Thunderdome by Rock the Capital 3.14.26

Eric Epstein and Millennial Brian talk about Iran, gas prices, and the new Ask Brian segment.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, March fourteenth, this is the fifteen thousand version of
Rock to Capitol. I think we hit a bit of
a milestone. At any rate, we're Rock to Capital. We're
a good government, anti corruption organization. We don't take sides,
we take aim, and we don't care what party you're from.
We care who's throwing the party. So please visit our website.

(00:22):
There's a lot of new stuff there. We just taped
an update yesterday on what's been going on at state
and county agencies over the last month. I want to
say hello to We have an executive club that listens,
including Nancy and Larry and I'm sure I'm going to

(00:42):
miss some people here Genie and oh my god, someone
who is the other person the other day, Bob. But
we'll get back to that in the moment. So we
wanted there's a lot to cover, so I wanted to
hit the new segment. We have asked Brian and I
want to cover a couple of things that really people
haven't and looking at it the media, and one of
them is that ballot PA has recently filed a lawsuit

(01:06):
that could change primary elections in PA. The lawsuit argues
that closed primary elections violate the state constitution. Currently, Pennsylvania
is only one of eight states with a closed primary system,
so they just allow registered independents to vote in the
primary election. If successful, the lawsuit could open the door

(01:28):
for independent voters to be able to vote in the primaries,
which is going to be interesting. The case is awaiting
a response from Commonwealth Court. So I think there's about
a million registered voters, Brian, This seems to me like
a pretty I don't know what the percentage of it,
the percentage for it to pass, but this would be

(01:50):
a really big deal.

Speaker 2 (01:51):
Yeah, so it's a million unaffiliated voters. So typically for
a close primary, we don't know what means. Democrats have
a primary, you have to be registered Democrats to vote
in that primary. Republicans a primary have to be registered
Republican to vote in that primary. What most states do
is they have open primaries, so anyone can ask for
a Republican ballot, anyone asks for a Democratic ballot. And

(02:13):
the reason they do that is that most people, especially now,
is that you have a growing number of independence people
that don't identify with the party. They might lean one
way or another, and they're kicked out, especially the primary elections,
which a select most of the time the top two
candidates to go in, so do not have representation on
that you see other states Alaska, there's even a more

(02:33):
extreme version of this with the rank choice voting where
every essentially everyone runs in the primary. Like one primary,
the top two candidates moved to the general. And so
it's ideally to say take away the you know, a
million people, million plus disenfranchised voters in the primary system.
That's the idea behind it. People that don't like it say, hey,

(02:55):
if I'm a Republican, I can go to a Democratic
primary and ask for a ballot and vote for a
crazy person or advice versus.

Speaker 1 (03:02):
So people don't like it, they have to ask themselves
why the other forty two states.

Speaker 3 (03:05):
Are doing it right?

Speaker 1 (03:06):
I mean, this is the norm and it will become
the norm here. It's just a matter. I mean Pennsylvania
and their ability for the legislature and the executive branch
to accept reality is always delayed. We're always behind the ball.
So if it does happen, and what what's been like

(03:28):
to the extent you can the impact in other states.

Speaker 2 (03:31):
So the big impact is that you have in enclosed primaries,
you have I would say hyper voters about people that
vote every election, you know, every minution, every primary, and
that you target your ads essentially to those people. And
when you're talking to those people, hyper political inside the
party people their issues are way different than let's say
the general public. So when you open it up the

(03:53):
general public independent, you get a lot more moderate voices,
but also you get people focused way more on the
bread and butter, affordability, schools, roads, the basics. Because rather
than having like very niche constituents to have certain issues
and to give you people an example, in the mayor
elections in like New York or whatever, the public sector

(04:16):
unions as from both financially and as a voting block,
basically run those elections. So the ones that happening is
you get elected, all these unions support you. You go in,
you have to essentially, you know, regulate and improve services,
but you got support by all the unions. They just
want pay increases. They probably less enforcement or accountability.

Speaker 1 (04:37):
So I think the point I'm trying to make is
what would be the impact in terms of the result
in Pennsylvania. Do you know if look, here's here's the
reality I think everybody right now is fed up with
wacos on the right and the wocos on the left.

Speaker 2 (04:54):
I mean, yeah, I think that would make it harder
for them to win primaries, for sure, it would. So
if you have the more moderate candidates, because you're appealing
to people that don't identify with the party, they might
swing one way or another, but typically those people are
we're gonna write it for moderate candidates. So so you have
to adjust. If you saw this in California with their
top two system, which is if you basically a Republican area,

(05:16):
the top two candidates have been Republican. The Democratic area,
the top two canistead up being Democrats, and one candidate
will try to appeal to the base or party that's
not So let's say a Democrat, you have two Democrats,
one of them will appeal with the Republicans and independence
and try to get their votes to sort of swing.
And so now there's because you have to go after

(05:37):
those voters in every election. You know, the ability is
want to narrow it down to certain issues or certain bases,
it goes out the window.

Speaker 1 (05:44):
All right, Well, we'll have to get into this detail
at a later date. So the Civil Rules Procedure Committee
of which nobody's ever heard of. Who's listening to this show?
At de Pennsvaya Supreme Court recently canceled the review of
medical malpractice venue rule change. So for some context, in
twenty twenty two, the committee reversed its twenty year old

(06:06):
rule requiring medical malpractice claims to be litigated in the
county where the alleged malpractice occurred. So what does this mean?

