Arthur Laffer Breaks Down Reagan, Trump, and the True Drivers of Economic Growth

On this episode of Impact Theory, host Tom Bilyeu welcomes renowned economist Arthur Laffer, famously known for shaping the policies of the Reagan era and the iconic "Laffer Curve." Together, they dive deep into the real forces driving America’s economy today—from the challenges facing Trump’s economic policies to the historical cycles of wealth, debt, and money printing that have shaped the rise and fall of empires. With characteristic clarity and candor, Arthur Laffer explains why he remains optimistic about America’s economic future, breaks down the role of debt and government spending, and explores how policy shifts can radically alter prosperity for average Americans. The conversation ranges from the legacy of tax cuts to the dynamics of wealth inequality and the potential impact of private currencies and cryptocurrencies on the next chapter of financial history. If you want to understand what’s really happening beneath the headlines—and how economic policies could impact your own financial future—you won’t want to miss this episode. What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business:join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show: https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show SCALING a business:see if you qualify here. https://tombilyeu.com/call: https://tombilyeu.com/call Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox:sign up here. https://tombilyeu.com/: https://tombilyeu.com/ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast,Tom Bilyeu’s Mindset Playbook https://open.spotify.com/show/47VE90Cittmo6TGGFqg2xf —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok:https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter:https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Business Wars: Follow Business Wars on the Wondery App or wherever you get your podcasts. Quince: Go to https://quince.com/IMPACTPOD for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Linkedin: Post your job free at https://linkedin.com/impacttheory HomeServe: Help protect your home systems – and your wallet – with HomeServe against covered repairs. Plans start at just $4.99 a month at https://homeserve.com Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial period at https://shopify.com/impact Sintra AI: 72% off with code IMPACT at https://sintra.ai/impact True Classic: Upgrade your wardrobe at https://trueclassic.com/impact CashApp: Download Cash App Today - https://capl.onelink.me/vFut/v6nymgjl #CashAppPod Connectteam: 14 day free trial at https://connecteam.cc/46GxoTF Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices https://megaphone.fm/adchoices See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Tom Bilyeu?

  Let's talk about the moment your side hustle becomes a real business. Now, I see way too many founders stay stuck running their business like it's a hobby, and then they wonder why nothing ever feels real. It doesn't feel real because it's not. I've helped thousands of entrepreneurs build real businesses through Impact Theory University, and the first step in the path to building a legit business is registering it. And Taylor Brands will help you do just that in a few clicks. An LLC, a limited liability company, is an official business structure. It's inexpensive to form and very simple to maintain. It's how you open a business bank account. It's how customers know they're dealing with a real company. And Taylor Brands doesn't stop at the filing.

• 0:45Tom Bilyeu?

  Their dashboard tracks what comes next based on what your business actually needs. So EIN number, registered agent, licenses and permits, bookkeeping, business banking. I tell every founder the same thing. Just make it official. Click the link in the show notes to check out Taylor Brands and get started on your business today. This is a paid advertisement. In the 1980s, under Reagan's leadership, the US economy exploded with 12% real GDP growth in just 18 months. And the man behind that boom? Today's guest, economist Arthur Laffer. Now, with America sitting on $38 trillion in debt, rising inflation and growing wealth inequality, Laffer's back.

• 1:27Tom Bilyeu?

  This time advising Donald Trump on how to spark a second economic revolution. In this episode, we go deep into the real mechanics of growth. What worked under Reagan? Why Trump's first term fell short of that same boom? And what Laffer says must happen now to avoid collapse? From tax cuts and currency reform to crypto and debt restructuring. If you care about your financial future, 2026 midterms, or understanding how we fix a broken economy, this is the episode you've been waiting for. I bring you Arthur Laffer. You helped design the policies that fueled Reagan's boom. So why aren't Trump's economic policies creating that same growth? What exactly is missing?

• 2:08Speaker 01

  Well, I think they will, but... Let me just say that I don't share your pessimism about the world because the systems adapt that. Well, the systems adapt and change and, you know, when things get way out of control, there are always response mechanisms that come through the political structure. Reagan was not an accident. John F. Kennedy was not an accident of, you know.

• 2:29Tom Bilyeu?

  So you see them as mechanistic responses to where the economy went and that we will always have said response?

• 2:37Speaker 01

  Yeah, and you have these back and forth and it's only when you get economies that don't have automatic responses like elections. And stuff like in those economies, you can't adjust and you would be completely correct. They were going straight to hell in a handbasket. If the markets weren't able to readjust and offset the damages that you see coming.

• 2:56Tom Bilyeu?

  But how do you, how do you reconcile that statement with the fact that every empire ever has always collapsed due to debt and money printing?

• 3:04Speaker 01

  Yeah, well, well, now, but I'll, you're talking in a very different timescale on that. You're talking hundreds of years, uh, you're, you're not talking hundreds of years, at least I don't think today. I mean, you had the Biden, uh, uh, economy there, you had the response by the Trump economy. Uh, what you're seeing with the Trump economy is exactly is what you'd expect. I mean, you know, the, the policies change, they don't change all at once. They come flowing in and the economy is responding very favorably right now. And I expect it to continue to respond favorably, in fact, even get more favorable. I mean, with Reagan, starting on January 1st, 1983, now that's almost two years into his presidency. Uh, real GDP started to rise, the tax cuts took effect.

