You Were Driving Down America's Happiness Rating

Hour 4 of A&G features...

• What's classified & what's not?
• International day of happiness!
• What would happen if people were more realistic about happiness?
• Final Thoughts! 

Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Jetty and he Armstrong and Yetty.

Speaker 3 (00:23):
I always say you have to learn from every experience.
I think it was very unfair the way they attacked Michael.
He's a a big person. The main thing was nothing happened.
The attack was totally successful. It was I guess from
what I understand, took place during and it wasn't classified information.

(00:43):
So this was not classified.

Speaker 4 (00:46):
Wasn't classified information that I don't know. What's classified and
what's not classified seems to be an ongoing question in
our country, depending on which parties on the wrong side
of having boxes in their garage next to their corvette
or in the batmarl lago or on a private server
in New York if you're Hillary or whatever. We keep
hearing different stories about what's classified and what's not. Were

(01:09):
they war plans or not? It seems pretty clear. But
before we get to that, based on today's news. But
here's a little more. Donald Trump, I.

Speaker 3 (01:15):
Don't know anything about Sigma. I wasn't involved in this,
but I just turned about it and I hear It's
used by a lot of groups. It's used by the
media a lot, it's used by a lot of the military,
and I think successfully.

Speaker 2 (01:29):
But sometimes somebody.

Speaker 3 (01:30):
Can get onto those things. That's one of the prices
you pay when you're not sitting in the situation room
with no phones on, which is always the best frantically.

Speaker 4 (01:39):
Yeah, And I don't understand why they don't do that
more often. I mean, I got to believe prior to
fifteen years ago, didn't they all have to get together
in a room more or less. Yeah, you wouldn't use
a landline for that.

Speaker 2 (01:53):
From now, I wouldn't think.

Speaker 1 (01:56):
So.

Speaker 4 (01:56):
Was it just that I feel that kind of comes
with the job. If I'm CIA director or Secretary of State,
I get called in on Saturdays at two because we're
going to discuss the biggest military attack of the administration,
and you've got to be there in person. You can't
be your son's soccer game, jumping on the phone real

(02:17):
quick to text U.

Speaker 3 (02:19):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:20):
I've worked in zero administrations. I would love to hear
the answer to this question. Putting aside partisanship and raw
for my side or boo for the other side, I
would just like to know the idea being Yeah, I'm
running around doing my job and my real life, but
the National Security Advisor wanted to update us and let
us know that the weather is clear and things.

Speaker 2 (02:41):
Are looking good.

Speaker 1 (02:42):
I don't think you need to be called in to
a skiff for the you know, the situation room to
get that sort of update. I think it's appropriate that
I don't have any they have a way to communicate.

Speaker 4 (02:55):
I'm both shocked and not shocked given our current political climate,
I guess it's not shocking, but how why can't we
get an answer on all of this stuff? What's classified?
What's not classified? What are the penalties for this? When
are you supposed to use this signal?

Speaker 2 (03:14):
App or not?

Speaker 4 (03:15):
To see how I hate directresses? Everybody uses it. Lots
of people say everybody use it, have then use it.
Other people say it's outrageous, it's ridiculous that anybody even
considered using it. Okay, Well, those are two very polar
opposite points of view, and one of them is true.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
I assume or even the story that no, there was
an update in February that went out that said, no,
the Russians have figured out a way to hack signal,
don't use it.

Speaker 2 (03:38):
Anymore. Well, clearly somebody didn't hear it.

Speaker 1 (03:41):
I find it impossible to believe that Marco Rubio right
got that update and said, yeah, well I really like
signal though, so I'm gonna go ahead and take my chances.

Speaker 2 (03:49):
I just don't buy that.

Speaker 4 (03:50):
I'm surprised I haven't heard from Marco in this whole thing,
because he's a very serious guy. The fact that he
was on there as part of that makes me think
that it is done regularly, or he would have said, no,
what are we doing here?

Speaker 2 (04:03):
I'm just guessing. I'm just guessing.

Speaker 1 (04:05):
I have a feeling Marco, who is very serious and
very buttoned up, is horrified and pissed off at Mike
Walltz and or his staff for this misstep, and so
he wants to he doesn't. He does not want his
name to be anything but a name on the you know,
the list of people who are involved.

Speaker 2 (04:26):
Wants to stay out of it, so exactly keep his distance.
So the way this.

