Transcripts for KAZU 90.3 FM [NPR for the Monterey Bay Area] KAZU 90.3 FM [NPR for the Monterey Bay Area] 20191023 190000

Accused of helping Rudy Giuliani take up dirt on Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden an effort now at the center of the ongoing in Pietschmann inquiry into Trump Winsor Johnston n.p.r. News New York the number of coal fired power plants being built in Southeast Asia is declining according to a new report N.P.R.'s Rebecca her show has details fired power plants contribute enormous amounts of greenhouse gases that cause global climate change in recent years Southeast Asia has been a hot spot for a new coal plant construction but a new report by the global energy monitor finds that the number of new plants has fallen dramatically for the 2nd year in a row hydro power is expected to take the place of coal in many parts of the region especially in the Mekong Delta where dozens of new dams are under construction but a 2nd report published today in the research journal Science advances warns that those dams block sediment and nutrients they could hurt fisheries downstream and make coastal communities less resilient to another effect of climate change sea level rise this is n.p.r. . Today the f.d.a. Propose that manufacturers of breast implants include a box to warning on the device informing patients of potential complications and illness resulting from the implants more on this from N.P.R.'s Patti naman the federal agency wants warnings to be easily understood and clear about possible side effects including auto immune related symptoms like fatigue joint pain and memory loss as well as the risk of developing a rare form of lymphoma It's also recommended that manufacturers include a patient decision checklist to help guide discussion between patients and their surgeon the agency is also calling for an updated version of guidance for screening patients for possible rupture of the implants in July this year the manufacturer allergen announced a global recall of its textured breast implants that had been linked to lymphoma and the proposed recommendations will be available for public comment for the next 60 days Patty name and n.p.r. News a young man who admitted to killing his pregnant girlfriend during a heated argument last year is out of prison in Hong Kong Chen Tong was actually serving time for money laundering but he says he's willing to face punishment in Taiwan where he says he murdered the victim his fate however remains unclear it was his case that prompted officials in Hong Kong to introduce an extradition law that would have allowed criminal suspects to be sent to Taiwan or mainland China but that law is now being pulled after protesters stage mass demonstrations fearing the measure threaten the judicial independence Hong Kong retain after the territory was transferred back from British to Chinese rule this is n.p.r. Support for n.p.r. Comes from n.p.r. Stations other contributors include constant contact with email marketing tools to help small businesses build their brands online through customizable email templates and email editor and now a website builder more at constant contact dot com. Support for Casey you comes from mounted on a school inviting parents of toddler preschool and kindergarten age children to Arden play in the pre-K. Pajama party a morning of fun and educational activities 9 30 am Friday October 25th information about Madonna school dot org And for me as Santa Cruz women's clothing boutique featuring select fashions by Porto incentive and jewelry by Denise Peacock plus personalized styling and tailoring at $910.00 b. So Cal ave on line at Mme dot. From n.p.r. And you are Boston I'm Meghna talk of r.t. And this is on point lots of politics and policy to discuss today in a bit we'll debate the merits of a wealth tax a favored policy proposal from both Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders but 1st to politics and yesterday's major moment in the House impeachment inquiry William Taylor u.s. Chargé d'affaires to Ukraine laid out his opening statement regarding President Trump and Ukraine 15 pages of detailed careful testimony that asserted there was a quid pro quo between the White House and Ukraine regarding investigating the Bidens including Taylor's testimony that President Trump wanted Ukrainian president Zelinsky quote in a public box by making a public statement about launching such an investigation so let's dive into this and joining us from Washington we have Mike Lillis senior reporter for The Hill he talks will talk about us with us about the latest from Congress so welcome to on point Hello Magnus Thanks for having me Well so 1st of all tell us a little bit more about what Taylor has offered in his testimony how much more detail is he giving us from what we've known over the past couple of weeks well that you're but you know based on the opening statement which leaked very early in this process it was just a few minutes after he went into the door and so there it was very clear that he wanted to south there and it's quite damning testimony that as you said the Trump. Wanted a foreign country to open investigations into his political rivals and he leverage 2 things to try to get that done and you know in short Donald Trump and his allies have said that there is no quid pro quo they said it over and over again over the course of this month long investigation Bill Taylor said very clearly that no yes there was and here's the evidence that lays out how this happened and as you said again he took very meticulous notes he has delivered those to the State Department and there is no doubt that Congress and Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff are going to want to get their hands on those documents as well that will offer you know a lot more detail than just a 15 page opening statement which is all we've seen to this point but you know this puts this puts Trump in a box I think you know he said to the landscape would be in a public box Trump is now in a box it's his word against you know this clear career diplomat and he's taken all of these notes and if you delivers them to Congress then you know buckle up we've got