JIMMY KIMMEL IS BACK, Disney Backed Down & Trump’s Charlie Kirk Memorial Speech Exposed Whats Next
PDS Published 09/22/2025
-
Charlie Kirk is being hailed as a martyr for both his country and his faith;
conservative Christianity is becoming an even more defining feature of Republican politics,
and Donald Trump has no intention of backing down.
These were some of the takeaways from the massive memorial service held yesterday honoring Kirk almost two weeks after he was killed.
Right, you had tens of thousands of people gathering in and around State Farm Stadium in Arizona.
Including at least 20 members of the Trump administration – many of whom were given speaking slots.
As well as several current and former Republican lawmakers – including House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senator Ted Cruz, and former Congressman Matt Gaetz.
You also conservative commentators and far-right influencers like Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, and Laura Loomer in attendance, as well as Kyle Rittenhouse.
Who became something of an icon among co nservatives after shooting three people – killing two of them – during unrest in Wisconsin in 2020 and being acquitted in 2021.
You also had Elon Musk – who actually sat next to Trump for part of the service – with the two of them seen shaking hands and chatting amiably (BROLL: 1:04).
This as it’s only been a few months since their very public falling out that involved Musk insinuating that Trump is implicated in the Epstein files.
Although, now, you had Musk posting a photo of them at the service with the caption: “For Charlie.”
But with all that, the memorial began with Kirk’s friends speaking about him and his work – as well as key members of his Turning Point USA discussing what’s next for the organization.
With one top official saying:
“We’re going to make [it] so big that it reaches you in heaven.”
And to that point, according to Turning Point, the organization has received more than 62,000 requests since Kirk’s death from students across the country to either start a chapter or get involved with an existing chapter – while donations are also reportedly pouring in.
But moving on, you also had a number of religious figures speaking as well as Christian musicians performing.
And what’s been noted by a lot of people is how we seemingly saw religion and politics come together in remarks by Trump administration officials.
With JD Vance, for example, explicitly calling Kirk both a “hero to the United States of America” and “a martyr for the Christian faith.”
Although, notably there, authorities have not presented evidence that Kirk’s religion played any role in his death.
And so you have people saying this event showed the extent to which conservative Christianity – and even Christian Nationalism – is making its way into the mainstream in the Republican party.
Right, you also had War Secretary Pete Hegseth, of course, talking about this like war:
“Over time, he realized, like so many of us have, that this is not a political war, it’s not even a cultural war, it’s a spiritual war.” (1:47-1:56)
And then you even had RFK comparing Kirk to Jesus:
“Christ died at 33 years old. But he changed the trajectory of history. Charlie died at 31 years old, but because he had surrendered, he also now has changed the trajectory of history.” (0:48-1:05)
And beyond that, you had White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller repeatedly referring to the “enemies” they were facing it and also framing the situation as a fight between good and evil:
“The light will defeat the dark. We will prevail over the forces of wickedness and evil. They cannot imagine what they have awakened. They cannot conceive of the army that they have arisen in all of us.”
“And to those trying to incite violence against us, those trying to foment hatred against us, what do you have? You have nothing. You are nothing. You are wickedness… hatred” (2:50-3:08, 3:14-3:31)
Outside of the Trump administration, you had Tucker Carlson – who has entertained the conspiracy theory that Israel killed Kirk – invoking religion in a way that has been criticized as antisemitic:
“It actually reminds me of my favorite story ever. So, it's about 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem and Jesus shows up and he starts talking about the people in power and he starts doing the worst thing that you can do, which is telling the truth about people. And they hate it and they just go bonkers. They hate it and they become obsessed with making him stop. This guy's got to stop talking. We've got to shut this guy up. And I can just sort of picture the scene in a lamp lit room with a bunch of guys sitting around eating hummus thinking about what do we do about this guy telling the truth about us. We must make him stop talking. And there's always one guy with the bright idea. And I could just hear him say, ‘I've got an idea. Why don't we just kill him? That'll shut him up. That'll fix the problem. It doesn’t work that way.” (0:43-1:39)
And with that, you had many people reacting that Carlson just espoused what is considered a common antisemitic trope that the Jews are responsible for killing Jesus.
With the Republicans against Trump account writing on X:
“Tucker isn’t even trying to hide his vile antisemitism.”
