WEBVTT - Biden-Powell Duo’s Macro Policy Revolution 0:00:06.040 --> 0:00:15.680 Madam Speaker, the President of the United States. Thank you, 0:00:15.760 --> 0:00:28.120 thank you, thank you, bring me back. Hello, and welcome 0:00:28.120 --> 0:00:31.120 to Stephanomics, the podcast that brings the global economy to you. 0:00:31.680 --> 0:00:34.599 And what we heard after that confirmed that President Joe 0:00:34.640 --> 0:00:37.199 Biden wants to turn the page on four decades of 0:00:37.320 --> 0:00:40.440 US tax cuts and talk of shrinking government with a 0:00:40.479 --> 0:00:43.479 call for not just more government, but higher taxes to 0:00:43.479 --> 0:00:46.199 pay for it. He celebrated his first hundred days in 0:00:46.200 --> 0:00:49.879 office this week with yet another massive spending package, this 0:00:49.960 --> 0:00:52.840 one squarely aimed at taxing the rich to give money 0:00:52.840 --> 0:00:56.640 to everyone else. Or told, he's proposed nearly six trillion 0:00:56.720 --> 0:01:00.000 dollars in new spending since taking office, paid for by 0:00:59.840 --> 0:01:03.040 at least four trillion dollars worth of higher tax revenues 0:01:03.800 --> 0:01:06.360 now as it happens. The US central Bank, the Federal Reserve, 0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:10.000 also met this week to consider its next move. Its 0:01:10.040 --> 0:01:13.640 policymakers looked at the ocean of new government spending coming 0:01:13.680 --> 0:01:17.160 down the track, the booming stock market, and the rapidly 0:01:17.240 --> 0:01:21.480 recovering US economy, and decided interest rate should stay at 0:01:21.560 --> 0:01:24.720 rock bottom and that the bank should continue to push 0:01:24.720 --> 0:01:26.720 money into the economy at a rate of a hundred 0:01:26.720 --> 0:01:30.240 and twenty billion dollars a month. All in all, it 0:01:30.280 --> 0:01:32.360 seemed like a good time to consider whether we really 0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:36.080 are seeing a revolution in US economic policy under the 0:01:36.120 --> 0:01:39.880 man that Donald Trump used to call Sleepy Joe. A 0:01:39.880 --> 0:01:42.880 little later, will also hear why Americans rich and Paul 0:01:43.240 --> 0:01:47.600 are retiring earlier these days thanks to the pandemic. And 0:01:47.680 --> 0:01:49.360 that's the opposite of what we were told was going 0:01:49.400 --> 0:01:52.200 to happen with the population aging and most of us 0:01:52.320 --> 0:01:56.840 expecting to work a lot longer. But first, let's have 0:01:56.960 --> 0:01:59.960 that talk about Biden's first hundred days and there's big 0:02:00.040 --> 0:02:03.800 new plan for American families with two of Bloomberg's smartest 0:02:03.840 --> 0:02:07.840 analyst of US economic policy, Federal Reserve reporter Rich Miller 0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:18.280 and White House reporter Nancy Cook. Rich Nancy, thank you 0:02:18.360 --> 0:02:19.960 very much for doing this in what I know has 0:02:20.000 --> 0:02:24.799 been a very busy week. Nancy, maybe just kicking off 0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:26.880 with you, can I ask you quickly just to tell 0:02:26.919 --> 0:02:30.120 me about the plan for American families and how it 0:02:30.160 --> 0:02:34.200 fits in with the president's other massive spending plans since 0:02:34.240 --> 0:02:37.800 becoming president. Well, Stephanie, I think that's the key operative word, 0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:42.239 massive spending plans. This latest bill that he's talking about 0:02:42.360 --> 0:02:45.800 is a one point eight trillion dollar plan that includes 0:02:45.880 --> 0:02:49.560 one trillion dollars of government spending and another eight hundred 0:02:49.639 --> 0:02:53.359 billion dollars and tax cuts and credits for families. It's 0:02:53.360 --> 0:02:58.679 a very sweeping plan that would try to expand preschool access, 0:02:58.760 --> 0:03:01.600 access to community car college, set up a national paid 0:03:01.680 --> 0:03:06.440 family leave program, expand and extend the child tax credit 0:03:06.440 --> 0:03:11.360 through It's really a liberals wish list. And it comes 0:03:11.400 --> 0:03:14.760 on top of the other two major plans that Biden 0:03:14.840 --> 0:03:18.760 has proposed, the one point nine trillion dollar COVID relief bill, 0:03:18.800 --> 0:03:22.280 which has past Congress, and then the infrastructure package, which 0:03:22.400 --> 0:03:25.520 is two point to five trillion dollars, which Congress hasn't 0:03:25.560 --> 0:03:28.720 even taken up yet. So basically, he is proposing about 0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:32.520 six trillion dollars in spending um in a very short period. 