Speaker 2 (06:14):
So, especially what happens do you have venue shopping? This
is this is used for medical malpractice. The most famous
one is for guns and abortion, where people essentially choose
the courts where they believe are ideologically aligned with them.
In this case, it's different. It's actually dealing more with
that would say corruption, where ei there's a judge that
let's say, favors either defenders and trial attorneys, or they

(06:35):
are judged let's say favors corrupt medical depending on who
sort of donated their campaign, and so people with venue
shop to those people. And then it's not surprisingly people
that have certain biases.

Speaker 1 (06:48):
This is really a victory for trial attorneys.

Speaker 3 (06:51):
Yes, because attorneys always.

Speaker 1 (06:53):
They're right right, So this is going to be there's
going to be what they said two years to review,
it wasn't enough, so they may come back, can look
at it, what in a.

Speaker 2 (07:01):
Decade, Yeah, But in the meantime, you're right. So the
trial attorneys because they just wanted those cases to go
and they want to be in more favorable courtse you know,
if you have a judge that you think is more
biased your side, it becomes the court case was way easier.

Speaker 1 (07:16):
All right. So several cows were found wandering on I
two seventy nine in Alleghany County, just north of Eggs
at eight, and they caused pen Dot to restrict traffic
access in the area. According to a local farm, two
calves were reported missing and we're stopped near the interstate.
Now this is actually a substantive issue because who pays.

(07:40):
So the farmer is the farmer responsible for reimbursing pen
Dot for the cost to bring these animals.

Speaker 2 (07:49):
Back, and the farmers, you know, they're they're asset rich,
but they're cash for so many to make them pay,
especially during a crop season, it's always variable. I think
that'd be tough. I mean, even you think it's right. Plus,
do we know that it's the farmer's fault or does
someone you know, you have kids that, you know, cut
the fences down and let the cows out.

Speaker 1 (08:08):
Well, let's say it is the farmer's fault. I mean,
and I know everybody loves farmers. But the point is,
if any other entity had caused, for instance, a bit
of demonstration that's true, what would have happened. So I'm
saying it doesn't happen all that much. But it's an
interesting point. All right. So, now we are in Nigeria.
I think we're in Colombia or is it Ecuador.

Speaker 2 (08:30):
We're in Venezuela, Theela, Cuba, Nigeria, obviously Iran. We still
have Ukraine Russia issues that you have, right it Sudan
just we're not there.

Speaker 1 (08:43):
But no, no, no, So the point is this. On Monday,
President Trump said that he is pursuing a government overthrow
in Cuba. In Cuba, he said, you know, look, it
may be a friendly takeover. I've never heard of a
friendly takeover of anything. There's no such thing. So, I mean,
at what point are we out of countries to invade?

(09:03):
But more to the point, Cuba has no resources, and
at some point people are going to wake up to
the fact that oil prices are all you know, just
out of control in the countries that we've had military
incursions with produce oil and it's hard to export oil
when you're at war. Yeah, But in terms of Cuba,
they basically have I mean sugarcane, cigars.

Speaker 2 (09:27):
It right, it's a very minimal economy. I mean it's
been run down by both the government there and also
the blockade. I think listen, I think one of the
things we have to bring up is that Marco Rubio,
who's foreign policy head, if you look throughout his career,
he's been big on the democracy movement, especially in Latin America,
and so I don't know how that squares exactly with

(09:49):
Trump because Trump had a different brand of.

Speaker 1 (09:52):
For going to break Let me ask you this. Everybody,
when they invade a country and the country is occupied
by someone on the left, said they're for democracy. If
it's on the right there said they're for democracy. There's
no real history of democracy in some of these countries.
But we're friendly and supportive of countries that are friendly
and supportive of us. So the reason I'm bringing it

(10:13):
up because the last time we went into the Middle
East and Iraq, it was democracy building, yes, And now
we're saying we're America. First, we're not going into any country,
but we've changed our mind and we're going into these
countries for the resources. So now Rubio is also saying, well,
but but for Cuba, we're going in for democracy.

Speaker 3 (10:31):
Right.

Speaker 2 (10:32):
Well, here's I think the real reason is that these
reasons sort of Trump is these countries are aligned against
us in our region or with critical minerals, and then
they shouldn't do that. They shouldn't be like that, and
we could make them American friendly, even if they're not
democracies like Saudi Araseia. You know, I get that's an argument.

Speaker 1 (10:52):
I get it. I disagree. I'm just saying with Cuba,
what do they have to offer other than sugarcane, cigars
and communists.

Speaker 3 (10:59):
Nothing.

Speaker 2 (10:59):
It's it's a straight This is a straight ruviews from Cuba.
There's not a huge human population in Florida. They obviously,
for understandable reasons, hate the Castro regime, and they would
say any friendly regime east of the United States are
just not a Castro, is it?

