Government spending to make services accessible drives up the cost of those services disproportionately, while sectors the government leaves to the market see deflation.

47:22>> what defines each of these parties. I mean, you were part of a party that >> the Democrats, you know, in I think their the peak moderate era that wanted to balance the budget, that wanted the border to be controlled and that wanted to have, you know, globalism, you know, and now that seems to be half Trump's. I mean, it's hard to define these parties anymore, especially with social.

47:41>> That's why I think actually categories like saying these are leftist policies is actually all bro all wasted and broken. But go ahead, David. >> Yeah. No, because I mean even in the Trump administration, we're taking equity stakes in companies, which is yeah, >> not a typical free free market conservative view. But let me just frame this up. So I would argue that over the last 30 years, where the government

48:02spends more to try and make things more accessible to American citizens, the cost of those things goes up in a disproportionate way. The average rate of inflation in the last 30 years has been 2.5%. But housing's gone up by at least 5% a year on average, compounding. Education over 6%, healthcare 5 1.5%. And all three of these categories are categories where the federal government has launched programs to either

48:29subsidize or make available these categories of services to people through promises. You are going to all have a home. You are all going to have education. You're going to all have healthcare. And the more that the government provides 300 billion a year in housing support, $200 billion a year in education, over a trillion dollars, $2 trillion almost in healthcare, the more things get more expensive. And so

48:52is it really the role of the government to provide these services or get the f out of the way and let the market work? Because in all the places where the government hasn't launched services, hasn't provided support, hasn't provided loans like technology, energy, food, consumer services, we've seen a net decrease in total cost. And so deflation actually works when you let markets work. But when the government comes in

49:19and tries to rally up markets to provide more to more people, things simply get more expensive. >> Okay. >> Tell tell me why I'm wrong. >> You're wrong. And first of all, the GI Bill was a government initiative. Massive increase in housing and home ownership in America. Would you have recommended after World War II for those who served overseas, no GI Bill because the market will take care of your

49:44housing needs? It also had an education component. Number two, when you said we don't have a we don't food costs went down and government was involved, what do you consider the agricultural bill that subsidized growing of food in the United States to big Agra? >> Well, I know that bill very well, but we we could debate that bill if you'd like, but I can two you say we're not involved

50:08in energy. Well, we have a tax write off for drilling. We're involved in energy. That's just not true. >> You could make that case about everything, Ron. Like, you could say we touch everything. But our total dollar spend, our total dollar spend is what I'm talking about. >> That that's why your analogies are wrong and B that right now I happen to think uh that the United States government and