June 4, 2025 • 29 mins
(June 04, 2025)
Elon Musk rails against Trump’s tax bill, calling it ‘a disgusting abomination.’ FEMA is not prepared. Los Angeles tourism workers rally against Referendum to overturn $30 minimum wage. Is it sex education or porn? Huntington Beach comes to blows over library books.
Elon Musk rails against Trump’s tax bill, calling it ‘a disgusting abomination.’ FEMA is not prepared. Los Angeles tourism workers rally against Referendum to overturn $30 minimum wage. Is it sex education or porn? Huntington Beach comes to blows over library books.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're listenings kf I AM six forty the Bill Handles
show on demand on the iHeartRadio app. Quick word about
our dinner on Saturday night, the morning crew, we are
hosting a dinner all of us together. We've never done
that before. It'll be at the Anaheim White House. Ooh,
(00:22):
some phenomenal, insane food and we're doing this. We're inviting
five people plus a guest. It's a plus one and
it's a contest. You enter, and here's how you do it.
You go to the iHeartRadio app during the course of
the show and you go to the Bill hand Bill
Handle Show. You click on that microphone in the upper
right hand corner, click on that, and you have fifteen
(00:43):
twenty seconds to tell us either why you should go
or want to go to dinner with us where we
bad mouth everybody else. It's really wonderful, should be hugely entertaining,
entertained with some great food. And we'll pick out some
of the more fun ones and that those go into
a hat and we at random pickout five and we'll
play those for you tomorrow. We'll contact the winners, we'll
(01:03):
play a few, and then Saturday night for those of
you invited. I guarantee the time of your life and
some phenomenal food. Okay, no surprise that Elon Musk and
the President are now at odds for a couple of reasons.
The tax bill, the big beautiful bill that has been
(01:23):
passed by Congress and now goes to the Senate, passed
by one vote. I might add, it's a massive tax
immigration bill, which is at the heart of the Trump agenda.
Must called it a disgusting abomination that would burden the
country with crushingly unsustainable debt. Trump and Musk have now
(01:44):
become enemies.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
It's that simple.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
And we sort of knew that that's not a hard
call because Trump, because Musk was getting more attention than
was the president, and that does not bode well for
Donald Trump, who likes a tension. There are certain people
that just like a lot of attention others don't, and
Donald Trump is one who does. And Musk was getting
an insane amount of attention as head of DOGE.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
So he leaves his post at DOGE last.
Speaker 1 (02:13):
Week, and he had previously criticized the bill, but in
gentle terms, well, he's gone to war. And even some
conservatives within Congress really have a problem with this bill
because it's supposed to have cut.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Look at the expenses, all.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
The social programs that being cut, the NPR. We're going
to talk more about what's going on later on at
eight o'clock because it goes beyond just cutting programs, FEMA.
I'm going to talk about FEMA too, how it's not prepared,
that's coming up next topic, next segment. But it doesn't
cut enough. It's more spent than his cut. We're talking
(02:59):
about the spending. We're talking about money's being spent for
the wall, immigration issues. That's more important to the president,
and that's his position. We knew that. I mean, it's
no surprise. It's not like he turned around and said
I was going to do something and he does something else.
No president was elected exactly based on what he was
going to do. As I said, there's no hidden agenda there,
(03:20):
and it is even the Congressional Budget Office, nonpartisan, says
that this bill would increase the national debt by two
point four trillion over the next decade. So the premise
that expenses were going to be cut and therefore government
was going to be more efficient and we were going
to reduce the debt, expenses have been cut, but more
(03:42):
money is being spent and we're going to go more
into debt. So the reality is cutting has taken place
in social programs and has increased in military and border enforcement.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Is what's going on. But to say we are.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Going to go and attack the national debt, we will
be leaner, we will be meaner, that's absolutely not true.
That has not happened, it will not happen under this bill.
We are going to spend more money. And it makes
sense because you know, for some reason, Trump believes that
tips should not be taxed. I don't understand that it's
(04:25):
part of income. I would love my income not to
be taxed. As a matter of fact, you have waiters,
both female and male waiters who work at restaurants.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
They make more money in tips than they do in salary.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
They make minimum wage, and they get seventy eighty percent
of their money fifty percent of their money in tips,
and that should not under the new bill.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
That's not taxed. So what you do.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
You go to a restaurant and you're paying fifty dollars
ahead and four people are now paying twenty two hundred
bucks and you're tipping twenty percent.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
So there's forty dollars, which is not taxed. What is taxed.
The minimum wage is taxed.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
Well, guess what, there's a lot of money that is
not being put into the government, not being paid for
the government, because all of a sudden, that enormous amount of.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Money is not being taxed anymore. Same thing with overtime.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
Wait a minute, how is it that overtime should not
be taxed? Again, It is salary, It is part of
your income. This makes no sense to me at all.
I mean, everybody should pay taxes. If you earn eighty
thousand dollars a year, you should pay income tax on
eighty thousand dollars a year. But if you live on tips,
(05:50):
you're going to pay income tax on minimum wage and
the rest of it is your money. It's effectively free money.
Well it's not free, looking for it, but it's non taxable.
So you know, you have a couple of programs like that,
and that's a lot of money not going into the government,
(06:11):
which means that income is dropping drastically, and that does
not help the budget. It doesn't because there's no money
there or very little. The other thing is the tax cut,
which was initiated under Trump's first administration and was supposed
(06:33):
to end the end of this year has now been
extended indefinitely. And if there's a tax cut that means
less money is coming in to the government. You put
all of that together and you don't have a budget
that is leaner, meaner, and less money is being spent.
