love and theft: The Economic and Moral Case for The People w/ @StephanieKelton 2020/12/14

2020年12月15日火曜日

The Economic and Moral Case for The People w/ @StephanieKelton 2020/12/14

参考：

CNBC 2020年12月23日

https://love-and-theft-2014.blogspot.com/2020/12/cnbc-20201223-stephanie-kelton.html?m=1

https://t.co/Cy81Zdo7IN
2020/12/15 pic.twitter.com/yB3K1OgmnH
— luminous woman (@_luminous_woman) December 15, 2020

you know it's frustrating i teach economics and i made a joke the other day that you know.

this is the question you put first on the exam because you're trying to build the student's confidence so you give them the easy questions first right.

what should we do now to support people in a pandemic and as the wheels come off the economy.

that's the question you put first because it's easy to answer right.

and yet we have com congress that's just completely sitting on its hands for months on end we know that the bidding is going in the wrong direction we started off with a 3.4 trillion dollar opening salvo right from the democrats.

and then the number has just gradually come down over time to the point that we keep talking skinnier and skinnier and skinnier everybody's starving and the bill is getting skinnier and skinnier.

so you know it's frustrating because as we've been talking about for the last hour um you know it's it's a pen stroke it's the it's the power of the purse it's as simple as getting the legislation written correctly include the kinds of things that ought to be in it provide the income support provide the fiscal support for this economy.

and be prepared to continue to do it for as long as it takes right and recognize that we really could pick up the pieces as the economy has fallen apart.

and and you know as brian said we don't want to pick up the pieces and put them back together the way they were assembled before because that was not a good economy we want to be able to pick the pieces up and put them together differently this time.

build back a stronger more resilient economy that looks after people cares for people get let's create the world we know we could have we have intersecting crises healthcare economic housing racial justice there it's a climate it's all bearing down on us.

so why not take advantage of the opportunity and as we've heard again and again we have the capacity so you know we can do these things we just need some imagination and some bravery in congress.

somebody to step up enough of them to step up and commit the kind of resources that will help us transform lives and livelihoods in this world into the kind of you know place that we all would be much happier living in you know.

私が経済学を教えているうえでイライラしていることを知っているでしょう。あなたも知っているように先日ジョークを言いました。

これは試験で最初に出す問題で、学生の自信をつけるために、簡単な問題を最初に出すんですよね。

パンデミックが起きて、経済が停滞した時に人々を支援するために、今、何をすべきか？

それが最初の質問なんです。なぜなら、それは答えるのが簡単だからです。

それなのに、何ヶ月もの間、完全に手をこまねいている議会があります。

民主党からの３兆４００００億ドルの一撃から始まりましたが、その数字は時間の経過とともに徐々に下がっていきました。

だから、もどかしいのです。この1時間、ずっと話してきたように、ペンの一筆書きであり、財布の力でもあるのです。

そして、その数は時間の経過とともに徐々に減少し、私たちがどんどんとどんどんとどんどんお腹を空かせて話し続けるようになり、法案はどんどん薄くなっていきます。

ですから、これはイライラすることです。これは、過去1時間の話でしたが、ペンストロークであり、財布の力であり、法律を正しく作成するのと同じくらい簡単で、必要な種類のことを含めることができます。その中には、所得支援を提供し、この経済に財政支援を提供します。

経済が崩壊したときには、私たちがその断片を拾い上げることができるということを認識してください。

そして、ブライアンが言ったように、ピースを拾って以前のように元に戻すのではなく、それは良い経済ではなかったので、今回は違う方法でピースを拾って元に戻せるようにしたいのです。

人々の世話をしてくれる、より強い、より回復力のある経済を築き上げていきましょう。

この機会を利用してはどうでしょうか。何度も何度も聞いたように、私たちには能力があります。

議会の中に想像力と勇気があればいいのです。誰かが十分に立ち上がって、この世界の生活や生活を、私たちが住んでいた方がずっと幸せになれるような場所に変えるために。

https://twitter.com/FlyingWithSara/status/1338634817169059840?s=20

https://t.co/bp2eAr9tF2
— Sara Nelson (@FlyingWithSara) December 14, 2020

https://twitter.com/FlyingWithSara/status/1338634817169059840?s=20

h ttps://twitter.com/FlyingWithSara/status/1338634817169059840?s=20The Economic and Moral Case for The People w/ @StephanieKelton 2020/12/15

