 The Iran brook show starts now Good afternoon everybody morning depending on where you are in the country. This is your own brook and thank you for joining me For the next couple of hours. We're gonna be talking a lot of economics today a lot going on Obviously tax reform came through yesterday. We we've got the president declaring that they are going to that he is going to reduce the regulatory burden on American businesses the 1960s levels And whether that is possible and and what that implies is interesting the Fed also increased interest rates This last week by a quarter percent small amount, but still and predicting to increase interest rates even more next year so a Lot going on there. We're gonna we're gonna focus on those Tax reform deregulation Fed and then you know if this time there's a bunch of other things to talk about I certainly want to talk about The election is an election tomorrow in Chile, which is I think really really interesting and really quite important But but let's let's see when we get there. Oh, I tax reform And let's let's let's create a context for this Where do I come from in looking at something like tax reform or looking at something like the economy generally I don't view the government as Really having a role to play or should have a role to play in our economy I don't think the government should be responsible for economic growth or economic prosperity or economic success so Trying to remedy the problems supposedly Created by inequality or anything like that the government's role As I think the founding fathers believed the government's role is to protect us the government's role is To protect our rights. I write the life living the pursuit of happiness to protect our freedoms To leave us alone so that we can start businesses hire people sell products buy products invest or not invest consume or not consume so My view is really I think the founders view was I think the fundamental idea about America is that the government is there to Kind of set Property rights the rules if you will of the game to make sure that father's not committed to protect us some cheats and crooks and bad guys But other than that basically to leave us alone To let us live our lives as we see fit as long as we're not hooting our neighbors It's not as I know we don't stick our hands in our neighbor's pocket It's none of the government's business for that matter. It's none of our neighbors business Now what does that imply For tax policy, it's kind of difficult to jump from there to tax policy because the first place one would think To go from there from the role of government for what the government should be doing is to government spending It's to the budget But Republicans seem to always Have this backwards. I am not even talking about Democrats who completely clueless and and when it comes to these issues So I'm ignoring them completely, right, but Republicans seem to have this backwards instead of focusing on shrinking government spending to you know To only spending on those things to protect us only think those things That the government is supposed to do Republican seems to almost always focus on the revenue line not on the spending line As partially as a consequence of that as a consequence of both Democrats and Republicans doing this We've got 20 trillion dollars worth of debt Indeed if you count the unfunded liabilities That is the promises we have made to all of you to pay you so security and to pay you Medicare and to pay you Medicaid all the things that the government has promised that it's going to have to pay over the next 50 60 70 years if you look at those unfunded liabilities the promises that we made over the next 70 years and You kind of look at them. What is that number today if we had to put if we had to take a Huge amount of money and put it in the bank so that we can afford to pay all that Given that the taxes were raising today and over the next 50 years are just gonna pay for everything We've already committed to So if you take into account the baby boomers are timing Therefore so security going up Medicaid going up. What are the added? Expenses that we can project over the next 70 years then what you get as a number Somewhere between because no economist really knows and it depends on a lot of assumptions and everything Somewhere between 60 to I don't 150 billion trillion trillion trillion T Dollars now that's a number that is unimaginable. We can't even think in those terms. It is so large So today's Total debt of the US government is 20 trillion and I'm talking about just federal I'm not even counting staying local governments and pension plans and all of that and then you add so security Medicare That's another hundred plus trillion. I mean That's where the problem is The problems on the spending side. We are spending way way more money that we can afford if you were running a household On the basis of running a massive deficit every single year Borrowing more and more and more money to the point where By some measures your total debt was equal to your total earning for a whole year and increasing with no Nobody nobody is projecting that going away in the future. So constant Increased deficits constant increasing debt. I mean you you you couldn't live that way and yet somehow we let the government We let the government do it so You got to focus on the spending side and you got a cut spending dramatically Significantly massively But nobody wants to do that nobody wants to talk about that that's hard they actually have to make real Decisions, I mean real decisions and it like what what are you gonna cut? Whose subsidies are gonna take away? You can cut farm subsidies. You can cut Solar subsidies and windmill subsidies, which nobody's doing. Are you gonna cut? Are you gonna cut welfare? Are you gonna cut so security? What about cutting Medicare because that's where the real costs are I mean the fact is the fact is that Unless we reform Medicare and I know I know it's a political suicide Because the American people don't want us to cut Medicare, but the fact is that unless you cut Medicare Nothing else you do matters Nothing else you do matters Medicare is most of the debt going forward But nobody wants to talk about that Medicare is gonna be bigger than defense Medicare will be the biggest expenditure on the federal budget very soon by far not even close But you can't talk about that. Oh, what about the poor people? What about all the sick people? What about all the old people? We can't do that to them What about all the young people? What about all the people gonna have to tax? What about all the the lowest standard of living future generations are gonna have to live with? What about reduced economic growth? What about all the suffering you're gonna cause in the next 20 30 40 50 years? Because the economy is not gonna grow very fast Or at all or maybe shrink What about all of that? Nobody cares Nobody cares because we've got suffering We've got people who need health care right now and if we have to suffer if you have to Sacrifice future generation for the sake of that. Well, what a future generations for if not to borrow at the expense so we can fund Making ourselves feel better about ourselves today, you know by taking care of not an old people by taking care of our parents and grandparents That's what's important. So as I said the problem is Spending and nobody wants to deal with it. So it's much easier to deal with taxes and So Republicans Had an opportunity to do something really dramatic with taxes They had an opportunity because they have a majority in the house a majority in the Senate and Donald Trump is basically said he'd sign anything to really shake up and reform and completely restructure our tax system and And do something really really dramatic and Unfortunately, they haven't done that. I mean they've done it a little bit on the corporate side Lowering taxes from 35% to 21% on the corporate side is significant It's big and and they should be applauded for that. That is terrific It's still by the way, not the lowest in the developed world The lowest corporate tax in the developed world is by is Ireland Ireland has a 12 and a half percent corporate tax rate. It's not even the lowest in Among the bigger economies, so Germany, you know Germany a massive welfare state an economy that produces and and has done very well and people say Well, wait a minute. How can Germany do so well? How how come Germany has performed the German economies performed so well? Over the last isn't a more socialist than America So how come Germany's done so well. How come the German economy has done relatively well and The you know even relative to the United States. Well to answer that we're gonna do that after the break We're gonna take a quick break here. You're listening to your own book show and the blaze radio network will be right back PhD media contributor. This is the Iran Brooks show PhD author media contributor. This is the Iran Brooks