booktv has covered many of these candidates. you can watch the montel web site, booktv.org. >> and now booktv's live "in depth" program. for the next three hours tour opportunity to talk to economist walter williams. his most recent book, "american contempt for liberty" tackles numerous issues including race, education, the environment, health care and more. >> host: walter williams. in your most recent book "american contempt for liberty" you write it is difficult to be a good economist and simultaneously be perceived as compassionate. to be a good economist one has to deal with reality, to appear compassionate, often one has to avoid important questions. >> guest: that is absolutely right.

to be a good economist you look at cause and effect. many times people don't want to see cause and effect. and economists will always talk about cost, when people talk about a benefit to doing something, someone has to talk about cost. a lot of times people don't like to talk about costs. >> host: is an economist a cold-blooded creatures? >> guest: i don't think so. i think i am a nice person. one of my issues, to help understand me, my initial premise is the each own ourselves. i am my private property and you are your private property. if you accept the idea of self ownership, certain ask -- check requests are more lancer nicks are immoral.

race is immoral because it violates private property, murder is immoral, it violates private property and so does that. i think you can get a fairly good vision of how the world should be from a moral point of view because you look at the initial premise. >> host: what about the concept of the common thing? >> guest: the common good doesn't make a lot of sense whatsoever. a lot of things have been done in the name of common good. what hitler did in germany was done in the name of common good. many horrible acts that we see around the world and over the history of the world has been done in the name of common good and has not been very moral. and to your book "american

contempt for liberty". many view america's education as a failure. a success in coming down the nation's, easy prey to shamans, hustlers. >> it is absolutely right. i haven't watched any of the debate. those undemocratic side of the spectrum. americans don't care about the character of a person. they are dumb down by the american educational system. the people who run, they have greater power and fewer

accountability standards than they ever had. >> host: you spent quite a bit of time writing about the american education system. what has happened. >> guest: for the good of the system. is the monopolization of education in the country. and there are 13,000 school districts so there's a massive consolidation. i don't think that is good for us. and there are fewer accountability standards, vote for students and educators, that is we see that teachers and

principals get pay raises and promotions with kids can read or write and kids get their diplomas whether they can read or write. and i think a startling condemnation for the school system is in coming freshman in college are not ready for college. so close to 50% have to take remedial education in reading, writing or mathematics and that is saying that the public schools, they are issuing fraudulent diplomas. they are issuing the diploma that certifies that a kid who can read or write "in depth" level when in fact cannot. >> host: what do you teach at george mason? >> guest: economic theory. in the fall i teach the first ph.d. i teach them my economic theory and in the spring i teach

intermediate which is undergraduate course. >> host: what you want your students to learn? >> guest: i would love for my students to share my values but i don't talk about my values in class. what i hope they gain is learn how to think, how to engage in dispassionate analysis and hopefully if they get out in the world and get into a good policy commission if they can engage in dispassionate analysis they can come up with compassion as ideas. >> host: when education do you have? >> guest: it is not nice of for me to say but i tell people that i am very happy that i got virtually -- i received all my education before it became

fashionable for white people to like me. what i mean by that is when i learned in high school or college, it was a real honest to god see that iron and when i earned an a that was a real honest to god a that i earned. those people did not care about the legacy of discrimination. they did not care about my handicaps' of being poor. they held the of to standard and i think that is very good. i think many students, black and white are not held up to the high standards. for example in my junior high school, one of our assignments was to write a three page has a and i received my essay back from a teacher and two occasions. with a nose on top of it, at least you could spell correctly.

and might be hurting the kids's feelings of self esteem. >> host: your autobiography talked about dr. rosenberg, one of your teachers. >> guest: he is my english teacher in high school and and i thought very highly of him. and he used to come to school early and caught us college tutorial english, those kids who he saw had some college potential, they could arrive at 7:00 in the morning and he would grow us on english and grammar. one day in class what he had the habit of doing, to write a

sentence on the board. he wrote a sentence on the board, and a student found an error. he was ready to erase what was on the board. i raised my hand and said there is another error. e-book that it and said what is it? i said there is lack of agreement between the subject, object entered to be. he said very very good. you are very alert this morning. so i said to my friend sitting beside me here i am paying taxes for the teachers to teach me and i had to teach them. he heard me and went into a tirade. he said williams, teaching you this material is like casting pearls before this one. you are never going to be anything. he was really frustrated with me and the -- legitimately so because i was kind of a clown in class. is addressing be that way was the first real challenge i had in high school and ultimately i

graduated salutatorian, second in my class. i needed that kind of dressing down. can you imagine what would happen to a white teacher telling a black students what dr. rosenberg said to me? he would be kicked out of school, he would be called racist and be condemned for not caring enough about the kids's feelings of self-esteem. >> host: one of your book is called "race & economics". what is "race & economics"? >> guest: there is a lot of confusion between race and economics. race has played a role in our country in terms of the economic well-being of blacks and/or other discriminated against minorities. it has had an effect but in my book "race & economics" i point out one thing, this discrimination does not explain as much as people think that it explains about the problems of

race in our country. >> host: this is from a column in 1997 that you wrote. for years i said if ku klux klan wanted to sabotage black academic excellence they couldn't find a tool more effective than the public school systems in most major cities. you were going to junior high at the time of brown vs. board of education. >> guest: high school. >> host: did that affect you, did it change your classes? >> guest: no, i went to a predominantly black school in north philadelphia. benjamin franklin high school. at the time benjamin franklin high school was the lowest rated schools in the city. it was in north philadelphia, predominately black, low income area. however, if you can imagine a time tunnel and you pull benjamin franklin from 1954 up to today, benjamin franklin would be probably one of the highest rated schools in the

city of philadelphia. that is the reason why, that standards of educational standards have plummeted so much. my statement about the ku klux klan. i have often said if you want to sabotage any black academic excellence you could not find a better way than to the public school system in most cities. what we do see that most americans are not aware of particularly black americans, the average black high school graduates or average black high school twelfth grader has the reading, writing, math and civics knowledge of the average white 748 grader. that is the devastating statistic where a major fraudul

diploma. the quality of 10% proficient in reading. >> host: why those disparities? >> guest: there are probably at number of reasons. one has to do with the education system in general but i think one of the things we have to recognize is there are many inputs that go into education.

if some of the inputs are not there it doesn't make a difference how much money you spend on education. education would not occur. in other words i am saying that for a kid to do well in school, somebody must make sure that the kid is in bed by 8:00 or 9:00 at night. somebody must get him up in the morning and get him some breakfast. somebody must make sure he arrives at school in time. somebody must make sure he does his homework and make sure he minds the teacher. if that is not done, i don't care how much money you put in education, education will not occur unless those things are done and if you ask the question can politicians do those things? can the president of the united states make sure a kid is in bed on time? can a mayor or congressman or senator? no. you need a parent and by the way i think you need two parents.

>> host: in your view when did this start to switch? when did the standards become dualities? when did the change in education begin? >> guest: if i were to try to find the time in the 60s and 70s standards began to change. i remember my mother used to complain about the preachings of dr. spock, that you shouldn't spank your children. regardless of what dr. spock advice i got spanked. what we started to do, in terms of education, we started to move away from things that worked very well to things that sounded good. we went from things that worked well to doing things the sound good and things that were not

productive. one example of this is i live in a high income neighborhood in the state of pennsylvania. my wife was trying to move my daughter out of this fairly good public high school. the tuition at the private school was $14,000 a year practiced in the 80s and what convinced me to move to the private school, parent teacher meeting, and her math teacher with all the teachers, six in the room, math teachers said your daughter has not been turning in sloppy work, has not been paying attention. why did you see anything about it? we don't like to flunk the kids,

we want them to feel good about themselves. i told him i feel good about myself every time i solve a set of quadratic equations. i went home that evening and told my wife let's start looking for private school. >> host: did state exchange? >> guest: yes. as an matter-of-fact one of the things that the private school we were interviewing several private schools and the school we decided to send my daughter to the head mrs. of the school said we don't hire education majors the if you teach a course in english you have to have your degree in english review teach a course in matthew had a degree in math. also if my daughter was on some of rework the new within the next two days, if she did something very well we would know that as well. >> host: in an interview you did

with the "national review" magazine you say i am not a member of any party. i call myself a jeffersonian or madisonian liberal, we need to take back the word liberal because people who use it to describe themselves today are not liberal at all. williams is in large part a libertarian, what some people call a classical liberal. he says he splits with many libertarians on national defense and foreign policy, he doesn't mind being labeled a conservative. >> guest: i have been called a lot of things in my nearly 80 years of life. yes, i think we need to take back the word liberal from liberals because liberal essentially means you are for personal the dirty. people who call themselves liberals today are not for personal liberty. there for things like using

government to force of the use one american to serve the purposes of another. they are anything but freedom oriented. >> host: how did you get from the projects of north philadelphia to economics professor at george mason university? >> guest: it was not an easy trip. one who has gone from where i started to where i am now, you don't do that without luck and chance and help from many other people. i am not a self-made person, but i think very significant about my journey, it is of wonderful testament about our nation. just because you know where somebody end ed up in light you

can't be sure where he started. and i think that is so great about our nation, part of the uniqueness of the united states, we are not a class society. in europe if you don't start at the top you are not going to get to the top but the united states it is possible to start at the bottom and move all the way to the top and interestingly if you look at forbes's list of the 50 or 100 richest people in the united states it is not, you don't find names like rockefeller, carnegie, ford and all these people. you find new money, steve jobs, bill gates, it is relatively, people who start with relatively modest incomes or middle class and they moved to be the richest people in the world. i think that is a great

commentary about the united states and something we should work hard to preserve. >> host: why haven't you watch any of the debate? >> guest: i am not turned on by politicians. i think -- i think the political world is very important, but i think politicians are salesman and they are trying to to sell people on their particular vision or trying to get people to vote for them and they will use any tools at their disposal to get people to vote for them. i am not turned on by politicians. >> host: in "up from the projects," page 128 you write it has always been my opinion that save for a precious few congressman these people are not deserving of the honor and respect they receive. i regard most of them save a handful or so as an enemy of

both the constitution and the moral precept of our founding fathers. >> guest: that is absolutely right. any politician who would rigorously live up to his oath of office to defend the united states constitution just would not get elected to office by the american people because what politicians reflect, they reflect the values and views of the american people, those who will collect them into office. some people might say that is a little bit strong. we just might ask ourselves what would happen to politicians who have a vision of james madison the acknowledged father of the united states constitution? in 1794 congress appropriated $15,000 to help some french refugees. james madison stood on the floor

of the house i raised and i am virtually quoting him, he said i cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article in the constitution of rises congress to spend the money of their constituents for the purposes of benevolence. if you look at the federal budget, two thirds, three quarters of it is for the purposes of benevolence. you ask yourself what would the american people do to a politician or anybody running for office who would make a statement like madison did or make another statement, madison also said charity is not a legitimate function of government. can you imagine what the american people would do to a politician who said that? politicians are reflecting the

