Distraction News 5/5/2024

Transcript

Marijuana Rescheduling and Its Implications

Speaker 1 0:00

Peace, peace to all my good people out there. Welcome to another session with Shay. On this session we're going to get back at some distraction news, and today is May 5th 2024. Cinco de Mayo, cinco de Mayo Fun fact.

Speaker 1 0:36

Cinco de Mayo, or the 5th of May, is a holiday that celebrates the date of the Mexican Army's May 5th 1862 victory over France at the Battle of Pueblo during the Franco-Mexican War. The date, which falls on Sunday, may 5th in 2024, is also known as Battle of Pueblo Day. While it is a relatively minor holiday in Mexico, in the United States Cinco de Mayo has evolved into a commemoration of Mexican culture and heritage, particularly in areas with large Mexican-American populations. So, basically, it's not, it's a misconception, that it's the Independence Day for Mexico and the United States. No, that's's not. This particular today, this particular day, cinco de Mayo, is basically a celebration of Mexican soldiers head over the French. Basically, basically. But shout out to Cinco de Mayo.

Speaker 1 1:43

But moving on distraction news, during the week lots of interesting things happened, but also a lot of things that were like, I feel, straight up and down to get people not to pay attention to other things, and we're going to talk about some of those other things, just in case you missed it, going back and forth with Drake and Kendrick and, but nevertheless so this week for those who know, you know, but US health officials want to loosen marijuana restrictions. Here's what it means. Earlier this week, um, the department of health and human services asked the drug enforcement agency, or the dea the other one was the hhs, this is the dea to consider easing restrictions on marijuana upon review of its classification under the Controlled Substance Act. It could be a significant catalyst for an industry hemed by federal regulations, even as legislation picks up on the state level. Marijuana stocks were higher Wednesday on the news. See how one thing plays into another on the low key, but anyway.

Speaker 1 3:19

Since the 1970s, marijuana has been listed, alongside heroin and lsd, as schedule one drugs or substances that authorities say have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Today, marijuana has remained in in this category, ranked higher than fentanyl, cocaine and meth. Than fentanyl, cocaine and meth say that again, marijuana has remained in this category, a schedule one category, higher than fentanyl, cocaine and meth, despite there being favorable momentum for pot in scientific research and state laws. The DEA will consider moving marijuana down to a Schedule III drug alongside ketamine, antibiotic steroids and testosterone as a substance that has moderate to low potential for physical or psychological dependence. The recommendation, however, will not deschedule marijuana Cultivation, production and sales would still be in violation of federal law.

Speaker 1 4:35

Marijuana is legal in 39 states medically and 23 states recreationally states recreationally. So as part of the recommendation process, hhs conducted a scientific and medical evaluation that would help authorities come to find a decision on the matter. A decision is likely to come before the 2024 presidential election, of course, because biden needs something to put in his back pocket to get the get certain people to believe that he's the guy, didn't he him? Historically, the dea has never gone against a scheduled recommendation from the hhs. So basically, whatever hhs says to do, dea is going to say okay, that's what it's going to be.

Speaker 1 5:23

The DEA will consider marijuana's reclassification under three criteria it's potential for abuse, it's potential for medical use and the extent to which it's unsafe or addictive. Regulators have previously used the second criteria to hold up marijuana schedule one classification, but doing so now proves may prove difficult with medical marijuana programs existing in nearly 40 states across the nation. Yeah. So how that's gonna do, I don't know. Uh, once a dea comes to decision, it will submit its own recommendation in a form of a proposal to the attorney general, who will then make his final ruling. Hmm, interesting. So it's all going to come down to what HHS says to do, and then DEA is going to do it, and then they're going to rewrite it up and it's gonna be up to the attorney general to say yay or nay. If that attorney general says yay or nay, then that's what it shall be. And since the attorney general is picked by Biden, that's what it's gonna be, and it's just a question of when. At this point, when is it more, uh, politically advantageous for them to drop it and be like here? Another one, uh, but what did this mean for the weed industry?

