complete of all causes, so americans are suffering every day from it. it's as if these people don't count. i saw how they can choose are customers and dump a sick so also they can satisfy their wall street investors. no parents should have to see what i saw. so if you're denying payment for someone's care, your make life and death decisions and determine to get to live and who dies to me, that's best getting away with murder mysteries. with this is boom bus one business show you can't afford to miss on brand new board. and

i'm rachel london's in washington coming up. economic growth in the u. s. close to it's the lowest rate hand amick began spending decrease while inflation skyrocketed . well, let's take a look at the latest data and what it mean for the ongoing recovery plot fall present environment infrastructure package bases an uncertain future. so does it propose tax on the pro wealthy will take on the question of whether americans billionaire should be passed on money. they haven't even earned yet. and trivial currency regulations remain in flux as the butting factor is based on scrutiny for its role in criminal activity. once again, the future of ben tech is resting on regulation. we'll discuss back to today, look that right in and we leave the program with a low down in growth for the world's largest economy. the u. s. economic recovery is happening at a much slower pace than most analysts had expected. in fact, the u. s. economy grew at a 2 per set rate in the 3rd quarter. it's slow,

it's gain of the pandemic era recovery. now it's the slowest g d p gains and see more than 31 percent plunge in the 2nd quarter of 2020, which encompass that period during which cobit 19 morphed into a global pandemic resulting and a severe economic shut down that sent tens of millions to the unemployment lines and for the choke hold on activity across the country. meanwhile, inflation is also hitting the european economy in a serious way. so to go further in depth on this was ben swan and octavio mer and the ceo of openness. i'll see, octavia, let's start with you now. many economists had expected at least 2.8 percent g d p growth. is there anyone factor holding back growth, or are there multiple factors that play here? well, i think you who basically attributed to 3 different factors, one is the ongoing supply chain problems that the u. s. is facing with things clumped up in the portrait, los angeles and goods from the rest of the world,

simply not coming through particular chinese goods. those tend to come through the west coast, so that's a big break on growth. the other thing is, course in that timeframe in q 3 resort resurgence corona cases throughout the us. so that was sort of todd's a trend back up. the deaths remain to luckily, quite low in comparison, but the number of criminal cases went up again during that time. but now it's coming back down a bit again. and i guess also you have sort of the positive impact. so stimulus checks and based with government initiatives being wound down and that gets count as part of g d p as well. so i think those 3 factors that we've, the ones held back, growth is quarter. and now, but we've heard from the, by an administration that supply chain issues are the result of so many people buying goods in this economy. really kind of saying the economies just to good. but these numbers contradict that. they, they really do contradict that. it's actually completely untrue, but just to give you kind of breakdown here about 10 percent of the goods being purchased. we're, that's how much we decline by during this time,

which means it's not an issue of so many people are buying goods. there isn't room enough for all of them to get delivered. the problem actually is that there's less spending on short term goods, but also long term goods buying things like appliances and automobiles that was down about 25 percent. so these are significant drops. now services were up about 7 percent, but that's still down from the 2nd quarter. so this idea, the spin that's out there, that hey, the reason that this is all happening is because everyone's doing so well. the economy is recovering to well, it's not even as i don't think you're going to spend, it's just an untruth. it's a lie. and i think most people see it through that because it's the reality of their lives. they know that in their life, things are not better than they were. i mean, i guess, i guess if you want to call it, it's been, i could see how they're basically saying, yes, people are trying to buy things that they couldn't buy. and so essentially they didn't buy them, but you know, like you said, i mean, that's a spitting the fact when we have a major supply chain issue going on right now here in the country. i want to kind

of take a transition here because the european central bank president christine the guard on thursday tried to play down the chances of a rate hike for 2022, hinting that market players might be getting ahead of themselves with their prediction is the e c b under playing the realities of inflation right now. well i must say every time i listen to christine, la, god, i come away very, very confused. i have to admit, i don't intend to feel intelligent enough to follow her. and the things that she says, i mean back in september when inflation hit about 3.4 percent in europe used to be came out and said we're going to curtail up on purchases. now we're not going to, we're going to slow that down. now she made it clear to the world that was not a tapering, but that was a re calibration. and so we should take heat that she wasn't saying we're, we're not stay in the course at now. she's come out and said that the models of the c b really strongly suggest that you can face is going to come down well below the 2 percent target. so we shouldn't worry. so i think the c b is

