« The Weeds

Australia solved its gun problem. Could America?


Sarah, Ezra, and Matt talk about gun control in the wake of Las Vegas, the GOP tax reform blueprint, and job-sharing in Germany. White paper: The Employment and Output Effects of Short-Time Work in Germany Referenced articles: What Do We Know About the Association Between Firearm Legislation and Firearm-Related Injuries? A Dynamic Analysis of Permanent Extension of the President’s Tax Relief After a year of work, Republicans have decided nothing on corporate tax reform (Matt's piece)

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
I feel very tired. I can't believe it's Tuesday is known to add at this. I say: welcome to another, so did the weeds, I'm a box. Media pack has networked ambassador glace. Yes, I joined by Ezra Klein answer cliff. We want to start by talk about. What's what's the news this, this horrific mass shootings in LAS Vegas, its left over fifty dead, five hundred injured and, of course, has We ignited that the debate around guns and and gun legislation- in the United States, but but reignited it in a way that anyone thinks anything? What actually happened, just kind of a lot of talk and- and so I think we wondered front, I I don't know I'm a weeds ear angle I guess I'm just a little more about somewhere, where they actually had a heart,
Mass shooting did something about their effect now. Shooting at ended actually worked there, the American conversation in the aftermath of these events is predictable, and its ineffective, and it's also a bit of Kabuki theatre. You tend to have his Democrats, saying: hey, listen, this keeps happen We should do something about it. As a way of showing that Republicans are completely and utterly unreasonable on this issue, which is true, they propose pollen, these. That would not actually do all that much about the underlying problem, but republic still say no to even those policies, so you have. The same. Were nothing passes but also. There isn't really an effort to build support, for the kind of An aggressive solutions that you would need, I think, to really make a dent in this problem we are saying is that as a beginning point here, America has said much gun violence and it's very important to say that gun violence includes both homicide and suicides as on
believable an awful and unique as America's gun. Homicide problem is its consumers. I promise at even worse, most Gunderson America are from suicides and these are in many ways even more amenable to gun control, but but America's here have a lot to do with the fact that we just have more guns, and anybody else does America has four point four percent roughly of the world population and we have got half half the world civilian own guns, so that is ape the king, crazy statistic, but we're not the only true. That has had a lot of guns and also of the only countries had mass shootings in banking, these six April. Nineteen. Ninety six in Australia, twenty eight year old man, Martin Bryant, walked into a cafe import, Arthur Wit, which is a tourist town. He opened fire the semi automatic and he killed a thirty five people any wounded. Another twenty eight since was a terrible mass shootings, thirty five dead, twenty wounded, not as many peoples and vague but also remember Australia's a smaller country. Now I want it
a moment here, because what happened next people have, I think, if you ve been on the internet and been had had internet content, world forbid, you ve probably heard it described in a the very funny and actually very apt little riff by The committee and Jim Jeffreys in Austria, where the biggest massacre on earth is drying government went back to normal. Guns and we'll away, and we await year within that sector. now in Amerika. You have society look massacre with little tiny children died and your government, when I ll be we'll get rid of the big yeah rosetta you and Sicily. Jeffrey saying here, is actually true australian, I did that they're gonna make
a lot of these kinds of guns illegal, but just making them illegal. Would it be enough? They had all these guns. There were actually out there among the population, people have them. So if you just made them illegally, you were doing anything but the existing gun problem, so what they decided to do as they would actually do a massive buyback programme. They would pay the gun owners affair ice beset by National committee using market values a benchmark? And here I am reading from a terrific article. Our colleagues act beach, get on this on this effort? So they pay? evaluation of the aid to compensate Gunnar Philosopher property, other aussi of illegal amnesty to anyone who wanted to turn in illegally own guns, though they wouldn't get any money for illegally on guns. So this by back, it brought back six hundred and fifty thousand guns as a lotta guns That's not all the guns were in Australia. According to two, one estimate is only about twenty percent of the privately and guns in Australia, but then, after that, I'll see you couldn't by these guys,
So as time went on, you had fewer and fewer guns are on the market and in people's homes. Obviously, people have guns at homes, but over time they break or they are not taking care of her or their lost or whatever might be. So. The question is: did this work and the answer, is it really did work in twenty loving heart? David Hemingway and Mary. Rennie, Addis, my Pope, I'm saying that name right, but I do not have much confidence in it. They they lie. Did the research on the aftermath of the gun, buyback programme and a conclusion was it was quote incredibly six thus full in terms of lives saved, but they found a huge declined but who said in homicide rates on the fire, I'm suicide rate in Australia and the seven years have the bill declined by fifty seven percent. Fifty seven percent compared seven years prior the average farm aside rate when done by about forty. Two percent and these numbers are actually amazing per hundred thousand people. Because you want to think about being also is off the vizier, a small country than where per hunt
thousand people buying back thirty five hundred guns correlated with seventy four percent drop in firearms suicides, which was very statistically significant. You know it was robust to analysis. Seventy four percent and non gun suicides did not increase to make up the decline. I want hold on a point for one second, because It is a highly spectacular- and I use the word- and it's sort of literal definition, not it with any positive connotation. Obviously it is these huge mass shootings bed command public attention that focus on us on our got problem at last I guess Andy HAWK Dylan Roof. I mean we have these terrible events that dead overwhelmed the national consciousness, at least for a minute, even have nothing. To happen in their aftermath. But if you look at does not coming primarily from multi, in person, mass shootings are coming from from homicides, but even more again from suicides and one thing about. suicide that we know from a lot of research eschew said is an impulsive act, people who
to commit suicide if they are stopped for three or four days that might just get rid of the there whose had ideation up entirely doesn't for everybody, of course, but for many people just get over that hump they're, not gonna, immediately try again a knock and immediately just delay their effort and the The thing is whether or not you are successful and a suicide is there. Dependent on what ever you use. What we're gonna means. You use people, treaties pills Try to hang themselves have a much much much much much lower success rate than people use guns because Gun designed and effective at killing human beings. So when you dont have guns both, it can be harder commit suicide, which means it. You ought to have more of an opportunity. Get people over that humping get them help, and often people who do try to take pills or something they just end up. Getting the stomach pump didn't give them treatment to. So why one piece of the whole gun discussion that I think often gets under noticed years. One way in which taking oddities guns off the street would be helpful, if not just in preventing these consumer shootings, but in
adding everyday suicides with which are in America. Vote Every gun related at thus very successful. So that's, I think that the Austrian, the basis for this point about Australia, they had a pretty radical gun problem. They implement pretty radical gun solution, and they had be significant results. So we have an even worse gun problem. We are not talking about so Is there anything near the scale, and so we are getting terrible terrible results with these continuous desk, continuous mass shootings, continuous suicide problem and it is always were saying that this is a choice, is a policy choices. Every day we everyday we choose to continue on in this world. Is it choosing this world. We know that there are ways to to choose a different pathway and you're, just as a country deciding to take them, and I want to point out the surely a program, I think it's even more radical and big than you described the buyback. It's one big part of it, but it's actually a suite of gun policy
If that happens, the things that happen- and this is a really apply article from the atlantic- from cash out of white people Jack will sometimes read other publication by the advice. I now see gonna break as your heart the policies involved in this. Ninety six, like suite of gun reforms, was- a ban on automatic and semi automatic firearms new licence requirements a national firearms registry. It twenty they waiting period for gun purchases in so the buyback, unjust and destruction of six hundred thousand civilian own firearms. So this is just like a big by them it's actually even bigger and more radical that that its bundling up of policies, we ve seen decently well on their own into one big gun reform and it costs money. Good cause. Half a billion dollars was funded by raising taxes, which seems like something kind. just in credit. It feels
absurd to imagine that you, as a proposal to raise taxes to fund this sweet of policies, just seems like something you wouldn't even start with here and there us because it costs money to buy because guns back when things it's interesting about gun policy, to some other areas of domestic policy. A lot of times. We talk about white papers the show. What were you talk about hard problems, hard problems where you can't really figure out solution. You're trying to figure out how to make me healthier, but it turns out health, insurance and great at that you to increase access to fruits and vegetables is our great track record, deserve hard policy problems too, to make people healthy, to solve. This turn of issues policy does not strike me as I'm as a problem like back there decent evidence that we actually know what works and even things smaller than the Australia. Buy back at work. There is another great vocs dot com articles from Zack Beach where he looked at this paper that came out of it.
