Dave Rubin Faces the Far Left on Wokeism, Broken Cities, and Trump's Legacy in Heated Jubilee Debate

You're arguing that things economically were better under Joe Biden than at the end of his administration. Absolutely. So, can you give me an example of how? >> Yeah. GDP growth was better off. Real median wage growth is better off. Inflation was better off at the end of his administration. Unemployment was better off the end of his administration. We had the worst year of job growth in the past four years. Just this last year under Trump's administration was the Reuben report. Did that also accept >> Russian money? >> What show did I do for Russia? >> I'm not saying you did a show for Russia. I'm saying Russia saw you as a stoogge who could easily say the talking points that benefited them. What law is stopping you from doing anything that that another person cannot do? >> Laws are not protecting trans people. If they were, trans people would not be disproportionately unemployed, unhoused. >> What would you what would you like? What would you like the law to do for you? Again, the law the law can guarantee equality. It can't guarantee protection, right? So, >> yes, it certainly can. >> Has wokeness pushed America past the breaking point or is the progressive movement the only answer to MAGA? I'm John Regalado and from Jubilee Media, this is Surrounded, where one brave soul faces a room full of disagreeers. Today, we're unpacking what it means to be far-left, the backlash to wokeness, and what your vote stands for in the upcoming midterm election. I'm here with our featured guest, conservative commentator Dave Rubin. Welcome. It's >> good to be here. >> Are y'all ready to debate, Dave? >> Let's begin. >> I'm Dave Rubin of the Ruben Report, and today I'm surrounded by the far left. My first surrounded claim is that wokeism did more damage to America than Trump ever did. >> All right. If you would like to debate this claim, please get to the center in three, two, one. >> He's quick. He's quick. >> Yes, I am. >> So, I find it interesting that you think wokenism has done so much damage to America as opposed to Donald Trump. Wokeism did not kick 17 million Americans off of their health insurance through Medicaid. Wokeism didn't start a disastrous war with Iran that has now led to inflation outpacing uh wage growth. Wokeism hasn't uh ripped up institutions or attempted even to destroy free speech even by your standards because uh Ronald Reagan appointed judge uh ruled that the Trump administration was violating the first amendment by attempting to uh deport, arrest and detain students and faculty members on college campuses for protesting for Palestine. Um, wokeism to me doesn't ha doesn't even have uh remotely as disastrous as a track record as Donald Trump. >> Well, how would you define wokeism? I guess we should start with that. >> I think wokeism is a pjorative term that's used to describe leftwing cultural politics, >> right? And and what do you think leftwing cultural politics are? >> I'd say leftwing cultural politics include uh just the broad um broad attitudes towards social justice, especially for minority groups um that have faced uh persecution in various ways. >> Okay. So, I think the simplest way to define wokeism is basically collectivism on steroids and usually as it applies to race and gender, meaning that you should be judged based on the color. You actually should be judged based on the color of your skin and your sexuality and your gender and a whole bunch of immutable characteristics. And depending on where those fall on the left's kind of hierarchy of importance, that's kind of how you can parse out where people should be and how important their ideas are. So even assuming your characterization to be an accur accurate characterization which I don't necessarily take we're going to we're going to have a lot of trouble getting you actually demonstrate that wokeism has for example skyrocketed inflation out to outpace wage growth the way that Donald Trump's a war of aggression on Iran has done. Can you can you demonstrate that wokeism has violated the First Amendment by arresting students and faculty members on college campuses? >> Okay. Well, yes I can. So let's start. Well, first off, the the disastrous war, the quote unquote disastrous war that you're talking about. You're talking about a 40-day military operation that stopped an apocalyptic regime from getting a nuclear bomb and exporting terrorism throughout the world. And we're in a we're now in a uh we're now in an economic embargo of them, right? We've basically done a blockade of the straight of Hormuz. So, to say it's a disaster, we've done a blockade. >> We did lose Hang on. Hang on. We did we did lose 13 We did lose 13 of our soldiers and that is killed over 200 children. Uh but well things happen in war, right? Things >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, things do happen in war. You wait. You can laugh at that. Hold on. Hold on. Listen. You want to talk about I agree. I agree. But that's why war should be a last option. Uh why did if if Donald Trump wanted to prevent the Islamic Republic of Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, he could have just stuck with the Iran nuclear deal that he ripped up. Iran did not Iran did not enrich past the two the 3.6. Wait, they didn't enrich past the 3.67%. 6 7% in the JCPOA. They only got to 60% after Donald Trump left that deal and they started doing um uh aggressive action. >> I must say I I'm impressed with your talking points. You got impressive talking points and you memorize them well. They're not correct, but I am impressed. >> First off, first off, the Iranians admitted in the negotiations right before the war started that they were enriching past what they were allowed to. That's that's number one. Number two, you also have to go on the assumption. You also have to go on hold we hold on. You also have time you also you also have to go on the assumption or acceptance that can you agree can you agree or verify their claims. It's one thing to say oh this is what we're doing this is what we are agreed to etc. But you have to be able to verify that and the idea that we have people on the ground or the UN or some third party organization that can verify what they're actually doing with underground nuclear sites and a whole bunch of other things is is I would say quite a leap of faith. Right. You want to trust but verify. >> Can I respond to that? >> Sure. So the IAEA and and US intelligence said that Iran did not enrich past the 3.67% prior to Donald Trump ripping up and stepping out of the Iran nuclear deal in uh in I believe it was 2017 2018 when he did that in these negotiations because Donald Trump ripped up the Iran nuclear deal to to begin with. That's the only reason why let's try and I'll try and the IAEAS assessments agree with me and Tulsi Gabbard, our director of national intelligence, testified in front of Congress last year and according to the entire intelligence community, Iran did not have a nuclear weapons program. >> Okay. That they didn't have a nuclear weapons program. They were enriching past the point that they were allowed to for civilian use. Everyone knows that. But but allow me. But do you understand the weaponization process is different than do you think the Iranian regime before this war, the Iranian regime that has oppressed the people of Iran for 40 years? Uh do you think that was a good regime? Would you say that was a good government? Would you like to live under those people? Were they progressive in any way? Do they hold any of the values that any of you guys hold? >> But we don't just we we don't just start wars on countries whose politics we disagree with or or or who are oppressive to their own people. We're actually an ally to Saudi Arabia. uh and Muhammad Salman ripped up >> that I agree with. You don't you don't you don't do that. >> Okay, we got something. All right, we got something that has committed uh gross human rights violations in Gaza. >> I'm shocked that Israel came up. Uh Israel, the only place that has any of the pro progressive values that any of you guys share. >> Really? Wait, this