Erick Erickson HR 1 8/10/26

At Great Wolf Lodge, your whole family can go on an adventure. Splash away in our water park and bowl a perfect score with your pack and mix game time with family time. And at Great Wolf Lodge, all this excitement is just a short drive away. So bring the pack together and learn more at Great Wolf.com and strengthen the pack. Welcome. It is another exciting edition of the Eric Eurksen show. The full number is 877979373-745. Yes, we're going to talk about the flop cameras today. Stand by, but first, we have news. There's been a 7.6 on the Richter scale. earthquake in Columbia. It's a big one. This comes after the Venezuelan earthquake earlier this year. Major earthquake, collapsed buildings. There's been a collapsed cathedral, among other things. Keeping our eye on this story. The president, of course, wants to reassert American authority over South and Central America in the Western Hemisphere. And humanitarian relief is being organized as a way to... get essentially American influence back into those areas instead of the Chinese influence. But that's not where I want to start today. I want to start with the Patriot Missile question because it's actually a pretty big story. And it comes as well with reports of things percolating in Iran. We know that the Russians this weekend were able to undermine key portions of Ukrainian missile defense because the Ukrainians are running out of Patriot missiles. And there is an argument being made in Washington, D.C. to allow the Ukrainians to make their own Patriot missiles. And it is being disputed by Lockheed and Raytheon, according to the Atlantic, citing Republicans in Washington. One of the primary holdups in the Trump administration's decision to license the production of air defense launchers and missiles to Ukraine, particularly the Patriot surface-to-air missile system, has been Raytheon and Lockheed. The official states the two defense contractors will officially frame their concerns around IP theft and tech transfer, but their real worry is that the Ukrainians will find a way to improve the Patriot and then produce them at scale faster and for less money than what the existing production lines in the United States could do, threatening manufacturers in the United States. It's a protectionist argument. Let's be real clear about what's going on here. The consolidation in the defense industry in the United States has been necessary.

As the American government itself has imposed restrictions, burdens, and costs on those companies, they couldn't keep up as small companies. They had to consolidate. But now that they have consolidated and there are fewer of them to produce the goods, they've moved slowly. And our defense industry has ultimately become a jobs program, not a defense program. Ukraine is a nation at war and it is bombed on a daily basis. Ukraine will produce 5 million drones this year. That is more than all of NATO combined. If you want real perspective on this, I've now gotten this from multiple sources, so I believe this actually is true. Ukraine's going to produce 5 million drones this year. The United States will produce less than 100,000. And you can say... Ukraine is at war, yeah, but Ukraine, its military headquarters, its manufacturing facilities, everything is being actively bombed, supplies are scarce, and they're going to produce 5 million drones. We'll have 100,000, and we need them. We can't produce Patriot missiles. It is now more and more apparent, despite the protestations from the White House, the rumors are true, that we cannot engage the Iranians in a way we want to engage the Iranians because we don't have enough missiles to engage Iranians, our surface-to-surface missiles, among other things. are in short supply. This is not good. This is, in fact, a very bad situation for the United States that not produce our weapons. But also, our weapons manufacturers are more concerned with protectionism than anything else. Let's just take Boeing. Side note here on Boeing. Now, I've got some listeners who work for Boeing. They get a little defensive. They like Boeing. I like Boeing. This triple seven is, I think, a marvel of engineering. The triple seven has only had, to my knowledge, it has had two. fatal incidents. One was the pilot who flew off his Malaysian air 777 into the Indian Ocean somewhere still never found. And the other was the Russian shot down a triple seven that was flying over Ukraine. Other than that, the triple seven is one of the safest airplanes that has ever been built. It can fly halfway around the world. It's a great plane. Boeing, however, has fallen into just disrepute. It allowed itself to be taken over by the bean counters instead of the innovators. Everything became a cost control, and it couldn't compete against Airbus. Airbus is now eating Boeing's lunch, and one of the big reasons is that Boeing engaged in protectionism, used an export-import bank created by the U.S. government in large part because...