0:03:33.600 --> 0:03:35.200 And if you add and as you suggest, you know, 0:03:35.200 --> 0:03:36.720 if you add the one point I tried in for 0:03:36.760 --> 0:03:40.000 this package, and then about to each for the short 0:03:40.120 --> 0:03:45.360 term stimulus and infrastructure, I mean you're talking real money. 0:03:45.640 --> 0:03:48.360 I mean rich is it? Is it remotely realistic that 0:03:49.360 --> 0:03:52.680 all of that spending is really going to come through? 0:03:52.720 --> 0:03:55.200 I mean, where are the deficit hawks that we used 0:03:55.240 --> 0:03:57.040 to hear from. Well, first of all, you got to 0:03:57.080 --> 0:04:00.360 remember the different time frame from these bills. The first 0:04:00.360 --> 0:04:02.960 one that Nancy was referring to is, you know, getting 0:04:03.000 --> 0:04:05.440 going to get spent very quickly. We already have, you know, 0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:09.240 the checks are in people's bank accounts and are being 0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:12.040 spent the judging by what we've seen with the trade 0:04:12.040 --> 0:04:18.080 deficit shooting up. Um. But the other other two packages 0:04:18.200 --> 0:04:21.320 are more longer term. The first one, the infrastructure one, 0:04:21.560 --> 0:04:23.960 is more of an eight year plan and the families 0:04:24.040 --> 0:04:26.840 one is more of a ten year plan. So it's 0:04:26.880 --> 0:04:29.479 not all coming all at once. And as far as 0:04:29.520 --> 0:04:32.920 the deficit hawks, um, you can't see them in the markets. Uh. 0:04:33.080 --> 0:04:36.080 The treasury yields went up a little bit, but now 0:04:36.120 --> 0:04:38.560 I've come back down. You can't really. I mean, the 0:04:38.600 --> 0:04:42.200 Republicans are grousing a little bit about this, but with 0:04:42.760 --> 0:04:46.719 interest costs so low, Treasury Secretary Janet and Yellen is saying, 0:04:47.080 --> 0:04:49.200 now is the time to go big and we don't 0:04:49.240 --> 0:04:52.520 have to worry about the deficits. Well, and it's interesting 0:04:52.560 --> 0:04:57.000 you say that. I mean, philosophically, we are that we 0:04:57.320 --> 0:05:02.400 remember that the Volca Reagan paradigm we had in the eighties. 0:05:02.480 --> 0:05:05.440 You know, not only the sort of tax cuts, small 0:05:05.839 --> 0:05:10.400 small government philosophy of Ronald Reagan, but also Paul Veoker 0:05:10.520 --> 0:05:15.920 coming in as a very muscular anti inflation central bank governor, 0:05:16.160 --> 0:05:19.159 and the two of them kind of defined an era 0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:22.400 for you. I guess Richard would be fair to say, 0:05:22.400 --> 0:05:24.440 you don't quite go back to the Vulcar fed but 0:05:24.520 --> 0:05:29.160 you certainly have. You've been around the block for for 0:05:29.160 --> 0:05:32.040 a while. You know this is this is It is 0:05:32.080 --> 0:05:35.159 not overstating it to say this is overturning a very 0:05:35.200 --> 0:05:39.200 long time paradigm, but not just the role of the 0:05:39.240 --> 0:05:42.040 government but also the central bank. Yeah, I think, I mean, 0:05:42.120 --> 0:05:48.000 I think it's right Vulcar and and Reagan together. You know, 0:05:48.040 --> 0:05:52.920 there was a tremendous change in in the way in 0:05:52.960 --> 0:05:58.000 the economy went from the government to the markets. The 0:05:58.200 --> 0:06:03.440 emphasis was on efficiency not equality, and and the power 0:06:03.480 --> 0:06:06.000 also went from a labor to the owners at capital. 0:06:06.040 --> 0:06:09.279 And it was monetary policy that was premier, not fiscal policy. 