May 6, 2025 • 36 mins
Hour 3 of A&G features...
- The real cost of immigration
- Trump's Hollywood tariff idea...
- Why Medicaid needs to be completely reformed...
- What happens when robots lose their heads?
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 Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Armstrong and Getty and now he.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
We're taking them out by the thousands. We're being obstructed.
It's very unfair what's happening because the court system is
being it's very unfair. So we're getting them out. It's
a very difficult thing with the courts because the courts
have all of a sudden out of nowhere, they said,
maybe you have to have trials, trials. We're going to
have five million trials. Doesn't work. Doesn't work. You wouldn't
(00:48):
have a country left. But hopefully the Supreme Court will
save it. But what they've done is a very very
serious thing.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
So how was how was the Deporter in chief, Barack Obama,
who deported so many people? Did he get him out
without having a trial for everybody? The new process that
we're talking about now, was it?
Speaker 1 (01:05):
A lot of that was they were apprehended at the border. Okay,
he did like the immediate quickie deportation, which is which
is different for reasons. I mean, we could argue about
whether it ought to be or not, but so those
differences part of it.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Biden opened up the border, let gazillions of the biggest
migration in human history happen. People got well deep into
the country for years. Then it's a different thing. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
Yeah, So within a certain geographic distance from the border,
that rules change because you're not apprehended. Then you're living here.
It's again, we could argue about whether that's appropriate or not,
but that's the way it is.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
So then you qualify as a person in the United
States as the Constitution.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
Called it, right exactly. You're not just caught sneaking across
the border, your person living here under the jurisdiction. Blah
blah blah. So anyway, Trump was explaining why they've gone
with various alternative plans to get people out of the country,
including self deportation. Next clip here with Michael.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
So, we're going to have a self deportation where they
deport themselves out of our country, and we'll work with them,
and we're going to try and if we think they're good.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
They have you know, the people we want in.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Our country, they're going to come back into our country.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Will give them a little easier route, and then the
world's most glam Department of Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome,
explaining further.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
We spend about seventeen thousand dollars arresting, detaining, and deporting
an illegal alien right now today, If we have the
opportunity to purchase a plane ticket and send someone home
with a stipend like this, it saves US thousands and
thousands of dollars, and it also is a much safer
situation for officers and for those in communities.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Yeah, somebody said it costs like forty five hundred dollars
to send them out on average.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
This Stephen Miller, and I thought that was part of
that same clip. But it doesn't matter. Stephen Miller pointed
out that over the course of a lifetime or multiple years,
with public benefits and education and the rest of it,
could easily cost the American taxpayer a million dollars.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Oh, no, doubt, No, I don't have any quid about that.
But why does it even cost forty five hundred dollars
on average? I could fly first class to anywhere in
the world for forty five hundred dollars.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
You have to, you know, arrest them and hold them
and feed them and get them to the airport. And
blah blah blah. It's just labor costs, among other things,
facilities costs. I think it's the process of getting them out,
not just the physical you know, transportation of getting them
from here to there. Yeah, so I thought that was
that was interesting and the Supreme Court will rule on this.
(03:35):
But the whole look, we'll buy a plane ticket, will
give you a thousand dollars, fill out to paperwork. Maybe
you can come back some day. It's not going to
get everybody out, but if it helps, it helps well.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
On the Fox interview, I saw her with this morning
looking fantastic. Probably shouldn't comment on that, that probably makes me misogynists,
But yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
I think that was wildly you know.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Although on the other hand, she didn't put all that
time and effort into that long hair to make it
look like that to not have it be noticed. That's
not an accident. It looks lip gloss. Yes, So me
noticing it makes me a bad person, that's correct. Yes. Anyway,
I think she said one person so far has taking
us up on this, so one.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Total, one ay longest journey, single step look it up. Huh.
I kind of like this because the quotes from Trump
forty one please from ABC News Michael.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
The Trump administration says they've deported one hundred and fifty
thousand people since January, far short of the pace needed
to remove the tens of millions the president promised. Trump
today blaming required immigration hearings for slowing down his plan.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
The courts have all of a sudden, out of nowhere,
they said, uh, maybe you have to have trials, trials.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
We're going to have five million trials.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
Doesn't work. So this is a beautiful Oh it is.
It's a beautiful example. It's like the best one ever
of the Cloward Pivens strategy that was sixties radicals. You know,
adhere to. The idea is you make the other side
live up to their own rules. You insist even as
you are breaking every rule you can think of. You
(05:15):
constantly make the other side live up to their own
rules and principles, and then you overload the system to
the point that it breaks. This is the absolute classic
example of that. Biden for whatever bizarro reasons or you know,
he was so incoherent, maybe it was his progressive aids
or pushing him to do this, but they let in
so many people so quickly. The systems that exist to
(05:39):
get people out again are completely overwhelmed. It's like, you know,
after the tsunami in Japan, that giant flood that ruined
the Fukushima reactor, that flood of immigrants is just it.
We're drowning in it. And so then the left is saying, no, no, no, no,
you have these principles, you have these procedures. You have
(06:00):
to follow your principles. Having drowned the system.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Yeah, that's a tough one. It is completely undoable. Five
million trials, more like fifteen million to try to get
people out. So yeah, it's I don't know what the
answer is that this. Well there is an answer, and
national reviews written about it, and it's been talked about
for decades. It's been talking about our entire radio career.
(06:25):
If you had Everify, where people couldn't hire you unless
you could prove your you've got the paperwork in your ear,
people would leave because you wouldn't be able to have
a job.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
Somebody pointed out via email the other day that, well,
you have to have employers that are willing to use
the everify. Oh yeah, I tell you what if they
don't to enforce it, we enforce the law on them too.
Absolutely hammer them. You're running some sort of chicken killing
plant in the middle of Iowa and you're not filling
the filling out your paperwork, mining your p's and q's. Huh,
(06:57):
we'll shut you down.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
What do you do for a living?
Speaker 1 (06:59):
I work at a chick and kill and I murdered
chickens and hack them apart. That's what they do.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
It is.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
We're going to meat processing facility. You murder chickens and
hack them apart. It's okay.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
I like chicken.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Yeah, I'm a carnivore. Speaking of getting back to the
questions and overwhelming the system and that sort of thing.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
Murdered chickens and act them apart.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Eric track Suit see from a story Oregon frequent correspondent
rights Dear Joe, kudos for your herculean and fair minded
analysis of what Trump said in response to Kristen Welker's
question over the weekend. But even given those numbers that
you're talking about, don't you need to uphold the Constitution
of the United States? As president? And he says the
(07:45):
presidential three as follows. Eric says, I do solemnly swear
or for him that I will faithfully execute the office
of President of the United States, and I will, to
the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States. Not to put too fine
a point on it, I might suggest that having given
this oath twice, President Trump could have come up with
a better answer than I don't know.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
Yeah, I don't. I don't know if he was trolling.
It worked, I mean because it got lots of headlines,
because he could have so easily said I'll uphold the Constitution.
But as always, it needs to be interpreted as to
what the Constitution means. It's always been that way it
is today, and I think it means something different than
(08:25):
you do.
Speaker 1 (08:27):
Eric, You're one hundred percent right. He could have come
up with a better explanation, But that's Trump. It makes
me insane because he does such a poor job of
explaining what he's talking about so frequently. And as a
guy who has criticized Trump. In fact, my last sentence
criticized Trump, he meant exactly what Jack was saying. He meant,
(08:48):
you are trying to, in the fashion of the Cloward
pivot strategy, which I was just talking about, trying to
hold me to your conception of the rules to prevent
me from solving the problem you have caused. That is
what he meant in his answer to the evil and
disingenuous and horrific christin welker horrific. I'm being charitable. I
(09:13):
emerged chickens and I hacked them into pieces.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
That's what I do.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
And I'm a wardsmith. And so he's trying to say, no,
you're not going to trap me into agreeing with your
premise that I have to adhere to the Constitution in
the ways you have just set forth. But he's not
a good enough litigator of his own point of view
to express it like that, so he goes without, Oh, no,
we'll have to see, we'll follow the Supreme Court, which
(09:37):
is saying yes, but we've got great lawyers looking at it.
