Trump Family Corruption, Making Tax Policy Fair, and 2026 Predictions

Summary

Podcast Summary: Raging Moderates with Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov

Episode: Trump Family Corruption, Making Tax Policy Fair, and 2026 Predictions
Date: December 19, 2025
Host: Vox Media Podcast Network

---

Overview

In this final episode of the year, Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov take listener questions covering the Trump family’s corruption, the fairness of American tax policy, the shifting nature of the political center, and bold predictions for 2026. With their trademark mix of irreverence, candor, and centrist insight, they break down how corruption is normalized, the myth of being “socially liberal and fiscally conservative”, problems with sales taxes, and more. The duo also openly debates the future of both parties, discusses transgender rights in today’s climate, and shares their big political predictions for the coming year.

---

Main Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Podcast’s Centrist Approach and Chemistry

• Early banter playfully frames the show as the “less toxic corner of politics.”
• Both co-hosts stress their preference for nuanced, less polarized discussion.
• Jessica: "...people also don't want to just listen to like 45 minutes to an hour of pure Trump rage. And we do make an effort to talk about other stories." [01:37]
• Scott jokes about the dangers of socializing with work friends and the “well-lit, less toxic” space they cultivate. [01:14–03:49]

---

2. Competition vs. Cooperation in Public Policy

Listener Question: Is life about competition or cooperation, given Scott's support for progressive policies?

• Scott: "I do think competition produces progress, but cooperation produces stability. And a society that emphasizes only one either becomes chaotic or stagnant." [08:38]
• Key Points:
  • Healthy societies engineer a dynamic balance between competition and cooperation.
  • U.S. has become too focused on cronyism disguised as competition, leading to chaos.
  • Europe, by contrast, leans too far into cooperation, leading to stagnation.
  • Democracies prosper by balancing these forces and adjusting over time.
• Jessica highlights the need for a “strong floor, no ceiling”—solidarity without stifling ambition. [09:23]
• Notable Quote (Scott): "Competition produces progress, but cooperation produces stability." [08:38]

---

3. Friendships Across Political Differences

Q: Are the hosts genuinely friends with their politically different co-workers?

• Jessica pushes back against assumptions of hostility among “The Five” co-hosts.
  • "I talk to my five colleagues outside of work and outside of politics all the time... if [Greg Gutfeld] has a question, a medical question about his kid, can't get to the pediatrician, like, I am the first call." [10:22]
• She stresses that adversarial TV dynamics don’t preclude true friendships.
• Scott recounts his experience at Fox, finding most staff personally kind—even when politically opposed. [12:41–14:24]
• Both agree that separating politics from personal relationships is crucial for a less divided society.

---

4. Why Do Americans Tolerate Trump Family Corruption?

Listener Q: "How does the American public compartmentalize Trump family grift?" [15:26]

• Jessica references her father’s view: “we elect leaders that are reflective of where we are as a nation... sometimes you've gotta take the proverbial hit and it has to stir and wake up a society.” [15:57]
• She observes intense polarization and partisan “blindness” as explanations.
• Scott delivers a scathing analysis:
  • "That is a dumpster fire compared to the nuclear mushroom cloud of launching a cryptocurrency the Friday before your inauguration..." [17:37]
  • He’s baffled by the public’s lack of a “gag reflex,” seeing it as evidence of America’s accelerating tolerance for corruption and political double standards.
  • Notes that Democratic corruption has been “small ball” compared to Trump’s magnitude.
• Scott calls for a reckoning and more aggressive legal accountability:
  • “I believe there should be a reckoning… we need to hold people accountable for theft, for fraud...” [18:59]
• Both hosts express dismay at normalized corruption.

---

5. The 'Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative' Myth

Listener Q: Is being both fiscally conservative and socially progressive a contradiction? [22:30]

• Jessica says nuance matters: modest conservatism is possible, but slashing social programs contradicts progressive social values.
• Scott argues it’s “lazy thinking”:
  • "It is lazy thinking because if you're fiscally conservative, [...] it's difficult to adopt those policies and pay for anti poverty programs, public education, affordable health care. All of these things take a lot of money." [24:01]
• He suggests a more honest version is “socially liberal and fiscally responsible.”
• Both agree on the need for efficiency and targeted spending, especially for social supports.

---

6. Making Tax Policy Fair

Listener Q: Why not replace regressive sales taxes with income taxes? [29:26]

• Scott on sales taxes:
  • “Consumption taxes are especially hard on the lower and the middle class because they spend a disproportionate amount of their money on consumption.” [29:44]
  • He advocates for a more progressive tax code, stronger inheritance tax, and a robust alternative minimum tax for the wealthy and corporations.
  • Suggests a tax holiday for Americans under 30 to ease economic precarity. [33:05]
• Jessica supports targeted sales-tax holidays (e.g., for school supplies) and enhanced credits for families, but expresses concern about funding public goods if sales taxes are cut. [31:30]
• Both reveal tax system’s complexity and unfairness, especially regarding generational wealth.

---

7. Gavin Newsom’s Presidential Prospects

Listener pushback: Is Newsom really a viable front-runner? [34:43]

• Jessica sees Newsom as the current front-runner largely because he “answered the call” and provided visible Democratic leadership post-2024. [35:00]
• Scott agrees with the data, noting prediction markets give Newsom the edge but cautions that front-runners often lose.
  • "Right now the most likely nominee for president on the Democratic side is someone we don't talk about... No one had heard of Obama..." [36:32]
• Notes Newsom’s media skill, California’s economic performance, and America’s “looksism” as assets.
• Both expect a highly competitive, crowded field.

