Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, Instant Feedback, Accountability the all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.0.
[00:00:08] Speaker B: Now we turn our attention to Dr. Jamila Harris, an economist, as we get set to prepare ourselves for what is the budget, the national budget to be read that's coming up in the coming weeks. What does it mean for us as the layman on the ground? How are we to interpret the challenging economic times that we are facing? Especially how did we fear in the last year? How did we navigate these financial constraints?
Good morning to you, Dr. Harris. Welcome back to Freedom.
[00:00:40] Speaker C: Good morning, Devi, thanks for having me and good morning to all your listeners.
[00:00:43] Speaker B: Dr. Harris, we are chatting on a topic here this morning that I mean, I do it every Thursday, Eye on the Economy with Rudy Hanamji. And we pay attention to various facets as it relates to the oil and gas sector, to the orange economy, to the green economy. We pay attention to whether there's diversification happening in the country, whether we did well as a people in the last year.
I mean going back, looking back at the last eight to nine months, 10 even, how would you say following the last budget presentation to now, we would have feared as a country?
[00:01:23] Speaker C: So I think it's been challenging.
I think most people you speak to, from the government to the opposition, various analysts, people on the ground would have a similar opinion on that. There might be disagreement on the extent to which there's surely disagreement and it causes. But I think the situation has been challenging. It has been challenging because we are not growing as fast as we used to grow before.
So last year growth was around 0.7 to 0.8%.
So that is less than 1% growth. Prior to that we had about 2.8% growth.
It's forecast to be around the same again this year.
So we're not really increasing our gdp and therefore GDP per capita. And GDP per capita is basically all of your output divided by the population size. So it means that we're not getting, this is a loose way to say it, but richer as a country, at least in the past year.
[00:02:25] Speaker A: Right.
[00:02:26] Speaker C: And how that sort of manifests when you have like a slow growing economy, which we are, or a stagnant economy, we might see some churn in the labor market, we might see some change in businesses. So the economy has been doing better than expected because of changes in energy prices. And that's largely driven by what is happening in the Middle East.
So we're not doing better because of output, we're doing better because of prices.
What are some of the challenging things? The main Thing that has been at the fore is job losses.
So we've seen from last year, and it's across all sectors, we've seen public sector job losses, starting with some of these make work programs like cpep, erp.
And a lot of these people may have been reabsorbed in other sectors, but that was sort of the first big thing where you saw more than 10,000 people being sent home quite, you know, within a short space of time.
There's also been job losses in the form of non contract renewals in the public sector.
So you haven't been let go or dismissed, but your contract hasn't been renewed. And I mean, Trinidad is a small place. So we probably all know examples of people who would have experienced this.
There has also been job losses in the private sector because since the end of last year until now. So this is Starting at about October 2025, we saw news that Nutrien was going to shut down.
Well, not shut down, but they were going to idle their plant. Right then we had met next the same. So that's the petrochemical sector. We also had Newsday shutting down.
So that's Media Express announced that they were going to let go some of their stuff.
And then we've also had lots of stories in around hospitality. So the bars and the restaurants, et cetera. And when the bars and the restaurants start having some evidence of contracting, we know that people are out there spending money less in terms of socializing. Right. The other thing that I have looked at and I find concerning is the construction sector is slowing. And the last numbers we had from the CSO in terms of employment, there was a fall in employment in the construction sector from end of quarter 425 to quarter 1 26, but also quarter 125 to quarter 1.
So it's a year on year fall as well as a quarter on quarter fall.
So it's not a seasonal trend, if that makes sense.
You know. So I think that that's how people are feeling it because you know, you have to look for another job, essentially your earnings are being affected.
[00:05:27] Speaker B: But to question you, is government truly saving by cutting back on these things such as the CPA projects, urp, forestry workers, other entities.
Are we fearing better? Because you mentioned Nutramix and these companies that we can't seem to get a handle on.
We have Hilton workers facing the breadline in the next 15 days. I think September 18th is the deadline. You know, we are hearing nothing about that. It's as though this new government is here.
Are we able to pilot the Projects that the past administration. How, based on your economic standpoint and you viewing this, how has this government transitioned from dealing with or picking up where the past administration left off with some of these negotiations on the table and bringing it forward and at least closing these deals?
[00:06:20] Speaker C: Right. So excellent question. I think you pick up on three things there.
One is around policy continuity and how much is continued from the last government. The other one is an allocation and I think that's a decision that the government makes and we expect different administration to behave differently.
And the third one I think is on implementation of the budget. So on the allocation decision, the government has limited resources and the biggest budgets we have had as a country was under the first, well under the People's partnership government between 2010 and to 2015 and under Patrick Manning, budgets were like 40 something billion, 50 something billion under Prime Minister Kamala Sabi says so when she came in in her first term, it went up to 60 something.
So the partnership and now the UNC tend to spend more.
[00:07:19] Speaker A: Right.
[00:07:20] Speaker C: But the question is the allocation, what are you spending on? They haven't been able to spend as much this time because we have less revenue. And that's a simple point. A lot of the challenges that we are facing is because the government has less revenue. And that comes back to the energy sector. We have less foreign exchange because the energy sector hasn't been doing well. We have reduced production.
We have production peaked in the energy sector in 2008 for oil and 2012 for gas and has been sort of declining steadily since. Which is why this whole dragon. And why are we so excited about this? Because it's going to bring us back to a level of what we would have described as plenty back in the days. Right.
So there's less revenue to go around.
But how you spend what you have is an allocation decision.
So the last administration did not close the wage negotiation. So they didn't spend on salary increases, they didn't spend on back pay.
This administration has decided to put some resources towards that. But it means that other things will get cut. Right. Because there's only so much resources.
The last government also did not spend on a laptop per child.
This government has decided to do that. So of course something else will get squeezed.
So it might seem as though.
So one could say, oh yes, we've spent this much on education, but what have you spent it on? Would be a different question.
[00:08:52] Speaker B: Right.
[00:08:54] Speaker C: And we could go down like that. So this government is prioritizing different things.
We see that in some of the social programs, like they Increase funding to the.
I think, you know, most people are quite happy with that.
So it's just a difference in priorities.
The one thing to note though from media review is that this government for the past year has not spent that much on infrastructure.
And I know we kind of thinking about the six budget documents and that's where the Public Sector Investment Program comes in. So there hasn't been that much spending on infrastructure. And that's critically important because infrastructure is not just building new things, but also we have to think about the maintenance of existing infrastructure.
