tonight on our t.v. in a fairy tale world of heroes steal from the rich and give to the poor in the real world taxes on the middle class are up and that cash is steadily flowing into the pockets of those who don't need it sure would force the concrete jungle of wall street is it time for americans to take a page out of robin hood's playbook. plus a new made for t.v. drama shines a spotlight on all behind the scenes chaos of a typical newsroom rather the type of newsroom viewers wish existed we'll tell you why this depiction of american journalism at its finest is a far cry from reality. and for most of us comparing notes on our sexual experiences with our current partner can be awkward to say the least or some things we'd rather they not know for sure withholding certain information be considered

a crime or question more. it's wednesday june twenty seventh seven pm in washington d.c. and abby martin and you're watching our team steal from the rich give to the poor hey it worked for robin hood because i work for the people of this country well it's not quite the same thing as what robin hood did it's actually a proposed tax on wall street transactions an idea growing in popularity since the inception of the occupy wall street movement the best way to symbolize this is a nominee who we enjoy in washington some good stuff and what we want to do with. you is what some. would put a man. rubbing up people this particular point. well other than drying hats on dollar bills how does this tax actually work and if something like that really the potential to pass with all the bipartisanship squabbling on the hill to discuss

more about the robin hood tax and the movement in favor of it i was joined by richard wolffe author of occupy the economy challenging capitalism i think this is a serious movement it is quite a few years old it was basically invented by a nobel prize american economist professor james told in of yale university who was my teacher when i was getting my ph d. in economics and the idea is simple just like we have a sales tax when you buy a candy bar or a bar of soda or a cigarette tax or a gas tax it's long past due that we have the same kind of tax on the financial transactions made by hedge funds and stock brokerage is and big banks across the world it's gaining traction in europe leaders in europe have already come out in favor of it the united states is behind the curve it would it be oh very good way to tax those who have done best over the last thirty years who had

a lot to do with bringing us with the financial crisis who've escaped this tax for a long time and who now ought to be made to pay what is their fair share anyway richard explain a little bit more in detail about exactly how it would work and the end mounted percentage of you know how much these would be tax it's very small but i think people kind of their eyes glaze over when they hear anything about stocks and bonds and derivatives and trading on wall street and just to explain and shed some light on exactly how it work. it's very simple the percentage is minute point three percent is one popular proposal and the reason it can be so terribly tiny is because there are literally millions and millions of these transactions mostly made by computers on a dozen stock markets around the world every day so all that would happen is a tiny tiny tax on each of those transactions very easy to impose the tax very

easy to keep track very easy to collect and it's a way of making the financial sector the sector that has grown the biggest of the united states' economy over the last forty years begin to pay its fair share for the immense transactions and immense profits it gets simply put it's a convenient easy quick way to make the financing years in this country finally begin to pay at the scale that the rest of us have been paying for decades how we make sure that the government allocates these funds that it collects through these transactions back toward people who need it. that's a whole nother problem that probably exists with every revenue with every tax whether it be a tax on your luxuries or a tax on your income or a tax on your property the one thing though that we know is that the government is using scarcity of revenue to justify cutting social security cutting government

jobs covering cutting government programs just as people need them the most in a crisis so here's a way to go to those who have the most who's done the best and ask them finally to pay the kinds of shares that they were made to pay in the one nine hundred thirty s. and forty's the last time we had this crisis they've gotten away with it to this boy here's a tax that can get it from those most able to pay so they finally do something to help us get out of a crisis they had more than anyone else to do with bringing upon us. richard i think that a lot of people when they hear more taxes they kind of. get startled and they say no that can't be the answer more taxes on the people and i will you know somehow affect the lower tier of the people in this country i mean you'd be hell bent to find a tax that doesn't have loopholes or exemptions of the people at the top i mean will banks be exempt from this are there any exemptions as as we see this. well there's

no question that the first line of defense of the financial community is to denounce this as a tax precisely to get people who are overtaxed already to turn away from this and not studied enough to realize that it's a tax that initially falls only on the richest institutions and people in the country but you're quite right like with every tax if we get forward in it if we move forward the way the europeans are then their plan b. will be to make loopholes and adjustments and if they can't win that then plan c. would be to shift the burden of the tax on to others but all of those things are things they will try to do and we will even have to see them trying if we are levy to tax in the first place so it's a sequence you'll struggle to get the tax and then struggle to make sure they don't pass it on to everybody else if we don't do that if we don't do that consider the

