In this episode of the podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Jack Goldstone about the rise in social inequality and political instability in the United States. They discuss how wealth is deployed, the loss of social mobility, comparative judgments of well-being, cosmopolitanism and the isolation of the rich, decreased life expectancy, taxation, the need for government to solve problems, success and social obligation, the causes of revolution, universal basic income (UBI), and other topics.
SUBSCRIBE to listen to the rest of this episode and gain access to all full-length episodes of the podcast at samharris.org/subscribe.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Welcome to the maidens, has bought Cast SAM Harris, just a no to say that if your hearing, this you're not currently honour subscriber feed and will only be hearing partial episodes of the pocket, if you like access to full episodes, you'll need to subscribe SAM Herriston work. There you'll find our private rss feed to add your favorite pot catcher, along with other subscriber only content and, as always, never want money to be. The reason why someone catalyst pocket, if you can't afford us, there's an option in Samara that work to request a free account and we grant a hundred percent was no question. Tat. Ok, we'll sit am speaking with Jack Goldstone
Check as a sociologist and a professor of public policy,
wash Basin University.
And he's one of the world experts on revolutions and knee social?
in political and economic variables that produce them here
Is it a lot on economic growth in a global economy and on the affair
serve population change on economic growth, and
All this feeds into the causes and outcomes of revolutions.
and I must say I was very impressed with how clearly he frames these issues.
And we talk about many- the relevant variables here- inequality,
there are various kinds, wealth and acquire
the included failure,
if social mobility chain
just we might make to the tax code.
new norms round social responsibility that we clearly need.
Probably dont have to remind you that a few short weeks ago we witnessed the capital stormed by a mob whose
diverse interests and commitments, certainly included and intent to overthrow the government of the United States, so
talking about the prospect of revolution at this point in american history.
Doesnt seem as Para.
Lloyd as it otherwise might
and am convinced that we really need to keep all of the trend.
that are leading to this level of political instability and hyper partisanship in view
and this conversation is an excellent place to start sooner
without further delay. I bring you. Jack Goldstone
you're with Jack Goldstone Jack. Thanks for joining my pleasure got to talk to you, so
before. We dive into the matter at hand. Hetty summarize your background warrior. What's been your professional and academic focus? Well,
Democrats would call me a sociologist, but my study is long term social change.
I have looked at revolutions and social protests and changes of
Regime and government from about fifteen hundred to the present and the sun gives you an expertise that same
hey excruciatingly relevant. I at the current moment in american life really
globally. It seems relevant, but I think I want to focus on
on our own country. Here now we can go.
Wherever in the world, you, like I'm happy for travel yeah
ass. I have noticed that in your work maybe wishes to start at least stem.
Acknowledging the global nature of the fund
I'm not going to talk about and then than we can talk about the American seen specifically, but what we ve seen that
been a rise of populism.
and anti glow
vision that either there many nouns hit intersect is a loss of trust in institutions
and what do we know about the sources of this kind of political instability and loss of social cohesion generally? What are those kinds of variables you think about when you try to
stand. These trends, sure where lemme give you at a general and then circle around to what's happening in the globe today,
general across the centuries. There's a pretty persistent pattern and it goes back to US
but the wisdom that roman leaders shared among themselves, and that is when you work for honour and the richest and most powerful men,
years of society, try to enrich and make their society as a whole. Stronger. The society flourishes,
On the other hand, when the rich and powerful simply try to protect and extend their own wealth at the expense of others, the society,
sooner or later collapses. So that's the general picture and you might say
Elites know that why would they do that? The answer is when a country gets rich.
a leap sir in competition with each other? They often fall back on just kind of keeping score with how they do compared to their peers
and they think throughout the rest of society will just go on. It's not my problem, not my issue, and so then you get people trying to
Cumuli, more and more wealth to protect it from taxation and to prevent public services from
being fully funded, and all of that leads to the rest of
society growing more and more angry, because they have a sense that their falling behind their being left out? The government, no
longer is watching out for them, and so they turn against it. They turn against the government, they turn against the elites they get angry and they look for ways to let that anger out usually joining some radical or extreme.
