February 3, 2025 • 11 mins
THE BEST BITS IN A SILLIER PACKAGE (from Tuesday's Mike Hosking Breakfast) The Trade War Rages On/Fixing the Climate Is a Bit Too Hard/Tax Is Complicated/Trump Literally Blames Canada/Early Entry for Dad Joke of the Year
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 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from news Talk said be
follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
The Rewrap There, Welcome to the Rewrap for Tuesday, all
the best but from the Mic Class and Breakfast on
news doorgs. They'd be in a sillier package. I am
Glenn Hart, and today, the government's climate policy. Is that
going to change? Like it seems to be changing in
a lot of places around the world. The government's tax policy?
Is that going to change? Is it seems to be
(00:44):
changing a lot of places around the world. Trump's war
with Canada, and is it all right to land a
helicopter and a colder set? But before any of that,
actually we're going to start with Trump and the tariffs
and their effects, well primarily on us. I mean, that's
what we really care about, right.
Speaker 3 (01:04):
I can see why some would be confused about the
so called trade war that's officially un folded this week,
mainly because it may or may not be about trade,
and it may or may not be a usual fight
even if it is about trade. So for now, the
tariffs are limited to some Chinese products with exemptions, Canada
with some exemptions, Mexico well, that seems fairly fluid in
the last couple of hours, and of course the threat
is still there for the EU. Traditionally, a tariff is
(01:27):
simply a charge put on a certain product, either by
a product type like steel, or a country like Canada.
It becomes a trade war when said country retaliates by
putting a counter tariff on America put tariffs on Canada,
Canada puts a tariff on orange juice. This time, it's
allegedly about borders and drugs. If said countries stop people
going over the border or clean up their export of drugs,
America might call it off. We've seen some movement on
(01:49):
that in Mexico this morning. But where Trump gets confusing
is when he talks about tariffs to protect American business. That,
of course is a very left wing policy, not one
of a conservative. Conservatives favor free markets. Tariffs are not
free market. Also confusing matters is Ontario's response, which is
not the tariff, but to simply remove American alcohol products
from the shelves, in other words, ban them. Tariffs traditionally
(02:12):
aren't about banned, there about costs. You can still buy
a tariff product, it's just more expensive. Next point is price,
and this is where Trump will land himself in trouble.
The tariff is a price. It either gets soaked up
by the importer or passed on to the consumer. When
it gets passed on, more money exchanges hands for less product.
That's inflationary unless, and here's the real issue for a
(02:32):
place like US, no one buys the product because of price.
They buy another product for cheaper, like an American product,
which is where Trump may well win. America makes so
much stuff you can almost always find a local product
to support. New Zealand can't because we don't make a
lot of stuff. So two questions while we watch this
play out. One, do we have a plan of America
hits US with tariff's ie, do we retaliate? And two,
(02:54):
given this is admittedly an extreme version of the business,
it nevertheless represents a more broadly a growing way of
the world, in other words, more protection less free trade.
Given we are the original free traders in a world
that's moving on.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
What now?
Speaker 2 (03:09):
It's trying to think the things that I get from America,
either directly or indirectly, that I would miss if we
couldn't afford them anymore? Burgers, I don't know, hang on
I think we make those. I'm sure there's something so rewrap.
(03:32):
Of course, Donald Trump is not big on saving the
world's climate. We've had a good crack at it, but
there seems to be only so much a country of
our size can do.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
So we've adjusted our climate target last week, a climate
target which, in and of itself, as far as I
can work out, it's part of the whole climate debate malaise.
There are so many targets involving Paris or not involving Paris,
or timelines twenty thirty, twenty thirty five, twenty forty, twenty
fifty five percent down on nineteen ninety one, two thousand,
So many numbers, so much noise. It's no wonder so
many of us have turned off. It's not that the
(04:06):
broad idea doesn't have some men. It's just how to
kill the buzz obsession, Like the Greens anger fury, Too
many numbers, classic recipe to lose the room. Anyway, we
adjusted one of our targets. It's not as high as
it was. Que the usual outrage. But but is it
time to ask, even if reluctantly, to ask the question
as to whether playing our part, if not leading the way,
(04:27):
as laudable as it may be, is now just a
pointless exercise. It's always been true that no matter what
we did, it would literally make no difference to the planet.