Speaker 1 (11:16):
I mean, we're gonna go to break But then the
so we go to Invada country when it's we wanted
for democracy in Invada country, when we wanted for minerals.
It's not a policy, it's just a justification, yes, forbading
a country. So look, we're Rock to Capital. I'm Eric Epstein.
We're with Maney O'Brian. The show is Thunderdone. We're being

(11:37):
produced by Art. Sorry Art went over again. I guess
we'll have a short break in So, Brian, we just
heard a promotion for a podcast by Enna Navarro and
she basically was saying that the Epstein files, I guess,
have been around for four administrations. Yeah, so does that

(11:58):
include the first Trumpet minute?

Speaker 3 (12:01):
Yeah, so it would include So.

Speaker 1 (12:03):
How did this then take off? Because if it was
missed by Ford administrations and it includes the first Trump
what ignited interest? Was it Trump?

Speaker 2 (12:14):
Well, so I think I think it's it's it was
it was a mix, So I think so you could
say because the first the first charges of investigation happened
in the Bush administrations. We're talking only two thousands, and
then you had the deal in two thousand and eight,
and then you had up to that I think during

(12:36):
the first Trump administration.

Speaker 3 (12:37):
That's when he got arrested, put in prison, and then died.

Speaker 1 (12:46):
Under very it's pretty obviously murdered.

Speaker 2 (12:49):
Yeah, I mean just an incredible, uh weird services. And
then Maxwell during the Body administration is found in Connecticut
just hanging out and she gets her rested. And then
I think after that there's been a big, big push
by the public, a big push, I would say, from
independent media to kind of release these files and let's say, hey,

(13:10):
what what.

Speaker 3 (13:11):
Was going like? What was going on? Who was going
hang out with this guy? What was he doing? How
do you operate?

Speaker 2 (13:17):
And I think what we know, obviously it's hard to
get everything, is that he was running a blackmail operation
and an influence operation for either a series or some
intelligence agencies, and he was trying to get powerful people essentially.

Speaker 1 (13:33):
I mean I just wanted to know. I mean, it's
been around for a long time.

Speaker 3 (13:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (13:38):
So Ana Navarro on the podcast has a I guess
a journalist who is an expert on the Epstein file.
So that's something you may want to listen to. Two
quick kidters measles nationwide one tho twenty two cases. I
guess at most during South Carolina, I don't know why.

(14:00):
Pennsylvania I think has twelve eight in Lancaster. Is this
something we should be concerned about?

Speaker 2 (14:06):
Uh? My concern maybe not freaking out. I would say
the big thing is just this is vaccine skepticism after
COVID and sort of the whole health policies from everything.
I think there's just less trust in institutions in general.
And so now when people will give their kids and
they say, hey, here's a healthy kid, We're gonna give
them all these vaccines, we know that. You know obviously

(14:29):
the vaccines work. Polio has gone down, measles have gone down,
all that stuff, but people are very skeptical now.

Speaker 1 (14:34):
I thought measles was technically thought of as not being obliterated.

Speaker 2 (14:40):
But yeah, dealt with a lot. A lot of the
worst diseases are history. Vaccines have been incredibly effective. I
think the argument is, have we studied the side effects appropriately?
And the benefit to risk is still obviously huge benefits,
But have we dealt with everything?

Speaker 3 (14:56):
Because there's going to be risk in anything.

Speaker 1 (14:58):
Woul the deny climate change? How much more study do
you need? You have ninety percent of scientists saying it's there,
you gotta get a ninety nine or one hundred.

Speaker 3 (15:08):
So but I think here's the thing.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
The reason why it's come up now is the post
COVID skepticism around institutions, especially the medical institutions.

Speaker 1 (15:16):
No, I get that, I understand the skepticism. It doesn't
mean you bring back the black pag black plague or
a leparsure of things of that nature. Okay, So go
fund me has been accused of plagiarism. Is this something
that we should be concerned of?

Speaker 2 (15:32):
I would say, now, because go fund me is the
probably the biggest charitable facilitator in the country.

Speaker 1 (15:38):
Well, I said they plagiarize over a million charities.

Speaker 2 (15:41):
Yes, but I think what they what they did is
they is they actually is there supposed to send money
to those organizations. Now, if if it is inaccurate and
they actually giving money off the top, that's different.

Speaker 3 (15:53):
That is a big deal.

Speaker 2 (15:54):
But if it's just they sort of use their web
pages without permission, which I think is you're that's not
I would say that's a less of a big deal.
Should be settled and it should be right. If they
were skimming money that was let's say money, we think
it's going to say press cancer.

Speaker 3 (16:09):
These are just right allegations.

Speaker 1 (16:11):
And and I mean because we all hear those things
about the gofund me, you know, and it tugs at
your heart and winds up not being true or well
that's that.

Speaker 3 (16:22):
Yeah, So I mean that's is that different? That is different.

Speaker 2 (16:24):
So so I would if it's plagiarism, which is we
use the information from your site without your consent to
send money to you, that's I think a very small
charge because it's sentially you're still sending money to those charities.
If it was we falsified information intentially saying were you
could send money to here, and we don't send money,
we take some off the top, we skim money, that's

(16:45):
way different.

Speaker 1 (16:46):
So I just don't know the motivation for plagiarizing to send.

