A lot of fundamentals, I'll acts and an individual lots.
This is the show.
Oh right, everybody, welcome to your one book show on this Saturday, January eighteenth. I hope everybody is after a great start to the weekend. And yeah, so, uh, we're gonna be talking today about the first hundred days and and kind of what is possible, and uh, talk about what I think Trump is going to do, and I'll I'll talk a little bit about and then I'll talk about what I would do in the first hundred days.
First hundred days, of course, a time where Congress and the public supposedly gives you some lead way, some freedom to maneuver, the ability maybe to pass stuff that maybe outside of the hundred days you couldn't do because it is not that popular, more difficult politically. Whether that is true or not, I do not know, but let's make the assumption. What the hell? All right, what else do we want to say? Yeah, today is tomorrow. Tomorrow is
officially in Puerto Rico, the end of Christmas season. I know for you guys, it's already over a long time ago, But in Puerto Rico they celebrate three kings and then they celebrate something called San Sebastian, and it's like a weekend, like from Thursday to Sunday. It's party twenty four to seven. It's out in Old San Juan. The consequence of that is they basically closed all the roads leading to Old San Juan, which means all the roads outside our condo are closed off.
It's a major hasshole.
But there are hundreds of thousands of people round, millions of people in Olden One right now partying, and.
They will be there all night anyway.
Yes, Puerto Ricans have a very long Christmas season, starts before Thanksgiving and it ends tomorrow night, Monday morning.
All right, So.
Monday Monday, Donald Trump will be come the president of the United States. He'd be inaugurated almost certainly immediately on his way to the party. He will assign a bunch of executive orders to get things rolling. In the days following, you can expect dozens of executive voters almost a day. Roomors have it that in the first week there will be one hundred executive voters that that Trump will sign. They'll be all over the place, covering everything, and most
of them will be think more than symbolic statements. Of stuff creating this group advisors and that group of advisors, and this thing or that thing, but some will be quite substantive.
There certainly will be.
Significant, significant executive executive orders relating to immigration, for example, and relating to tariffs, the two things that Trump is most seemingly most passionate about, immigration and tariffs, and I
think those will get very early on. I think already tomorrow you'll get some kind of deportation executive order that are going to effect immediately and will require ICE to start going into particularly blue states and blue cities and and start arresting people and setting them up for the deportation. It is good to remember in this context of deportation, just so people don't freak up too much, is that in Trump's Trump's first term, the first the four years
twenty seventeen to twenty twenty one, very little deportation happened. Indeed, Obama deported more people than Trump, and Biden deported more people to Trump.
Now, granted more people came.
Across under Biden, but Obama was pretty aggressive in deporting people. Is Trump literally going to be rounding people up and putting them in camps and making it I'm skeptical we'll see I mean he could be I think onemat more likely to see kind of an Obama level plus ramped up Obama levels of deportation, rather than kind of the the camp's scenario eleven million people being rounded up, as
some people in Donald Trump's camp have suggested. So I don't think we'll get the worst case scenario from that, but but it certainly will. You know, that certainly will be one of the first things he does. Remember a lot of what Donald Trump does, a lot of what Donald Trump says is performative.
It is for show, it is.
To appease a particular group of people. I think another thing that will happen on Monday is there will be official, an official announcement on Monday that we now have the greatest economy we have ever had. That it is immediately recategorized from a really really bad economy to a really really good economy.
Uh.
And uh.
Might take a few days.
To that one to happen, but but already, you know, people are people are reconsidering that. All right.
Let's see.
The other one, of course, will be tariffs. I do expect that we'll get tariffs right off the bat, pretty quickly here.
It really does seem like he is committed again.
Tariff's Anti trade is the one policy that Trump has held firm to since in nineteen eighty, so this is going on well into forty years. It's the one thing I think he really believes in. And so I do expect to see some form of, you know, maybe universal tariffs, so maybe a progression or maybe starting out with some increase in tariffs across the board, ratcheting up to some higher level in the future, so that he can pretend
that he's going to use this for leverage. And so we will see, we will see exactly what he has in mind in terms of starting out our tariffs and in terms of launching his tariff agenda. But those two certainly will dominate. At the same time, Congress will start putting together this mother of all bills, the biggest, greatest, most amate amazing, beautiful and wonderful and stunning, and I
don't know, just the greatest bill ever. And it'll be big that will try to capture a lot of Trump's priorities.
It will include provisions.
It will include immigration provisions, primarily at the level of just allocating budget for immigration.
It will also.
Include tax provisioning sort of include the extension of the two thousand and seventeen tax cuts into the future with some changes and adaptations.
We'll see. It'll this will this is going to.
Take a while to all come together. It will also include significant UH spending priorities, to include a budget which will include a number of spending priorities. My guess is that there will be a few bones thrown in the direction of Dodge, so there will be something in there around a greater government efficiency, and maybe maybe some budgets will be cut symbolically, But overall, this will be a massive spending bill, massive tax bill, a hugely, hugely deficit
will be clearly UH. This this bill will be a deficit spending bill, but it will have it will have It might include kind of an expansion of the president's authority visa the tariffs. I don't know whether the Trump people think they need that, but they might just throw it in there just for just to be safe, so give him more authority than he even has right now in.
Terms of tariffs. I don't think it'll have explicit tariffs in there.
We'll see, but I think it'll have some provisioning there again on the immigration.
It'll have.
There will be no And I'll make this prediction right now. Goverment spending under Trump every year will be higher than the previous year. Goverment spending under Trump will be higher than goverment spending under Biden. The growth, the rate of growth might slow, but gom and spending will.
Not be cut.
Uh.
There will be a big.
Grand, beautiful, amazing, stunning, greatest in all of history, proposals submitted by the Elon Musks of the world before the deadline. When there's the deadline sometime in twenty twenty six that argues for eight bunch of cuts and a bunch of streamlining and fiving people, and some people will be fired and everything, and Trump will say, this is magnificent, is exactly what I want, This is amazing, I love this,
this is fantastic. He will send it to Congress and it will die slowly because Trump won't fight for it and pressure group politics will not allow it again. A few symbolic things will happen here and there, but government spending will be significant higher four years from now than it is today. Trump will spend more money than Biden. And that is my prediction.
And you know.
I'd be known to be wrong, to be wrong and uh, but I'm betting that. Am I betting against Elon Musk? Absolutely, I'm betting against the loan Musk.
I'm not.
I'm not going to tell you what I think the price of Tesla is going to be or how much money SpaceX is going to make. I'm not going to bet against Trump against Elon Musk and business. But yeah, when it comes to politics, I'm betting against Alan Musk
without a doubt. They might also be an attempt by congressional Republicans to pass or to come together around a immigration bill A a immigration bill that restricts restricts immigration and uh, and there's and and so it'll look very much like the bipartisan bill there were is that it was brought in front of the Senate, what it was a nine months ago, and that Trump basically said to Republicans not to even consider It'll look very much like
that something like that will pass. They might even include in there some streamlining of H one B for for uh for extraordinarily talent. I don't know, I'm not sure that could pass, but they might include something like that. But there will be some kind of immigration stick to immigration bill, again very similar to the one Democrats agreed to under Biden, but that Trump would not let Republicans consider. And I think in this case what a uh Trump
will will will sign off on that bill. Here's here's here's what Here's what trump mindlessness syndrome does to people. So Jones Wright, Yeah, we should have elected Kamala instead. Is that your point you're on, No, it's not. My point is this is what Trump is going to do. I didn't make any opinion about who should have been elected. All I'm saying is Trump will spend a lot of money. You know, you like that?
Great?
You don't like that?
Fine?