So that answer was only unsatisfactory if A you're a
stickler for Trump, you know, being a better communicator, or
B you're wilfully misinterpreting what he was saying. I believe that, amen,
hell ya.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
So what do you think is going to happen with
the millions and millions of people that got in illegally
that the vast majority of people in this country including Democrats,
won't boot it out. They're gonna stay.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Most of them, A lot of them are. Yeah. I
think the question is how many can we get out
and buy what procedures? And I don't know the answer
to that question. That's one of the reasons that the
radicals use the strategy I was describing, because it works
real well.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
How about the majority end up staying.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
You end up, for instance, getting millions and millions and
millions of people in the city of Chicago where I
grew up, right outside the city, but dependent on the government.
You've overloaded the system. Now all of those people will
not eat or be able to medicate themselves. They don't
even feed their own damn children. How are you going
(10:51):
to reform the government now they've overwhelmed the system to
break it. It works. It's evil and insidious and non American,
but it works. So yeah, we're in a hell of
spot right now. What the answer is I don't know.
But Trump and company are working on it pretty hard.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
That's interesting. This story is not over.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
I think they are doing great, if somewhat controversial work.
I hope they can stay on the right side of
the law. On the other hand, the whole tariffs on
movies is ludicrous. It's practically hilarious. It's impossible. I mean,
it's intellectual property with no set value. If I made
(11:31):
a movie in Ireland today and Francis Corsese made a
movie in Ireland today, what are you gonna tear If
from the same nobody's gonna see my day movie, it'd
be garbage. Trust me, I don't know the first thing
about me. Well, I think you need a story anyway.
So it's just it's utterly unworkable. It's silly. Well, you'd
(11:52):
have to tax the profits after Oh lord, you know
nothing about Hollywood accounting. I could write, direct, star in,
and film a movie and own ninety eight percent of
it and the studio that owned two percent would find
a way to get all of the profits. That is
what makes Hollywood go round. So yeah, it's utterly unworkable.
(12:13):
The Alcatraz thing is hilarious. It's just trolling.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Yeah, that's one hundred percent trolling. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
But the immigration stuff, they're doing the work that needs
to be done, and they're they're working against the real odds.
Tough hearts.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Yeah, AI coming for a lot of people's jobs. As
we've talked about AI coming for our jobs. It looks
like got a good example of that, among other thing.
You stay here, do.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
You guys say this?
Speaker 6 (12:43):
Trump just shocked Hollywood by announcing on tariff on all
movies and TV shows made in foreign lands. And be
fun seeing the next Lord of the Rings filmed in
bay on New Jersey.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Hey, look at billb movies. We'll gonnoray got a mine merrita.
So you mentioned this last segment, but the the one
hundred percent tariff on foreign movies because we're gonna make
a movie's American again. And John Voight, the one of
(13:17):
the few conservative Hollywood types, came out yes day and said, yeah,
he's gonna help lead the charge to make a movies
American again. This is all is this? Does everybody know
this is trolling? Or I mean, because this isn't gonna
do anything?
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Not exactly Voight, by the way, who's eighty six years old.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
I didn't realize that he's almost like a bad age. Okay.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah. So the problem is there are a bunch of
foreign countries that offer huge tax incentives to make the
movies in their country instead of the United States. And
so Trump says, well, we'll see about that we'll put
huge tariffs on them, and the movie business is saying, like,
thanks for your concern, but uh, how about tax incentives
here in the US wouldn't be easier, and so that's
(14:02):
probably the direction.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
Okay, okay, okay, Well I get that different topic also
the entertainment world, where I.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Don't know why you'd offer tax incentives to movies and
not your local plumbing contractor. But we can discuss that
another time.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
And that's a good point. Yesterday we were talking about
AI Ai me continuing after I die from this cold
that I've had for oh going on a month. No way,
you can just take my voice in all the many
words I've said over thirty years and AI can fashion
it together and whatever it needs to say. Well, that
is actually happening. So I was watching the NBA last night.
(14:35):
I'm a big NBA fan. Great first round games last night,
two upsets, fantastic stuff. But one of the most famous
announcers in all of modern NBA history, Jim Fagan of NBC.
He no longer is with us, but the NBA is
using clips of him to create voiceovers to continue to
(14:56):
have the voice of the nineties NBA today. Here's a clip.
Speaker 7 (14:59):
Now, the NBA on NBC is bad. See you this
October for the NBA season tip off.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I want munch of that. I don't know if a
I had to play any role. They surely he said
that like eight million times so, but either way, that's
gonna be fairly common.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
I think, yeah, I'm sure they could craft him saying
the Lakers. Well, the Lakers aren't taking on anybody except
that the local golf course. But you know, whatever, the
Nuts take on the Nuggets Tuesday Night winner take all?
Sure you though? He's with God?
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Now, I was thinking of the great Don Pardo of
Saturday Night Live, who did the voice of that for
like the first forty seven years of their fifty year
history or whatever. They could have him continue, and you know,
with whatever new hosts are on there, that'll probably become
a thing. Yeah, big deal in eliminate a handful of
announcer jobs.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
But why not? Yeah, Well, they're talking in Movieland about
having no actors eventually and just a CGI generated AI
generated folks right actors on the screen.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
I don't know. We'll have to see it in action
to see if we like it or not. I don't know,
you're gonna tell us why Medicaid sucks at some point.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
That's a bit of a oversimplification, but although it's accurate,
Yes it does. It's a scam. It's a giant scam.
It goes around wearing the clothes of this is just
a little government help for the poor to get the
medical care they need. Poor pregnant women so their babies
are healthy. That's all we're doing here. It's become this
(16:45):
giant like money trading scam where the states exploit this
you know, sub law of a sub rule of medicaid
and get this much money in exchange, and if they
use that money for this to get even more money,
and it turns out healthy, lazy, grown men are getting
(17:08):
way more than poor pregnant ladies.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
Really, Oh, I don't like that story. So we got
a lot on the way to stay here. If you
missed a segment, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
But it sort of represents something that's both horrible and
beautiful and strong and miserable. Week It's got a lot
of it's got a lot of qualities that are interesting,
and I.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
Think they make a point.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
I think he's talking about me horrible, strong, miserable week
and everyone knows it. Thank you very much. How you
doing today, Good glad to hear it.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
So there's a lot here trying to figure out exactly
how to corral all this information. I should have figured
this out earlier, but I just came across something really
interesting about how do you explain the current battle over
Medicaid reform? Maybe you'll just start here, a couple of folks.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
I want to make sure everybody understands what's going on here.
So when you turn sixty five, you get government healthcare.
At that point, you get medical care, medical care sixty five.
Medicaid is for the super poor, down and out right.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Yeah, originally like one percent of the population, now much much, much,
much more. So let me just lay this out and
we'll stick with this through the weeks to come, in
a way that I promise won't be boring and wonky.
But it's such an enormous problem. The Wall Street Journal
is at the editorial board. I was talking about how
the Republicans are trying to reform Medicaid and they haven't
(18:49):
even rolled out a draft Medicaid bill, but Democrats and
the media allies are already pounded on them for snatching
healthcare from millions of poor people, which just goes to
show you, and you'll understand at the end of this
how incredibly dishonest politics is. And Republicans would be making
a terrible blunder to let that intimidate them from fixing
the program, especially winding down free federal money for able
(19:15):
bodied men on Medicaid, which is a huge part of it.
