[00:00:05] You're listening to casual talk radio where common sense is still the norm whether you're a new or long time listener. We appreciate you joining us today. Visit
[email protected] and now here's your host, Leister.
[00:00:21] Halloween is nearly upon us. I've got the sign ready to go. This will be the first time in this place that I use, use the sign, the notorious sign. Not the Notorious B.I.G. the Notorious Sign. The sign that I placed up everywhere that I've lived so far. Funny story about the sign.
[00:00:40] When I was younger and I was living with my parents, I actually put the sign up and the person who, the person who raised me, the male figure that raised me, ripped the sign down. It was putting candy out because the sign says there's no candy available.
[00:00:57] Here's my thought on this whole business Halloween and I've got my real topic, but I figured I'd preface with Halloween. I'm anti Halloween. I'm anti Halloween because I realized in my older age it's everything wrong with what we should be doing with our children. Think of what we're talking about. And I, I don't live in a high crime area, but if you were to look at the maps, they would swear that it's a, it's crime ridden, disgusting. But it's not. People that come, contractors all comment that it feels like a very nice, peaceful neighborhood. And it reasonably is. There are certainly shootings in core, but not where I'm at in the burbs. That's the reason I don't like the urban core, because that's where crime increases because you have dense populations. They're all crammed together. Crime was not anywhere near as high in the suburbs and in the farms in the spread outs where you have more breathing room, you're not as close to your neighbor, there's not a lot of you in close proximity and there wasn't an opportunity for those. Now when there was a crime, then all of a sudden it's a big deal because you're a tight knit community, you're close, you know each other. There's stories, countless stories. You know, talking about Tate, right, that gets murdered, Helter skelter, you know, just things where they're out in the middle of freaking nowhere and then there's a murder that happens and it's a big deal. Phil Spector, same thing. But generally speaking, the suburbs, the narrative and that ties to my topic. The narrative has been that the suburbs are a product of trying to spread wealth away from minorities. Is there some Correlation, Possibly, but that's not direct causation. The idea that suburbs alone are designed to separate wealth, I think is a joke. Is it possible though that the increase in wealth is correlated to the suburbs? Yes, because land availability and, you know, housing crunches and so on. We see this all the time. We know that it's harder for minorities to get good paying jobs. So I believe that the lack of good paying jobs or the challenge getting those good paying jobs, better said. And there's a little bit of okie doke coming from the government.
[00:03:18] We know that the government's pushing certain types of jobs. There are jobs that are requiring a STEM degree. They're not pushing the kinds of jobs that you would expect. And the college education is getting more expensive, not less.
[00:03:30] However, the vast majority of college degrees are not going as far as they could unless you do a STEM one. Some of the lesser ones that are out there that were still viable 30 years ago are no longer viable. They're no longer looked at sought after, they cost the same. But you can't bank on getting a job even with stem. You can't really bank on getting a good paying job. Some do, but then that forces you to be where? On the West Coast. And the west coast of course is Marxist territory. I don't know if you knew this, but California passed laws that essentially banned you having a lawn, a natural lawn, but then they also banned new artificial lawns because of PFAS risk. So they don't want you to have a lawn.
[00:04:11] Ostensibly this is because of water. The problem is we know farmers are the tightest consumer of water. They consume lots of water because they have to. It's natural. Lawns do not. Lawns help cool the atmosphere and they help stem off the very climate change that people are squawking about. The rush to stone gardens as we see in places like Irvine, it's very strongly probable that you guys are just rushing to what it is. That's part of the reason I swear I would never live in California again. Because it's a Marxist place. They do everything they can not to give you personal liberties. Then the extreme opposite, which is Florida, they'll let you do personal liberties all you care to and then they'll slip these little things in the law that you don't like that you don't notice, then you get fines and all that kind of stuff. So I said I wasn't probably going to live in Florida either.
[00:04:58] The point I'm making is that I think we're moving towards I and I support it. We're moving towards a world where each state has to make hard decisions about how they're going to treat the constituents. And people are going to have to make decisions about whether they want to continue living in the state that they're in if the state that they're in doesn't support their values for some reason, and I don't know what, when this changed, because it used to be in like this in the 70s for sure, and the 80s, people were absolutely happy to simply exodus to a different state. That was a big thing. People did mass exoduses to California, people did mass exodus to Florida, mass exodus to Texas, mass exodus to Washington, mass exodus to the north, Midwest. But for whatever reason, we stopped. And people are like, well, I don't want to have to leave. And I don't get it. Because if you're in a place that doesn't support your values, I'm sorry, the right answer is not to sit and scream and bang your head against the wall because they don't want to do what you want to do. I'm dealing with that now. The place that I'm in is predominantly Democrat and I don't like it. Because if you were to drive five miles away, you see nothing but, you know, Trump signs all over the place. Because the people in the place that I'm at have been conditioned to, just like I was when I was a kid, that you have to do Democrat, you have to stay loyal no matter what, even if you don't like it and they're, you know, tearing you a new one on the economy. So it got me thinking. I don't want to speak too much about partisan policies. What I did want to do is share something that was put out by the Epoch Times. The Epoch Times is a somewhat right leaning paper, but they put out an infographic that I thought was fair to do a comparison on different topical matters between Trump and Kamala Harris. I thought I would share some of the highlights on this because I'm hoping people are voting based on the policies, not the person, because that's what got us in trouble the last time. You voted because you hated Trump and hated mean tweets and then you got damaged for four years. The damage continued. The guy just. We just are having more wartime stuff happening with Israel and Iran and he gets up there and he barely has any message, then just totters off like an Alzheimer's patient. So I am hopeful that you're going to vote with, vote with your brain, not with your heart, because it's critical that you do focus on the policy, not the person.
[00:07:22] And a lot of these are going to resonate and I'm going to leave my favorite for last. Even though it's the first on the list. They know it's first on the list, but I'm going to leave it for last because I think it's that important.
[00:07:33] And we are in early voting in many states. So if you have that opportunity, I do recommend that you do so. So let's talk about China.
[00:07:41] China has been a bit of a polarizing situation because what people don't understand is we have a very strong dependency on China imports. Vast majority of what you would buy on Amazon.com is coming from China. If you didn't know that that's the way it is, you may not understand that China is at least partially responsible for the demise of local stores. How can that be, you ask me? Because China having such dominance through Amazon and people rushing towards Amazon because of quote, free shipping through prime kills these local businesses that these China people, they're not, they're not going to those stores, they're not stocking in those places. So those stores can't compete on certain products. Like it's not even the same product in most cases. Yes, there's the Teemu and all that garbage that you get scammed on. I'm talking about where there's products that you simply can't get other than Amazon. In limited cases you can get it from Walmart, but even Walmart can't compete because there are three day shipping because they don't store it every single place. Amazon has the luxury because of a bunch of money thrown all the place where they can have warehouses scattered all over logistics, they can get it to you really quick or they can just fly it because they have their own logistics set up.