values and views, unfortunately the values and views of most americans, those are the founders of the nomination. >> host: has the tea party movement in a positive in your view? >> guest: i think so. it has been a group of people, back to the constitution or principal, but whether they are successful or not. if you the founders of the nation they want limited government. if you read madison's federalist paper 45 or 48 what he was trying to describe to the citizens of new york was in the constitution to ratify the constitution, he said that the powers of the delegate to the federal government are few and well-defined, and restricted

mostly to external affairs. those left with the people and the states are in definite and numerous. if you turn that's upside down you would have what we have today, the powers of the federal government are indefinite and numerous and those of the people and the states are limited and well-defined. >> host: from your book liberty versus the tyranny of socialism you often write the acclaim that our nation is a democracy. that wasn't the vision of the founders. they sa democracy as another form of tyranny. if we have become a democracy i guarantee you that the founders would be deeply disappointed by our interpretation of their vision. >> guest: absolutely right. if you read statements by madison and jefferson and adams they condemned the idea of democracy. you don't find the term democracy in any of our founding documents, you don't find the

word democracy in the declaration of independence, you don't find the word democracy anywhere in the united states constitution and if listeners want further convincing of this, when we talked about we pledge allegiance to the flag, the democracy to which it stands or the republic? or the song during the war of 1861, the battle hymn of the democracy with the battor the b the republic? of elders fought majority rules was tyranny. if you look of the constitution, read the constitution represents our rules of the game is a very anti majority document. the president is not elected by majority vote, the president can veto wishes of 535 people of

congress and it takes two thirds to override his veto. there are many anti majority aspects to the united states constitution which represents our rules of the game. >> host: in 2010 from your book "american contempt for liberty" early indications are the barack obama presidency might turn out to be similar as the failed presidency of jimmy carter. >> guest: yes band what some people are saying of president obama is making jimmy carter's presidency look good. i think our enemies are around the world don't have a lot of respect for us and our friends don't have a lot of trust in us and i think at least the foreign diplomacy part of his presidency has been a disaster. i think the domestic aspect of

it with the socialized medicine under obamacare and the big business bailouts and spending programs has been a disaster for our country and will take a long time for us to recover. >> host: one of the things we are talking about is income inequality. what does that mean? >> guest: it doesn't mean much to me. one of the points we had to talk about when we talk about income inequality we should be talking about productive in the quality. you very seldom find highly productive people for, people that you find for tend to have low productivity but then again the whole idea of income inequality ignores the fact that there is all kinds of income mobility in our country. for example a lot of people will

get the lower quintile of income distribution, they look at it as if the people in the lower quintile are permanent residents there. it turns out there are several important studies, at least two important studies, one by the university of michigan and won by the irs shows up to 91% of people in the lowest fifth of the income distribution or 91% of leave-quintile in ten years and as a matter of fact the people in the top 1%, 30% of them are not there anymore after ten years. so there is a lot of income mobility so we should not assume that these different quintiles represent permanent residence for people. they're just statistical categories. >> host: back to "american

contempt for liberty," president obama and the democratic party harped about tax fairness. here's my first question to you, what standard of fairness dictates the top-10% of income earners pay 71% of the federal income tax burden, 47% of americans. ..

>> host: good afternoon and welcome to book tv on c-span 2, our monthly in-depth program and i guess this month, author and economic professor, columnists walter williams and he will be with us for the next two and half hours to take your calls and your comments via social media. if you would like to make a comment or have a question for walter williams 202-748-8200 if you live in the eastern central time zone, 202-748-8201 and

those in the mountain pacific time zone. we have several ways via social media to get a hold of us as well and we will begin with our e-mail and that is book tv c-span.org and you can e-mail doctor williams questions there and you can also make a comment on our twitter page apple tv. facebook, facebook.com. /a book tv and we have walter williams posted to the top of our page and you can make a comment along with other folks who have made comments with quite a conversation going on at our facebook page. bells have another one. if you want to send a text message you can send it to doctor williams at: 202-717- 9684. we will get to as many of those as we can and that is probably the first time i've ever read that little script and not said

to 02, because i know that is a pet peeve of yours. i used zero and my mom says the same thing. the first time i've ever said zero their. here is doctor williams books over the years, state against blacks cannot 1992-- 1982. "america, a viewpoint ". south africa's war against capitalism, 1989. do the right thing, the people's economists. more liberty means less government, 1997. liberty versus the tyranny of socialism in 2008. "up from the projects" cannot 2010, "race & economics" came out in 2011. his latest collection came out this year: "american contempt for liberty".

doctor williams, i want to go back to your second to last book houck-- how much can be blamed on discrimination when it comes to race in economics and the disparity we see currently? >> guest: i think one of the things we should recognizes that many things we see in black communities, the things we see in black communities such as ferguson baltimore and others, they are entirely new. that is, the illegitimacy rate among black americans is close to 75%. a lot of people would blame this on the legacy of discrimination, but it turns out in 1938, the illegitimacy rate was 11%. as a matter fact, among whites it was 3% in 1938 and today among whites it's around 30%. if you look at the breakdown of

the black family and, as a matter fact, maybe breakdown is a poor term to use. that is only 37% of black kids live in the two. family. again, many people will blame that on the legacy of discrimination, but turns out in 1880s, 75% of black kids lived into para family's. in new york, in 1925, 85% of black kids lived in two-parent families. the kind of crime that we see in many black neighborhoods is entirely new. i grew up in the housing project in north philadelphia, and we didn't go to bed to the sounds of gunshots. many people, they did not lock their doors until 11 or 10:00 p.m. at night when everyone was home. there was fire-- far greater civility in poor black neighborhoods at a time when

black people were closer to slavery, only two generations, two or three generations out of slavery and there was not opportunities and far greater discrimination against blacks from today. so, what i argue is that much of what we see has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination. if, i mean, the fact, it's not very pleasant to talk about, if you ask the question in what cities do black-- are black people most insecure, receive grossly poor education and have other very very poor living standards, they are in the very cities where a black mayor, a black is chief of police, black is the superintendent of schools and the very cities where the administration in those cities

have been democrat over half a century, so i'm not stating a causal relationship between blacks being in political control of cities and the poor living conditions and poor standards of school, but what i am saying is that you can't blame it on discrimination. that is the rotten education that black kids are receiving in washington dc, you can know where in the world can you blame that on racial discrimination when the political mechanism in washington dc is black him unless you want to say that the black politicians are engaging in racial discrimination and oppressing their people. so, i think that when you begin to try to solve problems, you have to identify the cause. for example, i could be a physician and you could come to me and say you have a bad

stomach ache and i can say well, your stomachache is caused by your ingrown toenails. well, if there is no relationship between your in grown toenail and your stomachache, i can treat your ingrown toenail all at once and you will still have the stomachache. the same thing with trying to help people out that is if you have to identify the causes of their problems correctly and if you justice eight, look, black problems are caused by the legacy of discrimination and the legacy is slavery and discrimination, well, you can work on-- on that all you want in black problems will persist. >> host: how long have you read your column, how many times a week? >> guest: i have written-- like i started out with the philadelphia tribune, which is a black newspaper. i think i put my column once every two weeks back in 1976, 78 and up and i became syndicated in 1980, 1981, so i had been

writing a column for close to 40 years and my column allows me to do those things that i can to do in classroom. that is the kind of discussion that you see me when i'm on the radio or television or in our discussion right now, they never come up in my classroom because i think that is academic dishonesty for professors to use their classrooms to profit eyes students and once in a while i get a student who asked me a question about something i have written in a calm and i will tell them to see me after class or come to my office during office hours because i refuse to do that to students and i think it's academic dishonesty. >> what is the first thing you say when you go in the class that first day with a new bunch? >> guest: in my intermediate, of course, the first and i tell the students is, this is a real college course. you will be expected to start seconds off with capital letters

, find a subject object and a verb and a period and if this is too challenging you should drop the course and i also tell the students my class is at 7:30 a.m. on my intermediate class at 7:30 a.m. on tuesday and thursday and in the spring and i tell the students part of my lesson on the first day is that the class starts at 7:30 a.m. on cold days in february. it starts at 7:30 a.m. when the sun is out and the birds are chirping and you would like to stay in bed in april, it starts at 7:30 a.m., so if the class is too early you ought to drop it now. >> host: doesn't sell out? >> guest: the class is almost always full. >> host: want to show a bit of video here and you'll understand what this is. is a friend of yours. let's see. >> people from time to time ask

and mention black conservative writers and i tell them, 30 years ago i could have told you walter williams and me and today i can't even keep track of them all. they are all over the place, the media, they have their own shows and right columns and books and i learn about them-- out of nowhere they suddenly appear, so there is this countertrend going on and everything depends upon this. >> how much of a role have you played in guiding them, conservative black riders? >> i have no way of knowing. you would have to ask them. most of the people-- sometimes i'm credited within fluids with this person or that person, but walter williams had arrived at the same conclusion i had before ever met him to read in fact, so easy to reconstruct these things , but it's what i call putting two and two together and getting seven. walter had his own ideas.

>> host: that was from 2005. >> guest: that was doctor thomas , my good and longtime friend and call it. we met at ucla in 1969. he came out as a visiting professor in 1969 and i believe in 1970, he joined the faculty and i never took a class with him, but we became instantaneous friends. i think some of our friendship began when he called me up and says, walter, i just got royalties on a new book. would you like to go see the muhamed ali fight and that was when mohammed ali came out of retirement and fought fraser and that was the fight that he lost against joe frazier and we have been friends ever since and we think very much alike. but, we are not twins in terms

of our thinking. >> host: what about his comment that he cannot count the black conservative writers? >> guest: back in the 70s, tom soul amalie worked on a project at the urban institute and he was telling me, we wanted to have a pinochle game among black conservatives it would have the cutthroat and he couldn't play partnership because there wouldn't be that many. also, bill buckley joked one time and said tom soul of the epa does not allow tom soul and walter williams to fly in the same plane because if the plane crash there would be no more conservative economists. today, there are many many people who are lucrative back-- black people are libertarian black conservatives and i think that maybe we are proud to say-- at least i'm proud to say that some of their inspiration to challenge conventional wisdom came from the writings of me and

tom soul. >> host: what is your relationship with rush limbaugh? >> guest: i just do the show. i have laid eyes on him only twice even though i have done his show for 20 years and the reason why-- >> host: and you have guest hosted cqi have guest hosted for 20 years and the reason why i don't see him is because the reason i'm in new york to do the show is because he is not there. he is somewhere else, so we have only seen each other twice, but over the years he lets me have the show and it's my show. it's just like i own the show and so-- and i'm always pleased to have a good guess and i have interviewed tom soul a number of times when he's been on the show and i looked at rush limbaugh's show as my big classroom. that was my 6 million student classroom and i could also

express ideas on the show that i could not express. >> host: walter williams, this is a facebook comment from trevor coleman. williams, thomas soul, clarence thomas and ben carson are right wing bigots, favorite color people because they have dissolved them of any responsibility for the races them they instituted and maintained in the society. of course, in spite of individual successes african-americans still have to navigate structural barriers to success and profound and relentless white privilege, most whitestone even have to think about. >> guest: well, i think that's very very unfortunate view of blacks in our country. that is, if you-- i think it's clear that black americans have made the greatest gains over some of the highest hurdles in the shortest period of time than

