Speaker 1: Forecasts.
Speaker 2: Okay for today all the way through Saturday, and every
Speaker 2: day comes with showers, storms and sometimes heavy showers and storms.
Speaker 2: So both day and night that in the consideration today's
Speaker 2: high sixty nine over nine fifty three.
Speaker 1: Tomorrow's high will be sixty three with.
Speaker 2: An overnight love of sixty We'll reach a high sixty
Speaker 2: seven on Saturday, and that flood watch expires on Sunday
Speaker 2: morning sixty five degrees. Right now, let's get a traffic updates.
Speaker 3: From Traffic Center.
Speaker 1: Don't let injuries slow you down.
Speaker 3: The U see Health Orthopedic SAM supports medicine experts can
Speaker 3: help keep you moving. Schedule the same day appointment at
Speaker 3: ucehealth dot com. South Bend seventy five breakway. Just you
Speaker 3: come out of Bachman now northbound seventy five beginning to
Speaker 3: fill in just a bit approaching Kyle's southbound two seventy
Speaker 3: five continues to be the heaviest between the Lawrenceburg Ramp
Speaker 3: and the Carrol Cropper Bridge, Chucking rom onnth fifty five
Speaker 3: KR and see the talk station.
Speaker 2: Seven thirty eight at five krc DE Talk station and
Speaker 2: a happy Thursday to you.
Speaker 1: Fast forward an hour.
Speaker 2: We're gonna hear from my Heart mediavia next Bert, Jay
Speaker 2: Ratliffe and head over at fifty five KRC dot com.
Speaker 2: Joe's already posted the conversation I had just now with
Speaker 2: Ken Blackwell. We had a special edition of the Big
Speaker 2: Picture with Jack alan In earlier on tariffs and he
Speaker 2: reminded us that today is the anniversary of the Sailor
Speaker 2: Park Tornado that was April third, nineteen seventy four.
Speaker 1: Amember like it was yesterday.
Speaker 2: And thanks to Jess Obert from Peyton's Lemonade Stand getting
Speaker 2: us up to speed because it is fast approaching, great
Speaker 2: opportunity to help out to charity. You too can open
Speaker 2: up your own lemonade stand. Just reach out to them
Speaker 2: through the link. They will do everything for you. Just
Speaker 2: get in touch with them. It's a great opportunity to
Speaker 2: get some business exposure and if you want to be
Speaker 2: a sponsor, you can be a sponsor and you'll also
Speaker 2: get some great exposure on that. And with that, I
Speaker 2: want to thank specifically Fisher Homes. After hearing my conversation
Speaker 2: with Jess over they reached out to Peyton's Lemonade Stand.
Speaker 2: They are now an official sponsor, So God bless the
Speaker 2: Principles at Peyton Holmes for making that decision, and that's
Speaker 2: why I am giving you a shout out today. Let
Speaker 2: us turn to Senator rand Paul. Always a distinct pleasure
Speaker 2: to have you on the program. Senator Paul, Welcome back.
Speaker 4: Good morning, Brian, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: Got a lot to go through. Just got on the
Speaker 1: phone with Ken Blackwell.
Speaker 2: We also talked about the Department of Government efficiency and
Speaker 2: Elon Musk And I don't know. I can't make heads
Speaker 2: or tails out of these leftists attacking cars that they
Speaker 2: once worshiped in the name of climate change, but that's
Speaker 2: what's going on. But they're trying to defend the indefensible,
Speaker 2: I mean, and also bringing to light and I wanted
Speaker 2: your reaction on this, the failure of our people, the
Speaker 2: folks in government, those behind the scenes working with the
Speaker 2: IRS social Security Department of minding tax dollars. How easy
Speaker 2: is or how difficult a chore is it to get
Speaker 2: people off active Social Security number lists when they obviously
Speaker 2: do not exist, are dead.
Speaker 4: You know, I don't think after you've been dead one
Speaker 4: hundred years you ought to be removed. They think we
Speaker 4: could all agree, you know, if you've been dead over
Speaker 4: one hundred years, maybe you shouldn't get any more social
Speaker 4: security now. Some of it is probably a glitch, and
Speaker 4: the way they have stuff recorded it makes a bit
Speaker 4: different whether you're on the rolls, whether they're collecting it.
