« The Weeds

Death Panel If You Do, Death Panel If You Don't


Sarah, Ezra, and Matt talk fake news, town hall protests, and research on why your cell phone bill is so high. 

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

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
This we support, is also sponsored by Nature box, good nature, backstop com, slash weeds for fifty percent off your first order. The following podcast contains explicit language: do either Pegana figures released, hung like a classic greeds yeah? That's why I decided to take into account also glow, welcome to another asserted the weeds boxes, policy, pod Casbah penalty network at your glazier storm by my colleague, Sarah Cliff. And as recline morning I hear hello, we can talk about the town halls that are happening. not happening all across Amerika this week to talk about a white paper that it made me angry.
Major, feel some things he was like. This is kind of like. If you know, if populism was a and b our research paper, I think it would be this paper, but before that I kind of wanted a little bit off the particulars of the new cycle to talk about fake. I was inspired by over gonna. Believe you, you don't believe me That is why I ask you this: is this: is a fake topic, a yeah? I can prove it, but I focus on people over the weekend and they were very concerned. As I think, a lot of laughter centre. People have become that all this fake news outlets is the reason that election outcome, so they don't approve of, has occurred. and that its like a like a really big problem and that it needs a solution. That we as a society are like failing to produce a civically, educated and group of people
who are knowledgeable and correctly informed, and therefore, who will vote for good candidates who who do good things and as a as media person? I think it is definitely true the way social searing works on the internet has meant that sort of deliberately fate news stories are like a thing you can do now in a way that we Marge and all in the past, but at the same time I think it is truly and profoundly wrong to think that when
good things happened in american politics. That was because of a super, well informed super engage civically minded citizenry and that it is also bad wrong to think that when, when things you don't approve of happened, it's because of these these fake stories that I think we all did the like paradigm, mad, a sort of like fake news stories and if you think about it for a low that you and you can see, that's right, like the most popular fake news story of the twenty sixteen campaign was one that said that the Pope had Endorse Donald Trump. And now you ve ass herself, I did that really move people's votes. Your imagining a devout Catholic wasn't so sure about Donald Trump, then they re story from a dodgy website? That was like other pump endorse tribe. So the next step is not too like check and see. If that's true see what Their bishops have been saying about Donald Trump, ask their priest about this,
even wonder: isn't it unusual for the Pope to do an endorsement presidential campaign, but instead no they're just like blindly, while I sought on Facebook so now I love Donald Trump Bright and that's ridiculous slink. Nobody does that. The reason a story like that get shared is it a lot of white Catholics like Donald Trump and so when they saw a story that just sort of was pleasing to their Donald Trump support. There, find go share and the other way around that story specifically got hate, share a lot. It got shared by a lot of liberals who don't like Donald Trump, who are either some people showed it because it was vague like this is a fake news story, stopped short It was one thing that was happening and then but another thing that happened with a lot of the sharing run. A particular story was people pissed at the Pope, saying look all these religious people hypocrites There's a lot of stories that wind, when you see them, go supervisory role day. They are not always going viral among the people of stories meant to reach
someone's going viral around the opposite group? The people who are most angered by the story wait any if you will get a story, that was not fake news, but I think was like Braun sleep before before the election. Had this like Alpha Bank story right that right, Donald Trump, secret server, and you know that guy chaired around a lot by Hillary Clinton fans who were like a high, we're gonna get. You know breed breed which had been a secret server that was connected to a secret service in Russia, way that just yet We did so with shared a lot by people who were criticising it. It was shared a lot by people who already believed that Donald Trump had a lot of nefarious connections to Russia. I think of all the different like motivations, that people share stories like They were previously undecided but change their mind about the election, because this stuff,
was so compelling and then they had to go share it with their friends who were also undecided is like far away least plausible reason than anybody would share. like incendiary story about politics, whether whether it's like fake or real or or any kind of like hot, taken an opinion page or like anything at all like that. Just this how people work, as I have consumption, although our own, and give more credit like as we get into this too. The fake news warriors than I think you're giving them look. I think you're right that, like it's not like, you see story like holy Shit, that the Pope Indoors Donald Trump or like Donald Trump, with a secret? bank and then all of a sudden you, like flip from like supporting Clinton to supporting trumpeter like off your couch like getting ready to vote. You don't think it's a I agree that that's like a very silly theory of how this works. It does seem like more plausible to me that that the
The larger, effective, single lots and lots of this like repeated over and over again living in this universe. I think that the Wall Street Journal a really great interactive peace. This year, I think those called they read: feed blue feed. Looking at like what your facebook feed looks like you're, someone who tend to be liberal or tends to be done, again, it seems actually coy plausible to me that there is a possibility of living in that sphere of that affecting kind of how you think the candidates and like on them on the margins affecting like who decides to go vote. I think, you're right. I don't think it's like flipping people from Clinton to tromp or trumped Clinton in any way, but when I think about turn other people, Having like excited and energized to vote like that, I think that a more generous and fairer Bree of the argument of of why this might matter that that it could be sing it an aggregate sing it all the time it could be enough to try to get some people to decide to vote.
to be more active and away they wouldn't have been. If we were like absence thickness. Let me try to cut this in a different direction and speaks to that Great Wall Street Journal, Red Facebook, feed, verses, blue Facebook feed feature. I think, people when they consider what are the sorts of polarisation that matter in media diets. They tend to think of the red. Conservative, liberal republican Democrat polarization, and they certainly Imagine if you're a political junkie and if you will think of the show ie or a political junkie. They extrapolate out for themselves and their facebook feed is full of politics. This, whom everybody Facebook feet, is full of politics and says he. Sailor, pepper, seeing tons of stuff in the area is very intense. the most important, I think, polarization around news. Consumption in politics is not read versus blue. It's interested roses uninterested. We are weird we are Who knows? We are strange human beings who, even at times when politics is not that interesting, I mean.
a lot of people are super gauge of politics right now, but we are super, engage with it during Euro two years ago, They just like whatever Paul Ryan and Brok Obama we're doing two years ago, and most people just aren't like that, and so into their facebook feeds. Mark Zuckerberg had the sixpence and we're Facebook manifesto out of the weekend rejected pretty interesting and and spoke to the fake new stuff, and we may be we want to get into, but he did make this point that the overwhelming majority. What paper seeing the Facebook feeds is not political like if you just look at a normal facebook feed its pictures of kids. It's your friends, posting we're stuff, I mean there's some stuff from your friends in our political, but but it's mostly not, and so the people seeing the most political stuff are the people whose minds are the most made up. the reason they are political junkies is because they are in very invested in what team rather keen blue winds. Maybe they're very invested for reasons of substance
the policy they really care about their their staunchly pro life or they really care about health care for all. Maybe it's just because have a sports teams like allegiance to at their dad was a democratic, their dad dad was a Democrat and their doubts. Duds dad was a Democrat, but they're not gonna, be per weighted by anything basically- and this is one of the reasons- I think- that a lot of our models of how people absorb information in politics don't work, Allison but this presidential speeches there it is the most in Shrove in journalism in pundits tree in cable news. Talk that whenever something on something to happen. It's just like. Why does the present give a speech? Why doesn't the present come out and The thing that I've written in my head that I would say if I were president today and answer. One issue the president has said that, or some version of that that professional speechwriters thought would be better. But then, when you look at present the speeches and their ratings and who listens their ratings.