is actually Wait, this is perfect. This is perfect because one of the things that you told me at the beginning of this conversation was that wokeism was judging people based on characteristics and collective thought. Israel is literally centered around the prioritization of the Jewish people a as a as a matter as a matter of policy. That is literally collectivist thought. So you must hate Israel too. You must you must think that that's the ultimate that's the ultimate uh let me ask you form of collective identity, right? >> How many Muslim countries are there? How many Muslim >> So you're just pivoting? No, no, no. I'm going to answer. Is Israel collectivist? How many Muslim countries are there? >> I'm sure there are a lot of Muslim countries because there are a lot there are a lot more Muslims than than Jews. >> Yeah. Well, just ballpark. How many Muslim countries are there? >> I I would probably maybe say like let's say between 10 to 20 maybe. >> All right. You're you're you're off by about 40. There's about 52 or 53 Muslim countries. In any of those countries, how's it going for minorities, women, gays, Christians, Jews? Yeah, I I I can say that other nations it's extraordinarily repressive, but I like I said, we got a pause there. We got a pause there. You've been voted out by the majority. Okay, >> please return to your seats. >> It's been fun. >> Oh, she had it. She had it. All right, >> Dave. >> All right. Hi. >> Good to meet you. I'm actually a big fan. I've been watching you since like all the way back in the Sam Harris era. Oh, yeah. >> And then I remember you brought >> Softening me up. Okay. No, you brought on like uh Steven Mghue, like the white nationalist, and I was like, this guy just loves ideas. He just loves all different types of ideas. I love that. >> Um, but yeah, just wanted to talk right now specifically about the difference between progressive values and the MAGA coalition. >> Sure. >> It seems to me that all of the ills that are attributed to wokeism are typically things that people find annoying. So, people being overly, you know, policy about their pronoun usage or or talking about specific groups that might seem extremely marginalized. That's what I typically hear from the right. I don't hear like a degradation of like society unless it's the far theocratic right. And I don't think that you ascribe to that. Would you call yourself a theocrat? >> I mean, I wrote the best-selling book on classical liberalism. So, it's funny. I get called a conservative all the time. I I actually happen to be a liberal in the truest sense in the truest sense of liberal unfortunate. Well, well, I progressives are not liberal as a general thought. Yeah. >> Yeah. For me, I just feel like that type of like annoyance that wokeism presents to the world is a lot less dangerous than like, I don't know, the coalition that you're a part of that like condemns people for having children when they're in gay marriages or says things like, you know, people that are of particular sexual orientations don't deserve the same equal rights. Would you say that that's something that's >> Well, a coalition is going to have all sorts of people in it. So, MAGA, if we were talking about >> ideological diversity, right? >> Yeah. If we were talking about what MAGA is, what I like about MAGA actually is that it's not a specific set of you have to believe this exact set, right? You have to believe. >> Some people in MAGA can believe like gay couples can have kids and others can believe like that's degeneracy and those people need to be jailed. Those are like the difference ideas. >> Well, actually the tough answer to that is yes, as long as you're not trying to litigate someone's life. I am around a lot of conservatives all the time and particularly uh Christian conservatives, let's say. They generally are not for gay marriage. By the way, there's not one mosque in the United States that performs gay marriages, which is worth noting. >> Why are you so focused on Muslims today? >> Why I'm just I'm just giving you I'm just giving you a fact. Um >> but what I have found consistently, you know, Donald Trump was the first incoming firsttime president that was for gay marriage. >> I actually Barack Obama was not for gay marriage when he first came in. So what I would say is the MAGA movement. I mean look, Scott Besson, who's the Treasury Secretary, is married to a man and has kids. Peter Teal is married to a man and has kids. Douglas Murray's one of the greatest voices we have in conservatism, happens to be gay. Um I I don't think for the most part people on the right actually believe in individual rights and don't really care. But that doesn't mean that doesn't mean that everyone has to have the same religious perspective on everything. But but you've been around the block for a long time and just like you alluded to in 2016 Trump held up a flag that said LGBTQ for Trump. He was asked in a CBS interview, would you let Caitlyn Jenner use the bathroom that she wants to in your hotels? He said absolutely. He didn't have a problem. >> He gave the He actually gave a better answer than that. He said, I'm a hotel builder. If you told me I had to build one bathroom, that would be fine with me. I think it's a great answer. >> But that's what's crazy is that evolution has changed so much to the current MAGA movement. The MAGA movement Donald Trump would absolutely not say that somebody could use the bathroom aligned with their gender identity. He spec specifically banned that. And not just that, but he's also just called for a uh he specifically wrote an executive order that classifies far-left groups like protransgender groups as a danger to the country, which often the the entire military can go after. That is insane. That is absolutely a violation of people's individual rights. >> All right. So, you want to talk about the trans issue sort of broadly. I just I want to talk about the MAGA coalition individual liberty yet wants to police the way that people express that also wants to police people's bodies that want to go after people specifically because their ethnicity none of that should >> Okay. So Donald Trump is in the middle of his second term. Gay marriage is here. It's passed. It's a just individual. Wait, you're friends with Michael, right? >> M. Yeah. >> Yeah. So what what's that coalition again called? I think it's like less equal that's trying to actually get rid of Oberfell and overturn gay marriage rights. Does that not concern you? >> I' Well, first off, I've never heard of that specific organization, but what I can tell you >> you're friends with them. >> Michael is part of I don't I just don't know what you're talking about, but what I look up right now less than and it's Llaya Rose, Michael Mo. I think it's uh what's that guy's name at the Daily? The head one. >> But okay, but that that's not Donald Trump. >> I understand they want to go away from this. >> No, no, that's not Donald Trump. That's not the head of the party. I have friends. Well, first off, Michael and I are friends, but there is a cap on our friendship. There actually is. >> I'm friends with someone who doesn't want you to be in love with my man. He He doesn't want me to be in love. He's had dinner at my house with his wife. My husband cooked for him. >> That's against God. So, I want to have a word. >> But no, no, no, no, but think about think about what you're saying. I get No, no. Think about what I saying your name. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on, Champ. Hold on, Champ. you know, in your in your world of how tolerant you are showing me you are, you're actually showing a remarkable amount of intolerance because although I don't know the group that you're talking about, Michael Nolles as a human being has been to my house and my husband has cooked him lamb and we have enjoyed evenings together and shared personal moments and all of those things. Now, do we agree on absolutely everything? Of course, the answer to that is no. And if Michael was Michael or anyone else was trying to lead some organization that was going to go against my civil rights, well that is where obviously we would have our difference of opinion. Of course, but I also but I also but I also respect but I also respect people's religious beliefs. They're allowed to have their religious beliefs. Their relig religious beliefs are not allowed to legislate my life. This is all very separate from the trans thing which obviously I sense is going to come up a few more times. >> I'll just say real quick like I'm not trying to come after you. I believe that you should have the full liberty to have the family of your choice. But what I will say is I'm glad Michael treats you with respect individually when you guys are together. But when he goes in front of his platform and says that a video of two gay men having a child is the most disgusting thing that he's ever seen, which is a quote, you can look up the tweet. Michael said that that child is in one of the most dangerous situations he can think of, which is crazy to think of all the abusive parents that actually live in this society, regardless of sexual orientation. And you're going to look at a happy family and say, "This is disgusting." That should feel like a violation. >> Okay. So, I didn't see that video. But if what you're asking me is if do I agree with if let's just say what you said is true. Do I agree with Michael's uh point on that? Of course, the answer is no. But that is the coalition. No, no, no. No. That is the ideology. That's not the coal. No, that's not the coal. No, that's not the coalition. That's what the administration. You're taking a very specific person and you're saying, >> is it a small specific? Absolutely. Yes. Yes. Oh, it is. I go. No. That's completely absurd. It's completely absurd. It's completely absurd. >> We got to pause there. You've been voted out by the majority. Please return to your seat. >> Good grab. >> I want to go to your prompt in a second, but I just wanted to address though. I actually come from a Christian background. I spend a lot of my career debating Christian nationalists >> and even the nicest >> Christian nationalists, they do want to take your rights. I I spend a lot of time talking to these people, even the really nice ones. So, I just want to be careful. And I guess I want to say like I remember when you posted about having your kids. >> Yeah. >> On Twitter, which congratulations on your kids. >> Um the comments were horrifying. I don't know if you remember, but it was >> Christian nationalists and Republicans tearing you and your husband down for having a child. >> Well, you should also note there was a lot of love. There was an awful lot of love from an awful lot of conservatives and liberals and people across the board and everything else. The the way the internet operates is people only focus on the negative. So, was there a whole bunch of nasty comments? Was there a whole bunch of nasty? What? >> Guess. Let's be honest. Let's just be honest. Which side of >> that? If you're asking me about for that specific post, it was No, for that specific post, it was mostly people on the right. For sure it was. >> Who are attacking you? >> Yeah. I I fully acknowledge that. Absolutely. 99% of the hate that I get >> is from people that are in this circle. >> It's definitely not from being gay. >> What? No. No. for supporting going back to the prompt. No, it's for supporting. >> It's not for being gay like the act >> authoritarian desiring probably demented old man. So going back to the prompt of wokeism. It seems like you defined it as intersectionality >> um some collectivization based on demographic. >> Yeah. Yeah. We could basically >> So wokeism is intersectionality. >> It is a p well inter intersectionality is a piece of wokeism. If you're going to group people on these immutable characteristics and then you decide based on this, we got to put black people up here, we've got to put white guys down here, gays are going to be of the straits, trans will be up above the gays. You know, you have this endless hierarchy. >> Policy harms have happened. >> I mean, quite literally, the easiest one would be college admissions. I mean, we know that Harvard and other colleges were discriminating against mostly white and Asian students because they were they're they wanted more diversity and they were allowing students of color with lesser grades to get in. I as a general rule I >> worried about universities who's cutting their funding. >> Do you agree? Do you agree? Do you agree that that happened? >> Uh to some degree I think it was overblown to a large degree. Affirmative action basically ended I think in the early 2000s, right? A lot of these issues were clamped down on pretty quickly. And the issue is that when you look at the reason why >> corporate I mean you could look at corporations I mean all these corporations that have their DEI stickers. I was just on a Delta flight they still have their DEI sticker on there. >> DEI is not inherently a bad thing. Why would diversity ever be a problem for anyone? >> Well, diversity in and of itself is not a problem. But if you say we are going we are going to hire people and we are going to factor in all of these immutable characteristics inherently by saying we're going to elevate one group of people you are going to have to discriminate against another group that actually is racism unique experience based on your gayness that other people will never have >> I'm sorry. >> Does your gayness give you insight into certain experiences that other people simply will not have because they're not gay? Well, I suppose as a gay person, I do have experiences that some people don't have >> and you probably have knowledge and experience. I did get the job. You got that. I mean, lots of people do. All causes crazy sex. Yeah. But the issue is that what we're talking about here when we come to diversity, >> but I wouldn't want that anything I wouldn't want that to have anything to do with me being hired. >> Sure. But it's really hard to compare. So, sir, let's say I grant you all of the woke harms. The issue is that it didn't take us to Iran. It didn't kill school girls. It didn't uh right now crush with the FCC and kick multiple people off of uh off of air and threaten to pull things. It's not burning books in Florida. >> Who's been kicked off air? >> Jimmy Kimmel got kicked off of air. ABC was regularly under threat for uh doing these things. The FCC president ABC president came out after we have these type of things. They crushed James Terrio. This has happened over and over again. They're all they crush James Terico. James Terico is the nominee right now. >> They crushed his appearance. What do you mean they crushed his >> FCC wouldn't allow his appearance? I >> I don't know what you're talking about. I have literally no idea what you're talking about. >> I got a pause there. >> I think you were talking about Cole Bear's show, but um you've been voted out by the majority. >> Okay. >> You guys are slow, bro. >> How's it going, Dave? >> Quick. How you doing? How you doing? >> So, I just quickly wanted to recognize I love this by the way. You have a very unconventional household and wokeism has brought you that household, right? to be have to live with your husband to have your two children are conceived through surrogacy and I appreciate that >> wokeism didn't bring that equal rights equal rights wokeism >> as I define it as I view it personally is looking to expand on already existing um civil liberties right to ensure that hold on to ensure America practices what it preaches equal protections inclusion of everybody democracy etc so it's not a policy prescription it's a social prescription Donald Trump is president he's the head of the executive branch he has a trifecta a judiciary that's on his side. Donald Trump's violent. Donald Trump's destroying the pillars of America, democracy, negative rights, the rule of law, our constitution. The list goes on and on. So, I'm just curious to see what institutional damage has wokeism done. And >> if you want to engage with Trump being violent, that'd be nice. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, I just don't agree with anything you said there, period. First off, wokeism, wokeism isn't what led to, say, gay marriage. What led to gay marriage is a fight for equality under the law. If you believe that heterosexual marriage, that an adult should be able to engage in any sort of contract within another adult, then that has to be equal. That's what equal protection, which you just mentioned, is actually what the decision was based on. Yes. So, that was not wokeism. That was the promise of America, which is the promise of individual rights and equal opportunity. Uh, as for a few of the other things that you said there again, I mean, if we could do the you want to do the Iran thing again. >> No, I said Donald Trump is violent. >> Yeah. So, Donald Trump is violent in what sense? >> Yeah. So, I also want to mention you the reason why you left the left, correct me if I'm wrong, is because you believe progressives were turning to authoritarianism. Am I Am I correct there? >> I mean, there was >> that was your video. You said it. You can't deny it. >> Settle down, Jeff. There there was a reasons that I did that. >> That's one of them, correct? Yeah. Do you think it's authoritarian for the president of the United States to call for the death of six active members of the legislature for making a video that is totally fine and legal? >> It's interesting. Oh, well, first off, you're talking about the video where they basically Mark Kelly and several of these guys were basically saying if you're in the military, you can uh you can go against, you know, Trump and all those things. Well, first off, there are some legal actual reasons that perhaps you should not as a former member of the military be telling >> the punishment for making videos is death. I forgot. Sorry. I'm sorry. Did anyone >> hang George Washington? >> Did anyone get put to death? Did any >> matter the president of the United States is actively calling for the death of members of the legislature? >> Is anyone in trouble? Is anyone in trouble because that you're missing the difference? >> No. You're saying Donald Trump hold. Let's just understand the prompt here. You said wokeism has done more damage than Donald Trump ever did. Can you tell me a single time wokeism is doing something remotely similar? >> So remotely similar as Donald Trump being slightly fantastic. can give you damage. >> Let me let me explain something. >> No, I can give you the damage. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Listen. Let me explain something to you. Donald Trump, all you need to know about for anyone of you guys that think that Donald Trump's coming for you because you're gay or you're trans or something like that or you're black or anything else. Might I recommend you just read Art of the Deal, which Donald Trump wrote about. It's terrible. He's just discussing his activities. >> But you can you can dismiss it. You can dismiss it. But Donald Trump gave you his playbook 40 plus years ago. 40 plus years ago. He gave you the playbook on how he negotiates. He leads with creat. >> This is irrelevant to what I'm currently talking about, right? >> No, it's completely >> You ask me about damage. I can give you examples, but you don't want them because you know you're going to get fried. >> No, no, >> no. That is the truth. Donald Trump tried to rewrite the constitution via executive order with executive order 14160. And it was followed up by 141601 where they used this to target individuals for pro Palestinian speech like Mahmud Khalil. And this was already ruled upon by the way. I'm sure you know about this. Correct. >> Okay. You try to rewrite the constitution be executive order. Can the president do that? >> There is a difference that hold on. There is a difference between exercising free speech. There's a difference between exercising free speech and closing down a campus and not letting students get >> You're an interesting character. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, you seem nice. Um there's a difference between exercising free speech, which I will always defend your free speech, no matter how noxious it is, and closing and closing down campuses. No, they weren't. No. Makm Khalil and all of these masks with no cause and it's literally in the in the documents of the case. >> Well, first off, Marco Review has illustrated the point many many times. If you're here on a green card or a student visa or you don't you don't have the exact same protections that you don't you don't >> Congress shall make no law what? >> No. >> For people for people that are citizens of the United States Wait a minute wait a minute nothing. So Donald Trump tried to sign an executive order rewriting the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th amendment. Where do you get this power? >> Let me ask you something. Do you >> Is it Is it authoritarian? Act on a self-granted authority. Hold on. Hold on. >> Can you answer my question? You're not going to let me chat here for a sec. Listen, listen. Listen. >> Let me ask you something. Let's try it this way. So, let's say you and your girlfriend went on vacation. Bora Bora. You show up to most beautiful place on earth and she's seven months pregnant and she then gives birth in Bora Bora. You think your child should be a citizen of French Polynesia? Bora Bora. states affirms that just solely principle and I'm sorry the president cannot defy because he doesn't like that's how our country works that is an example of damage to >> America you can fight it in the courts you can fight it in the courts >> he doesn't like the courts he ignores them prior to the Alien Enemies Act removals Emil Bet we're out of time we got to stop there >> okay got you >> my next surrounded claim is if you still vote for Democrats in 2026 you're voting for broken cities broken schools and broken borders >> if you would like to debate this claim get to the chair in 3 2 one. >> Hey, how are you, Santana? >> So, uh, can you explain a little bit about what you mean broken cities, broken schools, broken borders? >> Sure. Well, broken cities, I would basically, you can boil it down to crime and drug use. And I can tell you, having been in here in Los Angeles for the last 36 hours, I have seen more homeless people, more drug use, um, more urban decay than I have seen in the last 5 years combined living living in Florida. Florida. In terms of schools, it's basically brainwashing kids and teaching them what to think instead of teaching them how to think. Uh, and then what was the third one in terms of Oh, well, borders is the easiest one. I mean, under the Biden administration, we let in somewhere. We don't even know what the actual number is, but somewhere between 16 to 20 million illegals. If Donald Trump did quite literally nothing else in his presidency, just getting control of the border, I would say, would be good enough because you don't have a country if you don't know who is in it. >> Okay, all three of your claims are wrong. Pick which one you want to be proved wrong on. >> Let's do borders. >> Perfect. >> Okay. >> Donald Trump is absolutely the worst president on the border. First and foremost, you can talk about the Langford bill, which was a piece of legislation which would have strengthened our borders, but Donald Trump had that legislation shot down. He also >> Wait, wait, wait. So, do were the borders open under Obama? Let's or under Biden? Let's try Let's try that. The borders were not open. What piece of legis that he passed to open the borders? >> No, it's not about piece of legislation. It's about quite literally >> open the borders without legislation. >> You just let people through, which is exactly what we >> There was no one standing at the borders. Everybody just come right in. >> In many cases, yes, actually. In many in many cases, they were quite literally moving barbed wire fence. Our guy there there are videos of it. Have you ever seen the video of Have you ever seen Have you ever seen the video of Bobby Kennedy when he was running as a Democrat standing at the border? He was still a Democrat. >> Wait, you're talking about the same one that sniffed Coke off a toilet seat and admitted it recently? >> Wait, the same one that actually took a dead bear and dropped it in Central Park. >> The same one that actually chopped the head off a