show the blaze radio network Sorry about that guys. I was Bout of nausea. I don't know as some of you know, I'm I'm recovering from surgery and Maybe that had something to do with it. All right We are talking we are talking U.s. Economy we're talking about tax cut and one of the things that people don't realize is That even after the tax cut in the corporate rates, the United States will still have will not have the lowest Corporate tax rate in kind of the developed world particularly if you count a lot of the European countries as I said before the break Island has a twelve and a half percent Twelve and a half percent corporate rate wouldn't be cool if we had met if we had matched the Island the UK has a slightly under twenty percent corporate tax rates So even the UK, I think it's 19% corporate tax rates in the UK has a lower corporate tax rate then Then the United States but an interesting case study is Germany because a lot of people always ask me How come Germany does so well Germany's got a much bigger welfare state than the United States And it's got all these labor regulations and all this stuff And there's this perception of Germany is kind of a social estate and yet it's done I mean it hasn't done as well as the United States since the since the Great Depression, but it's done a recession Sorry since the Great Recession, but it's done fairly well over the last 10 or more years or 20 years Be able to ask me how come it's a socialist country you you don't believe in socialism and what they don't realize is the extent to which in some respects Germany is less Socialist less interventionist in the United States is and maybe corporate tax is a good illustration of this in 2000 Corporate taxes in Germany were 42 and a half percent higher than the United States United States has basically been Static since 2000 and 35% for a long time at 35% German corporate tax rates were 42 and a half percent and then in 2001 they lowered them to 26% and Then since then in 2008 Germany in 2008 as a response to financial crisis Actually lowered their tax rate to 15.8 percent So Germany's corporate tax rate right now is 15.8 percent and The world did not end. This is a response to the crazy Democrats We think the world's gonna end because we lowered the corporate tax rate The world did not end when Germany lowered its tax rate by more By more than half from 42 and a half percent to 15.8 percent That's way more than half. It's almost almost by two-thirds Right And the German economy is done fairly well in addition if you go back and look in the early 2000s Germany engaged in massive Labor deregulation so all the labor laws that really constraint labor mobility and flexibility in Germany were massively Deregulated and then a combination of labor deregulation some other deregulation they were engaged in and a lowering of corporate tax Rates has done a lot of good for Germany and in many respects Germany's in better shape when some respects Germany's in better shape than the United States Certainly, it's corporate tax rate is going to be lower than the US is corporate tax rate even after the Republicans lower it to 21% Wouldn't it have been cool if they'd load it to 15% I mean zero is my personal ideal But okay, you know, nobody goes nobody's nobody's that radical, right? so So corporate tax rate is lowered and that's a good thing. That's a good thing that'll raise wages You'll see in the next five years. You'll see wages real wages rising It's gonna actually have a deflationary impact on prices. It's gonna actually have Create pressure on prices to come down on certain products when corporate taxes is tax rates go down it it Puts pressure downward pressure on prices companies are making more money. They can afford to lower prices on The products that they sell and there's competition to lower prices and It it at least in a short run will raise corporate profits I in the long run in it doesn't raise corporate profit But in a short run it was raised corporate profits, which will reward Shareholders, but that's only a short run effect a long run effect Higher wages which you've seen in Germany and lower prices So we all benefit we all benefit when corporate taxes are cut and good cut good deal What would have been great, you know, this is my wish list for what I wish they would have done What would have been great is if they had then cut you know things like All the subsidies to businesses all the loopholes all the tax benefits I don't know that the windmill industry gets and the Solar energy gets and I'm sure some that they oil and gas get and whatever cut it all You know, so so lower the tax rate I would lower it to 15% in that case and then cut out all these deductions and exclusions and subsidies and loopholes and cronyism and all this stuff make it really really really really simple All right, that would have been huge that would have really really had an impact much more Then just cutting the corporate actually getting getting over the idea of Of trying to manipulate the US economy by subsidizing by giving preferential treatment all of those kind of things What a breath of fresh air that would have been if that would have happened All right, by the way, if you have an opinion about tax rates If you want to tell me how you think tax rates are gonna affect you personally or what you think about it Oh, generally on economics. We're doing an economic show today If you have a question about economics, feel free to call 888-900-3393-888-900-3393 Anything on the Fed interest rates on tax reform on deregulation on any other or what they're teaching you Those of you as students at the universities or what they're teaching you in economics class one minute, you know At your school because I know you're getting a lot of garbage there I know you're getting a lot of a lot of real bad stuff there All right when we come back we're gonna we're gonna have to take a hard break here in less than a minute When we come back, I want to talk more about The about taxes about tax reform what they did in terms of a fine income bringing Trying to bring some of that money home What that means bring that money back to us what that actually what that actually means and I also want to talk about Individual tax rates tax rates me and you are going to pay. How are those impact 20 and again If you guys want in on the conversation if you have a view about your economic state 888-900-3393 After after this break they were going to and after that we're gonna talk about deregulation And about Fed policy We're back back talking about taxes and The tax reform the it looks like the Senate and the House will both vote on it On this coming week, we should have a completely new tax regime by the end of next week by Christmas Your Christmas present some some additional cash in your pocket. I think that's true for most of us Not necessarily for everybody but for most of us we will see some a little bit some of us a little bit Some people a little bit more cash in their pockets Just a few more things on on corporate taxes and then I'm gonna go Miles is calling in from he's got some tax Tax plan concerns. We'll take that You know that an opportunity for example to eliminate interest deduction on Interest detectability from taxes right now when a corporation Pays interest on the debt that it's taken it can deduct that interest from its taxes When it pays when it gives shareholders dividends, it cannot deduct those dividends from its taxes So dividends a tax twice you the tax at the corporate level once as income And then when you get the dividends that taxed at your income tax rate This that absolutely makes no sense. Why should the tax code? Make it more beneficial for corporations to take on debt Then to issue equity It favors get accumulating leverage. It favors companies issuing debt To buy their own stock which makes no sense So it would have be nice if they would have treated both the same that is both either made both deductible from taxes Oh, neither deductible from taxes. They've changed it a little bit They've limited the amount of interest they can they can deduct but that's even worse because that's kind of telling corporations It's good to go up to X percent. It's not good to go to Y percent. It's again the central planning I hate it when politicians try to manage our lives or try to manage Corporations lives just leave us alone set simple neutral rules and everything else alone The foreign income the corporations have generated can now be brought home with no tax penalty There's a one-time tax penalty for their the stuff that they've accumulated up to date That's good. I mean it might go into investments and might be into buyouts Who knows but anything that gives corporations more flexible in flexibility in terms of how they use the cash Is a good thing in in in my book. All right, we've also got a Business investment, you know, you can immediately deduct Which increase which is supposed to increase incentives so invest for