>> and there's got to be a bet are way out of europe than a bavarian bond offering, if you know what i'm saying. >> i hear you. >> anyway, show starts right now. good wednesday afternoon to you. i'm dylan ratigan. today's big story, auction 2012. special interest election of course is what this year's election will be a prototype of, if you're confused as it what we have been talking about the past few years, you're in luck because, well, the games have begun. the most recent tutorial, wisconsin recall, but this is the first of many and politics do not matter. organized labor of course pouring in millions, supporting a democrat in the gubinatorial recall vote. there a nominating process, limited candidates, you know the story. meanwhile, rich folks pouring in millions to support scott walker. surprise, surprise. you know how this goes. it is like playing baseball.

play along at home. if you want the show, at least the most recent o round show that 94% of the time the person who raises the most money wins. there is your over/under, if you will, on the great electoral auction of 2012. and the overpaid last night as it has 94% of the time. let's bring in the political director mark murray. mark, do you find that analysis too simple? >> dylan, having a lot of money and having more than your opponent always helps in contest. but it is not the only thing. if money were the only requirement to be able to win, howard dean would have won the democratic nomination in 2004. mitt romney had more money than anyone else in 2008 would have been able to win on the republican side in that cycle. and people like steve forbs and also phil gramm might become president one day.

>> what are the intangibles. >> the one thing that was the nature of the recall, when you dig down into the exit polls, there is a big concern by wisconsin voters that recall went too far. 60% said that a recall should only be when there was official misconduct. and another 10% said that recalls should never end up occurring. so that was a big hurdle or organized labor and for tom barrett. not o only did they have to say, look, i'm better than this guy, but you need to fire scott walker two years before he is up for reelection in 2014. >> let's talk exit polls. which i know is a favorite pastime. short of like checking the baseball scores in the political business. where do the exit polls stand in the respect and esteem considering the embarrassing, i dare say humiliating estimation or failure to include the absentee ballot, massively in walker's favor, but not reflected in any of the exit

polls? >>ian, dylan, this isn't the only time that exit polls are an issue. you have to take them with a grain of salt, particularly as they first start coming in. you get the first wave of exit polls at 5:00. then another wave right around when polls close. those numbers do change. you're right, you hanted at absentee issue. i don't think a lot of people were expecting a lot of absentee voters in wisconsin. but it turned out to be a more sizeable portion. when you are factoring in absentee voters, you have to have your own poll of people that already voted to add those numbers into that. there is a bit after flaw going on as the night went on. but if you are covering politics and following this business, you always have to know these numbers do change throughout the night. >> all right, mark. thank you so much. mark murray with the day after reporting. mega panel ready to roll in

imogen lloyd webber, rob cox, i don't want to get hung up on the poll, rob, but there is a point when you would rather have no data rather than bad data. certainly in the market and any sport analysis of any kind pf i don't understand the appetite for bad data in politics. >> i'm not sure it is politics as much as media. >> or the media. >> this is such a highly watched local election. how many times have we tuned in and really cared about what is going on in madison, wisconsin. but this is so emblem attic of the issues that we're facing on a national level, that i think everyone was riveted to it. so for that reason i think people will focus on it. just going to the substance of the thing -- >> yeah, please. >> -- you know how i like to look at the glass half full. >> i think you said you come from the school of rational thought where the glass is always have full.

>> depends on what's in it. but there is a slight silver lining here. there are two sides here depending on -- forget what side you might be on. >> right. >> a very difficult political decision was made. and it actually was brought to the fore here with this recall. >> you are saying the decision to restructure the union -- >> the whole thing 18 months ago was extraordinary. a really difficult unpopular decision. and it was upheld, could you argue, for this recall. >> sure. >> we are going to have to make a very lot of difficult unpopular decisions of different -- >> each one is an experiment, basically. >> the fact that one could get through and we are moving forward, may actually be the glass half full way it look at this. >> that very good. jonathan, i have to give you my political analysis of which i am, you know, you know how i am, but here we go. >> okay. i'm buckled up here. >> okay, ready? >> yeah. >> the president has been