Speaker 1 6:52

If marijuana moves to a schedule three substance, this will effectively ease a number of restrictions holding the sector back. The biggest boon will come from a form of new tax opportunities more money. Currently, enterprise dealings and Schedule 1 substances aren't allowed to write expenses off or aren't allowed to write expenses off their federal tax returns under the IRS's code been a hindrance for many cultivators, processors and real estate retailers struggling to remain profitable as the industry sees a slowdown in sales, where, anywho, the removal of this irs service code known as 280e, will have a widespread material impact on the financial performance of every company in the industry, large and small, public and private. What's more, the potential rescheduling will allow for interstate commerce. While many states have legal markets within their borders, transporting Schedule 1 substances across state lines is illegal, resulting in a ugly. They should have just used the word a lot, but they I hate it when they, in articles, they put words that don't really add any oomph to the article anyway, resulting in a lot of marijuana in some states. That's what they should have said a lot, but they said gulped whatever. The move will furthermore expand potential for research in the sector, entice investors back amid a capital crunch and possibly return value to publicly traded marijuana stocks Possibly.

Speaker 1 8:47

The rescheduling, however, will not free up banking services for the industry, which has been kept out of traditional banking and loans due to marijuana's federal standing. Schedule III drugs still present a risk for banking institutions so long as federal laws remain unchanged for banking institutions. So long as federal laws remain unchanged, a bill called the secure and fair enforcement banking act, or safe, will remove this burden and make it and is making its way through congress and we'll see about that. Uh. Senate majority leader, chuck schumer, said, while this is an important step forward for the industry, the end goal is ending federal prohibition. Another word word salad filler. I swear hhs has done the right thing and dea should now quickly follow through on this important step to greatly reduce the harm caused by draconian marijuana laws.

College Campus Protests and Government Response

Speaker 1 9:48

Schumer said in a statement Thursday, there is still much more that needs to be done legislatively to end the federal prohibition on cannabis and roll back the war on drugs. Industry executive echoed Schumer's feelings. Industry executive echoed Schumer's feelings. Federal cannabis reform is long overdue and today's news brings us closer to the Biden administration's declaring an end to the US government's failed war on cannabis. Um, yeah, I mean they're basically doing step one at this point of 10, because, again, like I said, it has to go through like other people and those other people have to check off. And even when those other people check off is really only going to do a certain thing. It's not going to cover, you know, the whole gambit that weed or legalization of weed entails. So the end result is it to be for them to come to a conclusion that, yeah, it just needs to be not illegal just like alcohol or cigarettes or whatever. It just has to be at that level in order for all of this dumb shit to go away.

Speaker 1 11:05

But one of my good friends said the other day this is the smoke and mirrors part of this whole thing. Just on the strength of there, maybe they're trying to move it to a level of the pharmaceutical side, because the pharmaceutical side is already. We control that with. You know all the pills and the prescriptions and all that extra shit. If they put weed in that that realm, then they can have even more control over the masses, because not everybody drinks, not everybody, you know, smoke, cigarettes, not everybody does that stuff. So you're not going to get that demographic to get by by a prescription for weed or by a prescription for alcohol or whatever. But if you do it with weed, all the people that really want it like hey, you really wanted this bad, get this prescription feed more into the pharmaceutical companies. That that is a checkmate move and with the way that things are going, I I don't see that it could. It might not happen, but um, we shall see.

Speaker 1 12:24

On to the next story. Um, the college protest updates. So hopefully everyone has been somewhat paying attention to the things that are going on on college campuses right now, even if you don't have kids, even if your kids are little kids, even if your kids are out of college. Like this particular moment in history that our country is going through, I think right now needs to be paid attention to. There are a group of young people who are using their First Amendment right to speak on things or speak out on things that they passionately feel some shit about. Tell them they can't and say that if you stay here any longer or if you continue causing a ruckus, we're going to not only suspend you from the colleges and universities that you pay to go to as students. We're not only going to suspend you, but we're going to blackball you and call you a terrorist. And anytime you try to go to another university, I'm sorry if any other time you try to pay to go to a university, those universities are going to say no, because they are going to label you as a terrorist by doing the one thing that they say that it's okay to do, thing that they say that it's okay to do, just because what you are protesting against does not suit what they want you to think is a bad thing. So pay attention to the college campuses that are are treating these students in a way that makes it feel as though they are terrorists and not actually students that pay to go to these universities. There are some college campuses that are actually listening to the students and saying hey, you know what? We respect what you're trying to do here. What can we do as a university to hear you out out to those universities? But a good majority of them ain't doing that, so a few of them.