[00:09:44] Speaker A: Right.
[00:09:46] Speaker C: So the implementation side is another question.
So, yes, you say you're going to do this thing, but have you actually done it?
We know that wage negotiations. There hasn't been a full settlement with the psa, even though it said they said that this would happen by the end of last year. And then it got pushed to the media review and it's kind of ongoing still.
There were also lots of promises to generate more revenue, like restarted petrochain. We haven't heard about that in a long time. Restarting the sugar factory in St Mardalen. We haven't heard about that in a long time. So I think we also have to think about the implementation side.
The other point is policy continuity.
And I personally think it's one of our biggest challenges because we switch administrations and some of the things that may have been good are scrapped. And the example that I use usually is the ttre, the Trinidad and Tobago Revenue Authority.
Had the TTRE been fully implemented, we could have been getting an extra. The estimates were between 8 to 10 billion in revenue each year. And this is not 8 to 10 billion in revenue. That comes because we have more oil and gas or we boost in manufacturing production. No. Is coming because we have a lot of people who don't pay taxes. We have a lot of people who might not pay the right amount of taxes. So it's about efficiency.
[00:11:19] Speaker B: But with me and that ttre, while I hear it and you make proper sense, I mean, the advocacy for that comes from the PNM benches. However, this Transmega Revenue Authority, you know, we already have the Board of Inland Revenue Authority. Why?
Why do we have to create a separate entity? What's the difference between the BIR to the ttre?
[00:11:42] Speaker C: Right. This is a good question. The TT would have brought together the functions of the BIR and Customs and Excise. So you make it more efficient. So think about you. If you're a company, you'd have to run to Customs and pay something and then run over to bir. And pay something and then run over to another place. You have a Centralized, a centralized 1 point of contact in terms of your revenue, your payment of whatever, taxes or fees or whatever to the government.
It also makes it so one that does the efficiency. So it's more efficient for the government, but it's also more efficient for those who interact with the government.
It should also with the tgr there were also changes around, you know, making things more automated and digital.
And with that would come less leakages because if you have to pay your things online, it means that if you go to a particular representative, I wouldn't call any institution and they say, well, I can make this go fast if you just Give me a 500 where you're now paying, you're paying online. You're not paying in cash. It's not a cash transaction. So you have less of those sort of, as we call it in the literature, greasing the wheels opportunities.
All right, so it's, I mean, across the world. So I've worked in a number of countries in Africa and the recommendation is always to have a revenue authority.
So we started this process in the early 1990s in Trinidad. So you see how long it took to get to legislation and pass any legislation. So when we finally passed the legislation, I was very happy. I was sad that it took so long, but I was happy that we had gotten it. And then just like that, you see how policy, lack of policy continuity works because just by the stroke of a pen, 26 years of work was undone.
[00:13:40] Speaker B: You know, I would be very honest, this is the first time in a long time, or I should say in the true sense of me understanding.
I appreciate this explanation given about the ttre.
Research showed me it's across the globe. It's not unique or isolated to Trinidad and Tobago.
One texter is saying to me this morning, some of the information that supports your guests comments. The construction sector has slowed to a greater extent than is being spoken about by the authorities. I have been a housing developer for 12 years of homes between 1.7 and 2.2 million. I build five to six houses per year. The slowdown started in 2024 when I had six homes in the market for up to nine months.
In 2025 I built two, and in 2026 only one so far. So that's a very stark reality from 21 workers to seven.
[00:14:50] Speaker C: Yeah. And so it's a good point on the data. Right? The data is there. The central bank produces this thing called a data pack and they give data every quarter and you see the slowdown in construction.
The authorities haven't been speaking about it because it's not a good sign. Is not a good sign because the construction, the construction sector usually tells us about the health of the economy.
If you go to Guyana now, I was in Guyana at the end of last year, construction everywhere, because the economy is booming, because people are added on a room to their house, they're building a new house, their new businesses going up or businesses are expanding. There's a lot of.
[00:15:33] Speaker B: I have a nephew, two actually, in Guyana currently for the last few months. And they're there up until Christmas. They're coming back home briefly and then they back out in January and they're working in Guyana in the construction sector. So you are quite factual with that. I know that for a fact. Because they were unable to get work right here.
[00:15:54] Speaker C: Yeah. I mean it also comes back to government investments as well. Like if government is doing building infrastructure, you'd also see that construction. I'll give you an example of like there's a school in Mova and I drive past there all the time and that school is called Lower Mova Government Primary School. And that school was demolished in 2014.
[00:16:15] Speaker B: I know the school, right?
[00:16:18] Speaker C: It was developed in 2014 to build a new school and we were happy about this.
[00:16:23] Speaker A: That school.
[00:16:25] Speaker C: The development of that school started in 2024 under the previous administration.
And it was going. And I was like, oh, very good. You know, the kids are going to have their school because they're in a church now. They're in Church of the Rock and they have to cross the Lady Young cause a zoom in there, right?
Construction and that school has stopped since the elections.
[00:16:47] Speaker B: I saw that.
I saw that.
[00:16:49] Speaker C: And that is.
So you see, this is how we see it. So the large numbers would see a slowdown in construction. We are seeing these unfinished buildings.
[00:17:00] Speaker B: Take a call quickly. I mean, I also wanted to touch on the. Before you have about 30 seconds to raise your issue. Good morning.
[00:17:08] Speaker A: Good morning, Dr. Harris. And good morning to Davy.
[00:17:11] Speaker B: Morning, sir.
[00:17:11] Speaker A: Dr. Harris, I think one of the main bug we are facing this government is question of the 10% they have promised across the board. The Minister walked into Wasa recently and tell him, don't worry, you're getting your 10%.
Now we know that the revenues are down, the receivables are down, but the demand from the exchequer is large. It looms very large.
So I said the minister has three options here and the options, I all call them the banana peel option. One, he can borrow the money if he Borrows money, we in problems, he can devalue the dollar, we win more problems. Or he can take the money from other areas in the state sector, hospitals, whatever it is, to pay them.
So any option, I call it the banana peel option. The Minister needs to come clean with the public and say, listen, we do not have the money. This is what we could give you now. Later you're going to get the rest. Finally, I want to ask one question. Dr. Jamila, the minister recently borrowed $800 million US yesterday. Tell me something. What is he doing with that money? What is that money borrowed for? I am, I am scared because I don't know why he borrowed $8 million US.
