December 17, 2025 • 15 mins
What should the U.S. do with the tariff money it's collected if the Supreme Court rules they can keep it? Some companies affected by the tariffs are already lining up to receive their cut. Scott brings on trade attorney Michelle Schultz to explain what we should expect to happen.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Do you want to be an American idiot?
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Seven WLW. President Trump is going to speak tonight at
nine pm to sell you on the economy, addressing what
he calls the affordability hoax and the promise he made
on the trail to reduce the cost of living from
day one. As he said, we know that's not going
very well for the president. You know what, you know,
you go to the store and you see the price
(00:24):
of beef, You see the price of many thing except gas.
We're to what four or five year low right now?
Everything certainly feels much higher. And you know that when
you look at your checkbook, your savings account at the
end of the month. Of course, adding to inflation would
be the tariffs, and the President's going to talk about
that tonight. And on it is trade attorney Michelle Schultz
again on the Scott's Loan Show. Michelle, how are you
good morning?
Speaker 1 (00:46):
I have been busy a bet. Yes, it's all tariffs
all the time, lots of change.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Yeah, I'm sure the President is going to address a
lot of that tonight. And so we know the tariffs
brought in like close to a quarter trillion dollars so
far this calendar year. But companies like Costco and Bumblebee,
the tuna company, Revlon, the makeup company, RayBan Sunglasses, many
others are getting in line because the first person in
line gets paid first. In the lawsuits to lock down
the billions of dollars they might be out if the
(01:15):
Supreme Court rules against President Truft's tariffs to begin with,
So let's start there the likelihood that that's going to happen.
What do you see in the tea leaves.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Well, I'd say fifty to fifty. You know, in the beginning,
I thought it was pretty likely that the Supreme Court
would strike down the tariffs because they expressed so much
skepticism during the initial hearings. But the more I read,
the more I follow the government's reactions, I'm thinking it's
(01:44):
possible it could go either way. So companies like Costco,
Revlon and the big guys have gone in and they
have petition for Customs to essentially be forced to delay
its final computations so that refunds would be quicker. And
(02:05):
we're due for the final liquidation of entries as of Monday.
So it's been kind of a race to get to
the front of the line. Who can get to the
front of the line and who can get paid first
if we could keep Customs from finalizing its calculations. Unfortunately, Monday,
(02:27):
the Court of International Trade denied a consolidated motion for
this very thing. So it looks like, yeah, like.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
One hundred and thirty billion dollars, I mean so far
that number is growing. Is what the refund would be got.
And the thing is the preemptive lawsuits coming in to
be paid as being liquidated by the government. The Supreme
Court rules against the terraf after liquidation occurs, doesn't that
create kind of a legal black hole where companies can't
get refunds even though they paid on constitutional tariffs. How
(02:58):
would that shake out?
Speaker 1 (03:01):
That would be in my mind, it would be administratively
a mess. And I think that's what the DOJ was
concerned about when they last week they mentioned that, hey,
we've already been collecting about one hundred and thirty billion
in tariffs. I think if all that has to be refunded,
(03:23):
then it does have to be refunded, and there will
be a mechanism for refunds, such as protesting the liquidation
of customs entries. The problem is the time we're going
to have to go through a long process to get
that money back.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Yeah, and where does the money actually come from if
it's already been spent? I mean, I you know, he
has a list of I think there's like seven or
eight things on there. What he's going to do with
this money coming in from tariffs, including two thousand dollars
checks or taxpayers. All well and good, but if you
cut those checks, there's no getting it back. Where if
he's spend some of that money, where's it going to
come from?
Speaker 1 (04:02):
Yeah, that's a great question. I don't know. I think
it would have to come from through customs and border protection,
but I don't know what funds they'd pull it from.
It's the money's already been spent. It's been It's long
been the case that customs have to provide refunds if
(04:23):
someone overpaid. But wow, this is on a grand scale.
We're talking about billions and thousands of companies. So I
think it's legally the refunds will be required, but it
will be a process, and in my experience requesting refunds,
(04:45):
it's going to take a long time.
