November 3, 2025 • 25 mins
(November 03,2025)
Trump administration faces Monday deadline to respond to judge’s SNAP order. Host of "Petros & Money" on AM 570 LA Sports Petros Papadakis recaps the epic World Series that crowed the Dodgers back-to-back champions. Federal monitors are coming to California for Prop 50. Car repossessions are on the rise.
Trump administration faces Monday deadline to respond to judge’s SNAP order. Host of "Petros & Money" on AM 570 LA Sports Petros Papadakis recaps the epic World Series that crowed the Dodgers back-to-back champions. Federal monitors are coming to California for Prop 50. Car repossessions are on the rise.
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):
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from kf I
AM six forty. Let's go, we go it please Tale
you can do it out guy, KI am six forty
Bill Handle.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
It is a Monday morning, November third lot going on today.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
To say the least, what do we do have going on? Well?
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Saturday is thanksgrilling Neil and I are broadcasting his show
from the Wild Fork Food Store and Lagoon and Miguel,
So let's check that out and don't forget on a Friday,
it's ask Handle anything and boy, there is some fun
questions there. So if you want to ask Handle, let's
be anything that's anything, go to the iHeartRadio app during
(00:45):
the show and click on the Bill Handle show up
right hand corner microphone and record your question, which I.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
Theoretically answer every Friday. I actually I do.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Hey, today is a big day because today the Trump
Administry is facing that deadline to report to the federal
judges snap food stamp order. It's at noon today and
it's requiring the administration to update the federal judge who
last week ordered the Agriculture Department to disperse the SNAP
(01:19):
funds Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds food stamps. Tens of
millions of Americans are without their November SNAP benefits. Over
forty million Americans need governmental help to eat. They are
food insecure. The shame of it is this country, one
of the wealthiest countries on the planet, is not feeding
(01:41):
its own people. We have a system where people just
don't eat, which I find insane. And what's happening. A
story that came out of NBC News Texas, California stadium
parking lots were jammed mass distribution sites where people were
picking up the food bank stores. Food banks are out.
(02:02):
If you look at the video, it's insane. So SNAP
expected to run dry.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
It has.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
A lot of state governments are trying to fill in,
but the president said any state that tries to fill
in taking the place of SNAP, he will cut their money.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
I don't get that. One. Explain that to me.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
I mean, for those of you that are pro Donald Trump,
and I understand there's lots of you, and you have
good reasons to be that way. I mean, I understand
your philosophy versus the other side, But explain the philosophy
when states come in and spend their own money to
feed people, the government says, then we're not going to
give you money. We're not going to either reimburse which
(02:50):
there are governmental programs, or we're going to make sure
that it's miserable for you. And what it is, as
Neil pointed out correctly, I think and handle on the news,
is that these people are.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Pawns of the government. And the argument is on both sides.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
You can say, of Democrats, it's more important for you
to deal with the Obamacare, the extension of Obamacare versus
feeding people.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
How dare you do that?
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Republicans are saying exactly the opposite. I mean, it is
a political football that's going back and forth, ping pong ball. Actually,
and so the judge of lawsuits were filed twenty five
states filed lawsuits, I might add, saying that these funds
have to be dispersed, and they have to be dispersed.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Now. Now the government says, we don't have that money.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
It's eight billion dollars a year a month than all
we have is five billion. And so the judge says,
then release that five billion dollars. At least that's something.
And interestingly enough, the Trump administration, this is what Donald
Trump said, I think it was yesterday or Saturday. We
have to wait until the courts figure this out before
(04:04):
we release the money. Well, the problem is there's money
in that account for emergencies for exactly this sort of thing,
except the Trump administration is arguing legally that money is
supposed to be reserved only for situations like natural disasters.
(04:26):
Running out of STAP money is not a natural disaster.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
You could argue that.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Now, on the other hand, where the Armed services got
their paycheck where reserve money didn't exist, the government argued
that that was okay. And here is the bottom line.
It is more important to pay the military, which by
the way, I think is hugely important. Don't misunderstand. Not
(04:55):
to pay the military is insane as far as I'm concerned.
But they're okay with people not having enough money to eat,
which actually floors me.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
I mean, I just don't get it. I don't get
any of this.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
I am just stunned for the government to say, well,
we don't know if legally we're allowed to do this.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
Are you kidding?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
You know, it's interesting that the president thinks he has
ultimate insane power on anything else. Wakes up in the morning,
I'm going to tariff, I'm going to change the tariff.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
I'm going to do all this over here, and you go,
but but Congress doesn't let you. It's not the law.
I don't care what the law says. I am going
to do this, except when it comes to food stamps.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Now I have to figure out the judges and the
courts have to tell me whether I have the ability
to do this. And all you do is point to
that provision emergency funding. Well, we don't know what emergency
really means. You know, it's natural disaster, it's not Is
it an earthquake? Is that a hurricane? You know, we
(05:53):
really don't know. Emergency. Well, i'll tell you right now.