[00:18:20] Speaker B: $800 million.
[00:18:21] Speaker A: 800 million US and then say. All right, okay.
[00:18:25] Speaker B: All right, thanks. Let her respond. Okay.
[00:18:28] Speaker C: Okay. So thanks for that question.
And I will put a fourth option in your banana peel which is the Heritage and Stabilization fund. And approximately about 500 million has been withdrawn from that fund.
[00:18:44] Speaker A: Right?
[00:18:46] Speaker C: So and the guardian did a good, a good piece on this, on the borrowing.
I wrote a long form piece on this because it troubled me at the time.
In January, the government borrowed 1 billion US and it was a 10 year bond. And on, on the press release they said this bond was to refinance an issuance from 2016 because under the PNM administration they borrowed 1 billion US as a bond and general budgetary spending. So I said, okay, they borrowed this money to refinance the loan that we had to repay coming up. Because if you cannot repay a loan, you refinance it, right?
And then in July I saw they borrowed 800 million and the reason was to refinance the loan from, from 2026 and general budgetary expenditures. So I thought to myself, we have borrowed 1.8 billion to refinance a 1 billion loan plus general budgetary expenditure.
So we have been borrowing a lot and we're borrowing in US dollars. Which comes back to your second point. A devaluation would be very difficult because if you borrow 1 billion right now in TT, that's about 7 billion, right? And you devalue, your debt stock is going to increase straight away. So if you increase, if you devalue to 8, your debt stock is now 8 billion. It increases straight away.
So we have been borrowing and that borrowing of our debt stock has increased from about 60% of GDP from about 2015. 2016 is about 80.4, 84.5% of GDP now. So we've increased the debt stock significantly and with that comes the interest cost.
The Minister of finance in his last presentation estimated about 12 point caramelize 12.1. But about 12% of expenditure is on interest payments.
So it means that this is also one of the things that's crowded out spending on other things because we have to pay the interest on the debt that we have.
The I think you're right with the 10% being a strain. I mean.
[00:21:15] Speaker B: Yeah, it is, it is. And I mean we often talk about the Prime Minister and you know, put their foot in the mouth. But I believe sitting in the opposition benches you may not be 100% aware of government business.
There's certain things that you just are not privy to, especially matters of national security. Because remember the Prime Minister sits at the chair of the Security Council. So maybe the Prime Minister felt in her, you know, honestly bright eyed and bushy tailed getting into office and say we could do this. And then the stark reality hits and she's like this is just me thinking out loud, you know, what do I do next? How do I manage this? We are a lawless society. So I'm going to increase ticket prices and on traffic fines because we lawless money will come in there and people kick the Prime Minister for that. And the Prime Minister was right because if you don't want to pay the high ticket prices, just don't break the law.
You find oh God, she killing poor people. If I get a ticket it's $10,000 then avoid it.
So you have given the Prime Minister outside of the TTRA another way to get revenue. So I'm gonna keep you with me on the line briefly right after the news break for at least five to 10 minutes.
Before I go into the other segment, I want you to think about what Tobago is now doing and I want to give a couple calls a chance to reach out to us very quickly, at least for 30 seconds and engage as we keep our eye on the economy. We are chatting with Dr. Jamilah Harris. I want you to take and pay attention to Tobago. Tobago is saying $500 baby Grant Tobago's birth and that's on the public's purse coming out of the tha because central government provides them with an allocation of funds for the year as they do not have resources on their own. All right, so pay attention to the $500 and that is for five years until the child reach five.
So that is $6,000 a year. Five years, 30K. We take a break. Your news is up next. We're chatting with Dr. Jamilah Harris. We keep enough for at least 10 minutes into the Next hour. Stay with us.
[00:23:20] Speaker C: Why don't just the PNM pay back all of the thief from the country and they will get the money to pay the 10%.
[00:23:27] Speaker A: That is all. You don't need to borrow. You don't need to have no banana peel or no plant and peel,
[00:23:32] Speaker B: peel and then pay back all the money. They're the thief. Good morning again, Trinidad and tobago. Welcome back. Eight minutes after 8:00 clock, we're chatting with Dr. Jamila Harris as we keep our eye on the economy.
And I left her with a bit of homework as we do deals with. As we look at some of the infrastructural challenges facing our financial economy in Trinidad and Tobago, the construction sector, notably one.
Let me take this call. 30 seconds.
[00:23:58] Speaker A: Yes, your honorable lady there, our national debt. I as a caller saying as a near $200 billion. Would you like to comment on that, please? Thank you.
[00:24:11] Speaker B: Repeat that question to me. Don't even worry. Now listen, let's discuss the initiative in Tobago.
Tha says promise made, promise kept. Can we sustain that at this time?
[00:24:24] Speaker C: Right. So the.
When the chief secretary explained this, there's a problem that they're trying to address. And so I like to start from that. Like what is the policy targeting?
And the policy is targeting a decline in the fertility rate.
So the Tobago House of Assembly is concerned that people are not having as many babies to sustain the population. And that's important. It's an important problem. And it's a problem that what we call aging societies face.
Trinidad is an aging society.
We have.
We've had a decline in fertility rate, replacement fertility level. So I go into a better demography. Replacement fertility level is considered to be 2.1.
So as a couple, if you have two children, you replace yourself on this earth, it's 2.1. Because there's a small chance that some people might not make it to reproductive age and some people might not be able to have children. So you have a bit more.
[00:25:33] Speaker A: Right.
[00:25:33] Speaker C: But the data basically shows if you have fertility at 2.1, you replace. Most European countries have fertility rate below 2.
Trinidad also has fertility rate below 2. We have not been seeing the effects because we have immigration, we have foreigners coming here who are of working age, who work.
And it's the same thing in the uk. Foreigners go to the UK and they work. So it maintains the population is important because if you have an aging population, you have a lot of people who are older, which means you have to pay pension, you have to pay nis and you have a relatively smaller Share of the working population who work to pay taxes so that you can pay pension and nis. So that's the problem. It is a problem in many countries.
So the fact that the THA has recognized that they have an aging population and trying to do something good, are they trying to do the thing that is best? That's another question.
So they're, they're trying to give a $500 baby grant per baby born to, to be Gunian, even if the Tobagonian lives in Trinidad, to encourage people to have children. Because the idea is you're reducing the cost of having children financially. So you could take your 500 and buy formula or whatever.