we've got we've got a fight on our hands yeah so I just wanna let folks know if that's it they have any questions about this latest chapter in the impeachment inquiry give us a call at 180423855 that's 80423 talk no no Mike let's dig into this a little bit more because I mean for example Taylor goes into quite a bit of detail regarding what he called any regular policy channel effectively run by Rudy Giuliani and Ambassador Sunderland I mean we haven't seen this level of detail about the activities of Julian Giuliani insulin before how we know we you know we've heard whispers about it we have heard testimony suggesting as much you know when or even you know Vonnegut's was here just last week she was the former u.s. Ambassador to Ukraine she was removed in May over concerns that Giuliani was running sort of a shadow State Department was trying to pressure foreign leaders you know to. You know to to jump into these investigations that would have helped Trump's campaign so very politically motivated it would seem. And her testimony was also fairly damning but it wasn't delivered in this much detail at least that we've seen the transcripts we think will come out later but we haven't seen the transcripts and so we don't know exactly what was said so to say that we haven't heard that no one has delivered this type of detail we don't know the answer but certainly it hasn't been made public and that is why everybody is sort of in a in an uproar this week and if you listen to the Democrats coming out of Bill Taylor's deposition yesterday you know they seem to say that this is the smoking gun without without using those words you know they said this is this is the most the most damning testimony that we've heard so far someone described it as a sea change in the in the process and and Stephen Lynch from Massachusetts suggested that this could actually accelerate the process because the Democrats now have exactly what they need well let's listen to a little bit of that reaction that you're talking about Mike here's freshman congressman and 11 a Democrat from Michigan here's what he said all I have to say is that in my 10 George months in Congress not even now and this is the most disturbing so far now Michael is in the language of a career diplomat Usually they're very careful right and to assert not to inject politics into statements like this but I was quite taken when Taylor writes that he filled the sort of informal channel this informal policy making channel was actually acting in opposition to longstanding u.s. Policy I mean my sense is that for a diplomat those are pretty strong words extremely strong words and what you're seeing you know yes the career diplomats are usually very careful they don't like to get involved in the politics and that's to their advantage obviously these guys serve under you know various administrations of both parties and they want to be seen as a new boat and it. True arbiters of u.s. Foreign policy and not let the politics encroach on any of that you know that's an important element of the State Department and it's why they seek to remain sort of autonomous but what you saw even going back to the memory of on of its testimony she was very curt about you know the detrimental effects that this whole episode is having on the State Department is that it or you know it's an erosion of morale people think that might Pompei or the secretary of state is leaning too far towards Trump and not you know defending the career diplomats enough and that's why these guys are coming up to you know they're defying the blockade the Trump is trying to put on these witnesses on the documents and they're testifying. Under subpoena but they're sort of friendly subpoenas right the State Department says you can't you can't testify the Democrats issue a subpoena and they come in and they're saying like birds and you've got to think that they are trying to protect the institution because you know Bill Taylor doesn't seem to have any any kind of legal involvement in this you know he is not under scrutiny for any of this he has threatened to quit over it so it's not like he's trying to save himself in this case he's trying to save the institution that he spent his life working for Ok now a little bit more about that public box part because again it's the level of detail here which is just so I opening that Taylor says that Ambassador Susan Lynn the u.s. Ambassador to the European Union said that it told him that everything was dependent on everything you know in a meeting with the president. The $400000000.00 in the systems that it was all dependent on the Ukrainian president making this announcement making an announcement about investigating that company recently and the Bidens and that President Trump wanted Zelinsky in a public box by making a public statement about ordering such investigations and later on even read that they had discussed the Lewinsky going on c.n.n. In order to do this. That's right yeah you know and that part was not a surprise because if you look at the text messages that were leaked released a couple weeks ago that was Kurt Volker he was the former u.s. Envoy to the Ukraine and he came up testified he gave Congress a series of text messages between himself Gordon song one and Bill Taylor and they reveal very clearly the Volcker and so on them were both pressing Zaleski to make that public statement and they were sort of dangling a meeting with Donald Trump to get what they wanted so for Bill Taylor to come up to Capitol Hill and kind of amplify that message was not a surprise he provided some more details but the episode didn't change and so you know that part's not a surprise and so on and of course came up in testify just last week he said that he had regretted making some of those offers he didn't deny them but he did say there was no quid pro quo directly with the u.s. Military aid and so there was a discrepancy there between Bill Taylor and Gordon songs on and one of the things that were most striking out of yesterday was that a lot of Democrats seem to think that song was not you know he was less than open less than sincere in his testimony and some of them want Gordon song to come back and