All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 3, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:37
August 3, 2015, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Okay, here we are back at it.
Rush Limbaugh, a man, a legend, a way of life.
Beginning our 28th year behind the golden EIB microphone here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Great to have you with us, folks.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882, the email address Lrushbow at EIBNet.com.
So anyway, now back to Dan Price.
I got these Trump calls out of.
I was shocked.
I was literally shocked.
Here I gave 20 minutes of brilliant, great, compassionate on-the-money analysis of Trump and the debate Thursday.
And here come a bunch of people.
Hey, you criticize Trump.
You criticize Trump.
Trump's going to do well.
I'm left.
What did I say?
You all were hearing me in there.
Did I criticize Trump at any event?
I mean, I was.
I mean, maybe it wasn't a compliment, but I kind of meant it that way.
I'm all for these formats being blown to smithereens.
I think all this becomes too controlled, and I think it all becomes the way these debates happen, there have been enough of them now.
We've seen them our whole lives.
You know what happens?
These are establishment-run affairs, and they are designed to end up with an establishment candidate.
And anything that blows that up is fine and dandy with me.
So we'll just have seen.
As I said before the uh right before the end of the previous hour, Trump is out there.
I I don't know who asked him, but he's he's being quoted as saying that uh he I don't think I'm gonna throw any punches on Thursday, whatever that means.
But time will tell.
I think it's pretty pretty uh safe bet that this debate is not gonna be like others that uh we have seen.
Now back to Dan Price.
Look, folks, this teachable moment.
This is a big, big, big teachable moment because one of the things, one of the many things, as we try to keep up with the left every day, they get on this tear that CEOs are making way too much money, and they're making so much more than their employees.
And it's not fair, and it isn't right, and it's it's it's hurting the company, it's not helping America and all of this other stuff.
So there's a guy in Seattle that runs a credit card processing company by the name of Gravity Payments.
His name is Dan Price, and he read somewhere that $70,000 a year is an ideal salary.
If you earn $70,000, you can have a nice car, you can rent uh a nice place to live, and have some disposable income left over.
And it's a it's a number where people feel happy.
Uh 70 grand a year if they're making that kind of money, they they think they're respected by their boss and so forth.
So he made the decision.
He's gonna pay everybody 70 grand.
Every one of his employees was going to make the exact amount of money, including him.
He was the CEO, and he was making over a million.
And he was gonna cut his salary down to 70 grand, just like everybody else.
He was applauded from numerous corners all over the country.
Yay, yay, this is great.
Finally, a sensitive CEO who knows it's unfair for him to make anything more than his employees who are the real ones that make it work.
See, that's the key.
The CEO to these people on the left, just a figurehead.
He doesn't really do anything.
In fact, the CEO probably didn't even know what's going on half the time.
It's the middle managers and the employees, they're the ones that really make a company work.
They're the ones that really make it.
They're the ones that ought to be making all the money.
So they applauded this move.
But there were some critics.
I was one leading the pack.
So acknowledged, by the way, by the New York Times, even.
And not in a snarky way.
The move drew attention from around the world, including from some outspoken skeptics and conservatives like the talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who smelled a socialist agenda.
But most people were enthusiastic.
Well, Mr. Price has admitted now that the whole thing blew up on him.
It's been an abject failure.
It has bombed out.
Two of his most valued employees quit.
In part because they thought it was profoundly unfair to pay entry-level people the same amount they were making.
New hires were making 70 grand just like people that had been there for life.
Just like people that had been there for years.
Didn't matter how long you'd worked there, didn't matter how hard you worked, did not matter what your contribution to the company was, you made 70 grand a year.
Let's go to the audio sum.
I just want to just to refresh and remember what I said about it back on April 15th of this year.
This is pure unadulterated socialism, which has never worked.
That's why I hope this company is a case study in MBA programs on how socialism does not work because it's gonna fail.
He's chosen $70,000 as an arbitrary salary because he read that's where people are happy.
And he's gonna find out.
It's gonna take long.
It isn't gonna take long because once everybody figures out they're all making the same, no matter what they do, the slackers are gonna surface.
