Point of View October 27, 2026 – Hour 2 : Them Before Us

[00:00:04] Across America Live, this is Point of View, Kerby Anderson. Second hour today, one of the questions that Robert George asks in the forward, and of course Dr. Robert George has been on the program with us many times, is which should we prioritize the desires of adults or the needs of children?

[00:00:32] He says there's no avoiding this question for any of us and there is no way to be on both sides of it. You will come down on one side or the other. And so again, it is something we have talked about in the conversations that we've had before about the rights of children, both unborn and born. And that is something we're going to be talking about because we have information about this wonderful organization that maybe you are learning about for the first time.

[00:01:01] Them Before Us, why we need a global children's rights movement. One of the individuals we'll be talking with today is the executive director, Josh Wood. He has served in that particular capacity. Also the co-founder of the Greater Than Campaign, which is really a national coalition uniting parents, faith leaders, lawyers, policy organizations to defend children's rights in law and culture.

[00:01:27] I also just recently came across his Substack Everyday Interpreter. And so you have some information about that that you can follow by pushing and pushing on some of the different links that we provide. But first of all, Josh, thank you for joining us today here on Point of View. Hey, thanks for having me. Let's begin to educate our listeners. This may be for the first time. Many of our listeners have heard anything about them Before Us.

[00:01:54] We do have a link to the book, which came out about five years ago by Katie Faust and Stacey Manning. But can you give us just some background? Because when sometimes we talk about children's rights, sometimes that's implying a secular or progressive viewpoint. This is just, of course, the opposite. But I think it's important for people to know a little bit more about this idea of the need for a global children's rights movement. Great question.

[00:02:20] You have to unpack it because, like you said, so many people are fighting over what it means, what a child's right to anything means. And so I'll start. We fight for a child's right specifically to their mother and father. That's believing the statement that every child has a mother and every child has a father. Now, before you're tempted to say, I thought everybody believed that way. How is this controversial? Yes. It is. It is today.

[00:02:48] It really comes down to a civilizational question. When a child comes out of the womb and the doctor is holding them in the delivery room, this is the question to answer. Does that child belong with a specific two people in the world? Or is that child a completely detached asset? No relationships already formed with anybody. And they can be given to anybody.

[00:03:13] Those are the two worldviews that are really fighting over the redefinition of a child. And again, when this book came out a number of years ago, of course, I was aware of it. But just to give people a sense of all the different aspects, chapter one was about children have rights. Chapter two, biology matters. Chapter three, gender matters. Chapter four, marriage matters. Number five, divorce. Number six, same-sex parents. Number seven, donor conception, which gets us into IVF.

[00:03:42] Chapter eight, surrogacy. Chapter nine, adoption. Chapter 10, of course, join the movement. It just shows that there is a lot that can be unpacked in terms of this children's rights movement. And it might have been a little easier, say, a couple of decades ago to sort this out.

[00:04:01] But when people are redefining marriage, redefining gender, providing more biological and artificially reproductive material and means, this has become an issue that has become much more significant than it was just a few decades ago, don't you think? Yeah, well, I think no one would have thought you maybe 20 years ago that the definition of a child is the creation of two people,

[00:04:30] a mother and a father, to whom that child depends for their flourishing and safety. Well, why redefine that? Well, because we have in our society today a lot of adults, sometimes it's a single mom, a single dad, who want to create a child without the other sex. They want to buy an egg or buy sperm, and they want to create a kid through surrogacy, and they want to take that kid home and erase the mother or erase the father and do it by themselves. Well, that's wrong.

[00:05:00] But if a child, if we redefine them, and a child doesn't come from two people, if a child is fine with any adults, any number of adults, maybe 10 adults, then they're not really losing anything if it's one or five. So there's almost a sinister game at play to say, nope, a child doesn't depend on anybody for their flourishing. It's just any number of loving people.