Speaker 4 (04:31):
Unraveled, uh. The Atlantic guy Jeffrey Goldberg puts out a
few of the messages in his article yesterday just to
like have receipts that I was actually on the thing,
and the White House confirmed those are real. He didn't
give much more than that. I think for reasons of

(04:53):
national security. He thought, you know, it wouldn't do us
any good to put out more of this stuff.

Speaker 2 (04:57):
But then he was like what he.

Speaker 1 (04:58):
Said, specifically, I didn't want any dange any troops or operations.
But then he was called a liar by a number
of people, Tulsea Gabbard and others, Walls and hags Eth.
You know, no war planning was mentioned in that text thread,
so gold nothing classified.

Speaker 4 (05:16):
So Goldberg puts out more today and put this out,
for instance, in the Atlantic today, and I'll just read this.
Pete heggsth team update time now eleven forty four Eastern
weather is favorable. Just confirmed with Sentcom. We are a
go for mission launch twelve fifteen F eighteen's launch First
Strike Package thirteen forty five trigger based F eighteen first

(05:39):
Strike windows starts target terror is at his known location.
Show should be on time. Target terrorist. So you're announcing
that a particular person you're targeting to kill. Probably that
video we all saw the guy driving down the dirt
road that then disappeared, is just announced in this text
that we got to beat on him. And this is

(05:59):
when we're going to bomb him. That's probably not something
that should.

Speaker 1 (06:02):
Be out there in any way, right, I'm yessing, yeah,
oh yeah, fourteen ten more F eighteen's launch second strike
package fourteen fifteen. This is when the first bombs will
definitely drop, et cetera, et cetera. Sure sounds like war.

Speaker 2 (06:15):
Plans to me.

Speaker 4 (06:16):
And I mean, if if this had even gotten out
a little, that guy that was on the car on
the dirt road probably wouldn't about out in the car
on a dirt road. He'd have thought, Hey, he gotta
get you know, heads down for the next however many
hours do we figure out what's going on? Yeah, well,
at least they had the restraint to just call him
terrorist target as opposed to you know, Mohammed Mohammad one
two three Houthy Street, you.

Speaker 2 (06:37):
Know, right.

Speaker 1 (06:39):
But yeah, and and the fact that Steve Witkoff, Trump's
special envoy was in Moscow using this app that Moscow
has learned to hack when every single you know, blink
of his eye is being surveilled. Just it's it's it's
sloppy and it was a mistake, which they've said, Well,
I just as we were discussing earlier, I don't understand
why they went with Jeffrey Goldberg's liar and a cheat.

(07:01):
He is, by the way, he's a liar and a coward.
But there's no nothing classified. There are no war plans
when he had them. I just think the way you
defuel this is to say, hey, you know what, we
really messed up. We won't do this anymore. But it
was a successful strike against a righteous target.

Speaker 2 (07:20):
I think they would be leave it, leave it. Yeah.
As a political matter, there's always the legal part. I
don't know about.

Speaker 4 (07:26):
So if you admit there are war plans on there,
are you absolutely in violation of something to put you
in jail.

Speaker 1 (07:32):
Although you don't have to say that. I think you
could make the statement as short as I did. It
was a mistake. The way we handle that communication. We
will not repeat that mistake. It was a successful strike.
We have learned and we'll move forward.

Speaker 2 (07:48):
That's it.

Speaker 4 (07:49):
I don't know why you couldn't say, because this seems
to be the case. Look, we're all using signal all
the time. Maybe we decide, now, this is a bad idea.
Somebody figured that out. What's the best system for this,
and we'll start using that. Okay, I think you'd get
a pass for most of the public on that.

Speaker 2 (08:07):
Yeah, I do too.

Speaker 1 (08:08):
I don't know why they went with the strategy. If
it's not calculated and premeditated, well that's a new scandal.
You got to be more disciplined and smart than that.
But I don't know the answer to that question. I
look forward to to finding out, just because I'm curious
about the way that an administration actually functions. I still
love Mike Waltz. I think he's a very smart guy.

(08:30):
I think his views on foreign policy is terrific. Marco
Rubio I could not be happier with a choice for
Secretary of State than Marco Pete hegseeth, Mmm, jury's still out.
I like a lot of his instincts. So hey, just
learn from your mistake and move forward. The denials are silly.

Speaker 4 (08:51):
Here's a perfect place to put this so I don't
have to bring him back up again. I have talked
about how I think I've changed my mind on really
hating that we've been footing the bill for Europe for
all these years, because I think we get the great
benefit on calling the shots and them going along more
or less with our worldview because they need us so much,

(09:13):
and that when Europe has its own military defense to
the extent that they can ignore us. We might be
pretty shocked how often they go along with China instead
of the United States on different things.

