tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 18, 2015 2:00am-4:01am EDT
in which he said he would run balanced budgets not stop. if you weeks after that, he announced he would run $10 billion a year in deficit. he was clearly criticizing the fact mr. harper had run deficits but that's what he's planning to do. the only fair to say when your advisors tell you one thing and another, pick one. you cannot save them both. your first vote in canadian parliament was to vote for mr. harper's tax cut for the wealthy. m.p. trudeau: i am looking straight at canadians and being honest the way i always have. we are committed to balanced budgets. we will balance the budget in 2019 because canadians need investment and growth now. m.p. mulcair: mr. harper claims he made no cuts to social programs.
plenty sat down and announced he would be cutting the funding formula by $36 billion for health care, that's cutting social programs. p.m. harper: let's be clear on the facts. under this government, are transfers have risen from $20 billion -- m.p. mulcair: that number will grow every year into the future and we will hit over $40 billion. you didn't make -- announcement you are cutting social programs. you like to talk about the fact you vote against business tax cuts. you voted against tax cuts for working people.
-- mulcair has talked about health care transfers but he just stepped back from that comment and says balancing the books is more important. move to the final question of the debate to mr. harper. you are going to need some new ideas. the oil patch resources in general are going to be a smaller part of the canadian economy and it's clear under your watch, canada is no longer an international champion on many different data points. we have record household debt, minimal growth, and in many cases, stagnant wages. why do you deserve more time? p.m. harper: let me be clear. i do not accept what you said. over the past 10 years, we have
done better than all the major developed economies. we're living in a terribly unstable global economy. right now, a portion of the economy is hard hit by the following oil prices. that is something that concerns me. we will do something about that but it just just that is all that has been done with our policy is false. competitive, making sure we are investing in things that we know there's labor demand for, trade, opening markets, access to over half of global gdp. investing in innovation with manufacturers and reforming immigration systems to make it more effective for the economy. that is why i believe the canadians are optimistic.
host: let's talk about rate. what do you say to the auto sector as you look at the pacific trade plan? p.m. harper: we know they have concerns. we're entering the final stages of a trade discussion in the asia-pacific that i think will conclude successfully, that will be the basis of the global trade network in the asia-pacific for the generation to come. i'm not suggesting they will like everything in that but we simply cannot afford as a country to have our auto sector shutout of the global supply chain.we will make sure we get the best deal for that and all of our sectors but we are committed to making sure we don't fall behind and access to a global trading economy. that would be disastrous for the country. host: you know the challenges
and problems that come that cannot be predicted. you are facing an economy that demands new thinking. what are you thinking of for the new economy? had we turned this into knowledge and the sharing economy? p.m. harper: i have come to work for seven years in a row with nothing but economic crisis around the world. we now have market chaos in china, the falling commodity prices. we do have to respond to these crises but we also have to operate on a long-term plan and that's a we are doing. that's not only just about resources but also including resources. i don't want to suggest that we are not going to have a vibrant resource sector. the fact we have unparalleled resources and endowment, one of the highly -- most highly
educated workforce is in the world. canada is able to weather the global economic storm's and we are committed to making sure all the sectors move forward together. thank you very much, mr. harper. i will now go to mr. mulcair. one of the questions the prime minister responded to is in respect to his mission -- vision. what you think we can do beyond the buffeting winds with oil prices? m.p. mulcair: it's possible to build a canada more generous and prosperous. mr. harper tends to believe everyone is on their own and i think we're all in this together. i do come from a very large family and times were tough but
i've seen what it is one people work together and try to give each other that helping hand. i also know that it's time people started looking at us differently. i want a democratic institutions respected at home and are international invitation respected abroad. what to make sure every young person gets the opportunities they need and that our seniors get the help they deserve. that's what we proposed to raise the guaranteed income supplement. host: what do you say to mr. harper's position that the liberals will love for deficit but then there will be slippage? m.p. trudeau: on the contrary. the reason mr. harper has not been able to get out of deficit is he isn't creating growth and he has cut spending to veterans programs. iny are important element building our economy and making
sure we are creating proper partnerships and moving our resources and creating educational opportunities for young people across the country by investing in the liberal billion.$2.6 we have a lot we need to do to invest in growing this economy. mr. harper thinks giving tax cuts to the wealthiest canadians will create growth. talks about the right things but he will not be able to act on them because he has backloaded his promises and he has committed to balance when we don't need balance with low interest rates right now and a declining debt to gdp ratio and a flat economy. we need to invest in our future. that's what confident economies do and that's what the liberal party is proposing.
if the right plan to help canadians now. p.m. harper: when it came out the other day that we actually had a surplus last year, mr. trudeau immediately came out and said that's because they cut seniors and infrastructure. spending in those areas has actually gone up and the will rebalance the budget is we increase revenues by cutting taxes. we're not saying in this fragile global economy everything's great. risks andgnificant challenges. we are making sure we are investing in the things that will cause long-term growth and that will help people to get and higher taxes and permanent deficits is a risk that buys nothing for people.
mr. harper was elected on a promise to change ottawa but it ottawa that changed mr. harper. corruption has increased and other what has become a more divisive place. our relationships with the provinces are more divisive and mean. i come out of provincial politics.akes -- it's my job to sit on regularly to work with them on important issues facing them and things we want to bring forward like quality affordable childcare. m.p. trudeau: one of the things i think it's clear is i disagree with these gentlemen on a number of things but the main thing i disagree with is their lack of an vision for our country. mr. harper once you to think better isn't possible. that's not true. talks about making
things better but will not act on it. host: there ypu have ot. -- there you have it. the much-anticipated debate on the economy. i like to thank everyone who has joined does and made this evening possible and to the mayor in calgary for hosting us. you believe in the national debate and i'm sure you agree we got one tonight. a final word of thanks to the three leaders, mr. harper, mr. , we wishmr. trudeau you well and we know you have a common interest in doing the best for canada, just a different way of doing it. stay with us. we are carrying the postdebate later. joint is nothaver
to begin the postdebate debate. thank >> posted by congressman john conyers with a focus on policing in the minority communities by von c-span2 at 11 a.m. eastern. at tonight's town hall in rochester, new hampshire, candidate donald trump fielded a question from a man who called muslims "a problem in this country." and "we know our president is one." we have a problem in this country and it's called muslims. we know our current president is one.
