The Israel Deception

Is the return of Israel in the 20th century truly a work of God, or is it a result of a cosmic chess move to deceive the elect by the adversary?

Monday, May 13, 2019

Hints of gold returning as sound money as Trump readies new Gold Standard Fed Governor while Congressman submits bill to audit gold supply

With two of President Trump's primary picks to fill vacant slots on the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors having dropped out in recent weeks, rumors of his newest pick could very well send shockwaves through the central bank.  And that is because according to Mish Shedlock in an article published on May 12, Trump appears to be readying Gold Standard advocate Judy Shelton as his next nominee.


Economist Judy Shelton, a Trump economic advisor and a gold standard advocate is rumored to be Trump's next Fed pick. 
Bloomberg reports White House Considers Economist Judy Shelton for Fed BoardThe White House is considering conservative economist Judy Shelton to fill one of the two vacancies on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors that President Donald Trump has struggled to fill. 
She’s currently U.S. executive director for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and previously worked for the Sound Money Project, which was founded to promote awareness about monetary stability and financial privacy. – Money Mavin
Judy Shelton had been a strong pick early on in President Trump's plans for the Federal Reserve before moving into the role as an adviser and administration financier.

Yet this news of bringing Shelton onto the Fed Board of Governors is not the only gold based news to arrive at the government's doors as just last week, Congressman Alex Mooney submitted a bill before the House to call for a full and complete audit of the nation's gold supply.
U.S. Representative Alex Mooney (R-WV) introduced legislation this week to provide for the first audit of United States gold reserves since the Eisenhower Administration. 
The Gold Reserve Transparency Act (H.R. 2559) – backed by the Sound Money Defense League and government accountability advocates – directs the Comptroller of the United States to conduct a “full assay, inventory, and audit of all gold reserves, including any gold in ‘deep storage,’ of the United States at the place or places where such reserves are kept.” 
HR 2559 requires more than just a physical assay, inventory, and audit, however. Even if all United States gold can be physically accounted for, it may nevertheless be encumbered with third-party obligations – or otherwise be impaired by bank financialization. – EIN Presswire

With the BIS making the sudden and urgent shift to allow physical gold to become a Tier 1 reserve asset for the central banks, perhaps we should not be surprised that President Trump and his allies in Congress are trying to prepare the way for a return of the Gold Standard in some form, especially as the dollar continues to lose its hegemony on the world stage.

Monday, May 6, 2019

Central bank validates that the purpose of money printing was to transfer wealth to the rich

While the circus of Democratic Presidential candidates continue to try to outdo themselves in who would tax (steal) from the rich the most, the saddest part in all of this is that they also continue to defend the very entity that helped make them rich.

Because in a new study published by Netherland's central bank in April of this year, researchers concluded that even going back to the 1920s, the end result of any and all money printing by the world's collective of central banks has been to enrich the top 1%.
Authored by Mehdi El Herradi and Aurélien Leroy, (Working Paper No. 632, De Nederlandsche Bank NV), the paper "examines the distributional implications of monetary policy from a long-run perspective with data spanning a century of modern economic history in 12 advanced economies between 1920 and 2015, ...estimating the dynamic responses of the top 1% income share to a monetary policy shock." 
The authors "exploit the implications of the macroeconomic policy trilemma to identify exogenous variations in monetary conditions." Note: the macroeconomic policy trilemma "states that a country cannot simultaneously achieve free capital mobility, a fixed exchange rate and independent monetary policy".Per authors: 
"The central idea that guided this paper’s argument is that the existing literature considers the distributional effects of monetary policy using data on inequality over a short period of time. However, inequalities tend to vary more in the medium-to-long run. We address this shortcoming by studying how changes in monetary policy stance over a century impacted the income distribution while controlling for the determinants of inequality." 
They find that "loose monetary conditions strongly increase the top one percent’s income and vice versa. In fact, following an expansionary monetary policy shock, the share of national income held by the richest 1 percent increases by approximately 1 to 6 percentage points, according to estimates from the Panel VAR and Local Projections (LP). - Zerohedge
Yet besides ultra wealthy individuals like JP Morgan's Jamie Dimon and the former CEO of Goldman Sachs becoming billionaires following the Fed's introduction of QE money printing after 2008, a recent article even shows that the central banks themselves were transferring wealth to themselves as seen by the fact that the Bank of Japan itself holds so many assets derived from money printing that they are now considered a Top 10 Shareholder in 50% of all public companies.


