and then open to your questions. there should be cards out there that you can get. i think there will be people circulating with cards. and collecting cards. those will be brought up to me and i will choose questions from them to ask our guests. so stanley founded due cain capital in 1981 and closed it i think around 2010 but during that time did very well and had a storied career on wall street for his successes with his organization. he also at one time worked with george soros and helped him amass a substantial amount of wealth as well. he is the guy that know as lot about finance and part of what we're going to be talking about is finance budgets and issues of the future. part of what investing about is thinking about the future what is going to happen in the future. and so he is concerned deeply and profoundly about the future of young people in america and

you will see when he talks exactly the degree to which he is concerned about the investments we're not making in young people and how they're crowded out by other kinds of investments we do make. jeffery is an educator, social activist, and the founder of the harlem children's zone which he started in 1990. the harlem children's zone was designed to try to help children young people in harlem to get to college, graduate, and get good jobs. it is an innovative, comprehensive, and intriguing approach. it seems to be successful. and i don't mean to be depp kating. just it takes a while to evaluate some of these programs. and we do know that many people think this is a model for things we should be doing elsewhere. our president thinks that having put in the budget some

proposals and some programs that are actually trying to lep kate what's been done in the harlem children's zone. so the connection between the two of them is twofold. ey both graduated from boden college. the other connection is plfment trucken miller has helped raise the money and jeffery has provided the zeal, inspiration and leadership to make it the success that it has become. so with that, let me turn -- and remember the note cards. don't forget the note cards. i want to turn to stan who has a presentation to sort of outline the issues about the future of young people in america. welcome. [applause]

>> dean brady mentioned that jeff and i were at college together in the early 70s. as children of the 60s, we used to think about protests and changing the world. but even back then, i had never been here but berkeley, california, was always the larger than life institution where movements started. [applause] it is interesting. i hear a lot today about how millenials don't think the way children of the 60s thought. and they're not into movements and they're not into protests. but i look at a couple of examples and i couldn't disagree more. when i think about how much this generation moved the needle on gay rights and what you've accomplished, i think

it's ridiculous to suggest that this generation has not had been involved in political activism with results. i would say the same thing with this generation in terms of the environment and climate change. i look at the movement that's been made in washington in the last ten years and i think it's directly a result of this generation's act tivities and focus. i guess i'm somewhat puzzled by the fact, however, that there's another thing that your generation has not focused on. and the reason i'm puzzled is, a, i think it's violetly important to your future but also to the future of the country, and it affects you directly. dean brady said i'm going to give a presentation actually i think we're going to have a conversation about this topic and we just thought maybe i would throw six or seven slides up here to get everybody warmed

up with regards to this topic. so if you look at the chart. can everybody see this chart? we don't need to dim the lights. do we? the line in red is federal payments to individuals or transfer payments. and what you see is back in the early 60s, that used to be 28% of all federal government outlays. it's currently 67%. so over the years, we've gone from an economy that used to have transfer payments of 28% of the federal budget to 67%. put that in perspective. back in the early 60s, medicare and medicaid combined were 0.1% of g.d.p. social security was 2.6% of g.d.p. and discretionary spending was 11.5% of g.d.p. today, medicare and medicaid are now 5.6% of g.d.p., social

ecurity is 4.9% of g.d.p., and discretionary expenditures have shrunk to 6.5% of g.d.p. now, why is that important? because transfer payments are really consumption and you don't get that much return on your investment. and i want to highlight the blue line. back in the 60s, investments as a percentage of the federal budget actually used to be higher than transfer payments. they were 32 and they've gone down to 15. now, for the republicans in the audience, if there are any in berkeley, california, i want to remind you that government spending can be a lot more effective than what some of you have been putting out there in the press. what did you get for this blue line? you got the internet. you got g.p.s. you got the interstate highway system. and we got n.i.h. grants that have moved the needle

dramatically on cancer and other diseases. what's been going on now for the better part of 50 years is the amount of money we are spending on transfer payments primarily to seniors has been crowding out investments in our future. and it's not just investments in things that brought us the internet and g.p.s. it's been at the expense of children. this chart is pretty remarkable. what you're looking at is the per ca that -- capita spending on children and the elderly as a percentage of the average worker salary per capita. and what you will see is in 2011, which is the last year i have good data on, 56 cents out of every dollar that an american worker made went toward expenditures on the elderly, pretty much the transfer payments i showed earlier. but only 8 cents went on our