---

8. Transgender Rights Beyond Far-Left Advocacy

Listener Q: Why do moderate Democrats talk so little about supporting trans people? [38:36]

• Jessica apologizes for brash political messaging and “gross” sidelining of real issues affecting trans Americans:
  • “I wish that it wasn't the case. I hope that you can take some heart in politicians like Andy Beshear or Abigail Spanberger, who...have very good, strong messaging around supporting the trans community.” [39:00]
• Scott asserts that "liberalism" in the U.S. should mean defending every adult’s right to self-determination—Republican or Democrat, and that most gender-affirming care for minors includes due safeguards.
  • "Adults should be able to present themselves as they want to present themselves. And you have the right to do that." [40:20]
  • He sees the issue’s politicization as a cycle: Democrats overreach, Republicans weaponize with cruelty, real people get hurt.
• Emphasizes complexity and the importance of personal choice/family decision-making. [43:28]

---

9. Predictions for 2026

Jessica's prediction:

• Republicans will lose their House majority before the midterms, mostly due to intra-party healthcare battles and disillusionment (“Mike Johnson will not be the Speaker of the House.”) [43:40] Scott’s prediction:
• Regime change in Venezuela, supported by the U.S., is likely and strategically justified:
  • “I think Maduro is an illegitimate leader... it's an opportunity for us to let the Venezuelan people actually decide who they want to lead.” [44:48]
• He also predicts more Republicans will distance themselves from Trump as his power fades. [46:33] Bonus: Jessica is “on Supreme Court watch,” predicting possible retirements to ensure Republican nominating control. [46:33]

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• "Competition produces progress, but cooperation produces stability." — Scott [08:38]
• “...politics now has become another reason that people don't want to interact with each other.” — Scott [14:24]
• “We elect leaders that are reflective of where we are as a nation…” — Jessica [15:57]
• “…the nuclear mushroom cloud of launching a cryptocurrency the Friday before your inauguration…” — Scott [17:37]
• “It is lazy thinking because… it’s difficult to adopt those policies and pay for anti-poverty programs, public education, affordable health care.” — Scott [24:01]
• “No taxes for people under the age of 30... that incremental 10 or 20 or 30% in their pocketbooks would go a long way…” — Scott [33:05]
• “...transgender rights, which are part of the civil rights agenda and social justice issues that are so important to the party.” — Jessica [39:00]
• "Adults should be able to present themselves as they want to present themselves. And you have the right to do that. That's very core to our society." — Scott [40:20]
• "Safe, yet provocative. That's what I want on my tombstone." — Jessica [44:41]

---

Important Timestamps

• [08:38] Scott on competition vs. cooperation
• [10:22] Jessica on friendships at Fox and “The Five”
• [15:57] Jessica on American tolerance for corruption
• [17:37] Scott on the scale of Trump family corruption
• [24:01] Scott on the contradiction of “socially liberal, fiscally conservative”
• [29:44] Scott on sales taxes and fairness
• [33:05] Scott's proposal for a tax holiday for under-30s
• [34:43] Newsom’s prospects for the Democratic nomination
• [38:36] Listener plea about trans rights, Jessica and Scott's responses
• [43:40] 2026 predictions: House flips and regime change in Venezuela

---

Tone & Style

• The episode is irreverent, candid, and refreshingly honest, combining policy insights with personal anecdotes, humor, and moments of righteous exasperation.

---

Summary for Non-Listeners

This episode delivers a wide-ranging, centrist critique of today’s political dysfunction, from the normalization of Trump family corruption and the futility of lazy policy labels, to real issues facing everyday Americans. Scott and Jessica provide personal insights on navigating friendships across divides, call out both major parties, and emphasize the need for both competition and solidarity in a thriving society. Their bold, data-driven predictions and authentic empathy—especially on issues like transgender rights—make this a meaningful listen for anyone craving political sanity, not just political theater.

Transcript

[Strawberry Me Career Coach]

Support for this show comes from Strawberry Me. Be honest. Are you happy with your job or are you stuck in one you've outgrown or never wanted in the first place? Sure, you can probably list the reasons for staying, but are they actually just excuses for not leaving? Let a career coach from Strawberry Me help you get unstuck. Discover the benefits of having a dedicated career coach in your corner. Go to Strawberry Me unstuck to claim a special offer.

[MongoDB Representative]

If you're tired of database limitations and architectures that break when you scale, then it's time to think outside rows and columns. MongoDB is the database built for developers by developers. It's asset compliant, enterprise ready, and fluent in AI. That's why so many of the Fortune 500 trust MongoDB with their most critical workloads. Ready to think outside rows and columns Start building [e-mail] build.

[Scott Bessant]

Welcome to Raging Moderates. I'm Sky Galloway.

[Jessica Tarlev]

And I'm Jessica Tarlev.

[Scott Bessant]

Jess. What a year, 2025. There's been plenty for us to rage about and we're very grateful for our listeners for sticking with us. This has been rewarding both psychologically and professionally. We've really enjoyed this. I feel like we're the well lit, less toxic corner of politics right now. Or maybe I'm just eluding us.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I think that that's true. I hear that like, that people also don't want to just listen to like 45 minutes to an hour of pure Trump rage. And we do make an effort to talk about other stories. Those are my favorite stories, actually, when we talk about things like young people renting forever and like what that means and dating and relationships and like that kind of stuff. So it's been great.

[Scott Bessant]

I don't know. I'm thinking the new editorial direction is we bring on Scott Besant to say incendiary, stupid fucking head up your ass.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Statements like I'm a soybean farmer.

[Scott Bessant]

Oh, no, not Scott Bessant. Who's the guy who's. Who's who? Basically, Abby Phillips is going to make the next US Senator from Kentucky. What's his name?

[Jessica Tarlev]

Oh, Scotch enings. I did a panel with him.

[Scott Bessant]

I'm sure he's a very reasonable guy. I mean, yeah, my guess is in front of the cameras he says stupid, vile shit to evoke a reaction and tickle the censors to the far right. And then we should bring in a bunch of D list liberals to get outraged and clutch their Birkenstocks and then they can have a fucking food fight.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I think we should offline the discussion about 2026, because that plan sounds hideous to me.

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah. Yeah. No, I'm being. I'm being cynical and angry.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I just want to hang with you and talk about politics.

[Scott Bessant]

Go on. That's right.

[Jessica Tarlev]

It's fun.

