Conversation 452-004

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Thank you for watching.

But my mom used to tell me, how are you?

How are you?

You have a boss.

Only you and I are going to have a number in our agency.

You're going to be telling me that, aren't you?

Yeah, I am.

Well, that doesn't seem like a good reason.

I got a very long story here.

It's really easy.

Thank you.

... ... ... ... ... ...

I'm sorry.

And, you know, it depends on what it was.

You know, here it is.

Oh, here it is.

Here it is.

Is there a picture?

Uh, sir, I'm having a chance to have you see every other video on the main screen.

I'd like to have a picture with you, sir, of what I see.

Why don't you, uh... Well, it's just, of course, if you turn around, you'd like to see the video, right?

Well, if you just hang around the chair, you'll like to see a lot of the video you did of the people on that road.

I mean, look over at all the cameras.

How long have you been here?

Don't care.

Oh, just a second.

I have a second area.

Very funny.

It's a mess.

I heard about it.

Of course, it's great.

The weather.

And the view out across that bay.

The mountains.

It's unfortunate.

They have all the history there.

The veins on that bay down there.

It's more impressive in terms of the

I'm sure the people probably wondered why the kind of thing you read is someone on Siri's side.

But each individual, of course, has to read those things.

And I don't get his need, but also, you know, it's bloody, and it's open here, and if I can do it, it's great.

I have seen very, very few physical fitness counselors.

And I know that Tom Brady comes to very, very, obviously, I hate exercising.

I'm very, very, I don't know, like, oh, you know, it's going to get me.

But I hate it.

But I can't do exercising.

It's not all about the competition.

It's not all about the lift.

And it's good for the spirit.

Or I can kind of exercise and try to do, like, the journey.

The great clarity is the sun.

the sea, and the sand, and the sand, and the sun, and the sea, and the fall, the fall, and the foes I want.

I've used one in California because the water's too cold to use it in that place now.

But so is the reading, and in this case, normally the reading is, of course, the, what I have to read, the great, the great gods, such as the Mount Eucharist, I just sit back in the mirror and, you know, then, then I just...

Well, I want to say that we ask you to come down and we'll be glad to talk about things that you'd like us to discuss, but from time to time,

I have a view of the economy, both national and international, which may not be the same as ours, but which at least will give us a broader picture than the question we have.

I mean, to be quite direct here, the fact is that the last thing we're trying to do is to try to sell you on our views.

In fact, I'm not sure I know what they are, but nevertheless, I don't know.

The other thing is, however, if you would be willing, if I could get your analysis, how do you see that responsibility?

You know, we've got to monitor some of the dead ends of the bloody sort of business model.

I mean, let me just touch a few more problems.

One, in a sense, with the proposal that was made by several senators and congressmen, including the Republican non-minister, moved toward mandatory wage and price controls over the entire economy.

Simon, of course, serves a great history within the online community with regard to the forecast.

And I have, at this time currently, I have just been doing a forecast.

Of course, it's something very different from what I heard.

We heard Simon very well this weekend in New York a couple of weeks ago.

And there is a related area to that.

That is, the PDP is sincere on it.

I think that it turned out to be, in the economic field, well, other than the $8 billion in our full employment budget, the concept of the full employment in our community, not only the direct and outright deficit,

Also, you're restraining with regard to spending when the economy is low capacity.

You know, that concept is now finally adopted, and that burden moves to what I used to be talking about.

But as we get closer to what we do, the pollution market is turning to the right road.

You know, I hear that when we average, when we average savings, that's expensive.

That's right.

But the economy is not accepted.

You've got to serve us.

We're here to vote for you.

But, uh, which is not, uh, is, uh, but that, of course, is, is, is one area that, uh, I'm approaching.

Way back when, uh, you know, I don't think this is, uh, the, uh,

I don't know how we could

This is good.

Well, this is very good.

A second.

A second area that I need to allocate to you guys is publicity.

As I've heard, I'm going to press this as a comment right away.

As George also said, I'm very, very broken.

And I also want to add to that what he said.

It's the sum of it.

And that is, we've got to understand the whole reason for our agencies.

They may be flawed.

We can talk about the airline industry today.

All of this and some of them are not for the longer run.

The third one, of course, is, again, I digress, is getting away from these groups, which make the group the most important of all groups.

There's no counsel on policy.

Because you can use one example, which is why this is so essential.

First decision I had made was with regard to some airline group that had been previously administrated and put in and stopped praying and others and so forth.

So they brought this thing here.

And I said, hey, you brought it in.

One of the staff members brought it in.

It was Secretary of Transportation.

He thanks us for these people and that and so forth.

So I said, we had it.

There were a number of other people over the region that had to do with the state department because they're going to go to the board, planning lines.

They had to do, of course, with the city.

They had to do with the department.

They had to do with all of that a lot.

Uh, but there was no receiver, where I, uh, really didn't have any trouble, and they had an off-base, and I received this call from a few people, and I was trying to understand how they were going to receive this payment.

The, uh, they were using a Rolls Royce, a lot of easy problems, and, uh, and this happened before we even got here.

And, uh, we did not deliver it, and I'm putting it into a question, because I'm glad we did this, because I'm the other person, but look at what this car is.

They hired him as undersecretary and doing an actual job on it, but it covered the Department of Transportation, it covered the airlines, they had an enormous background, of course,

And they're off a billion dollars worth of subcontracts.

And others have believed in that.

If Rolls-Royce doesn't come through, and Lockheed may go down, and Lockheed goes down, you know, then

PWA is a serious trouble, but more than that, how best might Collins, Grady, Holt, and the others, there's $750 billion worth of subcontracts at home, all riding on this thing.

People say, well, why don't we just buy it from GE?

Can't be done, because it's going to cost even more than Pico, Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt, and Grady, Holt,

Uh, Jeffery had a business career handling the situation.

Uh, what we call, uh, national security affairs.

But Jeffery has, and his first movement has no confidence in the mountain field.

And Jeffery's got a job, and he has a domestic affair, and he's in a national, uh, affair.

The man at the top of the list is going to have to get a trade.

The Department of Commerce is also interested in this.

And, of course, working on the regulatory issues of these .

And there is no procedure at the present time where this is done.

We're sending this up in quotas.

Same problem.

Now, in the quotas, the Commerce Department's in here arguing one point or two.

The State Department's arguing another point or two.

A little side note, when I was speaking with Colombo here, he was talking about the fact that his economic situation has improved.

I would say this is all directed at him.

He's become an economic giant.

He's a political picnic.

And the problem is, of course,

They said, you've never been in any of their neighborhoods since the time of the Romans.

They know it.

But nevertheless, and the businessmen, they do not play their role.

They do it, like, in a different side.

I've talked to them a lot of the last time.

