The Young Turks - MINIMUM WAGE WAR

Episode Date: February 9, 2021

Biden says the $15 minimum wage won’t survive COVID relief talks but promises to push for the pay hike later. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Thank you. All right, come on. Welcome to the Young Turks. You know you love it. We haven't even started and you already love it.

Jank Yugar, Anna Kasparian, fun, information, news, analysis, awesomeness, all of it's happening right now. You don't have to go anywhere else. Just buckle up and brace for impact of awesomeness. Speaking of which, I present to you, Casper. All right, let's do it. Apparently, that's not going to occur because of the rules of the United States Senate. So you're saying the minimum wage won't be in this.

My guess is it will not be in it. I put it in, but I don't think it's going to survive. Well, that was a portion of Joe Biden's interview over the weekend, and we learned that he seems to have caved on the $15 minimum wage that was a part of, of his nearly $2 trillion coronavirus relief package. Now, as some of you might already know, the Senate Democrats have moved forward with the plan to pass a more robust relief package through reconciliation, meaning that the Senate would only need a simple majority in order to pass that bill. Now, Kamala Harris would serve as the tie-breaking vote. If they've moved forward with that process, no one in the Democratic Party, and certainly not Joe Biden, should give up

on the minimum wage hike in the package. But the argument here is that there are certain rules when it comes to reconciliation. And the rule indicates that you can't pass something with a simple majority if it doesn't have an impact on the federal budget. But a $15 an hour minimum wage increase would have an impact on the budget. And I'll give you the evidence for that in just a minute. But Biden also said, quote, I'm prepared as the president of the United States on a separate negotiation on minimum wage to work my way up from what it is now. No one should work 40 hours a week and live below the poverty wage. And you're making less than $15 an hour. You're living below the poverty wage. Now Bernie Sanders, who is the head of the

Senate budget committee completely disagrees with Biden attempting to pass a minimum wage hike through a standalone bill. He says this, let's be clear, we will never get 10 votes from Senate Republicans to pass a $15 an hour minimum wage. The only way we can do it now with 51 votes is through the reconciliation process. And I want to be clear that the reconciliation process is something that applies to increasing the minimum wage. Jake, before we go to you, let's hear a little more from Senator Sanders during his interview with Jake Tapper over the weekend. Now, to be clear, he supports raising the federal minimum wage.

He just thinks it's not going to make it into the final bill. You're the Senate Budget Committee, Chairman. Is President Biden wrong? Well, I hope he is, Jake. As you indicated, the president supports the $15 an hour minimum wage. I do. A last poll I saw has 62% of the American people supporting it. Because at the end of the day, we are in the midst of massive income and wealth inequality.

People on top are doing phenomenally well. And yet we have literally tens of millions of Americans working for starvation wages. You cannot make it in any state in this country, a nine or ten bucks an hour. We've got to raise that minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour. And I can tell you, as chairman of the Budget Committee, we have a room full of lawyers, working as hard as we can to make the case to the parliamentarian that in fact raising the minimum wage will have significant budget implications and in fact should be consistent with reconciliation. So just a little more context. There's something known as the bird rule. That's the rule

that I was referring to earlier indicating that anything passed through reconciliation would need to be legislation that has an impact on the federal budget. There is evidence that increasing the minimum wage would have an impact on the federal budget. But let me also be clear in stating that if the parliamentarian argues that the increase in minimum wage does not apply, that the bird rule indicates that it does not apply as a provision for the legislation under reconciliation, Kamala Harris, the vice president, could literally override what the parliamentarian says. So there really isn't much of an obstacle for Democrats to get what they want in regard to a $15 minimum wage. Joe Mansion is being a little bit difficult,

but it's pretty easy to make him bend to your will, as we've learned when it comes to the $2,000 direct checks to Americans. Jank, what do you think? Yeah, so look, I'm a little bit of split on this, but not in any way that you might expect. So first of all, $15 minimum wage, biggest no-brainer in America. So I don't even believe that poll that says 62%. I'll tell you why I don't believe it. I think it's much higher because no matter which state you put the minimum wage increase up on a ballot measure, it passes with tremendous majorities, including in Mississippi, in Arkansas, in Missouri.

You cannot put it on the ballot anywhere and not have it pass with nearly two-thirds votes. Even after all of the big business interests, pummel it with advertising against it. And it never works. In Florida, it passed with two thirds. So it's enormously popular. So we're not negotiating with Republican voters. Let's be clear about that. Republican voters want this too. No, we're only negotiate, and we're not even negotiating with Republicans, because we don't need a single Republican vote. So the only people we're negotiating with is conservative Democrats. And the conservative Democrats never wanted the $15 minimum wage. And by the way, in this case, and Biden is now really straddling the fence between progressives

and conservative Democrats, which is actually good news overall, he used to be just a conservative Democrat. Now he's come to the middle of the Democratic Party. So that's progress, such as it is. But there are people that are now significantly to the right of them like Joe Manchin and Chris and Cinema. They are not representing the best interest of their state. The people of West Virginia definitely want higher minimum wage. Anyone claiming to the contrary is either ignorant or lying. So what are they doing? They're representing their donors, as we've told you, you a thousand times. That is why I'm back on track with my predictions. I told you guys, and by the way, I also told incoming freshmen in Congress, they're gonna say that they're