前半

https://youtu.be/HPAfn9rX2_I

後半におけるケルトン発言のみ

https://youtu.be/LBxDX1TzJNQ

https://twitter.com/flyingwithsara/status/1338634817169059840?s=21

https://twitter.com/flyingwithsara/status/1338573450181550082?s=21

Can’t wait to discus The Economic and Moral Case for The People w/ @StephanieKelton @DarrickHamilton @iamdelmancoates at 7 pm eastern. We have a special guest, @brian_goldstone, joining us with stories from the ground in Atlanta on hunger and homelessness. #ReliefForThePeople

https://twitter.com/stephaniekelton/status/1338661453939822593?s=21

I didn’t see this great tweet in time to RT it ahead of the event. That said, rumor has it this won’t be the last time we do this. https://t.co/SodMKJaahi
— Stephanie Kelton (@StephanieKelton) December 15, 2020

^_^

①

DC:

you're ready to roll

Sara:

okay hi everybody thanks for joining us we threw this together really fast but we think it's really important that we're all talking about what needs to be done right now not only because this is the biggest crisis in over 100 years in our country but because there has been a reckoning coming for a long time about how our democracy is actually working for the people and uh we have been

…

instrumental in creating bold policy ideas like baby bonds and arguing with me and stephanie kelton for a federal jobs guarantee and derek stephanie and i did join together on the biden sanders unity task force for the economy and stephanie kelton is the now new york times best-selling author of the deficit myth modern monetary theory and the birth of the people's economy i just want to say that i have a first edition classic without the new york times best-selling note on it and um stephanie has also served as chief economist on the u.s senate budget committee for the democrats in 2015 and is a senior economic advisor to bernie sanders 2016 and 2020 campaigns as well as teaching at multiple universities around the world currently at stony brook and formerly chair of the department of economics at the university of missouri kansas city and finally we have ryan goldstone

…so we want to get to it and talk about relief for the people and um i thought that it's really important that we start to think about our demands because we're looking right now at a congress that has been unable to get relief to the american people.

we should have had a second round of relief in place in august that didn't happen.

we had uh unemployment that was covering people's pay and stimulus checks that was helping people get through this crisis all come to an end uh at the end of this month we've got 30 to 40 million people who are in jeopardy of losing their homes being evicted 17 million children who are going hungry right now.

uh 12 million people who are in jeopardy of losing any access to unemployment um and the list goes on and on.

so we're in a dire situation here and we still don't have relief from congress and now this week we're looking at a severely slimmed down bill um that our union would say we gotta get locked in um but we would all say uh right now tonight that that is just simply not enough so how are we gonna fix this going forward because even if we lock in what we can now to make sure we don't completely fall off of a cliff how can we fix this going forward and a lot of people are looking at georgia and saying that that's the only solution that this election for those two senate seats the only solution but the truth is that our politics have been failing us for a long time and not really working for the general welfare of the people so we've got to have clear demands to fix our problems and a lot of people are talking starting to understand.

and thanks to uh people like stephanie kelton who are bringing these ideas out into the open that we need to get rid of things like paygo.

and so i thought that we should probably start with defining what is paygo and why is it a problem and stephanie with your experience uh working with the u.s senate budget committee can you give a quick review of what paygo is and maybe an example of why something that might have you know um a well over a majority or a veto proof majority of support in congress for a specific idea like you know making sure that kids have nutritious lunches um but it can't get passed so could you give us a quick review?

ＤＣだ

準備はできています

サラ

皆さん、参加してくれてありがとうございました。この話はあっという間に終わってしまいましたが、私たちが今すべきことについて話し合うことは本当に重要です。

…

ベビーボンドのような大胆な政策アイデアを生み出すのに貢献し、連邦政府の雇用保証のために私とステファニー・ケルトンと議論し、デレク・ステファニーと私はバイデン・サンダース経済統一タスクフォースで一緒に参加しました。ステファニー・ケルトンは現在ニューヨークタイムズのベストセラー作家で、赤字神話現代貨幣論と人民経済の誕生の著者です。 s上院予算委員会のチーフエコノミストを務め、2015年には民主党のために、バーニー・サンダースの2016年と2020年のキャンペーンのための上級経済顧問であり、世界中の複数の大学で教えています。

国民のための救済について話したいと思います。そして、私たちの要求を考え始めることが本当に重要だと思いました。

8月に2回目の救済が行われるべきでしたが、それが実現しませんでした。

失業者の給料を賄っていた失業者や、この危機を乗り切るための景気刺激策も、今月末には全て終了しています。今月末には、3000万から4000万人の人々が家を失う危険にさらされています。

