looks at the chinese economy. dean cheng will discuss china and the national security market. later, michelle larkin and dr. remington discussed strategies to improve health. host: good morning. ."is is "washington journal yesterday, it was revealed that the national security agency collected information from verizon and has access to major internet companies like facebook and google. politicians on capitol hill were criticizing the use of this program. some republicans also supporting it saying it is a key tool in intelligence gathering. for our first 45 minutes, we are interested in your thoughts, particularly the scope of data

collection, privacy concerns and those kinds of issues. the national security and -- national-security association data mining program. you can reach out to us on social media as well. have 75 comments starting this program on our facebook page. send us an e- can mail. ofgive you the highlights these programs that were highlighted over the last day, here is the usa today headline this morning. they are making it their front page. eyes.

there was a store put out on the washington post late yesterday. documents show the program has not been made public until now. it may be the first of its kind. the nsa is accustomed to corporate partnerships that helped divert data traffic or sidestep barriers. it is unlikely there are richer the label intelligence than the ones in silicon valley. from the service of u.s. providers, microsoft, yahoo!, google, facebook, aol, skype and apple. this is a story that first appeared in the british paper the guardian. a little bit from that in the new york times.

an april order from the secret foreign intelligence court directing a subsidiary of verizon communications to give the nsa logs of communications between the u.s.a. and abroad or within the united states, including local telephone calls. well refusing to confirm or a threat to comment, of horizon come in and internal e-mail, defended the release -- verizon extended the release. saysecutive vice president the law authorizes the federal courts to order a company to provide information in certain circumstances and if verizon were to receive such an order, we would be required to comply. get yourlike to opinion.

3881 for republicans. 202-585-3880 ro45 -- for democrats and 202-585-3882 for independents. to help us gain some perspective, we are joined by a longtime national security writer and author. can you give us your perspective and your assessment on both of these programs we have been talking about. first the program and the data that was collected from verizon. caller: -- it is extraordinary the loops be nasa security agency has taken.

this is an agency that was developed to spy on people outside the united states. this program allows them to have unlimited access to major internet providers in the u.s. host: what is different about these programs and the ones we similarly heard about during the bush administration? the bush and administration seemed like it was far more limited than what we see here. -- they were focusing domestic -- mostly on domestic communications. domesticlves not only communication, but local communication. if you are calling in next door neighbor. never in this reach in the bush

administration. was quitehat extensive. what happened is that after the bush administration, along with these often -- after the eavesdropping program, it was revealed by the new york times that they allow that program to foreign under the intelligence surveillance amendment act. it was codified into law. activities of the bush these shopping program have been extended by the obamas -- bush eavesdropping program have been extended by the obama administration. host: since courts are involved in gathering of this information, it should not be allowed for average citizens. guest: it is such a misnomer in terms of describing the foreign

intelligence surveillance court. when it was originally set up, it was a powerful chord that exercise jurisdiction over who was being eased dropped on. that is how it works from 1978 until 2001. that is when the bush and administration went around the court secretly. after that was discovered, what congress did was they neutered the court. they took away a lot of its enforcement powers and made it a rubber stamp. the fisa oversee all operations is nonsense. mtadata andthe term metadata- is the term

as innocuous as it was described by verizon and others who have talked about the program? guest: all of the external information from the telephone call, what number was called, the frequency of the call -- all of that information is just bland information and does not mean much. what nsa's job is is to data mine all of that information and turn it into something meaningful. you start analyzing all the addingtion and the value it and getting into issues of privacy. people in the u.s. are supposed to have some degree of privacy.

wouldd not expect the nsa have a reason to have a record of how long i spoke or how often i spoke or who called after that. why do these agencies have this power to do this type of surveillance? host: there is an op-ed on this issue. some of the arguments made says, verizon has 120 million customers. it is not the use of a phone sex lines or a joke about barack obama. the matter how important you are to yourself, you are unemployed into the computers at the national security agency. how would you respond to that? i have never known him to be an expert on the nsa.

i think that is just a bad analysis. massive surveillance, that is what george orwell wrote about in 1984 where you had a society and the government has access to everything. it is absurd to say this is a great deterrent to terrorism. why didn't they prevent the boston bombing if this is such a great program? how about the underwear bomber or the times square, it? he u.s. has a bad -- what about the underwear bomber or the times square bomber? the u.s. has a bad reputation when it comes to preventing these things. the bigger the haystack, the more difficult it is to find the needle.

all they are doing is building the haystack higher and higher. they should be hiring more analysts to analyze what is in the statistics instead of an -- of acquiring more and more information. companies andjor now we are trying to get more companies, information from more companies. great, why do the bombings keep happening all i have heard is that there may have been some terrorist incident that was presented, but they do not give any details. ist: one of the statements that the president is open on a discussion to this type of activity and concerns about national security and privacy. do you think these revelations will open a dialogue on capitol hill as far as privacy is concerned?

of these contours people, senators, members of congress -- all these congress people, senators, members of congress know there is no value in siding with civil liberty. when you go up to reelection, your opponent is going to say, unless you voted for some heavy- handed legislation involving surveillance, you are weak on terrorism. you have very little support in congress for moderation or for the bar when it comes to all of the surveillance. i do not expect to pay much to come out of congress. host: one more question, james bamford. after the information is taken and what is done with it -- this

is a picture of the data center in utah. is that with the information is stored once it is that the or are there other places? guest: i read a story on the data storage in utah. there was a cover story on that program for wired magazine last year. it is a 1 million square foot datacenter. that will be the central location where all the up,rmation that nsa picks whether it is by satellite all from this prism collections horror from call details or from collection horse or from call details, libya, afghanistan. they will all go to this one location, this one million- square-foot data center in utah.

that will serve as the nsa's cloud. to that location, the nsa analysts will be able to access all the data sitting there through fiber-optic cables. nsas a repository for the surveillance capabilities and didpoint where the analysts into to analyze the information. a longtimes bamford, writer on these issues and an author as well. thanks for your time. for the remainder of our time, we will talk to you and hear your thoughts on these programs that have been revealed in the press for the last couple of days. fornumber is 202-585-3881

republicans. 202-585-3880 for democrats and independents.our line.is on our go ahead. caller: i find it amazing. when president obama came along, he wanted people to get involved with politics. call your senators in your contours people. then when you do not like what obama has to say, you have to worry about who was going to get your information. if you call the white house and you say, i do not like the way this is being done, they will monitor all of your calls. even in your own home, they can come to your home and see what kind of things do you like to

buy? your arguments between your spouses and what have you. jones flying over your head. you do not even have to go out. you have no more castle. it is all by the government. the democrats always cried under president bush. they are the same democrats who say, we throw our hands up. it is always been done this way. that is tanya from virginia on the republican line. rebecca, hello. everything we do, every .ime we use a debit card our cable box is digital now. everything we do is being stored somewhere.

