>> TARIFFS, SPENDING AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE.

HOW MUCH CONTROL SHOULD A PRESIDENT HAVE?

GOLDEN SHARES, RARE-EARTH MINES AND TAKING A CUT OF SALES.

IS TRUMP SOCIALIST?

AND MICRON, EMINENT DOMAIN AND A 91-YEAR-OLD WHO WANTS TO STAY IN HER HOME.

STAY TUNED, IVORY TOWER IS NEXT.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

I'M JOINED THIS WEEK BY CHAD SPARBER FROM COLGATE UNIVERSITY, TARA ROSS FROM ONONDAGA COMMUNITY COLLEGE, ANIRBAN ACHARYA FROM LEMOYNE COLLEGE, AND RICK FENNER FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

THE FEDERAL RESERVE CUT INTEREST RATES BY A QUARTER POINT THIS WEEK, THE ONLY DISSENTING VOICE COMING FROM THE FED'S NEWEST MEMBER, ONE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S TOP ECONOMIC ADVISERS.

STEPHEN MIRAN WANTED A BIGGER CUT.

MIRAN HAS ALSO SUGGESTED THE FED SHOULD HAVE LESS INDEPENDENCE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.

MEANWHILE, WITH TARIFF AND SPENDING CASES IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT, THE RESULT COULD BE A PRESIDENT WITH A GREAT DEAL OF CONTROL OVER BOTH FISCAL AND MONETARY POLICY.

OUR PANEL IS LOADED WITH ECONOMISTS THIS WEEK-WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN FOR ECONOMIC POLICY GOING FORWARD?

>> WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE FED RULES FIRST.

-- THE FEDERAL RESERVE.

SARAH BINDER IS A FELLOW AT THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION.

SHE CAME TO COLGATE A COUPLE YEARS AGO TO TALK ABOUT THE MIDST OF INDEPENDENCE, HOW CONGRESS GOVERNS THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND I REMEMBER HER DESCRIBING THIS SORT OF DANCE THAT POLICYMAKERS-- SORRY, ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE DO IN WHICH AS INDEPENDENT TECHNO CRATS, THE FEDERAL RESERVE MAKES THESE POLICY DECISIONS THAT ARE ANTIPOP POP LYFT THAT ARE GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY BUT POLITICIANS CAN NEVER DO.

AS SUCH IS THE FED OPERATES AS A SCAPEGOAT AT TIMES.

SO YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC SITUATION, THE HIGH INFLATION, THE SLUGGISH EMPLOYMENT GROWTH, THAT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP'S TARIFFS AND HIS DEPORTEDDATION ATTEMPTS-- HIS ATTEMPT TO DEPORT 11 MILLION PEOPLE.

BUT HE CAN KIND OF CONVENIENTLY POINT TO THE FED AND SAY THESE INTEREST RATES ARE TOO HIGH.

THAT'S A CONVENIENT OUT FOR HIM.

AND SO IF HE IS SMART, HE WOULD WANT TO PRESERVE THAT OUT AND THE SEMBLANCE OF INDEPENDENCE, OR INDEPENDENCE ITSELF EVEN IF HE IS AGGRESSIVELY TRYING TO SAY I WANT MORE POWER.

>> SO HE ALMOST, IF HE GETS THE FED-- REDUCES ITS INDEPENDENCE, HE IS MORE ON THE HOOK FOR ANY... >> YOU SAID IF HE IS SMART, AND WE CAN CALL INTO QUESTION THAT.

I'M A LITTLE MORE WORRIED BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR FROM, YOU KNOW, HIS CLAIMS THAT HE COULD FIRE POWELL TO TRYING TO FIRE LISA COOK.

HE WANTS CONTROL OF MONETARY AND FISCAL POLICY AND AS CHAD SAID, THE ROLE OF THE FED RESERVE IS TO DO WHAT IS UNPOPULAR AT THE RIGHT TIME.

THE JOKE IS, YOU KNOW, THE FEDERAL RESERVE TAKES THE PUNCH BOWL AWAY JUST AS THE PARTY IS GETTING STARTED.

AND SO THE PROBLEM IS IF THE PRESIDENT IS NOW IN CONTROL OF BOTH SPENDING AND ALSO INTEREST RATES, WHO IS GOING TO BE THE CHECK?

