Ep. 832 A Preview of the Horrors Ahead if the Dems Win the House
Summary:
In this episode I address the significant damage the Democrats will do if they win back the House. I also discuss the booming economy and the next revolution in production and growth.
News Picks:
Here’s a summary of all the damage the Democrats will do if they win back the House.
Why are the DOJ and FBI hiding potentially exculpatory information on George Papadopoulos?
The list of attacks on Republicans is, sadly, growing.
Nancy Pelosi says she’s fine with “collateral damage” for her political opponents.
Why did Glenn Simpson plead the Fifth? What is he hiding?
President Trump is on a historic media blitz.
Politifact is a garbage propaganda site. Here’s the proof.
Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Alright, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
It's Friday!
Yeah, you know what?
I actually forgot it's Friday.
It is Friday.
It is.
Folks, thanks again for tuning in to The Great Week of Listens.
Hey, one thing for you, quick message.
We're having an issue with people pirating our stuff on YouTube.
So if you are listening to our account on YouTube, we appreciate it.
Our account is youtube.com slash danbongino, straight through.
That's youtube.com slash danbongino.
If you'd like to listen there, if you're listening there now, please subscribe to our YouTube account.
We appreciate it.
If you are not listening and you are listening on a different account to this right now, and it is not youtube.com slash danbongino, Someone who is not paying the massive production costs for this show, paying Joe for the equipment, the airtime, the service, everyone else, is making money off our show.
So we'd appreciate it if you would listen on our account.
It means a lot.
We're trying to get the accounts taken down, but it's not that easy, unfortunately, with YouTube.
So just a quick note.
I appreciate that.
All right.
Yeah.
What are the Democrats going to do if they win the election?
Ladies and gentlemen, I got the, the seven, uh, what was it?
The movie with Demi Moore, The Seven Signs.
I have The Seven Signs of the Apocalypse coming up.
If the Democrats win the election, you are not going to want to miss this election update.
Important information.
Don't go anywhere.
All right, today's show brought to you by our buddies at Teeter, one of my favorite devices.
I hang upside down because it decompresses my spine, clears my head.
I love this machine.
It is one of the best things I have ever received in the mail.
It's terrific.
Love it.
Sorry about that.
Sorry about the, I get excited sometimes.
The vocabulary when I get excited is not always the best.
I can't say enough about these guys.
The Teeter Inversion Table uses gravity and your own body weight to decompress your spine and relieve pressure on your discs and surrounding nerves.
This thing is incredible.
I love it.
I use it twice a day.
Decompressing on a Teeter Inversion Table for a few minutes a day is a great addition to anyone's daily routine to maintain a healthy spine and active lifestyle without the pain.
You know, my arthritis problem, it's a big deal with me.
If you have back pain, if you've been lucky enough to avoid back pain, you need a teeter.
Invert every day.
Keep your back and joints feeling great.
I feel like a new man when I get off this thing.
I use it twice a day.
Love it.
Use it before the show to clear my head.
Some products I talk about, I use regularly.
Some I don't.
This one is a daily, twice a day one for me.
Over 3 million people have put their trust in Teeter.
They've been the best-known name in inversion tables since 1981.
They're the only inversion table that has been both safety-certified by UL Labs and FDA-registered as a Class 1 medical device.
For a limited time, you can get Teeter's brand-new 2019 upgraded model of the inversion table.
The Teeter FitSpine with bonus accessories, StretchMax handles, an easy-reach ankle system, plus a free vibration cushion for the ultimate muscle relaxation.
The regular price is $499, but they're offering it to outlisteners For $349.
That's a savings of $150 at teeter.com slash dan.
That's teeter.com slash dan, teeter.com slash dan.
Get the free vibration cushion, free shipping, free returns, and a 60-day money-back guarantee at teeter.com slash dan.
That's teeter, T-E-E-T-E-R.com slash dan.
All right.
The seven things.
Here we go.
The Democrats win back the House.
What's number one?
This piece is in the Washington Examiner at my show notes LinkedIn.
Joe, investigate, investigate, investigate.
The Democrats are planning like they always do because they are control freaks, Joe.
They love control and with control, they love to abuse power.
The ends justifies the mean for them.
That means they are going to investigate everything with Donald Trump.
They are going to investigate what he has for breakfast.
They are going to investigate the history of ingredients his chef uses in the evening meal.
They are going to investigate allegations of jaywalking for Don Trump Jr.
They will investigate, investigate, investigate.
They are not even hiding this.
They will use the subpoena power to shut down the government.
It'll all be about revenge.
It'll be about a reckoning for them.
It'll be about correcting what they feel is an election loss they should have won.
They are already talking about this kind of stuff.
They're going to look into Kushner, Don Trump Jr.
They're going to make sure that any single solitary allegation is investigated and the country is absolutely shut down.
Ladies and gentlemen, can we tolerate two years of this?
Now this isn't a big mystery, this is number one, but I want to warn you.
My experience with the federal government and law enforcement changed my life, and I mean this.
When you have the incredibly impressive massive powers of the federal government at your fingertips, the power to take liberty, the power to take a life if necessary in a use of force scenario, and you're a federal agent.
If you have half a brain and half a heart, it frightens you a little bit.
Now, I've said to you repeatedly what matters here is that we continue in this country to investigate crimes, not people.
If there was a serious allegation against some member of the Trump team and that there's evidence of a crime, then I'm not suggesting anybody should get a free pass.
The problem, folks, is there is no evidence of that.
And what are they doing?
They're investigating people.
And when you investigate people with no evidence of a crime, you will always find a crime.
You may say, well, Dan, what's the problem?
The problem is you're a criminal too under that definition.
Folks, I can't even tell you how easy it is.
I can't describe to you in words how easy it is to lock someone up for a federal crime.
You could lock up Mother Teresa for a federal crime.
There is always something somebody did somewhere.
Somewhere.
I'll give you a quick example I use often.
The tax laws.
The tax laws are so...
Discretionary at times and easy to interpret in either direction.
That nearly everyone in the country, if the government dedicated its full resources to locking you up, could get you on some kind of a tax law violation.
That is why we don't investigate people.
We investigate crimes and then we find the people later.
We don't investigate people and find the crimes later.
If the Democrats win back the House in these midterm elections, you will see a full-throated effort to take down this Trump team no matter what.
They will target all of their subpoena power.
They will pressure federal agencies to investigate Trump people and to find the crimes later.
Now, Joe, you can imagine if I'm telling you they can find a crime on you and me, which they can.
Oh, yeah.
I'm sure of it.
You rip off a mattress tag somewhere, right?
Yeah.
You laugh about this stuff, but this is real, right?
I'm talking about Joe, I'm talking about... People laugh, oh, come on.
No, this is real.
This could happen to you.
This will shut down the entire federal apparatus.
We will be dealing with this disaster for two years.
We will be dealing with police state style tactics.