whale. You're citing RFK Jr.? >> Yes, I am citing RFK Junior. >> No, no, no. I don't hear that. >> Who's running HHS right now, >> which he shouldn't be, but that's fine. Listen, when you talk about >> Do how many people do you think came in under Biden? Let's see if we're even operating on the same plane. >> The acceptable number is about 10 million. >> Okay. So, you Okay. All right. Fair enough. So, I I'll grant you that. They say it could be anywhere. I think I've heard 16 to 20 million, but let's say it's 10. Do you think that's good or fair or just or how a country can operate? >> I think that when you create instability throughout the world and then you also tell people that your country is open, then you create actual quote unquote border crisis. Think about this. So what what instability was Joe was Joe Biden? What was Barack Obama's nickname? >> Barry >> deorter and chief. >> Barack Obama had a negative immigration rate. That means that he deported more people than he let into the country. So you're for deportation. >> So we can say that there wasn't a border crisis under um Obama, right? >> The border crisis was significantly worse under under Biden. >> But but under Obama, was there a crisis? >> Biden Barack Obama did. >> Yes or no? >> Barack Obama. No, Barack Obama did deport, I think, more people than Donald Trump. I wish Donald Trump was deporting more people. >> I agree. So, you're saying there was a crisis under Biden? >> Yes. Of course. >> But no crisis under Obama. >> No, I didn't say that. He was deporting. >> Yes or no? Yes or no? >> Wait, hold on. We can Let's do Let's do Biden. >> Had a negative deportation rate. >> Let's do Biden and Trump. Bid. Let's do the last two administrations. >> Answer the question. Yes or no? >> I am for anyone that will close borders and I'll say no. I'll say no. That's Okay. >> So, if there wasn't a crisis under Obama and there was a crisis under Biden, what happened in between those two administrations? Was there something that happened? >> Wait, are you blaming Donald Trump for for Joe Biden's border? >> No. What I'm blaming Donald Trump for is when he's actually campaigning for president and he's going around and to any news organization that would let him speak and telling everyone that the border's open. They're wide open. Come on in. Come on in. And he actually created something that wasn't there. So when >> So wait, you're blaming people coming to this country illegally. You're blaming Donald Trump. Donald Trump who really only appeared because of borders, right? Build a >> There wasn't a border issue. There wasn't a border issue when he said that, right? But then when there was no no we've always had a we've always had a completely poorest border. That that is negative deportation rate under Obama. He created the actual desire for people to come here because he told the lie that the borders was open. >> Wait a minute. But why? But if America if America's if America is a racist evil capitalist country, why would these people want to come here? >> Because it's still better than the country that they're in. Because the United States Americabilizing other countries CIA, our CIA keeps destabilizing other countries, overthrowing other countries. They're doing that right now. >> Wait, so who did Barack Obama destabilize that then Donald Trump allowed into the country? >> The point being is our country has a history of destabilization. That doesn't matter if it's left or right. Well, I'm I'm just playing your game here. So, wait. I'm just playing your game. >> Created the need for people to come here and there was no crisis. Then Donald Trump not only created it, but he didn't handle it. >> I'm sorry, man. Nothing Nothing you're saying is making sense here. What you won't pause there. You've been voted out. >> What What What country did Barack Obama destabilize that caused people to come here under Donald Trump? >> I guess you'll never know. >> You've been voted out. Okay. Hey, how are you? >> Hey, how are you? >> Hello. Um, what's your name? My name is Maybe. Nice to meet you, Dave. >> Good to meet you. >> Uh, so I myself am a Democrat. I'm actually running for state senate here in California. >> Uh, I would argue that I am about as far left as you can get as Democrats. And I'm critical of the Democratic party because I actually don't think they're left enough. If we're going to talk about broken cities, uh, here we are in Los Angeles. Los Angeles is not a broken city. I live here. I feel safe walking down the street uh as an openly trans non-binary person, as somebody who does drag. Uh this is not a broken city. It is unaffordable in many ways, but that is the case across the rest of the United States. And if we're going to talk about broken cities, we actually need to talk about broken states. Uh eight out of the 10 poorest states in the United States are Republican controlled. And the majority of states that are the wealthiest states are democratically controlled. And these are actually donor states to Republican states. And the irony is that Republicans are against welfare except when it comes to funding their states. >> Okay. Well, first off, first of all, I would say I'm very glad that as a trans person, you feel safe here. You should feel safe. And I treat anyone that treats me with respect. You're going to get respect out of me. So, I appreciate that and I'm glad to hear it. I assume you've been to West Hollywood, right? I have. I used to live in West Hollywood pretty close to the Abbey. Uh, and I left about six. Well, I moved to the valley before that, but I lived there for about six years. And the six years that I lived there, from about 2013 to 2019, it was pretty clean and it was pretty safe. And there weren't drug addicts and homeless people all over the place. I spent the last two days there in West Hollywood. That's the the hotel I'm staying at is there. There are drug addicts and homeless people everywhere. Everywhere. You You would acknowledge that is the case? Yes, >> I would acknowledge that, but I would also acknowledge that there are plenty of housed people who are also drug addicts, and they never seem to be the problem. It's only when they're existing in poverty, abject poverty outside that you have to witness it, that it becomes a problem. The issue is not that these people are dangerous. The mythology around people experiencing homelessness is that they are dangerous. The reality is that unhoused people are more likely to be victims of violent crime than perpetrators. >> All right. So, listen, I can I can actually get on board some of what you're saying here. Now, there's a couple issues here because one of one of them is not just about violence. If you are going to create the conditions, the economic conditions or whatever you want to call it that's going to allow for these people to be out on the streets, would you want to walk a baby in a carriage down that block as these people are there? I don't think you would. >> I would because I don't I I have I don't know the last time I've heard of an unhoused person attacking a baby. And these are I would say if you No, it's not fearongering. It is if you were a young mother and you were pushing a carriage and there were a bunch of people who clearly were on well now they have supermeth or whatever it is but it but it is real. It is a real thing. It is a real thing that are on any of these drugs. You would not want to push a carriage down that block. But it's not exactly just about violence. I told you I would actually feel comfortable with that. Okay. So you would you would not I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that most most parents would not be comfortable with that. But it's not just about that. I would also say if you spend any time in well Hollywood's become a total disaster too but if you if you go down Melrose you go down to these places that were once thriving >> the store everywhere the stores are closed there are not shoppers but it's because of the e it's because of the economic condition it's a part of the economic condition what we need is economic equity no no policy makers but Democrats have been running this city forever