Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, along with our house DJ Tolliver and Tolliver. One of the great things about the Middle being one hour long is that everyone listening has an hour to not check their four O, one K.

Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, along with our house DJ Tolliver and Tolliver. One of the great things about the Middle being one hour long is that everyone listening has an hour to not check their four O, one K.

That's right, America.

That's right, America.

You're welcome.

You're welcome.

Okay, you're welcome.

Okay, you're welcome.

Close to the laptop and vibe out.

Close to the laptop and vibe out.

The stock market, of course, has had a lot of ups and downs recently, but in the big picture, it is down almost ten percent since Trump was elected president, and a lot of that is about uncertainty over trade because of the president's tariffs. There are other big economic changes in the Trump presidency too, a crackdown on immigration, the firing of tens of thousands of federal workers. And this hour we have with us one of the most listened to economists out there, Larry Summers, who was Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton but has publicly criticized both parties on the economy. He'll be taking your questions in a moment at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. But first, last week, we asked you for your thoughts on the first one hundred days of Trump's presidency. Here are some of the comments we got after the show.

The stock market, of course, has had a lot of ups and downs recently, but in the big picture, it is down almost ten percent since Trump was elected president, and a lot of that is about uncertainty over trade because of the president's tariffs. There are other big economic changes in the Trump presidency too, a crackdown on immigration, the firing of tens of thousands of federal workers. And this hour we have with us one of the most listened to economists out there, Larry Summers, who was Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton but has publicly criticized both parties on the economy. He'll be taking your questions in a moment at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. But first, last week, we asked you for your thoughts on the first one hundred days of Trump's presidency. Here are some of the comments we got after the show.

Hi.

Hi.

My name is Kelsey Winterbottom and I'm from Asheville, North Carolina. I feel nervous, anxious, I feel worried about the economy. I feel afraid for the safety of immigrants, and yeah, I'm afraid for the world for what you might do.

My name is Kelsey Winterbottom and I'm from Asheville, North Carolina. I feel nervous, anxious, I feel worried about the economy. I feel afraid for the safety of immigrants, and yeah, I'm afraid for the world for what you might do.

It's Lee from Louisiana. I'm excited. It's just remarkably pleasing the sea that they are uncovering such fraud right in our faith. All they worried about is trying to make him look bad instead of thanking him for saving taxpayer money.

It's Lee from Louisiana. I'm excited. It's just remarkably pleasing the sea that they are uncovering such fraud right in our faith. All they worried about is trying to make him look bad instead of thanking him for saving taxpayer money.

Hi, my name is Lisa.

Hi, my name is Lisa.

I'm calling from Louisville, Texas.

I'm calling from Louisville, Texas.

I am just wondering when somebody is actually going to rise up instead.

I am just wondering when somebody is actually going to rise up instead.

Up against what is happening in our country.

Up against what is happening in our country.

Who is going to just say no?

Who is going to just say no?

Wow.

Wow.

Well, thank you to everyone who called in, and you can hear that entire episode on our podcast in partnership with iHeart Podcasts, on the iHeart app or wherever you listen to podcasts. So now to our topic this hour, your thoughts about and questions on the economy for Larry Summers. Tolliver the phone number please.

Well, thank you to everyone who called in, and you can hear that entire episode on our podcast in partnership with iHeart Podcasts, on the iHeart app or wherever you listen to podcasts. So now to our topic this hour, your thoughts about and questions on the economy for Larry Summers. Tolliver the phone number please.

It's eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com. You can also comment on our live stream on YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitch. I've got a master computer. I'm looking at them all, okay bring.

It's eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com. You can also comment on our live stream on YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitch. I've got a master computer. I'm looking at them all, okay bring.

Joining us now is Larry Summers. He serves as the Secretary of the Treasury under President Clinton. Was also the president of Harvard University, where he is now Professor of Economics. Larry Summers, Welcome to the Middle. Great to have you.

Joining us now is Larry Summers. He serves as the Secretary of the Treasury under President Clinton. Was also the president of Harvard University, where he is now Professor of Economics. Larry Summers, Welcome to the Middle. Great to have you.

Could you be with you, Jeremy, So, before.

Could you be with you, Jeremy, So, before.

We get to the economy, let me ask you about Harvard, because, as a lot of people have been seeing, the President has been going after universities that he has said haven't done enough to combat anti Semitism or DEI, or they haven't hired enough conservatives for his liking. And Harvard this week stood up to the administration. And now the White House is freezing billions of dollars in federal funding for Harvard, and Trump now wants the irs to take away the tax exempt status that Harvard has. What should Harvard do?

We get to the economy, let me ask you about Harvard, because, as a lot of people have been seeing, the President has been going after universities that he has said haven't done enough to combat anti Semitism or DEI, or they haven't hired enough conservatives for his liking. And Harvard this week stood up to the administration. And now the White House is freezing billions of dollars in federal funding for Harvard, and Trump now wants the irs to take away the tax exempt status that Harvard has. What should Harvard do?

Harvard should avail itself of all the judicial revenues that are open to it in response to what is blatant illegality by the Trump administration. Look, there are plenty of questions you can ask about lots of policies at Harvard, but that is not a ground for the government to simply start giving orders about who's going to be hired and who's going to be fired at a university. To do that violates all the procedures that are contained in the various statutes like the Civil Right. Sack just violates them, and he is very problematic on constitutional grounds because academic freedom is an important component.

Harvard should avail itself of all the judicial revenues that are open to it in response to what is blatant illegality by the Trump administration. Look, there are plenty of questions you can ask about lots of policies at Harvard, but that is not a ground for the government to simply start giving orders about who's going to be hired and who's going to be fired at a university. To do that violates all the procedures that are contained in the various statutes like the Civil Right. Sack just violates them, and he is very problematic on constitutional grounds because academic freedom is an important component.

Of free speech. And I can tell you as.

Of free speech. And I can tell you as.

Treasury Secretary, former Treasury secretary that for all of us who worked in the Treasury Department, for all of us who worked in the administration, we were taught from the first hour that we arrived that meddling in the affairs of an individual taxpayers was one of those things like taking bribes, where the legalities were black and white, completely clear. It was something that you must not do. And so for the President of the United States and officials of the Treasury Department reporting to Secretary Descant, to do that is just on consionable and blatantly illegal. Here's what I think is the scariest thing, if I could, Jeremy, we went through a period in this country with Watergate. It was traumatic, it was difficult, it was wrong. A president was ultimately impeached. But Richard Nixon knew the difference between right and wrong, and so when he was doing wrong, he tried to hide it. Now we have an administration that is breaking the law with impunity and visibility, because that way more people will be intimidated and will be cowed away from dissenting. That's how countries descend into dictatorship. And I don't think he's going to succeed, because I have great confidence in American institute. But that is what President Trump is trying to do.

Treasury Secretary, former Treasury secretary that for all of us who worked in the Treasury Department, for all of us who worked in the administration, we were taught from the first hour that we arrived that meddling in the affairs of an individual taxpayers was one of those things like taking bribes, where the legalities were black and white, completely clear. It was something that you must not do. And so for the President of the United States and officials of the Treasury Department reporting to Secretary Descant, to do that is just on consionable and blatantly illegal. Here's what I think is the scariest thing, if I could, Jeremy, we went through a period in this country with Watergate. It was traumatic, it was difficult, it was wrong. A president was ultimately impeached. But Richard Nixon knew the difference between right and wrong, and so when he was doing wrong, he tried to hide it. Now we have an administration that is breaking the law with impunity and visibility, because that way more people will be intimidated and will be cowed away from dissenting. That's how countries descend into dictatorship. And I don't think he's going to succeed, because I have great confidence in American institute. But that is what President Trump is trying to do.