criticized for failure to be here or there. rewarded for doing this and that. but in the scheme of political calculations, explain to me the benefit to this president of strategically deciding to disengage from wisconsin, not send his vice president and risk alienating what i would say is much more -- it is one thing if you alien ate people like me, i'm not his base it begin with. if you alienate the base that says we want workers rights. we we want it defend these things, does he not create a lot of political risk for himself? >> sure. there is some risk. but look, this is wisconsin is a state that has voted democratic in presidential elections where i think the last 28 years. so it is a reliably blue state. of course, people are talking about the fact that scott walker survived his recall election means the state is a toss up but

i somehow doubt that. also, this is a -- it is a local issue. as much as everyone wanted to turn this into a national referendum, this really was a situation where you had the people of wisconsin who were angry with the duly elected governor of wisconsin and if you have the president of the out, no matter which party he is in, parachuting into locale its, saying what i thinks should happen, you already have obama accused ef overreach. >> great point. >> there is no need for him to go there and quite frankly, it was good he didn't go there. because the key thing in the interview with mark murray that you just did, he brought up something that i think we all have to keep in mind, that 60% of voters who said that they didn't think that the recall was the right thing do because it should be used for malfaesance earth own things like that. that is what was really going on

here. can you imagine the president diving into something like that. >> where the recall is a matter of principle for malfeasance. imogen, you get the last word. >> two take aways for me mp more than $60 million spent on this recall. 6 million people. that's crazy. as far as my unique perspective goes, i come from the uk and all parties spent $50 million and that is for 65 million people. that my take way. >> we print money here though. we can make our own money in d.c. we do it whenever we need it. it is different here. >> on national level as far as november goes, the big story will go to the top of the show with martin, what is going on with spain at the moment. fund manically the eurozone is romney's best friend right now. >> so is the powder keg that no president want it stand anywhere near. >> and it is about -- >> it is right there. >> and we will see. listen, you know, i just wouldn't want to be the ones

taking a bond offering to bavaria. nor would i recommend anybody else do it. let's switch to something else, shall we? still within the theme of money and politics, california's cigarette tax was a staging ground for money and politics, jonathan. big tobacco all in there saying obviously, don't tax cigarette. that's how we make money. the american cancer association in there saying tax cigarettes. tax money will go to more research for us. once again the 94% number held because tobacco spent more money. there is a bigger thing that is the tax code finally getting debated through the lens of inhibiting the things you dent want and encouraging the things do you. which i would ultimately consider, jonathan, a good thing. are we talking about taxes differently here? >> sure. >> yes, we are talking taxes differently here but also talking taxes in california where california voters have a say over just about -- over all

taxes. you know, there can can't be a tax increase without public referend referendum. you have that issue and i wonder if why the cigarette tax was voted no, i can't remember what was on the tobacco there. >> it was voted no, you got it right. >> how much of that was because didn't want a tax increase, but also because people didn't like the fact that as much as folks want money for cancer research, if you are taxed, why can't that money go into the general fund to help pay for all of the budget. and budget tax. >> it stinks of special interest. it stinks of special interest on the research side to get the tax money and stinks of special interests -- to me, this is classic american political debate. >> if you want it ask voters to make difficult decisions, like adding my tax, it has to be this their interest. not like congress with special interest versus special interest. one outspent the other four to

one. but as jonathan said, had they sold this as way it reduce the budget, get your education back up -- >> high and tight -- >> something like that, maybe people would have -- it might have tipped the balance from 49 to 51 to the other way around. >> thoughts here? >> no votes are apparently a lot easier to win bp so the money sort of happened, no vote on their sides. i did some research. proposition 16 and proposition 17 which both had very little money behind them still won because they were the no-vote. so you want to be a no-vote. the negative wins. >> i like it. very interesting strategy. we will all take notes and if you vote no on them, you get what you want. >> basically. >> think about it. >> a double negative there. >> too much. >> listen, work it out. we will work it out in a meeting. draw the whole thing. we are voting no to say yes for the no. panel stays. straight ahead, slammed, a stunning new report about prison sentences and what they are costing all of us, whether we are in prison or not. the numbers next.

and the honest truth about lying. why we all do it and if it is even possible to stop if you wanted to. plus, our specialist, on how to dial back our smart phone addictions for those of us who have, well, a smart phone tendency. here is a hint. call your friend. man: there's a cattle guard, take a right. do you have any idea where you're going ? wherever the wind takes me. this is so off course. nature can surprise you sometimes... next time, you drive. next time, signal your turn. ...that's why we got a subaru. love wherever the road takes you.