[00:26:54] Speaker A: Right.
[00:26:56] Speaker C: These things have been tried in countries before. In the UK they give a baby grant of.
I can't remember the exact amount, but they give one as well. The literature, however, shows that this doesn't work very well.
What works well is time having better policies around maternity leave, paternity leave, that's what works.
So in Trinidad you get three months.
Most children who are exclusively breastfeeding breast, you have to exclusively breastfeed for six months, so you're given three. So if you allow people to stay home for at least six months, you already have to pay for formula.
[00:27:36] Speaker A: Right.
[00:27:37] Speaker C: But it also helps with this conversation on parenting and building a bond with the child. In the UK they give one year maternity leave, but they even do further. You could share. You can have one year and decide if you take six months as a mother and the father takes six months, the father's gets I think a month.
[00:27:56] Speaker A: Right.
[00:27:57] Speaker C: I'm not sure how much fathers get.
[00:27:59] Speaker B: In Trinidad you're lucky to get four days.
[00:28:02] Speaker C: Four.
[00:28:03] Speaker B: You're lucky if you get four days in Trinidad.
[00:28:05] Speaker C: My goodness. Right, so you see, There we go. So those are the policies that work, that have been shown to work in con in the European countries that have faced this challenge for a long time.
The other thing that works is affordable childcare. So UK government has recently increased the number of hours that you can get free childcare because it's expensive to send your child to the nursery. And in Trinidad we used to be able more intently to rely on the grandparents and aunties, but we have been moving away from that sort of community structure and you're more, especially like on the east west corridor or in the more urban areas, you send the kids to a nursery or a childminder and you have to pay for that. So making those things more affordable is what has been shown in the data from other countries to work. So I think they've Done a good job of diagnosing the problem.
I'm not sure how they arrived at the solution. And the second thing I'll say on this is there's no means testing. From what I have seen it seems as though anybody could get this 500 and that's not how it is in other places that give a grant. In the UK you are eligible for the grant if your salary is below a certain amount. So it's not a free for all,
[00:29:23] Speaker B: it's not everybody who needs it most and most vulnerable in society. And I like that. I love the initiatives and I mean countries that even countries that promote, dare I say the same sex marriages that also contributes to the dwindling of the fertility or the birth rate in the country because we know why. So with that being said, let's take a quick call as we continue with the Iron economy here with Dr. Jamila Harris. Good morning.
[00:29:49] Speaker C: Hi, good morning Davy and Dr. Harris.
[00:29:54] Speaker A: Dr. Harris, I would like to know
[00:29:56] Speaker C: after five years what will happen to
[00:29:59] Speaker A: that child will grow in because when that child start go to secondary school, because this fund, it will be more expensive to send our child to school to buy books. Right now people can't even afford books. And then if a mother decides to have a child, three or four children within that five years, look at the amount. I mean will the government be able
[00:30:19] Speaker C: to stand at expenses you see right now? Thank you, thank you very much.
[00:30:23] Speaker B: And here's the final thought before you go, Dr. Harris. We are talking about making children, getting ourselves copulated with other individuals, bringing forth children into this world and then throwing that on the government and say hey, you gotta watch that. We talking about long term sustainability for the child, money for the child. That is not. Is that government responsibility?
[00:30:47] Speaker C: So that's an excellent question.
In the UK they also give this brand, they give it until the child is either 16 or 18 because they recognize what that cost. The point the caller was making, right.
And they do other things like if you buy clothes for your child, you don't pay vat. Same thing with shoes. Children get a ride of buses for free. So they make provisions.
It is or isn't the government responsibility depending on what the social contract is, what we as citizens think the government responsibility should be. And that is a conversation that we have, have not had and we do not have. Because in Europe they see that as the responsibility of the government and they see it as a responsibility of the government because they want to stimulate fertility, because they see having a working population as important.
I think we, I mean we have different problems here that might not be so prevalent. In the UK we have a labor force participation rate of 55%. I might be asking if I were whispering in the ear of the government, how can we get the other 45% to participate in the labor market?
[00:32:03] Speaker A: Right?
[00:32:04] Speaker C: Because we have people who are just not looking for work and not working.
I might also be asking if I was concerned with revenue from a government perspective, why can't we try to get instead of increasing fees on those who pay? So I think my. Let me just give my thoughts on the fees quickly. Those fees, some of those fees are old and you know, they have to be brought up in terms of inflation.
How you do it matters not just what you do. You pace it, you inform people, you sensitize, right? You don't just do it like that.
But there's a lot of people in Trinidad who don't pay taxes. And we see it everywhere, right?
We jump in the maxi. We know the maxima is not paying taxes. We buy doubles. We know the double spenders are not paying taxes. There are lots of people who pay taxes. The burden of taxes fall on a small share of the population, those who are formally employed.
And if we wanted to look at other examples, these informal workers become formalized. And it's good for them to become formalized because then they could access national insurance, they could get not just the state pension, they could get pension from NIS when they retired. They could get the sick benefits as well. So we have things here where it's just falling through the cracks and we put a new initiative here and a new initiative there and we're not really trying to fix some of the fundamental things that's wrong with the economy and as a result the country.
[00:33:32] Speaker B: You know, unfortunately I have to end our interview here, but Dr. Harris, I want to reinvite you next week Thursday. Godspeed alive. Let us continue to delve a bit deeper into some of these policies and framework surrounding the economy as to how we can better stabilize families, support for families of young children and even this ask of people now because I'll be very honest, based on the calculations and the breakdown of $500 on in Tobago for Pampers baby wipes, I mean we hold a baby shower when somebody get pack of Pampers, you're grateful for it. So if you're getting that monthly for the first three years of the child, while the child is is baby into toddler stages, moving from Pampers to pull ups and you're getting that kind of assistance for box a pampas, some Baby wipes. If you run out during the month, it's very easy for you to pick up a package because you don't have to buy the full complement, so to speak. So I do not agree with persons saying that, okay, I see what they're trying to do, but that is not enough, you know, so it had me a bit, you know, worried. I'm now getting some message. All right, so I guess we can keep conversating a little bit.
Conversing? Sorry, conversation. It's not a word. Let me.
[00:34:55] Speaker A: What about all those bennies who are having babies?
They don't believe in contraceptives and they have baby every year, every two years
[00:35:03] Speaker C: in Trinidad and Tobago.
[00:35:04] Speaker A: So what will be the. Their position? Fine.