Why do you think he's trying to do that? What do you think this is about? At the core that he wants control over universities in this country.

Why do you think he's trying to do that? What do you think this is about? At the core that he wants control over universities in this country.

It goes way beyond universities. I think the attack on universities is of a piece with the attack to impeach judges. Is of a path with the mass use of the pardon power with respect to the people who are in the capitol, is of a peace with telling law firms that they can't do business with the federal government because they defended one of his political adversaries. I think it's of a piece with threatening publications. We have lack of access to White House events if they are critical of him. This is what authoritarians do. This is what happens when a dictator takes over a democracy. We're at early stages. I don't mean to say that this has happened in the United States, but it's become very clear in recent months that that is what is being attempted, and.

It goes way beyond universities. I think the attack on universities is of a piece with the attack to impeach judges. Is of a path with the mass use of the pardon power with respect to the people who are in the capitol, is of a peace with telling law firms that they can't do business with the federal government because they defended one of his political adversaries. I think it's of a piece with threatening publications. We have lack of access to White House events if they are critical of him. This is what authoritarians do. This is what happens when a dictator takes over a democracy. We're at early stages. I don't mean to say that this has happened in the United States, but it's become very clear in recent months that that is what is being attempted, and.

I think it's very dangerous.

I think it's very dangerous.

You know, we're going to talk about economics, and those issues are immensely important. But we have recessions and then we have recoveries. We have the stock market go down and then the stock market goes up. But threatening the basic fabric of the rule of law, defying judicial orders, just ignoring the law in the actions of the federal government. This is something that has not happened in our country in the last century, and if it is tolerated and permitted and comes to be normalized, it is a very very deep, long run threat, including a deep long run threat to the economy because one of the bases of our economy is the idea.

You know, we're going to talk about economics, and those issues are immensely important. But we have recessions and then we have recoveries. We have the stock market go down and then the stock market goes up. But threatening the basic fabric of the rule of law, defying judicial orders, just ignoring the law in the actions of the federal government. This is something that has not happened in our country in the last century, and if it is tolerated and permitted and comes to be normalized, it is a very very deep, long run threat, including a deep long run threat to the economy because one of the bases of our economy is the idea.

That we have in an impartial rule of law.

That we have in an impartial rule of law.

Let's talk about the economy, and the phones are lighting up, so we'll get to some calls in a moment. But there are some who think that the US is already in a recession right now because of the tariffs. What do you think.

Let's talk about the economy, and the phones are lighting up, so we'll get to some calls in a moment. But there are some who think that the US is already in a recession right now because of the tariffs. What do you think.

It's possible.

It's possible.

We won't know until the revised version of the statistics have come in, but there certainly are very grave grounds for concern. And if we avoid a recession, it's not going to be because of the tariffs. It's going to be because the President is sufficiently rapid about backing off of his original proposals in response to market pressures.

We won't know until the revised version of the statistics have come in, but there certainly are very grave grounds for concern. And if we avoid a recession, it's not going to be because of the tariffs. It's going to be because the President is sufficiently rapid about backing off of his original proposals in response to market pressures.

If you were in the administration right now, it's obviously you're not. And he said, because of all the turmoil because of the tariffs, Larry fixed this. What would you do?

If you were in the administration right now, it's obviously you're not. And he said, because of all the turmoil because of the tariffs, Larry fixed this. What would you do?

I would say to him, mister President, I'm sorry to say that you have closed this turmoil with your tariff announcements and with your constant changes in policy that have everybody highly uncertain and therefore frozen and not making new commitments, whether it's purchasing a washing machine, a house or putting in a new factory. And so, mister President, you need to find whatever device you wish and end this. You need to have their be a stable, non protectionist regime that's not pushing American prices way up, it's not hurting the competitiveness of businesses who can't get inputs. And you need to show people that you recognize and have learned the lessons of the very painful experience of the last two weeks.

I would say to him, mister President, I'm sorry to say that you have closed this turmoil with your tariff announcements and with your constant changes in policy that have everybody highly uncertain and therefore frozen and not making new commitments, whether it's purchasing a washing machine, a house or putting in a new factory. And so, mister President, you need to find whatever device you wish and end this. You need to have their be a stable, non protectionist regime that's not pushing American prices way up, it's not hurting the competitiveness of businesses who can't get inputs. And you need to show people that you recognize and have learned the lessons of the very painful experience of the last two weeks.

Even if he were to do that, would there be long term damage from what's already been done.

Even if he were to do that, would there be long term damage from what's already been done.

Sure, people can't unremember things that have happened to them, but I think if we were to clearly retreat, a substantial part of the damage would pass.

Sure, people can't unremember things that have happened to them, but I think if we were to clearly retreat, a substantial part of the damage would pass.

Really quite quickly.

Really quite quickly.

And so I don't think this is a case where you should continue on a course just because you have embarked on it. But there certainly have been costs to the way in which we have upended our alliance with Mexico and Canada, the way we give upended our alliance with Europe.

And so I don't think this is a case where you should continue on a course just because you have embarked on it. But there certainly have been costs to the way in which we have upended our alliance with Mexico and Canada, the way we give upended our alliance with Europe.

Yeah, we'll stand by and again our number is eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three Tolliver. We've seen some big swings and drops in the stock market. But you know that has happened before.

Yeah, we'll stand by and again our number is eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three Tolliver. We've seen some big swings and drops in the stock market. But you know that has happened before.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Actually, I've heard a lot of references online to Black Monday market crash, to the Black Monday Market crash of eighty seven because of it. So here's how I played out on TV back then.

Actually, I've heard a lot of references online to Black Monday market crash, to the Black Monday Market crash of eighty seven because of it. So here's how I played out on TV back then.

Today is Black Monday, the day the Dow dropped more than five hundred points, The day the Dow dropped more than twenty two percent, almost double the rate of the Black Monday that signaled the beginning of the crash of nineteen twenty nine. But this crash of nineteen eighty seven is not just an American experience. Around the world, stock markets fell faster than a skydiver without a parachute.

Today is Black Monday, the day the Dow dropped more than five hundred points, The day the Dow dropped more than twenty two percent, almost double the rate of the Black Monday that signaled the beginning of the crash of nineteen twenty nine. But this crash of nineteen eighty seven is not just an American experience. Around the world, stock markets fell faster than a skydiver without a parachute.

That metaphor, by the way, that was not Dan rather Tolliver talk, but he would have. He would have been tighter than a nun's buns on a tin toilet seat in the Yukon.

That metaphor, by the way, that was not Dan rather Tolliver talk, but he would have. He would have been tighter than a nun's buns on a tin toilet seat in the Yukon.

Time.

Time.

That's a that's a real one. By the way, A couple of the three of the biggest drops in the stock market uh in history have happened in the last seventeen years We've been around for them. We will be right back with more of your calls for Larry Summers on the Middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just tuning. In the Middle is a national call in show. We're focused on elevating voices from the middle geographically, politically, philosophically, or maybe you just want to meet in the middle. This hour, we're taking your questions about the economy with former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. Tolliver, What is the number to call in?

