Surveillance: Conservatives Are Without Party, Says George Will

forty You're truly extraordinary. Is the two presidents try to understand the sacrifice that was given. We'll continue to stay with us and joining us right now, I am absolutely honored to bring to you the Councel General of the United Kingdom to New York, Her Majesty's Trade Commissioner for North America and also the former Commissioners Singapore. At this moment,

have Anthony Phillipson with us is amazing. To the east at Gold Beach where the British and of course Montgomery leading the way, explained to us what this moment also means for the British. Um if I may i mean, Tom, the emotion in your voices, you talk about the fact that they're walking the way that the soldiers didn't go. I think has been a constant theme of the commemorations this week and also actually over the last semi five years.

But the moment that really struck me was when Her Majesty the Queen was speaking in Portsmouth yesterday talking about the sacrifice of the wartime generation, which of course she was part of, as the President recognized in his remarks at the state banquet on Monday night, and she talked about the resilience and of course you know there's a much has been written, much i will be written about the the extraordinary special relationship between the UK and US,

but also our other partners in that extraordinary endeavor seventy five years ago today. Um, you know, we've we've seen the films, we've read the books, we've all watched Band of Brothers. But it's I think just important to remember what exactly happened on that day and the process that it began, of the liberation of Europe. And that's what you're watching there on the screen is George will says in his new book, quoting Abraham Lincoln then and other

Worthies and then times slips away. That's really what we see her at Normandy today, the ninety five commemoration. Well, but this, I think is the important thing, as the Queen said, is that you know that those soldiers who are there today, they're ninety four ninety five. I tweeted last night about an extraordinary moment watching a ninety five year old former paratrooper repeating the jump with the gentleman on the back of the journelan. Yeah, he's will he

be this? This generation is passing away. But this is why it's so important we tell their story, whether it's in the books or by commemorating the events as we're seeing now, because the people who lived it are inevitably and extorably passing away, so we must the memory live. Rick Atkinson out with this wonderful first volume on uh the War of the Rebellion. This is where the colonies left the United Kingdom a number of years ago, and you look at the shared history here which goes towards

your true expertise in trade relations. What is the media getting wrong now about the tone of coming post Broxit UK US trade discussions? Well, I think the way I would look at it. I honestly, I think we need to get behind the headlines. We need to sort of we need to talk about the extraordinary relationship that we already have between the UK and US, whether it's in terms of trade, investment, people to people, links um. And

then we need to look to the future. Then we need to think about what are we going to do with this relationship. How are the UK and US going to continue to build that trans atlantic corridor as we leave the EU. It will be part of our global engagement, both with the EU, with the US with other parts of the world. I think we have a shared commitment to a system of global rules that are free and fair, as the Prime Minister the President talked about in their

business round table said James's Palace on Tuesday morning. That's the agenda that we need to get to. That's the substance of it, and that's what we need to start to map. Let us talk Elizabeth the First and Elizabeth the Second. Elizabeth Second is a successful or Cardian experience of a global trade, a multilateral world, and all that we learned out of World War to Elizabeth the First

was a mercantilism of another time in place. How do we get the dialogue on a bilateral basis and on a multilateral basis back to the good of the Atlantic Charter and forward. I think you start there. You start with the principles. You start with the values that underpend our relationship, not just the UK US but the others who are at their commemoration today and we're in Port

Smith yesterday. You think about the world that we want to create, both the world that we want to live in, the world that you know, whether it's climate change or how we deal with increasing sort of global challenges around resources. And we we also talk about global peace and security Council General. If I could interrupt, what is so important here is a belief of the President that for the US to win, we must take unit trade from Europe.

