Lines We Cross For Friendship

What if a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist could argue hard topics, laugh at themselves, and keep choosing friendship? That’s the spirit of this conversation as we map common ground without sanding off our edges—tackling public education, healthcare, and the blurry line between rights and services.

We start by calling out how split life feels and then test our labels. Music sparks a detour to Ayn Rand, Objectivism, and why compatibilism appeals to people who dislike rigid binaries. From there we build a case for a limited social floor: tax-funded public education as a baseline that raises opportunity and reduces chaos, with clear guardrails to avoid mission creep. We face the tradeoffs head-on—property tax stability vs sales tax fairness, indoctrination fears vs the costs of ignorance—and keep the focus on equality of opportunity over equality of outcome.

Healthcare gets the same blueprint: a minimum viable layer that covers preventive care and urgent needs without promising the cutting edge to all. We wrestle with the claim that “a right cannot require someone else’s labor,” exploring what society should guarantee, what markets should deliver, and how to be honest about costs. The debate widens to central planning, zoning, and the reality that dense cities need coordination even as we guard against bureaucratic creep. Along the way we poke at shifting labels—how yesterday’s revolutionary becomes today’s institution—and admit where each of us would freeze or push change.

If you crave smart, good-faith disagreement that still lands on shared principles, you’ll feel at home here. Hit play, subscribe for more thoughtful clashes, and tell us: what single baseline—education, healthcare, or something else—should every society guarantee? Your take might shape our next episode.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:02

Does it feel like every part of your life is divided? Every scenario, every environment, your church, your school, your work, your friends, left, right, conservative, liberal, religious, secular. It seems you always have to take a side. This is a conversation between a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who happen to be great friends. Welcome to Living on Common Ground. Do you think if we met today, we would still be friends? I don't know.

SPEAKER_05 0:35

But we're friends now.

SPEAKER_01 0:38

A mom is known as a mom because they are living in a dog. Man, so well, we want a few games. Y'all fools think that's something? Man, that ain't nothing, y'all. And you know what else? We ain't nothing either. Yeah, we came together in camp. Cool. But then we're right back here, and the world tells us that they don't want us to be together. We fall apart like we ain't a damn bit of nothing, man.

Marker 4

SPEAKER_04 1:16

Okay. Now that we're done talking about music. So real quick, uh, if you're recommendations. I would highly recommend Foxy Shazam. And Lucas just gave me a recommendation called Fun. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:32

F-U-N period. Yeah, they're they're really good. I like them. Um I listened to their I gotta find the name of their um their album. I listened to their album Some Nights.

SPEAKER_05 1:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:49

Uh all the way through.

SPEAKER_04 1:52

So the name of the album is Some Nights? Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:55

Okay.

SPEAKER_04 1:55

I for a minute there, I thought you said I listened to them some nights.

SPEAKER_02 1:58

Oh yeah. No, they're the name of the album is Some Nights. And that's that's the name of the like the um one of the main songs in there, also. We Are Young is the is the single, the the single that most people would recognize from there. Anyway, the point is I listened to that over and over and over again while I was reading the book Um Atlas Shrugged. So to me, that album is the soundtrack to Atlas Shrugged. If I read a passage of Atlas Shrugged, I'm I am hearing their their um their music. And I think that's so hilarious because I'm sure they would hate that.

SPEAKER_04 2:35

Yeah. Well, so okay, I'm not familiar with the book Atlas Shrugged.

SPEAKER_02 2:38

No, it's Ayn Rand. It's her titular work. Okay. It's it is it's where the phrase who is John Galt comes from. It is about it is her um essentially it's a novel allegory about her philosophy called um, what is her philosophy called? Rationalism? No, it's called uh that is gonna bug me. I gotta look it up. Anyway, you know who Ayn Rand is, or you've heard her name at least.

SPEAKER_05 3:12

Um Ayn Rand philosophy. I'm gonna look it up.

SPEAKER_02 3:19

Objectivism. Objectivism is her philosophy. It's an um anyway, so uh uh I I'm a big fan of the of the book and I'm a big fan of Ayn Rand. And um anyway, I listened to that or I listened to that album, and so that is the soundtrack, and in my mind, and it just makes me laugh. But the soundtrack is or the the um excuse me, the the album's really good. But that one that you just showed me was um was good. I'm not big on like new music.

SPEAKER_04 3:51

Well, it just so the what the way I get exposed to music now is through shows.

SPEAKER_02 3:57

Sure, that makes sense.