But with all that, it eventually came time for Charlie’s wife Erika to speak, and you had her celebrating what she called the inspiration Kirk’s murder had given to his supporters to embrace Christianity –
Although also seemingly to draw a contrast with the mass protests that have taken place over racial justice and police brutality:
“After Charlie's assassination, we didn't see violence. We didn't see rioting. We didn't see revolution. Instead, we saw what my husband always prayed he would see in this country. We saw revival. [Applause] This past week, we saw people open a Bible for the first time in a decade. We saw people pray for the first time since they were children. We saw people go to a church service for the first time in their entire lives.” (9:06-10:06)
But with all that, what’s been seen as one of the most powerful moments of the whole thing is when you had Erika saying she forgave the man accused of killing her husband:
“My husband, Charlie, he wanted to save young men just like the one who took his life.” (22:12-22:25)
“That young man, I forgive him.” (23:06-23:12)
“The answer to hate is not hate. The answer we know from the Gospel is love, and always love, love for our enemies and love for those who persecute us.” (24:04-24:19)
But notably, of course, Trump, who spoke afterwards? He did not agree with Erika.
“Shortly before Charlie arrived on campus the day he was assassinated, a staff member texted him that there were many critics and students who were opposed to his views and rather strenuously in the crowd, and that actually made him feel good because he he wanted to convince them. He understood. He really did. He understood what was right, and he was right about that. A lot of it was based on common sense, by the way, Charlie wrote back to the staff member saying, I'm not here to fight them. I want to know them and love them, and I want to reach them and try and lead them into a great way of life in our country. In that private moment, on his dying day, we find everything we need to know about who Charlie Kirk truly was. He was a missionary with a noble spirit and a great, great purpose. He did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry. I am sorry, Erika. But now Erika can talk to me and the whole group and maybe they can convince me that that's not right. But I can't stand my opponent.” (23:22-24:40)
And with that, Trump repeated his claim that political violence “comes largely from the left” and that left-wing protesters are often “paid agitators” – saying again his administration would be looking into it:
“The Department of Justice is also investigating networks of radical left maniacs who fund organized fuel and perpetrate political violence and we think we know who many of them are.” (37:10-37:24)
And with that, Trump’s speech at times sounded more like a campaign speech than a eulogy.
He spent several minutes talking about his administration’s efforts to reduce autism rates and his decision to deploy the National Guard and federal agents to Washington.
And he actually claimed Kirk had urged him to dispatch federal troops to Chicago:
“One of the last things he said to me was ‘Please sir, save Chicago’. And we’re going to do that, we’re going to save Chicago from horrible crime.” (9:41-9:50)
But with all that, Trump’s comments about “hating” his opponent are definitely drawing the most attention.
One, of course, because they went against what Erika Kirk herself said and what she claimed her husband believed.
And two, because they're not just words, they’re backed up by what Trump has done and continues to do.
With another of the big things this weekend being directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to do more to prosecute his political enemies –
Including former FBI director James Comey, Senator Adam Schiff, and New York Attorney General Leticia James.
And this isn’t like “according to anonymous sources.”
Right, you had him writing on social media:
“Pam: I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, ‘same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam “Shifty” Schiff, Leticia??? They’re all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done.’”
“We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”
And connected to that, you also had him complaining about the now former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Erik Siebert (See-bert), calling him “A Woke RINO, who was never going to do his job.” – and adding:
“He even lied to the media and said he quit, and that we had no case. No, I fired him, and there is a GREAT CASE, and many lawyers, and legal pundits, say so.”
And with that, Siebert technically resigned on Friday, although clearly with little choice in the matter.
And that’s reportedly because his district is actually the one investigating Letitia James and James Comey, but he wouldn’t bring charges against them without sufficient evidence.
And in fact, similarly, administration officials have reportedly ramped up pressure against the U.S. attorney in Maryland: Kelly O. Hayes.
Right, she’s a career prosecutor who has spent more than a decade in that office and she’s leading inquiries into Schiff as well as Trump’s former national security adviser turned critic John Bolton. []
And Hayes has also reportedly indicated that she wouldn’t bring charges unless her team discovered evidence to support them. []
Right, which, of course, is what prosecutors are supposed to do.
But we'll have to see what happens.
Hayes still has her job for now.
And to take Siebert’s place, he’s recommending an attorney who was on his personal legal team and has never been a prosecutor.