movements, so that now is a wonderful summary of a very depressing landscape to bring it to the. U S context here: how much do you view Trump and the four years we ve just experienced as a
a mere symptom of these underlying problems and the problems themselves were evident in twenty fifteen and before
how much do you view him as ay and exacerbate, are a cause of these problems?
well. He certainly exacerbate her he's, not the underlying cause and, in fact,
the underlying cause, and this is why today
but phenomenon has more to do with the changes in technology
algerian society that we ve seen in the last thirty years we ve had to things happen. One is that the big post world or two generations, what we call the baby boom in this country, postwar
war surges elsewhere. They came of age in a time when manual labor was the key to the economy. People made things they provided services, they got wealthy or at least made state.
good incomes. Doing that, and there is respect for people who made things and built things, did things with their hands, but as the baby boom got older, they found the rug pulled out from under them. The economy started to shift in the direction of finance high finance, Sir loans. Credit management of securities grew bigger and bigger, from like five percent of the economy to fifteen percent of the economy, and the other thing that grew, of course, is the digital economy which we are all familiar with and which we all enjoy. But the digital economy doesn't employ that many people and it certainly doesn't give its rewards and respect.
Two people doing manual, labor and so for the baby boomers the life that they expected, the respect, the dignity that they had and work they find is disappearing. Their communities are hurt by it the prospects for their children if they can't get into university, which is increasingly expensive and difficult have diminished. So we ve seen a slow down in social mobility.
same time, we ve seen a reduction in the life quality and life prospects for those, especially in kind of the smaller
towns, rural areas that were the farming manufacturing heartland. The big metro areas have continued to thrive
But the big metro areas have their own issues. They tend to be very diverse. They have to deal with the issues of racial justice, discrimination
managing diversity and that's that's another source of anger for those who feel that as immigrants, perhaps or as people of color society doesn't grant them
dignity and respect either, and so you have both on the left and the right. These kind of widespread feeling
that wait a minute all the rewards of society seem to be going to a very small group.
And now they also seem to be taking over all the institutions and they seem to be rigging.
everything and in their favour and know, what's going to become of us
we need someone to fight back against everything being rigged, and that leads to the attraction of kind of the populist strong man who says I alone can fix it. I can be your champion.
And produces really an almost a quasi religious devotion to someone who presented themselves as a Savior as a national symbol of regeneration, Donald Trump came along and with all the skills of aid pro wrestling.
Television celebrity dawn the mantle of hero and was six very successful in that. But of course he had counterparts in other countries
Boss, Gennaro in Brazil, do TAT day in the Philippines, AIR Taiwan in Turkey, Forest Johnson and the breaks it movement in the United Kingdom. The other details vary, but in each case it's not been the leading edge economically of the society. That's been driving change, it's been those who feel frustrated that they are not benefiting
as much as those leading edge elite that they see. I think you wrote in a peace that you published with Peter Turton that term and I'm cool.
New inequality in polarization have not been this high since the nineteenth century. Ethical private want to follow.
on wealth inequality, but what are they?
Orton measures of inequality. Can you put some numbers
in the? U S and is anything
Other than wealth inequality, that is a a major driver of of this problem. Well, there certainly are many inequalities. Besides just inequality of wealth and inequality of wealth is probably not the most troubling how interesting
that's great at my assumption. Coming into this conversations that wealth in again,
these really the the elephants.
