Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  July 5, 2010 12:30pm-1:30pm EDT

12:30 pm
>> rose: welcome to our program. we begin this evening with the economy and paul krugman, "the new york times" columnist. and nobel laureate in economics. >> the point is that what the austerity people want to us do has nothing to do with our problem. denying unemployment benefits to people who have exhausted their coverage in the middle of a deeply depressed economy has absolutely nothing to do with whether we are going to be able to dot things we need to do to control medicare costs ten years from now. so what people are saying this generalized theory of pain, that if you demonstrate your willing tons impose pain now, when it actually doesn't make any sense, are you demonstrating your willingness to impose the right kind of pain ten years from now. >> rose: we continue this evening with the question where will lebron james play basketball in the nba next year. will it be cleveland, chicago, new york, los
12:31 pm
angeles, or miami. or perhaps a surprise choice, talking about that choice chris broussard, henry abbott, jonathan abrams and jim gray. >> i think for instance he knows that the chicago bulls situation looks promising so he wants to meet with them and see if can get the answers to the questions he may have about that team, same thing with the new jersey net, the miami heat. even the cleveland cavaliers. >> the key thing is he would like to play, i believe, with dwayne wade and chris born f not both of them then at least one of them. >> rose: coached by pat riley. >> i understand if they go to miami they will not be coached by pat riley. but if they are going to go somewhere together, then that's the new information we can get this week is how can they do that. >> you know, i think the cavaliers are still hopeful. you got to look and see, lebron is a very, very loyal person. he has friends in the area. he grew up in the area. he has a son who is about to
12:32 pm
start school in the area so i don't think that factor can be discounted in this whole thing at all. >> i don't think that it's some of being convinced as to where to go or a definitive answer in his mind, what he's going to do. i think there's still a lot of jockeying, teams getting under the salary cap. a lot of maneuvers that can still be made soichlt think he wants to go to the best place where he can win. and there's probably a hierarchy of that. >> rose: we conclude this evening with an appreciation of senator robert byrd of west virginiaia. he died on monday at age 92 after having served in the united states congress longer than any other person. >> i believe in the history of this country. one thing about it, we're losing our sense of history. that's why i keep going back to history. it was lord byron who said history with all its volumes vast hath but one page. meaning the history repeats itself. and we can gain much by studying history. because these events can do come and go.
12:33 pm
and this is why the young people of this country, i'm trying to instill in them a sense of history. and a love for the constitution. a love for the institution of the senate, the greates greatest-- the greatest deliberate body in the world who has forgotten how to deliberate. >> rose: paul krugman, the future of lebron james and remembering senator byrd. when we continue. >> funding for charlie rose has been provided by the coca-cola company, supporting this program since 2002. >> additional funding for charlie rose was also provided by these funders. captioning sponsored by rose communications
12:34 pm
from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: unemployment has been one of the biggest obstacles to a strong economic recovery. earlier this morning the government released new data showing that there could still be a long road a ahead. the private sector added just 83,000 jobs last month. overall the u.s. lost 125,000 jobs in june as temporary government census workers departed. the unemployment rate declined to 9.5% in june from 9.7% the previous month. but the number of people outside the labor force who are neither working nor look for work rose to 800,000. unemployment claims also rose by 13,000 to 472,000. earlier today president obama spoke about the challenges ahead. >> all told by economy has created nearly 600,000 private sector jobs this year. it is a stark turn around from the first six months of last year when we lost 3.7 million jobs in the height of the recession. make no mistake, we are
12:35 pm
headed in the right direction but as i was reminded on a troip racine, wisconsin, earlier this week, we're not headed there fast enough for a lot of americans. we're not headed there fast enough for me either. we continue to fight headwinds of global markets. we still have a great deal of work to do to repair the economy and get the american people back to work. >> rose: joining me now is paul krugman, a nobel prize winning economist and as you know a columnist for "the new york times". i'm pleased to have him back on this program, especially today. a, because he can talk about the numbers and talk about the recovery and talk about unemployment. also, can talk about his own interesting views about austerity which is the name of the game in greece and london and germany and in other places. so welcome. >> hi there. >> rose: so give me a sense of how you see these numbers and how you see the future
12:36 pm
of unemployment over the next nine months. >> basically we're not making progress. i mean the number that i focus on actually more than anything else is the fraction of the adult population that is working. because the unemployment number moves around depending on who says they are looking for work. and that basically hasn't moved since november. we're basically at 58.5% of adult americans are employed and we've been there bouncing around a little bit but we're not making progress. we're adding jobs but basically only fast enough to keep up the population growth. which is saying we are not really recovering. that's-- this is not good. >> but does it suggest that the economic recovery is not working? >> we are not on a path to anything like full recovery. we've avoided-- we stepped up. we are were looking into at business. we stepped back maybe three paces from that. but we are not, we're not on the way to anything that looks like healing the