WHO IS GOING TO BE THE ADULT IN THE ROOM AND I'M CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH MIRRAN SAYING HE IS ONLY GOING TO TEMPORARILY GO AWAY FROM, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS, THE LINK BETWEEN THE PRESIDENCY AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS EVEN STRONGER.

>> MIRRAN IS ONLY THERE FOR A FEW MONTHS, RIGHT, HE IS FILLING IN FOR SOMEONE WHO RESIGNED EARLY.

>> HE IS GOING TO GO BACK.

SO IN THE MEANTIME, FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU LOOK HOW HE VOTED YESTERDAY, HE IT IS ABSOLUTELY PORT TO KNOW HERE THAT CENTRAL BANK INDEPENDENCE HERE IS IMPORTANT PRECISELY BECAUSE AS MY COLLEAGUES POINTED OUT, AND ESPECIALLY NOW WHEN WE ARE SEEING A SORT OF INFLATIONARY ECONOMY WITH CERTAIN KINDS OF STAGNATION, WHICH WE CALL STAGFLATION IN ECONOMICS, THIS IS VERY HARD TO GET RID OF.

I THINK WHAT FED DID WAS TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF A JOBS SLOWDOWN IN CUTTING THE INTEREST BY .25%.

AND I THINK OVER TIME, THEY WILL, YOU KNOW, MAYBE REDUCE IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

AND I AM NOT SURE EXACT IMPACT ON THE BOND MARKET.

MY COLLEAGUES CAN POINT OUT WHAT THAT MIGHT OWE CUR.

-- WHAT MIGHT OCCUR.

BUT I THINK IN THE SHORT-TERM, WE ARE NOT IN A VERY HAPPY PLACE.

INFLATION IS WAY ABEFORE 2-- WAY ABOVE 2%, IT'S 2.9% AND WE ARE LOSING JOBS.

LAST MONTH, THIS MONTH EVEN THOUGH THE PRESIDENT DID NOT LIKE THE JOB REPORTS AND SO ON.

SO ON THE WHOLE, I THINK FED IS TAKING A VERY CAUTIOUS PATH IN ORDER TO GET AHEAD OF THAT SLOWDOWN, BUT AGAIN STAGFLATION IS A VERY DIFFICULT THING TO GET RID OF.

IF YOU REMEMBER THE 70s, AND WE WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

I MIGHT ALSO SEE IN THE FUTURE, THE INTEREST RATES RISING BECAUSE OF INFLATIONARY PRESSURE.

>> YOU BRING UP THE 70s.

WAS THAT 70s INFLATION A RESULT OF-- I GUESS IT WAS THE RESULT OF A LOT OF THINGS, BUT THE FEDERAL RESERVE, DID IT CAVE TO PRESIDENT NIXON BACK THEN TO KICK THAT OFF?

>> SO, LET ME BE CLEAR, TO CLARIFY SOME OF WHAT ANIRBAN IS TALKING ABOUT.

THE STAGFLATION SITUATION COMES WHEN THE SUPPLY CURVE IS SHIFTING AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE CAN CONTROL THE DEMAND CURVE.

THE POLICY LEAVERS IT HAS TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM, IT DOESN'T.

>> IT CAN DEAL WITH ONE BUT ANOTHER BOTH SIMULTANEOUSLY.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> TARA.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS WHERE, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SAY OKAY, EXPLAIN IT TO ME LIKE I'M A FIFTH GRADER AND THAT'S THE WAY I LOOK AT THIS, AS SORT OF, YOU KNOW, JANE AND JOHN AVERAGE CITIZEN, YOU KNOW, NOT AS MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE ECONOMISTS SAYING WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ME IN MY DAILY LIFE.

AND MY SENSE IS THAT, RIGHT NOW, SOME SMALL CUT IS A GOOD THICK THING BECAUSE IT WILL PERHAPS ALLOW MORE SPINEDDING, MAKE PEOPLE FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE BORROWING.