SPEAKER_04 3:58

Right. So I'll watch a show and I'll be like, oh, I really and then I'll do the little uh Shazam or whatever, you know. Yeah you can l and then I'll I'll be like, oh I they're actually really good. And then I might download them.

SPEAKER_02 4:08

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 4:09

So that's how I ended up and then the bonus was that they're out of Cincinnati. I just never excited about it. Well, Madison lives there, and so I thought that was really cool. And I wanted to know if they if there ever is gonna be a show she needs to go.

SPEAKER_02 4:22

It is very cool. I'm sorry.

SPEAKER_04 4:24

No, that's okay. So I think it's very, very cool. Objectivism. Um Atlas Shrugged, and uh and I guess so um is there a philosophy called compatibilism? I don't know. Probably. If there's not, my philosophy is compatibilism. TMTMTM.

SPEAKER_02 4:41

TMTMTM? Trademark. You gotta say TM. Oh, T M. Now now you can sue anybody who uh uses it.

SPEAKER_04 4:48

All right. But I don't know if it's a thing. Like, I mean, I know that people would know if I said compatibilism what I was talking about, because people get accused, like they're called compatibilists, but I'm developing a philosophy of compatibilism. What does that mean if somebody's compatibilists? Most of the times compatibilist is used in terms of um whether or not there is such a thing as free will. Oh right. So you're either a pure uh straight-up determinist or you believe in free will, but there's this middle ground called compatibilism.

SPEAKER_02 5:21

Yeah. Compatibilist. That's probably what David Dennett. Right. That's me.

SPEAKER_04 5:24

I think I'm there. Um and uh but anyway. Okay. So uh you brought up something that I thought was really interesting, and I'm not even sure how to answer it. I just thought it would be a fun thing to do. It's a it would be a great thing to do.

SPEAKER_02 5:41

So the uh the shtick the is that the conceit of the show is that you are the progressive.

SPEAKER_04 5:50

I am the progressive Christian. And um it it wasn't like I am struggling with whether or not I'm a Christian. That kind of sounded like I was like, uh, no, I am. Um it's the it's the progressive part.

SPEAKER_02 6:02

And I'm the conservative atheist. Yes. Mm-hmm.

SPEAKER_04 6:04

All right. That's the conceit of the show. Yes. All right.

SPEAKER_02 6:08

So the question that you raised is uh what is your most right wing position as a progressive, and what is my most left-wing position? Have you thought of it? Have you thought about this? I have two that I because Krista and I have talked about this in the past, and um there's uh there's two that I think of pretty quickly. There's one I think that I could I could nail down as a as a resolution, you know, as a debate resolution that I would I would I would argue for this.

SPEAKER_04 6:40

Okay. Let me hear it. Okay.

SPEAKER_02 6:44

I think that um it makes sense for societies to tax their population in order to fund free public education. I think public education should be a free service available to all um all citizens in a in a country.

SPEAKER_04 7:07

Aaron Powell Yeah, especially when the purpose for education is indoctrination.

SPEAKER_02 7:12

It is always going to be indoctrination, sure. But um that is not actually why I think that.

SPEAKER_04 7:16

I think that I was just kind of throwing that you that you're still that you're still a conservative with it.

SPEAKER_02 7:22

I well uh so I this is a com the uh it is a left-wing position and it is a um it is an anti-libertarian position. And I am okay with that. That is a position that I have. I think and it is not from an altruistic position either.

SPEAKER_04 7:43

It's not because of- Why do you believe that then?

SPEAKER_05 7:48

So let's see how far back I want to go.

SPEAKER_02 7:52

I believe that because I think that it so it goes back to a rising tide raises all ships as a principle. Sure. I want to bring the floor of an education level of a society upward in order to do a few different things reduce chaos in the society, um and uh provide opportunities, provide more opportunities, because I do I am a um equality of opportunity believer, not an equality of outcome believer, and so while I don't believe that it is possible to um create a s a scenario in which all people do actually have equal starting places, that's not, in my opinion, possible. I do think that it is beneficial for a society to raise the floor in order to um uh try to create as much opportunity uh for advancement for for everyone um in the society. Again, this is not from an altruistic position. This is not because I'm trying to help the downtrodden, right? I want to make sure it's very clear I don't care about the downtrodden. Just kidding. It's because it is because I think that a um a higher level of um of education to a point, and again, I want to make sure this is clear. I'm talking about a safety net type situation. I'm talking about a baseline level of education.

SPEAKER_04 9:51

So you're not talking about like being able to go to university for free. You're talking about being able to contribute to society.