They play their role, but it's always, you know, quiet.

It won't work.

But anyway, they come up and sit there and balance the tables.

And through, I said, I said, I don't know if I'm wearing a tie.

And they said, what are you going to do with this?

Let me close.

Let me talk about photos of the city, photos of the country, photos of America, let's say, Congress, the state, the trade region, the Palestinians and so forth.

Uh, well, that's just the beginning.

Now, what you can do about that, you see it, but define who's the guy in the next decision.

The president is coming in, and I cannot, as the order has been introduced, select one candidate officer out of the group, say, well, you're the only man.

It won't work.

The others won't take it from them.

Uh, Steve, for example, wants to be at the last plate.

But here's where he has to come in.

Questions for voters, questions about house payments.

We have a very serious problem.

We're trying to work with the council, correct?

So I think there's an impact with perfect consistency.

We're trying to pull all of these problems that happened to and broadly non-human cases on the ground together here such as they have been before as well.

Very interesting for all of us to hear the views of the video.

our visitors they think about the economy right about what i discovered the other night at the new york that they've been asked a lot of questions about really uh hear your views i know this was one of the things

Well, my name is, my director of editorial at the Bureau of Humanities.

Yeah, that's right.

I'm here to answer some questions.

My director of editorial, uh, gives what it is that I have seen a fair number of corporate executives in the last couple of weeks.

Probably the same with you, Ted and Sam.

I think, without exception, they identify inflation as their number one problem.

Without exception.

Uh, I see this emphasis in the manufacturing industry as a thing for vendors that they've drawn back from their flirtation with wage-price controls.

They are?

Yeah.

Yeah, I don't know if that's true.

I mean, can I, can I go ahead?

No, I mean, he and our, our, we're, we're on the record, and I don't want to get published on it.

But they had a lot of already distinct arguments with what happened with Cassius Irish, and this is a labor review that just says, well, on the holiday, we're going to have a waiting process, and girls, we're going to go to the nightclub, apparently, and that's staying on.

Well, and if you talk about your public security, he's done with that, and he'll stay with it.

But, uh, but also, as far as the police is concerned,

which you say are quite a good line.

It's one of the ways you drive a car.

In other words, it's no longer government fault.

It's what you have of any government.

And I don't say this in any partisan sense, but in 1976, 67, and 68,

The department spent approximately almost $40 million more than the taxes that were produced for the plant.

That was high inflation.

That created demand.

And, of course, the Fed had a high-risk-management policy at the time of the deal.

He had a direction, and so the little surtax split.

First, it came too late.

It was probably too little.

But now, at this time, the government policies we think have turned around.

And that is why...

I guess this is going to be the first step.

Yes, the power of the...

And I told him, I told him in the morning, I told him, this is a pretty standard in future Europe.

And I spoke very frankly to him.

I said, let's have a little interest to come in as I believe in the United States.

Those, the only friend, really, of policy, we are great, which I stand for.

The only thing is that you'll see it still has American agriculture.

If the European community moves, and the British, of course, move in that direction, even though it creates barriers to put up barriers and keep this wall up on our agriculture commodities,

then the club will be able to hold them and there won't be much that we can do about it because, you know, let's face it, it's the actual people.

They are there to see the people, to view the people, et cetera, et cetera.

And here are the intercultural people.

That's why our discussions with he, Colombo, Colombo understand this, but, you know, it makes the point, well, if it really is the culprits or others, that's probably not what we want to do.

They pretty much tend to come down in the area of jawline with teeth, I think is what I would call them.

Would you do as much as you could?

And one of the interesting suggestions was, every week you have something important to say about the problem of the economy.

But that was controlling the most part.

But in other words, every week, well, we have to see if there are any of the things that can, whatever, be done around the economy.

I think a lot of people now are thinking that you can turn away from the war on insolvency.

To start with, I'm not giving out the things that are not important, but are important, and we should concentrate on that.

And the wild insolvency goes on, and I think it is a matter of telling

to serve at least other expectations.

So to this extent, the job is important.

So this has become one of the fundamentals of our company.

And I think we're cool here.

I think it takes a position.

And it is stated by some of the people in our own administration that our team would be helpful

It was almost psychology, but you have a problem.

Why don't you go home?

What happens?

What do you think about that?

Do you know the COR?

Do you know the guidelines and all that sort of thing?

Well, I think on the whole, I don't know if I can speak for all my colleagues, but I think we do believe there's some value in it.

I think it's a matter of one go home one week, and the next week everybody folds up.

Uh, but, uh, for example, this Tito strike and this Tito labor situation coming up in the late summer, it'll be too late to wait until then.

I don't know if it's by the 12th or the 6th now that we can't create a plan where, uh, people in these strike hikes will not be as irresponsible as they otherwise would be.

Is that right?

I think a lot of people just might secretly admit that they were welcome.

Well, as a matter of fact, I already tried to get a distraction later, and I lost pride.

I don't say this publicly, but they want us to be sort of hard-line because of the natural distraction we deserve.

And so they're kind of like us staying up there.

and sort of hold the trend over so that they can be responsible.

Is that what we're saying?

And we very well had to do what we can to keep those costs from escalating.

And we put it on the terms of the regulators, and I got a letter here at the time that they were here before a few days ago.

So that's why on Monday, I need my house to come back.

We're going to do something.

Can't wait to go out.

But beyond that, I knew it was going to save us from time to time.

Strong statements.

And to get it to Stanford by June.

and any percent of the government spending.

While we have an expansionary budget, I've said this several times that this is plenty money.

While it's an expansionary budget, that spending cannot, as our Interag recommends, go up above that.

You see, the difference is that the, well, all of you understand that, I can continue to undercut it, is that

Is it that good?

Is it that if I solve it, or if I solve it, then it's a good thing?

Of course not.

The Act of Proposition, which is the economy, is running at a low capacity.

There is a plan that he has written in his budget, which tackles that sort of

and that we ought to spend more.

See, my philosophy is no, you can't do that.

You have to have reverse training.

There's a great deal of strength, and that strength is what the economy has never known.

That versus the anti-inflationary confidence, because I am sure this Congress, we're going to have to probably get them to a point in the month, one way or another, up to what we could suggest.

To be quite honest, I don't have some things here that I don't have to be told about 80 months from now, or 70 years from now, which go beyond that.

Why don't you tell us, Bill?

I don't have to be told that they should come up with a name.

Also, your health insurance bill costs an exact $60,000 to be told.

Not just because I'm here for other reasons, too, but the cost is one of them.

But I think that even the people who are in the business of saving us would be told.

I'm more concerned about the kinds of businessmen who might be regarded as generally conservative.

There's almost no racism, or I take it literally no racism of the impeccable deficit.

