there i marinate it this is boom bust and here are some of the stories we're tracking for you today first stop the boat will will will it or won't it be up and running by the end of the year that's the question on deck as the ruling faces new obstacles from top the regulators we'll tell you what's going on coming right up and big banks sure are known for their loyalty aren't they especially when it comes to governments that fail them out right right you know we'll tell you about j.p. morgan's already whipped up plan b. for a u.s. debt default and finally lori wallach from public citizen fred watson joins me live

in here to discuss the controversial transpacific partnership agreement say that three times fast you won't want to miss it and it all starts right now. kicking off your boom bust headlines the volcker rule it faces new hurdles today as top regulators argue that the law is too soft on banks now officials from the security and exchange commission along with you see have to see are threatening to further delay its implementation the ruling was slated to go into effect at the end of this year now the newly installed democratic commissioner of the f.c.c. chorused. mine has raised

a number of concerns about the current version of the law signed believes the rules allows banks to sidestep its intended purpose now these new objections are creating a frantic scramble by regulators to complete the rule which is intended to curb risk taking and ban banks term trading on their own gains. now elsewhere when the us was threatening to default on its debts last month big banks wasted no time coming up with a plan b. now it was reported by reuters that quote major u.s. banks set up war rooms spend many millions of dollars on contingency planning and in some cases even prepared to underwrite federal government benefits talk about cutting their losses and running front runners maybe perhaps i don't know now this is all according to a series of interviews with top banking officials the planning for a worst case scenario situation it didn't come cheap either in recent years j.p. morgan alone has spent more than one hundred million dollars on contingency plans

for a potential u.s. budget crisis and all that money may not go to waste with another impending budget crisis likely for february that's when the current temporary budget agreements run out. and finally before the federal reserve winds back its loose monetary policy it seems us corporations are issuing more bonds than ever before in an effort to take advantage of these rock bottom interest rate prices now the only problem with this is that every borrow or borrow or needs to eventually be paid back and in twenty eighteen that could be the year when the borrowing bevvy begins to it home now according to deal logic a record one point one trillion dollars worth of corporate debt is scheduled to mature in twenty eighteen that will also be the third straight year when companies will need to either refinance or pay back more than one trillion in borrowing concerns about the corporate debt with our center are centered around these high yield markets now the debt maturing between twenty sixteen and twenty eighteen is

predominantly made up and of investment grade debt or bonds issued by blue chip companies and with interest rates likely to be higher in twenty eighteen than they are today companies will have to pay up ford well there you have it we'll be tracking these stories and keeping you posted on all the latest. the virtual currency bitcoin took a step forward this week in terms of mainstream acceptance now the senate banking committee took up the topic on a special hearing that was called the present and future impact of virtual currencies i was on the hill covering the hearings tuesday and here's what some of the senators had to say about these virtual currencies. becomes

a standard currency or tool it could radically and dramatically transform. the whole central bank. monetary policy i have been worried about bitcoin so that because it's so complicated it could. be it could facilitate illegal activities or terrorist activities or bitcoin wallets like instant wallet going to replace swiss bank accounts. so many questions well before you make a wish on bitcoin it would be best to get some of the facts straight now earlier i spoke with john young we of the bitcoin foundation and i asked. if these hearings were taking place at all was a step forward for the virtual currency here's what she had to say. it's a great opportunity for the foundation and the members in the streets to educate us

to educate the public to educate the media on what the queen is what the queen is it were you surprised by the reception positive reception that you know basically both the senate and those in the hearing and the media response and how they responded we were a little surprised but at the same time not because what we have found are these government agencies and even the members of congress and their staff they've taken a very reasonable approach to big claim and said this is a new technology it's not going away so how do we find ways for it to fit into existing regulatory structures so you find them fighting progress less than may be reported sometimes yes definitely ok now chairman of the federal reserve ben bernanke he said in a written statement he wasn't at the hearing on monday but he said via recent written statement quote here i let me get this up on screen i think we have. reserve generally it monitors developments and virtual currencies and other payment systems innovations it does not necessarily have authority to directly supervisor

regulate these innovations or the entities that provide them to the market now what does this mean from a legal standpoint in terms of cryptocurrency well i think zachary politico capsize or analyzed the hearing on monday very well he said basically a lot of different agencies have taken a look at the coin have decided that it's nothing that they can't handle and that may already fit into regulatory existing structures and so it's nothing new they just need more resources in order to adapt to the new technology but not necessarily more laws on the books those are already there are plenty of i mean banking financial services one of the most regulated industries in america so what these agencies are finding is laws already exist we just have to understand and apply existing laws to the technology ok now the justice department's acting attorney assistant attorney general is probably in