years ago, I'm forgetting the name in the journal, but will put in shone out to link to it were they basic he did and international our view of gun reform laws. It looked Australia, looked Japan looked at another, their countries even looked at some states here in the U S and what happens when states implement individual level reforms and the generally find it it works The things you think will reduce gun and violence actually do reduce violence. It's not like this space where were searching for what is the right policy solution to lead to the outcome is actually a space where we have decent sense at the policy works from all these different international examples over the past few decades, but like us, said there is not much of an interesting putting those into action on a on a national level in the? U S, but so will you know this is an issue on which I have, I guess so, Some right wing sympathy is because it always is
makes me for one thing right that there's this: like total bad faith game where, like a mass shooting, comes and then people jump too well If America completely banned all guns, then we would have a huge can and suicides. So isn't a crazy that these energy fanatics are opposing our like total. Irrelevant. Large ammunition, holster type thing right and then you have Sammy like oh. This is like an easy promise on a hard problem like public health, but like if we made sugar illegal right like that, would have, I think, a pre, clear benefits and public out. If we doubled alcohol taxes, if we double- gasoline taxes like there are lots and lots of things where we know there's like everyday vices that people enjoy and that if we made them illegal or punitive, we expensive, we could have drastically better public health outcomes. and we don't mean sometimes we advocate for them- sometimes we don't, but we-
is like a bunch of people sitting around being like. I don't understand why? Don't we just make all alcohol in sugar illegal? Think, of course, you understand why we do those things is because people like Lamb and there's like a trade off that exists there. and I also like I grew up in Manhattan. I went to Harvard I was in Washington DC, I'm very much in the liberal bubble. I completely sympathise with the idea that gun ownership, as a cultural value in fact carries no value and we should put zero weight on people's interests in like dear society and the culture of gun ownership but I also know I'm a married to it to attacks on, and my father in law has has slipped guns locked up in his closet and, like I, I understand the viewpoint that, like this, this is valuable to some people and that it just like sort of take these outlier vans than proposed policy solutions that are not closely related to those events and where the benefits
mostly relate actually not to criminals, but to suicides like you can see. Why that rubs people the wrong way. Just as like. In the twenty years right, prohibition was understood by Jews and Catholics as like a protestant assault on their culture, even though, like the public health, albums with alcohol consumption are very, very real, like the reality of the politics is that it was this kind of cultural or politics that was free, floating free from any actual issues, but I think there I think there is a lot to be said for that, but I actually think there's a lot of ways in which you are giving the in you missing actually where I think those now. It is true that there is a lot that is similar the way we talk about guns and public health and guns. Another other issues like that. So one thing: or is it even when we do talk about big gun buyback programmes. Nobody is saying: let's take away, every gun, everybody has actually dont know anybody thinks you be able to have normal hunting guns.
No a lot of people. Think you should we live our fifteen, simultaneous beloved air, fifteenth unthinkable have handguns, doesn't mean kind of guns, does mean you can't hunt, but pretty. Similarly, when we're looking at substances in the public health arena, there are places where. say, okay, the trade off of being able to have sugar is worthwhile or the trade of being able to have alcohol is worthwhile, although we decide not if your kid and not if you want to drive and not if it's you know in certain com, trains and ensure their other extenuating circumstances there, but that of having heroin become completely legal for anybody who wants it with no waiting period and no registry at all is not worth it for knocking. Let people do that. You know letting large pharmaceutical manufacturers weapon eyes, hyper addictive drugs that you can then, by over the counter you know, sometimes happens. I think a lot of us wish we could go back and change the way opiates we're done, even though even they were more tightly regulated than that, but we do make distinctions. We do make decision
and yes it's true- that these big events focus attention. But it's not like these are new. Opinions that occur in the aftermath of big events mean everything in politics is a is a process of joy The setting of people moving from one to another of trying to get people to pay. Pension is something they think. You know the reason. I think it's important. suicide is that a huge fucking problem and it You are going to address the gun problem. That's part of what you should address. I think it's a shame that the way we orderly rank. What we pay attention to in politics has some to do with high level media events and thinks that the media will cover, but Canada is what it is. It doesn't make the underlying problem less bad. I don't. I don't really think it's a valid objection. Is somebody saying hey look now. There were two about guns. Let's, let's do something about our terrible suicide problem in this country to say all will you're just saying that because was a mass shootings who now people are going to talk about guns like? Oh, yes, but like
every week on the weeds, we decide to do things based on. What's in the new his, so you take you take the opportunities you can get. I think there is. Our would be a lot of ways to have a gun equilibria in this country that allowed for people to have fire arms they did in allow for continuous race and how powerful and how many people this firearms could kill. Now, Therefore, you dont, like them part of what people joy with guns, is like having better and better guns and they enjoy things that are or for they enjoy. You know using semi automatic the range and I'm not taken way from anybody. But by the same token, we ve already said there are certain kinds of guns like automatic guns can have Orkut launch again of a tank. We have to choose where we put our lines- and I do think is one of the weird things about this discussion that people dependence on something we only do or only want to do and guns. But it's not. We do it everywhere else, in my god of which, the other things in the country, the way which weakens its much easier to get power
fire arms for a lot of people than it is to get alcohol. I can't get. Am I not medication so Fran as easily, I can go into a warmer and get a semi automatic, so I just don't think Don't just no buyer that there's some kind of like incredible stringency being put on this issue. I mean it's each other's stringency. Did I mean to be clear luck, I would totally may guns illegal all goods. totally illegal. I dont think people should be allowed to hunt, and I bet you don't that people should be allowed. That being said, right like it's, when you read Chris Murphy's statement in the wake of LAS Vegas, he is not saying it is time for us to address America's elevated rate of suicides relative to OECD countries wait. There is something going on. If you are a person who is, in my view, also non profit a gun by you know I mean I understand that right, but I mean that's like I think it's like some