Speaker 1 14:59

This is an update from new york. New york city mayor defends nypd's handling of college protests. New york city mayor, eric adams on sunday defended the police crackdown on college campus protests that have broken out in the in america's largest city. When those protests this is eric ad adam speaking when those protests reach the point of violence, we have to ensure that we use a minimum amount of force to terminate what is perceived to be a threat. End quote. Adam added that the police intervention resulted from days of communication between the police and school officials. Ok, we knew we had to get permission unless there's imminent threat to life or severe threat to property, we were not going to overstep our legal authority when pressed by criticism.

Speaker 1 16:08

When pressed by criticism including some from other democrats that the response to protesters was disappropriate given that they were largely non-violent. Adam said one has the right to have his or her own opinion and I respect that and I have an obligation and responsibility to ensure the city is safe. This is Eric Adams in New York. I haven't done a lot of research about Mr Eric Adams, but from what I've heard from other people who actually live in New York he's not the best person for the job, nor is he the sharpest knife in the drawer, but anywho, usc.

Speaker 1 16:50

On the other side of the country, a pro-palestinian tent encampment on the university of southern california campus was cleared out and dismantled some early sunday morning without any arrests being made. A spokesperson for usc said in a statement that the encampment established by protesters 12 days ago was peacefully taken down. Earlier today, the University of Southern California Department of Public Safety successfully removed the illegal encampment rebuilt on the university's campus. It was necessary to request request lapd to respond to provide security. As this was carried out peacefully, no arrests have been reported. We want to thank lapd for assisting dps and clearing the encampment and restoring normalcy for students. Blah Um. So now they're basically saying okay, we're going to give the illusion of uh, us listening to you, but ultimately we're just getting our ducks in a row to, to, to get whoever on board to clear shit out, and we're going to do it, and that's what they're doing.

Speaker 1 17:59

Some of these universities. They're not even like attempting to listen to what the students are asking for, some students which are asking that the universities divest, which basically means stop investing in Israel or any cause that is not helping the Palestinian people. A lot of these universities are paid for by either Israel as a country or corporations that are sympathetic to Israeli causes or viewpoints. So a lot of these universities are basically saying, nah, we're not going to do that. And yeah, you're going to keep paying us because you want to go here, because college is everything in this country, this piece of paper that you pay for is everything in this country, and you're going to go here and we're going to say what we're going to say and you're not going to have anything else to say about it, because you want this degree. So what are you going to do? So that is the my guess mentality of the universities at this point.

Speaker 1 19:11

University of Virginia. However, the other day, when he called for the removal of the protesters, it was a little bit more, a lot, a bit more violent. Actually, they forcibly removed people. There's dozens of pictures out there saying and the way they did it didn't have to be done. But this is University of Virginia. Remember we started in New York. We went to the West Coast, to USC. University of Virginia said they're not having that.

Speaker 1 19:42

Southern states colleges they treat disrespect a little bit differently and if, if your beef is something that they're sympathetic to, they're going to show you and they're going to do it in force and then they're going to say what you're going to do too. So I just feel as though this college, these protests ongoing on college campuses right now, is a linchpin to a lot of things. It happened back in the 60s and 70s with the Vietnam War. Granted, those are two different things of why the protests were happening. Of course, there were actually boots on the ground in Vietnam, actual soldiers, us soldiers over there doing what they were doing on the backs of what Congress wanted them to do, and the people weren't, they weren't trying to hit at. That's what their protests for, these particular protests, are actually.

Speaker 1 20:43

We shouldn't be supporting that fuckery, and not only shouldn't we be supporting it, the people that we're giving our money to to get these pieces of paper shouldn't be supporting it either. So there's an impasse there that somebody either needs is going to win or lose. It's either going to be the students, who are just going to have to chuck it up and deal with it and take that piece of paper and shut the fuck up and go in the corner and color, or it's going to be the universities. That's going to say you know what? Your voice matters, your viewpoint matters, your dollars matter, and if you don't come to our, we're not going to have anybody here and we're going to be broke. So something is going to have to give on that viewpoint.