they never think about wal-mart shack' orpot or radio your television or what channels you watch. host: now we have the nsa collecting this information. what do you think about that practice? aller: the moment we got social security number, everybody started collecting information. this is way past the time to worry about that. and findn says, i am with the governments's ability to track terrorist organizations and their affiliates. says, i think it is so wrong. i think there focus should be on other issues and not people's

personal phone calls. says, we are all guilty until proven innocent. ynn onirginia, this is l the democrats' line. caller: this is all drummed up for a white media waiting failure in a journalistic system. why are the masses of our american public so shocked by this? our first caller says it was expended under this administration. caller: listen to the facts.

the american public wants to -- apologize.e to you are breaking up considerably. i want you to call back so you can get a clear signal. try it again. san diego, california. hello. caller: i am not concerned about a forsa using this metadat counterterrorism. i am concerned that this data is being recorded by everybody, phoneing verizon, the companies, the internet companies, and kept on their own servers that can theoretically be accessed by -- can and candy easily mined by anyone.

chinese hacking scandal and everything else -- host: do you change your practices as far as how you use your cell phone or the weather? caller: it is something i have to think about. it is catching me off guard. host: diana is calling from traverse city, michigan. caller: we have clear evidence that the irs cannot be trusted to retain information. there is evidence they have given information to public entities. my second point would be that the government had clear and convincing evidence that the boston marathon bombings had ill intent and they ignored it. my global concern is that any administration could use this tool against their political

opponents. we have evidence that the current administration is doing just that. "the wall street journal says the real danger from this league is potential over reaction. americans will worry less about the government spying on them if the justice department was not secretly spying on the associated press and fox news or if the white house was not targetting white house critics. antonio, texas. line.rats' caller: my name is jimmy. i have had a top-secret clearance for over four years. i deal with cryptology and secure information. us. was one thing talk to that was loose lips house ships.

it came out of world war ii. take on classified information. nclassified-- u information. you get enough of that you can glean classified information from it. there is no real center or meaning to it whatsoever. is doing harmrist to the united states, we can run it through the computer and see how many people that person has coordinated with. before then, it had no meaning unless a terrorist threatens the united states. there is one other point i want to make this morning. that man that you had on, bamford, he is the kind of

person who gives terrorists target to shoot at, telling them with the united states collection holds data. it only makes that place a target. that is the kind of thing being used people been into because they do not understand. host: as far as the practices we have read about and heard about, all you support them or oppose them? what is your thoughts on them? caller: i support them wholeheartedly. they are not listening to your information. they do not care what you do. has a phone and they know he is a terrorist, that gives them the opportunity to contact, to know who all that terrorists talks to.

host: we got that. you said that before. maryland up next. wonder what the alternative to this program would be? the alternative to doing nothing. it is a balancing act. if we do not do anything, we are going to have more boston bombings, more world trade centers. we absolutely have to do something even if it is distasteful. host: would you say what you have heard so far is balanced in your opinion? how would you react to that? caller: it is hard to tell. lot of times you cannot get a handle on it until you see it in the rearview mirror. that is one of the causes of concern that i have. how is it: to play out in the future. in cheek approach to

this issue. let's give a shout out to the nsa, who is likely monitoring our twets. -- tweets. theer: i was listening to judicial oversight hearing and lindsey graham was talking about the war on terror and we are at war and he kept using word war and the phrase war on terror. it is somewhat hypocritical because the definition of war, the way he was using it was in a political sense and a perpetual since instead of a specific interstate more concept in international relations. that gives the government a lot of liberty to do what do things in the name of national security. with the nsa's monitoring of

phone calls, making a database of phone calls for the justice department or the administration to look at when it deems necessary -- i find it peculiar in favortor graham is of that, but he is not in favor of a national gun registry that would do the same thing. i am not saying i am in favor of a national gun registry. i am trying to point out the intellectual hypocrisy here in this situation. last caller's point, we have the first boston bombing and this program was in place and it did not help. we had a fort hood shooting in this program was in place and it did not help. i am confused. what good is this program doing? what purpose does this serve? rosedale,s hear from

maryland on the democrats' line. thanks for joining us. go ahead. now themy concern is, face of terrorism has changed. terror is now american. we are not allowed to the less we are now allowed to spy on american. what are they supposed to do to by an- we are now allowed american. what are we supposed to do to stop terrorism. we are redirecting with the real problem in america is. immigration, mass in consolation -- mass incarceration to get americans' elected of what we

president obama to do. host: that is from maryland. the white house reacted to the release of this information. their reaction was from reuters. they addressed the controversy over its phone records surveillance same strict controls are in place to ensure that collection data by intelligence agency calls does not violate civil liberties. the intelligence committee is conducting court-authorized intelligence the knowledge and oversight of congress. to give you some perspective on the issue of data collecting and gathering, i will take you back to october of 2007 when senator obama was campaigning for president and talked about data gathering and the role of national security letters. this was in august of 2007.

gathering, data especially data about americans. [video clip] the mission should put forth a false choice between being libertine and be the would- theween the liberty -- liberty we provide. no more illegal wiretapping of american citizens. no spying on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. award tracking citizens who do no more than protest a misguided war. no more ignore the law when it is inconvenient. that is not who we are. that is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorist. court works. the separation of power works. our constitution works. we will set an example for the world that justice is not arbitrary. host: that is from august of

2007. call from enterprise, alabama. independent lines. caller: looks like president obama has come full circle. this data collection of the nsa is extremely egregious. but people love the united states do have power. of the united states do have power -- but people love the united states to have power. they can discuss this on line and on the mobile phone. host: up next, republican line. caller: how are you doing today? host: good. thank you. taught that my government was there to protect us.