testify again and to iron out some of the discrepancies with Taylor's testimony so we'll have to see you know does this program long the process now if previous witnesses have to come back does it accelerate the process as David Lynch said because they have the smoking gun These are all kind of balls in the air and questions that we have looking forward All right well let's hear belief briefly from a tape from a couple of Republicans about how they're reacting to the release. Of Taylor's testimony or is opening statement yesterday here's Florida Congressman Matt gets a Republican insisting that the Democratic reaction to Taylor's testimony is overblown the president has been very clear that there is not this mortgage of aid to any future election activity and the most important factual development actually I understand came from questions from Congressman Ratcliffe he asked Is there any Ukrainian who we can point to at any moment in time who knew that this aide was even on the whole. 1st of all Mike can we point to you a Ukrainian who knew that the aid was on hold it seems like he was opening statements as we can yes there was the opening statement says that we can now you not naming names just yet but I'm sure those were the questions that were asked after the opening statement was made and so we'll have to await the transcripts but you know the Democrats counter that again the smoking gun with Taylor goes back all the way to the you know to the whistleblower to the transcript that the White House itself released between Donald Trump and President Selenski you know. Out of his testimony and the acting chief of staff make more than he who was on t.v. Last Thursday and seemed to suggest yes there was a quid pro quo so you know as the accumulation continues as the the statements come out they seem to be pointing in that direction and the Democrats at this point are just kind of say you know they're taking it for granted that this has happened and now the question is how do we react to that they're beyond the question of whether this did in fact happen and then the Republicans it's important I think to notice are really focusing on the process here more than the substance Matt Gates' comments aside. That's the 1st time we have a lot of the substance of this Mike let me just jump in here because I want to play how tape from how another very powerful Republican on the Hill reacted Here is Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell speaking with c.b.s. Is Nancy Cordes yesterday the president has said that you told him that his phone call with the Ukrainian president was perfect and innocent do you believe that the president Ukrainian officials have not had any conversations on the subject so he was lying about that you have to I don't recall any conversation with the president about that phone call my close we just got about 30 seconds here so when you hear Mitch McConnell trying to take a half step back there while also supporting the president what does that mean. Very consistent you know. The president uncertain on certain issues you've seen it on the most recent period. But he has been very careful not to go after the president on anything he is up for reelection in 2020 and the base is still much behind. Mitch McConnell going to need a vote to get legislative things done and to get reelected Well Mike Willis is a senior reporter for The Hill speaking to us from Washington Mike thank you so much. To be with you when we come back we'll debate the merits of a wealth tax this is all points. All at a rural America does not have high speed internet but federal data on this kind of thing does not necessarily show that you looked at the f.c.c. Maps we should have all kinds of Internet service here in Georgia and we knew that wasn't happening. Has taken things into. A market marketplace ahead at 530 this afternoon around 90.3 k.z. You. Support for k.z. You come from counterpoint coffee an artisan coffee bar and recording studio also featuring pastries Panini's and take music played from vinyl counter-point coffee open 70 m. Daley at $565.00 Broadway in Seaside and from the city of Santa Cruz street smarts campaign reminding drivers that kids are limited in their ability to make safe traffic decisions so slow down if you see kids or whenever you drive near schools parks in neighborhoods. Support for on point comes from w. Boston and from Life Lock Life Lock with Norton offers cyber security solutions to help keep hackers out of consumers' devices and personal information more about the ever evolving digital world is it Life dot com and a new mom freeing up personalized weight loss program based on a cognitive behavioral approach with the goal of losing weight and keeping it off for a good learn more at Newman and o.o.m. Dot com. This is on point I'm magnetron Let's talk about a wealth tax now both senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have put wealth tax proposals near the heart of their presidential campaigns the tax is considered a key to paying for their many proposals now Warren's plan would levy a 2 percent tax on wealth above $50000000.00 Sanders plan would cut deeper are putting in place a graduated tax above $32000000.00 Here's Senator Warren on her plan this week here just so you will understand. What. Wondrous. Great fortune is in this country $7000.00 families that were touched by this so basically Senator Warren sees the wealth tax as a way to tackle inequality it's the same goal shared by Senator Sanders and then you also have 3 people owning more wealth than the bottom half of American society that is a moral and economic outrage and the truth is we cannot afford to continue this level of income and wealth inequality but the question is is a wealth tax the best and most effective way to do that so we want to hear from you were at 180-423-8255 that's 80423 talk you can also find us online at Twitter and Facebook at on point radio Well joining me today from New York is Emanuel side is a professor of economics at the University of California Berkeley and co-author of the triumph of injustice how the rich dodge taxes and how to make them pay he has advised both Senator Warren and Senator