Human nature.
Let me tell you what he's doing here.
I know exactly what this guy's doing, and that's why I know exactly what's gonna happen.
He's assigning the same passion to his employees that he has.
But they don't make enough money.
He's read that $70,000 is that liberating magic number you become happy.
And he wants people to be able to focus on the work, not on they can't pay the light bill.
They can't pay whatever bill.
So he's gonna pay them 70 grand so they don't have to worry about making their payments, and have to worry about being in debt, and they can focus on their passion, which is his business.
And you can do that with one or two, you've not every employee is the same.
You can do that now and then that can work for a time.
But I think what the guy's doing is trying to buy love.
Myself, I think the guy's trying to buy respect, trying to buy affection that never works, by the way.
It was a long monologue, and I went on to predict specifics of what would happen.
That long-term employees who valued themselves greatly would be resentful and lose their passion, and they would see people not working very hard or not caring and going on vacation, getting the same amount they were getting, and it just wasn't gonna work.
And the fact that he had cut his own pay to 70 grand was not going to get him any credit.
At the end of the day, it wasn't gonna matter to anybody, it wasn't gonna mollify anybody, it wasn't gonna change anybody's attitude, it was gonna lead to rampant unhappiness because nobody thinks they're the same as everybody else.
And contrary to what the left is trying to force on us, nobody wants to be the same as everybody else.
You might want to be like somebody in this way or that way, but you don't want to be the same, and you don't want to be considered the same.
You want to be considered unique.
There's only one of you, and if you're healthy psychologically, you know it's a special you.
There isn't another you.
You don't want to be lumped in with a bunch of slackers, half-baked, half-caring people.
You want to be thought of as the cream of the crop, and you can't be if everybody's making 70.
And that and the fact that uh there are going to be different degrees of talent and ability and passion, it just it never had a chance.
So here is Mr. Price on the New York Times website on Friday.
Remember, he just did this back in April.
Well, that's when we heard about it.
He might have done it some months prior.
But they they posted a video at the New York Times of uh Dan Price discussing the impact of his decision.
I'm working as hard as I've ever worked to try to make it work.
I'm renting out my house right now to try to make ends meet myself.
I haven't made this little amount of money since I was in my early 20s.
It helps that I'm 31 and not any kids, too.
And no girlfriend.
No girlfriend to tell me I'm crazy.
It's just a few months later, this guy is now renting out his house for additional income.
He took a pay cut from over a million to 70,000 in order to be fair and to show that he was no better than anybody else.
And that even as CEO, his contributions were no more important than anybody else's.
And see, that's the rub.
Nobody's more important than anybody else.
That's socialism to a T. Nobody's more important.
Everybody's the same.
They're interchangeable.
If one person making 70 quits, doesn't matter, go get somebody else, pay them 70, and you haven't lost anything.
And of course, none of that's true.
The main policy or main flaw with socialism, aside from you run out of everybody of somebody else's money at some point, uh, is that we're not the same.
And we are not equal.
There is no such thing as fairness.
Fairness is always arbitrary depending on who has the power to define it.
And there certainly is no equality.
There's a quality of opportunity, equality of chance, you know, equal before the law, but these people talk about equality in terms of outcomes, and there's no such thing.
You put uh you put a system of socialism in place where you have equality of outcome, and you're always gonna have some renegades, some entrepreneurs who are gonna say, screw this, and they're gonna bust out, and they're gonna do what they do, and they're not going to be shackled by silly rules like this.
And then you have on the other end of it, you have people who are going, I'm gonna get 70 grand a year, man, and I don't have to do anything special, I just have to show up, and that's all they're gonna do.
Because slackers are everywhere.
And if you're not going to be compensated or rewarded for merit-based behavior, then there's no reason to be concerned about merit-based behavior.
And so that goes out the window, too.
But look at the New York Times story here.
Most everybody praised the effort.
Most everybody got behind this idea and thought it was wonderful.
They're just two or three people, the Times references here, who had the audacity to criticize it.
And of course, your beloved host named as one of those.