[Scott Bessant]

We haven't had a chance to hang out much. You're just always so busy with your children.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I literally beg you to text me back, and, like, you're in town, and you're like, oh, do you want me to drop you off? I'm gonna go to Shea Margot. And I'm like, okay, I'll go home to my kids. Yeah, no, you have a much cooler life than I do, but when I'm a little bit older, I have confidence that I will have a cool life. But I have little people.

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah, you're a celebrity. I can't see. I don't want to go out with you socially because I couldn't stand. That's why I don't go out with Ed Elson. I can't handle people coming up to me, oh, Ed, we love you.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Do people swarm Ed?

[Scott Bessant]

I don't know. Cause I don't go out with them. I, generally speaking, don't like to socialize with the people I work with because they have this image of me being impressive and having my act together. And I get around a few drinks, and it all busts loose. It all falls apart. Joss. They just don't. People don't need to see that. Unless you're a close friend of mine and we listen to Led Zeppelin and smoke too much pot in my sophomore year in the fraternity. Nobody needs to see that side of the dog. No one needs to see me, you know, urinating all over the house.

[Jessica Tarlev]

No, I definitely don't want to see that. But I wouldn't be mad at, like, a joint and some music. If you want to hang sometime, if you're feeling really low, I'm your girl.

[Scott Bessant]

We're making real progress here. I like this. This is good. So this was supposed to be our predictions, not couples therapy. So I'll get back to the script here. We thought it might be fun in our final episode of the year to answer some of your questions, your meaning, the listeners, and to hear from you. Over the past few weeks, we've been asking our audience to send us questions in a short voice memo, and we got a ton of submissions, so thank you. I have not seen these questions or heard them, so forgive me if my. This is like, office hours, by the way, Jess, I don't know if you've ever listened to Office Hours? You may not even know this, but I have other podcasts.

[Jessica Tarlev]

That's so weird. You do? I thought that I was your one and only.

[Scott Bessant]

That's it.

[Jessica Tarlev]

And then Kara called me your side piece for no reason at all.

[Scott Bessant]

You found out? Yeah, no. Cat's out of the bat. I'm in a podcast polyamory relationship. So I'm pod poly. Ooh, I like that. Pod Poly.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Polly pod.

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah, Polypod.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Like Polly Pocket, but for podcasts.

[Scott Bessant]

But one of my other podcasts is this thing called Office Hours, and I used to watch Frasier with my mother and did you ever watch Frasier?

[Jessica Tarlev]

Yeah.

[Scott Bessant]

Office Hours is based on Frasier's call in program. I love the idea of a call in program. And so we're borrowing from Office Hours today and we're doing a call in. So, Jess, are you ready to hear some listeners questions?

[Jessica Tarlev]

Yeah, I'm excited.

[Scott Bessant]

First up is Daniel from El Paso. All right, roll tape.

[Listener Daniel Estrada]

Hey, Scott and Jessica. This is Daniel Estrada from El Paso, Texas. My question is for Scott, and it's about a fundamental tension in his political philosophy. Is life ultimately about competition or cooperation? Scott, you support many of the policies that today's social Democrats propose. Things like universal healthcare or robust wealth redistribution. So, Scott, I want to ask, will you say if life should be all about competition or cooperation?

[Scott Bessant]

Wow, that's really thoughtful. So I think it's a mix of both, and I think that our species excels because it creates an environment for both and then figures out the vent overlap. And you don't want it to go too much to one side or the other. So just loosely speaking, competition works when everyone agrees to fair rules. So even in competition, I like the full body contact violence of corporate America. I think we should let Delta Airlines go out of fucking business during COVID not bail it out after the CEOs have taken 150 million in compensation. I like that they hate each other and they're trying to come up with a better widget at a lower price. I like that we compete against each other for slots at a university and that it encourages incentives and excellence for better outcomes. At the same time, it can go too far. And that is there are some people who can't effectively compete in a society that are either disabled or are unlucky or raised in a household without a great deal of parental involvement. And I believe we cooperate to lift those people up. And competition with rules is a form of competition and cooperation. We encourage competition when it leads to innovation, creativity, Entrepreneurship in sports, huge competition, consumer markets. But at the same time, we come together and take the profits of competition that we then tax fairly, which we are not doing right now. And then we come together to cooperate around infrastructure. Let's all agree that highways and a high speed rail would be a good idea. Let's all agree that we should have one navy to defend our borders. Let's all agree that our national parks are a treasure. We all agree that it probably makes sense to do research or used to agree on vaccinations for measles. They require shared commitment more than rivalry. So there is an overlap. The problem is that sometimes these things go too far to one extreme or not far enough. So if you just let competition rule the day, you end up such that losing is catastrophic for some people. We need to break up monopolies so competition stays real and that it's actual competition. We need to teach teamwork. We value both ambition and solidarity. So, just to summarize, I do think competition produces progress, but cooperation produces stability. And a society that emphasizes only one either becomes chaotic or stagnant. So I would argue that the US has become chaotic. A reductive way of looking at this is we become too focused on cronyism massed as competition in the US and we have chaos. Whereas in Europe there's so much virtue signaling and distributed power that serves as veto power that you end up with stagnation. And the healthiest societies deliberately engineer a dynamic balance and they shift that balance depending on the domain and the period, whether you're in war, economic growth, et cetera. A word salad for saying that one of the reasons democracies have done so well is that we do a very good job of balancing the two. And I do think that the two peacefully coexist. Whew. Thank you for the TED talk, Jess. Do you want to add to that.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Strong floor, no ceiling. Right. I think that it applies to this, and I don't think that they're contradictory. I mean, you tell a lot of stories from the business world about where cooperation and also kindness and humanity are what, like got a deal done or got you to the right decision? So, yeah, I think that they work in concert. I think also people are swayed by their vibes in terms of how they're talking about certain things. So there are days when you sound more cooperative and there are days when you sound more competitive, I guess. But I'm in agreement. They have to work together. It's the only way you can have a civilized society.

[Scott Bessant]

Agreed.

[Jessica Tarlev]

A capitalist, civilized society.

[Scott Bessant]

All right, next question. Here's one from Will in San Francisco. This question's for Jess. Do you talk to the five colleagues as friends when the show's over, or do they genuinely dislike you for your politics?

