Method to impose financial charge or other levy upon a taxpayer by a government or functional equivalent
News from the Pacific region is disturbing as China successfully tested a hypersonic missile that can carry nuclear weapons. What does this mean for Taiwan and for the U.S.? Steve Forbes on how the U.S. should respond to China's supersonic missile test and why it should be made clear that we are not merely going to stand by if Taiwan is attacked.Steve Forbes shares his What's Ahead Spotlights each Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
We discuss breaking deals and compromises in the historic Build Back Better negotiations in Congress. Will the Democrats be able to bring their two rogue Senators into line, or do their corporate paymasters want to sink reform? Is a smaller version of Build Back Better still worth having? Next, we discuss Wednesday's failed U.S. Senate vote on the Freedom to Vote Act, Senator Manchin's slimmed down version of electoral reform. Does the GOP use of the fillibuster to block even debating the bill mean Democrats can finally do away with the Jim Crow and slavery era relic? Back in the Badger State, Republicans release outrageously gerrymandered maps. Will Governor Evers step up and veto them? A national report ranks Wisconsin the state with the worst Black incarceration, and if things could not get even worse, the Senate GOP passes a pro-child labor bill. We close the show with a look at the GOP's national school board strategy to bully and remove school board members who stand up for public health, and GOP gubernatorial frontrunner Rebecca Kleefisch's role. TAKE ACTION: plan to testify at Legislative hearing on maps >>> https://bit.ly/30HJ36t
As incomes and net worth may rise in your life, this is a common question. How much actual cash to keep in the bank? What percentage should one keep in the bank versus paying off debt versus using it for investments? Of course this is a very personal question but Jake and Kirk discuss some ways to approach this question and provide some tips. *“Tax preparation, planning, IRS representation, and business valuation services offered through iFile Tax Planning and Preparation Services are separate and unrelated to Commonwealth.” Have questions about managing your financial lifestyle? Email Jake@youandifinancial.com and Jake Rivas may read your questions on the show! Follow Jake on Twitter and Facebook @jakestwocents Securities and advisory services offered through Commonwealth Financial Network, Member FINRA/SIPC, a Registered Investment Adviser. Fixed insurance products and services offered through CES Insurance Agency. Actual performance and results will vary. These interviews do not constitute a recommendation as to the suitability of any investment for any person or persons having circumstances similar to those portrayed. Consult a Financial Advisor regarding your specific circumstances. I*financial is located at 1901 NW Military Hwy. STE. 102. San Antonio, TX 78213. Phone number 210-342-4346
The Office of Comptroller of the Currency isn't well known to the public, but this is an immensely powerful regulator supervising 1,200 financial institutions. The Biden Administration's recent nominee to head up such a powerful financial regulatory role is astonishing. Steve Forbes on Biden's radical nomination for the primary bank regulator in the U.S., Saule Omarova, and what you need to know about her. Steve Forbes shares his What's Ahead Spotlights each Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
A listener's economic question kicks off this episode although Patrick admits to his own self-interest. Following the listener's follow-up research on Supernova, the signals and signs are out there, but what are they? The conversation inside The Boardroom turns to investing and the economy. As you can imagine, this episode earns its fair share of financial disclaimers. Paul chooses to self-manage his portfolio, but that begs the questions of how and why. Diversification goes a lot further than choosing multiple asset classes. Paul shares his investing mindset that goes beyond increasing wealth and into preservation. From crypto to commodities, there are various playbooks out there, but is there one that can solve for inflation? Paul can't predict the future, but he does see trends reversing. Has anyone ever accused Paul of wearing rose colored glasses? He shares his take on massive demographic shifts and the very real threats of inflation. Tax receipts are at an all-time high, but they still can't keep up with the US's debt to GDP ratio. How will the US government navigate out of this extreme liability? Negative forward returns are on the horizon. There can be a variety of extreme outcomes. Take note. Ignorance will not excuse poor preparation. While it may or may not change who you choose to follow on Instagram, it's time to sign off with one last reminder that Paul, Patrick, and The Boardroom Buzz disclaim all liability. Co-Produced, Edited, and Mixed by Dylan Seals of Verbell.Ltd
Many Democrats are in support of a plan to have banks hand over accountholders' information if they do $10,000 a year in transactions. The policy is designed to catch tax cheats. But Utah Congressman Blake Moore is coming out strongly against the plan. He talks with Boyd about his concerns for regular Americans' privacy. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Are you worried that you won't be able to live the life of your dreams in retirement? This is one of the main issues facing many people on the cusp of retirement. That's why I created the Retirement Answer Man Show. I want to help you find the confidence to truly rock retirement. One way that you can become more confident in your retirement plan is by utilizing the tax planning tools that are available to you. Andy Panko from Tenon Financial is here to help you identify all the tools available in your tax toolbox. Press play to open up your tax toolbox and see what is inside. Opening your tax toolbox Before you can pick up a tool from the tax toolbox you must start with a broad understanding of your tax situation both now and in the future. This means that you'll have to do some educated guessing to figure out what your future tax situation will be. Projecting your tax situation out 10 or 20 years down the road won't be an exact science, so don't try to make it so. More accuracy doesn't mean more precision in future tax planning; there are too many factors at play. Simply because your tax situation won't be exactly the way that you estimate it to be doesn't mean that you shouldn't take the time to map it out. You must take this step to get the framework you need to make educated decisions. This framework will be your basis for making practical decisions. 4 useful tools in your tax planning toolbox Fill up your tax brackets. If you retire before you start taking Social Security you may find yourself in an unusual situation. You may not have any income and therefore you won't have a tax bill! Rather than marveling at this newfound freedom from the taxman, you may actually want to realize enough income to stay within the 12% tax bracket. By paying a bit in taxes now you could be utilizing an opportunity to lower your lifetime tax bill. Remember that those tax-deferred accounts are sitting there waiting for you to pay taxes on them when you reach age 72. Do Roth conversions. While you're filling up the lower tax brackets you can convert your tax-deferred assets to Roth. The money will continue to grow, but you'll be able to rest easy knowing that the taxes have already been paid. By performing Roth conversions you'll ensure that you won't have all of your assets in tax-deferred accounts waiting for your RMDs. By converting some of your assets into Roth you'll provide yourself with more flexibility, control, and optionality. Tax-loss and gains harvesting. Tax-loss and gain harvesting is a little-utilized tool that applies to brokerage accounts when you sell a position and realize a gain or a loss. You can use these gains and losses strategically to optimize your tax situation. Listen in to hear how this tool could work for you. Qualified charitable donation. If you are charitably minded QCDs are a great way to give to your favorite charity and save money on taxes at the same time. The trick with QCDs is that they must transfer directly from the IRA custodian to the charity. In retirement, tax planning isn't the same as in your working years. You need to plan ahead so that you can optimize your lifetime tax bill. Next week you'll learn how to incorporate all of these tools into your retirement plan so that you can avoid those tax bombs. Don't miss that episode so that you can build a retirement plan that will give you the confidence to rock retirement. OUTLINE OF THIS EPISODE OF THE RETIREMENT ANSWER MAN PRACTICAL PLANNING SEGMENT [1:30] Financial planning should be a collaborative process [7:25] Opening your tax toolbox [13:29] Filling up your tax brackets should be your first tool [21:44] Roth conversions [29:39] Tax-loss and gains harvesting [39:36] Qualified charitable donation TODAY'S SMART SPRINT SEGMENT [42:03] Map out your future income and build a net worth statement Resources Mentioned In This Episode Tenon Financial Jordan Peterson Rock Retirement Club Roger's YouTube Channel - Roger That BOOK - Rock Retirement by Roger Whitney Work with Roger Roger's Retirement Learning Center
Cathie Wood, CEO of Ark Invest, discusses her strategy for investing in China, as well as her thoughts on Tesla. Bloomberg Businessweek Editor Joel Weber shares the details of the Businessweek Magazine story Retrofitting Buildings Is the Unsexy Climate Fix the World Needs. Mark Jenkins, Head of Global Credit at Carlyle Group, shares his outlook for the credit markets. Kate Barton, EY's Global Vice Chair of Tax, talks about the proposed OECD global tax deal. Hosts: Carol Massar and Tim Stenovec. Producer: Paul Brennan. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
If you're looking to invest in a real estate syndication but still a little hesitant, join us today as Diana Morgan shares why she decided to invest with Integrity Holdings Group and what her experience has been so far. Key takeaways to listen for Self-managed rental properties vs. syndication Tax benefits for real estate professionals Giving back to the community through real estate How to overcome the fear of investing in a syndication Resources from this episode Tax-Free Wealth: How to Build Massive Wealth by Permanently Lowering Your Taxes About Diana Morgan Diana Morgan is a real estate investor from New Jersey and a REALTOR at Keller Williams Realty. Connect with Diana Website: dianamorgan.kw.com Instagram: @dianasellsnj Facebook: Diana Morgan Real Estate E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Connect with Us Want to learn more about real estate investing? Visit Integrity Holdings Group to sign up for our 7 Day Passive Real Estate Investing Course (it's free)!
Episode 378. Topic: FIRE. Theme: Retirement finance. How does one retire early? Is it difficult to save up the necessary investments for early retirement? What other ways can investment be used to lessen work later in life?Twitter: @3minutelessonEmail: email@example.comNew episode every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday!
Thimbleberry Financial Website and Phone Number:https://thimbleberryfinancial.com/(503) 610-6510The tax plan being debated in the US House of Representatives can have significant impacts on the financial futures and retirements of many Americans. Today, Amy Walls of Thimbleberry Financial highlights some key areas of the legislation, as of our recording date of October 12th.What are some differences between the House plan and President's Biden's plan?Who stands to be most impacted by these new laws?What are some changes that could impact high earners and high net worth individuals?Tax brackets and capital gainsRoth ConversionsWhat are some changes that could impact everyone?Could Back-Door and Mega Back-Door Roth Conversions go away?Wash Sale Rules extended to cryptocurrencyChild and Dependent Care CreditsWhat isn't in the plan?No elimination of step-up in basisNothing with social securitySALT (State and Local Tax) Deductions
Tax reforms proposed as part of the budget reconciliation process would have important consequences for U.S. multinationals' profit-shifting incentives, and also their competitiveness, according to an analysis by the Penn Wharton Budget Model.
In this episode, John and the gang discuss the newly coming tax bills and how they may affect your taxes as well as your paychecks. John lays down the groundwork of how tax bills function and how the government is able to continue to push these tax bills. We want to know more about your situations so we can create better tailored content. John and the team can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org. Reach out to us so we can get you or your segment featured on the show!
