Dave Williams - Taxpayer Protection Alliance

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
Seven oh five fifty five Car City Talk Station regular
listeners know that Bumper Music is in honor of my
next guest from the Taxpayer Protection Alliance. You can find
them online at Protecting Taxpayers dot org. Dave Williams, my friend,
welcome back to the Morning Show. A very happy Friday
and a happy Mother's Day weekend.

Speaker 2 (00:21):
You sir, good morning. And I feel like that's my
walk up music. You know how batters have walk up music.
Oh yeah, this is mine.

Speaker 1 (00:28):
This is this is my walk up mine. Mine is
Animal by the band Tool. I've been playing that as
the opening song for my fifty five Cars Morning show
since pretty much. I started a solo career on the
Morning Show nineteen years ago, and they play that when
I do speeches. It always cracks me up because the
lyrics aren't exactly FCC compliant, but they sum up my
mentality come one hundred percent. So check it out for yourself. Anyway,

(00:51):
Dave Williams, we are going to dive on into f
let's see here, democracy and artificial intelligence.

Speaker 2 (00:58):
Yeah. This is fascinating, Brian, because obviously artificial intelligence AI
is really kind of taking over and it has been
for a number of years and I think that's what
people don't realize is that we have been using artificial
intelligence a lot for the past ten, fifteen, twenty years.
I mean, listen, spell Check, that's AI. I mean, obviously
the most simple of AI, but it is, and it's

(01:21):
making businesses more efficient, it's improving people's lives. But that
doesn't mean we turn a blind eye to what the
potential is. But also some of the pitfalls and some
of the problems with AI, and a lot of people
are concerned what.

Speaker 1 (01:34):
Are the pitfalls and problems? Since you mentioned spellcheck, I
think it is responsible for dumbing people down a lot.
I have become less able to spell a given probably
more complex word. I can still spell the word the
but if I'm thinking of a word that typically can
be misspelled, you used to have to rely on your
own intellect and memory and or just go to a

(01:55):
dictionary to look it up, which I think serve to
help improve your intellect, because you don't have to do
that every time. Once you learn how to properly spell
a word, if you're using spell check, it's just like
it's lazy boom and you move on and you didn't
even think about it.

Speaker 2 (02:07):
Just ye say and there's grammar check. I mean, now
you have I'm just knowing which is uh, now it's humbling,
just say the least.

Speaker 1 (02:16):
It's humbling. But I think that is an often overlooked
feature if it's out in the world. I think a
lot of people are ignoring that as a feature because
you see, you see grammically and grammically incorrect things all
the time, grammatically in correct things all the time, speaking
in grammar.

Speaker 2 (02:29):
Speaking of yes, absolutely, And you know I do a
lot of editing on a day to day basis, and yeah,
I've seen some doozies.

Speaker 1 (02:38):
All right, Sorry about driving down that cull to sect,
but let's move on with this one. What's going on?
What's what's further to this? We got stuck on spellcheck
thanks to my skill.

Speaker 2 (02:49):
Really, the the democratization of open AI and making sure
that there are guard rails right is right now. The
States are looking to regulate artificial intelligence that you know,
fifty states, you know, thousands of different bills. That's chaos, Brian,
That's absolute chaos. Because if you're a business or you know,

(03:10):
big or small, and you're trying to deal with Ohio Kentucky,
and they have two different rules when it comes to
AI and how you can use it. That makes no sense.
And listen, I'm not a big fan of the federal
government legislating, but there has to be a national framework
to put these guardrails up on AI and what we
what they can do, what they can't do. So I
think that's where and I hope that's the direction we're going. Now,

(03:32):
what happened a few years ago, This is when Joe
Biden was still president. He saw the movie Mission Impossible,
where AI took over the world. And I mean, I'm
not lying about this. It freaked him out and he said,
we have to do something. And whenever the government says
we have to do something, of course, it sends a
chill down your spine. But when it comes to AI

(03:52):
and really you know, privacy, internet privacy and some other issues,
the federal government needs to take the lead on this.
I'm sorry, but it's just you can't have a patchwork
of regulations across the country.