Where a guy like you, within your modern history at Oxford knows that new trade can be additive upon present trade. How do we get to a trade agreement where good new American UK trade is additive upon EU UK trade. I think the way we do it is we set out a sort of a comprehensive, holistic agenda. If you look at the Trade and Investment Working Group that Secretary State Liam Fox and investor Bob Lightheiser have been pursuing

since the summer two than seventeen. It includes talking about our bilateral relationship, but it also talks about what we can do to help our sames in the here and now, and it also talks about what we can do together to address challenges. We need to take that into those glob before and keep talking about what's what makes our

lives better. Council General, thank you so much. So this is with the trade on top, Tom, Mexico in a really tough spot, in a tough spot, and let's say I would just kill the good sharing on your line today. I'm sure however in the coming days, John, but this you go right to the point, which is this is a complexity of any given country. It happens to be on our border. But some of the simplistic phrases that we're hearing in analysis or just just wonderfully naive about

the complexities of any given country. So do you just assume that we go five percent Monday and escalate as the months progress. Let's bring a Neil sharing and joined us here in London. Capital Economics Group Chief Economy so near is that the assumption at Capital Economics, that my working assumption in all of this now is that we I think if you'd have asked me that three months ago, I would have said that we'll find a way through,

both on the Mexican side and the China side. There'll be a way through these talks, and we'll get an impasse if you like. I don't think that's happening now. I think these trade at tension is going to continue to escalate. We're in a new era of globalization and we're in a new era of growing protectionism. The one caveat to that, I think is that Mexico may fold. Mexico has far more to lose in this than China.

It does, it exports the US GDP, and as you rightly touched upon, it has its own domestic, both political and economic challenges to particularly pem X. Oil production internal declined despite the previous government government efforts to try and reverse that. So I think pem X really has to give something. It has to do everything its Mexico has to do everything it can to try and head these

tariffs off. I suspect they'll my hunches, they'll find a way to try and do little hunches that we could avoid five percent months US US China actually not least because for the US it's a bigger deal as well. Right, we're just getting into the phase where US companies are thinking about their investment plans for twenty election year. Are they going to be investing if there's a big tariffs going on effects and all those supply chains back and

forth over the US Mexico order. I think the US has perhaps a bit more to lose us China much different scenario, much different scenarios. And we've all seen the briefings that show, to use a fancy word, they use a capital economics genormousness of the Mexico you were, relation is the technical term we all know, in particularly out of our academics, that tariff increase is a nonlinear exercise. Explain the reality of going five, ten, fIF and tariffs.

Where does that impenge on a trade system? Well, you're write that. I think the key point is is exactly that that it's nonlinear. And for US at the longer these tariffs and particularly this uncertainty persists, the greater the cross starts to build, and they building an expert investment ground zero. I'm not sure where they grounds to zero, but certainly investment in particular sectors is going to be

moth board. If you're an auto producer right now, you're thinking about your supply chains criss crossing the US Mexican border, semiconductors, electronics, consumer goods, all these type of things. I think that's where it hits. I mean, does it hit healthcare, Does it hit energy? Not so much, no, But I think in particular sectors it has a really big effect. And it's not the tariffs that are doing the damage. It's the uncertainty and the second un effects pticular financial conditions

doing the damage. It's a difficult question. And now Michael McKee has asked this question of several f WEBC policymakers, and Muhammad Alarion asked the question this morning too. Con FED rate cuts achieve the Fed's goals. If this is the environment you describe right now to rate cuts help, I'm not sure they necessarily do. I mean, they certainly

don't do any harm. I don't think at this stage unless you're going to get into a world in which is going to reinflate financial bubbles and cause instability further down their own and we're not there yet. The key challenge and the key issue from my side and now, is what's happening on the supply side of the U S economy. This increase in productivity growth that we've seen over the past twelve months, is that for real? Is it a late cycle blip? Is thinking structural? My gut

says that it's a late cycle blip. But you know who knows this. This is stuff that economists really tried to wrestle with and it's quite difficult, but be You're right to the extent that tariffs do damage on the supply side of the global economy. Moneture policy has nothing to do with that. So let's get your thoughts on monty policy in Europe. The ECB on tour today, they're in Lithuania. We get that decision and around forty minutes

time interest rate guidance currently no change. Nobody thinks the e CP is going to hike this year anyway. What can they do today of anything at all? Well, I think there's two things. One is they can reinforce that guidance, perhaps to shift to a slightly more Davish language. The second thing is around tell truths, what the terms and conditions that will be attached to those. I think we're moving into a world in which, pretty quickly next year, the ECB is starting to have to think again about

more quantitative easy restarted. What do they do to do more quantitative easy, Whether they've still got room to purchase soffering debt within their limits. So this is a call from A bien, A B and M are out there with this call. They think the ECB restarts Q. They've got a big call out there there. I say Capital Economics that we've had this call for the last three months. We think early said they've got enough room to restart

it on a modest scale, just doing softeign debt. And then you're right, Tom, there's corporate debt, there's equities, there's e t f s. The e c B are going to be dragged, kicking and screaming into that stuff. But I think there's enough space that they can do more softwing debt. But buying equity, I mean, I've talked to