Speaker 2 (04:47):
Yeah, And we'll probably hear more of this tonight when
the President speaks at nine o'clock. But Trump promised to
use the tariff revenue for as I had to look
it up. Yeah, eight different purposes with the checks. There's
tax cuts, there's paying down debt, there's eliminating MTIMP tax
in some groups, and the list goes on and on
and on. But you know, I don't know does Congress
have to appropriate it like any other revenue, or does
(05:09):
he just start cutting checks himself. I mean, that's the
other question is how much authority has an executive branch
versus Congressional park Congress. Congress, as we know under Republican control,
really doesn't want to do anything. They're happy with him
doing whatever he wants and doing very little as representatives
and senators. I wonder what happens in that regard exactly.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Yes, and under the constitution, Congress is the branch that
has authority over taxes and terrifts. Tariffs are attacked, they're
a tax on the US importer. So you know, you'd
think that Congress would have to weigh in on this
at some point if refunds are required. It's going to
(05:50):
be a combination, I think of the executive branch and
then Congress, which, as you mentioned, is just going to
probably support the Executive Regiet's decisions and then Customs, So
Customs is going to be swimming in payerwork.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I think yeah, doesn't mean for a smooth system. Michelle
Schultz on the SHIF trade attorney, expert in the area
of tariffs and the like, and I'm sure your phone's
been ringing off the hook with all this stuff going
on from your clients. Tonight, the President is going to
talk at nine o'clock to sell us on the economy
and the affordability hoax, as he calls it. I don't know,
you go to the store's customer expensive, I don't know
(06:28):
how that's a hoax. You know more than anyone your
personal finances. If you're doing fine and you're above water
and have a extra to spend, it's probably not that
big a deal. But as of course you get closer
and closer to the poverty line, or you just simply
make less money. Your middle class or lower you know
that it's it's really expensive out there, say maybe energy
and gasoline right now. So he's gonna try and sell
(06:50):
us on that tonight. It should be interesting what he says.
And of course the other area of this thing is Michelle,
you know this better than anybody. Are the terroriffs actually
working in a sense, because I mean, China just surpassed
a one trillion dollar trade surplus, which means they export
more than they import. If they export more than import
and that number is going up, that would indicate at
least relative to China, the tariff's not working.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
Right right, Yes, relative to China, we can see that
the tariffs really aren't having the intended effect. China's actually
doing more business with other countries and they have found
that it's easier to what they called dump or sell
products below market to other countries rather than dealing with
(07:35):
US at this point, So you know, yeah, I think
the tariffs have resulted in difficulty for US importers, and
at the same time, China seems to be fine.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Yeah, it doesn't have the endent. I mean there's other
countries out there that are squeezing, for sure, But I
mean this was all set to leverage China, and China's going, okay,
we'll fine, we'll just go We'll just expand market share
elsewhere and forget about you guys. But then tariffs go
away or we get the balance back. Are those stations
going to all of a sudden go, Hey, you know what,
We're just going to go back to good old maide
(08:08):
in the USA goods, you know, outside of maybe some
core products. I don't see that happening because once you
change change vendors, so to speak, it's difficult to get
that business back, isn't it.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
Oh? Yes, very difficult. And I think there is a
lot of sentiments regarding America that we're not reliable right now.
So I'm hearing that from the EU, from South America,
from everywhere. And you'll see China is currently very successful
in India, Brazil, Africa, you can look anywhere and they're
(08:43):
doing well because they're playing the game right. I think
that we are at a disadvantage at this point. Companies
don't necessarily trust us because we may or may not
go through with a transaction, or we may request christ changes.
And even if we do buy something at the regular price,
(09:07):
then the US company is losing profitability because they have
to either increase their price to match the terroiffs and
which are up to fifty percent or more, or they
have to just do something else.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
Yeah, and I think Michelle on the terriff issue, I
think there's a credibility problem here for Trump administration and
Republicans in a sense because you know the cry against
the Affordable Care Act, which is true. You know, we
subsidize things in this country to the extreme, and it
doesn't do anything to reduce and drive down the actual
cost of things. It's just simply a coupon. It's a voucher,
(09:42):
is what it is. To make it look to you
and your family like, hey, healthcare is affordable, it's not.
It's it's out of control of the government's just taking
money from a different pile and giving it to you
to shut you the hell up so you can afford
your healthcare insurance. And that is a legitimate bee for
Publicans have, and it's one hundred percent acrid. However, when
you now have twice on that for farmers and bailed
them out because in this case, because of teriffs where
(10:04):
Ohio farmers lost about seventy six million dollars in exports
to China. Well overall the trade is down like seventeen billions.