[Jessica Tarlev]

So this question makes me really sad because it feels as if a, people watch the show and think that I work in, like, an insanely hostile environment or no one would want to be my pal or that I wouldn't want to be their pals. And two, that maybe they don't have kind of politically adversarial friendships or relationships in their lives that can also be fruitful friendships, which is what we do have. So I talk to my five colleagues outside of work and outside of politics all the time. Like, Greg Gotfeld has a baby who just turned one. If he has a question, a medical question about his kid, can't get to the pediatrician. Like, I am the first call, right? That's like, what's going on? You know, she had croup before my baby had croup. Those kinds of things. Dana Perino, who is softer, obviously, than the rest of them. I talk all the time about everything from, like, we both love, you know, Emily in Paris and junk TV to what are you wearing today? To going to the theater, visiting her down the Jersey Shore. So, yeah, everyone is actually friends. And I think that you have different kinds of friendships, obviously, for people that you're connected to through work versus the friends that you might meet in college or, you know, out in the world, your. Your soul cycle pals or whatever it is that you're doing. Um, but we do have genuine relationships. And I think that when you only consume clips of the show, which is how most people at least take me in, that they don't see the entirety of the dynamic. Now, I'm not trying to minimize the fact that there are times where it looks totally awful and can even feel awful to me, Jesse Watters. And I definitely get into things where I'll say, even on air, like, you're being such an incredible jerk. And that's very real and genuine. But I think it is important for the sake of your workplace, but also in terms of modeling proper civic behavior to be able to get past these things. And I write about this a lot in my book, which will be out in September. And I think that you need to be able to argue really hard and then also play important and positive roles in each other's lives. And I think that's very much the case for us there.

[Scott Bessant]

I think you can sense it whenever I've watched the show. You disagree with each other but I don't think it's ever really malicious. And what I will say, I've probably been on Fox 100 or 150 times and I'm not exaggerating. I went on every week for several years and I generally found even more so at Fox than the other networks. The people there couldn't be more lovely. And also I don't want to say I'm very conflicted about Fox. And I stopped going on when they had this multi pronged attack across the post, the Wall Street Journal and Fox against Kara Swisher that I thought was just straight up homophobic, full stop. And they kept describing her as lesbian tech journalist Kara Swisher. Anyways, whether Fox in some of their editorial choices are good or bad for America is one choice. But I'm a big believer in separating the politics from the person. And if you decide that someone's political views are kind of, and I used to be this way, I had trouble when we moved to Florida. I hang out or know a lot of Trumpers and I just had trouble being around these people. And I decided I'm going to separate the politics from the person. Otherwise you just write off half of America or 47.8 whatever you got. And I think there's good arguments both ways. But I can sense with you guys that it feels like all five of you have genuine affection for each other. And I think as a general rule you're just much happier not letting politics get in the way of the person. And one of the things it breaks my heart about young people not meeting and mating and procreating is politics now has become another reason that people don't want to interact with each other.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Totally. I mean listing like no Trumpers apply in your dating profile and things like that, like I get it, I, I, I doubt that I could be married to a vehement Trump supporter, but pretends for some extreme loneliness to be heading people's way and just being turned off or separating yourself from the chance at having experiences that may be uncomfortable for you but I still think are important. Like I feel like a more complete person. I work and the kind of people that I interact with and the things that I say. And also I, I would add, like if you're friends, then people actually listen to what you're saying more than if you're just in an adversarial crouch all the time. So I'm not saying I've, you know, flipped a million votes or anything like that, but by Being part of the furniture and having genuine friendships, I think people are more open to my content.

[Scott Bessant]

All right, I get it.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Cool. I'll keep my job.

[Scott Bessant]

There you go. We're in. Next question.

[Jessica Tarlev]

All right.

[Listener Amy]

Greetings from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. My question is simply, can you explain to me how the American public compartmentalized the level of corruption and grift that is on open display by the Trump family? How do Americans square off the. The level of grift that is happening? Can you please explain? Big hugs, Cha chao.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Big hugs. Chow chow.

[Scott Bessant]

Do you want to start here, Josh?

[Jessica Tarlev]

I mean, I'll just. I think about what my dad said after the 2016 election a lot, because I was devastated, and, you know, I love Hillary and blah, blah, blah. And he said, this is what we deserve. And I was like, we don't deserve this. And he said, no, as a country, this is what we deserve. You know, it was height of Kardashian madness, and he said that we elect leaders that are reflective of where we are as a nation or a city, state, whatever it is, at that particular moment. And we are people right now that listen to the Access Hollywood tape and say, like, actually, I would prefer that to the woman who, you know, had hot sauce in her bag, and that offended me and didn't go to Wisconsin, and the pendulum will swing back. And it did. But that, you know, sometimes you've gotta take the proverbial hit and it has to stir and wake up a society. And I think about that a lot when I'm feeling overwhelmed by the grift and the corruption and all of that. I also just think our politics are so polarized. And now, I don't know if you've noticed this, but the right just says, I don't care anymore. Like, you'll make an argument that you think should hold water with them, and they'll say, but Joe Biden let in 250,000 migrants per month for the first three years that he was in office. So you did this. This is your fault. We're just cleaning up your mess, and people put on their partisan blinders and move on. So that's my take. How do you think that we stomach this?

