WEBVTT - Former US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin Talks Strength of the Dollar 0:00:02.480 --> 0:00:07.080 Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. 0:00:07.280 --> 0:00:09.680 I want to get right now to former Treasury Secretary 0:00:09.760 --> 0:00:12.520 Steve Manuchin sitting down with David Rubinstein here at the 0:00:12.560 --> 0:00:13.280 invest conference. 0:00:13.320 --> 0:00:14.240 If you want, let's. 0:00:14.000 --> 0:00:16.320 Listen in something I like the idea of the ten 0:00:16.360 --> 0:00:20.640 percent tariff across the board. It's a consumption tax on 0:00:20.800 --> 0:00:23.040 foreign goods. But if you were to do that, he 0:00:23.040 --> 0:00:25.880 should do that through the reconciliation process so that can 0:00:25.960 --> 0:00:26.520 be scored. 0:00:26.560 --> 0:00:27.880 I think would raise about two and a. 0:00:27.880 --> 0:00:31.319 Half trillion dollars and could be used to pay for 0:00:31.400 --> 0:00:32.000 tax cuts. 0:00:32.120 --> 0:00:32.919 As an example. 0:00:33.400 --> 0:00:36.800 Speaking of tax cuts, you engineered with President Trump the 0:00:37.120 --> 0:00:40.320 very large tax cut of his first term. Do you 0:00:40.360 --> 0:00:43.120 think a similar sized tax cut is essential now? 0:00:44.159 --> 0:00:48.040 Well, the biggest focus for them is just extending the 0:00:48.159 --> 0:00:50.840 personal side of the tax cuts, which which are going 0:00:50.840 --> 0:00:51.519 to expire. 0:00:51.560 --> 0:00:52.400 And I think. 0:00:52.600 --> 0:00:55.760 That that was a signature part of his first term 0:00:55.800 --> 0:00:57.920 and I think that's got to be the priority to 0:00:57.960 --> 0:01:00.800 continue now. On top of that, I know he wants 0:01:00.840 --> 0:01:03.800 to do additional tax cuts, and that'll be a little 0:01:03.840 --> 0:01:05.760 bit more challenging with the pay force. 0:01:05.800 --> 0:01:08.840 Or then the campaign, he talked about a couple other 0:01:08.920 --> 0:01:09.520 tax cuts. 0:01:09.520 --> 0:01:11.480 One is no tax on tips. 0:01:12.120 --> 0:01:14.400 Are people getting tips actually paying a lot of taxes? 0:01:14.400 --> 0:01:14.800 I don't know. 0:01:14.880 --> 0:01:17.080 I mean cash they're getting out today, I don't know 0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:18.600 how much they're paying, And maybe they're paying a lot 0:01:18.640 --> 0:01:20.640 of tax Is that a big source of revenue? If 0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:23.240 you are loss of revenue if you don't have tax 0:01:23.280 --> 0:01:24.560 on tips, well. 0:01:24.880 --> 0:01:26.760 You know we're not in as much as a cash 0:01:26.800 --> 0:01:28.960 society as we used to do. So there's a lot 0:01:28.959 --> 0:01:33.280 of tips that go through an electronic mechanism. I think 0:01:33.319 --> 0:01:35.959 if he wants to have a small carve out for 0:01:36.080 --> 0:01:37.480 tax on tips. 0:01:37.400 --> 0:01:38.479 I think that makes sense. 0:01:38.880 --> 0:01:42.479 I think obviously, if you start giving tips to investment 0:01:42.520 --> 0:01:44.800 bankers at the end of the year instead of bonuses 0:01:45.120 --> 0:01:46.480 and they don't get taxed, that would be. 0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:47.920 A little bit more problematic. 0:01:47.960 --> 0:01:51.560 And you know, you could tax your lawyers, and so 0:01:51.920 --> 0:01:53.960 I think if he does that, it needs to have 0:01:54.000 --> 0:01:55.120 a small carve out. 0:01:55.360 --> 0:01:57.240 In the campaign, he also talked about I think no 0:01:57.400 --> 0:02:01.360 tax on Social Security. Wouldn't that be pretty expensive? Very expensive? 