IS HE BACK IN ANDREW CUOMO IS ACTING LIKE A PRESIDENT.

THE PRESIDENT WANTS MORE OIL BUT LESS CARBON DIOXIDE AND BIDEN'S BUDGET.

DO DEFICITS MATTER?

STAY TUNED.

"IVORY TOWER" IS NEXT.

♪ ♪ SNROAT ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

I'M JOINED THIS WEEK BY NINA MOORE FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, KRISTI ANDERSEN FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, CHAD SPARBER FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, AND RICK FENNER FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

TELEVISION VIEWERS MAY HAVE NOTICED AN UNUSUAL POLITICAL AD RECENTLY.

STATIONS IN NEW YORK STATE HAVE BEEN RUNNING A COMMERCIAL SUGGESTING FORMER GOVERNOR ANDREW CUOMO WAS "CANCELLED"-FORCED OUT OF OFFICE BY CHARGES OF SEXUAL HARRASSMENT.

THOSE CHARGES HAVE NOT HELD UP IN COURT.

CUOMO RECENTLY HAS BEEN GIVING SPEECHES THAT SOUND LIKE THOSE OF A CANDIDATE...FOR SOMETHING.

HE'S SAID HE'S OPEN TO ALL OPTIONS WHEN ASKED IF HE WOULD RUN FOR OFFICE AGAIN.

AMERICANS LIKE TO GIVE SECOND CHANCES....

BUT WOULD NEW YORKERS REALLY ELECT HIM AGAIN?

AND VOTE ANDREW IMOAM OWE INTO OFFICE FOR ANYTHING?

>> I CERTAINLY HOPE NOT.

I THINK THAT WE FEED TO KIND OF THINK A LITTLE MORE BROADLY.

YES, THAT'S RIGHT.

THE VARIOUS D.A.s DID NOT CHOOSE TO PROSECUTE HIM CRIMINALLY BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN HE DIDN'T DO SOMETHING WRONG.

AND THEN THINK BACK.

I MEAN WE'VE KNOWN SINCE HE WAS THE HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT PERSON THAT HE CREATES A TOXIC WORK ENVIRONMENT WHEREVER HE IS.

LET'S NOT FORGET THE CORRUPTION AND HIS CRONIES WHO WERE THROWN IN JAIL, BUFFALO BILLION, PAY TO PLAY AND SO FORTH.

I JUST THINK-- NO, I DON'T THINK PEOPLE ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR HIM.

THERE WAS SOME PUBLICITY ABOUT A POLL THAT HAD-- I THINK HE HAD 30% OF THE PEOPLE WOULD VOTE FOR HIM AND 38% WOULD VOTE FOR HOCHUL IF THEY WERE BOTH RUNNING.

BUT I THINK THE SAME POLL ACTUALLY, SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THAT SIENNA POLL, THEY ASKED DEMOCRATS IF THEY WANTED CUOMO TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR AND ONLY 33% OF REGISTERED DEMOCRATS SAID IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.

SO I'M HOPEFUL THAT HE WON'T DO THIS AND THAT I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT HE WOULD NOT DO VERY WITH EL.

>> A COUPLE OF POLLS HAVE SHOWED HIM WITHIN STRIKING DISTANCE.

>> WITHIN STRIKING DISTANCE AND ALSO HE HAS A FAIRLY HEFTILY TREASURE CHEST.

I WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOU KRISTI AND SAY IF HISTORY TEACHES US ANYTHING, HE REALLY DOES HAVE A SHOT.

CONSIDER, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT DONALD TRUMP CAME CLOSE TO BEING RE-ELECTED DESPITE BEING, YOU KNOW, IMPEACHED NOT ONCE BUT TWICE AND IN CONNECTION WITH NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES, GO BACK TO THE DAYS OF WHAT WAS HIS NAME, MARION BARRY WHO WASN'T ACCUSE OF SMOKING CRACK.

HE WAS ON CAMERA SMOKING CRACK AND ENDED UP WINNING THE MAYORAL ELECTION IN D.C. AND THEN FINALLY BILL CLINTON WAS RE-ELECTED IN 1996 DESPITE THE FACT THAT A COURT OF APPEALS HAD APPROVED PAULA JONES MOVING FORWARD WITH HER SEXUAL HARASSMENT SUIT.

