of trumps last time in office, david stockman, the reagan administration's budget director joins me now from miami, florida. thank you so much david, for coming on, i suppose before we even go into the depths of the once an amazing tour to 4th of a book in terms of its analysis of i can say that the polls show trump uh, handles the economy according to polls best uh, uh, better than any other, uh, better than buying in the opinion polls. that's what people are thinking as he clearly is the favor, whether it runs from jail or where else 20 points. he's in the lead to what, why do you different from that huge lead of your fellow american public as well uh, compared to the by the period. uh, it is much to say that it was better, but the fact is, uh, there wasn't any great mega economy in 2017 to 2020. that is just one large and medicine balls. that donald trump and his mag

a supporters of stock promulgated uh you know, month after month, year after year. it wasn't true. and of course he wasn't even remotely a economic conservative. he's the biggest vendor we ever had the over office. he was constantly harassing the fed, make got your money even easier to prove even more to push the interest rates even closer to 0. he obviously shut down the whole economy arbitrarily and in an unconstitutional matter, with the call was locked down to the spring of 2020. so when you put all that together, my conclusion was, he's the last guy we should be nominating to address the huge problems facing the country in 2024. but the mag a republicans and republicans generally said, yeah, you know, he's a loud mouth, boastful eagle, me maniac. but he gave us

a good economy in the purposes of my book was to show that wasn't true. i, i take 4 or 5 or 6 major metrics that, uh, you know, assess the performance of the economy, compare it to all of the presidents since harry truman, as evan presidents. and he comes out on the bottom. we don't need to go into all the data, but the big picture is what was the economic growth rate during trumps for years, it was 1.5 percent per year, which is half barely half of the 3 percent on average for all presidents. the 5 percent averaged during the nixon or during the job as an kennedy administration in the sixty's 3 and a half percent during reagan, even more than uh, the 2 percent growth during obama. if you wait until you reach, of course, as we know, he would say it was all about cove it, but in the book you make for the case that and use of president reagan,

the very controversial president who's a foreign policy linguist today in the global south and, and amongst the working classes all fly over america is you call it in, in your book. you make the case was saying, actually it doesn't matter is the president is the federal reserve again. and again in this book, explain why that's the case as well. i mean, ultimately we've had so much increase in the public debt, so much spending that was paid for that we would have had an economic crisis long ago if the fads did not monetize to all the debt. in other words, the massive bomb buying that it did month after month after month was the only thing that kept interest rates from, you know, exploding higher. but it was in a permanent solution. it was simply building up an inflationary bubble, both on wall street and on the main street. and john and me that finally let loose as we know in the last couple years,

we got 40 year high inflation. and now they're struggling to try to somehow bring it down without sending the economy into the ditch, all of that stems from bad monetary policy. but the thing is if you're going to change the direction of the country, you need a house cleaning of the bed and truck with. and the other way to complain, ga certainly practically weakly, that the fed was not easy enough. that is needed. the cotton rates not get them back to some kind of normal. i hope that it needed to critique monetizing these huge debts that it was he was creating when we should have been going the opposite direction. now the one point that i make in my book is during trumps for years, and that was a long but it's a good test. the public debt in the united states went from 20 trillion to 28 trillion pets in a trillion game. again, of course you would take home and sorry to interrupt again and you know,

in the long run as regards this kind of money printing or quantitative easing has your hate figuring this book. haines would have said, we're going to be dead any way you use a also though, even if someone does support that historic policy, the united states of doing money, the, the money goes to the richardson society. yeah. who will be leaving all the said the money printing that accommodated august spending and fuel of this bible basically ended up with the top one percent or at most the top 10 percent of households that own 93 percent of the stock. so if we look at just 3 trunks term, the average household in the top one percent gain 10000000. where is the now we're the average household in the bottom, 50 percent gain, $1800.00. turn of the toner, surprise, that no surprise that they're obviously going to be masses of voters who uh,

i think the trump has lunch is less than i remember venezuelan president before chavez, who was completely corrupted perez and they said why you were doing a game for the same guy because he's stolen enough last time. similarly, is that your explanation as to why so many people in fly over america is you to pick that one to him back again. even though they didn't benefit and the richest in america benefits. i don't know that they want trump back so much is they want a fundamental change in the direction of policy. they know that the, you know, the, a lease on the back, you know what i call the bi coastal leads benefit from all of the empire abroad. and all the spending in the military industrial complex and all of the accommodation of the corporate interest that happened in washington. they know that the sad isn't necessarily making life any easier for them,