So I don't know what he's gonna do now.
Uh he could do he could do a GoFundMe campaign, uh, crowdfund, or or what have you.
But here this is the frustrating thing for me.
And I think it's always going to be frustrating.
The evidence that liberalism, socialism, fairness, sameness, equality, good vibes, good feelings, the evidence that it doesn't work is abundant.
It's everywhere, and it doesn't seem to register with people.
The good intentions always seem to trump the evidence.
They always seem to overpower it.
But at some point, everybody has a learning experience personally, where perhaps they learn it personally rather than objectively at a distance.
Okay, got to take a brief time out.
There's other stuff uh in the news, of course.
The Democrat presidential campaign is an absolute mess right now, with uh Joe Biden toying with the idea of getting in, Bernie Sanders being more popular than anybody ever dreamed.
Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz was on Meet the Press, and she could not define the difference between a Democrat and a socialist.
She was asked by F. Chuck Todd.
F. Chuck Todd also had Trump on, had to show Trump respect when he had previously written Trump off.
And then the animal situation here.
We've had more news of more hunters killing more beasts.
A giraffe is dead, and Impala is dead.
Uh An elephant is dead, all at the hands of evil hunters in Africa.
And people are outraged over this.
And the young among us are being convinced that all of these species are being wiped out by hunters.
And that ends up being part of the global warming or climate change political movement.
So sit tight, we're coming back right after this.
The big voice on the right.
The Mr. Big of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Rush Limbaugh Proudly, the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
And to Thomas and Fort Collins, Colorado.
Welcome, sir.
Glad to have you on the program.
Rush, it's my pleasure to speak to you.
Thanks for taking my call.
You bet.
You know, I heard your comments about Dan Price.
And he seems like a really nice guy.
And I read a bit of that article as well, and his intentions were well, but it appears that, you know, he just doesn't recognize the consequences of making that decision of paying people with uh limited skills $70,000.
Now, those those folks making $70,000 are going to have expenses for $70,000 a year.
And what's going to happen to those folks when they lose their job?
They are going, how are they going to make make their payments?
Uh keep the nice cars they bought.
Um, you know, they probably have upgraded their their home and uh paying much more in rent or purchase a house.
Those people are likely going to lose everything.
Well, now theoretically, you've got a great point here.
I don't know how long that these people have made that money.
Um, I don't know, they've been paid that much enough.
We just heard about this in April.
But it's possible people may have gone out and upgraded their cars.
They may have gone out and upgraded uh uh where they live.
Uh but but and and they may eventually uh I didn't read the entire story.
Have some of them already been laid off, have some are already been fired, or is that projected to happen down the road?
I think that he's actually initially had to hire some people, and when he'd hired those folks, um he's paying them much, much more than he would have.
Because initially he had, you know, he had a lot of uh responses after all the media attention that he hit he received.
But yeah, he ended up losing some.
I I think ultimately he has to let some people go.
Well, those people that have taken what their new salary was and started living it and maxed it out, you're right.
They are going to have expenses that uh they're not going to be able to replace if they can't find a job that pays them at least that much.
And the odds are they won't.
The this is this is the the tough thing about this is this is somebody has to say this.
Whoever says this is going to be thought of as heartless and mean spirited and all that.
But a lot of these people weren't worth 70 grand.
Merit based, they just weren't worth it.
Wait a minute, Mr. Limbaugh, they were being paid.
What do you mean they're not worth I'm telling you, in the terms of how productivity determines wages and value and worth, they weren't worth it.
Some of them weren't worth it.
They were getting any by definition, they weren't worth it.
If he wasn't paying them 70,000 beforehand, they weren't worth it.
But then again, you are worth what somebody will pay you.
Well, this guy came up with an arbitrary number of 70 grand, and there were a lot of people, some people who assuredly were not worth it.
They weren't making that beforehand.
And the only reason that matters is they're not going to be able to replace it.
If they do not have the skills, the talent, resume, and the economy being what it is.
So that is that is a good point, something to think about.
But he was this is a great example where good intentions can oftentimes come back to buy this guy.
