Jonathan Herzog

And I think your question is apt, and it's the reason I'm running, it's the reason there's a wave of Yang Gang running, because again, you might think, well, reason is on our side, or the facts are on our side.

That is not enough.

That is not the priority.

The priority is to put cash directly into people's hands through a universal basis.

So the headline cost is much lower than one would think, but it's on the order of two, two and a half trillion dollars.

So the goal is to build a floor, a foundation, right?

Capitalism where income doesn't start at zero, but,

And you know this as someone steeped in P&Ls and business accounting.

We have a revenue problem as well as an expense problem in the federal government.

And the key move we have to make is to pass a broad-based consumption tax, a value-added tax.

And what this will let us do is if we pass a value-added tax,

which almost every other industrialized economy in the world has.

In Europe, the average VAT is around 20%.

If we pass a value-added tax of around 10%,

which is the most efficient way for us to capture the gains, especially in a realm of software and artificial intelligence, where in the United States, we love to tax labor.

We love to tax human labor.

But we should recalibrate and incentivize the things we want more of, which is more jobs, more human labor, more productivity.

and ratchet up the value-added tax on things like artificial intelligence, like luxury consumption, and the like.

So if we pass a 10% value-added tax, that on its own, conservatively, would bring in 800 billion annually new revenue into the system.

And this continues and grows in perpetuity because, again, it's like oxygen in the system, where if you think about, like,