A SURGE IN THE NATIONAL DEBT-- HOW MUCH RED INK IS TOO MUCH?

MAKING THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY PAY FOR CLIMATE DAMAGE.

AND A NEW WARNING FROM THE SURGEON GENERAL •SOCIAL MEDIA MAY BE DANGEROUS TO YOUR MENTAL HEALTH STAY TUNED, IVORY TOWER IS NEXT.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

JOINED AROUND THE TABLE TONIGHT BY CHAD SPARBER FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, ANIRBAN ACHARYA FROM LEMOYNE COLLEGE, SARAH PRALLE FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, AND RICK FENNER FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

THE LATEST ESTIMATE FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE SHOWS THE NATIONAL DEBT HITTING 50 TRILLION DOLLARS JUST TEN YEARS FROM NOW.

THAT'S 122 PERCENT OF THE ESTIMATED G-D-P, MUCH HIGHER THAN EVEN AT THE END OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR.

INTEREST ON THE DEBT IS ALREADY GREATER THAN DEFENSE SPENDING.

BUT OUR POLITICAL LEADERS HAVE SEEMED MORE INTERESTED IN TAX CUTS AND INCREASED SPENDING.

WHY SHOULD WE CARE?

SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT THIS HUGE AMOUNT OF DEBT?

>> WE SHOULD BUT NOT FOR THE REASONS THE PUBLIC GENERALLY THINK SO.

THE PEOPLE SAY IF I HAVE TO BALANCE MY BUDGET, THE GOVERNMENT OUGHT TO HAVE TO.

IT IS UNFAIR TO PUT THE BURDEN OF THIS ON FUTURE TAXPAYERS.

THE REASON WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THIS IS SOMETHING CALLED CROWDING OUT.

WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BORROWS MONEY TO PAY FOR BUDGET DEFICITS, IT IS COMPETING WITH PRIVATE BUSINESSES FOR THESE FUNDS.

AND IT PUSHES UP INTEREST RATES.

AND WE KNOW THAT AS INTEREST RATES GO UP, BUSINESSES INVEST LESS AND THAT LEADS TO LOWER GROWTH IN THE ECONOMY.

AND SO ULTIMATELY G.D.P.

AND EMPLOYMENT CAN SUFFER IF THE GOVERNMENT TAKES ON TOO MUCH DEBT.

>> AND WE NEED THAT GROWTH TO PAY THE DEBT, RIGHT, CHATTED?

CHAD.

>> I WOULD SAY THE DEBT IS A MASSIVE PROBLEM.

THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE REASONS WHY.

PERMANENTLY HIGHER INTEREST RATES YOU REFERENCED IS THE THE FIRST ONE BUT I CITE THREATS TO NATIONAL SECURITY AND ECONOMIC SECURITY.

AT THE RISK OF GETTING A LITTLE WONKY AND ABSTRACT, I WANT TO THINK ABOUT HOW ANY TIME AN AMERICAN USES A U.S. DOLLAR TO BUY FOREIGN GOODS AND SERVICES, THAT DOLLAR EFFECTIVELY WORKS AS AN IOU WHERE THE FOREIGNER CAN THEN CLAIM GOODS AND SERVICES FROM AN AMERICAN.

IF THAT FOREIGNER TAKES THAT DOLLAR BILL AND HOLDS ON TO IT OR USES IT AMONG OTHER COUNTRIES,WE GET A ONE-TIME INTEREST-FREE LOAN IN OUR EXPENDITURES.

WELL THIS IS HOW WE BENEFIT, AS A CONSUMER, SOCIETY, WITH THE DOLLAR BEING DOMINANT IN FINANCIAL MARKETS.

WELL THAT DOMINANCE IS SLIPPING.

IF YOU GO BACK TO 199, 71-- 1999, 71% WERE HELD IN FEDERAL RESERVES.

NOW IT'S 50%.

PEOPLE ARE TURNING AWAY FROM THE DOLLAR BECAUSE OF DEBT AND INFLATION AND CONSTANT FLIRTATION WITH DEFAULTED.

IT IS WONKY AND ABSTRACT BUT WE ARE GOING TO SUFFER THESE HUGE COSTS PEOPLE DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND BECAUSE OF THIS DEBT.

>> WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT DEBT, I WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF THINGS REALLY CLEAR.

ONE PART IS THE PUBLIC DEBT HEAD BY THE PUBLIC OUTSIDE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT INCLUDES THE FEDERAL RESERVE, THE FOREIGN PRIVATE ENTITIES AND COUNTRIES AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL DEBT, THAT GOVERNMENT OWES TO OTHER BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT, SOCIAL SECURITY AND SO ON.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT IT BROADLY, ONLY% OF THAT TOTAL DEBT IS ACTUALLY HELD BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

AND YOU KNOW, CHAD, THAT HAS BEEN INCREASING.

COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD ARE HOPEFUL OF THE UNITED STATES ECONOMIC SYSTEM.

THEY'RE WILLING TO INVEST IN THE UNITED STATES AND THEY HAVE INCREASED THEIR DEBT HOLDINGS OF THE UNITED STATES.

NOW THE THING IS THAT, YES, THERE IS A CROWDING OUT EFFECT, STILL THE INTERNATIONAL MARKETS KIND OF HOPE THAT IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS THERE WILL BE SOME FISCAL CORRECTION THAT WILL COME FROM THE UNITED STATES SO THEY'RE NOT THAT MUCH WORRIED ABOUT IT.

BUT AFTER A CERTAIN POINT OF TIME, THAT CAN BE-- THAT CAN LEAD TO THIS DEBT DYNAMIC WHICH MIGHT BE PROBLEMATIC TO THE UNITED STATES.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THIS, RIGHT?

THE WHOLE THING IS THE RIGHT WING PART OF THE SPECTRUM IS HELL BENT ON PUNISHING THE POOR, PUNISHING THE WORKING CLASS.

SO I WENT AND DID THIS KIND OF THING ON THE INTERNET THAT YOU ASKED ME TO OR-- >> AN INTERACTIVE GAME THAT ALLOWS YOU TO-- ONE THING IS I JUST SLASHED THE DEFENSE BUDGET COMPLETELY.

LIMIT ANNUAL DEFENSE SPENDING 1%.

>> THAT'S COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC.

CUT DEFENSE SPENDING COMPLETELY.

>> NO LET IT INCREASE BY 1% INSTEAD OF 3%.

THAT'S IT.

AND LET THE 2017 TAX CUTS RETIRE.

YES, THE UNITED STATES DOESN'T NEED TO HAVE 800 MILLION BASES IN ALL THESE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES, RIGHT?

WAR DOMINATION HAS ITS COST IS ALL I'M SAYING.

>> SO IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE DEBT THEN, SARAH, IF YOU HAD THE PEN, WHAT WOULD YOU LOOK AT?

>> WELL, I MEAN I WOULD LOOK AT TAXES AND REVENUE FOR ONE THING, RIGHT?

AND AS ANIRBAN SUGGESTED, YOU KNOW, THE 2017 TAX CUTS ARE GOING TO BUFFALO A $5 TRILLION HOLE IN THE DEBTED SO THE CBO ESTIMATE ASSUMES THAT WE ARE NOT EXTENDING THOSE AND THAT'S A FAULTY ASSUMPTION BECAUSE CERTAINLY IF TRUMP GETS ELECTED HE WILL EXTEND ALL OF THEM.

IF BIDEN GETS RE-ELECTED HE WILL EXTEND SOME OF THEM FOR THE MIDDLE-CLASS.

THOSE KIND OF TAX CUTS, THEY'RE AN INCREASE IN INEQUALITY.

THEY'RE A DOUBLE PROBLEM.

INCREASE IN THE DEBT AND IN INEQUALITY.

ONE THING BIDEN DID WELL WAS TRY TO GIVE MORE MONEY TO THE I.R.S.

TO CATCH TAX CHEATS.

AND THE REPUBLICANS FORCED HIM TO CLAW BACK $20 BILLION OF THAT, RIGHT?

SO THAT'S ONE ISSUE TO LOOK AT.

MORE GENERAL POINT, TO MY COLLEAGUES, I THINK ONE, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT BOTHERS ME ABOUT THE DEBATE OVER THE THE NATIONAL DEBT IS THE DEBT IS TREATED AS A SINGULAR THING, RIGHTS?