alternative more deficits for the government more shortages of revenue more cutting of the benefits for people cutting of the social security cutting of the medicare so that we're not talking about having a tax or not we're talking about having a tax on the rich or having the mass of people suffer even more in these future years than these first five years of crisis have already meant for us and in the occupy wall street movement has really helped shine a light on these people at the top and wall street in general do you think that we really have a chance of passing this. yes and let me give you an example not only did occupy wall street put the one percent versus ninety nine percent in the forefront of our national discussion and that's something we told the occupy wall street movement no matter what happens going forward for having contributed to changing the conversation in this country but here's an example the current issue of time

magazine one of the largest circulating magazines in the country is all about their lead story their cover story about the end of the american dream about the conditions which make it impossible for people to work hard and do better and one of the reasons are the unemployment the government cutbacks of services and supports the only way to reverse that is to find revenue for the government that doesn't hit average people that goes after those most able to pay who will not suffer significantly this transactions tax that is being talked about that you are having a good program about is precisely one way to do that richard i think the robin hood tax though also throws people off i mean how can we get the conservatives and the wealthy in this country to back something that's basically telling in theirs and they're stealing i mean you know that's a bad name for the tax or do you that's going to affect terrible. so i mean how can his main support it. well you know in europe it's called the transaction tax or

also it's called the told in tax after professor told and who initiated it to call it robin hood is to suggest the notion that it stealing but it isn't stealing it's taxation and the only mystery is why we haven't taxed transactions all along by the way in american history if you go back we have had transaction taxes this is not a new tax this is a tax that was taken off the financial sector and all that is really being asked is to put it back on now that we need it more than ever richard i'm i'm i have the time magazine that you spoke of right here is the history of the american dream is it still real sad that we have to ask ourselves is that even still capable of achieving in this country but to somehow prichard talk a little bit about how this is already passed how it's already been supported across the new and it's not really that controversial in the countries that are. in

it over there. even the most stalwart austerity focused government that of angela merkel in germany mrs merkel has had to because of the pressure of the socialist party of the link of party in germany she and the unions she has had to embrace this transactions tax so the old american business communities argument don't do it because then transactions won't be done in new york the way they always have been they'll be sent to europe that's simply not true because the europe the europeans are going to make that tax. and if the united states did it they'd make it immediately so that nobody would have any incentive to leave none of those scare stories would be true and i think you would see that this would be a very good first step really organizing that tax structure so it goes after the people who used to have to pay a lot more who got out of it and who we now need because we're in

a crisis to come back and pull some form the way they should have been all along anyway thank you so much richard for coming on and giving your perspective about this richard wolffe author of occupy the economy challenging capitalism with over half of americans income taxes being spent on the military industrial complex one would think that the money is being put to good use and sixteen's tanks helicopters drones and armor well america certainly has the biggest and baddest killing equipment in the world but have you ever wondered what happens to all the military's toys once the troops get pulled out of the military zones well you won't have to wonder much longer you'll see it for yourself because many of the u.s. military as weapons are heading straight to local police forces it's called the ten thirty three program and gave half a billion dollars worth of military gear to police forces in two thousand and eleven alone we see it already happening in rural towns across america.

we've all seen these little handheld tasers cops use well a.p.t is seriously stepping up the taser firepower this is why i used the police chief. says like surrounding police departments the school district located in the high illegal trafficking area is also acquiring much needed military equipment worth three hundred eighty thousand dollars they are here to train members of the three hundred fifty fourth m.p. company here in st louis on how to drive these rigs and military drivers if you will on the highways and on city streets. this is just beginning take a look at this info graphic of the evolution of riot cops in the last couple decades it's obvious that the police are becoming increasingly militarized in this country and now they're being armed with actual military weaponry what's more this week the u.s. department of justice gave seven hundred fifty thousand dollars to the city of chula vista california to help their police force higher military veterans angeles

receive six point four million dollars for doing the same thing and certainly these are the only instances where this has happened that are ins are increasingly turning into police officers so not only are boys in blue arm of the gills they're also trained to be military machines in the end all of this begs the question what exactly is the police force preparing for and who are they trying to control with all this gear. apparently some of the entertainment industry see what journalism used to be and how drastically it's changed h.b.o.'s new show newsroom cuts through the world of manufacturing journalism featuring character reporters that have a desire to tell it like it really is our teams on the stasi a church going to has the scoop. good evening i'm on that cowboy this is newsnight slap in the face of mainstream american journalism i'm a leader in an industry that piped up terror scares and failed to report on tectonic shifts in our country speaking truth to power when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world i don't know what you're talking about the fourth

branch of power is finally back hitting america's screens a new t.v. show called the newsroom not in reality a lot of countries do things better than the united states but we can even discuss jotted down as unpaid. what journalism should really be about in the old days we did as well you know. we just decided the passion to question the status quo and the fear mongering of real broadcasts not all muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are muslim we were attacked by muslims we were attacked by sociopaths examples of absurdity taken to an extreme on t.v. news but what city what tell me is in danger of falling under cirilo as viewership on real mainstream media plummets the show adds insult to injury by portraying common news show behavior threatening the fabric of society no no no guarantee. amid critical reviews a t.v. show about the news more honest than real news show business is doing