every room now and I'm so yet. Please philammon,
apps and my knowledge you're. Ok, look what we ve been
This before we had the railroad robber barons, we had the Rockefellers. The Carnegie is build up huge amounts of wealth, but when they did so
other parts of society were benefiting as well, that is the railroads and the industries employed lots of money, lots of workers and gave them opportunities. What we ve had
in the last thirty years with the rise of finance and digital fortunes is
the rich getting richer, while everyone else stagnates or grows very slowly indeed, and its more Thee differences in
opportunity and social mobility in access to what I would call middle class amenities, a safe neighbourhood, good schools for your children, medical care, the ability to have a varied diet. Those things have, even though the price of a color tv is gone way down. The price of a new automobile
has gone way down. The things that are essential to quality of family life remain competitive and therefore expensive and in many ways
things increasingly beyond the reach both of young people and people who don't have college degree. Professional positions,
now wealth, inequality,
harms society. If
who's, who are wealthy use that to get control of government policy and steer that wealth in ways that benefits themselves, if
our generous with the wealth and use it to endow museums, universities to invest in new businesses to rehabilitate districts? Then that's fine! That's good forces!
I did so a lot of it has to do with how wealth is deployed and
how income and opportunities are distributed, and it's the fact that the the use of private wealth and the distribution of opportunities,
really seems to have diminished for large portions of the population, maybe thirty to fifty percent in many of the advanced western countries.
And so you have a lot of that anger there, the yellow vessel in France, Sir people in
Sheila who write it against their government. People in Brazil who rioted at the cost of bus fare going up. These are people who feel like they're just getting by and every imposition upon them is increasingly pushing them over the edge. So fundamental psychological
Fact here, which is certainly an unhappy one, is that people's personal, Joe
Men of well being are generally comparative so that, even if, by any
absolute measure, everyone was
any better off if the difference between the the
most fortunate in the least fortunate is continuing to widen.
then that is seen as a source of risk.
Grievance and frustration even
everyone in our virtually everyone, has a smartphone in their pocket that not even the President of the United States could have,
to get thirty years ago. On some level, we seem to be doomed to dissatisfaction,
and no matter how good things get for everyone. If things
getting better and better and better faster for a subset of the population and rightly said, it seems like something like that struck
is where that Arbour legacy code, that's a pessimistic way
looking at it. Yes, PETE, there's always envy people always
old down and out if they see others doing better than themselves, but people compare them so
loves mainly to other people they encounter in their own life. So, if
living in a subdivision, aura urban neighborhood you dont really
care, whether the guy living on the seventieth floor of the penthouse has a gold bathtub or a porcelain. Bathtub
you dont care, whether he's keeping an eighty foot yacht in the harbor or a fifty foot yacht. Those things are relevant to you. What you care about is whether
you're gonna be able to move into a better house when you get married with room for your kids, whether the people down the block or on
on the other side of town who you see our somehow able to afford things that you
yet afford any more that you thought you were. Your parents could afford so you're right, there's always a degree of comparing ourselves to others, but it doesn't have to be the case
Well, there always be people richer than May, so I'm always going to be unhappy. That's not how people are as long as people feel
but they're getting better with their getting it
in their own lives and that the progress that they're making
reasonable compared to most of the people. They see immediately around them, they're, usually quite pleased. Most people are not quite as prone to torture,
themselves with the envy of the rich, as you might think, otherwise
and be as much of a happy market for watching all those tales of the rich and famous those
like fairytales, the people hope will come true, but they don't actually hurt people's feelings. What hurts as if in their day to day lives they feel stuck if they feel that they can live the way that their parents did or that they expected to do ten twenty years ago, and they ve been working hard to get ahead and adjust,
It happened, so the circle of comparison is tighter than I suggested there, but it seems like this structure travels with us at every level of six.