Sadly, most Americans are ignorant of the warnings given to them by our Founding Fathers, who in the case of Thomas Jefferson foreshadowed this over 250 years ago.


"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies,"  Jefferson wrote. "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around(these banks) will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

And judging by how many homeless live in wealthy cities like New York, San Francisco, and Seattle, perhaps if the Democrats wanted to actually do something about poverty and wealthy inequality they would simply look inward and realize that it was their legislation passed in 1913 that is the root of this calamity.

Friday, May 3, 2019

While Democratic Presidential candidates push for trillion dollar universal free college, here are five ways it can be done on the cheap

In the race to 2020, Presidential candidates on the Democratic side are falling all over themselves in a rush to see who can promise the most free stuff to a voter base who no longer questions the fact that their politicians never actually fulfill these promises.  And one of the primary focuses they are pushing is that of free education for all, and dissolution of student loan debts.

However it is beyond a proven fact that whenever the government gets involved in a particular industry, both costs and prices tend to skyrocket to the point where consumers can no longer afford them.  And this has been particularly true starting in 1965 when the introduction of Medicare came into the healthcare system, and later for education when in 2010 President Obama nationalized the student loan industry.

Healthcare costs:


As you can see by this chart, prior to the advent of the Great Society and the government's move into backstopping healthcare, costs were relatively stable as market competition and the lack of inflation led to affordable prices.  However as with any industry when you add in additional liquidity primarily due to monetary expansion (increased US debt), it causes prices to rise as the natural order of markets becomes manipulated.

Similarly, here is what has happened to the cost of education both for K-12, and at the University level when the government chose to subsidize the industry first in 1979, then again in 2010.

K-12 per student costs - 1979 (when Dept. of Education was formed) - 2018


Costs of education at University level 2010 - 2018 after government nationalized student loans


The kicker in all of this of course is that despite the fact that costs have increased between 20 and 200% in some cases, the value of education has not as seen by nationwide literacy charts.

So anyone with two brain cells can easily deduce that more money thrown at the problem won't both improve service, or cut costs... which leads us to ask the question then of what will accomplish both?

Even going back to the Dark Ages, rulers have understood the potential benefits to their nations and empires if even the most common individual had some semblance of an education.  However today's rigid and closed education system has lost its original mission of expanding minds and training tomorrow's workers to instead be more of an assembly line where diplomas are given out to whomever was willing to pay the exorbitant costs no matter if they actually learn anything of substance.

So with this in mind I wanted to throw out my two cents on the topic and provide new ideas on how the U.S. could deal with the viable issues of student loan debt along with providing an inexpensive way to open up higher education to all.  And below are five ideas on the subject.

1.  A nationwide online University system

Since the government is subsidizing the University industry with hundreds of billions of dollars both through student loans and outright grants, it is time to instead take this money and build an open and online curriculum system that covers virtually all Degree level courses at minimal cost.  And what is perhaps the most significant thing about this system is that study by individuals can be done at their own leisure, and not under the time constraints demanded of them by colleges.  So for those who are slower learners, or who either have a family or work long hours, they can take as much time as they need to absorb the information necessary to be able to pass a test which would give them the credits applicable towards their Degree.

Additionally, those who already have a working knowledge of a given class subject can choose to accelerate through the coursework, and then take the test whenever they choose.

Which of course brings us to the question of testing.  Since the government would be in control over the online system, they would hire Proctors and have them placed in every major population center and region.  And each Proctor would have access to a series of tests (perhaps 10 completely different ones for each course), and evaluate the student in a live environment to determine if they have passed the course.  And should the student fail in their testing, they would not be penalized with a 'grade' but simply informed they need to go back and study further before retaking the test.

In the end this would solve three major problems... first, a way to provide inexpensive education at the University level to every American.  Secondly, it would spawn price competition within the legacy college system where they would need to adapt their prices to compete with the government.  And third it would end up providing a massive benefit to the nation as a whole by having a larger portion of its citizens being educated and skilled.

2.  End Federal subsidizing of Universities

It is high time to end the subsidizing of Universities, both at the student loan level and at the grant level.  Many Universities, especially those in the Ivy League, already have endowments in the amount of billions of dollars and can very easily pay for their own research and then profit from the results of that work.