• 3:50Speaker 01

  And from January 1st, 83 to June 30th, 84, now that's just 18 months, that's just a year and a half. U.S. real GDP grew by 12%. 12%. That's at an 8% per annum compound rate over a year and a half. And it just changed the whole face of the earth as we know it. You know, I think you're going to see very major improvements in the economy because of the policies you've seen. And when they fully take effect, wow.

• 4:18Tom Bilyeu?

  All right, let's get specific. So what, take us back to the Reagan conversations. You come into office, he brings you in. What are the structural problems that you see? And then why were tax cuts the answer?

• 4:31Speaker 01

  Well, when I came into the office on January 20th, 1981, all right, the prime, the prime interest rate was 21 and a half percent. Mortgages were doubled to 17, 18%. We had huge unemployment. We had a highest marginal income tax rate of 70%. You know, it was Collapseville. We just come off the four Stooges. I say four Stooges, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter. Which to me was the largest assemblage of bipartisan ignorance ever put on planet earth. When we took office, we found the US in the doldrums. I mean, it just trashed. We reached into that trash heap. We pulled out this platinum thing. We polished it a little bit. We put it up there. It said, USA Inc., America Enterprise.

• 5:16Speaker 01

  And we borrowed lots and lots of money. And we did, because we had very good uses for that money. We dropped the highest marginal income tax rate. Now just think of this, from 70%, which is what it was when we took office, down to 28%. Is that a good enough drop for you?

• 5:35Tom Bilyeu?

  It's pretty spectacular.

• 5:36Speaker 01

  We cut the corporate rate from 46% to 34%. That's not too bad either. We went from 14 tax brackets to two tax brackets. The two tax brackets were, were literally 28 and 15%. That's what we went, that was it. We dropped the capital gains tax rate dramatically as well. All of these things happened. We strengthened the dollar. We got Paul Volcker to strengthen the dollar. The US just took off like a rocket ship. And that's where I talk to you about the real growth. Once those policies took effect on January 20th, I mean, on January 1st, 1983, we were off to the races. He won the election, the midterm, his second term election, 49 out of 50 states.

• 6:20Speaker 01

  And I was on the executive committee of the Reagan-Bush Finance Committee. And I'll just tell you, in the 84 election, Fritz Mondale was not a bad guy. He was a good guy, solid person, nothing wrong with him. He just was running against Reagan. And you know, that's a tough one for a guy like that. Reagan, about eight weeks out of the election, uh, uh, eight weeks out, uh, asked us to withdraw our, all of our funding, all of the campaign funding from Minnesota, uh, so that Mondale could at least win one state. Now that's, that's a different world than you see today and the hostility and all that sort of stuff. But that's what it was. And we went from a huge, I mean, boom to the large share of the world. There was no wars.

• 7:05Speaker 01

  U.S. the economy was back in full. Stock market took off like mad, as you probably know. And it lasted for a long time. It lasted all the way through Bill Clinton. Now, uh, the one thing you mentioned, and, and I want to address that very formally with you. Uh, debt. And let me talk to you about debt a little bit because it's really, really important. And I'm an economist, uh, and I want to go through that debt number. And the way they usually structure the debt conversation is debt as a share of GDP is 130% of GDP and it's rising like mad. Oh my God, oh my, help me, I'm going to jump off the edge of the cliff.

• 7:47Speaker 01

  I, I can't, my grandchildren are going to be, you, you know what the one I'm talking about.

• 7:51Tom Bilyeu?

  Of course.

• 7:53Speaker 01

  Those numbers are true. And that debt as a share of GDP is too high. Okay. But let me put it in perspective. First place, uh, you should never look at gross debt of a country or an individual or anything else. You should always look at net debt. There's a lot of debt, uh, that has been issued by the federal government that is, uh, that is on the balance sheet of the federal government and different departments and agencies, et cetera. So what you should do is first and foremost, uh, eliminate all the intra-governmental debt and just look at net debt to the public, to the private sector. That's what you should do. And if you did that, you would reduce that net debt number, that debt to GDP number from 130% to about 100%. And that, that's a big drop.

• 8:37Speaker 01

  I mean, that's the first thing you do. The second thing we do, when you look at debt, uh, and compare it to GDP, it's really an inappropriate comparison.

• 8:48Speaker 01

  When you look at a company, for example, you only compare balance sheet items with balance sheet items, income statement items with income statement or cash flow items there for those. You should never mix stocks with flows or flows with stocks in any of these comparisons. So when you look at debt to GDP, it's an inappropriate measure. You should look at debt to wealth, or you should look at debt service to GDP. Both of those are appropriate numbers. One is a stock to a stock, and one is a flow to a flow. If you look at debt to net wealth, it's still too high, but it's about 18, 19% of total wealth.

• 9:30Speaker 01

  That's too high, but it's not jumping out of a window too high. It's just not. If you look at debt service to GDP, it's about 4%, something like that. Debt service to GDP today, it was about 4.5%, 5% after Reagan, you know, it was in that range. It fell as low as 3%. But again, it's too high, but it's not something you get panicked about. So when you look at it, it should be flow to flow or stock. When you buy a house from a bank, and the bank, you want a bank loan, the two questions they ask you, what's the loan, the value of the home? That's a stock to a stock. And can you afford the interest payments? Those are the two questions. Same thing you should ask about the US, and both of those are too high, but they're not

• 10:15Speaker 01

  panic city. It's not, you know, going to hell in a handbasket, far from it. Then, the real thing you want to look at on debt, if I can, is debt is just a tool. Debt is a way of getting money from savers to investors. It's just a loan, that's all it is. And it's a very normal way of transferring assets from net savers to net investors. And it's neither good nor bad, it's how the proceeds are used that is important. Now, let me, let me give you the example here. I'm gonna let you borrow all you want at 1%, and let you invest all you want, risk-free at 12%. How much are you gonna borrow from me?