ass in societies. Are you have billionaires who currently feel like they,
they haven't made it financially because they can compare themselves too
yesterday's us and Elon musk
and you have people who have tens of millions of dollars who feel poor by reference to billionaires and there's something. The insidious
this, because I'm as you say, they were deployed in their wealth in extremely pro social and generous ways. It wouldn't represent a kind of toxic capture of resources,
but I think, if people feel they haven't made, it
even when they have a billion dollars on some level and they're keeping score with reference to the people who have ten or a hundredfold more resources than they do in either
You know it erodes good norms. We used to have a dynamic. You can educate me on this point. I am not sure how much we used to have them, or at least it prevents
The formation of norms that we should have, which is people, should see that
that one of the main reasons to be wealthy is to be able to help other people and
It is the kind of society that we all
went to live in right and not to allow that kind of abundance to become to state aid
magnifying glass for thee, the light of self cans,
learn to be even more concentrated that some
In my view, not you, you ve got it. I think if we think about the elites having
come more cosmopolitan and traveling
to the same conferences and the same Richie Resorts and really
and cut off in some ways from their society in which they grew up. That's a very unfortunate thing
not that long ago, the rich might
lived in the fanciest part of town, but they attended pop.
Festivals and they attend a church in this,
town and in some of the same buildings institutions. As the other p,
oh, who lived in the community and the way, the
I wanted to be remembered was as benefactors as
pinterest, whatever they were, their private lives and their public lives. They wanted to be seen as people who were pillars of the community and that phrase know the pillar of the community seems to have gone out of fashion that we used to talk about it being in your heart
a rich man to enter Heaven right than to go in for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. The religious side
Here was virtue and honour were to be found in helping
your fellow men and today, I think job
and actually believes in the ideal of public service? He is more interested in making through,
hundred and fifty million Americans better off than making himself better off that has done
she returns for him, but he will go
is grave, delightfully happy if he has made all Americans better off. That's
old school ideal, I'm glad it's back in the presidency and the United States and I hope it can spread. But that's what successful
It is frankly rely on if the richest and most powerful turn their backs on public welfare. Then democracy doesn't make sense for people any more big
Why should they vote for a government that ignores them and concentrates its benefits on the rich
We want to restore and rejuvenate democracy. We need governments that function to provide broad general benefits again, not that simply exist to help them
Those who have the best positions or the most capital get even further ahead, wasn't fancy. It seems that there is a tent
in here, because they are in my lexicon personally caused Nepal.
is not a pejorative term to think of oneself
more and more as a citizen of the world has just opened to the best ideas, war
Oh, you know whatever their provenance and whose circle
of moral concern has extend,
beyond the borders of one's country to encompass all of
civilization right in and to feel that we should be prioritizing.
Play some of our generosity. Much of our generosity, along the lines of greatest need, writes a date to care about what's happening. You know some beleaguered place in Sub Saharan. Africa is
not a a misappropriation of one's compassionate, and in fact it is just a recognition of you. No one should be
more moved than one tends to be by them
greatest need and a kind of accidents of geographic distance are just
They don't actually have ethical import, even though they they
will they do? And you know, if you tell me my mind
Where's daughter fell down a well well then it's gonna occupy all of my attention and you tell me that there's a genocide,
raging in Sudan or some other place and hundreds of thousands of children, just like my neighbors daughter, had been killed.
I'm gonna find that so boring than amid a switch the channel when it appears on the evening news right, so that that seems like a bug and
code rather than a feature. So just it seems like much of what you use seem too
just derided, or at least flagged as a source of pollution.
Liability as cosmopolitanism is just day an acknowledgement that
many of our problems are
global now, and then they know when no one nation, and so many of our opportunities are global race Jesse, you know we are were struggling to building
global civilization, that actually works, and how are things
on many points should be global and at the end, that is actually all to the good that we want to go into conferences where p
but from all over the world, bring their best ideas and and network? And yet
one extra reality of that trend it sounds like is
the complete erosion or near complete erosion, of the very principles that would make a single
country like our own work as a democracy,
I clearly hit a nerve here. Let me try and talk about cosmopolitanism in a way that avoids, I hope, some of these
concerns about. Where do you do the most good? If you have a family,
and you're living in a house and
You say, your neighbors daughter fell down a well well, of course you you're going to go help your neighbour
and rescue the daughter, that's an imperative to do
On the other hand, let's say you here that some one all across town, their daughter, fell in a well.