Sanders campaigns on their wealth tax proposals professor say is welcome to on point. Thank you for having me so 1st of all just make your case here we'll get into the details in just a moment but I kind of want to just get your big picture take home why you believe a wealth tax is. A critical way to get at this fundamental problem of rampant inequality in America. Yes So the most important thing to to understand in this debate about what's taxation is a situation about inequality in the country so since 1980 inequality has surged dramatically in the United States so that's true for income and wealth that has really concentrated toward the top so if you look at the top point one percent of wage holders those that would be touched by the taxes proposed by Warren and Sanders their share of total u.s. Wells was on the around 7 percent around $980.00 s. And now it's grown to about 20 percent so the top $1000.00 families control one 5th of the total u.s. Wells contrast that wisdom but 90 percent of families so abuse group you know on 90 percent of the population that comprises the working class and the middle class they are a share of wealth as come down and now their share of wealth is only slightly above 20 percent so you're in a situation where the top $1000.00 as almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent more broadly if you look at income you see that the u.s. Economy has not worked for the bottom 50 percent what we call the working class essentially their incomes have stagnated since 1980 incomes are growing extremely fast at the top so it's obvious you know as President Obama said inequality is a defining issue of our times in the United States so we need to think hard about potential solutions wrestle well so as a professor if I may just what we're going to. Talk about the details of the solution. I promise you that we will because they're really quite fascinating but I'm looking at for example Senator Sanders plan right an end I mean this is the plan that he's put out publicly so it's it places things in very stark terms about sort of the the nature of inequality in America the Sanders campaign claims that the 3 wealthiest people just the 3 wealthiest people in the entire United States own more wealth than the bottom half the bottom 50 percent of Americans so there's a very stark terms here but I wonder. What is it about the particularities of a wealth tax that you believe work better than say sort of more straightforward potential policy proposals like fixing the income tax or raising the capital gains tax in America why introduce a whole new structure to tackle inequality you have so this is a very good question so and what we describe you know we're book is indeed how the current us tax system works and what what we find out when we put together taxes at the federal state and local level is that essentially all income groups pay you about the same rate relative to the our food economy income so around 25 to 30 percent with an exception at the very top the top for hundreds of think about them as billionaires actually in 2018 we estimate but you're lower rate than the other groups of only 23 percent So why is that that the current tax system doesn't succeed in taxying the very rich. Well the individual income tax East progressive but it is based on a realized income and if you're a very wealthy person who say owns a corporation so think about Warren Buffett who owns a large fraction of Berkshire your at. That way you may no need to realize income that is the profits of the firm can stay in Berkshire Hathaway in which case no income shows up on your individual tax return and they mentioned Warren Buffet because he gave those numbers so in 2015 as well as was 65000000000 income and that West was likely you know 5 percent of that so probably something like 3000000000 yet is reported income was only $10000000.00 because just a few shares he didn't need much more income so he's federal income tax liability was just mean astute and that's why the very wealthy if they don't need the income immediately essentially can defer the income tax the corporate tax has now been cut a lot with the tramp tax cuts so the ability they are as come down a lot in contrast if you think about a well stacks it goes directly after the accumulated wealth. And it would be a very powerful tool. To increase again tax progressivity in the United States so we've crunched the numbers we've developed a tax simulate door that a company eyes the book Tax Justice now dot org You can play with the numbers but you very quickly see that if you put stocks like cement or Warren or sanders proposed you really increase dramatically the tax rates at the very top especially in the billionaire class so just with the one in one stacks is enough to double the tax rate on billionaires from the current 23 percent grow up to 46 percent with the Sounders stacks you crank up the tax rate on billionaires by effect or 3 like something like 70 percent now you can play your so was doing come tax as you said you know taxing better capital gains but still you will always face the problem that the very wealthy can defer realizing those gains and therefore it doesn't change nearly as much x. Rates on the very though you know that there are one alternative take on on this whole idea of a wealth tax or a criticism of some of your work professor say as well maybe a quicker change would be to not allow the deferral of the realisation of the gains like just change that so that when the gain is actually realise that the taxes take into account all the time that that money wasn't actually taxed by the government I mean it is a wonky solution I get it it's not as easy to wrap your head around as saying we're going to slap a 2 percent tax on everything above 50000000 dollars but could it possibly be more effective. You know our view is that the tax our By the People for the people and to people need to understand the tax system that's what our book is about presenting taxes you know way people can understand and certainly the wealth stacks as a lot of virtue it's obvious to all our audit tours that the ones tax you know above $50000000.00 would really target the reach Now