Both Jake and Kirk are going on trips and are considering whether or not to get the car rental insurance. Of course the rental agencies will be insisting upon this. But is it superfluous? Jake provides some alternatives you may not be aware of. *“Tax preparation, planning, IRS representation, and business valuation services offered through iFile Tax Planning and Preparation Services are separate and unrelated to Commonwealth.” Have questions about managing your financial lifestyle? Email Jake@youandifinancial.com and Jake Rivas may read your questions on the show! Follow Jake on Twitter and Facebook @jakestwocents Securities and advisory services offered through Commonwealth Financial Network, Member FINRA/SIPC, a Registered Investment Adviser. Fixed insurance products and services offered through CES Insurance Agency. Actual performance and results will vary. These interviews do not constitute a recommendation as to the suitability of any investment for any person or persons having circumstances similar to those portrayed. Consult a Financial Advisor regarding your specific circumstances. I*financial is located at 1901 NW Military Hwy. STE. 102. San Antonio, TX 78213. Phone number 210-342-4346
This week on Hubwonk (our debut video & audio edition), Host Joe Selvaggi talks with research analyst Andrew Mikula about the findings from his recent report, A Timely Tax Cut, in which he explored the relationship between state tax rates and policy and the direction of interstate migration. Guest Andrew Mikula is a former Economic […]
In this episode, Brandon and Thomas discuss some of the tax proposals that came out last month and what they might mean for real estate investors. Join our Facebook group, the one-stop-shop for real estate investors to learn about tax strategy and stay up to date on changing tax laws: www.facebook.com/groups/taxsmartinvestors To grab the recordings from the 2021 Tax and Legal Summit visit: www.recordings.taxandlegalsummit.com/ today! For a free consultation from The Real Estate CPA visit www.therealestatecpa.com/become-client Subscribe to our YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/c/therealestatecpa Like us on Facebook www.facebook.com/realestatecpa The Real Estate CPA podcast is for general information purposes only and is not intended to provide, and should not be relied on for, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Information on the podcast may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. No reader, user, or listener of this podcast should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this podcast without first seeking legal and tax advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney and tax advisor can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this podcast or any of the links or resources contained or mentioned within the podcast show and show notes do not create a relationship between the reader, user, or listener and podcast hosts, contributors, or guests. Always consult your own tax, legal, and accounting advisors before engaging in any transaction.
In this special edition of the Money Talk for ER Docs™ podcast, we recap our 5 most listened to episodes over our first year of podcasting. We thought this would be a cool way to highlight what areas of personal finance ER Docs collectively are most interested in. Do you share the same pain points or interests as your peers? Enjoy and thank you for tuning in!
The White House and congressional Democratic leaders are pushing a chilling proposal that would destroy all vestiges of your financial privacy. Watch out! Steve Forbes on the IRS' plans to monitor and track every bank account and on why, if this assault is not stopped immediately, everyone will be a target.Steve Forbes shares his What's Ahead Spotlights each Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
Biggest jump in social security payments in 40 years, possible tax assistance for property and casualty losses and questionable trading in judges' portfolios. Plus ETFs trading crypto futures are here and banks are pushing back against IRS requests.
Today we are talking about taxes and more specifically how you can set up your tax structures when it comes to your real estate investing business. With the caveat that none of what you will hear today constitutes individual tax advice, let's dive in with Steve Moskowitz. Steve has over 30 years of experience as a tax attorney. His mission is to help smaller businesses and individuals deal with complicated tax issues. 0:00 Intro1:06 Steve Moskowitz on why he loves taxes3:15 Tax complexity3:59 Setting up tax structures12:33 Cost segregation analysis16:19 Qualifying as a real estate professional21:32 The benefits of Delaware Statutory Trusts24:59 Urban Catalyst ad27:06 What the Pandora Papers mean33:06 Understanding the pass through deduction39:10 What happens when you get audited41:57 How long should you hold tax documents?46:00 Opportunity zones48:24 Potential tax changes 49:48 Thoughts on crypto53:43 What's most important for real estate investors to know?
What would happen if the richest neighborhood in your town declared itself its own municipality, taking with it the tax dollars of the richest 20% of citizens? That is what might happen here in Atlanta where a well-funded group is petitioning to carve the wealthy neighborhood of Buckhead (coincidentally, where I live) away from Atlanta, into its own city. This initiative has gained traction and has a very real chance of making it to the ballot in November of 2022. Not that Buckhead residents don't have good reason to be frustrated with local government. Our police force is diminished and demoralized, and crime is simply out-of-control. Aggravated assaults in Buckhead are up 52% this year over an already violent 2020. And at Lenox Square, a mall that is 2 miles away from my home, there have been a half-dozen shootings and many more armed robberies over the past year or so. It's a total freaking mess. On today's episode, I talk to Bill White, the CEO of the Buckhead City Committee, the group behind the initiative, and to Felicia Moore who is both the President of the Atlanta City Council and a candidate on the ballot for next month's mayoral election. This might sound like a local news story but I think it's relevant to all of us and relevant to the mission of this show because it's emblematic of where we are as a society and whether or not the wealthy are better off trying to isolate themselves from our relatively less-affluent neighbors and fellow citizens. I look forward to hearing your feedback. Please email me your thoughts. To learn about Felicia Moore go here. To learn more about the Buckhead City Committee, go here. RATE and Review Crazy Money here.
Has anyone shown you what your future with taxes will look like? Tax planning is an essential aspect of retirement planning that can bite hard if not cared for. Tune into this week's full episode of Retirement Today, where Mike explains how you can pay less tax.
He has 50 years of financial leadership experience in a broad range of industries including being a licensed certified public accountant. His background stretches across accounting tax manufacturing, construction, information technology, marketing, transportation, logistics, human resources, wholesale distribution, insurance, credit, and more. He has held his series seven and 6366 licenses. And one of the most interesting things that I found is he's one of only 86 people in the last 16 years to pass the US Tax Court, non-attorney practitioners examination, which enables him to represent clients in the US Tax Court without being an attorney.In our conversation, we discussed:What if the stepped-up basis is taken away?Tax without being an attorneyTax Laws and the Incentive for Business OwnersConnect with Charles Read:https://capitalgainstaxsolutions.com/auto-filings-and-auto-payments-with-charles-read/Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review, and share!Here's How »Join the Capital Gains Tax Solutions Community today:capitalgainstaxsolutions.comCapital Gains Tax Solutions FacebookCapital Gains Tax Solutions Twitter
Nếu đi học hoặc làm việc ở nước ngoài thì có phải khai thuế không? Còn những thu nhập khác như làm freelancer, Youtuber hay bán hàng trên eBay thì sao? Và những lưu ý khác khi thời hạn khai thuế sắp gần kề.
Welcome to the Pandora Papers Episode!Some of your favorite pop stars...the leaders of foreign governments and other high profile people have been exposed by "investigative journalists," for their "secret" dealings overseas!And, some states in the U.S. enable private transactions and accounts that protect the name of individuals from both in and outside the United States...IS THAT EVEN LEGAL?Bob is joined by Ike Devji, a nationally-known Asset Protection guru with nearly 20 years of experience helping Americans use offshore tools legally. Listen in as Ike helps sort out what is legal, what is illegal and what is legal made illegal through stupidity!Some highlights:There is NO SUCH THING AS A SECRET where the law is concerned.Tax evasion is illegal.That Magic Bag of Beans Trust you bought from a radio commercial...? It may just land you in jail.
This week as we continue our ScotchToberFest month we are bringing you History! Culture! and True events!We are learning about the True story of the group of young Scots that Liberated The Stone of Scone from the clutches of the terrible English.This week we are joined by Ian from Cult Connections. He knows a thing or two about Arbroath, Tax on Beer and why must films lie to us!Cult Connections is the podcast that finds the links between all kinds of film, TV, books and more. From cult classics to major blockbusters they have everything covered. So if you want to hear about the evolution of the zombie film, the obvious and not so obvious screen versions of Spiderman or three films featuring the "other fellas" then this is the place for you. Join your host Ian) and a different guest every episode as we explore some Cult Connections!Twitter: @ConnectionsCultPodchaser: https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/cult-connections-1781121---Stone of Destiny is a 2008 Scottish-Canadian historical adventure/comedy film written and directed by Charles Martin Smith and starring Charlie Cox, Billy Boyd, Robert Carlyle, and Kate Mara. Based on real events, the film tells the story of the removal of the Stone of Scone from Westminster Abbey. The stone, supposedly the Stone of Jacob over which Scottish monarchs were traditionally crowned at Scone in Perthshire, was taken by King Edward I of England in 1296 and placed under the throne at Westminster Abbey in London. In 1950, a group of Scottish nationalist students succeeded in liberating it from Westminster Abbey and returning it to Scotland where it was placed symbolically at Arbroath Abbey, the site of the signing of the Declaration of Arbroath and an important site in the Scottish nationalist cause.Filming began in June 2007 in various locations throughout Scotland, Wales and England. The filmmakers were given rare access to shoot scenes inside Westminster Abbey. The film was premiered at the Edinburgh International Film Festival in Fountainbridge, Edinburgh, Scotland on 21 June 2008. The film closed the 33rd Annual Toronto International Film Festival on 13 September 2008; and was presented at The Hampton's International Film Festival in the United States. The film was released in the United Kingdom on 10 October 2008 and in Canada on 20 February 2009.Support the show (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/100things)
Episode 377. Topic: Aging populations. Theme: Retirement finance. How are age ratios expected to change in the next century? Why does this matter? How can we keep social programs running with a smaller working population?Twitter: @3minutelessonEmail: email@example.comNew episode every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday!