0:06:09.800 --> 0:06:12.200 And all of that we're seeing, you know, turned on 0:06:12.279 --> 0:06:15.080 its head. You know, Volker wanted to get inflation down, 0:06:15.880 --> 0:06:19.360 power wants to get inflation up. I mean, and Nancy, 0:06:19.560 --> 0:06:23.240 we just heard there about raising efficiency. If you look 0:06:23.279 --> 0:06:26.880 at these packages together, particularly, I guess the Infrastructure and 0:06:26.920 --> 0:06:29.640 the Families Act, you know how much of it is 0:06:29.880 --> 0:06:35.200 about raising the growth rate, making the economy stronger, and 0:06:35.240 --> 0:06:40.960 how much is just classic redistributive big government. I think 0:06:41.080 --> 0:06:44.479 that the first plan, the COVID Relief Plan, was really 0:06:44.520 --> 0:06:47.680 about raising the growth rate and making sure that the 0:06:47.720 --> 0:06:50.920 economy could crawl out of the whole from COVID nineteen. 0:06:51.360 --> 0:06:54.560 I think these next two packages, the Family's Plan and 0:06:54.600 --> 0:06:59.080 the Infrastructure Plan, are really huge government programs that are 0:06:59.120 --> 0:07:01.920 trying to reshape, ape and re orient the economy in 0:07:01.920 --> 0:07:05.560 a completely different way. They're trying to redistribute some of 0:07:05.600 --> 0:07:08.440 the wealth that we saw, you know, rich people gain 0:07:08.640 --> 0:07:13.320 during the pandemic. They are trying to give money to 0:07:14.320 --> 0:07:18.440 communities like African American communities that have typically had more 0:07:18.480 --> 0:07:21.640 of a wealth gap. They're trying to create new jobs 0:07:21.720 --> 0:07:25.080 in clean energy, raise the wages of workers for things 0:07:25.160 --> 0:07:28.400 like home health care aids and childcare workers. And so 0:07:28.520 --> 0:07:31.880 it really is a massive government program to try to 0:07:31.920 --> 0:07:35.080 reshape the economy for what the Biden White House argues 0:07:35.280 --> 0:07:37.640 is sort of the things we need to do to 0:07:37.760 --> 0:07:40.160 prepare for climate change and to make sure that there's 0:07:40.200 --> 0:07:43.880 a stable middle class. Of course, Republicans are very against 0:07:43.960 --> 0:07:47.120 these ideas, and the two parties are interestingly sort of 0:07:47.160 --> 0:07:51.440 going back to their most extreme positions, where you know, 0:07:51.480 --> 0:07:55.320 Democrats are really proposing some of the most sweeping redistributive 0:07:55.360 --> 0:07:58.800 policies that we've seen in decades, whereas Republicans are going 0:07:58.840 --> 0:08:01.680 back to many of their all arguments, not about the deficit, 0:08:01.760 --> 0:08:03.520 as you and Rich have talked about, but about the 0:08:03.640 --> 0:08:07.000 need for small government, um, you know, keeping tax cuts 0:08:07.040 --> 0:08:10.080 in place. Um. It just shows how polarized the politics 0:08:10.120 --> 0:08:13.400 are on the future of the economy, but about the 0:08:13.440 --> 0:08:16.600 politics of this though. I noticed with the infrastructure Bill 0:08:16.960 --> 0:08:19.200 that you know, a lot of it's paid for in 0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:25.040 theory by raising taxes on companies and business, and that 0:08:25.120 --> 0:08:29.600 seemed to be quite popular with the broader public. Is 0:08:29.600 --> 0:08:31.480 this can the same be said of some of these 0:08:31.560 --> 0:08:35.200 efforts to increase taxes on the very wealthy. If you're 0:08:35.280 --> 0:08:40.240 just fixing on how much people can inherit who are 0:08:40.240 --> 0:08:42.959 in the really the highest bit of the income scale 0:08:43.520 --> 0:08:47.720 and sort of closing loopholes for the super wealthy, I mean, 0:08:48.160 --> 0:08:52.760 isn't that quite politically popular? That's also politically popular? There 0:08:52.800 --> 0:08:55.199 has been a raft of polling done in the last 0:08:55.240 --> 0:08:58.400 several months that show that, you know, raising taxes on 0:08:58.679 --> 0:09:02.640 rich people, raising taxes on capital gains, these are things 0:09:02.640 --> 0:09:06.680 that gains so much political traction during the presidential campaign. 