Latest / The Bill Handel Show / Palisades Fire Report | Taking Greenland

Transcript

Palisades Fire Report | Taking Greenland · The Bill Handel Show

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: six forty Frement Fire Firemen. KFI AM six forty Bill
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: handled here on Aday, Wednesday, January seventh, One year ago today,
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: the Palisades and the Altadena fire fire exploded, killing what
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: nineteen and twelve thirty something people and over sixteen thousand
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: homes and businesses. Those structures were burnt or destroyed. And
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: it's it's tough. It was tough. It's made international news,
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: and I think it's the worst fire disaster in terms
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: of people that we've ever had in the United States,
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: certainly terms of property damage. Okay, so there's all kinds
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: of controversies involved here. First of all, how did the
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: fire start? Was it PG and E that started the fire?
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: Was it a power line that came down during high
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: winds and ignited brush underneath the power The polls are
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: actually towers in this case, and were was the fire
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: Department LA Fire Department that were there enough fire fighters
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: that were sent where they sent early enough? What happened
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: with Karen Bass? If you remember Karen Bass ran on
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: one of her campaign promises is I'm gonna I'm the
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: Los Angeles mayor. I will not leave Los Angeles. I
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: will stay here. Well, she was in Africa attending something
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: in Ghana some kind I think it was an inauguration
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: of the president or something along those lines. Anyway, there's
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: all kinds of controversy. So what happened after the fires, Well,
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: the fire chief was fired and then Fire Chief Ronnie
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: Villanueva was asked to produce a report and it was
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: a working draft of the fire after Action Report, and
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: it was sent to Mayor Karen Bass's office. Here is
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: our working draft. We don't have a final but we
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: have one that seems to take everything into account. And
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: Fire commissioned President Janethia Hudley Hayes was interviewed by the
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: La Times that broke all kinds of stories on this,
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: and she says that in a conversation, Villanova said that
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: the Mayor's office had asked for refinements in that fire report,
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: didn't say what they were. Well, yesterday the fire Chief,
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: Haiming Moore responded to the findings of that time's investigation
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: and acknowledge. Yeah, that report was edited, edited to soften
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: criticism of LA Fire the department leadership. You can tell
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: him at home and my dogs are going crazy? Was
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: that broadcast? By the way, did you hear the dogs? Oh? Yeah, okay, good, okay.
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: So with that, here's a little bit of background. Hudley
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: Hayes was appointed by Bass in June of twenty twenty
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: three to serve on a five member commission that provides
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: civilian oversight of the fire department. She said that in
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: her long career in various civic positions, she had learned
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: that the word refinement could mean troubling changes and is
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: another way of describing hiding, hiding facts, hiding figures, hiding policy. Now,
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: yesterday her remarks were the first public statements that she said, Well,
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: she understood all of that to be that the Mayor's
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: office possible intent was to influence the report, which was
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: supposed to lay out what went wrong in fighting the fire,
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: and it looks like a lot went wrong. However, I'm
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: also going to point something out, and I said this.
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: For example, there was a large reservoir up at the
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: top of the Palisades and I don't know, two million
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: gallons of water or whatever, and it was empty. It
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: was empty because there were repairs being made. And my
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: point was that this fire had one hundred miles per
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: hour win and there's nothing they could do, absolutely nothing.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: And we're talking about early early stages of the fire
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: because by the time firefires did arrive, what if they
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: arrived ten minutes sooner or a half an hour sooner,
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: because they have fought this fire, you know, we're not
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: going to know. So Hayes then said after reviewing early
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: draft and the final document released by the Fire Department,
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: she was satisfied that material findings were not altered, that
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: feeling minor stuff, that the only thing that was changed
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: is that the fire Department just wanted to confirm the
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: accuracy of items like how the weather was, how fast
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: the winds were going. On the department's budget, how much
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: was spent, how many firefighters were available, and the issue
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: as to deployment, that's a different issue because now you're
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: talking tactics, how many There was a report that we
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: were going to see fire season coming and this particular
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: risk of fire, I mean it was there for days
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: and before the fire started, the weather reports were saying
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: this is the weather that could actually affect and was
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: described as life threatening. And Bass was still in Ghana
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: and didn't fly out of there until the fire started.