Speaker 1 (04:03):
And I understand that question is the growing opposition to AI.
Generally speaking, price of electricity has gone up. People fear
that the AI centers in their neighborhood's going to cause
their bills to go back up. I know that's a great,
a terrible thing, and that may be one of the
great reasons for resisting it. However, this I point, I
have concerns about AI generally speaking too. But the world

(04:25):
is moving in this direction. If we don't get on
top of it and get ahead of the rest of
the world, and we refuse to adopt this type of technology,
love it or hate it, it's coming, and our failure
to adopt it may be and motivated in part by
some propaganda coming from around the world to tell us
to not adopt it. I mean, there's all kinds of
propaganda floating around, and people get ideas in their head
that it's terrible and the end of the world's coming.

(04:47):
But you know who benefits from that if we don't
adopt it, China, for example, the Chinese Communist Party and
other foreign nations. I mean, you know, I don't know
what's going to become of this, but apparently we need
to be part of it, or if we don't, it's
to our own peril. Is there truth behind my ramblings there,
Dave had Dave Williams.

Speaker 2 (05:04):
There's a lot of truth behind that. And let's look
at the data centers, and you know, people are concerned
about the electricity usage. Absolutely should be right, but there's
a lot of myths and realities with data centers or
you know, you look at the water usage, and yes,
they use a lot of water. You know what uses
more water? Golf courses.

Speaker 1 (05:23):
Yeah, but use a lot. I'm glad you brought that
up because fun fact, the golf course water goes into
the ground and therefore you can't use it or to
any other purpose. It's basically quote unquote gone, although the
plants enjoy the benefit of it. With AI centers, the
water only cools the equipment, but then is returned back
to the water source. Am I wrong?

Speaker 2 (05:44):
No, you're absolutely right. And I don't see anyone with
pitchforks at a golf course trying to shut them down.
And don't give me data centers.

Speaker 1 (05:52):
I don't golf, Dave, and I choose not the golf rather,
but you know I know a lot of people who do.
They will be upset by that.

Speaker 2 (05:58):
Yeah, And I mean, you know, data centers, they're hiring
people of really good jobs. They're talking about six figure jobs.
And again, you know, no free ride for any tech company,
for any company that they don't get to, you know,
mooch off of the electric grid. They have to pay
their fair share and more, and a lot of them
are willing to do that. But you know it can't

(06:19):
be corporate welfare, Brian. We can't say okay, big tech,
whatever you want, you get, That's not how it works.
They have to pay for the upgrades and make sure
that electricity prices don't surge in areas because of the
data centers.

Speaker 1 (06:33):
Well, and there's some good that can come of this.
I loved the fact that the folks behind the AI
data centers are no longer global warming climate change fanatics.
They realize that we do need an abundance of power.
Windmills and solar panels aren't going to provide it. Hey,
how about we bring along and here my listening audience goes,
we know what's common, Thomas, small modular reactors. They are

(06:54):
embracing the idea that we should get hit the ground
running with small modular reactors, small footprint. Currently they've pretty
much close to zero radioactive waste and they produce no
carbon dioxide. Problem solved.

Speaker 2 (07:08):
Very cool, And they've been talking about this for a
few years now, and I can't wait until the first
one is deployed, so people can see that these things
actually work and that they're not dependent upon the grid
and other people's electricity. And you know, this is something
that you know, the first company that's able to do this,
I think, is just going to pave the way for
everybody else. But of course we have federal, state and

(07:31):
local governments standing in the way when it comes to permitting,
you know, so many issues, brianding, you know, permitting water.
It's just very complicated, but it's important to talk about.

