tavis: good evening from los angeles. i'm tavis smiley. it probably does not sound like a good idea to open in summer hollywood movie with no stars and almost zero advance publicity, but do not tell that to j.j. abrams, despite the lack of star power and a shy campaign, he opened number-one at the box office this weekend. he began his new project "super 8." but first, a bleak outlook on jobs. rana foroohar oversaw coverage for "time" magazine and is the author of an article entitled: " what recovery?" both are coming up right now.

>> all i know is his name is james, and he needs extra help with his reading. >> i am james. >> yes. >> to everyone making a difference -- >> thank you. >> you help us all live better. >> nationwide insurance supports tavis smiley. with every question and every answer, nationwide insurance is proud to join tavis in working to improve financial literacy and remove obstacles to economic empowerment, one conversation at a time. >> nationwide is on your side >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning made possible by kcet public television] if you programming notes tonight

and i will be joined in one week by an official from china. tomorrow night i will be joined by anna deavere smith. will also look back emmitt conversation with film producer laura ziskin who lost her battle with breast cancer over the weekend. she raised millions of dollars in a fund-raising event. on friday, is talking -- conversation with talk-show icon, larry king. but first tonight we begin with the struggling u.s. economy. rana foroohar is the existing- existing "time" managing editor. she is also the author of this week's "time" cover story that everyone is talking about. i am delighted to have her join us tonight from new york city. an honor to have you on this program. >> an honor to be here. tavis: let me jump right to it.

if you make this easy for us. i love the cover and the way you break the story down. if you make it easy to grasp. let's just jump right in. and when you ask "what recovery ?" a. there are five myths about the economy. number one, that this is just a temporary blip. >> there has been a lot of talk about the bad couple of quarters that we have had. a lot of folks were predicting over 3% growth. and it came in below 2%. it is a very different economy than the 3% economy. and the thing is, it is not going to get a lot better by the end of the year. this is about real, major a structural shift in the way our economy works of the kind we have not seen in hundreds of years. tavis: before we go on to myth no. 2, why is it then that the american people were told a year ago and continue to be told by

certain economists, and he's been coming out of washington and now the obama administration is that things are getting better. if this is a temporary blip, then why the spin that things are getting better? >> we are going into an election cycle and the word -- it is a tough one for a politician -- double oip is a tough one for a politician. people want to think that it is just temporary and money is going to start pouring back in at home and there will be jobs. but it will not be that way. there are about half a billion people overseas that can do our jobs. we need to start talking about that. tavis: myth no. 2 is that the fed can save us. >> we had two rounds of stimulus and nobody is saying that the obama administration should not have done the first round, for sure, and possibly even the second round. but they did not work as well as economists thought they would.

and that is because stimulus of the kind we have been trying to do, where the fed is buying up t-bills in order to keep interest rates down so homeowners can get better interest rates on their homes, that works if people have jobs. but if you do not have a job you cannot make any mortgage payment. i do not think another round of stimulus is going to be a bailout of this situation. tavis: nobel laureate economists come to talk -- come to mind immediately. they have been saying that the stimulus, either one or two, was not enough. what do you have to say about that? >> i think that there is an argument to be made that you make the biggest hit hard in the beginning. if i was to do it all over again, i probably would have hit harder in the first round and you may not have been needed if the second round. but the bottom line is that our economy has changed in ways that

we are not talking about. one of the effects of the stimulus was to drive the stock market way up. a lot of that money went into bubbles and commodities in emerging markets. that made wealthy people wealthier, but it arguably increase the wage gap in this country. again, it leaves folks that do not have a home, that are unemployed -- and over 9% unemployment rate right now -- it leave them high and dry. tavis: myth no. 3 is that the private sector will make it all better. a quick couple of a sides before i get to your article. a front-page story today about the president's meeting with all of his friends on wall street. he is giving back for money from the same people he has been going have, or allegedly going out. they were in a private white house meeting of the other day with the president raising money on the phone after they leave the white house. and today, he met with his jobs grew, his jobs committee. he has come out again and said that jobs are number one.