Speaker 2 (09:27):
And we're used to all of Europe more or less
going along with us.

Speaker 4 (09:31):
They might all of a sudden decide, you know what,
what's financially beneficial doest China.

Speaker 5 (09:35):
And.

Speaker 4 (09:37):
For stupid euro reasons, they'll think China is no world threat.
Let's do business with China anyway.

Speaker 1 (09:42):
Oh yeah, we had to practically beat them over the
head to not install Huahwei right and all this sensitive
communications applications, which is so monumentally stupid.

Speaker 2 (09:52):
I can't even believe it was happening.

Speaker 4 (09:54):
Right in Germany signing on to the pipeline deal with
rushing all that sort of stuff. So we've already seen
what they're capable of doing, even when we are supplied
their security when we're not. God, who knows how many
bad deals they'll make that are bad for us AnyWho.
One other side of that is and I heard this
on a podcast yesterday, so I brought it up. In

(10:15):
nineteen sixty, United States had forty percent of the world economy,
GDP forty percent, pushing half of world GDP was US.
It's now twenty four percent, which is still crazy, which
is still amazing for one country. But maybe you can't
afford to protect five hundred million euros, not the dollar

(10:42):
dollar figure, but the population Europeans the way we used to.

Speaker 2 (10:46):
Maybe it's just math. Yeah, you know.

Speaker 1 (10:49):
Gerard Baker, who's a terrific writer, has an editorial today
in the Journal about what we're talking about, essentially our
relationship with Europe, and he's spending a lot of time
in Europe these days for various personal and professional reasons.

Speaker 2 (11:03):
But he points out that Europeans are to a man
or woman, alarmed.

Speaker 1 (11:07):
And energized at the same time with the Trump things
he said and Don jd Vance's statement on the very
signal app we're talking about President Trump's shock treatment of
the sensitive parts of Europe's anatomy.

Speaker 2 (11:22):
That's a hellovoid to put it.

Speaker 1 (11:25):
Up again, they're alarmed and energized. The word you hear
from business and political leaders over there is that whatever
the effects of mister Trump's presidency on America, he has
provided the incentives for them to make Europe great again.
Convinced that the US is no longer a dependable ally
or you know, generous sugar datagy, depending on how you
look at it.

Speaker 4 (11:45):
I don't like that terminology, the dependable ally terminology.

Speaker 2 (11:49):
How about it's more we aren't gonna.

Speaker 4 (11:52):
Be like like your twenty five year old who lives
in your basement, saying, I guess he's not a dependable
source of housing anymore, my parent.

Speaker 2 (12:01):
Yeah he doesn't have to be right right exactly.

Speaker 1 (12:04):
But putting that aside, Baker points out that, yeah, maybe
the US is no longer as dependable, but Russia is
an ever more dependable adversary. They are finally, decades late,
getting serious about developing the means for their own survival.
And he goes into a bunch of different examples, including Italy,
for God's sake, that's all energized, and saying, yeah, we

(12:26):
got to build up our armed forces, and do they
have any And as I've been saying all along, this
might be a rough period in which the relationship changes.
We've all had relationships in life that had to change,
and the period of them changing could be uncomfortable. But
putting aside your argument for the moment, because it's a
really interesting one that We're better off.

Speaker 2 (12:47):
Being the sugar Daddy because we call all the shots Europe.

Speaker 1 (12:51):
Could you know, over the course of the next ten
fifteen years, become an ally worth.

Speaker 2 (12:56):
Friggin having Wow, if we have right now the fuzzy.

Speaker 1 (13:00):
Little Pekinese dog that were saying beware of dog to
the Russians.

Speaker 2 (13:05):
If you were of that dog, please.

Speaker 4 (13:08):
You have any thoughts on this text line four one
five two nine five KFTC.

Speaker 6 (13:15):
Well, guys, the White House just as that they are
now seeking corporate sponsors for this year's Easter egg roll. Seriously,
how bad is the price of eggs when the government
needs a sponsor? I went as if it's appropriate to
tell sponsorship about the White House. Trump said, it's actually
called the Papa John's White House.

Speaker 4 (13:38):
Boy, I mentioned, yes, I heard a story in the
news about how they're stopping eggs at the border.

Speaker 2 (13:44):
People are trying to smugle eggs in because they're worth
so much. Again, how many eggs do you wind go
ahead and smuggle them? I don't care.

Speaker 1 (13:51):
I know mentioned this the other day, but it's worth
digging into just a little bit. They mentioned that March
twentieth is the inter National Day of Happiness, no.