going to pass the minimum wage, and I guarantee you the first opportunity, they'll drop it. And what's the first thing Joe Biden dropped? The minimum wage. Okay, now that's in negotiation with his donors and with Joe Manchin's donors and all of the corporate Democrats donors. That's why they dropped it. Otherwise, they would never do it. It's enormously popular, enormously popular. So hence, our media once again, not covering this accurately in any way, shape or form. Every article talks about how Joe Manchin is representing the will of his voters, when that is empirically incorrect, whether it's on COVID relief overall or on the minimum wage. So why in the God's green earth am I mixed at all? Because I like the idea of having a standalone

vote on minimum wage. I want to put the Republicans and I want to put Joe Manchin and I want to put Joe Biden and I want to put everybody on the record. Which side are you on? Donors or voters? Because the voters are super clear. If you vote to make sure they have lower wages, there should be tremendous political consequences. And I also like it because it won't give the mainstream media and much room to hide. They'll pretend and pretend and pretend that the people of West Virginia and Mississippi don't want it, and we'll prove them wrong time and time again until we expose the mainstream media and corporate Democrats as the liars that they clearly are. I believe that the Progressive Caucus should withhold its vote on the relief package until

it has a $15 an hour minimum wage. The way that Biden proposes the minimum wage increase, by the way, certainly falls short because it's not like the bill would pass and tomorrow the federal wage, minimum wage would be $15 an hour. It would take four. years for the wage to get to $15 an hour. And Jake, the reason why I don't think a standalone bill makes much sense is because, okay, they have that standalone vote or a bill on that state or vote on that standalone bill. Who's going to hold the politicians accountable when they vote against an increase in the minimum wage?

Do you think the corporate media is going to do that? Of course they're not. Are we going to do that? Of course we will. How much influence and sway does that really have? I think what's important is getting that $15 an hour minimum wage passed as soon as possible. And the best way to get that accomplished is through the reconciliation process. I guarantee you that there will be no minimum wage hike under the Biden administration if they

attempt to do it with a standalone bill. No one's going to hold anyone accountable. Immediately the corporate media will shift its focus onto think tank studies that are funded by millionaires and billionaires indicating that a $15 an hour minimum wage hike would be disastrous for the economy. We would lose tens of millions of jobs if that happened, even though the real evidence and data does not bear that out. Okay, let me be clear because we're going to ask you guys to vote on a poll too, t.t.com slash polls. Should it be standalone or should or not? Number one thing that I want to be clear about is that Anna and I are not disagreeing on the most important stuff. So if you said to me, Jay, push a button and it's included in

the overall COVID relief or it's not, I definitely push the button. Yeah, included in COVID relief because then it'll pass. And I just wanted to pass. That's the most important thing by an order of magnitude. That's definitely the most important. So I would rather have it be in there. What I'm telling you guys is I knew for a fact that Joe Biden didn't mean it. He uses a as a negotiating tool. He knew that he was going to drop it, just like Obama knew he was going to drop the public option. And when I said in the beginning that Obama is going to drop the public option, every reporter, every mainstream Democrats said, You're unfair to Obama. It's outrageous. He has pure intent. He's an angel dropped down from

heaven above, and you're a monstrous, skeptic, et cetera. And of course, he dropped it the first possible opportunity because it was a negotiation employee. It was he never meant it. Joe Biden never meant putting them in $15 minimum wage in the COVID relief bill. So he had meant to drop it all along. So if nothing changed, Anna would be right about the second part of it as well. Like, you think the corporate media wants to hold him accountable? Of course not. That's why I'm saying, in order for us to win this fight, the first people we've got to get through is the corporate media who's going to tell you, oh my God, the beloved think tanks all funded by multinational corporations tell you your wages should be dirt low and we will regurgitate that like morons

or, you know, they're butlers, basically. So I know all of that. And Anna's generally right about all of that, what I'm saying is I think we have a unique opportunity on $15 minimum wage, and besides which we don't have a choice because they were always going to drop it. But we have a unique opportunity there to make a progressive stand on a standalone bill and say we will put every ounce of media that we have, every ounce of power that we have behind this bill, because we have everybody on our side in terms of the voters. So if corporate media and corporate Democrats want to oppose us on $15 minimum wage, I'm telling you now, they better be careful what they wish for.

And Anna, I swear to God, we're going to hold them accountable. But it's not just about us. Yes, progressive groups. Anna, you think I can't primary people? Jake, I'm not saying that we're not going to hold people accountable. And yes, I know that we're going to primary people. It's what you do. It's what Justice Democrats has been pretty successfully doing.

But my problem is, like, we can't wait for, you know, the midterm election. to hopefully get more progressives in there and get minimum wage after that if we're lucky. Like time is of the essence. Yes, I think progressive media with TYT obviously included in that equation is gonna hold Biden and other Democrats who vote against increasing the minimum wage accountable for that. I just don't really think that it's gonna be enough to get the minimum wage hike that we need as soon as humanly possible, right? I think it's a big gamble. And so that's why I think a better strategy is, you know, it might be politically risky, but I think that if they frame it correctly, progressives can hold their vote on this bill unless

it has the, you know, the minimum wage hike. And by the way, aid to people that isn't means tested as strictly as before and certainly not as strictly as what's being proposed by Republicans now. Yeah. No, and that's why I'm telling you that I promise we will break them on this issue. Anna's right, in order for us to win, we have to break them because they're not going to want to do it and they're going to fight tooth and nail. And by the way, I'll tell you ahead of time, another trick that they will do when it comes

as a standalone bill, the Manches of the world will say, and Joe Biden will secretly agree ahead of time that instead of making it four-year transition, they'll want to make it 10 or 15-year transition. In other words, you're never going to get it. We're going to wait until the Republicans get back in charge, and then they'll cut it before it even goes into effect. So, so no way, no way, it has to be in that timeline and we will break them. And so, and I hear you, we're not, look, if the, if Mansion and Cinema are protected by corporate media and the people of West Virginia and Arizona never find out their corporate stooges, yes, then you cannot win in the short term. But if we can break through, not just TYT, but all of us fighting together, all the groups, all