a better job than the news this and presenting news it's a complete flip around a lot of reporters and producers news anchors who look at this show should people watching it should be thinking it got us here what are they if you try and do it in the purest sense what your character does in this show it doesn't right when a fictional anchor fights for substance on the news to him or not her story obviously breast cancer over women that the baby was raised that he's resisted by the system. in real american mainstream newsrooms this street forwardness is a myth nobody really likes to bite the hand that feeds that i feel like you know us right here on the nominees instead infotainment is king there's a deliberate effort here you know basically the say truth be damned we have to do we have to do to get audience it seems to take years before a truth catches up with news until then there's no room for real news in us

newsrooms you've got way too much crap focused on just as valid good stuff like reality television and what happened on jersey shore one taking away from good. the news in the mainstream media today focuses on pitch and spin not angering corporate owners or challenging the system uncomfortable issues opinions deemed politically incorrect or the questioning of long held beliefs about america at cvs are best left to t.v. drama and face it you're going to. new york. now as the consolidated corporate media model fails and coverage alternative media and citizen journalism are on the rise as more voices perspectives and biases enter the global reporting spectrum online it becomes harder to find the facts so where does that leave the for the state and what's to be for the future of journalism earlier christopher chambers journalism professor at georgetown university joined me i asked him what his

opinion was on the biggest obstacles journalism may be facing today take a listen. well you know they voile it down an allegorical form in the newsroom i mean it's corporate control five companies owning about ninety six percent. of the mainstream media in this country but there's also. there was a problem before that and that was not being able to really focus on what their role was in society yes expose truth and justice but everybody's got a different definition of what that is you ask fifty different people to get fifteen different answers so you have that moving as technology starts to move in the twentieth century early twentieth century then the corporate model gets a hold in the eighty's and that blows everything to hell i mean i've just given it to you in a nutshell right there like will mcavoy. is a good show how have you seen journalism change from when you were younger till now

well there is the fragmentation because of the technology and you know they don't really deal with that as much on the show it's really about cable news but it but let me just focus on that you have the rise with ted turner of the twenty four hour news cycle you have to fill it with something and when you mix it with the corporate culture of dumbing things down to get you know a lowest marginal cost the biggest bang for the buck and that big bang usually is through candy you know brain candy of some sort anything that's going to make people crazy either through affecting their rep till. brain in their medulla or given them something sweet to crave for and that's what news especially twenty four hour cable news has boiled into but then you have this other universe out there alternative news sources many different platforms but even there you have a problem where things are fragmented you can be in your own tribe you can wall yourself off and the craziness starts to echo you know t.v.

news down here and in the ditch and then you have this other universe that's about fifty percent crap and lunacy oh i think that's where people get really and they shut themselves off from news entirely bright either have this old dinosaur media model that totally is detached from what they were about or they have they're inundated with information just everywhere and i don't know where to find the facts i mean where do you suggest that people get their news or really search for things online and well i mean it would have to be various sources and you have to be it starts really starts young it starts before i get kids at georgetown i mean empathy critical thinking things like that starts start when you're a kid and you have to carry that through because by the time you're an adult with the fragmentation the corporate ownership the agendas either government or corporate it's going to pull you in about a dozen different different directions and that's what they have on the show they don't really go into multimedia stuff too much but i mean it's hard for the media

itself to look at itself even even in a fictionalized account it was christopher chambers journalism professor at georgetown university. well today is national hiv testing day in america that's pretty rare that you find people openly discussing s.t.d. or freely talking about their hiv diagnosis and the people that tell others are on a need to know basis but what if someone doesn't feel like there is a need to know basis someone has a should they be forced to tell their partner and if they don't know if they're crying on many states it is forty five states have already laws. against hiv positive people not disclosing their status during sex prostitution needle exchanges or making donations of fluid some who break the law or sense to twenty five years in prison so is this an issue up to the state to decide or should the stay among the morality of the citizenry to discuss more i was joined earlier by catherine hansen's director and founder of center for hiv policy i first asked her

if it should be a crime for an hiv carrier to not warn their partner here's your response. no and i think your initial point that nobody talks about as t.r. used is a critical one. i'm not the first person to say this but lots of people like to have sex but don't seem to like to talk about it and singling out each i big a as the only condition which must be reported to a partner assuming you even know and face criminal penalties if you don't really does it make any sense from a public health perspective which is why all of these laws come from politicians they really don't come from public health departments. sure i mean something like h.p.v. which causes cervical cancer even if things are on caramel that you have for life herpes genital warts things like that i mean when you look at something like age i mean it's not a death sentence anymore so why should that be criminalized when these other