MAYBE HELP PEOPLE PAY OFF SOME DEBTS THAT THEY HAVE, SO IN THE SHORT-TERM SENSE IT MAY BE A GOOD THING BUT AS A HISTORIAN, I LOOK AT IT IN THE BROADER SENSE OF THE FED RIGHT NOW IS ONE, THE FED SYSTEM YOU BOTH EXPLAINED SO WELL IS REALLY ONE RIGHT NOW THAT SEEMS TO BE ONE OF THE LAST SYSTEMS WHERE THE CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT CONGRESS ITSELF, YOU KNOW, WHETHER REPUBLICAN LED OR DEMOCRAT LED HAS PUT INTO PLACE AND HAS SUPPORTED, IS ACTUALLY WORKING.

AND LONG-TERM, DO WE WANT ONE MORE BREAKDOWN IN THAT SYSTEM?

>> SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM.

YOU SPOKE LIKE A PERFECT ECONOMIST.

THAT'S GREAT.

I THINK THE ISSUE HERE IS YOU ARE RIGHT.

LOWERING INTEREST RATES NOW GIVES YOU AND I AND BUSINESSES MORE MONEY.

BUT IT'S A TIME WHEN PRICES ARE ALREADY RISING.

SO IT'S GOING TO ADD MORE FUEL TO THAT FIRE.

WHAT TRUMP NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE 2024 ELECTION, TRUMP WON BECAUSE OF INFLATION.

PEOPLE BLAIPED BIDEN FOR BIDEN AND TOOK IT OUT ON HARRIS.

THERE IS A FEAR THAT THIS COULD DRIVE UP PRICES... >> PEOPLE BLAMED BIDEN FOR 9% INFLATION.

>> WE ARE GETTING OFF TRACK.

I WANT TO GET TO YOUR ISSUE ABOUT THIS SEPARATION AND, I LIKE SHARE RICK'S WORRY BUT I'M NOT PANICKED YET AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE-- AND I'LL CONFESS I'M BASICALLY QUOTING SARAH BINDER HERE.

THE SENATE CARES ABOUT INDEPENDENCE, MARKETS WILL PUNISH US IF WE REMOVE INDEPENDENCE.

JUSTICE ALITO HAS TALKED ABOUT THERE IS A SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT SANCTIONED BY HISTORY WHEN IT COMES TO THE FED AND ITS INDEPENDENCE AND THERE IS A HISTORY.

IF YOU GO BACK TO THE 19 FOURTH, IT WASN'T UNTIL 1951 THAT WE TOOK THE TREASURY SECRETARY OUT OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE.

UNTIL THEN, THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, THE DEMOCRATS, HAD WAY MORE CONTROL OVER MONETARY POLICY AND WE REALIZED AS A COUNTRY, THAT AIN'T GOOD.

AND SO WE SOLVED THAT PROBLEM WITH AN ACCORD.

IT WASN'T ACTUALLY A CONGRESSIONAL LAW.

BUT THERE IS THIS HISTORY WHERE WE HAVE SAID AS A COUNTRY LIKE NO, WE WANT THE FED TO BE INDEPENDENT.

THAT'S WHY I THINK THE COURTS MIGHT ACTUALLY BE GOING INTO A DIRECTION... >> THE REDUCTION OF THE INTEREST RATE, IT IS NOT DIRECTLY THE INTEREST RATE THAT YOU PAY ON YOUR CREDIT CARDS.

THE FEDERAL FUNDS RATE ARE THE RATE THE BANKS CAN BORROW FROM EACH OTHER.

WE HAVE A TRICK-- IT HAS A TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT BUT WE DON'T SEE THAT IMMEDIATELY.

TOMORROW ONWARDS, I DOUBT WE WILL SEE A MASSIVE REDUCTION IN MORTGAGE RATES.

>> THEY'VE STARTED TO COME DOWN.

THE MARKETS, I THINK, ARE FAIRLY RECEPTIVE TO CHANGES IN THE FEDERAL FUNDS.

>> THE CONCERN AGAIN IS INFLATION.

WE ARE ALREADY ABOVE 2% TARGET.

WE ARE JUST GOING HAVE HIGHER PRICES.

>> WHEN IT COMES TO ECONOMIC POLICY, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS MADE SOME MOVES NOT TYPICALLY SEEN IN THE U.S.

SYSTEM.

THE GOVERNMENT HAS TAKEN A 10 PERCENT STAKE IN INTEL.

IT ACQUIRED A "GOLDEN SHARE" FROM A JAPANESE COMPANY THAT BOUGHT U.S.

