The Young Turks - Survival Check Yourself

Episode Date: February 2, 2021

Republicans propose a $618B COVID relief plan and try to gut survival checks for Americans. Sen. Sanders says passing COVID relief is more important than bipartisanship. 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. All right, well, the young Turks, Jake, you're going to experience with you guys. We're a great show. I'm super excited. I'm back. Back everybody.

Okay, that's an old M&M reference. Okay, amazing show for you guys. It's actually kind of my first one in the Biden administration. Let's go kick some ass, okay? And shockingly enough, today we have a little bit of credit for the Biden team. It's hidden, it's a hidden little nugget inside a story, but I like it. We do it. We do, trust me, we do, okay?

Okay, fascinating. Indeed. We will have discredit for other Democrats. And Marjorie Taylor Green, a bit of a controversy. We've got a poll for you guys. I'm going to have a little bit of a different opinion than a lot of folks on the left have. But I will tell you about Jewish space lasers. That is apparently a thing. By the way, it is most definitely not a thing, but apparently Republicans think it's a thing. that is in today's show. Further ado, the salt track. All right, well, let's start off with an important update on the coronavirus relief package, because as you guys can imagine, there's quite a bit of disagreement among Republicans and Democrats on how robust that package should be. So let's get right to it. Republican lawmakers are pushing for a wholly inadequate coronavirus relief package that slices and dices much needed financial aid to Americans, while also severely limiting how many Americans actually qualify for this aid that they desperately

need. Now, while Biden has proposed a $1.9 trillion coronavirus package, the GOP is offering something far less helpful, $618 billion. Now, it's not necessarily about the price tag. It's about what the packages include. And to be quite honest with you, when it comes to direct relief to Americans, Biden's package didn't go far enough. But when you look at what Republicans are offering, you get a sense of just how cruel their approach is in providing relief to Americans during this pandemic. According to the Daily Poster, the 10 moderate Republicans proposed new $1,000 checks instead as part of their own scaled down coronavirus relief package. Remember that Biden was offering $1,400. And that was controversial because during the Senate races in Georgia,

he had promised $2,000. Now, under their proposal, meaning the Republican, survival checks would go to far fewer Americans than in previous relief bills, only to families who need assistance the most, according to the letter which was sent to the White House. Now, before I give you some more details on how awful this proposal is from these so-called moderate Republicans. Let's hear from Brian Dees, who is an economic advisor, one of the top economic advisors to Joe Biden. Turns out that he's actually entertaining this negotiation with Republicans. Here's what he had to say about it. Are you willing to negotiate any points of your proposal?

Or, for example, are you wedded to the number, the price tag, $1.9 trillion. million dollars. Are you willing to come down from that? We really need to focus on the elements of this package and what they're intended to do. So if we look at the vaccine distribution effort, for example, the money that was passed in December is quickly running down and we need more resources urgently to stand up the vaccine distribution efforts, the vaccine procurement efforts that we know are necessary if we're going to get our arms around this crisis. So if we want to have a viable chance at getting schools to reopen. We're going to have to provide more resources to schools. And if we don't act now, the cost of that is going to be greater going forward. So we're

certainly open to ideas. We're open to ideas. The answer to that question is no. We reject this proposal from the Republicans in the Senate. Brian Dease also said in that interview, and I want to remind you all that he's the national economic, the head of the National Economic Council under Biden, we're open to that idea, we're open to ideas across the board, just reiterating that he's open to this. He should not be open to it. Now, I have a lot more to share with you, including the fact that they want to cut the amount of money that Americans would be receiving through unemployment benefits from $400 a week to $300 a week. And while Biden has proposed those unemployment benefits extend through September, these Republicans are arguing, no, let's just have

them extend through June. So there's significant means testing here, Jank. There's significant cuts, the amount of money that people receive in this aid. And again, it should absolutely be rejected, no questions asked. What do you think? Yeah. So I just want to be super clear on the numbers, and then I'm going to get to the analysis. So for the Democratic plan, each family on average would get $5,600. For the Republican plan, you'd get $3,000. So the Republican plan, you'd get $3,000. So the Republicans are saying you should get $2,600 less. And that's for the people who get it, okay? Because in the Democratic plan, people making up to $75,000 get it, families up to $150,000

because of two earners. In the Republican plan, it's only 40,000. And then they start phasing it out until you get zero at 50,000. So there's, and that's really important because the Republicans are saying we're doing this plan that is better targeted, right? No, better targeted is just a code word for the rich want to keep their money and they don't want to give it to the middle class that's between basically 40,000 and 75,000 earners. And so they're just, they want to keep that money and they don't want to give it to. They already doubled their own money. They went from rich to

super duper rich during the crisis, but they've got no interest in sharing it with the middle class. Now what of course is sickens me as usual is the mainstream media goes along with this a thousand percent. Every story talks about this code word of well targeted relief that the Republicans are talking about. What does that mean well targeted? I mean Manchin lied. Manchin is a so-called Democrat. And he said, I don't want this going to people making $200 to $300,000 to $300,000. Mission accomplished, because that's not in anyone's proposal. So that's nothing but a lie. And the media never calls out those lies. So well targeted means middle class, you're not getting anything if you go with the Republican proposal. Now you might

be surprised at one of my thoughts here. I am not sure. I was not on the show when you guys were mainly covering this. I was never quite sure if Biden was promising 2000 in total or another 2000 after the original 600. But either way, this is very good. very clear. If you wanted to get to, even if you wanted to get to the lower number that Biden is now saying, 2000 in total, you would start negotiations at another 2000 so that you could get to 1400 if that was your real goal. Now everybody knows that. I can't imagine that the Biden administration is that dumb. I mean, because you'd have to be dumb in saying, no, the Republicans are going to give us everything we want, preposterous. No, we're not going to have any negotiations

And we're not going to budget at all preposterous. That's not how Biden rolls. So they knew going in, no, we're not even trying to get you to 2000 total. I'm going to say 2000 total. And then I'm going to negotiate and be open, as Anna just mentioned, be open to the Republicans so that I could, you know, make sure that you get less. Why? Because my donors want you to have less.