0:09:07.120 --> 0:09:09.120 And one thing that the Biden White House really has 0:09:09.160 --> 0:09:12.840 going for them is they are proposing dramatic chat tax changes, 0:09:12.920 --> 0:09:16.000 but those tax changes are not as dramatic as the 0:09:16.040 --> 0:09:19.000 ideas that let's say, Senator Elizabeth Warren put out during 0:09:19.000 --> 0:09:22.559 the campaign or Senator Bernie Sanders. And the White House 0:09:22.600 --> 0:09:25.480 feels like they do have some political cover because they 0:09:25.520 --> 0:09:29.920 can say to more moderate Democrats and Republicans, look, we're 0:09:29.960 --> 0:09:33.000 not going as far as some wings of the party wanted. 0:09:33.480 --> 0:09:35.880 And they're trying to make the argument that wealthy people 0:09:36.000 --> 0:09:38.720 gain so much during the pandemic, you know it's time 0:09:38.760 --> 0:09:41.000 to make them pay their fair share. How much of 0:09:41.040 --> 0:09:44.040 this actually has any chance of becoming law, Well, I 0:09:44.080 --> 0:09:46.640 think that that's the key question. People that I talked 0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:50.600 to think that these two bills are huge, and uh 0:09:50.640 --> 0:09:53.120 they're they're such big asks of Congress. Most people I 0:09:53.120 --> 0:09:56.760 speak to think that ultimately these two packages will be 0:09:56.880 --> 0:09:59.720 condensed into one package, and a lot of the things 0:09:59.800 --> 0:10:03.440 will be taken out, particularly things from the American Family's Plan, 0:10:03.880 --> 0:10:07.240 like potentially the paid leave aspect or um you know, 0:10:07.400 --> 0:10:11.280 universal preschool. I think the there's a lot of bipartisan 0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:15.400 interest in doing things like infrastructure, rebuilding roads and bridges 0:10:15.440 --> 0:10:18.080 in the US and spending money that way. I think 0:10:18.160 --> 0:10:20.559 some of the components of the Family's Plan or will 0:10:20.600 --> 0:10:24.079 be a much tougher left politically and rich. Just thinking 0:10:24.080 --> 0:10:26.360 about the economics of this, I mean, there's some bits 0:10:26.400 --> 0:10:32.200 of the US tax code which to outsiders seem extraordinary. 0:10:32.240 --> 0:10:36.520 I mean, the fact that when people die, when you know, 0:10:36.559 --> 0:10:40.840 someone very rich dies and there as inherit, you know, 0:10:40.960 --> 0:10:43.439 hundreds of millions of dollars, all of the capital gains 0:10:43.480 --> 0:10:47.200 or those get kind of counted in the inheritance and 0:10:47.240 --> 0:10:50.120 you can sort of start scratch if you're the person 0:10:50.160 --> 0:10:52.560 inheriting it. The fact that people would just never pay 0:10:52.600 --> 0:10:55.160 any tax on any of that or those capital gains 0:10:55.200 --> 0:10:58.720 seems crazy to outsiders, even countries that have relatively lower 0:10:58.800 --> 0:11:01.560 tax rates. I mean, do there is an economic case 0:11:01.600 --> 0:11:06.120 for some of these changes? Oh, there's definitely an economic 0:11:06.160 --> 0:11:09.440 case for some some of these changes. Um, not so 0:11:09.520 --> 0:11:11.840 much on the inheritance tax, which of course, the Republicans 0:11:11.880 --> 0:11:14.760 tried to rebrand as the death tax, and and actually 0:11:14.760 --> 0:11:18.400 probably succeeded in doing But on some of the change changes, 0:11:18.480 --> 0:11:23.640 like increasing educational opportunities, expanding childcare, all of that is 0:11:23.679 --> 0:11:27.520 aimed at both increasing the size of the labor force 0:11:27.800 --> 0:11:31.480 but also increasing the skills of the labor force, and 0:11:31.559 --> 0:11:34.520 that's aimed at lifting this sort of long term potential 0:11:34.520 --> 0:11:38.640 growth rate economy. Likewise, with the public infrastructure, it's it's 0:11:38.679 --> 0:11:42.160 you know, improving roads, improving broadband so that you improve 0:11:42.320 --> 0:11:46.120 productivity and therefore improve the potential growth rate accounty. So 0:11:46.200 --> 0:11:49.120 while Nancy was right in saying, you know, a lot 0:11:49.160 --> 0:11:52.560 of this focus is on redistribution, there is an argument 0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:55.640 they're making, sort of a little more sot voce that 0:11:55.720 --> 0:11:58.199 this is going to lift the long term potential growth 0:11:58.280 --> 0:12:08.960 rate of the economy. And you have Janet Yelling there, 0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:12.800 who was at the FED and is now Treasury Secretary. 