democracynow--2020-04-30--Economist Thomas Piketty: Coronavirus Pandemic Has Exposed the "Violence of Social Inequality"

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , here in New York City , the epicenter of the pandemic , joined by my co-host Nermeen Shaikh , who is staying home to help stop community spread .
Hi , Nermeen .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : Good morning , Amy .
And welcome to our listeners and viewers around the country and around the world .
AMY GOODMAN : Today we look at how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on inequality around the world .
The World Food Programme warns the pandemic could lead to a massive spike in global hunger , and a new report predicts more than 100 million people in cities worldwide will likely fall into poverty .
The United Nations labor agency said Wednesday some 1.6 billion workers in the informal economy , quote , “ stand in immediate danger of having their livelihoods destroyed , ” unquote , by the global economic catastrophe triggered by the pandemic .
Well , for more on how the coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crisis could be a catalyst for change , we ’ re joined from Paris , France , by French economist Thomas Piketty , whose work focuses on wealth and income inequality .
His 2014 internationally best-selling book , Capital in the Twenty-First Century , looked at economic inequality and the necessity of wealth taxes .
His new book , more than a thousand pages long , is called Capital and Ideology .
It ’ s been described as a manifesto for political change .
Thomas Piketty , welcome to Democracy Now !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great honor to have you with us .
Can you talk now about how this pandemic is likely to trigger the sharpest recession in the United States since the Great Depression , perhaps a depression ?
Can you talk about the long-term effects of the crisis , and perhaps what can be done to ameliorate it ?
THOMAS PIKETTY : Right .
So , you know , what I show in my new book , Capital and Ideology , is that this kind of crisis , very often in history , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what we should do about the economy , how we should organize our societies , the level of inequality .
So , you know , the first visible impact of the crisis is that we see the violence of social inequality .
So , you know , people are not equal with respect to lockdowns .
They are not equal with respect to joblessness , income loss .
So , you know , you can see people who have a very small home or people who have no home , who are homeless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than people who are locked down in their nice apartment or nice house .
And in terms of income support , you know , when you don ’ t have any wealth in saving and when you are in a very precarious labor market position , you lose your income resources very fast .
And I should say that , you know , the unemployment benefit system in the U.S. , in particular , is far too restrictive , and you have lots of workers who actually don ’ t have access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of people who don ’ t have access to housing .
And we ’ ve seen some of your reports , from just before , that it ’ s a service issue .
You know , we should do more .
And the U.S. government and governments around the world should do more about changing their view on what we do with housing , you know , getting urgent solutions for the people who don ’ t have proper housing , extending income support , making them over and beyond what we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And then we also need to start thinking about a different kind of recovery .
We can not just go business as usual with the same economic sectors again .
I think it ’ s an opportunity to rethink about a different kind of recovery , you know , more green , more social and trying to reach a more equitable and more sustainable development model , because this is something we ’ ve been discussing for a long time , especially since the 2008 financial crisis .
And I think , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we are going to have to change our view about what ’ s a proper level of inequality in a society .
You know , we see today that all the ideologies against government action , in particular against public health systems and public investment in the hospitals , this discourse today , of course , looks very weak , given the reality of the situation .
So , you know , I think this is likely to change .
It has already been changed to some extent , but this needs to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done so far .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : Thomas Piketty , before we get to what might happen once this pandemic has come to an end , could you respond to the stimulus package that the Trump administration has proposed and that the U.S. Congress has approved , who that stimulus package is helping or what companies the package is helping , and how it compares to the stimulus package put together by the Macron government ?
THOMAS PIKETTY : Yeah , you know , there ’ s a number of differences between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I would say , you know , the first thing is that the U.S. package is certainly insufficient in terms of unemployment insurance .
Generally speaking , unemployment insurance gives , in Europe — not only in France , but also in Germany , in Denmark , throughout Europe — are more developed than in the U.S. You know , they are more generous , including to wages , you know , at two times , three times , four times the minimum wage , whereas the unemployment benefit system in the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And also , in terms of coverage of workers which don ’ t have a permanent wage earner status and who have different labor market status , including temporary work , I would say , on both sides of the Atlantic , there is a lot of missing areas and a lot of gaps — I mean , a lot of people who simply don ’ t have access to adequate income support .
And I can see them in the streets of Paris , and I assume this is the same in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have to keep working , doing dirty , dirty jobs , on their bicycle , or all sorts of jobs where we don ’ t have adequate unemployment benefit .
What ’ s missing also from the Trump recovery plan , I think , is a clear understanding of how we are going to have a recovery in the medium run that puts more emphasis on , I think , first investing in the hospital sector .
You know , I think it will be a good time in the U.S. to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ healthcare system — that ’ s for sure — but , more generally , to invest more in the hospital sector .
I think we are going to have — we can not just recover with the same sectors as before — you know , automobile , airplane , etc .
We also have to take this opportunity to think about a more sustainable and equitable development model .
So this means investing more in sectors like health , hospitals , but , more generally , investing more in innovation and environmental technologies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schools , universities .
You know , historically , the source of prosperity has been education and relatively equal level of education .
And the U.S. , in particular , has been an economic leader for most of the 20th century because it was an educational leader .
And I think we ’ ve lost memory of that , because this has been replaced , starting in the 1980s , 1990s , by a different kind of ideology , according to which prosperity will come from more and more inequality , more concentration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But , in fact , this doesn ’ t work .
And , in fact , the growth rate of the U.S. economy has been divided by two .
If you look at national income per capita in the U.S. between 1990 and 2020 , it has been only 1.1 % per year , whereas between 1950 and 1990 it was 2.2 % .
And if you look between 1910 and 1950 , it was 2.1 % ; 1870-1910 , about 2.1 % , as well .
So , the last 30 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of inequality , rising concentration of wealth at the top , declining wages at the bottom , in particular decline in minimum wage , and also decline in growth .
So , in the end , this course toward more and more inequality didn ’ t work .
And I think we should take this opportunity of this crisis , and after the 2008 financial crisis , to just rethink not only about our health policy and investing more in hospitals , which is a just conclusion from this crisis , but also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generally and moving toward more equality , more sustainability .
And this is what I don ’ t see .
And I don ’ t see it with Trump .
I don ’ t really see it with Macron .
You know , both presidents , of course , are supposed to be very different , as we all know , but at the same time , there is one important common point .
It ’ s that they started their mandate by giving a big tax cut to the wealthy , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there was a repeal of the wealth tax .
In the U.S. , there was a big tax cut for very high-income taxpayers and for large corporations .
Trump also wanted to get rid of the estate tax .
He couldn ’ t get it adopted , but that was his plan .
And so , both presidents made these huge tax cuts to the wealthy .
And the big question is : Are they going to be able today to sort of change , you know , hold back a little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look , now we are going to have to pay for more investment in public services .
We have to care more about all these healthcare workers , all these homeless .
We have to ” — are they going to be able to change their mind and change their ideology about these tax cuts ?
And , you know , I think it ’ s very much an open question at this stage .
It will depend on the strengths of the mobilization in the opposition parties and various social groups as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will also depend on what people within the Republican Party or people within Macron ’ s party , in the case of France , whether they will accept to continue supporting their champion without a change in the policy package .
And yeah , I guess it ’ s too early to say what the full , long-run consequences , in terms of economic policy and political ideology of this crisis , are going to be .
And it ’ s a general lesson that I take also from my book Capital and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are a time when you have — you know , different trajectories are possible .
You have very fast bifurcation .
That ’ s a very general lesson of history , that the level of social inequality across societies primarily depends on political mobilization and ideological change , rather than pure economic or technological determinants .
So , you know , things can change much faster than the dominant discourse and the various elite in different societies tend to imagine .
And , you know , elites always tend to present inequalities as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of something that you can not change , as if it was a rule of nature .
But what we observe in history is very frequent and very rapid change in the way we organize systems .
So , think of the wealth tax .
You know , a few years ago , the idea of a progressive wealth tax on billionaires was hardly discussed .
And we ’ ve seen in the recent U.S. campaign that it was actually very popular .
So , you know , Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but their wealth tax proposal was extremely popular among voters — and not only among Democratic voters , but also among Republican voters .
And I think Joe Biden would be well inspired to borrow some of these ideas in order to show that more economic justice can actually come together with more economic prosperity , which was the case historically for a very long time in the United States but has ceased to be the case .
And , you know , I think this is the right time to change the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NERMEEN SHAIKH : Thomas , could you also respond to efforts that have been made at the global level to address this crisis ?
The International Monetary Fund announced that it will provide immediate debt relief to 25 different countries , among them the poorest in the world — Yemen , the Central African Republic , Mozambique , etc .