[Scott Bessant]

So his question, how do we stomach this? And how do we circle the square? And the answer is, I have no fucking idea. I'm absolutely flummoxed and shocked that we decided it was okay. That while we're obsessing over Hunter Biden's laptop and the fact that he went on the board of a company because of Daddy's connections. And let's be honest, it was because of daddy's connections. That is a dumpster fire compared to the nuclear mushroom cloud of launching a cryptocurrency the Friday before your inauguration that anyone can put money into in exchange for favors that we have taken the pardon and clemency process and monetized it, including direct links to people giving millions of dollars directly to Trump. And then what do you know? That person's son is pardoned after defrauding seniors. Or what do you know? Witkoff's kids and the Trump kids get a several hundred million dollars commitment to their shitcoin. And then two weeks later we decide that our most sophisticated chips that could end up in the hands of the Chinese or the Russians are clear for export to the uae. The level of corruption here is staggering. And the fact that Big Tech now shows up and the only instructions they have is don't forget to swallow and give the President such fealty and just gross obsequiousness in exchange for basically no regulation transfer of wealth from the S&P 490 to the top 10. Anyways, I'm basically talking this guy's book. The only thing I will say it's a nod to the other side of this, is that the Democrats engaged in corruption, but it was small ball. Speaker Pelosi is leaving Congress with $450 million in personal wealth. The S and P in the last 10 years is up 200%. Buffett at Berkshire Hathaway, arguably the greatest investor of all time, is up 300%. The Pelosi portfolio is up 600%. So there was kind of small ball corruption all over Washington. And then Trump came in and said, I know, rather than just running a stop sign, let's mow over a family of 12. Because corruption is obviously okay here. And I think what America has decided is that in a weird way, if you're corrupt, as long as you have your chest puffed out and say, oh, fuck you or whatever, that somehow that that's some perverted form of masculinity, I believe there should be a reckoning. And I think the Democrats, as usual, reach down and can't feel anything called testicles. I think they should be talking about statute of limitations and how it does not run out and how the clemency and pardon process should be severely reviewed and to the letter of the law. We need to hold people accountable for theft, for fraud, for. I won't call them war crimes, but extrajudicial killings or murders, regardless of how long they served in office. I think there needs to be a reckoning here. And Brazil, which has a much stronger democracy right now than the United States when they planned their own insurrection. The leader there was shamed and had to basically flee the country, which made Trump very mad. Yeah. So I don't. I'm hopeful. There's no denying that we have gone zero to 60 in corruption. I won't say zero to 60. We were already at five miles or 10 miles an hour of corruption. And then he just broke the sound barrier. He just said, well, clearly America's willing to accept this and I'll just be loud and proud about it, which will come across as strength. I am shocked that his own base isn't more turned off by it. And I am disappointed that progressives haven't been more aggressive around what should and hopefully will be a reckoning around what is clearly, in my view, criminal behavior. And I'm not suggesting political retribution. I'm suggesting that we uphold the law. But, brother, I'm with you. I don't get it. I am shocked by it. And it creates a downward spiral because at some point everybody throws in the towel and says, fuck it. I'm just going to trade stocks based on the armed services hearing, where I know we're about to give a contract to Palantir. So I'm going to go out and buy Palantir stock before the news is released. Marjorie Taylor Greene. I am going to overrun Washington with money to either get my son pardoned or to get a contract that a better medium or small size firm should have received with a better offer, with a better product at a lower price. So I'm not here with a message of hope, and I agree with you. I'm shocked and surprised that the American public has not had a gag reflex on this. This toxic, weird razors of corruption we have to swallow every day. Okay, swallowing razor blades. That was pleasant.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Yeah. Uplifting.

[Scott Bessant]

Next one. This is a good one from Amy.

[Jessica Tarlev]

H. Can you please settle a debate? My husband says that he is fiscally conservative and yet socially progressive. I tell him that's a contradiction. We are big fans. I think it depends, like, how fiscally conservative he is. So if you're talking about like a couple percentage points off, like the corporate tax rate. Right. Or even the individual tax rate, you know, I could kind of understand how that works. But if you're getting into a world of like, I want to cut massive social programs, like, no one should get their SNAP benefits, for instance, or that you're going to go door to Door trying to means test all of these things. I'm not talking about Social Security. I know Scott is into means testing Social Security, but I think that there's a very big difference, like the delta in what would be fiscally conservative or what. Maybe he thinks fiscally conservative is also curious what socially liberal means to him. So I think, you know, most people now are like, oh, I'm socially liberal, of course I support gay rights, gay marriage, trans rights, whatever it is. But then kind of if you dig in about how they feel about social programs, then it gets a little iffier. So I need more specifics on it. But I do think that those people exist. They're kind of like old school Republicans. I feel like at this point, like a lot of the Republicans who switched over to vote for Biden and then Kamala Harris in 2024. Scott, what do you think?

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah, it's lazy thinking. People often say that, that I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative. And quite frankly, it just means they're lazy thinkers and they want it both ways. I understand it, I think I used to say it. But it is lazy thinking because if you're fiscally conservative, you believe in small, inexpensive, minimally redistributive tax policy with minimal intervention from the government. And the reality is it's difficult to adopt those policies and pay for anti poverty programs. Public education, equality housing, support reproductive rights, affordable health care. All of these things take a lot of money. Which is directly contradictory to the notion of a minimally taxed, very conservative economic policy. It just the two don't jive, quite frankly. Now what I think you can say is that I am socially liberal and believe in fiscal responsibility. And that is I want my social programs means tested. I want them to be efficient. I think that redistribution of income is fine as long as the incentives are in place. And in my view, there's no reason the wealthiest generation in history, seniors in America, should be taking $1.2 trillion from people under the age of 65. That doesn't mean they should be in poverty. If they need it, they should get it. But you are going to need a redistribution of income, which will imply a more progressive tax structure. And I won't go into tax policy right now, but it is lazy thinking to believe that. What's interesting is that the majority of America, or a big talking point was I'm going to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative. And Trump, the genius of Trump, is that he said, no, you have it wrong. And markets basically, when everyone's zigging you want to zag, that's the opportunity. And what Trump did was he zagged and he said, no, no, no, no. I'm going to be socially conservative and fiscally liberal and he has $2 trillion deficits. Give money away to almost everybody with connections. Everyone gets a participation trophy, especially the rich. But I'm going to be socially very conservative. And America, really, quite frankly, it was sort of a brilliant positioning. But the two are somewhat contradictory. And if you're going to be intellectually honest, you're going to have hard conversations around which programs we're going to cut such that we can support a fiscally conservative viewpoint.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I think that you could also just be like a responsible Doge person, like how they did doge in the 1990s. I think that is an option for fiscally conservative because we do waste so much money on just bloat, like actually do the Pentagon audit and see what you get as a result.