Speaker 4: But for goodness sakes, can we not clean up the
Speaker 4: damn social security roles? The dead people don't get checks.
Speaker 4: You know, this isn't a brand new problem. During the
Speaker 4: middle of COVID, we noticed that there were reports coming
Speaker 4: back of dead people getting COVID funds, you know, getting
Speaker 4: these PPP loans for their business and stuff. This was
Speaker 4: a real scam and I think it was a thousand
Speaker 4: dead people got over like a billion dollars or something crazy.
Speaker 4: And so I went to the floor and we passed
Speaker 4: legislation to try to clean this up. But it's amazing,
Speaker 4: how you know, the system just is so slow. So
Speaker 4: when I tried to clean it up so dead people
Speaker 4: wouldn't receive checks, there were people complaining, and they said, oh, well,
Speaker 4: we'll do it in three years, but first we have
Speaker 4: to merge this system with that system, and it's going
Speaker 4: to take three years. And I said, that's ridiculous. Let's
Speaker 4: do it now, do it tomorrow. And so I appreciate
Speaker 4: Elon Musk and President Trump frankly just raising Ellen saying
Speaker 4: we're not going to do it anymore.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And you know, but that the reaction is to
Speaker 2: scream that he is somehow a fascist. I mean I
Speaker 2: always commented that they need to read the definition of
Speaker 2: fascism because by cleaning up fraud, waste, and abuse and
Speaker 2: reducing the size and scope of government reduces the amount
Speaker 2: of control they have over our individual lives, and control
Speaker 2: is exactly what fascism is, dictating the terms of conditions
Speaker 2: over how the means of production operates. I mean, they're
Speaker 2: definitionly morons.
Speaker 4: I think they basically expose themselves though. I mean, if
Speaker 4: you're setting cars on fire, you're a terrorist basically, and
Speaker 4: we're going to go to prison for a long time.
Speaker 4: I mean, people need to realize you burn up a
Speaker 4: car dealership, you burn up a eighty thousand dollars car,
Speaker 4: a sixty thousand dollars car, you're going to jail for
Speaker 4: a long period of time. And so, but the thing
Speaker 4: is is they expose themselves. For example, you know when
Speaker 4: Elon Musk points out and I've pointed this out as well,
Speaker 4: that we're spending two million dollars on sex change operations
Speaker 4: in Guatemala, three million dollars on girl centric climate change
Speaker 4: in Brazil. Nobody's for that. When you ask people at
Speaker 4: home in Kentucky, any part of Kentucky, do you want
Speaker 4: to send two million bucks to Guatemala to help them
Speaker 4: do something obscene to their children? People are absolutely enraged
Speaker 4: by this. But the Democrats haven't figured this out yet.
Speaker 4: The Democrats are not for cutting one penny of foreign aid. Unfortunately,
Speaker 4: there are many Republicans that aren't for cutting four and
Speaker 4: a too. I put forward an amendment about a week
Speaker 4: ago to basically take what Elon Musk and Doze has
Speaker 4: found in wasting four and eight about sixteen billion, and
Speaker 4: eliminate it. And I got twenty seven Republicans, but I
Speaker 4: got twenty six Republicans of vode to keep spending the
Speaker 4: foreign aid. So this is where we're stuck. Is that
Speaker 4: you know, there are some decent Republicans. There are no
Speaker 4: Democrats that will cut one penny in foreign aid. That's
Speaker 4: just the truth, and people can look it up, but
Speaker 4: it's the truth. On the Republican side, it's only a
Speaker 4: little over half on a good day that I can
Speaker 4: get to vote to cut this waste. We're gonna have
Speaker 4: the same thing come up this week. The Republicans are
Speaker 4: putting forward a budget. It'll be only Republicans that vote
Speaker 4: for it, but they're going to ask for five trillion
Speaker 4: dollar increase in the dead scale. And so I'm going
Speaker 4: to tell them, look, of course, unless you balance your
Speaker 4: budget immediately, you have to keep borrowing money. I'll let
Speaker 4: you borrow five hundred billion, which is crazy, but that's
Speaker 4: three months worth of borrowing, and in three months we'll
Speaker 4: come back and we'll assess whether or not you're doing
Speaker 4: what you promised. See, they're making these promises that they
Speaker 4: will cut spending and they'll behave and they'll be better people,
Speaker 4: and they won't be the typical big spenders that Republican
Speaker 4: leadership has been. And I say, look, trust, but verify.
