The Rod and Greg Show: Salt Lake County Council Passes $507 Million Bond to Voters; Kamala's Price Fixing Proposal on Groceries

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I've been watching the president, former President Trump's press conference

(00:04):
leading up to the show. A lot that he's discussing
right now on issues go figure and drawing a lot
of important contrasts between himself and Kamala Harris and Wall's ticket.
And we'll see. I don't expect the media to note
that he's talking issues. I think that's been the big
complaint about President Trump is that he's not talking issues.

(00:27):
But he is. I'm listening to them. This is a
second press conference in a week's time, and the best
you're getting out of the Harris Kamala Harris is that
by the end of the month she thinks she can
muster us sit down with someone. And that's about the
most you're going to get. So welcome to the show.
Got a power pack show for you today. We got
to have a lot of guests. We're still staring at

(00:49):
all these issues that are happening in real time. Things
are just unfolding as the campaign ramps up, as the
campaign season, in the silly season keeps getting sillier. Today,
in this first hour, we're going to talk about and
this is absolutely bizarre. No I'm not bizarre. I should
know better, but we got a New Jersey town that
just thinks that these illegal immigrants, even those that are

(01:09):
the most dangerous, with criminal records and arrests violent crimes,
rested for violent crimes. Citizens of this town stopped ICE
in the rare moments where they do have a re
enforcement and removal operation. The residents of this New Jersey
town stopped ICE for being able to do their job.

(01:30):
I guess out of some notion of compassion. But we're
going to talk to Simon hack Hankinson, senior research fellow
with Border Security and Immigration Center, talked to him in
this hour about that experience. What he's I think this
happened in his hometown, so there's kind of a personal
touch there. New York Times I read it so that
you don't have to ever. They are just talking about

(01:52):
how Democrats are leaning into liberty and the language of
Republicans and doing this to try and get those important
independent voters, those important working class Americans that come back
their way. And what this New York Times article is
really saying is we don't have anything of substance. We
just think we can wordsmith this and fool them into

(02:13):
voting for us. Got some polling data that I think
I want to share with you because again, if you
were to read, if you read the regime media, watched
the regime media, if you watch social media, you think
there's some great bounce happening and bump happening in the
polls for Kamala and Walls. Not the case. And again,

(02:34):
I just heard President Trump in this press conference that
he was asked the question point blank, you're in a
Fox News poll yesterday you were down by one point,
and we're seeing that the polls really shift in Kamala
Harris's favor. And to that at his answer was, I

(02:54):
pull low. I pulled low in sixteen, I pulled low
in twenty, and I tend to poll low. I thought,
what a great answer, because it's actually true. We talked
about that yesterday that a lot of pollsters are warning
Democrats if they think this is time to spike footballs,
that his numbers are far stronger than what they ever
draw out of their polls and their analysis. Have an

(03:17):
article today I'll share with you from Nate Silver, who
started five point thirty eight. He's an analyst and a polster,
and he's got some he's seeing some things, and again
he's not being fair, and he's not being objective. He's
floating this across the bow in a public format so
that the campaigns, the Democrats can read it, and it's

(03:37):
not coordinating with super packs in campaigns. So that's why
that article even exists. We're going to talk later in
the program the story that broke out this morning about
Kamala Harris's grand plan to deal with prices high prices
of groceries. And by the way, it's not just groceries.
I don't know if you've noticed housing, whether it's your
mortgage or whether it's your rent asoline. Everything is everything

(04:02):
costs so much more, measurably more than it ever did
when before this Hiris or Biden Harris one thousand, three
hundred and three day old administration took office. She has
a perfect plan and it always includes government. There isn't
one thing that this ticket, this candidate will ever profer

(04:24):
to the American people that is about free markets or
liberty or free markets, you name it, capitalism, nothing, it's government.
It's always a government solution. Wow. If you look at
job the job reports that come out, if you do
the cross tabs, if you look at the data, most

(04:45):
of those jobs that are being reported or government jobs.
The jobs that aren't government jobs, A large portion of
those are from people that are coming into the country illegally.
You're not seeing robust job growth amongst the everyday people
of this country. And and so they point to that
and say, look, we're doing well, they're not. What does
she want to do about the high prices of groceries, Well,

(05:07):
she's going to institute fixed pricing. She's going to price
fix it all. She's going to go in and put
restrictions on what you can how much you can sell
groceries for. And I think that's been done, I think,
and I don't think it. History has been very kind
in its narration of price fixing by governments. But we'll

(05:29):
get into that. We'll get into that later in the program,
and we'll explore that a little bit together and see
if that's you know, that's the direction we would want
a President of Congress to go in terms of just
getting government even more and more and more involved. How
about stop spending. How about you know, we get inflation
because you just keep printing money that means nothing. The

(05:51):
more of it you print, the trillions that they're spending,
that's that doesn't have any tax bearer, doll or connected
to it. Just keep printing money has to have something
to do with it. And I don't think it's evil
corporation's price gouging. That's the problem. And your price fixing
is just not gonna work if you're in a price fix.

(06:12):
What about rent control? What about gas control? I mean,
what where does that begin an end? I don't even
understand the logic in terms of her picking groceries by
itself is the big grand plan, but it's a it's
a plan that everybody should just naturally recoil when they
hear and then, you know, this is what I love.

(06:32):
She's trying to pivot away from some of the you know,
yesterday we talked about how she I mean, the Biden
White House is saying, you know, Como's a leader. She's
been with the President Biden hand in glove. There's no
daylight between them. They have been on the job, working
for one thy, three hundred and three days. And and
now she's saying, yeah, I think you know, I'm gonna

(06:54):
do it a little differently than than Joe Biden, which
he hasn't he doesn't appreciate. I'm going to play a
quick up for you. At some point he was asked
a question about his vice president pivoting away from him
on the economy and on prices and going up, and
he had a very quick answer, but we'll let you
hear it later in the show we have it should

(07:19):
receive more attention, and it's going to get attention on
this program. There's the tax hike come in our way,
or at least on the ballot. There will be a
question of whether you would like to raise through your
property taxes five hundred and seven million dollars for a
new jail and criminal justice facility. And there was only

(07:44):
one loan no vote in the vote by the council
to put this on the ballot for taxpayers and voters
to decide, and that was a councilman, Sheldon Steward of
the Salt Lake County Council. We're going to speak with
him later in the program about why you voted no,
and I think you'll find his answers refreshing and you're
going to scratch your head and wonder why we don't
have more members of the Salt Lake County Council that

(08:08):
maybe see it that way. Anyway, that'll be a big
issue that'll come up in the in the election this year.
That's for those of you who live in Salt Lake
County and your property taxes, by the way, when they
go up and they say, look, it's only you know,
one hundred dollars a year, not that big of a deal. Understand,
Go look at your tax statement that you have to
pay every year. Your school districts, your cities, your water,

(08:30):
your sewer districts, all of these. You're always seeing each
one of these notching up over time. And what's crazy
is it's supposed to be for a bond that once
you pay it off in fifteen years, twenty years, whatever
it is, your taxes should go back down because you're
not paying that bond anymore. But then what happens is
school districts are really good at this. They'll say, hey,
we want to do all these new things and it

(08:52):
won't raise your tax as a dime. That's because, absent
any effort, your taxes were actually going to go down deservedly,
and but that never happens. So once you start this,
once you go in one direction, you sell them. If
ever see it go the other way, where those taxes,
those property taxes come down, and when we look at housing,
whether it's your mortgage or if you pay rent, somebody's

(09:14):
paying the property tax on that on that building. It
just it just contributes to the higher and higher cost
of living here in Utah and everywhere everyone's feeling it
across the country. Anyway, we're going to talk to talk
to him about that. We also have another there's a
study that's out about the proposals to not tax Social Security,

(09:35):
and we're gonna have an interesting conversation. Wasn't I'm not
one hundred percent on board with this, but I there's
this idea that, you know, the seniors really don't need
tax relief by not taxing Social Security because they have
so much more than the working poor and uh and
it seems like a false choice to me. But we'll
we'll dive into that issue later in the program as well. Okay,

(09:56):
when we come back, we are going to be speaking
with Simon hacking Off. Hackinson, sorry about this situation in
New Jersey where Ice attempted to apprehend a violent offender
here illegally and the citizens rose up against Ice and
stop them from doing it. Look, get the whole story.
You're not gonna want to miss it when we come
back from this break. You're listening to the Rodd and

(10:19):
Greg Show here on Talk Radio one five nine Canters
a New Jersey town that prioritizes protecting illegal aliens from
ice over public safety. Mister Hankinson, welcome to the program.
Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 2 (10:32):
Oh, it's my pleasure to be with you.

Speaker 1 (10:33):
So what I the personal touch to this article is
that you were traveling summertime and you stopped at a
hometown or somewhere close to your hometown, pick and you
picked up the paper where you noted that you purchased
your first car from in the one ads. But you
saw a story that that really surprised you and you
shared it with readers. Maybe you could share with our

(10:55):
listeners a big operation from ice, which we don't see
a lot in force my removal operations. It made headlines,
but maybe not for the reason that we would hope
maybe you could share that experience.