That's a that's a real one. By the way, A couple of the three of the biggest drops in the stock market uh in history have happened in the last seventeen years We've been around for them. We will be right back with more of your calls for Larry Summers on the Middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just tuning. In the Middle is a national call in show. We're focused on elevating voices from the middle geographically, politically, philosophically, or maybe you just want to meet in the middle. This hour, we're taking your questions about the economy with former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. Tolliver, What is the number to call in?

It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. You can also write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com or on all social media.

It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. You can also write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com or on all social media.

And let's get to the phones. Joe and Lakeland, Florida. Joe, your question for Larry Summers.

And let's get to the phones. Joe and Lakeland, Florida. Joe, your question for Larry Summers.

Hey, guys, thanks for taking my call. So I have noticed the stock market has gone down I think twelve percent at least. I'm my four on one k, and it seems like the sentiment is getting away from bonds and traditional safe haven assets.

Hey, guys, thanks for taking my call. So I have noticed the stock market has gone down I think twelve percent at least. I'm my four on one k, and it seems like the sentiment is getting away from bonds and traditional safe haven assets.

Now.

Now.

I'm just curious where Larry seeds money going right now for safe haven and if he considers bitcoins as safe haven assets.

I'm just curious where Larry seeds money going right now for safe haven and if he considers bitcoins as safe haven assets.

Thank you, Joe, Larry Summers.

Thank you, Joe, Larry Summers.

It's difficult to know.

It's difficult to know.

I think money is flowing out of the United States to other countries. We've had a remarkable period of exceptionalism in the United States where the value of US stocks relative to value stocks and the rest of the world has gone way up, and there's been a tendency for that to be reversed of late. No. I think the available evidence, it's not definitive at this point, is that bitcoin trades more like a risk asset, more like a tech stock in terms of its correlations, than it does like some kind of safe haven if you're looking for a safe haven that moves in opposite directions. In recent months, in probably years, it's been the old standby gold.

I think money is flowing out of the United States to other countries. We've had a remarkable period of exceptionalism in the United States where the value of US stocks relative to value stocks and the rest of the world has gone way up, and there's been a tendency for that to be reversed of late. No. I think the available evidence, it's not definitive at this point, is that bitcoin trades more like a risk asset, more like a tech stock in terms of its correlations, than it does like some kind of safe haven if you're looking for a safe haven that moves in opposite directions. In recent months, in probably years, it's been the old standby gold.

You know, one place that a lot of people in the last many decades have put their money is into real estate, and we've seen the you know, interest rates go a lot higher in recent years. Do you think we're ever going to get back down to a time when we see thirty year rates at three percent as opposed to six or seven percent where they've been for a little bit.

You know, one place that a lot of people in the last many decades have put their money is into real estate, and we've seen the you know, interest rates go a lot higher in recent years. Do you think we're ever going to get back down to a time when we see thirty year rates at three percent as opposed to six or seven percent where they've been for a little bit.

Here, I've learned in economics never to say never. I certainly never imagined through most of my lifetime that I would ever see the kind of four and a half percent mortgage that my my father had gotten in nineteen sixty one. I remember very well when I bought my first house, I felt extremely lucky that Harvard was prepared to give me a nine percent mortgage, even though market mortgages at that time were thirteen. So you never know how things are going to fluctuate. But I would not expect to see very low mortgage rates in the near future unless we have a major economic downtern. And it's certainly possible with everything that's going on that we will have a major economic downturn, and if we do, the FED will move very strongly to cut rates, and it might well be that mortgage rates would fall, but that would be a sign of a very troubled economy, not any kind of success of economic policy. In the context of success, I would be surprised if mortgage rates fell below six percent.

Here, I've learned in economics never to say never. I certainly never imagined through most of my lifetime that I would ever see the kind of four and a half percent mortgage that my my father had gotten in nineteen sixty one. I remember very well when I bought my first house, I felt extremely lucky that Harvard was prepared to give me a nine percent mortgage, even though market mortgages at that time were thirteen. So you never know how things are going to fluctuate. But I would not expect to see very low mortgage rates in the near future unless we have a major economic downtern. And it's certainly possible with everything that's going on that we will have a major economic downturn, and if we do, the FED will move very strongly to cut rates, and it might well be that mortgage rates would fall, but that would be a sign of a very troubled economy, not any kind of success of economic policy. In the context of success, I would be surprised if mortgage rates fell below six percent.

Telever, Hey, I.

Telever, Hey, I.

Have a question so Saturday Night Live to this catch last weekend about how if you're not somebody who's a homeowner or playing the stock market, that you don't care about tars, you don't care about the stock market crashing. So say you're a renter or somebody like that who sort of isn't related to this world so much.

Have a question so Saturday Night Live to this catch last weekend about how if you're not somebody who's a homeowner or playing the stock market, that you don't care about tars, you don't care about the stock market crashing. So say you're a renter or somebody like that who sort of isn't related to this world so much.

What should you really be worried about?

What should you really be worried about?

Is it just the price of eggs, or what.

Is it just the price of eggs, or what.

To be worried about the price of all the things you buy? The Yale Budget Lab estimates that the current program would raise prices enough to cost the average family about five thousand dollars. So that's a pretty substantial burden to worry about. And if that happens, you're gonna quite likely get an economic downturn because if people are paying those high prices, they're going to be able to afford to buy less stuff. And when they're able to afford to buy less stuff, they're going to be fewer jobs, and the whole thing's going to multiply. I'm sore people should worry about the stability and security of their jobs as well. So I think that everybody's got a stake in this, not just homeowners, not just those with stocks, but all of us who are doing things and buying things in the economy have a stake in the damage that's being done.

To be worried about the price of all the things you buy? The Yale Budget Lab estimates that the current program would raise prices enough to cost the average family about five thousand dollars. So that's a pretty substantial burden to worry about. And if that happens, you're gonna quite likely get an economic downturn because if people are paying those high prices, they're going to be able to afford to buy less stuff. And when they're able to afford to buy less stuff, they're going to be fewer jobs, and the whole thing's going to multiply. I'm sore people should worry about the stability and security of their jobs as well. So I think that everybody's got a stake in this, not just homeowners, not just those with stocks, but all of us who are doing things and buying things in the economy have a stake in the damage that's being done.

Let's go to Laurent, who is calling from Atlanta, Georgia. Laurent, go ahead with your question.

Let's go to Laurent, who is calling from Atlanta, Georgia. Laurent, go ahead with your question.

Yeah, good evening. There's been a lot of reporting on the link between the terraffs and the loss of trust from foreign investors in the bond market. But I'm wondering if that loss of trust is also closely linked to the loss of structure in our own US government a Trump and his team or dismantling scientific research funding and possibly a lot of services, and that would cause the loss of trust from investors.

Yeah, good evening. There's been a lot of reporting on the link between the terraffs and the loss of trust from foreign investors in the bond market. But I'm wondering if that loss of trust is also closely linked to the loss of structure in our own US government a Trump and his team or dismantling scientific research funding and possibly a lot of services, and that would cause the loss of trust from investors.

Good question, Laurron, Larry Summers, what do you think?

Good question, Laurron, Larry Summers, what do you think?

