international in the very heart of moscow. time same sex in for tom hartman in washington d.c. here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture. today the house approved

legislation that if signed by president obama will put an end to all the flight delays caused by the sequester our elected representatives can find a way to make their trips home for research a bit easier they screw up the other plan to keep toddlers in school we'll talk about this and more in tonight's big picture rumble also why are extroverts favored in american society and are there any cultures across the globe that value introversion more lask author and lecturer susan kane's nights conversations with great minds. right it's friday which means it's time for the big picture rumble joining me tonight are marc harrold libertarian commentator and attorney ben cohen the editor of the daily banter and founder of banter media group and he knew some member of the national advisory council for project twenty one black leadership network and member of move on dot org mark. thanks a lot for coming on side so let's let's start by talking about the sequester we've

seen the sequester we. when the effects of the school sequester take hold in local communities you're seeing at these layoffs you're seeing furloughs we've seen two percent cuts to medicare the force clinics clinics to turn away chemotherapy patients ten percent cuts to unemployment benefits cuts to rental assistance for lowest low income families cuts to wic congress has been fine with all that for the most part but as soon as we start talking about delays at the airports where they fly members of congress more than anybody pretty much every week and of course rich people fly pretty often then congress jumps in to do something about the senate on thursday passed a bill to allocate funds to stop the furloughs of f.a.a. flight controllers and everything to make sure that all the flights were on time i want to play a clip here by study where he's a democratic congressman he voted against the measure in the house say it passed anyway but he voted against it and this is what he said. i want to end these delays for passengers in maryland across the country i want to pose this bill because it fails to address the horrible impact of sequester let me share just

a handful of how the sequester will affect america's education head start seventy thousand children will be kicked out of head start nothing in this bill deals with them. so is this is the best congress can do here you know when it comes to the sequester and this is pretty much implicit. acknowledgement that government spending does have an effect on our economy and all this stuff and they choose to only focus on the part that affects rich people in themselves and this pretty embarrassing mark well it's a bare this is just partisan politics is worse this sequester actions become a political football going back and forth i agree with you the fact that this is where the airports that they use obviously by the nature of their business they have to travel a lot to and from their districts they're going to shut reagan down at one point they left it open specifically because senators and congressmen didn't want to as far as we have to go through this sequester ation process it's a healthy process if it leads to cuts we need to make cuts what they're doing obviously is they've gone after things and i think the president's done this intentionally gone after you know high profile things that people see immediately

summer travel white house tours but this is just become the real distraction from the real issue that led us to sweep crist ration which is that they cannot do their job pass a budget and get our debt down so i think that they're just using this in the public's eye as a political football to blame each other how can members of congress justify passing legislation that will make their flight times a little bit better while people who need chemotherapy are being turned around at clinics because of the sequester you know i wonder how many people would have had to been turned away at those hospitals how many of the seventy thousand t. is being turned away from head start and all the other statistics that congress more you gave i wonder how many people would need to be reduced as far as the administration is concerned of those programs here in washington if you were to focus on that as opposed to the in the. post at the end of the chain the kids the cancer patients and all of that we focus on cutting the fat in the administration bureaucracy which we get for the hit effect this is interesting because the

president himself gave report a few years ago talking about fatima disease in the administration in the bureaucracies but that never was the focus of the sequence where is the limit how often do you have to keep cutting government until there's nothing left what do you have to have we have a. any government remember this is only twenty two billion this year anything less they don't want to lower the sequester cuts quite a lot of government officials and i mean you know it billion at a out of a budget of three point seven trillion it isn't yet not on the face of this it just people's health care you're going to have where was asked that cut two percent of his or her salary when the payroll tax cut was real estate the reality is that we have cut spending faster rate spending faster any time in recent memory at this point we are at a steady levels that are as a percent of g.d.p. that are in comparison with europe right now and all this is going on at a time when we desperately need more government spending in our economy to create jobs what are you basing this on when do we cut spending or you could talk about