Speaker 2 (11:08):
Sure, Yeah, this is the town. I grew up in Princeton,
New Jersey. Moved there about nineteen seventy five, and I
was maybe six years old, and you know, on and off,
been going back for many, many years. And I had
read about this story in the National Press and through
an ICE Press release, but I hadn't kind of put
things together until I was just having this cup of

(11:29):
coffee look at the town paper. But Immigration and Customs
Enforcement really is doing very little under the Biden administration
that they're really trying to do the bare minimum that
they can get away with, you know, politically, But they
are going after people who have not just entered the
country illegally or are living here illegally, but the ones

(11:50):
who have outstanding warrants and criminal records and who were
kind of a threat to society, the public. So they'd
identified two guys from Guatemala who are in Princeton. Princeton
actually has a excuse me, a bit of a cop
has a pretty sizeable guatemal in the Central American community
for a small town. And they went to get those guys.

(12:10):
Is that it was a carefully researched, targeted operation. You know,
they're not running through town and kind of sweeping people
up in a net like you might hear. And they
found one of the guys pretty easily, and I guess
they were asking around to try to find the other one.
They spotted him, ran after him, and then some local
sort of got in the way and then he got away.
So there's just kind of disappointing for me to see

(12:32):
that happening, and to see the congresswoman from the area
and the mayor really instead of saying, you know, we
should have tried to help and support law enforcement to
get these guys off the streets, to save the complete
opposite how we didn't want them in the neighborhood, and
ICE really has no business here.

Speaker 1 (12:50):
So the big irony for me in reading this story
is that America not just hear in Utah. America's in
everyday citizens' greatest frustration is what we see as a
lack of enforcement of federal law. So we don't see
the border being protected, we don't see the laws that
some people believe they have to follow to legally immigrate
into this country. It seems that they're casting a blind

(13:12):
eye and people are coming in uninterrupted. ICE. If you
see them actually doing this job, this should be a
moment of celebration, and they don't do it lightly. As
you've mentioned, these enforcement and removal operations are highly targeted,
their intelligence driven, and they're only targeting as you've set
As you've pointed out the most egregious non citizens that

(13:33):
pose the greatest security threat. So what has anybody called
out this congresswoman who said she was horrified by ICE's
raid in Princeton and that they stopped the Hispanic slash
Lateenx residence seemingly and she's not telling the truth here
seemingly at random to interrogate them and demand documentation. This

(13:53):
kind of conduct has no place in our community or country,
does an Has anyone called out this congresswoman for what
is a blatant lie about what Ice was actually trying
to do?

Speaker 2 (14:04):
I sincerely doubt it. I mean, this isn't a part
of the country that elects Democrats. I imagine her seat
is safe, So she's going to probably pick up more
votes by pandering to the illegal immigrant lobby or the
open borders lobby than she is by trying to support
law enforcement. It's just an unfortunate, I guess, political reality.

(14:27):
But I do wish that at the very least, you know,
we could all start, even if we disagree about the
numbers of people that should be allowed in, or even
about how we should treat those who are here illegally,
who've been here for whatever amount of time, so we
could all agree that the one point two million people
who judges have ordered to be deported, like they've had
their whole due process, they've had their day in court,

(14:48):
and they've still been ordered to be removed because their
case for asylum or whatever did not pan out they
were qualified, or the subset of those about four hundred
thousand who are convicted criminals here in the United States,
that we should all be able to agree that those
people really don't belong here and we can work our
way down to the others later on.

Speaker 1 (15:08):
You know, we're speaking with with Simon Hankinson with Senior
Research Fellow from Border Security and Immigration Center at the
Herriage Foundation, talking about your hometown, talking about this incident
where ICE was prevented from doing their job and their
enforcement and removal operations. Are violent and convicted criminals your story.

(15:28):
I mean, this is the third time they entered the
country illegally. This isn't just a once one off incident.
My question is this, do you think they would that
the residents that are so outraged, or the people that
stopped Ice from doing their job, or the mayor that
also joined the congresswoman in condemning Ice, do you think
that the details would matter if these people if you

(15:51):
just had people being sent to them, there are sanctions.
It sounds like they're a sanctuary city. Are they the
open arms where all violent offenders ought to reside? And
what if it was would they start to notice whether
they have a criminal history and have been you know,
adjudicated and supposed to be deported. Would it ever change?
I guess is my question.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
I mean they always the old joke is what is
it a conservative is a liberal? It was mugged by
reality or mugged Yes, I don't know. I mean, what
would it take for people to realize that these guys
were they were threats to the community, they were public
safety issues.

Speaker 3 (16:30):
If you're a drunk.

Speaker 2 (16:30):
Driver and you've been arrested and released, you know, a
couple of times, there's a good chance you're going to
do it again. If you've assaulted somebody or robbed somebody,
there's a very good chance. I think it's eighty percent
of prisoners in the US reoffend within ten years. But
somehow they don't seem to associate the two things. And often,

(16:53):
let's face that, the politicians, you know, the congresswoman and
the mayor, she's not living in that neighborhood, and maybe
she feels isolated from the consequences of keeping people like
that in the community. But I definitely think it's the
mayor's responsibility and the congress woman's responsibility to put the
community safety first. And when they talk about community values,
that ought to be the legally resident American citizen and

(17:17):
legal immigrant community. But even the illegal immigrants who live
there are probably more likely to be harmed by illegal
immigrants among them who have criminal records and are are
likely to re offend than anybody else. So I really
think it's kind of a disconnect. It's it's the same
sort of logic that allows them to release people like

(17:37):
the Haitian guy who was admitted under parole or at
least let into the country under parole in the Boston
area was charged with rape and then and then released inexplicably.

Speaker 1 (17:50):
You know, this is my hope. I hope you go
back to this town in Princeton, and I hope that
you run for mayor, and I want your tagline to be,
you know, any American or legal line imigrant charged with
assault the same that the Illegalisanta face, the same music
face the music as well. I think that's a I
think it's well put and I don't know who would
ever argue with that that is is wrong headed. Hey,

(18:11):
thank you for joining us on the program, and thank
you for the good work you do. Keep it up.

Speaker 2 (18:15):
I really appreciate that being on the show.

Speaker 1 (18:17):
Thank you, Thank you. When we come back, we are
more here on the Rod and Greg Show. So hang on,
you're listening to talk Radio one oh five nine can arress.
There is an article that came out today by Katie
Gluick is her name. It's News Analysis, and she says
the headline says democrats lean into liberty and the language

(18:39):
of Republicans and the article what it says is that
they're just they can keep all their radical positions they
but they just have to say it the right way
if they just use the words that everyday americans and
they're really trying to find those independent voters that are
not necessarily affiliated as Republicans, but the working class they're

(19:00):
trying to they're trying to pull them in. But this
article doesn't really say, you know, you've got to match
up with the concerns that they're that they're that they're
facing they're not. This article doesn't mean Democrats, you got
to give away your luxury issues and get to the
kitchen table issues. It doesn't talk about any of this.
It talks about language. So in Michigan Vice President Kamala Harris,

(19:21):
she declared that Americans should be free to make personal decisions. Now,
I want you to think about that for a second.
Free to make personal decisions? You mean like during COVID
Do you mean like the New Green Deal that you
you sponsored and that you were you were the sponsor of.
And by the way, seventy let's see what what is it?

(19:43):
Seventy three percent of Democrats are unaware that she co
sponsored the new the Green New Deal. Uh, the New
Green Deal doesn't have a sentilla of personal freedom inside
of that legislation. All of that is government compulsion on
how to behave, what to buy, what to do?