the media, fighting together on this issue, can break through and say there is no excuse. The only reason to vote against it is because you're a corporate butler and you take orders and you're deeply, deeply corrupt. I swear to God we're gonna break him on this issue. Okay, so we do have a poll on this. So here's what the question is. Should Biden fight for a $15 an hour minimum wage now as part of the COVID aid bill or kick the can down the road as a standalone bill? You can participate in this poll by going to t.yt.com slash polls slash minimum wage. That's tyt.com slash polls slash minimum wage. We really want to hear where you guys

stand on this issue. And you know, I do want to just quickly note that In regard to the bird rule, again, I've been saying this on the show repeatedly, but I want to reiterate that increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour does what? It increases tax revenue for the federal government, meaning that it would make people less, it would fund the government more, which is important. And a higher wage would mean that less people would be reliant on the social safety net in order to, you know, put food on the table for themselves to take care of their kids. You guys get the point. And so just one quick graphic that I want to read you. You see Berkeley economist Michael Reich, the author of the new research paper said the rise of the wage act, raise the wage act, I apologize, says that the raise the wage act of 2021 would have a positive effect on the federal budget. of $65.4 billion per year through a combination of decreased spending and some social safety net programs, which many workers are forced to rely on due to low wages and increased tax revenue. As you guys know, I mean, the people who take advantage of the social safety net more than anyone happen to be these massive corporations that underpaid their employees, which forces the

the federal government to subsidize them by paying for, you know, government programs for their employees, basically picking up slack for their employers. So this is, again, this is something that does apply, does qualify under the bird rule. Let's not waste any time. I, you're absolutely right, Jen, Democrats are the ones who are standing in the way of this. But I really think that progressives can play hardball here and win. Yeah. All right, last thing, guys, don't Don't get bogged down on process arguments. It's a cover story for what they actually want to do. Reconciliation, bird rule, filibuster, whatever. Democrats have 51 votes when you include Kamala Harris. And Republicans passed everything through reconciliation, including giant tax cuts and their effort

to kill health care for all of us. Okay. So, and some of those had budget implications, some of them didn't, they didn't care at all. They just use their power because they're not schmucks or liars like the corporate Democrats. Okay. So if the Democrat, want to, they can pass every single thing. Any process argument is by definition a lie, okay? Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, or don't you want it? There's a big update. There's a big update that Brett just sent me. So according to a post by the Progressive Caucus, big news, the Progressive Caucus has secured the inclusion of a $15 an hour minimum wage in the House's pandemic reconciliation package. This has been a leading priority for our caucus and would give 27 million

Americans, low wage Americans, a raise. Now, of course, this really relies on how the Senate reacts. And so Bernie, Warren, Markey, every senator who has claimed to be a progressive needs to fight on this and not drop it, not cave to, you know, conservative Democrats and whatever their wishes are. And so I would be super happy to have that $15 minimum wage fight right now, as opposed to later, okay? But I'm, so I do good news, bad news out of the breaking news that Anna just read you. Progressive caucus actually making a difference. By the way, the majority of the Democrats in the House now is 10 votes.

How many just Democrats are there? 10. Okay. So now we have power. I told you we'd have power. We do have power. We just use that power. And we got what we wanted out of the house.

Unfortunately, the Senate is not the same way. So the good news is we have and have used our power well, okay? The bad news is there's no way they're going to accept it in the Senate. When Biden said he's going to drop it, the corporate Democrats will definitely drop it in the Senate. They will not include it. I bet your bottom dollar on it. I would be shocked beyond belief if we could win that fight now. I would love it, but I would be shocked.

But I would be equally surprised if we don't win it afterwards as a standalone bill. because they have no grounds to fight on this. They have no leg to stand on and we'll kick out whatever leg they have. All right, we got to take a break when we come back. Democrats entertaining the idea of stricter means testing when it comes to COVID relief. We'll give you the details on that and more when we return. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-Fing the Republic or UNFTR. As a young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media,

and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of Un-B-The-Republic or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be, featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school.

For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must have learned what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi Transcendant. Why just survive back to school when you can thrive by creating a space that does it all for you, no matter the size? Whether you're taking over your parents' basement or moving to campus, IKEA has hundreds of design ideas and affordable options to complement any budget. After all, you're in your small space era. It's time to own it. Shop now at IKEA.ca. or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime. So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained all at the same time.

Thank you. You know, All right, back during the break, let me read a viewer comments here from our site, t.T.com slash join to get your comments read first. Bushaw 24 writes in the one thing Biden promise progresses is fighting for a $15 minimum wage. Shocking, he's a liar who could have predicted this. Guys, I want to be clear about that too. So I know. knew that Biden would drop it out of the general COVID relief bill. That doesn't mean he's not going to bring it up or push to bring it back up as a standalone bill. I think he will. Now,

what will his position be at that point? I think he doesn't even know his position. I think he will see how the fight between Bernie Sanders and Joe Manchin plays out and then make a decision, because he really is now has been pushed between progressives and conservative Democrats. So if you'd asked me two years ago, would Joe Biden be in favor of that? I would said, hell no, no way, right? And maybe two years from now, it'll be easy to get Joe Biden to agree to it. Right now, it's a 50-50 proposition. But at a minimum, it will come back up as a standalone bill.

