State of the Union

The speaker discusses Biden's State of the Union address, criticizing his aggressive tone and questioning the effectiveness of his proposed policies. They argue that Biden's plan to generate revenue through taxing billionaires is insufficient. The conversation also touches on the issue of politicians not fulfilling their promises and the cyclical nature of political power in the United States. The speaker suggests that the lack of opportunities and resources in impoverished communities, compared to wealthier areas, is due to a lack of investment and a perception that residents in these communities don't have a stake in maintaining or protecting those resources. They also mention that lenient laws regarding theft may contribute to higher rates of crime in impoverished areas. What's up, what's up everybody? Welcome back to Black in Tan. We're here to start another topic of misguided news. And today we should talk about how Biden and his address, State of the Union address, was very, what's the word we should use today? It's very, he spoke very violently. He was very strong-willed and we're going to see what Dom has to say and I'm going to try and feed into this. Unfortunately, I didn't get to watch it, but it seems Biden was very aggressive. Let's go. Well, the only thing I can say is I'm listening to this guy and it seems like this guy is very angry and yelling and, you know, his arithmetic, maybe he didn't have math back in the day because his math sucks. You don't like any of the points that he gave us? Well, one of the points is he said if these billionaires would pay their fair share of their money, he'd come out and said it would generate $500 billion. And I'm thinking, wow, for a year? So what's the fair share of the million? And then he says, he says it's going to create $500 billion over the course of 10 years. Well, what the hell? My math divided that into that equals 50 billion a year, which ain't shit. Nothing. For a set of 60 billion they want to send to Ukraine and this is something that impacts all these billionaires, which they say they don't pay. You're only going to bring in $50 billion a year? Well, that's nothing. I need to understand the tax system that they believe in. Is that something where billionaires are, you make a certain amount of money more, you pay less? Listen, I've said this many a time. The billionaires, it's this. If they sell their stock, they will be paying a tax on it. Just like Eli Buss did. He sold like, I don't know, 11 billion? He sold, I forget how many billion, but he had to pay like 11 billion to the taxes, okay? Listen, it's like you. You haven't been in the stock market. I haven't been in the stock market. If you don't sell your stock, okay, you don't pay any taxes on it. When you sell the stock, you pay taxes on it. But in order to make money, you have to sell your stock eventually, right? Well, listen, I've had stocks where they run up, okay, and if you don't sell them, they run back down, okay? So you have to sell to make money. Like, for instance, my marijuana stocks that these people told us that they were going to decriminalize marijuana and they never did it in three and a half years. Okay? They haven't done it yet, all right? These people, for some reason, people feed into this shit. They lie to you. I'm going to do this for you. This guy's been in here 50 years, okay? You're telling me this guy doesn't know the law in 50 years? He definitely knows it. Well, how can this guy tell you, and you're a guy that pays money towards your debt of your college tuition, right? So you're in debt, and this guy's going to tell you that he's going to give you $10,000 to $20,000 off your debt. And you're sitting back there, yeah, you've got to vote this guy in. He's a friggin' fantastic. And then what happens is, the guy doesn't do it. Why? Because when they send it to the courts, it shows that the Supreme Court says, no, you can't do that. Now, you mean to tell me this guy doesn't know that? He hasn't in 50 years seen it? Yes, he has. So he's a fucking liar. But that's the thing, he knows it, but the American people don't know it. No, because they tell the American people they're going to do this stuff for him. But that makes the American people a little slow and not smart enough to do their own education and find out that it's impossible to happen. It makes them vote for him. That's what the problem is. Because they believe that smoking is normal. It's all smoke and mirrors, man. Smoke and mirrors. Very good. So, listen, I'm not saying it's only this guy. Hey, listen, they all do it. They all say they're going to do this and this and this, and then when they get in there, oh, it can't be done. Oh, Congress helped me out. Oh, this one, and they go through this. You know, that's their favorite. So let me ask you this question. In the history of our presidency, we'll just start with Ronald Reagan, because I grew up kind of in the 80s. I'm an 80s baby. So we're going to go with that. And it just seems like the history of presidents, whether they get to stay in the office 8 years or 4 years, it's always a flip. It goes from Democrat to Republican and vice versa, Republican to Democrat. What is the absolute reason you feel behind the fact that we go from Democrat to Republican and vice versa, back from Republican to Democrat? That American people don't believe in the one side or they just feel the other side is in? Maybe they don't get the one side long enough term. I don't know. You only get 8 years, though. That's just the way the American system has been. You can only be a president for 8 years. They actually think that you can do shit in 8 years of time, which a lot of times you can't. You know, you can have... Don't get me wrong. I mean, you've got to be able to want to go out and do stuff on your own. Now, we're talking as an individual person, and you're still talking politics. Oh, an individual person. I mean, you can't rely on the politics to go get you a