[00:05:26] And so that redefinition continues so that they can be an asset that people can acquire. That's why you see here recently as this ideology has taken hold not only in the hearts of people but also in our laws to make it possible. You've seen now three men who will buy an egg and buy a surrogate's womb and they'll take home a kid that's not related to them at all. Well, how did this happen?

[00:05:52] It happened because society and the laws changed to say that child didn't belong with anybody. It could be given to anybody, and now we're going to actually facilitate that commercial transaction so that these adults get what they want. That's just amazing. And, again, as an individual that more than 40 years ago wrote a book on genetic engineering, at the time, Josh, I thought that I would probably have people interacting with me.

[00:06:20] At that time, it was recombinant DNA research. But I found that instead, most of the letters I received, phone calls I received, and then later, when, of course, we had the Internet, even e-mails I received were from modern-day Hannahs wanting to know about in vitro fertilization. But at the same time, I was also being requested to be on various talk shows because we had, as it developed,

[00:06:46] the whole idea of surrogacy, and, as well, you had frozen embryos. Then we had custody of those embryos. And if a surrogate mother wanted to keep a child, who was the rightful parent? And that's just what biology did and bioethics did. Then superimpose upon that when we finally had a decision that came down called a Obergefell,

[00:07:11] which then defined marriage very differently and said that two men, two women could actually form a viable marriage, and that would be recognized by the state and by the federal government. And once you've sort of redefined it all, the value of what you have put together, them before us, the children's rights needing to come first, is so essential.

[00:07:37] And so in some respects, when the book came out five years ago, it was already pretty significant. But over the last couple of years, you've really been ahead of the game, and it's been something which we need to come back to, to some of the basic principles, don't we? Well, the reason so many now are waking up to it is because our technology is getting better and cheaper. So there's more people doing it.

[00:08:00] And the people commodifying and victimizing children by intentionally depriving their child of a mother or father, what I mean by that is they will purchase away an egg from a young lady, and they will pay her for her parental rights. If you sign this letter, we'll give you $30,000 for a round of your eggs, but you're never allowed to contact a child, and you have to relinquish any claims to being mother.

[00:08:28] So they acquire through a commercial transaction the mother so that she is no longer a part of their kid's life. That essentially detaches the child. And that allows them to, again, acquire. Let me take a break. We'll come back and continue a conversation about this, them before us, why we need a global children's rights movement. And, again, we point you to the book as well. If you'd be interested in reading it, we'll be back right after this.

[00:09:00] This is Viewpoints with Kirby Anderson. Roger Kimball begins his column in The Spectator about artificial intelligence with his admission. He says it's not often that we get a ringside seat to the birth of a narrative. As you might imagine, the narrative was, AI will end humanity. Everyone memorized their lines. Artificial intelligence was the biggest threat to humanity since, well, since ever.

[00:09:26] Forget COVID, forget climate catastrophe, forget the population explosion or collapse. Not everybody was convinced. Commentator Miranda Devine was among the first to ask how anyone who has lived through the bogus fear campaigns of climate hysteria, Russiagate and COVID could allow himself to be duped yet again by the same cynical freaks using the same playbook. One writer posted an image of Time magazine from 2006 and one from 2026. The first said Earth was at a tipping point.

[00:09:55] The second warned that AI is the tipping point. Of course, the crisis also came with built-in solutions. Bernie Sanders called for a moratorium. Barack Obama encouraged Democrats to take up the issue and thereby never let a crisis go to waste. And everyone else called for an international oversight. Right on cue, Bill Gates called for an international organization to regulate AI. Rick DeVos was one of the many people who saw through the hype.

[00:10:20] These people really only have one solution for everything, and it's just world communism with corporate buzzwords. Anyone who has studied the issue of artificial intelligence knows there are potential dangers and significant challenges, but stopping further development or slowing it so the Chinese pass us is not a good position. What we need are common-sense safety protocols and cooler heads. I'm Kirby Anderson, and that's my point of view.

