Conversation 772-012

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

Yeah, it's good to see you.

Congratulations.

You got it early this year.

Yeah, you'll pitch six more times.

Yeah.

Great, great.

It's hard to get him.

It's hard to get by him.

He hasn't had much of a home run here, but he had a good average.

What's happened to Mike's kid in the long haul this year?

He spent a lot of time here until he faced me.

He had his first one.

But he does have a pretty good average.

He was in Sydney about a year ago.

He works with kids a lot.

I don't know.

I was a K-1 in our old times.

Bad money competition.

Oh, I watched it.

It wasn't predicted either.

What's happened?

Right the other night, Baltimore lost one game, won first place and fourth place.

Well, I'll tell you, anybody that wins 20 games, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know.

You were right.

I did it right.

When you come out, this is the world series of the game.

I'm just thinking about Michigan.

You a golfer?

Oh, I had to ask.

There's a golf ball.

That breaks for K-line.

He's a good person.

Right.

I know because of that year.

Right.

I met a lot of them.

Same thing for him.

All right.

Thanks for the sandwich.

Oh, that's fine.

He came down from Baltimore and had lunch with me today.

Good.

A year ago, we had a...

No, I think it was me and some of the elders.

Did they put it up in the menu of the Senate?

Yeah, it was very good.

I was there when my father came to my life.

Those are strong people.

When we were in the relationship, when we were in the government, they ran like they had 300,000 people here in the street.

That's what you're talking about.

He was a system.

Oh, yeah.

That's a nice experience.

I remember coming in, and I was sitting on a motorcycle, and I watched you.

Don't you ride a motorcycle?

Yeah, it was great.

And I watched you drive.

And I saw what you were saying.

Secretary of the Treasury, he gets most of your money, Mike.

He gets most of your money.

Mark Ebert is the chairman of the Federal Reserve.

He's a funny game-winner with the Piper.

He's won his funniest game.

He's got a fair amount of confidence.

What do you negotiate next year?

Forget the wage pricing.

Blue Ridge for you.

Okay?

Cool.

All right, good.

All right.

As I came in, Bob was sitting there with the head group, and he introduced me to Mickey Little.

And I said, you look like you're playing a game on a stand.

I know, right?

I have a great love of sports this year.

Not even football.

I don't know who's winning what.

Take a picture of us again.

All right.

I'm going to have some ice coffee.

Let's see what the others would have.

Icy ice coffee, hot coffee.

Would it be useful, I raised it at the meeting this morning, if I were to talk to Mills, I don't know, is he going to say no yes?

As of the present, I say no.

I know Wilbur pretty well.

Wilbur likes to do things for presidents.

But this season, this season, look, he's gonna interpret what you want.

Now you want it for two reasons.

You know it's damn good for the country.

Which involves voting on fire taxes, that's my line.

What else that would help you politically?

Now he's gonna see the, he's gonna see the latter and he will not see the former, he will see the latter.

But you, you hit the, you hit the other everybody.

I hit the other and I plan to see him again.

this week.

Let me just do it in the most responsible way, but if you're talking with me, I'm telling that I raised the subject with you when we talked about it, and that I said this is my intuition, and I would like to talk to you about it, but I just thought it would cause a political embarrassment if you did, and that that was it.

Why don't you just say that?

And you can give me a little email.

Oh, sure.

No, no, no.

All right.

i'm not keeping that line we'll do it if it fits yeah i met with the attorney this morning about something else and he brought the spending ceiling up and then i was scheduled to meet with the bills he did at one o'clock today about the debt ceiling bill and he brought the spending ceiling up again and he is very favorable to the spending ceiling and wants to have it in the debt ceiling

The trouble is, of course, what the hell is going to happen in the Senate.

How much they're going to Christmas tree the whole thing when it gets over there again.

That's right.

But he watched it.

He probably read.

This is better than what he is.

His concern goes like this.

What he is concerned goes like this, that if we have 250 billion tight ceilings, then members know that that means many programs are going to get slaughtered.

On the other hand, if we have the concept of a symmetric ceiling and a tight one, and we have a number like $255 million, which I suspect, in looking at the budget, is that we're going to do well to get it to that.

Then he isn't going to have that fight with the members that he's going to get his bill through.