He only wanted these people to have a happy life.
You know what spurred this with the guy?
And by the way, this is a legitimate concern.
He's got a business to run, and he found out that a lot of his employees were being distracted by the fact that they were late on a car payment or late on the rent, and the creditors were hassling them, and they were they were distracted and they weren't working, and he said, Okay, I I I don't want people working for you to be distracted by it.
So I he found out that 70 grand is the magic number where that stuff doesn't happen.
And he just said I'm a payer but he seven as they want he wanted him focused on the job.
Now I can understand that.
And that, in and of itself, you could say actually is an act of compassion.
And the intentions behind it are wonderful.
But then the reality, as old Thomas here points out, some of them weren't worth that.
And I only say that in the sense that their next jobs, they're probably not going to get that.
And the odds are they won't.
Hope they do, but they probably won't, in which case they're going to have a lifestyle that has been structured around 70 grand, which, by the way, it's it's not first time something like this will have happened.
But it just why all this is a teachable moment.
I was dead serious when I when I said I hope this ends up as a as a case study at uh MBA school down the road, because this is this plan this guy had takes every demand or suggestion that liberals have, and he put it in play, put it in motion.
And now he has to rent his house out to get by.
He can't make it on 70 grand because of course he had a lifestyle that was based on some amount up to a million.
He may have been living at all.
Who knows?
Anyway, thanks for the call.
Appreciate it, Thomas.
We're coming right back, folks.
Sit tight.
One more piece of information about this company.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, the gravity partners, what is the name of this company is uh gravity payments.
Here's the thing.
It sounds like the whole company may fold now.
That's how bad things have gotten.
This plan to pay everybody 70 grand a year was implemented three months ago, according to the New York Times.
But get this, and this was perhaps the worst thing that happened, less than two weeks after the announcement.
Dan Price's older brother and the co-founder of the company, Lucas Price, filed a lawsuit, citing long-standing differences that potentially threatened the company's very existence.
So apparently thing there was you know there was trouble in paradise even before Dan Price made this move.
Then he made the move and his brother co-founders.
What the hell is going on?
And file a lawsuit, which could end up putting the company out of business.
How's that?
Now you well, maybe what Dan Price was trying to do was save the company.
Maybe it was in trouble to begin with.
Who knows?
But whatever, this didn't work.
And it has now led to the absolute worst possible outcome for everybody.
No more company.
So, yeah, it sounded great, everybody making $70,000, but it wasn't possible.
Financially, it wasn't possible.
And in every other way, it didn't make any sense.
So now look at these great intentions.
Look at this heartfelt desire for everybody to do well, be happy, and not have to be pressured by bill payments that were late and so forth.
Now there might not be any jobs anywhere at this company because there might not be a company, an American animal psychic, claims that Cecil, sorry, Cecil the Lion has spoken to her and given instructions on how to deal with his death.
This is in the UK Daily Mail.
Cecil has apparently moved self-proclaimed animal communicator Karen Anderson To tears with his message.
Karen Anderson posted on her Facebook page that she wanted to let Cecil know how loved and honored he is when she made contact with the protected animal whose death has caused outrage towards Minnesota dentist and hunter Walter Palmer.
Let not the actions of these few men defeat us or allow darkness to enter our hearts.
If we do, then we become one of them.
Raise your vibration and allow this energy to move us forward.
Said Cecil the Lion to this animal psychic.
Hey, I'm not making this up.
It's right here in the Daily Mail.
There is an American animal psychic.
And she reached out to the dead Cecil.
Cecil heard her.
Cecil the dead lion replied.
Let not the actions of these few men, i.e.
hunters, defeat us or allow darkness to enter our hearts.
If we do, then we become one of them.
Raise your vibration and allow this energy to move us forward.
This is what the animal psychic said that Cecil the Lion told her.
Despite the possibility that talking to Cecil would unveil clues about his death, the animal did not offer an explanation.
The lion was quoted as saying, what happened does not need to be discussed, as it is what it is.
Are you following me on this, folks?