It has, there's no chance that it won't. It doesn't mean it'll pass, then there'll be the fight that Anna and I talked about in the first segment. All right, illiterate, aliterate writes in, only 638 days till Democrats lose the majority in both houses. of Congress, we should create a doomsday clock for that inevitable event. Yes, if they keep going like this, that'll be this situation. But honestly, as much as I, you hear me, including the first segment fighting against establishment Democrats, the Democratic Party has moved a smidge to the left in a way that I have not seen in literally decades. So we are having some effect here. The art bark says Biden essentially giving up on $15 minimum wage just

just shows how Democrats love to campaign on progressive policies and then play apologists and wave the white flag as soon as they possibly can, because they have no interest in the actual policy itself. Well, as a general way of describing the game that's being played, that's about 100% right. And so again, our audience understands politics, no joke, no exaggeration, way better than the average political reporter at Washington Post, New York Times, or any of these mainstream news outlets. None of them have figured out that very simple thing that you're talking about. Tom Zawaki says we shouldn't just pass a $15 minimum wage. We should include a cost of living increase for the minimum wage on a yearly basis. That might keep corporate profits

based on introduction of better service and product instead of price increases. So that's a great idea and definitely should be included and is included in some of the proposals. So a great job. I told you guys you have this. thing figured out. Let's keep doing this and we're to win on this issue together. We'll be right back. All right, back on Young Turks, Jane and Anna with you guys. Anna, take it away. All right. There's been a debate raging regarding whether or not there should be stricter means testing to essentially severely limit the number of Americans who would qualify or be eligible for economic relief under the upcoming coronavirus relief package.

Now, unfortunately, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen seems to be interested in implementing more means testing, although the proposals from Republicans is something that she was willing to criticize. So I think it's about time we take a good, hard look at what's going on with Biden's scabinet. Now, under what conservatives are fighting for, the means testing would ensure that people making anything above $50,000 a year would lose some of their eligibility toward receiving relief under the coronavirus relief package. Now, Janet Yellen, Treasury Secretary, thinks that that threshold is just far too low. And she takes absolutely no time to question or critique how the means testing relies on faulty data from 2019 tax filings, she instead decides, well, maybe I can meet these people halfway. Watch.

What do you think the cutoff should be 50,000, 75,000? Where do you come down? Well, President Biden is certainly willing to work with members of Congress to define what's fair, and he wouldn't want to see a household making over $300,000 receive these payments. But if you think about an elementary school teacher or policeman making $60,000 a year, so the exact details of how it should be targeted are to be determined, but struggling middle class families need help too. So you're not, so you definitely think higher than 50,000 per individual, but you're not necessarily willing to commit to 75,000 is what I'm hearing. Yeah, I, you know, I think the details can be worked out.

There's a possibility of the White House, obviously with Yellen included in this argument, that they would, they wouldn't go for $50,000 as the cutoff, but they would maybe go for $60,000. as the cutoff when it comes to COVID-19 relief eligibility. And that conversation that just took place, the video that you just watched, was stupid. That was political suicide. The Biden administration considering caving to conservatives, whether it be conservative Republicans or conservative Democrats or people like Larry Summers, embarrassing, embarrassing. Okay, under the means testing that's being proposed right now, 40 million Americans who qualified for coronavirus relief under the Trump administration would no longer qualify under

what Biden could be proposing with this lower eligibility threshold. Political suicide, what are you doing? Why are you guys being so stupid? They're being stupid. That's what's happening right now. If you're worried about people bringing in hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, taking advantage of government aid, then make them pay it back when they filed their taxes and let's stop engaging in these stupid negotiations. It's so senseless. Yeah, Anna, look, we get stuck all the time here on TYT between calling them stupid and corrupt. But in this case, it's almost certainly corruption. Janet Yellen is perfectly smart. So is Biden and those guys, generally speaking, and they've got a lot of smart people in the room. They're doing it on purpose,

which is, by the way, worse. So let me clarify a couple of things. Janet Yellen is not going to go on TV and wing it. She's, this is not the Trump administration. These are very thoughtful people, meaning they've thought it through. And she's not going to go out there without confirming with Biden that 60,000 is okay. She's also not going to go out there and say 60,000 unless they're pretty sure they're going to get 60,000. So they might even already have an agreement with Mansion and Cinema to get to 60,000. So are they going to go a dollar above 60,000? No, it's now over. That is the official Biden position stated on national television. You're not going to get, if you're making over $60,000, you're not getting any relief. So the stupidity that Anna talked

about is now pretty much written in stone. The policy is not bright. The political effect is not bright, but the reason they're doing it is because the Chamber of Commerce is putting tremendous pressure on them. So they represent big business. And it's not just that they're negotiating with Manchin's Cinema. They're literally negotiating with their own donors. So if Manchinus Cinema actually had ideological differences, they'd steamroll them. Nobody cares about ideology or principles in Washington. But no, they're backed up by literally billions of dollars in lobbying money and campaign contributions. That's why you just heard Yell and tell you, it's over. You're not going to go over $60,000. Yes, some people who got relief under Trump,

now mind you, he didn't pass this. So it's not like you give Trump credit, right? But in the earlier version, some people who got relief under Trump will not get it under Biden. And every one of them will then think the Democrats screwed me. So that's why I'm saying that they're being stupid, right? Like I know, I know that they in their minds are thinking rationally because they want to appease their donors. And maybe they're right because, you know, I used to be under the impression that they cared about their donors because they wanted to remain in power. And those campaign donations were pretty fundamental in our broken system to be able to pay for your campaign and to get reelected and to remain in power. But no, I mean, when you

