I'm John Batch with my colleague Joseph Sternberg, who's in London, which is why it's always

fun to go to the Parliament's version of democracy.

And right now, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that's the equivalent of the person running

the Federal Reserve, I guess, you'd have to say.

Not a Treasury Secretary, as we understand

it, but there's influence of the Chancellor that is not true for the Treasury Secretary and

for the Federal Reserve Board. So it's really an independent position, often seen as a launchpad

to be Prime Minister. It's that weighty. And right now, Rachel Reeves is in charge of tax policy remarks by the labor government.

And no matter which way she turns, there's trouble.

Right?

Most recently, there's trouble in terms of a tax she's considering on pensions.

That's right.

It's not enough that you tax to your estate when you die.

Your pension is to be taxed when you take it. And if I understand correctly how pensions work, you can indicate you

want your pension to continue after your death to your beloved. And that means that it would

be continued to be taxed after you're dead. I'm not certain of this,

but it strikes me as an argument for avoiding the nickel and diming of the public. It's confusing

and at the same time discouraging for growth. Joe, it's another world you live in London,

but I mentioned that we learned taxes the hard way.

It was called the American Revolution.

It would appear that London is still playing the same game several hundred years later.

Is it winning at the game?

...