We've already seen them do it.
I covered it in my new book.
I cover the whole chronology of what happened in the Spygate disaster.
Second, I got his pieces in the Washington Examiner.
Who is it by?
I should hat tip him.
That'd be the right thing to do.
Sorry about that.
Caitlin Corral.
C-A-R-A-L-L-E.
Very good piece here.
Again, so number one, investigate, investigate, investigate.
Number two, you interested in your firearms?
You're right to self-protection?
You damn well better protect that thing, because in this election, this is going to be all about, if the House wins, pushing gun confiscation, gun confiscation, gun confiscation.
They'll frame it, of course, as gun control.
There is no such thing as gun control.
Everywhere in the world firearms have tried to be controlled.
Just about every single place on earth it has backfired spectacularly in their fashion.
Think about it.
In Australia, right?
Australia, the liberal site, is an example of the effectiveness of gun control.
You hear it all the time, right Joe?
Yeah.
Look what happened in Australia!
Australia!
Number one, there's been an increase in knife attacks in big cities in Australia.
There's also been some bump in crime, including firearm crime itself in Australia.
But the most fascinating statistic about Australia you should always challenge your liberal friends on gun control with.
Kind of just throwing this in there.
Joe, do you know there are more firearms right now in Australia than there were before the gun control legislation?
No, I didn't know that.
So either way, you lose the argument.
So if your argument is what?
That gun control was so effective because we believe there's been some decrease in gun crime, which statistically you'll have a hard time proving, right?
But even if you believe that, the argument's null and void.
Because the simple comeback is, well, your point is what?
That the gun control controlled guns?
So there are now more guns in Australia than before the gun control, and you're saying that led to, what, a safer Australia?
So you're saying more guns equals less crime?
No, no, that's not what I'm saying!
Well, that's what the numbers say!
If your assertion is true... Joe, you see where I'm going with this, right?
Yeah.
Either way, they lose.
Sorry, I don't mean to get off on tangents, but, you know, I love Liberals are immune to facts, so I love sprinkling this show with facts you can use to debunk your liberal friends in spirited debates.
Gun control.
The author says in the piece The Washington Examiner, there have been two mass shootings carried out in the United States that has energized Democrats to call for stricter gun control.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is already talking about, if they get under Democrat control, to seek it to make it more difficult for people to purchase a gun, as if it's not more difficult now.
Folks, if you live in Joe's state of Maryland, it is nearly impossible to get a carry permit.
What do they call it?
Concealed carry.
Yeah, concealed carry.
Yeah, usually it's like a CCW, concealed carry weapons permit, but they call it a CQ something.
Gosh, I forget.
I'm sorry.
I left Maryland.
I used to have this off the top tip of my tongue, but I've been out of Maryland so long.
And it's so hard to get.
I've never even given any thought to getting one.
No, you've never even given it a thought.
Matter of fact, it's not even worth it.
I had to go through The HR 218 uses my former Secret Service background to carry a firearm in the state of Maryland.
They want to make it even more difficult, more difficult federally.
Folks, this is real.
These are election consequences.
These consequences are real.
They're going to smack you right in the face if we lose the House.
Number three, Trump's tax returns.
Enough already on the darn tax returns.
I told you the new rules.
We don't care about the tax returns.
I don't care.
If the IRS has something, do your thing, man.
I don't care about the Trump tax returns, but they will use their subpoena power to get their mitts on Trump's tax returns to make this a big issue.
Is this what we want to hear about for two years, ladies and gentlemen?
You know whose tax returns I care about?
Mine, Joe Armacost, CRTV, and the places I work.
Those are the only tax returns I care about.
And you know what I care about those tax returns?
That they show a darn profit.
That's all I care about.
I do not care about Trump's tax returns, not even a little bit.
Sorry, had to turn the fan a little bit, folks.
A little hot.
I worked out this morning.
I never work out before the show, so I'm like melting right now.
Number four, internet regulation.
Ladies and gentlemen, I've warned you about this over and over.
I've begged you.
I said, please, conservatives and Republicans out there, please, please, please do not fall into this trap with this internet regulation.
I get it.
Facebook sucks.
Twitter sucks.
Twitter won't even take down Louis Farrakhan's account.
Louis Farrakhan, of all people, they won't take his account down.
I get it.
I understand.
I totally understand that these places are liberal and biased against conservatives.
We all know that, okay?
Point stipulated.
But I have warned you repeatedly that the Democrats are master tacticians when it comes to this stuff.
They are strategically maneuvering themselves to get conservatives on their side, to introduce government regulation into these entities, to use it later to hammer us even worse.
My point here, folks, is right now, at least you have some free market options.
There are some places talking that who's Some Facebook pages who've been removed from Facebook, where the business entities involved, Joe, are talking about lawsuits against them.
At least you have options now.
Once the government gets involved and gives Facebook and Twitter legal cover to define hate speech, Joe, let me ask you this question.
Do you think they're going to define hate speech as conservative or liberal?
Well, most likely conservative, Dan.
You would be right, Joe!
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
So number four, if the Democrats take back that, the Democrats, this is why I'm begging you, I'm warning you to be really smart.
Please, please, please be slick here.
The Democrats are using you.
Do not call for government regulation of these entities.
It is a huge mistake.
You know, listen, I don't do the Sun Tzu stuff because it's cliched.
I don't care about it.
But people, you'll hear them say it a lot, you know, the Sun Tzu art of war stuff.
Here's the Dan Bongino art of war.
When you're doing what your ideological opponents want you to do, you're probably doing the wrong thing.
Am I right or am I right?
This is what the Democrats want.
They want you to call for internet regulation.
The author of the piece has a nice way of describing this.
She says, but the push for regulations will likely make, talking about internet regulations, will likely make a comeback under Democrats, particularly in the area of the internet.
Ever since the U.S.
intelligence community said Russians were able to influence the 2016 presidential election, you're seeing a connection here, through social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter, Democrats have been looking for ways to impose and tighten regulations on those sites.
It goes on.
Ideas for regulations show run the gamut from requiring sites to label bot accounts.
Here we go.
To making platforms legally liable for claims like defamation and invasion of privacy.
Why do you think the Democrats want this?
Because it's going to help the Republican cause?
No!
Conservative websites are going to be labeled by groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and others as hate groups.
They're going to be immediately kicked out.
By the way, they're not.
A lot of them that the SPLC targets, like the Family Research Council, are not hate groups at all.
It's just a disparaging, nonsensical thing.
The SPLC was just sued massively.
They will be kicked off these platforms and they will have the law on their side.
There will be no escape.
Do not fall for this trap, folks.
Please.
I get it.
These sites suck.
There will be... None of these companies last forever.
There will be an alternative.
There will.
We just have to give it time.
Do not let the government get the camel's nose under the tent here.
Please.
Number five, what we'll be looking at if the Democrats win the House.
Taxes.