[Scott Bessant]

But anyway, okay, let's take a quick break. Stay with us. Support for the show comes from HelloFresh. HelloFresh makes home cooking easier with chef crafted recipes and fresh ingredients delivered straight to your door. And this fall, they're serving up even more to love. HelloFresh has doubled its menu Discover new seasonal produce each week, from leeks to broccolini to Italian eggplant. And more recently, our producer David tried some hellofresh and he thinks. David, come on in. What did you think, David Scott, I got the cheesy Smash burger and I will just say, as a Single man in LA, HelloFresh provided me a very.

[Sean from Ohio]

Balanced, easy to make healthy meal.

[Scott Bessant]

So I would get it again. Single man in la with that hair now, David's very dreamy. The best way to cook just got better. Go to hellofresh.com moderates10fm now to get 10 free meals plus a free breakfast for life, one per box with active subscription free meals applied as discount on first box. New subscribers only. Varies by plan. That's hellofresh.com moderates 10fm to get 10 free meals plus free breakfast for life.

[Sean from Ohio]

Right now is the AI gold rush. And that means everybody who builds an app, a platform, a piece of software, a GitHub gizmo that somebody, anything, everybody is trying to put AI everywhere. And for two weeks in a series on the Vergecast, we are talking through what that looks like. We're talking to developers about what they're building and how they're building it and whether AI actually does make sense everywhere or is just going to ruin everything in the process. That's the AI miniseries on the Vergecast.

[Tanner G]

Wherever you get podcasts this series is presented by MongoDB.

[Sean from Ohio]

2025 was a wild year for the tech industry. AI seemed like it took over everyone's brains. It was the only thing anyone wanted to talk about. Nvidia became the most valuable company in the world. We had some huge new video games. The Switch 2 launched. A lot of people got it. There was just a lot going on. And on the Vergecast we are talking about the best, the worst, the most important, the biggest heel turns, all the stuff that happened in 2025 and making maybe a few predictions about what's going to happen next year. All that and more on the Vergecast Wherever you get podcasts this series is.

[Tanner G]

Presented by JIRA by Atlassian.

[Scott Bessant]

Welcome back. Next question. A question from Tanner G. Hi Scott and Jessica.

[Listener Daniel Estrada]

With all the discussions around affordability, I'm.

[Scott Bessant]

Surprised no one talks more about eliminating sales taxes. Because sales taxes hit lower and middle income Americans the hardest. Why not remove them entirely and replace the revenue with a small increase in state or federal income taxes instead?

[Jessica Tarlev]

You want to go first?

[Scott Bessant]

I love tax policy. Consumption taxes.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I love tax policy.

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah, I know. What a weirdo, right? Look, consumption taxes are especially hard on the lower and the middle class because they spend a disproportionate amount of their money on consumption. Right? They have to spend 95 to 120% of their income on consumption. So these are somewhat regressive taxes. Having said that, these states have to pay for the fire department and for social services, et cetera. So I don't it's like pick your poison. Where are we going to raise taxes? You're saying an increase in federal income? Again, I'm going to talk my book here. I think that we get messed up around tax rates and don't think enough about tax code. The key to solving our tax deficit, if you will, is a few things, but specifically an alternative minimum tax on corporations and the super wealthy of 30 to 50%, similar to when Reagan was president. Stop neutering the IRS. $750 billion a year uncollected the tax gap and then basically eliminating or lowering the exemption on the inheritance tax from 30 million to 1 million DOL. Because no one's going to be worse off if Bobby and Cindy get 7 million instead of 11 million and there's going to be so much money transferred that quite frankly should just go back into a system that values meritocracy over some sort of dynastic wealth. But it's A state by state thing and the sales tax, if you will, to a certain extent, I think the market determines what it is. There's some states that don't have a sales tax. Some states have a very high sales tax. And I like that. The states compete with each other and at some point people decide to leave from California and move to Austin and then realize they don't like it and move back and that it was worth it. What are your thoughts on sales tax, Jess?

[Jessica Tarlev]

I was nervous about the funding for public goods that would come as a result of this, but I like the idea of targeted sales tax holidays like around something like school supplies that you know are going to hit lower and middle income families the hardest. And I think that emphasis also on tax credits that can be used by lower and middle class families, like with kids, for instance. I mean, that's the number one way that we got what we get, like 50% of kids out of poverty with the child tax credit. So I think that you could do that. I think the country would have a hard time. And I know it's state by state basis, but everybody feels like their taxes are too high. The richest people feel that, but it's not true. But everybody else kind of even that weird, like you're rich but you don't feel rich that we were talking about with the new poverty line and kind of what the middle class is here. So I think doing it in a targeted way that showed that you're thinking about people in the lower and middle income brackets, especially those with kids, would be very useful. But I like the discussion. I think that it's a smart one. But we have to make sure that everything is still funded. And I don't know what the appetite is to raise taxes on the federal level to compensate.

[Scott Bessant]

I love this conversation. And, and I'll go out on a limb here, Jess. I don't know that much about you and your husband, but my guess is you're. You paid too much in taxes.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I do. I want to talk to you about it because I, I allegedly have a good accountant, but I still think it's bad.

[Scott Bessant]

Well, here's the bottom line. If you live in New York or California or a blue city, which you do to make an extraordinary living and current income.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Yeah.

[Scott Bessant]

No one feels sorry for you. But say you make a million or a million and a half bucks, dad's a chiropractor, mom's a baller, partner at a law firm, you're probably paying 50, 52% tax rate. And so discussion around increasing taxes goes nowhere because the workhorses say, fuck that, buddy. I'm literally working for the government right now. And that's true. The problem is, once you get to the 99.9, the tax rate plummets to the high teens, and people figure out a way to move to California or Texas. And capital gains, for some reason, is 20 versus 37 for people who actually work with their sweat, in my view. There's a ton of things we could do around tax policy. One of my favorites is I think we should have a tax holiday for people under the age of 30 who are really struggling to save for a home, who are more anxious and obese, not because they don't have a fucking therapist or a bunch of TikTok therapists who haven't practiced, who own a ring light. We don't suffer from an absence of therapy. We suffer from too much economic precarity among young people. And one of the ways we could address that is no taxes for people under the age of 30, and we wouldn't lose that much from the treasury, because the reality is people under the age of 30 don't make that much money. But that incremental 10 or 20 or 30% in their pocketbooks would go a long way to giving them the money. To think about a house, a family, going out, getting a little bit fucked up, and approaching a stranger and making a series of bad decisions.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Results that lead to a good decision.