It's the other way around. So in the Senate, that's
(06:53):
going to be a different story. Now the fight in
the Senate is going to be how much more cuts,
how many more cuts are going.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
To be instituted in this bill.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
It's not a question of reinstating programs that are being cut,
the social programs for example, food stamps, FEMA, which I'm
going to talk about in just a few minutes. It's
about how much more we can cut because we're running
at a deficit.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Year after year after year, and we're talking about trillion
dollar deficit this year.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
Maybe it's insane more deficits. Well, it used to be
more deficits under Democrats, and now the Republicans are right
there with deficit spendingbody everybody has deficit spending. There's no
such thing as deficit hawks anymore. The Republicans used to
be deficit hawks. You can't spend this much money. You
(07:48):
cannot spend more than what you have coming in. Now.
There's just a handful of deficit hawks that have come in.
You know, the President wants money to be spent on defense,
he wants money to be spent on the border. And
Mike Johnson, here's the problem with the Republican Congress and
the Republican Senate, for the most part, it is no
(08:10):
longer representing their constituents. Mike Johnson has said it outright.
Our job is to further the president's agenda.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
That's where we stop, that's where we start. We do
not represent anybody else at this point. He didn't say
that specifically, but certainly that is his position. And so
is the bill going to pass? Well, it's going to
be reduced. I mean, there are going to be some
more cuts. And my guess is that there may be
(08:38):
some cuts with the border and defense. No idea if
it's going to happen. I'm guessing that it will all right.
Coming up FEMA, big cuts to FEMA. FEMA is simply
not prepared. That's it, bottom line, not prepared. Not only cuts,
but philosophically, FEMA is an agency that even shouldn't be
(09:00):
around as far as the administration is concerned. I'll talk
about that coming up. It is a Wednesday more than
June the fourth. Here is a scary thought, especially if
you happen to be in the middle of a natural disaster,
much like hurricanes or floods, earthquakes, wildfires, and what we
(09:22):
do as Americans we rely on FEMA. FEMA's kind of
a neat organization, it really is. It simply helps us
and it's the Federal Emergency Management Agency. And I don't
think anybody who thinks of FEMA in political terms. Well,
yesterday Reuters reported that the now head of FEMA and
(09:42):
laughed about this. David Richardson suggested during a media with
employees that he was unaware of the existence of hurricane season.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
That was a big deal.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Now. A spokesperson for DHS, which oversees FEMA, said no, no,
despite mean spirited attempts to falsely frame a joke as policy,
there is no uncertainty about what FEMA will be doing
this hurricane season. And here is what the administration said
about FEMA. It is shifting from bloated DC centric dead
(10:15):
weight to a lean, deployable disaster force that empowers state
actors to provide relief for their citizens, moving what FEMA
did and does to the states, saying it should not
be a federal agency, or if it is, should be
much leaner, much meaner. The problem is states don't have
(10:38):
a resources because it's not money that goes with it.
It's just the states should take care of natural disasters.
Speaker 2 (10:46):
They can't. They can't. It's that simple.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
There are no resources, and the state has to be
The state has.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
To budget, has to balance the budget.
Speaker 1 (10:56):
Most states do. We do constitutionally. The federal government can
just keep on printing money. I mean, it's in debt,
what thirty six trillion dollars and so next year, over
the next few years, it'll be forty trillion dollars. I mean,
I've always thought it's unsustainable and it's all going to collapse.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
No.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
The Richardson, who's brand new according to The Wall Street Journal,
reported he was surprised at how broad FEMA's reach is.
What FEMA does now The last time that FEMA was
led by an administrator who was never an emergency management person,
which Richardson is not. Usually, FEMA directors are folks that
(11:39):
are experts in this. They've dealt with emergency's national, national
and natural disasters. Richardson, No, Remember Michael Brown, you're doing
a good job. Brownie, who had no experience. George W.
Bush a disaster, I mean a disaster with FEMA, and
(12:04):
Bush had to, of course name someone else who has experience.
Here's the bottom line with FEMA. In the aftermath of
Hurricane Helene. Trump grasped the public fury at FEMA because
the public was angry at FEMA. They didn't ask fast enough,
(12:27):
they didn't react because most of the victims were race,
were black. FEMA was racist. And the bottom line is
FEMA did not do a good job. And so the
answer now is we disband it or we cut it.
We cut it. And here's what's going on. FEMA is
(12:48):
making recovery harder for the victims of past disasters. In April,
they said no to declare a matcher a major disaster
in Washington State, and eight had asked for a declaration
of a major disaster when it was hit with a
bomb cyclone.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
In November twenty twenty.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Four, the entire congressional delegation in Washington State, Republicans, Democrats,
i mean, everybody begged Trump to reconsider.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Nope.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
Also, you had North Carolina wanted funding for cleanup after Halleen. Nope,
Federal assistance to nine Arkansas counties that were stuck struck
by tornado this past March. Now that was reversed after
being said no. Why because Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who
(13:44):
was very close to President Trump and was his press
secretary and his first go round, called the president directly
and said, please give these counties an emergency declaration to
free up federal funds.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
And he did. He did.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Now, it's kind of interesting that the argument is, and
this is the part that one of the issues that
really pisses me off about the Trump administration is the
cutting of all of these programs across the board is
for the most part, because they are partisan, because they
are political.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
FEMA, for example, is political.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
It only helps liberal positions, It only helps liberal states
and counties. So how are we going to deal with
those agencies that are political.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Well, frankly, we're going to be political.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
About granting emergency declarations, granting federal funds.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
I mean, the world is crazy.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
You have a non partisan agency who is accused of
being political, and the answer is you fight it.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
With political it's just crazy.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
So FEMA be prepared, by the way, and this is
the Wall Street Journal. A lot of people understand management
disaster management, or are saying it's going to be harder,
there's less money, you're not going to see the same
services be prepared for a much leaner I guess they're right, leaner, meaner,
FEMA more efficient. Well, yeah, you're more efficient when you
(15:20):
aren't doing anything or not doing as much. The other
side of it is when you need them and you're
not going to get them.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
So we will see. Also, I mean, can you imagine
and this is the part of pieces be off Nope
to the.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
Arkansas until Sarah Huckabee standers calls the president and then
all of a sudden it's yes, all right, coming up.
