The Joe Rogan Experience - #1167 - Larry Sharpe

Episode Date: September 5, 2018

Larry Sharpe is a business consultant, entrepreneur, and political activist. He is currently a candidate for the Libertarian Party nomination for the Governor of New York. https://www.larrysharpe.com/

Ready? 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Larry Sharp. How are you, sir? I am doing great. Thanks for having me. Before we get started, I like you. Oh, that's good. I like you a lot. I'm winning already. I like what you're saying, man. I'm just telling you right now, up front. I've been listening to a lot of your interviews, watching a lot of your interviews.

You make sense. Oh, my God. It's almost like you know you can't win. So you're talking so logically, you make sense. It's almost like you know you can't win. So you're talking so logically, you might win. Yeah. The hope is the people who actually have given up, who think it's so stupid, they don't bother voting, right? So the hope is I say something that makes sense and they go, oh, maybe I should vote.

Oh my God, maybe I should vote. If those people vote, I win. Yeah. There's an untapped resource of unmotivated people who are too fucked. But how do we fix that? Is it a matter of getting people? I believe firmly that if we could get people to register and vote online, especially with their phones, it changes the world. Yes. I really, really, really believe that. And I think that this is also a concern of the people that are in the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. And I don't think they want that. 100%.

They're relying on voter apathy. They're also relying on people who are committed to their parties and who are politically active, which is not the majority of the people. It's the establishment, right? I mean, look, you asked how we fixed this. Bernie and Trump actually taught us this in 2016. They taught us two things. Number one, if you can get people to an event, you can get them to the polling station. Number one, that's why they did a lot of events. I do over 30 events every month. I'm always doing events, getting people to show up, because if I can get them to show up to my event, I can get them to a polling booth, right? Because

to come to hear me speak, you have a lot of choices out there. You could be on Netflix, you can hang out with your family and friends. You could be playing a video game. You choose to come hear me speak, you'll come to the polling station. That's number one. But how do I get into care in the first place? It's hope. The average person who votes often, right?

If you vote often, you usually vote because of fear. The two-party system installs fear, right? I don't really care about my guy or gal, but I'm so afraid of the other guy, I'll go out and support my guy or gal, even though I don't even know his name. I just know I don't like the red team, so I vote blue, or I don't like the blue team, so I vote red. But to get someone who doesn't vote, and New York State's really bad. New York State, about 70% of New Yorkers don't vote. It's a huge chunk. Over 7 million New Yorkers. 70%. Yes, 70%. Yeah. Last election, I think it was 67%. So it hovers around 70. To get those people out, you have to give them hope.

Bernie gave the left hope. Trump gave the right hope. If the Democratic Party wasn't so broken as a party, Bernie would have been their nominee. It would have been hope against hope. It was hope against establishment. Hope won. That's how it works. I'm hope.

The other two guys who are running in my election, they're totally establishment. Well, you say some really logical things. One of the things that you said that nobody wants to touch, you were talking about gun violence. And you were talking about these mass shootings. And you said there's two things that they have in common. One of them, they don't have relationships. They don't have girlfriends. They don't have boyfriends.

Well, it's almost always a guy that does it. Yeah, usually. Boys tend to be more violent. Males tend to. People get mad at me being sexist, but I'm just doing stats. That's just stats. Statistically, males tend to outwardly strike. Women tend to inwardly strike.

It's a general rule, statistically. There's exceptions, obviously. The only other factor is psychotropic drugs. Yep. And these are two things that no one wants to talk about. Correct. And they're both real and they're both facts. And why is it that you think that these are, they're obvious facts that people want to ignore? Because they don't actually want to fix the problem, right? If you fix the problem, then you don't have controversy. If you don't have

controversy, you don't have a left versus right paradigm. Do you really think that's what it is? Yes. First off, they don't want to fix the problem. If you want to fix the problem of school shootings, right, it's two things to remember. As you've heard me say before, the school shooting, while it is a murder, at its core, it's actually a public suicide. And people don't understand that at its core, most mass shootings are public suicides. They would understand that. It's true. It's like death by cop, right? It's public suicide. So you have to make sure you have happier people, right?

But then why do they choose schools? Several reasons. One, because that's where their assumed enemies are, right? The incels think that the guys, the bad guys and the bad girls are there. But something else, they're soft targets. The other thing you remember from all these school shootings is they're planned. And that's a critical aspect. You want to stop school shooting? In New York State, you don't have to pass one extra law at all. You have to do one minor thing and one thing only. And that is say, if you are a licensed, if you're licensed and you have a permit to carry a

firearm, if you want to in school, you may. If you're a teacher or administrator, if you want to, you may. That's it. You don't have to force a teacher to carry. You don't need a resource officer. Why? Because if you have a resource officer, which is what most Republicans will say, put an officer there, they'll just shoot him first.

If you're all Democrats, no guns. They'll shoot everybody. So if you instead say, well, I don't know who's armed. Is it an administrator? Is it a teacher? Is it everybody? Is it nobody? The planning goes away.

Once there's no planning available, the school is no longer a soft target. They stop choosing the school. Okay, let me back. Let's unpack this. So you're saying that if you have an officer on the school that carries a gun, and this person knows that officer has a gun, they will shoot him first. Correct. And that if just teachers are carrying guns, there's no way this person knows, and so they're less likely to shoot people. There's two things. Here's the core of it. What's killing

our children? It's not firearms. One of the, I think it was a Texas shooting, I think it was, before he stole the guns, he had put together and set up pipe bombs and pressure cooker bombs in case he couldn't steal the guns. So if he couldn't get guns, he was going to kill people anyway. The key thing here is what's killing these kids?

Lack of community, lack of purpose, and loneliness. That's what's killing our kids. Those three things. Take those three things away. Kids don't do that. You give a kid who's 16, 17, 18 purpose, he can't go off and kill people. He has something to do. He has a something to do.

He has a reason to live. Remember, this is a public suicide. If you have a reason to live and you think the right answer is to go do something, you don't kill yourself. If you don't kill yourself, there's no public suicide. Mass shootings all of a sudden are tremendously reduced. It's just how it works. It's human nature. You have to understand that. But if you do that, then there's no extra law. Then there's no one to point a finger at. You can't restrict guns. What I'm saying just makes actual sense. This is where you and I break company because I don't agree with that. I don't think that anyone is trying to keep these school shootings in the same state they are now. I think that there's two things. One, no one wants to demonize psychotropic drugs, especially politicians. They have a really hard time with that because they don't want to tell people who are on psychotropic drugs that they're either suspects or suspicious or potential mass shooters.

New York State is showing you it's incorrect. We made the SAFE Act, and the SAFE Act literally says if you go on these drugs, you lose your firearms. So that's absolutely not true in New York State. It may be true in California. I don't know your laws here. But in New York State, the opposite is true. We've already done that. We have made our medical personnel part of our secret state police, which means if you go in and say, you know, I'm feeling depressed, I need some drugs, I'm thinking about suicide, the state police might come by and take your firearms. That's already happening in New York State. And they now want to create red flag laws, which means a teacher can now do it. So now a teacher says, oh, there's a student who I see drew a firearm, drew a gun, cops and robbers, maybe a red flag. Let me go to a judge and see if I can have the cops go and take his father's firearms. I definitely want to talk about this,

but I want to bring it back to what you said earlier. You don't think they want to fix the problem. I don't think that's true. I just don't think they have a viable solution that they think is politically viable. Perhaps, but I think my solution seems politically viable. Everyone I say this to, they go, oh, wow, you're right. Well, you are definitely right that they're lonely, sad people that are lashing out. I think you're definitely right that in many instances, it's a public suicide out and I think you're definitely right that in many instances it's a public suicide. Yep. And I think you're definitely right that the vast majority of them are on psychotropic

drugs which do have a disassociative aspect to them where they're not even sure they're aware of what they're doing. This is, if you talk to people that have been on those, well people that have been on these things things don't mean anything anymore. Like a car accident in front of them don't mean anything anymore. Like a car accident

in front of them doesn't mean anything. People have various reactions to various SSRIs and antidepressants. But one thing that happens is you lose the highs and lows and everything is just flat. You become numb. Yes. And you become numb to almost anything that happens. Absolutely. And again, it varies depending upon the individual that's on these things. Sure. Part of that would allow someone to do something horrific, which they wouldn't be able to before. Well, there's two things to remember here. One, I'm not concerned with being righteous.

I'm concerned with happy New Yorkers and happy people. That's what I want. Righteousness is very low on my priority of things. So if that doesn't sound, if what I'm saying sounds bad, I'm okay. I want to Righteousness is very low on my priority of things. So if that doesn't sound, if what I'm saying sounds bad, I'm okay. I want to fix the problem. The second thing is I'm not a politician, which means I don't have a career I have to protect. I don't have interests I have to serve. The average donor is $75. So I don't have a bunch of people who write me huge checks. So I don't have that concern either. So maybe in four years I'll be corrupt and you can beat me up on the show.

No, I don't think you're corrupt. I mean, I'm not saying that at all. I don't even think they're corrupt. I mean, I'm sure many of them are. But I think that they just – there's things they don't feel like they can discuss politically. And I think one of those things is in any way demonizing people who are on antidepressants. Because a lot of people are. There's a giant percentage of people on antidepressants. Because a lot of people are. There's a giant percentage of people on antidepressants in this country.

Yes, absolutely. Our opioid crisis is heavily based upon the idea that when you have pain of any type, physical, mental, the answer is not dealing with that pain, but the answer is a once-a-day pill. Right, medication. Yes, that is the answer for all of our pain. And because of that, you have a lot of people who are on drugs.

And you probably noticed that about 80% of all the people who are currently heroin addicts somehow started on someone's, not even always theirs, but someone's prescription legal drug. I mean, that was prescribed for you to pain medication or something like that. Usually pain medication. Yeah. But other things too. You're totally correct. This is a problem.

But what I'm saying is this is what I talk about often. or something like that, usually pain medication. But other things too. You're totally correct. This is a problem. But what I'm saying is this is what I talk about often. People say, Larry, why should I vote for you? Why should I support you? Here's the reason why. Whether you believe I can win or not is actually irrelevant. If you think I can win, awesome, I can win. And to be forward with you, if I win in New York as a libertarian, the entire nation changes overnight.

And that's not exaggeration. The entire nation changes overnight. This is's not exaggeration. The entire nation changes overnight. This is the most impactful election, hands down, the entire nation, 2018. Why? Because it's New York and it's not New Mexico like when Gary Johnson won. Yes.

New York State was ranked 50th by Cato when it comes to freedom. We have the most people leaving, over 100,000 people leaving every single year, more than any other state. We also, on top of that, we are ranked the least friendly to retirees. All of a sudden, Larry Sharp, libertarian,

becomes governor? I mean, it's insane. The advantage is it's a five-way race. In a five-way race, 30% could win. This is actually a winnable race. How is it a five-way race? It's going to be His Majesty, who our current king, he will run.

There'll be a Republican- Cuomo? Yes, correct. There'll be a Republican. Why do you call me His Majesty? Because he thinks he's a king, and he is a king. That's the reason. When I'm in front of him, I'll call him Your Grace. But to you, I'll just say Your Majesty. I met him one time in 2014. Was he a dick? Yes, he was. Yes, he was. He was.

He was very dismissive. Yes, he was. I was actually with the libertarian candidate then in 2014. So yes, he was dismissive. So his majesty will run. There'll be a Republican sacrificial lamb placeholder who knows he'll come in second, probably third to me. Because New York has basically always same thing happens in a statewide election. Blue team comes in first. Red team comes in second. Nothing changes. Nothing changes. That's been the last 16 years.

But prior to that, Republicans did win. It did happen, but the state's too blue. What is she running as? She won't be running in about a week or so. No? She'll be finished. Yeah, she'll be finished. Yeah.

How do you know? Let me give you the five people, then I'll cover her. Okay, go ahead. Right? Those two. Then Stephanie Minor will run. She's an independent who runs out of Syracuse. There'll be a Green Party communist who'll run, Howie Hawkins. Communist?

Yes. Legit communist? Yeah. He wouldn't be unhappy if I called him that. Really? Yeah, yeah. He would nod his head? Yeah, probably.

Close. Yeah. Wow. He'd be okay with that. So him and then myself. So five people running. Okay. Right?

With five people running, New York State's a plurality state. So 30% in theory could actually win this thing. With people who know who I am, I already poll at 25%. This is both the Quinnipiac poll and Gravis Marketing poll. Both polls, I poll about 25%. With people who know you are. Who know who I am. My problem is name recognition, right? If more people get to know who I am, then that number obviously will go even higher.

And how much time do we have here? Two months. Here's the reality. I get $2 million. I win. $2 million is all it takes. Because I just need to get my name out. I already have infrastructure.

I already have the message. All I need is to get my name out. What it takes is advertisements on local stations to get my name out, which takes, what it takes is advertisements on local news, news, uh, on local stations to get my name out. That happens, I win. That's not an exaggeration. How important are the debates? Debates are important. If I, if I don't get that money, I'll have to win in debates. I'll have to do a Jesse Ventura.

Right, Jesse Ventura in Minnesota when he had debates, he won, he handily won in debates, and that really gave him the, uh, that gave him the election. That will give me the election. People were a big fan of that movie Predator. Yes. He didn't have time to bleed. That's exactly right, Joe. Yes.

For those of you old enough to remember that movie, yes. Jesse didn't have time to bleed. So yes. So that's what I'm saying. With that, we make that happen, we can actually win and change everything because all I need is my name to get out. But you asked about Cynthia Nixon.

Cynthia Nixon made an error. Cynthia Nixon is not a politician and doesn't know politics. And she thought that her celebrity would get her past the Democratic machine, which is run by Cuomo in our state. So she ran as Democrat. Stephanie Minor is also a Democrat, but she chose not to run as Democrat because she knew that if she ran as that, Cuomo would crush her as Cuomo's crushing Nixon. How is he crushing Nixon? In the Democratic convention, if you are able to get 5% of the vote from delegates, you get to speak on stage. Cuomo controlled those delegates with an iron fist so much, he made sure Cynthia Nixon did not even get 5%. She couldn't even get on the stage to speak. Now, let me be clear. Cynthia Nixon is a popular actor who lives in New York City. There is no way there

weren't enough people who would have, if they wanted to hear her speak, would have voted. 5%, of course, he made sure that didn't happen. She had to submit 65,000 signatures to get on the actual ballot so she could be in the primary. There is no way that he allows her to win. She doesn't win. He debated her because he thought, let me just show people that I don't care. I can just dismiss her. And that's why he debated her. And he's going to win.

And she's going to lose. And when she loses, I don't think she's going to stay in. I doubt she will. If she does, better for me because it'll be a six-way race. But I doubt she will. She'll probably drop out in some way, shape, or form. My odds are she'll run for Congress or something like that in the Working Families Party.

She'll do something like that. The Working Families Party? Yes. That's another party? It's another party in New York State, yes. How New York State runs, New York State is a fusion state, which means you can run as multiple parties

if you want to. You can have three or four or five lines if you want to. So what often happens is the big two parties, they use it as a way to have issue-based voters. So they'll literally create parties.

So they'll create a party that says, I'm the working families party. And then people go, oh, well, it's not Democrat. I'm a working family. And they'll click that. And it's the same guy. Cuomo will be on four or five lines. Happens often. The Republicans on three lines and the Democrat, I think, will be on probably four lines.

It's a very complicated process. It is. Now, is there any effort made or is there any discussion whatsoever about potentially moving voting to online? Is that something that you would be in favor of? No, not in New York State right now. No, I'm unsure. You're unsure of it?

I love the concept completely. I do. The only thing I don't know is I don't know the technology behind it. I don't know how safe it is. I just don't know. But what about banking? If you can bank online, that's where all your money goes. No, I love the idea.

