and rebuilding the nation's wealth of soil, biodiversity, stabilizing the climate. about $80 billion is the cost of extreme events. we are not doing terribly well. the kind of agriculture we promote is getting rid of 70% species destruction, water waste. a lot of the water crisis is related to waste. 30% of greenhouse gases. 70% of the dispose ability of human beings because of fossil fuels and toxics. how is that relevant to all of you? the five function of quantum theory. [laughter]

at the end of it, we are all eaters. all of law should be caring about what food we eat and how it is grown -- all of us should be caring about what food we eat and how it is grown. about 1 billion people are hungry and about 2 billion people who are not hungry are suffering from disease or malnutrition of all other kind because of that food. i did learn math. what is wrong with the current economic model is the math is not right. [applause] what i realized it is 50% of us will always be involved in the food system. we can be involved in the destructive component of it, speculating on commodities, shooting up prices, creating

toxics, driving wal-mart trucks, or 50% could be in the creative work. every month, we have 25% of people around the world who become chefs or organic farmers. the food system is inviting us to a diversity of creative work that we have not even begun to explore. we need to go there. [cheers and applause] >> i think you certainly have begun to explore it. one thing you said that elicited a lot of whistles is that our math is not right. certainly the math of student loan debt in this country is staggering.

[applause] we now have more student loan debt outstanding than credit- card debt. we breached the threshold of more than $1 trillion of student loan debt outstanding last month. it is staggering particularly when we heard mr. peterson just talk about how he was so grateful that he got "the best education money could buy." a college education today versus when he went, in inflation-adjusted dollars, it is six or 12 times more expensive today. it is actually a lot more costly to go to school and a lot more costly when you get out of school to have gone to school. that is one of the things i hope

we will talk a little bit about, how we think about these impediments of people who are clearly motivated to get the best education available, the assessment of their own potential, then to truly go out and push the work forward that is being talked about. how do we think about that? what should we be asking our policymakers to do? >> great question. the big generational shift that has happened from your parents' generation to yourselves is a great cost shift in terms of who pays for higher education. the shift has been from a public responsibility to your responsibility and primarily by taking on a lot of debt. the implications of this are profound. i also want to talk a little bit about the overall context in which this shift has happened. we have a double whammy for a new generation entering adulthood which is the steady

decline in the jobs that are available particularly for those who will not get a college degree. we hear a lot about the american dream and whether it is broken or not. there has been a significant decline in economic mobility and social mobility. those are abstract ideas. i am going to tell you my story. i grew up in middletown, ohio. any ohioans? [cheers] yay! i grew up in a blue-collar middle-class family. my dad was a machinist at the local steel factory which at the time employed two-thirds of the people in the town. my mother was an office manager at the local orthodontist office. they were able to send me to a

public university, ohio university. [cheers] go bobcats! we did great in the n.c.a.a. by the way. they were able to pay for my college out of pocket. what did that mean for me? i entered school and exited school in four years which is now the exception because it now takes about five years for the average student to complete college. i had zero debt and i did not even have to work a job while i was in school so i could focus on things like clubs that would help my professional career when i graduated. fast forward to your generation. not only has the price tripled,

but the jobs that our parents had have declined. that factory now employs about 20% of the population. the wages for those jobs are not nearly what my dad was paid. my mom got laid off from her job and now makes half what she used to make and is without health care for the first time in her life at the age of 60. when you think about what we have lost, it is not just we have handed over the levers of opportunity over to the shoulders of students to pay for but we have also lost an economy that provided good, quality jobs for everybody who needs one which is true right now in the post-recession. even before the recession, we had a serious structural problem where wages have declined for all but the best educated workers. if we get a chance, i would love to talk about how we can

turn that around. one more point. that is how it plays out in the individual level. in the national level, this is why public policy is my domain. i care about the laws that we passed to create opportunity for people. the united states right now leads the world in the level of education of our older population. we are number one in the world. among 25 to 30-year-old, we are number 12. americans did not become dumber. our public policies changed. the doors that we opened over the course of a generation to a whole new cohort of college students have slowly been closed over time. we have this system that will leave most of you with $25,000 in debt. >> on that sober note -- [applause]

>> sorry. >> i hope we get back to talk about some of the solutions. i do not know if a lot of people are aware that the all world bank system is not only the largest funder of public health programs in the developed world but it is also the largest funder of educational programs in the developed world more so than unicef. could you talk a bit about what you think works since we are very biased toward action and solutions here in terms of accessing young people's potential in both formal educational systems but also through vocational programs? i know you have done a lot with apprenticeships and i think there is a lot of interest in this room working with those models. >> this is very important certainly in the case of latin america.

the protests in chile are very different than the ones in the middle east. this is much more about the growth of the upper class. the average age in latin america is 27. you have all of these young people coming into the labor market with a growing middle- class and there is definitely a change in aspirations which is driving this anxiety. how fast can they get a job? not only can they have the right skills for the changing jobs and our economy which is a paradox to what we see today in the united states. one of the key areas is how to develop skills to work. some of the things we are doing

is working with corporations who are doing business in latin america, both u.s. companies, global companies in general, and companies from latin america, and have them work and identify the kinds of skills that they need for that new labor force that they are engaging. that talks a lot about some of the faults that we know of. it requires much more on the job training. it is that phase that we are introducing which i think in many ways the united states saw years ago with your community colleges and some of the possibilities of vocation. these are some of the things that we are working on, marrying those two.

it begins with early childhood education and working with teachers and the whole society's interest in what matters. which is then leads to those skills to work. >> the larger ecosystem. >> yes. >> when you first started this work, how did you convince farmers to try something new? often, people will want to be second but there is often a great hesitancy to be first. how did you convince people that it was worth trying? given the many years you have been doing this work, do you see in younger people that children of the original farmers a different mentality toward their own lives and their responsibilities to our planet?

>> when i started, i would go village to village and sitting with the farmers. because they were all brainwashed to believe the chemicals were giving them more. that is why i say the math is not right. how much do you spend and how much do you earn? by and large, the net income was negative which is why the suicide epidemic. once they did a cost-benefit analysis themselves, and farmers are not used to doing it -- two years later, the land is being taken away. we worked with them. we helped them keep diaries so they would work on how much they spend on chemicals and seeds that are not renewable and how much they make.

she describes the crisis of education and the loan burden in terms of the destruction of the public education system. the same thing has happened to the agriculture system. now you have an unreliable seeds with royalties. i am starting a massive campaign this year and i hope all the young people will join. i think something is terribly wrong. seeds are being extracted with the cost of farmers' lives. we have four crops. genetically modified, patented. that is not the best food system that humanity can invent. we can do better. >> you are doing better.

[applause] >> so many people from the cities are moving back. as a young boy who used to work with me in the office went back to his village. in india, we make everyone a relative. you are doing good work. he looks at me and says you are doing good work. i left my village to come to the city. i am going to go back. within the first year, he made 200 villages give up toxic chemicals and pesticides. [applause] >> now you work with 500,000 farmers but they are not all in one location. >> we work in 16 states. now we work with the government of bhutan.

they measure gross national happiness. they are organizing at the un, redefining the economic paradigm. the prime minister has asked us to go 100% organic and waiting for the day when this country and makes that commitment. [cheers and applause] >> what do you think some of the solutions are that we actually collectively here can and should be advocating for? understanding the current financial situation of our country is in. understanding how many states are in a more financially precarious system because they cannot have a budget deficit year over year. what should we ask our national government to do and our state

governments to do to try to change this equation such that we are not the 24th in education for the next generation? >> well, i think a couple things. i think we need to think bold here. a lot of that starts with not allowing this idea that we cannot afford to invest in people in this country. we can afford it. it is absolutely true that we have a long-term debt problem but we also have a short term and a long-term priority problem. we have the money. our gdp nearly tripled in the last generation. per capita income grew by 66% since 1980. that does not tell you how it is distributed in society. we know the majority of those

gains went to the very top. states and our own federal government have been constrained from doing the things that benefit our entire nation. i think we have to get back to some real fundamentals. the best investment this nation can make is in the future of its people. [applause] we are a richard nation today than we were when i went to college -- we are a richer nation today then we were when i went to college. we are not without resources in this country. i also want to say a big area where the united states lags considerably at the complete other end of the educational spectrum which his early childhood education and care. [applause]

we are one of the few developed nations that, by and large, leaves that stage of life to chance. it is another responsibility that we put on the parents or people to figure it out by themselves. it is also probably our best shot at creating a level playing field in this country and doing something about the huge disparity of race and ethnicity that we have been this country. [applause] -- have in this country. >> you spoke about being in a job interview and someone saying to you you already have a job. what inspired you to start wello when you were at the university of michigan before it became codified? what sort of class work had you done that led directly to that idea cohering in your head and motivating you? >> it originally started with

my curiosity about the global water crisis. over a billion people are negatively impacted by the lack of access to water. it shocked me how this happens. i would write papers about the global water crisis and started studying business strategies. then i started competing in business plan competitions. it slowly snowballed into something much bigger. i think one of the benefits you have as students is everyone wants to help you.

i had the benefit of looking into any professor's office and saying i have a question so can you help me answer this. do you have a contact that i can talk to to continue to learn? the more i learned, the more questions i had. i would say you are at a unique moment. apply for an internship. it is a great time to explore that opportunity and you might surprise yourself. >> i think there are two big crises. the water crisis and the food crisis. i am so happy young people like you are turning to this. i was invited by a little village 10 years ago because their water was disappearing because coca-cola had set up a plant extracting 1.5 million liters per day. the water level had fallen and

what was there was polluted. women were walking 10 miles. one woman said no more and they sat in front of the gate. they called me for my support. within a year, that plant closed. [applause] water is a public good. it is not a commodity. whether it is education or the water crisis or the issue of food and seeds that i work on, we are talking about an epic contest. [applause]

>> turning to one of our questions from twitter. although those are cardinal challenges because if we do not have access to clean, reliable water and nutritious food, we cannot do anything else. yet there are so many other challenges facing us. in latin america, how can entrepreneurship thrive despite ongoing drug problems and violence? >> when people stop using cocaine in the united states. [cheers and applause] >> that is an entrepreneurship of a criminal kind. >> look, i come from colombia. i know this problem.