SPEAKER_02 9:58

And I don't ever expect the public education system to be the ideal of education. Ever. And I don't think that I don't I don't actually think that that is a reasonable goal. It doesn't make sense from a societal level, in my opinion. However, it does make sense to provide the minimum level of education for at no cost. Obviously, it's not free. It's not free, it is costing someone, but at no cost at the level of service or at the position or at the point of service school. Right. So I I think that um finding some way and I do think I think that uh cause uh traditionally property taxes have been um what have been utilized for uh for education funding, for public education funding. Um I think in a sense that makes sense. Um but um for for a few different reasons. I understand the inherent unfairness um of a property tax because you're going to end up taxing an enormous number of people who are not utilizing the service. But again, I do think that um this is a place where I don't have a I I think that even though we are giving up a level of freedom and fairness uh in that, um, I'm willing to compromise on it. I can see how there would be a a little bit more fairness in utilizing a sales tax to fund it. The problem is that for a sustainable service, for a for a permanent service that you expect to have in a society, um you would want that funding to be as stable as possible. And sales taxes are going to be subject to um economics, economic ups and downs. And the way that we have property taxes structured, it is a lot more stable. You know, obviously um property values can um can drop, but usually property value fluctuations in the market don't affect property taxes too much um because the assessments don't follow the the market value. So um, you know, I think that in a in a way that that makes sense. I I mean, seriously, this is treason to my libertarian friends.

SPEAKER_04 12:23

So funny. But it is so it still sounds very conservative to me.

SPEAKER_02 12:27

It's something that I think makes sense. No, I think I also kind of think that about healthcare. As long as we accept a society that we're talking about the minimum level of health care and we're not talking about access to all health care that could possibly that that does exist and could possibly exist. Right.

SPEAKER_04 12:50

So in other words, we're gonna we'll keep you from dying, maybe. Maybe, maybe not. But we're not gonna provide you with uh a cosmetic surgery.

SPEAKER_02 13:00

No, no, no, no. I mean cancer research. I'm talking about all the stuff that any, you know, this is all of the things that um that that cause healthcare to be so expensive, and and I don't want to get too far down that road because I think that government is what causes healthcare to be expensive, but anyway. What I'm saying is if we could get the society to all agree on a couple of things that we're gonna provide through tax revenue. Again, this is theft. We are agreeing to theft.

SPEAKER_04 13:36

I know, because you've already gone on record as saying you should you should fight against taxes.

SPEAKER_02 13:41

Everywhere in all places, yeah. In all places at all times. Yep. Um so we're agreeing to a level of theft. I would want to agree to a couple of minimum level uh health care uh provisions, and then that's it. That's what we're providing. Everything else is your response. I don't really know. It might be, I mean, I know that um, you know, the uh I haven't thought that far down the road, but um, but I think that some sort of you know, what the Obamacare um uh uh law, how it was sold. It's not what ended up happening, but how it was sold was we're gonna, this is what we're doing. You know, we're gonna provide this minimum level of care. And what most people think of is they think of uh a preventative visit once a year. That's what they think of. A preventative visit once a year, you're not gonna get charged for it. I think that's that's fine. And and I would be, again, I would be willing to um to compromise on some sort of like, and in addition, like one to two urgent care visits. You know?

SPEAKER_04 14:55

I can't even think of the last time I had an urgent care visit.

SPEAKER_02 14:58

That's funny because that's what we use as in our in our family. We have ended up, I mean we have a primary care physician. But hard to get into. Yeah, and and it just doesn't make much sense when there's a urgent care right down the street. So if like we use that for all of our sick care.

SPEAKER_04 15:14

Okay.

SPEAKER_02 15:15

And then that that's pretty that works out pretty well. Okay. But anyway, so those there, there you go. And those are your two? Now I've now that one that you kind of put together. That was a one and a one B.

SPEAKER_04 15:26

Okay, so let's hear number two. You said there was two, possibly.

