own eighty seven percent
of directly held equities, stock market gains tend to disproportionately
benefit the higher income cohort. By contrast, they're almost thirty
(19:35):
percent of lower income households appear to be living.
Speaker 3 (19:37):
Paycheck to paycheck.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Well, that's always true, and that's never not going to
be true. And there's nothing the government can do to
make lower income households into millionaires. And why are you
mad at the millionaires for holding as much of the
directly held equities possible.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
That's what you do, right, What would the first thing?
A guy wins the lottery.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
Right, and they hire an investment advisor, what's the first
thing they tell them? Invest If you don't have any money,
you're not going to invest. So stop doing the things
that keep you poor and start doing the things that.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
The wealthy you're doing.
Speaker 8 (20:16):
Everybody I know lives paycheck to paycheck. The more you make,
the more you spend. I put so much on my
four oh one K that I could have extra spending money,
But yes, I deprive of myself of the extra spending money,
and yes, I live paycheck to paycheck. That's my own doing.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
Yeah, I appreciate the call a little correction.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
You're not spending by investing, So when they say living
paycheck to paycheck, they mean people are consuming one hundred
percent of their paycheck. They're not investing in themselves. They're
not investing in education or training. They're not investing in
their retirement, which is what a four to oh one
k is, and from the way they make it sound,
(20:52):
they're not even investing in quality of life. It'd be
one thing if you were you know, uh, Devil make
care playboy, right, you live paycheck to paycheck, but you
were just going out to find restaurants and nice hotels
and pretty ladies and gambling. The people that the La
Times is talking about living paycheck to paycheck are a
(21:13):
ley miserab.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
That's the way they make it sound.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
So there's no I guess my point is there's no
good economy or a bad economy that's going to affect
change to that, so don't start bellyaching about it.
Speaker 9 (21:26):
It sounds like that server's not married. What she needs
to do is get get baby daddy to marry her
or draw up legal documents and make him responsible for
the insurance and child support. They do this all wrong.
Speaker 3 (21:41):
Yeah, they do everything wrong right.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
My brother has five children and two daughters, and he
had when when they were in their late teens early twenties,
and they would come to him with their problems. He
I remember him getting very frustrated and he would say,
you know, if you insist on doing things backwards, I
really can't help you. If you insist on doing life
(22:04):
out of order, then my advice won't work. And my
wife and I still chuckle about that, but it really
is a great.
Speaker 3 (22:11):
Wave of understanding.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
Right when you talk to kids, if they insist on
living life wrong, then there's no advice I can do
I can offer that helps you.
Speaker 3 (22:21):
Same thing here.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
If you insist on living paycheck to paycheck for your
whole life and nothing nothing, you don't seem to know
yourself that this is not the way to live a life,
then there's nothing that a economic policy out of any
administration can do for you that's gonna correct your misery.
Speaker 6 (22:44):
KFI Radio, if you're listening to this madness that's going
on in California, chances are probably seventy to eighty percent
you're the reason because you voted for him, California. You're
the one who voted for this governor.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
Yeah, I appreciate the call.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
It is okay to say, hey, if the economy is
not working in California and you voted for the governor,
then you deserve to live like this.
Speaker 3 (23:11):
It's okay.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
It isn't really a long term solution that that argument
should last a quarter, like a little more than a month,
for less than a half a year, because it is
what it is right. If socialists win, if progressives win,
and people that are living paycheck to patrick stay in
(23:32):
their lot in life, then what that means is, as
the alternative party, we are not selling We're not coming
up with solutions for them, we're not attracting them. It's
very easy for Democrats to stay in power in California.
They go to their base and say, we promise to
give you more money, we promise to give you more welfare,
(23:54):
we promise to give you more tax credits for more children.
Whatever it is that you want, we promise to give
it to you. And then they don't get it, and
their lot in life is dissolves and their quality of
life dissolves. And then they say well, it's because the
millionaires and the billionaires are not paying their fair share.
So help me pass this initiative. Help me pass this
(24:17):
new tax on billionaires.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
Did you hear this? This is a new one.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Help me put it to the millionaires in billionaires and
stick it to them, because if they paid their fair share,
then I, as a Democrat lawmaker, would have more money
and then I could give it to you. And isn't
that what you want? And Democrat voters fall for this
over and over and over again. So it is up
(24:41):
to Republicans and independents or any center right candidate to
say that's not working, it's not working for you. We
need to embrace millionaires and billionaires. We want millionaires and billionaires.
We want them paying a We want them to expand
their millionaire status and their billionaire status so they're paying
a larger percentage, or rather a smaller percentage of a
(25:03):
larger pie.
Speaker 3 (25:05):
Millionaires and billionaires.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Are your friend if you're poor, because they're the ones
that pay for the teachers.