[00:35:09] Speaker B: Venezuelans having babies in Trinidad and Tobago. My whole thought on this is whether we can sustain that type of payment for five years for multiple families and parents with multiple children. So up for now, it's open warfare. You could be working for 19,000amonth. You make a baby. I want 500.
[00:35:33] Speaker C: Right.
[00:35:33] Speaker B: So it doesn't seem to have a, a policy in place or framework that identifies those that are vulnerable. In addition to that, somebody asked me yesterday, can a woman make five children in three five years? Yes, she can.
Yes.
One pair, twin, our next twin and then one and his five children. You have a five aside. Hello. Good morning.
[00:35:59] Speaker A: Morning. Mr. Davy, Princess Town.
[00:36:01] Speaker B: Yes.
[00:36:02] Speaker A: Dr. Harris.
Mr. Davy, good morning. My opinion thus far is that 500amonth is madness.
Trinidad and Tobago, culturally, we are not ready for that kind of a social intervention.
What are the hundreds of thousands of fathers are not paying their maintenance monthly.
Why don't we try to step up and get them the whole impact on family as a whole, the economy, sustainability, all kinds of things.
I mean, that has to be factored into a whole philosophy. I mean, yes, we may have a problem with the population growth, but you just can't up and say, okay, we do that, and that is not going to solve the problem in the long run.
In fact, you may end up with more problems. I am saying we have to fix our family, we have to fix the society. We have to have an overhaul perhaps of our social program and see where the philosophy, where the ideology. What was the perspective of this in the long run? Just to increase the population?
What about the facilities? Do we have the requisite facilities right now? All our hospitals and schools and everything else need repairs and need to be improved, the services, etcetera, etc, etcetera. So probably might be a blessing that our population, there's not more demand on these institutions for services, etc. Etc. So while I agree in terms of economics, you need to have a young population, working force, etc, etc, but I think we have to look at other options and one can be why don't we invite other countries to give them citizenship in Trinidad Tobago? People with professionals, etc, with skilled people, etc. Can come here and we could work out and you would have people contributing significantly to the economy and to the growth and GDP of the country rather than just sharing all these goodies goodies that we do every now and then.
It's not good politics and I don't think it's good for governance. Thank you.
[00:38:16] Speaker C: All right, so just to reflect on that caller, he hit the nail on the head because, and this is what I was saying, the evidence shows that this type of grant in itself does not increase fertility. So they might be doing something to achieve an objective that might not be achieved. That's the evidence from other countries could be different in Tobago. Right. But the point that Ecolo is making, that I think is a really excellent one, is that if the problem is decline in fertility and you're concerned about that for the economy, you need to take a very comprehensive look at the situation and of all the different policies that could address the situation and don't just, you know, say, oh, we're going to do this one. This is a nice one, it's an attractive one because people will feel nice again. 500 so there's the politics around, right. But it might not be the best one.
[00:39:13] Speaker B: Good morning.
Hello.
Morning.
[00:39:19] Speaker A: Morning, Davey. And morning to your guests.
Let me tell you the the birth rates, birth rates worldwide is dropping. That's why Elon Musk said that we heading for a population collapse.
And one of the there are many reasons fit.
Number one I would outline is that not, not people are not getting married again and not they're not having children. They think life is posing with a cell phone, traveling, traveling around the world. That's what they think life is about.
Right. The second one is liberalism.
Feminism teaches women that having children and a husband is a downgrade.
Right. We don't want a man to tell you nothing and all this kind of nonsense, Right. They're teaching young women to pursue careers, which is nothing wrong with that. But you must also have children to live a fulfilling life, Right? Because when people reach 50 years, especially women, and they realize they have no children and they pass that age of childbearing, they live a very lonely life.
Right. And you have, you have a few more factors, but I think that the not marrying and this liberalism feminism movement that is telling young women that to have a family is not a good thing to have. And then you have another movement whereby people are being encouraged to abort their babies.
In some states in America, they passing laws to abort baby up to the ninth month.
Right. They're telling our babies, you know, it's not a good thing to have. And if you hear any kind of stupid comments, I don't know. So young people these days, they're not.
They're different, I think because of the Internet and all that they're seeing. They're not interested in having kids. Thanks a lot.
[00:41:26] Speaker B: Now that's a different conversation. How does that tie into the economy?
It's that simple. If we have a dwindling population, as Dr. Harris outlined, then we have less persons contributing to the working sector in any particular country, which leads to a downgrade, a drop in taxes collected. Because right here in Trinidad and Tobago we have this thing called paye, which is pay as you earn. We are grateful and thankful to past administrations for initiating a ceiling, a window to give the less fortunate an opportunity to really have a decent basic life. Because imagine paying, is it pay as you earn is 30% or is it 25? 25% of your salary of 3,800amonth and you're paying 25% tax on that. In addition to Elsa Charge and NIS and these things. What you going home with? So the ceiling in this country is 7, 500.
So you make. And then if you make anything in excess of 7,500, you are taxed on the excess, not the 75. So if you make a 500 extra and you reach the 8,000, then the 500 is where you pay the 25% pay as you earn. But outside of that, the texter mentioned something that I'm not sure if you could touch on it, about the way women are treating with this liberal and liberalization and so forth. Now you're a doctor today, you have your PhD, your master's degree. There's nothing wrong with that. What I think is the issue as just to highlight what he caller said is not being able to strike a proper balance.
[00:43:18] Speaker C: All right, so the first thing is the main reason for.
Well, let me just go up one step. The population, Trinidad is not actually declining. It has increased, but it's increasing because of foreigners, is mainly increasing because of immigration.
[00:43:34] Speaker A: Immigration.
[00:43:35] Speaker C: But what we are concerned with is the population pyramid should look like a triangle where you have fewer old people on top and more younger people at the Base. That's how it looks in most African countries because fertility is still high. But we have a kind of a different shape where it's narrowing at the base because we. So it's a relative thing that we're concerned about.
The reason why this trend has happened is called the demographic transition. And it has happened in all countries.
And what happens is mortality rates go down.
So people live for longer. That's the first thing. Life expectancy in Trinidad was 63 years in 1962. It's now 74.
[00:44:22] Speaker A: Right.
[00:44:23] Speaker C: So people are living for longer, which puts a burden on like systems like the National Insurance because you have to pay out for longer.
[00:44:29] Speaker A: Right.