0:12:13.400 --> 0:12:17.199 Um she used to have to worry about inflation in theory. 0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:20.480 The Treasury Secretary doesn't worry so much about inflation. But 0:12:21.040 --> 0:12:23.679 this this surely has to be a concern if you're 0:12:23.720 --> 0:12:26.240 looking at all of that spending and borrowing going down 0:12:26.280 --> 0:12:29.560 the track Rich. Yeah. I mean the White House has 0:12:29.760 --> 0:12:32.600 has gone out of its way to make clear that 0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:35.760 that this is something they're watching very very carefully. The 0:12:35.760 --> 0:12:39.920 the Council and Economic Advisors took the unusual step of 0:12:39.960 --> 0:12:42.840 putting out a blog sort of post, sort of taking 0:12:42.880 --> 0:12:46.600 apart the the arguments of people like Larry Summers are 0:12:46.920 --> 0:12:50.000 about inflation. But I think in the end, you know, 0:12:50.360 --> 0:12:53.720 if we do get inflation, Janet Yellen recognizes as a 0:12:53.760 --> 0:12:56.240 former FED it's going to be up to the Fed 0:12:56.640 --> 0:13:00.280 to control it. Fiscal policy is not nimble enough, and 0:13:00.280 --> 0:13:03.040 and all these fiscal depending on how much it gets done, 0:13:03.240 --> 0:13:05.800 all these fiscal policies will be in train, all the 0:13:05.920 --> 0:13:08.840 spending will be in train. And if we get inflation 0:13:08.880 --> 0:13:11.080 and there's there's needs to be something done about it, 0:13:11.080 --> 0:13:14.040 it's going to be the Fed and j. Powell or 0:13:14.000 --> 0:13:17.559 wherever his successor, is a job to make sure it 0:13:17.600 --> 0:13:20.200 doesn't get out of control. And we did have we 0:13:20.240 --> 0:13:22.920 had the novel backdrop for the State of the Union 0:13:23.120 --> 0:13:27.120 of two women sitting behind the President, the Leader of 0:13:27.120 --> 0:13:31.240 the House, Nancy Pelosi, and the Vice President. And you've 0:13:31.240 --> 0:13:34.400 got a lot of chairs changing at the FED in 0:13:34.480 --> 0:13:38.840 the next year or so, including the potentially the reappointment 0:13:38.960 --> 0:13:44.400 or not of J. Pow as the the chairman. Do 0:13:44.480 --> 0:13:47.079 you think do you think President Biden is going to 0:13:47.160 --> 0:13:49.920 want to make the US Central Bank look different as well, 0:13:50.240 --> 0:13:53.440 put in some different faces, maybe different color phases. Thanks 0:13:53.480 --> 0:13:57.520 for putting me on the spot set for me, um, 0:13:57.640 --> 0:14:00.440 I don't know. I did. On the one hand, it's 0:14:00.440 --> 0:14:03.640 hard to conceive of a more dubbish Central Bank chairman 0:14:03.640 --> 0:14:07.400 than we have now and J. Powell that argues for 0:14:07.400 --> 0:14:12.040 for for keeping him in place. Uh. On the other hand, 0:14:12.080 --> 0:14:15.280 there there's the big there's a progressive wring of the 0:14:15.320 --> 0:14:18.120 Democratic Party which is going to be pushing hard for 0:14:18.320 --> 0:14:21.440 someone as you say, maybe maybe you know a woman 0:14:21.720 --> 0:14:24.920 or maybe African American or so that would be the 0:14:24.920 --> 0:14:27.720 first the first black chairman of the FEN for sure, 0:14:28.080 --> 0:14:32.040 for sure. And while Powell has you know, probably more 0:14:32.080 --> 0:14:35.480 than exceeded Democrats wishes when it comes to monetary policy, 0:14:35.920 --> 0:14:40.080 he's been he's been more friendly, I would say, to 0:14:40.240 --> 0:14:44.520 some changes on the loosening the regulations on the banks. 0:14:45.080 --> 0:14:48.040 And you know, you have people like Senator Elizabeth Warren 0:14:48.160 --> 0:14:50.640 who really want to keep their thumbs on the banks 0:14:50.680 --> 0:14:53.920 and maybe do even more and attack private equity, etcetera. 