seen over the years, not just from obama but from our privacyents, has been being monitored for a long time. the patriot act was put in place for a certain reason, for the terrorists. if you look deep into the patriot act, it goes into the privacy of all americans. nsa doing what they are doing, this is what i look at. who are the terrorists? nancy pelosi, harry reid, president obamas, a lot of the democrats in a few republicans -- a lotresident obama of the democrats have said the

terrorists are coming back from the war. the tea party. they embraced occupy wall street. this really gets me that we are not the terrorists. if you want to look at the terrorists, you need to look at the political regime that is sitting in washington, d.c. host: a point that was made by mike rogers. he said the phone records collection helped avoid a significant case of terrorism in the united states within the last two years. he declined to elaborate on the nature of the attack. this program has merit and it works. puter: all programs are into place and there are good intentions. who you have evil people will take these good intentions and these good programs and use bad, for evil.

just and's hear from in tennessee on the democrats line. caller: i had some confusion. first of all, i would like to thank you guys for giving people a voice to speak on these things. we have heard from a lot of people. i am happy to hear it. how many people are calling up concerned about this. for a long time, people have been largely ignoring it or misinformed or whenever. really quickly if i could, i want to talk about the term terrorism and its definition from merriam webster, piggybacking on the last caller. the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. i am a psychology major with a long history with the democrats.

my family is highly democratic. i voted for obama initialling after bush. host: got your point, caller. go ahead. there is a group that people should be looking up, too. high echelonare people who are making decisions on a worldwide basis. i would like to let people think maybe we are in an interconnected a each. we have to start asking ourselves what kind of world government we are going to live in? from george up next michigan. independent line. caller: thank you for having me on. i have been very concerned since the date passed the patriot act. as far as i know, the two people

voted against it. joe biden and ron paul. they asked -- they were asked why they voted against it and they said because they read it. it goes back to what benjamin franklin once said. anybody who would sacrifice their liberty and freedom for safety deserve neither. host: what should congress do? caller: follow the constitution. that is what we have. it is a paper we had written years ago. it still holds true today. follow the constitution. that is the protection for the people. host: a data collection. should that be stopped or limited? what to you think? caller: intelligence agencies think you have to gather information. what we need to do is give people in there who are not just political appointees running these agencies or buddies or

whatever they are. we need professionals. i just take one look at what is going on with the attorney general's office and shake my head. i am not blaming the president. be likecies have to they were prior to world war i, world war ii, and through korea and all of that. i know we have to gather intelligence. i know we are living in a different world today. again i say, anybody who sacrifices their freedom for safety deserves need them. host: caller mentioned the attorney general. eric holder before the senate appropriations committee. one of the topics of conversation was the use of these programs. he received a line of questioning about if members of congress spied on americans. [video clip] the government is

sloppy, it is usually very sloppy. can you assure us that no funds of the capital, of members of congress, where monetary? that would give them unique leverage over the legislature. >> with all due respect, this is not an appropriate setting for me to discuss that issue. i would be more than glad to come back in an appropriate setting to discuss the issues you have raised. in this open forum -- >> i would interrupt you and say, the correct answer would be to say no. we did not spy on members of congress. host: on our republic in line is david from new york. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call and thanks c-span for letting people speak out. programo save this nsa has gone much further than the

patriot act. obama has promised most of the constituents and most of the country that he was going to get rid of a lot of the things that the bush and republican people had put into place. instead, he has taken it to a completely different level. like steroids into the program. now there is surveillance on all of the american people. terrorism, i believe. i have not seen an american blow up a building yet except for in oklahoma. that was one in many. i am sure there are some examples. my thought is that you could not have stopped it even if you did tress a phone call that might not have been times. i do not know if -- you could not trace a phone call if you had time. then he made phone calls and maybe parked a truck in front of

a government building and blew it up. i do not know if anybody else could have stopped it. the bombings, they cannot stop it. the patriot act was in place. there are lots of things this government says they are going to do and they have not done. like the health care and like the irs and like other issues. they have not done exactly what they said they were going to do. you have one person saying one thing and then another part of saying something completely different on the same subject. it is confusing and they have all of this information. what are they really going to do with all of this. feinstein, the democrat from california serves as a member of the intelligence committee in the senate.

she serves with saxby chambliss. feinstein commenting on the surveillance of horizon -- verizon own records. [video clip] >> protecting democracy is also a important. metadata is not constitutionally guaranteed to be first amendment material. the supreme court has passed on that. having said that, we have got to examine ways to be able to get data, to get intelligence that is in that can prevent clots from hatching and from americans from being killed. that is the goal. if we can do it another way, we are looking to do it another way. the lead editorial of the new york times this morning is

president obama's dragnet. the administration has lost all credibility on this issue. mr. obama is proving the executive branch will use in power is given and very likely to abuse it. that is one reason we have long argued that the patriot act, enacted in the heat of fear hasr september 11, 2001 over broader powers. we have a caller on the line.rats' caller: this all comes out because of leaked information. has to maintain some secrets. from what i understand, no personal information has been accessed by this program other than people who were suspected

terrorists. also, congress knew about the program. all three branches of government participate in this. i do not understand why there is electiverust about officials try to protect us. problemich you have a with the patriot act under the previous administration? caller: no, i did not. in the previous administration, there were far more excesses into personal information. we had sergeant smith calling his wife from iraq and people listening in on his personal conversation. that is totally different. host: people say the president has expanded the program as far as the size and scope of information being gathered. is what haswe know

been leaked. we cannot say what george bush did. we do not know exactly what president obama has done. thater, we can understand he is concerned about our liberties. it is a two way street. up next here in north carolina. caller: i want to thank you for carrying these hearings live. i have been watching them into the middle of the ninth and i really appreciate it. my comment is two -- i have been watching them into the middle of the knights -- night. who made the anti- --am and film is considered

anti islamic film is considered a terrorist. the government can determine which is which by their own definition. we have a very big problem. giving them all of this file -- out of reach and wanting to make history by rectifying the past in the united states. when they get the first job and they have the irs automatically beach in and take out a portion of their -- automatically reach in and take out a portion of their paycheck and they have no control laws of that. then they take your money and do what they want with it if you have no control over that. we have a lot of problems determining who and what is right. host: one more call on this issue. hawaii on leave

republican line. caller: 50 years ago, president eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex. part ofally, the nsa is that military industrial complex. as part of that complex, you reizon an --and -- telecommunications companies. we are living that crystal ball that eisenhower talked about. there is a facility being built in utah that is being run by the nsa. you can read about this in wired magazine. the facility is being built to monitor all calls within the

united states. host: we have the author of that article at the top of this program. now, talkat we know about data collection and the specifics and your concerns over that period caller: my concern is -- talk about your concerns over that. caller: i am a retired police officer. , the onerevious colors from new york specifically set -- the two previous callers specifically mentioned leaks. what information do they have it? what is going to be in leaked in the future. who controls this information. who is the custodian that has control over this information that can leak this information.

