.
>>> WELCOME BACK TO THE NEXT
REVOLUTION.
MY NEXT GUEST IS AN INCREDIBLE
CHARACTER AGAINST OTHER THINGS
HE FOUNDED AND EXPOSED THE
CORRUPTION INSIDE OUR HEALTH
CARE SYSTEM.
HIS LATEST BOOK MAPS OUT HOW
THIS COUNTRY GOT TO WHERE IT IS
AND HOW WE CAN FIX IT.
IT'S CALLED TAIL SPIN.
BY THE WAY, BIG NEWS, IT HIT THE
BEST SELLER LIST TODAY, WE'RE
TOLD.
WE'RE DELIGHTED THAT THE AUTHOR
IS HERE.
IT'S FANTASTIC TO SEE YOU.
>> CONGRATULATIONS.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> STEVE: I ACTUALLY BOUGHT
THIS BOOK MYSELF.
I'M NOT JUST SAYING IT.
>> YOU PUT IT ON THE LIST.
>> STEVE: EXACTLY.
IT'S REALLY, REALLY GOOD.
AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY
ANY OF YOUR COMMENTS.
WE'LL DIVE IN.
>> THE ARGUMENT IS BEGINNING IN
THE LATE 1960s, EARLY 1970s, ALL
THESE GOOD THINGS THAT WERE
HAPPENING IN AMERICA GRADUALLY
STARTED TO TURN AGAINST US.
>> STEVE: UH-HUH.
>> TO TAKE ONE EXAMPLE,
AMERITORACY, OBVIOUSLY A GREAT
DEAL.
GOT A SCHOLARSHIP TO YALE
BECAUSE OF THAT.
THROUGH A SERIES OF TWISTS AND
TURNS, THE MERITOCRACY ENDED UP
ARMING ALL OF THE INSTITUTIONS
YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IN THE
EARLIER SEGMENT WITH PEOPLE WHO
WERE SMARTER AND TOUGHER AND,
FRANKLY, MORE INCLINED TO
ACHIEVE WHATEVER THEY COULD ON
THEIR OWN AND NOT WORRY ABOUT
THE COMMON GOOD.
>> STEVE: SO YOU RUN THINGS
LIKE THE FINANCIAL SECTOR, FOR
EXAMPLE.
>> THE FINANCIAL SECTOR IS A
GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE FIRST
AMENDMENT.
WE ALL LOVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
BUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT HAS BEEN
USED IN ESSENCE TO MONETIZE THE
POLITICAL SYSTEM IN THIS
COUNTRY.
>> STEVE: EXPLAIN THAT.
>> IN A SERIES OF COURT
DECISIONS -- AND I THINK
ACTUALLY RIGHTLY THE KEY THING
ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS THE
BENEFIT TO THOSE WHO LISTEN TO
SPEECH.
NOT NECESSARILY THE SPEAKER.
>> STEVE: UH-HUH.
>> SO IF THE BENEFIT IS TO THOSE
WHO LISTEN, THEN WHY WOULD YOU
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THOSE WHO
ARE SPEAKING AND SAY, WELL, A
PERSON CAN SPEAK BUT A
CORPORATION CAN'T.
AND THAT'S A TERRIFIC ARGUMENT
UNTIL YOU LOOK AT IT AND SAY,
WELL, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT
ANY CORPORATION IN AMERICA CAN
GIVE AS MUCH MONEY AS IT WANTS
TO ANY CANDIDATE THAT IT WANTS.
SO I THINK WHAT WE NEED THERE IS
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
BECAUSE AS MUCH AS MY LIBERAL
FRIENDS DON'T LIKE THIS,
CITIZENS UNITED IF YOU READ THE
CONSTITUTION I THINK WAS
ACTUALLY RIGHT BUT WE THEED
ACTUALLY RIGHT BUT WE THEE
ACTUALLY RIGHT BUT WE NEEE
ACTUALLY RIGHT BUT WE NEED
ACTUALLY RIGHT BUT WE NEED T
ACTUALLY RIGHT BUT WE NEED TO
FIX IT.
>> STEVE: THE WAY THAT
FINANCIAL ENGINEERING TOOK OVER
THE ECONOMY AND PUSHED OUT
MANUFACTURING, JUST EXPLAIN HOW
YOUR ARGUMENT --
>> CREATE A KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY
WHICH IS WHAT AMERITOCRACY DOES.
THAT'S LEGAL KNOWLEDGE OR
BANKING KNOWLEDGE OR THE
FINANCIAL ENGINEERING THAT
BASICALLY TURNS THE COUNTRY INTO
AN ECONOMY WHEREAS
AN ECONOMY WHEREA
AN ECONOMY WHERE
AN ECONOMY WHERE AS
AN ECONOMY WHERE ASSE
AN ECONOMY WHERE ASSETS
AN ECONOMY WHERE ASSETS A
AN ECONOMY WHERE ASSETS ARE
TRADED.
THEY'RE TURNED INTO MORTGAGES
BACK TO SECURITIES.
THERE IS OFTEN STOCK BUYBACKS.
ALL THIS STUFF THAT MAKES THE
BANKERS AND LAWYERS A TREMENDOUS
AMOUNT OF MONEY BUT DOESN'T
CREATE A SINGLE JOB.
IN FACT, IT KILLS JOBS.
>> STEVE: THIS IS INTERESTING.
ALL OF THESE THREADS COME
TOGETHER, I THINK.
AND YOU'RE SAYING 50 YEARS TO
THE MOMENT WHERE YOU FIND PEOPLE
HAVE HAD ENOUGH AND THEY ELECT
DONALD TRUMP.