0:14:54.360 --> 0:14:56.600 So that when I'd argue to for replacing him, But 0:14:56.720 --> 0:14:58.800 I mean, it's probably gonna be come down to a 0:14:58.840 --> 0:15:01.920 decision later this year. If the economy is going swimmingly 0:15:01.960 --> 0:15:04.040 well as a lot of people expect, it might be 0:15:04.080 --> 0:15:07.520 easier to replace him. So just stepping back. Finally, you know, 0:15:07.560 --> 0:15:10.440 we always focus, rightly or wrongly on the first hundred 0:15:10.520 --> 0:15:16.880 days relative to your expectations. You've both been in Washington 0:15:16.960 --> 0:15:20.000 a long time. How would how would you rate President 0:15:20.040 --> 0:15:23.200 Biden's first first hundred days. You certainly spend a lot 0:15:23.200 --> 0:15:24.880 of money, or try to spend a lot of money, 0:15:24.960 --> 0:15:29.120 but any surprises, Nancy, I think that his first one 0:15:29.200 --> 0:15:31.720 hundred days have gone well. I think that even his 0:15:31.800 --> 0:15:34.680 critics would say that that they have gone well because 0:15:35.120 --> 0:15:37.400 he basically did two of the key things that he 0:15:37.440 --> 0:15:39.680 needed to do, which is, um, you know, inject a 0:15:39.720 --> 0:15:42.960 bunch of money into the economy to try to improve growth, 0:15:43.000 --> 0:15:45.760 to try to improve unemployment, to make sure that you know, 0:15:45.840 --> 0:15:49.120 families have stable financial footing. And then he's done a 0:15:49.120 --> 0:15:50.760 good job. He and his team have done a good 0:15:50.840 --> 0:15:53.440 job of getting the pandemic under control, ramping up the 0:15:53.520 --> 0:15:56.560 vaccine nation rate, and so the first one hundred days 0:15:56.560 --> 0:15:59.600 have really been dealing with these crises. I think what 0:15:59.680 --> 0:16:02.640 has a prize me and many other political reporters is 0:16:02.720 --> 0:16:08.680 just how progressive and revolutionary his agenda has been. President 0:16:08.720 --> 0:16:12.040 Biden has always been seen as a real centrist, a 0:16:12.120 --> 0:16:15.800 creature of the Senate, and institutionalist. He did not run 0:16:16.040 --> 0:16:21.160 a campaign that anyone saw as hugely progressive, that all 0:16:21.160 --> 0:16:24.240 that attention went to Senator Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. 0:16:24.840 --> 0:16:27.360 And yet once he has gotten into the White House, 0:16:27.720 --> 0:16:32.320 he has pursued policies that have shocked progressives and delighted them. 0:16:32.680 --> 0:16:36.600 And it's just much more of an ambitious, sweeping agenda 0:16:36.760 --> 0:16:40.000 in line with really the most progressive wing of the 0:16:40.040 --> 0:16:44.000 party then I think Democrats thought was possible just before 0:16:44.040 --> 0:16:46.440 we get to rich. I just wanted it is interesting 0:16:46.480 --> 0:16:48.920 that and that's obviously it's been striking to a lot 0:16:48.920 --> 0:16:52.800 of people. I guess that you could argue that if 0:16:52.800 --> 0:16:54.240 it's not going to if most of it's not going 0:16:54.280 --> 0:16:58.800 to get past in this Senate, that this is you 0:16:58.800 --> 0:17:00.560 know that he's not he doesn't really believe this, and 0:17:00.600 --> 0:17:03.600 this is all gesturing, this is all just sort of 0:17:03.640 --> 0:17:06.680 getting the left off his back. I think that that 0:17:06.800 --> 0:17:09.280 is there's some truth to that. With the American Family's Plan, 0:17:09.359 --> 0:17:12.480 this most recent plan, I don't think that I've been 0:17:12.480 --> 0:17:15.240 told that his heart is not as in this plan 0:17:15.560 --> 0:17:18.640 as it is with infrastructure. But I do think that 0:17:18.760 --> 0:17:22.080 he feels very strongly about the infrastructure package. I think 0:17:22.119 --> 0:17:24.840 that he feels very strongly that they needed to pass 0:17:24.880 --> 0:17:27.480 the one point nine trilliant dollar COVID relief plan, the 0:17:27.520 --> 0:17:30.879 Family's Plan. They unveiled the third because it is the 0:17:30.960 --> 0:17:33.560 last priority for the White House, and I think that 0:17:33.600 --> 0:17:37.400 plan is much more of one that has less support 0:17:37.440 --> 0:17:39.199 in the West wing or a bit more of a 0:17:39.240 --> 0:17:42.520 divided support among his top advisors and even from the President, 0:17:42.800 --> 0:17:45.119 and that is seen as something to get progressives office 0:17:45.160 --> 