My donors are super rich. It's embarrassing. It's embarrassing. It's incredibly embarrassing for the Biden administration to continue, playing games with Republicans like Rob Portman, Rob Portman, who voted in favor of Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts for the rich, costing the U.S. economy $2 trillion over 10 years. And now he turns around and says, no, no, we actually want to nickel and dime the American people during this moment of crisis because he's allegedly worried about the deficit. He literally had the audacity

to make that point. And for Biden and Dees to talk about the importance of bipartisanship right now, This game, okay, this game for, I don't know if it's for Biden's ego to prove that he can do something bipartisan. I don't know where it comes from, but it's trash. And he needs to abandon it right away, right away, because this is the kind of person that Joe Biden is trying to negotiate with. Here's Senator Rob Portman with his nonsense argument about the deficit, which he did not care about at all over the last four years. With regard to the direct payments, we think they should be much more targeted, $50,000 cap for individuals, as an example, 100,000 for a family. And right now, if you look at the administration's plan,

you could have a family with three kids making almost $300,000 a year getting a check. And many of these people have had no impact from COVID. In fact, some are doing quite well. Others are struggling. Let's focus on those who are struggling. Let's target it. We really want to help those who need it the most.

And at a time of unprecedented deficits and debts, and a debt is a percentage of the economy, is as high as it's been in our nation's history since World War II. We need to be sure this is targeted. Second, with regard to unemployment insurance, you know, they have a program that takes it until September. We don't know what the economy is going to look like between now and September. Most economists believe next year will be significant growth, over 4% growth.

So let's target that a little bit more and make sure that it is tied somewhat to the economic conditions. Now, this is the same argument they use when it comes to any type of progressive policy proposal, whether it's Medicare for all, canceling student loan debt, this argument that, oh, we don't want the benefit to go to the wealthy, right? They try to pit working people against one another with this notion that this financial aid is going to disproportionately benefit people who are already wealthy or in a privileged position. That is not the case. What they're doing here is promoting additional means testing, which I disagreed with even before with the caps that were proposed before with the CARES Act. And what they're doing is they're basing that means testing on taxes that were filed in 2019 before the pandemic hit, meaning that it doesn't matter whether you lost your job or got laid off

in 2020. Okay, if you made a good income, good living in 2019, well, they want to use that against you to disqualify you from being able to, you know, qualify for this next round of relief, survival checks, essentially. It's absolutely disgusting, Jank. And I am not even a little interested in entertaining Biden's desire to move forward with this bipartisan effort. Clearly, we're dealing with Republican lawmakers who have no interest in helping the American people. They're far more concerned about doing what their donors want them to do. And they are not acting in good faith, period. Why are we having this discussion? So let me give you a couple more clarifying numbers. And then I'm going to go back

to the, again, one of the top problems here, which is the media. They just will not tell you the truth. They will not challenge any of these politicians. So here's the numbers. When Rob Portman says you can go to families making $300,000, it's just not true. Dana Bass should have stepped in right there, Dana Bass should have, and said, where are you getting that number from? I've never seen that number. I've seen now a couple of senators make up a number. But it's not in any legislation. any proposals. So where is it? What are you talking about? Second of all, you say you want it to be well targeted. And so that's why you want to make sure that rich people don't get it. Now, you mentioned the number 50,000 is a cutoff. That's true, it is a cutoff. At 50,000 you get

zero. The max is $49,99, at that point you might get at a buck, okay? So the real number where you're getting actual money is $40,000. So are you saying people making above $50,000 are rich and that's why they shouldn't get money. And if you are saying that, why did you approve trillions of dollars earlier is stimulus relief for the richest corporations in the world? You want to talk about well targeted after you approve trillions for the biggest businesses and the richest people in the world. You approve that Senator Portman. So let's talk about well targeted, let alone what Anna mentioned, which is, I mean, it's such a perfect symmetry here. Theoretically, Biden's asking for 1.9 trillion.

The Republicans are coming in at about a third of that number as their counterproposal. But 1.9 trillion is also the same exact number that the Republicans cost the taxpayers and the government and the deficit and the debt with their tax cuts for the rich. At that point, even though 83% of those are going to go to the top 1%, they had no problems with it being poorly targeted so the lion's share went to their donors, the wealthy corporations and executives. They're such gargantuan liars. It's such an obvious, overwhelming lie. Yet, everybody in the media goes, oh, yes, of course, sir, well targeted, sir. Yes, oh, I see the Republicans, and by the way, implicitly the Biden administration, a little less so than them, but they're playing the same

game, the neoliberals. They're all saying, and the press goes, oh, yes, no, you do not want it to go to the rich. That's why you're limiting it to mainly people making $40,000 or less. Oh, you want to punish the people between $40,000 and $75,000 salaries because they are the rich. But the billionaires are not the rich. No, I see, you're right, Senator Portman. You are a wonderful politician, Senator Portman. I'm so glad to have access to you, Senator Portman. No, no, it's all a giant, giant lie. You could see it in the articles. You could actually read the numbers in the articles, and then you see the anchors on TV, and they say something completely different. And in fact, even inside the mainstream media articles, they'll be like, now the cutoff is

50,000 and 50,000 according to the Republican proposal, it gets nothing. But they want to make sure that it is well targeted so it doesn't go to the rich. But wait a minute, you just gave me the number. You said you get zero at $50,000. Where the hell are the rich in that equation? What are you talking about? It doesn't matter. I'm going to show you the numbers, so I'm not technically lying about the numbers, and then I'm going to repeat Republican propaganda as if it's true. That's what the media does. That's how they deceive people. No, this is a massive attack against the middle class by Republicans, neoliberals, and the mainstream media. All right, well, let's move on to a method that I think is far more effective in getting

what Americans need right now in economic relief, and that's the reconciliation process. Does your party have the votes to pass the relief package through the reconciliation process if you decide to go that route? Yeah, I believe that we do because it's hard for me to imagine any Democrat, no matter what state he or she may come from, who doesn't understand the need to go forward right now in an aggressive way to protect the working families of this country. That was Senator Bernie Sanders, who is the new chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. And one important method to push through legislation that would provide actual financial relief to Americans is the reconciliation process.