job. There's plenty of jobs out there. The bottom line is, and they talk about this all the time, and, you know, politicians will say, we're going to do this for you, this for you, that for you, you know, or, you know, and like we talk about in the big communities where people are poor, and we always say that these people come around, and every 4 years they tell you that, you know, if you don't vote for us, they're going to take this away. They're going to take your housing. You know, the Republicans are going to take this. They're going to take this. This is all you hear all the time. But what they're not telling you is, by keeping you on this system of the government, you still live in poverty. Okay, so let's go with this, with the whole poverty thing and the situation. Yeah. All right, but listen. Listen to my question. We're going to take a hood, ghetto, government-oriented, like a welfare-oriented environment. We're just going to use Camden as an example. Okay. And then we're going to take it down about 15 minutes to Merchantsville. Still kind of in the same area. One's a little bit further down the street. Okay. When you drive down Camden, you go to Pennsauking, and then, boom, you go into the Merchantsville area. Right. The difference between those two areas is there's no Wegmans. There's no ShopRite. There's no establishments that a person could get a decent job. Instead, when you go to Camden, you're going to work at a Save-A-Lot or a mom-and-pop buffet store. You're not going to ever have an opportunity. Okay, okay. I'm going to tell you why. You want to bring up that, and nobody's going to get a job. It's not about getting a job. It's getting a good job. Getting a good job. So you think working at a Walmart and all is a good job. I'm going to call it a good job because of this. When you put that on your resume, it's known. If you put that you worked at Mama and Sam's bogey shop, people are going to be like, what the heck is that? You're going to look at the resume. I agree with you there because you're working for a corporation. Right. You're working for something that's well-known. Here's the issue on that. Okay. The issue is this. If you're living off the government, and I don't know how it works. I don't know that when your family or your mom was single and all of a sudden you're living off of, you're getting welfare and housing and stuff like this. And then, of course, each kid, you know, your parent is getting X amount of money for each kid. Right? Okay. So when your kid's 14, the problem is the government still gives you money for that kid. So if the kid can go out and get, let's say, $30,000, $40,000 a year, then it would pay for him to go off the system. Do you understand? But if the system is going to pay you X amount a year, and by the time you took a $20,000 a year job and by the time they took taxes out of it, you ended up with a little bit more than what the system was giving you. Right? Yep. It's not worth taking that job. And that's why you'll see a lot of the communities don't take them jobs. Yes. But that goes back to what I was starting to say. The opportunities in Camden versus the opportunities that are in Merchantsville. Now, I'm just saying, you could drive maybe five more minutes down the road if you lived in Merchantsville. Wait a minute. So what are you trying to say? I'm saying that the government doesn't give an opportunity for some reason to the hood. You don't see the nicer stores. So that goes back to what I'm saying. Like if you put a resume together and you work at Sam and Mama's open shop. So you're saying. Now I'm going to tell you the reason why. Here's why. The reason why, and I'll be truthful with you, and people can listen to this or they can be offended by it or whatever. The bottom line is that you can't put stuff in communities that the people, how can I say this, they don't have any skin in the game. For instance, if you put them, like you say in the hood. So if you put them in the hood, in the hood they'll be robbing stuff. But why do you think that they would rob it in Camden? Let's just say they put a Wegmans in Camden and a Wegmans in Cherry Hill, which there obviously is one in Cherry Hill. But why do you think the one in Camden would be robbed more than the one that's in Cherry Hill? Okay. Well, the only thing I can tell you is that the way sometimes the codes, the tax codes are or the law enforcement codes are to where, you know, now they've encrypted these codes to where if you steal a certain amount of money you don't get arrested for it. You know, if you steal this you don't get arrested for it if it's under $500 or a lot of states have this now. So that's why you're seeing a lot of, you know, people are not being penalized. They're not going to jail. Okay. So you're going to have this happen all the time. Okay. But let me cut you before you go further in that. Go ahead. When you go to just robbery in general, why is the poor person in Camden more likely to rob than the person that lives in Cherry Hill? I'm saying they both have Wegmans. I'm not skin in the game. The people in Cherry Hill are not going to go out and rob. They pay a mortgage on a home. They're not going to do that. They don't want to lose. They'd probably go to work too, see. Right, right. Obviously if you pay a mortgage on your home you're probably working. Am I right? I'm 100% agreeing with you. Okay. So they're not going to lose their job over going to a store to be a shoplifter. So that's my point that I wanted to go into is the fact that the people that are in Camden are governmentally, nine times out of ten, governmentally funded to live there. Meaning they get some type of assistance. Yes. Where the man that works in Cherry Hill, like you said, skin in the game, they work for a living. They have a house to pay for and they've got to put food on their table. Yes. So they're actually going out and working where the person that lives in the poverty stricken area gets governmental