STEEL.

IT'S BECOME THE LARGEST SHAREHOLDER IN A RARE-EARTH MINE, AND IT'S TAKING A 15 PERCENT CUT FROM N-VIDIA AND AMD'S CHIP SALES TO CHINA.

THE PRESIDENT IS INJECTING HIMSELF INTO PRIVATE BUSINESS, AND WANTS TO CAP PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES.

IS THIS NOT SOCIALISM?

>> NO, TRUMP IS NO SOCIALIST.

HE IS NO MORE A SOCIALIST THAN HE IS A REPUBLICAN OR A CONSERVATIVE.

HE IS NEITHER OF THOSE, EITHER.

YOU KNOW, A SOCIALIST BELIEVES THAT THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION SHOULD BE COLLECTIVELY OWNED AND USED FOR THE GREATER GOOD.

TRUMP, ON THE OTHER HAND, BELIEVES THAT HE SHOULD OWN THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION AND TO BE ABLE TO USE THEM FOR ANYTHING THAT HE WANTS AND USUALLY THAT MEANS ENRICHING HIMSELF, HIS FAMILY AND ANYONE WHO ELSE IS IN HIS GOOD GRACES.

IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR LABELS, I WOULD SUGGEST FOR TRUMP TIE RESISTANT OR AUTOCRAT.

AND IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR A LABEL FOR ECONOMIC SYSTEM, CRONY CAPITALISM.

>> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION, CRONY CAPITALISM.

>> IN SO FAR THAT TRUMP HAS AN IDEOLOGY, RUTGERS HISTORY PROFESSOR HAS ARGUED HE IS A SOVEREIGNTIST.

HE FAVORS AMERICA'S SOVEREIGNTY OVER ALL INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, INTERNATIONAL GOVERNING BODIES AND SO FORDS.

IT'S NOT TOO FAR OF A STEP FROM THAT PHILOSOPHY TO A BELLICOSE ECONOMIC NATIONALISM WHERE YOU PURCHASE AND CONTROL ALL WAR MATERIALS, WHICH WILL INCLUDE SEMICONDUCTORS AND STEEL AND SO, IN THIS CONTEXT, I THINK MORE SOVEREIGN TIFFT, MORE NATIONALIST, LESS SOCIALIST.

>> WHEN BASICALLY THE GOVERNMENT IS TAKING A 10% STAKE IN INTEL, INTEL GOT SOME OF THE CREDITS FROM THE CHIPS ACT WHEN BIDEN WAS PRESIDENT.

BERNIE SANDERS SAYS YEAH, GO FOR IT.

THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

>> YES, I MEAN THERE IS THIS ONE BOOK CALLED VARIETIES OF CAPITALISM THAT CAME OUT 20 YEARS AGO.

THE PROBLEM WITH AMERICAN CAPITALISM THAT WE SEE TODAY IS THAT THEY'RE CONSTANTLY DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT LARGESS AND SUBSIDIES IN ORDER TO SURVIVE.

THEY HAVE ALMOST FORGOTTEN HOW TO GENERATE THEIR OWN PROFIT AND PLOW THAT INTO INVESTMENT.

REMEMBER 2008?

GOVERNMENT TOOK STAKES ON THE AIG AND THE FAILING BANKS AND WHAT HAPPENED THEN?

THAT WAS NOT SOCIALISM, WAS IT?

THERE ARE A VOTING RIGHTS OF CAPITALISM AND GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD, NORWAY, GERMANY, FRANCE, CHINA, INDIA, YOU CALL IT, RIGHT, THEY ALL HAVE A CERTAIN LEVEL OF ASSOCIATION WITH CORPORATIONS WHERE THEY OWN SOME STAKES, GERMANY THE LOWER SAXONY HOLDS 11.8% STAKE IN VOLKSWAGEN AND NORWAY HAS A SIGNIFICANT STEAK IN EQUINOR WHICH IS AN ENERGY COMPANY.

WE THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE, WE CALL IT STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES.

THERE ARE SOVEREIGN WEALTH COMPANIES.

I DON'T THINK IT IS LEFT FIELD AT ALL.