0:02:01.800 --> 0:02:04.200 And no tax on overtime too. I think he talked 0:02:04.200 --> 0:02:07.400 about does that be expensive too? It would be okay. 0:02:07.480 --> 0:02:10.520 So when you were working on the tax cut, when 0:02:10.520 --> 0:02:13.239 you were Secretary of Trategy, how did you find the 0:02:13.320 --> 0:02:16.799 intellectual level of the Ways and Means Committee members where 0:02:16.840 --> 0:02:19.200 they really everyone understand everything you guys wanted to do. 0:02:19.280 --> 0:02:21.400 And how was it like to engage with the Way 0:02:22.000 --> 0:02:22.880 Means Committee? 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:25.520 Well, I mean, there's no question, you know, when we 0:02:25.560 --> 0:02:28.000 passed the tax cuts, and this was a lot of work, 0:02:28.960 --> 0:02:31.680 we were very engaged with both the House and Senate, 0:02:31.720 --> 0:02:34.480 and actually we had weekly meetings which was called the 0:02:34.480 --> 0:02:37.280 Big Six. It was me and Gary Cohne from the 0:02:37.280 --> 0:02:40.600 White House, it was the Senate, and it was the House. 0:02:40.720 --> 0:02:44.320 And literally every week we sat down and went through details. 0:02:44.400 --> 0:02:46.560 So I mean, as you know, I mean, we had 0:02:46.680 --> 0:02:51.200 sweeping tax reform across everything. This time it is actually 0:02:51.200 --> 0:02:55.200 a lot simpler. But I do think Secretary Besett needs 0:02:55.200 --> 0:02:57.280 to be very focused on working with the House and 0:02:57.320 --> 0:02:59.560 the Senate to get this across the finish line. 0:03:00.200 --> 0:03:05.280 In recent decades, the annual deficit has been fairly high. 0:03:05.680 --> 0:03:09.240 I think under President Trump's first four years, I. 0:03:09.200 --> 0:03:09.920 Don't know exactly. 0:03:09.919 --> 0:03:11.840 I think it was maybe six to eight trillion dollars 0:03:11.880 --> 0:03:14.440 of additional debt added to the total debt. We have 0:03:14.480 --> 0:03:17.079 that thirty six trillion. Now, how are we going to 0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:19.880 get the debt down? And the deficit down if we 0:03:19.960 --> 0:03:21.639 have these big tax cuts. 0:03:22.120 --> 0:03:24.600 Well, David, let me just say I think the deficit 0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:28.679 is probably the most important issue today in terms of 0:03:28.800 --> 0:03:31.160 the long term impact on the economy. And just to 0:03:31.200 --> 0:03:34.760 put this in perspective, in the first term, we had 0:03:35.080 --> 0:03:38.520 debt to GDP ratio of about one hundred percent, and 0:03:38.880 --> 0:03:41.800 with the tax cuts and the economic growth before COVID, 0:03:42.160 --> 0:03:44.640 we were growing the economy faster than we were growing 0:03:44.640 --> 0:03:47.840 the debt, so that ratio would have come down, and 0:03:47.920 --> 0:03:49.560 I think we were trying to get it down to 0:03:49.640 --> 0:03:52.880 ninety to ninety five. The big focus on the first 0:03:52.960 --> 0:03:57.920 term was military spending. We unfortunately had to increase non 0:03:57.960 --> 0:04:00.840 military spending to get it through the Huston's Senate. But 0:04:01.040 --> 0:04:04.200 what really impacted us was COVID, and I think as 0:04:04.240 --> 0:04:08.040 you know firsthand, you know, we had to spend a 0:04:08.080 --> 0:04:09.840 lot of money in COVID or we would have had 0:04:09.880 --> 0:04:13.960 a worldwide depression, not recession. I think the problem was, 0:04:14.360 --> 0:04:16.760 you know, the first two trillion dollars was well spent, 0:04:16.960 --> 0:04:19.719 the next two trillion we never should have spent, and 0:04:19.760 --> 0:04:23.040 then the Biden administration kept on spending, so you know, 0:04:23.080 --> 0:04:25.200 we have debt to GDP of close to one hundred 0:04:25.200 --> 0:04:30.080 and twenty five percent today. That's a gigantic problem. Secretary 0:04:30.120 --> 0:04:33.200 Besent has talked about getting the deficit down from six 0:04:33.279 --> 0:04:36.240 percent to three percent of GDP, and that's got to 0:04:36.279 --> 0:04:38.640 be a major focus. So if we're going to do 0:04:38.680 --> 0:04:41.039 the tax cuts, we need to make sure there's pay 0:04:41.120 --> 0:04:43.640 for us and we need to make sure there's economic growth. 