Trump doesn't even understand what is trade deficit, says economist

Donald Trump gives a pause in his speech in your event and campaign in Indianapolis

São Paulo-"Donald Trump doesn't have a coherent theory that go beyond scaring people in China-and effectively, which is very dangerous."

The opinion is the Economist Russ Roberts, former Professor at George Mason University, a researcher at Stanford and host of the popular weekly podcast EconTalk, where conversation with great economists for an audience of non-economists.

Although it is considered an optimist, he confesses that the rise of Bernie Sanders for the Democratic Party and Republican party Trump did question the strength of theAmerican political system.

Besides making a blunt defense of legalizing drugs, Roberts talked to EXAME.com about ideology on economic discipline, American presidential election, immigration and uncertainties on the global stage.

EXAME.com-you're comfortable with the label "libertarian" who usually associate with you?

Russ Roberts – more or less. I prefer "classical liberal": I want the Government to doless in economics than today, but I'm not an anarchist.

Understand that markets operate in a cultural and institutional environment and that taxes are important, but my instinct would prefer more voluntary choices, with change and solutions that come from the bottom up and not from the top down.

When I was young, I hated when they placed a label on front of economists, but as he aged I realized that almost all bring ideological and philosophical baggage and it is important to be clear about that.

No means despise the sight of someone based on that, but understand that the economy is not as scientific as we like to think.

EXAME.com-do you think that since the financial crisis became more ideological debate?

Roberts-I don't think the books have changed so much, which is understandable. Certain concepts follow so there is valid as 20, 50 or 100 years.

The problem is that we are dealing with a complex phenomenon such as the economy, the result of many forces. It's hard to find empirical evidence of what causes what, so the way we teach it is, by its nature, open.

I don't think there is a consensus among economists about the lessons we should have learned from 2008, and it's ideological. The interventionists conclude that deregulation caused the crisis while non-interventionists say we had a lot of intervention.

Renowned economists who predicted the crisis or even no recovery keep saying that their models were right.

EXAME.com – there is a fear that the Central Bank's arsenal to fight new crises is over, which leads to unorthodox measures as negative interest rates. What do you think?

Roberts-we have two tools to combat crisis: monetary and fiscal policy-and it looks like we're on the cusp of the two. Several countries have bad situations of deficit anddebt, and interest rates are very low, or negative.

We use our weapons in 2008 and theoretically established a healthy path. But if the drug works, take the medicine, right? And now we seem to be at risk of overdose.

To be honest, I don't understand what is happening and I don't think most people understand. And it only gets harder by the fact that all actors have to pretend that everything is fine. Even if they are worried, they can't say. It's a very fluid in the interventionist fiscal and monetary policy.

EXAME.com-do you think this is the result of new phenomena, such as technological innovation or an ageing population?

Roberts-Good question. Think of one other thing: how stable are the major democracies? They look like they are in the us and Europe, at least. Latin America and Africa, less. But we don't know if that's true.

We will have more and more old people increasingly living and Governments who promised to take care of your needs, and economic health. But that promise may notbe fulfilled. We think we're going to fix, as before, but will be the same this time?

I see in the u.s. a strong political system-or thought he was, until this year. We can name a Socialist, at one extreme, and a businessman, a tough guy who doesn't seem to meet or do not respect the Constitution, on the other. Now anything goes.

An optimist could mention other forces, like the Congress or the Supreme Court, but they would have success in responding to an electorate that puts a person up there?

EXAME.com – both Trump how Sanders has an anti-free trade and anti-globalization discourse. The support of the American public to this type of policy was reversed?

Roberts – the rise of Sanders and Trump is exploring the powerful feeling that something is wrong with the system. The question is: what? There's what people think is wrong and there is what actually may be wrong – it doesn't have to be the same thing.

Sanders says the 1% more Rico is taking all the benefits. I think that's a misreadingof the data, but most people believe