0:17:48.520 back and rich Bella, what do you think of the 0:17:48.560 --> 0:17:52.360 first hundred days and anything? Have you been surprised by 0:17:52.400 --> 0:17:55.840 by Button's radicalism or or anything else. I mean, I 0:17:56.200 --> 0:17:58.879 think I've been a bit surprised by his radicalism. But 0:17:59.080 --> 0:18:01.760 if you go back to the actual proposals that he 0:18:01.800 --> 0:18:06.840 laid out during the campaign, he is following along with 0:18:06.920 --> 0:18:09.040 many of them. I mean, if you go back and 0:18:09.080 --> 0:18:11.000 read the literature, what that was. You know, he was 0:18:11.000 --> 0:18:13.000 putting out at the time, even though he came across 0:18:13.040 --> 0:18:16.720 as as Nancy said, compared to War and and uh 0:18:16.840 --> 0:18:21.600 Sanders as a centrist, his his his proposals were pretty radical. 0:18:22.560 --> 0:18:24.600 I think maybe one thing that he might have learned 0:18:24.640 --> 0:18:28.600 from President Trump is if you promise something, try to 0:18:28.640 --> 0:18:30.879 deliver it. And I think that's what he's trying to do. 0:18:30.960 --> 0:18:34.560 And that's Uh. Whether as as you and Nancy pointed out, 0:18:34.640 --> 0:18:37.560 whether you know, especially with the second two packages, it 0:18:37.560 --> 0:18:40.679 turns out to be more aspirational than than actual, you know, 0:18:40.920 --> 0:18:45.359 remains to be seen. But I think he did. He 0:18:45.440 --> 0:18:50.200 did campaign with a pretty progressive platform. Maybe the rhetoric wasn't. 0:18:50.400 --> 0:18:55.000 The rhetoric was more I'm, you know, gonna cooperate with Republicans, etcetera. 0:18:55.040 --> 0:18:57.720 But if you if you, if you actually read the proposals, 0:18:57.760 --> 0:18:59.560 there was a hell of a lot of spending he 0:18:59.280 --> 0:19:03.000 would he was, he was putting out there interesting. Well, 0:19:03.240 --> 0:19:05.120 in a hundred days, maybe we'll come back and see 0:19:05.119 --> 0:19:07.880 how much more money he's tried to spend in the meantime. 0:19:08.040 --> 0:19:10.560 Nancy Cook, Richmond, thank you very much, Thank you, thanks 0:19:10.600 --> 0:19:20.800 so much. And now I wanted to bring you a 0:19:20.840 --> 0:19:24.160 different take on the recovery from US economy reporter Mike 0:19:24.240 --> 0:19:27.600 Sasso in Atlanta, who, together with his colleague Alex Tanzi, 0:19:27.680 --> 0:19:30.040 has been taking a look at why so many people 0:19:30.160 --> 0:19:33.360 at different ends of the US labor market are deciding 0:19:34.359 --> 0:19:41.760 one is a good time to retire. Economists speak for 0:19:41.880 --> 0:19:45.480 K shaped recovery in the United States, so named because 0:19:45.520 --> 0:19:48.760 many Americans with office jobs fared well during the COVID 0:19:48.840 --> 0:19:52.600 nineteen recession, and their fates resembled the upward slope of 0:19:52.640 --> 0:19:56.119 the letter K. Many others in the travel and restaurant 0:19:56.160 --> 0:20:00.520 industries have faired poorly, though, and occupy the downward slope 0:20:00.960 --> 0:20:04.760 that same dynamic as occurring in retirement. The pandemic has 0:20:04.800 --> 0:20:08.400 sparked a retirement russia sorts in the US, at least 0:20:08.440 --> 0:20:11.360 among those fortunate enough to have built up their savings 0:20:11.400 --> 0:20:15.960 and investments. A soaring stock market has boosted their retirement accounts, 0:20:16.320 --> 0:20:20.479 while the pandemic caused many to reevaluate their priorities in life. 0:20:20.960 --> 0:20:24.840 In Massachusetts, Melissa Martini put away her business outfits for 0:20:24.960 --> 0:20:28.320 good at the end of March. She's retiring five years 0:20:28.359 --> 0:20:31.680 earlier than she expected from her job as an administrator 0:20:31.720 --> 0:20:37.840 for the agency that oversees the Massachusetts Parks. I'm fifty 0:20:37.880 --> 0:20:41.879 eight right now, and I had it not been for 0:20:42.080 --> 0:20:45.080 the stresses of the pandemic and the cuts and my staff, 0:20:45.119 --> 0:20:48.439 I probably would have stayed in my position another five years. 