armenia. and a quick reminder you can keep up-to-date with all of the news on our website. all the latest on the u.s. judges' did decision to charge two police officers over the fatal shooting of a 12-year-old boy in ohio. the address, of course, aljazerra.com. that's aljazerra.com. deal. plus, turning garbage into cold. today's tech is tomorrow's trash. that means big profits for many tech companies a global trade deal with a completely boring name, but huge economic implications.

the trans-pacific partnership. t.p.p. it pushed president obama into the arms of house republic leaders, putting the president at odds with allies, ranging from members of the black caucus to labour leaders, environmentalists. let me explain why the deal has not ignited drama. the trans-pacific partnership would remove trade barriers and tariffs around the pacific rim, potentially taking a third of the world's trade, and 40% of all global economic activity. many of the exact details of deal are unknown because it's being negotiated in secret. critics don't like that one bit, but some parts have been leaked. we know, friendships, that t.p.p. would create the biggest free trade zone that the world has scene.

it encompasses 12 countries, all the stuff in orange, united states, japan, canada, mexico. all these you see in the map. notice you don't see china, it's left out of the deal for now. many influential economists argue that the president and his friend on the right understood to do what they need to do to be competitive in the face of china's growing influence. organising labour and environmental activists from the country, from the president's base, say that free trade deals cost jobs, and point to the 20-year-old trade deal that removed barriers from canada, united states and mexico. critics say n.a.f.t.a. forced wages to stagnate costing nearly a millionons. the political debate is centered

on a house bill giving president obama so-called fast-track majority to negotiate tt perform. the isn't sit passed it last month, the house is on track to vote for it on friday. the house passed a bill authorising fund to help workers that lose their job. fast-track authority means the senate and the house have to vote yea or nay on t.p.p. it prevents lawmakers were adding amendments or filibustering. opponents are saying no to fast-track. among the unions is the afl/cio. the union's president sent a sharply worded letter to president obama chiding him for having repeatedly isolated and marginalized unions, saying t.p.p. does nothing to create

jobs or prevent the environment. we have a chief staff member joining us from washington. us. >> thank you for having me. >> thea, like it or not, we live in a global economy where everywhere is competing with everywhere, we trade with each other, and the best ideas win. is this position that unions in the afl, cil - that you are take, is it not defending an antiquated approach to strength by standing in the way of increased trade of lower barriers for the movement of goods and services? >> not at all. thanks for asking. we understand that we are in a global economy. every time we negotiate a trade agreement like this, this is an opportunity to write better rules, and make sure that trade is working for working families, for the environment and consumer safety. >> what's to say - you don't

know what is in the deal. >> well, we know a lot of what is in the deal because it's almost done, and the government has talked about some. i have clearance, i have seen some of what is in the agreement, i can't talk about it, i'd go to gaol. it is a secretive agreement. what we know in terms of opening new markets and protecting multinational corporations as they move jobs overseas is we haven't got the balance right. the agreement is lopsided in favour of kompt rights, against -- corporate rites, against working families, and the environment... >> i have to ask you. they sound like talking points. i don't know what that means. when you say i cannot believe our administration sits at a

table and says let's cut a deal against working fam flis america. that. >> that's a great question. the point is if you have a trade agreement taking trade barriers down and creates protection for corporations moving overseas, and i'll give you an example, a draft investment of the t.p.p. leeks. we see what they have in mind. it gives foreign corporations government, and u.s. corporations the right to sue the government in 11 other countries for environmental protections, public safety or labour protections that cost them profits. we think this is bad governance, we think it's a bad idea. it's a provision in a lot of u.s. trade agreements in the past. we object to putting it into a new trade agreement with 40% of the globe. >> it tends to be in 40 trade agreements.

i want to apologise, there's a bit of a delay, it may look like we are talking over each other. i want to listen to an answer i got when asking the chief economist at the department of labour about the criticism, that t.p.p. will hurt american workersers here is her response, i want your response. >> when we pass an agreement like this, we'll increase exports. exporting firms pay on average higher wages than other firms. they pay 18% higher. this deal - the increased trade that this will lead to increases average wages in this country. >> now, i guess the issue with that is that we have increased manufacturing over the last few years, but we have not done it with more workers. the wages may increase, but we continue to use fewer manufacturing workers, what is your response. that is a standard comment by the u.s. government or the

chamber of commerce or everyone that likes the deal, it increases the wages of manufacturing workers. why is that a bad thing? >> that wouldn't be bad if that's what it did. we heard that line for every trade agreement over the last 20 years, that we would increase exports to other countries. trade is a 2-way street. we can't just look at exports, we have to look at exports and imports. when you look at both of those, the united states has a half a trillion trade deficit. we import 500 billion more worth of goods and services. all the trade agreements have not delivered on the promise of creating good jobs or supporting good wages. we had wage equality. during the same period when globalizing rapidly. sure, workers in export sectors