he's not even american. but anyway, we have training where they want to kill us. that's my question. when can we get rid of them? looking at a lot of different things. they are saying bad things are happening and we will look at that and plenty of other things. see all of donald trump's comments of the town hall in rochester in one hour here on c-span or any time at www.c-span.org. >> federal reserve chairman janet yellen announced that interest rates will not increase yet. this is conference is about one hour. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> good afternoon. as you know from our policy statement released a short time
ago, the federal open market committee reaffirms the current target range for the federal funds rate. met in july,mittee the pace of job gains has been solid. the unemployment rate has and overall labor market conditions have continued to improve. inflation has continue to run below the longer run objective. partly reflecting declines in energy prices. recent global economic and financial developments are likely to put further downward pressure on inflation in the near term. these developments may also restrain u.s. activity somewhat but has not led to a significant change in the committee's
outlook for the u.s. economy. continues to anticipate that the first increase in the federal funds .ate will be appropriate it remains the case that the committee will come from the timing of the initial increase based on the assessment of the implications of incoming information to the economic outlook. i will note the importance of the initial increase shouldn't be overstated. the stance of monetary policy will remain highly accommodative for quite some time after the initial increase. i will come back to today's
policy decision in a few moments but first i would like to review recent economic developments. it's moving through the realerly volatility, u.s. gross domestic product has estimated to have expanded at 2.25% base in the first half of the year. and notably stronger outcome than expected in june when committee participants submitted economic projections. andinued job gains increases in real disposable income have supported household spending. growth in business, fixed , heldment was moderate down in part by a significant contraction and oil drilling activity as a result of the this drop in oil prices year. moreover, net exports were on gdp growth in the first half of the year. reflecting the earlier
appreciation of the dollar and weaker foreign demand. the committee continues to expect a moderate pace of overall gdp growth even though the restraint from net exports is likely to persist. the labor market has shown further progress this year toward our objective of maximum employment. over the past three months, job gains averaged two wanted 20,000 per month. the unemployment rate at 5.1% in august was down 4/10 of a percent from the latest reading available. although that decline was accompanied by some rejection -- reduction in the labor force participation rate. a broader measure of employment that includes individuals who want and are available to work but are not actively searching and people who are working part
time but would rather work full-time has continued to improve. , that said some cyclical weakness likely remains. all the unemployment rate is close to most estimates, the participation rate is still below estimates of the underlying trend. voluntary part-time employment remains elevated and wage growth remains subdued. inflation has continued to run below the 2% objective, partly reflecting declines in energy and import prices.by colleagues and i continue ofexpect that the effects these factors on inflation will be transitory. however, the recent additional decline in oil prices and further appreciation of the dollar may mean it will take a bit more time for these effects to fully dissipate.
as these temporary fix state and is labor market improves, we expect inflation to go back to the 2% objective. the committee has taken note of recent declines in market-based measures of inflation compensation and will continue to monitor inflation carefully. this assessment of the outlook is reflected in the individual economic projections submitted for this meeting by fomc participants, which now extends through 2018. as announced in the minutes from the july meeting, we are introducing a modest enhancement to the summary of economic projections by publishing the median projection across fomc
participants. these medians provide a concise summary statistic of participant perspectives. they should not be interpreted as a live view or -- as a collective view. teach participants projections are conditions -- each projection is conditioned on the monetary policy. participants increased their projections are economic growth this year compared with projections made with the june meeting. projection iswth 2.1% for this year and rises to 2.3% in 2016. somewhat -- median growthe projection declined toward its longest rate.
the unemployment rate projections are lower than in june. at the end of this year, the median unemployment rate projection stands at 5%, down 3/10 of a percent from june and close to the median estimate of the longer run normal unemployment rate. committee participants generally see the unemployment rate declining a little further next year and leveling out. finally, participants project inflation to be very low this year, largely reflecting lower energy and nonenergy import prices. as labor market conditions continue to firm, the media inflation projection rises from just four tense of a percent this year to 1.7% next year and 2018.s 2% after
the path of the median inflation projections is lower than in june. the outlook abroad appears to have become more uncertain as a late and concerns of that growth in emerging markets have led to notable facility in financial markets. , including the drop in commodity prices, the further appreciation of the dollar command widening risk spread have tightened financial conditions to some extent. these developments may restrain u.s. economic activity somewhat and are likely to put further .ownward pressure on inflation given the significant economic and financial interconnections between the u.s. and the rest of the world, the situation bears
close watching. returning to monetary policy, we recognize there is been a great deal of focus on today's policy decision. the recovery from the great recession has advanced and domestic spending appears robust that an argument can be made for a rise in interest rates at this time. we discussed this possibility at our meeting. however, in light of the heightened uncertainty abroad and the slightly softer expected that inflation, the committee judged appropriate to wait for more evidence, including some further improvement in the labor market to bolster its confidence that inflation will rise to 2% medium-term. i do not want to overplay the
implications of these recent developments, which have not fundamentally altered our outlook. the economy has been performing well and we expect it to continue to do so. as i noted earlier, it remains the case that the timing of the initial increase in the federal funds rate with hunt on the committee's assessment of the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook. to be clear, our decision will not hinge on any particular data release or on day-to-day movements in financial markets. instead, the decision will depend on a wide range of economic and financial litigators and our assessment of the cumulative implications for actual and expected progress toward our objectives. let me emphasize the specific timing of the initial increase in the target range for the
federal funds rate far less important to the economy than the entire expected path of interest rates. once we begin to remove policy accommodation, we continue to expect economic conditions will evolve in a manner that will warrant only gradual increases in the target federal funds rate. compared with the projections made in june, many fomc participants lowered somewhat their past to the fact that cap -- paths to the federal funds rate. most participants continue to expect economic conditions will make it appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate later this year. although four participants now expect with such conditions, they will not be seen until next your later. the median projection for the federal funds rate rises to
and 2% in late 2017 and 3.5% in 2018. 2016 and 2017, the medians are about .25% below those projected in june. the media projected rate in 2017 remains below the rated most participants expect to prevail in the longer run despite the fact the median and inflation close to the 2% objective. a numbernts provided of destinations for their low federal funds rate projections. particular,ed in the residual effects of financial crisis, which are likely to continue to strain spending for some time, as well
as headwinds from abroad. the restraining influence of , ase selectors -- factors the restraining influence of these factors unreal activity dissipates further, most participants expect the federal funds rate to move to its longer normal levels by the end of 2018. i would like to underscore it at the forecast of the appropriate path of the federal funds rate, as usual, are conditional on participants' individual projections of the most likely outcomes for economic growth, employment, inflation and other factors. but our actual policy actions over time will depend on how economic conditions evolve, which is quite uncertain. if the expansion proved to be more vigorous than currently anticipated, and inflation moves higher than expect, then the appropriate path would likely follow us deeper and higher
trajectory. projecteper and hired three. then the appropriate character read -- trajectory would be lower and less steep. the committee's sizable holdings of longer-term securities should help maintain accommodative financial conditions, and promote further progress toward our objectives. thank you, let me stop there. i would be happy to take your questions. steve, cnbc. madam chair, this notion of uncertainty and economic and global development, is it fair to say that it could be many months before those global developments work their way
through the u.s. economic data, and that you would not have the certainty that you are looking for to raise interest rates for many months well into next year? chair yellen: steve, i think you can see from the sdp projections that most participants continue to think that economic conditions will call for or make appropriate an increase in the federal funds rate by the end of this year. for participants moved their projections into 2016 or later, but the great majority of participants continued to hold that view. of course, there will always be uncertainty. we can't expect that uncertainty to be fully resolved. but in light of the developments we have seen, and the impacts on toancial markets, we want take a little more time to evaluate the likely impacts on the united states.