it is not safe. someone has it and someone can leak it. host: you would say that information is important when you are investigating crimes. gathering it helps in the solving of a crime. caller: not when it is being leaked. who owns that particular information? a caller right now, am i being monitored as i speak to you? do you or i own that information that we are sharing? or is it the government that owns the information? host: are you a user of cell phones and facebook and that kind of thing? caller: only cell phones. i stopped using facebook two years ago. host: was it because of privacy? caller: privacy.

i did a google search of myself last night. i try not to release information about myself that is of a private nature. ont: that is tom joining us our republican line. we appreciate all of you who contrary to this morning. our next two segments are about a segment -- a summit that takes place between president obama and the chinese president. we will address all of those issues with our two tests -- guests. later on, we will hear about china's military. all that continues when "washington journal" continues.

>> in order to raise money, i filed an application with the ira's in 2011 seeking to obtain (c)3 status. i have been waiting 29 months without status. >> many of the agencies of the federal government do not understand they are servants of the people. they think they are our masters and they are mistaken. i am not interested in scoring political points. i want to protect and preserve the america i grew up in, the america that people crossed oceans and risked their lives to become a part of. i am terrified it is slipping away. thank you. >> the purpose of a tax exemption is to enable easier

promotion of public good, not political work. it is the responsibility of the irs to determine which groups are choosing the correct exempt status and which are trying to many places them -- trying to manipulate the system. on c-span, house ways and means is from tea party groups. also this weekend months he onnt -- also this weekend, printers row. the life ofn 3, medgar evers. host: present obama and chinese president xi jinping will meet at the annenberg center in

california. a picture of it today in the financial times. the shirtsleeves indicating it will be casual in nature. no formal events. a cummins asia between the two leaders about a variety of topics. we will focus on those topics in the next two segments on the program. is a senior fellow at the brookings institute. what are both countries looking for at this summit? guest: there are three levels of objectives. the first is a concrete issue. no. 3 and cyber security and the korea and cyber security. and the south china sea and the east china sea. also, the second issue is the relationship, where they can

build mutual respect and understanding. the third level is strategic thinking. they both want to discuss what chinese call the new kind of major power relationship. it should be cooperative rather ing. conflict specifics, from the how do the economies of the two countries factor into the discussions? ofst: the economy is importing concern for both leaders. both countries face economic challenges. understand the importance of trade and many other issues areas. both countries are the engines of global economies. it should be the spotlight.

said china's economy is slowing down. why is that? china's economy is slowing down. yesterday -- domestic consumption is not up. the unemployment rate is going up because college graduates cannot find jobs. there is a possible property bubble in a serious problem of the state's owned enterprises and monopoly. host: a meeting between the present and the chinese president. they will talk about those

issues. two days of meetings in california that start today and continue tomorrow. if you have questions about china's economy and how it plays into relations with the united states, here is how you can join us. for republicans. 202-585-3880 for democrats and 202-585-3882 for independents. et,you want to send us a twe you can do so. top a little bit about the trade relationship that the united states has today with china. guest: the u.s. is concerned about intellectual property rights and chinese protectionism. there is a cyber security issue.

time, china is concerned about the pacific partnership, which china believes the united states wants trade abroad and exclude china from free trade. china was to know what the real intention is of the united states. there will be some discussions. he door is open. to china as an organization that excludes united states participation. both leaders have a lot of things to discuss.

they are blocked by some interest groups and u.s. congress. companies access -- here is an important reform program in the discussion for the washington economic team. this is a market-oriented plan. deregulation, among other issues. host: one of the things that always comes up in these discussions is the trade deficit that the united states has with china. $95s up from two under billion in 2011. if you go back as far as april of this year, about $93 billion. is getting a little

better. china argues that if you can have a technology transfer, it can be more balanced. host: our first call is from ourley, north carolina on republican line. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to ask the gentleman -- we have a codependent, symbiotic relationship with china because we have put ourselves in the position that the largest segment of our economy is retail and we really cannot compete with china and india because of the tremendous gap between the cost of labor. thewhat is really hurting ability to have a much better relationship between the absolute it is this

disregard for the rule of law in spying on us,nts, stealing technology and everything else. what can we do to make it where we can continue to grow together instead of not trusting each other and creating issues with the consumers. they did not want to buy chinese death. it is not good for either country. guest: i certainly agree with your general assessment. intellectual property rights issue is our major issues. the business community constantly raises it as an issue. for the chinese government, they understand the importance of that issue. sometimes they blame local governments. -- companies and local

governments tend to violate the law because of their own interests. has improved over the years in this area. of the patent violations -- 90% of the patent violations. also, china faces an increase in labor costs. the chinese manufacturing industry faces major challenges. bring some of the manufacturing back to america. intellectuale property rights, we should make obama raises the issue

seriously with the chinese leader. host: tennessee. republican line. caller: good morning. i would like to speak to dr. cheng li. i am born in germany. i have been here 67 years. people are always taught that the chinese people are so far in advance, or have been forever. why on earth would you stupid stoop down and steal our secrets that people in america have worked hard to get. i do not think that is very nice and professional. you have enough people that you can find out your own industrial things.

guest: first, i am chinese, but i am a chinese american i became an american citizen 10 years ago. i do not want to defend china. in the interest of not just the u.s. or the west but emerging markets like china. is dominated media by fear. there is a certain validity the president has touched an important part of american lives -- security, and physical safety. these are all important. we should also put in perspective that this is not the only country doing this type of thing, and certainly china might be behind with intellectual

property rights, but the issue of cybersecurity is a global issue. it could be argued that china could be a victim. i think this is an opportunity for world leaders, especially in and summit between china the united states to discuss this issue. this could be an act of war. it is very serious. we need to establish a code of behaviors, a code of ethics to deal with this kind of challenge. it is a new issue. only through discussion between leaders and also in the public domain will the issue be much better addressed. if we only point the finger and blame everything on china, it is unfair.