So the long story is we're bailing out farmers with
twelve billion dollars. Unfortunately it's to work by the seventeen
billion dollar loss in China. Trade to China loan. So
we're essentially subsidying farmers for the tariffs. That doesn't make
(10:24):
any sense at all.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
Yeah, it doesn't make sense. And we're still seeing with
our clients that farmers are they have stock, they can't
sell their jumping products, and even agricultural equipment is taking
a huge hit because they can't afford to buy the
new stuff. They're going to use their own equipment. It's
(10:47):
really still impacting farmers and agriculture, you know, down to
the individual and I think sending them a check for
a couple thousand dollars is not really helpful.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
No, no, no, you know it's again it's more subsidy.
And on that too, farmers in the particular Ohio farmers. Facally,
there's a double whammy there. There's higher cost from the
import taxes and lost export revenue from retaliation from countries
like China. So, from a trade law perspective, Michelle schultz Weer,
you're an expert in is the predictable outcome of the
policy something the administration's legally required to consider before imposing
(11:22):
those tariffs or other statues that can just impose it
without any economic impact analysis whatsoever. It feels like the
latter's true.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
Yeah, I believe the ladder's true. Unfortunately, because so the
tariffs that are the baseline tariffs, the reciprocal tariffs, those
are the tariffs that are on virtually every country, and
those were implemented under an emergency statue as if a
trade deficit or an emergency. So let's say the court
(11:51):
holds up those tariffs, they still have plenty of options
for the US government to impose tariffs under other statutes,
like aluminium and steel, which are under a National Security statute.
There's another statue that covers unfair trade practices, and none
of this, none of these statutes really ask what's the
(12:14):
impact on the importer in the United States state, They're
more focused on policy.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
So the big picture of the takeaway here is American
farmers are suffering because of those massive losses we talked.
Big companies are lining up to sue for refunds, and
the government collected almost a quarter trillion dollars but promised
to spend it in eight different ways. So, if you're
advising someone whose business is import export and you have
a global market here, what do you tell how are
(12:43):
you tell them to navigate this chaos right now, and
do you think we'll ever have clarity in the next
few months on the legality of all this stuff.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
I think we will have clarity. So that's the light
at the end of the tunnel. I'm hearing maybe beginning
of twenty twenty six. Folks have been saying before the
end of twenty twenty five. I don't know that we'll
have that much clarity then, And I don't think that
all the tariffs will be cleared up. Many of them
are going to continue, and there's not much of a
(13:12):
path forward for the importer. So what we're doing is
some importers want to get in line, they want to sue.
On the other hand, the Court of International Trade is
not willing to bind customs as far as its final calculations.
They've denied a consolidated motion on Monday about by importers,
(13:37):
So I think, you know, as it drags out, we
continue to look at technicality. We've had importers that have
been overpaying because they've been overvaluing their goods, and we
follow the customs regulations very closely to determine if you're overvaluing,
(13:58):
if you're paying a percent onto high value or maybe
you're paying on the wrong country of origin, or.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
I don't know how you sort all this stuff out.
I'll be honest, my head would explode her. How's your
head not exploding? It is okay, okay, good good. I
just couldn't hear it from more. You're thank god you're
in the phone, not in the studio. Are cleaning people
are are are overworked already. She has Michelle Schall's trade
attorney on the show. I always love having you on, Michelle,
because you're you just simply cut right through it to
(14:29):
help us figure out something complex is tariffs and what
it all means. And if you don't know what it means,
it should scare the hell out of the rest of us,
that's for sure. You have a great day. Thanks again
for coming on the show.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
You too, Thank you so much. Happy holidays, yeahppy holidays,
Mary Christmas. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
So it's a damist party in power right tonight. The
Republicans are today, actually I should say they're gonna not
vote for and include subsidies to continue the Obamacare for
another couple of years. However, it is till they sort
this out, and so yeah, you may feel like the
rugs being pulled out under if you're one of the
twenty two million Americans on it, okay, good because we
(15:05):
don't want subscdy amen, and subsidy is it's stupid. Then
tonight to nine President Trump will tell you why subsidies
are good when it comes to farmers and everything else
and two thousand dollars checks to Americans, isn't that subsidy?
The answer would be yes, yes, it would be leadership.