Speaker 4: I'll give you three months worth of borrowing and then
Speaker 4: we'll see what happens. But it'll be interesting to see
Speaker 4: how my amendment does because there's a possibility that people
Speaker 4: across the hour might even vote for it. Design So
Speaker 4: I'm going to try to red from five trillion dollars
Speaker 4: in ball rang, which is about two years worth so
Speaker 4: we're going to borrow two and a half trillion each
Speaker 4: year for the next two years during supposedly conservative Republican rule.
Speaker 4: But I'm going to try to change it to five
Speaker 4: hundred billion. But it'll be quite an interesting vote to
Speaker 4: see how Republicans vote on my Amma.
Speaker 2: It certainly will, and I think quite often the Republicans
Speaker 2: and certain Republicans, we could all come up with a
Speaker 2: list of names. Are the ones that continue and perpetuate
Speaker 2: this endless spending. We've dug ourselves into thirty six trillion
Speaker 2: in debt, twenty trillion dollars a year to pay our
Speaker 2: credit card interest rate. This cannot continue. And the elephant
Speaker 2: in the room, Senator Paul, and I'm sure you know this,
Speaker 2: so security, Medicare, and Medicaid, those are the biggest expenditures
Speaker 2: we've got. Those systems are collapsing under the weight of themselves.
Speaker 2: Something is going to have to do. It be done,
Speaker 2: and no one says they are willing to, you know,
Speaker 2: put their elected a job on the line to actually
Speaker 2: save us from ourselves.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and this is when you look at the spending.
Speaker 4: We spend seven trillion that we bring in five trillion.
Speaker 4: The seven trillion that we spend is largely comprised as
Speaker 4: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and huge stamps. So if you
Speaker 4: take those four items off of the table and you
Speaker 4: say we're not going to look at these at all,
Speaker 4: you don't have that much spending left, really, and so
Speaker 4: we've got a real problem. But we have to look
Speaker 4: at all spending. And so one of the proposals I've
Speaker 4: had is not actually to cut people immediately off Medicaid,
Speaker 4: but to simply say to the states, you know what,
Speaker 4: you got to share half of the burden. That's what
Speaker 4: it used to be. States paid half of medicaid, federal
Speaker 4: government paid the other half. But when Obamacare happened in
Speaker 4: twenty ten, we added about fifteen million people to medicaid,
Speaker 4: but we said, hey, it'll be free. The federal government
Speaker 4: will pay ninety percent and the states will have to
Speaker 4: pay ten percent. So this isn't This is one of
Speaker 4: those fixes that is eminently reasonable and not even that draconian.
Speaker 4: We don't cut anyone off. We just say to all
Speaker 4: the states, you now have to pay fifty percent of
Speaker 4: these new people people, And that saves about five hundred
Speaker 4: billion for the federal government. Now, state government would have
Speaker 4: to pick up the tab. But the difference is the
Speaker 4: state governments don't have a printing press, they don't have
Speaker 4: a federal reserve, and so they might have to make
Speaker 4: more responsible decisions, and they might say, hmm, if you're
Speaker 4: able bodied, you have no physical helments, you're not on
Speaker 4: any medications, why aren't you working?
Speaker 1: Exactly?
Speaker 4: You know, why don't you get a job with insurance?
Speaker 4: And there are plenty of jobs out there, I mean
Speaker 4: that have insurance. It's amazing the jobs are out there
Speaker 4: if you will work. You know, they're not easy jobs.
Speaker 4: But you can actually stack boxes in northern Kentucky and
Speaker 4: do the arranging of the shipping and help with shipping
Speaker 4: with Amazon for like twenty four dollars an hour. So
Speaker 4: I mean there are jobs out there for the waiting.
Speaker 4: I'm not saying it's easy, but you know, life's not easy.
Speaker 4: Get up there and work. There are many good jobs
Speaker 4: out there. There are many good jobs with insurance out there.
Speaker 4: But we can't keep doing what we're doing. There's just
Speaker 4: there's too many people in the wagon, not enough people
Speaker 4: pulling the wagon.
