Latest / Brian Thomas / Dave Williams is looking out for your taxpayer dollars

Transcript

Dave Williams is looking out for your taxpayer dollars · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Sorry, man, we've been having some serious problems with the
• 0:01
  Speaker 1: phone system here and you're the second person this morning
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: that it did not work, so at thoroughly embarrassed, am I,
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: But I'm glad to have you on my brother real
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: quick here before we get in to get another story
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: about the postal system. Shocking, no one. Did you see
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: the Cato Institute's number crunching on the cost of the
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: DSAY policies if they were to all be implemented.
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: I did, and it's absolutely insane. These numbers are massive,
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: and this is something that people really need to pay
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: attention to because these DSA candidates are painting this rosy
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: scenario right. They're saying Medicare for all, we're going to
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: tax the rich, We're going to do all these things,
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: and you know, the sky gets blue in their world.
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: But when you look at it, it's actually red red
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: ink because it's going to cost hundreds of billions and
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: trillions of dollars in the future. So this is the
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: fiscal reality of these policies is that it's going to
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: bankrupt the country even further. Listen, the country is already bankrupt,
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: but it's going to bankrupt the country even.
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: Further quicker, I think there are oftimate goal is to
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: just lapse the US dollar. I think that's their avenue
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: to get rid of the United States as a concept
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: and bring about whatever reality they think is going to
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: be better in their socialist minded world. But you know,
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: I thought the most, the most the best part rather
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: about the ko Institute study is not just that they
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: explained that it was going to be seventy one to
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: two hundred trillion dollars over ten years. You know, people's
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: eyes gloss over when they don't think about a trillion
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: is what it is, which is a thousand stacks of
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: a billion, and each billion is a thousand stacks of
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: a million. So the real numbers here. But when they
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: put it in practical terms, if you collected one hundred
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: percent of all the money from all the billionaires and
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: all of the corporations over that ten year period, it
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: still wouldn't fun but like maybe ten percent of the
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: total nut that would cost the country to put these
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: things in practice.
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's what a lot of folks, and these
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: DSA folks don't realize is O, Hey, let's say we
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: did tax one hundred percent of these billionaires. Well, they're
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: going to leave. They will leave with the country. Yes,
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: the companies will go to another country. We saw the
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: exact opposite with tax reform. Remember in twenty seventeen, when
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: we lowered the corporate tax rate, companies came back to
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: the US. Well, guess what they will do the opposite.
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: They will leave if you tax them at one hundred percent,
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: then businesses will no longer be in existent in this country.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean there is this boils down to the
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: ultimate reason why socialism and communism notally never works. You know,
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: you start taking enough of someone's labor and don't reward
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: them for it, they quit working. What's the incentive?
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: Figure zero? Zero incentive?
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: Absolutely well, and there's zero incentive to continue funding the
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: postal service on our current trajectory. Year after a year, Dave,
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: how many years of you and I have been talking?
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: How many years in a row you made? Have you
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: done reports on protecting taxpayers dot org? About the literally
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: billions of dollars of postal system loses literally every quarter
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: we're on track for uh I guess they said two
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: and a half billion loss in the third quarter.
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: And this is just the third quarter of this year,
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: and so far the Postal Service has lost six billion
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: dollars and it's probably going to be eight to nine
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: billion by the end of the fiscal year. So these numbers,
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: and you're right, we keep on talking about this over
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: and over again, and we keep on talking about solutions
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: because there are ways to change the Postal Service. And
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: I know people will freak out if we use the word,
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: you know, privatize, but there has to be some sort
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: of common sense in the Postal Service, and there isn't.
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: So let me give you one example. Okay, during the
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: holiday period, the Postal Service, FedEx UPS, they all hire
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: seasonal employees, right, makes sense because that's where you know
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: the upswing and businesses. The thing is that UPS and
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: FedEx in January, well those people go away. But the
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: Postal Service they offer all these seasonal employees full time employment.
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: So it's part of the union contract that if you
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: are a seasonal employee that you get to work for
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: the Postal Service full time after the holiday season. That
• 3:53
  Speaker 2: makes zero sense and you can imagine just how much
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: that adds to their liabilities into the employment.
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: So this is a collective bargaining concept. I mean, yeah,
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: it sounds It reminds me suspiciously of teachers that have
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: remouved from classrooms, and rather than letting them go or
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: firing them, same thing with government employees, they just park
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: them in a room and have them contemplate their nable
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: for the for the eight hour day. Are you telling
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: me these seasonal workers are left at home to do
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: whatever they want to do, and yet are drawing a
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: full paycheck because they're not needed. They're too many bodies
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: when it's not the season.