A very good question, and I think all of it factors into markets. I think it's fair to say, however, that since so called Liberation Day two weeks ago, there's been much more drama in markets, much sharper declines, much different pattern between the stock and bond markets than there was before. And so the big increase in drama right after the big tariff announcement suggests that one should probably think of the tariff announcement as the largest factor going over the last couple of weeks. But that does not mean that you can ignore the budget deficit, slash scientific research, raise questions about the rule of law without doing damage to the valuation of US assets.

A very good question, and I think all of it factors into markets. I think it's fair to say, however, that since so called Liberation Day two weeks ago, there's been much more drama in markets, much sharper declines, much different pattern between the stock and bond markets than there was before. And so the big increase in drama right after the big tariff announcement suggests that one should probably think of the tariff announcement as the largest factor going over the last couple of weeks. But that does not mean that you can ignore the budget deficit, slash scientific research, raise questions about the rule of law without doing damage to the valuation of US assets.

Sean is calling from Dallas, Texas. Hi, Sean, go ahead.

Sean is calling from Dallas, Texas. Hi, Sean, go ahead.

Yeah, Hey, so, I know, we know that the one percent owns more than I guess the lower classpital class. And I'm kind of concerned that the Trump tariff tax actually it's going to affect everybody right now, the very wealthy. You know, they own stock unless they sell it, they don't pay taxes. And I'm just concerned about the tax this tax shift, you know, basically, you know, if they if he does get tax cuts, be Trump, then it's going to be to the wealthy mostly. Aren't we pushing the money the wrong way? Shouldn't we be you know, helping the middle class, lower class as opposed to doing what we're doing right now.

Yeah, Hey, so, I know, we know that the one percent owns more than I guess the lower classpital class. And I'm kind of concerned that the Trump tariff tax actually it's going to affect everybody right now, the very wealthy. You know, they own stock unless they sell it, they don't pay taxes. And I'm just concerned about the tax this tax shift, you know, basically, you know, if they if he does get tax cuts, be Trump, then it's going to be to the wealthy mostly. Aren't we pushing the money the wrong way? Shouldn't we be you know, helping the middle class, lower class as opposed to doing what we're doing right now.

I see what you're saying, Sean, that basically you have a tax cut for that that leans towards the wealthy, and also the tariffs which may disproportionately hurt people at the lower end of the of the income spectrum. Larry Summers, what do you think?

I see what you're saying, Sean, that basically you have a tax cut for that that leans towards the wealthy, and also the tariffs which may disproportionately hurt people at the lower end of the of the income spectrum. Larry Summers, what do you think?

Go on?

Go on?

I share your concern.

I share your concern.

That's why I've worked in democratic administrations, not in Republican administrations. The alternative school of thought emphasizes that when you cut high end taxes, you are encouraging entrepreneurship, You are encouraged business investment, and all of that is the stuff that creates jobs and creates a prosperity. I don't share that argument. I would rather see us build our economy starting from the middle class. But this is an area where economists disagree, and I believe what I believe, and I believe it strongly. But I want to distinguish it from the areas like the Liberation Day tariff program, where there's no expert who's not being paid or is not politically beholden to Donald Trump, who sees the thing as logical and making sense. That's the case with respect to the Liberation Day program. The question you're asking is the debate that Democrats had with Ronald Reagan. It's the debate that Republicans had with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. It's a longstanding debate. I have clear and strong views on that debate. But it is a debate that is a different thing from the economics equivalent of saying the two plus two equals five, which is what is bedeviling us right now.

That's why I've worked in democratic administrations, not in Republican administrations. The alternative school of thought emphasizes that when you cut high end taxes, you are encouraging entrepreneurship, You are encouraged business investment, and all of that is the stuff that creates jobs and creates a prosperity. I don't share that argument. I would rather see us build our economy starting from the middle class. But this is an area where economists disagree, and I believe what I believe, and I believe it strongly. But I want to distinguish it from the areas like the Liberation Day tariff program, where there's no expert who's not being paid or is not politically beholden to Donald Trump, who sees the thing as logical and making sense. That's the case with respect to the Liberation Day program. The question you're asking is the debate that Democrats had with Ronald Reagan. It's the debate that Republicans had with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. It's a longstanding debate. I have clear and strong views on that debate. But it is a debate that is a different thing from the economics equivalent of saying the two plus two equals five, which is what is bedeviling us right now.

Dylan is calling for Minneapolis. Hi, Dylan, what's your question for Larry Summers Hi anything?

Dylan is calling for Minneapolis. Hi, Dylan, what's your question for Larry Summers Hi anything?

Thanks for thinking my call, and thanks for having secret Sary Smson, Yeah, second Sary Summers. My question is this you're clearly pointing out and we're all witnessing highly unorthodox economic choices by this administration. This is not he President Trump is leading us in ways that Republicans haven't certainly Democrats haven't. This is way out of the ordinary, out of the mainstream. As someone who's been a player in mainstream economic policy for all these years, I want to ask you, where is there a space for reflection and questioning of what you all have done? Is there something that you can point to. Have you spent anytime seeing what did we do that ended us up with this person doing these things? How did we get here? And where is some reflection or responsibility on how did we end up with a leader that takes us so far out of what is the mainstream? What are your thoughts about? Are there things you would have done differently? Are there things you'd have spoken about differently, focused differently, working with people differently than you have. I'm not saying I am not saying Trump is your fault. I am saying do you feel like, man, if I knew this now, I would have done that differently then? Because I think that's necessary, and frankly, miss Odds, and I'll throw it to you. I'm really helping media doing the same thing.

Thanks for thinking my call, and thanks for having secret Sary Smson, Yeah, second Sary Summers. My question is this you're clearly pointing out and we're all witnessing highly unorthodox economic choices by this administration. This is not he President Trump is leading us in ways that Republicans haven't certainly Democrats haven't. This is way out of the ordinary, out of the mainstream. As someone who's been a player in mainstream economic policy for all these years, I want to ask you, where is there a space for reflection and questioning of what you all have done? Is there something that you can point to. Have you spent anytime seeing what did we do that ended us up with this person doing these things? How did we get here? And where is some reflection or responsibility on how did we end up with a leader that takes us so far out of what is the mainstream? What are your thoughts about? Are there things you would have done differently? Are there things you'd have spoken about differently, focused differently, working with people differently than you have. I'm not saying I am not saying Trump is your fault. I am saying do you feel like, man, if I knew this now, I would have done that differently then? Because I think that's necessary, and frankly, miss Odds, and I'll throw it to you. I'm really helping media doing the same thing.

Man. Well, let's let's let Larry Summers answer your question. We've got it, We've got it. Let's let Larry Summers answer your question. Well.

Man. Well, let's let's let Larry Summers answer your question. We've got it, We've got it. Let's let Larry Summers answer your question. Well.