IT SOMETHINGS THAT IS NOT VERY COMMON IN THE UNITED STATES, AND THE UNITED STATES WHAT IS COMMON IS CORPORATE SOCIALISM, WHEN THE CORPORATIONS CAN NOT GENERATE PROFIT, WE BAIL THEM OUT, SOCIALIZE THEM AND IT'S CAPITAL FOR EVERYONE ELSE.

SO THAT IS THE PROBLEM THAT WE KNOW.

>> WE USED TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT... >> IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD.

>> WHEN BARACK OBAMA, YOU MENTIONED THE BANKS AND G.M.

AND THE AUTO INDUSTRY, WHEN IT WAS IN DIRE STRAITS BACK THEN, DURING THE GREAT RECESSION, AND WE WOULD HEAR HE IS PICKING WINNERS AND LOSERS AND HE WAS SLAMMED FOR THAT, TARA.

>> OH HE ABSOLUTELY WAS.

AND BUT AT LEAST WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, THERE WAS A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT THE LONG-TERM GAME WOULD BE FOR THE COUNTRY.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS REALLY STRUCK ME ABOUT THE DEAL MAKING OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAVING OR FINANCIALLY BENEFITING FROM THESE DEALS IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE A SENSE, AT LEAST I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIGURE IT OUT, OF THE COST OF THESE DEALS VERSUS THE AMOUNT THE TAXPAYERS WILL ACTUALLY SEE.

NOW YES, WE HAVE A GENERAL IDEA OF THIS GOES INTO THE, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTRY'S COFFERS, ET CETERA.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AS YOU ARE SORT OF GOING TO ULTIMATELY FINANCIALLY BENEFIT FROM SOME OF THESE DEALS AS A COUNTRY, YOU ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL OF THE CUTS THAT ARE BEING MADE IN GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS.

SO WILL THE PUBLIC REALLY SEE MUCH OF AN ACTUAL BENEFIT FROM ALL OF THESE DEALS THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS MAKING OR, AS WAS CORRECTLY POINTED OUT, WILL IT SIMPLY BE THOSE WHO ARE CONNECTED TO TRUMP AND/OR PARTS OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY?

>> I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS FLIRTED WITH QUASI SOCIALISM IN OUR LIFETIME.

THE PUSH TO PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY IS EFFECTIVELY A PLAN TO TAKE TAX DOLLARS AND BUY PRIVATE EQUITY IN TIRMSZ UNDER THE GUISE IT'S MY SAVINGS ACCOUNT FOR RETIREMENT.

THAT'S PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SOCIALIST BREEDING GROUND FOR WHAT YOU SAID, CRONY CAPITALISM, CORRUPTION, THE EXACT KIND OF THING THAT TRUE CONSERVATIVES WOULD FIGHT AGAINST.

WHAT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT NOW IS TRUMP HAD THIS AMAZING ABILITY TO BRING IN ECONOMIC POPULIST INTO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, A QUARTER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TODAY, THE FORMER DEMOCRATS WHO HAVE BEEN SWAYED.

THEY'RE THE ONES WHO, I THINK, LIKE THIS ECONOMIC POLICY THAT TRUMP IS PUTTING FORWARD AND THE REST OF THE TRADITIONAL REPUBLICAN BASE IS REALLY UNEASY.

>> THE PRESIDENT HAS, YOU MENTIONED SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND, HAS FLOATED AN IDEA.

WE SHOULD HAVE A SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND.

SO QUICKLY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT?

AND WHY SHOULD WE OR NOT HAVE ONE?

>> SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND IS A GOVERNMENT-OWNED WEALTH FUND IT MIGHT USE TO FUND THINGS LIKE RETIREMENT PROGRAMS, KIND OF AUTOCRATIC REGIMES LIKE SINGAPORE OPERATE REALLY SUCCESSFUL ONES.

BUT IT IS A GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE AND IT OPENS THIS UP TO... >> THAT GETS US TO THE SAME THING.

>> ALTHOUGH WE HAVE TAX POLICY THAT WORKS AT THE SAME THING WHEN YOU TAKE SPECIAL TAX BREAKS FOR DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS OF OR DEALING WITH INDUSTRIAL POLICY.