consider that Janet Yellen over the last two years collected $7.2 million giving Wall Street speeches, then it doesn't matter if you're in power with the government or not. You're going to rake in all that money later on anyway, or you brought in a lot of that money before coming back into power as Treasury Secretary. So you're right in that corruption plays a role. But if they care about remaining in power, if they really want to fend off Trump, a Trump-type politician, Trump 2.0 in the future, then this is a really dumb way to go about it, especially when you consider, again, 40 million Americans who qualified for government relief, for economic relief under Trump, who would not qualify for that relief under Biden. And I would venture to say

that these people would be pretty upset if they were left behind by stricter means testing that was forced down everyone's throats by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which, by the way, spent $82 billion lobbying Congress in the White House last year alone. Last year alone. Last year alone, $82 billion. And then, of course, you have think tanks like Opportunity Insights that's bankrolled by Mark Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, Bill Gates, all these incredibly fabulously wealthy people, you know, who it's a think tank that put out some BS study indicating that, you know, providing this relief without the means testing, the stricter means testing, doesn't make sense because it doesn't stimulate the economy enough. How about maybe this isn't about stimulating the economy? How about this is about keeping people alive? This is about survival at this point.

And we're not even talking about $2,000 direct checks to Americans every single month until the pandemic is over. We're literally having a debate right now about how many Americans should qualify for a one-time $1,400 check. That's what we're having a debate about right now. It's absolutely pathetic, it's embarrassing, especially when you can compare us to every other developed country that's actually offered far more relief than the United States has. And when you think about it politically and strategically, this is incredibly stupid.

Yeah, and look, I would say dead horse, but I'm gonna keep pounding that dead horse probably for at least another four years. Is anybody in media telling you that they're negotiating with their donors, is anybody telling you about how much the Chamber of Commerce is spending? Or are they all pretending, like some sort of kabuki theater, that Joe Biden and Janet Yellen and Joe Manchin have principles. And in their principles, they think that the average Americans should get less benefits and corporations should get almost all the benefits. Nobody's telling you the reality. And by the way, that's partly what drove the right wing crazy and had them go down conspiracy theory rabbit holes because it was so. so obvious that the media was lying to them. So one last thing, stimulating the economy. So Anna mentioned that some corporate Democrats are saying it's not going to stipulate the

economy enough. Well, what does that mean? By definition, it stimulates the pocketbooks of the people who got it, right? And do they spend into the economy? Yes, because they have to, because they don't have any money left. So all that is true. So what are they actually talking about? Oh, they're saying it won't actually help business interest. Stimulate the economy to them, it's not even a code word. They just mean it like because they think the only thing that matters is big business. They've internalized that group think, so they think, well, I don't understand how this would help big business. So hence it won't stimulate the economy. Hence, we're against it. Yeah, okay. Well, why don't you just say

it like it's you actually mean it? My corporate overlords are not happy about this. And they've told me that less of you should get money. And so that's why I'm doing this. And if If there were any honest reporters in the country, and there are some, Cerroda, Grimm, and others, you would know, yes, that's the actual game that's being played upon all of you, Democrats, Republicans, and independents. All right, well, let's move on to something that's gaining some traction. And it has to do with child credits, child benefit, as part of this relief package. Biden has his proposal for this and Romney came out with his own proposal that appears to be even more generous. But once you read the details, you might take away something completely different. So let's talk about it. The White House has unveiled a child benefit as part of Joe Biden's relief proposal, coronavirus relief proposal. And Mitt Romney, a Republican

senator, has responded with his own version of relief, which to be quite honest, with you on its face appears to be more generous in regard to how much money an average family would get, depending on how many children they have. But let's break it down, see what Biden's proposing, compare it to what Romney's proposing, and you guys can decide for yourselves how you feel about it, but I'll share my analysis as well. So Biden's enhanced child child tax credit bill is one that proposes that the IRS would deposit checks worth $300 every month per child younger than six and $250 every month per child ages 6 to 17. This would give parents $3,000 per year for each child between the ages of 6 to 7 and $3,600 per child under the age of 6. Now, this is different

from how child credits have worked in the past. So in the past, as you guys know, you can deduct, you know, you can use it as a deduction in your taxes when you file, but this is different. The IRS under Biden's plan, if it passes, would deposit hundreds of dollars into your account depending on how many children you have and depending on how old they are. Now, under the IRS plan, the current IRS plan, I'm sorry, under Biden's plan, the IRS would send these payments automatically to American families, similar to how the $1,200 stimulus payments were dispersed last year. This approach would not require taxpayers to wait until they file their taxes to receive the credit. Families would receive the monthly benefits, even if they owe the government more

in taxes than the value of the credit. And so that's a really interesting component of what Biden's proposing here. This is different from what Romney would do, right? So Romney would not allow anyone to qualify for this if they're undocumented, for instance. And under Biden's plan, based on the studies that have been done looking into what he's proposing, child poverty in America would decrease by 50%, which to be quite honest with you, if I were drafting legislation, I mean, my goal wouldn't be to decrease child poverty by 50%, it should be by 100%. But this is a decent first start. Now, what we know is that the proposal indicates as it stands right now, that it would not be a permanent thing. It would only

last for one year. And after it expires for a year, Democrats will try to make this a permanent benefit, not only to lift children out of poverty, but also to encourage people to have children in this dumpster fire of a country that we're living in right now. Now, the current child tax credit provides up to $2,000 per child under the age of 17. The credit phases out for single parents with a modified adjusted gross income of $200,000 to $400,000 for married couples. It's paid as a lump sum, not in monthly increments. And the way that it's paid is, as I mentioned earlier, you deduct, you get a giant deduction in your taxes, depending on how many children you have. Here's the red flag, though, Jank. Biden's plan, including the child credits, would be

means tested. So if you're making, I don't know where they're going to land on the means testing. Are they gonna phase out this relief and these benefits for people who make above $50,000 a year? If that's the case, this is kind of disastrous. It doesn't go far enough. And with Romney's plan, there's virtually no means testing, but there are other issues that we'll get to in just a second. Cenk. Yeah, I mean, there's a little bit of room here for bipartisanship, partly because Republicans love at least married couples making babies.