I think the most obvious example in this regard is the very large stimulus that the Biden administration proposed in twenty twenty one that led to very substantial inflation and led to prices being twenty percent higher four years later, and those higher prices were very disturbing to a large number of voters. And I think that was a very consequential policy error judged with the benefit of hindsight. From my perspective, it was an error judged with the benefit of foresight. I warned against it at the time and said there was a possibility that we were going to create the inflation problems that were reminiscent of the Vietnam War and then nineteen seventies period. So I think that was a substantially consequential policy judgment. And if we had not had inflation, I think it's possible that the results of the election would have been different. I think President Trump is running a very big risk that he is going to settle off higher prices, and that there's going to be a political price for him to pay. I also think that we probably have and this is something that I think would be common to many in government and to media, that while your show is called the Middle, I'm not sure that enough attention has been paid to the middle of the country, to the heartland of the country, and that economic policies have been set a bit too much with reference to the kinds of concerns that people have in New York and Washington and San Francisco rather than across the country. As an example of that, I think democratic administrations have made a bit of a mistake. They've put overwhelming emphasis on the issue of college affordability, and that is an absolutely important issue. I'm proud of what I did to make Harvard free for any family with an income under now one hundred thousand dollars, but I don't think that we thought about the very large number of young Americans who don't see an academic path through college but envisioned a different kind of career, and how to assure opportunity, chance to flourish, chance to be a prideful member of a community, and so I would say leaving behind those for whom college educations and all that follows are not the end all and the be all is a second kind of ashake, and is probably a longer standing error of the group of which I've been a part.

I think the most obvious example in this regard is the very large stimulus that the Biden administration proposed in twenty twenty one that led to very substantial inflation and led to prices being twenty percent higher four years later, and those higher prices were very disturbing to a large number of voters. And I think that was a very consequential policy error judged with the benefit of hindsight. From my perspective, it was an error judged with the benefit of foresight. I warned against it at the time and said there was a possibility that we were going to create the inflation problems that were reminiscent of the Vietnam War and then nineteen seventies period. So I think that was a substantially consequential policy judgment. And if we had not had inflation, I think it's possible that the results of the election would have been different. I think President Trump is running a very big risk that he is going to settle off higher prices, and that there's going to be a political price for him to pay. I also think that we probably have and this is something that I think would be common to many in government and to media, that while your show is called the Middle, I'm not sure that enough attention has been paid to the middle of the country, to the heartland of the country, and that economic policies have been set a bit too much with reference to the kinds of concerns that people have in New York and Washington and San Francisco rather than across the country. As an example of that, I think democratic administrations have made a bit of a mistake. They've put overwhelming emphasis on the issue of college affordability, and that is an absolutely important issue. I'm proud of what I did to make Harvard free for any family with an income under now one hundred thousand dollars, but I don't think that we thought about the very large number of young Americans who don't see an academic path through college but envisioned a different kind of career, and how to assure opportunity, chance to flourish, chance to be a prideful member of a community, and so I would say leaving behind those for whom college educations and all that follows are not the end all and the be all is a second kind of ashake, and is probably a longer standing error of the group of which I've been a part.

Well, we'll use your comments as an ad for the middle where we always hear from people in the middle of the country. Actually, we'll sneak in one more before a quick break. Joshua is in LaVita, Colorado. Joshua, go ahead quickly with your question for Larry Summers.

Well, we'll use your comments as an ad for the middle where we always hear from people in the middle of the country. Actually, we'll sneak in one more before a quick break. Joshua is in LaVita, Colorado. Joshua, go ahead quickly with your question for Larry Summers.

Thanks for taking my calls in honor to pick your brain. Doctor Summers. I have a question about the potential for countries maybe in concert with China dumping treasury bills in maps, now that there's been a lot of confidence and an increase in.

Thanks for taking my calls in honor to pick your brain. Doctor Summers. I have a question about the potential for countries maybe in concert with China dumping treasury bills in maps, now that there's been a lot of confidence and an increase in.

Uncertainty thanks to Trump's tariffs.

Uncertainty thanks to Trump's tariffs.

What do you think the chances of that are and how disasters could that be for the US dollars?

What do you think the chances of that are and how disasters could that be for the US dollars?

Great question, tash R.

Great question, tash R.

I think as a risk, there's some protection in the fact that if you sell a lot of treasuries, the value of the treasuries you have left go way down, so It's not a super attractive thing to do because you're reducing the value of the ashet that you hold. Or more generally, if you hold a lot of American assets and you sell them and you make the dollar go down, that may not work out ultimately to your benefit.

I think as a risk, there's some protection in the fact that if you sell a lot of treasuries, the value of the treasuries you have left go way down, so It's not a super attractive thing to do because you're reducing the value of the ashet that you hold. Or more generally, if you hold a lot of American assets and you sell them and you make the dollar go down, that may not work out ultimately to your benefit.

So there's an element of mutual.

So there's an element of mutual.

Deterrence that is perhaps increasing, and that's I think a pretty important factor that should be that should be considered here. But I certainly wouldn't want to deny that there's some risk of the kind you described, Tolliver.

Deterrence that is perhaps increasing, and that's I think a pretty important factor that should be that should be considered here. But I certainly wouldn't want to deny that there's some risk of the kind you described, Tolliver.

I know, just quickly some comments are coming in online.

I know, just quickly some comments are coming in online.

Yeah, Gordon and Kansas City says President Trump. Requiring Ivy League schools to remove anti Semitic behavior and DEI programs is not illegal. President Biden did the same thing by requiring some schools to include DEI programs. DEI is not merit based. Trump is not a dictator. He is implementing agenda that the majority of voter support.

Yeah, Gordon and Kansas City says President Trump. Requiring Ivy League schools to remove anti Semitic behavior and DEI programs is not illegal. President Biden did the same thing by requiring some schools to include DEI programs. DEI is not merit based. Trump is not a dictator. He is implementing agenda that the majority of voter support.

Maybe you can respond to that after.

Maybe you can respond to that after.

The well, yeah, we got to take a great But I will say, Teliver, that tariffs are something that I learned about as a kid from Ben Stein, who was my TV economics teacher back in the nineteen eighties.

The well, yeah, we got to take a great But I will say, Teliver, that tariffs are something that I learned about as a kid from Ben Stein, who was my TV economics teacher back in the nineteen eighties.

Was he, Now, Yeah, you're talking about this iconic scene from Ferris Bueler's Day Off.

Was he, Now, Yeah, you're talking about this iconic scene from Ferris Bueler's Day Off.

An effort to alleviate the effects of the anyone Anyone the Great Depression, passed the Anyone Anyone the Tariff Bill, the Holly Smoot Tariff Act, which anyone raised or lowered raised tariffs in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government.

An effort to alleviate the effects of the anyone Anyone the Great Depression, passed the Anyone Anyone the Tariff Bill, the Holly Smoot Tariff Act, which anyone raised or lowered raised tariffs in an effort to collect more revenue for the federal government.

Did it work?

Did it work?

Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression.

Anyone? Anyone know the effects? It did not work, and the United States sank deeper into the Great Depression.

For dry Eyes, Choose Clear Eyes.

For dry Eyes, Choose Clear Eyes.

That is one of my favorite movies, Toliver. I could quote a lot of it right here and now, but I won't.

That is one of my favorite movies, Toliver. I could quote a lot of it right here and now, but I won't.

I won't do it.

I won't do it.

But ben Stein was also a speech writer for both Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford in real life.

But ben Stein was also a speech writer for both Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford in real life.

Oh okay, Yeah.

Oh okay, Yeah.

More of your calls coming up on the Middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. In this hour, we're asking you for your questions on the economy for Larry Summers. You can call us at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. You can also reach out to us at listen to Themiddle dot com My guess is former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, and the phones are full, so let's get back to them. And Andrew is in Duluth, Minnesota. Andrew, go ahead with your question.

