The Zach Foust Show
We break down housing, growing wealth gaps, and the economy in a simple, meaningful way.
Clear, honest, and structured for real people.
The Zach Foust Show
"Big Corps have STOLEN our Country | ZFS 78
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
I sat down with Todd Achilles, the independent veteran running for US Senate in Idaho against a man who has been in Idaho politics for over 50 years, bragged that the Senate was an easy job in his first month, and has become a rubber stamp for whatever comes out of the White House.
Todd served in the Idaho Legislature and built a reputation as one of the most bipartisan members in the capital. He is now running as an independent and was trailing the incumbent by 14 points 90 days before we recorded this. As of last week he was down four. Pay attention to Idaho.
We went deep on everything. RealPage and algorithmic price fixing that has stolen an estimated $700 million from Idaho renters since 2000. Corporate ownership of single family homes and why banning purchases is not enough without a forced divestment period. The Dodge versus Ford case from 1917 that legally locked corporations into favoring shareholders over workers. The Powell Memo. Citizens United. Stock buybacks consuming 90% of corporate profits while employees fall onto the social safety net. Non compete agreements being used on burger flippers. Unions. Public lands. And why competition is the single most powerful economic tool we have stopped using.
Todd answered every lightning round question I threw at him. Age limits on Congress. Term limits. Ending insider trading. Banning corporate PACs. Ending the carried interest loophole. Banning Citizens United. No super PAC money for himself. He said yes to nearly all of them without hesitation.
This is the kind of candidate that gets replaced. Let us make sure that does not happen.
Subscribe to the Zach Foust Show and join the Dollar Club to keep independent media alive. Drop a comment. Would you vote for Todd Achilles?
Good morning, good evening. Welcome into the Zach Fowl Show episode number 78. Today we have an interview for you. We're going to be interviewing somebody who is running as an independent for a seat in the U.S. Senate. So he's running as an independent. Means the primaries that just happened nationwide did not apply to this guy, but he is only trailing by four points in the polls behind the current incumbent. So he spent two years in local government in Idaho. He is a U.S. Army veteran. He is a local farmer there from Idaho, as I'd learned in this conversation. They're called Idahoans. Idahoans. I feel like I'm putting too much emphasis on the hoans. Oh, Idahoans. Idahoans. There we go. Idahoans. I'm going to read this right off of his website, Achilles for Idaho, for Mr. Todd Achilles, independent veteran for U.S. Senate. It says, I'm running for the U.S. Senate because the two-party system has failed America. Both parties grow the national debt, keep us in forever wars, and favor corporations over families. Both parties profit from dividing Americans. And I reject the left-right division because the challenge ahead of us is top versus bottom. Those with power against the people. I will fight for all Idahoans, not billionaires or extremists. I grew up on a family farm where I learned early the values Idahoans hold closest: hard work and looking out for your neighbor. I served in the U.S. Army as a tank commander and armor officer. The Army taught me teamwork, leadership, and grit. And these are the public qualities that I bring to public service. We go through his top 10 policies and we speak about some legislation. A lot around the economy is where we start this conversation. So when you start it, you're going to hear a lot about the economy. How can we fix housing? What's going to happen because of this Iran war? If you were to be elected and walk in in January, what are you going to do with the economy at that point? As oil and gas and food prices have probably already spiked up higher than where they're at on today's interview. We also talk about Israel. We do not agree on Israel. I think we both made it very clear to each other that we disagreed on Israel. And at the very end, I give him my nine lightning questions. Uh just to see where he sits on a lot of the core topics we talk about on this show. I will give it no further ado. Thank you for listening to the show. Make sure to like, subscribe. And if you're so beautiful, leave a comment. Let us know what you took from this. And for my members out there, if you're part of the dollar club, again, the corruption map is live. If you want to see all the spheres of corruption from our government to Israel, Epstein, and more, the corruption map is live to our dollar club members. It is pinned as a post in YouTube. And as well as my members, if you comment on this video, any questions or things you want us to bring up or review on our next show, we will be doing a podcast specifically answering your questions. So without further ado, Mr. Todakeles. I have kind of sifted to this uh mindset of maybe nothing will, but we're gonna go back and forth on that because, brother, you are running for US Congress. What first of all, what made you decide to do that? I know you priorly served in uh Idaho, uh which by the way, I Idahoans? Idahoans? Idahoans. Idahoans, okay. So what what branched you from normal Idahoan to I want to do something locally to heck with it? I'm just gonna go for the national seat. Talk me through that.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I mean, I I I served two years in the Idaho legislature, uh, really enjoyed it. It was it was one of the toughest jobs I've ever had. Uh but I mean, like like you, Zach. I mean, I I my first real job was in the Army. I believe in public service and I believe how important it is.
SPEAKER_03Thank you for your service, brother.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, well, same to you, man.
SPEAKER_03Well, I was just National Guard with active contracts. It was it was I was like the minor leagues that got called up for a couple two-week contracts, and that was really it.
SPEAKER_00Dude, it's all I spent some time with the guard too, at all accounts.
SPEAKER_02Yes, sir. Well, thank you. I appreciate it.
SPEAKER_00Because there's a whole lot of people that don't do it. Uh but um, but for for me, you know, I I I love being in the legislature. I had a reputation as being one of the most bipartisan ones in the Capitol. Uh it really just you know worked really well with my Dem colleagues, with my Republican colleagues. Uh, but uh but I think like you and like most of Americans, uh, you know, I look at what's going on in Congress, man, I'm just profoundly worried about the future of the country, right? We you were probably a teenager when you took your oath to the Constitution, I was. Um and you know, we have a duty to do something, we have a duty to try and fix it. And right, you know, we we looked at this thing, we looked at the race. Um if you're gonna run against an incumbent, the best time to do it is an off-year, low-turn out election. Right. Right? And so that's 26.
SPEAKER_03Um and then Because the general election, just to that logic, so I'm understanding it. The general election is gonna bring a lot more, it brings a lot more Super Bowl voters, right? There's so many people that will never watch an NFL game or even a sporting event that'll show up to the Super Bowl. People that will not vote it for anything from their local clerk up to their governor are not voting except for the general election, which would be in 28. And your argument is the best way for an independent to win or at least have the best odds to is running in that off-year 2026, correct?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, exactly. So turnouts, turnouts about 20 points lower in an off-year election. So that that benefits the challenger. I expected it to be more, actually.
SPEAKER_03I thought I thought it was gonna be more like 30, 40 percent.
SPEAKER_00I think it depends on the state. But in Idaho, that's the typical numbers, right? It's usually kind of 79, 80 in a presidential and then 57, 58, something like that in uh uh in an off-year uh so that's pillar number one. And pillar number two is if you're gonna run against an incumbent, run against a dude that nobody likes. Tell me about your incumbent, okay?
SPEAKER_03Make a clip for me, baby. What tell me about your incumbent there in Idaho? How long have they served? What what are they doing out there? Tell them by name, and of course, serving in the U.S. Congress representative?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, no, uh so I'm running against Senator. Senator Jim.
