26 Burst results for "Jason Furman"
"We're going to start in the early nineties back before this shift. When the old rules about government borrowing still applied. Bill clinton had just been elected president. He appointed an economist named laura tyson to be one of his top advisors and she looked at the economy and she saw this glaring problem year after year. Both government deficits and interest rates. Were going up and then he said omega if we don't get a hold of this federal deficit than that trend will continue. Those rates will continue upward. That was a very significant concern. Higher interest rates were concerned for a couple of reasons for one thing. Obviously they meant that the government had to pay more to borrow money but also when interest rates for the government went up. Interest rates also went up for everybody else. And that's it up this whole cascade of problems so we're people won't buy as many houses. There won't be as many houses constructed in their wealth as much capital equipment invested in and investments in important part of the Economic growth in your all sorts of every interest sensitive part of the economy the way the government runs a deficit. The way it borrows money is by selling bonds treasury bonds. The government says to really anybody. Okay lend us whatever one hundred dollars and in say ten years we will pay you back with interest will pay you back one hundred twenty dollars. The bond is basically the government's i. Iou you that it will pay back that loan with interest and during the clinton administration because of that link between deficits and interest rates. Everybody in the white house talked about treasury bonds about the bond market time. James carville was a political advisor to president. Clinton was just an obsession. In the early days of clinton's everybody say what's the bond market could house bot mocking react to hell multiple. i don't know it just became this omnipresent. The heart of every conversation. James carville was not an economics guy but as he spent time at the white house he realized that sort of bizarrely all these people who worked there making policy the people who had what seemed like the most powerful jobs in the world. We're in fact terrified of the bond market so when a reporter from the wall street journal called up carville to talk about the bond market. He came up with this line that became sort of famous or at least bond market famous kid. I wanted to grow up with four hundred hitter. The pope and the president. But i just want to be the bond. Market's gonna scare the hell out of everybody pleat. What did he say. A what a hundred hitter like in baseball pope the president baseball. I cannot tell you how many times he said that's me. Every meeting every meeting a lot of my memories are about carville sort of making jokes about you. Know you issues as a bond trader bond traders. These are the people who work in finance all around the world who manage a bunch of money. Generally other people's money pension funds or college endowments that kind of thing and every day they decide what bonds to buy and what bonds to sell what companies and countries to lend to and what companies and countries to not lend to to stop lending to and like with any lender bond traders worry about lending more money to a borrower who is already borrowing a lot because all that borrowing makes it more risky and so to compensate for that risk bond traders demand a higher interest rate. They stop lending until rates. Go up and this bond traders demanding higher interest rates when the government is borrowing more money. This is the scenario that everyone was so worried about people. Were so afraid of this that there was even a special term for the bond traders. Who do this bond vigilantes. Bill clinton has convinced. The bond vigilantes are scary and in fact he decides the us needs to bring the deficit down. He decides to build a whole economic plan around getting rid of the deficit. One of the economists he brought in to make that happen was jason and a central argument. That we made was if you do this. It will lower interest rates and interest rates are lower will have more investment and more economic growth and sort of amazingly. All of this happened. They did raise taxes and cut spending and get the deficit down. In fact by the end of the clinton administration the deficit felt all the way to zero. And what came next was sort of a golden moment for the economy in silicon valley. There was the dot com boom but really the whole economy was doing great businesses of all kinds. Were doing well. Ordinary workers were getting breezes lower deficits lead to lower interest rates which led to more investment. And that was good for basically everybody. The system was working. The next big moment in the story comes right after the financial crisis of two thousand eight and this is the moment when everything is about to change when this big shift in the way the world works is about to happen but nobody quite nosy yet. Brock obama has just been elected. President obama brings in clinton's guy. Jason furman as one of his economic advisors and ferment. Goes into this meeting to discuss. How big of a stimulus. Bill obama should push for as he takes office. We met with the president-elect december sixteenth two thousand eight and we're all crowded together in a conference room. I think it was in a law firm in chicago and he wanted it to be big. He wanted to be bold but there was this worry. The stimulus was going to be funded with deficit. Spending government was going to borrow the money. And some of obama's own economic advisers worried that borrowing and spending too much money might actually harm the economy for that classic reason
Hopes dimming for another round of stimulus checks in 2020
"Regardless of a vaccine for so many americans. This is emergency time. We're so close. There is a light at the end of the tunnel and yet people are going to the hospital now. Businesses are getting closed now and without financial relief a lot. More people will lose their jobs some getting ready to spend their first winter in homeless shelters but this week you're also seeing some hope in washington that a deal can get done for the first time in months it seems. Lawmakers are close to passing another round of support. Compromise is within reach behind the scenes. There was clearly some bipartisan cooperation. Happening for example many democrats wanted direct stimulus checks sent to americans will it now appears some republicans and perhaps even the white house itself may be on board with that idea. Some workers have gotten sick. Have sued their employers for not protecting them better from the virus. Republicans wanted to shield corporations from that type of lawsuit. Mitch mcconnell is no longer saying that really has to be included. But they're so lots of hangups lots of reasons. This could be sunk so this morning. I don't want to talk about the partisan back and forth. I wanna ask a simple question what happens. Congress does not pass a code relief. Bill what are the consequences days weeks and months from now. Abc's chief business and economics correspondent. Rebecca jarvis is here rebecca. Can you smell it the stakes for me at the capital this week will brad incredibly important. It is make or break. It's life or death. I'm just day by day trying to figure it out day. Bonday that in the pocket of for example a single mother like angel recently spoke to in detroit who works in a hospital makes minimum wage. Therein has three school age. Children were that school. As of last friday is no longer available to her in person. The choice of work and kids shouldn't be a choice. I want to be the best mom i can be. This could be the difference between her being able to afford to pay for childcare to have someone come to her home or to even drop her children off at daycare or her potentially having to quit her job because she has no other alternative to care for her children and at the same time work so it's been challenging trying to keep going to work and prevent being far low or fire to keep you know inconsequential our lives and our lifestyles. But at the same time some nights. I go to sleep. And i'm like why am i going to work. What are the domino's that would actually fall. Just nothing happened like. Can you walk me through how that would play out from. The halls of washington to small business will two things especially are hammering. Small businesses and many small businesses in this country happened to be independent restaurants. They have not given us money and they have shut us down. We cannot survive. My staff cannot survive in one case particularly in california. You have a number of restaurants who've been told to close their doors because of the spike in cova cases now that we are going to close the outside. It's of our employees go home. And how are they going to pay their bills in new york while restaurants can remain open and they can serve primarily outdoors. They have a tipping point because things have just gotten so cold that as goldman sachs estimates about forty degrees. Is the tipping point where people are no longer going to be interested in dining outside while we're there in new york. The summer has just been a disaster to scott freezing cold after thanksgiving and the world has just completely fallen apart. Earlier this year in september the national restaurant association pulled all of its members and said how many of you can make it. The next six months without any additional aid from the government forty percent of the national restaurant association members. These are