Speaker 1 (07:42):
It's really important to talk about. Again, we're going in
that direction. I guess the larger problem is it's also impacting.
I mean, we realize that our grid is insufficient to
handle whatever power increases we want to put on them.
So we've got a lot of rebuilding and upgrades to
do in this country. It's going to come at a
great expense, and it's going to take a real long
time to get to where we need to be.

Speaker 2 (08:03):
Yeah, and you know, when I look at AI, I
look at it as a tool and just back you know,
hundreds of years ago, when the first shovel was created,
the shovel was a tool. Now you could pick up
that shovel and hit someone over the head with it, right,
You could still use it as a weapon. You can
use AI as a weapon. But it's it's helping people.
It's helping business, it's helping small business. That's what I

(08:24):
don't think people kind of grasp is that AI is
helping small business be more efficient. And that's good. We
want more businesses to prosper and to thrive.

Speaker 1 (08:34):
We do. And then there the correlator to that is
businesses often prosper and survive because things like AI streamline
processes and therefore you do not need to hire someone
to do something for the job. You can get AI
to do it. And that's the rub and the whole analysis,
isn't it.

Speaker 2 (08:48):
It is? And as this society we have always adjusted,
you know, the Industrial revolution, you know, we figured out
that it doesn't take away jobs, it creates jobs. And
I think AI is going to be the same. When
we look back on this, we're going to see that
it creates jobs. And like you said, we are in
competition with China. China is a very you know you're
gonna laugh when I say this, but a very permissive society.

(09:10):
And when it comes to building things, because they don't
have laws, they don't have regulations, they don't have permitting.
If they want to build something, they build it. They
don't ask any questions, they just do it. And that's
why you know they're going to be ahead of us
if we don't do something.

Speaker 1 (09:24):
Coming up, we've been talking about what a Day's favorite topics,
considering his father died of lung cancer as being a smoker.
FDA is trying to help us out, help us, help you,
just like they did during Prohibition when they banned alcohol
because it was sinful and did bad things to people.
That worked out great. Coming them up. Dave Williams Taxpayer
Protection a lines on that station just Shina seven twenty

(09:47):
here fifty five KCD talk station. It's Friday doing that
Taxpayer Protection Alliance discussion with our friend Dave Williams. The
Taxpayer Protection Alliance. Find them online, learn what they do
all the time, maybe help them out you can. It's
detecting taxpayers dot org. Topic near and dear to your heart.
You know, Dave Williams, I was doing my prep for
Day yesterday for the show this morning, and I put

(10:08):
your name right at the top of this article that
I found and lo and behold this morning when I
woke up, you have a topic involving the FDA trying
to engage in some harm protection involving tobacco and vape products.
Don't import UK's tobacco prohibition experiment to America. America, writes
Christina Smith in this op ed piece, isn't an interesting.

(10:29):
Tightening restrictions on vapes and other nicotine products does not
reduce the demand. It just shifts people over to the
black market. It does not slower cigarette smoking rate at all.
In fact, you know, when you take away alternatives to
real tobacco, people go back to real tobacco. And of
course they've they've banned tobacco purchasing for anyone born on

(10:52):
or after January first, two thousand and nine, permanently never
allowed to buy tobacco products in the UK. But then
they're taking away the vape options as well. This sounds
like prohibition, David. That didn't work out too well, did it.
What's the FDA doing now?

Speaker 2 (11:05):
Well, the FDA did something miraculous is that they approved
flavored vapes for at all.

Speaker 1 (11:12):
Ah, the opposite direction.