And you certainly would like to help if you didn't have any other priorities at home. But if you're,
Own daughter is upstairs sick with fever and needs to be cared for members,
just gotten out of surgery, or she has a very high fever- you're, not going
leave your own daughter who is sick to go,
help someone else, even if they need help
until your own house is in order, and when you asked me about this,
types of inequality? I said I wasn't focused on wealth. Let me too,
about one, that's really down to earth, and that is life expectancy. How long people live America, along with the United Kingdom,
was one of the only rich country
he's in the world where life expectancy started going down between two thousand fifteen and two thousand eighteen, we ve never had that in our history. It indicates that our society was suffering from illness was an illness of opium addiction and other deaths of despair, alcoholism, suicide.
Now I do think it's important we'll have one planet. We have one climate we all have to pitch in our country
you'd money to medical charities
overseas, as well as to hospitals here at home, because you're right
is important to recognise. We're all part of a global community, but we cannot neglect p.
both who are really suffering, who are losing years of life here, that they shouldn't be losing
I say that was going on even before Trump was elected as part of the region.
I think he was elected. You can look at the vote for tromp against counties that head declines in life, expected
c in the prior few years and its very close match it's one of the best predictors above the Trump kind of voting as a protest, because you're unhappy with conditions in your community in your life
So when I say cosmopolitanism is a problem, it's only if people say that they think they're countries, United
Aids is fine, and we can look beyond that. You can look
beyond your own country, but not if it blinds you to what's going on right in your own home, and I think this is something we missed. It really wasn't done till and case, and Angus Deaton published their research, calling attention to the fact that life expectancy has started to go down.
That it became an issue for policymakers and for the media. It went on for years quietly and communities across Amerika without being appreciated, but we could have seen the precursors of it, I believe, by looking at changes in the distribution of income in the distribution of opportunity and mobility in what was happening to the economic base of many rural and small town communities.
so by all means be a cosmopolitan, but that also means get to know parts of your own country that you might not know as well. We talk about fly over and coastal elites. I find that kind of
the meaning. I spend a lot of time when I was a kid taken: buses across the country. Listening to country western music. I still like to drive when I can from the east coast to the west and see this big beautiful country and between and get to know the people there
because those are the people at the end of the day whose choices as long as we live in a democracy. Those of the peoples whose voices and whose choices will make a difference just as much as mine
and we have to come together and find things that will make everyone better off if we're gonna, keep democracy goin
the wise we get into these historical cycles of selfish elites, angry popular grew
send the rise of populist leaders, demagogues and mass protest, and it gets violent, gets ugly and we ve seen that we need to change direction.
So I guess I want to land here in this conversation is with some sense of what we think we should do going forward. Images seems like we have massive problems to solve
many of which are only exacerbating the problem were talking
about money that we have to deal with the covert pandemic. Obviously, but the covert pandemic has
has ratified and worsened various forms of inequality in our society. Certainly, wealth is one an egg
and we will begin with the gun. This conversation framing it in terms of of what the most fortunate people decide
to do essentially what we ve put in terms of philanthropy and charity, but really the other peace here, as is our tax code, and
the willingness sore disinclination of rich people to pay? What women?
think as their fair share or or more in taxes and the degree to which they are going to fight any attempt to re
taxes. How do you view taxi
in here and end any specific strategies we might use to redistribute what
Here's what I think the psychological status quo is here among among fortunate, wealthy people at every level. There's a sense that,
in a rather often, the government is terrible at what it attempts to do right as a basic cynicism
that the government can ever do anything especially well, and therefore you,
who encounter rich people who think that there are some that this offers. Some.
paying more in taxes that, because the money will be wasted or mean are spent on some boondoggle
whereas in my view that is really just as an argument for better governance by all means
went out on the ways in which government fails and is wasteful, but that's not an argument at where you want to know.
