Good evening everyone,. I want to know if you can hear. Me we have a new sound. System can you hear me. Wonderful. We are thrilled, honored, to be celebrating the publication of jfk and the raegan revolution. We have the two coauthors with us a man who needs no introduction, lawrence could loaf, and his coauthor, brian domitrovic who was associate professor of the some state houston university. They will be talking about the book together and were so thrilled and honor to have you both here. I should mention also, larry lives across the street and his a very regular customer at the. Bookstore for 20. Years that makes it so special and so personal. Please join me in welcoming larry and brian. Thank you i appreciate. It are we on both . Mics were on cspan. Thank you very much recovering. Us that is, true i am larry called low. And i am a local. One Penguin House started organizing this thing the mic. Which . One this works. The sounds not great but we will do what we can. Penguin writing house said awhile back when we got this thing written and published, its good to have a couple of local bookstores. And i said, awe ha across the street. Were gonna do a bunch of these across the country. We have done tons of media. People have been wonderful to. Us lovely Oped Piece of ours was published in the Wall Street journal. This is my coauthor brian. Brian, by the, way is a curator, or head of the center. Senior associate of the center and a longtime friend of mine. In his prior book, iconoclast, was all about the classical Surprise Side Revival going on. He is a harvard trained historian, as ive said before. His historiography is really the glue that held this entire book together. So what i want to do is just read a few excerpts from this thing, get a feel for it, and brian will then speak on whatever he wishes to speak about and whatever is out there. I want to begin. Whats very simple. The underscored to the the under heading to todays Oped Piece that the journal kindly published, returned to jfks rising tide not all, returned to jfks rising time model. We bipartisan Tax Cuts, that is just what is needed now. If you take away anything, you may disagree with, me i appreciate. That i love disagreements. I have been in the Disagreement Business for a long time. Tv and radio, so its fine. There is going to be a q a and come right at me. Im used to it as long as its civil. Really, the essence of this book is that first, john f. Kennedy, then 20 years later, Ronald Reagan, both used lower marginal tax rates as well as the sandal to revive law commies. This is not something from the 18th century, its not something from the 15th century. This is something from recent times in the 20th century. Our argument is, we have we experienced a long dry spell, the last 15, years frankly, under republicans and the democrats. President and congress. Poor economic growth. Very poor growth. That is one of the points we make. You can draw whatever conclusions you want to draw but we did not want to write a politicized book. We dont mention the current election. But just to raise history. We can learn a lot from history. One of the great things about history is when you forget history you forget that john f. Kennedy who i would argue is the greatest democratic politician in the last 50 or 60 years. I speak myself as a former democratic in my long dark past. John f. Kennedy was in fact the first supplies are. We first supply side. He was a pioneer. You have to go back all the way to the 1920s. That was a long time ago. But kennedy was responding to very poor economic growth during the eisenhower years when there were three recessions. Kennedy felt if he didnt produce growth, in fact he talked about 5 growth during the campaign, that he would use. In 1964. He was looking around for things that would get the economy out of the doldrums. There were three recessions during the eisenhower years and the Unemployment Rate increased up to 7 . So i will just read you a couple of excerpts from this book and i hope that you get a flavor for what we are talking about. Fortunately, we have a model for to follow as we seek to return our with nation to economic. Growth it is the kennedy reagan. Model one into areas of economic policy, fiscal and monetary policy. Both Kennedy And Reagan identified substantially cutting in context rates and getting the dollar strong and stable as the specific policy that will lead the private sector, which is to say the real economy, thrive. We need that. We need that. Most of us are well aware that reagan was a Tax Cut or. We hes the guy who had to deal with the high tax inflation. Which came to end in the first years of his presidency. Some of us are even aware that bill clinton used some of that model to foster prosperity in the decade after Ronald Reagan with the republican congress, clinton cut capital Gains Tax rates and was a proponent of free trade, which we think is part of the mix. However, what is generally not known, or at least were not remembered, is what the subject of this book is about, is that president john f. Kennedy in the early sixties not only use the largely pioneered exact same model. Kennedy. He came to office during the period in which growth was only a little better than todays and his own presidency launched the u. S. On the greatest and longest economic booms in our nations. A mix of tax rates and a strong dollar, it was by the way 5 economic growth. Per year. Between 1962 and when it ran out of gas and policies changed in 1969. If americans had known this