that high for most of them are very, very low. In fact, baby motion donating a covered live by even cable news muscles network, and the people who do tune in are extremely polarized and what they already believe, even something like state of the union, which is the big speech event of the year. Most people who tune into that tuna incomes are interested in politics, there's some folks who to infer a civic duty, reason that that that's a rare one that may be breaks through a little bit, but even their most people tune in already have them made up so there's one way I think it's very hard for fake news or real news or any kind of news to change anybody's mind is that the people absorbing it. It's not even whether their redder blue, it's there already into politics and because already into politics they already have pretty strongly held opinions, because I would have everybody listening to his pod- guess right now. It is really ask themselves. When is the last time they read something in it truly change their opinion, not about a small thing about politics, but a big thing like change
opinion about which party they should vote for. The election are changed, their part, their opinion about whether a major public policies- gutter, I'm not saying you can't ever find. Example, of it, and- and I look forward to the females about it, I think people will find it's rare than than they think it is very depressing things because I feel like I'm always writing things. I hope will be persuasive, but I know what's up one, persuading nobody of nothing, but I maintain the flip side of that like to go back to the plans making earlier If we were to ask are listeners when was the last like something got you more active and more involved, and I decided to go to a town hall or donate to something like that seems like that, like a plausible napkin mechanism that this stuff matters, I bet there's a lot of people listening to this who will say like three weeks ago when there was this muslim travel ban? I think like that still strikes me as like the plausible mechanism that we're talking about an intensity of fact, desire like getting people actually organised around or against people.
Changing their minds, but that seems like the kind of mechanism. That's more plausible to me. They idea that, like it could get people more active and invite. So there that's voting or donating on either side. So I agree that that is a way that media does things but I mean I I didn't start this by talking about specifically about fake news, swayed with which I do think is an important distinction social media filtering works, even if, if, if Mark Zuckerberg had a magic device that made it impossible for any story that had any inaccuracies in it to be shared on Facebook, that would revolutionise the media industry because it would kill off all fake news sites. It would get us all hiring fact. Checkers things would have to slow down a lot. I dont believe that that would it all change politics, because the people who were in red or blue heavily politicized filter bubbles would still be in it
It is entirely possible. I could have written every day to stories a day that were completely true and reflected poorly on Hillary Clinton and, like I like tiller, could either I just like. I didn't do that because, like that's not like my job to do, hits on her, it wouldn't have I work with the vocs audience. I don't think it would have been informative, but it The reason filtering is weird and the recent editorial decision making matters a lot is that, like the total, a universe of accurate assertions about an individual is like nearly infinite reg. Oh, I think something in the campaign that mattered. A lot was that the FBI inquiry into the question of whether or not there was inadvertently discussion of classified material on an email server that Hillary Clinton had set up in a private resin this blood.
love of lava story was like treated is a really big deal, whereas, like is Donald Trump being bribe by the russian government, was treated as like. Here, who cares thing? and since the election that has flipped God, you don't see how much coverage, now obscure email, classified information, handling controversy and there's a lot of concern about Donald Trump. Shady ties to Russia that matters a lot, but that had nothing to do with like inaccuracy use in in in stories, and I think that, though, I think that where people get hung up on the faintness, that, I think is wrong is in the belief that politics is like built but out of facts or possibly wrong facts, and that information and misinformation ard like constructing people's peoples
views in saying that I find very enlightening on this subject. Actually is, if you just look at historical information about Americans, educational attainment of you. Look like the nineteen forty senses are. The average American had an eighth grade education point in time- and this was a time that I think most liberals, I think most of the people I met over the weekend, who are worried about fake news, we're like really excited about new deal type politics right, you're, talking about a country that was, you know, barely litter right, well we're not embracing new deal policy because they were sitting around with a deep understanding of financial regulation and welfare state design, in a way that has been lost and our like debates cable news era. It is almost certainly the case that today's much much much better educated american population,
immersed in digital technology, like knows more stuff about what's happening in politics but like the situation, is just different in a big Julian different ways and when you think about would like DR people in politics, its its identity, type issues and its its feelings, you know, like those airport protests right, is something Donald Trump did. There was incidental to the substance of the rulings. Was it they applied immediately so where people like on aeroplanes in immediate jeopardy and it fell to people like you could show up and like help like instantly right, and that had a lot of, I think, like me, leading force in like an understandable way like you have to go. Do this now? People are in detention now any more prudent policy that I,
Eventually, going to land on which is just like, there's can be some rule enforced by consular officers and far away country. Is that you don't know anything about you know is much more demobilizing, but that kind of thing is like it's. It's not about facts and in politics just never has been. If you are anything like me, you know, sometimes you want a snack and if, what's a wound snack on his junk food, you gonna eat junk food and it's not great
if you want a sort of live, a healthier life, he did start snacking healthier with nature box. It makes knacks that actually take great and their better for you, the greater with high potty ingredients that are free from artificial colors flavors of sweeteners. She can feel ok about snacking. I like some their dried fruit stuff. They got great app, also great pairs. They also have some slightly more indulgent, principally things and there that that I also article four and they recently made their service even better. You can order as much as you want, as often as you want with no minimum perch required and you can cancel at any time I. So it's really simple you than a nature box. Dot com you check out their snap catalogue deserve our hundreds smacks to choose from there always adding new stuff,
choose what you want. They deliver read your door, it's easy, but nature max! You never get. Bored is new stuff there, each month, it's inspired by real customer feedback and for some reason something comes you don't like it. They will replace it for free, that's a good opportunity to try out something new, I'm so right now, you're, safe, even more because nature boxes offering offence fifty percent off your first order. If you got a nature box, dot com, slash weeds, she got a nature box. Tat, complex weeds are that we get credit. You get. Fifty percent of the first order, Nature box, dot, com, slash. Second reading a book recently that I was a sort of agree with everything everybody said, I agree on and plausible mechanism of effect being how much you mobilise people- and I agree that politics is based on facts, and I do I want to stop on another point from an. I just read a book while democracy for realism, which is by Chris Acorns and Larry BAR, tells her who are too great political scientists, and this book
as a real, thoroughgoing attack on everything you have ever believed about hypocrisy. I mean this is like a depressing book. He did that's right, right and I ve been enjoying reading this book because I like it, turns out their whole swathes of this book that our great, even aside from the great parts of mad, focused on the twenty sixth election, what what's your review of a called map as caught the but gives you re it understand the TWAIN, sixteen election, something you can google that or something you can go about or something it was it was. It was, moreover, moreover, social headline anyway, the first thirty. The book is making the case the based on mountains? Empirical research? There is no possible case at the way democracies work is people know, is going on and boat based hum accurate facts about it. The next third is making the case that this sort of hack, the political scientist
created. The conceptual active make. Dartmouth democracy still works, despite the fact that people don't have very much good information about it is that they do retrospective voting. They heavy short cuts were thick. The economy doing well, are we in a foreign? More people are dying and they basically show that even when you pull together in some out of which there is some it doesn't amount to anything. You'd be perfectly comfortable with. It basically says people a look at the economy and the six month right before the election and even most people don't do that so gay that doesn't quite work either. So then they're kind of asking what explains the behaviour of most people in a democracy and the answer they come to is it is about various kinds of social identities, activated and and its is, I think it's worth actually thinking about this. It's weird if we are so used with that. We don't notice how weird it is, but it is weird that we spend a lot of time talking about groups like Non College, educated, whites and war.