any other racial group in the history of mankind. why would i say that? well, if you added up the amount of income that black americans earn and you thought a black americans as a separate nation, we would rank 17 or 18 richest nation on the face of the earth. there are few black americans among the world's richest people. there was one black american who was the head of the world's mightiest military: powell. there were some black americans who are the world's most famous personalities. now, the significance of all of this is that in 1865, neither a slave nor slave owner would have believed that these kind of games would be possible in just a little bit over a century. as a such, it speaks to the fortitude of a people, but just as importantly it speaks to the

greatness of a nation. now, the task that lies before us is, how can we get these gains to a large percentage of back community, maybe one third or for whom these gains appear to be a lucid and that's a real challenge, but the point is that anyone who would portray black people as poor and downtrodden, i think that is a racial insult. >> host: well, we have calls waiting. walter williams is our guest and bob in denville, new jersey, you're the first call it. hello, bob. >> caller: hello. >> host: go-ahead. >> caller: i'm enjoying the conversation very much and i'm interested for an opinion on doctor williams brought up madison. i'm wondering if he's familiar with richard b men's book, plain

honest men. >> guest: no, i am not. >> caller: in it he describes the shift from what would be considered a principal of federalism to one of more of a national supreme government. in light of shays rebellion, i guess that it-- general washington's troops that were threatening to march on philadelphia, for lack of payment and over time it became an understanding that they stronger centralized government really was critical to our nation's survival. hamilton felt that way, maurice saw pettway and others felt that way and it really constitutionally is not necessarily an issue of black and white because there have to be the partnership between the federal government as well as the states with an ongoing basis

and that remains today. i'm not arguing with principles of conservativism, but i'm asking you, do you recognize the need on a continual basis for public private partnership between the centralized federal government as well as the states and as well as private enterprise? that is one question i have and i wonder if i could have a follow-up later? >> host: we have a lot of collars waiting, so let's have doctor williams respond to that and then we will move on. >> guest: well, i think one of the issues is that the important issue is that-- not whether something is a good idea or a bad idea. the question is, is it permissible by the united states constitution. much of what the federal government does is not permissible by the united states constitution. and the constitution calls for limited government, limited

powers of federal government and as i say, i gave the madison quote i say that in the federal's paper 45 he said the powers of the federal government are few and well-defined and restricted mostly to external affairs. those are the people in the states that are indefinite in numerous and. i would like to see where we have changed the constitution that says, well, the federal government has unlimited powers and of those powers by the glen states are are indeed limited. so, what we have done is we have made changes in the constitution without having a constitution amendment and indeed, the framers who are wise gave us article five as a means to amend the constitution, but we do things now and we say the heck with the constitution and i think that that's a big mistake.

>> host: in your book, liberty versus tyranny and socialism, you quote government even in its best date has been a necessary evil in its worst state intolerable. >> guest: that is absolutely right and i think we americans should realize and recognize that the history of mankind has been that of arbitrary abuse and control by others. the founders were not perfect, but they tried to move us away from that and the main enemy, the main enemy of mankind throughout history has been governments. that is, if you look at the 19-- at the 20th century it's the most brutal century in the history of mankind. i think that something like 60 million people lost their lives in war time, but that pales in comparison to the

number of people who were murdered by their own governments and the number comes up to somewhere close to 100 million people murdered by their own governments in a matter fact, these statistics are documented in a book called "death by government" and so it shows it's a strong arguments that government is the enemy of mankind. as a matter of fact, the framers of our constitution recognized that. just look at the language of the bill of rights. it says things like, congress shall not abridge, congress shall not disparage, congress shall not infringe. now, if the framers did not think that congress would do these things, why in the world with a put that down in the constitution? i suggest to people that when we die and if at our next destination we see anything like a bill of rights, we know that we are in hell because a bill of rights in heaven would be an

affront to god and we would say we cannot trust god and so the framers recognize that the enemy of mankind was government. but, they recognize we do need some government as thomas paine was pointing out that government under the best conditions is necessary evil. the whole second amendment arguments about guns, they write to keep and bear arms, most think the framers gave that the second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms wanted to protect our right to keep and bear arms and they think it was for deer and duck hunting. but, the framers actually come out and say, to allow americans to have some kind of defense against abuse of government and people like hamilton said things like, to allow the american protect people to protect themselves against the

representatives if they are betrayed by the representatives. who in the world other representatives? united states congress, so i think that the framers held a great distress for government that americans today, i think, we love government that is the average american loves government and the reason why they love government is because the government can do those things for them that if they did the same thing privately they would go to jail. that his government can take my money and give it to you, but if you came up to me with a gun and took my money, you would go to jail, but if you go to congress and ask them where you take williams money and give it to me , you don't go to jail, but you have my money. >> host: i should have said this earlier, but if you do text in a message for walter williams if you could include your first name and city so we can identify you that way. this is a text without first name and city. is the welfare system intrinsically intended to keep

poor people mainly of color and poverty? >> guest: i don't think that it's intrinsically intended. i don't think that's the intention. i think that the intention for well intended people i think is to help. but, i think that when you look at the intentions of a program, when you look at programs you should ignore their intentions and ask, what is that affects and i think that the affect of welfare has been devastating for black americans. the kind of things you seeable monk black americans today are entirely new as i said earlier. there is no more material poverty in the united states, no more material poverty, we don't have anything like you see in bangladesh and afghanistan and all of these other poor countries. what we have in our country's

poverty of the spirits. that is where people have become dependent on government programs and they are not self-sufficient. that's the kind of poverty we have today. >> host: tommy, texas city, texas, good afternoon. >> caller: good afternoon. my question i have-- i have four things i would like to ask mr. williams. in the 1950s, not until the 1950s my understanding is that black people in this country were not considered human beings until man. the next thing is that the ku klux klan is a hate organization for years and no government official has ever approach them, no police department has ever really done anything that would be effective to get rid of such a group and the third thing is a

black lives matter movement. before thing-- the fourth thing is that immigration, i don't think, you know when i was coming up that black people wanted to go to school with white people. black people wanted their own. they wanted a level playing field. integration seemed like integration today what it has come has caused black people in this country to lose their foundation because there was a time when my mother could see another kid doing wrong and she would discipline that kid and take that kid to his or her parents. are teachers which would govern and watch over us and would report to our parents what we was not acting correctly in school. integration-- when integration took place the white teachers

were scared. it was like it was a standoff. there was no communication. there was always the contention between black students and white teachers. >> host: tommy, quickly before we get walter williams ranter, tell us a little bit about yourself. where were you raised and how old are you and if you could, also clarify your remark on the black lives movement. >> caller: okay. i was raised in dallas. my first encounter with the system and when i say the system, police officers i was nine. >> host: what year was that? >> caller: i'm 64 now. >> host: thank you. >> caller: that was back in the 50s, 1958. might-- that's the way they did back then. they would come in and intimidate you when you were young and i mean very young.

get you under control. but, that is one incident where an officer that i considered to be racist and a bigot, but my experience is with police officers has not always been bad. i have had some that had the right to arrest me, but they didn't. they gave us a chance. they sent us home to our parents. >> host: tommy, quickly, what did you say about the black lives matter movement? >> caller: okay, this is why i'm so interested in the black lives matter movement. and i was 19, i was shot six times by my step father. this is black on black crime. the reason i'm interested in the black lives matter movement is because i don't think anything has really changed.

these young people, which is our children now, they have heard over and over what the politicians have to say and these politicians go to washington, they have been going to washington since the 60s. we are finding out that the black community still is suffering. it's still doing the same things that was done before we were declared human beings in this country. >> host: tommy, we have a lot of information thank you for your time this afternoon. walter williams. >> guest: he doesn't have any specific questions, but i would comment on-- let's say the black lives matter. ..

all in all somewhere around 95% of them are murdered by another black, and so if you focus attention on what police are doing or what white people are doing, you will not deal with the problem of black lives being destroyed on the street. most are done by and murdered by blacks. i don't quite understand the black lives matter movement, if you asked these people, look

let's make that assumption that cops murdered 500 lives. still, you're talking about overwhelming percentage of blacks who are murdered by other blacks. what what are you going to do about that? just focus your attention on blacks who are shot by policeman you just missed the boat. the murder rate will continue. >> from our facebook page, tony noonan, he is very selective and uses numbers to fit his ideology without looking at the fact. he he is a good house slave selling a pro-right-wing agenda that supports the top 1% and blames minorities for the situation they are in. guest: that is the kind of thinking that is the continuance of what we see today.

just pointing the finger at places that are irrelevant to the problem, we just do not get anywhere that way. that is, if he wants to blame, or you blame rich people, blame the top 1% of the schools that the black kids go to. so you round up the 1% that are rich and you take all their money, take their houses, what in the world is it going to do for a black kid in high school, graduated from high school and high school in washington d.c. that cannot read and write at the third grade level. it will not do anything. it may make some politician and make mike that do-gooder feel good. host: michael is calling in from alabama. >> caller: good afternoon, i am honored to have this privilege of asking the question.

before i get into my question. host: michael, we hear from you once a month and if you could get right to your question that would be great. >> caller: all right, it's about the way that campaigning politicians, radio hosts and think tank radios broadly use the word freedom and liberty and how washington involvement in the economy is going to somehow take away our freedom and liberties with the constitution protects. i'm not standing up for president obama at all, but even though i am a white male as a born-again saved christian with both a mental illness, and a very rare birth autism that is why i talk too much, i don't see how those who are impoverished through no fault of their own in

the third war especially children who are born into poverty and handicap people, if washington washington provides assistant to united way agencies, federal work projects such as the public buildings, public schools, and all of that spee1, michael michael i think we got the point. the importance of washington helping out those less fortunate in those that cannot do for themselves. guest, i believe it is praiseworthy for people to help their fellow man. i think it is praiseworthy to help your fellow man by reaching into your own pocket. i think that is worthy of condemnation to help your fellow man by reaching into someone else's pocket. i think for the christians among us when god gave moses the commandment, thou shall not steal, he did not mean

thou shall not steal unless you have a majority vote in congress. host: darrell, tacoma, washington please go ahead. >> caller: yes, thank you. first of all, congratulation on still be in a row. you have been around a long time. you as a clear thinking individual, you have two distinct disadvantages. first of of all you expect people to think like you and come to the same conclusions, and then you think you are right in all things, but your college, had the pleasure of the naacp at that time, you change my life. whether i want to accept it or not, you are factually correct.

