We may earn money or products from the companies mentioned in this post.
![\"Matt](\"https://yogispodcastnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Liberty-Revealed-episode-1-1.png\")
Liberty Revealed Episode 14 Show Summary
Mike is joined by 17-year-old Matt Plautz to discuss all things politics.
Listen to Liberty Revealed Episode 14
Liberty Revealed Episode 14 Show Notes
Mike: Hey, welcome back to another episode of Liberty Revealed. I\'m Mike Mahony, your host, and today I have a guest with me. His name is Matt Plautz. He\'s the 17-year-old host of Unfazed with Matt Plautz. His podcast focuses on current events comedy, philosophy and various subjects that guests bring in. So please welcome to the show, Matt. Hey Matt
Matt: Yeah thanks so much for having me, Mike.
Mike: How are you doing today?
Matt: I\'m doing great. Just excited to get going and talk a little bit about what we were talking about with Howard Schultz and everything like that. Talk about some independent candidates in just 2020 in general.
Mike: Sure well before we jump into that, you know since it is Super Bowl Sunday when we\'re recording…Patriots or Rams?
Matt: I\'m Patriots. I got a patriots jersey in my closet right now. I am a Bears fan, but they never make the Super Bowl so I usually root for the Pats and I\'ve got Pats by seven.
Mike: Alright, awesome. Yeah, I think it\'s gonna be a good game, that\'s for sure. So, we\'ll see. So, so yeah, you mentioned Howard Schultz and I mean, that\'s been the the big uproar in the media. You know, everyone\'s afraid that Howard Schultz is going to run as an independent and taking votes away from the democrats, that he will help re-elect Donald Trump. So what are your thoughts about that?
Matt: Well, first of all, I mean, I think it\'s a little ridiculous that everyone\'s attacking him for running as an independent when he is an independent. Like, what else would he be running as? He was a former Democrat, obviously, but he no longer aligns with the Democratic Party in terms of, you know, free college for all he doesn\'t agree with, as far as I\'m aware, free health care just doesn\'t think it\'s affordable. So when your party has shifted, people leave the party. It\'s just like, you know, you wouldn\'t expect someone to continue to vote for the Democratic Party if their opinion has changed on it. So I mean on that side of things, I just think it\'s a little unfair for everyone to be so accusatory towards him when really, it\'s just, he\'s still very against Trump. Whether you like Trump or hate Trump, you can\'t say that Howard Schultz is trying to help out Trump in any way. And I don\'t think there\'s any guarantee that it really would help Trump because personally, I\'ve worked on the Republican side for a couple years now, and I know a lot of Republicans who are agitated with Trump and I know a lot of Democrats that love him. So there really is no way and that just as you saw with 2016, deep diving and analytics doesn\'t really work anymore because people are extremely unpredictable with how divided our nation is right now. So I don\'t know I think they\'re being a little bit unfair. What about you?
Mike: Yeah I completely agree with you. I think that
Matt: Did it didn\'t he didn\'t Ross end up getting about like 15% in some states?
Matt:Yeah
Mike: He definitely affected that election. But it was because he ran more on as a conservative independent and so he, you know he made that, he created, you know, a situation that they\'re claiming Schultz is going to create. I don\'t think he will. I think if he runs with a position in the center he\'s going to have a good chance of getting a lot of votes but he\'s going to pull them from both parties. That\'s the key thing that I think they miss.
Matt: Yeah. Did it didn\'t he, didn\'t Ross end up getting about like 15% in some states?
Mike: Yes, yes I mean, he did quite well but of course,
Matt: Yeah.
Mike: You know, a similar situation to Schultz, he was a CEO of a major tech company. He had a lot of money to burn and I mean, that\'s, you know, money and politics is another topic for another day. And maybe you can come on another time and we can talk about that, but for now, I mean, I think.
Matt: For sure.
Mike: It\'s known that one of the weird things about our country is, you know, I think it was Thomas Jefferson that said, you know, we should avoid political parties and you know, I think he was right. I think political parties…what it does is you get some people who are automatically against Donald Trump because they\'re democrat and then you get some people who support anything he says, because they’re republican rather than, you know, I\'ve gone through the last two years as a libertarian. I\'ve gone through the last two years going well, okay, I like that idea. Oh, I hate that idea. I can\'t believe you said that. I\'m all over the place with it, because he\'s all over the place. And that\'s how it should be. But then you get the people that are like, in lockstep and I know they\'re intelligent people because I know some of them personally and you just say how is it that you miss like, like, how do you feel about this wall that he wants to build?