I'LL SAY WHAT FOLKS SAID BACK THEN WHICH IS ULTIMATELY THERE ARE TIMES WHEN VOTERS CARE MORE ABOUT DOW JONES THAN THE PAULA JONES OF THE WORLD AND IN CUOMO'S CASE, HE SORT OF OVERSAW A TAX CUT, RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE AND ALSO PUTTING A CAP ON PROPERTY TAXES AND SO I THINK THOSE ARE GOING TO MATTER.

BUT I WILL ADAMS ALSO WHAT IS UNIQUE ABOUT HIS CASE IS HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN BETTER OFF SMOKING CRACK THAN-- NOT FOR HIMSELF, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC IMPLICATIONS OF IT, BECAUSE HERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALMOST A DOZEN WOMEN, NINE OF WHOM ARE STATE EMPLOYEES, WHO HAVE ACCUSED HIM OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT ON THE JOB, INCLUDING 20 SOMETHING YEAR OLDS.

SO THAT MIGHT SET HIM APART FROM THE OTHERS.

>> NINA, ONE REASON I THINK THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE HERE IS REMEMBER WITH DEMOCRATS WHO REALLY PUT THE PRESSURE ON HIM TO RESIGN.

YOU KNOW, REPUBLICANS STILL-- REGARDLESS OF WHAT DONALD TRUMP ARE DOING, MANY OF THEM ARE STILL BACKING HIM AND ENCOURAGING HIM.

CUOMO IS NOT ONLY GOING TO HAVE TO RUN AGAINST REPUBLICANS, BUT MOST OF THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP.

AND SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A HUGE EMBARRASSMENT TO THE DEMOCRATS IF HE WERE TO RUN.

I WOULD ENCOURAGE HIM TO RUN BUT RUN FAR AWAY AND NEVER COME BACK.

THAT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF MANY OF THE THINGS HE HAS ESPOUSED AS GOVERNOR.

>> AND TO THAT POINT, WE'LL KNOW IN A WEEK WHETHER HE IS RUNNING BECAUSE THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING PETITIONS A WEEK FROM YESTERDAY, I THINK.

AND THAT REQUIRES DEMOCRATIC SUPPORT.

IT REQUIRES THE SUPPORT OF PEOPLE LIKE JAY JACOBS WHO IS HEAD OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WHO IS NOT SUPPORT SUPPORTING HIM.

>> THERE HAVE BEEN PLENTY OF POLITICIANS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THAT HAVE MADE COMEBACKS.

AMERICANS LIKE PEOPLE TO GIVE THEM A SECOND CHANCE, THIRD CHANCE SOMETIMES.

ARE THERE ANY RED LINES?

CHAD, HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO BE OUT OF THE PICTURE BEFORE YOU CAN TRY AND MAKE A COMEBACK?

>> I MEAN HE IS HARD FOR ME TO TAKE SERIOUSLY.

YOU ASKED EARLIER HOW WOULD YOU ADVISE HIM.

I WOULD SIT DOWN AND APPEAL TO HIS EGO AND SAY YOU ARE GOVERNOR FOR 10 YEARS.

THAT'S TOO SMALL FOR YOU.

YOU HAVE TO THINK BIGGER.

YOU NEED TO THINK PRESIDENT.

YOU ARE 64 IMREERDZ.

WE AGREED BIDEN WAS A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT AND NINA ADDED THAT STRONG PRESIDENTS DON'T GIVE REBUTTAL SPEECHES FROM THEIR OWN PARTY AFTER THE STATE OF THE UNION SPEECHES.

NOW IS THE TIME TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT AND I HOPE HE TAKES MY ADVICE AND LOSE SPECTACULARLY.

>> RUN FOR PRESIDENT.

>> HE HAS THOUGHT ABOUT IT FOR SURE.

>> BOY, COULD THAT BE HIS INSIDE PLAN?