you gave a statistic that they have received more federal assistance then any other people, yet they have more of the problems. you made some recommendations that night, i will name them all, one you made the recommendation that if we would do certain things, we would be successful. but the key, and i will finish very quickly, the key is you said something about politics and i'm a christian i believe in doing things. here, they had an election about eight years ago, there is a white male against a black female, the white male, i came in i just moved to the area and

his credentials were incredible. twenty years of working, et cetera. the other party said nothing about what they think, what they believe except, they represent the black race. as a black person, i took the other person because what i fought for and what i'm sure you fought for is that race should not be the determining factor, but what is surprising is through clear workings. host: can you get to the point? >> caller: yes, i told them that by me working for a white person is the same as we would would want whites to vote for a black person. the. host: okay we will leave it

there. did did you get anything you would like to respond to come i'm not sure what he was going for. guest: when he was talking, is thinking about the lecture i gave i think at trinity college some years ago. one of my objectives when i give lectures, or generally when i talk to people, i don't try to get people to necessarily think like i do although i would be happy if they did. my objective is to try to get people to challenge conventional wisdom. that is, give them some ideas to enable them to challenge conventional wisdom and then reach their own conclusion. i never try to say i want you to think the way i do. also, again i would like them to do that, but i give them evidence to question things that

they had not question previously. spee1, you write, for most my professional life i have traveled frequently, have traveled frequently, sometimes boarding a commercial flight, to order more times a month for lucrative speaking engagement. over the past three years, the frequency has fallen to an average of once or twice per year. the reason is simple, i don't want to be arrested or detained for questioning some of the senseless airport security procedures. don't airport security procedures. don't get me wrong, i am for security. guest: i have a very low tolerance for the tsa people, i think think this is a number of years ago. i had carry-on luggage and in my carry-on luggage i had an eyeglass repair kit. this tsa person told me i could take the screws but i cannot take the screwdriver. and i i said that's stupid as hell. whoever heard of someone hijacking an airplane with an eyeglass and screwdriver. so he said, wait here.

so his superintendent came up and asked me, and i repeat myself. he said it's on the list either leave it here or you don't get on the plane. so, i would not have gotten on the play but the people who invited me set up a banquet and things like that, and it would be pretty awful if i did not show up. but i just don't travel commercially anymore, now i just travel in a private plane. if people want to have me give a talk, i just will go by private plane. i just will not deal with the tsa because i'm too old to go to jail. i am not as compliant as most my fellow americans. host: you have been in jail. guest: yes i have. host: how many times have you been arrested. guest: i think i've spent three nights in jail. as a matter fact, my stepfather used to joke, you are not a citizen unless he spent time in jail. one time, my first time in jail

i was a taxicab driver at the time, i strive and on the street and the cop was standing in the middle of the street for no obvious reason to me. i learned later that he was holding a parking spot for his body. so i asked him, did he want me for anything, he just ignore me. i said look, if you don't want me for anything get out of my way. so he came up to the cabin asked me to repeat myself and i repeated it. he me out yanked me out of the cab until my customer, who i had as a witness to be on his way unless he wanted to get charged with interfering arrest. so i was taken to jail, he need me in the groin, and i was really in pain. initially i was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. when i i got back from the dr. another charge had been leveled, assault assault and battery on a police officer. so i spent a night in jail, then

the next time i went to jail, again i was driving a taxicab and i came to pick up my wife. she was now my wife at the time, she was my girlfriend. she was at her sister's house and they had a loud, rowdy party there. the police came to the house in north philadelphia, my wife's, sister's husband, really big guy, picked up two cops and threw them on the street and sick to his german shepherds on them. they call for backup and arrested all this. i asked the officer who placed me under arrest, what are you arresting me for? i just got here. he said we are resting you for frequenting a disorderly house. then the third time, i was married, we are in los angeles and i had an argument with my wife. so i got up and walked out of

the house at one am or two am in the morning to walk off my anger. i was walking along, a policeman stop me and asked what i was doing. i said i was taken a walk and he said this far from home. he asked where i live, and, and i said i'm taking a walk. and i said yes, and i think you ought to walk once in a while your cell. so that remark made him : the station to check my record and it turned out, this was in los angeles, it turned out about four or five years ago from that time i had a parking ticket that i did not pay. award was issued for my arrest. they had to arrest me of the worst thing about it was i had to to call my wife who i just had an argument with to come down and bill me out. i think the bill was like $50 or $75. she came down to the station and i got a lecture two.

i met connie when i was driving under driving a cab in philadelphia. we used to go to speak is at that time in philadelphia or pennsylvania they had laws that bars had to close a 12:00 p.m. on saturday night so cab drivers in some of their wives and girlfriends, we would meet at this luncheonette across the street and go to the speakeasies until two or 3:00 o'clock in the morning. so they started dating just a cabdriver friend of mine, as a matter fact i gave her my phone number and said why don't you call me once in a while. later she said she thought as being pretty arrogant because girls back then did not call guys. she eventually eventually called me to meet a girlfriend

of hers. i went to the house and met her girlfriend, she asked me what i give her drive home and we became friends. we were married, she she passed away in 2007. we were married most 48 years, and together 50 years. some people, during our long marriage, some people congratulated us for congratulated us for being varied so long. and i say congratulations is not in order, both of us are just apathetic. i can do better and she can do better but we're just too lazy to try. >> who is devon. guest: she is my daughter. i wanted five children and my wife did not want any. the reason why she didn't want any is she was the tenth, the last of ten children and she was

obliged to take care of her nieces and nephews. she did not want any children. after we're married 14 years, we finally did have a daughter and so we settled with one. but then again i kind of got even with mrs. williams because when my daughter went away to college, sometimes i would go down to get water or glass of wine it should be sitting and watching tv with tears in her eyes. i i would tell her, look if you had five children you would not have an empty nest. your to play for it. host: what is devon doing today? guest: she teaches. she teaches high school history and ap history i believe. host: private or public school? host: private school. host: thank you.

>> caller: hi professor williams, i've been on hold here for a while i have got about a dozen more comments to make. i need about an hour, set possible? a lot of what you are staying is true, but i would just like to get some contrary, and you mention be able to think, i guess change your conventional thinking, which i'm a big believer inches i think that is one of the biggest problems we have is that people take these big assumptions and can't really examine and think. i would challenge you to do the same. i do agree with a lot of what you are saying, however, the big

government is a problem and one of the major reasons is controlled by largely the wealthy. big money. we have socialism for defense contractors, big egg, pharmaceutical companies. so when we look at the money, sure poor people but who stands up for poor people? you know what #not everyone is going to be an entrepreneur. what i would like to see as a is a country that recognizes that that janitor who works hard, if he is working hard should he be able to put our roof over his family's house, and have medical care? spee1. host: okay i think we have your point. guest: i think what the color talks about wealth and big business and others in washington, i think the problem is not necessarily money in

washington, i think the problem is the power of congress to do favors to people. to give one american unprivileged that would be denied another american. so, of course, of course people are going to be willing to pay for that. so what we need to do, we need to strip congress of that kind of power to play favorites with different americans. so, you would not find money coming to washington. so various packs empirical organizations, they are not giving money to congress for congressman to uphold and defend the constitution, they are giving money to congress because they want special favors. they they want access. i think that is the big problem with our system. that is the big problem with a a of things that go on in congress. getting like the export, import back that gives huge hand out to

boeing and two other competitors , and i think one of the things that we recognize is that the only way congress can give one american citizen 1 dollar is to first intimidation threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from another american. so i agree with the collar in the following sense, we need to do something about these handouts that congress is given out. i think we need to do it down the line, handouts in general. keep in mind when people say, well we just have to fight under and have food stands are people*. i say i say look, when the poor irish were fleeing the potato famine in the 1840s, arriving in new york without, with just the clothing on their

back, how in the world did they make it? was there there food stamp program? of course there wasn't. people say, we need this program in that program. i said how in the world did we make it, we became a rich became a rich nation without all of these programs? think of another area, people say well government ought to do something about the inflation or government ought to do something about the recession or depression. it turns out that from 1787 until about 1930 the federal government, we had recessions and depressions, no one thought the government ought to intervene to correct the economy. it wasn't until the hoover administration and later the ed roosevelt administration that people thought that government should get involved to try to correct the economy. as a a result they created the longest depression we ever had.

that is during the entire 1930s we dealt with the unemployment rate went below 19 or 20%. it wasn't until after world war ii that we solved some of the problems with the depression. in general, your hard put. your hard put for finding out some good things done by government except that are protecting individual liberties and individual rights. host: boyd calling in from st. louis. hi lloyd. >> caller: hello. how are you. host: lloyd you just have to go ahead make a comment or question. >> caller: okay prof. this is what i would like to ask him about. the three fist claws and also the founding fathers who are

slaveholders, and also what about the 13th, 14th, 15th amendment. i will stop there and hang up and i am looking forward to hearing the professor's comments on those things. he keeps talking about the founding fathers if it was just turned on them would still be in slavery. host: lloyd, before we get an answer give us a brief snapshot of yourself. >> caller: first of all, i i am a retired schoolteacher, and also an attorney. i went to what you would call and all colored high school. but at any rate, we had a good foundation. i graduated in january of 1953. my integration was the military in college. during that generation they produced a lot of outstanding black folks who are called colored then. but anyway i will stop and hang up, i am looking for to hearing

the professor's response to those different things, and i appreciate. host: this is something you write about, the phony fathers in slavery. guest: yes, i think the three fifths clause that people talk about, people talk about blacks being seen as 3/5 of a person. it. it turned out during the 1787 convention in philadelphia that slaves were 40% of of the population of the southern state. the southern states wanted to count each person, each slave as one vote. the northern delegate to the convention did not think slave should be counted at all. in terms of the proportion men of the house of representatives. so the concession they made was

to make blacks count, the slaves count as 3/5 of a purpose under a person person for the portion of the house of representatives. now, the color i don't know whether he would want this but what he would argue on the side of the seven states to count each black as one vote. if they were counted as one vote it would give the southern states far greater power in the united states congress. now, many of the founders they did not want, they were against slavery but they felt that if they had abolished slavery during the convention then there would not have been a union. so, one has to ask the question,

would blacks have been better off if the north went their way and the south went their way and there was not a union created between them. we didn't become a united states. i don't think so. i would disagree that blacks would have been better off under those conditions. as a matter fact, i think it was wilson wanted delicates i believe from new jersey, he said well at least we have outlawed slavery, the slave trade by 1808 and that might be a very good start for outline altogether. now, in terms of the founders vision of slavery i have many quotations of the founders on slavery.