small independent restaurants across the country. Said they weren't gonna make it six months without help. That was three months ago. We're already in the territory where they weren't sure they were going to be able to survive. We see all these posters that were all in this together but it doesn't seem like we are when a particular industry as being targeted stricter than others for many of them. they're using their home as collateral their mortgage as collateral. What does it mean if they go out of business it means they could lose their home. It also means that their retirement savings for for many small businesses. The retirement account is the business itself. You've seen from j. p. morgan for example. They're now estimating the first quarter of next year. We'll see negative economic growth Moody's they're saying at this point that without help from the government we will see a double dip recession. And that's really what we're talking about here brad. What's you're not just envisioning like stays really bad. You're envisioning a scenario where it could even get a lot worse really suddenly affecting everyone with a potential deal rebecca here. I'm sure the average person would just take what they can get. But when you talk to economists business leaders are there things that need to be in this deal to avoid that disaster scenario. You just talked about well brad. According to a group of more than one. Hundred and twenty-five economists including jason furman who's a former top economic advisor to president obama. Those direct cash payments to american families are incredibly important. I need the help. My kid's name to eight other people's kids. The the the thing about stimulus checks is that they're one of the fastest ways to get people money that money gets spent immediately and it gets spent immediately in ways that can help give the economy a little bit of juice at a time where people have been pulling back but once you start looking at what various analysts in what economists are calling for. They're saying at this point sooner rather than bigger is better in fact If you look at what. Bank of america's chief economist is calling for right now. She wants to see money for testing for the vaccine and contact tracing pandemic employment insurance. That's the employment insurance for gig workers and people who have lost coverage because they've already extended out all of the benefits because they've been collecting benefits for too long and then direct aid to small businesses. Moody's mark zandi adds to that list. Rental assistance among the programs ending soon is the cdc eviction moratorium. If it expires it will lead up to five million tenants facing eviction in january the beginning of winter. I've never been in this situation ever before my life. I've never had to come out to beg for help. And even calling any of this stimulus is sort of a misnomer. It's really about relief. So that people can just get to the other side.
UK to launch new watchdog next year to police tech giants
"Will create a new watchdog to police. Big tech companies, including Google and Facebook. The AP Syria. Shockley reports the U. K government says that setting up a digital markets unit next year to enforce a new code of conduct governing the behavior off tech giants that dominate the online advertising market. The digital markets. Units scheduled to launch in April will oversee a new regulatory regime for tech companies that's aimed at spurring more competition. The measures were foreshadowed in findings, but former Obama economic advisor Jason Furman, who was commissioned by the UK Treasury to carry out the review off the digital economy. Sarah Shockley, London, Delta
UK to launch new watchdog next year to police tech giants
"Britain plans to create a new watchdog to police and big tech companies including Google and Facebook to counter the market dominance and prevent them from exporting consumers and small businesses the UK government says that setting up a digital markets units next year to enforce the new code of conduct governing the behavior of tech giants that dominate the online advertising market the digital markets units is scheduled to launch in April will oversee any regulatory regime for tech companies that's aimed at spurring more competition the measures were foreshadowed in findings by former Obama economic adviser Jason Furman who was commissioned by the UK treasury to carry out a review of the digital economy Sarah Shockley London
Has Globalization Undermined the American Working Class?
"America's working class has been cheated is an assertion that has been getting a lot of currency lately are last presidential election went deep on that claim in both parties by the way and the culprit most often blamed for that. It's that monstrous five syllable word globalization, the philosophy and the practice of free trade which has been great for companies and for shareholders but has had a devastating impact. It is argued on the American working woman and. Man Well Economist do agree that in the past four decades the American working class, which we're defining tonight as people who lack a four year college degree. They have seen flat wages and a steady disappearance of good jobs. But is globalization a main reason that that's happening to those workers and for those workers is globalization entirely bad. Well, we think this has the makings of a debate. So let's have it. Yes or no to this statement globalization. has undermined. America's working. Class I'm John Donavan, and I stand between two teams of experts in this topic who argue for and against this resolution globalization has undermined America's working class as always. Our debate will go in three rounds and then our live audience here at the Saint Regis Hotel and Aspen Colorado where we are appearing in partnership with the Aspen Ideas Festival will choose the winner and as always if all goes well civil discourse, we'll. Also win a resolution once again, globalization has undermined America's Working Class Jared Bernstein you have debated with us before. So welcome back you're a senior fellow at the center on Budget and policy priorities. You were Vice President Joe. Biden's chief economist. The last time you debated with US interestingly Jason Furman who is your opponent at the other table tonight was your debate partner as a team you were formidable formidable I, almost want to use the French pronunciation. Formula, so are you planning to use your insiders knowledge of Jason's debate battles against him to very much am the way to do that with Jason is to make a lot of sports analogies because they repealing confusing. All right. Thank you and I see you detail to Aspen. You were a to aspen well I. Think the guy with the tie is the guy you want to listen to, but I'll let you decide. All right. Thanks very much. Jared Bernstein and can tell us who your partner is. This someone I've known for twenty five years she's a dear friend of mine and I consider her my mentor in this topic feely gentlemen feeling. Theo welcome to intelligence squared your president of the Economic Policy Institute. You've spent two decades as an economist for the AFL CIO, which is America's largest federation of unions. It represents some twelve point, five, million working women and men. You've spent twenty five years working on trade policy. So what got you interested in trade? Well, when I came to Washington in the early nineties I got drawn. INTO THE NAFTA debate the North American Free Trade. Agreement. And I realized pretty early on that. This was not some kind of a dry text book discussion about tariffs but it was a transnational battle over democracy good jobs, workers, rights, and regulation. So I was hooked because a lots at stake a lot is at stake. Okay. Thanks very much thelia once again, team arguing for the motion. And motion again, globalization has undermined America's working class. We have to debaters arguing against it, I Jason Firm. Welcome back to intelligence squared Jason you're a professor of the practice of economic policy at the Harvard Kennedy School you're a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, you were Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama tonight. As we said, you're going to be debating your former colleague Jared Bernstein on the impact of globalization. So is this the first time you to have debated the globalization issue with each other jared and I agree on I'd say about ninety five percent of economic issues and my goal tonight is to bring to one hundred percent. Thanks very much Jason and can you tell us who your partner is someone I've only known for a few years and every single thing. He's ever told me I have believed James Manica Legitimate James Manyika. Welcome the first time telling squared you're a senior partner at McKinsey, and company you're the chairman of their economics research arm, the McKinsey Global Institute, your first time debating with us. But not your first debate you debated at Oxford I did you studied robotics and computers earlier in your career you were visiting scientist at NASA. So how do you go from very eclectic from robotics and space to thinking about trade policy? In American. Workers I've always been fascinated by the kinds of technologies that drive innovation and growth, but also affects what will people in the real world actually do. So when you put that together with the economy, these issues around trade and workforce become very, very important. Those are the issues that motive a great perspective to bring here and then once again, thank you. Thank you again to the team arguing against them.