are more than the average worker, but workers in imports earn more than the average worker, and we lost more import competing jobs than we have created. >> i assume you at aclio share president obama's objective to increase exports. he's tried hard to do that. at some point when the rest of the world says you want us to buy more of your stuff, you have to give us access to your market. they don't get to sell more, unless they create the opportunity. what would you do, would you accept ttp if they had the assurances, that they had not been damaging to wages and workers in america. >> we'd like to see a different tp living on the promise of creating good jobs and more exports. one thing that t.p.p. could have done, but did not do is address currency manipulation, and that

is a disadvantage for american workers and businesses. we had a bipartisan majority in the house and senate. plead with the administration to include protection that helps competitiveness of american producers, to include the provisions in the t.p.p. and the disagrees didn't do it. we believe by assigning t.p.p. we are making the united states more vulnerable because we did not include currency provisions. that could be done and still could be. >> we heard this criticism, the u.s. treasury labelled three past. japan in 1988, taiwan in "88 and 1982, and china. the act of 1998 requires the secretary of treasury to provide reports twice a year on the international economic and partners.

since 1994, the treasury, secretary of united states - been from different parties - has not labelled anyone a currency manipulator, where is the disagreement, why is there a disagreement about whether or not these are currency manipulating countries. >> the treasury department violated the law by failing to name countries as manipulators, almost any observer would say china is manipulating the country. known why the government let us down, failing to act or identify countries as currency manipulators, there's pressure on the government from multinational corporations. if you are a company that is outsourcing jobs, producing, let's say hypothetically china. importing the goods to the united states, and currency

manipulation is a benefit. if they are whispering in the ear of the treasury, don't act or say anything. we have been working with farmers. they agree with us, our country needs to act, and a majority of republicans need to agree. they need to act. >> we don't know the details. you have security clearance. i know you can go to gaol if you tell me any, but it could do wonders for my career, i'll give you one last chafference. >> i'm not going to do thark i'm not going to violate the confidentiality, i happy the administration will make the agreement public. i think there are a lot of provisions in the draft t.p.p. that will upset folks.

asking. >> the deputy chief of staff at the afl next, electronic devices are obsolete almost before we take them out of the box. few of us recycle cell phones and laptops, making tech companies a lot of money, but stressing the environment and creating national security issues.

>> he was electro-shocked and tortured. >> decades of corruption abuse, and torture, by chicago police... >> you think people make a distinction between cia, black ops sites, verses torturing a thirteen year old kid from the south-side? >> people realize that torture is torture. >> lisa fletcher brings you an in depth report chicago torture only on al jazeera america them away. best case, in a few years you'll need a new one.

i get it, they get slow, they are outdated, the kids make tonne of you, trust me, i get it. we have two problems. regardless of whether you are a weird person ready to camp out for a few days ahead of the latest iphone release. first, less than 30% of 2.5 million tonnes of electronics discarded is recycled, second, the technology we are using and tossing relies on rare earth elements - electronics, aerospace, technology - depend on rare earth elements. second. >> the only phone you use could be hanging on the wall of the kitchen of your home. they are found in fluorescent lights, ear muffs, you are using up the elements, and the supply is not guaranteed. i'm not saying that you want to burn through your electronics so quickly. if you are yelling at your flat

tv screen, things are not made the way they are used to be, you are right. >> look at the light bulb. it's been burning at a fire house in liver more. 114-straight years the light bulb has been working. apart from hours when the power supply from a battery decide, this is working. why is it? the simple answer is profit. apple posted the biggest profit history in the fine three months of 2014. more often we replace devices, the gratst apple's profit. it's true of all companies. it's essentially when it comes to electronics, a garbage economy, relying on us to discard smart phones and computers, that's how most take companies like it. they are turning tech garbage into gold.

they come at a cost. >> electronic recyclers pick up about 113,000 pounds of e-waste every week in new york city. it's a fraction of computers, tvs and other electronics, that end up in houseslike this, where they are started or disguarded. up to 90% of 41 million tonnes of e-waste is illegally dumped. a lot of it end up in land fills in asia and africa, where urban miners extract some metals. what is buried and lost are the rare earth elements. they are found in devices like ear buds, fluorescent lights and speakers. researchers at the aims laboratory is trying to find ways to replace rare earthments and use

them more efficiently, and say the reason they are not recycled comes down to cost. >> what you get from a mine costs money, and it's reflective of the cost of producing it. the cost of getting the same amount of rare earth by cycling can be ten times as much as the cost of getting it from mines. >> scientists are getting closer to elim lating the rare earth, the problem has been in the future the demand could over take supply. more of our lives are electrified, demand grows up for lighting and others. this drives the demand for rare earth up. respond. >> china supplies around 95% of the rare earth elements. mining in the united states

stopped in 2002. it was resumed in 2011. when this californian mine is producing at its goal output, it accounts for 15% of the world's supply. joe silverman's business has been preparing electronics. he has seen how frequent technological changes lead to devices. they know that they'll be stuck at 32 gig, 64 gigs, if you want something bigger, the next model will come out. models. a car tell of the largest light bulb manufacturers agreed to limit light bulb life to 1,000 hours, half for normal life. it is the first case of an industry limiting product longevity.