And creditor countries , including France and the U.S. , have also agreed to suspend debt .
What effect do you think this will have ?
How much will it affect debtor countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to be done ?
THOMAS PIKETTY : Well , first , let me make clear two things .
You know , this suspension of debt payment , it ’ s better than nothing , but I think it ’ s not enough , because in the decisions that have been taken is that this country will have to repay more one year from now , two years from now , in order to compensate for what it didn ’ t pay this year .
So it ’ s just a suspension , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are pending .
And I think , in many cases , we should just cancel some of this debt for good , or other , you know , much longer horizon , with a much longer suspension .
There ’ s also one thing I want to stress , is that the French proposal to suspend the debt payments in Africa was a bit hypocritical in the sense that most of the debt is not held by France , it ’ s held by China or other countries .
And , you know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that other countries suspend their debt , but I think it ’ s even better if you can show the example , so you can decide to stop your payment for your own debt .
You should also , you know , in the case of Europe , develop more solidarity within Europe .
And I would like France to propose to mutualize the interest rate to countries like Italy and Spain , which have been hit very hard .
And , you know , the usual excuse for not doing that in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , look , the Netherlands or Germany don ’ t want to do it , therefore we can ’ t do it.
” But , you know , it ’ s always better to do something with two countries or three countries rather than one .
Of course , it ’ s even better if all countries join after that .
But to begin with , every initiative is good .
Now , over and beyond this issue of debt , which is very important , I think this crisis , especially in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for instance , should be used as an opportunity to accelerate the development of the welfare state , of the safety net system .
And in many of these countries , you just don ’ t have anything in terms of safety net , which means that when you decide a lockdown , when you decide a confinement , like what happened in India a couple of weeks ago , it ’ s not clear that it ’ s really something you can sustain for very long , because , in practice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve seen that on TV and in many articles — is that , in practice , many of the rural workers or migrants were just pushed away of the cities .
You know , many people that were working on construction sites in cities or who didn ’ t really have a solid home in the cities were pushed away , which is sometimes violent , and mass transportation of people through the countryside , which is probably not the best way to avoid the spreading of the virus .
And , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you don ’ t have a basic safety net , at some point people will have to go out and work and find work and find money and find food .
And so , you know , this should be an opportunity , both in India , in Africa , in every country where you don ’ t have such a system , to develop this kind of basic income scheme , which is possible .
You know , let me say that if you look in the case of India , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course — you know , it is about to become the largest country in the world very soon .
This is the largest democracy , electoral democracy , in the world .
And last year , during the electoral campaign in India , there was a proposal by the Congress Party and by a number of low workers ’ party to put in place a minimum income scheme .
Unfortunately , they didn ’ t win the election , partly because there were terror attacks in Kashmir in January 2019 , which allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reframe the election more in the direction of a Hindu-Muslim identity conflict , rather than redistribution and sort of social inequality .
This is sad .
But , you know , this is not the end of history .
I think the discussion will continue .
And sometimes what you see in history following like big crises like this one is that even a government like Modi , you know , even a government which initially didn ’ t plan to introduce the welfare state or to introduce progressive taxation — like you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after World War II , even sort of right-wing governments or governments who didn ’ t have such plans end up developing new policy tools just because the circumstances sort of force them to do so .
And at this stage , nobody knows .
You know , at this stage , we talk mostly about the U.S. , about Europe .
Nobody knows how the epidemic is going to spread in the South .
We don ’ t have much data .
This might take a bit more time .
What we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 1919 , which is the closest historical precedent to what we have today , is that the human casualties , as a proportion of the population , were much , much larger in India , in Indonesia , in South Africa .
It was up to 5 % of the population who died in these countries , as compared to 0.5 % to 1 % in Europe or in the United States , which is already enormous .
You know , today , 0.5 % to 1 % in the world would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So this is already an enormous mortality rate .
But in poor countries , it was five time more .
So , nobody knows at this stage how things are going to work out in the South , but it ’ s clear that in case things go bad and in case a more complete lockdown is necessary in these countries , then governments will have to develop safety net .
And , you know , the international community will have not only to suspend all debt and to actually cancel all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — we will also to think also to a different international economic , financial and tax system .
You know , there ’ s been a lot of discussion over the past 10 years at the level of the OECD on how you tax large multinational corporations , which , as we know , very often don ’ t pay tax anywhere .
So there ’ s a proposal at the level of OECD , so everybody ’ s around the table and pretending to be cooperative , at least for one time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a common declaration of profits at the world level for large multinational corporations .
And then the question is : How do you distribute these taxable profits across countries ?
And so far , because the OECD is a club of rich countries , countries in Europe and North America have said , “ Well , we are going to try to get the money out of tax havens to bring them , those taxable profit , back to us , ” basically , rather than back to the South .
So they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ base in proportion to the sales , in proportion to indicators , which are sort of moot , in effect , for where the final consumers are in the North in terms of total value that is being sorted .
AMY GOODMAN : Thomas Piketty , I hate to cut you off — THOMAS PIKETTY : But , you know , I think there are other proposals — yeah .
AMY GOODMAN : — but we only have a minute to go , and I want to ask you — AMY GOODMAN : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its latest unemployment numbers , as you were speaking , showing more than 3.8 million people filed for unemployment benefits in the last week .
So that brings the total number to 30 million people who have filed for unemployment in just six weeks .
I want to go back to two months ago .
Bernie Sanders was the Democratic front-runner for president , a man you supported .
The unemployment rate was 3.5 % , and the U.S. just reported its first coronavirus death .
So , I want to ask you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month , you tweeted a graph showing voter turnout from 1945 to 2020 , which revealed far fewer Americans over that period voted in elections than the electorate , proportionally , in either Britain or France .
You tweeted , “ Sanders to the aid of US democracy .
Only a full-scale reorientation of the type proposed by Sanders would eventually rid American democracy of the inegalitarian practices which undermine it and deal with the electoral disaffection of the working classes.
” That ’ s what you wrote then .
Talk about what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what you think needs to happen , this as the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said states should simply go bankrupt , unless they agree to a Republican austerity plan , and then they might get some U.S. government aid .
THOMAS PIKETTY : Yeah .
I mean , this statement is particularly crazy .
I mean , we had this kind of statement back in the '30s .
You know , they were what we call the liquidationist ideology : “ Let 's liquidate bad firms , bad banks , bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is the worst policy you can imagine , both in terms of social consequences and in terms of macroeconomic consequences .
Look , I think , you know , coming back to Joe Biden and the Democratic Party , I think Joe Biden will be very well inspired to borrow some of the new ideas that were put forward by Bernie Sander , Elizabeth Warren , including a progressive wealth tax on billionaires , including more investment in public hospitals , in public universities .
You know , I think this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show to the middle class and the lower-middle class and the lower socioeconomic groups that they care about redistribution and they care about improving the minimum wage , which is what the Democratic Party stood for until the ’ 60s , ’ 70s and even ’ 80s .
And then , what I show in my book Capital and Ideology — which , by the way , I should say , it ’ s a very readable book .
You know , it ’ s a bit long , but it can really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technical at all , and it ’ s a broad history of inequality regime across societies .
And I show that the Democratic Party in the U.S. , starting , as you were saying , in the ’ 50s , ’ 60s , just like social democratic parties in Europe , gradually lost touch with the more disadvantaged electorate .
And , you know , I compare all these countries and timing together .
And my conclusion is that this is largely because they failed to renew their policy package and to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the lower-class and lower-middle-class voters have just stopped voting , so now , somehow , also voting for Trump , and , in Europe , somehow , also voting for the nationalist party , I think , largely , for lack of a better alternative .
And they feel that protection and return to the nation-state and the frontiers of the nation-state at least will protect them a little bit more than nothing at all .
And I ’ m not sure they are so optimistic that all the gesticulation by people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ France will do a lot of good , but at least they see something new , and they hear nothing for them on the other side , therefore they feel — but let ’ s remember that most of these voters are actually staying at home .
You know , if they were really enthusiastic about Trump or Le Pen , they would all go and vote , and you would have a 90 % participation rate , which is not at all what you have .
THOMAS PIKETTY : Yeah .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in particular , the bottom 50 % income voters , you have huge abstention , you know , very low turnout .
So I think this shows that there ’ s a need for a different discourse trying to bring back these voters to the voting booth .
And I think this crisis is that opportunity for Joe Biden , in particular , to send a strong signal to this electorate .
AMY GOODMAN : Well , I want to thank you so much , Thomas Piketty , and there ’ s so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people can read a lot about your thoughts in your new book .
Thomas Piketty , French economist whose work focuses on wealth and income inequality .
His new book is just out ; it ’ s called Capital and Ideology .