Matt: The wall well, yeah, just before I talked about that a little bit, I 100% agree.What I always say is that you get entrenched with a two-party system you\'re forced to check a box that you stand slightly closer to and then everyone gets mad at you if you check that box was oh you agree with this that he said. No, I don\'t! I was forced to choose one of them because there isn\'t a viable third party and, so yeah, that I totally agree that it\'s a broken system I don\'t know that parties are unnecessarily the problem, maybe they are, maybe they aren\'t, but I think the lack of choices it\'s just not representative to the population, you know? You have people that couldn\'t check republican or democrat and that\'s why there should be four to five parties maybe even more maybe less. But and with the wall, it is it\'s a hot button issue and I can go either way on it. I understand both sides because you on the Democrat side of things, their reasoning for not wanting the wall is mostly financial saying that it\'s not worth the dollars spent..And then there are also those further to the left that just think that it\'s inhumane. Um, I think there\'s definitely an argument to be made if it\'s worth the money or not if it would actually be effective and depending on what side you are, they\'re going to say one thing or say the other, but I think it\'s a little ridiculous, the inhumane part, because in my opinion, it just…it\'s not inhumane to keep people out of your country when they can come here legally whether or not the system\'s broken,you know I don\'t actually know too much about that because everything every information you\'re getting they\'re trying to nudge you one way or the other so it\'s really hard to truly know how broken the system is, but to say that it\'s inhumane to try and keep border security, you know, talk to the people that are that are being raped, and being murdered and stuff by people that we didn\'t get a chance to vette and I don\'t think that all illegal immigrants by any means. I don\'t even think the majority of them I think most of them are coming here because they want abrighter future, but you know, they can come here legally. And the argument I\'ve always had is because I\'m actually I leaned away and the wall that\'s one of the things I do like about Trump, because he\'s so adamant about border security. I always say, you know, regarding illegal immigration, it\'s just like, for me, you know, it\'s, it\'s way easier for me to just hop on the highway and never take driver\'s education never have to go get my license at the DMV, because God knows no one wants to go to the DMV, you know, it\'d be way easier to do that. But in a society, there are laws that may inconvenience you just for the sake of the general population safety and if we need to vet people, we need to vet people if you have a problem with that, you know, I think that maybe you should look at going somewhere else. That\'s just my personal opinion. What about you?
Mike; Well I mean I kind of have a kind of a hybrid libertarian view on this issue i think that you know first of all, let me tell you, my wife is from Canada and we\'ve been going through the immigration process herself. And the first thing I\'ll tell you is it\'s extremely inefficient
Matt: Yeah
Mike: .We\'ve been in the process for quite a while now. And we still don\'t have it. We we\'ve been told there\'s an interview date been picked and that it\'s being sent to us. But you\'re talking over two weeks ago, why does it take two weeks to process a letter that goes, you know, from maybe I think it\'s coming from Chicago to Orange County.
Matt: sounds like getting approved by iTunes
Mike: right? It\'s exactly like why Why does it take so long and And not only that, I mean, we spent over $5,000 on the process. And I mean, imagine if, you know, I\'m lucky enough to I\'m running multiple businesses and making good money. Imagine if I was making $10 an hour How do I afford the 1400 dollar filing fee to get her here? And so I think that what we need to do is we need to be
Matt: Yeah
Mike: Give people a pathway that if they want to come here and work that they can do that with a work visa, where we vet them, like you said, and we also make sure then that they\'re paying their income taxes because you know what, they don\'t pay their income taxes, we can revoke their visa and have them sent out of here. But I also think that it comes down to this there if there\'s going to be an immigration system at the federal level. And I don\'t think we\'re ever going to see that go away. And if that\'s where it\'s going to be, then they need to have it so that the pathway to being a legal immigrant is affordable and something you can have helped doing if you don\'t if you know, that\'s one of the things that\'s lacking. Like if you don\'t have you don\'t understand something you call the immigration people and they\'ll mostly tell you, well, you\'re supposed to check this box and you\'re supposed to make sure that this is filled out, but they can\'t really give you advice should you fill out this form or this form and there needs to be someplace ever I mean, I don\'t know how it is in every state, but I know in a few states I\'ve been in the court systems have helped centers that people are there volunteering their time to help you so that you are able to avail yourself of your rights and of course as a libertarian personal freedom and liberty it\'s huge for me. So I