could and you could get hurt in dollars and eighty billion dollars this year which is part of the it's a question of spending you know. budget not one that's been one hundred thousand and i say i was going to spend one hundred fifty thousand dollars next year but i actually kind of forty thousand dollars that's not a cut that's an increase and for some reason people characterize that as a cut that's not the case as far as government spending goes i forgot what member of congress it was who are senator yesterday when they passed sister like you know this is good that we came together to pass a measure to make sure that the sequester doesn't have harmful effects on our commerce and travel and things like that connecting it to our economy how we need to pass this because it's harming our economy with these flight delays everyone hates government and so we need it exactly how can it how come how come the consensus in washington can come together and accept that government spending does affect our economy but only when it applies to them when it applies to their flights how come they can't see that government spending affects the economy throughout but you can't use that as a justification to grow government that's the whole point because government isn't

doing its job passing a budget having streamlines in place you can't use as justification ok knows what happens when government goes away doesn't do its job we did need to grow government i disagree with that argument well this is that these are ridiculous expectations and we're see. and so many things because governments doing absolutely way too many things they may feel that it's being caught and they don't like that but these are expectations that have been a risen by having government do so much more so who would you order that you regulate. the aviation industry would you would you have that because i would have ties a huge portion of the aviation industry to totally over regulated and it cost more for the consumers you're seeing these cuts in services but a lot of services the government should never been providing in the first place and then we have to retract and we have to go back to what the government absolutely needs to do you have to cut all these programs that they never should have been doing in the first place and that's what we're seeing these ridiculous expectations of what government is and what it's supposed to do has led us to the point where needless programs get cut some are needless some are well intentioned but we don't need them or they're not constitutionally authorized and everybody panics the

bottom line is the government does way too much and in doing that it doesn't do anything well i think maybe just a bit of perspective is needed when we're talking about this issue because when we're the united states is a compared to every other industrialized nation on the planet along with it what it will take when it comes to government spending on things like health care and things like infrastructure you know at the end of the spectrum in terms of how do you spend it's how the military spend you but you don't have much room on health care you know it's remote from infrastructure any more it's a military that a lot of those other countries rely on them for telling them it all on our behalf i think we can all go agreement that the government can find places to cut and find ways to cut nobody's standing in the way of that i think the problem is true that all that's being but no they're not all that's being put on the table right now are cuts to programs that affect working people and yet nothing is being put on the table to ask wealthy people to make in the very sacrifice of the small a sacrifice we're asking well to be able to make the sequester moses has made a little bit longer for their values and they were first none of this has to do with cutting spending in the future it all has to do with cutting the balance in

the surrounding we're not cutting anything we're just not going to spend as much next year that's what all these cuts are about this another about really cutting government they're about we're not going to expand government as much in the next ten years that's what you're calling a cut it will be also and we also have more population of people growing which we've got to go he's crazy and he will do it i always. relationship you're at risk of all this nonsense but let's move on here earlier this week show cars are new if was given his miranda rights and this has upset some conservatives and i've heard some democrats question whether or not it was a good decision to give him his miranda rights he were there was a delay and he was arrested friday night over the weekend he was questioned for sixteen hours before he was given his miranda rights here's what mike rogers he's the chairman of the permit house permit intelligence committee said about it. when you're talking about weapons of mass destruction this is as serious as it gets and we better err on the side of public safety but to have the court affirmatively push their way in is a i think it's wrong and b we should have given the f.b.i.

the time that they needed given the circumstances they infusing its formal god awful policy and dangerous to the greater community and we have got to get to the bottom of this and we've got to fix it right now so we're talking about an american citizen here who is it ever too soon to give someone their miranda rights and they're being charged with a crime salute the ministration had forty eight hours without it before it had to issue miranda rights in terms of public and parts of the public safety clause of the public safety terms if you will so if you look at it from that perspective they question for sixteen hours but let me ask you look let me ask you a question. if you know that this person has shown an ability to kill people and use weapons of mass destruction and own top of that this person has shown that you know the weapons that he had you know get it from the c.v.s. down the street so how is it that you believe when he say is that he has backing from someone else this critical intelligence that you need if he's not telling the