[laughter] i will always be extremely grateful to president clinton for what he did for our country because columbia is beginning to turn the corner largely because of what he started. [applause] one of the paradoxes i see is in latin america at a moment when we have the best growth in many, many years, if you look at it and most violent countries in the world, six of them are in latin america. we have about 8% of the population of the world and about a third of the homicides. that requires a very vigorous government response. it has to bring society to get there. we did a steady in central america alone what this means. about 8% of gdp.

imagine the cost of drug trafficking in these countries. this is a part of some of our growing things because of entrepreneurship is thriving and there is huge potential. the huge potential is in the growing middle-class as you have to think about disruptive business models. it is the theory that you are used to selling the regular toothpaste to a certain set of consumers. but today, you have some consumers who have never bought that toothpaste. because maybe the packaging makes it expensive. how to rethink to begin to

produce products for the growing middle-class that has a different set of the aspirations. we see it in all kinds of what we call investments. we have developed a number of very fascinating projects. you have seen for instance networks of the private sector to reach the majority. if i were any of you here, this is what i would be thinking. the biggest growth market in the world it is in the base of the pyramid which is growing very fast around the world. you have about 1.2 billion people in the middle class. in two years, more than 3 billion. that is a big opportunity. >> how can the base be the middle class? the base is the poor. >> the base is definitely the poor. government policies have to support that movement to get people out of extreme poverty. initially through government subsidies and some form of

entitlement. something that we developed at the bank which consists of -- we do not want to let your child not go to school. on the contrary, we want you to send your child to school. the government will provide a subsidy of about $50 a month. then the child will go through medical checkups to begin their learning process. this is something that has begun to become important throughout our country. we are having a difficulty of teaching a whole generation with limited capacity to learn. the one thing that breaks that cycle of poverty begins with giving access to people. >> now my question to you from brian.

can lessons of delivering affordable sustainable agriculture be applied to other global challenges like access to health care? >> i think the two are so intimately linked. the who had a report of the biggest chunk of diseases related to the food system. [applause] >> it is true in this country as well. >> this country sets the basis for bad to around the world. i think this junk food culture should go. that is why we talk about growing nutrition. cannot grow drum approve and add one vitamin to it. that is not how we will solve it. we have to maximize attrition

output but identified ecology and biodiversity, not identify chemical inputs and capital inputs. that is the destruction in the present model. higher cost of everything, education, cost of production in agriculture, cost of health, while lowering the income for everybody. we need the opposite. laura ling the cost of production of food, access to health care, access to education, while increasing the capacity of people to meet the need and earn an income. [applause] >> this is a question for luis and tamara. i would argue with you just articulated it is a call for government action. i think this is precisely what should be rendered under

government. what do you think, given that we have growing inequality, not only in our own country, but around the world? for the first time, in 2011, more people lived in middle- income countries than poor countries. how should the government in this country, and around the world, think about the calibrating the field for the corporate sector and private individuals? >> well, i am like the cynic on this panel. i fundamentally think it will be hard in the united states to have the government plan that robust role, if corporation dictate our policy making. [applause] >> this goes back a little bit to what mr. peterson was saying. there are lots of special interests in this town but not one sufficiently reflective of our views. that is also a challenge to us, the thinking should be different.

>> absolutely. we need everyone in this room to help champion, i would say, public financing of elections, a constitutional amendment that says money is not speech. the battle for the future of this country is very hard to fight when we are outspent by corporate and special interest. [applause] i will leave it at that for now. i do think -- the work i do everyday, which is about how to revitalize the work of government and provide the basics needed in society, providing the structure of opportunity -- frankly, enabled me to sit in front of all of you today, which has been great. i do not see it fundamentally changing until we change the system. >> i would argue, require corporations to be more

transparent about the cost of their supply chain, so that those of us sitting in washington, d.c. would know there is a coca-cola factory in karala that was polluting the water. that should be something we should expect, even if it was a distributor owned by a subsidiary held by a separate holding company. we should have a more holistic view so that we can make what we think are the right choices. given your experience, louise, having worked in government before at the idb, what do you think a middle income countries possible is? >> the question of closing the gaps of its pickup -- of inequality. when you look at land america, it is the most unequal part of the world in terms of lack of distribution. for the first time in ages, for -- because we have had positive economic growth of a sustained basis, you see a drop in

inequality. but there is a huge function in this that comes with the way that succession is done. a huge function in a way that entitlement programs are delivered, measured, and the quality of institutions that are behind them. this is something that is extremely difficult to put together, and unfortunately in many cases, takes many years before governments have the capacity to deliver the kinds of things that are needed. we devote a lot of our efforts at the bank to support governments in renewing institutions precisely for this

purpose. in the larger discussion, the awareness of leadership, that this is what matters, and how to drive, not only the effort of government, but how to build partnerships. today, the way to do this is using talent out there from everybody. in doing this kind of public- private partnerships, in delivering social services, i have seen a lot of interesting cases in many countries in latin america which are great seats, possibilities for the future. >> maybe we should learn something from you. given that the system of education takes decades to show employable results, how can we convince poor families it is worthwhile, that it is worth the investment? how can you convince the farmers you work with to use the now 100% additional income from the cross that you helped them plant, to invest in their children and communities? >> two points about this. you remember there was a scholastic system of teaching. at a certain point, it fell out

of the system and new universities were created. >> maybe you could define what this collapse system is -- the scholastic system is. >> all learning was connected to the church. galactic, as a term of the abstruse knowledge, comes from that. i have a feeling that the university system at this point is being squeezed into very narrow teaching in order to turn human beings into raw material for the corporate machinery, rather than pull the evolution of the human being for all of the potential. we need to pluralize and make public education again. that is why we started and earth university. we have got to have these other initiatives of learning beyond the walls of universities.

our farming is a new university. in any case, we need multiple universities, and that is why we have grandmothers come to teach. we have been told to disrespect the knowledge of our elders. at this be crisis, the elders of a lot to show. it is the elders of indigenous culture that have wisdom of time which we need desperately. i think we need to learn from every source. at least for me, a plant, seed, nature, the soil, they are all teachers. we have to make more teachers. >> a broader definition of education. cynthia, i will direct this to you. from ryan, those of us stop of a student loan debt, how do we continue this work while facing the reality of meeting our basic needs? >> be very creative.

[laughter] personally, a year ago that was something i were about. how audacious it was to think to move to another country to start another business without being from that country, without speaking that language, how to get it up and running. rally support, get people behind me who believe in what i'm doing. you have to think in sometimes short time increments. what is going to get into next week, next month, next quarter? not necessarily what does this look like 20 years down the road. you have to juggle both in your mind, but the creative and tighten your belt all about. that is great and wise for any of us and what we may want to do. >> even if small businesses receive funding to get off the ground, how can the startups complete with global mega companies?

>> i think when you will see more and more in the world is how the change -- the changing face of global companies and how you have any dilution of global companies coming from the south. you see huge businesses developing as a result of the changes that are taking place in their emerging countries. if you look at the top 100 corporations in the world today and compare them to 20 years ago, they are very different. and it will be even more different in a short period of time. the real possibility for emerging small businesses is basically to solve needs. all entrepreneurs look at the backing of needs that exist in these spaces that are developed that require a totally new

thinking of the way you do your traditional business. with the use of technology, as i said before, disrupted business models, that is where the real possibilities are for the future. >> tamara, i want to give you the last word because you said you thought you were thecynic, and i do not want you to leave feeling like you were the only one with cynicism. even though we have the highest number, highest percentage of students outside of the u.s. and we have ever had here at cgiu, which is great. more than one-third are outside of the united states. we have close to two-thirds that are from the united states, even more who are here studying in the united states from abroad. i would like you to comment on what cynthia said. how would you recommend, as we leave here, trying to make a

living and pay off student loan debt, to navigate that balance? not only for their own lives, but for all of us. >> it is a hard balance and one of the reasons why so many students it pulled into careers they originally did not want to get into because they pay so well. one thing i have love about this conversation is, clearly, from imams that you are applause -- clapping, there is a strong moral compass in this room. i am optimistic about the future of this country. i want to be one of your honor very nieces. i am in love with this woman. [applause] you know, i am not a personal finance expert. i myself loaded up on credit- card debt after tried to make ends meet after college, and i

did not have to the loans. what i will say is, we need young people with your moral compass to solve these public problems and we desperately need you to run for office. [applause] if your talents and passions lead this way, we desperately need to revolutionize the economic field. we need you to go into economics. >> and just remember, while the were talking about the leadership coming from the young. at the world future council -- we realize this neglect of the future as part of the problem. we are moving, the un, to create a people's commission for the future generation and their rights. [applause]

this will be part of the process. i hope all of you will join. >> as someone who recently lost their grandmother, i would join you in adopting her as a matriarchal figure. i would like to close, harkening back to what mr. peterson said, exhorting us, hundreds of thousands, to have our voices heard. to hold corporations accountable, public institutions accountable, certainly, our politicians accountable, and to urge you to not only to go into economics or run for office, but work for walmart, coca-cola, to work in the corporate systems to change the corporate system to build a better world we all want to live in. i think you will have a lot of

people knocking on your door in delhi. [applause] please applaud our panelists, and thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> tonight, "booktv" focusing on the u.s. economy. his book are of the american way of debt.

later a discussion on the book "money well spent?" all these events tonight starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "book tv" on c-span 2. >> the city store takes our book tv and american history tv programming on the road. this past weekend featured little rock, ark. at the university of arkansas. >> he collected photographs and he was interested in 19th century -- the civil war in particular. these are two friends, union and confederate that knew each other prior to the war that fought against each other in 1862. they came out alive and remained friends after the war.