children. so just as they've been crowding out other investments, the greater and greater allotment we've been making towards payments for things like medicare, medicaid for the elderly, we also have medicaid for children. but as you can see it doesn't move the needle much. and social security has been at the expense of money we might be spending on our younger generation. for some reason -- well, this is kind of sad but i'll work around it. the chart you're supposed to be seeing is the united states poverty rate by age group. and what you see in red back then president johnson declared a war on poverty. since then, the poverty rate for seniors has dropped to 30% to 9%. i think we can all agree that's a wonderful accomplishment. there's nothing worgs than thinking of an elderly person

who is poor and can't make it in society and all that encompasses. but the interesting thing is during that same time period, the poverty rate for children -- maybe we have it on -- how clever. this is what happens when you're over 60. you don't know how to use technology. the poverty rate for children has actually been an uptrend. thst it is actually pretty much flat to up but believe it or not we have made no progress in the last 40 years even though the war on poverty has been declared a success it's all been for the elderly and in fact for children that poverty rate hasn't dropped at off it's pretty amazing. we now have a child poverty rate in this country of 24%. think about that. almost one in four of every child in america grows up under theport level. just to show you how horrific that is, what we've done here

is we've taken the 35 leading economic countries in the world. and here's the united states. we rank 34th with our 23% poverty rate for children. the only country we beat out is romania. we're actually worse than latvia and the other 33 countries. so here we are in the united states with all this wealth, with all the things we have, and we have the second highest child poverty rate. one in four children in america are growing up in poverty. we've got this fancy thing again now. ok. i showed you on the first chart how much we've been spending on our seniors and on transfer payments relative to investment. and the second chart on relative to children. and look at what that 40 to 50 years of spending more and more and giving more to the elderly has resulted in. this is a little complicated

but i think i can deal with it here. so what you're looking at here if you take the average net worth of age groups in 1983 versus their average net worth in 2010, in constant dollars. and for the first time in the history of america we have a generation now that where their net worth in 2010 was actually less than their net worth in 1983. that is your 29 to 37-year-old group. so a 29-year-old in 2010 in constant dollars is worth less than a 29-year-old was in 1983. but look at the elderly with the most extreme case being 74 and over. not only is there their net worth not less than it was in 1983. it's 150% more. and as you can see for all the elderly, their net worth has gone up dramatically again all

the result of the first chart as we continue to spend more and more on the elderly at the expense of the rest of our society. so far, i've only talked about the size of the economic pie, and more of that i -- i'm sorry, the proportion of how the pie is split up, more and more has gone to the elderly. there is to be a lot more of the elderly and a lot less of the working force to support those elderly. back in 1957, we had a birth rate in this country of 3.7 to one. we had more babies born in 1957 with 100 million less people than we have today. it is pretty incredible. we only had 165 million people in the country and in the last 15 years, we've never had as many babies born. this was called the baby boom, after soldiers came back from world war ii.

1947 to 1967, they did their business with their wives. a lot of babies were created. we had a baby boom. for those of you who can add, 1947 plus 65 equals 2012. in 2012, the baby boom for the next 20 years he comes a gray boom. for the next 16 years, every day, 11,000 people are going to turn seniors. we are creating 11,000 seniors every day for the next 16 years. we are only creating 2000 young adult workers a day to support those seniors. what you have is, over the next 25 years, the people that are actually working to support the retired elderly, they are going to grow by 17%, but the elderly

are going to grow 102%. it gets even hairier if you look inside the numbers. the over 85 contingent is going to grow by 322%. why does that matter? because as longer life goes on, the more we spend on our elderly and the health care system. the average 85-year-old, we spend two times what we do on the average 66-year-old. we've been shifting more of the pie to the elderly. there are about to be a lot more of the elderly versus the rest of society to support them and they are living a lot longer, and the longer they live, the more they spend each year and this is going to cause financial problems. i used to put a chart up, but it is so horrifying, i just thought i would talk about it rather than put the chart up itself.