[00:08:55] The point is that China has dominance that they should not have. This has been, this has been a big issue for Donald Trump. He's been completely against China having any sort of dominance from the degradation of the US dollar's value to our reliance on these products and the lower tariffs. A stat that came out that people didn't understand was that at one point in the past we used to be funded by tariffs. We were funded, there was no income tax, we were funded by tariffs. Then the internationals started complaining, we don't like these tariffs, we don't want these tariffs. And weak presidents bowed down and said, well, we gotta get the money from somewhere. Why don't we get it from the people? Because during these revolutions that we're experiencing Here, like the industrial, et cetera. We're making a lot of money, people. All these workers are making good money and we gave them houses with the GI Bill and everything is prosperous here. So let's take the money off income because we expect they'll keep on increasing, right? So all they did was saddle the regular worker with that money that they now depend on that contributes to the very debt that we're now settled with. It didn't solve the problem. It actually made it worse because it's like opening the spigot all the way to full when you didn't really need it.
[00:10:10] This also assumes that you're curbing spending, which they weren't going to do because we had wars happening in the mid, we had damage locally, hurricanes, et cetera. So no matter what all this led to, what you now subject are subject to is income taxes that are egregious. Businesses have to pay payroll taxes on your behalf in addition to having you pay taxes and they'll come after you if you're a small business owner and you don't do W2 no matter what. The system is rigged to depend on draining money from the individual, which does what suppresses your ability to get ahead. Can we say this was a contributing factor to this separation of wealth that was blamed on the suburbs? That okay, you just made it harder for the average American, much less minorities, where we've already established it's harder for them to get the higher paying jobs and you're taking a good portion of the money that they do make. So you're making it harder for them to get ahead because then the more they make, the more you take. We know the statement, right?
[00:11:12] Donald Trump, he has never wavered on this. He's consistently said, no, we're cutting that off and we're encouraging these businesses to bring these jobs back to United States and stop relying so much or they've got to pay tariffs because no matter what, they're not going to get enriched off of selling the products to American citizens while our Americans are struggling to get those jobs. I struggle with anybody that pushes back against this. And chances are you don't. But some of you, I don't know who all, but some of you are so fixated against the man that you can't listen to what he's saying, which is he's right, you should not be saddled. He even proposed maybe we can get rid of the income tax. That's not going to happen in his presidency if he does win. But it's something that is worth talking about because that's what it should be. We should not be saddling American citizens when all these other countries are, they're getting fat alcohol. Especially when you remember China is one of the biggest gross polluters to the oceans where they were talking about all the pollution that goes in the ocean and bon slots out there cleaning it up. They're the greatest, greatest contributor to this. You got California out there banning plastic bags. It's not going to have a dent. We are the smallest, the smallest in terms of pollution in the oceans and et cetera. It's just, they get news headlines and they trigger people and then you get the Greta Thunbergs of the world who don't know what they're talking about. The issue is real. It's not a United States problem. We have just been subject to false narratives promoted by the media. So I support what Donald Trump has said on this, especially when he talked about EVs. A lot of the EVs, the hardwares that were part of the push from the Biden administration that manufacturing the parts and everything else is coming over from seas. So we are not even manufacturing our own stuff. We are subject to them. That is increasing the price. The narrative about why they were offshoring is that it was higher to pay the labor. It's not higher to pay the labor. It's higher to pay the taxes. That's what it really is. And they have to maintain profitability. Well, Tesla took a hit anyway. It didn't matter. No matter what. I completely support this idea of if we're not going to get rid of income taxes, but I certainly would love to minimize the dependence on income taxes. I would love to make it where a small business owner does not have to do W2 if they, as long as their business is paying taxes on the business side. Leave me alone about the W2 side. I know why they won't do it. Because Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. It's a pyramid scheme. More closely, I get it. Meanwhile, Kamala Harris talked about, you know, we need to curb unfair trade practices with China. We need to make sure that technology is America first. We need to make sure that we manage relations with Beijing. We need to make sure to call out human rights and everything else. But no, I don't like that tariff business. So I am not a supporter personally of what Harris is. And she's flip flopped, by the way. But she's, she's like not committing to the most, the most effective way to reign stuff in which, yes, it is ripping the bandage off, because a lot more damage has been done. But I'm not a fan personally of bowing down to other countries, especially when we're supposed to be that superpower. But we're losing that. We're losing that position. We've got wars happening all over this place and it's not being controlled. And meanwhile, China's getting rich and they're contributing to some of the war situations. I'm not supportive of that personally.
[00:14:34] Ukraine, speaking of wars, Trump has said multiple times when he was in office, he even said this. Remember, we didn't have anywhere near this level of disruption international when Trump was in office. Do you know why? That's because everybody was afraid of the dude. And then he was pulling out of NATO and said, it's not fair for us to pay the bulk of what's going to NATO. This isn't fair. They should be paying their fair share to this. We shouldn't be footing the bill. Goes back to what I said they didn't want. The other countries didn't want to pay a lot of money, but they're getting enriched off of the imports that they do that they sell to American citizens. And by the way, that's taking your money, United States money, and it's shipping it overseas. We can't complain about the government shipping money to Ukraine while we're busy buying foreign assets. That's what you're doing. You're buying foreign products and you're shipping that money overseas. You're doing the same thing that the government's doing, because that's how the system's been set up. It's been set up to favor them and promote them. You don't have very many other options because the other stores can't compete on a level playing field. So you're only left with the Amazon, and Amazon is essentially cheating. That's fine. Their business, it's what it's what it is. It's cutthroat. I'm saying this is what you're saddled with and this is what you're dealing with. And Trump is trying to break all that stuff.
[00:15:49] Meanwhile, Kamala Harris believes Ukraine cannot lose the war. Kamala says, yeah, Israel should defend itself, but no, we got to be careful about how you do it. And we got to talk this out with the war and we should negotiate ceasefires and we should come to the table together and figure this all out. The question that has been hit on Harris, you're vice president right now and you can't say that. No. Well, it's not My job. That's Biden. Because as vice president, there's been vice presidents of past that have gone and done negotiations on behalf. I mean, geez, I can count on three hands the number of presidents where they were the only one that could go and do it. And the vice president was just feckless. No, the vice president could. She hasn't. So what's that all about? She hasn't really done anything since she's been in office. So I'm saying she talks to the game about what she would do. The question that's being asked to her is, why haven't you done it? You're vice president. We know you can. Why haven't you? The theory is that Biden is not allowing her to. If that's the case, I think that should be called out. The problem is it makes her look like a hypocrite as she does so. Ultimately, Trump wants to take a strong approach to ending the wars and take that stance of we are the world power. You're going to listen to us or we're going to start nailing you people with. Which is how he got Kim Jong Un to stop firing rockets. Rocket man. That's Russia wasn't. Russia was not messing with Donald Trump. And then they accused him of colluding with Russia. And Russia said, no, we weren't colluding with him, but it did benefit us to have, you know, have somebody else in office. Here we are.
[00:17:29] Speaking of military, it was discovered that a lot of the military equipment that you pay for, that's tax dollars, was sent to help Ukraine fight in the war. Put. Putin would come out and say, the war stops when you guys stop helping them. That's when it stops, and that's when we can talk. But as long as you keep helping them, this is going to keep on going. Biden didn't say anything when Putin did that. They just let it keep going. And all they're doing is adding the aid over to Ukraine.
