Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Do you remember last summer when Kama came up with
that brilliant idea about no taxes on tips and all
the dums sit around her, clapping like sills, telling her
how brilliant she was, except for the fact that she
stole that idea from Trump who'd already promoted it. But
that was not well received. Vote was last night Every
(00:22):
single Democrat, all two hundred and twelve voted against. It
tells you what you need to know.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
People you know, like the talkback said, even a dumb
engineer can do it. Well, guess what even a dumb
lawyer can find it. I found how to do the
preset on the new free and redesign iHeart Radio app.
You know, just like you have in your car. The
iHeart Radio app users are loving just like you are,
(00:49):
the new industry first features. So go online right now,
go on to your little phone and do it. Said, kay,
how is your preset today on the iHeart Radio app?
And you know what, while you're doing it, go ahead
and set Freedom ninety three seven as a preset too,
so you can get the weekend of Michael Brown on
that Also, see how easy it is. If I can
(01:09):
do it, you can do it. Guess what happened last night.
Speaker 4 (01:13):
I loved that real quick. I just love the fact
that the app is brand new. It's a new redesign
and everything. And we've already got rules of engagements by
some of our favorite goobers to put that in the
rule of engagement talking about how awesome the new app is.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
I'm confused, what what? What's this phrase? Favorite goobers? They
admit it.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
You've got a couple one or two out of the twelve,
one maybe two.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
So last night the House of Representatives narrowly passed and
all in one big beautiful bill. Unexpectedly late last night,
the legislation had been pulled in the afternoon because it
appeared to be doa dead on arrival, but a lot
of Republicans dropped their opposition. Lawmakers then got called back
(02:12):
to Capitol Hill by Speaker Johnson in order to vote
to the legislation, which contains Trump's plans for no tax
on tips, no taxing, overtime, tax relief for senior citizens,
tax breaks for products manufactured in the United States, and
the requirement that budgets be at least deficit neutral.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
Now.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
It also plans some cuts to Medicaid, which you can
expect that heads will explode on well, on the left
and the right. Probably my head explodes simply because I'm
still and maybe one of you can help me understand this.
But they say they need to cut some of medicaid,
(02:55):
and they always pick Medicaid, and I think they picked
Medicaid because part of it is going to illegal aliens,
and I think we got to cut that off. There
was also, maybe in this bill, I'm not sure, but
there was also a proposal yesterday to cut food stamps
or any food programs from going to illegal aliens. And
(03:16):
I'm totally fine with that. I don't want illegal aliens
to come to this country, period, But I don't want
illegal aliens to come to this country and then starve
to death. But we should not, as taxpayers, be funding
SNAP or food stamps or whatever you want to call them,
whatever one of.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
The damn programs called.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
Now, we shouldn't be feeding stray cats that come into
this country. Now, that doesn't mean that I want them
to starve to death. But look specifically, and I'm not
referring to non government organizations. I am not referring to
NGOs that would simply get a grant under the guise
of some other name, and then use that grant again
(03:57):
federal tax dollars to pay themselves a big salary, and
then anything that's left over use that to then go
pay for food for illegal aliens. I'm not talking about
those NGOs, but I am talking about churches, charitable organizations,
nonprofit organizations. I'm talking about true like five oh one
c three nonprofit organizations that would then step up food banks, churches, synagogues, mosques, whatever,
(04:24):
of them providing food to people that cannot afford to
buy it. In particular, in this case, I'm talking about
illegal aliens. So whether that whether that actually ended up
being in this one big beautiful bill or not, I
don't know. But nonetheless I wanted to comment that I
happen to agree with that, and you can say that
I'm an ahole, which you probably do anyway.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
But.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
Why, why, why.
Speaker 3 (04:49):
Do we think that it is the obligation of taxpayers
to pay for food, transportation, housing, healthcare, education, whatever else
for someone who breaks the law and sneaks into this country.
If you, if you by you, I mean generically you
(05:13):
think that if people somehow manage to sneak across the
border and get here. If you think that there is
a moral obligation to then help them, you know, get
on their feet, or to help them, you know, find
a place to live, or to help them find food
to eat, or whatever else it is. I don't have
(05:34):
a problem with that. I don't think they should come
here in the first place, and I think we should
stop them from coming here. But if someone sneaks in
here and finally does get here, and then you feel
some moral obligation to take.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Care of them, then get off your eyes and go
do it.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Go, you know, go to your church, go to your synagogue,
go to your mosque, Go to your you know, business club,
Go to your you know, whatever it might be, chamber
of commerce, Go to your neighborhood, go to go to
next door, go to wherever. I don't care. But don't
come to the taxpayers, because I don't believe that this government,
which is us. By the way, let me remind you
(06:13):
of that. If you're starting to get your taxes ready, yeah,
that's you that's paying for all of this. I don't
think we have a moral obligation to do it. I
don't even think we have an ethical obligation on the
government to do it.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
Now.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
I do believe that we have as Christians, we have
a moral obligation to help those who are less fortunate
than us. But that is us, that's not the government us.
I've got a real bugaboo about that, and it drives
me crazy. And you know, I'd be curious what you
think if you think I'm being in ahole about it.
(06:49):
I mean, if you seriously think I'm being in ahole
about it, to explain to me why. Well, anyway, back
to the budget bill. So the budget bill includes and
I'm may or may not get this to this today.
I don't know how ready I am to talk about it,
but it does include some cuts to medicate. I don't
know specifically what those cuts are, but why it's It's like,
(07:16):
when we have a government shut down, let's find the
most in your face thing that we can do, Like,
you know, let's shut down the national parks. So when
Chevy Chasing his family are going to you know, just
to see some national park somewhere, they got to stop
the you know, the paneled station wagon at the gate
because they can't get through, and John Candy comes out.
(07:37):
I know that was Disneyland, but they come out and
they say that no, no, you can't come in. We
we're closed because the government's shut down. As oh, then
we run your vacation. What a bunch of crap, What
a total bunch of crap. But here's the rationale. We
have to cut these social welfare programs in this case
a in an entitlement program in order to pay for
(07:59):
the Trump tax cuts from what is it now, eight
years ago?
Speaker 1 (08:05):
Why why the revenues I don't think.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
I I don't think I bookmarked this. But let me
see if I have real quick But someone on X
yesterday pointed out that, oh, you know, if you look
at revenues from the time that the Trump tax cuts
were enacted until you get today, you realize that, oh
(08:32):
wait a minute, uh, we've actually had an increase in
the number of dollars coming into the US treasury in
spite of or I would say, because of those tax cuts.
I don't apparently I didn't book market, but you can
look it up. Revenues continue to increase. So why is
(08:55):
there a need to so called pay for the tax cuts?
And don't give me this crap for millionaires and billionaires either,
because it's not the tax cuts applied to everybody. One
way back to this bill, it passed strictly along partisan lines.