>> american history tv look at life and a world war ii japanese internment camp. >> it meant surviving the answer viable for us. she talks a lot about how the arts and crafts or how they kept their sanity. how depression was so bad at a lot of the camps. there is a high incidence of suicide. people would give the these to each other as a way to say, we support you and we care about you. >> our city tore continues the weekend of may 5 and six from oklahoma city. >> economists examined the world

economy. it is moderated by the author of "more money than god it." from new york city, this is one hour. >> think i have been sharing this for a little over two years. at somebody comes up and says, why do you depress me so much? i say i am just the messenger. i intend to be a better -- a better messenger this time. i am hoping the rest of this panel will be more optimistic than i just was. it is a very veteran view on

this stage. next to me here is joyce chang from jp morgan, and here is vincent reinhart. last time he came to speak here he managed to invoke "rebel without a cause." you better not let us down. we want the follow up. just a couple of housekeeping. . remember to turn things that go "bleep" off. i think we have c-span here so we care a lot about the sound system today. this is on the record. keep that in mind. let's start with the eurozone.

it is still the most turbulent part of the global economy. they seem to have stabilized things. we had the announcement of a new firewall agreement. are we out of the acute phase of this crisis in europe? >> the acute phase of the crisis that i would describe as liquidity, i think we are out. but the chronic phase which is the economic adjustment, we are embarking on that a very long road. we are forecasting a recession of 1.5% contraction in the economy this quarter. if you look at the fire wall, that is not what will move the market. ltro moved the market. if you look at where european central bank balance sheet is as

a balance sheet -- with gdp, it is in line with japan. the systemic liquidity issues have been addressed through ltro, not the fire wall or other actions. but the chronic painful adjustment -- take a look at spain. 23% unemployment. the chronic phase is going to extend for a long time. the debt-burdened -- the public sector debt burden increase by 23%. . >> since we have three countries in europe so far that have had formal support programs, how long before he thinks in

different. >> that depends on the willingness of leaders of the rich countries to continue to send resources to keep the enterprise on going. i worry about the chronic aspect. we have a continent in which a large number of countries will be shrinking as part of fiscal consolidation. the core rich countries expect to have export-led growth. it is not obvious to me who they will be selling to. if we get past the funding stage, we do believe the rule will appreciate and it will not be selling to the rest of the world either. the chronic aspect of it is going to be, what do people see the benefit of keeping the exercise on going? back to the immediate question, it is an exercise program the imf used to do in the 1960's. what do they have to roll over,

how much can the contract? the answer is it will -- it depends on the market aspect how wide it spreads. >> there are crunching of the fiscal deficit every time they do that. they drive more people out of work. then they have a worse deficit. >> think about the death ratio, on the bottom is the real cost of borrowing and real growth. when you try to consolidate you do not do anything good to real growth. you often make the sustainability problem even worse. the only moving part there is the real cost of borrowing. what we are seeing is increasingly they will use their domestic financial institutions as the repository of the debt they cannot sell. in some sense, the answer to your question is, how much more

room is there to impose on the european financial system before -- 7 forced ownership in a debt-free country. >> even that would not solve the risk problem. greece on the other hand is a great story. it is completely in compliance with their program. that is because the program has only been there for 10 minutes. >> i think you highlight the important question. i agree with the way they characterized as with the ltros, the fact that the ecb is willing to use their balance sheet that way. i ultimately it depends on greece and particular being an agreement with the europeans for continued funding. there is a fundamental issue of the greeks have to make a commitment that the rest of europe is willing to fund. they do not have a surplus up as.

. as long as that is the case you run the risk that if the question breaks down, we are going to be back in a bore key phase. we have a great election coming up and that will be difficult. -- a greek election coming up and that will be difficult. there is the rest will go back to a world where you see the potential of a breakdown and greece ability to stay in the eurozone becomes an issue. i very much agree we are in a different world. one where growth issues are the predominant ones. detail risks are very much there. we still have, how will we deal with portugal? you look at the numbers on that and one can raise questions on that. then all of the broader financial questions are on the table. >> the portuguese spanish

integration -- >> those are all complicating factors. those things can make the ecb's problem worse. i think we are in a different phase and things are going better. detail risks are out there. >> would -- the tale at risks are out there. >> you have one camp that is doom and gloom, and an optimistic camp. if you only can put models through as optimistic scenario, if you muddle along a tight rope, you will wind up falling off. >> i think it is inherently a risky path. while one can imagining working in some sense, it does not take large deviations to put you over the edge. i think that is the problem that

people in markets have to face. the europeans have successfully managed to walk that so far. each time we have come close to the edge, we came very close to a destructive breakup. people kind of pulled back. i think there is a very strong incentive for the system to continue to manage in that way. it is difficult. it is dangerous for the system to be on edge. i think it is a drag on global growth in the sense that everybody looks at downside risk in europe as something you have to filter in. that affects your decisions. i think at the moment one of the reasons things are looking better in the united states is the downside risk we were facing last fall with the imminent crisis in europe has faded a bit. that is part of what has gone people more optimistic. i think it is an important

aspect of how you look at a going forward. >> three years from now, will there be 70 members of the eurozone, 16 or fewer? >> i think your. -- 17 members of the eurozone or fewer. >> i think there will be the same. >> keyword. >> we have -- fewer. >> let's talk about the united states. you have been arguing in the month or two before that the chances of qe3 were high. heavy changed your mind? >> certainly. you have to respond to what they say. they are an open and transparent fed and they're telling you

something that matters. we were thinking there would be a 2% or 3% chance in the first half. we have a forecast where the economy grows at trend. we have been above trend and we come back to trend, that is the second part. the third part is there is an election coming and they would not to want to stamp act during the campaign season. what the fed told us was that policy makers would be willing to act if there was evidence of a cooling in economic growth. they are not in the mode to buy insurance in advance of that. our forecast is one out of three chance the want to buy insurance, one out of three chance that given our forecast of growth they have enough reason to act.

we're down to one of three now. >> are they making a mistake? we still have an economy operating way below capacity. your perk -- your projection is inflation is leveling off. you have a low capacity. it is not just politics. >> they admit there is a lot of resource slack. they assert that the temporary increase and inflation -- the increase and inflation is only temporary. expectations are well anchored. they are short of both of their goals. the real risk is a two out of three chance they do not act. in that case it is possible it was just a growth spurt, we will see the economy come back to trend, and it will be through

july or august when the come to appreciate that and be hesitant to act immediately in the heat of the election season. i think it could prove to be a mistake. in 2010 they waited probably too long to nurture the green shoots. the only mark on qe2 in november. it started to accumulate as early as spring. >> i want to come to joyce for the international aspect of this monetary stunt in the u.s. part of this is the discrepancy between the employment data which has been fairly strong and gdp data has been less strong. how do you see that conundrum? >> that is an important aspect of how you look -- the chairman stresses and his statements, and that is part of what the fed is

struggling with. when you look at it over the past four quarters you have gdp growing 1.5%. you have had the unemployment rate coming down a full percentage point. the fed has been clear they do not expect that to continue. what has driven that is two things. it is the combination ofa combiw productivity growth and an exit of the labor force. the fed has argued that those trends are not likely to continue. consequently, i think the pace of improvement in labor market is likely to slow. i think the other problem they have is financial conditions. you saw in the way the market reacted to the minutes

yesterday essentially there conundrum, if you like, that if they make it clear that they are not going to do qe, there is a chance that rates will rise, according spreads will fall, and credit spreads will widen, and there will in some sense engender a tightening of financial conditions that they do not want. one of the things all the policy leaders have been pretty clear on is that they believe at this moment we need to have continued very accommodative policies, and the market's own reaction to what they do can create a situation we do not want. the one aspect in addition to the way that vince characterize it is that you actually get into one of these on the backs were in anticipation of the not going, markets start to sell off, and you get an effect of tightening of financial conditions, which then undermines things. i think that is one of the trickiest challenges they face. be prepared because of that for

confused communication. right now, they have embarked on two sets of on conventional policy. what is the ongoing balance operation in the second is managing expectations by offering the assurance that rates would stay low through 2014. markets are contesting that view. they have priced in a tightening before like 2014. fed officials will have to protest that, and how do you protest that? you emphasize how much slack there is, how much room for the economy to expand, how well inflation is contained. when you hear that, do not assume they are signaling they will do qe. they are defending what they have already done. >> it is an interesting conundrum about the way banks function. if we communicate more clearly, more extensively, more openly, then the markets would get exactly what we want to do, so there would be none of these

this communications. lo and behold, they do that, and we are still talking about potential miscommunication. i want to come to joyce and ask -- if there is a sustained recovery that the fed appears to be wanting to believe in now, what that means for emerging markets, emerging-market currencies, and the global outlook. >> much of the story has been a dollar weakening story. you have seen in recent weeks a pullback in a lot of the currencies. the question is are we at the turning point right now? particularly when you look at the " prospects for europe. the message has been no further asset purchases by the fed, but we want the zero interest rate policy to continue through 2014. the central banks of large have signaled that. that still made emerging-market is pretty attractive place to be, just given how low yields are. peripheral europe at the beginning of the year was at 7%.

it is now down at 5%. emerging markets are at 6%, a for your time is the growth. china alone is 50% of the contribution to global growth. for capital flows into emerging markets, it is still a pretty robust picture, given where interest rates are likely to stay for the foreseeable future. the question for the currencies, though, is are you through with the currency appreciation trend, particularly in asia where rates are very low. are you looking at a scenario where rates have to go up? if you look at what central banks have done -- $6 trillion balance sheet -- you have to be looking at a time when we're looking at higher rates and higher volatility. emerging markets looks like an attractive place to be, but the

differential is only widening. you're getting paid more for being in emerging markets. >> do you think that in terms of the way the global system is perceived to operate, the wave of dissatisfaction we have had out of emerging markets will continue? just to recap, i would say that the first shock comes in 2008 when china holds vast amounts of dollar assets and suddenly realizes u.s. capital markets are not the safe, and the talk about dollar hegemony, and they want to change that. do you think that as things go forward, we will see more dissatisfaction about the way the system works?

