Scott Santens

She decided years later to say that she was thinking about it because it had grown more popular to the point where she then felt like the political wins were in her favor to say that she was for it.

So that's why I kind of laugh about the Hillary stuff.

But when it comes to being able to afford it,

Andrew Yang, he made a good argument as far as value-added tax, and that would create $800 billion worth of revenue around that.

Yeah, so if you have a 10% value-added tax, then that generates around $800 billion worth of revenue.

And that depends on what you're applying that to as far as the goods involved.

And the way Andrew wanted to do that was to actually exclude stuff like

consumer staples like foods and things, and then actually crank it up on those like luxury goods.

So it wasn't actually like a flat 10% VAT.

It was more like an average 10% VAT.

But just calculating a flat 10% VAT and applying it to everything we could, then estimates are it's around $800 billion worth of revenue.

So that is an important element.

No, it's because you're still excluding a bunch of stuff and it doesn't apply to, you know, it's not as simple as just saying it's the economy is 2.21 trillion and therefore 10% of that is, you know, 2.1.

If you look at any estimate of value at a tax, it's always around $800 billion worth of U.S.,

And of course, people will vary that in various ways.

I believe it makes more sense to have a flat amount, but it's around $800 billion for a 10% VAT.

And it's important then to go on to what are the savings and what are the effects on the actual economy.

you know that people spending this money by putting the money in the hands of spenders is going to have a multiplier effect on the economy.

And that too is something that you can have estimates on.

We know that something similar in Canada called the Canada Child Benefit, it kind of looks like a basic income for a lot of various families.