So here's the one idea that they're working with, is
imposing sanity on the way federal Medicaid money flows to
the states. Here's the core dysfunction, writes the editorial Board.
The Feds pick up roughly fifty to seventy seven percent
of the tab, depending on the state, for pregnant women,
(19:39):
the disabled, and other low income populations, so between half
and three quarters. But the Feds pay ninety percent for
prime age adults, all eligible under the Affordable Care Act,
Obamacare's Medicaid expansion. You remember all the talk about the
(19:59):
Medicaid expansion and the money to states, and most of
us scratched our heads and weren't sure what to make
of it. And blue states said yes, and red states
said no. And we're accused of neglecting their citizens for saying.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
That, and critics said this was just an attempt to
get universal health care going, which is what it looks like.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
Yeah, exactly, so again, the feds paid ninety percent. If
I'm a thirty two year old male, smoking pot, living
in my parents' basement, in porn, watching porn, refusing to work,
collecting fake disability whatever.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Probably got a one man bun of some sort, probably
man bund.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
They pay ninety percent for my medicaid expansion the federal
government does. The enhanced funding was a Democratic bribe debate
states into expanding their programs under Obamacare. That it also
contradicted the founding purpose of Medicaid, which was to help
the poor. Now you you can't find voters who think
the federal government should be giving their scarce healthy sources
(21:00):
to working age men over poor children and pregnant women.
Nobody wants that, But that's where we are because that's
what the perverse financing formula encourages. The states can grab
more federal dollars if they sign up more prime age adults.
But if you try to reform this, Chuck Schumer is
going to get on the steps of the Capitol and
with crocodile tears in his eyes, talk about how you're
(21:21):
trying to starve poor babies right. Twenty twenty two study
from the Mercada Center looked at the spending growth patterns
and states that took the expansion money compared with those
that didn't. It found quote strong evidence in Medicaid expansion
states of a shift of financial resources away from certain
vulnerable and roly populations, the most notable being from low
(21:42):
income children. And the GOP can make a really strong
argument that fixing this bias in federal payments is shoring
up the program to serve the vulnerable much better. It's
not trying to take it away from them. It's the
opposite about it, opposite of that. But you know how
politics works. It's easy to scare people. It's way easier
(22:04):
to scare them than to explain to them. There are
ten states, including Florida and Texas, that have declined the
federal government's Medicaid expansion bait, but just ten, and some
are talking about part time work requirements if you're on medicaid,
to go after improper payments and call it good, but
you really have to restructure the entire thing. Obamacare was
(22:28):
everything its critics said it was.
Speaker 2 (22:32):
But it's so galling, and I know it is for
a lot of you. It's just, you know, you get
up and you go to work in the idea that
there's somebody out there suck it off your tax money
with a smile on their face.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
It's just so galling. Yeah, I know, I know. I've
got some more figures on on Medicaid's expansion, but I
can't find them. It has to do with watching your pot,
smoking your porn. No, no, no, no, we're past that part.
(23:08):
It has to do with, oh damn it. I thought
I had it handy. The extent to which Social Security
is self supporting, and how much it's grown beyond the
self supporting part. Self supporting meaning we're all kicking in money, right,
we all know that, right, But it does get subs
(23:29):
these from the federal government because we don't have enough
workers for the old people, blah blahlah. And then you
have Medicare, which has grown much much, much more in
relation to how self supporting it is. And then you
have Medicaid, which is exploded as a drag on the
federal budget way beyond any you know, supporting self supporting
(23:52):
nature it has. I will find those numbers for you
that they're astonishing. But if you're talking about entitlement reform,
you've got to start with Medicaid then move on to Medicare.
But that's a different kettle of fish. So just you know,
if there's a takeaway, enjoy the absolute dishonest demagoguery of
(24:12):
the Democratic Party as they're claiming Republicans are trying to snatch,
you know, infant formula out of the mouths of babes right.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
The whole health care thing, as we all know, it's
just so because I'm been going to the doctor a
fair amount being sick right now, and you know, I'm
gonna get a bill for next week. I'll get a
bill and it'll be eighty bucks or it'll be eight
hundred bucks. I don't have any idea, and I don't
have any idea if I actually have to pay it
or not. And maybe I'll pay it or maybe I
won't pay it, and hope it goes away, and maybe
(24:42):
it does go away, because sometimes they do, or maybe
then you get a letter saying we're gonna turn it
over to collections. Because you don't have any idea if
you're supposed to pay it or not. Just the whole
thing is so random and I never have any I
never know.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
Yeah, yeah, it's absolutely terrible. So I guess you know
that's your takeaway. And I will find those stats if
I possibly can and bring them to you because it's
so revealing. Yes, discouraging. Quick word from our friends at
Prize Picks. Oh my gosh. You like the sports, you
think you know what you're talking about. Turn your sports
(25:14):
predictions into cash money. All you have to do is
pick two players, at least two players, and say, hey,
the stats projection, they're gonna do better than that or
worse than that. You can be two to six players.
You can even combine sports. One basketball guy you think's
gonna go off one baseball guy.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Did you have more or less on Jalen Brunson meeting?
What missing wide open layups to win the game last night?
For the to Mix and Men? Did he get bailed
out by the rest of the team? Otherwise he would
have been the goat of goats in New York City.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Prize Pick's the best way to get action on sports
and more than thirty states, including California, Texas, and Georgia,
withdrawals are fast, safe and scare some hitting your account
as little as fifteen minutes. Fabulous. Download the prize picks
at today. Use the coat Armstrong. They'll give you a
fifty bucks instantly after you play just a five dollar
lineup for the first time. That's the code Armstrong to
(26:03):
get fifty dollars instantly after you play your first five
dollars lineup. It's fun, seazy, simple prize picks. Run your game, right.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
I know you're I know you're a hater on the NBA.
I like the NBA, but it is amazing how many.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
No no, no, no, no, no no, you slenderous bastard.
I just don't care.
Speaker 2 (26:23):
Well, yeah, it's a saving I don't know. But uh,
it's amazing how many games come down to like the
last minute. I mean, you know, you watch for three
hours and then so many games it's just who can
do their thing in the last minute, like all the
time and it works.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
I was a kid and my dad said to me,
there's no point in watching the first three quarters.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
Shoe you have you have to enjoy the play of
it otherwise. It's right. Yeah, it's the reason I don't
get soccer because I don't. I've never played soccer. I
don't understand. I don't understand the play so because there's
no scoring, I get nothing out of it. You have
enjoy the playing of the NBA game because if you
just want the result, well you might as well just
watch the last minute, like your dad said.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
By the way, for the record, this will be a
minority opinion. But I am a courageous man, Jack, and
do not fear being in the minority. A playoff hockey
makes playoff basketball look like middle school chess tournaments.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
Hockey. All right, about the hockey, Well, the few times
I've ever gotten into hockey, it is fantastic. Why is
that not caught on more? Is because it just doesn't
translate to television as well.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
That's the half of it. The second half of it
is enough people don't understand like the rules of it,
and the rules are really super easy to understand. Give
me five minutes, you'll enjoy hockey. Puck in the net, well,
that's a lot of one of the that's really the
key rule. Yes, there are some minor rules, though they
confuse people. Why'd they just whistle the puck? And why
(27:52):
are they stopping and going down to that end. Now
people get confused, they get discouraged, And yes, if you
don't know the game, it's a little harder to fire
on TV live in a stadium hockey aspect, akill.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
I'm not a hockey fan, and I would say that
in person hockey is the best. It's absolutely fantastic, and
the crowds are fantastic too. All right, we got a
lot more of a I was uplate at the met gala.