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: I don't know if they're at home, but I do
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: know they're getting a paycheck, and I know that you
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: know it's keeping the labor costs extremely high at a
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: time where obviously the postal service can't afford it. And
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: it's just again, Brian, this is common sense. If you
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: are a private business, you are not doing this. If
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: you are a private business, you are not spending you know,
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: billions of dollars in electric vehicles when you can get
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: other vehicles a lot cheaper. So, but when you have
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: unlimited access to money via the taxpayer, these are the
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: decisions that you make.
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: How is it that Congress keeps funding this, this bottomless
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: pit of loss?
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: They're afraid Congress is afraid to really have any fundamental
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: reform at the postal service, because let's say they talk
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: about getting rid of Saturday delivery. It's a real politically
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: charged item, and they're gonna have people call and say, well,
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: I really like my postal carrier. Well that's fine. I
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: think we all like our postal carriers for the most part, right,
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: But that doesn't mean that we have to keep on
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: doing the same thing over and over again. And by
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: the way, getting rid of Saturday delivery could save two
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: to three billion.
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: Dollars a year, well, that would cover that would cover
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: one quarter's loss so far.
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: That's exactly exactly, Dave.
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I have no fear or concern or worry
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: over no Saturday delivery. What I mean in this modern
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: age we find ourselves in where you have instant communication,
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: you have emails, you have cell phones and telephones. You
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: can get in touch with someone immediately, you can respond
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: to someone literally immediately. What's the big deal about get
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: we're in a Saturday mail delivery?
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: There isn't. And as people have probably noticed, and maybe
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: they didn't know, but in July first class mail went
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: up to eighty two cents from seventy eight cents to
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: eighty two cents, And you know, I wonder how many
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: people actually recognize that because you mentioned email, you know, texting,
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: all the sorts of ways that we communicate. You know,
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: how many people noticed that first class mail went up
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: to eighty two cents.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: I knew it only because I read about that kind
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: of thing to prepare for the morning show. But it
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: isn't because I went and bought stamps, Dave, which is
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: further to your point. Who sends mail letters anymore? M
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: For the most part, I know the vast majority of
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: everything that comes to my home it's junk mail.
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: Even the letters that I sent you, Brian. Is that
• 6:43
  Speaker 2: chunk mail?
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: Oh? That is not chunk mail? Dave Williams, Of course not.
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: Dave Williams, don't go away. We're gonna be talking about, well,
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: the farm bill, me burning? Am I going to be
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: burning food in my gas tank? Dave Williams. Let don't
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: go away, because we're gonna find how much that's going
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: to cost you and me more with Theave seven thirty
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: on a Friday with Dave Williams from the Taxpayer Protection
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: Alliance again online Protecting Taxpayers dot or pivoting over. Oh yeah,
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: another farm bill in the more trillions of dollars Dave,
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: and some problems over with the SNAP program. They're at
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: it again, Dave.
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah, So this is this is fascinating because the Farm Bill,
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: obviously we've been doing this for decades, is helping farmers.
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: When I say helping farmers, you know, giving them a
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: lot of taxpayer money. And this Farm Bill, what they're
• 7:35
  Speaker 2: trying to do is change the SNAP program food stamp program. Now,
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: last year during the One Big Beautiful Bill, Congress passed
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: the law saying that states have to pay more for
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: actually have to pay for administrative costs of food stamps, right,
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: but they also said you have to pay more if
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: your error rate is higher than thirteen percent. I'm higher
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: than nine percent.
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: So real quik gave. So I ends that process. Who
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: is determining the error rate? Is that the state doing that?
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: Or is this is the USDA the US government.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: Is monitoring error rate?
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: Then yep. Giving an example, Ohio has an error rate
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: of about six point five percent, Maryland about thirteen point
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: two percent. So it varies widely across the country. Ohio
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: is actually doing a really good job comparatively to other states.