[00:17:56] Remember that Biden, he was in charge when they did the botched departure of Afghanistan and multiple people. This is right after Biden took office. And Trump was going to do it a different way. He had a different plan. He broke down what it was, and Biden said, no, we're not doing that. Let's just yank that, pull the bandage off, because this has been a long time coming. And there was the video floating around of soldiers falling out of the plane because it was a botched. It was a botched deal. You know, expensive military equipment left behind. The whole nine was a failure. This pissed off a lot of people that have military backgrounds, because it's like you are the commander in chief and you left them people behind.
[00:18:33] Kamala Harris supports doing things that help defend Israel.
[00:18:39] This got her some flack to one set of the people. And this is. This is a minority group. The point is, this got some flack for her where protesters would show up at her different deals. And she dismissed it as if they're Trump supporters, completely dismissing their plight and their message. They're not Trump supporters. They just didn't support this defense of Israel because of their own reason. Her being so dismissive, I think, turned people against her.
[00:19:04] In my opinion, it feels like Biden and to a lesser degree, Kamala don't have a good handle on how to use military. And they may be just kowtowing to the Democratic standard, which is to not use military force unless absolutely necessary. Like, if it attacks, you know, United States, then we'll go and do that. But other than that, we'll use it to help other people, but we're not going to go and stop these wars happening or we're not going to go and take an aggressive stance. Whereas Trump's like, whatever we have to do to lock it down. Like, he was talking about sending the National Guard in on the Portland riots, and the Democrats attacked him. It's like, well, why? Because that's what you. That's what you're supposed to do. It's literally written in their edict that, yes, you might be called. There's a domestic situation, you might be called in there to help it out. And that's what he wanted to do and could not do. And he was in office, and he's saying, if I get back in office, then, yes, I'm going to support this Second Amendment, which, of course, for those that I know, that US Education is failing people that has the right to bear arms. It's been an ongoing issue. The screams are out there about banning weapons, and studies have been done that says bans of weapons don't do anything. California has bans of weapons. That doesn't do any good. Banning the weapons is not really the answer. I've always said what I would do is I would increase the taxes on ammunition, make it extremely expensive to buy ammunition, so you can have whatever you want, but you're going to pay out of the nose for the privilege of shooting that weapon. That's what I would do. It does two things. One, it's a disincentive. Some people are going to say, screw that. I'M not going to pay it, especially have a 300% tax or something. That's designed to be a disincentive, but it's open. Anybody can sell the ammo. I don't care anymore. But you're going to pay out the nose for the privilege of shooting that weapon. That's what I would do. The ban is not going to work. Trump in office tried to ban the bump stocks. He got shot down. The ban was there and he got shot down. It got overturned. The bump stock was put on as this is a way that somebody can turn a non automatic weapon into an automatic weapon. The case was flimsy at best. The only reason that they overturned it is because it was Trump. Because we knew that, yes, that is a real risk. And it was, it would have gone a little bit of a ways towards mitigating who can do something like this if they couldn't get a regular weapon otherwise. In my mind, I felt like that was politically motivated. I can't say Trump is on record having criticized other Republicans that supported gun control bills. In my mind, the gun control bills that advocate let's first we're going to yank your gun, then we'll go through due process is the wrong answer. And I say that as somebody who doesn't personally support guns, but I'm not a fan of losing due process in just because we're freaked out over guns. And to see that some Republicans supported that was a bit appalling. And Trump said, no, we're not doing that. Due process has to come first because he's always supported having people's rights protected.
[00:21:57] There's a lot of stuff that Biden put in place that made things harder on gun manufacturers and gun owners that didn't do any good because we still have a lot of shootings happening. In fact, the shooting spiked the moment Trump left office under and under Obama. Remember, shootings were like weekly under Obama and his fake crying. And then Biden gets in. They go down significantly down when Trump's in office and they spike again when Biden's in office. I'm just saying Kamala says she supports the Second Amendment and she supports reasonable laws, but she wants a ban on assault rifles. She want. She flip flopped on this. At one point she said, no, I didn't say that. And then later she said, I support a ban for assault weapons. Well, the assault weapon ban has never been passed. It's never been supported. No judge seems to want to take that smoke. And it, it's just talk, right? It's just Talk to, get talking points, even though it's a good idea, because there's really no reason that a regular citizen should have an assault rifle at this point. I understand why somebody feels like they might need it in the event of some apocalypse where the freaking government overtakes whatever. I understand, but you don't need an assault rifle for that. You need skill. You know, if you have a regular pistol and you got the right skill and talking marksmanship, it doesn't matter who's coming at you, because guess what? They're going to snipe you from a roof anyway. Your assault rifle is not going to do any good. So I'm. I'm one of those that feels like the regular American should not need an assault rifle. I don't see a reason for it. If they want to own a pistol, fine. I just would tax them out the nose for their ammunition if I were doing that.
[00:23:29] Kamala said that the current system of laws for guns and the lax laws is the reason for the rise in school shootings. I disagree with this. The reason for the rise in school shootings is a fear of perimeter security. Perimeter security, to me, is the most fundamental protection you can do. I've had people swear, we don't want to turn our schools into a freaking jail. I know that some people don't pay attention, but that's exactly what our airports are. When you walk into the airport, it's all fine. But the moment you try to get past tsa, they will absolutely lock you up. If you walk through there with no permission, how is it any different? They'll confiscate your weapon. How's it any different? Your metal scanned? How's it any different? They'll grope you like crazy. How's it any different? Your bag goes through a checker. How's it any different? We have to be consistent. We do it on tsa. If you send your kid to go visit grandma, your kid's going to go through that exact same scrutiny. And you would welcome it because you don't want somebody shooting your kid. Why don't we want it at perimeters in schools? Which is what I say they should be. Leave all you care to, but when you're trying to come in, no, we're going to check your bag to make sure you don't have knives, because no kid should have a knife walking in the school. We're going to make sure you don't have guns because no kid should have a gun in the first place. And we might check to see if there's drugs. Because hey, by the way, your kids shouldn't have drugs. To me, that perimeter security, I'm talking just to get in. Just to get in there should be implemented. And there's no reason not to do it. Except that there's this narrative from a lot of parents I've even heard that say they don't want their kid attending something like a prison. Let me remind people, in the olden days, school used to be an indoor building. We didn't have this outdoor nonsense. Used to be an indoor building with one entrance and one exit. So I'm suggesting, yes, just like every courthouse, that you actually have at least a metal detector for people to come in. You go in, go out all you care to. But to come in, you must go through the metal detector. I would love to see school security beefed up. I would love to see tighter guards. I'd like to see cops, you know, even off duty cops. I don't care. But yes, because we're. The goal is to try to protect our kids. I don't support training teachers to be gun wielders if they happen to own one. That's different. I'm talking training them to. You should be the good guy with good. No, I would rather use local law enforcement. I saw some parents, some African American parents, black American parents who said they don't support the local police. I would argue that's a city problem. Because if you can't support your local police, you got a problem. Dart, which is the program that I was trained up, this was back in elementary school for me, DART came in and they would come on a regular basis and they would talk to the kids and they would allay concerns about what police really do and how they're your