This Podcast Is Episode Number 441, And It's About Four Things To Consider Before Expanding Your Service Offerings If you're looking to grow your construction business, you might consider expanding your service offerings. Adding additional services is an excellent way to increase your profitability, diversify your income and expand your market. But there are essential things to consider before adding to your income streams. First things first - find the money. If you don't have savings earmarked to fund your ideas, you'll want to make sure your "scaling my construction business" plan includes adequate financial planning. Applying to a lender for a business loan is one option. In this case, you'll want to include up-to-date cash flow reports, income statements, budgets, and projections in your plan for a potential lender. If your construction business doesn't have a credit history, you may need to look at other options for financing your plans. Using a business credit card regularly and paying off the balance can help you build a good credit rating, which will help you prepare to apply for a loan down the road. Here are four important things to keep in mind when you consider adding to your services. 1. Does the expansion complement your company? The best way to expand your service offerings is to add value that complements the work you're already doing and is attractive to your current client base. While it takes more effort to bring new customers in, adding something that your existing clients need and that you already have the capacity for is an efficient way to increase your profits. If you already offer lawn maintenance, find out what other yard work your clients need done, for example. It might be reasonably simple for you to provide those services to your clients, and they'd probably be happy for you to do it rather than hiring someone new. 2. Is your profitability consistently high? Spending money to hire new people and buy more equipment if your business isn't consistently profitable is risky. It might be tempting if you make much money in one year to jump into offering a new service, but hold back until you've got a couple of years of high profits behind you. That allows you to save money to cover the increased expenses and ensure that the one year wasn't an anomaly. Invest in your business, but expand your services when your profits are consistently up, not when you've had one outstanding period. 3. Is there a potential partnership or merger that makes sense? There are times when forming a partnership or otherwise merging businesses makes sense. Is there someone out there who works in a similar capacity that you could work well with? Maybe they are excellent in their field but need help running a business. Explore a partnership or a buy-out. For example, if you offer Residential Home (Builder) consulting and you know someone who provides relocation services, you might form a partnership so the new company can provide both customized help and relocation services. That can lead to new clients for both you and your new partner. Keep in mind, joint ventures are a bit like change orders. They can be an incredible opportunity to make or lose much money very quickly. 4. Are you doing it for the right reasons? There are many good reasons to add new services, but there are also reasons to increase your risks. Competition, for example. While competition can drive innovation, it's not the only reason to add a new service—and doing so just to beat your competitors can lead to mistakes being made and money being lost. Rushing to expand is when companies find themselves in trouble for adding services there's no market for or without a fully-formed plan. Final thoughts For your construction company to survive and thrive in any economy, you must pick a niche market and develop your Strategic Business Process Management System (BPM) with definitely written goals of what you want to accomplish and how much money you want to earn from it. Your construction accountant can help provide additional financial advice and support as you update your business plan based on your most current financial records. Expanding your business is exciting, but it's important to consider some issues before committing your time, energy, and financial resources. If you're adding new services, do so because it makes sense, you're in a financial position to do so, your clients want it, and you have the capacity for it. About The Author: Sharie DeHart, QPA, is the co-founder of Business Consulting And Accounting in Lynnwood, Washington. She is the leading expert in managing outsourced construction bookkeeping and accounting services companies and cash management accounting for small construction companies across the USA. She encourages Contractors and Construction Company Owners to stay current on their tax obligations and offers insights on how to manage the remaining cash flow to operate and grow their construction company sales and profits so they can put more money in the bank. Call 1-800-361-1770 or firstname.lastname@example.org
The Biden Administration has launched a major attack on our free speech liberties. Are your rights to free speech at risk? Steve Forbes on who the DOJ is targeting and on why federal law enforcement is coming for parents who challenge the policies and practices of local school boards.Steve Forbes shares his What's Ahead Spotlights each Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
Your practice is a very valuable asset, and it's important to know how much it's worth! Whether you're interested in selling your practice in the next year, or you'd like to get a head start on increasing the value of your practice, today's episode is for you.Episode Highlights:Key Drivers in Increasing the Sale Value of Your PracticeProfit & Owner's CompensationMore profit = more cash generated for your buyerMinimizing DebtPaying off business credit cards and closing loans both increase the value of your practice tremendouslyOrganize Your Expenses to Paint the Best PictureTo ease the transition, you want to make sure your expenses make sense to your buyer, and this is an easy step to be proactive about!EBITA = Earnings Before Interest, Tax, and AmortizationLinks & Resources:GreenOak AccountingTherapy For Your Money Podcast
Episode 376. Topic: Types of retirement funds in the US. Theme: Retirement finance. How can you invest for retirement? What kinds of investment accounts are out there and what are their pros and cons? How are retirement accounts different from regular investment accounts?Twitter: @3minutelessonEmail: email@example.comNew episode every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday!
If current tax reform proposals become law, there will be many issues to be mindful of with planning for trusts. In this episode of the PFP Section podcast, Bob Keebler, CPA/PFS, helps you get ahead of these changes so that you can plan for your clients to be ready for impending changes. Bob discusses: How the proposed higher income tax and capital gains rates will impact trusts planning The low threshold for trusts that would have the additional 3% surtax, NIIT expansion, and 199A cap kick in Changes to grantor trusts taxation that will make transactions between grantor and trust pertinent to monitor Being cognizant of electing fiscal year ends in rising tax rate environments Access resources related to this podcast: Note: If you're using a podcast app that does not hyperlink to the resources, visit http://pfplanning.libsyn.com/ to access show notes with direct links. Register for our year-end planning webcast that is free with CPE for PFP/PFS members. Access the Proactive Planning Toolkit audio learning to hear about tax proposals impacting individuals, estates, and trusts. This episode is brought to you by the AICPA's Personal Financial Planning Section, the premier provider of information, tools, advocacy and guidance for professionals who specialize in providing tax, estate, retirement, risk management and investment planning advice. Also, by the CPA/PFS credential program, which allows CPAs to demonstrate competence and confidence in providing these services to their clients. Visit us online at www.aicpa.org/pfp to join our community, gain access to valuable member-only benefits or learn about our PFP certificate program. Subscribe to the PFP Podcast channel at Libsyn to find all the latest episodes or search “AICPA Personal Financial Planning” on your favorite podcast app.
Tax reform might not be the sexiest topic to discuss over drinks with friends, but the fact is, taxes impact just about every facet of our lives. In a series of interviews with top economists and tax experts by The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, we have found that Australia is in desperate need of an overhaul to its tax system. Today on Please Explain, economics correspondent Jennifer Duke joins Nathanael Cooper to break down the push for tax reform. Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
We talk about the latest COVID surge in Wisconsin and update the status of the stalled Build Back Better plan in Congress. Will the new alliance between moderate and progressive Democrats produce generational reform, or will it crash and burn, dooming the Biden presidency? Rebecca Lynch joins us as a guest panelist to take a deep dive into the resurgence of organized labor fighting back across the country against corporate greed and pandemic profterring on the backs of workers. We close by checking in on the election investigation circus train which left the tracks weeks ago, making Wisconsn a national spectacle.
Last week, over 130 countries announced an agreement to overhaul international tax rules. The changes may seem high-level, but should investors pay closer attention?----- Transcript -----Michael Zezas Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Michael Zezas, Head of Public Policy Research and Municipal Strategy for Morgan Stanley. Todd Castagno And I'm Todd Castagno, Head of Global Valuation, Accounting and Tax within Morgan Stanley Research. Michael Zezas And on this edition of the podcast, we'll be talking about recent developments around a major overhaul of international tax rules and what it means for investors. It's Thursday, October 14th at 10 a.m. in New York. Michael Zezas So, Todd, I really wanted to talk with you after last week's announcement by more than 130 countries about an agreement to undertake a major overhaul of international tax rules. Central to the agreement appears to be a change in how companies are taxed and a new 15% global minimum tax rate. So, investors might see a headline like this and think it's one of those things that sounds important, but maybe a bit too high level to matter. But you think investors should pay attention to this. Todd Castagno Right, it's big news. There are really two key motives driving what is referred to as a two-pillar global tax agreement, and this motivation provides really important context. So let's start with pillar one. There's a growing desire from certain countries to change who gets to tax the largest and most profitable corporates. So Michael, in a modern marketplace, companies can engage and transact with consumers in countries where they may not have much or any physical presence. So the first pillar of this agreement proposes to reallocate profits of the largest and most profitable companies to where they transact with customers. Then there is desire to stop what's often referred to as the 'race to zero' in terms of corporate tax rates. So under pillar two of the agreement, countries will need to adopt a 15% minimum tax rate structure on corporate foreign income. So why should investors care? A few reasons: Not to overstate the obvious, but tax rates are likely going up for multinationals if this is implemented. There are also important geopolitical dynamics. These changes have the potential to significantly change where corporates invest. And countries have been increasingly imposing unilateral taxes, particularly on digital services. Those taxes are complicating trade relationships. Pillar one seeks to remove those taxes so trade dynamics may actually improve. Michael Zezas OK, so assuming these guidelines are implemented globally, what's your expectation about which industries overall could see the most headwinds? Todd Castagno Well, it's an interesting question. Not all sectors and industries will be impacted equally. According to our analysis, technology hardware, media services, pharmaceuticals and broader health care appear most exposed to both pillars. Michael Zezas OK, so the concept is that some industries' tax burdens are going to be affected more than others. Can you walk us through a specific example? Todd Castagno Yes. Technology hardware appears predominately exposed to both pillars. Why is that? Manufacturing and IP are centrally located, and the industry currently benefits significantly from tax incentives, which often drive a very low tax rate. This illustrates a potential political tension, as countries are currently motivated to provide more tax and R&D incentives given the current supply constraints. So, it'll be interesting to see how countries attempt to incentivize under a new minimum tax rate system. Michael Zezas OK, so last question here. Just because countries have agreed to pursue these tax changes doesn't mean these changes are imminent. They obviously require countries to go back and change their own laws. And regular listeners may know that our base case is that the US could soon raise corporate taxes, including a potential hike in the global minimum tax rate to 15%. So, how much do the current tax changes proposed in the U.S. already reflect this international tax agreement? Todd Castagno So what's notable is pillar two really emerged as a function of the tax bill passed under the prior U.S. administration. Today, the U.S. is the only country with a minimum tax remotely similar to what's being proposed under pillar two. However, there are both rate and structural differences. Our base case is 15% in line with the agreement. But Michael, as you know, Congress and administration have proposed higher rates. What's also important is the structure. So, today's U.S. system applies a minimum rate on aggregate foreign income. What's notable about Pillar two is it would apply that rate on a country-by-country basis. So, what that means is many companies may be exposed to a new minimum tax rate structure versus what's in the U.S. today. Todd Castagno But before we close, Michael, taking all this into account, what could this mean for markets moving forward? Do we think these changes are already in the price? Michael Zezas You know, it's an important question that really defies having a simple answer. In the view of our Equity Strategy Team, the impact of these tax changes to U.S. companies bottom lines probably isn't fully appreciated yet and could cause some short-term market weakness. But beyond that, these tax changes are part of a broader fiscal package that spends more than it taxes. And so that should continue to support robust economic growth into 2022. So that makes the medium-term outlook rosier for risk assets. Michael Zezas Todd, thanks for taking the time to talk today. Todd Castagno Great talking with you, Michael. Michael Zezas As a reminder, if you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please take a moment to rate and review us on the Apple Podcasts app. It helps more people find the show.