so they want to change. unfortunately, donald trump is the wrong answer because he really is close as to the underlying cause of why there's so much distress in a fly over america. basic so we, we've inflated our economy so much that is not competitive in the world. so we've off short, a huge share of our industrial base, millions of good paying jobs. so that's part of the problem. it stands from the fed . no truck went in there and said, well, it's just due to this various governments in china and elsewhere and bad people in washington to negotiate bad deals. if you only put him in charge, he would fix everything more than you make the casement. actually, trump funded china during is time to factor. yeah, exactly. and even more because it happened today after all of the tariffs that he

put on, which would be paid by the american consumer, not by china. we have an even bigger trade deficit today with china than we had in 2017. when he said he was gonna fix the problem. the deficit with mexico today is twice the size. it was when he started. and when he started, we had a balance with the canada, and today we have a large deficit. so none of the nostrils that he propose were accurate. none of his policies help, they made them worse. and i don't know what trump might as well have been in china is call me in the spy while he was in power. that's what you're saying in the book . so, yeah, i, i don't know if i would that necessarily interpret it that way. but what i am saying is that we've got to get back to basics in this country. we need to get these deficits under control and eliminated. and we have to stop the probably death from continuing to serge at the rate that it's been going. you know,

we're going to be at 50 trillion of public debt by early in the next decade. and with trump is likely to be even more. okay. i want to explore some of the nuances there in a bit, bye. just wanna take a quick detour and that is something that trump talks about the increasingly robot of kennedy certainly talks about it as does going out west the welfare state. as you describe it, how much do you see a these presidential contenders as being proxies of this warfare? state as the united states, as the by the ministration desires to as print loads of money and send it to the lensky in ukraine. as well as you, as well, you know, obviously the buying is a tool of the warfare state. if you want to call that, the deep stakes. i agree, you know what he's doing, and ukraine is absolutely and say, this bill before the congress,

they added another $100000000000.00 for an a to ukraine. israel and the rest of them is totally on affordable as the 1st point, trump talks a good game. he to, he sounds like he's for america 1st he sounds like he wants to end the forever wars, but he has no capability to execute anything. when he was president, he inherited a defense budget that was nearly 600000000000. it was already badly blown and he should have taken an axe to it and cut out a $1200000000000.00. but instead, he pushed it to 750000000000, and then biting came man, you know, i call it the you in the party, the war party in both a democrat and republican versions. and it's taking into 900000000000 now. i have no confidence the truck would kind of dialogue with the advanced budget. he thinks that if he, you know, has a big, big stake he can go around the world clubbing everybody and as

a nation or cleverly negotiating. uh, you know, uh, in the end as some of these problems well negotiated with a lot of people. and as far as i can tell during 4 years, very little had happened. in fact, lucky today, we have as soldiers in harm's way, in iraq and is syria, what the hell they doing there? well, you know, trump said we should in these forever words. he said, let's skip the troops out of syria and there's 2 still, 2000 people. the point that he has now line does mean quite apart from, as you say, the fed having the power over the monetary expansion isn't, isn't the fact going to be the lunch from last time round. and john bolton last time he was on this, you'll obviously hates donald trump and wrote a book, a tool here by the way to him and trump and replies basically said he got the wrong man. his is national security advisor. this time around, is he going to be different? i mean, you know, you want stuck a golf and maybe as a, as a v. i talk

a call soon as an isolation is he's against the big wolf as state. yeah, well that's true, but i have very little confidence that donald trump ever learns anything for more than a day or 2. he slides by the seat of his ample britches, whatever. uh, idea possesses him at the moment he pursues without any serious reflection or research or homework. and so i have no concept is that he's learned anything mean after all, he was talking about america 1st, the bringing the empire homes stopping the forever wars throughout the campaign in 2016 and his early days in the white house. and who did he bring in to the top positions? john ball, who is a total neil con, more monitoring, you know, global head geminus, and mike com peo, who's even worse? any, what's one of the c i a,

the other is national security advisor and then rewards bound failed by megan secretary of state. this tells me you're dealing with someone who doesn't have any ability to focus the same things through and, and make the decisions that are going to be affective. so i don't want another 4 years of learning experience for donald trump. they have been struggling. i'll, i'll stop you that more from the reagans bunch of director and the older of trump's war and capitalism after this break. the,

the, the, the welcome back to going on the right. now i'm still here with people that you as budget management director under reagan, an order the new book, comfortable on capitalism. david, we were talking about, well, you enjoy going to me about, oh, really? yeah, you know, fan of the drum personally and anything else, joe biden, and of course, that's the main choice. and you know, find that is either and i'll give you a backing robot f kennedy joe biden,

obviously obsessed with this border as well. explain how your book delineates the midst of, uh, any kind of any kind of truth actually in the public debates in your country when it comes to immigration and why you need so many immigrants for the united states economy to perform in the future. and without them, out of your economy is in danger of collapse as well. you know, 1st of all, it's a matter of basic demographics. the native born workforce stop growing in 2015 a decade ago, and it will be shrinking at a pretty goodly rate as far as the i can say. now secondly, we know from economic history and logic, that about half of the economic growth comes from more labor for more workers for more hours employed in the economy. well, unless we have some way to increase the size of our labor force,