I'm good in life to try to to sympathize with with other peoples viewpoint and like there's something fishy happening with liberals and gun discourse. It seems to me right would like these spectacular, mass shootings occur and then like outcome, the sort of waves of outpouring and outrage- and there is a very poor mismatch between like the rhetoric. being used the charts about America's gun death rates, the policies that are actually being proposed do you think, would be a fair response to continuous mass shootings like what is it's like the non fishy version of response, try responded. The thing I don't know exactly right leg, someone would have to try to come up with a proposal that was aimed at addressing bash They gathered its weight from the idea that he's gonna substantially reduce mass shootings manuscripts. Let us focus on a lot of automatic weapons, exactly the kind of policy
we may be. It is right, but like that's what I then I turn to Vauxhall COM, which I think is an excellent website and gives a lot of things and what I read a lot on. Vocs outcome is like the real benefits of this is gonna, be like Susan reduction if it was up to me I mean if I could somehow control everybody what I would say that, like we as a country, have decided that we actually don't want to address mass shootings in, for example, in it, You say we ve hugely elevated rate of car fatalities compared to other countries, and that's the fact, and I can write crank website articles about it, but we don't just like every day, be like, oh, my god, all these car deaths in America right. It's like deeply ingrained, we enjoy. vehicles. We enjoy suburban growth model and we just cannot pass it by weight and I feel like we ve like made a similar, Troy I'm guns, and if it were me, I would like to like not have these like he's long media like let's all make a big deal,
all about guns because, like we ve decided not to that, this is like the cost of do but, as I said, Rebecca a place in which the WEEE is doing work it shouldn't do, there is, do we I did not tell me one of the things people bring up a lot about this, this debate and a much actually how relevant it is. But public opinion on what gun, flush look like this a different than equilibrium we actually reached. So it's not, got a gun buyback, but it is like ok background checks, waiting periods in lots of his very popular there. I mean debts Unsettled now, like I actually would with have highlighted her opportunity. if that were provided, where we can get people to pay more attention to traffic. Thus, I think, I think an interesting topic like we have published a lot of your writing on zoning, and you know when we make the problems of love of suburbs and sprawl, but I'm going, because things very weird in the argument you're making about how, in the aftermath of spectacular focusing events
people should only have an incredibly limited response that does not taken too count the underlying problems related to the cause of the event ivy issues like it just ignore it's like saying if not how we dress The one I think also like Australia like actually speaks to situate, like that's where you did that focusing event with the mass shootings you had this big gun country packaging than you do see. You know you stupid. From rural areas. We have more Gunnar than ownership, but you do see the dividend has been paid in in fewer shootings in food Suicide like it seems like it is. I think, I guess you're asking. Why is this the right way? people who support and gotten control to take a moment like LAS Vegas in some sort of gains Why do we making any gain something for one thing why this is as a political strategy? This is cataclysmic failed,
right that has only moved gun was in the opposite direction. Ride like over the past fifteen twenty years. Ride like gun laws have become lax, not more stringent, but my request is that guides me out. Turn yeah like like me: like. Let's all stay quiet after all, these people that I just don't know that time raising say confidence well, but what what do people trying to do? I just like I am baffled by linking the mid arts I feel like it was like a good sort of like come to Jesus moment among Democrats who are like. Why don't we stop losing elections of our unpopular ineffectual, gun control stance. and then motivated by like Facebook shares like no. What we need to do is not make any legislative progress on this, but lose more elections over it and like it just it seems,
baffling to me? I mean I know everybody is frustrated about this like now, in the wake of mass shootings, all I read are not even people like advocating for gun control measures, but just like voicing frustration with the fact that the measures and not passing- and I too am frustrated, but it's like like what like? What are we trying to do here these days? You know it's! It's an undermine world, it's an undermanned economy and stamps that com is about bringing that undermine philosophy to the world of postage ass. You don't need to go to the post office. You don't need to sort of wait for when are they open? You can get postage whatever you want online with stamps that come anything could do adipose office. You can do from your desk with your computer. You combine print official. U S postage for any letter package, own computer own printer,
you never closed, so you know you need, and on Sunday you needed sevenpm. If you need an early in the morning, stamps outcome is always open. That's really can mean you know the rhythms of your life, just don't necessarily line up with the rhythms of of postal service openings and its incredibly can so right now, if you use a promo code weeds, you get a special offer to four we trial that includes postage and digital scale. So how do you get it you gotta instead com and, before you do anything else, you click on the radio microphone at the top of the homepage, taken we that stamps that calm, enter weeds, stay calm never went in line at the post office. Again I just I am not sure that it makes sense to me as a general principle and I dont actually believe it is your general principle that the fact that Certain things are a little bit outside the current political consensus. I mean like, for instance, gun measures almost did pass in the wake of sandy hook on me. They failed, but you talk him ass. I have a couple of oats.
like, though I don't measures we're not, but they I mean they would have helped trailing share of our demand that about any pause. You fight, like, I think, there's a lot of policy fights for you see you like push out it again and you fail and you push at it again and you fail, and then there is a mole. that someone unpredictable, that it actually believe that the worst thing that almost came through way- because I'm was this like this like now fly no gun bill right. We're Democrats were pushing legislation that we can get people who warrant on that the agreed. Small bore, but setting believes that Asia is best. It is not just that it small bore ready me what what I understood for from experts- and that was that, like that, was actually bad rattling, it would not have addressed the gun measure that it was going to increase the scope, of this sort of law, less discriminatory, applied measure
It was like enormous sort of breakaway behind it right, but we wrote about how that was, but we did. This is how I got all my guide, but right now and right now we are talking about things that really could be good, But I am not going to convince you on this, but I just I think that it is. worth rethinking the underlying principle like. Maybe maybe it is a view that people should do talk about only things like might happen next week or might happen in two years right or my people, it or my more critically. How do I do actually related fields and why I will be interested to see right and Nevada has very lacks laws for an american state, Tibet is also not a super conservative state random. We ve talked about our a friendly sprinkle care. They baddow one Democratic, senator of vulnerable republican Senator They have a modern republican governor, a democratic state legislature. I will be the interested to see one.