Where is it? I don't I don't see it. I
(15:27):
don't see it on the left. I don't see it
on the right. I just don't see it. News on
the way minutes here, seven hundred w all the
Do you want to be an American idiot?
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Seven WLW. President Trump is going to speak tonight at
nine pm to sell you on the economy, addressing what
he calls the affordability hoax and the promise he made
on the trail to reduce the cost of living from
day one. As he said, we know that's not going
very well for the president. You know what, you know,
you go to the store and you see the price
(00:24):
of beef, You see the price of many thing except gas.
We're to what four or five year low right now?
Everything certainly feels much higher. And you know that when
you look at your checkbook, your savings account at the
end of the month. Of course, adding to inflation would
be the tariffs, and the President's going to talk about
that tonight. And on it is trade attorney Michelle Schultz
again on the Scott's Loan Show. Michelle, how are you
good morning?
Speaker 1 (00:46):
I have been busy a bet. Yes, it's all tariffs
all the time, lots of change.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Yeah, I'm sure the President is going to address a
lot of that tonight. And so we know the tariffs
brought in like close to a quarter trillion dollars so
far this calendar year. But companies like Costco and Bumblebee,
the tuna company, Revlon, the makeup company, RayBan Sunglasses, many
others are getting in line because the first person in
line gets paid first. In the lawsuits to lock down
the billions of dollars they might be out if the
(01:15):
Supreme Court rules against President Truft's tariffs to begin with,
So let's start there the likelihood that that's going to happen.
What do you see in the tea leaves.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Well, I'd say fifty to fifty. You know, in the beginning,
I thought it was pretty likely that the Supreme Court
would strike down the tariffs because they expressed so much
skepticism during the initial hearings. But the more I read,
the more I follow the government's reactions, I'm thinking it's
(01:44):
possible it could go either way. So companies like Costco,
Revlon and the big guys have gone in and they
have petition for Customs to essentially be forced to delay
its final computations so that refunds would be quicker. And
(02:05):
we're due for the final liquidation of entries as of Monday.
So it's been kind of a race to get to
the front of the line. Who can get to the
front of the line and who can get paid first
if we could keep Customs from finalizing its calculations. Unfortunately, Monday,
(02:27):
the Court of International Trade denied a consolidated motion for
this very thing. So it looks like, yeah, like.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
One hundred and thirty billion dollars, I mean so far
that number is growing. Is what the refund would be got.
And the thing is the preemptive lawsuits coming in to
be paid as being liquidated by the government. The Supreme
Court rules against the terraf after liquidation occurs, doesn't that
create kind of a legal black hole where companies can't
get refunds even though they paid on constitutional tariffs. How
(02:58):
would that shake out?
Speaker 1 (03:01):
That would be in my mind, it would be administratively
a mess. And I think that's what the DOJ was
concerned about when they last week they mentioned that, hey,
we've already been collecting about one hundred and thirty billion
in tariffs. I think if all that has to be refunded,
(03:23):
then it does have to be refunded, and there will
be a mechanism for refunds, such as protesting the liquidation
of customs entries. The problem is the time we're going
to have to go through a long process to get
that money back.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Yeah, and where does the money actually come from if
it's already been spent? I mean, I you know, he
has a list of I think there's like seven or
eight things on there. What he's going to do with
this money coming in from tariffs, including two thousand dollars
checks or taxpayers. All well and good, but if you
cut those checks, there's no getting it back. Where if
he's spend some of that money, where's it going to
come from?
Speaker 1 (04:02):
Yeah, that's a great question. I don't know. I think
it would have to come from through customs and border protection,
but I don't know what funds they'd pull it from.
It's the money's already been spent. It's been It's long
been the case that customs have to provide refunds if
(04:23):
someone overpaid. But wow, this is on a grand scale.
We're talking about billions and thousands of companies. So I
think it's legally the refunds will be required, but it
will be a process, and in my experience requesting refunds,
(04:45):
it's going to take a long time.