Democrats have been running the state of the thing who are running to represent this including Spencer Press is not coming in to build housing for all the issues that there is not enough housing in Los Angeles number of people experiencing homelessness. Yes, it is because it's not a housing issue. It's not a housing you could give drug addicts all the beds and homes that there are and it will not work. It will not work. If you told me that what you were trying to do is figure out truly functional programs that would help these people get off drugs and they could actually work universal healthare I could get on some of that. No, but just saying universal healthcare and we're going to give healthcare to everybody. >> Well, you haven't given me you haven't given me a moment to speak and retort. So, what I want to say is that on any given night in Los Angeles, in LA County, there are more than 72,000 people experiencing homelessness. In LA City, there are more than 43,000 people. Let me finish. There are more than 43,000 people experiencing homelessness. Yet, there are only about 16,000 interim housing shelter beds. Meanwhile, there are more than 250,000 vacant units. Here's the thing. Democrats argument is your argument that Democrats have not funded is your dem argument that Democrats have not funded homeless policy argument that my argument is that Republicans are not going to fund it either. They are just going to criminalize our neighbors experiencing poverty and we cannot criminalize our neighbors experiencing just because they are poor. >> But you seem more angry at Republicans who've had nothing to do with this. Republicans have literally no influence in this city or in this state. So even if I could grant you some, >> but they have said what they want to do, which was which is come in and criminalize people who are living poor in public. And that is not going to solve the problem. That is going to shove the problem down the street. It's going to create more incarceration. You're angry at people in the state of California. >> You seem angry at people that aren't in power and haven't been in power here in decades than the people who are actually in power. If you're if you're angry, I could be angry at both. But if you're angry at somebody, be angry at Gavin Newsome. Gavin Newsome when he was mayor of San Francisco had his what 10-year plan to end homelessness in San Francisco. I am sure I don't have to tell you about the drug and homelessness problem. >> You don't. But what we actually have is permanent supportive housing. We do not have enough permanent services. We can't just criminalize people in jail. >> We have no no. So we have a fundamental difference on what you can do for these people. I don't think that if you take a bunch of drug addicts and just give them beds that that's going to solve anything. I think it's going to prolong it for the most part. Okay. So we have a fundamental difference there that that's just fine. But what I would say is aim your anger that you would probably do drugs if you lived on the street as well. >> Aim your anger aim your anger at the people who have been in charge. Your anger should not be at >> my anger is at the duopoly which is both Democrats and Republicans. >> But it's not a duopoly here. It's not a duopoly here. Here in Los Angeles which has you've been voted out by the majority. Please return to your Thanks Dave. Thank you. He's quick. He's quick. Hi, Eric. How are you? >> Good. How are you? >> Good. Good. >> Uh, so I really want to ground this conversation more in what I believe is the greatest damage that's happening right now in America, which is the affordability problem. And I think that there's no one who has exacerbated that more than Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans. We can talk about cities specifically, but I like to just talk about the nation as a whole. If you look, I was previously an economics teacher for 12th grade. And if you looked at the three primary indicators of how the economy is doing, GDP, the labor uh market, and uh inflation, all three of those are indicating that the economy is going in a downhill direction. And that's also validated by a recent poll. 73% of people in America are saying that the economy is in poor condition. Now, if you look at the primary things that the Trump administration has done, taking away people's healthcare in one big beautiful bill, the war in Iran, which has raised gas prices, that's really the thing that is making everyone really feel like, oh, affordability, I need to choose between gas and groceries. This is the big big problem that we're experiencing. So, I don't think that going more in a Republican direction is necessarily going to be helpful for that. Um, because we're seeing that Donald Trump ran on a platform of making the economy better. He appealed to people, the populace, of saying, "Listen, I understand the struggle." They pointed the finger at immigrants, at trans people, LGBTQ people, but then he made it worse. I don't think a lot of people were expecting that, oh, you know, the economy could actually go in a worse direction. So, I just want to say >> again, I think there's been a certain theme that I I obviously I disagree with a little bit of the premise there, but I can I can basically get on board what you said there. Look, if you want to create the conditions for economic success, what I think you have to do is you have to lower taxes literally for everybody and you have to eliminate as much regulation as possible. Right? When we see a massive exodus right now, we'll use New York as an example. Since Mami has taken over, they have they have lost trillions of dollars in tax revenue. Right? So, the guy wants to fund big government programs and what he's saying is I want to tax these people more and then he is causing them to leave. That is what people are going to do in a free society, right? We have states rights and in Florida say we have no state income tax. We have low regulation. We create the conditions for economic boom. And that's what we're getting right now. It's not it's not a coincidence that massive corporations and if you look at nothing else, if you look at nothing else between blue and red right now, do you know how many people since co have moved to Florida? >> I want to touch on what you were talking about because I don't know the answer to that, but I can say I'm not trying I'm not trying I'm not trying to get you. I'm not trying to get you. So 2.3 million people have moved to Florida since CO, right? And it was largely because of COVID. Then there were economic opportunities. Now it's because there's a huge boom down there and there's lower taxes and the Santis is trying to get rid of property taxes, etc., etc. You know how many people have left California since CO? >> Well, I would like to leave California if there was a proposed billionaire tax and the percent is less than 5%. >> But the billionaires are the billionaires that billionaires will leave. But the billionaires are the billionaires are leaving. Peter Teal left. Uh Elon Musk left. Um we can like look at Ken Griffin just in the last Well, if you want >> pause there, you've been voted out by the >> If you want their money, they're going to take it. All right. Nice. >> Thanks. >> He didn't try very hard. >> No, really. Hi, Kian. Nice to meet you. >> Hi. Good to meet you. >> Um I want to talk on broken schools. You mentioned that you think um schools are teaching kids what to think, not how to think. I just finished my student teaching program today. I'm getting my teacher certificate like right now. >> Great. >> Thank you. Everything we talk about in my program, every piece of what you guys would probably consider to be like woke critical race theory has been so beneficial for me in my student teaching and connecting with our students. >> Give Yeah, give me an example. >> Yeah. taking students backgrounds into account when I am planning my lessons, making it actually engaging for them is like the step one if you want to teach them anything cuz if students >> Can you give me an like an actual example? I'm I'm following you for sure. Um like I have noticed a