♪ power surge, let it blow your mind. [ male announcer ] for fruits, veggies and natural green tea energy... new v8 v-fusion plus energy. could've had a v8. there's natural gas under my town. it's a game changer. ♪ it means cleaner, cheaper american-made energy. but we've got to be careful how we get it.

design the wells to be safe. thousands of jobs. use the most advanced technology to protect our water. billions in the economy. at chevron, if we can't do it right, we won't do it at all. we've got to think long term. we've got to think long term. ♪

out with new numbers today. the average prisoners spent nearly three additional years behind bars.

more time in jail costing $23,000 additional per prisoner. which means $10 billion more for u.s. tax pay earns sweet deal when private companies are running the show. it is like doing a really low maintenance residential development program where the tenant rent is paid by the state and they are not allowed to leave the building. adam direct the state's project. and adam there is a lot to know here. but for now, do you have an explanation as to why we are paying more to put more people in jail for a lerng period of time? >> sure, dylan. there's no secret here. for a long time, there has been an underlying assumption or premise. it puts as many people in prison for as long as possible and it's understandable.

it seems to make logical sense. the trouble is, that over time, research has shown that for a lot of low risk offenders that's not the case. violent and career criminals for sure. they should go to prison, stay there for a long time. that what we have prisons for. a lot of lower level nonviolent offenders were swept up in this big net. so we are at the point where we have nearly one in 100 adult behind bars. one in 31 are on some form of community corrections super vision that is in prison, jail, probation or parole. one in eight state employees works in corrects and the corrections budget has been the fastest growing category of state spending behind only medicaid and so people are now saying, we've got to take a look at this and prisons are a government spending program just like any other government spending program, need to be put to the cost benefit test, whether it is education, healthcare, taxpayers now in this economic situation more

than ever, want their dollars to be put to the best possible use. >> so even if you look, this is a classic case of sort of the privatization racket where, as long -- if you look at prison like a private hotel, that nobody want to stay in, has a business model, though that is what it is, el estate and services and that is a very good business if you can keep the prison full and if somebody else pays for the prisoners, is that a fair assessment? >> well, i think it is fair theoretically. but i'm not sure we want to overstate the role that privatization has played in the buildup of this country. our studies show the fastest period of growth occurred during a period before privatization became more common place. still less than 10% of prisoners this this country are in private pris yons. i think what is really going on is that there has been a role

that the state leaders have thought they were supposed to play and that is to demonstrate that they are tough on crime. and not just because of the economy, but because of a lot of other reasons. mainly that we know so much -- well, that was the politics. but we have so much better knowledge today about what works to stop the cycle of recidivism than we did when we started down this prison building path. and the new question -- >> tell us about it. tell us about the new way. >> so the new way is based on advances in research. we have risk assessment instrument that didn't exist 25, 30 years ago, that did a really good job. there are no crystal balls here in predicting human behavior but do a good job making distinction between high, medium and low risk offender. we know who should go to prison and how long they should stay. we have gps monitoring and like

rapid result drug test that allow probation and parole officials and courts to have a much better sense of what offenders do and what they are doing. we have strategies to work with offenders. we don't sit around the table and talk about problems but we work and focus on strategies to help people understand how they can stay away from the people and places and the things that trigger their drug use and other behavior. and kpe you combine all of those things together, you have a system of alternatives that is providing a lot of extra comfort to judges, even prosecutors, that say, you know, there are things we can do that are a lot less expensive and a lot more effective than simply throwing these lower level offenders into prison at a cost of taxpayers, as you noted earlier, about $30,000 a year. >> it is like this is the same as everything else, which we learned through the modern world and our ability to learn over the past few decades how to

create a lot less crime and spend a lot less money, it sound like. >> yeah, sometimes it sound like snake oil a little bit. we can have less punishment and less crime at the same time. but we are seeing in state after state, starting in texas in 2007, and dylan, there's a narrative out there that allow the changes that are happening now are happening because of the economy. but texas in 2007, long before the economy turned south, made some significant changes and just said no. we're not going to continue to try to build our way out of this problem. we are going to shift some of these prison funds into alternatives instead and it has been a tremendous success in texas. their recidivism rate is down 27%. crime rate is down same as national average. in just the last couple of years we have seen 17 other states as well including unanimous vote just in the last few months in georgia for significant changes

