Ralph welcomes back Erica Payne, founder of Patriotic Millionaires, to update us on that group’s latest efforts to save American democracy by lobbying to raise wages for workers and tax the rich.
Wow! Such an eye opener. I never thought to compare the way people make their Money, nor have I realized that those different ways imply different rates of being taxed. Of course! But if you are an average worker, who’s ability to buy stocks or bonds or whatever other market means is curtailed by lack of income, you never even think about how other means of making money are taxed. It’s the worst of glass ceilings!
Thanks to your guest and the greatest of insights. It’s a revelation to me and I will be reading this book.
I have thought for some time that taxing unearned income (capital gains, etc.) at a lower rate than earned income was a dead giveaway as to who was running the show ..
Wow! Erica Payne is a fantastic woman. Great show. Thank you. To buttress what she said, here's a word from Noam Chomsky: "Concentrated wealth creates concentrated power, which legislates further concentration of wealth, which then concentrates more power in a vicious cycle."
Impeachment. I think it's too late to oppose him now. The resistance should have started last year, months before the election, even after Project 2025 was released. It was too late after the November 5, 2024, elections. That's why Joe Biden issued those pardons before leaving office. Both the Democrats and Republicans are afraid of the consequences they might face if they oppose the Trump regime. Project 2025 is progressing without interruption. The Trump regime has implemented DODGE. It's not to target waste in the federal government; rather, it's designed to create a Surveillance State similar to that of China. Just imagine what they can do with Artificial Intelligence by merging all of our data from various federal agencies. What I want to know is, what can we do if they restrict access to government benefits or, even worse, place us in Social Security's death master file?
Thousands, and more thousands, and more thousands of us in the Streets and flooding our Congress people. Insist. Insist. Insist. If you are indolent, you know what will happen.
I mentioned something similar on someone’s Substack, and in response, he said: “Well you’ve got private pursuits to keep you busy I’m sure. Oh well. So it goes.” I will share exactly what I said to him:
If I had told you back in 2016 that Trump was going to become a dictator, what would you have said? I told a co-worker that Hillary Clinton would win the election in a landslide. That co-worker was so confident in Trump’s victory that he offered to bet me a steak dinner. While I’m not a betting person, I felt so sure that people would recognize what I saw—that Clinton would win convincingly—that I accepted the bet.
When I returned to work after the election, all my co-workers who had voted for Trump said, "Give him a chance." What would you have said to me back then?
I sensed a feeling of darkness after he won. I experienced a similar feeling when I first read about Germany in the 1930s and when I watched the British documentary series "The World at War," which chronicles the events of the Second World War.
Project 2025 was developed by individuals closely tied to the Christian Nationalist faction of the Republican Party. What they crafted in Project 2025 is very well thought-out.
The Trump administration is evolving into an authoritarian regime modeled after Hungary. Viktor Orban, Hungary’s autocratic leader, came to the Heritage Foundation to collaborate with them on crafting a plan to keep Trump—or a Christian Nationalist—in power. That’s why I believe it’s too late.
Wages and Wealth, the two objectives for radical change, are a basic to fixing our society. About 40% of U.S. household live with hardship, insecurity or poverty, this is objective fact. But the average household income is around $180,000 per year, so extreme inequality is a fact of life. And total wealth today is far higher (relative to total annual national income) than ever, and that's a sign that the rich are skimming too much of the surplus. Excess wealth is hoarding at this point, and it's dangerous to the economy, I believe. Financial motives rule the economy, not productive and social benefit motives. I write a blog, Economics Without Greed, Part Two. -- http://benL88.blogspot.com -- My plan is a little different. I propose raising the minimum wage for workers at the largest corporations to $20/hour, about 40% of the workforce. That minimum wage could be even higher. About 55% of workers, that's 90 million of 160 million total workers, earn low wages. The Job Quality Index (NYU Buffalo) shows that 55% of full-time workers, 60 million, earn an average annual income of $37,500, about $18.00 per hour, and the 30 million part-time workers earn annually less. Thisis far too low, all should earn a living wage. The average for the higher paid 45% is around $72,000. Together, these nonsupervisory workers compose 80% of all full-time workers. A Job Guarantee also could be implemented to tighten the labor market, that raises the wage level. That calculation is difficult given differences in locality. And so for. It's complex. The basic idea -- taxing wealth and raising wages -- are foundational for restoring prosperity and democracy. Sen. Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act also advocates a wealth tax.