for Investment so overall I turn the corporate side, you know things are better The tax reduction is substantial could have been more and could have been simpler Could have been more dramatic could have been Fewer exclusions and deductions and all that crap so that You what I like is I want tax policy to the extent that you need taxes to fund revenues to fund it government expenditures The most of government expenditures today in my view are illegitimate, but the ones that are legitimate is Is a tax that's neutral in terms of changing people's behavior? The tax that's as neutral as possible in terms of changing people's behavior the corporate tax is Are not quite there yet Better than it was not quite where I would like it to be. All right, we're gonna take a quick call from miles Hi, Miles. You're in the Iran book show Hi, hi, you're in I have three points to make On this tax plan first is on the business side. I think you remember a few years ago They were tax cuts given to business, but they were tied to business hiring people In other words, it was conditioned and in order to qualify for the tax cut. That's not the case here No, businesses get tax cuts they can do whatever they want with the money They can reinvest it in the corporate in stock. They can pay executives But there's no guarantee that it's gonna go to hiring people. That's right. That's that's that's that's my first gripe Okay, on the purse on the personal side The fact that there's a cap on the salt Facts me because there's a $10,000 cap on the salt. I pay more than $10,000 in salt What do you talk about salt explain what salt is? Well salt is the state and local taxes. Okay, good action And I pay more than $10,000, which is what the Displaying caps that that deduction hat. So I'll have less A lesser deduction and the result is I'll be paying more taxes. Yep. Yep. I'm a middle I'm a middle class guy. So Yeah, I'm gonna I'm gonna get nailed and now went to when you live miles you live in South Carolina What's your cup of time? What's your what's your state tax day? State income tax rate is I believe 7.5% okay, it's high. Wow in South Carolina. I'm surprised. Okay But originally from New York if I live in New York, I really be yeah, I'm in California. So I know I feel your pain Believe me miles. I feel your pain What's the third point? The third point is Now I'm trying to remember what that what that point is corporate tax rates. We had cap on state and local and property You forget Sounds good. All right. Thanks, Miles. Let's let me take let me take on both of those Let me take on both of those corporate tax rates on business. They're not Telling businesses they have to hire which is great God forbid the government starts telling businesses how they run their businesses how to spend their money God forbid that they that that companies hire people only because it gives them a tax break not because these people are gonna be Actually productive and useful the best thing we can do is Not try to tell businesses what to do with the money Businessmen know much more about what to do with that money than we do in terms of Making it productive. So what a businessman can do with that money? Well, they're gonna invest it. What does it mean to invest it? It might not seem like they're hiving people because they might be investing in a startup Or they might be investing in a new venture or they might be investing in some financial instruments But the fact is that every one of those that money ultimately goes to a productive activity Which yeah, it creates jobs. But more importantly, it's creating wealth and what drives the economy is wealth creation and Wealth creation also creates jobs. You cannot create wealth Long-term without jobs being created as well The idea that we can manipulate the economy by giving a little bit here and a little bit there and telling them what breaks They should have on what breaks they can have and so on in ways that maximize Work is again this fallacy of central planning as if the central planner knows knows how to Manipulate all these factors in order to create an optimal situation. No I mean I'm so glad that the tax cuts are not contingent on Corporations behaving in any particular way even stock buybacks stock buybacks are good Why do corporations engage in stock buybacks? because it's it's More profitable for them. They believe to buy their stock than to invest the money. Why? Because they're no good investments They can't find any good investments and rather than the cash just sitting in the bank. They hand it over to shareholders and Let's shareholders decide what to do with it Let's shareholders figure out where to invest it and how to invest it and those shareholders invested in what they invested in new projects and new ventures in new capabilities When corporations sit on a lot of cash That's not a good thing. You want that money? Invested in its highest return and if Apple can't find the best investments possible For the cash that it has then give it to the shareholders and let them try to find the best investment possible So the idea is to provide incentives so that the cash is invested in its best use where they can get the highest return and if it's not in the corporation then Then it shouldn't be with the corporation and that's why they should do buybacks. They should give out dividends. They should Send the cash to people who can better utilize it give it to people who can better utilize it instead of hiring people for what if if the hiring people actually generated a good return then they would hire them instead of You know buying back the stocks All right, we're gonna take a quick break here and when we get back We'll continue our discussion. We'll take on the second objection Miles had on on taxes We'll be right back. You're listening to run bookshelf on the blaze radio network Hey guys, all right, so my I'll ask some really good questions and the first one was well Why can't we force corporations to invest in jobs corporations would invest in jobs? If those jobs were good investments What does it mean good investments that they made money right and and this is where I think a lot of people have cognitive dissonance Every job that you have somebody's making money off of it Otherwise, they wouldn't be investing in you The only reason I hire people to work for me is because they make me more productive and they make me be able to have more profits So corporations would take the tax-saving and invest in Hiring people only if those people were good investments and If they were good investments that is better investments than buying back the stock They would do that and if they're not then you don't want them from an economics perspective You don't want them hiring people you don't want them hiring people To do non-productive work to do non-profitable work So what you want the money is to return it to shareholders and let them find the best possible investments in the economy To apply their money to and I know I'm being somewhat professorial, but how you can understand the the tax issues Without this right there's a lot being thrown out here. The second one is this cap on state local and Property taxes that being imposed now. I think that the cap was a cop-out that they should have had no deductibility For state local and property taxes. Why should you get that deducted? Why should you why? Why should you be shielded from your choice to live in a high-tax state? Why should why should people who live in low-tax states in a sense in a sense be subsidizing people who live in high-tax states? Now I'm gonna suffer because of this, but the fact is that the federal government shouldn't be Encouraging states to raise their taxes because the burden of it doesn't fall on the residents of California It falls another so think of it on other states. Think of it. They the federal governor has to raise X number of dollars right and They're giving Californians a break by letting Californians deduct a massive amount of taxes they pay Sacramento and as a Consequence people in in I don't know in Nevada who have a zero tax rate at the at the state level Have to pay in a sense higher corporate taxes to make up Whatever the federal government has to achieve So no, I I would like to see no deductibility zero deductibility Which will increase the incentive of people to leave states That are high-tax states or to put political pressure on those states to reduce their taxes I don't want to reward California and New York for the fact that they have high high taxes now this $10,000 means I won't even be able to Deduct my my property taxes my property taxes are higher than the $10,000 because I live in California Never mind my oh my god I mean, I'm just thinking now of how much my state taxes are my state taxes are enormous and I won't be able to deduct them now The fact is that I couldn't deduct them anyway because the alternative minimum tax Which I've been paying for the last few years and many of us