Speaker 1 21:31

But then those are going to have trickle effects down the way because then you're going to have a whole student body who doesn't go to these colleges and then the college degrees are going to lose their value in some aspect. Because if you don't go to these colleges and then the college degrees are going to lose their value in some aspect, because if you don't go to college, the degree technically is still going to have value out in the world because the things have the value of what the society placed upon it, but it's going to have a lot less value. It's already starting to have a little bit less more now value anyway. Um, a lot of jobs are taking the degree requirement away, so it might not be as valuable as it is now. Five years from now might be nothing. It might be on high school diploma level and, honestly, a high school diploma at a lot of, for a lot of reasoning, is more valuable than a college, because a lot of entry level jobs you need to have at least a high school diploma, a lot of those upper ones. You can't even get in the door without the high school diploma. You can do other things without a degree, but not without that high school.

Speaker 1 22:40

So now this next thing hmm, one of the trickle downs effects of who should win this, this, the protests or the universities? The university just has lobbyists. Everybody has lobbyists. Lobbyists are interest groups that pay Congress people to basically vote the way that the lobbyists want them to vote. If they say, hey, we're sympathetic towards this, I'm going to pay you a whole bunch of money to say you're sympathetic toward that too, can you do that? And the congressperson like, oh, yeah, yeah, sure, I'll do that, no matter what it is. So israel has, I'm not even going to say it like that, because I I don't know, but my deductive reasoning lets me believe that they have lobbyists who pay congress to do exactly what they want to do and they have so much money and they spread it around so much with so many Congress people. That is the way that Congress is able to pass bills and everybody passes it at the same time, like those enormous numbers, like that TikTok bill, that was some coordinated shit. Those infrastructure bills that benefit certain people but not everybody, those are little coordinated attacks. But that whole TikTok thing, that was all the lobbyists paid to all the same people and all the people ate off the lobbyists' decision. So, with that being said, an anti-Semitic bill clears House Rules panel.

Speaker 1 24:31

Following partisan feud, lawmakers on the House Rules Committee advanced a bipartisan bill Monday night attempting to codify a definition of anti-Semitism, after the panel's Democrats bashed the measure at length. The legislation HR 6090, the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2023, is one of several bills introduced in Congress since Hamas's October 7 attack on Israel and the burst of pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses. But ahead of Monday's 7-4 vote, democrats, including New York Rep Jerry Nader, told the rules panel the measure was deeply flawed. The bill threatens to chill constitutionally protected speech. Quote Nader, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said speech that is critical of Israel alone does not constitute unlawful discrimination. The bill sweeps too broadly. The bill led by another Republican Democrat has 13 Democrat co-sponsors and will codify the International Holocaust Remem 1964, a federal anti-discrimination law that bars discrimination based on shared ancestry, ethnic characteristics or national origin with Title VI. But it has been unclear how to determine when free speech crosses into anti-Semitic discrimination. Many Republicans on the panel said the bill is needed to protect Jewish students and provide clarity for the agencies that enforce the law. Now more than ever it is critical for federal government's definition of antisemitism is clear and uniform. Congress must clearly define antisemitism so universities are empowered to take appropriate and decisive steps to keep Jewish students safe and respond to exercises of speech so hostile and discriminatory that it is not covered by the protections of enshrined in the first amendment in the united states constitution.

Speaker 1 27:07

Committee members approved a closed rule and one hour debate. Still, some republicans expressed their reservations of the bill. A representative was critical that no definition was actually written in the bill and that it just referred to the ihra definition and posed several hypothetical comments to the bill's supporters. It's a dangerous. It's dangerous to take one's definition, he said, though he still voted to clear the bill. So he said all that but still voted for it, as the biden administration did not weigh in on the bill. So he said all that but still voted for it. The Biden administration did not weigh in on the bill, even though it responded with a comment of administration policy to six other measures the rules committee considered on Monday.

Speaker 1 27:54

Nadler, who was brought in to testify against the bill, had previously supported a similar one that would have codified multiple definitions of anti-Semitism. But after being pressed on that support, nadler said I was mistaken to do so, bitch. He explained that he would support a bill that did not include the IHRA definition and included several definitions of anti-Semitism. Nadler and other Democrats repeatedly pressed Republicans to instead boost funding for the Education Department and the Justice Department's Office for Civil Rights, which are responsible for enforcing anti-discrimination laws. Nadler also urged lawmakers to consider a competing bipartisan proposal which would establish the first ever national coordinator to counter anti-semitism. So they even want to make. They want to make a job in Congress, or maybe a federal job, I don't know, but they want to make something and call it the national coordinator to counter antisemitism, but not, you know, nevermind.