[00:10:49] Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Back once again with Josh Wood, and again, he is the executive director of this global children's rights movement, Them Before Us. And Josh, one of the things we talk about so often here on Point of View is worldview.

[00:11:18] And it does seem to me that there's where the clash of worldview is, because in a book, for example, they had a chapter on don't kids just need to be safe and loved. When you go down that road and say, well, just as long as they're safe, it doesn't matter whether they have two fathers, two mothers, a father, a mother, some other people involved, it doesn't matter if they're related biologically to the family they're in.

[00:11:43] It just illustrates all the tangled issues that develop. And having written a book years ago that oftentimes has been used in Christian schools on Christian ethics, when you start talking about these issues, we've always, within biblical understanding, as well as even Western culture, the idea that children are genetically related to the father and mother with the exception of adoption.

[00:12:08] But once you start redefining marriage, once you start redefining how children come into the world, it's really hard, even if you want to try to provide a moral perspective, to sort all of that out. Don't you think? Well, yes, I think there is guardrails for a reason. And a mother and a father and them being required for the creation and required for the flourishing of the child, and every study would tell you that. That's where they're safest. That's where they do best.

[00:12:38] The unrelated adults in the home present the highest risk. I think those guardrails exist for a reason. Well, and that's one of the things we've talked about before, is that if you go into, whether it's an adoptive situation or one where it's just kind of free love and there's all sorts of adults and kids together, you don't have the kind of protection that is intended.

[00:13:01] And so it does seem to me that if we want to find our way back, we need to challenge some of these court cases, don't you think? For example, let's just take the obvious one, marriage. Right now we have a situation in which people can live together, and eventually that's called common law marriage, which is cohabitation is very different than marriage. We have individuals of different sex, genders, and whatever that can be calling themselves marriage.

[00:13:28] And a lot of that comes really from some rulings that first were taking place at the statewide level and eventually came from a Supreme Court ruling. And it seems to me that if we want to find our way back, we need to reevaluate some of those decisions, don't we? Well, I think without boring your listeners, the Supreme Court case at Obergefell did do that.

[00:13:50] It did lock all the states in to essentially say you are not allowed to restrict the definition of a child to be the creation of two people, a mother and a father who they belong with. And it prevented any state from trying to roll back and say, wait a second, we're not going to redefine them and allow other people to acquire them. And so that is why our Greater Than Campaign, which you can go to greaterthancampaign.com,

[00:14:17] you can learn all about our efforts specifically to overturn it. Well, and another aspect of that is, and we've talked about this before, Josh, that there were a lot of studies that came out before that decision and even after that say really there's no difference between opposite-sex parents and same-sex parents. And yet, as we've documented a few times, I've done commentaries on it, that's just simply not true because we recognize that the best environment for a child

[00:14:44] is to be in an environment where there's a father and a mother that are genetically related to them, or at least we have adoption. And any other variation oftentimes ends up with all sorts of other kinds of problems and difficulties, which, again, is part of the reason for your study because of the need for us to maybe go back and challenge some of those studies that were front page in some of the news magazines and newspapers to try to promote same-sex marriage in the first place.

[00:15:16] Yes, it was just propaganda. I mean, that's all it was. We had decades of research showing that adoptive children, they struggled because it's hard for them to leave or to have to deal with the loss of a parent. We had donor-conceived children in heterosexual families who struggled because they lost one of their biological parents. But somehow, when it was the same-sex couple, everything was the same.

[00:15:41] And, again, there's just a lot of bias built into that in a lot of other ways, too. But we should all be suspect when the parties change and suddenly the data follows. And, again, I've looked at a few of those studies, and there are some that just wouldn't have passed scrutiny in a junior high school science class.