Speaker 2 (11:15):
Yes, and this was amazing. I think it was what
mango and blueberry vapes for and again for adults over
twenty one. You know, if you were under twenty one,
you were not allowed to buy these products, and you
should not be allowed to buy these products. And yeah,
you reference my father. He was sixty three when he passed.
I'm sixty. I turned sixty this year. It is frightening

(11:37):
to think that I am three years away from the
age where my father passed. Now, listen, I don't smoke,
I don't vape. I don't use pouches, but people that
do smoke, please find an alternative because cigarettes will kill
you and they will destroy your life. And you know,
whether it's pouches or again vaping or ease cigarettes, I

(11:58):
encourage people because each have been studied over and over again.
You mentioned the UK, they're saying you can't smoke after
a certain age, Well in two thousand, if you're born
after two thousand and nine, that's not going to stop smoking.
What that's going to do is drive everything underground. We
have seen this time and time again. Brian. Is that

(12:20):
and you mentioned prohibition the same exact thing. There's going
to be cigarette speakeasy in the UK. Mexico, the country
of Mexico has banned vaping. The cartels are involved in vaping. Now,
oh yeah, we're moving away from fentanyl, and they're involved
in vaping because that's where the money is. It's because
it's illegal and government officials are clueless. They think that

(12:44):
if you ban something, people stop doing it. No, they
find another way to do it. It's human nature.

Speaker 1 (12:51):
Yeah, And you know, the odd thing about it is
people out there in the world that demand will never
go away. And then the epic stupidity that people this shows.
It reflects the crazyness of the demand. You mentioned cigarettes.
If they don't start, you never get I mean, you
won't get lung cancer from smoking, if you don't smoke,
no kidding, you won't drop dead by injecting fentanyl. And
yet people aware of the risk and knowing that it's

(13:11):
out there in the world, and watching their friends around
them drop dead for years and years and years, they
still do it. What I'm not advocating for the legalization
of fentanyl necessarily that that experiment hasn't worked out real
well in cities like Seattle. But you know, something be
said that with the stupidity of people's human nature generally.

Speaker 2 (13:32):
And you know, at the heart of this is nicotine right,
is We've had nicotine replacement therapies for years, for decades.
Gum gum doesn't work for some people. But nicotine is
not the.

Speaker 1 (13:45):
Problem, No, it isn't.

Speaker 2 (13:46):
It's the stuff that is wrapped in that tobacco heap,
all the carcinogens that you're inhaling when you like that cigarette.
And what you have now are different nicotine delivery systems,
whether it's pouches, whether it's vapes. And Tina's like caffeine,
you know, does it affect you? Absolutely, Caffeine effects you.
I don't hear anyone trying to ban caffeine. And why

(14:08):
not flavors again, my dad, My dad had a sweet tooth.
I could totally see him with a vape with watermelon flavor,
you know, cotton candy. The guy had a sweet tooth, right,
And I wish these products were available in the nineteen
seventies instead of riding in a car with him to school,
windows up, air conditioning on uh. One cigarette after another.

Speaker 1 (14:28):
It was brutal well, which negates the idea that you'd
never smoked there, Dave, but he basically did for all
the time he was around you. And you know, I
feel so terrible for you having to experience the loss
of your father. But it does serve as an excellent
point when you're trying to bring this reality, this regulatory
environment up. And you know the other component of this
approval process. In the United States, they're so slow to

(14:49):
approve any given product, like they have approved the sale
of and I think it's because they connected the well
in big money lobbying groups like the tobacco companies, which
have gotten deep involved in vaping. But you can only
buy certain products. Others you can get at these these
you know, vape shops from all over the world, but

(15:09):
they're not licensed they I guess under federal law. They
aren't approved by the FDA.

Speaker 2 (15:16):
They're not approved by the FDA, so that means the
FDA shuts them down. And I guarantee you there are
people listening right now that are vapors that use these
products and swear by them and swear by them in
a good way. You know how they've changed their lives
going from smoking to really becoming you know, a less
harm these less harmful alternatives. And you know a lot

(15:36):
of these places that are mom and pop shops that
are putting these vape liquids together and it's really a
fascinating community once you get involved in and I've spoken
to many of these people and they're not big tobacco,
they're small town vape shops. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (15:52):
Well, you make excellent points, Dave. I cannot argue with them,
and I just you know, I don't like Nanny Steve
the shocking statement from my listening audience, but it's anyway,
I'm glad to see though. The bright news and all
this is that they are moving toward expanding the opportunities
for people to choose from various products. And again, I

(16:13):
think in the name of improving health. It seems to
be sort of contra counterintuitive to one having vapes out
there and more quantity, But the flip side is more
people will smoke or you create a black market. And
again a lesson learned from prohibition and what they're learning
in the UK real time right now black market is
growing by leaps and bounds seven twenty.

