We want to have an election about the issues. Lets talk about the economy and foreign policy, immigration and health care. When i come to questions like this on the radio or tv, i will stay in my lane and u donald trump has talked about trade quite a bit but also said he is for trade agreements. Tell me if he got the trade agreements he would want. Explain how quickly and in what ways that would affect Economic Growth. Our mission is to get to 3. 5 growth rate. We think we can do it. How much would be through trade . Guest probably about half. Wilbur ross and i conservatively estimated, we went through the benefits from tax cuts, reduced regulation, energy and trade. Half of that would be trade. Roughly. Here is the problem. When you ask me that question, we silo stuff. Lets look at energy policy. Think about internationally. Tax policy if you cut the Corporate Tax 35 which is the highest in the world among developing countries, what does that do to the trade equation . It changes the incentive of board or gm, stay in michigan rather than go to mexico. Gdp increases nonresidential which boosts the gdp growth rate that if you have facilities in michigan you also are selling into the American Market a trade deficit rather than going to mexico, so when you say which of these, it is synergistic. And what time period that kind of trade policy . Let me show you how this would work, look at the numbers, the trade deficit. Germany, japan, south korea, china, mexico, the trump strategy, recognize first of all the problems we have, the reasons we have deficits is different. Mexico is a trade deal problem, rules of origin and back tax problem. What we want to do surgically is negotiate bilaterally with each of these countries, a little bit more petroleum products, that will help us. When you are a big business with small vendors. That is the whole thing. We are cutting bad trade deals with think tanks telling us they are good deals. Host who pursued that strategy . Guest europe has trouble. They grow smaller than we do. And overregulated, have nowhere near the energy resources, they have lower potential output, and the problem is we are underperforming. You take advantage of the markets engaging in a base one kind of approach to reducing their trade deficit selling products, going into the markets and it is okay. Host in the mid 50s worst economy since world war ii. The Affordable Care act, all bad ideas, talk about if donald trump would work with 40 plus democrats in the senate, to make those a reality. That is the art of the deal. What they offered us, and she makes no bones about this, she is going to raise taxes, no economics textbooks, she will continue increasing regulation as the Obama Administration has done, no one told you the tpp, the democratic flavor with the wto. What i do know is it took time to run up a threat debt of 10 trillion. It is a misdiagnosis, the idea that whenever we had a problem we could solve this, they could run the fiscal stimulus, whacked out the Federal Reserve balance sheet, that risk is working and the reason is misdiagnosed the structural problem associated with sending our factories and investment offshore and running massive trade deficits that drag us down. Should the United States have a federal policy in place . Guest i dont think so. The trump plan, what donald trump has promised is to get rid of obamacare, barack obama was a coward when he did obamacare. Lets go back to that debate, two things he had to accomplish, coverage and cost containment. The hardwon was cost containment, the easy one was coverage, they let it be done. He said let it be done, didnt deal with cost containment, the people getting hurt worse where the 30 somethings and late 20 somethings who were caught in that fight and make no mistake, that was bad policy. Host you dont think what is the right goal regarding coverage . Guest obamacare is gone and that is not working. When canada, canadians need good care they come across the border. When they need good care they come across the border. Host if donald trump has the Republican House and Republican Senate what is a realistic deficit reduction goal . Guest one of the problems in the analytics of all this is the think tanks out there, look at the tax cuts, we have positive offsets, big deficits, the way washington thinks here i am is if you are a democrat or republican, cut spending, if you increase your growth rate by just one point or one. 2 points, that is what we do. Host macro numbers. A 3 growth. Guest by the end of the year 2. We want to eliminate trade deficits in a year or two, that is doable with good yields, a moratorium on all new regulations that dont threaten Public Health and safety, and agencies trying to cut 10 , we are not going to suppress coal, oil and Natural Gas Industries and we can grow. Host what deficit does that put us on . Be small plan is revenue neutral. Tax foundation, 2 . 6 trillion, revenues go down. And a conservative one, 2. 4 trillion, makes it revenue neutral. Doesnt sound like deficit reduction. Guest we will have a plan grows and be revenue neutral. Host if donald trump is a two term president guest think about this, a much larger gdp, the effective deficit goes down dramatically. We want to grow in revenue neutral rate, what is the alternative, Hillary Clinton told me what she was going to do, continue obama. Make no mistake, the best with Hillary Clinton is 2 . Raising increasing regulation, tapping oil and natural gas and run stupid trade deals. Host talk about the other clinton, last time we had a surplus was in the 90s. Anything about what bill clinton did with fiscal policy and economics you think is worth copying to bring down the deficit . Guest the clinton years were blessed by an inventive explosion of technological innovation we have seen since the invention of the steam