s now than they did in the 40s. So that would suggest that we were less likely to have anxiety caused by this shortage. But we observe that people's anxiety seems to be worse lately than compared to the old days. So I'm not sure I buy this. Maybe there's a correlation but not a causation. But eggs are apparently good for you.

All right. So Hakeem Jeffries has finally grudgingly agreed that President Trump should get credit for closing the border, which is now secure. Fox News says that. And Jeffries says, "Of course he'll get credit for that." To which I'm thinking, "Huh, I'm actually surprised. Aren't you surprised that even though it's so obvious that Trump closed the border and the other leaders did not? Aren't you surprised that one of the top Democrats just even admitted it instead of changing the subject?" So I guess that's the part that's interesting is just that he said it at all. Well, that might be because the polling shows that people care less about the border because they consider it a solved problem. So it might be that there's no benefit to arguing that Trump didn't close it. So it's well, that's old news, it's closed. Moving on. See if we have any other problems besides that.

So I saw on MSNBC, which used to be MSNBC, on Lawrence O'Donnell's show, I think it was last night, that he had Chuck Schumer on and the two of them were introducing their newest hoax. Have you heard the new hoax about affordability? All right. You can tell that they're introducing a hoax by looking at their faces with the sound off. There's a certain smile that Democrats do when they're introducing a hoax. And it's like this. I've got a suspicious smile on. I'm going to introduce a new hoax. And the hoax goes like this. No, I'm not smiling. I'm not too happy about it. Well, stop it. Stop it. Stop it. I'm trying not to smile to give away the fact. Oh god, I'm smiling again. I'm smiling. Okay. Ignore my creepy smile because this is how I introduce a hoax. Are you ready for the hoax?

The hoax is that President Trump is the only human being out of 7 billion human beings. He's the only one who believes that affordability doesn't matter. That's right. Because it's based on something he said. Well, I'm not going to quote what he said or put it in context because then you'll know it's a hoax. Do you know how else you could know it's a hoax? Look at my creepy smile. And Lawrence O'Donnell has this creepy smile too. We got two creepy smiles. Yeah, that's how we introduce the hoaxes because we know it's a hoax, but we're trying to see if you're dumb enough to believe that there's actually any human being who doesn't understand that affordability matters to people who don't have enough money. I'm not creepy. You're creepy. All right, that's enough of that. Stop it. You're right, Jeep guy. I need to just stop making that face. But I didn't start it. That's a Chuck Schumer face.

Anyway, no, it is not true that Trump is the only person in the world who doesn't understand that affordability matters. So I was thinking to myself, how are we doing on affordability? So I made a little list of the things we talk about when we talk about affordability. And let's see how Trump is doing. How is he doing on eggs? Well, really well. The price of eggs is down. And I do think we can attribute that to the actions of the Trump administration. Now, probably the egg prices would have drifted back to normal anyway, but I do think that Trump goosed it. His people did a good job. So we'll give him eggs.

How about gas? Gas, definitely. Certainly the Trump instinct to go for maximum drilling and drill baby drill and getting rid of obstacles for that. Yeah, that definitely caused the gas prices to go down. So we'll give them eggs, we'll give them gas.

What about groceries in general? No. Groceries in general, especially beef, not so good. They're still high. And even if they're not inflating much from where they are, they're kind of too high. So now keep in mind that it doesn't mean that Trump gets the credit or the blame for every kind of price and every kind of situation. It's just is what it is. Groceries are high.

What about rent? Well, the recent news is that rents have actually fallen a little bit from October to November. Don't know if that's a pattern yet, but it would make perfect sense if you paired it with the knowledge that 2.5 million people have been deported. That should create a little bit less demand. Little less demand means a little lower rents. And sure enough, 1% lower. So he gets... I'll give him rent. Could be more, but we'll give him that.

How about interest rates? Well, he's been working pretty hard to get those interest rates down. And I believe they're lower than they were. Is that true? Lower than when he took office, but they'll definitely be lower when he gets his own hand-chosen Fed head in charge. So I expect interest rates to go down.