ally and how you can ask for help and what to do in certain situations. I don't see that still happening. Maybe it is, but I don't see that it is. If you don't create that bond with law enforcement, you as a city have failed. You as a school system have failed. That's my point. I'm saying Kamala Harris is fluffy a bit on the second amendment. She says, I support the second amendment, I support reasonable gun safety laws. But in the second breath talks about ban total bans on assault weapons. And we don't want, you know, these gun laws or the rise of school shootings gun laws. I got to lock it down. She flip flops and I can't trust what she's really saying. Again, for me, I would just tax the frickin ammo because that's in their control to implement a tax on ammunition. They did it for cigarettes. They did it for cigarettes. They raised the tax on cigarettes. Why can't you do it on ammunition? For the same reason. Anyway, I spoke just about law enforcement, law enforcement. Trump has repeatedly said, I support law enforcement. Various law enforcement, including Border Patrol, has come out in support of Trump versus the current administration. So I don't need to repeat what he said. I will say Trump talks about decriminalizing marijuana. If you didn't know, marijuana is still a federal. It's controlled, right? So you're not allowed to have it. It's a federal crime to have marijuana. You could be locked up for distribution. Even if your state supports it, it's banned at the federal level. He's talking about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults, not for kids, but for adults. He's also talking about adding more for police departments, adding more funding for police departments, protecting them from frivolous lawsuits. This got people a little bit nervous because they felt, what's frivolous? How do you define frivolous? If it's that black kid getting beat up when they didn't have a weapon, is that really frivolous? If he gets sued? Well, is the cop just doing their job? Maybe. But is it really frivolous? If it's potentially a racial biased case, is there not going to be any investigations that made people nervous? I would say I support funding the police. However, I support the funding to be conditional. The funding condition is very simply, you as a police department have to go out of your way to ease unrest, drop the temperature in the neighborhoods, increase the safety in the neighborhoods, implement neighborhood watch programs, educate the neighbors, educate the people, go to the schools. You have to put a face out there and not just be the person that's their enemy. And you have to, if you see something, say something. If you cop A, you know that cop B is a flaming racist. Your job is to report what's happening. If you stay silent, you will be culpable and we will restrain your funding, tie the funding to tangible results. See that we want to see. There's a decrease in murders, There's a decrease in rapes, there's a decrease in robberies, there's a decrease in property damage. We want to see that there's an increase in trust. Take polls from the neighbors. I'm serious when I say this. I think you should take polls from the various neighborhoods. How safe do you feel? How much do you trust local law enforcement? Do you think they got your back what could they do better and implement change to improve something so simple and tie it to funding for those results, I guarantee you're going to see much better of a result than simply taking this passive approach of, well, it's a frivolous lawsuit. Is it really frivolous? I. Maybe it's not. Who's to judge Kamala's side talks about smart on crime now, mind you, she has a very sketchy record. Record when she was a prosecuting attorney. So I don't know that her approach was really smart per se. She did oppose the death penalty, which I also do. She does want to reduce recidivism, which I also support. I think the problem with reducing recidivism has to do with the nature of the crime. Right. If you have something where somebody robbery, right. They rob a store somewhere and they steal $3,000 worth of something. Well, is it really about recidivism that we're worried about or are we worried about the reason that they robbed? Right. If the reason that they robbed is they recently lost their job, I would like to see something where they make a case that they should not have lost the job, then make a case for fixing the reason they were so easily able to lose the job if they lost the job. Simply because we're an at will state where we can fire anybody that we feel like it. When we feel like it. It just turned out that person happened to turn 45. We decided to get them out of there. And we know that's age discrimination, but we can't prove it because we don't document trail anything. To me, you fix that. Now the government's not going to do any of this. So that criminal behavior, that element is going to continue because we're not solving the root cause of why they're committing the crime. I don't believe that every single person is committing crime just for the element. I think there's a reason that specific ones are committing specific crimes. I believe if you don't fix those root causes, the crimes are going to continue regardless of any sort of actions. You talk about support of a minimum 90 day jail sentence for possession of a weapon, minimum of 90 day jail sentence for possession of a weapon. So for gun violence. So let's break this down. You have a weapon, right? You. You're in some sort of a public venue, a movie theater or something else, and then somebody shoots. Okay? You shoot back. You hit something or somebody and perhaps you accidentally ricochet, right? Something somebody else gets hit. Are we saying that that person who was trying to stop the shooter should serve 90 days. I don't have a stake in it because ultimately that's what we promoted is this good guy with a gun narrative. That's the reason I'm not a fan. When I hear people and I've heard people say, I only bought a gun because everybody else has one. At that point, you're a sucker because you're saying you're so afraid that you have to have something lethal. You can't defend yourself with something non lethal. And somebody would say, well, what can I have that's non lethal? A pellet gun is actually non lethal, but if you use it correctly, it will incapacitate anybody that you want, believe them alive. And you're probably not going to go to jail for such a thing because you're doing it to suppress somebody, not to kill them. That's just me, though, in my personal opinion. So I'm saying I don't have a stake in what she's promoting because, I don't know, you're promoting the narrative about good guy with a gun. So you're saying that anybody who does gun violence, quote, which is an open definition, is going to serve 90 days. Hey, I don't have a stake in it.
[00:32:32] Defund the police. She. She was advocating defund the police back when it happened. So this is right after Biden took office. And defund the police was rallying in the streets. This narrative that we should not be funding cops to the degree that we were, because we were seeing what appeared to be improper actions taken by police officers against black people. Okay? I don't support defund the police, despite what I felt about what was happening, because I'm one of those slim few that believes. Yeah, unfortunately, it sucks. It truly does suck. But you probably shouldn't be fighting back. When the cop says, hands in the air. You probably shouldn't be arguing with them, which I see a lot of them do. You probably shouldn't be running from them, which I see a lot of them do. You probably shouldn't be going for a weapon. The one that walked around the car, this is recent. This is like a month ago. He's walking around the car. The cops like, don't do it. Don't do it. Don't do it. And then shoots him. The rage on the media is crazy. Under a black man getting shot. He was going for a fricking weapon. He was literally going for a weapon. I'm sorry. I do support this idea that the police should be able to defend if they see that there's truly a provable threat. I'm not a fan. When there was no provable threat, there are situations where it's somebody who is autistic or somebody who is obese or somebody who had no weapon whatsoever. The girls, there was girls, they were out there fighting and one of them is an overweight girl and cop just shoots one of them. Why? Why? Because he felt like, okay, it's only back. He felt threatened. He felt like he couldn't do anything unless he shot her. Okay, why don't you tase her, right? Use your taser to subdue the person. But they just get triggered. Those, they go after those. Those are the bad eggs we're talking about. Go after those. Singular, bad eggs. It's not a full on police department situation. I'll tell you a story and the reason I'm so adamant about this. When I was living in Washington state, I drove up there. This is when I had, Yeah, I had asked him where. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I had the, the Fusion. It was Black Fusion 2013. So I'm living in, I'm living in Washington state. I had tent, and my tent wasn't crazy dark. But the problem is that we didn't get a lot of sun during this period of time. So the tent looked darker than it really was. I go to the local, you know, Circle K. I think it was the curse. Circle K looks okay.