1,200万人の人々が失業の危険にさらされています。

我々は悲惨な状況にあり、議会からの救済はまだありません。今週、非常にスリム化された法案が提出される予定ですが、組合は「固定化する必要がある」と言います。多くの人がジョージア州を見て、それが唯一の解決策だと言っていますこの２つの上院議員選挙が唯一の解決策だと言っていますが、真実は、我々の政治は長い間、我々を失望させてきました。

多くの人が理解し始めています。ステファニー・ケルトンのような人たちのおかげで、ペイゴのようなものを排除する必要があるという考えを公にしてくれています。

それで、私たちはペイゴーとは何か、なぜそれが問題なのかを定義することから始めなければならないと思いました。ステファニーさんは、あなたの経験から、米国の上院予算委員会で働いていましたので、ペイゴーとは何かについて簡単なレビューをしていただけますか？

Kelton:

sure uh well i i want to start by saying thank you to everyone and just to sarah for helping to put this together as she said this really uh did come up i think sometime sunday night late uh with this idea and all of a sudden you know here we are on monday and we can just make things happen so um thanks to all of you for making your schedules accommodate this it's really nice and as she said it feels a little like getting the band back together.

uh and so look pago is a self-imposed and that's really important right because this is congress saying we're going to play by this rule called pay go pay as you go and what it essentially says is anytime we want to commit a dollar of say new spending to education infrastructure feeding hungry kids whatever it is if we want to commit a dollar of new spending we have to find the money we have to pay for that spending in one of two ways either we raise new revenue so we try to convince enough other members of congress to vote for some tax increase that will generate the revenue to quote unquote pay for that spending or we fight over carving out money from some other area of the budget so i say well i'll take the money out of defense or i'll take the money out of you know this or that place and that will pay for it and the whole point is to avoid adding to the deficit because congress has for a very long time at least theoretically right at least rhetorically had this idea that adding to the deficit is something we just don't want to do so in order to budget responsibly we are going to hold ourselves to this standard called paygo so that anytime we spend another dollar we aren't adding to the deficit well of course we're adding to the deficit in big ways now right we did that with the cares act that was a 2.2 trillion dollar piece of legislation that did so much good to support incomes and to protect workers through the early part of the pandemic and guess what that spending wasn't quote unquote paid for it didn't adhere to pay go so it did add to the deficit and it allowed congress to move very quickly because all they had to do was go around and collect the votes for the spending they didn't also have to collect the votes for the tax increase.

Sara:

wait wait a minute wait a minute stephanie i want to be really clear on this congress didn't have to go out and collect the tax dollars before they voted on the 2.2 trillion.

Kelton:

yeah

Sara:

say again.

Kelton:

so there there's this thing called the power of the purse right and congress has it congress has the power of the purse you and i don't we can't commit to spending money that we don't have if we could you wouldn't see people lined up you know at food banks with miles long you know stretches of cars you wouldn't see small businesses going under.

you wouldn't see state and local governments pleading with congress for aid if we could all do what the federal government can do hell we would all just look after ourselves.

but there's a difference between what congress can do and what the rest of us can do they have this thing called the power of the purse they can commit to spending money that they do not have and the reason that they can do that is because as i said congress controls the purse strings okay so congress can spend without the need to come up with the money from somewhere that's what they did with the cares act that's what the house tried to do with the heroes act that's in fact what uh congress is trying to do with these different bills these bipartisan bills that are being put forward now.

so those will add i'll say modestly to the deficit my own argument is that we need to be doing much more and i think everyone here tonight agrees with that.

and pago can very much stand in the way because whereas you know just committing the dollars and authorizing the spending is quite it should be quite easy right because it's the right thing to do both economically and morally once you bring pago in you set up an extra hurdle because now you've got to go around and convince other members of congress to vote for your tax increase to vote for your carve out of some other part of the budget it gets even more contentious and harder to pass legislation.

ケルトン

ケルトン: そうですね......まずはみんなに感謝の気持ちを伝えたいと思いますし、この企画を手伝ってくれたサラにも感謝したいと思います。

彼女が言うには、バンドを再結成したような感じがします。課せられたものですが、これは本当に重要なことです。議会が言っていることですが、これはpay go pay as you goと呼ばれるルールに従うことになっていて、本質的には、1ドルでも新しい支出をしたい場合はいつでも、教育のインフラ整備のために、飢えた子供たちを養うために、何であれ、1ドルでも新しい支出をしたい場合は支出を見つける必要があります支出のために支払わなければならないお金を見つけるには、2つの方法のいずれかで新たな収入を上げるので、私たちは、その支出のために引用符を支払うために収入を生成するいくつかの増税のために投票するために議会の他の十分な他のメンバーを説得しようとするか、または我々はいくつかの他の領域からのお金を切り取る上で戦う。だから私は、国防費からお金を取るか、ここやあそこからお金を取るかして、それで賄うと言いました。赤字はどうしても避けたいものですだから責任ある予算を組むためには、ペイゴーと呼ばれるこの基準を自分たちで守ることにしていますいつ使っても赤字を増やさないようにしていますもちろん今は大きな方法で赤字を増やしています 2.2兆ドルの法案は、所得を支え、パンデミックの初期段階で労働者を保護するために非常に良いことをしました。

サラ

ケルトン

はい

サラ

もう一度言ってください。

ケルトン.