0:20:48.520 --> 0:20:52.480 But I was looking at retiring, probably at sixty two 0:20:52.560 --> 0:20:56.240 or sixty three. I've seen so many people who have 0:20:56.520 --> 0:21:01.800 decided to wait too long to retire. And you know, 0:21:01.840 --> 0:21:07.359 many of my colleagues or older family members, and they 0:21:07.400 --> 0:21:09.640 get one year of retirement and then they get sick 0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:13.080 and they pass on, and it's just I don't want 0:21:13.119 --> 0:21:16.920 that for myself. Traditionally, Americans have waited to retire until 0:21:16.960 --> 0:21:19.800 they at least reached their mid sixties. That's when most 0:21:19.840 --> 0:21:24.240 are eligible for full retirement benefits from the Social Security Administration. 0:21:24.800 --> 0:21:28.520 The pandemic, however, has upended that thinking for the fortunate ones. 0:21:29.200 --> 0:21:32.600 After the global financial crisis of two thousand seven, the 0:21:32.680 --> 0:21:35.679 US stock market took more than five years to recover 0:21:35.720 --> 0:21:40.200 its losses. In this pandemic recession, it took only seven months. 0:21:40.720 --> 0:21:44.280 Many are getting out while it's getting still good. While 0:21:44.320 --> 0:21:47.680 the pandemic caused some Americans to delay applying for their 0:21:47.720 --> 0:21:52.120 Social Security retirement benefits, overall, it cost a net increase 0:21:52.160 --> 0:21:55.840 of one point seven million applications, according to the US 0:21:55.880 --> 0:21:59.800 Census Bureau. Some of those people retired willingly. Others lost 0:21:59.800 --> 0:22:02.240 their jobs and see little hope of getting a new one. 0:22:02.680 --> 0:22:06.280 Martini chose to retire after the state in Massachusetts kept 0:22:06.320 --> 0:22:09.840 cutting her subordinates during the pandemic, leaving her with too 0:22:09.920 --> 0:22:14.120 much work into little time. It's just there's too much stress, 0:22:15.280 --> 0:22:20.240 too much responsibility to UM to really handle without the resources. 0:22:21.320 --> 0:22:23.879 So my husband and I looked at our investments and 0:22:23.920 --> 0:22:27.840 our finances and UM, and we decided, you know what, 0:22:28.080 --> 0:22:32.520 I can survive on my state pension of my pay 0:22:32.600 --> 0:22:36.040 for the rest of my life because our investments were 0:22:36.080 --> 0:22:38.960 such that we could afford for me to do that. 0:22:39.400 --> 0:22:42.080 Six years ago, she and her husband bought a forty 0:22:42.080 --> 0:22:45.880 two foot sailboat. He's also retiring early, and they plan 0:22:46.000 --> 0:22:50.159 to put it to good use. And UM, we're hoping 0:22:50.240 --> 0:22:53.080 that at some point in the future, when we're not 0:22:53.119 --> 0:22:56.440 worried about aging parents, UM, we won't be able to 0:22:56.480 --> 0:22:59.399 sail to the Caribbean in the intertime and live on 0:22:59.440 --> 0:23:03.040 the boat or females a venture in the Virgin Islands. 0:23:03.040 --> 0:23:06.960 Probably to be sure, economists will spend years researching this 0:23:07.119 --> 0:23:11.320 most unusual recession and its case shaped recovery. While some 0:23:11.440 --> 0:23:15.879 recent national surveys suggest people are retiring early, others are 0:23:15.880 --> 0:23:19.760 being left behind. A recent survey from the Employee Benefits 0:23:19.840 --> 0:23:24.800 Research Institute suggests the pandemic in net terms, prompted more 0:23:24.920 --> 0:23:28.240 US workers to delay retirement than to speed it up. 0:23:28.840 --> 0:23:33.399 It's cited job losses in other stresses. Ultimately, the pandemic 0:23:33.480 --> 0:23:36.520 helps to shed more light on the gap between America's 0:23:36.560 --> 0:23:48.440 haves and its have not. So I'm delighted to talk 0:23:48.480 --> 0:23:50.960 now to Alex Tanzi, a senior editor for the Real 0:23:50.960 --> 0:23:55.119 Economy Team in Washington who worked with Mike pulling together 0:23:55.200 --> 0:23:57.240 some data to go with the story, but has also 0:23:57.359 --> 0:24:04.080 been thinking about broader quest of generational inequality. We tend 0:24:04.119 --> 0:24:08.000 to think that the last few years have not been 0:24:08.040 --> 0:24:11.920 great to young people relative too old, and it was 0:24:11.960 --> 0:24:15.399 sort of symbolized in that piece by the fact that 0:24:15.440 --> 0:24:19.600