When we come back , President Trump invokes the Defense Production Act to bar local governments from closing meatpacking plants around the U.S. , even though they are the major hot spots for the coronavirus .
What does this mean for the thousands of workers who have gotten sick ?
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law expert Lawrence Gostin .
Stay with us .
AMY GOODMAN : Mozart ’ s The Marriage of Figaro , performed by the National Orchestra of Île-de-France while socially distancing in their homes , playing alone together .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, here in New York City, the epicenter of the pandemic, joined by my co-host Nermeen Shaikh, who is staying home to help stop community spread. Hi, Nermeen.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Good morning, Amy. And welcome to our listeners and viewers around the country and around the world.
AMY GOODMAN: Today we look at how the coronavirus pandemic has shone a light on inequality around the world. The World Food Programme warns the pandemic could lead to a massive spike in global hunger, and a new report predicts more than 100 million people in cities worldwide will likely fall into poverty. The United Nations labor agency said Wednesday some 1.6 billion workers in the informal economy, quote, “stand in immediate danger of having their livelihoods destroyed,” unquote, by the global economic catastrophe triggered by the pandemic.
Well, for more on how the coronavirus pandemic has impacted the most vulnerable and whether the crisis could be a catalyst for change, we’re joined from Paris, France, by French economist Thomas Piketty, whose work focuses on wealth and income inequality. His 2014 internationally best-selling book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, looked at economic inequality and the necessity of wealth taxes. His new book, more than a thousand pages long, is called Capital and Ideology. It’s been described as a manifesto for political change.
Thomas Piketty, welcome to Democracy Now!
THOMAS PIKETTY: Hello.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, it is a great honor to have you with us. Can you talk now about how this pandemic is likely to trigger the sharpest recession in the United States since the Great Depression, perhaps a depression? Can you talk about the long-term effects of the crisis, and perhaps what can be done to ameliorate it?
THOMAS PIKETTY: Right. So, you know, what I show in my new book, Capital and Ideology, is that this kind of crisis, very often in history, has a potential to change dominant views about what we should do about the economy, how we should organize our societies, the level of inequality.
So, you know, the first visible impact of the crisis is that we see the violence of social inequality. So, you know, people are not equal with respect to lockdowns. They are not equal with respect to joblessness, income loss. So, you know, you can see people who have a very small home or people who have no home, who are homeless, are in a very different situation than people who are locked down in their nice apartment or nice house.
And in terms of income support, you know, when you don’t have any wealth in saving and when you are in a very precarious labor market position, you lose your income resources very fast. And I should say that, you know, the unemployment benefit system in the U.S., in particular, is far too restrictive, and you have lots of workers who actually don’t have access to adequate income support. You have lots of people who don’t have access to housing.
And we’ve seen some of your reports, from just before, that it’s a service issue. You know, we should do more. And the U.S. government and governments around the world should do more about changing their view on what we do with housing, you know, getting urgent solutions for the people who don’t have proper housing, extending income support, making them over and beyond what we’ve been doing in the different countries.
And then we also need to start thinking about a different kind of recovery. We cannot just go business as usual with the same economic sectors again. I think it’s an opportunity to rethink about a different kind of recovery, you know, more green, more social and trying to reach a more equitable and more sustainable development model, because this is something we’ve been discussing for a long time, especially since the 2008 financial crisis. And I think, with the financing of this crisis, we are going to have to change our view about what’s a proper level of inequality in a society.
You know, we see today that all the ideologies against government action, in particular against public health systems and public investment in the hospitals, this discourse today, of course, looks very weak, given the reality of the situation. So, you know, I think this is likely to change. It has already been changed to some extent, but this needs to go much further than what we have done so far.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Thomas Piketty, before we get to what might happen once this pandemic has come to an end, could you respond to the stimulus package that the Trump administration has proposed and that the U.S. Congress has approved, who that stimulus package is helping or what companies the package is helping, and how it compares to the stimulus package put together by the Macron government?
THOMAS PIKETTY: Yeah, you know, there’s a number of differences between the U.S. and the European stimulus package. I would say, you know, the first thing is that the U.S. package is certainly insufficient in terms of unemployment insurance. Generally speaking, unemployment insurance gives, in Europe — not only in France, but also in Germany, in Denmark, throughout Europe — are more developed than in the U.S. You know, they are more generous, including to wages, you know, at two times, three times, four times the minimum wage, whereas the unemployment benefit system in the U.S. is going to be pretty weak.
And also, in terms of coverage of workers which don’t have a permanent wage earner status and who have different labor market status, including temporary work, I would say, on both sides of the Atlantic, there is a lot of missing areas and a lot of gaps — I mean, a lot of people who simply don’t have access to adequate income support. And I can see them in the streets of Paris, and I assume this is the same in the U.S., you know, people who have to keep working, doing dirty, dirty jobs, on their bicycle, or all sorts of jobs where we don’t have adequate unemployment benefit.
What’s missing also from the Trump recovery plan, I think, is a clear understanding of how we are going to have a recovery in the medium run that puts more emphasis on, I think, first investing in the hospital sector. You know, I think it will be a good time in the U.S. to move in the direction of a universal healthcare system — that’s for sure — but, more generally, to invest more in the hospital sector. I think we are going to have — we cannot just recover with the same sectors as before — you know, automobile, airplane, etc. We also have to take this opportunity to think about a more sustainable and equitable development model. So this means investing more in sectors like health, hospitals, but, more generally, investing more in innovation and environmental technologies. We have to invest more in schools, universities. You know, historically, the source of prosperity has been education and relatively equal level of education. And the U.S., in particular, has been an economic leader for most of the 20th century because it was an educational leader.
And I think we’ve lost memory of that, because this has been replaced, starting in the 1980s, 1990s, by a different kind of ideology, according to which prosperity will come from more and more inequality, more concentration of wealth in a few hands. But, in fact, this doesn’t work. And, in fact, the growth rate of the U.S. economy has been divided by two. If you look at national income per capita in the U.S. between 1990 and 2020, it has been only 1.1% per year, whereas between 1950 and 1990 it was 2.2%. And if you look between 1910 and 1950, it was 2.1%; 1870-1910, about 2.1%, as well. So, the last 30 years have been characterized by very high levels of inequality, rising concentration of wealth at the top, declining wages at the bottom, in particular decline in minimum wage, and also decline in growth. So, in the end, this course toward more and more inequality didn’t work. And I think we should take this opportunity of this crisis, and after the 2008 financial crisis, to just rethink not only about our health policy and investing more in hospitals, which is a just conclusion from this crisis, but also to rethink about our economic model more generally and moving toward more equality, more sustainability.
And this is what I don’t see. And I don’t see it with Trump. I don’t really see it with Macron. You know, both presidents, of course, are supposed to be very different, as we all know, but at the same time, there is one important common point. It’s that they started their mandate by giving a big tax cut to the wealthy, to summarize. You know, in France, there was a repeal of the wealth tax. In the U.S., there was a big tax cut for very high-income taxpayers and for large corporations. Trump also wanted to get rid of the estate tax. He couldn’t get it adopted, but that was his plan. And so, both presidents made these huge tax cuts to the wealthy.
And the big question is: Are they going to be able today to sort of change, you know, hold back a little bit and say, “Well, look, now we are going to have to pay for more investment in public services. We have to care more about all these healthcare workers, all these homeless. We have to” — are they going to be able to change their mind and change their ideology about these tax cuts? And, you know, I think it’s very much an open question at this stage. It will depend on the strengths of the mobilization in the opposition parties and various social groups as a push for different policy. It will also depend on what people within the Republican Party or people within Macron’s party, in the case of France, whether they will accept to continue supporting their champion without a change in the policy package.
And yeah, I guess it’s too early to say what the full, long-run consequences, in terms of economic policy and political ideology of this crisis, are going to be. And it’s a general lesson that I take also from my book Capital and Ideology, which is that the crises are a time when you have — you know, different trajectories are possible. You have very fast bifurcation. That’s a very general lesson of history, that the level of social inequality across societies primarily depends on political mobilization and ideological change, rather than pure economic or technological determinants. So, you know, things can change much faster than the dominant discourse and the various elite in different societies tend to imagine. And, you know, elites always tend to present inequalities as sort of fair and natural and sort of something that you cannot change, as if it was a rule of nature. But what we observe in history is very frequent and very rapid change in the way we organize systems.