0:04:44.440 --> 0:04:47.640 When Bob Rubin was Secretary of the Treasury, he once 0:04:47.800 --> 0:04:50.200 talked about the value of the dollar, and he made 0:04:50.240 --> 0:04:54.200 a mistake, he later would say, by talking about saying 0:04:54.240 --> 0:04:56.760 something other than we want a strong dollar. And now 0:04:56.760 --> 0:04:59.560 every Treasury secretary is told you can only say one 0:04:59.560 --> 0:05:01.960 thing about the dollar, we want a strong dollar. But 0:05:02.120 --> 0:05:05.400 what can former secretaries and Treasury say about that? Can 0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:07.560 they say we want a strong dollar. Can you say, 0:05:07.720 --> 0:05:09.560 maybe it should weeke in a little bit and to 0:05:09.560 --> 0:05:11.360 make our exports easier to sell. 0:05:11.800 --> 0:05:13.400 Well, you know, it's funny that you say that, And 0:05:13.880 --> 0:05:17.920 Bob really was kind of credited with the strong dollar policy, 0:05:17.960 --> 0:05:20.479 and I think it's kind of every Treasury secretary after 0:05:20.520 --> 0:05:23.000 that kind of you know, you got Treasury one oh 0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:25.359 one training, and the first thing they told you was 0:05:25.960 --> 0:05:29.800 just talk about a strong dollar. You know, actually, when 0:05:29.800 --> 0:05:34.440 I was at Davos, I made a comment that I 0:05:34.560 --> 0:05:38.520 come into it on a balanced, stable dollar as opposed 0:05:38.520 --> 0:05:41.400 to saying a strong dollar, and all of a sudden, 0:05:41.440 --> 0:05:46.640 the dollar moved significantly. Look, I think and now I 0:05:46.680 --> 0:05:49.000 can talk a little bit more freely about this, But 0:05:49.560 --> 0:05:52.160 I think on the long term it is important that 0:05:52.200 --> 0:05:54.680 we have a strong dollar. The dollar is the reserve 0:05:54.800 --> 0:05:58.159 currency of the world, and a strong dollar affects a 0:05:58.240 --> 0:06:01.920 strong economy. In the short term, particularly because of trade. 0:06:02.480 --> 0:06:06.440 You know, the strength of the dollar can have a 0:06:06.560 --> 0:06:07.480 negative impact. 0:06:07.640 --> 0:06:09.800 But I think the most important thing. 0:06:09.720 --> 0:06:13.440 Is actually a stable dollar so that there's not volatility. 0:06:14.560 --> 0:06:17.320 Speaking of stable, what do you think about the Secretary 0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:22.080 of Treasury or the US government supporting cryptocurrencies. They didn't 0:06:22.120 --> 0:06:24.239 really have them so much when you were Secretary of Treasury, 0:06:24.560 --> 0:06:28.400 but now cryptocurrencies seem to be very heavily supported by 0:06:28.400 --> 0:06:29.840 President Trump and his administration. 0:06:30.120 --> 0:06:31.760 Do you have any comment on whether that's a good 0:06:31.839 --> 0:06:32.360 or bad thing. 0:06:32.839 --> 0:06:35.719 Look, my view on crypto has been pretty consistent. We 0:06:35.760 --> 0:06:37.839 did a lot of work on this in the first term. 0:06:38.279 --> 0:06:41.760 If people want to buy crypto as an asset class 0:06:42.720 --> 0:06:46.960 like they buy gold, that's fine. I personally don't wouldn't 0:06:46.960 --> 0:06:49.800 invest in it, but that's fine to me. The bigger 0:06:49.839 --> 0:06:53.559 issue has been making sure that crypto is not used 0:06:53.600 --> 0:06:57.280 for illicit activities. And you know, we spent a long 0:06:57.320 --> 0:07:00.679 time getting rid of Swiss numbered bank accounts, making sure 0:07:00.720 --> 0:07:04.880 that we have a mechanism that crypto can be compliant 0:07:04.920 --> 0:07:08.440 with BSA and all of our money laundering regulations, and 0:07:08.480 --> 0:07:10.240 I have concerns today about that. 0:07:10.960 --> 0:07:14.760 You know, in the business world, investment world, if you 0:07:14.880 --> 0:07:18.520 hire more fundraisers, you usually raise more money. In the 0:07:18.560 --> 0:07:22.120 IRS world, if you get more agents, you usually raise 0:07:22.200 --> 0:07:22.720 more money. 