[Scott Bessant]

That lead to a good decision anyways. But I absolutely will come back and we'll do a full thing on tax policy. But I absolutely love this shit. Thanks for the question. Next question. Scott from Pittsburgh has a bone to pick.

[Tanner G]

Hey, Scott and Jess. This is Scott from Pittsburgh. I want to push back on the idea that Gavin Newsom is somehow the front runner for the nomination. He hasn't run a competitive election since 2002, and I just don't think he has a shot at ever convincing the Midwest that he's the right candidate.

[Scott Bessant]

Jess.

[Jessica Tarlev]

So I think there's a difference between who's the front runner right now and who's the front runner when everybody is standing up on that stage and they're gonna be like 18 to 22 people. There'll probably have to be a kiddie stage as well for the number of fol are going to throw their hat in the proverbial ring. What I think Evan Newsom has done that's really important is he answered the call. Democrats have been flailing since Donald Trump got back into office. The 2024 election sent shockwaves through everyone. Right. Like our usual coalition completely shattered with minority voters, with young voters, and things look like they're rebounding. But Gavin Newsom basically said like, I'm going now because somebody has to go now. And I think that we really needed that. And he also, you know, Prop 50 is a really big deal. Like it's a big deal in terms of the seats and what's going to literally happen on the ground in terms of the midterms. But somebody kind of stepping up to that mantle and saying like, I'm not bringing a knife to a gunfight anymore. And I think J.B. pritzker has done something similar in terms of the vibes. Obviously he can't redistrict in the same way. But I think that Newsom right now is doing a lot of good for himself, for his image. We're not talking about actual California policy, which is easier for him. Cuz I think there are gonna be a lot of things to answer for in terms of what's gone on in California during his tenure. Um, but I think that he is unequivocally a top face of the party. And I mean the betting markets have him as a front runner, so he technically is as well.

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah, look, we, we can have an argument over who should be the nominee. And I think a lot of people have valid points around why Governor Newsom won't be or shouldn't be the nominee. But the data is what the data is. And right now he is the clear leader from the prediction markets. He's well ahead of the number two aoc. And then there's kind of the seven doors below that. Buttigieg, Harris, Shapiro, Pritzker and a bunch of other people. But yeah, he's the front runner right now. Now having said that, that's a terrible place to be. Typically the front runner at this stage almost never ends up being the nominee. Here are some past leaders on the Republican side. Herman Cain. Remember him? Rip Colin Powell. This is my favorite. Fred Thompson. Fred Thompson from Law and Order was the primary. The Republican leader. I mean, Gary Hart. We can just go on and on and on. Right now the most likely nominee for president on the Democratic side is someone we don't talk about. No one had heard of Obama or this little known governor who'd been booted out of office and then managed to get back in, called Bill Clinton. But I've consistently said even when Newsom was really unpopular like a year ago, people underestimate him because he's willing to go behind enemy lines. He's Very good on Fox. I think there's a great story out of California. All of these billionaires who have more options than anyone in the world decide to live in that hellscape called California. And under the tenure of Newsom, he's managed to take it from the fifth largest economy in the world, past Japan, and is now the fourth largest economy in the world. And I would argue he did effectively run again with the recall effort where he trounced it. So I'm biased. I like the man. And also, finally, I think America is highly sexist and highly looksist, and he's on the right side of both these trades. But to your point, the fact that he's the leader right now probably means the good money is that he won't be the nominee anyways. Great question. Next question. Here's a question from Sean in Ohio.

[Sean from Ohio]

Hey, I'm Sean, but I'm thinking of becoming Shawna. It is a scary moment transitioning right now. And why do I have to always look at the far left for support? There are other Democrats that could be helping me along. I'm not hearing anything.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I'm so sorry that you feel that way. Sean or Shawna, if you're already going by that name, potentially, I feel terrible about that. And anytime that we talk about an issue that relates to someone's humanity in brash terms, like, come on, it's an 8020 issue, it's gross politics. It might be the reality of winning elections, but it is gross. And I apologize for that. And I wish that it wasn't the case. I hope that you can take some heart in politicians like Andy Beshear or Abigail Spanberger, who are more moderate Democrats that I think have very good, strong messaging around supporting the trans community and really separating the issue of trans women in women's sports from transgender rights, which are part of the civil rights agenda and social justice issues that are so important to the party. But listening to you, we have to do better. And I hope that we will in 2026 and not allow the Republicans to make your life some sort of bargaining chip or media play or right wing outrage that scares people away from supporting people that genuinely care about you being able to live the life that you are destined to live if that's what you so choose to transition. So those are my thoughts.

[Scott Bessant]