So, think of the wealth tax. You know, a few years ago, the idea of a progressive wealth tax on billionaires was hardly discussed. And we’ve seen in the recent U.S. campaign that it was actually very popular. So, you know, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren didn’t win the primary, but their wealth tax proposal was extremely popular among voters — and not only among Democratic voters, but also among Republican voters. And I think Joe Biden would be well inspired to borrow some of these ideas in order to show that more economic justice can actually come together with more economic prosperity, which was the case historically for a very long time in the United States but has ceased to be the case. And, you know, I think this is the right time to change the narrative and to change the trajectory.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Thomas, could you also respond to efforts that have been made at the global level to address this crisis? The International Monetary Fund announced that it will provide immediate debt relief to 25 different countries, among them the poorest in the world — Yemen, the Central African Republic, Mozambique, etc. And creditor countries, including France and the U.S., have also agreed to suspend debt. What effect do you think this will have? How much will it affect debtor countries? And what more do you think needs to be done?
THOMAS PIKETTY: Well, first, let me make clear two things. You know, this suspension of debt payment, it’s better than nothing, but I think it’s not enough, because in the decisions that have been taken is that this country will have to repay more one year from now, two years from now, in order to compensate for what it didn’t pay this year. So it’s just a suspension, but you still have the payments that are pending. And I think, in many cases, we should just cancel some of this debt for good, or other, you know, much longer horizon, with a much longer suspension.
There’s also one thing I want to stress, is that the French proposal to suspend the debt payments in Africa was a bit hypocritical in the sense that most of the debt is not held by France, it’s held by China or other countries. And, you know, it’s good to propose that other countries suspend their debt, but I think it’s even better if you can show the example, so you can decide to stop your payment for your own debt.
You should also, you know, in the case of Europe, develop more solidarity within Europe. And I would like France to propose to mutualize the interest rate to countries like Italy and Spain, which have been hit very hard. And, you know, the usual excuse for not doing that in France is to say, “Well, look, the Netherlands or Germany don’t want to do it, therefore we can’t do it.” But, you know, it’s always better to do something with two countries or three countries rather than one. Of course, it’s even better if all countries join after that. But to begin with, every initiative is good.
Now, over and beyond this issue of debt, which is very important, I think this crisis, especially in developing countries in Africa or in India, for instance, should be used as an opportunity to accelerate the development of the welfare state, of the safety net system. And in many of these countries, you just don’t have anything in terms of safety net, which means that when you decide a lockdown, when you decide a confinement, like what happened in India a couple of weeks ago, it’s not clear that it’s really something you can sustain for very long, because, in practice, what happened — and we’ve seen that on TV and in many articles — is that, in practice, many of the rural workers or migrants were just pushed away of the cities. You know, many people that were working on construction sites in cities or who didn’t really have a solid home in the cities were pushed away, which is sometimes violent, and mass transportation of people through the countryside, which is probably not the best way to avoid the spreading of the virus. And, you know, in any case, if you don’t have a basic safety net, at some point people will have to go out and work and find work and find money and find food. And so, you know, this should be an opportunity, both in India, in Africa, in every country where you don’t have such a system, to develop this kind of basic income scheme, which is possible.
You know, let me say that if you look in the case of India, which is a very important case, of course — you know, it is about to become the largest country in the world very soon. This is the largest democracy, electoral democracy, in the world. And last year, during the electoral campaign in India, there was a proposal by the Congress Party and by a number of low workers’ party to put in place a minimum income scheme. Unfortunately, they didn’t win the election, partly because there were terror attacks in Kashmir in January 2019, which allowed the Hindu nationalist party of Modi to reframe the election more in the direction of a Hindu-Muslim identity conflict, rather than redistribution and sort of social inequality. This is sad. But, you know, this is not the end of history. I think the discussion will continue.
And sometimes what you see in history following like big crises like this one is that even a government like Modi, you know, even a government which initially didn’t plan to introduce the welfare state or to introduce progressive taxation — like you see it after World War I, after World War II, even sort of right-wing governments or governments who didn’t have such plans end up developing new policy tools just because the circumstances sort of force them to do so.
And at this stage, nobody knows. You know, at this stage, we talk mostly about the U.S., about Europe. Nobody knows how the epidemic is going to spread in the South. We don’t have much data. This might take a bit more time. What we know from the Spanish flu of 1918, 1919, which is the closest historical precedent to what we have today, is that the human casualties, as a proportion of the population, were much, much larger in India, in Indonesia, in South Africa. It was up to 5% of the population who died in these countries, as compared to 0.5% to 1% in Europe or in the United States, which is already enormous. You know, today, 0.5% to 1% in the world would mean 50 million people killed in this. So this is already an enormous mortality rate. But in poor countries, it was five time more. So, nobody knows at this stage how things are going to work out in the South, but it’s clear that in case things go bad and in case a more complete lockdown is necessary in these countries, then governments will have to develop safety net.
And, you know, the international community will have not only to suspend all debt and to actually cancel all this debt, but we will really — we will also to think also to a different international economic, financial and tax system. You know, there’s been a lot of discussion over the past 10 years at the level of the OECD on how you tax large multinational corporations, which, as we know, very often don’t pay tax anywhere. So there’s a proposal at the level of OECD, so everybody’s around the table and pretending to be cooperative, at least for one time. And the idea is to have a common declaration of profits at the world level for large multinational corporations. And then the question is: How do you distribute these taxable profits across countries? And so far, because the OECD is a club of rich countries, countries in Europe and North America have said, “Well, we are going to try to get the money out of tax havens to bring them, those taxable profit, back to us,” basically, rather than back to the South. So they are discussing about distributing the corporate tax base in proportion to the sales, in proportion to indicators, which are sort of moot, in effect, for where the final consumers are in the North in terms of total value that is being sorted.
AMY GOODMAN: Thomas Piketty, I hate to cut you off —
THOMAS PIKETTY: But, you know, I think there are other proposals — yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: — but we only have a minute to go, and I want to ask you —
THOMAS PIKETTY: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: The U.S. Labor Department has just released its latest unemployment numbers, as you were speaking, showing more than 3.8 million people filed for unemployment benefits in the last week. So that brings the total number to 30 million people who have filed for unemployment in just six weeks. I want to go back to two months ago. Bernie Sanders was the Democratic front-runner for president, a man you supported. The unemployment rate was 3.5%, and the U.S. just reported its first coronavirus death. So, I want to ask you about the significance of this. Last month, you tweeted a graph showing voter turnout from 1945 to 2020, which revealed far fewer Americans over that period voted in elections than the electorate, proportionally, in either Britain or France. You tweeted, “Sanders to the aid of US democracy. Only a full-scale reorientation of the type proposed by Sanders would eventually rid American democracy of the inegalitarian practices which undermine it and deal with the electoral disaffection of the working classes.” That’s what you wrote then. Talk about what has happened in this two months, what you think needs to happen, this as the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said states should simply go bankrupt, unless they agree to a Republican austerity plan, and then they might get some U.S. government aid.
THOMAS PIKETTY: Yeah. I mean, this statement is particularly crazy. I mean, we had this kind of statement back in the '30s. You know, they were what we call the liquidationist ideology: “Let's liquidate bad firms, bad banks, bad states.” But, of course, this is the worst policy you can imagine, both in terms of social consequences and in terms of macroeconomic consequences.
Look, I think, you know, coming back to Joe Biden and the Democratic Party, I think Joe Biden will be very well inspired to borrow some of the new ideas that were put forward by Bernie Sander, Elizabeth Warren, including a progressive wealth tax on billionaires, including more investment in public hospitals, in public universities. You know, I think this is the time for the Democratic Party to show to the middle class and the lower-middle class and the lower socioeconomic groups that they care about redistribution and they care about improving the minimum wage, which is what the Democratic Party stood for until the ’60s, ’70s and even ’80s.
And then, what I show in my book Capital and Ideology — which, by the way, I should say, it’s a very readable book. You know, it’s a bit long, but it can really be read. It’s not technical at all, and it’s a broad history of inequality regime across societies. And I show that the Democratic Party in the U.S., starting, as you were saying, in the ’50s, ’60s, just like social democratic parties in Europe, gradually lost touch with the more disadvantaged electorate. And, you know, I compare all these countries and timing together. And my conclusion is that this is largely because they failed to renew their policy package and to keep redistributive ambition.
And I think many of the lower-class and lower-middle-class voters have just stopped voting, so now, somehow, also voting for Trump, and, in Europe, somehow, also voting for the nationalist party, I think, largely, for lack of a better alternative. And they feel that protection and return to the nation-state and the frontiers of the nation-state at least will protect them a little bit more than nothing at all. And I’m not sure they are so optimistic that all the gesticulation by people like Trump or Marine Le Pen in France will do a lot of good, but at least they see something new, and they hear nothing for them on the other side, therefore they feel — but let’s remember that most of these voters are actually staying at home. You know, if they were really enthusiastic about Trump or Le Pen, they would all go and vote, and you would have a 90% participation rate, which is not at all what you have.