truth or that there are other weapons that doesn't fall into ok so there's a narrow definition of this public safety exactly as there is to make sure there isn't current threat under way as if i guess it was in one thousand nine hundred four when they created when they asked the guy where the one was when they were arresting him right before they read him his miranda rights and so i can understand . i'm in being like you know is there a gun in the city where is or is there a bomb somewhere in the city but didn't question him for hours after that about intelligence of other terrorist groups or what other information he might know like that that's definitely pushing the line on what this exception supposed to be my question is is terrorism which kills fewer people in america than have furniture falling on people's heads more people were just killed in west texas in a explosion due to corporate negligence is terrorism worth it to be shredding or rather constitutional rights like a right to understand what our rights are going to arrest if you're under attack from another entity the answer is yes but it is a u.s. citizen but words but we don't know his of the foreign organizations that's the

hope when it's not you you have a presumption of innocence and we need to prove otherwise in a cool through a base that a basic tenet of american workers that the public safety clause in the faith is that safety trumps that we can not and back to your zero point talking about you know it's a double digit that you think is a dangerous route to go down there when you stop because that if you may have government that power. if we can we start arresting gang members in chicago and then not mirandizing them and then questioning them about the intricacies of the gangs in chicago and think that that's ok and how is that any different well if you do that that evidence is going to be suppressed in the explosion or oh i mean to be thrown out because the way that was gathered thing here is we can't confuse the fact that we did the miranda rights don't give you a right constitution gives your right american satirist citizen has a right not to incriminate themselves the miranda warnings were originally a prophylactic measure they were something that we did to try to ensure the voluntariness of statements and the corals exception or that the public safety exception is very narrow but you have to remember one of the things i don't think coming out a lot is in two thousand the supreme court in

a surprising chief justice rehnquist and scalia dissented vigorously as you can imagine but it was one of those decisions they actually took the miranda warnings from being a measure to ensure a right to a constitutional rule and you can't that doesn't give you a right you have to mirandize someone if you're past the public safety the immediate threat and you're going to try to use the information against them and just as you see terrorism again being used as an extremist as they are but we're out of time we're move on to the next topic rhetoric coming up next. wealthy british style. that's not on the tireless. markets why not come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with max cause or for a no holds barred look at the global financial heinz kind of report.

which. gave its. feet. deep. sixed.

welcome back joining me for tonight's big picture rumbalara marc harrold ben cohen and here we knew some welcome back let's talk about what's going on in bangladesh this week we had a garment factory collapse workers had notice crocs the day before the collapse of the building they were all told they have to get back to work or else they could be talking about they went back to work in the building collapsed more than three hundred people are killed there still people trapped in their homes off the hills

in november there was a fire lost last year in november there was a fire that killed two hundred twelve people in a bangladesh garment factory and this also comes after. a lot of the stores here in the united states like wal-mart were approached about coming together putting in some money in and raising the safety standards of a lot of these factories that they're using that they're going through suppliers and having clothes made for them and they basically all rejected saying they could afford of course wal-mart is making billions in profits here at the same time do american companies like wal-mart that contract with suppliers in bangladesh and use these factories have a responsibility to make sure that hundreds of people aren't being killed in the same factories mark while there's a moral responsibility in the way that you do work as far as whether they should i mean that is the question whether a company should look to their subcontractors of the people that they buy from and try to have fair trade these type of course yes there is shouldn't be a doorstop ok well when they did have these sort of tragedies here what is the

recourse the recourse is in the free market they have the resort recourse is is a p.r. thing those companies will or will not be favored by the consumers i guess the question you're really asking is should the american government put in rules against companies that there are forced against foreign countries indirectly where they're sort of the super legislature i see that as a type of economic economic ethnocentricity we're going to save everybody else now i don't think we should do that there are more ways to conduct ever good corporate citizenship but i. i think there's a government action here to force our rules on other countries i think this is a story. i'm surrounded by because. i would think this points to the kind of going to depravity of free market cap to the some of the costs where you can have written this tragedy of this and for corporations to still say no video problems we're not going to regulate if you have a system is built on profit course at the expense of human life really at the expense of what you're saying is at the expense of human life and it doesn't really

matter you may give them some of it and hope that consumers are not going to go boy crazy you know whoever it is i mean it's not. like an insane system with you we're also talking about stuff happening halfway across the planet i mean most american citizens are completely unaware i wonder if if if these factories are right across the border maybe in mexico when we're seeing these tragedies happen all the time just across the border maybe people care so much but global better to globalism is that things are so far away that people don't even have any understanding of i couldn't disagree more in this world that we live in now where. me that hit the indonesia if you think about a mess standpoint things happen instantaneously people not to know about it to social media this is a great time in which the consumer that we talked about before the consumer should be have some accountability for what he or she is by because the consumer has the highest level of intelligence that we've ever seen the consumer have through facebook through twitter to all these mechanism. what about this other thing i've