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: And what happens what happened in the One Big Beautiful
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: Bill is the way that they I'm using air quotes
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: saved money is saying that states have to pay more
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: for the food Stamp program. Well, during the negotiations this summer,
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: they're trying to delay that process and saying, Okay, we're
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: not going to require states to pay that for either
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: one year or two years. Now the Democrats and some
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: of the squishy Republicans are saying we want two years. Well,
• 8:56
  Speaker 2: that doesn't make any sense because you have to give
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: Stacey incentive to go after waste, fraud, and abuse. And
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: that's exactly what this provision did, is saying, listen, if
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: you get your error rate down to six percent, then
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: you don't have to pay as much. And this is
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: has been working the last year. Again, a state Lake,
• 9:16
  Speaker 2: Ohio has taken that to Hart and said, okay, we
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: are going to reach those goals. Maryland not so much.
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: But now if they delay it one year or two years,
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: you know states are going to not pay attention to
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: this and we're going to see a higher error rate.
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: So again, something common sense here that the Republicans tried
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: to do last year now is going to be probably
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: undone when they come back in September and potentially finished
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: the Farm bill.
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: I just because I have never ever thought it was
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: a good idea to put food in our gas tanks.
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: In other words, corn, You know, it gives an incentive
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: for farmers to continue growing more corn than we need.
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: We have more corn than we need, and we shouldn't
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: be using it in terms of corn syrup either, because
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: it's bad for us. But are we going down the
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: same path in this farm bill, Dave Williams.
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: We are the renewable fuel standard I mean cost consumers
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: what twenty eight billion dollars over a ten year period.
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is increasing the cost of gas, right,
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: because this is a mandate saying that you have to
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: put ethanol in gas, and it's increasing the cost of gas.
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: And this is not because of what's happening in Iran.
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: It's because of what's happening here. Yeah, yeah, yeah, What
• 10:21
  Speaker 2: Congress does, I mean, let's make that clear is that
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: there are sometimes there's things out of our control that
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: increase the cost of gaslane other things are within our control,
• 10:29
  Speaker 2: and we're not even paying attention to those.
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah, we're not short on supply, right right, that's funny, right,
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: this is when we find out most recently, Oh guess what,
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: the world's not running out of oil, So we've got enough.
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: We're a washing in the United States is now the
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: leading producer of oil. We just need more refineries to
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: be more product on the market. The price might come down,
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: but it's not for want of something that we can burn.
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: Like you might want to turn to ethanol if you
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: ran out of the fossil fuels that we've been using
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: the oil, right, yeah, and I mean you don't have to.
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: And let's look what happened to you know, and I
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: don't want to, you know, always blame the Biden administration,
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: but let's you know, well, the first thing that Joe
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: Biden did was he shut down the Keystone XL pipeline. Yeah,
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: that prevented hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil coming
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: into this country, I mean a day, Right, So this
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: was a major problem, and we've never really recovered from that.
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: And we need to be energy independent and part of
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: that are fossil fuels. I'm sorry, but the renewable people,
• 11:27
  Speaker 2: fossil fuels are still the lifeblood of energy in this country.
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: Without question. Literally everything around you has fossil fuels in it.
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: I mean, yeah, there's no question about it. I've been
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: watching the Landman series. I had never seen it before,
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: and Billy Bob Thornton's character just regularly throughout the series
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: makes points along those lines. And look, dude, look around.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: You out of your mind if you think we can
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: live without oil, and the Biden administration did try to
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: make it more expensive, leading to weird concepts like burning
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: corn in your gas tank. Right, if you lessen the
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: supply unnecessarily, in other words, artificially via legislation, you curb
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: the available product on the market because you won't allow
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: it to get to us, then we have to turn
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: and look elsewhere. That's how we end up with corn
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: in our gas tank. Was that trip necessary? Absolutely not.
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: You shouldn't have canceled the XL pipeline. You should allowed
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: more drilling and not stood in the way of all
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: efforts to extract this stuff economically logical and reasonable for
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: lower gasoling. Dave Williams, can you stick around more because
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: we have a couple more topics.
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: To go over, I absolutely can.
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: Wonderful, that's good news. At seven thirty five, seven thirty six,
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: right now, we'll talk about seven forty one on a Friday.
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: We're here from Adam Kaylor at the top of the
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: ur news. We also have Jack Windsor from the io
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: Press Network. Apparently Amy Acton has a bit of an
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: abuse problem, substance abuse problem. He just wrote about that
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: on the ihio press network dot com. In the meantime,
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: from a Protecting Taxpayers dot Org Dave Williams, we returned
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: to another reason why I am concerned about, you know,
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: turning the keys of responsibility over to someone else. I
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: know we live in a representative from a democracy day.
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: But with that sort of yeah, sort of point well taken.