From now or two years from now went when state elections are being held there. When Democrats Plenum elected governor trying to act turning general or those candidates going to talk about the gun issue. As you know, part of their platform sing, it wanna do and are they going to talk about it as a day to day this is going to improve public health outcomes in vat a kind of way, and that to me is the kind of thing that would potentially like work, but it really build support overtime to get people to think about widespread gun possession as a sort of constant public health threat to the United States, that is leading to more Nevadas committing suicide, just somewhat more street crime that is existing and the Therefore, as people like start to think about the front environment, this good, this could actually should go and happen. I'm not sure if that would work, but to me that kind of thing widely group's view
bird slow, boring of hard boards like that's how you make progress on this, and I find the liberals engagement on this issue to be incredibly inconsistent, like weirdly fickle a little bit like tantrum, throaty and in a way that is actually distinct from other kinds of things that we talk about and eats. It hasn't been working overtime. Maybe it will change- and I agree that vocs outcomes. Gun articles are very informative and, like I hope, people wool read them and and understand, but I just to me like that. The discourse that we see in the wake of these things is not productive. It's not helping its, not changing people's minds. It's not bill support for anything they I just. I just don't think I agree in a Broadway. I don't wanna make one point on suicides because I think that's a place where, where this gets, this section has a laborious crux. And what I think that's doing so when I think
The way we run coverage in some of these things are not just guns, but a lot of things. The via our pro tread the sort of explanatory journals approaches to say, oh the news has focused attention on a point of, on a point of curiosity, appoint of urgency, a brand new story. How can we fill in the rest of the picture? Swear? We can give you the context so that the news makes more sense than into saying what happened right here. We can try to give you the information to understand the the broader space in which it is happening, but the way this puzzle peace fits into the broader puzzle. There is, I think, it's important to talk about suicides. Is that I think that is a place where, if people had a low, that more focus on it and did stand how much a part of the gun issue begun problem. That is, there are problems. It could be specific oriented there, that that would be valuable, I'm now gun buy back. We start this with Australia and with a much more radical approach, an approach it you know, propagandists
kinds of weaponry I would support, but nobody thinks it is anywhere close to happening here and also to your point, medicine on something that actually any democratic politicians ever propose here, but I do think that it would be good to give people the sense that hey there are like One recent waiting periods are actually a pretty interesting proposal is the other I'd be some mass shootings that they would have stopped. they would deal with, but they are really quite effective, potentially for suicides. and so yes, part of it is when there is an opportunity to try to talk through this stuff, you say, hey look here- are dimensions of the problem. Here is a broader context of the problem here. Different solutions that might help in different ways and you know one day their merits, Dorothy, but I expect there will be an opportunity to act on some of this and then having a pretty good understanding of the dimensions of the problem will be important onto me. Like that's what
media should be doing and then what we try to do on a lot of issues, not just guns, but you ve written explained is here says rent explained is here: we ve all done had a lot. try, say: okay, people are focused on the saying here is what else matter in the space. So you can kind of get a fuller picture and I think I think I think that's a pause thing to do, and I think that you do not. You cannot understand American. unusual gun death without breaking down into homicide besides and suicides- and you know I think you can understand why their policies we would be effective without understanding the that the suicide piece of it. Yet brings a little bit of policy new to what it is you're trying to deal with the understanding that these mass shootings and upping, focusing why don't? We just have a lot less focusing moments? I'm done suicides there like the car crashes, they just happen. Quite Lee. You know, unless it is, I guess it is someone famous committing a gun suicide. I can. You can even are met like remember the last and like that was drawn,
as an issue. It is such a quiet sure that I do understand the impulse to rapid end. You a moment when there is folk s and I think there is these international evidence that that it has worked as a political strategy, but is in time is necessarily something that is going to stop legislation like this. If there is enough political will behind, packing of political take a break turn, but the hop button question of tax reform, you're busy, I'm busy we're all busy everybody's busy these days, yet everyone has little bits of free time. Fifteen minutes just like waiting time on Facebook, twitter or something like that, but instead, when I get a summary of the main points of a great book that you ve been meaning to read, but listen to the key incites, just fifteenth friends and colleagues are probably was mentioning books. You know you hear buzz about these things, but you don't always have the time to get to them and then draw blinkers comes in with the solution if over
thousand best selling nonfiction fiction transformed into powerful packs a reader, listen to him, you know anyone who is listening to this package probably loves. The idea of putting on the go is a great way to take that into the realm of nonfiction books. So what with bunkers you can feast you're mine on key ideas from some top assigned bucks? You got why nations EL the myth of a strong leader, two nations, invisible, a great stuff out there, and you can get the essential ideas in this fifteen minutes or less. Here's a special off. We have put a blinkered start coms like weeds right now, you sort of free trial or three months off a yearly. That's blinkers spelled be tell Pie and K. I S, T blink IST dot, com, slash weeds, start, a pre trial of three months of the year. We plan blinkers back coms, slash weeds, so Republicans, late last week
came out with a framework for a tax reform about which they ve like develop Del kinds of jargon around this. Today they created this construct that there is a big six who was working on tax reform, which is like House republican leadership, Senate republican leadership to guys from the administration and they spent months working on a plan that was supposed to fill out the details of tax reform relative to Republicans had previously proposed, and I would say they basically didn't do any of that. They came out with this new, somewhat ambiguous framework. That's largely the same as ambiguous frameworks that they had before, but with healthcare. Now off the table. You boys are more fully stop it. So you know we can talk about what it is But this is a really telling sender, p instead of seven tax. Brackets, it's going to be three: it's going to be twelve, so the lowest one is fire is going to be thirty five, so the highest one is a lower twenty five.