have been paying So no, I'm not only for the cap. I wish I wish it was capped at zero I wish you couldn't deduct anything and indeed I think there was should be many many more Eliminations of deductions if you look at the personal tax if we go over to the personal tax So what they've done is they've changed the brackets They were Seven brackets and they are still seven brackets now that is sad in my view One of the reasons to do tax reform is to simplify They could have easily reduced the number of brackets to three. I mean ideally one a flat tax would be ideal But but okay three would be better than seven Why are some people taxed at 32 others at 35 and others at 37 and then the two brackets 22 and 24 and then there's 10 and 12 Why not have one at 23 and one at 11? I Don't know I mean Yeah, if we're having seven tax brackets, why not have 13? What about 27 tax brackets? Tackles form was a real opportunity to simplify Simplify means fewer Fewer brackets and fewer deductions now some of the directions It's good. They've they've done away with a personal exemption and they raised the standard deduction I don't have any problem with raising the standard deduction. Basically what that does is it wipes out Many low-income people for paying any taxes at all because the standard deduction is higher than what they have to pay in taxes It's it's higher than in some cases their income So the new standard deduction for married couple is 24,000 So if there's a young couple that's making less than 24,000, they're basically not gonna pay any taxes. All right Now we have child tax credits, I don't believe there should be any child tax credits Why is the government incentivizing us to have children or giving us a reward for having children? and You know their reward is there for married people unmarried people I mean if you have a child you should bear the forecast of that So I don't think this should be taxed at it. I don't think they should deduct state and local taxes They've gone from you can itemize everything to now you can deduct up to 10,000 You shouldn't be able to deduct any of that mortgage interest deduction They reduced it from a million dollar cap to 750,000 dollar cap. What a wimpy. How wimpy is that? Right. Why not again? Why not make it zero now? I would have again suffered because I take Mortgage deduction, but why is the government incentivizing me to take out a mortgage rather than paying cash? Or incentivizing me to take out a mortgage rather than renting None of the government's business stay out of stay out of my purchasing decisions. Why are you trying to social engineer me? This is part of the reason why we had a housing crisis Because we incentivize people to buy when they couldn't afford to buy when they shouldn't have been buying when they should have been running They'll turn it a minimum tax. They had an opportunity to get rid of it completely Just a whole complexity which hurts a particularly Upper middle-class people they preserved it and they've narrowed it again a wimpy wimpy Solution alternative minimum tax. Oh, that's alternative tax medical expenses. They should have made health insurance deductible So if I buy a health insurance as an individual, why shouldn't I be able to deduct it? But when a business buys health insurance for me, they get to deduct it So why do we have unequal treatment of of medical insurance deductions? Why do we prefer employer-based again social engineering telling me where I should buy my health insurance? Incentivizing me to buy health insurance through my employer, but I'm not employed anymore. I'm self-employed Why why is my situation vis-a-vis healthcare gotten worse because I'm no longer getting a salary Because I don't have an employer anymore and then medical expenses so you can still You know deduct some of those kind of in emergencies student loans you can deduct Graduate tuition you can deduct And they change some stuff with a grad of alimony a big one is a state tax a state tax doesn't affect many people that the it was 40 percent on 5.6 million and above and 11 million for married couples now it's 11 million for individuals 22 for married couples Still 40% they were going to make it zero, which would have been ideal But they've raised it so much very few people are gonna be paying it. But again Why are we penalizing people who have a lot of money? Why are we penalizing success? Why are we penalizing high incomes? You know, they're the people who invest in it. They're the people create Miles was considered by job creation. You want to create jobs? Lower the top marginal income tax rate a lot would eliminate a state taxes and Most importantly capital gains and dividends unaffected. They stay at 23.8 But wait a minute That's where you get the most bang for the buck from an economics perspective So why why won't those reduced eliminated zero should be the capital gains and dividends that would have been a revolution That would have been the best thing the economy has ever seen if they were really really serious about economic growth They would have eliminated the capital gains and dividend tax. I mean now would have been amazing. You would have seen stuff Really really Dramatic changes to the US economy, okay A bunch of other things Passed through businesses get get some benefits. It's not clear to me how that how that exactly is going to work We're gonna have to see some examples of that and what it works. So generally Text plans, okay for the individuals had an opportunity to be brilliant had an opportunity to make big impact particularly state Lowered capital gains and dividends load the top man to marginally complex rate And completely simplified in it taking away all the social engineering. They didn't their whims principles of rational self-interest and Individually clear on your radio. It's the Yaron Brooks show on the blaze Welcome to a discussion of radical fundamental principles of freedom rational self-interest laissez-faire capitalism and individual rights The Yaron Brooks show starts now Everybody welcome to the second hour of today's show You're listening to your own book show and this is the blaze radio network If you want to ask a kind of random question not necessarily on the topic today We we allocate the last segment of the second hour for that. So in about I don't know 45 minutes or so So feel free to call then the number is eight eight eight nine zero zero three three nine three eight eight eight nine zero zero three three nine three if you want to call now and Just stay on the line until then that's fine Just tell the the call screener that you're in for the final segment that you want to ask a Question ask a question about a topic. That's not directly related to what we're talking about today All right, so let's let's let's talk again about taxes I want to I want to give you the principle that I I see in terms of taxes You've got a certain level of revenue that you know, you want to raise and I would argue that the ideal would be as low of a revenue as possible So so I would like to see government spending come down significantly But the way to raise that revenue should be given that we have taxes and given there's no way around it is to have the lowest rate possible have it as flat as possible and As simple as possible That in terms of in terms of individual tax rate corporate tax rate should be zero Because they're primarily paid by Consumers and and and workers anyway and When it comes to double taxation should be zero That's why capital gains shouldn't be taxed and dividends shouldn't be taxed So noble double taxation Maximum simplicity so no deductions no exclusions nothing and maximum flatness Unfortunately this tax reform and and the lowest rate possible given the amount of revenue you are trying to raise Unfortunately, this tax plan doesn't Doesn't qualify by any of those metrics Other than a corporate side where it lowered rates dramatically the only the only good thing about this rate this tax plan From an individual perspective is that it lowered some of the brackets that's good. That's good But it hasn't dramatically simplified things and it hasn't dramatically Flattened things which is what I would have liked to have seen. All right We're gonna take a couple of calls. We've got Skyler on the line and then we're gonna take Mark. Hey Skyler. How's it going? Season's greetings, Dr. Brooke. Merry Christmas to you too Merry Christmas. I Just want to know one thing How long would it take for the culture to be able to accept the idea of a zero percent tax rate? And how long would it take and what would need to happen in the culture for that to occur? Well, I mean our culture would have to change dramatically So that they would see that the role of government they would understand that the role of government is Is only to protect individual rights so As long as it takes to explain that and to convince the culture of that now I happen to think that's gonna take a long time We're talking about 