lot of my students are specifically concerned about like money and being able to make money in the future. So, when we're reading Romeo and Juliet, we talk about um the class the class um like dynamics at play in that play because that's something they're interested in. So, when I talk about that, they can buy in and they can actually do that. >> Okay. >> This is something that the right would look at and say is like >> CRT, you're just like looking at them because they're from like poor economic backgrounds, so they're doing all this. >> You haven't but you haven't mentioned anything related to race. I don't have I don't have an inherent problem with what you just described right there. I don't see how that's CRT. >> We're not trying to teach people what to think. We're teaching them how to think. And that and the way to do that is by getting them engaged. And I think we see this in that all the top states are all blue states. All the top states for education are all blue states. >> Florida's Yeah, Florida's number one in higher education without question. I mean, you check the US check US News World Report. Yeah, I'm pretty sure Florida's top three. We have check check US News World Report. We we can we can fact check it. Yeah, please do. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. What I would say my basic situation when it comes to education is we should have school choice. We should have charter schools. We should have public schools. We should have private schools. You shouldn't necessarily be stuck in a failing school just because of your zip code. You want to have as much choice as possible within the system. And then it it also creates uh competition. I also look we have a huge home cut off charter schools are not more inclusive. Do you know what the average cost of >> I didn't say I didn't say anything about inclusive. >> You said you don't want people to get stuck. >> I don't want people I want school should be inclusive. >> Well, it depends what you mean by inclusive. So, >> I think that everyone should have similar opportunities and the way to do that is not with school choice. School choice you want stateun no competition. >> I think having public schools is the best way to get the most amount of people. And if we make public education good and we actually resources into that's a hell of a school choice is what guts that >> but if but if you want wait school choice >> yes where do you think the funding goes with school choice it comes from public education to go to private and charter schools >> so I would have as many charter schools as possible as many private schools as possible I would encourage home school I would encourage eliminate public schooling >> I think actually you could over time I think you could but I'm not calling for that today you Can I tell you what I really want? Can I tell you what I really want? >> So, might I might I recommend >> have always been but has always been run and how do you think that's working out? How do you >> I think it was working out really great until we started gutting our funding. If we look at class sizes right now, can I talk about class sizes? >> My teacher um my mentor teacher has class sizes of up to 40 students in her classes. That is not sustainable. If we put more funding in, we can hire more teachers for those public schools to get class sizes down, which is the number one thing. Lower classes. Wait, let me finish. Do you think if we just put more money into these things? >> I think if we hire more teachers, if we hire more teachers, then we have lower class sizes. Teachers like myself can individualize our curriculum. We can take individual students into account in our lesson planning, which is something I do cuz I was lucky enough to have a small class size, but other classes don't have that. >> You you would be quite a good teacher, likely in a pod or at a charter school or at something where it would be more. >> I'd be a good teacher anywhere. I promise you. We got a pause there. We got a pause there. You've been voted out by the majority. >> Thank you. >> Nice to meet you. >> Hi. How are you? >> All right. Good. What is one main metric that Donald Trump has made better off since he got in office? Like an example would be GDP, unemployment, inflation, etc. >> Well, right now, first off, the big beautiful bill was just passed last year and it's kicking in now, right? It's kicking in now. Okay. So, we are see we're going to now see results of that. Like even the tariffs. All right. So let's do tariffs. Are you for or against tariffs? >> I'm against the universal tariffs. So what's the main metric that he made better off? >> What >> what's the main metric that he made better off? GDP, unemployment, inflation. Do you have any idea? >> Listen. >> Listen, >> I don't think you do. >> Do you think Hold on. So you're arguing that things economically were better under Joe Biden at the end of his administration. Absolutely. >> So can you give me an example of how? >> Yeah. GDP growth was better off. Real median wage growth is better off. Inflation was better off at the end of his administration. unemployment was better off at the end of his administration. We had the worst year of job growth in the past four years, just this last year under Trump's administration. The inflation 3.8% year-over-year since Trump got in office. We're seeing all of those economic indicators become worse off. Can you tell me anything that he's done to make it better off? You say it's broken for Democrats. It sounds like it's broken right now under Trump. >> Have you looked at the stock market? >> It's worse off in terms of the growth in 2025 as compared to 2024. If you look at Dow Jones and S&P 500, >> they're both up quite a bit right now, >> but lower. You know, things don't happen overnight. So, Donald Trump, for examp there's reality. There's actual reality. Like, you put policies into place and they don't just kick in the next day, right? Donald Trump Donald Trump said Donald Trump said when the tariffs said in a year prices would be down 50% for electricity. Are they up right now? >> Hold on. Donald Trump when when he brought in the whole idea of tariffs. Would you agree that for the last four decades, we have had completely lopsided trade deals with all of these countries where they're tariffing and taxing our products that go to them and they're getting sweet deals when they sell to the American public. Do do you think that's a fair >> Didn't Trump address that with the USMCA, but he went against that when he didn't extend it through the context of his new trade agreement because he wanted to place tariffs on all of them again. And his tariffs that he's placing on are destroying our relationships with countries all around the world. It's it's destroying destroying it's costing it's costing consumers here in this country. A Federal Reserve report just came out indicated that we'd be below prepandemic levels of inflation if Donald Trump never imposed the tariffs in the first place, meaning be able to bring down interest rates and be able to increase investment within our economy and bring more jobs back. >> Hold on. When you say destroying our relationships with other countries while other countries were getting sweet deals, right? If Canada, which was charging crazy taxes and tariffs on our products that were going to them and we were basically charging nothing back, how can we sell to their market? So if they're upset with us, right? So, China is a little upset with right now. We're try upset with us. We're trying to get fairer deals. Canada obviously under Carney is upset with us because we're trying to get fairer deals. Donald Trump is trying to reset things. We were basically the world's piggy bank for the last It's really basically post World War II and Donald Trump is trying to reverse that so that we will have fairer deals. If you told me that it was just zero across the board and there were no tariffs going any which way, I could completely get on board that. But as long as countries are going to treat us unfairly, often while we foot the bill for their defense or a series of other things and we give them foreign aid