That's why I've got this cough Medicashians and I wore
my statue of Liberty outfit. And there's really something more
in the way I stay here.
Speaker 8 (28:30):
And A wave flipped a suspected human smuggling boat carrying
at least sixteen people off the California Coast. The boat
washing ashore around six point thirty this morning on Tory
Pine State Beach near San Diego.
Speaker 9 (28:42):
Authority say at least three people were killed. Four more
rushed to the hospital. First responders searching for at least
nine missing. The twelve foot vessel is called a Ponga boat.
It's designed for fishing, but commonly used by smugglers slipping
people past the border.
Speaker 2 (28:57):
WOW lot for ways to try to get people in
that's how badly people want to come into the United States.
Yet we have people marching in the streets about how
awful it is to be here.
Speaker 1 (29:08):
Yes, I suggest a change of location.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
Perhaps I'm looking at our Twitter feed. A couple of
things I wanted to mention. I retweeted the great James
Lindsay yesterday, who had a happy birthday, shout out to
Karl Marx with this funny meme. A quote from Karl Marx,
who I guess it was his birthday yesterday. A quote
from Karl Marx. I don't know if I'd ever heard
this before. My object in life is to dethrone God
and destroy capitalism. Lindsay's response was, don't care, get a job,
(29:40):
no kidding.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Speaking of memes and communists in California, this was one
of my favorite. The French have given up on high
speed rail in California. The French because there's too much bureaucracy.
Speaker 2 (29:55):
Yeah, that should hurt, that should make us, that should
make us go.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
They're gonna help build one in North Africa instead, saying
the region was quote less politically dysfunctional. That is a quote.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
But my favorite thing I tweeted out over the weekend
was the footage. If you've seen the footage of the
humanoid robot losing its s there in the factory. Oh,
you gotta go to our twitter feed and look that out.
I tweeted, whoa, here's the future. A robot losing its ass.
But the thing starts flailing around with its arms and legs,
kicking and throwing, and everybody's running away from it. I mean,
(30:32):
it would have taken your.
Speaker 1 (30:33):
Head off, oh even hit you.
Speaker 2 (30:37):
And some of the responses to the tweet were pretty
funny and things that you have said very, very many times.
It obviously was wanting to get our vital human juices,
among other things. Keep a baseball hat handy when working
with a robot. So this is the future. Thank god,
(30:59):
I'm old you deal with it.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
Have a baseball hat, handy baseball bat.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
Oh I'm sorry if I said hat.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
Oh wow, it's flailing like a lunatic.
Speaker 2 (31:09):
Oh yeah, it just lost its mind.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
It's human sized and like built of hard plastic. Or
the scientists are trying desperately to corral it.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
That robot's request was denied for getting their birthday off,
so it begins. Many people retweeted, which I agree.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Yeah, kidding.
Speaker 2 (31:27):
Yeah. Oh, and then this this was a common theme
now the debate. How about one hundred men versus a
berserk robot.
Speaker 1 (31:37):
Well, the thing seem to be restrained on some sort
of robot gallows, which helps but for now, but did
the next time exactly? Yeah, if it was turned loose,
plays we'd all be chopped up like little things that
are chopped up.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
And it kind of reminds me. Elon did an interview
the other day. I meant to play the audio of
it where he said, this year they're going to release
the fully self driving Tesla update where it can drive
you know, autonomous sealy without you in it or not.
And so we're getting closer and closer to a lot
of these cars, robots, whatever, completely being on their own.
(32:10):
And I just, I just I think there's gonna be
I don't understand how it gets through lawsuit America, That's
what I want to watch. I don't understand how you
get past the first time one of those robots swings
its arm, hits somebody in the head, and the company
gets sued for five billion dollars and so nobody can
even try it anymore. Right now, Are we gonna fix that?
Speaker 1 (32:31):
So literally, the Tesla is self driving if you're not
in it, so it can come pick you up.
Speaker 2 (32:36):
That's what Elon said the other day. I don't believe
it's gonna happen for a variety of reasons, including what
I mean, how can we have a world where kids
can't run on the playground if it ran yesterday because
of the liability. But we're gonna have, you know, fully
automated robots or cars driving around and the risks that
come with I just don't see how the math works
on that unless we redo our our tort system or something.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
Yeah, that is absolutely true. Does tech have good enough
lobbyists to redo our horrific tort system here in the country.
I don't know, Jack.
Speaker 9 (33:09):
If you'll take get that update on your Tesla, you
got to sit in the back seat and just wave
to people as you go down the highway, And.
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Oh, I would love it if it worked. I just
don't think it's ready yet. The newer Tesla is like
my my twenty four Cyberbeast. They moved to sonar, a
sonar like thing from just the video cameras that they
that I have on my twenty one Tesla, and I
don't know if it's a step forward or backwards. A
lot of people think it was a step backwards. It's
weird looking at the screen. It looks like the sort
of sonar thing you've seen in movies, with the wiggly
(33:38):
lines and everything like that. Yeah, it's supposed to be, Yeah,
supposed to be a step toward autonomous vehicles.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
But it's just it's just never gonna work.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
The first one crashes, you know, runs over an eight
year old girl in a crosswalk, and I just feel
like it's over and it'll never come back.
Speaker 1 (33:55):
Yeah, I don't know. They have lobbyists, they have lawyers. Sir,
there have been I hate the specificity of your example.
I get why you did it, but there have been
three hundred and four eight year old girls run over
by human beings this year. So this we're saving many,
many little girls. Sorry about this one. You know, they'll
(34:18):
they'll make that argument.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
I think that's the most interesting angle of the whole thing.
I don't understand how it works in modern I just
read a great piece on Twitter, a breakdown of how
that whole thing works with juries and judges and corporations,
and then corporations have to go extra safe to try
to protect themselves and then you can't have this and
you can't have that, and the reactions.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
I mean, it's such a mess, as we all know. Yeah, yeah,
it's one of the great challenges to our economy. If
we were to and this is you know, pipe dream,
and if we were to get serious tort reform in
this country, just make it much more reasonable like it
was I don't know thirty years ago. The explosion in
economic activity would stun you. It would take place in
(35:02):
ways and places you never would have imagined.
Speaker 2 (35:04):
You can't have a real playground in your park because
of the liability, but we're gonna have cars and robots
going around on their own. It just I don't see
how it fits together.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
Yeah, and it's probably worthwhile to mention once again. German
insurance companies insisted to the German government moron's the Germans
next hour. By the way, they've got a crazy situation
going on politically right now, a couple of different crazy situations.
But their insurance companies actually went to the government and said, look,
you've made life so safe for German children. They have
(35:34):
no idea what risk is. They have no idea how
to figure out how much risk to take or how
to manage it, and so they're getting in all sorts
of crazy accidents and injuries because they're veal calves. You've
got to let kids be kids. The insurance companies said that.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
On the other hand, if I'm working at some sort
of factory and my boss says, we got this new robot. Robot,
it's fantastic and it swings its arm and takes my
eye out, a little compensation for it?
Speaker 1 (36:02):
Oh yeah, granted, yeah, I Removing robots is very different
from overleas safe playgrounds. Jack.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
You can't just say, well, robots being robots, what are
you gonna do if Frank will take you? Yeah, well,
we'll see, and maybe that's the future. We'll be surrounded
by flailing robots losing their s. Good stuff next hour.