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: So there's a problem. So the LA Times obtained analyze
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: seven drafts and said, boy, there were some changes the
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: deployment decisions before the fire, the wind warnings that became
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: increasingly dire, They became more and more dire, and in
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: one instance, the Fire Department officials removed language saying the
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: decision to not fully staff up and pre deploy all
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: available crews ahead of the fire did not align. I
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: love this wording that the decision not to staff up
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: and pre deploy the crews where the fires were or
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: should or could start did not align with the department's
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: policy and procedures during red flag days, and instead, the
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: number of engine companies rolled out ahead of the fire
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: went above and beyond the standard LA Fire Department pre
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: deployment matrix. Now I have a question, okay, and that
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: is okay. Let's say they did deploy in the Palisades appropriately,
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: right to where no one could complain. What if the
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: fire started someplace else? What if there was another part
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: of the city. You should have sent those fire trucks
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: and those assets to that place instead of this place.
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: Now you knew there was a risk. Here's the other argument.
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: There were power poles here power lines power towers, that
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: the lines could break off, the towers go ahead and
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: hit the ground and spark, and if there was vegetation
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: underneath the towers, that could ignite. And that looks like
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: what is what happened? Which is why now when there
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: are warnings of high winds and extreme temperatures, the power
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: companies will simply shut down power to various parts of
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: the city and there's no fire and all of a sudden,
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: you're out of power. Let me tell you how people
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: at play are upset about that one. So the controversy
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: now is not only as to the specifics, as to
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: the pre deployment plans, as to the fact that not
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: all fire battalions and stations and equipment were assigned and
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: were held back, but also as to the very report.
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: This is why people don't trust government. Just along these lines. Okay,
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: I've said this many, many times, and that is the
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: administration is not really happy with democratic governments, the county
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: city states. And I think the biggest fight, the most
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: contentious fight, is between the administration and California. I mean,
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: they're just not real fans. So the House Judiciary Committee,
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: run by a Republican all the committees are run by
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: Republicans because they control the House, led by Representative Kevin Kylie,
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: and the committee chair is Jim Jordan oh Man. He's
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: a piece of work. Well, it became in August when
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: Kylie sent a letter to fire Aid saying, we want
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: a detailed breakdown of all the nonprofits that receive money
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: from fire Aid. We're talking, we're talking a one hundred
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: million dollars well fire Aid, which then sends money out
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: because these organizations that are funded by the Feds, they
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: send money out because the FEDS pay for virtually everything.
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: Fire Aid immediately released a document detailing its fundraising and
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: grant dispersals. This is an LA time story. And they
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: investigated the groups who had applied for the grants and
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: were quickly given money and given money in their areas
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: of expertise. And this is right in line with fire
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: Aid's mission statements. And an outside review by an outside
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: law firm confirmed the same thing, and the new Republican
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: led committee the report is skeptical of the nonprofit's work
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: done under the auspices of fire Aid. Why is that?
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: Why are they skeptical about this? Because the one hundred
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: million dollars that was given. The House Committee is saying
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: this thing is rife with wokeness and distribution to organizations
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: that are antithetical to the values of the United States. Okay,
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: the committee, out of the hundreds of nonprofits, found six
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: organizations that allocated grant fire aid grants towards labor salaries
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: other related costs, arguing that instead of the money going
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: to victims, it went to pay salaries to attorneys for example,
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: that we're supposed to do pro bono work. And this
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: report that was issued by the committee, which cited Fox
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: News Breitbart New York Post host said that friar Aid
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: prioritized and awarded grants to illegal aliens, people who didn't
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: deserve it. LGBTQ rights groups. For example, five hundred thousand
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: dollars was used by the California Charter Schools Association, Neighborhood
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: Legal Services of La County, LA Regional Food Bank, LA
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: Disaster Relief Navigator, Community Clinic Association. It goes on and
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: on and on, and examples they say were suspicious. One
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: of them is paying salaries to attorneys providing free legal
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: aid and discrimination. You're giving money to groups that help
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: illegal aliens and therefore you're not giving money to Americans
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: who deserve it. Therefore, we're looking at the report and
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: what are they going to do. Are they going to
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: shut it down? Well, they haven't yet. I mean, the
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: adminsis is shut down plenty of stuff. We're gonna talk
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: to Jim Keiney about one of these stories. And the
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: report says that instead of helping fire victims, donations made
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: to fire Aid. This is donations as well as federal
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: money help defund causes and projects completely unrelated to fire recovery.