Speaker 2: Isn't that the true? So it also forced states to
Speaker 2: take greater stock and fraud, waste, and abuse. I know
Speaker 2: we have a real problem with fraud here in the
Speaker 2: state of Ohio with Medicaid billions of dollars, is what
Speaker 2: I've been told. So you can take some measures to
Speaker 2: curb the cash outlays without impacting anyone, really, Senator Paul
Speaker 2: pivoting over briefly to the Department of Education, I know
Speaker 2: got a lot of teachers unions wigged over, wigged out
Speaker 2: over the idea of pairing it back and ultimately perhaps
Speaker 2: eliminating which require an active Congress. But our lives are
Speaker 2: not better because the existence of the Apartment of Education.
Speaker 2: Just looking at the nation's failing schools and the inability
Speaker 2: of many children to even be able to read or
Speaker 2: write at grade level. Block grants of the states, rather
Speaker 2: than going through the Department of Education and giving the
Speaker 2: freedom to the local school boards and school districts to
Speaker 2: determine the future of their children. That's a better path,
Speaker 2: is it not.
Speaker 4: You know, getting rid of the Department of Education in
Speaker 4: Washington is the most pro teacher policy probably ever presented
Speaker 4: in the last several decades. The teachers I talked to
Speaker 4: chase at the Department of Education. It gives them federal
Speaker 4: man days. It tells them the to do federal testing.
Speaker 4: They spend a lot of their time teaching the kids
Speaker 4: according to the testing, and the kids aren't necessarily getting
Speaker 4: more proficient at reading or math because we've been forcing
Speaker 4: them to take these federal tests for the last you know,
Speaker 4: forty years or so. So I think we should promote
Speaker 4: this as pro teacher. Also, it's you know, sixty eighty
Speaker 4: ninety billion, it's a huge pot of money. That money's
Speaker 4: not going into teacher salary. You know that you've got
Speaker 4: bureaucrats in Washington doing DEI diversity equity conclusion, some bureaucrats
Speaker 4: and in Washington consumed with race when we should be
Speaker 4: getting away from race and talking about people's individuals, not
Speaker 4: as you know, what ethnic group they're from. But we
Speaker 4: have people making four hundred thousand dollars as bureaucrats in
Speaker 4: the DEI bureaucracy. That money could be spent more on
Speaker 4: education or frankly, teacher salaries. So there's a lot of
Speaker 4: ways that teachers I think should look at getting rid
Speaker 4: of federal control and sending it back to the States
Speaker 4: as a good thing not only for students, but for
Speaker 4: teachers and Frankly, you're exactly right. Over the last forty years,
Speaker 4: our scores have gone down. I mean, really, science proficiency
Speaker 4: is under ten percent. Reading proficiency about a third of
Speaker 4: the kids can read at grade level. I mean, it's
Speaker 4: not an overwhelming success.
Speaker 1: It is not.
Speaker 2: And finally, let's pivot over to tariffs for part coming today.
Speaker 2: Senator Paul, I know you're not a fan, and you
Speaker 2: had a quote yesterday you were speaking with the Hill
Speaker 2: on the Hills rising tariffs are attacked and if you
Speaker 2: tax trader, you tax anything, you get less of it.
Speaker 2: And I agree with that point, and I know we're
Speaker 2: going to suffer a little bit in terms of increased prices.
Speaker 2: But when you see China, for example, head in place
Speaker 2: and has had in place a sixty seven percent tariff
Speaker 2: on goods imported from the US, and you can go
Speaker 2: across the board and look at some of these outrageous tariff.
Speaker 2: Of course, the people that live there get fewer American
Speaker 2: products as the price out of the market, and that
Speaker 2: exists in a multitude of countries that now have at
Speaker 2: least some tariff on them. I mean, if one thing
Speaker 2: this has been eye opening on it's that well, we're
Speaker 2: being mistreated in the global sense.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think the mistake in analyzing this is thinking
Speaker 4: that the United States buy stuff from China or the
Speaker 4: United States buy stuff from Canada. Individuals buy stuff from
Speaker 4: other individuals, and they happen to reside in other places.