Taxco is. It is an argument for better government, but there is a sense that to your taxes are already too high. Do you run into this with disconcerting frequency among rich people, and therefore it's only rational to want to decide to give the money to the most effective causes oneself rather than have the government waste it to this. Is this explains of bias for philanthropy
taxation, but as we know, people aren't, you know all that generous when they don't have to be- or at least most of them are also is so they amount that people actually give away, even when it's well publicized,
You know a in error on around in error of their wealth, rather
often, and it certainly not what they would be obliged to give away. If we raised taxes on them so at a headache,
You taxation here and and put an end unifil, forty get into any specific ideas about how to change our tax code,
Thank you for that invitation. Most people would like to tear up the existing tax code and start over, but let me say
the point of view of my model, there actually three things that need to be kept in mind as we tried to pull our society back from the edge of extreme conflict into
One is restoring people's trust. The government can function and can solve problems. The days when we looked government to provide the interstate highway system to build beautiful airports to build
subways to take us to work to provide law in order to provide for the national defence to send rockets to the moon to develop new cures for disease. All of these things
trusted government to do reasonably well, when we thought they were prudent investments for the future. But, as you say too, many people now think that any dollars spent by government is wasted and therefore, even in dollars.
Bent the honor ultra premium, whisky for one person's consumption is still better than letting that money be wasted by the government, so that philosophy has to change. We have to say look, there are legitimate things that government can do, and you know what, when there is a disaster, when even a rich persons land gets flooded,
or a tornado, comes they come to the government and say what about restoring my property would about fixing bits and so on. So government has to be seen as having a valid role in a complex, wealthy society. There are big problems covered nineteen, obviously a huge one. That's hitting us in the face, but so too is climate change, as the Midwest is flooding envy. California is burning and the Gulf Coast is being battered by repeated, powerful hurricanes. We can't allow those things to double or triple and expect that quality of life will go on so you're right. People have to recover a trust that government is worth.
funding, otherwise, everyone fight to taxation. The second thing is that elites have to work together to find some common ground in what needs to be done to strengthen and improve society, as opposed to just being in competing camp saying. This is what our group needs to do and we don't want you be to be involved and vice versa,
If you have Republicans and Democrats or Tories and socialists whatever your divisions are if instead of saying yes, of course, we have differences, were human beings but
because we're human. We have some common needs and interests, and we have to work hard to find them. If you put that task,
and just say I want my group to win. We go back on the path towards I'm, not gonna, raise any ones
Access because you might spend them on things that you want- and I think that's awful and the other group will say well we're not gonna raise taxes, because you might spend on things that you want. Instead of saying, let's have an agenda for things that we agree:
We need and then find a level of taxation that allows us to accomplish what is necessary. So you need to have governments, that's trusted. You need to have a leaps that work together and then the third thing is, you need people to feel. The system is fair, that the taxes that they pay are not unfair compared to the two
says that others, especially the rich pay. One of the big problems we have with the tax system now is not the rate of taxation, but the fact that so many assets and so much income escapes taxation altogether. It's in offshore l L sees its in real estate trusts. It sin exempt inheritance trusts. All of these things make the system unfair and give people a general hatred of taxation is just something else, that's rigged, so we need to go back to fair enforcement, clear
an understandable laws and a system that people believe in. But let's take the first place. What what do you think we can do cause there's a kind of perverse self, fulfilling aspect to this? What what can we do to increase trust in government? There really is a pervasive sense.
that, firstly, anything that can be handled by the private sector is better accomplished in the private sector. Either
was numbers of invidious comparisons between private businesses that have to function by the constraints of a market and the government is simulations of those,
businesses racy, comparing FED axe to the post office say or you know you any
any business you ve ever had to deal with two, the DE envy rise. I guess I was just because a sense it
Throwing more money at it from the government side just gets you a business
that you, no one, would ever direct
their money out if they had a choice, and so there's that kind of cynicism. How do you see us right?