So the point seems to have been gotten across, which I think some of my Republican fellows in Congress made that well.

I mean, it is taking up a lot of our employment, but since a lot of people do accept that concept, you know, it does seem to imply that the concern is no longer about inflation, but rather toward hyping up the economy.

You know, some reanimation of people that have concern about inflation.

Uh, we have a range of hand-in-hand designs.

There are also specific actions, for example, a tech level of 47,000 prices, which, uh, if they go up again, we may re-ignite that as a whole set of prices.

And that, if we turn to those items, comes with a promising future.

Do you want us to fight it out?

What is the percentage of food in that?

It's about 20 years coming in Atlanta.

It's over 25, 23, 25, 23.

It used to be an outfitter, but that's 15 years ago now.

People come out here and say, well, you're going to be more right about the whole person team for a match.

So you can't just knock it out.

I mean, I do that at each of the institutions.

It's not just farmers, big farmers, most of them.

There's, you know, lending institutions, storage offices, over and so on.

They're based on this huge system that has been produced.

But we've got to move them.

And actually, Colombo said he said, security development and the great industrial companies.

I guess it was a possible exception, and I don't know where it is, but he's all over Europe and the United States.

The primary culprit that we have is agriculture.

It's our primary problem, decision-making problem.

Of course, it's Brady's problem for other reasons, because, I don't know, the S.R.

problem, and the Italians' arrest, and yet it's a very small part of the problem.

So you have an interest in our program, and you have the support of Mr. Kerslow, and Senator Krasinski,

So if you're counting on food, the category in there of food at home, they call their food purchases grocery stores as distinct from restaurant prices.

that element in the index has now, this report has been a constant for an entire year.

I don't think people quite appreciate that fact.

It is, of course, a strategic item.

I think it's starting to be expressed, though,

If you look at what happened to glues on the wholesale side last month, if you look at your soft charge, that can have an impact.

So it's going to be the most terrible, terrible down.

There's no political problem in creating supply.

Oh, my.

Yeah, there is.

Oh, it's the Corn Hall Radio.

Yeah.

And that is, I think, that would be...

It's apparent the impression is that the conservative-flagging division here is the majority of the elite of the GNP here in Wisconsin.

Uh, but the impression, I think the targeting, the impression that one is concerned about the policy is to go off and to put your garbage off, all those clothes off, and inflate that.

The inflatings need to be put aside so they don't end up coming on the floor.

And that, uh,

And that's a problem.

And I think I should speak for myself and for my colleagues that we don't think that that should have an emphasis.

Whether it's a theory, whether it's a word, whether it's a story, whether it's a real, we don't need to take that into account because there's a long list of questions.

And I think it's not.

It's the uncertainty that's raising the emphasis on the air force on a daily basis.

People are concerned about inflation, but they are more concerned about the people that produce the jobs, and that's why we're all here to ask you, right?

In the long run, the situation is going to be inevitable.

Business planning and the rest will be good.

And they think there's going to be stability.

Business planning will be expansionary.

Trusting that it will stop all the unemployment.

So in the long run, perhaps we're going to have to ask folks what we should look at in the short run for the rest of the time.

Uh, when you have a, you bring it on the line, say, around six percent low, uh, every, every, every jackass, possibly many, is being suggested in Congress and other places, including, for example, a huge, uh, you know,

uh public service which would not be trying to move these people from that kind of service well in particular the some sort of program had that give you some time to balance things a little longer

We believe that by and large,

While that is public service jobs for unemployed, we think are a good temporary tool, but that it must be tied to the total manpower training program, so that as the manpower training, the manpower training being designed to train these people to move and all of those, shall we say,

Uh, making work jobs.

And that's where, that's where we're going now.

We're working on the same way in the back.

We, we, we do not do a lot of building construction.

We have a property that's just standing out there, but here's, here's a permit, a new permit program, $330,000, $500,000.

Barrow down to 39-4.

That is interesting.

We'll go out there and see if we can find a place for the last section.

There's a door to that, I don't know.

I don't know if we're ready to go with that.

I don't think it's a good idea.

Oh, I don't know.

I don't know.

I don't think I can stop that.

Plus the fact that...

the whole simple act of trying to get away from there on the adverse and so on.

George, if I could refer to him for that.

You know what's interesting about the state of the mind?

First thing, I had the defaults on here a couple days ago, and they just started asking me to talk for 45 minutes.

80% of the time, they're talking about laws, which is understandable, because that's such a big thing.

But in all the economy,

Actually, I have done a great deal of work on it, because I'm not as familiar with it as I am also about some subjects.

And I think I've got one question about it.

It was so disappointing.

And I had an idea at one time, I'm going to go out, of course, the difficulty is if you just go with the word of the press, the journalists, they won't answer your questions.

They would be caught here because I think that we've got to get across more than anybody.

But our training program is a very fiery program.

It's designed to get at us on a point of problem.

And it is the use of public service jobs.

But some of our welfare reform, which is another great county in Bristol, all of our conservative friends

First of all, I don't, anybody that wants to sign up for our program, huh, so nobody, the sacrifices, when you talk about the assistance for the working poor, this does not, excuse me, it's just as I did not believe that Cambodia had a lot of success in the war.

And that's a plus.

This is not expanding welfare.

The purpose of it is to go out and get a house, get people in all of it.

And if you've got a huge amount of cash, put it over, and then it's on welfare.

And if he takes a part-time job and loses it, he's going to sit there and see any.

So people leave.

And this gets back at that.

we believe that we can get a manly assistance line with great work requirements, work incentives, and a manpower training program that will provide, finally, for that great hard core of manpower, you know, generation after generation of developers who are going to be standing hard on your job, and they can all, well, I wonder if you have this other question.

It's the same about, I don't think we've gotten across that, because the fact that we are for

not the NFR training program, but for the useless buffer service jobs or employment, but where it's at the end of that program.

And that is a decision that's really necessary for us, but we decided to hire a public service program.

on the basis comparable to the President's J-O-D-S program, but of the same concept.

We'll have to get a regular name on that, where I can get that across, so they won't have to press on this.

All right, I'll see about that.

Go ahead.

Where is that idea?

I understand what you're saying there because I think it's again a problem of emphasis, which I spoke of before.

The emphasis that comes across on the outside, the emphasis on increasing the ways of life, for example, which tends to stir inflationary thoughts.

As opposed to the job creating kind of thing which we were talking about.

I think if there were more emphasis placed in

on this

I don't see any prospect unless the aerospace program is going to be more scale.

One has to find somewhere to release people.

No, there are no centers there.

There probably isn't any of them are Republican.

They're all voters.

And they need to get on the local government level.

They have some sort of...

underwriting, federal underwriting, part of which is getting into places on local and state government levels where they might be able to make a contribution.