We're a liberal society, and people hear the word liberal and they immediately think, oh, Republican versus Democrat. No, if Republicans are intellectually honest, we believe in a liberal society. What does liberal mean? Socialism is everyone should be equal. Fascism is the Enemy within liberalism is that effectively everybody gets to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. And I think adults should be able to present themselves as they want to present themselves. And you have the right to do that. That's very core to our society. So more power to you, and you should be able to live the life that makes you happiest, as long as it doesn't hurt other people. And I fail to see how an adult transitioning hurts anybody else. What has happened here kind of indicates the currency or the cadence of politics in the United States, and that is Democrats grab the transgender issue and decided that it was virtue and made blanket statements and policies that were just seen by the majority of America as being fucking crazy. Letting a 65 transgender woman show up to an NC2 a swim meet. There are instances that I would argue where minors entered into an infrastructure that may have moved them too fast or that they became politically correct or fashionable. I think the Republicans in the right do have some legitimacy around that. I, however, believe if you really do your research, the issue around minors, and this is really where the fight kind of took off, is that the majority of transition or gender affirming drugs among people under the age of 18 is done correctly. It's done with huge protocols, huge safeguards, the involvement of a family, a physician, and it would be very difficult to find an example of any 18 year old who's undergone surgery without the involvement of their parents. And a lot of protocols. Having said that, there are some instances, as the ones I mentioned before, a transgender woman is allowed to enter a bike ride. There's cash awards, and crosses the finish line five minutes before everybody else. And progressives look around kind of bereft and all applaud and look at each other like, is this what we're supposed to do as liberal thinkers? So, as always, Democrats stick out their chin and Republicans come in and see an opportunity to weaponize this issue with coarseness and cruelty and have a dramatic overcorrection and pass laws in South Dakota saying they can't have transgender athletes in high school. And then when someone actually asked them how many transgender athletes are in high school sports in South Dakota, the answer was zero. This was nothing but legislation to be mean, to be cruel and create problems where there aren't any. And I'm a Republican on this in the sense that I think that on issues this sensitive, this complex, it should be up to the individual family, their doctor, and the way they want to acquit themselves. But as a legal adult, my sense is you should be able to live the life you want to lead. Full stop.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Yeah.

[Scott Bessant]

All right, Jess, to close out the year, it's time for us to put it all on the line and go on the record. Let's make some predictions for the coming year. Why don't you start? What's your big prediction for 2026?

[Jessica Tarlev]

My big swing. And I'm scared about this because I don't usually do it. I'm much more of like a timid predictor, but I'm gonna go that the Republicans lose the majority in the House before the midterms, so they only have a three seat majority. I think that especially over this healthcare fight, that people are going to be even more turned off by leadership, feel like they're not being listened to and what's the point? And I should start my career on K Street faster or spend some time with my grandkids. And so that's my big swing, that Mike Johnson will not be the speaker of the House. I also think Mike Johnson may lose the speakership anyway and that would be related to healthcare too. But I'm gonna go with they lose the majority before the midterms even.

[Scott Bessant]

That's interesting. So basically you're saying speaker of the House, Hakeem Jeffries is what you're saying.

[Jessica Tarlev]

At least for a minute.

[Scott Bessant]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's super interesting.

[Jessica Tarlev]

I don't think it's that insane, but it feels big, too.

[Scott Bessant]

I like it. It's both. Safe, yet provocative. That's the sweet spot.

[Jessica Tarlev]

That's what I want on my tombstone.

[Scott Bessant]

Safe, yet provocative.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Safe, but provocative.

[Scott Bessant]

I like that.

[Jessica Tarlev]

What's your big swing?

[Scott Bessant]

There's going to be regime change in Venezuela. And here's what'll piss everybody off. I think it's a good idea. I think Maduro is an illegitimate leader who kicked out every international observer around elections, seize power illegally from the rightfully elected leader. Also, I think it is a very bad idea to have a Russian and Chinese satellite in our backyard. I think you're going to see the fall of Maduro. I'm not suggesting we invade. I'm suggesting that we be supportive of a change in leadership there. And people will say, well, you're a colonialist arguing for regime change. No, I'm not a colonialist, but I am a pragmatist. And just as it was stupid to overthrow the democratically elected leader of Iran and put in place a US friendly Shah of Iran, this is an illegitimate leader who is anti American and it's an opportunity for us to let the Venezuelan people actually decide who they want to lead. And hopefully that person will be more pro American than pro Russian or pro Chinese. And I think it's a moment in time for us in terms of energy supply. I'm not suggesting we usurp those fields, but having a pro America country would make a lot of sense for us. I think it's going to happen. So, as usual, the Trump administration's instincts, there is some veracity or merit to them, but they go about it just in a stupid way, like bombing boats. Anyway, that's gonna happen, I believe. And I believe you're gonna along with Jess said. I think a lot of people are gonna go MTG on the president. I think he's just losing his luster and his power. And I think you'll see a lot of people decide to go. I think people are gonna find their backbone and their testicles in the Republican Party, not because they have them, but because they see political opportunity in a president that's getting weaker and weaker and sleepier by the day.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Yeah, I like it. I'm also, I think I'm on, like, Supreme Court watch. I'm fearful, slash predicting that one, maybe two of these justices goes early, like Alito and Thomas, maybe older fellows, to make sure that Trump isn't like fully lame ducked when they're trying to push through new nominations. So that would be.

[Scott Bessant]

I think they suffer from the same disease as Ruth Bader Gensburg. I think they're both fucking up.

[Jessica Tarlev]

They're gonna stay forever.

[Scott Bessant]

Okay, well, then what the hell is Justice Thomas gonna do? What does Thomas have other than this? Anyway, we'll see. All right, everybody, that's it. That's all for this episode. Thanks for listening to raging moderate. Stick with us and tell your friends, please. Also, while you're thinking of it, please, as a Christmas gift to us, please hit that subscribe button. We're gearing up for a big 2026. We'll be back with our next new episode on Wednesday, January 7th. Jess, have a great week. Happy holidays, Happy New Year, the whole shebang. What a great year.

[Jessica Tarlev]

Everything. Happy to you and the fam.

[Scott Bessant]

Thank you, Jess. Likewise.

[LinkedIn Ads Representative]

Does it ever feel like you're a marketing professional just speaking into the void? But with LinkedIn ads, you can know you're reaching the right decision makers. A network of 130 million of them, in fact. You can even target buyers by job title, industry, company seniority, skills and. Did I say job title? See how you can avoid the void and reach the right buyers with LinkedIn ads. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a free $250 credit for the next one. Get [e-mail] Campaign terms and conditions apply.

[CVS Caremark Representative]

What do walking 10,000 steps every day, eating five servings of fruits and veggies, and getting eight hours of sleep have in common? They're all healthy choices, but do all healthier choices really pay off with prescription plans from CVS Caremark? They do. Their plan designs give your members more choice, which gives your members more ways to get on, stay on and manage their meds. And that helps your business control your costs because healthier members are better for business. Go to CMK Co Access to learn more about helping your members stay adherent. That's CMK CO accession.