so supplement, the declining hours that we're going to get from the native born, our economy is going to stagnate, even as we head towards a 100000000 retiree, using the baby boom in their later years, so that that's the fundamentals that we're dealing with. the problem is we have a totally broken immigration system that says if you are skilled and you got a ph. d, and you're a high tech guru. well, google can get you in through one of the many categories that are in our immigration system for skilled labor. but if you're just honest, skilled or low skilled worker, but we desperately need in this country, you can get in at all. there's only $4000.00 slots a year when we need millions of people. so what you have to do instead, and this is what the crisis is all about, is basically pretend that your and aside we are in asylum seeker,

a refugee from mexico, or l. salvatore, or lot of molla or elsewhere in the western hemisphere, come to the texas border breakthrough log, interested in, get in the queue of a, you know, overburdened work system to try to get asylum on the ground. so lets do dangerous to go back and tell you in the book you, you may think as the guest passes in a and a sort of or i, the old version of the, of the system. i understand these ideas are not there or even on approved by the so called progressive, who knows will create type of the media. have you being allowed to talk about this? the wall street journal's in the new york times, what's, what's going on with the day by day basis, and they bigoted to they just don't like people from overseas. if they can't realize this is a practical thing is not even to do with morality from where you're coming from. well, the liberals in the buying people's sort of like the asylum basis them because they

think ultimately these people won't come to america unless they're accommodated through the asylum system and they'll be grateful. and therefore they'll go democratic or that's their whole view. on the other hand, there's so holding to organize labor that they can't talk about the logical alternative, a large scale guesswork or program where people wouldn't come to the rio grande river or to the border and try to break through. they would simply go to the consulate in their country, mexico, or goes the rigor apply for a gas worker permit if they were screened in the past of and could make contact with the us employer they, they could come to the united states. there wouldn't be any crisis at the border, but the liberals can live with a guest worker program is organized. labor is a guest. now the republicans, they are looking for an issue and they don't want any more for democrat motors

coming to america. so i, you know, they create all of this hysteria about, uh, you know, uh the board rhyme and drugs and you also explain why that's actually a to be interesting, white native americans, they should be deported onto the head of a be here in the book. yeah. um, okay, but uh, you know that, uh, if the fed, as you make the case for is running uh, everyone's livelihoods in effect. you must think that if you do take the morales the out of it, a person sitting in the oval office will think, well, the way to increase manufacturing jobs is to order the printing of money to send to zelinski and ukraine to send it to nothing. yahoo! to kill other people to kill palestinians to kill ukrainians, actually. and russians, and that will stimulate the war economy in the united states. and that's the only

way that you have any power as a president. is that why the military industrial complex continues so many as of tries now to be the what biden supports we don't know really about trump as much could you, if you make the case that he do the same of the military industrial complex thrives we have at 900000000000 defense budget is absurd. in fact, if you count every thing security assessed is for an aide, you know, international operations of the state department and national down for democracy and all the risk is 1.3 trillion is probably double to even triple. what we really need, so why is that fair? because there's so much money flowing through what you would call the national security complex. that in basically creates its own lobby, all the think tanks, all the n g owes all over lob uses the bell ways built way all the military industrial, complex contractors all put their shoulder behind keeping their budget where

it is today in rising a, you know, as steadily, year after year. so it is a political problem that can be solved until we get our president. and this is why i'm so strongly for our f. k. robert kennedy junior, who says, i'm not, is enough. we're bringing the empire home. we don't need 11 carrier battle groups swarming around the globe, looking for trouble. we don't need a 180 bases. we don't need to be placing the red sea or the straits of taiwan, and we certainly don't need to be running a problem. i'm sorry to interrupt. i know he wrote the forward to this book, but you know, he said for as much money into israel against palestine as it takes. i don't know whether you've had a chat with them since since you were to forward of your book. is kennedy once more a village genocide in gaza? yeah, well, you know, obviously you're never going to have a 100 percent agree with anyone either. the his case is more than a mouse is

a bunch of bad guys and we shouldn't i overlooked that? and i think he's right about that. but i don't think he's real needs a lot of money from the united states. but when i point out in some things i've written use, they're spending only 5 percent of ged be on defense. back when they had a true existential crisis in the seventy's, at the time of the kipper, where they were spending 20 percent. so they're taking the usa for a ride, a yeah, a couple percent more of taxation on their be able to provide the security that netanyahu in that class thinks they need is what all of the happens here. rather than asking the, you know, the us taxpayer to cough up another 15000000000 that they don't need because they can get from their own resources and we can't afford because we're already had totally bankrupt. so i disagree about a israel, but that's a very small piece of the picture where i think he's totally correct. but as you