seen exists to distract from the reality of what i put i would look at where nike trainers at the moment sneakers so you know it's a lot on your hands eyes blood on one hand the other i don't want to know how these things were i'm sure they it was a horrendous process but i saw him in the store and i thought it pretty cool and i'm going to representative snow for you and act on your behalf if you want to read about this what it was made it has a series of standards. workers' rights where if i'm going to buy sneakers i leased on some break it is the end of the week your own decision you want government to make that same as your proxy to look around the world and see what you shouldn't. be what influences you i would not have this how about this rather than creating safety standards or having the u.s. government for safety standards on bangladesh or whatever what if we stop incentivizing companies here in the united states to move their their manufacturing overseas to these should we factory said that it would lower the corporate tax and would have cut off the tax breaks for people who ship jobs overseas something

that's been proposed in congress here but something that's being were filibustered by conservatives in the senate are infallible and fair tax flat tax anyway the shamy tax breaks for anything if we should just pay their taxes about it and about standards in the state would you agree that it needs to be some basic worker rights new york state so the factories don't burn down and kill hundreds that would like that would not be acceptable in america as forced regulation by the government the free market will take care of that by the worker when you die and i don't problems with collective bargaining and how many so many will have to die before it was a failure mark it's going to take care of it how many people have to do that so my has to be held accountable the consumer has more knowledge now that he or she has a right that's what i'm for the advertising exists as a distract people from that but that's the intent is to load the billion dollar industry but designed to fool you into buying stuff that is being created in these kind of inhumane conditions and the government's going to save you from that mind control by putting in their own regulations. and saying what i'm saying is that they were the reality of it is that people have time i don't know enough about that something to say to you i say if you don't trust people what's right not you know

there really isn't any of the free market here assumes that there's this awful smart consumer out there making decisions on behalf of that's not true don't like there's only one of us they don't want to let it work really only freedom itself but you. can. throw off the right here we don't want to. look at stark's new regulations here's some more regulations we need mark on wednesday senator barbara boxer and cagr. introduced legislation called the genetically engineered food rights no act basically requiring that if force companies to label genetically engineered foods this is something that is very popular ninety percent of people of course that doesn't matter nowadays if there's something supported by ninety percent of people are pretty much it's the kiss of death in congress but here's something else don't we have a right to know what we're eating what's wrong with this goes come on freedom may we have a right to know we're eating we can go seek it out these companies if they say what we can only go to the companies that are willing to go if there's a company that said tells you what you're into and coming that doesn't the people

who want to know this will gravitate towards that company i mean there's not going to be all these consumers out there saying i want to know what i'm eating all these companies are like we're not going to tell you if it becomes a fiscal reality that they need to tell their consumers to make their product more marketable they will target i'm sure doesn't there's a hell of a lot of find out what i'm eating i don't i believe that sort of the emotions that are you whether it's growing our food processing our food our stuff you know delivering our food stocking our food on grocery shelves the market is basically four or five big companies you know maybe a tiny handful small ones and there's going to be no major all gospelly in them in the food industry here so we're talking about competition which companies are going to put labeling on we're really talking about five or six companies there so much of a choice here is the question what problem we try to solve you know because we already have regulations in place that is to say when a food is harmful when the nutrition content of a certain food is changed we have labeling this already in place to do this. genetically modified food which you want to know just to be

a label that says this is genetically this is genetically modified would you like to know that but what does that mean what does that mean if i were are you going to raise your great in a laboratory it means that it's a type of food that's only been eaten recently that wasn't even by our ancestors for the last thousands of years this is something that's very in the science is still very new on it in the sciences coming out and tests are coming out showing that this g.m.o. could actually have harmful effects and we still haven't had the long spectrum. to study this because we're really the first generation this being we've raised on this right i mean actually never seen you've never seen dress that part they owe to the d.n.a. you've gone to solicit and then that on us was took over the audience but we don't know who that you know the point of the dressing part was to warn us about this kind of stuff but there's a danger in genetically altering species we don't really understand how that's going to affect the food chain how it's going to ecosystems we don't really know but also how it effects bodies what we ingest this stuff look i don't know i'm not a scientist i don't know i would just like to know whether it's just

a modified or not but i think that's a legitimate role for government to comment and that is that we don't understand what the ramifications are but you can someone have a right to know that's the point not i don't want to go the grocery store and buy food that that doesn't come from j. most don't have a right to be informed consumer and look to the grocery store and be able to sniff yes and this will become something that the marketplace demands that these companies will put it out there because if they had they'll be five compensated because what we've already put in one of them will do it to satisfy the market that says i want to know what's in it a lot of people they will care about it's going to be on the i hear talk to the i was going through a cost benefit analysis and realized that if they spent a few million dollars in advertising they can distract people enough so they went ahead advertising they were just going to see what the average about the tribes of the time of my website i mean he said as long as this thing will be five thousand words long and i know it's one of the six saying my topic here there's a hearing in the house government reform committee is national security subcommittee on the d.h.s.s. department homeland security hoarding ammunition and what could they possibly be

using all this ammunition for. i want to play a clip here this was congressman john tierney of massachusetts criticizing why this hearing is even being held in the first place. to the extent that we here was the chairman to clarify the procurement policy to determine whether or not they're wasteful with not this been some abuse of the contracting policy that's fine to the extent that we're responding to conspiracy theories or whatever i think we're really wasting everybody's time. when the course reported. when you're buying like seven hundred fifty million rounds of ammunition which prompted conspiracy nuts to say up government must be planning a seven year war on us they're going to put us into these fema concentration camps and it goes to the loop through the echo chamber whether it's alex jones or glenn beck or whoever and then it somehow ends up in a house hearing our taxpayer dollars our elected officials focusing time on like this and it seems to me that this is really only coming from the right ok so let me have to take this one here's the problem with the street with

a straw man argument you take the most ridiculous argument but it's just an furious it's agenda twenty one it's ok all of these things thousands if within the say that is ok to buy seven hundred fifty million us actions i won't point six billion in four years when i was doing research on this to say that you need that many rounds of ammunition at a time when trying to cut everything else previously we talked about secret station cuts and people that are cancer patients out of hospitals but yet you've got d.h. led by fifty sixty seventy years worth of main mission in advance i agree there's a problem with how much ammunition we're buying but i think they're going to use it to declare some more and by the way maybe we wouldn't be buying this much ammunition if conservatives and you know a lot of democrats were constantly saying that we need to be scared to death of terrorism all the time that we need to train all these counterterrorism forces and with. bush was in. putting forward similar proposals when bush was about it i don't think so the fact is there's a left wing black on the white house so that's why this is it's

a complete. it's so ridiculous that off the conspiracy arguments you throw them on throw them out but yet again i'll say it again you still haven't justified seven hundred fifty million rounds were to be ammunition to reminded us just what this is as a political strategy let's talk about what the. market is for it let's try to bring you in on this i think as a former police officer do they need do is the evolution. here's what i'll say about this you know this is one of the things i tried to do my research on this too and i couldn't get anywhere near the same number in any story this i agree with you has become sort of a a runaway information thing that caught momentum and i want to i think you always love your country inferior government i do believe that on this particular story i know you research and i research i couldn't find two stories that actually gave me a real idea of what's going on what the purchase is what the amounts are i don't know i think this is a pretty media driven thing i don't know if it's is as much about what ben says it is but it's all those things it just cut its own life and i will say i don't work out what happens as love america fear the government i fear the corporations mark

we're all going to be afraid of going on banks coming up you've been told your whole life that confidence in conversation are the keys to success but what if the secret to happiness was just to sit down and shut up i've next time we'll talk to author and writer susan tate about the power of introverts in tonight's conversations with great minds after the. download the official application to choose your language stream quality and enjoy your favorite. if you're away from your television just doesn't bassa now with your

mobile device you can watch on t.v. anytime anywhere. more news today violence has once again flared up. these are the images seeing from the streets of canada. trying to corporations rule the day.

the international landlords in the very heart of moscow. are tides conversations of great minds i'm joined by susan kane susan is an author like sure and former wall street corporate attorney she graduated undergrad from princeton university received her j.d. from.