There is a referendum in LA to fight that thirty
dollars minimum wage that's going to be put into place
in twenty twenty eight for hotel workers, okay, and the
(16:01):
airport workers limited to that. And there's a referendum that
it's saying Nope, ain't gonna happen. We'll see how the
vote goes. Is being we're right up against the vote,
and of course can you imagine the fight between those
who don't want the wage increase and those in the
unions who do want the wage increase.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
And no surprise that.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
That's the issue that's coming right up Andnesday morning, June fourth, Oh,
is this We have a lot of stuff going on
coming up in what twenty seven days something like that.
There is a ballot measure which is we're going to
that is the citizens of the city of Los Angeles,
(16:44):
and what it does. It's about undoing the minimum wage
for the workers in the hotel industry and at La
Or Airport.
Speaker 2 (16:57):
And what you have is a.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Group of hotel loaners, business people who work at who
own property, and who deal service providers at the airport
are saying, Nope, it's going to kill us. The Olympic
Wage Ordinance increases the minimum wage for workers to thirty dollars.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
An hour by twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
Supporters of the referendum to undo that say that the
wage hike is just too aggressive. Frankly, it's too fast,
it's too much, and could further strain a tourist industry
still in recovery. I'm going to ask Neil a question,
because this is a wheelhouse in just a moment. Opponents
of the getting rid of the referendum that undoes the
(17:46):
wage increase argue that the effort threatens threatens hard fought progress,
and accuses the business community of prioritizing profits over the
workers needs. Surprise, we're in a capitalistic society.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Profits are more important. Now workers' needs have to be addressed.
So here's what they're arguing. Thirty dollars an hour is
going to kill business.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
It's that simple. It's going to kill restaurants.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
It's going to kill anybody involved in business dealing at
in tourism or at lax.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
Neil.
Speaker 1 (18:26):
We've talked many times about whether this is true or not.
I must say historically, historically wage increases, which were fought
like crazy, business did just fly.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
However, we have the pandemic.
Speaker 1 (18:43):
Neil, do you buy the argument that a thirty dollars
wage is going to destroy entire businesses or make it
almost impossible to grow to even be sustainable.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
Absolutely, but not necessarily the businesses that will be forced
to do it. I think the mom and pop ones
that have to compete with it are the ones that
are gonna suffer. Not necessarily the bigger companies that are
pushed to do it, and I'm actually in favor of,
like during the Olympics hospitality raises. I'm in because it
(19:16):
will be a different situation, more difficult to me.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
It's like hazard pay.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
So if they work with hospitality vendors like hotels and
said hey, during the Olympics, you're going to get a
profit share. I'm a bigger fan of profit sharing than
i am of forcing a wage up. So personally, I'm
seeing what California has done in the fast food industry
(19:40):
causing problems where lesser restaurants that were okay but maybe
a little bit on the border have had to shutter
and other places have. Mom and pop places have had
to shutter because they can't keep up with it.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Oh yeah, now to you rises, it's not just to
your point, okay, Uh, that seems fair. Income of workers
based on profit go up. Now do they go down
if a company loses money? No, I've never heard of that.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
No, you still get a base pay. But what I'm
a fan of is anything above that. I mean, here's
your okay, but in intense times, just like whether it's.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
Right, that's fair, Okay, that's fair.
Speaker 1 (20:32):
So you have you have a limit, You have a
limited You have a limited time ten days of Olympics.
For those ten days, everybody in hospitality and the tourist
business lax gets an increase in pay. Now giving up
an increase in pay is a very different animal.
Speaker 2 (20:49):
That's for starters.
Speaker 3 (20:50):
That's why you do it as a bonus or okay thing.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
Now Here is the question, and that is when you're
talking about a Ford Motor company that has a union,
and Ford Motor is a is a public company, and
we know how much profit Ford Motor makes. How do
you know how much profit a mom and pop makes?
You don't, especially privately owned. I have a company that's
(21:15):
privately owned. If you think I'm going to tell you
how much money I lose or make in a given year,
You're crazy.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
I'm not good.
Speaker 1 (21:23):
You don't have to file time, No, you can. You
can manufacture or anything you know not that.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
I egal is illegal? Is illegal.
Speaker 3 (21:30):
I mean if people do want to go to the
point where they are lying on their taxes, I can't.
Speaker 1 (21:35):
No, no, no, I'm going to go into a tax situation.
For example, I have income and if I want to
buy a piece of equipment this year versus next year,
this year, I'm going to lose some money and then.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
It's it's it's complicated stuff.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
The point is the basic premise, and I guess it
boils down to this, and this is where I'm generally
in favor of wage increase, is that I have a
hard time accepting the fact that someone who works full
time cannot feed themselves or their family.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
And no starter jobs.
Speaker 3 (22:10):
Every job, every single job, whether you're flipping burgers or
making fries.