Speaker 2 (14:01):
It's not shut up what. You can declare it that
if you want.

Speaker 1 (14:04):
But that's why that World Happiness Index always comes out
on March twenty. It's all right, the internationhold Day of Happiness,
so it was last Thursday.

Speaker 2 (14:13):
I missed it, which makes me unhappy.

Speaker 1 (14:16):
And Yasha Monk writes for Free Press, like a lot
of us reacts the same way. Every year, Finland is
ranked the happiest country in the world, while the US
falls to its lowest ever position. And this guy happens
to have spent a fair amount of time in Scandinavia,
and the Scandinavian countries are always the happiest, and he says,

(14:38):
I have to admit I've been skeptical since I first
came across it, because I had family in both Sweden
and Denmark.

Speaker 2 (14:42):
I've spent a fair amount of time there.

Speaker 1 (14:44):
And while Scandinavian countries have a lot of great things
going for them, they never struck me as pictures of joy.
For much of the year, they're cold and dark. Their
cultures are extremely reserved and socially disjointed. When you walk
around the admittedly beautiful centers of Copenhagen or Stockholm, you
rarely see anybody smile.

Speaker 2 (15:01):
These really be the happiest places in the whole world.

Speaker 4 (15:03):
I wish it got portrayed more as look, it's cold, dark,
et cetera, et cetera.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
But they have a culture of saying, yeah, I'm happy.
That's what I'm impressed by. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (15:16):
They define happinesses I have enough. Yeah, which is different
than the American definition. Which is interesting and a really
interesting discussion to have. And we talked about this, I
think last year when it came out at length. Anyway,
but he says, to honor the release of this year's report,
I finally decided to follow my hunch and looked into

(15:37):
the research on this topic more deeply. What I found
was worse than i'd imagine. To put it politely, the
World Happiness Report is beset with methodological problems.

Speaker 2 (15:45):
Oh, to put it bluntly, it's a sham. All of
these always are. I don't care whether it's the best
college or the best.

Speaker 4 (15:52):
State or whatever the hell it is, they're always The
criteria are always stupid.

Speaker 2 (15:57):
So it is a small sample size.

Speaker 1 (16:01):
Turns out that that World Happiness Report is not based
on any major research effort. Far from measuring how happy
people are with some sophisticated mix of indicators. It simply
compiles answers to a single question as to comparatively small
samples of people in each country. Here is the one
and only question. Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered
from zero at the bottom to ten at the top.
The top of the ladder represents the best possible life

(16:23):
for you, and the bottom of the ladder represents the
worst possible life for you.

Speaker 2 (16:27):
On which step of the.

Speaker 1 (16:27):
Ladder would you say you feel personally you stand at
this time?

Speaker 2 (16:32):
And the Ovimber problem.

Speaker 4 (16:34):
I remember answering this question a couple of years ago,
and I think I was a three at the time.

Speaker 2 (16:38):
BUYE.

Speaker 1 (16:39):
The obvious problem with this question, commonly known as the
Chantral letter, is that it doesn't really ask about happiness
at all. We know from many surveys people tend to
give very different answers to questions about what makes them
satisfied with their lives and their questions about whether they're
feeling good in the moment.

Speaker 4 (16:55):
Now, this is all about expectations. This has nothing to
do with happiness, and we're being told in expectations that
unless you have free healthcare or a giant house, or
all these different kinds of things. You're famous, your life sucks,
so yeah, you're gonna be further down the ladder than
the Finns, apparently.

Speaker 2 (17:13):
The happy, cheerful, laughing fins Armstrong and Geddy.

Speaker 5 (17:20):
A Kansas state trooper is being hailed a hero for
rescuing a six year old girl offish will say that
during a traffic stop, the trooper arrested a man who
had an outstanding warrant for allegedly kidnapping the child. A
trooper was then able to calm the girl and get
her to tell him her real name. Authority say the
girl had been with a man for over a month
while he was on the run.

Speaker 4 (17:40):
Wow, I don't know all the details of that story,
but then got it played out that way?

Speaker 2 (17:46):
H Yeah, no kidding.

Speaker 4 (17:48):
I want you to restate, because everybody hears this every
freaking year, that Finland is happier than the United States,
and then a whole bunch of socialists try to explain
to us why skullcal socialism that they're so happy.

Speaker 1 (18:03):
No, it's because that's international Happiness Index that comes out
once a year is completely bunk in terms of methodology,
and it asks a single question that really doesn't define happiness.
It's you know, where are you on the ladder of
possible lives you could have right now, right at the
top near the bottom.