a bunch of this mess fairly ramana i believe that's correct she said that we all recognize virtual currencies and. want to serve virtual currencies and are not illegal like we were saying before you know this isn't a legal thing as it stands today does this very kind of say enough to keep crypto currencies from further scrutiny by the government it does entrepreneurs' of the coin community can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that you know the agencies members of congress are not out to get them they understand that this is a new technology that holds a lot of promise not just for america but for the global sell for millions of people that are being around the world and they are wanting to let the industry foster and grow. they just want to sit back let's see how it grows and see what innovation comes out of it now there was a massive rally in the price of big client on monday i believe valued sorted went

all the way past seven hundred the first time it has ever done that now do you believe that the rally was a sign of the government that the government would not stand in the way of big coin because the fact that the government came out and pretty much said we're going to let this continue and figure out how to work with it. triggered this incredible rally. i think i mean as a foundation we don't typically comment on the price because the price is not what's important what's important is that the protocol stays open source and that people can build upon that. i think with the surge in price there's actually you know the government is actually going to pay more attention but we're not afraid of that because their approach has been pretty reasonable. now much of the demand for digital currencies that comes from countries where you know they have weak banking sectors they're looking to improve upon this do you think the central bank is that all the u.s. central bank is that all threatened by this reality. so to go back on the first part of that question the search for the demand for big client is not just dictated

by countries. it's brought on by mainstream people by investors. who see this as the next evolution of payments much like how credit cards allowed us to buy things without cash now because it allows us to securely buy things online and transact peer to peer the second part of the question is that. when you asked one of her questions now do you think the central banks here the u.s. central bank is threatened by the fact this could pose a threat this is good for countries with weaker banking systems. i don't think the central bank has anything to worry about the coin is not meant to replace existing currencies it's meant to complement and so some people are going to choose to use the coin other people are going to choose to stay with their credit cards other people are still going to only use cash but now the big point foundation it's reported you guys are considering moving your headquarters. the regulatory concerns

here in the us is there any truth to this so i think it's not the big point foundation but what you're hearing is because companies are moving overseas because of actually the lack of regulation because there isn't aside from the fence and guidance we're still waiting for the other agencies to come out with so this is how big clean fits in our existing structure and so without that especially for example the i r s i r s hasn't provided any guidance on how people with their client account for that during tax season it makes it very hard for companies to plan and so some of them have considered moving overseas do you think of anything on the books. or because we hope so there are a lot of people who will want to know how to comply with the law or the one of us will be able to continue to keep all their crimes to grow now pay taxes on it now also this week it was the first court who. hearing on the silk road case and during those senate hearings on big quiet on monday and tuesday there there was much

concern expressed about the crime being used for illicit purposes almost exclusively not the goods or do you expect to see extensive legislative legislative action and regulation on cryptocurrency as in the near future so again while the agencies and the foundation as well we agree that criminals they will use anything to achieve their deeds to achieve their goals and so while we don't expect greater or more legislation we expect agencies to as we understand the quite see how it fits on their existing structures and. where we're not afraid of what's ahead and that was genuinely england from the big coin foundation coming up later it's big deal and we're going to talk about who is your ideal boss to gender really make a difference what you might be surprised to find out that many people prefer the males to males their way this is and i discuss this in today's big deal it's all

coming up stay tuned. technology innovation. developments around. the future coverage. we need. to with. your party there's an. issue is that no one is there with the gas that you deserve answers from.

this week a new round of trans-pacific partnership t p p talks commenced in salt lake city utah now representatives from twelve countries are meeting to discuss what crude be the world's largest free trade deal however exactly what is being discussed is unknown as the negotiations are being kept secret from the public and even congress now activists have gathered outside the meetings to protest and joining me now to

discuss the t p p is lori wallach director of public citizens global trade watch thank you laurie for being here we're glad to have you now first and foremost i want to start by asking you the trans-pacific partnership agreement i want to make this clear to the audience it's been highly criticized for its lack of transparency and even michael froman u.s. trade representative to the p.p. has even acknowledge these transparency issues now in trying to you laurie why do you think even you know our representative to the the t.p. is acknowledging these issues does what i think happened well in a moment of candor the top trade official admitted the last time they let the public look at the text of one of these agreements they couldn't finish it. to me and more importantly someone like senator elizabeth warren if what's in the agreement is so problematic you have to keep it from the american public you have probably shouldn't sign that agreement now what you we know about the meetings and from the meetings that have gone on this week so this is allegedly going to be the

