Scott Galloway

Even if we don't create additional programs, it would at least reduce the deficit.

There's just no getting around it.

State taxes, exemption, capital gains, lower tax rates, being able to piece out from the state of Washington to Florida about the time you decide to sell your stock, despite the fact that you aggregated $120 billion in wealth using the great infrastructure and ecosystem of Washington.

You know, you just shouldn't lecture us.

I think this is, quite frankly, a deflection and a misdirect.

And I don't think he's genuine about his own view on taxation.

Having said that, I do think that if Andrew wanted to be successful in framing this, I think the way you frame trying to get money to people to level them up

is not by saying universal basic income, that sounds socialist.

I would have framed it as a negative income tax.

And that way you'd get Republicans on board.

Republicans like the idea of cutting taxes.

So say we're gonna cut taxes and make a negative income tax.

And so for example, and by the way, there'd be a big argument over whether it's universal childcare or services, because the problem when you give people services and just not straight cash is you create a government bureaucracy that never goes away.

And there's a lot of NGOs in Europe that give a lot of money to needy people in Africa.

But what they found is they're better off just giving the money to people in Africa, as opposed to creating these large infrastructures of people, of administrators who get paid, who are overeducated to think big thoughts and host lunches and talk about famine in Africa.

You're better off just giving money to people in Africa and say, go buy your own food.

and figure out what to do.

And they also, and this is sexist, but I'll say it, give money to the women, because you give money to the dudes and the prostitutes and the bars thrive.

You give money to the women and the kids get taller and fatter.

Anyways, I think that negative income tax is a really good idea.