Classes, spandex and single women and catholic white voters, and so on. Why Are those useful terms for talking about the voting behaviour of that many people? What really does connect the interests of single mothers, since I mean obviously there are some things, but I've met a lot single mothers are more different than they are similar on the same thing with people in the in the way, working class and You but the answer you know from from and they can sit. There really is a lot of evidence that people have extremely strong identities. Republican and Democrat Catholic and jewish whirl and an urban southern and northern, and so on so forth and that basically, what elections are is their priming mechanisms, and- and this goes to the point of facts, but they would say- and this goes to the issue of fake news too- I think- is in our head. The way
Work is only see something like this story about the Pope and what it does the effect it could have. Is they say? Oh the Pope Indoors Donald Trump, the Pope is grey, I'm in a trusted pumping over four Donald Trump, whereas what would actually be a sort of happening there? I think they would say is that that story is: the change? People's minds, if you dont, like those of you like the Pope, is completely wrong on this one. Just like wrong on so many other things or if you loved Donald Trump it'll, make you feel better about Donald Trump, But- but it will more than that do. Is it will act of eight? A question like? Are you catholic, like? Are you a catholic voter? Like D? Are you activating your catholic identity in election and that all elections are our collisions of different identities and so like, for instance, the Trump Clinton election activated, a of identities or on multiculturalism. Are you comfortable with a right multicultural majority. In U S politics. Are you comfortable with me?
immigrants coming in over the border. Are you comfortable black lives matter? Are you comfort? You want the american power structure to be dominated by certain more traditional, voters, from suburban in rural areas as it has been for a very long time, and it up I mean- is really important and then the one of the major effects it news stories do more than they convinced people stuff This is where this goes back with Zuckerberg thing, where he notes in the memo correctly, that showing people information conch? their biases does not tend to convince If anything, in fact, it has often a backlash effect. What makes our initial perception stronger, but what it does do is depending on how the bulk of the serious point, how the bulk of those story structure the questions, different election, activate different identities, so Mitt Romney verses, Brok, Obama activated Ident,
use of like capital versus labor. Are you a worker? Are you a manager? Are you somebody feels like you're winning in the economy or not? Are you somebody who feels good about business, or do you feel bad about business, whereas Trump and Clinton, despite I mean I'll, be? activated them credit republican identities, as Obama Romney did, but they also activated their identities and a much more explicit way around. Are you comfortable with America coming majority minority political nation, or are you not comfortable with that, and that is what the bulk of the story, you're, saying to your identity so which identity you end up feeling when you walk into that booth is really really port in and is separate from their factual content There was one when I M coming into the what influences elections. as one amazing example. I read about in my speech this morning about sharks in New Jersey that just like was it The interesting remind yes, that research is coming,
I don't know I guess I was about to set up, because I thought this was just like a really taking in taking into account Everything you're saying this was like a good aid reminder, but maybe it's a total garbage reminder met will tell us in a second of even with he's, like identities being activated and kind of people choosing their political tribes at the end of the day. There can also be like a lot of things like. I don't think we like to think of it. We don't think of them is fake news, but things we by train illegal adoptions influence election like how the football games go before the election, that we don't want people voting. that- and it's not like fake news in the sense of like people are, lying and making up the facts, but these things that are doing this priming effect in a way that we like to think what people are smarter than that. But this sharks examples are released. Quiet and let me explain the shark ascend. Some questions were so did walkers through the show That is one of the better weeds lines. Later
Woodrow Wilson was governments Jersey than he was elected president in nineteen twelve. He was reelected nineteen sixteen and the nineteen twelve election with super hard, but Wilson ran stronger, almost everywhere in nineteen sixty and then he ran and nineteen twelve exception to that rule was his home state of New Jersey where he ran weaker and, the authors speculate at this is because soon before the nineteen sixteen alike, and there was this crazy wave of shark attacks in coastal New Jersey that damn aided the news in part because they were spectacular a shark swam up a river and like killed a boy who was he wasn't even in the ocean so like, like the could start a deck. The kind of thing that would really make you worry
like you're doing arms like fake news you're here to ask you something where it could not possibly have occurred to you to worry about sharks before and suddenly kids are dying. Sharks and it wasn't just a terrifying story. Buddy rushed the economic fortunes of the Jersey, close beach towns, because, because, but he wanted to go so they show through some instruments that the decline in propensity to vote for Wilson was concentrated in these Jersey Shore, beach towns that were most directly impacted by the shark attacks, and you know the argument that they're making. That, I think, is not that, while the shark story is wild, but if you think about the Democrats, who I know, one capitol hill- all believe that the above a story hurt them in the twenty fourteen midterms could have an example. I think it's just yes he's we're cause,
the evidence on the solid garrison sharks of his coming to track drought yeah. There is reams of evidence that drought hurts incumbent, politicians and as cartels- and he can say in the book like even if you think that what voters are punishing somebody's bad at handling drought, then it hath the cases it would do better because, like some would be better than average intelligent. But just trout hurts everybody right, and it's not that politicians fault, like it's not like. They didn't do a good enough reindeer single judge or of a very clear one. Is that if you are a part fishing in a state that exports a lot of natural resources that having the price of the commodity you produce go up, is really good for your re election chance ride so like the oil boom in North Dakota made North Dakota politicians really really popular, even though nobody and the point of all of this is that, like nobody actually thinks that, like the President of the United States, causes sharp attack
or that the governor of North Dakota controls global commodity prices, where, like anybody who can get some Robin Hansen, has a idea of a close and far end like but political, analytic commode tends to be a little bit weird in which like wanna see things come out a certain way, if you put it in a totally different case, you just ask someone making financial planning decisions about their own life right. Do you I think that whether or not Woodrow Wilson is reelected should impact whether we invest in a beach hotel in New Jersey, like nobody thinks right, nobody actually fix the presence in charge of shark attacks. Nobody actually thinks of the Governor Dakota controls worldwide price of oil, but still in a practical sense, when good, things are happening. People tend to take a good view of the comments and when bad things are happening, they take a bad view. It that's the point about droughts, you should
you saying something like well. Our politicians handling this crisis well, but instead it just like. Oh no something bad is happening at the eighty that actually loops back to the fake news. stuff in a kind of interesting way were. I think, one of the ways big NEWS can work in all of this is like by by creating the idea that the world is like a very bad scary, place or a good place, and I think a lot of like the fake news around Hillary Clinton kind of like built up this idea that, like a lot of a really bad things, are happening like bad scary thing, that you should be upset about, I think, like one of the kind of another one that went pretty viral was this idea that Clinton's staff were running sort of a child sex ring out of a local DC. Pizza parlor comment pizza on Connecticut Avenue, just a few miles and where we are taking. This radio show any If you're reading that through the lens of like what is