20 to 100 years Before their culture is ready to accept what the founding fathers understood 200 plus years ago Which is that the job of government is to protect our rights? Period that's it and that means that the government should be composed of almost entirely police Military and judiciary and that's true not just at the federal level of it at the state and local level So until we have that kind of realization You're not gonna see the kind of dramatic changes I would like to see on the tax side because you can't change taxes until you change spending So Skyler it's gonna take a long time maybe in your lifetime certainly not in mine Maybe maybe maybe all right. Thanks Skyler Appreciate your call Mark mark from Michigan. How's it going? Hey, you're on hey Yeah, so you were talking With another caller about the effects of the tax plan changes and his life sure from my perspective I'm kind of a young guy just starting out my Career and I'm looking at the changes in the Individual side and that's worth a couple thousand dollars per year which seems kind of nice It'll be worth even more if I have kids But it seems like over half of the benefit that the White House is talking about for me is They are projected effects on wage growth into the corporate tax cut and I was wondering It seems to be there's a big debate Thanks, the case come out with this number about like four thousand dollars per working family over some amount of time of Wage increase and yeah, it'd probably be that that or more for me if that's true So I'm wondering what what you think about that. I mean to put a number on it and to put a time frame on it Is what I call voodoo economics. It's just it's just somebody has a formula. They stick some numbers in it's It's it's it's it's random and it's meaningless What you will see is for jobs particularly Where there is competition for workers if you're in an industry your people are competing for you where you have a lot of Alternatives wages will go up. I don't think anybody knows by how much Economic research does not suggest exactly by how much it's not as I said, it's not gonna be uniform It depends on the industry depends on the company. It depends on your profession It depends on what you're starting out of whether you're very senior the more It's likely that the more senior people will get more Of the benefit than the junior people the more productive people will get more than the less productive people and The the the more you have bargaining power as an employee Which means the most special you are in a sense the more you'll see an advantage from the corporate tax decrease so To put a number on it is I think meaningless and to try to put a number on it is meaningless I really think it is kind of voodoo economics, and I wouldn't trust I wouldn't trust that number so Sorry, I can't help there So I'm glad you're gonna have two thousand dollars more because of the individual tax cut That's easier to calculate I think if you're if you're single and you don't have a mortgage and all these other stuff Then it's easy to calculate and it's easy to see that you're getting a benefit for me Because I live in California Because I have a big mortgage because I'd be paying the alternate minimum tax Because I pay a lot of taxes state state federal and local. I'm not sure what effect the tax is gonna have on me Now as I've hinted at in previous shows I'm making a move in January that's gonna affect my taxes dramatically So to some extent none of this is relevant to me But I'll let you guys all know about that later on in January, but so I don't know if I stayed where I am What impact it would have I have no clue But I wish you luck Mark. You know you should go to your boss. Do you work for corporation? Yeah, yeah, big corporation. Yes, I would go to your boss and say hey corporate tax rate has gone down I want to raise see how that see how that goes I'm kidding. I do not recommend that at all I would wait a little bit, but then You know if you really do if you really are in a profession way you other people are Looking at you where you've got options Yeah, you can go and ask for a raise and and and I think over time the corporations will be much more agreeable to that Than otherwise. All right. Thanks Mark. Thanks for calling and again I hope I hope you get at least four thousand dollars over the next few years of raises because of these tax cuts I mean generally The less money politicians have and the more we have the better the problem is the politicians can borrow The money and and that's why to me from again from a big economic perspective Tax cuts matter less government spending matters more Because if they don't tax us and get the money They suck that money out of the private economy by by borrowing it and and it does just as much harm sitting in the hands of politicians because they borrowed it as it does sitting in the hand of politicians if they if they tax it Still sucking money out of the private economy Sucking money away for investments sucking money away from raises and and giving it to government bureaucrats to spend You got to fix the spending side. You got to cut spending Congress Let's hope maybe next year before the 2018 election. Maybe they will try to do that I have my doubts, but maybe maybe we can we can hope Okay, we're gonna take a quick break Michael I know you're on there from Tennessee. I definitely want to get to you But what I'm gonna do is take a quick break and then I'm gonna I'm gonna go to Michael to talk about tax instead of in child's Credits, and then if we have time, I still want to talk about deregulation and a bunch of other things Which yeah, we'll see if we have time for all right We'll be you're listening to your own book show and on the blaze radio network and we'll be right back after this break Is the Iran book show The Iran book show All right, we're back and we're talking tax reform today, and I'm curious how these taxes affecting you Your taxes you think you're gonna go up or they're gonna go down for most of us They're gonna go down. Is it dramatic? Are you excited about this tax reform? Is it is it a positive in your life? Well, is it a negative you can call in 888-900-3393 888-900-3393 and then in the final segment in about 30 minutes You can call in and ask a question about anything you want to so Completely open lines in that segment. We've got Michael and miles remember this third point. All right miles So miles we're gonna we're gonna get to miles as well in this segment. Okay, Michael So you want to talk about tax incentives and child's credits? Yeah, I heard you kind of ask why why would you need incentives to have children and I mean I know that you'll probably reject this answer, but some my understanding the Yeah, from my understanding the rationale behind this is so that you can Boost birth rates of your native population because as you know the European and American birth rates are pretty lackluster and There's projections that will be extinct in like a hundred years if it keeps going the way it's going which it probably won't but And their argument is that It's easier. It's easier to socialize people who have grown up in that culture rather than bringing people from a different culture Not only I'm not not that you shouldn't do that You should always bring in the best and the brightest people who have skills I 100% sport that but I just wanted to maybe get your thoughts on that and then I was gonna ask you a little bit about FHA Just real quick. Yeah, sure. So let me just say about child's credits So if your middle class or upper middle class are wealthy the child credits have no impact on you Because it's small and and it's you're not gonna have kids because you incentivize to have kids financially, right? You're doing pretty well and and that's where the birth rates are particularly low So where the child credits actually have an impact is if you're relatively poor and and young When you can't afford kids Well, do we really want to incentivize people single mothers? Poor people to have more kids when they can't really afford them Think about it. If you're gonna have a if what's gonna make the difference between having a kid or not is The child credit should you really have the kid? Really? I mean, is that what should drive you to have children given how much work children are how given how expensive children are Given everything that's involved in raising children is that the new $2,000 credit is that what should incentivize you to have them? I don't buy it now Let's be honest about what this demographic issue is It's white people not having enough kids. That's what they're concerned about, right? Because Hispanics seem to have a lot of kids, right? So do we really is that what we're doing? So this is kind of a racist policy to try to incentivize white people to have more kids I mean really I mean is that where we are as a country? Just get rid of the child credit. It's just It's just not right. It's just