AND WE ARE NOT REALLY DIGGING DOWN INTO WHAT ARE WE DEFICIT SPENDING FOR, RIGHT?

SOME DEFICIT SPENDING MIGHT BE VERY RATIONAL AND USEFUL, YOU KNOW.

I'M THINKING LIKE MY GRANDKIDS PROBABLY WOULDN'T MIND PAYING OFF SOME OF OUR DEBT IF IT WAS FOR THINGS LIKE MITIGATING AND ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE TO MAKE A MORE LIVABLE PLANET.

THAT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD INVESTMENT AND SOMETHING THEY WOULDN'T MIND PAYING OFF, RIGHT?

SO I THINK A REALLY MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE WE DEFICIT SPENDING MORE.

>> I THINK THAT IF-- SO THIS THING THAT ANIRBAN REFERENCED, IT'S AN ONLINE DEBT SOLVING TOOL THAT THE COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE FISCAL BUDGET HAS PUT TOGETHER.

I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO USE IT.

THE LESSON YOU SHOULD GET FROM THAT IS THAT CUTTING THIS DEBT IS HARD, AND IF YOU WERE SITING HERE ARGUING ABOUT WHO IS AT FAULT LEFT OR RIGHT, WE ARE REALLY MISSING THE POINT.

IT'S QUITE DIFFICULT, YES, THE TRUMP TAX CUTS WERE TERRIBLE BUT BIDEN IS RUNNING A 7% OF G.D.P.

IS THE DEFICIT IN A TIME OF EXPANSION?

THAT IS INCONSCIENABLE.

>> FIRST THING I WOULD SAY IS ANYONE WHO SAYS THAT YOU CAN CUT THIS ONLY BY RAISING TAXES OR ONLY BY CUTTING SPENDING IS NOT BEING SERIOUS.

THIS IS GOING TO TAKE BOTH.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE LONG-TERM, WE ARE CURRENTLY COLLECTING LESS IN TAXES AS A PERCENT OF G.D.P.

THAN WE HAVE OVER THE LAST 50 YEARS BUT WE ARE ALSO SPENDING MORE THAN WE HAVE.

AND SO THAT'S CAUSING THIS.

WHAT IS DRIVING THIS THOUGH TO A LARGE EXTENT IS SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE AND DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE IN TERMS OF AGE.

THAT IS GOING TO GET-- WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO AT LEAST SLOW DOWN THE SPENDING IN THOSE AREAS AS WELL AS BRING IN MORE REVENUE.

>> IF YOU LOOK AT THE DATA OVER TIME, YOU KNOW, THE DEBT WAS KIND OF HOVERING AT ABOUT 60% OF G.D.P.

AND THEN IT SPIKES UP RIGHT AT THE FINANCIAL CRISIS AND THEN IT LEVELS OUT.

SPIKES UP AGAIN, COVID AND LIKE IT'S REMARKABLE THAT IT'S STILL SUSTAINING ITSELF RIGHT NOW.

THAT WE STILL HAVE SOME MASSIVE DEBT THIS FAR PAST COVID.

>> SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS IS GOING TO TAKE KIND OF A SOME OF EVERYTHING APPROACH TO WRANGLE... >> THAT WON'T HAPPEN BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT TRUMP'S POLICIES, ANOTHER THING THE CBO FOUND IS THAT IMMIGRATION ACTUALLY REDUCES THE DEFICIT BECAUSE IMMIGRANTS PAY MORE IN TAXES THAN THEY TAKE IN IN BENEFITS DESPITE THE RHETORIC OUT THERE AND SO I DON'T HAVE MUCH FAITH THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO ANYTHING REGARDLESS OF WHO WINS.

>> NIKKI HALEY WAS THE ONLY CANDIDATE TO TAKE THE DEBT SERIOUSLY AND, YOU KNOW, SHE DIDN'T MAKE IT.

>> HAD >> VERMONT RECENTLY BECAME THE FIRST STATE TO PASS A LAW REQUIRING FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES TO PAY FOR THE COST OF CLIMATE-RELATED DAMAGE.

THE STATE MOVED AFTER CATASTROPHIC FLOODS LAST SUMMER, THE WORST IN ALMOST 100 YEARS.

