austerity and fears of a meltdown. looking ahead to the rio environmental summit, a sharply contrarian take from someone who says the whole thing is a waste of time. finally -- >> i am for free press, fair elections and equal rights for women. i can't say that. >> what in the world? "the dictator" might be a fun movie, but dictators in real life are getting smarter, sav savvier and less authoritarian. but first, here's my take. we're now in the general election campaign in the united states. the point at which the candidates are meant to pivot from the primary voters to the general election voters, most of who now are registered independents. but this isn't really happening. the obama campaign started with its attack ads about bain capital which presented a simplistic picture of a complicated reality, although some private equity firms have engaged in some bad practices. on the whole, the industry has grown so large because it performs a useful function. then came mitt romney's first major ad which told us that on his first day in office, he would introduce tax cuts. now, the one idea that is almost certain not to jump start this economy is a tax cut. after all, that's what we've been doing for the past three years. for those who think president obama's policies have done little to produce growth, keep in mind that the single largest piece of his policies in dollar terms has been tax cuts. it actually began before obama with the tax cut passed under the george w. bush administration in response to the financial crisis. then came the stimulus bill of which tax cuts were the largest chunk by far. one-third of the total. then the payroll tax cut. the small business tax cut. the extension of the payroll tax cut. and so on. the president's twitter feed boasted that president obama has signed 21 tax cuts to support middle-class families. and how's that worked out? "the wall street journal" explained this away saying that the problem is all these tax cuts are temporary. if only we had across-the-board cuts. except that those were tried as well. the 2001 bush tax cuts were designed precisely along those lines. they were in dollar terms the largest tax cuts in u.s. history. and the economy got worse, not better. in fact, the years 2000 to 2007 were the period of weakest job growth in the united states since the great depression. now, look. tax cuts can stimulate growth, especially when you go from, say, 70% rates to 30% rates, as ronald reagan did. but a cut of a few percent from a reasonably moderate base or a temporary waiver of some small tax provision is highly unlikely to unleash lasting growth. what it will do is explode the deficit. for four decades, washington politicians have bought popularity by cutting taxes. always saying that spending cuts or growth will make up for the lost revenue. that never happened, and the result is $11 trillion in federal debt held by the public. and finally, now this week, democrats have been busily defending public sector unions. public sector unions are big backers of the democratic party, but their retirement benefits are, in fact, bankrupting states and localities across the country. california's total pension liabilities are now 30 times the size of its budget deficit. ohio's now add up to 30% of the state's total gdp. this is utterly unsustainable. the growth and size of these benefits are now making it impossible for governments to spend on education, infrastructure, parks, really anything. at some point, the candidates, both candidates, need to stop pandering to their bases and start speaking intelligently to the mainstream voter about their vision for america. we're waiting. and let's get started. by some accounts, my next guest is the most popular politician in great britain. he's a conservative at a time when torry policies have steered england to what some are calling a double-dip recession. yet, he's just been re-elected. boris johnson is a two-time mayor of london. he is the former editor of "the spectator" magazine, and he has a new book out, "johnson's life of london: the people who made the city that made the world." he joins me now. boris, pleasure to have you on. >> very good. by the way, to be the most -- even if i were the most popular politician in britain or england which i doubt, it's not a very hotly contested field. at the moment. pretty minimal. >> tell me why that is. because the -- your party, the conservative party, came into power and said we're going to do the thing that we have to in order to save britain, and in doing so, we will be rewarded by the market -- >> i know -- >> we will be rewarded by the economy. and in fact -- >> it's all going very slowly. and there's no doubt at all that the economy -- look at what's happening to the numbers in america. you're seeing same sorts, problems in many european countries. i think it's a lack of confidence. and i don't take the same analysis as many other members of the european political