history, we probably wouldve tried the jfk reagan Policy Mix years ago. We wouldve kept tax rates low, we wouldve maintain a strong dollar, we wouldve traded stagnation for expansion just as we did in the 20th century. Yet, this history has been obscured. Todays liberals and progressive act as the tax rates had a meaningful dollar are shockingly farright policies. That were never put into practice in the 19 sixties and failed in the eighties and can only work in a dream world. But it was Democrat Kennedy who launched those policies. That, by itself, i think, is a great factor from this book. Let me read you just a couple of quotes. We were recording along Radio Interview with my great pal John Baxter who is going to right into night 11 00. He actually found the tape with kennedys boston accent, his famous speech, in december of 1962. Very famous speech which really was the breakthrough of his new policies. In short, its a paradoxical truth. The tax rates are too high Today And Tax revenues to low. And the Scientist Way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now. The reason is that only Form Deployment to balance the Project And Tax reduction can pave the way to that. Employment the purpose of tech cutting taxes now is not to incur a Budget Deficit but to achieve the more prosperous expanding economy, which can bring a budget surplus. That was jfk in 1962. December. Okay. Let me turn the clock forward in this history. Ronald reagan comes in office. We i have gratefully served as one of his budget deputies, long time ago. On February 18th 1981, the month into his presidency, reagan gave a speech to the nation. He announced that he was seeking the ten 10 10 tax rate cut. Across the board Tax Cut. 30 across the board was kennedys. Heres reagan. Back when Calvin Coolidge had texas across the, board the governments revenues increased. When Jack Kennedy did it, his economic advisers, they were all telling him that the government would lose revenue and the government gained revenue. That is the reality. So they made quite a sizeable financial error. Jack kennedys line about it was, quote, a rising tide lifts all boats, and quote. This is what we believe the tax proposals that we have made our aimed at. That is reagan in almost the identical words of john f. Kennedy. And finally, last quote from reagan, can you Cut Taxes and fight inflation by so doing this . I believe you can. Let me just read you something. Our true choices not between Tax Reduction on the one hand and the avoidance of large budgets on the other. An economy stifled by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget. Just as it will never produce enough jobs or even enough profits and here is reagan quoting, quote, john f. Kennedy said that back in 1962 that he was asking for a text decrease. They cut in tax rates across the board. And he was proven right. That is reagan. And before that is kennedy. I just want to say this for the young up teeth time. Kennedy, the democrat, raegan the republican and as the under heading up this Mornings Paper for us. Kennedy and reagan both spurred growth who bipartisan Tax Cuts. Thats just what we need now. So it has become something of a career to blame reagan, to blame, meets to blame arthur laugh, are to blame jack kemp. Lamb a whole lot of people who contributed to the story. Im fine with that, go ahead and blame me. Im thickskinned at this. Age if you want to blame, Someone Blame john f. Kennedy, get your facts. Right he started. It and great fashion. Unfortunately he was tragically assassinated but it went into place, it succeeded, reagan borrowed it and all i want to say is this book is not about the election, but whoever, somebody needs to form a bipartisan coalition, reach across the aisle as kennedy did and reagan did was. Kennedys top economic adviser was a republican. We need to do the same. Think that is all i ask. Stop yelling, stop cursing, stop snarking, stop being mean, just look at the facts and read some history. You can see there is a way out of the slump that america finds itself in. I will turn myself i will let my pal brian Takeover Larry and i had a great time writing this book. A lot of it right here in new York City across the street and a lot of events in this book happened in this neighborhood. I just want past the carlile hotel, that is where when he got one of his economic reports that we discuss in this book including a report that he said dont you ever Cut Taxes ever, he turned his back on. That and of course that done in the canyons not too far from here. One of the things we wanted to do in this book was kind of correct by means of evidence the impression that the Tax Cut of 1964 was kanes iain. That kennedy was some sort of pump primer and not a supply side. I never understood that given his Tax Cut was a cut in marginal tax rates. We arent sure why that argument had traction. We want to try identify the really important role that douglas dylan, his treasury secretary, played in 1962, 1963, and 1964. I want to read a memo from the treasury of secretary. Usually these things are dry as dust but in the context of what we are talking about. When kennedy actually turned on his advisers, this memo turns out to be really important. So kennedy is listening to this advice from his advisers, all these canes and saying you have to increase government, spending loosen money, get off the Gold Standard. If you can have a text, that only a temporary Tax Cut because were gonna have to preserve the current Tax Structure for public programs