with all of that back story, why should i believe that the private sector cannot or will save us? >> i was in washington last week and there was a lot of talk about the fact that american companies are doing very, very well. they have about $2 trillion on their balance sheets at home and abroad. and the administration is hoping that they will bring it back here and use it to start hiring. but the fundamentals have not changed. as you mentioned, there is a nobel laureate, michael spence, who recently did some startling research looking at american companies in the global marketplace. they have actually created almost no jobs since 1980. it is only the companies that work here at home in the more protected marketplace areas like health care, retail, things you really have to do at home, that have created any jobs. this is not a three-year lack of economic certainty thing that is stopping companies from investing. this is a 30-year cost trend toward globalization.

tavis: i do not mean to making political, but how is it that these companies who did, in fact, take money from american taxpayers to write their ships, how can they be sitting on trillions of dollars in profits? everybody knows that they have it. we hear it and see it every day. you can turn on any business channels and they are talking about it. but they are sitting on it. the argument i hear is that they are sitting on a because they are uncertain how well the recovery is going to do and ultimately, how fast is going to recover. back to your story, when they needed us they were -- we were there for them, but now they are not reinvesting in the economy. what do you make of it? >> i think they have gotten -- you have gone to an important point, which is why are we bailing out big companies? for starters, they do not create the majority of the jobs. i would be all for a tarp for

homeowners. we ought to think about not bailing out the largest industries, which are doing just fine, as we know from the numbers. but think about how to support new businesses and small businesses and individuals. tavis: your myth no. 4 is that we can simply move where the jobs are, a move the web -- move were the work is. >> and this goes to the fact that may be surprising to a lot of folks. there are 3 million job openings in the u.s. right now. it is not that there are some jobs out there. if there are quite a few jobs, but there is a mismatch between where the jobs are and where the labor is. in the past, we had this idea that you can pick up and move to where jobs are. it is not a straight line like that anymore. for starters, it is the fact that people are under water with their homes. in means that you cannot just have an out of work on a worker in michigan pick up and go to, let's say, washington state where the unemployment level is very low and get a job as a

machinist. he may not be able to get out from under the house. but beyond that, our labor effort -- labour force is changing in ways that we have not seen before. mom and dad are working and it has made it a tougher decision to just move for that job. these are bigger structural decisions that people do not talk as much about. tavis: and myth no. 5 is that entrepreneurs are greatest strength. why is that a myth? >> i think there is this belief in american society that we can elbow grease our way out of everything. i think that is used a lot of times to put the onus on the individual off when the state could be doing more. it is interesting if you look at the numbers. we used to be a very entrepreneurial society, but in the early 1980's, levels of new businesses starting actually started dropping off and they have been dropping and five over the last decade. that goes hand-in-hand with the rise of the financial sector. there is new research showing that a lot of talent that might have ended up in silicon valley

or other entrepreneurial hubs around the country are actually going to wall street. why? because they can be paid $400,000 for a starting salary right and $80,000 or possibly nothing starting in their garage. tavis: now that we have talked about these minutes, i wonder whether or not to your mind and your research if there is any reason to be hopeful. >> i think that there is. it is interesting. the administration is trying to death some of these questions, but the republicans are trying to pin all the economic problems on obama. i think the general policy vectors of the obama administration are correct, invest in education, talk about infrastructure. the retraining and employment would be job one. if i were in charge in washington to bring down the double-digit use unemployment numbers by retraining these kids to do jobs they can take in the future. otherwise, we will have a generation of people that will be lost to the work force.

tavis: maybe you should beach -- in charge in washington. she is a great mind and a great writer. you have just scratched the surface. digging into it yourself. parana, good to have you want. >> thank you. tavis: up next, j.j. abrams with his film "super 8." stay with us. welcome'm pleased to j.j. abrams back with this program. if you have been in the dark about his latest film, that is because he wanted it that way. now the cat is out of the bag and supported is in theaters across the country. it is produced by stevensville work. here are some scenes from "super 8." >> and, action. watch out! go, go!