In this week's episode we are taking a deep dive into current legislative developments, specifically the tax-related changes that may be on the horizon. Rohit Kumar, co-leader of PwC's Washington National Tax Services practice, joins host Heather Horn to provide his perspective on anticipated developments. Tax leaders are already scenario planning - we break it down so CFOs can do the same.Topics include:2:12 - What's the lay of the land? Rohit takes us through where things currently stand with negotiations in Washington. Heather and Rohit discuss the infrastructure and reconciliation bills as well as the likelihood of these bills getting signed into law before the end of the year.9:53 - Possible scenarios. Rohit provides a few potential legislative outcomes, touching on the gross spending side of the budget equation as well as revenue raising, such as through changes to the corporate and individual tax rates and credits, among other domestic and international policy alternatives.34:13 - Where should CFOs focus? Rohit and Heather talk about the policy changes CFOs should be focused on - think corporate rate, OECD agreements, and tax based on book income.42:43 - Wrap up and timeline. It's up to Congress now. Rohit expects that we will know in the next month whether politicians will be able to reach an agreement by the end of the year. We close by walking through this timeline.Want to learn more? PwC podcast: Washington explained: Infrastructure, tax reform, and moreRohit Kumar is co-leader of PwC's Washington National Tax Services practice. In this role, he advises clients on all aspects of domestic policy, including tax policy. His insights and knowledge enable companies to assess critical policy issues more effectively and to develop legislative strategies to address those issues from both a technical and a political perspective.Heather Horn is a Deputy Chief Accountant in PwC's National Office and leader of the thought leadership group, responsible for developing our communications strategy and conveying firm positions on accounting and financial reporting matters. She is the engaging host of PwC's accounting and reporting weekly podcast and quarterly webcast series, as well as periodic webcasts for the power and utilities industry. With over 30 years of experience, Heather's accounting and auditing expertise includes financial instruments and rate-regulated accounting.
On the latest episode of the ABA Banking Journal Podcast — sponsored by NICE Actimize Xceed — Citizens Bank of Edmond CEO Jill Castilla talks about the effects the Biden administration's controversial proposal for a financial account reporting regime would have on a bank like hers, with $310 million in assets and 55 employees. She talks about the challenge of implementing a system like this alongside current anti-money laundering reporting and 1099 filing at a community bank. Castilla also discusses why she started speaking out about the proposal, which would entail bank reporting to the IRS of gross annual inflows and outflows in financial accounts over a de minimis threshold of $600. Hearing directly from Citizens Bank customers worried about their financial privacy and about the elevated risk of audits over normal transactions motivated Castilla to press the issue. With House Speaker Nancy Pelosi indicating that congressional leaders still plan to include some version of this reporting regime in the social spending bill — which continues to be negotiated on Capitol Hill — ABA continues urging bankers to take action and educate their customers about the proposal. Take action and find customer resources at SecureAmericanOpportunity.com.
How much due diligence goes into filing bankruptcy? What are the document requirements? While these are not questions I get from clients too often, they are two of the most important questions when considering a bankruptcy filing. Why? Because failing to do any due diligence prior to filing could get both the client and the law firm (and me) in trouble with the bankruptcy court. And when you get into trouble with the bankruptcy court, it is the FBI that comes knocking on the door! So what are the due diligence requirements? We provide all of our clients with document checklists, information, and support. In today's episode, I discuss most of the different common types of documents and information we need. Of course, every bankruptcy is factually different, so the list provided in today's episode is just the starting point. If you have questions about bankruptcy, please let us know or post a comment wherever you listen to this podcast! We're also excited about Podfest Origins at the beginning of November, LIVE in Tampa, Florida. You can get more information at www.Podfestexpo.com. In the event an attorney does not do his or her due diligence, we have our sponsor, Sam Cohen of Attorneys First Insurance who handles malpractice coverage for attorneys and title companies throughout the United States but, right now, has a particular focus on Florida and Texas. If you know an attorney or title company in need of professional liability coverage, please refer them to Sam@AttorneysFirst.com or www.AttorneysFirst.com. More questions about bankruptcy or just want to know how to have more money at the end of the month rather than month at the end of the money? Check out my book, Become Debt Free in Less Than One Hour at www.ShawnMYesner.com/BecomeDebtFree.
This week on 16:1, the hosts follow the money in an in-depth analysis of the sources of (and strings attached to) public school funding in the United States. Learn about the competing funding formulas that are occasionally unconstitutional, the levies that might greet you at the ballot box, and the struggles that state departments of education face to balance budgets. Since last episode, Chelsea has spent some time learning about arts and crafts, and Kate has become familiar with an unusual bear.Sources:Understanding Levies, Ohio School Boards AssociationThe Next 400: School funding system ruled unconstitutional 4 times, failing students in poor rural, urban areasOhio Budget Bill - Fordham InstituteThe Cutest Bear
You may have been offered a Health Savings Account (HSA) from your employer. Although there are similarities with more traditional health plans provided by your employer, there are important differences. Many people believe HSAs are a non-starter, due to their higher deductibles. While each case is different, there are times when an HSA may be the right move for you. *“Tax preparation, planning, IRS representation, and business valuation services offered through iFile Tax Planning and Preparation Services are separate and unrelated to Commonwealth.” Have questions about managing your financial lifestyle? Email Jake@youandifinancial.com and Jake Rivas may read your questions on the show! Follow Jake on Twitter and Facebook @jakestwocents Securities and advisory services offered through Commonwealth Financial Network, Member FINRA/SIPC, a Registered Investment Adviser. Fixed insurance products and services offered through CES Insurance Agency. Actual performance and results will vary. These interviews do not constitute a recommendation as to the suitability of any investment for any person or persons having circumstances similar to those portrayed. Consult a Financial Advisor regarding your specific circumstances. I*financial is located at 1901 NW Military Hwy. STE. 102. San Antonio, TX 78213. Phone number 210-342-4346
Shownotes can be found at https://www.profitwithlaw.com/254. You're a responsible law firm owner, and you pay your taxes. You file your paperwork on time, it's accurate, and everything's above board. But what if you could legally pay less? Fortunately, tax planners can help you figure out how to pay as little tax as possible. Tax terminator and CPA Larry Weinstein joins Moshe Amsel in this exciting episode. He generously shares his knowledge as an expert tax planner. They discuss his tax minimization strategies: the Larry Six-Pack. He also shares the difference between tax planners and tax preparers and how you can spot a good planner. Want to know how to navigate the tax code and enjoy more of your hard-earned money? Then this episode is for you! Resources mentioned: This episode is sponsored by Smith.ai. Curious how you can use a receptionist service at your law firm? Download the Smith.ai free eBook: Are you Lawyering or Laboring? 7 Steps for Running a Highly Productive Law Firm with Virtual Receptionists. This episode is sponsored by Get Staffed Up. Learn more at www.getstaffedup.com/VIP Connect with Larry: Website | Facebook | LinkedIn Larry's tax checklist The Successful Lawyer hosted by Larry Weinstein Join our Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/lawfirmgrowthsummit/ To request a show topic, recommend a guest or ask a question for the show, please send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Connect with Moshe on: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/moshe.amsel LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/mosheamsel/
As the Federal Reserve, the White House and Congress play with fire regarding future inflation and economic stagnation, there's a lot they can learn from the history of inflation. Steve Forbes on the seemingly forgotten past of former President Ulysses S. Grant and the crucial role he played in enabling the U.S. to become the most significant economic colossus in history. Can the ghost of Ulysses S. Grant save us from an economic catastrophe?Steve Forbes shares his What's Ahead Spotlights each Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
Today on the Retirement Lifestyle Show, Roshan Loungani and Adrian Nicholson go through actionable year-end financial planning strategies. They explain why the last quarter of the year is an excellent time to review your finances, the benefits of tax-loss harvesting, and how to spend money on your Flexible Spending Account. [04:01] End-of-year Financial Planning [08:44] Cancel Unwanted Subscriptions [14:27] It's a Good Time to Perform That Cash-flow Analysis [15:40] Analyze How your Portfolio is Performing [20:20] The Benefits of Tax-loss Harvesting [23:30] Spend Money in Your Flexible Savings Account [25:30] If You're 72, Take Out Your Required Minimum Distribution [28:10] Review your Benefits and Beneficiaries [34:58] Pay-off Owed Money in Your State Taxes [38:24] Plan for Life Events and Consider Roth Conversions [42:01] Meet the Co-hosts Follow Us At: Website: https://retirementlifestyleshow.com/ https://www.retirewithroshan.com https://youtu.be/hKVzI87v0tA https://twitter.com/RoshanLoungani https://www.linkedin.com/in/roshanloungani/ https://www.facebook.com/retirewithroshan/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/financialerik/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/adrian-nicholson-74b82b13b/ #retirementlifestylepodcast #fire #podcast #FI #Retire #retirewithroshan #BAM #BusinessAsMission #ImpactInvesting All opinions expressed by podcast hosts and guests are solely their own. While based on information they believe is reliable, neither Arete Wealth nor its affiliates warrant its completeness or accuracy, nor do their opinions reflect the opinion of Arete Wealth. This podcast is for general informational purposes only and should not be regarded as specific advice or recommendations for any individual. Before making any decisions, consult a professional.