>> OKAY, NOW, THE CENTRAL NEW YORK ECONOMY-- AND ITS FUTURE-- HAS A LOT RIDING ON THE SUCCESS OF THE MICRON CHIP PLANT GETTING READY TO BREAK GROUND NEAR SYRACUSE.

IT TURNS OUT THERE IS ONE HOUSE LEFT ON THE LAND MICRON WANTS, AND IT'S THE HOME OF 91-YEAR OLD AZALIA KING.

TWENTY YEARS AGO THE ONONDAGA COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOUGHT MRS.

KING'S FARM, WITH THE WRITTEN PROMISE SHE COULD LIVE THERE FOR THE REST OF HER LIFE.

NOW THE COUNTY IS TRYING TO EVICT HER.

IT HAS OFFERED HER $100,000 DOLLARS TO MOVE.

SHE WANTS TO STAY PUT.

TARA, IS THE COUNTY BEING UNFAIR HERE?

>> I DON'T THINK THE COUNTY IS BEING UNFAIR BECAUSE THE COUNTY ASSUMED, PROBABLY, THEY HAVEN'T SAID THIS, BUT THEY ASSUMED WHEN THEY MADE THIS DEAL WITH HER, CONSIDERING HER AGE, THEY PROBABLY DIDN'T EXPECT HER TO BE ON THIS PROPERTY THAT LONG.

THAT'S THE FIRST THING.

I THINK WE NEED TO JUST BE HONEST ABOUT THIS.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THEY HAVE OFFERED HER $100,000, WHICH IS A SIZEABLE AMOUNT.

PROBABLY THE LAND IS WORTH MORE NOW BECAUSE OF THE MICRON DEAL, BUT AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, THIS ORIGINALLY STARTED, IT WASN'T WORTH THAT MUCH.

AND THEY HAVE ALLOWED HER TO LIVE THERE RENT AND TAX-FREE.

SO I DON'T SEE THE COUNTY AS BEING UNREASONABLE.

ON THE OTHER HAND, IS $100,000 REALLY FAIR COMPENSATION CONSIDERING WHAT THEY'VE PAID FOR OTHER LAND IN AND AROUND THAT AREA TO GET THE MICRON DEAL ALL SET?

AND THAT'S REALLY THE BIG ISSUE.

>> THE FAMILY SAYS THEY JUST WANT ENOUGH MONEY TO ALLOW HER TO LIVE AT AN APPROPRIATE PLACE, WHICH DOESN'T SOUND OUTRAGEOUS.

>> ANIK INACCURATE CHARACTERIZATION WHEN YOU ARE ASKING FOR $10 MILLION FOR A 91-YEAR-OLD WOMAN TO LIVE THE REST OF HER LIFE.

BUT LOOK, THAT ISSUE ASIDE, I THINK THIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY A CASE OF GOVERNMENT INCOMPETENCE.

THEY HAD THREE YEARS TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE FAMILY AND THEY FINALLY CAME AROUND TO SAYING WE NEED TO PAY THEM.

OFFERED $5 GRAND?

THAT'S WHERE I THINK-- THAT'S A LOW BALL OFFER THAT THEN LEADS TO RESPONSES LIKE 5, THAT'S TOO LOW, WHY DON'T YOU GIVE US 10 MILLION.

SO TO THE FAMILY, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND WANTING TO SQUEEZE THE GOVERNMENT FOR AS MUCH AS YOU CAN GET.

I DOAB THINK 10 MILLION ALSO THE RIGHT NUMBER BUT GOOD LUCK.

>> THEY PROBABLY DON'T EITHER.

I'M GUESSING AT THAT.

THEY PROBABLY UNDERSTAND... >> I AGREE WITH CHAD.

THIS IS INCOMPETENCE BUT GOES BACK TO THE SIGNING OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT.

I MEAN LIFE EXPECT AN-- EXPECTANCY, HOW LONG ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY OUT THIS?

THEY MADE A PROMISE.

WOMAN HOLDS ALL THE CARDS HERE IN THAT SHE HAD A LEGAL AGREEMENT WITH THEM.

SO, YES, IT'S UP TO THE COUNTY TO... >> SHE HAD A CONTRACT THAT THEY.

>> SHE HAD A CONTRACT THEY NEED TO ENFORCE.

>> THEY WANT TO SAY IT'S NO GOOD.