SPEAKER_03Senator My apologies, dramatically sorry for remiss stating that. Yes, running for Senate.
SPEAKER_00You're good. Uh yeah, so Senator Jim Rish first got elected to Idaho politics in 1970. So he's been in Idaho politics for over 50 years, uh, long time in the Capitol, and uh not a lot of love for him. He's he had a long long term as a lieutenant governor, he had a short stint as as governor, and then he's he got to the Senate in 2008. And I mean he in his like his first month in the Senate, he was bragging about what an easy job it is to a reporter.
SPEAKER_02Oh, not to a reporter.
SPEAKER_03I thought he was doing it locally. I thought he was at the local bar, like, man, I get to take three months off. This stuff's easy. I know it's crazy, right?
SPEAKER_00I mean, it should be the hardest goddamn job you've ever done in your life. Quite honestly. If if you're taking care of your people, and and he isn't. And the longer he spends there, the more he votes with the DC insiders, and he's just a rubber stamp on the on the White House. And and this is the I think the fundamental thing about you know, one of the reasons why your system of government isn't working right now, because and and the Dems do this too. If there's a Dem in the White House, the Dems are cheerleaders in Congress rather than checks on the White House, right? And and and this guy, Jim Rish, he's a cheerleader for everything coming out of the White House uh rather than a check, which is this freaking constitutional duty, is to be a check on the executive branch.
SPEAKER_02Well, it's the reason we have the three-branch system in the first place, or at least supposedly.
SPEAKER_00Dude, it's how we got, you know, to where we are now as a nation that checks and balances. And so when you've got a branch of government that's just blowing off their duties, I we're not going to make it to our 260th birthday if we don't get our act together.
SPEAKER_03And to your point, uh, because I I know that this is a belief system I believe you'll align with, is that not even just this administration, but many in the prior can be blamed in conglomeration, both sides of the coin for the especially the economic problems, especially the foreign aid issues, uh, the endless war. You know, this is a this is a very purple problem, as we'll call it. So you're running for U.S. Congress. I just had the opportunity, uh, what was that a month or so ago uh to go out and meet Thomas Massey out in Kentucky.
SPEAKER_00Oh, cool.
SPEAKER_03Cool. Yeah, he's a good dude. He is a good dude, and I'll give him that. I don't 100% back his policies. In fact, I I met and talked with a bunch of people, some of the creators that uh joined me. Uh Tiffany Siance, a very, very big advocate for all things uh evil and fighting it, uh, organized 30 creators to go out to Kentucky to try to get young voters to come out. Because as you've already uh brought up, the the general election brings out the most people, the off-year brings out less, the primaries in an off-year bring out nobody young. So they had a real struggle there, and obviously APAC won that battle. But I I got to witness how when someone steps against the grain too often and too on the nose, as Thomas Massey has, you know, because things that we do align with is no foreign wars, they're stupid, and people are dying on our dime, all while more people need more dimes here in America. Uh our bridges, our infrastructure, our teachers need more dimes. I know there's no pennies anymore. Let's upgrade to dimes. All this inflation, gas prices, all off war. Another thing he stood against was the Epstein class and these elite globalist uh transnational capital geeks that that are tech broing themselves into our world into a AI surveillance state oblivion. I look at Congress brother and I see an endless loop of the people who want to make change either A are simple mouthpieces for the virtues that they they they want to be seen having, I think. I won't name certain congressmen I've met that I feel like lean this direction and why they do things. Uh, but I feel a lot are really good at reading the room and want to be popular. And then there's others that are actually creating bills and actually put putting a mouthpiece on against the people that are the greater lobbyists in corporations and countries that be, and they get replaced. So talk to me about how someone like you, and I do want you to take this opportunity to state your policies and your beliefs so we can get on the same page here with our listeners. Yeah. But what gives you the idea that even if you were able to get in, they'd stick around?
SPEAKER_00Yeah. Um, well, a couple things. And and I I think it's awesome that you spent some time with with Congressman Massey because uh he he's his property was incredible. I l I was geeking over his property. Well, in in uh northern Kentucky there, yeah.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, he's got a homestead, solar farm, built his own home out of it from the dude's uh, you know, he he went to MIT.
SPEAKER_00I mean, he writes his own code, he's he's a really impressive guy.
SPEAKER_03Well, honestly, I asked him while I was out there, I'm like, why aren't you just here all the time? Why are you why are you? Yeah, you got your own peach fleet out here of trees. Like, what are we doing? Yeah, but yeah, go on.
SPEAKER_00I feel uh excuse me. I feel that way about Idaho. I mean, this is absolutely one of the most beautiful states. And it's like, dude, I'm gonna be spending all this time in DC when I could be in Idaho. Um no, but but Massey, Massey does the right things, right? It it things like hiding the Epstein files is just unconscionable. Unconscionable, right? And you've got it, you've got a duty to stand up for the law and and to stand up for um people that the law is not protecting. And and then what I love about what Massey did there is Massey teamed up with the Democrat, with Roana from uh from Silicon Valley, right from the Bay Area. And those two guys, you got a Republican and a Dem, both bucking their parties to do the right thing. That's their duties. Uh standing up against these forever wars. I mean, and listen, there's a bunch of policies of Massey's that that I don't agree with, but but that's that's what you do. I mean, that's what I did in the Idaho legislature. I, you know, I served as a Democrat in the legislature. There were only nine of us in a chamber of 70. And so we were by definition bipartisan, and we'd find it, you know, and and things like with my far-right Republican colleagues, um, you know, we would disagree on maybe some of the social issues and things like that, but but when it came to monopolies and competition and breaking up that corruption, man, I we were lockstep with my far-right colleagues. And when it came to, you know, other issues that were important to the state, you know, I'd probably team up with my moderate Republicans, my my LDS buddies in the in the House. Um and I think this is what Massey's done such a good job of. Here's to the second part of your question. The fundamental problem with Massey is that he ran into a closed Republican primary, right? A low turnout primary. If Massey was an independent like the path I'm taking, dude, he would have coasted to run again. Because he's a he appeals across the political spectrum. Because he's focused on these just these core values, right? That as Americans we all agree on. Um I'd love to see Massey run again as an independent man. I think he's great. I I would uh, you know, he's in Congress, but uh, and I'm I'll be in the Senate, but he's the kind of guy I could totally work with.