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: For example, voter participation for Native Americans Illegal Aliens. Podcast
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: shows fungus planting and is that true? It could be
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: peripherally true. And if it's part of and let's say
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: it's true, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: Fungus planting. And if that is a small, tiny percentage
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: of what an organization is doing, do you concentrate on
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: the fungus planning part and say the rest of it
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: is also woke and discriminatory. And this is simply I think,
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: not just an attempt, I mean, actually causes so much dissension.
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: Bottom line is any federal money that comes into California
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: is going to be suspect. The way we spend it.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: We just take federal money and spend it on woke
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: LGBTQ communities, illegal aliens. We don't spend federal money the
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: way we should spend federal money. FEMA funds where FEMA
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: is working hard. Certainly not in Democrat state because it's
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: all fraud. The cities that have been overrun by crime
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: and the invasion of these criminals where the federal authorities
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: have to come in are only Democrat states. There is
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: no fraud in Republican states. There is no crime in
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: Republican cities. I mean, it's gotten pretty nuts, it really has,
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: all right, I want to talk about this thing with Greenland.
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, this has just gotten completely nuts. And the
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: President has said that Greenland should belong to us. We
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: need Greenland because of the vast resources that it has.
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: We don't necessarily need them because of their vast military might.
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: But the President said that he doesn't put he is
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: not ignoring the possibility of going in there militarily to
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: take Greenland, which I think is going to be a
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: hell of a fight between the United States military and
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: fifty six thousand people that's the population of Greenland. The
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: problem is Greenland is a member of NATO, and now
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: that gets really problematic. And now we're talking about this
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: president who is certainly turning the United States around and
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: going in a different direction. He is on the verge
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: of changing how the world works, certainly the Western world.
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: So the President was talking about Venezuela, starting with the
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: attacks on those drug boats. He had said, yeah, I
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: may put boots on the ground in Venezuela. That's one
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: of the things I might do. And as a matter
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: of fact, boots were on the ground. At least an
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: attack was made and Maduro of course was abducted. He
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: was captured. According to him, he was kidnapped, and all
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: of a sudden, the President talking about Greenland, that has
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: some credibility. Certainly, the Danes are sweating bullets on this
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: one because here's why the President has said, we need
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: those resources. I'm not arguing with that. And he has
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: talked about annexing Greenland, just outright saying it is now,
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: it now belongs to the United States. Stephen Miller, who
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: is a senior policy advisor to the president, has said
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: straight out it's ours. What is it? You know? Why
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: is Denmark in fact control of Greenland. What made Denmark
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: the owner of the owner of Greenland. Well, Greenland is
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: a quasi autonomous government, it says, island that sits out
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: in the middle of the Atlantic. And as far as
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: the argument that Denmark has in fact an ownership, if
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: you will, much like we own Puerto Rico, that's sort
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: of along the same lines. It said, let me tell
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: you when Greenland became part of Denmark one year before
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: we created the United States of America. Denmark in fact
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: annexed Greenland in seventeen seventy five. So there's a little
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: bit of history there. Now Here is the political fallout.
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: This is what makes this so crazy. All of a sudden,
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: the president saying we need Greenland, We're going to take Greenland,
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: We're going to own Greenland, has credibility. At first they thought,
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: you know, everybody said, oh, come on, he's just talking.