Speaker 4: Trade deficits between countries really don't mean much. So, for example,
Speaker 4: over the last seventy years, we've had a trade deficit
Speaker 4: with Canada. It's not a big one. It's actually they
Speaker 4: buy a lot of stuff from US. In fact, Canada
Speaker 4: buys more from US than China plus Japan plus England
Speaker 4: plus France. So Canada buys more than four countries combined,
Speaker 4: four big countries combined. And putting tariffs on that that
Speaker 4: just makes our products more expensive. But there is The
Speaker 4: thing is is, let's say that you make one hundred
Speaker 4: thousand dollars a year and I make five million dollars
Speaker 4: a year. Who do you think has a bigger trade
Speaker 4: deficit with Amazon, or with a grocery store or with
Speaker 4: you know, luxury goods. Well, the person who makes more
Speaker 4: will always have a bigger trade destict because they buy
Speaker 4: more stuff and they don't make anything themselves. A rich
Speaker 4: person doesn't necessarily make anything. So every individual has a
Speaker 4: bigger trade deficit if they are rich. So the United
Speaker 4: States is rich, we will always have a trade deficit
Speaker 4: with Canada because we're rich. It's like five million people
Speaker 4: in some reindeer living up there, you know, And so
Speaker 4: we always will have a trade deficit with Canada. But
Speaker 4: doesn't mean we've gotten poorer over seventy years. We've gotten
Speaker 4: richer over seventy years, and so the Canadians. But if
Speaker 4: you put a tariff on potash, which is you know,
Speaker 4: goes into fertilizer, what's going to happen to our farmers
Speaker 4: is they're going to pay more for fertilizer. And what
Speaker 4: happens that people eat the stuff our farmers make is
Speaker 4: going to cost more. So it's a mistake to get
Speaker 4: caught up in this country versus that country when every
Speaker 4: individual trade, if it's voluntary, is a good one. If
Speaker 4: I'm a farmer and I buy my fertilizer from Canada,
Speaker 4: it's a voluntary trade and I buy it from them
Speaker 4: at a certain price, but it isn't something I'm not
Speaker 4: getting ripped off. Nobody who makes a trade has ever
Speaker 4: ripped off, because when you make a trade, you agree
Speaker 4: voluntarily to give up your money for something you want.
Speaker 4: The person trading with you gives up something they made
Speaker 4: for your money. So a trade is never bad, and
Speaker 4: a trade is never injurious to any of the parties
Speaker 4: of the trade if it's done voluntarily. If you look
Speaker 4: at the last seventy years and you look at the
Speaker 4: curve of international trade, international trade has grown exponentially over
Speaker 4: the last seventy years. But if you look at GDP
Speaker 4: per person across the world, it has grown exponentially. Also,
Speaker 4: every day one hundred thousand people escape poverty. We the
Speaker 4: middle class is not being hauled out. The middle class
Speaker 4: has actually gone to the upper class in the last
Speaker 4: seventy years. If you look at household income, those who
Speaker 4: make fifty thousand to one hundred thousand dollars, there's slightly
Speaker 4: less than there was seventy years ago. But if you
Speaker 4: look at the lower class, there's also slightly less. So
Speaker 4: where did these people go. There's less people in the
Speaker 4: under fifty thousand dollars category, there's less people in the
Speaker 4: fifty to one hundred thousand dollars. Guess what, There's three
Speaker 4: times as many people in over one hundred thousand dollars category.
Speaker 4: And this is including inflation. If in long term historical trends,
Speaker 4: trade and wealth are proportional. You know, the more trade,
Speaker 4: the more wealth we've gotten. And then wealth is more
Speaker 4: apparent in the poor countries because they started out poor.
Speaker 4: But we are all getting richer. And if we want
Speaker 4: American manufacturing, the best way to do it's lower their
Speaker 4: taxes and less than their regulations. We have the smartest,
Speaker 4: most capable workers in the world. We still make many
Speaker 4: things here, but you know, we don't make shoes. We
Speaker 4: don't make some of those things. But you know, if
Speaker 4: the tariff history day is a fifty percent tariff on Vietnam,
Speaker 4: so para nikes instead of costing one hundred and twenty
Speaker 4: dollars are going to cost one hundred and eighty dollars
Speaker 4: or or whatever the price is going to be. I
Speaker 4: don't think that makes us any richer. I think that's
Speaker 4: just going to make us poor. We're not going to
Speaker 4: make shoes here tomorrow. You know, you think in five
Speaker 4: years of fifty percent tariff on Vietnam or all of
Speaker 4: a sudden, you gonna make shoes here. No, we's every American
Speaker 4: is going to pay more for shoes, which means we're
Speaker 4: all going to be poor.