it's true that the income tax as weakness is loopholes that we are in favor of closing in in part he could order the taxation of capital gains doesn't work very well so we are in favor of closing these were saying it wouldn't be a nerve and or so it wouldn't probably generate. But we can through because it's a it's a technical fix on the income tax so it's good for it for experts like my saying flowery summers to debate that but it wouldn't clearly flag you know that we are going to solve the problem of excess concentration of wealth in our country Ok Well you mentioned Larry Summers I will introduce him in a moment because we will have that debate Professor size but 1st let me just take a quick call here let's go to Laura who's calling from Des Moines Iowa Laura you're on the air. Thank you and thanks for the show today. You know there's lots of ways to equalize well finance country but I feel like if we don't address our actual tax system and rules then even implementing this kind of idea of a wealth tax is going to be very difficult they tried it in Europe in many many countries and it didn't work compliance was an issue and even today we have you know compliance issues but that basically all that legal I mean tax conversions and tax havens are all legal so I think if we don't address that and it's very difficult to have the structure. And compliance to actually do a wealth tax and that kind of agree with the tax but I'd like to know how that guest you know how how would America with you know we we can barely get our poop in a group when it comes to our tax system now how are we going to do that so a lot of work yet thank you for your call professor say is the implementation challenge here Yes Laura thank you those are excellent points and certainly for progressive taxation to work it needs to be designed well so that it's very difficult to avoid or evade and it needs to be enforced. With the point we make you know we're book is that the cease. And we say that as you know by in disk I hope for the future it's because we've looked at the history of taxation and actually the United States is really the country that invented very progressive taxation into 1930 s. That has been few before any other country the us said very very high tax rates on income then you never return Cs and it worked for decades and the reason it worked it's because when those taxes were put in place. Society and government made sure they would be enforced and then the system unraveled you know when tax when the money during the enforcement we could. So it's obvious that if you want the world stacks to be successful you need a good enforcement mechanism so I agree with Laura and others that say that what sticks in Europe of and worked well but we've looked at the experience and thought very hard about the shoe and we think a well designed well stocks could work the weakness of the European stocks is that they were easy to avoid and evade if you moved from Paris to London after a year you were no longer liable for the French stocks in contrast in the us the tax for those you because wherever you are because it's based on citizenship and there is a huge exit tax to renounce your citizenship while the professor says you're saying that we would chase the money wherever it is in the world and point well taken there but stand by for just a moment because I did promise a vigorous debate about this concept or a proposal for a wealth tax and joining us now from San Francisco is Larry Summers he is former u.s. Treasury secretary served under President Clinton is former director of the National Economic Council for President Obama former president of Harvard University as well Larry Summers welcome to on point glad to be with you so 1st of all I mean you do have a detailed critique of professor says his proposals and plans here are ideas ideas but I want to ask you the same through the flipside of the same big picture moral question that I began our full conversation with because when we talk about inequality in America Mr Summers we're talking about wealth inequality not strictly income inequality so what is the moral argument against a wealth tax. Some large part of the argument is that it's simply a riverboat gamble with the future of the American economy terms of what it would mean for our continued prosperity in terms of whether it would actually generate revenue for the government on a substantial scale in terms of whether it would enable the financing of a large set of social initiatives that. We need in terms of whether the numbers would add up you know way close to that Professor sigh as suggest these are all river but these are all highly speculative questions and my reading of the evidence suggests otherwise there's a long tradition of what might be called Campaign economics proposals put forward during campaigns without scorekeeping by people who are professional at it but supported by professors who've written books that then the materialize when a president attempts to implement them and this is a moment when we as a country can't afford to have the kind of thing happen that happened to President Clinton's health care plan that deferred a national health insurance for our country for 20 years have take those kinds of risks there are ways of strengthening enforcement closing loopholes in the income tax that will be as progressive raises substantially more revenue put the economy at less risk and be much more likely to actually happen we'll present them as the direction the direction that should be the focus of. Rest of tax reform we're going to talk to me talk about a riverboat gamble here the u.s. Economy there's also a long tradition of analysts policymakers and the ultra wealthy Any time there's a suggestion to increase their tax burden in any way shape or form the 1st thing they do is they stand behind the body of the u.s. Economy and say don't shoot because you're going to take down the u.s. Economy and yet that has not when has that directly happened I can't where in u.s. History has an increase in taxes on the on the ultra wealthy taken down the u.s. Economy we have so far of voice. Making the kinds of mistakes that are implicit in these