if you take what we've promised our seniors in terms of social security, medicare, and medicaid projections, what we've promised versus the tax revenues we've projected, you get a number which we call the fiscal gap. the american government uses very interesting accounting. how many people here are 65 or over? maybe you don't want to admit it. ok. i would assume you think you are going to get your social security check next month. according to the federal government, that is probably not going to happen. in their accounting system, they don't account for the fact that anybody over 65 is going to get any payments going forward. that is not considered a liability on their balance sheet. there's not a corporation in america, maybe enron, who does their accounting that way.

the way the government accounting works is, the payments the seniors are going to get, they don't exist, and if they did exist and you put it on the balance sheet and took the present value of that cap, according to an economist from university of massachusetts, the present value of that gap would make our current debt, $18 trillion by most accounts, would make it $205 trillion. i don't know whether this is science. all i know is 205 is a lot more than 18. you see the problem. let me just wrap this up in a nutshell for you. if you look at what we've promised current seniors and you look at the size of the fiscal gap, there's not going to be any money left over for future seniors. that is the young people in the audience. people might think i'm against medicare and social security.

actually i love social security and medicare. the problem is, i love them so much i think the younger people in this room should be able to get them to do. -- in 40 or 50 years, too. this is not young versus old. this is smoothing out the generational transfer from current seniors to future seniors. that is what we are here to talk about. i realize 30 or 40 years seems like a long way down the road and this is not something we should be worried about, but i take heart from your generation and their thoughts on climate change, because that is 30 or 40 years down the road. that is another ticking time bomb. i'm hoping maybe i can get a movement started in the greatest movement starting place in the world, berkeley, california. thank you. we're going to have our conversation now. [applause]

mr. brady: that was great, and i think that sets the stage. it also gives new meaning to the old vulcan phrase, "live long and prosper," and it looks like some people will and others may not. that is the concern we have. it is not even just the case that we are worried that young people eventually won't get social security and medicare. we are also worried that as very as government agencies including the federal government, but also states and localities, as they try to meet these obligations for pensions, medicare, social security, that is going to elbow aside other investments that are necessary for the next generation to succeed. geoffrey canada is the guy trying really hard to make sure we do invest in our children.

i want to start by talking about why that is so important. first, what the problem is, what the investments look like, and what we should be doing about it. jeffrey, tell us a little about what the problems are. mr. canada: i think that as i think about this issue, it is really clear to me that the numbers that stan was talking about, one in four children in america growing up in poverty, is a disaster. all of the research about what it means to actually be in poverty, when it starts, which is literally at birth, that you begin to see changes in these young children who have done absolutely nothing but be born in the wrong zip code or to parents who often through no fault of their own don't have enough support, that we as a society, i think, have created a

really unsustainable democracy. you can't continue this and expect that we are going to remain a democracy. i think it is a crisis. i've spent my entire life trying to prove that poor children, if they have serious investments in them, can end up entering the labor market and being successful. that sounds like a funny thing to say i've been trying to prove it, but a bunch of people did not believe that was true. when they thought about poverty, they said, there's nothing you can do about it. there are things that work. proving that is really important. the one reason people should understand that, after all of our, and we have been partners

-- all of our work and we have been partners in this, we've actually now got kids going to middle school, high school, college, graduating from college, being very successful. the point of the effort was to make sure those young people had a piece of the american dream. stan and i grew up in the same time. as a kid from the 1960's, i've always believed in conspiracies. that might shock those of you here in berkeley, but here's where this whole thing got time together for me for the first time. i was in graduate school and someone began to talk to me about social security and life expense and see -- life expectancy, and blacks, their life expectancy wasn't long enough for them to collect social security. i said, of course. here's another. and so as i became happy to see black life expectancy increase,

then i got stan's charts. it looked like they got is again. [laughter] like they got us again. [laughter] i'm going to tell you why you shouldn't laugh about this. stan, he makes his money from understanding things that most people ignore, which i respect. quite a while ago, he showed me similar data about housing in the united states. he laid this data out and pointed not just to the year, but to the month our economy was going to become undone. i'm looking at this, saying, america wouldn't let this happen. this would destroy the united states. we talked about it and decided

we would go to washington together and say to people who should care about this, you are about to destroy this country. just destroy it completely. they did nothing. so i just watched the crisis unfold, which we are still living through today, and i learned a funny lesson. you should listen to stan. those charts -- you have to understand, as clear as this data is, the data on housing was that clear, and no one did anything about it. i'm determined that for my kids, our kids that we've invested all this time and energy, that we are not going to allow them to get ripped off. i'm part of the baby boomer generation. my generation quite honestly, they care what is left 30 or 40 years from now, and i think that is a disaster.