Forty million people not getting enough to eat, in my opinion,
is true emergency. Having people having kids not have breakfast
this morning or tomorrow morning, that's an emergency. And even
with states scrambling to try to get money into the
(06:16):
system so the kids can eat, President comes down and says,
if the states get involved.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
In doing this, I'm going to nail the states. I
mean that one. I have a very hard time with.
I really, do you know.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
I get the President arguing in terms of ice and
the power he has to arrest or not arrest people,
and to go forward. I get the argument there, I
truly do. I don't get this argument. I do not
get this argument with holding money so people don't have
enough to eat.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Explain that one to me, please.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
And the White House was asked for comment and it
deferred to the Office of Management and Budget, which gave
no comment.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
Hopefully this thing ends very very quickly.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
Unfortunately, right now the Republicans the Democrats are at an impasse,
all right, and we are waiting for Petros to join
us because Petros, of course one of the sports casters, extraordinary,
probably one of the well I love Petros and he's
on a five seven LA sports. Is he there yet
(07:27):
as we're working, or I'm going to have to pretend
I know what I'm talking about?
Speaker 3 (07:30):
Is there?
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Oh? There you are, Petros? Good morning, God Bell, how
are you. I'm good, Thanks for joining us. I know
you're kind of busy this morning.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
I have one question I want to ask you that
you know I'm not the maven of sports. You and I, well,
you have made a lot of fun with me over
the years about how I know so little about it.
But correct me if I'm wrong on this one. First
of all, the game Saturday's game was the first full
baseball game that I've watched on TV in probably fifty years.
(08:00):
I am not a baseball you know. That's a long time.
I've seen bits and pieces, but this was the whole game.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this one. The Blue
Jays outplayed the Dodgers throughout the entire series. They were
just a better team. And yet of course they lost.
And I'm saying because lightning in a bottle in a
few instances, would you respond to that?
Speaker 3 (08:22):
Well, that was some narrative from some of the bitter
Canadian types from the Toronto side of it after the game,
because the Dodgers just did hit well throughout, I mean
ever since the second half of that extra innings game
all the way through. They just did not have the
(08:43):
offense that they normally have. And you could say that
the Blue Jays were stingy. You can say that the
Blue Jays were tough. You could say that the Blue
Jays were very stubborn as far as letting the Dodgers
have any kind of pausetive feelings or big innings. But
I don't know if you can say that the better
(09:04):
team because they have it's a seven game series. You
have to win four games, as you know, to win
the championship. Of course, Dodgers won four. I mean they
won four games.
Speaker 2 (09:17):
But let me ask you this, if you have how
much much would you say, is well go back to
lightning in a bottle where if you're looking at it
big picture.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
Maybe I'm wrong on this because Colono brought this up too.
Speaker 2 (09:28):
Hey, you win, you win, You can call it whatever
you want, and you win, and that's the better team.
But okay, yeah, that can be an argument, and certain
less with the Jay say so in terms of magic moments,
I've heard a game for the Ages series of the Ages.
You want to comment on that, and do you buy that?
Speaker 3 (09:48):
Yeah? I think that As we've kind of watched this
Dodger team over the years, our perspective has kind of
been skewed because you see things, especially in the last
couple of years, that you just don't see in baseball
that no one's ever seen a guy like shohey Otani
do what he's doing. And it's really hard to compare
(10:10):
it to anything because it's not something that's really ever
happened before. So that alone, that part of it alone
is pretty astounding. And then the factor in what Yoshinobu
Yamamoto did, which pitchers don't really do anymore, go on
no rest and get out there and look ice cold
even though they're in the toughest situation that you can
(10:31):
imagine in sports. That's the kind of stuff that made
it really special. And then an eighteen inning game, like
you said, an extra innings game. I mean, I understand
your perspective about the better team, but I work in
football and deal with coaches after losses all the time,
and everybody always says, well, if only this happened, if
(10:54):
only this happened, But what about this this was? I mean,
the margins are really, really, really said when you're trying
for a championship, and we saw that very much throughout
the series.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
When are they ever going to return to a player,
a pitcher doing all nine innings. It's you know, when
I started watching baseball. To give you an idea, the
last time I actually watched the game, watched the game
and went to a game and actually knew who the
players were. It was Don Drysdale, Sandy Cofax. With the pitchers,
Jim Gillian was first, Mary Wills was shortstop. Seriously, that's
(11:30):
when I knew all the Dodgers. So it's been a
couple of years, but Dodgers, but pitchers went went nine
innings unless they were thrown out and just and just imploding.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Why do they do that anymore?
Speaker 3 (11:42):
Well, this guy Yamamoto had a pension for doing it
in Japan, and then all of a sudden he was
able to do it this year. But it doesn't happen
anymore because pitchers throw a lot harder all the time
than they used to. They are always searching for something
(12:03):
they call spin right now or velocity, and that leads
to more tired arms. It leads to a lot more surgeries,
Tommy John surgery. A lot of these guys have Tommy
John surgery before their career even gets started, when they're young.
