How free is America's economy?

The United States ranked #12 in the 2015 Index of Economic Freedom, just behind Denmark. On radio Wednesday, Glenn and radio co-hosts Pat and Stu explained why comparing ourselves to Denmark is pointless.

"Denmark doesn't work. And the Denmarkians know it," Glenn said.

Pat added, "Their lifestyle is not like ours."

To illustrate, Stu pointed out the average dwelling space in Denmark is about 900 square feet.

Glenn explained further.

"Denmark pays for a large and expensive welfare state. The only way you can with relative high taxes on the middle class, whose members pay both high income taxes and a VAT tax," Glenn said. "If Sanders were intelligently honest, he would acknowledge forthrightly that the only way to pay for generous benefits for the middle class is to tax the middle class, where most the income earners are. But Senator Sanders doesn't seem to think a great deal about these things."

Listen to the segment or read the full transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: The United States is currently the 12th freest economy in the world.

So when Bernie says, we're going to be like Denmark, he's lying to you. He has to know. But everybody thinks, "Well, Denmark is good."

PAT: No, it's not.

GLENN: Denmark doesn't work. And the Denmarkians know it.

PAT: The Danes know it. The Swedes know it. The Finns know it. The Norwegians know it. They all know it doesn't work. Their lifestyle is not like ours. It's just not.

GLENN: Pat, have you done -- have you done your heritage? Have you done your genealogy?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Do you have any Denmarkian in you?

PAT: I don't. Not a lick of Denmarkian.

GLENN: I do. I have Denmarkian. Please don't play around with the Dane thing. Us Denmarkians find that offensive. I have royal Denmarkian blood in me. I just want you to know that.

STU: I think the average dwelling -- because I was looking this up because Pat had mentioned earlier. Something like 900 square feet.

PAT: Yeah, it's right around there. 900 square feet. Now, the average in the United States is about 38 square feet. Is that right?

STU: Yeah, no, no. The average new home in the United States is over 2500 square feet. So three times basically as big.

PAT: It's pretty amazing.

GLENN: Denmark has strong property rights, relative freedom from corruption, low public debt, freedom of trade and investment, and their corporate tax is currently lower than ours.

PAT: Lower. By quite a bit.

GLENN: Is that a problem for anybody?

PAT: I like the bank situation too. Because he loves to talk about the banks and how evil they are.

GLENN: Denmark pays for a large and expensive welfare state. The only way you can with relative high taxes on the middle class, whose members pay both high income taxes and a VAT tax. If Sanders were intelligently honest, he would acknowledge forthrightly that the only way to pay for generous benefits for the middle class is to tax the middle class, where most the income earners are. But Senator Sanders doesn't seem to think a great deal about these things. He worries about the size of the holdings of our largest banks. And fret that six banks have assets equal to 65 percent of the US GDP. He doesn't consider that, in Switzerland, there are two banks whose combined assets are more than twice the GDP of Switzerland.

STU: Not 65 percent. But more than twice.

PAT: Okay. Double the GDP. It's 1.6 times as much in Denmark.

GLENN: Here's the thing, everything we're doing, including the big bailouts went to -- to make the banks bigger. I'm not for bigger banks, quite honestly. I'm for -- monopolies never work. Socialism is a monopoly, through the government. It doesn't work.

Never mind that Denmark's largest banking assets has 1.6 times Denmark's GDP. A lot more than 65 percent split among the six banks that troubles Mr. Sanders. It goes on and on and on. But Bernie Sanders apparently doesn't understand what us Denmarkians know.

(laughter)

STU: You just sound so native to Denmark.

PAT: You really do.

GLENN: You can't fake it. Ya sure.

STU: Wow, did you hear that?

GLENN: Oh, my gosh, I just slipped -- it's like when Hillary Clinton goes to the South, and she slips right into it. When I'm talking about Denmark as a Denmarkian and I just start to slip into, well, quite honestly, my wooden shoes.

STU: Yeah. You're big on the wooden shoes.

GLENN: Yeah. Which may be Holland. But I say, ya, damn Holland. You know what I mean?

PAT: I do.

STU: That's a good stance.

PAT: Yeah, it's powerful.