But doing our bit was important. So with Trump here
and America out of Paris, and China and India and Brazil,
et cetera, doing nothing but boosting emissions, what here at
the bottom of the world is the point ah, Because
(04:48):
what has become indisputably clear is that one Paris will
not be met. None of these targets are ever met.
Two the price seems high economically. I mean, read the
piece over the weekend in Britain where it was announced
nine percent of farmland has to go gone. Eventually it
will be twenty percent, a fifth of all land in Britain.
Farmland needs to be interfere with in some way so
(05:09):
they can meet their climate targets. Nice, clean air, fabulous,
just can't feed the people. It's a hopeless ask, it's
not real. Hopefully science will save us, as Nick said,
because it's increasingly obvious, you've got the lethal combination of
the countries that don't care, made worse by the fact
they tend to be the large countries and the economic
sacrifice made by everyone else that is simply increasingly beyond
the pale. We're not putting up with it. In simple terms,
(05:31):
you need to give up economic growth in order to
freshen the air or clear the atmosphere. That, to my eye,
is an argument that as more and more evidence of
failure mounts, is not only never going to be one,
but harder and harder to even start.
Speaker 2 (05:44):
Yes, more and more we seem to be hearing this
argument it's too hard, so why bother trying? And Yeah,
I'm the last person in the world and disagree with
that attitude. I've applied that to most things in my life.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
Wrap.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
So Christopher Luxen came in this morning for his weekly interview.
I don't know if he enjoys it, but he turns out.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
One of the dificulties I'm having at the month that
tax thing's fascinating is they're going to go with tax
you can't cut corporate, and I hope they do cut corporate,
and of course you know it'll be something around investment
as well, and if you invest in certain areas you'll
get to depreciate faster. But you can't cut corporate. If
you're then leaving the top rate at thirty nine and
(06:29):
then but in cutting the thirty nine it costs your
fortune and they don't have a fortune. Of course, you remember
the interview we did years ago with John Key and
he sort of gave away the tax cuts. I said,
how much would it cost you to do a tax cut? Andy?
He went, oh, I've done the numbers. Ats three and
a half billion dollars, remember that, And so it's big
money they don't have. So it's going to be fascinating
to see how that whole thing unfolds.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And this led to much discussion later on in the
show whether a person can be a company. I accused
Mike of being limited. He didn't deny it. Well, it's great,
tyas great to We have fun here. Rewrap it all right, Now,
let's get back to the trade war because it seems
to be ongoing. The most violent skirmishes so far in
(07:09):
the trade war seem to be between Canada and Donald Trump.
It's sort of the rebel forces versus the Federation. To
put it in Star Wars terms, I.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
Think Trump op the pone to Rudeau. Still got this
idea about the fifty firth state.
Speaker 4 (07:30):
What I'd like to see Canada become our fifty first
stead we give them protection, military protection. We don't need
them to build our cars. I'd rather see Detroit or
South Carolina or any one of our Tennessee, any one
of our states build the cars. They could do it
very easily. We don't need them for the cars. We
don't need them for lumber, We don't need them for anything.
(07:52):
We don't need them for energy. We have more energy
than they do. We don't need them for energy. So
I say, why are we doing this? Why are we
willing to lose between one hundred billion and two hundred
billion dollars a year. We don't need them.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
I get. I get the myopic person in Arkansas who's
going horor he's a good guy. I get all of that.
But this whole we don't need anybody will just be
in isolation of Jesus. I finished The Apprentice last night,
which I thoroughly recommend to you currently on Apple, and
I think, Neon, you've got to pay for it. That'll
(08:29):
change eventually. But the guy who plays Trump is very
very good, bordering on superb. As I mentioned yesterday, the
guy who plays Cone is absolutely brilliant. And I was
wondering as I was watching the program whether they ever
got themselves into legal trouble how to get this. So
there's a couple of scenes in there that infer Trump
(08:51):
indulged in illegality, and I assume they somehow covered themselves off.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
With that, but as because he did illegal stuff.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
Could be there. But there was a rape scene in there.