“There's no consistency here,” exclaims Bruce Fein about the incompetence of Houston's own (groan) Al Green, and I’m saying the same thing in a different context pertaining to the segment with Erica Payne. The segment with Payne started out very well:
“How the left likes to look at taxes is how you get money to pay for stuff. And getting money to pay for stuff is the purpose of taxes on the state and local level. On the federal level, we approach taxes very differently. We say concentrated wealth is the threat to democracy.”
Excellent! That’s what I’ve been saying in the comments section here at the RNRH for months for years now. Unfortunately, this excellent start was entirely contradicted, however, by balderdash from Payne which is completely centered on federal taxation being a source of ‘revenue’ for the federal government to facilitate spending.
Payne may have convinced herself that they are approaching taxation from some kind of novel perspective, but the Patriotic Millionaires are entirely approaching taxation from a right-wing monetarist perspective, one which contradicts any end goal of restoring/maintaining democracy. Payne may have also convinced herself that her argument is clear, but the only thing that is clear are the contradictions in her statements. Her opening statement is one of an empirical approach to taxation and economics, but it ends up being the same Milton Friedman-esque theosophical belief system about the rôle of taxation, the national debt, and the general ability for the federal government to spend.
On a related topic, Payne’s approach to stabilizing the country through an increased minimum wage is short-sighted. I agree that it is important for workers to earn a livable wage, but Payne’s methods are not congruent with the nature of labor in current times. Maybe it would have been appropriate in the 1950s when labor was generally working normal wage-earning jobs, but such is not the case today in the ‘gig’ economy. Employers have learned how to circumvent labor laws and present it as something favorable for labor. With that, merely implementing an increased minimum wage is hardly sufficient to stabilize the national economy.
Instead, the focus should be on implementing a national job guarantee program where the federal government guarantees a job to anyone wanting one at a minimally livable wage with the intent that people in the job guarantee program will transfer into regular employment rather than stay in the JG program. This does many things. For one, it sets an unofficial minimum wage as most people will not work for less than what the JG program is offering. Second, this gives even the otherwise unemployed and underemployed a livable salary, something which would not happen with a regular minimum wage. Third, it maintains job skills and connections for the unemployed/underemployed. Further, it provides price stability as it provides a ‘buffer stock’ of employable labor, which increases national productivity, while also maintaining full employment which helps to stabilize demand.
Ultimately, the Patriotic Millionaires, and the population as a whole, have to confront the reality that in order to fight the oligopoly confronting the nation, the citizenry must transition from the aforementioned theosophical macroeconomic belief system and adopt an empirical one. From that, economic policies can be implemented which favor the entire population, not just small pockets of the population while a large number of other citizens are put in a disadvantaged position. However, that goal will not be achieved until the public is in position to advocate for informed economic position. We’re not in that position right now and the policies being advocated by the Patriotic Millionaires are entirely faith-based positions which I will not support. The Patriotic Millionaires have something to start with given that informed opening statement, but the Patriotic Millionaires still have a lot of homework left to complete.
The best way to tax the rich and save Social Security is to raise the estate tax and eliminate the tax loopholes that led Gary Cohn to say "Only morons pay the estate tax." In 2001, my mother's estate was one of the 2.2% of estates that paid an estate tax. In 2023, less than 0.1% of estates paid an estate tax. Trump and the Republicans now intend to use reconciliation to repeal the estate tax.