It didn't want to, didn't like, and could not keep up with competition. And it claimed, well, Airbus is being subsidized by the Europeans. And Boeing wanted subsidy too. But what we have found over time is that Airbus has been far more innovative than Boeing. I've got friends of mine, I have mentioned this before. They are pilots for Delta. One of them does flight training. He allowed my son into the... A-320 flight deck simulator. I got to describe for you these airplane simulator. Some of you all men have grown up and played flight simulator, Microsoft Flight Simulator. I did too. And he always took off from the airport in Chicago that is no more. They should restore that airport just because of Microsoft Flight Simulator, but I digress. My son and I go into this Airbus flight simulator at Delta, and you can't tell that you are not on a real plane. The sounds it makes, the vibrations it makes, the rattling inside of it, you feel like you're taken off, you feel like you're landing, you get pushed forward, you get thrown back in your seats, you can dangle, it's impressive. They were telling me that the pilots, first time pilots, go from the flight simulator to the plane. And there's really no, I mean, you, it's like you have a hard time imagine because the graphics are obviously animated. But everything about the plane, the feeling, the sound, everything is like being on a plane. There's no difference. And if you get into, for example, a Boeing 737, which is the competitor to the A320, The Boeing pilots like to say they're actually flying planes, that the Airbus pilots are just buses. The Boeing planes have the U-shaped yoke in front of you that you're used to thinking about what you think of a plane. And Airbus is like a joystick. It's like you're playing a video game. The innovation that Airbus has Delta, one of the largest airlines in the world, has mostly moved to Airbus. Now, they're buying some Boeing, but they're mostly an Airbus company, and the planes are great. I was a Boeing guy until the 737 started falling out of the sky, and it turns out that they were doing cost cuts and innovative changes that the bean counters wanted when the engineers were like, eh, maybe not a good idea. And they listened to the bean counters over the engineers at Boeing, and Boeing's got to be subsidized by the government. Lockheed and Raytheon exist essentially as government as government. We can't build the Patriot missiles. Boeing can't turn around a 747 on time for the government. Lockheed and Raytheon can't.

Are we seeing a pattern here? Boeing can't produce on a timeline. Lockheed and Raytheon can't produce on a timeline. The Ukrainians are at war being bombed every day and they can produce 5 million drones. Our protectionism from the government has cost innovation. And by the way, for all the people on the post-liberal right now who hate Milton Friedman, Milton Friedman said, this is what happens when the government begins to protect its industries. Costs go up. timeline slow. You don't get innovation and efficiency. You get no innovation and inefficiency. What Milton Friedman said what happened is happening, and yet the Republicans now want an American industrial policy. That's going to get us more of the inefficiencies that are leading us to not being able to make missiles. At a time, there are clearly problems in Iran. Trey Yinks was on Fox and Friends. Talking about the problems going on in Iran and what our intelligence is showing. We listen to this. Trey, I saw some images of the Supreme Leader, allegedly the Supreme Leader being released over the weekend. How legitimate are those? And how are the troops responding? Have you heard anything? If they're not getting paid and they're still expected to fight? It's a great question. That video that was circulating of Iran's new supreme leader, Mostabakhamanai, is believed to be old. And it was circulating among Iranian state media. They were trying to show it as proof of life. But then analysts online pointed to the fact that this is actually showing Mostab Khananai from the city of Khome. months before Operation Epic Fury began. What's interesting about paying soldiers in Iran, this is something that we actually saw during Operation Epic Fury. Remember Fox reported on some intelligence indicating that as the United States and Israeli air power was hammering the Iranian regime, they had satellite imagery showing the different locations of where these missile launching facilities were located. And then they were actually tracking with real-time video some of the soldiers on the ground fleeing their positions. And so you have a position now where the Iran... Iranians are not only afraid of the U.S. strikes that could take place, but also they're not getting paid in some cases. And it raises questions about the morale inside the IRGC and the willingness for these ground soldiers to continue the fight if they are ordered by commanders in Iran. Yeah, you hear the Iranian people selling their hair. They have no money to buy anything, and you have inflation going through the roof. They do. The Iranian economy is in shambles. The soldiers don't want to fight. And, well, we now know that there is no deal. Last week on Tuesday, while I was on this program, Scott Bessent went on CNBC and announced that there would be a forthcoming deal to open the Strait of Hormuz. That afternoon, Marco Rubio came out and assured us the same thing. On Wednesday of last week, the president assured us of the same thing. The stock market jumped. Oil prices went down, and there is nothing. from the Wall Street Journal. For weeks, President Trump has been laying the groundwork to declare victory in the Iran war, should Tehran fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, even floating the idea privately to senior aides that he's willing to walk away without a nuclear deal. But that scaled-back objective became more difficult when Iran insisted Saturday on its highest price yet for permitting the free flow of traffic in the waterway, seeking billions of dollars in U.S. payments, the removal of American troops from the region, and an end of the U.S. naval blockade, among other...