And I think it's the pressure that we put on
(12:24):
the arms of the pitcher playing year round that they
play year round baseball, you know, in youth baseball now,
and it tires them out, and everything's just become a
lot more specialized. And the real answer, probably deep down,
is that everybody's a lot softer than they used to be.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
Yeah, okay, I'll buy that. And you know, short of
either a no hitter or a perfect game. You're just
not going to see a pitcher go all the way.
Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (12:53):
You just well you see it, but it just happens
a lot less, probably seventy five percent less the time
that's used to Although maybe with the way that Y'a
Mamoto performed in this World Series, maybe you'll see a
trend go back to that. I mean, we've had baseball
for over one hundred years, and trends kind of change
(13:16):
and things kind of move, and we end up going
back to a lot of stuff. It happens in football too.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
All right.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
I know you're going to be really business warning covering
what is happening. I just want to quickly remind you
don't forget your can of gasoline and your matches, Okay,
enjoy yourself.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
All right, Well I have that, and yeah I have that,
and I also have my hairspray and my liners. So
we're good.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah, we're all good. Petros. Thanks for taking the time.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
Take take care anytime. Bill. I'm here for you whatever
you want.
Speaker 1 (13:45):
I know, I love it, love having you on. I
don't know why we don't do enough.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
Of that that Bill I've to handle on the news.
I'll come back.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
I love it. I love it when you do.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
All right, so Petro so well, they'll be all day
coverage today on AM five to seven LAS Sports, and
obviously LA is celebrating in a very big, big way.
I'm not because you know, eh, but this is a
big deal. Okay, I wanna yeah, don't a big.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
Deal, bill it is, but you know it's a big deal.
When the Lakers win, it's a big deal. I'm just
not in. I'm just not into that stuff. To be fair,
the Lakers haven't won much in a while, so no, when.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
The Lakers did win, that was another one when they
were the dynasty that absolutely dominated the NBA or the
LFB or the s whatever. Okay, Now, guess who's coming
to town for the Prop fifty vote, and that is
going to be the federal overseers.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
Federal election monitors are coming.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
The Department of Justice deploying election monitors to five California
counties on election day.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
This was announced on.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Friday, and why it's to quote insure transparency, ballot security,
and compliance with federal law. Now, while that seems outrageous,
doesn't it. Oh my god, look what the feds are doing.
They're going to oversee our election by the way, it
happens a whole lot, believe me. And this one is
(15:17):
because the Republicans, actually the California Republican Party actually requested
election monitors and the Feds are going, yeah, that'll work.
We're going to come in and oversee the Prop fifty elections. Now,
keep in mind that this is not lightning in a bottle.
This is not an outlier. It happens all the time
(15:41):
when federal judges order it, sometimes state judges, when requests
are made and Department of Justice goes forward.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
It happens.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
But now it's simply the political the political backlash. I'll
tell you what I have not heard yet, and I
don't know whether we're going to hear it. Maybe it's
good news. I have not heard from any Republican for
source at this point saying if Prop fifty wins, it's
a rigged election. I have not heard that. I guess
(16:14):
that's good news, isn't it that we're staying away from
that point? Now, what are they going to do?
Speaker 1 (16:20):
Well?
Speaker 2 (16:21):
What does observing mean? Does that mean overseeing the counting?
Does that mean only day of the election. Again, we
don't know at this point, and there have been just
it's been a long track record of civil rights violations
that the Department of Justice has been monitoring.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Now here, it's not a civil rights violation.
Speaker 2 (16:41):
I think anybody's arguing that it's just the numbers, And
why is it such a big deal that the FEDS
want to oversee and make sure that this election is
I guess legitimate. Is because the whole concept of Prop.
Fifty is in response to what Texas did in in
terms of redistricting at the request of President Trump. Texas
(17:06):
was not going to redistrict until President Trump said to Texas, redistrict,
take this legislature, state legislature, which is Republican, changed.
Speaker 1 (17:17):
The rules or not.
Speaker 2 (17:18):
In the case of Texas, it wasn't a rule change,
it was changed your procedure, your policy to redistrict to
create more Republican seats. And California is fighting that directly
with Prop fifty, saying that it's rules now, that it's
procedure that's in law has to be changed to enable
(17:40):
California to do exactly what Texas did. It is become
a political football. Now has it become a political football
in terms of a fair election? I have not heard that.
I have not heard that I think to the credit
of everybody. I think it's just a legitimate political fight
where the Republicans are arguing, we keep our redistricting plan
(18:03):
exactly the same it is in law, and the Democrats
are saying, wait a minute, we have to fight fire
with fire if the Republicans are doing that in Texas
and other Southern states, and we've got to do the
same thing.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Otherwise we've lost. Otherwise, it's guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
That there will virtually always be a Republican majority because
the way the restricting redistriction works is so horrific. The
California model makes all the sense in the world. California
has an independent commission because of the the history of jerrymandering.