SPEAKER_02 15:29

Yeah, the second one is a little, this is not it's a little um more um amorphous, I would say. And that is I think it's inevitable that when a population gets to a particular size, and I don't know what that size is, but when a particular when a population gets to a particular size, you have to have central planning in infrastructure. And you have that, and which which means necessarily a restriction on um personal property rights, what you're allowed to do with your own property. Um and so I just think that that's inevitable. That's why I say it's it's it's more left-wing because I mean, if you if you where we come from, the California, we were born under a regime that had already calcified years ago into complete bureaucratic nightmares, right? That's what California is. They long ago went in in the urban areas, and then the urban areas control all the rural areas in in California regulatory-wise. But they long ago transitioned, grown to a population where they went through a transition of like, now we've we've got to have some planning from from the outset where these roads go, where the sewers go, where the where the zoning for commercial and and all of that goes, you know, we can't just say, because you have a farm and you want to sell it, you get to sell it to whoever you want. You know, we're gonna have more central planning. We're gonna have what, you know, we're gonna impose some regulations on how you build that road. And then, and then layer upon layer upon layer, by the time we come along, you know, all of those decisions were made by generations, two generations in the past to transition. Now we're two generations into it's all just bureaucrats following policy. So then you're in a situation where you can look around, you can go, nobody makes it, you can't just make a common sense decision anymore, you know, because it doesn't it there's a rule that it violates right here. You can see it in this code. Yep. And everything's run by code and policy policy, right? And so then you go, well, I'm gonna, I'm gonna I gotta get out of here. And um and you know, I think that um I think that if you are in a well, and again, I think that if you're in a a rural enough area, you do not have to have policy and bureaucracy, and that's just that really is just tyranny. Um but I I think that it's probably, probably inevitable once a population gets to a certain level that you've got to, in order to be able to preserve the um the way of life for the people who have been living there forever.

SPEAKER_04 18:45

Well, I I think I I'm I'm pretty sure it's still this way. I know it was when we first moved here in '97, but if you're in the county, your property is not regulated in the same way that it is within the city.

SPEAKER_02 18:58

That's true.

SPEAKER_04 18:58

Right. So, like in the city, you can't necessarily and depending on and it also depends on what city you're in. So if I wanted to, and I live out in White County, I can park as many broken down vehicles as I can fit in my property. But you can't do that in Sparta. Right. Um and of course, now here in Mount Juliet, it's even more strict. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 19:23

Because it's because the population's growing and you're and I, you know, I um that's just again, I I just think that it's inevitable. I think it's just an inevitable transition.

SPEAKER_04 19:38

So it's interesting to talk about in terms of, you know, um traditionalist or um conservative and progressive, and where do we see ourselves maybe leaning towards or on the other side of things? And because as you're talking, one of the things I thought about is I guess, and this is actually goes to something back we talked about two years ago. How to say like what it is to be a liberal or what it is to be a conservative, if you go back in history, what is now a conservative position would have been considered by some a a liberal position, right? And so that liberal and that conservative thing sort of seems to stay.

SPEAKER_02 20:16

And so for me, I think today's revolutionary as tomorrow's reactionary. Right.

SPEAKER_04 20:20

Yeah. And so I think about it in terms of who is trying to be the reformer and who is the um who is the uh uh institution. So when I hear things like, you know, the taxes and and um you know, I see that. Well, and I even like today in in our arguments, when I see a lot of times everybody seems to want to be the reformer. But we still label certain groups conservative and certain groups progress you know, tr progressive or liberal or whatever. So um because even your positions went down the wrong pipe.

SPEAKER_02 21:03

Well, this is where I get a little pedantic, and my family rolls their eyes every time this comes up because this is where I start separating out um the spectrums of conservative to progressive and the spectrum of um right-leaning and left-leaning. And um, you know, my again, my my family would roll their eyes if they heard me talking about this because I talk about it so much. But um, but like for instance, I see it is not a lot of times uh my conservative friends or my um, you know, however they want to describe themselves or whatever, they will um when they're talking about uh the Nazis, they'll like to point out the Nazis. Always they'll like to point out that uh, you know, it's national socialists, socialists right in the name, right? And they'll point out that it was um, you know, confiscation of property and the and and what they'll say is like it's um it's the same thing as um as communism. It was the same thing as communism. That's not right. It wasn't right. However, what they're getting at, they're getting at a principle that was right, in my opinion. I see um uh Stalin and Hitler, the Nazis and the communists, as both being both being progressive. But one's a right wing progressive, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 22:28

That's kind of what I'm getting at, right? Is this idea of anybody that wants to change what is currently the status quo is a progressive.

SPEAKER_02 22:34

Because they wanted to, they both wanted to reform the world as they saw it.

SPEAKER_04 22:38

Yes.

SPEAKER_02 22:39

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 22:39

So um, where I, you know, and so you you kind of lean, especially with the one about education, right?

SPEAKER_02 22:50

You're leaning more towards a progressive position, but you still have very like strict guidelines to it. Yeah. To me, it feels like I'm giving in on something. Yeah. And I'll just give in on this, but I'm standing right here.

SPEAKER_04 23:07

But it but we are not gonna, but we're gonna we're not gonna give you a good education. Right. We're gonna give you just enough. That's right. We're not gonna give you great health care, just enough. Right where a true progressive would say, no, it they have the right to the best healthcare they can get. They have education as a right to the healthcare is a right education that they can possibly get.