"jason furman" Discussed on NewsRadio WIOD
"Have experts who have advised me to do that I'm considering it now while New York is seeing record low coronavirus cases here in Florida we know cases are soaring New York City was once the Kobe that nineteen epicenter and Cuomo doesn't want another spike in his state meanwhile looks like Florida may become the next epicenter scientists at children's hospital of Philadelphia and university of Pennsylvania say the risk here in the sunshine state is worse than ever in their predictions this comes of course the sunshine state sees its biggest spike in corona virus cases the number of cases in Palm Beach county and Miami Dade are expected to continue to rapidly increase if social distancing practices do not improve meanwhile it's seven oh for nearly eight hundred Oklahoma health care professionals have signed a letter urging the mayor of Tulsa to cancel the president's rally tomorrow allowing our city to be one of the first places in the world to host an indoor gathering of this magnitude is not a political matter it's a public health matter the letter said the rally is slated to take place the be okay center an indoor venue that seats more than nineteen thousand people at a time when Oklahoma has seen ninety one percent jump in its coronavirus cases over the past week the rally does fall under the CDC's highest risk category for gatherings but the B. okay center says it will check attendees temperatures upon entry and provide masks attendees will be required to wear them that's my power the fight against carbon nineteen and unemployment are still top of mind for many what's most important is that there continues to be a very vigorous ambitious response and that response last as long as it is needed at a virtual hearing Harvard University professor Jason Furman added that even if all workers who were temporarily laid off return to their jobs there would still be an unemployment rate of seven percent and amid the pandemic are jobless rate here in the state jump to twelve point nine percent in April and we're gonna find out what may's look like later I don't think we're going to we're still going to see a rather high unemployment number I'm hoping that as we move into maybe that's the second quarter October is we should hopefully see some nice decreases if you are looking for work near the Blanco with career for a source urges you to freshen up your resume and be ready to tell prospective employers you can help them move forward during this time seven oh five the NBA's gonna be using wearables to combat corona virus during the league's restart at Disney world C. N. B. C. reports players will have the option to wear an aura smart ring which can measure body temperature respiratory functions and heart rate the data tracking company says.
"jason furman" Discussed on News Radio 920 AM
"Service last month a guy named Jason Furman a top Obama regime economist spoke to a bipartisan group of policy makers he laid out what to expect when the economic shutdown is over he predicted that they're about to see the best economic data in a history of the country that's not good from their perspective now many in the group I couldn't believe it they thought professor Fuhrman misspoke but Fuhrman has stuck to that forecast he expects that as the economic lockdown passes the American economy will come away feeling back in on president it rate he says that will experience a steep and quick rebound just like trump is said to counter the steep and quick shut down now politico is reporting Democrats are directing this that they are spooked that in even a partial comeback will put trump in the driver's seat for the November election now think about this for a minute here we are we're slowly coming out of an unprecedented economic catastrophe over thirty million Americans lost their jobs over night businesses had to shut their doors some may never come back and what spooks Democrats what are they dreaded Americans getting back to work because that'll make president trump look good I'm telling you folks these people are sick these Democrats are pathologically sick the country will recover from covert nineteen Democrats will never recover from their hate in January of twenty seventeen I was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and within twenty four hours of that diagnosis we found ourselves here in Memphis it's a G. they knew what they were doing they knew how they were gonna trader they laid out this elaborate plan we didn't know what the future was or if there even was a feature thank you there was nothing you can the survival rate was four percent four percent do the work in research the same G..
"jason furman" Discussed on KSFO-AM
"Radio five sixty KSFO with you wherever you go last month a guy named Jason Furman a top Obama regime economist spoke to a bipartisan group of policy makers he laid out what to expect when the economic shutdown is over he predicted that they're about to see the best economic data in the history of the country that's not good from their perspective how many in the group I couldn't believe it they fought professor Fuhrman misspoke but Fuhrman has stuck to that forecast he expects that as the economic lockdown passes the American economy will come roaring back in on transit that'd rate he says that will experience a steep and quick rebound just like trump is said to counter the steep and quick shut down now politico is reporting Democrats are directing this that they are spooked that in even a partial comeback will put trump in the driver's seat for the November election now think about this for a minute here we are we're slowly coming out of an unprecedented economic catastrophe over thirty million Americans lost their jobs over night businesses had to shut their doors some may never come back and what spooks Democrats what are they driving Americans getting back to work because that'll make president trump look good I'm telling you folks these people are sick these Democrats are pathologically sick the country will recover from covert nineteen Democrats will never recover from their hate.