think if they could they could fix that. Then we get to the point where and this is where I think I part ways with libertarians because I feel Remember I said if they don\'t pay their taxes we can revoke their reason and get them out of the country. I think we need if once we\'ve had an affordable system that makes sense the people can understand and actually have a legal path to work here. Then we need to be like Australia where you don\'t you overstay your visa they send somebody out to find you and support you and attach a penalty to it you\'re banned for three years you can apply again for three years I think what would fast happen is we would be would make a lot more revenue in the immigration system because you know, it\'s it\'s a volume thing more people going to going to apply legally and you\'re going to you\'re going to make that that money but also you\'re going to have higher tax revenues because you\'re you\'re getting people in this country who really want to work and they want to take these jobs and I don\'t know they it seems like we should allow them to do that that\'s just the where I where I go with it and i think you know as far as I my stance on the wall is i think it\'s it\'s it\'s extremely expensive and I think they need to use a system like we have on the Canadian border on the Canadian border we have technology there\'s electronics that if you walk across the border it goes off and they and it\'ll trigger infrared cameras that\'ll turn on I mean they can find you if you\'re you know trying to tempt into the country illegally the wall I mean they\'re going to go around it they\'re going to go under it. They\'re going to go I mean right away. The joke was if it\'s a 50-foot wall, someone\'s gonna make a 51-foot tall ladder. I don\'t necessarily think they\'ll climb the ladder to go over it but you know they\'re gonna they\'re gonna find their ways yeah you know they\'re gonna they\'re gonna find their ways and I think we it may just be too much money especially since there are areas of the border where the terrain it won\'t allow someone to cross so don\'t have a wall there..Yeah, you only have two choices.
Matt: Yeah. And so. So when I say that I\'m I\'m pro wall. I think it\'s just because I\'m forced to. Like I said, that\'s the problem with the two party system, you have two choices. And the Democrats, they want to say that they have no word for border security. They\'re not really doing a whole lot about border security and they don\'t want to and that\'s very clear for risk because because they receive a primary amount of the votes that come from that, but that\'s a discussion for another day, but it\'s um, it\'s a little unfortunate that you\'re forced to check one of the two boxes, which is almost no border security or border security that I don\'t think is the most effective and I\'ve always agreed with the argument that well, the wall isn\'t the most cost-effective option on the wall isn\'t X, Y, or Z, that those are legitimate arguments. What I have a problem with is when people come in, and you know, they, they try and instead of doing a logical appeal, they use an emotional appeal. And that\'s my problem is because I\'ve never really been a recipient of emotional appeal because, you know, it\'s not the best way to do things. You know, if you make a decision based on an emotional reaction, it\'s usually not the best result. And so I think the discussion that should be had is not and I understand Trump\'s angle Trump wants to build a wall because it\'s it\'d be very hard for the Democrats to undo that to justify undoing it because once the money is spent, that\'s what we have, you know, taking the wall down wouldn\'t make sense it\'d be very hard to justify so I get that angle of it. But at the same time, it\'s you really have to think about is technology a better solution? You know we have drones we have all kinds of technology we could be using to our advantage we just need to figure out how to make that a permanent solution and also how to fix the system it\'s similar to taxes you know you should tax people when we tax the rich far too much they just load all their money the Bahamas you have to find the right percentage where people will actually be willing to get taxed. So we need to fix the immigration system like we try to fix the tax system is where people it\'s easy enough for people to come. But we also can at least attempt to filter out the bad ones, you know that we have to find some type of a sweet sweet spot where it\'s effective. But also like you said, I didn\'t know that type of angle from the Canadian perspective. And I\'m similar. I\'m sure it\'s similar to Mexico because one of my friends had an immigration problem as well. They had to move back to Mexico for like a year to resolve it. So it is it is a broken system.we do need to figure out how do we fix it as opposed to just not doing anything so like like I said it\'s that\'s what\'s important about a third fourth fifth and party is so that we can have other ideas then just build a wall or do nothing it\'s a two extremities is what it is
MIke: Yeah I agree with you and I think like how do you think someone like let\'s say Schultz were to run and by some miracle he were to win. So now you have, you know, probably a democrat-controlled house or a Republican-controlled Senate, and you have an independent president in the middle. How much do you think that would affect the outcome of issues like this?