GLENN: If I were the king of Denmark, Holland would pay for its crimes.

PAT: Well, and it's so confusing to the rest of the world because a lot of people mix up Holland and Denmark.

GLENN: Right. Right. They're like, "Oh, you're from the -- you're from the Netherlands."

PAT: That's how confused they are. They don't even call it that anymore.

GLENN: No, I'm from Netherland. I don't know who these Netherlanders are.

STU: Netherlanders.

GLENN: Yes. I don't know who they are. But it's probably a plot by Holland.

STU: Ah.

GLENN: And the Swedes give us that boxy car. And then what? Nothing else.

STU: IKEA.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: No, that's the Swiss.

PAT: Oh, yeah. Dang it.

STU: But IKEA are the Swiss. And they come with the Swedish meatballs and lingonberry juice. Whatever that is. I don't know what it is, but it's available at every IKEA.

GLENN: Well, because you're not Denmarkian. Lingonberry juice is the -- was the official drink of the Denmarkians, until the great Lingonberry War of 1761.

STU: 1761. Lingonberry War.

PAT: Should I Google that?

GLENN: Oh, it was awful. No. It's not up there. You know why? Holland.

PAT: Bastards.

GLENN: The people that make hollandaise sauce. Piss me off every time. They covered up the great Lingonberry War.

PAT: Did they commit genocide on the lingonberries?

STU: You're right. It's been deleted by Holland. You were actually right on it. I didn't think --

PAT: You were skeptical.

STU: I was skeptical at first.

PAT: Man. He's Denmarkian. Never doubt him.

GLENN: So I'm just coming to you and saying, Bernie Sanders doesn't know a damn thing about Denmark. You know, ask him about the Lingonberry War. He won't know.

PAT: He won't know. He won't know. He won't know.

How Trump is WINNING at the Panama Canal

MARK SCHIEFELBEIN / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite the doubts of the nay-sayers, Trump's Panamanian plans have already borne fruit.

Shortly before his inauguration, President Trump drew national attention to the Panama Canal. He reminded Americans of just how important the canal is for the U.S. and highlighted the Chinese influence that has been slowly taking control of the vital passage ever since America handed it over to Panama.

President Trump was immediately mocked and ridiculed by the Left, who called him delusional and an imperialist. However, earlier this week, Trump's Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, made a trip to Panama and spoke with the Panamanian President, José Raúl Mulino, and Rubio made some serious headway. As Glenn has explained, Trump's boisterous talk is part of his strategy. Invading Panama was never the goal, just one of several options to get what America needed, and after Rubio's visit, it seems like America's needs will be met.

Here are the TOP THREE takeaways from Marco Rubio's visit to Panama:

1. Marco Rubio makes headway

MARK SCHIEFELBEIN / Contributor | Getty Images

On February 2nd, Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Panamanian Foreign Minister Javier Martínez-Acha and President José Raúl Mulino where they discussed critical regional and global challenges, including the canal. Rubio drew attention to the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal in which the U.S. promised Panama ownership of the canal on the condition of its guaranteed neutrality. Rubio argued that China's growing influence qualified as a breach of the treaty and that it gives the U.S. the power to take necessary measures to rectify the faults, given Panama doesn't act. As of this week, reports say Panama agreed and promised to take immediate action to purge Chinese influence from canal operations.

2. Panama is ditching China's Belt Road

MARK SCHIEFELBEIN / Contributor | Getty Images

After his meeting with Rubio, Panamanian President Mulino agreed that Panama would step away from China's "Belt and Road Initiative" (BRI). The BRI is a Chinese effort to establish China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. In 2017, Panama signed on to this initiative, and China's influence in the small nation has exponentially grown. However, after Rubio's visit, President Mulino has not only stated that Panama will not renew its agreement with China, but moreover, the country will also look for ways to back out of the agreement early. This is a massive win for the Trump Administration and the American people.

3. The Chinese may lose their ports on the canal

MARTIN BERNETTI / Contributor | Getty Images

Shortly after Rubio left Panama City, two lawyers spearheaded the effort to kick out a Chinese company that controls two major ports on the Panama Canal. The Chinese company—CK Hutchison Holdings—has operated one port on both ends of the canal since 1997, which could potentially give China a massive degree of control over traffic. After analyzing the contract, the Panamanian lawyers argue that the contract is potentially in violation of the Panamanian constitution and should be revoked. It is unclear if the constitutional issues relate to the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal, but even on its own merit, this is a huge victory for America.