Democratic Economist Predicts A Rosy Economy That May Work In Trump's Favor
"It's the economy stupid they line up widely attributed to democratic strategist James carvel carvel helped run bill Clinton's winning campaign for president back in nineteen ninety two so how much might be twenty twenty presidential election hinge on the economy and economy by the way with historic levels of unemployment double digit contractions in economic growth large sectors of the economy shut down for weeks now months well because of the corona virus will it is tempting to think all of that would be an albatross for president trump but maybe not so says Jason Furman a Democrat and economist and chair of president Obama's council of economic advisers he has got a theory that the economy could it be a winner for Republicans this fall and he is here now to make the case Jason Furman welcome thanks for having me so your argument is that yes said complete economic carnage right now the economy the data is dire but then in the coming months we could see the best economic data in history really make the case so I'm not a political forecaster I'll tell you what I think's gonna happen the economy then can speculate about what it means for the economy economy collapsed over a one month period from mid March to mid April after that it's gone from very very very bad to what on election day will probably just be very bad now the difference between very very very bad and very bad will be four months in a row when we might see more than a million jobs created a month when we might see the unemployment rate falling really rapidly and so if you just focus on the most recent data there will be a case that one can make with a straight face that we're seeing you know the fastest economic recovery ever so you're saying the numbers might still actually be bad come fall but they would be moving in the right direction if you're president trump and thinking this might help your reelection prospects yeah and and I don't expect that right direction to last forever but could it is the first phase of the recovery is the fastest part that's where you turn the lights back on in your business that's where the furloughed workers get called back and that can lead to a rapid decline in the unemployment rate a rapid increase in jobs even at the end of that process you'll still have an unemployment rate in the double digits and you know what I think a lot of the debate will hinge on is you know the unemployment rate is twelve that's terrible or the unemployment rate has come down really far from you know the twenty percent it was out earlier in the year isn't that great nobody knows what the fall will bring of course but it does seem the base than expected second wave of the virus would follow up with throw a serious flying they want out of this argument yes the second wave a large second wave would make this wrong it is what most economic forecasters are expecting right now and but I do think you know the Great Depression forecasts and the like are setting the bar in the wrong place we are very unlikely to have something like the Great Depression we are much more likely to have a very bad reception is very bad recession is a problem I think we should be doing everything we can to avoid it but for some people you know there may be a relief that you know it will appear as if the worst is behind us I do I mean the politics and economics are hard to untangle here because we are in an election year and and inside of six months from that presidential election how how tricky a spot does this put Democrats in it in the sense that everybody just about everybody but surely wants the economy to recover we would all like to see it doing better but if it does does that play straight to president trump's advantage come November I think the relevant question for voters in November will be who has a better plan to make the economy better in twenty twenty one twenty twenty to twenty twenty three who has a plan for infrastructure for training for paid leave you know whatever it is you think you're going to need for the recovery of the economy on a sustained basis that is Jason Furman he's an economics professor at Harvard and he served as chair of the council of economic advisers to president Obama Jason Furman thank you
"jason furman" Discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
"You can vote for against or undecided. If you're tuning in on podcast you can click the Lincoln. Our show notes as well okay. Let's meet our debaters again. The resolution is this. The global financial system was better prepared for the pandemic then for two thousand eight and arguing for that resolution. I want to say hello. I Jason Furman Jason. Welcome to intelligence squared. Us great to be here Jason you've debated with us before and you're one of President Obama's top economic advisers and you served as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors from two thousand thirteen to seventeen year now at Harvard University. Your professor of the practice of economic policy. And we just WANNA say it's great to have you. We love the way your debate in the way you present an argument so thanks for joining us. It was in person so but this is the best we're going to do and we are pleased to be doing it. Also with Jillian Jillian. Welcome back to intelligence squared. You're the Financial Times the US and chair of the editorial board. We WanNA thank you for joining us and I also want to put another a little bit of background for those. Who didn't attend our previous iteration of this debate back in two thousand nineteen we debated on the resolution. Ten years after the global financial crisis system is safer. We had Jason Furman and the L. Cash Gari Arguing for the resolution arguing against we had scheduled Jillian and Kenneth Rogoff except Jillian. We missed you. That evening during Due to a flight mishap so at the eleventh hour our chairman Rose Rosencrantz. Took your seat and he argued in your place. We're going to hear from him a little bit later in the program. So we're sorry to have missed you. Then as Jason said we're sorry that on personnel but we are delighted to have you here and to have both of you making your cases for the side that you're on in this time of pandemic and let's move onto round one round one..
Pelosi: House 'close' to striking deal with Trump on coronavirus response package
"Breaking news from Capitol Hill as House Speaker. Nancy Pelosi announced that she is close to an agreement to legislative deal with the trump administration on a package that could be passed tomorrow to deal with mostly the economic effects of the Corona virus and Donald Trump has not been involved in the negotiations is treasury. Secretary has done the president's job for him because the president is not in the mood to speak with Nancy Pelosi and reportedly believes that Speaker Pelosi would humiliate him if he involved himself in the discussions. This is of course one way of looking at the other way of looking at it as Donald trump humiliates himself whenever he opens his mouth as he did last night. While Donald Trump was addressing the nation last night for ten minutes from the office stock market futures trading started to drop dramatically and then when the market opened today proceeded to crash by the largest amount since nineteen eighty-seven losing almost ten percent of its value today. Harvard economics professor and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers tweeted hostess sets. What I believe is a new world record for presidential market value destruction. Joining us now. Is Jason Furman? The former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. The President Obama. He is now professor of the practice of economic policy. At Harvard's Kennedy School. Thank you very much for joining US tonight. Professor Ruin what. What would you suggest the government action that could be taken now? What action could be taken to deal with what we're seeing as the economic effects of this crisis? Lawrence this is the most serious economic crisis. This country may have faced since the Great Depression bigger than what we faced in two thousand eight. Two thousand eight was terrible. It was devastating but most people kept their jobs. Many people kept spending right now. Everyone is cutting their spending large swaths of the economy. People's jobs are at risk. And so once you start to think about that the answer to your question of what we should do the more. We can do the better so my next question was going to be. Is this one thousand. Nine hundred eighty seven or is this nineteen twenty nine which you've already answered that it's closer to that of maybe about six months ago. I reread John. Kenneth Galbraith book the Great Crash About The nineteen twenty nine stock market crash. And when you read the things people were saying As it was already underway as the crash was happening others so many people who sounded like Donald Trump that saying it will bounce back as the president said today the stock market will bounce back. Don't worry about it Larry cudlow the other day saying invest As it's going down you know you'll be very happy with that. Of course it's dropped dramatically since Kudlow said that so just to set this of for our audience perspective you are comparing this now to the nineteen twenty nine crash of the stock absolutely and you know the difference is it depends on what happens if we get through this virus and the next two months then maybe it bounces right back if it takes us nine months even at that point if we find a cure for the vaccine a lot of damage a huge amount of damage will be done to companies to workers on to unemployment of type. That would persist. And you could take a long time to to recover from so I I'd love to have more reassuring things to say for Lawrence but I just I am. I am worried right now. Well you're confirming what. I've been feeling in my my amateur way about this but so this presents an enormous policy-making challenge because when you talk about things like payroll tax cut which the president mentioned a few days ago and it died instantly when the Senate Finance Committee chairman said he wouldn't even consider it. That could come back. But a payroll tax cut to a person. Who's no longer on payroll Doesn't work the way it bye-bye in the stimulus way. You might have wanted it to a while. That person was still on the payroll. That's absolutely right so what I think we should do. Is Number one everything. We can do on health free testing which is in the house legislation. I think that's terrific. We're GONNA eat a lot of hospital beds. A lot of ventilators. We're going to need that fast
"jason furman" Discussed on FT Alphachat