a bit behind the fed. the fed had said few months ago, the inflation was transitory. now they changed the tune saying it's going to go into next year in the middle of next year. sometime the e. c. b is a few months behind that they're still saying this is transit. we don't worry about, we'll say inflation going to come way down. i expect by the end of the year, the c b to, to be admitting that inflation is gonna stay around for quite some time to come. and so i think yes, that definitely play inflation at the stage a, b, c, b, but quite deliberately. so they're trying to talk it down. well, i wouldn't say i, i know we've had you on talking about inflation pretty much throughout the world over the last several months, maybe even 2 a year. and i, it feels like it's the same kind of sentiment every time we hear this from a lot of different analysts, do any of the central banks really know how transitory this inflation is at this point? well, they all the central banks have supposed do these great models and full cost again abilities. but i do wish they'd share these models with us if we could have a close look at them and sort of kicked ties of it and understand what a desert modeling forecasting for some reason they don't want to do that. they

won't necessarily see under the hood and see exactly what's going on. so i think they're basically more political than anything else. they know that created an animal. now that's going to take off. it's going to be difficult control because they pumped so much money as the economy. so i think that just in the, in the person now trying to talk it down. i, i don't really believe their forecasts at all. they've been pretty much wrong for some time to come. right. and i know that now they've continued to say, hey, inflation is transitory, both in europe and here in the united states. but the average american is watching prices go up all around. and so it's kind of that continued charade of americans going and wait a 2nd. you're saying is transitory. but what exactly does that mean? because we're not saying not. and then on that point in its latest business sentiment survey, the munich based ipo institutes, and on monday that every, every 2nd industrial firm in germany is already planning to hike prices due to persistent supply problems. how bad is this for the german economy, and is this what we're likely to see more of with

a number of companies kind of put in those increased gains off on the consumer? yeah, i think we will see more of it. and i think, you know, to the point of our travels making, i think it's an important point, right? and this goes back to the spin issue that, that folks who are in positions of authority, whether it's at the e, c, b, or the federal reserve. they're, they're making statements right, to try to quell the fears of people to say, well, we're going to talk it down a little bit. we'll make you feel better. but the problem is, is that they are also disenfranchising people who listen to them today and are told one thing and those things turn out to be wrong prediction. so in the case of what's happening in europe right now, i mean that these, these german companies are saying they're going to continue to raise prices are for consumers, because we're looking at an inflation rate about 4.6 percent. but it was $4.00 just a month ago was actually accelerating. and i think that in the, the thing that's important about this, by the way, is it's the highest, it's been since 1997. so these are extremely high numbers in terms of what's happening with inflation. but it's also disenfranchising to people who listen to someone who's in a position of authority, who says, don't worry,

there's nothing to worry about because it's not as bad as you think. it is, then it turns out it's actually worse than you thought it was. and then they come back again to say ok, but trust us this time. at some point you lose the confidence in the trust of the people you're supposed to represent when you continually tell them that something is not happening. that is clearly happening, right? and when you lose that confidence and it can lead to massive ramifications that many of those, that officials likely don't even realize. boone bus, benson and octavia mirandi of openness al, i'll see, thank you both for your time and insight and in an effort to fund president violence to trillion dollar spending package, senate democrats, a proposed change to the way the assets of the nation's billionaires, our tax, the chairman of the senate finance committee, senator ron wyden, introduce legislation on wednesday, which would have taxpayers with more than $1000000000.00 and assets or more than 100000000 dollars in annual income for 3 state street years. pay taxes on capital

gains which have not yet been cashed out for background. here investors generally pay taxes on capital gains only when the assets in question are sold. capital gains taxes can generally be deferred, allowing the owner to earn returns on the on tax fund. it also allows them to borrow against those assets to bolster their business or whatever they might need to do before too many americans get to concerned about this new plan. the so called billionaires tax would only affect around $700.00 people in the country. while the proposal says it would raise hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade. the massive spending bill along with the associated taxes, has already faith blow back from some moderate democrats, although there is news that it is moving forward. joining us now discuss is former us representative alan grayson and jeffery tucker, president of the brownstone institute. great to have both of you all today. congress are great, but i want to start with you and i want to start with the billionaires tax. it sounds like a good idea when you consider something like 11 months besides net worth grow by