I WAS THINKING MORE FOR SENATE OR SOMETHING.

>> I DON'T KNOW.

>> YOU ARE THINKING TOO SMALL.

>> BE CAREFUL BECAUSE IF TRUMP IS HIS COMPETITOR, YOU KNOW... >> HOW WOULD YOU TELL THE TWO OF THEM APART.

>> THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT.

>> CHEECH AND HONG KONG.

AND CHONG.

WITH GAS PRICES AVERAGING MORE THAN FOUR-TWENTY A GALLON, PRESIDENT BIDEN WANTS TO FIND A WAY TO GET MORE OIL ON THE MARKET.

THIS WEEK HE AUTHORIZED THE RELEASE OF A MILLION BARRELS A DAY FROM THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE, EVERY DAY FOR THE NEXT 6 MONTHS.

HE WANTS MORE PUMPED FROM U-S WELLS, AND MORE FROM OVERSEAS, BUT THAT MEANS DEALING WITH UNSAVORY REGIMES.

MORE OIL PUMPED OF COURSE MEANS MORE CARBON DIOXIDE EMITTED.

ARE BIDEN'S ENERGY AND CLIMATE GOALS IN CONFLICT?

HOW CAN HE PURSUE BOTH GIVEN NATIONAL SECURITY IMPERATIVES??

>> YOU KNOW, I ACTUALLY WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON THIS UNSAVORY REGIME THING THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST OIL THAT WE DEAL WITH ONE SAVORY REGIMES.

IT'S GREEN METALS, COAL COAL BATTLE AND LITHIUM AND THINGS WE NEED FOR OUR ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND BATTERIES.

WE NEED TO HAVE A DIVERSIFIED ENERGY PORTFOLIO.

SO THAT WE ARE NOT OVERLY DEPENDENT ON JUST ONE ENERGY SOURCE.

AND SO AS I THINK ABOUT SOME OF THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL POLICIES THAT THE WEST HAS PURSUED RECENTLY.

THINGS LIKE GERMANY CLOSING HALF OF THEIR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, GOVERNOR HOCHUL PROPOSING TO BAN NATURAL GAS IN NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION.

CALIFORNIA PROPOSING TO BAN THE SALE OF GASOLINE POWERED CARS.

INDIVIDUALLY YOU MIGHT DISAGREE WITH ME ON ANY ONE OF THOSE BUT COLLECTIVELY THE POINT IS THAT THESE ARE POLICIES THAT MAKE US MORE RELIANT ON THESE UNSAVORY REGIMES FOR OUR ENERGY SOURCES AND THEY THREATEN OUR NATIONAL SECURITY.

AND IF WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO IS SORT OF, YOU KNOW, BUT DEMAND, WHICH WE CAN DO THROUGH HIGH GAS PRICES OR HIGH TAXES BUT THAT'S POLITICALLY TOXIC AND NO WAY BIDEN IS GOING TO DO THAT.

>> I WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE CONTRADICTION BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, THE DECISION TO RELEASE THE OIL AND THE CLIMATE CHANGE.

CLEARLY ANYTHING THAT LOWERS GAS PRICES IS GOING TO ENCOURAGE MORE GAS USE, WHICH IS BAD FOR THE CLIMATE.

SO THERE IS DEFINITELY A CONTRADICTION HERE.

NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY, YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME YOU DRIVE BY A GAS STATION THESE DAYS AND YOU SEE 4.20 A GALLON, THERE MIGHT AS WELL BE A VOTE REPUBLICAN SIGN IN THAT GAS STATION SO HE IS TRYING TO DO WHATEVER HE CAN TO LOWER THE PRICE BECAUSE HE IS GOING TO GET BLAMED FOR THAT.

BUT THERE CLEARLY IS A DISCONNECT HERE BETWEEN LOWERING GAS PRICES AND TRYING TO IMPROVE... >> I DON'T THINK IT'S SO MUCH OF A CONFLICT AS IT IS RECOGNIZING THAT IT'S A QUESTION OF PRIORITIZING, RIGHT?

TO BORROW THE WORD OF OUR BRILLIANT ANIRBAN OF LAST WEEK.