Now as the chair of the budget committee, he would have the ability to pursue legislation through reconciliation. And I do have a really positive update by Igor Bobbick over at Huffington Post, who tweeted that Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi have filed a joint budget resolution kicking off reconciliation to pass $1.9 trillion COVID aid with a simple majority vote. And that's what reconciliation allows you to do. It bypasses that legislative filibuster that requires 60 senators to vote in favor of legislation in order to pass that bill and allows for a bill to pass through a simple majority. And so that's good news, especially when you consider that Republicans in the Senate

are serving as obstructionists to this process and have responded to Biden's $1.9 trillion dollar coronavirus relief package with a measly $618 billion package that would disqualify millions of Americans from even being able to receive those benefits. So I have more details on what Senator Sanders had to say during that interview with Martha Radditz. But Jank, why don't you jump in? Yeah, so let's break down the myths here. So first of all, again, the media is obsessed with bipartisanship. Senator Sanders, are you going to be bipartisan? Biden administration, are you going to be bipartisan as if bipartisanship is the goal? But wait a minute, bipartisanship is just part of the process. It's not the actual goal. The goal is what's in the bill.

But they don't want to talk about what's in the bill. They want to talk about, are you going to to make the Republicans happy. Why are we all obsessed with making the Republicans happy when they lost the election and they want to make sure that the average American doesn't get more relief during coronavirus? Why is bipartisanship an agreement with Republicans a good thing in and of itself? What are the Republicans say, okay, look, we like the violence that happened on January 6th, which they kind of do, okay? Some of them do, some of them don't. I mean, shoot, later we're going to talk about how Marjorie Taylor Green says that there are Jewish laser beams that are starting forest fires. So if we had bipartisan agreement on that,

would it be a good thing? No, but literally, I'm asking media, because you guys worship the God of bipartisanship. What if we agreed to something super crappy in a bipartisan deal, which, by the way, is almost exactly what's happened in every bipartisan deal for the last 40 years. What did they all agree to? More war, more tax cuts for the rich, and nothing for you you guys. So bipartisanship that means nothing to me. It's the worst goal in America. It doesn't tell you what you agreed to. The question is, what are we voting on? Is there any, is there a single reporter in the country? No, oh, bipartisan, bipartisan. Now, let's talk about how absurd this is. Now we got reconciliation versus filibuster. So they're saying, okay, now,

Mansion and Cinema and these corporate Democrats, they don't want to get rid of filibuster, so we might or might not pass this through reconciliation. Do you know what the difference is? I do, but I don't even want to bother explaining it to you because it's so irrelevant. So the mansion argument that the media backs up is, oh, the people of West Virginia, they care so much about Senate etiquette, I mean, already stopped there, no one believes that. Not one person in America believes that. And according to Senate etiquette, you, you, you, you You need the Republican approval for a filibuster. But you know, for some portions of it, which my donors can live with, you don't need it for reconciliation.

So they're okay with some part of Senate etiquette, but they're not okay with other parts of Senate etiquette. There's not a single person in West Virginia who gives a damn if it's filibuster or reconciliation. All they care about is, are you going to send the goddamn check or aren't you? Okay. So any talk of like this, oh, filibuster is great, but reconciliation is okay. So I'm going to pass this, but not that. And that's what the American people want is nothing but a kabuki theater, total lie.

The American people don't give a goddamn about reconciliation or filibuster. Send the check. Absolutely. So one of the elements of Biden's relief package is an increase in the federal minimum wage. He would like to increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour. And a week ago, there was this discussion about the Biden. administration, trying to get a slim bill, something that doesn't have all of the bells and whistles that Americans actually genuinely need right now just in order to pass a slim

version of his bill through a bipartisan effort without having to do it through reconciliation. And then a more robust version that includes everything that was cut would be done through reconciliation. I disagree with that. I think that the urgency of this moment makes it abundantly clear that we need to pass the robust relief package with the minimum wage requirements as soon as possible immediately. Forget about dealing with these Republicans who are acting in bad faith, who had no problems in increasing the deficit by passing Donald Trump's tax cuts. Do this to reconciliation. And it appears that Senator Sanders is pretty committed to doing that. So he elaborated on this during his interview with Radits. Let's hear more of what he had to say.

Is it a mistake for Democrats to consider abandoning bipartisanship negotiations so soon? Martha, the issue is not bipartisanship. We're not. The issue is all we going to address the incredible set of crises and the pain and the anxiety, which is in this country. You know what? I don't care what anybody says. We have got to deal with this pandemic. We have got to make sure that we are producing the vaccines. that we need and get those vaccines into the arms of people. We cannot have children in America going hungry, people being evicted.