Speaker 1 29:12

I'm really concerned that this bill repeats what we've seen so many times in this Congress. We're seeing the houseans majority trying to exploit real problems to divide people and and score political points rather than providing actual solutions, also adding she would support the other proposals. That's tough, I mean, because, honestly, what can? I guess they don't want to feel like they're not being above the board while being shady, I don't. Again, I'm not gonna fake like I want to understand Congress. I've said many times before Congress does what the lobbyists tell them to do and clearly somebody is paying them so much money to do so many things.

Speaker 1 30:11

Another article that I saw I read from Al Jazeera says the United States House of Representatives have overwhelmingly passed a bill that would expand the federal definition of anti-Semitism, despite opposition from civil liberties groups. Other groups are even saying that this shit is wild. But anyhow, the bill passed the House on Wednesday by a margin of 320 to 91, wednesday, by a margin of 320 to 91. And it is largely seen as a reaction to the ongoing anti-war protests unfolding on us university campuses. It now goes to the Senate for consideration, which, as of Monday or as of Sunday. It's still there. This bill was passed on Wednesday. Uh, if the bill were to become law, it would codify a definition of anti-semitism created by the international holocaust remembrance alliance, the ihra, in the title six of the civil rights act of 1964, that is, a federal anti-discrimination law that bars discrimination based on a shared ancestry, ethnic characteristic or national origin. Adding irh's ihra's definition to the law would allow the federal department of education to restrict funding and other resources to campuses perceived as tolerating anti-semitism. But critics warn of ihr's definition could be used to stife campus protests against israeli war in israel's war in gaza, which has claimed the lives of 34 568 palestinians so far. So you may ask shea, what is the definition? Well, here it is. I'm gonna tell you ihra's working definition of anti-semitism.

Speaker 1 32:10

Semitism is a certain perception of jews which may be expressed as hatred towards jews. Rhetoric, rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed towards Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and or their property, towards Jewish community institutions and religious facilities. That was a lot of shit to say, but basically what I gather from it, you can't say anything bad about them in any form or fashion, whether you're playing which, whether you're joking, or in the physical manifestation. That's literally their wording, the physical manifestation of anti-Semitism are directed towards Jewish or non-Jewish individuals, so you can't even joke about it. And or their property, towards their institutions or their religious facilities. According to the definition, it also encompasses the targeting of the state of israel conceived as a jewish collectivity. So yeah, they include that too. So you can't. You can't talk shit about that too.

Speaker 1 33:35

The group also includes certain examples in its definition to illustrate anti-semitism. Saying, for instance, the existence of a state of israel in a racist endeavor would be deemed anti-semitic under its terms. The definition also bars any comparison between contemporary israeli policy and that of the nazis, so you can't compare them, even in gist. However, ihra does specify that criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic. Ain't that wild? So basically, they say they can say anything they want to say, but anybody, no other country, cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic. So they are the ones that can only use that word. That's basically what that said. That's that whole definition that Congress said is going to be the new working definition of anti-Semitism in America. Is going to be the new working definition of anti-Semitism in America Wild, mind you.

Speaker 1 34:57

Congress is doing all of these things for an outside entity. They aren't even classified as a group. You know what? I take that back. I take that back because I don't know, so I'm not going to speak on that, but what I do know is the more attention that we pay to this, the more the more Congress works in unison and falling in line with this particular thing screams dictatorship, screams a takeover, screams. This is what we're doing because we can do it and you can't do anything about it. But yet they put all this energy into anti-Semitism. But we still have laws on the books that you can lynch a black person. There are still laws on the books that cops can kill black people if they choose to, if they feel like it. There's still laws on the books that cops can kill black people if they choose to, if they feel like it. There's still laws on the books of sundown towns. All these things are things that have been on the books, that haven't been codified or made like real, but yet we're still out here doing the things or the things are being done here, doing the things or the things are being done.

