November 21, 2024 • 35 mins
Hour 4 of A&G features...
- CA voters reject minimum wage hike
- The sound that will haunt you forever
- Matt Gaetz drops out!
- Final Thoughts!
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
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 (00:01):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe, Katty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Arm Strong and Jetty and no he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Wicked hits theaters tomorrow.
Speaker 4 (00:26):
Here you.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
And so far the movie is getting rave reviews. They're
very interesting that check out what they said. For instance,
this review said magical and uplifting and hang on, that's
actually a review for the shrooms your cousin brings to
Thanksgiving and that's sorry. This next review called it the
tale of two people who has.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Passed never should have crossed.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Hang on, that's actually a review for Mike Tyson versus
Jake PAULMS.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
This is a mistake. I'm so sorry. Here's another.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
This review said Oz is back. This is insane. Don't
get ahead of me. I heard of you for Trump
putting doctor Oz and chars and medicare.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
That's yeah, this is a likable guy.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
So uh uh.
Speaker 5 (01:19):
Seinfeld says Fallen is the most normal person he's ever
met in short show business, which always sticks in my head.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
I find that very interesting.
Speaker 5 (01:26):
Uh So, Wicked is a reimagining of the Wizard of
Oz movie correct, and it's supposed to be really cool,
so I might actually take the kids to that. I mean,
my high schooler will hate it, but he hates everything,
So what are you gonna do?
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Ye the novel Wicked, and then you had the musical,
and this is yet a different mutation of it that
I don't think resembles the novel much, but I don't know.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
So I want.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
I only bring that up because I thought the novel
was fantastic.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Oh you did really interesting? Okay, cool, Well then the
movie might be good. It's kind it might be wildly different.
It's got a ton of big stars in it, which
is why on Saturday Night Live they did a sketch
about the screen tests for Wicked and all the different
people who had tried out for it. I meant to
grab this audio, what I never did, but so one
of them was Bernie Sanders trying out for a part
(02:14):
in Wicked, and it's Bernie Sanders says, the.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
Wizard has millions and billions of dollars.
Speaker 5 (02:20):
Well, meanwhile, the munchkins are living paycheck to paycheckutiful.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
I thought that was hilarious. Yeah good, yeah, Oh, coming up.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
We did one of those war game simulation thingies, which
I don't know how they work or how accurate they are,
but the Pentagon does it to see if we could
win a war, for instance, against China f China tries
to take Taiwan, and they briefed Congress on that yesterday
and some of the results are horrifying.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
So stay tuned. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
I actually read something a couple of weeks ago about
a father and son I think they're Brits that came
up with a computer game that was like the game Risk,
but not so boring and long. But it was essentially wargaming,
a wargaming computer game where you would assign assets and
(03:12):
weapons systems and move it around and employ different strategies
and stuff like that. And it's so good, and it
became so good they're now teaching it at like the
US War College and West Point and they use it
to wargame, which is really a story I think about
private enterprise and the amazing things you can do with
a little innovation.
Speaker 5 (03:32):
There's a major caveat to this report, major, like so
major it makes you wonder why you even read the
report at Stay tuned.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Okay, all right, fair enough, So we have been trying
to help people understand for a long time about how
artificially mandated minimum wages, essentially the government mandating, let's see,
for that work, you shall pay them that amount, is
a terrible idea. It's bad for workers, it's bad for business,
(04:00):
is bad for the economy, and that's just not the
way the labor market works, and it causes real damage.
And the fabulous Katie Grimes of the California Globe was
writing about this and she's it came up because Californians, shockingly,
for the first time ever, rejected a minimum wage referendum
a proposition, and it was rejected fairly narrowly, but it
(04:21):
would erased the state minimum wage to eighteen bucks for everything.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Wow. Now, now non Californians are saying.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
Well, didn't y'all raise it to twenty bucks? No, that
was just for fast food workers for some reason. Actually,
the reason is because the Service Employees International Union wants
to unionize fast food work.
Speaker 5 (04:39):
Fast food that doesn't serve bread in some capacity.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
There was a weird carve out for putting Rona Gavin's buddies.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (04:50):
But anyway, the folks at the Employment Policies Institute of
California had took a serious look at what has happened
since the increase in the fast food minimum wage. The
rejection comes on the heels of California's twenty dollars minimum
wage law for fast food workers that seen severe backlash
(05:11):
from employees and business owners alike and led to a
notable amount of business closures and job losses that should
be numbered.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
Not amount. You need me as your editor.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Anyway, Californians are sending Gavenusom in the SEIU a clear
message they're sick of being lab rats for the pet
projects devastating economic fallout center.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Here are the specifics.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
After the implementation of the twenty dollars minimum wage. The
EPI survey found that the majority of restaurants say they
have the majority they've raised menu prices ninety eight percent.
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Yes, we've raised menu prices.
Speaker 5 (05:47):
So they called almost all the majority nice writing also.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Well, katie's busy and she's fabulous. Anyway.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Now, the devil's ad position might be, well, there's been
there are other reasons for raising prices, you know, inputs,
inflation and stuff like that. You're absolutely right, But the
idea that labor is in a significant part of the
cost of a fast food restaurant you don't know anything
about fast food restaurants anyway. What percentage of fast food
(06:19):
restaurants reduced employee hours? This got nothing to do with
the price base eighty nine percent, eighty nine limited employee
shift to pick up or overtime rules seventy three percent,
or just flat reduced staff seventy percent was the result
of the minimum wage law.
Speaker 5 (06:41):
Wow, well, of course, of course, what are you gonna do?
I mean, I just I don't I don't understand. This
is one of those where you always say, like, if
you had ten minutes with people, you could have convinced
them to vote the other way if you have to
pay more for your workers. It's because so many people
(07:03):
believe that prices are just like random, arbitrarily set. Yeah,
they're arbitrarily said. There's no supply and demand curve or
anything like that, So the restaurant can just charge more
for their hamburgers to cover those costs and the same
number of customers will come and eat there.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
That just doesn't make any sense if you're a child.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Right, right, it really doesn't. And again, it doesn't take
a lot of economics training to understand the supply and
demand curves and elasticity. What elasticity is, anyway, has nothing
to do with your sweatpants.
Speaker 5 (07:39):
You're wearing their to your Thanksgiving dinner. Michael, And what's
your favorite example of inelastic product? I have mine from
economics in college. I always always my.
Speaker 2 (07:52):
Favorite example snake bite anti venom.
Speaker 5 (07:55):
That's a pretty good one. Salt you're gonna buy the
same amount of if it was twice as much or
half as much, it's twice practically nothing.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
Yeah, but you know, elasticity essentially means the tendency of
people to increase or decrease their purchase of it based
on price. So if if I walk into the hospital
and say, I just got bit by a rattlesnake, which
I've avoided through the years, it's more rare than you think.
(08:30):
But there are a lot of rattlesnake anyway, Sorry, I
just had to kill one not long ago. I meant relocated.
I relocated it right to a farm upstate. Anyway, me
and Madam tangents. Oh, if I walk into the hospital
(08:50):
and they say, you know, hey, good news, Joe, We've
got two for one on rattlesnake anti venom, I'm like,
I just need the one, right.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
I'll pay you the five one hundred dollars.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
And if they said, did we say five hundred dollars,
it just went up to five thousand, and you're going
to be dead in half an hour. If so, you've
got no time to go to the other hospital. I'm
saying five grand. It is dot cook me up. There's
zero elasticity there.
Speaker 5 (09:13):
It's one as opposed to a particular restaurant that raises
their prices and you just think this is worth it,
and you don't go there anymore.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
You go to other restaurants or eat home. Right, Yeah, exactly.
You have many, many alternatives anyway, So how about next year?