Schools not open. We need to open our schools in a safe way. That's what we have to do. So the question is not bipartisanship. The question is addressing the unprecedented crises that we face right now. If Republicans want to work with us, they have better ideas on how to address those crises. That's great. But to be honest with you, I have not yet.

get heard that. And so far, they do not have better ideas. They offered a smaller relief package that would basically cut off many Americans from even being able to apply or qualify for the relief that they need. So I like that Sanders is moving forward with reconciliation. As I mentioned earlier in the story, you have Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer also helping with that effort, which to be quite honest with you, I have such low standards for them at this point that I was actually surprised to see that. And hopefully they move forward. And by the way,

there are some requirements when it comes to passing a bill through reconciliation. And I'm going to skip ahead to the last video here featuring Senator Rob Portman, a dishonest actor who argues that, you know, no, no, Bernie's not going to be able to do this. He can't do it through reconciliation. I say otherwise, based on the evidence of what the rules and regulations indicate, I'll explain that in just a second. First, let's watch what his argument is. You did support Republican efforts to use reconciliation on a few things like trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act, passing the Trump tax cuts. So explain why it was okay for Republicans, but not Democrats. Well, reconciliation is a tool that you're able to use. It has to

relate directly to the budget. And what the Democrats are talking about doing is, one, using it right off the bat without, you know, trying to come up with a bipartisan compromise as we have on COVID-19. If you can't find bipartisanship on COVID-19, I don't know where you can find it. You know, our proposal is an example is going to have all of the health care funding that President Biden has in his proposal, all of it. So there's a lot of bipartisanship. But second, reconciliation is not meant for the purposes that they're trying to use it for. They would have to get rid of what's called the bird rule, which keeps it to the budget. In other words, everything has to be directly related to the budget.

And so that would change the rules of the Senate. So it wouldn't be the old reconciliation, it would be a new reconciliation. They'd be very clear about that. Okay. You know how that works. But essentially it's getting rid of the filibuster if you get rid of the bird rule, which, you know, is a huge change in our country. And we'll leave less bipartisanship, not more. Yeah.

And I want our viewers to stay awake while we talk about the inner workings of the Senate. Yeah, well, you know, it's funny that he brings up the bird rule regarding legislation that absolutely would impact the budget. And luckily there's some data and some studies done indicating just how it would impact the budget. As I mentioned, Biden's proposal includes a $15 an hour minimum wage increase, federal minimum wage increase. So there was a study done that found that raising the national minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025 would have a positive federal budget impact of $65.4 billion a year. You see Berkeley economist, Michael Reich, the author of the new research paper, said the Raise the Wage Act of 2021 would have a positive effect on the federal budget of $65.4 billion a year through a combination of decreased spending on some social safety net programs, which many workers are forced to rely on due to low wages and increased tax revenue. So Senator Sanders pointed to this research as further evidence that the minimum wage increase would meet the standard required by the so called bird rule, which gives senators the ability

to block provisions of reconciliation bills that don't have a direct impact on the federal budget. And again, let me reiterate, there are two studies, I just named one of them, but two studies indicating that this would in fact impact the federal budget. Also a new report by three experts at the Economic Policy Institute found that there would be a significant and direct effect on the federal budget by increasing payroll tax revenue by $7 billion to $13.9 billion and reducing expenditures on public assistance programs by $13.4 billion to $31 billion. So Rob Portman can kiss it. Okay, so real quick on minimum wage, I actually, look, if they're going to pass it, great.

I love it, I want it, let's do it right away. But if there's any kind of like, if it's holding things up, I don't mind voting on it by itself. So the minimum wage creates $92 billion extra in wages for working Americans. So now the reason the Republicans don't want it is that's $92 billion coming out of their beloved corporations. So you want to argue that? Great, let's argue it. Let's have a standalone bill and you say, no, my beloved multinational corporations should have $92 billion of your wages that they're keeping. from you. And the Democrats say that you should have the $92 billion. We should pummel them on that.

We should destroy them on that. Okay, now on to back to coronavirus, heart of the bill. So these are two things that are not clarified that need to be clarified. Number one, the Republican proposal is one third of the Democratic proposal. So when he's, when Portman is on there, or any Republican, every anchor should clarify. So you're saying you want bipartisanship, because you want the relief to be much, much lower for the average American. That's a fact. That's a fact, and you should ask it as a fact. So you want it to be one third of what the Democrats want, so you think it's the responsible thing to do to make sure that Americans get only a tiny bit of relief. That's it. That's a fact.

Number two thing that needs to be clarified is, who are we negotiating with? Because you say you want bipartisanship, but wait a minute, Republican voters also want the relief. They also want the $2,000 check. So we're not negotiating with Republican voters. Republican and Democratic voters all agree. So who are we negotiating with? Oh, we're negotiating with your donors. Now, no one on TV is ever going to tell you that because then that would show you that it's all a game.

And they never ever want to expose the corruption. So if you're a Republican watching this and you normally hate us, but you know you want a $2,000 check and you know every Republican you know wants a $2,000 check. So understand that your own politicians rob you on purpose to help their donors. That's how this game is played. We got to take a break, but we're not done with this topic yet. No Manchin, who has raised his hand to be an obstacle to getting relief to Americans, is super salty with Vice President Harris for holding his feet to the fire.

So we'll give you the details on that story and more when we return. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-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 UNFTRTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you'd, 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 not learn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training 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. So, I'm going to be. I'm going to be. I'm going to be. I'm going to be the same. I'm going to

be a minute. All right, guys. So first of all, it's a social break. So number one, I get to tell you that tomorrow I'm talking Derek Johnson. He's the president's CEO of the NAACP. So that's a 530. And you know all the interviews are before. the young tour starts at 6 o'clock. So make sure you check that out of 5.30. He's going to push the Biden administration to get you guys more help. That's awesome. Ryan Grimm's going to come on the next day and he's going to talk about Medicare for all. Lots of drama there as well. Okay. So make sure you're tuning in at 530. Now to the member's comments, Greg writes in, return of the jank.