host: is there any indication that using ping might be open to this -- xi jinping might be open to this idea of rules? , some to a certain extent things are government-sponsored, andsome might be individual not linked to the government. i think if chinese leadership makes a strong statement, xi jinping will be very important. decision orpect a announcement, but it will be at the top of the agenda. host: the meeting between the two president takes place tomorrow in california, discussing a wide range of

topics, including the economy, the military and cybersecurity issues. that is the driving force for these segments today. bill. chicago, illinois. democrats line. we have a media that is feeling like they are entitled to knowing everything and they want to know everything. if you do not want anyone to know anything, do not let it happen. there are no secrets. host: michael. vermont. independent line area did -- independent line. there are certain differences. america has been in wall -- involved in wars for 60 years. china has been in peace for 60 years. china is oriented towards the people, where there is no real

orientation in america that i see except corporate profit. china has economic development to expand their interest. america uses development at the point of the gun. nation on earth that can do cyber crime does do it. that is my comment. host: how china goes about development. the chinesenk people probably like that comment. they believe that through the years china has not been in wars and the united states has been in wars for many decades. china benefits from economic integration with the outside world, economic globalization.

cybersecurity is a global issue, not a chinese issue. it is not fair to single out china and create a sense of fear rather than to talk about establishing an international code of conduct and how to , whether it is a nationstate or an individual to take advantage of this new domain which is important for the life and safety and many other aspects. i think the caller raised some good questions. we should be humbled, we, meaning americans, to look at this issue. host: if the economy is changing in china, what does it mean for the worker in china? guest: previous opportunities

now probably will become more difficult because of the labor cost increase and the side effects of the chinese economic miracle become obvious, including corruption, pollution and degradation. the government needs to address these issues. it is not just growth that is important, but the quality of growth becomes important. when you have pollution in beijing, what is the point when people are dying from pollution? how can they say it is better than yesterday? the chinese are also searching for a better model of development. there are many people joining the middle class lifestyle, what using ping has called the -- using ping has called the chinese -- xi jinping has called

the chinese dream. , dede saystwitter what is the wage and fringe of between the u.s. and china -- wage difference between the u.s. and china? guest: it is huge. the data is not reliable, but we should also look at purchasing power. it is still a huge gap. the chinese middle class in shanghai and beijing -- i think the income reduced significantly. host: and the cost of living in china? guest: it is relatively low, but at the same time property prices have increased. host: meridian, mississippi, debra. republican line.

caller: i was thinking god help us. our country will only suffer. donald or mitt romney meeting with this man, america hating socialist. caller: keno. -- host: keno. sorry about that. whatr: i want to offer should be put on the agenda -- making an interesting life for people in the country, so that some people want to work in agriculture instead of the learner of the city and the economic gadgets. ,e want france to work with us too, so that they can be the

leader in europe. the other item is to help citizens understand how much governments are putting into making guns and producing butter. book called the 17 solutions. askant citizens to questions about how much money is going into making butter and how much is making guns? we want the people of china to understand like ralph nader that citizens can inquire and put things on the record here at host: -- record. host: thank you. guest: this concern about the chinese military budget , which is still relatively small compared to the united states. the u.s. under president obama in the second term has a serious

plan to cut the military budget. china had some rebalancing. -- the u.s. had some rebalancing, toward the asia- pacific region specifically. this to be aed u.s.-led deliberate effort to contain china. this is also an opportunity for his rebalancing to asia policy, and hopefully have dialogue rather than start a new arms race. about currencyn from twitter -- what is the effect of the currency were having on china? inst: some of the people

the united states and the west believe china is a manipulator, but that u.s. government does not define it that way. thea actually appreciated rim be significantly. as chinese exports slow down, there is a tremendous word in for -- burden for the chinese government because there is a high percentage of students. the chinese government is always concerned about social stability heard on the -- stability. on the other hand it is in china's interest to make the chinese currency convertible. it will still take a few more years to complete that process. host: we had a previous

legislator, representative tim ryan, cochair of the manufacturing caucus, talking about what china does with its rnc. he gave this explanation. [video clip] into guest: you can go the market and buy at a certain level in the chinese have done that to keep the price of the currency artificially low so that when they export prices -- products to the notes date, they are cheaper than they should be. .e have a company in our area the chinese make a similar product. when the final product lands on the shores of the united states, it is the same cost as just the raw material cost of the american company. that is how significant of an advantage you can gain by manipulating your currency. by forcing the chinese to make

sure the currency reflects the market value, it would level the playing field and help u.s. manufacturing area -- manufacturing. host: the action from china is? guest: it is very slow. it would hurt the u.s. if the chinese economy collapsed. it would be a disaster for everyone, including the united states economy. china is also a major investor in the united states. the gradual appreciation of the currency is the right way to go. host: new york. dependent line. -- independent line. caller: everybody seems to forget china is a communist company -- country. the chinese corporations are owned by the government.

that is my comment. how does that play into the economy on a larger scale? need to start: we buying made in america only. host: cheng li, the story that broke last week was with smithfield foods being bought out by a chinese company. guest: first of all, i do not think it is right to call china communist. it is still a communist party in a one-party rule, but the economy is diversified. 50% are not state owned enterprises. to a certain extent american companies are well represented in china. this merger reflects that. theuse of concerns about

lack of food safety, they love to purchase or merge with foreign companies, in this case, the meat and pork. i think you will see more development in that area. host: if you look at the amount of purchases -- energy being a big factor. entertainment and real estate about $3 billion. the automotive industry, about $375 million. guest: is as good news for many companies. it is part of economic mobilization, but at the same time we should make sure that china meet international standards, following trade agreement. on the other hand, the development of china could be part of a solution. china is not the problem. we have to look at other problems and causes of the slowdown in other countries, like in the eurozone, for

example. china.ot fair to blame businesses are welcome to do business with china. , democratington, d.c. line. al, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. my call is about the trade agreement we have with china. it is lopsided. i do not think we had to do that. i think that is because of the rise of china. as far as being a communist country and all of that, into this name calling thing, like the lady who called about the president, the stuff has to stop. it is a bad reflection on our country. inas born and raised here

america. i am proud to be an american citizen. we are an immigrant country. what i am saying is i think we should be fair with the currency, and our trade policies -- china has to come forward with honesty and put these things on the table here. that is all i have to say. what do you have to say about that, sir? general agree with the assessment. i think china contributes to the assumption of the -- consumption of the united states. , sellingribute relatively high-end products including technology-intensive product. that is a major development. without this kind of a contribution, the price in the