3.  End Professor tenures.

Most professors achieve tenure NOT based upon their ability to teach, but on their abilities to publish and acquire grants from the government.  In fact in many instances, tenured professors no longer even teach courses in the Department they are assigned to but instead pawn off their responsibilities to grad students or other instructors.

4.  Incentivize needed career fields

It is the right of any student to study in the career field of their choice, but rarely does a Degree held in 'Gender Studies' serve society beyond that of perhaps an HR Department.  And with the government desperately in need of STEM workers and researchers in order to keep up with the rest of the world, incentivizing these career fields for students would go a long way in solving the problem of shortages.

5.  Bring back a form of the 'Peace Corps' to help Americans pay off their student loans

Every psychologist and criminologist knows that condoning bad behavior only leads to more of it.  So the idea of dissolving or allowing the default of one's student loans means the taxpayer absolves them of their bad choices and responsibilities without a consequence.  So in order to provide a beneficial solution to all in regards to the crisis that is student loan debt, I am proposing a return to a concept that worked during the 1960s and 70s, but instead of going out and serving the world through a few years of charitable work, students willing would fill positions in the government, military, or other parts of society where they would replace retiring workers in public service on a temporary basis, and have 20-50% of their paychecks garnished towards the paying off of their loans.

For those willing to do this, yes it could mean 5-10 years of their lives relegated to a limited choice of lifestyles, however since most of the money is owed to the government anyway, it would provide a benefit to both while in the end also providing experience to the worker they might not have gotten it in the normal economy.

While it is not in my nature to go to the government for solutions that the free market could in the past have easily provided, unfortunately we are in a place where the government is already involved in nearly every aspect of society.  So for now it is best to try to adopt solutions to industries like education using the tools and systems we already have in place while at the same time trying to minimize costs as much as possible since we already know that throwing MORE money at a problem has rarely solved anything.

Rabobank fears that Fed policies are headed towards the US losing control over the dollar as the global reserve currency

As dollar shortages and an underlying global liquidity crisis spurred on the central bank to lower IOER rates during the Fed's recent mid-point FOMC meeting, analysts from one particular bank are suddenly questioning whether Powell and his Board of Governors have lost control over monetary policy.

Additionally, if this assessment should prove accurate could it also be the final death knell for the dollar's place as the world's reserve currency?


One week later, and following the Fed's admission that even it was surprised by how quickly the overnight funding market plumbing had gotten clogged up, others are starting to ask the very question we posed a week ago. 
In a note published overnight by Rabobank's Phillip Marey, the US strategist - just like us - asks "Is the Fed losing control of the policy rate system?" Needless to say, the answer could have profound implications not only for the future of US monetary policy, but whether or not the dollar can remain as the world's reserve currency in a world in which the US central bank loses the ability to set the price of money. - Zerohedge
 Below are more details from Rabobank.
What to make of the lack of a formal warning? In the first place, it means that the recent rise in the federal funds rate took the Fed by surprise. In the second place, it means the Fed thought it could not afford to wait for another six weeks. This shows that the Fed’s current framework for monetary policy implementation is not working. It has difficulty keeping the effective federal funds rate close to the midpoint of the target range announced by the FOMC. Moreover, the changes in the IOER rate present a challenge to the Fed’s communication to the public: the central bank is tweaking one of its policy rates now and then, but this supposedly has nothing to do with its monetary policy stance? What’s more, this time the Fed could not even afford to  give a formal warning to the markets. Today’s decision proves the failure of the current policy rate system. 
Therefore, the Fed’s debate about effective monetary policy implementation is likely to continue. While the current system has two floors, the interest on excess reserves (IOER) and the overnight reverse repurchase agreement (ON RRP) as we discussed back in 2015, it is lacking a ceiling. At the press conference, Powell said that the FOMC will be looking at a repo facility as a possible tool in an upcoming meeting, think about it for a while, and then make a decision. 
We take the inversion of the yield curve more seriously and we continue to expect the economy to fall into recession in 2020H2. Consequently, we think that the Fed will be forced to start cutting rates in 2020.

Sadly, printing more dollars has been the central bank's 'only solution' to every perceived problem over the past 10 years. And with the end result being that debt levels have reached untenable heights at every level of the economy (sovereign, corporate, consumer), it is beginning to appear that even the banks are fearing that the Fed has taken things to the point where they have lost control over the system, and could lead to the rest of the world to losing all remaining confidence in the dollar.