more than 30000000000 dollars in just one day earlier this week. but when much of these assets of billionaires are tied up to the stock market, which is based on speculation, are you really taxing folks money that they haven't truly earned yet? what's your thought? oh it's, it's silly to think of it that way. listen, investors are the only ones who get the side when they pay their taxes. think about it that way. if you're some porch, mo, actually work in every day, trying to make a living. you pay your taxes the minute you have to pay your tax, you're liable to your taxes. the minute that they hit your bank account. if you're self employed, you have to pay them every 3 months. investors never have to pay them. in fact, many investors die without ever having to pay them and then they are a group, their children, their grandchildren, other members, their family, get that wealth without any taxation of stepped up basis. so the system is broken. and the real question is, why did we ever allow this, either the money that these billionaires have is for all practical purposes,

their money? yes, it's possible to start back and go down. but those billionaires are making sure that doesn't happen by a trillion dollars each year in stock buybacks. a trillion dollars is removed from the u. s. economy every year to buy rectangular piece of paper called stocks in lieu of actually demand any goods and services that might employ people. so the system is, is rigged in favor of the stock market going up. and it's about time that we tax it like we tax you and me, donald trump paid less and taxes than famous. so our $50.00 than anybody in us who makes $15000.00 a year. the system is badly broken and we have to fix it on, especially when you're talking about those $700.00 selected billionaires. i mean they're in that club for a reason because they had figured out what the average american wasn't able to figure out now. and jeffrey, of course, who will surely hear a big push back from the sort of anti tax crowd. but why vote of that for just 700 hyper rich americans was the logic there?

it's, it's mouth pencil and he's in as far as i can tell, and i did some research on this today, this, this proposals without precedent. we're really talking about attacks on, on valuation of the assets that are being held there. they're not even income being earned, but rather just the market valuation of existing a property which is banana republic style of taxation. and once you, once you do that, it's not going be just about billionaires. look about about everybody, everybody, but it shouldn't even be about billionaires. i mean, and in portfolios the, the, the value goes up and it goes down, it goes up and goes down the iris coin to compensate or give back the money that, that they pay in taxes. if the stock goes down, we know that these talks can be, can be wild. i mean that you can earned a tremendous amount at the in december and have it all fall apart in january. and you're talking about imposing this tax liabilities and people on money that haven't even taken this is just just a pure valuation. so like, like i say,

this is not really the way we've ever done taxation in this country. basically ever . and some people are speculating that wouldn't even survive a constitutional test. i like it's, it's not even consistent with the 16th amendment. so i don't, i don't understand where this conser while i do not understand where it's coming from. where you've got a gang of law makers right now just desperately looking for money wherever they can find it, to devour it, to fund their preposterous increases in that debate. they fueled over the last year . so we really do have a kind of predatory state on the loose right now, and it's going to cause a capital flight and confuse ceos and, and make a mass of, of market valuations. very dangerous proposal. and actually i don't, i think we've done a lot of crazy things are last 20 months. i don't at risk and say it's, i don't think, i don't think it's going to pass for congressman grayson. i want to give you a chance to respond to that. i mean, for someone like you on mass where his value is skyrockets, on a certain day,

it may fall significantly 2 months later. so how does that work out for those unit is billionaires whose valuations do change as they go along? look, let's look at reality. let's not look at banana republic type arguments. hypothesizing . what might or might not happen? the reality is that there's these $700.00 people have 2 and a half trillion dollars of wealth and income because they can spend that any time they want. they can borrow against at any moment that they want. they have this wealth, they have this income and it is not been taxed or penny. how could we possibly justify that? if you wash dishes in a restaurant, you get tax the income, the moment it hits your bank account or the moment you're issued a check. but if you're ill on must, you may never get taxed on that income. how was that morally justifiable? it's a ridiculous system. i, jeffrey, i'll give you a chance to respond. i thought income it's, it's, it's a valuation. and which is very strange. it, it implies that somehow we're,

we're merely renting the valuations of the things better than that for which we bear to some responsibility and we're renting them from the government. they can change the rents at any time. and this is very dangerous for the whole idea of, of, of, of, of entrepreneurship and an investment. and like, i say it, it really is without precedent, this is not a tax on income. mm hm. take it as income it gets taxed. this is a tax on valuation of assets, of which we bear some responsibility that you not actually calling to to become liquid assets. so like i said, this is, this is, this is, i'm sorry to say it, but it's, it's just, it's inconsistent with anything we've ever thought about in terms of property ownership and, and, and, and entrepreneurship and, and freedom in enterprise. it's a radical proposal. and congress are great, i'll give you the final word. i have 30 seconds left, but i want you to push back at that last thing because i know you got a, a stock ready to go answer on the this will stop in. listen,