Two hundred and seventeen Republicans voted in favor, two hundred
and fifteen Democrats opposed, So the bill passed by a
(09:19):
margin of two votes.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
So now it's going to have to go to the.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
Senate, where the Senate has a slightly larger majority, and
those Republican senators are going to have to adopt it
to begin the budget reconciliation process. Now, ultimately, Republican lawmakers
intend to use reconciliation to address the budget, border security funding,
and an extension of those provisions in the Tax Cuts
(09:45):
and the Jobs Act of twenty seventeen. So that's where
we are this morning. I really hope that they that
they do it. I'll try to study more and understand
what the cuts are about medicaid or Medicare or medicaid.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
But I truly I'm confessing ignorance here.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
If if the tax brackets have been in place since
the passages of the tax cuts, and revenues continue to
increase into the treasury, then what is there What is
it about the tax cuts that we need to pay for?
Because the tax cuts seem to be paying for themselves,
(10:30):
so because if they weren't, there would be a decrease
in revenues and you'd have to cut the budget. So
this leads me to the only conclusion I think you
can make, and that is, because they want to increase
spending in other places, and because they want to increase
spending in other places, you got to find some place
to cut in order to get to a balanced budget. Well,
(10:52):
whoop pooped, you do. Uh, that's the way the real
world works, speaking of budgets. Remembermember, I think it was yesterday.
It's only hunt day, and I already don't remember one
day I talked about this, But I told you that
Governor Tony Evers, the Democrat in Wisconsin, wanted to get
rid of the word mother and father in all the
(11:14):
language and all the statues and everything else. Well he's
now defending a state budget proposal that would indeed change
the terms mother and father to inseminated person and spouse respectively.
Did you get it? So mother becomes inseminated person and
(11:37):
father becomes spouse. Now the terminology comes specifically from a
section of the budget pertaining to in vitual fertilization to
IV E and obviously Republican lawmakers, even Green Bay Packer's
legend Brett Fagg, had come out and said, this is stupid.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Why are we doing it?
Speaker 3 (12:00):
So, the IVF section of the Wisconsin budget is arguing
that the terminology changes are necessary because they're more inclusive,
and though even though mother and father are used elsewhere
in their one nine hundred and seventeen page budget document,
Ever's defended the changes, though his argument was so haphazard
(12:24):
that I think he was probably actually unaware of what
was actually in the budget. Ever said this, let me
just quote it. We wish to provide legal certainty and
protection to ensure that moms.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
Wait, wait a minute's say that again. Wait a minute.
Speaker 3 (12:47):
We wish to provide legal certainty and protection to ensure
that moms.
Speaker 4 (12:52):
Uh huh.
Speaker 3 (12:54):
I thought we were changing the language to insiminated persons.
So he can't even use the language that he puts
in the bill or that somebody slipped into the bill.
He can't even use it in a statement trying to
defend it anyway. Quote, we wish to provide legal certainty
and protection to ensure that moms can can access necessary care.
(13:15):
What the Republicans say is a lie. So of course
I'm pretty piste off about that. It gives people using
iv IVF legal certainty.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Moms are moms, dads are dads. What we want is
legal certainty. Now I'm kind of scratching my head here.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
Now.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
I the three or four stories that I looked at,
none of them stated that well, neither the governor or
the staff clarified how these terminology changes would actually increase
legal certainty a state a Wisconsin state repped by the
name of a Manda Nuduski and Nudit or whatever.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
Post it on X.
Speaker 3 (14:03):
If you believed moms or moms and dads or dads,
then there would be no need for this change. But
apparently Evers believes dads can be moms do and then,
of course, and I have to admit I've kind of
reached Look I before I say what I say, let
(14:25):
me just put a caveat in front of it before
your heads blow up. I love what Elon Musk is
doing in terms of DOGE. I think it's got a
lot more work to do. I think they're barely scratching
the surface, and I think they need to expand it,
and they need to grow it. But you know what
I am growing tired of. I'm growing tired of Elon
(14:47):
Musk inserting himself into every.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
Little thing going on.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
So I don't know why, but one story says quote likewise,
Elon Musk described the changes as messed up, and of
course they also include professional football legend Brett Favre called
Ever's proposal, I proposed terminology nonsense. Who cares what Elon
(15:18):
Musk has to say about it. You've got your job
over there. In fact, you've got several jobs. You've got SpaceX,
you got the Boring Company, you got Tesla, You've got
whatever other companies you have, and you've got your special
government employee position to start, you know, finding waste, fraud
and abuse and trying to make the government more efficient.
Speaker 1 (15:38):
So focus on that.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
I just because every story that I read yesterday, most
of which was from the dominant media, was from the cabal,
had to insert Elon Musk. And so I came to
this conclusion, and it is having an effect because I'm
tired of it. But I'm not tired of it because well,
maybe I am to you, which came first to check
under the egg. I'm tired of Elon Musk inserting himself
(16:06):
into every political story that comes about, just as I
get tired of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett or Peter
Thiel or anybody else inserting themselves into every story. Because
as much as the cabal tells us they hate millionaires
and billionaires, they really do love millionaires and billionaires, with
(16:27):
the exception, of course, of Elon Musk. So anytime they
can get Elon Musk to quote, to give them a quote,
or say something some offhanded remark about some issue that
has nothing to do with Doge or with Tesla or
with boring or with SpaceX, then they're going to insert
in the story and quiet frankly, I'm just started reading
about it. So you got to know when to hold them,
(16:51):
you got to know when to fold them, and you
got to know when to just shut up. And then
just as we're doing a pope re here, I voted
against it because I am indeed an Apple shareholder, but
apparently I was in the minority. So I guess once
(17:11):
again I'm the kid in the back of the room
going wait a minute, wait a minute. The shareholders, you know,
when we vote our proxy statements, have rejected a proposal
to halt Apple's DEI program even while other companies are
doing it. It was the initiative to end the woke
policies at Apple was led by the National Center for
(17:35):
Public Policy Research with A which is a conservative think tank.
And it showed up in your voting when you vote
your shares. It just showed up as a very It's
almost like a ballot issue. It just gave you a
simple thing, you know, should you know, a proposal for
the elimination of Apple's diversity, equity and Inclusion program, and
(17:57):
you vote for against or abstained, And of course I voted,
you know, I voted for the the shareholder proposal. Now,
a similar proposal was also rejected at costcos annual meeting.
But here's what Tim Cook said that I thought was
kind of stupid that Apple's culture relies on hiring exceptional
(18:19):
talent and fostering collaboration.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Well, if that's.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
True, then you don't need a DEI program, So all
you're doing is.
Speaker 1 (18:28):
Your virtue signaling.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
In fact, you went on to say, we've never had
quotas or targets for Apple, so then why do you
need DEI because you don't want Now Al Gore's will
one run on the board. Thank goodness, I voted against
al Gords several years ago too.
Speaker 6 (18:48):
You know, Michael, I'm trying to figure out why they
just don't put a requirement for medicaid.
Speaker 5 (18:55):
That no money.