Well, the point that I make is that any ceiling that's rubber is good because I can use that as an excuse for holding bonds.

Right.

Well, I have an excuse, though.

I can say, well, the Congress isn't sitting in the spirit of what it requires.

See, that's what I would list.

But let, uh, I think the President has to stick to what he's figured.

And the President may, in the end, be willing to compromise.

Well, what we thought we might do in the debt ceiling hearings is

to come in and say, we want, the president wants a $250 billion ceiling and a tight ceiling.

And consistent with that, here are our estimates of the amount of debt that we think that we can get through at the end of June if we have a 250 ceiling with a $465 million debt ceiling.

And we can work that through.

And that would be a suffice to say that we're looking at a higher ceiling.

And we would have to say, well, the higher the spending ceiling is, the higher the debt ceiling is going to have to be.

It's just arithmetic.

But we went to $250.

But that thing will probably mess around.

But I think we would come out with something a little higher.

But your position can be continuous on the $200.

Do the best you can.

Because our three-year position, of course, is to be cold turkey drugs.

That was quite responsive, too.

the domestic financial markets and the importance of letting domestic financial markets know that the budget is not a runaway budget, that there is at least some limit on it.

And second, he's responsive to the argument that international financial markets need this kind of reassurance.

And both of those points were easy to see.

Well, that gives me an interim wedge, at least.

And these meetings will not lead to success unless there is a demonstration in this group.

On our part, we'll come now to whatever other subject you want, but because I have to decide right now on the meeting, I candidly argue, I told George this morning, that

that I don't know if anybody would go on to address the group.

Your name was on it.

You said Arthur and I said Arthur.

And now we've got to work the speech off of her.

And I guess we'll let her do some things on it.

But you see it's a subject that you well know that I don't.

I don't have an expert on it, but I have received them.

Do you see the notes prepared on the treasury staff?

Which ones?

I've got those paragraphs, content notes that we went over, and they went over those, and they're sort of in a green set.

But we'll do it.

We'll make a talk, and then that gives us a line, and you've got a positive line.

In the meantime, as I told George, it's very important for all of us, to the extent we can, except for me and the rest of you two,

try to sell it to the responsible writers, the Eddales, the Wall Street Town Crowd, and the others, so that they would think that we have a good plan.

You're not going to sell them all, because it's an election year.

But you sell some.

If you think that this is a good plan, it's an improvement.

We have to be very cautious with the plan.

You see, we have to stress the principles and become a little specific, fairly specific, but not specific to the point where either you personally or the plan itself, you see, will become the target of serious criticism.

And I think we can accomplish that, I'm quite confident.

When I get this draft done, Arthur, I'll have

You know, on a private basis, we'll have to take a look at it.

So if you see a nuance that you'd like to tone down, we'll do that.

And George, who, of course, showed you basically this... You'll have a more specific thing, and I'm going to make it more terrible.

You can see my... You cannot separate the tyranny of George and Sweden.

So I don't endorse his mind.

Yeah, I know.

My point is, if George's speech should become the target of criticism, why?

That's right.

Because I don't endorse it.

That's right.

But that's what I want.

I think I will.

I think that we can do this.

I'm not sure why this is going so indefinite.

Indefinite plus.

Do you think so?

Yeah.

Is it no reason for us to do anything now that it's a minus?

Of course.

I mean, you recall, right?

Of course.

This is something, Mr. President, that we worked up, basically, between Arthur and I and our respective staffs, and after we got it into some shape, we have discussed it in a wider group, including Bill Rogers and Herb Stein, and we had a one full day of discussion here.

About a week ago, we've had a number of two-hour meetings that have been pretty thorough.

Rogers, you know, you raised it with me.

He doesn't want us to be specific at all on the ground that it might shake the international monetary markets.

Well, that's my feeling.

Don't say something that'll shake the international monetary markets.

So, anyway, I'm going to go.

Well, I accept this conclusion.

I don't care if I share it or if I don't market it.

I've been working on it, I call it, for months.

I've developed it with some success.

Now the...

But I'm pretty confident that we can do this without upsetting markets.

On the contrary, it's still more confident.

That's the objective of the game, and I think we can pull it off.

We have incidental here.