united states will be very, very high. china now has capital to invest in different parts of the united states that can also provide jobs, etc. if we take a nationalistic approach, we probably feel this is a threat, but if we really believe in economic globalization, this is a good thing, it is a win-win. you see from this new president in china and openness of more products from the u.s. into china? guest: certainly. he wanted to lift some bands. our banks can access china. this will be another great opportunity. nowadays, when you talk about investment companies, hedge funds, they all look at china, and chinese policies, whether they be military, environmental, or physical, they all have a

strong implication to the global economy typically for europe and the united states. host: bob is in silver spring maryland and joined us on our republican line. caller: good morning. why does the president of china brutalize the people of type that? -- did that? -- tibet? he does it because he is the leader and he could stop it. i hear that the ruling class in china is pretty corrupt and they get all the perks, cars and nice close. thank you. guest: those are important issues. china will never become a respectful, great power if it can not handle its own ethnic tensions, whether it be tibet or

any group. i think this is a human rights issue. the new president position on that is not clear because he just became the leader a few months ago. in terms of social unrest, it is not a secret. it is happening all the time across the country in china. according to government statistics, it each year there are 180,000 social protests, which means 50 people or more, and that means almost 500 per day. .here is a series of tension also, the corruption has become a very serious issue in china in a top leader in a myrtle case -- murder case last year and the railroad ministers are in jail now.

it's all revealed a serious problem of corruption in china and tension between the elite and the masses. now there is a good opportunity for president obama to argue that you need to deal with this issue not with just a crackdown onlydia censorship, but through emphasized rule of law, opening up the chinese political system, and achieving long-term stability, which means democracy and rule of law. host: our guest is with the brookings institution. he is cheng li, joining us to talk about the u.s.-china relationship in terms of the economy. two-day summit summit is taking place in california. talk about how the summit is described -- very casual, short- sleeved summit, as it is described. this is an environment to establish mutual respect and

understanding, and maybe even friendship. both of them will have several hours to get together, including dinner tonight, breakfast tomorrow, walking around the resort. for areally extraordinary chinese leader to spend so much time with the u.s. president. host: why do you think they did it this way? guest: it was on purpose because previously leaders wanted to and a and quick, -- banquet did not want to take responsibility. twoprevious leader brought leaders. a lot -- as the conference to do this.

both of them love sports. both of them are very confident in themselves. both of them face serious domestic challenges. they have outgoing personalities and in this environment, with the weather being beautiful according to forecasts, it is a good opportunity -- a conducive environment to have a candid discussion. we hope that is important. this type of relationship, despite having this agreement, we should emphasize common ground. we should emphasize that if there is a crisis, not two point militaryr, not to use force, but to use peaceful means to deal with the dispute. in certain areas we have commenting -- common interests, whether it be climate change, cybersecurity, or not to mention the global economy.

host: if this goes well, what is the next step? guest: in the coming months there will be more dialogue in levels,ty or ministry and hopefully china will lift detection is him, and the currency will be more accommodative to foreign pressure and understand the u.s. position, and perhaps the u.s. will let china access to u.s. market, which will also be when- when. -- win-win. the u.s. can help china in terms of protection. it can help china set up a banking system that will have strong implications for the american business community. milton,e is from massachusetts, democrat line.

caller: can you hear me ok? host: you are fine. caller: i will try to be brief. lifelong-year-old democrat and i was in the army during the korean conflict. is an to say china economic partner and should be. my son-in-law and i went to china two years ago and spent two weeks there. the people there are friendly. they may say they are socialist -- communist, but they say they are socialists. they seem like entrepreneurs. i think we should stop looking for enemies and start looking for friends. china should be and is now trading partner and should be friendly. as far as the south china sea is concerned, we would not like to have chinese warships off of cuba, so why would we be

provocative? guest: i love the line, "we want to seek friends rather than enemies." let's face it, do we want a war with china? if china threatens us, we would be vigorous in defending the interests of the u.s., but at the same time, we should not be use this -- lose this opportunity. first of all, we could not afford the war, it would be extremely expensive and we would be fighting for what? it is now about political reform within china. there is a good chance that china will make that development in the next to kate or so. why would we -- decade or so.

why would we lose that opportunity? we should by all means avoid military confrontation. weareas like north korea, see that china expressed its own interest and determination to make sure the korean peninsula is nuclear-free. we welcome china's role in that area. this will be an important part of the discussion. host: gene from dublin, virginia. democrats line. thank you for c-span. a lot of my friends that work in the economics community basically describe the relationship between the u.s. and china as a battle between democratic and non-democratic capitalism. of themzed at how many are betting on non-democratic to win. i am wondering if your guest can

comment on that. it does seem to make sense from my point of view. i would like to hear your comment. guest: there is some truism because there is some state owned enterprises. is state capitalism, crony capitalism. because this government has sponsored industries, monopolized industries, not letting foreigners access markets like telecommunication service and this kind of that notnt -- but only hurts the foreign companies, but also chinese private companies, private sector, which was a dynamic force in the 1995. in the past five years -- in the 1990s.

telecommunications, thanks, in the past five years have shrunk. the agenda for the top leaders under xi jinping is to try to change that for the middle class. giving a real opportunity for investment. this means tax cuts. at the same time, china needs to change its banking system rather than -- to make it a real banking system rather than just providing state owned enterprises. this will open the door for foreign competition. we do not know if they chinese initiative could be successful, but it is likely that if you do not push for that, the middle class will be on the revolt. -- this ise first xi jinpingst time

hazmat president obama. they had a formal meeting earlier. a less formal in environment in california to talk about issues that we have been addressing and we will address. there is a picture from last year. this is cap, florida. eugene is joining us. caller: good morning. i have a question regarding the financial institution bric -- china. india and i am wondering how we can make stable. more is there a way we can go about becoming the most powerful financial country in the world? host: before you answer that,

the jobs report has come out, 100 75,000at the -- jobs were added in may, but the unemployment rate has risen to 7.6%. guest: the u.s. is still the largest economy in the world. our financial institutions are the powerful and you do see rising of brazil, russia, india and china. their share of the market has increased. that is a trend you cannot change. fundamentals the change of the global economic landscape, the tickly rise of east asia and -- particularly the rise of east asian and the decline of europe. markets will top

be located in asia. there iss you that dramatic change of the global economic landscape. the u.s. should understand this kind of trend at the same time take advantage through our knowledge, financial institutions and human resources, etc. in this area, the u.s. still has an edge. there is a move to bring manufacturing back to the united and andn the high tech nanotechnology and human intelligence and the cloud calculations -- these all, potentially, could be very important. , so much,not change

jobs, so manufacturing returning to the united states can provide more jobs. if we adopt this kind of strategy rather than putting money in the military, we will see some positive things coming back. host: cheng li, from the brookings institution, studies china. thank you for your time. we will continue this discussion with dean cheng from the heritage foundation who will talk about security and military issues in china. later on we will look at the health rankings for u.s. counties in our america by the numbers segment. "washington journal" continues right after this. ♪