Speaker 1 (09:26):
The restaurants surveyed said next year, ninety three percent are
going to raise their prices again.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
They'll have to Wow.
Speaker 5 (09:35):
Man, I'm glad she wrote about this. I wish more
people were aware of this. They should be teaching this
in school. Going forward, eighty.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Seven percent said we're going to reduce employee hours even more.
Eighty seven percent, reduce staff or consolidate positions that means
fire people seventy four percent.
Speaker 5 (09:54):
So three quarters of them are going to reduce people.
So your effort to to make a better life for
employees for a whole bunch of them. You made their
lives much worse as they no longer have a job. Yeah,
which is the most practically the most well, is the
most frightening thing that can happen to you job wise,
(10:15):
losing your job.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
The best number that the good folks at the Employment
Policies Institute can come up with last year as a
net job I'm sorry, since January is a net job
loss of forty four hundred jobs.
Speaker 2 (10:29):
Yeah, well California.
Speaker 5 (10:30):
Well, I would like to know for the cut hours thing,
which you said, what was ninety percent of them? Because
employers don't like to fire people, see, but they probably
cut a ton of people's hours.
Speaker 1 (10:41):
Yeah, yeah, so yeah, forty five hundred people or so
now have no job at all because of this, many
many thousands have fewer hours and have had to pick
up another job. Thanks, Gavin, You're a real friggin saint.
And more to come. This year, almost without a doubt,
(11:01):
the state has seen the first fast the worst fast
food job growth rate since the Great Recession.
Speaker 4 (11:09):
Anyway, that's I can't believe the voters were into this
enough to reject an all out minimum wage race for
everyone and.
Speaker 5 (11:22):
I thought I read the other day, is the first
time a minimum waged prop had lost in America since
the nineties mid nineties. I'm glad people have caught onto
this the way it works. Man, if everything had gone
up to eighteen dollars an hour in California, wooh, that'd
have been rough.
Speaker 4 (11:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
I love the idea of the states being laboratories at democracy.
It's a wonderful, wonderful vision. I just it depends on
the lab results being reported accurately to everybody else to
hear how it came out, and the prejudices of our media.
Speaker 2 (11:57):
You know.
Speaker 1 (11:57):
I would like to think if I were staunchly in
face of a policy and it turned out to be
a disastrous mistake, I.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
Would say so.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
In fact, I have said so through the years. I
can think of a couple of different examples. What's the
matter with you? Moral cowards? And you liars?
Speaker 2 (12:13):
Who can't you just I don't know what's.
Speaker 1 (12:15):
Wrong with you that you won't say, Wow, I was
My intentions were great, honest to God.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
Because I think a lot of you are.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
You think this is a good idea to help poor people,
You're wrong. That doesn't make you a bad person. But
when you won't admit you're wrong and let the damage
continue to more and more poor people, that does make
you a bad person.
Speaker 5 (12:34):
But so like Bernie, I think Bernie's completely sincere on this,
and he talks about a living wage. How has he
not come across the information that if you paid people
a wage where they could support their family, you wouldn't
have a single restaurant in the country.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
Certainly fast food. Yeah, I don't know. I'd love to
have that conversation with him, But like both, my kids
can't wait till they can work jobs. Unfortunately, in modern
society you have to be sixteen. I was working when
I was twelve, thirteen, whatever. But my son, who's going
to be fifteen here soon, I can't wait to get
(13:10):
a job be less like much less likely a job.
Speaker 5 (13:13):
If they raise the minimum waged eighteen, it could be
that many fewer jobs for people with his skills, which are.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
Zero, right, right, And actually it occurs to me what
Bernie's answer would be. But we don't really have time now,
but we'll squeeze it in a bit.
Speaker 5 (13:25):
This whole war games thing with China is super duper interesting. Well,
we got to tell you about that. If you haven't
heard the as tech death whistle. You won't forget it.
You won't forget it. I don't want to hear it again.
It frightened me too badly the first time.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Okay, stay tuned. I don't want to know how I
spent the commercials.
Speaker 5 (13:46):
Besides writing down the phone numbers and names of all
of our clients, i's been.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
Reading up on its sponsors.
Speaker 5 (13:53):
Haven't been reading up on the as techs since we're
about to hear a weird sound. The as techs indigenous
to Mexico and thriving civilization city states. Everything very modern,
any like anything Europad. I've been to the big pyramid
there outside of Mexico City. That's bigger, as big as
(14:13):
the pyramids in Egypt. It's really quite amazing. But the
Aztecs were conquered in fifteen twenty one when the Spanish
showed up and killed them off. But the Aztecs were
into cannibalism and human sacrifice. Just reading there is a
documentation of one site where they believe eighty thousand prisoners
were sacrificed over four days.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Oh yeah, can you.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
Imagine sacrifice to prisoners of Waria.
Speaker 5 (14:39):
Between one thousand and twenty thousand annually at least. But
can you imagine eighty thousand slayings of humans in four days,
just the organization of that, what it would be like.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
Well, and it's thought that during before those those rituals,
they would blow the Aztec death whistle, and archaeologists uncovered
this and noticed it was a musical instrument looking thing,
but blew through it.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Now they blow through three D.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Replicas of it, so they're not messing with the actual artifacts.
And then they've done psychological experiments on how people react
to this whistle. And if you're listening, if you've been listening,
if you're listening to the podcast in the future, First
of all, did Elon make it to Mars the.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
Whole trump thing? How'd that work out?
Speaker 1 (15:29):
Anyway, we played this earlier and people drove off the
road and we apologize for that. But this is the
whistle that they would blow during the ceremonies.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
Oh, like that freaks me out. Man. Imagine if you
had a whole bunch of people blowing that at the
same time.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
Oh my god, oh, on each side of you as
you're the young boy about to be sacrificed, and you
got that going on or completely.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Oh please, so I haunt my dreams.
Speaker 5 (16:04):
I've eaten some ass tech food when I was down
in Mexico and stuff like that, and visited the sites
and done all the stuff, you know.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
Blah. But the sacrifice and killing.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
They would sacrifice French warriors from all the tribes that
they conquered, or they could sacrifice their own people to
various gods and everything like that. But the idea of
colonialism and how awful it is, and the Spanish came
and destroyed their culture and all that sort of thing.
You think the Aztecs wouldn't have done that to Spain
if they'd have had the right ships and could have
done it.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Of course they would have.
Speaker 5 (16:29):
They just slaughtered them by the tens of thousands, in
the same way.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
They did nearby tribes.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
Yeah, and they wouldn't have kept their warriors in nice
camps and fed them. They'd feed them into volcanoes and
blow the damn death.
Speaker 5 (16:46):
Oh my god, that's right. There are some cultures that
are better than others. Ours is better than the Aztecs
or the Chinese Communist Party. It was hell bent on
taking over the world, with one step being taking Taiwan.
We did some war games recently on how we would
(17:06):
fare in that battle. How did it come out?
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Well?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
The report was released yesterday Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:13):
A new escalation, massive explosions rocking Russia's cursed regions, Ukraine
launching at least ten British made storm shadow cruise missiles.
Ukraine fighting to hold onto a small patch of Russian territory,
is holds in Kursk to use as leverage, but Russian forces,
assisted by thousands of North Korean soldiers, are slowly pushing
them back. The US in another policy reversal, now allowing
(17:37):
Ukraine to use anti personnel land mines to try to
slow the Russians down, with.
Speaker 5 (17:41):
The theory being that we're trying to or Biden's trying
to get Ukraine in the best position for making some
sort of deal.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
I guess.