It all, and they don't say where the brackets occurs star and also there might be for real and those who take israeli funding whenever you like, raise them just like well, we might out before I come to my don't, be high higher could be, while all come to our silk. So this is standard. Deduction is gonna be doubled. Basically, the child tax credit will be higher by an unspecified Mt. The personal exemption is going to be eliminated, mortgage interest and charitable tax deductions will remain, but other tax reduction It will go away. Corporate income tat, including, very importantly, the state and local tat. At last, the biggest one corporate income tax is gonna, be lowered from thirty five percent to twenty percent. That's gonna be paid for by unspecified reductions in corporate tax breaks, but they're going to create a giant new corporate tax loophole. So all foreign profits will be exempt from TAT
nation accept this another asterisk here where many feet. That won't happen because of the new international corporate tax rates It is also going to be a bigger loophole, because this gonna be instead of depreciating over a multi year. Time frame. You can be able Do it immediately past? company is right. So if you have a business with only a small number of owners, they call them as you name it after yourself, it's like a family. Yes, there is real estate in Manhattan, exultant brand stuff, that's gonna, just get a special twenty five percent tax rate, which is a big tax, can add the estate he's going away, the eternal minimum taxes going away. So In this sense, I mean thief: specified a bunch of tax cuts. Right I mean the the the set, are really clear. Here are the estate tax? which right now, if you stand to inherit of multi million dollar fortune is pretty hot right. I mean, if you inform all it doesn't exist
in these areas is a what about weird, because you say, tax rate is really high, but almost everyone is exemplary. What is it we have about? This point is like five million dollars, but you pay a forty percent rate on it, which I think is weird policy, but anyway, it is where we are. So it's like a big tax cut if you are evoked a trump, corporations wait going for right now, there's like a lot of problems with collecting taxes, american companies, foreign profits. You hear all these action against Babar, so the republican solution to that is just not collect those taxes really big tax got if you're like Facebook or your apples limiting the m t. You know it's kind of a big deal. The pass through thing is a huge the rainbow. If your Donald Trump, you pay thirty nine point. Six percent marginal tax rate he's gonna cut his own taxes to twenty five percent. All the rest of this is like a credibly murky. If, yes, the tax policy centre did a score
es which showed that doesn't get huge tax cuts for the one percent at ain't. You talking a scar, rockwork I've three numbers and score that are just worth knowing here. So for the top one percent, average they get a hundred. Thirty thousand dollar tax got someone in the middle class, the Middle Cliff, someone in the middle class gets on average six hundred and sixty our backs had affirming this correctly and the whole thing both two point: five trillion dollar home the deficit which employ and you know here is it. The Trump administration is promise that this will be deficit neutral and also as progressive as the current code. So, in theory, They are finding any those words the way we normally to find them, which they may well not, but if their defining the boy you normally to find them this summer have to come up with two point: five trillion dollars and offer and also a set of policies that will lead to a hundred thirty thousand. Our tax got becoming something much much much much much much much much smaller than that. So Republicans,
come in and say: oh well, that that tax policy centred analysis. We got given details like they're. Making assumptions but number one. When they give the details, it could get worse. Somebody's assumptions actually made favourably to the administration and to like fair enough but then it just shows like how little they have actually said about how they gonna keep their promises and how hard the task we have in front of them really is slim iguana things you Do I know Matthew somewhere time. Looking at this is you could lower the corporate tax rate but get rid of these, get rid of a lot of people say like where we're going. thus, but wouldn't you you're not can be able to get out of like the NASCAR loophole, you know, gets you better tax breaks on your run, your race, cars or whatever other things exist, but it's sounds like they have not been so I know there is, but it's under you have on the M individual side there deductibility of saint local taxes, but is there anything in here with the lowering of the corporate tax rate bout, like closing
corporate levels, this corporate tax proposal? It makes no sense right, so Mitt Romney in twenty tat, came up with a proposal which are structurally simulated as he was gonna. Have a corporate tax rate cut, as whom we paid for through unspecified? loophole elimination and what his team came up, what Romney minute sad to say came from this, like weird momentum, Meanwhile, when people in just totally make stuff up in their policy proposals, he came to the conclusion that twenty five percent was like the most that they could promise. They would cut it too because, if you eliminated all the loopholes introductions that would pay for probably like a twenty seven percent corporate tax rate, so they gave themselves like a little fudge factor and got down to twenty five to twenty five that sound good enough, I guess to Common Brady and Paul Ryan who months ago you may recall we mentioned the destination based cash for tat,
so they had this idea employer time they had this idea to replace the corporate income tax. With this twenty percent sort of consumption tax, the designation based casual tax but they didn't want to say that they were replacing the corporate income tax with a kind of twenty percent national sales tax. does that sounded bad, so they called it still. The corporate income tax, even though, is completely different and had nothing to do with it, Britain contacts. So then, this idea of a twenty percent corporate income tax rate, like ended up in documents, but it was decided months ago to drop the proposal to implement the destination MACE Castro tax. So twenty percent number just kind of migrated over, but the effective tax, where it right that the tax rate, the corporations pay, including all the loopholes and all that it actions- is either twenty four or twenty eight percent, depending on how you look at it, but it's deafened
not twenty percent, so they met specifying which will cause they're gonna get rid of creating some new loopholes and you just can't. It will give literally a Campi. Does my group, you can't you would have negative loopholes? Would you You can't have or you can raise the deficit but it, but you can't. I mean you little under the bird raw like you cannot have a gigantic payment, your brain unfashionable just so, the tax policy centre says they're going to raise taxes on individuals to make this corporate cut work. I was various. If, because this has all been governed in the world of bird, there is no suggestion that there is going to be an attempt to create a sick. Member coalition in the Senate that this will go through the same conciliation process that on the healthcare, was threatened, attempting to go through you could have. The the tax cuts not be permanent right, like we ve seen that story before and it
like something that every summer publicans are interested at. One of my understanding of the bird role is, you can have short term increase yet set, but once you get past the ten year budget window, that's when you cannot be increasingly deficit One way to do that when we debate that was just create all that doesnt increase it up. another is just to have a budget where they did not really a gimmick bulk, as it happens that I have but where you have your tax cuts just sunset, quickly and in twenty twenty seven ass I may well come to that, I dont understand this proposed, like this proposal does not meet it stated Goals- it's not in line with the budget resolution that their working on so I was, and fascination with Paul Ryan is weakened if he, so they are not going to do that. He said this is not gonna race deficit. It was ninety and said I am just saying that they are currently not planning for the right. They there,
probably making a harder for themselves to to have that. Be the outcome right, like Paul Ryan, I have to go out and say they keep well we'll see. You know we'd like gets a democratic support, but there's no Blake. knocking expire, it's going to be permanent. It's gonna go forward. One question add, is that Obviously, one of the ways we want to do this is by blowing up the deficit. Ah, what you gonna do about one point: five trillion dollars and a bird obviously, but so saying: it's not gonna block the deficit, not they're, not saying we're. Gonna use. filiation have followed the fullest of its capability sit there thing we're not it will not add deficit and also, like Bob Corker things cannot add to the deficit. I mean the crucial votes are saying like this: should not be a deficit. Increasing tax got what they do, however, leave a space for is to dynamically score. The tax cut to say well to increase growth and growth leader revenues, and so even maybe it looks like it is increasing. The deficit really can be so good for the economy, it won't, but mine. standing is that that