Speaker 1 (36:22):
If you can't hang around, grab it via podcast later
on Armstrong and Getty on demand. You can subscribe or
follow wherever you like to get podcasts Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Armstrong and Getty and now he.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
We're taking them out by the thousands. We're being obstructed.
It's very unfair what's happening because the court system is
being it's very unfair. So we're getting them out. It's
a very difficult thing with the courts because the courts
have all of a sudden out of nowhere, they said,
maybe you have to have trials, trials. We're going to
have five million trials. Doesn't work. Doesn't work. You wouldn't
(00:48):
have a country left. But hopefully the Supreme Court will
save it. But what they've done is a very very
serious thing.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
So how was how was the Deporter in chief, Barack Obama,
who deported so many people? Did he get him out
without having a trial for everybody? The new process that
we're talking about now, was it?
Speaker 1 (01:05):
A lot of that was they were apprehended at the border. Okay,
he did like the immediate quickie deportation, which is which
is different for reasons. I mean, we could argue about
whether it ought to be or not, but so those
differences part of it.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Biden opened up the border, let gazillions of the biggest
migration in human history happen. People got well deep into
the country for years. Then it's a different thing. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
Yeah, So within a certain geographic distance from the border,
that rules change because you're not apprehended. Then you're living here.
It's again, we could argue about whether that's appropriate or not,
but that's the way it is.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
So then you qualify as a person in the United
States as the Constitution.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
Called it, right exactly. You're not just caught sneaking across
the border, your person living here under the jurisdiction. Blah
blah blah. So anyway, Trump was explaining why they've gone
with various alternative plans to get people out of the country,
including self deportation. Next clip here with Michael.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
So, we're going to have a self deportation where they
deport themselves out of our country, and we'll work with them,
and we're going to try and if we think they're good.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
They have you know, the people we want in.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Our country, they're going to come back into our country.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Will give them a little easier route, and then the
world's most glam Department of Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome,
explaining further.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
We spend about seventeen thousand dollars arresting, detaining, and deporting
an illegal alien right now today, If we have the
opportunity to purchase a plane ticket and send someone home
with a stipend like this, it saves US thousands and
thousands of dollars, and it also is a much safer
situation for officers and for those in communities.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Yeah, somebody said it costs like forty five hundred dollars
to send them out on average.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
This Stephen Miller, and I thought that was part of
that same clip. But it doesn't matter. Stephen Miller pointed
out that over the course of a lifetime or multiple years,
with public benefits and education and the rest of it,
could easily cost the American taxpayer a million dollars.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Oh, no, doubt, No, I don't have any quid about that.
But why does it even cost forty five hundred dollars
on average? I could fly first class to anywhere in
the world for forty five hundred dollars.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
You have to, you know, arrest them and hold them
and feed them and get them to the airport. And
blah blah blah. It's just labor costs, among other things,
facilities costs. I think it's the process of getting them out,
not just the physical you know, transportation of getting them
from here to there. Yeah, so I thought that was
that was interesting and the Supreme Court will rule on this.
(03:35):
But the whole look, we'll buy a plane ticket, will
give you a thousand dollars, fill out to paperwork. Maybe
you can come back some day. It's not going to
get everybody out, but if it helps, it helps well.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
On the Fox interview, I saw her with this morning
looking fantastic. Probably shouldn't comment on that, that probably makes me misogynists,
But yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
I think that was wildly you know.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Although on the other hand, she didn't put all that
time and effort into that long hair to make it
look like that to not have it be noticed. That's
not an accident. It looks lip gloss. Yes, So me
noticing it makes me a bad person, that's correct. Yes. Anyway,
I think she said one person so far has taking
us up on this, so one.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Total, one ay longest journey, single step look it up. Huh.
I kind of like this because the quotes from Trump
forty one please from ABC News Michael.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
The Trump administration says they've deported one hundred and fifty
thousand people since January, far short of the pace needed
to remove the tens of millions the president promised. Trump
today blaming required immigration hearings for slowing down his plan.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
The courts have all of a sudden, out of nowhere,
they said, uh, maybe you have to have trials, trials.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
We're going to have five million trials.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
Doesn't work. So this is a beautiful Oh it is.
It's a beautiful example. It's like the best one ever
of the Cloward Pivens strategy that was sixties radicals. You know,
adhere to. The idea is you make the other side
live up to their own rules. You insist even as
you are breaking every rule you can think of. You
(05:15):
constantly make the other side live up to their own
rules and principles, and then you overload the system to
the point that it breaks. This is the absolute classic
example of that. Biden for whatever bizarro reasons or you know,
he was so incoherent, maybe it was his progressive aids
or pushing him to do this, but they let in
so many people so quickly. The systems that exist to
(05:39):
get people out again are completely overwhelmed. It's like, you know,
after the tsunami in Japan, that giant flood that ruined
the Fukushima reactor, that flood of immigrants is just it.
We're drowning in it. And so then the left is saying, no, no, no, no,
you have these principles, you have these procedures. You have
(06:00):
to follow your principles. Having drowned the system.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Yeah, that's a tough one. It is completely undoable. Five
million trials, more like fifteen million to try to get
people out. So yeah, it's I don't know what the
answer is that this. Well there is an answer, and
national reviews written about it, and it's been talked about
for decades. It's been talking about our entire radio career.
(06:25):
If you had Everify, where people couldn't hire you unless
you could prove your you've got the paperwork in your ear,
people would leave because you wouldn't be able to have
a job.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
Somebody pointed out via email the other day that, well,
you have to have employers that are willing to use
the everify. Oh yeah, I tell you what if they
don't to enforce it, we enforce the law on them too.
Absolutely hammer them. You're running some sort of chicken killing
plant in the middle of Iowa and you're not filling
the filling out your paperwork, mining your p's and q's. Huh,
(06:57):
we'll shut you down.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
What do you do for a living?
Speaker 1 (06:59):
I work at a chick and kill and I murdered
chickens and hack them apart. That's what they do.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
It is.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
We're going to meat processing facility. You murder chickens and
hack them apart. It's okay.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
I like chicken.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Yeah, I'm a carnivore. Speaking of getting back to the
questions and overwhelming the system and that sort of thing.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
Murdered chickens and act them apart.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Eric track Suit see from a story Oregon frequent correspondent
rights Dear Joe, kudos for your herculean and fair minded
analysis of what Trump said in response to Kristen Welker's
question over the weekend. But even given those numbers that
you're talking about, don't you need to uphold the Constitution
of the United States? As president? And he says the
(07:45):
presidential three as follows. Eric says, I do solemnly swear
or for him that I will faithfully execute the office
of President of the United States, and I will, to
the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States. Not to put too fine
a point on it, I might suggest that having given
this oath twice, President Trump could have come up with
a better answer than I don't know.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
Yeah, I don't. I don't know if he was trolling.
It worked, I mean because it got lots of headlines,
because he could have so easily said I'll uphold the Constitution.
But as always, it needs to be interpreted as to
what the Constitution means. It's always been that way it
is today, and I think it means something different than
(08:25):
you do.
Speaker 1 (08:27):
Eric, You're one hundred percent right. He could have come
up with a better explanation, But that's Trump. It makes
me insane because he does such a poor job of
explaining what he's talking about so frequently. And as a
guy who has criticized Trump. In fact, my last sentence
criticized Trump, he meant exactly what Jack was saying. He meant,
(08:48):
you are trying to, in the fashion of the Cloward
pivot strategy, which I was just talking about, trying to
hold me to your conception of the rules to prevent
me from solving the problem you have caused. That is
what he meant in his answer to the evil and
disingenuous and horrific christin welker horrific. I'm being charitable. I
(09:13):
emerged chickens and I hacked them into pieces.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
That's what I do.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
And I'm a wardsmith. And so he's trying to say, no,
you're not going to trap me into agreeing with your
premise that I have to adhere to the Constitution in
the ways you have just set forth. But he's not
a good enough litigator of his own point of view
to express it like that, so he goes without, Oh, no,
we'll have to see, we'll follow the Supreme Court, which
(09:37):
is saying yes, but we've got great lawyers looking at it.