Charlotte Shooting and Apple's Buyback

Speaker 1 36:13

So before I go off of this, I just want to make it aware that they worded all of these things in particular for a particular reason. So anytime there's any instance of anti-Semitism that doesn't fit in this particular definition is considered a gray area. So they chose to cover every single base they could within that definition. And, to be fair, that is an outside organization and so they. They are going to make up their own definitions accordingly, like they're their own club, so they can choose to define it the way they choose to define it. But the United States Congress shouldn't take that definition and run with it because they're paid to do such and run with it because they're paid to do such. They're paid to look out for American, what us as Americans need, and all of this extra attention that they're giving to this old we're going to define anti-Semitic and change it. It seems like they're just giving more attention to an outside entity versus the inside entity. All of the money that's been given to the war for israel and gaza and all that other, all that other shit. They're giving a priority to the attention that they're giving to outside things versus things that are happening here, so for them to basically say, yeah, we don't want any more clashes on campus, we don't want none of that. Let's get the most controversial thing that can cover every base and make that the law and sign it off. So if there's any other thing that comes up with these protests, we can just say, hey, we changed it. Now it's this, and if you break this rule, this has happened to you. You're gonna suffer under a national uh or federal hate crime law because we've changed the word now and that's exactly what they're gonna do. So just be aware of the play of the wording and just be aware of the play, that's all, uh. Moving on this story here, I'm not gonna dive too deep into it because it just caught me aback and I didn't want to spend too much energy on it.

Speaker 1 38:47

But four officers killed in north carolina shooting. New details emerge a day after police and four law enforcement officers were killed and four others were wounded in a shooting in charlotte, north carolina, while trying to serve a warrant. Mond afternoon A suspect was killed in a shootout with police. Local police say a US Service, a US Marshal Service fugitive task force, comprised of officers from multiple agencies, were attempting to serve an arrest warrant on a man for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He called the shooting an absolute tragic day for the city of Charlotte. When officers approached the house to arrest the suspect, they were immediately met with gunfire and they returned fire. There's indication that the suspect saw them coming to the house prior to them getting to the front door. Police said the officers called for backup and they continued to exchange gunfire with the suspect. More gunfire came from inside the house as officers approached the suspect, setting off a long standoff, the man. The man then left the house while armed and opened fire and shot and and the police shot him in the front yard where he was pronounced dead. He was identified by the police as Terry Clark Hughes Jr, 39.

Speaker 1 40:13

So that story has more of. That story was from Monday, it happened Monday and what I just read was from Tuesday. That story has now morphed into a whole nother thing. Um, basically look at it as a training day thing. Training day, the movie where there was some cops doing some dirty shit and trying to get the money from under the house and they got caught up in their own game of things and some cops got shot. That's what the last I heard with the story. Another thing I heard about this story is Mr Terry Clark Hughes Jr was just not want to go back to jail. Granted, I'm not sure of what he did in order to get those firearm felonies, so I'm not condoning anything that he did as a person. But what I will say is I I understand the mentality of if someone has been in jail in and out of jail and they over it and they say I'm not going back. That was his thought process is I'm not going back and I'm taking all of these people with me and they were all cops. So I'm not saying that what I'm not condoning anything he did as a person, but I understand the mentality of I ain't going back.

Speaker 1 41:44

On another note, apple unveils record $110 billion buyback as results beat low expectations. So Apple did a share buyback and it's the largest in US history. But what does it mean and I want to emphasize this because I do not think this is the last time that another company will do this type of thing and when you do this type of thing too much, the market can't handle it and hopefully, after I explain this a little bit, you get a better understanding. You can point it out if you see it again. But what is a share buyback? A share buyback is when a company uses its money to buy shares of its own stock. This effectively removes those shares from the market, reducing the total number of outstanding shares in the company. Since there are fewer shares on the market, it should theoretically make the remaining shares more valuable. Now the company said its board approved the repurchase of $110 billion in Apple stock. That makes this share buyback the largest in us company history.

Speaker 1 43:09

Now the companies have tried this, though. Plenty of tech tech giants have completed buybacks before. Google owner alphabet has bought back 70 billion worth of its shares each year for the past three years. For example, meta completed a 50 dollar 50 billion dollar buyback in 2024 and a 40 billion dollar buyback in 2023, and microsoft did it in 2021 for about 60 billion. Um, apple did this before. As a matter of fact, while its $110 billion buyback this week is a record breaker, apple is actually breaking its own previous record. Back in 2018, apple initiated a share buyback for $100 billion at a record that's held now. But between then and now, apple has initiated five other share buybacks 75 bill in 2019, 50 billion in 2020, 90 billion in 2021, 90 billion in 2022 and 90 billion in 2023.