as i mentioned, the inflation outlook has softened slightly. we have had some further developments, namely lower oil prices, and a further appreciation of the dollar, that put downward pressure in the near-term on inflation. we fully expect those further effects like the earlier moves in the dollar, and in oil prices, to be transitory, but there is a little bit of downward pressure on inflation. we would like to see some further developments. this importantly, could include further improvements in the labor market that would bolster our confidence that inflation will move back to percent over the medium term. -- 2% over the medium term. >> can i ask about the next
meeting in october, do you view that as a live meeting even though there isn't going to be a scheduled press conference at that time? kind of developments would you need to see to be confident in moving in the near-term, is it more important in the financial markets or the upcoming data? thank you. chair yellen: as i have said before, every meeting is a live meeting. , where the committee can make a decision to move to change our target for the federal funds rate, that certainly includes october. as you know, and i have stressed previously, where we to decide to do that, we would call a press briefing and you've toticipated in an exercise make sure that you would know how to participate in that press briefing, should it happen. yes, october remains a
possibility. be looking at incoming developments, both financial and economic, to try to make sure we feel that the u.s. economy is doing well. i want to emphasize domestic developments has been strong, we see domestic demand growing at a solid pace, the labor market continuing to improve. of course, we will watch incoming data to confirm how expectation that that will continue, and we of course will watch global financial and economic developments. i can't give you a recipe for exactly what we are looking to see, but as we say, we want to see continued improvement in the labor market, and we would like to bolster our confidence that inflation will move back to 2%.
further improvement in the labor market does serve that purpose, to put the other things we would see that could bolster that confidence, but further improvement in the labor market will serve to do that. gym from the l.a. times. there were a group of protesters out here before the meeting, there was a similar group at jackson hole. they and others have warned the fed not to raise rates, out of concern that the labor market is not fully healed, wages have not risen fast enough. what impact has had on you and your colleagues and your decision today? chair yellen: we have been receiving advice from a large number of economists and interested groups. that is of course appropriate, and we value hearing the opinions of many differing groups and individuals with
different perspectives. but at the end of the day, it is the committee's job to come together to analyze the data that we have on the economy, to decide how it affects the outlook, and to try to deliberate and arrived at a committee judgment about the appropriate path of policy. that is what we did today. closeaid, although we are to many participants, and the median estimate of the longer run normal rate of unemployment, at least my own judgment -- and this has been true for a long time -- is that there are additional margins, particularly relating to very high levels of part-time involuntary employment, and labor force participation that suggests that
at least to some extent, the standard unemployment rate understates the degree of slack in the labor markets. but we are getting closer, the labor market has improved. past, we said in the don't want to wait until we have fully met both of our objectives to begin the process of tightening policy, given the legs in the operation on monetary policy. kate davidson from the wall street journal. do you think over the last two months that you have gotten closer to or further away from the inflation goals? separately, you have received a congressional subpoena related to the disclosure of information from the said september 2012 meeting, are you any closer to complying with that and have you turned over information to congress? chair yellen: your first question was have we come closer
are moved further away from our inflation goal. we have used the same language, which is that we expect to achieve our 2% goal over the medium-term. say, as we say in our statement, recent developments seem likely to put downward pressure. we are after all way below the inflation targets. but an important reason for that is that declines in import prices reflecting the appreciation of the dollar and declines in energy prices are holding down inflation, well below our target and well below core inflation. we expect those effects to be with inflation executions, we expect inflation to move back to 2%. in the interim meeting.
we have seen some further appreciation of the dollar and further downward pressure on energy prices. that creates a bit of further that i wouldtion view as transitory. it is very likely to be transitory. i continue and the committee continues to expect that the inflation will move back to 2%. this should be a small thing. in the meantime, the labor market has continued to improve. -- tighteror market labor market moving toward full employment, is one that historically has generated a boards pressure on inflation. that bolsters my confidence in inflation. on the other hand, we have had a in which inflation has been running below our objective.
i consider it very important that we achieve our inflation objective, and defend against inflation that is persistently above our inflation objective, and also persistently below our inflation objective. only in a have not good degree of confidence that that will occur. we did take note in the statement of the decline in inflation compensation. it is hard to get a direct read on inflation expectations out of these measures. they can be pushed down by factors pertaining to liquidity, and the treasury, and the tips market, and other issues pertaining to risk premia. but we have taken note. i would say that is something that is caught has caught our attention, and factors we are watching.
a littlelike to have bit more confidence, but i would not interpret developments during the intermediate. period as significantly undermining confidence. the labor market is really important, that as it continues to improve, it has and we want to see it improve further, that there is to bolster confidence. you asked about september 2012. we are working very closely with house financial services committee that requested information to satisfy their request. we are working very closely with them. from the new york times. the economic projections you released today show that members expressed -- expect a three-year time when the unemployment rate will be at its lowest sustainable level but inflation will not rise above 2%.
that seems extraordinary. can you talk about why we would expect inflationary pressures one unemployment is at mid-level, why would inflation be so weak, and does it indicate that you are projecting much of the decade will pass without the fed reaching inflation target, does it indicate the u.s. failed to do enough to revive the economy? chair yellen: we have been very focused on doing everything we andto revive this economy, to achieve our maximum employment objectives. after we took the funds rate know, weero, as you put in place a number of other extraordinary measures, including forward guidance and large scale asset purchases in andr to speed the recovery
attain both our inflation objective and maximum employment objective. productionok at the -- projection, you can see that we see sufficient growth to push the unemployment rate. it is already very close to estimates of its learn curb run normal level. we expect the unemployment rate to fall slightly, but participants project it will fall slightly below that level. if that occurs, we would expect labor force participation, the cyclical component of that, to diminish over time. we would hope to see some decline in the portion of slack that is reflected in high levels of part-time involuntary employment. inflation is going back in our projection to 2%.
until 2018 to get there, it is awfully close in 2017, and not terribly far away even next year. fromve very large drags import prices and energy prices. over the next year or so, those and thehould dissipate, behavior of inflation should mainly, if our understanding of the inflationary process is correct, and if inflation atectations are willi anchored two, if the labor market heels, and if the healing progresses, we will see further upward pressure on inflation. that is what we expect now. it is a slow process. it is characterized by lags,
and that is why it takes a few years as the unemployment rate falls, and even overshoots is longer run normal level, it just takes some time for inflation to get back to 2%. helps theershooting cap back faster than it otherwise would. important for us and our credibility hinges on defending our inflation. from if it rises above, if we would not have over the medium-term that we want to see inflation get over 2%. we believe the policies we are fat -- following are designed to accomplish that end will do so. -- and will do so. >> thank you. from the washington post. i want to piggyback on that question, and bring up the old threshold of 6.5% unemployment
and 2.5% inflation, when the fed promised to keep interest rates low. that has assumed, or suggested the fed was comfortable with inflation rising above 2%, but you just said moments ago that you don't want to wait until inflation actually hit your target before you are ready to lift off. and wonder if you could explain that a little bit, is there a shift in how much inflation the fed is willing to accept? chair yellen: let me be clear, 2% is our objective. we want to see inflation go back to 2%, 2% is not a ceiling on inflation. we are not trying to push the inflation rate above 2%, that is always the objective. ceiling, and if it were, it would have to be conducting a policy that on average would hold the inflation rate below 2%.