12:37 pm
damage so no, this is-- the recovery is at least at this point not working. >> it does not have enough momentum. >> that's right. and there are reasons to get worried. it could-- it's a pretty good chance that the numbers will actually get worse over the next six months, nine months. >> is that what we call a double dip? >> you know, whether it will technically be a recession may be gdp will keep growing. but you know, if gdp keeps growing and unemployment rises is that a double dip or not. and i think we'll argue about that but it doesn't matter. the point is it will feel like we've basically had a setback. >> business, there is some liquidity out there. >> yeah. >> is there a rise in manufacturing? >> there's a rise in manufacturing. which is almost largely driven by the fact that they really found themselves with too much inventory late last year, slashed production. and now inventory has been worked out so the production is on tap. but there is not much beyond
12:38 pm
that. and for the rest, no, business is sitting on lots of cash. not investing, not spending but then why should they. >> because of what? >> because there is, we're awash in excess capacity. you're not going to build an office building when we have vacant office buildings all here. so business is waiting for some reason to invest and of course consumers are waiting for jobs. and everyone is waiting and nothing is coming along. >> i want to move to austerity for a second. >> yeah. >> you have a column today called the myth of austerity in which you basically say that you lead it off by saying that most of what serious people believe rests on prejudice. subject to fads and fashions. and the surprise you have come to is what? >> well, i mean, no, what's happened now, i mean i've seen this in lots of things over the years but especially true right now. a few months ago, greece was
12:39 pm
in the news, interest rates were rising a little bit and so the of everybody, all the important people said well, the markets are going to turn on us. we've got have austerity. >> rose: was the idea of the debt contagion. >> the idea that we are all greece. not only-- actually two ideas. one is that we are all greece and the second is that punishing ourselves in ways that actually have almost nothing to do with our long-run budget problems are going to keep us from having a greek-style crisis. so it's really these two things. and then one more idea which is that if we do punish ourselves this will actually not hurt that much because it will improve confidence in the economy will-- . >> rose: that is the argument you cannot abide. >> well, both of them. first of all there is what i call the invisible bond vigilantes which is the people are going to attack the u.s. and lose confidence in our debt who are also mysteriously willing to lend the u.s. government money at less than 3% interest for long term. >> rose: but will that continue? >> well, you know t might end. >> rose: don't the chinese occasionally say look, this is -- >> by my count there have
12:40 pm
been four episodes in the last year and a half when everybody said oh, the vigilantes have arrived, and the money-- and then every one of them went away and sort of people, the same people who were claiming last time keep-- yeah, i mean something could happen but it's not-- you know, the u.s.-- big advanced countries have a loss of capacity to run deficits, provide there is any plausable reason they going to turn things around. >> rose: let me talk about this, it is this notion that you have to show that you are serious about doing something about debt. because everybody believes that over the long-term debt is the big enemy, over the long-term, a big enemy so therefore to show you that you understand that and are serious about that you either have to raise taxs or cut spend. cutting spends is austerity, and are you here to say no. >> if you look at the u.. we have a serious long-term budget. dealing with that budget problem requires first and foremost it is really
12:41 pm
medicare, in the long run if we don't do something really serious about making medicare more efficient then we don't make it work. >> that was one of the arguments made by the president when he pursued health-care reform. and will it produce that result. >> it's a step in the right direction. it is the most cost control we've ever done on medicare which is not enough. but it's a step in the right direction. it has nothing do with that problem. denying unemployment benefits to people that have their coverage in a deply depressed economy has nothing to do with whether they will be able to do things we need to do to control medicare costs ten years from now so what people are saying is this generalized theory of pain that if you demonstrate your willingness to impose pain now, when it actually doesn't make any sense, are you demonstrating your willing tons impose the right kind of pain ten years from now. >> and therefore people will have confidence in your ability to deal with the problem, therefore they will make investments, loan you money, do whatever is necessary.
12:42 pm
>> right, and it turns out that, first of all why should the markets believe. these run related things. denying unemployment benefits. laying off schoolteachers in the recession. why should that make them think will you be more willing at a future time when we are more prosperous. and the other thing is it, you look at the countries that have done this. i have been saying, lieu at ireland. they've done all of these cuts. imposed terrible austerity. >> rose: that is because they had a real run when they lowered the tax rate and business flowed in. >> monstrous housing bubble. >> rose: then a recession, that's right. >> but the point is if austerity brings confidence from investors then would you believe that ireland must be back to being able to borrow money at reasonably low rate, right? and sometimes you even see people report that that is true. but it is not. in fact, the irish who have been, you know, grumablely but doggedly going about the austerity still don't have access to markets. >> rose: how come so many people believe this? >> i think there are a couple of levels to that.