The Japanese under Tanaka will be feeling their boots of grief no more.

Very difficult to deal with.

I want to talk to you about it.

Very difficult.

I step in on this.

They've been left to wait for a good money one.

So, we think I know the area of this.

Now wait.

Before the election.

All right.

Action.

Oh, in your case, it wouldn't matter that much.

You can't participate in the election anyway.

I think the thing to do is to, if you're going over there, you know the Japanese well.

And don't you think it would be good for Earth to go into, but the main thing is Trump turned to these people.

Oh, well, I don't know.

We've got to keep Trump in the damn cabinet.

Now, they ain't going to be doing this out in Hawaii for, you know, roughly speaking five minutes.

It's got to be better.

I am good for an announcement, but basically the Japanese have got to be alert.

We don't want that because of the pocket of the Europeans.

Right?

Well, that isn't going to happen.

I think it would be useful for you to go, I'd say pick the time to pitch it, but I've got many others to go to.

Well, the English meeting, the afternoon point now, I just have, just this morning, another letter from November 20th.

That's good.

All right, well, I'll see you.

And if you would get the word to...

that he has to do all this to repair, you know, the mines.

Because I want him to stop.

It is a part of the NASA industry, you know.

So he considers himself to be somewhat of an economic expert.

He does know something about it, more than I do.

But he doesn't know that much.

So I would say that the thing to do is to be sure you see him, and not just the NASA people.

and indicated, well, I have great respect for his financial background, and it would be very helpful.

One of the things that we're going to have to do, Mr. President, after we put forward this general program, is to get around and talk about individualism with the leading people in these countries.

Absolutely.

I know that the only countries that really matter

are Europeans, Japanese, and us Canadians.

But it would be very helpful from a foreign policy standpoint.

You took your trip to Latin America and the rest.

The Latins just love to pay attention to it.

I talk to them.

I get it.

I understand.

Maybe the Mexicans and the Brazilians, particularly.

Argentines.

I would like it.

you know, what to do with Latin Americans.

I had a different plan, and I settled on the simplest plan, but I'm not sure it's the wisest, namely to invite the four governors, the central bank governors of the four countries that I visited to.

This could be made broader, but I thought I'd rather do it in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, and Peru.

Venezuela and Peru.

You know what I would add?

I'd add Colombia and Mexico.

Well, that's very interesting.

They're the other important towns.

And these were the two countries also that kept pressing for me to come down there, but I couldn't.

I see no reason why you can't add, because certainly Mexico you would add.

No problem there.

And then Iceland is not acting well at all, trust me.

Well, as a matter of fact, I think it'd be useful for you to go there.

It's a short trip.

Treating them specially.

That could be better.

You might even dig it.

Why don't you just go down to Mexico City and have a chat?

You go down in three hours, spend the day, and come back.

When?

Any time.

Right now.

Pay attention to the Mexicans.

It's terribly important.

You'll go to Canada, won't you?

I've been there.

I was there in May.

Mexico, you see, is so close.

I think you treat them a little special and separate.

The others, I agree, live up to your four.

If you get beyond that, because of little countries, you get mad as hell.

Don't pay.

Don't do it for children.

On a hauler.

It's only miles away from there.

See, dealing in the square, I thought, well, it's easy.

I'm just returning there in hospital.

Excellent.

But I suggested, would you do have a

You can invite your ambassadors also to your dinner or lunch.

They're ambassadors.

It builds them up.

It's not that you haven't had it, but you haven't been asked for that sort of thing.

If not, we're all right.

Well, the state can come home now if you have ambassadors.

That's good foreign policy.

Always have the ambassadors are here when you have these people.

You always know that they're British because he is an expert, but the ambassadors have just built them up like this.

It's fine.

We'll do it.

Wait, did you repeat the report I sent you on that, where it really gets you?

Yeah.

Very.

What is it?

Very interesting.

And very interesting to our, uh, our Irish, uh, this is our cooperation.

Well, I'm glad.

I'm very impressed.

You did a lot of work.

Yeah, I hadn't heard from him.

Well, I don't know how busy you were, but I had a good trip.

Oh, you had a good trip.

The one thing I, of course, which I think really concerns me the most in that area is Argentina.

And it concerns you, obviously.