Speaker 4 (19:58):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (19:58):
What businesses will be going out out of business if
they have their way. But she says, you know, we
have to be able to be free to make personal
decisions without having their government telling them what to do. Well,
I don't know the government telling him what to do.
The truth of what that sentence means is that she
wants to be able to do things, and she doesn't

(20:19):
want you to ever complain about what the government does.
So if she wants catch and release, and she thinks
that death row inmates should be able to vote, that
she thinks that she should be able to post bail
for violent criminals that have rioted. You shouldn't you You
stay in your lane and the government will stay in
its lane and it'll stay out of it. But that's
that's not what she's she's not conveying that. I'm telling

(20:42):
I'm translating it for you. But that doesn't that sound compelling.
That government, uh, their government shouldn't be telling them what
to do. That's all they're about. They're proposed, she's proposing
price fixing today. Tell them talk about government shouldn't tell
you what to do. In Arizona, Tim Walls, you know,
he's said, I don't need you telling me what books

(21:02):
to read, really, because you're shoving a bunch of books
into public schools that kids have should not be reading
or having near them. It's pornographic, it's it would be
against the law and should be against the law in schools.
But any adult that would ever bring any of this
material in front of a child. There are laws to
protect those children from things like that. So he says,

(21:22):
I don't I don't need you telling me what books
to read. Well, you're telling school tea, you're telling schools
what books they should have in their schools. I don't
need you to tell me what religion we should worship.
You know, I don't know. Have you seen their problem
they have with with I don't know the Jewish people
in this in this state right now, or in this country,
h the hesitancy and the pain they go through to

(21:46):
want to defend Israel, to defend to really take their
side because of this pro Hamas movement in their party.
Sounds like your religion and this freedom of worship isn't
isn't all that that you're saying that you think it is?
And I assure as I don't need you to tell
me about my family. Governor Walls is saying this in

(22:06):
Arizona to a great applause. It gets some of the
biggest applause lines. While he's interfering with people's families and
their kids and whether they're converting into transgenderism, and whether
they can tell their parents or all the other things
that they're doing in their public schools that do interrupt
a family, and the family is understanding and raising of

(22:26):
their own children. But the biggest I think irony is
he looks at when they were in Philadelphia together, both
Harris and Walls. They come together and he looks out
in the crowd, Governor Walls, doesn't He says, some of
us are old enough to remember when it was Republicans
who were talking about freedom. There's a golden rule. Mind
your own damn business. Okay, Well, nothing could contradict that

(22:52):
sentence more than the clip that I played for you
on yesterday's program where in Minnesota when he put that
law down order for COVID and he had what looks
like the military walking through a suburb, a neighborhood and
early in the morning, and people had their doors open
on their porch and they were filming it, and they
were commanded to go back into their homes and uh

(23:15):
and and and don't be outside. And then they were
still filming and you hear one of the someone you know,
light them up and then they start shooting them with
paint paintballs. Okay, mind your own business. Does it mean?
Does he mean you know when they tell you when
the when the mill, when I marched the National Guard
through your neighborhood and tell you to get inside, you

(23:35):
get inside and you obey. Is that the mind your
own damn business he's talking about. Well, if you look
at his conduct, he is. But that's not what he's trying.
That's not the impression he's trying to leave uh with
the voters. He's trying to He's trying to use the
vernacular of conservatives, Republicans, people that love freedom, who actually
would be appalled by the things that he's that the

(23:56):
Walls is doing in the state of Minnesota, what Kamala
Harris did to San Francisco, what she did in California,
what she did as a senator ranked again, seventy's the
what's the percentage here? She was rated the most liberal
senator in all of the Senate, of the entire Senate
in twenty nineteen. Seventy five percent of Democrat voters have

(24:18):
no idea that she was ranked number one most liberal.
That's that's to the left of Bernie Sanders. That's that's
the left of everyone. When you're number one, that is
that is not that is not the words that they're
using right now. And fair enough, they can't stand on
their issues. That's why they're not bringing up any But
this article is saying that the way they're going to

(24:41):
be effective is they're going to talk about freedom. They're
going to talk about not having the government get into
your business. That's all they know. Transportation Secretary Pete Bouda Jedge,
he's actually very good at this. He's very articulate, a
young guy who was the mayor of South Bend, Indiana,
home of note before he ran for president. He's now

(25:01):
the Transportation secretary. He loves this idea of playing word
salad and using words that Republicans and independence will appreciate,
but they don't mean they have no substance behind them.
He's quoted in this article saying, if you want to
reach out to independence, if you want to open the
door to what I like to call future former Republicans,
part of what you can do is tap into these themes. Okay,

(25:24):
it's all about it. It's all about deception. It's all
about making people feel like you're on their side even
when you absolutely are not. So when we come back,
we're going to continue on this discussion. We're going to
go over some of these issues. I got a story
here from James Carvill, the Raging Cajun. He is raging,

(25:45):
and we're going to talk about what's making him so
mad and what he thinks, what Republicans and even Senator
Vetterman are making him so angry. I'm going to dive
into that when we get back after this break. You're
listening to the Rod and Greg Show on Talk Radio
one oh five nine. Canra James Carville. He was the
campaign manager for Bill Clinton and was pretty prolific. He

(26:06):
was out there a lot back in the nine. He's
got quiet for a little while. Well he's he is
on a terror right now, and he is mad, and
he loves Kamala Harris, and he was kind of critical
of Biden, wanted Biden to get out of the race.
But right now. He was on a podcast recently and
he just said someone asked him, they said, you know,
we think these were and this is a leftist podcast, right,
so again we're tapping into what they're talking about. Listeners said,

(26:29):
I accuse the Republicans of being, you know, neo Nazis,
but then the person calling it is, but you know,
this party, the Republican Party's support for Israel. It appears
at odds with their neo Nazism. And the answer that
James Carvill gave was was just unbelievable and disingenuous, and
he said, this is what he says. It's really about misogyny,

(26:50):
hating women and the racism that drives this thing. We've
got to recognize that it's not a policy prescription. He said.
The reason I suspect that most of these people talking
about Republicans describe themselves as pro Israel Is because the
Jews are whiter, whiter than the Palestinians, which I think
drives a lot of what they are. This is just blather.

(27:12):
This is just a full blown lie. You can be
Republican and you can be celebrating the recent decision from
a judge in California telling the UCLA that they cannot
they can no longer have Jew exclusion zones on their campus.
Go figure this judge in this injunction that he put
on against u c l A. He's forbidding the university.

(27:35):
And it's sad it comes to this level where a
judge has to do this forbidding the university from using
the goals of preventing violence or de escalation as an
excuse to allow pro Hamas protesters or any others to
deny Jewish students full and equal access to their campus
and their programs. Uh, these students, they've been they've been
put under there, they're they're getting there's distribution of swastika's

(27:59):
Nazi imagery, a document called Loudmouth jew that's just being
passed out freely at UCLA against students and faculty and
staff there. UCLA has done nothing to stop this. They
have to listen to the chance of death to Israel.
But according to James Carvel, we would never be offended
by anything I just described. We would just be racist

(28:21):
and that's why we would support Israel more. When we
come back and talk Radio one O five to nine
canter Us. I at least learned today that Kamala Harris
finally has a policy position to be found. She's been
hiding from them, she doesn't want to talk about them.
Joining us on the program is David McGary. He's a
policy analyst Taxpayer Protection Alliance, and he's going to help

(28:42):
but walk us through this brand new policy position of
price fixing for groceries, government price fixing. Mister McGary, welcome
to the program sir.

Speaker 5 (28:54):
Thank you so much for having me on.

Speaker 1 (28:56):
All right, So for the listeners, I mean, I just
instinctively think this is probably a really bad idea. Then
maybe you could help illuminate what what benefit would there
be and what consequences would we see ourselves in if
we were to see Kamala Harris price fix our groceries.

Speaker 5 (29:16):
All Americans have been feeling the effects of inflation, particularly
in the grocery store over the last few years. And
there's a certain sort of straight line a b thinking
that says that if only the government were to set
some price for different different commodities, different groceries, different food items,
then everything would be okay. It's the sort the sort

(29:37):
of the idea is that what if we could just
get inflation to go down by ordering it to go down?
But of course that's not actually how economics works. Prices
reflect something in the supply chain or or something on
the demand side that are driving them upward. High prices
are there for a reason. They're not just They're not
just arbitrary metrics that are set.

Speaker 1 (29:58):
And one thing I'll quickly say is Kamala.

Speaker 5 (30:00):
Harris seems to be leaning fully into the notion that
high prices are only caused by corporate greed, which is
of course completely untethered from any kind of economic reality.
So at the end of the day, price fixing price controls,
they cause shortages.

Speaker 1 (30:17):
Essentially, the.

Speaker 5 (30:19):
Quick summary of how this works is that if you
have some good where there's too much demand for the
amount of supply that's available, and you force the price down,
more people are going to want to buy it, and
there'll be less of a profit motive for manufacturers to
produce more of it. So essentially you have a higher
demand suppress supply, which only creates shortages. And that's what

(30:41):
American should be looking towards. If any kind of price
or any kind of a draponium price bill actually makes
it what makes its way through Congress, Well.

Speaker 1 (30:50):
That would sound very heavy handed by the government government
to me. But surely she has some examples of where
this has gone famously right. I'm sure there's lots of
countries where when they thought their prices or inflation was
getting away from them, they instituted these these this price fixing,
be it groceries, fuel, whatever it may be. Any success
stories out there in history that we can point to

(31:13):
that she could point to.

Speaker 5 (31:15):
The answer comes down to basically, no. Price fixing is
a very old idea. It goes back to ancient Rome,
it goes back to the code of Hamarabi, it goes
back even before that. Actually, and it doesn't work it.
As Milton Friedman says, the eminent economist Milton Freedman says,
price fixing simply covers up the symptoms of deeper economic problems.