I don't know that they love babies overall or making babies overall, but they like it with married couples. It's fun to make them. Yeah, well, we think so. And God knows what Republicans think. Anyway, so they want to encourage that. Yes, it comes out of the general budget, which of course, Chamber of Commerce is going to have general issues with.

But no, it doesn't come out of anyone's direct pocketbook, any of the specific industries. So that will help make it possible to pass. And that's why even Romney's proposing a pretty decent version of it. Now, Romney's version cuts other things in the budget. Of course, right? And I'll get to that in a second. But here I actually have some degree of hope that they're going to land on some proposal with some number that's better than what we have today. Yeah, I mean, I agree with you on that. I definitely agree with you on that. But I do think it's also

important to like pinpoint which proposal is better, which one is far more generous. I think that Romney's proposal could potentially have some unintended consequences, especially when it comes to the fact that he's insistent on making it deficit neutral. That's a giant red flag when it comes to Romney's plan. But let me give you some more details on it. So Romney on its, Romney's proposal on its face does appear to be more progressive or generous because of the dollar amount associated with it. So for instance, his proposal would provide $4,200 per year for every child up to the age of six, as well as $3,000 per year for every child age six to 17. Now remember, Biden's plan would offer $3,600 for every child under the age of six. So again,

And this appears to be a little more generous than what Biden's proposing. There's far less means testing involved in what Romney is proposing here. The benefit would begin to diminish at above $200,000 for single tax flyers, sorry about that, filers, and $400,000 for couples who filed their taxes jointly. Senior Democrats are also- At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways of big tech companies, are taking control of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN

hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's EXP-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash T-YT. Check it out today.

You know, again, they're offering $3,600 for children under the age of six and $3,000 for children by the age, between the ages of 6 and 17. The money would be deposited in their bank accounts every month, much like Biden's bill. Romney is also proposing to pay for the measure by both, this is important, consolidating existing government programs and ending a policy that lets Americans deduct up to $10,000 in state and local taxes off of their federal tax. obligations. So what if you happen to live in one of these high tax states like California or New Jersey and you don't have children, well, then you're going to be harmed by this. And also, I mean, you really need to get into the details of what Romney is trying to cut from the social safety net. So there are some worries that this could negatively impact funding for food stamps, for instance. So again, you got to look into the details and I get super

uncomfortable once I hear language about, ooh, it's deficit neutral and, ooh, we're going to cut some of these other government programs and make the process a lot easier. I don't know. I want to know exactly what you're going to cut and to what extent you're going to cut it. Romney's plan would not provide the benefit to those living in the United States without a social security number, meaning that undocumented immigrants would not qualify. So undocumented children of undocumented parents would not qualify. I guess it doesn't matter if they're living in poverty. In its 2017 tax law, the GOP stripped as many as 4 million immigrant filers from receiving the existing child tax credit, which Romney envisions repurposing for his new proposal.

And by the way, his plan does have a cap. So this is interesting. He wants to cap how much any individual family can receive from this program to $1,250 a month. So Biden's plan doesn't have that. It doesn't limit how many children would qualify for it, which is why if you look at studies that look at both of these plans, Biden's plan would lift about 50% of American children out of poverty, whereas Romney's plan would lift 34% of children out of poverty. So just some details that I think are relevant and important as this debate continues.

Okay, so a couple of points here that are important. Romney says it's got to be revenue neutral. Did Republicans ask for the $2 trillion tax cuts for the rich to be revenue neutral? Nope, didn't care about it at all. So when we say, hey, look, we don't care that it's deficit or revenue or budget neutral. Understand the context of it, which is that the Republicans never cared when it was time to give it to rich people. So number two is that $10,000 that you could deduct for a state and local taxes. I don't think Romney means it as a poison pill, but it could be a poison pill. Because blue state voters hate it.

I went door to door in California. They universally despise it, Democrats, Republicans, et cetera. So it jacked up their taxes in the blue states tremendously if they owned a house, especially. Well, there's a couple of different provisions that jacked up their bills. One was the House provision, the other one was this provision. So it might kill the bill entirely, so beware of that. And then finally, there are actually real corporate Republicans here opposed to Romney. So Romney's kind of center right here, if you will.

Mike Lee's a so-called libertarian. When it comes to voters, I think there are real libertarians. When it comes to politicians calling themselves libertarians, that means I work for the rich even more than anyone else does. So Mike Lee's like, no, this doesn't help the rich, even though I'm all. also from Utah and have the same exact theoretically political principles as Romney on issues like this. I vote no because I want every nickel to go to the rich. And of course, Marco Rubio, the biggest waterboard for the rich there is in politics, has also opposed it because God

forbid it should help your children instead of his corporate donors. And that's how this game is played. Well, we gotta take a break. When we come back, Lou Dobbs has lost his job over at Fox Business. What a shame. We'll tell you why. We'll give you the details and we'll have some fun when we come back. All right, guys, back here. So you were seeing during the break there. After the regular show and the post came for members, we got Big Rick Energy coming up on Twitch. That's at 8.30 p.m. Eastern tonight. And so check it out at Twitch.tv.tv slash Ti.T. I'll read some of your comments from there in a second. What gives me big energy, you ask? Oh, I'm glad you asked. Why, it's obviously too strong coffee.com slash tyt. Okay. Seriously, great coffee, gives the progressive causes, coffee on a cause, win-win, two-strong coffee.com slash t-y-t. All right, now I'm going to your comments on superchat. Tyrannosaurus in F-14 road, step aside, Mr. President, let Chairman Bernard do the work here. While on all of these issues, we would all be better off if we were with had, if the Democrats adopted Bernie's positions.