You ever seen jerry mannering is you look at a
(18:43):
map of a district and it makes no sense whatsoever.
It goes in and out, and the little peninsulas and
a little seems like islands, and just I mean, it's horrible,
and that has been going on forever. Well, we in
Californias the proposition that says we're going to take that
away from the legislature. We're going to give the redistricting
(19:04):
based on the census. Every ten years. We're going to
give this independent commission. They're going to be the ones
to redistrict and they have to be looking at it objectively.
There'll be Republicans on an equal number of Democrats, and
there'll be other leaders and they'll I don't even know
the makeup of that commission, but it's not political. Where
(19:24):
in Texas and other states they don't have that independent
commission so they can change the rules day and night.
That's what Prop fifty is about, is taking away the
independent commission, bringing back to the legislature which can fight
fire with fire. And that's what's happening in Prop fifty
and the Feds, I mean obviously the Republican, the Republican,
(19:46):
the administration which is Republican. At President Trump specifically, who
asked the redistricting to happen, he is not a big fan.
Speaker 1 (19:54):
Of what California is about to do.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
By the Prop fifty is going to pass, overwhelming him, Amlichino.
Right now, it is going to happen. Okay, here is say,
maybe a sign of the times. Car repossessions are at
a fifteen year high. Does that mean there's an economic recession?
Because usually you know it makes sense car repos are
going up, up, up, which means the recession has to
(20:17):
be on top of us, not.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
Necessarily, not necessarily.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Two point two million cars already repossessed this year, expecting
to be passed three million by the end of the year.
And so here are the debates. Economists are debating like crazy,
does this number of car repossessions and the fact that
they are growing, does that signal deeper trouble for the economy.
(20:44):
Alan Jen who's an economics professor at the University of
San Diego, really looks into this and he says, some
people think that we're headed for a recession. Other people
think that will remain positive. But we're growing only very slowly.
And he says, and this is his position, and rising
repossessions do not necessarily mean a recession is coming. But
(21:06):
all it does show is the economy is slowing. That
means it's still growing, but it is slowing. And the
slowing part of it mainly is jobs and wages. If
people aren't getting raises or new jobs, they could be
(21:26):
impacted in terms of their ability to make payments, particularly
with the cost of other products increasing.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
YEA a little complicated here.
Speaker 2 (21:34):
There are a lot of moving pieces on this one,
and of course the pandemic is involved like crazy, as
it does with everything.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
So here's what's going on.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Inflation is continuing to drive up price of housing and food.
It was to a point a couple of years ago
where wages were increasing at a greater rate than inflation.
It is turned around again where inflation is beating wages
and households because of the cost of food and housing
(22:06):
are simply pushing car payments lower on the list of priority.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
You got to live someplace and you have to eat.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
Now getting a car, keeping a car, how do you
go to work, Well, you can figure out another way
of going to work. You can take the bus, you
can carpool, you can do whatever. You can't carpool with
food or housing. And so Jin traces us back to
the pandemic where we had extra savings and we're spending
(22:39):
big ticket items and not really paying attention to prices
or interest rates. Because when you have a pile of
money that you're saving, guess what, You're not going to
really pay attention to the cost of things or the
interest rates. So a lot of car buyers ended up underwater.
I get this call all the time on handle on
the law. My car has been totaled. But they tell
(23:02):
me I owe more money than the car is worth.
You bet you do. A lot of car buyers ended
up underwater. So what happens is what do people do,
and they don't care about their credit. They walk away
from the car. Just walk away because at the end
of all, at the end of it all, if the
car is worth less than is worth less than the
(23:25):
amount you owe, but you might as well walk away.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
And a lot of people are doing that.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
Today.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
The average price of a new car in the US
is over fifty thousand dollars for the first time ever.
I can you imagine the average price of a car
is over fifty thousand dollars? I mean, you know, I
just look at that and I go, that's almost impossible. Now,
Jin said, it's too soon to tell whether the repos
will continue to climb or to start to level off.
(23:55):
But here is the main issue here, and here's the
equation we have to look at very very careful. When
Americans can't make payments on something as essential as a car,
which is the way they get to work, this is
a sure sign of financial stress. Is housing too expensive? Well,
(24:18):
particularly here in southern California where housing is ridiculous, the
cost of food that's going up and people are noticing that.
And that's the and this may cost the Republicans during
the mid terms because they won on the inflation issue,
they won on the cost we are going to bring
(24:40):
the cost down and have not been.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
Able to keep their word on that one through their fault.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
You know, there's so many issues that any one group
that says I'm going to do this, I'm going to
bring the cost down, that's not true. Or any one
group that's blamed for cost going up, that's not true either.
Speaker 1 (24:59):
It's a lot more complicated than that.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
Now, during the past downturns, spikes in the car repos
have coincided with job losses. And if you add AI
and the unemployment figures that are hitting across the country
and me talking more.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
A little bit more about AI later on.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
Kind of a fun topic with AI death threats that
I enjoy death threats as a topic.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
It's just something that's fun.