and everything else, well then we should have equal playing field going both directions. >> What better deal did he get? >> What >> What better deal did he get? >> What do you mean? Several countries have already come back and we've >> name any of the conditions that made the trade better off. Give me the specifics. >> Canada, I think they had something like a 60% tariff on cheese. literally on cheese that was being sold from America, from Wisconsin to Canada and that basically is zero right now. That's one that's one little example. >> I think it's zero right now. >> Okay. So that's that's a targeted tariff, not a universal tariff. Can you name one country that had a universal tariff on us? >> I think there are several countries that I think there I think there are several countries that did. Honestly, I'm not sure, but I think there are several countries that did. >> Okay. So that that zeroed out the tariffs. I think Argentina did if I'm not mistaken. I think Israel did. I think a few other countries did. Why don't we put a proportional tariff on them, the same that they put on us, so that we can negotiate that down? It doesn't seem like Trump's looking for that. >> What do you mean? That's what that's let me just clarify. The tariffs are being paid by our consumers. So Trump, while trying to get his deals, is making inflation go up and making it worse off for you at the grocery store, worse off for you at the gas pump, worse off for you when you're trying to buy a house. So can you, again, like you mentioned before, can you name one metric that better off? the premise of what you're saying because do you think we should just have >> free trade with everybody without any penalization? >> Libertarian, don't you want free trade? >> No, that's what I'm saying. So, so I think you're agreeing with me. What Donald Trump is trying overall decrease tariffs? >> He's trying. >> The Supreme Court did more to decrease tariffs than he did. >> It doesn't happen overnight. It doesn't happen overnight. They're negotiating these things. >> Have we done anything in his office yet? >> Yes. >> Yes. Talk Scott Besson every day is negotiating with these other countries. You you think that >> you think the negotiations are worse off with the JCPOA? We have less political concessions right now than we had a decade ago under the JCPOA. So tell me, what political concessions have we got with the war with Iran since Trump started it? >> Well, right now Iran literally exports no oil. Every day they are losing $500 million. So what you can do over time is you have a military adventure which we had 40 days which we took out their air force and their uh their entire navy and everything else and now we completely control their concern. What's the political concession since the beginning of the war? >> What's what's the political concession from Iran since the beginning of the war? Yes. >> I Well, we're in the We're having negotiations with them right now. >> And we haven't gotten anything. >> We're having negotiations with them right now. >> So, nothing. >> Well, we're in a negotiation for two and a half months now. We got no political concessions for two and a half months. How long do you think >> decade ago? We had we had a limitation in terms of them enriching uranium to 3.7% that was going to be in place until 2030. It would still be in place to this day to the GCP. >> We started with this. They admitted they were they were enriching past that point. Steve after the JCPOA Steve Wickoff said the day two or three days before the war started that they admitted they were enriching more also pulled out of the agreement strike that we made a year ago. They haven't been building up to the DNI that you believe. Why would you believe the Iranian theocratic regime? Why would you believe that's the director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbert appointed by Donald Trump? So explain to me why you don't believe her. >> Listen, Marco Rubio. Marco. Marco. Marco. Hold on. >> Why don't you believe the entire US intelligence committee? Why do you think they're all lying? >> So are you saying that Donald Trump just ignored the entire US intelligence community? >> Literally, that's what he did. >> No, he didn't. That's it. That's okay. So that's an interesting disconnect that we have. I mean, Marco, why did they contradict each other? >> Marco Rubio very clearly laid out what was going on here. And by the way, Donald Donald Trump Donald Trump and every president for the last 40 years has said that Iran will not get a nuclear bomb. Right? Every president has said that. Joe Biden said no. Remember Kamala Harris said no. The JCPA limited it to a greater extent. Why didn't you address that point >> again? Again, you are going on the assumption that you can trust these random inspectors that are going into these places. Literally >> random inspectors. The IAEA is the international atomic energy. With with all due respect, I think that I think that trusting some of these international things that they somehow have America's interests or the West's interests in mind, I think is a kind of faulty it's just a faulty premise, I would say. >> So the international actors that are lying, they don't actually have legitimate surveillance over their nuclear enrichment facilities. >> No, they don't. >> Okay. So they have they were buried they were buried under they were buried under mountains. They were buried underground. My next surrounded claim is that progressives push normal moderate Americans to the right. >> Like to debate this claim. Please get to the chair in three, two, one. >> Hey, how are you? >> Nice to meet you. >> Good to meet you. >> So, my argument here is that what progressives are doing are is opening up opportunities for people to re-evaluate the way that they see politics, right? Progressives are arguing that more pocket power should be delivered to the average American. That is like one of the most the foundational tenets of progressivism. >> Can you say what that what does more pocket power mean? >> Okay. Right. So this is the idea right that under our current system we see that the majority of power as well as just like monetary control exists within people who own private property. And to essentially uh decrease that gap, progressives want to give more power to those who are in the workplace. Do do you not want people to own private property? >> Well, I'm definitely anti- capitalist, I would say. So, I would say that workers should own the means of production, >> right? Oh, so you're a communist. >> Yeah. >> Oh, interesting. Yeah. Wow. I don't know what is communist. I haven't talked to a real life communist. What's a communist? >> Well, you want the pe you want the people to own the means of production and you don't seem to believe in property. >> The people who create value as in create the value of commodities should own the the actual value that they create from that process. Yes. So my answer if you want pe the people everyone in this room and everyone in this country to have more what I would want is that you would take less from them. So you tax everybody less. You remove regulation. You create the conditions for competition and capitalism so that more people will have more of their money. I want you I assume you work. Do you work? >> Yeah. >> Do you pay taxes? >> Yeah. >> I want you to keep more of your money. I don't know what you do. I don't know how much you earn. I whatever it is you earn, I want you to have more of that money so that you can put that money back into the system. >> The majority of wealth in this system is is owned by 1% of the population. You understand that, right? And where does that wealth come from? >> Wait, 1% of the population. Do you know how much percent they pay in taxes? That 1%. >> Not nearly enough because the majority of their because the majority of their wealth comes from >> it's 47%. What? Hold on. Hold on. So 1% of the population pay 47%. You accept that? Okay. >> Yeah. So what would be their fair share? >> What would be their fair share? their actual wealth that they own that again majority of these lineages of power and ownership. >> What would be thei