I don't want to commit without knowing the technology. New York State is a problem because New York State throws out everything that is new. We've thrown out blockchain. We don't want to do any open source. We threw out hemp and marijuana. We're trying to destroy the vaping industry. I mean, anything that's new in New York State, we try to get rid of. We hit with the state. We're beating hemp and marijuana. We're trying to destroy the vaping industry. I mean, anything that's new in New York State, we try to get rid of. We hit with a stick.

We're beating up Uber now. We're taxing Uber to pay for the MTA. Is that because of corruption by established bodies that are- 100%. Yeah. New York State likes old money. We're really happy with old money. We do not like new money at all, which is another reason why the youth is leaving.

We had the hardest time getting the UFC into New York because of corruption. Yes, absolutely. We had to wait until that one politician was arrested. What was that one guy that went to jail? New York State, there's so many at you. Yeah. I forget who it was, but he was corrupt. Yes.

He was one of the main reasons that they were trying to make it illegal. Absolutely. It's new, which means by default, hit it with a stick. That's how New York thinks. It's new, hit it with a stick. Don't like it. It's new. We want old stuff. hit it with a stick. That's how New York thinks. It's new, hit it with a stick. Don't like it, it's new. We want old stuff. How ironic for a place called New York.

Yes, which is why my slogan is A New New York. That's the reason why my slogan is that, because we are right now in old New York, and it's not helping at all. The worst part is with the old New York, speaking of the people who are older, people who are retiring, they can't stay in New York State. Because it's too expensive. Too expensive. They pack up and go to North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida. Is it taxes? Is it real estate? It's both. It's taxes and it's an opportunity. It's both of those two things, right? So they decide to head on down to North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee. They actually have a name for us in the Carolinas. They call us halfbacks. We went to Florida and halfway back. It's true. They call us halfbacks. That's how many New Yorkers go there. But here's the worst part.

Most people who go to Florida go, oh, this is a mistake. There we go. See? Well, the sad part here is though, Florida actually has more people than we have and half of our budget. And Scott actually, the Governor Scott actually thanked Cuomo for sending all the people down there because 15% of New York State's budget is actually pensions. And so many people who have pensions are actually leaving New York State and going someplace else. So New York State people are paying for the pensions and then they're being

spent in other states. It's a terrible idea. The state is broken. It is so broken and people are talking about, if you're a Democrat you're saying, everything's still great. If you're a Republican you're saying well, tweak this or tweak that. I'm saying rebuild from scratch. There are things you have to change.

You have to change the root so you can make the branches actually die. We keep clipping branches. The weeds keep growing. Now, we got way off track with this school shooting thing. And I wanted to get back to it because I think it's a very complex issue. And I don't know what the answer would be. I think you found problems. And these problems that you're willing to discuss that very few people are,

are that these people are lonely and sad that it's public suicide and that they're on psychotropic drugs. Absolutely. I don't know why you don't think that other people want to fix it. I just don't think that they have a solution that they can discuss that is not so controversial that it overwhelms the rest of their messages. What could be done? Sure. I have a couple of answers.

Okay. The issue is this is an issue that's been going on literally for decades. So there is no do this and it's done. Right. There are several things. One of them is fixing education. The other one is fixing family courts. Okay, well, let's start slow.

How do you fix education? Absolutely. It is a complete reboot. Right now, the first thing you want to do for education is you want to make sure there is no standardized testing until high school. None whatsoever. Standardized testing is bad for several reasons. Number one, it's an unfair way of grading teachers. Teachers are now graded by how their students do in a standardized test, which is silly.

That doesn't mean you're a good or bad teacher. Next, it makes a bunch of kids who are 10, 11, 12, 13 years old feel stupid because they're not good test takers. And you create now a secondary class of student for absolutely no reason. Because the next reason is standardized testing is no indication of success in life. You could be a great test taker at 12 or 13 or a terrible test taker, and it does not mean you'll be successful or not successful in life. Last is how New York State often will decide how to fund schools. So it's a way of funding schools that's also unfair. There's no advantage to standardized testing except it means the federal government now begins to control our schools more.

So when you say that standardized testing has testing, there's an effect on funding, does that mean that if a school does really well, they get more money? Yep, often. It's part of a very complex algorithm that New York State has that almost no one can actually find. That seems like it should almost be the opposite. That if a school does poorly, that they should put more resources into that school because it's not being effective.

In theory, that's true. I'm not sure that's accurate either. We throw about $22,000 per student per year in New York State, more even than California, and it doesn't work. We have mediocre results at best. Dollars isn't the answer. It's revamping the system, right? Funding is not the answer.

So how do you revamp the system? There's more parts than that. The first one was just getting rid of that. The second thing is we shouldn't even have K through 12. K through 12 is an anachronism and shouldn't exist. Why is that? Because the last two years, it should be K through 10. The last two years of high school for a huge chunk of people, gym, study hall, video games, and probably smoking weed.

Just nothing but bad for too many students just sitting around doing nothing. They have no purpose. They have no community. They have no reason to do anything. They're unhappy, right? Another reason why they're unhappy. Isn't that a gross generalization that they're unhappy and they're not doing anything? I mean, there's probably a lot of kids listening to this that are 16 and 17.

They're working their ass off right now. Absolutely. And I have a solution for them. Preparing for their future. And I have a solution for them that's even better. I have a solution. Again, let me keep moving. Okay, go ahead.

Right. First thing is, how do I know what I just said is true? Right. You just asked that question. K through 10. I'll tell you why what I just said, why I know is true.

Because for the vast majority of students going to college now, the first year of college is 13th grade because they're not ready for school because the last two years didn't prepare them for college. If it did,

we wouldn't require 13th grade. How do I know it's 13th grade? The average student now takes six years them for college. If it did, we wouldn't require 13th grade. How do I know it's 13th grade? The average student now takes six years to graduate college. So the results show me that I'm correct, right? The results of what's happening. And here's the worst part. Now we ship these kids off to college who many of them don't even want to go to college.

So we send them anyway, take some six years to graduate. They're 24 years old with at least 50K in debt, if not more, minimum 50K, some 100K, some 200K, depending on what it is. And now there's no job for what they want to do. And now they're working at Starbucks. Wow. What a disaster that is. We wonder why our kid's coming back home. So how about this instead? At 10th grade, take a test. You pass a test, you get a diploma. Whether you were homeschooled, private school, public school, diploma's yours. Awesome.

Now you have five choices, and this is exactly to your point. You have five choices. Choice number one, you're a kid who's hardcore. You think that college is your answer. Good. Go to two-year prep school. Imagine that kid who right now you just said is busting his ass. He could be in a prep school of his choice, and the people in that prep school are all

kids who want to be in that prep school. It would change his entire situation. No more knuckleheads who don't want to be in that prep school. It would change his entire situation. No more knuckleheads who don't want to be there, who are forced to be there, who are cut in class. The kids who would be there are those who want to be there. The teachers, no disciplinary issues. They want kids who want to be there. Better for them. They could hustle better. Now they're ready for college when they get there. They take advantage of incubators, of internships, maybe even graduate in three years. Now they're rocking and rolling. Less debt, better off, life is good. Better services, better everything for less money. I'm not done. You're not that kid.

You're the kid who's super smart. You want to become a scientist. You want to get a PhD. Awesome. Go right to an associate's degree. Start right away, 16, 17, 18, get to your degree because you're that good. Take your SATs. You're that smart. You're Einstein. Awesome. Go do that. You don't want any of those things.

No worries. Go to trade school. Become a plumber, carpenter, mason, whatever the case may be. Go do it. New York State desperately needs tradesmen. Desperately. The average tradesperson in New York State is about 50 years old. Too old for an average.

Should be 30-something for an average. 35 would be for an average. It's too high, which means we have a lot of trades jobs that are not filled. I mean, a lot of foreign labor has to come to New York State, right? New York kids aren't doing it. Why? We've been told a lie. And that lie is the only way to success. The only way is to do well in high school, get a great four-year degree and go get a job and sit behind a computer all day. That's a lie. That is a way to success. It is not the only way to success. There are a lot of kids now,

and I'm sure you know people like this, who they spent the first five, 10 years of their life trying to make it that way, struggling through school. Then at 28 years old, they go, I just want to build houses, man.

Then they go build a house. I just want to be a computer guy and they just make apps. Let's go do something I want to do. They should have been doing that at 18. I'm still not done. For most people, though, they don't know what they want to do. That's a big part of the problem.

I get that all the time. They don't have a passion. They don't have a direction and they're confused. Yes. This is one of my biggest complaints I got about this plan, right? Because the other two ideas are just go get a job. Right. Just go to work or start a business.

And what you just said is what I get all the time. But Larry, they're 16. They don't know what they're doing. Good. Make your mistake at 16, not 26. We're making mistakes at 26. We have people who are lost at 26. We have a generation now.

If you ask the people in their 20s right now across this nation, you say, do you feel like an adult? Over half will say no. Over half will say no. Over half will say no. 40-year-olds will say that. Not as much, but yes, but not as much. No, it probably won't be over half. It won't be over half. Okay.

You go to 20-somethings, over half will say, no, I don't feel like an adult, right? Because they're making the same mistakes that many people made at 18, 19, 16. They're now making it 25, 26, 28. Well, there's also not a rites of passage. Bingo. There's not something that actually happens to them. This would actually be that.

They'd have to make that choice at 16. But here's the issue. How do I pay for it? And this covers the entire issue that we just talked about. That's the next question I get. How do you pay for it? New York State says I have to pay for a full 12 years of school. Have to pay for it.

State has to pay for it. No worries. I was a Marine. When I got in the Marine Corps, I got a GI Bill. It was X dollars. I think it was $100,000. I forgot what it was back then. This was a Marine. When I got a Marine Corps, I got a GI Bill. It was X dollars. I think it was $100,000. I forgot what it was back then. This is in the 90s.

I think I got $100,000, like 10 years to use it. We're going to give all of our kids $20,000 and five years to use it. They don't get the physical check, but the state will pay a check to whatever school they want to go to for $20,000. They have five years to use it. What does that mean? You can, at 16, start experimenting. You can say, you know what?

I know college is for me. I'm going to go to prep school. Here's what I promise you. I promise you this. I'll pay any amount of money you want. Promise you this. As soon as this comes into play, you will find tons of, all of a sudden, prep schools and trade schools that pop up.

And guess how much they're going to cost for two years? $20,000. That's going to be their tuition. You might say, well, wow, Larry, that's a lot of money. It isn't. We're paying $44,000. That's going to be their tuition. You might say, well, wow, Larry, that's a lot of money. It isn't. We're paying $44,000 now for each of those kids. We're saving $24,000 per kid and giving them better schooling, more accurate, actual choices. They can learn something.

They make their mistakes at 16, 17, which is way better than 26 or 27, and maybe they figure out what they want to do. Well, why is it so cheap? Why are you going to be able to do that for $20,000 when it costs so much more now? What's going to be different? People are going to be choosing. Right. Yes.

But the people that are educating these people, how are they going to get paid? Oh, I love that. Where's the money going to come from? Great question. Now, a couple things to remember. Teachers ask me all the time. They say, Larry, how are you going to help us? Here's what I tell you.

I'm going to get rid of a bunch of your administrators. In New York State, we actually have school districts that have more administrators than teachers. What? Yes, that's correct. Do you own homework? What's the value of having administrators? Because you have to check boxes for government. You have to check boxes for government.

Did you do X? Did you do Y? Did you do Z? These administrators are required. That's what's going on? That's correct. There's about $60 billion in our budget in New York State for education, give or take. About $4 billion comes from the federal government.

About $35 billion comes from the state. About $20 billion comes locally, give or take. These are round numbers, and they change yearly depending on who you talk to, but it's about that. Once we get rid of the federal government being involved in New York State, $4 billion goes away. People get afraid. Oh my God, we lose that money. Good. Good. Let it go away. Because all those administrators go away also. If you can get rid of three, four, five,

six administrators for every one or two teachers, oh my God, what could you do? I'm not a professional educator, but I would imagine that if I was, I would be upset at this. I would say that there's a reason why those administrators are there, and we need them to take some of the administrative weight off of the teachers the teachers are stressed out

enough by teaching students they don't have the time to be taking care of all the formalities and the things that these administrators do I have never heard that ever because that's not true you are the first person to ever said to me ever in over a year of me doing this so every teacher would agree with you?

No, no, no, no. Not every teacher. I never heard it. You never heard it. But you've talked to a lot of teachers? Lots of them. Dozens of them. Okay. And what do they say about administrators? And they say, awesome, because it's... Not in those words, but yes. Because most administrators are actually administering

teachers. They're telling them how to teach, what to teach, when to teach, grading them. Okay, but if they don't, who will? The parents will. The parents will? Yes. Do you think the parents have the time or the understanding of what an education should comprise of to be able to direct not just their student, what their child needs, but

a group of 50 or however large the class is? I love that. Great question. And generally speaking, probably not. But teachers do. Teachers do. Yes. So they're going to self-police?

There'll be some administrators. You're assuming that I'm going to get rid of all administrators? No, no. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that. But you're definitely saying that administrators... You went to school, though.

Hold on. You went to school. Do you remember how many vice principals there were at any of your schools? Do you remember? No, I don't. Probably two or three. That was normal in most schools. When I was in school, often it was two or three. I don't remember. Now there's 12. 12? 10, 14. And why? Why is that? Because they're administrators and they're making sure other things, they're making sure boxes are checked. So here's your alternative. Your alternative is keep funding a broken system and be afraid, which is what you're saying.

No, I'm not saying be afraid. You're saying teachers will be afraid. Afraid. Yeah, because then who will educate our kids? No, no, overwhelmed. Overwhelmed, okay. Yeah. Fear of being overwhelmed, yes.

Not just that, but also having a mandate, like having a very strict curriculum that they have to teach these children. And that is nothing but a bad thing. I'm going to give you real fast, if you don't mind. I'm going to give you a list of all the times centralized control has worked. Okay. Finished. Centralized control meaning in education, meaning what? In anything.

When does centralized control make things all of a sudden better? Define centralized control meaning – It doesn't work. In education meaning what? In anything. When does centralized control make things all of a sudden better? Define centralized control. A strict mandate from Albany. A strict mandate from D.C. I'll ask you a question. I'm assuming you're old enough that you were in school at one point at 1980 or older. Yes. Or before.

I was. Yes. Prior to 1980, basically the Department of Education didn't really exist as it does now. It did exist, but it was basically just a repository for information. It didn't really do anything. It didn't have any power. Since 1980, it began to have power. Do this and we'll give you money.

Don't do this. We don't give you money. Here are your rules. Follow them or we punish you. That's what they are now. You learn to read and write. You learn to function in society. So did I. Somehow every American prior to 1980 went to school, learned how to read and write, You learn to function in society. So did I.

Somehow every American prior to 1980 went to school, learned how to read and write, learned how to function in society. Somehow it worked. Do I trust the administrator or a teacher? I would rather trust the teacher. Now, does that mean there'll be no administrators? Of course not.

There will be administrators. Of course there will be. There will be still principals and things of that sort, of course. But the difference is an administrator cares about checking a box. Check a box. Your students aren't better off because boxes are checked. Your students are better off because your students are getting better and because the parents are happier. Right. But when you're saying boxes being checked, that means things

being covered that they feel are significant. Yes. Or a standardized test. Yes. You said that they feel significant. That's correct. Yes. Well, that someone, I mean, I don't know how curriculums are set up, but I would imagine that people get together and they decide that children need to have a certain amount of ability with grammar, a certain amount of understanding of mathematics. Yes. I'd agree. So who's going to do that? How about teachers and the local administrators? And how about the local PTA? What's wrong with that?

So less administrators, but not an elimination of administrators. I never said that. So I didn't say you did, but how we decide how many administrators are necessary and how many can you cut out? How much money can you save? And this is even better. You're going to love my libertarian ways on this one. Okay. Right now, what happens is there is a convoluted way of deciding how- A what?