There's no reason for Argentina to be in trouble.

The damn country's rich.

And their talk is now on their own.

They come back.

How did they impress you?

I mean, not that, but how did they finance the group?

They used to have a very good management.

They had amazing people to monitor.

government has not supported the economy.

I'm trying to go over the economic team every few months.

You take the central bank governor.

He's already gone since I've been in the cap.

And you know, it's strange.

I'm moving from one meeting to another, and I meet people who would introduce me.

Here's a former finance minister, former head of the central bank, former minister of economy.

Dozens of them around me.

And in talking to, well, you know, I met with economists covering political spectrum.

They wanted it that way, and I wanted it that way too.

I noticed.

But one thing they could agree on was that the government is unstable, and this is hurting the economy.

And they also said, oh, this is repressive.

I noticed.

I say he was president when I was a young man interested in monkeying, when the second requirement interested in making monkeying.

I go there first because anyone with some energy and some imagination can make it, and then he can keep it after he's made it.

And the thing is too, the thing is too, they're going to continue to have Brazil as sort of a strong central government, guaranteed.

I don't mean like, I don't mean like children.

But they don't like the government in Brazil because they think it's too dictatorial.

Oh, the Latin Americans need strong hand.

They do.

I mean, they don't have any government in Latin America that's worth a damn, that has a sort of American-style democracy.

It doesn't work.

It's a mess.

And we should not try to second-guess these governments that have a strong hand.

Well, this is something that he spoke to me about on the American press.

He was worried that I would keep on criticizing the government and talking about, you know, torturing prisoners.

I don't know.

What's he want to do with it?

Let it happen like Chile.

That's why they do it.

And it's being done on a very limited scale, for sure.

They also do it in the case of terrorists, trying to get information out of them about terrorist groups.

Arthur, it's a Latin way of saying it.

The Latins have been doing this since the beginning of time.

The Spanish are damn cruel people.

Right?

You know that.

In the end, we're standing on less than a comment by militia.

It's rhetoric.

You show up and it conveys an attitude.

You want to know, oh, is she out?

And I'd be saying, how do you feel?

How do I feel about her?

How do you sound?

That's the way I want them to tell me, the American businessman.

He said, I always do that to the department.

They were talking, you're all known to the arts.

And ours had very few complaints.

And they liked our gene, and the incentives that we created.

And he said, well, he said, well, let me tell you something.

If they have any complaints, I want to know about it, because I want to remove every and every cause for complaint to it.

Well, let's wrap it with this good record.

And one of the things that I think conveys an attitude towards private enterprise and foreign investment, you know, if I had any money and were so much younger,

I like to go, I like to go and I go and I keep living for so long.

I'd love to go down there and just buy a good amount of that land down there.

It's a beautiful country, you know what I mean?

It's a beautiful country.

Oh, yeah, someday you want to go?

Well, I think little trickle hasn't kept telling me I should go around.

I mean, I should go everywhere.

I should.

No, not now.

They say, yes, this year.

But the Secretary of the Treasury should do some traveling.

Right, right.

get to know these people.

And not just Europe.

We're in Europe already.

Mr. President, I want to say a word to you about the overturned economic and financial question.

I want to say a word to you about Israel.

I don't know if this makes any sense at all, but, you know, I've been scratching my brain.

This is a terrible tragedy, and it should be tried.

Everybody has to, of course, have to pull those people a little bit.

Now, they, uh, have somebody that they have to bring out.

All right, sir.

No, I've got to talk to this.

Well, you know, as I've, as I've observed life over and over, for many years now, and in my reading of history,

I find that the time of tragedy, the time of crisis, often creates new opportunity.

New opportunity for constructive things.

And I was wondering whether, if you know what's going to happen, these rapists are going to have to get ahead of themselves.

We're starting to get better.

But I can't let them around.

They must go any further than that, because then they can turn.

See if they go in and knock off Beirut, that would turn the country's world against them.

Now they've got the world with them.

And they need the world with them.

I go on these thoughts.

I don't like to classify people.

I try when we're on the war, people are people.

I don't like to classify people.

I mean, you know, certain selective sprain bands have been able to survive, you know, that's true.

I know most, I know most of the, what the, uh, you take the Arabs, I think that they must be ashamed that they should be ridden.