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: He's just talking. And because there's a lot of puffery
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: with President Trump, he does that. That's part of his
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: negotiating styles. He asks for the moon and negotiates. He
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: didn't do that with Maduro, and a lot of people
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: are frightened that he's not going to do that with Greenland.
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: Is he really going to invade Greenland. Do you put
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: it past him after the Maduro situation, Because if you
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: look at the quote need of Greenland to the security
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: of the United States far more important than Venezuela because
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: of the rare earths and the resources that it has.
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: And here's the problem. Greenland is one of the most
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: one of the closest allies we have to the United States.
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: They've always been on the United States side. They were
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: founding member of NATO, much like the United States was.
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: There were bases on in Greenland. Greenland is always negotiated
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: with the US whatever it needed. They were at one
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: point thirty bases, thirty US bases in Greenland. The government,
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: our government, the military shut down twenty nine of them.
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: Actually there were thirty one shut down thirty of them,
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: so there's one base left. But it's the decision that
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: the US military made Greenland is. Fine, you put more
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: bases on, Fine, you need the rare earths, Fine, we'll
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: talk about that. There's no problem. We're not gonna argue.
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: You know what's fair, what isn't fair. I mean, let's
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: sit down. Well the President is saying, no, we're not
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: going to sit down. We own it. We want it,
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: it's all ours. And what if Denmark says no. What
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: it's saying to right now? Now? What is there going
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: to be an invasion, a military invasion of Greenland which
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: would take thirty minutes to take over Greenland because the
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: army has to stop to pee and that's going to
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: hold up military forces. That's it. Yeah, I think it's possible.
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: I think a lot of people do think it's possible.
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: The authorities in Greenland thinks as possible. The NATO countries
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: think it's possible. Now Here is a real problem with
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: two issues here I want to share with you. Number one.
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: One of the arguments is we are going to buy Greenland. Now,
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: how do you buy a country or a territory? Actually,
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: we've done it twice. We bought Alaska from Russia under
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: it was the Secretary of State Seward under Lincoln's administration,
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: and we spent seven point two million dollars, biggest bargain
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: you could ever imagine buying Alaska. Also France that controlled
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: the middle part of the United States, England, the eastern
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: part France, sort of the middle. The United States bought
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: that in eighteen oh three. The Louisiana purchase spent fifteen
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: million dollars and bought that entire section, doubled its size
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: of the territory of the US. So we've done it before.
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: The problem is the people that sold it were fine
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: selling it. There was negotiation. Denmark is saying, no chance,
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: We're not going to sell Denmark to We're not going
• 20:32
  Speaker 1: to sell Greenland to you, and the United States the
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: President says, well, we need it, we want it, and
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: where do you go from here? And then the NATO issue.
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: Denmark is a founding member of NATO. Under Article five
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: of NATO, an attack on one country is an attack
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: on all countries in NATO. I think there's twenty eight
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: countries now in NATO, which means that you're not going
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: to see Putin attacking a NATO country. And the reason
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: that the other countries in that area are not jumping
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: in with boots on the ground is Ukraine is not
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: a member of NATO and that gives them an excuse
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: not to go in and have it at war with Russia.
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: Russia attacks a NATO country, tries to invade a NATO country,
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: there's war, at least according to the Charter of NATO.
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: They didn't anticipate one NATO country attacking another NATO country.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: What the hell do you do with that? I'll tell
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: you what happens. NATO disintegrates. That's it. NATO just disintegrates,
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: It disappears. NATO created after World War Two to fight
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: the Russians in case they invaded. Is it still there?
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: Do you need to fight Russians? Look what's happening in Ukraine.
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: Look what happened in Crimea. Yeah, it's a real fear.
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: So I don't know what's going to happen with Greenland.