Speaker 5 (17:51):
Russia did or didn't fire a ballistic missile today That'll
be sorted out throughout the next hours in a provocative
of move. But I suppose, well, one if the war ends,
we stop expending a lot of our munitions, which is
going to fit in with our next story, but you know,
(18:12):
and people stop dying, and then also the opportunity for
it to spire. A lot of control goes way down
if there's a settlement of some sort.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
Hey, I think I have breaking news.
Speaker 5 (18:21):
Breaking easy for me to say, I'm not a Ukrainian
who's about to give up twenty percent of their country
to an evil, murderous dictator.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
But that's probably what's going to happen.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
I win, I win. Matt Gates dropped out. He did
withdrawing his name from consideration. Wow, does it say what age,
what turned the tide? What made the difference, because I mean,
as of yesterday he was walking the halls. Although he
was walking the halls talking to senators.
Speaker 5 (18:46):
I wonder if he talked to enough senators that said, look,
I'm one hundred percent of no, one hundred percent, and
once he got past four, which is all he could lose,
and maybe he got to like twenty two who said
I'm an absolute no, no matter what happens, I'm a no.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
He said he didn't want to be a distraction of
the transition.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
Well, remember I opened this clastic, you know, political statement.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
I didn't predict he's gonna drop out, but I did
say this morning when we started, like does the Trump
administration want this to be the lead story every day
because it was the lead story last night, it was
a lead story this morning. There's always a new thing,
like it was the canceled checks they found from Gates
to the girls. It looks like for the sex and
the party and everything like that, they're just gonna let
(19:34):
Matt Gates be the lead story every news cycle for
two months.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Well, there are times you want to defy the media.
Speaker 1 (19:43):
If they all right, you make it the number one story,
we're gonna win this one.
Speaker 5 (19:46):
But there are times it's just not worth it. I'll
be interested in hearing the reporting.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
No what what? What made the difference?
Speaker 5 (19:56):
Maybe there was something that was so bad that somebody
said we're gonna let this come out and he said, okay.
Could be that could be from that report. There might be, Hey,
we know about the and who knows what that is? Yeah,
and they let him knowing that, Oh, I didn't think
anybody knew about that. I liked your senator theory more
because he and his people have been going around and
(20:17):
getting Hey, Matt.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
I like you.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
But I'm not going to die on this hill just
because the Biden justed the Justice administration the investigated the
guy for two years. I don't think decided not to
charge they would have leaked anything that would damage any Republican.
Speaker 5 (20:32):
I don't think these Republican senators would have said, hey,
I like you, but I'm a no vote. They would
have said, I hate you, and there's no way I'm
allowing you to be attorney general. Based on everything I've read,
everybody hates him except for like three people, Marjorie Taylor
Green and you know, Nancy Mace. Every other member of
the House, the Republicans and the House and the senators
(20:54):
that are Republicans hate him, absolutely loathe him. So they
might have made yeah, really clear. I wonder, Yeah, I
can't wait to read the reporting on that. Well, I
think that's good news. I think that's good news for
Trump and good things happening. You get somebody who's not
so dang controversial and move forward.
Speaker 1 (21:15):
Well, and my final comment on this will be and
I think I made this point earlier, and I compared
it to Rosa Parks being the perfect plaintiff in the
Birmingham bus case because she was unimpeachable, unimpunable as a
human being, and Gates is a scumbag, and he might
(21:36):
have been effective and some of the allegations against him
might be exaggerated or even false, but he's.
Speaker 2 (21:43):
Not a good guy.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
If you have somebody go into the Justice Department to
really strip it down and get rid of the rod,
and that person is like universally respected and is a
good scholar, and just you're in so.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Much better a position, way, way, way better.
Speaker 1 (22:04):
I know you want a bomb chucker, but have it
be a bomb chucker who can't be disregarded for dopey reasons. Again,
it's about effectiveness above all else.
Speaker 5 (22:13):
I don't know if Trump had any role in this whatsoever. If,
like you know, Susan Wiley is that her name, If
she went to Gates and said, hey, Trump, Trump wants
you to get out because he gets out now, it'll
be forgotten. It'll completely be forgotten. It did no damage whatsoever.
It'll be forgotten to history. It's overright. Whereas if you
(22:34):
let it drag out over the next couple of months,
it could be a really big deal.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
I asked Susie Wiles, Susie Wiles, there you go, Yeah,
here you go, Here you go.
Speaker 1 (22:42):
Mister Gates accompanied VP elect Jdvans across the Capitol, meeting
with Republican senators to win their support for his confirmation.
Many senators in both parties have expressed concern over the
choice of mister Gates to lead the Justice Department. That's
the way you phrase it in public. Behind the scenes,
you phrased it the way you just phrased Matt, I'm
a hard no.
Speaker 5 (23:02):
Don't waste your time, right, And there's a bunch of us,
Like I mean a bunch. Well, remember the Wall Street
Journal reported that there were thirty hard nos of the Republicans.
They said there were thirty people that said no way.
So if there was any number like that, of course
he got out. I had one other comment on this, Oh,
when we come back from our next break, I will
(23:22):
have for you some tweets of people saying it's the
deep state, the deep state one with their lies and
everything to keep you in Okay, here's doing everything that's
good in the world.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
And this might not necessarily refute that. But in addition
to his ethical and legal challenges, mister Gates has a
long record of gleefully disparaging some Republican.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Senators right whose votes he now needs to be confirmed. Yeah,
that's why they hate him. And they would say look,
I hate you.
Speaker 5 (23:49):
You have a.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
Wipe off the sofa where you're sitting. Fraidy Cassam, your
orgy hung on there. Huh you'r orgy monk. Hey, don't
get any orgy on my upholstery.
Speaker 5 (24:10):
You disgusting walking STD who said that the other day. Oh,
there's been dominant who couldn't be a bigger Trump honked like.
Speaker 2 (24:19):
To try to do anything to help Trump with everything. Yeah,
and he called him a walking STD.
Speaker 5 (24:29):
Oh all right, I feel like we need to take
a break and come back with the how the war
games went between US and China.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Yes, oh yeah, And I'll make this very very short.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
But we were asking before what Bernie Sanders response would
be to the the inevitable and obvious result of artificially
raised minimum wages, and that is that thousands of people
got laid off, many many thousands in California.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
Got their hours reduced, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
He would advocate, I'm sure for a government mandated maximum
level of profit and any profit beyond that.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
Would be distributed to the workers.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Workers would own the businesses in like the spirit of
the Soviet fantasy, and that less profitable to build businesses
would be subsidized by the high taxes on the more
profitable businesses, so everybody made a living wage, even if
their job was to, you know whatever, flip burgers or
something any child could be taught to do in ten minutes.
Speaker 5 (25:26):
By the way, I wouldn't cry any tears for Matt
Gates if you were a fan. I'm sure he's going
to work for some very lucrative company that his dad
sets him up with, and he'll live his party, privileged
lifestyle for the rest of his life. He'll be perfectly
fine without the scrutiny of the country. Bunch of good
stuff on the way, we will finish strong. Stay here.
(25:49):
Country music superstar Jelly Roll lost over one hundred pounds,
which you would have noticed if you watched the CMA's
last night.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
You walked out.
Speaker 5 (25:55):
A tiny sliver of what he has been as a
giant guy. See how long that lasts. Unfortunately, the diante,
oh you know how that works. Would the US win
a war with China over Taiwan? US lawmakers briefed on
the potential outcome yesterday in Congress. Here are some of
(26:15):
the headlines we uh the rest of the world could
probably stop China from taking Taiwan, But you would lose
a lot, is really the headline. House lawmakers were briefed
Wednesday about the potential outcome if the US were to
find itself at war with China over Taiwan within the
next two years, which is the expected timeline for China
(26:37):
to try to do this. The Chinese defense industrial base
is operating at a wartime footing, says the report.
Speaker 2 (26:45):
Are we operating at a wartime footing? We are not?