all of this has come together for me. these are kids that we wanted to break into generational poverty. we know what will happen to these kids if my generation takes all the money. and by the way, what stan didn't show you, some of the charts about discretionary spending and how that has strength -- when you look at something like what happened in flint, you begin to say, how can an american city not only have children being poisoned in front of our eyes, but nobody doing anything about it, and people acting like we can't find the resources to fix this? by the way, flint is not even the worst place in michigan for lead poisoning. there are 22 other communities that are even worse. this is going on all over the country. when it comes to the

policymakers, they simply say we don't have the resources. a lot of it has to do with state pensions and what is happening to state budgets and city budgets. there's also this other entitlement issue. i think that it is disgraceful for us not to do the kind of investments in our kids that give them the same opportunities that stan and i had growing up. that is how i got tied up in this issue. mr. brady: let's outline some of the ways we might be under investing. let's just, between the two of you, what kind of areas are we talking about? we have a property problem, but where are we under investing? mr. canada: when you start thinking about medical supports for young people, educational supports for young people, and what is happening with school budgets across the country, and while i'm the first one to argue that money is not the answer to failing schools, i will also say

it does take money to educate. it does take money to actually educate kids. we are not prepared to do it. we think about food scarcity. we think about kids growing up exposed to environmental toxins. the asthma, the other diseases. i think that health, social services -- by the way, one of the things that we are becoming very clear about is young people growing up in poverty have lots of symptoms of mental health problems that simply aren't being treated at all. when you think about -- it used to always frustrate me, what happens when there's a shooting in an upper middle-class community, one of those horrible shootings. the first thing everybody talks about, how all the mental health services are going to be there. these shootings are every day

and we do absolutely nothing. no one since any mental health to any of those kids. if you are growing up underneath that kind of stress, which we know when we send soldiers overseas, they are exposed to a year or two years of violence, the posttraumatic stress, what happens for decades afterwards, you have kids growing up with this. at least as a soldier you get to come back home. that is home. why aren't we providing any mental health services to our young people? i think employment is an area, youth employment, that we under invest. one of the things that disturbs me the most, stan and i were talking to some folks who were visiting. we get a lot of kids to stick with our program for years because we have great arts, sports, and other kinds of what i would call high engagement

activities for our young people. you name it. we are providing that to kids. when you are poor, that is seen as a luxury. in most places, a luxury we can't afford. when you are not poor, you consider that essential for your own kid. it is another area that i think we have massive underinvestment. mr. brady: stan, do you have other things you would add? mr. druckenmiller: i would amplify the health comment. as the sequester was unfolding, both sides of the aisle were not going to balance the budget on the back of our seniors. so they cut infrastructure spending. that is often michigan is. that's -- that's all flint, michigan is. we're talking about

infrastructure problem. i've been on the border memorial sloanrd of my memorial kettering for years. we didn't even know really what caused cancer until about six years ago and how it happened. massive breakthroughs. we can genetically sequence drugs. now, we are having our nih grants cut at sloan-kettering to do cancer research. so much crowding out. geoff mentioned the other main problems. hillary talked about medicaid for children and the effect on toxic stress and other things on kids. you saw it. they are getting eight cents and the elderly are getting $.56. can we at least make it 12 or something? give them a little bit of the pie. frankly, to invest in a 5, 6, 3-year-old, to me, the payoff is a lot bigger than to invest in an 85-year-old. i may feel differently in 23 years.

[laughter] those are the major issues i would highlight. mr. canada: the only other thing i would say, it is the sort of underinvestment that we've done in higher education for young people. i've actually had folks -- stan and i were having this conversation, say a college education doesn't pay when you have to borrow huge amounts of money and there's no guarantee that you're going to earn enough money to pay back the bills. some folks are thinking, maybe these kids shouldn't get a college education. my theory is, maybe it shouldn't be so expensive for a poor kid to go to school that we think maybe they shouldn't go to school. that is a challenge. [applause] again, this is something that we should put at the top of the priority list.