I am a bit unsure why you inferring that taxing the rich some kind of necessity for operating Social Security. The US federal government has a floating currency. There is no limit, aside from inflationary considerations, on how many US Dollars the federal government can spend into existence through various programs. Increasing taxes, on the wealthy or otherwise, are not necessarily a requirement to keep Social Security viable. The situation is quite different for state and local governments, but we’re talking about a federal issue here.
Any constraints Social Security is facing are purely artificial ones. When Social Security was first enacted, it was thought that it might be viewed as socialism in the era where McCarthyism was born. In order to get it passed, it was presented as social insurance rather than a social program, but there is no reason to continue this political compromise or political hoodwinkery. The public demands a stable retirement pension and it should be thought of as a social program in the same way as other countries do it. The same can be said about healthcare or any other number of social programs or potential social programs.
Now, there are potential arguments for taxes such as the estate tax, but the need for these tax receipts to pay for federal government spending are invalid and these types of political messages must perish as they only serve to further right-wing agendas.
Ms Payne’s comments reminded me of an article written by Dorothy Brown back in 2009, Two Tax Codes, Two Americas. Both are an eye opener for the lay person.
I hope she and Bruce Fein prevail but I don’t have much faith in the dems these days with respect to supporting their efforts, especially since very few are calling for a General Strike US.
Our resistance is feckless unlike in France where they shut down attempts to curtail rights and cut benefits in a heartbeat. Trump and his MAGA cult are running roughshod over us while Dems are patting themselves on the back. It’s pathetic to watch.
Perhaps Ralph could shed some light on the General Strike US movement supported by both Prof Richard Wolff and even Rep Jim McGovern.
Wow! Such an eye opener. I never thought to compare the way people make their Money, nor have I realized that those different ways imply different rates of being taxed. Of course! But if you are an average worker, who’s ability to buy stocks or bonds or whatever other market means is curtailed by lack of income, you never even think about how other means of making money are taxed. It’s the worst of glass ceilings!
Thanks to your guest and the greatest of insights. It’s a revelation to me and I will be reading this book.
I have thought for some time that taxing unearned income (capital gains, etc.) at a lower rate than earned income was a dead giveaway as to who was running the show ..
Erica Payne for President!
Ms. Erica Payne, in answer to your question, Mr. Ralph Nadar is a multimillionaire and STILL a fabulous dude.
Wow! Erica Payne is a fantastic woman. Great show. Thank you. To buttress what she said, here's a word from Noam Chomsky: "Concentrated wealth creates concentrated power, which legislates further concentration of wealth, which then concentrates more power in a vicious cycle."
Impeachment. I think it's too late to oppose him now. The resistance should have started last year, months before the election, even after Project 2025 was released. It was too late after the November 5, 2024, elections. That's why Joe Biden issued those pardons before leaving office. Both the Democrats and Republicans are afraid of the consequences they might face if they oppose the Trump regime. Project 2025 is progressing without interruption. The Trump regime has implemented DODGE. It's not to target waste in the federal government; rather, it's designed to create a Surveillance State similar to that of China. Just imagine what they can do with Artificial Intelligence by merging all of our data from various federal agencies. What I want to know is, what can we do if they restrict access to government benefits or, even worse, place us in Social Security's death master file?
Thousands, and more thousands, and more thousands of us in the Streets and flooding our Congress people. Insist. Insist. Insist. If you are indolent, you know what will happen.
I mentioned something similar on someone’s Substack, and in response, he said: “Well you’ve got private pursuits to keep you busy I’m sure. Oh well. So it goes.” I will share exactly what I said to him:
If I had told you back in 2016 that Trump was going to become a dictator, what would you have said? I told a co-worker that Hillary Clinton would win the election in a landslide. That co-worker was so confident in Trump’s victory that he offered to bet me a steak dinner. While I’m not a betting person, I felt so sure that people would recognize what I saw—that Clinton would win convincingly—that I accepted the bet.
When I returned to work after the election, all my co-workers who had voted for Trump said, "Give him a chance." What would you have said to me back then?