I told you yesterday at the end of the show what the strategy is going to be to raise taxes.
The Democrats are going to blame it on the debt ceiling to try to frame it as a debt argument.
Joe, the debt's going up.
We have to do something.
We got to do something.
The debt's going up.
We need to get... Yeah, there you go, Saul.
It's not gonna happen.
This is... This has nothing to... The debt has nothing to do... The tax argument is a separate argument.
Income taxes... I don't want to repeat yesterday's show, but income tax rates have gone down and income tax revenue is at record highs.
They are separate arguments.
The debt issue is a spending issue.
The Democrats are going to confuse the American public by using the upcoming debt limit, as I covered yesterday, to lobby for hike taxes on the income tax side and on the corporate tax side.
Folks, the corporate tax side is a ground ball for them.
You know why?
The Democrats don't understand basic economics, and when they do, they lie about it.
People hear corporate taxes and they think, oh, it's just a business thing.
It's not going to affect me.
No, it is big time.
People work for corporations.
People work for businesses.
These businesses can consume the money invested or spend it or pay it in taxes.
They can consume it by investing in internal improvements in the business, leading to more productivity, leading to higher wages.
They can invest it in other companies.
That's what a lot of businesses do when they don't have enough growth opportunities within their own structure.
They'll invest it in other businesses.
Or they can spend it on dividends, giving it back to you, stockholders and pension funds.
It is important.
It requires a little bit of a deeper understanding of basic cash flows and economics.
But don't be dopey like the libs.
It's just the businesses, man.
Screw the businesses.
They can pay higher taxes.
They can afford it.
It's you paying.
Businesses don't pay taxes.
They charge their customers and their employees.
And what do they do?
Well, they pay their employees less.
They just pass the money on to the government.
It's as simple as that.
They're tax collectors.
That's it.
You're paying these taxes.
Don't fall for this dopey debate.
That's why I always said that when the Sturge shows up, they're a Bongino show.
We're not immune to facts.
We have to give you the tough information here.
We don't give you quickie, you know, cutesy little soundbites.
Ah, screw those businesses.
They're the worst.
You're screwing yourself.
Yourself.
You're the one getting screwed, folks.
This isn't a joke.
Where do you think this money goes?
These bets all being paid to the CEOs.
It is.
They're all getting the money.
No one else gets the money.
So Apple, that's worth, I'm not even a fan of Apple by the way.
I like their products, but I don't like their politics or their corporate culture in many respects.
But we have a lot of Apple listeners.
I know a lot of hard people and good folks at work.
They have, you know, you know what I mean, Joe, but thank you.
Thank you very much.
You guys are all great.
We appreciate it.
But I'm just saying these companies are not paying their, their billions of dollars in profits all to the CEO.
CEOs worth what the market dictates their worth.
Don't be a sucker for this tax argument.
Alright, six.
Drug prices.
The Democrats are introducing a bill over the summer, or introduced a bill over the summer, would allow for Medicare to negotiate its prices directly with pharmaceutical companies.
Ladies and gentlemen, this could be a big problem.
The problem is, these, listen, I don't want to, I'm not running for office, I'm not getting any lobby money from anybody, they don't sponsor my show.
I'm just telling you that the pharmaceutical business is screwed up, but it's screwed up on multiple fronts.
You have middlemen, you have Medicare reimbursement rates having to be offset, you have research costs.
This is a market problem.
It's not a problem that's going to be solved by increasing the heavy hand of the government.
I'll have to go into that.
That's a whole show.
Drug prices, pharmaceutical benefit managers, and third-party payer systems, and Canadian pharmaceuticals, and how research costs aren't being offset, and patents.
It's a long topic.
Just know this.
The Democrat solution is an absurd one that's going to introduce more government and create potential shortages in the medications you need to stay alive.
Number seven, immigration and border security.
The Democrats are already hinting that if they win in this election, they're going to seek to loosen immigration laws.
They're going to seek to expand things like DACA and DAPA.
Folks, this is bad.
This is, you know, the Democrats listen to me on immigration.
This is not about immigrants.
This is not about compassion.
This is not about, you know, people are just coming here for jobs.
This has nothing to do with that.
To the Democrat, to the hard Democrat on the left, this is about one thing and one thing only.
The Democrats are in a world of trouble with working class voters.
Working class voters everywhere.
Black, Hispanic, white.
It's not just white working class voters.
The Democrats are in trouble.
You can see it in districts like the 23rd district of Texas, where I just read a poll that Will Hurd, who's in a largely Hispanic district, Joe, he's a Republican.
It's something like eight to 10 points ahead of his Democrat opponent.
You know why, Joe?
According to the Democrats, What do they say?
They talk about Hispanic voters like they're like robots.
My wife's a Hispanic voter.
She doesn't listen to you guys.
These are socially conservative, largely folks who work for a living.
They're interested in the same things you and I are.
They don't have Hispanic issues.
They have issues like everyone else does.
But the Democrats treat them like automatons.
I don't know Herd.
Again, I don't communicate with anybody's campaign on that kind of stuff.
You know, congressional campaigns like that, but Hurd's people apparently are putting together quite a good campaign.
He seems like he's doing quite well down there.
Why?
Because people don't vote like Hispanic voters.
They vote like people with issues like moms and dads and employees.
This immigration issue the Democrats think they have a winner on in open borders is strictly about them hemorrhaging.
Joe, hemorrhaging votes amongst working class voters.
They are bleeding support like you would not believe.
What does that have to do with immigration?
They need the next generation of people to come into the country, legally or illegally, and they want, I mean you've seen it, you've seen candidates talking about the candidate for governor in Georgia, Abrams, talking about undocumented people voting.
They need to replace the loss of working class voters and they see immigration as demographic destiny to them.
You will see a significant loosening of border security and immigration if we lose.
All right, so that article is a good one, folks.
It is in the show notes today.
The Washington Examiner, I strongly encourage you to look at it and check it out.
It's important.
Okay I want to give you a quick election update then I want to get to an economic argument.
Election update on some candidates here because this is important and I want to play a positive role in this election.
I want to contribute to the effort here like I said yesterday I get offended or sorry earlier in the week and I was talking about Ben Sasse.
I get deeply offended about people like Ben Sasse who spend most of their time taking shots at Sean Hannity and Trump while you know Us, Joe.
We're the ones who are the team players.
I've acknowledged multiple times, Joe, haven't we not, that some of these Republican candidates, you know, we pull the lever for are not necessarily the greatest conservatives in the world, but I understand tactically the bigger fight is we need these people in office because they're better than the alternative.
The world is not full of good and bad choices.
The world, sadly, is full of bad and worse choices sometimes.
You know, I told you in Maryland, Joe's got an important gubernatorial race.
Larry Hogan, you know, is he a diehard conservative?
No, he's not.
He's not, but everybody gets it.
You know, you have to vote for Hogan.