• 11:01Tom Bilyeu?

  It depends on which one of those I get.

• 11:03Speaker 01

  But you get 1% cost and you can invest it at 12% risk free.

• 11:08Tom Bilyeu?

  I see what you're saying. Yeah.

• 11:10Speaker 01

  You're going to borrow infinite amount. Reverse those two numbers. I'm going to let you borrow at 12% and invest at 1%. How much are you going to do?

• 11:17Tom Bilyeu?

  Zero. Yeah, so, okay, we're getting into the abstract here because of course in reality.

• 11:23Speaker 01

  It's going to be reality.

• 11:24Tom Bilyeu?

  Okay, bring it, bring it home to reality for me.

• 11:27Speaker 01

  Bring it home. When we came in under Reagan, we found the US had been trashed. The economy was in bad shape. We had to look at Enterprise America and we had an actual ability there to borrow at lower rates, what we considered lower rates compared to the investment rates there. And we borrowed lots and lots of money. We use it to cut tax rates. We use it to build up defense spending. We use it to do all the wonderful stuff and that economy just took off like a jackrabbit. And thank God, you know, when you get to people like Biden and Obama and W and these people, they borrowed lots and lots of money to pay people not to work. The purposes of the debt were very different. What you want to do here is if you use debt properly on a federal level,

• 12:11Speaker 01

  you can reestablish credulity in the debt market within a couple of years. I mean, you really can. You can grow your way out of this debt quite easily if you do the right policies. That's all I'm saying. It's not something that's inevitable. It's not something that can't be handled over the next three or four or five years. It can be. It's just, it's a, it's a problem, but not a crisis problem.

• 12:36Tom Bilyeu?

  We're hitting pause for a moment, but there's plenty more ahead, so don't go anywhere. There's a reason Quince sells cashmere for $60 and it isn't the cashmere. It's real 100% Mongolian cashmere. It's the same stuff luxury labels charge a fortune for. Quince just works directly with ethical factories and cuts out the middleman. So there's no need for a markup and no logo tax. The $60 goes to the actual sweater, not the fancy name on the tag. That's why everything they make runs 50 to 80% less. And it's not just the cashmere. I ordered a few things myself, their fleece joggers, a couple of their tees, which I wear obsessively. First thing I noticed was the quality. Soft,

• 13:20Tom Bilyeu?

  well-made, built to hold up. They make down jackets and wool outerwear now, too. So upgrade your stuff to things you'll actually wear. Find your next fall favorites at Quince. Download the Quince app for app-exclusive offers or go to quince.com. Get free shipping on your order and 365-day returns, now available in Canada and the UK, too. And when Quince asks where you heard about them, let them know it was Impact Theory. It's the best way to support the show. Let's talk about something that genuinely keeps me awake at night. My team at Impact Theory gets hit with phishing scams from bad actors pretending to be me all the time, and they keep getting more sophisticated attacks with details specific enough to look legit.

• 14:05Tom Bilyeu?

  AI has made a lot of things possible, including scams like this, but AI still needs raw material. It gets it from data brokers who sell your name, address, phone number, to anyone willing to pay. Incogni goes after that supply. They handle removal requests across 420-plus harmful broker sites, and they keep checking back as brokers constantly try to relist you. On the unlimited plan, the exposure scanner hunts down your information, send a link, and their privacy experts handle the takedown. Track your progress in the app and get a monthly risk assessment showing exactly where you stand. Go to incogni.com/impact and use

• 14:47Tom Bilyeu?

  code IMPACT for 60% off an annual plan. Incogni is I-N-C-O-G-N-I.com/impact. Promo code IMPACT. It's completely risk-free with a 30-day money-back guarantee.

• 15:04Tom Bilyeu?

  Thanks for sticking around. Let's get right back into the action. It was great. It's very easy to follow. However, I have what I think is the rebuttal that can't be gotten around. And I hope you can, because I have no interest in living in the dark and terrifying place that I am currently occupying. So here is what I see. The humans are a certain way. We have a nature. I've heard you talk about this. Given that we have a nature, history is going to loop. It doesn't exactly repeat, but money, money abides by something akin to physics. Humans only have so many reactions to different setups.

• 15:43Tom Bilyeu?

  And you put those two things together and on a roughly 150 to 250 year time horizon, every empire collapses. And they collapse for one very simple reason, debt and money printing. We are debt and money printing, not in the way that you just described it. We are debt and money printing for the exact reason you just warned us not to. So we are running deficits precisely so that we can give people money not to work. And the great irony of that, when you increase your levels of debt, you radically increase the levels of inequality because a very small number of people, let's call it 10%, understand assets and therefore 10% of Americans own 93% of the assets

• 16:24Tom Bilyeu?

  and are shielded from the inflation that's caused by debt and money printing to pay people not to work. And the other people, 90% that own 7% of the assets, they just get hammered by inflation and they don't understand that's what's happening. So they have this economic force being applied to them. But all they know is they can't make ends meet. They're, they're very anxious about what's happening. They have to transmute that anxiety, which does not feel good, into anger, which does feel good. They need someone to blame. A populist leader will rise up and give them someone to blame. And that's how in this moment... Despite the fact that it's basically all the socialist policies in America that have

• 17:09Tom Bilyeu?

  created this, you have a rise in a love for socialism and a decrease in a love for capitalism. And the only thing historically that has pulled us back from that ledge is an amount of pain that is so extreme that people finally go, ah, yeah, I guess we do have to completely restructure the system and effectively start, not over, but

• 17:33Speaker 01

  You're hitting me with a lot of topics, so let me

• 17:36Tom Bilyeu?