Speaker 2 (04:47):
Yeah, And we'll probably hear more of this tonight when
the President speaks at nine o'clock. But Trump promised to
use the tariff revenue for as I had to look
it up. Yeah, eight different purposes with the checks. There's
tax cuts, there's paying down debt, there's eliminating MTIMP tax
in some groups, and the list goes on and on
and on. But you know, I don't know does Congress
have to appropriate it like any other revenue, or does
(05:09):
he just start cutting checks himself. I mean, that's the
other question is how much authority has an executive branch
versus Congressional park Congress. Congress, as we know under Republican control,
really doesn't want to do anything. They're happy with him
doing whatever he wants and doing very little as representatives
and senators. I wonder what happens in that regard exactly.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Yes, and under the constitution, Congress is the branch that
has authority over taxes and terrifts. Tariffs are attacked, they're
a tax on the US importer. So you know, you'd
think that Congress would have to weigh in on this
at some point if refunds are required. It's going to
(05:50):
be a combination, I think of the executive branch and
then Congress, which, as you mentioned, is just going to
probably support the Executive Regiet's decisions and then Customs, So
Customs is going to be swimming in payerwork.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I think yeah, doesn't mean for a smooth system. Michelle
Schultz on the SHIF trade attorney, expert in the area
of tariffs and the like, and I'm sure your phone's
been ringing off the hook with all this stuff going
on from your clients. Tonight, the President is going to
talk at nine o'clock to sell us on the economy
and the affordability hoax, as he calls it. I don't know,
you go to the store's customer expensive, I don't know
(06:28):
how that's a hoax. You know more than anyone your
personal finances. If you're doing fine and you're above water
and have a extra to spend, it's probably not that
big a deal. But as of course you get closer
and closer to the poverty line, or you just simply
make less money. Your middle class or lower you know
that it's it's really expensive out there, say maybe energy
and gasoline right now. So he's gonna try and sell
(06:50):
us on that tonight. It should be interesting what he says.
And of course the other area of this thing is Michelle,
you know this better than anybody. Are the terroriffs actually
working in a sense, because I mean, China just surpassed
a one trillion dollar trade surplus, which means they export
more than they import. If they export more than import
and that number is going up, that would indicate at
least relative to China, the tariff's not working.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
Right right, Yes, relative to China, we can see that
the tariffs really aren't having the intended effect. China's actually
doing more business with other countries and they have found
that it's easier to what they called dump or sell
products below market to other countries rather than dealing with
(07:35):
US at this point, So you know, yeah, I think
the tariffs have resulted in difficulty for US importers, and
at the same time, China seems to be fine.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Yeah, it doesn't have the endent. I mean there's other
countries out there that are squeezing, for sure, But I
mean this was all set to leverage China, and China's going, okay,
we'll fine, we'll just go We'll just expand market share
elsewhere and forget about you guys. But then tariffs go
away or we get the balance back. Are those stations
going to all of a sudden go, Hey, you know what,
We're just going to go back to good old maide
(08:08):
in the USA goods, you know, outside of maybe some
core products. I don't see that happening because once you
change change vendors, so to speak, it's difficult to get
that business back, isn't it.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
Oh? Yes, very difficult. And I think there is a
lot of sentiments regarding America that we're not reliable right now.
So I'm hearing that from the EU, from South America,
from everywhere. And you'll see China is currently very successful
in India, Brazil, Africa, you can look anywhere and they're
(08:43):
doing well because they're playing the game right. I think
that we are at a disadvantage at this point. Companies
don't necessarily trust us because we may or may not
go through with a transaction, or we may request christ changes.
And even if we do buy something at the regular price,
(09:07):
then the US company is losing profitability because they have
to either increase their price to match the terroiffs and
which are up to fifty percent or more, or they
have to just do something else.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
Yeah, and I think Michelle on the terriff issue, I
think there's a credibility problem here for Trump administration and
Republicans in a sense because you know the cry against
the Affordable Care Act, which is true. You know, we
subsidize things in this country to the extreme, and it
doesn't do anything to reduce and drive down the actual
cost of things. It's just simply a coupon. It's a voucher,
(09:42):
is what it is. To make it look to you
and your family like, hey, healthcare is affordable, it's not.
It's it's out of control of the government's just taking
money from a different pile and giving it to you
to shut you the hell up so you can afford
your healthcare insurance. And that is a legitimate bee for
Publicans have, and it's one hundred percent acrid. However, when
you now have twice on that for farmers and bailed
them out because in this case, because of teriffs where
(10:04):
Ohio farmers lost about seventy six million dollars in exports
to China. Well overall the trade is down like seventeen billions.