So I want to contribute to the cause here a little bit and highlight a couple of races and some things that are going on I found interesting.
Joe Donnelly.
Democrat Senator in Indiana just put out one of the worst political ads I have ever seen.
Joe, this... The ad appears to be taken almost directly from an HBO comedy show.
The ad, yeah, it's him splitting wood.
And the splitting of the wood is, you know, he's a Democrat in a red state, Indiana, Joe Donnelly, right?
Running for Senate, running for re-election.
So the analogy is like, you know, splitting wood, that he can go both ways.
Like he can vote Republican or Democrat, like, I don't know, like King Solomon, whatever, split into baby or whatever it is.
It's a horrible, stupid analogy, but that's not that the commercial was even, looks like it was lifted from an HBO series that's hysterical.
What's funny about it, Joe, is what's the one thing?
It's not a trick question, Joe.
I'll just put it out there and see if you agree with me on it.
What's the one thing you think people hate more than anything about politics?
I mean, would you venture to say it's inauthenticity, like phoniness?
That's one way to put it.
They hate it!
I mean, right?
It explains the Trump phenomenon.
Folks, I consider myself quite a student of politics.
I ran, I love it, I enjoy it.
I've said this a couple of times on the show, the most damaging political narratives out there that hurt candidates are not necessarily the ones you think.
They're the narratives that change a pre-existing interpretation of who that candidate was.
Oh.
Those are the damaging narratives.
And it explains why when people go, oh my gosh, how come this didn't hurt Trump?
And how come that didn't hurt Trump?
And how come this didn't hurt Trump?
Because people knew Trump was a brawler.
People knew his history.
There was no pre-existing change, a narrative that was changed by the Democrats' relentless assault.
None.
Yet, when you run as something, you know, like, hey, I'm an authentic, like, lumberjack in Indiana, whatever, I'm an outdoorsman, I'm splitting wood, and then in the ad, Joe, it looks like there's a seam in the wood already, so you're not splitting it!
Is this the greatest story ever?
People are like, the pre-existing narrative that this guy wants you to believe is that he's this like outdoorsy Indiana guy, wood splitter.
Yeah, Joe, you got like the Paul Bunyan shirt on today.
Joe has the red Paul, I mean, we could not have planned this better.
I swear to you folks, you know, one of the things about my books people like is you feel like you're in the moment, like I use very good modifiers and descriptors, Joe has the red Paul Bunyan flannel with the white and black cross lines going through it now.
Joe even looks like Paul Bunyan.
If he had the wool cap on.
I'm watching to meet my blue ox, Hillary.
The blue ox!
He needs the blue ox!
What was the blue ox's name?
I call her Hillary.
That's a terrible idea.
Oh no it's not!
That's a terrible idea.
I disavow all knowledge of that, but leave it in anyway.
I don't even remember the blue ox's name.
Oh, I don't either.
But Joe looks like Paul, but he needs the bull cap and a big lumberjack axe.
So Donnelly, in the thing, is splitting the axe and splitting the wood, and the wood appears to already have a seam in it.
Like he couldn't even split the wood now.
Folks, I have filmed political ads.
A lot of them.
Like, I don't know, 20 of them?
I get it.
There's a little bit of acting in there, but here's my problem with this whole thing.
You can't even split one piece of wood, Joe!
The guy probably could have taken...
20 or 30 takes to split the wood.
It's not hard to split a piece of wood, folks.
I'm sorry.
If you look at the commercial, right?
Just put Joe Donnelly splits the wood, right?
You'll see it.
You'll look at the wood.
It looks like the seam is already in there.
The dude couldn't even split a piece of wood.
People hate inauthenticity and phoniness.
Is it going to crush the guy's election chances?
I hope so.
I want the Republican Mike Braun up there to win, and he's a little bit behind.
So, Indiana, get out and vote, please.
But it's not going to help that he comes off entirely inauthentic, Indiana.
Like, I can go either way.
I support Trump.
Get out of here.
You're a die-hard, dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, Donald.
So, Indiana, get out and vote.
Another quick update.
Andrew Gillum, running for governor of Florida.
Floridians, get out there and vote.
This is a quick one, but a major, major breakthrough in this gubernatorial race.
The next governor, whether it's socialist Andrew Gillum, who is a socialist, or Ron DeSantis, Iraq war veteran, real patriot, good man.
Again, disclosure, I have appeared at some campaign events for Ron.
I don't want to be disingenuous claiming, you know, authenticity does matter.
I do know, Ron, we don't communicate that regularly, and I did just write an op-ed for his team, though, about it.
Gillum is associated with a group that attacks on police, but I want you all to understand, you know, I'm not going to be phony like them.
But in the race, it was just determined, Joe, that the next governor is going to pick three, three Florida Supreme Court justices.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is going to live with you forever if we lose this election.
Florida, you must, must, must get out there and vote.
That's huge.
That's enormous, enormous.
So, three Supreme Court justices in Florida.
That could be a dent in your firearm rights, school choice, everything.
Gillum is a far-left socialist.
I promise you, he will pick radical leftists, no doubt about it, and in this swing state of Florida, we will be punished forever for it.
So please, Florida, get out and vote.
All right, I've got two more quick updates, but I'm sorry, I've got to pay for the show.
I always appreciate your patience, so just hang with us.
Our sponsors want to be here, they want to talk to you, so I always thank you for your patience with the show.
Hey, have you tried Beachbody On Demand?
My favorite program is Core to Force.
Core to Force on Beachbody On Demand will rip up those abs like you've never seen before.
I use it because I like mixed martial arts, and a strong core is important.
You've heard me talk about Beachbody On Demand for a while now, but have you gotten your free trial yet?
My wife loves it too.
Loves, loves, loves.
My wife is ripped if you see her, and you can thank Beachbody On Demand for it.
So we, like I said, I like the Core2Force.
She was a big fan back in the day of P90X, Insanity.
She loved it.
They have a history of success.
They have the 21 Day Fix.
Like I said, P90X, T25, Pyo, Hip Hop Abs, 3 Week Yoga Retreat, and more.
They have world-class trainers get motivated by celebrity super trainers you know, like Sean T, Shailene Johnson, Tony Horton, and Autumn Calabrese.
They have the best programs out there.
These things are terrific.
Over 700 workouts for all fitness levels, ranging from bodybuilding, to weight training, to cardio high-intensity training, to yoga and even dance workouts.
You can't go wrong with Beachbody On Demand.
They'll give you nutrition help.
Success just doesn't happen on the beach.
As someone told me in the gym once, Joe, the real battle's with the knife and fork.
But don't worry!
Beachbody and Demand's got you covered.
They have tools to make eating right easier, dozens of easy-to-follow meal plans, and hundreds of delicious recipes.
You can work out on your own schedule.
They have workouts as short as 10 minutes, folks, that don't require extra equipment.
Time it takes you to drive to the gym and park, you can already be done.