More of your calls coming up on the Middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. In this hour, we're asking you for your questions on the economy for Larry Summers. You can call us at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. You can also reach out to us at listen to Themiddle dot com My guess is former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, and the phones are full, so let's get back to them. And Andrew is in Duluth, Minnesota. Andrew, go ahead with your question.

Hi, thanks for taking my call. Mister Sommers. How can you say that the recent price increases or inflation is due to the Biden stimulus when it's been proven in multiple studies that it was actually just corporate greed and it's borne out by record corporate profits. I don't understand how you can keep peddling this lie.

Hi, thanks for taking my call. Mister Sommers. How can you say that the recent price increases or inflation is due to the Biden stimulus when it's been proven in multiple studies that it was actually just corporate greed and it's borne out by record corporate profits. I don't understand how you can keep peddling this lie.

Okay, Andrew, I will say, Larry Summers, there are people who would say that the inflation came also from the fact that there were supply chain problems around the world. Is it is a contested question about what led to the inflation, but you certainly believe that a large part of us from that stimulus package from President Biden.

Okay, Andrew, I will say, Larry Summers, there are people who would say that the inflation came also from the fact that there were supply chain problems around the world. Is it is a contested question about what led to the inflation, but you certainly believe that a large part of us from that stimulus package from President Biden.

Here's what I think.

Here's what I think.

If you hadn't had so much money poured into the economy, then given the constrained supply, you wouldn't have had such large price increases. But when you had constrained supply and then you poured a lot of money in and so there was demand for two hundred widgets and a business only had one hundred and twenty five widgets. What were they going to do? They were going to raise their price. And so that's I think the way to understand what it is that happened. I don't think, with all due respect to the caller, that the caller's view is a preponderant one among people who have studied what caused this in many many industries. I mean, take take an area where inflation was particularly severe. Rent on houses, landlords charge what they can get. I don't think that's greed. That's the way the economy operates. Nobody can say that all the landlords in the country, or even all the landlords in Cincinnati, are constituted a monopoly. There's a market price, and the market price depends upon supply and demand. And when you pump up demand very far before there's any chance for supply to respond, you're going to get a big increase in prices. And I think that's the clearest way to think about what it is that happened with respect to a significant part of the inflation.

If you hadn't had so much money poured into the economy, then given the constrained supply, you wouldn't have had such large price increases. But when you had constrained supply and then you poured a lot of money in and so there was demand for two hundred widgets and a business only had one hundred and twenty five widgets. What were they going to do? They were going to raise their price. And so that's I think the way to understand what it is that happened. I don't think, with all due respect to the caller, that the caller's view is a preponderant one among people who have studied what caused this in many many industries. I mean, take take an area where inflation was particularly severe. Rent on houses, landlords charge what they can get. I don't think that's greed. That's the way the economy operates. Nobody can say that all the landlords in the country, or even all the landlords in Cincinnati, are constituted a monopoly. There's a market price, and the market price depends upon supply and demand. And when you pump up demand very far before there's any chance for supply to respond, you're going to get a big increase in prices. And I think that's the clearest way to think about what it is that happened with respect to a significant part of the inflation.

Chris, if you're there in Nashville, Tennessee, go ahead with your question.

Chris, if you're there in Nashville, Tennessee, go ahead with your question.

Well, Hey, thanks for taking my call, so I'm going to conservative part of the country was raised more literal. I'm not a fan of Trump because it's just like narcissism, but I do think there's some merit some of the things he's trying to do. I think his follow through skills are poor, but I believe that some of the things he's trying to do are appropriate. The question is, is the things that they're focusing on, like doge and reducing expenses of the federal workforce.

Well, Hey, thanks for taking my call, so I'm going to conservative part of the country was raised more literal. I'm not a fan of Trump because it's just like narcissism, but I do think there's some merit some of the things he's trying to do. I think his follow through skills are poor, but I believe that some of the things he's trying to do are appropriate. The question is, is the things that they're focusing on, like doge and reducing expenses of the federal workforce.

It's such a.

It's such a.

Small my understanding, it's such a small percentage of the federal expenditure every year that if they really wanted to save money and cut back, they would look at different things like defense funding, right, things where the majority of our money goes to, and things like that. Would that not be more appropriate than necessarily the tariffs?

Small my understanding, it's such a small percentage of the federal expenditure every year that if they really wanted to save money and cut back, they would look at different things like defense funding, right, things where the majority of our money goes to, and things like that. Would that not be more appropriate than necessarily the tariffs?

You know?

You know?

And if we're going to do manufacturing in the country, who we're not going to build that many cars. We need to build things like semiconductors, computer chips, like you know, high textings that are going to be there, Yeah one hundred years.

And if we're going to do manufacturing in the country, who we're not going to build that many cars. We need to build things like semiconductors, computer chips, like you know, high textings that are going to be there, Yeah one hundred years.

Yeah a lot there, Chris. But let's go with what you were talking about with making cuts. Larry Summers is it a serious effort to cut the spending of the federal government If you're not going after defense.

Yeah a lot there, Chris. But let's go with what you were talking about with making cuts. Larry Summers is it a serious effort to cut the spending of the federal government If you're not going after defense.

Would be But if it was going to be serious, you probably have to look at entitlement programs, the very large programs, the rules of which are set and for which there's no congressional action taken each year, as part of considering the program's future. The caller makes an important point, which is that federal payroll, even if you eliminated all the federal workers, you probably wouldn't eliminate even one third of.

Would be But if it was going to be serious, you probably have to look at entitlement programs, the very large programs, the rules of which are set and for which there's no congressional action taken each year, as part of considering the program's future. The caller makes an important point, which is that federal payroll, even if you eliminated all the federal workers, you probably wouldn't eliminate even one third of.

The budget deficits.

The budget deficits.

And so for that reason, it's a pretty it's not That doesn't mean it's not important to look for waste. That doesn't mean there aren't potential efficialcencies to be found. And I think that's good and important work. But I think to hold out the prospect that it's going to eliminate or make a large dent in the budget deficit, I don't think is right. And I think these are areas where you have to be very careful if you want to be prudent. I some me worked in the Treasury Department for eight years, had responsibility for the oversight of the Internal Revenue Service and the evidence there is that what you get out in terms of tax revenue and in terms of legitimacy has a lot to do with what you put in. And if they carried through with their plans to cut half the employees of the IRS, I think they're going to be incredible losses as more people try to do the audit lottery and do things on their taxes that they know they shouldn't and hope that they won't get caught. So the studies that I've seen that we did that others have done say that one more hour of IRS auditing devoted to a high income taxpayer generates about three five hundred dollars in revenue. And I can assure you we don't pay IRS auditors anything approaching even ten percent of that three thousand, five hundred dollars an hour. So I think that slash and burn at the IRS can be very, very costly for the country over time. And so I'm a bit worried that some of what is taking place is not being done in thoughtful and careful ways, in addition to the fact that it's not going after the places where most of the expenses.