[00:44:31] Speaker C: And then that's how you have more people on top than below because they're just around for longer. And the other thing is fertility has gone down. Fertility has gone down for several reasons. One, there was a big push for contraception. So the use of contraception has gone up significantly to how it was decades ago. And this was intentional. It was pushed by the UN organizations.
[00:44:55] Speaker A: Right.
[00:44:56] Speaker C: And I'm sure for people growing up in the 90s, remember somebody jingle around, right?
So contraception has. The use of contraception. The second thing is delayed childbearing.
Most people long time, your granny, and they had 12 children because they started having children at 16, 17, 18.
Now most people have their first child beyond 25 in developed countries is beyond 30.
So if you have, you have children later, you have fewer children as well.
The other thing is that we've had a cultural shift in the Caribbean. We have been used to an extended family structure that has been the norm for most of our existence in the Caribbean. We've had a cultural shift to want a nuclear family structure, husband, wife together. And that came with. And two children does the. And the picket fence. We learned that as we see that on tv. We won that.
[00:45:53] Speaker B: And the dog in the back.
[00:45:55] Speaker C: And the dog in the back, Right. And you have your lawnmower too.
So part of that cultural shift means that we want a smaller family and part of that is also the cost of child rent. The caller is right that female empowerment has also led to a delayed age of marriage and with that a delayed age of childbearing.
So. So it's a number of different factors happening at once.
From the policy side, we look at the cost.
Policy hasn't really tried to bring forward childbearing, but they've tried to shift the cost of child rearing, the cost of having children and bringing them to age where they could be self sufficient.
[00:46:46] Speaker B: You know, let me take this Call here. Good morning Morales. Quickly please.
[00:46:55] Speaker A: You know Davy, you know as.
As a leader due to the diversity of our country and so on. As a leader any statement you make and I think people take offense. You know sometimes the people take an offensive statement. Can't really comprehend the statement or the depth of it or what it is. But I would have simply. You know due to the fact. I mean the second controversial. What will what, what the what certain elements that what certain section society considered divisive and maybe top point it was in certain certain words in it and at the emancipation now you have the second one falling. So you know I would have simply then my suggestion recommendation being in the prime minister's position just simply apologize if I didn't open or offending anybody.
I mean because sometimes as I said you make a statement it wasn't deliberate. Sometimes it could be deliberate because I remember when you are a qualified or a trained person you can technically make.
You can barely make the deliberate statement. But whatever it is, apologize. Let's move on because you see trying to justify it wouldn't take the country anymore Looking at moving the country forward and we got to accept the fact due to how diverse our country is we had to kind of like work together with everybody as far as practically possible. You will never be able to please anybody. But in case like that.
[00:48:15] Speaker B: I understand what you're talking about, you know. Yeah, I understand what you're talking about but let's cut it quickly. All right. Thanks Morales. Let's get this call before you respond. Dr. Harris. Hello. Good morning.
[00:48:25] Speaker A: Hello, good morning.
[00:48:26] Speaker B: Yeah, we hear you.
[00:48:27] Speaker A: Yeah baby. Oh gosh boy, we on one topic. This man coming and Tankon I don't
[00:48:32] Speaker B: know, that's what I say. Let's, let's move on from it, you know just talking.
[00:48:36] Speaker A: Listen before you call the blooming station anyway you see that, that, that, that, that, that. That population situation we're in.
It was designed that way internationally. You know the power that be in design it that way. You know, you see would you roll out AI and automation and all soon jobs and all them things going to go defunct. We have no need for all them humans in the world, you understand? One factory way are 500 workers four machine going and do their work in the future and them kind of thing. So they had that from down coming down the road. All these COVID 19 and set up wars here and all them kind of things. All that is part of the plan. All the rainbow movement. We encouraging behavior that not consistent with making any more procreating two MAN two Man can't procreate. So all this thing that they have designed and pushing on the Internet and all them things is to gear towards that having less humans in the world so that we have less need for people. Automation going to take over. Thanks.
[00:49:52] Speaker B: Okay. Dr. Harris, your response?
[00:49:55] Speaker C: Okay, so my response, I'm not entirely sure about some of the more recent links that ECALLA is making in terms of AI and those things, but I do know that there was an intentional push to reduce fertility rates.
And this comes from since the 19th century, going into the 20th century because there was a guy called Malthus and he put forward his Malthusian view. And the Malthusian view was that we just didn't have enough resources to feed everyone so we would have a population problem. So let's try to see how we can reduce fertility rates to control the population and the, I mean, you know how things work, right?
People in the Western world form an idea and that diffuses towards the rest of the world. And that idea was very dominant. We've pushed onto the other side now where it's going the other way. But added to that is also the fact that cost of living has increased, which feeds into this problem. So I'll use the US as an example.
In 1960s in the US it was sufficient for one person to work and for there to be a housewife and you could sustain your family.
It's very unlikely that that's the case. Now, like you think about it, if you are in, in a relationship we live in with somebody, can you survive in your household with one income? Oftentimes that's not the case. And that is because cost of living has gone up partly because we.
Some things that were luxuries and now we see it as necessities, like we want to take our kids on these nice holidays. We want to do this, we want to do that. Right.
So it's a host of different things coming together, but now policy is going the other way, trying to correct it. And that is what is happening in developed countries. And again, I think it's going to diffuse here. So I think what the Chief Secretary has highlighted, as I said, he's diagnosed the problem and we need to have more conversations around what the solutions can be without just jumping in and saying, let's pick this one. You know, there's no, I don't know if there was any consultation. There's no presentation of evidence as to what could work, what can work.
So that's where I think we need to do a bit better and the
[00:52:18] Speaker B: thing about it is that these type of conversations is necessary and it augurs well when we take it back to parents in homes that are raising children, especially girl children. You know, you want your daughters to excel. Don't depend on no man. No man can do nothing for you.
That nonsense thinking and vice versa. Don't depend on no woman. And you have to learn to do this for yourself. I mean, family structure is a partnership. It's a coming together.
It's us working united, not working independently.
All right, So I think the teachings that we too as, as adults are teaching our. The next generation is also help helping to damage the, the mindset of wanting to start your own family. Then with the, with the advent of a lot of broken homes and mothers and parents attempting to do it on their own and eyes of what woman and I, I could stand up on my. All these things. Your girl children watching you, your boy child watching you. Me mono woman, I go stay by myself. And if they do have children, I know they do, they encourage the woman to get rid of it. And if she keep it, they don't want to be a father. It's a, it's a whole social breakdown in society, Dr. Harris, that I see affecting us. And as that happens, persons are not understanding how every time you break that family, that cycle and you put push that narrative, you affect the wider stability of the economy of the entire country.