They can cater it to you and your lifestyle.
Access it anywhere, anytime.
View it on your computer, your web-enabled TV, your tablet, smartphone, Roku, Apple TV, Chromecast, and more.
It's the best deal in fitness, and my listeners can try Beachbody On Demand right now.
Absolutely, positively free.
Absolutely free.
What are you waiting for?
Join the over 1 million people currently on Beachbody in demand.
Folks, this is legit.
I'm not messing with you.
These are really, really good programs.
I'm not kidding.
I know sometimes I can be dramatic, but this thing will slice and dice you up.
You'll never look better.
Right now, my listeners get a special free trial membership when you text, text Dan B, my first name, last initial, Dan B, to 303030.
Text DANB to 303030.
Text DANB to 303030.
You will get full access to this entire platform for free.
Workouts, nutrition, information, support.
Just text DANB to 303030.
You won't regret it.
The blue ox, babe.
Babe, yes!
Thank you, thank you.
How did I not know that?
Me, I forgot all about it.
So, the resident show researcher, ombudsman, producer, executive producer, soundboard operator, and hopefully soon-to-be calls if we add some content.
I'm open one day to get some calls in and maybe take some calls from you guys.
That would be a lot of fun.
Even if we do a separate segment, I'd love to hear what you all have to say.
Okay, so here we go.
More on the campaign updates quick.
I don't want to let this story go because it's really important.
A guy who's not a huge fan of me, but he writes some good stuff over at Washington Examiner.
Beckett Adams has a piece up about Martha McSally and PolitiFact.
You know what, it's sublinked in another one, so I'll talk about another piece.
Not to hit and knock on Beckett Adams, but this one.
It's sublinked in a different piece, and I want to cover both stories is what I'm getting at.
Oh yeah, this one's by Beckett Adams too.
So PolitiFact.
PolitiFact, which is PolitiFarce.
PolitiFact is a joke.
It's a scam site.
It's meant to be a fact-checker.
It's a scam.
It's a big scam.
It's not a fact-checker.
It's a radical, far-left, phony fact-checking site that will do anything in its power to make Republicans look bad while covering for the Democrats.
It's a scam.
Once in a while, they'll nail a Democrat to look like bipartisan Joe.
PolitiFact is a big scam.
Scam-a-rama.
Okay?
Now, on these local races, this story's hysterical.
So Claire McCaskill, far-left radical Democrat running in Missouri, Missouri.
So we talked about Indiana, we talked about Florida, Missouri, you're up.
How Claire McCaskill continues to get elected in a state that loves God, loves its firearms, loves its money, loves its businesses, and loves its liberty is absolutely beyond me.
Claire McCaskill has absolutely zero interest in any bipartisan outreach.
She is a radical leftist.
Not only is she a radical leftist, she is completely 100% out of touch with reality.
How does this apply to PolitiFact and why are we talking about this now?
Well, she's at some kind of campaign event and some guy asks her a question.
About private jets.
Let me give you the exact quote, to be fair.
It comes from an August 2017 town hall meeting in Missouri.
A constituent asked of the senator, and I quote, You know, that's one thing the United States has that nobody else has, is the freedom to fly around and be affordable where a normal person can afford it.
What are they talking about?
Folks, you remember Eric Claire?
Claire McCaskill told everyone, oh yeah, we're doing this whistle stop tour, bus tour, whatever, around the state.
We're going to be on this RV and we're going to run around the state.
What did I tell you, ladies and gentlemen?
Authenticity, right?
That's how we started this segment.
When I say I knocked on 7,000 doors personally in my campaign, I mean it.
I have the spreadsheets.
I remember a lot of the people I knocked on the doors.
Claire's like, hey, I'm going to drive around the state in an RV.
We're going to shake hands.
I'm going to be one with the voters of Missouri.
Well, what happened, Joe?
They found out she was actually flying around the state in a private plane?
Erroneous!
Again!
Erroneous!
Flying around the state in a private plane, where this RV would pick her up in a private plane.
Joe, what would they do?
They'd probably drive a mile to a house.
Knock on the door.
Hey, look, we just pulled up in the RV.
Hey, it's Claire McCaskill.
She's driving around.
They jump back on the private plane, go back to D.C.
or go to a different stop.
What a joke.
Totally inauthentic.
So the joke about her became Air Claire.
How she flies around in this private plane.
That's the genesis of this question by the constituent.
The constituent saying, hey, you know, they shouldn't be knocking you about this private plane, you know, quote, a normal person can afford it.
Now, instead of her coming back and being at least somewhat realistic and going, well, I appreciate the sentiment, sir, but private flight, you know, maybe it was a mistake on our part.
This is how I would handle it.
It may have been a mistake on our part to say we were driving around the state.
It was logistically more feasible.
We had the money.
We wanted to reach as many voters as possible, so we took some private flights, but it's my fault.
We shouldn't have insinuated.
People are very forgiving.
They would have said, all right, stupid move, but it's an authentic answer.
No, that's not what she said.
McCaskill responded, and I'm quoting.
Will you remind them when they come after me about my husband's plane that normal people can afford it?
So the GOP jumped all over this, good for them, saying normal people can afford private planes?
Folks, listen, we have had a good year.
Joe knows it.
Joe and I, thanks to you, by the way, exclusively.
We've had a good year.
Not a great year, but a good year.
I'm not, you know, I don't have Trump-type money, nowhere even close to it.
But we've had a decent year.
I'm telling you, there's nothing I would like more than to fly private.
We can't, because I can't afford it.
So don't tell me normal people can afford it.
I grew up my entire life, quote, normal.
I've had my first good year and I still can't afford it.
I begged my wife, hopefully one day we will.
Maybe the year after, maybe, but not now.
So, Air Claire in the state of Missouri, which has a lot of successful people, a lot of middle class, a lot of people who are struggling, running around the state in a private plane and insisting to people that normal people can afford it is not a sales pitch, folks.
She's embarrassing herself.
Now, the GOP runs this ad and PolitiFact, unbelievably, published that Air Claire was saying that private planes are affordable for normal people.
PolitiFact said, it's false.
This is false.
She didn't say that.
She said, I just read you the quote.
Like, well, she may not have been talking about private plane flight.
That's exactly what she was talking about.
She answered the question the way the guy asked it.
What are you talking about, PolitiFact?
Now they've been forced, of course, to re-evaluate.
Re-evaluated in light of new information.
Ladies and gentlemen, the two takeaways.
Missouri, get out and vote.
McCaskill's a fraud.
She is not one of you.
She's not down-to-earth, Claire.
She's private plane.
Great.
Good for you.
I'm a capitalist.
Just don't lie about it.
She's air, Claire.
She's totally out of touch.
She's a radical far leftist.
A hundred thousand percent.
Get her out.
Vote Josh Hawley.
Please.
PolitiFact is a joke.
They labeled it as false.