my generation, there were schools you could go to that you could afford when you were poor. when i was in college, this was one of those places. city college was free. in new york city, not one dime did you have to pay to go to city college. there was this idea that education was the great equalizer and you shouldn't have wealth determine whether you had a shot. i think that is a real challenge. there are a lot of kids thinking, i can't afford college or i can't afford the loans to get through college. i think that is not the kind of country that stan and i believe you should have. we shouldn't be leaving that to our children and grandchildren. mr. brady: we have a really good question here. why can't we expect the economic pie instead of trying to carve -- expand the economic pie instead of trying to carve out

the one we have in place? is that just saying we should reallocate money from will able to young people -- from old people to young people or is there something else going on? mr. druckenmiller: i don't know who asked, but if you cut investments and put all the money in expenditures into consumption, the economic pie will shrink over the long term. the first thing we can do is start investing in our kids and investing in productive things, not paying people like me who is a billionaire. social security checks, it's ridiculous. i don't want to get into my ideas on expanding the economy, because everybody has different views, but there is no question, and i think both sides of the aisle would agree, if you keep spending money on transfer payments and consumption and you cut education and cut investing in your infrastructure, your

economic growth will unequivocally be slower. mr. brady: so in fact, what you are proposing is, let's invest because everybody will be better off. mr. druckenmiller: this is not just about fairness and equity. it is not just about that. it is about growing our economy and making it more productive. mr. brady: back to the harlem children's zone. tell us what you see with individuals there are you invest in and what the results are. where do they start from and where do they end up? mr. canada: for the folks who care about the research, the research on us is probably the most definitive in terms of some of the real hard outcomes. when stan and i began this initiative, if you were in my office and i was trying to raise money from you all, which i told the dean i wouldn't do -- it so

happens you stumbled into harlem, i would show you a chart of the incarceration rate in my zone. i would show you manhattan and i would show you what is happening in my 100 blocks. the way they calculate it, after a certain number, it becomes red. the harlem children's zone looks like one red sort of area. that has been going on all over america. these kinds of communities, we are spending huge amounts of money, not just on incarceration, which in new york state is $60,000 a year, but here's a number you need to keep in mind. if you go to new york city jail, there are two estimates. the low estimate is $115,000. the other estimate is $160,000 year.

when i think about what we have been doing in these communities, it has basically been just a black hole for tax dollars. unemployment is sky high. folks aren't working. folks aren't contributing. we are paying not just for incarceration, for special education -- it goes on and on. right now, our college graduation rates are not just higher than blacks in this country and latinos in this country, it is higher than whites in this country right now. this is where you need, if you really want to fight poverty, you've got to get the kids out there and give them a shot. i think that it's not only the education, but the latest data talks about incarceration, which is almost zero, and teen

pregnancy, one of the best teen pregnancy programs in the nation when you look at the difference between kids in the zone and kids outside. on each one of these indicators, i think this is really just trying to take our kids who are at the bottom and get those kids back into the middle so they have some opportunity to become middle-class citizens. [applause] mr. brady: so what can we do to make sure the communities are investing in the future in this way? that leads to the larger question of, how did we get to a situation where so much spending goes toward the elderly and why isn't there more for young people? what are the political issues that need to be overcome? mr. druckenmiller: it started with very good intentions. i showed the chart in the

mid-1960's when medicaid and medicare came on. we spend nothing and those are great programs. social security is a great program. but if you want to get into the raw politics of it, there's an organization called the aarp which represents the elderly. i started getting notices when i was 50. literally, every month -- you did too? i can't wait until i'm 65 to collect. just kidding. [laughter] it is an unbelievably strong lobby. to be frank, the elderly vote. first of all, children can't vote, but more importantly, the young don't vote. for whatever reason, dean brady, the young have not focused on this issue, but the elderly are focused because it is directly affecting their pocketbook. the young are having trouble focusing on something 20 or 30 years out.

i think that is the raw politics of it. the politicians cater to it. mr. canada: the thing i would add is that when you begin to talk to people -- there is a belief that these investments that were made simply didn't produce any results. folks believe that we had a war on poverty and we lost. i think one of the things, and i know a lot of the researchers are coming out of the goldman school, one of the things that folks are demonstrating is that you do get a return. sometimes it is not as quick as you would think. sometimes it takes longer to sort of see what those investments turn up, but when i go on capitol hill, which if you really want to see your government work, go to capitol hill and try and argue on the merits of science. you will be extremely disappointed.