12:43 pm
one is just the sheer power of-- behavior. there is something there is always something weirdly appeal being the idea of austerity it makes you feel that you are being rses but there is something appeal being good budgeting period, is there not? >> right, and it's very-- there's a reason why john maynard keynes had to write a long book to explain that during a depression this is not the right thing to do. it is not come naturally and i mean if you actually look at what people, everyone from jean-claude fitcher from the european central bank to the new chancer of excheck never britain it is almost-- what herbert hoover was saying in speeches, about how rebalancing the budget will-- . >> rose: it will build confidence that they can start hiring people, confidence that they can -- >> so if you don't
12:44 pm
understand anything that we learned about macroeconomics in the past 70 years you revert to the instinctive things which is what hoover was saying in 3ee. and there we are right back there again. >> okay. listen this is in "business week." how to make america, how to make an american job, first cover story by andy grove. here is what it says about you, history will show that the wait before the nation's birth paul krugman went all in on keynesian orthodoxy to regular readers of his column this was not a surprise since the crisis began. he has been adamant that the federal government must fearilessly run up deficits to compensate for weak private spending and keep the u.s. economy from depth spiraling into deflation that is at the core of how you see where we are. >> exactly. we are, we had a dress rehearsal for all of this in japan in the '90s. and a lot of does including a lot of people who are now in positions to make
12:45 pm
decisions that the problem with the japanese was that they dealt with it in dribs and drabs. they didn't-- instead of hitting it hard with a really strong monetary and fiscal stimulus program, they allowed the thing to drift until they were droped in this kind of deflationary quicksand. and we're doing the same thing. >> and the people who believe that were ben bernanke and paul krugman. >> well, yeah. and but pretty close, i mean larry summers. >> rose: all of them. >> yeah. >> rose: and yet now they don't see that? >> that is a question about what people-- i don't have any access to the inner most thoughts. >> rose: so the president knows better but it's politics. >> i don't know that for sure. i do believe that the economic advisors around the white house actually understand that we really should be having another major stimulus, that the first one was way too small but there's no chance of getting through the senate so, never mind. >> rose: because the republican mantra today is the president doesn't do anything about debt.
12:46 pm
you know, that's a principal part of their argument that they are going to take into the midterm elections. >> right. >> rose: confidence, debt. >> interest is interesting, polls say the public as much more worried about jobs than it is about deficits. >> rose: but they are worried about deficits, that is clearly part of the political climate. >> right, but what is the really killing fact is the centrists or conservative democrats who are all concerned about debt and are in fact sliting their own throats politically because by not doing something now they are ensuring it will go into the mid-term selection with high unemployment with not a lot of progress but yeah, i mean it is a political thing. ben nelson who happens to come from a low unemployment state. >> rose: nbc. >> yeah s in effect, you have to persuade ben nelson and we haven't managed to do that. >> rose: this has happened before, actually. >> exactly.
12:47 pm
>> rose: but you are saying what we need for this economy in order to create jobs is a big stimulus. what we need is to for the federal government to spend a lot of money on a series of programs to create jobs, otherwise we will not recapture economic growth. >> right. i mean my view is that there have been two things-- there are two things that people widely called depressions in u.s. history. the great depression, and we are not heading for that i don't think. we are not heading for 25% unemployment and all that. but something called the long depression in the 1870s and 1880 which is a long terd of short recovers, long recessions, trouble. that unwas ended by a giant railroad ending boom and discovery of gold in south africa. but anyway, so you know, eventually something will come along. if we do nothing, then eventually i don't think the ipad is big enough but something is big come along
12:48 pm
with that is a big enough innovation to drive a new wave of investment and we'll comeut but that could take a long, long time. if you want to do a quicker recovery we need an active government role. federal reserve could do more stuff. they could buy pore bonds. that would help. but unless the basically public authorities could am in and pump up this economy, we can drift in a state of substandard growth, substandard-- . >> rose: and into deflation. >> and into deflation, you know, core inflation, take out the volatile stuff. food and energy. core inflation was around two and a half percent before we got into this thing. which was good. you want a little inflation for various reasons it is now under 1%. give us another year or two of this and we'll be into deflation. >> rose: what is important about this argument also is to understand you are not saying we don't have to attack this big problem of this huge even debt that we have. but by doing a stimulus now you are not ignoring that problem you are just saying
12:49 pm
you have to deal with economic growth. >> you want to be fiscally responsible, make spending cuts, tax increases, whatever it takes. but you want to do it at a time when the federal reserve can cut interest rates so it doesn't depress the economy. you want to do it at a time when you are releases resources to the public sector that would make use of them not just not even do much-- a weaker economy means less revenue. so you could not come up with a worse time to be austere than right now. and of course politics being the way that it is, that is when we are actually going to probably dot harsh cutting. >> rose: do you think there is a division in the white house? >> i have no sense, really. i mean the people i talk to at the white house tend to be on the economic side and they are utterly reasonable. and. >> rose: they will say of course are you right, paul, but we can't do it. >> something like that or
12:50 pm
you know, we have to get this shall did --. >> rose: or we're facing an election here. >> i under-- you know, politics-- i understand that coming out with a program that has no chance of getting through the senate is not helpful. but we need to discuss these issues. >> rose: doug ellmandorf is on your side or not. he said interesting things. you quoted him saying there is no intrinsic contradiction between providing additional stimulus while unemployment is high and many factories and offices are unused and imposing fiscal restraint several years from now when output and employment will probably be close to their potential. >> yeah. >> rose: it is the congress budget office, a guy who has enormous credibility in washington. >> that's right. he said it in cbo speak but that's exactly the point. you can simultaneously be a real deficit hawk and say, you know, in 2020 we have
12:51 pm
got to have 5 points of gdp, less spending, more revenue or a combination thereof. and if we don't do that we're in deep, deep trouble. but at the same time say right now we need to be creating jobs. because this is a special condition. we are a deeply depressed economy. federal reserve policy interest rate is 0 and can go no lower. so now is not the time to be doing this ideally we would pass legislation that would simultaneously stimulate the economy now and lock in, you know, responsibility fiscal policy for when the recession is over. but apparently that's walking and chewing gum at the same time is beyond what washington can do. >> well. >> that is noting can-- actually what lyndon johnson said. >> rose: he said it about gerald ford. he said he had been playing football without a hell matt-- helmet. >> it is not really complicated it is not a contradiction, it we need to
12:52 pm
deal with it. >> rose: i have. >> make me chast and confident you go not yet. this not the moment to be doing this. >> i have been quoting st. augustine a lot. >> rose: let's hear it so let's go to greece for a second. >> the thing about greece is that it was not their deficit in 2009 that did it. it was the people, the deficit in 2009 woke the people up. they took a good hard look and said oh my god this sun workable. >> rose: this country is going bankrupt is what they said. >> yeah, greece has been fiscally irresponsible. >> rose: that's what they said. are you going bankrupt. >> and why not. it turns out half its modern history greece has been in arrears on its debt. so this is-- and they have this additional problem of being part of euro which means that although their cost and prices are way out of line they can't devalue the way another country would. so it's basically hopeless.
