you join the movement then walk a little bit take. your friend post a photo from a vacation you can't afford. to different. the boss repeats the same old joke of course you like. your ex-girlfriend still tends to rejection poetry keep calm ignore it. we post only what really matters at r.t. to your facebook news feed. i've read that. site. and big corporation kind of can. do and the bank is all that all about money and i'm a family pick for a politician write the laws and. coming up.

here just to plug pratt today's society. that. hello there i'm marinated this is boom bust and these are some of the stories that we're tracking for you today. first up bryan caplan a professor of economics at george mason university is talking to us about kids pacifically went to have them how many and the effect that they had on one professional life not good i would assume but we'll find out he's got some pretty provocative thoughts on the subject as a whole and you definitely don't want to miss my interview with him and then we're talking to george sells and about three's banking now sullivan says that the best way to create stability in a banking system is to deregulate it and i counter intuitive but by the way yesterday and in today's big deal i'm joined by our chief political correspondent mr sam sachs sam is sitting down with me and i have to discuss the rise of these

children's separate servant economists who don't want to miss a moment when it all starts right now. with. our lead story today never put something in e-mail that you wouldn't want the whole wide world to read i'm talking to you morgan stanley now the mudslinging between allergen and valley and pharmaceutical got more intense this week but it was actually backers of morgan stanley who wound up in the crosshairs true story now allergan released in mails sent by a senior morgan stanley banker which outwardly denigrated valiant in its business strategy now allergan the maker of botox is currently fending off

a fifty three billion dollars takeover bid by valley and the man behind the emails is david horner a senior healthcare banker at morgan stanley now. on may eighteenth horn sent an e-mail to allergens chief financial officer jeff edwards saying that his firm morgan stanley would help persuade shareholders and the media that valiant is quote a house of cards you said now the big conflict of interest in all of this is that morgan stanley is currently working for valiant. but awkward but not only is the position awkward it's also unusual mainly because most companies don't publicize such private communications however the row between allergan and delhi into being so heated it's clear that allergen is ready and willing to use all tools at its disposal now according to the wall street journal allergen the company behind the massively popular anti-wrinkle treatment botox like i mentioned before released the contents of the e-mails as part of a larger package of documents which it used to show why shareholders should reject

a valiance offer and while wall street is no stranger to the use of tough tactics to win deals senior investment bankers such as horn should know better even warns boss robert robert kindler had some thoughts on the subject of valley and saying quote my takeaway is that allergen is not being nearly aggressive enough and going after the valiant business model and currency the valiant allergan deal would be among one of the year's biggest and would no doubt yield a windfall of feeds for the bankers involved many in the business of m. and a would argue that morgan only did what any good bank would do in order to get the job done and furthermore morgan stanley isn't the only bank on the block to pay those sides of a deal in order to get one side to get something else it all happens at one point or another this is just basics to the m. and a business and this basically is par for the course in the world of hostile wall street takeovers don't forget these bankers are pretty much financial mercenaries hired to get the job done bottom line it's a dirty business but someone's got to do it.

the kids should you have them when and how many and what effect will they have on your professional life now this is a conversation that definitely concerns women in the workplace but the economic considerations of fatherhood also influence men as well bryan caplan a professor of economics at george mason university and a blogger at economy log has a different take on the situation that we discussed his ideas on nature versus nurture and how that relates to parenthood take a look at what he had to say pushing gears here you wrote a book called selfish reasons to have more kids and i love that title i just have to tell you but for the uses of your book what's the elevator pitch. the elevator pitch is this right now there's a very laborious high investment style of parenting this popular especially among middle class parents people they already know it is popular because people feel

like if they don't do it that they are not going to give their kids a decent future their kids need this kind of pushing and nagging and shoving and special classes to do well but at the same time there is a whole lot of research that tries to understand why is the kids resemble their parents which begins by realizing well there's a there you know it might not be up or it might actually be genetics it's possible the reason why successful parents have successful kids isn't the parenting style of the successful parents might just be that successful parents pass on success will change their kids also there have been there's been a lot of work researchers have looked at both kids were adopted and twins to try to sort out the difference between nature and nurture and the big finding is that nature crushes nurture especially in the long run up parents are under there in the grip of a powerful lucian about how much their parenting affects their kids' development as a result people are making being a parent is a real chore now what is that what is the you know this parenting style had to do