What about inflation? Inflation's not great, but it's not terrible. It's sort of just limping along. So it's not the worst thing in the world, but you know, could be better.

What about automobiles? Well, I don't know if we've seen the impact yet. Especially because there would be tariffs on automobiles from other countries. But he did recently get rid of that Biden era idea that your gas powered car would have to get 51 miles to the gallon on average. So he got rid of that, which should cause more availability of low-end cars that would cost people less because the gas would be less and the cost of the car would be less if it's purchased. If it's built in America, then you don't have the tariff problem. So automobiles, I'll give him that. I don't think we've seen the drop yet, but he's done the right thing to get that drop.

And what about entertainment? Entertainment doesn't seem like that's going down. Maybe it's gone up. I don't know. But entertainment is not the most important thing in the world.

So here's my take on affordability. Trump's actually done pretty well if you look at all the categories. Pretty well. There's a lot more you could do and we would like him to do more and it looks like he is but he's going for it. And then I was thinking about what would you do to make food less expensive and I'm going to give you some brainstorming on that topic. These are not meant to be great ideas. The way brainstorming works is you just throw some ideas that maybe you hadn't thought of before and then it spurs you or encourages you to think of your own ideas and if there's more ideas there's a greater chance that one of them will be useful. So I'm just going to throw out some ideas for reducing costs.

Number one idea would be to have some kind of mechanism where local farmers could more directly and legally sell to consumers. So where I live, you might have the same situation. On the weekend, there'll be a farmers market but I would have to get in the car and drive to the farmers market and it doesn't have everything that I'd want. Doesn't have meat for example. So there's some things I think the government probably prevents like meat is my guess. But suppose you removed obstacles and said, "Yeah, the farmers market can deliver it to your house. Deliver it right to your house." So then if I didn't have to drive to it and it was the local farmer, so that would cut out a bunch of steps and a bunch of people taking a cut. Could I get it cheaper? I feel like I could. So there's probably something you could do that would make food a lot more accessible and cheaper if you just got rid of all the middle people and said, "Okay, the farmer can sell this." Now, would it be more dangerous? Yes, it would. Probably because you can imagine there'd be a farmer who didn't meet all the standards, etc. But here's what I think. Don't you think the farmers eat all their own food? If you're a farmer and you're selling beef, you don't think you're eating the beef yourself? Of course you are. If you're growing a certain vegetable, you don't think that the farmer's family is eating that vegetable? Of course they are. What would make you feel more safe? Eating the same food as the person who grew it or some government entity told you it was okay? I don't know. You might be more comfortable eating what the farmer eats.

How about if you started a government grocery store? Stop. Stop. You're just assuming a bunch of things that I'm not going to say. Wait till I say it and then tell me if you like it or not. Okay. And in the government grocery store, it wouldn't try to reproduce every kind of product. There wouldn't be any of the highly processed foods. Wouldn't be any. None. But it would also be a very limited set of choices that were designed to be affordable. And because it's a limited set of choices, you could bring down your expense of providing them. Let's say it was only chicken for protein and maybe two or three kinds of fish that are accessible and easy. That's all your proteins. And then let's say it's not every exotic vegetable in the world, but you definitely have broccoli. People like broccoli. And whatever are the top five vegetables, so everybody's got one that they like. And so let's say your grocery store has I'll just pick a number, 25 goods, but they're the ones that most people would eat. They wouldn't be delighted because it wouldn't be that many choices. But there's a lot you can do with chicken. You know what I mean? You know, once you get it home, you can make it taste any variety of ways. So I think the thing that the so-called government grocery stores have done wrong is probably try to produce the same amount of choices as a regular grocery store. That's probably where they go wrong. I would like an option if I had very low income, an option to have more boring food, but it's really easy to get and it's cheap. I'll accept boring because I'll spice it up on my end. It doesn't have to be exciting on your end. Anyway, that's one idea.

And then another one, this is really interesting. Th