in their property crime penalties and drug crime penalties. people are sick and tired of the revolving door and sick and tired of getting -- >> not to mention you listen to people, whether you talk to some of the right on crime folks in texas, talk to the judges in hawaii who are very conservative, and aggressive, who are seeing -- i talked to one judge who says he sees 80% drop in recidivism with parolees by using techniques you are describing. and you also mitigate one of the problems that russell simmons point out that right now we are training young black men on prison culture and releasing them back into the community and wondering why prison culture is becoming street culture, when we are funding the collection and training of of people for prison culture, then wonder why we are getting more of it. i really respect the work you've done. i advise folks to go to the pew center, look at the body of this research as adam so eloquently

shared it. thank you for sharing it with us. adam is the director of the pew center. yes, believe it or not, ladies and gentlemen, you can get less crime and less punishment if you simply learn the new way. you can't make it up. next, we call on our specialist to help us get smarter about our smart phones, after this. ♪ [ male announcer ] if paula ebert had her way, she would help her child. deoxyribonucleic acid. he knew that. [ male announcer ] with everything. go! goooo! no. no no no no no. mommy's here [ male announcer ] but that kind of love is...frowned upon. so instead she gives him new capri sun super-v. so he gets more of what he needs... without all the "her" he doesn't think he needs. with one combined serving of fruits and vegetables. new capri sun super-v. so i wasn't playing much of a role in my own life,

but with advair, i'm breathing better so now i can take the lead on a science adventure. advair is clinically proven to help significantly improve lung function. unlike most copd medications, advair contains both an anti-inflammatory and a long-acting bronchodilator, working together to help improve your lung function all day. advair won't replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than twice a day. people with copd taking advair may have a higher chance of pneumonia. advair may increase your risk of osteoporosis and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking advair. if you're still having difficulty breathing, take the lead. ask your doctor if including advair could help improve your lung function. get your first full prescription free and save on refills at advaircopd.com.

tdd# 1-800-345-2550 there are atm fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and the most dreaded fees of all, hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, you won't pay fees on top of fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no monthly account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and we rebate every atm fee. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd# 1-800-345-2550 because when it comes to talking, there is no fee.

do sleep with your iphone or blackberry tucked slavely next to your bed? i do. are you like me constantly having to charge it? i am. are you checking your phone right now? i would be if i wasn't hosting this tv show. well our guest today says that teen dynamic that keeps you and me tethered to our work, e-mail, late into the night can be turned onity very head to break

the habit. her experiment to give each member of the team a predictable night, mondays, tuesday, wednesday, you got it. to unplug, manned story unplug and free up more personal time but made those who practice this technique more efficient and productive in the office. our specialist today and potentially a personal savior for everybody involved in this conversation right now. leslie, perlot, professor at harvard business school. she has plenty of credential. author of "sleeping with your smart phone ". rob. how to change your habit. and that me that i'm talking about, not rob. not fair to rob. so anyway, this is a prevalent issue in our culture. have you not only observed it but believe you have analyzed it, researched taen and proposed

an alternative. lay it on us doctor. >> i hope we recognize this tendency to be always on. rob. >> and dylan. not fair to rob. >> and dylan. an almost everybody else. it is destructive for us, for our lives and most surprising, it is destructive for organizations. >> let us say we have come to terms with that some version of your narrative, which is doing this is bad. >> yes. >> and still when it comes down to it, when left alone in dark of night with an iphone, you can't separate it. you're not going to get in there. >> i believe the individual addiction is not an individual problem so you can't involve it alone. i believe however that if you recognize -- the reason you can't turn off is because the rest of the world is still on but if you work with those on

your team you can make a big difference. >> a lot of people that freelance and don't have a team and they work paycheck to paycheck, have you any tips for them at all? >> think about doctors. doctors are on. doctors are on call. doctors are off. why can't we do that too? for us, it is about thinking about how can we create a team it make this possible? >> how do you check twitter? no. but seriously -- >> you don't. >> i know. but what is the -- you say it is bad for us to be connected. can you elaborate on that? what is actually the harm or what is the potential injury that we would suffer as a result of being on too much? >> so i don't want to suggest that there need to always be off. there is distinct advantages. the problem is when we are all on all of the time that is is undermining our ability to step back and think about, does it have to be this way.