A convoluted way. Oh, I thought you said cum loaded. Did you hear that? It could be, but no, I don't think it is. Con convoluted way of deciding how... A what? A convoluted way. Oh, I thought you said cum-loaded. Did you hear that? It could be, but no, I don't think it is. Convoluted. Convoluted way. I'm like, this is a new word, and I don't think it should be used.

Is that new? No, not convoluted, the other one. Yeah, okay. Cum-loaded, I was like, this is... I'm sure there's a fetish there somewhere. I'm sure there is. I just haven't heard it. Me either.

See, you're ready to go now. So there's a convolut there somewhere. I'm sure there is. I just haven't heard it. Me either. See? You're ready to go now. So there's a commoner way of actually funding these schools. I don't want that. I want it to be very simple. I want a flat fee to come from the state. Here district, depending on how many kids you have, here's your money. What does that mean? Well, the reality of it is there are about, if I'm not mistaken, about 700 school districts in New York State.

A lot. A lot. That's a lot. It. A lot. A lot. That's a lot. It is a lot. And so what happens now is there's your money. Most of them are going to make no changes because they're going to be afraid. But it's like anything else.

They'll be early adopters. And early adopters are going to say, wait a minute. So the federal government isn't telling us to do this. The state government isn't telling us to do that. So we can change some things here. So when you say here's your money, they're going to get less money than they're getting now? It depends on the school district. Some will, some won't.

It's not like you'll have less jobs there. They're going to have to decide whether or not they have less administrators. You got it. Exactly right. Yes. And you're saying, oh, my God, that's scary. Some of our school districts will fail. Yes.

But in New York State, they're all failing now. So why do I care? We're failing in mass right now. I'm okay. Let me finish. Okay, please go. I don't want government to be what you always hear, which is elections have consequences.

So I win. I now get to impose my will upon all of you because I won. So what I say goes, I'm supposed to know everything, be everything, create boards and make things happen. I instead want to be the guy who, when you have trouble, I can help.

So as school districts begin to have trouble, I will, without question, try to help them. Of course I will. But there's 700 districts. That's correct. How would you have time to do that? I won't personally. I'll have people who would do it right now. There's already an infrastructure to handle that already.

I don't have to create a new one. It already exists. But right now, it's just an infrastructure to handle that already. I don't have to create a new one. It already exists. But right now, it's just making up reasons to punish people. I don't want it to make up reasons to punish people. I want it instead to say, okay, this school district is lost. How do we help? I only have one string attached to the money I give, only one, and that is transparency. As I told you before, I'm a business guy, and here's what I know.

This is an actual equation that works every single time. Very simple, simple equation. Personal freedom plus transparency plus accountability equals innovation. If we do that, the early adopters will come on. They will find great ways of making things work. They will get rid of some administrators. They will get rid of some teachers. They will hire new ones. They will decide which one should be given raises. That will happen. Okay. Can I stop you there? Please, go ahead. Because what you're saying may work in the world of business because people have incentive to succeed in business.

And that incentive is monetary success. Not always monetary, but yes. Okay. Not always, but for the most part. Yep. Sure. When you're talking about a school and you cut the funding for the school and say, hey, figure it out. You guys decide how many administrators you want to keep.

Aren't the administrators essentially the bosses? Aren't they the ones who are in control? I mean, they're not going to get rid of their own jobs. So what are they going to do? Are they going to pay the teachers less? Are they going to get inferior teachers? It's a great question. Are they going to ramp up their control of the cash flow because they realize that there's less of it?

It's a great question. And here's the issue. It's not going to happen overnight. It's not like I win in November and go, great, all the money's gone. That's not how it works. I win in November. People know what the plan is. We start talking about it already.

We start bringing parents on board. We start coming up with plans already. The plans, it's like any other organization. You're saying business. I'm thinking, oh, this works in military. This works in business. It doesn't matter. It works in everything. It works in your family. It doesn't matter. If you knew that six months from now, you were going to have a significant decrease in your income, you would start to make change, particularly if there was someone above you saying, hey, Joe, you're going to have a decrease in your income. How do

we make this work? What can we do? If someone's there to guide you and you already have an infrastructure there, you'll begin to fix it. My fear would be that they would have less teachers. It's possible. And they would have larger classes. Totally possible. And the administrators, because they're in control, people don't like to give up control. But the administrators aren't actually in control.

Well, who's actually in control is the PTA, right? The Parent Education Association can have a lot. So do you think the PTA would decide? The school boards would decide. But they would have to agree with you that they want to get rid of administrators. Absolutely. And if they didn't universally, if they didn't universally cross the board, then this fails miserably, and then classes get

larger, and then kids get less attention, and then the already piss-po poor education system sinks further into the abyss. And we have two choices. Number one we can be afraid of that and stay a hostage to a terrible system

that's not working and filling our kids and making us unhappy and destroying the state. That's option one. Or option two, do that and just watch over it. Understanding that that could happen. Because those aren't the only two options. The other option is, yes, fund it more. Boo.

Fund a bad system? Boo. No. Why is that bad? If you had a terrible... What's wrong with the system? Let's go over that first. I just told you already.

No, no. But I mean, in terms of like, how much money are they making? Right? And what would increasing that amount of money enhance? Okay. Two things to remember. The first thing is there's no way in the world that a governor should be deciding what every teacher makes in a state. Okay.

That's just philosophically wrong. Okay. So I'm never going to do that. That is simply philosophically wrong. It's against who I am. Centralized control is a bad idea. Localized control is always a better idea. So that premise, I'm never going to even touch that.

What I'm trying to achieve here is to make change. I know that locally there will be people who do it right because that always happens. That's just how it works. You will see out of 700 districts, some will decide to get together and mix districts together. Some will decide not to. Some will do different things. You'll see it happen. My point is this is a major overhaul. I get it. But businesses do it all the time. Families do it all the time. If you're able to watch it, I don't want to be the mother or the father. Democrats want to be

your mother. They want to give you everything. Republicans want to be your father and protect you from everything. I want to be your brother. I want to be the guy that you love. You don't want to live with him, but you love him. And when you need a ride to the airport, he's there for you. I want to be the firefighter, the guy who comes to help when you need me. Now, you're saying, but Larry's school district will fail.

Yes, some will. No, that's not what I'm saying. Well, okay. Some might fail. That's what you're saying. I'm not even saying they might fail. What I'm saying is that you're going to put them in a compromise situation. Yes. You're going to give them less money and you're going to say, figure it out. Yes, but not just, see, you're assuming that it's just, here's money, good luck. No, here's less money. Yes. Here's less money and I think you have too many administrators. Yep. And let's talk this out over a series of several months. When you talk to professional educators, do they agree that they have too many administrators? The teachers always do. Yes. So far, every teacher I've met, everyone. But they agree they do well with less money? If they didn't have administrators, yes. And how much less money are you talking about? I'm unsure to

be fair with you. Not sure yet. This I'm unsure yet. But you feel like the way to fix the education system is to cut funding. That would like, for people like me who are on the outside, you hear that and you go, ooh, I already feel like teachers are underappreciated and probably because of that unmotivated. Because you decided to say the answer is cut funding. It's not what I said. No, no, no, no, no. Regardless of what you're saying. Yep. It's not what I said. No, no, no, no, no. It's not what I said. Regardless of what you're saying.

Yep. Regardless of what you're saying. Yep. What I'm saying is currently. Yep. Even in California, forget about New York. Yep. I feel like teachers are underappreciated.

I would agree with that. And I feel like it's a noble profession that's incredibly valuable and the people should be able to make a decent living. Agreed. I don't know how the solution to that is to give less money to the school. You're missing a very important point. If you ask most teachers why they're underappreciated, most of them, they're not going to say that people like you and I don't appreciate them.

They're going to say, the system doesn't appreciate me. That's why they're always fighting the system. Oklahoma, they fought the system. They're always fighting the system. What I'm saying is fix the system. The system is heavily controlled in many cases by the federal government, $4 billion worth. So we have to lose $4 billion unless we want to keep the federal government in our system. I don't want that.

But your fix is to let them figure it out. Get the federal government out and let them figure it out with less money. I have to push back here. You keep saying, let them figure it out with less money. I have to push back here. Okay. You keep saying, let them figure it out. As if I'm just going to walk away and say, oh, well, good luck. I hope I'm going to go off and hang out in Puerto Rico for a while. No.

I'm saying I'm going to facilitate it because you know what I do? I trust teachers more than I trust administrators. I trust the local people that if I give them the right tools, they'll do the right thing. But more importantly, they'll show others as also transparent. What's going to happen is they're going to figure out the right way to deal with teachers. Should school district one hire more Spanish teachers versus school district two? I don't know. I'm not supposed to know that, but they do. And if they make a mistake, then they'll fix it. And then other counties. When you say they, are you talking about the teachers themselves? Or are you talking about these administrators who you want to eliminate in the first place? I'm talking about the school boards.

The school boards. The school boards are going to be the ones with the PTA. If we make this work the right way, it will be everyone talking together. It will be school boards talking to administrators, talking with teachers, talking with parents. I don't want schools graded by standardized tests. It will be school boards, talking to administrators, talking with teachers, talking with parents. I don't want schools graded by standardized tests. We've been doing that for years, and we have very, very unhappy people, unhappy students, unhappy parents. I want parents to be happier.

I want students to be happier. And you might say, but then, Larry, they won't learn certain things. Is that a horrible thing? I'd rather them be happy than learn AP chemistry. Yes. If that means one school district decides that AP chemistry isn't that important in their school district, it's fine. Those kids will learn it in the prep school

and some kids won't learn AP chemistry. If that makes your school district happy, I'm okay with that because it goes to the next level, which of course becomes kids with special needs. You have a special needs kid. How do you make that kid happy? How do you decide whether that kid's successful or not? Does the standardized testing doesn't work? What do you do? You start doing check boxes. Does that work? Of course not. That's why you literally have hundreds of parents every single

year suing New York State because they weren't happy with their kids getting services but not getting better. I want your kid getting better. You're assuming that because the federal government puts these standards in it, that makes them good or bad. It doesn't. If anything, it makes them worse. I'm not assuming that. If my kids are happy, that's what I want. Happy New Yorkers means they stay in New York. Happy New Yorkers means they grow their businesses in New York, keep their families in New York. I get that. But saying happy and saying the solution and the key to happiness is funding them less and getting rid of administrators by letting them figure it out. Oh, my God. You're such a Democrat, Joe.

I'm not? You're such a Democrat. Yes, you are. I'm definitely not. My God, you are so a Democrat. How am I a Democrat? Less funding means the world's ending. Less funding means the world's ending. You're a Democrat.

Well, for a lot of people, they hear that you're going to take money away from schools. The person who only hears that, if the person says all he's going to do is get rid of money from schools, that person is never going to vote for me. That person is probably a Democrat. That person is going to vote for Cuomo. And that's fine. I'm not going to win everybody. I can't win everybody. But I'm going to change a system that is completely broken.

If you say this, what you're talking about people talk about the MTA also in New York City. The MTA. You got to keep funding the MTA. I'm not going to be hostage to a shit system. Period. I don't care. I'm not going to be hostage to a shit system. This is a terrible system that is failing New Yorkers, that is failing people in New York City when it comes to the MTA.

That's failing our state. And for people who don't know what that is, that's mass transit. I'm sorry. Yes. Those of you who are not in New York. It's a bad system. I'm not going to be a hostage because of fear. No.

I will fight my jailer, period. And my jailer is a system that is broken that says, you better give me more money, otherwise this will happen. You better give me more money, otherwise this will happen. No, no, I'm going to fix that system. I'm going to help facilitate fixing that system. I'm not just going to let them go away. I'm not saying that.

What I'm saying is I'm going to help facilitate that system. And to do that, we just going to let them go away. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is I'm going to help facilitate that system. And to do that, we're going to lose $4 billion. And we'll get over that. We'll fix that. We'll make it happen. We'll make it work. And if you get more people into this state, and this is the most important piece, you can raise money through other ways than just raising taxes on people. And this is the most critical piece. When we hear funding, and this is why I was teasing you and calling you a Democrat, because when you talk about funding, you're talking about more taxes. I'm not talking about that.

If you get more people to stay in New York State, you raise your revenue without having to raise taxes on anybody. But if you raise your revenue, are you going to put more revenue into the schools? Of course. There'll be more people in the schools, more revenue. Yes. Absolutely. So you'll spend more money in the schools.

There'll be more people in the schools and more taxes. Of course we would. If we taxes. Of course we would. If we could, of course we would. Of course. New York State has $170 billion budget with about a $4 billion deficit and $300 billion in debt. And the answer for every Democrat and Republican is more funding. There's going to be nothing left. This state's going to go defunct.

It's going to go under in 10 years. So how do you get more people to come to the state? First thing, by having a really super cool education system I just talked about. Super cool education system. That'll get people to come back. Are you going to hire someone to create this super cool education system or are you going to let these teachers figure it out on their own?

Hey, teachers, build me a super cool education system so that we get more funding. I already have the infrastructure for the super cool system I just told you. I've already told you what the infrastructure is. The concept already, the skeleton is already there. Okay. Now, once I win in November, we begin to build it out.

And yes, it'll be me and other people. Be clear. It's not like New York doesn't have enough workers. We have tons of workers that we can absolutely use to make this happen. Tons of workers. We have tons of workers that we can absolutely use to make this happen. Tons of them. If I'm not mistaken, the New York state has the most by percentage of government employees, I think, in the nation. I know we're the most unionized, but I think we're the most government employees by percentage. So you're going to move their jobs?

Sure. Love it. Yes, let's do that. Love the idea. You're asking details that are simple to fix when the time comes. Simple to fix. So you're going to take people out of what professions and move them into fixing these things? Do you think I actually have decided for every person in New York State what they're going to do? I don't know. That's why I'm asking you. Of course not. You're doing like a show now.

I'm not doing a show. Do you? You're a Democrat. Look at you. You're a Democrat. You are a Democrat. I'm not. I'm just asking you real clean questions here.

You four times said you're going to take money away from schools. But you are, right? Yes. You've said like four times. Right. Because you keep going on about these other things. Which is what matters more than losing $4 billion from education. Right.

But I just want to be clear about what you're saying, about what the actual plan is. I'm going to fix this system by creating a good skeleton off the bat that people are going to enjoy and like. And then once I win in November, we're going to fill that skeleton up to make an amazing school system that people are going to be proud of. They're going to want to bring their people. They're going to come back from North Carolina. They're going to come back from Tennessee.

They're going to move from Pennsylvania and Massachusetts and want to be part of this system. They're going to see schools that actually work well. They're going to see prep schools get kids into college. They're going to see colleges that actually educate kids and get them into jobs. When they see that happen, they'll all start coming. That's going to happen. It doesn't happen by me saying, how do I fund this? It doesn't happen by me saying, being afraid of making a step. You don't have to have the perfect plan to move forward. No plan is perfect anyway. You want a good, solid plan with motivated people. If you have motivated people to take up a plan, it'll wind up being successful.

Again, it's how it works. So this grandiose plan is that you're going to get rid of the last two years of high school. And you're going to offer rid of the last two years of high school, and you're going to offer potential prep school for children, and you're going to, for other kids, offer them trade schools. You're going to get rid of $4 billion in federal funding. You're going to let the schools figure out how many administrators they should have. With help.

With help. With help. And what's the help? Who are you going to hire to oversee this whole thing? We'll figure it out. You'll figure that out. Yeah. Look, I'm two months away from the election, and then at least six months for implementation.

Right. At least. That's probably low, probably more like nine. But plenty of time. This can't come into play until next September. Right. At earliest. Right? The earliest it can come into play until next September at earliest. The earliest it can come into play is next September.