THE QUESTION IS HIGHER TIEING.

WHAT DO WE EMPHASIZE MOST.

IN THIS MOMENT I'M LESS CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER THE POLAR BEARS ARE GOING TO BE EXTINCT 30 TO 80 YEARS FROM NOW THAN I AM WHETHER UKRAINE WILL SURVIVE THIS ASSAULT FROM RUSSIA AND DEMOCRACY ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND SO WHAT I FAULT NOT JUST THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THIS IS NEW.

THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR SOMETIME.

I FAULT OUR LEADERS FOR HAVING SACRIFICED OR JEOPARDIZED OUR ENERGY INDEPENDENCE WITHOUT A BACKUP PLAN; FULL WELL KNOWING RUSSIA'S CAPACITY AND THE WORLD EATS DEPENDENCE ON RUSSIA FOR OIL AND KNOWING RUSSIA ISN'T ALL THAT CRAZY ABOUT AMERICA.

I THINK THE WAY FORWARD IS AS THOMAS FRIEDMAN SAID IN A SORT OF TRANSITORY POLICY, TRANSITIONING, SLOWLY RECOGNIZING WE ARE NOT IN THE WORLD THAT WE WANT, BUT WE CAN GET THERE.

>> DO WE HAVE A NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY?

I'M NOT SURE THAT WE DO.

YOU MENTION VARIOUS GREEN POLICIES AND INDIVIDUAL STATES ARE DEVELOPING THESE POLICIES.

BUT DO WE REALLY HAVE A NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY?

>> AND TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, I THINK YOUR POINT ABOUT WE CAN'T BE-- NOT ONLY IS THOMAS FRIEDMAN SAYS WE SHOULDN'T DEPEND SOLELY ON, YOU KNOW, A FEW KIND OF SOURCES OF ENERGY AND CERTAINLY NOT THOSE SOURCES OF ENERGY CONTROLLED BY BAD GUYS.

BUT I THINK POINTING OUT THAT THE ENERGY, THE GOOD ENERGY IS ALSO OFTEN CONTROLLED BY BAD GUYS.

AND SO YOU ARE SUGGESTING, WHICH I THINK IS INTERESTING, A MUCH MORE DIVERSIFIED-- AND NOT ONLY MUCH MORE DIVERSIFIED PORTFOLIO OF ENERGY SOURCES BUT PRESUMABLY ONE THAT IS AMENABLE TO CHANGE OVER TIME BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING TO MOVE AWAY FROM CERTAIN THINGS AND ON TO THE MORE GREEN ONES EVEN KNOWING AT THE TIME THAT THE LITHIUM BATTERIES AND SO ON HAVE COSTS, ALSO.

>> YEAH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, AS BAD AS CARBON IS, THE UNITED STATES IS SITTING ON A LOT OF OIL.

AND SO WHEN WE MOVE TO THESE ALTERNATIVE SOURCES, WE ARE SACRIFICING SOME OF OUR NATIONAL SECURITY.

HERE'S WHERE I WOULD DISAGREE.

WHEN NEW YORK WENT TO A MORATORIUM OF GRABBING FRACKING I WAS IN FAVOR OF THAT BECAUSE I THOUGHT IN THE LONG RUN, IF THAT STAYS IN THE GROUND, THAT IS INSURANCE THIS THE LONG RUN, WE CAN ALWAYS GO BACK AND EXTRACT THAT.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, BEING LESS DEPENDENT ON NOT ONLY INDIVIDUAL SOURCES BUT OTHER COUNTRIES, THE MORE, YOU KNOW, I HATE TO SOUND PROTECTIONIST BECAUSE I'M USUALLY AGAINST THOSE TYPES OF POLICIES, BUT THE MORE THAT WE CAN CONTROL OUR OWN ENERGY DESTINY, I THINK THE BETTER OFF THAT WE ARE.

>> NINA SAID A MOMENT AGO TALKING ABOUT ENERGY INDEPENDENCE, BUT WE EXPORT A FAIR AMOUNT OF OIL.