Top 15 jobs AI is TAKING OVER

CFOTO / Contributor, VCG / Contributor | Getty Images

The AI takeover has begun.

Last week, Glenn delved into the World Economic Forum's 2025 summit in Davos, where our malevolent overlords focused especially on AI and how it can replace millions of workers worldwide. We are at the precipice of a monumental change in how the world is run—WEF founder Klaus Schwab called it "The Fourth Industrial Revolution"—and in time, AI will augment every one of our lives.

Already, AI is taking jobs. Thousands, if not millions, of tasks are slowly being delegated to it. The affected fields are largely data entry, admin tasks, and clerical work, along with graphic design and some customer support roles. However, as AI becomes more sophisticated, the scope of its abilities will only grow. The WEF is all for it, and last month they released a shocking chart

that revealed what jobs were already feeling the pain. Check out the top 15 jobs that are already disappearing:

1. Postal service clerks

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

2. Bank tellers

JOHANNES EISELE / Staff | Getty Images

3. Data entry clerks

AFP / Staff | Getty Images

4. Cashiers and ticket clerks

Andreas Rentz / Staff | Getty Images

5. Administrative assistants and executive secretaries

6. Printing workers

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

7. Accounting, bookkeeping, and payroll clerks

8. Material-recording and stock-keeping clerks

9. Transportation attendants and conductors

10. Door-to-door salesmen

11. Graphic designers

12. Claims adjusters, examiners and investigators

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

13. Legal officials

14. Legal secretaries

15. Telemarketers

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

3 stories that prove USAID is a criminal organization

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency has one mission—to eliminate government waste—and it's starting with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). USAID is a federal agency that, on paper, is responsible for distributing foreign aid to conflict-ridden zones across the world. However, for years, Glenn has revealed that the USAID acts more like a second CIA, but without the regulation or oversight under the State Department. Elon Musk concurred, describing the federal agency as not merely "an apple with a worm in it" but rather "just a ball of worms."

Don't fall for the left's narrative calling USAID a "humanitarian" organization. Here are the top three stories that reveal just how corrupt the USAID really is:

1. USAID has funded terrorist organizations and Osama bin Laden

Ahmad Khateib / Stringer | Getty Images

In 2023, USAID provided "assistance" to nearly 130 countries, including Ukraine, Ethiopia, Jordan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, Yemen, Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, Nigeria, South Sudan, and Syria (which is currently run by a terrorist that received aid from the Obama-era CIA). Under Obama, USAID gave funds to an organization known as the Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA), which was known at the time to help finance Jihadist groups and had been labeled by the U.S. Treasury Department as a "terror-financing organization."

The ISRA also funded and gave shelter to the 9/11 mastermind, Osama bin Laden—U.S. taxpayer dollars sent straight to the perpetrator of the deadliest terrorist attack in history and the most lethal attack on U.S. soil.

2. USAID "loses" funds that happen to end up in individuals' pockets

MANDEL NGAN / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent investigation by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) revealed that in 2016, Chemonics International colluded with a USAID subcontractor to massively overcharge a USAID project to pocket extra funds from the project's bottom line. Moreover, the USAID project used "self-reported" performance metrics, which made it impossible to verify the actual progress of the project and how the funds were being used.

Even the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic has USAID's sticky fingerprints all over it. In 2014, USAID provided $38 million to an EcoHealth Alliance project called "Predict-2." One of the subcontractors, Ben Hu, headed the Wuhan Institute of Virology's gain-of-function research and was one of the first three people infected with COVID-19 in late 2019. That means U.S. taxpayer dollars were likely used to fund the very research that gave rise to the COVID-19 pandemic.

3. USAID operates as a second "CIA" with no accountability

Andrew Burton / Staff | Getty Images

The CIA isn't the only agency that meddles in the political inner workings of foreign powers. USAID has conducted similar operations since the 1950s. USAID notoriously sowed dissent in Cuba to grow U.S. influence, and they even taught South American police forces Nazi torture methods. In the late 1990s, 300,000 Peruvian women were forcibly sterilized in a "poverty reduction strategy" that received $35 million in funding from USAID.

More recently, USAID's foreign influence has grown significantly under former Obama adviser, Samantha Power, called USAID America's "soft power arsenal." Under her leadership, the organization meddled in the political affairs of several nations, including Ukraine, Ethiopia, and, Bolivia. Several domestic, left-leaning influence groups, such as the Tides Center, received several grants and aid.

Top THREE reasons we NEED the Panama Canal

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Is Trump seriously planning a military conquest of the Panama Canal?

In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, Donald Trump launched the Panama Canal into the national spotlight. The canal is one of the most important passages in the world, and its continued operation has been critical for both the U.S. military and economy since its construction.

Since America relinquished sovereignty of the canal, China has asserted its authority in the region. The Chinese Communist Party has been growing its influence in Panama and neighboring Latin American countries, convincing them to join their "Belt and Road Initiative," an effort to poise China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. Panama in particular is quickly becoming a Chinese puppet state. There are currently over 200,000 Chinese living in Panama, a Chinese company runs two of the canal's five major ports, and another Chinese company provides telecommunication service for a large portion of the canal. The government of Panama has even gone as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

It's clear that the Panama Canal is under serious threat of falling into Chinese hands, but President Trump doesn't intend to let them move in. Here are the top three reasons we need the Panama Canal:

1. The canal was built by the U.S.

Hulton Archive / Stringer | Getty Images

Without the United States, neither Panama nor the Panama Canal would exist. In 1903, after Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, President Teddy Roosevelt devised a controversial plan. He supported a Panamanian independence movement, which swiftly overthrew the local Colombian government. Meanwhile, he stationed a U.S. warship off the coast, preventing Colombia from sending military forces to retake Panama.

The moment Panama declared its independence, the U.S. recognized it and struck a deal with the new government: the U.S. would control the Canal Zone, while Panama would receive $10 million and an annual payment of $250,000. Construction of the canal took over a decade, cost $375 million, and resulted in thousands of American casualties, making it the most expensive U.S. construction project of its time.

Fast forward to 1964 when tensions between the U.S. and Panama over the canal erupted into a riot. President Lyndon B. Johnson decided it was time to transfer control of the canal to Panama. However, this proved more complicated than expected. In 1968, General Omar Torrijos, a known ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, seized control of Panama in a coup. Negotiations over the Canal stalled, as many Americans opposed giving such an important asset to a controversial figure. It wasn’t until 1999, following the deployment of 27,000 U.S. troops to facilitate yet another change in power, that the Canal was officially handed over to Panama.

2. The canal is vital for the U.S. economy

IVAN PISARENKO / Contributor | Getty Images

The U.S. relies heavily on the Panama Canal for commercial shipping. Between 13 and 14 thousand ships use the Panama Canal every year, which is roughly 40 percent of the global cargo ship traffic. Additionally, 72 percent of ships traversing the canal are either heading toward or leaving a U.S. port.

The time ships save using the Panama Canal reduces shipping costs massively. For example, when the canal first opened in 1922, it was estimated that a ship’s journey from Oregon to the UK, was shortened by 42 percent, reducing costs by 31 percent. If the Panama Canal was blocked or destroyed, or if American merchant vessels were denied passage, the effects on the U.S. economy would be tremendous.

3. The canal is a key defense point for the U.S. military

Historical / Contributor | Getty Images

Similarly, the canal is key to the U.S. military and national security. The canal shaves off approximately 8,000 miles of the voyage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. If U.S. Navy ships were denied access in a time of crisis, the extra time required to bypass the canal would be disastrous. Conversely, if the U.S. can keep the Panama Canal from being used by foreign aggressors, it would provide a massive advantage in future conflicts.

A foreign enemy could easily exploit the canal's current vulnerability. This was proven in 2021 when a cargo ship accidentally blocked the Suez Canal for a week, paralyzing global trade. Imagine China intentionally sabotaging the Panama Canal, considering it controls ports on both ends, owns a bridge that spans the Canal, provides its telecom services, and has the second-largest fleet of ships using the route.