Right, so ultimately, you just have Trump taking his personalization and politicization of the justice department to another level, and we’ll have to see where this goes, especially as he seemingly feels empowered to be even more bold following Charlie Kirk’s death.
-
Jimmy Kimmel has some prominent right wing figures in his corner now.
Well, maybe not in his corner, but at least in the corner of free speech.
Right, after Disney and ABC pulled him off the air last week, there was a ton of discourse about government censorship because ahead of the suspension, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr had suggested he might take regulatory action against ABC over comments Kimmel made about Charlie Kirk’s death.[]
A lot of that criticism was coming from people on the left upset that the Trump administration was wielding power in this way and that ABC so quickly caved to it.
Meanwhile, plenty of MAGA voices cheered the decision on, classifying it as simply a corporate move on ABC’s part.
But in recent days, some on that side of the aisle have vocalized concern here, including Senator Ted Cruz.
With him saying that while he is personally glad to see Kimmel unemployed and even thinks he deserved it, he is not happy about the FCC’s role in this mess.
“Look, I like Brendan Carr. He’s a good guy, he’s the chairman of the FCC, I work closely with him, but what he said there is dangerous as hell.” (22:23-22:35)
“He says, ‘we can do this the easy way or we can do this the hard way.’ And I gotta say, that’s right out of ‘Goodfellas.’ That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, ‘Nice bar you have here. It’d be a shame if something happened to it.'” (23:36-23:41)
“I think it is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying, ‘We’re going to decide what speech we like and what we don’t, and we’re going to threaten to take you off air if we don’t like what you’re saying.’ And it might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel. But when it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it.”(25:41-26:05)
And he was not alone, the likes of Ben Shapiro has also fallen in the camp of, if the FCC can do this to a liberal voice under the Trump administration, this is a two-way street where Democrats can use this against conservatives once in power.
“I do not like that the FCC muddied the waters here. I think it is bad politics and I think it is bad policy.” (22:00-22:06)
“The FCC should not be threatening action against ABC or its affiliates or Disney based on Jimmy Kimmel being a jackass.” (19:16-19:24)
“Because one day the shoe will be on the other foot.” (19:49-19:51)
So we will have to see if any voices on that side grow louder, if that sways the conversation at all.
With this all happening as the sort of usual suspects are still taking a stand against ABC and Trump amid all this fallout.
Just this morning, hundreds of Hollywood figures teamed up with the ACLU to sign a letter defending free speech, writing that:
“In an attempt to silence its critics, our government has resorted to threatening the livelihoods of journalists, talk show hosts, artists, creatives, and entertainers across the board. This runs counter to the values our nation was built upon, and our Constitution guarantees.”
“We know this moment is bigger than us and our industry.”
And the people attached there include Tom Hanks, Selena Gomez, Meryl Streep, Lin-Manuel Miranda, and hundreds more.
On the political front, local outlets in New York reported that Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani pulled a planned town hall with WABC.
With him telling AM-NY:
“ABC pulled Jimmy Kimmel off the air after the FCC sought to pressure them. The message that it sends to each and every American across this country is a message the First Amendment is no longer a right that can be counted on, but rather that it is government which will determine what should and should not be discussed, what can and cannot be spoken. And we cannot normalize these kinds of acts nor offenses. These must be the basis upon which we act.”
So obviously this story is going nowhere, we will have to see what comes next, but in the meantime I would love to know your thoughts here.
-
The Fox Corporation might be getting a slice of TikTok.
That is what Trump just said during an interview with who else but Fox News yesterday, where he discussed the deal to get U.S. ownership of the app:
“I hate to tell you this, a man named Lachlan is involved. Do you know who Lachlan is? That’s a very unusual name. Lachlan Murdoch?...Mr. Murdoch, we call him…You call him, and Rupert is gonna be in the group, I think they are gonna be in the group. A couple of others. Really great people, really prominent people. And they’re also American patriots. They love this country, so I think they are going to do a really good job.” (9:29-9:53)
And there, Trump was talking about the bosses of the Fox media empire.
If the Murdochs were to invest in the app, reports say they would do it via the Fox Corporation, not as individuals. []
Though Trump did not say how much the deal was worth or the extent of their role.
And for a quick recap here, this is all the result of Congress last year passing a bill that would ban TikTok unless it sold its U.S. operations, and Trump kept delaying it until last week when learned a deal had apparently been reached. []
We previously learned that a private equity and a venture capital firm were part of the group of U.S. investors.