with the number of kids that people should have well you know so around the time that my book came out there was an op ed by a woman who said well you know we've got two kids who are in soccer and we're putting all this effort and then we started thinking about having a third kid he said wait a second we have three kids that means three sets of soccer games to go to three sets a soccer practice is a shuttle or kids around to she briefly can say well maybe we don't have to have the kids all in soccer center now that's as hopeless that will lead to disaster and so therefore we don't want have this there get and really my argument just reversing that saying look well it won't lead to disaster you can have a much more relaxed parenting style without her your kids and the a maybe that's just going to lead you to say we're going to relax maybe it's going to make you say one more kid actually doesn't scare me anymore because i don't feel like i have to sacrifice my whole life and be miserable for another eighteen years. just to have one more you know this kind of reminds me of i bet it is about a year ago that american ex-pat living in france out published a book about like the french style of raising children and how it's much more back

i'm sure you might know that the type of the book i'm talking about but is that kind of what you're leaning towards a much more hands off approach. so you know hands off which which you're going is very different from just now doing stuff with your kids when i when i wrote an op ed for the wall street journal they did let me choose the title as usual instead they put in the title a lesson from twin research have more kids pay less attention to them i actually pay a lot of attention to my four kids but i don't spend a lot of time trying to mold them into some shit something that they're not to try to push them into things that are in your interest then i just try to make make sure that they're good roommates of their good to each other and good to us and other that i tried to give give them freedom to be there to be the people they want to be do you think it's a very american thing to think about how many soccer games you have to go to and then decide not to have another child. america is probably high up although i suspect actually that parenting styles in taiwan singapore are even more excessive than our than our own so you know you miss him not specifically at

a soccer game so much but just the idea that everything hinges on what kind of a parent you are and if you ride your kid to death and they'll succeed otherwise they'll fail. that's actually probably more even more perhaps an asian countries which are not so coincidentally have close to the smallest family sizes on earth and you know when you see the way that a real tiger mom raised her kids you understand well you know i wouldn't want to kids either if that were the way that i have to treat my kids every day it sounds terrible to spend every day being an ogre to the small of the small creatures and then in the end your reward is that they're going to be successful and that's why you spent twenty five years bickering with them you know sounds like it's not a very fun way to spend your life so that i can see if that's what you feel like you have to do understand why people wouldn't want to and then now isn't that the actual parents don't matter or is it that in a free society kids end up making a lot of decisions for themselves and parents need to set the broader structure for kids to have the freedom in which to explore and feel safe and well i mean here's

what we can really say based on the evidence out of the out of the people that are studied it doesn't see it seems to make very little difference what the characteristics of your parents are so you look at kids who are adopted kids were adopted by rich parents and poor parents highly educated parents and not so highly educated parents religious or not religious you can know all these things about the parent that adopted them of this tells you next nothing about what kind of adults are going to be also now this also means by the way that the indirect effects of parents like you might think it was not so much the parents' matter as the parents get you into a good neighborhood and that matters but you know you don't study actually really says that the whole effect is the whole effect of getting adopted by the rich family that that leads you get rich friends go that i school district that's one package the other package is you're adopted by a low income face. only where they don't give you all these advantages how do you turn out of the ends and what we see in the numbers is that it's very little difference between getting up to buy one kind of family or another of the kinds we observe now this doesn't mean that if you were locked in

a closet raised by wolves that would be devastating but it is saying that there's this big flat rage where you could make all kinds of different choices and you shouldn't expect to see an impact on the way your kids turn out when they're adults but i have to say you know just from looking at my social circle do you find that i find a lot of kids go into the industries in which their parents worked and that's a trend that you see so that would have to do with nurture over nature. well i mean it could although this is totally anecdotal let me say that without knowing i could say oh you know when i think about when you have a number of economists that i know with kids in economics i mean you know the thing is is that the that you know it is well established that many of the traits that matter for being good in walk you patient versus another arjen are inherited i mean this is obviously true for athletes when you see that kids are kids rational baseball players are unusually likely to become professional baseball players it's not at all obvious that's because they were raised by a baseball player may just be because they have fantastic hand eye coordination they're super competitive they can run well we all you know all these advantages

they have which we are now or know now to be highly to be highly heritable on now some other things that matter for occupation you know so general intelligence matters a lot and it seems to be as heritable as height as you know when you know albert einstein had has a son who puts him up for adoption that kid is likely to be brilliant anyway you refuse raised by a family where they just watch nascar all day and no interest in books while still the other kid is likely to be very bright and then in terms of things like work ethic and motivation these personality traits also very much look like they are passed down in the genes a so it's not so surprising just in terms of genetics that people tend to be in similar occupations you know committed a parent's would you surprise me if the exact details make a difference says oh if you took a kid you know so if there was a kid that was whose parents were physics professors and they hand him over to a pair to chemistry professors raise wouldn't surprise me if that led him to switch to being a chemist rather than a physicist rather than a physicist although again of course if his parents had been farmers ah then it's

very unlikely that just being adopted by chemists is going to charge you into a chemist because you probably don't have the you know the kind of ability or the personality to do it. an interesting take that was bryan caplan a professor of economics at george mason university and a blogger for econobox. time now for a very quick break but stick around because when we return george celdran is on the program the professor of economics at the university of georgia is telling us about free banking and how a deregulated banking sector would create stability in a clearly unsustainable system then in today's big deal our chief political correspondent sam sachs is sitting down with me to discuss the rise of the service economy but before we go here are a look at some your closing numbers of the bell stick around.