"I think part of it, honestly, was just they had a lot of cheap options in the labor market. So it's not like they needed to emphasize productivity because they could just hire more workers without having to pay a lot more, I think eventually once labor markets, titan enough. You should see more on the investment side, just because they're going to want to start to conham is on labor zoo, automatic stabilisers seem to be as a Keynesian economists, they seem to be kind of a no brainer. Such sort of something everyone should like the problem, I guess is maybe had a pay for it. So the implications for higher deficit in a bigger debt burden or a concern. But are there really any fiscal hawks laughed and mean do we really need to worry about this? Now, do you think that the higher cost of it? I think on. The one hand, we try to argue that it's not that much higher of a cost. Right. If, if we're going to do discretionary policy anyway, just at a later point in time. So, you know, it's not time to the business cycle as well. And all that, then this is just saying let's do what we were going to do, but do it better. And in that way, it's not really increasing costs, substantially. I think the other reason actually that a fiscal hawk should like something like this is what it's trying to do is say, let's make sure we spend when we should, and we don't spend when we shouldn't, and so by having triggers that turn both on and off and making sure that we're doing things time to the business cycle appropriately but not ratcheting up spending permanently. Right. It's saying, let's spend more when we need to and then go back to normal. I actually in some ways, feel like that should be attractive to people who do worry about longer term debt paths because it shouldn't in some sense. Shift, trajectory may be a one off shift up in debt lev. Nls during a downturn. But it it shouldn't be kinda permanently ratcheting up your deficit spending, because you're going back to a normal time afterwards. Right. And I guess if you can implement these really quickly than the depths of the recession could be lessened. So it's not that they pay for themselves. But that the cost is mitigated somewhat by their affective nece. That's exactly right. And in Jason Furman, and Matt learned really pals chapter they actually did try to do a little bit of kind of a dynamic scoring type of side of this. I think the scoring question frankly, is a really interesting one because CBO has would have to score these types of things probabilistically, because, you know, if you said, you know, we do this, when the unemployment rate rises quickly well, in CBS forecast. The unemployment rate never rises quickly. So in technically would score zero right? But they, you know they're not stupid. They're recognized that, and so they have rules that they would score things probabilistically, but I don't think honestly anyone's exactly sure how an a lot. It would I think, depend on if they view these things that should be scored dynamically because if they do you're exactly right. If you if you shorten the downturn then you're helping the budget out as well. And so these things might have bigger sticker prices than the actual effective cost to the government in do you mentioned earlier something we haven't really touched on. And we've talked about how the triggers could be slow in starting the program, so we haven't really talked about triggers made in them. And I know in the last recession some governments actually responded with us charity. I'm talking to you both gun show the in Germany rather than stimulus. So if we have these automatic triggers to start these programs. How politically realistic is it to expect? Policymakers to wait until the programs are triggered off to shut them down versus just getting nervous about constantly spiraling debt. And, and shutting them down prematurely rushed me to stray into the political science side, where I, I worry about my expertise more, but. I guess what I would say is if you look at experience, the things that get turned off or all the discretionary things, and they'll never extend the discretionary things, or they fight about that, the things that we have that are currently automatic..
Does the Deficit Matter?
"As evil number one fat, sandy not wanna eat fat. It was bad. There was no such thing as good fat. It was just all bad fat. And so in the store there was low fat everything there were these Lafayette cookies your snack cookies cardio. Yes. Like hockey pucks like had the consistency of packing phone. We're like frozen yogurt. Then it was like a low fat alternative to ice cream, which also kind of had the consistency of packing foam eighties. Eating a lot of stuff with the consisting of packing foam, like even low fat butter. You could've mentioned cholesterol, good, cholesterol, and bad cholesterol. Is at all bad. You know, that's that's another one for your list. That is Jason Furman. He's a professor of economic policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, and he also worked as an economist for the Obama administration. And we wanted to talk to Jason because he writes anything's a lot about another kind of universal evil that we had back in the eighties deficits the deficit is the shortfall between the tax revenue. The government collects in a given year and the money it spends when the government spends more money than it takes in. It has to borrow money to cover the shortfall that is the deficit, by the way, the deficit is not to be confused with the national debt. So the debt is like the amount of water in the bathtub and the deficit. Is like the amount of water. That's coming out of the tap in a given period of time and flowing into the bathtub to the debt is you're running total. The deficit is what you do in any given year politicians on the right on the left in the center. The one thing they could all agree on was the deficits were bad. It came up a lot deficit spending should not be a feature of budget. We have to cut the deficit because the more we spent paying off the debt the less tax dollars. We have to invest in jobs and education, the massive national debt, which we accumulated is the result of the government's high-spending diet. Well, it's time to change the diet and to change it in the right way. Government spending is a dangerous road. The deficits the people of America have been overcharged and on their behalf. I'm here asking for a refund, but now attitudes about budget deficits are evolving a lot. There's even a whole sort of tr. Trendy school of thought economics now, saying budget deficits, don't matter nearly as much as we thought that unless budget deficits lead to inflation. We can rack up all the deficits we want. No big deal. Jason Furman is not in that camp. But he says, you know, just like fat deficits are not the universal evil that we used to think they were. Although he did say that he didn't think it was an exact analogy it's a little bit different in that there. Probably is some timeless truth about dieting undefeated. I don't even think there is an underlying timeless truth because the world actually is changing and financial markets are functioning one way in the eighties and other way now and you need to. You know, change, your your an update, your ideas with with us changes in the world this indicated for planet money, I'm carseat, and I'm Stacey Vanik Smith. Dan, the show deficits why did everybody used to think deficits were bad, and what changed? Support for this podcast in the following message. Come from Jimmy Nye, the regulated exchange making it easy to add bitcoin and other crypto currencies to your portfolio, protecting your investments with oversight and state of the art cybersecurity open a free account at Jim ni- dot com slash indicator. Support also comes from WordPress dot com with powerful site building, tools and thousands of things that she was from users can launch site that's free to start with a room to grow. Get fifteen percent off any new plan. Purchase at WordPress dot com slash indicator. Today's indicator is a trillion as in a trillion dollars this year. The budget deficit is set to hit a trillion dollars. Jason Furman urine economist with Harvard's Kennedy School, you also served as an economist under President Obama trillion dollar sounds like a lot. That's scary Ohno's lot and that'll be popping for people absolately. Do I wish the deficit was smaller? Yes. Would I feel better about our economy? We had a lower debt as sheriff are Konami. Yes. So I feel like when I was growing up in eighties. The deficit was just this universally acknowledged terrible thing like the deficit was was bad. I feel like that his changed. But why has it changed? I mean, why did I mean it was really talked about. I think sort of this universal evil. Like, the one thing we could all grand was that the deficit was bad. Sometimes deficits can be good. Sometimes they can be bad. And sometimes they can be just not nearly as important as you'd like to think the time when they're good is in a recession you need to get yourself out of a recession. A'deficit means you're spending money or cutting taxes, that's helping the economy and in the nineteen eighties deficits back then really were a problem now deficits aren't causing high interest rates. So I don't think they're causing nearly the same magnitude of problems for the economy as they once were. Feel like they're kind of two parts of the deficit that people tend to worry about one is this kind of like there's almost sort of a morality like a moral principle at stake about deficits and the other one is just that sort of drags are Konami down. You could think about it in terms of morality because it can affect the distribution of income between generations. They're it depends on what you're doing it for if you're running a deficit to invest in infrastructure. You might actually be helping a future generation if you're running a deficit to give big tax cuts to people who are going to just run out and spend it today, you might be hurting a future generation. So I think there is a morality play between how this affects different generation. So what do you think is the best approach to the deficit right now? I mean, it sounds like maybe one extreme the other extreme don't like neither of those are good idea. What's a good idea? I can't give you. Scientific certainty. Exactly what the right way to handle the deficit is if you have a great new idea for college or a great new idea for social security or a great new tax cut. You wanna do then, you know, cut spending or raise taxes so that you're not adding to the deficit and making even higher than otherwise would have been that strikes. Middle course, it says you're not making a major exit for deficit reduction. You're just doing no harm. What I wouldn't do though is pass a law that makes that deficit even larger what are some good things about running a deficit. You know, the good is in a recession. It can help stimulate demand. Get people in businesses to spend more and help you get out of the recession in normal times. If you're using the deficit as a way to spend money on good things like infrastructure like scientific research, then it can actually make you richer in the future. Not. Poorer the flip side, the bad is if you're spending money on bad things, it can make future generations poorer, and it can drive up interest rates. Probably only happens a little, but it can that results in less business investment unless economic growth, you mentioned that like the economics of deficits have changed. How how have they changed? What has changed? And what is what does it mean for deficits the single most important number to know in? Judging country's fiscal situation is the difference between its interest rate and its growth rate 'cause if your interest rate is higher than your growth rate, your debt is going to be spiraling up as a share of the economy. If your interest rate is lower than your growth rate that helps contain how much your debt is rising relative to the economy right now in the United States growth rates are higher than interest rates, and that's helping us. To grow out of some of our debt burden and it's that key variable or minus Chee watching how that changes over time is I think a real key to understanding how much you should be worried about deficits at any point in time. Jason furman. Thank you so much. Thanks for having.