happening in America. Right now, are things going good or bad luck? That kind of feels like I, like a shark attack right leg. It feels like a weird scare, thing that you don't want happening and you knew it felt real enough to somebody that you had a gunman show up at the pizza parlour and jam. You didn't shoot anyone, but he said he was there. It investigating this suppose it child sex, which I should state. Clearly I think the listeners podcast know that there is absolutely no evidence that any of this was happening. Was a hundred percent fake news I've even there recently, There are no signs of anything terrible happening, but it's even you know putting elections aside in one thing- and this is not like a shocking observation but like that is seems like a strong reason to be worried about fake news if it's not changing people's political motivation is encouraging someone to show up to this pizza place, it is seems general negative to the discourse that we're happen happening end. One thing: I'm curious about this you're, like the first
action where we really hide this big fake news debate like what does it look like in the twenty Eightth MID term, like what does it look like in twenty twenty liquid? how does this unfolds in future elections? It is, it will hardly the game out right now. What the next version of this debate looks like also Samantha Use, so one I think the point you make there is really important, even if this did inflict the election it. Among other things, that a gunman to a pizza parlor like it's bad, like this stuff, is bad and the people do, it should feel bad. Things is bad, but we
our tee to put it on twenty two and twenty is really interesting, because we're having this conversation a little bit like its November fifteenth and what has happened since the election is the Donald Trump has adopted fake news as a line that he continuously applies to real noose and and fake news. I faked stories are bad, but I think in the end, the fake stories will do a lot less damage than the a rising of this concept, which is now being thrown by anybody who wants a deal legitimize any kind of information and, in fact, I'm in the press, of the United States of America is, can constantly tweeting. I think we ve become a little bit in Europe. How we're this is, is continuously tweeting the New York Times and the washing imposed in NBC and CNN are fake news, and he does even quite believe that he talks to those places. He reads: em, he watches em.
But we are entering a space of just total metaphysical and informational confusion. Iron of this friends to your guys, but when things I've noticed in my inbox is before the election, this would never happen, but now I get two or three emails a week saying like will your fake news, your stories, fake news and that like never got people are telling me? I was. ridge and they gently cover, but it also seems be changing the way people are interacting with new sources. They don't like a kind of get permission disable. That's just not true in a like I didn't get before the election and this day I gonna like it better. It was before before you. Actually, what would happen is whenever I would do a story that somebody didn't like they would ride into complain that I was biased. The four o clock, which Louis Click Bay, which I wish I didn't even makes like, even if they could care it's right. Now. There are least saying no. My objection,
This story is that I believe it isn't true which is like that is a good objection to Europe, objection, one it is allowed SARA. I was saying I was ignoble. Conceptually right this story is fake, is a good reason which I think is advised, who I think a bad thing about this and, and I dont know how much it matters, but I dont think along these people. Think we stories are fair. I don't think Donald Trump- is using this actually to mean things that are fake, but there are often times the p who push these kinds of means and these politicized arguments, and then the people believe that made it goes to the thing about common pizza. There are the Senate websites that put up you know some clearly wrong email that you know misinterpreted a better does iconic China gets clicks and there's a guy Really really thinks: maybe he needs to go with a gun to save a bunch of kids were being sexually traffic at a pizza. Joint and this big new stuff.
One of the really scary parts of this era is the president's informational habits, his wave doing with information. He doesn't like his wave and doomed information does like his tentatively conspiracy theories. His purpose, his his tendency to listen a red info wars. His grabs just He sees randomly on cable news and without checking it tweets it out, and this whole thing: You know he's accusing feel being fake news now seeing other people that any news you dont like is probably just fake. I just think it's about time. Worse, the again like I don't know how to test. If it is worse than things have been at other times, I think other people to say quite didn't like things or they like Rawdon, untold your garbage like quaintly, but this seems it seems bad to me. You know it is advanced news, the town calls others it real name, those really that's where the pay protestors, who you so
right. Now are common. In this moment, legislators are on resource right now, their expected to come back next week to some kind of Obamacare replacement plan. Speaker Ryanair, kept saying that very early March is when they plant, or at least some kind of their planned, replace Obamacare Enzo seeing really happen across the country this week is the surprising political moment when you have publicans and charge. They have been promising Obamacare appeal for seven years now, and you're just seeing this massive outcry, a town halls using kind of two two versions. This one is just a lot of people turning up to town halls when people are back home in their districts, I think one of the most interesting examples has been chuck Lastly, in Iowa eight ago. He had to go to all these town halls or people are going at him, don't pass Obamacare there. death penalty in Obamacare, it was right around the town halls that gradually flipped from supporting the
Virgil, Mandy two opposing the individual mandate that they really have an influence on his relationship, both Kerala Flash. Eight years were now grossly goes back home many is now getting yelled at to repeal the affordable care act. There's one guy, you told him. A save appeal is a giant panels are basically, you know. Death of you do And if you do not mind you have to story with, thereby death penalty do death penalty outta that that's that's today, that's great I do, obviously that people are going to continue to die in the under either housing and unpopular policy per se. Matt Sosa you. Why did you have people really turning up in and hasn't? Let up. You have people turning up who, like the affordable care, act to be blue hate my care, are really not sure, up in a prominent way. I'm sure there's some of them who are there, but they are not really the presence that the protegee people are
and then the other thing you know you have happening is legislators not holding town Hall so, for example, Craig Gardener in Colorado. I'm Susan Collins in Maine, they have really been dogged by liberal groups, may believe. Anna Maryland. They held liquor town hall with an absent seat for the native Andy here, as he is one of the few Republicans around here. thank you know this seat, Reserve Randy Harrison is obviously not there, and I think you know what things you see happy it's happening an interesting moment. Republicans are going to come back to DC next week there enough to start talking about the replacement plan. Anything they look back at the protests of eight years ago. At the time they thought those mattered. They thought those were bad for Democrats. They thought that some of the reason you solve outage up, a lot of kind of moderate Democrats lose their seats in twenty. Ten was because of all this heat and outrage around ACA and anything theirs adding to have to decide lake. Do we Can we do to shut this down? Like does not holding town halls work, and
you do we support this thing that is early, rising up the liberal basic, our Republicans and twenty eighteen at the risk of being the Democrats of twenty tat. I think these are this week is released, shaping how legislators come back to DC next week and what their thinking about. So I have a question for you about this. One of the big deal it is between this and the two thousand nine TAT house. Is it the two? Doesn't it I'm town halls came in the context of a pretty well shaped, set of bills. Rights of the house had the bill how to build a pretty much look. They want a bunker. Look like us and Finance Committee to bill. There had already been a lot of convergence, as Democrats had something that they were recently committed to, that they were defending that any them liked there's no bill, and so this is all coming in as an input. Before I mean you, you mentioned that
All right said and- and I think also of trumpets, said that they're gonna have something in March some time and will see if they do they don't, but that's gonna, be there. First draft then needs like all the many needs to look at and all their members need to weigh- and I mean that's gonna- be the beginning of their process. It's not the thing urban he's kind of converged around. Do you think it matters in this process that this kind of input is happening, but or that has come out, and so Europe plausibly getting these folks coming back to Paul Ryan Comeback, Mitch, Mcmullen saying hey whatever you do just you need to know. It has to do this because I am like all my people are saying you have to do this yeah. I think I think a quiet, I think will I mean, will see the test for me as I can have better way, which is kind of the republican outline. We have the prey spell they're pretty similar in like how how much it shifts from that, for example, EC, do the tax credits.