proposals so you're right that the tax increases we've had in the past we haven't had very many tax increases. Have not been the cause of taking down the American economy and look there are all the people who opposed President Clinton's tax increases on the wealthy in 1903 or President Obama's tax increases in. During his presidency would also. The closing of all the loop closing of all the loopholes reform of capital gains tax evasion. You jack serious. One once again on Larry Summers Stand by for a 2nd I'm the only interrupting here because we do have to take a really quick break I'll let you finish that thought when we come back we are debating a wealth tax this hour on on point I'm joined by Larry Summers and Professor Emanuel as well we'll be right back this is on point. You might call them accidental heroes over the years they've stepped up to defend the 1st Amendment people think they're free. If you try to exercise a free free for the 1st time we hear from people who help fill in the constitutional gaps left by our founding fathers their stories in the new podcast unprecedented next time on one essay one age and I did 9 year on 90.3 k.z. You. Norma Ramirez has faced lots of challenges but this one's different nowhere in my life in my narrative was there ever like you know one day I'm going to sue the president she's one of 11 plaintiffs taking the trumpet ministration all the way to the Supreme Court to try to save the doc a program to protect her right to stay in the u.s. The only country she's ever called her story on the world listen for the world Wednesday evening at 6 our 90.3 days e.u. Support for Casey you comes from Santa Cruz neurofeedback center in So Cal harnessing the power of neuroscience in mindfulness to help maximize focus confidence and success in school career and relationships details at Santa Cruz neurofeedback dot com and from Sunset cultural center presenting Natural Woman a night of soul with Shel am the vocalist and star of the p.b.s. Special Quincy Jones percent chalet it comes to Carmel Nov 2nd tickets at sunset Center dot org. Support for on point comes from w.v.u. Our Boston and mind body where wellness and people meet with thousands of fitness classes to find and book in one place studios can join the network at Mind Body Online dot com slash n.p.r. And Geico offering auto insurance coverage for cars trucks or S.U.V.s and providing 247 customer service more information on auto insurance said Geico dot com or 180947 auto. This is on point 0 magnitude we are debating the merits and practicalities of a wealth tax this hour and I'm joined by Emmanuel sayas He's co-author of the book the triumph of injustice how the rich dodge taxes and how to make them pay he has advised both Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren on their wealth tax proposals Larry Summers joins us as well from San Francisco is former treasury secretary for the United States former director of the National Economic Council for President Obama former president of Harvard University as well and Larry Summers we had to take a quick break there and I had to jump in on you but it go ahead and complete your thought about why a wealth tax might come at the expense of the u.s. Economy. There are ways of making the tax system much more progressive and raising much more revenue that are more reliable that they will get the revenue more reliable that they will be legally allowed to go into practice more reliably that the money will come from people who actually have the cash aren't and are in a position to pay it the wealth that that Emanuel says is the triumph of hope over experience it's the estate tax is basically a wealth tax it's easier to collect because we only collected every 25 years or so when a family has a death and it's very very substantially avoided the wealth tax has been tried extensively in Europe and more than 3 quarters of the people who had it decided to get rid of it the wealth is in the judgment of most experts likely rightly or wrongly to get declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and the wealth tax raises all kinds of fundamental problems it's easy to say people should give up 2 percent of their wealth but many people have were called illiquid assets sure if you have stock you could say you could sell the stock but people own private companies people own private real estate assets of one kind or other you can't really start selling off a share of those people all have the cash and that's the beginning of why these taxes have largely been avoided every place else and the thing that a manual says just isn't right for people who know the history is that somehow in some glorious old day when the United States had 90 percent tax rates we were some kind of progressive power. You know we warned everyone will earn a lot of income incorporated themselves got their income in the corporation and that's why you show up in the tax return well they know Mr Chairman you trying to Arsenal deals to compensate themselves in ways that weren't tax free any appreciable amount of revenue or a 90 percent tax rate so Mr So as you've said you've presented a lot of the counterpoint here to Professor say is I mean just give him a chance to respond and your professor says let's pick up with the thought that Larry Summers has left us with that is the rich have a long history of behaving badly when it comes to paying taxes so why try. Yes Well you know we're book we take the deeper historic view and we document how much each group was spending in taxes not only counting the individual income tax but also the corporate tax and taxes and you know where data very clearly we see that when the u.s. Went very seriously you know as the 1st country in the world to do it to crank up enormously tax rates on individual income on corporation it changed dramatically the picture that is in the 1950 s. For example the individual income tax rate was at a maximum of 90 percent and it's true that the very rich didn't realize that much income but we also had a huge corporate tax that was taking in more than 50 percent of corporate profits in taxes today we were down to 16 percent so when you stack up those taxes we