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: But when we elect someone, we elect them and immediately
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: I think many people will perceived that they just have
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: this knowledge base that transcends you know, I mean it
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: transcends everything. They must be experts in all things, you know,
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: agriculture and business and industry. They're writing laws about that. Taxation,
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: they have to understand economics the right and laws about
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: all that. And now they're going to be writing laws
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: about technology. Do you think any of our elected officials
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: residing in the swamp of DC have any understanding that's
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: necessary to come up with legislation that can address all
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: of the problems and concerns that we are faced with
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: artificial intelligence and what goes along with it, like the
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: Kids Online Safety Act DAVE, And are they even capable
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: of doing this?
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: Well, let me say, Senator Chuck Grassley, who just turned ninety,
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: is in charge over the Judiciary Committee, which is the
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: committee of jurisdiction for some of these tech bills. No,
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: I mean no, obviously not when you have in their seventies,
• 14:00
  Speaker 2: eighties and nineties, and listen, I hope you'd be one
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: of those folks eventually in my seventies, eighties and nineties.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: But I should not be making policy on artificial intelligence technology.
• 14:11
  Speaker 2: And they are. They are crafting this legislation, and that's
• 14:15
  Speaker 2: why they should lean on groups like Taxpayers Protection Alliance
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: to look at these issues and give an unbiased look, because, Brian,
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: we call balls and strikes here. We look at this
• 14:24
  Speaker 2: and it's like is this good for a free speech?
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: Is it good for taxpayers? Good for consumers? We don't
• 14:29
  Speaker 2: look at political party, We look at policy. And when
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: you talk about the Kids Online Safety Act, listen, it's
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: very admirable.
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 14:37
  Speaker 2: We want to protect children from the bad things that
• 14:39
  Speaker 2: happen on social media. I think we can all agree
• 14:42
  Speaker 2: to that. But what they want to do is they
• 14:44
  Speaker 2: want an institute a regime where there's age verification, so
• 14:48
  Speaker 2: you have to verify your age. The problem is that
• 14:51
  Speaker 2: it's not just kids under sixteen. Everybody has to verify
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: their age. You'll have to verify your age. Brian Joe
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: when he goes on on Twitter, we'll have to verify
• 15:02
  Speaker 2: his age. And what that means is submitting your data
• 15:05
  Speaker 2: to either big tech, which a lot of people don't like,
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: or big government, which more people don't like. So you know,
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: what's the solution here. The solution is not to be
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: giving more of your data that is easily hacked to
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: big tech or big government. It just it doesn't work.
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: And of course, you know, we could talk for hours
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: about the free speech implications of requiring people to provide
• 15:29
  Speaker 2: this ID before you go online.
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no question about it. And currently I suppose the
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: idea requirements put in place for the noble goal of
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: trying to keep children away from, say, pornography. I understand
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: the desire to do that, but under the way it
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: currently works absence some sort of federal blanket law which
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: comes with the perils you just mentioned each state is differently.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: Some states don't have ID protection. So all you need
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: to do is go use a VPN and pretend you're
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: in some other state or country to get around the obligation,
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: he uses a photo ID. Children know how to use VPNs, Dave.
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: Oh more so than than adults do. And you know,
• 16:06
  Speaker 2: states like Florida they have tried to pass laws saying
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: if you're under sixteen, you can't access social media at all. Okay,
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: so free speech begins at age sixteen? Is that what
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: you're saying, is that all of a sudden, at age sixteen,
• 16:20
  Speaker 2: you have free speech. No, it's not the way it works.
• 16:23
  Speaker 2: And of course it's going to cost money to institute
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: the you know, these regimes and these background checks, and
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: like I mentioned before, the amount of cybersecurity hacks we've seen,
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: Oh my goodness, can you imagine the security threat of
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: doing this? And also, you know, another sort of understated
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: point here is that cosa the Kids Online Safety Act
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: says in the interest of children, that could change from
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: administration to administration. One administration can say, well, this content
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: is not in the interest right children, it's subject and
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: administration can completely change that. So it's crazy how bad
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: this is.
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: It really is, and we'll just go a little bit
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: over in this and rather than hold you over their day.
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: Because artificial intelligence centers themselves, the data centers obviously have
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: come under huge attack, and I am painfully aware of
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: having read so many reports about it. The outside influences
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: ginning up opposition come a lot of times from foreign
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: powers like the Chinese Communist Party, who would rather dominate AI.
