little gusting all around the world from the u. a. on sundays ago, we spoke to us presidential candidate for 2024. professor cornell west, who believes joe biden is a war criminal for the gaza genocide. but there's another jail for it. and candidate who's us supreme court to bill for immunity from prosecution deadline is today. he claims he could end the war and gaza and on russia through ukraine, and revitalize a suffering economy at home. and he's a favorite to be president. donald trump, a former republican congressman, is new book trump to warn capitalism that exposes the catastrophe of trumps last time and 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 force of a book in terms of its analysis of i can say that the polls jo trump, uh, handles the economy according to polls but as a, uh, better than any other, uh, better than buying in the opinion polls, that's what people the 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 as 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 maggot supporters is uh, 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 oval office. he was constantly harassing the said, make got your money even easier to prove even more to push the interest rates even closer to 0. he obviously shut down the hallway, trying to me arbitrarily,

and in an unconstitutional matter, with the call is 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 of republicans and republicans generally said, yeah, you know, he's a loud mouth, boastful eagle, me maniac. but he gave us a good economy and the purpose 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 average for all presidents. the 5 percent have reached during the nixon or during the job incident. kennedy administration in the sixty's 3 and a half percent during reagan. uh, even more than uh, the 2 percent growth during obama is always going to 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 bond 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 academy 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 talk with them 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 the huge . that's 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. puts in a trillion gain again of course you would take home and sorry to interrupt again and, 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 all 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 richardston society. yeah. over, well, really all the said, the money printing that accommodated august spending in the fuel. this bottle

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 during trumps term, the average household in the top one percent game $10000000.00 worth of 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 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 as they want

a fundamental change in the direction of policy. they know that the, you know, the lease on the but 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 have 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 fail, they made them worse. and i don't know what trump might as well,

have been a chinese communist spy while it was empower. that's what you're saying in the book to. yeah, i, i don't know if i would 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 data 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 landscape in ukraine to hold 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 taping bill ready to execute anything. when he was president, he inherited a defense budget that was nearly 600000000000 and 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 it to 900000000000. now i have no confidence the truck would kind of dialogue with advanced budget. he thinks that he, you know, has a big, big stake. he can go around the world clubbing everybody and his admission or cleverly negotiating, you know, in the end and some of these problems. well, he negotiated with a lot of people and as far as i can tell during 4 years, very little happens. 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 get the troops out of syria and there's 2 still, 2000 people. the point that he's now law 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 show, obviously hates donald trump and wrote a book a told you about how we ate them. 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, he months 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 there, 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 he's learned

anything. i mean, after all, he was talking about america 1st, the bringing the empire home, stopping the forever wars throughout the campaign in 2016 and his early days in the white house. and who really bring in to the top positions john ball, who is a total neo 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 from failed by making them sick. j state. this tells me you're dealing with someone who doesn't have any ability to focus the same thing 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 have been struggling. i'll, i'll stop you that more from the reagans budget director and the older of the drums war and capitalism after this break

the, the, the, [000:00:00;00] the,

the welcome back to going on the right. now i'm still here with people that you as budget management director on your ranking, an order the new book, comfortable on capitalism. david, we were talking about, well, you and talking to me about our, clearly you, you know, fan of trump personally and anything else. joe biden, and of course that's the main choice. and you know, fan of is either and i'll give you your backing robot f. kennedy joe biden, obviously obsessed with this border as well. explain how your book delineates the midst of, of 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 how 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 good land rate as far as the i can see. 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 though we headed towards a 100000000 retirees in the baby boom. in their later years. so 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't 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 n s i we are in asylum seeker, a refugee from mexico or l. salvatore. or bought them all out or elsewhere in the western hemisphere come to the texas border breakthrough log, interested in getting in the queue of a, you know, overburdened port system to try to get asylum on the grounds that us do dangers to go back. okay. and the bulk you, you make a so a guest passes in a and a sort of more 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 to have 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 come and realize this is a practical thing is not even to do with morality from where you're coming from. 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 the that's their whole view. on the other hand, there, so the whole need 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 them. they would simply

go to the consulate in their country, mexico are those, the rigor apply for a guest worker permit if they were screened in the past of and i could make contact with the us employer they, they could come to the united states. there wouldn't be any crisis at the board or, 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 to the bad. the hey, be here in the book. yeah. um, okay, but uh 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 zalinski and ukraine to send it to nothing. yahoo! it to kill other people to kill palestinians, decalle, 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 years after eyes now to be the what bite and 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 everything security assessments for an a, you know, international operations of the state department and national down for democracy

and all the risk is 1.3 trillion is probably double or even triple what we really need. so why is it there? because there's so much money flowing through what you would call the national security complex that and basically creates its own lobby, all the think tanks all the n g o's. all the lobby 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 basis. 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 product. i one 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 him since since he wrote the 40 yearbook is kennedy once more, a village genocide and gaza. yeah, well you know, obviously you're never going to have a 100 percent agreement with anyone. either use 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 is 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 g d, b on defense back when they had a true existential crisis in the seventy's at the time of the paper 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 cross 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, i totally bankrupt. so i disagree about aid to israel, but that's a very small piece of the big picture where i think he's totally correct. but as you say, no one can agree totally with everything. uh, people say, but you know, in the, your greek memoir, read 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 from being in that administration. as i 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 sense. and basically, as your books of a 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 ways. means and going to say the whole disaster in ukraine. today's region in the world 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 present use avoiding robert f. kennedy. why kind of all these different elements get together and defeat the will buddy or? 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 lobbyist kind of backing him of it, which is why there's constant anti 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 to the, you know, uh, unification of germany, that nato would move an inch to the east. we know all of that, and then for the next 25 years, nato has been moved in and is doubled in size. and we've even tried to put former republics of the old soviet union into nato and asked what you grain was about georgia and so forth. none of that is necessary, there is no evidence whatsoever that either. ringback is trying to read constitute deals on the union. one you have in the ukraine is a civil war over a territorial 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 says of the nato countries and certainly not to the mainland of north america. for me. i ship, you know, david talking like that is like, uh, i mean, what do you think about how talking causing his being treated? he's being called a traitor in your country for even uh, trying to say or trying to elicit that he 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 f. m. s. i remember right now he wasn't considered a traitor. 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 has his enable or some kind of drop of danger. and when they think about the food, there's the red thing in the guise of donald trump. and so therefore, have totally irrational attitudes about russia, about proving about foreign policy, about the proxy war and the creed and, and, uh, nato uh, in the whole, whole rest of it, i don't think unfortunately, troops going on line. 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, sure, i'm 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 under warranty, the normal don't come to watch, new and old episodes of going on to go into

the hello and welcome to the cross stuff bullhorn. here we discussed some real in the heart of rick sanchez and i'm here to plan with you. whatever you do. do not watch my new show seriously. why watch something that's so different little opinions that he won't get anywhere else. welcome to please, or do you have the state department to see i a weapons bankers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. i changed and whatever you do. don't want marshall state main street because i'm probably

going to make you uncomfortable. my show is called stretching time, but again, you probably don't wanna watch it because it might just change the way and say the disturbing images from gall. so why more than 100 people have to be killed and this radio strikes on rough uh, according to the palestine up ranch crescent society, also perhaps the worst moment in my life to meet the family open. it's rainy. resolve this mistake control how much militant in killed in a hail of ideas comes to mind, is devastated relative to demanding. the government takes responsibility for us to stake, passed many different drugs of the testing according to the files and the documents