in the future. You have to do. That meanwhile, in 1960, to every forecaster saying theres gonna be another recession. The fifth and 13. Years and dylan writes this letter to john f. Kennedy. He told him about the advice he was getting in europe. And dylan believe this is. Yet all believed ill wrote to the president that any significant adaptation of Government Policy aimed at stimulating economic expansion should be presented in the clear cut simple package with consensus on these points. One, if there is to be a Tax Cut, it should be oriented to improve business incentives. Should be of a permanent and reform character. Reduction centered on lower bracket personal incomes would be regarded as fiscally loose bread and circuses. Although some Companion Action in this sector would be understandable. Two, a deficit should be presented as the cost of the central tax reform. Tight over on ceilings and expenditures should be announced. It is also very important that deficits be financed out of current savings. As opposed to federal reserve. Three, the government should declare is willing to allow interest rates to rise of demands in the private sector and a large Government Deficit create and kennedy took every point in that advice. He said yes, i am not gonna do the spending, im gonna stop the monetary looseness, and it is stop the run a Cut Tax rates and the rates that matter. The rates that have incentives, especially the highest rates in the tax code. That will draw capital back into this country, because the time growth. And save the Gold Standard for the demand of the dollar. If i might read one more passage. We why was kennedy Policy Mix, his policy in the 1960s, why was it for second and why wasnt it the policy all the way through the 19 eighties, why did reagan have to resurrect . At why did we have a stagflation in the 1970s . Unfortunately, one of the reasons why we had a speculation and 1970s because Kennedys Opponent became president in 1969. And nixon studiously made sure he didnt do janet kennedys policies. He reversed the policies, went off the Gold Standard, raised the tax. Raids regulation, spending. So here is an interpretive passage that we write about the 19 sixties and seventies. The assassination, we, right of 1963 had provided an enormous short Term Boost to the cause of the Tax Cut, in 1964. It was fatal to it in the long term. The assassination was so shocking that the opponents of kennedys legislative agenda had to submit on at least one Pet Continuity Goal out of due respect to the slain leader. The obvious choice was the Tax Cut. Once that was enacted, all leverage was lost on blocking civil rights, another big legislative initiative. In the long term, however Kennedys Absence after 1963 deprived the Tax Cut of its principal exponent articulate and enforcer. The cerebral tone that kennedy brought to the question of the Tax Cut, you just heard about it, kennedy commitment to thinking through the real economic effects of a Tax Break Cut while unencumbered by the intellectual paradigms of university economics, flawed as they. Where the supreme social standing that he had in common with douglas dylan, and dylan alone, in the native ambition that kennedy possess that compelled him to solve the economic Growth Problem of his day that constituted the reason, and credibility, behind the Administrations Commitment to seeing the Tax Cut through. With kennedy gone, the mechanism of the Tax Cut cut the logic keen was gone too. No longer the phenomenal quality of the prosperity it had unleashed. So that works. We in other words. Didnt take johnson long week to undo the best policy he was associated with. And for a lot of reasons related to the war and politics, whatnot. He raised tax rates. He might as well put the individual rate we from 70 to 70 . Began to unhinged the dollar and, as i, said this is a bipartisan nonpartisan. Bill so the next, president nixon, who ive met many times and his families dear friends of mine with, he said to me one who is office said no sir, i really dont with so nixon raised taxes. He unleashed the dollar for any cold with an imposed we regulations on the economy we again, in a bipartisan way, we weve got a democratic who got a, right and a democratic and republican who got it wrong. So how is the balance going to wind up tipping . I cannot answer that question. We the other point that brian brought up which i love noting we, Doug Dylan was very wealthy banker. His father founded the dollar read for which for many we years was one of the widest investment banks and new york. He had just about as much money as we kennedy and traveled the very high social circles, even higher than the kennedys. So kennedy could not stare him down, he had to listen when dylan spoke. He put him in office as the treasury secretary. I thought that was pretty good. Sometimes have to get people to listen to you whatever it takes, and this, case it was money and social standing. I take it any way i can get it. Good policy is a good policy. But the main point here, again, this is not a partisan vote partisan book. I just need america to get moving again. We have to turn less than 2 we back to three, 4 growth which is what we do historically. To get, there were gonna have to take strong remedial actions, particularly on business Tax Cuts to grow the economy at five or 6 for several years to get us back on track. Kennedy and reagan showed proof historically that that can be done. It can be done since i love american believe in democracy, i believe we can get it