"jason furman" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"And Britain's digital market suggests tough rules are needed to help counter. The dominance of tech giants like Facebook, Google and Amazon the independent review commissioned by the government and led by Harvard University. Professor Jason Furman finds global tech giants don't face enough competition, and that existing rules are outdated and the be stop recommendations include setting up a new digital markets unit to get people more control over the data and giving more power to regulators to tackle illegal anticompetitive practices. Going cools by leaders in the US and the EU the strict deregulation of technology companies Charleston with asthma nothing in other news about Facebook. The technology giant has been experiencing some technical difficulties today in a statement on Twitter. Facebook said they were aware that some people are currently having trouble accessing the Facebook family of apps that working to resolve the issue as soon as possible. More on these stories at townhall dot com. Your mom. I don't know. The.
"jason furman" Discussed on The Ezra Klein Show
"Fast gave British stream today at Amazon WalMart or target. If we were to see a really large increasing government spending, and it wasn't accompanied by taxes that would put upward pressure on the economy, and you'd see the fed raising interest rates, and in fact, they'd raise it quite a lot. Hello. Show on the box media podcast network. This is a conversation. I wanted to have for I don't know a year. I literally got the idea for this. I think like he here a go, and it's just taking some time to get to get it together to figure out how to do it. I have been for a long time interested in and often confused by this idea of modern monetary theory, which is an alternative way of looking at how to think about budget deficits and inflation and the government's ability and constraints on printing money, but because as I said, it's not always an idea. I understand all that. Well, I've wanted to try to get a better way of tracing its boundaries. And so I wanted to have a debate between not a debate. I guess a conversation between somebody who is a proponent of modern monetary theory and someone who comes out of more mainstream if liberal branch of of traditional economics. And so I'm very glad that Jason Furman President Obama's former chief economist and Stephanie Kelton who is an economist at Stony Brook university. And is I think one of the most public advocates modern monetary theory have both agreed to join me here. So on the one hand, I this is an idea that often gets caricatured in the debate as saying, particularly like on Twitter and elsewhere saying you don't have to pay for anything, you just print whatever you want. But on the other hand if it's not that. Well, what is it? Right. What what how would it recommend different path forward for government budgets for fiscal policy for the fed for the country, then more traditional economic? So this is a great conversation. Trying to trace that boundary. One thing. I want to say is that we had a catastrophic audio mess up on my end. And so we had to redo it. We had salvage as much transportation pecans most of it is pretty exact, but they're places where I had to fill in based on contextual clues in the conversation. And what I thought I had asked. So if anything sounds a bit off that that may be part of it. I've really done my best half full fidelity to the original conversation. And I think I mostly have. But it is possible. I have screwed something up somewhere along the way. This was a quite unusual kind of technical failure. And if you'd heard what it sounded like. You'll be glad I did not release version of it. But I'm very grateful to to Jason for being here to Stephanie for being here. I think there's a lot of value in this conversation to very we'd see one. So it was a lot of fun for me. So was my Email is as recline showed box dot com. As her client show at vox dot com. Here's Stephanie Kelton and Jason Furman Jason Furman. Stephanie Kelton welcome to the show..
"jason furman" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Around three and a half, and I would have called that low. So Jason, you're not a politician. You're not a that. I won't ask you about that. But let me ask you about. What might happen? In fact, that Democrats did take over the house, which is what a lot of pundits are saying right now on November the sex and particularly other some ways in which President Trump actually could join forces with the Democrats on things like infrastructure spending, which might increase our dad, actually and even drug price controls. Yeah. I would add. I'd also I'd take those two and I'd add the minimum wage. Those are all things that you know, Democrats have been in favor of that at various points in time. President Trump has been in favor of you could imagine the logjam being broken that way. I don't think that's the real scenario. I don't think it's the most likely because so far he really has been very beholden to his base. And only wanted to do what is base wanted to do. And a lot of Democrats aren't particularly eager to do deals with him. So I think in Washington in general and the next two years wouldn't be an exception. Your best bet is not a whole lot happens. I'm except maybe when it comes to the. Sequester for discretionary spending in twenty twenty. I would expect that to be lifted and us to get more defense and more nondefense spending did last year that was former council of economic advisers chairman Jason Furman speaking with Bloomberg's David Westin and Alex Steele coming up. We'll take a look at Shinzo Abe's women program. This is Bloomberg. This is a Bloomberg quick context and background on issues of interest. Focuses on the Magnitsky act with Bloomberg's Lawrence Arnold.