As much as we enjoy the fantastic guests, good to have you back. Great to be back, as you can tell. I'm excited. And I love this show and I love doing it with you guys. And the art bark writes in, if an anchor on CNN ever asked a politician about stimulus to corporations, producers would pull the plug on them faster than a Jamal Bowman interview. That is hilarious. I love that you guys pay attention, smartest audience of the world. All right, t.com slash join to be part of our members. In fact, I'll give you one more from there. Kofi 19 writes in, these are the same Republicans who cry about quote unquote class warfare when it comes to taxing the wealthy. Funny, I don't hear them making the same claims when it comes to getting relief to regular folks. That's because they're the ones doing the class warfare, that's exactly right. Now, you could also join membership from YouTube and Twitch.

You could also do it on Facebook, but it's a little bit harder. In YouTube, it's really easy, the buttons below. You just hit join and Amy Pagana, Joe Tube and Lolo Johnson just joined and you guys are awesome and we love having you as part of the Young Turks community. And now I'm going to go to Super Chat on YouTube, Hoot USMC, the Dragon Slayer says, welcome back, Jake. I just wanted to read that because I love you guys, it's great to be back. It's good to hear these encouraging messages of course.

R. King I Garcia writes in, don't Don't take the Dems with you when haggling over the price of the car you want to buy. Well, that's certainly true. Look, but on the other hand, if Anna's update is true and they pass all this through reconciliation and they pass the whole bill, awesome. I'll give them tons and tons of credit. It's never personal, it's about policy, it's about getting the you guys the change that you need in your lives, okay? And and look, TYT Wolfpack Justice Dem, that's actually a handle on YouTube wrote in, Biden, there goes Democrats, surrounding before the negotiations begin, $2,000 should be a standalone bill. The reason I'm reading that to you is because it's a good

point. If you did it as a standalone bill, they're going to have trouble fighting it. Go ahead, Republicans fight it. But that's where we need the clarity of the media. That's why I love that you guys are part of the Young Turks. We'll be back. We're going to be. I'm going to be. I'm I'm going to be and

I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm

I'm I'm and I'm All right back on a young Turks. For those of you on YouTube and Twitch, I read some of your comments during the break. But I wanted to read this to everybody. Jay Anthony wrote it on YouTube super chat. Have you guys seen Anna's viral TikTok? It has almost 13 million views. Gen Z loves Anna. Wrong. Every generation loves Anna.

No, it's not sure. But thank you. It's really sweet. I don't know what to do in those kinds of situations, but I'm super grateful for everyone who, you know, we'll talk about it in the post game because a woman from Iran reached out to me. And it was pretty heartbreaking because she doesn't get a choice regarding her religion in Iran. But we'll talk about that more in the post game. And thank you to everyone who sent me. you know, kind words and love over the weekend. I really appreciate it. All right, yeah. And guys, if you want to get the post game, t-y-t.com slash join to become a member or hit the button below on YouTube.

And at the essentials level, you get the post game. You could also be a member on Twitch. On Twitch, if you have Amazon Prime, it's actually free for you, but we get the money. So that's a great deal. If you're a member somewhere else, do it on Twitch too, because it really doesn't cost you anything. Anyway, much love, Anna, what's next? All right. Well, conservative Democratic Senator Joe Manchin is in the news again, and he's a little bit of an issue.

So Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat who's pretty conservative, is reeling from the fact that Vice President Kamala Harris decided to do local interviews in West Virginia to bolster Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion dollar coronavirus relief package. Now, Mansion has been an obstacle to passing this type of legislation. He thinks that we need to be concerned about the deficit, which is absolutely ridiculous. And so I had suggested earlier that maybe we need people to go to West Virginia where people are really struggling financially right now to make the case for why this is a relief package that absolutely must pass.

And so got to give former senator now vice president, Kamala Harris, a lot of credit for that because she did do an interview with WSAZ and she basically called out the actual statistics of poverty in the state of West Virginia. In West Virginia, one in seven families is describing their household as being hungry. One in six can't pay their rent. One in four, small businesses are closing permanently or have already closed. So it's a big issue in West Virginia and across the country. That's why the president and I are offering the American Rescue Plan.

Now she shared more details on this in the interview, talking about why the American Rescue Plan is about opening schools back up in a safe way, something that's tremendously popular. It's about getting support for small businesses, getting relief for families. So many people have been unemployed for almost a year at this point. The president and I feel very strongly that these are the most. moments when we are facing a crisis of unbelievable proportion and that the American people deserve their leaders to step in and stand up for them. So Senator mentioned he no like that.

He got very salty about that. He went on the same news outlet to complain, and this is what he said, get a load of this. I saw the interview, I couldn't believe it. No one called me about it? We're going to try to find a bipartisan pathway forward, but we need to work together. That's not a way of working together. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Did the vice president need to ask your permission to do an interview in your state where

the vast majority of your own constituents want the relief? Is that what you're upset about? Oh, she didn't ask you permission? Is it because she called you out for being pathetic and standing in the way of getting Americans the relief that they need right now? I love that Senator Harris did this and they should do more of it. Yeah. So all of a sudden strength, look, I love giving credit where creditors do. And it very rarely happens in Democratic leadership. But out of the gate, we come out really nice on this one.