[00:16:03] But because there was already a bias towards wanting to show that there's no difference between traditional families and same-sex couples, there was an unbelievable acceptance of that as well. So I've kind of taken on the marriage issue, but I'd love to hear a couple other things because you also have been taking on this whole idea of donors,

[00:16:25] surrogacy, and the rest because those are all issues that have surfaced because we biologically are able to do some things that we weren't able to do just a few decades ago. Well, unfortunately, you know, this really did get started by a lot of heterosexual couples who were facing infertility. And so they did build some of the mechanisms of sperm donation and egg donation.

[00:16:51] But what we've seen now with this new regime, constitutional regime of Obergefell, is the only way that a same-sex couple can, quote, build their family is by erasing a mother or father. And inserting this child into their home with an unrelated adult. And that is the big issue now is that it is hitting scale.

[00:17:14] There are insurance companies trying to push to make this covered so that even single men can be classified as infertile and have you pay for their fertility treatments or you pay for their surrogates. This is to try to scale this child victimization up, which we, again, think is a tragedy. So, again, what can we do? Because one of the things, Josh, is that we have a lot of activists here.

[00:17:38] As a matter of fact, as I was traveling last week, we had some people talking about pieces of legislation that they wanted to address that would maybe restrict pornography in libraries and all sorts of other things. But it does seem to me that you want individuals to join with you. Again, you can go to thembeforeus.com and a variety of other links that we have provided on the website, including a link to some of the material that you have been putting together in your substack.

[00:18:06] But how can people kind of get involved in this? Because we do broadcast all over the country. And some of these changes could at least be started at the statewide level where there's a better chance to bring about a change. But ultimately, some of those need to change at the national level. But how can people get involved and what are kind of the next steps?

[00:18:29] Well, we are the only organization working across all 50 states on this issue of protecting a child's right to their mother and father. And so if you go to thembeforeus.com and you sign up or you give a gift, you can get in touch with us. You'll get emails from us. And you can find out what we are doing in Utah, in California, in Florida to protect a child's right to their mother and father. Of course, giving helps us to go represent the child in all those places. But we also need advocates on the ground and would love to partner with you.

[00:18:58] Let me just for a second to mention that when you go to the website, it gives you some very good talking points. For example, if indeed you are in a situation where there aren't two parents, the possibility, the increased likelihood of a person ending up in prison, dropping out of high school, even dying of suicide. There's just a lot of evidence that certainly does not make its way to the mainstream media.

[00:19:24] We've tried to include a lot of it in some of the books, booklets and commentaries we do. But this is another resource that if you find yourself wanting to fight for and defend traditional family values, you're another great resource that people can find. Absolutely. We'd be honored to partner with you. Again, we need more courageous voices willing to tell the truth and defend kids.

[00:19:50] Let me just mention that, again, we have some of those links on our website at pointofview.net. Of course, you can just type in them before us or all sorts of other things. You might be interested in getting the book. I think it would be a great resource for you if you're fighting some of the battles forward by our good friend, Dr. Robert George. And again, written by Katie Faust and Stacey Manning. And so, again, a resource that's available. Of course, we've been talking with Josh Wood. Go to the website. You'll find some great resources.

[00:20:17] So, Josh, thank you for joining us today and look forward to the next opportunity. Yeah, thanks for having me. Let's take a break. And when we come back, we're going to talk for just a few minutes with Stacey Eldridge. The book is The Ladder of Love. A lot of books today that we've been covering. And we wanted to try to give you as much information about that as possible. And then we're going to get back into the fact that as tomorrow, we will focus a fairly significant amount of time on the midterm elections. So those are going to be really important.

[00:20:46] Where can you get information if you haven't already voted? What you can say to people that you know that did not vote, haven't voted, and don't plan to vote? Are there some talking points we can give to them? Those are all great resources we want to make available to you. So let's take a break. We'll come back and focus a few more minutes on a few other books that you need to know about.

[00:21:09] And then, of course, we are likely to spend a lot of time tomorrow on the whole midterm election issue. So take the time to join with us, and we'll be back right after this. Who can you trust?