0:07:22.960 --> 0:07:24.000 But for some reason, the. 0:07:23.960 --> 0:07:26.520 Republican Party seems to want to have fewer agents, and 0:07:26.520 --> 0:07:29.880 therefore they reduce the number of agents, and therefore maybe 0:07:29.880 --> 0:07:31.200 they're not going to raise as much money. Do you 0:07:31.200 --> 0:07:33.960 have a view on whether cutting back the IRS agents 0:07:34.000 --> 0:07:36.240 that were put in under a President Biden is a 0:07:36.240 --> 0:07:37.200 good thing to do or not. 0:07:37.880 --> 0:07:40.920 Well, I have a strong view on this. I spent 0:07:40.960 --> 0:07:43.840 a lot of time overseeing the IRS. I mean, the 0:07:43.920 --> 0:07:49.600 reason why Biden administration added so many agents, this is 0:07:49.640 --> 0:07:51.600 the silly part of government math. 0:07:52.240 --> 0:07:55.080 So if they added all these agents. 0:07:55.080 --> 0:07:57.400 They were able to score it that they were going 0:07:57.480 --> 0:08:00.600 to able to raise revenue in the future, sure, and 0:08:00.680 --> 0:08:04.520 they spend that revenue today. So I actually don't think 0:08:04.560 --> 0:08:07.160 we need more agents. What we need is a bigger 0:08:07.160 --> 0:08:09.760 investment in technology in the irs. 0:08:10.720 --> 0:08:12.760 The systems are outdated. 0:08:12.280 --> 0:08:15.240 And I think in this day and age, there's a 0:08:15.240 --> 0:08:18.160 lot we can do with technology that we don't need 0:08:18.800 --> 0:08:22.160 physical agents auditing people. It can be done electronically. 0:08:22.440 --> 0:08:26.320 Now, is it possible for the DOOSE people to get 0:08:26.360 --> 0:08:29.960 the individual tax returns of a particular person to who 0:08:29.960 --> 0:08:34.120 they might not like or that's pretty impossible to do, well. 0:08:33.920 --> 0:08:34.959 It's not allowed. 0:08:35.320 --> 0:08:40.160 So the people are not allowed to get individual taxpayer information. 0:08:40.440 --> 0:08:45.760 My understanding is that they can get access to anonymized information. Again, 0:08:45.840 --> 0:08:48.640 I think it's it would be helpful for those to 0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:53.880 help look at modernizing the technology. But obviously, you know, 0:08:53.920 --> 0:08:57.520 looking at specific taxpayer information should not be allowed and 0:08:57.640 --> 0:08:59.160 isn't allowed now. 0:08:59.280 --> 0:09:01.800 President Trump and his administration are very focused on the 0:09:01.840 --> 0:09:05.080 trade deficit, which is very, very high these days. But 0:09:05.240 --> 0:09:07.600 is the trade deficit that big a problem compared to 0:09:07.640 --> 0:09:10.600 the budget deficit? If you were to worry about which deficit, 0:09:10.600 --> 0:09:13.280 wouldn't be budget deficit be more important than a trade deficit. 0:09:13.840 --> 0:09:16.559 Well, as you said, we have what's called the twin deficits. 0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.720 In my opinion, the budget deficit at two trillion dollars 0:09:20.760 --> 0:09:23.000 annually is a much bigger problem. 0:09:23.400 --> 0:09:26.040 And I think, by the way, if you brought. 0:09:25.800 --> 0:09:29.199 Down the budget deficit, by definition, you'd bring down the 0:09:29.240 --> 0:09:33.600 trade deficit because you'd have less demand for goods in general. 0:09:34.120 --> 0:09:37.800 And I do think the idea of resetting trade relationships. 