(31:39):
High part, like I said, high prices represent something that
they're trying to tell consumers something, that they're they're trying
to tell producer something, and forcing them down by a
government mandate doesn't actually solve the underlying solution. What what
price fixing does do do, though, is it buys politicians
votes because it sounds when you when when a politician

(31:59):
announces that they are going to grab prices by the
throat and shove to shut them down, voters who aren't
paying attention to economics for a living because they're understandably
worried about their own lives and their own families. These
voters look at look at this, look at these proposals,
and think that the politician is actually doing something that
is in the best interest of the average American, even

(32:19):
though that's manifestly not true by every piece of piece
of economic data available.

Speaker 1 (32:24):
You know, you went back to Rome. I was just
going back to Jimmy Carter. I was just or you know,
I I is there. I mean even in in that
in that timeframe of just the early seventies Nixon Carter,
I believe this has been attempted in the United States.
To your point, Uh, we only saw shortages of whatever

(32:46):
it was they were trying to artificially fix the price
for it. Or am I wrong? Is that?

Speaker 6 (32:51):
Is that?

Speaker 1 (32:51):
Is that right?

Speaker 5 (32:53):
You are entirely correct. Price fixing has been tried many
times in the United States. Is actually being tried in
certain sidecor is like the agriculture industry today, and it
simply doesn't pan out atf Ther found this out during
the Great Depression. And as you said, Richard Nixon knew
better than to institute prize controls. He knew the economic uh,

(33:14):
he knew the economic literature, but he succumbed to political
pressure to do something, just to do anything to appear
active on the economic problems that he was facing, and
he instituted of price controls. And America's Americans did then
undergo shortages. It's a it's a it's a it's a
simple and well observed phenomenon that we've seen from the

(33:37):
Soviet Union to a modern America, and it always goes
one way.

Speaker 1 (33:41):
Here's here I I even try to Okay, I'm just
gonna imagine that they're gonna do this, and they're gonna
and we'll see grocery prices come down because they're gonna
limit all this and the let's let's just live in
the short term and say, okay, well, at least short term,
we're gonna we're gonna be okay, this is gonna help
us out a little bit. Uh, how do you how
would you even begin to enforce something like this? Because

(34:02):
if you had those price fixing the price fixing on this,
would there be then an immediate black market? Would people
be able to find more options for food?

Speaker 7 (34:10):
Waight?

Speaker 1 (34:10):
What enforcement measures does she even imagine she could impose
to keep people adhering to her edict of grocery prices.

Speaker 5 (34:21):
Some of that is still TBD, but she has said
that she's going to give new powers to the Federal
Trade Commission, presumably under its consumer protection authorities, and so
essentially what this would mean is that the FTC would
go out and buy some metric, would decide what prices
were too high for which commodities, maybe location would pay

(34:42):
would play factor into it, and then regulators would be
sent out to make sure that grocery stores and perhaps
perhaps wholesalers were complying. But I think I think you
bring up a really good point, which is, how do
we know what how do we know how to set
these prices? How do we know how to actually effectuate
a anti or some kind of price control law. And

(35:04):
that's kind of the problem is that we don't actually
have this information. It's the the economy is too complex.
Regulators can't know all of the things that they would
need to know in order to do this sort of
thing effectively.

Speaker 1 (35:17):
Again, I appreciate your So you're a policy analyst, you're
not a campaign and elections guy. But with your best eye,
because you're smart, I can tell is this going to
sell in the rust belt? You know this is you
know she's trying to win And I don't think Minnesota
and Governor Walls got her anywhere in Wisconsin and Michigan
and in Ohio and Pennsylvania. But will price, will Price

(35:39):
fixing groceries. Actually, do you sense with the with the
independent voter and the working class gravitates an idea like this.

Speaker 5 (35:49):
I think some will now now the the benefit that
Kamala Harris is going to get from this kind of
proposal again is that she is going to seem to
be concerned about problems that everyday Americans are facing, and
she's going to seem to have a plan irrespective of
its actual economic merits. But one thing, one thing I'll
add that will be difficult for her is that she

(36:11):
is largely proposing what amounts to an extension of Joe
Biden's policies. And obviously she is in the Biden administration
at the moment, So simply saying that she's going to
do more of what Biden has done, but maybe ratcheted
up to eleven isn't necessarily going to get all of
the necessarily going to get all of the electoral bonus

(36:35):
that the same proposals would if she was coming in
as an outsider and a change candidate.

Speaker 1 (36:40):
Well, David, I mean Gary, thank you so much for
your good work, great great analysis, and please stay on
this because this would only be the beginning of I
fear that if this, somehow was would resonate and she
would be elected on ideas like this, I think that
we would see more than just groceries coming our way,
which would to me be the beginning of the end.
Thank you for joining us on the program. Keep up

(37:01):
the good work.

Speaker 8 (37:03):
Thank you so much.

Speaker 1 (37:04):
Okay, folks, when we come back, I want to hear
from you. I mean, this idea to me is so surreal.
I would think that there would be a natural recoil
from the public in general. And I don't care if
you're in a rust belt state or if you're in Utah,
wherever you may be, maybe California it would be the
state they would love it. Other than California or Minnesota.
Where do you think people are going to fall on

(37:27):
an issue like this, where you're going to price fix groceries?
Is that just the beginning? If that gets some traction
eight eight eight five seven zero eight zero one zero
is the number to call for your comments observations about
this first out the gate policy position that Kamala Harris
has taken in this election, and it's all about how

(37:49):
to make groceries affordable for you? Back with your calls
and more commentary when we come back on the Ronn
and Greg Show here on Talk Radio one oh five nine. Okay, nrs.
We have been way since Kamala Harris has been you know,
since the coup took place and they booted Biden and
they kicked him to the curb and Kamala was placed
in without a single primary vote. You know, that's the

(38:10):
way they roll when they're protecting democracy. We haven't heard
much from her. She doesn't want to really talk. She
doesn't have press conferences. President Trump, former President Trump, just
had a second one today. But boy, she just came
out guns blazing today with a brand new policy position
of price fixing. She's going to fix the prices of groceries.

(38:31):
She's going to mandate federally what your groceries are going
to cost to help us to make sure that they
are less expensive and not so cost prohibitive. So let's
go to the phones. I again, if I would love
to hear from you, the audience on this is the
short term gain of this, if there is one worth
what the long term consequences would be. I have my feelings,

(38:52):
but let's go to the phones. If you would like
to call in. Eighty eight five seven zero eight zero
one zero is the phone number. Let's go first to
Adam on I fifteen. Adam, thank you for joining the show. Sir,
what's say you about this price fixing idea?

Speaker 9 (39:07):
Hey, Greg, thanks for taking my call. I think the
Trump can really capitalize on this. There's people that remember
what happened in the Soviet Union with breadlines when there's
all these shortages, and that's exactly what will happen. There's
gonna be rushes on the stores, there's gonna be shortages
of items, and I think the Trump can really just

(39:31):
there's people still alive that remember that happening. And I
think we can just look back to COVID when there
was rushes at Costco for items, and yes, we don't
want that to happen. And Kamala has just revealed her hand.
She has shown us who she is. This is what

(39:53):
every communist country has done, and the results lose the same.
It's predictable. And this is Kamala Harris wanting to control
our forefathers risked their lives and people shed their blood
so that we have freedom, and she wants to take

(40:13):
it away. Control how much money we can take and
what we're going to spend, and that's not what this
country is about. And I think Trump can talk about that.
It doesn't matter if he can beat her to the punch.
If he gets to talk first into debate, he should
bring it and leave her nothing to say. Where she

(40:34):
goes first, it's easily refuted. He can talk about the consequences,
and that's where I would go with.

Speaker 1 (40:40):
This, well said Adam, Adam, I think you she wanted
to go anyway. Yeah, Adam, thank you for the call,
the insight, insight that I was hoping for, because you're
exactly right. Breadlines the Soviet style shortages of food because
of ideas like this, But it also reveals her hand.
We talked about how they want to change their language
to to fool people that they love liberty. But this

(41:02):
is who she is and this is probably more consistent
with her worldview and policy positions. Let's go to Matthew
in Salt Lake City. Matthew, thank you for waiting, and
welcome to the Rod and Greg Show. Let's say you, sir,
about price fixing by Kamala Harris for our groceries.

Speaker 10 (41:21):
Oh, I understood.

Speaker 11 (41:22):
Thanks for helping me Basically, I just wanted to kind
of touch on that supply.

Speaker 10 (41:26):
And demand that the Gentleman was on before. And you know,
from my understanding and taking a look at that, I
just I believe more of I think what we're missing
is what these companies and manufacturers are basically making these
items for and what their costs and what these companies
are their profit margins at the end of each quarter

(41:47):
of what they're actually getting. You know, That's kind of
my concern is why aren't we regulating these profit margins
on these corporations on the different items that we're buying
from the shelves And I just wanted to touch on that.