Sunday, April 21, 2019

As China's Belt and Road forum kicks off this week, Arab nation attendance provides a strong confirmation to end of Petrodollar

With China's Belt and Road confab set to kick off this coming week in Beijing, an astounding number of Middle Eastern nations are expected to attend.

And with representatives from 17 Arab countries confirmed to be participating in the new Silk Road project, it all but validates that the long-standing Petrodollar system is at an end.


Beijing has inked cooperation deals on its multi-trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) with 17 Arab countries, state-run Xinhua News Agency reported, citing the results of a joint Sino-Arab forum. 
The second China-Arab Forum on Reform and Development, which was held in Shanghai on Tuesday, attracted more than a hundred businessmen, politicians, and academics from China and Arab states, including Egypt, Lebanon, Djibouti, and Oman. This year’s meeting, dubbed ‘Build the Belt and Road, Share Development and Prosperity’, was dedicated to boosting the project. - Russia Today
 All in all, representatives from 37 countries will be attending this forum between April 22-25.  And what makes this trade project a real threat to the U.S. and dollar hegemony is that much of it will be done bilaterally, and in currencies that are outside the global reserve.
Chinese currency renminbi (RMB), or the yuan, has gained a bigger popularity overseas, especially in countries along the Belt and Road as the B&R construction advances smoothly. The use of Chinese currency sees a huge development potential in the B&R countries with further rise of cross-border trade, which can be settled in RMB since 2009. 
According to data released by China’s central bank, the People's Bank of China (PBOC), 3.71 trillion yuan worth of cross-border trade was settled in RMB in the first three quarters of 2018, and a growing number of countries and regions have accepted the settlement of cross-border transactions in RMB. 
International demand for RMB is increasing. The thirst for RMB may be found in the booming currency swap between China and foreign countries and hot selling of Panda bonds in B&R countries. - yidaiyilu.gov
While President Trump continues to try to break apart global trade through the use of tariffs and economic sanctions, China appears to be focusing on new markets where competitive advantages are being tied to the strength of each nation's own money, and not within the restrictions formed on them through the Petrodollar.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will continue to be relevant since 2.5 billion people still function in black market economies

With the OECD reporting that nearly two and half billion people, or a good 50% of all those eligible to be part of the global labor pool, work in jobs that aren't readily regulated by various governments, it would not come as a shock that one day soon cryptocurrencies could play a much greater role in the financial system.


Nearly two billion people work in it. And it accounts for perhaps 20% of the world’s total economic activity. 
“It” is the black market, or System D, a slang phrase adapted from the French word débrouillard. A débrouillard is a resourceful and self-reliant person. A débrouillard figures out how to get what they need regardless of the obstacles. The obstacles are usually the laws or price controls put in place by the state. 
There are a lot of débrouillards in the world. In 2009, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), estimated that around 1.8 billion people – at the time, half the world’s working age people — had unofficial jobs that weren’t registered, regulated, or (in many cases) taxed. The OECD estimated that by 2020, two-thirds of the world’s workforce would be part of System D. 
The OECD considers anyone between the ages of 15 and 64 to be “working age.” As of mid-2018, about 65% of the world’s 7.7 billion people were working age; that’s about 5 billion people. If half of them rely on System D to support themselves and their families, that comes to 2.5 billion people. – International Man
 Additionally, the World Bank reported back in 2017 that approximately 1.7 billion people do not conduct business using a banking institution.

What this means of course is that as the internet grows to connect the entire globe together, those needing to, or even simply wishing to stay off the radar will have to find some form of payment system which will allow them to function financially as everything eventually becomes digital.  And these systems appear likely to include Bitcoin or another of the myriad of cryptocurrencies available now, or coming in the future.

Friday, April 19, 2019

Bernie Sanders is very much like Karl Marx in their getting rich through Capitalism while espousing everyone else should live under Socialism

Perhaps one of the biggest reasons why Bernie Sanders is such a staunch advocate for Socialism and Communism is that his own life appears to mirror that of the very philosopher who created those economic models.


Both Karl Marx and Bernie Sanders were indifferent students at college and dedicated much of their time towards radical activism.

Marx -  Karl's dad got him into a number of fine schools. He wasn't a very good student so the family connections came in handy (more exposure to how unfair the system was).  His father wanted him to get into law, but Marx preferred philosophy and history.