12:53 pm
you look at the official recovery program that they have signed on to and it actually leads-- leaves them in worse shape as far as debt is concerned five years from now than they are today. but you know that is a very different story from the rest of us. and greece is now imposing to at to its austerity it is not making a bit of difference because people still look at the numbers and say this is not going to work. >> i was just at the g-20. >> condolences. >> rose: you say that because the consensus was the g 20, the leaders of the 20 most powerful economies in the world, the consensus was cut spending. >> right. >> rose: now i mean the whole, the leaders of 20 countries are wrong and paul krugman is right. >> you know, i was reading one of-- i won't say who but i was reading a blog post by-- . >> rose: just say it. >> tyler you coulden was saying that oh,-- cowen, was
12:54 pm
saying the fact that all these governments believe this, there must be something to it. >> rose: exactly. >> i was thinking have you-- you know, have you been living in the same world that i have for the last 20 years. look, we understand the pressures here. and how it works. >> rose: but are you just sort of saying they don't really believe it. they've got political pressures. >> some of them believe it. >> rose: if they don't believe it they should be run out of office. if they are taking policies they don't believe in because they're scared. >> no, some of them-- it is the u.s. government that is where i think knows better. >> rose: you're not sure about the brits. >> not the new dogs of britain. they've got-- this is wonderful stuff. people believe in the vin isable enemies and they also believe in invisible friends, that i have been calling the confidence theory. who is going to come in and deliver this wonderful stuff. and you know-- . >> rose: even treachier said that, a leading central banker in the world. >> i know, but even herbert
12:55 pm
hoover, a much admired savior of europe rses well, it was from an earlier time, by the way. >> well, but how much do we learn. that is the shock, i'm an academic when all is said and done. my shock has been how little we've learned. how we are following down the footsteps of our great grandfathers here. but no, when you actually look, you know, never mind the argument for authority about how important these people are, look at what the evidence on what they are basing these claims really is. and it's not there. >> rose: so what did you think is likely to happen. all of a sudden the leaders of these 20 countries are going to come to their sense and say krugman is right and we better stimulate our economy rather than take it through a period of austerity. >> well, if we do have something that feels like a double dip, whether it really is or not. >> rose: what would a double dip feel like? >> it would mean that we really see unemployment starting to rise again. i this is the main thing. if you see, u.s. not hard to imagine unemployment goes up again. late this year, sometime
12:56 pm
next year. euro zone, the your mean, they've never actually seen unemployment fall it went 20710 and has been hanging there if it goes up to 11 maybe people will say wait a second. maybe we are declaring victory over this too soon. maybe we're looking at the wrong set of ideas. but who knows. it's again john maynard keynes talked about madmen and authority hearing voices in the air. i'm afraid there is a lot of that right now. >> where do you think your former princeton pal ben bernanke is on this? >> you know, i don't know where-- i think i know what the ben bernanke i knew would be thinking right now. if you look at his academic writings, he would be all for, specifically for the federal research, a much more aggressive policy, expanding the balance sheet, buying more stuff. now whether he has learned better or been, had his mind changed, what if he just said i got this board. i can't advocate policies that the board of governors
12:57 pm
is not going it to back me up on. so he himself is playing a diplomatic game, who knows. >> rose: john paulson this is the store knee business week where you and john paulson are squaring off against each other. here is what says. we're in the middle of a sustained recover in the un unt-- united states. the risk of a double 2ki7 is less than 10%. he says the housing market is an opportunity. california has been a leading indicator of the house are market that turned positive seven months ago. i think we are about to turn a corner. the economic recovery is around the corner. >> yeah, boy t really does have this dirty feel, doesn't it? so let's have another cup of coffee and another slice of pie. no, this is-- now i hope he's right. i mean i hope that there's something but i really can't see it in any of the data out there. and you know, we just had a pretty disappointing job report. we have got a pretty disappointing report on manufacturing. stimulus is staling off. >> people are finding a little bit of sort of positive innocenceness in
12:58 pm