Speaker 3 (25:10):
They're the ones that pay for the police. They're the
ones that pay for the firefighters. They're the ones that
pay for the social services. They're the ones funding the government.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
If you have needs from a government, then you should
embrace the millionaires and billionaires because they're the ones that bought.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
It for you. If you're on Section eight housing, thank
a millionaire.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
If you're getting a if you have reduced energy bill,
if you're paying reduced rate on your energy bill, a
low income rate, thank a millionaire.
Speaker 6 (25:41):
Right.
Speaker 3 (25:41):
If you're getting reduced cost or no cost school lunch,
thank a millionaire because they're footing the bill.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
Lou Penrose in for John Cobelt on the John Cobelt
Show on kf I Am six forty live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 5 (25:56):
You're listening to John cobelts on demand from KIF sixty.
Speaker 2 (26:02):
Loupenrose and for John Cobalt on the John Cobalt Show.
I'll be in for John all this week, and it's
good to be with you, all right.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
So the billionaire tax, this is the next thing. Now.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
We were talking in the last segment about the Los
Angeles Times and their opinion piece now for the third
week in a row, or how to someone submit an
opinion piece that basically blames millionaires and billionaires for all
the problems of the bottom twenty percent of the earners.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Somehow, it's their fall.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
And of course Democrat lawmakers and Sacramento have to agree.
So the best way to make things even is to
take from the billionaires.
Speaker 10 (26:38):
Are proposed one time five percent tax on California's billionaires
as some of them considering a move.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Out of state. Imagine that five percent. Gosh or golly.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
If you're Philip rivers, five percent, which five percent of
a billion dollars.
Speaker 3 (26:58):
Is imagine writing that check. You better believe I'd move.
Speaker 10 (27:01):
I proposed one time five percent tax on California's billionaires
as some of them considering a move out of state.
According to reporting from The New York Times, tech venture
capitalist Peter Thiel and co founder of Google Larry Page
are considering cutting or reducing their ties to California by
the end of the year.
Speaker 2 (27:17):
Yeah, that's pretty easy to do. You can just set
up a residence in Puerto Rico. Then you wouldn't have
to be any tax. But of course, of course the
earners are going to leave. They're not going to just
sit here and let government that's running a debt take
money away from people that are showing a profit. And
I think there hasn't been enough done to celebrate what
(27:42):
millionaires and billionaires do in capitalism. There's been a lot
done to try and drag them down. Democrats use them
as their whipping boy. They're the pinata. They're the reason
that you're broke. They're the reason that you're struggling. They're
the reason that you don't make enup because millionaires and
billionaires are having a good time and somehow they're doing
it on your back. And you don't like your lot
(28:05):
in life. You don't like the car the hand that
was dealt to you. You don't have the energy or
the guts to go change the direction of your own
family tree. So you listen to a Democrat that says
it's somebody else's fault. You'd be richer, you'd be happier,
you'd be married to a prettier girl if it would
not for the millionaires and billionaires, right, and they sold
(28:27):
people on it, and it must work because I see,
at least on the national stage, democrats continuing with this
narrative that the millionaires and billionaires are not paying their
fair share when the reality is they're paying just.
Speaker 3 (28:40):
About all of it.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
Like they're paying just about all of it, And now
they want to put a one time hit of five
percent on millionaires and billionaires. Let me try and sell
this to you as best I can. We need more
millionaires and billionaires.
Speaker 3 (29:00):
Not less. We want people to become millionaires in billionaires.
Speaker 2 (29:05):
We want people to be so wildly successful in what
they do that they have such profit that they can
private jet to Aspen and they can take a private
jet that uses all kinds of jet fuel and adds
to the carbon footprint just to go have their daughter
go and meet with Mickey Mouse.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
I mean, we.
Speaker 2 (29:24):
Want just obnoxious levels of wealth in this country, so
much wealth, because until you have more millionaires and billionaires,
you can't have more teachers. Until there are more millionaires
and billionaires and more private jets, there aren't more cops.
That's how we get police and fire and emergency responders
(29:48):
and teachers and nurses. Incredibly successful millionaires and billionaires, So
stop picking on them and thank them for having the
skill to show a profit while the government's running a debt.
I just think there needs to be a real paradigm
shift in attitude, and it's pretty easy to get there
(30:12):
when you realize that all the social services that the
least among us on the ladder of society, right, the
lowest income bracket.
Speaker 3 (30:22):
They're the ones that consume the services. The millionaires and
billionaires are.
Speaker 2 (30:25):
Paying for the services. I'm going to get a Thank
a Billionaire t shirt because of.
Speaker 3 (30:30):
This proposed tax.
Speaker 10 (30:31):
If it acted, it would generate about one hundred billion
dollars in revenue from the state's roughly two hundred billionaires.
The tax is supported by labor and healthcare groups. The
aim would be.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
To labor and healthcare groups. Now why is that labor?
What's going on? Healthcare groups?
Speaker 2 (30:45):
I get they're sick of taking, you know, eighty cents
on the dollar, so I get it. Healthcare groups are
getting screwed by the legal aliens getting free healthcare. So
you're not getting reimbursed anywhere you were anywhere near what
you should be.
