podesta_email_08567.txt

podesta-emails 1,595 words email

P17 D6 V16 P19 V11

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Isn't stagnant wage (for the bottom 90%) part of the reason we have rising inequality? I guess I don't see these as two separate things. But, as you know, I've always seen rising inequality as more of a problem of declining fortunes for the middle class and people trying to get into it, than a problem of too many wealthy people. I would definitely take increasing fortunes for everyone rather than poor fortunes for everyone. -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Hutchins [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, July 6, 2015 4:33 PM To: Neera Tanden Cc: John D. Podesta Subject: Re: my latest presentation on the economy you have (characteristically) gone right to the heart of the most difficult problem. In response to your specific question, over that last 15 years, the capacity of labor to demand a greater share of profits from productivity gains have been overwhelmed by several factors: 1) globalized wage competition as incomes have slowly equilibrated around the world, 2) the increasing portion of our economy that is generated by service work (as opposed to good production) that is less susceptible to productivity improvement, 3) the use of technology to generate productivity gains (so that the benefits accrue to capital rather than labor), 4) the overhang on the labor market and wages from discouraged workers who dropped out and the long-term unemployed, 5) the replacement of lost middle wage jobs with lower wage jobs, and 6) more recently, the change in the nature of work itself which is now more part-time, project (or "gig") oriented and based on an independent contractor model. All of this had led to both stagnant wages and rising income insecurity - both of which are far more relevant than income inequality. I think some smart candidate for public office is going to figure this out and start talking about the modern economy in a way that resonates with workers' actual experience. The public policy response can be a re-tooling of the policies that touch on work - unemployment insurance, OSHA, worker's compensation, retirement savings etc - in a way that is relevant to the modern economy, refocusses the debate in an innovative way and proves that the candidate(s) understand the world in which the voters live. Glenn Hutchins > On Jul 6, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Neera Tanden <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is phenomenal. I have seen the discussion of declining productivity -- one question I have is why is it rational for workers to be more and more productive if they don't see gains from productivity in their paychecks? From an economically rationalist perspective, stagnant wages should inexorably lead to declined productivity, no? Is there an alternative view of why there's a decline in productivity? Our econ team said productivity increased 30% btwn 2000 and 2013, with no corresponding increase in wages. 30% for that time period is not great, but it's also not an historic low. > > Would love to understand why people would expect increasing productivity in the world we live in. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Glenn Hutchins [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, July 6, 2015 3:38 PM > To: John D. Podesta; Neera Tanden > Subject: my latest presentation on the economy > > You have both expressed an interest in the past in my analysis of the global economy - so I have attached the latest version for your review. Take a look especially at pages 18-21 which detail why our labor markets are weak and how they have fundamentally changed since the Great Recession. To my mind, the big issue which the data highlights is income insecurity (rather than income inequality) to which there can be some targeted and innovative public policy responses. > > > Glenn Hutchins Macro Presentation.pdf Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: by 10.25.24.88 with SMTP id o85csp1806610lfi; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 13:39:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.55.17.204 with SMTP id 73mr1196562qkr.83.1436215160027; Mon, 06 Jul 2015 13:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0097.outbound.protection.outlook.com. [65.55.169.97]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i196si22162331qhc.119.2015.07.06.13.39.19 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Jul 2015 13:39:19 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 65.55.169.97 as permitted sender) client-ip=65.55.169.97; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 65.55.169.97 as permitted sender) [email protected] Received: from BN1PR05MB422.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.58.142) by BN1PR05MB421.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.58.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.201.16; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 20:39:18 +0000 Received: from BN1PR05MB422.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.5.82]) by BN1PR05MB422.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.5.82]) with mapi id 15.01.0201.000; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 20:39:18 +0000 From: Neera Tanden <[email protected]> To: Glenn Hutchins <[email protected]> CC: "John D. Podesta" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: my latest presentation on the economy Thread-Topic: my latest presentation on the economy Thread-Index: AQHQuCLAiHeZXIovs0GD20V0Xj7YAp3O3aIwgAAIBQCAAAEHQA== Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 20:39:18 +0000 Message-ID: <BN1PR05MB4224C532C4D29F2B40A4F39D7930@BN1PR05MB422.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> References: <[email protected]> <BN1PR05MB422574301524B1E69706E78D7930@BN1PR05MB422.