Speaker 5 (26:48):
Now has a shipbuilding capacity two hundred and thirty times
greater than the United States, making a potential invasion of
Taiwan a night not unlikely outcome.
Speaker 2 (27:00):
I think I've heard enough.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
Well, if it were not for China's financial and demographic problems,
if you're going to ask me what's the next thirty
years look like geopolitically, Joe, I'd say, well, they have
two hundred sometimes our shipbuilding capacity, and naval power is
going to be one of the deciding factors. So game over.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
Yeah. To steal a Joe Getti routine, it would be shocking.
Speaker 5 (27:26):
China has twice the shipbuilding capacity I'm sorry, twenty times, No,
two hundred and thirty times. The shipbuilding capacity in the
United States that is shocking. US military analysts have projected
twenty twenty seven is the year by which China would
be fully equipped for a military invasion. Explains how they
(27:49):
do the whole war games thing to try to figure
this out in China invading Taiwan, et cetera. During the simulation,
the costs for all sides were high. The US lost
ten to twenty warships, two aircraft carriers which would be huge,
two hundred to four hundred warplanes, and more than three
(28:10):
thousand troops were killed in the first three weeks of fighting.
China loses ninety percent of its amphibious fleet, fifty two
major surface warships and one hundred and sixty planes. The
idea being that we could hold them off to be
US in Japan mostly holding them off, but it would
(28:33):
be a hell of a price to pay. The report
emphasized four key points. One, Taiwan must hold the line
of the ground invasion be up to them for the
ground part.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
Two.
Speaker 5 (28:42):
There's no Ukraine model here where the United States can
slowly escalate. It must decide immediately whether it's fully coming
to Taiwan's defense. That's where the rubber meets the road
really stole the words out of my mouth. Yeah, all
of this depends on the will to engage in it.
What military operations would be conducted through Japan. For the
US needs to immediately increase its supply of anti ship missiles.
(29:04):
But as it say says here, the scenario all depends
on the current presidents, in this case, probably Trump's decisional
whether or not they're going to defend Taiwan. Trump has
made some noises in the past saying I don't think
we would or I don't think we should. And I
remember listening to the National Review podcast, which I listened
(29:25):
to every week.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I really love every member on their podcast.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
When they had this topic last year, sometimes said I
don't think we would, and I don't think we should
expend that level of expenditure three thousand. They don't think
the United States would have put up with the population
would be in.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
Favor of it.
Speaker 5 (29:41):
You know, we're you know, the politics runs our war machine.
The person that makes the decision as an elected official.
Three thousand deaths, two aircraft carriers, four hundred planes. Is
the average American into that for protecting Taiwan? They don't
even know what Taiwan is probably.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
Not right right, and we could make our own chips eventually,
et cetera, et cetera, not our issue.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
China would then control.
Speaker 5 (30:11):
I think the numbers are between twenty five and thirty
percent of international shipping. It would no longer be open
waters around the world as we have kept it since
World War Two, and the bridge kept it before then
that would be over.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
Right, right, Barbary pirates, et cetera.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
Yeah, I'm trying to figure out how this is not true.
I think we are heading toward another period of wars
of conquest. Vlad Putin kicked it off. Really, China's going
to continue it. China has made enormous inroads in our hemisphere.
In South America, by the way, I've been reading a
great deal about this as well, and they're doing it
(30:51):
by hook and crook and loan and assistance and trade
relationships and all sorts of stuff. As we've ignored our
own backyard to our detriment. But where those moves are resisted,
say in Central America or South America.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
There it's some country country X.
Speaker 1 (31:10):
Where the government officials or would be government officials become
more and more in league with China for their own profit,
and forces within that country decide to resist that because
they know how unholy and destructive that would be long term.
And the war is on with China backing guerrilla factions,
(31:31):
even if it's not overt first, you know, like non
proxy wars of conquest. They're backing of military factions in
our hemisphere.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
I think is about to explode.
Speaker 5 (31:42):
Yeah, and I think we don't come to Taiwan's defense,
which would be a great shame for the United States
of America, as we have promised that sort of thing.
Speaker 1 (31:55):
But I think there'd be a hell of a strong response,
but not trodding the full horse of the Navy and
our fighters out there.
Speaker 5 (32:02):
Now, Boy, would there be a strong response. As the
war games say, you're either all in or there's no point.
I'm sorry immediately quotes strong response. I should have said sanctions.
You announced the toughest sanctions.
Speaker 1 (32:12):
I wasn't going to use the S word, jack, but
you've laid it on the table. That's right, sanctions, the
toughest sanctions anyone has ever seen.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
It will be a pariah.
Speaker 5 (32:19):
China is now a pariah and they're isolated as Russia's
economy is growing faster than ours currently.
Speaker 2 (32:27):
They're isolated. Look up and smell reality.
Speaker 7 (32:34):
Strong Strong, You're ready?
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Yes, we love that one. I can back to a
simpler time, doesn't it.
Speaker 5 (32:51):
That was a hit song back in the day. Did
you know that, Katie? Maybe they're young. Here's your host
for final thoughts, Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Let's get a final.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
Talk from everybody on the crew. To wrap up the show.
There is our technical director, Michael Angelow, laboring away in
his cage, pressing the buttons. Michael, what's your final thought? Well,
we're one week away from Thanksgiving, and so the following
phrases is what I'll be saying to my.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
Relatives next week at this time.
Speaker 7 (33:13):
Let's see we got.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
Quit watching me too?
Speaker 1 (33:16):
And yes, this is my third plate, and you think
you're better than me? And finally, yes, I grab mashed
potatoes with my hand, deal with it.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
Wow, I place my rules.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
Katie Green are esteemed Newswoman. As a final thought, Katie.
Speaker 7 (33:31):
I'm gonna get my hands on one of.
Speaker 1 (33:32):
Those Aztec death whistles and just blow at whatever somebody's
bothering me.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
Wow, that'd be funny and horrifying. Jack final thought for us, Yeah,
I was just thinking.
Speaker 5 (33:45):
I need to set my parameters for the year on
weight gain. What am I willing to put up with
during this holiday season? Because if I don't have some
sort of range of acceptance, that could get out of
hand very quick.
Speaker 2 (33:56):
Yeah, it's funny.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
I was gonna mention and I went to my Bourbon
Appreciation Society dinner last night and my weight has been really,
really good.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
But the dessert was.
Speaker 1 (34:05):
A pecan pie with a full sized Reese's Peanut butter
cup on top of it.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
Of course, of course, the course plays off a little
of the pie, then a little of a cup.
Speaker 1 (34:17):
Put it in your mush and know that God wants
us to be happy.
Speaker 5 (34:21):
Of course, the pie has a giant Reese's Peanut butter
cup on top of it.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Of course I never eat stuff like that. I looked
at it, I'm like, what is this a joke? Well,
I'll try.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
It featuring pie surely. Yeah, that's true, that's Truely.
Speaker 5 (34:37):
Armstrong and getting wrapping up another grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
So many people thanks a little time.
Speaker 1 (34:42):
Good Armstrong and Getty dot Com, the superstore, get your cut.
Speaker 2 (34:45):
The crap T shirt. It's time to stand up to
the madness. The woke lunatics. Cut the crap back to sanity.
Why did Gates drop out?
Speaker 5 (34:53):
Spend the day looking into that, and we'll have all
the news for you tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
God bless America. I'm strong and it's mere sound could
could make you insane.
Speaker 1 (35:03):
Such as the what this one actually and I couldn't
believe it?
Speaker 2 (35:08):
Okay, what in the hell I mean? This feels like
a more red alert moment for democracy.
Speaker 5 (35:15):
So let's go with a buying so they like shelaq
the banana or pray shellac in the banana is not
something we need at all, not during the holiday season.
