>> the second point is, why does the elite want to do this? i can give you a fairly simple answer to this question but i think it's very important. this is something i was trying to puzzle out in writing "the people's pension," is why is their point of view changed so much? well, the reality of the last 35 years of politics in this country is that the 1% if you

want to call them that have managed to create a very, very favorable tax persuasion for themselves in this country, capital gains taxes have been lowered drastically. income taxes, the top margins have been lowered. corporate taxes are so full of holes, to say we have a corporate tax isn't even reality for a lot of large companies. this is something that started under the carter administration, not the reagan administration. its continued off and on for 35 years your and the 1% has become very accustomed to this favorable tax situation that they have for themselves and their overriding concerns, overwriting everything else, is to maintain it and extend it as best they can. there have been some pickups. there was a hiccup in january when the fiscal cliff deal raised, a limited some of the bush tax cuts. only some of them. but for the most part this sort of favorable tax situation for

the wealthy has been kept in place. now, the reality is that we do have an asian population in this country. we will have to pay somewhat more to support them. there are figures on this. social security announced about 4.5% of gdp these days. that will go up to about 6%. we will have to pay more. the overriding concern of the elite 1% is to make sure that that extra burden does not fall on them. the way to do that is to cut social security so that the burden is shifted from this collective system that we have, social security, medicare, on to individual households. so it is not funded by raising taxes anymore on the wealthy. that's why the kinds of solutions to social security that we see on the right, means tested raised the chained cpi, et cetera, that's why they

support efforts like that. it's really the desire to keep the tax system in place. >> on the side. >> you a lidded several times to a link between an improving economy and improving wages, and i wonder if we're not at the beginning of a paradigm shift and take the linking of that were our stock market is as high as it's ever been, our economy is improving wages are not. the last 2008 recession so people moving from permanent jobs to part-time work, dropping wages, robotics picking up, outsourcing, all those things tend to indicate that we may be delinking that improving economy from improving wages. and if that's the case, what type of solutions do you see going forward? >> first of all, you're absolutely right in the way you characterize it but i would suggest he goes back much further. it was the early '80s where the first time we saw high

unemployment and a stock market boom happening at the same time. i think that we can really trace this kind of period in our history right back to that point. that was the first time that we really saw something like that happen. in this society, which is where the stock market really kind of, and the investment world delink themselves what's happening to the working public. one thing that is probably worth mentioning is, you know, the id they used to be what henry ford said, i want to have recently high paid workers so they can buy my cars. that's not the case anymore. manufacturers in this country, to the extent with manufacturers, or people invest in manufacturing, and simply say we have a rising middle class in east asia. in malaysia come in taiwan, south korea, et cetera. they can buy our product. americans can work either in knowledge-based business or they

can work at 7-11. we've got middle-class people over there who will buy our product and we're making a lot of those products over there anyway. so there's a lot less concerned about nurturing a prosperous american working class in this country. what to do about it, again, i think that if we want to do something about it within the present system we have went to do the things i was discussing earlier. we need to change the laws that prevent unions from organizing in a reasonable way. we need to have an industrial policy that would begin to create or nurture industries and create good paying jobs here. we needed reasonable trade policy that some it doesn't give away everything to big business in the form of multilateral trade agreement. revival of the seattle movement would be a very good thing. if we don't see these things happen, if working people in this country really lost control

of the state and of the governing class, and this is a serious possibility, that we need to start thing that much more drastic things. we need to start thinking about, i could even see, this is looking ahead a bit obvious, going back to the sort of cooperative movement, mutual aid movement of the 19th century and say, we have to do this ourselves as working people. we need to set institutions outside of government that are not subject to these kinds of pressures. that's the kind of thing we might have to see. because the pressures on social security are enormous, but the reality is that as a society, complex, industrial or post in the sugar we can't do without social security. we can have viable communities in this country without these kinds of social solidarity institutions. if the governing class is sending a clear message that the state will no longer do this for us, you and it's only matter of

time before the implement the kind of changes they want, i'm hoping they don't, but then we have to start thinking about and entirely devoid of think about ourselves as a community. that maybe the long-term reali reality. >> can you comment on whether contributors to social security, either low or nurse or high earners, actually get more back than they contributed? taking into account inflation and passage of time or cost of money spent you are talking about low earners. >> or high earners. high earners subject to the cap. >> there's been a lot of attempts thomas studies, do you get a good orator benefit, or fair return on the money you pay into social security in payroll taxes. there's a number of ways to look at this. one is, if you are, i like to

think of economics sort of the art of manipulating to tell a story. there's a number of ways you can analyze this. i've seen people run numbers that say no, you're getting a terrible return on your sausage terrible return on your sausage to be. and some that say you're getting a good return. but the reality is this. the social street is indexed to the cost of living. it is indexed to the growth in wages rather than the growth in prices and that's really key. it means associates good illiterate allows you to maintain a middle-class or operable standard of living to what you had at the working person. if you try and buy an annuity that is indexed to inflation, even just priced inflation got to pay a fortune. you could not do that as a working person in this country unless you are very, very wealthy. not available at a reasonable price. so there's something about social street that is literally kind of priceless for the working person.