engine. Those were golden years everybody remembers fondly. You made a bunch of money and if you got out of the stock market you kept it. That had little to do with anything. Host Economic Policy guest there is a big debate on that. There is a big debate whether Herbert Walker bush set up the clinton recovery by resisting the keynesian call to stimulus or not as you can probably give credit to both of those administrations for what happened but the real credit doesnt go to them. It goes to technology. It was remarkable. Host attributed to anything bill clinton did in terms of policy. Guest what i attribute to bill clinton is this, he made the worst decision of any american president in the economy when he pushed china to get into the wto. Our world changed after that. Look at the data. 19472001, 21 2 growth, china came into the wto, 300 million new workers over the 15 year period dumping, cheating, it has been difficult. Whatever you want to attribute to bill clinton in the 90s, he undid everything. Host did george bush make that ever . Guest the best president we had in terms of Economic Growth is reagan. When you look at reagan. Host on china, you would say not a better path. Guest the statistics on this, reagan came into office, a horrible situation, some of us remember and by year 3 through 8 of this administration, 3 growth every year. But again, gdp was growing so well with this through gdp you have to bring that into consideration. What the American People are concerned with now is growth and jobs and the fact that we can do it in a neutral way, Hillary Clinton the growth will decline. Host a lot of washington oriented groups, not the way you do, increasing deficit, what assumptions are they making that are different . Guest the good, the bad and the ugly, we get Hillary Clinton in cleveland talking to High School Students saying independent analytics basically score a trump plan that will create a recession and named and imply a republican to give him credibility. Factchecker. Org got all over her. A big donor to the Democrat Party and her. The tax policy center, aei and tax foundation, and tax policy centers, ideology comes into play, which we dont do, i do two things. They dont dynamically score the plan. They live in a dynamic world, and the mission has been over the past month is to give people the analytics, but if you have got Energy Regulatory trade reformists, lets look at the whole picture. [applause] the change and advisor to the Clinton Campaign, Vice President joe biden is a senior fellow, policy priorities, come up and join us. Respond to what peter said. That was not a political thing. You are someone who did not want this to be about policy differences on two candidates. You shouldnt talk about personal things. And Donald Trumps temperament not a bad issue in policy so both campaigns, and talking about policy. Talking about policy than you might think, debate policies came up, and what was reverberating by the news and social media, but i do think issues of temperament, that is particularly germane in this campaign, really elevated this issue. It is not what i call the policy framework, changes any quality, globalization, changes in Bargaining Power and unions, and holding down middleclass things. The muslims, mexican, immigrant, and it is deeply divisive. And for 20 plus years, as a member of the obama economic team, really trying to intervene in that space. That is the part i think is damaging. Host is go to economics. Regardless of whether wikileaks obtain those emails from russia or not, is it proper for news organizations and report on them, these are John Podestas private emails q guest there are few questions nobody is asking but that is one of them. Let me see. It is important to confirm what you are seeing is what they are telling you you are seeing so before people release that information they need to make sure it is true. The fact that we are learning important stuff, to be publicized and not sure that is a bad thing. Host the Clinton Campaign, the Clinton Campaign, should not be reported on. Guest i cant think the Clinton Campaign on this, until we know what we are looking at. I have a real problem with things that come out, get anybody wound up and turn out, that definitely rubs me the wrong way. Host a donald trump tweet 20 seconds ago. Lets talk about economics. The current administration, unemployment has come down, there the big number we talked about with peter previously, Economic Growth, more robust growth, entitlement reform, deficit reduction, healthcare, and higher grades of growth, what has gone wrong over the last eight years, you inherited a tough situation. And 2 growth. Guest let me disagree with one subtle part of that question that is very important. In the age of income and wealth, wage any quality, great imbalances, Bargaining Power, it is not a correct assumption to assume that if the economy grows quickly the middle class and poor will be better off. One of the characteristics of noninclusive equal growth is too much gdp growth is an end run around the middleclass, Economic Growth for 200 people in the middleclass, and as you decca out, that is beginning to change in ways that are really important and economically in terms of economic policies, the games you referenced that the Median Household Income are 5 , 50 middleclass and the income of the 10 household grew 8 , , this is precisely how a tight labor market down to the benefit of low income workers, this is what i would predict was when the economy begins to tighten up, everybody is fine. A year or two does not make up for them. It is the predictable outcome of a tightening job market. To middle and lowwage workers. On growth you look at a couple things, and the growth of the labor force. The growth of the labor force, and aging boomers are retiring, one issue is a function of demographics baking the cake. It goes back prerecession phenomena. And the economic problem, and many of which are closely linked to Hillary Clintons investment agenda but what would hurt would be 7 million working people. We have a problem with the slow growth of the labor force, i heard peter talking about mark sandy, running trumps plan through standard macroeconomic model and ended up with a recession and the main reason he endeded up with a recession he assumed trump is able to deport significant chunk of the labor force, which he says he wants to do. 70 of the country believe we are on the wrong track. Looking at polling, some large amount of that, their kids future, the elections on the referendum on the democratic policy isnt it fair to ask, donald trump says 3. 