AMY GOODMAN: Twenty seconds.
THOMAS PIKETTY: Yeah. If you look, in the U.S., in particular, the bottom 50% income voters, you have huge abstention, you know, very low turnout. So I think this shows that there’s a need for a different discourse trying to bring back these voters to the voting booth. And I think this crisis is that opportunity for Joe Biden, in particular, to send a strong signal to this electorate.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you so much, Thomas Piketty, and there’s so much more to talk about. But people can read a lot about your thoughts in your new book. Thomas Piketty, French economist whose work focuses on wealth and income inequality. His new book is just out; it’s called Capital and Ideology.
When we come back, President Trump invokes the Defense Production Act to bar local governments from closing meatpacking plants around the U.S., even though they are the major hot spots for the coronavirus. What does this mean for the thousands of workers who have gotten sick? We’ll get response from global health law expert Lawrence Gostin. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: Mozart’s The Marriage of Figaro, performed by the National Orchestra of Île-de-France while socially distancing in their homes, playing alone together.


democracynow--2020-04-30--Headlines for April 30, 2020

Headlines for April 30, 2020

At the White House , President Trump predicted the coronavirus would soon be “ eradicated ” from the United States — even if no vaccine is developed .
President Donald Trump : “ It ’ s gon na go .
It ’ s gon na leave .
It ’ s gon na be gone .
It ’ s gon na be eradicated .
And it might take longer .
It might be in smaller sections .
It ’ ll be — it won ’ t be what we had.
” CNN reports President Trump angrily threatened to fire his campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with poll numbers showing him losing ground to presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden .
Trump ’ s outburst came one day after he suggested injecting disinfectants into COVID-19 patients .
The New York Times reports top Trump administration officials are pushing U.S. spy agencies to hunt for evidence to support an unsubstantiated theory that a government laboratory in Wuhan , China , was the source of the coronavirus — and not an animal-to-human transmission of the disease , as most scientists suspect .
The effort is tied to the Trump campaign ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ onto China .
Meanwhile , President Trump said Wednesday he ’ s planning to travel to Arizona next week , and predicted his presidential campaign would resume holding massive rallies “ in the not-too-distant future.
” On Wednesday , Dr. Anthony Fauci said a second wave of coronavirus deaths is “ inevitable , ” and warned that if states relax stay-at-home orders and social distancing measures too soon , the United States “ could be in for a bad fall and a bad winter .
”

At the White House, President Trump predicted the coronavirus would soon be “eradicated” from the United States — even if no vaccine is developed.
President Donald Trump: “It’s gonna go. It’s gonna leave. It’s gonna be gone. It’s gonna be eradicated. And it might take longer. It might be in smaller sections. It’ll be — it won’t be what we had.”
CNN reports President Trump angrily threatened to fire his campaign manager on Friday after he was presented with poll numbers showing him losing ground to presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Trump’s outburst came one day after he suggested injecting disinfectants into COVID-19 patients. The New York Times reports top Trump administration officials are pushing U.S. spy agencies to hunt for evidence to support an unsubstantiated theory that a government laboratory in Wuhan, China, was the source of the coronavirus — and not an animal-to-human transmission of the disease, as most scientists suspect. The effort is tied to the Trump campaign’s bid to deflect blame for the pandemic onto China. Meanwhile, President Trump said Wednesday he’s planning to travel to Arizona next week, and predicted his presidential campaign would resume holding massive rallies “in the not-too-distant future.” On Wednesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci said a second wave of coronavirus deaths is “inevitable,” and warned that if states relax stay-at-home orders and social distancing measures too soon, the United States “could be in for a bad fall and a bad winter.”


democracynow--2020-05-01--Caravan for Life: Protesters in Puerto Rico Demand More Tests & Resources to Combat the Coronavirus

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report , as we end today ’ s show in Puerto Rico , where Governor Wanda Vázquez announced Thursday that certain sectors of the economy will reopen Monday as the island begins to ease out of a strict lockdown that began in mid-March .
At least 92 people have died from COVID-19 in Puerto Rico .
There are more than 1,500 confirmed cases .
But as of last week , Puerto Rico @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any U.S. state , at an abysmal average of 15 tests a day for every 100,000 people .
On Thursday , activists in dozens of cars held a “ Caravan for Life ” through San Juan to demand the government provide more COVID-19 tests and sufficient resources for people to stay home .
Police stopped the caravan .
This is some of the voices .
PAOLA APONTE COTTO : [ translated ] My name is Paola Aponte Cotto .
Part of our demands include that unemployment benefits are approved faster .
For example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people .
With the food stamps , we demand the automatic approval of food stamps .
Another demand is to freeze the prices , which have been inflated .
And it is unacceptable that this hasn ’ t been regulated by the consumer agency .
Another thing is that right now the message of the private sector is to open the economy , when in Puerto Rico the statistics are not being managed properly in order to know how many people are infected , and while we really need that massive tests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ translated ] The police are all over us , abusing us , when we have coordinated , we ’ ve followed all the safety measures .
What are we going to do ?
What are we going to do ?
PAOLA APONTE COTTO : [ translated ] This is what we do : feed people .
Feed .
Since week number one , we ’ ve done it with great effort , taking strict safety measures , so that our people may not suffer any needs .
Today they arrested one of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organized and safe , which sought to show that human lives are first .
And people need that the aid reaches them .
People need to eat .
PROTESTER 2 : [ translated ] The caravan had coordination .
It had security protocols .
The stopping points of the caravan were publicly known .
And it was the police that decided to block their transit .
And beyond it , they put our lives at the risk of contagion .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s voices of the Caravan of Life .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yulín Cruz .
MAYOR CARMEN YULÍN CRUZ : No one in Puerto Rico has received the $ 1,200 from the federal government .
We are having problems with the local $ 500 that the governor said that it was going to distribute .
There ’ s more than 130,000 unemployment requests that have not been filled .
The same thing with people getting food stamps .
AMY GOODMAN : Special thanks to Democracy Now !
correspondent Juan Carlos Dávila in Puerto Rico .
The organizer of the Caravan for Life , Giovanni Roberto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caravan and then later released .
That does it for our broadcast .
Democracy Now !
is working with as few people on site as possible .
The majority of our amazing team is working from home .
With Juan González , I ’ m Amy Goodman .
Stay safe .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report, as we end today’s show in Puerto Rico, where Governor Wanda Vázquez announced Thursday that certain sectors of the economy will reopen Monday as the island begins to ease out of a strict lockdown that began in mid-March. At least 92 people have died from COVID-19 in Puerto Rico. There are more than 1,500 confirmed cases. But as of last week, Puerto Rico was reporting a testing rate lower than any U.S. state, at an abysmal average of 15 tests a day for every 100,000 people.
On Thursday, activists in dozens of cars held a “Caravan for Life” through San Juan to demand the government provide more COVID-19 tests and sufficient resources for people to stay home. Police stopped the caravan. This is some of the voices.
PAOLA APONTE COTTO: [translated] My name is Paola Aponte Cotto. Part of our demands include that unemployment benefits are approved faster. For example, establishing 24/7 phone lines to help the people. With the food stamps, we demand the automatic approval of food stamps. Another demand is to freeze the prices, which have been inflated. And it is unacceptable that this hasn’t been regulated by the consumer agency. Another thing is that right now the message of the private sector is to open the economy, when in Puerto Rico the statistics are not being managed properly in order to know how many people are infected, and while we really need that massive tests are made.
POLICE OFFICER: [translated] Arrest this guy. Let’s arrest this guy. You’re getting arrested now. Arrested. It’s over. The patience is over.
PROTESTER 1: [translated] The police are all over us, abusing us, when we have coordinated, we’ve followed all the safety measures. What are we going to do? What are we going to do?
PAOLA APONTE COTTO: [translated] This is what we do: feed people. Feed. Since week number one, we’ve done it with great effort, taking strict safety measures, so that our people may not suffer any needs. Today they arrested one of our comrades in a caravan, very well organized and safe, which sought to show that human lives are first. And people need that the aid reaches them. People need to eat.
PROTESTER 2: [translated] The caravan had coordination. It had security protocols. The stopping points of the caravan were publicly known. And it was the police that decided to block their transit. And beyond it, they put our lives at the risk of contagion.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s voices of the Caravan of Life. And this is San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz.
MAYOR CARMEN YULÍN CRUZ: No one in Puerto Rico has received the $1,200 from the federal government. We are having problems with the local $500 that the governor said that it was going to distribute. There’s more than 130,000 unemployment requests that have not been filled. The same thing with people getting food stamps.