>> THIS IS COMPLETE LACK OF PLANNING FROM THE PART OF THE STATE HERE.

>> STATE OR COUNTY?

>> COUNTY.

AND YES A COUPLE OF WAYS TO LOOK AT THIS, RIGHT?

I WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT SOCIALISM FOR CORPORATIONS, RIGHT?

MICRON IS GOING TO GET $20 BILLION.

THAT'S WITH A B. SUBSIDIES FROM TAXPAYERS FOR BUILDING THIS FACTORY.

GOD NODES WHEN THEY WILL GENERATE ANY PROFIT OUT OF IT.

I'M EXTREMELY SKEPTICAL ABOUT ALL OF THIS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU ARE SAYING YOU DON'T HAVE MONEY FOR THIS PERSON, YOU WILL GIVE HER $5,000.

I HAVE A BETTER DEAL AND IF THE FAMILY IS LISTENING.

LET THEM SAY THAT EVERY YEAR THAT THIS PERSON LIVES, THEY WILL GET $400,000.

OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT IS NOT 10 MILLION, BUT IT IS ALSO NOT 5,000.

IT TIES TO THE PERSON OF HOW LONG THAT THEY LIVE, BUT IF SHE LIVES ON TO 100 YEARS, GOD BLESS HER HEART, AND SHE WILL GET $300,000 EVERY YEAR.

>> OF COURSE IT'S NOT MICRON.

I MEAN YES, THEY'VE GOT THE DEEP POCKETS.

>> MICRON CAME IN AND SAID WE WANT THAT PLACE RIGHT NOW.

>> THE COUNTY WHO HAS THE CONTRACT.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

BUT THE NEWS REPORT THAT YOU SENT US ALSO SAID THAT MICRON ALSO SAID THAT IF THEY DON'T REMOVE, THEY ARE GOING TO GO TO THE COURT AND YET MICRON IS WAITING FOR PUBLIC HANDOUTS.

>> CERTAINLY SEEMS LIKE THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT COULD BE EASILY SOLVED.

AND THAT THERE IS PLENTY OF-- YEAH, THERE IS PLENTY OF CORPORATE-- SOCIALISM.

IS THAT WHAT YOU CALLED IT?

>> SO THERE IS, SHOULD BE MONEY AVAILABLE.

>> YOU WERE A COMPANY ACCOUNT WHY DO YOU NEED $20 MILLION.

USE YOUR OWN MONEY TO RUN YOUR CAPITALISM.

WHY DO YOU CONSTANTLY DEPEND ON PUBLIC MONEY FOR THIS.

>> AS AND FS, CHAD YOUR F.

>> I MOURN THE DEATH OF CHARLIE KIRK.

I ALSO MOURN THE DEATH OF THE FREEDOM OF PRESS.

LATE NIGHT HOST JIMMY KIMMEL MADE A JOKE NOT ABOUT KIRK OR HIS ASSASSINATION BUT THE G.O.P.

'S EFFORTS TO SCORE POLITICAL POINTS FROM IT.

THIS OFFENDED FCC CHAIR BRENDAN CARR AND WEDNESDAY ABC ANNOUNCED IT WAS TAKING CINL EL OFF THE AIR INDEFINITELY.

THURSDAY I SOLD MY STOCK IN DISNEY BECAUSE I DON'T WANT ANY PART OF THAT COWARDICE AND I CHALLENGE OUR VIEWERS.

WHAT IS IT YOU ARE WILLING TO DO TO STOP THE WOKE RIGHT SNOWFLAKES FROM DICTATING THE MEDIA THAT YOU CONSUME?

>> MY F GOES TO PRO-RIGHT CANCEL CULTURE CREATED BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ITS MINIONS AND PROCEDURES.

THE ADMINISTRATION'S ONGOING EFFORTS TO ROOT OUT POAB DEI OR PRO-PALESTINIAN FREE SPEECH IS SUCCESSFULLY BECOMING SELF CENSORSHIP AT MANY MUSEUMS.

LAST WEEK, JAMIE JOHN, A NATIVE AMERICAN ARTIST LOST HIS COMMISSION TO PAINT A MURAL AT THE MUSEUM IN EVANSTON, ILLINOIS.

