reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Mike Rowe discusses his transition from Dirty Jobs to hosting People You Should Know, which premieres May 2 on YouTube, where he travels the country interviewing regular people making a difference. He emphasizes the human side of work, the value of skilled trades, and the need to revive American manufacturing. He analyzes tariffs as a tool that may bring jobs back, but cautions about unintended consequences and the necessity of tending to the ethics and dignity of labor. Rowe recalls towns like Jackson, Mississippi, where boarded‑up storefronts contrast with the need for skilled labor. He suggests that the tariff conversation belongs to tier two economics, while the deeper question is the economy of the human spirit. He argues that American manufacturing can be competitive if there is a culture that values work and a system that shares ownership with workers. He introduces the Sweat Pact and Sweat Pledge: a code that includes skill and work ethic, integrity, gratitude, and personal responsibility. He frames work not as a burden but as a crucible for growth and identity. He describes Microworks, his work-ethic scholarships, and millions committed to training people for skilled manufacturing jobs. Rowe cites Groundworks, where private equity partner Pete Stavros helped convert a company’s frontline workers into owners through an ESOP, impacting thousands of tradespeople and hundreds of thousands of jobs. He emphasizes that ownership creates commitment and dignity, reduces adversarial labor relations, and improves outcomes. He shares stories of American manufacturing, notably Bard Winthrop and American Giant, who prove that high‑quality, U.S.‑made products can scale when retailers collaborate to lower unit costs. He notes Walmart’s role in expanding American‑made goods and argues that the right supply chain incentives can align workers’ pride with consumer demand. He critiques higher education finance and the job market: trillions in student debt, millions of open manufacturing positions, and millions of able-bodied men not in the workforce. He argues that four‑year degrees aren’t the only path and that a complete solution requires policy and culture changes, including rethinking unions and embracing door three: ownership‑driven models. Rowe revisits Obama’s Highway Infrastructure Act, the call for shovel‑ready jobs, and his open letter urging reinvigorating trades. He notes current unemployment and underemployment and the need for a PR campaign to make trades appealing, along with mentorship, community, and purpose. Returning the Favor’s relaunch as People You Should Know on Facebook Watch, and then YouTube, is highlighted, with moving stories from veterans and craftsmen. The conversation closes with a reminder that purpose and pride in work, shared ownership, and practical solutions can rebuild communities. Mike Rowe ends with gratitude for the audience and a call to act, to lift up others through work that matters, and to celebrate the resilience of the American worker.

In this episode of The Koerner Office, the hosts and guest unfold a provocative approach to funding and scaling trade education through government grants. The core idea is to build online trade schools that rely on state paybacks for training, often paying up to $5,000 to $15,000 per student, depending on region. The conversation emphasizes minimal traditional marketing, instead leveraging referrals from churches, nonprofits, workforce centers, and other community partners to drive enrollment and awareness of these government programs. From there, the discussion moves to practical execution. The guests describe a path from a disaster with a failed insurance pitch to discovering a grant that covers training, including the use of low-cost tech like virtual reality goggles and white-labeled curricula. They highlight how a one-man operation can scale to millions by offering online courses in high-demand trades and pairing curriculum with placement services, funded by the government rather than out-of-pocket tuition. Several case studies anchor the dialogue, including a nurse-tech IT school with placement, a boutique CNA program, and a vet technician scenario. A recurring theme is turning perceived friction—bureaucracy, regional variation, and credential requirements—into an edge by simplifying processes, hardening sales scripts, and aligning with employers who need skilled workers. The guests also outline nuanced strategies: when to operate online vs. in person, which trades yield the best returns, and how to structure joint ventures or staff augmentation through grant-supported training. The takeaway is a blueprint for entrepreneurs: identify a pain point in staffing, find a suitable grant, source or white-label courses, and deploy through alliances with community partners and employers. While the government’s complexity varies by state, the potential to scale a profitable training and placement operation remains compelling for those willing to navigate regulatory landscapes and to sell the value of certified, job-ready workers to employers and students alike.