0:09:37.800 --> 0:09:41.280 I mean, President Trump is right that the US market 0:09:41.320 --> 0:09:45.360 has been opened for foreign trade, and foreign markets have 0:09:45.480 --> 0:09:47.040 not been opened in the same way. You know, we 0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:49.840 spent a lot of time with China on the Phase 0:09:49.880 --> 0:09:52.360 one deal. They haven't lived up to that. But the 0:09:52.400 --> 0:09:55.640 whole idea was if we could allow access to our 0:09:55.720 --> 0:09:58.959 business to a growing China middle class, that's an enormous 0:09:59.000 --> 0:10:02.200 opportunity for US business. And I do think kind of 0:10:02.240 --> 0:10:04.960 a big part of the trade deficit is we don't 0:10:04.960 --> 0:10:06.720 have fair trade in both directions. 0:10:07.120 --> 0:10:09.640 Now, President Trump has made a big push on getting 0:10:09.679 --> 0:10:12.600 American companies and foreign companies to invest in the United 0:10:12.640 --> 0:10:17.800 States manufacture things that would probably be somewhat inflationary because 0:10:18.000 --> 0:10:21.600 by definition, if you have people producing things overseas, probably 0:10:21.600 --> 0:10:24.040 because it's the lowest cost producer. If you bring them 0:10:24.080 --> 0:10:26.360 back to the United States with higher labor costs, it'll 0:10:26.400 --> 0:10:30.360 be a higher cost production, therefore maybe more inflationary. Despite that, 0:10:30.520 --> 0:10:32.640 you think it's a good idea to have more things 0:10:32.679 --> 0:10:34.040 manufacturing United States. 0:10:34.440 --> 0:10:37.960 Well, I definitely think US manufacturing jobs has always been 0:10:37.960 --> 0:10:40.280 a big focus of his. I think you know, there 0:10:40.320 --> 0:10:43.160 was a large part of the economy that was left behind, 0:10:43.640 --> 0:10:44.200 and I. 0:10:44.120 --> 0:10:45.360 Do think that's a focus now. 0:10:45.360 --> 0:10:49.240 Obviously, there are different markets that can be competitive, so 0:10:49.400 --> 0:10:51.720 I think we can have the same thing, but his 0:10:51.840 --> 0:10:53.920 focus should be US investment. 0:10:54.559 --> 0:10:57.160 So when you became a Secretary of Treasury, there was 0:10:57.160 --> 0:10:59.520 somebody on the Federal Reserve Board who had been appointed 0:10:59.559 --> 0:11:03.439 by Obama, James J. Powell, who used to work at 0:11:03.440 --> 0:11:06.720 my firm, and then you recommended him to President Trump, 0:11:06.760 --> 0:11:08.840 I think, to be the chairman of the Federal Reserve. 0:11:09.679 --> 0:11:11.680 President Trump was not happy with him at the beginning, 0:11:11.720 --> 0:11:14.360 I guess, but I think he's going to keep him now. 0:11:14.440 --> 0:11:18.000 I guess any regrets about recommending J. Powe or how 0:11:18.160 --> 0:11:20.000 kind of job you think he's done. 0:11:20.280 --> 0:11:23.040 Well, let me first say, despite the fact that Obama 0:11:23.320 --> 0:11:27.920 did appoint him, Jay was a Republican and is a Republican. 0:11:28.760 --> 0:11:30.800 I had the opportunity to work with him really on 0:11:30.840 --> 0:11:34.040 a lot of the regulatory issues at first when Jenny 0:11:34.120 --> 0:11:37.160 Allen was chair and I do think Jay's done a 0:11:37.240 --> 0:11:37.959 very good job. 0:11:38.400 --> 0:11:38.600 You know. 0:11:38.679 --> 0:11:41.160 As President Trump, he had a bunch of issues with 0:11:41.240 --> 0:11:44.040 him raising rates. But then during COVID he did give 0:11:44.120 --> 0:11:46.600 him the Most Improved Player Award when he dropped trades 0:11:46.640 --> 0:11:48.040 down to zero at the time. 0:11:48.280 --> 0:11:51.160 So it generally the President of United States is not 0:11:51.160 --> 0:11:54.360 supposed to talk to or lobby the Chairman of the Fed, 0:11:54.400 --> 0:11:56.680 but the Secretary of treasurer