says and then create any jobs but the bad side so you go ok so what are we going to let's assume for the money you can increase spend well as a number of things you could try to do and you have to try to do something one you could try and follow the path that's been very successful is for most important germany work. is actually part of the unemployment insurance program and i think it's twenty states now president obama can try and promote that try and push it the idea being that instead of companies laying off workers they reduce work hours every month we have two million workers that are dismissed from their job their later are fired if you could reduce that by ten percent that's the same thing as creating two hundred thousand jobs a month i don't know if that's a realistic target but the point is that there's a lot of jobs being lost but it's also going on i mean are we seeing certainly when we talk about government workers we see things like furlough days and things like that but aren't a lot of people also you know what we call underemployed they're full time hours and switch to part time you do see a lot of that i'd like to see a lot more in the sense that if the alternative is going to person or if you're much better off going to part on that someone's going to be happy if they're counting on a paycheck for forty hours a week but if they get

a ten percent cut in hours and a five percent cut in pay i think most people consider that much better than being laid off altogether and you point to germany and many ways they seem to be a country that a lot of people are looking at as putting a lot of good examples i want to look to two currencies around the world and so it's sweet from the global economist nouriel roubini today he said that basically q e three has already started in japan and switzerland that the fed will eventually get to it too but it may be too late so i want to talk to you about your thoughts on this with and the japanese devaluing their currency against the dollar and if you think that another round of quantitative easing here in the u.s. is necessary and if it is necessary when the timing today well i understand both japan and switzerland doing that the clintons have been rising especially switzerland certainly hurt their trade situation the u.s. is the country of course with the big trade deficit so we actually should deal with and get the value of the dollar down and part of that story. it would be

a q e three that will have some impact that by itself is going to do it this again is an area we're really going to obama from being just horribly negligent to get vacancies on the federal reserve board he doesn't even have a nomination now i understand republicans are being obstructionist to wherever he puts up a month so you know maybe if you put up john boehner you know you'd point to go did prove him but you know where every puts out they're going to give a bad time no doubt about it but if you don't even put something out there you can't blame the republicans so he should be having in his nominees out there and he should be leaning on the fed the conservative certainly leaned on the fed about q.e. two my god they're blaming it for everything in the world you know they're probably blamed for the earthquake in japan i mean you know so they put a lot of pressure on her nike and made it difficult for him not to be more aggressive he should be out there you know they have this idea of the fed being independent we're not going to fire bernanke you the point is to say here's what we think the fed should be doing rainout the case for the public which he's not done at all i was dean baker co-director of the center for economic and policy research . well when it comes to making decisions about how to dig this economy out of the

deep deep hole it's in there are fewer of suggested making cuts to the area that make up more than half of the total discretionary budget and twenty percent of the total budget i'm talking about defense spending despite involvement in three wars even secretary of gates in his time in office said you know there's no need to return to cold war levels of defense spending still i can tell you one person who hates the idea of cutting defense the new secretary of defense leon panetta he spoke today about the broad and growing range of challenges our military must be prepared for he also spoke about the dangers if congress fails to enact other measures to reduce the deficit if it did happen it would result in a further round very dangerous cuts across the board. the stance cuts that i believe would do real damage to our security our troops and their families and our

military's ability to protect the nation and this is a really important topic and joining me now to talk more about this is lawrence korb senior fellow at the center for american progress consequent thanks for being here you served as assistant secretary of defense under president reagan you know a great deal about this i want to get your take on what we heard today from secretary of defense panetta well the secretary of defense panetta is trying to basically keep the spirits up of the organization he took over but his former director of o.m.b. he knows that the defense budget now even if you control for placement is higher than at any time since the end of world war two it is a higher than it was at the height of the reagan buildup so yes we can afford to cut it but and then of course he's playing the family card well we've got to take care probability our family nobody's talking about doing any and anything anything like that those of us who work you know with the whole simpson deficit reduction

commission and all the various other groups that work that looked at that show how you can do it without really hurting military families i know that president obama has said before that he's not opposed to cutting military spending. you know that this is some place that could be looked at and we did hear from him back in april during a speech on fiscal policy let's listen to a little bit of what he had to say so just as we must find more savings in domestic programs we must do the same in defense and we can do that while still keeping ourselves safe over the last two years bob gates says courageously taken on wasteful spending. saving four hundred billion dollars in current and future spending. i believe we can do that again i believe we can do that again this is back in april how do you see anything that shows that we are going in that direction at the force of law and secretary gates didn't say four hundred billion

dollars he pretended to save it by you know announcing that weapons were already going to be cancelled he was going to cancel they weren't even in the program he found one hundred seventy billion dollars in addition seized by the crowd one hundred thirty in back in two other other other new new programs. what president obama said back in april is very similar to what they agreed is the first thought of the deficit deal that defense well actually security spending would be cut by three hundred fifty billion dollars over the next decade security spending also includes veterans it includes the state department it includes apartment of homeland security so it's very similar to what he said back then but i think the key thing to keep in mind is that when they talked about cuts up until now they talked about we do seeing the projected level of increases not cutting when you and i talk about cutting means we're going to get less hour that we got last week no in the defense applauded it means we won't get as much as we thought it was still