>> and east bound freighter derails, but what the carter was on that freighter we do not know. -- what the cargo was on the freighter we do not know. >> you cannot tell anyone. >> i know. >> i understand your concerns about corporate. whatever your question, i can assure you that answer is no. >> it is like they all just ran away. >> of the property damage. i've got left. i've got nine people missing now. things are happening that i cannot explain. tavis: before we get to the content, i have a few questions about context, the buildup to the film. first, congratulations on a great weekend. >> thank you. tavis: let me start with what

the purpose and the value is on a film like this in deliberately keeping people in the dark. >> honest become for me, it is about -- honestly, for me, is about the experience. as a kid, you were not for said information about what the movie was going to be, so you actually had an experience. you were surprised and have fun. i feel like now at the theater even with a trailer, the trailer is over and it is like, well, that was it. that was the movie. tavis: [laughter] >> you could almost tell someone the story as if you had seen it. i like having an experience that is a little bit more surprising. we were not trying to be coy or clever. we were just trying to preserve the fund, the surprise for the audience. tavis: since everybody else in the business is doing it the other way, the way you suggested has been done for a while. the trailer pretty much gives the whole film.

what is the risk in doing it the other way? >> they risk is huge. especially coming out in the summer surrounded by movies. there might be a number of the end of this title, but is not a sequel. it is either a comic book or a sequel or a franchise. there's nothing wrong with sequels. they are easy to sell. the risk is putting out a movie that the audience does not have enough about. they might say, i do not know enough and i'm not going to go. tavis: what does the studio say even though you are j.j. abrams and spielberg is in the meeting with you and -- , but what does the sugiura say when -- the studio say? >> having stevensville or on your side is not a small thing. we said, look, we want to make a movie with a respectable number. if we did not go crazy and the $100 million over budget. it was a relatively speaking, is responsible amount of money and

stephen was saying, we want to make a movie like the old movies with a lot of hard. it is about a committee of people. there is a supernatural element to this fee -- to this thing. tavis: was paramount supportive? typically, you have to have a bankable star and you have to blow something up. as long as i live, will told me he studied how to make himself a star. i am paraphrasing now. and he talked about the ingredients that go into making a blockbuster. he and his partner steadied summer films, those that become blockbusters. i do not want to give his recipe away, but he said there were four or five things that go into it. you have some of those things from of you are missing a key ingredient, and that is, a major star. there is no major start carrying

this film. the truth is, the stars in this film, the names on the trailer, j.j. abrams and steven spielberg. if that should be enough. >> i should call will smith. tavis: [laughter] i'm just asking about the decision to put a movie out and hoping to do well and there is no big name attached to it. >> you are right. is a risk. and i think that people love discovering people. by the way, star trek, which of course, have been in "star trek," bud people did not really know that -- but people did not really know the source of that film. the movie came out and people still went. i think there is a fun to go into the movie and seeing people and getting to discover them yourselves and not feel like it is a another star vehicle.

if the right actor happens to be unknown, that should be allowed, too. tavis: for those who have not seen it yet, what do you want to tell us without giving too much away? >> super 8 is a movie about a group of kids making a movie on separate film, like i used to do it as a kid. they're making a zombie movie and it is really scary. they're filming one night. they have seeped away and they are filming at a train depot. -- they have snuck away and they are filming at a train depot. something escapes the wreckage. it is from an innocent, a kid's point of view of a monster movie, but it is also a love story, if parents and children story. it is about becoming a leader and not just a follower and finding your own voice. ultimately got the message of the film is that you can go through real tragedy in your life and still live and be

stronger afterwards. tavis: as a director, you can see your touch on the film. you can see some things cinematically that's the to your style. but it is clear that spielberg's imprint is on it as well. you talk about being a kid and making saberi movies back in the 70's -- making super eight movies back in the '70s, there is a touch of spielberg in this as well. >> i owe so much to spielberg. when i was a kid, that time of my life with friends making movies, i was not much of an athlete. i was the one chosen at the very end to be on a team. i was not the smartest kid. i was never in the library saying, just a minute, one more chapter. i did not have a niche. in a weird way, making movies was, for me, that of salvation.