they will think differently if stan comes with me because maybe that i will give me some money. i'm just coming in with problems. [laughter] i'm not kidding about that. the challenge is that when you talk to people, they honestly don't believe in many cases that these problems have solutions. they just have not seen the evidence, empirical evidence that says this is not some liberal do-gooder but actually a sound investment. i think to a degree that we continue to have our social scientists sort of file on the evidence that has to be done in a sophisticated enough way that reaches a skeptical audience, it gives some of us ammunition to begin to push back and say their investments you can make that actually do payoff and you get a real return on investment.

just say another example of those kind of investments and why they really work. >> the evidence on early childhood has been clear. findingngly, we are in these strategies that in families, has paid off even though folks didn't believe they did. there is a lot of research saying the ability of families to get mental health services and employment training really does pay off. that evidence is becoming very clear. there is increasing evidence that working in a place -- when we decided to work in our 100 blocks, there is not a lot of evidence that there was this idea that if you improve the physical and other opportunities in that area, it would broadly,

i think, allow children to do better. i think that evidence is becoming clearer and clearer. we should not have places where there is a sense of despair and there is no hope that this place will get any better. i think that is also becoming clear. there is evidence is now works. >> nutrition affects brain development right from the get go. that has been proven now. toxic stress affects brain development right from the get-go. that has been proven. you can absolutely invest in those areas to reduce those. about theittle more sense of despair because many people don't understand what it's like to be in some of these communities. -- ifthe very beginning you came to harlem today, you would not have a clue what i am talking about so we have

pictures we have to show people of what the community actually looks like. it was a disaster. it look like a bombed out place after a war had happened. people have this belief that children growing up there, you get used to it. no, you don't. you don't could use to that. would you rather be here or in this nice place? everyone would rather be in the nice place. it's not like kids don't know they are rowing up in a place where people don't make it out of those places. i was speaking to a young man, samuel and he was talking about growing up in an environment and how it was just normal for kids to go out and get involved in hustling. it's different but it's all the same stuff. doing something illegal to make enough money, not that you ever get rich or can retire but enough money you can take care todayessities and maybe

and tomorrow. when that becomes the culture in a place, that's what the expectation is. it goes with a lowered belief that you will live. kids who are 14 and 15 and believe they are probably not going to see 20, they do more risky kinds of things than people who think they have a future. it's easier for girls to not care if they get pregnant or not. they don't believe they have a future and there is nothing saying to them that you're getting out of this place. despair is infectious. i got it and you come in and whyr a while, i telling you it's not happening in in this place in these places have names that people give them that suggest us is one of those places you don't get out of. harlem was one of those places. this is what we learned -- hope is also infectious. -- weeople begin to see said we were going to change the know how manyyou

different entities coming to harlem and say we are going to change this thing? yeah, you will change it. when people began to see the physical change and begin to understand that this thing was really happening, at first we had to convince people to work with us and then people began to come to us to come on their block. and sense of growing up having a believe -- i will give you one last example -- harlem was the kind of place that for kids ended up at a place like this. they might get on the front page of time magazine. it's a big story and kid makes it out of the hood. we asked somebody when we started if they were going to college and they say i think there's this girl in 117th street and i think she's in college. you would have to be a genius to go to college. stan and i have over 940 kids in

college right now. when they come home which they are all coming home for spring they come home to a place or you have 900 kids for your community in college. you asked them if they go to college, are they in college? [applause] that's what changes what the norm is. the norm is no one goes and then you say you are normal. is, they are going to college? i know i can go to college. when that becomes the norm, young people just have a different sense of what it means to be hopeful. even if they are trapped right now, even if you are in a house and your mom is struggling and she has mental health issues and maybe there are drugs and maybe your brother is in jail, you see a path out of this that does not involve you risking your life or risking imprisonment. you see examples of it. you say there is hope.