that would condemned the idea of slavery. i think there's one thing we have to recognize, and again this is not getting any moral sanction of slavery is that throughout mankind's history, slavery, slavery has been the normal state of affairs. it turns out that blacks were the last people to be enslaved. as a matter fact, the term slave is a reference to the slavic people, the slavs were among the first slaves. as a matter fact, white white americans were enslaved and that is why jefferson sent troops to tripoli, to free american slaves that were enslaved by some of the northern african countries. so, i think think the unique thing about slavery in the united states, and slavery in the western world is that great

written and the united states were the two countries that went to the greatest pains to eliminate slavery. that is, great britain bandit slave trade, just the sight of the union jack on the high seas. that ended the trade of slavery and then americans, we fought a very costly war, 600,000 americans died and part of the effort was to eliminate slavery. so i think there's two things we have to recognize. slavery was the normal state of affairs of a mankind, get i am not giving sanctions to it but it was a normal state normal state of affairs among mankind. but the fact of business was the united states and great britain had the most to and that abusive

and ugly thing. spee1 rod is calling in from florida. you are on tv. >> caller: high professor. that is a long rap sheet. i want to point out that you brought the constitution and framers designed to secure liberty did not, as james madison said, did not rely on parchment barriers. did not. did not reline words on paper. it's great that we have all of these rights and privileges, natural rights put there on paper, it is fantastic, however, however, their system relied on a separation of powers. probably every school kid, i am 60, my generation early on i learned that you can have three

branches of government. the legislative, executive, and judicial. however, with the framers inserted in there, which we do not have today, were senators representing their states. the framers recognized the only rights that were actually secure were those that had an interest group behind them. the tenth amendment is a dead letter because the states are not in the senate. we can thank the 17th amendment for that 102 years ago. my point. my point is that we cannot return, possibly to freedom in this country until power is once again dispersed, dispersed widely. that means among the 50 states. the people. the people there that created this union. look at today. host: you know what, we are going to leave it there and get a response. guest: i think the caller is suggesting and i think he is absently right, the loss of power by the states because of

the senators they are not obligated, they are not chosen by the legislators of the various states. the states have have lost considerable power. the tenth amendment means very little. i think that also the tenth amendment means very little because of the war between states and people called the civil war. i think it is incorrect to call it a civil war, that suggests that there two factions trying to take a hold of the central government. davis so it was really a war between the states. but what the war between the states settled was the issue of succession. once the issue of secession was settled by brute force, then the federal government can do anything it wants with the states. they can run rough side over the states. it is very much like if you tell my wife that you cannot divorce

me, i could treat her anyway wanted to. the very act of exit is a very powerful inducement for people to live up to their contractual agreement. then again, there is an issue and people say, well what can we do to restore economic freedom or to get us back on track. i say well, i don't want to be too pessimistic but are we as americans, as human beings, any different than the people from the romans, from the french, french, the portuguese, the spanish, these are great empires of the past that went on the two. they are doing many things that we're doing. are americans expecting anything different from ourselves? are we we any different as human beings? i think not. i think we also have to

recognize that personal liberty is rare in human existence. that personal liberties as we know the western world, in the the united states are relatively rare in human existence. so, i i am also afraid that historian writing too many years from now, they'll say well there's this historical curiosity where people were free mostly in the west in the united states. they had some liberties but it all went back to normal state of affairs. arbitrary abuse and control by others. i'm afraid that will be entrance. if you asked the question, which way are we americans headed? tiny steps at a time, are we headed towards more personal liberty or are we headed toward more government control over our lives? you'd have to unambiguously be

the latter. so, i don't don't see a trend in the other direction that is headed toward more liberty and less control over our lives. so the ultimate ultimate answer of this process is totalitarianism. host: are live conversation and your calls with watts old williams will continue after this quick look at some of the authors that he is reading right now and some of his favorite books be back. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> many of this year pres. of candidates have written books to introduce themselves to voters and to promote their views on issues. here's a look at some of the candidates books. and his newest books, reply all, jeb bush catalogs his email correspondence e-mail correspondence during his time as florida governor.

presidential candidate and neurosurgery, ben carson argues that a better understanding of the constitution is necessary to solve america's most controversial issues in his latest book, a more perfect union. former secretary of state, hillary clinton looks back on her time serving in the obama administration in, hard, hard choices. in a time for truth, texas senator ted cruz recounted his journey from a cuban immigrant son to the u.s. senate. carly fiorini, former ceo of hewlett-packard is another declare candidate for president, and rising to the challenge she challenged shares lessons she learns from her difficulties and tribes. south carolina sen., lindsey graham released an e-book on his website, in my story. he details. he details his childhood and career in the air force. former arkansas governor, mike huckabee gives his take on politics and cultures, in god, guns, grits, gravy. and in american well, louisiana

governor bobby jindal jindal uses 14 events from our nation's past to explore his vision for the future. ohio gov., john kasich, calls for a return to what he sees as traditional america

>> finally, governor chris christie and former governor martin martin o'malley and jim gilmore have announced their candidacy but have not released books. book tv has covered many of these candidates, you can watch them on our website, book tv.org. >> walter williams, as we ask all of our authors some of their favorite books, some of their favorite authors, some of their favorite influences area this is

the first time this response is coming to us. when asked asked about his inspiration, this is the producer nick writing this, williams responded with, all those people involved in my life who didn't give a damn about myself. guest: that is absently right. they held me accountable to even their own standards, or held me accountable to other people's. up to high standards in general. so, for example at ucla, that is where i went to graduate school, one has to in order to get a phd, one has to take a theory exempt. lunch when i took the theory exam, 16 students took it, 14 flunked. i was among the ones that flunked.

they had two professors sit down with you after the exams and decide whether to kick you out. one of my professors told me, he said walter, your exam was among the worst. but we think you can do much, much better. so they gave me reading assignments, i had to come to their office and discuss the journal article. sometime sometime i would come to the office and they said william you're just a nonsense. , read it again and come next week. maybe next week or next time i came i felt very good. and they said oh perfect. when i took the exam again, i passed it. so they did not give a damn about the legacy of slavery or discrimination, or my heart upcoming, my hard life. but they held me countable to

standards that they held every other student. that is respectful. that is the basically, look williams, there is slavery and discrimination, blah, blah, blah, we are not going to have you live up to standards of white people, we are going to have a special standard for you, one that is lower. that would have been insulting. that would not have lower. that would have been insulting. that would not have helped me in the long run. i'm a better economist as the result of holding me to the standard they did. host: and in your phd is from ucla? spee2 yes. spee1 walter williams is our guest, we have an hour 50 minutes left with him. we will put the numbers up on this green, divided by where you live in the country. east, central time zones and mounted pacific time zones. we also have several methods of social media where you can contact and make a comment meant

to walter williams. real flash to those as well, email, facebook, twitter, text messages as well. if you do send a text message, you do send a text message, please include your first name and the city and state so we can identify you through that. this is a tweet that you have received, it is from chris heller, i'm sorry it is a facebook comment and he wants to know can you talk about your experience with milton freeman? guest: milton friedman he was a free-market economist, in 1976. he has done outstanding work in his economics and a lot of his work had to do with monetary policy, milton friedman, he was one of my mentors at ucla. i audited his class, is is afraid to take it for credit.

after i got my doctorate we engaged in several activities, one was to write a spending limitation amendment to the united states congress, spending limitation. we wrote the amendments and it was carried in the senates, it passed in the senate i believe in 1982, 1982, it did not make it to the house. we offered again in 1986 and it did not pass them. what it sought to do is put a limit on federal spending. milton friedman, he is even if you disagree with them you have to like him as a person because he is everybody's old uncle. i remember one time he called me up, it was like in 1978 and i was in a debate on educational on school vouchers.

it was at harvard university. it was shown on wg b, wgbh some like that, anyway milton friedman called me up the next day and he said walter williams, your points are right on the money, you brought out the important points but you made one fatal air. he said, you didn't smile. when you talk about liberty, you have to smile. so i think i learned that lesson to him to try as much as i can to smile when i talk about liberty. host: from a text message field, vincent pat texas wants to know what you think about the true flat tax proposal and doctor ben carson. guest: i think we need to do something in the way of a flat

tax. get rid of some of the loopholes in the current tax system. i would never support a flat tax unless we got rid of the income tax because if we had a flat tax would find that we would have both an income tax and flat tax. i think the big army some years ago he suggests that 17% flat tax with only exemptions for dependents. i think that would do away with a lot of the hanky-panky you see in washington. if you look at the two most powerful committees of congress, the house ways and means committee and the senate finance committee, these are where lobbyists go to get congressman to rig the tax law in their favor. so, if we had a flat tax we

would get rid of much of the congress ability to play favorites with others. host: donald trump says he wants to bring jobs back to america,. guest: well, the the way they could bring jobs back to america is to get government out of the way. getting rid of a lot of the regulations, the taxes, i think we would see enough surge in the number of jobs. keep in mind, we became the wealthiest nation on the face of the earth long before we had these regulatory programs. for example, from 1787 until the 1920s the federal government was only 3% of the gdp except

during wartime. 3% of the of the gdp compared to the federal government being 25% of the gdp now. so you say, how the say, how in the world do we go from a third world backward country in 1787 to the richest country in the most powerful country in the face of the earth without all of these government programs. i think the reasons we did become a rich country was because we did not have all of these government programs. u.s. the question, zero well well you need housing and urban development. you need a hud agency. well, the american people build some of the greatest cities on the face of this earth before hud was established i think back in the late 50s. then it was only after hud that we found a lot of our cities going down the tube. so, we always have to ask that

question, what do we do before? well we? well we need a department of education, it turns out, well american education was on a higher plane before the department of education then afterwards. so, we find all of these different programs, all of these excuses whether the increase in the role of government in our lives without asking the questions, what do we do before? host: michael, oakland, california thinks california thinks for holding your on with walter williams. >> caller: mr. williams, i want to know what you think about illegal immigration specifically. especially economically. that is my question, i'll take it off the air. guest: i think no one has a right to come into our country except legally. i welcome people to our country, we have a huge country. we have plenty of resources.

as a matter fact that has been our history, people coming to our country legally. i do not think that people should have a right to ignore our laws to make their first step across our border to be an illegal one. i think we should do something to ensure attitude protect our borders. borders. what we should do about the people who are here illegally, that is a little more difficult question. it is a clearly an easy answer. the first thing we ought to do is to secure our borders and make sure the people that we want in our country are here legally. also, there is a security issue, that terrorist organizations if they want to put 30 bombs, if they want to put bacteriological

agents in our country, they just have to send their agents to mexico and come in through texas, arizona, new mexico, and open up sleeper cells in our country. so, i think there think there is a national security issue here as well. host: i have a text for you. hello walter, my name is devon, i am a 25-year-old half black, half white male from virginia. i was just wondering what your opinion is on the new political correctness movement and the sudden pry of cultural appropriation from self proclaimed allies of minorities? guest: i think we should ignore political so-called politically correct strictures. people say to me, while williams you can't say that, and i say will damn if

i can. the first amendment. the first amendment of the united states constitution guarantees me the right. so, i think what what we ought to do is ignore these people that are demanding that we change our language to accommodate some particular values they might have. host: from the new york times was an article about halloween, costume correctness on campus, feel free to be you but not me. it is an article about what is acceptable, pocahontas, caitlyn jenner are no nose, also off-limits our geisha geisha girls and samurai warriors, but you can be a crayola crayon, a a cup of starbucks or, where's waldo. guest: that's really going very far. i think her grandparents would be shocked by the kind of things we accept, that we just accept. i think we should ignore. host: do see political correctness. guest: probably so. i ignored there as well. i do not see it in any of my

classrooms and i'm not political correct at all. i say whatever i want to say. my colleagues tolerate me, i think i start my 35th year there. host: what you think of tenure? guest: i am tenured. host:'s tenure in important thing for universities? spee2 i think we ought to eliminate tenure. you don't have tenure, the average person does not have tenure and the school like a university such as hillsdale college where i used to teach, and i am still on the board of trustees emeritus though, and the schools getting along well, what tenure does, tenure does not allow you to keep your

high-quality professor. what tenure does do, it makes it difficult to get rid of your rotten teachers because they have tenure. i think the same thing happens in public education, as teachers with tenure and makes it difficult and costly to get rid of them. but does not allow you to keep the good people because if people are competing for them. host: next call from laurie. >> caller: yes, i heard the professor equating the irish coming here during the potato famine to the black experience and i almost fell off my chair. there is no comparison to what the black suffered and the irish suffered professor, i don't know. guest: but i did not say that. host: they said you they had a fine and dandy when they came here.