could we change the way we work? there is no incentive if everyone is always on. there is no forcing function to say, can this wait? what if we did things differently? >> could we check the e-mail on tuesday? >> yeah. >> as opposed to all the time. or whatever it is you're saying. >> i'm trying to understand why that's -- is it because it creates group think or doesn't allow our synapses to fire in the way they should for proper creative and innovative thinking? what is it -- >> what's the injury? >> yeah. >> so we are on because we have some factor that we think something will happen. m n my research, it is the client. so in your case, someone is going to call and you're worrying about that. you create all sort of unnecessary interaction because you're on. and people e-mail you and come to expect you'll be on. then you respond, even when it is not urgent, and you'll signal you will be on and you perpetuate these access that are unnecessary. >> so you say if you find the core issue, in this case the client and research that you did

and come up with a client management strategy so that something somewhere is always on for the client even if everybody is not always on. now you're playing football. >> yes. because it is not the client who usually calls. it is all of the interaccess. >> -- you have anxiety about the client on the box but now you're on the box and you are on twit perp client is out playing golf or god knows, they don't even care about you. jonathan, what do you think? >> leslie, in terms of rob's question about the harm, it made me wonder, what about the harm to interpersonal relationshipses. our phones while we're sleeving or at meetings with everybody. what is being connected all the time doing to 0ur ability to interact face it face with another human being. >> you see people on dates with each other. >> that reprehensible. >> they are across the table from each other. you're like, are those people on a date? that crazy.

>> a bad date. >> yeah, but -- >> don't tell that to a lot of people who are married and that the date they are having. >> very common. >> turns out i think the biggest customer from my book i think are spouses. they are the ones who are realizing that the detrimental effect and want their spouses to turn off and realize they could turn off and be bet are o off. >> so you say spouses are the ones most aggressively -- >> upset about and recognizing the benefit if their spouse turned off. >> thus i'm not married. now, am i okay? if spouses are the issue -- >> maybe that's why you're not married. >> clearly -- there is not much to discuss there. but i'm just saying, as a management strategy. anyway, congratulations on the book. >> thank. >> you thank you for not only spending time with us but tolerating our nature. jonathan, rob, imogen, nice to sigh again.

leslie perlow is the author. here's the book, "sleeping with your smart phone." you could sleep with the book instead of the phone. i don't even have jonathan's attention. >> oh, yes. >> if the situation made a mission to mars -- would you tune in? also, get a free flight. you know that comes with a private island? really? no. it comes with a hat.

see, airline credit cards promise flights for 25,000 miles, but... [ man ] there's never any seats for 25,000 miles. frustrating, isn't it? but that won't happen with the capital one venture card. you can book any airline, anytime. hey, i just said that. after all, isn't traveling hard enough? ow! [ male announcer ] to get the flights you want, sign up for a venture card at capitalone.com. what's in your wallet? uh, it's ok. i've played a pilot before. [ crowd chatters and groans ] ♪ [ male announcer ] hunger getting to you? ♪ grab a ritz crackerfuls. made with real cheese and whole grain. get hunger before it gets you. and how much the people in your life count on you. that's why we offer accident forgiveness... man: great job. where your price won't increase due to your first accident.

we also offer a hassle-free lifetime repair guarantee, where the repairs made on your car are guaranteed for life or they're on us. these are just two of the valuable features you can expect from liberty mutual. plus, when you insure both your home and car with us, it could save you time and money. at liberty mutual, we help you move on with your life. so get the insurance responsible drivers like you deserve. looks really good. call... or visit your local liberty mutual office, where an agent can help you find the policy that's right for you. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? [ thunk ] sweet!

thanks, mister! [ meow ] [ male announcer ] the solid thunk of the door on the jetta. another example of volkswagen quality. that's the power of german engineering. more than 50 times a day? so brighten your smile a healthy way with listerine® whitening plus restoring rinse. it's the only rinse that makes your teeth two shades whiter and two times stronger. ♪ listerine® whitening... power to your mouth. has anybody seen the yellow ribbon? >> i don't know. what kul ocolor was it? ha! i kill me. >> you kill me. >> it is time to get ready for bed, okay? >> sorry, alf, get we have to play later. >> oh, here is that ribbon bp but it's wet. >> forgot to tell you, you're out of floss.