Speaker 6 (18:57):
Shall go to illegulalien and force states to verify citizenship
of those they're giving them money to you, is that
would act as a cut without actually cutting it.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
Have good day, man, but you answered your own question.
Can you play it one more time?
Speaker 1 (19:20):
Dragon? Is a possible?
Speaker 3 (19:21):
Play it one more time? As I there was something,
be ready to stop it.
Speaker 6 (19:27):
You know, Michael, I'm trying to figure out why they
just don't put a requirement for medicaid that no money
shall go to illegal aliens and force states to verify
citizenship of those.
Speaker 3 (19:43):
There's your answer, because they don't want to force and
the states don't want to be forced to verify citizenship.
Speaker 4 (19:53):
Heck, if you don't even have to show an ID
to vote, exactly.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
You think they're going to require you? You think that
you're Can you let me paint the picture for you
here is let's just say it's a poor family from
Guatemala and they're in their rags and they've had a
really you know, they've paid all their money to the
Coyotes and they finally got over here, and now you
want them to go down to a uh to you know,
(20:20):
the Medicare Medicaid office and you know, verify that they
are American citizens. You cruel, sob shame on you, shame shame,
shame on you. We can't ask no stinking question like
are you a citizen of this country? Are you a
tax pay well getting asking? Don't ask your tax paying
(20:40):
citizen because you'll really get pissed off when you find
out how many people don't actually pay taxes in this country.
So there's your answer. You answer the question yourself. Because
they would have to verify IDs, they'd have to verify citizenship,
which is a good segue into the other thing I
(21:00):
wanted the popery I wanted to do this morning. So
Trump and his newly confirmed Commerce Secretary of Howard Lutnik,
announced yesterday that they're soon going to end the EB
five visa program. Now four nationals have been abusing this
program through fraud in order to cheaply purchase a green
cart officially known as a permanent residence cart. So the
(21:25):
announcement was made as Trump was fielding questions from the
press and the Oval Office, and it marks a hugely
significant shake up in the US visa system. Now, before
you get all been out of shape over this, numerous countries,
lots of countries have similar programs where you can essentially
(21:47):
buy your way into a dual citizenship. You agree to
invest so much money, you pay so much money, you
agree that you're going to start a business and hire
so many people. They're all different countries have all different
you know, one, two, or numerous requirements to buy your
(22:09):
way into citizenship and other countries. And quite honestly, I
don't have a problem with that because if you have
the wherewithal to pay in this case, five million dollars
or you're gonna you know, you have a business plan
where you are, uh, you know, with your own capital,
are going to come in and start a business and
you're going to hire let's just say, one hundred employees,
(22:30):
I have no problem granting your citizenship because isn't that
the kind of personally won in the country. Yeah, so
Trump yesterday and this is kind of becoming normal, which
in some ways kind of bothers me because it's it's
announcing policy during a press conference. Now that's not unusual,
(22:52):
but I freely admit I get a little nervous when
Donald Trump, of all people, starts policy while he's sitting
at the Resolute Well it's not actually the Resolute Desk
because I think it's been refurbished right now, but he's
sitting in the Oval office signing, you know, executive orders,
and he we're going to.
Speaker 5 (23:11):
Be doing something else. It's going to be very, very good.
Speaker 7 (23:14):
We're going to be selling a gold card.
Speaker 5 (23:20):
Do you have a green card? This is a gold card.
We're going to be putting a price on that card.
Speaker 3 (23:25):
I just love a gold card. You know, American Express
has a platinum card. I think he missed an opportunity here.
We don't need no steaking green card. We don't need
no steaking gold card. I want a platinum card. I
want it to be a platinum.
Speaker 8 (23:42):
About five million dollars, and that's going to give you
a green card privileges, plus it's going.
Speaker 5 (23:47):
To be a route to citizenship.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
Do I get lounge access if I get one of
these gold cards? Do I get access to all of
the airport lounges? I mean, because that's that's what I
really care about. Do I get free check bags?
Speaker 8 (24:02):
And wealthy people will be coming into our country by
buying this card. They'll be wealthy and they'll be successful,
and they'll be spending a lot of money and paying
a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
And God, did a lot of you have a problem
with that? I don't. I don't.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
It's not unprecedented, uh, as I said earlier, lots of
other countries do it. I just I just find it
funny that we're going to be a gold card. I
wanted to be a platinum card.
Speaker 8 (24:29):
And we think it's going to be extremely successful and
never been done.
Speaker 5 (24:32):
Before or anything like this, but it's something.
Speaker 8 (24:34):
That we're going to be putting out over the next
would you say, two weeks out, do you want to speak.
Speaker 5 (24:38):
A couple of words about it?
Speaker 9 (24:39):
Sure?
Speaker 5 (24:40):
Had appoint a second?
Speaker 8 (24:42):
Do you have to invest a certain amount of money
in this country in order to qualify for that goal card?
Speaker 1 (24:48):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (24:48):
Exactly.
Speaker 7 (24:49):
So the EB five program was really you lend some money,
but it was all it was full of nonsense, make
believe in fraud, and it was way to get a
green card that was low priced.
Speaker 10 (25:03):
So the President said, rather than having this sort of
ridiculous EB five program. We're going to end the EB
five program. We're going to replace it with the Trump
Gold Card, which is really a green.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
The Trump Gold Card. I love it.
Speaker 3 (25:17):
I wonder when you get it if it'll have like
you know, Trump embossed across it.
Speaker 10 (25:23):
OM card gold so they'll be able to pay five
million dollars to the US government, don't have to go
through vetting.
Speaker 11 (25:28):
Of course, we're going to make sure they are wonderful,
world class global citizens.
Speaker 10 (25:33):
They can come to America, the President can give them
a green card, and they can invest in America, and
we can use that money to reduce our deficit. Why
do we give out lotteries of green cards? Why do
we give out EB five for green cards?
Speaker 11 (25:48):
President of the United States understands that the right answer
is why don't we eliminate the deficit of the United
States of America.
Speaker 5 (25:55):
Into state and for gold cards a gold card, well villion.
Speaker 8 (26:00):
But the Goal card will bring in with it people
that create jobs, very high level people.
Speaker 5 (26:10):
I think companies will pay to get people in.
Speaker 8 (26:12):
For instance, you today graduate from the Wharton School of
Finance or Harvard or Stafford or any college, and nobody
knows if you can even go to work for a company.
So Apple and all these companies that want to get
people to be working for them will be able to
(26:32):
buy a card. And for the people that are number
one in that class and top schools, I see that
as one of the things.
Speaker 5 (26:40):
But generally speaking, it'll be people with money and people they.
Speaker 8 (26:43):
Create jobs, and they won't have to pay any tax
on income outside.
Speaker 5 (26:48):
Of the United States, which are not paying right now.
Speaker 8 (26:50):
They're not citizens, but they'll have to pay if they
create jobs in the United States, they'll pay full taxes
like everybody else. So you're getting big taxpayers, big job
or do. And we'll be able to sell maybe a
million of these cards, maybe.