SPEAKER_02 23:26

And I will always stand on something cannot be a right if it requires the labor of another.

SPEAKER_04 23:33

Okay.

SPEAKER_02 23:33

Rights can only exist if they are outside of the labor of another. Therefore, education cannot be a right, healthcare cannot be a right, housing cannot be a right. These things cannot be a right because they require the labor of another person. However, given that, I'm okay with as long as we're all this is the thing. I want everyone to get into a room. I'm like, okay, we're all gonna agree though. We're not calling it a right. Okay. It's just so dumb. But that's like that's kind of how I'm sitting, you know? Yeah. And then I go, okay, but I'll give it on this. Anyway, that's my yeah.

SPEAKER_04 24:08

So I haven't really thought too much about it because I know that I'm just kind of all over the place anyway. Sure. Um, but uh so when push come to shove politically, I would tell people, and I just I would just say this, and I really have to think more about it, but I I tend to be socially progressive, fiscally conservative. Um what do I mean when I say that? I I I do um I I don't believe that uh I don't want to word this. I'm not a socialist, right? I do think that there is something to be said for um working hard and uh the harder you work, the the more income you can get, right? Um and so I guess that sort of leans me towards a more conservative position that I don't think that like a quality of outcome or a quality of uh of opportunity instead of a quality of outcome. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 25:10

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 25:11

I do think that everybody should have equal opportunity. And so I know that that's not the case. And so that does bother me. Sure. Um but I think if we get to the point where everyone has equal opportunity, then you we have to work for it. Right. I'm not a big fan of everyone gets whatever. Um I also do believe that it's not the government's responsibility to take care of its citizens.

SPEAKER_02 25:40

Yeah, we've talked about that before. We were talking about like uh homelessness and stuff.

SPEAKER_04 25:44

Yeah, I don't I don't think so. I think I think the government's responsibility is to order society in such a way that um people have the opportunity, that that there's nothing blocking the opportunity and to uh protect them. Right. So the police force is uh should be a protection group, right? Um and uh and two, uh the the the the federal government, the military should be to protect from foreign, right? Um but I don't think the government should be in the handout business. I don't think it's the responsibility of the government to make sure that but I do think that we have a responsibility to take care of each other. Right. And so as a human being, if I see someone who is doesn't have a coat, I should give them a coat.

SPEAKER_02 26:40

You have the responsibility.

SPEAKER_04 26:41

I have the responsibility. The government does not. That is not the role of the government. And so that's probably uh a con that's probably more of a conservative position, I would think. Um and I do think that uh we created our own problem with the government now being responsible for taking care of its citizens when we began to push really hard, uh push the the church and everything really hard out. And when that starts to happen, then the government assumes the responsibility and the role that often sat with religion, whether it be Christian, whether it be Jew, whether it be Muslim, just whatever that that's built into all of them that you should take care of each other. Yeah. Um and so so yeah, I guess that would be my more conservative thing is that that's not the government's responsibility. How's that? Is that does that make me a conservative? Yeah.

SPEAKER_05 27:39

Welcome.

SPEAKER_04 27:40

Yeah. Just kidding. Uh and I have I have I have really good progressive friends that think I'm not progressive enough.

SPEAKER_02 27:48

Sure.

SPEAKER_04 27:49

You know? And um, and I have very good uh conservative friends that would never expect me to be conservative.

SPEAKER_02 27:58

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 27:58

In fact, they're a little bit surprised when they do find things out.

SPEAKER_02 28:01

Yeah. It's always, you know, um, you were showing me that um that like spectrum thing. Yeah, the thing we're working on. Yeah, and like compatibilism. The compatibilism thing. And the one of the things that I was thinking about when I was looking at that is that um, you know, you had all of these like labels on there and and um then kind of the the ideas like where do you find yourself on this spectrum? And and you you had other stuff in there that I think is really interesting. I'll be interested when you flesh it all out and create a presentation and finish it and all of that.

SPEAKER_04 28:37

Yeah, you saw about it's about halfway through.

SPEAKER_02 28:40

Yeah, but one one of the things that I thought of when I looked at those labels is that the other thing that happens is um that you can find yourself um saying things or or hearing things that seem true to you that like jump way over onto another one. And so then you're not like it's not like I'm I lean to the right, and therefore all of my positions kind of fall into this leaning to the right position where I'm just slightly right on everything, or I lean to the left, so I'm just slightly left on everything. It's more it a most of the time when you get into conversations like this, like I'm sure somebody could hear what I just said and be like, well, you're not You're not a libertarian. You're not a libertarian. Yeah, exactly. What are you talking about? We should there should be taxes. Right. Taxes equals theft. Yeah. I taught my there's one of the first slogans that my kids ever like repeated over and over again is taxes are theft.