The allegation was he raped somebody, and so I thought, Jesus,
you need to know that you've got that off. Anyway,
it's well worth watching. And I did wonder if he
hadn't become president, would you watch it, or now that
he is president, do you look at it in a
whole different light? But it's well worth watching. The Apprentice.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Yeah, I think you generally only take people to court
if you can prove what they're saying isn't true about you.
I'm just saying that that's one reason people don't go
to court, That's all I'm saying. There the re rap.
(09:40):
We're going to finish up here with possibly the best
dad joke of the year to date. Can you have
a best dad joke or are they all just horrendous
and an actual fact? The best one is the worst
actual joke.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
So Ellie Williams an Ana Moobray for people outside of Auckland,
you probably don't know who they are in norder your care.
The only reason I mentioned Ellie Williams this morning was
once in all black Anna Mobra is part of the
Zuru grouping worth a lot of money.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
And person or company.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
Very good question. Anyway, they bought a house and I
happened to be in the street the other day and
it's a little street, it's almost a cul de sac,
and it's a beautiful street and it's a very nice
place to live and they can afford to live there
because they're very successful people, and on that we congratulate them. Unfortunately,
(10:34):
they decided, for reasons best known to themselves, that landing
a helicopter there would be something they might like to do.
So they made the appropriate paperwork and the Independent Commissioner
Mark was set upon the task and he decided to
publicly notified the application on the basis that it affects
the environment. The environment I think he means birds, but
I would say probably the neighbors, because I know a
(10:56):
bit about helicopters and they tend to be quite loud,
especially in small cul de sacs. Not that I've ever
been in a helicopter in a small cul de sac,
but my guess is that they're pretty damn loud, and
so a lot of people I'm reading this morning, not
surprising they've gone they don't like that idea. Neighbours, Eh,
what do you do you think.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
That the Mowbrays would travel by balloon?
Speaker 3 (11:19):
That's almost clever.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
See from one one dad to another. Game appreciates game.
That's that what the saying is something like that. Anyway,
make sure you come back next week. In fact, come
back tomorrow. I don't know why I suddenly thought it
was Friday. There, it's all Tuesday. Come back tomorrow, and
(11:44):
there'll be more dead jokes probably, and maybe I'll even
know what day it is.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
For more from news Talk said B listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
You're listening to a podcast from news Talk said be
follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
The Rewrap There, Welcome to the Rewrap for Tuesday, all
the best but from the Mic Class and Breakfast on
news doorgs. They'd be in a sillier package. I am
Glenn Hart, and today, the government's climate policy. Is that
going to change? Like it seems to be changing in
a lot of places around the world. The government's tax policy?
Is that going to change? Is it seems to be
(00:44):
changing a lot of places around the world. Trump's war
with Canada, and is it all right to land a
helicopter and a colder set? But before any of that,
actually we're going to start with Trump and the tariffs
and their effects, well primarily on us. I mean, that's
what we really care about, right.
Speaker 3 (01:04):
I can see why some would be confused about the
so called trade war that's officially un folded this week,
mainly because it may or may not be about trade,
and it may or may not be a usual fight
even if it is about trade. So for now, the
tariffs are limited to some Chinese products with exemptions, Canada
with some exemptions, Mexico well, that seems fairly fluid in
the last couple of hours, and of course the threat
is still there for the EU. Traditionally, a tariff is
(01:27):
simply a charge put on a certain product, either by
a product type like steel, or a country like Canada.
It becomes a trade war when said country retaliates by
putting a counter tariff on America put tariffs on Canada,
Canada puts a tariff on orange juice. This time, it's
allegedly about borders and drugs. If said countries stop people
going over the border or clean up their export of drugs,
America might call it off. We've seen some movement on
(01:49):
that in Mexico this morning. But where Trump gets confusing
is when he talks about tariffs to protect American business. That,
of course is a very left wing policy, not one
of a conservative. Conservatives favor free markets. Tariffs are not
free market. Also confusing matters is Ontario's response, which is
not the tariff, but to simply remove American alcohol products
from the shelves, in other words, ban them. Tariffs traditionally
(02:12):
aren't about banned, there about costs. You can still buy
a tariff product, it's just more expensive. Next point is price,
and this is where Trump will land himself in trouble.