last big push to make a deal it's twenty nine chapters about ten of them are done the remaining chapters are not mainly about trade they would set up corporate tribunals where foreign companies can attack each government outside their courts and demand cash compensation out of our treasuries not making this up that chapter leaked jack up medicine prices new monopolies and a free trade agreement for big pharma grannie's medicine prices go up limits on internet freedom remember sopa that sneaky online limiting advocacy that parts that no copyright chapter limits on food safety their limits on financial regulation it is like a big corporate trojan horse painted to say free trade. is about to get rolled right through congress but there's what to be done folks can stop it it's not necessary that it be something we have to live with we all work together can you expand on how folks can stop it so i would say there are two big things one of

them we call the dracula strategy something this secretive and rotten does not do well in the sunshine so folks need to make sure they know the details just the basics of what we do on your mind their lives and to make sure their friends do their colleagues do the place to go is expose the t p p w w w expose the t p p it lays out exactly all the ways to undermine you it has a huge provision on offshoring of jobs and it tells you how to get involved specifically which types of multinational corporations are most likely to benefit from this agreement well while the public's out in the press is out there are six hundred official. pretty advisors to the trade negotiations and it reads like the who's who of the big fortune five hundred multinationals so the guys who really love it the big pharmaceutical companies because they could raid medicine prices the big oil and gas companies because we give them new rights to get out from under the kind of laws that both protect consumers and the environment the chronic u.s.

jobs offshore so the big manufacturing companies have a brand name but if shipped all their jobs away this deal has to be nominate that's goal low wage alternative to offshoring jobs compared even to china so they're all thinking we can have all these cheap jobs profit no more u.s. jobs basically is every company that you didn't love before has gotten together to try to achieve what they can't do in congress through the sneaky back door and i want to get to that in a second but first can you talk to me about the currency manipulation and how comes into play in the trans-pacific partnership agreement and we understand it's kind of expanded on a you bet so. theoretically able to trade agreements about trade which this one mainly is and it's about cutting border taxes and there is a chapter that's about that and here's the problem let's say you have a border tax of twenty percent on to the fish we make a deal you want my apples i want you to fish you both say we're taking the border taxes out but they knew devalue the value of your currency so suddenly when i

exchanged my currency to your currency it was so you devalued twenty percent it's like you just put your tariffs back it's not be twenty percent even though you just cut so if a trade agreement doesn't simultaneously make sure you can't cheat by changing the value of the currency anything you bargain for to send more exports to your country you can take away the change in a currency so two hundred thirty house members and sixty senators wrote a letter to president obama it is true that many don't agree on anything because obviously democrats and republicans and they said that c.p.p. has to have currency cheating rules because this country. had a history of cheating with the currency to get more exports to us and not take their imports and so far the administration's ignored the us congress it's interesting number two ppm might change bans on risky financial products including the toxic derivatives that we always hear so much about how does this fit into the

trade agreement how does this play into the tepee so this is the part a lot of people have a hard time believing so again go to expose the t p p dot org the binding provision of the agreement is each signatory country shall ensure the conformity of all of its laws regulations and procedures so what that means is the united states has congress has sat the regulation for the banks stirs in the wall street disaster makers. if but we all have right now the ability congress makes those rules if this agreement were to go into a fact we'd have to conform our domestic law to all these constraints on policy so like here are two really clear ones we know about already from leaks number one you simply can't bear a risky derivative or other financial product if you have taken market commitments it band is considered zero quote we consider

a bag of something risky could be the way to have financial stability for both second thing you can't use were called capital controls or other what are called macro prudential regulations so that would be friends to stop speculators from jacking up your currency and then raiding it causing your help to do basically happened iceland among other countries you're not supposed to be able to use any of the mechanisms that would stop that kind of speculation what the heck is that doing in a trade agreement it's behind the borders it's anti sovereignty and it's not me interest to most of us and that's what they're trying to finish it can you answer what is it going to be on the trade agreement well you know it's basically been and. probably clever branding stunts because in the u.s. there is this peculiar elite consensus free trade good no one thinks about what's in the agreement as a recovering trade attorney i actually read the damn things and the philosophers of free trade like adam smith and david ricardo are rolling in their graves because