Speaker 2 (16:32):
Six right and it's going to be a case study
of the black market in the UK.

Speaker 1 (16:37):
Just watch, oh yeah, learn from others' mistakes. Dave Williams
will continue with Dave Don't go away at seven twenty six.
Right now, if you have CARES.

Speaker 2 (16:45):
Talk station.

Speaker 1 (16:47):
Seven thirty one, if you have care CD talk station,
Happy Friday from the Taxpayer Protection Alliance online at Protecting
Taxpayers dot org book markets. You know what Dave Williams
and the team they are doing for you every day,
holding government accountable, trying to do it by raising our
awareness about the government accountability needs pivoting or let's stick
with the FDA. From the Protecting Taxpayers dot our website.

(17:08):
Ross Marshall and Marshan writing about rejecting RFK Junior's Food
Safety Plan Healthier America legislative proposals on their regulation and
oversight of food. That was a hearing they had the
other day. What's this one all about, Dave Williams, Well,
you know this.

Speaker 2 (17:22):
Is the Mahad movement make America healthy again, and you
know very much support people being healthy, but you have
you have RFK Junior, who is you know, putting mandates
on food and really not making America healthy again. That's
the problem. And you know the FDA. I don't know
if if people realize just how much influence the FDA

(17:43):
has in everyone's life on a daily basis, and really
the foods we eat, the prescriptions that we were allowed
to take that are approved, and you know, we just
don't see a lot of leadership coming from RFK JR.

Speaker 1 (17:55):
Well, what of this generally recognize safe grass thing that
they're apparently going to require food manufacturers to go through
and provide notifications for. Is this going to raise the
price of our food or how will this allegedly bring
about some better healthier American diet.

Speaker 2 (18:13):
I'm not sure it's going to bring about a healthier diet,
but it will raise the price of food. Whenever you
have any sort of regulation, that always raises the price
of food. And that's what we're concerned about, is that
there's too much manipulation a regulation and of food. And
these are regulations that don't go through Congress, And really
Congress has abdicated a lot of their responsibility here. They

(18:35):
might have a hearing or two, but after that, there's
really nothing that they do to manage the Food and
Drug Administration or the Health and Human Services Department of
Health and Human Services.

Speaker 1 (18:46):
Well, do the food manufacturers have maybe a major questions
document or major questions argument they could bring to court,
Like wait a second, they did not delegate this degree
of authority to regulate how we manufacture food. It's outside
of the scope of whatever regulation they're springing from.

Speaker 2 (19:03):
We're starting to see that. And Ross marsh until you
mentioned he's our executive director, has a law degree, and
we've been filing AMEKAS briefs at the state and federal
level when it comes to these regulations, because we feel
that there's a lot going on here. There's freedom of
speech issues, there's overregulation, and so it's something we're getting
more involved. And I remember, you know, back in April,

(19:25):
I think Joe was telling me April first was the
last time we spoke, April Fool's Day, and you mentioned,
you know, what is the Taxpayer's Protection Alliance? You know,
what do we do to affect change one of it?
You know, are AMEKAS briefs and trying to you know,
get the court's attention and to change what the federal
government is doing and what these agencies are doing. And
a lot of agencies, you know, this is authority that

(19:47):
they previously didn't have and they're taking for themselves.