I hope it's that fast. That would be amazing. I hope it is that fast. But it isn't five minutes. I'm not doing this so I can become king. We already have a king, and that's why we're in trouble. I want to give localized control many more options. I'm the crazy guy who actually means what he says when I say, let teachers teach.

I actually mean that. Most people say it, and their response then becomes, give more administrators. So you think what's stopping them now is standardized tests and administrators, and then funding that's based on the success of the tests in these school districts.

That's correct. The answer is always more funding. The answer is always more funding. And it isn't. It is not that. People always say, we have to fund, fund, fund. That is not the answer. There are better answers out there.

Of course there are. Let me go to another piece on how to raise money. Okay. The first thing is, of course, as I mentioned, get more people. If more people show up to the state. New York State could, in theory, and this is theory, easily hold 30 million people. The state? The state could.

It's possible. How many is in the city? Seven? There's about eight and a half in the city right now. About eight and a half in the city right now. Ooh, that's a lot. It is a lot. It's the largest city in the country by far.

It's over double Los Angeles. Los Angeles is about, what, three and a half? If I'm not mistaken. Well, sort of. L.A. has no end to it. Yes. Well, if you look at the metro area of New York City, it's actually 16 million. Metro area is 16 million.

The actual city itself is eight and a half. So it's by far the largest city in the nation. So yes. So it could, in theory, take 30 million people. It's possible. If we get that amount of people, oh my God, the tax revenue

would be insane. Right, but how would you get people to move to New York State? By having a better state. And one of the things I mentioned was education. But there are several other things you can do.

First off, why aren't we supporting small businesses? And we don't in New York State. We punish them. We punish them but with licensing. We punish them.

In New York State, there's actually a license to braid hair. There's a license to walk a dog. There's all kinds of licenses like that. You have to get a license to walk a dog? That's correct. Yes. What's involved in that? I don't know. I'm not a dog walker. I don't know. There should be none. Here's my rule on licensing. I got a nice, good general rule. Would you ask your friend to do it? If you were a woman who had lots of long hair, would you

ask your friend to braid your hair? You probably would, wouldn't you? Probably. Yep, you probably would. If you had a dog, I don't know if you have a dog, but assuming you have a dog, would you ask your friend to walk your dog? Sure. Sure, of course you would. Why is there a license for that? Would you ask your friend to remove your appendix?

Well, I think the idea would be that you wouldn't want someone to screw it up, so you'd want to make sure someone has insurance so that the consumer doesn't get ripped off. Yes, but the appendix thing, you wouldn't let someone... No. Yeah, get a license for that, I'm fine. Right. Get a license for that. But your point's a valid one. How about instead?

There's a difference between licensing and what you just said, which is insurance. There's a difference. Right. Licensing says the government decides if you can or can't do it, and if you don't, the government will fine you and or jail you. That's a license. So you don't have to have will fine you and or jail you. That's a license. So you don't have to have hair braiding insurance

or dog walker insurance. You might want to have insurance. I didn't say that. I said license. There is a difference. Right. The assumption is, and you've made it by Make That Step,

you made the assumption, which is licensing is for safety. It is not. It is for control. That's all it's for. An example I'll give you is vaping. In New York State, many counties,

you have to have a license for vaping. So what does a license entail? A license to sell? Yes, to sell, to have a vaping store. Yes, to have a vaping store, you have to have a license to have a vaping store. Similar to that of having a tobacco store. Similar. Right.

Right, they do that. So you might say, well, vaping, a license, it's great. It's for safety, right? Well, does the person who has done the vaping store, maybe, I don't know, learn CPR, understand the effects of nicotine on the body. No. They have to write a check and fill out a form. That's it.

There's no safety involved in the license. And they have to be approved for a license. That's correct. Meaning they can't be a felon with a history of fraud. I'm not sure if that's even

the case in the vaping. I don't think that's true. I think in vaping, that's not true. In certain cases there are. That's true and certain. But this one, yeah. Isn't tobacco a controlled substance?

It is. So I would assume that they do have to have a license based on not being a felon. For tobacco, perhaps. I'm talking about vaping. Vaping is not controlled. But vaping is tobacco. No, it is not. It's not?

No, not at all. But it's nicotine, right? Some is, some's not. No. So the stuff that is, though, isn't that a controlled substance? No, not at No. Vaping is basically a- That is, though. Isn't that a controlled substance? No, not at all. Nicotine?

I don't think it is. I don't think it is. Tobacco is, I know. That's hilarious. If tobacco itself is and the active ingredient isn't. The point of all of this is why is any of it controlled? And why is vaping controlled? If you're talking about safety, and let me go to safety.

I'm glad you brought this up. Safety. Everyone will tell me, well, licensing is for safety. Regulations are for safety. They're not. They're not. They're not. And I'll give you the best example I can give you.

Health food stores. The healthiest people you know shop at health food stores. There is almost – What is a health food store? It's a store like a store where you might go and buy vitamins that are not – that's not GNC. Okay. Or a store where you might go and purchase organic things. That's not a regular –

Like Whole Foods? Not a Whole Foods. Is that what you're saying? Whole Foods is similar. But the mom and pop health food store, which generally speaking is usually privately owned, usually. It's kind of a thing from the past, isn't it? Health food store. Yeah.

Yeah, I said it because most people understand what I mean when I say that. But if you didn't, I apologize. Most people do understand when I say health food. I mean basically a local store that will sell things like vitamins and it will sell things like supplements. It's like a GNC. Often it's a mix of like a GNC and grocery store, usually owned by an individual but not always our family, but that kind of store. Those stores are almost not regulated at all. I mean probably 90% of their products have no FDA approval.

Right, because there's no FDA approval for supplements. That's correct. So there's just a stamp that says not approved by FDA, right? Most of their products are. Most of their products are just out there. Where are all the deaths from health food stores? There aren't. What health food stores have are standards, lots of standards, tons of standards.

Now, some people buy certain products because they believe in them. Some people buy certain products because they believe in them. Some people buy certain products because they believe in the brand name. Up to them. Some people go to certain stores. They trust those stores. It's fine. It happens all the time.

It's a standard. What would happen if, say, there was a health food store or even a GNC or any place like that, there was a supplement, that if you took that supplement and most people who took it would get addicted and do crazy things. And that came out to the news.

Look, here it is. If you take XYZ product, you'll probably go crazy or do something nuts or whatever. Well, they've had that happen. They've removed them. Yes, that's correct. Ripped fuel. It goes away. Yes.

That's exactly my point. They kill you. Thank you. It goes away. There's acts of repercussions and it goes away, right? And maybe there's a lawsuit, maybe not, but it goes away. What if it's FDA approved? Nothing happens.

80% of all of our addicts, FDA approved drugs. Nothing happens. When it's a government monopoly run by a government regulatory body, there's no repercussions. It just keeps killing us. Well, that's certainly true for the pharmaceutical industry. Yes, absolutely. It just keeps killing us. Well, that's certainly true for the pharmaceutical industry. Yes, absolutely. It just keeps killing us on and on and on and on. If you want things to be safe, then let's focus on safety, not focus on control.

So I want products to be safe, not controlled. Controlled is useless. So how do you make sure that they're safe? I'll use a health food store example. It's a perfect example. How about competing standards? Standards that are competing. I don't have a problem with the government saying,

these are the standards we believe are the appropriate standards to be safe. They should do that, absolutely. A product has a choice. Take the stamp or not. The only exception is, why are they punishing you if you choose not to? What it does by default, it stops innovation. So you're saying you don't have a problem with government stamps. Not at all. But it has to be something that is voluntary.

That's correct. By the person who owns the store. And by the consumer. Now, my example I give is this water probably has it. Yes, it does. It has that circle U. The circle U. Do you know what that means?

No. It's the Orthodox Union. I live in New York City. It's a very high Jewish population in New York City. It has that circle U. The circle U. Do you know what that means? No. It's the Orthodox Union. I live in New York City. It's a very high Jewish population in New York City. I have many Jewish friends. And the Orthodox Union means it's a kosher product. Oh, so that water's kosher? This water's kosher, yes.

How does it become kosher? Do they have to bless it? There's the issue. I don't know. The circle U on it. Do you know? So if you're Jewish and you care about keeping a kosher household, you would buy this product because you trust the circle you. Is this kosher?

I don't know. But the person who buys it believes it and buys it. And what if they found out this water was not kosher? Then there'd be a problem. There'd be some kind of backlash. Well, as a person who is a partner in a supplement company and also someone who works for the UFC, who has, the UFC has giant issues with people taking tainted supplements. Sure. There's third party independent verification,

third party independent testing. Absolutely. Really good supplement companies like Onnit and many others use where you can find out that you don't have tainted supplements. Absolutely. I'd rather have that than how about we have those stamps on products. I like that. Yes. Have the stamps. And if you want to have a government stamp, have that. And guess what? Maybe you want four stamps. Maybe you want the government stamp plus third-party stamp plus the Orthodox Union stamp. And you as a consumer decide. Well, what I like about it also

is it creates business. Yes, it does. It creates business. Third-party independent company. Absolutely. Has their own personal standards. And when they're a really good company, you can rely upon them. Yes. And if if you don't you can have competing standards multiple companies because you trust one company more than the other or you want both is that a possible solution for education a third party independent absolutely verification of the education system we've been here for what about an hour or so and you already gave a good idea yes second my point that seems like a good idea to me there we go go. Yeah. That there should be some effective school system that works. And then you take the people that run that

effective school system and they have a curriculum and a way of doing things that they could perhaps, you know, teach other other school systems. That's the idea of transparency and accountability. That's the whole point. So this is the deal with people that are libertarian, right? The idea is that you are a free market person and that you believe in the free market and you believe in less government. I believe in the consumer. Right. I believe in the consumer because it's a general rule when things are consumer-driven. And this is not a 100% rule.

Look, government isn't always wrong. It's often wrong but not always. And the consumer isn't always right but often right. It's often wrong, but not always. And the consumer isn't always right, but often right. So as a general rule, consumers tend to drive things better. Like, as I said, kosher water, like supplements. If you don't allow the consumer to decide, you by default stifle innovation.

You just stifle innovation. You stifle everything new. Because if it can't get through the FDA, then it almost can't be done. And you have centralized control that's very difficult to get past. You got it. Exactly right. And they're not really motivated to improve or to innovate. No. And the opposite.

They're actually incentivized to make sure nothing goes wrong. So always err on the side of no, no. It becomes the rule of no one, meaning everything is about no. There's no one's job to make it work. This is my point on the education system. The job, there has to be someone who says, we have to make this thing work. I'm the guy who says that. I want to make it work. Let's make this thing work. Let's just not make sure things go bad. Let's make sure that things actually work. Now, you obviously know far more about New York

politics than I do. I know very little about it. But one thing that I do know is it's almost universally regarded as being insanely corrupt. True. You get to a position where you become the governor. Yep. How do you clean up that fucking hornet's nest? Yes. The one thing people always say is, Larry, you got to clean it up, like you just said.

It's funny. You say a lot of things I hear all the time. You got to get these guys in jail. You got to punish them, whatever. I rarely talk about that. And the reason is, okay, you put some guy in jail, you punish him, whatever the case may be. Great. Whose family came back from North Carolina? Whose kid got a better education? Who got a better job? Whose taxes went down? Who's happier? Whose business didn't go under? No one's helped by people going to jail. We feel righteous, and then we pack up and move to North Carolina. I one's helped by people going to jail. We feel righteous,

and then we pack up and move to North Carolina. I mean, this is not the right answer. North Carolina's beautiful. It is. That's part of the problem. It is. You go there, it's all green. There's less people.

It's great. People have a little twang to the way they talk. Barbecue is pretty fucking good. I'm trying to make sure a bunch of New Yorkers don't go there and ruin it, see? I understand. I understand. Let's keep it New York. Keep it New York. I want to keep them all in New Yorkers don't go there and ruin it. See? I understand. I understand. Let's keep them in New York. Keep them in New York.

I want to keep them all in New York. So, my point being, I forgot my point now. I don't know your point. I don't know my point either. Corruption, getting rid of people, putting them in jail. The goal is not to just put people in jail. The goal is to make a better system. Well, I'm not really even interested in putting them in jail.

What I'm interested in is figuring out a way to stop corruption. Yes. Several things. The first'm interested in is figuring out a way to stop corruption. Yes. Several things. The first thing, first of all, you can't stop corruption. You can absolutely lessen it and you can catch it fast. That you can do. You can make less corruption and catch it fast. The thing to remember is the average person who is about to do something which may or may not be unethical or may be corrupt isn't thinking, I wonder if I'll get five years or 10 years. They're just thinking, will I get caught? That's all they're thinking about. Will I get caught and will my career be over? So several things. Number one, I want less opportunity for someone to be caught.

What does that mean? In New York State, less money coming from Albany, which is our capital. Less money. The less money the governor has to give out, the less chance that there will be corruption. That's number one. But on top of that, New York State is filled with boards and committees and authorities and things that the governor creates to make other things happen. We'll create this authority to make this happen and this commission to make that happen. And then he appoints all of his cronies, all of his buddies

onto these commissions and boards and such. Now, he now is one step away, but he has raised over $800,000 for his campaign for people he's put on boards. So he gets lots of money from these people, rewards them by putting them on boards, and then they become corrupt. If you've noticed New York politics, many people have been indicted, arrested, convicted. Almost every one of them is either on a board

or a commission or an authority. Trashing those is a huge part of getting rid of corruption. Getting rid of what we have in New York State, we have regional economic development corporations. These are basically where the government decides where the money goes to develop areas. Yes, the government decides where to develop areas. You mean you're talking about real estate development?

Any kind of development, yes, yes. Where are we going to put money into? Whether it's going to be infrastructure, building a hospital, putting a new downtown in, all these types of things. So who would decide then? How about the local? The local people.

Yes, let them decide. The local government, the mayor. Absolutely, why not? Okay, so instead of it being the government, you have it be the local. Local and less taxed. Add something else. How about just like bankers who want to invest in things? Businessmen who think this is a good idea?

How about the local woman who thinks this is a great place for her to open up her new business? How about the guy or gal who thinks this is a great place for a new school? As opposed to what it is now, which is? We all petition to the government. I'm not joking. We think we should. The government then agrees, blesses it, gives a certificate of need, and then says, here's government money to build this thing. That is completely the wrong answer.

Right, but there's got to be some regulation. Like, you don't really want a nightclub opening up right next to a school. There we go. There's got to be some regulation. Do you think that there should be? Of course. At what point did I say destroy everything? Well, I'm not saying you did. I never said that.

But I'm asking you if there should be some regulation. Based upon safety, I'm arguing against you, and I'm not. you did. I never said that. But I'm asking you if there should be some regulation. Based upon safety. You're saying as if I'm arguing against you and I'm not. Based upon safety, not control. Safety. If it's based upon safety, I'm in. Right. Not about control.

Like a school will be right next to a strip club. Is that safety? Right. Is it? Yeah, I would think so. Then I'm okay with it. I'm not sure that's true. I don't know enough about that.

But if that's safety, I'm okay with that. It's not safe for those kids. Then there we go. Some of those girls. Then I'm okay with it. I'm not sure that's true. I don't know enough about that. But if that's safety, I'm okay with that. It's not safe for those kids. Then there we go. Some of those girls. Then I'm fine with that. I don't have a problem if it's based upon safety. But by whose standards, right? But just because I decide I don't like this thing here.