>> i think you are seeing that the satisfaction, but until you see countries like china make deeper progress on currency convertibility, interest rates, where else can they go, right? it is one thing to talk about the opportunity in the emerging markets, but you have a lot of distortion as far as macro controls and the size and liquidity of these markets. i think there is growing dissatisfaction, but emerging markets are still in many ways going to proceed slowly on how they manage the capital inflows. we are still in an environment where there are not that many investable assets for just the size of the reserves we are talking about. emerging markets now that 80% of the global foreign-exchange reserves, and we continue to invest most of that, just given the size of the markets. >> you argued that the level of

distortion around capital controls in emerging-market are converging in a way. >> it is a couple of things. the first is expect more capital controls on average. in 2009, have the economy -- the economy's -- half the economies in were in financial crisis. in the emerging markets, it was the man shop. you snap back, you grow more slowly as a consequence. -- it was demand shock. that implies that emerging market economies are going to be dissatisfied with the very accommodative monetary policies in the advanced economies and therefore going to want to reclaim a measure of independence. the way you do that is put on capital controls. but they are starting from a

very uneven pace. that gives china the opportunity to liberalize at its own pace, but brazil and more globalized economy is, to tighten at their own pace, converge in the middle. on average, there will be more. that let's ask another question here about global governance. you have got, on the one hand, the u.s. posting a new president of the world bank, and some commentators observing that the nigerian candidate seems to be much better qualified. you have a fight going on about imf resources with europeans hoping the emerging markets will kick more money in to match what they have promised. how do you see that part of the governance of the global economic system devolving? >> in some ways, if you look back over the last several years, i would argue the g-20 has been a success.

the evolution we have seen from the g-7 back in the 1990's up until where we are now, i think there is some real momentum. for example, the committee that was made in seoul at the g-20 summit i think was a good thing, but if you look at what happened with europe and what is going on here, it has taken a bit of the steam out of the momentum, and i think that is something to be concerned about. i think about the situation in the u.s.. one of the things that is interesting is i have been looking at polling data on what kind of priorities voters have. one of the priorities is less money for foreign aid. if you translate that to what is on the agenda, that is a material issue. >> for the imf, you mean. >> yes. the g-20 essentially made a committed to try to complete the change in governance of the

fund by september of this year. frankly, the chances of getting that through the u.s. political system this year at slim to none of your frankly, if you were to try, it would fail, and you would have to take a step back. i think about the risk in some sense when i look at all those things, of the u.s. taking a step back, frankly, from being part, global governance being a real risk. sometimes the debate over the world bank, i think, raises some real issues. i have personally felt for a long time that we ought to open these things up, but i think there is a bit of a risk, just from the u.s. perspective, that if we kind of take less of a leading role in these things, that our overall commitment to the process goes away. the same time, you see what is going on in europe where they are, in some sense understandably, obsessed with their own problems. that in of itself has also taken

some of the emphasis away from the global governance side of things. at the same time, there's obviously a bit of a reticence on the part of the chinese to sort of step into the breach. it feels in contrast to what it felt like 92008 where i think there was, sort of, legitimate -- there was a real commitment to this. it added to the policy response. you get a bit of a sense of things kind of pulling apart in a way that i think is problematic. the realities of an election year in the united states are what they are. i think it would be a mistake to try to push this agenda now. you would get an answer you do not want. but it does raise risks about where we're going. >> reaching up to the audience and to the members in the second because there's a lot of talent in the room. we want to get questions. but let me pose one last thing to all of you, maybe starting

with joyce. is there a crisis over the horizon that we have not talked about, that we have not focused on? is it turkey or some other economy running some kind of deficit that will be in trouble? anything you worry about with oil prices spiking in iran -- what is your risks set? looking out six months or 12 months? >> looking out six months or 12 months, i do not think it is an emerging markets crisis. even though you have a country like turkey that is more vulnerable to higher commodity prices that has a current account deficit, but does not have a funding problem. it has a pretty good domestic industrial base. i think the situation is manageable. the higher commodity prices on the whole are actually benefits to emerging markets a bit more. i think near term, the crisis still comes back to europe. have we graduated from the queue to chronic?

is it really that greece was a kicking the can down the road restructuring? that an exit from the eurozone is something that gets more debate over the next six to 12 months, and then it comes back to europe? the big surprise last year was not europe. it was the u.s. ratings downgrade. that is what started the sell- off last year. we are getting into a u.s. cycle again. another debate about the u.s. debt ceiling. i think the markets will continue to focus on china just because there's not as much information available. and because there are more questions about how we are finally seeing a shift in growth in china from 11.5% to 8.5%, which in my opinion is not a hard landing. they talked about that for a long time. now it is actually happening, but everybody is worried about it. that does pose some uncertainty over the medium term. >> any date of the rising shock you want to predict?

>> december 31. on december 31, an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. adverse the dynamics and a legislative sudden stop on the equivalent of 4.5% contraction in gdp and run the same time we're talking about the debt ceiling. >> and the ability of the u.s. political class to reach sensible compromise is not as robust -- >> not proven, yes. [laughter] >> i very much agree that that is the frame of risk. i just want to put something on the other side, which is i think there is an upside to the u.s., as well, which is if you get an electoral outcome that allows you to do things, i think we are lining up to do some fairly major things that are positive. in addition to some long run fiscal deal, i would point out that just in the last couple of weeks, there have been a bunch of plans that have been put out on the fiscal side. the differences in his plans is not really about stabilizing debt. they all do that. the difference is in the vision

of government that you have. so i think if you get a clear outcome from the election on one side of the other, there's the potential for " doing a big fiscal deal, but that would include things like we are getting ready to do a major tax reform, which is i think potentially a very positive thing for the economy. i think we are lining up to the mortgage finance reform. i think if you get an outcome to the election that essentially puts gridlock to the site, there are very positive outcomes that could come of it. you look at the polls and ask yourself the question of how likely that political outcome is, and it is clearly not the most likely outcome. partly, as it think about how we think about the second half of the year, it will just be very complicated. there are very negative outcomes that are possible, and i would argue there are actual positive outcomes that are possible, and it will depend on the complicated interactions and what will get out of the election. >> in some sense, the good news is we are so efficient in

delivery of fiscal policy that there is no single direction we have to go. that is it is about taxes, appropriations process, entitlements, the wii budget, the lack of rules. you could actually contest the election on two different views of how big the government should be, opportunity compared to safety, marginal structure, tax rates. two different views, contest the election, and whoever wins but it in place. the problem is if we do not contest the election on those issues, then it is difficult to put it in place after the fact. >> i agree with that. >> sounds like you are on a parliamentary system, and that is very dangerous. >> one of the things we are shaping up for -- i think the choices will be much clearer this time than they are normally. republicans, to their credit, have put on the table a credible budget plan that is in full

detail and is very severe. it is not the plan i would choose, but it is a very clear vision for how you get fiscal consolidation. i think the democrats have a very different vision of how you approach the same problem. in some sense, i think you will have very clear choices presented to the electorate. it is an election. it is complicated. these are not issues that are easy for people to understand. one of the things that jumps out at the polling results on this is it is interesting that there is consensus in the electorate across the political spectrum in some areas that is encouraging. for example, you ask people, both republicans and democrats, if it would be willing to raise taxes -- do they think it is a good idea to raise taxes on people who think more than -- who make more than $250,000, and the answer is a majority yes. even among republicans. i think that is encouraging. looking at some categories of spending and asking if they are areas we should cut, you see some areas of consensus.

on the spending side, it tends to be in relatively narrow areas. getting out of afghanistan, farm subsidies, foreign aid. unfortunately, that is not going to do it. one of the places a little more troubling when you ask about medicare or social security, you tend to get majority on both sides not for less but for more. 21% of republican voters would support cutting medicare. 24% would support spending more, which puts the republican plan in an interesting context. look, when you look at those numbers and ask the question if the election were held today, would you get a sensible response from the electorate on the fiscal challenges we face, i think the answer is probably no. >> both of you seem to be saying the chances of a bipartisan solution look incredibly slim. the electorate may not force this issue.

-- the electorate may force this issue. there is not necessarily a drop dead date. if it can be postponed, will it be postponed? >> i think the odds of a bipartisan solution, unfortunately, given the political alignment, is low. to me, the good outcome for policy is a sweet, either way. all republicans, all democrats. that is the clearest way in my mind for where you will get progress on all these things. we get the most likely outcome, which seems today to be the president is reelected, republicans take control of the senate and retained control of the house -- that is problematic. that is the outcome where i am much less confident that we get, you know, progress. i personally think we will --

the problem at the beginning of the year will be handled in some way, but it is likely to be messy and noisy and have adverse effects to the market. an s&p downgrade seems possible, another one. fitch downgrade. >> you'll be happy to note that this reminds me of my second favorite quotation from kafka, which is from "the country doctor, which is, "writing prescriptions is easy. dealing with people as hard." >> let's go to questions. i see one right in the aisle there. >> a little twist on the question you asked. there is some discussion among economic, democratic elites that

is sort of a hopeful discussion on our economy. i am interested in the reaction of the panelists to it. for one, the gdp growth is -- has been inconsistent with the employment numbers. typically, the gdp numbers are less reliable than the employment numbers. we have had a lot of revisions there. admittedly, on the downside, since 2008. the national income accounts, which should be about where gdp is, are a good bit higher than gdp. putting these facts together, the hopeful democrats say this is probably a pretty good indication that gdp growth has been stronger than we have seen reported and that we believe. i would like some reaction.