>> think of it like the reverse of alf. reality show where humans are sent to live on mars. a dutch company claps they aims going to do it. based on the reality show of big brother, he plans to send four folks, you and me or whoever it may be, to the red planet in 2023. he said he will send another four each two years. 25, 27, you get it, until there are 20 people living on mars. there is one catch. befo the four that go will never come back. one way tickets to mars. so you can be on a reality television show. still interested? company plans to start training astronaut next year. when asked how they will play for the whole kitten kaboodle, they say they will make one big media event out of this thing. and if we're any indication, they may have already begun

doing so. so mars in 2023. for anyone interested. you just can't come back. coming up, getting honest about the truth. or are we just living a lie? ♪[music plays] ♪[music plays] ♪[music plays] purina one beyond. food for your cat or dog. we have product x and we have product y. we are going to start with product x. the only thing i'll let you know is that it is an, affordable product. oh, i like that. let's move on to product y, which is a far more expensive product.

whoaaa. i don't care for that at all. yuck. you picked x and it was geico car insurance and y was the competitor. is that something you would pay for year after year? i, i like soda a lot but for a change of pace... with less chronic osteoarthritis pain. imagine living your life with less chronic low back pain. imagine you, with less pain. cymbalta can help. cymbalta is fda-approved to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain. one non-narcotic pill a day, every day, can help reduce this pain. tell your doctor right away if your mood worsens, you have unusual changes in mood or behavior or thoughts of suicide. antidepressants can increase these in children, teens, and young adults. cymbalta is not approved for children under 18. people taking maois or thioridazine or with uncontrolled glaucoma should not take cymbalta. taking it with nsaid pain relievers, aspirin, or blood thinners may increase bleeding risk. severe liver problems, some fatal, were reported.

signs include abdominal pain and yellowing skin or eyes. tell your doctor about all your medicines, including those for migraine and while on cymbalta, call right away if you have high fever, confusion and stiff muscles or serious allergic skin reactions like blisters, peeling rash, hives, or mouth sores to address possible life-threatening conditions. talk about your alcohol use, liver disease and before you reduce or stop cymbaa.lt dizziness or fainting may occur upon standing. ask your doctor about cymbalta. imagine you with less pain. cymbalta can help. go to cymbalta.com to learn about a free trial offer. go to cymbalta.com so i test... a lot. do you test with this? freestyle lite test strips? i don't see... beep! wow! that didn't take much blood. yeah, and the unique zipwik tab targets the blood and pulls it in. so easy. yep. freestyle lite needs just a third the blood of onetouch ultra. really? so testing is one less thing i have to worry about today. great. call or click today and get strips and a meter free.

test easy. oh. let's go. from the crack, off the backboard. [ laughs ] dad! [ laughs ] whoo! oh! you're up! oh! oh! so close! now where were we? ok, this one's good for two. score! [ male announcer ] share what you love with who you love. kellogg's frosted flakes. they're gr-r-eat! i would really, really, really like a continuance.

>> i'll have to hear good cause, counsel? what the problem? i can't lie. >> well, he might be the exception to the rule. our next guest tested 30,000 folks and found that nearly everyone lies at least a little. with us now, duke university professor dan ariely, author of, the honest truth about dishonesty. how we lie to everyone, especially ourselves. congrats on the book. >> thank you. >> let's begin at the center of the core. you say we lie it everyone beginning with ourselves. lying to yourself is probably the hardest thing to stop? >> oh, very hard it stop. easy to start. >> yeah, of all the lying, to stop lying to yourself would be the most impossible. >> because we don't see it

coming. i ask people often, when was the last time you lied? people look carefully and said, it has been a few hours. but maybe today. and we lie a lot. then we ask, are you a good person? oh, yeah, i'm a fantastic person. we find that people try to balance two goals. we want it look at ourselves as honest wonderful people. and we want it benefit from cheating. economic incentive. >> so human beings, like food, path of least resistance. we are all on this thing, so think well of me and let me cheat when i want because that the path of least resistance. >> you can't cheat a lot and think of yourself as being good. >> you can't? >> no. but can you cheat a little and still find yourself good. >> we find balance between the two forces. it is all about -- cheating is not so much what we find, not thinking long-term and say if i get caught, how much time will i be in prison or what would happen. >> which putting people in jail does not stop crime because it is not a rational thing. >> people in jail is, there's

lot of sad things about it. retribution is one thing, maybe that's about g. but is it frightening people. >> it is not a deterrent. we're off topic. >> a study looked at the death and alty. state with high death penalty, do they have less murders? that's a big punishment. there is no e6d. it is hard to get evidence. >> so how does that tie to this cheating and i think highly of my receive. >> it is about rationalization. now the question is what kind of act of cheating can you do and still think of yourself as a good person? i'll give you one example. >> okay. our basic experiment looks like this. we give each other a sheet of paper. solve as many of those as we can. you solve as many as can you, five minute are over and i say stop. count how many questions you got correctly. go to back of the room and shred the paper. come back and come back and tell me how many you got.