Radio Sweden brings you a round-up of the main news in Sweden on October 13th 2021. You can hear more reports on our homepage www.radiosweden.se, or in our app Sveriges Radio Play. Presenter: Odessa Fardipour Producer: Kris Boswell
Whenever you have the money, it is the best time to invest. The caveat is that you must have a customized, well thought out plan that you can stick with over the long term. The market will always give you an excuse to wait. The problem is that waiting has proven to cost investors sitting on the sidelines huge amounts every year. Markets are rallying this week on an agreement to raise the debt ceiling temporarily, the COVID delta variant is declining, and Russia is agreeing to pump more oil. Does this mean you should wait until markets go down? No, because without the structure and process to get invested, you will always find a way to put off investing until next week. When markets were going down aggressively as they did in March 2020, you would have said: “I'll just wait until they go lower.” No one rings a bell for you that the market has bottomed. Calling market bottoms and tops is purely luck. Anyone telling you differently has something to sell you. Something to keep an eye on is the release of the Pandora Papers. This is a follow-up release to the Panama Papers by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. It is fascinating to see hugely influential world leaders and celebrities doing whatever they can to evade taxes. A key distinction here: tax avoidance is perfectly legal and should be implemented as part of tax planning for anyone paying large amounts of taxes. Tax evasion is never worth the risk, especially when you are high profile.EPISODE HIGHLIGHTS:(4:19) Markets are rallying from the recent sell-off because some of the uncertainty over the debt ceiling has been removed. Republican and Democrat leadership have agreed to fund the government through December.(4:35) Is now a good time to invest? It's always a good time to invest. Markets reward investors over the long term. (6:10) Wall Street has a playbook of calling you when the brokers see markets decline. They then tell you to buy the dip like they alone can predict the future. This is salesman 101 trickery at its core. The reality is your investment plan should already be fully invested. Sitting on the sidelines is harmful to your financial priorities. (8:00) Returns have been above average so far year to date. Volatility is elevated but at historically normal levels. Markets will always give you a reason to wait to get invested. They are very good at appearing like they can't keep going up. All of the data that exists for long term investors tells us otherwise. (9:30) March 2020 and the perfect time to invest. The problem is the entire world was shutting down and uncertainty of the future of the world economy was at its highest. It only now looks like it was a no brainer with the benefit of hindsight.(10:20) The real question is, when would you feel comfortable investing? Creating a financial plan and sticking to it with a long-term philosophy is how you achieve success in investing.(12:30) There will be another financial crisis. They have happened many times in history so they should be expected in the future. It is the price of admission for the returns of the market. The way to take advantage of it is to have a customized financial plan with a portfolio implemented to make you financially bulletproof through these periods. (14:20) Volatility in the equity market should not be affecting your priorities. If it is, you do not have a good financial strategy/advisor.(15:20) Recognize your human capital as the asset it is. Converting your human capital to financial capital over time is what creates generational wealth.(16:35) Atomic Habits by James Clear, “Professional stick to the schedule, Amateurs let life get in the way.” (17:45) Whenever you have the money, it is a good time to invest. But you must have a well thought out plan that is diversified across markets and a long term philosophy. Without it you are just a rudderless ship at the mercy of the wind.
If you're buying and holding properties, but not using cost segregation, you're really missing out. In this episode, Joseph Viery explains the tax strategy that every successful real estate investor is using. Dial-in and learn the correct way NOT to pay taxes. Topics on Today's Episode What does cost segregation mean? Property owners who should do a cost segregation How much you'll pay for depreciation recapture if you do cost segregation? What you should be looking for in a cost segregation company? Cases where cost segregation isn't useful About Joseph Viery Joseph Viery is the Principal at US Tax Advisors Group, Inc (USTAGI). As a Cost Segregation Professional, he has helped property owners defer or eliminate millions of dollars in income taxes by leveraging IRS compliant cost segregation studies. Since becoming a CSP in 2008, Joseph has performed thousands of Cost Segregation studies for clients in various industries ranging from $500,000,000 commercial properties to $50,000 single-family residences. He has also been able to bridge the gap for the independent residential real estate investor by providing an affordable modeling approach. Connect with Joseph Website: www.ustaginc.com Quotes ‘'In real estate, you can make a lot of money, and pay no taxes if you do it right. '' - Corey Peterson ‘'We don't care what your building is worth, we care about what you paid for it. '' - Joseph Viery Don't forget to download my Free Workshop Quick Start Video Series, and if you like what you have heard please leave a review on iTunes.
In this episode, Brandon and Thomas discuss what it is like to be a landlord and the economics of being a landlord. Join our Facebook group, the one-stop-shop for real estate investors to learn about tax strategy and stay up to date on changing tax laws: www.facebook.com/groups/taxsmartinvestors To grab the recordings from the 2021 Tax and Legal Summit visit: www.recordings.taxandlegalsummit.com/ today! For a free consultation from The Real Estate CPA visit www.therealestatecpa.com/become-client Subscribe to our YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/c/therealestatecpa Like us on Facebook www.facebook.com/realestatecpa The Real Estate CPA podcast is for general information purposes only and is not intended to provide, and should not be relied on for, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Information on the podcast may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. No reader, user, or listener of this podcast should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this podcast without first seeking legal and tax advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney and tax advisor can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this podcast or any of the links or resources contained or mentioned within the podcast show and show notes do not create a relationship between the reader, user, or listener and podcast hosts, contributors, or guests. Always consult your own tax, legal, and accounting advisors before engaging in any transaction.
Government pension funds are in bad shape, and taxpayers could take the hit to make good on the financial shortfalls. Could your taxes be going up? Steve Forbes on the public pension crisis and the fundamental problem with payouts defined by unrealistic political promises, and on what states and municipalities should do differently before the lack of money forces a crisis.Steve Forbes shares his What's Ahead Spotlights each Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
Michael Hudson, American economist and author of Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (1972) discusses the rentier economy that accounts for the growing disparity in wealth due to finance capitalism. Giving a history of the the polarisation of the US economy since the 1960s through the present, Hudson discusses how the high costs of education and housing have led to a growing problem of student debt, higher costs of living and increasing austerity. Noting how 80% of bank loans are made for real estate in the US, Hudson expounds upon how loans and exponentially growing debts outstrip profits from the economy proving disastrous for both the government and the people who are paying increasing amounts on housing with little to no money left to spend on goods and services. Hudson contends that finance capitalism is a “self-terminating” oligarchical system leaving workers traumatised, afraid to strike or react to working conditions, while they are pushed towards serfdom as US and Europe are heading towards a debt crisis on par with that of Argentina and Greece.TranscriptIntroduction: Welcome to Savage Minds. I'm your host, Julian Vigo. Today's show marks the launch of our second season with a very special guest: Michael Hudson. Michael Hudson is a financial analyst and president of the Institute for the Study of long term economic trends. He is a distinguished research professor of economics at the University of Missouri Kansas City, and the professor at the School of Marx studies, Peking University in China. He's also a research fellow at the Levy Institute of Bard College, and he has served as an economic adviser to the US Canadian, Mexican, and Latvian governments. He's also been a consultant to UNITAR, the Institute for Research on Public Policy and the Canadian Science Council, among other organisations. He holds a BA from the University of Chicago and an MA and PhD in economics from New York University. Professor Hudson is the author of Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy (2015), and most recently, J is for junk economics, a guide to reality in an age of deception. His super imperialism, the economic strategy of the American Empire has just been translated into German after its appearance in Chinese, Japanese and Spanish. He sits on the editorial board of lap times quarterly and has written for the Journal of International Affairs, Commonweal, International Economy, Financial Times, and Harper's, and he's a regular contributor to CounterPunch. I welcome Michael Hudson, to Savage Minds.Julian Vigo: Class analysis in the United States is rather subterfuge amidst all these other narratives of the American dream as it's framed—that being the right to own one's home. In the UK, that became part of the Trojan horse, that Thatcher built to win her election. It was a very smart move. She won that election—she won her elections—by the reforms in the “right to buy” scheme as I'm sure you know. I t was really clever and disastrous for human rights in the country. I've spent quite a bit of my life in the UK and to see that in 1979 was, I believe, 49% of all residential housing was council housing. And when I wrote a piece on this for the Morning Star about eight, nine years ago, that rate was reduced to under 11%. So we're seeing the haves- and have-nots. And this is where your work really struck a chord for me. And let's kick into the show at this point. I have written over the years, about rentier capitalism, a term that is increasingly used to describe economies dominated by rentier, rents and rent-generating assets. And you discuss this quite a bit in your work, more recently, your article from July, “Finance Capitalism versus Industrial Capitalism: The Rentier Resurgence and Takeover.” And in this article, you discuss how today the finance, insurance and real estate sectors have regained control of government creating a “neo-rentier” economy as you put it, while you note—and I quote you: “The aim of this postindustrial finance capitalism is the opposite of industrial capitalism as known to nineteenth-century economists: it seeks wealth primarily through the extraction of economic rent, not industrial capital formation.” Unquote. I was wondering if we might begin our talk by branching out from this piece you wrote in July. And if you could explain for our listeners why discerning rentier capitalism is essential for understanding the global push to privatise and financialise those sectors that formerly existed in the public domain such as—and we see this everywhere, including in the EU—transportation, health care, prisons, policing, education, the post office, etc.Michael Hudson: Well, most textbooks depict a sort of happy world that almost seems to exist in the 1950s. And this “happy world” is when wealthy people get money, they build factories and buy machinery and hire workers to produce more goods and services. But that's not what the credits created for today, it's the textbooks that pick the banks that take in people's deposits and lend them out to people who build industrial production, and you'll have a picture of workers with lunchboxes working in. But actually, banks only lend money against assets. And the main assets do not make a profit by employing people to produce things there. They simply are opportunities to extract rent, like real estate 80% of bank loans are made for real estate. And that means they're made against primarily buildings that are in land that are already there. And the effective more and more bank credit is to raise the price of real estate. And in the United States, in the last year, housing prices have gone up 20%. And typically, in America, if you go to a bank and take out a loan, the government is going to guarantee the bank that you will pay the loan up to the point where it absorbs 43% of your income.So here's a big chunk of American income going to pay simply for housing, those price increases, not because there's more housing, or better housing. But in fact, the housing is built worse and worse every year, by lowering the standards, but simply inflation. There are other forms of rent, other people pay, for instance, 18% of America's GDP is healthcare, much higher than the percentage in any other country for much lower quality of service. So you know, that's sort of taken out of people's budgets. If you're a worker in the United States, right away, you get your paycheque 15%—a little more, maybe 16% now—is deducted for Social Security and medical care for when you're older. They also need up to maybe 30%, for income tax, federal, state and local income tax before you have anything to spend. And then you have to spend for housing, you have to pay for transportation, you have to pay for your own medical insurance contributions, your own pension contributions. So there's very, very little that is left over in people's budgets to buy goods and services. Not only have real wages in the United States, gone down now for three decades, but the disposable income that people and families get after they meet their sort of monthly “nut,” what they can spend on goods and services is shrunk even more. So while they're getting squeezed, all this money is paid to rentiers as at the top. And because of the miracle of compound interest, the amount that the 1% of the economy has grows exponentially. Any rate of interest is a doubling time. And even though people know that there's only a 0.1% rate of interest, now for the banks, and for large wall firms, it's about 3% if you want to buy a mortgage. and so this, the 0.1% is lent out to large companies like Blackstone that are now buying up almost all of the housing that comes onto the market in the United States. So in 2008, 69% of homeowners of Americans own their own homes. Now it's fallen by more than 10%. It's fallen to about 51%. All this difference has been basically the financial sector funding a transformation away from home ownership into landlordship—into absentee ownership. And so the if you're part of the 1%, the way that you make money is by buying stocks or bonds, or corporate takeovers, or buying real estate and not building factories. And that's why the factories and the industry have been shifting outside of the United States over to China, and other countries. So, what we're having is a kind of…I won’t say its post-industrial capitalism, because people thought that the what was going to follow industrial capitalism was going to be socialism. They thought that there will be more and more government spending on providing basic needs that people had. And instead of socialism, and a more, egalitarian distribution of wealth and income, you've had a polarization of wealth and income, you've had the wealthy people making money financially, and by real estate, and by rent seeking, and by creating monopolies, but not by building factories, not by producing goods and services. And that is why the economy's polarizing, and so many people are unhappy with their conditions. Now, they're going further and further into debt and their student debt. Instead of education here being a public utility that's provided freely, it's become privatised at NYU, it's now $50,000 or $60,000 a year. There is no way in which the United States can compete industrially with other countries when they've loaded down new entrants into the labor force with huge housing costs, student debt, huge taxes have been shifted off the 1% onto the 99%. So in the United States, finance capitalism basically is self-terminating. It leads to a polarised economy, it leads to austerity. And it leaves countries looking like Greece looked after 2015, after its debt crisis, it looks like Argentina is trying to struggle to pay its foreign debts. And that seems to be the future in which the US and Europe are moving towards.Julian Vigo: I posted on my Facebook wall about this about maybe five weeks ago, that the rentier class, I'm not just including the likes of Blackstone, but the middle class that are multiple home dwellers. I noted that during the lockdown, I was reading through accounts on social media of people who were being threatened by landlords, landlords, who actually had no mortgage to pay. And I had to wonder at that point, what is the input of the rentier class by the landowning class who are not necessarily part of the 1%. These are people who, as some of these people came on my wall and said, “I worked hard to buy my second and third houses!” And I thought, “Well, let me pull out my violins.” One thing that really alerted me during lockdown was the lack of sympathy for renters. And I don't just mean in the US, in fact, I think the US had a kinder response to renting in some sectors such as New York state where there has been—and still—is a massive pushback against any form of relaxation of rent forgiveness, since lockdown in the EU and Italy and France. It's appalling the kind of treatment that renters received here. I spoke to people in Bologna, who were doing a rent strike, but fearful of having their name mentioned. I ended up not being able to run the piece because of that. And there are so many people who don't have money to pay their rent in the EU, in the UK, and yet, we're somehow focusing oftentimes on these meta-critical analyses of the bigger corporations, the 1%. But where does the middle class fit into this, Michael, because I do have to wonder if maybe we should be heading towards the model I hold in my mind and heart is St. Ives in Cornwall, which about eight years ago set a moratorium saying no second homes in this city. Now, they didn't do it because of any allegiance to Marxism or socialism. They did it in part because of that, and because of a left-leaning politics, but mostly because they didn't want to have a ghost town that when the summer was over, you had very few people living in town. What are the answers to the rentier class that is also composed of people who consider themselves hard-working people who just want someone else to pay for their house, as one person on Twitter, put it.Michael Hudson: This is exactly the problem that is plaguing left wing politics, from Europe to America in the last fifty years.Julian Vigo: Exactly. It's astounding because there was a lot of debate on Twitter around last summer, when one woman wrote, I just did the math, I'm almost 29 years old, and I paid and she listed the amount in rent, I have just bought my landlord a second house. And people are adding it up that we are back to understanding. And I think in terms of the medieval period, remember in high school in the US when you study history, and you learn about feudalism, and the serfs coming in from far afield having to tend to the Masters terrain. And I think, are we heading back to a kind of feudalism under a new name? Because what's dividing those who can afford rents and those who can, it's not only your eligibility to receive a bank loan in this climate, which is quite toxic in London. I know many architects, lawyers, physicians who cannot get bank loans. Ironically, the bar is being raised so high that more and more people in London are moving on to the canal system—they're renting or buying narrowboats. The same is happening in other parts of the world where people are being barred out of home ownership for one reason or another and at the same time, there's a class of people often who got loans in a period when it was quite easy in the 80s and early 90s, let's say and they hold a certain control over who's paying—43% of income of Americans goes on housing. And as you know, in New York City that can be even higher. How can we arrive at a society where there's more equality between these haves and have-nots? Because it seems that the middle class is playing a role in this. They're trying to come off as being the hard-working schmoes, who have just earned their right to own their second or third homes, and then the others who will never have a foot on that ladder, especially given the crash?Michael Hudson: Well, I think you've put your finger on it. Most people think of economies being all about industry. But as you've just pointed out, for most people, the economy is real estate. And if you want to understand how modern economies work, you really should begin by looking at real estate, which is symbiotic with with banking, because as you pointed out that in a house is worth whatever a bank will lend. And in order to buy a house, unless you have an enormous amount of savings, which hardly anyone has, you'll borrow from a bank and buy the house. And the idea is to use the rent to pay the interest to the bank. And then you end up hoping late hoping with a capital gain, which is really land price gain. You borrow from the bank hoping that the Federal Reserve and the central bank or the Bank of England is going to inflate the economy and inflate asset prices and bank credit is going to push prices further and further up. As the rich get richer, they recycle the money in the banks and banks lend it to real estate. So, the more the economy is polarised between the 1% and the 99%, the more expensive houses get the more absentee landlords are able to buy the houses and outbid the homebuyers, who as you pointed out, can't get loans because they're already loaned up. If they can't get loans in England to buy a house, it's because they already owe so much money for other things. In America, it would be because they own student debt or because they own other bank loans, and they're all loaned up. So the key is people are being squeezed more than anywhere else on housing. In America, it rents care too and on related sort of monopoly goods that yield rent. Now the problem is why isn't this at the centre of politics?Is it because— and it's ironic that although most people in every country, Europe and America are still homeowners, or so they only own their own home—they would like to be rocky as a miniature? They would like to live like the billionaires live off the rents. They would like to be able to have enough money without working to get a free lunch and the economy of getting a free lunch. And so somehow, they don't vote for what's good for the wage earners. They vote for well, if I were to get richer, then I would want to own a house and I would want to get rent. So I'm going to vote in favour of the landlord class. I'm going to vote in favour of banks lending money to increase housing prices. Because I'd like to borrow money from a bank to get on this treadmill, that's going to be an automatic free lunch. Now, I not only get rent, but I'll get the rising price of the houses that prices continue to rise. So somehow, the idea of class interest, they don't think of themselves as wave generators, they think of themselves as somehow wouldn't be rentiers in miniature without reaising that you can't do it in miniature. You really have to have an enormous amount of money to be successful rentier.So no class consciousness means that the large real estate owners, the big corporations like Blackstone, that own huge amounts can sort of trot out a strapped, homeowner and individual, and they will sort of hide behind it and say, “Look at this, poor family, they use their money to buy a house, the sort of rise in the world, and now the tenants have COVID, and they can't pay the rent. Let's not bail out these, these landlords.” So even though they're not getting rent, we have to aid them. And think of them as little people, but they're not little people. They're a trillion dollar, money managers. They're huge companies that are taking over. And people somehow personify the billionaires and the trillion dollar real estate management companies as being small people just like themselves. There's a confusion about the economic identity.Julian Vigo: Well, certainly in the United States, we are known to have what's called the “American dream.” And it's, it's quite interesting when you start to analyse what that dream has morphed into, from the 1960s to the present, and I even think through popular culture. Remember Alexis, in Dynasty, this was the go-to model for success. So we've got this idea that the super rich are Dallas and Dynasty in the 80s. But 20 years after that, we were facing economic downfalls. We had American graduates having to go to graduate school because they couldn't get a job as anything but a barista. And the model of getting scholarships or fellowships, any kind of bursary to do the Masters and PhD. When I was doing my graduate work, I was lucky enough to have this, but that was quickly disappearing. A lot of my colleagues didn't have it. And I imagine when you went to school, most of your colleagues had it. And today, and in recent years, when I was teaching in academia, most of my students doing advanced degrees had zero funding. So, we've got on the one hand, the student debt, hamster wheel rolling, we have what is, to me one of the biggest human rights issues of the domestic sphere in countries like the US or Great Britain, frankly, everywhere is the ability to live without having to be exploited for the payment of rent. And then we have this class of people, whether they're Blackstone, and huge corporations, making billions, or the middle class saying, “But I'm just living out the American dream.” How do we square the “American dream,” and an era where class consciousness is more invisible than ever has it been?Michael Hudson: I think the only way you can explain that is to show how different life was back in the 1960s, 1950s. When I went to school, and the college, NYU cost $500 a semester, instead of 50,000, that the price of college has gone up 100 times since I went to college—100 times. I rented a house in a block from NYU at $35 a month on Sullivan Street. And now that same small apartment would go for 100 times that much, $3,500 a month, which is a little below the average rent in Manhattan these days. So, you've had these enormous increases in the cost of getting an education, they cost of rent, and in a society where housing was a public utility, and education was a public utility, education would be provided freely. If the economy wanted to keep down housing prices, as they do in China for instance, then you would be able to work if the kind of wages that Americans are paid today and be able to save. The ideal of China or countries that want to compete industrially is to lower the cost of living so that you don't have to pay a very high wages to cover the inflated cost of housing, the cost of education.If you privatise education in America, and if you increase the housing prices, then either you're going to have to pay labor, much higher rates that will price it out of world markets, at least for industrial goods, or you'll have to squeeze budgets. So yes, people can pay for housing, and education, but they're not going to buy the goods and services they produce. And so and that's one of the reasons why America is not producing industrial manufacturers. It's importing it all abroad. So the result of this finance capitalism that we have the result of the rent squeeze, that you depict, and the result of voters not realising that this is economic suicide for them is that the economy is shrinking and leaving people basically out in the street. And of course, all of this is exacerbated by the COVID crisis right now. Where, right now you have, especially in New York City, many people are laid off, as in Europe, they're not getting an income. Well, if your job has been closed down as a result of COVID, in Germany, for instance, you're still given something like 80% of your normal salary, because they realise that they have to keep you solvent and living. In the United States, there's been a moratorium on rents, they realise that, well, if you've lost your job, you can't pay the rent. There's a moratorium on evictions, there's a moratorium on bank foreclosures on landlords that can't pay their mortgage to the bank, because their tenants are not paying rent. All of that is going to expire in February, that’s just in a few months. So they're saying, “OK, in New York City, 50,000 tenants are going to be thrown out onto the street, thousands of homes are going to be foreclosed on.” All over the country, millions of Americans are going to be subject now to be evicted. You can see all of the Wall Street companies are raising private capital funds to say, “We're going to be waiting for all this housing to come onto the market. We're going to be waiting for all of these renovations to take place. We're going to swoop in and pick it up.” This is going to be the big grab bag that is going to shape the whole coming generation and do to America really what Margaret Thatcher did to England when she got rid of—when she shifted from housing, the council housing that you mentioned, was about half the population now dow to about 1/10 of the population today.Julian Vigo: This is what I wonder is not being circulated within the media more frequently. We know that major media is not...