Speaker 2 (16:50):
Well to get money, because I mean they I think
you do. They get money up every transfer and advertising
and stuff like that. But if you essentially falsify the
entire transfer. If I gave let's say, one thousand dollars
to breast cancer charity and it didn't exist one thousand
dollars one to someone, I mean that's.

Speaker 1 (17:07):
No, no, I get that. That's a different story.

Speaker 3 (17:09):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
I don't know if the listeners know that you started
a GoFundMe for me and I wound up boeing money.
So yeah, yeah, so there's two things here. And I
know this is extraordinarily long Brian ass segment, but we
have in Lancaster County. I think this is and this

(17:30):
is good kind of get statewide political. There are Senate
Republican primaries where folks on the extreme right are challenging
more moderate senators and they're all competitive. Those guys can win.
And the reason I'm bringing this up is the Senate
Democrats think they can win back the Senate. But the

(17:51):
one case it's interesting is Senator Malone, who won in
Lancaster for like the first time since Civil War. There's
something and he is very competitive, but what I thought
he did was real interesting. Now Lancaster County has a
lot of puppy mall puppy mills. Yeah, so he is

(18:12):
working to prevent pet stores from using puppy mills. Extraordinarily
positive legislation. I don't know anybody that would oppose it.

Speaker 2 (18:23):
Yeah, and I think it's one of those easy wins.
And we've seen this with animal rights across it's very biparison.
I think the difference is we see the images now
and it's been able to you know, social media, you
could put it out real quick, and so when you
see what the animals look like and how they're treated.

Speaker 1 (18:39):
It.

Speaker 2 (18:39):
You know, it obviously tons the heart strengths and then
becomes of a very bipartisan issue. I think the question
is they originally did this. They had all these rules
because they wanted to make food cheap and have research
used on animals before humans. Not for this issue specifically,
but animal rights in general. If that goes away and
food gets more expensive and we have less medical breakthroughs,

(19:03):
would people reverse their opinion or would it still be
we gotta treat the animals you made. It looks horrible, It's.

Speaker 1 (19:08):
Possible, I think. I mean, it's not just a puppy Mills,
it's also at slaughterhouse.

Speaker 3 (19:13):
Yes.

Speaker 1 (19:14):
So the final go asked Brian, which is going to
take us into the end of the second segment, is
let me read this to you because I thought this
was kind of interesting. So one hundred and fifty years ago,
Alexander Graham Bell made the first telephone call from his
Boston lab to his assistant. We all know about that.
The breakthrough came just days after Bell received a patent

(19:36):
from Telephone Technology and four days after his twenty ninth birthday.
So his successful prototype used acidified Wader to convert acoustic
oscillations created by the human voice.

Speaker 3 (19:52):
Da da da D.

Speaker 1 (19:53):
That's one hundred fifty years ago. Were you aware that
there was a guy by the name of Alicia Gray
who unsuccessfully contested his pat I mean, you know about
the whole teslid deal, but I've never heard of this guy.

Speaker 3 (20:06):
Yeah, I haven't heard of him either.

Speaker 2 (20:08):
Although this is common where it's someone else invents something,
they don't get the patent, someone else does the work
for a professors, the professor takes all the credit. You
hear about this almost all throughout history, especially back then,
because you think about if you don't have an established name,
then the only way to kind of get your stuff
out there is to get almost like a rich benefactor,

(20:28):
have someone recognize you or be noticed by someone who
has an established name, and so people will take credit.
There's there's accusations going back to you know, some of
the founding fathers that all their claims of inventions and
stuff like we're actually done by someone else. They just
were stolen.

Speaker 1 (20:45):
But the case here, and I think you see this
with Belle, is that he was a ruthless businessman.

Speaker 3 (20:50):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (20:50):
I'm not saying he didn't do it, but it's plausible.
But the bottom line, regardless of who invented the phone,
we've come up a long way in one hundred and
fifty years when it comes to communication.

Speaker 2 (21:04):
Yeah, I mean I would say that the phone from
like just an innovation and invention. It's probably the most
important technological innovation invention over the past like one hundred years.

Speaker 3 (21:15):
Think about it. Think about you if you went to every.

Speaker 2 (21:17):
Person now and you said I'm gonna take away your phone,
they almost feel naked because all the stuff it could do.
You see phones now they used to be you know,
ridiculously rich or for now you see in every country
in the world and the poorest country in Africa, everyone
can have a cell phone. Ever's got iPhones Now I
can actually do.

Speaker 1 (21:34):
All countries in the world of cell phones except Lebanon.

Speaker 3 (21:37):
So I mean there's a different reason.

Speaker 1 (21:41):
There was an Israeli promotion there. So the final question
with this and then we do need to get to
break if you look at the technology that emanated from
Alexurander Graham Bell or Tesla or this fella again who
I had never heard of, Alicia Elagia Gray, Elijah Gray.

(22:04):
What do you think comes in the next one hundred
and fifty years.

Speaker 2 (22:07):
I mean, oh wow, I mean I think I think
the big thing that we're thinking of now is AI
how Thomas it will be as a learning device, will
make this all rich, will make it you know you
don't have to work, you do all that?

Speaker 3 (22:19):
Or will you know they take over? I mean is
very interesting.

Speaker 2 (22:24):
You know, are we advancing technology so fast that we're
almost surpassing us on the food chain type of thing?
I mean it's it's can we control the level of innovation?