So Kamala Harrison just do an interview on local West Virginia television. She also did one in Arizona. The two Democratic senators that are holding things up now are from West Virginia and Arizona. That's Kirsta Cinema. So that is very much intended as both, well, basically a warning shot to those two senators, a shot across the bow. You better watch yourself because if you mess around with us, you're going to find out. And yes, this is what I've been waiting for. I'm borderline shocked by it, but very pleasantly shocked. So great, if that's how they're going to use Kamala Harris, so go get Democrats to fall in line for progressive policies,

like more COVID relief, well played. There you go. Give me more of that. Yeah, it's definitely yummy in my tummy. I'm enjoying every minute of it and I want to see more of it. Absolutely. Now, what was also interesting though is that the governor, of West Virginia. A Republican came out in support of robust economic relief. Let's hear a little from Governor Jim Justice. Again, the governor of the state of West Virginia, where Joe Manchin is a senator. Let's watch. At the end of the day, really and truly, Poppy, what we need to do is we need to, we need to understand that trying to be per se fiscally responsible at this point in time

with what we've got going on in this country, if we actually throw away some money right now, so what? We have really got to move and get people taken care of and get people back on balance. Your Democratic Senator, Joe Manchin, thinks these payments are not targeted enough. Have you talked to him about it? Well, you know, I have not talked directly to Joe about that and everything. I don't really, you know, I don't really know exactly what the thinking could possibly be there. I mean, we got people that are really hurting. I mean, that's just all there's to it.

Here's a perfect example, probably. My executive assistant came in the other day and said, not far from my home, there was an elderly man that froze to death in his house and everything. Probably couldn't afford to pay the power bill. You know, I mean, there's so many different things where people are really, really hurting. And today, we've got to move. We can't hold back. We've got to move.

He's right. More than two thirds of West Virginians are in support of $2,000 direct checks to Americans during this pandemic. And just to show you how, well, I guess, organized and coordinated the Biden administration seems to be on this issue. You have his press secretary, Jen Saki, signal boosting what the governor just said in that video. And Jen, Jen, let's just watch this quick clip and then we'll discuss. Would you consider a bill bipartisan if it doesn't have any Republican support in Congress, but it has support among Republican voters? Well, I think you touched on an interesting point, which is that 74% of the public, according to recent polls, supports this package and the key components of this package. Democrats and Republicans, we just saw the Republican governor of West Virginia come out earlier today and advocate for a big package. Yeah, yummy in my tummy, jank.

Yummy, yummy, yummy, yummy. I love it. Yeah. More of this. Yes, that's exactly right. So look, let me be clear though about the politics that's being played and the one enormously important factor they're not talking about. So Jim Justice, the governor of West Virginia is generally full of crap.

He was pretending to be a Democrat and then when Trump was really popular in West Virginia, he switched over and became a Republican. But his policies didn't change at all. He's always been totally in favor of the rich. He himself is incredibly wealthy. So why is Jim Justice doing this now? Because he's on the right side on this one. Because he could read a poll and he might run against Mansion one day.

So he's like, okay, I'll out populace you. And so I'll go to the position that the overwhelming majority of the voters agree with. So wait a minute, why is Joe Manchin doing what he's doing? Because for so long, the rest of the Democratic Party and the media played along with this fiction that senators like Joe Manchin were being moderate because West Virginia is moderate and his voters wanted him to do those things. But in this case, as in almost all cases, we have polling that shows without any doubt at all that his voters do not want him to fight for, reduced relief, and help the Republicans cut their

checks down to about one third, okay? They don't want it. They don't want the Republicans in West Virginia don't want it, and the Democratic voters in West Virginia don't want it. None of them want it. So why is Manchin doing it? They never tell you, because his donors want him to cut the checks. Because as they think I'm rich, it's going to come out of my pocket, I don't want the people of West Virginia to get it. Hey, boy, Joe Manchin, go get him, boy. You know, you go do as you're told and tell me that the people of West Virginia wanted. That'll be a funny joke, Joe, don't you think? And normally Jim Justice plays along with that. And normally the media plays along with that. But now Jim Justice is like, oh, yeah, why don't I snake you? And then I'll run against you. And I'll go to

the popular position. Do I really mean it? Not really. I'm a governor. And I really can't affect it. It's a federal issue. And when I get to be a senator, I'll screw people over too and favor of myself and my donors. But that's how this game is played. But for God's sake, people in the media, the donors. That's who we're negotiating with. We're not negotiating with the Republican voters in West Virginia. They agree with us almost 100%. So stop helping Joe Manchin cover up what his real intentions are. But all in all, great work by the Biden administration. We got to see how they finish it, because that's the most important thing. But for now, strongly played, and I'm very much in favor of it.

We're going to take a break, but when we come back, we'll switch gears a little bit. By the way, one quick note, I would regret not mentioning this. There is a website that you should check out. It's called Joe Mansion is blocking your stimulus check.com. Again, it's Joe Manchin is blocking your stimulus check.com. And there are some actionable items there that you can check out. So please take a look at it and see if you want to get involved in applying more pressure on Senator Mansion to ensure that we get robust relief to Americans as soon as possible.

We're gonna take a break and we- Hold on, Anna, I gotta say one quick thing there. So I love that website because it's so simple, and you'll see, you just click a couple of buttons and it makes a giant difference. The second reason I love it is I found out today, it's my former co-founders of the Justice Democrats who've set that up. So if you get through the donate button, do that too. It's their new pack is called No ExcusesPack. can't get enough of it. Okay, we'll have both links down below. If you're watching this later on YouTube and Facebook, it's so easy to click on it. It's in the description box. So they're coming from Mansion immediately out of the gate. This is how strong progressives roll. So now,

oh my God, you got the Biden administration working with the most progressive people in the country to go after, you know, conservative corporate Democrats like Mansion. That is a development. I didn't even expect. And that's a great development. Let's go make it happen. Let's make Mansion bow down to the will of the people because that's what he's supposed to do in a democracy, not serve as donors, no excuses. All right, we'll be right back. And we're going to be. And then... And...

…Sub ...and... ...you know... ...and... ...and... ...and... ...and... ...and...