I mean, why is everything about the last election? Last electures finished? Trump one celebate, you've celebrated. Now let's talk about what he'll actually do and whether any of it is good. My prediction very little will be good. Some of it will be good, but very little will be good. And when it's good, I'll mention it. But right now, my prediction for the first ninety days, for the first one hundred days of his administration, most of it would be shitty.
What choice did we have? I don't know.
I don't care it's over, it's finished. Why are we hashing the past? Why why debate the past? We're debating the present in the future. That's what's important. The past is the past. It's over. He won. You guys got what you wanted. Yay, we're celebrating, and now we're talking about what will happen. I have no interest in rehashing who should have won the previous election, because it's irrelevant,
not compared to the perfect. I'm comparing to Biden. Biden was horrible, terrible, one of the worst in all of history. I'm comparing to Biden. Will Donald Trump spend more or less money than Biden? And I'm gonna I'm my guess, and you guys can bet against me, and we can in four years, we can we can adjudicate this. My guess is he'll spend more. But you know what other predictions do you guys want? We can, we can do other predictions. That's fine. Will Will he raise tariffs? Yeah?
He raised tariffs. Will that be bad for the US economy? Yes, that'll be bad for the US economy. He will raise tariffs h more than Biden did. Biden kept Trump's previous tariffs, raised some tariffs on on batteries and and I think, uh, solar panels, Trump will raise them even more. What other issues, you know, go fit whatever whatever you guys want.
Will he go to war, No, he will not go You will not go to war.
He won't exactly bring the troops home. He never has, but he's not going to go to war. He will let Ian be. He will negotiate a deal with Iran. Who who else is there to go to war?
Worth?
He's not going to go to war with China, all right. So so that's what I think Trump will do. Uh, that's what I think he'll do in the first hundred days. I think a big focus in the first hundred days in terms of fun policy will be a deal with you on I think that he is very much aware that that a deal with Russia is not in the cards for the first one hundred days, so he'll probably let that one be for now.
He will continue.
To support Ukraine in spite of everybody's hating him on that, and and try to angle for some future deal with Russia. He will kind of deal. He will probably day one start negotiating with the Ranians.
Yeah.
That that that is that that is fall and policy. He will put a lot of pressure on Israel to kind of deal.
With with Ramash.
I don't not think Trump wants the war and gods that get reignited under his under his watch, I don't think he wants UH to see a war there. Once Phase one of the cease fire expires. I think he'll put a lot of pressure on the Israelis to negotiate a phase two, in a phase three. And yeah, I mean I don't think he wants wars. I think part of his stake again is no wars. Even if I have to sell out my allies, I don't want word was right, what.
Would I do?
And and and here the thing it's important to note that there's a real opportunity for Trump.
I mean, if you paid any attention to serious people.
Oh by the way, one of the things I do think will happen in the first hundred days, which is good. So this is the good is I do think you will get significant movement on energy right off the bat. I think the energy people are ready, you know, and they have a list of things they want to do, and I think they will do that very quickly. And I think on on energy, that is where the best stuff will happen on the Trump and it will happen
really really fast. So and one hundred days will give them cover to do a lot of things that are exciting. It'll be interesting to see, for example, whether they approve offshore drilling or not. But there's plenty of oil and natural gas on shore, so we'll see, we'll see exactly what happens. As I mentioned, Alex Epstein, who's the sponsor of the show, has a twenty five point what should be done to liberate energy? You can find it on a substack. You should go.
There, all right.
So what I do if it was me in terms of this, because I do think that the first one hundred days on opportunity, particularly when there is a change from democratic Republican, would particularly when the Republican being elected in this case, Trump is coming in as a disruptor, as somebody who doesn't play by the rules, as somebody who might be doing things completely different, might be doing
new things, exciting things, an agent of change. Well, then I would say, let's really change, let's do major change, let's embrace change. All right. So I'm going to go run down a few things and then open it up to your questions.
Let's start with tax policy.
Since taos are tax and let me just say a few things that I think should be done. It could be done on tax policy starting on day one of a new administration. So first thing I would do on day one is i'd signed executive vote. Again, assuming you could get here, I think the president can actually do this unilaterally.
I think you can.
I would sign an executive vote basically lowering tais to zero unilaterally across the entire United States on every single product that exists out there, so all products taris down to zero. You know, I probably phase it in a little bit, just I like giving people the opportunity to adjust so that it's not instantaneous and things get thrown off KILTA. But I would say within six months, this one's easy, and it's easy to do and it's quick. Within six months, all tariffs in the United States will
be zero. I will be declaring the United States a free trade zone. A. Please bring your goods to the United States, try to sell them here. You know, we are open for business. I also make it incredibly easy to invest in the United States. Oh. One of the things I would immediately do is reverse the Biden administration's decision about Nipon steel. Let Nipon steel buy US steel and encourage farn companies to come to the United States
and invest by buying. By buying US US companies unilaterally means that I would reduce tariffs coming into the United States, whether the countries that are exporting to the United States had tariffs or not, or reducing the traffs or not. So I would make the United States a zero tariff unilaterally, zero SERF country in the US.
I would also.
Immediately sign an executive order, and if not it couldn't actually do this by executive order, I would submit a simple, straightforward up and down vote quick vote bill that would basically repeal the Jones Act. So the Jones Act would be a major priority for appeal again, all in the name.
Of just let's just simplify.
Let's just get rid of the low hanging food, the stuff that we don't need. We don't need voters and customs and all of that overhead. We don't need tariffs. We want to compete with the world. We want our businesses here in the United States to go into complete competition with the world. We want a free flow. I mean I'm not quite ready to make a free flow of immigrants yet. We'll get to them and later, but I want at least free fow capital into the United States.
It's already pretty easy to invest here, but the idea that Nipon steel can by US steel is a major deterrent for capital to be invested in the United States. So we want to get rid of that and reverse that on day one. So those are things day one Jones Act, a repeal of Jones Act, a reversal of Nipon Steele and h and tariffs down to zero within six months. Then I would sit down with congressional leaders and I would encourage them to adopt a straightforward, simple
tax legislation. And that is legislation that's already available in the House of Representatives.
UH, and it is the tax, the Fair tax.
UH.
The fair tax would basically abolish everything. It would the fittax would abolish the income tax, the state tax, the capital gains tax, the dividend tax, the corporate tax. Basically all taxes on income, all taxes on production, all taxes on actual productive activity would be abolished immediately, you know,
with within a year. Over the next year, completely abolished all again income taxes, well taxes, all capital gains taxes, dividend taxes, maybe most importantly, corporate taxes would be down to zero, would be eliminated completely. And by the way, as soon as you zero out the corporate tax, all the subsidies that have to do with I don't know, accelerated depreciation and you can deduct this are indeed, but you can't deduct that, and you can do this, and
you can do that. All the attempts by the government to manipulate businesses into doing what they'd like, All that is out the window because there's no taxes from which to deduct them.
So all that is out the windows.
So copate taxes zero. And then I would put in place a federal state sales or vat value added tax across the board in the United States, again getting rid of all production productive income taxes, and uh, making the only tax in the land at the federal level a tax on consumption. And I would make it on everything everything. I would make it flat, and I think this is what the fair tax have. I would not have any provisions for poor people for you know, for bread, for fruit,
for vegetables. No, the taxes on everything everybody pays exactly the same rate. You don't want help bureaucracy figuring out what your income is and should you get money back or should you get money back, and everything you deal with you deal with welfare separately. The tax code is just about revenue, and it's flat, and it's the same you're wide about old people. Old people give them money.
It's better.