Speaker 2 (22:15):
Oh, I understand, but tell me what a starter job is.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
Tell me that a starter job when you have someone
who is sixty five years old is a starter jobagement.
Speaker 3 (22:25):
I've never been at a place I have never worked
anywhere in my life where I was there for two
years where I.
Speaker 2 (22:34):
Will moved up or in me.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Neil, you Neil, you are Neil and you forget Yeah,
you go to an in and out burger where I.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
Go just to that burger pays very well.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
I'm not arguing, but what I'm saying is you still
can't feed yourself with what In and Out Burger make
pays you.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
You can't eat on twenty two dollars an hour.
Speaker 1 (22:55):
You can't get a car wash anything you do car
wash tell me that's minimum wage.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Okay, but that's what I'm saying. So any any job
out there, you should be able to feed a family.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
But you don't. Some people don't have the wherewithal. Some
people don't have the education. By the way, what kind
of rays do you get working? Get a car wash?
Where is you go into management? Do you go to
the front of the car and you work on the
fender instead of the rear fender?
Speaker 2 (23:22):
Is that the yeah? From tires?
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Okay, all right, coming up, this is We're gonna have
a good time on this one. Is it sex education
or is it porn? And should kids be told about it?
This is Huntington Beach which has become the forefront of
this fight and the whole country is looking at it.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
We'll deal with that when we come back Wednesday morning,
June the fourth.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
Okay, next week, there is an election in Huntington Beach.
There is a ballot measure that is on the books
to roll back library restrictions that have been put into place.
Does Huntington Beach repeal a community review board for library
(24:09):
material which is currently in place? So the review board
is citizens who have been elected to determine what libraries
carry or don't carry, and the placards that you see
protect our kids from porn. It was funded, it is
funded by a city council member's political action committee urging
(24:33):
people to vote against this ballot measure in this upcoming
special election, including one that would abolish this new community
review board for library books. That's what's scary is that
libraries are now would be controlled by this committee outside
of the school board, outside of the educators. And it's
(24:57):
a very conservative group of people, and that's why this
is so important. People are looking all over the country
at Huntington Beach, which has become sort of the poster
child of super conservative members on the school board. There
is a political movement movement and they call themselves the
(25:19):
Maga Nificent Seven. What does that tell you? It's you
know right there, that's you. You have everything you want
to go. You want to know the Magagnificent Seven.
Speaker 2 (25:31):
You have to be making that up. No, I am
not making that up. I am I am not making
this up. And what they're saying.
Speaker 1 (25:40):
Is that books have become for children now have become
so sexualized. The council person, Gracie Vandermerk, who is at
the head of this said she is alarmed by a
contemporary wave of picture books and sex education manuals that
(26:03):
she feels goes way beyond what's appropriate for young readers
and could damage kids who accidentally encountered the materials before
they're ready. So you have even in the library these books.
And she's for the most part talking about elementary school,
even middle school, she said an interview. The last thing
you want a child to do is pick up a
book and have a big picture of penises or instructions
(26:25):
for how to masturbate.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
Now, that is ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
Although I do remember in the fourth grade picking up
a book that said Masturbation Techniques for fourth Graders. I
understand that that was a little problematic.
Speaker 2 (26:41):
Right, I mean, this is completely crazy, colle no.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
I was in the fourth grade when I picked it up.
You know, I just was really learning to read and
understand what life is about. And there was the book
Masturbation Techniques for fourth Graders. Now that probably did not happen.
Maybe I'm making that up, but the city council established
(27:08):
this ordinance that this community board will review library books
for textual graphic references to sex, sexual organs, sex acts,
relationships of sexual nature, sexual relations in any form LGBTQ
rights even admitting that there is a gay community. And
(27:28):
the argument is, at what point do you tell a
youngster about homosexuality in the gay community.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
You got mom and dad, And then that.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
Was a huge, huge issue when it first came out,
you know, was it Linda has two moms? That one.
I remember a book talking about a young lady who
was growing up and trying to figure out what she
was going to do, you know, and it was entitled
(27:58):
Subway slot as the possibility of moving ahead in her career.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
No, okay, children's booked by Bill Handle.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
Yeah, I will never be elected to this community Advisory board.
But all kidding aside, you know, masturbation for third graders. Okay,
maybe I am kidding on that one. But this actually is,
this is the forefront of a huge argument. We're moving
way back when well, there was there was a and
(28:37):
this was undone. There was a Kansas City school board
that passed a past a bill, passed a law and
ordinance that kids in school in this one district have
to have when evolution is taught, have to be given
the same education with creationism. It's the theory of evolution
(29:00):
which means it's not proven. The theory of creationism is
as valuable. God created the world in six days and
the entire world and dinosaurs are only six thousand years old.
Speaker 2 (29:14):
Crazy stuff, all right?
Speaker 1 (29:15):
Coming up the attack on knowledge, you know, Here's what
I want to do is we'll play a few.
Speaker 2 (29:23):
Because this is getting pretty deep on this one.
Speaker 1 (29:25):
I don't know how deep I want to go, because
it's just it moves in a direction that's way beyond
what's happening politically. We're going to play a couple of
these phone calls that have come in the recorded calls
for Saturday Night. You'll see it hugely entertaining. You'll have
a great time. This is KFI Am sixty. You've been
(29:45):
listening to the Bill Handle Show. Catch My Show Monday
through Friday, six am to nine am, and anytime on
demand on the iHeartRadio app.