assistance. Yes. That's my point. Government doesn't set up, for some reason, the hood, the ghetto. They don't have the same opportunity. They live off of the struggle. Yes. So let's just say they get $1,000 a week where the man in Cherry Hill works. I'm not saying it's only in the ghetto. It could be where white people live. It could be anybody that's living in communities that are living off assistance from the government. This is the thing that I don't understand. Okay, so we're going to use that as my next example. Why are there no trailer parks in Camden? But yet there's one in Williamstown. There's one down the street in Cherry Hill. Well, because everybody has their own thing. That gives those people, I think, a little bit more of an opportunity. Even though they live in a trailer park, they're in a community that gives them accessibility to other opportunities. Like you could work at a trailer park but still have a really decent job. You could use Walmart versus working at the mom and pop shop in the morning. Yes, if you work at Walmart or whatever, you should be able to live in a trailer park because it's a lot cheaper to live in these, you know, to have that kind of housing. That kind of housing, but that gives a better opportunity to those people in the trailer park versus the people that live in the hood of Camden or the poverty-stricken areas of Camden. Okay, so your thing is to say, hey, maybe we should put trailer parks in Camden? No, I feel like, I mean, here. Maybe I bring racism into this. Racism into this is this. When you think of a trailer park, you kind of think of a white man, the M&M-ish type looking character. And then when you think of the hood, you think of like boys in the hood, men in society, the ghetto-stricken looking kids, who are, of course, of color, Spanish, black. So my thing is, when you say trailer park, you don't really think of black. You think of white. When you say the hood and the ghetto, you think of black and Hispanic. Yes. So my thing is, is that there's no trailer parks in the ghetto. So let me ask you a question. When you think of Chinatown, what are you thinking of? Chinese people. Oh, there you go. But this is the thing. In Chinatown, 95% of those businesses are owned by those people. They're not getting checks for welfare. Yes. They're out there actually opening Chinese stores or food stores or opening nail salons and opening. So they're on their own level of success, where the ghettos and the hoods are all governmentally owned. The welfare checks, the food stamps, whatever they call them now, the food cards. Like you're getting nothing but free handouts. Yes. Where these people come in here, like Chinatown was abused, like you just said. But most of the drugs being sold and the turf wars happen to be in them communities. I don't know why. But drugs are everywhere. But for some reason, the control, like let's just say me and you snorted cocaine. We love to do cocaine. Every Friday after work, we were like, we worked hard all week. We're sniffing some cocaine. So we have access to that. But I'm just saying, we have access. Literally, I would hope to find something that would be in my own area. But there's drugs in this area just like there's drugs in Camden. It's just the amount of people that don't separate the fun part of drugs versus the necessity to live on drugs. That's my point. Like I'm saying to you now, we work hard all week. Friday, we're like, you know what, Dom, Jay, we're going to go sniff an eighth of coke. Yes. Because you know what? We worked all week, and that's our celebration for it, where I feel like in those poverty-stricken areas, they don't have to work because they're getting that $3,000 through the government. So let's just say, Monday night, let's go out and do some coke. Wednesday night, let's go out and do some coke because I don't got to go to work on Thursday, or I don't got to go to work on Tuesday. So what's your point? My point is, is that they set it up in those communities to be given the opportunity to do other than work. Failure. Right. That's better even than what I can say. Yes. To fail. Why do you think they say K&A? K&A, if you go over there and look at every corner, it's a freaking bar. They set you up for failure. Failure. I think the government will put these ads on the thing, and it'll say, if you have a gambling problem, call this number. Well, listen, why are you putting all these casinos and stealing all our money? Think about this. If you didn't have all those casinos, and I'm a firm believer, and I'm the guy to, they cost us a lot of money. When you lose, not everybody's a winner. If they were a winner, they wouldn't have the casinos there anymore. Exactly. Look at the town of Las Vegas. Every corner. But the problem is the government gets revenue. Yes, they do. Everything that you see, listen, probation came around years ago, right? Back in the day, right? And of course, people were making their own moonshine, and then they were selling it, and people kept going by. Well, the government got a ticket of shit, and they were tired of it. They wanted a cut of it. They were like, listen, why don't we just legalize it? We can get a cut of it. It's the same thing that's going to happen with marijuana. And I firmly believe the marijuana situation happens to be because they're tired of locking people up for actually marijuana, I guess. I mean, honestly, when you have a misdemeanor like marijuana, you're blowing up a jail system that is taking up way too much space due to marijuana, when you have people out here killing people or physically really doing real federalized crimes. Yes. Marijuana is very, like – It is. Of course. I mean, that's another thing we can get into. But I feel the reason why the government assistance is so heavily driven to the poverty-level people is because it's all about the control. Yes. And like we said before in another podcast, we said that the individual has to make the decision to decide to move themselves out