So that answer was only unsatisfactory if A you're a
stickler for Trump, you know, being a better communicator, or
B you're wilfully misinterpreting what he was saying. I believe that, amen,
hell ya.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
So what do you think is going to happen with
the millions and millions of people that got in illegally
that the vast majority of people in this country including Democrats,
won't boot it out. They're gonna stay.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Most of them, A lot of them are. Yeah. I
think the question is how many can we get out
and buy what procedures? And I don't know the answer
to that question. That's one of the reasons that the
radicals use the strategy I was describing, because it works
real well.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
How about the majority end up staying.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
You end up, for instance, getting millions and millions and
millions of people in the city of Chicago where I
grew up, right outside the city, but dependent on the government.
You've overloaded the system. Now all of those people will
not eat or be able to medicate themselves. They don't
even feed their own damn children. How are you going
(10:51):
to reform the government now they've overwhelmed the system to
break it. It works. It's evil and insidious and non American,
but it works. So yeah, we're in a hell of
spot right now. What the answer is I don't know.
But Trump and company are working on it pretty hard.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
That's interesting. This story is not over.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
I think they are doing great, if somewhat controversial work.
I hope they can stay on the right side of
the law. On the other hand, the whole tariffs on
movies is ludicrous. It's practically hilarious. It's impossible. I mean,
it's intellectual property with no set value. If I made
(11:31):
a movie in Ireland today and Francis Corsese made a
movie in Ireland today, what are you gonna tear If
from the same nobody's gonna see my day movie, it'd
be garbage. Trust me, I don't know the first thing
about me. Well, I think you need a story anyway.
So it's just it's utterly unworkable. It's silly. Well, you'd
(11:52):
have to tax the profits after Oh lord, you know
nothing about Hollywood accounting. I could write, direct, star in,
and film a movie and own ninety eight percent of
it and the studio that owned two percent would find
a way to get all of the profits. That is
what makes Hollywood go round. So yeah, it's utterly unworkable.
(12:13):
The Alcatraz thing is hilarious. It's just trolling.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Yeah, that's one hundred percent trolling. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
But the immigration stuff, they're doing the work that needs
to be done, and they're they're working against the real odds.
Tough hearts.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Yeah, AI coming for a lot of people's jobs. As
we've talked about AI coming for our jobs. It looks
like got a good example of that, among other thing.
You stay here, do.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
You guys say this?
Speaker 6 (12:43):
Trump just shocked Hollywood by announcing on tariff on all
movies and TV shows made in foreign lands. And be
fun seeing the next Lord of the Rings filmed in
bay on New Jersey.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Hey, look at billb movies. We'll gonnoray got a mine merrita.
So you mentioned this last segment, but the the one
hundred percent tariff on foreign movies because we're gonna make
a movie's American again. And John Voight, the one of
(13:17):
the few conservative Hollywood types, came out yes day and said, yeah,
he's gonna help lead the charge to make a movies
American again. This is all is this? Does everybody know
this is trolling? Or I mean, because this isn't gonna
do anything?
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Not exactly Voight, by the way, who's eighty six years old.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
I didn't realize that he's almost like a bad age. Okay.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah. So the problem is there are a bunch of
foreign countries that offer huge tax incentives to make the
movies in their country instead of the United States. And
so Trump says, well, we'll see about that we'll put
huge tariffs on them, and the movie business is saying, like,
thanks for your concern, but uh, how about tax incentives
here in the US wouldn't be easier, and so that's
(14:02):
probably the direction.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
Okay, okay, okay, Well I get that different topic also
the entertainment world, where I.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Don't know why you'd offer tax incentives to movies and
not your local plumbing contractor. But we can discuss that
another time.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
And that's a good point. Yesterday we were talking about
AI Ai me continuing after I die from this cold
that I've had for oh going on a month. No way,
you can just take my voice in all the many
words I've said over thirty years and AI can fashion
it together and whatever it needs to say. Well, that
is actually happening. So I was watching the NBA last night.
(14:35):
I'm a big NBA fan. Great first round games last night,
two upsets, fantastic stuff. But one of the most famous
announcers in all of modern NBA history, Jim Fagan of NBC.
He no longer is with us, but the NBA is
using clips of him to create voiceovers to continue to
(14:56):
have the voice of the nineties NBA today. Here's a clip.
Speaker 7 (14:59):
Now, the NBA on NBC is bad. See you this
October for the NBA season tip off.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I want munch of that. I don't know if a
I had to play any role. They surely he said
that like eight million times so, but either way, that's
gonna be fairly common.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
I think, yeah, I'm sure they could craft him saying
the Lakers. Well, the Lakers aren't taking on anybody except
that the local golf course. But you know, whatever, the
Nuts take on the Nuggets Tuesday Night winner take all?
Sure you though? He's with God?
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Now, I was thinking of the great Don Pardo of
Saturday Night Live, who did the voice of that for
like the first forty seven years of their fifty year
history or whatever. They could have him continue, and you know,
with whatever new hosts are on there, that'll probably become
a thing. Yeah, big deal in eliminate a handful of
announcer jobs.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
But why not? Yeah, Well, they're talking in Movieland about
having no actors eventually and just a CGI generated AI
generated folks right actors on the screen.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
I don't know. We'll have to see it in action
to see if we like it or not. I don't know,
you're gonna tell us why Medicaid sucks at some point.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
That's a bit of a oversimplification, but although it's accurate,
Yes it does. It's a scam. It's a giant scam.
It goes around wearing the clothes of this is just
a little government help for the poor to get the
medical care they need. Poor pregnant women so their babies
are healthy. That's all we're doing here. It's become this
(16:45):
giant like money trading scam where the states exploit this
you know, sub law of a sub rule of medicaid
and get this much money in exchange, and if they
use that money for this to get even more money,
and it turns out healthy, lazy, grown men are getting
(17:08):
way more than poor pregnant ladies.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
Really, Oh, I don't like that story. So we got
a lot on the way to stay here. If you
missed a segment, get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
But it sort of represents something that's both horrible and
beautiful and strong and miserable. Week It's got a lot
of it's got a lot of qualities that are interesting,
and I.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
Think they make a point.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
I think he's talking about me horrible, strong, miserable week
and everyone knows it. Thank you very much. How you
doing today, Good glad to hear it.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
So there's a lot here trying to figure out exactly
how to corral all this information. I should have figured
this out earlier, but I just came across something really
interesting about how do you explain the current battle over
Medicaid reform? Maybe you'll just start here, a couple of folks.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
I want to make sure everybody understands what's going on here.
So when you turn sixty five, you get government healthcare.
At that point, you get medical care, medical care sixty five.
Medicaid is for the super poor, down and out right.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Yeah, originally like one percent of the population, now much much, much,
much more. So let me just lay this out and
we'll stick with this through the weeks to come, in
a way that I promise won't be boring and wonky.
But it's such an enormous problem. The Wall Street Journal
is at the editorial board. I was talking about how
the Republicans are trying to reform Medicaid and they haven't
(18:49):
even rolled out a draft Medicaid bill, but Democrats and
the media allies are already pounded on them for snatching
healthcare from millions of poor people, which just goes to
show you, and you'll understand at the end of this
how incredibly dishonest politics is. And Republicans would be making
a terrible blunder to let that intimidate them from fixing
the program, especially winding down free federal money for able
(19:15):
bodied men on Medicaid, which is a huge part of it.