Speaker 5 (27:05):
More than that. And if you add up the numbers
they're pretty good.
Speaker 8 (27:08):
As an example, a million cards would be worth five
trillion dollars five trillion, and if you sell ten million
of the cards, that's a total of fifty trillion dollars.
Speaker 5 (27:21):
Well, we have thirty five trillion dragon.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
I don't think that map's right. A million cards at
five million apiece, is that right? We're getting into the
trillions of dollars and debt.
Speaker 8 (27:38):
That'd be nice, So we'll see. But it could be great.
Maybe it will be fantastic. We have it all worked out.
From the legal standpoint, it's totally legal to do. Hasn't
been done before, It's been done in many different forms.
We give them away. Why should we give them away?
We shouldn't give them away. And I think it's something
(28:02):
very exciting. I think it's potentially just something that we're
all very excited about now.
Speaker 3 (28:08):
I think that under the existing EB five visa program,
he is the authority to do this, because Congress is
already granted the President his executive authority under the Immigration
and Naturalization Act to do these kinds of programs. He's
just going to revamp it and say, look, we've looked
(28:28):
at the cost of these, We've looked at the fraud involved,
we looked at how people are buying it on the cheap.
So we're going to increase the cost of this. It's like,
you don't go to Congress to get an increase in
the cost of entry to Rocky Mountain National Park. The
Park Service decides that, well, so can the Department of Commerce,
and so can the Department of Owned Insecurity under their
existing authorities decide to do it. But then I kept thinking,
(28:52):
But what's the left going to say about this? Can't
you just hear Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren why we're
just turning this country into an oligarchy. We're now selling citizenship.
I'd rather sell citizenship to producers than to give away
(29:13):
citizenship to non producers. In other words, let's let the
producers who understand that the benefits are coming to this
country is that they can create even more wealth by
creating jobs and building companies and doing all of that.
I'm all for that, as opposed to the takers that
we talked about earlier that just come here because well,
(29:35):
they live in a craphole country, and so they want
to come into a non craphole country where they can
get all these benefits that you know, you and I
are paying for. So I don't know, I just I
found it fascinating. And of course I can't help the
last because the Trump Guard, we're gonna call it the
Trump Guard. Okay, I still want to know, do I
get uh, do I get to check my bags free?
(29:58):
And do I get to board first? Do I get
to board first? Do I get to stand in the
line first?
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (30:03):
This is this is the kind of stuff will tall people.
That will cause people on the left for their heads
to absolutely explode. Now, if you're on the right and
it causes your head to explode, I kind of like
to know why, because this program already exists. We're just changing.
(30:23):
It's kind of like you're going through the grocery store
and you're just remarking the prices on the cans of
porking beans instead of or the price of eggs instead of,
you know, a dollar forty nine a dozen, Now it's
fourteen ninety nine a dozen.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
Michael.
Speaker 9 (30:37):
There was a time in this country when they didn't
expect the government to give hand us to everyone who's
underprivileged or downtrodden or whatever. It was up to private
individuals and the church.
Speaker 3 (30:54):
Well, those days are long gone. In fact, we've reached
the point now where in the city County of Denver,
they're going to tell you, if you own land, whether
or not you can build a gas station on it.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
Bill Council members sponsoring the new ordinance say the new
policy is meant to help address the city's housing crisis
and food desert Fox.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Yeah, think about that. By banning gas stations, i e.
Convenience stores, you're going to help eliminate food desert. So
you're going to take away now the most convenience stores.
I stopped the circle K this morning. I didn't see
any Oh, there may have been some bananas or something
in there, maybe some apples, but there weren't like a
lot of fresh veggies or anything. But now you can't
(31:35):
even buy tater chips. Nope, can't even do that.
Speaker 7 (31:37):
The cent Aianus takes a deeper dive into that story
for us tonight.
Speaker 12 (31:42):
This is an area that will be impacted by the
Denver City Council's vote last night. For example, there was
a company that wanted to build a big gas station
in this area, right near I seventy and Peoria, but that.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
Will not happen now. And here's why.
Speaker 12 (31:55):
There's a gas station right here, and then another one
right behind.
Speaker 1 (31:59):
Me bleet too close.
Speaker 12 (32:02):
There were plans to build a third gas station at
the corner of I seventy and Peoria, near the Montbelo neighborhood,
but the new City Ordinance prevents construction of new gas
stations within a quarter of a mile of an existing
gas station or light rail station. And there are others
here already.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Now, why would you not want a gas station built
near a light rail station, because I'm thinking, like, over here,
there's a light rail station not far far from us,
about a mile away, And if I park there and
I get back in my car when I get done
with work and I realize, oh, I need some gas,
wouldn't it be nice to have a gas station right there?
Well there happened to be, Well, there's only one left
(32:42):
right now because there's the McDonald's and the Lexus Dealer
and then the the high rises the night, it would
be convenient to have it in the one gas station
that's left. If you want to get to from the
light rail, you got to make this or two of
this route all the way around get so you can
pull into it.
Speaker 1 (33:01):
But they don't care about that.
Speaker 12 (33:03):
Levi Lee lives in the neighborhood.
Speaker 3 (33:05):
Now, listen to this guy. They find the dumbest guy
they can to ask him what he thinks about limiting
gas stations.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
He said, there's a lot of gas stations so here.
Speaker 3 (33:16):
I'm no, I'm not gonna lie, man, And it really
necessess up to describe.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
I mean, you got seven to eleven right down there.
You gotta you got some more gas stations, right down there.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
You got I wonder if the guy even owns a car,
because he's out just walking his dog.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
So Denverright has has the story.
Speaker 12 (33:37):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Their sponsors say the band will open up more land
for housing, restaurants, and other uses. So they're already deciding
what private property ownership. They're already deciding what you should
use your own property for. The painting of Office says
that gas stations consume a large amount of land for
the purposes of vehicle parking and maneuvering, and are known
(34:00):
for low wage retail jobs. Are their jobs? Their jobs?
Commercial real estate developers objected to the new law as
an unconstitutional overreach that would stifle development in Denver. Those
damned developers always citing something like the Constitution. But City
(34:22):
council members Diana Romero Campbell, Amanda Sawyer, and Paul Poschmann
Cashman sponsored the bill. It passed on a twelve to
one vote. It prohibits within a quarter mile of an
existing station, within a quarter mile of a transit station platform,
within three hundred feet of low intensity residential zone districts
(34:44):
dedicated to single into unit buildings. It even says that
existing stations also could face new limits. If they fall
into those categories, they could be blocked from adding more
gas pumps, though they could add e TV chargers if
they replace the existing gas pots. And then the catch all,
(35:08):
Oh yeah, the zoning administrator can waive the restrictions if
it's coupled with oh, King Supers or another large retailer, Costco.
So M Costco and King Supers get exemptions, but just
Circle K does not. We not have a constitutional problem.