Speaker 1 44:20

All the numbers, um, um, the stock market well, the actual Apple stock reacted pretty well. Uh, the stock is up 6% to $183 a share and that's a price Apple shares haven't seen since February. The history with Apple, yada, yada, anyway. Uh, apple increased its cash dividend by 4% and that's how they authorized this buyback. But long considered a must-own stock on Wall Street. Apple shares have underperformed other big tech companies in recent months, falling 10% this year. As it struggles with iPhone demand weak iPhone demand, actually and tough competition in China, apple expects current quarter services and iPad revenue to grow by double digits. Hmm, okay, the company expects gross margins between 45 and 46.

Speaker 1 45:30

Apple faces a raft of there's another word, a raft of challenges across his businesses. Smartphone rivals such as samsung have introduced competitive devices aimed at hosting artificial intelligence chat boxes. On the regulatory front, apple's service business, which contains its lucrative Apple Store App Store and was one of the few areas of growth in its physical second quarter, is under pressure from a new law in Europe. In the United States, the Department of Justice in March accused Apple of monopolizing the smartphone market and driving up its prices. And they did, and they did. Apple faces pressure from other brands in China. Excluding that one time phenomenon, iphone sales were only slightly down, as the California company's signature product faces stiff competition in China. Hawaii I know I'm mispronouncing the hell out that word, but Huawei technology we'll go with Huawei. Huawei technology has gained market share. Cook said that iPhone sales still experience growth in some markets, including China. However, apple's revenue decline in China was not as steep as analysts expected, with greater China sales of $16 billion Down 8% above their expectations of 15 billion.

Speaker 1 47:11

Um, one of the other things and this article goes somewhere left that I didn't expect it to, but other one of the things that I read somewhere else is that Apple is basically trying to buy back. I guess love with the consumer because, full disclosure, I am an Apple user, iphone team, iphone all day, baby, but it's only because I'm used to the product. Let's say that. And a lot of Apple users I'm not going to speak for all of them, but a lot of iPhone Apple users are that way as well. Um, we're pretty much stuck in the bubble of it. So we're here with it with the ride, but we have.

Speaker 1 47:55

I personally have not been wowed by any iPhone for a minute. The iWatch is like the same iteration of itself Every it comes out. It just has a better screen or cooler colors, some shit like that. The ipads they either get crisper or thinner and that's about it. Um, those google goggles, those I ai, I'm, I would, but not the first, not the first iteration of it, because it's buggy and stupid and all of that other stuff. I'm not spending my good money on a first drop of anything from Apple, because I know better. The headphones, the iPods, all of that other stuff. Yeah, so they got me locked in, but they are not wowing me with innovations within the space.

Speaker 1 48:48

So my biggest beef with Apple in this whole thing is that you're sitting here trying to gain my confidence back because they want to buy back and all that good stuff, but yet where's that money going to go? Apple, are you going to make me a new iPhone is going to be the dopest shit ever I've ever seen on the iPhone level, or an iPad or an iWatch, or headphones or the goggles or whatever. No, I don't think so. You're probably going to keep giving me the same shit and I'm probably just going to keep eating it up until I get done with it. But the innovation of Apple products is severely lacking. But the cost of basic innovation is constantly going up.

Closing Peace

Speaker 1 49:30

So as long as we as the consumer of Apple products. If it's not true, it's not true. But we as the consumers of Apple products, if we continue to just eat that shit up just because we're used to the product, we're used to it, they're never going to get better. They're just going to keep putting money in their pockets and be like all right here, keep eating this mediocre shit while we keep taking all your money. So, but again, notice, apple is not going to be the first company. I don't know who will be next, maybe an Amazon, maybe not, maybe a Target, I don't know, maybe not. But when record-breaking buybacks happen, it's not because they need more money or want more money. They're just trying to get more capital and more confidence back in the consumer at this point, the consumer and the stockholders. So is it? If we were that confident in you, apple, why would you have to go and do such a thing, right? But anyhow, that is all I have for you.

Speaker 1 50:42

Good people today Appreciate each and every one of you hanging out for me for this long session of distraction news. But, as always, I appreciate each and every one of you hanging out for me for this long session of distraction news. But, as always. I appreciate each and every one of you for hanging with me. We'll catch you on the next session with Shay Peace. Thank you.