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <[email protected]> In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; x-originating-ip: [208.87.107.66] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1;BN1PR05MB421;5:qUaDmAqJeX4P6LVBQOybja0NJTza66Mht16ZxSGrIw6ZH+byTedverh6SkIFAKlXknM2fA6j6aK4AdaCGDVOKr9G18iVKMow4Csx7A3BSNw1aWSeGyLAngMUIYgJ+IcFO/tYZjbfpbpY88vhRkv1gQ==;24:GeFVLpX1xVmdnJdkkxAPJEpL75jd/ok0QEcdbgI6ztwirsuS9iH6nG/Iz9o0tcRgM1XvQ3FFG3U1iEr9AmB49YQzMPXH9mc6bvSe5Yv3UwI=;20:lFsXrfgdHJgBVVfvXo1iCgHKS7UZ5lwFQsvJANYv+XjLcZHJH37k0Y7tWo76WlgIQ2/jCjF7CABFToGF9nIbqw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1PR05MB421; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN1PR05MB421286ECD6303433925DD56D7930@BN1PR05MB421.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(601004)(5005006)(3002001);SRVR:BN1PR05MB421;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1PR05MB421; x-forefront-prvs: 06290ECA9D x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(377454003)(24454002)(13464003)(51704005)(51404002)(5002640100001)(46102003)(33656002)(5890100001)(110136002)(189998001)(5001960100002)(5003600100002)(122556002)(76576001)(54356999)(74316001)(102836002)(66066001)(40100003)(77156002)(62966003)(450100001)(106116001)(99286002)(19580405001)(19580395003)(50986999)(76176999)(2900100001)(86362001)(2656002)(2950100001)(92566002)(87936001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BN1PR05MB421;H:BN1PR05MB422.namprd05.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;MLV:sfv;LANG:en; Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: americanprogress.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Jul 2015 20:39:18.5458 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 08d3764b-1fe7-4bfc-a551-4415fd4cfab2 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN1PR05MB421 Isn't stagnant wage (for the bottom 90%) part of the reason we have rising = inequality? I guess I don't see these as two separate things. But, as you= know, I've always seen rising inequality as more of a problem of declining= fortunes for the middle class and people trying to get into it, than a pro= blem of too many wealthy people. I would definitely take increasing fortun= es for everyone rather than poor fortunes for everyone. =20 -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Hutchins [mailto:[email protected]]=20 Sent: Monday, July 6, 2015 4:33 PM To: Neera Tanden Cc: John D. Podesta Subject: Re: my latest presentation on the economy you have (characteristically) gone right to the heart of the most difficult= problem. In response to your specific question, over that last 15 years, = the capacity of labor to demand a greater share of profits from productivit= y gains have been overwhelmed by several factors: 1) globalized wage compet= ition as incomes have slowly equilibrated around the world, 2) the increasi= ng portion of our economy that is generated by service work (as opposed to = good production) that is less susceptible to productivity improvement, 3) t= he use of technology to generate productivity gains (so that the benefits a= ccrue to capital rather than labor), 4) the overhang on the labor market an= d wages from discouraged workers who dropped out and the long-term unemploy= ed, 5) the replacement of lost middle wage jobs with lower wage jobs, and 6= ) more recently, the change in the nature of work itself which is now more = part-time, project (or "gig") oriented and based on an independent contract= or model.=20 All of this had led to both stagnant wages and rising income insecurity - b= oth of which are far more relevant than income inequality. I think some sm= art candidate for public office is going to figure this out and start talki= ng about the modern economy in a way that resonates with workers' actual ex= perience. The public policy response can be a re-tooling of the policies that touch o= n work - unemployment insurance, OSHA, worker's compensation, retirement sa= vings etc - in a way that is relevant to the modern economy, refocusses the= debate in an innovative way and proves that the candidate(s) understand th= e world in which the voters live. Glenn Hutchins > On Jul 6, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Neera Tanden <[email protected]> w= rote: >=20 > This is phenomenal. I have seen the discussion of declining productivity= -- one question I have is why is it rational for workers to be more and mo= re productive if they don't see gains from productivity in their paychecks?= From an economically rationalist perspective, stagnant wages should inexo= rably lead to declined productivity, no? Is there an alternative view of w= hy there's a decline in productivity? Our econ team said productivity incr= eased 30% btwn 2000 and 2013, with no corresponding increase in wages. 30%= for that time period is not great, but it's also not an historic low. =20 >=20 > Would love to understand why people would expect increasing productivity = in the world we live in. =20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Glenn Hutchins [mailto:[email protected]]=20 > Sent: Monday, July 6, 2015 3:38 PM > To: John D. Podesta; Neera Tanden > Subject: my latest presentation on the economy >=20 > You have both expressed an interest in the past in my analysis of the glo= bal economy - so I have attached the latest version for your review. Take = a look especially at pages 18-21 which detail why our labor markets are wea= k and how they have fundamentally changed since the Great Recession. To my = mind, the big issue which the data highlights is income insecurity (rather = than income inequality) to which there can be some targeted and innovative = public policy responses. >=20 >=20 > Glenn Hutchins Macro Presentation.pdf