more generous. Gets people really worried about being able to afford their insurance. Do they back off like how did they protect pre existing conditions? For example, do they increase the funding for risk fools right? Now? if its twenty five billion over ten years in the Ryan Plan, like do they bombed that up because they feel like they need to sell people something better. But I think you know, if anything it puts them. in a harder bind, and I think that, for example, the tax credits are a good example of this, because you have on one side, constituents that want more generous tax credits. They want to be able to afford their insurance and then you have. On the other side, the Freedom caucus is saying, no tax credits at all and its weirdly, like a replay of the two thousand debate. I'm sure you remember where, like assented, Democrats wanted less generous tax credits. Now the debate as Ike Stingy, tax credits are no tax credits and you have powerful forces mobilizing on each side. So I dont know
which direction it gets dragged in, but it means they are getting a lot more input anything keener, I think all of us is it could really matter? There's a story. I wrote last week about the end of life, time limits in Obama, care and whether things are An end to this was traditionally a lot of insurance plans about half of employer sponsored plans before the SBA. Would cap benefits at one or two million dollars and with things that really so as Nunez reporting. This story is the hoary This even gonna table like this wasn't like You know the individual mandate, it wasn't part of the three legged stole it. You didn't need to ban lifetime limits. The only reason there was this one Mohammed, North Dakota, like bug the hell out of here. Later about it and brought her son to Washington and showed up at all is town halls and that look at these medical, those look. This is a real problem and
Senator Byron Joergen from North Dakota, like finally decided like ok, I'll, look into this and others like seems kind of insane like I should change as part of the healthcare system ended really spoke to how much personal stories could have mattered just leaders that they actually are nervous about getting hit on these sort. Things and that hearing these are really individuals. Stories can actually keep the type of legislation that they support. So I think, like that, the hearing that story kind of Venus- me a little bit more that the stuff that is happening now really could have a big effect, so artist story from mean that I just think really show, is sort of what the activation looks, like others was not around a tunnel, so This is from somebody had made, and so apparently a cup- weeks ago or maybe a month ago, whatever was Susan Collins made a promise that she would keep her phone minds opened.
And she said that you know listen. Your feedback is really important to me. I know a lot of you feel very passionately about Trump and so Can it make sure that you may not always be reached somebody, but the lines always be open? You'll always be able to leave a message. We will always listened to the messages. We will hear you. That was a dumb promise, because they don't have that the phone lines so immediately the foam hides get swamped. in the forty eight hours between whenever the farmers get swampy whatever solution they come up with. There is a fifteen hundred person protest outside hence his office in Maine, with science like Hell Susan coffins to open the phone lines, the you, the Obama administration, could not get fifteen people, to protest. Susan calls office to pass Obamacare I mean it was they couldn't do anything and you're getting fifteen hundred it to argue that sees a continuity
reopen more answering machine, so they can leave messages telling other pissed off. This is what makes the Republicans are terrified of his tongue. Maybe they are seeing that the videos going around I've just like I got, an email the other day that people are very angry, that I think it's a Dave, Brat Town Hall or somebody did. It wasn't gonna, be in a big enough venue that here they were angry. Whoever was maybe I'm worried. It wasn't rapid, as somebody I know, brat wasn't allow, like signs are like various paraphernalia has now is causing a lot of outrage, but most of them I've seen like day waigel shared a photo and before I gradually is, town hall ended had like a ton of people were not that these are the overflow crowds routinely at this point like people can fit, and it's a kind of like think back like it's been seven You're like when was the administration ever able to like rally, people like to come out like a support base yea rally- and I think you know Andrew Program at ignites peace rests earlier this
arguing that once you want to take something and this is something we ve talked about before and I think my views additives shifted over the past month or two that it turns out. A lot of the theories we had about the welfare state might have more staying power than I would have thought that it actually is quite hard to take something away from somebody else. but I also I do want to say something about this. Like the minutes, Asian couldn't get people to whatever thing, because I think that the people who make their like really strong versions of the Obama failed by folding, organize our merited actually now without wayward baby, I'm saying I think it's important to understand that broccoli. my deliberately demobilized grassroots progressives as part of settling down into his governing agenda. If Obama had wanted,
to get angry crowds of liberals to yell at MAX Bokkis about the public option. I think he could have done didn't do that because he thought it would have been counterproductive to get angry crowds of left wing people yelling it MAX Bokkis about the public option that thought that would have alienated moderates and Democrats. It would have undermined that was a gang of six gang of eight. Whatever was process which would Senate Republicans that kind of thing, because when you are trying to mobilise but right, you're, go to organizers and mobilise ears are like the most keyed up tight people. One reason that opposition is easier to do is like some of the people showing up to these town halls. Maybe like the single payer, people who spent the entire affordable, correct debate. Sending me annoying email about that? You know like who knows right, but it's like
position has like a nice easy message like hold the line, and all Democrats like want liberal people to be showing up republican town halls, giving them a hard time and if you think about where the Anti Asia town halls, I think most clearly made a difference. It wasn't even in frightening Democrats who was in frightening republicans whitey was that the democratic legislators, Gee put a lot of stock in the idea of reaching a compromise in the Senate of kind of like having this, like liberal House bill as like hammer, and then a bipartisan compromise in the Senate is like an anvil and then something like popular and broadly supported, would be wrought out of this and by showing that there was a