We have an animal psychic who claims Cecil the Lion reached out to her, would not tell her how he died, what really happened there, and urged her not to be defeatist, and not to let darkness enter everybody's hearts, because then we would all become hunters.
And of course, that would be bad.
Cecil the lion supposedly told the animal psychic Karen Anderson, who specializes in speaking to clients' deceased pets, and by the way, charges $75 for a 15-minute session with up to two different animals.
Cecil told the animal psychic that he is now finer than ever.
Cecil is dead.
But he's finer than ever.
That's what he told the animal psychic.
So, no harm, no foul.
If if Cecil's finer than ever, we need to find this hunter and thank him.
Cecil's in a better place.
Cecil himself is saying so.
To the animal psychic.
He apparently said he is grander than before, as no one can take our purity, no one can take our truth, no one can take our soul.
No, folks, I'm not making this up.
This is in the UK Daily Mail.
He is he told this psychic he's grander than before, as no one can take our purity, our truth, or our soul.
Be strong and speak for all the others who suffer needlessly to satisfy human greed, bring light and love, and we will rise above this.
And this woman's only charging $75 for a 15-minute session.
It's the headline right here: Animal Psychic claims Cecil the Lion spoken to her and given instructions on how to deal with his death.
And you know the scary thing about this is that there are going to be people, there are people who have read this, and they're believing it.
And they're talking about, I think it's wonderful.
And they're thinking Cecil is even a better girl better person, better guy that we knew.
And we know people are believing it because they're paying this woman $75 to do a seance with their dead pets.
And of course, she's able to make contact with every one of them.
So you know people are believing another American has been accused of an illegal lion killing in the same safari park as Cecil was killed.
This is from the UK Express.
Another American accused of illegally killing a lion in Zimbabwe with a bow and arrow just a few months before Walter Palmer brutally slaughtered Cecil a lion.
Are you people aware that Barack Hussein Obama has written favorably about lion hunting in one of his books?
I have it right here from the uh from the Daily Caller, August 1st, today, actually over the weekend, it was Saturday, Obama impressed by lion killing.
President Obama was really impressed by lion killing years before his administration started investigating the killing of Cecil the Lion.
Obama, whose administration's assisting the Zimbabwean government in an investigation into Cecil's killing by the Minnesota dentist didn't used to have a problem with lion killing, according to his 1995 book Dreams from My Father.
Obama detailed his conversation with Maasai guardsmen protecting him during a visit to Kenya.
Obama explained the guardsmen had each killed a lion to prove their manhood.
The guardsmen engaged in illegal lion hunting, and Obama wrote about how impressed he was with it.
Well, don't doubt me, I've got it right here.
Here's the passage in question from Dreams of My Father, page 192.
At night after dinner, we spoke further with our Maasai guardsman.
Wilson told us that both he and his friend had recently been members of the bachelor class of young warriors who were at the center of the Maasai legend.
They had each killed a lion to prove their manhood.
They had participated in numerous cattle raids, but now there were no wars, and even cattle raids had become complicated.
Only last year another friend had been shot by a KU rancher.
Wilson had finally decided being a Moran was a waste of time.
He had gone to Nairobi in search of work, but he had little schooling.
He ended up as a security guard at a bank.
The boredom drove him crazy, and eventually he had returned to the valley to marry and tend to his cattle.
Recently, one of his cattle had been killed by a lion.
And although it was illegal now, he and four others had hunted the lion into the preserve.
I asked Wilson, how do you kill a lion?
How do you do that?
Wilson said five men surround the lion and throw their spears.
The lion will always choose one man to pounce.
That man he hurls under his shield while the other four finish the job of killing the lion.
Obama writes that he says, it sounds dangerous, I said stupidly.
Wilson shrugged, well, usually they're only scratches, but sometimes only four men will come back.
Sometimes the lion does kill one of the five.
The man didn't sound like he was boasting, more like a mechanic trying to explain a difficult repair.
And it's Barack Obama in his own book, talking about the art of proving one's manhood in Kenya.
By virtue of killing a lion.
And then describing how it's done.
And we are back.