Speaker 2 (35:26):
Is strong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe, Katty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Arm Strong and Jetty and no he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Wicked hits theaters tomorrow.
Speaker 4 (00:26):
Here you.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
And so far the movie is getting rave reviews. They're
very interesting that check out what they said. For instance,
this review said magical and uplifting and hang on, that's
actually a review for the shrooms your cousin brings to
Thanksgiving and that's sorry. This next review called it the
tale of two people who has.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Passed never should have crossed.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
Hang on, that's actually a review for Mike Tyson versus
Jake PAULMS.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
This is a mistake. I'm so sorry. Here's another.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
This review said Oz is back. This is insane. Don't
get ahead of me. I heard of you for Trump
putting doctor Oz and chars and medicare.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
That's yeah, this is a likable guy.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
So uh uh.
Speaker 5 (01:19):
Seinfeld says Fallen is the most normal person he's ever
met in short show business, which always sticks in my head.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
I find that very interesting.
Speaker 5 (01:26):
Uh So, Wicked is a reimagining of the Wizard of
Oz movie correct, and it's supposed to be really cool,
so I might actually take the kids to that. I mean,
my high schooler will hate it, but he hates everything,
So what are you gonna do?
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Ye the novel Wicked, and then you had the musical,
and this is yet a different mutation of it that
I don't think resembles the novel much, but I don't know.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
So I want.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
I only bring that up because I thought the novel
was fantastic.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Oh you did really interesting? Okay, cool, Well then the
movie might be good. It's kind it might be wildly different.
It's got a ton of big stars in it, which
is why on Saturday Night Live they did a sketch
about the screen tests for Wicked and all the different
people who had tried out for it. I meant to
grab this audio, what I never did, but so one
of them was Bernie Sanders trying out for a part
(02:14):
in Wicked, and it's Bernie Sanders says, the.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
Wizard has millions and billions of dollars.
Speaker 5 (02:20):
Well, meanwhile, the munchkins are living paycheck to paycheckutiful.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
I thought that was hilarious. Yeah good, yeah, Oh, coming up.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
We did one of those war game simulation thingies, which
I don't know how they work or how accurate they are,
but the Pentagon does it to see if we could
win a war, for instance, against China f China tries
to take Taiwan, and they briefed Congress on that yesterday
and some of the results are horrifying.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
So stay tuned. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
I actually read something a couple of weeks ago about
a father and son I think they're Brits that came
up with a computer game that was like the game Risk,
but not so boring and long. But it was essentially wargaming,
a wargaming computer game where you would assign assets and
(03:12):
weapons systems and move it around and employ different strategies
and stuff like that. And it's so good, and it
became so good they're now teaching it at like the
US War College and West Point and they use it
to wargame, which is really a story I think about
private enterprise and the amazing things you can do with
a little innovation.
Speaker 5 (03:32):
There's a major caveat to this report, major, like so
major it makes you wonder why you even read the
report at Stay tuned.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Okay, all right, fair enough, So we have been trying
to help people understand for a long time about how
artificially mandated minimum wages, essentially the government mandating, let's see,
for that work, you shall pay them that amount, is
a terrible idea. It's bad for workers, it's bad for business,
(04:00):
is bad for the economy, and that's just not the
way the labor market works, and it causes real damage.
And the fabulous Katie Grimes of the California Globe was
writing about this and she's it came up because Californians, shockingly,
for the first time ever, rejected a minimum wage referendum
a proposition, and it was rejected fairly narrowly, but it
(04:21):
would erased the state minimum wage to eighteen bucks for everything.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Wow. Now, now non Californians are saying.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
Well, didn't y'all raise it to twenty bucks? No, that
was just for fast food workers for some reason. Actually,
the reason is because the Service Employees International Union wants
to unionize fast food work.
Speaker 5 (04:39):
Fast food that doesn't serve bread in some capacity.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
There was a weird carve out for putting Rona Gavin's buddies.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (04:50):
But anyway, the folks at the Employment Policies Institute of
California had took a serious look at what has happened
since the increase in the fast food minimum wage. The
rejection comes on the heels of California's twenty dollars minimum
wage law for fast food workers that seen severe backlash
(05:11):
from employees and business owners alike and led to a
notable amount of business closures and job losses that should
be numbered.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
Not amount. You need me as your editor.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Anyway, Californians are sending Gavenusom in the SEIU a clear
message they're sick of being lab rats for the pet
projects devastating economic fallout center.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Here are the specifics.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
After the implementation of the twenty dollars minimum wage. The
EPI survey found that the majority of restaurants say they
have the majority they've raised menu prices ninety eight percent.
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Yes, we've raised menu prices.
Speaker 5 (05:47):
So they called almost all the majority nice writing also.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Well, katie's busy and she's fabulous. Anyway.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
Now, the devil's ad position might be, well, there's been
there are other reasons for raising prices, you know, inputs,
inflation and stuff like that. You're absolutely right, But the
idea that labor is in a significant part of the
cost of a fast food restaurant you don't know anything
about fast food restaurants anyway. What percentage of fast food
(06:19):
restaurants reduced employee hours? This got nothing to do with
the price base eighty nine percent, eighty nine limited employee
shift to pick up or overtime rules seventy three percent,
or just flat reduced staff seventy percent was the result
of the minimum wage law.
Speaker 5 (06:41):
Wow, well, of course, of course, what are you gonna do?
I mean, I just I don't I don't understand. This
is one of those where you always say, like, if
you had ten minutes with people, you could have convinced
them to vote the other way if you have to
pay more for your workers. It's because so many people
(07:03):
believe that prices are just like random, arbitrarily set. Yeah,
they're arbitrarily said. There's no supply and demand curve or
anything like that, So the restaurant can just charge more
for their hamburgers to cover those costs and the same
number of customers will come and eat there.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
That just doesn't make any sense if you're a child.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Right, right, it really doesn't. And again, it doesn't take
a lot of economics training to understand the supply and
demand curves and elasticity. What elasticity is, anyway, has nothing
to do with your sweatpants.
Speaker 5 (07:39):
You're wearing their to your Thanksgiving dinner. Michael, And what's
your favorite example of inelastic product? I have mine from
economics in college. I always always my.
Speaker 2 (07:52):
Favorite example snake bite anti venom.
Speaker 5 (07:55):
That's a pretty good one. Salt you're gonna buy the
same amount of if it was twice as much or
half as much, it's twice practically nothing.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
Yeah, but you know, elasticity essentially means the tendency of
people to increase or decrease their purchase of it based
on price. So if if I walk into the hospital
and say, I just got bit by a rattlesnake, which
I've avoided through the years, it's more rare than you think.
(08:30):
But there are a lot of rattlesnake anyway, Sorry, I
just had to kill one not long ago. I meant relocated.
I relocated it right to a farm upstate. Anyway, me
and Madam tangents. Oh, if I walk into the hospital
(08:50):
and they say, you know, hey, good news, Joe, We've
got two for one on rattlesnake anti venom, I'm like,
I just need the one, right.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
I'll pay you the five one hundred dollars.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
And if they said, did we say five hundred dollars,
it just went up to five thousand, and you're going
to be dead in half an hour. If so, you've
got no time to go to the other hospital. I'm
saying five grand. It is dot cook me up. There's
zero elasticity there.
Speaker 5 (09:13):
It's one as opposed to a particular restaurant that raises
their prices and you just think this is worth it,
and you don't go there anymore.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
You go to other restaurants or eat home. Right, Yeah, exactly.
You have many, many alternatives anyway, So how about next year?
Speaker 1 (09:26):
The restaurants surveyed said next year, ninety three percent are
going to raise their prices again.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
They'll have to Wow.