巾着の力と呼ばれるものがあって、議会はそれを持っている。議会は巾着の力を持っている。私たちは、持っていないお金を使うことはできない。

州や地方自治体が議会に助けを求めているのを見ることもありません。連邦政府ができることをみんなでやれば、

しかし、議会ができることと我々ができることには違いがある。議会は財布の力と呼ばれるものを持っている。議会はどこからかお金を調達する必要がなくても支出をすることができます彼らはケアズ法でやったことをしました家はヒーロー法でやろうとしたことをしました実際には議会は異なる法案でやろうとしていますこれらの超党派の法案は現在進められています

これらの法案は、私が言うには、赤字を少しずつ増やしていくことになりますが、私自身の主張としては、もっと多くのことをする必要があるということです。

そして、パゴは非常に邪魔になります。ドルを投入して支出を承認することは、経済的にも道徳的にも正しいことなので、非常に簡単なはずなのですが、パゴを入れてしまえば、余計なハードルが高くなります。

Sara:

so i have two quick questions for you um one is can the u.s government go bankrupt and two um was there any discussion about pay go when we talked about the um the tax cuts two years ago.

Kelton:8:52

okay well the answer to your first question is no categorically no you see the picture over your shoulder on that book you held up little uncle sam with his empty pant pockets right notice the word right above uncle sam myth it's a myth that the idea that the federal government can run out of money can go bankrupt can go broke and turn our nation insolvent these things can happen not to the united states of america not to a currency issuing government like the us so again the government is different from the rest of us and the key feature that makes the federal government different from state local governments businesses households is that they get to issue the currency and the rest of us just have to use it.

right we really do have to finance our spending we are constrained we face a financial constraint the federal government is different.

um your other question was see i've already forgotten.

Sara:

somebody help me out what was my other question derek oh did we did we talk about the tax yeah pay go during the tax cut.

Kelton:

listen.

pago was waived off because paul ryan was in the house and he was the uh you know he was a majority uh leader in the house and pago got in the way of the republican tax cuts so paul ryan said well pago is gone we'll just wave it off and so pago did not stand in the way of course republicans tried to claim that the tax cuts would in fact pay for themselves because they were going to generate so much growth and so much new income that you know taxes revenues were going to come raining down uh on on washington.

and that didn't happen and and didn't matter in a sense right they just added to the deficit why because they're more interested in passing their agenda than anything else and if they have to add to the deficit to get what they want they're happy to do that democrats i think too often try to hold themselves to a different and they think higher standard and that's what the problem can become right if you start saying well i'm not going to do what they do i'm not going to add to the deficit to accomplish parts of my agenda i'm more interested in um deficit neutral paygo stuff and that is going to absolutely kill the progressive agenda.

サラ

サラ:では、2つ質問があるのですが、1つはアメリカ政府が倒産する可能性があるかどうか、そして2つ目は、2年前に減税について話したときに、給与の支払いについての話はありましたか？

ケルトン:8:52

あなたの最初の質問に対する答えは、はっきり言ってノーです。その本の肩越しの写真を見て、あなたは空のズボンのポケットを持った小さなサムおじさんを掲げていました。このようなことが起こりうるのは、アメリカ合衆国ではなく、アメリカ合衆国のような通貨発行政府ではなくても起こりうることなのです。連邦政府が、州の地方自治体や企業、家庭とは違う大きな特徴は

私たちは、本当に支出を賄わなければなりません。財政的な制約に直面しています。

あなたの他の質問は、もう忘れてしまいました。

サラ

サラ: 誰か助けてくれないか、他の質問は何だったかな？

ケルトン

聞いて

ポール・ライアンが下院にいたのでパゴは免除されました彼は下院の多数派リーダーでしたパゴが共和党の減税の邪魔になったのでポール・ライアンは「パゴはもういない」と言いましたパゴは邪魔になりませんでしたもちろん、共和党は減税は採算が取れると主張しようとしましたなぜなら、減税によって多くの成長と新たな所得が生まれて