Seattle, Bloomberg and Jonathan Ferrell discussed on Politics, Policy, Power and Law
"A top aide kim jong un is in washington about to deliver a letter from north korean leader to president trump and we'll have more on that as soon as it happens the most restrictive abortion law in the country is temporarily blocked by federal judge it stops the so called fetal heartbeat law from taking effect in iowa next month under an agreement between lawyers for the state and abortion rights groups they sued to block the law that would ban most abortions if a fetal heartbeat can be detected president trump started the day by breaking with presidential practice again this time it had to do with the jobs report trump tweeted about the main numbers more than an hour ahead of their official release signaling a good report was on the way jason furman chaired the council of economic advisers under president obama he says presidents typically wait until after the report is out to comment on it president obama had done this tweet i would have had exactly the same reaction and conveyed it directly to him and everyone else in the white house that it was a major major problem that he had done it and i would hope that that's what's happening right now in the white house economic adviser larry cudlow says the president did have the numbers last night but his tweet wasn't meant to signal a positive report the unemployment rate did fall to an eighteen year low but democratic leader nancy pelosi says wages only grew by a third of a percent and even that is being offset by rising costs of healthcare and gasoline repeating we expect that letter to be delivered to president trump any moment now from a north korean official a top aide kim jong global news twenty four hours a day on air and it tectonic on twitter powered by more than twenty seven hundred journalists and analysts in one hundred twenty countries it's not enough to get the right people in the room somebody has to know what to ask them me dr somebody's how far is the united states from an age of a sturdy just asking because we've been talking about this in japan tom keene care for ten enjoyable book value seven percent lower than it was a biblical and jonathan ferrell seattle's been cutting costs aggressively bloomberg surveillance weekday mornings at seven eastern on bloomberg radio.
"jason furman" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"A bloomberg business flash tom and john karen thanks so much jason furman will join us at the end of the nine o'clock hour looking forward to that we thank alan krueger earlier for joining us two of them presidents chairman of the president's council of economic advisors the one thing i would notice in it moved before the president's tweet is gold but then it moved further down just one of the tea leaves were looking at the two year yield the fact is is advanced higher over the last hour the president tweeting fifty eight minutes ago yeah this after the president tweeted that he's looking forward to saint employment numbers eight thirty this morning dot navy seen those employment numbers but we do know that he has access to them if he wanted to see them before the gym plasma see them before the president's jim glassman of j p morgan does not say them if he did a lot of trouble and so with bank jobless claims figures and it's all go there but critically this is a really important point dr glass and brings up jobless claims it's one side of the story but is that information as good when you get to the nirvana point that we're at now is it is it a normal time it's it's a highly significant for figuring out if there's a disruption or not and we saw claimed jump up a little bit we look closely at it it looked like it was a ford problem they had to shut down some operations he gives you so much color on what's going on in the economy and the trend there has been steady and lower.
"jason furman" Discussed on KOA 850 AM
"Long on information short on exaggeration you're listening to america's first news this morning with gordon deal thanks for joining us well democrats as you know are enthused about the midterm elections in november there's maybe a fifty fifty chance they could regain control of the house of representatives dem's will obviously run hard as a counterweight to the presidency of donald trump but it's better to run four something then against something yahu finance columnist rick newman examines an economic message that might resonate but will it be stronger than the gop economic message rick explain well this was an interview i did with jason furman who's a harvard professor who used to be president obama's top economists and i said you know you you understand the political environment in washington so democrats think they're gonna have a wave election in twenty eighteen what do you think there are economic issues should be and said i can answer that writer for my head he should first of all more immigration we actually need more immigrants now he doesn't mean we need more illegal immigrants but as an economic matter he's pointing out what many economists say which is that we need immigrants to help our labor force grow with your labor force is not growing your konami doesn't do as well productivity is not as high and immigrants are also very entrepreneurial more entrepreneurial than native gordon people so i i do more immigrants both highskilled and lowskilled second idea more infrastructure spending that is clearly something the democrats favor and some republicans even favor that including president trump the coal question is how to pay for it and jason furman idea is it's perfectly fine to raise the federal gas tax to pay for that and then his third idea is more healthcare reform there's a lot more that needs to be done you know there are many ideas about what else we can do for health care and i think we're going to hear republicans sex use me democrats talking about that a lot in these elections for sure but they were the ones who put obamacare out in the first place so can they be believed i guess if they were want reform if they can be believed it's a good question i think it i.
"jason furman" Discussed on BizTalk Radio
"One of obama's economists said that after eight years the obama recovery get it recovery it was essentially mathematically impossible to get the growth you're talking about well there you go you jerk obama administration economist jason furman you may know his name he forecast ten years of gdp growth gdp growth around two percent a year then you've got the ultimate economics snob there are a few others out there of course and i'm talking about larry son is former president i you like to believing the administration's forecast of three percent growth to believing in tooth this is his quogue in two theories and ludicrous supply side economics paul krugman and other one everything these quote geniuses predict are wrong so you wanna know what what is going on in reality gdp growth three point one percent over the last three quarters the congressional budget office forecast even higher growth and there supposedly a neutral organization what they do is they take feedback from administration and put it out which is why i think a lot of the numbers that they put out over the years were buoyant from obama i don't know if i may want to stop short of saying they're in the tech for obama but they're not a reputable reporting company but nevertheless for those who think they are they predicted three point three percent and here we go we're heading we're heading up there an amazing thinking about it so amazing eight trump more than he loved the conscious shrunk.
"jason furman" Discussed on KBNP AM 1410
"Relationship are politically breakdown in trust is very is very broad in the united states in europe in many places trust is between international partners trust in national institutions is diminished and i think that's a problem the way it has to work is that people cooperate and show the cooperation leads to gains and then you start to rebuild a sense that there is something to be achieved together i was talking to jason furman about the wonderful economist robert bear on the trust over time are we destroying within year study of trust at the i i did a panel on this and dr lipton will do a panel on this as well do large deficits do burgeoning debt over the long term they must destroy institutional and societal trust i think globalization and dislocation the financial crisis technology all of those things have led to an erosion of trust people don't believe that institutions the government has taken care of them and so there's vogel is aviation you know we've been saying this for years globalization has to be managed in a way that it is going to be durable you have to deal with the dislocations that come from globalization and i think as you're saying you have to make sure that you maintain stability because the financial crisis was the biggest destroyer of trust we've not really we've recovered in the sense that people trust financial institutions because we did a huge reform to make bank safe again but more broadly it's very important to maintain stability of public finances in order to people will trust in their government within this is china and within this is a trade this has been a wonderful discussion centered on the united states but there are changes in the pacific rim there changes in china and maybe the dialogue in may is about tpp the president's swings back and forth who knows where the president will be review the imf stance on the efficacy the benefits that all conceived from tpp even china potentially excluded from it at the root is the proposition that we still can gain from more interconnectedness and that that's key to the future of the asia pacific region and i think that that there's there's certainly having high standard trade agreements where there can be a deepening of links and countries can open themselves up to competition and everyone gains from competition it's a positive sum game is important i it's a shame that the.