[00:34:48] I go in, I'm looking around for the stuff. Police officer walks in. I don't think much of it, but he doesn't. He's not doing as much shopping as I'm thinking he should. But I don't think much of it. I'm not worried about it. I, you know, as far as I knew, I didn't do anything. I've clean tags the whole night. Check it out, guys. I think you. Come again? That's literally what he said too, by the way. So don't call me. Whatever. That's literally what he says. Thank you, come again. Okay, take my stuff. I'm walking out and I hear, excuse me. Boy, I was, I was panicked.
[00:35:17] I was panicked. So I'm like, it came out of nowhere. I didn't hear. And the police officer behind me, but I didn't even hear his feet.
[00:35:24] He's like, this your car? So now like, okay, well, I'm screwed. Yes, really nice car. I mean, we're about to get this as an interceptor. We're told it's about come. Is it fast? How's it look on the inside? Who. So I'm like, I opened the car door. Let him inside. I'm thinking he's trying to set me up. And I'm like, whatever, I'll play along. He's like, yeah, it's pretty sweet. Nice. Is that a custom radio? No, it's a factory one. It's nice. I can't wait. That na takes off. Nothing. Just cool. Absolutely cool. The girl I was living with, and that was ages ago now, girl I was living with, it was her older sister.
[00:35:55] I had a falling out with the older sister. Nothing physical, but she. Anybody seen the movie Thin Line Between Love and Hate where Lynn Whitfield's character gets in an argument with Martin's character, and then Lynn Whitfield's character bangs her wrist into the door to cause damage to make it. It breaks her own wrist. That's what this girl did. So we get in this altercation. Verbal altercation. Over. It was over money, by the way. Verbal altercation. I leave. So I'm like, look, I'll just leave. It's not worth, you know, escalating. I'll just leave. It's not a problem. And after I leave, I'm trying to get my stuff out, and she locks the door. She's like, you're not getting back in here. Like, okay, well, fine.
[00:36:35] And then she said, I've already called the police. Fine, no problem. Now I'm out. I'm. I'm wearing a wife beater. For those that knows what it is, right? I'm wearing a wife beater, and I don't have any full sho shirt. I got a couple of things. I didn't get the most sentimental of things, but I wasn't worried about it. I just want to get out of there. Police guy comes up, puts me in the back of the squad car temporarily while he asked me what's going on. I said, I'm just trying to get my stuff out of there. She locked me out of there. I hear them, right? He goes up to the door. He asks her what's going on. Yeah, he was beating me, and he threw me against the whatever, and he broke my arm. And cop takes one. And I'm watching this. Cop takes one. Look at her. This woman's got to be 350 pounds. And at the time, I'm like 150 pounds soaking wet. And he says, yeah, he beat you. Open the door. Let him get his stuff. He knew what the game was. And then he let me out of the car to get my stuff. By that time, they had already hidden the sentimental items that I was looking for. But the point is, I've had these interactions with police. I got the one where I got, you know, it was a stop, right? Turn on the stop, and the guy pulled me over for tint, and he's like, why is tint so dark? This is in California. And I said, because it's. It's bright and it's hot, and it's like, okay, I'll let you go. I've had these interactions. I've never experienced what I see that the media promotes, which tells me it's likely happening, but statistically improbable to happen, or it's very certain specific areas. Certain areas likely would have a greater probability, like the one I'm in right now. If you look at the stats, it'll tell you that you have a higher probability of XYZ simply because of the area. But I talk to neighbors, and they don't see any representation of what they're talking about. There's people. This is. This is their retirement community. People will swear, I have never seen anything like this. There was one guy that had his garage robbed, okay? And that's about it. But other than that, no, we don't see the kind of things you're talking about because effectively, it's a retirement community. So I think in what Kamala's talking about, I understand kind of the messaging. Okay. I have to at least react about this business. I don't think defunding the police is the right answer. I don't also think she talks about a registry to keep track of police misconduct. I don't think it's going to do anything. I understand the thought. I don't think it's going to do anything. I would like to see situations where police conduct in general, we want to understand the investigative process that leads to them getting off. As in, we want to know all details of the investigation where you let a cop get off, not just the pieces you choose to let out. As in, if there's some disputed outcome you have to document and collect and make public immediately every single iota of evidence, every single bit of proof. Like if there's somebody and it looks like an unarmed black person, you have to say, no, the person had a knife, it was buried in his pants, whatever, and he tried to pull it out, and the police shot him. Here's the picture of the knife that he had. Here's the fingerprint evidence of the knife. Here's the person's witness statement that said, yeah, he saw him pick up the knife and said he wanted to kill the cop. Like, we have to break down why that person's getting off right now. It's just cops acquitted, cops acquitted, cops acquitted. And it's inflaming people. And I understand. I don't think a cop level registry is the right answer. I just want to see more public data around misconduct. I would love to see this. Sounds like Kamala also supports decriminalizing marijuana. Raises the question, why didn't you do it? You're in office. Biden's in office. Why don't you do it now? So she's getting flack for it, and she's not answering why she's not doing it now.
[00:40:06] Energy. The economy more so. Energy and economy. I am. This is big and near dear to my heart.
[00:40:14] Energy bills are a scam, okay? Electric bills, they're a scam. They're a total scam. The reason I say they're a scam, I understand what it takes to produce energy. I'm not disputing it. I'm saying that the rates are a scam. Because what the government should be doing is it should be fully subsidizing solar panels. Instead, what they do is they'll say, we'll give you a tax credit so you have to spend the money up front that you probably don't have, or take out a loan that's going to put you in the poor house. And because of the way loans work, it's all a scam because it goes to your credit. No, the right answer is I want to see you subsidize. It's like you want to go solar. Okay? Zero. Nothing out of pocket for you. All you gotta do is find your installer, tell the installer they will funnel it through us. Installer, you are not allowed to charge that customer. You're gonna get it from the government, and you may have to wait three months. But the point is, you cannot charge that customer. I know. It'll happen. Some of these installers will just say, screw it. We're just not gonna do it then. Because we need our money right now. That's why they don't do it. I understand. I'm saying that's we need to fix that problem. We need to incentivize it and speed up the process to where they get the money quicker. Because at the end of the day, what are we talking? We're talking parts and labor. If they're trying to rip the government off, then the government should go after them. We shouldn't be the one having to chase that down. But we should be able to get solar panels without creating loans and we should be able to get solar panels without breaking the bank out of pocket, in my personal opinion. I also don't support this rush to all electric stuff. I do support moving away from natural gas. You might be thinking that's weird because natural gas is always cheaper than electric. Yes, it is weird, but only weird because we've been conditioned to believe that natural gas is somehow superior when really it's not. Natural gas is a very risky thing. It has been a risky thing. Setting aside the whole CEO and emissions, I'm not a fan of having literally bombs in your basement or in your garage or something. And that's what they are. Your water heater is a bomb, your furnace is a bomb. They happen to have all sorts. And I've heard the story multiple times from contractors. They have all sorts of safeguards and, you know, stop gaps and all these different things. And I understand it doesn't negate the fact that the bombs. And I'm not a fan of it. I would rather use electric with basic parts where it can shut down, that's fine, it can short circuit, that's fine. But nothing where it can literally blow up your house. That's what I don't like. We've not solved that problem. So I'm not a fan of natural gas coming in the home at all. Especially when you talk about gas stoves. They just found gas stoves were starting to contribute to some of the air quality problems in people's homes after so many years. Fortunately, I don't have a gas stove in this place. The cooktop's electric. Well, somebody has some wherewithal to not do gas on the cooktop because, you know, the gas lines are fine. I just, I'm not fan of things that can explode in the house.