Oh no, she wasn't talking about private plays.
She answered that way!
So now they're re-evaluating it.
Forget PolitiFact.
PolitiFact story number two.
Martha McSally.
Republican candidate in Arizona.
Running against Kirsten Sinema.
Radical, radical far leftist.
Kirsten Sinema.
I mean, Kirsten Sinema's radical if she was running in New York.
But she's running in Arizona.
Radical far leftist.
Radical, radical far leftists.
So Martha McSally at one point...
McSally puts out this statement, Joe, saying, hey, while I was over there fighting in Iraq and the troops were fighting over in Iraq, Kyrsten Sinema was disparaging our troops in a rally in a pink tutu.
PolitiFact is like, well, that's not really true.
No, it's true.
There are actual videotapes of Kyrsten Sinema, supposed moderate Democrat, in reality, radical leftist, in a pink tutu at an anti-war rally.
It's ridiculous!
She's at this rally in a pink tutu.
There's video of it.
You have to see the flyers they handed out at this rally.
PolitiFact's like, well, she wasn't exactly disparaging the troops.
She was at a rally where they handed out these flyers with the troops depicted as skeletons going after the, you know, going after innocent civilians.
I think disparaging is an accurate word.
So again, two takeaways.
We have to get into some election stuff.
It's critical.
We're just a couple weeks out.
Cinema.
Radical leftists.
Claire McCaskill.
Radical leftists.
Vote Hawley.
Get out there and support Martha McSally.
Please.
We will be dealing with those seven things I just told you about forever.
And by the way, one other takeaway again.
Completely, 100%, disregard PolitiFact.
It's a joke site.
It's a scam.
They're not fact-checkers, folks.
It's a liberal propaganda site.
These fact-checkers are nonsense.
All right.
Let's see.
I got a couple more things to get through.
Oh, this is an important one.
All right, before I get, let's get this out of the way again.
I sincerely appreciate your patience.
Today's show finally brought to you by our friends at We The People Holsters.
Folks, We The People Holsters, one of the best holster companies out there.
They sent me a sample of the product a long time ago.
I loved it so much.
I insisted we take them on as a sponsor because good holsters are hard to find.
And when you get a good one, as most of you firearm owners know, you'd keep it forever.
I mean, I've had my, uh, My Galco Pancake and my We The People.
The We The People for about a year and a half now.
I had the Galco for like 20 years, but We The People is one of the best holsters I have ever used, ever.
I love it.
The adjustable can, the adjustable ride, and they make their custom-made holsters right here in the USA.
They design their holsters in-house.
They don't use third-party molds.
They build them right there in Las Vegas in the United States.
They cut each mold to fit each firearm perfectly.
They update their models all the time.
They update their designs.
They have the Constitution, the thin blue line.
They have the camo one.
They are really unbelievably comfortable.
You will not be disappointed.
And the price is absolutely outstanding.
They update designs all the time.
Yeah, you can adjust the cant.
You can adjust the ride for maximum comfort.
You know with those in the pants holsters, folks, sometimes with your hip bones, those of you who carry, you know exactly what I'm talking about.
Be a little uncomfortable.
Not with me, the people.
You can adjust the cant.
You can adjust the ride.
You can also adjust the tension on the holster, which is great.
You like it a little more snug in there?
You want to hear that click?
You can tighten it up a little bit.
You like a little less tension on it?
You can, just one screw, you loosen it up a little bit.
These things are terrific.
Each holster has that click sound.
In case you need that security, you know it's in there.
Their holsters start at just $34.
Every holster comes with a lifetime guarantee.
These are the best in the market.
I'm telling you, I've owned quite a few holsters.
I can tell you a hundred brands I've had.
This one is the best.
The best.
Every holster ships free.
If it's not a perfect fit, send it back.
You won't need it.
Here's the website.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan.
That's WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan.
Listeners of the Dan Bongino Show can use code Dan, promo code Dan, get $10 off.
It'll only be $24 with free shipping.
Go check it out.
WeThePeopleHolsters.
Don't miss this opportunity.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan.
Okay.
An economic article, because this is going to be important in the upcoming elections, ladies and gentlemen.
I have an article in yesterday's show notes from CNBC.
The United States is back to being the number one most competitive economy in the world.
This is a major, major thing.
This is not small yet.
Joe's giving me the hip hip hooray side.
This is, this is a huge, huge thing.
We are back to being number one.
Now, a lot of that is due, if you read this, you know, it's CNBC, but it's in yesterday's show notes.
A lot of that is due to the corporate business tax cuts.
I told you before that the Democrats are legitimately disparaging.
I don't mean legitimately their ideas are legitimate, I mean that they are disparaging them.
It's kind of a take on the PolitiFact thing we were just talking about, about disparaging the troops.
They are tearing apart these corporate tax cuts, insisting that there's some kind of a sop to big business, which it's not.
Businesses don't pay taxes, they are tax collectors for the government.
But there's an interesting snippet in there, Joe.
And you know, I like taking these articles and running with my own analysis on them.
It says, okay, great.
You know, we're back to this.
We still have some issues.
We still have a massive national debt and growing deficits.
These are real problems we should not ignore.
We have an entitlement crisis.
There's no doubt about that.
We get all that and we have to acknowledge that.
But they said that the next generation of economic growth, at the end of the piece, kind of just slipped in there at the end, is going to, the obstacle is going to be who wins the fourth industrial revolution.
And it was fascinating because I had, one of my favorite podcasts is Econ Talk.
It's really, really well done.
It's a once a week show.
It's different than the show.
It's like a long-form interview.
And if you're into economics, it's your thing.
If you're not, you'd probably be bored by it.
But the host is terrific.
He's more of a libertarian type.
But I was listening to one of his podcasts this week.
I thought of this fourth industrial revolution.
He had one about artificial intelligence with a really brilliant guy and they had a great analysis.
So the fourth industrial, I should have said that first, the fourth industrial revolution the piece is referring to, I believe in the CNBC piece, this doesn't get too detailed, is really going to be the advent and the use of artificial intelligence and technological advances incorporated into everything from supply chains to medicine.
Now, I think they're right.
And the reason I bring this up, ladies and gentlemen, is if we can, again, just get some semblance of control over our spending, and we have a significant breakthrough in the next 10 to 20 years on things like AI, you know, new material sciences, 3D printing and things like that, we could potentially double or triple the value in our economy.
And if we could just get a hold of the spending now, the debt we have, which now looks insurmountable, wouldn't look so bad if we could double or triple our economy.
Now, that's a big ask, obviously.
You know, we'd have to grow at 7% for 10 years to double our economy, right?
That's double the rate we're growing now, which is a lot.
I don't want to be naive here and pretend like this is going to be easy.
I'm simply suggesting to you, ladies and gentlemen, that use an analogy from your own home finances.
If you make $100,000 a year and you're like the United States that owes 100% of its economy, we owe about $20 trillion.
