Congresswoman grills billionaire CEO over pay disparity at JP Morgan


So where we left off
was this woman had – and I apologise, you’re going
to need to follow aurally – she had $2425 a month,
she rents a one bedroom apartment. She and her daughter sleep
together in the same room. In Irvine, California, that average
one bedroom apartment is going to be $1,600. She spends $100 on utilities,
take away the $1,700 and she has net $725. She’s like me, she drives a 2008
minivan and has gas – $400 for car expenses and gas –
net $325. The department of agriculture
says a low cost food budget, that is ramen noodles.
A low food budget is $400. That leaves her $77 in the red. She has a Cricket cell phone,
the cheapest cell phone she can get for $40.
She’s in the red $117 a month. She has after school childcare
because the bank is open during normal business hours.
That’s $450 a month. That takes her down to negative
$567 per month. My question for you, Mr Dimon,
is how should she manage this budget shortfall whilst she
is working full-time at your bank? – I don’t know that all your
numbers are accurate. – That number is a starter …
Is it generally a starter job? She is a starting employee.
She has a six-year-old child. This is her first job. – You can get those jobs
out of high school. – She may have my job
one day. She may but but, Mr Dimon,
she doesn’t have the ability right now to spend your $31m.
– I’m totally sympathetic. She’s short $567.
What would you suggest she do? – I don’t know. I’d have to think
about that. Would you recommend that she take
out a JP Morgan Chase credit card and run a deficit? – I don’t know and I’d have
to think about it. Would you recommend that
she overdraft at your bank and be charged overdraft fees? – I don’t know, I’d have to
think about it. So, I know you have a lot of … – I’d love to call her up and have
a conversation about her – financial affairs and see if we
can be helpful. See if you can find a way
for her to live on less than the minimum
that I have described? – Just be helpful. Well, I appreciate your desire
to be helpful but what I’d like you to do is provide a way
for families to make ends meet, so that little kids who are
six-years-old, living in a one bedroom apartment
with their mother, aren’t going hungry at night
because they’re $567 short from feeding themselves,
clothing – we allowed no money for clothing, we allowed no money
for school lunches, we allowed no money for field trips, no money
for medical, no money for prescription drugs. Nothing.
And she’s short $567 already. Mr Dimon, you know how to spend
$31m a year in salary and you can’t figure out how to
make up a $567 a month shortfall. This is a budget problem
you cannot solve.

Court Lets Trump Steal Military Funds To Pay For His Border Wall


In a horrible ruling earlier this week, the
US court of appeals in New Orleans voted two to one to allow Donald Trump to steal money
from the US military in order to fund his border wall. This could be as little as $2.1 million, billion
dollars, excuse me, or it could be as much as a little over $6 billion that the two judges
on this panel said, sure, Mr. Trump, you can go steal money from these military projects
and use them to fund you’re completely useless and not needed border wall. So the two judges out of the three judge panel
who voted to say yes, Trump, you can have this, one of them not surprising was a Trump
appointee. The other was a Ronald Reagan appointee and
I want to hit on that point just a little bit here. A Reagan appointee from the 19 friggin 80s
is still sitting and serving on a court in the United States and clearly basing their
rulings on their party affiliation because the law US law is very clear about the was
what the president can and cannot do with military funds, once Congress has voted on
them. If he wants to change the allocation for what
military funds have already been allocated for by Congress, when they vote on it, he
has to get congressional approval and if Congress does not approve, he cannot divert that money. If he declares a state of emergency, which
he has, then he is free to use a little bit of that money, but he must also tell Congress
what it is for and since it’s from the military, the military has to be the one to do the actual
project and none of those things are happening. He’s hiring private contractors. People who’ve donated to his campaign are
getting rich off this, so he’s clearly not following the very clear rules set forth in
US code. And the two Republican judges on this panel,
one of whom has been sitting there since the 1980s just said, sure, go ahead. We don’t care. We’re Republicans and Republicans stick together
and that’s all we base our rulings on. But back to the idiot sitting on that court
since the 1980s let me hit on that for just a moment because that absolutely pisses me
off. This is why we need term limits. There is nobody in this country who was appointed
in the 1980s who should still be serving on a court today. They shouldn’t have been serving on a court
10 years ago, and to be honest, they shouldn’t have even been sitting on a court 10 years
after that. We have got to put judicial term limits in
place, now. The next president of the United States has
to make that a priority because there is no way in hell that somebody who’s been sitting
on a bench since the 1980s still has the same kind of mental clarity that they had when
they were first appointed. There is no way that they have the same acute
legal mind that they had when they were appointed. People’s cognitive abilities, once they hit
a certain age, begin to decline, that’s science. That’s not an attack on whoever this judge
is. I’m not going to name them, but it’s not an
attack on them. That’s basic human biology. This person should not be there, and their
partisanship with this particular ruling just goes to prove that even further. So now, Donald Trump, the administration already
issued a response, a statement to the world declaring a victory here saying, here we go,
folks. Buckle up. We’re about to build this unnecessary and
useless wall because this court with a Trump appointee and a Reagan appointee says that
we can ignore the established laws of the United States and steal money from the military.