Speaker 2 (25:26):
The point is is are we looking at an economy
that is going down? I think we are, but the
jury is out. KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
You've been listening to the Bill handle show.
Speaker 2 (25:39):
Catch my Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from kf I
AM six forty. Let's go, we go it please Tale
you can do it out guy, KI am six forty
Bill Handle.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
It is a Monday morning, November third lot going on today.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
To say the least, what do we do have going on? Well?
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Saturday is thanksgrilling Neil and I are broadcasting his show
from the Wild Fork Food Store and Lagoon and Miguel,
So let's check that out and don't forget on a Friday,
it's ask Handle anything and boy, there is some fun
questions there. So if you want to ask Handle, let's
be anything that's anything, go to the iHeartRadio app during
(00:45):
the show and click on the Bill Handle show up
right hand corner microphone and record your question, which I.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
Theoretically answer every Friday. I actually I do.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Hey, today is a big day because today the Trump
Administry is facing that deadline to report to the federal
judges snap food stamp order. It's at noon today and
it's requiring the administration to update the federal judge who
last week ordered the Agriculture Department to disperse the SNAP
(01:19):
funds Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds food stamps. Tens of
millions of Americans are without their November SNAP benefits. Over
forty million Americans need governmental help to eat. They are
food insecure. The shame of it is this country, one
of the wealthiest countries on the planet, is not feeding
(01:41):
its own people. We have a system where people just
don't eat, which I find insane. And what's happening. A
story that came out of NBC News Texas, California stadium
parking lots were jammed mass distribution sites where people were
picking up the food bank stores. Food banks are out.
(02:02):
If you look at the video, it's insane. So SNAP
expected to run dry.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
It has.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
A lot of state governments are trying to fill in,
but the president said any state that tries to fill
in taking the place of SNAP, he will cut their money.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
I don't get that. One. Explain that to me.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
I mean, for those of you that are pro Donald Trump,
and I understand there's lots of you, and you have
good reasons to be that way. I mean, I understand
your philosophy versus the other side, But explain the philosophy
when states come in and spend their own money to
feed people, the government says, then we're not going to
give you money. We're not going to either reimburse which
(02:50):
there are governmental programs, or we're going to make sure
that it's miserable for you. And what it is, as
Neil pointed out correctly, I think and handle on the news,
is that these people are.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Pawns of the government. And the argument is on both sides.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
You can say, of Democrats, it's more important for you
to deal with the Obamacare, the extension of Obamacare versus
feeding people.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
How dare you do that?
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Republicans are saying exactly the opposite. I mean, it is
a political football that's going back and forth, ping pong ball. Actually,
and so the judge of lawsuits were filed twenty five
states filed lawsuits, I might add, saying that these funds
have to be dispersed, and they have to be dispersed.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Now. Now the government says, we don't have that money.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
It's eight billion dollars a year a month than all
we have is five billion. And so the judge says,
then release that five billion dollars. At least that's something.
And interestingly enough, the Trump administration, this is what Donald
Trump said, I think it was yesterday or Saturday. We
have to wait until the courts figure this out before
(04:04):
we release the money. Well, the problem is there's money
in that account for emergencies for exactly this sort of thing,
except the Trump administration is arguing legally that money is
supposed to be reserved only for situations like natural disasters.
(04:26):
Running out of STAP money is not a natural disaster.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
You could argue that.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Now, on the other hand, where the Armed services got
their paycheck where reserve money didn't exist, the government argued
that that was okay. And here is the bottom line.
It is more important to pay the military, which by
the way, I think is hugely important. Don't misunderstand. Not
(04:55):
to pay the military is insane as far as I'm concerned.
But they're okay with people not having enough money to eat,
which actually floors me.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
I mean, I just don't get it. I don't get
any of this.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
I am just stunned for the government to say, well,
we don't know if legally we're allowed to do this.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
Are you kidding?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
You know, it's interesting that the president thinks he has
ultimate insane power on anything else. Wakes up in the morning,
I'm going to tariff, I'm going to change the tariff.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
I'm going to do all this over here, and you go,
but but Congress doesn't let you. It's not the law.
I don't care what the law says. I am going
to do this, except when it comes to food stamps.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Now I have to figure out the judges and the
courts have to tell me whether I have the ability
to do this. And all you do is point to
that provision emergency funding. Well, we don't know what emergency
really means. You know, it's natural disaster, it's not Is
it an earthquake? Is that a hurricane? You know, we
(05:53):
really don't know. Emergency. Well, i'll tell you right now.
Forty million people not getting enough to eat, in my opinion,
is true emergency. Having people having kids not have breakfast
this morning or tomorrow morning, that's an emergency. And even
with states scrambling to try to get money into the
(06:16):
system so the kids can eat, President comes down and says,
if the states get involved.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
In doing this, I'm going to nail the states. I
mean that one. I have a very hard time with.