>> when you put on a uniform for a job that is a maintenance job, and this is true if you are a building janitor or a sanitation worker, you are consumed by the role to the point where it is almost like you are part of the background, almost like a machine. you are a human being wearing that uniform. the general world gets to overlook you and really not see you. i have called you -- it is like a cloaking device. star trek"are fellow " geeks will recognize that reference area it is frustrating -- reference. it is frustrating and interesting privilege because when i am wearing the sanitation uniform, i can observe people in ways they do not realize.

robin naglessor sunday at 8:00 p.m. on c-span's "q&a." >> in poor health, first lady ida mckinley suffered from epilepsy, and because of that her husband william mckinley would shield her face if she had a seizure. despite her health problems she traveled as the first lady, pan amng the 1901 exhibition, where her husband was assassinated. idae will look at the life of -- we will look at the life of ida mckinley monday night. "washington journal" continues. host: we continue our

conversation about the summit between president obama and fishing -- xi jinping with dean cheng of the heritage foundation. security to be discussed? some of the things that will certainly be on the agenda is cyber espionage. at this point we have had lots of stories about china raking into american defense programs, engaging in cyber espionage. the chinese have rebutted by saying we are the ones being hacked, cyber-assaulted, and many of that is green from the united states. in addition, there were almost certainly be on the agenda north korea and some other territorial disputes that china has, including with japan and then brought transnational issues

including terrorism. host: one of the issues that came off leading up to this, or has been described in the media at least, is there is a shift happening when it comes asia and asia pacific from the administration. can you explain the plan? guest: the administration, which termed it as the asia event, and then later the idea is wherehe should america be prioritizing resources, and given the economic importance of asia, the security applications of asia where there are multiple nuclear powers, a sickly the united states -- basically the united states should shift its focus to that region. unitedemphasize that states is not just talking about the military, but also economic trade. the pieces in play as the

u.s. tries to emphasize its asia connections. host: china perceives the. -- the pivot as? an attempt to limit china's capabilities and limit their rights. host: is that accurate? guest: i would suggest that perhaps paranoid is too strong a word, but china is refusing to recognize that their actions .ave reactions to -- reactions i do not think there is case teaming american president looking to contain china so much as a push reaction to china's increasing assertiveness. host: we will talk about these issues with our guest dean cheng

until 9:15 a.m. if you would like to ask questions, here is how you can do so -- when it comes to china's president, what is his philosophy when it comes to military security issues for his own country? xi jinping will continue the policies that hu jintao began, which is a study modernization of the chinese military. pla.is not your father's they do not believe in quantity over quality. they are students of foreign wars, and they understand that wars are won by technology and high-quality troops.

that requires investments. xi jinping will continue to invest significant resources -- double-digit increases in their defense budget every year for the past 20 years. at the same time, it is important to note that china is not out looking for a fight. they are in alphatec about how they need a stable -- emphatic about how they need a stable environment to build up their economy. as china has modernized, what we are seeing is more willingness to take risk in the belief that doing so for others national security and creates convictions for economic construction -- creates conditions for economic construction. host: the modernization, where is it focused? thet: what is stunning is broad based in nature. we have seen ballistic missiles, a range of space abilities,

cargo aircraft, tanker aircraft -- at this point, there is no part of their military that is not enjoying boom times. host:: the justification from china's perspective would be -- would be? guest: they have global economic interest in the right to defend them, and that for a long time the chinese military was relatively stars, so this is playing catchup, and the american pivot requires expansion. --t: does he have president does the president have assisted -- experience in the military? guest: he served as an it -- to ao the to general, but never served in the military. host: as far as hard military

subjects, the last discussion was about cybersecurity. is there a sense that the illegal gentlemen of come to an agreement how to -- the two gentlemen will come to an agreement? guest: given that china has never taken responsibility for cyber espionage, getting on the same sheet of paper rather than a decision moving forward, will be important. whether or not you can control your own resources and a on the chinese part, i think that will be a very hard road to hell. hoe.oad to host: what will be discussed? guest: on the cyber part, we will see the agenda for a

working group, which has been talked about secretary of defense chuck hagel and secretary of state john kerry. whether or not the nuclear program in north korea will proceed, and what china can do about it versus what the united states can do about it, and, hopefully, more discussion among broader transparency issues. for: denise is up first dean cheng. if you want to ask about chinese military issues, the numbers will be on your screen. she is from pennsylvania. democrats want. denise, go ahead. seek out i calling because i am wondering about -- caller: i am calling because i'm wondering about security. cato.ve heritage and

i am interesting -- interested on how they have information on our security. guest: if you are asking how the chinese obtains information about our security, a lot of it is reading our media, watching c-span, reading pentagon reports and the like. the chinese do a good job of translating our field manuals, our press releases. they are close observers of military exercises and our wars. there were chinese correspondents embedded with u.s. sources in baghdad. you can be sure their reports were being read by top chinese leadership. host: military exercises -- as china and the u.s. ever dissipated in one? guest: the u.s. has invited china to participate in 2014,

and china has accepted. host: can you discuss what that is? guest: it is one of the largest multinational exercise in the world involving the u.s., australia, japan, the philippines. has never been invited to participate, but in 2014 -- these happen every other year -- the u.s. has invited china to send one or more forces to play with the other folks in this very large exercise. previously the u.s. and china have had what are called passing exercises and search-and-rescue exercises. you throw a dummy over the side, ,nd you basically try and find as if it were a man overboard. user low-level things. this this will be much higher level. host: chuck from dayton, ohio. the public in line.