We are done with the classes.

Well, I think Laura Harris was well-tuned as a confederate.

I would be honest with you.

Of course, the other has more opportunities, too.

I have George, and also about David, and Don, I guess, are on the front.

Yes, sir.

I've got a particle science structure.

Let me tell you an example of this.

I had a boy, I don't know if you've seen it, I don't know if you've seen it, I don't know if you've seen it.

The ones I interviewed, the mother, the grandkids, the crannies, the jackknots, they're just so soft.

You just didn't know anything else.

And they don't even know how to fill up the line for a job.

And these crannies, they've all gone to school in the cellar service.

And I think all the people around them, they're not so easy to watch.

You can't follow any presence of a cranny in the school floor.

It's a lot harder and a lot harder to do something like that.

So here they are at $20,000 a year or something like that, 26, 27 years over.

And we've got to do something on the security.

Because while it is a small number compared to the total thing, it is an extremely important number in terms of the country.

You can't let those people lose their thinking and success.

They're, they're, they're, they're, they're, they're going to have to be sitting in places like this in the future.

Okay.

What are you, uh, you're a cop.

Uh, if you run across a lot of these and you're, uh, that's what, that's what I heard in the front.

And I'm surprised that if I could be a little parochial, I'd have to be a gentleman here.

Don't throw it out.

The batteries had to stick in the ground.

Two months.

I think it would be very useful for you to have you back across to New York because this is going to be some new program.

Pulling this whole thing together, you know, this whole business international thing.

So yeah, it's probably going to be growing.

I guess there are two subjects on which economists tend to agree more than on free trade as a basic proposition.

Now, I wonder if you could get some feedback from the business community.

What would they have the president do, vis-a-vis credit policy, vis-a-vis quotas, vis-a-vis international investment, et cetera?

Would we try to address all of that?

But before we talk about that, I want to be sure that I hear what you want to answer about wasting price control.

Well, there's certainly a number of business views in front of us.

I don't know if you can see your hand right there.

Well, I think my personal view would be that we should

work for free trade and not compromise it with the quotas of

of recognizing the problem, but still with papers to my side spiraling in and protectionism.

I think there's a lot of unanimity about the impact of the whole thing and getting rid of the impact of the control, which is one of the things we should get rid of.

We should get rid of them.

They don't do any good, and they hurt someone.

I think one of the bad ones, I think, as well, is that, yeah, that would have to happen.

I think it would work for others, and it would also be, in that respect, all that we were talking about, she's like, you know what?

Oh, I'm really excited to see Jordan.

I've been worried about him in terms of the balance of payments for a while, but I've been thinking that we're going to do some material around it for you.

doing good is kind of a key point.

They can hardly have a balance in any of these problems.

They really aren't doing anything.

So, all they do is look for is an employer.

Well, Pete, one other point that I was interested in on the side is that there is coming into view a very strong feeling about Japan.

You've got, you know, Mr. Tom Campbell and others, I know, but it's going to be really more and more sickness.

It's the steel people talking, it's the automobile people saying, we just can't have people as a team.

I don't know, I don't see where I'm going to go.

Uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh.

Well, there you go.

I don't think it's a special problem, but maybe they want to see the normal stretch of the frog on the cavity.

So, hold it up.

That's it.

That's the hard thing about this.

Nobody does it.

Just give us a fair way.

Well, I'll let you play on that.

All right.

On to the next one.

It couldn't be more right.

We had the very, because we got Sato in and we worked on the open harbor thing.

We have marvelous relations.

They are enormously important to the future of the Pacific.

We need to talk to everybody.

We have to have a thing about our temporary relationship with always Southeast Asia.

But the big thing in the Pacific is Japan and China.

And Japan will be there too in 10 years.

I mean, Japan, they, you know, they're going to do some more of the China, Japan alone.

And, uh, and so, they're, uh, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so,

And he tried, as he can see.

But it is just that his cash flows, his investments, as you know, in American companies in Japan, well, there are ways that people get around some of them.

You know, you can't go and intercept the tedious wayward through a trading company, except in a minority position.

And the Japanese, they have a free run here.

And we have a free run there.

They may be driving by a car park or something.

However, we know of the European Union.

the European Union has been paying a whole ton.

What I've had as a scientist, I've given this proposition, this is rather ideal for a republic, that I have an entry trigger.

Well, you remember our, one of the first times when I stopped here, I just hadn't had a motive to reciprocate, as I believe, and I remember, it goes to the extent of where it was coming from.

I remember at a college in Vancouver, starting from 1933,

was whether we can have free trade or protection.

And I love the free trade side, so I came in free trade.

This is something that's not going to happen.

On the other hand, it has to be, of course, a two-way street.

And at the present time, this is just Japanese.

The Europeans, the Europeans are being played some very tough games.

They're in the mouth of tariff barriers.

It's the common market with their agricultural policy.

and when the British in it, it's going to raise health care.

So what we have to do, and the penis is the thing we've got to play a hard game of there with the other penis, with our friends and their good friends, the British, and with the Japanese, to politically take the British to the Japanese.

The British are frankly our best and most reliable friends in the world, period.

I can hardly say, he said that, he said the,

that the British are terribly difficult allies, but I don't think they're the best ones you can have, and it's true.

They are our best friends, and they understand the extent.

And, you know, especially the Japanese are not, I mean, that's our way, that's where we're going to stand right now.

We want to live this, from a religious standpoint.

So all the foreign policy arguments, every time the State Department comes in, they've gone and argued, well, now, don't be too rough with the Japanese.

Don't be too rough with the British.

We've got to remember that they're our friends.

On the rise.

Not that you can just get the old Republican deal of giving and getting.

It's that the free traders of the good days have now become the protagonists of the bad days.

Among our kind of bad friends.

And not just the unions.

The unions are gone.

And the agriculture goes dependent.

So what we need to do, whatever you can just get that, is a question of legislation on that.

And it's really a question of driving harder to use.

So we've got .

And it seems to me that we have problems in Europe.

We have problems in Japan.

And yet we have problems with the beach.

The Europeans aren't really terribly interested in the Japanese product, at least not nearly to the extent that we are.

And if we could gang up with the Europeans on the Japanese gang up, I guess it's a bad thing to do.

That's a good point.

Now, throw that down.

I want to talk to you about that.

It's a very good point.

I'm a little surprised, frankly, from the political standpoint that you don't put more emphasis on the fact that even if we were to go more for free trade, we don't have to come up with a very positive program.

upon the annulment of this location of the unemployment movement of the board, that now I'll draw up your proposed action, or if I am in this arena, I want to get your comment on this.