that kind of sense of opportunity i think is what has made america great. in these places, we got to bring that sense back to these communities. >> let's just talk about a few things that some people have mentioned. some presidential candidates are telling us the issue is immigration and if we just stopped immigration we would solve the problem. how do you think about immigration? is it a problem for america or could it be a solution? all of us are the product of immigration. it might have been this generation. this country is built on immigration. with regard to the specific issue, immigration is a huge help. you bring in more of the population get more economic growth. you get more suckers to pay for the older people. [laughter] this is the way the system works. when you pay a payroll tax if you are working, it's not going

to you. this is not a pay-as-you-go system. you are paying for someone who works 40 years ago. immigration with regard to this issue is a help them and not a hurt. immigration in general, this country was built on immigration. i don't really understand. there is not a candidate out there where somebody in their family did not immigrate. it's just reject it was. [applause] -- it's just ridiculous. you see this differently in new york city. energy, see the sort of the economic energy that all of these immigrants big into the city. i don't think anyone thinks that's a bad thing we see going on and folks are trying to figure out what their niche is to climb the american dream. when you look at countries that have failed totally to bring new people into their communities,

you have a problem. and what about japan happens when that group grows older and they cannot sustain, you got a problem. this thing really has consequences. right now, immigrants are scapegoats for the fact that we problem growing and sustaining our middle class in america. that is not an immigration problem. and i thinkproblem an easy ways to find a skate out and say they are the reason that this is happening. we stopped all of them from coming in and suddenly we would have all these jobs appearing back area . this has been one of the more horrid kinds of conversations we have had in this country in quite a while. it reminds me of a time when it

othersto villain eyes like african-americans or anyone who grope in the 60's knows what was being said and how open people were disparaging that group. it sounds a lot like that to me. i think it's a real problem that we have not addressed fully. --there is another solution just lift the cap on capital gains and increase taxes on capital gains and we will have enough money to solve the problem. true or false? >> i happen to think he should normalize capital gains and dividends and it will bring some money so i think it will be helpful but it's just a pittance in terms of solving the problem. the funny thing about capital danes and tying it to this issue is the average 60-year-old has five times the net worth of the average 30-year-old.

taxing old people and rich people at a lower rate than the 30-year-old plumber is a direct transfer of wealth again from the young to the old. i don't think that's why it was intended but i have invested in businesses for the better part of 40 years. i started a business. the idea that somebody is sitting around collecting dividends and clipping coupons is some kind of great job creator relative to some guy working i think is a joke. you're talking to somebody who thinks they should raise or normalize capital gains and dividends and not give them preference but it won't solve the problem. it will give you some money but it will not solve the problem. >> that's one of the complexities that it's the magnitude of the amounts of money we're talking about. >> talk about the defense budget.

the defense budget of $700 billion. it's a lot of money and i don't think that is equal to three years of the growth in entitlements coming up. toyou took defense spending zero, you would not make up or three years of the upcoming growth in entitlements. again, should we have a defense than the 18er countries in the world combined? that's what the equal to just us. probably not and you could find a way to cut a little bit of the defense that it. they have already cut it. defense used to be 6% of gdp and now it will be like half a percentage of gdp. it has come down a lot. you can cut a little defense spending but these are just tiny little snippets compared to the big problem. if you want to get at the big problem, you will have to means social security and medicare --

means test social security and medicare. item have a problem stopping the colas. they have increased their share dramatically and five and seven-year-olds are suffering big as of expenditures on their future. i've got questions here from students. how do we start a movement here? >> that's why i am here. [laughter] that's their job. >> what is the leverage? what should we focus on question mark how can we get young people to focus on -- how can we and up with a war against all. >> that's not the goal to have a war against seniors. the first thing is to start voting. [applause] >> start voting, young people. >> i would make this issue a priority. i talk to young people and i have daughters in their early

20's. i was thrilled when gay marriage went through for a couple of reasons. i thought it was great and i thought maybe they could move onto another issue and that problem was solved. i got a two for when that happened. the charts i put up there and you are willing to think about your future, this is a big deal. thing i know about young people in this country, when they show in force and they vote on an issue and they are loud about it like they were on a rights and like they have been on climate, the politicians eventually listen but i have to vote or the politicians won't give a dam. >> the voting rates among young people are about half of the voting rates of those sexy five and older. about halfe are -- of the voting rights of 65 and older. the politicians will focus on the needs of those who vote. >> i don't want to put this as

young versus old. one thing i want to do as talk about seniors and future seniors. one of the things i want to do is preserve these programs so they are viable for our young people when they are 65 that's all. talk more about the harlem children's zone. what would you like to see if you had a way of expanding it around the country? what kind of investment do we need in the cities along the lines of what you have pioneered? >> the biggest challenge -- when president obama decided to replicate our work and create promised neighborhoods. if you look at his original announcement before he was president, he talked about putting billions of dollars which was a very modest sum compared to what he actually got through the congress. it was relatively small, much less in any of us ought was

sufficient to get the job done. big lift moving forward is to do a couple of things. work atare doing good the harlem children's zone but there are folks around the country doing good work also that is getting evidence and we need to celebrate that work. i think one of the real challenges was at first they said it could not be done and you could not go in and eliminate generational poverty in an area and get kids who not going to college into college in significant numbers. then people said we have evidence that you can do it but you are the only one who can do it which is absolutely not true. there is someone else running the harlem children's zone right now. the idea that we need to not do a minor investment in kids but put real dollars in there, i think that is really worth fighting for.