And I'm I'm Ande Ande Uh And I'm Uh

Uh Uh Uh Uh Uh Uh Uh Uh

Uh Uh Uh Uh All right. So, guys, more of your comments. Let's go to the members section on our website first. Proud member of the squirrel squad, hilarious, writes in, one in seven are hungry in a state in the richest country on earth. So disgusting. That's exactly right because we never helped those people. We always find trillions for the powerful. Effectos writes in, hopefully these local

journalists then go, Senator Manchin, why are you fighting against your own party? I thought you were a Democrat and wanted unity. They should also ask, why are you fighting against Republican and Democratic voters? They actually are unified. Ironically, the only person fighting against unity is you, Senator Manchin. So again, smartest audience in the world, love it. Edward writes in, are these statistics VP Harris mentioned real? What is mentioned actually doing for his constituents? They're absolutely real. And he views his constituents as his very, very wealthy donors.

And he's doing a lot for them. He's trying to save the money by denying the money to you so they think that they keep more of it. And then Jen writes in, Jim Justice is the richest man in West Virginia, literally. It's true, he is. I mean, like the oligarchy has gotten so bad that every once in a while the wealthy go, you know what, I'm tired of buying the politicians. I'll just buy this seat for myself. And that's what Jim Justice did.

New people that joined by hitting the join button below on YouTube, three-eyed raven. So now that's it. We can even see the future. We're all set as the young Turks. Pyro-O-G maniac. So we have that option too, apparently. Nutritionist Liz, these are all folks who just. just signed up. That's their handles. Now I'm going to read some super chats. Super Grupo Key 2

writes in, saw CNN article calling what VP did a huge mistake. Okay, now say it with me. Of course, of course. Because what is it? What is the mainstream media or the establishment media? There's another word for it. The corporate media, they are in favor of trillions going to corporations because they're a multi-billion dollar corporation. They, them, you know, money going to you, well, CNN and the giant multi-billion dollar corporations, that doesn't help their cause at all. And they view it maybe as a zero-sum game. I'm not saying every anchor does, but it filters down from the top. I wrote a lot about this in my book. That's, of course, what I was doing in January. You could pre-order that at justicescomingbook.com,

Justice's coming book.com. And last one is CE4 saying Harris is doing exactly what Bernie said he would do if you were president and Manchin gave him trouble. Glad to see your fight. hope we see more of it. Exactly right. We'll be right back. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that 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 either. 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 E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N dot com slash T-YT. Check it out today. All right, back on a Young Turks, Jane Hugar, Anna Kisparian with you guys. I kick it over to the viral TikTok star now.

Please stop saying stuff like that. It's really embarrassing. But thank you. All right. Let's move on to an update on what's happening with Wall Street Betts and Robin Hood. So the co-founder of Robin Hood is still trying to defend the investment platform's decision to restrict trading for small investors in GameStop stock and other companies that Wall Street Betts subreddit had been targeting to invest in. Now, the online

brokerage firm limited trading to 13 equities in the beginning that has now been scaled back to to eight different companies that these retail investors cannot purchase more shares of. They can sell their shares of these companies, but they can't purchase more. And Vlad Tenev, who is the CEO for Robin Hood, argues, quote, we had no choice in this case. We had to confirm, I should say, to our regulatory capital requirements. So Tenev said that Robin Hood's operations team received a request at 3.30 a.m. Pacific time on Thursday from the National Security's Clearing Corporation, saying that Robin Hood and other brokers are required to meet capital deposit requirements from clearing houses like NSCC each day. The amount required is based on factors such as volatility and concentration in certain securities. And this is, you know, his argument, Robin Hood got a request for security deposit of $3 billion from the NSCC to back up trades an order of magnitude more than what it typically is, Tenive said.

The company raised an additional $1 billion in emergency capital from existing investors in an effort to shore up its balance sheet and enable it to ease the trading curves. But I'm really still not buying this argument. Jank, I know you have a better handle on what these, first of all, how Robin Hood really makes its money. But are you buying this argument, do you genuinely think that like, oh, you know, regulators, they twisted our arm and we had no choice but to stop the retail investors from buying shares of these companies? Yeah, so there are things we know and things we don't know. So let's start with the things that we know. So Robin Hood doesn't charge you anything for a trade. So the e-trades and TD Ameritrade and all those things, they charge you per trade.

So everybody always wondered, how does Robin Hood make money if they're not charging you per trade? Well, they make money actually in a more efficient way. That's why they are valued at $6 billion. And that's why they have more customers too. But so here's how that works. Yes, you don't pay for the trade. But, and I'm going to give a really simplistic example here, if you're buying a, one share of a stock at $100, the Robin Hood goes to what's called a market maker.

And the top one that they use is Citadel. And that's very relevant to the story, because Citadel backed the short trades on GameStop and other companies. So that means Citadel wants GameStop to go down. And they are the people who get where Robin Hood gets most of their revenue. And so those market makers say, okay, we're going to buy it at $100, but we're going to charge your client $100 and $5. As an example. So they're making it for every, they're making the money for every transaction through a higher price rather than charging your fee for that transaction. Now, if you're only buying one share, you probably come out better on that deal. But if you're buying a lot of stocks, you're not going to come out better on that deal. And they come out better on that deal.