  The great news is I can run through it piece by piece, over and over and over, because these are the physics.

• 17:41Speaker 01

  Piece by piece. Let me do the first one, inflation, printing too much money and all that. Prior to 1913 in this country, we had a private money system. It was not public. Now, the government did do three things. It defined what a dollar was. It's one twentieth of an ounce of gold. It's one ounce of silver. That's a dollar. It also did one other thing as well. It did mint coins. If you brought bullion into the federal government, it got it's the right purity. It would mint the coins and charge a commission. But so did lots of other private sector mints all around the country did the same thing. So there. The real thing they did prior to 1913 was the government audited banks' balance sheets.

• 18:24Speaker 01

  Banks would issue their balance sheets, their income statements, and the government would audit them and say they're true and correct, etc. At that time, banks created money. There were bank notes that were the liabilities of individual banks. They had those. They had gold coins circulating, silver coins circulating. Money was private. The only thing the government did was define what a dollar was, and that was the world back then. Now, some, some banks' notes sold at a slight discount to other bank notes like they did, because they were all private liabilities. And that was a system that went from 1776 until 1913 in the US. That's a, what is that, 137 years there. Now, starting in 1913, we put in the

• 19:09Speaker 01

  Federal Reserve, the government started to nationalize money. We then had the Roosevelt won the gold of confiscation of 1933, where they confiscated gold at $20.67 an ounce. Then they devalued that, so they just had this huge wealth tax. We were the only country, I think, ever that has had our citizens prohibited legally, criminally, for holding gold. I mean, it was just amazing. And then, of course, we had the interest equalization tax. We had the voluntary foreign credit restraint program. Those were the ones I did my dissertation on at Stanford. We went on up to Smithsonian. I was in the White House in Smithsonian time. I was George Shultz's right-hand person when we went off gold completely and totally. We were a free-wheeling

• 19:53Speaker 01

  paper currency, unbacked by anything, anywhere, at any time. George Shultz's comment was, "We've raised the price of gold, of the gold from $35 an ounce to $42 an ounce, but we're unwilling to buy it or sell it at that price," which is a joke. And now, finally, government had 100% control of money in 1972. They did. Inflation from 1776 until 1913 was zero.

• 20:24Tom Bilyeu?

  Up kiss. Yep.

• 20:25Speaker 01

  Zero. There were no major depressions or anything like that. There were some financial panics, but they were over in a matter of weeks or months. There was nothing there. Long bonds, now, these are all from Jeremy Siegel and Jeremy Schwartz, who were my colleague at the University of Chicago, best people in the world. Long bond yields in 1776 were in the 5.5% range. By the time you got to 1910, 1912, they had gone down to about 4.5%. Just all very stable, staying, no ba, ba, ba, ba, ba, ba, ba, ba, none of that stuff. It was a beautiful system. From 1913 to the present, the price level has risen 35-fold. You've had interest rates that I've mentioned went from 21% down to zero, but bop-a-doo-doo,

• 21:10Speaker 01

  we had the biggest depression ever. You know, this is a classic example of the federal government nationalizing an industry and screwing it up. We went from private banking, which worked really well, to public one, which just screwed it all up. And the US, by the way, screwed it up a lot less than other countries did. We are the, we are the tallest midget in the bunch on that. Now, when you, it gets you to be scared. I look at, I look at cryptocurrencies as being the private sectors and gold as being the private sector's way of circumventing government monies and creating a money of their own, especially Things like, um, uh, like, uh, tethered and these other stable coins, they can really stabilize

• 21:51Speaker 01

  values. And what I'm seeing in this world is the private sector moving back in and replacing the government monies and, uh, which makes me very optimistic about the long term there. So that's the monetary inflation. Now you have redistribution, you said, uh, let me go to redistribution with you. And this is a really important topic. And by the way, I've, I've written a lot on the banking system, as you know, if you did my background stuff, that's my bailiwick and trade. Uh, the book I wrote on this one is called Taxes Have Consequences. It's two and a half years old. Uh, it is the complete history of the US income

• 22:31Speaker 01

  tax from 1913 to the present. Uh, in this, I just want to say we have every single tax return. Uh, you know, the last two months of 1913, we had an income tax and all the way here. We know the last guy in the top one percent. We know the first guy in the bottom 99%. We, we don't have his name, but we have his tax return. All right. We have this. We see how the first year, 13, 14 and 15, uh, the number of people required to file was about 358,000 out of 62 million adults, a teeny tiny little group. And the tax rates went from 0% to 7%. That was it. Little bitty, little bitty. And then of

• 23:16Speaker 01

  course, by 1915, 16, 17, it had gone up to 77% was the highest marginal income tax rate. It went up to 6.4 million people. That was World War I. That was the pandemic then. And then Wilson dropped it to 73% in 1918, 19, boom, on down, went as low as 25% under Harding and Coolidge. We have had huge amounts of variation in the tax rates on the rich. We, we have. We've had enormous amounts and we don't just guess what happens when you raise tax rates on the rich. Uh, we know, we have every single example. And let me

• 23:57Speaker 01

  just summarize if I can on Sayes, Piketty and all these other guys, you know, Zuckman and Sancheva and all the redistributes, Bernie Sanders, AOC. I can easily imagine raising tax rates on the rich and collecting more money and helping the poor. I can also easily manage raising tax rates on the rich. They hire more lawyers and accountants, deferred income specialists. They have bad economic activity happen to them and you actually collect less money from the rich. Either one of those is very possible because these guys are rich and they can hire lawyers, accountants, deferred income specialists, whatever. So we have to look at the facts rather than feelings. Every single time we've raised the highest tax rate on the top 1% of income earners.