SPEAKER_04 29:40

That's interesting. And so Which one of your kids is more a libertarian? That's a really good question.

SPEAKER_02 29:48

I I don't know that I could say that because of um because they're still developing. If I had to just At this point in time. If I just hopefully we're all still developing. If I just had to, yeah, I know, but you know Like kids can you know they change so much and then um I I voted for W. Okay. So uh Me too. I uh you did?

SPEAKER_04 30:11

Yeah, but I voted for W. But I've also voted for Clinton.

SPEAKER_02 30:15

No. I voted for Obama. I'm sorry. I'm just kidding. Just kidding. Uh I would say Reed. I would say Reed just because he's more um he he's more developed in his political ideology, so he talks about it more. Like for instance, right now, he's very he the things that he says when he's talking politics are very like anti-Trump and anti-Republican because that's who holds the position right now. But when it swings, I will not be surprised at all if he like spends four years sounding like he's a Republican. Do you know what I mean? Like he's kind of anti-authoritarian.

SPEAKER_04 31:00

What's that guy's name? Which I really like. There's a there's a uh um I like that a lot. There's a comedian and he talks like he's got kind of a gruff voice, and and he's he's an older guy now, but he's he's still alive? Yeah, I think his last name might be Black.

SPEAKER_02 31:16

Um yeah, um uh yes, his last name is Black, and I know who you're talking about, and I cannot think of it. Not Jack, no older. It's like Robert Black, it's like Rob Black.

SPEAKER_04 31:28

You know who I'm talking about, right? So I saw this thing uh yesterday, a video, and he said, I've never before like have found so many people offended by my position on the president and what I say about the president. He goes, if you've paid attention to me at all, I've hated all of them. Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah. Um, what is it, Lewis Black? Lewis Black. Yes, I love him. Yeah, so he's so funny. But anyway, kind of like what you're talking about. I wouldn't be surprised if he was a libertarian.

SPEAKER_02 32:03

Yeah. I and I'll say, um I've had this really interesting, I've had a really interesting um experience this term. Because I I will I'll say just I'll just be kind of vulnerable here. I rolled into this term being like, let's go, baby. Trump went to the Libertarian Party convention. I remember when that was gonna get raided. Yeah, that was gonna be happening. We talked about that. Yep. Um, and you know, I kind of like I chuckle out of the side of my mouth when he when he did that, you know. Um, but rolling in to the administration, he did the the populist thing of like, I'm gonna gather a coalition, I'm gonna make promises. And he like any, he's like, I'm I'm um, you know, I'm bringing in RFK Jr. Um, I'm which he did. I'm bringing, you know, his the whole cabinet that he brought in. Besides, I don't really care about the defense secretary, but like the rest of the cabinet, even Cash, who I've been really disappointed in, um uh chairing the or the um running the FBI, um, we were all really excited about having him come in and be like, we are releasing Epstein files, we are releasing JFK files, we are like all of it, right? Tulsi bringing Tulsi in. I was I was like, let's go, right? And also, you know, like even like the whole um immigration thing, I know people are upset about that, but there's like a part of me that's like, you know, it's tough to take. It's tough to take the people who are like upset about ice right now because we I I I've been listening to how we shouldn't be caring about illegal immigration for the last 20 years, you know, and we've seen the results. And so, you know, like I'm a libertarian, I but still like we gotta have a border. We gotta do something, and there's always gonna be there's always gonna be criticism, no matter what, when you when you start trying to fix the problem. So I've been like kind of like, okay, fine, do what you gotta do, right? But um, and so anyway, I've kind of had this like, you know, uh everyone's gonna be anti-Trump because he's a lightning rod, and I'm just not, you know, I'm I'm let him let him cook right now, you know? Um and in the last like like month or so, he's turned on like first of all, the main one that he turned on was Massey, that that all of us libertarians, well, as far as I'm concerned, from a libertarian position, I was like, all right, you lost me. Fine. I'm I'm like you're gonna come after Massey, who is the most principled right-leaning libertarian Republican in Congress. He's like actually principled. All right, forget you. Now I'm like turning on him, you know. Like now I'm like, all right, go after him. I don't care, bring him down, you know. But it's it's just interesting. Um the I'm sure like people who hear me say that, I'm sure there's there's some people who would be like, yeah, we told you, and fine. You know, that's fine. But um, it's just been an interesting, uh, an interesting experience over the last uh nine months or so. But yeah, Reed's been very anti-Trump be again, because he's the one in power right now. He was very anti-Biden. He's very anti uh Newsome, he's very he's just anti whoever's in power, which again, I can definitely respect that.