the manufacturing numbers. >> well, still expanding but the new order stuff, but it's not expanding as fast as it was. and looks like the inventory balance is hard to avoid jargon here. is gradually fading out. where is this growth going to come from. so if there is something out there that is going to drive a sustained recovery it better start showing up soon. >> rose: it used to be argued that without the war we would not have come out of the great depression. that's true. >> as far as we can tell, that's true, yeah. >> rose: we need some kind of silver bullet to make it out of it this? >> well, like i said, it's helpful that we sort of had two depressions in our history. the first one was not solved by a war. the first one was solved basically by technological progress and opportunities which finally generated an investment boom that was big enough to spontaneously bring us out. >> rose: what year was that. >> you would say it would come to an end in the 1880s, so sooner or later something will come along. but yeah, as it happens the
12:59 pm
great depression would have gone along a lot longer without the war. and the war is actually in some ways it is a great example because it is an example of completely unproductive government spending. a negative productive government spending. which nonetheless by reflating the economy broke the vicious circle of deflation, got us out into a real recovery. and that's-- the problem is that you never get sufficient stimulus spending unless it's for some destructive purposes. >> do you think that if the president, do you think that the economic policies that the president is following now threaten his presidency? >> they certainly threaten his control of the house of representatives which is, you know, not looking good for him right this year. by 2012 all kinds of things can happen. and if i had to make, this is way outside my job description but i would say he will be re-elected because he's likely to face
1:00 pm
an opponent who will look really absurd one way or another. but it certainly threatens his ability to achieve anything. i mean they-- you know, in the early months of this administration i was more or less hysterical saying you have got to have a stronger program because it doesn't look good enough. the large part of the fear was not just what would happen to the economy but that the political economy would work against him that if he didn't have success, he basically had one shot. if he didn't get this he didn't have a sufficiently strong program at the beginning then people were going say say well where are the jobs, he failed. and would not get another chance. and that's kind of where we are right now. >> let me just make this small. you have been nothing but consistent. on the other hand you have said some things like kind of temporary national bang of banks. they didn't do that the but the banks seem to have come out okay and they are getting all the money back, e september for aig. >> that wasn't the objective. i mean yeah, i get things wrong. my moth kerr tell you. >> rose: this is the place
1:01 pm
to con ses-- confess. >> but on the nationalization of the banks it was not that the banks would not survive. we didn't know, i they have done better than i thought they would. >> rose: so nationalization would not have been the right course. >> not necessarily true. because what i was saying was what we needed was we needed to put a lot of capital into the banks so that they would begin lending again. and we didn't do that. and they have gotten themselves back to solvency and they are repay bug they are not lending. >> rose: that's true. >> so the goal. >> some big banks, big citibanks were lending. >> a little bit. but what i wanted was again it was all part of this really jump-starting the economy. and what they did was they followed a more cautious policy and got away with it in the sense that the banks are still there and we didn't lose money on the support that was given to them but we never did get the jolt, the positive jolt to growth that i was hoping for. so you know, you can certainly argue that i was
1:02 pm
too pessimistic about the banks but it is not the same thing as saying it was the right thing to take this light touch approach to them. >> rose: finally, how much money is required in terms of the estimate plus-- stimulus to give it the kind of growth that we need? >> well, at this point, i mean, the straight economics would say that we want another stimulus as big as the first one. >> 700 billion. >> yeah. you know, since we're not going get any of it i can make the number as big as i like, right. but that would, look, we are operating, we're an economy where full employment is 5% unemployment. we have actually got 9.5. that is a huge amount, a huge gap to be filled and this is a $15 trillion economy so you really need to be talking about big numbers if are you really going to move it. >> thank you for coming. pleasure to see you. >> okay. >> rose: paul krugman, nobel laureate, columnist, professor. back in a moment. stay with us.