You're listenings kf I AM six forty the Bill Handles
show on demand on the iHeartRadio app. Quick word about
our dinner on Saturday night, the morning crew, we are
hosting a dinner all of us together. We've never done
that before. It'll be at the Anaheim White House. Ooh,
(00:22):
some phenomenal, insane food and we're doing this. We're inviting
five people plus a guest. It's a plus one and
it's a contest. You enter, and here's how you do it.
You go to the iHeartRadio app during the course of
the show and you go to the Bill hand Bill
Handle Show. You click on that microphone in the upper
right hand corner, click on that, and you have fifteen
(00:43):
twenty seconds to tell us either why you should go
or want to go to dinner with us where we
bad mouth everybody else. It's really wonderful, should be hugely entertaining,
entertained with some great food. And we'll pick out some
of the more fun ones and that those go into
a hat and we at random pickout five and we'll
play those for you tomorrow. We'll contact the winners, we'll
(01:03):
play a few, and then Saturday night for those of
you invited. I guarantee the time of your life and
some phenomenal food. Okay, no surprise that Elon Musk and
the President are now at odds for a couple of reasons.
The tax bill, the big beautiful bill that has been
(01:23):
passed by Congress and now goes to the Senate, passed
by one vote. I might add, it's a massive tax
immigration bill, which is at the heart of the Trump agenda.
Must called it a disgusting abomination that would burden the
country with crushingly unsustainable debt. Trump and Musk have now
(01:44):
become enemies.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
It's that simple.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
And we sort of knew that that's not a hard
call because Trump, because Musk was getting more attention than
was the president, and that does not bode well for
Donald Trump, who likes a tension. There are certain people
that just like a lot of attention others don't, and
Donald Trump is one who does. And Musk was getting
an insane amount of attention as head of DOGE.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
So he leaves his post at DOGE last.
Speaker 1 (02:13):
Week, and he had previously criticized the bill, but in
gentle terms, well, he's gone to war. And even some
conservatives within Congress really have a problem with this bill
because it's supposed to have cut.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Look at the expenses, all.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
The social programs that being cut, the NPR. We're going
to talk more about what's going on later on at
eight o'clock because it goes beyond just cutting programs, FEMA.
I'm going to talk about FEMA too, how it's not prepared,
that's coming up next topic, next segment. But it doesn't
cut enough. It's more spent than his cut. We're talking
(02:59):
about the spending. We're talking about money's being spent for
the wall, immigration issues. That's more important to the president,
and that's his position. We knew that. I mean, it's
no surprise. It's not like he turned around and said
I was going to do something and he does something else.
No president was elected exactly based on what he was
going to do. As I said, there's no hidden agenda there,
(03:20):
and it is even the Congressional Budget Office, nonpartisan, says
that this bill would increase the national debt by two
point four trillion over the next decade. So the premise
that expenses were going to be cut and therefore government
was going to be more efficient and we were going
to reduce the debt, expenses have been cut, but more
(03:42):
money is being spent and we're going to go more
into debt. So the reality is cutting has taken place
in social programs and has increased in military and border enforcement.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Is what's going on. But to say we are.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Going to go and attack the national debt, we will
be leaner, we will be meaner, that's absolutely not true.
That has not happened, it will not happen under this bill.
We are going to spend more money. And it makes
sense because you know, for some reason, Trump believes that
tips should not be taxed. I don't understand that it's
(04:25):
part of income. I would love my income not to
be taxed. As a matter of fact, you have waiters,
both female and male waiters who work at restaurants.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
They make more money in tips than they do in salary.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
They make minimum wage, and they get seventy eighty percent
of their money fifty percent of their money in tips,
and that should not under the new bill.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
That's not taxed. So what you do.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
You go to a restaurant and you're paying fifty dollars
ahead and four people are now paying twenty two hundred
bucks and you're tipping twenty percent.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
So there's forty dollars, which is not taxed. What is taxed.
The minimum wage is taxed.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
Well, guess what, there's a lot of money that is
not being put into the government, not being paid for
the government, because all of a sudden, that enormous amount of.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Money is not being taxed anymore. Same thing with overtime.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
Wait a minute, how is it that overtime should not
be taxed? Again, It is salary, It is part of
your income. This makes no sense to me at all.
I mean, everybody should pay taxes. If you earn eighty
thousand dollars a year, you should pay income tax on
eighty thousand dollars a year. But if you live on tips,
(05:50):
you're going to pay income tax on minimum wage and
the rest of it is your money. It's effectively free money.
Well it's not free, looking for it, but it's non taxable.
So you know, you have a couple of programs like that,
and that's a lot of money not going into the government,
(06:11):
which means that income is dropping drastically, and that does
not help the budget. It doesn't because there's no money
there or very little. The other thing is the tax cut,
which was initiated under Trump's first administration and was supposed
(06:33):
to end the end of this year has now been
extended indefinitely. And if there's a tax cut that means
less money is coming in to the government. You put
all of that together and you don't have a budget
that is leaner, meaner, and less money is being spent.
It's the other way around. So in the Senate, that's
(06:53):
going to be a different story. Now the fight in
the Senate is going to be how much more cuts,
how many more cuts are going.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
To be instituted in this bill.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
It's not a question of reinstating programs that are being cut,
the social programs for example, food stamps, FEMA, which I'm
going to talk about in just a few minutes. It's
about how much more we can cut because we're running
at a deficit.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Year after year after year, and we're talking about trillion
dollar deficit this year.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
Maybe it's insane more deficits. Well, it used to be
more deficits under Democrats, and now the Republicans are right
there with deficit spendingbody everybody has deficit spending. There's no
such thing as deficit hawks anymore. The Republicans used to
be deficit hawks. You can't spend this much money. You
(07:48):
cannot spend more than what you have coming in. Now.