booting from where we currently are
time where it would just be expected that if the government sets itself to a specific task, whether its space program or public health emergency
it's going to do a a wonderful job. That task, because many the basket,
are involved and it's all well funded, and this is greatest priority straight and it's not captured by endless layers of bureaucrats,
I don't understand how the world works. How do we get to something like daylight here? You need a few big wins. I applaud President Joe Biden for making covert nineteen treatment and mitigation his first priority
this is clearly a job that private industry can develop. Vaccines, they're, not gonna, distribute them so getting vaccines into people's arms. Making them safe is a perfect example of the type of thing public health has been doing under government since the nineteenth century
and if we have a big success, I think it'll be applauded and will go a long way to making people say. You know, I'm glad the government was on the job. Now, if the government, as under Donald Trump, says what
you? No government can do things, not really our responsibility, we'll just encourage private firms to make the
vaccine and then we'll. Let people figure out how to get it. That's a disaster, that's what we're living through now! That's why, even though the backs
means became available. Last fall. Fewer than five percent of Americans have benefited from them.
but we need government programmes that are visible and that work and it's not as rare as you think, people love social security. They fought bitterly against efforts to private eye
Is it sometimes people don't realize it's a government program at Del government? Do you know who keep your hands off my social security? It's mine, okay, but it came to you and still does come through your go through your government. Your local government provide police protection, provides fire protection,
your local government provide public schools. America has always been attached to private schools, I'm sorry to public schools.
and the rich who feel hay, and I can send my kids to private school. There tends to be a kind of let them eat cake view,
it is. If you're wealthy enough, you can have beautiful private property, you don't need public parks. You can afford private schools, you don't need to pay for public schools for everybody else
you can afford private concierge medicine. You don't need to worry about public health and that kind of let them eat. Cake goes
to what happened in IRAN and the nineteen seven days where you had such terrible traffic congestion-
people couldn't get to work and instead of building more roads,
They show son was quoted as saying look. If people are unhappy with traffic congestion,
the make some money and by helicopters, that's the
should that led to a revolution that we're not as extreme there, but that's the end point of where elite, selfishness and lack of understanding and empathy leads. If leaders have empathy for people, if they really do work to make government
benefit, not just this interest group that particular minority, but really
All Americans, where
All Americans need it like with public health care like public education, then we get back to people. Seeing government is a good thing and important part of this
yeah. This is something I am I'm really
worried about now that I've been worried about this general topic, at least since
two thousand and nine, but no that's good for you. You have her from her but I'll be
but under covered it, it's just. I guess it specific case
that they find alarming in Ireland alone. Here is what is what we see in California, with the the flight of many people in tech to other states that
Just by coincidence, don't have income tax rates of as many people are going to Texas in Florida and its is an unimpeachable,
rational decision. If your concern is to make an immediate,
change in one in your own quality of life and to have it have. It makes sense. On paper,
In our view, if you're going to be essentially
hey millions of dollars a year to lie.
in another city that you like just as well as you liked San Francisco before it was inundated with crime and homelessness. Well, then, what
I do that when I moved Austin or WAR Miami it make
sent on every level, and yet it's part of
very trend. You sketched out in the beginning. This conversation it in
many version of cosmopolitanism, the fact that you were also deal
fascinated that you know any nice city will do were knowledge
workers, we can work from anywhere and cove. It has really deliver them.
Lesson to everyone who is available to it, so the water, what were witnessing is just a flight of some of the most productive people in our society and the corresponding tax base to other states
that have a different tax code not to get bogged down on this specific case, but I'm wondering what you think California should do in this case with holder. What we're suffering from here is just the fact that we have a tax system that can be gamed simply by
crossing border and the barrier to doing that. It is quite a bit lower than leaving it in the United States would be there for many. Many people are doing it. Do you have any ideas for what California would you want later? If you'd like to continue listening to this podcast you'll need to subscribe, it Samharris, DOT, org you'll get access to all.
Of making has podcast and two other subscriber only content, including bonus episodes and amaze and commerce
I've been having the waking about making sense, podcast ad free and relies
entirely, unless your support and you
subscribed now at San Paris dot Org
Transcript generated on 2021-02-02.