you know, it's just it creates wrong incentives Let me let me be very blunt. You shouldn't have kids if you can't afford to have them kids expensive If you don't have time to take care of them, don't have kids if you don't if you're not mature enough to have them Don't have kids if you don't realize Well, nobody actually realizes but if you're not willing to put in the effort to work the Long hours that sleepless nights to have kids don't have them You know, so not so I you know This demographic stuff is very very very dangerous and and very very very Scary, I mean France has here. I mean, you look they're really doing this. They're in Poland right now. They're massively incentivizing People to have children. I mean this is bad bad policy. It's awful Again, you're you're basically incentivizing poor people more than anybody else. So You know what It really is socially Just horrible. There's nothing wrong with having a low birth rate if the economy is free and And the economy is growing and there is prosperity. The problem is that in a lot of countries I mean, there's no problem low birth rate period people should be people should choose now I think low birth rates particularly in Europe And particularly and with some Americans are consequence of cynicism about the future Having children is an optimistic statement about the future And I think the most cynical the more negative the more pessimistic the culture becomes about the future the fewer kids We have Now I'm not saying that if it's between eight and one I'm thinking about between Between two and zero between three and zero a lot of couples in Europe Don't have kids and I think I think it's a lot because Because the pessimistic about the future I think it's I think for a lot of people it's rational not to have children So I don't think there's a right level of right number of kids But I do think it's much more cultural than it is financial and we should leave it as cultural And if there's a cultural problem, let's fix the cultural problem. Let's not try to manipulate people with taxes That's a general principle. Don't manipulate people with taxes All right, what's your second second question about housing? All right, I absolutely agree with what you said. We should never should Insinivising motherhood for sure. Yeah, I don't know about the demographics in terms of race I know it does it's a class, but I don't want to get down that road. It's doing that. That's evil, but okay, so Some of my some of my friends people that I know have took an advantage of the FHA loans Which allows first-time buyers to get a pretty good rate If their credit screwed up from the start see I was that so I have a little bit of experience in this Yeah, sometimes some sometimes people When they get 18 they have they have bad credit. Sometimes they have no credit Sometimes they have good credit like I had a friend who had a perfect score. I only turned 18 Yeah, I was actually one of the people who had bad credit, which had made no sense And sometimes that puts people behind the eight ball I've had to build my credit up over the years obviously, but I've had friends take advantage of this FHA loan If they can prove they work and pay their bills Yep They can get a good Deal to kind of remedy the bad hands. They were given by chance. I mean, I don't know what goes into all that But I wanted to get your thoughts on something like that. What do you think about it? I mean, I think it's again I think I think it's terrible policy Why should young people be incentivized to buy a home is buying a home the rational decision and it might be if You're subsidizing their mortgage, but why should I be subsidizing a mortgage for a young person? Why should I be subsidizing anybody's mortgage? So no, I think FHA loans and Freddie and Fannie and American housing policy is what led to the to the financial crisis in 2008 I think that the FHA loans only required two and a half percent down or three and a half percent down something ridiculous like that They're on terms that are unrealistic No, I mean the market should be completely private and if that means fewer people own homes That means fewer people own homes. Who cares why? Again, why is the government trying to get you to buy a house? Rather than rent a house why a central plan is deciding what the home ownership rate should be in any particular country None of their business. I Mean you as an individual decide based on market prices based on the markets evaluation of your credit quality whether you should buy a home or not and politicians and central planners and Treasury departments and the president of the United States should all stay out of it out of it one of the reasons we got the The 2008 financial crisis is exactly because these kind of things where the FHA is only demanding seven and a half percent down on homes That's ridiculous. I mean and it puts you in a bad situation because if home prices go down By more than seven and a half percent You now owe more on the house than what the house is worth Why would anybody ever take out 92% and a half percent leverage on anything? And why would the government motivate you to do that to do something stupid like that? So yeah, because they think home prices can only go up. Well People are gonna be surprised home prices sometimes go down and they did in 08 and 09 and 10 in many places So no, I'm against the FHA doing any of that. I would shut down the FHA is one of the first things I did as president But don't worry. Nobody's electing me Yeah, well the reason I ask is it's not really it's not really it's kind of a unique program because it's not really Incentivizing bad people to own homes. They won't loan to you if you don't have a good job Yeah, but they're incentivizing you to take on more leverage than you should and they're Subsidizing you owning a home above and beyond, you know at my expense Why right? Why why would you take on 90% leverage on any asset any asset? Don't do it. Good financial planners will always tell you don't do it and So they're incentivizing you to take on a huge amount of leverage and on top of that I'm subsidizing it because I have to pay higher taxes because of it because When you default who has to who has to back up the FHA? Well, the taxpayers do So no, I'm against again any government program that tries to manipulate you into particular Economic behavior That makes sense. All right, I'm a radical. I'm sorry Michael I know you know, I'm actually kind of with you. I just I don't know if people are that easily manipulated I think they have a choice. Oh, they're easily manipulated. I'm easily manipulated. I have a much bigger mortgage Because I can deduct it from my taxes than I would otherwise Because it makes rational sense to me. But why am I why have I got this crazy mortgage? Why because I can deduct it from my taxes. So I'm I'm manipulated I know I'm being manipulated, but it's in my self-interest to be manipulated Because because it has a financial bottom line, but but but in a real world I would never take the kind of mortgage I have today Sorry. Yeah. All right Thanks Well, okay, buddy. I will I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We've got miles on the line I'm gonna wait on miles because We're coming up on a hard break that I can't really push forward. So miles. I'm gonna take your call as Soon as we come back Here's the principle the government should not be intervening in our lives The government should not be intervening in our lives neither for good no bad other than to protect us To protect us from bad people which means to protect us from force from fraud From Steve from people stealing from people committing violent acts against us They should protect us from fallen invaders and terrorists But other than that You know the government should leave us alone It should butt out it shouldn't incentivize me to buy a home or rent a home or not buy a home or not rent a home How many kids to have or not have see what to get married on Mount married? It should be neutral about all those things. That's what a Rational government would do that's what the founders 10 would do. All right. You're listening to your own book show We're in the blaze radio network and we'll be right back All right, we're talking taxes all Day today so taxes taxes taxes taxes if you want to talk taxes How's this tech plan going to affect you or how you think it'll affect the economy or For that matter if you want to talk about anything We're getting to that part of the show close to that part of the show I'm willing to take calls on any topic you want to talk about you can call in it's 888-900-3393 888-900-3393 and miles is on the line miles who called in earlier And had two at three comments on the taxes But could only remember two has now remembered the third one. Hey Miles. Thanks for calling back Thank you, you know My third point which ironically has to do with housing, which is what you were speaking of last last segment You obviously