Speaker 1 (22:35):
I mean, well, look, I don't know that you can
control the level or you want to control, but you've
got to be mindful of the impacts and the side effect.
So Eric Epstein in with Money Obrian. The show is underdoone.
We're Rock the Capital. We're being produced by Art Selby,
and of course on the other side of this we'll
be looking into the actual economic impacts of yourn. All right,

(22:57):
we're back. So I just want to give a a
a couple I'm trying to think of the right way
to describe this, but an idea of the cost of
the current war in Iran. So we're over ten billion.
Let me point out that this war was not in
the budget, so slightly under a billion dollars a day.

(23:18):
One Patriot interceptor missile is four million dollars, and we're
probably running low on interceptors because we used a lot
to defend Israel in the twelve day war that we
had before. So if you're looking at what it's at,
we're at about thirty seven million an hour, which is
probably going to rise. Gas prices went up about sixty
cents a gallon in the wars first week, and the

(23:41):
Dow fell four hundred and fifty three points. What I
did not know, Brian, is on Friday, the Bureau of
Labor Statistics announced the economy lost ninety two thousand jobs
in February. In the year and changed. Since Trump returned office,
economy has added one hundred and forty thousand jobs. But

(24:01):
to keep pace with the growth in the number of
people who age into the labor force, the economy needs
around one hundred and fifty thousand jobs a month. A
month with one hundred So what what did what do
those statistics mean for the I mean, look, the average
person gets the price again. I mean this is interesting

(24:22):
because this was a staple of Trump on the campaign
trip yeah, you know, I guarantee you price will be
Recently I was saying close to two dollars four dollars
a gall.

Speaker 2 (24:32):
Yeah, it's going that direction. The price was down. I mean,
this is here's the thing is that we have. You
have oil is a global demand market. So you have
whatever you think you need globally for oil. The straight
up our moose which is now you know, in between
Iran and the Gulf States, and.

Speaker 1 (24:49):
That's for twenty percent of the oil flows.

Speaker 2 (24:51):
For the world. Yeah and so and so. Now you
have essentially you have a basic demand. It's supply problem.
It's essentially a negative supply shock. The man's still constant.
Price goes up because of that and an oil being
probably arguably the most important commodity in the world as
far as just it goes into everything because every transport,

(25:11):
every you need it. And the region which is produces
the most energy in the world per capita. The United
States is the biggest energy producer, but per.

Speaker 1 (25:20):
Capity say that again, because I don't think people know that.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
So the United States is the biggest energy producer in
the world. We're also the biggest energy consumer in the world.
But the countries that produce way above their capacity. So
Saudi Arabia around all these produced way above what they use.
They're all in that region, they're all affected by these
shipping lanes, and there are some alternatives. Saudi Arabia built
a pipeline, they curly should have built more to take

(25:43):
its essentially the or the oil reserves to the other
side of the country and go through a safer route.

Speaker 1 (25:50):
I'll always understand that because I think most people are
probably aware. But you have an issue with liquefied natural gas,
and we're the largest producer of that. However, I think
guitars tar is closed and they're about to be unable
to transmit produce any allergy. What does that mean? Why
is that different from oil, which you can see, you

(26:12):
know when you go to the gas station, normally you
don't fill up with that leng.

Speaker 2 (26:16):
Yeah, well, LLERG is a different I mean, it's a
different energy sources, different input, but using the utilities you
know that your gas or gas bill, all that stuff.
And guitar is the most important supplier for Europe, especially
now that they've been trying because remember Europe's been trying
to get off Russia, Get off Russia, Get off Russia.

Speaker 3 (26:32):
The Middle East and guitar.

Speaker 1 (26:34):
So that's actually kind of ironic. So as Europe is
pivoting from Russia to go to Katar, they're now in
a jam because Russia and guitar may be unavailable.

Speaker 2 (26:48):
Yes, well, that's the other thing is that is that
Trump's release sanctions off Russia, that the Russian oil flow
that's still not enough. And also you bring up a
good point is that we're talking about energy needs like
it's all the same thing. You just you know, you
release the oil. We saw this with Venezuela, like different
oil for different things in different markets. So you can't
just say, well, we're released the strategic reserves. It's like, okay,

(27:11):
that helps a little with straight oil? What about LNG?
What about crude oil? What about you know, heavy the
light oil? What about the other critical minerals that you
now because we need because we fired all these munitions
that use the critinal do you have? So all those
markets get hit and then everyone's kind of scrambled because

(27:33):
everyone does, whether they like it or not, some level
of business with the Middle East, China, Europe, the United States, Russia.

Speaker 1 (27:41):
I think I just want to stop there because that's
one of the drawbacks with America. First, we're interdependent. Like
it or not, you know, we're interdependent. And you know
what you're saying with the Middle East. You know, people
need to understand. I was just looking up the number
one producer is America. Russia's three, Canadas, for China six,

(28:02):
Brazil is seven. As I'm naming these countries. Trump has
picked a fight with everyone. He's picked a fight with Canada,
He's picked obviously a fight with China. He's at odds
with Brazil and Lula. He's pissed off at Norway because
you know he didn't get the Nobel Prize. All right,
they're in a number twelve producer from Mexico's eleven Nigeria.
We have troops there Venezuela. We'll see how that works

(28:24):
out in Columbia. And so what I'm saying also throwing
Mexico in there. I don't know if there's an understanding
by the public or even the administration that it's hard
to go it alone.