SPEAKER_03I have a little bit of inside 2028, maybe. No, there we go. There we go. I'll tease, but keep tease myself now. But the the the the real point of of Massey though in watching him lose is him in the moment being able to feel and understand, and he probably had already thought about this, um the movement that's gonna come from after it. Because what you just hit right there is very, very important for people to understand. Because again, I was in Kentucky, I conducted an exit poll at one of the polling stations, and yeah, I was able to talk to just over 200 people. And though I wasn't allowed to talk to them before going in, some law, um, and as you mentioned, closed primary, meaning only people registered Republican were able to vote in that Republican primary vote, and the primary vote leads to who's gonna actually run in the general election for that seat. So the the election for Kentucky, the the fourth district of Kentucky, is Republican, it's been Republican since the 60s. So whoever won that is gonna get the seat, Ed Gallerine will be in Congress. So for Massey, what I got to see was I was able to talk to not just Republicans. People were going there to vote at the closed Democratic primary. And I didn't just say, okay, never mind when they said they were a Democrat, because here's how I set it up. They'd walk out, uh actually they would be walking in, I'd make sure to greet them, say, Hey, what's up? Thanks for coming out to vote, because I noticed there was a higher turnout of them actually talking to me when they came out, if I started before. Uh, and they would say, Hey, you know, quick question Who did you lean toward today, Thomas or Ed? I tried to make it as innocent as possible. And if they told me Thomas, um, the answer usually fell into one of the three categories uh war, the economy, or Epstein. When someone voted for Ed, interestingly enough, they couldn't or didn't bring up anything Ed necessarily stood for. Rather, they said they were voting against Massey or for what Trump wanted. Only four people said they were voting for Ed and had a policy to bring up, and one of those people didn't even pronounce his last name right. They put a K in it. So I don't think there was much emotional investment in going with Ed. But the interesting part is of the 22 Democrats I spoke with, 22 out of 22, I said, if they said they were Democrat, I said, well, just hear me. If it was an open primary and you got to vote, who would you have leaned toward? 22 out of 22, said Massey.
SPEAKER_01Yeah.
SPEAKER_03So you're right. And I hope and think he will run in some capacity as some kind of independent, as this America First Party. And would you say that that America first vibe is where you lean? Because it sounds like that when you talk about your policies.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I mean, I'm I'm up there. I mean, I I I think America First is it.
SPEAKER_03It shouldn't be it shouldn't be a yeah, it shouldn't be even like a viewpoint. It should just be what a congressman or anybody serving in government is.
SPEAKER_00You gotta put the country first. I mean, you you you deployed overseas, I've deployed overseas, right? You know, my my job was to protect the the Emirate of Kuwait. I mean, all right. Right. You were trying to clean up a mess in Afghanistan.
SPEAKER_02Protect the poppy fields, baby.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, yeah, right. Um, I mean, we we gotta put, and and I just you know, this was uh I I had a house party with some with some young families uh a week or two ago, and just talking to this this great young couple, they they've got their own gym, they've got two young girls, uh they can't afford health insurance for their family. So their daughters have no health insurance. And and you know, and and the wife, she was like, Todd, man, why are we spending billions of dollars in the Persian Gulf? I just want health insurance for my daughters. Right. Right? And it's not like anybody is asking for something outrageous. It's just this is this is kind of the deal, man. This is what we should be able to do to take care of ourselves, and we still can't do it. And this is what man, this is what's so broken. Agreed.
SPEAKER_03So assuming you win and you are now Congressman Achilles, which Senator. I'm sorry, God damn it, I did it again. It's all right, man. No, it's not. Which you are in Congress still. You are in Congress, absolutely. Yeah, it's my fault, giving myself excuses. So you're Senator Achilles, even better name. It sounds like you you fought as a leader in the in some form of Roman war. Tell me the one thing I can expect from you nationally, and one thing I can expect from you as an Idahoan. What's one thing that you're going to step against or push for that is gonna benefit the normal everyday American? And same question for someone from Idaho.
SPEAKER_00I mean, for for me, the most important thing in DC is we've got to break the grip of the two-party system and we've got to get Congress functioning again. We just got to get the wheels of government um uh rolling. Uh and this is term limits and age limits, this is money in elections, overturning Citizens United, it's replacing gerrymandering with proportional representation, it's it's being done with all this day trading crap that just undermines trust in Congress. Um get the building functioning again, and then I think you can start tackling the hard problems like the national debt. You know, this economy that's just totally rigged against um, you know, working Americans and entrepreneurs. Um the number one thing from Idaho, you know, it's there there's a bunch of things, you know. Um Idaho used to be kind of a middle-wage, low-cost state, and now we're a low-wage, high-cost state. And and there are too many people struggling in this state. Uh we we gotta fix that. And and you know, the key thing in Idaho is the public lands. The public lands are sacred, right? They just they belong to all of us. You know, there's there's in a capitalist system, there's only a few times when everybody's on equal footing, right? It's in basic training. It's when you're standing in an election booth, doesn't matter how much you got in your bank, your vote is got equal, uh, is worth equal amounts. And when you're on public lands, doesn't matter who the hell you are, we're all equal on public lands. And so taking care of public lands in Idaho is just essential to us as Idahoans, and and that's incredibly important um in terms of bringing things back to the state. So let's talk about the economy then.
SPEAKER_03So you bring up a situation that I think not just Idaho is feeling, but many states are feeling of going from yeah, we're not the largest economy in the country by far, but our people get by and the work is honest and and people seem to get along. And now, in a lot of states where a lot of more division is being felt, which even though I think it has a lot to do with the muscle velocity of media, also has to do with people making less money. People who can't afford their bills tend to be more irritable, taking it from experience in the past, right? So one of the key priorities, which I'm just gonna read off for everybody real quick, um, happens to do with what I do in the economy. So I'm gonna ask you directly about that. Um, but here are the main key points. It looks like there's about 10. Stop corruption in Congress. Number two, reduce the national debt. Three, protect and grow the middle class. Four, make housing affordable again. Hint, that's what I want to know about. Five, protect public lands, as you just said. Six, defend the Second Amendment. Seven, keep government out of our private lives. I like that one. Eight, restore the public internet. Have questions about that. Nine, end forever wars and support veterans. Hoorah. Ten, secure the border, and I lied. It's actually 11, strengthen public schools. Now, I've read through a lot of political websites. I'm running for Congress, I'm running for governor. I've, you know, even as far as when Trump initially ran and he was making promises around the economy and affordability and inflation, as someone who's tracking all I was like, all right, let's let's see if you can do it. Let's let's read through it. So I am a no stranger to reading buzzwords with no bagging. So let me ask you straight up how are you going to make housing affordable? How is that defined for you in terms of what affordable is? What would you see as a I reached my goal moment? What's the KPI? And and break down how that could happen.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, good good good question. And this is this is where we do need to be poking on these things. I mean, I for for me, I mean we we're one of the fastest growing states in the country, right? And and we particularly have a bunch of people coming in from California, Oregon, and Washington. And so that so supply is really tight in Idaho. So making housing affordable starts with making sure we can build, right? Fix supply and balance out the market. Um, I I'm not a fan of corporate ownership of single-family housing. I I think that uh that puts too many families into sort of an extractive renter relationship with with a you know a private equity owner. Um you know, the president had uh uh an executive order on that one to prohibit that, and I think that's I think that's a good idea. Um you know, in rental housing, let me step in on that one.
SPEAKER_03So the problem with that bill is I believe it is only applied to corporations that own, and I'm gonna mess up the number, it's about 215 homes to their name.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, there was a big number on it. You're right. I can't remember the number off my top book.