That doesn't even count a lot of the off-the-book stuff.
If you owed $100,000 and you made $100,000, you'd be in a catastrophically bad debt situation, would you not, Joe?
Yes, you would.
You would.
Now, Joe, if I told you you were getting a raise to $500,000 or $600,000, that debt all of a sudden looks manageable, doesn't it?
A little bit better, yeah.
What I'm telling you is we're not going to be able to do this with spending cuts.
Trump has just proposed, which is a good idea, 5% cuts in discretionary spending.
5%.
You may say, oh wow, that's a big cut.
It is, and I applaud him for doing it, but it's not a huge cut.
It's $33 billion.
The deficit this year, Joe, is $779 billion.
We're not even close.
Even cutting 5%.
My point in this, folks, is If we can crack that fourth industrial revolution and win the AI game, the material sciences game, the supply chain game, the internet, the communications game, the health sciences game, if we can do this with technological advancements, we may be able to grow out of this if we can get a lid on the spending now.
It's now a race in time.
What comes first?
The technological breakthroughs into this fourth industrial revolution or bankruptcy from debt.
That's the only, what comes, one of those things is going to happen first.
It's either going to be we're all in, we're all in on debt or we're all in on technological advancement and growth.
Now I bring this up because, turning back to the podcast, I don't want to oversell AI.
The guy who was an expert on the show, this is all he does is artificial intelligence.
He said this great, great thing.
I loved it.
I wanted to get it across to you in case you don't have time to listen to the show, right?
His show, that is.
He says, about artificial intelligence, Joe, we always overestimate its effect in the short run, but underestimate its effect in the long run.
He's talking largely about technology.
It was a brilliant analysis.
Here's what he means by that.
When things like the personal computer came out, right?
In the beginning.
I mean, when you talk, think about the Commodore 64, right?
Back in the eighties, people had this, they overestimate the effect.
Oh my gosh, computers are going to put everybody out of work, Joe.
It's going to be Hal from a 2000 Space Odyssey.
Hal, which Hal I always heard was like, uh, they use the letters after IBM.
Cause IBM, I don't know if that's true or not, but, Remember, everybody overestimates the effect of the technology.
You know, when we first saw robotics, that was it.
What came out in 1984?
Terminator.
The robots are gonna kill us, Joe!
They're gonna come and look like Arnold Schwarzenegger.
I'll be back.
They're coming like Schwarzenegger, right?
It was a great point.
How we always overestimate.
And he was making the analogy to AI now.
Again, back to the piece, whoever wins this race to the fourth industrial revolution is going to be the economic winner for generations to come, right?
But don't overestimate in the short run AI.
And the guy makes a great point, like you hear it now.
AI.
Oh my gosh, Joe.
Artificial intelligence.
The robots are going to figure out a way to kill us.
They're going to develop artificial intelligence.
The machines are going to turn on us and burn the factories down.
It's going to be an extermination on a mass scale!
The guy in the Econ Talk episode who's an expert in AI, Joe, this is all he did.
It's a great episode.
He's like, listen, I mean, for the sake of brevity, let me just summarize it like this.
Chill!
He's like, chill, folks.
Chill out.
AI is not coming to kill you.
We haven't even figured out like basic things about it yet.
Don't overestimate it.
Don't overestimate it.
It's not going to put every human being on earth to death or out of work.
It's not going to solve every problem.
They haven't even figured out basic problems yet, AI.
Again, he's the expert.
I don't pretend to be.
I've done very, very basic reading on it, but it's a fascinating episode.
Secondly, so you see the point where we overestimate it in the short run.
It's going to kill us all.
Put us all out of work.
The robots are gonna think for us.
But he said in the long run, we tend to underestimate it.
Now you say, well, how do those two things can't possibly coexist?
No, they do!
And he says, I can prove it to you.
He's like, think back to the seventies.
If you would have shown someone in the 1970s, they had no capacity to think into the future.
They can guess what the future was going to be like.
There is not one movie from the 1970s which shows the future.
This is a great point where there's a device like an iPhone, not one.
There's like phasers, there's lasers, there's Star Trek stun devices, stuff that doesn't exist, but the things that actually exist, the iPhone, nobody saw it coming.
Nobody!
This was a brilliant, brilliant analysis.
In the long run, we underestimate the impact.
Nobody in the 70s had any idea that a Walkman Email device, high-end multi-pixel camera, video camera, heart monitor, jogging monitor for your EKG, would all be contained.
I mean, gosh folks, there's more.
Word processors, you know.
All of this stuff was put out of business by the smartphone.
Samsung too, give them a shout out there, right?
All these companies.
And nobody saw it coming!
Nobody!
So we overestimate in the short run.
They're all gonna kill us, but in the long run we never ever incorporate the technological advancements.
Nobody saw it coming.
Look at the movies from the 50s, the 60s, the 70s, and even the 80s.
You'll see all of this.
Uber.
We have a perfect example and I'll end it because this was such a fascinating episode, like it just blew my mind what a deep analysis it was.
In the movie Total Recall with Arnold Schwarzenegger, right?
You have Johnny Cab, right?
The guy, the robot shows up driving the cab and it's a flying... But it's amazing that nobody in the 80s or 90s even saw Uber.
Like, there's never a movie where a guy picks up a smartphone and goes, hey, I'm just gonna call up a private driver on an Uber app.
Like, nobody thought of that.
Nobody saw that, but you saw Johnny Cab!
You saw Johnny Cab, right?
So it's a great point.
The point here, folks, too, is that research and development matter.
The corporate tax cuts matter.
It is bringing money and investment back into the United States.
We may be overestimating the impacts of AI now in that fourth industrial revolution, but the truth is, ladies and gentlemen, we have no idea in the long run how powerful it could be.
We may be underestimating the impacts in our daily lives.
What I mean is you have no idea in the future what it's going to do.
None.
We're all guessing.
Is it going to be a microchip implanted under your skin that's your cell phone?
You don't have to carry a cell phone anymore.
What is it going to do?
Is it going to program your food purchases when you walk in a supermarket and have a grocery cart follow you around and devices on the shelves that dump products?
I don't know.
I have no idea.
I'm just saying to you, if we can invest in our country, pour money into R&D and research and development, you may be overestimating it now, but you may be underestimating, we may be looking at an era of prosperity in the future, you have no ideas coming.
It was a fascinating episode.
And I think, I hope I did a semi-okay job in putting it together.
But the CNBC piece mentioned it at the end, that this fourth industrial revolution, and I want to tell you, you look back in the past, our ancestors would have had no ability whatsoever to envision the prosperity we're looking at now.
I mean, obesity is the biggest food problem.
We have so much darn food, but everybody's obese.
We're getting fat in the country.
Flat screen TV, smartphone technology, Uber-like devices, you have no idea.
That's why investment matters.
Now, I want to leave you on one final thing.