things. The rapid chain of events suggests President Trump's options for walking away from the conflict have again narrow. Trump has repeatedly threatened a massive escalation of the bombing campaign, but the recent chaos and negotiations signal Tehran is prepared for a long and grinding conflict. I have been telling everyone who would listen for months that this was going to happen. Iran has no incentive to wrap this up if they believe they can hurt the President of the United States at the polls. For the last week, people on the right have been complaining about the $20 burrito that doesn't actually exist as a proxy for complaining about the war in Iran. Oh, it's driven up all the costs. Oh, it's made everything more expensive. Pay no attention to the tariffs, by the way. Oil in the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve is below 300 million barrels, the lowest since 1983. The Dow is now down today and NASDAQ as well. And where is oil? Oil is up to $80 a barrel. Brent is up to $86 a barrel. U.S. and Tehran allege that they will, or Washington alleges there will be a deal with Tehran. Tehran says no. And oil prices are starting to go up again because we don't believe there's going to be a deal. The markets were suckers. This just hit the wires as I am talking to you. U.S. President Donald Trump has signaled he's prepared to let economic pressure take its toll on Iran rather than launching further military strikes as Tehran insists the Strait of Hormuz. will only reopen if Washington agrees to several conditions. Trump, who last week projected confidence in an imminent deal, is now backing away from a renewed military offensive quote. We are low-key, the president said. We are only semi-negotiating with them. We are just watching Iran with its huge inflation and the fact they have no money. The president posted a chart on true social showing the plunging value of the Iranian real between 2025 and now with the title Iran has no money and currency is trash. Iranian officials have set out sweeping demands. A senior Iranian official confirmed to MS now on Monday morning that Tehran's position is the United States must meet all conditions. Iran contends her in memorandums of understanding of the two countries. The JD Vance deal was no deal at all. The straight is not open, and the president doesn't have the missiles to go back to war. And that is the bottom line here. And Raytheon and Lockheed do not want us to give any technology to the Ukrainians that could show that there's a way to produce these missiles more rapidly and possibly even with more innovations. We need to give Ukraine the technology and allow Ukraine to prove our defense industry wrong. Our defense industry has gotten one of my favorite words, sclerotic. They are failing to innovate and they are restraining our ability to wage war. It's time to unleash the free market on the military industrial complex and start innovating so we can finish this war with Iran. Have something to say? Hello. Hello. Call the show. 1-877-97-9-7-airing. That's 1-877-97-7-4-25.

com slash Eric save $280.000. Perfectly snug.com slash ERICK. Y'all, it works. It's like an air conditioner for your bed. Perfectly snug.com slash Eric. Get one today. Save $280. Perfectly snug.com slash Eric. Greetings. Welcome. It is Eric Erickson here. The phone number 87797933-4425. I want to take a LeVonda's phone call right now. Welcome. How are you? I'm fine. How are you, Eric? I'm great. What's going on? First off, I would like to say thank you a lot for staying on the topic and having it where we can focus on what's going on around us. But I believe I agree with you 100% on these terrors because me as a working mother, these terrors are hitting me very hard. Like I can barely afford groceries and to keep my rent up all due to these tariffs. And I'm really appreciative of you on how you keep that as a main focus in society when everyone else is. mostly focus on social media and things that are very distracted. Well, look, I appreciate it. And I know that a lot of people on my side don't appreciate it. They wish I would just beat up the other side. But I think when my side is messing up, they need to be called out and held accountable from our side, less the voters do it. And I mean, you're right. Grocery prices are expensive. And I mean, everything right now is expensive. The tariffs do have something to do with it. I mean, so Levant, I wrote this this morning. I was pulling this up. Let me find where I wrote it this morning. Here it is. This is what I wrote this morning. The clearest evidence that government intervention raises prices can be found within the Trump administration. A tariff is a tax. It falls hardest on the working families. Every faction claims to champion. For a year, the public was assured terrorists were not raising prices or slowing wage growth, that the claims were a fabrication and that the number at the bottom of the receipt was imagined. Then the president himself removed the tariffs on coffee, banana, beef, and eggs. He would have had no reason to do so. had the tariffs not raise prices on coffee, banana, beef, and eggs. He deserves the credit for the reversal, but he doesn't deserve the pretense that the tariff was anything other than a tax. Even now, wage growth has slipped again behind inflation, but we don't have cheap toasters anymore. We don't have the manufacturing base they promised to build toasters here either. I'm frustrated by it, so I appreciate your phone call. And I appreciate your frustration. And in fact, before I get to flock, I might as well just go through this with you because, look, let me just step the stage here for you. I didn't want to talk about the burrito again. Everybody's still talking about the $20 burrito. I didn't want to talk about the $20 burrito. But. In 2024, the vice president argued that cheap toasters were no substitute for a good, well-paid American job.