Rick Reader of black Rock about this. Who actually thinks who actually thinks it could be a good idea to buy equity Because if you look down the capital stack right now, the dead of these companies is not the problem. It's the cost of the equity, right. The trouble is that you're dealing with a we've seen this from Japan. Actually, once you start to get into that stage as a que you've got to be dragged kicking on that. And

the ECB is incredibly conservative bodies. We know. I still think there's room they can they can do more softwing debt purchase capitalism. That is getting kicked and screaming all the way down through Frankfort and through Tokyo through Washington. Thank you so much. Sounds so depressing out No, I'm not depressed. We're dashing it, Reddy and we'll be there for job today tomorrow in New York and throw it to be back. Over the decades, there have been any

number of George will books. Um I find interesting. At one point years ago, discussion of how he would fish with one of his daughters, I find interesting. The great George Will quote something to do with adults, do not make children, Children make adults. But then there is a book that is a tour to force. He has finally delivered that in a seventy eighth year. It comes off his graduate work at Princeton of a few years back, and it is the conservative sensibility. I will not mince words, folks.

Robin Rodgings book The Third Pillar and Simon Johnson's wonderful book Jump Starting America are my books of the summer. This will be one of my two books of the year, the Conservative Sensibility. George Will. Thank you for joining Paul Sweeney in New York and I mean London. George. I look at the conservative sensibility and I've got to go right to the immediate politics. And we'll just gous this

in the half hour. You are brutal, is always we can dignify our present disputes among small persons of little learning. George Will, how did we get here? Well, would say, this is what democracy looks like. Uh. But the fact that it's untidy doesn't mean that it isn't dignified. Also, you know, the woman making her maiden speech in the House of Commons recently in Britain said democracies like sex. If it isn't messy, you're not doing it right. And uh, George,

this is radio. Be careful. I know this is anything goes though, George. I look at the conservative sensibility I know Paul wants to jump in here as well. The reason it's one of my books of the year is because you've had the courage to write not just for conservatives, but those of the debris of Woodrow Wilson. You're right for progressives, You're right for the liberals of another time and place. What can aggresses in liberals learned from the

conservative sensibility? They can go back to nineteen sixty four when I cast my first vote for president for Barry Goldwater, to the memory of whom the book is dedicated, and progressive should look at the numbers in nineteen sixty four of the American people said they trusted the federal government to do the right thing all the time, or almost all the right time. Today that numbers under as the

government's pretensions have grown, its prestige has plummeted. And progressives who want to use the government for large enterprises, I'll dispute with them about the virtue of that, but that's their stand. They should be as concerned as I am about the fact that government today seems to have lost all sense of its proper scope and actual competence. So George, just give us a state of where you think conservatism

is today in America? Well, frankly, it's it's an orphan without a political party, but an idea, a set of ideas with a distinguished pedigree that derives momentum from Hamilton and Jefferson and particularly Madisone and Lincoln above all, doesn't go disappear because the party that at one point was its vessel has become cracked a little bit. Uh. The

ideas are still valid. They have to be argued for, however, and that argument will continue until the Republican Party comes to its senses, or until someone else comes along to to be the representative of that persuasion. Well, how did we get to that point where the conservative conservative movement in the US has been effectively orphaned by the party, by the Republican partyw do we get here? Well? Mr Trump, when he ran for president, said pointedly, it's not called

the Conservative Party, It's called the Republican Party. And he set out to say that much of what Republicans have believed, particularly in free trade, most dramatically, uh, he said, by the way, you don't believe that anymore, and appallingly most of them said, okay, we don't believe that anymore, they sort of nibble at the edges of presidential discretion and applying tarrorists, which means raising taxes on Americans unilaterally without

any letter hindrance from Congress. But basically the Party has become against medicine's great assumptions, a teammate of the president. What Madison had in mind was an equilibrium among equal and rival risk institutions, with their own sense of dignity and their own sense of purpose and their own sense of independence. That has has gone away largely because of the legacy of Woodrow Wilson and the Progressives. The Progressives were amazingly forthright at the turn of the twentieth century.