>> we at chevrolet... >> also general motors offered a new model. it worked. by 1931 it had overtaken its rival. today it was all about tropics held in your hand. >> this is a new one. made of blocks. what if there were other options like objects that could be replaced. >> i'll see what it looks like in a few years. i'll be interested if it holds up to the tack. ugly. >> puzzle phone is not ugly, designed in finland. it's due on the market in 2015. we wanted to achieve a change. it was doable,

feasible to create this device, built to everyone. >> electronics companies were not slowing down production. and with it consumption. the top two smartphone manufacturers sold a total of $116 million devices. >> if you expand the life span, two or three times worth, you are slowing down the reason you are extracting the region from the earth. >> likely. sounds like we should race for short earth pollution, we'll look at that after the break. >> after six weeks of fighting

>> you must make you're voice be heard... >> struggling >> it's very scary... >> dreaming >> we're actually working on that as we speak... >> where are they now? >> nothing was given too us, we had to earn everything... >> see how it all ends.. >> all of the other families they give us hope... >> i know that keeps me going... >> we just have to keep doing what we have to do... >> an honest look at the american dream... >> this definitely gave me an opportunity to grow up... >> you just don't give up... >> hard earned reunion only on al jazeera america

>> we will be able to see change. >> gripping. inspiring. entertaining. talk to al jazeera. only on al jazeera america.

earth elements are not actually rare, but they are costly, and complicated. china currently plies about 95% of the rare earth elements, because they are so critical to defense and energy products, a shortage or monopoly by china concerns many. someone that nose a lot about rare elements and national security is my next guest, from the university of austin, but degrees with the premise of the story i told you that, demand for rare earth elements could exceed supply in the future, and joins us from washington d.c. i don't typically like to start an interview saying tell me where i hope wrong, but, please, tell me where i'm wrong. >> in 2010 and 2011 there was a period where people forecast the shortage you talked about, and

prices soared. we went through a buzzle. the amounts people used of rare earth, partly what was used and supplied. and we are in the reverse situation, a situation of lots of oversupply of rare earth, where prices are so low that rare earth companies are on the brink of bankruptcy. in the long run i'm optimistic that they'll do well, there'll be a robust market. but the timing of your story is ironic. two years late, i think you are trying to say. >> two years late, or right now. this month, molly corp, one of the mines outside of china, the ones in california, are on the brink of filing for bankruptcy. it's not obvious that they are going to do it. there's a loft discussions. i think, you know, if they re-organise debt burden, if it's alleviated, this is a company

with a great asset and technology, someone will make money out of the mind. maybe the counter molly warn. >> you are an expert on rare about it. i know you know about this. something happened in natural gas. we decided to be about natural gas production, or the idea that we wanted a secure splay supply. everyone will tell you what a success it was, but the price of natural gas fell in the process. >> it's true, with commodities, supply and demand match-up to how market price adjusts. at times it feels like there's a bit of scarcity and a bit of surplus, and some people come into the market and some lead

the market and the adjusts. in the long run, there's a supply for the important activities that we need. >> like oil or gas, when we have a glut - we are in one now with both of those products, we don't think it's less important to under the chain of production and the custodial nature of it, so the fact there may be more than we think, and the fact that we won't be using it at the rate of what we were, does it concern you that 95% of the production of the small market is controlled by china? >> not that much. 95% - it's hard to pin down the numbers, so maybe as 70 or 95. it depends element by element. the answer obvious all was that even if the

chinese government decided that they wanted to cut off the world tore a political reason, and to find a way to enforce that cut-off which has been a challenge for them. there is a bit of supply outside of china and integrated all through the supply chain. there are non-chinese manufacturers who have the capabilities on how to do it. have the technologies, material, all of those things. to make these products outside of china. it would cause a spike, there was some uses where it would be impractical in that period to use the rare earth. things that make us concerned about national security. there would be enough, there

would be plenty for the uses. >> that is our show for today. i'm ali velshi, thank you for joining us. i'm ali velshi, thank you for joining us. i'm ali velshi, thank you for joining us. but for the youngest drivers the digital natives who had a cell known in their hand since they were little, it heightens the elevated dangers for them and other motorists on the road with them. driven to distraction - it's