A SIMILAR BILL JUST PASSED HERE IN NEW YORK BUT HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED BY GOVERNOR HOCHUL.

THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRIES SAY THEIR PRODUCTS ARE LEGAL AND SHOULD NOT BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGE.

SARA, SHOULD HOCHUL SIGN THIS INTO LAW?

>> THERE ARE SOME GOOD THINGS ABOUT THIS APPROACH.

IT IS NOT IDEAL BUT DESPERATE TIMES CALLS FOR DESPERATE MEASURES.

ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE IS THAT IT DOES FOCUS ON THE HIGH COST OF CLIMATE.

LET'S SEE HOW WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THE CLIMATE IMPACTS AND ADAPTING TO THOSE OVER THE NEXT DECADES, RIGHT?

SO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO CLIMATE MITIGATION POLICIES OFTEN TALK ABOUT THE HIGH PRICE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AND NEVER PAY ANY ATTENTION TO THE HIGH COST OF I AM FACT IMPACTS.

SO WE HAVE A BILLION-DOLLAR WEATHER DISASTER EVERY THREE WEEKS IN THE UNITED STATES.

THAT ADDS UP.

SECONDLY, I LIKE THE FACT THAT IT FOCUSES ON WHO SHOULD PAY, RIGHT?

AND TO SOME EXTENT, MAKING IMPLICIT MORAL ARGUMENT THAT THOSE WHO ARE MOST RESPONSIBLE, FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES SHOULD BEAR SOME OF THE BURDEN OR A LOT OF THE BURDEN OF PAYING FOR THIS.

THEY ARE EXPERIENCING RECORD PROFITS RIGHT NOW.

THEY HAVE FOUGHT FOR OVER 40 YEARS TO PREVENT ANY KIND OF CLIMATE MITIGATION, EVEN THOUGH THEIR OWN RESEARCH SCIENTISTS SUGGESTED BACK IN THE 70s AND 80s THAT THIS PRODUCT WAS DANGEROUS, RIGHT?

AND SO THERE IS A PRECEDENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW POLLUTER PAYS.

IT'S BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF EXTERNALITIES THAT MY ECONOMIST COLLEAGUES KNOW VERY WELL, RIGHT?

, WHICH IS THAT THERE ARE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF THIS PRODUCT NOT INCLUDED IN THE PRICE.

>> I TOTALLY AGREE ON THE EXTERNALITY THING BUT I'M GOING TO WARN YOU ON ONE THING.

THE JUSTIFICATION HAS BEEN THESE RECORD PROFITS AND SO THE POLLUTERS SHOULD PAY.

BUT MARKETS DETERMINE WHO REALLY BEARS THE BURDEN OF THIS AND MOST OF THE STUDIES SHOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE PUSHED BACK ON TO CONSUMERS AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S-- WE STILL NEED TO DO THIS BUT THINKING THIS FREE LUNCH THAT WE ARE GOING TO MAKES EX-ON-PROFIT'S DISAPPEAR THROUGH THIS IS NOT TRUE.

>> I'M STRANGELY NOT REALLY OPPOSED TO THIS.

THE QUALMS THAT I HAVE ARE NUMBER ONE, FAIRLY ASSESSING WHO PAYS HOW MUCH IS A RIDICULOUS AND EXPENSIVE TASK SO THAT'S DUMB.

IT PUNISHES PAST BEHAVIOR INSTEAD OF INCENTIVIZING FUTURE ACTIVITY.

IDEALLY WE WANT TO TAX, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE A GAS TAX TO INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO CONSUME LESS CARBON.

THIS INCHES TOWARDS THAT DIRECTION BECAUSE THE OIL COMPANIES ARE CERTAINLY GOING TO PASS SOME OF THE COSTS ON TO GASOLINE CONSUMERS.

AND BUT THAT'S NOT QUITE THE SAME THING AS TAXING NEW CARBON... >> THE IDEA OF COST, IS THAT MORE A PERSUASIVE WAY TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO TAKE CLIMATE SERIOUS SERIOUSLY THAN SIMPLY SAYING 97% OF CLIMATE SCIENTISTS SAY WHATEVER?