usually meets regularly with the 0:11:56.880 --> 0:11:58.520 Chairman of the Fed. They kind of talk about things 0:11:58.520 --> 0:12:01.480 to some extent. Did you meet with him fairly regularly 0:12:01.559 --> 0:12:03.520 and how would those conversations go when you met with 0:12:03.600 --> 0:12:04.240 j Powe? 0:12:04.640 --> 0:12:04.960 I did? 0:12:05.080 --> 0:12:08.760 I mean we inherited a tradition which has been kept 0:12:08.840 --> 0:12:11.760 up is that the Secretary of the Treasury and the 0:12:11.800 --> 0:12:15.640 Chairman of the Fed meet weekly. It alternates every week 0:12:15.720 --> 0:12:18.880 between being at the Treasury and the FED. And I 0:12:18.960 --> 0:12:21.880 found those meetings very helpful. I mean a big focus 0:12:22.000 --> 0:12:26.439 was obviously what we were doing on regulation monetary policy. 0:12:26.600 --> 0:12:31.280 I never talked about monetary policy publicly, but yes, of course, 0:12:31.360 --> 0:12:33.600 we did talk about those types of things. We talked 0:12:33.600 --> 0:12:35.559 about the economy, and I think we had a very 0:12:35.559 --> 0:12:36.880 good working relationship. 0:12:37.120 --> 0:12:39.960 So today, if you were J. Powe, would you lower 0:12:40.040 --> 0:12:42.599 interest rates in the next six months or so? 0:12:42.800 --> 0:12:44.520 I think it's pretty clear the FED is going to 0:12:44.559 --> 0:12:46.760 lower rates. So I mean, if you look at the 0:12:46.800 --> 0:12:51.839 dot plot, which is what the FED governors have publicly said, 0:12:52.440 --> 0:12:55.800 you do see rates coming down to about three in 0:12:55.880 --> 0:12:58.440 a quarter, and you see the long term rate at 0:12:58.440 --> 0:13:01.680 about two point eight. I do think the long term 0:13:01.760 --> 0:13:05.000 rate between being closer to two and a half than three, 0:13:05.280 --> 0:13:08.120 and I think we're going to see rates lowered next year. 0:13:08.200 --> 0:13:10.240 And by the way, I think the ten year has 0:13:10.280 --> 0:13:13.160 that already built in to the market. So I think 0:13:13.160 --> 0:13:14.839 we're going to see three in a quarter three and 0:13:14.920 --> 0:13:17.600 a half percent funds, and I think we'll see about 0:13:17.640 --> 0:13:19.479 four percent ten year treasuries. 0:13:19.720 --> 0:13:22.120 So if President Trump were to call you and say 0:13:22.280 --> 0:13:23.640 I need to have a new chairman of that FED 0:13:23.679 --> 0:13:25.960 in May of twenty six, who would you recommend. 0:13:26.840 --> 0:13:28.560 Well, I have a bunch of ideas, but I'm not 0:13:28.600 --> 0:13:30.199 going to say that publicly. 0:13:30.240 --> 0:13:31.640 I would say that privately to. 0:13:31.800 --> 0:13:36.200 Okay, So let's go to the next subject then, more 0:13:36.240 --> 0:13:39.240 important than the policy of the economic policy of the 0:13:39.280 --> 0:13:43.160 United States government is a subject called private equity. So 0:13:44.280 --> 0:13:46.760 you left Secretary of Treasury and you start a private 0:13:46.760 --> 0:13:51.560 equity firm, Liberty Strategic Capital. So is private equity as 0:13:51.600 --> 0:13:53.400 fulfilling as you thought? I know you were in it 0:13:53.480 --> 0:13:56.040 a bit before you became Secretary Treasury, But how do 0:13:56.040 --> 0:13:57.880 you enjoy the private equity world? 0:13:58.400 --> 0:14:01.160 Well, David, you know, I've been in the investment business 0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:06.480 and the markets businesses now for forty years, and I 0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:09.200 think kind of every job I did kind of prepared 0:14:09.280 --> 0:14:12.840 me more for the future. And when I became Treasury 0:14:12.840 --> 0:14:15.400 as secretary, I think it was helpful that I had 0:14:15.640 --> 0:14:18.680 a background in markets and risk. I had a background 0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:20.760 I had been CEO of a bank. 0:14:20.800 --> 0:14:23.800 So that you know, I understood a lot of these issues. 