AND IF WE DIDN'T, WHERE WOULD WE BE?

ARE WE ESSENTIALLY INDEPENDENT OR COULD WE BE?

>> WELL, I THINK ABSOLUTELY WE CAN BE, BUT WE CAN'T BE AS OF NEXT WEEK OR THE NEXT TWO OR THREE MONTHS.

AND TO YOUR POINT ABOUT FRACKING, SURE WE HAVE ALL OF THESE NATURAL RESOURCES, BUT IT'S THE PROCESS OF EXTRACTING THEM.

AND WHEN YOU ARE SHUTTING DOWN GAS LINES AND DRILLING, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION TO READILY HAVE THOSE-- I'LL JUST REPEAT MYSELF AT THE READY WHEN THEY'RE NEEDED.

>> PRESIDENT BIDEN SAID YESTERDAY THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF WELLS THAT ARE NOT IN OPERATION AND FLOW TO THE IDEA OF A USE IT OR LOSE IT PENALTY, RIGHT?

THAT COMPANIES, IF THEY'RE NOT DRILLING, WOULD HAVE TO PAY SOME SORT OF FEE.

SO AS AN ECONOMIST, CHAD, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT IDEA?

>> I THINK IT'S RELATED TO A LOT OF HEAD SCRATCHING IDEAS IN TERMS OF THE CONTRADICTION THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, LIKE WE WANT FEWER CARBON EMISSIONS AND YET WE ARE SUBSIDIZING OIL PRODUCTION OR CONSUMPTION SO ONE OF THE IDEAS THAT WE HAVE SEEN A LOT LATELY IS GAS TAX HOLIDAYS OR GAS CARDS FOR LOW INCOME DRIVERS, JUSTIN WOLFER WHO IS A LEFT LEANING ECONOMIST, A VERY GOOD ONE OUT OF MICHIGAN HAS RHETORICALLY ASKED WOULD IT BE A GOOD IDEA TO GIVE CHECKS TO PEOPLE IN PROPORTION TO HOW INEFFICIENT THEIR CARS ARE?

NO.

WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT SO IT IS BAFFLING WHY ARE WE SUBSIDIZING IN THAT WAY.

LIKE HELPING POOR PEOPLE, FINE, BUT MAKING IT CHEAPER FOR THEM TO SPEND MONEY ON GASOLINE, BAD.

>> COULD I JUST, IN THIS LAST POINT, TALK ABOUT THE OTHER PART OF THAT?

THE SUPPLY SIDE AND THE BUDGET THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, GOING TO TALK ABOUT NEXT, IT ELIMINATES A LOT OF THE INCENTIVES FOR GAS AND OIL PRODUCERS HERE IN THE U.S. AND SO WHAT WILL THAT MEAN TO SORT OF STORE UP AND HAVE, YOU KNOW, TO REPLENISH OUR RESERVES BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN AT SOME POINT.

BUT THIS BUDGET SEEMS TO WORK AGAINST IT.

THAT'S WHAT I SEE AS A MAJOR CONTRADICTION.

>> OKAY.

NOW WE'LL LEAVE THAT THERE FOR THE MOMENT.

THIS IS A GOOD WEEK TO HAVE TWO ECONOMISTS ON THE PROGRAM, AS IT'S ALSO THE WEEK PRESIDENT BIDEN RELEASED HIS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

POLITICALLY, BIDEN APPEARS TO BE TACKING BACK TO THE CENTER, INCREASING FUNDING FOR POLICE, ICE, AND THE PENTAGON WHILE SAYING ALMOST NOTHING ABOUT BUILD BACK BETTER.

THE BUDGET NUMBERS DEPEND ON A NEW "WEALTH" TAX FOR THE SUPER-RICH AND EVEN THEN, THE ANNUAL DEFICIT WILL STILL RUN OVER A TRILLION DOLLARS FOR YEARS.

REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS ARE RAISING THE ALARM OVER THAT LEVEL OF DEBT...IS IT A PROBLEM?

DO DEFICITS MATTER?

TO ASK THE QUESTION?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS FIRST ON BIDEN'S TAX PROPOSAL.