It's better generally to rate a check then to try to control prices or try to manipulate taxes, or try to use the tax system to redistribute wealth. Don't use taxes for anything other than one function, and then it's to bring in revenues to the government. That is the only function, not to manipulate the behavior, not to control behavior,
not anything. By the way, doing this with out encouraged states to eliminate their federal, their state taxes, income taxes, because now you'd have a whole You know that bureaucracy would go away. By the way, that means shutting down the IRS, not creating an EERS, but shutting down the IRS and shutting down the EOS right because taris would be gone, so you'd have no e R S. This this is Trump's new agency for External revenue services. Shut that down, shut down the irs. You'd save tens of
billions of dollars by doing that. And you know, again, this is at the federal level, so I'm not talking about state. States will have to do what they have to do at the federal level. No income tax, but more importantly, no colporate tax, no no dividends, capital daines, none of that. You I mean, imagine, I don't know how many of you. I mean, some of you probably make a decent living and do quite well. I mean, think about how liberating that would be to just eliminate.
Eliminate taxes as a concern is something you think about. When you go to the grocery store, you buys up. They add the fifteen percent whatever needs to be to get enough revenue so that we can balance the budget. Even if it's twenty five percent whatever happens to be. You pay it there, but you do not concern yourself anyway in your actions with taxes. This primarily the lowering the corporate tax to zero.
Lowering the corporate tax to zero will.
Immediately raise wages, lower prices, because that's really out corporate taxes are paid from, and increase investment.
The fact that capital gains.
Now zero on short term and long term will dramatically increase investment. And you will see you know, money flowing from overseas because now it won't be have to have withholding taxes.
In the United States.
You will see a massive, massive boom to economic growth to I mean free of You haven't even deregulated anything,
you haven't done anything. You basically eliminated taxes, tariffs and income taxes and corporate taxes that in and of itself, that in and of itself will have such a huge increase to economic activity that somebody wanted to increase economic activity to five to six percent just that might have that kind of impact, particularly again taking the corporate tax on what is a twenty twenty one percent to zero, huge, huge, huge, And it's very workable because in most places businesses, retailers
already have the infrastructure for state sales tax. What you have to do is overlay an infrastructure for federal sales tax. Of course, if that might be better, might be easier to put in place. It's also a little bit more hidden from consumers, so maybe maybe less honest, if you will, than a straight up straight up sales tax. Is workable. Absolutely,
there's no economists of running numbers. There's actually a bill in Congress that every now and then a couple of weeks in the House of Representative bringing up for vote or don't because the leadership to the public company won't allow it to go to a vote and it fails. But there is a bill available. I haven't run the numbers on that particular bill to make sure that it all adds up. But it wouldn't be that hard to take that bill and tinker with it and make it workable.
Make it workable. So step one would be that it would be a true revolution. I would also start as president in my first one hundred years the process of repealing the amendment to the Constitution that made income taxes legal. And I forget which amendment that was sixteenth nineteenth anyway, repealing the amendment to the Constitution that allowed for income tax would be part of this. But even if I
can't repeal it, let's get that on the books. Let people see what is possible when you stop trying to control them, pulate them, and control the manipually business through the system of taxation. So that is step number one tax policy. Get rid of all of that. Step two is probably the most controversial of all of them. Step two is, uh would take on what Trump has said he would not and what Democrats have said they were not.
It's a Step two would be to shame Democrats and Republicans into taking on immediately, immediately the issue of entitlements UH and UH offering dramatic, substantial, significant entitlement reform. And this or four means that you would we would immediately reform medicaid medicaid and UH and social security UH and so security might be the easiest of these to reform. So security is going bankrupt within about ten years or maybe even earlier than that. It goes it is already negative.
That is, more money goes out than comes in to the to the system. So it's basically being paid off through the general general taxation.
UH so uh uh.
The way to do this, the way to do this, in my view is is a few things, a few kind of tweaks that are just required in order to sustain the system and.
Then radical reform.
The tweaks I would do is I would I would definitely mean test so security if you make over a certain amount of money or you you you're you're still making as you know, you you don't get it, or you or you get a fraction. This is just because it's it's not sustainable.
And right now.
You know general taxes are going to pay this. You don't have a saving account, it's not your money put aside. So I would definitely put in a means testing mechanism. One of the advantages, of course, eliminating the income taxes, so security taxes are no longer so security is no longer going to be taxed. Note also that by eliminating taxes the income tax I would also eliminate and this is important, mad care taxes and payroll taxes, so you will no longer be paid be paying into this system.
The system would.
Have to be funded through general tax revenue i e.
The consumption taxes.
So I would mean test soial security, if you make over two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, you don't get it. If you have x amount of wealth, maybe you don't get it, and and you know, And it would have to be phased and done in a way that doesn't penalize people too much. Second, I would change to a time and age from whatever it is today sixty seven to seventy or seventy one. Again, this is just to
by time, just to buy by some years. And then more fundamentally is that I would convert so security into a into a saving account. That is, I would you know, again nothing is nothing is taxed here, so you know, I would basically wouldn't convert into same accounts. I would basically phase it out. So basically what I would say is if you are if you are in your sixties, you will get everything promised, adjusted for the means testing and adjusted for the.
Later a time and age.
If you're in your fifties, you will get I don't know, eighty percent or seventy five percent. If you're in your forties you will get fifty percent. In your in your thirties you'll get twenty five percent. And hey, by the way, if you're in if you're twenty five and older, you will get zero and you will get zero and right. And there's a consequence of and that's fine because you're not paying payroll taxes anymore, so you're not putting any
money supposedly aside. So something like that pretty aggressive. So within forty years the system is gone, there is no Social Security. Somebody says, what about IRIS, I was don't exist in this world, right, Why would you want IRIS for one k's any of that?
They're no taxes.
The only reason IRIS exists is to protect shield you from taxes. The only reason for one K exists is to shield you from income taxes. But there are no income taxes anymore. You pay no taxes. You write no check to the government except when you pay for your grocy. So for whatever it is that you're buying, so you get to choose how much to save and how much you consume. More you say, the better, I think for your own retirement, because nobody is there to bail you out.
This is it you have to say for yourself.
So that would be. That would be basically the program in terms of social security, Medicare, Medicare and Medicaid, and Medicaid is a little tricky because Medicaid today by law, is primarily given to the states. But I would so I would continue to do that. Maybe I think Republicans have always wanted a block granted to the states. Just give every state a block of money to use for medicaid and let the states decide how are they're going to use it. And I would say, Okay, we've promised
to do this, we will continue to do this. Here it is, but from now on, every single year, the amount of money that you are going to get is going to go down by I don't know not not only is it not increase, but it's in terms of actual dollars, real dollars, not inflation adjusted, but actual real dollars. It's going to go down by five percent, seven percent, some number that you know allows the states to adjust, because it's going to go down over a long period
of time, but it starts immediately. The numbers are going to be Medicaid is going to shrink, it's going to go down. Medicare is going to have to be part of White to healthcare reform. It's it's it's very difficult to do this, to do this independent of that. And I think the one law that I would try to get past Congress here is a law that basically federalizes health insurance, and it basically eliminates all regulation and health insurance. So today health insurance is regulated at a state level.
It creates it's a disaster. The states have done a horrible job regulating this. Now they could be a way around that. They could be a way to create a federal charter for insurance companies, and then if they abide by the federal charter, if they sign up for the federal child, they are regulated at the federal level, not at the state level. So we can come up with creative ways to get around state regulation of health insurance policies.
But basically, I want unregulated health insurance policies. I want a competition. I want a marketplace in health insurance.
So that's step one.