that is not our policy. we want to see the inflation as rapidlyck percent -- back to 2% as rapidly as we can. but there are lines and the impact of monetary policy on the s on the impact of monetary policy on the economy. employment falls below estimates of the natural rate, only then did we start to begin "tighten" monetary policy i don't think is right. let me say, just to begin to diminish the extraordinary degree of accommodation for would likelycy, we overshoot substantially our 2%
objective. we might be faced with and having to tighten policy in a way that could be disruptive to the real economy. and i don't think that is a desirable way to conduct policy. >> gina from bloomberg news. you mentioned earlier that there is always going to be some uncertainty in the global economy. that is whatthat kept you from hiking this month. how do you communicate to markets, what is the kind of uncertainty that keeps you from lifting rates, and what is the uncertain you -- uncertainty you can overlook? chair yellen: that is a very hard question. it is why we come together and had very careful of valuations of a wide range of factors. but at the end of the day, we are focused on two things. the path for employment, and whether or not we feel confident
we are on the road that will take us to our maximum employment objective, and whether or not we see the risks around attaining that as balance. of course, there will be uncertainty around it. with that, we have reasonable confidence inflation will, over the medium-term, go back to 2%. it is really through that filter that we are trying to look at uncertainty. of course, there are many uncertainties in the global economy, but we are asking ourselves how economic and financial developments in the global economy affect the risk to our outlook for our two goals, and whether or not they that wenbalanced risks want to wait to resolve to some extent. can you talk about what
foreign developments you discussed and what you are concerned about? --assume it might be tied china, are you concerned about the chinese economy slowing, the markets there? do you have concerns about the european economy? related to stop markets can i ask you feel how -- how you feel about u.s. equity markets, because you spoke about the inmate and you saw that they were generally quite high. now equity prices have pulled back. chair yellen: with respect to global developments, we reviewed developments in all important areas before, but we have focused particularly on china and emerging markets.
expected thatg most -- as most analysts have, we have expected to see the chinese rebalance their economy. and iave planned that, don't think there are more surprises there. the question is whether there might be a risk of a more abrupt slowdown than most analysts expect. i think there were concerns the deftness with which policy makers are addressing those concerns. in addition, we saw a very substantial downward pressure on
oil markets. those developments have had a significant impact on emerging market economies that are important committees -- producers of commodities, as well as more advanced countries, including canada, which is an important trading partner of ours, that has been negatively affected by declining commodity prices. net and players of energies are positively affected, but emerging markets has been negatively affected by those developments. we have seen significant outflows of capital from those countries, pressures on their exchange rates, and concerns about their performance going. a lot of their -- our performance has been on risk
around china, but not just china, emerging markets more generally and how they may still over to the united states. in terms of thinking about financial developments and our reaction to them, i think a lot of developments -- we don't want to respond to market turbulence. the fed should not be responding to the ups and downs of the markets. it is certainly not our policy to do so. but when there are significant financial developments, it is incumbent on us to ask ourselves what is causing them. of course, while we can know for sure, it seems to us as though concerns about the global economic outlook for drivers of those financial developments. they have concerned is, in part because they take us to the global outlook and how that will affect us. to some extent, we have seen a
tightening of financial conditions during the interim meeting period. the stock market adjustment, combined with a somewhat stronger dollar and higher risk spread does represent some tightening of financial conditions. in and of itself, it is not the end of things in terms of policy, because we have to put a lot of pieces together. we are looking at a u.s. economy that has been performing well, and impressing us by the pace at which it is creating jobs, and the strength of domestic demand. have that, we have some concerns about negative impacts from global developments, and tightening of financial conditions.
we are trying to put all that together. important, we say in our statement, despite of all of this, we continue to view the of economic activity and labor markets as balanced. there are a lot of different pieces, different cost currents, some street and indeed outlook and some creating concerns, but overall no significant change in the economic outlook. >> just to piggyback on the global considerations, as you say, the u.s. economy has been growing. are you worried given the global interconnectedness, low inflation globally, all of the other concerns you spoke that, that you may never escape from this zero situation? chair yellen: i would be very
surprised if that is the case. that is not the way i see the outlook, or the way the committee sees the outlook. can i completely ruling out? i can't completely rule it out. that is an extreme downside risk of myear the center outlook. michael mckee from bloomberg radio and television. if the economy develops as bit projections suggest, you will see improvement in labor market, but it won't push inflation of any faster. i'm wondering what the argument is for raising rates this year. even allowing for long and variable lags, you are not forecasting and inflation problem -- problem that would need a faster rate path for at least a couple of years. if we maintain a
highly accommodative monetary policy for a very long time from here, and the economy performs as we expect, namely it is strong in the risks that are -- and the risks that are out there don't materialize, my concern much morebe tightening in the labor markets then you see in these projections. lags will be probably slow, but eventually we will find ourselves with a substantial overshoot of our inflation objective, and then we will be -goced into a kind of stop policy. we will push the economy so far, it will have become overheated,
and we will have to tighten policy more abruptly than we would like. slow, steadyving growth, improvement in the labor market, and continued inrovement in performance the labor market, i don't think it is good policy to have to then slam on the brakes and risk a downturn in the economy. >> one of your colleagues said they would like to see negative interest rates. i did not expect to see that. what do you make a negative interest rates as a potential source of new stimulus if the fed were to do something more? to doing qe, does negative interest rates --
should it be part of the fed's toolkit essentially? >> negative interest rates was not something we considered very seriously at all today. it's not one of our main policy options. committeeipant in the would like to see additional accommodation and is concerned by the inflation out luck and thanks that we need additional stimulus, additional accommodation to provide him propose doing so by moving interest rates negative. that's something we've seen in several european countries. it's not something we talk about today. i don't expect that we're going to be in the path of providing additional accommodation, but if the outlook were to change in a way most of my colleagues and i do not expect and we found ourselves with a weak economy
that needed additional stimulus, we would look at all of our available tools and that would be something we would evaluate in that context. associated press. in july when you were talking to us, you said that you yourself the firstacted to see rate hike before the end of the year. is that still your expectation? when you talk about the developments in financial markets and what caused the august turbulence -- you mentioned china -- you did mention the prospect of a fed rate increase. do you think that would slow as well? you asked me about my own expect haitians. i would say -- i speak on behalf of the committee and try to explain committee decisions. we do not identify who's who in terms of our projections with
the funds rate. i do not want to change that and my personalus be on views on the past. i have characterized the a forecastiew as prevails likely, if it , call for a funds rate increase later this year. i think that's a fair summary of the committee's assessment of things. i think you've also asked me about uncertainty about our own policies? >> the fact with market turbulence, people concerned about the fed about to raise interest rates. you did not mention that is one reason for the turbulence. the main drivers of the turbulence have been concerns about the global outlook. that is how i read it.