HE MADE THE MISTAKE OF PUTTING FREE GAZA IN HIS PRELIMINARY SKETCH, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN PAINTED OVER, ON THE WALL.

SIMILARLY, HE LOST HIS COMMISSION LAST YEAR, A LAKOTA ARTIST LOST HER RESIDENCY IN VEIL, COLORADO BECAUSE OF HER PAINTING G IS FOR GENOCIDE.

BOTH WERE DISMISSED WITHOUT WARNING AND NO APPEAL.

>> ANIRBAN.

>> MY F GOES TO THE PUNDITS, POLITICIANS AND DEMAGOGUES OF THE RIGHT WING FOR WEAPONIZING FREE SPEECH MARTYR TO ATTACK FREE CHEECH.

THE RIGHT IS CHAMPIONING CANCEL CULTURE THAT IT DESPIEDZED AT ONE POINT.

A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STUDY THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED BUT PUBLISHED NOTED THAT THE NUMBER OF FAR RIGHT ATTACKS CONTINUES TO FAR OUTPACE ALL OTHER TYPES OF TERRORISM AND VIOLENT EXTREMISM.

THIS IS ALSO SIMILAR TO ANOTHER UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND STUDY THAT REACHES THE SAME CONCLUSION.

>> RICK.

>> MY F IS IN THE SAME VEIN.

I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES, YOU KNOW.

THE ATTACK ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY A NUMBER OF THESE, ESPECIALLY THE KIMMEL SUSPENSION IS VERY TROUBLING.

AND IT GOES BEYOND, YOU KNOW, STARTING WITH THE FCC CHAIRMAN SUGGESTING THAT LICENSES WOULD BE LOST FOR THIS.

AND THEN THE COMPANY'S ACQUIESCING IN TERMS OF GETTING RID OF HIM AND TRUMP COMES OUT AND SAID YOU CRITICIZE ME, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

YOU ARE GOING LOSE YOUR LICENSES.

WE ARE GOING DOWN A VERY BAD RABBIT HOLE.

>> LET'S GO TO THE AS.

CHAD.

>> I WANT TO THANK FORMER CONGRESSMAN JOHN KATKO FOR VISITING COLGATE EARLIER THIS WEEK TO MEET WITH OUR STUDENTS.

HIS CENTRAL MESSAGE TO THEM WAS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING A STEADY DIET OF OPPOSING VIEWS, DOING WHAT IT RIGHT EVEN WHEN NOT EASY AND DEVELOPING A THICK SKIN WHEN IT COMES TO CRITICISM.

NOW HE HAS A SISTER PROGRAM HERE ON WCNY CALLED ""BALANCING ACT"" WITH JOHN KATKO.

IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO CHECK IT OUT.

>> TARA.

>> MY A HAS TO DO WITH FASHION WEEK WHICH WAS LAST WEEK.

AND MY A GOES TO DESIGNER AND ACTIVELY BLACK FOUNDER LANNY SMITH.

UNUSUALLY FOR FASHION WEEK, THE CLOTHING WAS CASUAL CHIC, THE THEME WAS THIS IS NOT A FASHION SHOW AND WOVE AMERICAN HERITAGE INTO THE RUNWAY PRESENTATIONS.

EACH MODEL, INCLUDING THOSE ON YOUR SCREEN WAS OR IS AN ICON IN THE FIGHT FOR CIVIL RIGHTS.

ON YOUR SCREEN YOU HAVE TWO OF THE MODELS, Dr.

BERNISE KING, DAUGHTER OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

AND SHAH BADS, DAUGHTER OF MALCOLM X. ALSO ON THE RUNWAY WERE OLYMPIC LEGENDS.

>> AND MY A GOES TO THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GENOCIDE SCHOLARS THAT STATES ISRAEL'S CONDUCT MEETS THE LEGAL DEFINITION LAID OUT IN THE U. IN CONVENTION FOR GENOCIDE.

>> MY A GOES TO REPUBLICAN SENATOR BILL CASSIDY OF LOUISIANA NEXT DIRECTOR OF THE CDC SUSAN MONARES.

>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

FOR COMMENTS YOU CAN WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THE SHOW AGAIN YOU CAN VIEW IT ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FOR ALL OF US AT IVORY TOWER, HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.