>> are we richer than we thought? >> if you look at gross domestic income, it has increased faster than gross domestic product over the last year. we have seen some revisions. problem is that the spread between the two does the very a lot over time and can reverse itself, so it is tough to know. it is true, for instance, we got more household employment in the last month than payroll gains. there is clearly a possibility of a break out on the high said. hiring needs to income, in from the sales, sales leads to sales expectations. all that is on non-financial firms. but our work backwards.

and hope is a strategy. but when my optimism flutters upwards, i think that the world is a risky place. we have an ongoing sovran crisis and banking crisis in europe. the possibility of elevated energy prices and a fiscal cliff coming. those are not the baseline outcomes, but those sales to potential outcomes are reasons investors should not have convictions, and if investors do not have convictions, you did not get the wealth creation the polls and economy of relative to trend. >> i think you are all too complacent about europe. seems to me that the european has changed its spots totally from focusing on inflation to focusing on shoring up the banking system and

keeping the economy afloat. that is likely to continue for three years or so, but three years from now, is there not a very strong possibility of a break up? none of these countries are going to be able to make the fiscal changes necessary. growth is going to be slow or negative. you will not be able to implement the austerity with the work rules that exist there. consequently, three years from now, the ecb will run out of money, and europe's structural problems will still in door. am i too pessimistic? that even the next three years, i think, are pretty pessimistic. looking at spain and italy, they have a hundred billion dollars of gross sovran funding. the next three years are hard. it could be about a breakup of europe, or it could be you have weaker europe and stronger europe, which is the equivalent

of a break up. it is very clear that the fiscal path cannot be held amongst all the countries. i think that the focus will be less on the grease/portugal than on the italy and spain and what happens with those two -- less on the gree/ce to go -- greece /portugal. >> in some sense, he is asking if this superman bank in an act that is going to be revealed to be a cartoon. you have a million debates in europe. one fine day in december, the central bank says, "you know what? we would just print $500 billion in one day and do it again in february. >> i would distinguish -- i

would follow that in the following way -- the central bank can provide liquidity, and liquidity is very important in the funding situation, and that is the contribution they have made. that was obviously an issue in terms of the response to -- if you go back to where we were a year ago, there was this perception that sovereign risk in the eurozone was limited and concentrated. essentially what we went through was an adjustment to the world that they're serious sovereign adjustment, and that generated pressures that the ecb could respond to perak what they cannot respond to is the fundamental question is that there are fiscal imbalances that need to be funded. it fundamentally depends on the political relationship between the countries that need the funding and essentially the european institutions willingness to provide it. there is a political set of challenges. you think about it between greece and germany. greeks have to commit to doing certain things, right, in order to make it politically feasible for the germans to fund then.

as long as they can find a balance between the greek willingness to make commitments and, to some degree, actually deliver on them, in a way that is consistent with the political constraints on germany on providing the funding, this thing can go on. as somebody who has watched european integration from this side of the atlantic for decades, i am always struck by we tend to underestimate the commitment of the europeans to that process. i fully agree with you the there are risks in parts of this that are likely to continue. my response to sebastian's question was fewer than 15 down the road. is that too often? i do not know, but there are very big challenges. i think there are risks of accidents along the way. i do not think the ecb -- i mean, i think the ecb has done what it can do, but i do not think it ultimately faces a problem in the same way that

they tend to think that is perfectly able to exit from its current situation and that will all be manageable in a reasonable way. i did not see that as the core problem. there is a different problem that is very tough to manage. monetary policy can be a bridge, but it has to be a bridge to somewhere. >> if there is not the fiscal consolidation, there is nowhere to go to. before we give the ecb high marks on everything, their attitude towards private sector involvement has been on helpful because they have put themselves -- essentially, they have said that they do not participate in a hair cut in the greek arrangement, but what that means is when they buy sovereign debt, it actually places itself senior to everyone else, so it does not remove sovereign credit risks in its open market operations. that then raises the question --

in a sovereign crisis in the future, what exactly will the ecb do? >> question right over here. question for joyce >> -- >> question for joyce. i was struck by your comment on what countries are willing to do. having traveled to asia, a guest we share a lot of they seem very willing to allow for the depreciation. i guess the question i have is what would you look at as a signal that they are allowing the euro-dollar to depreciate more substantially to allow both regions to grow their way out of their problems through exports, which is kind of what both need and can help them rebalance, but

given their unwillingness, there has got to be something that you might be looking for as some sort of policy change or some sort of economic change that would signal greater willingness. >> i did not see the greater willingness. i think that there are emerging markets willing to look at more unorthodox policy mix is because they have their own domestic agenda. >> you mean unorthodox mixes in order to prevent depreciation of the currency? >> yes. we have seen that across the board in the number of countries, particularly in some of the commodity-supporting countries, that they have had appreciation pressures, but i go back to the point about the g- 20. how will you get this kind of coordination with emerging markets countries and developed countries? emerging market countries, we still have such a big income differential. to try to convince emerging market countries where you have a standard of living, which they

are still trying to bring up to provide resources for a bigger firewall for countries that have 35,000 or $40,000 per capita income. i think emerging market countries -- now, it is about their own domestic self interests. they have a deeper domestic investor base. i am not sure that you get a catalyst that comes out of some local policy coordination that will result in an agreement that will work. it seems to me you had an agreement in 2008 or 2009 that is more effective than it has become now. convincing for countries to bailout richer countries is just something that is politically very difficult. going back to the politics in all of these countries when we talk about europe and the u.s. imaging markets has its own set of politics as well. >> sounds like the climate change debate the bit where rich countries say that they are

growing emissions faster, and the emerging markets say that they still emit more. >> i wonder if you could comment on china. there's two schools of thought, one that they are in trouble, show that is showing up in the currency and a strengthening. china recently raised its quota on bank lending and yesterday raised its quota on foreign investment in china. is it headed in the right direction or still headed for a harder landing? thanks. >> china is a very opaque economy. the line between the public and private-sector is extremely interesting -- indistinct, but that means there's a lot of policy to keep demand growing quickly, and our own forecast is they will succeed in that period that they can shift,

essentially, credit bank capital and get some infrastructure building out of the private sector. if anything, growth is going to be very well-maintained in china. >> ok. do you have a question here? >> if sarkozy is not reelected, will there be a spillover to the rest of europe? >> that is a great question because it relates to the german fiscal situation where there is also pressure from the opposition on merkel to change her stance on austerity compared to growth. seems like in france and germany, two core economies', you could get political shifts. >> i will not pretend to be an expert on french politics. >> i did not ask you about the

end of the election in spain, come on. [laughter] >> i think the german situation is a complicated one in the sense that i think there is actually more support in europe outside of the government then within the government, and there is this problem within the german government that it is a relatively narrow base taking the most hawkish position. merkel, unfortunately, is in the position of trying to lead a coalition that has that as a base, and it is a tough challenge for her to walk that line. i think having a partner in france who she could work with was very important. my guess is they will continue to find a way to do that, but it will make things harder, i think, for them to manage going forward. my impression is that the french, as the way they see these problems, is ultimately consistent with solving the issues in europe regardless of which side wins on the election,

so i'm not sure it is a long- term issue, but it will make what is already a difficult process harder, at least for a while. >> one thing to come out of these political shifts in europe could be a transactions tax, right? the german opposition is saying that is their condition for supporting what merkel wants. is that something you're clients worry about? >> most feel that is probably something they will avoid at the last moment or that for one country to do that unilaterally is probably unlikely to happen. all sides are actually worried about the amount of regulatory arbitrage that could occur, so there has been questions about the pace of which the u.s. is moving compared to europe, and that is where we have seen more delays and more postponement, even though these become political issues.

i do not think that has come up as a burning issue more immediately, but i would say that all of the peripheral governments have been overthrown, and belgium as well, so if you look at the trend in europe, a mean, look at all the periphery, and question on france, it is -- i think the risk still does come back to political happen is, given the kind of adjustment that needs to occur in europe. >> the question is is transfer free or core, and let's go to the question right here. >> what oil price or energy price over what time becomes a real game change your in your models? then again changer for u.s. growth? >> u.s. growth and world growth. >> i will speak for myself.

in general, i think these things are not generally -- there's no question that higher oil prices are generally a drag. we did see in the first half of 2008 when gasoline prices hit $4 a gallon -- use of very discreet changes in consumer behavior. having been a $4 before, i do not think we will see that again. if we're talking about normal supply and demand in the context of coming into a driving season and things will go up probably until june, i do not see that as a big issue. if we go to a supply disruption out of the middle east, there are obvious scenarios under which that can happen, that is a different kettle of fish. i did not think that is the most likely thing to happen, but it is certainly one of the things that would be on my list of risks. >> i will also look at whether it is a supply shock or demand shock causing the change. first half of last year, you had a 33% move in oil prices that

was largely a surprise shock with libya. if you look at where we are at currently, maybe it takes 0.25% off of growth if it is sustained. not a huge move. whether it is a supplier rather than demand shop, i think it makes a big difference. i would also put the risk -- it seems like sanctions are growing. i would put military conflict as an unlikely scenario at this stage in the game, but there's not necessarily a price. what we look at in emerging- market is -- what is the breakeven price for these countries? where they are budgeting the price of oil and saving the windfall for spending it, and i would say in emerging markets, most countries have been pretty conservative. they have budgeted oil conservatively. maybe $30 below where it is at right now. it is more of a problem for the developed market countries.