5, isnt it fair to ask another pursuing from different policies and a lot of continuity how can we expect Hillary Clinton to have growth rates. The constraints in the Macro Economy are such that president ial candidates get you to 3. 5, i havent heard Hillary Clinton say anything like that. What i have heard her say is her policies will ensure growth goes to middle and low income people increase the minimum wage through college, investments in families being able to balance work, and this is an innovative policy, make sure Child Tax Credit reaches excluded from it now. And the tax credit, one dollar of earning instead of 3 a burning and kicked 45 rate to a 15 rate. Those are great ideas, the answer is no president has the ability to do that in a way that will convince any reasonable economist, dont understand the factors that dampened productivity growth, if you ask to get Hillary Clintons policy to increase the growth rate the answer is yes. By the way the main way that would occur for infrastructure, i would like to talk about that. Host more government spending, either more cuts in spending . Guest and the reductions in spending. Host increases in spending. Higher taxes on the wealthy and institutions. Guest the key is the institution they kick it above you are saying there is no specific goal in mind i dont fear if you look at her policy it is not a goal people should be optimistic about. Substantially i think any a generic question. No set of policies, there is a lot of philly talk, a lot of really with talk about getting 3 somebody said four and somebody else said 6, that is complete nonsense. Hillary clintons plan can increase productivity growth, a big chunk of that equation and labor force growth, the productivity growth, it is critical and bipartisan support. If you want to ask me, this might interest folks in the room, something that will realistic happen in the first hundred days. Let me say one other thing not only can Hillary Clintons plan boost productivity, two areas there is a strong toxicity right now. The ctc extension boost labor side of the equation, doesnt do anything for productivity but i believe Hillary Clinton, i wont tell you would get 3. 5 or 3 or whatever, it will improve. Host more specificity which everybody talks about, speaker ryan, there will be tax reform and infrastructure, repatriation, you are in the room at Andrews Air Force base with chuck schumer, paul ryan and Hillary Clinton, a grand bargain solves taxes, individual Corporate Taxes, what would that look like . Guest great question and infrastructure program, Hillary Clinton talks about 250 investment in roads and bridges, mass transit, broadband. It needs serious investment in energysaving areas. And infrastructure leveraged numerous times, how do you pay for it . I think the idea of a broad grand bargaining tax reform isnt likely to go anywhere because of the resistance to tax increases that have been so pervasive in this town and tax reform becomes uniform, more of a distraction because everybody means Something Different by it. The corporate side you alluded to is something everybody agrees on and seem we could find compromise. A good place to start is repatriation attached to a reform of international Corporate Taxation. I got to cite a colleague of mine, and the repatriation, you got to read the latest paper on that because it goes through the details. The foremost scholar on repatriation, that is a lousy idea, it is the idea that you allow companies, and it is purely voluntary and that is the deal. Get the earnings back at 5 or 10 and they wanted to be 5. According to the scorekeepers that is a big money loser, they train these corporations to do more deferral so that leaves me with repatriation, a better idea but the best idea is repatriation ties to International Tax reform. I like president obamas idea, you repatriate at a 14 rate at the same time you plug 19 minimum rate on foreign earnings. That could fund a one time dive into infrastructure. Host tell me areas where you and paul ryan agree on what he has done to help the economy. Guest one area we agree on, expanding earned income tax credit to reach childless adults, something paul ryan talked about and i remember in the Campaign Marco Rubio talked about expansion of the Child Tax Credit that looked a little bit like what we have been talking about but, paul ryan talked about poverty and many of his ideas are like my own, the idea people just want a job, they can get a good job, that is what he believes and i know that is wrong but ing we agree on is these refundable tax credits work really well, expanding the area, i dont know if he said that, you may know, i would think the infrastructure idea has some appeal to reform the corporate side of the code. I have pretty good friends, republican friends some of whom harangue me and say why arent we doing, these are business people, why arent we doing Infrastructure Investment . s historically it has been a bipartisan thing. Host i have about 50 more questions but i am a student of the clock. Thank