[00:21:37] Years ago, many of us could probably have provided a fairly long list. But today, well, today it seems we almost can't trust anyone. Educators don't even know what a woman is anymore. Many so-called public servants have shown all they care about is themselves. The FBI has been accused of bias, law-breaking, betrayal, and journalism. It's largely corrupt, with no Clark Kent standing up for truth, justice, and the American way.

[00:22:07] All of this is why Point of View Radio is more important than ever. And your part in supporting us is more needed than ever. Do your part today in supporting trustworthy truth. Stand with us and help push back the lies and the darkness. Visit pointofview.net. Don't put it off. Take a moment right now and click on that big blue button that says Donate Now.

[00:22:34] Or call to invest at 1-800-347-5151. Pointofview.net and 800-347-5151. Point of View will continue after this. You are listening to Point of View.

[00:23:05] The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station. And now, here again, is Kirby Anderson. Final half hour, if you'd like to join us, 1-800-351-1212. Or just sit back and take some notes as we cover some very important issues that you need to know about. But it's going to be a busy week. And, of course, I started by talking about all the things happening. Everything from the election today in Israel and election this time next week here in the United States.

[00:23:34] And all sorts of activities as well as riots and all sorts of other things taking place. So, lots to cover. But I thought for just a minute, let me mention that our commentaries are also available on the website. Also, of course, available on the app, which is available. And you can find out more about that by going to the website, pointofview.net. But my app today and my particular viewpoint commentary, which you can find on the app, is by what I call AI Fears.

[00:24:05] And Roger Kimball is an individual that writes in The Spectator. And he says, you know, sometimes it's pretty rare that you get a ringside seat by the birth of a narrative. But the narrative was very simple. AI will end humanity. And, of course, as he points out, everybody that was part of this attempt to try to promote that all had memorized their lines. Artificial intelligence was the greatest threat to humanity since, I don't know, ever.

[00:24:34] You know, forget COVID, forget climate catastrophe, forget the population explosion or collapse. And, of course, everybody was convinced until we started digging in a little bit. Started saying, okay, yes, there are some reasonable concerns, but maybe some of that has been overplayed. And so I give you the quote from Miranda Devine.

[00:24:53] You see her sometimes on Fox News and some other various talk formats in which he said, you know, is this maybe another bogus fear campaign that reminds me of, I don't know, climate hysteria, Russiagate, COVID. Are we going to be allowing ourselves to be duped once again?

[00:25:13] And I thought it was kind of interesting because there was an individual that dug back in the archives and found a Time magazine cover that said, Earth is at the tipping point. And then pointed to one that just came out, AI is at the tipping point. You know, okay, we've seen this before, haven't we? And, again, the crisis, of course, also came with, as we've pointed out, built-in solutions. Bernie Sanders had a solution. That is a complete moratorium.

[00:25:40] Barack Obama said, this could be a real good campaign issue. Never let a crisis go to waste. Everybody else said, well, maybe we just need some international oversight. And right on cue, Bill Gates called for an international organization to regulate AI. So I quote from one individual, Rick DeVos, who said, if nothing else, these people really only have one solution for everything,

[00:26:07] and it's just world communism with corporate buzzwords. Now, are there dangers? Certainly. Have they been overplayed? I think they have. You heard the other day that AI has now escaped and it's going into people's bank accounts. Is there a rest of that story? Yes, there is. Because it turns out, and I don't want to get into all the details. We'll leave that to Liberty McCarter. She's the expert on this, I guess.

[00:26:31] But when you are, and let's say Claude, I'll use that one since it's anthropic and they're pretty safe, you can have what's called an AI agent. And you can then allow your AI agent to go into your bank account. But they're there because you opened it up to them and sent them in to make a payment. I'm not sure I would do it, but again, that's why they were in the bank account in the first place. And so you can begin to understand there are some answers to these questions.