1:03 pm
even though it is a time of the world cup and also wimbledon, all eyes are on lebron james as the nba free agent season began yesterday. he is the most highly coveted player among a stellar group of all-stars that include dwayne wade and chris bosh. a host of teams are heavily courting the two-time league mvp. yesterday he met with the new york knicks and new jersey nets. today the miami heat and los angeles clippers will make their pitch. joining me now chris broussard, an nba analyst and writer for "espn" the magazine. henry abbott who writes a basketball blog, true hoop. jonathan abrams covers the nba for "the new york times", he returns this morning from cleveland where he reported on the latest developments surrounding lebron. and what might do. from los angeles jim gray, a special broadcast correspondent with the sacramento kings and long time observer of the nba. i am pleased to have all of them here. tell me what you make of all this? you think it is a foregone conclusion, he is going to go one place or the other or do you think people can come
1:04 pm
in there now and make an argument that he has not heard and convince him to change his mind? >> i don't know that he knows. and therefore i don't know that any of us can sit here and do anything other than guess, charlesee. i don't think it is so much being convinceds too where to go or a definitive answer in his mind what he's going to do. i think there is still a lot of jockeying, teams getting under the salary cap. a lot of maneuvers that can still be made. so i think he wants to go to the best place where he can win and there's probably a hierarchy of that. he's probably established that in his mind but this will take a period of time. i don't think we will have an answer tomorrow or monday or tuesday i think we will go into next week. >> chris. >> well, i think lebron has certain leans and certain ideas about what looks good right now. but there's no question that these meetings he's going through will have sway. i think for instance he knows that the chicago bulls situation looks promising. sow wants to meet with them and see if he can get the answers to the questions he
1:05 pm
may have about that team. same thing with the new jersey nets, the miami heat. even the cleveland cavaliers. now they just hired byron scott. so he wants to hear byron scott's philosophy on offense, what are you go to do with this team from the front office. what guys are you going to get to play around me. how will we build this thing into a title winning team is so i don't think lebron has you know decided in his mind where he's going yet. >> could you ooring that if all things are being equal, he goes to cleveland, he stays in cleveland? >> from what i'm hearing i don't think he's going to cleveland. since this battle ever since he signed the last deal in 200. i think both teams are out, from what i have heard. i think it's going to be-- the key thing is he would like to play, i believe with dwayne wade and chris bosh. if not both of them then at least one of them. >> rose: coached by pat riley? >> i under fan if they go to miami they would keep eric. but if they going to go somewhere together, then that is the new information
1:06 pm
we can get this week is how can they do that. which teams have which players and which coaches has been pretty much known over the four years he has been thinking about this moment so what is happening today is wow, how can we get these three guysing to is it miami, chicago, new jersey, you know, been doing everything they can to try to make it happen there. the other x fact certificate jay-z who has a big influence on lebron james is it big enough to change his whole career, i don't know. >> rose: he was part of the contingent that went out there. >> everybody raved about how that went. >> rose: what are they saying in cleveland. did you get any insight into how they are going about this process? >> you know, i think the cavaliers are still hopeful. you got to look and see lebron is a very, very loyal person. he has friends in the area. he grew up in the area. he has a son who is about to start school in the area. so i don't think that factor can be discounted in this whole thing at all. >> rose: what happens in these meetings? >> i mean, the two meetings yesterday, the knicks and the nets, they both.
1:07 pm
>> rose: made their case. >> a little bit on the basketball side but a lot of it, particularly with the knicks centered on how lebron james if he comes to the new york area, how he can become a billionaire through different paths. >> rose: he is going to become a billionaire pretty much anyway, isn't he? i mean with the appeal he might have in terms of endorsements. >> well, the thing was they-- they used a marketing firm to calculate how much of a percentage or chance he would have becoming a billionaire if he went to miami or stayed in chief and and came to new york. of course it came up that he would become a billionaire faster if he went to -- >> zero% chance they calculated in miami. they said if he went to miami there is a 0% chance of becoming a billionaire. >> rose: why dow say that. >> the knicks announcement was published, the power points were published i think on their analysis came up with you have 200 different variables. >> rose: why would he not want to come to new york? >> itsee eye good question.
1:08 pm
i mean i think they're one of the only teams around with a bad contract left. they have eddie currie sitting there eating cap space. you can do the same arrangement in miami you don't have that piece. you get to have more valley-- value in his teammate approximates, basically. in chicago they have an actual good roster now. they have been in the play-offs with this roster and they have a defensive center and derek rose so i think and the nets have a big man in brook lopez. definite on harris at point guard and good young players. so i think the knicks are the team that don't have all the cap space miami has and the talent the other teams have, we are just interesting you to trust us and enjoy the city. >> a great place to come. >> the reason you wouldn't go to new york is because basketballwise, first of all he realizes the that the way to build my brand is to win. that is the only thing left for lebron james to do. he is already the face of the nba playing in cleveland, as a small market and he hasn't even won a title. and he's already the face. >> rose: can live in new york and still play anywhere
1:09 pm
else in the world. >> can live there in the off season if he wants to live in new york, can fly to new york any time he wants. but the things that's hurting the knicks is when you look at it from a basketball standpoint, chicago has got a lot more to offer, miami potentially has a lot more to offer, new jersey has more to offer. some might even argue that cleveland has more to offer because they did win 127 games the last two years so what hurts new york is the feeling that even if i and chris bosh went to the knicks are you still playing with tony douglas, wilson chandler, dan ilo and eddie currie. so that team probably can't win a championship next year. now cat nicks rather than trying to use, saying eddie is a bad contract, they are real estate looking at it like look, lebron, if you go to miami and chicago, that's your team. whereas if you could you come here with the chris bosh, for instance, eddie curry's contract comes off the cap next year and we can go out and get another star. we can still build on this team whereas miami, chicago,
1:10 pm
they would be locked in. >> i think it's a good argument but i don't think it's going to machlt i don't think that will happen at you will because you have to look at will bron james, he is 25 years old. he wants to be considered like michael jordan and kobe, he moot be the best player in the nba right now but he's got to start winning championship. if you take him there next year there is no guarantee that they will even make it to the conference finals because orlando is there and boston is there. then we will have a lockout so then he's 27 or 28 years old trying to win a championship. i don't see that at all. i think it is going to be chicago or miami. i think he really wanted to come and place in los angeles and the clippers haven't been able to figure it out because we have liked to take it on head-to-head with kobe bryant. and you know this is the entertainment capital of the world. but that's to the going to play either. but i don't see new york right now. >> rose: you see chicago as the lead, in the lead. >> i do, chicago, cleveland and himee. >> what about this argument you don't want to go to chicago because chicago was michael jordan's town.