you don't believe in incentivizing You know people to buy houses through taxes I don't believe in incentivizing people to buy houses period okay And eliminating You know some of these deductions or capping them certainly would be with Disincentivize people from buying houses, but but I guess my question is the present the new taxi form plan Yeah, with its with its salt cap together with Fed rate increases which have already started and are projected to continue Do you think that that's going to have a depressing effect on the housing market there? And you know we'll be back and we will be back to a 2008 situation. Yeah, so far we're not seeing it particularly on the Fed side, let me get to the salt cap in a minute, but on the Fed side Because the yield curve is pretty flat So while the Fed is raising short-term rates Long-term rates are not going up and mortgage rates are set by long-term rates more than they are by short-term rates Unless you have a variable rate mortgage, which in these days is insanity because the 30-year mortgages and 15-year mortgages So show so I have such low interest rates that it's an old-brainer to get one of those if you have variable rate mortgage Then then yeah, it's a little dissent disincentivizing the rising rate the flat yield curve Which are troubling from an economic perspective because when the yield curve gets inverted that is long-term rates are Lower than short-term rates. It's usually a precursor to recession and we're not quite inverted But we're fairly flat and if you start seeing it being inverted start worrying So I think that doesn't seem to have any an impact on mortgages yet If the if the 5 and 10 year and 30 year bonds Interest rates on them go up, which they haven't yet then you'll see mortgage rates go up now the inability to deduct salt and the new Reduction in deduction from million to 750,000 is Definitely getting hurt California and New York So it's gonna hurt people living in San Francisco. It's gonna hurt people living in LA We all here own homes that are worth more than a million dollars We have million dollar mortgages because we thought we could deduct the whole million now We can only deduct 750,000 interest on and of course we can't deduct our property taxes in our The complete property taxes and we can't deduct any of our sales in a of our income taxes on state and local That's gonna really hurt New York in California. Now. I think that's a good thing Because again, why why should California you'll get a break for the bad economic policies that they're engaged in so You know to the extent that we can incentivize California to reduce its state taxes to the extent that we can incentivize New York to do the same To the extent that this puts downward pressure on home prices. That's a good thing. I mean Let me say something about home prices I don't have a lot of time to get it really into this, but let me just say this How spices should not overall on average go up? Housing is a consumption product when you buy a house. You're consuming something and you when you live in it You're using it. You're using the house the value of the house should be going down Just like when you buy a car and as soon as you drive it off a lot the price goes down Why is it when you buy a house you expect a price to go up houses should not be investments? houses are consumption The only reason house prices are going up is because of government policy house prices have been going up significantly since the late 70s and the reason the primary reason and they're going up primarily in California and New York and a few other places is Primarily because of government policies government policies that restrict supply when you restrict restrict supply in Places that attract a for people to live you cause home prices to go up There's absolutely no reason why home prices should continuously go up in San Francisco, but they've been going up since 1979 Why because in the late 70s, California passed all these environmental laws that made it impossible to build new homes Because everything was allocated to green spaces Also because in places like San Francisco, you're not allowed to build up. You're not allowed to build high Condo towers except in the downtown area outside of the downtown area You're not allowed to build a high condo town now Why because people who already have homes in San Francisco don't want you to because it'll lower the value of their homes Because there'll be more supply so The solution and so in a free market Home prices should be flat and And you would never view a home as an investment you have your home as something you consume And you wouldn't care that much whether you were renting or whether you're buying just like in a car It's it's Moderately it's unclear what's better to lease a car to buy a car. It depends on your tax situation stuff like that But why would you care? so So again, I think our whole perception of housing as This investment product it already goes up and when he goes down. Oh my god, the world is gonna end That is a consequence of bad government policy. So I'm not worried about housing declines I think they should decline in some areas the way too expensive in California people can't afford to live here So why don't we care only about the people who already own the homes? Why don't we care about the people who want to move into California and who can't afford to come here? What about all the people would love to come to California because their jobs here, but they don't move here because the cost of living is too high so Yeah, again, I want government to get out of the business of telling me incentivizing me Motivating me anything about housing. I want a neutral housing market where supply and demand is based on the market and My financial incentives are based on the market not on government central planners Cannot know whether it's good for me to buy or to rent whether it's good me but buy You know whether it's good for my house. They appreciate or stay or depreciate in value You know central planning is bad. I don't know how to get that through to you guys But it's bad. I my house. I went on on there. I don't know if you're what if you have a follow-up on that No, I know my only follow-up is just to gauge your consistency. Do you feel that taxes? On the business side, there should be no incentives on the business side. Absolutely zero incentives. No subsidies. No loopholes No crony is a nothing now I believe that the best way to achieve that is to reduce corporate taxes to zero because because Corporate taxes are paid by it by lower wages and higher priced goods almost all research shows that so the only Rational corporate tax rate is zero, but if you had a corporate tax rate, let's say the 21% now I believe in no loopholes. No deductions. No subsidies. Nothing just a flat rate You know straight business expenses are deducted you take that profit and you have a tax rate on it It doesn't matter what industry you in doesn't matter any of these things you make it as simple and as straightforward as possible Yes, I'm I'm consistent. I don't believe the government should be manipulating business investment telling them what they should invest in Sola energy versus this energy just flat simple. No intervention Okay, sounds good. Good. All right I don't know if I'm if I'm gaining adherence to my run for the president or not But you know, we're building up for that. We're building up for that Alright, let's see We're gonna take let's take a quick break when we come back We're gonna we're gonna talk to Navin Navin wants to take us in a slightly different direction Because I think he wants to raise the issue of Bitcoin. All right, you're listening to your own book show on the blaze radio network. We'll be right back Clear for a prolific media contributor PhD in finance. This is the Iran book show All right, you're listening to your own book show and we're talking we've been talking taxes the whole time a little Deviation here and there into things like housing. So let me just say something about the housing somebody on on Facebook says Yeah, but population growth would cost house prices to go up. No, why would that happen? So population growth causes iPhone prices to go up population growth causes automobile prices to go up No, when population grows you build more houses. There is plenty and plenty and plenty of land To build more housing. So the supply reaches meets that So the fact that the man goes up doesn't mean Prices go up unless supply is constrained and supply is not constrained Shouldn't be constrained. It is constrained by government, but it shouldn't be constrained. So no housing prices Should not have to go should not have to go It should not have to go up Capital investment just you're still getting a profit on selling those houses So the fact that there are more people more people buying houses does not cause The price of housing to go up any more than causes the prices of cause to go up when