I don't think it's even politically acceptable or socially acceptable to take this point of view.

that the very serious dislocation problems that are being now seen as present in textile and social, and frankly, between you and me, we're going to make a list of other industries I think I could persuade you if I needed to.

If there are any other industries that are going to make any more serious problems than those, we're going to look at them.

I would think one of the important things we have to do, both politically and socially, is come up with a very important policy approach that takes a series of dislocation problems, asks the top question, why haven't they adjusted, and what specifically did this government do to make that adjustment feasible?

And if we don't do that as a person, I'm concerned, six months from now, there will be eight other industries that

And this is a profound problem that's going to be with us for 10 or 20 years.

I might have to get very high on that.

This is a program that facilitates this.

And it's the same word for free trade.

All I can say is free trade leaves us in a very tough situation.

One more word.

And that involves the actual tough impact in particular.

And that's against the kind of psychological damage that we're

We're being made fools of by trying to bust down on us in other markets.

And I think a lot of that, in turn, fits in with the fatigue and the foreign aid and the feelings.

They're a starter.

They're a starter to war.

We're going to kick around, whatever.

Just to put it in respect, I do have a gender view.

I feel very strongly that we should look at the problems of

of Latin America in a different way.

I know that this is not good economics, but it's essential from the standpoint of diplomacy.

The last thing, of course, is that they do have a special relationship.

Now, if we can get all

That, of course, you see, and that's from all the industrial countries, the special treatment.

That is the better.

But if we can't, I think we've got to go through Latin America.

Latin America is one of, you know, a problem now for a variety of reasons.

And this is one thing that seems to be a great deal to another.

Do you have any?

Is that a great idea that you can apply to them?

Uh, but I don't know what's going on.

Yeah, I'm using what we have.

I'm using what we have.

Well, I heard it's going to get some treatment.

That's the fact of the matter.

Mr. Bredesen, you guys are not in a place where we could have gone past a little diplomatic leverage, because one of our points against the common market is that they are getting special favors to their adage.

That's actually the story.

We went and said that we're...

We're going to do expecting favors to places where we have questions.

We're going to have a letter to open up.

Good point.

But doesn't that already refer to our generalized approach to places?

Of course.

We've got to get in time and start out.

What's the agenda like?

What do you have in mind, though?

Exactly.

I don't have anything in mind except for the Latin American spiel.

that, uh, they should have a, uh, a, uh, a contract of freedom.

And so, just so that they and the industries and the rest have a chance to come in.

And it affects, uh, it could have, it, it is not going to happen.

In fact, in the next five years or in the next twenty-five, there are a great deal of things we can get done.

So that's cool.

Yeah.

You know what's most exciting and most surprising is that when I was, uh, arguing with my daughter about,

a so-called job on a, well, approach.

I mean, I put the thing in respecting the, and I don't mean to suggest that anyone in this office must be a slave to absolute consistency.

I think that was true in January 1969.

I think that got rid of it.

created, not only that, but one of the more fussy, stationary policies, both by , created demand for what you can spend.

I said it to a government.

So a government must put its house in our direction.

But we did that in 69.

We did it all substantially.

And then in 70, we paid prices.

We expected to pay the programs a larger price than we anticipated in terms of the economic downturn.

Having done that, we now reach the problem that

And parenthetically, it should be said, this is the problem of all the industrial countries.

When I talk to the Germans, when I talk to the Assad, when I talk to the and all the rest, they all have tremendous weight in the present time.

And it isn't caused simply by their government.

It's all over the world.

And it's here.

What I have here, of course, is that because we have been inflating labor, looking at what happened to them, 66, 57, 68, labor ain't helping me.

The big communities, you know, they have big industries, but they ain't helping me.

because inflation will take it all out, and they all know, and that's why the Stevenson and the Alderson earlier, they said, ah, we're going to get caught this way again.

We started with what the inflationary spiral has been, or is been, and we've got to have something on top of that, and that, of course, builds on itself, so that's a problem.

Now, therefore, the government has to put its house in order.

And I agree, and he must emphasize, and I think your point is well taken, that our incentives on the expansionary budget do something about it.

I find that they create the idea that you don't give a damn anymore about the price.

You don't think it's any longer a problem.

You must continue to see it as a problem.

And in terms of our handling of fiscal policies, be responsible.

But the other thing I would add is, now,

We have the responsibility both because government is a major purchaser of services and second because we have responsibility for not only full employment but price stability to use government leverage with business and labor where

It is not going to be, in other words, selecting one culprit out from their numbers, where it is a half where, second where it can be attracted by.

Whatever he tells me is bringing a business or a labor.

And then he must be looking for a problem.

But I already know that it isn't his fault.

And there's a reason why there are a lot of other people.

That means all heroes are all good.

but it but it isn't the right thing to do it's just right in the long run doesn't take quite that is why we have been a lot of times quite quietly and privately uh we handled the steel thing quite well and i think that the u.s people felt it felt as if they're therefore it was not as great as uh it was it's enough but uh but it was because they um

But Buds used to do a little job right there and help on a private base, but we didn't embarrass him in talking to him.

We got it done.

The second thing is, regardless of the person like that, it's a large number of problems.

Let's be quite frank, though, and I'll take the later people from a political standpoint.

So what do we do about this hearing that has been tried?

And I'll single out construction law, for example, because that will be a signal to the people

And the others have been having to try and try very, very hard by persuading it to get their industry.

And later it said, John, be more responsible.

And Hockey comes back and says, well, we struck out.

And he doesn't do so.

Now, what do we do?

Well, I can tell you that this is not for immediate, immediate release.

As you know, there's something that will be said in next week on it.

I can tell you the way the price reads.

And so you put it away to grass seed for 30, 40 days.

It just sounds great for that period of time.

You get the instructions, get the instructions all the time.

It sounds great for that period of time, at the end of that period of time.

That's what I'm going to do.

I guess I'll take it with deep prediction.

In fact, I believe we've kicked it around.

It's still a little bit of a question, but I think you're going to find we've found out the other side of that.

Now, what else can you do?

There is a mistake.

A mistake in terms of the total percentage of contracts that would affect.

I'm not saying you've got to get this done on this,

It falls to the state level when the impact on destruction would be at most a mile, a little more than a mile.

It would have an enormous political effect on the world, but not a very practical one.

But it was making it.

Just like other governmental policies which interfere with the free market.

That's the problem with agriculture.

is another area where, for good reasons perhaps, when it was done, but those reasons now out there themselves, we have a government policy which really contributes to an inflationary demands on the part of labor.

For that reason, all of us, we have a lot of will to believe.

If I do it, I told George and Jim Hodge and the rest of them to lay down on the table and talk about this in the money.

And if we, if I think we'll do some good, see what, here's fine, get back to your mind, the psychological, my mind, I'll let you go there.