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: The only thing I believe is that the president if
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: Denmark will not sell it, If Denmark doesn't agree to
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: every single demand of the United States, could there be
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: an invasion? Can you imagine? Can you imagine invading a
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: NATO country? But then, prior to the abduction of Duro,
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: could you imagine the United States with special forces abducting Maduro,
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: who deserve to be abducted, By the way, I have
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: no problem what the president did. The only problem that exists,
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: I believe is what the hell happens now? Right? We
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: are governing, governing Venezuela. How okay, how so the president
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: is gone, but everything else is in place. We're really
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: good at going to war. We're not really good at
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: what happens after the war. Now, this is a great
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: story out of the Washington Post, and it talks about
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: a starter home. Now, the concept of starter home is
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: antiquated and cute because they really don't exist. They're perceived
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: as being on the smaller side, pretty small in our world,
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: in need of renovation or both. And what buyers do
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: is they go on expecting to stay a few years,
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: building equity and then trading up for something bigger and better.
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: And I did that by my first home in my twenties.
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: It was a starter home and then I built up
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: and up and up. Today it doesn't happen. Why because
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: starter homes here in southern California are a million dollars,
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: certainly the ones in Burbank. Over I look over through
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: the studio window and I see homes in Burbank and
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: they are eight nine hundred square feet eleven hundred square feet,
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: three bedrooms, two baths or maybe a bath, and a
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: half a million dollars. So how do people afford them?
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: Or they don't? And the problem is builders aren't building
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: them because there ain't enough money in it builders. And
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: this is not only because of the profit margin for them,
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: but also because of what the buyers want. Are building
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: bigger and bigger homes, four or more bedrooms. That was
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: half of the construction in twenty twenty two, more rooms,
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: more upgrades, being well, more costs. On top of that,
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: you have layers of local regulations, and it's same regulation
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: to build a four thousand square foot home than it
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: is to build a twelve hundred square foot home. It's
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: still the same regulation. So why wouldn't you build? Why
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: if you're a builder, buy a more expensive home, and
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: so between zoning requirements, the cost of building, the fact
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: that we want much bigger homes, well, the problem is
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: is that it's reached the point where we can't afford
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: it anymore. As a matter of fact, financially not even
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: viable to build what we perceived as a starter home,
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: which is considered about a thousand square foot home, and
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: you could buy that for While I bought my first house,
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: it was seventy two thousand dollars, but that was a
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: whole lot of years ago. That was in the nineteen thirties,
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: my parents in the nineteen fifties. Now this was a
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: long time ago, but we came to the United States
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: in nineteen fifty six and bought our first home, or
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: they bought their first home in nineteen I think fifty nine,
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: twenty six thousand dollars. I'll never forget that held onto
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: the house for four years building equity, and they sold
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: it for twenty six thousand, five hundred dollars. Now, let's
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: go back five years. Anybody who bought a home five
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: years ago, what do you think it's worth? Now it's
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: a different world, and it's gotten to the point where
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: even prospective buyers with great jobs that pay six that
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: get six figures income can't afford a house. If you
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: look at what is it. I remember the figure if
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: you buy a million dollar house, which is pretty close
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: to the median here in Orange County, in La County,
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: particularly in a decent area, a middle class area or above.
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: You put so it's a million dollars, You put twenty
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: percent down, and that's two hundred thousand dollars after taxes.
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: In money, I mean, you're writing a check for two
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars if you're putting a normal down payment.
• 26:50
  Speaker 1: Now you have to in order to qualify for that mortgage.
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: If you follow the rules of mortgage payments and ownership
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: the family. You have to earn about one hundred and
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: eighty thousand dollars a year to qualify for a million
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: dollar home with a twenty percent down payment. Of course,
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: there are other programs out there where you pay ten
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: percent down, and the VA if you're a veteran, you
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: can pay what five percent down. But the point is
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: we can't afford homes anymore, and the concept of starter homes,
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: and that's for those of you that are looking to
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: buy a house. Let's say you're starting a career, you're
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: in your twenties, for example, or you're in your thirties
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: and you're still living at home because you can't afford
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: to pay for an apartment. The thought of being able
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: to afford a home, of course, at this point is very,
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: very difficult until we change everything and the concept of
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: starter homes. You don't even know what a starter home is.
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: KFI AM six forty you've been listening to the Bill
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: Handle Show Catch My Show Monday through Friday six am
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: to nine am, and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.