Right. If someone wants to build it there, they'll build it there. If the community doesn't want it there, as a general rule, the community doesn't support it. What's the main argument against libertarian philosophy? Fear. Fear. Fear. Fear of change. Fear of not having big brother in control. Remember something in New York, in America in general. As a general rule in America, the government does not just take our rights. As a general rule, we eagerly vote them away because we're afraid. I'm afraid, take my rights. I'm afraid, take my rights. That's what usually happens. Fear is a problem, which is why, as you've said,

will there be no regulation? There are a lot of libertarians who probably heard that and went, yeah, Larry, say no regulation. I'm not going to. And here's the reason why. If I decide to pull the rug out from people, they will be afraid. People who are afraid make bad decisions all the time. The word that I need to use more here, and maybe it's not landing, maybe this is my error for not making this land better, is facilitate. I want to facilitate better options. I want to facilitate better answers. I'm not just going to go to a school system and say, take away the money, go away. That would create fear and bad decisions. What would you do? Instead, I would say in X number of months, the federal government regulations and the

federal government dollars are going to go away, which means by this time, we're not going to have it, which means not only do you not have the money, but also you don't have these restrictions. How can we fix this system so you don't have these restrictions anymore? What can you make to be better, stronger, faster? How can we do this now? Let's talk this thing out. Some people will fight me, of course.

Some people will not make a change, of course. But some will go, oh my God, thank you so much, yes. I would much rather not spend the money here, but I'd rather spend it here. Okay, let's try that, let's do that. And before, now others will follow. And then others will follow. And that might take a year or two.

It might take three years. But what'll happen? We'll have a much better effective system. And that might take a year or two. It might take three years. But what will happen? We'll have a much better, effective system. And when one fails... But hopefully. It hasn't been done yet. Why hopefully? Because it hasn't been done before. Okay. It's been done in everything. I'll give you the best example I can give you. With

education? I'll give you the best example I can give you. Okay. Google. Google. Google, yes. Google had a program, and I think they still have it. I'm sure someone will let me know if they don't, but I believe they do, to where you had an employee could choose to take 20% of their work time and do it on any project they wanted to. Any project. Whatever they want to do, just work on it if they wanted to. It was voluntary.

You didn't have to. You could just do your regular workload if you wanted to. But if you wanted to, you could take 20% and work on anything you want, whatever you think is appropriate. The only rule was you have to be transparent and you're accountable to your team for what you did. Again, freedom plus transparency plus accountability, right? Boom, that was it. Many of the people who did things

wound up doing things that didn't really work very well. But when they did it, they said, hey, Joe, I went and tried this thing, it didn't work. You might've tried it too. You learned something, figured things out, made it better. But a bunch of their most profitable things, profitable applications came from this. Now, what actually wound up happening also is some people did 20%. Some people worked even more. That's get more work out of some people. They have more innovation out

of people because they were doing stuff they wanted to do. Now, did everyone take it? No. Some people just did their own work and were happy with their own work, got their salary and moved on. But what happened is you got innovation and other people learned from it and it became better and better and better. That happens all the time. All the time. That is a very different system than talking about the education system. When you're talking about Google, you're talking about people that are hired to make money for a mega corporation that makes billions and billions of dollars. And you give them a chance because they're engineers and techies and you give them a chance to innovate yep they innovate but their financial incentive is massive

I mean I have a friend who's a big executive at Google they make a shitload of money absolutely the people that work underneath them have the potential to move up that corporate ladder there's none of this financial incentive in the school systems. That's correct. Not only that, you're limiting their amount of money. You're not just offering them the possibility to exchange creative ideas. You're saying we're going to give you less money and we're going to have the administrators who are still going to be in the position of power. You're going to have to – everyone's going to have to figure this out.

This is not a parallel situation. It absolutely is. Let me tell you why this out. This is not a parallel situation. It absolutely is. Let me tell you why it is. How is it a parallel situation? I'll tell you why it is. The first thing is the people who get into teaching, they don't get in because, my God, I'll make millions of dollars. They don't do that.

They get into it because they think it's a viable career path for them. They have skill at it. They enjoy doing it and they want to make a difference. All those things. Yes, that's correct. If you're lucky. If everyone's lucky. Yes. And they want to make a difference. All those things. Yes. That's correct. If you're lucky. If everyone's lucky, that's what they do it for. Well, the same thing with Google, right?

Does everyone go there because they want to make tons of money? No. A lot of them do. Sure. And a lot of teachers go there because they want to make a difference. Yes. So the incentives- Wait a minute.

I don't think anybody's going to Google because they want to make a difference. No, no. Teachers. Teachers. Yes. Okay. While they're- But somehow they're parallel.

Some people go to Google. Because one of them is a giant business. How many? One of the biggest businesses in the world. And the New York State school system is a $60 billion business. Still a bunch of money. It's not profitable. That's for sure.

It's not the same thing. I agree. It's not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination. And it's certainly not profitable for the individuals that are involved in this innovation that you seek. And I think you are wrong in many ways. How am I wrong that it's not profitable for the individuals that you're asking? You are assuming because we lose $4 billion, your assumption is that means teachers don't get more money. That's your assumption. How are the teachers going to get more money if you're giving them less money? I'm not giving teachers less money. You're giving the school less money. That's correct. The school district less assumption. How are the teachers going to get more money if you're giving them less money? I'm not giving teachers less money. You're giving the school less money.

That's correct. The school district less money. How are the teachers not going to get less money if the schools get less money? Well, what if you got rid of, I don't know, a bunch of administrators? What if you got rid of- But you would have to, who would decide that these administrators are removed? I don't know how many times I've got to say this. But you never said anything clear.

That's why I'm asking you over and over and over again. Yes. This is not clear. Okay. You're saying it's going to work itself out. Yes. We're going to say this. But you never said anything clear. That's why I'm asking you over and over and over again. This is not clear. You're saying it's going to work itself out. Yes, we're going to facilitate it. But then you're comparing this to Google when you're giving people who are making a fantastic salary the ability to innovate for 20% of their time. Sure. Absolutely. I don't think these are valid comparisons. Humans are humans. We want to have purpose. We want to do better at whatever we're doing. We want to have accolades from those we respect.

That's what humans want. Okay, I agree with that. No matter what, humans want that. Right. If you're a teacher, you want accolades from those you respect. You want to be good at what you do. You also want to be able to feed your family. You also want to be able to make a living.

And most of them make piss poor money. All right. This is in Oklahoma. It's New York State. Right. So most of them are doing well enough to not starve to death. Well, how much do they make? That's not true.

I'm not sure how much you make. Well, didn't you just get done saying how expensive it is to live in New York? It is expensive, yes. Taxes are outrageous. Real estate's outrageous. Absolutely. People are moving out in droves. It's true.

And then there's going to be less money for people that already get paid less than they should. I'm not saying that's true. You're saying that's true. But there's going to be less money that goes to the school. That goes to a school district, yes. So how is that not going to translate into less money that goes to the teachers and less? I will try it again. No, no, no.

You've never said it. Tell me what you want me to say. No one has decided how this is going to somehow or another benefit the teachers. Yes. You're not firing these administrators. You're making everybody figure it out on their own. No, no. The administrators will wind up being fired.

They will. By who? By what? The PTA? I'm sorry, PTA. The school boards. They will begin to. It's going to happen.

We're going to facilitate the way out. It's going to happen. the school boards. They will begin to. It's going to happen. We're going to facilitate the way out. It's going to happen. If you want me to say there are 700 school districts and I'm going to fire that guy, that guy, that guy, that guy, that guy, and I'm literally two months out from the election and then at least nine months from implementing it, you're simply asking too much of me. You're asking too much of me. The skeleton is built. The idea is good. It will work. Will we fill in? Of course we will. Absolutely. How am I going to know which guy to fire? And I'm a year out from doing this. You simply ask too much of me. It's an unfair

question. It's an unfair question. I'm not asking you which particular human being to fire. I'm asking you how you're going to facilitate paying less money to these school districts and somehow or another having them organize the right way to make the school system run smoother and more efficiently while you're comparing it to people who work at a multi-billion dollar tech company where you're allowing engineers who get paid substantial amounts of money to innovate for 20% of their time. And I'm saying that this is not a valid comparison. And I'm saying you're incorrect

because they're both human. Humans want to be good at what they want to be. The reality of it is, as I said earlier, a lot of school districts won't do much different at all, but there will always be early adopters. That happens in everything. There will always be early adopters. And some people will jump in and go, this is a wonderful idea.

Let's start working on this now. And some will. Some will do absolutely nothing. And they will think Larry's going to fail. Who cares? Let's change nothing. Of course. And probably most will do absolutely nothing once I'm elected.

Nothing. But a bunch are going to say, oh, my God, what an awesome thing this is. And they'll begin making changes right away. And as they do, we'll start watching. Oh, what are you proposing? What's the right way? That sounds great. What do you think?

What do you think? As I said, I'm a business guy. I go in. I've been an officer in a public company for a short period of time, twice. And in both cases, when I went in, I didn't go in going, you, you, you, you. That's TV show stuff. That's not how it works. How it works is you walk in. You talk to people, you begin to figure out what's going on, you try new things until the right thing works.

That's how you fix a business. And if you know anyone who does it, they'll tell you that's how you do it. You don't walk in and go, I know everything. That's not how it works. Well, let me come at you from a position of fear. Please. Let's pretend that I'm a parent and I'm hearing this plan. Yep.

And I'm thinking, this is not a plan. You're eliminating money. What if my school system doesn't figure out a way to innovate? What if they cut funding? What if the kids' classes get bigger? What if there's just a mass panic throughout the organization because you've essentially gutted their infrastructure? Wow. I gutted their infrastructure. I really hope they don't believe that. But they might. You're right.

They might. I mean, that would be a valid argument. If I was your opponent, that's absolutely what I would argue. Sure. And I guess you could argue that if you wanted to. Here's my response. Okay, keep the same system. Keep paying your same taxes.

Keep your kids unhappy. Sue the state. And you can pack up and move to South Carolina this time instead of North Carolina or Tennessee instead of North Carolina or Florida. You can pack up and move if you want to. That is an option for you. If I was your opponent, I would say that is a ridiculous proposition. So you're saying either we keep the current system or we adopt your system. These are the only two options. We either leave or we adopt your system. These are the only two options.

We either leave or we take your option. And your opponent would say, why don't you throw more money at these teachers, give them more incentive to succeed, figure out a way to take money away from something else and apply it to education, because we believe that it is the least appreciated thing that is the most important. Because we've been doing that for 20 years and failing. That's why. They've been paying teachers more for 20 years? No, but they've been throwing more money at the system for 20 years. In regard to hiring administrators? Yes, they've been throwing money. We've been doing it for 20 years. It hasn't worked yet. When are you going to stop? That's my response.

We've been doing it for 20 years at least. We spend more money per kid than California does and we have worse results. If you're happy with that system, awesome. Vote Cuomo. You'll get it.

You'll keep it. No worries. But if you actually want change, if you're unhappy with the system, you got to change it. And this is my system. Do you debate the system with people? All the time.

What I'm doing right now. I do the same thing. Yeah, but I haven't even prepared and I'm finding all these problems with it. You haven't given me one problem at all. I haven't given you any problem? What have you heard me say? Not one. You just said, I'm afraid, I'm afraid, I'm afraid.

That's not what I said. That's what I heard. I haven't said I'm afraid. Never said that once. You said, but what if, but what if, but what if, but what if, but what if. Because I'm asking you questions. That's not saying I'm afraid. Which says I'm afraid, I'm afraid, I'm afraid. I've never said that once. You said, but what if, but what if, but what if, but what if, but what if. Because I'm asking you questions. That's not saying I'm afraid. Which says I'm afraid, I'm afraid, I'm afraid.

That's what I hear. But what if is asking you to define how your system is going to succeed. It's not saying I'm afraid. That's hyperbole. Didn't you just say, maybe I didn't hear you correctly, but didn't you just say, but what if this bad thing happens? What if it's my school district? No, no, no. What I did there is I had an exercise where I played a parent who was scared. I didn't say that's me. And I'm telling you as a person who's not debating you,

I'm just asking you questions about this. Please. I'm curious, but I see massive flaws in the logic behind allowing these systems to figure out how to eliminate administrators in order to stay alive with less money. I'll try it again. I'm facilitating this to make it happen. I'm going to oversee it. Of course. There's already administrators at Albany who can help to facilitate these.

I understand. Those administrators. I understand what you've said, and you can repeat it to facilitate these. I understand. Those administrators. I understand what you've said. Yes. And you can repeat it ad nauseum. I'm curious about it. But it seems very loosely defined. And it's very confusing.

I would agree with you. I don't think it's confusing at all. Loosely defined is true. It's a skeleton. And it's a good skeleton. Well, it's confusing in the fact that you have these administrators. And they're in this position where you're going to eliminate some of them. But you don't know how many or which way or how to do that. And you're going to allow the PTA

and the teachers unions to figure this out or not the teachers union, but whoever it would be. The unions will be part of it too, of course. Look, unions will be part of it. PTAs will be part of it. School boards will be part of it. Of course, Albany's administrators will be part of it. Of course. You can't do a long-term solution for any problem by just dictating what is right and what is wrong. I agree with you. But the people that are worried about the short-term consequences are the ones that are going to vote for you or not vote for you. Probably not vote for me. My assumption is not vote for me. I'm with you. I think most people who are afraid of that, who think the way you're presenting to me, most of them are not going to vote for me. But you've got to play devil's advocate with yourself when you're going over these things.

Of course. And here's what I know for sure. There are a bunch of people who are not going to vote for me. I'm okay with that. I'm still right. It's the right answer. Whether I win, lose, or draw, everything I'm saying is true and right. And there is no better alternative in New York State, period.

No other, every other person who's running is saying, we have to fund more, fund more, fund more. That's not going to work. That I'm sure of. And anyone who knows the system also knows that. It is impossible that funding more is going to work? That's correct. Why is that? Because you're not changing the system itself. You still just have a bunch of teachers being told, your goal is high test scores in standardized testing. That's your goal.

That's how you're funded. That's how you're judged. That's how you decide if you're going to stay a teacher or not. That's everything. That's the current system. And there's no opposition to that other than you? That is correct. Yes.

So everyone else wants the people that are doing the best to get more money. The people that are doing the best. The school systems. No, no, no. They judge them by standardized testing. Right. But they're doing the best. No, they're not.

They have the best tests. They're doing the best. Whoever's getting the best scores. Thank you. Those are the ones that are getting the most money. That's correct. The people that are doing the best. Yes.

No, not doing the best. Best scores. The scores don't mean anything. Doing the best. Well, they mean something. You take a test. So? I mean, it anything well they mean something you take a test so i mean it means something it means you're a good test taker you're better at the test and the people that do the best tests correct yeah but but but test taking standardized test taking is no indication of success what is a good indication of success emotional intelligence but

you can't measure that. Emotional intelligence. Yes. But that's not going to work for schools. Right. But if you're teaching kids, how do you judge whether or not you're doing a good job? You know. Other than tests. How would you judge, as an example, how do you judge things when they're hard to judge?

And I bring this up in my business often, right? When you can't, when things aren't, when it's not easy to find a win, right? If I don't know what a win is, how do I figure out what a win is? Sometimes it can be challenging, right? If you own a supplement company, you might judge it on sales, which is a lot easier, but you might not. You might judge on something it on something like, how many of your competitors, how many of your customers are professional athletes? You might judge it on something like that. You could find another way of judging it if you felt appropriate, depending upon what you thought was a win or valuable. The same thing could happen in schools. You could judge it by simply how many parents are happy. And you could judge them by how many show

up. You could judge them by having an actual rating system similar to how Google rates things or Yelp rates things. There's many ways you could judge it. A rating system to how well the kids are doing? You could in theory, sure. It's another option, of course. But how would you be able to figure it out? Like, spell this out for me.

Well, I don't... What's your question? You're saying a rating system for kids? Yeah. You're saying a rating system for kids. Yeah. You could create a rating system. Could be parents judge the school. Could be the teachers do a 360 on themselves, right? Many businesses will do a 360.