Speaker 4 (18:20):
Right, which I find interesting. So it's a scale of
one to ten, so ladder with ten ten steps and
ten is like the life you have always dreamed of.
And so where are you currently?

Speaker 2 (18:31):
Yeah, your best possible life or yeah, I don't.

Speaker 4 (18:35):
Because I remember, I remember when we talked about this
kind aware but several years back, I was like a
three or something. I think it was like right after
I found out I was.

Speaker 1 (18:45):
Getting divorced, and that was pretty accurate about where I
felt like I was, you know, and where I wanted
to be and everything like that. But first of all,
those things can well. And I remember we we all
decided as a staff that you were driving down America's
happiness ratings. So we berated you to be happier. We
screamed at you until you complied more happier. But then, yes, Michael,

(19:07):
I remember that time.

Speaker 4 (19:09):
But and we were just talking a little bit ago
about how Finland or some of these countries or whatever,
maybe they just have different expectations. I mean, because expectations
is the whole ballgame, and I wanted to give this
stat before we got into more of that.

Speaker 2 (19:23):
I just read this yesterday.

Speaker 4 (19:25):
The median income for a full time mail worker in
nineteen sixty was fifty four hundred dollars.

Speaker 2 (19:31):
Adjusted for inflation, it was forty five grand.

Speaker 4 (19:33):
So the median full time mail worker in nineteen sixty
made forty five thousand dollars a year in.

Speaker 2 (19:38):
Today's wow money.

Speaker 4 (19:40):
But the average the median house was twelve hundred square feet,
one bathroom for five people, because I was the average
size and one car, which is the way I grew
up right, one car, one bathroom, small house, and we
would have described ourselves as happy. That group, I don't

(20:01):
know if they describe themselves as happy, but other people
looking at them would describe them as they shouldn't be
happy in a house that's small, with one bathroom in
one car, how could you possibly be happy.

Speaker 2 (20:10):
So again, it's all about expectations. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (20:13):
I think it was the New York Times, who, when
they're not being shameless liberal crap merchants, do some really
good journalism, went into the Finland thing, and that's exactly
what they said. No, it's a culture of I have
enough therefore, I am satisfied. You learn that from the
time of your little child. If you are, mister I've
got to have more and more and more in Finland,

(20:33):
that's just you're out of your mind culturally speaking. Anyway,
I thought this was interesting. The other side of the
coin as a monk, the journalists here in the Free
Press Rights two distinguished economists, David Blanchflower and Alex Bryce,
and we'll just call them B and B Jack like
they're at Bartig Radio show, set out in a recent
paper to discover what would happen to the world happiness

(20:54):
rankings if they looked at a more reasonable and broader
range of indicators, And what they found is not surprisingly
totally different picture. Instead of relying on the old Cantrell
ladder of life satisfaction, they asked the folks to consider
eight survey questions.

Speaker 7 (21:10):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (21:10):
The first four questions measured different dimensions of positive affect
meaning well, for instance, asking whether response and respondents experienced enjoyment,
smiled or laughed a lot, and felt well rested the
day before.

Speaker 2 (21:25):
That's kind of interesting.

Speaker 4 (21:25):
I don't know if I put how often I smile
or laugh on my list of determining whether or not.
I'm content, I'm not sure are happy.

Speaker 1 (21:36):
The next four questions measure different dimensions of negative effect.
They ask respondents whether they experienced sadness yesterday, whether they
worried during a lot of the day, whether they experienced anger,
whether they were in physical pain.

Speaker 2 (21:48):
None of that for me. Scowl How many times did
I scowl yesterday?

Speaker 1 (21:52):
M yeah, yeah, But I kind of liked them looking
both sides of the coin. I remember my sainted mother
famously was one of the hardest laughs in America to get.

Speaker 2 (22:05):
All right.

Speaker 1 (22:06):
We would be watching something hilarious and she would just
smile slightly. I'd say, Mom, that's hilarious. She'd say, that
was very funny.

Speaker 2 (22:16):
Yeah, that's funny. Some people, she would respond, she would say,
oh yeah, I.

Speaker 1 (22:22):
Maybe not smiled or laughed a lot, but was very
amused and pleased and happened.

Speaker 2 (22:26):
Doesn't mean they didn't enjoy it as much. I don't
think exactly so.