SPEAKER_03It's a large number. And and so there's that, and there's there's also not the divestment factor. So let me let me ask you a separate question from what you've already said. Um you already mentioned the supply dynamic. Delaware and Idaho are kind of akin in that problem where we're an affordable state, very tax-friendly state, and then people from DC, Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York are like, my home value just went up 50%. Let's go ahead and retire early, and they come to Delaware. So we're seeing a similar problem: low supply and home builders building only for the richie retirees that are coming in, not building for Delawareans. So how do you fix supply, in my opinion, not just banning corporate ownership of single-family homes? Todd, are you are you open to presenting legislation on not only stopping them from purchasing, but having a five-year divestment period in which they have to sell down to a certain amount of units, say 10, 20, generously 50, something that would actually bring supply to the market? And my last point to that one is uh, because I've presented this to a couple members of Congress, is also those homes are going to be the right kind of homes, more than likely. Whereas if we did pave a way for builders, not to say that building isn't also part of the solution, you're right, but they build profitable homes. And a lot of those profitable homes tend to be bigger just based off of how it works with pricing. So the way we can get affordable supply back to the market is getting rentals back to the market because those tend to be the smaller homes, the rentals, the row homes, the condominiums. Would you would you consider presenting legislation to not only ban but force a divestment uh from these corporations that have bludgeoned the housing market?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, no, I I think that's a great idea, Zach. Um and and it is all about putting putting supply back in and you know and forcing these by forcing these guys in, you know, they you remove their ability to kind of gain the market, keep supply tight, keep prices elevated. Um I mean I'm all in on that one. Uh you know, there's another element on housing that, you know, I brought a bill in the Idaho legislature on this, which is a prohibition on algorithmic price fixing, right? Which is a big deal in in rent in the rental housing market in apartment buildings. We've had a bunch of national property managers come in, buy up all these apartment buildings in the state, and and they're all using the same uh pricing algorithm company called RealPage. And so they share all their confidential information, not with each other, but they share it with this common pricing algorithm company. It crunches all the data, and then it tells everybody, hey, you know, uh property manager A, you can increase by $100 on a one bedroom, property manager B, you can do $150. And as a result, uh rental rates in the state of Idaho have increased three times faster than inflation since 2000. Right? That shit only happens when people are price fixing. That means the market isn't working. Um and when you do the math on this, and and it's a huge problem, there are about a hundred and uh about 150,000, nah, it's closer to 120,000 apartment buildings in the state of Idaho. When you model out rents are about 30% more expensive than what they would be if these guys weren't price fixing. So that inflation, that extra taking of what these property managers have done is $700 million from the Idaho economy from Idaho renters, right? That was the down payment on a house. That was, you know, the kids' college fund. That was a nice dinner out on a Friday night at a local restaurant. These guys are freaking price fixing and they're they're taking the wealth out of the state. They're ripping us off. And and you get that. And if I mean it used to be, at least certainly back in my day, you know, you'd rent for a couple years, you save up, and then you could, you know, you got enough for a down payment on a house. Now people are just getting absolutely extracted as renters, and they're they're even falling behind that, man. And I in my district in Poise, I've got a bunch of apartment buildings. And boy, Zach, I've I've had some really hard conversations about people saying, you know, they hit me for a hundred bucks last year, they hit me for a hundred bucks this year, if they hit me for another hundred bucks, I'm in my car. I mean, and and that's just wrong, man. It's just wrong. And we can't live in a society like that where you let these people just manipulate the market and extract from everybody. And we gotta we gotta fucking stand up for this stuff.
SPEAKER_03Amen, brother. Listen, I I think there's a there's a couple of solutions I've heard and played around with myself. I'd love to hear yours. I did hear banning of algorithmic uh price setting. Uh something that, of course, could be done nationally. There was even a lawsuit around that. I you're absolutely right that exists. But back to the affordable housing as a whole, think think of it this way, because I think there's two there's two issues here. One, rent should be a stepping stone toward ownership. Hey, no one should be forced to ever have to own. But to be frank with you, renting a home should not be setting you back from progressing in your financial life. Yes. Right? And that's exactly why I've been suggesting to many, especially young men, young single men under 30 across the nation, brother, live with your family if you can. Live pay them a little rent, buy the groceries, do the extra choice. Like they probably are cool with it, you know, as long as you you're not just a lazy bum. But you know, $2,200 a month to go after an apartment in in Dallas is insane. So I believe legislatively, there should be a limit based off the median income of an individual in Idaho or in that given state or in that given county, maybe, however it could be divided up, that the median income, that more than 30% of that median income cannot be charged in rent. And on an obviously an annual basis, so divided by 12, that you can only charge that set amount. Uh and if you're charging more for that, well, sorry, I guess it's not a good property for you. And guess what? The price on the sale will continue to drop until it makes sense. That's how investors work. If you simultaneously are kicking investors out of properties on a five-year basis, mixed with that pricing pressure on the rental side, you could possibly create some affordable housing in three to four years. I like where you're going, man. But but tell me more about the specifics of the economy, because we talked a little bit about housing. Go deeper on that if you'd like. But speak specific as if anybody who's all across the country, who is feeling this economy, who wants a change, just give me a few of the things you will stand for and or against that could put more dollars back in the pockets of Americans if you were to be elected.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I I mean I th I think the number one thing is we just need more competition. We need to return competition in the American economy, right? Which which levels the playing field with everybody. You know, we've we've got um, you know, Home Depot and Lowe's each have a third of the of the market in Idaho, and then you've got uh just a handful of mom and pops just barely hanging on. Um, you know, we've we've there it's impossible for these mom and pop shops to to compete with the big with the big box stores. Same thing in retail. Walmart, Target, all of these guys just crushing small retailers. And there's a lot of anti-competitive practices that we're doing too. I mean, Pepsi got busted for basically giving Walmart a deal where Pepsi guaranteed that every other retailer would have higher prices for Pepsi. But Walmart would always get the lowest, right? And that's I mean, that's just flat out anti-competitive. You you can't do that. Uh you know, and then and then we need competition on the labor market side. Um, you know, and things like non-compete agreements, right? I mean, listen, that's just modern-day indentured servitude. Yes. You know, and I had it, I had another bill in the Idaho legislature to ban non-compete agreements. Um because non-compete agreements, I mean, it used to be it's sort of at the executive level, and and and you know, that's that's a more balanced negotiation.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, you knew some proprietary, you knew some proprietary information or something like that. Yeah.
SPEAKER_00Yeah. I mean, that's that's fair. You could you could do that, and you can you can structure an executive agreement, but when you're flipping burgers and you've got a non-compete agreement, and maybe you're just working for a complete asshole at at this restaurant, and you want to go across the street to another one where it pays two bucks more an hour and that and the manager's great and gives you flexibility for your family, why? Right? Right why can't you do that? So non-compete agreements and and what we have, unfortunately, particularly in in rural Idaho, you don't have a lot of employers. So the employers have pricing power on salaries, and so they keep salaries low. Um you know, I I do think that we need to make sure that we've got competition in labor markets, and so people can people can move, they can, they can find a better job. Um, that helps the income side, and then you bring more competition on you know retail side so that prices come down. Um and I think this is how we get the economy going again. And I'd say the third one is unions. I'm a union member, part of the American Federation of Teachers. We've tied the hands for unions behind their back. We need to untime, we need to let these guys compete.