AMY GOODMAN: Special thanks to Democracy Now! correspondent Juan Carlos Dávila in Puerto Rico. The organizer of the Caravan for Life, Giovanni Roberto, was arrested by police during the caravan and then later released.
That does it for our broadcast. Democracy Now! is working with as few people on site as possible. The majority of our amazing team is working from home. With Juan González, I’m Amy Goodman. Stay safe.


democracynow--2020-05-01--Tara Reade's Ex-Neighbor on Biden Sexual Assault Allegation: I Believed Her Then & I Believe Her Now

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
For the first time , this morning , presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has responded to sexual assault allegations against him on MSNBC ’ s Morning Joe , breaking his silence after weeks of mounting pressure to deny allegations put forward by Tara Reade , a former Biden staffer who says he sexually assaulted her in 1993 .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , quote , “ I want to address allegations by a former staffer that I engaged in misconduct 27 years ago .
They aren ’ t true .
This never happened , ” he said .
This is Biden speaking on MSNBC just before we went to broadcast .
AMY GOODMAN : Joe Biden was being questioned by Morning Joe 's Mika Brzezinski about his senatorial records at the University of Delaware , which are sealed to the public , and his comments during the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearings , in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come forward in the glaring lights of focus , nationally , you 've got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she ’ s talking about is real , ” unquote .
Joe Biden ’ s denial comes as two more people have come forward this week to corroborate the account of Tara Reade .
Business Insider reported earlier this week that Reade ’ s former neighbor said the pair discussed the assault in detail in the mid-1990s and that Tara Reade described then-Senator Biden pushing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ penetrating her .
A former colleague who also knew Reade in the mid- ’ 90s said she had spoken of being sexually harassed by her former boss in Washington , D.C. Tara Reade first came forward with her allegations in March .
She recounted the incident on Democracy Now !
A warning : Her description is graphic .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s former Biden staffer , when he was senator , Tara Reade , speaking in a Democracy Now !
TV/radio broadcast exclusive .
To see the full interview , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following up on a podcast interview done by journalist Katie Halper .
Many news outlets were slow to report Tara Reade ’ s allegations , but our story gained renewed attention last weekend when archival video emerged of Reade ’ s mother anonymously calling into Larry King ’ s show on CNN in 1993 and making a reference to what happened to her daughter Tara .
AMY GOODMAN : Tara Reade has confirmed the voice of the caller was her mother , who died in 2016 .
Joe Biden ’ s campaign has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , calling her allegation untrue .
All this comes as Joe Biden has picked up several high-profile endorsements this week , including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressmember Pramila Jayapal , who co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus .
Well , for more , we ’ re joined by the Business Insider reporter , Rich McHugh .
He ’ s a former NBC News producer , where he worked with Ronan Farrow on the story of Harvey Weinstein ’ s serial sexual assaults .
Rich McHugh ’ s recent investigation confirmed Tara Reade ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her in the 1990s .
And we ’ re joined by one of those women : Lynda LaCasse , a former neighbor of Tara Reade who has corroborated Reade ’ s account .
And she will be talking about that for the first time in a broadcast interview .
Rich McHugh brought out the interview with her in print in Business Insider .
Rich , let ’ s begin with you .
Talk about this story .
Joe Biden , as we speak , is saying it ’ s not true .
RICH @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not unexpected , you know , for someone in his position .
What I ’ ll say is that when I started reporting on this , I go at every story like this with extreme skepticism .
I never actually wanted to report on this story .
One of the survivors in the Weinstein story that I worked with , Sarah Ann Masse , came to me and said , “ Look , can you take a look at this ?
” And I said , “ Well , look , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but if everybody ’ s OK with that , I ’ ll go down this road.
” And so , the more that I ’ ve gone down the road reporting it , the more corroborating voices I ’ ve found .
And when I — you know , when she filed a police report , and then when I found Lynda — you know , Lynda is someone that struck me as entirely credible .
She ’ s like , “ Look , I ’ m a lifelong Democrat .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this happened .
So I need to , in good faith , come forward and say that.
” So , you know , will we ever know that there ’ s 100 % truth that this happened or did not happen ?
I don ’ t think so .
But this needs to be continued to be reported out .
I know this morning , Joe Biden said — he ’ s calling on the National Archives to release his papers .
So we spoke to the National Archives and said , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tara Reade filing a complaint outside of this office , outside of the Biden office .
If you have that , would that live there ?
” And they told us that , no , they have no records from the — I believe it ’ s called the Fair Employment Practices office .
And so , that leads us to believe that there might be some of those papers within the University of Delaware in his senatorial papers , which is why we ’ re calling on them to open them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s go to Joe Biden speaking today , Joe Biden speaking today on MSNBC , talking about that issue of the University of Delaware archives .
He was being questioned by Mika Brzezinski .
RICH McHUGH : From speaking to the National Archives , they say , no , they would not have that report , that it would not be within the National Archives .
AMY GOODMAN : Let ’ s bring in Lynda LaCasse , the former neighbor of Tara Reade , who has accused Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1993 .
We just played the clip of Tara describing what happened .
Lynda LaCasse came forward just recently in the Business Insider piece and has corroborated Tara Reade ’ s account .
Lynda , this is your first time speaking on television about this .
Can you tell us what happened in the mid-1990s ?
How did you know Tara ?
And then tell us what she told you and why you ’ re coming forward today .
LYNDA LACASSE : Well , Tara was my next-door neighbor .
I moved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and we became close at that time .
And we actually — she told me about it when we were having a conversation .
And so , as Rich put forth in the article in the Business Insider , I was having a moment — I was outside , and I had just received some papers , and I was upset about them .
And she came over .
And we were talking about violence , because I had experienced violence myself .
And she started telling me about Joe Biden and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she told me that he put his — he put her up against a wall , and he put his hand up her skirt , and he put his fingers inside her .
And she was very distraught , and she was very upset , and she was crying .
And that ’ s how that conversation happened .
We were just sitting on my front stoop in front of my apartment .
AMY GOODMAN : And what year was this that you had that conversation ?
LYNDA LACASSE : Well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — yeah , I ’ m sorry , 1995 or early 1996 .
AMY GOODMAN : And , Lynda , if you could talk about your response at the time ?
She told you — did she tell you it was Senator Biden who she had worked for ?
LYNDA LACASSE : She did .
She did tell me that .
And , you know , I really didn ’ t pay that much attention at the time .
I didn ’ t really care much about politics .
I didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I didn ’ t know really who he was much .
I didn ’ t put that much importance on it .
So… AMY GOODMAN : So , can you talk about why you ’ ve decided to come forward now ?
I understand you ’ re a Biden supporter .
Is that right ?
LYNDA LACASSE : That ’ s correct .
I ’ m a strong , lifelong Democrat , and I am a Biden supporter .
And , you know , I didn ’ t know about — I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stuff that was going on in the news .
She told me about it last month .
She called me , and she told me that she had decided to come forward with it .
And I said — and she told me about the allegations .
And I said , “ Oh , yes , I remember that.
” So , then we talked again a little over a week ago , and I volunteered to come forward .
And again , you know , I ’ ve worked so much , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pay as much attention as I could have .
But I did volunteer to come forward .
And the reason I volunteered to come forward is just I feel that the truth needs to be told , and her truth needs to be told .
I believed her back then , when she told me , and I believe her now .
AMY GOODMAN : And just talk about how you mesh believing her now , that she was sexually assaulted by her boss , by Senator Joe Biden — that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her , why you support him .
LYNDA LACASSE : It ’ s a difficult thing .
I ’ ve always supported him .
And I just have to keep supporting him now .
And it ’ s a little bit harder now , after this allegation .
I ’ m a definite anti-Trumper , so I ’ m having a little bit of a hard time with it .
So , but mostly it ’ s an anti-Trump thing .
And , you know , I saw him on Morning Joe this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , too .
But I ’ m hearing this today , and I heard Tara a long time ago telling me that .
So , I ’ m struggling with it , with the election now .
But I ’ m not — I ’ m still going to vote for him .
AMY GOODMAN : Let me bring back in Rich McHugh .
Your thoughts on how the media has covered this story ?
I mean , ultimately , The New York Times did a piece .
New York magazine , Rebecca @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course , MSNBC is now interviewing Joe Biden today .
You ’ ve had a lot of experience with NBC in trying to bring out the Harvey Weinstein story first on NBC with Ronan Farrow .
But talk about the progression of this piece .
RICH McHUGH : I think the media was afraid — I ’ ll just say “ afraid ” — because , you know , there are things in Tara ’ s story , there are some inconsistencies , there ’ s her writings about Russia and whatnot , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some pause in reporting this .