Speaker 1 (22:29):
Anyway, But they used both sides of the coin. What
blanch flower, I'm s right. What B and B in
the Morning found is striking. Responses to the cantrel ladder
barely seemed to correlate with expressions of either positive or
negative feelings. Denmark, for example, came on the top of
the ranking in the Cantral Ladder, but like most other

(22:50):
Scandinavian countries, Denmark did much worse on both metrics and
positive effects, such as how likely respondents had been to
smile or laugh.

Speaker 2 (22:58):
There are one hundred and eleventh out of one hundred
sixty four. You think you're a non men? Now where
do we take Greenland? Oh?

Speaker 7 (23:05):
Come on, Michael, that is the co host joke of
the day, tie together relevant headlines and they were also
super high on negative measures whether they'd worried a lot,
they were ninety third out one hundred and sixty fourth.
As a result, the rankings presented by these guys looks

(23:27):
totally different than the more famous version published by the UN,
which is really almost enough to ruin it in my mind.
If I hear the UN is in charge of this,
I think, yeah, right, it's either a scammer a ripoff
for both. Where are you on the Cantrell's Ladder do
you think? Where would you put yourself?

Speaker 2 (23:47):
Oh? Pretty high? I'm a I'm a seven or eight?
I think currently?

Speaker 1 (23:53):
Yeah, gosh, well I the cancer Ladder. Stupid but probably.

Speaker 2 (24:00):
Ish nine ish.

Speaker 1 (24:03):
I guess, but I like this other measure more. There
are many things I'm very very happy and satisfied with.
There are things that I worry about a lot, but
all right, so it's very very different. Finland, for example,
falls to fifty first place. Conversely, countries like Japan, Panama,
and Thailand Thailand, none of.

Speaker 2 (24:25):
Which do especially well on the official rank.

Speaker 1 (24:27):
Would you like to take a shot at Panama as
long as we're here, mister Trump.

Speaker 2 (24:31):
Anyway, they suddenly appear a lot happier.

Speaker 1 (24:33):
All of them are ranked above Finland and others supposed
top performers.

Speaker 2 (24:37):
I'm not sure.

Speaker 4 (24:38):
I find this pretty complicated to try to get into anyway,
because I've talked about this a lot with my own personality,
and I was discussing this with somebody the other day
who has a similar personality to me, like kind of
cranky bitches a lot, but like in real life, I mean,
like in reality, Oh no, things are gonna be fine
for me. I always think things are gonna be fine

(25:00):
for me always, I have, always will. But I complain
a lot. I think everything's going to hell, but I
think things are gonna be fine for me. I think
I know people are the opposite who are just kind
of cheerful.

Speaker 2 (25:09):
How are you? Everything like that? But just everything sucks,
so I'm not sure. I don't even know how to
rate those things.

Speaker 1 (25:16):
I called myself the world's most cynical optimist. The other
day my son calls me the world's most conservative.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
Hippie, which is probably.

Speaker 1 (25:25):
There's a songwriter who have been really into lately, and
I think it's a color Carl Wallinger. He was with
a bank called Backrack. No, I'm over my backrack face,
so I've gotten rid of all my tuxedos. I bought
like twenty tuxedos. No, But I like him because he's
kind of a hippie and he's a ghasted at the
world as he observes it. He's passed now, but he's

(25:48):
got a sense of humor and he says, this really
sucks and then he laughs, which I think is important. Anyway,
how about the United States? Turns out that happiness varies
widely across America, which was just bleak in that stupid
Cantrell ladder pole, and some of the parts of the

(26:09):
country are seemingly the happiest in the world. Once you
break the United States into our states, it becomes clear
some are actually doing quite badly. West Virginia, for example,
if it was a country ranked one hundred and first
out of two hundred and fifty countries and states, it's
about as happy as much poorer places like Sri Lanka
and Mauritania. How come ran out of cigarettes well, rampant

(26:31):
unemployment and death from overdose. I think probably Jack, but
the cigarettes too. But some other US states are, according
to these guys, among the happiest in the world. Seven
of them Hawaii, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota.

Speaker 2 (26:44):
Could you live in freaking paradise? That's part of it.

Speaker 1 (26:47):
Yeah, although you get the anesthesiologists chucking their wives off
cliffs lately and listening to the podcast, I think those
our two or three. But anyway, they're at the very
top of the list, meaning that their residents are happier
than those of the happiest country in the world world
so called, which turns out to be Taiwan, which is
East Age obviously not Northern Europe. All in all, the
residents of thirty four US states plus DC have higher

(27:10):
average levels of happiness than do the vaunted fins with
their quote unquote happiness.

Speaker 2 (27:16):
The UN poll is stupid. This one is more interesting.