of that, to better themselves. Exactly. Now, yes, you can give me $3,000 a week, but it's different because I'm stuck in that area, let's just say, of gambling. Okay. Where if I went out and got that landscaping job where I worked at Walmart, I might have an opportunity to take myself out of that. Listen, I told you that I went to California and had an opportunity to go over there with a girl that had to go over there for six months of training, and I was in there, and I actually seen a job in the paper that I wanted to be a carpenter. I said to myself, I would like to learn how to frame. And the job was paying $10 an hour, and I called, and the guy said, you don't have experience. Okay, so that shut that down. The following week, I look in the paper, and it's the same jobs there. I called the guy up, and I said, hey. And he says, you still don't have experience. And I said, but it ain't getting filled. The third week, I called him up, and I said, no, it's still in there. You didn't fill the position. I tell you why. Do this then. You don't have to pay me the $10 an hour. I don't want the $10 an hour, okay? You can pay me whatever you think you feel like paying me, but I'll show you what I can learn, and then you pay me a fair wage. And he said, well, I'll tell you what. You come in. You seem like you want to work. I'll give it to you for $7 an hour. And I took the job, and I said, I'll take it. Knowing that everybody around me was getting $10 an hour. Right, so you had to learn. When I was there to learn a trade, that was the key. So I learned to trade, and in one month, never asked for a raise. The man paid me $10 an hour like everybody else. Now, of course, me and my big mouth, you know, we're sitting around and drinking or whatever. And, of course, your workers want to know what you're getting paid. And, of course, I tell them, and I lose my job. Why? Because the boss says to me, let me tell you something, Tom. You're a very hard worker, okay? And only on Saturdays, you're the only guy that shows up with me to work on a Saturday. Nobody else does. He goes, let me tell you something. You advance so much, and you learn so much, but here's the problem. Now that they know that I'm paying you $10 an hour, they all want more money. And I can't afford to pay them more money, so I've got to get rid of you. And I lost my job, and I never told anybody what I made again. Period. So, I'm a firm believer of this, and I've been a boss. And I pay people according to what they work. Just because you know the same as another guy, but if you put some drive into it, and you do these things that make the company money, you should be paid more money. Okay, that's the only reason I told you I don't like unions is for that fact. It's that you and another co-worker will work the same, but yet one person goes beyond, and yet he can't even make any more money because he's stuck in a rut that says this is what you're supposed to get paid at your scale. Right, right. I don't like it. Also, the union has its benefits of protecting you. Yes, there is. There is. Yes. I just said that the only thing I don't like is that. But here's the only problem with the unions, okay? The other factor is this. When you do have a union, a lot of times you're not going to get jobs, okay? Because, let's face it. You know, back in the day, the Democratic Party is not the same Democratic Party as it is today. Okay? Because we talked about this, that we both grew up as a Democrat, right? We never heard about no Republicans or shit. They never came into our, they never came into our, you know, where we lived in the city, you know? So, you know, I grew up, you know, welfare, you know, government cheese, all that stuff. But when you start going to work, I even took jobs when I was a kid. You know, my friends didn't work, but I took a job for $2 an hour, you know, to clean siding and all. And guess what? You know, I did the job for $2 an hour and I learned a trade. Now, that propelled me to learn all these different trades, and I went into my own business, you know? And I was successful doing it on my own instead of having to go work for somebody. And over 34 years, people that worked for me actually went into their own business, a lot of them. And that's what you're supposed to do. You hire people that want to learn. Do not listen to the people that tell you on the news that you're not going to make nothing, you don't want to make that guy rich. Let me tell you something. If you ain't making that guy rich, he gets another person and that guy makes him rich. But without that guy being rich, you don't have a job. Okay? So they want to keep hammering this and hammering this. I never, when I say trickle-down, I don't understand what trickle-down means to these people. Because trickle-down to me means that, you know what? If you get this guy up here and he has more money, he can afford to pay you more money, okay? He can afford to buy better equipment for you. This is all. But if he taxes ASF, okay, and he can't afford the taxes here and this and that and he can't grow, then he can't expand to have more people having money. Right. But that's the whole part of governmental control. They don't want you to... Well, there you go. I personally believe, and I watch these shows on TV, there's no way these people should have all these agencies. Correct. Because all these agencies, you've got to go through this. Oh, we can't go here. This has got to go through there. And then you've got to go through and have one. So we're going to talk about our next topic. It's going to be the belief of the American dream. That's what I'd like to talk about, the fact that the government tries to sway a person not to be bettering themselves and be stuck in a system that is controlled by them giving you money or them giving you handouts. But again, we will talk about that next. This is Black in Tan, This Guy Abuse. Hope you guys are enjoying. If you like what you hear, share it and pass it on. Okay.