Speaker 1 (19:51):
Yeah, and I know this, I suppose arguably a more
altruistic road that RFK Junior is going down. And I
like some of the things he's done, you know a
lot of things kind and I kind of take a
sit on the fence approach to it, But overall, I
think it's a good thing that he's bringing awareness about
our diets to our attention. That the idea of going
against processed food just choose not to eat them, as

(20:11):
opposed to Dave telling them how to make them. An
educated population, that's where the food additives and problems with
processed food will reject those over time, I would hope
much in the same way awareness about cigarettes causing cancer
will pushed a whole lot of people to just quit
smoking just because they got the information.

Speaker 2 (20:30):
Well, and look at GMOs, genetically modified organisms. That sounds
really scary, doesn't it, And some people are really afraid
of GMOs. Well, they're saving lives in countries that need
food because they're able to produce food at an incredible level.
So science is working on our behalf. And a food

(20:51):
company's goal is not to kill you, it's to sell product.
And this reminds me of the fugitive is when a
pharmaceutical company, why would they create to pill that kills you.
It's not what they're in business for. So food companies,
you know, do they need to be policed and then monitored.
We're already doing that, so I think it's just really

(21:11):
micromanaging what they can put in the ingredients.

Speaker 1 (21:15):
I just thought of a conspiracy theory, Dave, where we
take a break and come back to my conspiracy theories,
or as they like to be referred to, pattern observer friends.
Maybe the idea of getting rid of GMOs to reduce
the quantity of food that is produced is a direct
relationship to controlling the population, Dave. I just put that
in people's minds. See, I can come up with them too,

(21:36):
although ill gott to get chimed in right now. No, No,
that's actually going on. Here's a link to an article
I found out on the internet. Because anything you read
on the internet, of course is true. That's what Abraham
Lincoln said. Don't go away more with Dave Williams. Taxpayer
Protection Alliance Death by a thousand quotas a crackdown on
us stream. Tom's talking well overreach of government, taxpayer protection lions.

(21:58):
Dave Williams again protecting tax or. Dave got a chuckle
as I mentioned my conspiracy theory, and I was taking
credit for coming up with it. No, lo and behold
my friend Maureen. Good morning, Maureene. That's what I was
thinking of. Had already sent me an instant message about
the GMO products unless you have a population agenda. I
didn't see that before I made my comment. She said,

(22:21):
great minds. Of course, great minds, think life, see Dave,
and there you go, GMO, GMO, getting rid of them
is for the purpose of population control. Okay, you can
agree or believe whatever you want. Pivoting over a consumer
watchdog exposing the global crackdown on US streaming services. Why
are they cracking down on our streaming services? I think

(22:43):
maybe has something to do with the idea that we
have free speech and the free exchange of ideas in
large part on our social media and places like oh,
I don't know, Iran, don't.

Speaker 2 (22:55):
Well. Listen. The European Union, Canada, Australia, they want money
and they found another way to take it from US businesses.
And this is with streaming quotas, streaming taxes, and this
is billions of dollars a year. And these quotas are
really weird. Is that the European Union is saying that,
you know, if your Netflix or any other streaming service

(23:17):
that you're gonna have thirty percent of the catalog that
you have has to be European produced award I mean.
And then of course they imput taxes on these streaming services.
And again we've seen this from the European Union in
so many way, the Digital service tax. This is a entity,
the European Union that just overregulates and over taxes and

(23:40):
they see. What they do is they see the rich
neighbor and they go, I want some of their money, yep,
And so they pass these rules of regulations and these
taxes trying to fleece our businesses.

Speaker 1 (23:50):
Well, I guess the larger question remains is can these
large corporations still make money? Can they still be profitable?
I mean, obviously the profits will be less having to
comply with all this and all of the bloody work
that would have to be done to comply with something
like three percent of the content needs to be EU created.
I suppose AI in and of itself can call up
with the content list. But still obviously this comes at
a great expense of the large companies. But will they

(24:13):
remain there in spite of this cash grab that they're
engaging in?