And so for that reason, it's a pretty it's not That doesn't mean it's not important to look for waste. That doesn't mean there aren't potential efficialcencies to be found. And I think that's good and important work. But I think to hold out the prospect that it's going to eliminate or make a large dent in the budget deficit, I don't think is right. And I think these are areas where you have to be very careful if you want to be prudent. I some me worked in the Treasury Department for eight years, had responsibility for the oversight of the Internal Revenue Service and the evidence there is that what you get out in terms of tax revenue and in terms of legitimacy has a lot to do with what you put in. And if they carried through with their plans to cut half the employees of the IRS, I think they're going to be incredible losses as more people try to do the audit lottery and do things on their taxes that they know they shouldn't and hope that they won't get caught. So the studies that I've seen that we did that others have done say that one more hour of IRS auditing devoted to a high income taxpayer generates about three five hundred dollars in revenue. And I can assure you we don't pay IRS auditors anything approaching even ten percent of that three thousand, five hundred dollars an hour. So I think that slash and burn at the IRS can be very, very costly for the country over time. And so I'm a bit worried that some of what is taking place is not being done in thoughtful and careful ways, in addition to the fact that it's not going after the places where most of the expenses.

Are What about the other comment about bringing back manufacturing. We haven't talked about that, but what are your thoughts on the idea that these factories, even if it's in a number of years, are going to come back to the United States, are going to come to the United States and people that we've even heard comments that people who are getting fired from their jobs and the government are going to be trained to work in factories and make things that I guess we're getting from China.

Are What about the other comment about bringing back manufacturing. We haven't talked about that, but what are your thoughts on the idea that these factories, even if it's in a number of years, are going to come back to the United States, are going to come to the United States and people that we've even heard comments that people who are getting fired from their jobs and the government are going to be trained to work in factories and make things that I guess we're getting from China.

Now, I'd say three things.

Now, I'd say three things.

First, the best and smartest thing we've done is a country to promote manufacturing has been the Chips Act, which is all about manufacturing semiconductors, establishing semiconductor plants, addressing a terrible vulnerability where ninety plus percent of the world's best semiconductors, high tech most high tech are coming from Taiwan, which is proximate to China, and unfortunately in the State of Union, the President basically declared war on the Chips program.

First, the best and smartest thing we've done is a country to promote manufacturing has been the Chips Act, which is all about manufacturing semiconductors, establishing semiconductor plants, addressing a terrible vulnerability where ninety plus percent of the world's best semiconductors, high tech most high tech are coming from Taiwan, which is proximate to China, and unfortunately in the State of Union, the President basically declared war on the Chips program.

Second, there might.

Second, there might.

Be tariff policies that would to some extent help manufacturing, but those would be more strategic policies than the ones that the Trump administration is putting in. For example, one of their major areas for tariffs is steel, and there are sixty times as many people who work in steel using industries as there are who work in the steel industry. So on net, you're probably reducing the competitive and the CI of American manufacturing more than you're helping the competitive and the c of American manufacturing.

Be tariff policies that would to some extent help manufacturing, but those would be more strategic policies than the ones that the Trump administration is putting in. For example, one of their major areas for tariffs is steel, and there are sixty times as many people who work in steel using industries as there are who work in the steel industry. So on net, you're probably reducing the competitive and the CI of American manufacturing more than you're helping the competitive and the c of American manufacturing.

And third thing I'd say is.

And third thing I'd say is.

Yeah, we should absolutely make sure that if we ever had to fight a war we have an industrial base. We should make sure that we're doing things not to be vulnerable against supply cut offs from China or any other country. But the idea that we're going to bring back a huge manufacturing sector that's going to be a large scale source of employment, I don't think that's terribly realistic. The number everybody quotes is that eight percent of the population is employed in manufacturing. That's a somewhat misleading number because people think about people working on assembly lines and the like, But in fact, half of that eight percent are people who are working in marketing or accounting or sales or what have you. And so the number of people who are working in actual manufacturing on a factory floor is only about one in twenty five Americans. And so even if you were going to increase that number, which I very much doubt we will. You're not talking about something that's going to be an immense factor in the economy.

Yeah, we should absolutely make sure that if we ever had to fight a war we have an industrial base. We should make sure that we're doing things not to be vulnerable against supply cut offs from China or any other country. But the idea that we're going to bring back a huge manufacturing sector that's going to be a large scale source of employment, I don't think that's terribly realistic. The number everybody quotes is that eight percent of the population is employed in manufacturing. That's a somewhat misleading number because people think about people working on assembly lines and the like, But in fact, half of that eight percent are people who are working in marketing or accounting or sales or what have you. And so the number of people who are working in actual manufacturing on a factory floor is only about one in twenty five Americans. And so even if you were going to increase that number, which I very much doubt we will. You're not talking about something that's going to be an immense factor in the economy.

Let's get to Andrew, who's in Palo Alto, California. Hi, Andrew, welcome to the middle Go.

Let's get to Andrew, who's in Palo Alto, California. Hi, Andrew, welcome to the middle Go.

Ahead, hey, question, Professor Summers. President Trump seems unconstrained by usual political controls, unlike most politicians. With this in mind, do you think there's any economic policies that he might do that others would have done if they didn't have political constraints that might be helpful to the economy, Whether that's pushing through Biden's a universal forbidding, a non competition, or things in the anti trust space, or something else.

Ahead, hey, question, Professor Summers. President Trump seems unconstrained by usual political controls, unlike most politicians. With this in mind, do you think there's any economic policies that he might do that others would have done if they didn't have political constraints that might be helpful to the economy, Whether that's pushing through Biden's a universal forbidding, a non competition, or things in the anti trust space, or something else.

Good question, Andrew.

Good question, Andrew.

I think that we have too many regulatory barriers that slow things down too much. In the United States. There's a bridge cross from my office at Harvard. It's a three hundred and sixty two foot bridge. It connects Cambridge, Massachusetts, with Boston. It needed to be repaired. A lane of traffic was closed for sixty two months, five years and two months. To put that in perspective, it took the United States three and a half years to win World War Two. To put that in a different perspective, Patent built a bridge ten times as long over the Rhine in one day. To put that even in a more dramatic perspective, Julius Caesar, with the technology of Julius Caesar's time, built a bridge across the Rhine not three hundred feet but three thousand feet in nine days. And those examples can be multiplied. The Second Avenue subway in New York costs twelve times as much per kilometer or per mile as the Paris Metro did, and we don't think of Parish as a paragon of efficiency. So I think there are a lot of areas where we have just distributed veto power promiscuously and in the process created great delays and driven up costs very substantially. And I think that's the kind of thing that a strong willed president with a firm attitude towards the government bureaucracy could usefully address. And so that is the area that probably comes first to my mind as an overlap of my beliefs.

I think that we have too many regulatory barriers that slow things down too much. In the United States. There's a bridge cross from my office at Harvard. It's a three hundred and sixty two foot bridge. It connects Cambridge, Massachusetts, with Boston. It needed to be repaired. A lane of traffic was closed for sixty two months, five years and two months. To put that in perspective, it took the United States three and a half years to win World War Two. To put that in a different perspective, Patent built a bridge ten times as long over the Rhine in one day. To put that even in a more dramatic perspective, Julius Caesar, with the technology of Julius Caesar's time, built a bridge across the Rhine not three hundred feet but three thousand feet in nine days. And those examples can be multiplied. The Second Avenue subway in New York costs twelve times as much per kilometer or per mile as the Paris Metro did, and we don't think of Parish as a paragon of efficiency. So I think there are a lot of areas where we have just distributed veto power promiscuously and in the process created great delays and driven up costs very substantially. And I think that's the kind of thing that a strong willed president with a firm attitude towards the government bureaucracy could usefully address. And so that is the area that probably comes first to my mind as an overlap of my beliefs.