YOU REFER TO IT AS A WEALTH TAX, WHEN IN REALITY, I THINK IT'S AN INCOME TAX AND THAT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CONSTITUTIONAL.

WEALTH WHAT IS WE CALL A STOCK VARIABLE AT ONE POINT IN TIME.

IF I HAVE A SHARE OF STOCK I BOUGHT ON JANUARY 1 FOR $20 AND TODAY IT IS WORTH $50.

IT IS A MEASURE OF MY WEALTH.

INCOME IS A FLOW VARIABLE, SOMETHING WHOSE VALUE CHANGES OVER TIME SO THAT 30-DOLLAR CHANGE IN THE SHARE OF MY STOCK IS INCOME AND THAT'S WHAT BIDEN WANTS TO TAX.

AND IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ECONOMISTS WHETHER OR NOT THAT-- WHETHER WE REALIZE THAT GAIN BY SELLING THE SHARE OF STOCK OR NOT.

IT STILL REPRESENTS INCOME.

FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU TAKE OUT A FIVE YEAR CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT AT YOUR LOCAL BANK, AT THE END OF THE FIRST YEAR, YOU ARE GOING TO GET A TAX FORM THAT SAYS YOU HAVE ACCRUED THIS AMOUNT OF INTEREST EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN'T ACCESS IT UNTIL YOUR C.D.

IS DONE, YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY TAX ON THAT YEAR ON THE INCREASE IN YOUR C.D.

WE ALSO DO THE SAME THING WITH MUTUAL FUND DISTRIBUTION SO THERE ARE A LOT OF EXAMPLES OF US TAXING THE UNREALIZED CHANGE IN AN ASSET.

THIS IS IMPORTANT, I THINK, BECAUSE THE WEALTHY HAVE BEEN SO GOOD AT BEING ABLE TO SHELTER INCOME FROM TAXATION.

YOU KNOW, THIS THEY COMPLAIN A LOT ABOUT... >> YOU ARE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THIS IDEA OF THE WEALTH-- >> A WAY TO GET THEM TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE.

>> A NATURAL SEGUE TO YOU.

>> I HOPE YOU GIVE ME ENOUGH TIME TO TALK DO DEFICITS MATTER BUT HAVE I TO RESPOND TO THIS.

LOOK, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND CUMBERSOME TO OPERATE, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TAXING UNREALIZED CAPITAL GAINS.

I THINK THE CLOSEST PARALLEL WE HAVE HERE IS WITH PROPERTY TAXES.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOESN'T TAX PROPERTY.

THAT'S NOT OUT OF THE FINDNESS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S HEART, IT'S BECAUSE IT'S ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

AND SO IT'S NOT THE SAME THING AS WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> WHY ARE UNREALIZED GAINS NOT INCOME?

YOU LOOK AT ANY PUBLIC FINANCE TEXTBOOK AND I'VE TAUGHT THE COURSE FOR 30 YEARS AND THEY DEFINE INCOME COMPREHENSIVELY AS WHAT YOU GET PAID TRANSFERS AND REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAINS.

>> IF THEY WERE, WE WOULD TAX PROPERTY AND WE DON'T.

EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU STILL HAVE TO CONVINCE A SUPREME COURT THAT IS SPLIT 6-3 CONSERVATIVE THAT YOU ARE RIGHT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> WELL, HE DOES THINK HE'S RIGHT, CHAD.

[LAUGHTER] >> I DO.

>> LET'S GO BACK TO THE OTHER QUESTION IN HERE, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, THE DEFICITS.

AND THERE ARE HUGE ANNUAL DEFICITS.

WE'VE HAD THEM NOW FOR QUITE SOMETIME AND THEY'RE JUST GETTING BIGGER.

THEY'RE GETTING A LITTLE SMALLER NOW WITH THIS.

BUT DO THEY MATTER?

YOU WANTED A SHOT AT THAT.

>> FORGIVE ME, I WANT TO EXPLAIN THIS.

>> I FEEL LIKE I'M IN ECON 101.