Michael.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Do you remember last summer when Kama came up with
that brilliant idea about no taxes on tips and all
the dums sit around her, clapping like sills, telling her
how brilliant she was, except for the fact that she
stole that idea from Trump who'd already promoted it. But
that was not well received. Vote was last night Every
(00:22):
single Democrat, all two hundred and twelve voted against. It
tells you what you need to know.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
People you know, like the talkback said, even a dumb
engineer can do it. Well, guess what even a dumb
lawyer can find it. I found how to do the
preset on the new free and redesign iHeart Radio app.
You know, just like you have in your car. The
iHeart Radio app users are loving just like you are,
(00:49):
the new industry first features. So go online right now,
go on to your little phone and do it. Said, kay,
how is your preset today on the iHeart Radio app?
And you know what, while you're doing it, go ahead
and set Freedom ninety three seven as a preset too,
so you can get the weekend of Michael Brown on
that Also, see how easy it is. If I can
(01:09):
do it, you can do it. Guess what happened last night.
Speaker 4 (01:13):
I loved that real quick. I just love the fact
that the app is brand new. It's a new redesign
and everything. And we've already got rules of engagements by
some of our favorite goobers to put that in the
rule of engagement talking about how awesome the new app is.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
I'm confused, what what? What's this phrase? Favorite goobers? They
admit it.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
You've got a couple one or two out of the twelve,
one maybe two.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
So last night the House of Representatives narrowly passed and
all in one big beautiful bill. Unexpectedly late last night,
the legislation had been pulled in the afternoon because it
appeared to be doa dead on arrival, but a lot
of Republicans dropped their opposition. Lawmakers then got called back
(02:12):
to Capitol Hill by Speaker Johnson in order to vote
to the legislation, which contains Trump's plans for no tax
on tips, no taxing, overtime, tax relief for senior citizens,
tax breaks for products manufactured in the United States, and
the requirement that budgets be at least deficit neutral.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
Now.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
It also plans some cuts to Medicaid, which you can
expect that heads will explode on well, on the left
and the right. Probably my head explodes simply because I'm
still and maybe one of you can help me understand this.
But they say they need to cut some of medicaid,
(02:55):
and they always pick Medicaid, and I think they picked
Medicaid because part of it is going to illegal aliens,
and I think we got to cut that off. There
was also, maybe in this bill, I'm not sure, but
there was also a proposal yesterday to cut food stamps
or any food programs from going to illegal aliens. And
(03:16):
I'm totally fine with that. I don't want illegal aliens
to come to this country, period, But I don't want
illegal aliens to come to this country and then starve
to death. But we should not, as taxpayers, be funding
SNAP or food stamps or whatever you want to call them,
whatever one of.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
The damn programs called.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
Now, we shouldn't be feeding stray cats that come into
this country. Now, that doesn't mean that I want them
to starve to death. But look specifically, and I'm not
referring to non government organizations. I am not referring to
NGOs that would simply get a grant under the guise
of some other name, and then use that grant again
(03:57):
federal tax dollars to pay themselves a big salary, and
then anything that's left over use that to then go
pay for food for illegal aliens. I'm not talking about
those NGOs, but I am talking about churches, charitable organizations,
nonprofit organizations. I'm talking about true like five oh one
c three nonprofit organizations that would then step up food banks, churches, synagogues, mosques, whatever,
(04:24):
of them providing food to people that cannot afford to
buy it. In particular, in this case, I'm talking about
illegal aliens. So whether that whether that actually ended up
being in this one big beautiful bill or not, I
don't know. But nonetheless I wanted to comment that I
happen to agree with that, and you can say that
I'm an ahole, which you probably do anyway.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
But.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
Why, why, why.
Speaker 3 (04:49):
Do we think that it is the obligation of taxpayers
to pay for food, transportation, housing, healthcare, education, whatever else
for someone who breaks the law and sneaks into this country.
If you, if you by you, I mean generically you
(05:13):
think that if people somehow manage to sneak across the
border and get here. If you think that there is
a moral obligation to then help them, you know, get
on their feet, or to help them, you know, find
a place to live, or to help them find food
to eat, or whatever else it is. I don't have
(05:34):
a problem with that. I don't think they should come
here in the first place, and I think we should
stop them from coming here. But if someone sneaks in
here and finally does get here, and then you feel
some moral obligation to take.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Care of them, then get off your eyes and go
do it.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Go, you know, go to your church, go to your synagogue,
go to your mosque, Go to your you know, business club,
Go to your you know, whatever it might be, chamber
of commerce, Go to your neighborhood, go to go to
next door, go to wherever. I don't care. But don't
come to the taxpayers, because I don't believe that this government,
which is us. By the way, let me remind you
(06:13):
of that. If you're starting to get your taxes ready, yeah,
that's you that's paying for all of this. I don't
think we have a moral obligation to do it. I
don't even think we have an ethical obligation on the
government to do it.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
Now.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
I do believe that we have as Christians, we have
a moral obligation to help those who are less fortunate
than us. But that is us, that's not the government us.
I've got a real bugaboo about that, and it drives
me crazy. And you know, I'd be curious what you
think if you think I'm being in ahole about it.
(06:49):
I mean, if you seriously think I'm being in ahole
about it, to explain to me why. Well, anyway, back
to the budget bill. So the budget bill includes and
I'm may or may not get this to this today.
I don't know how ready I am to talk about it,
but it does include some cuts to medicate. I don't
know specifically what those cuts are, but why it's It's like,
(07:16):
when we have a government shut down, let's find the
most in your face thing that we can do, Like,
you know, let's shut down the national parks. So when
Chevy Chasing his family are going to you know, just
to see some national park somewhere, they got to stop
the you know, the paneled station wagon at the gate
because they can't get through, and John Candy comes out.
(07:37):
I know that was Disneyland, but they come out and
they say that no, no, you can't come in. We
we're closed because the government's shut down. As oh, then
we run your vacation. What a bunch of crap, What
a total bunch of crap. But here's the rationale. We
have to cut these social welfare programs in this case
a in an entitlement program in order to pay for
(07:59):
the Trump tax cuts from what is it now, eight
years ago?
Speaker 1 (08:05):
Why why the revenues I don't think.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
I I don't think I bookmarked this. But let me
see if I have real quick But someone on X
yesterday pointed out that, oh, you know, if you look
at revenues from the time that the Trump tax cuts
were enacted until you get today, you realize that, oh
(08:32):
wait a minute, uh, we've actually had an increase in
the number of dollars coming into the US treasury in
spite of or I would say, because of those tax cuts.
I don't apparently I didn't book market, but you can
look it up. Revenues continue to increase. So why is
(08:55):
there a need to so called pay for the tax cuts?
And don't give me this crap for millionaires and billionaires either,
because it's not the tax cuts applied to everybody. One
way back to this bill, it passed strictly along partisan lines.