Step two is converting Medicare Medicares for people over sixty five into a voucher system where every old person Medicare will stop within one year. Medicare will stop buying health services, that is, stop paying hospitals, stop buying drugs, stop paying pharmacies. It will stop all medical services. And it would instead take the money and block granted and give it to seniors for the purpose of buying an insurance policy. That is, the money will be allocated for purchasing insurance. They get
to choose what insurance. The federal government will not be involved. Maybe it'll have to be a federally chartered insurance policy where there will be massive competition for that. Today There's something called Medicare advantage, which is already health insurance for
people who already have Medicare. Will this will be a massive and dramatic expansion of Medicare advantage, but it basically will have the effect of privatizing Medicaire and subsidizing the government subsidized rather subsidized, rather subsidized then actually the manipulated people or actually pay U producers, you know, the the the the most neutral thing the government can do in terms of redistribution of wealth is to write people checks
and step away from buying products, from engaging in economic activity, step away from the economy. Uh So, Sony says, wouldn't wouldn't it create a black market to avoid taxes like paying with cash, bitcoin, et cetera. I mean, Europe has a vast system that works quite well. I don't think that black markets in Europe. Uh So, I don't see why that would happen. It would again, it would be enforced by businesses. Businesses are much easier to monitor the individuals.
Uh And.
So at the margin, would this happen like like smuggling cigarettes into the EU in order to avoid that? Sure? But it is I mean as compared to the amount of money today that is shielded from taxes.
It would be a fraction.
It would be a fraction, right fraction. All right, So you know, UH providing vouchers for people to uh basically to buy health insurance. That would be Medicare, with a provision that that amount of money that they get every year to buy health insurance will decrease by five percent every year until it basically goes down to zero.
So that will be entitlement.
That'll be dramatic, and titlement reform again that will make both so security and medicare viable into into the future, and that will reduce government deficits in the future, would use UH goverment debts into the future, and as a consequence of all of that, it will put the United States government on much better financial footing, which will flee up dramatically capital for investment in the economy and again will generate significant economic growth.
All right, what else are we going to do?
We've done some tax policy, We've done some UH entitlements. Let's see, all right, let's let's sake comment spending. Let's let's well, let's take another piece of this.
Let's take welfare reform. Let's take welfare today.
There I don't know, two hundred different warfare programs in the United States, all kinds of welfare programs, from food stamps to to income supplementation. There's a negative income tax, which would go away because there's no income tax. There's
there's just a bunch of a bunch of stuff. I think all of that should be replaced with basically a provisioning of some kind of minimum income to begin with, some kind of a check that everybody gets that is a brings them up to whatever the number is these days. So you take all those hundreds of programs or place them with one. This one is not about holding anybody's hand. It's not about trying to manipulate the behavior. It is of income supplementation. You make x amount, will up it
to a other amount. And I note that if there's no that about, you know, the amount that you you get will shrink as you make more money. You have to be careful how you do that, so you don't provide a dis incentive for people to work harder, or for people to get raisers and and to go into the job. So some thinking has to go into it. It's not a ubi because there's no reason to give everybody a UBI. That seemed just like a silly way
to redistribute money. You want to, you want to at least you want to give the money to people who quote need it and uh and and you want to figure out how to do it in a way that does not create a massive tax on them gaining gaining extra wages.
There are ways to do this.
Uh, you know you could, you could anyway. There are ways to do this in a clever way with the with the marginal taxes for making more money are.
Not that high. Again, I'd be.
Happy to be pretty generous in the first few years to compensate for all all the changes and all the upheaval that is going on. So I think being generous with these checks is good. Also, remember a lot is going to get privatized. A lot of stuff that people just get for free now they'll have to actually be paying for under my system. So I don't mind being generous to begin with. And then that amount just shrinks over time. So over the next twenty to thirty years
that amount will go to zero. But we start out with some kind of not universal basic income, but select the basic income that wereplaces and has to replace basically all the other various welfare provisioning that happens out there.
And again there is a path where.
This number shrinks constantly, and this is partially this shows the markets.
Yes, government spending will go down over the years.
It's not endless deficits and endless debt because it's going to go down and surpluses are going to be used to pay off the debt. And then once the surpluses pay off the debt, then siplus is going to be used to cut taxes. And then that that consumption tax will start going down every year as revenues exceed exceed expenditures. Okay, so let's talk about other government spending. I think here
it's pretty straightforward. Congress will have a mandate. The mandate will be to cut spending every year, to dramatically cut spending by real spending, not inflation adjusted rot to grade growth, just actual spending by five to ten percent every single year. I'll leave it to them to figure out the priorities on how to do that, but that will be the mandate is to cut spending on a regular basis over
the next ten years. We want to cut spending, let's say seven percent a year over ten years, seventy percent. That's about right, and slowly again with the exception of the entitements which we're phasing out the way I talked about welfare, which we're going to do the way I talked about So everything else right, everything else, And maybe seven percent is too much because a lot of that
is military. And while I think we can cut military spending, I don't want to do that too fast, and they might be periods in which we have to increase military spending. A few executive orders that I would sign in that first week, literally in the first week. One an executive order that basically closes down the Department of Education and also eliminates all government lending for education, all government involvement education.
You see what they want to do right now. When Trump talks about shutting down the part of education, they shut down the bottom of education. But all the things that the Departum of Education does are just transferred to other garments. I want all the things that the Department of Education does not done anymore. And then includes no
student loans. The government has to get out of the business immediately of issuing student loans, no grants, no scholarships, to help poor people or to help rich people, to help anybody. Government gets out of the business of education. I would immediately sign executive orders implementing Alex's plan for energy abundance, and as part of that plan, have a have a clear agenda on shutting down the part of it of energy. Zue reason why the federal government should
have a Department of Energy. Third, I would have an executive order, and I think I think the president could do this without Congress.
I'm not sure.
I would have an executive order to create a government entity, a new governmentity that will be responsible.
Starting immediately.
With auctioning off all government lands, with the exception of military basis, active military bases, and essential government property for the functioning of government, so grazing lands, it lands with natural resources, Alaskan wilderness, Wyoming wilderness, you know, maybe with exception for now of national parks. All land that is not a national park, that is not an essential government building, that is not a military facility, will be auctioned off.
Money raised through this auction will go immediately to the payment of government debt, to a reduction in the government debt. So build an auction house inside the government to create a new government entity, the auction. I mean, they're lighthouses. There are all kinds of stuff out there that the government should just sell, just sell. Now, if we just did what I mentioned so far, there would be a boom in the US economy, A quality of a life, stand of a living would go up so fast you
wouldn't know what hits you. You wouldn't know what hits you. There'd be so much excitement, and of course there'd be a clamoring to come into the United States.
So certainly, as.
Part of this I would I would have Congress draft a new immigration bill. Basically can find my immigration proposal in my show I did an immigration There would be scrap all immigration laws that exist today, replace them with a work visa, a student visa, and a a tourist visa, and that would be it.
And anybody who can get a.
Job in the United States, anybody who has a job offer in writing, would be allowed in. And given how much I think the economy would grow as a consequence of what we've already done, I think that millions of people will want to come in to the United States, boosting economic growth even more. And then, finally, and in many respects more most importantly, we want to have a
clear systematic plan for deregulating the US economy. And here we would have to take different fields like healthcare, finance, finance, and banking, energy we talked about, but every one of these areas and potentially education and find, you know, just make put together all the regulations that apply to that particular area of economic activity and then basically eliminate them
one by one. I think with financial regulation, a lot of that could be done just by going backwards in terms of the history of regulations, starting with maybe Dot Frank and then Sabeans Oxley, and then going backwards through history and getting rid of the regulations one by one, all the way back to the nineteen thirties, and maybe you know, doing away with you know, something like and here it's not in the number of regulations, but doing
away with substantial regulations in every one of these areas anyway from let's say twenty five percent of the regulatory burden on each one of these industries, getting rid of them every year until the burden of regulations is down basically to zero. And do this across across the whole thing. Work safety, I mean, every area in which there is
substantial regulation needs. That regulation needs to be eliminated. That regulation needs to be reversed, and reversed slowly, so the industry, trade groups, workers unions can all adapt, but eliminated nonetheless. At the federal level, states will deal with states later. Let's clean up the federal government and then we can deal with the states.