Speaker 2 (28:36):
Yeah, well, yeah, and listen, this is the I mean,
you go back to the teriff document, which is, well,
we want to raise we want to raise put tariffs
on imports because we want every to be American made. Well,
if American maid becomes more expensive, was that do that
hurts the consumer surplus where someone spends money more money,
it helps hurst producer surplus because every single port that

(28:59):
they now because more expensive. Now the argument is, well,
we got to do that because we have to protect
certain industries for security reasons, or because we want to.

Speaker 1 (29:07):
Rebuild manufacturing for terrorists. That's what I used to support
is that you got to protect steel, you got to
protect munitions. You need to protect things that we need
day to day and to defend ourselves.

Speaker 3 (29:19):
And and here's the thing.

Speaker 2 (29:20):
We can make that argument. I think it's a good
argument on security. But the economic argument is the same,
which is, if you increase prices across the board, people
will people you know, their value for money goes down.
And so that's he understands that with energy perfectly, which
is he came in Biden had very high inflation above wages.
His argument was we're gonna make We're gonna put inflation,
but we're gonna put wages above inflation, not the other

(29:43):
way around. We do that through energy, we're gonna do
that through limiting immigration, increasing housing supply. And those arguments
apply not just those but to every sector. So they
apply to the terrificture they apply. So now we have
with the oil and the Middle East. If you if
you take off twenty percent of global supply. I remember,

(30:03):
Iran didn't have to win in the sense that they
can defeat the US military. In fact, I think the
US military has been incredibly dominant, destroying almost all.

Speaker 1 (30:11):
The history has proven there's a difference between a military
victory and a political.

Speaker 2 (30:18):
Victory, right, and and the regime is still in power,
grant underground and you know, destroyed to a certainly you know, hurt,
but still in power. They only have to make this
strait of our moose unsafe to navigate well. And then
you do that, then there's just going to be amount
of oil at most at least ten percent of the

(30:40):
global oil supply is going to essentially be well taken
off line.

Speaker 1 (30:44):
But you also have picked fights with our allies or
are oil suppliers to us. Yeah, and so what I'm
arguing is that that oil will likely phone out to
Europe or to other people who may need it. We
don't have the leverage. And you know, when you speak
about LNG, that's it's just amazing to me that we

(31:06):
could be or guitar could be that narrow minded. I mean,
apparently there's not LNG production facilities anywhere else but guitar.
And so what you were talking about is right on.
I mean, oil serves different persons, purposes, Oil is diversified.
But what this war has proved is that the world
still runs on oil.

Speaker 2 (31:29):
Listen, energy drives the world. I mean we talk about
the Industrial revolution. If you don't have energy, whether oil, coal,
all the to produce, you can't do anything. I mean,
our whole lives.

Speaker 1 (31:41):
Energy, but oil that comes for basically transportation. It's not
a form of electricity. But to dial back just a second,
we have a situation where I think, at its peak
when Biden was president, I think you had oil or
gas at tank almost hit five bucks. I don't know

(32:02):
if it got that far.

Speaker 3 (32:03):
It was up. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (32:04):
Yeah. But what's interesting, So if a guy that ran
on immigration, a guy that ran on reduced fuel price
is a guy no more wars. We seem to be
going off on a tangent here.

Speaker 3 (32:16):
Yeah, I think what happened.

Speaker 1 (32:17):
I don't know that we can afford to be in Cuba,
in Venezuela, in Nigeria in Colombia. Why the world's on fire.
If you think Iran was not waiting for this, you're
out of your mind. They've been planning for this day
for forty seven years a country of ninety two million.
For me, the thing that's going to cripple them the

(32:39):
most is they've had a drought for the last five
years throughout the water.

Speaker 2 (32:44):
Yeah. And here's the other thing is that we talk
about them shutting down the straight and hard news hurting everyone,
It's going to hurt them a ton.

Speaker 3 (32:50):
Let's not make this.

Speaker 2 (32:52):
The only thing Iran has from a revenue an economic
producer standpoint, is oil. So the idea that this doesn't
hurt them is But the question is, if you push
them to a certain extent, do they care. I mean,
the leaders clearly don't care about that.

Speaker 1 (33:06):
But people are missing the point in Gaza that war
was provoked on purpose so that Israel would have a
bad pr outcome. You know, people forgot about the butchery
and the savagery that took place. All they see where
Hamas won the publicity war, Iran is looking to do
the same. So if you're out of warder, they're already

(33:27):
poor and you're out of resources, and you start having
Doctors without Borders or other humanitarian groups going to Iran
and sending out photos every day. And here's the thing,
Just like Gaza, who's going to overthrow Hamas? I mean,
who's going to overthrow these folks?

Speaker 2 (33:46):
Yeah, there's no unless you want to arm these ethnics
and surgery groups like the Courge and the different groups.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
You can't you do that.

Speaker 3 (33:52):
That's a civil war and that's.