>> Lisa: YES.
SO HOW MUCH -- BASED OFF OF YOUR
BOOK, HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK ALL
THESE DIFFERENT FACTORS, AS
STEVE JUST LAID OUT, HOW MUCH
DOES THAT LEAD TO WHERE WE
CURRENTLY ARE IN A POLITICAL
SOCIETY.
>> THAT, IN FACT, IS THE WAY THE
BOOK ENDS WITH THE PEOPLE WHO
AREN'T IN THE MIDDLE.
PEOPLE WHO AREN'T IN THE
KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY WHO FEEL SO
SHUT OUT AND SO FRUSTRATED THAT
THEY TURN TO A GUY WHO PROMISES
I'M GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THAT
IS DIFFERENT.
NOW,
>> Lisa: WHICH HE HAS.
[ LAUGHING ]
>> WELL, HE HAS.
BUT HE'S ALSO DONE A LOT OF
THINGS THAT HAVE HURT THE PEOPLE
WHO VOTED FOR HIM.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GET RID OF
THE PAY DAY LENDING NEGOTIATION
SO THE PAY DAY LENDERS CAN GO
BACK AND CHARGE THESE WORKERS
WHO ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO HAVE
JOBS 100% INTEREST, THAT'S NOT A
GREAT THING.
>> Lisa: YOU TALK ABOUT TOO
OBVIOUSLY THE THINGS THAT YOU
FOCUS IN THESE INSTITUTION
THAT'S ARE NOW CORRUPT AND HAVE
NEGATIVELY IMPACTED SOCIETY.
WHAT OTHER --
>> STEVE: FINISH YOUR POINT.
>> Lisa: WHAT OTHER
INSTITUTIONS DO YOU LABEL AT OR
THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT DO YOU
DISCUSS IN THE BOOK?
>> WELL, PRETTY MUCH THE LEGAL
ECONOMY.
AND I ACTUALLY AM AWARE WITH
THAT.
THE FINANCIAL ECONOMY.
JUST THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE
KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY.
>> STEVE: I WAS INTERESTED.
IT WAS REALLY INTERESTING.
SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
THIS IS A REALLY INTERESTING
POINT THE WAY DUE PROCESS AND
LEGAL PROCESS HAS ACTUALLY HAD
SUCH A NEGATIVE IMPACT.
AND THE LAWYERS ARE SORT OF --
HAVE SORT OF GOTTEN TO
EVERYTHING.
>> THE LAWYERS IN WASHINGTON
BETWEEN 1973 AND 1983 TRIPLED.
AND WHAT WERE THEY DOING?
THEY WERE LOBBYING.
AND THEY WERE LOBBYING IN
CONGRESS AND LOBBYING THE
REGULATORY AGENCIES.
THE FIRST REGULATORY AGENCY IN
1974 WAS TEN PAGES LONG AND TOOK
LESS THAN A YEAR TO WRITE, WHICH
I THINK IS STILL TOO LONG.
THE LAST ONE WRITTEN IN 2017 WAS
604 PAGES LONG AND TOOK 19 YEARS
TO WRITE.
SO WHAT DO YOU THINK WAS GOING
ON IN THOSE 19 YEARS?
THE LOBBYISTS WERE FIGHTING OVER
-- AND ONCE THEY PRODUCE THE 604
PAGE REGULATION, THEN THEY CAN
FIGHT OVER ALL OF THE PARAGRAPHS
ON ALL 604 OF THOSE PAGES WHEN
SOMEONE TRIES TO ENFORCE THE
REGULATION.
THAT IS THE ECONOMY WE CREATED.
>> STEVE: AND THE OTHER POINT
YOU MAKE IS THAT THIS EMPOWERS
THE BIG CORPORATION, THE BIG
BUSINESS.
THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD THE LAWYERS
AND EVERYTHING.
AND, AGAIN, THAT'S PART OF THIS
POPULIST MOVEMENT WHICH IS
PEOPLE ARE SICK OF THOSE -- THE
BIG CENTRALIZED ORGANIZATIONS
HAVING ALL OF THE POWER.
>> Lisa: THAT WAS SORT OF THE
MESSAGE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP RAN
WITH DURING THE ELECTION, RIGHT.
IT WAS STANDING UP FOR THE
FORGOTTEN MEN AND WOMEN.
MANY PEOPLE THAT FELT LIKE
POLITICIANS DIDN'T CARE ENOUGH
TO COME AND EVEN SPEAK WITH
THEM.
LOOK AT HILLARY CLINTON.
SHE DIDN'T EVEN STEP FOOT IN THE
STATE OF WISCONSIN.
RIGHT.
SO THOSE INDIVIDUALS IN THE
STATE WHO FELT LIKE THEIR VOICES
WERE FORGOTTEN, OBVIOUSLY IT
WAS.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE SOMEONE LIKE
HILLARY CLINTON WHO MANY DEEM
WAS AN ELITE
WAS AN ELIIS
WAS AN ELIIST
WAS AN ELIIST WH
WAS AN ELIIST WHO
WAS AN ELIIST WHO DI
WAS AN ELIIST WHO DIDN
WAS AN ELIIST WHO DIDN'T
WAS AN ELIIST WHO DIDN'T E
WAS AN ELIIST WHO DIDN'T EVE
WAS AN ELIIST WHO DIDN'T EVEN
BOTHER TO STEP FOOT AND TALK TO
THE GENERAL ELECTION.