しかし、それは実現しませんでしたし、ある意味では重要ではありませんでした。なぜ、赤字を増やしたかというと、彼らは何よりも自分たちのアジェンダを通すことに関心があるからです。私は彼らと同じことをするつもりはない、私のアジェンダの一部を達成するために赤字を増やすつもりはない、私は赤字にならないようなものに興味がある、と言い始めると、彼らはより高い基準を考え、それが問題になります。

D H:

sarah if i could jump in real quick and just make this like point in that that's a critical point the aisle actually pays any attention to it when it comes to a progressive agenda and the other side of the aisle uh literally ignores it um literally pays no attention to it when they want to pass a 2.1 trillion dollar tax cut so you know that makes it politics that makes it a political choice values that are decided um in the case of of war or military aggression it's never part of the conversation and whether you want to call that a national emergency or not how could you not call.

Sara:

yeah and i want to get to that um i just want to ask really quickly of you derek and stephanie you know hasn't this pandemic just with the 600 plus up alone hasn't that turned on its head what you're talking about so the republicans were willing to throw paygo out the door when they were giving tax cuts to the rich to push the money up to the rich but when they actually put money into the hands of people who otherwise didn't normally have it didn't we find out that people were spending into the economy.

and that that was actually improving the situation of the economy.

D・H

サラ、もし私が本当に素早く飛び込んで、このような重要な点を指摘したいのですが、進歩的なアジェンダになると、通路の反対側は、文字通り無視しています。 1兆ドルの減税ですから、それが政治的な選択をする価値観になります。戦争や軍事的侵略の場合には、決して会話の一部にはなりませんし、それを国家的緊急事態と呼びたいかどうかに関わらず、

サラ

サラ：ええ、その話をしたいのですが、デレクとステファニーに早く聞きたいのですが、今回のパンデミックは、600人以上の人が感染しただけで、そのことが頭をよぎったのではないでしょうか？

そして、それが実際に経済状況を改善していることに気付きませんでした。

Kelton:

yeah i mean look this is the key point that you're making every deficit is good for someone we just have to realize that like let's be honest every deficit is good for someone the republican deficits that were passed in december of 2017 republicans passed those tax cuts because they knew they were good for someone who were they good for well 83 of the benefits went to the folks in the top one percent of the income distribution and they had corporate income tax cuts as well so in other words the the majority of the benefits the windfall if you like went to the people who least need to help when i say every deficit is good for someone i mean that the government's deficit is just the difference between two numbers.

one of the numbers is how many dollars they're spending into the economy the other number is how many they're subtracting back out mostly by taxing.

so a deficit means they're adding more in than they're subtracting away and when they do when they do that somebody gets a surplus the government's deficit is a financial contribution to some other part of our economy republicans like to send that financial contribution to people who least need the help what happened in the cares act sarah you just said 600 extra a week plus that 1200 dollar check.

when people deposited that money it went into their bank accounts into their pockets it made them financially better off than they would have otherwise been so it's an example of using deficits to divert that surplus to the people who are hurting who most need our help right now.

Sara:

and if i can just brag brag on my people for a minute the aviation payroll support kept people in their jobs it was money that had to go directly to people's paychecks keep us connected to our healthcare and so the people that i represent were able to keep their jobs continue to pay their rent their utility bill all of that and paid 英語 (自動生成)

ケルトン

あなたが言っているようにすべての赤字は誰かのためになるのです正直に言うとすべての赤字は誰かのためになるのです 2017年12月に可決された共和党の赤字は誰かのためになることを知っていたからこそ共和党は減税を行いました所得分配の上位１％の人たちに行き渡り、法人所得税も減税されたので、言い換えれば、利益の大部分は、最も助けを必要としていない人たちに行きました。

一つは経済にどれだけのドルを使っているか、もう一つはどれだけのドルを税金で引いているか、という数字です。

赤字というのは、引いている額よりも増やしていることを意味し、そうすると誰かが黒字になる。政府の赤字は、経済の他の部分への財政的貢献であり、共和党は、その財政的貢献を最も助けを必要としない人々に送りたいと考えている。

人々は、そのお金を銀行口座に預けて、ポケットに入れました。そうでなければ、そうなっていたよりも、経済的に豊かになりました。

サラ

私が代表を務める人々は仕事を続けることができ、家賃や公共料金の支払いを続け、支払うことができました。

②

Sara:

economy going forward an economy for the people so can we actually build things in the in the near term in the short term here that can be a template for the kind of economy that we want to build going forward.