Matt: I think the the opinion that Schultz is a true centrist is I think it\'s a little bit skewed because if you look, you know, he\'s a lifelong Democrat I think it would be similar to like having a 2000 democrat or 2004 Democrat in presidency..He would probably lean towards democratic issues but the the more radical progressive you know Alexandria, Kazuo Cortez Bernie Sanders type of thing I don\'t think those would be I don\'t think he would fight for those but the more moderate type of you know Nancy Pelosi would do very well I think if that makes any sense in a Schultz presidency she tries to be progressive but we all know that she was a moderate and she\'s just switching with the times to keep on staying relevant I think it would lean democratic to be completely honest and then everyone\'s know on maybe tax issues he\'d lean a little more conservative from what I\'ve been able to understand he he\'s not a huge fan of taxes but he thinks Trump\'s tax cuts were a little extreme you know top heavy whereas they should have been towards the middle class which I honestly agree with you know if I could have chosen one or the other I as a libertarian with some conservative beliefs as well not a big fan of taxes i live in Illinois one of the most tax states in the nation and I can tell you people are fleeing out of here so we have to find like I said a sweet spot with taxes as well where people are not you know loading out there money to the Cayman Islands to the Bahamas. We need to find something that people are actually willing to pay and it\'s it\'s a truly fair and balanced tax, but that\'s difficult.
Mike: But ok so like one of the things I read is the you know, they actually think was Fortune magazine said well you know maybe he can maybe he could help fix this country because you know he\'s a corporate he\'s been a corporate executive he\'s run a large corporation Starbucks of course but then isn\'t that what they said about Trump?
Matt: yes and no, um, I think the fact that Schultz wouldn\'t carry in very many. You know, opinions. He\'s not the most he\'s more of an open minded whereas Trump it\'s kind of my way or the highway. And some people love that. Some people hate it. I\'m not trying to reprimand or trying to praise him for that. But I think that\'s pretty obvious that people love Trump because he\'s so close minded and the people hate him for that reason so but I think Schultz is that the type of person that will listen to both sides I almost think that he would be easily influenced for bad and for good just because he he is so open minded but he is a smart guy at the end of the day obviously you can\'t be where he is today but I think it\'s kind of interesting that the the democrats primarily are attacking him so much for his success when he came from almost nothing he\'s he\'s quite honestly living the democrat you know, the dream of coming from nothing and becoming something but it\'s a he\'s being attached..That and I think that\'s why the democrats are almost losing their mold if that makes any sense.
Mike: Well, I think like I was you were saying that I was thinking about how if you are a third party candidate so you know, of course of the major third parties that makes sense and have a big, big enough numbers to make a dent in a run for president, you\'re talking about either green party or Libertarian Party and the problems that they have getting elected is people say, Well, okay, if I had voted Gary Johnson and is the president he goes into office with no allies on either side. I disagree with that, by the way, he goes in there with no allies. I think that\'s too simplistic of a concept.
Matt: Yeah.
Mike: I think that he would definitely have allies because I think what it would do is it would force Congress and Senate to start thinking long term and start thinking about the best interests of the people they represent. Rather than their party line because they\'re going to have a president who\'s going to say, Well, okay, the Republicans, you\'re thinking about the solution this way yours is a democrats your solution is be but like my solution is see kind of a hybrid of a and b. So now what are you going to do? And I think what will happen is for the first time in a long time, you would see kind of that bill clinton cooperation where, you know, Clinton I you know, despite his moral issues, I think he was a pretty darn good president and he he managed to speak to both sides of the aisle and convince one there was an important issue and he needed some support on the on the left, he would go after it when he needed support on the right he would go after and I think that\'s what you would get with more of a third party slash independent president is someone who would pull support from both sides so that what passes would be something that the majority of our country would buy into.
Matt: Do you think people want that though? Like, I mean, I want something similar to that, that I feel if you go on Facebook or Twitter, which obviously isn\'t necessarily representative to the the small towns and all that. But if you go on Facebook and Twitter that doesn\'t seem like something that people actually want, they like to pretend like that\'s what they truly want. But is America in a situation where we truly want cooperation or or do we just want my way or the highway and let\'s switch for years of being selfish and crying when we don\'t get what we want.