In rejecting the Founders, Woodrow Wilson said, don't read the first two paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. It's mere fourth of July rhetoric. The Founder's view was, first come rights, then comes government. That government exists to indep language of the Declaration, secure our rights. The Progressives that no, actually governments give rights as dispensations. They are approved areas of

autonomy that the government likes. Whether it's George Will the new book the Conservative sensibility as a triumph It's written off of his graduate paper of just a few years ago at Princeton. It is exceptionally thoughtful. I'm gonna say it one more time. It is not only the obvious book for conservatives lost in the wilderness, it is a must read for those lost in the middle of America's politics,

and also for liberals and enthusiastic progressives as well. George Weill, I'm gonna go back to the doom and gloom that George Wills associated with Paul You're gonna love this. Our listeners in Boston are gonna love this. Many thoughtful Americans worry that the Republic peaked a little early and has been trundling downhill since Bunker Hill. How to conservatives, George will lose the gloom that had all ended a few years ago. Well, my my book is in part explicitly

a summons to pessimism. But pessimism is not fatalism. By pessimism, I means there's so many ways things can go wrong. The democracy and free markets are not the default position of the human race. They are complex social structures and government structures at the paradox. I notice, say, but LEAs a fair as a government project, It requires courts, contracts, arbitration, laws against fraud, information dispersal, all the rest. So the simple truth is that this is a complex system we're

trying to defend. My book is a particularly chapter on political economy is as robust a defensive capitalism as you'll find. This side of Hyak and Hik, of course figures largely in my in my book. Uh, my view is that capitalism does not just make us better off, which it manifestly does, it makes us better that the argument between Hamilton and Jefferson was an argument about what kind of

people we would be. I want to swing the discussion forward Georgia, because they know Paul Sweeney wants to get into the clear and present with our present president. Let's swing forward, folks to my ute. Look, look, there's this particular fringe, and there one fundamental problem is they simply never accepted the New Deal, Boynihan of New York, And there's a whole tone in America that's never gotten over f DR and that's the raison detra of certainly a

new Republican party. Well, there's no question that the New Deal is an accomplished fact. It's interesting, however, that Ronald Reagan, who came of age during the New Deal, never assaulted New Deal institutions or approaches to government. It was the great society that he had in his sights. The New Deals signature achievement with social security, which is some the government knows how to do. It identifies an eligible population

and mails out checks to it. That's fine. When government goes wrong is when it says it's going to deliver model cities or head starts or meaningful work, when it undertakes two minutely regulate us to paradise. Government is a

blunt instrument, a necessary instrument, capable of much good, but blunt. Nonetheless, George, are you surprised or that the Republican Party, some of the conservative members of the Republican Party haven't maybe pushed back on some of the current presidents maybe questionable actions, actions that may not be in the conservative venaculars, such as free, free trader. Are you surprised we haven't gotten the Republican Party has been so silent. I guess it's

been silent, with a few honorable exceptions. Uh. Senator Department of Ohio says, all right, if we're going to pretend that imported Volkswagen's or a national security threat. Shouldn't we have the Defense to Apartment rather than the Commerce Department

established the criterion for a national security threat? Uh. Senator to me has been pushing back of Pennsylvania Republicans, saying, we have over the years, we have spun off far too much power, investing presidents of both parties from congresses of both parties with an enormous discretion that enables them to do essentially legislative things such as tariffs, which are raising taxes unilaterally. George Will with us. I've got time, George for only one more question. John writes in and says,