you. [applause] host our last discussion, we are joined by two folks talking economics, professor of law and foreign policy, Deputy Director of the White House National Economic Council and Douglas Holtz egan of the American Action forum on the council of economic advisers so you both can come up please, thank you. Thank you for coming, good to see you. Have a seat. Lets start with you, tell me what you thought of the conversation, areas where you agree or disagree, talk about John Podestas emails. Not my area of expertise. I only heard part of the discussion so far but i agree with a lot of what jared said that i heard on what are some drivers of growth and policies that hold the most promise including expanding for young adults entering the labor force. Secretary clinton asked this question, how should i think about economic proposals to win paul ryans support or reject and try to go to the American People and wear him down . There will be a compromise. If i were her i would think about policies, paul ryan is someone who cares about policy too. They have different views, trying to find common ground, things that are a combination of what you believe will have the impact on growth, probably what i would have. You are a supporter. Are you a supporter of Donald Trumps candidacy . I am not. Host what is your favorite outcome . John mccain. I am still there. From a policy point this is a disappointing campaign. The democrats platform has given up on growth. There is nothing in there that will genuinely affect longterm growth that we need to move from a 2 economy back to the American Economy we deserve and can achieve. I find that troubling. Entitlement programs with promises to pay for by taxing the rich and that it. Host some programs would increase productivity when expanding the itc. It might a one time bump in Labor Force Participation at best. That wont affect longterm productivity. I find that disappointing, trump talks about growth but his policies dont add up in any coherent fashion. When you look at the us economy the most telling feature of it is unlike the postwar period in 2007, living every 35 years the American Dream was visible to people, doubles every 75 years, there is nothing in these two candidates that addresses that. Host lets talk about the Affordable Care act, if you are comfortable voting in front of everybody close your eyes, if you think the Affordable Care act is on track to control healthcare costs and raise your hand think it is not on track. I ask that question every group i speak to end two votes is actually a lot. What has gone wrong that the perception of business people, academics, people in the Obama Administration, this is not on track, one of the primary goals . If you look at 2010 before it was enacted we have lower health care. Host did you raise your hand . Guest i wasnt sure. I think it made Real Progress controlling costs but if you go back to 2010 before it was enacted we have our healthcare spending than we did projected from that time plus 20 million more people covered by health insurance. Host why is it no one thinks that except you and a handful of people . Guest more of a policy analyst. Host people in the real economy, the healthcare industry, Business Owners on track to do that, should they be feeling that in the real economy . I have not seen polling of the broader public outside this room. It is a unique example. If you did broader polling, these, you often find programs building over time and responding to it. What is important are the real effects and so far we had a positive trend in controlling healthcare costs. It would be better to control them even more but the effect of aca has been positive. Host as it was enacted one of the primary ways to control the advisory board, members have not been named for that. It does not exist. The fact that it is not there is a problem with the original architecture. We have not gotten to the point where that is supposed to go into effect about the cost controls have come through payment reform in the medicare system so that is not exclusively the way to achieve. Host the Affordable Care act control healthcare on track for businesses or governments. Actually it never was going to control costs. If you look at the debate at the time there were two objectives, expanding coverage, very expansion heavy, medicaid and exchanges cover people very light on a genuine attempt to change the Delivery System, medicare savings programs, these were the features that were supposed to be important and they have been modest at best so it is not surprising because it wasnt a genuine effort. Host what do you think of that answer is healthcare cost growth has been better since 2010. Prior to 2010, a related phenomenon lots of other things, the aca put it on notice people cared how much was going on and basic attitude in that area where people are worried about big patient costs, we have seen important transformation but not really driven in a way we could have cemented the Real Progress, everyone says we are only going up 3 or 4 . The places it touched our disaster areas, the exchanges, medicare programs, before the expansion. I dont think it deserves any real credit for the change for spending. Say secretary clinton as president , paul ryan speaker and you two our staff people for the negotiators making changes in the Affordable Care act. Talk among yourselves, where would be areas it would look to . Here are ways speaker ryan and president clinton could agree to make these changes. Any common ground, what would they be . I am not a healthcare expert. I am a tax care expert so i cannot go into details on that but there are some compelling proposals to deal with the higher costs, outofpocket costs. Medicaid is a major issue. The Supreme Court case, there are holes in coverage not attended by the act so those are