going to get more i think that it's risen every single year for at least the last thirteen years or two years has gone up in real terms you know when i worked for president reagan there were not for years but then we had a big deficit so we cut it the next four years so you can you can do that and their side did that somehow you're going to have all these apocalyptic scenarios it normally happens where people say that's what we've done it before and you know what she we won the cold war you know what when richard nixon left office care call him soft on the feds we were spending in today's dollars three hundred fifty billion two hundred billion cost of responded now what you need is good management and put out a lot of good i'll get some people who can keep up and systems growth under control and not by rep. we don't need well speaking of weapons we don't need i want to take a look at some specific programs our defense budget spends money on some of the most expensive aircraft in the world i'm talking i here's one example of the f. twenty two one hundred eighty seven or purchased at a cost of seventy seven point four billion dollars there's also the effort thirty

five the government purchased nearly twenty five hundred of those with a cost of one trillion dollars now something unique the reason that i point these two aircraft out is because both of them i know the f. twenty two has been grounded for a while i think yesterday the f. thirty five has been grounded so these are aircraft that are not being used some of the most expensive talk about that as it relates to wasteful spending well what happened is after the events of september eleventh the defense department didn't have to make any hard choices and they did not pay attention to the weapons programs and their own business border defense apartment house one point and by the secretary of defense said you had four hundred billion dollars in cost overruns you spent fifty billion dollars on weapons which you've already canceled so no they haven't been managing the department and you know it's interesting if you go back and look at our history with richard nixon clearly he appointed that get to the

secretary defense and that's the key position david packard from who we're talking thank you whole example to cut the budget and get the weapons systems done and get them done on time and you know who was a great secretary of defense vice president may not be in the same dick cheney of course reported on out with from general motors and they got spending under control . you know a lot of companies that the u.s. pays big bucks to manufacture these weapons these are not competitive in the global market these are not weapons that we're selling to other countries or even equipment that we're selling to other countries why is it that the u.s. makes so many things that we're not able to then make money off of well we do sell them and i think it's important to my we're the world's largest or. export i mean we sell an awful lot of weapons around the world and the defense department like to do that because that reduces the unit cost of the weapons that we buy for example the f. thirty five of the joint strike fighter is going to be poured supposedly by about fourteen you know are there other countries we sell to you have fifteen around the

world but you have a sixteen that's that's really not the not the issue the issue is can we get the weapons systems under control so the american taxpayer has would have to pay more for them just a we are out of time but just a little notes bloomberg did some number crunching and they found that the spending on missile defense over the last twenty seven years including the next year is one hundred fifty billion that's the same as the apollo space program kind of interesting when you put it all in perspective dr lawrence korb a senior fellow with the center for american progress well the white house has announced it will make getting tough on human rights violations around the world a top priority today the president issued a comprehensive review in hopes of quote strengthening the united states' ability to prevent mass atrocities they have on an administration says a wide range of economic diplomatic and other tools will be employed in this effort and also his priorities were outlines and i discussed some of these priorities earlier with jennifer hard barry human rights lawyer and author of the book truth

torture and the american way i asked her how the u.s. can claim to want to protect civilians when you look at places like libya iraq pakistan and yemen. well i think really for all the reasons you just stated can't claim that we are protecting the billion certainly we thought it was great enough to understand under president bush that in fact we were leaders in in trying to openly carry out or is the underdog rating. of interrogation unfortunately we still use blackwater we still use a number of other organizations to use of torture as a standard then we're still using other government and then sources for it we have not closed down. so we in fact have a very serious problem it didn't just start with the september eleventh either it's not something that obama just recently inherited and it's only gone down for a while. all of our friends is not the america who were tortured were able to look

at the techniques in the open trade sort of trap and verify that the techniques had been used and that american advisers abandoned their torture cells teaching. they also were very involved in my husband's torture and their parents in guatemala found out for you provide us documents i know you've talked a lot about this and. your care is moving a little in an hour right there with us ok just so many important things to talk about regarding human rights another thing listed out in these priorities the obama administration says preventing that mass atrocities and genocide is a chord national security interest and of course moral responsibility of responsibility of the united states of america let's talk about this aspect of being a core moral responsibility how does this play out i know you talked about this a little bit in terms of some of these military actions and i guess i want to go when you know who made the united states the moral authority. well we call that

think the moral authority. of the founding fathers i think the great position. that there should be no more. or change just as i'm quoting patrick henry whatever we made that declaration that we never fulfilled in that it became sort of a waste to not that we would make that work for real exactly the opposite the overseas another country person who are barely white upperclass from the world that's not really embarrassing for all of us. to what extent i mean should the obama administration get credit i mean as we know his is the first that actually appointed a person a position in the administration to focus specifically on human rights violations and it's hard to say that you know when compared to his predecessors obama is doing worse i mean shouldn't he get some credit. of course he should and we were very