I really, do you know.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
I get the President arguing in terms of ice and
the power he has to arrest or not arrest people,
and to go forward. I get the argument there, I
truly do. I don't get this argument. I do not
get this argument with holding money so people don't have
enough to eat.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Explain that one to me, please.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
And the White House was asked for comment and it
deferred to the Office of Management and Budget, which gave
no comment.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
Hopefully this thing ends very very quickly.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
Unfortunately, right now the Republicans the Democrats are at an impasse,
all right, and we are waiting for Petros to join
us because Petros, of course one of the sports casters, extraordinary,
probably one of the well I love Petros and he's
on a five seven LA sports. Is he there yet
(07:27):
as we're working, or I'm going to have to pretend
I know what I'm talking about?
Speaker 3 (07:30):
Is there?
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Oh? There you are, Petros? Good morning, God Bell, how
are you. I'm good, Thanks for joining us. I know
you're kind of busy this morning.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
I have one question I want to ask you that
you know I'm not the maven of sports. You and I, well,
you have made a lot of fun with me over
the years about how I know so little about it.
But correct me if I'm wrong on this one. First
of all, the game Saturday's game was the first full
baseball game that I've watched on TV in probably fifty years.
(08:00):
I am not a baseball you know. That's a long time.
I've seen bits and pieces, but this was the whole game.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this one. The Blue
Jays outplayed the Dodgers throughout the entire series. They were
just a better team. And yet of course they lost.
And I'm saying because lightning in a bottle in a
few instances, would you respond to that?
Speaker 3 (08:22):
Well, that was some narrative from some of the bitter
Canadian types from the Toronto side of it after the game,
because the Dodgers just did hit well throughout, I mean
ever since the second half of that extra innings game
all the way through. They just did not have the
(08:43):
offense that they normally have. And you could say that
the Blue Jays were stingy. You can say that the
Blue Jays were tough. You could say that the Blue
Jays were very stubborn as far as letting the Dodgers
have any kind of pausetive feelings or big innings. But
I don't know if you can say that the better
(09:04):
team because they have it's a seven game series. You
have to win four games, as you know, to win
the championship. Of course, Dodgers won four. I mean they
won four games.
Speaker 2 (09:17):
But let me ask you this, if you have how
much much would you say, is well go back to
lightning in a bottle where if you're looking at it
big picture.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
Maybe I'm wrong on this because Colono brought this up too.
Speaker 2 (09:28):
Hey, you win, you win, You can call it whatever
you want, and you win, and that's the better team.
But okay, yeah, that can be an argument, and certain
less with the Jay say so in terms of magic moments,
I've heard a game for the Ages series of the Ages.
You want to comment on that, and do you buy that?
Speaker 3 (09:48):
Yeah? I think that As we've kind of watched this
Dodger team over the years, our perspective has kind of
been skewed because you see things, especially in the last
couple of years, that you just don't see in baseball
that no one's ever seen a guy like shohey Otani
do what he's doing. And it's really hard to compare
(10:10):
it to anything because it's not something that's really ever
happened before. So that alone, that part of it alone
is pretty astounding. And then the factor in what Yoshinobu
Yamamoto did, which pitchers don't really do anymore, go on
no rest and get out there and look ice cold
even though they're in the toughest situation that you can
(10:31):
imagine in sports. That's the kind of stuff that made
it really special. And then an eighteen inning game, like
you said, an extra innings game. I mean, I understand
your perspective about the better team, but I work in
football and deal with coaches after losses all the time,
and everybody always says, well, if only this happened, if
(10:54):
only this happened, But what about this this was? I mean,
the margins are really, really, really said when you're trying
for a championship, and we saw that very much throughout
the series.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
When are they ever going to return to a player,
a pitcher doing all nine innings. It's you know, when
I started watching baseball. To give you an idea, the
last time I actually watched the game, watched the game
and went to a game and actually knew who the
players were. It was Don Drysdale, Sandy Cofax. With the pitchers,
Jim Gillian was first, Mary Wills was shortstop. Seriously, that's
(11:30):
when I knew all the Dodgers. So it's been a
couple of years, but Dodgers, but pitchers went went nine
innings unless they were thrown out and just and just imploding.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
Why do they do that anymore?
Speaker 3 (11:42):
Well, this guy Yamamoto had a pension for doing it
in Japan, and then all of a sudden he was
able to do it this year. But it doesn't happen
anymore because pitchers throw a lot harder all the time
than they used to. They are always searching for something
(12:03):
they call spin right now or velocity, and that leads
to more tired arms. It leads to a lot more surgeries,
Tommy John surgery. A lot of these guys have Tommy
John surgery before their career even gets started, when they're young.
And I think it's the pressure that we put on
(12:24):
the arms of the pitcher playing year round that they
play year round baseball, you know, in youth baseball now,
and it tires them out, and everything's just become a
lot more specialized. And the real answer, probably deep down,
is that everybody's a lot softer than they used to be.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
Yeah, okay, I'll buy that. And you know, short of
either a no hitter or a perfect game. You're just
not going to see a pitcher go all the way.
Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (12:53):
You just well you see it, but it just happens
a lot less, probably seventy five percent less the time
that's used to Although maybe with the way that Y'a
Mamoto performed in this World Series, maybe you'll see a
trend go back to that. I mean, we've had baseball
for over one hundred years, and trends kind of change
(13:16):
and things kind of move, and we end up going
back to a lot of stuff. It happens in football too.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
All right.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
I know you're going to be really business warning covering
what is happening. I just want to quickly remind you
don't forget your can of gasoline and your matches, Okay,
enjoy yourself.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
All right, Well I have that, and yeah I have that,
and I also have my hairspray and my liners. So
we're good.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah, we're all good. Petros. Thanks for taking the time.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
Take take care anytime. Bill. I'm here for you whatever
you want.
Speaker 1 (13:45):
I know, I love it, love having you on. I
don't know why we don't do enough.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
Of that that Bill I've to handle on the news.
I'll come back.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
I love it. I love it when you do.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
All right, so Petro so well, they'll be all day
coverage today on AM five to seven LAS Sports, and
obviously LA is celebrating in a very big, big way.
I'm not because you know, eh, but this is a
big deal. Okay, I wanna yeah, don't a big.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
Deal, bill it is, but you know it's a big deal.
When the Lakers win, it's a big deal. I'm just
not in. I'm just not into that stuff. To be fair,
the Lakers haven't won much in a while, so no, when.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
The Lakers did win, that was another one when they
were the dynasty that absolutely dominated the NBA or the
LFB or the s whatever. Okay, Now, guess who's coming
to town for the Prop fifty vote, and that is
going to be the federal overseers.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
Federal election monitors are coming.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
The Department of Justice deploying election monitors to five California
counties on election day.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
This was announced on.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Friday, and why it's to quote insure transparency, ballot security,
and compliance with federal law. Now, while that seems outrageous,
doesn't it. Oh my god, look what the feds are doing.
They're going to oversee our election by the way, it
happens a whole lot, believe me. And this one is
(15:17):
because the Republicans, actually the California Republican Party actually requested
election monitors and the Feds are going, yeah, that'll work.
We're going to come in and oversee the Prop fifty elections. Now,
keep in mind that this is not lightning in a bottle.
This is not an outlier. It happens all the time
(15:41):
when federal judges order it, sometimes state judges, when requests
are made and Department of Justice goes forward.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
It happens.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
But now it's simply the political the political backlash. I'll
tell you what I have not heard yet, and I
don't know whether we're going to hear it. Maybe it's
good news. I have not heard from any Republican for
source at this point saying if Prop fifty wins, it's
a rigged election. I have not heard that. I guess
(16:14):
that's good news, isn't it that we're staying away from
that point? Now, what are they going to do?
Speaker 1 (16:20):
Well?
Speaker 2 (16:21):
What does observing mean? Does that mean overseeing the counting?
Does that mean only day of the election. Again, we
don't know at this point, and there have been just
it's been a long track record of civil rights violations
that the Department of Justice has been monitoring.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Now here, it's not a civil rights violation.
Speaker 2 (16:41):
I think anybody's arguing that it's just the numbers, And
why is it such a big deal that the FEDS
want to oversee and make sure that this election is
I guess legitimate. Is because the whole concept of Prop.
Fifty is in response to what Texas did in in
terms of redistricting at the request of President Trump. Texas
(17:06):
was not going to redistrict until President Trump said to Texas, redistrict,
take this legislature, state legislature, which is Republican, changed.
Speaker 1 (17:17):
The rules or not.
Speaker 2 (17:18):
In the case of Texas, it wasn't a rule change,
it was changed your procedure, your policy to redistrict to
create more Republican seats. And California is fighting that directly
with Prop fifty, saying that it's rules now, that it's
procedure that's in law has to be changed to enable
(17:40):
California to do exactly what Texas did. It is become
a political football. Now has it become a political football
in terms of a fair election? I have not heard that.
I have not heard that I think to the credit
of everybody. I think it's just a legitimate political fight
where the Republicans are arguing, we keep our redistricting plan
(18:03):
exactly the same it is in law, and the Democrats
are saying, wait a minute, we have to fight fire
with fire if the Republicans are doing that in Texas
and other Southern states, and we've got to do the
same thing.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Otherwise we've lost. Otherwise, it's guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
That there will virtually always be a Republican majority because
the way the restricting redistriction works is so horrific. The
California model makes all the sense in the world. California
has an independent commission because of the the history of jerrymandering.
You ever seen jerry mannering is you look at a
(18:43):
map of a district and it makes no sense whatsoever.
It goes in and out, and the little peninsulas and
a little seems like islands, and just I mean, it's horrible,
and that has been going on forever. Well, we in
Californias the proposition that says we're going to take that
away from the legislature. We're going to give the redistricting
(19:04):
based on the census. Every ten years. We're going to
give this independent commission. They're going to be the ones
to redistrict and they have to be looking at it objectively.