1:11 pm
>> if he didn't want to go there i don't know why he would have requested to change his number hast year from 23 to 6. it seems to me that possibly the groundwork was already being laid because he couldn't go into chicago and wear 23 because that number is up in the rafters if he chicago stadium there at the united center. so i think that you know, i think that cleveland, somebody made a good point a moment or so ago. it may have been chris, that you know he's a very loyal guy. and he's going to take all of that into account too. i wouldn't discount cleveland even though i don't think they can win there either. >> from what i understand the playing in michael jordan's shadow isn't really an issue with lebron. he doesn't see it that way. remember lebron was a little boy watching michael jordan. he wasn't a contemporary of jordan. even like us, we were late teens, in our 20s. michael jordan's last title was '98. lebron was in junior high school so he looks at michael jordan is an idol that i looked up to. to walk into his shoes, footsteps would be something lebron would rather do than i have to beat him, i have to compete with him.
1:12 pm
kobe said the same thing after the finals. he yearly put himself in competition with shaquille o'neal. i've got one more ring than shaq and asked about michael jordan. are peting with jordan to get another ring. he said 90% of what i learned i attribute to michael jordan so i'm not competing with him. i don't think lebron looks at being in michael jordan's shadow as an issue at all. remember when larry byrd went to the boston celtics, that was 12 years after bill russell's last championship. bird won three titles there. nobody was saying oh you didn't win 11. you didn't win 6. you didn't come close to winning as many as bill russell did. i think would be the same thing with lebron. if he goes to chicago and wins three rings, i don't think people going to be killing him because he didn't win just as many as michael jordan that was 12 years ago as well. so i think we love to win six or seven there, no doubt. >> it's a great point that chris makes. because he's not competing with skplord an. he's competing to try and get to where it is that his contemporarys are. and if you looked at the team there i mean if derek rose was a free agent right
1:13 pm
there there would be every team at his doorstep. we might not have the procession. and we might not have the parade of everybody going to chicago to see him but there would be all 30 teams in the nba trying to sign this guy. he would be one of the top two or three free agents in the country. >> rose: who about make a difference in terms of influencing lebron. >> this decision is going be to lebron's decision, his decision only. he's a very, very savvy guy. he's a smart guy. and everybody likes to talk about how he is a businessman. about how he has all these corporate interests. >> rose: friends with warren buffett. >> but his business is basketball and the only way he will be able to raise his stature the way he wants to, like we all agreed is by winning championships. that is what i think this, you know, businesswise it's going it to be coming down to championships, personalwise it will be can he leave his home down. >> rose: what happened to him this year, jim, lebron. >> well, he needs help and he didn't have the help. they tried to bring in
1:14 pm
schquello neel and jamison and jamison was a big disappointment and schqael o'neal is past his prime. he was a serviceable player at this time but it just didn't work. and you have to have other people who can contribute and you can't put it all on one guy's shoulders. and it has been that case for him. and the cleveland cavaliers have tried very hard. they just haven't been able to get to don. and going forward, if you look at that roster right now and the shape that it's in, it's a difficult task for him to get that done. what it boils down to is i saw lebron for the nba finals and i saw him in a restaurant one night and asked him what is the one criteria you will be looking at when it comes to picking the team that you are going to stay with in cleveland or going to a new team, and it's like all the guys have said, he said there is only one criteria, win. win, win, win. so he's got to get on deck with a team that he feels can do that with people in an organization that he feels can do that the money
1:15 pm
is basically the same everywhere unless he stays in cleveland. and the global icon business, he already is a global icon. the one guy who i think could help him if that is really what he wants to do and take it further is probably the new owner of the nets because he has an empire in russia. so he could probably expose him there, there ways that the others can't. the question then is does he really want to be in newark for a couple of years. i know it is friendly with jay-z and there may be influence there. but if you look at the five teams in this thing they are probably in fourth place or third place and so that's not an answer right now either even though they can sign a couple of free agents. if you want this global thing, maybe we shouldn't be discounting the russian owner of the nets let me go around the circle. you think you lend up where. >> at this point i think you can discount two teams. i think the clippers and the knicks. i think the other four teams are all in the race at this point. >> chicago or miami i think
1:16 pm
are at the top and then new jersey is the only other one. >> the x-factor because of jay-z and the russian bill ar. >> the new blueprint. >> i agree with jonathan. i this i that new york and the clippers are pretty much out of it. but i think that miami, chicago and new jersey all have great shots as well as cleveland. don't discount the loyaltyy factor. the family factor, the comfort level within the organization. so i think there is a good chance cowind up in cleveland but those other three teams chicago, miami, new jersey very much alive. >> is this good for basketball. >> it's great for basketball. it's july and basketball is on the front pages, the back pages, everybody is talking about the nba. >> here it is. >> you have to love it. >> the thing i love about it, nobody knows. >> rose: nobody knows. >> so many issues. >> rose: nobody can come to the table with tort and say i know. >> nobody knows, that's fun.