pleased that the first thing he did was to sign that there would be no more of these kinds of organizations but he's impact to carry through guantanamo still better than black sites are still there are torture still being used as a as a standard operating procedure by us and intelligence forces are still using companies like block. he has tried there is an inherited possible code leaking from the white house with the crash cetera et cetera but he has not built promises on the human rights issues and we are very disappointed with. him that was jennifer hard very author and human rights attorney . going back to some of these economic factors in the country we have numbers of well people a population that stimulates the economy in many ways in order to increase the compilation you need to be born in order for babies to be born you need well you

know but in russia women outnumber men by about ten million leaving many single bachelorettes clambering over the few eligible bachelors but one man thinks he's found a solution for the women throwing themselves at his feet polygamy r.c. correspondent maria for notion that shows us why this one man says the more the better. i need some dream a father of three and husband of three another years ago and dre got married two years own case together and then again. why should i refuse any of them if i love them all really why the country's demographic realities andries site according to the latest census there are ten million more women in russia and the mean a shortage of supply leads to the need for sharing a concept of injuries white say they've made peace with the word i thought he was kidding and they're realizing he wasn't i never expected something like that

happening to me but how they used to you know if you love me you understand we never fight for under a love of the world there is no kind of competition either. and reconsiders himself an ardent a christian yet to his wife who brought of muslims the distribution of duties and conjugal delights within the household also lies in the islamic traditions but he doesn't because that's what i mean them all feel equal it one was needed by his something i will them but when our boys something of the same price for the other to his world the building three houses and board three apartments that's fair isn't it were as extraordinary as it seems and rees example is not that rare in russia many men are in relationships with several women at the time of course and i used to keep their extramarital affairs secret. no one was sleaze me look strange i agree but we consider it better to be a second or third wife rather than think you are the only one and be bitterly mistaken for this cassidy of man is also paid down to their propensity to need it

was described as unhealthy behavior alcoholism and reckless driving is cheap in a way at a country's gene pool let me tell you my story twenty eight years old reasonably smart fairly pretty and very compassionate yet i'm still single by my order of trying to. daughter gets in sleeve might add three year according to a recent poll in russia or rather a single man with thirty iraq doesn't of single women still on the lookout for their dreams. true love becoming statistically challenging no wonder i don't want to ring abroad and from russia. used to go in strong. regional. moscow. all right so let's talk about that there's a lot of different ideas here but russia is not the only place where this is going on apparently here in the united states forty thousand people are involved in polygamous relationships now who knows how many of those are people who actually

know that there are forgiveness relationships so i want to talk about that you know there's a lot of baby boomers in this country there's a drop in the birth rate over the last few years at times as much as four percent so should we consider polygamy as at least one idea to stimulate our population well why not marking her as a national calligraphy advocate and founder of truth or. heather mark let's talk about this we just saw this report in russia and one of the arguments that we saw is there's simply a shortage of men and so the shortage of supply leads to the need for sharing talk about this and talk about some of your arguments that you give in terms of why polygamy should be legal in this country where. we. are actually sure when. we are actually quite a lot. well we. i created

a society there are. males in our society or it isn't right as are the last thirty not really growing up allowing free more. free choice. women to choose. and create or start. living is really not about all of you for between men and women actually. that's been mature and here we. are women. and. all our choices let me know. all right so let me get this straight so you think that allowing polygamy would say to those guys who don't have their act together well you know want it doesn't matter you know if you act like

a jerk someone else the good guys can just take all the women for themselves is that what you're saying here well it doesn't go you then changing the women vote and so we're going to bring the better men you have and young women and none of those manage your. idea in just one day and one woman by. the way from not and of those women to have a good man but if you are our main thinking of free market economics the burden of an i'm going to realize we're go undergo not go for them down all my goodness i've got to hurry up and grow up the next week we're going to be on the national tree or did your response about teaching older men around are women changing but then i'm all right says a very interesting argument there and i'm assuming that you think there should be across the board that women should be able to have multiple husbands as well. we national for you know actually. sending a donor we are living there i mean we are in b. but there is debate all that is always. related. to whether you

are looking which you would. probably entering this. is what i want to. run involved in. how popular is this argument are i do you have a large following i mean a lot of people associate polygamy with mormons i know that there are some people that are muslim that think this is ok as well but what about this as a non-religious argument what about just as a sort of societal argument are you getting followers here were absolutely actually . interviewed a job or christian and not a mormon not a muslim that work for the national things like national interest first thing you want to do because i. think they. were the only solution. and services would be

a limited government solution for the america we were regular in the solution that allows. we're going to government services everybody. so why are we thinking and thinking there's a lot of christians so they say you know what there's adam and eve not adam and eve and sophia and stephanie also what do you say to those people well certainly i mean slurry was written by the government they moses in god's rights so if you want to believe or any other man who wrote the story all right i was sorry we're out of time but that's an interesting point marc hangal national polygamy advocate and founder of true fair dot org costs a lot of interesting things to talk about today that's going to do it for now but for more on the stories we covered go to our.