I mean, Howard Schultz has been already talking about that, one of the reasons and one of his pillars of his campaign.

It sounds like if he does decide to run, is that growing deficit?

How worried should we all be about it?

I don't think it's our biggest problem when we've got life expectancy diminishing for middle class men.

We've got an opiate epidemic when our major airports in New York City are crumbling.

When Americans were paying 75 cents a gallon in call extra automobile repair costs because of potholes in highways, when we are lagging increasingly in key areas of technology like artificial intelligence behind China because of underinvestment, we've got deficits.

But the budget deficit, which we can fund for 30 years at 3% in a currency we print ourselves.

That's not our biggest deficit as a country, and so the first priority needs to be fixing that investment deficit.

So when does the budget deficit actually become a concern for investors?

Isn't that the rial risk here that the bond vigilantes descend upon the U.

S.

It is.

It is a risk, but there are many risks.

Another risk is that the economy will slide into recession.

Another risk is that with very low interest rates will have major asset bubbles.

Another risk is that because of underinvestment in education, our kids won't be prepared to compete in the mid 21st century economy.

You have to judge the priority of risks.

And you know the market makes a judgment about that when it prices long term instruments than when prices.

Short term instruments on the fact that markets are pricing long term interest rates at such a low level is telling you what the current market judgment is.

So would it be better to have less debt?

Of course.

Would it be better to have a smaller deficit?

Yes, but if we find a way of generating extra revenue, which is a higher priority paying down a bond on which we're paying 2% interest or investing in the future of the country, whether it's in infrastructure, whether it's in science, whether it's in our people, I just think we have many higher investments that pay much better returns than the 23% we can save by paying down debt.

Larry, when you talk about an investment deficit that sounds like more spending and adding more to the current government deficit right now, unless you're doing a major overhaul of how the government operates in general, Is that what you're proposing?

Not exactly.

I mean, I think what the article that Jason Furman and I wrote puts forward is that we should operate broadly on a paygo basis.

That is, if we want to do new things, we should figure out how to pay for them with higher taxes.

And there's plenty of room to do that by adjusting aspects of the Trump tax cut that has done zero, not a four investment on dhe economic growth I mean business on.

Lee wanted the rate cut to 25% and it was cut Maur than business was originally asking for down to 21%.

That's brought a lot of stunt stock buybacks that's brought some increase in dividends.

There is no evidence of any kind that it has brought any increases that investment or employment of any significance.

So there's things to do to correct the trump tax cut their tax shelters two too close.

Why should it be that a billionaire is far less likely to be wanted it in America today than they were 10 years ago?