But when you ’ re at a network level , you weigh those things even more carefully when the allegations are against a , you know , presumptive Democratic nominee .
That said , I am a little surprised at the fact — the lack of coverage after more voices , corroborating voices , came forward , even after Lynda came forward .
AMY GOODMAN : Talk about who else , Rich .
RICH McHUGH : Well , so , right now on the record is — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said she told her mother , who is since deceased , in 2016 , so we can ’ t hear from her .
But we did just hear from her on Larry King .
She didn ’ t name Biden , but she did say things that make sense according to Tara ’ s story .
And Tara did tell us about this before it was unearthed , so we were looking for it .
She said she told a friend at the time , contemporaneously .
I have spoken to that friend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her story lines up exactly .
I find no inconsistencies with that story .
Her brother , Collin Moulton , has gone on the record , with me and Business Insider and others , and confirmed parts of her story .
He says he was a younger brother by seven years , so he doesn ’ t think he was told the full story , because he was a younger brother .
But he definitely remembers being told that Joe Biden had his hand up her — inside her clothes or up her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re hearing from now .
And Lorraine Sanchez , who also went on the record .
She worked with Tara from '94 through ’ 96 in Senator Jack O'Connell ’ s office in California and says , at the time that Tara arrived there , she was complaining about having experienced sexual harassment at the hands of her former boss in D.C .
I asked Tara , I said , “ Did you experience sexual harassment from anybody else in D.C. ?
Do you have any other allegation ?
” And she said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for — I only experienced it in the Biden office at the hands of Joe Biden.
” So , you have a number of voices right there that — and there are other people , too , by the way .
I spoke with an intern who worked under Tara in the Biden office , and she says she doesn ’ t remember Tara saying anything about sexual harassment or about sexual assault .
But what she does confirm is that Tara was — all of a sudden , in mid-April 1993 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer her supervisor , which she found odd .
AMY GOODMAN : I want to put President Trump on , who was questioned about whether he thought Joe Biden should respond to the allegations .
AMY GOODMAN : So , that was President Trump , who has himself been accused of rape and sexual assault repeatedly by dozens of women .
Rich McHugh ?
RICH McHUGH : It ’ s a complicated conversation , no doubt about it .
This is — both of these — both Trump and Biden now are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And we ’ re talking about this allegation right now because it ’ s Joe Biden , but both need to be discussed , all of them .
AMY GOODMAN : And , Lynda LaCasse , do you feel strongly that Tara Reade should be believed ?
AMY GOODMAN : Well , I want to thank you both for being with us .
Lynda LaCasse has come forward , who corroborates Tara Reade ’ s story , says she told her about it in the mid-1990s .
And I want to thank Rich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Business Insider .
We will link to that .
He ’ s an investigative reporter , former NBC News producer , worked with Ronan Farrow on the story of Harvey Weinstein .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. For the first time, this morning, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has responded to sexual assault allegations against him on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, breaking his silence after weeks of mounting pressure to deny allegations put forward by Tara Reade, a former Biden staffer who says he sexually assaulted her in 1993. In a statement Friday morning, Biden said, quote, “I want to address allegations by a former staffer that I engaged in misconduct 27 years ago. They aren’t true. This never happened,” he said. This is Biden speaking on MSNBC just before we went to broadcast.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Would you please go on the record with the American people? Did you sexually assault Tara Reade?
JOE BIDEN: No, it is not true. I am saying unequivocally, it never, never happened. And it didn’t. It never happened.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Do you remember her? Do you remember any types of complaints that she might have made?
JOE BIDEN: I don’t remember any type of complaint she may have made. It was 27 years ago. And I don’t remember, nor does anyone else, that I’m aware of. And the fact is that I don’t remember. I don’t remember any complaint ever having been made.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Have you or your campaign, have you reached out to her?
JOE BIDEN: No, I have not reached out to her. It was 27 years ago. This never happened. And when she first made the claim, we made it clear that it never happened. And that’s simple as that.
AMY GOODMAN: Joe Biden was being questioned by Morning Joe's Mika Brzezinski about his senatorial records at the University of Delaware, which are sealed to the public, and his comments during the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearings, in which he said, “For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you've got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real,” unquote.
Joe Biden’s denial comes as two more people have come forward this week to corroborate the account of Tara Reade. Business Insider reported earlier this week that Reade’s former neighbor said the pair discussed the assault in detail in the mid-1990s and that Tara Reade described then-Senator Biden pushing her up against a wall and digitally penetrating her. A former colleague who also knew Reade in the mid-’90s said she had spoken of being sexually harassed by her former boss in Washington, D.C.
Tara Reade first came forward with her allegations in March. She recounted the incident on Democracy Now! A warning: Her description is graphic.
TARA READE: I was approached by my supervisor. She handed me a gym bag and said, “Hurry, Joe wants this, so get it to him. He’ll meet you down towards the Capitol.” And I went down the stairs, and I don’t remember exactly where I was, because there’s connections between the Russell Building and all of that and the corridors, but we were in a semi-private location. It wasn’t a room. It wasn’t, you know, the Russell Office Building — I mean, in his office. It was down in the corridors. And I handed him the gym bag.
And then he — it was one, as I described, fluid moment. He was talking to me, and he said some things that I don’t recall. And I was up against the wall. And he — I remember the coldness of the wall. And I remember his hands underneath my blouse and underneath my skirt, and his fingers penetrating me as he was trying to kiss me and I was pulling away. And he pulled back, and he said, “Come on, man. I heard you liked me.” But he was angry. It was like a tight voice. And he tended to smile when he was angry. And he isn’t like the Uncle Joe like everybody talks about now. He was younger. He was my dad’s age at that time and very strong. And he looked insulted and angry. And I remember feeling like I had done something wrong when he said that statement. And then I was standing there when he said — he was still near me. He said — pointed his finger and said, “You’re nothing to me. You’re nothing.” And he walked away.
And I don’t remember exactly where I went after. I think I went to the restroom to clean up, but I don’t remember precisely. The next memory I have is sitting on the cold stairs, on the Russell Building back stairs, where the big windows are. And I remember just my whole body shaking. And I remember knowing that — knowing that I had made him angry and that my career was probably over. … Sitting on those stairs, the reality hit me.
The next thing I remember was that night and talking to my mom, and she was like, “You need to file a police report. It’s a sexual assault.” And I didn’t think of it as sexual assault, and I didn’t really understand. And I was trying to just get over the shock of it, because I looked up to him. He was supposed to be a champion of women. And I was so thrilled to be at that office and so honored, and it shattered my life and changed the trajectory of my whole career and life. And I lost my job after I complained, and I was fired.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s former Biden staffer, when he was senator, Tara Reade, speaking in a Democracy Now! TV/radio broadcast exclusive. To see the full interview, you can go to democracynow.org. We were following up on a podcast interview done by journalist Katie Halper. Many news outlets were slow to report Tara Reade’s allegations, but our story gained renewed attention last weekend when archival video emerged of Reade’s mother anonymously calling into Larry King’s show on CNN in 1993 and making a reference to what happened to her daughter Tara.
JEANETTE ALTIMUS: Hello. I’m wondering what a staffer would do, besides go to the press in Washington. My daughter has just left there, after working for a prominent senator, and could not get through with her problems at all. And the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it, out of respect for him.
LARRY KING: Or she had a story to tell, but out of respect for the person she worked for, she didn’t tell it.
JEANETTE ALTIMUS: That’s true.
AMY GOODMAN: Tara Reade has confirmed the voice of the caller was her mother, who died in 2016. Joe Biden’s campaign has denied Reade’s sexual assault claim, calling her allegation untrue.
All this comes as Joe Biden has picked up several high-profile endorsements this week, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressmember Pramila Jayapal, who co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Well, for more, we’re joined by the Business Insider reporter, Rich McHugh. He’s a former NBC News producer, where he worked with Ronan Farrow on the story of Harvey Weinstein’s serial sexual assaults. Rich McHugh’s recent investigation confirmed Tara Reade’s accounts with two people who knew her in the 1990s. And we’re joined by one of those women: Lynda LaCasse, a former neighbor of Tara Reade who has corroborated Reade’s account. And she will be talking about that for the first time in a broadcast interview. Rich McHugh brought out the interview with her in print in Business Insider.
Rich, let’s begin with you. Talk about this story. Joe Biden, as we speak, is saying it’s not true.
RICH McHUGH: Well, I think that’s not unexpected, you know, for someone in his position. What I’ll say is that when I started reporting on this, I go at every story like this with extreme skepticism. I never actually wanted to report on this story. One of the survivors in the Weinstein story that I worked with, Sarah Ann Masse, came to me and said, “Look, can you take a look at this?” And I said, “Well, look, we might not like what we find, but if everybody’s OK with that, I’ll go down this road.”