"jason furman" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Well that's what i think was interesting and centered around touch on this in the interview and i i caught him in the hallway as well on the way out and and you know i think that the from the administration's perspective they feel that they have the upper hand and now is the time to do this because this is you know they don't think they're gonna lose the base of their support i mean completing farmers that said it's a very risky gamble because the basis of president trump's political coalition particularly in the early primaries were a direct result of those farmers i mean i guess that's one of the distractions right now but certainly what i've seen in my first eighteen hours here is the complete focus in the ending of every conversation is on the nation's debt and yet jason furman in essay with chair yellen and alan krueger and others is saying the fact is nothing happens politically until there's a crisis juicy a crisis on the washington horizon i don't see it well i'm not sure if i am not sure if i really i think that there's a dramatic shifting of in terms of the deficit in which political party really cares about the deficit and that's quite remarkable jason furman saying that this is an issue that could happen after midterms but you know i just heard from the source up on capitol hill this morning that that they actually want to change the committee structure to take on things like medicaid and medicare specifically which would be really interesting because republicans behind the scenes particularly conservatives to beat the drum on this for years are very frustrated and they're kind of having a political identity crisis when it comes to the deficit this is something that they can't pay not and fundraise on for years kevin surreal you wonder if you connect that with the twenty eighteen midterm elections and noting that the democrats seem to have out raised the republicans when it comes to campaign money is that an indication of what we can expect in november yeah i i think that's a really important point because anecdotally speaking you go to any political rally right now and and you notice that that the progressive left is incredibly fired up but from the from a statistical standpoint i would note.
"jason furman" Discussed on KBNP AM 1410
"That's what i think touch on this in the interview and i i caught him in the hallway as well on the way out and and you know i think that the from the administration's perspective they feel that they have the upper hand and now is the time to do this because this is you know they don't think they're gonna lose the base of their support i mean being farmers that's it it's a very risky gamble because the basis of president trump's political coalition particularly in the early primaries were a direct result of those farmers i i mean i guess that's one of the distractions right now but certainly what i've seen him i i eight hours here is the complete focus in the ending of every conversation is on the nation's debt and yet jason furman in an essay with chair yellen and alan krueger and others is saying the fact is nothing happens politically until there's a crisis do you see a crisis on the washington horizon well i'm not sure if i am not sure if necessary i think that there's a dramatic shifting of in terms of the deficit which political party really cares about the deficit and and that's quite remarkable jason this is an issue that could happen after midterms but you know i just heard from the source up on capitol hill this morning that that they actually want to change the committee structure to take on things like medicaid and medicare specifically which would be really interesting because republicans behind the scenes particularly conservatives to beat the drum on this for years are very frustrated and we're kind of having a political identity crisis when it comes to the deficit this is something that they campaigned on and fundraise on for years kevin cirilli you wonder if you connect that with the twenty eighteen midterm elections and i'm noting that the democrats seem to have outraged the republicans when it comes to campaign money is that an indication of what we can expect in november.
"jason furman" Discussed on Freakonomics
"Republicans follow through on this at least to some degree by nearly doubling the standard deduction they gave a lot of taxpayers good reason to not itemize deductions for some people it will be simpler people who are itemizing today will be able to take the standard deduction is about twenty five million of them and that's that's not trivial that's real simplification but there's a lot of new complications complications and costs and as furman argues a lack of transparency the trump administration selling this has been a business starting from the premise that the united states has really high taxes when in fact the united states has really low taxes that this legislation would pay for itself and cut the deficit when legislation would actually cost a lot of money and raise the deficit to its claims originally that no high income households would benefit which is patently untrue so the core arguments the administration made over and over again were completely false jason furman and austin goolsbee see way too much in the tax package that benefits the wealthy and will exacerbate income inequality several nonpartisan analyses back them up but glenn hubbard says it isn't quite so black and white most americans will get a tax cut and not all high income people are treated very well i happen to be a high income person who lives in new york city i'm not going to get a tax cut quite the opposite quite the opposite new york city is pretty bad but anywhere new york state is pretty bad this is one of the many interesting wrinkles of this tax act is the end of the salt deduction or not the end but the the minimization so it used to be you could deduct i guess an infinite amount of satan local taxes from your federal return.
"jason furman" Discussed on Freakonomics
"Would have been pleased with at least that part of the new trump tax law but you'd be wrong they had specific arguments as to why but also let's face it everything with trump's name on it is inherently contentious i am guessing the tax policy is not your most favorite topic in the world but in honor of our upcoming tax day we thought we'd give the new law the freakonomics radio treatment track down all four of the ca chairman from that panel for a robust debate this will require two episodes today we focus on sitting ca chair kevin hassett we'll hear why he thought such a drastic tax law was needed in the first place so we had really kind of like a raging problem that required antibiotics of attacks afor we'll hear some hard core economic walk speak there's this thing called the capital deepening contribution to productivity growth and has it tells us what it's like to work for president trump he will challenge you in ways that economists often are not ready for and then next week we will dissect the tax law off with the former c h airman glenn hubbard to say it's a disaster seems over the top jason furman the core arguments the administration made over and over again were completely false and austin goolsbee the entire stimulus that some people said all this is unbelievably large and how can we do something that would increase the deficit by seven hundred eighty billion dollars i mean come on this is four times bigger than.
"jason furman" Discussed on Recode Decode
"Exactly exactly it's a combination of multiple multiple trends you know there are a lot of economists who think that's crazy and i talked to a lot of them to you know jason furman who was played a prominent role in the obama administration is particularly carve out a place saying in the long term this this is unlikely to happen so i'm concerned about it i don't but i also don't i'm not in the class where i'm here saying it's going to happen it's a federal employees it's it's a done deal it may or may not but i do think the trends are very clear about ease the increasing fragmentation of jobs already and it's the gig economy that is indicative of that the lift drivers and drivers but it's also the worker at starbucks who can only get twenty five hours and who doesn't know next week you'll get ten right or forty and the merwin the idea that you're able to plan planning is is made very very difficult i mean so you're constantly stressed if you don't know you're gonna be able to make rent yeah you have a job you have some hours but if you're not going to get enough then then constantly living on the constant instability so i worry about the wholesale job loss absolutely but i'm also personally really intent on making clear that that wherever you fall on whether or not that's the future or not the future we already need i you know mark andriessen big proponent is that in the end it'll be like farming in factual more jobs than ever and we reason i'm so interested in it this past year we've done a special msnbc about it we're going to do a lot more of them is because he was saying i said yeah but the blacksmiths what happened to them and he goes i don't care what happened in the last minute and i was like yeah but they had families and something happened something not good happened to those people that they retrained they there was social unrest.