Kelton:

well look i i think that you know we we sort of almost have buckets we're working with some different buckets here right and we're we're still very much in the relief phase of this and i know people use the word stimulus and that kind of thing but you know we're if we're lucky if we're lucky next year congress will come at this again and we will start talking about recovery and some of the strategic investments that can be made to lay a sustainable foundation for an economic recovery and if we were really lucky we would use the other r word that fdr used and we'd start talking about reform and then we would get really in to the sort of structural changes that we could make to the economy that would you know make um our social safety net more resilient we know that this thing is not uh up to the job right it is not strong enough to support families communities businesses in an economic downturn but we're not there yet we're in the relief phase and so you're saying what do we need to have in this package we need to have renewed unemployment insurance for people who remain unemployed that absolutely has to happen whether it's 600 it's i like 600 i'm happy to see 600 done again uh who knows what we might get but that has to happen and you know economists at the economic policy institute have told us.

that just doing that will help to create or save 5.1 million jobs we have an economy that is very much slowing down right now.

so you know where we've pulled our foot off the off the gas pedal we've removed the fiscal support and we're seeing the the ramifications the economy is slowing down so what are we going to do we're going to restore some income support for the unemployed that's absolutely critical but so is getting money to state and local governments.

the same economists at the economic policy institute tell us if we do not provide if congress doesn't get money to state and local governments to help them avoid further layoffs.

because they've already laid off 1.3 million people if they don't get the money that they need to shore up their budget shortfalls and keep public services going and workers and so forth we're going to lose millions more jobs.

and guess what most of them are in the private sector because public sector jobs support other jobs in the economy so i mean you know the the stimulus checks or the direct cash payments i think are absolutely critical.

we got to do something on um on rent what are we going to do.

when we know that at the you know turn of the year starting january you're going to have about 12 million or so people who are behind on the rent.

who will owe an average of almost 6 000.

so even getting a 1200 check or a couple of 1200 checks and maybe some money for the kids.

that's great it's 3 400 bucks for a family of four but if you owe 6 000 you're still in trouble you're still at risk of eviction so we've got to do something on rent it can't just be this deferring rent.

it's got to be you know some cancellation we've got to help people work their way out of debt because the debt has been building up on folks and i'll just throw in student loan debt.

as yet one more example because you know all these people that were told don't hang on to that money don't pay back that student loan debt right now just just wait a minute well it's all built up on them so when the debts are coming due it's the rent it's the utilities it's the student loan debt and they're not going to have the income to do it so we're going to be facing um renewed carnage and this in this economy come january february march if we don't get enough income support and i think also do something to deal with the debt that debts that are unpayable are going to bleed into the rest of the economy as defaults begin to happen.

Sara:

so it's interesting that you brought up student loan debt because that was one of the biggest questions that we got before we started tonight and i just want to i should have been doing this earlier but if people who are watching right now have questions uh tweet your questions with hashtag relief for the people um and we'll look for those and try to answer your questions over the next 20 minutes that we're here.

um but you know we want to talk about we want to really define the problem we want to define the demands and we also i think everyone has been talking here about the fact that this is not hopeless this is actually something that we can take on together if we define the problem define the demands there is urgency so we know there's urgency people are hurting but we can come together.

and do something about it so this is where we start is really understanding it so um reverend coates what what would you like to see uh in the relief package um that you think it makes the most sense and then i'm we'll get some questions too.

D C:

yeah well i think uh derek and stephanie have really hit the nail on the head uh we need all these we need we need the the reason the debt problem is so immoral is that they are just numbers we are allowing our willingness to type numbers into a computer keep people in economic slavery and bondage for generations that's it and i think that is the deepest moral travesty as it relates to the debt question today.

Sara:

and stephanie on a macro level how does this individual debt hurt everyone in society.

Kelton:

all right well so you've got about 1.7 trillion that is owed by some 45 uh 46 million people.

and you know it hurt it affects different people in different ways for some people it's the reason that they can't get married and start a family for other people it's the reason they can't move out of their parents home get a place of their own for other people you know it's holding back that car purchase or it's the reason they don't go out to dinner more than once a week or take a vacation because you know all the disposable income has to go to service you know student loan debt or something.

so at the macro level it is like a wet blanket right it is .

imagine the the alternative what would people do if they didn't have to pull out the checkbook every month and write that three hundred dollar check for that seven hundred dollar check for that twelve hundred dollar check to service their student loan debt what would they do instead.

well you know people would spend a whole lot more money into the economy they'd be flying on airplanes they'd be going out to restaurants.

they'd be going to the theater they would be buying that new pair of tennis shoes they would be you know i mean it's pretty sweet .

Sara:

the carbon neutral emission airplanes by the way.