say, no one can agree totally with the everything people say. but, you know, in the, your great memoir drive for politics, you say something about reagan being converted by congressman jack kemp in 1980 to reduce the top rate of tax and change. the idea is a reagan, you obviously learned a lot of lessons for being in that administration. and they said it's no more for a, you know, arguable genocide in so many foreign policy areas. and for impoverishing the united states, you learn so much instantaneously as your books of uh, change in their, in their ideas. when you, when you say, washington doesn't need nato to protect our allies in your a because they are not facing any threat that copy, handled by their own weights, means i'm going to say the whole disaster and ukraine. today's rooted in the wall bodies mind is expansion. of nato, that is the same policy as cornell west, and that is the same policy as donald trump. and that is of course, the policy of the best news avoiding robin f. kennedy. why kind of all these

different elements get together and defeat the whole body? yeah, because they're all over the line. robert kennedy is there, and of course the list is there, but trump had the view that we all there. she knows. he didn't argue that the nato's combined defense budget of 1.25 trillion isn't necessary, was basically say they should spend more, so we don't have to spend as much so yeah, but now now the is lobbying, backing him of it, which is why it is constant and the drum propaganda is propaganda. so the mag of people listen, you know, but we, we need to go back to the beginning, the garbage show up as problems. 1989 and richard for acquiescing through the, you know, uh, utilization of germany, that nato would move an inch to the east. we know all that. and then for the next 25 years, nato has been moved and is doubled in size. and we've even tried to put former republics of the old soviet union into nato and asked what your grain was about

georgia and so forth. none of that is necessary. there is no evidence whatsoever that either. ringback is trying to read kind of do deal. so the union one you have in the ukraine is a civil war over a territorial of numbers that has nothing to do with nato or western europe, or even pulling or the baltic states for that matter. so when you consider the fact that nato's countries all 31 of them have a g p, a 46 trillion, and russia has a g, d, p, up to a trillion. and you understand that in the modern world, a military threat is grounded in industrial light, industrial throw waves and capacity is pretty obvious. there, there is no real sick of the nato countries and certainly not

to the mainland of north america. for me, i ship, you know, dave and talking like that is like, i mean, what do you think about how talking call soon as being treated as being called a traitor and your country for even uh, trying to say or trying to elicit any has said similar things, as you just said, trying to make the points that you just might. yes, well, i don't know really crazy times. richard nixon went to moscow and met with bracelet fmr as i remember right. he wasn't considered a trader. he went to china and met with my house. she wasn't considered a trader back in the day, even in the cold war. there was an idea that there was something like peaceful coexistence, and some were more hawkish about it, and others were more w. in here we have basically a totally different ideology. the liberals hate donald trump so much i have to use for him. but they hate him so much that they see who else is enable or some kind of

drop of danger. and when they think about the food they're seeing, read in the guise of donald trump. and so therefore, have totally irrational attitudes about russia, about proving about foreign policy, about the proxy war in the ukraine and, and, uh, nato uh, in the whole, whole rest of it. i don't think unfortunately, trump's going online, they're sort that out because he's lazy, he's or he's uninformed, is historically illiterate. he's lazy and he's going to be taught in all kinds of digressions and diversions when he shouldn't be saying the cold war ended 3 decades ago. nato is done, let's on wind it and let's, uh, you know, begin to try to find some way to bring the world to a, uh, kind of peaceful status quote. well,

trump says he's great and he'll bring about peace and didn't have all your accusations, david's argument, thank you. thank you. thank you. and the drums on capitalism is out now that some of the show will be back with a brand new episode on topic until then, keep in touch by, well i social media. if it's all sense in your country and had to our channel going on demand tv, or normal, they'll come to watch new adult episodes of going on. the grantees have that the the, i guess it was a pleasure for spouses. people's the best way to look at,

even if it was a mutual report, then you click on that. i mean, if i give them the spending those electrons, what i'd like to bring up with you all setup initially for that and i wish there are some are so very simple. most of the most fun with a need for some, some video. i think he's also still open. i'm shipping a machine, you know, in a solution, most of the things, insights we get on there and then just get brush up and take a little bit of an easy phineas or another code on the lamb just for millions, from the, by the name of the units for, for the introduced to your wish,

it by nature, the disturbing images from call to where it needs to 50 people have been killed in his radio, strikes on rock plus the southern city. that type of thing you had previously designated a safe. so the civilian cost for the moment in my life. ok. he saw many of and is rainy. resolve this mistake could for a mass militant in killed in a hand or by to have gone fine. his devastated relative to monte, the government takes responsibility for us and stake on many different drugs have been tested according to the files. and the documents that we found was most shocking. the children.