And by the way, electorally they'd also be better off and that's indisputable. Kimberly McNaught wrote in, I want to see Rebellion Pack's ads on $15 minute wage. Are they with their voters or their donors? Ask and ye shall receive. So when that comes up, a Rebellion Pack will weigh in very, very heavily. Okay, so RebellionPack.com, if you want to help there. Like Andoid writes in a super chat, I know New Zealand isn't perfect, but watching your country political system flounder around at the detriment of your citizens is both frustrating and heartbreaking.

How can it take this long? So yeah, no, no, you have no idea. If you live in a developed country as opposed to America, like New Zealand or Netherlands or so many others, you guys have it so much better than us. We're barbarians over here. We let people die in the streets. It's insanity. And so you all went and helped your citizens immediately because you live in a democracy. Our democracy ended in 1978 when the Supreme Court said that corporations can give unlimited money to politicians. The rest was just playing out the string. So that's what we have to overturn. That's why Wolfpack exists. So wolf dash pack.com. Okay. All right, now I'm going to Twitch. Crazy Hawaiian in Pennsylvania. As always, now in her ninth month with us, that's awesome.

Says, Aloha, everyone. I hope you have a great Monday right back at you. Verity NS has also been with us for nine months at Tier 3. Thank you. And they add, yo, yo, yo, yo, what's up, TYT? Well, yo, yo, yo, yo right back at you. Lots of news is what's up. Your mom's a bot has been with us for five months. Elder Mind plus gifted five subs. Storm Nomad gave a thousand bits. I knew the Storm and Mormon in law school.

So random Mormon dude, random nickname. Anyways, not Mitt Romney. Dallas Stake's been with us for six months and says, been a member since DNC, RSC, 2016. Love you guys and thanks for all you do. Love from East Coast Canada. When I say six months member, that's on Twitch. But a lot of folks have been with us for longer.

TYT.com slash join to join us anywhere else. You can hit the join button below if you're on YouTube. And as you know on Twitch, as John Mizze points out, quote, I also want to thank Jeff Bezos for my subscription. If you have Amazon Prime, it's free for you. We get the revenue anyway. It's a win-win. So please check it out at twitch.tv slash t-y-T. We'll be right back.

I'm going to be able to be. I'm going to be. All right, back on T.I.T.J. Jank. All right, back on TYT. Jank. Anna Kasparian, otherwise known as Casper the friendly host, though the friendly is somewhat in question. All right. I can be pretty friendly. Depends on your mood, let's keep it real.

Yeah, it depends on the topic. It's very true. Depends on the topic, not my mood. My mood is impacted by the topic at hand. But this next topic, I'll just say I'm jovial. Makes me very happy. I'm a happy person today. today. So let's talk about it. So Lou Dobbs has been canceled. Fox News has canceled him.

Cancel culture over at Fox News. Sad. Now, why? Why did Fox cancel him? He happened to have one of the highest rated shows on Fox business. And according to CNN, although Fox isn't saying, the timing of Dobbs' cancellation Friday appears to be no coincidence. It took place 24 hours after Dobbs and Fox were named in a $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit filed by Voting Technology Company, Smartmatic. There's also the fact that with Trump no longer in office, Lou Dobbs' ratings aren't going to do as well because his ratings really relied on coutowing to Trump, licking his boots. Sources at Fox indicated that the Smartmatic lawsuit was just one factor in the decision to cancel Dobbs' show. His weak performance with advertisers was also a significant factor,

one source said. Dobbs was one of Trump's most vocal on-air supporters, which kept his show's ratings high. And we have some fun video to get to, you know, just give you an example of the nonsense and shenanigans he engaged in during the Trump's, during Trump's administration. But, Jank, any thoughts before we go to those videos? Yes. So let me explain how the behind the scenes stuff works here. So number one, did the lawsuit causes? 100%, yes. So this is, first of all, what a lot of corporations do, just throw one of the bigger names under the bus. So it makes it seem like you've done something significant. When in reality, you'd authorize it all along. If they actually want to take

action, they could have pulled Lou Dobbs in the middle of his lying, not at the end of his lying. They could have made a difference before January 20th, when what Lou Dobbs was saying was super dangerous and was affecting the outcome. But they chose not to do that. They chose to keep him on air to lie that entire time, and then only pull him after the lawsuit is filed. So, and by the way, Not only is this a well-known Rupert Murdoch strategy, he did this in the UK as well, but it's literally in the HBO series succession. They talk about it because it's based on the Murdox and they have lots of strategy discussions about who to throw onto the bus and whether it's a big enough fish for the media to go away and say it's good enough, like that a scalp was taken

and they could move on. So that's how this game is played. Now the other important part is is what Anna mentioned in the middle there. Lou Dobbs actually lost a ton of advertisers because advertisers now find them to be brand unsafe because they don't want to have their brands on a program where a guy is apparently a lunatic, raving lunatic conspiracy theories that are hurting the country.