1:17 pm
>> rose: jim, you were going say? >> i was just going to throw out my 2 cents. i agree with what chris has said. the other thing that i think is a possibility, i think chicago is leading right now and then the others fall behind. but i think there just may be the possibility that if he doesn't know what to do or isn't sure, that he could sign a three-year contract and go through this rawl again with cleveland, take the maximum they have to offer right now even though that doesn't offer the extra year and then become a free agent once again at the age of 28 and if there is a lockout, you know, things and teams will have much different rosters than they do right now. so i would think that might be a possibility also. but i think chicago is the place that he is going to go. >> rose: thank you all. senator robert byrd was yew lodgized today as a great american senator by president obama and others in his beloved home state of west virginiaia. he was the longest serving
1:18 pm
member in congress in american history. robert byrd died on monday at the age of 92 after serves in the house of representatives for six years. he moved to the senate and reached the highest level of leadership as the majority leader of the united states senate. here's a part of what the president said today in west jarj. >> when i think of the man we memorialize today, i will remember him as he was when i came to know him. his white hair full, like a main. his gate steadyed with a cane. determined to make the most of every last breath. the distinguished gentleman from west virginia could be found at his desk until the very end doing the people's business, delivering soul-stirring speeches, a hint of the appalachias in is voice, stabbing the air with his finger, fiery as ever.
1:19 pm
years. he was a senate icon. he was a party leader. he was an elder statesman. and he was my friend. >> rose: robert byrd appeared on this show in 2004 and here is a look at that conversation. >> we in congress became in my view just something to be used by the executive branch. he invited me to the white house on one or two occasions. i don't like to go there any more. i have been there so many times. but i felt that the meetings we were having at the white house were a sham and that we in the legislative branch were being used as potted plants. as backup for the president. all of these things had an
1:20 pm
impact upon me. and i came to distrust this administration t seemed to change the image of america around the world. it was no longer a benevolent ung em sal but it talked about our earth while friends of long-standing and said they were old europend our friends around the world began to wonder and distrust us. and be fearful of us. and when your friends tart being fearful of you it's time to be concerned. >> the causes of going to war were misleading? >>. >> the administration spread the tale of hussein who had all kinds of weapons, all
1:21 pm
kinds of pilotless aircraft all kinds of weapons of mass destruction and was about to use all of these things. and presented itself as an imminent danger to the world and to the united states. i didn't believe that. why? in my mind went back to karl rove on january 19th, 2002, when he spoke in the national republican committee in austin, texas, at which time he said as much as this is a horse. this war on terror, this is a horse which we can ride flew the election. he said that. he said that the american people believed and trusted in the republicans to best guide this country and to best defend it. >> rose: how long where you going to serve in the senate. >> until the lord and the people of west virginia
1:22 pm
decide otherwise. >> rose: which do you think, the people of west virginia are not going to decide otherwise. the lord is going to have to take you before you leave the senate. >> well, i love the senate. i'm not there today to bring bread and butter to the byrd table. because i paid into the system up there now for 51 years. and i draw just as much, i could draw just as much money and stay at home as i will draw as a united states senator. i do it because i love this country, i love the senate and i see that this constitution being undermined by this crowd that's in the white house. and i'm there to fight them to the dawn. >> rose: you know, you have won a lot of new-- . >> rose: fans of robert byrd who weren't necessarily in agreement with all the policies of robert birth,
1:23 pm
you've become a great hero to anti-war people, a great hero to liberals, a great hero to a lot of americans who not necessarily were robert byrd. >> there are a lot of young people out there who believe in what i am saying they want to see someone who will stand up to the arrogance of this administration. think want someone who will stage up for the united states, the united states to and into the constitution. and i'm trying to do that. i wrote this book, losing america. and i wrote this book to save this book which contains it the constitution of the united states. i believe in the framers. i believe in the history of this country. one thing about it, we're losing our sense of history. that's why i keep going back to history. to remind the people. it was lord byron who said history with all its volumes,
1:24 pm
vast, hath but one page, meaning the history repeats itself. and we can gain much by studying history because thee events do come and go. and this is item kouning people of this country, i'm trying to intel in them a sense of history. and a love for the constitution. a love for the institution of the senate. the great test delivered bodyed in the world which has forgotten how to deliberate, how to deliberate. >> rose: robert byrd, united states senator, dead at age 92. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh
1:25 pm
1:26 pm
1:27 pm
1:28 pm
1:29 pm


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on