I had a couple other things, but this is, I'm really enjoying this episode, because sometimes, you know, the economics stuff, I've had to sideline it for Spygate and other things, but it's, for those of you who've been listening from day one, and still a lot of you, you know it's my passion.
Finance, economics, business, I love it.
It's just everything to me.
Why does the debt and deficit matter?
Why does it matter towards this investment in this fourth revolution and potentially AI and the long-term effects of our economy and prosperity?
I talked about this on the Mark Levin show while filling in on Monday and I got a lot of positive feedback so I want to end the show with this today.
The reason, ladies and gentlemen, that this argument going forward about the role of government in our lives and the investment needed to bring about that prosperous tomorrow I'm talking about, that we can't envision, we have no capability to do it, right?
We underestimate in the long term the effect of technology.
Government is the barrier there.
This is the great ideological divide of our time.
You have people on the left who believe the government solves problems, and you have people on the conservative side of the spectrum who understand, just reasonably using common sense and logic, that government is the problem.
Taxes are the problem.
Taking away and spending our money is the problem.
Here's why.
Ladies and gentlemen, the government is entirely incapable of spending your money using cost and quality metrics that would lead to any kind of positive investments in our lives over the long run.
They are not capable of it.
Here's how I know this.
Milton Friedman discussed in, what is it, Capitalism and Freedom, one of his books, The Four Ways to Spend Money.
Never ever forget this.
They range from the most, you've sure heard this like a thousand times, but for you new listeners, you may not have.
And I talked about it on Monday in Levin Show, and I got tons of email.
They range from the most efficient ways to spend money, using logic, to the least efficient way.
This is just plain logic.
This is why the left is wrong that the government's a positive force in our lives.
What's the most efficient way to spend money?
You earning money and spending it on yourself and your family.
Why?
Again, we're using simple reason.
Because when you earn money and you spend it on you or your family, The cost of what you're buying matters.
Why?
Because it's your money.
It's your money.
The cost matters.
You're spending your money.
You're not going to say, hey, uh, give me that flat screen.
Well, at what price?
It doesn't matter.
Whatever price you want.
The quality matters too because you're buying a product for yourself or someone in your family.
You're using it.
You don't want a crappy TV, a crappy sweater, garbage headphones.
You want effectively priced, good quality stuff.
That is the most efficient way to spend money.
Period.
Full stop.
That is the importance of economic liberty.
You putting money in your wallet for your family.
The money will be spent on efficiently costed and quality based products when people spend it on themselves and their families.
That's why tax cuts matter.
That is it.
Now, going down the continuum, making it more inefficient so you understand just how awful taxes and spending by the government are.
The second way to spend money is you spending money on other people.
Now you spending money on other people, your money on other people, the cost matters because you're still buying a product for someone else, but it's your money.
So if I'm buying headphones for Joe, the costs matter.
I'm still buying a gift for Joe.
But folks, candidly, the quality doesn't matter as much.
Not that you don't care about it, but it's a gift for Joe.
If they break in the long run, you know what, I gave him his gift.
It's kind of Joe's problem, not mine.
I mean, it sounds like a jerk, but it's just common sense that, you know, when people buy things for others, the cost matters, but the quality doesn't matter as much.
So it's a less efficient way to allocate capital to spend money.
What's the third way?
Other people spending other people's money on themselves.
So think about it, right?
If I'm on a work trip, and I'm spending my job's money on a hotel room, that's other people spending other people's money on themselves, then I want the nicest hotel room out there, right?
The job's paying for it, right Joe?
Makes sense?
So does the cost matter?
Nah, not so much.
Why, Joe?
It's not my money!
No offense, CRTV, we love you.
But you know how it is, you want the best room out there, the cost, CRTV's paying for it, right?
But does the quality of the product matter?
You're darn tootin' right it does!
Because it's your hotel room, you're staying in it.
So at least it's inefficient because nobody cares about the cost.
We get that.
Point stipulated, right?
It's inefficient but at least you care about the quality and you're still buying quality stuff which incentivizes people to produce quality.
The hotel's got to produce a good room.
But it's still inefficient because the cost doesn't matter.
What's the fourth way to spend money?
I know!
Joe's like, I know!
I know!
Other people!
What is it?
Other people spending other people's money on other people!
On other people!
Ding, ding, ding!
Joe's heard this like a hundred times.
We've been covering this since episode one, which has disappeared off SoundCloud.
You have no idea why.
The show actually starts with episode two.
If you go back 832 episodes.
Other people spending other people's money on other people!
Ladies and gentlemen, when the government takes other people's money and doesn't even spend it on themselves, they spend it on other people.
Social programs, what matters?
The cost?
No!
The cost, it's not your money!
It's taxpayer money, who cares?
Oh, this welfare program's gonna cost 20 trillion over 10 years.
Ah, great, it ain't our money, who gives a damn?
But here's where it gets even worse.
The quality doesn't even matter.
Because you're not even spending it on yourself.
You're like, listen, this welfare program is not going to work.
It's going to be horribly inefficient.
It's actually may lead to more poverty over time.
Ah, who cares about the quality of the product?
It ain't our money.
Who gives a damn?
The government would be better off buying Ferraris for itself.
At least they would be buying a quality product that would incentivize some competition amongst car makers.
But they're not.
They're not even spending it on themselves.
They're spending it on other people.
They don't give a damn.
Then neither the cost nor the quality, it's a double whammy!
Neither one matters!
This is the problem with government spending!
This is why logic, fact-based reasoning should dictate to you that we should keep as much money from the government as possible that we can legally do!
You want taxes as low as possible and spending as low as possible to incentivize people to care about the cost and quality of what they buy.
And the only way to do that is when people spend their money on themselves and their family.
It's the only way!
That's how we get to this fourth industrial revolution.
By incentivizing companies to produce things cheaply, effectively, and of high quality, and the only way to do it is to get it out of the government's darn pockets!
It's the only way!
That's how we get to this prosperous future.
Don't ever forget those four ways to spend money.
Ever.
You spend it on yourself?
The best.
You spend it on other people?
Cost matters, quality not so much.
Other people spending other people's money on themselves?
Quality matters, nobody cares about the cost.
Other people spending other people's money on other people?
Neither cost nor quality matter, it is the quickest path to bankruptcy.
Scam!
All right, folks, thanks for tuning in.
This is an economics and campaign-heavy show today, but, you know, we like to give you the full spectrum during the week.
I hope you leave the week a little smarter than we all started.
I know I do, doing a lot of research, so I appreciate it.
Thank you for subscribing to the show.
We're back, so we appreciate it.
The subscriptions are free on iTunes, SoundCloud, on iHeart.
This helps us a lot when you subscribe.
It is free.
Please do it.
And please, if you haven't, our book is still in the top 200 on Amazon, SpyGate.
The attempted sabotage of Donald J. Trump.
Please pick it up.
I really appreciate your support.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud.