He said, we believe that a million cheap knockoff toasters aren't worth the price of a single American manufacturing job. We believe in rebuilding American factories and rebuilding the American dream. Those were his words. And then just last year, President Trump, if you'll recall, remarked that American kids don't need 30 dolls, two or three would do. These are the president's own words. He said, you know, somebody said, oh, the shelves are going to open. Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, so maybe the two dolls will cost a couple bucks more than they would have normally. Both were at bottom statements suggesting the government should have some measure of control over our economic life. What we can buy, what quantity, what price. The sympathies, I acknowledge the sympathies underneath are there. A man ought to be able to support his family on a single income and no child needs a mountain of plastic to be happy on Christmas morning. But the premise, the vice president's statement and the president's statement was that the government and not the family or the individual should decide what they need. And the two statements are worth remembering because of that $20 burrito. The people who were cheering on, making toasters more expensive and reducing the number of dolls that our kids have, they spent the last week complaining about a $20 burrito after a college student complained that a burrito shouldn't cost $20. They adopted as a rallying cry. Now, keep in mind, there's no burrito that cost $20 except at high-end restaurants or you get double steak at Chipotle. The populace, they're angry about the cost of living. They're angry about the groceries. They're angry about beef prices. They're angry about gasoline. And they've decided the government's got to intervene to bring those costs down. The difficulty, of course, is that the government, including this government, the Trump administration, has already intervened. And, you know, just think about this. And I mentioned this before. Consider where prices have risen where they fall in. The cost of clothing's decline. Television's have become so inexpensive. They're nearly disposable. It was at Walmart yesterday with my son. And they had an 85-inch Samsung TV for a couple hundred bucks. 85 inches for a TV. It's only a few hundred dollars. Cars measured against what they deliver. They're better value than they were a generation ago. But government regulations are making them more expensive. Consider the sectors that are getting more expensive for Americans, housing, health care education, and increasingly food. What they got in common is government involvement. They're the sectors. The government subsidizes guarantees and regulates the heaviest. They're the sector's ordinary families can least afford. It's not coincidental or complicated. When the federal government guarantees a student loan, colleges have no incentive to restrain their prices for education. They've got no incentive at all to do that. Once the government guarantees it, when Fannie and Freddie stand behind mortgages, the price of a house floats up. I had a listener from Woodstock, Georgia, text me. They live in a $350,000 home, carry a $2,800 monthly payment. Only $300 goes to principal.

Americans under 35 are getting priced out of homeownership, not because greed was invented in the last decade, but because the government guarantees and creates moral hazard, and the moral hazard makes things more expensive. Government regulation requires more bureaucracy, which drives up prices. Healthcare follows the same pattern in most places in this country and around the world. It's the most heavily subsidized and regulated corner of the economy. Families of ordinary means are having to find themselves selling stuff and borrowing so they can keep pace with medical bills. Foods another example, by the way. State governments like California are now regulating the care and feeding of the animals that are being sent to slaughter, which drives up the price on everybody. The lesson is clear across every single sector the government's deemed too important to leave to the market. Those are the sectors that become unenfortable. The right does not like Milton Friedman right now, but Milton Friedman explained the dynamic decades ago. Vice President JD Vance's intellectual influences like Patrick Deneen, Oren Cash, the writers at American Compass, they contend the free market is exhausted, and we now require an industrial policy with our own subsidies and a managed economy. But, no, I mean, look at government intervention with tariffs and protectionism. It's raised prices. This is the fundamental weakness of the populism right now. It possesses no governing philosophy, only a disposition. It moves from one grievance to the next grievance. Every time it moves, it creates a remedy to a complaint and then creates other problems that have to be remedied later. It resolves that cheap imports are destroying jobs, so it taxes the imports, and then expresses surprise when the toaster, the washing machine, and even the burrito costs more. And then it demands that government make housing more affordable and the prices rise because you can't reconcile the two things. Government intervention and cheapness don't go together. Intervention prevails, prices rise. Milton Freeman accounted for both halves of the problem. Milton Freeman explained that when costs climb, which is very often due to government intervention, The way to get the cost to go back down is to get the government out of the way. But the populace can't get the government out of the way because that would mean getting rid of their power. And the acquisition of power is the one thing populace won't surrender. They insist the markets failed the public when what's actually failed the public is the government they want to entrust with still more abilities to pick more choices for us. Behind the argument is socialism, even on the right. covetousness organized as a governing principle. They're turning the Tenth Commandment on its head. Thou shalt not covet. No, no. We want what the rich guy has. It's the only coherent part of the populist philosophy. It's the guiding philosophy under all the socialists out there. To raise up the poorest charity. To tear down the man who built something is envy. The free market for all of its imperfections remains the only arrangement that rewards a person for serving his neighbor rather than resenting him. And it does so most reliably in a society that's grown less inclined to love its neighbor. The socialist don't love their neighbor. They love the collective. The populist post-liberite think that they know what's best for their neighbor and that they, not the family, not the local community, should decide what's in the common interest. And the common good now means we've got to have expensive toasters and cheap burritos and cheap burritos and limit our kids' toys.