done. We will see. Happy to take your questions. Happy to take them. Even your criticisms. Yes sir. Thank you. Its interesting ive never before associated this time carlile and lee [inaudible] im recently listening to an interview with a scholar who has a book out about the decline of the people participating in the workforce, particularly men working age, who are not even looking for jobs, just out of the labor force. Im wondering if this development, that he argues is very significant, whether that would in any way limit the effectiveness of a new going through another round of these Tax Cuts. It goes the other way. Nick as he argues in this piece, theyre probably two key issues. Here one is the lack of economic growth. You want to create jobs, grow. You want to lower Budget Deficits, grow. You want to help solve poverty, grow. You want to employ my people, grow. There are other issues federal, policies, regarding small entitlements and other regulations, they have been a disincentive to work. That is too bad because we want to get it we get everybody to work. I thought the same argument today, a governor made a similar argument, how the Participation Rate is in the backbone of the economy, which is 25 to 54 whistled on. Down you know . I were not growing. We are not creating jobs. You want to look at that gigantic black and brown Unemployment Rates in this country . We are not growing. You want to see the reason why people are cranky . They are not happy, and pointing fingers at everybody . We are not. Growing when a growing. I know we made rose on immigration and so forth. But a lot of this is about growth. Nobody complained much. In the sixties, the, eighties 90s, about the subjects. When we stop growing, they complain. Yes maam. This is what tangential. I always believed in alan Green Span and his theories of how to control recession. We then, a few years ago it came out with the fact that what he did was wrong. How could we say it does work and then he declared it to be invalid . One to answer that one . Hes a personal friend of mine. We have a little caption about Alan Green spend an hour book. He gave an interesting top in 2002, i believe it was, to a Bond Convention in which he said, with all these surpluses we have been running, we we can envision a future in which there is not enough government for debt to continue its market operations. It the debt to gdp was getting that fast. Im ready to believe actually that some of the economic stagnation that arose in the mid 2000s was a kind of Survival Mechanism in a darwinian sense as a part of these governmental institutions. I certainly remember visiting the imf in 2008 early that spring. Everyone was scared to death because nobody wanted their business. There was so much cash slashing around the world, no one was begging the imf for money. And sure enough a crisis came and the imf has another 50year lease on life. So i think one of the other benefits of big time constant 5 economic growth is you clear out some of the non real entities, the feds, the imf,s all these things. We they seem frivolent and nonexistent in the midst of prosperity. We allen is a friend of. Mind i thought that he was a superb federal Reserve Chairman. We served four terms together, i think. I dont think anyone else has done that. When he made his statement, it was a statement about the ability of markets, free markets, to function properly at all times. And a lot of people blamed the financial meltdown of 2008 on what is called ultra easy, ultra low interest rates that alan was partly responsible for. Partly responsible for. We i think he made mistakes but i think he is losing his nerve and he testified some committee and said, oh my, god the markets didnt work the way the we thought they did. I think hes gaining his legs more and realizes that Government Regulation played a huge role. Government overregulation played a huge. Roll out a want to go deeper on that because it is not our subject. Green span, through 40 years of economic policy and service, was a free market guy. And also was a sound money guy. We may be people in high Office Shouldnt served four terms. Maybe one or two is enough. Yes maam. , how do you feel about tpp . Look, you tpp, pacific, trade is a good idea. A good idea. But it is not done a properly. A good idea. Im a free trader. I am a free trader. And will remain so. I think the geopolitics are good, bringing our allies, india japan, even australia, serving as a Buffalo Warning to china depending on how you wanna put. It and it will lower trade barriers among these countries which we need, which is good for growth. There are also a couple of international boards that will not reflect the american electorate and so forth that will be used to these side issues and conflicts. I am Internet Sick of international i want an american board. I really dont want us to be governed by world. Courts i dont want to be governed by the distance institutions like the imf in the world bank. Im sure that they are good for employment as phds as far as im concerned. Im sick of 1000 economists at the federal Reserve Board who have done more harm than good in my humble opinions. Im sick of devils that is done more harm than good. I love brexit, i was in so much in favor of brexit. What they can pull out of the European Union union. It gives a british people, which has a wonderful legacy, im glad i love british. I love what they just. It meg dakota, parliament, representative of democracies, freedom, equals growth. That is the way i see. It i put