Speaker 2: Well, and I agree, But the correlary to that is
Speaker 2: Vietnam charges a ninety percent tariff on on goods important
Speaker 2: from the United States, which means the Vietnamese aren't going
Speaker 2: to be able to afford products that we make. There
Speaker 2: won't be any demand for them because of the insane terror.
Speaker 4: Or I mean, if you put a ninety percent tariff
Speaker 4: on American goods, you're an idiot and it makes you poorer.
Speaker 4: So because they're idiots and it makes them poor and
Speaker 4: they can't buy our stuff, doesn't mean we still shouldn't
Speaker 4: want to have less expensive things in our country. See,
Speaker 4: it gets into this fairness argument between countries. And the
Speaker 4: thing is is, you know people say, well, they've got
Speaker 4: a terraff so they must be must be a better place. Well,
Speaker 4: hell no, ours, our country is a much better place
Speaker 4: than Vietnam. I wouldn't move to Vietnam, and still being
Speaker 4: Vietnam would move to Vietnam, they wouldn't be want to
Speaker 4: move over here. So having a ninety percent tariff, you know,
Speaker 4: that's what we're trying to go towards because we think
Speaker 4: it's on fair and this unfairst argument doesn't really make
Speaker 4: sense because it doesn't make me want to move to
Speaker 4: cant to Vietnam that has ninety percent tariffs.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 4: Actually, I think I would think, well, gosh, if I
Speaker 4: moved to Vietnam, everything's gonna be very expensive if they
Speaker 4: have ninety percent tariffs, I wouldn't want to move. That's
Speaker 4: why I want to stay here. So when countries do
Speaker 4: that to us, it doesn't make us poorer. It just
Speaker 4: makes them. It makes them poor, but it doesn't necessarily
Speaker 4: affect us. We are still killing it. I mean, we
Speaker 4: are the dominant economic engine of the world despite what
Speaker 4: others do, and some get you know, sometimes things do improve.
Speaker 4: You know, us in Israel, we have no tariffs. We're
Speaker 4: basically a free trade zone between US and Israel since
Speaker 4: nineteen eighty five. So I don't begrudge President Trump if
Speaker 4: he wants to try to tell them go lower, and
Speaker 4: will go lower. But just slapping these things on, you know,
Speaker 4: fifty percent tariff on Vietnam is the crazy thing. You know,
Speaker 4: we fought the war, we got through the war, and
Speaker 4: you have many veterans that go back now and we
Speaker 4: actually have better relations with Vietnam now. But fifty percent tariff.
Speaker 4: It is not a good way to keep good relations.
Speaker 4: It's a good way to sour things.
Speaker 2: Thoughtful analy says, as always by Senator Ran Paul. Can't
Speaker 2: thank you enough for the willingness to come on the
Speaker 2: program and share your thoughts and reason with us. Senator Paul,
Speaker 2: You're always welcome here. Keep up the great work, and
Speaker 2: I look forward to having you on real soon. Thanks Ryan,
Speaker 2: Thank you seven forty eight fifty five krs to the
Speaker 2: talk station. Odor Exit. We'll get rid of the Stenchi
Speaker 2: of politics. Od o rxit dot com. Go to odor
Speaker 2: exit dot com. It's easy to figure out which product
Speaker 2: you need, depending upon which odor you want to get
Speaker 2: rid of, whether it's smoke, will mildew, pet odor, human oder, food, owders.
Speaker 1: The list is lengthy.
Speaker 2: The products are one hundred percent satisfaction guaranteed when used
Speaker 2: as directed. Any questions called the toll free number. They'll
Speaker 2: explain how to use it right and you will get
Speaker 2: your money back if it doesn't work. So odorexit dot com.
Speaker 2: Order write on our web page or use the search
Speaker 2: engine to buy it locally. It's sold all over the
Speaker 2: Greater Cincinnati area. Twenty five years in business, locally manufactured
Speaker 2: and own odor exit dot com i've k rc