• 24:40Speaker 01

  Every single time, three things have occurred. The economy is underperformed. Tax revenues from the rich have gone down, not up. And the poor have been hammered. Every single time we've cut the highest tax rate on the top 1% of income earners. Every single time, the economy has outperformed. Tax revenues from the rich have gone up. And the poor have had opportunities that have exceeded other time periods by long shot. So that's where we are in this. So as you can probably guess, I'm far less afraid of Mamdani's, Elizabeth Warren's. Yeah, they screw up, they dumb, they don't understand economics, they don't know straight up from sic 'em.

• 25:23Speaker 01

  But you know, frankly, they sooner or later are going to be squashed. And they're going to be replaced by a low rate flat tax. In 1944, the highest marginal income tax rate in America was 94%. Every dollar you earned, you were allowed to keep six cents. God bless your son for working hard. Today, the highest marginal income tax rate is 37%. We've made enormous project progress over the years. If you look at states in 1976, there was one state in the United States that did not have a state death tax. And that was Nevada. All right, every other state did. All right, today, 38 states have eliminated the death tax.

• 26:08Speaker 01

  All of them eliminated the inventory tax. You know, when you look at the progress we've made, we've now allowed people to do discount sales. We've gotten negotiated rates in the stock market. In 1973, every stock traded by

• 26:23Speaker 01

  Law had to pay three, four cents as a commission. Today it's zero. Trucks were decontrolled, airlines decontrolled, all of this stuff. You know, we are making enormous progress coming along here. And, you know, I, I do see the problems you're saying, and I do think they're correct. And a lot of the response is anger, but, you know, we had a lot of anger after Nixon. I don't know if you were aware of that. You're way too young to understand that world. But I was the chief economist in the White House then. I was George W. Bush's right-hand person. If you think it's hostile and political today, you have no idea how bad it was under Nixon and Ford and Jimmy Carter and all. Oh my God, it was awful. So this stuff is repeating, but every time it's repeating.

• 27:08Speaker 01

  I, I'm telling you, it's getting better and better and better. Yeah. We make five steps forward, then we're pushed back three steps. And it's all true, but we're making progress all over the place on inflation, private money, tax rates, all of this stuff. We are, we are really making a big difference in the world in the right direction. We're creating a lot of new problems too. But they are soluble in the U.S. The way our structure is, is that we allow those cer- solutions to come back into the system where other countries really don't. You can't get a vote in Russia, for example. And you have a hard time even in Britain. You don't vote for the prime minister, you vote for a party that then is a hundred percent in control.

• 27:52Speaker 01

  That's not the way we do it. We do checks and balances. Britain does not. So.

• 27:56Tom Bilyeu?

  Okay, hold on really fast before, let me say back to you what I just heard.

• 28:01Speaker 01

  That's why we're doing this.

• 28:02Tom Bilyeu?

  Yeah, so I, here's what I heard. Hey, Tom, listen, uh, when you put this into historical context, yes, we make these really bad decisions, but that causes humans to react and so we come back down and then that causes people to react and we go back up and, you know, we sort of rock back and forth. Okay, so you have a base assumption that that will protect us. Unfortunately, history is on my side that what is actually happening is that you're getting these back and forth, but they are on a trajectory of debt just going up, up, up, up, up. So there's no denying that you have this tack up and down for sure. But when you just look at the M2 money supply, the amount of debt that we're taking on in terms of

• 28:44Tom Bilyeu?

  just the sheer magnitude of it is so much bigger than what we were doing in the 70s, 80s, 90s. It's like, once you get the breaking point of the 2001.com crash, all hell breaks loose in terms of how we treat printing money to solve our problems. You then compound that in the 2008 financial bubble or bursting of the housing bubble. Then obviously COVID. And so you look at this and we are in a moment now.

• 29:14Speaker 01

  Gotcha.

• 29:15Tom Bilyeu?

  Where we're roughly 122% debt to GDP. You've already told me you don't think that's the right way to look at it. And I've heard you. However, I will say this, when you say, don't look at that, I hear the same thing I hear when people are like, oh, we don't like the CPI results. We're going to change the CPI. At some point, you just need to have a metric. And so either. Bear with me, bear with me, bear with me.

• 29:35Speaker 01

  But you can't say I just made up that new rig. This has been done in accounting for a thousand years.

• 29:40Tom Bilyeu?

  What? Changing the metric by which we judge it?

• 29:42Speaker 01

  No, not changing. You're using a bad metric and you've always been using a bad metric. And the proper accounting going all the way back in time is the way I describe it to you. It's the way every company does its balance sheets and its income savings and its cash flows. That's the way you do it. Banks do it that way. Now always have.

• 29:58Tom Bilyeu?

  Okay.