Speaker 6 (31:00):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
And the state's telling you you should be happy for
what you get. But the labor groups, why are you mad?
Speaker 2 (31:06):
It's the millionaires and billionaires that hire you, So you
might want to rethink that.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Stop listening to your labor council.
Speaker 10 (31:15):
The tax is supported by labor and healthcare groups. The
aim would be to make up for a thirty billion
dollar healthcare funding shortfall due to federal Medicaid cuts.
Speaker 3 (31:23):
Oh, the federal Medicaid cuts. I see.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
It wouldn't be because we are giving healthcare to illegals, right,
So it's the federal government's fault. Always somebody else's fault.
And you see the way the entire story is designed.
It's just a one time five percent. What's a five
percent that's a nickel compared to a dollar bill.
Speaker 3 (31:41):
Lou what's five percent of a billion dollars?
Speaker 6 (31:46):
Right?
Speaker 3 (31:46):
One time five percent?
Speaker 2 (31:48):
Only once, only one time five you know, five percent hit?
Speaker 3 (31:51):
And oh, it's supported by labor and healthcare. Everybody loves
those people. They're just the hard workers and the nice
people will take care. Labor and healthcare support it.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
And you know, there's only a couple of billionaires, so's
if they don't like it.
Speaker 3 (32:09):
There's only a few of them, right.
Speaker 2 (32:11):
They make it sound so logical that we should take
from people showing a profit and give it to the
state that's running a deficit.
Speaker 10 (32:18):
The aim would be to make up for a thirty
billion dollar healthcare funding shortfall due to federal Medicaid cuts.
The proposal needs around eight hundred and seventy five thousand
signatures to make it out of the November ballot.
Speaker 3 (32:29):
Then it would be up to the.
Speaker 10 (32:30):
Voters to decide whether or not to slap California's billionaires
with the one time tax.
Speaker 3 (32:35):
Yeah, slap the billionaires. Oh my goodness.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
All right, we are going down a wrong path by
demonizing successful people. We are a capitalist society. We love success,
we embrace success. We're not the country that gets mad
at people for driving the Rolls Royce down the boulevard.
We wish we drove the Rolls Royce down the boulevard.
We are a nation that invented lifestyles of the rich
(33:01):
and famous.
Speaker 3 (33:02):
We watched the Kardashians. I mean, come on, stop pretending
that we hate millionaires and billionaires.
Speaker 2 (33:08):
We end v millionaires and billionaires, especially ones that are
self made. Those are the best stories. And Democrats want
you to be mad at them because they mismanaged the
Sacramento budget and want you to be on their side
to punish them.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
For having the nerve to be a billionaire. It's just
terrible thinking.
Speaker 2 (33:29):
It's disastrous because it will never end right if this passes,
or if this even gets on the ballot, it becomes
a moral question because then it's like, well, there's a
healthcare shortfall because of the illegals, So we.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
Had to tax the billionaires one time five percent.
Speaker 2 (33:46):
The ones that were foolish enough to stay in California
and didn't bolt for Florida, they got hit. Many will leave,
so certainly they're not going to get anywhere near the
amount that they planned on getting. But then the next
it'll be, well, you know, we don't have enough funding
for school, and that's not fair, so let's hit the
millionaires and billionaires with another one time five percent hit,
(34:09):
because it's im moral to leave the kids without money
when people who were sick were without money, and we
backfilled the money with the maynaire the billionaire at tax.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
You see, it never ends.
Speaker 6 (34:21):
Right.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Once you start subsidizing inefficiency with efficiency in the form
of theft, which is effectively what this is, then it becomes.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
A moral not to do it to every constituency group.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
And the problem with socialism as it is, as it's
been said by the late great Margaret Thatcher so brilliantly,
is effect eventually you run out of other people's money.
It's easy to throw out other people's money, it's easy
to go after other people's money, it's easy to demonize
other people's money. What do they need two houses for?
What do they need a private jet for? How much
(34:56):
is enough?
Speaker 4 (34:57):
How?
Speaker 2 (34:57):
You hear this all the time, and that's it's a
very dangerous path to go down. Because you are allowed
to become wealthy in the United States. We encourage you
to become wealthy. The tax code is designed to advance you.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
You know why. You know why that is. You know
why we write the tax code that it's designed to
advance you. So there's more opportunity to keep more of
your own money.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
It's to keep you out of poverty. Poverty is expensive
for government. We don't want you broke, We don't want
you living paycheck to paycheck. So we designed a tax
code that lifts you up if you take advantage of
it and you stay out of poverty. And then, and
only then, if you want to charitably, you can give
(35:44):
back and help other people.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
It's the only way it works.
Speaker 2 (35:47):
Lou Penrose on KFI AM six forty live everywhere on
the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (35:52):
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 monk Monday
through Friday, and of course anytime on demand on the
iHeartRadio app.
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.