they come back and say i had six. so they get $6. so what they don't know is we played with the shredder. it shredded the sides. so people solve. >> reporter: six. >> when you say people, you say that's the averages? sots that what -- >> very good question bp so what happen said most of the people, now we found very few people who cheat a lot. we found a ton of people who cheat a little. here is a very interesting version of this experiment. we do the same thing but when people shred, they come and look me in the eyes and say mr. experiment i solve x, give me x tokens. they take the plastic, walk 12 feet and change it for money. >> like casino interaction. >> like casino or stock option. what happened p? people double their cheating. >> so when i come so i will be the patient or the participant. and i go back to the shredder. i've got four correctly.

which we can see on paper but i don't know that anybody can see it. average dylan whatever the person is, will come back and say six over four for two bucks. >> yes. >> however, if you're not giving me money, you're giving me credit for me to cash in 12 feet later, whatever that credit is. >> that right. >> i double my lying. is that right? >> that's right. this for me was the most worry sum experiment we created. what happens if one step for money removes a moral to such a degree, what happens to stock options? what happened to derivatives? could it be that every time we move to something that is further and further removed from money and removing to society that is cashless, we have all of the higher representations of money. >> i was thinking about this and literally the big update and taxes in new york is credit cards in the back. >> yeah. >> and i was asking, i was talking to cab drivers as we were driving around, and i said what is the difference between cash and credit in terms of tips and how it goes?

and stunningly, i found out, that if the cash transactions, and this anecdotal, but there is a huge impact on what happens based on the nature of the payment system. >> of course. >> that's what you are saying with your experiment. >> yes. >> the cheating goes up depending on the payment system. >> right. depends on the distance from where you are. think about something else. i talk to restaurant owners. very few people eat and leave without paying. same people have no problem downloading illegal things on the internet. do you play golf? >> not very well but from time to time. >> so i ask people how do you cheat in golf? >> nobody cheat in golf except everybody else. >> yes. >> imagine you want it ball your move three inks. can you pick the ball up and move it. >> which is what i would do. >> awful.

>> i don't even play 18 holes. they say, he doesn't even count. >> can you kick the ball. >> that's better. >> much, much easier. >> more subtle. >> or do it with the club which people find more easier. the more distance is the more people find it. similarly, getting golf, and i don't study much golf. but imagine you have six shot. you can either write it in five, write it in as five, cheat by one or write in in as six and summarize differently. people have much easier time writing it differently but once they wrote it they add wrongly. like this is not really there. is it six, is it five? i don't know. until it becomes reality. then people don't cheat. same thing as experiments. they give an envelope with $20. and they say, right down how many questions you got correctly and then pay yourself. people solve four, right six, but when they get to the

envelope they could take $20. but they don't. the moment something like like stealing, people don't to it. >> let's be honest, if i'm following you, what you have discover said that people are crazy. people are completely bat, loopy, nuts. >> i think i would -- >> but predictably so. >> people are predibbleable and i think they are interested. let me give you the good point. people cheat less than predicted. there would be lots of stuff you could steal. for me in the studio i'm sure i would find lot of stuff i could steal ael get aen /* and get away it. i wouldn't do that in front of you. by the time we get to rational people, psycho paths, who just think about benefit, most of us have morality. what is interesting about the morality, is that it is influenced by all kind of things. influenced by what other people

are doing that helps us figure out what is the sense of morality. it is influenced by the time of day and whether we have energy or we're tired. it is also influenced by how many steps removed from money we are. once we get closer to money we are more tight with the moral standard. >> when you this think about the disconnection of the government, media, bank ceos, really the whole banker politician technologi technologist, then you think about the other culture here as story tellers, cowboys and manufacturers. who tend to be much closer to money by culture. >> that right. on the ranch. in the -- whatever it is. what does it tell us about correcting our culture. we say listen, we agree with professor's research, we need to create more intimacy to the transaction in order to diminish the loss.