SPEAKER_03I love that. Anything that's undoing Reaganomics, I can stand for. So especially that last point. One thing you did mention earlier that I think people would be remiss to not hear you bring up in that top three, and again, I only asked for three, would be banning Citizens United. That's on your docket as well.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, that's that's fixing Congress.
SPEAKER_03Could I bring up one other thought as someone who you know might get that seat? You you mentioned the numbers earlier, said again, running as an independent, so you're basically running against two different opponents, it's not a one-on-one thing. Uh, two different main opponents. Of course, the list can be longer. But 90 days ago, you were trailing by 14 in comparison to the incumbents, and as of last week, you were only trailing by four. So you've made up 10 points, and you brought up this fact of when people understand your background that you're a you're a farm owner, you're a local guy, you're a veteran, you stand up against corporate corruption, you've served in the local government, you beat the incumbent by about 20 points. So let's say there's a good uh opportunity for you to get in there. Um I look at, for example, you mentioned um the economy. Okay, now I'm gonna get hypothetical tin foiley real quick, okay? Because I believe when you walk in in November that now let me pause real quick. When you get voted in in November, when do you actually take your seat? Is it January like the president? January. January. So January. You walk into that office, I'm gonna make an audacious claim that could be completely wrong, and I hope it is. But hypothetically speaking, I think the war in Iran is not gonna be over by then. So I think so. I think you're gonna be walking into quite the economy. Exxon's uh VP came out just two weeks ago and gave a claim that within two to three weeks, if nothing were to happen, and as of this point the strait is still 100% shut, uh the oil has a threat of going above $150 uh for Brent crude, which is too what two-thirds of the world utilizes. Um I think that that is not just gonna affect the gas pumps, it's already affecting PPI inflation for producers. Uh anything industrial shipping exporting is affected by fuel. We're already seeing as I'm sure in Idaho it's affecting local farmers the cost of urea and nitrogenous fertilizers to get their crops started, many saying they don't have enough. Uh so I so I think just based off supply, food prices are going up. And when food and fuel go up, everything tends to go up, including things like layoffs and when oil's going up, inflation tends to go up as well.
SPEAKER_00So, the numbers yesterday, right? Inflation popped above 4%.
SPEAKER_03Yes, and and 60% of that inflation uh was approximately was due to the energy sector. But the thing about it is that the ripple effect of the energy sector being more expensive is it's more expensive to produce import, export everything, uh for the most part. So, unlike when closing or housing go up, which housing did, uh, it doesn't really affect anything else on the table too dramatically. Oil does. So again, assuming that issue is still ongoing and not completely uh neutralized by that point, you're walking into a very rough economy. What are your thoughts on this war? Give me a brief summary. I have a couple follow-up questions in regards to said war, but let's stick on the economy right now. Um if you were to be walking into said economy and that war was still ongoing, uh, would you have any position as to whether or not uh we should continue in these uh endeavors in Iran? Uh do you believe we need to be protected from the almighty nuclear missile? Uh what are your thoughts overarchingly on this war? And then I'll give you a sub-question around the economy when you walk in.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, yeah. No, good good good question, man. Good good buildup on it. You you you know your stuff. Um Thanks, Mother. You gotta call my mom and let her know she's worried about it. Well, yeah, I'll call yours, you call mine, because she's perfect, perfect, easy. And uh, but I mean you if you're gonna if you're gonna deploy troops, you better have a damn plan to win, right? And have clear objectives. We don't have any clear objectives. You know, are we destroying all their missiles, 30% of their missiles? What are we doing? You know, are we completely destroying their nuclear uh bomb building capabilities, just setting it back? Uh you know, there's no defined objectives. And these guys have thrown out like 10 different objectives on this war. Um and you know the deal, right? You I mean, you went to Afghanistan where I mean every we were just kind of muddling along. Uh so And then Biden just ripped it all apart.
SPEAKER_02I'm like, dang on, it was all for nothing.
SPEAKER_00Exactly, right? And and a whole bunch of guys feel like you uh and and women. Um if you're gonna if you're gonna deploy troops, have a damn plan and have a plan to win. Um and we're not doing that. So we gotta hold the we gotta hold uh the administration accountable on this. Um I think Hegseth is is the worst Secretary of Defense in the history of the country. He has no business in that role. I want to see him out. Um I think things would get better with HegSeth not in there, somebody that can have an honest conversation with with the president to say, here's what's really going on, because I don't think he knows what's going on. Um and then Congress has to step in and and and assume its constitutional responsibilities on foreign affairs and overseas deployments. Um I the Iran wars, listen, they're an absolutely awful, evil regime, right? You know, they funded the guys that attacked Israel on October 7th. And I mean, a thousand people died in that terrorist attack. That was horrible. They've been, you know, they've they've overrun the Lebanese government. They've been just, you know, funding terrorism around the world. These guys are awful. We need to get rid of them. But don't just stumble into this without our allies and without a coherent plan. Uh and I think that's the mistake that this administration's made. And I I'm with you, man. I I don't know how we're gonna how we're gonna get ourselves out of this thing. Because the Iranians know they've got the upper hand.
SPEAKER_03So then economically speaking, does it seem like Iran is playing the economic card by simply staying put and not progressing in any form of negotiations because we're not allowing for Lebanon to be at peace, we're not unfreezing assets, we're not allowing for a toll, which are the main three that they want. So economically speaking, what do you think this this turns into for our country as you're walking in in January, and then what will you do to help it?
SPEAKER_00Um I mean, listen, if we continue to see inflation where it is, if oil continu I mean, if oil continues to go up, we're gonna see inflation come up, just exactly to your point, right? Because it's foundational on the on the economy. It it affects everything downstream.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, and oil embargo in the 70s preclude uh prelude the great savings and loan crisis.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, exactly. So I mean, you know, how do you if the economy you gotta watch out for stagflation, right?
SPEAKER_02Where the economy slows down, but it's which was which was exactly what that was savings and loan crisis, yeah, exactly.
SPEAKER_00Right. And it was it was painful to get ourselves out of that thing. Yes. Um, and it's it we're better off than any of our allies, like our our Asian partners, Japan, Korea, right? I mean, they're in big trouble because they are incredibly dependent on that oil. Um, they don't they don't have the alternatives that we do. Um and and these, you know, the reserves for those guys is getting dangerously low right now. So if if we're still talking about this in January, Japan's in a recession, Korea's in a recession, Indonesia's in a recession, Malaysia's in a recession, you just go, you know, all of those huge economies, that's gonna um uh uh uh ricochet out to us. Um I don't know, man. It's it's it's scary to think about it that this is, you know, this is one of the biggest uh unforced errors I think the country's ever done and where it goes and and how we keep the economy going. Um I I I don't have a good answer for you because I I think there's just a bunch of variables there.