• 29:59Speaker 01

  It's a you're using a bad metric. Now you saying changing it to, but I'm changing it to a good merit metric. It is a problem. I'm not denying that, but it's nothing like the problem you're describing.

• 30:10Tom Bilyeu?

  Okay.

• 30:10Speaker 01

  You're using a bad metric.

• 30:12Tom Bilyeu?

  You've, that point is very clear. And so now, well, I haven't said that I concede. I just said you've been very clear.

• 30:19Speaker 01

  Concede. I'm just the guy who knows those metrics.

• 30:22Tom Bilyeu?

  Sure. But the, any philosophy that somebody uses must describe the world that I see. The world that you are failing to describe so far is that every.

• 30:32Speaker 01

  Accounting.

• 30:33Tom Bilyeu?

  Bear with me.

• 30:34Speaker 01

  Numbers.

• 30:34Tom Bilyeu?

  Ev- every empire, Arthur, has failed for debt and money printing.

• 30:39Speaker 01

  You know, I read Bogoff too.

• 30:41Tom Bilyeu?

  Right, but this, we're, we're just talking about what's actually happened. So if, if you're going to give me a metric that shows this is actually what they did wrong, so that I can look at the American empire through that lens, fair enough. But until I have a metric where I can go, oh, this is why all of these empires before us failed, so that I can look at, are we making the same mistakes or not?

• 31:04Speaker 01

  I got you. No, I got you. I understand. It's a great, great question. And let me just answer a little bit if, if I can. I tried to give you an answer on, on that. That our system is much more flexible than most systems have been historically. They have not been free market democratic economic capitalist system. And maybe ours will fail on that grounds as well. And I'm not sure it won't. But when I look at the systems today, first place, the metrics I use are just accounting textbook metrics. It's not like I have edited to rebut you. I didn't. It's been around there. It just is useful in rebutting your 122% number. That's all. I'm, you know, you're, are right about debt being too large and you're, but the problem is, is government spending.

• 31:45Speaker 01

  And, you know, when I look at this system today, I don't see the end of the earth coming. I see this system adjusting right now. And I was trying to describe.

• 31:55Tom Bilyeu?

  But so you've been very clear on all that. So I want to make sure that we differentiate between when I'm confused and when I disagree. I'm not confused about what you say because I agree with all of it. What I'm saying is that the, where we disagree is that I have a way of explaining this that describes the collapse of the previous empires. So far, you probably understand it far better than I, but so far you've not articulated what it is that caused those empires to fall.

• 32:23Speaker 01

  Well, let me say your cause. Let me, let me support your argument here. In 2007, I think the, the balance sheet of the Fed was about $850 billion, something like that.

• 32:35Speaker 01

  It went up as high as 9.4 trillion dollars in the next bunch of years, which you're talking about M2, you were talking about the money system in that terms. I use the balance sheet of the Fed. You're totally correct. You can see that 22% inflation from Biden really clearly in those numbers. It's just obvious, duh. I mean, they're, those numbers have changed dramatically, and they not only have changed on the balance sheet, not enough to make it great, believe me. But they've also changed on the responses of the market to the bad money that's been created by the Fed and by the US government and the nationalization. All of these cryptocurrencies are rushing to our defense and to our savior. Look at

• 33:17Speaker 01

  Tether. I mean, Tether's hitting marketplaces all over the world, and it's doing in Turkey and Central Africa with the Masai and all these, where you can hold dollars on your phone and you can transact. The transactions costs have been dropped enormously, and they're growing by leaps and bounds. What was, I think it was 2014, Bitcoin sold for 250 bucks. It's a couple of dollars higher than that now. I mean, all of these things, I view that as the private sector trying to come in and solve your problem correctly.

• 33:49Tom Bilyeu?

  We agree. So what you're saying is this empire won't collapse because that's democratically possible for us to replace the money?

• 33:57Speaker 01

  Yes, exactly. That's exactly correct. And I think those other countries that you've always talked, that you've mentioned there, and that's all, they're all true. Your data are correct. I, you know, I know Rogoff, and those numbers are correct. The collapse is all there. I just think that just saying the same thing always happens to every country is not correct. It happens for a reason. And I think the reasons it happened in those other examples are not applicable today in full. They may become applicable very soon, and thank God I'm 85 because I won't have to live to see a collapse of the US. But, but the truth of matter is, I don't think we're doing the same problems that they did. I don't think our debt is anywhere near the same level, those other countries you talked

• 34:41Speaker 01

  about. And, and I think the private market is coming in and replacing it, which really excites me. This is Jude Winiski's book, The Way the World Works, which is a really a classic in this area. And it's just wonderful. And, and I just don't see the inevitability of the collapse just because we're 250 years old next year.

• 35:01Tom Bilyeu?

  I totally agree that it has nothing to do with the timeline.

• 35:05Speaker 01

  Good.

• 35:05Tom Bilyeu?

  I think the timeline is simply tied to the duration it takes the society to discover how much they can profit off of debt. And once they realize, oh, wait a second, I don't, as a politician, my only job, no matter what anybody tells you, is to gain and retain power. So I know I have to gain and retain power. And what they begin to realize is I gain and retain power by promising free things. And I can pay for those free things by generating as much debt as I want and printing money to cover it, which is an invisible tax. And so it just, oh, it takes roughly 150 to 250 years for that cycle to get so far out

• 35:48Tom Bilyeu?

  of control, because you need these random events, not random, but you need these problem events to occur and to begin to stack up. And so you get, I mean, I've heard you say that, no, no, no, if you really want to understand about America's financial problems, you need to go back to the Great Depression. You're one of the only people I hear talk about that.