Because we all make up a pot. It's like a puzzle. If the entire family structure and social society disintegrates and just moves away, that pyramid that we have, it will be an upside down pyramid because you'll have very little bit at the bottom and everybody at the top dying off and getting old. And that's it. There's.
And that's the fact everybody has died of and gone. You just mentioned the mortality, not immortality. The rates of humans just living longer, you know, I mean, based on scriptures, we promised three scores and 10, which takes us roughly to 70. Anything after that is borrowed time.
All right, you now bring it down to 60. How much? You tell me. 68, 69.
[00:54:36] Speaker C: So we're currently 74.
[00:54:38] Speaker B: 74, right, right. So seven. So you're four years in Tanya.
[00:54:41] Speaker C: 11 years in our independence period.
[00:54:44] Speaker B: Yeah, you know, so I mean, when you think about it, when you reach, when you reach the top of the hill, 50 and you come, you're on the next side coming down. Basically you have 15 years and then you could expire, you know, but so
[00:54:58] Speaker C: I think the point that you're making in terms of So I mean, it's a question of child rearing, right? So how we are looking after children and the temptation often is to throw money behind a problem.
Let's give this amount, let's, you know, let's, let's buy something.
But then we can ask the question, we want to have more kids, are we able or are we going to have something in place to ensure that we raise these kids in a way that make them productive?
Because if the outcome that we are aiming at is productive working people, just having children isn't going to make productive working people. And that's the point I was trying to make. With the labor force participation, 55% of the working age population participates in the labor market. 45% are not.
So we have a whole bunch of people who are already of working age who are not productive, participating people.
So when we want to just have more, we want to increase the fertility rate. We also need to think about if this is the route we're going down. I'm not saying, you know, if I think this is the right way or not. If this is the route we're going down, how can we also have not just more, but more productive?
[00:56:21] Speaker B: And then outside of that, I want to play a couple voice notes that I see coming in and I see in the calls. Outside of that, it's like you mentioned, the 26 year period of trying to get the revenue authority, these children.
That's a long term turnover. You know, that's not a fast turnover. That's an investment for the next 20 years down the road. And I say in 20, given the fact that, okay, 20 for two years in Upper level, lower, upper, lower level or whatever it is, and then tertiary education before you actually join the labor market to be a part of the working populace in the country. So the investment is now for a 20 year wait, providing that there are no illnesses for the child, the child doesn't get injured, getting into an accident, rendered paralyzed and all these things.
Because we would have spent that $30,000 investment in you for the first five years of your life. And we expect that within the next 15 years you become a productive contributor to society. And then something happens. You, you are, you are diagnosed with cancer, leukemia.
Just saying, I don't want.
[00:57:35] Speaker C: No, but like with that productive part of it. And this is why I said we have to think about all the different options. And it comes back to the maternity and paternity leave. That is a non financial policy.
You give people the option to take wait three months. Let's go piecemeal the UK is a year and Germany in some countries in Europe is two years. Right, let's go piecemeal. Let's say let's increase it to, to six months after the child is born so the child can be breastfed. If the mother wants to do that, fine.
You don't have to pay anything. As a guy government, you just need to make sure the employer passed legislation, pass legislation that says you cannot terminate this worker for up to six months after the child is born. They have the right.
[00:58:26] Speaker B: Yeah, because maternity leave and that's a beautiful point you raised because sometimes as a person gets a job, they on probation, they get pregnant, they don't want to take them beyond that because they're now thinking I have to pay you for no productivity at all because you're now off the job. And if the doctor render you on bed rest, well, God forbid.
And then there's a culture, well, if somebody else take your job, come on doing your job, then we don't really need you anymore. And that high employee turnover things happen. And I want to talk about that too. So how can government one sustain that payment?
That seems indefinite. There's no sunset clause on this so far. So this is an indefinite payment. As you mentioned, two things. One, we do not have rank and file. Who gets access? It seems as though anybody, rich, poor, indifferent, Everybody gain access. 1 and there is no sunset clause as to say by year, so and so we will revisit or it ends there.
[00:59:32] Speaker C: Yeah, I think this is hopefully the tha is doing them medium term budget, medium term as in, you know, they're just not plugging in figures for this year only, but they're doing it for the other five years or whatever because.
[00:59:47] Speaker B: Exactly.
[00:59:49] Speaker C: It has, we have across the board we have a lot of social programs in this country.
[00:59:57] Speaker A: Right.
[01:00:00] Speaker C: More than in most places. If we are spending on the right things, that's a different question.
If we are spending in the most efficient way, that again is another question.
But we do have a lot of things that could help people. We have the public assistance, you know, we have old age pension that everybody could get as eligible. Doesn't matter if you paid a dollar into the tax system ever. Right. You could be a housewife for all your life and you get old age pension. So we're quite generous in that regard.
[01:00:30] Speaker B: Very generous. And people do appreciate that.
[01:00:33] Speaker C: Yeah, no, I do think that people don't appreciate it as well. The concern with things like this that I have from a governance perspective, it becomes a carrot stage.
We go increase this and you Say that to tantalize the voter.
[01:00:51] Speaker A: Right?
[01:00:52] Speaker C: And I think that is problematic because you know, the other side of this is these things have to be finely balanced. And this is where I keep making the point about the evidence.
If you do it where you're trying to incentivize, there's a word using it in economics. You're motivating people to change their behavior in a certain way.
What you don't want to do is incentivize in a way that you create a behavior of dependency.
[01:01:20] Speaker B: That's the point.
Listen, you went into my head because my next point in tandem with what you said is how do we move away from that dependency? Because that's what's going to happen.
They're already depending on it. They already find it's too little. They're already. They already want to know if the tha gone mad. They ain't see any cost of things any good. They're not understanding this is an unassistance. Because let's be honest, nobody says I have too much money, I don't want no more.
We all want. So if you're getting 500 grand from a government that is a generous government, they have a strategic purpose in mind to bring up the birth rate in the country. It's not the best way to do it. Based on the research done by Dr. Harris and we have seen that worldwide. However, identifying the problem was great.