of course i know there is uncertainty about fed policy. as i mentioned, we are well aware that there has been a huge focus on the decision today. i would ask you to appreciate that there are a lot of crosscurrents in economic and that wel developments need to take into account in deciding on what the appropriate course of policy is. not make continuous decisions every single they about our policy. we meet periodically. darndest to pull together the best analysis we intonto exchange views arriving at committee decisions. i do understand during this time that every word that an fomc member has said has been the
that for its potential implications for what our decision will be. i think that's an unfortunate state of affairs, but i understand and i think it's natural when you are at a point when conditions may be falling in place for there to be a shift in policy. it's natural that should have been. extent, to some contribute to uncertainty in financial markets. michelle, bbc news perry and talked about the strong dollar. do you see your policy actions affecting the dollar? is it something you're considering when you make a policy decision? so monetary policy -- u.s. monetary policy -- is directed towards trying to achieve the goals the congress has laid out for us.
when monetary policy titans and interest rates rise, it commonly is the case either when it happens or an expectation that interest rate differentials globally do tend to induce capital flows that have impacts on exchange rates. often hasy policy some effect on the exchange rate . it is not in my view the main channel by which monetary policy works. it's one of a number of different channels by which monetary policy works, but it does have some impact on exchange rates. yes, we need to take that into account. >> greg from market watch.
i wanted to see if you would shift gears a little to talk about the housing market. you said in a statement that it has improved. how much are you counting on the housing market for growth going or especially since the committee sees rates rising? thank you. we are envisioning further improvements in the housing market. depressed.very housing starts are below levels that seem consistent with underlying demographics, especially in an economy that is creating jobs. we had lots of people who are forl double the and demand housing should be there and should materialize as the job market improves and income growth improves.
are we counting on it? housing is now a very small sector of the economy. and --ot the driver of ais is my own forecast -- driver of ongoing improvements in the u.s. economy. , butays a supporting role consumer spending is the main by decentstered outlook for investment spending. but i would continue to expect housing to improve. , ifmber we are envisioning things go as we anticipate, a of increasesl path in short-term interest rates over time to some extent that is already embodied in longer-term rates. on the other hand, as time passes and you move beyond the
window and short rates are zero, it will be natural for rates to rise some. we recognize that the housing market is sensitive to mortgage -- market rates. it's an important factor. that is something we are definitely taking into account in thinking about the appropriate path of policy. nancy from market place. you mentioned you got a lot of unsolicited advice. there's another side that says the fed should raise interest rates because keeping rates so low for so long has actually exacerbated the wealth gap. you think the fed has widened the wealth gap with its low interest rate policy? people say that it mainly benefits the wealthy. iti guess i really don't see that way. it's true that interest rates affect asset prices, but they
have complex effects for balance sheets, liabilities and assets. me, the main thing that an accommodative monetary policy does is put people back to work. and since income inequality is by havingcerbated high unemployment and a weak job market that has the most profound negative effects on the most vulnerable individuals, to back to workople and seeing a strengthening of that has aarket disproportionately favorable effect on vulnerable portions of our population, that's not something that increases income inequality. there have been a number of donees that have been recently that have tried to take
account of many different ways actingh monetary policy through different parts of the transmission mechanism affects inequality. there's a lot of guesswork involved and different analyses, with different things, but a pretty recent paper is quite concludes that fed policy has not exacerbated income inequality. >> thank you. john prior with politico. what would a -- what role would a possible government shutdown play in your vote today? what would you say to lawmakers pursuing the strategy? >> it played absolutely no role in our decision.
i believe it is the responsibility of congress to pass the budget, to find the government, to deal with the debt ceiling so that america pays its bills. we have a good recovery in place that's really making progress and to see congress take actions that would endanger that begress, i think that would more than unfortunate. to me, that's the job of congress. congress charged us with warming and economic outlook that is focused on the medium term taking appropriate policy actions based on that outlook and that is what we've done in the past and will continue to do going forward. >> madam chair, you said in your opening statement that the fed's
policy of maintaining a large balance sheet by not starting to shrink the balance sheet by curtailing re-investments and rollovers help set your accommodative monetary stance on top of the near zero federal funds rate. by delaying rate hikes logically are you not also delaying reducing the balance sheet? one euro ago the he said it would start shrinking the balance sheets until they started raising the funds rate. you areconcern that delaying normalization of the balance sheet? was that an issue you and your colleagues discussed? thank you. been and as was reported in the minutes of our july meeting, we have been discussing reinvestment policy. our normalization principles indicated that we would not
begin to either reduce or eliminate reinvestments until after we have begun to raise the federal run -- funds rate. the exact timing of that would on economic and financial conditions and our evaluation of them. bet guidance continues to accurate. we do not have anything further, but it is certainly true that we to beginitted to wait running down our balance sheet until after we've begun the process of normalization. yes, if we defer, it's not a very large matter we are talking about from a stimulus point of view, but it is to some extent true that if we delay our raising the rate it will
maybe delay the timing at which that process will begin. there is no fix. we've not given some fixed amount of time of so many months after we start. we're continuing to discuss what the appropriate timing with the of that policy and have not made any further decisions on that just yet. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, >> the federal reserve -- reserve decided to leave the rates unchanged. we will talk about that in a possible timeline for a rate hike. the congressman from connecticut, a member of the community. and that the budgeting member on the house conservatives
legislative agenda for the deadline. we welcome your comments on phase look and twitter full top -- on facebook and twitter. attorney general loretta lynch wills the cap the congressional black caucus edges light of conference later today. the focus is on criminal justice reform and policing in the minority community. that is live on he spent to at 11:00 a.m. eastern. >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house. you get unfettered act as to the candidate. rally finance beaches. speeches. and every campaign event we cover is available on our web'site.
we will be here for a while. we just got back. we came from mobile, alabama two weeks ago. we had 31,000 people. 31,000. [applause] we just left dallas, where we were in the great mavericks. team, a great team. a wonderful team. mark cuban was so nice. good guy. said, whated, he about using the arena? i said, much do we have, how long do we have, and how many seats? they filled it up in today's. filled it up in two days. we have to make our country great again. [applause]
to a very nice place, los angeles. we went to the uss iowa. we were honored by a great veteran group, that gave me an endorsement. they endorsed me. i love the vets. we have many here tonight. [applause] we have a lot of vets here tonight but that that's on the uss iowa -- that is some ship, by the way. they don't build them like that anymore. but they endorsed me and i flew -- as you know last night, we had a little thing called the debate at the reagan library. it was sort of an amazing thing. we had an incredible time. >> we love you, donald. p: thank you.
that was some evening. saidd so well that cnn let's make it one hour longer. can you believe this? that the bay was three hours. it felt like more than that. why did they do that? endave to teach the children to be entrepreneurs. they wanted more revenue from the commercials. is it that terrible? i think it's terrible. the money should have gone to the vets. right? they've made a lot of money. we had an incredible time. i got such great remarks. look at this. did votes as to who won the debate last night, right? time magazine, 114,000 votes as of 6 p.m., trump 56% --
[cheers] , rubio 7%, ben9% carson 4%, the rest not doing too good. drugdge- we love --donald trump 51% with a total of 668,000 votes cast. it.k of 51%. second, fiorina much less -- like, much. then rubio, cruz -- i will not mention the next name because i don't like him very much. ahead., way up i like this one. donald trump first place by a lot. reet, donald trump 52%.