There's just a handful of deficit hawks that have come in.
You know, the President wants money to be spent on defense,
he wants money to be spent on the border. And
Mike Johnson, here's the problem with the Republican Congress and
the Republican Senate, for the most part, it is no
(08:10):
longer representing their constituents. Mike Johnson has said it outright.
Our job is to further the president's agenda.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
That's where we stop, that's where we start. We do
not represent anybody else at this point. He didn't say
that specifically, but certainly that is his position. And so
is the bill going to pass? Well, it's going to
be reduced. I mean, there are going to be some
more cuts. And my guess is that there may be
(08:38):
some cuts with the border and defense. No idea if
it's going to happen. I'm guessing that it will all right.
Coming up FEMA, big cuts to FEMA. FEMA is simply
not prepared. That's it, bottom line, not prepared. Not only cuts,
but philosophically, FEMA is an agency that even shouldn't be
(09:00):
around as far as the administration is concerned. I'll talk
about that coming up. It is a Wednesday more than
June the fourth. Here is a scary thought, especially if
you happen to be in the middle of a natural disaster,
much like hurricanes or floods, earthquakes, wildfires, and what we
(09:22):
do as Americans we rely on FEMA. FEMA's kind of
a neat organization, it really is. It simply helps us
and it's the Federal Emergency Management Agency. And I don't
think anybody who thinks of FEMA in political terms. Well,
yesterday Reuters reported that the now head of FEMA and
(09:42):
laughed about this. David Richardson suggested during a media with
employees that he was unaware of the existence of hurricane season.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
That was a big deal.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Now. A spokesperson for DHS, which oversees FEMA, said no, no,
despite mean spirited attempts to falsely frame a joke as policy,
there is no uncertainty about what FEMA will be doing
this hurricane season. And here is what the administration said
about FEMA. It is shifting from bloated DC centric dead
(10:15):
weight to a lean, deployable disaster force that empowers state
actors to provide relief for their citizens, moving what FEMA
did and does to the states, saying it should not
be a federal agency, or if it is, should be
much leaner, much meaner. The problem is states don't have
(10:38):
a resources because it's not money that goes with it.
It's just the states should take care of natural disasters.
Speaker 2 (10:46):
They can't. They can't. It's that simple.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
There are no resources, and the state has to be
The state has.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
To budget, has to balance the budget.
Speaker 1 (10:56):
Most states do. We do constitutionally. The federal government can
just keep on printing money. I mean, it's in debt,
what thirty six trillion dollars and so next year, over
the next few years, it'll be forty trillion dollars. I mean,
I've always thought it's unsustainable and it's all going to collapse.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
No.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
The Richardson, who's brand new according to The Wall Street Journal,
reported he was surprised at how broad FEMA's reach is.
What FEMA does now The last time that FEMA was
led by an administrator who was never an emergency management person,
which Richardson is not. Usually, FEMA directors are folks that
(11:39):
are experts in this. They've dealt with emergency's national, national
and natural disasters. Richardson, No, Remember Michael Brown, you're doing
a good job. Brownie, who had no experience. George W.
Bush a disaster, I mean a disaster with FEMA, and
(12:04):
Bush had to, of course name someone else who has experience.
Here's the bottom line with FEMA. In the aftermath of
Hurricane Helene. Trump grasped the public fury at FEMA because
the public was angry at FEMA. They didn't ask fast enough,
(12:27):
they didn't react because most of the victims were race,
were black. FEMA was racist. And the bottom line is
FEMA did not do a good job. And so the
answer now is we disband it or we cut it.
We cut it. And here's what's going on. FEMA is
(12:48):
making recovery harder for the victims of past disasters. In April,
they said no to declare a matcher a major disaster
in Washington State, and eight had asked for a declaration
of a major disaster when it was hit with a
bomb cyclone.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
In November twenty twenty.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Four, the entire congressional delegation in Washington State, Republicans, Democrats,
i mean, everybody begged Trump to reconsider.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Nope.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
Also, you had North Carolina wanted funding for cleanup after Halleen. Nope,
Federal assistance to nine Arkansas counties that were stuck struck
by tornado this past March. Now that was reversed after
being said no. Why because Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who
(13:44):
was very close to President Trump and was his press
secretary and his first go round, called the president directly
and said, please give these counties an emergency declaration to
free up federal funds.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
And he did. He did.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Now, it's kind of interesting that the argument is, and
this is the part that one of the issues that
really pisses me off about the Trump administration is the
cutting of all of these programs across the board is
for the most part, because they are partisan, because they
are political.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
FEMA, for example, is political.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
It only helps liberal positions, It only helps liberal states
and counties. So how are we going to deal with
those agencies that are political.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Well, frankly, we're going to be political.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
About granting emergency declarations, granting federal funds.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
I mean, the world is crazy.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
You have a non partisan agency who is accused of
being political, and the answer is you fight it.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
With political it's just crazy.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
So FEMA be prepared, by the way, and this is
the Wall Street Journal. A lot of people understand management
disaster management, or are saying it's going to be harder,
there's less money, you're not going to see the same
services be prepared for a much leaner I guess they're right, leaner, meaner,
FEMA more efficient. Well, yeah, you're more efficient when you
(15:20):
aren't doing anything or not doing as much. The other
side of it is when you need them and you're
not going to get them.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
So we will see. Also, I mean, can you imagine
and this is the part of pieces be off Nope
to the.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
Arkansas until Sarah Huckabee standers calls the president and then
all of a sudden it's yes, all right, coming up.