And so, the more that I’ve gone down the road reporting it, the more corroborating voices I’ve found. And when I — you know, when she filed a police report, and then when I found Lynda — you know, Lynda is someone that struck me as entirely credible. She’s like, “Look, I’m a lifelong Democrat. I am voting for Biden regardless. And this happened. So I need to, in good faith, come forward and say that.”
So, you know, will we ever know that there’s 100% truth that this happened or did not happen? I don’t think so. But this needs to be continued to be reported out. I know this morning, Joe Biden said — he’s calling on the National Archives to release his papers. So we spoke to the National Archives and said, “Look, there is some question about Tara Reade filing a complaint outside of this office, outside of the Biden office. If you have that, would that live there?” And they told us that, no, they have no records from the — I believe it’s called the Fair Employment Practices office. And so, that leads us to believe that there might be some of those papers within the University of Delaware in his senatorial papers, which is why we’re calling on them to open them.
AMY GOODMAN: So, let’s go to Joe Biden speaking today, Joe Biden speaking today on MSNBC, talking about that issue of the University of Delaware archives. He was being questioned by Mika Brzezinski.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Nothing classified with the president or anybody else. I’m just asking: Why not do a search for Tara Reade’s name in the University of Delaware records?
JOE BIDEN: Look, I mean, who does that search?
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: The University of Delaware? Perhaps you set up a commission that can do it? I don’t know. Whatever is the fairest way —
JOE BIDEN: No.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: — to create the most transparency.
JOE BIDEN: Well, this is — look, Mika, she said she filed a report. She has her employment records still. She said she filed a report with the only office that would have a report in the United States Senate at the time. If the report was ever filed, it was filed there, period.
AMY GOODMAN: Rich McHugh, your quick comment?
RICH McHUGH: From speaking to the National Archives, they say, no, they would not have that report, that it would not be within the National Archives.
AMY GOODMAN: Let’s bring in Lynda LaCasse, the former neighbor of Tara Reade, who has accused Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden of sexual assault. Tara Reade accused him in 1993. We just played the clip of Tara describing what happened. Lynda LaCasse came forward just recently in the Business Insider piece and has corroborated Tara Reade’s account. Lynda, this is your first time speaking on television about this. Can you tell us what happened in the mid-1990s? How did you know Tara? And then tell us what she told you and why you’re coming forward today.
LYNDA LACASSE: Well, Tara was my next-door neighbor. I moved into the apartment right next to her, and we became close at that time. And we actually — she told me about it when we were having a conversation. And so, as Rich put forth in the article in the Business Insider, I was having a moment — I was outside, and I had just received some papers, and I was upset about them. And she came over. And we were talking about violence, because I had experienced violence myself.
And she started telling me about Joe Biden and what he had done. And basically, she told me that he put his — he put her up against a wall, and he put his hand up her skirt, and he put his fingers inside her. And she was very distraught, and she was very upset, and she was crying. And that’s how that conversation happened. We were just sitting on my front stoop in front of my apartment.
AMY GOODMAN: And what year was this that you had that conversation?
LYNDA LACASSE: Well, it was either 1994 or very early — yeah, I’m sorry, 1995 or early 1996.
AMY GOODMAN: And, Lynda, if you could talk about your response at the time? She told you — did she tell you it was Senator Biden who she had worked for?
LYNDA LACASSE: She did. She did tell me that. And, you know, I really didn’t pay that much attention at the time. I didn’t really care much about politics. I didn’t — I knew she worked for him. I didn’t know really who he was much. I didn’t put that much importance on it. So…
AMY GOODMAN: So, can you talk about why you’ve decided to come forward now? I understand you’re a Biden supporter. Is that right?
LYNDA LACASSE: That’s correct. I’m a strong, lifelong Democrat, and I am a Biden supporter. And, you know, I didn’t know about — I didn’t know about all the stuff that was going on in the news. She told me about it last month. She called me, and she told me that she had decided to come forward with it. And I said — and she told me about the allegations. And I said, “Oh, yes, I remember that.”
So, then we talked again a little over a week ago, and I volunteered to come forward. And again, you know, I’ve worked so much, I hadn’t really had time to pay as much attention as I could have. But I did volunteer to come forward. And the reason I volunteered to come forward is just I feel that the truth needs to be told, and her truth needs to be told. I believed her back then, when she told me, and I believe her now.
AMY GOODMAN: And just talk about how you mesh believing her now, that she was sexually assaulted by her boss, by Senator Joe Biden — that’s her allegation — if you believe her, why you support him.
LYNDA LACASSE: It’s a difficult thing. I’ve always supported him. And I just have to keep supporting him now. And it’s a little bit harder now, after this allegation. I’m a definite anti-Trumper, so I’m having a little bit of a hard time with it. So, but mostly it’s an anti-Trump thing. And, you know, I saw him on Morning Joe this morning, and he looks very believable, too. But I’m hearing this today, and I heard Tara a long time ago telling me that. So, I’m struggling with it, with the election now. But I’m not — I’m still going to vote for him.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me bring back in Rich McHugh. Your thoughts on how the media has covered this story? I mean, ultimately, The New York Times did a piece. New York magazine, Rebecca Traister, did a piece. Of course, MSNBC is now interviewing Joe Biden today. You’ve had a lot of experience with NBC in trying to bring out the Harvey Weinstein story first on NBC with Ronan Farrow. But talk about the progression of this piece.
RICH McHUGH: I think the media was afraid — I’ll just say “afraid” — because, you know, there are things in Tara’s story, there are some inconsistencies, there’s her writings about Russia and whatnot, that give journalists, myself included, some pause in reporting this. But when you’re at a network level, you weigh those things even more carefully when the allegations are against a, you know, presumptive Democratic nominee.
That said, I am a little surprised at the fact — the lack of coverage after more voices, corroborating voices, came forward, even after Lynda came forward.
AMY GOODMAN: Talk about who else, Rich.
RICH McHUGH: Well, so, right now on the record is — so, at the time, Tara said she told her mother, who is since deceased, in 2016, so we can’t hear from her. But we did just hear from her on Larry King. She didn’t name Biden, but she did say things that make sense according to Tara’s story. And Tara did tell us about this before it was unearthed, so we were looking for it.
She said she told a friend at the time, contemporaneously. I have spoken to that friend a lot and interviewed her, and her story lines up exactly. I find no inconsistencies with that story.
Her brother, Collin Moulton, has gone on the record, with me and Business Insider and others, and confirmed parts of her story. He says he was a younger brother by seven years, so he doesn’t think he was told the full story, because he was a younger brother. But he definitely remembers being told that Joe Biden had his hand up her — inside her clothes or up her clothes.
Lynda, who we’re hearing from now.
And Lorraine Sanchez, who also went on the record. She worked with Tara from '94 through ’96 in Senator Jack O'Connell’s office in California and says, at the time that Tara arrived there, she was complaining about having experienced sexual harassment at the hands of her former boss in D.C. I asked Tara, I said, “Did you experience sexual harassment from anybody else in D.C.? Do you have any other allegation?” And she said, “No, I only worked for — I only experienced it in the Biden office at the hands of Joe Biden.”
So, you have a number of voices right there that — and there are other people, too, by the way. I spoke with an intern who worked under Tara in the Biden office, and she says she doesn’t remember Tara saying anything about sexual harassment or about sexual assault. But what she does confirm is that Tara was — all of a sudden, in mid-April 1993, Tara was replaced, and she was no longer her supervisor, which she found odd.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to put President Trump on, who was questioned about whether he thought Joe Biden should respond to the allegations.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I don’t know anything about it. I don’t know exactly — I think he should respond. You know, it’s — it could be false accusations. I know all about false accusations. I’ve been falsely charged numerous times.
AMY GOODMAN: So, that was President Trump, who has himself been accused of rape and sexual assault repeatedly by dozens of women. Rich McHugh?
RICH McHUGH: It’s a complicated conversation, no doubt about it. This is — both of these — both Trump and Biden now are, you know, credibly accused. And we’re talking about this allegation right now because it’s Joe Biden, but both need to be discussed, all of them.
AMY GOODMAN: And, Lynda LaCasse, do you feel strongly that Tara Reade should be believed?
LYNDA LACASSE: Absolutely. Absolutely. I believe her 100%.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both for being with us. Lynda LaCasse has come forward, who corroborates Tara Reade’s story, says she told her about it in the mid-1990s. And I want to thank Rich McHugh, who wrote this piece in the Business Insider. We will link to that. He’s an investigative reporter, former NBC News producer, worked with Ronan Farrow on the story of Harvey Weinstein.