Speaker 1 (41:59):
So thanks for me, Thank you Matthew for the call.
Where does that go? How far should we should we
just end in food? If we're going to look at
bottom lines? And then I just think there's other factors
of the cost inflation and things we don't count inflation
for that are contributing to the cost of everything that
we're experiencing out here. Look, i'd love to hear from
you from you your take on this issue. Price fixing

(42:21):
generally or specifically, as Kamala Harris proposed today on groceries
is the number to call. Let's go right now to
Zay in Ogden. Zay, welcome to the program, sir. What's
say you on price fixing for groceries?

Speaker 6 (42:40):
You know, just like the previous the first caller said,
with the Soviet Union and all that's that's that's kind
of the the basis of it.

Speaker 12 (42:52):
But even if she is just trying to just trying
to help give her the benefits out trying to help
the common person, the best way to lower the prices
would be to drill for oil because all the shipping
supplies and all the costs for diesel fuel is what's
driving the prices. So if she would just open up
the pipelines get us to drill here in America, then

(43:16):
that would solve all of the issues without further government regulation.

Speaker 1 (43:20):
Well said Zaying, you know that the cost of fuel
of delivery. We cannot ignore what has happened to the
cost of fuel and how prohibitive it is, and how
that doesn't just impact our households, but just the delivery
of goods and services, and what's happening there absolutely has
something to do with it, has a big something to
do with it. Let's go right now to Joe in

(43:41):
West Jordan. Joe, thank you for calling the show.

Speaker 8 (43:44):
So are you?

Speaker 1 (43:45):
Thank you for calling, thank you for having me give it.
What's your take on this?

Speaker 13 (43:50):
Okay, so again shining again with the a shield of besting.
There's numerous corporations bested in the food industry. In fact,
most of our foods that come from large supermarket come
from corporations. People have certain expectations invested in the market
as to what they're looking for in revenue on their investment.
And if the government's going to come in and decide

(44:11):
what how much money companies or corporations should make, then
people is going to start taking their money out of
the stock market. And I feel this stock market's going
to collapse.

Speaker 1 (44:19):
Well said Joe, I'll tell you what the consequences of this.
Just ripple and ripple, I think. But if finally we're
getting something that at least she's showing her stripes. I mean,
the frustration I've had is that she's trying to pretend
to be something. She's not called a chameleon, but this
one's pretty aggressive. And when we come back from the break,
I'd love to hear more from your calls. I love
your take eight eight eight five seven zero eight zero

(44:42):
one zero. Keep these calls coming. I'd love to hear
how what you see when you hear an idea like
this being expressed. And then when we come back. Also,
I'm going to play a clip where Peter Doocy from
Fox asked Biden, how do you feel about Kamala Harris
trying to get away from you on your economic policies
and the costs of food and everything else? And he
said she won't do it. I'll play you that quote
or clip when we come back. But also get back

(45:04):
to your calls. Here on the Ron and Greg Show
on Talk Radio one oh five nine, cannais waiting patiently.
Let me go to Gordon on I fifteen. Gordon, thank
you for holding sir. What say you about this price
fixing idea to save us money at the grocery store?

Speaker 14 (45:21):
Hey, this is the dumbest idea yet that she's come
up with. An earlier caller mentioned that this is what
communist countries do. But I remember when Richard Nixon came
up with a plan to freeze prices. It was it
was ridiculous. It was a dismal failure. My dad was

(45:43):
in in Well. He owned a store and he was
under all these regulations and it was complicated and difficult.
She has no clue as to how Joe Biden created
the inflation that followed when he entered office. If she
could just take one econ one oh one course, maybe

(46:06):
someone could put some sense into her brain. I have
a degree in economics, and she knows the zero about economics.

Speaker 1 (46:13):
Gordon, thank you, Thank you for holding in. Thank you
for your comments. The insight we want, I mean from
your father owning a store and feeling the effects of
Richard Nixon deciding to do this. You know, in a
way that was an abject failure to today. Finally, though
she's coming out with some positions, she's been afraid to
do it. And this is why, folks, we haven't heard

(46:34):
from her. These are not the positions that she feels like.
She wants to have to defend her her liberal ways,
but she doesn't know any better. So now we know
that she wants to price fix our groceries. I think
there's more coming. There's an event tomorrow where she wants
to talk just not about groceries, but she wants to
talk about healthcare and housing too, we might have rent
control out of her by way of an agenda. By
the time she's done, let's go back to the phones

(46:55):
and let's talk to Ivan. Speak with Ivan and Sandy.
Thank you for holding what say you, sir?

Speaker 15 (47:04):
Yes, a good afternoon. Well I think it's a good
thing that she starts saying these things because it's going
to help people that our own fans realize how stupid
she is, because it's like basic, you know, like some
the previous collars just said basic economic principles, but even
more than that, I'm in the food business, and it's
incredible that these people don't understand the cause and effect

(47:26):
and and and the whole web that how everything works.
So so you you kept the groceries, where do you
stop it? Is it the grocery store owner, is it
the farmer, or is it the field that the crupt dusters,
or the transportation or the feed for the cattle, or
you know that everything is impacted by the cost of
fuel and all the other elements that go into getting

(47:47):
that food in the supermarket. So where's he going to attack,
Where's she going to attack? Who is she going to control?
It's impossible, It's it's like a child. And you know,
some kid in high schools I want to be the
press that the class president come up with some stupid
idea free lunch.

Speaker 1 (48:03):
I'vean thank you for the call, and I'm with you.
I'm glad she's coming out with these hair brain ideas
because it is it's it's it's it's really uh, it's
what she believes. She is the most liberal center, which
righted the most liberal center in the Senate nineteen twenty nineteen.
And these are what liberals left of Barry Sanders come
up with by way of policies. If you're hurting, we're

(48:24):
gonna we're gonna price fixed gas. But I'm telling you
a meat, she has an event tomorrow. I think she's
even gonna expand it from food, which is pretty scary.
Let's go back to the phones, Dan in Utah County,
Thank you for holding sir. What say you about this
price fixing for groceries? Compliments of Kamala Harris? What do
you say?

Speaker 11 (48:44):
Hi, Greg, how you doing good?

Speaker 1 (48:46):
Thanks for calling listen.

Speaker 11 (48:48):
I'm pretty sure Tamala doesn't even know how to spell manufacturing.
We I've been in the manufacturing industry for forty five years.
And I've been involved with pharmaceutical filling, and just to
get up set up to do pharmaceutical filling with all

(49:09):
the rigs you've got to comply by it or comply
to it's so costly that it could take a glass
of water and turn it into a two hundred and
fifty dollars bill. If people truly understood what big business
has to go through in this day and age, with

(49:30):
all of the regulations that they have, with the fear
of lawsuit that they have to go through, if they
truly understood it, they wouldn't call and make dumb comments
like maybe what we need to do is go out
to the manufacturing world or those that are making profits
offer it. Years and years and years go into the

(49:51):
development of some products. It's not done for free.

Speaker 6 (49:56):
Now.

Speaker 11 (49:56):
As for Kamala, I would expect this from her. I'm
pretty sure that because she thinks she got this boost
in the polls, I'm pretty sure that she thinks she's
like the most unwanted kid in the class. She's telling
everybody that people like me now, and so she's going

(50:18):
to come out with all this strange stuff and she
deserves what she gets. I agree pretty sure what she's
done what she's done now, and she can't blame it
on Trump. She can't blame it on the American people.
All she can blame it on is stupid comments.

Speaker 1 (50:36):
Dan, thank you for the call. Look, either do we
have time for another call or should we take it
off to the break. Let's go one more caller. Look
forty five years in the manufacturing industry from Dan. You
can't get more closer to this issue than what we
just heard from our caller. Let's go to Anna in
Spanish folk who has been patiently waiting. Thank you for waiting.
Tell me what do you think about this brand new

(50:56):
idea first idea policy issue that Kamala Harris has come
out of the with. She wants to price fix the
groceries so we can afford our groceries. What say you, Anna?

Speaker 4 (51:07):
Well, my biggest problem is I've been working in a
grocery store since September of twenty twenty. I've gone through
many different departments, even being a seafood manager, so I
was able to see the prices of seafood coming in.
And now I am actually the scanning coordinator, which means
I take care of price integrity if she doesn't make
it so that those prices change every week. I'm out

(51:30):
of a job.

Speaker 8 (51:31):
Wow.

Speaker 1 (51:32):
Wow, that's sobering. Thank you for that observation. Look again,
what I love about the show, Anna's she works in
literally the prices of the groceries that Kamala Harris is
talking about. And you're not hearing anybody celebrating. There's not
been a call that has thought that this is even
remotely a good idea. Tomorrow and Raleigh, North Carolina, she

(51:53):
has more announcements coming on healthcare and housing in addition
to her food plan and what he's calling corporate price
gouging and stopping it with price fixing from the federal government.
That's her new plan. Well, we're going to go to
a break right now, but we'll continue to talk about
this when we come back on the Rotten Greg Show
here on Talk Radio one oh five nine canaus. Here's

(52:15):
some of the clips I wanted to play as we
get to the top of the hour, I wanted you
to hear. So this is okay, So let me go
to this one real quick. Biden is asked by Peter Deucy,
are you Kamala Harris wants to get away from your policies.
They're dragging her down. How do you feel about that?