Lindsay Burke from the Heritage Foundation discusses the implications of potential changes to the Department of Education, emphasizing that federal funding constitutes less than 10% of K-12 education funding. She argues that eliminating the Department won't harm education, as many effective programs could be transferred to other agencies. Burke highlights the need for block grants to empower states and parents, particularly regarding the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), allowing families to access funds for necessary services. She critiques the current education system, noting stagnant academic outcomes despite increased spending since 1965. Burke advocates for reforms in higher education, suggesting that federal aid has inflated tuition costs and enabled inefficiencies. She calls for a market-based approach to education funding, emphasizing the importance of flexibility for students to pursue various educational paths, including vocational training, rather than solely traditional college routes.

Ben Sasse, a fifth-generation Nebraskan, discusses the cultural and historical differences between Nebraska and Kansas, noting that Nebraska feels more progressive and independent. He highlights Nebraska's unique unicameral legislature, established in 1937, which promotes a nonpartisan approach and allows for diverse coalitions. Sasse reflects on the challenges facing small towns in Nebraska, emphasizing the need to understand the transition from an industrial to a post-industrial economy, where many counties are shrinking despite growth in county seats. He touches on the importance of recognizing the American frontier in contemporary society, suggesting that a lack of clear strategic choices leads to declining ambition. Sasse's dissertation focused on the realignment of domestic politics from 1950 to 1980, examining the complexities behind the rise of the religious right and the impact of the Cold War on American society. Sasse argues that both political parties are intellectually exhausted and fail to articulate a future vision, leading to a rise in populism. He emphasizes the need for a national security strategy that addresses modern challenges, including cyber threats. Sasse also discusses the importance of empathy in parenting and education, advocating for intergenerational relationships and the cultivation of empathy through diverse experiences, including travel and literature. He critiques the current state of higher education, arguing for a pluralization of educational models to better serve students' needs. Sasse concludes by stressing the significance of human capital in politics and the necessity for leaders to focus on long-term visions rather than short-term electoral concerns. He encourages young people to invest in experiences that foster empathy and understanding, preparing them for future roles as parents and community members.

Think tanks are a catchall term for a certain type of organization, existing along a continuum that blends research, a general set of principles, and a goal of influencing public debate. They aim to change the way policymakers think about tax policy, education policy, what to think about Israel right now, how to resource the effort in Ukraine or not, and all those things. At AI, the scholars have independence; they don’t get told what to write or what to say, but they work there for a reason. They are wary of regulatory intrusion into the commercial market space. Think tanks on the left and right bring experts to brief legislators and the media, and much of the important work happens behind closed doors, not on camera. I remember the war game definition: a war game is a way of creating, in this case, a geopolitical scenario and giving people the opportunity to understand that one decision changes outcomes—air power, naval responses, resource shifts. People learn there are always trade-offs. I was there during Katrina; in that time there wasn’t an exact war game that prepared the federal government for that, and policy had to be made on the fly with imperfect information. During the run‑up to the financial crisis, economists disagreed sharply, yet you still needed to talk to those experts. Outside specialists were relied upon; think tanks provide a catalog of experts for policy councils and presidential deliberations, especially when you have to decide what to do quickly. At the University of Texas, Civitas Institute seeks to reclaim a place within a public research university to recover the basic principles of the American founding, to teach a free society and economic life, and to research them. Civitas is a university‑based think tank; it will work with the School of Civic Leadership, which will have its inaugural freshman class next fall and about 20 full‑time faculty by year three. The School emphasizes constitutional studies, Western Civilization, economics, and a multidisciplinary PPE‑style education. It will attract students headed to law school, MBA programs, or policy careers and will emphasize internships and practical policy work. Costs and value in higher education are central. Student debt is high, housing costs rise, and ownership of a degree does not always translate into gains. The model should reward leadership, teamwork, and non‑cognitive skills as much as technical knowledge. The best curricula integrate classroom learning with workplace opportunities; internships and employer partnerships strengthen job prospects. Some universities successfully commercialize research (Purdue, Stanford), sharing returns with researchers to spur innovation. The growing pie of non‑instructional spending has pushed tuition higher, while wages for graduates lag.