i was at it and i see a society i'm sick corp kind of can. do and they try to get all about money and i think that actually that for a politician writing the laws and what the tax rates. are going out. there just to flood threat is a society. welcome

back to the show now free banking argues that the best way to create stability in the banking system is to do regulate the banking sector now in this system banks would supply their own paper currency and then market forces and competition would ensure stability this is a drastically different system from the one that we have today were too big to fail banks get bailed out in order to avoid financial meltdown now in part two of my interview with dr george celdran a professor of economics at the university of georgia would discuss more about the concept of free banking now i first asked him to explain why there would be a lender of last resort in the free banking model take a look at what he had to say. well one reason quite simply is there was never any perceived need for one there were failures in the scottish system of individual banks of course there were failures in the canadian system which by the way had no central bank until nineteen thirty five but they generally tended to be handled by

. acquisitions and mergers that sort of thing could very quietly for the most part they seldom amounted to a system wide crises now part of this secret here was that in both of those arrangements and in any truly free banking arrangement banks have the right to branch nationwide even internationally that was a right that for example the united states makes didn't really enjoy until the ninety nine days so we have large numbers of weak under diversified banks until then and that was a big source of our history of our financial problems with banks being much more likely to fail it wasn't the only source but it was one of them and its regulatory people have to understand that so wait that's an example of how regulations in this case laws that prevented banks from having big bridge networks created artificially

weak systems the scottish and canadian system as they would have dozens of banks not tens of thousands as we did at one time and when there was a problem it was easy for the bankers themselves to deal with it by arranging an acquisition or merger and so they were able easily to insulate the public from those failures that occurred and failures didn't occur so often when you had big very well financially diversified institutions to start with so i want to ask you have u.s. banks ever issued their own liabilities. yes they say they certainly have until the federal reserve was formed or before the federal reserve or swarm our paper currency was supplied largely by national banks the same banks that we still have plenty of but they no longer enjoy that privilege and before the civil war before the national banks were created state chartered banks issued most of the

country's paper money the problem though is as i just mentioned that these banks were small and mostly local institutions and that's not a good way to supply paper currency you want your paper currency to come from a nationally diversified or even internationally diversified financial firm and that's not likely to go belly up and normally nobody want to dealt with good notes of these banks have been had any better choices in fact it's interesting canada very briefly in its history in the latter nineteenth century they experimented with setting up little unit banks that were more like the us institutions of the time. and those banks didn't last a decade the net nationally branched rivals that existed in canada just the ones with big branch networks they just put them to put their backs to the wall so we can have good banks to supply us with currency before the fed.

good enough ones but we should have had them in the fed itself was a poor substitute for what was really. a structurally unsound private banking and currency system. here what are some of the problems that you have with the present he had currency system in terms of freedom or other economic terms. the biggest problem i have with it is it's arbitrary. this defeat of money that's now our basic money. is not of course naturally scarce we were lie on the central bank on the fed to make it scarce to preserve its scarcity through deliberately restricting supply the problem is the fed doesn't always do it doesn't generally do a very good job at that the value of the dollar which was almost unchanged from the beginning of the republican till the founding of the fed is now about who has

increased about twenty five thought since the fed's establishment and much of that increase has been since the early seventy's when we've had no gold convert ability now. the problem isn't that the central bank can't in principle do a good job maintaining this stability of the perch it's simple our of it's money it's possible for central banks to to do that but they in practice are not able to do it not reliable instruments for that they also can of course mismanage the money supply on a more short term basis allowing for well to to well refer to the name of your program to for booms and busts and i think that the jury's still out on this but i think this plenty of evidence for example that the fed so overly easy monetary policy in the early two thousand was one factor fueling the sub prime boom and i

also believe that the fed's actions after the collapse of the subprime market contributed to the severity of the bust so i have a big problem with money because particularly as it's matters to day by discretionary central bankers because they simply can't be trusted to to manage it correctly. i also have problems i might say a little more on this with the fact that today our private bank by billet east many of them at least are held up by government guaranteed either deposit insurance or the doctrine of too big to fail and this these guarantees because private banks as suppliers of money in the form of deposits cause them to be unreliable because they courage it encourages excessive

risk taking so our whole modern monetary and banking apparatus based on us as it is on the centralization of paper currency or monopolization of paper currency and on the ever increasing. umbrella of government guarantees is frankly an extremely dangerous system and one that has consequently gotten us into trouble time and time again we can do better than that history shows that and theory shows as well. that was dr george celdran a professor of economics at the university of georgia time now for today's big deal .