And yesterday Trump also noted that one of his supporters, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, as well as Michael Dell, the CEO of Dell Technologies, are among the list of potential investors, too.
And while there is still a lot we don’t know, right now it looks like for American users, the TikTok algorithm would run through Oracle.
Right, TikTok would reportedly lease its algorithm to the group of American owners, and then Oracle would rebuild it.
And when all is said and done, if this all goes to plan, this U.S. group will own 80% of TikTok’s U.S. business, and ByteDance’s ownership will go to a little less than 20%.
Previous reports suggested that U.S. users would need to download a new app for this plan, but it seems like that might not be the case and we can stay right on TikTok as we know it.[]
And obviously, you do have some concerned that these investors could have the ability to influence content on the app now.[]
Which has outraged some people, who have noted that Elon Musk is already behind what we see on X, Mark Zuckerberg is behind Facebook and Instagram, and now TikTok could have the influence of the Fox News family and Larry Ellison.[][]
But we will have to see where all this goes, but I would love to know your thoughts, specifically if this ownership changes how you feel about the app, would it make you consider leaving or using it less? Anything at all.
Kickstart your passion project with a free trial today: Squarespace & enter offer code “Phil” to get 10% off your first purchase!
-
A direct assault on independent journalism, the most egregious violation of the First Amendment, and a cause for alarm for every American.
That is how this latest move by the Pentagon is being described by experts and advocates.
Right, over the weekend, the Pentagon distributed a 17-page memo requiring credentialed journalists to sign a pledge promising not to report anything that hasn’t been expressly approved for release.
And that includes unclassified information.
With the memo threatening to remove the press pass for any journalists who don’t abide by this new policy.
The new policy also restricts where journalists can go within the Pentagon.
Specifically, it designates large chunks of the building as off-limits to press without an escort.
And that’s notable because, while many officers and meeting rooms are restricted, the press corps was previously allowed access to most of the building unattended.
Which obviously didn’t sit well with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth - who took to Twitter after the new policy was circulated, saying,
“The ‘press’ does not run the Pentagon - the people do. The press is no longer allowed to roam the halls of a secure facility. Wear a badge and follow the rules - or go home.”
Now, this new policy isn’t coming from nowhere - Hegseth has spent months tightening restrictions on the Pentagon press and limiting military personnel’s communication with them directly.
The Washington Post reports that the briefing room has gone dark - which is a pretty stark difference from the twice-weekly televised Q&A sessions happening there just last year.
And Hegseth’s chief spokesman and his press secretary reportedly rarely hold media briefings.
Despite all that, or maybe because of it, we’ve seen several big leaks from the Pentagon this year.
And, like many defense secretaries before him, Hegseth is getting grumpy about it.
His staff even briefly tried using polygraph tests to find leaks before being ordered to stop by the White Ho use.
But these new rules are taking things to the next level and have prompted alarm and outrage from experts, advocates, and even officials within the Pentagon itself.
With National Press Club President Mike Balsamo saying,
“If the news about our military must first be approved by the government, then the public is no longer getting independent reporting. It is getting only what officials want them to see. That should alarm every American.” []
And that sentiment was echoed repeatedly - with a statement from the Society of Professional Journalists saying the policy reeks of prior restraint and calling it, quote, “the most egregious violation of press freedom under the First Amendment.”
And Seth Stern of the Free Press Foundation added that this policy goes against decades of legal precedent of journalists lawfully obtaining and publishing government secrets. []
Saying he hopes that journalists don’t just capitulate and even says they should forgo their Pentagon access if need be.
Adding,
“Agreeing not to look where the government doesn’t want you to look and, by extension, not to print what it doesn’t want you to print, is propaganda, not journalism.”
With still more journalists and press advocates calling this an intimidation tactic and even fundamentally anti-American.
But maybe the best demonstration of the significance here came from two-time Pulitzer-winning reporter Bill Marimow - who wrote,
“Under Pete Hegseth’s new rules, journalists would have had their press credentials canceled for reporting the Johnson Administration’s lies during the Vietnam War; for John Hersey’s groundbreaking New Yorker report about the aftermath of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima; the stories about JFK’s disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba; the torture of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison; and countless other stories of importance.” []
Now, the backlash here doesn’t end with journalists and their organizations - even current Pentagon officials are taking issue with this policy.