The tariff is a price. It either gets soaked up
by the importer or passed on to the consumer. When
it gets passed on, more money exchanges hands for less product.
That's inflationary unless, and here's the real issue for a
(02:32):
place like US, no one buys the product because of price.
They buy another product for cheaper, like an American product,
which is where Trump may well win. America makes so
much stuff you can almost always find a local product
to support. New Zealand can't because we don't make a
lot of stuff. So two questions while we watch this
play out. One, do we have a plan of America
hits US with tariff's ie, do we retaliate? And two,
(02:54):
given this is admittedly an extreme version of the business,
it nevertheless represents a more broadly a growing way of
the world, in other words, more protection less free trade.
Given we are the original free traders in a world
that's moving on.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
What now?
Speaker 2 (03:09):
It's trying to think the things that I get from America,
either directly or indirectly, that I would miss if we
couldn't afford them anymore? Burgers, I don't know, hang on
I think we make those. I'm sure there's something so rewrap.
(03:32):
Of course, Donald Trump is not big on saving the
world's climate. We've had a good crack at it, but
there seems to be only so much a country of
our size can do.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
So we've adjusted our climate target last week, a climate
target which, in and of itself, as far as I
can work out, it's part of the whole climate debate malaise.
There are so many targets involving Paris or not involving Paris,
or timelines twenty thirty, twenty thirty five, twenty forty, twenty
fifty five percent down on nineteen ninety one, two thousand,
So many numbers, so much noise. It's no wonder so
many of us have turned off. It's not that the
(04:06):
broad idea doesn't have some men. It's just how to
kill the buzz obsession, Like the Greens anger fury, Too
many numbers, classic recipe to lose the room. Anyway, we
adjusted one of our targets. It's not as high as
it was. Que the usual outrage. But but is it
time to ask, even if reluctantly, to ask the question
as to whether playing our part, if not leading the way,
(04:27):
as laudable as it may be, is now just a
pointless exercise. It's always been true that no matter what
we did, it would literally make no difference to the planet.
But doing our bit was important. So with Trump here
and America out of Paris, and China and India and Brazil,
et cetera, doing nothing but boosting emissions, what here at
the bottom of the world is the point ah, Because
(04:48):
what has become indisputably clear is that one Paris will
not be met. None of these targets are ever met.
Two the price seems high economically. I mean, read the
piece over the weekend in Britain where it was announced
nine percent of farmland has to go gone. Eventually it
will be twenty percent, a fifth of all land in Britain.
Farmland needs to be interfere with in some way so
(05:09):
they can meet their climate targets. Nice, clean air, fabulous,
just can't feed the people. It's a hopeless ask, it's
not real. Hopefully science will save us, as Nick said,
because it's increasingly obvious, you've got the lethal combination of
the countries that don't care, made worse by the fact
they tend to be the large countries and the economic
sacrifice made by everyone else that is simply increasingly beyond
the pale. We're not putting up with it. In simple terms,
(05:31):
you need to give up economic growth in order to
freshen the air or clear the atmosphere. That, to my eye,
is an argument that as more and more evidence of
failure mounts, is not only never going to be one,
but harder and harder to even start.
Speaker 2 (05:44):
Yes, more and more we seem to be hearing this
argument it's too hard, so why bother trying? And Yeah,
I'm the last person in the world and disagree with
that attitude. I've applied that to most things in my life.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
Wrap.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
So Christopher Luxen came in this morning for his weekly interview.
I don't know if he enjoys it, but he turns out.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
One of the dificulties I'm having at the month that
tax thing's fascinating is they're going to go with tax
you can't cut corporate, and I hope they do cut corporate,
and of course you know it'll be something around investment
as well, and if you invest in certain areas you'll
get to depreciate faster. But you can't cut corporate. If
you're then leaving the top rate at thirty nine and
(06:29):
then but in cutting the thirty nine it costs your
fortune and they don't have a fortune. Of course, you remember
the interview we did years ago with John Key and
he sort of gave away the tax cuts. I said,
how much would it cost you to do a tax cut? Andy?