I really don't care about the conservative sensibility. Please ask Mr Will about the baseball sensibility. George Will, Cobby, how do we save baseball? Where you've got to do something to cure the following? In two thousand and eighteen season, for the first time in history, there were more strikeouts. Thank you. The ball is put in play, that is not walk strike out. Her home run put in play once every four minutes. You know. Red Smith once said

baseball's doll only to the doll. Unfortunately, baseball is becoming dull because it's becoming one dimensional. We've got to find I think markets work. I think there will be a demand for Rod carews and Wade bugs and Tony Gwin's see that and the demand will be met. Paul. Do you see how his voice changes when he gets away from Madison and with Roe Wilson. I only write about politics to support my baseball have it. Well, here's what

I'm gonna do. I'm in London. I'm gonna put out one of my books of the year, The Conservative Sensibility. And when that writing with George Will in the Washington Post, there was a tour to force article a few oh five six seven days ago on the strikeout to Walks Ratio. Just an absolutely spectacular effort. And we'll get that out as well. George Will, of course with the Washington Post and many many books over the many decades, and I could just simply say that The Conservative Sensibility is a

tour to thank you so much. Thank you this morning. Well, Tom, you know, one of the things we've seen since the financial crisis is the big New York investment banks getting more and more into the commercial banking side of the business, the retail side of the business. If you will interesting ubs just recently is out there now offering ultra high savings rates to try to attract some cash from the listing clients. Exactly. It's kind of like an assumed toast toaster.

I'm not sure gonna toaster toaster. So we would talk when we talk in vestment banks time, we always talk to Shanelli Bassik Bloomberg News investment banking reporters. So what's UVUS doing here, Snelli? Their ultra high savings rate. You know, in the US particularly, there are a lot smaller than a lot of you know, the Morgan Stanleys, the Goldman

Saxes of the world. So they're saying, at least through the end of September, we're gonna offer you a rate that's higher so long as you have ten thousand dollars to put in our bank and away from another one. And so they're definitely trying to lure money away from

the big US contenders. They need to do this, frankly, Um they have a lot of growth in Asia, but the results in the America's were flat in the last quarter, and so it's something that if they don't do it, they're going to have a harder time one's volatility kicks in and people start saving instead. So it's it's interesting, am I right? In kind of my view? That goshly even Goldman Sachs. You know, the blue chip corporate investment bank is getting in more and more into the retail

side of individual investor side of the business. What's the trend here? You know, one's got to wonder if this is a very late cycle behavior right their biggest corporate clients right now. Um, and you know we were just talking about this. I've been doing invest in banking meetings all week and everyone's pretty bored. There's not a lot of big ticket deals going on, and the ones that are happening are either tied up for a year in

a regulatory hurdle or falling apart. And so when you know big corporations are under a lot of pressure here and maybe deal making, especially this big ticket deal making, is slowing down, then can you lean on the individual investor and then you know, mom and pop investors really to make money for the bank. Yeah, okay, so I'll go there, but you know, I hit her like you you go out to the Hampton Coffee Company to pick up a cup of coffee or John's Pancake House, Montauk, wherever,

you know the power players like Hugo Schnali. What's the mood into the summer among Wall Street banking? I don't see it? Is it there? Like I was saying, pretty bored. I'm sure that you know. It's funny you mentioned the hampa, But board means nobody makes any money, right, nobody makes any money. But you know, while you're not making money, you kind of wait for a better September ahead. And things are slower in the summer. People are taking time off.

Ever since Memorial Day turn, things were just slower, right, I was writing four stories a day, and now it's just a lot less going on. Well, within that is bank merges, I mean Commerce bank, and I n G. I know that's off your beat, but I guess they're picking up the thrust and we've got to figure out what to do with Deutsche Bank. Very importantly, Paul, I missed this. Deutsche Bank had rallied this morning now five point nine nine euros. I did not see that. You're

on that six euro watch for long. Well, that may be because Shnelli showed up to get in front of the mic. I don't know Deutsche Bank self. What is the mood in Wall Street? Come on, you're you're wired of this totally. What are the young turks of Wall Street doing right now? It's funny the young Turks as with a bunch of young Turks yesterday, which is a very exciting thing. Uh Again, not a whole lot going on. You know, you think about how much bad news there is, right,