>> AGAIN, I AGREE IN LARGE PART OF WHAT THE COLLEAGUES ARE SAYING HERE.

IT'S ABOUT TORT, RIGHT.

THERE IS AN INJURE AND HOW DO YOU COMPENSATE FOR THE INJURE.

ING-- INJURY.

HAVING THE FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES PAY, I MEAN THEY CAN PASS IT ALONG DEPENDING ON ELASTICITY F. THR NOT GOOD CONSTITUENTS TO FOSSIL FUEL, IT WOULD BE PASSED ON TO CONSUMERS.

YOU CAN TAKE A DUAL APPROACH.

ONE IS THAT YES, FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES DO PAY FOR CERTAIN THINGS.

THEY KNEW THIS.

THEY HAD RECORDS THAT OF EXPERIMENTS THEY HAVE DONE THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS HAPPENING.

THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, RIGHT?

AND REAPED HUGE PROFITS AND AT THE SAME TIME I SEE MASSIVE CARS PEOPLE BUY, HUMMERS AND HUGE TRUCKS, WHY NOT PUT A TAX OR YOU KNOW, A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TAX ON LARGE TONNAGE CARS.

>> THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE CAR BUT THE GAS.

>> YOU WILL BUY MORE FUEL EFFICIENT CARS ON THE LONGER-- >> IF YOU TAX THE GAS.

>> THAT IS A GOOD SOLUTION... >> SUPPLY SIDE.

>> BUT IT CAN'T GET PASSED OR ENACTED.

THIS IS SOMETHING STATES CAN DO.

UNFORTUNATELY THE FORTUNATE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT DOING ENOUGH DESPITE BIDEN'S INVESTMENT IN CLIMATE.

THEY CAN'T GET A GAS TAX PASS PASSED OR A CARBON TAX PASSED SO STATES HAVE TO DO WHAT THEY CAN.

THEY HAVE LIMITED TOOLS.

>> IT'S COWARDLY AND IT'S FRUSTRATING BECAUSE THIS POLICY IS GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE LITIGATED THROUGH THE COURTS AND TRYING TO ASSESS DAMAGES AND ALL THAT IS SO WASTEFUL AND EXPENSIVE JUST TO A GAS TAX.

IT'S CHEEPER AND ACCOMPLISHES THE SAME GOAL.

>> HOW DO WE KNOW IF THE FLOODS IN VERMONT WOULD HAVE OCCURRED OTHERWISE.

A LOT OF THIS IS GUESSTIMATION.

IT WILL BE VERY POLITICALLY DRIVEN.

AGAIN, I'M NOT AGAINST THIS.

YOU MENTIONED THE EXTERNALITIES, SARAH, AND YOU ARE RIGHT, THEORETICALLY THIS IS WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN.

THOSE THAT IMPOSE EXTERM COSTS SHOULD PAY FOR IT BUT THIS IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT THAN SAYING OH THERE IS AN OIL SPILL, EXXON CAUSED IT.

THIS IS THE COST OF CLEANING IT UP.

I'M NOT THEORETICALLY OPPOSED TO IT.

>> ALL STATES OR MOST STATES DO HAVE GAS TAXES, RIGHT?

I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE LAST TIME THAT TAX WAS INCREASED IN VERMONT OR HERE IN NEW YORK.

>> BUT THIS IS THE FREE LUNCH.

WE ARE PUTTING IT ON EXXON, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY CIRCLE AROUND TO RAISE OUR GAS PRICES EVENTUALLY, PEOPLE WON'T SEE THAT F. WE GO AND RAISE GAS TAXES, THEY'RE GOING TO BE ANGRY AT THE POLITICIANS.

>> OKAY.

THE SURGEON GENERAL DR. VIVEK MURTHY THIS WEEK CALLED FOR WARNING LABELS TO BE PLACED ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS, SOMETHING LIKE THE WARNINGS ON CIGARETTES.

HE WANTS TECH COMPANIES TO MAKE CLEAR THEIR PLATFORMS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVEN TO BE SAFE, EVEN WHILE HE CANNOT FOR SURE SAY THEY CAUSE HARM.

MURTHY SAYS WE CANNOT WAIT FOR PERFECT PROOF.