I don't know if you know what that means. I'm sorry. No, I don't. It's a business thing. Sometimes what will happen is in a business, how you judge the individual is you do what's called a 360. And people who are around that person will judge them usually anonymously. So the person maybe has seven juniors, seven peers and three or four seniors. They'll pick a couple of juniors, a couple of peers and a couple of seniors who will then grade this person.

It's called a 360. And now that person gets graded every six months or every year or depending upon the company every quarter. And now you know how the person is doing because everyone around them is judging him or her. So the teachers are judging each other. They could do that too. Sure. You're asking me for a specific plan? Could be.

I think these are all viable plans. Well, what I'm saying is what would be a viable alternative to testing to find out how well children are doing? It could be graduation rate. How about graduation rate? I like that too. Graduation rate could work. It could be graduation rate. How about graduation rate? I like that too. Graduation rate could work. It's a great way. By what standard are they graduating if they're not taking tests?

I didn't say not taking tests. They're not taking standardized tests. They're not taking standardized tests. That's what I said. So they're taking some tests. Of course. So you're judging them by these tests. That's correct.

But not standardized tests. That is correct. That's why I said- What is the difference between the tests that you would judge them on and standardized tests? Sure. Standardized test is usually given by federal or state authorities. It's usually written someplace out of state. It's usually decided based upon the company that bids the right bid.

And it doesn't necessarily decide what's important to the local kids or to the parents. So what would be the difference in the test that you would give these kids? The teachers would have their own test. So what would be the difference in the test that you would give these kids? The teachers would have their own tests. So there would be no standard that the state would enforce. They would all be up to the community? Sure.

Love the idea. I love the idea. Let the school districts create their own tests. And the odds are they'll wind up copying each other most of the time anyway. That's fine. We'll see what works. The issue is you're assuming that a standardized test has value. I don't. I'm not assuming a standardized test has value. I'm just asking you what would the alternative to a standardized test would be. Sure. Is a district-wide test.

District-wide? Yeah. What's wrong with that? That's a great idea. So it's standardized for the district? For the district. I'll take that. Sure. Much better. Why would that be better than for the state? Because each school district is different because each because each county in new york state is different each region is different they're just physically socially they're just they're different regions so they should have different standards sure in terms of how they graduate i think what an a is and what's a pass, how you get through school, and with that, would it be even across the board? I mean, would you have schools that would be better?

Would you have schools that would be worse, and they would all have the same grades? Look, if you wanted to, I think you could easily create a system to where at the end of the day, meaning at the end, meaning 16 in this case, right? I'm talking K through 10. At a K through 10 where there is one statewide standardized test, which is why I said no standardized testing until high school, right? So prior to high school, I don't want standardized

testing. At high school, I'm fine with it. At that point, the kids are a bit more mature. The kids kind of know where they're going. The standardized testing will have more value for them in that regard because they'll know, wait a minute, I'm doing standardized testing because I'm thinking, do I want to go to college? Do I want to go to prep school? Do I want to go to trade school? Okay. So you're okay with standardized testing in high school? That's what I said. Okay. So for 14 to 16, basically just two years. That's correct. Yes. In those areas, I'm totally happy with that because at that point, the kids are deciding where they want to go. And being a good test taker in those years might make you think, you know what?

Maybe I'm good for sciences. Maybe I'm good for math. Maybe I should be a plumber. Maybe I should be a truck driver. Maybe I should be an insert thing here. Maybe I should be a teacher. So I'm totally happy in high school. That's why I said until high school.

Doing it in the youth doesn't do anything except make things bad. So once we get to the high school level, yeah, there's standardized testing at that point. But I'm saying before that. But before that is when the kids are building up who they are. Right? Before that is when the kids are building up who they are as students, as who they think they are in their life. Are you familiar with other types of teaching like Waldorf or some of the other alternative forms of education? Have you ever looked at those models? I have not. No? I have not. I'm not a teacher. Yeah. I have not. But I'm happy to look at those too. I'm happy to look at them. If those are models

that would give our kids an upper hand and a better chance of success, I would happily take them. If they are, I would happily take them. If they are, I'm happy to do that. To be forward with you, as I'm trying to tell you, everything you're saying right now in the conversation we've had in the past hour and a half, you've already come up with some different ideas and such. Already you have. Can you imagine what teachers would do once they had this? The concepts and ideas they would come up with? We could facilitate things out to working, maybe even by region, maybe even by county, maybe even counties that would test, maybe even test schools,

schools that would test things out for a year. Right, but would any teachers have the kind of freedom to innovate in, I mean, in any foreseeable future like that? Yes.

And decide, decide some of the things that we've talked about now, have third party certifications and trying to figure out. Absolutely, yes. What you're hearing me say, which is why so many people get afraid, I'm not saying you are, but many people do,

is I'm talking about an actual revamp, a reboot of our education system. We're talking about change, radical change. Yes, because my state is collapsing, and I understand that. Radical change, yes. Do you think it's collapsing, or do you think the current numbers are just unsustainable? Is there a difference? Yeah. The difference is it'll still maintain, but there'll be less people.

It's not collapsing. I don't see that. Collapsing to me seems like it's falling apart. Yes. That's what I see. I think there's a lot of people that are in New York that are like, holy shit, this is too much. I got to get out of here. Which in my eyes tells me that it's collapsed because you have a situation where you have counties that are one third of Medicaid,

one third of Medicare with a bunch of unfunded mandates that force them to pay for certain things. And with people leaving, you have a dueling tax base. So at that point, yeah, that's collapsing. At what point does it stop? I don't see it stopping. I just see larger chunks of Medicaid, Medicare. And at one point when it's Medicare, even they pack up and head to Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, right? Okay. Families are keeping people in New York State more than anything. Because their relatives are close by. Yes.

So now if they're not – So I see it's collapsing. Let's take education out of the equation. So if we've got education cured, how do you make it more? It'd be amazing. How do you make it more attractive for people to stay in New York that don't have children? How do you make it more attractive to businesses? Absolutely.

Several things. Number one, as I said before, we have to raise money through ways other than taxation. We can still raise money. We can find ways to fill gaps. And if we have to fill a gap, say the $4 billion from the federal government, if we have to fill the gap, if we find that the first six months of discussion,

there's no way we can do this without the $4 billion from the federal government. Let's say I'm wrong. Let's say I'm wrong. And the $4 billion I want to get rid of from the federal government is, no, we have to have it. The plans we've come up with that we think will work

require that money. Okay, deal. I got it. We can still raise it some other way. Now, in the past, we've done things very poorly in New York State. We've done things like, let's have a lottery and the lottery will pay for education. Then it goes off to the general fund and goes away. What we can do is something like this. I talk often about using our infrastructure in New York State as a way of raising money. We have bridges and tunnels and throughways and the Erie Canal, which is over 500 miles and about three dozen locks and lots of stuff like that, right? Why in the world do we have a bridge right now in New York State that's named after one of our previous governors called the Mario Cuomo Bridge? That's embarrassing. We literally

have an imperial bridge named after our royal family. That bridge should not be named that. The bridge should be the Staples Bridge, the Verizon Bridge, the 3M Bridge, the Kellogg's Bridge, the Apple Bridge, whatever. We should be leasing the naming rights out. I'm a business guy. I want to retain the asset. We don't lose the asset.

Lease the naming rights out, right? These are companies that pay billions of dollars every year in marketing, all the time. They drop $20 million for a stadium that gets used on the weekends. Instead, we have them pay $100 million for a bridge that's crossed by hundreds of thousands of cars every single day.

So you call it the Verizon Bridge or something. The Verizon Bridge. Love it. Perfect. And it's mentioned hundreds of times every single day during rush hour in a 16 million person metro area. But here are the next pieces on top of that.

Once he has the money, they're also responsible for the maintenance. We will still inspect the bridge, right? People say, but Larry. So Verizon's responsible for the maintenance? That is correct. That's part of it, yes. So they have to pay you

and they have to fix the bridge? Bingo, yes. Who the fuck is gonna sign up for that? All I know is I already have bankers already asking me about how long is the lease? What are we gonna do? They already love it, yes. Really?

People already told me about it. And they know that you want them to fix it too? That's correct. Yes. Absolutely. Holy shit. But that'd be part of the contract. Again, I don't have to,

and this is a common theme that you'll find that people don't like. And you don't seem to like it either, which is I don't have the answer for exactly what the contract is. I'm not saying I don't like it. I'm just saying, man, if I was Verizon, I'd be like, shit.

Yeah. I'm paying you guys just to put my name on it. Now I got to fix this thing? Yes. Then maybe, you know what? If you don't want put my name on it and now I've got to fix this thing? You know what? If you don't want to, maybe we negotiate and you pay a little bit less. Pay $90 million instead and fix the bridge. But I want you fixing the bridge. And there's a reason I want you fixing the bridge. Right now, across our country, bridges collapse.

Concrete cancer. They're all the time, right? And why? Because the government has to run it. The government runs out of money or bureaucracy fails. But in this case, we would actually have someone who has to fix it. Yeah. So we could actually check the bridge, and say it's at a B, and a D is the lowest it can get to, as an example, right?

Is it a B? Verizon refuses to fix it, goes to C. Verizon fixes it now, or you lose the contract. And I guess now it's going to be the Sprint Bridge. Right. They have to fix it. The bridge will actually get fixed. That makes sense, too. I might even know what that is.

I like this idea. So yeah, that's one, right? So immediately at that point, we're getting money. The bridge is actually getting fixed. And here's the best part, the need for tolls. If you've been through New York State,

you know we are the toll monsters. I mean, we are horrible. It's brutal. Yes. Didn't they establish those tolls under the false premise of once the bridge was paid off? You got it.

Yeah. It's correct. Once they got addicted to that money of once the bridge was paid off? You got it. Yeah. That's correct. Once they got addicted to that money, they said, well, we're never paying this bitch off. That is correct. Yes. So instead, now no tolls. That is so creepy. Which means now those truckers that are paying $100 every time they cross that bridge, they pay by the axle, those go away.

Is it $100 every time they cross the bridge? For a big truck, a trailer? Yeah. Because they pay per axle. That is dirty. Yes. It per axle. That is dirty. Yes, it's horrible. That is so dirty. They're paying tons of money every time they cross that bridge.

That goes away. And if you could, just if you could do that, you would win the governor. I would hope so. If you could figure out how to do that, you would become governor. It's already been, the idea's not crazy. We already have Adopt-a-Highway. Has anybody ever brought this up besides you? Never.

We already have Adopt-a-Highway. Just fuck your education system. This shit would work. See that? I got you on that one, at least. All right. So I'll tell you what. This one would work, man.

We'll work on this one instead. But here's a better part. I'm not even done yet. Not only are they paying for maintenance, which means we have lower spending because we're not paying for maintenance. Right. And here's the even better part. The less money I have to give out for these contracts, less corruption.

Because I'm not giving out the contracts anymore. Verizon's giving out contracts. How much money do they get, though, in the tolls every year? I would imagine it'd be bigger than $100 million. No, it isn't. It's not? No.

Yes, it is. I'm sorry, yes. The tolls, I'm sorry, I'm thinking about billions. Yes, because New York State budget, I always think of billions. I apologize, yes. It's not $100 billion. But yes, several billion.

I think just New York City, if I'm not mistaken, is over $2 billion. $2 billion a year in tolls. Just New York City. Jesus. That is so dirty. That may include MTA. That's all stealing from people.

You can't drive unless you give us money. You want to cross this line, pay a tax, pay a tariff. Yes. Oof, that's so gross. It's tons of money. We're so lucky here in California. So we could raise that money. So to make you see, I'll make your education happy.

I'll take $4 billion off of that. I'll put it back in the teachers, and the money's the same. But if you're taking the money away— So now you love me again. I did not love you. I was just finding holes in your game. Now, when you're talking about— No holes, my friend.

No holes. Don't be silly. No holes. Don't be silly. There's some holes there. None. Come on. So when you take away all that

money that people are paying on the tolls two billion dollars a year how do you replace that if they're paying two billion dollars if we're getting a hundred if we're getting a hundred million dollars right from just from one bridge that's just one bridge okay how many bridges you got there's over a dozen just in new york city just in the MTA. And I didn't even count the Erie Canal. That has 36 locks. We can name each lock, repair the entire Erie Canal, make it commercially viable without paying any taxpayer dollars whatsoever. And we have McDonald's could own one. They put McDonald's on every single lock.

And the lock, these are for commercial boats? Yeah, we can make whatever we want. Commercial boats? Yeah. We can make whatever we want. Right now, the Erie Canal is run by the Parks and Recs, which it costs us about $100 million every year, including capital projects to maintain the Erie Canal. We make less than $5 million. Have you crunched all the numbers on putting different advertising sponsors on these different bridges? You can't.

In theory, you will absolutely raise billions. That I'm sure. In theory. You absolutely raise billions. That I'm sure. In theory. You will raise billions. The problem is you don't know which one goes first, which one is more valuable. You don't know how long negotiations will take. Right. You also don't know will they take the three ways also, what bridges they'll take.

Right. Some bridges may not be viable to be taken. So I don't know each one. Some tunnels they may not want to take. And then how fast will this catch on? Right. The advantages – You could do this with tunnels. You could do this with roadways. I mean, nobody gives a shit

what the parkway is called. The Verrazano Parkway. It's not making anybody any money by calling it the Verrazano Parkway, right? There's another idea. There's an I-81 in upstate New York, which is falling apart. So my idea for that is they're saying, how are we going to fund this interstate? You porn.

You porn highway. Well – What if they're willing to give you the most money? What I'd rather do with a highway – what I'd rather do with a highway is have instead make it a Google road. A Google road? Jesus. You're going to give those fucking people a grip on your state? Oh, yeah.

Well, look. If they want to give me a road. A whole road. No. Here is how it works. They get their own road. They get their own road. And they can make it a driverless car road.

They can do whatever they want. Okay. The rent for that is maintenance of the regular road. Okay. That's the rent. That's it. You maintain the regular road for free. I like it.

Right? You get to keep the next to it Google Road. Now, people now have an option. You want to drive in a driverless car as they come up with or the driverless buses or whatever they come up with. I don't care what they come up with. Right. You take it if you want to. If you don't, drive the regular road.

If Google says I don't want to pay for it anymore, they lose the Google Road. Someone else buys it. Now it becomes an Amazon Road or I don't care whatever road. It becomes Apple Road. Whatever. Whoever's willing. It's fine. See, that makes sense to me and I like that because nobody really gives a shit what a road is called.

That's correct, which is why you don't name the road. You give them a road next to it. Right. Right? They can – but you can use – they can use the road they want to just to transfer their goods for Amazon. It could be an Amazon hub that just moves Amazon products. Fine. I don't care as long as you maintain the regular road.

Do what you want with the other road. What other road is this again? It could be an Amazon road where the only thing is it's a hub to move Amazon products back and forth. It's fine. Again, I don't have to know what this is. It's not required.

Okay. They will figure it out on what works for them. That's an innovative way to generate income. Absolutely. The bridges, the roads. Not even done. The MTA and the subway, right?

The subway plan right now, the answer is the same thing. Just give them more money. No, I'm not going to be a hostage to the MTA either. The T-Mobile subway. No, not that. No? Instead, because I don't think anybody would care about that anyway. The issue is there's all the rail lines.

There are rail lines. The MTA crosses about 11, I think, or maybe even 12 different counties. I think it's 11 different counties. So it's all over. So a lot of these lines at night aren't used. So why aren't they freight lines? Let Amazon move its product from upstate New York into Manhattan on a freight line instead of being used at night. What's the fee for that?

Fix the lines. Fix the lines. Fix the lines. Fix them and maintain them. Is that a viable alternative? Yes, absolutely. If you run this by people, would that make sense for them? People already like the idea.

Of course, yes. I live in New York City, right? I live in Queens. I work in Manhattan. I know lots of bankers and I ask them these questions and they all say, yeah, nice idea.