right now, the current trend seems to me less worrisome than what we saw a year ago, given the move we had in the first half of the year. >> i think from a u.s. perspective, it is all about gasoline prices, and the evidence suggests that households basically pay for higher prices at the pump by cutting back on other parts of consumption as long as gasoline prices are within prevailing norms. once they break out more significantly from prevailing norms, then they cut back in total. if we remain around where we are, then that means it is a problem with lodging or food or from the home or components of consumption, but not for overall consumption. it is a modest drag because we are a net oil importer. our chief risk is we have now

essentially rolled back earlier declines, so we are at the high- end of prevailing norms. any increase from here on would more likely be associated with more restraint. >> one last question. i saw one in the aisle there. >> where do you all think the dow will be in the first week of november? >> you will have to specify which day in november. [laughter] >> do you think any industries or countries such as iran will make any unusual attempt to influence the outcome of the election, say, by constricting oil supplies? >> a cake, two parts of that. >> i thankfully am an economist and not an equity strategist, so i feel acceptable in not giving you a straight answer to that question. having said that, one of the

things we are thinking about is how the uncertainty around the election will affect markets. there's the economics of the fiscal clip and what not, but also how the markets will react in anticipation. if you look at what happened last year on the debt ceiling and what not, the interesting picture you get is that the primary effect of the uncertainty that was created by that showed up by a weaker equity prices as opposed to higher interest rates. so there is a sort of interesting question, if you are facing fiscal chaos -- how do markets respond to that? i think, certainly, the experience last year would suggest that that will show up as uncertainty about the economic outlook, uncertainty about earnings that translates into weaker equity prices as opposed to people decide they want to sell treasuries. i would suspect that be the pattern. to the extent that you come into the election with one of these uncertain outcomes that we talked about earlier, my guess

is you are not going to get the reaction of people looking up and deciding they do not want to hold treasuries. it will be there is more uncertainty. the economic outlook is likely to be weaker, which will mean weaker equity prices. on the foreign meddling, it is hard to imagine anyone could do that successfully. it is a blunt instrument, and my guess is it would not do it. as someone who worked in washington for a good part of my career, i often hear conspiracy theories about this and that, and my general argument for why they are wrong as it assumes a level of competence that is not there. i apply that argument here as well. >> jpmorgan is forecasting for about a 14% return this year. we have had a lot of it already. i think what investors are trying to do is lock in what they made in the first quarter,

which is in some cases with the forecasted for the full year, with all of this uncertainty ahead. but what i have seen over the last couple of weeks is you have had a breakdown in these correlations where everything was correlated. there is more bullish sentiment right now about u.s. equities. on the whole issue of foreign meddling, i have to just say that if you act unilaterally, you will have retaliation. there's the question of who is the first mover in the iran situation? who will do that in a unilateral way, face retaliation? and when you get something that involves more global coordination, which has been very difficult, so i think the approach has been sanctioned, which has seen some effects, and that is what they are going to stay with, but i have seen recently, though, the some of those fears on iran seem like they have dissipated a bit over

the last month compared to a bit earlier this year. >> do you think have to believe -- kafka believed in devious bureaucracy? >> no that about it. i agree with the point that it assumes a level of competence that probably -- and ability to predict the consequences of the campaign, the consequences of two campaigns. with regard to equity prices, the world is a really risky place. with such risk, it is tough for investors to have a conviction and therefore tough to get durable wealth creation. we would say the equity market will be considerably lower relative to today. in particular, despite the fact that we have known since 1786 that it would be an election, equity investors have not

really -- their window of observation has not embraced november or december 31 yet, but it is beginning to happen. as that happens, we are going to be spending the summer and into the fall looking at in-trade " on who will be president, who will win the house, who will win the senate, and we will supply the in to what we hear on sunday morning talk shows about what they do in power. that is not good for markets. >> we apologize for running over by 203 seconds, but it has been a great meeting. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> tonight on c-span2, focusing on the u.s. economy. "the end of money" counterfeiters, preachers,

techies, dreamers. then we look at "barack: the american way of debt to." later, a discussion on the book "money well spent quarter me -- discussion on the book "money well spent." a senior advisor to the muslim brotherhood said today that egypt's ruling military council ruled against the canada in the presidential elections next month. moslem brotherhood's party reversed its earlier pledge not to run for the presidency. party officials discussed the reversal and egypt politics at a talk at georgetown university today. this is an hour and 15 minutes.

and not get started as soon as we can. -- >> get started as soon as we can. i would like to welcome you on behalf of georgetown university and the center for muslim christian understanding. to our program today. i had some opening comments, but because we have a limited amount of time, i will skip them, which is a first, but if i feel really frustrated, i will get up and give a talk after they are done for 10 or 15 minutes. but what we plan to do is to have two of the speakers -- each will speak about seven minutes, so instead of having four. then, we will go to the q&a, in which all four will then respond. that will give us a maximum amount of time. could i ask you ahead of time to ask questions? if you want to give a speech, i

will stop it because we have a limited amount time, and we want to get as many questions in as we can. our first speaker today is the first speaker for this delegation that has come from the brotherhood and the freedom and justice party. she is a political activist and senior editor of the muslim brotherhood cozy official web site and its twitter account. she is a member of the freedom and justice party's foreign relations committee, told a b.a. in english and an m.a. in mass communications. she also serves as a board member of an academic publishing house. [applause] >> thank you very much for having us. it is really our pleasure to

join you today in the very first official visit of the freedom and justice party here. we are here to start building bridges of understanding with united states. we are doing this in several places in the world, but we believe our visit to the united states is probably the most important because we acknowledge the very important role of the united states in the world, and we would like to -- our relations with the united states to be better than before, and we believe that the democratic egypt will have positive relations with the united states and will have positive relations with all the democratic world. as you know, we are coming from

the freedom and justice party with an islamic background, so you will find us quoting the crown -- koran a lot. this principle is very important for us and probably for our foreign policy and relations with the world. it says all people, we have created a wall of male and female and made you enter nations and tribes so that you may know one another or you may get to know one another. so we are here to get to know each other. it is not just from our side. we would like to get to know you, and we would like you to have a better understanding of us, and we are here to start good and positive relations with the united states. let me first start with a brief

history of egypt or modern egypt and what has brought us here today. before the revolution, as you have been aware, we have been under tremendous oppression and immense violations of human rights by mubarak's regime and lack of democracy and a very suffocating dictatorship that has impacted all egyptians, both muslims and christians, and egyptians from different segments of society. we have all been victims of such a dictatorial regime. egypt has been suffering extreme poverty. about 30% of the egyptians are under the poverty line due to the corrupt policies of the previous regime and preceding

regimes over the past several decades. we have high rates of illiteracy. we have seen lots of nepotism, and, of course, are deeply entrenched corruption -- our deeply entrenched corruption in almost all state and governmental institutions. before the revolution, the future was bleak. personally, i had no hope for a better future under the mubarak regime. we have reached a point where we were almost desperate. we have lost all hopes of a better future. for me, for example, -- i will tell you just a story of myself, which it applies to many egyptians, who suffered lots of

oppression under mubarak's regime. before the revolution, i was working on a business luncheon for nurse, and i dropped a lot that was part of my job. my name was registered in the airport on the security check. for me, that was a tremendous violation of my freedom of movement. whenever i wanted to travel, whenever i decided to travel, i have been stopped arbitrarily by the security police in the airports. they interrogated me. they searched my bags. they confiscated any papers that i had, only because i was affiliated to an opposition movement. i found this tremendously unjust, and i reached a point where i was really disappointed, and that was about a month

before the revolution. i told the security police in the airport who used to interrogate me -- i told them, "well, i'm tired. are you going to do this whenever i travel? am i going to encounter that throughout my entire life?" whenever i travel, i am intimidated. i am not sure whether i'm going to travel or not. i am not sure whether my belongings will be confiscated. he told me, "yes, you will be interrogated all your life as long as your name is registered on this list." so i told him, "i should have no hope or legal solution to the," and he told me there is no legal solution. the only solution is for the mubarak regime to go, and that

is not going to happen soon, and that was just one month before the revolution. when he told me that, although i was really desperate, i had slight hope. the tunisian revolution affected that hope, and our revolution -- of course, it changed history. it just brought our hold back. i became optimistic again that i can pursue my career. at least i have the freedom upon which i can decide on what i want to do. that was just a brief example. that happened to hundreds, probably thousands of egyptian families who have been treated

unjustly by the mubarak regime because of their political opposition to the regime and then came the revolution, and the magical words -- the people want to topple the regime. we wanted it, and we got it. mubarak stepped down. and that is just the beginning. the demands of our revolution have been mainly freedom, dignity, justice, and democracy. to shift to my party background, these are also the objectives of our party, the freedom and justice party. we are seeking to fulfill the demands of the young people who revolted, and these demands are our priorities, and we are committed to achieving that,

although it is a huge challenge. it is a very long-term goal, but we are going to do it. and we are going to be up to the operations of the egyptian people and the trust they gave us in three consecutive elections. you're so it's going to hand it over. [applause] >> let me just give you a little background on the next speaker. he is a member of the parliament from the freedom of justice party, serves on the foreign relations committee, holds a ph.d. in cultural studies from the university of pittsburgh and a b.a. in english. he is an adjunct professor of cultural studies at metro state university in minnesota and has authored several publications on bridging cultural and civilization gaps. i forgot to mention, i am john

esposito, in case in the q&a you need to refer to my name. thank you. >> thank you, john, for inviting us here. thank you all for being with us here a little bit over a year now. millions of people had to go to the streets of cairo and the rest of egypt to stand against corruption, dictatorship, and oppression. i remember those who sacrificed their lives for us to be able to meet together today. if i may kindly request that we stand up for a moment in commemoration of those who sacrificed their lives in the peaceful revolutions in egypt.

thank you. the egyptian revolution, as egypt itself, was unique in the way it presented itself, in the way it acted against oppression, dictatorship, and corruption, and in the way that it is fulfilling its promises on the road map toward democracy, freedom, and the rule of law. the revolution was not against one individual. it was against a system, the regime.

the most common word that egyptians would feel very proud of financing it. i saw babies of three, for your, by repeating that i and many streets in egypt. it was very fitting that the young egyptians, boy or girl, would stand up and declare that they are free now, that they are willing to work together to build a new country based on the principles of justice, freedom for all. the challenges are enormous. that is the unique moment. it is very difficult to find the oppressor and the oppressed together. i cannot forget that moment when ashad was getting out of prison at the same time. the minister was getting in the same cell.