There'll be Republicans on an equal number of Democrats, and
there'll be other leaders and they'll I don't even know
the makeup of that commission, but it's not political. Where
(19:24):
in Texas and other states they don't have that independent
commission so they can change the rules day and night.
That's what Prop fifty is about, is taking away the
independent commission, bringing back to the legislature which can fight
fire with fire. And that's what's happening in Prop fifty
and the Feds, I mean obviously the Republican, the Republican,
(19:46):
the administration which is Republican. At President Trump specifically, who
asked the redistricting to happen, he is not a big fan.
Speaker 1 (19:54):
Of what California is about to do.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
By the Prop fifty is going to pass, overwhelming him, Amlichino.
Right now, it is going to happen. Okay, here is say,
maybe a sign of the times. Car repossessions are at
a fifteen year high. Does that mean there's an economic recession?
Because usually you know it makes sense car repos are
going up, up, up, which means the recession has to
(20:17):
be on top of us, not.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
Necessarily, not necessarily.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Two point two million cars already repossessed this year, expecting
to be passed three million by the end of the year.
And so here are the debates. Economists are debating like crazy,
does this number of car repossessions and the fact that
they are growing, does that signal deeper trouble for the economy.
(20:44):
Alan Jen who's an economics professor at the University of
San Diego, really looks into this and he says, some
people think that we're headed for a recession. Other people
think that will remain positive. But we're growing only very slowly.
And he says, and this is his position, and rising
repossessions do not necessarily mean a recession is coming. But
(21:06):
all it does show is the economy is slowing. That
means it's still growing, but it is slowing. And the
slowing part of it mainly is jobs and wages. If
people aren't getting raises or new jobs, they could be
(21:26):
impacted in terms of their ability to make payments, particularly
with the cost of other products increasing.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
YEA a little complicated here.
Speaker 2 (21:34):
There are a lot of moving pieces on this one,
and of course the pandemic is involved like crazy, as
it does with everything.
Speaker 1 (21:44):
So here's what's going on.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Inflation is continuing to drive up price of housing and food.
It was to a point a couple of years ago
where wages were increasing at a greater rate than inflation.
It is turned around again where inflation is beating wages
and households because of the cost of food and housing
(22:06):
are simply pushing car payments lower on the list of priority.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
You got to live someplace and you have to eat.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
Now getting a car, keeping a car, how do you
go to work, Well, you can figure out another way
of going to work. You can take the bus, you
can carpool, you can do whatever. You can't carpool with
food or housing. And so Jin traces us back to
the pandemic where we had extra savings and we're spending
(22:39):
big ticket items and not really paying attention to prices
or interest rates. Because when you have a pile of
money that you're saving, guess what, You're not going to
really pay attention to the cost of things or the
interest rates. So a lot of car buyers ended up underwater.
I get this call all the time on handle on
the law. My car has been totaled. But they tell
(23:02):
me I owe more money than the car is worth.
You bet you do. A lot of car buyers ended
up underwater. So what happens is what do people do,
and they don't care about their credit. They walk away
from the car. Just walk away because at the end
of all, at the end of it all, if the
car is worth less than is worth less than the
(23:25):
amount you owe, but you might as well walk away.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
And a lot of people are doing that.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
Today.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
The average price of a new car in the US
is over fifty thousand dollars for the first time ever.
I can you imagine the average price of a car
is over fifty thousand dollars? I mean, you know, I
just look at that and I go, that's almost impossible. Now,
Jin said, it's too soon to tell whether the repos
will continue to climb or to start to level off.
(23:55):
But here is the main issue here, and here's the
equation we have to look at very very careful. When
Americans can't make payments on something as essential as a car,
which is the way they get to work, this is
a sure sign of financial stress. Is housing too expensive? Well,
(24:18):
particularly here in southern California where housing is ridiculous, the
cost of food that's going up and people are noticing that.
And that's the and this may cost the Republicans during
the mid terms because they won on the inflation issue,
they won on the cost we are going to bring
(24:40):
the cost down and have not been.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
Able to keep their word on that one through their fault.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
You know, there's so many issues that any one group
that says I'm going to do this, I'm going to
bring the cost down, that's not true. Or any one
group that's blamed for cost going up, that's not true either.
Speaker 1 (24:59):
It's a lot more complicated than that.
Speaker 2 (25:01):
Now, during the past downturns, spikes in the car repos
have coincided with job losses. And if you add AI
and the unemployment figures that are hitting across the country
and me talking more.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
A little bit more about AI later on.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
Kind of a fun topic with AI death threats that
I enjoy death threats as a topic.
Speaker 1 (25:24):
It's just something that's fun.
Speaker 2 (25:26):
The point is is are we looking at an economy
that is going down? I think we are, but the
jury is out. KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
You've been listening to the Bill handle show.
Speaker 2 (25:39):
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
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
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.