Sometimes they say no to some stuff I say, but these they say, they actually asked how long the lease would be on the bridge. They went that far. That's how much they like the bridge idea. You like the bridge idea too, obviously. It's a good idea. It's a good idea.

They like it very much. Is this all your idea? Of course. I'm just going to lock that shit down. Why? I'm just going to steal it. Cynthia Nixon. Let them.

Joe, you just came up with the reason why this is so important. Because win, lose, or draw, everything I'm talking about stays and will fix my state. Let them. Joe, you just came out with the reason why this is so important. Because win, lose, or draw, everything I'm talking about stays and will fix my state. People say all the time, what happens if everyone takes all your ideas? Good, I'll go home and go back to work. I can stop doing this. I hope they steal all my stuff. So the only reason why you're doing this is just because you want to affect change in New York?

I don't. There are three reasons why. Number one, I don't want to leave New York. And if there doesn't change. Do you ever go to North Carolina? I have. I know. I know.

You ever try that barbecue? I get it. And I don't want to go. So yes. Stop teasing me. So yes. I don't want to go. Ever.

The number one reason is I want to stay in New York. Okay. Number one. But also, I want to change the state for better. But even more, I can change the nation for better. When New York can be the place where people look and go, wow, you know what? We can start doing these things. I'm not even done.

Okay. I'm talking about small business, right? Wyoming has a law right now that says if you're a small farmer and you agree to not sell outside of Wyoming, that you're immune from federal regulatory bodies. Helps the small farmers to get a leg up. Do the same thing in New York. But why can't they just for every business? Every small business. If you agree, you will only sell locally.

Why are you being bothered by the federal government? How does the commerce clause come into effect here? It doesn't. So how about we make that happen? So that applies to all restaurants, of course. Absolutely. Because they're local. But unless some border restaurants actually deliver across the border. Okay.

So if you deliver across the border, no. That won't work. If you deliver. That's correct. If you deliver across the border, it doesn't work. If you don't deliver or don't cross the border, you're fine. What about if you use one of those third-party delivery services? You know, where they use an app and they order something?

The app would be the people who are actually doing delivery would be responsible. You would not. As long as that company is based in New York State. So this keeps all the money in New York State? No, it doesn't keep all the money in New York State. A good amount of it. It gives the small business owner a shot at competing against larger businesses, which almost always cross borders.

And it gives farmers a much greater incentive. Yes. And they don't have to pay us. To be more farm to table, all that stuff. Now, I got to help my farmers out. My New York State farmers are hurting badly. That's one idea. But the second thing is you want to treat farmers like small businesses.

And they're not. Which means they don't get the SBA loans. They don't get help. They don't get treated that way. It does not work when you treat them like small businesses. But next, I want to completely legalize hemp and cannabis. Now you're talking. And I want to regulate them like onions.

Onions. Like onions. I'm not joking. Like I want to regulate them like onions. Onions. Like onions. Am I joking? Like onions. Why onions? Here's the reason why. A lot of onions come out of New York. That's why.

Yes. So that's why I picked onions. And you can grow your own onions and no one cares. Bingo. Exactly correct. And here's the issue. There are three reasons why I want to legalize hemp and cannabis. And most people think, you want to get high.

No. The only drug I use is cannabis. I mean, it's cannabis. It's caffeine. Oh, busted. It's the only drug. Looking at Freud. I mean, it's cannabis. It's caffeine. Oh, busted. Look at you, Freud. I like that. That's about cannabis.

No, but if I used cannabis, I would happily tell you. Right. So I don't have anything to hide. Okay. I would happily tell you. You ever use it? Not my thing. Do you get paranoid and worry about the school system when you get high?

I think I talk even more. I don't want to talk even more. Do I? You might not, man. You might be introspective. You might sit back and go, God, I talk too much. Yeah, maybe. Have you ever done mushrooms? That's what happens. I've never done mushrooms. I've never even more. Do I? You might not, man. You might be introspective. You might sit back and go, God, I talk too much. Yeah, maybe. Have you ever done mushrooms?

That's what happens. I've never done mushrooms. Yeah. When I do mushrooms, I feel like I talk too much. So maybe. Maybe I should try them one day. You've never done mushrooms? Never done mushrooms.

That makes me uncomfortable. Yes. Yeah, I'm very square. But you're my age, right? How old are you? I'm 50. Yeah, I'm 51. There we go.

You've never done mushrooms? Never. So somebody came up to you and go, Larry, you want to do some mushrooms? And you're like, no, man. One day I want to be governor. That's what I was thinking. I was 51. There we go. You've never done mushrooms? Never. So somebody came up to you and go, Larry, you want to do some mushrooms? And you're like, no, man. One day I want to be governor. That's what I was thinking. I was seven. And I thought.

Got to be governor one day. Jesus, who's bringing mushrooms to a fucking seven-year-old? No, that's what I was thinking. What kind of psycho are you hanging around with? You don't understand where I grew up. I get it. Queens, right? No, I grew up in South Bronx.

Oh, even more crazy. It was crazy. Do you know Tim Dogg? I don't know who Tim Dogg is. Sorry. I haven't been in the Bronx in many years. South Bronx. Sorry. I haven't been in the Bronx in many years. South Bronx. Sorry.

I haven't been in the Bronx in many years. Apologize. But anyway. It's a very obscure reference. Mushrooms and marijuana. Yes. Thank you. And you've never smoked pot?

I have not. No. Never? Never have. What the fuck? I can't get behind you, bro. Sorry. Never have.

What kind of square are you, dude? I'm square. No pot. I am. No mushrooms. I don't even drink alcohol. Do you Sorry. Never have. What kind of square are you, dude? I'm square. No pot, no mushrooms. I don't even drink alcohol. Do you have a diet? Nope. Do you want to try it? Maybe one day.

What about right now? No, not now. No, no, no, no. I'm running a campaign, my friend. Oh. Yes, running a campaign. Maybe it'll help you. Maybe it'll help you.

Odds are no. Talk to me November 7th. Okay. November 7th. Okay, November 7th. To be forward, I'm not against any of these things. Right. It's your body.

You own your body. Okay. So if I smoke cannabis. No, I don't drink either. You don't ever drink? Not even a beer? Once in a while. Glass of wine with dinner?

If people are around drinking, I'll drink. Right. But I don't have any alcohol in my house. I don't drink unless others are drinking. Okay. I'll socially drink. Again, I don't have any problem with it. Drink if you don't drink.

So your focus for most of your life has been what? Business? First, it was military. I was a Marine for seven years. And then? And then it was business. Yes. So you're just a keep your nose to the grindstone kind of guy?

Yes. Get things done. How else could I do this? Have you seen my campaign? This is the last three gubernatorial campaigns in New York State combined didn't raise $10,000. Combined. I raised over a quarter million already. The last three gubernatorial candidates combined didn't do anywhere near the amount of stops I've made.

And I still have two months left. How much did Cynthia Nixon raise? 1.7, I think, million. Million? That is crazy. I think 1.7. How many people are getting behind sex in the city? A lot.

There's a lot of that menopause money out there, bro. I need some of that, I guess. I don't know. It's floating around. My point being, yes, nose to the grindstone. I'm doing this, of course. Okay, I believe you. Absolutely.

No mushrooms, though, huh? No mushrooms. Nothing. Maybe later. No weed? Not now. Wait until November 7th. And then once you hit?

Then maybe. We'll see. Then maybe you'll party with me? Maybe. If I win, I can't do it while I'm governor. That would be not cool. But marijuana, isn't it legal in New York State? No.

No, it's not. You have to have serious diseases, right? That's correct. Medical. Can you fix that? Of course. That's the point. Yeah, that seems really preposterous.

My whole point on cannabis and hemp is heavily because of farmers also, right? Right. Small farmers right now- Particularly hemp. Yes, particularly hemp, yes. Because it's totally uncontroversial and it's a fantastic commodity. It's good for the soil. It's good for the environment.

And the best thing is if you treat small farmers like small businesses, they can now specialize. Meaning they can specialize in hemp and then also create products on their farm. They want specialized hemp products. They can do that and create niche industries. Right. And we see that in New York State with both coffee and breweries. We see that already happening in New York State. And you would have the same sort of incentives for them to sell in New York. Absolutely. Yes. Particularly hemp, which would be incredibly beneficial with zero controversy. That's correct. In terms of like psychoactive effects, it doesn't have... People would be very happy to do that, right?

But cannabis too because I want you to be able to create cannabis products. But there's something else and that is there are a lot of people in this country, but I'll talk about New York State specifically, who have chronic pain. And right now they have three choices. One, an opioid and maybe get addicted. Two, suffer, which I don't accept. Or three, what people tell me and for some reason, again, it's only been women who have told me this. accept. Or three, what people tell me and for some reason, again, it's only been women who've told me this. They walk up to me and say, you know, Larry,

I hope you can legalize marijuana because I smoke a little at night so I can go to sleep. What about CBD? CBD is legal in your state? No, I don't think so. It's not? I don't think it is. Fucking A. You know, it's a good question. I don't think it is. That's crazy. It's probably medicinal. I'm sorry. It's probably medicinal. CBD? Probably

that'd be my assumption. But CBD has no psychoactive effects, no side effects. No, I know, but it comes with cannabis. Right. So I think it is... Well, Jamie's going to look it up real quick. I think it's medical in New York State. So you have to have some sort of a doctor's prescription to get CBD. So my point is

if it's onions, you can grow it in your backyard. Right. Grow your medicine in your backyard. Right. Carrots, tomatoes. Yes. If we heavily regulate cannabis and or hemp, big business wins, small business loses. Guaranteed. It'll become

big business cronyism, the small farmers collapse. Right. It's the wrong answer. Right. So we need to make that happen and people already smoking it and maybe you don't want

to smoke it. Why don't you have an edible? Why don't you have liquid? Why don't you have whatever's your thing? You don't have to smoke it. If you want to smoke it, please smoke it.

But there's many ways of taking advantage of both THC and CBD, which you prefer. And look, it's your body, not mine. And why in the world would I want you to have to live with chronic pain if you don't have to? I said it again, I'm not about being righteous. Particularly CBD because CBD, again, is not psychoactive. Is it legal? Yeah. Okay.

It is legal in New York. There we go. CBD, again, is not psychoactive. Is it legal? Yeah. Okay, it is legal in New York. There we go. It's pretty legal everywhere, CBD, because of the fact that it doesn't have any psychoactive effects.

And it's fantastic for people with arthritis. There we go. A lot of older folks are, I mean, shit, I got Ted Nugent taking it. How about that? Oh, I like that. He's never even touched anything marijuana related. Ted Nugent likes my stuff. Does he? Yeah, he likes my Facebook stuff.

Well, one of the things that Ted likes is that you're a Second Amendment proponent. I am. Very true. You know, there's an issue that I have with people demonizing the National Rifle Association. And one big issue is they always point to these school shootings. And I'm like, goddammit, not a single

NRA member has ever committed one of these mass shootings. This is not NRA members. So you guys are going after people that are fighting for the right for people to have arms when there's people that are taking these arms and they're using them completely illegally, and none of them are in the NRA. It doesn't make any sense. Yep. Well, you find a boogeyman. Right. But that boogeyman is culturally accepted. Yes.

And it's really confusing. And then it's not helped by the fact that a lot of people that are NRA proponents get, you know, they dig their heels in the sand. Yes. And they fight hard and very much emotionally so against people who are against the NRA. And then it becomes this tribal thing. It does. And the tribal issue is the biggest issue. I totally agree. It's a point where you're not even listening to each other. This is why I say

the third party is the way. Look, people ask, Larry, can you win this thing? And I hear it all the time. The biggest critique I get is, you can't win, man. What are you doing? You can't win. Who's saying that to you? Particularly right now, Republicans, but some Democrats, too. They're heavily saying, you can't win.

You can't win. You can't win, you can't win. But two answers. They're hopeful you can't win. Yeah, a lot of them are. Some are, some aren't. But there's two things to remember, though. The first thing is, I can win. And here's the reason why.

The Republican cannot win because there's only about two and a half million Republicans in New York State and about six and a half million Democrats in New York State, give or take. The tribalism we have now, if you're a Democrat, you're not going to vote for a Republican. If you're a Republican, you're not going to vote for a Democrat, but you might vote for a libertarian. You might vote for somebody who's not the other evil guy. So I have the option of getting the other things. I can get the other guys and I can get the 70% of New Yorkers who don't vote. I can get those. So there's a chance to win. Add on top of that, a five-way race only needing 30 to win this is a winnable race this can be done but let's say i'm wrong i've been wrong maybe all my ideas are wrong maybe every hole you found is a is a real hole and it can't be done and maybe they all destroy me and they beat me up and i can't win

get rid of those polls and you win, bro. Get those fucking polls out. Get those tolls. Not polls, rather. Tolls. You mean your tolls. Get those tolls gone and you can win the whole thing. But say I'm wrong and I can't win.

Great. If I just come in second, I beat the Republican only. Imagine what it does for the state. The first thing it does is it shows them that a third party can actually have impact in New York state, which means the entire nation off the bat. People with third parties will start thinking, wait a minute, we can do something. In a big state. Yes. And something else.

It'll make better Republicans and better Democrats. Because right now, neither of them does anything for anybody. They don't care. It's done. But when there's a third party, I become the referee. I'm the one who says, Democrats, you're supposed to be about civil liberties. You're not. What's wrong?

Republicans, you're supposed to be about less government and Second Amendment and small business. You're not. What's wrong? And now the media hears me. Now people hear me. They have to become better because if they're not, they'll come to me instead and they'll see it. And out of fear, they'll begin to change. Now, what do you think about this move toward democratic socialism? And you're seeing this a lot in young kids in particular. They seem to be abandoning this old system and trying to adopt a much more radical left-wing system. Yes. And apparently there's some real problems with that lady who won. She's literally my congresswoman. She won my congresswoman.

Yes. AOC. Yeah. Alexandria Ocasio. Alexandria Corte Cortez? Was it was that true? Are they smearing her or is it true that she used to be a Republican anti-abortion? I have no idea. Person. I don't know. And that she's really from Florida. I don't know. I don't know. There's people are so terrified of her and yet, you know, and attacking her. And she's made some missteps too on her own. What we have to realize is socialism for most Americans today, particularly young ones, is just the newest ideology of rebellion. Right.

That's all it is. Most of them don't know. Most of the people, the youngsters particularly, who actually supported Bernie, couldn't tell you any of his policies. Right. They just knew he wasn't the establishment. The same with Trump though. There were a lot of people who supported Trump who couldn't tell you one policy. But there's. They just knew he wasn't the establishment. The same with Trump, though. There were a lot of people supporting Trump

who couldn't tell you one policy. But there's things that he says that Bernie says that resonate with people. Yes. And one of them is that there's income inequality in this country. Very true. That's a big one.

Yes. And so people say, oh, well, the game is rigged and Bernie's going to fix it. Yes. Well, the game is rigged. That's true. And inequality is, and that's true. But it's rigged because of corruption because of the going to fix it. Yes. Well, the game is rigged. That's true. And inequality is happening.

That's true. But it's rigged because of corruption, because of the two-party system. It's rigged because of corny capitalism. That's why it's rigged. But it is rigged. The problem is you have a system where people keep saying it's the free market, right? This happened with Obamacare, by the way. With Obamacare, they said, well, we have markets, right?

We have the marketplace where you can go buy insurance. And what people then heard was, oh, it's a free market. It's not a free market, but that's what they heard. It was a free market. So then when Obamacare fails in certain states, what do they say? The market didn't work. See, we need single payer. The market didn't work. We need single payer. That's how it spun. And single payer is, oh, single payer is the right answer. It's Medicare for all. Well, that sounds amazing. But it won't be. What it will be is VA for all.