[00:43:13] But I'm also not a fan of forcing electric unless we can figure out how to subsidize and drop some of that cost. People did stats and they showed when we spike the cost of electricity, we are putting an undue burden on minorities and the low and middle class because what you're doing is you're taking away again a chunk of the money that they would otherwise make that goes that's disposable income. And they know they're doing that, but they don't have any recourse. They'll say, well, we have all these other plans that we can flatten the bill and we can do low income things. Let me tell you a story about the low income business.
[00:43:48] Some of the during the pandemic they offered, in certain states, they offered things where the bill would be paid for you because it was the pandemic and the government was paying money under the CARES Act. The problem is it would take three months to get that aid. So you have to apply for it. Then you have to wait. They're still charging, charging, charging, charging, charging. Then it takes three months to get the payment. Because everybody's basically doing this because it's the pandemic. People are screwed. You can't go anywhere.
[00:44:15] The point, though is that they could have done that for a regular thing. Like they could literally allocate, no matter what, whatever the bill happens to be up to a certain threshold, we're going to pay 50% of it and that's just going to be a regular thing because we got to keep these electric charges down for people. They could do it instead of shipping money overseas. They choose not to do it. So I'm not a fan of excessive reliance on electric and I do support fuels, fossil fuels, within reason. I think we should all be using hybrid vehicles, not EVs and not full gas. I think hybrid is the natural evolution we should be using that completely minimizes reliance on fossil fuels without completely eliminating them. Because consider all the jobs that are going to be lost. Setting that aside, range anxiety is a real thing. Tesla hasn't solved that problem. No, I'm not a fan of putting strain on the grid and spiking everybody's bills just so you can be cool.
[00:45:07] Trump, he's been talking about it. He wants to be the dominant energy producer. He wants to be producing all sorts of energy to where they're buying from us instead of us buying from other places. He's talking about getting rid of the Paris Accord, which is about climate change. He's talking about getting more back into the oil. Drill, drill, drill, baby. And tax breaks to oil and gas and coal because he understands those industries. That's the blue collar. He's appealing to the blue collar. Calm list complete, 100% opposite. However, Kamala talked about, we have to say this whole energy cost business does need to go down and we got to figure out a way to decrease energy cost. I don't know that that's going to really be reality. I don't know. But I like hearing that she said that. I just don't know that she's going to pull it off.
[00:45:52] The thing is with fracking, right, which is all related, she's been against fracking, that she flip flopped on him. But yet in the same breath she talked about we can't be totally reliant on domestic oil production. I agree with this. She also said we can't be reliant on foreign oil. I agree with this one. So my frustration on the, on this one with Kamala is that whoever's advising her doesn't know how to message it. Right. Kamala is basically saying we need to have, we effectively need to have hybrid energies. Hybrid energies. That's like a, say a 60, 40 percentage. And work towards, which is what I want, work towards true, you know, natural sources that are not pollution sources, but that it's hybrid. It's not just YOLO into ev, which is what Biden did. The question again is why didn't you do it? You're in office right now. I'm not a fan of the whole environmental justice, climate change, Greta Tumber stuff. I don't want to hear it. I don't. Because at the end of the day, we still have the tolerance we have to deal with now. I don't want to hear about what we should be doing. I want to hear about what we are now. And again, that's hybrid and where we're evolution, how long it takes to shift, how long it takes to evolve, how long it takes to change and not force it. Because remember, EVs and SUVs are cost prohibitive for all for the middle class and lower. That's the bottom line of what they are. Again, you're taking away a slice of what their disposable income is. It was a bad choice. You can't even find a regular, nice, low price, $10,000 sedan anymore because they're trying to rush to the EVs and everything else. That's starting at $30,000. That's not sustainable. It's not sustainable to require people to take out loans to buy cars requiring it. It used to be you could buy it straight cash and be okay. Now you're basically required to get a loan to get a car. It's not the right answer. That's where this rush is coming from, is pushing the EVs and everything. That's pushing up the cost. It's just saddling the middle class. So you take higher taxation on the middle class, inflation on the middle class, pushing EVs, which is pushing up the price of the stuff in the middle class. Utility bills going up in the middle class. Do you understand all of these initiatives pushed by the Biden administration have a stacked effect of impact on you. That's why I don't support them. All the other stuff that they're complaining about. That's what helped keep prices low. And them rushing away from it is what spiked it. If she wants to continue doing that, you're going to have much more pain for the next four years.
[00:48:24] Housing, which is near and dear to my heart, despite me being a homeowner myself. But you have to understand, at some point I want to refinance the house because I want to take advantage of the fact that I could drop the rate by 1%. That's a lot of money. It's probably about 300 bucks a month. Ish. Ish. Somewhere in that neighborhood. Trump wants to drop rates. Trump wants to open up federal land for new homes. Trump wants to do tax incentives and first time homebuyer programs and drop regulations. I'm not a fan of the federal land deal because I question, you know, I see land that's not federal land that we're not building on. And Trump talked about how, you know, there's, it'll be like this little pond and they call it a lake. And so now you can't build on it, can't build near it, or there's some plant and it's rare. And so you can't build on it, you can't build near it. There's a lot of that. And he says that they do that in order to control cost. I believe it. I would like to see how he would fix this.
[00:49:18] Kamala talked about building 3 million new homes in four years. Okay. The government building homes. I am completely, emphatically against it. I've had, I've heard people propose such a thing. I'm emphatically against it. Do you know the problem is when you have them do that, there's always strings attached. It doesn't matter what side of the government, it's always strings attached. When the government does it, it. I'm not a fan of it. Unless, unless you can remove all the red tape that's involved. As in the moment you do this house, it is yours. We are, we're not beholden to it. We don't hold a lien on it. We hold no sway over it. Once it's built, it's yours. Okay, we could do that. If they're only talking about multifamily. No, I would not support that because. No, I'm sorry, we can't support just multifamily all over the place because that's probably what they're talking about. And I can't say, because they didn't say, but I wouldn't support that either. Sorry. What I Would like to actually see, and it's kind of implied here, but what I would like to see is like Sears, people didn't know Sears used to sell home kits where you literally were buying the kit, all the living parts necessary to build a house. Some of those houses still stand today. Sears and Roebuck and company. I would like to see that come back into style. I would like to see that become that cottage industry that it used to be and then have contractors who are offering to sell you the kit and install it for you. I would like to see that build up because that's going to create a boom.
[00:50:46] Now we need more regulation obviously around the quality of the home and energy efficiency and all these things that weren't in place back then when Sears was doing that. So we do have a shift in how we do it. I'm saying that I want to see catalog goes to customer, customer sees the one they want, they can buy the kit they want for 10,000 bucks or lower or whatever it is. Then they contract with somebody, they buy the land, they build it themselves, and you're all good to go. I would love to see something there. She talks about. Kamala talks about cutting regulatory red tape to increase the speed of home construction. Because when you, when you build a home, there's a lot that slows it down. That is all about regs, paperwork and all these permits and inspections. Things have to go that slow down the process.