SPEAKER_03Thank you for not spitballing one, and I appreciate that. I appreciate that. So then economically speaking, I think some listeners would feel remiss if I didn't ask why is it that we're going through all these domestic economic problems at the behest of a foreign problem, right? And these economic issues domestically are not even new due to this foreign problem. Uh they predated it. The greedflation post-COVID, the money printing pro uh post-GFC of 2008 are really what's set in stone with the money printing and the spending deficits to upkeep endless wars has gotten us to this point, right?
SPEAKER_01Yeah.
SPEAKER_03So why are we funding any war and or country outside of America? And would you stand against any funding going out to Israel or any of our quote unquote allies so that our money can go back into infrastructure of our own country?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I mean, I I I I think you you have allies where the investment in an ally has a return on that investment that makes life better in the U.S., right? So NATO, I'd say, is, you know, NATO worked. NATO stabilized the economy. We had the fastest growing economies in the world as a result of NATO. And and everybody, people got wealthier. Um so so I I I guess I'm not like cut it all off, but just you know, we got to get involved here, we got to get involved there. Um, and doing it without any of our allies, without spreading the burden and the risk. Uh it's just we're just shooting ourselves in our foot, in in our foot.
SPEAKER_03Uh so where would the return on investment come in for you? Uh like let's let's just target Israel, make it easy. Um, what what would be the return on investment you'd see from the about 3. I think 6 billion that we spend on them yearly? And you know, I'll I'll just say we're in this war on behest of Israel. Uh it was in protection of them. So I also attach the $50 billion and growing tab of this war to them. Uh why not cut it all off? And what is the return on investment with a country like Israel?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I I I mean, I think we're we're spending way too much there. I mean, they they are the only democracy in the region. I I think that that has value to us. We we want to see more democracies around the world. Um, but we're spending way too much. We're letting these guys engage in war crimes. Um and it, you know, the Netanyahu government is is doing so much damage to uh to Israelis, and I think that's the government needs to change. Um I I you know I don't think we want to kick Israel to the curb. I don't think that benefits us. I don't think it benefits the region. And if the region's unstable, um then that hurts us. But right now, you know, the NetNet Yahoo government is the one that's destabilizing the region.
SPEAKER_03Um to push back on that, you probably have some military knowledge. You know, we installed a leader in Afghanistan in the 70s, and we destabilized them to be able to do so. Um we haven't reaped any rewards from that. Uh why are we the ones called to have a hundred plus bases in the Middle East to be the security guard to defend us Israel? And you you could say democracy, but I mean there's plenty of democracies and free countries that are around the world. Uh, you know, but I won't get flagged on TikTok if I say, hey, let's stop sending money to Iceland. No one no one's gonna give a shit. Uh yeah. But like back to the question on the return on investment. Is there a return on investment that you see outside of even the war? The the the money spend that comes back into defense contractors like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, like, do you see the return?
SPEAKER_00No, and and I think we're We we've gotta we've gotta rationalize all this, all the bases there. I mean, like when I first deployed to Kuwait in the early nineties, I mean there was just you know, there was like a brigade's worth of equipment that was just sitting there at this, you know, at this big warehouse facility. And that was it, right? And and that was enough of a turn. It was cheap. You know, we'd fly in, we'd jump on the gear, we'd go up to the Iraqi border, and and you know, we we kept things stamped down. And you look at it now with with all the bases. I mean, we we do we gotta rationalize this. I think we're we're trying to be too too much to too many people. Um I mean, and then you look at like the deal we did with the Qataris. Right? So we we're giving the Qataris training resources in an Air Force base in southern Idaho. These guys are the biggest bribers in Washington, D.C. And they bribed our way to get their own training facility in Idaho. Um and like we're rewarding bad behavior by by doing stuff like this.
SPEAKER_03Uh yes. But with that, at the very least, I can see a return on investment, though they do enrich themselves, like for example, this executive branch right now, the Trump administration. Uh pretty much everybody who's donated to this ballroom being built has received some form of contract or subsidy. Uh, or, you know, you could look at the executive criminals, the white-collar criminals that have received so many different uh pardons, executive pardons. And Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, yes, there's a lot of investment that goes into donations to the executive branch, but they also are one of the largest investors into our stock market. Uh, and though many would love to see that stock market not be so bubbled and inflated, at least I could see a tangible return on some kind of investment. Uh, I don't see that with Israel. And I'll I'll I'll bring up another question that isn't really just economic. So there's this book called The 48 Laws of Power. I have it right here.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_03I specifically keep it here because you know, people hate it. People hate it because it's essentially a book on manipulation and and war criminals and and um some of my colleagues in the legislature swore by that book. And con men and just the scum who all want to benefit for themselves off the backs of dark psychology. But know your enemy better than yourself. If you don't want to be conned by these evil people out there, understand how they operate. And I think it's like law, somewhere like 8 to 11. It talks about this power dynamic tool that you can have by allowing yourself to be close to the power that you want. Um, that who you associate with eventually can bring you up or bring you down in like terms of social status. An easy example is if you smoke uh hang out with the the crew in the alley smoking cigarettes every day versus you're hanging out with the prince of the royal family every day on the golf course, just the initial perception of who you are and who you're connected to and how valuable you are uh to them is an immediately changed. Uh so when I think of something like that kind of law, honestly, Israel comes to mind first. They seem to keep their relationship with us to somehow keep their branding clean from actually walking through a Holocaust-akin genocide and and utilizing our media to get Americans to to back a democracy that's been bred on uh assassinations and murder and and and sexual assault and crimes that I can't even mention for the sake of words on algorithms. Um I don't see the world looking at us in a very bright light at this moment. I don't see many countries that look at America and think that we are the angel, we are the world's superpower, superhero, that maybe at one point we did. Maybe at one point we did hold that brand, but it definitely doesn't feel like we do, and the bond market speaks to that. So I believe that part of the reason for that, not just economically, but psychology, is due to our friendship, allyship, akinment with Israel. We are attached to them at the hip, whether it's a United Nations vote or a war. And I think the world is tired of it. And I, you know, am tired of it. Yeah. What what keeps and and not to say you're dancing around it, but what keeps you from saying, no, we cannot fund this country anymore? What what keeps you from saying that?
SPEAKER_00I I I I it's it's it's it's a good question. I I think the unintended consequences are are are worse than what we're doing right now. Now that that that being said, could you label a couple of those? Um Yeah, I mean i if if we if we if if the region falls apart and the region falls into into conflict, then we're set then then we're worse off than where we are. Um and and I guess I I I take a little bit of a historical perspective on this. And and and I may be I may be dipping into history a little too much, but I mean it was always you know supporting the Israeli state against just constant attacks by the Arab states around it was was a good decision, right? Um it helped stabilize things, it promoted democracy, and it but that that was a very different Israeli government than what we're seeing right now. And I think that's that's the crux of the of the problem. Um we're also a very different country ourselves than where we were 30 or 40 years ago. And I think that that's that's the piece we we gotta get back on track because the the Netanyahu government has done so much damage, they have destabilized a region where it used to be a stabilizing factor. And that's costing us, and then we're funding it. This is I think what we have to what we have to stop, what we have to cut off. We have to hold these guys accountable. Um, because it's it's it's setting us back to to your point, Zach. I I I do think you know, and I've worked with Israelis and and and know lots of um uh lots of Israelis and companies and all that stuff there for my days in the tech sector. It's it's not all bad there, but the government that's been in control and the aggressiveness and and the war crimes that have happened are unacceptable. And this is what has to stop. Uh and we as a country need to hold them accountable, and that's not happening either. Well, to your first, I'm not trying to be nuanced on this, but I just I I Well, no, no, I hear you.