In President Trump's natural interests.

In President Trump's natural interests.

Well, since you brought up Boston and Cambridge, let's get to a caller in Boston. Adam is in Boston, Massachusetts, go ahead.

Well, since you brought up Boston and Cambridge, let's get to a caller in Boston. Adam is in Boston, Massachusetts, go ahead.

Hello, Professor Summers. It's honestly a pleasure to how wind up together. I was over at the Kennedy School and I just want to be real with you. Thank you so much for everything you've been doing. And I mean it sincerely because it's just such a joy to see you on CNN and all these media outlets just simply doing a thing you honestly start are a public gift, really, and I mean that. My question, sir, is in regards to it's more macroeconomics, thinking about, you know, the World Trade Organization, kind of how the United States had played a major role globally. I think about things in certain phases, you know, the gold standard transition to the petro dollars, than this neoliberal order that we sort of had been involved in and stuff. My question to you, sir, and I'm considering and looking at some of these things, and I don't mean to theorize such, but when this president talks about Greenland and basically trying to it seems like more of an enforcement of the mineral doctrine where it's mostly about protecting the Western hemisphere and then sort of releasing this releasing out of global system that I'll be real with you. I'm only thirty one years old, but it's been such a privilege to be involved in and see as a kid, you know, growing up in a post Cold war society, born in ninety four. What is the end goal of all this, sir, with these tariffs and stuff? Because he's just simply ripping us apart. But what do you suppose he is taking us too? Because I just can't let's.

Hello, Professor Summers. It's honestly a pleasure to how wind up together. I was over at the Kennedy School and I just want to be real with you. Thank you so much for everything you've been doing. And I mean it sincerely because it's just such a joy to see you on CNN and all these media outlets just simply doing a thing you honestly start are a public gift, really, and I mean that. My question, sir, is in regards to it's more macroeconomics, thinking about, you know, the World Trade Organization, kind of how the United States had played a major role globally. I think about things in certain phases, you know, the gold standard transition to the petro dollars, than this neoliberal order that we sort of had been involved in and stuff. My question to you, sir, and I'm considering and looking at some of these things, and I don't mean to theorize such, but when this president talks about Greenland and basically trying to it seems like more of an enforcement of the mineral doctrine where it's mostly about protecting the Western hemisphere and then sort of releasing this releasing out of global system that I'll be real with you. I'm only thirty one years old, but it's been such a privilege to be involved in and see as a kid, you know, growing up in a post Cold war society, born in ninety four. What is the end goal of all this, sir, with these tariffs and stuff? Because he's just simply ripping us apart. But what do you suppose he is taking us too? Because I just can't let's.

Mind, Adam, I think we've got it. Let's I don't have that much time, so let's go to Larry Summers for his answer. Thanks for the call.

Mind, Adam, I think we've got it. Let's I don't have that much time, so let's go to Larry Summers for his answer. Thanks for the call.

I think it's dangerous nostalgia. I think there's a kind of myth that things were better forty years ago. I don't think they were. I think for all kinds of Americans, they were vastly worse forty years ago. To take just one example that's been forgotten, it was more than forty years ago. But when I was a child in school, we did drills where we learned to kneel, wrap our bodies up into a ball, and be under our desk to protect ourselves in case of amputative nuclear attack. There are lots of examples like that of where We've made enormous progress as a society, but I think the President has a kind of nostalgia for what he thinks of as an earlier time. I was struck by an event at the White House in the last few days where they were celebrating.

I think it's dangerous nostalgia. I think there's a kind of myth that things were better forty years ago. I don't think they were. I think for all kinds of Americans, they were vastly worse forty years ago. To take just one example that's been forgotten, it was more than forty years ago. But when I was a child in school, we did drills where we learned to kneel, wrap our bodies up into a ball, and be under our desk to protect ourselves in case of amputative nuclear attack. There are lots of examples like that of where We've made enormous progress as a society, but I think the President has a kind of nostalgia for what he thinks of as an earlier time. I was struck by an event at the White House in the last few days where they were celebrating.

A return of coal mining.

A return of coal mining.

Now, most of us thought that the highest aspiration of most coal miners were that their children would not have to be coal miners and would be able to pursue a different opportunity. And certainly, coal is toxic to human health see black lung diseased. Coal is part of a contribution to particulates and lead in the air, which raised mortality rage, and of course it's the major contributor to global climate change. So I would have thought the right objective was to move past coal while supporting people who were caught up in the transition, not to celebrate a return to coal mining. So toxic nostalgia would be my theory of the case.

Now, most of us thought that the highest aspiration of most coal miners were that their children would not have to be coal miners and would be able to pursue a different opportunity. And certainly, coal is toxic to human health see black lung diseased. Coal is part of a contribution to particulates and lead in the air, which raised mortality rage, and of course it's the major contributor to global climate change. So I would have thought the right objective was to move past coal while supporting people who were caught up in the transition, not to celebrate a return to coal mining. So toxic nostalgia would be my theory of the case.

Well, it's nice that we were able to start this hour talking about Harvard and end with a Harvard student. That was a perfect book. ND Larry Summers, from a Treasury secretary now at Harvard University, thank you so much for coming on and answering all of our questions.

Well, it's nice that we were able to start this hour talking about Harvard and end with a Harvard student. That was a perfect book. ND Larry Summers, from a Treasury secretary now at Harvard University, thank you so much for coming on and answering all of our questions.

It was good to be with you. Thank you very much, and don't forget.

It was good to be with you. Thank you very much, and don't forget.

The Middle is available as a podcast in partnership with iHeart Podcasts on the iHeart Apple wherever you listen to podcasts, and coming to your feed next week an episode of our weekly podcast Extra One Thing Trump Did. We're going to be talking this time about cuts to global AIDS funding and what that will mean around the world. And next week we'll be right back here talking about the power of billionaires in our politics.

The Middle is available as a podcast in partnership with iHeart Podcasts on the iHeart Apple wherever you listen to podcasts, and coming to your feed next week an episode of our weekly podcast Extra One Thing Trump Did. We're going to be talking this time about cuts to global AIDS funding and what that will mean around the world. And next week we'll be right back here talking about the power of billionaires in our politics.

As always, you can call in at eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can also reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com. You can also sign up for our free weekly newsletter featuring a new section called Toleras Tidbits, which is all recipes okay for music.

As always, you can call in at eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can also reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com. You can also sign up for our free weekly newsletter featuring a new section called Toleras Tidbits, which is all recipes okay for music.

The Middle is brought to you by Lungnik Media, distributed by Illinois Public Media in Urbana, Illinois, and produced by Harrison Patino, Danny Alexander Samburmastas, John barth On, Akadessler, and Brandon Condritz. Our technical director is Jason Kroft. I'm Jeremy Hobson and I will talk to you next week.

The Middle is brought to you by Lungnik Media, distributed by Illinois Public Media in Urbana, Illinois, and produced by Harrison Patino, Danny Alexander Samburmastas, John barth On, Akadessler, and Brandon Condritz. Our technical director is Jason Kroft. I'm Jeremy Hobson and I will talk to you next week.