[00:51:30] She talks about first time homebuyers, the $25,000 subsidy on the down payment. I don't support that. I understand.
[00:51:37] But having gone through a similar program when I was in Washington, I feel like it's a scam because it would probably be the same damn thing. And I'll tell that story sometime a little bit later. Tax incentives are home builders who construct affordable homes for first time buyers. I had a similar program when I was in California. I was about to buy a. It was a condo and it was a condo conversion of an apartment. The condos are still there. Villa Taviana out in San Diego and Chase was doing a promotion where they said for first time home buyers, we're doing this whole shindig. And I was pre approved and you know, all you have to do is basically apply. And I applied, I started the process and I backed off of it. But they were doing something there. And then in Washington again, they had the tax incentive and all that, but it was a scam. So I'm. I don't know that these gimmicks are the right answer. What I would Love to see is a decrease in the cost of buying a home, a decrease in the cost of building a home and a decrease in the cost of fixing things that are wrong with existing homes. You know, rehabilitation. I don't want to see loans all over the place. I know why they're doing it. They're doing it because they're helping out the banks. I don't want to see that. I want to see the costs come down. Rehabilitation should be subsidized by the government. If you have something where it's a home that was built in like the 40s or the 30s or something, you want to rehab it so it's modern, it's energy efficient, it's safe, etc. I believe the government should subsidize what it takes to rehab that home to bring it up to standards, and then you're just subject to the types of parts and stuff you use. But I think they should subsidize that and the labor because ultimately when we don't do that, we're saddling the individual person on it. We're expecting them to turn around and resell it and some do. But when you, what happens when you turn around and resell it? Then there's all sorts of red tape and hoops that have to jump through and the sellers and the buyer's agents get fat off the pig and nobody really wins. I would love to see the government step in and do something to help rehabilitation of existing homes because a lot of the reason there's new build is because some homes are so far gone they have to be demolished and start over. And I don't want to see that happen.
[00:53:35] General blue collar about manufacturing workers, Trump, in summary, he's about build and buy American. He believes it should be all about American stuff, auto industry. We need to fix it. Ev should be done here if we're going to do it. Slim down the imports. I love the way Trump talks about manufacturing blue collar. Kamala only was talking about things I don't support. She. I don't support anything she was talking about. She was talking about the minimum wage. I'm not a fan of increasing minimum wage. Is it low? Yes. I'm not a fan of increasing it. I'm a fan of fixing the law that enforces it. In other words, you know, because the most, the most affected population for wages is the white collar. The white collar is not subject to that minimum wage. So I would rather fix that then. I would rather encourage competition with the blue collar to force them to increase wages locally. That's What I want to see rather than saying, well it's going to increase minimum wage. We already saw that the 515 didn't do any good because inflation just burned it. It didn't do any good. And I'm not a fan in my opinion. Personally, I'm not a fan of unions having been in one. They're in bed with the employer. I would love a rework of the law that protects unions, but I'm not a fan of them at this point.
[00:54:55] Border and immigration is kind of self explanatory. We've heard the story. Trump is all about locking down the border. Build a wall. You know, you heard that. I'm not. It's ad nauseam.
[00:55:04] Kamala Harris was the border czar. She it's on verbal that she was the border czar and didn't do anything.
[00:55:11] She wants to do spot treatment, things like let's deal with the drug crisis over here, let's reform the pathways of citizenship, let's give you funding for ice, let's do permanent resident for Afghan like she's doing These stove pipe solutions.
[00:55:27] I think Trump is trying to take let's first we need to stem the flood and figure out who's coming in. Then we can worry about how we solve it.
[00:55:36] You might feel one way or the other. I'm more of a fan of minimizing who's floating in and even if they don't build a wall, the one thing that happened when Trump took president is a lot of people were freaked out about trying to come in because he was in office and they were afraid of what he was going to do. So we saw a decrease in immigration by just the fear of something. Just like with Jong Un stopped firing rockets because he was in office. So maybe it's just one of those victories where just him doing the threats is good enough. I don't know. But I'm not a fan of stovepipe solutioning either because that gets out of track. It's hard to track. It's get out of whack and it's hard to manage. My opinion, education, which is near and dear to my heart. Trump wants to abolish the freaking doe. I 100% support this one. Trump wants to cut federal funds for schools that teach critical race theory and gender ideology.
[00:56:24] And one support ones that prioritize project based learning. I support this one. He supports affordative alternatives to traditional four year college. I support this. He supports schools that focus on parental rights while ending teacher tenure, adoption, merit pay. I support it. Everything he says I 100% support. He also supports homeschool parents to use education savings accounts to offset the cost of doing it. I am 100% on board with his approach to education because it is fundamentally broken. And I don't like where education has been pushed. I'm talking higher ed college, where they're pushing the fact that, you know, this is where you need to be. Four year degree and then it's egregiously expensive and loans you can't do anything with. And Biden trying to do an end run and basically waive it when they, they help saddle people with this. I don't support this. Kamala, on the other hand, wants to increase what Biden already put in the Title nine, which is lending Pell Grants, which is lending historically black college and universities, which is pandering. You know, I'm not, I don't like it. I don't like what she's hers. Her approach feels like socialism. It feels like it's just social. We're just going to give money to these things. I don't like it because again, you're not solving the real problem is the quality of education is not where it needs to be. The things we're teaching kids is not where it needs to be. And we don't pay the teachers enough to boot. And the merit pay I think is a good way to solve that. Tenure, teacher tenure I think is a good way to figure out, okay, how do we get the right teachers in for the right reasons that have the right education for the students where they are right now? I support all of that.
[00:58:04] Health care. Health care is a little bit near and dear to me, but health care is kind of one of those moving targets. It's out of control, price wise. We all know this. The problem is Kamala is talking about, again, a socialist approach. We want to expand Obamacare. We want to cancel medical debt for millions of Americans. We want to expand home care. No real plan for how we pay for all this stuff. Just a bunch of socialist stuff. I'm not a fan of what she's talking about. Trump says he wants to reform Obamacare. I like what I'm hearing because I think Obamacare is the right idea. Just the wrong approach by Obama himself was like, if you like your current doctor, you can keep him, period. And that was not true. And he's like, yeah, no more taxes on the middle class. That wasn't true because it's an excise tax in Obamacare. So he lied. And Trump wants to try to fix the flaws of it while keeping the spirit of it, that's, that intrigues me at least a little bit. Chronic disease prevention, which is RFK's hold messaging, he's talking about doing those. He's talking about veterans care, he's talking about family caregivers, he's talking about coverage of ivf. People attacked him, said he was against ivf. He pledged and said, no, we need universal coverage of these treatments. So it wasn't true that he attacked it. And then new parents getting a tax deduction for newborns, geez, that's a huge thing. Because anybody who's had kids will understand that that newborn period is egregiously expensive. And it's hard, especially if you're slim on the income of your up and coming. It's hard at any type of break you can get to help with that period is huge. So I, when I heard him say that, I'm like, okay, this is, this is what we should be doing. Because what you're doing is you're advocating. And I know what they would do. They would say it has to be a natural born kid, as in, it cannot be, you know, let's say a lesbian couple that adopts a kid. Right. Or a gay couple that adopts the kid. It's got to be natural born. The natural born can be, you did IVF to do it. But the point, it has to be born a born child. Because what they're trying to do, I know the Republicans because of Vivek Ramaswamy, is talk about the nuclear family and the idea that we need to have more childbirths and not discourage it. Because a lot of the people in Congress right now, they've been against the idea of childbirth and many of them are saying, pro abortion, pro abortion, pro abortion. And they're fighting against the natural birth cycle. That's where that's coming from. I know, I know that Trump listens on those voices where they're saying, no, this is a pain for us parents, this is a pain for us, so do what you can. Kamala's talking about ivf, but that's not really talking about these parents that are still struggling, that don't need ivf.