scored by armed, Jesse, Tee and scipio, which a little bit of dynamic scoring, but does not do that kind of work, crazy dynamics going Republicans role is wishing someone would do like they keep trying to do this in putting new directors hard to see beyond them an actress look at the evidence in and they don't do that they Well, you know that this on only so much you can do I mean a weakened, whole episode of maybe should on dynamic scoring, which I ask is worth talking about, but with in the congressional process there, just not going to get a huge dynamic number. You I mean one of the many known unknown about this is because he cares one thing which, after having watched the healthcare thing, is difficult to know exactly how much they are going to abuse the congressional process to get this done right. So I got health care at the end of the day it turned out. They were willing to comply bypass the committee structure. Have the house vote on bills the ceo hadn't scored, then after the Senate
like no like we're not gonna. Do that we're not gonna do that were definitely can have CBS scores. They work things out so that the she will bills were amendments to the bill that had been CBS scored, so the Senate was in fact gonna pass bills that the Seville hadn't scored too. Who knows right? I mean we ve got desperate enough like cock Congresses Congress right, like fundamentally an empowered a majority in Congress can do what it wants these rules matter, but their self imposed restraints. It seemed like ultimately to get the health care bill done. They were willing to break the Senate process and it really extreme way, but it doing that they like broke John Mccain's loyalty to the Republican Party and the whole thing by collapsing. Now we're like back at square one- and I think we don't know right if you listen to what Paul Ryan is saying, listen what Bob Corker assaying and the one thing I can say for sure. Is that, like the thing that
Ryan is saying they are going to do. That is not going to happen right there. They are not going to pass a permanent bird compliant tax cat that reduces taxes for the middle class, but also has this I can't take, that sank, negative corporate income tax eliminates this day this no way way like there is man if you, to eliminate the estate tax and you want to cut the corporate tax rates and you want to eliminate the m t any want a big tax caught for sort of like law firms and other passed through entities, and you wanted to be deficit neutral. You half do have a large middle class tax increase. Wait like this. No other way to do it. Now you can dynamically
glory herself. However, you want, if you ultimately want you. I noted it. The Treasury department per dished a office of tax analysis paper that said that the incidence of the corporate income tax falls mostly on winners of capital, while they were doing that they could have deleted the office of ties, allows it was important to see that would mean the cutting. The corporate tax rate is attacks caught for owners of entropy exactly so so they went through oh oh dossier, and they found one paper that violated there. Talking points and they deleted at there's a visit to family, really wages, yeah we'll just deleted it. So, there's a two thousand six paper about dynamic scoring which says that you can make this work with dynamic, scoring haven't deleted that one. Yet I'm not sure if they know where it is. I know we put it in China and worsening desolator isolated Anwar AL blog about it later, but it's like It is only in this way is not tat. You should have you downloaded that paper
paper. They don't want it's I'm c b anyway, it shall be acquitted, this is a mysterious document, because nobody made them produce this framework at all. Right I mean there are out of things that you have to do to comply with the legislative process. This is like not on that and it doesnt convey any information. I do also want to note that you have a very good piece on this this morning, which It will also be in China, but it but about all the decisions have been made here, but do want to notice it a lot like the end of gram of Obamacare, the Graham Cassidy, the only legal hard hang Republicans side to commit to doing is fucking over blue states, something there they they're keeping the mortgage interest deduction which, in the context of a tax plan, my best just crazy that ginger deduction is about deduction. It definitely should not be structure the weights currently structure. This is bad charitable, I'm not a huge fan of, but you can, I think, there's a much better argument for it, but the
you think they really do here is take away. The state and local tax deduction, which is good. Forest states had have high tax burdens, which is to say it's a good tax deduction for California. For now, work for Massachusetts for New Jersey also to say it's a devastating packs plan for Europe. Lookin in any of those states which is a kind of republican who might lose their reelection bed in two thousand and eighteen, so they're all putting them at their majority, but more risk, but they are going to have to do all of this. Fighting over auction closing almost dislike the term. Loopholes conditions or loopholes are like actual policies. It got decided sometimes for good reasons and measure bad, pulls, makes him sound easy lately they got a hole in your sweater and you gotta close it, but no like the corporate loopholes, are real loopholes, but they have a really powerful defender. Yes, rioting, they just don't they're, not mistakes
That's what I think is an error in the tax yeah someone discovered and took advantage leering lobbied for, like when you say, the single loophole legally in a software program, or something like I take that to me like, oh, like The code is not really well ran, unlike some like a hacker. Can get you know? That's not. What is the code is we're home. It was written by lobbyists. They knew it, doing it's gonna be hard to get rid of. There are some loopholes. Blake interested accountability is not a loophole like that's a big tough deduction and if you gonna get real money, you're gonna have to begin going after things like that, so they have. many decisions you only real one. They have taken on in a serious way like no other. They haven't even said the carried interest. Deduction just like the one that helps hedge funds. Out, like they say the the committee will look at that. The only thing there actually willing to say they're, gonna fuck over California, which internet into not getting them all the way to where they need to go, but at the same time making it harder for, like their bunch of republican members of Congress in California, it also
they just speaks to this new thing, but I don't remember being true in the Ways Republic, Sir Building policy before us. deciding that they're just going to defend Hey force and approaches just hurt: blue states versus red states like it's, a real like pure politics of tribal war. That, I think is it sensuality to the end of health care and the beginning of tax reform issues. I think a fact worth noting, so I think we have talked a lot about the flaws and the many obstacles it faces but eyes I feel like I'm, ready, Rosalie Polish on this To health care, I know you're like a nine month period where they worked an old. It can get it done, but. I, even with all these obstacles that exist, it still seems like something that is a slightly easier lift. in tax reform, you don't have the people. Healthcare of right ended right after this hearing, where people with wheelchairs are being literally dragged out where people are telling a lot of stories about losing.
health insurance about these very like life and death situations, I dont think tax reform has quite the same. emotional valence, which I think makes it a more difficult issue to organise against, and I think you know that to form? There was a lot of internal lamb in turn strife in the republican Party? Do we actually want people to lose health insurance I don't know that dynamics on tax, quite as well. They do on healthcare. It seems too, though there is a little bit less of that, I'm on the tax side. I think one dynamic, I'm curious to see how this place out is we ve generally scene pretty ineffective Congress that has not been able to pass sort of major legislation, despite all the way down and Congress go on, but I'm curious if that kind of walls the other side into like a false sense of security like this is a party or if it let you know, maybe and like three months will take the weeds and how we completely wrong, and it really just as a party that cannot-
anything done, but it feels this to me like there's more more opening here with an with an issue that has a lot less emotional valence to the debate, yes a hundred percent, a route that I mean. Look in two thousand wine Drudgery Bush wrote a bill that lowered everybody's taxes a little bit and which people's taxes alive and increase the deficit a lot, and it was scheduled to expire after ten years, and when ten, we're up. They got it extended for a couple more years and then, when those couple more years were up. They got it mostly made permanent. I would think that they, do that again, I don't see how Democrats capacity to stop them from doing that again, it doesn't seem politically viable to me to try to stop them. Interest rate at low. I mean people as they are the deficit, but like the deficit is fine. They just that, isn't what they are proposing. So it is a little bit weird right like
station on the subject of health care is going to pass Congress right, whether in the form of a by parties. unstable zation, something with the chap something will be done but like then, with a chip turn induced the does. I think that the businesses like what they are proposing to do here, like I really don't think that is going to happen like they started with this border adjusted tax thing, which was crazy and obviously not can happen. Like here's the thing as you will supplement the same local tax reduction right, so they're, saying this goes ever blue state. The screws on both sides, which totally does the sacred screws over four out of the top five are below the fifth is the top utilise represented it's not only, not a blue state or catches, the fucking chair this reply, you cannot it's fine to do something that screws over the chairman of the Foreign Affairs committee.
Your reason for picking that can't be. That is like a dirty political pool. The choose your enemies like that doesn't work at all is really stupid. The where the text was similarly it with you is baffling youth is of what. If we proposed a huge tax increase on large retail chains, Ebay, like I wouldn't while Barbie MAD and their own acknowledges, propose it. Then war market, man, then the senators from Arkansas, who Republicans will acknowledge not do that, so they had to kill it, but this month's talking about this for no reason they're not going to do the same thing, which was in Aachen, willing to pay for any of this, I don't know I really. I agree with you, Sir, like I think conventionally they're gonna write a tax cuts bill, but I ve also that's what I thought in February and I dont know why they don't like zero head to the part where they admitted this is pointless and impossible, and just like do a deficit financed tax that for which people the throws, some pennies that everyone else and like they can
signing ceremony like that. We really hope here that the same here, like a higher than a stand at how I would pass attacks, could, if I were the Republicans, I don't understand, is why they have set up a like, literally impossible series of promises. They can't they can in any way fulfil I was very much for your on this until the framework came out and deliver like it's gonna be progressed as the current code. It's going to be deaf neutral like it's gonna, you know if the bird rule like it's. None of that can happen. So at some point, they're gonna have to talk to walk that down or walk that back. was a really good issue for them to centre committees, like the press, It's kind of wheeling and dealing you need to do on taxes were worried about senators from the state forces that one or members of Congress who have like a district, the has this kind of industry and not that kind of industry
the committees have like ten thousand people on every single one of the big house. Committees are huge and it's a perfectly good place to got these kinds of questions having the six do this as her calling it that was really dumb like there is no reason for it and help them into another like set on these mark and they're gonna take a lot of political damage, as they tried till he reached the markers, and so the question just like by end of that process have been taken on so much political water. They ve killed. The whole thing or are they gonna be able to do like a final pivot turn to the plan like, if I were Paul Ryan, I would have somebody in backroom somewhere writing the plan. People right just like that. easy tax cuts like everybody like it, but you couldn't Democrats do if you ve got a middle class tax cut. You did repaid Corbett, repatriation for infrastructure and you did support extra form stuff. You could have gotten Democrats
like I was talking to a democratic Senate, staffer hissing that exact thing the other day they ve just decide to do this in the hardest possible way from the set and to set up a bunch of conditions that they're both to be able to reach, but while there are failing to reach them, they're going to inflict Hugh damage, Hunt he effort the only. The only question, I think, is it possible that Publicans are so bad at legislating now that they will have made it impossible for them to pass a tax got. The irony There are times I do not think this proposal path, but I think something comes out of it. You know Sir political water from like giving up on some things you promised, but people like tax cuts like even if your tax cut, doesn't feel as big as the next time. People like a pang. less taxes, and I think we ve seen before
that- has a lot of failure, seed that could over override, like other promises that are being broken and the process, I don't, I think a tax cuts is- is still possible that you yes, it's definitely. I just happen to why we're doing this my paper, yes, again take a break break tug by Germany, the order shaving his Paul about taking your shaven and your grooming routine for from good too great, your friend in New York and ninety ninety six. They can help guys look you're best for over twenty years got a whole routine cover. You know whether shaving of beer, maintenance, hair, skin body fragrance, they got it all. Their products are formally with high quality, botanical ingredients, bittorrent pure essential oils. So the four elements of the perfect shave increase to deliver smooth result everyday. I, u crap with appreciate. Why are you quit thick formula? there were shaming cream, applied, shape, brush shaved and punish, moisture within aftershave bomb
and you can finish up with one there- five do fragrances about Santa wooden Cyprus, food swayed very sit on green lavender and Coriander Encarta mom. Each clones been carefully assembled for distinctive, and the other shaving offers a convenient punishment service as well save any safer products and never need to worry. So here's what you need to know that this is a bunch of cool products and our listeners can get. fifteen percent off your first order and free shipping. If used promo code, we ask you to get this order. You go online to the art of shaving dot com use, promo code leaves you got fifteen percent off your first order. Can free shipping, the art of shaving dot com for special offer, or you know, if you're interested in consultation with the grooming expert, they got retail locations all over the country. Really great shout you didn't you can check their step out and try it out talk to people about what you might like. It's the ardor shaving fifteen percent off with promo code. We.
So this paper comes to us: the employment output effects of short time work in Germany by Russell Cooper more. It's my iron ammo shot. so this is looking at Germany jury the great recession instead of having tons and tons of people lose their jobs and then give them unemployment insurance money. They set up. This programme called Kurtz our right in German. Our short time work their colleagues in English we are basically the government. Would it's a lot harder to describe it? Ok, so if your employer was allowed to sort of cut you two half time, rights, you'd only work twenty hours a week and of laying off half the staff, you could put everyone and half time work and the
Set of giving unemployment insurance to the workers have been laid off, the government paid sixty percent, which would have been paid had you been working those extra hours, so basically the aggregate hours worked decline in Germany, just like it in the United States, but instead of tons of people being thrown their jobs. They just sort of work the less and were paid off it in a similar way. So. The researcher shows that this was highly successful at its goal of reducing unemployment. It also shows that the american Economists in the Obama administration, who spent that whole winter trashing this idea me by saying it would create a bigger gdp loss were correct and it did create a bigger gdp lost, so now lay summaries, can claim vindication if you want. I would note on the flip side, is that where we handle this of United States appears, will completely destroy the american political.
in a set of measures. That feels like the thing this paper does not quite get out as a trade off my German focused lighten. The Merkel is still celebrations. Germany, where, where I just was their society remains largely intact. So I'm not The thing that kid's identified as the problem with this policy that that did happen. It is true, their gdp is lower than it might have been other hand. I I feel, like Angela Merkel, probably visit K about it For one thing they talk a lot about here. I hadn't thought as much of our sessions and that in this contacts, but you see a lot of jobs, shuffling and recessions, people have a job. They lose the job and they eventually end up. You know somewhere that might be a better fettes that it turns out. We note there actually are much better air than they were, I don't know whatever they were before doing the ethically go actual ass. Well, it turns out there a very productive lawyer
in Germany mandating from this paper. As you didn't see as much jobs, which were for good, Is that right they give. You still have your twenty, our weak job, the other twenty hours are being paid at sixty percent. You would probably stick around verses of one is laid off, who might like go back to school search for a new job You see, people remaining in these jobs that are maybe less good, fits that their less efficient at I was also curious. Only paper really gets into it, but it's a really inefficient way to run a workplace were everyone's like working part. Time You know, I think, there's a lot it. there's. A lot that gets lost in like having people share a job. For example, you know getting caught up, unlike what the other person sharing your job was doing like. I think it's more wrote tasks if it works well, but Just curious like how this works in a german office, where you have people like cancer Like passing in the night like not really communicating with each other, it seems like a really inefficient way
in Germany to turn our office. I want to offer grimmer interpretation of the sale of the same data, because I think that this paper the way the way I interpreted it. there's some of what you talked about right somebody the bad faith they they get laid off. They retrain and get into a job, it's benefit for sure there. But I think that what we are seeing in this way Burma is that there are a lot of people in work places Rubia like not not highly productive in the workplace, but it's not because it be super productive in some other workplace, or at least not in another workplace. It they're gonna find it's that they're just now. Does proactive. I mean like be assumed that workers are like some people are the most productive work, as some people less productive workers, and what cuts are by did is you? Have it cut. Everybody's hours were