[00:27:01] And so, again, it's worth some common sense evaluation, maybe some common sense safety protocols to make sure that we don't make mistakes. But at the same time, I'm not going to let so much fear dominate our thinking. We are individuals that should have a sound mind. We should not be motivated by fear. But since I mentioned the election, I thought I'd give you a couple other talking points.

[00:27:29] You know, we, for example, pointed out how you have some of these elections that have ended in a tie. I just mentioned two in the interest of time. But even at the presidential election level, think how close these elections have been. Those of you that are older might remember 2000 when George W. Bush led Al Gore in Florida after the first results were tallied. But then there were questions about counting hanging chads.

[00:27:58] And it eventually was decided by the Supreme Court. Then four years later, winning Ohio was enough for Bush to be back in office. But let's go to 2016, which is closer because you might remember that. Donald Trump won three swing states by a combined total of 77,000 votes. Joe Biden in 2020 won three swing states by a combined 42,000 votes.

[00:28:26] And, of course, controversy surrounded both of those elections. And even the most recent one, 2024, yeah, okay, Donald Trump was a clear winner. He won the popular vote by more than two million votes and won seven swing states. But it's even there worth mentioning that in five of those swing states, he won by less than three points. So let's recognize that in some respects these elections are very close.

[00:28:54] And at the state and local level, sometimes a few votes make all the difference in the world. In 20 of the last 22 midterm elections, the president's party loses seats. So there's every reason to believe that there could be a blue wave, which would be a reaction to Donald Trump. But we will see.

[00:29:18] We have 435 House races, 25, excuse me, 35 Senate races and 36 governor's races, along with thousands of state House and state races and local races. These are all, I think, really important. And yet we have to understand that by the time you add in the thousands of state legislative races and local races,

[00:29:44] we are talking at least 30,000 races around the country. And some of them are decided by just fractions of a percentage of the vote. So if I can't convince you to go out and vote, I don't know what else I can do other than to say your vote really will matter. I have somebody in my semi-school class that actually has been elected and is responsible for,

[00:30:11] I think, many millions of dollars of allocating funds in this unincorporated area. And he was elected by, you ready for this, 50 votes. Not 50,000, 50 votes. And yet he now is in a position, and I'm glad he is, to make sure that they are spending millions of dollars in this unincorporated area.

[00:30:35] And again, some of these races for school board and city council, that may be decided again by a few hundred votes. And so it's just a reminder that as individuals, we have a stewardship of the vote. And I think some of us have been like that very sad parable of the so-called unfaithful steward who buried the talents.

[00:31:00] He buried his opportunity to make a difference, in this case, to raise funds or to increase its amount. And there's a sense in which I think sometimes we bury our talents, and we should not do so. Well, just before we take a break, I guess I should say something about Cheesecake Factory, right? You know, everybody loves cheesecake, and I take my family to it from time to time.

[00:31:21] But as you might have remembered, if you've been out there for a while, there was very significant comments made by Barack Obama when she was complaining about this very significant addition that is going to be part of the White House

[00:31:42] because the ballroom will then prevent us from having to have foreign dignitaries eating on the South Lawn, especially if it's raining under umbrellas. And so this new ballroom, I think, makes a great deal of sense. But nevertheless, former President Barack Obama had to say, there's gold everywhere. What's with the gold? He's got the White House looking like Saddam Hussein opened a Cheesecake Factory.

[00:32:11] Well, of course, the reaction has been rather significant, given the fact that I'm not sure more than once he's ever been in a Cheesecake Factory, but that's another statement. And the reaction, first of all, Treasury Secretary Scott Best, as you might have noticed, went the other day to actually eat in a Cheesecake Factory and made some comments about Barack Obama's perception about buildings, which might not have been so good. And, of course, Donald Trump as well had to weigh in, as you might say.

[00:32:39] The White House, President Obama, is a symbol of America. It has to be clean. The columns can't be broken. The bricks can't be falling off under the plaster. And for you to say it's a Cheesecake Factory, that just shows you a lousy president. So there's been some back and forth between the current president and the previous president, and you're going to probably hear some more of that in the future. Thought I'd mention it. It's probably not worth mentioning any more than that. Our guest, which was scheduled today, apparently has not shown up.