If we move on that,

First, it will be a reallocative of construction and trailer use.

Second, it will have a modern elevator on the top of the summit.

I think it's going to have a dramatic effect.

My only view is from having talked to a lot of business leaders, all the people who make decisions in the business community, because they believe that they will emerge as the extraordinary character of the culprits.

And I think this nation is a powerful way of allowing them to continue to rob that mentality.

So that's the real question.

That is the power of the presentation of the language.

And I guess I think that is

only underscore the long-run gains from getting rid of an app of it, things like that, would cost you.

I'm not sure if I heard that right or not.

I don't have a precise answer.

But we have our job.

I mean, the signage is not the point.

There's going to be no job without people.

I'm sure you all will.

Without at least, in the back, something that we can do that can help.

I don't believe that you would bring in this amount of dollars, that you would bring people in.

our leaders, our labor, I mean, a single of us, for the good of the country, we want to be responsible.

But they all want to be responsible.

They all want to be good guys.

But in the final analysis, we're going to be responsible and good guys, and their self-interest will be served.

And we've got control in that way, in my view.

So that's why we're at the scene where all the rest of the team, we've got to say, no, here it is.

We urgently need to do it.

Let them put that out.

That's great.

They've got it all behind them.

So they're going to move on some of these areas where there is .

I think to that, to the other thing that I brought up earlier, all of the, uh, of having regional, um, setting up regional, uh, bargaining.

Oh, that's really interesting.

That's going forward.

Yeah, I want to go to the Department of Bargaining and Programming.

That's right, that's good.

Bargaining.

That goes forward.

That's been pretty good.

Well, uh, Sydney Bank will, uh, talk to the Business Council.

That's followed.

That's...

We've been helping as we could to negotiate with this union that they had last week or I guess last week.

the National Instructors and the unions.

It's the first agreement that has some emphasis on productivity and puts some sanctions on people who violate the agreement on jurisdictional disputes.

I think it's a real offense to the rest of the industry to come into it.

That's an improvement.

We also noticed, and I've checked with this with Steve and with any others in the industry, that there is more and more taking place to swing through non-union work.

Yeah.

And that is where you look on the energy table.

Mm-hmm.

And it was hard to do that.

And he brought a confirmation of this, although the

It may also be some confirmation of the fact that work is going.

the construction industry pointed out that it started to use the term of steady-state 300 ahead of the cross because of their diaspora and where they're just all a lot of money planted.

I mean, if you go to the yard where you see those brick houses, those steel guys and all the rest, but around this time there was a lot of money planted because they priced themselves out.

Now, however, there's a huge amount of housing under construction.

There are a lot of business people not making decisions and they're trying to ease it because they think it's awesome and it's a good service.

That's right.

Mr. President, do you have one more?

No, I don't think so.

I have a question.

As I thought about this, this diversification doesn't drop both at home and abroad.

I'm inclined to believe that the acquisition route

to diversification.

It is one that they find quite attractive for 20 reasons we need to elaborate here.

Could you give the President the rest of your views as to how this community views this administration's point of view on the high-trust acquisition policy both here and abroad?

There was some uneasiness that... What do you mean by that?

Well, we, I guess, always felt that...

The conglomerate was not whole.

It had a lot of drug tax and stuff, but we really hadn't got one.

We always, we couldn't see it as a problem.

At the second time, he was fighting Canada because they had disagreed with the property here.

You know, I think it goes on in every administration.

We were all constipated.

which is good, big is bad.

And to oversimplify it, the question isn't whether business is big or little, the question is whether it's good.

And I would argue our conversation plan is a good example.

We're moving again from 12 to 8 in the old gym, and that moves toward a central session for the big business.

But it'll run better.

He looks great.

Very heartbreaking.

He's very big.

With the type of man he is, it runs pretty well.

It runs better perhaps in the small of the head, as some of the scratches do now.

What do you mean?

I don't know.

And unless you have these foreign landlines, you've got foreign subsidized businesses and so forth and so on, the United States cannot continue to take a view that is horrible with regard to combinations and so forth that will stay in state companies.

So that's why on this very delicate thing, a flag, a heroine, you know, a combination sort of something.

But you've got to see where you're going to end up.

You've got to, there's Panaman, there's the Americans pretty well, the United, I guess, pretty well, and so forth.

But you cannot have four lines flying off of the Los Angeles every day with 25% full.

That's silly.

That's just a silly thing to do.

And part of that is not this guy.

And part of it is other people who are just doing it.

So my view, and I should always say this, this will sound like cock for cartels, but I have come around in a full circle.

I just believe that we've got to look at each one of these cases as evidence.

And if it's evidence, we're going to do it.

Now that means that we're going to be able to trust people.

It's hard to trust America.

It kind of gets back to kind of where we live.

We're going to compete with the Japanese.

We're going to compete with the Europeans.

We're going to compete with other people.

who are approaching the understanding of a great combination, and I think we've got to move in that direction.

This truly is an area of life.

ICC, Farm Pulse, and some of our 14, 15, 16-year-old attitudes are great, but they're really obsolete.

I think a lot of Republican businessmen feel they're generally at a worse break from the

from the Public Department.

Oh, I know they did it on the ground.

I didn't hear what they had told me.

But we agreed to respond to the report on that.

Congratulations, Christy.

Well, let me tell you what I hear about it.

Because I felt that I was quoted on both sides of the issue, which is well-intended.

But nevertheless, we need to be honest about this.

And I had the experience of free trade with the little things that I was going to get into the line of where I was going to make the decision.

I was the OPA.

We immediately had to work again.

And I guess what I asked for in the service in 1944,

And uh...

Now, the lawyer for George Gaines was here.

And I think it is very, very small.

I heard about those other guys.

There are a lot of poor guys out there.

And they all just bounce up around it.

And I'm tired of hearing about George Gaines.

And I have that on a grill.

That's very racist, Mr. Sinister.

The workability of your television is nice and well-worked.

Where you have literally not thousands or tens of thousands of decision-makers.

So I thought entirely normal, entirely racist.

And I ignored it.

All of this, all of that.

And I remember he had a war team from Congress in 1947.

I remember I had a Republican friend that spoke in Canada.

What was it about?

It happened to be mostly about me.

But it has to do with all of that reason to me.

Here's the problem with your controls, and a lot of very honest people felt that we should continue to have a control.

We saw that we had this huge bureaucracy at OPA.

And so we had price controls and wage controls.

But keep in the back here, it also rained.

There's one thing I know.

You cannot have price controls and wage controls without having rain.

It will not work.

And it might do.

Frank controls, we controls can reign on a national basis.

We will not work without a spurt of a national crisis to live for.

I just don't believe it will work in peace time.