Speaker 1 (33:53):
The whole's problematic. If you arm the Curge, you piss
off the Turks. And because Yorks are the only one
that's taken basically the bite out of Kurdish resistance. And
right now Turkey is close to us. But look, when
we come back, we'll clean up the oil slick here
and I want to talk about water. So this is

(34:15):
Eric Epstein with Manio Brian. We are Rock to Capital.
The show with Thunderdome Art Selby is producing us and
we'll be back for our last segment. Yeah, I know
this seems to be there's a lot and maybe we
have to circle back in two weeks. But what makes
us even more complicated is that countries like Saudi Arabia,
the Emirates Qatar and Turkey have developed pragmatic trading ties

(34:39):
with Iran, and there's certain countries like Turkey that gets
a lot of its natural gas from Iran, and Qatar
and Iran actually share the world's largest gas field, so
everything's interconnected. I think most people are in the Middle
East are very mindful of not wanting to antagonize Iran

(35:00):
kind of control them. But there's going to come to
a point where the war as it goes on and
as people are deprived, not just in the West but
also in the Middle East. I guess what I'm saying
is when the war with mister Bush went in Rock

(35:22):
that we had basically people prepared to make a sacrifice
because there was a goal in a name, and there
were dozens of countries in this coalition. You know, as
everybody starts to take a hit and their quality of
life declines, I'm not really sure. I still don't know
what the purpose is, but I don't know what our
coalition is here.

Speaker 3 (35:44):
Well, I don't know if we have a coalition.

Speaker 2 (35:46):
I think the argument is if we get a more
friendly outcome, or we can destroy their ability to essentially
harm other countries and economically be more dependent that we
can get a better deal because typically, when let's say
Venezuela was an example, we have an initial strike and

(36:06):
then he tries to leverage that to get deals. So
he's trying to get a better deal in Venezuela, he's
trying to get a better deal in Cuba. I don't
necessarily think it's become like a Sweden type scenario. But
the desalination plan she brought up, well, I don't think
because I think one of the things when people bring
up on a rock in Afghanistan rock and Afghanistan, it's
not the initial a rock in Afghanistan war, it's the

(36:30):
build a Germany Japan type democracy, right, which is which
brought in years of urban warfare, huge subc like just
infrastructure to put out there showing political all these things
that I don't think we're getting into. I think the
question is does this strategy of a quick attack than

(36:53):
a deal quick attack that a deal. Does this work
in this scenario where the regime in Iran feels like
they're threatened that they'll do suicides because if they are
willing to shut the straightforward moose or they're willing to
attack desalination plants in other places. That's like a because
now because now you're you're escalating at a level that's
out of your control.

Speaker 1 (37:13):
So Iran is not going to give up anytime soon.
If they give up at all, they have the ability
to amp up through unconventional means. I'm sure they have
chemical weapons.

Speaker 3 (37:24):
The drones. The drones have been here.

Speaker 1 (37:26):
Yeah, the drones have been here, suicide bombers. So you know,
essentially they did in a way what Iraq did is
they've drown drawn America. We're sending several thousand troops over
to the Middle East. It's expensive, it's economically disruptive all
over the excuse me, the planet. And look in nineteen

(37:47):
ninety one, we had thirty four countries in the coalition.
Right now it looks like it's America and Israel. But
when you get to desalinization, I mean, the most valuable
mineral in the Middle East, it is not a mineral,
it's water. Yeah, I mean, so Khuwait gets ninety percent
of its drinking what are from desalination? Oman eighty six,

(38:10):
Saudi Arabia seventy, the UAE forty two percent. And apparently
this is an estimate from American diplomats that a successful
attack on Saudi Arabia's drew ball play it which provided
READD with ninety percent it's more like eighty now, which
forced the kingdom to evacuate the capital within a week.

(38:35):
All right, so where are they going to go?

Speaker 3 (38:39):
Yeah, I guess they're gonna go to Europe? Are they
gonna go to other place?

Speaker 1 (38:42):
I mean Europe doesn't want immigrants of any stripe.

Speaker 3 (38:44):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (38:45):
And and and that's the worry is that these plants
are are are essentially protected just by people don't want
to see, you know, civilian infrastructure damage, these ties damage.
So the worry is does a rant habit like the
suicide pack, where we think we're in danger, we'll do anything,
we'll strike these plants.

Speaker 1 (39:07):
Well, so let me ask you this. What is here's
the thing. Let's say we say, okay, we won, and
what do we win? I mean the country Iran is
in ashes and everything that was attached to you just
can't push your button and everything gets up, goes up

(39:28):
and goes out. Uh, there's you know, there's limited oil
production as it is in Iran and Iraq, there's going
to be even less. So it takes a while to recessitate.
What would victory look like.

Speaker 2 (39:41):
Well, I think victory would have if it would have
been like the Venice where it's just a quick switch
and you have a more friendly regime. I think they're
going to say we took out most of them, which
they did. They took out a ton of their military infrastructure.
They destroyed, you know, just huge amounts of weaponry and
all the industrial capacity around that. We'll see if they

(40:06):
take it. They try to take away the nukes or
the nuclear material, and that would, in their argument, that
would reduce their ability to affect their neighbors.

Speaker 3 (40:16):
And listen, it might.