[00:33:09] And our guest, the first half hour was, or second half hour, was not showing up as well. So don't know what it is, but we have more to talk about, and we'll do that after these messages. But let me, again, point you to the individuals that have been with us today. Thomas Woodward's book, again, a really good book on the issue of intelligent design and how genetics really is giving us an answer to some of the questions we've had for some time.

[00:33:35] And then Josh Wood, he did not write the book, but, of course, he's with the organization that wrote this book, Them Before Us, Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement. We'll take a break. Have some final comments right after this. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth.

[00:34:04] For a few more minutes, let's go ahead and talk about one of the issues in this campaign, and that is the issue of affordability, because that has been something that we've heard time and time again. And I've always tried to help you understand that this is not a problem with one administration, one president, one member of Congress. This has been happening for some time. Now, for those of you that actually are Truth Team members, let me give you a preview,

[00:34:30] because one of the booklets I've already written, and you won't receive it until late December, because I think it's the January booklet. Or, no, I guess it's the December booklet. I take it back. So maybe later this coming month here, you might actually get it, and it's on fiat currency. And the reason is to help people understand that this happened because the value of the dollar keeps going down. Now, there's not any one reason.

[00:34:58] There are many reasons, but if you had to pick one reason, it's the fact that because of our dollars, which are not tied to anything, like gold, we no longer have a situation in which we can't print more money. And so in the old days, there was a sense in which that was the case. But I point out in the booklet that in 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt decided, you know what, we're going to confiscate everybody's gold.

[00:35:26] And by 1971, Richard Nixon took us off the gold standard, and it was off to the races. There was no longer a limit in terms of the amount of dollars that could be printed. But when they print more dollars, the dollars in your pocketbook or in your wallet are worth less. And so as a result, as prices went up, wages did not keep apace.

[00:35:50] And so in some respects, it's becoming more and more difficult to achieve the American dream. And I'll get to that in just a minute. As a matter of fact, one of the things we are now recognizing is not only are we $40 trillion in debt, but we have unfunded obligations of about $115 trillion. By the way, if you think we're in a bad way, just look at what's happening overseas.

[00:36:17] Global debt is at least $365 trillion, and that's, I think, an undercount on that. You can see what has happened in many countries from Venezuela to Argentina to Lebanon. I mean, you can go down a long, long list of that is happening for some time. But the problem is, is that we end up with what I call and what many people refer to as a K-shaped economy. Think of the letter K. One part of the K goes up, the other one goes down.

[00:36:47] And that's exactly where we are. That upper leg represents those people whose assets, it takes more and more dollars to buy those assets. And that's stock, and that's bonds, and that's gold and silver and Bitcoin and things like that. And the other particular part of that is the fact that your wages aren't keeping up. So the rich get richer, the middle class and the lower class get poorer.

[00:37:14] We see a larger gap, and as a result, it's harder to actually achieve the American dream. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that is becoming more and more out of reach of most Americans. There is a very interesting website that you can go to called Investopedia. You know, we always talk about Wikipedia. This is called Investopedia.

[00:37:39] And Investopedia, each year, the writers there do a calculation of the true cost to achieve the American dream. And they estimated that the true cost for the American dream now is $5.3 million. Now, where do they come up with that? Well, they look at eight milestones.

[00:38:00] Owning a house, buying new cars, raising two children and sending them to college, retiring, paying for health care, having a wedding, owning pets, and taking a yearly vacation. Now, this phrase, American dream, I never knew where it came from.

[00:38:19] But it turns out that it comes from the writer James Truslow Adams in his book, The Epic of America, in which he said it was the fulfillment of a life that was better and richer and fuller for everyone. And so the idea is, is that in order for you to really achieve what we call the American dream, you would have to, over a lifetime, probably bring in $5 million.