That's why they structured it that way. And a lot of the other brokerages, they charge a much lower fee. So you still need to charge something for the market makers. So if you're buying a stock for $100, they might be $100 and a penny. But Robin Hood charges a lot more through Citadel. And so all of that is absolutely true. And Wall Street Journal wrote an article about it. You can go all the way back in 2018, you can go read it. You can see more clear examples. So that's how they make money. That's why they make more money, not less money, even though they're not charging you per transaction. So if you're concerned about Robin Hood's relationship to Citadel that's shorting these stocks, that's a very legitimate concern. Now, is that why Robin Hood stopped the trades? I don't know. He has a perfectly plausible explanation, and it's possible that it really was because of these clearinghouses. But does that solve? the entire question, no. Why did the clearing houses make the decisions that they did? Why did they change the deposit requirements? How much of that was necessary? What was the deposit requirements? What did they change it to? We don't know any of that information. And who is affecting the

clearing houses? Because the clearing houses are structured through the SEC, but they're not part of the SEC. So who the hell are the clearing houses? How do they make money? And who's influencing them because it's not just Robin Hood. Now I'm hearing reports that if you're putting in a transaction through E-Trade and Ameritrade and others, they're also taking an incredibly long time to fill that transaction. Now, one more thing that we know that's important, when Robin Hood shuts down, they're not just affecting on those particular stocks. They're not just affecting people who trade through Robin Hood. So if you think, well, I don't have an account in Robin Hood. So, It doesn't matter to me.

The New York Stock Exchange is still open. I can still buy and sell GameStop as an example. No, it does affect you because that takes six million traders off of the market. That by definition, because of the laws of supply and demand, affects your price. And you're going to be shocked to find out how it affects your price. It drives the price lower because Robin Hood says, oh, if you want, you could sell your shares, but you're not allowed to buy shares. Wait a minute, first of all, if people can't buy shares,

how are people going to sell shares? Who are they going to sell it to? Right? And if you can't buy, that by definition is going to drive the price lower. And who benefits from a lower price? The giant hedge funds on Wall Street that are shorting the stock, betting on it to go down. How is any of this okay?

How is this, like, what's incredible is, look, If you have a problem with market manipulation, I hear you. But it's a strange moment to be up in arms about market manipulation right now because of a subreddit. I mean, if you're worried about market manipulation, that's been going on for a very long time right now. I mean, especially with these hedge funds that end up, you know, shorting certain stocks. And then they get to go on CNBC to brag about how they shorted these stocks, which what do you think happens? You don't think that's a form of manipulation. But that's just honestly, the lightest form of manipulation when you consider all the other stuff that's been going on. When you look at the amount of money that was taken

from Trump tax cuts after 2017 and then used by these massive corporations and executives to do corporate stock buybacks to artificially inflate the values of the shares, like that kind of manipulation is totally okay. I mean, it's just amazing to me that this is a moment. where all of a sudden you hear regulators like the SEC, you hear politicians, you hear CNBC anchors argue that manipulation is so bad and so scary, and this is so terrible. Well, where were you guys all these years when all the manipulation was taking place by the people at the very top, by banks and Wall Street hedge funds? I just, the whole thing is just absolutely sickening. Yeah, so many great comments from our members. I want to read one and then I want to tell you

something else we don't know that goes to the great point that Anna was just making. Shikata Guy Nye writes in, remember folks, when you're thinking about things like Robin Hood, if a service is free, you are the product, not the customer. That's a really good way of pointing out what the part of the issue here is. We have the smartest audience in the world. I love it. By the way, t.com slash join to get your comments read like that and be part of the show. Okay, so now, to Anna's point, now I don't know what the deposit requirements at NSCC are, okay, and so that's the clearinghouse for Robin Hood. But I also don't know what the deposit requirements are for the hedge funds. Are they the same deposit requirements or are they different deposit requirements?

Well, that's something that everybody should know because when Robin Hood stopped trading, the hedge funds didn't. The New York Stock Exchange was still open. So the hedge funds could do anything they could do anything they could. wanted. Now, it might be because they had more deposits in there. Number one, we don't know that. Number two, guys, this is the most important point. You want to know what is systemic risk, leverage. And that is what the institutional investors, the big guys like the hedge funds use. And so if you lose 50 bucks on GameStop, it is not systemic risk. And everybody keeps talking down to people, like the anchor, Stephanie rule is among the worst of them. She's on MSNBC. She's constantly looking down her nose at people.

They don't even, do they even know they could lose money? Yes, Stephanie, they know that, yes, they know that. And so you don't have to treat us like children. Yes, they know that they could lose their money. Now, but if they lose their money, the whole economy doesn't crash. Why did it crash in 2008 and why are people worried now? Because if the hedge funds lose all their money, it's not just their money that they're losing, they're leveraged. So they will make sometimes up to a $10 bet. When they don't

have the $10, they're using $1 and they're using leverage to make a $10 bet with it. Now, that's called gambling. They can call it anything they like, oh, yeah, it's financial creativity and we need that kind of ingenuity in Wall Street. No, we don't. No, we don't. You need some degree of leverage for capitalism to work. The question is how much and in what areas. So don't tell me that the guy betting 50 bucks on GameStop is a systemic risk and we should regulate him, but we shouldn't regulate a guy taking a $3 billion risk that he has got giant leverage on. And if he goes under, it's not that he just loses his own $3 billion, meaning his investors $3 billion, but then that creates a domino effect. Because Citadel didn't short the

stocks. Citadel backed Melvin Capital that was shorting the stocks. Because so then if Melvin capital is in trouble, Citadel, which is much larger, is in trouble. And then everybody's in trouble. Why? Because they were doing out of control gambling. They never regulate that. That causes the crashes. And then the minute you take a tiny little risk, like, oh, we got to regulate Bob. Bob in Nebraska is the problem. No, leverage is the problem. It's what causes every single crash. All right. I love this conversation. We got to take a break though. But when we come back, we're going to talk a little bit about the faux meritocracy in this country that's constantly shoved down our throats. It infuriates me. So Brett Ehrlich thought that he would pitch a story

that I would find funny. I did not find it funny. It infuriated me. So we're going to talk about that and more when we return. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.