mobilized constituency of grass roots conservatives who were like mad. It's hell about this. They got chuck grassland. Other Republicans, who did not seem in principle, really like, had a profound objection to this structure to pull the plug on the whole thing which, in the end, didn't stop the veil from sing, but it did greatly complicate the that politics around it. Public insults, emu even attempting to get a bipartisan bill done so, in a way you know there must have been a time Joe Donnelly was thinking after the election. Like you know, if there's this number energy, be involved in a bipartisan process. can say, I'm working with Republicans to fix Obamacare like I should probably get in process, but there was no process so there's now nothing. I just scare him out, you are to supply their. They do anything they get. These supporting I've done suggests that they do. You think you're gonna have to work with the Democrats at some point
can't accomplish everything they want through reconciliation. I agree I do not a process leading to get there, but I think you could do the same affected. These town halls were Democrats watch these and if they had even been thinking about working with Republicans they're, just like. Why bother likely? Why not just like? Let them deal with this and re now, what do I think the these short of twenty seventeen version of this is where did seem like there was this idea yeah that ok, we can do a repeal through a reconciliation bell and then have this like replacement hot potato. Something Democrats will have to work with us. so we can now not worry about if the freedom carcass gonna like stick us to an untenable position right. So the
the virtue body is just like. It's called that whole juggling act. I think into a lot of question, and it has clarified that I think in a realistic sends Republicans would have to do what. The crowds ended view which is assembling a partisan majority to do something controversial because they decided they think it's important so I think we want to go back to etc. To set. It is unclear they can do the thing they want through a partisan majority. I need it for a lot of that period. You're talking about Democrats, sixty votes in the Senate, and so please help possible way of doing that, just on their own and then Kennedy died and Brown won the election and that that called all that into question and they were able to finish the thing. Often reconciliation but republics have fifty two separate votes. They do certain kinds of like repealing money, but they can't rebuild a regulatory structure like that they just can't so they need eight Democrats from somewhere. If there actually passing up like, I don't think you can
yet the price spill through reconciliation like us. Nowhere, you can't, I mean you have to yeah that that's not going to happen and I think, there's a question are they willing to get rid of that filibuster? Unlike that's one way, one one. That seems like the most plausible path. This planet sought super adjusting plausible, but I think you're really going to see. Like the same, I think that's right. Liquid back in two thousand nine wasn't about tat was about. Democrats is all about republic and saying, like I do want to touch that I think they haven't even started that acknowledging the union started. The process of really working with Democrats, unlike when you wanted to do those nine the protests than they really working together like before the protests are actually was talking about how do you like the individual mandate in the workings of the various numbers, and you didn't even get that far this time and
If I'm like Joe Donnelly like watching us, why would I possibly bring this like on on myself like why not just said all this out. This speaks to me to something I am fascinated by an, and we are talking about this for the show Sarah and you made the good point that I might say this in it. My change like three weeks so I Speaking about reality, as it exists right now, it could change vast, thickness, thickness faith patriotic, but compared to my expectations of what would be happening right now. There is a lot less policy happening. There is a lot less policy happening in the administration. There's a lot less policy happening on the hill. There is just less now we are we keep hearing that now they're gonna bring out their tax bill Marge and a kind of pre howdah healthcare bill in March, and maybe they will maybe they won't do and will see, but even that that is really not as impressive as I think it might sound. That is not a
Maybe process were hundreds of amendments need to get done. Bring. bill that nobody seen is the absolute first thing you To do right, I mean you have to somehow like that happened for Obamacare before Brok Obama came into office right MAX Bokkis releasing. Although the was sent a white paper, it was the framework for Obamacare like it was getting worked through the Senate Finance Committee, beginning in I believe, those early, two thousand and eight from raw might have been engrossing seven and like that that that was happening for a long time. So we hear plausibly. Maybe Ryan brings up at her way maybe Trump release, as some kind of you know, principles document, but I have to get everybody on board there and they just they have no process right now I mean, I think, furious villains, send things different committees. That's when people begin saying: hey, no, the freedom Caucasus. This wasn't get rid of Medicaid or the Senate. I say this gets rid of medicate there's no way we can do that. I got all his people, my state on Medicaid, and the same is true
I therefore reject this is less happening, but I would have thought I mean thought we'd be having reporters on the hill right now every day covering these hearings on their tax reform bills are like how to create their tax reform bill or something yeah. I think the longer you wait, the harder it gets right over there. I think of this week is critically important as you're the town halls. You also have the National Governors Association meaning this weekend and they are going to be having a big on medication. I am certain that governors will be going to meet with their delegations and, like getting more involved in the medicate side of things that you have more conflicting opinions developing as you wait long and not only that, but other things come on schedule. So in April they have to do, is to fund the government like they do budgets, opera relations. All of that. The debt ceiling begins to run out now. They're gonna have a fair amount of time from the statutory
like the dancing onawandah till now, because of power receipts work and has also complicate things will probably have until September before things get really bad there, but it's gonna take Lot of congressional energy they're gonna be other fight due to fund plan parenthood in the budget due to Fund PBS, because only so much com Skiddoo on the answer is not that much usually like they're just. I think this is more problematic than other people isn't also like what is a hospital pockets going to demand in return for increasing the debt ceiling as you're not going to get them both on this not under. I need a possible things. They want to do trump want to increase defense spending. Is he going to pay for that by cutting bit like this is coming really fast and that's just keep in the government open where that is not having a shut down. That's might even doing the hard new things you want to do so. The fact that what is happening now it it doesn't feel to me that it is, you neutral like its, and then they go home there having these panels, people come back there more afraid it. It seems weird to me.