Why The Rich Pay Lower Taxes


Good morning John, and welcome to this
special edition of Vlogbrothers where we discuss the basics of the United
States Tax Policy and why Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. According to the United States government, there are basically three ways to make money. One: You can inherit it when someone
dies. Two: You can make it by working. This is called ordinary
income. Making money off YouTube ads, getting paid
to do a job, making raw materials like yarn and then converting something worth more
than those raw materials like a cool TFiOS hat. That’s all ordinary income.
And number three capital gains. Now before we talk about
capital gains, let’s first talk about the ordinary income tax. Some people have a
misconception here that when you reach the new tax bracket, all of your income
lumps over into this new place, so you have to stay below a certain tax bracket.
That’s not how it works. It’s actually a significantly better system than that. Here we have the four lowest tax brackets
for a married couple. Now if you make ten thousand dollars a year, you pay a 10
percent tax. You probably pay less than that because
of deductions but that’s your tax rate because the first tax bracket is zero to
seventeen thousand dollars. Now if a married couple makes fifty thousand
dollars they’ve moved into the second tax bracket, but still their first seventeen thousand dollars
is taxed in the first tax bracket and then the rest is taxed in the second.
This works on a scale for a hundred thousand dollars and when I made this
graph, I had to make it extra long to fit on five hundred thousand dollars which
includes all of the tax brackets, but even that person the makes five hundred
thousand dollars still pays into all of the lower tax brackets before
they get to their big high up ones. Just wanted to clear that up. Now, back to capital gains. Capital gains,
is money that you get when you buy something and then you wait
and then you sell it later for more. That’s income, you’ve made money there.
Most capital gains are made in the stock market though you can also do it lots other ways, real
estate being a big one. If you make more than like thirty thousand dollars a year, your
capital gains tax is 15 percent. It’s a flat fifteen
percent for everybody. And basically, capital gains is how really rich people make most of their money. They invest in stuff and then it gets more valuable and then
they sell it. Now, that’s basically explaining how it works. Now I am going to get into how I feel about it. This is
just my opinion, but this has always seemed really weird to me. Money in the stock market isn’t actually doing
anything. Companies don’t have access to, like, do stuff with that. It’s not being used to build cars go to Mars or
make video games or whatever. I know that investment is important for our
economy, but so is income. Income is, to me, it seems like it’s worth more. So why
is it then that we tax people almost invariably more on the money that they earn by
providing actual value like proportionate to the amount of
money they make? The idea is that investment should be really good for the
economy and that you need to encourage people to invest and so you should tax it
less. The problem with that is that there isn’t a lot a good data that actually supports
that claim. What kind of concerns me is that the people who are advising the
government on these tax policy decisions are people who make their money this way.
And maybe they, just like a lot of us do, overvalue their particular impact on
the American endeavor. Or maybe they’re super greedy or maybe on the other hand
they’re right. Maybe they’re right. Maybe lower taxes for them is better for all
of us but I can’t help but feeling deep down that it’s tremendously unfair that a
waitress at Applebee’s pays a higher tax rate than a billionaire. Whether or not that’s good policy, I’m
not sure, but it does seem like bad ethics. But as I say, I am not an expert and
I’m completely willing to be convinced that I’m wrong. Nerfighteria, you are not
wrong, because you kicked John’s goal in the butt right out of the
park. You kicked it in the butt outta the park. That’s a mixed sports metaphor.
A million dollars raised for Kiva before I even got to make my first video
promoting it, but please still keep going because one thing that
is proven economically is that micro finance is a really great way to help the developing world and you can
be a part of that through kiva.org. John, I’ll see you on Tuesday.