There is a referendum in LA to fight that thirty
dollars minimum wage that's going to be put into place
in twenty twenty eight for hotel workers, okay, and the
(16:01):
airport workers limited to that. And there's a referendum that
it's saying Nope, ain't gonna happen. We'll see how the
vote goes. Is being we're right up against the vote,
and of course can you imagine the fight between those
who don't want the wage increase and those in the
unions who do want the wage increase.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
And no surprise that.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
That's the issue that's coming right up Andnesday morning, June fourth, Oh,
is this We have a lot of stuff going on
coming up in what twenty seven days something like that.
There is a ballot measure which is we're going to
that is the citizens of the city of Los Angeles,
(16:44):
and what it does. It's about undoing the minimum wage
for the workers in the hotel industry and at La
Or Airport.
Speaker 2 (16:57):
And what you have is a.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Group of hotel loaners, business people who work at who
own property, and who deal service providers at the airport
are saying, Nope, it's going to kill us. The Olympic
Wage Ordinance increases the minimum wage for workers to thirty dollars.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
An hour by twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
Supporters of the referendum to undo that say that the
wage hike is just too aggressive. Frankly, it's too fast,
it's too much, and could further strain a tourist industry
still in recovery. I'm going to ask Neil a question,
because this is a wheelhouse in just a moment. Opponents
of the getting rid of the referendum that undoes the
(17:46):
wage increase argue that the effort threatens threatens hard fought progress,
and accuses the business community of prioritizing profits over the
workers needs. Surprise, we're in a capitalistic society.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Profits are more important. Now workers' needs have to be addressed.
So here's what they're arguing. Thirty dollars an hour is
going to kill business.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
It's that simple. It's going to kill restaurants.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
It's going to kill anybody involved in business dealing at
in tourism or at lax.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
Neil.
Speaker 1 (18:26):
We've talked many times about whether this is true or not.
I must say historically, historically wage increases, which were fought
like crazy, business did just fly.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
However, we have the pandemic.
Speaker 1 (18:43):
Neil, do you buy the argument that a thirty dollars
wage is going to destroy entire businesses or make it
almost impossible to grow to even be sustainable.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
Absolutely, but not necessarily the businesses that will be forced
to do it. I think the mom and pop ones
that have to compete with it are the ones that
are gonna suffer. Not necessarily the bigger companies that are
pushed to do it, and I'm actually in favor of,
like during the Olympics hospitality raises. I'm in because it
(19:16):
will be a different situation, more difficult to me.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
It's like hazard pay.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
So if they work with hospitality vendors like hotels and
said hey, during the Olympics, you're going to get a
profit share. I'm a bigger fan of profit sharing than
i am of forcing a wage up. So personally, I'm
seeing what California has done in the fast food industry
(19:40):
causing problems where lesser restaurants that were okay but maybe
a little bit on the border have had to shutter
and other places have. Mom and pop places have had
to shutter because they can't keep up with it.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Oh yeah, now to you rises, it's not just to
your point, okay, Uh, that seems fair. Income of workers
based on profit go up. Now do they go down
if a company loses money? No, I've never heard of that.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
No, you still get a base pay. But what I'm
a fan of is anything above that. I mean, here's
your okay, but in intense times, just like whether it's.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
Right, that's fair, Okay, that's fair.
Speaker 1 (20:32):
So you have you have a limit, You have a
limited You have a limited time ten days of Olympics.
For those ten days, everybody in hospitality and the tourist
business lax gets an increase in pay. Now giving up
an increase in pay is a very different animal.
Speaker 2 (20:49):
That's for starters.
Speaker 3 (20:50):
That's why you do it as a bonus or okay thing.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
Now Here is the question, and that is when you're
talking about a Ford Motor company that has a union,
and Ford Motor is a is a public company, and
we know how much profit Ford Motor makes. How do
you know how much profit a mom and pop makes?
You don't, especially privately owned. I have a company that's
(21:15):
privately owned. If you think I'm going to tell you
how much money I lose or make in a given year,
You're crazy.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
I'm not good.
Speaker 1 (21:23):
You don't have to file time, No, you can. You
can manufacture or anything you know not that.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
I egal is illegal? Is illegal.
Speaker 3 (21:30):
I mean if people do want to go to the
point where they are lying on their taxes, I can't.
Speaker 1 (21:35):
No, no, no, I'm going to go into a tax situation.
For example, I have income and if I want to
buy a piece of equipment this year versus next year,
this year, I'm going to lose some money and then.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
It's it's it's complicated stuff.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
The point is the basic premise, and I guess it
boils down to this, and this is where I'm generally
in favor of wage increase, is that I have a
hard time accepting the fact that someone who works full
time cannot feed themselves or their family.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
And no starter jobs.
Speaker 3 (22:10):
Every job, every single job, whether you're flipping burgers or
making fries.
Speaker 2 (22:15):
Oh, I understand, but tell me what a starter job is.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
Tell me that a starter job when you have someone
who is sixty five years old is a starter jobagement.
Speaker 3 (22:25):
I've never been at a place I have never worked
anywhere in my life where I was there for two
years where I.
Speaker 2 (22:34):
Will moved up or in me.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Neil, you Neil, you are Neil and you forget Yeah,
you go to an in and out burger where I.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
Go just to that burger pays very well.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
I'm not arguing, but what I'm saying is you still
can't feed yourself with what In and Out Burger make
pays you.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
You can't eat on twenty two dollars an hour.