there are folks who are continuing to get the evidence that these kind of programs matter. we were talking with some of those folks today. i would love to say politicians simply look at the evidence and say great, thank you very much. stan has certainly been a major player in this. i learned this from the guy stand used to work for, george soros. he is very much on the left wing of the democratic party. >> he is to the left of berkeley. >> he is. was governor pataki governor, i have been trying to convince the democrats and republicans to do some investments and youth development. and really look at the mandatory minimum sentences before all of the stuff came up about incarceration rates and other

stuff. i was an organizer and an activist. i was yelling in march in doing all that stuff and it added up for to nothing. george called for a meeting with pataki which was at george's office. george is a democrat and pataki is a republican. the meeting is at george's office. george shows up to the meeting 15 minutes late. how is this going to work? he does not apologize and just sits down and says i want three things. theki gives him two out of three. not because they shared any political beliefs. itply because pataki thought wouldn't be a good idea to upset a billion or so i will do what the power matters.

here i was an activist yelling and screaming and marching. how you figure out what the power levers are to move public policy is a thing we need to focus on. we have an thinking real crisis in this country. you see it in the electorate. the establishment did not realize they had a rice is but people realized they had a crisis. i firmly believe that there will be an opportunity to talk to folks who would never listen to is anfore and say there answer to its making everybody so angry out here. we have the research to back up why this would be a good political investment. by the way, it will cost some money to get this done. until we can get folks to realize that there is money in that we could free up to do some of the stuff, we will continue to think we are a country of scarcity.

nothing could be further from the truth, nothing. this is really a matter of whether or not we will do the investment. i am kind of a foolish optimist in the midst of all of this but i think there will actually be an opportunity to have these conversations and i think this ,ime, we've a lot more evidence real scientific evidence, of what works and we had before. >> that is a heck of a note to end on. thank you for your optimism. we appreciate it given the presidential campaign we are all watching now. i want to end by saying these are two remarkable people. i feel honored that they came across country to be with us, to tell us what they are thinking about. what is quite remarkable is that they come from quite different places, quite different things in their lives and yet have come together with a concern for this issue. and ik that is wonderful think it's indicative of the kind of creativity that exists in america to try to follow

problems. the harlem children's zone is solving problems and i hope we can work here at berkeley and around the country to solve the issues we discussed today with respect to the future investment in young people to make sure we create a feature for them that's worthy for them in america. thank you for coming. thank you so much jeffrey canada and stand druckenmiller. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> florida governor rick scott speaks on the first day of the republican national committee's 2016 spring meeting in hollywood, florida. we will bring you his remarks live starting at 12:30 p.m. eastern on c-span three.

later, we will have more from the republican national committee when we joined their standing committee on rules for a discussion on recommendations for the parties july convention. that is live at 2:00 p.m. eastern also on c-span three. night, historian hitchernow talks about the broadway musical "hamilton." >> he said i was reading your book and as i was reading it, hip-hop song started rising of the page. i said really? he said hamilton's life is a hip-hop narrative. i was thinking what on earth is this guy talking about. i think he picked up on the fact that he had a world-class ignoramus about hip-hop. he said to me on the spot -- my first question was can hip-hop

be the vehicle for telling this kind of very large and complex story? he said i'm going to educate you about hip-hop. he did it on the spot and pointed out that hip-hop, you can pack more information into the lyrics in any other form. it's very ends and rapid and he started talking about the fact that hip-hop not only has rhymed endings, it has internal rhymes and wordplay. he started educating me in these different devices that are important to the success of the show. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific. we showcase our student cam winner. the video documentary competition for middle and high school students. this year's theme is road to the white house. ask what issues you want presidential candidates to discuss.