Speaker 4 (27:20):
Well, it's driven by a couple of things. First of all,
the UN loves anything that could diminish the United States,
even though we fund the whole damn thing. And the
mainstream media loves anything that diminishes the United States. The
mainstream media every single year can say once again, in
the United States is not a very happy country, you know,

(27:40):
because income inequality, or we don't have enough trans bathrooms
or whatever the complaint is.

Speaker 1 (27:47):
And to paraphrase, well, not Chevy Chase, but the guy
who wrote the original vacation article on National Lampoon in
the seventies. Everybody around you might be Whistland's zippity dudah
out their high end. But if you're experiencing really tough times,
what the hell does it matter you're living in a.

Speaker 2 (28:06):
Happy, happy state or vice versa. So anyway.

Speaker 1 (28:12):
Is start ignoring that stupid, stupid pole or better yet,
when it comes out next next March twentieth, which is
edit National habit As, they go ahead and pooh pull
it to your friends and neighbors.

Speaker 4 (28:24):
Well, and I just wish there was more focus on
if if somebody's happy, because their expectations are reasonable, or
they emphasize the you know, correct things for being happy.

Speaker 2 (28:36):
Well, let's talk about.

Speaker 4 (28:37):
That as opposed to I mean, if somebody's unhappy because
they're not famous, I don't give a crap that you're unhappy.

Speaker 2 (28:43):
There's someone who.

Speaker 1 (28:45):
Cares how countries are ranked. What makes you happy in
a lasting way? And how do I attain that? I
mean that that is that is, that is Mount Everest,
next to the you know, dirt clod, that is that
idiot poll? What brings actual happiness? Why don't we talk
about that all the damn time? Well, because there's very

(29:06):
little money to be made in it, as opposed to
you know, defrauding us, bamboosling us into thinking X, Y
and Z bring us happiness.

Speaker 4 (29:14):
Well, you don't you buy a lot more stuff if
you're convinced that that will make you happy.

Speaker 2 (29:19):
There's no doubt about that.

Speaker 4 (29:21):
Again, I say ing and a lot of our cultural
influencers are not living the kind of lives that are
going to make you personally happy.

Speaker 1 (29:28):
So how many Instagram influencers that are just smiling and
beautiful and happy all the time? I have to off
themselves before America gets the idea.

Speaker 4 (29:38):
Yeah, for all its attention for baby boomers when they
were twenty two, Sex, drugs and rock and roll is
not actually.

Speaker 1 (29:43):
The best plan for long term happiness. It's good for
an afternoon. It's occupied several weekends in my life. But no,
I wouldn't want to make it a lifestyck uh wol
finish strong next. Jennifer Aniston was out to eat with
Pedro Pascal.

Speaker 2 (30:03):
Last night in Hollywood. No, and bothers me for some reason.
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (30:07):
I think of as Rachel and I kind of, you know,
have a crush on her, like lets of men have
throughout history. And I don't like him, So I just didn't.

Speaker 2 (30:15):
Like seeing that.

Speaker 1 (30:16):
So the Mandalorian and Rachel getting together, it's just it's
too much for you.

Speaker 2 (30:20):
Yeah, I like it.

Speaker 4 (30:22):
I saw one interview with him where I thought he
was a jerk, and just I can't stand even see
his face anymore, which I shouldn't see his face, he's
a Mandalorian. Wow, here's the media freaking out over the
whole story of the day yesterday.

Speaker 8 (30:40):
It's obviously a very serious mistake on the part of
whoever included Goldberg in this highly classified chain of Command
messaging that went on that involved war plans.

Speaker 4 (30:54):
The idea that instead all these Trump deputies were hanging
out chatting on signal instead, that is very noteworthy and
that's going to raise a lot of red flags.

Speaker 1 (31:03):
All this information about a strike that happened was imminent.

Speaker 2 (31:08):
I think about all.

Speaker 5 (31:09):
The different ways that people's lives were in danger.

Speaker 2 (31:12):
This is so utterly ridiculous. It's not only a national embarrassment.

Speaker 4 (31:15):
This is a national enough to get the flavor of
at the national embarrassment and the US this signal and
everything like that. John Bolton, who was what was he
under Trump? Was he National Security advisor? That is correctzor
not a Trump fan now? And Trump's not a fan
of him anyway. He said yesterday, it's inconceivable that the
White House would not use the classified channels. We have
spent so much time and effort and money over decades

(31:38):
trying to make as secure as possible. This carelessness puts
American service members at risk. If that's true, I'm as
unhappy as him. Can we nail that down? People, Come on, somebody,
It should be fairly easy. The CIA director said, yeah.
As soon as I confirmed, they put this on my
computer and everybody uses it all the time.