[laughts] They like to call themselves left-of-centre but they're neoliberal which I don't look at anything in the liberal, the neoliberal sphere, as “left.” I look at it as a sort of strain of conservatism, frankly. But when you were speaking about paying $35 a month for an apartment on Sullivan Street, get me a time machine! What year was that? Michael?Michael Hudson: That was 1962.Julian Vigo: 1962 And roughly, the minimum wage in New York was just over $1 an hour if I'm not mistaken.Michael Hudson: I don't remember. I was making I think my first job on Wall Street was 50 to $100. A year $100 a week.Julian Vigo: So yes, I looked it up because I was curious when you said 100 times certainly we see that. If the tuition at New York when and New York University when I left was $50,000 a year you were paying $500 a semester. This is incredible inflation.Michael Hudson: And I took out a student loan from the state because I wanted to buy economic books. I was studying the history of economic thought and so I borrowed, you know, I was able to take out a loan that I repaid in three years as I sort of moved up the ladder and got better paying jobs. But that was the Golden Age, the 1960s because in that generation there was the baby boom that just came online. There were jobs for everybody. There was a labor shortage. And everybody was trying to hire—anyone could get a job. I got to New York and I had $15 in my pocket in 1960. I'd shared a ride with someone, [I] didn't know what to do. We stayed in a sort of fleabag hotel on Bleecker Street that was torn down by the time you got there. But I, took a walk around and who should I run into that Gerde's Folk City, but a friend of mine had stayed at my house in Chicago once and he let me stay at his apartment for a few weeks till I can look around, find a place to live and got the place for $35 a month,Julian Vigo: When there was that debate on Twitter—there were many debates actually about renting on Twitter—and there were a few landlords who took to Twitter angry that they learned that their renters had received subsidies in various countries to pay their rent. And instead of paying their rent, the people use this to up and buy a downpayment on a home. And they got very upset. And there was a bit of shadow on Friday there with people saying, “Well, it's exactly what you've done.” And I find this quite fascinating, because I've always said that the age of COVID has made a huge Xray of our society economically speaking. And it's also telling to me that in countries that I would assume to be more socialist leaning, if not socialist absolutely, in the EU, we saw very few movements against rent. Very few people or groups were calling for a moratorium on rent. It's ironic, but it was in the US where we saw more moratoria happen. What is happening where—and this reaches to larger issues, even outside of your specialty of economics and finance—but why on earth has it come to be that the left is looking a lot more like the right? And, don't shoot me, but you know, I've been watching some of Tucker Carlson over the past few years, someone who I could not stand after 9/11. And he has had more concern and more investigations of the poor and the working class than MSBC or Rachel Maddow in the biggest of hissy fits. What is going on politically that the valences of economic concern are shifting—and radically so?Michael Hudson: Well, the political situation in America is very different from every other country. In the Democratic Party, in order to run for a position, you have to spend most of your time raising money, and the party will support whatever candidates can raise the most money. And whoever raises the largest amount of money gets to be head of a congressional committee dealing with whatever it is their campaign donors give. So basically, the nomination of candidates in the United States, certainly in the Democratic Party, is based on how much money you can raise to finance your election campaign, because you're supposed to turn half of what you raised over to the party apparatus. Well, if you have to run for an office, and someone explained to me in in the sixties, if I wanted to go into politics, I had to find someone to back up my campaign. And they said, “Well, you have to go to the oil industry or the tobacco industry.”And you go to these people and say, “Will you back my campaign?” And they say, Well, sure, what's your position going to be on on smoking on oil and the the tax position on oil, go to the real estate interest, because all local politics and basically real estate promotion projects run by the local landlords and you go to the real estate people and you say, “Okay, I'm going to make sure that we have public improvements that will make your land more valuable, but you won't have to pay taxes on them.” So, if you have people running for office, proportional to the money they can make by the special interests, that means that all the politicians here are representing the special interests that pay them and their job as politicians is to deliver a constituency to their campaign contributors. And so the campaign contributors are going to say, “Well, here's somebody who could make it appear as if they're supporting their particular constituency.” And so ever since the 60s, certainly in America, the parties divided Americans into Irish Americans, Italian Americans, black Americans, Hispanic Americans. They will have all sorts of identity politics that they will run politicians on. But there's one identity that they don't have—and that's the identity of being a wage earner. That's the common identity that all these hyphenated Americans have in common. They all have to work for a living and get wages, they're all subject to, they have to get housing, they have to get more and more bank credit, if they want to buy housing so that all of the added income they get is paid to the banks as mortgage interest to get a home that used to be much less expensive for them. So basically, all of the increase in national income ends up being paid to the campaign contributors, the real estate contributors, the oil industry, the tobacco industry, the pharmaceuticals industry, that back the politicians. And essentially, you have politics for sale in the United States. So we're really not in a democracy anymore—we're in an oligarchy. And people don't realise that without changing this, this consciousness, you're not going to have anything like the left-wing party.And so you have most Americans out wanting to be friendly with other Americans, you know, why can't everybody just compromise and be in the centre? Well, there's no such thing as a centrist. Because you'll have an economy that's polarising, you have the 1% getting richer and richer and richer by getting the 99% further and further in debt. So the 99% are getting poorer and poor after paying their debts. And to be in the centre to say, and to be say, only changes should be marginal, that means—a centrist is someone who lets this continue. With that we're not going to make a structural change, that's radical, we're not going to change the dynamic that is polarising the economy, between creditors at the top and debtors is at the bottom, between landlords at the top and renters at the bottom between monopolists and the top and the consumers who have to pay monopoly prices for pharmaceuticals, for cable TV, for almost everything they get. And none of this is taught in the economics courses. Because you take an economics course, they say, “There's no such thing as unearned income. Everybody earns whatever they can get.” And the American consciousness is shaped by this failure to distinguish between earned income and unearned income and a failure to see that dynamic is impoverishing them. It's like the proverbial frog that's been boiled slowly in water. So, with this false consciousness people have—if only they can save enough and borrow from a bank—they can become a rentier in Miniature. They're just tricked into a false dream.Intermission: You're listening to savage minds, and we hope you're enjoying the show. Please consider subscribing. We don't accept any money from corporate or commercial sponsors. And we depend upon listeners and readers just like you. Now back to our show.Julian Vigo: I don't know if you saw the movie called Queen of Versailles. It was about this very bizarre effort to construct a very ugly Las Vegas-style type of Versailles by a couple that was economically failing. And it spoke to me a lot about the failings of the quote unquote, “American dream.” And I don't mean that dream, per se. I mean, the aspiration to have the dream, because that is, as you just pointed out, unearned income, that is the elephant in the room. And it almost seems to be the elephant maybe to keep using that metaphor, that the blind Sufi tale: everyone's feeling a different part of it, but no one is naming it. And I find this really shocking, that we can't speak of unearned income and look at the differences as to which country's tax inheritance and which do not—this idea that one is entitled to wealth. Meanwhile, a lot of US institutions are academically, now formally, being captured by the identity lobbies and there are many lobbies out there—it's a gift to them. They don't have to work on the minimum wage, they don't have to work on public housing, they don't have to work on housing.They can just worry about, “Do we have enough pronoun badges printed out?” And I find this really daunting as someone who is firmly of the left and who has seen some kind of recognition have this problem bizarrely, from the right. We seem to have a blind spot where we're more caught up in how people see us, rather than the material reality upon which unearned and earned income is based. Why is it that today people are living far worse than their grandparents and parents especially?Michael Hudson: Well, I think we've been talking about that, because they have to pay expenses as their parents and grandparents didn't have to pay, they have to pay much higher rent. Everybody used to be able to afford to buy a house, that was the definition of “middle class” in America was to be a homeowner. And when I was growing up in the 50s and 60s, everybody on the salary they were getting could afford to buy their house. And that's why so many people bought the houses with working class sell rates. As I told you, I was getting $100 a week. At least if you were quiet you could do it. If you were black, you couldn't do it. The blacks were redlined. But the white people could buy the houses. And that's why today, the white population has so much more wealth than the black population, because the white families would leave the house to the children and housing prices have gone up 100 times. And because they've gone up 100 times, this is endowed with a whole white hereditary class of kids whose family own their own homes, send them to schools. But America was redlined. Now Chicago was redlined, blacks were redlined. In New York City, the banks would not lend money to black neighbourhoods or to black borrowers. I was at Chase Manhattan and they made it very clear: they will not make a loan to a mortgage if they're black people living in my block. And they told me that when I was on Second Street and Avenue B. I won't repeat the epithet racist epithets they used. But what has caused the racial disparity today is what we've been talking about: the fact that whites could buy their own homes, blacks could not.And the reason I'm bringing this up is that if—we're working toward a society where white people are now going to be reduced to the position that black people are in today: of not having their own homes, of not being able to get bank credit. One friend of mine at the Hudson Institute, a black economist, wanted to—we were thinking of cowriting a book, The Blackening of America. The state of, well, the future of the whites, is to become blacks if you don't solve this situation. And I've been unable to convince many black leaders about reparations—that the reparations, very hard to get reparations for slavery, which was to their grandparents, their reparations are due to the blacks today who do not have housing, their own homes, because of the redlining that they have been experiencing right down to today.So, you have this, you do have a separation in this country. But this is not the kind of hyphenated politics that the politicians talk about. Not even the black politicians, the fact that if you're going to hyphenated American, how did this hyphenisation affect the real opportunities for real estate, for homeownership, for education, and all of these other things. I think maybe if people begin to think as to how there is a convergence of what was diverging before—now you're having the middle class pushed down into its real identity which was a dependent wage-earning class all along—you're going to have a change of consciousness. But we're still not to that. People don't realise this difference.And at the top of the pyramid, at New York University, for instance, where we both went to school, I have professor friends there and there was recently an argument about getting more salaries for professors, because they're hiring adjunct professors at very low prices instead of appointing them full time. And one professor turned to my friend and said, “They’re treating us like wage earners.” And my friend said, “Yes, you are a wage earner. You’re dependent on the wage you get from New York University.” And he said, “But I’m a professor,” as