Two hundred and seventeen Republicans voted in favor, two hundred
and fifteen Democrats opposed, So the bill passed by a
(09:19):
margin of two votes.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
So now it's going to have to go to the.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
Senate, where the Senate has a slightly larger majority, and
those Republican senators are going to have to adopt it
to begin the budget reconciliation process. Now, ultimately, Republican lawmakers
intend to use reconciliation to address the budget, border security funding,
and an extension of those provisions in the Tax Cuts
(09:45):
and the Jobs Act of twenty seventeen. So that's where
we are this morning. I really hope that they that
they do it. I'll try to study more and understand
what the cuts are about medicaid or Medicare or medicaid.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
But I truly I'm confessing ignorance here.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
If if the tax brackets have been in place since
the passages of the tax cuts, and revenues continue to
increase into the treasury, then what is there What is
it about the tax cuts that we need to pay for?
Because the tax cuts seem to be paying for themselves,
(10:30):
so because if they weren't, there would be a decrease
in revenues and you'd have to cut the budget. So
this leads me to the only conclusion I think you
can make, and that is, because they want to increase
spending in other places, and because they want to increase
spending in other places, you got to find some place
to cut in order to get to a balanced budget. Well,
(10:52):
whoop pooped, you do. Uh, that's the way the real
world works, speaking of budgets. Remembermember, I think it was yesterday.
It's only hunt day, and I already don't remember one
day I talked about this, But I told you that
Governor Tony Evers, the Democrat in Wisconsin, wanted to get
rid of the word mother and father in all the
(11:14):
language and all the statues and everything else. Well he's
now defending a state budget proposal that would indeed change
the terms mother and father to inseminated person and spouse respectively.
Did you get it? So mother becomes inseminated person and
(11:37):
father becomes spouse. Now the terminology comes specifically from a
section of the budget pertaining to in vitual fertilization to
IV E and obviously Republican lawmakers, even Green Bay Packer's
legend Brett Fagg, had come out and said, this is stupid.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Why are we doing it?
Speaker 3 (12:00):
So, the IVF section of the Wisconsin budget is arguing
that the terminology changes are necessary because they're more inclusive,
and though even though mother and father are used elsewhere
in their one nine hundred and seventeen page budget document,
Ever's defended the changes, though his argument was so haphazard
(12:24):
that I think he was probably actually unaware of what
was actually in the budget. Ever said this, let me
just quote it. We wish to provide legal certainty and
protection to ensure that moms.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
Wait, wait a minute's say that again. Wait a minute.
Speaker 3 (12:47):
We wish to provide legal certainty and protection to ensure
that moms.
Speaker 4 (12:52):
Uh huh.
Speaker 3 (12:54):
I thought we were changing the language to insiminated persons.
So he can't even use the language that he puts
in the bill or that somebody slipped into the bill.
He can't even use it in a statement trying to
defend it anyway. Quote, we wish to provide legal certainty
and protection to ensure that moms can can access necessary care.
(13:15):
What the Republicans say is a lie. So of course
I'm pretty piste off about that. It gives people using
iv IVF legal certainty.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Moms are moms, dads are dads. What we want is
legal certainty. Now I'm kind of scratching my head here.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
Now.
Speaker 3 (13:37):
I the three or four stories that I looked at,
none of them stated that well, neither the governor or
the staff clarified how these terminology changes would actually increase
legal certainty a state a Wisconsin state repped by the
name of a Manda Nuduski and Nudit or whatever.
Speaker 1 (14:01):
Post it on X.
Speaker 3 (14:03):
If you believed moms or moms and dads or dads,
then there would be no need for this change. But
apparently Evers believes dads can be moms do and then,
of course, and I have to admit I've kind of
reached Look I before I say what I say, let
(14:25):
me just put a caveat in front of it before
your heads blow up. I love what Elon Musk is
doing in terms of DOGE. I think it's got a
lot more work to do. I think they're barely scratching
the surface, and I think they need to expand it,
and they need to grow it. But you know what
I am growing tired of. I'm growing tired of Elon
(14:47):
Musk inserting himself into every.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
Little thing going on.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
So I don't know why, but one story says quote likewise,
Elon Musk described the changes as messed up, and of
course they also include professional football legend Brett Favre called
Ever's proposal, I proposed terminology nonsense. Who cares what Elon
(15:18):
Musk has to say about it. You've got your job
over there. In fact, you've got several jobs. You've got SpaceX,
you got the Boring Company, you got Tesla, You've got
whatever other companies you have, and you've got your special
government employee position to start, you know, finding waste, fraud
and abuse and trying to make the government more efficient.
Speaker 1 (15:38):
So focus on that.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
I just because every story that I read yesterday, most
of which was from the dominant media, was from the cabal,
had to insert Elon Musk. And so I came to
this conclusion, and it is having an effect because I'm
tired of it. But I'm not tired of it because well,
maybe I am to you, which came first to check
under the egg. I'm tired of Elon Musk inserting himself
(16:06):
into every political story that comes about, just as I
get tired of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett or Peter
Thiel or anybody else inserting themselves into every story. Because
as much as the cabal tells us they hate millionaires
and billionaires, they really do love millionaires and billionaires, with
(16:27):
the exception, of course, of Elon Musk. So anytime they
can get Elon Musk to quote, to give them a quote,
or say something some offhanded remark about some issue that
has nothing to do with Doge or with Tesla or
with boring or with SpaceX, then they're going to insert
in the story and quiet frankly, I'm just started reading
about it. So you got to know when to hold them,
(16:51):
you got to know when to fold them, and you
got to know when to just shut up. And then
just as we're doing a pope re here, I voted
against it because I am indeed an Apple shareholder, but
apparently I was in the minority. So I guess once
(17:11):
again I'm the kid in the back of the room
going wait a minute, wait a minute. The shareholders, you know,
when we vote our proxy statements, have rejected a proposal
to halt Apple's DEI program even while other companies are
doing it. It was the initiative to end the woke
policies at Apple was led by the National Center for
(17:35):
Public Policy Research with A which is a conservative think tank.
And it showed up in your voting when you vote
your shares. It just showed up as a very It's
almost like a ballot issue. It just gave you a
simple thing, you know, should you know, a proposal for
the elimination of Apple's diversity, equity and Inclusion program, and
(17:57):
you vote for against or abstained, And of course I voted,
you know, I voted for the the shareholder proposal. Now,
a similar proposal was also rejected at costcos annual meeting.
But here's what Tim Cook said that I thought was
kind of stupid that Apple's culture relies on hiring exceptional
(18:19):
talent and fostering collaboration.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Well, if that's.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
True, then you don't need a DEI program, So all
you're doing is.
Speaker 1 (18:28):
Your virtue signaling.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
In fact, you went on to say, we've never had
quotas or targets for Apple, so then why do you
need DEI because you don't want Now Al Gore's will
one run on the board. Thank goodness, I voted against
al Gords several years ago too.
Speaker 6 (18:48):
You know, Michael, I'm trying to figure out why they
just don't put a requirement for medicaid.
Speaker 5 (18:55):
That no money.