it ride im for free trade. But i want free trade to be governed properly in court with the american interest in democracy. Yes maam . What do you think of the uk leaving the European Union i just said. It im in favor of it. I think you are . To thats what i thought. Sorry i came to work on Wall Street [inaudible] he plays with fdr and then so, if my memory serves me right. Would you contrast or would you care to contrast the era much as Knee Moran and the public posturing and public statements, and comparison to this Letter Day Minstrel show of the fed board of governors and the way they conduct themselves in this Day And Age . Theres a Difference Isnt . There you want to go after . That i havent thought. But my partner. I will say something about wellbred martin. The federal Reserve Chair from 1951 to 1969. Its clear that Bill Martin was trying to do a good job in the fifties he really had trouble. The famous comment out of the fed at that time, thats because we had 91 marginal tax rates and progressive brackets going. Up the feds ought to be extra village. Aligned in that context, the United States was losing two billion dollars of its gold every year because foreigners were quitting on the u. S. Economy. So when martin was employed, he was ready to raise interest rates in the context of economic growth that was inspired by incentive latent Tax Cuts. I have listened to some telephone conversations that the fed has of Martin And Lbj and i have noticed how obsequious martin then got to jay. He folded when jay asked him for anything. We the federal Reserve Chair was trying to be obliging towards the president s he served and thats why he was at his best. And. Reagan was carter appointed locker. But again, this is sponsored Showboat Gun on the a daily basis from individual governors. I dont recall that from my youth. Years ive written about that. Its called fed yapping. Thank, you thats what i wanted to. Here when i was a child i worked for the federal reserve and i worked under paul volker, secretaries, or a clerk. I did some speeches i did his correspondence. Anyway, his Chairman Wouldnt put up with it. He basically told everyone to keep quiet. Pokers chairman didnt want anybody to know what he was doing. Kind of. Cool in mind not always be so. It depends on who the president do raegan did. I dont agree with the candidates who believe the whole fed is politicized. I dont agree with that. The fed makes a lot of mistakes because they had lousy econometric models and they see the world opt in the wrong way. But i dont know. Brian is right. He Cut Tax rates, open the doors to trade. A lot of things get easier. Yes, in the back. So larry if we got back to this old world, that would be the old normal . And todays normal is 25 fed ones funds . And we are debating today on whether we go september or december and move it up to 50. If we had five or 6 growth, when we began back to the old normal. So higher rates are going to impact that outlook. How do you see that playing out. Because one is going to work against you. No, no. If we slash tax rates, yes. And i think the Issue Today is Business Tax rates, the biggest obstacle we face, then interest rates will go up normally, without any inflation, because the economy rises and real interest rates will go up. And all the fed has to do is let that happen, follow the market. Thats whats ive always wanted the fed to do. And in the eighties and nineties we had great prosperity. Average interest rates, lets take the ten years, about 6 , its now one and a half or so. The reason rates are low today is because the economy is terrible and in fact there is greater deflation. Those are the biggest reasons why we have low rates, protect hell early, for the past seven years. The fed doesnt control those rates. All these jockeys, God Love them. All of them on cnbc, they just dont understand that. The fed doesnt control rates, the market controls rates. The fed controls one or two rights at the bottom. A healthy economy would have a five or six percentage rate. That would be a good thing. But you have to Cut Taxes first. Im happy with wet Leyla Bernard said today. Shes a liberal democrat. I agree with what she said. Lets not jump the gun here. My point is, wait until you Cut Tax rates. Then let interest rates go up normally. That will be great, everyone will be happy. Thats just me. People would be happy. America would be happy. I want america to be happy, america is not happy now. Thats part of the reason we wrote this book, i just hate that. I want america to be in a good mood. [laughs] i mean it. And if you didnt have any wage hikes for 15 years, you would be in a bad mood to. I get that. And if you look at the actual statistics, the top 1 hasnt done so great either. Seriously. Scott at the manhattan institute has done a lot of work on this. The top 1 , all in market income, is about where was at the year 2000 or 2005. It got smashed during the downturn. And it kept back only about 35 . Fascinating, anyway, i dont want to dwell on that. But im saying, one of the reasons we need Tax Cuts, its a new dose of kennedy, reagan. It will make people happier. It will. And then you will have less crime. And more job opportunities. And we can enforce civil rights laws and figure out a way to do immigration without killing people. You follow me . I get very into this, because i think in many ways the whole political debate today, is putting a cart before the horse. We have to put the horse before the cart. The horses the growth rate. We will pull everything out. This is not small potatoes. We lives are at stake. I dont know why, my Friend Arthur Laugher says hes a candid the democrat and oregan republican. Ill buy that. [laughs] larry . Yes, peter. From an economic standpoint, can you talk more about goal and how it relates to this. And also tim bell. All right, im guilty of this. Ive been saying it for about 25 years. I dont know if we have to go back to the gold preference point. I would personally prefer what my friends manly Johnson And Wayne angel did. And heller from san francisco. I think it was bob heller. And Green Span. You could use a Market Basket of commodities. 