So here's the one idea that they're working with, is
imposing sanity on the way federal Medicaid money flows to
the states. Here's the core dysfunction, writes the editorial Board.
The Feds pick up roughly fifty to seventy seven percent
of the tab, depending on the state, for pregnant women,
(19:39):
the disabled, and other low income populations, so between half
and three quarters. But the Feds pay ninety percent for
prime age adults, all eligible under the Affordable Care Act,
Obamacare's Medicaid expansion. You remember all the talk about the
(19:59):
Medicaid expansion and the money to states, and most of
us scratched our heads and weren't sure what to make
of it. And blue states said yes, and red states
said no. And we're accused of neglecting their citizens for saying.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
That, and critics said this was just an attempt to
get universal health care going, which is what it looks like.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
Yeah, exactly, so again, the feds paid ninety percent. If
I'm a thirty two year old male, smoking pot, living
in my parents' basement, in porn, watching porn, refusing to work,
collecting fake disability whatever.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Probably got a one man bun of some sort, probably
man bund.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
They pay ninety percent for my medicaid expansion the federal
government does. The enhanced funding was a Democratic bribe debate
states into expanding their programs under Obamacare. That it also
contradicted the founding purpose of Medicaid, which was to help
the poor. Now you you can't find voters who think
the federal government should be giving their scarce healthy sources
(21:00):
to working age men over poor children and pregnant women.
Nobody wants that, But that's where we are because that's
what the perverse financing formula encourages. The states can grab
more federal dollars if they sign up more prime age adults.
But if you try to reform this, Chuck Schumer is
going to get on the steps of the Capitol and
with crocodile tears in his eyes, talk about how you're
(21:21):
trying to starve poor babies right. Twenty twenty two study
from the Mercada Center looked at the spending growth patterns
and states that took the expansion money compared with those
that didn't. It found quote strong evidence in Medicaid expansion
states of a shift of financial resources away from certain
vulnerable and roly populations, the most notable being from low
(21:42):
income children. And the GOP can make a really strong
argument that fixing this bias in federal payments is shoring
up the program to serve the vulnerable much better. It's
not trying to take it away from them. It's the
opposite about it, opposite of that. But you know how
politics works. It's easy to scare people. It's way easier
(22:04):
to scare them than to explain to them. There are
ten states, including Florida and Texas, that have declined the
federal government's Medicaid expansion bait, but just ten, and some
are talking about part time work requirements if you're on medicaid,
to go after improper payments and call it good, but
you really have to restructure the entire thing. Obamacare was
(22:28):
everything its critics said it was.
Speaker 2 (22:32):
But it's so galling, and I know it is for
a lot of you. It's just, you know, you get
up and you go to work in the idea that
there's somebody out there suck it off your tax money
with a smile on their face.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
It's just so galling. Yeah, I know, I know. I've
got some more figures on on Medicaid's expansion, but I
can't find them. It has to do with watching your pot,
smoking your porn. No, no, no, no, we're past that part.
(23:08):
It has to do with, oh damn it. I thought
I had it handy. The extent to which Social Security
is self supporting, and how much it's grown beyond the
self supporting part. Self supporting meaning we're all kicking in money, right,
we all know that, right, But it does get subs
(23:29):
these from the federal government because we don't have enough
workers for the old people, blah blahlah. And then you
have Medicare, which has grown much much, much more in
relation to how self supporting it is. And then you
have Medicaid, which is exploded as a drag on the
federal budget way beyond any you know, supporting self supporting
(23:52):
nature it has. I will find those numbers for you
that they're astonishing. But if you're talking about entitlement reform,
you've got to start with Medicaid then move on to Medicare.
But that's a different kettle of fish. So just you know,
if there's a takeaway, enjoy the absolute dishonest demagoguery of
(24:12):
the Democratic Party as they're claiming Republicans are trying to snatch,
you know, infant formula out of the mouths of babes right.
Speaker 2 (24:21):
The whole health care thing, as we all know, it's
just so because I'm been going to the doctor a
fair amount being sick right now, and you know, I'm
gonna get a bill for next week. I'll get a
bill and it'll be eighty bucks or it'll be eight
hundred bucks. I don't have any idea, and I don't
have any idea if I actually have to pay it
or not. And maybe I'll pay it or maybe I
won't pay it, and hope it goes away, and maybe
(24:42):
it does go away, because sometimes they do, or maybe
then you get a letter saying we're gonna turn it
over to collections. Because you don't have any idea if
you're supposed to pay it or not. Just the whole
thing is so random and I never have any I
never know.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
Yeah, yeah, it's absolutely terrible. So I guess you know
that's your takeaway. And I will find those stats if
I possibly can and bring them to you because it's
so revealing. Yes, discouraging. Quick word from our friends at
Prize Picks. Oh my gosh. You like the sports, you
think you know what you're talking about. Turn your sports
(25:14):
predictions into cash money. All you have to do is
pick two players, at least two players, and say, hey,
the stats projection, they're gonna do better than that or
worse than that. You can be two to six players.
You can even combine sports. One basketball guy you think's
gonna go off one baseball guy.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Did you have more or less on Jalen Brunson meeting?
What missing wide open layups to win the game last night?
For the to Mix and Men? Did he get bailed
out by the rest of the team? Otherwise he would
have been the goat of goats in New York City.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Prize Pick's the best way to get action on sports
and more than thirty states, including California, Texas, and Georgia,
withdrawals are fast, safe and scare some hitting your account
as little as fifteen minutes. Fabulous. Download the prize picks
at today. Use the coat Armstrong. They'll give you a
fifty bucks instantly after you play just a five dollar
lineup for the first time. That's the code Armstrong to
(26:03):
get fifty dollars instantly after you play your first five
dollars lineup. It's fun, seazy, simple prize picks. Run your game, right.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
I know you're I know you're a hater on the NBA.
I like the NBA, but it is amazing how many.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
No no, no, no, no, no no, you slenderous bastard.
I just don't care.
Speaker 2 (26:23):
Well, yeah, it's a saving I don't know. But uh,
it's amazing how many games come down to like the
last minute. I mean, you know, you watch for three
hours and then so many games it's just who can
do their thing in the last minute, like all the
time and it works.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
I was a kid and my dad said to me,
there's no point in watching the first three quarters.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
Shoe you have you have to enjoy the play of
it otherwise. It's right. Yeah, it's the reason I don't
get soccer because I don't. I've never played soccer. I
don't understand. I don't understand the play so because there's
no scoring, I get nothing out of it. You have
enjoy the playing of the NBA game because if you
just want the result, well you might as well just
watch the last minute, like your dad said.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
By the way, for the record, this will be a
minority opinion. But I am a courageous man, Jack, and
do not fear being in the minority. A playoff hockey
makes playoff basketball look like middle school chess tournaments.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
Hockey. All right, about the hockey, Well, the few times
I've ever gotten into hockey, it is fantastic. Why is
that not caught on more? Is because it just doesn't
translate to television as well.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
That's the half of it. The second half of it
is enough people don't understand like the rules of it,
and the rules are really super easy to understand. Give
me five minutes, you'll enjoy hockey. Puck in the net, well,
that's a lot of one of the that's really the
key rule. Yes, there are some minor rules, though they
confuse people. Why'd they just whistle the puck? And why
(27:52):
are they stopping and going down to that end. Now
people get confused, they get discouraged, And yes, if you
don't know the game, it's a little harder to fire
on TV live in a stadium hockey aspect, akill.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
I'm not a hockey fan, and I would say that
in person hockey is the best. It's absolutely fantastic, and
the crowds are fantastic too. All right, we got a
lot more of a I was uplate at the met gala.
