we had stagflation. we had periods unemployment plus inflation which the country never had. >> throw the history books out. everything is different. what we know for a fact that any policy that he put in place to help the middle class has not helped them at all. has hurt them at end of the day. made 1% richer. boosted stock market. unfortunately put lower income people on the dole. >> going with what tracy just said, remember the federal reserve has interfered more than they have done since the 1920s and '30s in the market. regardless of the obama policies, you now have this other entity not owned not by the united states government controlling the markets and hurting the middle class. >> be clear here, if you're watching show, you want to invest, i hate to say it this is a good market to invest in. >> heck yeah. cheryl: wages are not going anywhere. >> but our viewers viewers actually care about this. 2% growth, very low inflation. >> should be in this market. >> fed not raising interest rates. maybe so

stagflation, a problem we'll consider in a future edition of economics usa.his is david schoumacher. captioning made possible by the annenberg/cpb project captioning performed by the national captioning institute, inc. captions copyright 1986 educational film center ♪ programs call 1-800-learner and visit us at www.learner.org. annenberg media ♪ nenberg media ♪ for information about this and other annenberg media programs call 1-800-learner and visit us at www.learner.org. annenberg media ♪ one of its major banks the knickerbocker trust, closes. one man commits suicide. the banking system nearly collapses. what is it about banking that could lead to such a calami? inhe 192 the banking system helped spread prosperity.

"how sad" he asks "does one have to be to want to return to the era of stagflation." so one might ask a similar question about 1970s more broadly and about new york in particular. and thinking about the panel today, i think one of the reasons for the appeal of the decade and part of the challenge for historians but also why we're drawn to it is even the sense that even as it was unfolding there was this acute historical sensibility about what was happening. this seasons of the period of one of transformation. and i think there's something appealing about this feeling of openness and urgency implicit in the idea of crisis even though it's also fraught with danger. so just think a little bit about what this means and what the challenges and opportunities are that offers. just to look back, we've talked about some of the areas that were perceived as being incrisis, but one of the interesting things about that time is that many intellectuals invoke this idea. in his 1969 essay "political theory as a vocation" the political scientist writes about crisis as a kind of system

"how sad" he asks "does one have to be to want to return to the era of stagflation." so one might ask a similar question about 1970s more broadly and about new york in particular. and thinking about the panel today, i think one of the reasons for the appeal of the decade and part of the challenge for historians but also why we're drawn to it is even the sense that even as it was unfolding there was this acute historical sensibility about what was happening. this seasons of the period of one of transformation. and i think there's something appealing about this feeling of openness and urgency implicit in the idea of crisis even though it's also fraught with danger. so just think a little bit about what this means and what the challenges and opportunities are that offers. just to look back, we've talked about some of the areas that were perceived as being incrisis, but one of the interesting things about that time is that many intellectuals invoke this idea. in his 1969 essay "political theory as a vocation" the political scientist writes about crisis as a kind of system