it's like one page a real free trade the tariffs and then all the other stuff is again like a trojan horse you put the brand outside what a nice present and then it rolls right into your country and causes disaster now the good news is in the us constitution this agreement can only go into effect if congress says yes so even if the administration signs it does it mean anything all of us need to get real noisy fights going to be in the house of representatives not the side that's if we all call our house members and insist that they keep their constitutional authority over trade because now president obama's trying to get the delegates away. you want to can you quickly expand on what the so fast track is this procedure that was actually cooked up by richard nixon and the idea was to get congress to give away all of its authorities in the us constitution that the founders gave control over trade and the right to write legislation and just ask a president would be allowed to sign an agreement before congress votes write legislation remember from civics class that's not what the president does that's

what congress does and then put that through congress guaranteed vote ninety days no amendments limit to debate a verbal legislative. if there's normal process because congress has to give that away if congress doesn't give it away it does not exist that's where you and i and everyone watching can make the difference because if we make sure our member of the house of representatives simply says i'm not giving away my constitutional authority there is no way this will get through normal process of anyone takes a good look it's not going by current thank you for your time and concisely and clearly explaining what's going on here behind the if you really. hope to have you back that was lori wallach director of the public citizens at global trade watch time now for today's big deal.

rachel crow as she joins me now to charge the balance of the corporate hierarchy heard. about hierarchy now hollywood stereotypes of decontrolling demanding boss doesn't paint such a pretty picture for women check it out. i'm a leo many times you have to scream your name actually it's andy my name is andy andrea that everybody calls me and. i need ten or fifteen skirts from calvin klein ok what kind of skirts to use these boards someone else with your questions and make sure we have people. who are called how are male bosses they don't look much better either check this one out. ok

chad do you treat me any differently because i'm a woman but why are you a little less. personally i find that pretty. pretty good stuff. we're going to turn to rachel if you had to choose miranda priestly or jack donaghy from thirty rock who would you want to be your boss even if i got paid less probably jack donaghy because he's funny and interesting and is in a total ice queen and he said he was blunt but he was he was honest about it yeah i mean under the louie lead better act i would then be able to ask for more money so definitely jack donaghy jack donaghy is your choice now a little more general here if you had to choose a male or female boss. i know we're on television but who would you choose as truthful as you can as you're listening to you i would i know this kind of sounds like cheating but i'm going to have to go with no preference right so long as i was pays me more than jack donaghy would. promise is to you know respect my creative

energy i think i don't care if it's a man or a woman so long as they let me do my job i do think that that's the truth you know if they can let you do your job the way you want it to be done even if they're going to fail and i prefer because you have as i want to get paid a lot i want to give you a lot more to do what i want to do it's just my generation where you know now gender it doesn't matter to you which actually puts you with the forty one percent of americans when it comes to gender issues this is according to a gallup poll however twenty three percent of americans would prefer a female boss and this is a record high and thirty five percent prefer a male boss that's down from sixty six percent you would prefer males in one nine hundred fifty three ritual is this a sign of progress for women in the workplace i mean i guess so the fact that people are prefer ring female bosses than they did before is certainly a sign of progress i mean that means at least twenty three percent of people can envision a woman in a leadership role and actually prefer it that's pretty big though i do think of

real sign of you know gender equality would be not caring whether it's a man or a woman but you know we both did the informal polling around the office and found that a lot of women would actually prefer male bosses and i think that that's what the gallup poll bore out as well is there you go. also striking is why don't we look at the preferences broken down by a group now more than fifty percent of each group has either no preference or prefers a female boss what i mean that's pretty crazy to me it is a lot of maybe there's a lot of women loading other women bosses are feeling you may be feeling competition or something like that to say that i think that it is pretty important in the office place to have a lot of diversity not for tokenism because studies have borne out that it actually creates better more profitable outcomes now check out the two groups with the lowest combined scores there rick. and women know what we're at a time where we can talk how they were going to talk about every bit of us thank you for watching we'll see you tomorrow come back same time same place if you want more youtube dot com slash boom bust r.t.

. i was a new alert animation scripts scare me a little. there is breaking news tonight and we are continuing to follow the breaking news. the alexander family cry tears of so why it great things other than there for you ever read or get a call for a wall around. there's a story many sort of movies playing out in real life. and

you'll enjoy the moment like. i dislike you. pleasure to have you with us here on t.v. today i'm sure.

one of the most celebrated investigative journalist of our time bob woodward of the washington post he's a reporter on every president since nixon and he's the author or co-author of a dozen number one best selling nonfiction book. considering what he's covered over the years it's appropriate that he joins me at the historic a adams hotel overlooking the white house all next politicking. it's always great to go back to washington especially on a lovely day like today and especially to be with an old friend like bob woodward the pulitzer prize winning journalist work for the washington post since one thousand nine hundred seventy one.