big deal time with cyrus the one and only he's joining me today and we're talking about the task of con me yes all about the task on economy and what it means for the future of work in america now technology has brought us a new way to connect people who need things done with people who watch work and there are many variations on this theme task rabbit for example find you workers to do a whole range of task from your garage that's a. flower here's the other things like that task rabbit does a background check for people who want work and then they can start getting on odd jobs available it turns out that there are a whole range of services like this today sam is here to break it all down for me so sam what are some other examples of this task economy or tasks like web sites that are out there and what can other tasks what other tasks be daunting people search for well any task or service you need now it is there's an app for that pretty much how scrub it is pretty broad as you mentioned your garage to having

your i.q. of bed put together for you to a book report written for you on task rabbit but there's there's tons of other service there's an insta card where you can get someone to go go do grocery shopping for you there's a laundry were some will come pick up your clothes and do the laundry for you so really there's a multiple. amount of services out there that you can choose from and we're getting to a point where if you have enough money you really don't need to do anything for yourself anymore now here's the thing i used to card and i love insta card and i personally think it's great so my little shout out to inscribe there if you want to give me a discount and purchase but i think that is great but i want to ask you how do you make money and connect people like how does how does an insta card for example which goes and picks you. they have someone go pick up your groceries how do you how does insta court the company make money because they're are they is here basically i mean you're basically paying a premium for the service so within stickered a lot of the groceries or prices are marked up and that allows him to card to be able to pay their independent contractors who are going around us that you know for really not much but if you have enough of the customer base that. pays the bills

right you know these are all similar to. you you go in you get a driver and there's a premium on top of the the fare that goes back to goober that's how they all make their money all of these services have their own sort of different funding mechanisms but essentially it's a premium on top of what you would normally pay if you're just doing something yourself right now here are some of the economic themes that give the task economy some context now this first crop that we're going to throw up it shows that middle class jobs if it ever comes up and taking a massive hit over the past two decades there it is now the only growth in jobs has been menu a low skill work or high end creative skilled work now this graph we're going to give you another one shows how these highly educated workers have less leisure time than those with less education so sam on one hand you see a decline in middle class jobs and on the other people with higher educations having less free time and people of less educated lower levels of education having more free time so this looks like a story of technology creating

a demand for people and jobs that wasn't there before no well yes that's an optimistic way to look at it these are no good jobs these are not high paying jobs they might sound at first if you're making fifteen or thirty bucks an hour that while this is a pretty high paying job but you're not paying any payroll taxes out of that doesn't include the cost that you're covering yourself like putting gas in your car because you're driving around all day delivering groceries for some areas in manhattan or something it doesn't cover any benefits or anything like that so these are all low wage jobs when it comes down to it. and we are. in this economy where we've seen middle class jobs shed we've seen globalization force these one strong manufacturing jobs in america offshore we can expect these task rabbit to be able to replace that broad middle class economy do you think that this is kind of the now classic argument of the one percent versus the ninety nine percent to is this

really because it here's my thing is it better to have some money than none at all and if jobs are being taken by drones nowadays you have machines this is a demand for a job that other demand for a con to be a tough economy that otherwise was never there before and i mean look i guess this question is no job better the small low paying job better than no job and i'm not sure that's true if it's exploitative i mean the time that someone spends being a task rabbit for somebody and knocking paid well enough for that could be used for job retraining programs or something that could give them that suitable job that they need them also i'm talking with you as always we have to have you back on very that's all for now but you can see all segments featured in today's show on you tube at you tube dot com. we also love hearing from you so please check out our facebook page facebook dot com. and please tweet us at edward n.h. who is away on holidays. from all of us here thank you for watching with the x. time chalo.

do you like me you want your comedy news from t one to comedy news to be a bare fisted no holds barred fight to the dead. like a vampire sliding into the next of the corporate elite billionaire freaks well they're going. well that's what you get with my new show but back to the night.

play play. live play. the lead. play glu. live. crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want. he. was.

killed in action two russian journalists who were filming refugees fleeing to eastern ukraine being killed by shelling we learn the details of the tragedy and here from the only member of the t.v. crew to survive. iraqi forces are struggling to push back sunni rebels who have to taken control of several key cities briefly held areas close to the capital. plus the king's farewell speech the spanish monic one call us officially leaves the throne after the senate approves the abdication with the course.