[00:38:47] Okay, let's now compare that to reality. And that's when the dream crashes into reality. Because if you look at that $5.3 million figure, the average American falls short. Let's just take one example.

[00:39:05] A single wage earner, for example, would you be a full-time worker with a bachelor's degree, earns a median of about $3.6 million from age 25 to 64. That's based on, again, the reasonable analysis of the Census Bureau. Even if you add Social Security as retirement, of course, you've heard me talk about whether or not that's going to be available a few years from now. But let's assume that it is.

[00:39:34] You still don't reach that amount. Can you understand why people are frustrated? As I've mentioned in previous commentaries, our world today falls short because the dollar is diminishing. And so the cost of living goes up faster than wages and salaries, which is why the American dream seems elusive. We don't know what actually will happen with the election next Tuesday.

[00:40:03] But whatever it happens, I think we will come back and look at this issue of affordability being a really significant issue that affected individuals. And so as a result, this whole idea of affordability is something I addressed the other day in one of my commentaries.

[00:40:22] Because I told the story that comes from Porter Stansfield's book of John, whose grandfather, born in a small Pennsylvania town, buys a brick rancher on half-acre lot, has four children. His wife does not work. He works most of the time at this one company, raises the family on a single salary, sends all four kids to college.

[00:40:45] When he dies, leaves money in the bank, a paid-off house, a modest IRA, and even some stock. His son, who was born 50 years later, graduates from Penn State, has a degree in mechanical engineering, works as a regional manufacturing manager. But again, he works, his wife works at least part-time. They have three children.

[00:41:08] And even though he's thinking about retiring now, is concerned because two of his three children are moving home because they cannot afford a house. And then I tell the story of Jake. His oldest son graduates from Penn State, has a master's degree in computer science, works remotely as a software developer for a firm in Seattle. He makes a lot of money, very similar to what we talked about in that couple in San Francisco.

[00:41:31] But he cannot afford a house because, first of all, the median house price there is much larger than his annual income. He has $47,000 in student loans. He's not getting married. They're not having children. And you can see, just in three generations, the effect of the declining dollar. And it's just a good illustration, as we've talked about before. You can blame everybody you want.

[00:41:59] You can blame Republicans and Democrats, presidents, members of Congress. I think you should blame a lot of it to the Federal Reserve. But the reality is that decision was made a long time ago, and it's hurting the generation now. And that's why affordability was such a big issue in these electoral campaigns. Well, that's all we have for today.

[00:42:22] We're going to be talking about the midterms tomorrow with iVoterGuide, as well as some other people looking at some very important issues that you need to know about here on Point of View. If you go to the website, pointofview.net, you're going to find all of the articles that we have talked about here today, some of the links, some of the references. So take the time to go there. Make sure you put the app on your phone so you can listen anytime you want. You can find all the podcasts, all the articles, all available to you as well.

[00:42:49] As always, I want to thank Megan for help engineering the program. I want to thank Derek for producing the program and still trying to figure out where two of my guests showed up today. But we had four guests. We ended up with two. I guess we just need to overbook. That worked out pretty well. Anyway, we look forward to seeing you tomorrow on Wednesday right here on Point of View.

[00:43:14] It almost seems like we live in a different world from many people in positions of authority. They say men can be women and women men. People are prosecuted differently or not at all depending on their politics. Criminals are more valued and rewarded than law-abiding citizens. It's so overwhelming, so demoralizing. You feel like giving up. But we can't. We shouldn't. We must not.

[00:43:42] As Winston Churchill said to Britain in the darkest days of World War II, Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. And that's what we say to you today. This is not a time to give in, but to step up and join Point of View in providing clarity in the chaos. We can't do it alone, but together, with God's help,

[00:44:11] we will overcome the darkness. Invest in biblical clarity today at pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. pointofview.net and 800-347-5151. Point of View is produced by Point of View Ministries.