Kelton:

carbon neutral but look i want to really quickly i know we're running short on time but this this um question about hey that's not fair i paid off my student loan debt so i'm opposed to you know debt cancellation for anybody today.

because by god i had to suffer my way through repaying uh my student loans and so forth this is you know i i i understand it on some level but then on a on a very deep level i really just don't get it because i want the generations that come after us to do better than we did i want people to have an easier go of it.

and plus you know all the student loan debt this is a policy failure that's why we have 1.7 trillion but would you say would you want to hear somebody say i'm opposed to raising the minimum wage the federal minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour because i retired yesterday and i was making seven dollars and 25 cents an hour and i went through my whole working life at 7.25.

so i'm opposed to moving the minimum wage up now because i didn't get it right i want the working class to have better conditions to have better pay to have better um benefits.

and so i want to fight for you know if i had um paid for my health insurance all along and then somebody said well what about you know giving moving to single payer or something like that i say no that's not fair i paid for my private health insurance my whole working car.

no come on let's create the world we want let's have the the social safety net strengthened for workers to come for future generations like you know if some solidarity here would be nice right.

we we're all members of the working population we're working people and gotta want for other working people i think um better pay better working conditions and we ought to be able to stand up and and fight for someone uh.

we don't know and somebody who may not you know is not ourselves it's not about us about all of us.

Sara:9:00

so i i want to ask we're going to go just a couple minutes over but i want to ask you know um brian can you see the face of someone who is affected by you know this personal debt and tell their story.

because i think that one of the other problems is that we have not been willing to talk about the people living in poverty in this country and we have gone from in you know the last 30 years gone from uh under 20 percent poverty to almost 50 percent of the population is living in poverty now.

and it's been about poverty shaming and telling people that they shouldn't talk about the fact that they can't pay their bills and they can't have a home.

and they should be ashamed of that and so i think it's really important that we're telling their stories and can you describe a face and tell us the story of someone that you've talked to um that's coming to mind as we're talking about all this.

BG:

yeah sure so um so stephanie um is a uh i think she's 32 years old um there something really is emerging and um and i think that's incredibly exciting to to be living um in a moment of you know.

Sara:

we have a shared experience that we can organize from and we need to organize from here and stephanie said the other night she said um that uh i'm i'm almost at a loss for words except that i'm not completely out of them and so i'm going to speak um when we get together.

and i think that we should get together more often because we should be talking there's so much here that we have to talk about to have people believe and understand what is possible.

but um stephanie um i want to give you some space to say some of the things that you wanted to say the other night and then reverend coats i'm going to ask you to take us out with something uplifting and positive.

Kelton:

well i mean i want to be uplifting and positive too it's just that i'm so frustrated and now.

Sara:

call it out call it out girl.

Kelton:

that that's really how this came about because we we three derek and sarah and i will get in these you know private chat conversations.

and we'll be texting or whatever and then just um you just have to you want to shake someone you want to scream you want to let it out you're so frustrated and so i i unleash on them and we all unleash our you know our frustrations uh between ourselves and i i think i just at some point said we should we should say this out loud.

and we should just go public and have a conversation i think we were pretty pretty restrained to be honest you know it's frustrating i teach economics and i made a joke the other day that you know.

this is the question you put first on the exam because you're trying to build the student's confidence so you give them the easy questions first right.

what should we do now to support people in a pandemic and as the wheels come off the economy.

that's the question you put first because it's easy to answer right.

and then the number has just gradually come down over time to the point that we keep talking skinnier and skinnier and skinnier everybody's starving and the bill is getting skinnier and skinnier.

and be prepared to continue to do it for as long as it takes right and recognize that we really could pick up the pieces as the economy has fallen apart.

so why not take advantage of the opportunity and as we've heard again and again we have the capacity so you know we can do these things we just need some imagination and some bravery in congress.

Sara:14:00

well that was uplifting stephanie so i'm gonna i'm gonna give you an a-plus on that too but quite seriously reverend coates you know and and derek and stephanie and brian i think that we should get together again so i think we should do this again and yes okay um but but reverend cuz i'm gonna give you the last word.

DC:

well we definitely have to convene grassroots movement of people.

we can have the kind of society that we envision thank you.

Sara:

that's everybody out there watching tonight thanks everybody for joining us and we'll see you again soon good night.

DC:

thank you

Kelton:

thank you.