something seems like it's really off the tracks. What I guess you know what one question about this is like were unrealistic. Expectations raised by policy focused journalists to cut our teeth in the early Obama years. Right is to an extent what we see. Hear something of like a return to normal sea because It does look to me that if you look at the kind of track record of most presidents its fairly typical to not do that much, yeah, who, who is president, is of course, always an important topic. You know like when Bill Clinton was president, as opposed to George W Bush. A number of things happened that change that were important to the lives of the american people. In particular, environmental regulations got stricter,
The margin get out. Taxes on the rich went up more than they would have, but we don't look back on Bill Clinton presidency as like an epoch. All Once in a generation kind of policy making change, even though he had you know unified democratic control government for two years, it was the same with Jimmy Carter, And you know Carter is remembered as like a failure. In a way that Bill Clinton wasn't because macroeconomic conditions went bad for him, but this actually not. it's rare to have the kind of big bursts of policymaking that you in two thousand and nine or you had one thousand nine hundred and eighty one or you hadn't in nineteen sixty four. Sixty five- and you know, I think the we are seeing that you know it's hard to do that stuff and if we had a son,
in may be more sober minded way, is Donald Trump likely to perform above average at like getting the ducks together complicated contentious policy matters like no, of course not ride like he has no relevant experience doing this, he doesn't seem to have a great deal of interest in the details of this kind. Things- and it's looking to me more, like you know, likely you should have seen this coming a little bit more. A presidency that is more focused on frankly. The things that were there central themes of his campaign. You know like trumpeting there choose of law enforcement officials and how political correctness is bad rather than a comprehensive rewrite. The corporate
I will just say one quick thing on this, which I see you're making me go back to look at Clinton to see what was happening at that point and I want to say it was January when Clinton January. Ninety, three five days after he came in when Clint in created the task force on National Healthcare form appointed Hillary Clinton to be in charge of it, and obviously none of that happened. But I do I do to sink one it's interesting is that there were gears and motion earlier. He had already given his big speech laying out his economic plan at this point in his presidency. Now, a lot of that's of did pass alike. We look back in it, but that shows how hard it is to do. Even we do get and rights it was they like one. I think when structural thing, that's different from the Clinton Obama and Trump is there's just a lot more interest in health policy in the Democratic Party than there is in the Republic of Turkey. I've been asking a lot of color conservative health policy experts, who are the legislator like leaving this, and it really is small group of people which I
maybe actually ends up like in its Ryan and its price, that they are really like the healthcare thinkers of the House and weird way. Maybe that ends up being like a little bit easier. I do thank you. Like an ideological wing and freedom cock as there are some strong views on how this all should work, but I've been re reading this wonderful book John Mcdonough, who worked in the Senate during the affordable CARE Act and teaches at Harvard it's called inside national health reform and his hands down my favorite book on the affordable care act and it can. It tells a history passage and one of the things you remember is like how people had such strong opinion. How many democratic, really like one to be like the person on as the ones be the person championing- that's, like you, add Dingle and Waxman enclosed Sea in pockets. Unlike widen, and like so many people who really cared about like putting their mark on this, I don't see that energy and the public I think maybe it emerges at some But you know maybe it's also possible possible
ends up is like a net positive, because you have a lot fewer competing am theories of what they should look like and like less strongly held opinions and more people kind of willing to say that. Paul Ryan's version of the Us- and I am happy to go, I think that cuts the other way to some extent like I think you had a lot of house Democrats in particular, who knew they were holding somewhat unsustainable seats. have a wine in o six in a way it and be cut. Is health care? Is such a big deal to Democrats? They like wanted to get this done, while they could, you know, and if they had to The plank for it, or they thought they were going to lose any way or something they wanted to be able to say,
was was in the Congress that passed a universal healthcare plan for America right, and I dont think there that many Republicans who feel that strongly about this issue, right that there are other things Republicans would like. Go down with the ship for right, but like taking away people's Medicaid coverage strikes me as more something the typical Republican. Would along with, if he thought, all things considered. That was the smart move for him, but if he's hearing from the governor of his state and the people at his town halls and maybe upholsterer, he had is that like and some hospital lobbyists- and there are like hey man like don't do this so ok, maybe I won't do it right. It's not as much of our past in point where's. Republicans are pretty clearly eager to like go down swinging on topics related to abortion
in and are very passionate about, tax policy issues, and I think that I think that one thing we're seeing right here is that Paul Ryan was very invested, informal correct and so he rig together a servant legislative scheme in which you have this. This ac, a truck going ahead of the like tax cuts, bus which I think is not how most Republicans they did that for specific regime yea. It knows it makes it easier way. We re Emmy. They then it makes it easier to lock in permanent habitats, but it makes it harder to like Passe tax cuts bill This makes it harder repeal Obama, Ray Gibson, made a lot of things very difficult, and I think it doesn't reflect like every single person in the republic, parties sense of the priorities. It reflects the legislative leader of the party sense of the priorities and they may have some some tensions there
Brok Obama. It seemed to me, during the two thousand eight presidential campaign thought I think correctly, that climate change was a much more pressing problem for these. States, then the ramshackle nature of the health care system, and he gave some indication that, like his personal preference, would be to put climate change action Health care action, Nancy Policy said said much the same thing. Ultimately, both of them decided not to do that because it wasn't like where the party membership was and they weren't gonna try to allay swim up river on that kind of thing, and you there was probably why it's right, because it just turns out that you can't make other people care about what you care about you have to do. If you want to get anything done, you have to focus on the place where the possibility of action is really
missing, and this is a little bit, particularly with this. Like scrap medicate expansion. It feels like trying to force something that, like not, that many were publicans, that fired up about. Speaking of things, people are fired up about cellphone bells I've really high cellphone bells. I'm excited for this paper. We all do because we are patently getting screw. That's how I feel our game. So this is a paper that is by Morocco. Wages single as single I don't have to say, as last name of our citizen Ghali's allies. Now that's crazy! He's italian filled Italian. He does a lot of good paper. And this one is this. One is particularly great. we know about. Luigi yeah, how in gray paper papers I book I have not read the, but also has one other good Luigi is English in dollars. Fact extremely preshent about Donald Trump, like yours, apparently in his book years ago, wanted to have a chapter about like what
Donald Trump branded became like we American Berlusconi and his book utters. Like that's absurd, we would never take it on I'll. Just he's talked about there's any road publicly in city journal yeah like in two thousand in time of twelve. Here, it's like it's a good thing for Republicans on trumped didn't run for president, because if he had run for president, he probably would have one any probably would have thrown free market ideology over the bus to govern is a corrupt populist, and but it's all its outcome of what about cell phone service I thought about, so so with keeping to hijack their sentences. Ngos italian centre right guy, he's really into free market. Its and because he's italian and obsessed with Silvio Berlusconi and Donald Trump he is obsessed with like corruption and like pro business policies that undermine free market, I'm somebody looks out here is regulation of the mobile phone industry, which People
That is an interesting thing to study, because each country has its own telecom regulator. So even like Liechtenstein has an independent telecom regulators, but the basic phone technology why'd. You have. Your androids, you have your iphones is the exact same everywhere. So you really compare? What are people paying for service and what are they getting and how do the prizes very any varies enormously from from country to country? and he goes through me- shows that it varies enormously largely according to how regulated the industry and that in countries that have more sort of business friendly regulation gives this there's an index from the International Telecom Union. so countries that have more business friendly regulation have higher prices. Countries that have more consumer friendly regulation have lower prices. He shows that democracy is have lower prices because The government has to care what their citizens think that authoritarian com-
these are more likely to have business, friendly regulation and high prices linked. What does business friendly regulation look like in in this well. So like like one example, that's like well coded and the thing is phone number portability right so it used to be in the United States that if we wanted to switch from it, indeed arise in. You have to give up your phone number, so that was like an anti competitive the SEC came in and said: no, you have to allow that, and so you know that's one of the things on the index There's another thing about voice over IP which is like. Can you make phone calls using data or you locked into that it into the voice. Then he shows within the developed world by the. U S in Europe are like broadly in the same like regulatory category, but you can compare the United States to Germany and Denmark and we are still paying substantially more than than Germans ordains. I think to the tune of of sixty five billion
hours a year collectively section a lot more than Denmark, and this is pretty clearly, is attributable to the differential, anti trust enforcement in the United States, which caught fairly strict under a bomb a but in the arts. A lot of big mergers were allowed that created a sort of two major carriers- eighty Indian Verizon and then to like made major ones, whereas in Denmark they have for about equally sized types of carriers here so funding, I'm innocent, interesting issue. I mean this amounts to about two hundred dollars per person per year, which is not nothing and it's just a good conceptual demonstration. So one thing he does here: one thing: that makes his papers good. Is that because he's kind of situated on the political right he's attuned to like, really. What it is conservative people say about this stuff and says:
the whole long section in here about Jews, these less competitive policies drive more investment right, which is what industry will say. no, you know will make more money in the on vessels will build you a better quality network me. He shows you know it is true. We have us, slightly higher quality network available in the United States than than in Europe, but not commensurate to the amount of higher prices that were being paid? That mostly, what happens is that the stock price of mobile phone companies is higher as and they pay more diffidence so you know we're being screwed people in the developing countries are being screwed even worse, Denmark think got good stuff gonna. The same is true in a lot of is likely, you're. In a weird way I mean it's not exactly the same, but it almost like reminds me a lot of what I read about drug pricing. Where you have like same product, I seem sort of thing we're all buying, and yet we still keep paying more.