With the Intercept reporting unnamed officials calling this, quote, “a mockery of American ideals” and something one would see in some of the most repressive and unstable nations on the planet. []
With another specifically pointing to Hegseth - saying this is yet another method he’s trying to dodge accountability.
Now, as for the response to this backlash, a Pentagon spokesperson was quick to defend the new policy - saying the new guidelines are, quote, “already in line with every other military base in the country.”
And adding that they are “basic, common-sense guidelines to protect sensitive information.” []
But maybe the most surprising reaction to this came from Trump.
With reporters asking him whether the Pentagon should be part of deciding what journalists can report and him responding,
“No, I don’t think so. Nothing stops reporters.” []
But, as Politico points out, there’s not really any indication whether that means he’s going to do something to stop this new policy or if that’s just a personal observation on the matter.
So this is definitely something we’re going to have to keep our eyes on going forward.
In the meantime, I would love to know your thoughts about this whole thing.
Especially if you’re in the journalism sphere - let me know in those comments down below.
-
After months of teasing it, the Trump Gold Card is finally here.
All you have to do is write a check for one million dollars to the U.S. Treasury, and you can legally live and work in the United States. [Webpage]
Or if you’re sponsored by a corporation, your employer can pay two million. [Image]
With Trump and his Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announcing this on Friday. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 01:26:40 - 01:27:02] Caption: [Howard Lutnick:] “We are going to only take extraordinary people at the very top. Instead of people trying to take the jobs from Americans, they’re going to create businesses and create jobs for Americans, and this program will raise more than a hundred billion dollars for the Treasury of the United States of America.” [Donald Trump:] “And which we’ll use for cutting taxes and paying down debt.”
But experts say the fact the pricetag is only a million dollars and not five million as originally planned suggests demand for the visa is actually low.
Though that’s definitely not the case for another visa that Trump’s now overhauling: the H-1B.
Right, employers use this to bring in high-skilled foreign workers, hundreds of thousands of whom currently hold the visa. [Image]
But whereas before, the fees to hire an employee through H-1B totalled a few thousand dollars at most, now companies have to pay a hundred thousand dollars for it.
And when Trump announced this change, it provoked confusion, panic and chaos.
Because Lutnick seemed to suggest the new fee would apply not just to new visa holders, but also to current ones, and that it would end up totalling 600,000 dollars per worker. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 01:37:38 - 01:37:47, 01:37:56 - 01:38:02] Caption: “Renewals. First times. The company needs to decide do they want, is the person valuable enough … It’s annual, and it’s for total. It can be a total of six years. So $100,000 a year.”
And the change was set to take effect just after midnight Saturday, meaning companies apparently had little more than a day to prepare for these huge fees on thousands of their workers.
So firms including Amazon, Microsoft and JPMorgan pulled the fire alarm, warning visa holders not to leave the country, and urging those already abroad to fly back as soon as possible.
But then, on Saturday the White House clarified that the 100,000-dollar fee would only apply to new applicants, not renewals or current visa holders, and that it’s a one-time fee, not an annual one. [Post]
Either way, though, this is expected to disrupt several sectors of the economy; the question is whether that disruption’s gonna be good or bad.
On the Trump side, supporters claim that corporations have abused the H-1B visa to import lower-paid workers where they could’ve hired native citizens, effectively taking jobs away from Americans.
With the White House citing data that purports to show increased unemployment among computer science and computer engineering majors, for example. Quote, find “6.1”]
But critics counter that the economy’s not a zero-sum game, and that H-1B visa holders and their families contribute roughly 86 billion dollars to the U.S. every year. [Quote, find “86”]
Plus they provide some of the world’s top talent not just to tech companies, but also to Wall Street, universities and the medical industry.
With executives from India now running Google, Microsoft and IBM, for example, and Indian doctors making up nearly 6% of U.S. physicians. [Quote, find “6%”]
So critics say this could weaken American competitiveness in tech and AI, as well as crippling our healthcare system.
And to give you an idea of how steep the cost is to businesses, the median salary for a new H-1B worker in 2023 was 94,000 dollars. [Quote, find “94,000”]
So most of them don’t even make as much as that hundred-thousand-dollar fee, which is why experts say only the biggest companies will be able to afford to pay it or extract an exemption from the White House.