-- republican line. seek out the wife or -- caller: thank you for c-span. with the chinese military growth, and buying businesses in the united states and supporting our government by loaning us money, are the chinese trying united statesthe and take over quietly? guest: thank you for the question. no. i do not think we are seeing china try to take over america by buying it out from underneath us. china invest in u.s. t-bills because they have a massive surplus, and frankly, they can either build the world's largest mattress and stick all of that money underneath, or they go to the only place in the world that has the kind of liquidity to handle billions and billions of dollars and that is the u.s. bond market area china -- bond market.

china does this for china's , not to buy or implement the united states. if they sell the home there -- all their bonds, somebody would have to buy them. either others by it and it is a wash, or they discounted. we by our get back to muscle either way we end up -- so either way we end up winning. >> even if the -- host: even if the chinese economy slows down? guest: we are talking about growth from eight percent to four percent. it is not a full-blown recession. at this point we are not seen any indication the chinese will slow down the defense spending. , theis trend continues chinese economy slows down for the next five years, you will probably start to see a real in

china about guns versus butter. host: down from santa maria, california. republican line. good morning. thank you for holding on. caller: my name is john. i am concerned about the chinese's attempt to buy a pork processing plant in the united states. essentially, it is to provide cheaper pork products for the chinese nationals in china. i do not see the cost-benefit of processing food in the united states and shipping it to china, but instead of view it as an opportunity for the chinese to obtain a footprint in the united states and further their political agenda. i am also concerned about the safety of the workers and the food that is distributed within the united states, considering

the fire that destroyed a chicken processing plant in china and killed 112 workers there. so, how is this going to benefit china and the united states? it is definitely a security issue. guest: well, with regards to worker safety and food product safety, china does not get to export its regulations or adherence to safety standards. a factory in the united states still has to abide by american laws, david laws and the like -- state laws and the like. in terms of china's interest in buying a company like smithfield, keep in mind that their leadership is worried about things like food security in two ways. one is access to food, and smithfield is one of the most efficient food producers in the world, and also, product safety.

in that regard, the hope is they will improve chinese levels of food safety. certainly, they have the potential of political influence by affecting workers and things, and that is something to keep an eye on. that is something that hopefully the federal election commission to keep an eye on -- chinese contributions. host: does the u.s. look at these purchases through a security ones? >> we do. -- host: we do. -- and guest: we do. there is a group that has high- tech concerns. host: you might have addressed this, but you can expand, chuck from twitter says you heard a lot about military and cyber, but will north korea be on the agenda? guest: north korea will be on program,a the nuclear

and also the very active cyber program. even though the average north korean does not get the chance to go on the internet, there are dedicated people doing cyber hacking. host: how does the recent conversation about the nsa and intelligent -- intelligence gathering influence the conversation they will have? is a: insofar as this scandal, it is something the chinese will be paying attention to because it will affect how much influence, how strong of a president they think barack obama is. a president that his dog by a bunch of scandals if someone got chinese will try to take advantage of. host: -- advantage

of. host: milton -- philadelphia, pennsylvania. toler: i agree with the move asia. also, i see china as a military threat to the united states, in particular when it comes to taiwan. eventually china is going to want to reach out and take taiwan back, and that is one of the things i fear. how will he react. host: if you could explain the taiwan issue before responding. guest: the taiwan issue involves -- taiwan is considered the republic of china. they are the losing side of the civil war that ended in 19 189 -- 1949. after we recognize china in 1979, we passed the taiwan legalization act, a commitment to provide for security of

taiwan, and that law is on the books and it is the basis for maintaining a the american institute on taiwan, a de facto embassy, as well as arm sales. china is not happy about this. it is an unresolved issue. they also consider it a territorial issue. the american military commitment in the western pacific is aimed at shoring up relationships with our allies but also with key friends like taiwan. the question that the caller posed is one that pacific command, the pentagon and others are worried about all the time. biggests the single flash point, the place where we and the chinese really do rub up hasnst each other, and it for a long time been considered the most likely case where if there were a war, it would be over taiwan.

our interest is to making sure china is deterred and we never end up in a situation where we go to war over taiwan. security, it comes to who are china's friends? guest: china does not have many friends. north korea, not stable. .akistan, china's oldest friend it used to be aligned with burma. it has a lot of influence over cambodia and laos, but both are very poor countries. when you compare it with japan,'s allies, australia, the philippines -- we have bigger economies, more sophisticated militaries, and frankly, happier countries on our side. host: how does russia fall on where the relationship goes with china? often they are aligned,

agreeing with each other on things such as syria. they both want to keep the u.s. out of central asia, but they're also deeply suspicious of each other. part of this goes back to history. 1960'sas a split in the which left a bad taste in , and conversely, russia's population is dropping and they look at china as a spillover into russian territory. host: in chain from the heritage foundation looks at security issues -- and dean cheng from the heritage foundation looks at security issues. st. petersburg, florida. caller, go ahead. seek help thank you -- caller:. -- caller: thank you. i was asking why china and other countries are pulling out

of the u.s. dollar as if it is about to collapse. caller.ank you, guest: actually, i think that is more hype than reality. at this point china has yet to allow its currency to float freely. that would be really pulling out of the dollar. essentially, china's currency is a surrogate in some ways for the dollar because it is locked in. it is not allowed to simply float. if you look at japan and south korea, these countries are hardly pulling out of the dollar as a reserve currency. what you see is china and australia, china and russia are agreeing that their mutual trade does not have to be conducted through the dollar, but so long as the chinese currency is fixed, all you are doing is removing an intermediary. it is still tied to the dollar.

eventually the chinese will want their currency to standalone. as long as our deficit are out of control, there'll be be more likely with each passing day. oft: i have a picture china's first aircraft carrier. why is it significant? before for --re the only member that had no aircraft carrier. it is a step forward in its military modernization. confronted by a lot of maritime powers -- japan, taiwan, so a carrier divides them with additional capabilities to counter them. thirdly, as china's global interest expand, a carrier provides them with the ability to eject power away from the -- project power away from their shores. when the libyan situation deteriorated, they had no air cover.

in a future situation in africa or the middle east, a chinese aircraft carrier would be an important part providing defensive or even offensive capabilities. the: who is teaching chinese how to land the aircraft carrier and how to drive it? has beene carrier going through tests. host: i believe it is refurbished? guest: russian and ukrainian, it has gone through many hands. a lot of these things on it were installed by the chinese. who has been teaching them, that is a good question. some reports have suggested brazil. there is close corporation between brazil and china in a number of areas, including space. they have probably tried to hire

people from other countries, possibly russia or other places, and i suspect there is trial and error that they are doing on their own. host: elmhurst, new york. democrats line. hello. host: -- caller: given the fact hat china is developing china may possibility take over as the super power in the world? guest: i think by 2025 we're looking at a situation where china's economy in terms of gross domestic product may be the largest in the world. it depends on whether or not china engages in economic reform which we've seen peter out over the past ten years. it's part of the reason their economy is slowing. another piece to this is actually