Sanders - Sanders studied at Brooklyn College for a year in 1959–60 before transferring to the University of Chicago and graduating with a bachelor of arts degree in political science n 1964. He has described himself as a mediocre college student because the classroom was "boring and irrelevant," while the community provided his most significant learning.

Then early in life both Marx and Sanders chose to get married but were unwilling and unable to support their wives or their children.  In the case of Sanders he had a child out of wedlock after his first wife left him and the child and mother often lived in squalor.  Meanwhile, Marx allowed three of his progeny to die of starvation.

Bernie shacked up with Susan after splitting with first wife Deborah, sources said. 
The pair raised Levi in an “informal arrangement,” according to an insider, with the boy calling his dad “Bernard.” Levi sometimes went hungry, and lived in the dark in their rental apartment. “The electricity was turned off a lot,” recalled a pal, Nancy Barnett. 
“He (Bernie) couldn’t pay his bills.” - National Enquirer
Since neither Marx nor Sanders had the internal fortitude to make a living by their own labor, they learned to game the system.  In the case of Marx, he used his charm to coax money from banks and from a rich benefactor named Fredrich Engles while Sanders often lived on welfare until friends encouraged him to carpet bag to the state of Vermont where he slipped into politics.

Now decades later Bernie Sanders is still preaching the ideals of socialism and Marxism but is doing so as one of the bourgeoisie.  In fact in recent tax filings produced to the public by Sanders as he tries once again to run for the Presidency it shows that not only is he one of the 5% of top wealthy Americans, he did so through the very Capitalist system he claims to abhor.
When confronted as being among those he has long villainized, Sanders became defensive: 
“I wrote a best-selling book,” he declared. “If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.” 
Translation: "I made my money fair and square, so quit hassling me about it." - Mises.org
The fact of the matter is neither Karl Marx, nor Bernie Sanders wanted to live under Socialism, but whew their inner loathings of themselves evolved into where they now seek to project their miseries onto the rest of the world through authoritarian philosophies.  And this is why radical Marxists like Sanders don't really believe in the rhetoric they spew since what they really want is to be just like those they claim to hate and will try to accomplish that by any means necessary.

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

With young males already on the precipice of collapse, is the next step for Western society to simply abort boy babies?

In perhaps one of the most important 'Tales of Two Cities' in modern day history, the West, and in particular the United States, is going out of its way to destroy the future of the male species.  And the reason why we denote two cities here is that for centuries China did just the opposite as they were at the forefront of culling females in their society.

Female infanticide has existed in China for a long time, and although the One Child per Family policy has added to the problem, it didn't cause it. 
The One Child Policy was introduced by the Chinese Government in 1979 with the intention of keeping the population within sustainable limits even in the face of natural disasters and poor harvests, and improving the quality of life for the Chinese population as a whole. 
Under the policy, parents who have more than one child may have their wages reduced and be denied some social services. 
Despite the egalitarian nature of Chinese society, many parents believe that having a son is a vital element of providing for their old age. Therefore in extreme cases, a baby is killed if it is not of the preferred sex, because of the pressure not to have more than one child. - BBC
America is now at its own crisis as feminism, political correctness, fatherless households, and a dedicated disdain towards anything masculine is threatening to change the landscape of the country completely since there are very few willing to stand up for the needs of both men and boys as they suffer through mental, emotional, and psychological disintegration.
It is a crisis of education. Worldwide, 60% of the students who achieve less than the baseline level of proficiency in any of the three core subjects of the Program for the International Assessment are boys. Even boys’ IQs are dropping. 
It is a crisis of mental health. Boys’ suicide rate goes from only slightly more than girls before age 14 to three times that of girls’ between 15 and 19, to 4 1/2 times that of girls between 20 and 24. Mass shooters, prisoners and Islamic State terrorism recruits are at least 90% male. 
It is a crisis of physical health. American men’s life expectancy has decreased two-tenths of a year even as American women’s has remained the same. Boys and men are dying earlier in 14 out of 15 of the leading causes of death. – End of the American Dream
And with even the media going out of their way to promote women while at the same time degrading men, one wonders if society will one day soon follow the China model since newly passed abortion laws in several states will allow mothers to actually choose who they kill and who they might want to keep, even if that choice is dependent upon the child's sex.

Sunday, April 7, 2019

Goldman Sachs validates that the only thing propping up stocks are share buybacks and Dovish Fed policies

For anyone with a technical chart and two brain cells to rub together, they know that the primary thing that has helped the stock markets recover from their 60% decline from a decade ago was monetary intervention from the central banks.