Speaker 2 (24:17):
And Darren lies there rub is that they will pull
out of these markets and that's not good for people
in the European Union. Australia, boy, Australia, time and time
again are passing these bizarre regulations. You know, Australia used
to be a place of like freedom, No more. I mean,
so many different regulations on social media. Who can access

(24:41):
social media? Yeah they have. They have a rule that
you know, if you're sixteen or under, you only have
free speech after sixteen years old, which I think is
a weird concept about accessing social media. And we've seen
this of course in this country, state by state. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (24:56):
Yeah, I read an arc like again another one I
thought about you, Dave Over. In the UK, there was
an ur about kids getting around the social media age
verification by simply using a mask, garapen and drawing fake
mustaches and beards on themselves. I mean, duh. But see
the nefarious part about this, Maureen, good morning, is that
because of that, they're going to use the workarounds in

(25:17):
order to bring about the dawn of the everyone must
have an online digital ID, the numbering of the people
kind of thing that my friends out there in the
religious community kind of argue about all the time, and.

Speaker 2 (25:28):
Now Michigan wants to ban VPNs. Obviously a VPN is
a way or around they do age restrictions. Yeah, so
this is the next step. This is the absolute next step,
is banning VPNs that you can't use a VPN to
access the Internet. And you know, age verification is something
that we actually are work a lot on because a

(25:49):
lot of First Amendment issues. Florida tried to ban kids
sixteen and under. Now, if you're let's say you live
in Georgia and you're sixteen, you have a social media account,
you drive into Florida, how does at work? Like? I mean,
it doesn't make any sense, Brian, And it doesn't. And
people are saying, well, we have to control big tech.
Big tech is bad. Listen, think what you want to

(26:09):
think about big tech. I don't care. So what you
want to do is create a government regime to collect
your ID biometric information to ensure that you're old enough
to get onto the internet. And it's not just for
sixteen year olds. As a almost sixty year old, I
have to go through the same thing. Yeah, I have
to prove that I am sixty, which I really don't

(26:31):
want to do. I have to prove that to get
onto the internet. So it's not just the kids. Everyone
has to submit this data. And we have seen one
breach after another in the UK, in the US, everywhere.
These things are breached all the time. Huge security risk.
And for some reason people are trusting big government to

(26:51):
do this and to be able to handle this. I
don't get it.

Speaker 1 (26:54):
People are trusting big government for anything. I don't get it. Yeah,
it doesn't matter what the topic happens to be. I
was thinking about that when you mentioned about the regulatory
screen stream for a regulatory process and streamlining it and
making an uniform for all the United States based upon
federal legislation. You know, I was thinking about it. I
wrote down, our idiots in Congress don't know anything about AI.
How is it that they can legislate curbs and controls

(27:16):
on it? Who do they rely on? They rely on
the people who build the AI platforms. I guess lobbyists. Right.

Speaker 2 (27:23):
You have Senator Chuck Rassley, who's in his nineties. Is
this the person that we want to be debating AI
in the future of AI in this country? I'm sorry,
but no, these are not the people that we want
deciding these issues.

Speaker 1 (27:38):
Let's pause bring day back for one more. I appreciate
the extra time you have. This has been a fascinating conversation.
Dave went Talk station. It is seven fifty one here
fifty five KERCD Talk Station. The return of Corey Bowman,
former mayoral Candada for the city of Sin santawais the
comments about the primary race and the new safety program
that was rolled out. He'll be joining the program top

(28:00):
of their news the meantime. One more comments or more
comments from Dave Volliams from the Taxpayer Protection Lines. Dave,
you know I asked you specifically about the artificial intelligence
companies pulling out of those you know, unbelievably over regulatory
and high taxation countries. You suggested, Yeah, they may very
well do that. Obviously downside risk with that. And I
was looking at this wonderful one to two punch this morning,

(28:21):
and I talked about it in the US at the
beginning of the six o'clock hour report released by the
Committee to Unleashed Prosperity, and they rely on IRS numbers
showing that the states that voted for Trump, the Red States,
gained about two trillion dollars from those who fled the
blue states that lost a collective equal amount roughly two