SPEAKER_03To your to your first point, you you mentioned like if if we don't want a destabilized Middle East, you know, we are a transnational economy, so every other country, at least major ones, being stable is good for a debt-based consumer economy. So yeah. Um but we're the ones that caused this war. I know. So it was it it was stable prior to, and as you mentioned earlier, you know, it seems like we've had 10 different goals. The the bar of victory continues to get lower and lower to the point we're just at this moment where we just want to get back to where we were before all of this.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I know. I know. So after all of this stuff, and we're just trying to get back to where we were before.
SPEAKER_03And so you meant you mention accountability. I completely agree with you. So when war crimes are being carried out, and they've, you know, you can talk about modern day for sure. Uh you could talk about October 7th, and you're right. Uh many hundreds of people died. Uh, some reports even saying thousands brutally in in just a day. Uh but a lot of the funding also for Hamas came directly from Qatar via Bibi Netanyahu's billion dollars in cash. So he was controlling the height of the flame and giving them the opportunity to create these tunnel systems and weaponry. I mean, hell, they don't have an airport or a shipping port. They can't go across their own borders. How are they getting this stuff in? It's got to be smuggled. They got all the border controlled. So how is it getting in? Um I I I would say, honestly, the accountability at this point should be full cutoff. Because I do look into the history as well. And I guess I don't see the same picture. Maybe we don't see the same picture because I look at the King uh the King David Hotel bombing, uh, the the pre-Massad intelligence bombing uh done. I I look at the Nakba, uh, I look at the pre-1967 border agreement, uh I look at the uh dissolving relationship that happened uh in those states from from Clinton into Bush into Obama. I see that BB, you know, yes, he is tyrannical, but I'd argue also the people sitting beside him and next to him or maybe next in line are worse and and have even more staunch and aggressive Zionistic viewpoints. I do want to state that again, I I don't have anything against Jewish people, Judaism, Israelis, any human. We all have a heart, arteries, breathe oxygen, got a weird meat computer that runs on water and electric between our ears. Like we're all just on a floating marble in space. All a better reason for why in the hell are we watching a f uh like I imagine it's like if I if I was supplying the rent for a buddy of mine. Okay, a buddy of mine, he's a good friend, he's always been a good ally, but he's down on his luck. Okay, he's just he's he's had a dirty past. But let's look at it. And you're helping him out. Yes, let's look past that. He's had a dirty past. I got a spot, you got rentals, you know, I'll cut you 200 down on rent, maybe even 500 on rent, so you can get back on your feet. Okay, and you do that for four, five, six, seven months, and then you learn that he's been beating his wife in your apartment. And then you find out next month he did it again. And then you find over the next months he's been cheating, sexually assaulting, doing all this. Are you still gonna be cutting him like a deal on his rent? Which is what I'm saying. I would argue you wouldn't go I would argue you wouldn't go straight to even going the full rent. You would just say, get out of my apartment. I am I'm calling the police. So that that's where I view this relationship with Israel. At what point do we say no?
SPEAKER_00Yeah. And and and I I mean we're we're well past that, right? Agreed. Fully agreed. Fully agreed. And and I and I think this to some degree this gets back to what's the fundamental problem in Congress right now is you can't tell the difference between a corporatist Democrat, a corporatist Republican. Um, and and they're not holding allies accountable for the wrong things they're doing. And we should be holding them accountable. We should kick them out of the apartment building if we've been helping them out on their rent, right? I mean, that's a great analogy, Zach. And we gotta do that. And I think when we threaten to do that, guess what's gonna happen? They're gonna clean their shit up because they know they can't get away with it anymore. And maybe that's how we get you know these allies back on track.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, because they have a large tech sector. Their economy's not gonna die. I mean, they don't produce any diamonds or have any diamond mines, but they export the most from their slave labor in Africa, but that's all a discussion. So let's shift this toward our toward our ending runway here, our final stretch. Let's get back to Idahoans, shall we?
SPEAKER_00Amen.
SPEAKER_03Take the pressure off. So when it comes to, again, my biggest focus and one of the biggest things I think that this world, or I'm sorry, country needs is a more stable economy, a more fair economy, an economy where wages match cost of living. So, in that supply-demand relationship between what people make and what people have to pay, which do you think you'll have a stronger push for or ability to make change for in a positive direction, if and when you were to make it to Senate? Is it to somehow increase wages and increase uh corporations' likelihood to pay their people? Or is it, I'm gonna find a way to get corporate greed out of certain sectors to maybe lower prices, cause some deflation in some sectors?
SPEAKER_00You know, I I I think Zach, you've got to look on both sides of the ledger. Right? Because I mean, if if you want to make a company more profitable and you increase revenues but expenses increase with it, then you haven't accomplished anything. You know, so so I I think we've got to look at at both sides and do it in parallel. Um I mean we've we've we've got to bring competition back to the American economy, you know, particularly in the digital economy. You know the the two most concentrated sectors in the U.S. economy are tech and ag.
unknownRight?
SPEAKER_0085% of the beef in this company is processed by four meat packers who've constantly have been busted for colluding. 72% of the company.
SPEAKER_03I loved your 40 and slip right there of calling our country a company, by the way.
SPEAKER_00Oh, uh yes, sorry. You know what I meant. Um I didn't know. What's the other one in ag? So 72% of the seed is controlled by two companies. Right? And you just go down through through the ag economy, and these, you know, these poor family farmers, if they don't get big, they're out. They just can't compete anymore. So now that drives these big industrial farms, industrial dairies. Um, and and you know, the and it just it concentrates what happens, it hollows out our small towns in Idaho. So, so competition number one, break up these monopolies, break up these, these, these oligopolies, and get some get some competition, level a playing field for family businesses, family farms, um, and then remove all of these things that have been used over the last 20 or 30 years to depress wages, like non-compete agreements.
SPEAKER_03Fair. Okay. What other are there other wage suppressing yeah, take it, take you're good. At a cough earlier. Are there any other wage suppressing uh roadblocks and or wage increasing legislation that you'd have in mind?