they came here under terrible condition and look how good they did yeah they had a flying part start compared to what the blacks had. but my other comment. host: hang on, you'll leave you on the line. guest: you misinterpreted. when people say you have to have food stamps i say, well what did the irish, the poor irish to clean the potato famine there is no food stamp program. that is the point i was making. >> caller: you said if you elected black mayors, black police chiefs you kinda said that look in the cities where they have elected blacks the crime is still higher whatever, but i'm going to say to you, and

the places where there black leaders that does not mean the people underneath them are not racist, mean people. if you have a black police chief there are still going to be racist police officers. i live in a live in a town where you can count the black people on one hand. when i called in and my car had been broken and the first thing out of that police officers mouth, is i i bet it is a black person. i'm like, why? they're not even any around here but they are ready to blame them for everything. so, you can, off the air but i know i heard you correctly on irish thing because everyone in the room was just looking like wow. host: lori can you tell us a little bit about yourself. nope, we'll never know. she hung up. guest: i don't know what to say. let's just move on. host: david in chicago, good afternoon. >> caller: good afternoon, prof. williams it is a great honor and pleasure to speak with you today. my question is, early in the program you remarked that you do

not see existing inequalities of wealth and income as necessarily problematic, but as libertarians we also acknowledge that there several layers of distortion and interventions in the economic system that separate it from being a true, free market. i wonder wonder if you think that if existing interventions might be aggravating problems of wealth inequality and incoming inequality? guest: i your quote is incorrect, however i have argued and you can look in my books particularly race and economics. i . out that very often attend the economic game is rate. it is rigged against people who can be described as latecomers and outsiders. one example example i give is the taxicab industry.

that is, what does it take for person to be able to get into business, become an owner operator of a taxi. well, maybe make $50000 a year. what does not take a lot of capital, you get a used car, you get some insurance, and you learn the city streets. it turns out, new york city for example the license to own and operate one taxi cost $700,000. that was as of last year. in boston, $400,000, $400,000, chicago, $300,000, miami around 500,000. so what is the ask expect of these license regulation. they keep people out of the taxicab business who don't have $700,000 line around or who can have bank credit to get such a loan. so, that that discriminates against outsiders and the game is rigged to become insiders want to keep outsiders out because they want a higher wage.

another law that discriminates against people moving up the mainstream of american society is the minimum wage law. so, a lot of americans most of them support the minimum wage law and they supported out of the intentions, because it has good intentions, but when you look at a law you shouldn't ask, what are the intentions you should ask what are the effects of such law? you see the effects of a minimum wage of say $7 per hour and you say look, put yourself in the place of an employer. >> and. >> connect. >> ..

who are the low-skilled workers in our society? for the most part teenagers and their teenagers that are low-skilled because they lack of maturity and experience of adults. among the teenagers are black teenagers who not only shared the handicaps of teenagers in general but the additional handicap of living in right neighborhoods, what the minimum wage law does is cuts off the bottom rung this of the economic ladder because if you pay a person $4 an hour at least he will be working and gaining some experience and later on

ultimately 7, $8, $9 an hour but the minimum wage cuts of the bottom rung of the economic ladder. i have written about the data which is a superminimum wage law that restricts employment for blacks, restricts discriminates against nonunion labor. the davis-bacon act is still on the books today and if you read the congressional testimony in support of davis-bacon act, march 31st, day 6513 of the congressional record you will see all the statements from politicians saying see that contractors there? he brings cheap colored labor up from the south and puts them in cabins, competing with white americans. in light book in south "the relevance of religion: how faithful people can change politics"'s word against set up capitalism racist unions in south africa were the major supporters of minimum-wage laws for blacks and their stated

reason was to protect white workers from having to compete with low-skilled, low-wage black workers. in the united states we don't use the same rhetoric but the fact is the same. to discriminate against the employment of the least preferred worker. there are many regulations on the books that create a disadvantage for disadvantaged people but we don't focus on that. we focus on discrimination, focus on this and that rather than looking at the rules of the game, various regulations that discriminate against the less preferred individual. >> host: i want to show something from your web site, a certificate comment and have you explain what exactly we are looking at. proclamation of amnesty and pardon granted to all persons of

european descent. >> guest: i was teaching at temple university in philadelphia from 1973 until 1980 when i went to george mason university. when i became a faculty member at temple university, there was the push for black economic, class in black economics. i asked my colleagues how did demand terms and supply curves work, what is the economic difference? they could come up with any answers. i said you are doing these things because you feel a sense of guilt. and so as a matter of fact during a department meeting what i told my colleagues when they brought this up, what are like to do is to for give you for your own grievances and those of your forebear's against my

people so you stop feeling guilty and stop acting like fools. it italian students demanded italian economic you would throw them out, chinese student demanding chinese economics, you would throw them out of your office but black students, you listen and i think a lot of what we see is motivated by white guilt and guilt is one of the most dangerous and despicable motivation for doing anything. >> host: here was an article that appeared when you were teaching in temple, a philadelphia inquirer, racism, question-mark, opposes easy grades for blacks, the cluster opposes leniency for blacks. >> guest: i came across this, a very nice professor asked me to go to lunch with him and during lunch he was saying but the

problems he's having with black students, they don't come everyday, their assignments, many times they are sleeping in class, not very well, and so i said what do you do? he asked me what to recommend? what do you do? so he said i try taking consideration poverty and discrimination. you have a pencil like i do, you put down grades. he says if they come everyday and look like they are taking notes i will give them a seat. i said you know what you are doing? that is like my having a dog in an english class and sometime during the semester the dog gets on his hind legs and says you are not going to do that. you get the dog and because you don't expect the dog to say

anything and whenever he says is laudable. you are insulting and hurting these students by such a policy. as a matter of fact i found out a number of my colleagues were doing the same thing and they are motivated by guilt or trying to compensate for the legacy of slavery or discrimination and poverty and i don't think that does a person very much good in the long run. >> host: steve in arlington heights, ill. texts to you can you speak to the anti confederate hysteria currently sweeping? >> guest: i think people don't really understand much of the history of our country. just very briefly, this is on my website and my articles i talked about this.

and that is in 1783 there was the treaty of paris and the treaty of paris ended the war between the colonies and great britain. if you read the treaty of paris it says there are 13 sovereign nations. each state was that nation and these states came together as principals in 1787 and created the federal government as their agent. principals conspire agents and so if you read and you read the ratification documents of rhode island, new york and virginia they specifically say in the documents the federal government becomes abusive of powers we have delegated to the federal government we have the right to rescind those powers. we have the right to secede.

so most americans do not understand, they think that the war was solely to end slavery but the war was for much more than that. however, but winners of any war write history so the confederacy, they got a really bad name and i think that this anti confederacy movement is just maybe one more step towards abolishing many of our symbols. one can argue whether the confederacy was right in seceding and you don't have to be for slavery. you can be against slavery but that is an independent argument if they had the right to secede.

all the evidence suggests yes they did have the right to secede because the state's work principles and they came together and created the federal government. most americans today think that the states are recreation of the federal government. that is the way congress acts, the states are of the creation of a federal government when it is the opposite. >> host: tray in fresno, calif. thanks for holding, you are on the air with walter williams. >> caller: what you are doing is beautiful. i want to ask a question of economics to you. are you aware of any economy is brought history that it can scarcity as the foundation of its bases of the economy. are you aware of any economy that did not have scarcity as foundation? >> guest: economic theory would not exist unless there was scarcity and what scarcity means

is humans once back seat the means, that gives rise to scarcity gives rise to conflict and we have to find ways to resolve the conflict and we can resolve conflicts through the market mechanism for government, through violence and through gifts. scarcity, without scarcity there would not be any economic problems whatsoever. >> host: john in portland, ore. a text message, in what ways do you believe black americans would be better off if the wells there -- welfare state had never been? >> guest: not only black americans but americans in general, americans in general would be more independent. one of the things we have to recognize, any economist, liberal or conservative or

free-market, will tell you that if you tax something you will get less of it and if you subsidize something you are going to get more of it. what we have been doing is subsidizing slovenly behavior. you see, the duration of unemployment has almost doubled since the 1940s and one of the reasons why the duration of unemployment has doubled is because of unemployment compensation whereby people can pick and choose, they can say i am not going to take this hamburger flipper jobs, i will wait for something better to come along. but not accepting that job and starvation they would not make such a decision. it creates dependency mentality. give you an example of this. my wife has that cute family as i suggested she would be the

youngest of ten children and one time we were over at their house and two of her nieces were arguing about money and one set i will pay you, i will give you their money when i get paid. and she was referring to going to the mailbox and picking up a welfare check. the idea that a welfare check is payment. it is not only poor people, it is farmers. farmers think they have the right to get subsidies. sugar producers think they have the right to get subsidies. businesses think they have the right, walt disney, they think that you and i should subsidize their advertisements or subsidize their campaigns. we have become a nation of thieves. that is what we have become, nation of people seeking to live at the expense of other people and i think that represents

moral decay. >> host: bill in rock, mich. good afternoon to you. bill? rock, michigan. let's try john in missouri. you are on booktv with walter williams. >> let me make this as a statement, i want your opinion. micro aggression, micro aggression, seems to me it could be a cry, people make their living on racism to make sure there is something around if the real racism goes away. i would like your opinion on that. thank you and you look great, by the way. >> guest: my take on micro aggression is similar to my colleague who wrote a column, he calls it micro totalitarianism. that is what it is, people try

to stop people from expressing certain views. that is nothing more than totalitarianism. >> host: should some public service be required for full citizens rights? >> guest: i don't think so. i think a lot of people's a should you be in the army or should you work on roads to be at citizen. i say no. that is nonsense. i don't think public service should be a requirement for citizenship. >> host: auburn, alabama, text, do you think the fed serves a viable purpose? >> host: the fed has been very unproductive.

justification for the federal reserve bank, federal reserve act was to promote price stability and end bank failures. you did just a simple before and after analysis, you will find price stability was greater before the federal reserve act and there were fewer bank failures before the federal reserve act than after the federal reserve act. and i think the federal reserve bank, this might not be nice for me to say this way, they enabled the government to steal from its citizens by inflating the currency. i have often suggested to people that if they ever find themselves on trial for counterfeiting they should tell the judge that they were engaging in monetary policy. that is what the federal reserve does.