So the long story is we're bailing out farmers with
twelve billion dollars. Unfortunately it's to work by the seventeen
billion dollar loss in China. Trade to China loan. So
we're essentially subsidying farmers for the tariffs. That doesn't make
(10:24):
any sense at all.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
Yeah, it doesn't make sense. And we're still seeing with
our clients that farmers are they have stock, they can't
sell their jumping products, and even agricultural equipment is taking
a huge hit because they can't afford to buy the
new stuff. They're going to use their own equipment. It's
(10:47):
really still impacting farmers and agriculture, you know, down to
the individual and I think sending them a check for
a couple thousand dollars is not really helpful.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
No, no, no, you know it's again it's more subsidy.
And on that too, farmers in the particular Ohio farmers. Facally,
there's a double whammy there. There's higher cost from the
import taxes and lost export revenue from retaliation from countries
like China. So, from a trade law perspective, Michelle schultz Weer,
you're an expert in is the predictable outcome of the
policy something the administration's legally required to consider before imposing
(11:22):
those tariffs or other statues that can just impose it
without any economic impact analysis whatsoever. It feels like the
latter's true.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
Yeah, I believe the ladder's true. Unfortunately, because so the
tariffs that are the baseline tariffs, the reciprocal tariffs, those
are the tariffs that are on virtually every country, and
those were implemented under an emergency statue as if a
trade deficit or an emergency. So let's say the court
(11:51):
holds up those tariffs, they still have plenty of options
for the US government to impose tariffs under other statutes,
like aluminium and steel, which are under a National Security statute.
There's another statue that covers unfair trade practices, and none
of this, none of these statutes really ask what's the
(12:14):
impact on the importer in the United States state, They're
more focused on policy.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
So the big picture of the takeaway here is American
farmers are suffering because of those massive losses we talked.
Big companies are lining up to sue for refunds, and
the government collected almost a quarter trillion dollars but promised
to spend it in eight different ways. So, if you're
advising someone whose business is import export and you have
a global market here, what do you tell how are
(12:43):
you tell them to navigate this chaos right now, and
do you think we'll ever have clarity in the next
few months on the legality of all this stuff.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
I think we will have clarity. So that's the light
at the end of the tunnel. I'm hearing maybe beginning
of twenty twenty six. Folks have been saying before the
end of twenty twenty five. I don't know that we'll
have that much clarity then, And I don't think that
all the tariffs will be cleared up. Many of them
are going to continue, and there's not much of a
(13:12):
path forward for the importer. So what we're doing is
some importers want to get in line, they want to sue.
On the other hand, the Court of International Trade is
not willing to bind customs as far as its final calculations.
They've denied a consolidated motion on Monday about by importers,
(13:37):
So I think, you know, as it drags out, we
continue to look at technicality. We've had importers that have
been overpaying because they've been overvaluing their goods, and we
follow the customs regulations very closely to determine if you're overvaluing,
(13:58):
if you're paying a percent onto high value or maybe
you're paying on the wrong country of origin, or.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
I don't know how you sort all this stuff out.
I'll be honest, my head would explode her. How's your
head not exploding? It is okay, okay, good good. I
just couldn't hear it from more. You're thank god you're
in the phone, not in the studio. Are cleaning people
are are are overworked already. She has Michelle Schall's trade
attorney on the show. I always love having you on, Michelle,
because you're you just simply cut right through it to
(14:29):
help us figure out something complex is tariffs and what
it all means. And if you don't know what it means,
it should scare the hell out of the rest of us,
that's for sure. You have a great day. Thanks again
for coming on the show.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
You too, Thank you so much. Happy holidays, yeahppy holidays,
Mary Christmas. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
So it's a damist party in power right tonight. The
Republicans are today, actually I should say they're gonna not
vote for and include subsidies to continue the Obamacare for
another couple of years. However, it is till they sort
this out, and so yeah, you may feel like the
rugs being pulled out under if you're one of the
twenty two million Americans on it, okay, good because we
(15:05):
don't want subscdy amen, and subsidy is it's stupid. Then
tonight to nine President Trump will tell you why subsidies
are good when it comes to farmers and everything else
and two thousand dollars checks to Americans, isn't that subsidy?
The answer would be yes, yes, it would be leadership.
Where is it? I don't I don't see it. I
(15:27):
don't see it on the left. I don't see it
on the right. I just don't see it. News on
the way minutes here, seven hundred w all the
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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
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!