Here's the bottom line. No government, none, whether it's controlled by the Republicans, the populists, the communists, the socialists, the Democrats, no government can deliver a well-paying job and an inexpensive toaster and a $2.00 burrito all at the same time. None ever has. But a free people. left to their own devices, to their own work, to build, to trade, at arms-linked transactions with each other has come closer to that than any government program in the history of the world. People say the middle class has been decimated. It hasn't. We have no middle class because they've all become wealthy in our free market. And the populace would dismantle the arrangement out of frustration with the moment we're in. And the frustration, frustration is not a policy, y'all. The answer to a government that's done almost too much is not to have the government do even more. You want to bring down prices, get the government out of the way. You don't think that a burrito should be $20? Well, you get the government out of the economy and the burrito price can come down or your wages can come up to meet it, but with the government dictating all the controls and the idea of the populace and the idea that they know best. It undermines our ability to get things cheap. That's actually an unintended but perfect segment into the flock cameras. There is a major backlash towards the flock cameras. If you don't know what the flock cameras are, if you drive down roads around America, you will see these black poles, and they have cameras and solar panels on them. Those are the flock cameras. And they're license plate readers. I was very much opposed to them because I really don't like the idea of a police state or a surveillance state, but they've done a lot of good. I've talked to law enforcement and defense or district attorneys who have solved cases in large part because of the flock cameras. There's a murder case I'm aware of in Georgia that would not have been solved but for a flock camera identifying a car. There have been people with Alzheimer's who have driven off and gotten lost, and the flock cameras have found them. There have been kids who have been kidnapped, and it was the flock cameras that found them. But there's a growing backlash to them on the left and the right people are cutting them down, cutting down the polls. Communities are walking away from them. I was early in my skepticism of, and I've done many shows in the past on them, and over time I've like, you know, they actually do do some good. But we have too many stories now with police who are abusing them, getting them in to spy on girlfriends and the like. And if flock wants to help itself out, it should do a big PR program. But I got a buddy of mine who is an entirely reasonable person, and he's become completely opposed to him. And where the opposition comes from is post-COVID, when the experts abused their privileges. Think about in California the people walking alone on the beach who were arrested. Now, think about the government using flock cameras to round those people up. And there are a lot of people at this point who say, we need less government in our lives, and we need less government spying, and we need the tradeoff between liberty and security. And maybe if we did a better job, just hear me out on this one.