that's a lot when you have all these guys. it's not against two people. donald trump 52%. then you have slate. we had a great time. you don't read about that much in television. fox has treated me shabbily. but that's ok. cnn a little bit better. result is people know what happened. it was an incredible time and we are going to do something very special. there's a great movement going on. it's a special movement. people want to see our country be great again. they want to see things happen.
he's a great person -- i love winners. we love winners, right? tom brady. [applause] tom is an incredible guy, total champion and did not even want to tell me about it. he endorsed me yesterday. everybody appear knows about it. when you get tom, you are getting a champ. we have some others, i will not mention them now, but so many people are endorsing. it's a very interesting. coach ditka and people i just don't even know coming out in favor of trump because they want to see the right thing happen. when cnn did a poll recently,
they had a few different categories. in leadership, i win -- forget it. so much higher than everyone else. leadership, through the roof. the other thing is a thing called the economy and jobs. nobody is close. the only thing they did not like was my personality. can you believe it? so here's what happened. theent to dallas, mobile, uss iowa. i making speeches all over the place and we had the debate last night which was exciting. you are no what we are going to do tonight? no speech. let's do question and answer. i'm going to say a few words and then we are going to do question and answer. you can make them vicious, questions.rrible how many cameras are lit? there's a lot of them. aery time i speak now it's
lot of them. if i did not get ratings, those cameras would not be on. they would not be on. [applause] when u.s. gore question, remember you are on live television. we're going to talk for just a couple of minutes, we are going to make the military so strong, so powerful. who wants to use it? you have to have it because what's happening in the world, we need that military, that protection and we will have it if trump is elected president. that i can tell you. [applause] part of that, because i consider it part, but we are taking care of our veterans, ok? they're are going to be so happy. i've been appear many times. times been appear many with my guy?
things. to take care of so many vets in new hampshire and they are not treated right. they are not treated right anywhere. two weeks ago on wednesday, they had the longest wait in a waiting room that anyone can remember. think of it. days, four days, five days. it will not happen anymore. it's not that happen. going to come out with a plan but one of the things we're going to do, when you have to wait that kind of time you go to a private practice, private's private hospital. believe me it will be less expensive and you will get much better service but you will not be waiting in a room for 5, 6, 7 days for a condition that can be dealt with immediately. it's not done a happen. happen.not gonna
the only thing i want to dwell on his we're going to build a wall at the border. [cheers] [applause] in people are going to come into this country, but they are going to come in and legally. they are going to be legal. they will come in legally to our country. so when i announced, as you know -- can you believe i've been a politician for almost three months. i never thought in a million years i'd be a politician. that's the hard part. that's true. we are running this time and it will be incredible. you look not just at the new all of themll but and it's absolutely incredible what we are doing. what we are really doing together.
immigration, the politicians are all talk and no action. how many politicians are in this room? these are great, fabulous people. stand up. he's been with me from the beginning, right? what? how about elected officials? stand up. these are all fabulous people, especially you. so we are going to do something. when the wall gets built, i'm saying mexico will pay for it. mexico.ove i do business with the mexican people and entrepreneurs. i have many, many hispanics working for me, but you know what? whether it's china, japan, mexico, they are outsmarting our leaders and we will not let it happen anymore. we won't let it happen.
i asked about a week ago with is with china.it it's almost $400 billion per year. we are talking per year. in other words we are losing almost $400 billion, that's only china. in japan it's close to $75 billion every year and it's been pretty steady. it's gone up -- of course. we get dumber and dumber so it's getting worse. then we get to mexico. $45 billion and it could even be more than that. i'm competingle against, the so-called candidates you saw last night. some are very nice, by the way. cannot doo me you
that. why would mexico pay? they will never pay. why wouldn't they? we send hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into mexico. you have a huge problem at the border with the tremendous job cartels pouring and with drugs and out with money. we're not making a good deal. drug cartelsndous are pouring in. the numbers are staggering. people say the wall does not work. you ask israel whether or not a wall works. a wall properly done, a trump wall, it works. that i can tell you. [applause] know these guys, the politicians -- they are politicians so i understand. my whole life i've dealt with politicians. you can't get mexico to pay for the wall. it just doesn't work.
are losing almost $50 billion. think of it. $50 billion a year on trade. that's just peanuts. they say it's going to cost 10 thosebillion dollars that people have no idea. you will do it for much less, bigger, better, stronger and people are not going to home depot and walking up with a latter. not this wall. [applause] way, this wall is going to have a big beautiful open gate. it will be a nice opening and when people want to come in legally and go through the process, we all welcome them. that's a correct statement. we welcome them. when someone goes to harvard number one in their class or ofnford, the wharton school finance, yale, any of them and they do great and then we throw
them right out and they go back to a country and they tried to compete and they do very successfully. we want to keep people of talent . we want people of great talent. we've got a plan in terms of illegal immigration -- and remember this. when i first announced, and this was an incredible two weeks, rush limbaugh says he's never more incoming -- which means really bad dress, i've never seen anything like it and then i doubled down and it was true. nobody would have done that because i knew the problem. i knew what was happening. we have tremendous crime whether angelesn francisco, los , whether it's the woman two weeks ago who was killed in california, a 66-year-old veteran who was raped and --omized, killed
unbelievable, by an illegal immigrant. it's just not going to happen anymore, folks. we're going to have a border. [applause] we're going to get the gang members out of here fast. a lot of gang members are illegal immigrants. these are tough dudes. we're going to get them out of here so fast your head will spin. honored i the crowd and we are going to have some fun now. instead of making a speech that i've been doing over and over, i want to take questions. don't we like that? let's start with this group over here. come on. >> hey, man. we've got a problem in this country and it's called muslims. you know our current president
is one. you know he's not even american. but anyway, we have training want to killhey us. that's my question. when can we get rid of them? aretrump: a lot of people saying that in saying that bad things are happening. we will look at that and plenty of other things. go ahead. know i definitely have to ask you a good veteran question. welcome first of all to new hampshire. last night was a disgrace. cnn did not touch on any of the issues that are going on with veterans health care. mr. trump: true. there was not one question relating to the veterans. did anyone even ask them why? i know that's a clinton influenced net work. do they not like veterans? >> there was not one question relating to that and not too much on the military.
those days, believe me, are over. go ahead. hi, mr. trump. the economy and jobs market is a big issue. i just finished my masters and now i'm told i'm either over or underqualified. i believe the unemployment rate is cute. what can you do to improve the job market for qualified, educated u.s. citizens? mr. trump: it's an amazing question i get all the time. one of the things we are doing, we will be taking our jobs back from china and japan, all of these other places that have in ripping us for years. for been talking about this 10 or 15 years. no politician sees it. we are ringing our manufacturing back here. the question, other than veterans, the question i'm asked the most.