we were talking about deals falling apart too. But the hedge fund industry, you know, we're still waiting for some big launches, but there hasn't been a whole lot going on in that industry either. I p O world, right, we're finally seeing Uber hit above its I p O prices. So in the I p O world is where there's some real excitement going on and people are ready to kind of be in every New York hotel at these road shows coming up in some really sexy ones, right,

peloton Um, Endeavor. There's some really exciting names that make for really great stories, but but also frankly something you just to talk about. It's just interesting. Yesterday we had Mark Schaeffer, the co head of Global m and A for a City Group in talking about the business. He was speaking at the Bloomberg Panel yesterday investment panel in New York. He was saying that, you know, the year to date M and A volumes are down pretty significantly

after January personage to one digit. Ye, and you're interesting, it's you know, I was just wondering, are they claiming when you talk to M and A bankers, are they saying, oh, it's just the trade uncertainty or it's slowing economy. What's kind of you know, the excuses this time around. It's a little bit of both and volatility. Let's not discount it. I know it's nowhere where it was at the end of last year, but it is a little higher this

year so far. Um, you don't want to pay for something when you don't know what the price is really gonna end up on, especially for Stofferson deals. Um, you know you're mentioning a Deutsche Bank and Commerce Bank. The prospect of financial steals are very exciting to people, both for smaller finn tech companies and consolidation across Europe. Right, the fact that Deutsche Bank and Commerce Bank died, right, but now Commerce Bank is talking to I m G again.

That's again more excitement for the investment bankers and nervousness for the staff because it does usually mean some job cuts, but are there's still too many firms doing too many things where a given Wall Street firm Cinale will cut out a hunk of business just because they say, we don't want to be number four, we don't want to be number three, we don't want to be number eight. That's the big question. We think that there's going to be a lot of consolidation, but what kind of consolidation.

It's really hard for the biggest banks to keep getting bigger. There's a lot of talk earlier this year about a lot of banks trying to get bigger under the Trump administration, in particular in case the Dems take over in the next cycle, they'll have a harder time for our audience. Those are Democrats she's talking about. Than sorry, but you know, if they're going to get bigger, they might as well

get bigger now there. That means through buying companies or what UBS is doing, and diversifying into businesses that they're not as big as already. Yes, the big want to get bigger for certain, and that will wipe out the smaller end of the pie. To be clear, we just got off a bunch of job cuts as well, all across Wall Street done? Is Wall Street done? What the job cuts? You know, Wall Street can be a little fickle and it really depends, you know, in the next

couple of weeks or so. We're really going to see the next second quarter numbers come out. So far, James Gorman, for example, Morgan Stanley had been pretty optimistic about what the second quarter looks like. People are trading, People are not staying away from the markets necessarily. Um, you know, we talk dealmakers are staying away, but generally traders and bankers are not staying away from markets. So hopefully that

means not too many job cuts ahead. It's similar Bassic, thank you so much writing on Global Wall Street for Bloomberg. And now we've take a different tact with a book. We have Alan Krueger's Rock Eonomics, and of course Professor Krueger told me much about this book over the last number of years, his excitement of looking at the music business,

which was an inquiring mind. We lost Alan Krueger in March is untimely death and joining us this morning to um to look briefly at Rockconomics, a wonderful book from Princeton University at Press. But also to speak of Professor Krueger is Austin Guelsby. He is a gentleman from Milton Academy and out of University of Chicago and the Boost School. Austin Guelsby, of course, like Professor Krueger, a former chairman

of the President's Council of Economic Advisors. Austin, I spoke to you yesterday, thrilled to have you on Worldwide today. What permeates Alan Krueger's rock economics is what permeated his study of terror, his study of his core economic theories, his study of any number of things, which is just an insatiable curiosity. And here about music, from your great, great uh knowledge of Alan Krueger, Why did he choose music?