And that's it.
That would be, That would be, and we would try to do that as much as possible, of that, at least laying out the framework for all of that within the first one hundred days. It would be the hardest any Senator a Congressman has ever worked. It will be an administration basically is rushing to shut it, to shut
down as much of government as possible. I expect that after four years of an administration like that, you know, the government will be running supplus's government debt will have shrunk significantly.
I would also expect that after four years.
Like that, the economy would be growing steadily at four or five five plus percent a year and creating massive amounts of wealth. People would be incredibly prosperous. And I think overall, as all of these government programs are slowly starting to shrink from entitlements to welfare, resentment across society, and and envy, and you know, the spiritual values. How to really estimate to what extent that will change the whole mood, the whole atmosphere, the whole attitude of people
within the year's economy towards one another. I really think that spiritually we would land up with a dramatically healthier country, a country that embraces competition, embraces immigration, embraces embraces progress, embraces technology, embraces growth, embraces ambition, ambition more than anything else, because the economy has a feedback mechanism. It's not just that people only care about economic growth. You know, how they're doing financially, and they look at other people doing
better and they resent them. But it's all these regulations and welfare stating controls that are oppressive and they cause they lead people to feel oppressed and unhappy and envious, and they lead to that. So to the extent that you get rid of all those restrictions and all those constraints, then to that extent, to that extent, people are going to be happier. They're just going to be happier. Put aside, richer they don't have to think about They don't have to think about.
Taxes, for example, anymore.
They really don't have to think about it that to think how much they can afford to consume and how much it's costing them, and how much they want to save. But taxes become a non existent issue anymore, just doesn't rise up. So yeah, exciting. Now somebody's asking about fun policy. So let's do my one hundred first hundred days in
fall policy. I would immediately order the Pentagon to prepare plans for the complete and uttered destruction of the Iranian nuclear facilities and the complete and destruction of of Iran's
capacity to wage war. And that would mean the bombing of their of their missiles, of the you know where they stole the missiles, the missile launches, the bombing of of of pretty much all of the Islamic Revolutionary God bases uh, and the destruction of the capacity to build drones and to build missiles for Russia, for whoever, anybody else.
Right, So I would.
Definitely uh destroy Iran's capacity to produce nukes and basically to wage war, basically to wage war.
UH.
Beyond that, if that is not enough, I would uh you know, have Congress reverse the the law that says that the United States intelligence agencies cannot assassinate foreign leaders, and I would ask the CIA and others to draft a plan and to put it into implementation to basically uh ce.
Reverse see a.
Regime change in Iran in the the complete collapse of the regime of the Ayah toolers. So that would be priority number one from a foreign policy perspective. Uh privatey number two would be too, as part of a defense bill to a authorize the Ukrainians to use American weapons in the way that they were designed, so without any restrictions. I would also tell the Ukrainians and tell the Russians that Ukraine can expect the kind of weapons that it needs in order to push Russia.
Out of Ukraine.
So whatever weapons Ukraine deems necessary for achieving that goal. I would also encourage our generals to advise Ukraine in terms of strategy and how to beat back Russian forces out of Ukrainian territories and back onto the Russian border. So no peace deal, no negotiation from the perspective of weakness for the Ukrainians, nothing that the United States would support, and I would support them you know, at least for now,
by some kind of mechanism with arms. Military arms. I don't think they need, and I don't think we should support them economically, but I think do think we should need to support them with military equipment. Most equipment, by the way, we send them is equipment that we're not going to use anyway, so it doesn't actually come out of your pocket.
So that is Ukraine China.
I would basically go to China and make a few things crystal clear to the Chinese. I will tell them that the United States will not stand still and will not sit by if they attempt to invade Taiwan, that invading Taiwan is one hundred percent unacceptable to the United States and they should just take it off of their agenda. The United States does not want war with China. It does not want to get into any kind of conflict with China. On the other hand, it will not tolerate
the fall of Taiwan. Indeed, the Chinese can expect in my administration that relations between the United States and Taiwan will get closer and that there will be a recognition of Taiwan as an independent political entity, whether the Chinese like it or not. On the other hand, no interest in getting into a cold war with China, no interest in getting to a hot war with China. Completely understand the China wants to have influence on the South China Sea.
It is called the South China Sea afterwards, and as long as they are committed to maintaining open sea lanes, as long as the United States Navy can function in this area, and as long as the shipping lanes stay open, the United States has no interest in intervening in I don't know artificial islands that China wants to build or other things, but they stay out of Japan's way, they stay out of South Korea's way, they stay out of Taiwan's way, and most fundamentally, they stay out of the
United States and the shipping lanes way. And you know, the rest in terms of their domain of influence in Asia is their business and the business of other Asian countries.
I would also emphasize the Chinese that the extent that they are going to be aggressive in any kind of way, including threatening Taiwan, the United States will establish adjoint what do you call it, defense treaty with South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and other Pacific countries, certainly Australia, but potentially even potentially the Philippines, maybe even Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, that will preserve open shipping lanes and so on.
The United States will.
On a tavene and internal affairs in China, but we also ultimately expect that the Chinese stop immediately.
Hacking into US computers.
If it is discovered that the Chinese government is behind another significant hack into computers of US companies or the US government, the United States will do everything in its power to fry every hard drive in China. I think that's the right technical terminology, fry every hard drive in China.
So going back to Ukraine, I think part of the deal with Ukraine is the United States should declare that it will not do any trading with Russia, that it is basically embargoing Russia, that it is it is not, it does not want to have any dealings with Russia, that Russia is an aggressive.
Nation and is in that sense an enemy of the United States.
The United States has no interest in going to war with Russia, but it has no interested in cooperating with Russia on any front. Again, as part of the pressure in Russia to cut a deal with Ukraine. Do we need anything else on phone policy? If we solve the problems of the world, I think we basically solved the global international problems of the world. Trade with China should continue as normal. As I said, I've already lowered taist to zero, so the Chinese will be happy about that.
But there is that They're gonna have to live.
With the rest of it.
They're gonna have to live with the rest of it. Right, there's the agenda.
I don't know.
Radical, Yeah, it's radical, very radical, is compared to today disruptive, Absolutely, this is disruptive. What Trump is going to do is just going to be noise and it'll disrupt but in an unhealthy way. This is disruptive in a healthy way, in a way that actually will shake up the world and shake up shake up the United States. I think the United States best friend in a scenario like that will be heavier Milai, who is doing you know something similar,
if a little bit more moderate in Argentina. Oh, I haven't even gotten to getting rid of the fad privatizing the fitters of system, going to a private banking system with private money, all of that, all of that should be should be included in in in in plans for you know, reversing financial regulations. But I think for the first hundred days we might have to hold off on that because we Before we do that, we have to deregulate the banking system. You can't privatize the FED without
a completely unregulated banking system. So we need to do we need to combine those two.
Let's see.
Unbelievable, all right, Yeah, you take the Free Market Revolution my book, and you do it quickly.
That's what my first time days on.
Free Market Revolution, fast on steroids. I What else do we want to do? I guess, I guess that's that. That covers everything. So let's uh, let's move on to our super chat. We've got a few super chats. There's room for more, definitely room for more. We've we've not even made it in you know, enough for the first hours. So please consider making some contributions. Stickers maybe stickers would be great. If you're not a subscriber, please come and subscribe on YouTube. I know a lot of people are
watching the show right now on on Twitter. Please consider coming over to you pudube and subscribing to my channel. That would be great. You can also if you're watching on on Twitter. We've got one hundred and seventy five people watching on Twitter. You could also so come in to support the show to a sticker, a super chat. But you can also support the show on Patreon Patreon dot com. Just put in your on book show and you can become a monthly supporter. Love monthly supporters. It
really is fantastic and you make this show possible. We are forty three dollars short of our first hour's goal for the superchat.
So if somebody wants.
To do a forty three dollar sticker or question, that would be fantastical. Maybe just two twenty one and a half dollar questions that would be amazing. All right, So my one hundred days not happening. Sadly I didn't get elected. Trump did. We will be monitoring his first hundred days, and we were monitoring what he proposals to actually do, and we will monitor the consequence of that, the good,
the bad, and the ugly. And there's going to be plenty of ugly, plenty of bad, some good, and we will be monitoring all of those and I will be I will, I will you know, keep you updated as we go through that. All right, let's start with some of our super chat here. Liam uh starts us. But you know, you can ask about anything by the way, well we talked about or other stuff as well. And the nice thing is you get to decide what we're
going to talk about through your questions. Liam says, you said, quote, you need to accept incompetence, stupidity, and immorality of people.
Can you elaborate?
Are you saying because we live in a pre objective as time, stupidity and competence and immorality, immorality will be the norm.
We just need to navigate around.
Yeah. I mean, you just have to accept reality. This is reality. We live in a We live in a world where objectives to ideas, ideals and ideas of foreign in the smallest minority, uh, where even people who embrace these ideas have not fully integrated into their own character and everything else, so they are not always consistent. And where a bad morality, a bad epistemology is making people more stupid than the otherwise would be more incompetent than
they otherwise would be. And and and that's that's just the way people are. And it's something that in as part of accepting reality and facts are facts, and they don't care about your feelings. You've just got to accept it and navigate around it and take that into account as you deal with reality. Try to deal as much as you can with rational people.
Try to avoid as.
Much as you can the irrationality that exists out there in the world. But that's not going to change the fact that a significant portion of the population out there is irrational.
Is irrational, and you have to deal with it.
You have to deal with it. You can't stop living because they're being irrational. Thank you, Liam, fifty dollars. That was very, very generous.
All right, Neo, you.
Blame BBI, but Israel is forced to fight in a moral way. You also say, is Or can't survive without American equipment. Should is Or fight in a way that may disrupt the relationship And if chooses to what to what?
Then?
I mean, this is such a false dichotomy. Yes, the world and the United States puts a lot of pressure on Israel to fight quote the right, the altruistic way. But that's but it's not true. It's just not true that somehow in Israel people are not altruistic. Now in Israel, people would embrace rational egoism in a second, if not for America at least when it comes to phone policy.
It's just there's no evidence of that. Israel's philosophers, is there, intellectuals, and Israel's political and military leadership have all bought in to the altruism. The only people who don't buy into this kind of altruistic view of fighting wars are the same kind of people who don't buy into it in America. That is, the religious nuts, the messianic religious knuts, who don't give one iota about killing as many Palestinians as they need to. But everybody else in Israeli society is
a just war theorist. They all believe in just war theory, at least the majority of just like they do in America, and subtly and overwhelming majority of any intellectuals.
So and BB is no exception.
It's not that BB is again a rational egoist. He just what can you do?
He has to listen to the Americans. He doesn't believe in this.
He's had multiple opportunities over the last twenty five years to prove his mantle, to do something extraordinary, to stand up for Israel in a way that it's just a way that would show us that he is the real thing, and he hasn't. He didn't do it in Gaza for twenty years. He didn't. He did a little bit of an Lebanon, a little bit, but not consistently. It's just it's just not true that Israel's just just haven of egoistic wolf fighting. It's America the ties his hands behind
the back and stops him. It's just it's just not it's not true. Now, what would actually happen if Israel lashed out in lightening speed, killing however many Palestinians it was necessary in order to win, destroy Kamas, destroy the entire political leadership, and bring the Palestinians to the point of defeat so that they understood that they will never defeat Israel. The world would be in shock, it would be upset, it would be horrified, but Israel would have won.
It won't take a lot of bombs. It wouldn't take a lot of weapons. I mean more bombs. More weapons are used in order to fight a so called quote just war than are used in order to fight a real war, a war victory.
You actually use less weapons, so you wouldn't run out of weapons systems, and you would actually have won, and then America would turn around and say, we're really upset at you, but you.
And then Palestinians won a deal and they're recognizing the state of Israel and you wont and it's over and oh okay, I mean, what are they gonna do? So they might penalize Israel with you know, you can't come to Europe otherwise you'll be arrested or something for a few months. Or they might penalize as roll by not selling them alms for a few months.
But Israel has lots of stock piles.
The American political system is such that no American politician is going to completely abandon Israel and let it die. Just tell them, unequivocally, straightforwardly, you're going to do whatever's necessary to win. Close your eyes, close your ears for a couple of weeks while while we finished this, and then we can talk in two weeks. That's what needed
to be done. That's what needs to be done. Thing bad will happen to Israel as a consequence, everybody will get over it because they will have won, and that victory can lead to a two state solution. It can lead to some kind of pieceless solution. It can lead to something positive. Losing never leads to anything positive. It's very clear why bb caved suddenly. I mean, I don't know what you're talking about. Boy was first of all, it wasn't sudden. Bib was willing to do this deal
over many months. It just the minute shit he wasn't willing to do, and he cave because Trump told him to. I mean, there's no there's no mystery here why bb caved. Bbcave because it's his nature to cave. It's his character to cave. He just needs somebody who's willing to push him enough. And Trump pushed him and basically said, I mean I can see the conversation now. Basically said, look, could be your best friend or could be your worst enemy. What do you want? You want it to be your
best friend. You have to give him this. You have to give them this win, and then we'll talk about the rest afterwards. And Bibby said, okay, it didn't take much.
One meeting.
One meeting. I mean, this is what happens when you build the expectations that Trump is going to be the most friendly president in all of human history to Israel.
Okay, Well, if he is the most.
Friendly president in all of history to Israel and he wants a favor, how can you say no to the favor? So stop trying to whitewash Bbe. This is his character. It's always been this character. I don't understand. I'm merely am frustrated. Bibi's been Prime minister for twenty years. He's Delta ramas Risbela over and over again, every single time he dealt with him for over this twenty years.
Actually, if you go back.
To the nineties, he's dealing with a PLO.
He dealt with him in.
A compromising, sellout, unprincipled way, which set up Israel for October seventh. So why why in all of the universe would anybody still support Baby? Put aside the latest caving, what is it that he's done over the last twenty five years, twenty seven years, whatever it is, What is it he's done that would lead anybody to think anything positive of him, anything positive of him? Nothing, He's done nothing.
He sold out, he's compromised, he's appeased, and he sets up October seventh, and he won't recognize that and he won't resign.
So he's a coward. On top of everything else.
He's indecisive, he's weak.
I just don't.
I mean, it's so clear to me, it's so obvious to me, it's so unequivocal to me.
You might say there's nobody better.
That is the closest you can get to justifying baby. So I don't. I really, honestly don't get the sympathy for this guy.
I don't get it.
I've never gotten it since he said he would never negotiate with terrorists and ran to negotiate with Ya but immediately afterwards.
I just don't get it. He is not principled, you get, and he always has been.
So you guys either want to ignore reality or you want to argue that he changed. Couple seventh has changed him, but he's not. He hasn't nothing changed. I mean, they did a great job in Lebanont for a while for a few weeks. Then I'm only judging. But my list, my chat is supposed to be people who know about mal judgment. Okay with it? Suppose all right, thank you, Neil Andrew. People don't trust leftist politicians, the media, other institutions.
But instead of an intellectual pivot, people are moving to the opposite of what the intellectuals say, which isn't rational. New intellectuals needed, Yes, absolutely, but but people don't trust the right either, the right politicians right either. Remember Donald Trump.
Did not win in a landslide.
He won by one and a half percent the popular vote, and he squeaked by in every one of their every one of the battlegrounds states by a few thousand votes.
He didn't anything big time.
So the country's still fifty to fifty basically, and fifty hs the left and fifty h the right.
And that's what it is.
And you know, right now there's a pivot away from woke and away from far left, but there's also an embrace of far right. But even an embrasive center is like an embrasive blah, embrace of nothing, ambrace of what's center? What does that mean, Biden?
What is center? It's nothing? It's nothing ness.
And what's needed is radical change. What's needed is radical intellectual change. Which needed is radically new thinking.
And that's what we're not getting.
Andrews says, how do you explain that in the physical sciences we have reached the marvel of AI and in the science of humanities we have sunk to a revival of tariffs. You know that science is still compartmentalized to a large extent, away from the rest of the culture, away from the collectivism and the irrationality of the rest
of the culture. But even even AI. Think about all the scientists who are afraid of AI, who think it's going to be go conscious any day now, who have all kinds of weird stories about AI that have no understanding of what human consciousness is that or what thinking is, and think that these AI is thinking. So it's it's even Ani is infected by the bad philosophy, Brian says, any other dictators on your assassination list, King Jong onun?
Wouldn't an association basically be a declaration of war? Yeah, but you know who cares, right, I mean? And who would they go to war with?
The North Koreans?
I mean, they can't really hurt the United States, Uh not if we're serious, and they would hurt the South Korean So I wouldn't assessinate Kim jungun only because uh, that's South Korea's job, right, He's not a threat to the US, not a significant threat to the US. I wouldn't bother it's it's it's you know, if you weaken the Russians, we can the Chinese. Then I don't think he's a threat. You want as a threat, and you want to stop them before they get nukes. So there
you want to be more engaged. But there's no reason to get rid of Kim jummun that I can tell. I'm I'm open to being uged.
Otherwise, but so let it.
Let it be South Korea's problem, although they seem to be have their own problems right now. See here's by the way.
I'm just looking at Twitter.
This, by the way, is the House of Representatives just release a list of options for ways in which they are going to.
Pay for the tax cuts.
Right here's some A ten percent tariff which they think will increase revenue by one point nine trillion, apply to all inputs. Note again how serious they are about tariffs. This is not going away. Uh ten percent tariff, So one point nine trillion. Your taxes just went up by ten percent. Bord An adjustment tax that's another tax that restrange trade and ultimately is paid for in the United States by Americans. They claim that will increase revenue by
one point two trillion. You know, this is kind of another consumption tax on imported goods. So this disallowed deduction on the cost of imports and eliminates taxes on exports. Yeah. I don't know exactly how it works, but it's not good. It's not a good, it's really really bad. Repeal so deduction entirely. So they would repeal the deduction on state taxes. Right now, you can deduct up to ten percent at ten thousand dollars. They say that will increase you avenue
by one trillion. It would be hard to get. Yeah, there's some senators I have a feeling would not want to vote for the ooh, eliminate the whole mortgage interest deduction. That would increase you revenue by one trillion. Right currently, you're allowed to deduct the interest on primary residents up to I think a million dollar mortgage, so up to a certain amount and subject to the the what is it the minimum some minimum.
Tax rate that you have to do.
They add, eliminate non citizens from federal health benefits. They say that I'll say thirty five billion dollars. So right now illegal aliens eligible for some federal health kit programs. This would eliminate that eligibility only for illegals, also for legal I don't know. Repeal green energy credits. That's a good one. That suppose he will save seven hundred and
ninety six billion. So that would eliminate clean vehicle, clean energy, efficient building, and other energy credits that were introduced in the Inflation Reduction Act. They would also cut an additional green related credits.
Yeah, so there's.
Other stuff that could also cut us another four hundred billion. That would be good. That's all good stuff to cut. I wonder what Alon thinks about that. End the employee retention credit. That's another one where you get a credit if you don't fire people.
I guess seventy five billion.
That that would pass in COVID to keep people from being fired during COVID. So security requirement for requirement for child tax credit, it's twenty eight billion. Tax college endowments. A tax on tax college endowments a fourteen percent ten billion.
That's not a lot of money.
Ten billion only would apply to large endowments, and right now the tax is one point four percent, so they would multiply by ten. Eliminate nonprofit status for hospitals, so they would convert all hospitals.
A full profit.
Include increased revenue by two hundred and sixty billion. Maybe disallow charitable deductions for health organizations. Really, that would increase eighty three billion. Why not reduce charitable disol out about deductions for everything? Tax scholarships and fellowship income. That's fifty four billion. Tax employee provider, transportation and gym use So they want to tax more stuff, right, I want to
taxt less stuff would increase revenue seventy billion. Eliminate deductions of student loan interest okay, deny so security to those with felony warrants. That's three billions saving what they get. What are you gonna do with people with fel any warrans who don't have enough money to live as old people?
Just don't give them anything?
Ban telehealth facility fee, income verification for free, reduced school meals, on shore earl and gas leasing. All of these Yeah, pretty small stuff. The main stuff is the tariff, the border tax, adjustment tax, and the taking away taking away certain deductions.
Those are the big ones.
But all of this is doubling up on income taxes, doubling up on the income tax. So all this is is moving as far away as possible.
As possible.
Neil says, I forgot to kick out the UN, and I sat, that's right, I did forget. I forgot to get rid of the UN. It's such a trivial thing. But yes day one executive order withdrawing the United States from the United Nations and repealing whatever lease they have for the property in New York City and encouraging them to move to Caracas, oh Teheran or maybe a punk pant, you know, maybe maybe a North Korea. All right, now you're having Jogo with him, says why is it you
don't care about the poor? It makes you a sociopath. I don't care about the poor. Care about the poor lot. I want them to be the beneficiaries of capitalism.
I can't think of a system.
That is more beneficial to poor people than capitalism. The poor I don't care about is the deserving poor people who deserve to be poor, you know, the the wife beating drunks of the world. I don't care about them. And if that makes me a socialpacity, then so be it. But capitalism I'm all about. I'm all about the poor. I'm all about, particularly the ambitious poor. Liam You also said on yesterday's show that most Republican voters are not that bright. I'm not sure I agree with that. Could
you elaborate? Yeah, I mean, if you look at MAGA, which is what forty percent of Republicans people affiliated with MAGA a pretty stupid. They're just low intelligence, low intelligence.
You look at the mega.
Influences, these are dumb people who play to really you know, the left is much more sophisticated theoretically and in in in trying to convince people. So you know, MAGA is not very smart. You see them on on on Twitter, you see them elsewhere. I'll also add that generally Republicans, uh, there's a huge education gap politically Republicans. You know, Republicans do really really well, but people don't complete high school. Republicans do really really well with people don't go to college.
And I'm not saying college is this great thing in today's world. College is incredibly corrupting. But there's something there Republicans don't do well necessarily with in the past, with STEM. So it's just I think if you ran intelligence tests on Republicans and Democrats, Democrats would be smarter, more philosophically corrupt in many ways.
But just smarter.
Republicans have a hard time dealing with abstract ideas. Now. Granted, all political buddies, everybody in America today is not particularly smart.
But conservatives are not that smart. They're not.
You know, Ben Shapiro smart, yes, corrupt, but smart. You know, Jordan Peterson is smart, you know in some way. Okay, so we've got a handful cool and you know, and it's sad. It's very sad that Ben Shapiro, who has embraced MAGA. But if you look at other people on Ben Shapiro's platform, Knowle's and uh, what's the other one? Walsh smart? No, No, those are not smart people. Those are not smart people. Anyway, it doesn't really matter because I don't being smart is not that crucial. It's at
the end of the day, morality is what's crucial. And Republicans a formal committed to Candace Own is one of the dumbest people in the world. What are you talking about. Somebody's using Candace Owned, who doesn't believe in the existence of dinosaurs, as an example of smart. Tulsa Gabbard Smart, Tulsa's not smart and terrible on pretty much every dimension one can imagine. But Candace uh about as bad as it gets, all right, um, Michael says, well, I agree
with most of your criticisms of Donald Trump. I find myself wanting to defend him because I absolutely cannot stand the left. I wonder if many objectives fall into this category. Yeah, of course they do. Most people do. I didn't say. I did not say you won't find anywhere that I said that every person who voted for Trump or support of Trump is not smart. I've never said that, but that's the kind of publius, that's the kind of unthinking you
suffer from because of Trump unthinking, you know, Trump brainless syndrome. Right, I said that on average Republicans. I'm not the smartest Democrats, that's all.
I think.
Empirically that would stand. Did I say every single person who voted for Trump or supports Trump is not smart?
I never said that.
But that's what happens when you, you know, contract Trump brainless syndrome, is you stop being able to actually think, and you instinctually say stupid things in order to try to defend Trump. Michael, Yeah, I get not liking the left. I get that everybody hates the left, and I get that's why a lot of people support Trump. I get it. That's fine. I stand by all my criticisms of Trump. I don't think any of them is made less valid by that fact. Happa Campbell, How do nihilists get into
positions of power? You would think by the nature of their philosophy they wouldn't be so ambitious about climbing up the ladder.
Well, it depends on that type of.
Nihilists, consistently nihilistic they are, and it depends on the culture. And look at look some people. It doesn't take that much to climb the ladder, right they go right to the top fairly quickly.
But in a.
Culture that has at least to some extent embraced nihilism, embraced envy, embraced resentment, embraced fear, embased fear and hatred, then I don't think it's that hard for nihilists to raise the top pitty quickly. Marra bends message the philosophy at work. I love watching iin rand in Sense It Life z I. Another one of those that I completely miss R Clark is altruism accepted only up to a point in any gift and culture. Yes, in any given
human life, it's only accepted up to that point. Otherwise it is suicidal and destructive and self destructive and and and uh uh that to that extent, it is not ever fully embraced because it would lead to death and destruction very very quickly.
But yeah, so we talked about this many times.
I think in man's mind, it's only accepted up to a point. By the way, just a Trump did you see that he issued a a trump coin which has no value, and uh it sold a gazillion and he made a lot of money. And I mean it a day before he's inaugurated as president of the United States.
Or two days before.
It's unbelievable. The Trump coin is just another example of how low this man is, how just absolutely low he is, and how willing he is to exploit you, his fans as much as he can, as much as he can. Millionaires were made off of the Trump coin. I'm sure they were. I'm sure they were. Michael says. One good thing about Trump being in power and the Republicans controlling both houses of Congress is alex Epsain will become much more connected and influential over the next four years.
I hope so, I hope so.
We will be here in four years to evaluate what exactly turned out. But let's hope that Alex becomes even more influential over the next period. He says, I hope you're wrong about Iran, so am I I hope I'm wrong about a lot of things, Andrew, if you hold the full context, the government holding the gun to farmer to negotiate the price of those life saving enhancing drugs is an egregious injustice. The producers are being looted. Yes,
we talked about this yesterday. It is truly horrific that we allow the government to coerce and to force them to blackmail big farmer that way or small farm, it doesn't really matter. Paulo Zeus, Do you expect the rest of existing government workers and politicians to go along with such radical changes? No? I mean, but who cares they work for me? I'm presidents. I'll fire them if they don't want it. I'll have to fire many of them, if not most of them, anyway, because that's what the
changes will necessity. What are they going to do? Are they're going to launch a revolution? And this this is the thing that my policies would create so much economic activity, So much job creation that many of these government employees will be eager to leave to benefit from the riches that are being offered in the private sector enrich The government was central in new technologies from nuclip plants in the fifties, moon rockets, and the sixties self driving cause.
Should government continue It shouldn't continue doing any of those things. The only reason government was central to many of those things is because it was the only player playing in that field. The government should continue to do an invest in research that is essential for national security. So all the projects ADAPPA, the Defense Department funds, those should continue. But other than that, ultimately the government should be geting
getting out of these big research projects. And given that private individuals will now have a lot more money to invest to save, they will be the ones investing in the kind of research that is necessary, UH to create these big innovations. So no government, Now we should close down NASA. That would be one of my executive orders, will be shutting down NASA, although I think you need an active Congress for that. And I don't know about self driving cause right if how much the government it
was involved there. But but you know, GPS was a government creation for national security, which was then commercialized and used in a private sector to far greater extent than anybody expected. And you could imagine a lot more of that happening, but out of defense industries, not from other kind of spending. He of US executive orders work, I'm on an American Well, I mean it basically is a way of within the scope of what.
Is allowed to the president.
It is a way for the president to change policy without going through Congress. So as applies to the executive branch, there is there are things that a president can do. Now, the extent of those things, the scope of those things is really has to be determined by the Constitution and by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has generally given
presidents a wide leeway, but not completely. So. For example, Biden tried to forgive a lot of student debt through executive order and the Court said, oh, you can't do that. If you want to forgive that, it has to go through Congress. And I expect that they will do that to a lot of other executive orders. So there's a limit to how but you can get done to executive vote. It has to be something where the courts believe is within your scope. Of responsibility, not legislative, which is what
Congress is supposed to do. Andrews says, do you understand the psychology of political partisan hacks? How do they justify their insane fealty to their party? I think they rationalize it by how bad the other side is, by the need to win, by the fact that, oh, no, you don't understand how good a people are.
I think it's a.
Rationalization of rationalization or rationalization. But the psychology is tribal. It's at the end of the day, what they need to get. What they need to get is a sense of belonging, a sense of being part of the tribe. Rob is Alex not sanctioning evil by working with Trump? No, because he's not working with Trump, right. Alex was very clear, at least to me, that he did not want to work for Trump, that he're not to work for the administration.
He would advise the better people in an administration on things that would lead to greater freedom for all of us. So I don't think that is a sanctioning of evil. I don't think that he is going to support evil policies. He is going to praud certain people towards better policies. Towards greater freedom. So no, I don't think he's sanctioning and evil. All right, let's see I mean with some stickers, and I don't think I thanked you guys. Let's see
Barbara twenty dollars. Thank you, Barbara Jacob, thank you. Let's see Greg, thank you, Mike, thank you, and Alan, Henrik Apollo, Zeus, Gail, Jonathan Honing, Martin Anderson, an anonymous user. Thank you guys for the stickers. I really really really appreciate it. Thank you to all the super chatters. I hope you enjoyed today's show. I'll be back tomorrow with the show on Hebrew. So for those of you Hebrew speakers, you can join
me tomorrow. Those of you who are listening not live, please consider becoming patreons, going to patreon dot com and subscribing to you on book show for ten dollars. You get the podcast ad free, but more generally, your dollars help make this show possible a reality. And yeah, couldn't do it without you, so thank you, and I will see you all on Monday. Oh Monday, we're having We're talking healthcare with Amish and Ray from Afgham. It's gonna
be fabulous. It's gonna be a really really good show. Uh. And yeah, we're committed over the next few months to really going through healthcare and really trying to figure out how to fix healthcare in the United States and how to change people's attitudes. So fixing healthcare in the United States would be easy. See you guys, talk to you Monday. If you're not a Hebrew speaker. If you are, there'll be a show tomorrow. Bye, everybody.