do find that in the 1950 s. Appearing come groups paid you know over 60 percent of their true economic income in taxes today we are down to 23 percent and I would also say. Say that I don't oppose the fixes that Larry Summers is proposing and some of those have been tried in Democratic administrations in the past you know increasing a little beat the top tax rates perhaps improving the taxation of capital gains but this is not going to solve our inequality problem because if you look at the last 40 years you find inequality rising. And the little fixes we are discussing or that were on the table you know in those debates. Are not going to suddenly In contrast look at what happened in the 1st part of the 20th century when the u.s. Really imposed a very progressive taxation when enforced there we did see a dramatic reversal in inequality and that. Narrow of prosperity was very quick growth in the post-war decades while both you know. Manual and his colleagues just don't have that history right as I read it. Many things were going on in the 1st half of the century we had the 2 Roosevelts we had a whole new she asian of antitrust and financial regulation that all different set of issues all the issues raised by the Bostonian Louis Louis Brandeis around concentrations of economic power it wasn't the taxes I look here's what happens when you put high tax rates on when you put I catch rates on people find ways of earning their income but not putting it on their tax returns and then you look at the tax returns and you think you've had some kind of phenomenal carrion success the reality is that the income has simply avoided taxation by not showing up on tax returns and that's the judgment. And of the vast majority of scholars who study the tax system and that's why Democratic administrations like John Kennedy's administration in 1964 when the charge of running the top tax rate down from what people came to realize was a mistake in the level of 9090 percent will prudently summary let me just jump in here for a 2nd I do want to ask you something because you said I mean yes we can debate the fact that that the ultra wealthy will go to quite a distance quite at length to find creative ways to avoid taxes but that doesn't necessarily mean that perhaps it's bad policy to try but you also said a 2nd ago that you know in the early part of the last century that the it wasn't the taxes or the middle of the lesson Trisha's a was in the taxes it was Roosevelt and it was regulations so it was government spending and regulation but I guess what folks like Professor scions would say what Elizabeth Warren emerging standards both say is that it would be a wealth tax that would allow for the government spending what's wrong with that equation. If a wealth tax was found unconstitutional it wouldn't permit any government spending but that's a way if x. If a wealth tax found didn't succeed in raising revenue as it didn't in 9 out of 12 European countries that have abolished it it wouldn't generate and permit any substantial level of spending if a wealth tax proved to be damaging to the economy because for many people it was a tax rate of more than 100 percent on their income it would reduce the government's capacity to spend so I'm for more progressive taxation to enable crucial public investments in everything from children to health care to greater competitiveness what I'm against at a time when we are fighting for our competitiveness for our economic leadership in the world with China is an approach that has as its center pitting workers against. Companies some Americans against other Americans rather than focusing on cooperatively making the investments we need to compete and have the stronger economy that's necessary for everybody's prosperity to go up all due respect President Summers I think there are millions of workers out there who already feel like they have been pitted against corporations but but Professor size I'm sure you have some response that you'd like to offer here you know the defining issue you know we're society is uniquity key and I'm sorry to report you know 2 to Larry Summers that the u.s. Economy has not worked well for the working class that he's you know we're just he made. We find that their incomes have stagnated so Larry Summers my not see it as an urgency but you know we're view that's not that's just not sustainable and therefore the police he is you know that have been tried are not going to solve the problem you need something different and our view again is that. If you want to do progressive taxation you can it's true that if you designed a taxi stem poorly the wealthy will escape taxation but we really feel that society has the power through its government to impose taxes if it wants to and we'd make those points you know tax after tax where we discuss the wealth stacks we see ways you know we could overcome the issues that have plagued you know the European well stacked says We also discussed that for taxing corporations that right now can avoid taxing taxes by booking profits in low tax jurisdictions all these have fixes and we view the role of tax experts really doing our work. To find the fixes and make sure we have an era tied them in and I take on what Larry Summers is telling goes in the sense that we want to hear those objections but we want to hear them as experts ready you know standing at the ready to provide the solution to to provide you know defeatism and say we cannot do anything well perfessor says though I mean in fairness to Larry Summers here he's bringing the voice of political experience to the to the table which is important because ultimately you know if the goals are the same and in terms of reducing inequality and you have someone who's spent quite a many number of years in government saying you if you want to meet that goal this plan is not going to get you there because it is politically in practive practically not feasible is that not worth noting that that perhaps you're sort of going down the garden path here. What I hear from Larry Summers are you know policies that have been. Try discussing what we know you know from the story and then he sees of inequality it's not going to fix