>> THE FIRST GRAPH, WHAT IT IS LOOKING AT IS THE INTEREST RATE THE U.S. GOVERNMENT PAYS ON ITS FEDERAL DEBT IN MY LIFETIME.

WHEN I WAS PORN IT WAS 7.5%.

PEAKED AT 15% SHORTLY AFTER THAT AND DECLINED PRECIPITOUSLY SINCE THEN.

WE LIVE IN A VERY LOW INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT.

THE OTHER ONE LOOKS AT OUR DEBT TO G.D.P.

RATIO AND THAT RED LINE IN THE MIDDLE IS WHEN CHENEY SUPPOSEDLY SAID DEFICITS DON'T MATTER.

THAT G.D.P.

RATIO OFFERED HOVERED AT 6% FOR A DECADE AND HUCK OUT FOR A FEW YEARS AFTERWARDS.

IT'S NOT UNTIL THE 1-2 PUNCH OF THE FINANCIAL CRISIS AND COVID THAT IT SHOOTS UP TO 130% WHERE IT IS NOW.

WE SPEND $562 BILLION A YEAR ON SERVICING OUR DEBT ALONE AND IF WE WERE TO LEAVE THIS LOW INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT, THAT DEBT BURDEN EXPLODES.

YES, DEFICITS MATTER.

WE SHOULD BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS.

>> THIS IDEA OF MODERN MONETARY THEORY DOES NOT APPLY.

>> I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE LONGER TERM, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITH SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE AND FUNDING, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGHER ACT TO KEEP THE DEFICIT FROM EXPLODING DOWN THE LINE.

SO I DO THINK WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE DEFICIT.

I THINK THAT THE DEFICIT ISN'T FEARLY AS BIG A PROBLEM AS SOME MONITORRISTS BELIEVE.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THE LEFT IS ADEQUATELY SEEING SOME OF THE SERIOUSLY OF THE DEFICIT.

>> I THINK WERE YOU TRYING TO GET A WORD IN THERE.

>> YEAH, BUT NOT IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO.

[LAUGHTER] I WOULD LITERALLY BE OUT OF MY WEIGHT CATEGORY SO-- BUT I WILL SAY WHATEVER ARE THE APPROPRIATE APPROACHES TO THE DEBT AND TO THE DEFICIT, IN THE HERE AND NOW, WHEN I LOOK AT BIDEN'S BUDGET, I SEE PRIORITIES THAT I'M NOT ALL TOGETHER CONVINCED MATCH WITH THE ISSUES OF THE DAY.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A 10% INCREASE IN DEFENSE THAT MANY, INCLUDING DEMOCRATS, DON'T BELIEVE REALLY TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE EXTENT OF BOTH THE RUSSIA'S WAR ON CHINA AS WELL AS WHAT SECRETARY AUSTIN REFERRED TO AS THE SORT OF, YOU KNOW, CHALLENGE OF CHINA.

>> WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE THAT RIGHT THERE BECAUSE THE ECONOMICS DISCUSSION TOOK US RIGHT TO OUR As AND Fs.

WE HAVE TO GO TO OUR FS STARTING WITH NINA, WITH YOU.

>> YESTERDAY'S NEWS HEADLINES REPORTED THAT CHRIS ROCK HAD FINALLY BROKEN HIS SILENCE ABOUT THE SLAP AT THE OSCARS THAT WAS HEARD AROUND THE GLOBE.

TURNS OUT, WHEN ROCK HAD SUPPOSEDLY QUOTE UNQUOTE BROKEN HIS SILENCE AT THE SORT OF A COMEDY SHOW IN BOSTON, WHAT HE SAID WAS THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY.

TALK ABOUT CLICK BAIT.

>> KRISTI, YOUR F. >> I'M GIVING AN F TO VLADAMIR PUTIN.

THAT MAY SEEM A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD DO THAT A LOT.

BUT AS PART OF THE NEW CENSORSHIP LAW HE HAS SHUT DOWN THE LAST RUSSIAN MEDIA OUTLET CRITICAL OF CREME LIN'S WAR IN UKRAINE.