25 commodities. And thats judging the value of the dollar. So if the inflation is rising, with the Market Commodity Basket rallies, that tells you something, you have to tighten up. If its falling, that tells you you should loosen up. Thats what i would use. I dont know that i would use gold. Im an old gold guy. But i think nowadays you would have to make the basket a little larger. But we will never have balance of payment transfers in gold. And the fed, again, i worked at the fed, and as a broker. They used to move gold from one country to another, literally, to do the payment accounts. They dont do that anymore. So, robert sims. I want to make you both happy. If you had your Magic Wand and three picks. Specific. Policy actions that you think would be you dont have to agree, obviously, by three policy picks that you would implement right now, whether its immigration, regulatory, corporate, individual taxes. Capital gains, whatever. What would be the three things you would wish for. Go. Ill take that. You know arthur always used to talk about the five pillars of reagan onyx, low taxes i said the two of you right. [laughs] i was going to say you can illuminate one of the five. You dont need to worry about spending. Spending will naturally fall if you Cut Tax rates. Get the dollar strong and stable. And get regulatory rollback. If you have those three things, the demand for the private sector would be so great, people would just jump off of welfare, they would get out of obamacare. And they would go into the real economy. If you have low tax rates, then investment would come from dollars. And get this regulation out of the way. Spending would start to plummet like it did in the 1990s. I like that. Ive always believed that. At least its a share of gdp, taxes come down when you grow. By the way, each point of real growth above the 2 cbo baseline, is worth about three trillion dollars and lower deficit. Which you know. I would say the single most important thing to do is to slash Business Tax rates from large and small companies. Just slashed them. 15 is a very good number. I would abolish the corporate tax altogether. But 15 is a good start. You wont get it but its a good start. Work on it and you may get 20, to come back. Single best thing we can do. And i think also, obamacare must be repealed and rewritten. Completely rewritten. It turns out i mean, the new York Fed said its costing jobs. And i think that that is probably right. And. I dont want to lose the free trade path. I understand that deals must be enforced, absolutely. And weve been lax on that. But free trade is a good thing, now the bad thing. It helps both sides. And ive always believed, and you notice, robert and i work together for many years. Day today and just talking on the floor and so forth. Americans should have the freedom to purchase the best quality goods at the lowest available prices anywhere around the world. I believe that and im still going to believe that, im never going to give up on that. The chinese, you know, they can steal and some actions have to be taken. But as far as the generic point, its not going to move me on that. And kennedy, by the way, was a big free trader. Yes . Go ahead. Yes sir. Do you believe that inequality plays or operates as a barrier at all to growth . Or do you believe that inequality run rampant no, i put it the other way. I let growth run rampant. I think this Inequality Stuff i only happens when the economy is soured and times are bad. Its a resentment and i dont like that. First of all, in america, its a free country and it represents democracy. We all must start at the same line. We must all be treated equally under the law at the same starting line. We must all have equal opportunity. But in a free economy, a free country, we dont all end at the same place in the finish line. Some and better than others. And thats a good thing, not a bad thing. And i have no trouble with the redistribution us. And in my opinion, you may disagree, i dont see any real evidence that socalled inequality first of all, i think its vastly exaggerated, when you look at various statistical studies that we wont go through here. But the case that inequality causes slow growth is unproven. Unproven. In fact, most or some of the Northern European countries have shaken that off. And they are cutting taxes and deregulating labor markets. Now, inequality exists. I dont think people i dont resent you becoming a multibillionaire by starting a social Media Operation where, you know, you wear dark kids over your head. I may hate it from a fashion standpoint. Fine, thats the way you want to dress. And he discovered, this terrific social media. So did others. And he gets rich. By the way there are 30,000 people who work for him who get rich because they own own stock options. I have no problem with that. Just give the rest of us a chance. And thats why open, free Market Capitalism