So now, you have to understand why they kept them on the air that long if he'd already lost his advertisers. So if you have high ratings, it doesn't matter at all if you don't have advertisers, the whole point of high ratings is to get you more money from advertisers. But the reason they kept them on the air is because Fox News and Fox Business make most of their money, not from advertising, but from your cable subscriber fees. So they need a lot of audience so they could tell the cable providers, you need to carry Fox business. You need to

carry Fox News. So I'm going to charge you a ton of money for that. And that's how they make the lion's share of their money. That's why they play this. game nonstop where they say outrageous things to get audience so they could build up their revenue through subscriptions basically, and then cut a couple of prominent people loose because they're getting hurt by advertisers and now lawsuits. So that's the needle that they're threading from a business perspective. Now with Luke Dobbs gone, I think it only makes sense to just reflect on his legacy. And I want to do that chronologically. So many people don't know this, but back in 2007, my role at TYT was not in any way similar to the role that I have now.

I was the guest booker. And I'm very proud to report that one of the big names that I got on the show was Lou Dobbs, who got into a pretty feisty debate with Jank. And so I have a snippet of it to share with you guys. This is from November 9th, 2007. Let's take a look. On facts, there are many things that we can certainly argue. For example, on your show, you said that a third of the people that are in jails are illegal aliens, but it turns out it's only 6%. Have you corrected that?

That's not true. That is absolutely not true. Nearly 30% of those people in our federal prison are... Not according to the Justice Department? Yes, according to the justice. No, I'm looking at the numbers right now. How can you reform immigration law if you can't control immigration? How can you control immigration if you don't control your border?

You do a comprehensive piece of legislation that recognizes the people that are here, that recognizes the future problem, that recognizes controlling borders. You take all that into account. I have no problems with that, absolutely. You get out 30 seconds. All right. The book is Independence Day. And one last question for you real quick, in 30 seconds or less. No.

Christopher Columbus. Do you celebrate Christopher Columbus? to say because he was an illegal alien. I didn't ask for permission to come. Actually, I don't like, I frankly have no fan of St. Patrick's Day, Columbus Day, or any other celebration of heritage. What a liar. I mean, that last part is hilarious. But the woman that you heard in the audio was his publicist who did not appreciate the tone of the interview because Jake was asking him some pretty tough questions and he did not like that. Neither did she. To be fair to Lou Dobbs, He actually stayed on, right?

But the publicist coming on to a live radio interview at the time. Now we were also online, but we were on Air America. We're going to a lot of people at the time, right? So now we go to more people, but they don't know that. Anyways, so back then for her to jump on in the middle of live radio and go, yeah, 30 seconds, no, no, don't ask that question. No. That's insane.

I've never seen that before. But it's shocking that Lou Dobbs publicist would be as crazy as Lou Dobbs, or actually crazier in that case. For the members, I want to save another hilarious Lou Dobbs story. I have from an interaction that I had back in the 1990s. Okay, so we'll do that in the postgame today. That's just for members, t.yt.com slash join. Or if you're watching on YouTube, you just hit the join button below at the essentials level, you get all the post games. Now let's take a look at some of Lou Dobbs's greatest hits during the Trump administration, where he continued to not only suck up to Trump, but push all sorts of conspiracy theories. Pastor Robert Jeffers always talks about this president. God sent this president. He is a person of providence. And I'll tell you, the evidence is accumulating mightily to support the pastor's view.

He's already set a standard, Congressman, for presidents that most mortals won't be able to meet. He outworks them. He out thinks. He is remarkably resourceful. He's bright. His judgment is second to none. He's not perfect. Nobody's perfect.

But he's not a really good job. Well, he's pretty close to perfect, Sean. Pretty close. I'm serious. Everything he's doing on his own, he's doing. At every level, on every floor, this White House is energized. their sunshine beaming throughout the place and on almost every face. It's winner and winning center.

And our White House, our president, is at the top of his game. It is a shame that this country, which is benefiting so much from this president's leadership, does not understand their obligations to the leaders. Have a great weekend. The president makes such a thing possible for us all. not only did his show get canceled, it got canceled after four years of this man showing that he has no dignity. No dignity, no self-respect. Lou Dobbs, man who lacks self-respect man, that is an embarrassing montage, I will say. Yeah, so first of all, he said, we have an obligation to the

president to compliment him. I'm pretty sure that's not true. I think you think you have an obligation because it's in your DNA. I mean, that dude's a natural born boot liquor. The only thing Lou Dobbs was doing, his whole life was searching for the right boot. So he, well, he found a second boot now, the one to the back of his ass from Fox, because he's gone. But I'll tell you, when he, I don't know what was more over the top, him saying that Trump was close to perfect, him saying that Trump outworks anyone or out thinks anyone, let alone everyone. I mean, you really have to be. That's why I say Lou Dobbs is deranged. I think he genuinely believes things that no rational human being could come close to believing. And then he ended it with,

we're going to have a weekend thanks to the president. Wait, what? We have weekends because of Trump. He invented a hot top time machine that apparently he and Lou Dobbs got into, which was apparently the best moment of Lou Dobbs' life. They went back to invent weekends. You want to know who actually invented the weekend? Unions. Yep. Yep. Well, sorry about that PC culture over at Fox News, Lou Dobbs. Sorry about that censorship. You know, it's just not fair. Anyway, we got to take a break. That does it for the first hour of the show. But in the second hour, we're going to get into some international news, including some updates regarding Netanyahu's corruption trial in Israel. also the farmer's strike in India. Come right back.

Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen to ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple podcasts at apple.co slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.