THE NEWSPAPER IS EDITED BY COMMITRY ONE OF THE WINNERS OF THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE FOR HIS EFFORTS TO DEFEND FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

>> CHAD, YOUR F. >> MY F GOES TO NEWS THAT SAUDI ARABIA IS CONSIDERING USING SOMETHING OTHER THAN DOLLARS TO ITS SALES TO CHINA.

TURNS OUT WHEN INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS OCCUR IN U.S.

DOLLARS, WE BENEFIT, GOOGLE IT IF YOU WANT TO.

BUT THE POINT IS THAT THIS NEWS IS BAD FOR THE U.S. AND IT'S FURTHER SIGNS OF CHINA'S RISING ECONOMIC POWER AND ALSO OF OUR DETERIORATING RELATIONSHIP WITH SAUDI ARABIA UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

>> RICK.

>> MY F GOES TO CONGRESS FOR NOT APPROVING BIDEN'S REQUEST OF $15 PRNLT 6 BILLION IN HIS BUDGET FOR FUTURE VARIANTS OF COVID INCLUDING MONEY FOR VACCINES AND THERAPEUTICS.

THIS IS VERY SHORT SIGHTED.

WE DON'T KNOW THE FUTURE OF THIS VIRUS AND NOT PLANNING FOR THESE CONTINGENCIES, I THINK, IS AN EXAMPLE OF BEING PENNY WISE AND POUND FOOLISH.

>> OUR AS.

NINA YOURS FIRST.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW OFF MY MOTHER.

THESE PICS ARE FROM LAST YEAR.

SHE IS PERFECTION, WONDERFUL AND A BLESSING IN EVERY WAY, WHICH IS WHY I ALWAYS TELL HERSHEY IS MY ALL TIME FAVORITE MOM.

THIS MONTH SHE TURNS 93 YEARS OLD.

HAPPY BIRD DAY MADEA, WHICH IS WHAT WE CALL HER AND HERE IS TO 93 MORE.

>> HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOUR MOTHER.

AND KRISTI, YOUR A.

>> GIVING AN A TO REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC ELECTION OFFICIALS IN GEORGIA.

THEY PUSHED BACK AGAINST PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT TOOK POWER AWAY FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE, GAVE THE GEORGIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS POWER TO LOOK FOR VOTE FRAUD, WOULD HAVE ALLOWED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO INSPECT BALLOTS, IMPOSE NUMEROUS ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, SO STAY TUNE FOR THE OUTCOME OF THAT.

>> CHAD, A.

>> MY A GOES TO DONALD TRUMP FOR GETTING A HOLE IN ONE IN GOLF THIS WEEK.

SURE IT'S A LITTLE PECULIAR THAT HE WROTE A BIG LONG AND DETAILED STATEMENT ABOUT IT.

IT PORTRAYS HIS INSECURITIES AND NEED FOR CONSTANT VALIDATION AND CURIOUS ALSO IT DIDN'T REFER TO WHETHER HE BOUGHT A ROUND OF DRINKS FOR HIS FELLOW GOLFERS AS IS CUSTOMARY WHEN YOU GET A HOLE IN ONE BUT I'M ACTUALLY HAPPY FOR HIM AND I WOULD MUCH RATHER HIM TWEET ABOUT THAT THAN SAY, YOU KNOW, ASKING POLITICAL FAVORS FROM VLADAMIR PUTIN.

>> OKAY, RICK, YOUR A.

>> MY A IMS TO SOME JUDGES.

ONE THAT RULE AGAINST THE RESTRICTING IN NEW YORK STATE AS GERRYMANDERING AND THE JUDGE THAT INVALIDATED PARTS OF FLORIDA'S RESTRICTIVE VOTING LAWS.

WE NEED TO RESTORE FAITH AND CONFIDENCE IN VOTING IN ELECTIONS IN COUNTRY AND THE CULPRIT IS NOT IMAGINARY FRAUD.

IT'S FORTUNATELY THE LEGISLATURE.

>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

FOR COMMENTS YOU CAN WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO WATCH THE SHOW AGAIN, YOU CAN DO SO ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY AND FOR ALL OF US AT "IVORY TOWER," HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