(28:41):
trillion dollars. They did a breakdown in all the states
that benefited and gained from it. With a corollary article
op ed piece from Kimberly Strassel, the Red Blue economic divide.
We have the freedom of travel in this country, day Voliams.
And when you get hit over the head by oppressive
regulation and outrageous cost of living, a government that doesn't
do anything about feces in the streets and roads and infrastructure,

(29:03):
and you know, the whole litany of problems in cities
like Seattle, states like California, Illinois, they're underwater financially. Look
at what's happening in New York with everyone who can
get out of the dodge leaving. As backed up by
this economic report, that's what people do. Do you have
a reaction to that? And I don't know if you
saw the data on that one, Dave, Yeah, absolutely.

Speaker 2 (29:23):
This is about competition, tax competition, and people vote with
their feet. People are leaving California. Listen, We've heard this before,
people leaving California, going to Texas, going to Florida. It's
not for the weather, it's for the tax climate. It's
because and you have businesses that have relocated to lower
tax states. And that's what I love about this country

(29:46):
is you have that tax competition, you have that competition,
and people are smart. I mean, that's the thing is.
You know, we can talk all this theoremy when you
see it actually happen, you know that people look look
at the bottom line, and this has been happening for years.
And California, Maryland, these deep blue states, they just don't

(30:06):
get it, they don't understand. They keep on raising taxes,
people keep on leaving, and it's really a vicious cycle.
But you know, the red states are winning. They're winning
and winning economically. And the next battle that I think
is going to be property taxes. We're going to see
a lot of states dropping property taxes, lowering them, or

(30:26):
completely getting rid of property taxes again to get people
to come into their state. And I love that. I
love competition because at the end of the day, consumers win,
property owners win when there's more competition.

Speaker 1 (30:40):
More competition. And you know, we've got that property tax
issue raging here in the state of Ohio. I don't
know if you're aware of, but there's a battot petition
circulating around to get the eradication of property taxes into
the Ohio Constitution, and it's freaking out a lot of municipality,
municipalities and of course the school districts wondering what they
would do in order to get funding for you know,

(31:01):
fire departments, police departments, and of course school districts. If
the property tax disappears. But other states can do it,
why can't we?

Speaker 2 (31:09):
Deep Blue Baltimore City is considering cutting their property tax rate.
If that doesn't tell you everything about property taxes, I
don't know what does. Because this is something that I
think is going to be sweeping the country. Florida is
now discussing whether to get rid of their property taxes.
So I love it. I love the fact that we're
talking about this, and because it puts more money back

(31:30):
into people's pockets. I mean, the bottom line is people
will have more money at their disposal, and guess what
they're going to spend that money. They're going to go
to the store. They're going to buy things. This is
what people do when they have more money, They buy
more stuff.

Speaker 1 (31:43):
And going back to the figure from the Committee to
Unleashed Prosperity, Florida the largest gain of all the states
receiving the benefits of new people moving into the tune
of ready day one point two nine to three trillion
dollars in adjusted gross income tied to migration during the
ten year period study between twenty twelve and twenty twenty three.

(32:03):
And I'm sure it got a lot bigger twenty twenty
four and twenty five are added.

Speaker 2 (32:08):
Absolutely absolutely, And you know, God blessed Florida and other states.
You know, if they're smart, they're looking at what Florida
did and going hm hmm, yeah, we should do the
same thing.

Speaker 1 (32:18):
Yeah, Ohio lost one hundred and six billion in spite
of the fact that it's one of the several Trump
states or several states that voted for Trump. M maybe
we need to follow a different course. Dave Williams, thanks
for what you do. I appreciate your willingness to spend
time with my listeners and me on the morning show.
Here we'll recommend again protecting taxpayers dot org. I look
forward to our next conversation, Dave, and a happy Most

(32:38):
Day weekend you and the crew at tax Payer Protection
Lines