Leaving start-ups shit out of luck, with the venture capitalist Alan Patricof [Patrick-off] telling The New York Times:
“There is not a single company that I have invested in the last 10 years that could afford to pay this.” [Quote]
And instead of paying it, experts say they might just opt for remote contracting, offshore delivery and gig workers. [Quote, find “remote”]
All of which is why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce reacted to the news with: “We’re concerned about the impact on employees, their families and American employers.” [Quote]
But if you ask Trump and Lutnick, Corporate America is just thrilled about having to pay more for foreign workers. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 01:32:41 - 01:32:49] Caption: [Howard Lutnick:] “All of the big companies are on board. We’ve spoken to them about the gold card.” [Donald Trump:] “They love it. They love it. They really love it. They need it.”
But one place that definitely doesn’t love it is India, where over 70% of H-1B visa holders originate from. [Image]
Because the H-1B program helped lift up a new middle class in India and gave many talented Indians a pathway toward a better future for their families.
So the government warned that the disruptions done to families by this new policy presents a humanitarian concern, and it could damage the people-to-people diplomacy achieved over the past three decades. [Quote, find “disruption”]
But as with pretty much any Trump policy nowadays, you can expect this one to get challenged in the courts.
With the American Immigration Lawyers Association leading the charge, partnering with other groups, scouting for plaintiffs, and seeking a temporary block on the policy. [Quote, find “plaintiffs”]
-
then the final thing that I wanted to share today is, you know, I spoke with Ed Nelson from Prophecy Markets on my podcast in good Faith.
and something that he hit on, and it felt like he really want to get out there was the importance of billionaires being taxed on their wealth because they literally can't spend the money anywhere.
of course, you can get the full hourlong thing on YouTube, Apple Podcasts or Spotify links in the description down below. But here's a taste.
trickle down economics story was one of the one of the greatest lies ever told to America.
And I don't think it was that insidious.
I think that the the theory was a nice it was a nice theory.
We can pay less in taxes and it actually helps us with growth.
It means that people spend more.
It means that people are participating in the economy.
It was an amazing story because it basically told us we can have our cake and we can eat it too.
And I don't decry us for believing the story well, I do to Christ for is the fact that after we saw how the story did not work, how it wasn't true, we decided, let's keep doing it and let's keep telling the story.
Let's keep talking Reaganomics.
Let's keep talking about trickle down theory.
And it's very plain and very obvious for everyone to say it does not work.
And the way that we can see this playing out is, again, you got to go back to the inequality problem.
What happens when rich people, really rich people get really, really rich?
Do they spend all of their billions of dollars on houses, on going out to eat food on restaurants?
Do they spend it on getting that car washed?
No, you can't spend billions of dollars.
They keep it.
They buy stocks and they buy assets.
And the assets grow and grow and grow in price.
And then they just sit on it because that's all you can do.
I mean, if you're Elon, if you're worth 350 to $400 billion, he cannot spend that money.
He cannot inject that money into the economy that does not trickle down billions and billions of dollars in the hands of one person.
There is one thing that you can do with that amount of money, and that is sit on it and then give it to your children.
That's all you can do with this money.
So essentially what's happened is all of the money that we have decided to give to rich people because we said, we're going to cut down on your taxes and we're going to make the environment extremely favorable to the very, very top 1%.
We basically said to them, you know, just just enjoy the cash and we're going to have it locked up there in your bank account at Goldman Sachs, or we're going to have it locked up in your I mean, look at Ken Griffin, who spent $1 billion on a house.
You know, it's been $1 billion on a house.
It's pretty good to know that.
Yes, he he bought he went didn't know you could do that in Florida.
It's crazy.
And it doesn't make any sense.
So all of that money is locked up in there and it's not being reinvested into the economy.
And that, by the way, is why GDP in the past 50 years has grown three times faster than wages in America.
well that it brings us to the end of this video.
You got even more just a click away.
Because I've just been doing more and more podcasts.
I got a brand new podcast with Ed Ellison from property markets over here, and I also just did this new podcast with Mr. beat.
you can click or tap to watch either of those.
But also I've got links in the description to our Spotify, Apple podcast and YouTube version so you can get filled in wherever you like.
no matter what you do, let me just say thank you for watching.
I love your faces. And of course, I'll see you right back here tomorrow.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/Jane-Fonda-Age-Getty-Images-1393277830-f6dbaee5869b4dcfba7edfb56e4a76cf.jpg){kind=link}