0:14:24.520 --> 0:14:27.120 You know, we're small enough that we focus on a 0:14:27.120 --> 0:14:31.200 handful of investments. We've done about ten investments to date. 0:14:31.280 --> 0:14:33.840 And you know, I find it very interesting. 0:14:33.840 --> 0:14:36.080 You agree with my view that the highest calling of 0:14:36.080 --> 0:14:37.360 mankind is private equity. 0:14:37.560 --> 0:14:40.160 I do not. You don't think so there's something more important, 0:14:40.160 --> 0:14:41.800 but I don't know what it is. But okay, I. 0:14:41.720 --> 0:14:43.120 Would have thought you were going to tell me the 0:14:43.200 --> 0:14:46.480 highest calling was to own a baseball team if. 0:14:46.320 --> 0:14:47.040 It's a winning team. 0:14:47.120 --> 0:14:50.760 Yes, But so let me ask you, when you your 0:14:50.800 --> 0:14:54.720 Secretary of Treasury and you know, you're a very powerful person, 0:14:54.800 --> 0:14:56.720 and then when you're on the private sector, you're going 0:14:56.760 --> 0:14:59.360 and asking people for money who used to ask you for, 0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:02.440 you know, information about what's going on. What is it 0:15:02.520 --> 0:15:04.320 like to kind of make that switch to kind of 0:15:04.440 --> 0:15:07.000 asking people for money who used to ask you for 0:15:07.360 --> 0:15:09.400 not favors but more information or help. 0:15:12.320 --> 0:15:15.080 No, I mean, I mean, first of all, fortunately we're 0:15:15.680 --> 0:15:17.440 we're not in the fundraising business. 0:15:18.120 --> 0:15:21.000 And you raised for your first fund about four billion 0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:21.760 plus or something. 0:15:21.840 --> 0:15:23.920 Well I can't comment on the size of it and 0:15:23.960 --> 0:15:26.520 things like that, but yes, we did raise our fund. 0:15:27.600 --> 0:15:30.320 But you know what I find interesting now is actually 0:15:30.400 --> 0:15:33.200 it's it's you know, when your Treasury secretary, and it's 0:15:33.320 --> 0:15:36.760 extraordinary experience. But you can't publicly talk about a lot 0:15:36.760 --> 0:15:38.960 of things, and there's limitations on what you can do. 0:15:39.080 --> 0:15:42.480 So I find it actually quite interesting being involved in 0:15:42.520 --> 0:15:44.200 different things now from the outside. 0:15:44.480 --> 0:15:46.400 Well, one of the pleasures of being Secretary of the 0:15:46.440 --> 0:15:50.360 Treasury is you get your handwriting on the dollar bill 0:15:50.720 --> 0:15:56.360 something like that. So some Secretary of Treasures had incomprehensible, 0:15:56.680 --> 0:15:59.960 indecipherable handwritings, and they couldn't figure out who actually was 0:16:00.000 --> 0:16:03.360 finding it. But what was the pleasure like of getting 0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:06.560 a bills one hundred dollar bills or dollar bills and 0:16:07.360 --> 0:16:07.840 having your. 0:16:07.760 --> 0:16:09.440 Signature on it? Was that fun or not? 0:16:09.720 --> 0:16:12.960 You know, David, I changed my signature because my signature 0:16:13.160 --> 0:16:17.040 was completely illegible, okay, And I thought, if I'm going 0:16:17.120 --> 0:16:19.880 to have my signature on the money forever, it would 0:16:19.880 --> 0:16:21.800 be nice if you could see it and read it. 0:16:21.880 --> 0:16:23.880 So I simplified my signature a lot. 0:16:24.440 --> 0:16:27.440 I guess the question is is you know, I wonder 0:16:27.480 --> 0:16:30.360 if President Trump wants his signature on the money. 