the other aspect to it is that social security is not just retirement benefits. if you're working person you die at the age of 50, you have a spouse and a couple of kids, social security pays survivor benefits for them. paul ryan, representative paul ryan, he admitted a couple years ago that one of his parents died when he was 16, he received survivors benefits and social security. he saved them up and you were very concerned and allowing him to go to college. so you've all kinds of ways to put social security as a pervasive benefit, something that is the absolute essential in all kinds of factors of middle-class living. it is impossible to replicate that in a private market based setting at a reasonable price. over here. >> i would like to thank you for dressing the long-term prognosis

that we are probably facing. in addressing that, among people i know, there seems be a lot of hysteria about, against the government, how evil it is. but i would like your more about the distinction between why this is, you said it's not a government program, but yet it's a payroll tax that people are required to pay so it is taken from them by the government. and so how do i address that? >> we argue -- we are in a two minute warning so you have to take a quick. >> that is one of the kind of notions that we keep hearing about some glad you brought it up. the argument is that why should the government get your payroll tax rather than you being able to invest it anywhere you want for your retirement? and the answer i guess, the

short answer is that we already own it because he goes into something that belongs to us collectively. social security is a government program and that it is run by the government, but two things. number one, again, it is a trust fund and there's a reason why it's called a trust fund because it is held in trust force. it's not something the government can do with as a it pleases. it's required to invest in treasury bonds rather than putting to hedge funds or mortgage-backed securities a soft like that because it is supposed to be safe money. it is supposed been something that you can count on the so i think that's really the thing. it goes up to the politician, totally up to the politician, i would reckon social security would be all kinds of reckless things. i think that that is a strong indication that the public regarded as something different. and wanted to be treated as something like that. >> okay, and i think we are at the point where we need to start wrapping up the session. [applause]

>> the eric gagne wanted to mention your book is available at revolution aggressor in tucson and you had some internet, speeded i was asked earlier, what are some good sources of information about social study that's not disinformation but is useful? there's a wonderful organization called social security work. they are the website. you can google it. they have some terrific material that is brief and to the point and addresses a lot of the issues but i urge you to go to social security works website and check them out. a couple of other organization, the center for economic and policy research, and the center for budget and policy priorities put a great research on social security the counters a lot of the myths about it. you can also get some of that from the national academy of social insurance, another good organization. i was just going to say i will be happy to talk further and sign copies of my book.

if they run out at the 10th, go into the people at revolution aground, booth 313. they have copies as well. support them. they are your local shop and they are run by an incredibly adorable seven year old girl but she really runs the place. she does a great job. >> and terrific coffee as well. >> thanks to erik larson. thanks to all of you for attending this session. [applause] >> thanks very much. >> is there a nonfiction author or book you would like to see featured on booktv? send us an e-mail at booktv@c-span.org. or tweet us at twitter.com/booktv. >> kristan hawkins, executive director of the pro-life group, students for life of america, presents the collection of essays that focus on students efforts to stop abortion. this is about 45 minutes.

>> good afternoon. i'm michelle, president of the claire booth lose policy institute, an organization named after the very pro-life claire booth to welcome to those of you in washington, d.c. and those in the c-span audience. all over america and all over the world. welcome to the march conservative woman's network luncheon. thank you for being with us today at a special thanks to our partner, the heritage foundation and bridget, for cohosting the conservative woman's network with us every month. now i'm so pleased to introduce today's speaker. kristan hawkins, the president of students for life of america. as president, kristin directs them mission and strategy of the organization and has more than tripled the number of campus pro-life groups in the united states. she has grown students for life

of america national conference to become the biggest pro-life conference in the nation. this year she offered students for life of america's first book, called "courageous: students abolishing abortion in this lifetime" we will be selling it outside afterwards. tristan serves as the organization's official spokeswoman and has appeared on many, many tv networks including fox, cnn, christian broadcasting. she blogs it is also including many, many times and national and regional papers including the "washington times," the "washington post," and many others. under her leadership, students for life of america has launched several successful investigations into planned parenthood. and kristan, planned parenthood with kristan herself going undercover on several occasions. pre-decisional work for the 2004 bush-cheney reelection a