elements are not elements of it as t.d.'s aren't well that is that's the key question happy i think one of the reasons these laws are still on the books and it's important for folks to know that they were primarily adopted back in the 1980's when hiv was viewed as a terminal disease something that hasn't been the case since drug therapies evolved more than fifteen years ago but you know most of these laws have been on the books since before nine hundred ninety and unfortunately a lot of our attitudes about each eye they remain back in the one nine hundred eighty s. thinking about it as a fatal disease and also. also understanding about how each ip is transmitted and how easily it is transmitted or not transmitted it also unfortunately states back in the one nine hundred eighty six well so they're pretty

antiquated laws considering the progress of technology and help people dying. no so they j.v. talk a little bit about how this is actually regulated i know that i read a case about prosecutions happening when condoms were used an i.v. wasn't transmitted i mean how did that happen yeah absolutely and were involved in in an appeal of a case of a man in iowa who after a one night sexual encounter that was consensual in which he used a condom. in same for sex which hopefully i can say this on t.v. or else acts which poses very little risk of transmission at least of a tribe in a but used protection was on the fact if there be so the transmission mission breast was pretty much as close to zero as you can have i mean scientists will never say zero without practically anything and after his partner discovered

that our our client might be a child be positive he went to the police the iowa man was arrested he was sentenced to twenty five years in prison and although the sentenced last reconsidering reconsidered excuse me and he's currently on. on extended court supervision he also is required to register as a sex offender which needless to say has permanent lifelong consequences on your social interactions and your employment opportunities and this is a case in which transmission didn't occur but even in cases where there is transmission people are being punished with sentences that in in many instances if not post instances far outstrip the kind of penalty should face if you get in your car and run somebody over and kill them so their reaction from beginning to end is

far from rational and it really is not rational or or sensible from a personal health perspective to. rely on what somebody tells you or what you think you can tell or know about their reach ivy status when making decisions about your sexual health and you pointed out all the excellent reasons why that's not a good idea h.p. pay other s.t.i. hiv is just one of them and probably not the last of serious viruses that can be sexually transmitted that will encounter in our lifetimes very interesting case indeed catherine was that this having happened in one of the states that it's actually against the law if you bite or spit on someone if you have your diagnose they or is this in another state well it's no that was in iowa where the crime is actually to act with the intention to expose somebody to your body fluids in a way that can transfer transmitted h.i.b.

so it doesn't specifically. you know in the reference there is to intimate contact but there are cases even without hiv specific statutes new york is a sad example for example of such a state where people have been prosecuted under from will salt. statutes for speeding and biting. but there are issues suggest a number of states that do have statutes that explicitly make spending and biting well hiv positive a felony which is interesting because it's never been proven that actually transmits the disease like you're saying it's based on this antiquated base of knowledge that doesn't even apply to what is really happening no there is no moderately informed person that believes hiv can be transmitted by spitting or throwing up on someone and yet we have a prosecutor here in

a county in new york who is that how we want to pursue a law that will do precisely that because a case that he prosecuted them that put someone behind bars for many years for exactly that was reversed on appeal on the reason according to new york's high court that to base criminal liability on the health status of an individual is is dangerous not only because it's not consistent with regular criminal law but dangerous from basic human rights principles catherine how do we move past this this. timid nature of people you know you said yourself we love to have sex and we don't we're very scared to talk about the stark reality that exists in the world today that as cities are very real and they're transmitted all the time how do we get we move past this and really open

a dialogue well i mean shows like this are are certainly an important way of communicating to a lot of people the realities of what sexual health involves and how to protect yourself and the kind of. really harmful. dangerous. you know. so uninformed were misinformed shall seize that are being pursued on the books be have by politicians essentially that should know better but joan i think there are other things that there are a variety of things that can happen we've been calling for the centers for disease control and prevention which is the federal agency church with overseeing the public's health to really be more aggressive in campaign honest and open discussion about sex and sex. catherine and thank you so much for coming on and we really appreciate your time and for explain this issue that was

a hot iron hansen's executive director and founder of the center for hiv law and policy and that does it for now for more on the stories we covered go to youtube dot com slash r t america don't forget to click comment and for our videos to your friends for the very latest information on all the stories we covered today and a few that we didn't have time to get to check out our web site or to dot com slash usa also follow me on twitter at abby martin capital account is up next on our team and i'll be right back here at the top of the hour. r t is the state run english speaking russian channel it's kind of like al-jazeera. russia today has an extremely confrontational stance when it comes to us.