is the best path to prosperity. Back, back. Can you talk a bit about the coolidge Tax Cuts . And was that effective or did kennedy was that the President Precedent that he used . And are you aware of any situations, either in the u. S. Or in foreign countries, where Tax Cuts were not effective in spring growths . Is there any contrary precedent . About the coolidge Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts in the 19 twenties. Yeah, Income Tax rates went up 11 fold during World War i, from the top rate of 77 . And by 1920, and james has written about this in his great book, the forgotten depression. By 1920, there essentially was an Investment Strike in this country. There was no investment that could be measured in housing. In Railroad Track and station maintenance, among any other categories. While municipal bonds were selling like crazy, because they were exempt from taxation, and so there was this big Portfolio Shift with the nations capital. Out of the economy and into, you know, the public purse. And so harding and coolidge, under the guidance of andrew melon, the treasury secretary, who was reading the memo memos of his three predecessors, all of Wilson Secretary said, we created a monster. And this is back when the democrats were beholden to their tradition as tariff cutters. And then there were a series of cuts dropping the Income Tax. And then Kennedy And Dylan referred to that and the canes eons referred to that. And they didnt want to do that. Its these Tax Cuts that dont work. There is the case of foreign countries that are really tossed by their exchange rates of the dollar. The dollar goes like this all the time. And they have a Currency Board and are trying to make a brave mullen monetary policy. That can really neutralize the effect of good fiscal policy. There are examples, japan may be one, certain countries in eastern europe, that have good low flat tax systems. But investment just doesnt move in the right direction because there is no guidance from the leader on monetary policy from the United States. You know, walker gave a speech on this. A Year Or Year and a half ago. He said, we have to move back to a rules based monetary policy. Thats the Commodity Basket idea. And international currency cooperation. Very important, we have neither. They just had a G20 Meeting and there was no headline coming out of the G20 Meeting. More progress to solve global warming. [laughs] i dont want to get into that, maybe reasons for and against it. But the pressing issue for the g20, economically, was currency. We are having currency wars breaking out, currency manipulations. We are as guilty, more so, than anybody. And that is what volker is referring to. Those bezos guys would sit down and get agreements. One of the agreements lasted half a century or something. You need to do that. We need to do that. Yes sir . Whats your thought on artificial intelligence and will it increase productivity . Affect middle class jobs . Want to take it . I think the only way we will know that the economy is incapable of creating a lot of jobs, is if we have very low tax rates, strong currency and little regulation. Until we get those circumstances, we should not look for other causes of our unemployment problems. So i fully expect there to be an abundance of jobs with the technological revolution when we get Tax Cuts. There is an argument floating around about this that i just dont like. Basic argument is that, advanced high technology breakthroughs, along with the automation that goes along with that, are necessarily bad for the economy and jobs. So i just hear is a case where we should look at history. Every time we have had tech breakthroughs in this country, we had one in after the civil war, with the railroads and so forth. The 1920s were full of technology breakthroughs in electricity, radio and so forth. The 1960s, perhaps some examples in our book, about breakthroughs. Intel we started in the sixties. The most famous is the eighties and nineties. But employment exploded. Now, you know, at the turn of the last century, makers were in a bind. I agree. I accept that. On the other hand, Henry Ford and the rest of them created tens of millions of jobs for products that were cheap enough for tens of millions of more people to buy cars. Think of that. Why did put the harness makers out of business. But they lost out. But they are adaptable. We move the whole country from the farms to the industry in the cities. We did great, okay . Microsoft, apple, i mean they are huge companies. People forget that. Its like the only person getting which was bill gates, nonsense. I dont want to get offensive here but i used to travel that route, washington to new york. Now it has more millionaires than anywhere else per capita. Silicon valley. You may go through patches of this. But robots are not going to take over the world. Jobs will do he said, give us economic freedom, and great things will happen. I will just pet on it. Bet on it. Economic freedom produces great things. So this political freedom. One more question. One more question. Well, you are very kind to come, you fill the joint up. I never thought that would happen. [laughs] we are very grateful. [applause] next on history bookshelf, Peggy Granny talks about her book, the president will see you now, my lessons from Ronald Reagans final years. The Ronald Reagan president Ial Library hosted this event in march 2017. Todays event is a little different than we have done in the past. For those of you, or maybe all of us in this room