areas i would look at. The basic idea whether it is childcare costs, the strategy gives people money to buy more increases. Host if she is president she will have some say. This is what she will once, to keep exchanges from melting down further. Change from the 3 to one to 5 to one, minimize the grace period, has to do with margins to prop them up and in exchange they want a real focus on medicare as the Delivery System reform mechanism, people practice medicare, driving through medicare you have a real chance, Medicare Advantage is the Program Republicans want to focus on, the bridge to the future, premium support and use that as a vehicle for coordinated care Delivery Systems, a grassroots up approach, something they can talk about. We get medicare reform, she gets the expansion. Host republicans have been unwilling to raise any taxes over the last several years was a president clinton making a proposal on her domestic agenda involves what she says are fully paid for by raising certain taxes. Of the house of representatives and speaker ryan wont raise taxes what happens to her domestic agenda . There are a couple possibilities to think about. When is infrastructure coupled with tax reform. There have been longstanding proposals. Including proposals by the chairman that would couple revenue raised from Business Tax Reform to pay for infrastructure so there are instances where republicans voted for targeted tax increases in the context of financing infrastructure, one could argue whether the expiration of the tax cuts are for raising taxes. Right now the Republican Party is somewhat imploding given the president ial campaign. They control the house and senate, governor of massachusetts, governor of wisconsin. There are lots of republicans in stable positions but a lot of controversy this president ial campaign generated so there is a question after the campaign of if secretary clinton wins what kind of Republican Party the Republican Party must be. One question is would the Republican Party begin to think about Immigration Reform . Would they begin to think about how to attract female voters and things like childcare. Perhaps they wont, perhaps they will but these are open questions if secretary clinton wins will require some research. Do you accept the democratic argument made by the president and secretary clinton Immigration Reform is good for the economy . The fundamental fact is nativeborn population in the us does not have a place in fertility. In the absence of immigration we shrink as a nation and get very old. The flip side is everything about our future is dictated by immigration so Immigration Reform is a real opportunity to set the economy on path in the future. It is shortsighted not to take the opportunity. Gdp growth, talking about 3 , a lot of republicans and some democrats to make these, 3 growth something Hillary Clinton should be thinking about, talking about or not a big emphasis in your mind . I think Hillary Clinton is accelerating growth in the economy and estimates are trumps proposals would result in a recession, significantly lower growth because of immigration proposals and other things. You thought it would never happen, that was a little bit misleading. I would hope it does not happen. We are confronted with what each candidate is proposing. Whether she annunciates 3 growth or not, would that be the result . Is that an important goal . I would add the word inclusive. For growth in middleclass america and low income people experience and a lot of investments she is talking about, childcare or expansion of the tax credit or education there is extensive evidence leading to longterm improvement if you look at the child care tax cut, similar expansion resulted in longterm improvement in education outcomes and earning outcomes. All things the drive growth in the longterm. Defense spending is a huge part of the budget. Where would you say that the bait is in the Republican Party on whether the rhetoric of president obama should be met with defense spending . There is a lot of agreement that should increase spending. The only disagreement has been willingness for nondiscretionary spending as part of that deal. The budgetary fact is more entitlement spending programs, medicare, medicaid, the Affordable Care act have been steadily crushing and pushing out of the budget the discretionary so all the things the founders thought are steadily pushed out and the budget control act, has got to be undone and recognize that. The trouble is to undo it, the deal with existing entitlement programs, they are saying no, trump saying i wont touch Social Security and medicare. Dont here paul ryan or other leaders talking about cutting entitlement programs either. No. I dont think we have seen a serious discussion about this in a couple years but the reality is barack obama will leave behind a budget, trillion dollar deficit in two terms, 60 from previous borrowings, we are going into an unsustainable budgetary situation. No one has promised to fix it. Be change if secretary clinton won, and all these domestic policies and tax and spending policies where would the lead me after my first term on the deficit, what is your analysis where that would lead . Community for fiscal budget estimated this and if you include money set aside for tax reform to finance infrastructure, she does not increase the deficit whereas trump would increase by 9. 