that is an amazing moment and difficult challenge in e jets. in egypt. you have killer and victim together. the challenge is how can we create alternatives that brings back the rise of the egyptians that is unique. i always have this optimism about all citizens to come and visit and witness the great history of egypt. after we as individuals are becoming free, we would like to build and create free institutions.

egyptians are determined not to go back to the old regime by any means. not by governments or an attitude. egyptians are serious. voices will no longer be fired. i ran as a member of parliament. you cannot imagine the difficult dialogs we had to the people of in egypt. the new egypt was welcoming. this agreement, welcoming. they were willing to charting a course for the future. there is a need for a value system based on freedom, justice, and dignity. we have a culture that supports a strong tammanfamily tie.

faith for us defines this value system. we would like for egypt to be part of the global economy. the state need to empower the young egyptians. we would like to focus on economic partnership, on the political front.

free and interrupted trade and oil, energy supply, that nuclear disarmament and comprehensive peace are an important agreement of the political platform. we have a dream. the dream is that all egyptians have access to clean water, food, schools. we have a dream that the egyptians will not be fearful anymore of speaking truth to power. we've would like not to have the ear of any more torture for any more moreave torture for political beings. we want a civil society that is strong.

the stronger the society is, the better for everyone. we need to create a balance between the strength of society and strength of the government. the moment the government is stronger than society, it can lead to depression. we would like people of egypt to have the power in their hands. living for so many years under oppression, it created a culture of oppression. we have to replace it with a culture of democracy and freedom. we have a dream that visitors to eject can come safely -- to egypt can come safely. any time you visit egypt, make sure you stop and see the square. we but like you to be able to walk in the shadow of the

pyramids and whisper a prayer in the virgin mary church which is across the street. this is the egypt we have a dream for. we have a dream that others will be able to sail down and feel connected with 7000 years of human genius and creativity. of that is the dream we have a. we had a dream that is not limited to egypt but is open for the whole world where we can honor human dignity and respect our cultural differences that we consider as indispensable conditions for world peace. thank you for having us.

[applause] >> we will just do a brief introduction of two of the other people who will be joining in and responding. khaled al-qazzaz is an adviser to the muslim brotherhood on issues of national development and organizational performance. he has a ph.d. in organizational behavior and business administration from ohio state. khaled al-qazzaz is for an relation. he serves as an educational consultant at a private and international chain in cairo. he is a ph.d. candidate at walden university. i would like to begin questioning with just one observation. in the aftermath of the uprising, as we have seen in

egypt and, though islam did not initiate the uprising, we see this with the fjp plus the vote that went elsewhere. the question is whether that will demonstrate a willingness to pursue and build the democratic system and effectively depressed economic issues. what role will religion play in egypt's government and institutions? what impact will that have on non-muslims and relations with the u.s.? those of you that are familiar with the platform of the fjp will see some of that address. how is that understood the? house that played out today? -- how is that playing out today? we will start here.

>> hello. i have a couple of questions. >> one question. look at the line. we are catholic but you cannot do trinity or three questions in 1. >> i will start with abdulmawgoud dardery. he said the united states and israel are the biggest losers. i wanted you to explain more about this. in november 2011, and you useyot if the united states did not like the results of the election, we hthey can drink frm them.

>> ok. >> that was a run on sentence. >> the first part of the question concerning -- what's your video on youtube. >> there is no doubt in the minds of many egyptians, and that was by ex-president george bush that the administration supported a dictatorship for the past six years. to support dictatorships and the side of the administration, it is a shift toward the future. the administration has detains its policy to the arab world and has to work with the people of egypt and tunisia and other

places as well. these are true realities in the arab world. in the coming years if we succeed, building the relationship based on freedom and justice for all, respecting our differences and willing to work together it will be able to create. egypt is not egypt of the president. egypt is of the egyptian people. no country should accept interference from any outside country. >> then there was the second part that had to do with the red sea. >> that was during the political

complaint. how about people who are asking to come out to mubarak? what if the united states does not like the election result? the united states can do whatever it wants. it is an egyptian decision. if the united states likes it, we are happy. if you do not like it, recanting from the red sea or the white sea. we have to -- you can drink from the red sea or the white sea. we have two sees. we have to make use of them. >> in and egyptian activists. i was disappointed with your statements. i would like to ask you that the constitution cannot be written by the majority. mubarak is to do the majority rule.

we should not use people from parliament from the constitution. >> thank you for asking. it is a valid question. it is very important to know that this represents more than 47%. in spite of this, we became underrepresented. the people will choose those who would write the constitution. this included liberal [inaudible] it was interesting about the committee writing the

constitution. it is described by both extremes. we will continue exactly that the committee is trying to be in the middle and invite everyone to the addition. these are the committee's that would involve anyone. it belongs to the egyptians. the voices have to be included. they have representatives from them living outside of this. writing the constitution is open for everyone. we welcome every voice. the people have a constitution that the egyptians will be proud of.

-- we will have a constitution that the egyptians will be proud of. >> i have two quick points. one is the direction of a electing the assembly. over 70% of egyptians voted for the parliament's. this was democratically decided. the party proposed when this came out.

at the end of the day it was still open to suggestions. at the end of the day, the egyptians will vote on everything in constitution. thank you. >> thank you for coming. my question is about your check here. you were scheduled to us today to speak at the muslim public affairs company. it is the only one on your agenda. they say you canceled because to insisted on seeing a list of the attendees. they put this out in a public e- mail. why did you insist on getting solicited attendees? >> this is a miscommunication.

in the past few weeks, the invitation is by the carnegie endowment for peace conference. since then, we have received so many requests to meet their out this week -- throughout this week. social things got pushed out. it is unfortunate that impact decided to announce it before confirming with us. it was good to talk to everybody but then the american society. >> we are asked not to submit

any names. we have submitted them to dhs on the other hand. if you're going to travel, good luck. [laughter] >> i am a business consultant. it is an offshoot of the muslim brotherhood. why do they change the position all the time? is that he would not have a presidential candidates. when one of your members said that you would like to run for presidency, a you fired him from the party. at the same time, i do not think this is democratic. are you going to adhere to the policy that you announced? is it going to be always changing positions from one to the other?

>> i will start by saying that with the needed to does not matter any more. i want to realize that there has been a revolution with a certain set of values. if this violates it, we realize the next election will be punished. we know exactly what are caught this looks like. it is an offshoot of a movement. our compass is not one that is internally in one looking.

on the nomination of the president come here is the situation. what happens is we engaged in discussions. it is running like the present authority in egypt to give this a specific message that your reign of the country starts with the parliament. if you are not allowed to have any significant representation in the executive arm of the government. that is funny for a party that won the election. i can give you all the details. this is its. we are stepping our foot down. you're taking too much. your role is in the parliament. you would set the whole thing to fail. our nomination of a presidential candidates came at the heel of the staff refusing to allow the

party to form a coalition government with other parties. some answer to the people. some answer to the parliament. i guess we follow the economic indicators. the muslim brotherhood is still waiting for that to happen. we still believe that the country cannot be run by one group. this is for very obvious reasons. it is a complicated situation in egypt. no one wants to take that burden upon themselves. our sense is still the same. we would like to be important to everyone who can contribute to to saving egypt. we will not stand still. you do not have a right to be in the government.

>> there was a second part to that question that i want to make sure the answer that. >> it came at a time where the group had a good policy. we do not want to be monopolizing all the positions. at that time, he said "i do not anyway."ill read any waun it is a very different reality. i know how this looks. now that was months ago. >> the process itself was deciding the democratic process, whether he used consulting in a decision making body.

hundred and 10 individuals spent hours to make the decision at the end -- 110 individual spent hours to make the decision. the overwhelming majority of votes it about this. they attended ones. he is right. we have the utmost respect. if he decided to go outside this then it is his right. but it is also our right to continue on a different path. >> they look contradictory but science has shifted significantly. >> i-- but signs have shifted to the densely.

>> one of the candidates to is in the background seems to be really moving up. that also was one of the catalysts. can you address that? >> as we go there, it will be a difficult situation. we're looking into what is best for the egyptian people. we have things based on what is good for egypt in the short term and long term. what is good for egypt is basically finding a candidates. now we need it from our end. who will make sure that each of follows a democratic path. >> thank you very much for being

here and taking our questions. in your presentation and discussion, you talked a lot about values. there were broad strokes when it came to policy. much of your platform was based on those values. i'm curious what you think they need to do to develop its policy analysis developments, either within the government's to tackle these issues. this is for the egyptian people. what many have done is gone in and say "this is what you need and what you should have." policy things to the egyptian people need a?

>> do you want for our economic policy? >> i think he said domestic. >> thank you very much. but he said all of it. >> just give one example. >> it is our reproduce one document that is circulating for discussions. we are biting everybody to contribute. specifically, it is best to give an example. this is how it is translated. we have distractive political and economic institutions. we have a few that used to

distract from the economy. they use it to a system that it means. it is through all kinds of protection through the governments. it is very funny real-estate deals and tax breaks. there are three industries in egypt that are concentrated. values are extremely high. this is the reality. that reality has created a very weak economy. the egyptian contribution to the global economy is less than 30% of 1% for a population that is 1.2% of the world economy. what we have proposed is to create the inclusive

institution. we're taking to specific measures to include much more people in the economy. it increased the demand. it will hopefully improve social justice. one measure is to reverse the very specific measures that the mubarak regime has taken. in terms of tax breaks and so on and so forth. we are launching a very aggressive campaign. we are not the first to think of it. many campaigns have been launched. they did not succeed. this is a technical issue and a

political issue. we're trying to use the grass roots of our party to create an enterprise that will succeed. they want to stimulate the economy and create jobs. with this mentality, we hope the broad base will translate for equality and justice and so on. but thank you for coming. you guys were talking about the constitutional committee he were

pulling you in two different directions perrin in terms of human dignity and freedom, -- into different directions. in terms of human dignity and freedom, what is the position of the freedom and justice party on these issues? how much of them are influenced by the actual values in foundations of the parti? >> the values you mentioned are a matter of consensus. we have been signatories to different documents. they were explaining these principles in the main principles of the egyptian constitution.

we have assigned to documents, of the democratic alliance and the second was another document where we expressed our full commitment to those principles together with the rest of the political party. i do not think this is a matter of disagreement between us and the rest of the parties. even between us and christians. i think the differences had to do with the prose itself. perhaps a had a political dimension. it had nothing to do with disagreeing upon those values. >> this characterization is

liberal list of one side and traditionalists on the other side. this has been a struggle for the last 200 years. this holds which direction we go in. i remember egyptians thinking there is no way for this unless it is europeanized. we have nothing to do with europe. it has to come only from tradition. the freedom and justice party is taking a middle ground. we have a tradition that needs to be respected. this is where we started from. we cannot ignore human civilization. europe has great things to offer. did the united states has great things to offer. we choose what we like and leave what we do not. >> go ahead.