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: If we don't build the data centers, we can't have AI,
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: we can't be in charge of it, or at least
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: we can't have some measure of control over it, obviously
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: leading into the hands of the Chinese Communist Party. I
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: think all the concerns or claims about data centers generally
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: speaking are a bit overblown, Dave. But if you can
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: beat the challenges, the arguments about power, the arguments about noise, water, water,
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: maybe unless they have a closed system like our cars
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: have radiators that don't use a lot of water. And
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: then there's also the parallel argument, well, if you've got
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: a golf course in your county, then you can't go
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: complain about AI and data centers because they use less
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: water than a golf course. But the challenges can be
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: overcome and met I'm hoping that data centers result in
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: us having small modular reactor access. Wouldn't that be grand
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: and glorious a company that can afford to pay for
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: its own power and then maybe let us use a
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: little bit of the leftover. But we need them, don't we?
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: As bad as AI might be in some of the
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: nefarious ways that can be used, we can't unring the bell,
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: can we, Dave.
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: No, we can't. And let's look at the economic argument
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: of this also is loud and County of Virginia has
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: probably the most data centers of all the country. Right,
• 18:32
  Speaker 2: they just lowered their property taxes by twenty five percent
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: because of the money that is coming in the economic
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: development from these data centers. I mean, this is the
• 18:41
  Speaker 2: economic reality of this. Okay, let's talk about Ohio. Total
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: water usage for data centers in Ohio is zero point
• 18:49
  Speaker 2: six percent of the state usage. It is minimal. So
• 18:54
  Speaker 2: we talk, you know, you hear about all this water
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: that's being used. You mentioned golf courses, you know, agricultural
• 19:00
  Speaker 2: products use so much. God, yeah, we don't talk about that,
• 19:04
  Speaker 2: at least not enough people talk about that. But zero
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: point six percent of the water used in Ohio right
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: now is from data centers. That is an insanely low number.
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: And they're going to become more efficient. Like you said,
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: great analogy with the radiator in cars, because there will
• 19:19
  Speaker 2: be closed loop systems and they're going to find a way. Listen,
• 19:21
  Speaker 2: these companies are woke, you know, Google, Facebook, Meta, they
• 19:25
  Speaker 2: are woke. They are going to find ways to make
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: this more environmentally compatible.
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: Oh, especially in the face of some you know, screaming
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: citizens complaining about concerns over water. No, no, again, up front,
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: we've got that covered. That is not even a legitimate argument.
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: Why closed loop system? Look at your car? Does it
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: use up.
• 19:41
  Speaker 2: Water all the time.
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: No, this isn't nineteen twenty where you're stopping and filling
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: your radiator up. So yeah, I'm with you all day
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: long on this, Dave. And again I will, you know,
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: outloud say I wish we didn't even have a thing
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: like artificial intelligence. I know it's bringing some great advances
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: in medicine and other areas and fine, but overall, well, yeah,
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: it's like watching a sci fi movie. It skynet, you know, it's.
• 20:04
  Speaker 2: Just too And Brian, I think there's a discussion that
• 20:08
  Speaker 2: needs to be had about AI artificial intelligence, because it
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: can be used as a tool. But there are you know,
• 20:15
  Speaker 2: there are some very scary things about AI that we
• 20:18
  Speaker 2: need to make sure there are guardrails. Right, But again,
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: we need to you know, do this and not have
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: Congress mess this up or have fifty states. Imagine if
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: fifty states had fifty different AI rules, right, how do
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: you work as a business when you're working in multiple states.
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: So there has to be a way that we move
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: forward where we just don't let everything happen willy nilly.
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: But there's a way to move forward to you know,
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: embrace AI and make it a part of our economy
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: and not part of the Chinese economy exactly.
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: And I don't know what the answer to that is, Dave.
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: It's too complex a problem for my brain to handle.
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: I know Bernie Sanders wants to put a complete, one
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: hundred percent full stop on all AI. Yeah, the Chinese
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: would would embrace that. Oh sure, Bernie, we'll stop doing
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: it too. Yeah, you guys, go right ahead, full stop crazy. Now,
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: that's the kind of solution you get out of people
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: who really just don't quite get at Dave Williams gets,
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: at least in terms of dollars. Taxpayer protection lines find
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: them again protecting taxpayers dot org. David, it's great having
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: you back on the show, and again apologies for the
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: technical difficulties. We'll see if we can't smooth matters out
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: before we get to speak again next time.
• 21:23
  Speaker 2: Thanks Brian, have a great weekend.
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: Thank you too, Man, keep up the great work. Seven
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: fifty to fifty five cars they talk