>> host: your publishers the hoover institution press. why do you go with the hoover institution press? perhaps a major new york publisher. >> they made life easy for me. that is one. >> host: not denigrating that in any way. >> guest: no. maybe some inertia although i have been criticized for using some because some people say they don't spend enough resources in publicizing the book, but they spent considerable resources in publicizing the book. >> host: if someone said pick up a walter williams book, they go for the newest book, american contempt, sorry about the analysts, or they go up from the project? one book. >> guest: i would say "american contempt for liberty" and the reason why, that is a collection

of my columns and ideas and not whole range of topics. books like south africa's war against capitalism are a little more narrowly focused. as well as race and economics, that is more narrowly focused. i think race and economics, i would recommend as a second choice. >> host: joan, you are on booktv, this is "in depth," walter williams is our guest. >> caller: this is the personal economic problem. i am in my 80s and went through the depression and world war ii and grew up in a very frugal way of managing my finances and right now i do have some money saved. however, in the bank i am getting 1% interest is a big

deal, personally, where should wheat old people put our money because we are afraid to take too many risks and in a way with the social security not being increased because they're supposedly is no inflation i kind of feel my age group has had it. what is your opinion as to where we old people should invest? thank you. i will listen. >> guest: i am not a financial adviser but there are many places like mutual-fund its that maintain a portfolio in equities and bonds that you can check out. what you need to do is talk to and investment counselor, call up ubs or merrill lynch or some other investment house and ask a stock broker to give you some ideas and they will be happy to give you ideas because they

would like to have your account. i am not going to -- when people ask me, what is going to happen to interest rates, what is going to happen to stocks, i tell them a fine is the answer, i would not be sitting here talking to peter. i would be out on my chios and i would be rich and i am not rich. i don't have the answers. >> host: when you were a teenager you bought shares in pepsi. how did that happen? >> guest: i used to work after school for stockbroker and sweep the floor and deliver packages and one day we were sitting and talking and nothing was going on and he says i can sell -- at that time your people was not a derogatory term, a shiny vacuum cleaner, or stock.

so i listened to him and next time we talked i said what stock? he says -- explained to me what stock is, a couple times later i said suppose i want to buy stock? he said choose something that you like and so he gave me a list of stocks and eyes of pepsi-cola. i loved pepsi-cola and so the man went out and bought me one share of pepsi-cola and i think it could have been around $12 or $13 a share. subsequently -- it really cost him to buy, he had to pay a fee to get one share. i started accumulating shares of pepsi-cola and then i stopped buying it because it got too expensive. what it did was it forced me into looking at the newspaper, looking at following my pepsi-cola share and looked at other stocks and read the

newspaper accounts of what was going on, i learned a little about it. i have been on vostok market 14 or 15 years old, ever since. the point i make is if i did not have that job i would not have met that guy. in other words if there were a minimum-wage law there would be not only that opportunity but other opportunities that would have been denied for me and might not have turned out the same way. >> host: what happened to you in the korean war era when you declared yourself white? >> guest: i have a lot of problems in the army. i was drafted into the army. sometimes i call it drafted, my labor services were confiscated by the united states government. this was 1959. i sent to fort stewart, georgia

and without a very good -- i had some adjustment problems. the adjustment problems led to my being court-martialed and the won a court-martial. made a jackass of the people who court-martialed me and brought charges against the company commander who court-martial me and the charge was undue hardship on a person subject to your command but before i could get the court martial charges started i was sent to korea. when i landed in korea to fill out these forms to give your race, notification of next of kin and things like this. where it said race i put down caucasian. the chief warrant officer inspecting the forms was of soldier who made the mistake. i didn't make a mistake. we said you put down caucasian. i said i am caucasian. when around and around.

if i put down negro i get the worst job over here. i never changed the marking i put down for caucasian. he probably changed it, but i was the troublemaker when i was there. first class troublemaker. >> host: something about painting a truck. >> guest: i was sent to the motor pool to work with trucks. they gave blacks menial jobs. this officer told me to paint the truck, paint the flatbed of the truck so the whole truck? he said the whole truck. i started painting tires, windows, guys were crowding around the laughing. the company--not a company commander but this officer said up what was i doing?

i said i am painting the whole truck. he made me wash the paint off myself. then i got another job watching trucks, but those inside the engine to wash the engine out. i told the guy there was a lot of greece in there. then they kicked me out of the motor pool and i was sent up to the lunchroom, the dining hall to be the mop man. i was kicked out of that job because the head chef caught me mopping off not meet table with the form of, it was a horrendous site, nasty water flowing on the sides so long story short, i was sent to battalion headquarters to sweep up everyday. it turned out that this corporal was getting discharged and i

asked the sergeant major could i have his job? they laughed and said you couldn't do it. i said give me a chance. he gave me something to type out and are made some corrections and he decided to give me a chance and i became head clerk of the battalion. i did some things as head clerk because i was in the field of communication and the only black in the field of communication and they had separate dances on post, dance for white guys and black guys. so they would send a sergeant and some soldiers to town to get the girls, one time the sergeant called, he called up and said can i speak to sergeant major, sergeant major is not here, can i take a message be to tell the sergeant major, plenty of niggard bus drivers the known bigger and ceos. i said yes sir. it turned out the inspector

general was from washington, was doing an inspection of the post, they had generals and colonels. i went to the water fountain and hollered to the sergeant major with the message one of the colonels said get that as ob up here and they got him up there and raised hell. so i did all kinds of things. i was a bit of a troublemaker, quite a bit of a troublemaker. >> host: this e-mail for you from charlotte, n.c.. please comment on the tendency of liberal blacks to treat blacks with conservative views as less black. is this affected your career? >> guest: no. it hasn't affected my career because i ignore them. however, i think for people to

suggest that there should be at monopoly on ideas that black people have about many of the important issues is counterproductive. black people cannot afford to have a monopoly on various ideas and many of the various ideas that were put out in terms of helping blacks have been disastrous. what we need to have is other ideas. i don't think anybody should have a monopoly on any idea whether it is black people or food and drugs or health or whatever, i think this superior outcome is always the result of a competition in the marketplace of ideas. >> host: mark in columbia, south carolina, please go ahead with

your question or comment for walter williams. >> caller: thank you for your service. my question has to do with legacy of tobacco in america. your view on today's situation with tobacco products. >> guest: what about it? i think -- >> host: something you write about quite a bit. >> guest: the idea that we should outlaw let's say cigarettes and cigarette smoking, i think that it is a violation of property rights. i mean that in the following sense. the issue is not whether tobacco smoke is harmful to others or not. that issue is private property rights. that is for example if you own a restaurant and you do not want

people smoking, then it is your right to the a sign outside saying no smoking in my restaurant. if i own a restaurant and wants to prevent people smoking are assigned out saying smoking is permitted. so people have the option, they know where the smoking is. ..

we can control whether you have foie gras in your restaurant, or how many -- whether there can be salt in your diet. and so once you tell a person, you tell a government, they can control certain areas of your

life, well, they have incentive to try everything else to control your life. and so we have invited people to control our lives, and i think that smoking represented the beginning of it, and it's kind of interesting how these people start. they always start out small. at the beginning of the antismoking movement, they said, we just want a warning signs on cigarettes. then they got the warning signs on cigarettes. then we want no-smoking sections in away airplanes. and then we don't want any smoking. they got that. we don't want any smoking in the airport and then we got that. we don't want smoking within 50 feet of the doors of the airport. so it always starts out small, and then it gets larger and larger, and that's almost with any act of government. >> host: y money more liberty means less governmentor," you

write: i'm at a loss what can be done to gender norm boxing the fact of business is that we humans are not equal. >> guest: that is right. we're not equal. now, a lot of people want to pretend that we're equal because they think equality before the law requires you be in fact equal but we're not equal. there's no evidence to suggest we're equal. by race or by sex. if you look at -- for example, how in the world would you explain that jews are three percent of the american population, but the wayne 40% of the nobel prizes won by americans. how do you explain that? or blacks are 13% of the population, and 80% of the nba basketball players.

and the highest paid ones. or 66% of the nfl, football players. or virtually no blacks in olympic class swimmers, or all -- with the 100 meet are -- meter dash, there are almost all won by blacks. sew can't pretend -- there are differences between people, even medically, that is there's a -- jews get a disease to a great extent than everybody else. the pima indianed have diabetes, blacks have sickle cell anema and other populations it's not there at all. we are different.

men are stronger than women. men have greater upper body strength than women. men have tesss to at the -- testosterone, and men score a standard disease nation higher than women in physical cocompetition. so we're different. now, because we're different, shouldn't mean that we should be treated differently in the eyes of the law. so, i think that -- viva la difference. >> host: al, ames, iowa, good afternoon. >> caller: hello. >> guest: hi. >> caller: my comment is earlier talking about irish and when they came to america, something that is very rarely talked about is the fact how the british so despised the irish hundreds of years before that, and captured and enslaved irishmen and sent them to different places to

work, and also during the potato famine, i know as college student, taking these history courses, learning about this, that the irish actually had enough food during the time of the famine when the potato blight took place they could have not had to starve to death, and that millions of them would not have had to have fled ireland for places like the united states so they could have food to live off of. but the british, however, placed many, many military people, many recommending -- in ireland to make sure the food was shipped out of ireland and the irish had to subsist on potatoes which had the blight. we rarely hear about the fact that black people were captured by blacks in africa and sold by blacks the slave traders. we don't hear about slavery except a certain politically

correct kind of slavery issue. >> i. >> guest: i think that the issue is that there's probably enough grievances for all ethnic groups for each of us to have our share. we lived in a brutal and ugly world where there have been massive aggressions and massive denial of basic human rights, and so there's enough for almost every ethnic group to -- or racial group to have their share. i don't know of any particular group of people who have not seen oppression of one form or another. so, of course -- matter of fact, kind of interesting case about irish. you need not go back anymore than, let's say, 1910, or 1890, to see signs and advertisements

that any race except irish, any race can apply when they're advertising for jobs, any race except irish, or restaurants saying that anybody admitted except irish and dogs. so, irish faced discrimination, and many groups -- most groups in the united states failed some form of discrimination, which it was japanese, chinese, irish, black americans, jewish americans. i don't know of any other group -- maybe the people with english ancestry faced the lowest amount of discrimination, but there's been description and oppression for all the groups in the united states. of course, different groups responded in different ways, but that we can -- that can be studied, but nonetheless, various groups faced various -- varying degrees of discrimination.

>> host: here is a text message we received. a picture sent to us. see if i can get this -- i'm not very -- there we go. let try that. see if we can get that picture on the air. and -- is that anybody you recognize? >> host: that's your grandson, according to their text message that said your grandson is enjoying watching the show. do you see that there? can you see it? >> guest: yes, i can. hi. >> host: that was sent in. roslyn, baltimore, maryland. hello. >> caller: ey, thank you for answering. your answer to this question is probably blank but i'm prompted -- i was prompted to call based on your remark on to tall -- >> guest: to -- totalitarianism.