Speaker 5 (09:35):
Man, I'm glad she wrote about this. I wish more
people were aware of this. They should be teaching this
in school. Going forward, eighty.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Seven percent said we're going to reduce employee hours even more.
Eighty seven percent, reduce staff or consolidate positions that means
fire people seventy four percent.
Speaker 5 (09:54):
So three quarters of them are going to reduce people.
So your effort to to make a better life for
employees for a whole bunch of them. You made their
lives much worse as they no longer have a job. Yeah,
which is the most practically the most well, is the
most frightening thing that can happen to you job wise,
(10:15):
losing your job.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
The best number that the good folks at the Employment
Policies Institute can come up with last year as a
net job I'm sorry, since January is a net job
loss of forty four hundred jobs.
Speaker 2 (10:29):
Yeah, well California.
Speaker 5 (10:30):
Well, I would like to know for the cut hours thing,
which you said, what was ninety percent of them? Because
employers don't like to fire people, see, but they probably
cut a ton of people's hours.
Speaker 1 (10:41):
Yeah, yeah, so yeah, forty five hundred people or so
now have no job at all because of this, many
many thousands have fewer hours and have had to pick
up another job. Thanks, Gavin, You're a real friggin saint.
And more to come. This year, almost without a doubt,
(11:01):
the state has seen the first fast the worst fast
food job growth rate since the Great Recession.
Speaker 4 (11:09):
Anyway, that's I can't believe the voters were into this
enough to reject an all out minimum wage race for
everyone and.
Speaker 5 (11:22):
I thought I read the other day, is the first
time a minimum waged prop had lost in America since
the nineties mid nineties. I'm glad people have caught onto
this the way it works. Man, if everything had gone
up to eighteen dollars an hour in California, wooh, that'd
have been rough.
Speaker 4 (11:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
I love the idea of the states being laboratories at democracy.
It's a wonderful, wonderful vision. I just it depends on
the lab results being reported accurately to everybody else to
hear how it came out, and the prejudices of our media.
Speaker 2 (11:57):
You know.
Speaker 1 (11:57):
I would like to think if I were staunchly in
face of a policy and it turned out to be
a disastrous mistake, I.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
Would say so.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
In fact, I have said so through the years. I
can think of a couple of different examples. What's the
matter with you? Moral cowards? And you liars?
Speaker 2 (12:13):
Who can't you just I don't know what's.
Speaker 1 (12:15):
Wrong with you that you won't say, Wow, I was
My intentions were great, honest to God.
Speaker 2 (12:20):
Because I think a lot of you are.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
You think this is a good idea to help poor people,
You're wrong. That doesn't make you a bad person. But
when you won't admit you're wrong and let the damage
continue to more and more poor people, that does make
you a bad person.
Speaker 5 (12:34):
But so like Bernie, I think Bernie's completely sincere on this,
and he talks about a living wage. How has he
not come across the information that if you paid people
a wage where they could support their family, you wouldn't
have a single restaurant in the country.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
Certainly fast food. Yeah, I don't know. I'd love to
have that conversation with him, But like both, my kids
can't wait till they can work jobs. Unfortunately, in modern
society you have to be sixteen. I was working when
I was twelve, thirteen, whatever. But my son, who's going
to be fifteen here soon, I can't wait to get
(13:10):
a job be less like much less likely a job.
Speaker 5 (13:13):
If they raise the minimum waged eighteen, it could be
that many fewer jobs for people with his skills, which are.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
Zero, right, right, And actually it occurs to me what
Bernie's answer would be. But we don't really have time now,
but we'll squeeze it in a bit.
Speaker 5 (13:25):
This whole war games thing with China is super duper interesting. Well,
we got to tell you about that. If you haven't
heard the as tech death whistle. You won't forget it.
You won't forget it. I don't want to hear it again.
It frightened me too badly the first time.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Okay, stay tuned. I don't want to know how I
spent the commercials.
Speaker 5 (13:46):
Besides writing down the phone numbers and names of all
of our clients, i's been.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
Reading up on its sponsors.
Speaker 5 (13:53):
Haven't been reading up on the as techs since we're
about to hear a weird sound. The as techs indigenous
to Mexico and thriving civilization city states. Everything very modern,
any like anything Europad. I've been to the big pyramid
there outside of Mexico City. That's bigger, as big as
(14:13):
the pyramids in Egypt. It's really quite amazing. But the
Aztecs were conquered in fifteen twenty one when the Spanish
showed up and killed them off. But the Aztecs were
into cannibalism and human sacrifice. Just reading there is a
documentation of one site where they believe eighty thousand prisoners
were sacrificed over four days.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Oh yeah, can you.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
Imagine sacrifice to prisoners of Waria.
Speaker 5 (14:39):
Between one thousand and twenty thousand annually at least. But
can you imagine eighty thousand slayings of humans in four days,
just the organization of that, what it would be like.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
Well, and it's thought that during before those those rituals,
they would blow the Aztec death whistle, and archaeologists uncovered
this and noticed it was a musical instrument looking thing,
but blew through it.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Now they blow through three D.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Replicas of it, so they're not messing with the actual artifacts.
And then they've done psychological experiments on how people react
to this whistle. And if you're listening, if you've been listening,
if you're listening to the podcast in the future, First
of all, did Elon make it to Mars the.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
Whole trump thing? How'd that work out?
Speaker 1 (15:29):
Anyway, we played this earlier and people drove off the
road and we apologize for that. But this is the
whistle that they would blow during the ceremonies.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
Oh, like that freaks me out. Man. Imagine if you
had a whole bunch of people blowing that at the
same time.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
Oh my god, oh, on each side of you as
you're the young boy about to be sacrificed, and you
got that going on or completely.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Oh please, so I haunt my dreams.
Speaker 5 (16:04):
I've eaten some ass tech food when I was down
in Mexico and stuff like that, and visited the sites
and done all the stuff, you know.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
Blah. But the sacrifice and killing.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
They would sacrifice French warriors from all the tribes that
they conquered, or they could sacrifice their own people to
various gods and everything like that. But the idea of
colonialism and how awful it is, and the Spanish came
and destroyed their culture and all that sort of thing.
You think the Aztecs wouldn't have done that to Spain
if they'd have had the right ships and could have
done it.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Of course they would have.
Speaker 5 (16:29):
They just slaughtered them by the tens of thousands, in
the same way.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
They did nearby tribes.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
Yeah, and they wouldn't have kept their warriors in nice
camps and fed them. They'd feed them into volcanoes and
blow the damn death.
Speaker 5 (16:46):
Oh my god, that's right. There are some cultures that
are better than others. Ours is better than the Aztecs
or the Chinese Communist Party. It was hell bent on
taking over the world, with one step being taking Taiwan.
We did some war games recently on how we would
(17:06):
fare in that battle. How did it come out?
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Well?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
The report was released yesterday Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:13):
A new escalation, massive explosions rocking Russia's cursed regions, Ukraine
launching at least ten British made storm shadow cruise missiles.
Ukraine fighting to hold onto a small patch of Russian territory,
is holds in Kursk to use as leverage, but Russian forces,
assisted by thousands of North Korean soldiers, are slowly pushing
them back. The US in another policy reversal, now allowing
(17:37):
Ukraine to use anti personnel land mines to try to
slow the Russians down, with.
Speaker 5 (17:41):
The theory being that we're trying to or Biden's trying
to get Ukraine in the best position for making some
sort of deal.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
I guess.
Speaker 5 (17:51):
Russia did or didn't fire a ballistic missile today That'll
be sorted out throughout the next hours in a provocative
of move. But I suppose, well, one if the war ends,
we stop expending a lot of our munitions, which is
going to fit in with our next story, but you know,
(18:12):
and people stop dying, and then also the opportunity for
it to spire. A lot of control goes way down
if there's a settlement of some sort.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
Hey, I think I have breaking news.