SO, ANIRBAN, IS HE ON THE RIGHT TRACK HERE IN TERMS OF WARNING LABELS FOR SOCIAL MEDIA?

>> I THINK THE ALARM IS REAL, RIGHT?

AND WHY WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE UTICA UNIVERSITY SHOW, THAT FACEBOOK AND OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES HAD THEIR INTERNAL MEMO THAT SAID THESE KINDS OF ADDICTIVE PUSH NOTIFICATIONS, FEEDS, THEY ACTUALLY FEED INTO, FOR LACK OF A BETTER PUN, IN THE MENTAL ANXIETY OF CHILDREN.

THEIR SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE REDEWSES THEIR ATTENTION SKILLS.

TO SOME EXTENT I SEE A NEED FOR ALARM BUT WHETHER IT SHOULD BE JUST A LABEL WARNING, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT WOULD WORK.

BUT ALSO I JUST WANT TO ALSO SAY THAT SOCIAL MEDIA HELPED A LOT OF CHILDREN, A LOT OF YOUNG ADULTS, YOUNG KIDS, TEENAGERS WHO ARE NOT ACCEPTED IN SOCIETY SO THEY FIND A WAY TO COMMUNICATE WITH OTHER SIMILAR-MINDED PEOPLE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK JUST SLAPPING A WARNING WILL DO ANYTHING BUT ON THE WHOLE, IT IS ALARMING HOW IT AFFECTS OUR YOUNG POPULATION FOR SURE.

>> SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THE SURGEON GENERAL INCLUDED IN THE OP-ED IN THE TIMES WAS DEALING WITH THE ALGORITHM THAT OPTIMIZE THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS AND CHANNEL STORIES TO KIDS WHEN IT MAY HAVE BEEN EITHER A VIOLENT OR SELF-DESTRUCTIVE THING THAT STARTED THIS, THOSE ARE AN ISSUE.

AND OBVIOUSLY THE BUYING AND SELLING, USING THE DATA GENERATED FROM KIDS SO I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME REGULATION.

I THINK THE WARNING LABEL IS A LITTLE BIT SIMPLISTIC AND SILLY, BUT I SHARE SOME CONCERNS.

>> YEAH, I MEAN I LIKE THE IDEA OF BANNING THEM IN CELL PHONES AND SCHOOLS AND USE OF THESE IN SCHOOLS, SETTING ASIDE TIMES WHEN THEY DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT, BECAUSE WHAT WORRIES ME MOST ABOUT IT IS REALLY THE TIME SPENT, AND WHAT THEY'RE NOT DOING, RIGHT?

SO ARE THEY NOT-- KIDS ARE NOT SLEEPING AS MUCH, EXERCISING AS MUCH, HANGING OUT WITH FRIENDS IN PERSON ENOUGH.

ALL OF THOSE ARE ARGUABLY THINGS THAT ARE MORE HEALTHY FOR THEM THAN SOCIAL MEDIA.

THE DATA ON WHETHER SOCIAL MEDIA IS REALLY DRIVING THIS INCREASE IN DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY AMONG CHILDREN IS ACTUALLY QUITE DISPUTED AND AFTER READING A BUNCH OF SUMMARIES OF THAT RESEARCH, COULD I NOT COME UP WITH LIKE A FIRM CONCLUSION, RIGHT?

SOME STUDIES SHOW NO EFFECT, SOME SHOW REVERSE CAUSALITY THAT KIDS WHO ARE ANXIOUS AND DEPRESSED SPEND MORE TIME ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

SO I THINK THE JURY IS A LITTLE BIT STILL OUT ON THAT.

SO I ALSO DON'T KNOW WHAT A WARNING LABEL WOULD REALLY DO.

>> THE SURGEON GENERAL, I THINK IS SAYING THAT YEAH, THE JURY IS OUT BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS HAPPENING AND WE CAN'T WAIT.

>> WELL, OKAY.

I WAS SURPRISED ON THE FIRST PART, LIKE YOU.

BUT THE MAYO CLINIC HAS A GREAT SUMMARY ON LIKE THE RISKS AREN'T ABOUT SOCIAL MEDIA ITSELF BUT SORT OF THE ISSUES LIKE HOW MUCH TIME ARE THEY SPENDING, WHAT ARE THE SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS OF THE INDIVIDUAL USING THE SOCIAL MEDIA.