Speaker 6 (18:57):
Shall go to illegulalien and force states to verify citizenship
of those they're giving them money to you, is that
would act as a cut without actually cutting it.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
Have good day, man, but you answered your own question.
Can you play it one more time?
Speaker 1 (19:20):
Dragon? Is a possible?
Speaker 3 (19:21):
Play it one more time? As I there was something,
be ready to stop it.
Speaker 6 (19:27):
You know, Michael, I'm trying to figure out why they
just don't put a requirement for medicaid that no money
shall go to illegal aliens and force states to verify
citizenship of those.
Speaker 3 (19:43):
There's your answer, because they don't want to force and
the states don't want to be forced to verify citizenship.
Speaker 4 (19:53):
Heck, if you don't even have to show an ID
to vote, exactly.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
You think they're going to require you? You think that
you're Can you let me paint the picture for you
here is let's just say it's a poor family from
Guatemala and they're in their rags and they've had a
really you know, they've paid all their money to the
Coyotes and they finally got over here, and now you
want them to go down to a uh to you know,
(20:20):
the Medicare Medicaid office and you know, verify that they
are American citizens. You cruel, sob shame on you, shame shame,
shame on you. We can't ask no stinking question like
are you a citizen of this country? Are you a
tax pay well getting asking? Don't ask your tax paying
(20:40):
citizen because you'll really get pissed off when you find
out how many people don't actually pay taxes in this country.
So there's your answer. You answer the question yourself. Because
they would have to verify IDs, they'd have to verify citizenship,
which is a good segue into the other thing I
(21:00):
wanted the popery I wanted to do this morning. So
Trump and his newly confirmed Commerce Secretary of Howard Lutnik,
announced yesterday that they're soon going to end the EB
five visa program. Now four nationals have been abusing this
program through fraud in order to cheaply purchase a green
cart officially known as a permanent residence cart. So the
(21:25):
announcement was made as Trump was fielding questions from the
press and the Oval Office, and it marks a hugely
significant shake up in the US visa system. Now, before
you get all been out of shape over this, numerous countries,
lots of countries have similar programs where you can essentially
(21:47):
buy your way into a dual citizenship. You agree to
invest so much money, you pay so much money, you
agree that you're going to start a business and hire
so many people. They're all different countries have all different
you know, one, two, or numerous requirements to buy your
(22:09):
way into citizenship and other countries. And quite honestly, I
don't have a problem with that because if you have
the wherewithal to pay in this case, five million dollars
or you're gonna you know, you have a business plan
where you are, uh, you know, with your own capital,
are going to come in and start a business and
you're going to hire let's just say, one hundred employees,
(22:30):
I have no problem granting your citizenship because isn't that
the kind of personally won in the country. Yeah, so
Trump yesterday and this is kind of becoming normal, which
in some ways kind of bothers me because it's it's
announcing policy during a press conference. Now that's not unusual,
(22:52):
but I freely admit I get a little nervous when
Donald Trump, of all people, starts policy while he's sitting
at the Resolute Well it's not actually the Resolute Desk
because I think it's been refurbished right now, but he's
sitting in the Oval office signing, you know, executive orders,
and he we're going to.
Speaker 5 (23:11):
Be doing something else. It's going to be very, very good.
Speaker 7 (23:14):
We're going to be selling a gold card.
Speaker 5 (23:20):
Do you have a green card? This is a gold card.
We're going to be putting a price on that card.
Speaker 3 (23:25):
I just love a gold card. You know, American Express
has a platinum card. I think he missed an opportunity here.
We don't need no steaking green card. We don't need
no steaking gold card. I want a platinum card. I
want it to be a platinum.
Speaker 8 (23:42):
About five million dollars, and that's going to give you
a green card privileges, plus it's going.
Speaker 5 (23:47):
To be a route to citizenship.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
Do I get lounge access if I get one of
these gold cards? Do I get access to all of
the airport lounges? I mean, because that's that's what I
really care about. Do I get free check bags?
Speaker 8 (24:02):
And wealthy people will be coming into our country by
buying this card. They'll be wealthy and they'll be successful,
and they'll be spending a lot of money and paying
a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
And God, did a lot of you have a problem
with that? I don't. I don't.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
It's not unprecedented, uh, as I said earlier, lots of
other countries do it. I just I just find it
funny that we're going to be a gold card. I
wanted to be a platinum card.
Speaker 8 (24:29):
And we think it's going to be extremely successful and
never been done.
Speaker 5 (24:32):
Before or anything like this, but it's something.
Speaker 8 (24:34):
That we're going to be putting out over the next
would you say, two weeks out, do you want to speak.
Speaker 5 (24:38):
A couple of words about it?
Speaker 9 (24:39):
Sure?
Speaker 5 (24:40):
Had appoint a second?
Speaker 8 (24:42):
Do you have to invest a certain amount of money
in this country in order to qualify for that goal card?
Speaker 1 (24:48):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (24:48):
Exactly.
Speaker 7 (24:49):
So the EB five program was really you lend some money,
but it was all it was full of nonsense, make
believe in fraud, and it was way to get a
green card that was low priced.
Speaker 10 (25:03):
So the President said, rather than having this sort of
ridiculous EB five program. We're going to end the EB
five program. We're going to replace it with the Trump
Gold Card, which is really a green.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
The Trump Gold Card. I love it.
Speaker 3 (25:17):
I wonder when you get it if it'll have like
you know, Trump embossed across it.
Speaker 10 (25:23):
OM card gold so they'll be able to pay five
million dollars to the US government, don't have to go
through vetting.
Speaker 11 (25:28):
Of course, we're going to make sure they are wonderful,
world class global citizens.
Speaker 10 (25:33):
They can come to America, the President can give them
a green card, and they can invest in America, and
we can use that money to reduce our deficit. Why
do we give out lotteries of green cards? Why do
we give out EB five for green cards?
Speaker 11 (25:48):
President of the United States understands that the right answer
is why don't we eliminate the deficit of the United
States of America.
Speaker 5 (25:55):
Into state and for gold cards a gold card, well villion.
Speaker 8 (26:00):
But the Goal card will bring in with it people
that create jobs, very high level people.
Speaker 5 (26:10):
I think companies will pay to get people in.
Speaker 8 (26:12):
For instance, you today graduate from the Wharton School of
Finance or Harvard or Stafford or any college, and nobody
knows if you can even go to work for a company.
So Apple and all these companies that want to get
people to be working for them will be able to
(26:32):
buy a card. And for the people that are number
one in that class and top schools, I see that
as one of the things.
Speaker 5 (26:40):
But generally speaking, it'll be people with money and people they.
Speaker 8 (26:43):
Create jobs, and they won't have to pay any tax
on income outside.
Speaker 5 (26:48):
Of the United States, which are not paying right now.
Speaker 8 (26:50):
They're not citizens, but they'll have to pay if they
create jobs in the United States, they'll pay full taxes
like everybody else. So you're getting big taxpayers, big job
or do. And we'll be able to sell maybe a
million of these cards, maybe.