Maybe if we did a better job of rounding up the bad guys and putting them in jail for a long time, we wouldn't need as many cameras. And so we have this balance where the social justice left opposes the surveillance cameras because they don't want the bad guys being arrested. And the Liberty right opposes the cameras because they don't want a police state. Well, we don't need a police state if we round other bad guys and throw them in jail, which the left doesn't like. And the left opposes the cameras because it makes it easier to round out the bad guys and throw them in jail. Maybe if we rounded the bad guys and threw them in jail, we would have less need for the flock cameras. I don't know what to do with it because my gut is. We're going to turn into a surveillance state like Great Britain has become or like China has become with these cameras, although they're in the private sector. We know the police are abusing them, but they also have served real world purposes. They have solved murders that would otherwise be unsolvable. They have caused the rescue of children who would otherwise not be rescued. They have caused the finding of adults with dementia who would not have been found. They serve a good purpose and lives have been saved because of them. But perhaps we have gone too far, and we need to step up security and safety and reasonableness and really punish the police who abuse the use of them. Because I'm seeing reasonable people turn against these cameras. And I had at one point been very much against them and I've seen enough of their usefulness to think, okay, maybe they serve a purpose. But when I read how the police have been abusing them and how the police have been stalking ex-girlfriends or spouses or what have you, it seems like it makes it way too easy. And maybe, maybe we need more checks on these cameras. I mean, look, I think generally it's a good idea. But I also think maybe we've taken it too far. And I also think we have seen in our own society the government abuse itself against its citizens to corral them and restrain them. And so I totally get people's concerns and antipathy towards these cameras. I don't know what the solution is. I don't think we should completely get rid of them. But I think we probably need to step up greater regulation and restraint. Honest. Putting your trust in me to tell you what's going on. Transparent. I need you to know this from the bottom of my heart. Giving you the information without the noise. My job is to tell you what you want to hear. It's the Eric Erickson Show.

Get the podcast, live stream, email, and social media links by texting Eric to 33777. Now. This is our the program brought to you by Van Allen Golf. Go to Van Allen Golf. Go to Van Allen Golf.com or text golf to 33777 and get one of their putters. Have you used Eric, E, R-I-C-K, as your code at checkout, you'll get a 15% discount. Van Allen Golf.com or text golf to 33777. Ivan, you're going to be up next. Welcome to the show. Hello, Eric. Thank you for taking my call. Sure. Your flagship station, I live here in Georgia and work in the metro area of Atlanta, has had two news stories in the past seven days about employees of municipalities or counties being... force to resign or be fired or put on administrative leave because they were misusing these cameras for their own for their own use So I don't know if you had covered anything like that as part of this flock discussion, but I just thought I'd call in. Yeah, you know, it has, and they're not alone. This has happened around the country where police officers, and in fact, one of the situations in Georgia was a police officer essentially stalking his ex-girlfriend using these cameras. It's just, it's an unfortunate thing that's happening. And I really, I got a. See, like, I see the usefulness of these things. I mean, there are kids who have been saved by them. There have been murders that have been solved, and there have been dementia patients who have been found. And it was all because of the cameras. We've got one in my neighborhood that comes in and out because we had some car break-ins and started, we put them in for reading a license place to keep track of who was coming in out of the neighborhood. And it caused crime in our neighborhood to go down. I see the benefit of them. But there's also abuse, and I really, I just don't trust the government to not abuse them. And that's the problem. And surely there's got to be some balance out there. There's got to be some balance. I just don't know what the balance is. And I don't know that anyone knows. When I see reasonable friends of mine who are raising the red flag and are like, these things need to go. I'm like, yeah, there's there's an unhealthy level of paranoia about the government and it's unhealthy, but it's deserved given how the government treated all of us during COVID. You know, that's also like, so I advertise for Incogni. And Incogni like takes your information offline at a time like you're being surveilled in the real world where you drive. And at least online, you have a partner like Incogni to make you more private online. They go to the data brokers who sell all your information and they send the legal takedown notices for them to take down your information. Your phone stops ringing with telemarketers.

My phone for the last week, I haven't had a single telemarketer call until Saturday. I had one of those recalling about your IRS deal, which I don't have a problem with it. I was able to flag it for Incogni. They'll find the data brokers. They'll get the information deleted for you. They do for me as well, and they follow up to make sure it stays deleted. You can go to incogni.com slash Eric. That's I-N-C-O-G-N-I. It's like Incognito without the T-O. Incogni.com.com slash Eric. Save 60%. Your phone will go silent, that your data will be deleted. Incogni.com slash Eric, take your privacy back online with Incogni. Progressive knows you think the grass is always greener. Like maybe you ride a motorcycle. But today, it's raining. So you wish you had an RV. But if you did, you'd have to listen to some guy parked next to a campsite play as acoustic guitar. Now before you start wishing you had a boat, remember your brother-in-law would invite himself every weekend. Permission to come aboard, Captain. But one thing that is greener is the money you could save when you bundle your RV, boat, or motorcycle with your home or auto with Progressive. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company affiliates and third-party insurers. Not available in all states or situations.