Speaker 2 (31:57):
So is that true or not? Yeah, can get that
figured out. No, how can we really know?

Speaker 4 (32:06):
Bottom of this is the Is there no anybody that
we can count on account call balls and strikes anymore?
It says, yeah, it's very common. Maybe it shouldn't be.
Maybe Congress ought to write a law that this is
okay or not. But people have been using it for
for classified information now for several years, right, or say.

Speaker 1 (32:23):
That update that said it was hackable was part of
a blizzard of information that all federal employees get and
many people missed it.

Speaker 2 (32:29):
That's what happened.

Speaker 1 (32:30):
I just I'm fine. I don't mind my own side
screwing up. That doesn't mean Aosia should be the next president.
It just means we need to do better. I'm not
threatened by that. Hey we made a mistake, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (32:44):
Everybody does. It's cool, just trying not to make a
fatal one.

Speaker 1 (32:50):
Admit me chorus to this history, who colade like your
humble patients, pray gently to hear kindly.

Speaker 2 (32:59):
To judge the final thoughts of Armstrong and getting Of
course it works both ways.

Speaker 4 (33:05):
You can't claim there are no war plans discussed when
we find out absolutely we're war plans discussed.

Speaker 2 (33:11):
Here's your host for final thoughts, Joe Getty.

Speaker 1 (33:13):
Hey, how about a final thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap up.

Speaker 2 (33:16):
The show for the day.

Speaker 1 (33:16):
There is our technical director to lead us off, Michael,
what's final thought? You know, I know a lot of
people don't like the digital coupons and grocery stores, but
I use them a lot, save a lot on my
yogurt because I eat yogurt like every day, So I'm pro.

Speaker 2 (33:28):
You know, pro coupon. I love them.

Speaker 1 (33:32):
Katie Green, what's your stance on coupons or pick your
own final thought?

Speaker 2 (33:36):
Well, love coupons.

Speaker 4 (33:37):
But my final thought is these people attacking the tesla
is my favorite part is that every tesla has cameras
all over it.

Speaker 2 (33:43):
Yeah, and the videos of them are all over the internet. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (33:47):
And people wearing masks out in a parking lot to
key the car.

Speaker 2 (33:53):
Anybody's wearing a mask alone out of.

Speaker 1 (33:56):
Doors, it's because they're about to do something nasty. Masks
are illegal, and a lot of situations starting forcing a jack.

Speaker 2 (34:02):
I've jumped with que But what's your final thought? Funny
you bring that up.

Speaker 4 (34:05):
I'm fighting the urge to get a cyber truck, almost
primarily because it's a big middle finger to a certain crowd.
And I've got so many people in my neighborhood that
still have Harris Walls signs up, and I just feel
like rolling by in the cyber truck would be so awesome.

Speaker 1 (34:21):
Giant trump flag of flapping kid rock jamming from the stereo.

Speaker 2 (34:24):
I love you it. Do it?

Speaker 1 (34:28):
Make your town great again? Jack, make me unpopular again.

Speaker 4 (34:33):
Armstrong and Getty wrapping up another grueling four hour workday.

Speaker 2 (34:36):
So many people thanks a little time. Good to Armstrong
and Giddy dot com. That's hot links.

Speaker 1 (34:40):
Oh my goodness, the clicks so enlightening, so interesting. Pick
up at ang Hoodie your t shirt for your favorite ang.

Speaker 2 (34:46):
F and maybe it's you.

Speaker 1 (34:47):
Helps to keep everybody on the staff during these difficult times,
and let us know if there's something we ought to
be talking about. Email at mail bag at Armstrong Giddy
dot com.

Speaker 4 (34:55):
I mean, if your neighbor gets a cyber truck, now
that's a message, isn't it.

Speaker 2 (35:00):
See tomorrow, God bless America. I'm strong and Getty. I'm
going to say this at risk of my job. I'd
love to have hands for hands that is very noteworthy.
He's crazy thinking. It's really come as quite a shock
to me. This is a national emergency. That's true. Yep, absolutely,
so let's go with it.

Speaker 1 (35:17):
In the Greenlanders, they got their fur up and that
literally they're furry people.

Speaker 2 (35:21):
It's so cold there. Have you seen the hospital. They're
like hobbits, very much like that, but not just defeat,
very Harry that I know. Thank you all very much,
Armstrong and Getty