Now, having said all that, from a political standpoint, a substantial majority of the American people, Gallup reports virtually every couple months, Harris as well, think they're winning the price control.

They really do.

A substantial majority of the American people favor any war in Vietnam, sure.

But finally, they think they're working in priority control.

They say, by God, some of these weights seem too high, the price seems too high, so let's control it.

The government should do something about it.

The question is, what happens to the economy?

What happens to the market system, which is, with all of the speculations that we get rid of, when I have any of our problems,

And I consider the problems of the poor Italians, the French, the British, and the rest of them.

When I came to the White House in this country, and God knows it's bad enough, but Paul was there in Brazil the other day, and he was just promising, and we agreed to make progress in the question of the GDP.

I was against 25% this year.

But anyway, we're still doing very well.

I think it's in my view that the politics is going to be a problem because the Congress is going to move in the other direction.

They're trying to force it.

We hate Christ and trolls in peacetime.

on a broad basis, will not work.

If I thought they would work, if I thought they would not leave a terrible, smothering damper on this whole free economy of ours, hell, I'd be for it.

But I think that's the reason I feel so strongly about now having a percent of those arguments.

There are people

Within our industry, hoops, it gets very intense before you get into a hoop race.

A little ADR axis.

And fortunately, we've got a pretty good handle on some spaces.

So, we started this with, well, I had an OE branch for it.

And then, of course, they say in a court, you go a little further in any specific industry, like construction, and maybe you like something down there.

But what we have really realized, all of us who are interested in survival of this economy, and what we all have realized is this.

Looking down on the road, ironing wood to the back of the boat, I was standing up, a huge feather of your arms.

Just as if we were using crash controls, with all that heat.

And in my view, it has to be fought.

But that's so I say right now.

I don't think any of us are .

Well, I was surprised to hear a visit from Frank, who's in the country.

He's a very kind person, and he's a great leader.

So, I was wondering, I don't know how I'd tell him, but he must have said he was a friend of yours, wasn't he?

uh... uh...

The most important is the things that are going to happen.

And you, of course, are going to have to take it and have it out on the scene.

You're stepping up.

And you're going to have to take it out on the scene.

Go ahead.

I have a lot of hope to control this.

I don't have any restraints or controls.

But you should get away from linking wage and price controls together in the automatic way that we usually do.

This habit of linking them together is referred to as a ritual mutualism.

Control of the wages and control of prices are restraining on wages restraining.

Prices are two quite different things from an operational point of view.

You can administer restraints on wages where people want that to be done.

I think there's a change for trying to liberate

We do tend to think that way, have thought that way, but at the end of the day, should we do something about it, we're going to have to take care of it.

I think there's some virtue in disregarding the political difficulties they have to face eventually, of course.

Well, control of wages, restraint on wages is, per se, very much easier to administrate.

When you've got a small unit, you have wage agreements, union wage agreements, which have been the problem, aren't they, for periods of a year, two, three years, for very large numbers of people.

So really, to administrate this problem is much easier.

than where you're dealing with a great many offenders at different levels.

So the administrative nightmare is you're going to involve inevitably in a crime control that may not be quite so nightmarish.

I do think that there's some kind of restraints.

One way is just as hard as an article.

And so you can divide it into six things, for example.

Oh, well, I think that by itself, I don't think it would be as enormous a crime as it actually went down, but I don't think it's going to have as bad an impact.

Your psychology has that effect.

It also has an effect more on the standpoint of something you were going to scream about.

And to have that effect will then get reaffirmed to others.

Well, I don't know if you mentioned it.

It is a movement of control.

Yeah.

It is real.

You can get across to some of this.

Of course, we have a bunch of us, and it's all black majority, and they're all free with us.

And I just believe that we're going to move away from the control.

So that's bad.

But coming back to the race, even then, you could move on the way to the ground without the, in some areas, without grabbing the...

I don't think you have to.

If you are going to have any, I think your strength is how they should be imposed primarily at this point.

I'm talking about in person, not text.

One way is that not, let me put it this way, if you don't have experience with imposing the wages, I think you need not be imposed the same way.

or they should not be able to speak in an argument against these strange cases.

I think those should not be said to this law.

I concur with this as far as I'm concerned.

I want to talk about competition in the bargaining system.

so-called uh

What we're working on is we're very constantly bothered by that problem.

It's not easy to see a solution to it.

It's a terrible one.

We cannot say that it's a major problem.

But comparing it to our friend Heath's problem, we've just got to run it.

It has a total problem.

With us, the U.N. is only a, it's by this figure, some, I mean, I actually sent it over the other day, they could realize that only 25% of the American workforce is in June.

It's not, of course, their lead.

They're out there, and that affects all the alignment and everything, but at least it means that it isn't the overwhelming problem that is the report of all IT.

God would keep well to, say,

You know, you realize that as a human being, what he does, it's not a matter of student affairs and all the rest of it.

It's just important.

What he does is important.

But he's a failure or a success in the whole agency of non-profit.

We will determine whether Brady is going to remain in the company of the great nation.

He's gone.

That's all I can say.

I think if he does, if he does succeed on this, then the British will just recede into a, well, first, they can't move into the market.

They can't be in Europe.

They will remain isolated.

They will be chopped away into the rest and become a senior head market.

So when you say, excuse me, all right, Margaret,

But he really hasn't suffered this whole situation that he would have guessed two years ago.

Not yet.

I thought it was tough because I saw what had to happen before we came.

And we know the rate of inflation in 68 was not the only 4% CPI.

But I saw that we were going to pay much greater price later because I could tell the inflationary psychology had set in.

And people just were used to it.

It is covered by a factor of 20%.

Due to the fact that psychology, the

I knew there was even an arm's length down in terms of the hole on the cabinet side to the fact that people had gotten used to a situation of very high employment.

Take, for example, the numbers.

In 1961, unemployment was 6 and 7 tenths percent.

In 1962, unemployment was 5 and 7 tenths percent.

In 1963, it popped up again to 5 and 7 tenths percent.

In 1964, it was down to 5 and 3 tenths percent.

In 1970, unemployment was 5% per year.

And the White House suggested that if you wanted to do

for recession years.

It was, of course, not on the plus side, but looking at that in particular, in those four years, the economy was moving up, at least in terms of growth, and price stability was there.

There's only 1% or 1.5%.

So our office is coming to you with that.

But nevertheless, as I can see it, it was incredible with the war pushing

with what I think were at least, certainly well attended, but very, very disastrous policies of the previous administration, not on the 61, 62, 63, 64th grade, when their deficits were not as legendary because the economy was less in full capacity, but because their state continued to do that in 66, 67, 68.