• 36:07Speaker 01

  Yes, you do.

• 36:08Tom Bilyeu?

  I'll ask you to go all the way back to 1913. For me, that's where the problem really starts, because that's where...

• 36:15Speaker 01

  That's why I did the money up to 1913, because you had the Fed and the initiation of the income tax. 1913 is a critical year where government came in and started screwing everything up really badly. And 1930 was proof of the pudding.

• 36:30Tom Bilyeu?

  Okay, so I think just so everybody understands why you and I can agree on so much and still walk away being you not worried and me like terminally worried.

• 36:41Speaker 01

  Don't get me wrong, I'm just not like you are worried. I don't think it's inevitable. I think we, through the political process, can solve it and have done so, so far.

• 36:51Tom Bilyeu?

  Okay, so really fast, because I want you to walk us through what Trump is going to do at a policy level to back all of this out?

• 36:58Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 36:58Tom Bilyeu?

  Because I, certainly from where I'm sitting, it seems like Trump listens to you. He certainly hears you out. Whether he takes your advice or not, we'll see over time. But that is extremely useful as we're talking to somebody that's inside the... White House that understands how this works. Okay.

• 37:13Speaker 01

  I like you. I like where you're coming from. And just for the record, I'm an economist. Trump has to look at all sorts of stuff. When I'm with him, and I do see him frequently. I try to give him information to allow him to make better decisions. I ask him explicitly not to tell me what his thoughts are because I don't want to be burdened with that type of knowledge. He has a lot of other things to consider that I never consider. And so all I do is view myself as someone who tries to facilitate him making great decisions. I think he is a great decision maker. He's a COO. He's not the most popular guy anywhere. But he doesn't know how to make a decision, and he bases it, I think, really on good stuff.

• 37:56Speaker 01

  Many times using my inputs but coming to a different conclusion. And sometimes his conclusions are a hell of a lot better than mine were. And I look back on it and I, oh my God, how could I misled him so badly?

• 38:09Tom Bilyeu?

  Taking a short break, but there's more Impact Theory after. Stay tuned. You're probably paying two salespeople to do one salesperson's job. That's where today's sponsor Pipe Drive comes in. An intelligent AI-powered sales CRM loved by growing sales teams. Pipe Drive just launched meeting intelligence built right into the CRM. Before every call, it pulls deal history and past conversations into one brief. During the call, it records and takes notes. After it, it drafts your CRM updates to review and approve. So there's less admin and more selling.

• 38:47Tom Bilyeu?

  Switch to a CRM built by salespeople for salespeople and join the over 100,000 companies already using Pipe Drive. My link gets you an exclusive 30 days free instead of the usual 14-day trial. There's no credit card payment needed. Just head to pipedrive.com/impact to get started. Again, that's pipedrive.com/impact and you can be up and running in minutes.

• 39:17Tom Bilyeu?

  Thanks for staying tuned. Now, let's get back to it. The base assumptions that I think cause us to share so much in common, but still draw a different conclusion are you believe that democracy allows for a release valve where people it has a corrective mechanism and that the private market has come in with will round it to cryptocurrency in order to create a new financial system where people can escape the abuses of a government-controlled financial system.

• 39:48Speaker 01

  Yes, they can. And also on the tax system too, just for that. I mean, I mentioned that the tax system has gone from 94% in 1944 to 37 today. That is, that is a rectification. Our capital gains tax, I mean, we effectively have no capital gains tax on owner occupied homes anymore. $500,000 for every couple and a step up basis at death. And I could go on. That's half the capital stock of America. So we've made huge progress at the state level and at the federal level on tax rates, which to me are much more important than tax revenues. As you know, I just did my curve quickly and slid it by you, didn't I? I got it slipped through.

• 40:28Tom Bilyeu?

  I know your curve very well.

• 40:29Speaker 01

  Well, you lower the rate, you collect more money. So.

• 40:33Tom Bilyeu?

  Yeah. And look, we, we will almost certainly get to the point where we really push into that because it's very, very important for people to understand that. Something that I have a hard time getting people to embrace.

• 40:44Speaker 01

  Me too.

• 40:44Tom Bilyeu?

  But first I want to lay out what my base assumptions are. So, and we don't have to debate them. I think there's probably more interesting things for us to move on to, but for the audience who's trying to build their own worldview, I want them to understand. So for me, the thing that I see is voters vote emotionally. And so democracy can be the biggest problem as much as it can be a salvation. So it comes down to how voters feel, not what's actually happening. And wealth inequality, for better or worse, is the thing that drives how people feel. So you've got a system right now, as of today, because of inflation, money printing, that wealth inequality is just going absolute haywire, which. Is making people feel bad.

• 41:28Tom Bilyeu?

  And that feeling is going to continue to create an impulse for politicians to give things away for free and run an unbalanced budget. Okay, so.

• 41:39Speaker 01

  But let's do more about inequality, just the facts. During the Great Depression, money, wealth was much more evenly distributed than it was in the 20s or than it is now. During World War II, wealth was much more evenly distributed than it was now. In other words, the only way you can get equality of wealth or income is at zero. Do you know the transfer, can I do a transfer theorem with you because I think you'll love it.

• 42:05Tom Bilyeu?

  Sure.