SPEAKER_00Well, I mean, I think we've got to take a hard look at the minimum wage. You know, it's it's 725 in our state. If you if you look at other states that have raised the minimum wage, it it has not had a dramatic impact on um on the cost of goods. Everyone's like, oh, well, if I gotta pay a livable wage, you know, I gotta charge three times as much for the hamburger. The the data shows that that's actually not the case, particularly in really low-wage states. Um, you don't see any any impact. Um, you know, another thing that just drives me absolutely frickin' nuts is share buybacks. There you go. Now you're talking about language. You're you're taking you're taking the profits of a company and you're giving it back to the institutional investors. And it here here's here's an example on this one. So I was out in eastern Idaho, this was a couple months ago, went to a Sinclair station to gas up late at night, and it was just me and the store manager in there. She's about my age. Uh she'd been managing convenience stores for over 10 years. She was earning 19 bucks an hour, a livable wage in that part of the state in Idaho is 23, uh, no health care. Uh, she was working until midnight. It was clear she hadn't had a chance to see a dentist in I don't know how long. Um It was clear? I I mean, just you know and it's unfortunate, man, because you know it costs money to go see.
SPEAKER_02It was funny the way you said that.
SPEAKER_00Yeah. Um but it's it it's just indicative of of this people that have just been kept down. And and so, you know, the next morning I went to look at Sinclair's, you know, last annual report. So they basically, you know, they made, I think, 27, 28 billion dollars of revenue. They had a billion dollars of net income, and they spent that billion dollars of net income on share buybacks. Right? And if you just take that that billion dollars of net income and you divide it by every Sinclair employee, it would have been the equivalent of maybe an extra five, six thousand dollars a year for every one of those employees. That would have made the difference for her, that would have moved her up into uh into a livable wage. And that's just absolute bullshit, Zach. Yeah, you're you're stealing for the people that did the work.
SPEAKER_03It is, it is, and the stock buybacks I think the national number for the S P 500 is somewhere between 70 and 80 percent of net profit is utilized toward stock buybacks, and the numbers even higher when you involve interest uh payout investor payouts and dividends, closer to 90 percent. So we're talking nine out of ten dollars aren't going back into infrastructure, aren't going back into retirement plans, aren't going back into uh just work life. Uh it's just the people, right? Or at the very least, just paying the people, right? I think I think everybody in the nation, or at least a great majority, would take a pay increase rather than a new kitchen in their workplace. So yeah, I think you're right there.
SPEAKER_00Okay. So I mean, that's a that's a good statue got. I I haven't heard that. I I I think in 2025, share by peaked over a trillion dollars, highest it's ever been.
SPEAKER_03And it makes sense if you're a company, because because of the Dodge v. Ford case, you are which I believe is 1917, uh, the Dodge brothers versus Henry Ford, when the Dodge brothers were losing employees to the Ford Corp uh Ford Company because the Ford company was paying their people better, they bought some of the Ford share, sued Ford, and said, by you paying your employees more, you are doing a disservice to your shareholder. And the court ruled in favor of the Dodge brothers, stating that yes, you have to favor the shareholder. And then you get into the Powell memo of 71, and then you get, you know, hey, corporations, we want you to get more involved in in politics. And then you get Citizens United, of course, that just unweaves the whole ball in one in one foul stroke of a pen to allow the bigger.
SPEAKER_00But I mean there's no taxes on their share buybacks, too.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, right. Exactly. Yeah, there's no there's no uh taxes. And the there's also no downside for them because there it's of benefit to their shareholder. And of course, that entire executive board, that entire C-suite owns a shit ton of the stocks because they'll pay with those stock buybacks, they'll just divvy them off as bonuses to the executive board. So they want to see it go up too. So now you have an entire group of people who are behind all of the decision making for an S P 500 company saying, okay, it benefits us and it benefits our shareholders.
SPEAKER_00Um yeah, let's do it. I mean, I I actually we've we've drafted a bill which uh would would significantly tax share buybacks if the CEO to average worker ratio is is beyond you know some some certain threshold. So if these guys are using their share buybacks to compensate themselves and you know leave their employees living on the edge, we're gonna tax a bejesus out of you for that. And we're gonna just make that whole path just economically unviable. So, and using the same Powell Memo shareholder return stuff, we'll we'll make that we'll eliminate that shareholder return to do share buybacks if you're using it at the expense of your employees. And of course, what happens with these employees? Right? They still fall in the social safety net. So me and all the other Idaho taxpayers are are are helping this poor woman out. It's just another form of corporate socialism.
SPEAKER_03Yes. Yes, a hundred percent. A hundred percent. Todd, I want to hand you the the microphone. Give me your 60 second. Anyone in Idaho that has the ability to potentially vote for you come November, let them know why they should come out, what you stand for, and then I'll last uh end us with some lightning questions. All right.
SPEAKER_00All right, let's do it, man. All right, 60 seconds. Um you know, I think I this is the first time in a generation of Idaho we got an opportunity to vote for somebody that's actually gonna put Idaho first rather than rather than the party. Uh and somebody with real conservative values, like breaking up monopolies, like holding corporations accountable, uh, you know, like protecting individual rights of how Idahoans want to live. Um these guys may call themselves a Republican, but there's nothing conservative about their values. Uh, and this is how we we pull the state back and we return to an Idaho in which we, you know, the American dream is still an opportunity and and we take care of each other.
SPEAKER_03Hell yeah, brother. All right, you ready? Go. Number one, if you were elected into office, would you be dedicated to creating a national first-time home buyer program? Oh, hell yeah. Would you find or add trans or I'm sorry, end or add transparency to the Federal Reserve? Transparency is always good. Would you create age limits and term limits for members of Congress?
SPEAKER_00Damn straight.
SPEAKER_03Would you end insider trading for members of Congress?
SPEAKER_00Oh, dude, come on. When Wall Street has higher ethical standards on insider trading than Congress, you know we're in a bad place.
SPEAKER_03Will you end corporate lobbying and PAC funding to members of Congress?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I think the corporate lobbying's harder, but pack funding, yes. Get corporate PACs, we gotta get rid of them.
SPEAKER_03Would you end the carried interest loophole that private equity funds live off of? Yeah, absolutely. Would you end all funding to Israel? No. Will you take any super PAC money yourself? No. Will you ban Citizens United? Yes. Perfect.
unknownMr.
SPEAKER_03Achilles, anything you want to leave off? I do hope at one point I get to call you Senator. Uh I love that you're running in the independent party. I think at the end of the day, um there's lots of points that can be discussed, but the purpose of it all in Congress is to have discussion, is to have debate, is to have debate without hate or political uh, or I should say, party affiliation driving your decision making, just being a rubber stamp. I believe if we got 535 members that weren't rubber stamps for their parties and sought Americans first and not profit first, we'd be a better country. Uh and being in the Senate, only 100, so you have less to fight.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, yeah. No, you're spot on, Zach. And listen, I enjoyed the conversation, man. I'm I'm super impressed with your uh with your control of the facts. Um, you know, and these these kind of conversations, you know, given our corporate media in America right now, these kind of conversations are how we um how we inform the country and how we because if if people don't know what's going on, uh we're in an even deeper world of hurt. So I appreciate all your work on this stuff, man.
SPEAKER_03Appreciate you, brother. Best of luck. We'll stay in contact and I'm gonna go hit the M record button. Don't go anywhere.