3 trillion. Is that a good enough goal . Or is there deficit reduction . Longterm we will need deficit reduction but our deficit reduction efforts which have been significant are heavily weighted toward spending and a lot of the drivers of longterm deficits are the aging of the population and demographic trends. If she won i looked at policies and what i said about deficit reduction and it is important i engage deficit reduction in my first term, where you tinker with or changed dramatically . We need to look at the revenue side more than we have in recent years. You say raise taxes more than you are proposing . I would consider it. Which one did she not raising you would want to raise . You could potentially go higher. Individual. From how high . The exact number. There is a recent study in the journal of economic literature that finds no reasonable evidence for convincing evidence that raising rates on high income people will result in real economic effects so there are changes in the timing and realization of income but it is not clear you generate distortion by raising taxes on the wealthy. Could you raise meaningful money and deficit reduction . Absolutely . How high would you raise it . We would have to sit down with a spreadsheet, defense what youre deficit reduction target is. You dont do that . Change there is always a tradeoff. With deficit reduction, heavily weighted, we need to do more on revenue. Most president ial candidates ran on boilerplate notions repealing the Affordable Care act, had tax cuts of one sort or another, marco rubio has original ideas criticized by some on the right as too activist. Did you see the president of nomination, any congressional candidates, any ideas front and center of republican orthodoxy . I thought something mentioned about the earned income tax credit, important for people to focus on, the house agenda, at the center, basic reality is three elections in a row, mccain, romney, trump has fallen on deaf ears. They have to wake up, focusing on antipoverty more than genuinely having to worry about and when marco rubios tax plan came out it wasnt a collection of things, it said i want growth, had a set of values that is really important. I am a big fan of tax reform for the same reason. And emphasis on growth and there is going to have to be the reality that the next president is going to have a recession but i dont know what year or how bad it will be, but start thinking about insulating the economy, buying insurance against the recession. That is inevitable . Where we are in the cycle . The structure, two part economy, household vector running at 3 in the business sector and Everything Else really not that good. With the exception of durable goods orders that has been the character for a while. It cant persist forever. The household sector, really are okay and spend more money on investments, or look at the business sector and say that is the future and cut back but i dont think this uneven growing for a stable period. Different policies from president obama, he did inherit a weak economy from president bush. The different choices made it more robust over eight years. Tough win for the congress that we had. There are policies that would increase growth even further even getting a proposal, whether it might be larger stimulus in response to the recession. There are a bunch of education investments, Healthcare Investments that would stimulate the economy and promote growth in the longterm. Even if you just adopted secretary clintons proposals that are deficit neutral, would stimulate growth and in the long term as a result of that the question, is there something more president obama could have done with congress, not sure i pushed hard for important priorities and got some of them enacted and done by congress. Look at the evaluation, if you pick up Immigration Reform there is no growth there and the median Family Income declined even in their efforts for beneficial policies so if not inclusive growth because of good market performance, a lot of transfers. How do you know that . Read the report. You disagree with that conclusion . That is what the report says. Look at the table, 600,000 jobs over the next eight years what did the immigration do . 600,000 new immigrants have jobs, that is fine. That is the policy. It is a decline. One of the issues in general, economic estimates do not include all the different factors that drive this. A lot of them dont include the positive effects of getting more people to go to college for high quality childcare. Increasing Labor Force Participation. I am all for education reform but worried about that, we should be worried im worried shortterm. In the next eight years, no longer longterm. We will finish the scintillating topic of infrastructure. Everybody agrees that will be a big part, both candidates talking about major Infrastructure Spending, what are the best practices we learned from the stimulus bill and other major Infrastructure Spending, how to spend efficiently so you are building things that are useful . I am more of a tax expert then an infrastructure expert so i focus more on aspects of how to pay for this and business tax code, on the International Side, and the worst of both worlds on the International Side distorting investments, encouraging money to stay offshore when if it was another system that was proposed, we have that block out effect. You are the Infrastructure Spending czar under a ryan schumer deal. What do you do to keep it maximally efficient . Dont promise too quickly to great promise to shovel everything that is proposed dont overpromise, a lot of infrastructure is very valuable, fix the roads, i can commute more easily, leave later, get to the office, leave the office and get home sooner, my life is better but dont overpromise. Require a genuine Economic Impact analysis before any state or locality gets the money. There is a lot of evidence in the kansas city region requiring productive Infrastructure Investment in chicago, required to do it, they throw it away. I will say no more. Thanks to you both and ken goldstein, thank you for coming in. We host these breakfasts to talk about twitter and policies so have a great day. [applause] also this wee
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.