That's why I've got this cough Medicashians and I wore
my statue of Liberty outfit. And there's really something more
in the way I stay here.
Speaker 8 (28:30):
And A wave flipped a suspected human smuggling boat carrying
at least sixteen people off the California Coast. The boat
washing ashore around six point thirty this morning on Tory
Pine State Beach near San Diego.
Speaker 9 (28:42):
Authority say at least three people were killed. Four more
rushed to the hospital. First responders searching for at least
nine missing. The twelve foot vessel is called a Ponga boat.
It's designed for fishing, but commonly used by smugglers slipping
people past the border.
Speaker 2 (28:57):
WOW lot for ways to try to get people in
that's how badly people want to come into the United States.
Yet we have people marching in the streets about how
awful it is to be here.
Speaker 1 (29:08):
Yes, I suggest a change of location.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
Perhaps I'm looking at our Twitter feed. A couple of
things I wanted to mention. I retweeted the great James
Lindsay yesterday, who had a happy birthday, shout out to
Karl Marx with this funny meme. A quote from Karl Marx,
who I guess it was his birthday yesterday. A quote
from Karl Marx. I don't know if I'd ever heard
this before. My object in life is to dethrone God
and destroy capitalism. Lindsay's response was, don't care, get a job,
(29:40):
no kidding.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Speaking of memes and communists in California, this was one
of my favorite. The French have given up on high
speed rail in California. The French because there's too much bureaucracy.
Speaker 2 (29:55):
Yeah, that should hurt, that should make us, that should
make us go.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
They're gonna help build one in North Africa instead, saying
the region was quote less politically dysfunctional. That is a quote.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
But my favorite thing I tweeted out over the weekend
was the footage. If you've seen the footage of the
humanoid robot losing its s there in the factory. Oh,
you gotta go to our twitter feed and look that out.
I tweeted, whoa, here's the future. A robot losing its ass.
But the thing starts flailing around with its arms and legs,
kicking and throwing, and everybody's running away from it. I mean,
(30:32):
it would have taken your.
Speaker 1 (30:33):
Head off, oh even hit you.
Speaker 2 (30:37):
And some of the responses to the tweet were pretty
funny and things that you have said very, very many times.
It obviously was wanting to get our vital human juices,
among other things. Keep a baseball hat handy when working
with a robot. So this is the future. Thank god,
(30:59):
I'm old you deal with it.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
Have a baseball hat, handy baseball bat.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
Oh I'm sorry if I said hat.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
Oh wow, it's flailing like a lunatic.
Speaker 2 (31:09):
Oh yeah, it just lost its mind.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
It's human sized and like built of hard plastic. Or
the scientists are trying desperately to corral it.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
That robot's request was denied for getting their birthday off,
so it begins. Many people retweeted, which I agree.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Yeah, kidding.
Speaker 2 (31:27):
Yeah. Oh, and then this this was a common theme
now the debate. How about one hundred men versus a
berserk robot.
Speaker 1 (31:37):
Well, the thing seem to be restrained on some sort
of robot gallows, which helps but for now, but did
the next time exactly? Yeah, if it was turned loose,
plays we'd all be chopped up like little things that
are chopped up.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
And it kind of reminds me. Elon did an interview
the other day. I meant to play the audio of
it where he said, this year they're going to release
the fully self driving Tesla update where it can drive
you know, autonomous sealy without you in it or not.
And so we're getting closer and closer to a lot
of these cars, robots, whatever, completely being on their own.
(32:10):
And I just, I just I think there's gonna be
I don't understand how it gets through lawsuit America, That's
what I want to watch. I don't understand how you
get past the first time one of those robots swings
its arm, hits somebody in the head, and the company
gets sued for five billion dollars and so nobody can
even try it anymore. Right now, Are we gonna fix that?
Speaker 1 (32:31):
So literally, the Tesla is self driving if you're not
in it, so it can come pick you up.
Speaker 2 (32:36):
That's what Elon said the other day. I don't believe
it's gonna happen for a variety of reasons, including what
I mean, how can we have a world where kids
can't run on the playground if it ran yesterday because
of the liability. But we're gonna have, you know, fully
automated robots or cars driving around and the risks that
come with I just don't see how the math works
on that unless we redo our our tort system or something.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
Yeah, that is absolutely true. Does tech have good enough
lobbyists to redo our horrific tort system here in the country.
I don't know, Jack.
Speaker 9 (33:09):
If you'll take get that update on your Tesla, you
got to sit in the back seat and just wave
to people as you go down the highway, And.
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Oh, I would love it if it worked. I just
don't think it's ready yet. The newer Tesla is like
my my twenty four Cyberbeast. They moved to sonar, a
sonar like thing from just the video cameras that they
that I have on my twenty one Tesla, and I
don't know if it's a step forward or backwards. A
lot of people think it was a step backwards. It's
weird looking at the screen. It looks like the sort
of sonar thing you've seen in movies, with the wiggly
(33:38):
lines and everything like that. Yeah, it's supposed to be, Yeah,
supposed to be a step toward autonomous vehicles.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
But it's just it's just never gonna work.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
The first one crashes, you know, runs over an eight
year old girl in a crosswalk, and I just feel
like it's over and it'll never come back.
Speaker 1 (33:55):
Yeah, I don't know. They have lobbyists, they have lawyers. Sir,
there have been I hate the specificity of your example.
I get why you did it, but there have been
three hundred and four eight year old girls run over
by human beings this year. So this we're saving many,
many little girls. Sorry about this one. You know, they'll
(34:18):
they'll make that argument.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
I think that's the most interesting angle of the whole thing.
I don't understand how it works in modern I just
read a great piece on Twitter, a breakdown of how
that whole thing works with juries and judges and corporations,
and then corporations have to go extra safe to try
to protect themselves and then you can't have this and
you can't have that, and the reactions.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
I mean, it's such a mess, as we all know. Yeah, yeah,
it's one of the great challenges to our economy. If
we were to and this is you know, pipe dream,
and if we were to get serious tort reform in
this country, just make it much more reasonable like it
was I don't know thirty years ago. The explosion in
economic activity would stun you. It would take place in
(35:02):
ways and places you never would have imagined.
Speaker 2 (35:04):
You can't have a real playground in your park because
of the liability, but we're gonna have cars and robots
going around on their own. It just I don't see
how it fits together.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
Yeah, and it's probably worthwhile to mention once again. German
insurance companies insisted to the German government moron's the Germans
next hour. By the way, they've got a crazy situation
going on politically right now, a couple of different crazy situations.
But their insurance companies actually went to the government and said, look,
you've made life so safe for German children. They have
(35:34):
no idea what risk is. They have no idea how
to figure out how much risk to take or how
to manage it, and so they're getting in all sorts
of crazy accidents and injuries because they're veal calves. You've
got to let kids be kids. The insurance companies said that.
Speaker 2 (35:50):
On the other hand, if I'm working at some sort
of factory and my boss says, we got this new robot. Robot,
it's fantastic and it swings its arm and takes my
eye out, a little compensation for it?
Speaker 1 (36:02):
Oh yeah, granted, yeah, I Removing robots is very different
from overleas safe playgrounds. Jack.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
You can't just say, well, robots being robots, what are
you gonna do if Frank will take you? Yeah, well,
we'll see, and maybe that's the future. We'll be surrounded
by flailing robots losing their s. Good stuff next hour.
Speaker 1 (36:22):
If you can't hang around, grab it via podcast later
on Armstrong and Getty on demand. You can subscribe or
follow wherever you like to get podcasts Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.