so if paulson was looking at the sub prime borrower was in the eyes there is no way. but from the building in d.c., there's no problem. >> right. it is about distance. as we create more complex instrument we get more distance. the other thing is conflict of interest. you like any particular sport team. >> 4ers. >> okay. so if you see a game and 49ers are playing and the referee calls a team against the team you think the referee is evil, vicious, stupid, something. no way for you to see reality. banking has the same problem. conflict of interest. imagine you were a banger and we paid you $10 million to view mortgage pank security as good product. i'm not saying you lie and just tell people they are good, no. won you convince yourself that they are great product? of course could you do it. if there is steps for money and lot of people doing it around you, now have you a real problem. that what we find over and over. when we put testimony, good

people in situation of bad conflict of interest, it is crazy of us to expect good behavior. so instead what we need to do is limit the gray zones in all kind of areas. we could try and eliminate conflict of interest and it is one of the main ways forward. >> really, solution is a cultural change. not a rule change. >> relation, culture yb social influence and seeing who you are affecting. all of those need to come together. >> professor, i always learn when you're here and i enjoy that. c congrats on the book. >> thank you very much. >> the honest truth about dishonesty. >> do you do youtube? >> check my website. >> okay. you should do that. would you be great on youtube. all right, no lie here. ari is in the building and he has many words he would like to release out of his mind and into the world. he will do so after this. ♪

power surge, let it blow your mind. [ male announcer ] for fruits, veggies and natural green tea energy... new v8 v-fusion plus energy. could've had a v8. new v8 v-fusion plus energy. if you made a list of countries from around the world... ...with the best math scores. ...the united states would be on that list. in 25th place. let's raise academic standards across the nation. let's get back to the head of the class. let's solve this.

[ male announcer ] we began with the rx. ♪ then we turned the page, creating the rx hybrid. ♪ now we've turned the page again with the all-new rx f sport. ♪ this is the next chapter for the rx. this is the next chapter for lexus. this is the pursuit of perfection. to provide a better benefits package... oahhh! [ male announcer ] it made a big splash with the employees. [ duck yelling ] [ male announcer ] find out more at... [ duck ] aflac! [ male announcer ] ...forbusiness.com. ♪ ha ha!

a rhode island is here, he has a rant. have at it. >> thank you. over the last few weeks we've been talking about the president's national security powers. he has continued bush policies on secrecy, spying and military tribunals and new powers like killing citizens abroad with the unmanned drones. we have covered what we think is wrong with some of these policies but pod today i want it look at politics. here is how dylan framed the question last week. >> you do have to wonder if the republican president was doing this, whether would you have such quiet tude from the left. >> my answer is that during president bush's term there was

a lot for outcry over similar policies. remember democrat hammered bush for violating civil libertyes. ran against guantanamo. they also slammed the military tribunals. here for example is hillary clinton in 2007. >> our constitution is being shredded. we know about the secret wiretaps. we know about the secret -- >> yes we do. but today secretary ever state clinton is presiding over the warrantless wiretapping. what about targeting people without due process? take a look at this. in september '08, the height of the general election, obama made, i think, a very cogent case for the key role of due process in any deteng policy. >> when you -- if the government grabbed you, then you have the

right to at least ask why was i grabbed and say, maybe you've got the wrong person. the reason you say that is because we don't always have the right person. we don't always catch the right person. we may think this is one of the terrorists, it might be -- >> might be mohamed the cab driver. that was senator obama. today we are talking about whether those protections should apply before people are killed. the president's unmanned drone program killed people including americans and children as young as 16 without any attempt at due process. there is no way it say you've got the wrong person after you're dead. by endorsing and expanding on the policies, a lot of democrats

are giving bipartisan legitimacy to things that were once unthinkable. it is really hard it spark a meaningful public debate about it. that's one reason this president's drone program, which if you think about it has trappings after high stakes action movie, is barely discussed in political circlees. the government can claim a new power to kill americans without trial and no one kauks about it because there is no electoral angle. but when the government fines people for not buying health insurance, well that is a tea party outrage and we spend months on it. often it is the issues where two parties agree from the run up to the iraq war that demand the most scrutiny and outrage from the most of us. >> what is the mechanism? i mean, i lived it with the banking debate expecting there was going to be one. what do you suggest? how does it break? how does this gridlock break or are we all trying to find out together. >> there is one routehr