Okay, so we hand this psychic Karen Anderson who spoke to Cecil the Lion from that great jungle in the sky.
And Cecil was, of course, magnanimous in death, claiming that he's finer than ever, and we must not become dark of heart.
And we must be forgiving and so forth.
That takes us to CBS this morning.
They had a guest there with De Agale King, uh BFF Obama, sorry, the Oprah.
And the guest is Animal Planet, large predator expert, David Salmoni.
Animal Planet.
That's a cable network.
And if it's anything else, I don't know, but I know that it's a cable network.
And they have a guy that is a large predator expert.
And his name is David Salmone, and they're talking about the killing of Cecil the Lion.
And here is Gail King.
Every time I see the pictures of Cecil walking around, he looks so majestic to me.
It's like something out of Lion King the movie.
It really is heartbreaking to see him when he's walking around.
And I wonder how his death has affected other lions in the region and your thoughts on that.
Yeah, I'm sure the other lions are talking about it.
I'll never forget, folks, there was a we had a story.
It was winter time in Pennsylvania.
And uh some some forget the details that it was a reporter or it was a reporter.
Uh apparently what had happened was that a cow had fallen in through the ice of a frozen lake somewhere in Pennsylvania.
The ice was not thick enough, and the cow being too stupid to know, just walked right onto it and bamboo, the ice gave way and cow vanished, and that was it.
And the reporter said that the other cows looked on in fear and hope.
Really, the other cows looked on in fear and hope.
Why didn't they call 911?
Why didn't one of the other cows go get a rope?
Why didn't the cow jump in, try to find the cow that fell in, tie the rope around one of the hooves, and why didn't they all band together to drag the fallen cow out of the ice?
They just stood there.
Which frankly is normal behavior for cows.
I mean, they stand around while others end up to the slaughterhouse.
So Gail King, see, this is how it happens.
We humanize and I've just been cautioned by helpful staff on the other side of the glass that I am quickly going down a slippery slope.
What slippery slope?
*Sigh*
Okay, so I've just been told that that say that to me again, animals what?
Okay.
Okay.
All right.
Animals, animals have real sadness, and they have emotional connections to others in their species.
And so when one cow falls in the ice, the other cows are devastated by it.
Is that what you're telling me?
Okay.
So maybe Gail King's on to something here, that the other lions in the jungle are now affected by Cecil's death, and they're asking the expert, large predator expert, what the other lions are saying about thinking about it.
Here's here's it look, I I know we humanize.
I I know this is this is why the death of Cecil is had such an impact on people.
I understand all this.
But why have not the other lions attacked?
Why haven't they formed a group, planned a strategy, and had a mass mauling of every human being or hunter they can find?
Why hasn't this happened?
You know what's happening in the in the pride?
The remaining lions are trying to figure out how to kill Cecil's babies.
That's what's going on.
As I pointed out last week, they're not plotting revenge against humans.
They're trying to figure out how to get themselves, the other males, as head of the pride.
They're not worried about whoever did this as Cecil.
Did they know his name was Cecil Don?
Did the other lions?
They love their own babies.
They love their own babies.
Well, um Uh okay.
Okay, look I um so if Cecil ran into his mother, he would know her.
He would.
Cecil would know his mother years after he's been he would know his mother.
Is that right?
Well, has it worked out that way when I was going for dogs?
I mean, I when when I was young, we got a puppy, it was daughter of a friend of my mother's.
And years later we put the dogs together, and there was no indication they knew each other.
There's no the mother knew that it was its kid.
There was no way the dog we had knew that it was talking and dealing with its mother.
There's no way of knowing.
Unless there's something they smell on the rear end that says this is my mother.
But I well, okay.
All right, so good time to take a break then.
If I'm heading down the slippery slope, I'll just put the brakes on right here.
Empire State Building in New York.
There's a there's a documentary that is about to be released called Racing Extinction.
It it's it's uh uh it's about the fact that we humans are wantonly killing every animal species out there.
And they're trying to start a PR promotional movement for it uh in New York City using the Empire State Building over the weekend.
And it's working.
It's working on young people.
▲
Export Selection