Speaker 16 (52:30):
Here?

Speaker 1 (52:30):
He said, this is it how much my father.

Speaker 9 (52:33):
Light and vice president parents might suit for political reasons,
start to distance herself from your economics.

Speaker 17 (52:40):
She's going to.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
She's not going to. Did you hear that? He said?
How do you feel that she's trying to distance herself
She's not going to. Well, here's kind of the little
wrenching things on Friday and Raleigh, as I've mentioned, where
she's going to announce some of her finally some of
these policy positions that she has. They're going to be
on healthcare, housing, and food for middle class consumers. Biden's

(53:05):
supposed to join her at this rally. Will it will
be interesting to see if that happens, and what Biden's
role will be is she starts to now distance herself
from his bad policy, and now we have even worse
policy if we didn't, if we thought that the Inflation
Reduction Act that she was a deciding vote for was

(53:28):
a complete and outer nightmare. Now she's going to start
price fixing, probably not just through the rent and fuel
and everything else. We'll get back. We'll keep talked about
this when we come back. You're listening to the Rodden
Gregg Show on Talk Radio one oh five nine kenrs.
We're going to lower the plane from thirty thousand feet.
We're gonna come right down here into Salt Lake County.

(53:49):
For those of you listeners that live in Salt Lake
County and those that don't, you can stare at this
in Salty County and draw some conclusions. But Salt Lake
County had their county council meeting last night and in
a vote of eight yes is and one no, they
voted to support a five hundred and seven million dollars
bond to help address homelessness, substance abuse, mental health, and

(54:11):
public safety needs. They're looking at a combining two jails
and building a justice and accountability center. Joining us on
the program is is council member from Solay County's District five,
Sheldon Stewart, who was the lone no vote on this
vote to put this a bond, this taxing property tax

(54:31):
increase of five hundred and seven million, five hundred and
seven million dollars on the ballot this November. Thank you
for joining us as councilman, and can you share with
our listeners why you decided to vote no against this
bond proposal.

Speaker 8 (54:45):
Yeah. I mean right now, as we looked at the
economy and economic times, you know, everybody's being taxed right now,
we're seeing you know, ever increasing just for the basic
needs and households. You know, people are more for food,
for gas, for all those things. On top of it,
we've been increasing taxes almost every year in Salt Lake

(55:08):
County and it doesn't seem to end.

Speaker 1 (55:12):
You know, I'm being a former lawmaker. I feel like
Charlie Brown in the county. Maybe not meaning to be,
but it might be lucy sometimes. I was working with
then County Sally County Mayor Ben McAdams, and he had
a plan for our homelessness and how to address it,
and with resource centers in the state, we were participants
in that, and there was a lot of money spent

(55:32):
and committed to that of which I believed in. I
have not seen it pan out. The dollars that we
spent as a state, and I think even the county
at the time would not come close to five hundred
and seven million dollars that this bond would raise. But
this doesn't This seems a little bit more like an experiment.
There's quotes in the paper like we have to try something,
and this would be taking two jails, combining it into one,

(55:54):
creating a justice and accountability center. What kind of data
or what kind of plan did they put in front
of you as a counsel that would give you confidence
that five hundred and seventy five hundred and seven million
dollars would deliver as advertised.

Speaker 8 (56:09):
I don't know that I saw a plan that really
showed that. I mean, there was some presentations given, and
there's been some discussions that have been made and that,
but I the only thing I ever saw was when
I first got on the council was that an additional
jail pod would be about one hundred and fifty million
dollars and we had one hundred million reserved for that

(56:32):
that we already have cash in hand, which was alluded
to in the meeting. So that for me has been
a big factor also in this is that I believe
between selling the oxpo gel and the other things, we
could still come up with one hundred and fifty million.
And so it's just not clear to me what we
need this additional amount for. And this time, especially infrastrates

(56:55):
you know, are at an all time high. And then
if you look at the bond rates, you know people
are inning. I think was quote in the meeting that
was three point seventy five for triple A. But when
you add that up, that's three hundred and thirty three
million dollars of interest over a thirty year bond Versus
if we were to take the rates that were when
I got on, we'd probably be just under one hundred

(57:17):
million in interest for that same amount. So even the
fiscal sense doesn't make sense, and I never invest when
I'm unsure.

Speaker 1 (57:25):
I think that's wise. Counselman, here's my other question, and
this is a little bit more broad, but you have
a county attorney there that has a long reputation of
catch and release, declining the prosecution of arrests misdemeanors. But
if they continue, and people continue to rob and steal
and these these crimes accumulate, they become felonies. But we're

(57:47):
not really seeing that. That is not really showing us
that that kind of public safety or that those prosecutions
are occurring. Do you worry that that could fill your
jail with just misdemeanors where these crimes should probably be right,
His felonies at some point if you had someone committed
more to public safety.

Speaker 8 (58:05):
Well, I mean that's always the big question too, is
I mean, if it was a felony, would they even
be in the jail, and would we have some of
these occupancy issues.

Speaker 1 (58:15):
I'm guessing that you wouldn't. And so when you have
a county turning like sim Gil who doesn't want to
prosecute these things, I guess my last question and I
appreciate your time, and I'm glad for your vote. Look,
you didn't win, but I think it's the reason we're
speaking is because somebody on that council stood up and
is making I think the important points that US taxpayers

(58:36):
would hope would be made. But it looks like it's
trying to be everything for everyone. If it's public safety,
and you mentioned a number that was in the hundred million,
one hundred and fifty million or something like that for
the more jail beds and a commitment to public safety
and maybe arresting people and having it go to jail,
that's one thing. But we saw that this is also
going into behavioral health, it's going into homelessness. It seems

(58:59):
to be doing a lot of things that I don't
know is really enhancing public safety. So I guess my
final question is do you think that this is truly
a public safety measure or do you think this is
more of a of a let's hug it out with criminals.

Speaker 8 (59:18):
Yeah, and so I mean if this was indeed just
one hundred percent public safety, and I think that's the
way that people are trying to direct it. That's where
I've struggled with this five hundred and seven million dollars.
And you know, I don't know. I'm not going to
say any names related to it because I'm not clear
on who's who with this, but it just doesn't add

(59:38):
up for me again using that one hundred and fifty
million is that base? And then as we talked about
different costs and expenses that that's something that I start
thinking about, is are we strictly focused on public safety
here with this measure? And I'm not sure that we are.

Speaker 1 (59:57):
Well, thank you Counselman for again standing up for the
taxpayers and I share your concern. And again, is a
very very broad plan. It's one that I've not heard
a lot of specificity, and I don't think that you
have either, So thank you for joining us on the program.
That is Sheldon Stewart. He is a Salt Lake County
Council District Council member from District number five. Hey the

(01:00:20):
number to call eight eight eight five seven zero eight
zero one zero for your comments concerns. We can talk
about the price fixing. We can talk about this new
property tax increase that will be on the ballot in
November in Salt Lake County raising five hundred and seven
million dollars for a Justice and Accountability Center. Whatever you want.

(01:00:43):
It's day one, thy three hundred and three of the
Biden Harris administration, if you're wondering. And so we got
that to celebrate right since January twentieth till today. So
we'll take your calls and your comments when we come
back after the break, and also when we come back,
I want to go before because we have another interview

(01:01:03):
at the bottom of the hour. But before we do that,
I want to get into some of the polling data.
Saw some new stuff today. We talked a little bit
about it yesterday, but if you watch the regime media
social media there, I just saw something now that has
Kamala Harris up to three hundred and six electoral votes
and she's going to win by a landslide. Now, wait
till these policies she's announcing today and going forward, if

(01:01:24):
she if she stays true to herself, let's see, let's
see that stuff. Get around and see where people are at.
And we have some pretty smart people looking at these
polls thinking that that they're not as accurate as to
think the Democrats and the regime media wish they would be.
So look, when we come back, we'll take your calls
again eight eight eight five seven zero eight zero one zero,

(01:01:47):
and we'll get more into this when we come back.
You're listening to the Roden greg Show on Talk Radio
one oh five nine Cannas. Here's a new one though
that I want to just broach in this segment, and
that is the polling. I have to just everybody gets
worried that they felt so great when it looked like
the polls were in Trump's favor. We never see poles

(01:02:08):
in sixteen or in twenty where Trump is winning and
against Biden. He was leading, and that leads seemed to
be growing, and so they kicked Biden to the curb
and they brought in Kamla, and you saw those poll
numbers change.

Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:02:22):
I've said on this show that they the sampling, who
they were sampling, who they were looking at, who they're questioning.
There's there's some of the numbers that they were showing
the CNN or this the New York Times Siena poll.
I clearly undersampled the working class. They call him the
non college degree white voter. We would all just say,

(01:02:45):
without regard to color, we'd just say the working class.
You know that, there's no way it's at twenty four
percent when he has never seen a day under thirty
percent advantage on the working class in any of the elections,
including this one but interesting interview that Nate Silver, who
used to do the New York Times analytic polling piece

(01:03:07):
called five thirty eight. He sold that or New York
Times zones it. He's out on his own now, but
still doing his work, and he is trying to warn
I mean, he's warning the public and others that think
that that Kamala Harris has it in the bag, especially
after today's announcement of her price fixing for groceries. I mean,
I hope she stays at least intellectually honest with her

(01:03:28):
policy ideas so that the Americans really do have a
choice of where they'd like to see this country go,
so just be honest about it. But he is just
warning them, look, folks, we've got it wrong in the
polling in the last two elections when it comes to
President Trump, this guy under polls. President Trump even admitted
as much, or stated as much in his press conference

(01:03:49):
today when they said you seem to be down or
losing ground to Kamala Harris, and he goes, look, I
under poll It's a fact. It was in sixteen, it
was in twenty silver who does know this stuff? And
again he's not being fair by the way. He's just
pushing this out publicly so that super packs and campaigns
can see the information and him not be accused of coordinating,

(01:04:12):
which would be against federal law election law. But anyway,
he's just warning, look, we've got this wrong. Before. He
has now put this as at best a toss up,
and he says that people should remember two things. One
or three months away from the election. We have three
months to go. And then the other thing is that
the polls have been wrong in the last two elections.

(01:04:33):
In terms of President Trump's strength in the vote. The
race is still considered a toss up as far as
he's concerned. And with that, he warns if on election day,
right before election day, you see that Kamala is up
two points in Pennsylvania, don't be surprised that the Trump
wins Pennsylvania by two percentage points or even by six.

(01:04:55):
That's some of the comments that he's making. But let's
I just again, I just want We have a Democrat
convention that's going to come up next week, and we
are just going to be suffering through all of this talk,
especially if they try to hide the ball and do
what The New York Times has described during the show today,
use language of freedom and all the language that Republicans

(01:05:16):
use and mean, and use it to disguise they're more
left or even communist objectives for this country. That's going
to be hard to watch. It's going to be hard
to endure. The media is going to do everything it
can to push that out. Is just the best thing
we've ever heard, best things since slice bread. So while
we have her pin down Kamala Harris on her first

(01:05:37):
real policy position of I'm going to stop corporate gouging
of prices of food and I'm going to put in
price fixing, price fixing for food. We have had great
calls about this, and we've had a lot of people
discuss what they think about this idea and if the
immediate relief that it would be would be the aim

(01:06:00):
of seeing prices fall in our grocery stores. Is it
all that it's cracked up to be. We have waiting
on the phone here. Let's go to Jerry in Sandy. Jerry,
thank you for joining us on the Rotting Greg Show
Minus Rod this week. Let's say you about this idea
of Kamala Harris to fix the prices of groceries to

(01:06:20):
help out the everyday people.

Speaker 17 (01:06:23):
So, like the other colors, I think it's a great
campaign issue. I'm a Donald Trump supporter, but I'm very
frustrated when I listened to the Elon Musk interview, he
spent the first nineteen minutes and thirty two seconds I
timed it talking about crowd size tryan.

Speaker 7 (01:06:41):
My impression is that he's more.

Speaker 17 (01:06:43):
Interested in glorifying himself than he is in sticking with
the issues. I see that he doesn't have the self
discipline except when he's on a teleprompter, to stick with issues.
He's gotten great.

Speaker 14 (01:06:55):
Issues, he just doesn't use him.

Speaker 11 (01:06:57):
That's so frustrating to me.

Speaker 1 (01:07:00):
It's a great observation, and I got to tell you
this is bad news. I saw this with my own
ISAA Milwaukee, even when he has a teleprompter. I watched
him in that acceptance speech go off that teleprompter for
a long long time before he came back. When I
was watching it, I was sitting behind the stage or
to the right of the stage, and I could see
the giant teleprompter. And I texted my wife and said,

(01:07:20):
when you hear him speak about Israel, that's when he's
back on the teleprompter. And it was quite I think
she used when in the kitchen came back in was
still watching and he had not got to that part.
So that is I watched his press conference today, Jerry,
and he does go a lot of different places. I
do believe that this is the guy that will talk

(01:07:40):
about anything on any level. I do think he's talking
easily because I don't think Kamala Harris is bringing up
issues at all except for today in this price fixing thing.
I think he's talking about these issues at a much
more granular level and in a more honest way. And
I even think in the discussion with Elon Musk. You heard,
I mean that that thing went everywhere. Tell me the

(01:08:02):
politician that doesn't need white papers or staffers whispering in
their ears to span the number of issues that that
two hour conversation went over and discussed. But I agree
with you, he does go on tangentcy goes a long time.
But I think when people see that, they just know
he's not a scripted guy, that he's not plastic, that

(01:08:22):
he's real. And let's hope because the alternative to Trump,
I don't think any of us we'll be able to
make it through without a lot of suffering in front
of us. But let's go back to the phones and
let's go to Jim in Salt Lake City. Jim, what
say you about this Kamala Harris idea?

Speaker 3 (01:08:44):
Well, all I know is that Kamala Harris gas lights everybody. Okay, yes,
Democrats gas light democrats. They tell them all the things
they're going to do for him, all the great things
that's going to happen, and everything. Kamala is going to
come up with reparations. I bet before the election's gonna

(01:09:08):
she's going to come up with reparations for everybody you know,
and the Democrats are going to believe it, just like
they did in California. They brought it up about a
year ago and said, Okay, we're going to give all
the black community a million dollars in reparations. Has that
happened at all, No, it hasn't happened. They just gaslight

(01:09:31):
and gaslight and gaslight. It's it's it's what the what
the mayors, the mayors of the big cities do. They
just tell them what they think they want them to hear,
and they're lying through their teeth. They don't intend any
way whatsoever to keep their promises, but they tell them
these things and they believe them, and they continue to

(01:09:52):
vote for them. Why do you think, what do you
think the people in the big cities have these terrible,
awful mayors that never make their lives any better in
the big cities.

Speaker 1 (01:10:05):
Yeah, yeah, Jim, I thank you for the call. We're
coming up to a break and I want to get
one more caller in before we break. Is that good array?
But he brings up such a good point. She's in
day oney three hundred and three of this current administration.
What is she promising that she hasn't had levers of
power to pull to already be able to deliver. It
is so and I think it's just so intellectually dishonest

(01:10:27):
to even suggest there's a new day coming. For one thousand,
three hundred and three days of an administration, she's been
on the clock. Let's go to Jerome and Layton. What
say you, sir about this new policy position Kamala Harris
has taken on groceries.

Speaker 16 (01:10:43):
Well, I'll make it real short and simple. I saw
it under President Nixon in the late seventies, going towards
nineteen eighty, and I put it in some orders for
some things, and I got so many back orders, and
believe it, and that's because the items are no longer

(01:11:04):
available thanks to price control.

Speaker 7 (01:11:06):
Well, so this idea is just crazy.

Speaker 1 (01:11:12):
Thank you for your call, Jerrome. We're hitting a break.
But he is exactly right. And you're hearing institutional memory
when you hear these reflections of what this, what Nixon did,
what what Carter did in the United States in the
early seventies, and it's it has its consequences in our listeners.
You the listeners, you know this. You're not getting fooled.
We'll get back we have. When we come back, we're

(01:11:34):
going to speak with Chris Pope from the Manhattan's Too,
talking about social security and taxing social security versus tactually
for the working poor. Are these two issues in opposition
to each other. We're going to find out when we
come back after the break. You're listening to the Rod
and Greg Show here on Talk Radio one oh five nine. Canterus.
Let's move on, Let's look talk about something else. Interesting

(01:11:54):
study that came up caught my eye. A study that
looks at President Trump's talked about not taxing social Security benefits,
and there's also talk from JD Vance, especially about lowering
the tax burden, reducing the tax burden for young working families.
Some think that these two policy positions may have some

(01:12:16):
conflict to them. So we're calling We're speaking to Chris Pope,
he's a senior fellow at Manhattan Institute, to get the
skinny on this report on what this working class needs.
And so the question I have, Chris, thanks for joining
us on the program, is what is the data that
you have found telling us about these working families and
also America's retirees.

Speaker 7 (01:12:38):
But the beast find is that the main thing the
federal government does. In terms of redistribution, it's to take
money from people who currently work it and give it
to people who are retired, redistribution from which the poor
is much much smaller. It's mostly redistribution from walkers to retirees.

Speaker 1 (01:12:56):
So my question is this, and it's just struck me
when we were looking at this. Entitlements are a lot
of other things as well. So you got you got
Medicaid in there as well, Affordable Care Act are There's
some recent maneuvers by the federal government, the Bide administration
to include people who've entered the country illegally in Medicaid
and Medicaid expansion or the Affordable Care Act. You have

(01:13:17):
some states that are suing because they're they're state match
for those federal entitlements. They fear will bankrupt their states.
Why is that not that is that a variable in
your research? Because I look at the seniors and I go, look,
they've been paying They're paying taxes on a benefit they
paid into Social Security. What about the other entitlements that are.