SPEAKER_04 35:51

So so really what I'm hearing is that we're both liberals. We just are we just have different opinions on what it needs to look like. How so? What do you mean we're both liberals? Well, in the same way that that fascists and communists were both liberals.

SPEAKER_02 36:05

Both progressives, like trying to change things.

SPEAKER_04 36:08

Yeah, okay. Thank you for correcting me.

SPEAKER_02 36:10

Progressive. No, I didn't mean to progress. I didn't mean to close.

SPEAKER_04 36:12

Yeah, we're both we're both progressives. I don't want to change things.

SPEAKER_02 36:16

We just Yeah, you do.

SPEAKER_04 36:17

What do I want to change? I want everything to stop. You want to blow it up. What do I want to blow up? No, no more. We're gonna you've got to reduce taxes. You've gotta like I think that you I think that you would want to see the government change.

SPEAKER_02 36:28

Okay, so that's okay, that's a fair assessment of what I have said so far. Here is how I like if here is my like the tableau that I paint on. You want to make America great again? I want to make America great again. That's right. No. I'm gonna buy you a mega hat for Christmas. I'm not kidding. I want everything to stop circa 2014. Okay. Okay. Post gay marriage is legal. Post kind of we don't really care about um legal weed anymore. Yeah, it's still federally.

SPEAKER_04 37:03

You're sounding kind of uh progressive.

SPEAKER_02 37:06

No, but just stop there. I'll give you everything. We'll I'll I'll give uh we we give we give everything. Okay. We've got gay marriage, uh, Roe v. Wade isn't overturned. That's fine. Okay. And uh and we've got and we've got kind of quasi-legal weed, and all the taxes are what they are, and Obamacare has been passed. I'll even give you Obamacare. That's fine. And you can keep Obama actually as the president.

SPEAKER_03 37:30

That's fine. Just stop. Everything stop, but it just kept going. I just want everything to stop.

SPEAKER_02 37:38

Okay. That's why that's why I call myself a conservative. I'm like a I'm like a mid-2000s conservative. I just want everything to stop.

SPEAKER_04 37:45

Yeah, I mean, and so technically you are a you're conservative in that you want to conserve where we are. Yeah. But the further we get from there, you're gonna become a progressive. And then it's just gonna be a matter of though determining what would be better communism or socialism.

SPEAKER_02 38:07

You know, uh are those our two options, communism or socialism?

SPEAKER_04 38:10

No, actually, according to um uh The End of the World is just the beginning. Great book if you want to get really depressed. Uh-huh. Um it is it's actually a very interesting book. It's about the end of globalization. Yeah. It's de-global de globalization is the term. Um he suggests in his book, and I'm sorry I have to say he because I can't remember who the author is right now.

SPEAKER_02 38:32

But um It's the guy with the little uh ponytail. I don't know. Does he have a ponytail? He does, unfortunate. But he does. Yeah. I've seen him on Rogan before.

SPEAKER_04 38:41

Yeah. Anyway, uh, he talks about that we don't have a current ism that will that would that it's that's the right ism.

SPEAKER_02 38:51

That's probably true, actually.

SPEAKER_04 38:52

You know, and he and he said it's not capitalism, it's not socialism, it's not communism, it's uh, you know, it it's we don't have the right ism yet.

SPEAKER_02 39:01

Historians, 500 years from now, if we don't destroy ourselves, we will. Um we'll probably look back and create and and and decide what we had. You know what I mean? Like we won't know it right now. Right.

SPEAKER_04 39:14

You know? Are you saying like Locke didn't well did Locke call it capitalism?

SPEAKER_02 39:20

I don't think so. And I don't think Adam I could be wrong about this, but I am almost positive Adam Smith didn't even call it capitalism. I don't think that's I think he talked about the role of capital and the you know the unseen hand and all of that. But I don't know that they're not gonna be able to do that. Well, it was a reaction to mercantilism, which I don't know that anybody during that time period uh would have called it mercantilism. I don't know if that's the case or not.

SPEAKER_04 39:48

Actually, I do know of it ism we could go back to beautalism.

SPEAKER_02 39:51

That sounds pretty good. As long as as long as you're a uh we gotta get land first.

SPEAKER_04 39:58

I just want to be one of the lords.