And the VA is a disaster. It'll be a two-tiered system. And that's a disaster. And what most people don't realize is socialism actually equals a two-tiered system. The reason why so many people who are wealthy will be fine with Obamacare or socialism is because they're not going to use it. They're not using it. I in manhattan right where where i'm in manhattan it's already happening because of how new york state works and how bad the system is you have less and less options for insurers there's only like one or two insurers now left in new york state they're leaving they're walking away at them can't make any money

so what's happening now is all the best doctors shouldn't say all most of the best doctors don't take insurance anymore really don't take best doctors don't take insurance anymore. Really? Don't take it. Just don't take it. Really? Yes. So what do you have is a two-year system. So the best doctors have enough patients that are wealthy that want the best medical care.

They can go, look, you're going to have to pay me. Yes. And it's actually a better – I know because in my own family, right? That's crazy. I'm a business owner, so I have to pay for my own Obamacare, right? But my wife won't go on Obamacare. That's crazy. I'm a business owner, so I have to pay for my own Obamacare, right?

But my wife won't go on Obamacare. So my wife takes private doctors and I take Obamacare doctors. That's how I work for my actual family. Wow. So when we go to a doctor's office, you can see a difference, right? If a doctor takes insurance, two doctors in a doctor's office, five people who are administrators, and they care more about photocopying your documents than you. You're in the way. The room's bad. No one cares, whatever. Your appointment's at two o'clock. You get seen at 345. Now change it. Now it's a doctor who does not

take insurance. When it's five doctors in that office, two administrators. You show up like, hey, how are you? What's going on? Please have a seat, whatever. They take your credit card or your check, whatever, but boom, you're good to go. Your appointment's at 2 o'clock, you can send 205. Well, the comparison, a valid comparison, is Canada's healthcare system versus America's. I have friends from Canada that come to America to get

healthcare because the healthcare system over there, although it's free, it's not as good in many aspects. And their waiting lists are massive. And the wealthy come someplace else. A two-tiered system. Exactly correct. They literally have a thing now where you go on vacation to get your stuff done.

It's horrible. But let me finish the last piece. If you have an insurance, a doctor who takes insurance, he'll talk to you for maybe 5, 10, 15 minutes at most. And it will always end with one of two things, a prescription or a procedure.

It's how they get paid. They bill Medicare, right? They bill Medicaid. They bill your insurance company. Prescription or procedure. They're always doing this. How do they make money? Private, the person talks for 20 minutes, 30 minutes,

ask you things that matter, like how are you eating? How are you sleeping? What's your stress level? Things that actually matter when it comes to your health. They ask those questions. What's going on? All those things. They begin to ask these questions to see if it works. Then it doesn't always end with that. It ends with whatever's appropriate because you're

writing them a check anyway. They're getting their $300 for one visit, no matter what. You're writing them a check or you're swiping your credit card. And there's an incentive for you to talk about what a good doctor they are so they get more business that pays them the same way you're paying. That is exactly correct. And they don't have to go through all the bullshit paperwork. Because you are the customer. Right. Right. When it comes to anyone who takes insurance, the insurance company is the customer. Right. Now, people that are listening to this that don't have

enough money to pay for that are saying, well, I want that kind of care. and I want it to be federally funded. Is that possible? The combination? No. No. Can you get good care? Yes. And how do I know this? Again, anything I'm saying is based on something, right?

And the best example I can give you is non-emergency or non-critical care, things like LASIK eye surgery, things like cosmetic dentistry, all types of things, right? Getting breast enhancements, things of that sort. Any type of enhancement. Yes, any of those things, right? If you remember years ago, you're as old as I am, so you know. When LASIK first came out, they used to charge you per eye because it was so expensive. It was so expensive.

It was per eye. Now you get both done for less than $1,000. Sometimes a couple hundred bucks, depending upon where you go. So what's happened in every instance, service level has gone up. Price has gone down. Technology has gone up. In every case, that's happened. So why don't we follow the same model in this?

And can it work? So what's happening? The Oklahoma Surgery Center right now is doing it right now. They list all their pricing. So you can actually figure, oh, okay, I can get this. I know what it costs. It's cheaper than anything else. And they do this outside of insurance. Correct. No insurance. Yes. There's a model that's popping up in certain areas now,

doctors that are coming out of it. And this is in Oklahoma only? That I know of. There may be others, but that one I know of. Interesting. So I think it's actually called the Oklahoma Center for Surgery or something like Surgery Center, something like that. And so the ideal situation would be that would be available for people that can afford it. And for people that can't afford it, there's always going to be catastrophic health care.

You break your leg, you're going to be taken care of. Well, here's the issue. You get the flu, you're going to be taken care of. There's a bigger issue here. And the bigger issue is we in this country have confused health care with health care insurance. They are two totally separate things. I don't talk much about healthcare insurance that much because I care more about the healthcare system itself.

The system itself is broken. It's a cartel system. Right? So it's literally people in a room get together and go, hey, what do you think? Aspirin, 85 bucks? What do you think? Yeah? 85 bucks it is for aspirin.

And it's not based on how much it costs to make aspirin? No, not at all. Not at all. It is literally a cartel system. So is that like that Martin, what is that little twat's name that wound up going to jail? The kid on the Wu-Tang Clan album? Perfect example. Who jacked up the price of some medication in a horrific way?

Perfect example. Yes, that of course is an extreme example. But that's actually happening. If you've ever gone to a hospital or gone to a doctor's office and you see the, they give you the bill, right? Ask for 85 bucks. In a bed for five minutes, $3,000. I mean, they do that, right?

And that's a problem in itself. And one of the reasons is this. Right now, healthcare system, it's the current healthcare system. All right, Joe, you decide you want to get a new job and you want to get some new clothes for your job.

So you come to me, the clothier, Larry, and you say, hey, I need some new clothes. I go, great. Here's some new clothes for your job. So you come to me, the clothier, Larry, and you say, hey, I need some new clothes. I go, great. Here's some new clothes and I show you what you're going to do and I give you your hat

and clothes and everything you got. It's awesome. You go, thanks, Larry. It's perfect. Awesome. How much does it cost? And I say, I don't know. You say, wait a minute.

I came to your store. You gave me the perfect outfit for my new job. You don't know how much it costs? That's correct. I don't know. It's perfect. I don't know how much it costs.

Here's what I'm going to do. You go home, take the clothes. It's great for you. You're going to get a bill in the mail about a week or so. Whatever the bill is, I don't know what it is,

you have to pay. That's our current healthcare system. Wow. That is true. Yes, that's how it works. That is true. It's only in our system.

Right. You don't do that for a car or clothes or computers. Anything else. Nothing else. Only that. It's true. But here's the worst part.

All right. You decide you want to buy this water from me. Right? I'm sorry. Jamie. Jamie. So Jamie decides he wants to buy this water from you. You can call him Young Jamie if you want to be up to it.

Young Jamie. Young Jamie wants to buy this water from you. And you agree you want to sell it to him for a dollar. He agrees he's going to buy it for a dollar. I step in. I'm insurance. Nope. You cannot have this.

I have deemed as the insurance company that this actually is worth 50 cents. I've decided so. So I give him the water. So I'm trying to sell the water for a dollar. The insurance company says, fuck you. That's correct. It's 50 cents. That's correct.

And gives you 50 cents. Done. Yeah, that's a real problem with doctors. Yes, absolutely. So here comes the next piece though. Now, this guy over here, and he wants to buy the water too. He doesn't have insurance. I can't get involved here, and he wants to buy the water, too. He doesn't have insurance. I can't get involved.

Well, you want to sell the water to him. How much do you want to sell the water to him now? A buck fifty now. You're going to make up 50 cents for him. So he's paying three times as much as he's paying. How do you fix that? That's the current system. How would you fix that?

Transparency, transparency, transparency. Number one thing, transparency. You go to the doctor's office, you broke your foot. You say, a broken foot costs this. It costs $50 an hour for that. It costs 15 cents per pill for this. That would be amazing. But just doing one thing, just saying in New York State, just saying this.

If you sell medical services like any other service, you must be transparent. Right? That's it. So you can't just give someone a bill. You have to show them why it costs what it costs. And you have to have a standard. Absolutely. That's very reasonable. Yes, it's like a car, right? You don't always know how much it costs

to fix the car. They give you an estimate. So you feel like the system has just been in place for a long time and they've taken advantage of it and they have power. And so they're just leaving it the way it is. There's also a bunch of fear. And then you have, this isn't enough, right? This concept of transparency is not enough. All these problems that we have, people often say, well, I, what's the answer? It's not one thing. It's many things. Transparency is a huge piece, but you also have to facilitate more things. As an example, you want to facilitate an environment to where if a – okay.

The current system people are starting to use now is what I call the Costco model, which is basically a membership model, right? So the doctor's office has all of us as customers. All of us decide to pay or they agree whatever the payment is. It's $400 a month or you have a kid, so you're $800 a month or you're single, you're two, whatever. Whatever the price is, we all pay. We now can go to that doctor's office whenever we need to. And whoever's in the office, whatever they have, we have access to. It costs $5.

$5 per visit, that's all. They try this at zero, just doing it free, but senior citizens would show up every day. So they charge instead $5. $5. Show up at $5 anytime you need to. What's the goal of the doctor's office? The goal of the doctor's office is for you to be healthy, for you to never show up. Just pay your $400 every month and to never show up.

That would be awesome, right? Right. Now, that's happening already, right? The advantage is whatever they have, we get to use. So if they start making more money, they will bring on more doctors, they will bring on more everything so that you will get more of your family and friends to come and pay them the monthly fee. Like a gym membership. Same thing, right? As long as you're healthy, you're fine.

Well, what happened is as long as they can help you, they help you. If they can't do things, you have catastrophic insurance. And they would have some type of agreement with another facility like a hospital or something like that so that they will get a lower price because you're going to them. They're sending patients to you, right? So if you had a bigger issue they couldn't handle, they have an agreement with other facilities, so you get a lower price anyway. But you'd have insurance for that, catastrophic insurance, of course. And we already have something like that.

We have long-term care insurance, right? Which is insurance that when you get something that will last a long time, there are insurances that will help to pay along that also. But more importantly than that, with that in mind, we have to take care of our people who are very poor. So what can we do? We can have a system to where you have the option to take an insurance normally if you want to or this system, and here's an incentive. If you decide to say, as an example, and I'm making this up as an example only, 10% of your people you will bring on for free. And based upon how we decide that they're poor, I'm making this up as an idea.

So they are eligible for free school lunch in New York State. That's how we as New York State will define poor for the sake of argument, right? For the sake of argument. If they're eligible for that, you take those people, then we will give you a break on this tax or this fee or this thing. If you do this, many of the smaller doctors, the break probably won't be enough and they probably won't take it, but large organizations probably will. So larger companies will take on people who can't afford to pay anything. This is another idea or a concept. You start making this happen and facilitating this and you will see healthcare will get cheaper. And when healthcare gets cheaper, now insurance gets cheaper. Now you have more people who want to get into the insurance business.

You'll have more options and choices for insurance. You'll have people who just get emergency room insurance. Some people just get long-term care insurance. Some people just get X, Y, and Z insurance. How could you reduce the number, the amount of money rather, that pharmaceutical drugs cost? Because that would be a big issue, right? It would be, absolutely. Now, there's several things. One, of course, is the FDA. The FDA stifles so much. I mean, if you have to be completely rebooted, I can't really

do that in New York State. That's the thing the government, the state government really can't do much of. All I can do is make, force them to be transparent so that people see how bad it is. As a general rule, and this is a 100% rule, but general rule is when you shine a light on bad behavior, almost always you can make the bad behavior less. So when it has to be transparent, and when you actually see each pill cost all this money, enough people go, dude, what are you doing? Enough go, what are you doing? I'm not doing this. And it will force the system to change. But that's a long-term solution that is really a federal issue. Well, listen, Larry, you got some really good ideas.

They're very revolutionary. You're a bold motherfucker. That's the goal. You're taking some chances. Absolutely. I like the fact that you're sticking your neck out there with a lot of these things, and I hope you really do well. Let me wrap the last piece up here. Please do.

If I don't win. If you don't win. If I win, it changes this nation overnight. 100%. Because all the ideas pop up. Things will change. You will see people who are independent step up. What do you have to do to get them to be in the debates? Just be popular.

That's it? That's it. How much do you have to be popular? What has to be decided? They just decide. Who decides? Is there a state committee? No, I think the cuomo decides if he

wants to show up or not that's it yes and what he does is he says follow my rules and i'll show up what is his rules whatever he feels is appropriate really yes he can do that yeah oh he won't show he did with dixon he said it has to be sit down must be here must be there she said yes he showed up so he'll have his rules i'll say yes and I'll show up. Will he do that with you? I don't know. I think he will. In the last two times, he did it. He did it.

All four people showed up. Well, good for him. So yes, last time he did it. So he probably will. So when would this possibly happen? October. October. Yes.

And we could promote that. Of course. And we could tell people about it. Absolutely. What would be the key things that you and him would butt heads on? Wow, so much. As a general rule, the biggest thing is the state's collapsing, and he doesn't say that. He says the state's awesome because we have great gun control.

That's literally what he says. He's worried about fighting Trump. He thinks fighting Trump is everything because he's running for president in 2020. So his entire campaign is, I'm the only one who can beat Trump. I'm the only one who can protect New York State from Trump. And if he loses the governorship,

he's fucked running for president. I don't know. Depends on how Democrats think. I mean, you know, depends. Some Democrats who, depends on who wants to fight Trump in 2020. If Trump is very popular, a lot of Democrats won't want to fight him. But Cuomo will. Who else is going to run? What do you mean for 2020?

For president as a Democrat. Is Hillary running again? I don't know. It seems like she is. Right? Maybe. Seems like Bernie might run again. He might.

Yeah. I don't know. There's a lot of mights. So I don't really know. His loss might mean that he doesn't run. But if you win, everything changes. Not just that. You will find people who are liberty-leaning all of a sudden run the libertarian banner.

Because I'm right now the most popular guy running who has an L by his name. There are some libertarians who are running who don't have Ls by their name. They're running in nonpartisan races. I'm running boldly with an L by my name. So I'm trying to change the brand so it's a decent brand is what I'm doing. I put libertarian on my stuff. I'm always libertarian.

So I'm trying to build the brand out to be a better brand. So if I win, the brand's better. People will do that. We'll raise more money. There'll be a real third party. I mean, there'll be a third party in the United States which will make better Democrats and better Republicans.

We'll literally be a better nation, a better politic will be better in America better Republicans, will literally be a better nation, a better politic will be better in America if I actually win this damn thing. But let's say I lose. Say I'm wrong, my ideas are wrong, whatever, people don't agree, I lose. Doesn't matter. The bold ideas are still out

there. What you heard, what your audience heard is still there. Someone's going to pick this up. Someone's going to talk about it. And you're fine with that? 100%. Yes, please. I want to fix things. I'm not concerned with who gets the credit for it. Let's fix it. I want a better place to live. This country's in trouble. New York City's a perfect example of where we're going. I don't want that to be the rest of this nation. We can fix. Steal all my stuff, please. Steal it all. Awesome. I hope you steal it. I hope California copies me and does everything I said. It'd be

amazing. Please do that. It'd be awesome. But if people don't hear me, if I don't get out there, if I don't get on the debate stage and I don't come in second or third, then no one's going to hear me because I'm going to be forgotten. But if I come in second or a tight third, there will be a microphone in my face for the next two years. And every time it's out there, I'll be saying stuff just like this again and again and again. And maybe my education isn't perfect, but guess what? Someone will figure out the right one. It won't be just keep giving it money. It won't be that. It'll be something that will actually work. It'll be something brand new and exciting and get people to come back to our state. What I don't want is what's happening now is kids get educated, they leave, they don't

come back. They'll be educated someplace else and never come back. It's the wrong answer. Good luck to you, Larry. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. All right. Larry Sharp, ladies and gentlemen, the revolution has just begun.

That was great.