Maybe there are other people, sure, because they're not proficient, not proficient.

In fact, if they can't fight, that's an indication of it.

I mean, they're...

It's these, they're just, these people are, they're not, they're outlaws, they're international outlaws.

I'm sure the Lebanese are not mean people.

No.

Actually, I never thought about it.

They trade with people.

I'm thinking about the possibility of making my thing to the, what was it?

To the Arabs.

And to the Braves.

What can we say to the Arabs?

You can say to the Arabs, look at this.

You're losing the face of the whole world.

The Israelis are going to retaliate, and then they will lose face before the world.

This will go on and on, and the tragedy is going to heighten.

And isn't this the time to forget Haram?

Try to come together like human beings and try to work this out.

And we will simply be, we will extend our good offices.

We've got to be impartial.

We try to bring them together without the pressure on either side.

Well, let me say that there's two problems.

One, as far as any progress is concerned, it will not occur at the election, because everybody waits.

Then we will have the arms department.

Second, as far as the situations, the Arabs are concerned.

This is something we just keep among ourselves.

The Russians.

Now, Anderson will be over there.

I forget that you hear this.

This will naturally be discussed.

But after the elections, we all went through the sort of errors that the Russians have more struggle with Israel's enemies than we have.

We have struggle with the Saudis.

We've got it with the Jordan.

We have it with the Lebanese.

We've got it, of course, with Iran.

And of course the Iraqis, all the big powers that got away, but the most important thing here, Israel is intriguing since they don't want the Russians to sell themselves or us to get together with the Russians.

So we are Israel's friends.

That's why I want to be very careful to be on Israel's side.

If they don't feel that part of the host, if Israel doesn't feel we've got our friend here, they're going to take the law out of their own hands and start kicking the hell out of the earth.

Which they can do, but it'd be a scary victory.

Quiet place to warn.

Sure.

Yes sir.

Yes.

But we've got to do something .

Those youngsters grow up paying all this money out and so forth.

That's a lot of other problems in the world.

Yeah.

about the tax problem that is emerging in this country.

I, as the governor, have done a very clever piece of work.

I raised an additional $10 million from corporations

additional 12 million or so from individuals.

And it will say that people who are on wages and salaries will not have to pay one additional cent in taxes.

And that's the first lower amount.

That's what he has said.

But you see, his total budget is $100 billion and above.

Well, I'm talking about his tax proposals.

The tax proposals that he put into effect would be rules for the economy.

I think that politics is very...

he got to raise all this additional money in taxes and a burning wage for a salary line to pay an additional cent.

Well, now, now, now I come down to the top.

He has started an attack, which I feared he would do, and this was in the cards all along.

He started an attack on you, Rob, that you wanted to do this time.

But I do have a tax.

Now, uh... Mr. Finkel's tax is politically inappropriate.

No, I mean, I... We must be...

I think you have to dissociate yourself from that.

We absolutely do.

Absolutely.

I agree.

In fact, I think you have to dissociate yourself from any increase in taxes.

Any?

Well, I won't have to get by on that.

I...

I scratched my head on the subject of tax reform.

He's come forward with a program that is going to look very attractive to many people.

Now, what he did, he did nothing.

You can try to compete with them unless you can't succeed.

But there's one thing you can't do.

You know, under the present law, we have a minimum tax of 10%.

You see, rich individuals get a lot of municipal securities, capital gains, tax, and so on.

Well, hell, the tax bill will be very low, so you have a minimum tax of 10%.

Well, can't you raise that, you see, without really doing any injury and satisfying sense of equity?

I think that person is damn wrong.

And how do you not convince yourself of anything specific?

You see, unless you are having a limited number of active individuals, are you going to raise the minimum tax on them?

What do you think, George?

Well, this is something we have discussed a great deal, I think, with the minimum tax proposal.

There's a much better way, really, of going after the tax shelter type problems than going directly after the

individual items, because the individual items are there, and they can produce a policy.

So the minimum tax way of getting out of that is preferable to the way the government's done it.

In fact, he has left himself a position where he says, you're protecting politically

He's gonna argue.

He already is.

He'll hear a lot more about it.

You're protecting the avenue.

Well, all right.