-- a bit of salvation. what i was making movies, it was not just influenced by that context, but by the movies of that era. steven spielberg's phillips, among others, had such a -- films, among others, had such a profound effect on me as a kid. but this movie was never supposed to be overly influenced or borrowing from any specific films he made. that time frame in my childhood, it is impossible to separate the movies of that time from being a kid at all. tavis: is is not your first encounter with mr. spielberg, is it? >> it is not. i met him in 1989 as a screenwriter. but in 1982, i was 16 years old and there was a super 8 film festival in los angeles. a good friend of mine, matt reeves, and i were in this film festival. there was an article about us

calling us the beardless wonders, comparing us to people like spielberg and others, implying that we were incapable of growing a beard. to this day, i am offended by it. tavis: [laughter] >> the next day, spielberg's office called map. it was kathy kennedy, his assistant at the time. she is a big producer now. she called and said, would you guys be interested in repairing these movies that stephen made when he was your age? and we rely, what? nothing made sense. how was that a possibility? these were the original movies. it was not like it was a copy. he had done e.t. and readers of the lost ark. you would think that his early works would be protected by the government. tavis: and the smithsonian. >> that there would be hangar somewhere, a clean room.

you cannot give them to kids. that would be a huge mistake, but he did. and we did them and we repaired them. just to watch them. they were special features from that era. to watch these films were unbelievable. -- was unbelievable. there were better than ours. but it showed us that he started somewhere. tavis: what did that do, at age 16 ramat what did that do for it -- at age 16, what to do for your confidence? >> he is so much more confident than i ever was as a kid. and i do not honestly think -- you know, we may get comfortable sometimes and get used to something, but i do not think we ever outgrow the thing that we are. meaning, you are always kind of deep down still as uncertain as to work as a kid. there was inspiration that i had when i watch these movies. look what he did when he was our age. we should keep going.

but i was never as confident as the kid who is making the movies in "super 8." tavis: by your own admission you were not necessarily the smartest kid, not the most athletic, but you are the only kid -- you and your partner who were getting calls from steven spielberg to get an opportunity to work on his personal stuff. that had to do something for your confidence. i know your wife, mary in, works with kids. so much of what she does is at work with these kids to give them confidence. >> there is an event that my wife and i chair every year. it is completely inspired by her. it is amazing work that the children's defense fund does to celebrate these five kids in different cities who, despite odds that you cannot believe and lives that just are criminal,

literally criminal, and are still succeeding in school. most of these kids, the thing that inspires me is that they want to go back. most of these kids want to succeed to go back and help the kids that are in those environments. that is really what it is. they know who they are and they know the truth of who they are. and they are more confident, despite everything. that is what is so inspiring. and people believe -- leave literally starving because of how inspiring those kids are. as for real is this -- as it is to make movies for entertainment and growing up and talking about insecurity, it is the dance like that and the work that my wife does every day, you know, to support the use of this country -- youth of this country, it makes everything else seemed trivial. tavis: my time is up and "super 8" is the movie. you are such a busy guy and you

have television shows this fall. you even know how many you have? we know that "friend" is back. >> we have a show called "person of interest" on cbs. and we have another one called "goucher torrez." tavis: oh, to be j.j. abrams. "super 8" is the movie, if you did not know. see you next time on pbs. thanks for watching, and as always, keep the faith. >> for more information on today's show, visit tavis smiley at p.c.s. door. tavis: 24 a conversation -- join me for conversation with

anna deavere smith next time. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> for more information on today's show, visit tavis smiley at pbs.org >> all i know is his name is james, and he needs extra help with his reading. >> i am james. >> yes. >> to everyone making a difference -- >> you help us all live better. tavis smiley. with every question and every answer, nationwide insurance is proud to join tavis in working to improve financial literacy and remove obstacles to economic empowerment, one conversation at a time. >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> be more.