>> from the conflict resolution program, my question is this. what have you found are the best ways to negotiate and resolve this within your coalition and within other parties? >> don't be shy. >> it is very tough. a member we had at least 30 years of political life that was so dry that we actually do not have any serious debates or process in place. all of a sudden, we are expected to decide the fate of our

country there a very democratic process for which traditions and figureheads and histories are being billed as we go. it is a very tough process. what have we done about it? we try to get in team meetings come at mediators, come up with grounds and so on. is it working? not 100%. we have such a high atmosphere of around all of us, that even the simplest issues are very hard to discuss rationally. everything in egypt nowadays is so hyped up. you are familiar with how past and the egyptian people are.

if you've ever been to an egyptian funeral our wedding, we have won every single day on the political scene and now. -- one every single day on the political scene now. you feel that this is going to break the whole thing. there is another issue that is going to bring the whole thing. the issue has receded. i am not trying to market. this is characteristic of the post-revolution era. we need to embrace its. >> at the beginning of the revolution, i run a private school with an american curriculum. at the beginning of the revolution, one small group of

students came to me and said are you sure -- is said to make sure you read a piece a week. he is telling us that these are non patriotic. part of the big international movements. i think they were pushing me to fire the guy. i sit on a very interesting. what can we do about it? should i fire him? we will bring this teacher and whoever has another opinion and we will start a debate between both parties. it was a very interesting debate. i informed the teacher the day before so it is a fair competition.

this group came for me to fire him. they started discussing and debating with this. it is a beautiful debate. they wanted good for egypt. it was a healthy solution. these solutions are to the education. s we face, challenge a fac when you come out of oppression, you cannot say anything to anyone. if there's only one vote. all of a sudden, that voice disappears. you have so many different voices. i used to use the seventh

habits of highly successful people. i used to say we have two years in one town. let's listen twice. -- two ears and one tongue. let's listen twice. >> my name is john anderson. i am an independent analyst. my question involves party finance and electoral campaign finance, particularly from foreign sources. since the arrest by the government's both u.s. and egyptian, a democracy promoters seem to be a healthy debate. democracy promotion on the one hand eventually campaigns and

party activities. my question is given the long history of support that the muslim brotherhood's funds from foreign sources, particularly from the gulf and perhaps elsewhere. not necessarily from governmental sources. what is the position of fjp in regard to foreign sources of political party activities, electoral campaigns? what specifically will the fjp do to ensure all egyptians have accurate information with regard to political party activities in

the sources of campaign funding? >> financing is a very interesting debate. there is a lot of debate on rules and regulations. there are different models. the idea is that the government propose something before the parliament that was done. they chose to run and regulate the parties. this is how we operate. this indicates that cannot receive international funding. even specifically with the gulf countries, and the situation is even.

we want them to thinvest in each it entirely. the party financing will not have any problems. to have a huge membership from within the muslim brotherhood in from outside the muslim brotherhood. a the% of the party members are from outside the brotherhood. we have a good representation even outside the muslim brotherhood's. we like to support our members.

they said this internationally. this involves a lot of intervention. we think international funding has the respect of this. what we want to encourage generally is this. >> they're also making public the campaign funding. >>, will they make public to the egyptians and other their sources of campaign funding? >> the short answer is yes. they have to. i would like to make clear that during mubarak, there is no right to any information.

i initiated the discussions. it is being discussed. information has to be public. >> i am a retired federal employee. i like members to explain why with few exceptions christians are persecuted, their churches burned, they're forced to convert to islam. >> you have made your statement. they heard it. >> i want to give them an example. >> this has to do it the egyptian situation.

the first part of what he said they can. they're primarily speaking about the egyptian experience. but sears talking got any other place other than egypt. >> today suffered? yes. tremendously so. boast active as encryption suffered. -- both christians and egyptians suffered. 10 years ago, i was in a meeting with the president of the university that was a promising girl. she became the first effort

class. she is supposed to be a teacher's assistant. to my surprise i found the president and we cannot. i was so angry. it was a stupid statement from my side. i did not agree with that. i promised myself during my teaching career in a caustic -- kosic would be treated as any other muslim. this is the history of egypt. people go to the mosque. people go to the mosque. we are very determined. another ornament of the world. we will do this as muslims and

christians as equal citizens to move forward and present an alternative that is good for the rest of the world. >> i want to piggyback on that question. the broader issue is very important. and number of places from nigeria over to indonesia, there are issues. we intend to run a major program. given what you said, what of the questions that some raised, one talks about supporting a civil society that is neither run by the military or theocracy. with islam as the state tree legioreligion the no. 2 person e

muslim brotherhood talked about the fact that it is clear that the people want an islamic state. this language is important. tunisia since to talk about civil government. we have a number of words floating around. >> the second man in the freedom and justice party is a christian. the freedom is welcoming. i think this is more of an islamic state. a civil is state is what the freedom and justice party is calling for. an islamic state is different from a muslim state. an islamic state means a state

where christians, jews, and muslims can live together and work together. a muslim thistate is exclusive to muslims only. it is important to make a distinction about this. there's also a discussion of what do we put [inaudible] we are focusing more on the objective of the sharia rather than the rulings. rulings are limited by time and space. it is universal like freedom and human rights. it's this is the priority of the freedom and justice party. >> often in american literature, the way you describe muslim an islamic state is often

just the opposite in terms of terminology. beckett also be true in european -- that can also be true in europe with how people view that phrase. >> the christians do not have the same opportunity to build houses of worship that is available. >> one has to see this. there will be a change. the policy you are referring to did not happen because of islamic rule. it also existed hundreds of years ago. >> can i put something on record here? if christians need this, i myself will participate in building the church so someone can call me later. >> i just want to, and trying to

figure out how we're going to do this. can we go an additional five minutes? is that ok? we have a problem with all of the people there. let's take three questions and see if we can get through those and i will see if i can take another three questions. you do a question and then we will do a question there and then to the panel. >> i have a question about the legitimacy of the freedom of justice party, specifically after the recent announcement of the presidential candidates. yet been getting support from people who are not members of the muslim brotherhood's. a lot did these people are rethinking their decision to vote for you after you change your opinion. >> so your question is? >> it is a close call between deciding to nominate him.

how are you going to reassure the rest of the public that you are stable as a political party internally to leave egypt now that it is obvious for egypt is going? >> thank you. >> my question is what they in general are doing to promote female political participation. >> i am egyptian political activists. i was there when the muslim brotherhood was there. >> question, please. >> they had their officially. >> question please. >> i do have a question. i also have the right. >> you do not. >> i do. >> that is a rugged american

individualism. >> given that we're in this atmosphere, i probably don't. >> that is right. >> they recently said that islamists and islamic role works in several stages. he recently gave the speech. what stage of stabilization are we in? >> the question. -- good question. you have three questions. >> concerning theme of participation, i would just like to confess that we are not happy about the situation of women in egypt. we think the presentation of

women in the parliaments as well as their engagements here. it is part of our platform to engage women both in civil society and in the next municipal elections, we are intending to build more women candidates. we're working to improve the situation of women in society. we are conducting research across egypt for the skill of the problem. we have lots of solution to that. this is one of the priorities of our parliamentary agenda and our party platform.

>> how many candidates did the fjp run in the last elections that i'm not asking how many succeeded. what about 70. -- elections? i am not asking how many succeeded. >> about 70. >> we have the largest number. >> the stability of the party was simply running extensive dialogue on why he made that decision. we believe that the end of the day the party would be stable as long as the stands it takes still make sense to the majority of the people. i think people start understanding once they hear the facts.

we are for empowerment of the egyptian people. i am not clear on where the problem is. they were busy with 100,000 of them in jail. >> i think the question was referring to a speech in which it was plugged into the notion. >> as he mentioned, it means empowerment. this is empowerment of society in different ways. it is the way we see our development. it is interesting to use these terms and cliche is. i do not see anybody upset with

the european union or the united states. there are international forums for people talk was similar. there are different parties and countries in agreement together. this is simply the modern translation of this. only going to ask for two more questions. they have an incredible schedule. here. here. >> thank you for being here. my question is how you define freedom of speech and religion? you spoke of the right to speak

truth to power. do you believe in the right up egyptian citizens to criticize or doubt is lomb? [applause] >> if you allow me, i am interested in asking you as the islamic party. are you trying to say -- do you balance between the universal principle? just in case you fail in leading the country, don't you think this would affect is lomb? >> we have two questions. >> religion is a human choice.

you cannot force anyone to love a particular religion. whoever wants to believe, let him or her bill be. if they do not come at it is his or her decision. this is very clear. the alternative is being criticized by some many people. you have to be able to accept the criticism. we have to distinguish its. we are not islam.

we are muslims. we would like to present a muslim alternative that can succeed or can fail. we have to be prepared that this is a human experience. in human experience is the can 0/50eed but there is a 58 chance. hopefully, we will really determined to present an alternative that is good not only for egypt or arabs or muslims fought for the rest of the world. >> thank you. excuse me. thank you all very much for coming. i want to thank the delegation. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]