Speaker 1 (22:55):
You can't get a car wash anything you do car
wash tell me that's minimum wage.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Okay, but that's what I'm saying. So any any job
out there, you should be able to feed a family.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
But you don't. Some people don't have the wherewithal. Some
people don't have the education. By the way, what kind
of rays do you get working? Get a car wash?
Where is you go into management? Do you go to
the front of the car and you work on the
fender instead of the rear fender?
Speaker 2 (23:22):
Is that the yeah? From tires?
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Okay, all right, coming up, this is We're gonna have
a good time on this one. Is it sex education
or is it porn? And should kids be told about it?
This is Huntington Beach which has become the forefront of
this fight and the whole country is looking at it.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
We'll deal with that when we come back Wednesday morning,
June the fourth.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
Okay, next week, there is an election in Huntington Beach.
There is a ballot measure that is on the books
to roll back library restrictions that have been put into place.
Does Huntington Beach repeal a community review board for library
(24:09):
material which is currently in place? So the review board
is citizens who have been elected to determine what libraries
carry or don't carry, and the placards that you see
protect our kids from porn. It was funded, it is
funded by a city council member's political action committee urging
(24:33):
people to vote against this ballot measure in this upcoming
special election, including one that would abolish this new community
review board for library books. That's what's scary is that
libraries are now would be controlled by this committee outside
of the school board, outside of the educators. And it's
(24:57):
a very conservative group of people, and that's why this
is so important. People are looking all over the country
at Huntington Beach, which has become sort of the poster
child of super conservative members on the school board. There
is a political movement movement and they call themselves the
(25:19):
Maga Nificent Seven. What does that tell you? It's you
know right there, that's you. You have everything you want
to go. You want to know the Magagnificent Seven.
Speaker 2 (25:31):
You have to be making that up. No, I am
not making that up. I am I am not making
this up. And what they're saying.
Speaker 1 (25:40):
Is that books have become for children now have become
so sexualized. The council person, Gracie Vandermerk, who is at
the head of this said she is alarmed by a
contemporary wave of picture books and sex education manuals that
(26:03):
she feels goes way beyond what's appropriate for young readers
and could damage kids who accidentally encountered the materials before
they're ready. So you have even in the library these books.
And she's for the most part talking about elementary school,
even middle school, she said an interview. The last thing
you want a child to do is pick up a
book and have a big picture of penises or instructions
(26:25):
for how to masturbate.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
Now, that is ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
Although I do remember in the fourth grade picking up
a book that said Masturbation Techniques for fourth Graders. I
understand that that was a little problematic.
Speaker 2 (26:41):
Right, I mean, this is completely crazy, colle no.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
I was in the fourth grade when I picked it up.
You know, I just was really learning to read and
understand what life is about. And there was the book
Masturbation Techniques for fourth Graders. Now that probably did not happen.
Maybe I'm making that up, but the city council established
(27:08):
this ordinance that this community board will review library books
for textual graphic references to sex, sexual organs, sex acts,
relationships of sexual nature, sexual relations in any form LGBTQ
rights even admitting that there is a gay community. And
(27:28):
the argument is, at what point do you tell a
youngster about homosexuality in the gay community.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
You got mom and dad, And then that.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
Was a huge, huge issue when it first came out,
you know, was it Linda has two moms? That one.
I remember a book talking about a young lady who
was growing up and trying to figure out what she
was going to do, you know, and it was entitled
(27:58):
Subway slot as the possibility of moving ahead in her career.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
No, okay, children's booked by Bill Handle.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
Yeah, I will never be elected to this community Advisory board.
But all kidding aside, you know, masturbation for third graders. Okay,
maybe I am kidding on that one. But this actually is,
this is the forefront of a huge argument. We're moving
way back when well, there was there was a and
(28:37):
this was undone. There was a Kansas City school board
that passed a past a bill, passed a law and
ordinance that kids in school in this one district have
to have when evolution is taught, have to be given
the same education with creationism. It's the theory of evolution
(29:00):
which means it's not proven. The theory of creationism is
as valuable. God created the world in six days and
the entire world and dinosaurs are only six thousand years old.
Speaker 2 (29:14):
Crazy stuff, all right?
Speaker 1 (29:15):
Coming up the attack on knowledge, you know, Here's what
I want to do is we'll play a few.
Speaker 2 (29:23):
Because this is getting pretty deep on this one.
Speaker 1 (29:25):
I don't know how deep I want to go, because
it's just it moves in a direction that's way beyond
what's happening politically. We're going to play a couple of
these phone calls that have come in the recorded calls
for Saturday Night. You'll see it hugely entertaining. You'll have
a great time. This is KFI Am sixty. You've been
(29:45):
listening to the Bill Handle Show. Catch My Show Monday
through Friday, six am to nine am, and anytime on
demand on the iHeartRadio app.
The Bill Handel Show News
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.
True Crime Tonight
If you eat, sleep, and breathe true crime, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT is serving up your nightly fix. Five nights a week, KT STUDIOS & iHEART RADIO invite listeners to pull up a seat for an unfiltered look at the biggest cases making headlines, celebrity scandals, and the trials everyone is watching. With a mix of expert analysis, hot takes, and listener call-ins, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT goes beyond the headlines to uncover the twists, turns, and unanswered questions that keep us all obsessed—because, at TRUE CRIME TONIGHT, there’s a seat for everyone. Whether breaking down crime scene forensics, scrutinizing serial killers, or debating the most binge-worthy true crime docs, True Crime Tonight is the fresh, fast-paced, and slightly addictive home for true crime lovers.