Now, you're not protecting the avenue.

You're protecting America.

That's for sure.

Now, the, uh...

Also, we've given them a hell of a package for them already.

Sure.

I think one of the things that fascinates me is the way they kicked her out.

Well, I just failed both of them here.

When you came out against us in my direction, before you came in today, I said, knock that damn, uh, I can't knock them clear out today.

What I did was soften them.

I moved off of them.

You know about that?

No.

Well, I can't knock it off yet.

We've got the advisory commission, we've got governors and mayors and everybody sitting out there working like hell, setting a cost of $85,000 or something to the federal government.

The president doesn't have to take care of that.

Well, the president said he wouldn't take care of that.

Well, but he won't stay there today.

I said this.

I said that my understanding was that the ACIR was cool for demanding by the tax.

And that I thought it would be unwise speculation for them to elevate it from the realm of possibility to the realm of probability.

That there were, that this administration was not committed to it in any way, shape, or form.

Now, we can reach to the tax increase.

And flatly said you were committed to no tax increase.

No tax increase.

Right.

Now, they dodged, weaved,

They want to talk about tax substitution, does that mean increase, and all this kind of stuff.

And I said, all I can tell you is the general policy for us, which you will see from the Tax Reform Act of 69, the Tax Reform Act last year.

I mentioned the fact that in 69 we tried to get a benefit tax, but that the Congress fell far short of what we asked it to do.

I said, from that whole course of conduct,

The president's tax policy is well known.

He has eliminated poor people from the tax code.

He has reduced lower income rates.

He has increased taxes on perforations.

He has strived for greater equity.

And I think it's better to assume that that will continue to be the president's tax policy.

Before we get to the, John, before we get to the, and not too long, I'm going to take this, if you want to take it, I'll get it down here.

We've got to get off the value of it.

Fine.

So that's the question.

Between noon and three o'clock today, we can't do it.

It's got to be done with preparation.

You've got to have the HGIR in.

You've got to say to the gentleman, what's your opinion?

They've got to say, this thing is full of problems, which they will.

And then you could then say, I've taken the advice of the HGIR, and I've concluded that it's not a viable alternative.

You see, I agree with you.

You can't leave her a text.

increase sales, any kind of sales tax or value added, which of course at one time, you know, we were considering leaving the law.

But, and so did I.

Right, I agree.

Now, so let's get off of it.

The point is, don't let him have an issue of raising taxes.

He's the guy who's got to raise taxes.

So his budget, his budget, you see the whole, it's a phony, I have to say, but he puts out that so he will prepare for it.

There'll be no increase in taxes.

That's providing children with local programs.

But other spending programs he's for, that he's approved in his platform, would add a net of $100 billion he's spending, which means a 50% tax increase.

That's what he's for.

That I get it.

Anybody question that?

No.

Right.

Let me ask this critical question, Arthur.

What do you think, suppose, what figure, what number would you put on it?

Now that's a tax increase for whom?

Who's that going to hit?

There's been no tax?

Yes.

I can't give you a number.

But I just want that.

This will, this will, this will, this will hit them.

The revenue will be very small.

But I think it's, you know, there's quite a lot of revenue.

There's a sense of justice.

That's what you have to get across.

We estimate that the... 600,000.

It would be in the... What figure would you put on there on tax?

What part of it is the 600,000 you're talking about?

600 million.

It is by going to the recommendation, to make sure the recommendation that you originally made...

It's our original 1969 reform.

We probably produced that, although we think that the last two years, the tax shelter industry, so to speak, has just blunted.

And there's just a tremendous amount of syndication going on, apparently.

And these things are just growing.

What's your reaction to that?

What's your reaction?

In fact, that's what I have.

Well, if we came out with that, sure, lots of folks would like it.

I have no idea what folks is going to get.

Is it going to get people who are in the 25th house?

I don't think so.

I think this is something of a treasure.

What I'm thinking about politically, if it hits people 50,000 or above, then we'll do it.

Well, that's what I heard.

We won't.

If it hits people in the 15 to 25, forget it.

Those are our people.

I agree.

And they should be it.

I agree.

But I would, George, I would watch the 16, 69 proposals had...

There were some detailed provisions you have to work on.

You see, there's a certain B to B about a minimum tax.

You don't have to talk about the completion of loans.

You don't have to talk about any specific tax preferences.

All that you're saying is people have these special people.

We have our tax laws, and so happens that some individuals only have to be in the operator group under a law that the Democratic Congress wanted.

We were opposed to pay only 10%.

We won't raise that now.

What figure you want to raise it to, I don't know.

I would please tell them myself, or you might want to say 25%.

Or you don't have to, you don't necessarily have to do a figure like that, better if you can get a bucket docket.

Stand out.

I think that that has the substantive advantages that Arthur has mentioned, and it has the political advantage that

Well, I think the most important thing from a political standpoint, George, is to be able to say that this affects only people who earn so much and above.

You see my point?

If you can't say that, forget it.

Well, we don't scare the hell out of our own consumers.

Well, you have to say that.

Or others that don't.

Those people with an income of above, say, X dollars, whose income is derived in large part from taxes and bonds and other things like that.

You have a lot of wealthy contributors, and they will not be affected by this.

You don't want to scare 50,000.

Well, all right.

Why don't you say that?

No tax increase.

Black.

No taxes.

Start a comparison with a candidate who proposes to increase taxes.

Well, there is a tax reform.

I call this a reform.

Well, there's an increase for some people.

I realize that.

But it's a...

It's... Well...

I... You know, you may be... You may be put strongly on the defensive, and I... And therefore, rather than wait until late October...

You may be privileged to this.

It might be desirable to come up earlier with this call, so I'm very careful political approach.

Let me send you my transcript that I just finished and read it over and then see what you think.

We wanted to draw a very stark contrast.

He is for tax increases.

He necessarily has to have them.

We are flattening this now.

But let me say, John, if you could have a device whereby it was very clear that you were simply hitting people in the much higher directions.

I don't give a damn about the victim-triggers.

They should be crawling their hands and knees that we're here.

And you're only hitting some of them.

Yeah.

What you're just hitting is, all right, you take this, I suppose you do this.

So you take that off, going back to our proposal of 1989, urge the Congress to do what we've already asked them to do, and they have not acted upon.

But then, rather than say additional revenue that will be given over to that goddamn OEO or something else, or community actions,

take that and give some relief.

Start a relief on the property tax thing.

Well, thank you for no tax increase success.

No, no, we're just, we're for tax reform.

Uh, you see my wife, yeah, it's, uh, it takes me, if those are cutting edge, uh, I don't, I, I'm just trying to get what you have, if you have, uh, if you have an increase from the minimum tax.

and decrease for older people than the property tax.

And you're not after zero.

You haven't increased taxes.

You've increased some people's taxes, but you have created a wash there.

That's a little difficult.

You know, if you see the yield from this minimum tax, if this yield is small, what can you do?

I don't think too much.

I just, you know, by the start of the rest of the property tax, the property tax, you know, I think your revenue sharing, you know, goes a good distance in meeting that.

Let me suggest this, Arthur, because I saw George's sparring on the International and we got into this briefly.

Let's have another crack at this.

And I would like to have, if you would, you, George, John, and I sit down and let's look at it from a political standpoint.

It's a crash political decision.

Fair enough.

I just don't know.

I don't like the idea of it.

I also think that on the political side, it's not good.

It's not good.

Well, I think we could probably get it down to another paper, just, you know, I will see.

I can hear from you.

All right.

The most expert person has, I mean, we have this kind of discussion

The most expert person on how these things work is Eddie Coleman.

Sure, I'm trying to have him in.

But I know I think if we got him in, it's fine.

I'm happy to sit down with you, sir.

But, I don't expect a meeting in two hours.

Well, I'll tell him to keep his mouth shut unless he's asked a question.

Well, I haven't.

All right.

What can he add and what do you know?

Well, I don't think he's been sold.

I haven't had time to see meetings.

Many people live in these cities.

Eddie, I agree with what he said about this.

of the federal taxes, is creation.

No, I think he's very smart.

Let me do this.

Let me get these pictures.

I've got some senators here and some patients.

And you all wait for me and talk over this thing.

I've got some more.

You've got some more.

All right, Mom.

Let me get the pictures.

I really can't keep up with you.

And then come back in as soon as we get the pictures done.