Speaker 5 (18:21):
Breaking easy for me to say, I'm not a Ukrainian
who's about to give up twenty percent of their country
to an evil, murderous dictator.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
But that's probably what's going to happen.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
I win, I win. Matt Gates dropped out. He did
withdrawing his name from consideration. Wow, does it say what age,
what turned the tide? What made the difference, because I mean,
as of yesterday he was walking the halls. Although he
was walking the halls talking to senators.
Speaker 5 (18:46):
I wonder if he talked to enough senators that said, look,
I'm one hundred percent of no, one hundred percent, and
once he got past four, which is all he could lose,
and maybe he got to like twenty two who said
I'm an absolute no, no matter what happens, I'm a no.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
He said he didn't want to be a distraction of
the transition.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
Well, remember I opened this clastic, you know, political statement.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
I didn't predict he's gonna drop out, but I did
say this morning when we started, like does the Trump
administration want this to be the lead story every day
because it was the lead story last night, it was
a lead story this morning. There's always a new thing,
like it was the canceled checks they found from Gates
to the girls. It looks like for the sex and
the party and everything like that, they're just gonna let
(19:34):
Matt Gates be the lead story every news cycle for
two months.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Well, there are times you want to defy the media.
Speaker 1 (19:43):
If they all right, you make it the number one story,
we're gonna win this one.
Speaker 5 (19:46):
But there are times it's just not worth it. I'll
be interested in hearing the reporting.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
No what what? What made the difference?
Speaker 5 (19:56):
Maybe there was something that was so bad that somebody
said we're gonna let this come out and he said, okay.
Could be that could be from that report. There might be, Hey,
we know about the and who knows what that is? Yeah,
and they let him knowing that, Oh, I didn't think
anybody knew about that. I liked your senator theory more
because he and his people have been going around and
(20:17):
getting Hey, Matt.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
I like you.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
But I'm not going to die on this hill just
because the Biden justed the Justice administration the investigated the
guy for two years. I don't think decided not to
charge they would have leaked anything that would damage any Republican.
Speaker 5 (20:32):
I don't think these Republican senators would have said, hey,
I like you, but I'm a no vote. They would
have said, I hate you, and there's no way I'm
allowing you to be attorney general. Based on everything I've read,
everybody hates him except for like three people, Marjorie Taylor
Green and you know, Nancy Mace. Every other member of
the House, the Republicans and the House and the senators
(20:54):
that are Republicans hate him, absolutely loathe him. So they
might have made yeah, really clear. I wonder, Yeah, I
can't wait to read the reporting on that. Well, I
think that's good news. I think that's good news for
Trump and good things happening. You get somebody who's not
so dang controversial and move forward.
Speaker 1 (21:15):
Well, and my final comment on this will be and
I think I made this point earlier, and I compared
it to Rosa Parks being the perfect plaintiff in the
Birmingham bus case because she was unimpeachable, unimpunable as a
human being, and Gates is a scumbag, and he might
(21:36):
have been effective and some of the allegations against him
might be exaggerated or even false, but he's.
Speaker 2 (21:43):
Not a good guy.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
If you have somebody go into the Justice Department to
really strip it down and get rid of the rod,
and that person is like universally respected and is a
good scholar, and just you're in so.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Much better a position, way, way, way better.
Speaker 1 (22:04):
I know you want a bomb chucker, but have it
be a bomb chucker who can't be disregarded for dopey reasons. Again,
it's about effectiveness above all else.
Speaker 5 (22:13):
I don't know if Trump had any role in this whatsoever. If,
like you know, Susan Wiley is that her name, If
she went to Gates and said, hey, Trump, Trump wants
you to get out because he gets out now, it'll
be forgotten. It'll completely be forgotten. It did no damage whatsoever.
It'll be forgotten to history. It's overright. Whereas if you
(22:34):
let it drag out over the next couple of months,
it could be a really big deal.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
I asked Susie Wiles, Susie Wiles, there you go, Yeah,
here you go, Here you go.
Speaker 1 (22:42):
Mister Gates accompanied VP elect Jdvans across the Capitol, meeting
with Republican senators to win their support for his confirmation.
Many senators in both parties have expressed concern over the
choice of mister Gates to lead the Justice Department. That's
the way you phrase it in public. Behind the scenes,
you phrased it the way you just phrased Matt, I'm
a hard no.
Speaker 5 (23:02):
Don't waste your time, right, And there's a bunch of us,
Like I mean a bunch. Well, remember the Wall Street
Journal reported that there were thirty hard nos of the Republicans.
They said there were thirty people that said no way.
So if there was any number like that, of course
he got out. I had one other comment on this, Oh,
when we come back from our next break, I will
(23:22):
have for you some tweets of people saying it's the
deep state, the deep state one with their lies and
everything to keep you in Okay, here's doing everything that's
good in the world.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
And this might not necessarily refute that. But in addition
to his ethical and legal challenges, mister Gates has a
long record of gleefully disparaging some Republican.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Senators right whose votes he now needs to be confirmed. Yeah,
that's why they hate him. And they would say look,
I hate you.
Speaker 5 (23:49):
You have a.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
Wipe off the sofa where you're sitting. Fraidy Cassam, your
orgy hung on there. Huh you'r orgy monk. Hey, don't
get any orgy on my upholstery.
Speaker 5 (24:10):
You disgusting walking STD who said that the other day. Oh,
there's been dominant who couldn't be a bigger Trump honked like.
Speaker 2 (24:19):
To try to do anything to help Trump with everything. Yeah,
and he called him a walking STD.
Speaker 5 (24:29):
Oh all right, I feel like we need to take
a break and come back with the how the war
games went between US and China.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Yes, oh yeah, And I'll make this very very short.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
But we were asking before what Bernie Sanders response would
be to the the inevitable and obvious result of artificially
raised minimum wages, and that is that thousands of people
got laid off, many many thousands in California.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
Got their hours reduced, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
He would advocate, I'm sure for a government mandated maximum
level of profit and any profit beyond that.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
Would be distributed to the workers.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Workers would own the businesses in like the spirit of
the Soviet fantasy, and that less profitable to build businesses
would be subsidized by the high taxes on the more
profitable businesses, so everybody made a living wage, even if
their job was to, you know whatever, flip burgers or
something any child could be taught to do in ten minutes.
Speaker 5 (25:26):
By the way, I wouldn't cry any tears for Matt
Gates if you were a fan. I'm sure he's going
to work for some very lucrative company that his dad
sets him up with, and he'll live his party, privileged
lifestyle for the rest of his life. He'll be perfectly
fine without the scrutiny of the country. Bunch of good
stuff on the way, we will finish strong. Stay here.
(25:49):
Country music superstar Jelly Roll lost over one hundred pounds,
which you would have noticed if you watched the CMA's
last night.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
You walked out.
Speaker 5 (25:55):
A tiny sliver of what he has been as a
giant guy. See how long that lasts. Unfortunately, the diante,
oh you know how that works. Would the US win
a war with China over Taiwan? US lawmakers briefed on
the potential outcome yesterday in Congress. Here are some of
(26:15):
the headlines we uh the rest of the world could
probably stop China from taking Taiwan, But you would lose
a lot, is really the headline. House lawmakers were briefed
Wednesday about the potential outcome if the US were to
find itself at war with China over Taiwan within the
next two years, which is the expected timeline for China
(26:37):
to try to do this. The Chinese defense industrial base
is operating at a wartime footing, says the report.
Speaker 2 (26:45):
Are we operating at a wartime footing? We are not?