• 42:05Speaker 01

  If you let me do it. And let me just, a transfer is when you take from one person and give to another person, what you're saying, the governments give away money to buy off votes and stuff like that. You know, that's a transfer. We usually think of a transfer system being from those who have a little bit more to those who have a little bit less. That's the way we usually think of it. Although there is one from young to old, that's social security, which I love, by the way. From tall to short, I love that one. Skinny to fat, I like that one too. But let me do it here, the transfer theorem with from those who have a little bit more to those who have a little bit less. Whenever you take from those who have a little bit more, you reduce their incentives to produce. And they will produce a little bit less.

• 42:51Speaker 01

  Period. Whenever you give to those who have a little bit less, you provide them with an alternative source of income other than working. And they too will produce a little bit less. This is just the slut's key equation in macroeconomics. That's all it is, common sense. So the theorem here is whenever you redistribute income, you always reduce total income, period. That's math. It's not whether you're tall or short, Harvard or MTSU, it doesn't matter. It's just plain math. That's the theorem. Now, the lema from this theorem is sort of cool, and I think it's fairly intuitive. The more you redistribute, the greater will be the decline in total production income.

• 43:35Speaker 01

  But now the one that's delicious that I think you will love is the limit function of this theorem. If you were able to redistribute income so that everyone comes out exactly equal. There will be no income whatsoever and God, I hope Bernie Sanders listens to this show. I hope he does. Let me do this one.

• 43:57Tom Bilyeu?

  He's avid subscriber. Yeah.

• 43:58Speaker 01

  Oh, good. Good. Well, let me if I can do the math for you on this one. In order to get everyone to come out exactly the same, so you have complete income equality. So you have a complete. What you'd have to do is you'd have to tax everyone who earns above the average income 100% of the excess. And you'd have to subsidize everyone below the average income up to the average income. Only in that way can you make sure that everyone comes out exactly the same. Now, if you actually did that. If you actually taxed everyone above the average income 100% of the excess. And if we actually subsidize everyone below the average income up to the average income. I'll stipulate today, counselor. We'll all be equal at zero income in the system.

• 44:42Speaker 01

  That is the theorem that drives the equality of income. Equality of income is the stupidest concept I've ever, ever heard in my life. It's dumb. It's awful. It's nasty. It's brutish. It's vile. Because the dream should be to make the poor richer. Not to make the rich poor. The dream is to help those who are in need not to hurt those who have succeeded. That's the dream in this world. And so when I see people willing to sacrifice all the poor disenfranchised people in this earth just to make sure they get even with that rich guy. I find myself disgusted. It's the Larry Summers model of economics. And he's been my arch nemesis for 40 years now. And he. I win, he loses.

• 45:27Speaker 01

  You follow my.

• 45:29Tom Bilyeu?

  Well, he's, he's, he's pulling himself off the chessboard for you. So I don't think you have to.

• 45:34Speaker 01

  I, I, let me just say a little fun, fun one for you. This is fun, but I, I'm not a mean person. I really not. I don't want anyone to suffer.

• 45:41Tom Bilyeu?

  You don't strike me as one.

• 45:42Speaker 01

  Well, I, I don't want anyone to suffer. I don't. Uh, even no matter if they're vile or terrible, I just don't want them to have pain either. But if. But if pain has to be come down and there has to be here, I know the guy I want to be the one who gets it, Larry Summers, who has just done such a beautiful job at taking it for me. He's lived on privilege all of his life. His uncle is Paul Samas and his other uncle on his mom's side is Kenneth Thero, both Nobel laureates, famous mathematical economists. He's parlayed that privilege all the way up to being president of Harvard, secretary of the treasury, head of the NEC, and now, he's always been a bad economist. He's always been that, but now you find he's a bad person as well.

• 46:27Tom Bilyeu?

  Yeah, yeah, well, to, you reap what you sow, I guess. All right. So, really fast, all of that makes sense to me. This is another case of everything you say I agree with wholeheartedly. The, there are a couple of things-

• 46:40Speaker 01

  But you're a very clever guy, from what I've heard.

• 46:42Tom Bilyeu?

  Well, that is exceedingly generous.

• 46:44Speaker 01

  They all say very nice things about you. That's why I'm on the show. And you're living up to your expectations. I think your questions and comments are really, really insightful and correct. They're the right questions. And I hope I'm, I get emotional in answering them, but I hope you don't mind that. But I love, I love economics.

• 47:03Tom Bilyeu?

  That's it for part one. Make sure you are subscribed so you do not miss part two coming up soon.

• 47:10Tom Bilyeu?

  Let's talk about a pattern that is guaranteed to be killing your progress. You know what you need to do. You need consistent nutrition. We all do. You need vitamins, probiotics, greens. We all know that we should be doing more of it. When your morning gets chaotic, you skip it. When you travel, you skip it. When your routine breaks, everything tends to break, and that inconsistency compounds against you every single day. AG1 is designed to solve the execution problem. One scoop, eight ounces of water, and you're done. You're getting 75 plus ingredients, vitamins and minerals, pre and probiotics, nutrient-dense superfoods, everything that used to require six, seven different supplements, and perfect

• 47:52Tom Bilyeu?

  planning now happens in one drink that takes about 30 seconds to make. Right now, AG1 is giving you $87 worth of free gifts with your first subscription. You get a welcome kit, travel packs, vitamin D3 plus K2, and flavor samples. Click the link in the show notes or visit drinkag1.com/impact to claim this offer.