But when the Fed decided they needed to slow down their monetary expansion due to the yield curve threatening to invert and the advent of real inflation reaching above 10% in late 2016, something was necessary to replace the Fed put and keep stocks artificially propped up.  And that something of course was an increase in share buybacks.


Ironically, the December/January crash of stock prices entering into 2019 appears to have been intrinsically tied to the Q4 earnings period where the SEC placed a blackout for share buybacks during this time.  And of all things, on April 5 Goldman Sachs stepped up to validate this as Congress begins to discuss whether companies buying back their stock should be further regulated.
Goldman's valiant effort to halt regulatory and legislative focus on buybacks - which also included Goldman’s ex-CEO Lloyd Blankfein issuing a rebuttal defending the practice on Twitter, saying the money “gets reinvested in higher growth businesses that boost the economy and jobs" did little however to stem the tide and as a result buybacks have been getting increasing scrutiny in the wake of the tax reforms in late 2017, when companies used money saved from the lower taxes as well as repatriated cash to return money to shareholders in record amounts, with total announced buybacks surpassing $1 trillion for the first time in 2018. 
As a result, Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida released a plan last month that would curb buyback incentives. Democratic Senator Chris van Hollen of Maryland may propose legislation curbing executive share sales after repurchase announcements. The culmination - so far - was the US Senate convening hearings and introducing legislation to prohibit public companies from repurchasing their shares on the open market. 
This was too much for Goldman, which realized that the carrot approach is not working, and late on Friday went all "stick", when one month after his first report exposing buyback "misconception", Goldman's David Kostin doubled down, effectively warning that a ban on buybacks would likely result in a market crash, as "eliminating buybacks would immediately force firms to shift corporate cash spending priorities, impact stock market fundamentals, and alter the supply/demand balance for shares." - Zerohedge
When you couple in the fact that the Fed announced they were halting the raising of interest rates during their January FOMC meeting, and even hinted towards returning to an interventionalist policy in markets, it should be no surprise that the Dow, S&P, and Nasdaq all saw a massive recovery from their December swoon, and it confirms to the world that the only thing propping up stocks are share buybacks and central bank credit infusions.

Wednesday, April 3, 2019

Forget capital gains, Democrats now want to steal a portion of your wealth portfolio at the end of each year

It's high time we stop calling what the Socialists and Democrats want to do taxes, and instead call it what it really is... theft from those who have.  Because it appears that this is the case when the latest scheme concocted from Congressional Democrats is to force you to pay them a tribute on any wealth you might hold in paper assets.

Even before you have sold them or not.


The top Democrat on the Senate’s tax-writing committee has proposed taxing unrealized gains in investment assets every year at the same rates as other income, offering not only an idea that would transform how the U.S. taxes the wealthiest people, but a solid reason for those same people to get the hell out of America. 
The proposal from Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon is the latest berserker plan from Democratic lawmakers and presidential candidates for boosting taxes on the wealthy to address economic inequality and provide funding for their policy agenda. And while this specific proposal has little chance of becoming law soon - or, one hopes, ever - such ideas could quickly gain momentum if the party succeeds in next year’s elections. 
What is especially insane is that this proposal is effectively the polar opposite of that other bananas proposal putched by AOC and various other Democrats, namely MMT, or money printing, because why bother taxing anyone, rich, poor or otherwise, if you can just print all the money you need. We are confident we won't get a satisfactory answer, ever. 
Going back to Wyden’s suggestions, capital gains would be taxed annually based on how much assets have gained in value. - Zerohedge
So in essence this proposal would destroy investors, savers, retirement plans, but most importantly, anyone who owns a public company.  Ie... Unless someone like Jeff Bezos has billions in liquid cash, he would be forced to sell enough shares each year to cover the cost of this new tax, and in a short amount of time would end up being a minority shareholder in the company he created and founded.

In the end anyone, be it politician or business owner, who calls for government to siphon more wealth from the producer, is doing it so that they, nor their so-called constituents, can reap the benefits of other people hard work and money.  Because all one has to do is look throughout history at the rulers who gained power promising socialism and you would find that nearly all of them... from Hugo Chavez, to Fidel Castro, Mao Tse Tung, and the former Soviet Polit Bureau, were all millionaires and billionaires who gained their wealth by advocating it be taken away from those who actually earned it.