Speaker 5 (26:48):
Now has a shipbuilding capacity two hundred and thirty times
greater than the United States, making a potential invasion of
Taiwan a night not unlikely outcome.
Speaker 2 (27:00):
I think I've heard enough.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
Well, if it were not for China's financial and demographic problems,
if you're going to ask me what's the next thirty
years look like geopolitically, Joe, I'd say, well, they have
two hundred sometimes our shipbuilding capacity, and naval power is
going to be one of the deciding factors. So game over.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
Yeah. To steal a Joe Getti routine, it would be shocking.
Speaker 5 (27:26):
China has twice the shipbuilding capacity I'm sorry, twenty times, No,
two hundred and thirty times. The shipbuilding capacity in the
United States that is shocking. US military analysts have projected
twenty twenty seven is the year by which China would
be fully equipped for a military invasion. Explains how they
(27:49):
do the whole war games thing to try to figure
this out in China invading Taiwan, et cetera. During the simulation,
the costs for all sides were high. The US lost
ten to twenty warships, two aircraft carriers which would be huge,
two hundred to four hundred warplanes, and more than three
(28:10):
thousand troops were killed in the first three weeks of fighting.
China loses ninety percent of its amphibious fleet, fifty two
major surface warships and one hundred and sixty planes. The
idea being that we could hold them off to be
US in Japan mostly holding them off, but it would
(28:33):
be a hell of a price to pay. The report
emphasized four key points. One, Taiwan must hold the line
of the ground invasion be up to them for the
ground part.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
Two.
Speaker 5 (28:42):
There's no Ukraine model here where the United States can
slowly escalate. It must decide immediately whether it's fully coming
to Taiwan's defense. That's where the rubber meets the road
really stole the words out of my mouth. Yeah, all
of this depends on the will to engage in it.
What military operations would be conducted through Japan. For the
US needs to immediately increase its supply of anti ship missiles.
(29:04):
But as it say says here, the scenario all depends
on the current presidents, in this case, probably Trump's decisional
whether or not they're going to defend Taiwan. Trump has
made some noises in the past saying I don't think
we would or I don't think we should. And I
remember listening to the National Review podcast, which I listened
(29:25):
to every week.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I really love every member on their podcast.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
When they had this topic last year, sometimes said I
don't think we would, and I don't think we should
expend that level of expenditure three thousand. They don't think
the United States would have put up with the population
would be in.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
Favor of it.
Speaker 5 (29:41):
You know, we're you know, the politics runs our war machine.
The person that makes the decision as an elected official.
Three thousand deaths, two aircraft carriers, four hundred planes. Is
the average American into that for protecting Taiwan? They don't
even know what Taiwan is probably.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
Not right right, and we could make our own chips eventually,
et cetera, et cetera, not our issue.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
China would then control.
Speaker 5 (30:11):
I think the numbers are between twenty five and thirty
percent of international shipping. It would no longer be open
waters around the world as we have kept it since
World War Two, and the bridge kept it before then
that would be over.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
Right, right, Barbary pirates, et cetera.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
Yeah, I'm trying to figure out how this is not true.
I think we are heading toward another period of wars
of conquest. Vlad Putin kicked it off. Really, China's going
to continue it. China has made enormous inroads in our hemisphere.
In South America, by the way, I've been reading a
great deal about this as well, and they're doing it
(30:51):
by hook and crook and loan and assistance and trade
relationships and all sorts of stuff. As we've ignored our
own backyard to our detriment. But where those moves are resisted,
say in Central America or South America.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
There it's some country country X.
Speaker 1 (31:10):
Where the government officials or would be government officials become
more and more in league with China for their own profit,
and forces within that country decide to resist that because
they know how unholy and destructive that would be long term.
And the war is on with China backing guerrilla factions,
(31:31):
even if it's not overt first, you know, like non
proxy wars of conquest. They're backing of military factions in
our hemisphere.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
I think is about to explode.
Speaker 5 (31:42):
Yeah, and I think we don't come to Taiwan's defense,
which would be a great shame for the United States
of America, as we have promised that sort of thing.
Speaker 1 (31:55):
But I think there'd be a hell of a strong response,
but not trodding the full horse of the Navy and
our fighters out there.
Speaker 5 (32:02):
Now, Boy, would there be a strong response. As the
war games say, you're either all in or there's no point.
I'm sorry immediately quotes strong response. I should have said sanctions.
You announced the toughest sanctions.
Speaker 1 (32:12):
I wasn't going to use the S word, jack, but
you've laid it on the table. That's right, sanctions, the
toughest sanctions anyone has ever seen.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
It will be a pariah.
Speaker 5 (32:19):
China is now a pariah and they're isolated as Russia's
economy is growing faster than ours currently.
Speaker 2 (32:27):
They're isolated. Look up and smell reality.
Speaker 7 (32:34):
Strong Strong, You're ready?
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Yes, we love that one. I can back to a
simpler time, doesn't it.
Speaker 5 (32:51):
That was a hit song back in the day. Did
you know that, Katie? Maybe they're young. Here's your host
for final thoughts, Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Let's get a final.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
Talk from everybody on the crew. To wrap up the show.
There is our technical director, Michael Angelow, laboring away in
his cage, pressing the buttons. Michael, what's your final thought? Well,
we're one week away from Thanksgiving, and so the following
phrases is what I'll be saying to my.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
Relatives next week at this time.
Speaker 7 (33:13):
Let's see we got.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
Quit watching me too?
Speaker 1 (33:16):
And yes, this is my third plate, and you think
you're better than me? And finally, yes, I grab mashed
potatoes with my hand, deal with it.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
Wow, I place my rules.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
Katie Green are esteemed Newswoman. As a final thought, Katie.
Speaker 7 (33:31):
I'm gonna get my hands on one of.
Speaker 1 (33:32):
Those Aztec death whistles and just blow at whatever somebody's
bothering me.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
Wow, that'd be funny and horrifying. Jack final thought for us, Yeah,
I was just thinking.
Speaker 5 (33:45):
I need to set my parameters for the year on
weight gain. What am I willing to put up with
during this holiday season? Because if I don't have some
sort of range of acceptance, that could get out of
hand very quick.
Speaker 2 (33:56):
Yeah, it's funny.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
I was gonna mention and I went to my Bourbon
Appreciation Society dinner last night and my weight has been really,
really good.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
But the dessert was.
Speaker 1 (34:05):
A pecan pie with a full sized Reese's Peanut butter
cup on top of it.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
Of course, of course, the course plays off a little
of the pie, then a little of a cup.
Speaker 1 (34:17):
Put it in your mush and know that God wants
us to be happy.
Speaker 5 (34:21):
Of course, the pie has a giant Reese's Peanut butter
cup on top of it.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Of course I never eat stuff like that. I looked
at it, I'm like, what is this a joke? Well,
I'll try.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
It featuring pie surely. Yeah, that's true, that's Truely.
Speaker 5 (34:37):
Armstrong and getting wrapping up another grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
So many people thanks a little time.
Speaker 1 (34:42):
Good Armstrong and Getty dot Com, the superstore, get your cut.
Speaker 2 (34:45):
The crap T shirt. It's time to stand up to
the madness. The woke lunatics. Cut the crap back to sanity.
Why did Gates drop out?
Speaker 5 (34:53):
Spend the day looking into that, and we'll have all
the news for you tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
God bless America. I'm strong and it's mere sound could
could make you insane.
Speaker 1 (35:03):
Such as the what this one actually and I couldn't
believe it?
Speaker 2 (35:08):
Okay, what in the hell I mean? This feels like
a more red alert moment for democracy.
Speaker 5 (35:15):
So let's go with a buying so they like shelaq
the banana or pray shellac in the banana is not
something we need at all, not during the holiday season.
Speaker 2 (35:26):
Is strong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.