Speaker 2 (40:17):
The problem is if Iran becomes sort of like a
gorilla fighting force and they're just using cheap drones, all
they really have to do is to disrupt the straightform
moose or attack desalination plants. Do you have plans in
place to stop that? If you do, maybe maybe you
can't just say we won, were done, this is our

(40:37):
new neutral and then and then, because it's not like
Iron could actually attack America, you have Well, but.

Speaker 1 (40:43):
Here's the deal. If you have just destroyed the infrastructure.
When you destroy the infrastructure, which is the energy, and
it takes out the water. You have a country that
needs to be rebuilt, and we have a president whose theory,
right or wrong, is that will go in and then
create a regime that's sympathetic to our economic interest. All right,
in the past, when we have done this with an intervention,

(41:05):
we've rebuilt the country. We're not gonna do that.

Speaker 2 (41:08):
No, this is not This is not an Iraq Afghanistan rebuilt.
It's not a Germany or Japan rebuilt. It's it's this
is if you look at I was trying to find
because sometimes I'll look at people around Trump to see
if is there. And if you look at the military
people that are talking, they seem to be saying that
we need we need to destroy the military, industrial basic

(41:31):
capacity of Iran, which they did very successfully, and then
whatever happens with the regime and stuff like that, they
won't be able to attack their neighbors. The question is
if they lord, then they can shut down the straight
for moose or just threaten desalination plants. Does that not
change their blackmail level?

Speaker 1 (41:50):
But let's say this, Let's say you win the war
and you make Iran look like a parking lot, the
same thing you did in Afghanistan. We lost in Afghanistan.
Nobody's ever won in Afghanistan, nobody's gonna and Iran, if
you basically reduce it to a parking lot, who's going
to rebuild it?

Speaker 2 (42:07):
Well, no one, but in Afghanistan here, I guess. Here's
Here's my point is that when we went to Afghanstad
the first four weeks, we pushed the Taliban basically out
of all the city centers, We destroyed all their command
bases there basically had to be in these like weird
remote areas, or in Pakistan, if we had just left,
if we had just left, not build democracy, not build

(42:28):
any infrastructure, just left and said, hey, that's it, You're done,
and that will if you try to rebuild your terrorist hotspots,
we'll just bomb them.

Speaker 3 (42:38):
Is that what we'll do here?

Speaker 2 (42:39):
I mean, it's it's a very weird scenario because Afghanistan.

Speaker 1 (42:43):
Yeah, but they both have governments that are like weeds
that have to be trimmed all the time, and we
don't have the resources. Are aware with all Afghanistan is
also award Pakistan. You know, you got all these continued wars.
So look what we visited this in two weeks. Who
knows by then, maybe it'll be over I doubt it.
But you know, it's the same problem that Israel had.

(43:05):
You need to have a day after plant, all right,
so after you win the war militarily, you're not going
to occupy the country.

Speaker 2 (43:13):
I mean that's you know that you want to, you
want to send three undred thousand American troops there and
deal with all that.

Speaker 3 (43:19):
That's just not going to happen.

Speaker 2 (43:21):
I mean, I think the thing is that if they
if if the United States is able to restrict them
from striking the straight up harmouse or dec on nation plants,
they'll say that's a wind because that essentially Iran's government
is basically constricted to their own country and they can't
do anything else, so they don't have a friendly regime.
Their ability to do anything is weakend, and their ability

(43:44):
to negotiate is weakend.

Speaker 1 (43:45):
Yeah, but it's a domino effect. Iran supplies the petroleum
oil products to countries that no longer will have them,
and we'll have to look elsewhere, which puts pressure on
a limited supply. So, I mean, it's a fascinating I know,
but I'd like to see what Vegas has. The odds.

Speaker 2 (44:04):
I hear there's fifty to fifty the war ends by
the end of the month on the different betting sites.
I think I think the real question is do the
Gulf countries then become very close with the American Israel
because the Iron's attack them directly, or they say, well,
this is a stupid security pact. We should just hedge
and deal with the Ron pragmatically.

Speaker 3 (44:25):
Or yeah. And then the other thing is the long term.

Speaker 2 (44:29):
This is going to hurt Ron economically because no one's
going to want to buy oil from the straight over
Moose from Iran if at any time they're.

Speaker 1 (44:36):
So oil is Ryan. Oil is like a drug. People
will do anything to get it.

Speaker 2 (44:40):
Man. But but will they go other places? And would
the because there's one pipeline in Saudi Arabia taking the oil,
especially away from the straight bar Moose to the other
the river, the other straight on the other side. Will
there be ten and then and then that's a different.

Speaker 1 (44:57):
We have a minute for seconds, all right, who at NCAA.
Who you picking art? I'm gonna say Michigan right now,
all right, Brian.

Speaker 3 (45:06):
Yeah, I got Michigan.

Speaker 1 (45:07):
I've got Miami of Ohio.

Speaker 3 (45:10):
Right they lost the conference tournament?

Speaker 1 (45:12):
Oh did they?

Speaker 3 (45:12):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (45:13):
I take that back Santa Clara anyway. Eric Epstein, Millennial Brian.
This is thunder dun warrock. The capital art Selby is
producing us. We'll see you in two weeks. Schom y'all