[01:00:41] I'm going to skip that one taxation.
[01:00:44] Trump wants to make permanent the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. I actually don't like the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. One little sliver in there that I didn't like and I only learned about it in 2019. This is when I went to Oregon in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. They changed it to. So it used to be that if you relocated and you had a new job and they were going to give you relocation, you know, bonus upfront, that that was not taxable.
[01:01:07] It was basically pre tax dollars. They changed it to where it's fully taxable. So when I went out there, they offered me a relocation deal but like half of it was taxed. And I'm like, okay, that's not right. I've done this before. Turns out it was the tcga. I wasn't a fan of this one at all. Cut the corporate tax rate 21 to 15%. I understand why he's doing that. I, I like it and I don't, I understand why he's doing it. I like it. As a business owner, I don't know that I like it from. Where are you going to get the money from? Because that's a lot of revenue lost. Eliminate taxes on service and hospitality workers. Taxes on tips.
[01:01:45] Yeah, but I would rather see a law that says if you're not paying minimum wage, tax cannot be the only source of money. You gotta pay minimum wage. If you're paying taxes, it has to be off minimum wage, you know, minimum wage, not just tips. Because tips, you know, you could only get, let's say you clear like 30 bucks a day, which I, I know some waitresses that did 30 bucks a day and they're taking a third of it. Right. Which sometimes happens. No, I think it's fair. I think they're these like retailers are required to pay minimum wage and that's taxable. And then you make tips over top of it and that's not taxable. That's what I'd love to see. But you need a law that forces them to pay minimum wage, not just be tips only. So I love to see in taxes on overtime pay for workers I only support, I understand what they're doing. I only support it if you enable overtime pay for white collar workers. Because again, the narrative has been white collar, not blue collar. So this idea of hourly pay only applies to a subset of the lower class tiers. I would like to see it apply across the board. To do that you have to enable overtime pay for the white collar as well. And I know they won't do that.
[01:02:56] Comma, is her basic tax credits that she wants to put back in and then no tax heights for people earning less than 400,000 a year. Raising the top individual tax rate to 39.6% on high income filers. Roll back the tax cuts and put back the tax for corporate taxes. Tax long term capital gains 25% unrealized capital gains tax with a net worth of over 100 million. Eliminate taxes on tips, just like Trump did.
[01:03:23] Common is more about people who make a lot of money should pay more. What we know is that as long as you have those, those credits and deductions, it doesn't really do much. So it's not that I'm against what she's saying. I'm saying it doesn't really do much. You can try to thaw you want, but they can do so many deductions and credits, it just negates it. You're not really getting the benefits you think you do. Whereas at least Trump's approach. I don't like the TCJA TCJA at all. I completely don't like it and I don't like to cut on the corporate tax rate. So for me, I'm not really a fan of either on taxation and neither are talking to the language I want. That said, Trump recently came out and talked about abolishing income taxes. I said earlier for the tariffs. If he pushes that, I would support that. How can he sustain it? I don't know, but it would be much better than what we have for everybody across the board. And then my favorite one, the economy.
[01:04:14] K doesn't get it.
[01:04:17] On the economy, when she talks about increased taxes on the rich, raise the minimum wage, not to interfere with the Federal Reserve, she's saying the wrong man. I'm sorry, she's, she's got it wrong. And on the economy, this is the one. That's why I say this is the one issue where she just doesn't have a clue because she's trying to copy what Biden and Obama did. And it's not the right answer. It's not what people want. What people want is closer to what Trump is proposing. Reduce inflation by increasing American energy production so we are self sufficient. Lower commodity prices by ending the wars. No cuts to Social Security, Medicare, no changes to the retirement age. President should have a say in the Federal Reserve's monetary policy decision. US dollar as a world's reserve currency which increases the value of it, by the way. Use of cryptocurrency, but no CBDC people support this. Bring crucial supply chains back to the US and then sign trade deals which benefit us. Reverse the EV mandate, cancel the emissions mandate, which is why they're rushing to EVs now tear and why you have so many recall spikes. Tariffs of at least 60% on Chinese input goods, 10% universal tariff on all imported goods. Temporary cap on credit card interest rates at 10%. Everything he's talking about is designed to rein in everything that's affecting you. That's literally what it is. Everything that's there is designed to help. It's like a stimulus to the economy. Every single one of these is a temporary stimulus for at least the four years he'd be in office if you were to win. That's really what we need. We need to pump the economy up. Not what Kamala is talking about, which are not going to solve the problem. What Kamala is talking about are just going to increase inflation further than what it is. It's going to make it worse. It's four more years of Biden. That's why I say she doesn't get it as far as the economy. But I understand she comes across as a hypocrite if she doesn't go along with Biden's mandate. So that's everything that I see on Trump and Harris. I'm disappointed because, again, there's inklings of success in what Kamala is saying. But I get the sense that whoever's advising her, maybe she's trying to flip and then somebody's advising her, no, you can't. You'll be labeled a hypocrite if you go against Joe Biden or something, or Biden himself is putting it down or Obama's doing it. I don't know. I'm saying that somebody is not advising her well on what the people are really resonating with, in my opinion. And Trump doesn't have everything answered correct. He certainly doesn't have it, in my opinion. Right. On taxation, I'm not a fan of what that is at all.
[01:06:51] But I am a fan of the way he wants to handle the economy, and I am a fan of the way he wants to handle, you know, the education, because those are two big things that I think are completely broken and the border. I do think he has the right. At least he has a plan to try to go after it, you know, be aggressive on these things. And I think that's what we need. We need aggressive, not passive. We've been passive for four years. All it got us was more wars and a lot of dead soldiers. So for me, that's what I'm stressing. How you vote is how you vote. It doesn't matter how somebody else votes. It matters how you vote. And you got to vote with your own conscience. And you might completely, emphatically disagree with my analysis on it. I'm not, again, saying that Kamala's completely wrong because she flipped on a lot of stuff. That's the problem. I'm saying that some of the stuff that she's talking about is not, it's not enough, like it's not aggressive enough to fix the American state. It feels like it's just passive so that we don't piss other people off, that we don't piss other countries off. If that's the way we want to do it, then that's, that's to be your vote. But I think we need an aggressive approach. We got to push and get Americans back on track than where we are and we got to play a lot of catch up because we don't have a lot of time because at some point all this war stuff that's happening is going to spill over here. And I'm not trying to freak people, but that's the reality. It's going to hit. If they sense weakness, it's going to hit. And I don't want to see that happen. I would love to see that we get some stability going on. At least the economy, if nothing else, but certainly economy, education, those two are near and dear to my heart. And I want to see that we get better than what we've been for this past four years by far.