Speaker 8 (01:13:37):
Going out right now?

Speaker 7 (01:13:39):
I mean, the issue is that the benefits of seniors
are ten times as big as benefits as medicaid. For
walking age people. Probably biggest seniors are all the use
a lot more healthcare stuffs as immigrants who arrive here
in their twenties and thirties, they don't really use that
much healthcare. And then with is they did contribute a

(01:14:01):
little bit, but the payroll tax contribution pay only fifteen
percent of Medicare, like it only covers a tiny pot
of the cost.

Speaker 1 (01:14:11):
So if we see and I do think that there
is a struggure, we will we know it's not a
thought that there's a structural imbalance with entitlement spending and
it's eating up most of the budget. Is the big
problem going to be the seniors? Because I think that's
a political hurdle. I know that Republicans are always accused
of attacking social security, and there's a fear tactic there

(01:14:33):
in campaign season. But what are some of the real
solutions that we could do in terms of entitlement spending
and even the idea of some of these young people
where we need to give them a hand up or
even lower tax burden maybe instead of entitlements. What's a
solution other than saying to seniors, we don't we're going

(01:14:53):
to taxture your social security are there any other solutions
out there?

Speaker 7 (01:14:57):
Sure, the issue is so much today we can afford
to pay for today seniors for social Security and medicare.
The issue is the scene is in twenty or thirty
yeth time, maybe forty yeth time. And the solution there
on social security is to say we'll let you have
lower payroll taxes for the rest of your working career
in return for agreeing to take slowly low benefits in

(01:15:20):
twenty or thirty years time. And people likely to get that,
to accept that, because it's the same people, and it's
the problem again is not today's seniors. It's the seniors
in the generation that are really potentially going to bankrupt us.

Speaker 1 (01:15:36):
I like what you're saying because I'm fifty four and
I've honestly listening to the debate for years and decades
about social security. I've never imagined that that was going
to be a viable way to retire or to depend
on upon retirement. So I think that deal can be
made with people that are the working age and working
and contributing now and looking forward. I think the fear

(01:15:58):
comes when people think that what they've paid to now
or what they're depending on now, I think it's good news.
I should say that when President Trump says to a
lot of seniors, we won't taxture your social Security. But
what you're pointing to is we've got to go upstream
a little bit and look at the system and say, look,
payroll now. But really, let's let's be honest about the
future of Social Security. It's not very bright.

Speaker 3 (01:16:21):
Is that?

Speaker 6 (01:16:21):
Is that?

Speaker 3 (01:16:21):
Am I?

Speaker 1 (01:16:22):
Am I getting this? Is this what you're Is this
what you're seeing?

Speaker 7 (01:16:25):
Yeah? Yeah, I mean the issue was is probably if
you give more money to seniors, that money's got to
come from somewhere, and somewhere is people who are in
the workforce. What this report finds is that the whole
point of Social Security Medicare is that when people are retired,
they don't they don't have the ability to earn money.

(01:16:47):
So we created these benefits to basically give more money
to people who didn't have the capacity to didn't know
how long they were going to live, couldn't afford healthcare,
that had much greater healthcare need, and we try to
basically reduce tribute from people who are into lack force
the people who are tired. We've kind of taken that
a little bit too far, and we're kind of instead

(01:17:10):
of a situation. We've done such a good job of
basically providing benefits to seniors, but now people who are
are young, who are in their twenties and thirties, who
have kids to look aft, to feed, to educate, to
take to school, they need to pay all the expenses
to go block. These people are now significently less seniors

(01:17:30):
by almost any metrics.

Speaker 1 (01:17:32):
So did you have in your in your look look
at let's talk about And this is where I don't
know that you studied the medicaid side of it, Medicaid
and Medicaid expansion, But what's the trajectory and the growth
in terms of entitlement spending on Because Medicaid medicares for
the elderly, but Medicaid is for more able bodied individuals.
Medicaid used to be for disabled people. Medicaid expansion is

(01:17:54):
what I would call the Affordable careacter Obamacare. Is there
a trajectory that's sustainable on the Medicaid and Medicaid expansion
side of entitlement spending?

Speaker 7 (01:18:04):
Well, again, I think it's a bit the same story
in that Medicaid is for low income people, but because
senior's used so much more healthcare. The biggest use of
users of Medicaid are actually the oldest Americans. Even though
Medicare also covers seniors, Medicaid is the main funder of

(01:18:24):
long term care in the United States, and because it
provides long term care, Medicaid actually spends three times three
to four times as much per senior as it does
per person who's a working aged on top of Medicare,
So Medicaid, even Medicaid, is very very skewed in it's
spending to seen this, and I'm saying we should. We should,

(01:18:47):
It would be a good idea to stop that, but
we need to recognize that there is a huge imbalance
that we've gotten ourselves into and Medicaid, especially for long
term care. Medicaid is supposed to be for low income people,
but Medicaid's longtime care eligibility has now gone to such

(01:19:07):
a point that it's crowded out long private long term
care insurance. Instead of people buying private long term care insurance,
people just run down their assets and qualify for Medicaid.
And that was never what Medicaid was intended to be.
Medicaid was intended to be housecare benefit for pole people,
it's now become this entitlement for a longtime care entitlement

(01:19:29):
for the middle class that it was never intended to
be so.

Speaker 1 (01:19:33):
And my final question is this is kind of the
description of retirees who have Social Security. It sounds from
your study that they're mostly middle class or above would
have more living space, less needs or having a less
difficult time with living space or paying for meals or

(01:19:54):
health care or utility bills. But where they don't have
any income versus people that are working and would have
a household income. Is it really an embarrassment of riches
for our seniors here with social Security?

Speaker 7 (01:20:08):
Well, there are rich people and poor people at every
age group, right, They're rich retireing, relatively rich retirees, are
relatively poor retirees, relatively rich, and relatively poor people in
their thirties and forties. But within any what the study
finance is that basically within any kind of income range,
the rich retirees have many more assets and a much

(01:20:35):
higher standard of living than rich people in the workforce,
and the poorest retirees are significantly better off than the
poor people who are in the workforce. And because Medicare
and Social Security mostly redistribute across age groups rather than
from rich to poor. We're basically overdoing it. We're overburdening
people who are currently in the workforce who've kind of

(01:20:56):
gone a little too far in terms of shifting resources
to see news.

Speaker 1 (01:21:00):
So there's a deal that must be cut here with
younger people as they are, they're not old enough to retire.
But we need to start having those conversations now, is
what I hear you saying.

Speaker 7 (01:21:10):
And that's the solution. It's the solution, isn't And I
think this is the way people will talk about these
issues is to say, oh, we're putting old people against
young people. Let's know what this issue is about. It's
about people who are all people are going to get
the benefits no matter what the issue is. People who
are today in the workforce, do they want to have
more resources now or do they want to have more

(01:21:31):
resources later? And do they want to pay in as
much now for Social Security and Medicare in the future,
which is probably more than they are going to need
in the future, and they probably need the extra funds now.

Speaker 1 (01:21:46):
Thank you very much, mister Chris Pope, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute.
An interesting study appreciate your time. We're going to a
break right now. When we come back. Final thoughts here
on the Rotting Greg Show. You're listening to Talk Radio
one oh five nine, cannais. I know I can't stop
talking about these polls, and I got about a minute left,
so I just want to let you know Cook Report

(01:22:06):
Political report, which really does is actually very dependable on
what's the upside or what races senate. US Senate races
are leaning Democrat, neutral, toss up, or leaning Republican. Someone
in the in the media wants to say, oh, look
at all these strong races for the Democrats. Look at
how well they're doing. Frank Once interrupts the love in

(01:22:28):
by saying, well, the Democrats are going to lose West
Virginia the seat with Joe Manchin's retirement, and Montana's Senate
seat with John Tester is currently down in the polls
and is leaning towards the Republican candidate. Well, those two
losses that would just flip the control of the Senate
to the GOP. So you can list as many of
these states as you want where you think the Democrats

(01:22:48):
are doing well in those Senate seats. Those two states alone,
will flip control of the Senate in the Republican hands.
And it's just not what you hear from the Democrats,
says it or the media in general. Hey, thank you
for listening. Look, I want you to keep your hands up,
your chin down, your eyes forward, answer the bell, and
I will see you tomorrow on the Rotten Greg Show
here on talk radio one oh five nine can Arres

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Rod Arquette Show News

Popular Podcasts

1. Stuff You Should Know

2. Dateline NBC

3. Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Salt Lake County Council Passes $507 Million Bond to Voters; Kamala's Price Fixing Proposal on Groceries

Episode Transcript

Rod Arquette Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}1. Stuff You Should Know

2. Dateline NBC

3. Crime Junkie

All Episodes