establishment or media which is that you've got to sort out the euro by creating this fiscal union. i think that's going the wrong way. i'm afraid to say that that exercise is just going to compound the mistake. and we spent two years now bailing out greece, bailing out spain, pumping money into it, trying to get the germans to be more generous, trying to get the peripheral countries, the mediterranean countries to be more austere, cut more from their budgets, put more people on the dole -- >> what would you do? would you let it all collapse? >> well, that's obviously -- would be a disorderly outcome. what would be great, i think, is if the european leaders could face up the reality. shrug off their egos, shrug off all the political capital that europe has collectively invested in this project and say, look, we made a mistake. we put countries into a scheme, a one-size-fits-all currency union which they're not suited to. let's have a realignment, a bisection. let's do a north euro and a south euro. they've got to take control. >> so that means the best answer is break up the euro -- >> sure. >> and allow the southern countries to have -- >> to devalue, to devalue. to get the benefits that come with competitive currency again. and obviously it would be difficult -- i'm not denying that there would be great strains and there would be all sorts of consequences for banking and all the rest of it. but you'd of lanced the boil. people would know where you were. we're skiing downhill blindfolded and don't know where the bottom is. it's just going to go on. >> now, you said something that suggested you were disparaging -- you said something that was disparaging about austerity. now the question i have for you is austerity in britain. your great friend, the chancellor, when he came into power said, look, we have to make these sacrifices because it will restore market confidence, it will give business the boost it needs. and they will invest. in fact, what's happened, as you know, the economy has suffered. many people from robert skidelsky to martin wolf said this is what will happen at a time when the economy is weak, if you cut government spending -- >> he hasn't. i hear what you're saying. but the reality is that actually the government hasn't cut spending in quite the way that people say that it has. and spending continues to be a and borrowing continues to be -- i think possibly there's been a lot of -- they suddenly restrained spending and they've tried to cut some of the crazier schemes, and they're trying to reduce the size of the public sector insofar as they can. but, you know, they haven't made the savage cuts that some people accuse them of. i -- i do think it comes back to this issue of confidence. and i -- i do have a lot of sympathy for the chancellor and for the government. the coalition because business is sitting on these cash mountains. they've got the money. they could be investing in new plant, new employees. they could be doing it, but they're not because they don't know what's going to happen in the eurozone. they don't know what's going to happen to the banks. >> when you watch the american debate, who do you find yourself rooting for as a tory? >> mike bloomberg. i'll be honest. the mayor. we mayors stick up for each other in all circumstances. and look -- ages ago, i wrote a piece in favor of obama. i think i was about the first british politician to say, come on, obama, why not? and i have to say that he hasn't reciprocated. i don't remember him endorsing me. he said -- >> the bloom off the rose. >> he probably had other things on his tray. i've got to be realistic about it. i'm an admirer of the president in many ways. i don't know very much about mitt romney. a lot of people say he's got great qualities. it's hard for me to judge. but i do know mike bloomberg, had met him a lot of times. and this is a guy who not only set up a massive media empire, it 22 billion quids worth -- dollars worth, sorry. he also has great experiences as a public servant and does something and innovative things. whatever you think about his crazy thing to do with banning the size of cups, whatever -- >> what do you think of that? >> whatever you think of it, it shows a very, very pragmatic, can-do approach to government. the answer is -- i often think about the size of cups. i don't know. it's not instinctively the kind of thing i would do. but if it can reduce childhood obesity -- >> we are going to take a break. when we come back, i'm going to ask boris johnson about conservatism. how america and england compare. and i'll ask about the summer olympics, of course. right back. [ male announcer ] citi turns 200 this year. in that time there've been some good days. and some difficult ones. but, through it all, we've persevered, supporting some of the biggest ideas in modern history. so why should our anniversary matter to you? because for 200 years, we've been helping ideas move from ambition to achievement. and the next great idea could be yours. ♪ [ music plays, record skips ] hi, i'm new ensure clear. clear, huh? my nutritional standards are high. i'm not juice or fancy water, i'm different. i've got nine grams of protein. twist my lid. that's three times more than me! twenty-one vitamins and minerals and zero fat! hmmm. you'll bring a lot to the party. [ all ] yay! [ female announcer ] new ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. twenty-one vitamins and minerals. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. refreshing nutrition in charge! [ thunk ] sweet! [ male announcer ] the solid thunk of the door on the jetta. thanks, mister! [ meow ] [ male announcer ] another example of volkswagen quality. that's the power of german engineering. right now lease the 2012 jetta for $159 a month. visit vwdealer.com today. blast of cold feels nice. why don't you use bengay zero degrees? it's the one you store in the freezer. same medicated pain reliever used by physical therapists. that's chilly. [ male announcer ] new bengay zero degrees. freeze and move on. [ male announcer ] new bengay zero degrees. do you guys ride? well... no. sometimes, yeah. yes. well, if you know anybody else who also rides, send them here -- we got great coverage. it's not like bikers love their bikes more than life itself. i doubt anyone will even notice. leading the pack in motorcycle insurance. now, that's progressive. call or click today. aarrggh! we're back with boris johnson, a man who has worn many hats. mayor of london, planner of the olympics and former editor of britain's flagship conservative magazine "the spectator." do you think that conservativism in america, the republican party, is very different from conservatives in britain? >> totally. i mean, totally. you know, i -- i'm a low tax, small state guy. which is why, you know, when mike says reduce cup sizes, i -- you know, find it difficult to compute. but i want to see how it works out. but on things like -- on all the social moral stuff, most british conservatives are far too timid to get involved in that sort of stuff. particularly me. i wouldn't go get in -- no, siree. that's a matter for private conscience. >> but when you say you're too timid, do you secretly wish, or you think that's not really where conservatism should be? >> i don't think it's central to politics, as i practice it. i think it's a kind of -- these issues become hugely important totems of your beliefs. but it doesn't seem to me that they should be determinative of how you run a country. i mean, what's -- these things are -- gay marriage, gun control -- >> the three gs, gays, guns, and god. >> yeah. >> on all of them, from what i've read of your -- you see to me -- you're closer to a democrat than a republican. >> sounds like it, yeah. i mean, i think -- i didn't know the gays -- i was surprised to discover it was banned. that's ridiculous. there you go. i'm sorry, it just seems to me that marriage is an ancient sacrament, pre-christian system that anti-dates pre-religions. what's it got to do with anybody is my view? >> mitt romney says one of the reasons he should be made president is because he did a bang-up job running the olympics. do you think running a good olympics is a qualification for higher office? >> i'm not going to be lured into that elementary trap that you've boorishly dug for me. i think, freed, we're obviously excited about the olympics. we're looking forward to welcoming people this summer and hope lots of people will come from america and have a great time. i was just speaking to your producer who was saying that she wasn't going to come because she was worried about the crowds. i want you to be it's going to be fantastic, folks. london is going to be the place to be in the summer of 2012. and yes, occasionally going to one of the menus on the tube, there will be a press of people. but we're going to make sure that people have a great time. whether that -- where that leads me in my so-called political career, i don't know. i'm concentrating on this for the time being. >> so tell me, running the olympics or planning for it in your capacity, it must be very different from what your day-to-day life was like. what have you learned most about dealing with this enormous, enormous event? >> it's just that there's so many bits of the mattress that keep popping up. and you've got to press it down, and it pops up again. so one day you've got the transport, right, and then something pops up with the security. and -- it's just there's -- you know, talking about a few months ago. we're getting to the state now where things are starting to be ready. the venues are built, they're looking fantastic. we've got the stadium complete, the very well velodroem, the aquatic center. this is not like some other olympics that i could mention. and we've built this weird curly-wurly pretzel thing, that will welcome the world developed by aneesh kapur, an indian artist. it's -- london is going to look fantastic in games time. and we're half a billion pounds under budget. so so far, you know, touch wood, we're all right. it's not as bad as -- it's not as bad as many other olympic cities have been at this stage. >> do you wish you had the kind of powers that the people who ran the chinese, the beijing olympics had? >> well, i wish i could blow half our defense budget on the fireworks, yes, basically what they did. you know, i have great respect for what the chinese did. the chinese had a fantastic olympic games, but it was shock and awe, wasn't it? it was shock and awe. they threw everything at it. we're going to be more subtle and ingenious, and i think more enjoyable. >> boris johnson, pleasure to have you on. >> thank you very much. up next, what in the world -- why the era of brutal, all-powerful dictators may be a thing of the past. i'll explain. [ female announcer ] gain fireworks scent booster, inspired by women who like control, which, last time i checked, was most women. sprinkle as much as you'd like into the wash to boost the scent. gain. anything but ordinary. [♪...] >> announcer: with nothing but his computer, an identity thief is able to use your information to open a bank account in order to make your money his money. [whoosh, clang] you need lifelock, the only identity theft protection company that now monitors bank accounts for takeover fraud. lifelock: relentlessly protecting your identity. call 1-800-lifelock or go to lifelock.com today. for three hours a week, i'm a coach. but when i was diagnosed with prostate cancer... i needed a coach. our doctor was great, but with so many tough decisions i felt lost. unitedhealthcare offered us a specially trained rn who helped us weigh and understand all our options. for me cancer was as scary as a fastball is to some of these kids. but my coach had hit that pitch before. turning data into useful answers. we're 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. in your car. now count the number of buttons on your tablet. isn't it time the automobile advanced? introducing cue in the all-new cadillac xts. the simplicity of a tablet has come to your car. ♪ the all-new cadillac xts has arrived. and it's bringing the future forward. now for our "what in the world" segment. we tend to think of dictators as all-powerful leaders who act with naked cruelty and impunity. think of al assad in syria or for a celluloid reminder, look at this scene from sacha baron cohen's new film -- [ gunshots ] >> the film "the dictator" and our imagination of dictators is somewhat outdated. the modern dictator is more evolved and more attuned to how people think. a new book highlights that trend. it's called "the dictator's learning curve" by william dobson. dictators have gotten smart, dobson writes, to keep pace with changes in technology. ♪ old-school oppressors like mao, polpot or amin could thing secrets, that's not true today. if a dictator tried to orchestrate a mass killing and keep it secret, it would fail. it would end up on youtube. the crimes of joseph kony are an internet phenomenon, and he remains on the run. war criminals can't count on impunity. sudan's president bashir has been indicted by the criminal court. today's cleverest dictator have evolved. they allow a certain amount of dissent as an escape valve. consider china. there's a new study out by three political scientists at harvard. they've devised a way to analyze millions of social media posts in china. what's special is they claim to do this before the chinese government gets to censor them, so it provides a unique insight into not just what the chinese people think but also what the government teams necessary to sensor. ♪ what did they find? contrary to what you'd think, it turns out criticisms of the government are not more likely to get censored. even vitriolic criticism is allowed. the focus is on stopping mass mobilization. last year beijing blocked internet searches for tunisia's jasmine revolution to prevent discussions about the arab spring. similarly last week, searches for the number 4-6 were censored, the numbers representing june 4th, the anniversary of the massacre at tiananmen square. the harvard study shows that beijing's leaders are making measured concessions. it is said that some 500 protests take place every day across china. but anything that could lead to something larger or more organized is instantly clamped down on. ♪ another example, putin's russia has usually allowed the print media a great deal of freedom on the theory that what a few tens of thousands people read in moscow and st. petersburg doesn't matter. but the regime has taken over television news completely. so mass opinion is carefully controlled out of the kremlin. we're witnessing a trend in china, russia, venezuela, and many other countries, even myanmar. gone are the days when dictators could completely ignore the demands of their people. as citizens become more exposed to