>> host: yes. the constitution is the law and if you're denied due process, denied due process to resolve a matter, and in the denial of it for years the ones who are making for the denial are benefiting off of in due process, which is the law, how does the constitution speak for me if i am not afforded due process? and it's the law? >> guest: well, i think that the constitution calls for due process, and -- do you have a specific area in mind? >> caller: well, it would require an attorney to represent me, but the situation is just that unique. that means it just could go on and on and on with in due

process. >> guest: i don't understand the question. >> host: okay. jim in colorado. texts in: were you are the beneficiary of affirmative action? >> guest: well, if i was, i don't know about it. 0 matter of fact when i was interviewing for a job at, let's say, temple university, i told the department chairman -- i asked the department chairman, are you under any pressure to hire a black person in your department? so he says, no, i'm not under any pressure but we would like to have you. and i told him, i'm going to accept you at your word, but if i find out you're not telling the truth, i'm going to quit the very day i find out about it. at george mason, i'm pretty sure they weren't under any pressure to hire black person, at least

in my 35 years there i haven't found that they were under pressure. and then moreover, if they're on any pressure to hire black person, i don't count as the right black person. they have to hire a liberal black person. so, i don't get -- matter of fact, i had a colleague al temple university, he heard in in the hallway talking not very nicely to one of my colleagues on this guilt stuff. he's a friend help says, walter, don't blame anything on racial discrimination in our department. he said, he wouldn't like you even if you were white. so, that an observation. >> host: ben in chester, ad, wants to know, when i was in college in the late 7 sod the mon tearests economic theory was

taught. what are you teaching today? >> guest: i don't teach monetary economics. i teach microeconomic theory. is a said earlier in the show, i teach our first ph.d -- our first-year ph.d students microeconomic theory, and in the spring i teach undergraduates microeconomic theory. so, i don't get into monetary theory. and when i did take monetary theory as a class i did not do very well on it. so, i am not really good. i love reading about monetary theory but i'm not an expert in that at all. >> host: injury during elect seasons we hear politicians say they're going to do this or that for the economy. do they have that much control? sunny think politicians have very, very limited ability to do

good for our economy. very, very limited ability. and they have awesome power to do harm. and so when people would say to me, some years ago, when i got a job -- i was teaching at the grove city college in 1990. and i -- so i asked people, said, i got a job teaching at grove city college in 1990, during the clinton administration. was president clinton responsible for my getting a job? what did he actually do to make me get a job at grove city college? i doubt whether he even knew i got a job at grove city college. so, a president or a politician has very, very limited ability to do good, and an awesome ability to do harm for the economy. >> host: can't find the right book, maybe it's in here.

but it's -- about corporations. spineless corporations, take on citibank for paying reparations. >> guest: a lot of corporations will try to buy off their adversaries. they will do things like contribute to the environmentalists movement, or contribute to the idea of reparations. and i think that -- as i suggested a little bit earlier, there's been enough grief that if we are going to say reparations -- pay reparations, everybody ought to receive reparations. but i think that one of the problems is that when people say, look, we're going to pay

reparations today, so it means that white people of the day have to compensate black people of the day for what white people of yesterday did to black people of yesterday. now, if you believe in individual accountability you have to find such a standard offensive. and that is to punish a white of today to help a black of today to compensate what a white of yesterday did to a black of yesterday. and when people talk about reparations, i think that reparations ought to be paid to slaves. slavery was a great injustice, but that's going have to be a matter taken care of in heaven. there's no way we can compensate slaves for slavery. and so -- but for their

children, who never faced slavery, i think that it doesn't make sense. >> host: elaine's calling from sun city, california, we have ten minutes left with our guest, walter williams. >> caller: thank you. will you comment on the effect of the change from an economy based on savings with compounding interest, to one of investment in the stock market and did it take away -- take power and accountability to individuals and ultimately give it to the government? thank you. >> guest: i think that investing in equities -- i don't think that in itself gives power to the government, and i think that we still have a society where if you save, there's a compounding of interest. i think that is not going away. >> host: daniel, baitville, indiana. go ahead.

>> caller: thank you. my question for professor williams is about the government takeover of the college loan industry, and how that is going to affect the total economy in the future. i believe we're now at over $1 trillion and millenials can't get jobs. so i'll take my answer off the air. >> guest: what industry did you say the government taking over? >> caller: the government loan industry -- the loan industry for college students that the government has taken -- basically taken over. >> guest: well, it happened seemed to be with all the defaults, hasn't appeared to be a success. >> host: what does it cost to go to george mason? >> guest: i think the tuition is about 16,000. >> host: is that a reasonable amount for college education? >> guest: well, it's much lower

than many other -- >> host: affordable. >> guest: much lower. that is, there's some colleges where tuition, room and board, you're talking about 50,000, 55,000, like at princeton or hard record or other colleges. >> host: as an economist, is that affordable, worthwhile -- >> guest: no it's not worth it. matter of fact i think that -- i think that roughly 40% to 50% of students who are in college should not be there in the first place, and that if anybody who is admitted to college, who is not college ready, as suggested by the requirement that so many kids have to take remedial english and remedial math, they're not ready for college, i think that it's a waste of resources. i think that when -- sometimes i'll go to the library and i'll see some kids out there playing frisbee, and go to the library

at 8:00 in the morning and i come back at 11:00 and the same kids are out there playing frisbee. so i wonder whether it's very productive for them. now, here's what -- i think that many kids, many young people, when they graduate from high school, their parents should go out and try to make sure they gate job at mcdonald's, a car wash, at some of the other places, to gain maturity. and then to go back and maybe when they're in their mid-20s, maybe having gained some maturity go to college. i know in my own personal life i had gone to college right out of high school it would have been an unmitigated disaster. so i started college when i was 25 years old. i was married, and i had been in the army, and i worked. >> host: from our facebook page, this is craig wiley.

when i was young black man in camden, new jersey, there were some jobs, a shipyard, factories and major retail outlets, leftovers from the world war ii economic boom. the town was systematically eviscerated. the highway was built around the town, the first nail in the coffin. mr. williams doesn't know b.s. and an pallingist for the systemic exclusion of people of from african ancestry from economic power. >> guest: i think an unfortunate view of the world. matter of fact, for that person, i used to work in camden. my cousin and i worked for campbell soup, unloading tomatoes in april -- i mean in august. and i used to shine shoes. i'd get on the ferry and shine shoes in camp den. so camden was a flourishing city

at one time. but you know, a lot of times you have to say, well, what drove the businesses out of the cities? well, a lot of things like taxes, high crime, poor schools, and all those -- you have to ask questions, what drove the people out of a particular city? and so you see that in many cities, urbanization of the cities and a lot of time people talk about white flight to the suburbs, and this is in the '70s, very popular topic. but turns out that black flight to the suburbs was greater than white flight to the suburbs and black people don't like being mugged anymore than white people. so, one has to ask the question, what created the condition? look at detroit. detroit at one time, during the

'40s, and '50s and part of the 7 six's, a si with 1.9 million people. today it's 700,000 people in the city. people had less. and industry has gone. and people have to ask why. turns out that coleman young was the mayor during the '70s, he was responsible for a lot of the policy done he and his successors were responsible for policies that ran industry and people out of the city of detroit. so, one has to ask, what led to the evacuation of many of our cities? and people don't want to ask that question at all. >> host: how often do you write your column? >> guest: once a week. that's the best i can do. >> host: how many newspapers. >> guest: about 140. it varies. nationally sin syndicated.

>> host: robert from what's, massachusetts. go ahead. >> caller: how is the day going? i listened the and is one thing that interests me when our president got elected -- i live in a small white community here in new england -- there was no tea party until he got elected. and from my own personal observation, from my customers that come and go over the last seven years, we have a lot of people here in this country that were really surprised that we elected a black president. i think his problems, since he has been president, has been because he was our first black president. now, that's my case. >> host: what kind of business do people see you about? >> caller: i have a little convenience store and we get into real donnybrooks and the past when customers came in and spoke negative about my president issue said i'll put your grocery back, here's you money, and i connected out 500 people in the last seven years itch doesn't put up if the the

dialogue the people i know, go to church all the time, are as white as can be, and say such negative things about our president. didn't come out of nowhere. >> that's right robert in massachusetts. if i could take this liberty to read one paragraph from your book, american contempt for liberty, just to add on: this from 2010: early indications suggest that the barack obama presidency might turn out to be similar to failed presidency of jimmy carter. that's bad news for the nation, you write, but especially bad news for black americans. no white presidential candidate had lived down the disgraced presidency of carter but i'm all too fearful a future black presidential candidate will find himself carrying the heavy baggage of a failed black president. that's not a problem for white liberals who voted for obama who received their one-time guilt relieving dose from voting for a black man to be president but it

is a problem for future generations of black americans. >> guest: well, one thing i could be -- i'm wrong in one assessment, i think, that a future black president might have to carry the baggage of a failed black presidency such as obama. that is with the support that ben carson is getting. it seems like the -- i think that it shows that americans are good enough not to hold ben carson responsible for barack obama. but i think that what the caller recognized is that black people did not elect obama to the presidency. just not enough of us. so the way that he got into office was having huge numbers of white people vote for him, and i think that that's a statement -- that alone is a

statement about the goodness of the american people. that is, that we were able to eventually get around to electing a black president, or at least a partially black president. but i think that he just has not -- i think he squandered that goodness among the american people by his presidency. >> host: ada, pennsylvania, you can be the last word, ada. >> caller: how nice. thank you so much. walter williams is a voice of reason on every topic. i don't use that word "reason" because it's the magazine of the libertarians. use it because i agree with everything you have said thus far and i want to see his smile and those long legs back here in philadelphia as soon as possible. could he please let us know how we can get him and his wife to visit us again and speak to us.

>> guest: well -- >> host: ada, tell us about yourself before we get an answer. >> caller: you remember me. i'm in the 90-year-old libertarian, caucasian, was married to an army officer, and the first joke he told me was about the two black men and the motor pool, and they got into an accident, and one of them said to the other, see, do the horns still blow, as if that was a necessary thing. so, believe me, i know all about what he is talking about with the army. and i do agree with him, and please tell me how we can get him and his wife to visit us here in ardmore, p.a., come back to philly. >> guest: well, thank you very much for your compliment, and unfortunately i can't get my wife at all because she passed away seven years ago, and so -- but i get back to the philadelphia area now and then, and i think that there's a -- at

the union league club, think that there's a -- i'll be giving a talk there i believe december 3rd but you can check on their site. and at the same time people should go to my web site, walter ewilliams.com and you can see many things about me and sometimes when i have events, upcoming events, i post it on that site. plus a lot of book recommendations and other things you can get to gather from the site. >> host: walter williams, came out in 1928. america, minority viewpoint. all it takes is guts. south africa's war against capitalism. a couple more of his books. do the right thing, more liberty means less government. liberty versus the tyranny of socialism. race and economics and american

contempt for liberty is his newest book. he has been our guest for the last three hours on booktv. thank you for your time. >> guest: thank you. thank you. >> next on booktv, mary looman and john carl suggest ways to reform the american prison system. [inaudible question] [inaudible conversations]