0:16:33.240 --> 0:16:36.120 By the way, I have a similar problem, don't. I 0:16:36.160 --> 0:16:38.440 can't do cursive because I think that was being taught 0:16:38.440 --> 0:16:40.520 in the second grade when it was Jewish holidays and 0:16:40.560 --> 0:16:43.240 I wasn't in school, so I can't really like cursive. 0:16:43.280 --> 0:16:44.400 So I don't have to worry about this. I'm not 0:16:44.400 --> 0:16:45.440 gonna be Secretary and Treasury. 0:16:46.000 --> 0:16:48.880 But there is a proposal now to have a two 0:16:48.920 --> 0:16:52.680 hundred and fifty dollars bill, a law of bills proposing 0:16:52.720 --> 0:16:56.920 Congress with President Trump's picture on it. Usually you're supposed 0:16:56.960 --> 0:16:59.320 to have passed away before you get your picture on it. 0:16:59.360 --> 0:17:02.480 But ye, many comment on that, or well. 0:17:02.480 --> 0:17:04.720 My only comment is, why would he pick two fifty. 0:17:04.800 --> 0:17:06.680 Let's go for a thousand if they're going to pass 0:17:06.720 --> 0:17:07.080 the law. 0:17:07.160 --> 0:17:10.200 Okay, Well, when you were Treasuring secretary, you did work 0:17:10.200 --> 0:17:14.120 on I think having a woman on the dollar bill. 0:17:14.240 --> 0:17:16.080 Was it the twenty dollars bill or or something. It 0:17:16.119 --> 0:17:18.240 was going to be somebody, but it took years to 0:17:18.240 --> 0:17:20.600 get it done. It hasn't happened yet. You actually think 0:17:20.600 --> 0:17:22.320 there will be a woman on the dollar bill in 0:17:22.359 --> 0:17:23.080 our lifetime? 0:17:23.720 --> 0:17:27.080 Well, David, you know what I was focused on, and 0:17:27.119 --> 0:17:29.280 I knew it wasn't going to be my decision. It 0:17:29.400 --> 0:17:31.840 was going to pass over. I don't know if it'll 0:17:31.880 --> 0:17:34.720 be Scott Besson's or not. But what we were very 0:17:34.720 --> 0:17:38.760 focused on the time is the issue around the dollar 0:17:39.080 --> 0:17:43.359 and so that you couldn't replicate it, and the security 0:17:43.400 --> 0:17:45.960 features of the dollar. And there are changes that I 0:17:46.000 --> 0:17:50.040 can talk about that are in the works around the printing, 0:17:50.119 --> 0:17:53.400 so that takes time, and that's the most important part 0:17:53.400 --> 0:17:54.120 of the change. 0:17:54.560 --> 0:17:54.840 Now. 0:17:56.000 --> 0:18:00.520 One of the most important parts of the Treasury Code 0:18:00.800 --> 0:18:04.480 i RS code is something called carried interest taxation. You're 0:18:04.480 --> 0:18:06.720 probably familiar with that. I've heard about it a few 0:18:06.760 --> 0:18:09.040 time times. I heard about it during the first I know, 0:18:09.520 --> 0:18:11.240 I talked to you about it maybe a few times. 0:18:11.240 --> 0:18:14.679 I don't remember exactly. But President Trump has never been 0:18:14.680 --> 0:18:17.480 a big fan of that. I think you know, and 0:18:17.520 --> 0:18:20.639 I think in this current speeches he's made about he 0:18:20.680 --> 0:18:23.680 said he wanted to get rid of current carried interest 0:18:23.680 --> 0:18:26.680 taxation and whatever benefit sports owners gets as well. 0:18:26.720 --> 0:18:27.920 I don't know exactly what they are. 0:18:27.960 --> 0:18:30.359 But so do you have a view on carried interest 0:18:30.440 --> 0:18:32.399 now that you were in the private ecuy world. Do 0:18:32.440 --> 0:18:34.480 you think we should preserve it or not preserve it 0:18:34.600 --> 0:18:37.560 or you don't want to comment on it. Well, David, 0:18:37.880 --> 0:18:38.800 there's going. 0:18:38.760 --> 0:18:42.439 To be a lot of pay fors in have to 0:18:42.520 --> 0:18:44.719 be in the tax code, and they're going to look 0:18:44.760 --> 0:18:47.640 at a lot of different things. I will say, first 0:18:47.640 --> 0:18:50.199 of all, in the carried interest it doesn't raise a 0:18:50.240 --> 0:18:53.760 lot of revenue. I mean, look, one of the issues, 0:18:53.760 --> 0:18:56.400 as you know, on carried interest is if you have 0:18:56.480 --> 0:19:00.919