You know? To a well, Tom, First of all, thanks for having me back, and thanks for for giving me a chance to talk about Alan and and this book. Alan always loved music, you know, as you know, and as you said there in the opening, he loved talking about music, He loved listening to music. And he was a you know, absolutely world class economist. And I think he couldn't help but apply his economics to this thing that that he enjoyed so much, and and and in

the end, that's that's where the book came out. The book is basically going to popular music, UM and talking about how popular it is and measuring that, but then just analyzing the economics of it and the ways enriched the music business reflect kind of these broader trends that

have happened in the labor market over the last fifty years. UM. And so that's kind of the premise of the Okay, But what's what permeates the book, Austin, and this includes your work at Chicago, is this this and all of us are living this right now in music and outside music. Is the technological overlay. He's got ahod chapter on streaming, and that's going out lights people. We saw the Apple

announcement two days ago. They're gonna lose iTunes. I mean, what do we learn about technological change in music that goes over to what all of us are confronting in our lives with our families. Super important topic obviously and clearly UM. I think one of the things that that this suggests is as the technology of of digital copying, let's call it, and digital distribution makes it easier to

reach these big markets. It does have a tendency who lead to winner take all superstar um type factors in the labor market. So so in the book, Krueger shows that the share of the tworldwide UH music revenue is getting more and more concentrated among the very most popular artists. And if you're if you're struggling in the middle, um, you you are struggling. And part of that is from

the technology change um. And there's a there's an ironic bid in there for anybody who's who's a ficionado of economics, which is the great economist Alfred Marshall, kind of inventor of supply and demand. In his original writings he made a big deal about there are some industries and jobs that are scalable and some are not. And the example of a job that was not scalable he had was a very famous singer. And they said, well, obviously everybody

can't listen to that singer. That they have to go town to town and only the people who can hear them, because there were no microphones and U And now you know, however, many years later it's the complete reverse. So now if you add an example of what somebody where technology makes their market bigger, and bigger makes for more winner take all. You would say, well, what about Beyonce. You know she can she can sing once and and record it and everybody listen. So, Professor, how does a new band or

a new artist break intoday? It used to be just try to get a record deal than the record company promotes you. How did the new uh, the new bands do it? Yeah, I think it's uh, it's gotten harder. That's part of the thing about the superstar model is it's gotten harder to be a super If you get to be a superstar, you make more than you've ever

made before. Um, But if you're just starting out, the marketing component has gotten more difficult because you don't have the radio side, and the labels are are not investing as much in the discovering the bands. Austin, I want to go to the legacy of Allan Krueger, and to do that in this short time is grossly unfair to Professor Krueger and frankly to Professor Goulsby as well. Let us cut to the chase. Krueger and Card in the middle nineties changed the dialogue on what the most basic

people in America should be paid. We're not talking about minimum wage lifts. Walmart and uproar at their annual meeting, et cetera, at the fifteen dollars an hour. Did the Allen Krueger win the war of the minimum wage? You know that war continues, but he certainly won a major battle. Uh. And you know, took over one continent in the in the old game of risk. You know, if you if you could get control of one of the continents, Uh,

you're You're on your way. And I would say he was part one of the leaders of a of a movement that got us to rethink employers and employees and the thinking of maybe employers have a lot more bargaining power, monopoly power than than we thought before. Maybe it's not as competitive each particular employer as we thought. And if it's not, then textbook kind of examples like hey, if you raise the minimum wage, it automatically leads everyone to

get fired kind of thing, um are not accurate. And so there there are many aspects of labor economics that Allen was a leader of, but this whole space which continued up to more recent times where he was one of the first people documenting the way that employers were signing non competes. And no I'm not talking about you know,

law firms or or things like that. Literally McDonald's signing making their employees signed non competes for bidding them from working at other fast food restaurants, um, and showing the ways that that allowed employers to kind of depress the wages of the people who worked for them because they didn't have to worry about um that you would go to a competitor. All of that goes to to Alan's

intellectual curiosity and working on important problems. You know. That's why President Obama identified him as a leader made him Chair of the c E. A before that, President Clinton had made him the chief Economists at the Department of Labor. He was he was a rare bird in that he was a world leading economist researcher, but but he was very practical. Well, Austin Goes, We thank you so much from Chicago Today in support of the late Alan Krueger's

Rock Economics. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keene before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio