Can Someone Recommend a System vs the KID?

The best what you can do within a week: stick with what you already know. Study high-level games and learn from them how to get something out of these positions you're uncomfortable with. Learning a new variation which involves a completely different approach is doomed to fail.

are there any videos on how to beat the kid?

Unfortunately, no good ones! Of all the videos on the KID on chess.com, the only one recommending a line for white is Ben Finegold's video on the Bf4 KID. It's a great intro, but nothing at all more than that, and he pretty much shows two games where his opponents got crushed. And obviously it's not a try for an advantage.

Outside of chess.com, Var Akobian made a video on the Smyslov System, but it shows no real theory, just a game or two that he played.

You're a lot higher rated than I am (noted), but I will say that I have a pretty good record against the KID in particular, and I use a hybrid system of the Averbakh and Saemisch that works quite well. Basically, I enter the Saemisch, put the bishop on g5 (back to e3 if questioned), play h4, Bd3, Ne2, O-O-O, and hack like a maniac. KID players want to be on the attack - and they want to attack the kingside, so it's a bit of a psychological victory when white uses the extra move to steal black's plan.

The Averbakh in general is a little underused and has a lot of bite to it, so I would say that looking at the Saemisch, the Averbakh, and plans that utilize an early h4 are all good tries, and, at my modest level, they mix quite nicely. 

See, the following is an example of why I am frustrated with this. There are very few resources that I can find on non-theoretical ways for white to play in the KID, and when there are, they are just not good. Maybe that's the nature of the opening, but there are plenty of lines after 4. e4 (like Moissienko's system, the h3 variations, early Bg5, etc) which are worth looking at and I can't find material.

In the case of the Smyslov (Bg5 + e3) and "Dzindzi-Smyslov" (Bf4 + e3), I think the Bf4 system isn't a bad practical choice except for the ...c5 lines, often followed by ...Bf5, ...Ne4, ...Qa5 stuff. In fact this same stuff seems to equalize against Bg5 systems also. And whatever limited literature there is on these lines, it never gives a promising picture.

In Roman Dzindzichashvili's video on a rapid and complete white repertoire (lol @ rapid and complete- he doesn't even mention the Benoni or the Semi Slav triangle, which are both possible given the moves he recommends), he recommends the Bf4 King's Indian, which was originally what got me interested in the line. However, as a much stronger player now than I was back then, I can see that his assessments in this line are extremely exaggerated and inaccurate. About the line 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nf3 Bg7 4. Nc3 d6 5. Bf4 0-0 6. e3 c5, he says white is much better and gives 7. Be2 (or 7. h3) and says that if black plays cxd4, white will recapture with the e-pawn and have a better pawn structure after d5 because of black's e7 problem. And that's it- he doesn't even mention anything else for black, like any actually good moves instead of just playing into white's hands. Of course black does not have to (and certainly should not) capture that pawn, and if black plays something like 7...Bf5, followed by 8...Ne4 depending on what white plays, he's totally equal. Additionally, black can try stuff like 7. h3 Qa5 with near-equality.

Meanwhile Bill Paschall tried to make a video on the Smyslov System with 5. Bg5, but the c5 idea still gave him major problems. He recommended a transposition to a completely harmless line of the Benoni, where even he, as the proponent of the Smyslov System, was forced to concede that black was absolutely equal (although I'm not even sure white has equality in the position he gives- black has a bishop against white's knight with a slightly better pawn structure and seemingly more easily maneuverable pieces).

This sort of thing is very frustrating because it's all the literature/educational content that there is on the theory of these systems (the videos by Finegold and Akobian only show games where they won easily against weaker opponents with these lines) and it's clear that white is achieving exactly nothing with good play by black. Ugh.

The Moissienko line looks interesting. Unfortunately I haven't found a great way to combat systems by black which force d5 and then immediately follow with the typical ...a5, ...Na6, ...Nc5 plan. Maybe it's still worth trying out sometime.

IMO a practical and fairly dangerous at club level try is the Bg5 samisch (assuming you reach the KID from 1.d4 or 1.c4).

This way of playing has a couple of advantages:
a)It can be played with 3.f3, and thus avoids the mainline grunfeld.

b) Black can no longer play well for ..e5, and the immediate ..e5 loses immediately to 7.dxe5 dxe5 8.Qxd8 Rxd8 9.Nd5. 

c)If black plays c5, and white responds with d5, the bishop is better placed on g5 than it would be on e3.

d) White has a ready made plan of attack with Qd2-bh6-h4 etc im sure you know this plan from the countless openings its played in, so the onus is on black to find counterplay before whites attack breaks through.

The main downside is that black can equalise with accurate play, but I think that the easy and dangerous play it gives at class level it worth more than whatever .50-.60 advantage you give up from not selecting major lines.

Personally, I moved away from the Bg5 samisch once I started opening with 1.Nf3 rather than 1.c4 (obviously it cant be played now). If you want a more theory heavy, but also reliable opening, the fianchetto variation is very difficult for black once you get a hang of it, and it is now, I believe, the highest scoring opening of my repertoire.