the problem so so my view is that we need fresh ideas that are informed you know by the deep history of our country that really invented progressive taxation and that we believe you know based on our long scholarship was Thomas because he played a crucial role in reducing income in a way as concentration in the u.s. And you know in other countries we are at a time where income and wealth concentration has grown enormously again and we need to reinvent progressive taxation for the let me you know what I actually said Larry Summers the 2nd I do have a duty to make a little bit of room for our callers and I want to lease just get one person in here because I did put the number out and we've got so many Bill let's just go to Jim from Omaha Nebraska Jim you're on the air. And they are the best explanation and savor it well sacks which I've heard of camp or Miller's a book or she said that the ultra wealthy amassed their wealth in part due to infrastructure which we taxpayers paid for so based on that I do agree with the wealth tax x. Well Jim thank you so much for your call Larry Summers would you like to respond go ahead. I want to say 2 things 1st there is a long history and the campaign proposals that the wealth tax reminds me most of our George McGovern's with the same kind of redistributionist emphasis and that didn't work out very well for the progressive cause and it led to Richard Nixon's reelection. 2nd the. Inequality is a crucial concern but so is the fact that the American economy is stagnating and may well go into recession next year so is the fact that our leadership of the largest economy in the world is being threatened in an unprecedented way by China. And if we define our entire economic debate around wages not growing rapidly enough around a fight between workers and. Business we're not going to do the kind of thing we did that got us out of a depression that won a World War to. Pull together as a country the right emphasis is on making sure that taxes are based on the ability to pay and are much more progressive than they are right now but it's not an emphasis on the salvation of the United States is tearing down the wealthy well that was George McGovern's promise Yeah yeah well Larry Summers we just got 90 seconds left here so I'm going to say thank you to you Larry Summers former u.s. Treasury Treasury secretary and former director of the National Economic Council and former president of Harvard University thank you so much for joining us today Mr Summers glad to be with you Emanuel says we do have about 60 seconds left so the last word goes to you yeah so what I would say is that look during World War 2 there was a big task ahead of us and what did we do we cranked up tax rates at the very top enormously we increased the corporate taxes enormously and the u.s. You know won the war and really was the dominant economy economy for dk So we're a society you know as the listener said the business is succeed when the workers Stormers workers I've not had the or. Indeed you could I mean it's high time that we resolve these problems Progressive taxation is the key part of the solution Well Emanuel is co-author of the new book The triumph of injustice how the rich dodge taxes and how to make them pay He's a professor of economics at the University of California Berkeley and he advised both Senator. Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren on their wealth tax proposals Professor science Thank you so much for joining us thank you I'm Magna Charta this is on point. On point is a production of w p u r Boston and. Comes from the listeners of w.b. You are Boston and your n.p.r. Station from Home Advisor matching homeowners with home improvement professionals for a variety of home projects from minor repairs to major remodels homeowners can read reviews of local pros and book appointments online at Home Advisor dot com and w.b. You are presenting the storytelling podcast for kids circle round thoughtfully selected folk tales from around the world adapted for today's families circle round available on Apple podcasts. The next as concerns arise about the possible resurgence of ISIS we'll get a firsthand account of the 27000 battle to drive the terrorist group from Mosul Iraq's 2nd largest city Our guest will be journalist James Verini author of the new book they will have to die now Mosul and the fall of the Caliphate join us join us for fresh air Wednesday afternoon at 2 and again in the evening at 90.3. K.z. Use mobile app is available for download with just a few simple clicks get on demand audio of our local news stories as well as programs like N.P.R.'s Morning Edition and All Things Considered on the go with. Support for k.z. You comes from Stone Creek kitchen featuring gifts and entertaining supplies for the cook the prankster and the party or this holiday season on highway 68 East next to tarp is Road house and Stone Creek kitchen dot com I'm Bill and music at this case you weather update there's a red flag fire warning in effect for the Santa Cruz Mountains beginning at 7 tonight lasting through about for tomorrow afternoon a combination of strong winds low relative humidity and warm temperatures are the reason for this warning this is 90.3 Pacific Grove moderates Salinas and Santa Cruz and translators k 2170 k. 901.30 Palo Colorado. 207 c.n. a 9.3 Santa Cruz. Major funding for on point is provided by Geico offering car insurance as well as services for homeowners and renters insurance through the Geico Insurance Agency additional information can be found at Geico dot com.

Related Keywords

Radio Program ,Personal Taxes ,Tax Law ,Taxation ,American Politicians ,Writers From New York City ,Latin Legal Terms ,Income ,Taxation In The United Kingdom ,Public Finance ,American Businesspeople ,Member States Of The United Nations ,Macroeconomics ,Femail ,Business Terms ,Harvard Law School Alumni ,Wealth ,Capital Gains Taxes ,Income Taxes ,Harvard Law School Faculty ,Latin Words And Phrases ,University Of Pennsylvania Alumni ,Presidency Of Barack Obama ,Massachusetts Democrats ,Taxation In Canada ,Taxation In Australia ,Princeton University Alumni ,Radio Kazu 90 3 Fm ,Stream Only ,Radio ,Radioprograms ,