Speaker 5 (27:05):
More than that. And if you add up the numbers
they're pretty good.
Speaker 8 (27:08):
As an example, a million cards would be worth five
trillion dollars five trillion, and if you sell ten million
of the cards, that's a total of fifty trillion dollars.
Speaker 5 (27:21):
Well, we have thirty five trillion dragon.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
I don't think that map's right. A million cards at
five million apiece, is that right? We're getting into the
trillions of dollars and debt.
Speaker 8 (27:38):
That'd be nice, So we'll see. But it could be great.
Maybe it will be fantastic. We have it all worked out.
From the legal standpoint, it's totally legal to do. Hasn't
been done before, It's been done in many different forms.
We give them away. Why should we give them away?
We shouldn't give them away. And I think it's something
(28:02):
very exciting. I think it's potentially just something that we're
all very excited about now.
Speaker 3 (28:08):
I think that under the existing EB five visa program,
he is the authority to do this, because Congress is
already granted the President his executive authority under the Immigration
and Naturalization Act to do these kinds of programs. He's
just going to revamp it and say, look, we've looked
(28:28):
at the cost of these, We've looked at the fraud involved,
we looked at how people are buying it on the cheap.
So we're going to increase the cost of this. It's like,
you don't go to Congress to get an increase in
the cost of entry to Rocky Mountain National Park. The
Park Service decides that, well, so can the Department of Commerce,
and so can the Department of Owned Insecurity under their
existing authorities decide to do it. But then I kept thinking,
(28:52):
But what's the left going to say about this? Can't
you just hear Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren why we're
just turning this country into an oligarchy. We're now selling citizenship.
I'd rather sell citizenship to producers than to give away
(29:13):
citizenship to non producers. In other words, let's let the
producers who understand that the benefits are coming to this
country is that they can create even more wealth by
creating jobs and building companies and doing all of that.
I'm all for that, as opposed to the takers that
we talked about earlier that just come here because well,
(29:35):
they live in a craphole country, and so they want
to come into a non craphole country where they can
get all these benefits that you know, you and I
are paying for. So I don't know, I just I
found it fascinating. And of course I can't help the
last because the Trump Guard, we're gonna call it the
Trump Guard. Okay, I still want to know, do I
get uh, do I get to check my bags free?
(29:58):
And do I get to board first? Do I get
to board first? Do I get to stand in the
line first?
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (30:03):
This is this is the kind of stuff will tall people.
That will cause people on the left for their heads
to absolutely explode. Now, if you're on the right and
it causes your head to explode, I kind of like
to know why, because this program already exists. We're just changing.
(30:23):
It's kind of like you're going through the grocery store
and you're just remarking the prices on the cans of
porking beans instead of or the price of eggs instead of,
you know, a dollar forty nine a dozen, Now it's
fourteen ninety nine a dozen.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
Michael.
Speaker 9 (30:37):
There was a time in this country when they didn't
expect the government to give hand us to everyone who's
underprivileged or downtrodden or whatever. It was up to private
individuals and the church.
Speaker 3 (30:54):
Well, those days are long gone. In fact, we've reached
the point now where in the city County of Denver,
they're going to tell you, if you own land, whether
or not you can build a gas station on it.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
Bill Council members sponsoring the new ordinance say the new
policy is meant to help address the city's housing crisis
and food desert Fox.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Yeah, think about that. By banning gas stations, i e.
Convenience stores, you're going to help eliminate food desert. So
you're going to take away now the most convenience stores.
I stopped the circle K this morning. I didn't see
any Oh, there may have been some bananas or something
in there, maybe some apples, but there weren't like a
lot of fresh veggies or anything. But now you can't
(31:35):
even buy tater chips. Nope, can't even do that.
Speaker 7 (31:37):
The cent Aianus takes a deeper dive into that story
for us tonight.
Speaker 12 (31:42):
This is an area that will be impacted by the
Denver City Council's vote last night. For example, there was
a company that wanted to build a big gas station
in this area, right near I seventy and Peoria, but that.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
Will not happen now. And here's why.
Speaker 12 (31:55):
There's a gas station right here, and then another one
right behind.
Speaker 1 (31:59):
Me bleet too close.
Speaker 12 (32:02):
There were plans to build a third gas station at
the corner of I seventy and Peoria, near the Montbelo neighborhood,
but the new City Ordinance prevents construction of new gas
stations within a quarter of a mile of an existing
gas station or light rail station. And there are others
here already.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Now, why would you not want a gas station built
near a light rail station, because I'm thinking, like, over here,
there's a light rail station not far far from us,
about a mile away, And if I park there and
I get back in my car when I get done
with work and I realize, oh, I need some gas,
wouldn't it be nice to have a gas station right there?
Well there happened to be, Well, there's only one left
(32:42):
right now because there's the McDonald's and the Lexus Dealer
and then the the high rises the night, it would
be convenient to have it in the one gas station
that's left. If you want to get to from the
light rail, you got to make this or two of
this route all the way around get so you can
pull into it.
Speaker 1 (33:01):
But they don't care about that.
Speaker 12 (33:03):
Levi Lee lives in the neighborhood.
Speaker 3 (33:05):
Now, listen to this guy. They find the dumbest guy
they can to ask him what he thinks about limiting
gas stations.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
He said, there's a lot of gas stations so here.
Speaker 3 (33:16):
I'm no, I'm not gonna lie, man, And it really
necessess up to describe.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
I mean, you got seven to eleven right down there.
You gotta you got some more gas stations, right down there.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
You got I wonder if the guy even owns a car,
because he's out just walking his dog.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
So Denverright has has the story.
Speaker 12 (33:37):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Their sponsors say the band will open up more land
for housing, restaurants, and other uses. So they're already deciding
what private property ownership. They're already deciding what you should
use your own property for. The painting of Office says
that gas stations consume a large amount of land for
the purposes of vehicle parking and maneuvering, and are known
(34:00):
for low wage retail jobs. Are their jobs? Their jobs?
Commercial real estate developers objected to the new law as
an unconstitutional overreach that would stifle development in Denver. Those
damned developers always citing something like the Constitution. But City
(34:22):
council members Diana Romero Campbell, Amanda Sawyer, and Paul Poschmann
Cashman sponsored the bill. It passed on a twelve to
one vote. It prohibits within a quarter mile of an
existing station, within a quarter mile of a transit station platform,
within three hundred feet of low intensity residential zone districts
(34:44):
dedicated to single into unit buildings. It even says that
existing stations also could face new limits. If they fall
into those categories, they could be blocked from adding more
gas pumps, though they could add e TV chargers if
they replace the existing gas pots. And then the catch all,
(35:08):
Oh yeah, the zoning administrator can waive the restrictions if
it's coupled with oh, King Supers or another large retailer, Costco.
So M Costco and King Supers get exemptions, but just
Circle K does not. We not have a constitutional problem.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!