because a very specific policy decisions that we have made there, you know I do take a little more serious some of the arguments about innovation and people investing like if there is not in the sense like we're gonna get these profits, unlike plough them back and research, but more but you're gonna have just more people who want to invest in drugs if the financial rewards are higher and they put together I guess I don't see that working on the cell phone like it's not like. You see a lot of companies like wanting to invest in cellular technology or like, reason I'm gonna like building do Iphone like building itself phone is because I think, there's a huge financial words. There at the the argument seems even weaker on this phone side than it might for, like other technologies. That you're going to see like some so massive amount of investment, because you're offering like this higher,
Angelo or word will, but also what I think is kind of interesting is that I mean everything is on the march and write a note. There's no version of the regulation should be talking about here. We, you wouldn't get a lot of money if you'd best invented the next Iphone and like the Iphone guys, don't even care that much about self regulation because, like their separate from that Brad Apple, doesn't care about full portability. They they want that they want voice when the question is like the development of when they move from three g to elegiac total aid. But but the one thing I will in this is that I think you you it of you. You mentioned populism here, and I do just one and say I think it is one of the great ironies of this age, Vet Donald Trump Oops victory is seen as a victory of a certain kind of economic populism, and yet nobody thinks it is going to come out of this is more consumer friendly, cellphone regulations. I don't think anybody believes like that is gonna, be the the end result here, yes, and
I have thought a lot about the election to connect is made our first conversation a bit. The ways in which populism is an identity and not a policy package like Donald Trump was good it activating a certain kind of populist aunt. I led fuck, the technocrats like Scruby establishment identity, and it is clear to me that people whose identity was activated their care. That much is not doing. I mean he brought in a bunch of Goldman Sachs bankers. He got the ceo of acts do his administration he's. Nobody believes that we're gonna get better. self on regulations, and maybe people do believe also common. They will end up being disappointed, but I I think they aren't going to be. I think that there is a lot more. This is just about identity than people. Give it credit for and at the end of the action was bringing in the guy who all those other people hated another that was the victor obey I'll get. So I think it Did you see? I'm still
This point from somebody else, whose name I don't remember, which is unfortunate, but there is an anti government populism and there is an anti bid. this populism and then there is like Davos right you're an end, so I think the trumpet elaborated on alike, tea party version of Anti government populist right dislike the system is rotten and we need to throw these politicians out and we need to bring in a bunch of people who aren't politicians and in trumps case that means a lot of business, men and a lot of generals, and I think that you are not going to see better cellphone regulation from from this stew, The other approach to populism that I think was offered to us by by Bernie Sanders is that leaders of american business are bad
This was a really clear differentiate her and in his rhetoric, and you can t see it like. He uses the term greed right and he thinks that greed is bad right, so he thinks that it you say what the reason that I am doing this is to increase the profits of my company, which increases, my salary and also increases the revenue. Who my large shareholders, that that is a bad thing to do that. That is, 3d and that Greece is wrong and that you need to have a government that, like takes a very suspicious view of greedy businessmen, and then you have Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, but really especially Hillary Clinton, who, like we're not their right, they believed in regulating business. They particularly believed and taxing business people, but they were all. very comfortable in the company with business man. You would not think that they would say
hey man, that's greedy and wrong right to like a rich executive, they would say: oh yeah, We need to collaborate on finding new solutions to things, and you don't. This article, I should say, is actually quite favourable to the bombing of Sis II and and the U S. Mistakes were Reuben, largely happened. Whitman drudgery Bush was president, but the basic moral of it is that it is helpful to have regulators who are sceptical of the motives and arguments offered by industry right that, like this thing that like well, we need higher revenue per user so that we can do more investment. But tat sounds and, above all, that could be true. If some he said to me: I wouldn't be like our high you're, obviously lying because clearly on some margin like it is, but what he showing is that, on the relevant margin of the actual countries that we have like it's not true and governments are giving
to what businesses want, because they are by not making policy in the public interest That's like up a stronger line. Rhetorically then I think we heard from Bill Clinton onward, like most Democrats about most kinds of industries every once in a while. You know they would turn in on people forget now, but one of the like forgotten legislative accomplishments of Barack Obama was, he gave the FDA Authority to regulate tobacco use. was like. I did you like an endless political argument in the in the Clinton and and bushy ears, and you know Democrats like really got into it and that one with the idea that, like to tobacco companies, are bad. These are bad companies that make money by selling people addictive cancer drug. And they like do their backs into it, and smoking has
like gone down a lot in the United States as a result of like a relentless campaign against tobacco company interests, but that's not like their view of most company, and I think, certainly not have like telecom infrastructure providers. You know it I'm greedy for ratings on Itunes subscriptions to the needs and share the weeds with your friends. We might even improve that. We if we get more feedback, more investment for investment and also there we need to buy Products sold by our sponsors, I think tat. The whole virtuous cycle, that's terrible and you can check out- is a conscious. This week I've Elisabeth drew on who covered Watergate and we talk about what parallels there are and aren't you didn't Watergate years and Trump yours is a fun conversation I think we'd listeners will enjoy, as Second of my colleagues are cliff thematically, his thank it or producer. Fume Shapiro, the weeds, is a box doc. and panoply production and we'll be back in week.
Transcript generated on 2021-09-13.