But then with the advent of social programming and assistance for parents is what is where we should have gone or even if we adding this financial assistance in the interim there is a sunset clause with the proven data to show it can sustain the birth rate can continue to rise. Because while we would have given out this incentive, we have also put these measures in place to support family structure going forward. In addition, they might have to show me how they're going to get a GDP up in order to pay this out. Because it's $500 a month for five years.
Right?
[01:02:45] Speaker C: So I'll pick up on a point there because you're talking about the sunset clause. So the way how this would work, this is where means testing is important. Because if you have something that's means tested, people will naturally graduate out of receiving the benefit. Because if you say this benefit is for people who have an earnings, an annual earnings of below a certain amount as their annual earnings increase, which one would expect as they, you know, as they get older, they get a better job, etc. They graduate out of it. So they are no longer beneficiary. So that's One of the important things about means testing.
The second thing, and we don't do this and is a point that I've raised is after you run a policy, you need to have a value for money assessment.
So the value for money assessment would go into certain questions and one of them, one of them is efficiency. Has this program been run efficiently? And the other question is on effectiveness.
Has this program achieved the objectives set out to achieving that it was set out to achieve? Right. And if the program is not achieving the objectives, we need to rethink the program. And we have really struggled with this.
I will use an example, it's probably a contentious example, but I'll use the example of CPEP because CPEP had very defined objectives. It was an excellent program by design.
CPEP was meant to be designed to, so that people would work in the mornings, look for a job in the afternoon or get training in the afternoon so that they could better themselves.
[01:04:21] Speaker A: Right.
[01:04:22] Speaker C: The contractors were meant to be as an opportunity to stimulate small business.
You want some experience as a contractor and then you could go out and do your own thing.
You were supposed to graduate out of the program, I can't remember was three to five years. But you were not supposed to be a lifetime CPAP worker and a lifetime contractor. The, the point of that was a buffer while you upskill or look for work and a way to get this sort of management experience if you are a small contractor.
[01:04:56] Speaker B: And training as well, training and skills would have been developed and honed because persons would have understood the workers. And, and, and people talk about the Wakan and all of that. Don't lose your thought that lead that lends into landscaping.
[01:05:09] Speaker C: Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly. But then you have to do a value for money assessment. You say, am I meeting the objectives of this program? And the answer with CPAP would have been no.
And we have to be honest about that. Right. And if not, how can I reform it?
So what you're talking about with a sunset clause, this is where having proper data comes in. Because if it is the case that, you know, you give you 500 and you see, yeah, like we have, we have more babies being born. These, these children are really well looked after. We can see how this is going and it's going to have a positive impact, fine, you carry on. But if not, you have to think, well, maybe this wasn't the best thing. How can we make it better?
Not next five years when it's election, we're going to increase it to 600 if you vote for us. That's not what we want, but that's, that's where we always land.
[01:06:03] Speaker B: Yeah, unfortunately. All right, let me just give people a little 10 seconds. One person says, davy, best program ever. Please bring her back.
She's invited to come back and speak on other issues. Let's take a listen. Good morning, Devi.
[01:06:17] Speaker A: Your point is well taken.
[01:06:18] Speaker B: That's the result of feminism.
It was a very huge push towards the anti social structure of families, you know, and it also came with implanting a biasness in the minds of women against men. This is what you get from feminism. You know, it's a breakdown all across, economically, socially, with families and all that stuff. And now we are paying the price. It's a hard price to pay, but these things can be remedied.
[01:06:46] Speaker A: I agree with what you're saying.
[01:06:48] Speaker B: Yes, thank you very much.
[01:06:50] Speaker A: Hello and good morning, Devi, and to your guests.
[01:06:53] Speaker B: So, Davy, it all comes down when
[01:06:57] Speaker A: you analyze it, long or short of it. It comes down to the home parenting.
Then if you missed it at home, you should get it in school.
So, you know, it's an individual thing.
And you have to strike that balance.
It's about sacrifice.
And you have to take your age limit.
We all, when you, when you're analyzing these things, you have to analyze the balance with age. You'll know where you start, where you stop and have that balance. Now, this is all healthy, but you cannot, with just one program to solve this situation.
I think the government should open for all these ministries for the MPS or through the counselor, to accept recommendation from the population before you go ahead and
[01:07:51] Speaker B: make any major decision.
I agree. Quickly.
[01:07:54] Speaker A: Good morning, Dr. Harris.
180 degrees. You know, one of the problems that I'm having in this country is the lies we continue to tell to the population.
I want the minister to put all, all of his labor liabilities into one basket, analyze them and look at what his income is going to be and tell the population unions, this is what we have. If we are not frank with the population, where would we go?
[01:08:24] Speaker B: Agreed. Thank you.
[01:08:25] Speaker A: All right.
[01:08:26] Speaker C: Yes, agree.
[01:08:26] Speaker B: All right. Hello, good morning.
[01:08:28] Speaker A: Quickly.
Morning again. Dr. Harris and David Princess Tom. Two points. One.
Right now we hear all the time in 20 Tobago that there's a water problem that many times people have to be buying water and I mean, you're talking about expanding your tourism industry, et cetera, et cetera. So there's a problem in Tobago right now with the size of their population. Secondly, the cost and the subsidy for the air bridge and the sea bridge is heavily subsidized. And these have to be factored in. So when we are talking about these economic initiatives, etc.
So I am saying this can't be a one off point. We have to look at this thing holistically. All the factors that contribute. What about we have been talking a long time about increasing the employment age to 65. Why can't we feed up on that? There are people who are living longer in the production system a little longer. So you reduce the dependence on NIS and pensions and stuff like that. So it has to be a holistic conversation. Thank you, Princess.
[01:09:29] Speaker B: All right. Thank you very much. And that is something Dr. Harris spoke heavily on this morning. So Dr. Harris, I want to say thank you very much. We out of time, but I want to say thank you for staying the extra time with us this morning as we continue to look at eye on the economy here in Trinidad and Tobago and the region. No doubt you are invited with me next week. We would continue to talk on tourism, talk on regional travel integration.
How does the, how does different economies reflect that of Trinidad and Tobago or match or run parallel to. We can talk about it next week as well. So I thank you again. I will speak with the producer and I look forward to chatting with you again in the not too distant future.
[01:10:04] Speaker C: Thanks, Evie. And thanks for all your callers who checked in.
[01:10:07] Speaker B: Yes, man, have a good one.
[01:10:08] Speaker A: Bye bye.
[01:10:08] Speaker B: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability.
[01:10:12] Speaker A: The all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5.