BUT THE IDEA THAT A WARNING LABEL WOULD BE EFFECTIVE IS ABSURD.

THERE IS A GREAT REPORT IN 2016 FROM TRIO OF HARVARD RESEARCHERS WHO HAD TALKED ABOUT LIKE WARNING LABELS HAVE BECOME SO UBIQUITOUS THAT PEOPLE ARE JUST FUNDAMENTALLY IGNORING THEM.

HOW MANY PRODUCTS HAVE YOU RECENTLY BOUGHT THAT CONTAIN A CHEMICAL KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE CANCER?

I HAVE REACTED TO THAT BY SAYING I GUESS I'M GETTING CANCER.

>> WOULDN'T IT DEPEND ON HOW THE LABEL IS DESIGNED?

>> NO!

>> IF YOU HAD SOMETHING UP THERE, A RED BANNER AT THE TOP THAT SAYS-- >> IT WOULD BE UTTERLY DISMISSED.

I THINK SARAH IS RIGHT, WHAT WE ARE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS A COORDINATION PROBLEM AND SO THINGS LIKE YOU KNOW, BANS IN THE SCHOOL HOURS, OR MAYBE LIMITS ON TIME.

THESE ARE GOING TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE TOOLS THAN LABELS.

>> IN FACT, THE LOS ANGELES SCHOOL DISTRICT JUST BANNED CELL PHONES.

>> TALKING TO THE NETWORK, THERE ARE STORIES IN WHERE SCHOOLS, KIDS ARE WILLING TO PAY EACH OTHER TO STAY OFF THE SOCIAL MEDIA AS MUCH AS THEY CAN.

SO WHEN THEIR PEERS ALL STAY OFF THE SOCIAL MEDIA, THEY'RE VERY MUCH WILLING TO STAY OFF OF IT BECAUSE THEY SEE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING INTERESTING THAT THEY CAN DO WITH THAT TIME, RIGHT, OTHER THAN THINKING ABOUT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING AND SO ON.

SO THERE IS A LOT OF INTERESTING WAY WE CAN DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THE WARNING LABEL THOUGH.

BUT IT LOOKS GOOD.

IT SOUNDS GOOD.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A WARNING LABEL JUST TO MAKE FACEBOOK ANGRY, BUT THAT'S VENGEANCE TALKING MORE THAN POLL.

>> I WE SHOULD ADD THAT GOVERNOR HOCHUL JUST SIGNED A BILL INTO LAW HERE IN NEW YORK WHICH DOES TAKE ON SOME OF THESE SAME ISSUES BY LIMITING ALGORITHM-BASED FEEDS.

>> HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE ENFORCEABLE ON A STATE BY STATE BASIS WILL BE VERY INTERESTING.

>> TIME FOR OUR As AND Fs.

SPEAKING OF SCHOOLS.

AND CHAD, WE'LL GO WITH YOUR F. >> ALL RIGHT.

SO GOVERNMENTS CAN RAISE REVENUE BY TAXING GOODS OR BY TAXING BADS.

AND I WOULD RATHER THAT THEY TAX BADS LIKE SAY CONGESTION.

SO I WAS LIVID WHEN GOVERNOR HOCHUL ABRUPTLY TURNED AGAINST NEW YORK CITY'S CONGESTION CHARGE OSTENSIBLY BECAUSE WOULD IT HURT THE POOR, A BONUS A TO LAST WEEK'S PANEL FOR GETTING THIS TOPIC 100% RIGHT BUT I WANTED TO PILE ON AND GIVE GOVERNOR HOCHUL AN F. IF SHE CARED ABOUT THE POOR, SHE COULD USE THE REVENUE FOR CONGESTION AND GIVE IT TO THE POOR.

>> NICK ADAMS WHO TEACHED AMERICAN MALES HOW TO BE TOXIC.

NEVER APOLOGIZE HE SAYS, NEVER MASK UP.

IT STARTS WITH BONELESS CHICKEN WINGS AND ENDS WITH GENDER PRONOUNCE OF COMMUNISM.