I echo what employers dead or a lot of home? Was he laid off the least productive workers? A lot of us were. Some of this work has got new job. Some of those jobs might have been a better fits in the main, been a worse fit, but some as workers also became long term unemployed. Some the drop out the labour market had been absolutist, had a long spell of unemployment for coming back to a job at their equally qualified at. But what was in the workplace, for the higher performers, who are also terrified of being fired, because, like other friends just been fired is another working really hard, Germany, you take the workplace, unlike the higher birth was work less. The lower performers work, less albidus works us, as you say, the thing becomes hearted manage because Hake, you know, best. People are not there as much as he's like the whole thing, those down and you just dropped the less efficient economy, but the upside of developing? That less efficient economy is like some people are spared from really really really terrible, like pain
long term, possibly permanent unemployment and unlike wage loss, and then his things come back. You can kind of like ran things Up, I mean there's a lot of evidence. It recessions fine people hard on it and really like no matter what company I Shan T on sugar companies at a sociopath. It got there, but I find it was really tough like even it even in these circumstances, words very merited emotional, incredibly wrenching. I mean it issues its terrible and you know workplaces off How folks, who are like low performers benevolence fire them they're, well liked its George. Nobody likes. George, like yours, comes to the company soft ballgame, like gay he's like knock aid and like his appointment is you performance marks a fair peace, not up blow me doesn't shop drunk. He doesn't like fuck up big projects you just like if your hire? Somebody like you wish you'd had somebody's, not George, but I got George here like Georgia's kids, you don't fire George and then recessions, George, gets fired alike
when they hire again, they have somebody better than George, like that makes the whole thing more active and in Germany George days on end, like that, maybe makes a thing less. Active, but also like Georgia's life lot. Better and Ben Donald Trump doesn't get away. I thought I'd psychologist. I want to know. I thought that this paper did not account for four german labour market institution. correctly radiometer, Germany has a much stronger labour unions that than the United States does, including at shops with over two thousand employees. Half of the board members are elected by the workers. Every work site has a works council. That's like coal run back by managers, workers, so the south, as was talking about ready, the efficiency of the american system, is that if the boss decides
hey, we gotta, let go of half of the salesman at the store you just fire, whoever you walked right. It's a hundred percent up to the bus and so on. Session. When word comes down from on high- and it's like you, you you and you, middle managers have to each identify half of your employees and you have to fire them. They do their best to identify the least productive employees they get rid of them. Nobody is a protections. what are you can't do right? The kind of mass lay offs that were aimed at productivity enhancement that are typical and the american private sector you couldn't do in german plants at all. Costs is a much stronger union voice and is of course, the same. I add a heavily unionized american workplace. If you want to do staff reductions at a place with a strong union, you either need to do at last. In first out lay offs. You need to do some kind of biology you're right, so whatever the efficiency loss, eggs
in the german system is baked into the cake of them having, hunger, labour unions, time work in that country. Next, it seems to me, is just clearly a winner right. So am I because flexible labour markets mean When there is a recession, companies have the flexibility to fire there reached productive workers, and the upside of that is that that's an official way to earn a labour market in Germany, a strong union model. You can't do that in a recession, and so what should work does? Is it lets companies and workers minimize the amount of lay offs, because if they had lay offs, they wouldn't be able to do them in the Koran Court efficient way anyway, but the main point, I just still think you look at this, and they just do you have to say that it may be different. If you look
at a very poor country that is like trying to get up the economic developed ladder, but in wealthy countries, United States, Germany, Canada, Spain, where we want them, the cost Of the recession in like dollars and sense too this is just so small compared to the like psychological and social welfare cost of mass unemployment rate, and women's like they, they really avoided that right. They had these charming here, they have by far the biggest GDP loss of any developed country and by far the smallest unemployment rise and it seems to me that you're, like your counting raw, if you're saying Germany had a more severe recession- and you see it everywhere right, you see in the fact that Merkel has been in power since, like the dawn of time at you, even the fact that you know they, how do you can read? Listen to that. The worldly episode about the german
what you don't really good by the way you ve had a significant increase in people voting for a far right political party at the same time, Had a million syrian refugees in the union states we're talking about like ten thousand right, a hundred four times the size, a million at an that's. What it's retook too, like shake the stability of Germany's from consensus in part, because employers now would really like to have more people come work at their jobs, particularly for lesser skilled type positions, because I haven't had this, this kind of mass unemployment. right. I mean the third thing between between the sort of rosy mismatch scenario that Sarah was talking about and the kind ugly you like in a week. We lay off that the lazy guy he's just the kind of Arbitrary sort of farm cycling wait before the recession in the United States. A lot of people worked at borders now nobody works at borders right cause. I just like one out of business.
and some of the people who used to work at borders after a certain amount of time. You know they got a job someplace else right, be they work at a new lunch in a ball kind of place. Right, you're, just trading one kind of arbitrary retail shift work for another kind of arbitrary retail shift, work that is better suited to like our present day times and inclinations and that's the magic of disruption to which the economy goes forward. Any few effect just happen to like a thousand people. You'd say: ok, fair enough we're like we're reallocating resources, but when it happens to a million people- and it just goes on for years- that's like it's awful and it takes such an incredible toll. on people and in America. Policymakers just did not think the recession could get that bad,
The view was like ok, a lot of people know is a job we're gonna bounced back and its can we more efficient to maintain the flexibility of the american labour market and we just like we didn't bounced back. and the fact that we can look back seven years later and be like ok, it wasn't permanent was only four years like that's, that's not so great ass. Bright. What is greater the other vocs media pod guests yes, mentioned worldly Bear episode on Germany's recent action. The most recent episode was right. The gray I just listen to it over the weekend and I I learned TAT. I felt However, the line you, but it's really really good I have also, on my part, gotta think we dismissal be interested. I interviewed e g d on norm or student Thomas Mann, congressional Scholars, Washington, post calmness, alienated, was gone trump and so two three them about, basically like the structural
situation that the created trump and also part of the way the Republican Party created Trump or instead man, particularly for while, have been banned in the jump, their public in part has become a sort of pathologically dysfunctional institution, and so they are pretty interesting on how trouble Peasants, continuity, not a break from that, so I think we designers will like that episode There are also like leaving us a carpenter ratings and ample packing extra people. They would like the comments ratings. It's all good. Things are ripe for listening. I think said Peter Leonard Bert, for producing, and I will see you in a few days thanks is always for listening to the weeds also want to take this moment to insert a really proud plug for a parent company. Vocs media bucks media
is the fastest growing modern media company known for its stand. Our technology and high fidelity advertising their platforms. What supports our growth here at vocs dot com and it's what allows us to go deeper into the topics that you are listeners care about? Most you know for us, that's that's! Really public see, but for listeners you haven't already. You should check Box media's other editorial brands with it. Has been nation which tells a story behind the scoreboard, the verge, which helps you discover what I put obsess about what to disrupt next or curbed, all about real estate home design, though that great stuff, what unites all these editorial branches refusal to compromise on quality, because we believe in the power of going deeper and we believe in the best of our audiences, if you aren't going deep, where are you going check box media.
Transcript generated on 2021-09-13.