young, beautiful, great people go to college and in many cases borrow a lot of money to get through college and they are so proud of themselves. they get out there and they cannot get a job. with trump? there's an expression. greatest jobs president that god ever created. i tell you that. that's what you need. [applause] >> can you hire me, please? willrump: go ahead and we go around. lots of people with their hands up. let's go. trump, i was wondering when we can get together and work on the unsafe conditions at the plant. it's been a month since i gave you that information. should haveou and i a press conference because both governors in massachusetts and thehampshire are protecting
first responders. i would like to work with you on it. mr. trump: we will take a look at it. next, back here. >> have a question about the trump wall. trump wall? that's what's going to happen. yeah, bill the wall. when i'm gone they will change the name to trump wall so i have to make it beautiful. big and powerful. go ahead. we don't have a good record when it comes to paying off debt. of 19 trillion. i would say we not doing too well. >> how are we going to expect to mexico to repay that debt? mr. trump: they make a fortune
off of us. they take our business. >> we borrow a lot and not pay it off. mr. trump: do you like oreos? i'm not eating them anymore. nabisco's closing their big plant in chicago and moving it to mexico. ford is building a 2.5 billion dollar plant in mexico. they are doing very well. we need leaders who can deal with them and deal with all the other countries. we need leaders who are smart, tough, cunning. i have carl icahn lined up in some of the greatest business leaders in the world, really tough, smart people who will help us. they will go negotiate and we will make great deals and bring the jobs back see you can get a job. you like that? ok. question. with the hat. welcome back to new
hampshire. mr. trump: you think it's hot enough in this place? pretty hot but this blows it away. go ahead. who applaud the gentleman brought of the muslim training camps but america also has its guns pointed at ordinary citizens here. don't get nervous. you are on seven television networks. >> what is the bureau of land management and agriculture. differentoing into ranches, shutting them down with regulations, but they seem to be pointing the gun to make sure our they get their fees, own government putting us at siege. how can we stop them? aretrump: so many things going to change.
these are regulations. that's just one. seeing in real estate, we have army bases, navy bases. so many are for sale in so many have been sold. how many can we sell? they come across my desk. things are going to change. go ahead. you young handsome guy? go ahead. this was a great friend of mine, daniel -- mr. trump: he just passed away. of america's rags to riches story. i think america has lost the american dream. what can donald trump do to bring that back? was a banker who passed away a few years ago and he was a very successful, great guy. we will bring back the american dream. we are bringing it act.
i understand what you are saying many get it from so people. is the american dream dead? they asked me that question. dream is in trouble. that i can tell you. it's on life support. we are going to get it back and do some real jobs. how about a man with that beautiful red hat? stand up. what a hat. what does that say on it? make america great again. that's beautiful. [applause] mr. trump, can you please explain your position on the second amendment? on the second amendment. mr. trump: all for it. you need the protection. we had an incident in new york, two prisoners a few months ago that escaped from a maximum security prison, a real beauty
in new york and they escaped. people were really scared. they work killers and tough cookies. a man and a wife were in the she was anti-gun. she hated that the husband had a bignd the guy was second amendment guy. all of a sudden these two tough cookies are somewhere around and all of a sudden she is now totally pro because she felt she was so happy that her husband had guns and they had the gun on the table and you know what? they never had to use it because only the bad guys use them. they were secure. now she's bigger than the husband in terms of wanting it.
100% pro-second amendment. [applause] i'm a veteran of both iraq and afghanistan. mr. trump: wow. you are in good shape. were you wounded? couple groundnd a incidents. of human a lot suffering on the iraqi site -- danny. what, if anything, should the u.s. be doing for the humanitarian crisis in syria? is massivethe crisis and i'm getting this question a lot. you have hundreds of house and of people. point -- there comes a we all have to have a heart and i think i have as big a one as anybody but the comes a point where this country has to say we have to get our own act
together. we have to do it. [applause] are looking at isis and all of the problems that are being caused over there, you say to yourself what happens if a lot of these people are al qaeda, isis? you can have 15 different things and they don't know anything about them. with all of that being said, europe, they have to help themselves. be the unitedys states. we have bridges, roads, tunnels. we have problems here. japan $1.4 trillion. they sell cars by the thousands. thousands of cars all over the place and we know them money. how do you do that? we have people that are not very smart. china, we over them the same amount of money. trillion dollars.
we have to straighten out our own country. you have the gulf states who are very rich -- saudi arabia, qatar, bahrain -- they don't want to have anybody. nobody. you have europe and they've got to help them. what i do like is a safe zone. you've got a lot of sand in syria. i do like the concept of a safe zone where you put them there and build it out. you have security and you create a little bit of an environment until they can ultimately go back to their homes -- which most of them really want to do. they're caught in this conflict, but the concept of a safe stone is something that makes sense. europe.to help the gulf states have to contribute. saudi arabia -- and all fairness it's a little bit less, saudi was making so much money
beyond anything and anyone's comprehension. all of these countries have to get together and fund this. we can do something, but we have to get other people to help us. we cannot be the patsy every time there's a problem and in airports areour third world, our bridges are falling down. our safety rating on the bridges are 62% in danger. our roads are collapsing. we are a mess. we want to build our country and we want to help people on a humanitarian basis but we have to do some things to help ourselves. it's time maybe for us to help ourselves. ok, in the back. let's go. going to the lousy seats looking at the back of my head. they see that it's real. go ahead. >> do you plan to visit with the
pope when he comes to philadelphia? poperump: you know the believes in global warming. you know that, right? in this room, it's so hot maybe i will start to believe it as well. this room -- the air-conditioning was not designed for this many people. , a lot of pope personality, a good man. my name is helene up. i have a house here in him then and i worked very hard all my life. my parents came over during the berlin airlift and when they landed, they both had to work in the mills. my father became a carpenter to put us through school and here we are working hard, getting social security, but my problem is that people coming over here land on the shores and they have no problem going in getting food
stamps, housing, a lecturer, all of this and it's coming from our social security money and we are getting nothing -- nothing. [applause] mr. trump: she's getting more and more excited. put our fiorina company, lucent technologies, in the ground. mr. trump: people might as well here it. i thought i would wait a few days before i exposed her business failure, but it's so ridiculous. i invested in my stock. i worked for the company 37 years when i was forced to retire. mr. trump: lucent headed up by who? >> carly fiorina. mr. trump: before hewlett-packard. at $87 perying stock share and when i was forced to retire my stock wasn't worth $.25. i lost almost half $1 million. that's what i plan to retire on
and i've got nothing. amazingp: it sort of because a lot of people don't get it. lucent was a disaster. it was a company she ran prior to hewlett-packard. compaq she was heading up hewlett-packard for a decision tode the buy compaq computers. people who work there said it was such a great company until she got involved and went out to make this horrible acquisition that just destroyed the company. yesterday on the front page of "the wall street journal," and big story that hewlett-packard is dropping about 30,000 jobs. they are still recovering -- who know if they may ever. goodone thinks she made a speech yesterday. i don't get it. i don't get it. at some point, people are going to see, and i think it will be a very big roadblock.