if somehow being a professor doesn't mean that you're not a wage earner, you're not dependent on salary, you're not being exploited by your employer who's in it to make money at your expense.Julian Vigo: Oh, absolutely. We've got the push from NYU in the 1990s by adjunct professors to get health insurance, and to have a certain modicum of earnings that would allow them to pay rent in an extremely expensive city. I find it amazing how many of my students at the time had no idea how much I was being exploited at the time, I was at lunch after the graduation of two of my students, they invited me to lunch, and they were having a discussion about how well we must be paid. And I laughed. I didn't go into the details of my salary. But later in later years, they came to understand from other sources, how exploitation functions within the university where they were paying almost quarter of a million to go to school, and graduate school, and so forth. So it's quite shocking that even though we have the internet and all the information is there, anyone can see precisely how much NYU or Columbia cost today, or how much the cost of living is, as opposed to 1961, for instance, that people are still not putting together that when you have housing, that is like income. For most of us, if housing is affordable, the way one lives, the efficiency to live, the ease, the mental health, and physical health improves. And it's fascinating to me that during lockdown, people were told, just to bite the bullet, stay inside, and how many publications, how much of the media went out to discover the many people being locked down in extremely small hovels? Multiple families living in three bedroom houses, even smaller. And I just kept thinking throughout these past 20 months or so that the media has become complicit in everything you've discussed, we've seen an extra tack added on where the media is another arm of industry and the 1% they are able sell lockdown stories: stars singing, Spaniards singing, accordionists from Neapolitan balconies, everyone's happy. But that was a lie. And that was a lie being sold conveniently.I regularly post stories from CNN, where their recent yacht story—they love yachts—their recent yacht story from about five or six days ago was how the super-rich are “saving” the world's ecology. And it was a paid advertisement of a very expensive yacht that uses nuclear power, what you and I hope: that all the rich people are running around with little mini nuclear reactors on the seas. And I keep thinking: what has happened that you mentioned campaign financing? Remember what happened to Hillary Clinton when she suggested campaign finance reform? That went over like a lead balloon. And then we've got CNN, Forbes, all these major publications that run paid sponsored news articles as news. It's all paid for, they legally have to see it as but you have to find the fine print. And we're being sold the 1% as the class that's going to save the planet with this very bizarre looking yacht with a big ball on it. And another another CNN article about yacht owners was about how it's hard for them to pay for maintenance or something and we're pulling out our tiny violins.And I keep wondering, why is the media pushing on this? We can see where MSNBC and CNN and USA today are heading in a lot of their coverage over class issues. They would much rather cover Felicity Huffman, and all those other stars’ children's cheating to get into a California University scandal which is itself its own scandal, of course. That gets so covered, but you rarely see class issues in any of these publications unless it refers to the favelas of Brazil or the shanty towns of Delhi. So, we're sold: poverty isn't here, it's over there. And over here, mask mandates, lock up, shut your doors stay inside do your part clap for the cares and class has been cleared. Cut out. Even in the UK, where class consciousness has a much more deeply ingrained fermentation, let's say within the culture, it's gone. Now the BBC. Similarly, nightly videos at the initial part of lockdown with people clapping for the cares. Little was said about the salaries that some of these carriers were getting, I don't mean just junior doctors there, but the people who are cleaning the hallways. So, our attention has been pushed by the media away from class, not just the politicians doing the dirty work, or not just the nasty finance campaign funding that is well known in the US. What are some of the responses to this, Michael, that we might advance some solutions here? Because my worry, as a person living on this planet is enough is enough: Why can't we just try a new system? Is it that the fall of the Berlin Wall left a permanent divide in terms of what we can experiment with? Or is there something else at play?Michael Hudson: Well, recently, Ukraine passed a law about oligarchs, and they define an oligarchy as not only owning a big company, but also owning one of the big media outlets. And the oligarchy in every country owns the media. So, of course, CNN, and The New York Times and The Washington Post, are owned by the billionaire class representing the real estate interests and the rentier interests. They're essentially the indoctrination agencies. And so of course, in the media, what you get is a combination of a fantasy world and Schadenfreude—Schadenfreude, when something goes wrong with people you don't like, like the scandal. But apart from that, it's promoting a fantasy, about a kind of parallel universe about how a nice world would work, if everybody earned the money that they had, and the wealth they had by being productive and helping society. All of a sudden, that's reversed and [they] say, “Well, they made a lot of fortune, they must have made it by being productive and helping society.” So, everybody deserves the celebrity, deserves the wealth they have. And if you don't have wealth, you're undeserving and you haven't made a productivity contribution. And all you need is to be more educated, managerial and intelligent, and you can do it. And it doesn't have anything to do with intelligence. As soon as you inherit a lot of money, your intelligence, your IQ drops 10%. As soon as you don't have to work for a living and just clip coupons, you write us down another 30%. The stupidest people I've met in my life are millionaires who don't want to think about how they get their money. They just, they're just greedy. And I was told 50 years ago, “You don't need to go to business school to learn how to do business. All you need is greed.” So what are all these business schools for? All they're doing is saying greed is good and giving you a patter talk to say, “Well, yeah, sure, I'm greedy. But that's why I'm productive.” And somehow they conflate all of these ideas.So, you have the media, and the educational system, all sort of combined into a fantasy, a fantasy world that is to displace your own consciousness about what's happening right around you. The idea of the media is that you don't look at your own position, you imagine other people's position in another world and see that you're somehow left out. So, you can say that the working class in America are very much like the teenage girls using Facebook, who use it and they have a bad self image once they use Facebook and think everybody else is doing better. That's the story in Congress this week. Well, you can say that the whole wage earning class once they actually see how awful the situation is they think, “Well, gee, other people are getting rich. Other people have yard spots, why don't I have my own house? Why am I struggling?” And they think that they're only struggling alone, and that everybody else is somehow surviving when other people are struggling just the way they are. That's what we call losing class consciousness.Julian Vigo: Yes, well, we're back to Crystal and Alexis wrestling and Dynasty’s fountain. Everyone wants to be like them. Everyone wants a car. You know, I'll never forget when I lived in Mexico City. One of the first things I learned when you jumped into one of those taxis were Volkswagen beetles, Mexicans would call their driver “Jaime.” And I said to them, why are you guys calling the taxi drivers here “Jaime”? And they said, “We get it from you.” And I said, “What do you mean you get it from us? We don't call our taxi drivers Jaime.”And then I thought and I paused, I said, “James!” Remember the Grey Poupon commercials? That's what we do—we have James as the driver in a lot of these films that we produced in the 1970s and 80s. And the idea became co-opted within Mexico as if everyone has a British driver named James.Now, what we have turned into from this serialised, filmic version of ourselves to the present is dystopic. Again, you talked about the percentage of rent that people are paying in the US, the way in which people are living quite worse than their parents. And this is related to student debt, bank debt, credit card debt, we've had scandals directly related to the housing market. We saw that when there were people to be bailed out, they had to be of the wealthy class and companies to be bailed out. There was no bailout for the poor, of course. I was in London during the Occupy Wall Street. In London, it was “occupy the London Stock Exchange” (Occupy LSX) right outside of not even the London Stock Exchange. It was outside of St. Paul's Cathedral. And there was a tent city, and people were fighting ideological warfare from within their tents. There wasn't much organising on the ground. It was disassembled months later. But I wonder why Americans, even with what is called Obamacare, are still not pushing for further measures, why Hillary Clinton's push for or suggestion merely of finance reform within the campaigning system, all of this has sort of been pushed aside.Are there actors who are able to advance these issues within our current political system in the United States? Or will it take people getting on the streets protesting, to get housing lowered to maybe have national rent controls, not just of the form that we have in New York, which, before I got to New York in the late 80s, everyone was telling me how great rent control was. Now it's all but disappeared? What is the answer? Is it the expropriation of houses? Is it the Cornwall style, no owning more than one house type of moratorium on homeownership? What are the solutions to this, Michael?Michael Hudson: There is no practical solution that I can suggest. Because the, you're not going to have universal medical care, as long as you have the pharmaceuticals. funding the campaign's of the leading politicians, as long as you have a political system that is funded by campaign contributors, you're going to have the wealthiest classes, and decide who gets nominated and who gets promoted. So, I don't see any line of reform, given the dysfunctional political system that the United States is in. If this were Europe, we could have a third party. And if we had an actual third party, the democratic party would sort of be like the social democratic parties in Europe, it would fall about 8% of the electorate, and a third party would completely take over. But in America, it's a two-party system, which is really one party with different constituencies for each wing of that party, and that one party, the same campaign contributors funds, both the Republicans and the Democrats. So it's possible that you can think of America as a failed state, as a failed economy. I don't see any means of practical going forward, just as you're seeing in the Congress today, when they're unwilling to pass an infrastructure act, there's a paralysis of change. I don't see any way in which a structural change can take place. And if you're having the dynamics that are polarising, only a structural change can reverse this trend. And nobody that I know, no politician that I know, sees any way of the trends being reversed.Julian Vigo: The funny thing is that scandal, quote-unquote, scandal over Ocasio Cortez's dress at the Met Gala was quite performative to me. It's typical that the media does. “Tax the rich,” as she sits at a function that I believe cost $35,000 to enter. And she socialised the entire night even if she allegedly did not pay either for her dress nor for the entrance. And I'm thinking, isn't this part of the problem: that we have so much of our socio-cultural discourse wrapped up in politics in the same way that Clinton's suggestion that campaign finance reform disappeared quite quickly? Is there any hope of getting campaign finance reform passed in the States?Michael Hudson: No. Because if you had campaign finance reform, that's how the wealthy people control politics. If you didn't, if you didn't have the wealthy, wealthy people deciding who gets nominated, you would have people get nominated by who wanted to do what the public ones, Bernie Sanders says, “Look, most of them are all the polls show that what democracy, if this were a democracy, we would have socialised medicine, we'd have public health care, we would have free education, we would have progressive taxation.” And yet no party is representing what the bulk of people have. So by definition, we're not a democracy. We're an oligarchy, and the oligarchy controls. I mean, you could say that the media play the role today that the church and religion played in the past to divert attention away from worldly issues towards other worldly issues. That's part of the problem.But not only the pharmaceutical industries are against public health care, but the whole corporate sector, the employer sector, are against socialised medicine, because right now workers are dependent for their health insurance on their employers. That means Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve Chairman said, this is causing a traumatised workers syndrome, the workers are afraid to quit, they're afraid to go on strike. They're afraid of getting fired because if they get fired, first of all, if they're a homeowner they lose their home because they can't pay their mortgage, but most importantly, they lose their health care. And if they get sick, it wipes them out. And they go broke and they lose their home and all the assets.Making workers depend on the employer, instead of on the government means you're locked into their job. They have to work for a living for an employer, just in order to survive in terms of health care alone. So the idea of the system is to degrade a dependent, wage-earning class and keeping privatising health care, privatising education, and moving towards absentee landlordship is the way to traumatise and keep a population on the road to serfdom. Get full access to Savage Minds at savageminds.substack.com/subscribe