He went, oh, I've done the numbers. Ats three and
a half billion dollars, remember that, And so it's big
money they don't have. So it's going to be fascinating
to see how that whole thing unfolds.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And this led to much discussion later on in the
show whether a person can be a company. I accused
Mike of being limited. He didn't deny it. Well, it's great,
tyas great to We have fun here. Rewrap it all right, Now,
let's get back to the trade war because it seems
to be ongoing. The most violent skirmishes so far in
(07:09):
the trade war seem to be between Canada and Donald Trump.
It's sort of the rebel forces versus the Federation. To
put it in Star Wars terms, I.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
Think Trump op the pone to Rudeau. Still got this
idea about the fifty firth state.
Speaker 4 (07:30):
What I'd like to see Canada become our fifty first
stead we give them protection, military protection. We don't need
them to build our cars. I'd rather see Detroit or
South Carolina or any one of our Tennessee, any one
of our states build the cars. They could do it
very easily. We don't need them for the cars. We
don't need them for lumber, We don't need them for anything.
(07:52):
We don't need them for energy. We have more energy
than they do. We don't need them for energy. So
I say, why are we doing this? Why are we
willing to lose between one hundred billion and two hundred
billion dollars a year. We don't need them.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
I get. I get the myopic person in Arkansas who's
going horor he's a good guy. I get all of that.
But this whole we don't need anybody will just be
in isolation of Jesus. I finished The Apprentice last night,
which I thoroughly recommend to you currently on Apple, and
I think, Neon, you've got to pay for it. That'll
(08:29):
change eventually. But the guy who plays Trump is very
very good, bordering on superb. As I mentioned yesterday, the
guy who plays Cone is absolutely brilliant. And I was
wondering as I was watching the program whether they ever
got themselves into legal trouble how to get this. So
there's a couple of scenes in there that infer Trump
(08:51):
indulged in illegality, and I assume they somehow covered themselves off.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
With that, but as because he did illegal stuff.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
Could be there. But there was a rape scene in there.
The allegation was he raped somebody, and so I thought, Jesus,
you need to know that you've got that off. Anyway,
it's well worth watching. And I did wonder if he
hadn't become president, would you watch it, or now that
he is president, do you look at it in a
whole different light? But it's well worth watching. The Apprentice.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Yeah, I think you generally only take people to court
if you can prove what they're saying isn't true about you.
I'm just saying that that's one reason people don't go
to court, That's all I'm saying. There the re rap.
(09:40):
We're going to finish up here with possibly the best
dad joke of the year to date. Can you have
a best dad joke or are they all just horrendous
and an actual fact? The best one is the worst
actual joke.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
So Ellie Williams an Ana Moobray for people outside of Auckland,
you probably don't know who they are in norder your care.
The only reason I mentioned Ellie Williams this morning was
once in all black Anna Mobra is part of the
Zuru grouping worth a lot of money.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
And person or company.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
Very good question. Anyway, they bought a house and I
happened to be in the street the other day and
it's a little street, it's almost a cul de sac,
and it's a beautiful street and it's a very nice
place to live and they can afford to live there
because they're very successful people, and on that we congratulate them. Unfortunately,
(10:34):
they decided, for reasons best known to themselves, that landing
a helicopter there would be something they might like to do.
So they made the appropriate paperwork and the Independent Commissioner
Mark was set upon the task and he decided to
publicly notified the application on the basis that it affects
the environment. The environment I think he means birds, but
I would say probably the neighbors, because I know a
(10:56):
bit about helicopters and they tend to be quite loud,
especially in small cul de sacs. Not that I've ever
been in a helicopter in a small cul de sac,
but my guess is that they're pretty damn loud, and
so a lot of people I'm reading this morning, not
surprising they've gone they don't like that idea. Neighbours, Eh,
what do you do you think.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
That the Mowbrays would travel by balloon?
Speaker 3 (11:19):
That's almost clever.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
See from one one dad to another. Game appreciates game.
That's that what the saying is something like that. Anyway,
make sure you come back next week. In fact, come
back tomorrow. I don't know why I suddenly thought it
was Friday. There, it's all Tuesday. Come back tomorrow, and
(11:44):
there'll be more dead jokes probably, and maybe I'll even
know what day it is.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
For more from news Talk said B listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!