サラ

経済が前進していく... 人々のための経済なので短期的には近いうちに実際に物事を構築することができますそれが今後構築していきたい経済のひな形になります

ケルトン

景気刺激策という言葉が使われていますが、運が良ければ来年の議会が来るでしょう。もし本当に運が良ければ、ＦＤＲが使っていた「Ｒ」という言葉を使って改革の話を始めて社会的セーフティネットをより強固なものにするために、経済を変えることができますが、これは仕事に耐えられるものではありません。このパッケージには失業者のための失業保険を更新する必要があります。これは絶対に実現しなければなりません。

経済政策研究所のエコノミストによると、これを行うだけで、510万人の雇用を創出、または救うことができます。

アクセルを踏み外したところで、財政支援を外しました。経済が減速していることの影響を目の当たりにしています。

経済政策研究所の同じエコノミストが言うには、もし議会が解雇を避けるために、州や地方自治体にお金を提供しなければ、

彼らはすでに130万人を解雇しているので、もし彼らが予算不足を補い、公共サービスを維持するために必要なお金を得られなければ

公共部門の仕事は経済の他の仕事を支えていますので、景気刺激策の小切手や現金の直接支払いは絶対に重要だと思います。

景気刺激策の小切手や現金の直接支払いは絶対に重要だと思います。

年明けの１月から、約１２０００万人の家賃滞納者が出てくることになります。

その人たちは、平均で約６千ドルの借金をすることになります

だから、１２０００ドルの小切手か、１２００ドルの小切手を何枚かもらって、子供のためにお金を稼いでもいい。

４人家族で３４００ドルですが、６００００ドルの借金がある場合は、立ち退きの危険性があります。

家賃の支払いを猶予するだけではダメなんです。借金を帳消しにして、借金から抜け出す手助けをしなくてはなりません。

これはもう一つの例ですが、お金にしがみつくなと言われた人たちは、学生ローンの借金を今すぐ返すなと言われましたが、ちょっと待ってくださいと言われました。もし十分な収入を得られなければ、1月2月3月には、この経済状況の中で、新たな大惨事に直面することになるでしょう。

サラ

サラ：あなたが学生ローンの話を持ち出したのは興味深いですね、それは今夜の放送が始まる前に私たちが受けた最大の質問の一つだったからです。

問題を明確にして、要求を明確にして、みんなが話していますが、これは絶望的なものではありません。

しかし、私たちは一緒になって何かをすることができます。これを理解することから始めましょう。

www.DeepL.com/Translator（無料版）で翻訳しました。

…

サラ

ステファニーマクロレベルではこの個人の借金は社会全体にどのような影響を与えているのか？

ケルトン

約1.7兆ドルの借金があります 4,500万人、4,600万人の人が負っています

ある人は結婚して家族を持つことができない、ある人は結婚して家族を持つことができない、ある人は実家を出て自分の家を持つことができない、ある人は車を購入するのを躊躇している、ある人は週に一度も外食をしない、休暇を取ることができない、ある人は可処分所得のすべてが学生ローンの借金の返済に充てられない、ということです。

マクロレベルでは、濡れた毛布のようなものです。

代替案を想像してみてください。もし、毎月小切手帳を出して、300ドルの小切手を書いたり、700ドルの小切手を書いたり、1200ドルの小切手を書いたりしなくても、学生ローンの借金の返済に充てることができたとしたら、人々はどうするでしょうか。

人々は、もっとたくさんのお金を経済に使うでしょう。飛行機に乗ったり、レストランに出かけたり。

劇場に行ったり、新しいテニスシューズを買ったりするでしょう。

サラ

ところで、カーボン・ニュートラル・エミッションの飛行機です。

ケルトン

ケルトン：カーボンニュートラルですが、本当に早くしたいのですが、時間がないのは分かっているのですが、この質問は......それはフェアじゃないですね、私は学生ローンの借金を完済したので、今日は誰かのために借金を帳消しにすることに反対です。

私は学生ローンを返済してきたので、今日は誰かのために債務を帳消しにすることに反対です。

私は最低賃金の引き上げに反対だと言う人の話を聞きたいですか？連邦政府の最低賃金を時給15ドルに引き上げることに反対だと言う人の話を聞きたいですか？

だから私は最低賃金の引き上げに反対しています。私が正しく理解していなかったからです。

だから私はそのために戦いたいのです。もし私がずっと健康保険を払っていたとしたら、誰かがシングルペイラーに移行するのはどうだろうと言ったとしたら、それは不公平だと思います。

私は民間の健康保険に入っているし、働く車も全部払っているのです。

我々は皆、労働者の一員であり、労働者であり、他の労働者のために、より良い賃金、より良い労働条件を求めるべきだと思う。

私たちが知らない誰かのために戦うことができるようになるべきだと思う。

サラ:9:00