the fundamental purpose of taxation is to tax. people can afford to pay the bill on bus can pay nothing. he doesn't have to pay anything. where's the goober driver has to pay $10152030000.00 a year to the government. it doesn't make any sense. it's morally wrong. barbara representative alan grayson and jeffrey tucker. thank you so much. we really appreciate you and we knew we would have a good discussion on this. thank you so much. take care and time now for a quick break, but when we come back, a global money wandering regulator is making a new push for crypto regulations worldwide. so what kind of mean for the future of decentralized finance? we'll discuss and as we get a break, here are the numbers that the clothes with

with we keep missing fossil fuels in the way that we're currently doing it. by the end of this century, $2100.00 level of carbon dioxide is necessary. it will be a 1000 pos, familiar that we wouldn't have seen that level of carbon dioxide for 55000000000 years. and when that last happened, there was no washing up on it. and as you said and talked to, can have flow, some trees living on it. so the consequences will be a sea level globally of about 60 maces, higher than it is today. he died. i cried. and i just kind of split the whole time. i was there, no one really thought anything different. knew this all i just didn't feel good on

the way for the surgery. his lungs failed. 30 seconds when i killed him. i had gotten stuck with so many needles that day in 2019 don't to started talking about a new wide spread disease that caused severe lung damage. there's a few points that were really the target. all of the patients were diagnosed with a lung injury associated with using electronic cigarettes or vapor products. he pulled this out if you really felt holy crap, he's him died. oh no, he's been better. it was, i wouldn't want my worst enemy to ever go through that. it was come out of breath

match guy, there's financial survival guide. liquid assets are those that you can convert into . it's quite easily the keep in mind know, asked if you need to inflation get to watch guys report with the welcome back. big global regulator formed by the g 7 to target money laundering has a new set of guidelines for the crypto industry. the financial action task force renewed calls for more regulations on crypto firms that would force them to identify customers and report suspicious activity. even though it would be up to the individual countries to adopt the suggested policies. the group has more than a 3 dozen members, which includes the us, china, and the european commission. now, in addition to calling for strict regulations on unstable coins and platforms that allow peer to peer transactions, the f a t s new guidelines,

specifically target decentralized finance. they are pushing for the platforms which allow crypto lending and training to be classified as virtual asset service providers and to be subject to additional regulations as a result. however, crypto advocates argue that even though this version of regulations is slightly better than the last go around, it is still incredibly vague and leaves plenty of room for corruption to joining us now to discuss a co host, christy i. now christy there some saying that the latest guidelines are a little bit better because they aren't quite as broad as a version that was released 6 months ago. so what all has changed and more importantly would have stayed the same. i mean, it's slightly marginally better, but not much at all. really, the only difference is that early in the year out to find also crypto miners validators and even software developers as brokers. and also require them to report information to the i or as about these anonymous block chain participants. that

they would have absolutely no way of obtaining information about so it's literally the equivalent of the iris going. here's your assignment, it's going to be come really impossible. i don't know how you would go about doing this, but you have to use your own capital to enforce it and make your customers comply one way or another. otherwise, you'll be the one at fault and getting punished. kind of similar to the rhetoric we're hearing now about businesses being forced to do a math mandate. but that's a different story. but now they're actually defining the terms so that it doesn't really include minors. and it seems like the main target is, defy, or decentralized platforms that provide services such as exchange lending or stake it. and this is where it gets really complicated because the entire point of defy and the centralization is that there is no central entity to go after to make them shut down the site to do. so the s a t f is now gaining an interest in d 5 project after the world has grown 5 times this year to about

a $100000000000.00 in locked up projects. so the f a t proposes have been repeatedly delayed as authority, struggle to find ways to gain oversight where instead of boards and c o, there are instead pre programmed algorithms that run these defy organization. so christie, here in the united states crypto exchanges are already required to verify the identity of their users and to report suspicious transactions. if these new guidelines are adopted, could it change us policy? and what would it mean for the countries that are at risk of being classified as not protecting against money laundering and terrorism financing? simply because they don't actually have regulations on, on the books for crypto. i mean, there are a few risks every year. the basal institute of management publishes their anti money laundering index, which basically accesses the risk of money laundering and scores. countries in 5 key areas which includes the quality of their m, l and k y c programs, bribery,

incorruption, financial transparency, public transparency and legal and political risk. so if you score too high on these categories, then the country might suffer sanctions as a response from the u. s. or another form of financial punishment. but then on the flip side, there will also be some consequences for the u. s. 2, because this could lead to a massive talent exodus from the us if they take too hard of a stand against the crypto industry. and that would just lead to a block chain brain drain. and i mean, block chain is essentially internet 2.0. and the only reason that the internet is what it is today is that the friendly regulatory climate that it was born in to back that. but today, greed and political agenda is a big banking, have made the entire landscape completely unfriendly for the future of us innovation and disruptive technology. right. and there was, was a time when people were for, can be internet as a scam saying when last it was just divided is interesting that kind of see that

same writer use towards crypto. now i want to go back to a point that you made earlier, which is that one of the biggest targets here with these new guidelines was defy with the f a t s even saying it doesn't by the claim that these platforms are controlled by do centralized communities of users, and that there isn't at least one person with significant influence making decisions who should face regulations accordingly. what is your response to that? my response is that the people making these regulations have a gross misunderstanding of how crypt currencies and define particular works. it also exposes the willingness of legislators to give into special interests, gripped them big banking because how will they determine who is responsible for these services and exchanges? they're regulated by dows, the centralized atomic organization. how are you going to figure out who built it? and certainly right now, the names of all the builders and creators are known because they want to accept

credit for all their hard work and they deserve it. but these doubt organizations will have absolutely no problems going dark and shielding your identities if needed . i mean, the name says that all of these organizations are thomas, when they say they want to crack down on these decision makers. good luck with that because it shows that they've completely missed the point of crypto, where decisions like forks and upgrades, and a hands are made via majority vote. and the vote is by all the token holders. so they are essentially saying that they're going to go after the hundreds of millions of token holders who voted and are essentially all decision makers are. it'll certainly be interesting to see if the united states in countries around the world are up for that kind of a fight boom. most. christy, i thank you so much for your insight. thank you. and finally, we've told you about the rental car company hurts and his plan to purchase 100000 and tesla. but did you know that half of that order will go towards a new partnership with over? as all part of movers pledged to operate only electric vehicles by 2030 the new

plan ams, to get drivers a chance to run a tough le, when they don't always have the means to buy one themself. but it will come with a price only the drivers who have a rating higher than $4.00 stars will be eligible, and they will have to pay $334.00 a week in order to drive a tesla that's significantly higher than the current deal with hertz, which left over driver's rent, a typical 4 door sedan for $180.00 per week, which becomes free if the driver has more than 75 right. the new program is set to kick off in los angeles, san francisco, san diego, and right here in washington, d. c. just this next week. and let me interesting to see how that kicked off. and if you're next or right. and it seems like they're just trying to collect a lot of data for driving so they can help driving stuff off the road. that's it for this time you get boba's on demand a portable t, v portable dot e b. we'll see you next time. ah

ah, if you want something done, right, do it yourself. the acronym d i y, i e, do it yourself has now become the name for unusual nra of online videos. we do, coupled with my 3rd year away. i need some acres. yup. school that he'll at no one, you can't, the was more or less did any more that up. so the spoke a deal, it people use scrap materials and whatever is at hand to rig up all kinds of stuff from household items to pump action. squid guns, richer company for my freshman long list of must be or a fellow much more pool with. the best part is people want to watch. millions of view is spend earlier seeing how a person they've never met and who's half way around the world, assembles the contraption. no one else needs to check with the arrange to filter for i can, which could just more of my key when you minute synergies like user g,

we're looking at the glutton lucia future wishing which correctly still couldn't ah, russia, this class of car was discontinued more than 20 years ago, even though stay more than normal. so in the world of the model in the world, sort of can you sell it to proposal this? sure. dealing with just important practice. it took 5 years to close the gap on the world car industry from the drawing board to the 1st finished model escapes her will on over on the show to finance. totals can you deal with with them or who knows? washington law school well will shoot for shift awful millennium luca crockett, the porcelain with a nurse or ah,

no job, no pay in new york city workers protest outside the city mirrors official residents in opposition to a looming deadline for a vaccine mondays, we speak to a man who saved, that's how he lost his job and during the health crisis, also how mehta of them facebook parent company undergoes a name change with the internet exploding into a garage of mocking both the rebrand and mark zuckerberg canceled. and few lena sound you support areas including rock legend, roger waters, the man just this following an extradition appeal hearing at the u. k. hi core to which has yet to deliberate verdict on the whistleblower space. i'm so angry and i'm so the, and i'm, she discussed it with the united kingdom.