I sensed a feeling of darkness after he won. I experienced a similar feeling when I first read about Germany in the 1930s and when I watched the British documentary series "The World at War," which chronicles the events of the Second World War.
Project 2025 was developed by individuals closely tied to the Christian Nationalist faction of the Republican Party. What they crafted in Project 2025 is very well thought-out.
The Trump administration is evolving into an authoritarian regime modeled after Hungary. Viktor Orban, Hungary’s autocratic leader, came to the Heritage Foundation to collaborate with them on crafting a plan to keep Trump—or a Christian Nationalist—in power. That’s why I believe it’s too late.
Thank you . Great Panel . Learned a great deal of important information, always time well spent here at the Ralph Nader Radio Hour .
Cheryl 🔝 Nailed It! Thank You Ralph, and your team👏🏅🥰
This was a great segment.
Wages and Wealth, the two objectives for radical change, are a basic to fixing our society. About 40% of U.S. household live with hardship, insecurity or poverty, this is objective fact. But the average household income is around $180,000 per year, so extreme inequality is a fact of life. And total wealth today is far higher (relative to total annual national income) than ever, and that's a sign that the rich are skimming too much of the surplus. Excess wealth is hoarding at this point, and it's dangerous to the economy, I believe. Financial motives rule the economy, not productive and social benefit motives. I write a blog, Economics Without Greed, Part Two. -- http://benL88.blogspot.com -- My plan is a little different. I propose raising the minimum wage for workers at the largest corporations to $20/hour, about 40% of the workforce. That minimum wage could be even higher. About 55% of workers, that's 90 million of 160 million total workers, earn low wages. The Job Quality Index (NYU Buffalo) shows that 55% of full-time workers, 60 million, earn an average annual income of $37,500, about $18.00 per hour, and the 30 million part-time workers earn annually less. Thisis far too low, all should earn a living wage. The average for the higher paid 45% is around $72,000. Together, these nonsupervisory workers compose 80% of all full-time workers. A Job Guarantee also could be implemented to tighten the labor market, that raises the wage level. That calculation is difficult given differences in locality. And so for. It's complex. The basic idea -- taxing wealth and raising wages -- are foundational for restoring prosperity and democracy. Sen. Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act also advocates a wealth tax.
Excellent with powerful ACTION steps. Thx Ralph & team!
Read the book, please
“There's no consistency here,” exclaims Bruce Fein about the incompetence of Houston's own (groan) Al Green, and I’m saying the same thing in a different context pertaining to the segment with Erica Payne. The segment with Payne started out very well:
“How the left likes to look at taxes is how you get money to pay for stuff. And getting money to pay for stuff is the purpose of taxes on the state and local level. On the federal level, we approach taxes very differently. We say concentrated wealth is the threat to democracy.”
Excellent! That’s what I’ve been saying in the comments section here at the RNRH for months for years now. Unfortunately, this excellent start was entirely contradicted, however, by balderdash from Payne which is completely centered on federal taxation being a source of ‘revenue’ for the federal government to facilitate spending.
Payne may have convinced herself that they are approaching taxation from some kind of novel perspective, but the Patriotic Millionaires are entirely approaching taxation from a right-wing monetarist perspective, one which contradicts any end goal of restoring/maintaining democracy. Payne may have also convinced herself that her argument is clear, but the only thing that is clear are the contradictions in her statements. Her opening statement is one of an empirical approach to taxation and economics, but it ends up being the same Milton Friedman-esque theosophical belief system about the rôle of taxation, the national debt, and the general ability for the federal government to spend.
On a related topic, Payne’s approach to stabilizing the country through an increased minimum wage is short-sighted. I agree that it is important for workers to earn a livable wage, but Payne’s methods are not congruent with the nature of labor in current times. Maybe it would have been appropriate in the 1950s when labor was generally working normal wage-earning jobs, but such is not the case today in the ‘gig’ economy. Employers have learned how to circumvent labor laws and present it as something favorable for labor. With that, merely implementing an increased minimum wage is hardly sufficient to stabilize the national economy.