trump, iyou look at built an unbelievable company, tremendous network which i don't want to talk about other than to say it's the kind of mentality you need in this country at least for some time. [applause] as a businessman i help democrats, republicans, whoever. i used all of the laws of the land. i would buy a company, throw it into a chapter. you bankrupted, beat the hell out of the banks. you have to do that. you have many people in my position where they do the same thing but nobody talks about it. we are writing of the biggest business leaders in the country who have all done the same thing and nobody ever talks about it, but i've done great and that's the kind of ink and you're going to need. we will make it rich again,
fantastic again. can blowsomebody else it. we have to save our country. carly fiorina did a terrible job terrible, a terrible, job at hewlett-packard. terrible job. stories are legendary. yale businesse school, you know who he is. he wrote a story that is so to readpeople have this. i just don't see how she can get over that hurdle in addition to cutting thousands of thousands of jobs that they are still cutting. bottom line she made a horrible purchase because it was a disaster. but a lot of people don't know before he lit you had lucent and lucent was probably just as bad if not worse relatively. ok, yes? i have not a question but i
just wanted to know about the nightmares i have about isis beheading rochester's young foley. i'm having horrible visions of .eople i know everyone being loaded up into boxcars, you know, like another holocaust. i just want you to know about that. [inaudible] does anybody have a towel? you know, i've lost a lot of weight. running for president, believe it or not, every room we have is
packed and nobody has enough air-conditioning. of weight.a lot it's not so bad. go ahead. when will we meet your first lady? mr. trump: that sounds good. [applause] wow. that sounds so great. thank you, darling. go ahead. when you are talking about illegalrtation of the aliens why is it that you don't costs tohow much it keep them versus how much it costs to send them that? mr. trump: he's a businessman. he's from new hampshire. that's such a good point and i made it last night but people don't want to hear it. really i would say
$200 million per year ok? $200 billion per year on illegal immigration. i think the number is much higher than that. and --the bad ones out to do the wall is peanuts. the great wall of china, 13,000 miles long against our southern border its 2000 of which you really need 1000 because you have a lot of natural barriers and other things, frankly. it. say, you cannot do yet 2000 years ago they had no problem. he brings up such a great point. we have numbers that go from $175 billion. of to $260 billion per year. nobody knows how many illegals we even have here.
11,e been hearing for years 11. it never moves. give me a break. it might be much more. are a country of laws, a country of orders. we have to secure our border. we will clean it up. we will make our country so strong, so wonderful, so great. there's a huge offsetting cost which, by the way, which will help out. ok. what your favorite? [inaudible] am i in trouble. am i in trouble. go ahead.
yes sir. thank you, man. thank you. go ahead. ok, thank you. thank you. >> donald, my question is this. if you are elected president, one of the things that's been happening over the last several decades is our congressmen and our senators voted themselves huge pay raises and other .enefits if they are elected for one term, they get a lifetime pension, medical. they don't have to join obamacare. if you are a leg did -- mr. trump: they don't have to use obamacare. youf you are elected, would
introduce a bill in both houses to roll back these excessive benefits? and the people who don't fall for it or vote it down will be fired, lection time. election time. [applause] mr. trump: if i'm elected aesident, i'm not accepting salary. that's not a big deal for me. when these guys go to congress, as for your question, a couple of things happen. cant benefits nobody else even think about, ok? we will work on that. that's peanuts and the relative scale of how this country is being hurt. we will work on that very hard. that ishave a system going to be fair to everybody. one of the things i'm doing that
has really gotten a lot of praise, i'm self funding. i'm not getting the tens of millions of dollars. you know, it's very unnatural for me. in many ways, i feel foolish because people want to give you lots of money. lobbyists, special interests, and they keep turning them down. i'm the only one out of everyone running. we lowering taxes for corporations, for the middle class. middle income, you will love me. we're lowering taxes. we will simplify. with anoming out amazing plan. we are lowering taxes, but the thee fund guys and others, hedge fund guys are going to have to pay of. someone said that's not very republican. i don't see anybody weeping
here. to be very, very happy when you see what we do with the taxes, when you see what we do with jobs, economic development. you are going to be very, very happy. go ahead. >> thank you. mr. trump: don't get nervous. >> everyone has awesome questions big picture and my question is a little closer to home. i spent the last two-and-a-half years and $50,000 working to keep my daughter safe. the result could have been better. do you think it will trickle down to the state level and our court system to help families like mine not have to endure? mr. trump: to keep them safe? it's over now. the family court system is broken. mr. trump: i see. very much so.
i hear it is. the whole court system is broken, not just family court. look at what happened with justice roberts approving obamacare twice. you were talking about more than local. yes, i think it should be a local situation. jeb bush loves common core. crowd: boo! mr. trump: i do like that being local. i want people from new hampshire, iowa, south carolina, i want to see local people taking care of your children's education instead of people from washington that in many cases could not care less. think of it. as ano use jeb bush example, because there are other guys ahead of him in the polls by a jeb bush is strongly in favor of common core and is weak on immigration. how can you have him?
you can't have him. so i don't think he'll do too well in new hampshire or iowa or anywhere else. okay. go ahead. how you doing? thanks for coming. the estion is, we all know gap between the rich and poor in this country is bigger and bigger and american manufacturing is getting sent overseas with all of these horrible trade deals. how do you plan on bringing back american manufacturing jobs and would you repeal nafta? how do you feel about the ccp deal? donald trump: the new trade deal is a terrible deal and one big thing hurting us is currency manipulation. it is a disaster. that answers that question. that is not the deal that should be made. you know about nafta better than anybody because your places have been stripped out of all of new england. you know what's happened. they've gone to mexico, all
over the place. i am not and never have been a fan of nafta. we are going to bring our jobs back. we'll have ford and the other companies instead of going down to mexico and a lots of other places we'll have them build here. we'll give them the incentive they need to build here. go ahead. >> hi, mr. trump. i'm a volunteer with the league of conservation voters and i am asking you your plan to reduce pollution that is driving climate change and endangering public health. >> that's an interesting -- let me ask you a question. let me ask you this. okay. take it easy, fellows. here believe in global warming? do you? who believes in global warming? ho believes in global warming?
who believes in global warming? raise your hand. wow. not much. do you have your hand up? a little? no. nobody? one person? >> sir, that -- >> you believe, right? okay. > we'll do two more questions. let's go. right here. right here. go ahead. just last week one of the other candidates said that he thought the base realignment and closure system was good because it kept workers on their toes. do you believe that the way to make people more efficient is to threaten to take away their
jobs, our military, and those who support our military? >> you're saying that's what's happening, right? i know that. i heard that. i heard that yesterday actually. ot a good situation. one more question. make it a good one. go ahead ma'am. right here. go ahead. give her the mike. go ahead. make it a good one. >> i would like to know what your plans are on social security. >> we're going to save social security. we're going to save it. we're going to save social security. that was your deal. right? we are going to save social security, make life for the vets better than ever in this country. we are going to build up the military. we're going to end, terminate, repeal obama care, and replace it with something