YOU DON'T WANT THAT HE SAYS.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ALPHA MALE BUT HE SHOULD BEAT WHAT COMES OUT OF HIS MOUTH.

>> SARAH, YOUR F. >> MY E F GOES TO THE LOUISIANA GOVERNOR WHO SIGNED LEGISLATION REQUIRING THAT DISPLAY OF 10 COMMANDMENTS IN EVERY PUBLIC CLASSROOM IN THE STATE.

THE PASSAGE OF THIS LOUISIANA LAW IS GOING TO BE CHALLENGED IN COURT, OF COURSE.

AND IT'S ANOTHER SIGN THAT THE CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES FEEL 'EM BOLDENED THIS THEIR EFFORTS TO REDEFINE THE UNITED STATES AS A PRIMARILY WHITE CHRISTIAN NATION WHERE PEOPLE OF OTHER FAITHS AND NATIONS ARE SECOND CLASS CITIZENS.

>> MY F TO ANNA SECRETARY, NATIONAL PRESS SECRETARY FOR THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE WHO SAID "THE NOTION THAT TARIFFS ARE A TAX ON U.S. CONSUMERS IS A LIE.

PUSHED BY OUTSOURCERS AND THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY."

I GUESS I HAVE BEEN OUTED SINCE LAST WEEK ON THIS SHOW, I SAID THAT TRUMP'S TARIFFS AMONGST MANY OF HIS ECONOMIC POLICIES WOULD LIKELY CAUSE INFLATION.

>> AND AS, CHAD?

>> I'M TRAVELING AI LOT THIS SUMMER.

SOME OF IT IS WORK RELATED, INCLUDING A RECENT STUDY ABROAD EXCURSION TO LONDON AND DUBLIN.

I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE AN A TO MY STUDENTS ON THIS TRIP WHO ASKED REALLY IMPRESSIVE AND INSIGHTIVE QUESTIONS AT THE INSTITUTIONS WE VISITED, INCLUDING THE ECONOMIST, OF COURSE, IRELAND'S INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE BRAZILIAN EMBASSY IN THE U.K.

THESE STUDENTS REALLY MADE ME PROUD.

>> AND ANIRBAN, YOUR A.

>> MY A GOES TO MARYLAND GOVERNOR WES MOORE'S ISSUANCE OF A MASS PARDON OF MORE THAN 175,000 MARIJUANA CONVICTIONS, THE PARDON FORGIVE LOW LEVEL MARIJUANA POSSESSION CHARGES FOR 100,000 PEOPLE IN WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR SAID TOY HELP DEALING YEARS OF INJUSTICE.

>> FOR MARIJUANA-RELATED OFFENSES.

>> LOW LEVEL CRIME.

>> LOW LEVEL CHARGES.

AND SARAH, YOUR A.

>> MY A GOES TO OPAL LEE, THE SO CALLED GRANDMOTHER OF THE JUNETEENTH HOLIDAY.

SHE WORKED FOR DECADES TO GET JUNETEENTH DECLARED A FEDERAL HOLIDAY INCLUDING WALKING FROM HER HOME IN FORT WORTH TEXAS TO WASHINGTON D.C. AT 87 YEARS OLD.

IF YOU DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO HEAR THE LOVELY AND INSPIRING INTERVIEW WITH HER ON NPR'S ALL THINGSES CONSIDERED, I WOULD CONSIDER LISTENING TO IT.

IT IS A WONDERFUL ANECDOTE FOR THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE WE HAVE.

>> MELANCHOLY A TO WILLIE MAYS THE SAY HEY KID WHO PASSED AWAY AT THE AGE OF 93.

BELIEVE MANY BELIEVE HE WAS THE MOST GIFTED BASEBALL PLAYER EVER.

IT WAS FITTING MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYED TRIBUTE TO THE NEGRO LEAGUES WHERE WILLIE MAYS STARTED HIS CAREER.

AND AN A FOR FINALLY INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF NEGRO LEAGUE PLAYERS INTO THE OFFICIAL STATISTICS.

>> THE SAY I HAD KID GETS AN A.

WHAT A BALL PLAYER.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

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

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THE SHOW AGAIN YOU CAN VIEW IT ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG.

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