When I consider all that, I think it was inevitable that he would have, one,

the other is

the American people now have gotten used to being framed in the seller's market, and particularly are the people that, when you talk about unemployed, you know, let's say, you think four and a half to five million people unemployed, it isn't really all that serious.

I mean, there are other people out there, Solomon Appleson, Bob, the leader class, what we call the leader class, the future leader class, to have those people unemployed, that's why,

Getting into that church is so important.

We've just got to get some kind of purpose.

You know, for a time I called out Barry Goldberg, and you know, this suggestion is not original, and everybody makes the same one.

We've got all this problem with the environment.

This is the end of the year to take all these people to the aerospace and wrestle under the environment.

At the same time, it's all that.

It's all the environment.

through certainly brains, intelligence, and all that can help.

In terms of the number of jobs and so forth that are available, the time, the days, and the rest, it just isn't all that easy.

You're going to use it.

You're going to run it in aerospace, and so you're going to make an added effort for it.

Same kind of brain, right?

No.

But I'll just say that on the other hand, I'm not optimistic about it.

I'm not optimistic in terms of the political reaction.

That applies and continues to hang high, in my opinion, for the next several months.

It will even recede during the last year.

But the economy is the important thing.

The economy is going to grow.

And the CBI is going to graduate from that.

It will be, when I say graduate, I don't mean to go down any rate or anything, but it's never going to get it off.

So we will be in the state this year, particularly the first six months.

This was our study period, the second six months, and then it will be last year.

I feel as the economy moves forward, as productivity goes up, as the wage costs lessen,

You know, if you're caught in an error, or you're in another error, or you're caught in an error, that already shows that at least one of the other things, if there are any other things out of your settings that are down here that's causing you to be lying, it's just that people become a little bit more demanding, a little hungrier, a little more patient.

And that's happening.

I think this is going to happen.

And so that's why I've retracted receptor two, that you hear it move up.

But it may be, it may be that while we will be moving up from every side of the rest, that we then will have the courage, the inflationary psychology.

Now, to go ahead and go off, to go ahead and go off this whole positive market.

Now, the market, as we know, it all involves a new working period every day in our country.

I guess a lot of people still think about it.

We know that that market was since the 30s.

a peak of heat, and now we see that indicates that there's a certain buoyancy in office.

Again, on the plus side, we can say this.

I know that there are other parties arguing about our peak and on the forecast.

I think they're too high.

But the interesting point is, what is the debate about?

It is about the economy will go down and go up.

It's a question of how much it will go up.

That is the dream.

You know, it's kind of bad inflation thing.

It just may be that we've got to find a way to get it to labor.

Believe me, we're trying to find ways to do that.

It's the math.

This is state to state.

I just want that.

But again, it will be one hell of a signal.

What would you think of doing that?

Is your mandate a public mandate?

Or would you think it's better done

But it doesn't have to be too dramatic.

It's the action itself.

Let me put up this word.

Come on.

strong, but generally speaking, when you need the Germanic semantics, it's when the action doesn't come much.

When the action is good, they're able to do it.

Mr. President, a lot of general messages on the 17-9.

Most Americans are carried here to the town.

Yeah.

And then how do you look for us?

Do you look just as the way you were talking?

Well, one of the uses, also, of any of those suggesting lives that you're going to go is to have an economic press conference in which you can say, well, again, I'll pretend over there.

That might be a good idea.

Well, take your occasional talk, explaining to people that the government has done its part to, yeah, yeah, some to labor.

You don't have to.

I mean, I know it's supposed to burn this morning, but you've got to catch up.

And this is the stupidest thing that you can ever imagine, to keep on catching up.

You've got to catch up.

Well, I thought that it's a...

And if you have 100 reporters, you know, you can put up one-second answers.

If you wouldn't get out of it for a long time, you wouldn't get out of it for a long time.

You wouldn't get out of it for a long time.

I thought it was very impressive because obviously there was time for them to get into practicing.

We only had one on the subject and I got kind of too fatigued, but certainly got to cover it thoroughly.

What you're talking about is, do you think that the country needs to be informed on this?

If you don't get your own subject and you've got to deliver your own speech, you must be able to get a lot of data to turn this on.

I think a lot of the United States are rediscovering that.

It also has to be repeated.

It's going to have to be said again and again.

So it's got to be said again, perhaps just given a forum.

You're afraid of the approach, as you know, of the 13th?

Yeah, I think just that kind.

Yes, yes.

Well, I have an idea.

Maybe before the seal's up, we'll get a few blow signs.

Sure.

Because I do think, I do think what is said before that they're already worried about the seal guys.

Well, other than that, they're on their own.

I can tell you a lot about the markets.

The problem with the seal is that most of the happening plants are here in Japan.

And it's just, it's just not making us the most moderate finances.

I'm trying to get to that line.

So we can put that as a pretty good, I think it's a good point.

I'm trying to make sure to have a thought that strikes me quickly, at least in the news.

and whether one of these ended up in conversations.

But in general, I know that maybe three or four people whose focus is economic, who might be very responsible, and I don't know if that's what it ever sounds to me, but I don't know.

I don't know.

I wonder what that drug meant, whether it wasn't important anymore, or whether it was self-opening.

Well, I think it was important, but I did not

Well, I did not go along with some of our people who suggested, well, if the G-list was going lower because of those 50,000 hands, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I,

I feel that the answer to it is not trolls or all sorts of things.

I don't believe you see the answer to it.

The answer is increased productivity.

Moving on the flexibility front at this level,

And, of course, to the extent that we can, opening up opportunities for investment abroad and markets abroad, that I don't want to see a surge in prices at all.

I don't want that.

The profits for the economy are good, but the American economy can't even envision a community that will be in the world market and that will even move in a better direction.

So I'm not as, I know this, we're going to talk about it in a second, but our university will raise this question to John Connolly.

He's just getting it, getting it, getting it, getting it, getting it, getting it.

This terrible crisis.

I mean, the Swiss actors are all worried about the point of having me coming over here.

They don't even want to have our plot.

I care about both.

I deal with the problem.

It's not subtle.

It's all stirring.

It's like a long injury that I don't have.

uh, we've got to put the, you know, straddle the problems we've been talking about.

We've got to get our inflation down, we've got to get our cost-price solution out, we've got to get more and more and more productive, more efficient, we've got to hold the markets abroad, and that's your job.

Well, you know, you're doing a good job, and, uh, you're doing a good job, and so you get a lot of, well, you get, uh, two months.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Well, I started at, uh, I started at, uh, I started at, uh, I started at, uh,

I see 200 athletes.

I don't believe it.

I don't know.

I don't think you can tell a false truth.

That's all right.

All right.

I'm going to get the people to be advised.

All right, all right, all right, all right, all right, all right, all right, all right.

Uh, this one should be, should be, should be, should be, should be, should be, should be.