Mike: Well, yeah, you make a great point because I\'m very active in the California Libertarian Party. And as a side note of that there\'s a person that I\'ve met here locally who runs a…
well he calls it a Liberty club but it\'s essentially a chapter of the libertarian party at a city level and he there\'s a city here in Huntington Beach California you know the Beach Boys made it favorite famous and it\'s his club meets there and we just had a meeting this past week and they\'re sitting there talking about how a lot of them were saying hey you know what, you know I wasn\'t really I\'m not a big fan of Trump\'s tax cuts but it was a step in the right direction and they say that but what I\'ve said and even have an episode out of liberty revealed I think that the libertarians and I do think pretty much every party is like this they\'re more of a political cult than anything else they they have an ideology and that\'s what they want and I always tell them like okay guys I understand what you\'re looking for you\'re looking for the utopian libertarian society but the reality is you\'re never going to get that ever it\'s not going to happen so you need to do is you need to get yourself elected using reasonable ideas. And then once you\'re elected, show people how you can govern. Like, for instance, I ran for Orange County Supervisor this past election cycle. And one of the things that I told they kept saying, Well, how are you as a libertarian going to make a difference in the county? I said, Well, the first thing I would do, I\'ve reviewed the staff numbers, and they have like, 25 staff members, and they\'re spending $4 million a year each office that\'s $20 million on five districts offices a year that, hey, I could probably cut that down to five people per office. So I would reduce the size of my staff and they said, Well, what does that show it? What if it works? Well, if it works, it means we can also reduce the size of government because we just proven that we can do the same job just as efficiently with less people, which thereby saves a lot of money which means that money is available for either cutting taxes or using the money for something like homeless people.It\'s
think that you have to be more pragmatic in your approach and that\'s the problem you know if you\'re a republican your your problem I mean, of course we\'re speaking in absolutes here and absolutes are never you know realistic in society but you\'re right i think if you were to do a poll I would say more than 80% of Republicans fall in line with the Republican platform and more than 80% of the democrats fall in line with a democrat platform and even I\'m going to say 80% of libertarians 80% of Green Party members I think the majority fall in line with the platform and the don\'t bother to think about the real world implications of the decisions they\'re trying to force on society and with libertarians it\'s kind of ironic because I\'m not sure if you\'re aware of this but like when you become a a dues paying member of the Libertarian Party. One of the things that you initial says you will not use us or support any idea that imposes its will by force on anyone So you know you have a non aggression principle and it\'s great it really is but at the same time they\'re trying to force their ideology on everybody by saying we\'re there\'s one guy I met at convention last year who\'s running for president and his he says that he\'ll be the shortest term president ever because he\'s going to get into the office and then he\'s going to eliminate the federal government ask yourself you really think the republicans and democrats and house and senate are going to say oh yeah sure let\'s just eliminate the government we don\'t need the government anymore and and and that\'s where it comes down to being more like a cult because they\'re they\'re only thinking about their ways the best way I mean if you\'ve ever I don\'t know if you\'re religious at all but like religious cults they all say the same thing our way is the way and and so that\'s what it is you know political party Our way is tthe way and I think really That way is a mixture of all of the ideologies
Matt: Yeah, it\'s actually really interesting how the Foundation of America was, you know, the, the popular phrase is a melting pot. But the thing about a melting pot and I said this on my podcast, too, I\'m in a melting pot. Nothing can just remain solid. You can\'t, you can\'t entirely remain solid and everything else melts. No, I\'m gonna keep my beliefs everyone else you all be open. I mean, you\'ll be open minded to me. But I\'m not going to be open minded to you. I\'m not going to understand your opinions you know we all have to mount and I don\'t think that was necessarily talking about race. I think that was talking a lot about ideology, and in the the foreshadow of this type of thing, I think they knew that something like this will eventually happen and…
Mike: So I\'ve really enjoyed this conversation. I think. I think we\'re in agreement actually more than I thought we would be. So why don\'t you tell people where, where and how they can find you.
Matt: Yes. So I\'m on almost every platform, iTunes, Stitcher. Google podcast will be on YouTube next episode and you\'ll just look up, Unfazed with Matt Plautz. I\'ve got an Instagram at unfazed.podcasts and I\'ll talk a little bit about politics current events, I\'m going to be having guests such as you know as well.Mike said I\'m going to be having I\'m going to be doing the cardinal sin of having a pastor on that I also want to have a lot of other religions on and just talk a little bit about philosophy and how they look at other religions I think would be interesting and also might be able to get some state representatives possibly even a congressman on so it\'s gonna be a lot of a lot of everything almost I don\'t have a set theme you know I\'ll talk about politics one episode then maybe comedy one episode it\'s just really whatever is going on and yeah Mike thanks so much for having me
Mike: Do you have a website?
Matt: we don\'t have a website yet I host on PodBean right now
Mike: I\'ll put that in the show. I\'ll put that in the show notes and I encourage my listeners to go listen to and subscribe to your podcast. unfazed and definitely follow you on social media and I I\'ve got your social media links I\'ll put those in the show notes as well and again it\'s been a pleasure having you on and I\'m sure we\'ll follow up and have you on again in the near future
Matt: Yeah thank you so much
Mike: Alright well this has been another episode of liberty revealed If you or a friend or family member wants to find out a little bit more about liberty just go to https://YogisPodcastNetwork.com/libertyrevealed it\'s all there for you and we appreciate you listening.
Catch Yogi\'s Podcast Network on YouTube
Yogi\'s Podcast Network YouTube Channel