SPEAKER_02 39:59

Yeah, you gotta get land first. Yeah. Well, you know how you get it. You've actually I don't want to be a lord. I'd rather just be one of the tenants. You want to be a tenant? What do you mean you want to be a tenant? I don't want to. They're basically slaves. I don't want to have the responsibility of being a lord.

SPEAKER_03 40:12

Response you don't have any responsibility. You put the responsibility in the hands of your of your land manager.

SPEAKER_04 40:18

We're gonna argue about feudalism and whether it'd be better to be a lord or a surf. Oh, yes. Oh, and I'm thinking about my kids who are gonna have to look it up. They would know what a lord or a surf is, right? They'll know lord. Surf may be a bit much. Yeah, um, and they know feudalism. And actually, I'm I'm it is tongue-in-cheek. Both of my kids have uh taken AP um Oh wow. A P history? Uh AP uh yeah, like uh in human geography and like all yeah, they they know. Oh yeah, Robbie right now is in AP uh government. Dang, Gina. That's so that's impressive. Yeah, he and I uh had to work on a project the other night um about uh about the development of state states um uh uh minor labor laws. Child child labor laws and how it connects to the federal government and the role that the state plays in implementing and determining child labor laws within their own border. It was interesting.

SPEAKER_02 41:28

Yeah, that is interesting.

SPEAKER_04 41:30

So um good for you, Rami. Yeah. So they probably do know surf and lord. I'm I'm just teasing. Yeah. All right. So uh I think what we've agreed on is that you're actually a progressive. Yeah. At least not yet. Maybe not yet, but you will be.

SPEAKER_02 41:45

All right, all right. You know what we actually are? Old men. That's what we are.

SPEAKER_04 41:52

We're old. Oh boy. All right, so that's our common ground. Yeah, but I'm if you're an old man, I got like one foot in the grave. Yeah. Congratulations. Yeah. And when people say, Jeff, you're middle-aged, I'm like, I'm not living to 108.

unknown 42:08

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 42:08

I mean I'm not middle-aged anymore.

SPEAKER_02 42:10

You are. I see middle aged as like a range. So like you're middle-aged, but you're like one of our elder middle-aged men.

SPEAKER_04 42:17

Yeah. You're 40. I don't remember. Okay, yeah, because I'm 54. Yeah, we're like 10 years apart again. You could you could live to be 88. So you're like middle-aged still.

SPEAKER_02 42:27

Yeah, but I don't think you go.

SPEAKER_04 42:29

Who do you know that's gonna live to be 108?

SPEAKER_02 42:31

I don't think that you're middle-aged right in the like right at a moment. Sure.

SPEAKER_04 42:37

I know I heard you is like a 20-year range? Is it a so like from like 35 to 55?

SPEAKER_02 42:42

I mean, look.

SPEAKER_04 42:44

I'm gonna go 35 to 55.

SPEAKER_02 42:46

I'm in the insurance business. 80 81 is the blended life expectancy between genders, but that's because it's 79 for dudes. Yeah. So I'm clean closing in.

SPEAKER_04 42:59

Yeah. Uh that's why I'm hoping that's why I'm hoping to retire at 59 and a half. Yeah, go for it. Because at 59 and a half, I'm eligible for Medicare.

SPEAKER_02 43:07

Right? Not Medicare. No. What 65 is Medicare.

SPEAKER_04 43:12

Then what what is it at 55?

SPEAKER_02 43:13

59 and a half, you can start taking money out of retirement accounts without penalty. That's what it is. This is not a financial show, by the way. This is not a financial show.

SPEAKER_04 43:22

That is me as a friend. No, so my friend Lucas reminded me of what my financial advisor, David, that's right. Told me. Yeah. Um but yeah, you can you can start uh because I knew 59 and a half was in my head. Yep. Yeah, because we met with David just about a month ago. And I thought, oh, that's pretty good. Because he said the one concern, David. The one concern that everyone has is um insurance.

SPEAKER_02 43:45

Yeah, that's the thing. Those last five years, between 60 and 65, those are killing.

SPEAKER_04 43:51

I think I think in the next couple episodes, we need to talk about insurance reform, medical care reform in our country.

unknown 43:58

Okay.

SPEAKER_04 43:59

All right. I think we can solve it. All right. And then people just need to send this episode to the to Washington. Yeah. And it'll be all taken care of. There we go. Did we decide we agreed on something? Oh, yeah. You're a progressive. Awesome. All right. Thanks.

SPEAKER_00 44:16

Thank you for listening to Living on Common Ground. Please follow wherever you listen to your podcasts and share it with your friends. You can also find a link to our social in the description. The more people we have living on common ground, the better the world will be.