Instead, the focus should be on implementing a national job guarantee program where the federal government guarantees a job to anyone wanting one at a minimally livable wage with the intent that people in the job guarantee program will transfer into regular employment rather than stay in the JG program. This does many things. For one, it sets an unofficial minimum wage as most people will not work for less than what the JG program is offering. Second, this gives even the otherwise unemployed and underemployed a livable salary, something which would not happen with a regular minimum wage. Third, it maintains job skills and connections for the unemployed/underemployed. Further, it provides price stability as it provides a ‘buffer stock’ of employable labor, which increases national productivity, while also maintaining full employment which helps to stabilize demand.
Ultimately, the Patriotic Millionaires, and the population as a whole, have to confront the reality that in order to fight the oligopoly confronting the nation, the citizenry must transition from the aforementioned theosophical macroeconomic belief system and adopt an empirical one. From that, economic policies can be implemented which favor the entire population, not just small pockets of the population while a large number of other citizens are put in a disadvantaged position. However, that goal will not be achieved until the public is in position to advocate for informed economic position. We’re not in that position right now and the policies being advocated by the Patriotic Millionaires are entirely faith-based positions which I will not support. The Patriotic Millionaires have something to start with given that informed opening statement, but the Patriotic Millionaires still have a lot of homework left to complete.
Klassik, tune in this coming week. We had Erica Payne back on to respond to your comment, both on MMT and minimum wage.
Thanks. I will be sure to listen to the episode this week.
The best way to tax the rich and save Social Security is to raise the estate tax and eliminate the tax loopholes that led Gary Cohn to say "Only morons pay the estate tax." In 2001, my mother's estate was one of the 2.2% of estates that paid an estate tax. In 2023, less than 0.1% of estates paid an estate tax. Trump and the Republicans now intend to use reconciliation to repeal the estate tax.
Richard, tune in this coming week. We had Erica Payne back to respond to your comment. Thanks!
I am a bit unsure why you inferring that taxing the rich some kind of necessity for operating Social Security. The US federal government has a floating currency. There is no limit, aside from inflationary considerations, on how many US Dollars the federal government can spend into existence through various programs. Increasing taxes, on the wealthy or otherwise, are not necessarily a requirement to keep Social Security viable. The situation is quite different for state and local governments, but we’re talking about a federal issue here.
Any constraints Social Security is facing are purely artificial ones. When Social Security was first enacted, it was thought that it might be viewed as socialism in the era where McCarthyism was born. In order to get it passed, it was presented as social insurance rather than a social program, but there is no reason to continue this political compromise or political hoodwinkery. The public demands a stable retirement pension and it should be thought of as a social program in the same way as other countries do it. The same can be said about healthcare or any other number of social programs or potential social programs.
Now, there are potential arguments for taxes such as the estate tax, but the need for these tax receipts to pay for federal government spending are invalid and these types of political messages must perish as they only serve to further right-wing agendas.
Ms Payne’s comments reminded me of an article written by Dorothy Brown back in 2009, Two Tax Codes, Two Americas. Both are an eye opener for the lay person.
I hope she and Bruce Fein prevail but I don’t have much faith in the dems these days with respect to supporting their efforts, especially since very few are calling for a General Strike US.
Our resistance is feckless unlike in France where they shut down attempts to curtail rights and cut benefits in a heartbeat. Trump and his MAGA cult are running roughshod over us while Dems are patting themselves on the back. It’s pathetic to watch.
Perhaps Ralph could shed some light on the General Strike US movement supported by both Prof Richard Wolff and even Rep Jim McGovern.
www.generalstrikeus.com
Wow! Terrific, smart, powerful, clear, passionate woman! Please invite her back again. Learned a lot from her...
I looked around Bruce Fein's website and substack and couldn't find any link to the articles of impeachment
The Capitol Hill Citizen published them