demand Over time when demand for a cause go up It prices of cause do not go up look at inflation adjusted prices of automobiles. They're not going up Not because of because of regulations. Yes, but because yeah, they have to have more and more components and they have to have Better gas fuel mileage and all of that but independent of that Automobiles are becoming cheaper and cheaper. It costs less and less to build a home today than it did 50 years ago And certainly if you'd allow free markets in housing, it would cost even cheaper to do that And then the other one is But you're on aren't you for paying less taxes? So don't you want all these deductions so you can pay less taxes? Yes, absolutely. I want less taxes, but I want less taxes through the tax rate The fact that they are picking winners winners and losers Is massively detrimental to my life Because it is encouraging and supportive of cronyism Which is destroying capitalism as in america today. It's destroying not just The the the the mentality of the ceo's the mentality is a businessman But it also is destroying people's Belief that capitalism is a good system cronyism is one of the most destructive forces In the world today and cronyism is enhanced dramatically By the various loopholes and deductions and exclusions that exist in the corporate tax code and on the personal level It is so destructive to have all these incentives and motivations and picking winners and losers even on the personal level That what we should be fighting for is a lower rate With no exclusions deductions. Nothing coming out because they're unjust. They're immoral And they're they're bad economically and they're bad for my and your life So I never want anybody to pay more taxes God forbid but We live in a crazy world where somebody's paying more taxes So if I look at what the solution is the solution that's realistic in terms of lobbying for I think it's a it's a simplification It's a flatness and it's it's getting rid of all the deductions and exclusions as we convince the world that the Proper amount of spending is probably 10% of what the government spends today And therefore taxes can be pretty close to zero Um, somebody asked about taxes and royalties. I don't know what taxes and royalties for authors are I all though all the royalties I get on my books go to the iron rand institute. So, uh Um, they don't even come to me. They they automatically go to the iron rand institute All right, as you guys should all be doing you should all be contributing money to the iron rand institute This is december after all this is the season of making those attacks deductible. They didn't touch a charity contribution So you can deduct charity from your taxes And if you're going to give charity the most important charity the only charity that really makes a difference in the world out there Is the iron rand institute because you were actually fighting For making you all much wealthier long term and making the world a far far better place for everybody Long term so fight for that. All right. Let's uh, let's take this call from navine. I can't wait to talk about bitcoin. Hey navine Here i'm thanks for taking the call and It's a slightly General question, but also very related to what you're talking about right now because Yeah, can you for my question is can you talk about? Um bitcoin in general what you see at the future for it right as far as adoption and You know right now the price is going up significantly But also the question is about How do you see this affecting? government regulation and power and The social engineering that they're doing right now because i've heard some people say that this is Some libertarians especially talk about how this is um an avenue for to take away the power from the government because It's all anonymous and when more and more people start trading in cryptocurrencies and By these means It basically takes away all the power from government. Yep. So can you talk about that a little bit? Sure. I mean I hope they're right, but i'm skeptical and and let me let me tell you My view of bitcoin and this is true of most cyber currencies out there I believe that for money to be money It has to be backed by something tangible. It's the cost of mining it Is not what makes money money. It's the fact that it has value beyond the money So it's that's what gives it to store value. That's why it has the value so gold You can use in industry. You can use in jewelry It has value beyond its use as money So if for some reason people stop using it money, we can still use it for something else So it still has it's it's worth something in terms of money. Even if it's not used as money And it gains It's actual value from its alternative uses from the competition on its uses. So Uh And bitcoin doesn't have that bitcoin is is a fiat money in the sense that it's not backed by anything tangible That has other values. So what why are people so excited about bitcoin? Why does it have a value? And I think it does have A value and I think the value it has is the anonymity the ability to use it to do illegal stuff And the more people want to do illegal stuff The more people incentivize to do illegal stuff The more people think it's just for them to do illegal stuff or write for them to the greater the value bitcoin has Now what is that value? I don't know because I don't know how many people they are out there who are interested in doing Anonymous illegal stuff And I don't know how much they'll use it and I don't know I don't know so I don't know what the price is and for that matter I don't know that anybody knows what the price is and right now What we're seeing is market speculation Trying to figure out what the price is I suspect That what's driving up the cost right now is is just sheer emotion and and speculation because Markets don't go up 40 in two days Markets don't have the kind of volatility bitcoin has right now when they're rational when they're truly engaged in price discovery I expect bitcoin to collapse at some point. I don't know when the bubble will it will Predict it looks like a lot of the Energy behind bitcoin speculation coming out of asia It's coming out of individual investors in asia I think there will be a point in which either because the government climbs down or something happens in china or whatever That that disappears and the market will collapse And then we will get real price discovery just like What was the internet worth? Well, you couldn't tell in 99 But once the bubble burst and the market became irrational Then ultimately we could get a sense. Okay. Okay. This is what amazon is really worth. This is what google is really worth, right? I think the same thing will happen with bitcoin and with other cryptocurrencies As for making government regulation obsolete. I mean we can hope but I doubt it because Government have a gun They have criminal law They can kill bitcoin by using that gun The anonymity is not that anonymous. You still have to store it. They're still servers Now, I know that technology guys can come up with answers for every one of my Complaints, but I still believe that the guys with the guns The guys writing criminal law Have the last say And therefore this is why governments are not that worried This is why they haven't outlawed bitcoin yet because they don't believe it will happen And I think they're actually right. So while I would love to say Bitcoin is going to save us from statism I just don't see it. I don't see how it happens and again I I Bitcoin is always I think going to be too volatile to actually serve as a good alternative to real money To money And unless what I see is the future of cyber currency In cryptocurrency is a cryptocurrency backed by gold That I think will be the future But but the problem there is that the gold reserves have to be in the physical world and the government can shut them down as well I just don't think we can get around government the solution to statism the solution to government encroachment into our lives Is better ideas. It's individual rights. It's rediscovering the principles of the founding fathers It's education education education There are no shortcuts bitcoin. I do not believe will provide us a shortcut Maybe for a while you'll be able to do some illegal things that you couldn't do otherwise in the net sense You'll feel free But if it really starts hampering government regulations, they will shut it down So freedom depends on education freedom depends on rediscovering the ideas of the founding fathers of this country Freedom depends on the simple concept not so simple complex of individual rights and a recognition That the only job of government Is to defend those rights now you will not hear those ideas on any other show You know on on mainstream radio on the blaze or anywhere else That's why you need to continue listening to your own book show on the blaze radio network and See you all or listen to all of Next week same time same place You're clear