now let me start back in the beginning back in two thousand and eight fannie and freddie were bailed out by the u.s. government they were two of the biggest and earliest bailouts of the financial crisis hank paulson the treasury secretary at the time place the companies into conservatories shift and provided them with hundreds of billions of dollars in backstop financing there was one catch though the government never wiped out the existing common or preferred shares because doing so would have bankrupt bankrupted some major midsize american banks which have been encouraged by regulators to use the preferred stock as bank capital with c.d.'s these now stranded capital structure rules would dictate that the common preferred shares should have should have been wiped out but the government didn't want to do that and hedge funds piled in thinking that these things had huge optionality values and they were right now once the conservatorship now once in conservatorship the government required and fred to issue super preferred stock to the treasury department stock which they do

which they would repay to the government before all other creditors at a rate of ten percent so they jumped in the line now what do you know by two thousand and twelve fannie and freddie started accounting huge huge gains accounting gains now with the crisis behind it bigger meant decided the common preferred stock should be worth zero and all dividends should go directly to the treasury you know stops along the way common in preferred stock holders would receive nothing that of course didn't sit too well with the hedge funds and they sued now why i think these funds are vultures and investors like warren buffett right there on your screen wouldn't be caught dead participating in the shares i do understand however that the hedge funds are within their legal right to do this but that doesn't make it ok. now with that said when it comes to ethics who really is to blame here the government shouldn't have allowed the purchase of these common preferred shares in the first place and had the elected officials done the right

thing six years ago they wouldn't have found themselves in the legal battle they are in today with the very guys that fund their campaigns you don't want to be fighting with them right near a check now the government didn't want to buy the bill in two thousand and eight and wiped out the shares all together and they're now suffering the consequences of those actions they wanted to save certain institutions and because of that political desire they now find themselves in quite a bit of a predicament report just so. dr ron paul is a former congressman and a three time presidential candidate paul has spent his career public service pushing for freedom and liberty both domestically and abroad now he's a prominent libertarian in american politics who's advocated for free markets liberty and non interventionism throughout his life i sat down with dr paul to get his take on the u.s.

foreign and domestic policy and i first asked him to explain what concerns he has about america's involvement in ukraine take a look. there are several first is i don't like our government getting involved in the affairs of other people and leading only to trouble. the admonition of our early founders of the country that we should be involved in the entangling alliances throughout the world nor in the internal affairs of other nations so whether it's the middle east northern africa or whether it's ukraine i apply that principle so i do but not believe it's to our benefit i don't hell i don't think it helps our national security i think it hurts our national security i don't think it helps in this particular instance the ukrainian people so i think it would be best for everybody for us to just stay out besides we don't have the money we have to go borrow the money if we decide it we're already spending money on this effort in ukraine and i don't think we should be doing it. dr paul i take it you believe the

money spent by the u.s. abroad would be better used to shore up our finances here at home now in your view what role does the u.s. government have in terms of projection of power or is a global super cop. well it's mainly to develop friendly relations with as many people who are better open to it i was delighted with the collapse of the soviet system and i have been delighted with our efforts to end a lot of trade going on with not only the former communist nation of china. also with russia we've invested five hundred billion dollars in russia and they've invested four hundred billion dollars outside so there's a lot of trade going on to sort of defies the side dhea that a few people are stirring up enough trouble where they want to ruin all that so my effort in the world is to promote trade and promote friendship promote travel at the same time not be involved in trying to determine what's best for other people i

don't want to do that individual lives and i don't want to do that for other governments and other peoples in spite of the many many problems out there it's just impossible for us to do it if we don't have the authority and we're not going to be welcome and we don't have the wisdom to do it if things are to be done to help people who are in trouble overseas it should be done from our viewpoint of liberty it should be done voluntarily in the american people generally have been very very generous in helping people when they're in trouble but i want to i want our government our people to stay out of the affairs especially when they come to violence and and militarism now some people believe that u.s. political and military involvement in places like iraq afghanistan libya and ukraine is a big basically to maintain u.s. global wealth by maintaining us global gemini you know what's your view on the on the subject. well i think there's a lot to that i think a lot of countries you know are interested i think whether it's russia or china

when they invest overseas that goal may be the same and america's goal used to be that we were much more designed to have a global presence by trading and investments and you know having friendly relations but no i think now we have fallen into the trap of saying well there's some that was in the whole reason that we went into the middle east oil was an issue there were other issues as well but china and other countries are investing overseas and they're investing in oil and different things and and right now we're giving russia tremendous incentive to go in do deals with more with china and india and these other countries where if the market was working we might be able to better provide these trade agreements that and then when when when we give them trouble and people resist what we do is do so that's why i don't think it's in our

best interest now inside the u.s. we have a policy whereby the n.s.a. collects data on u.s. citizens and mass allegedly to mine data in order to deter future terrorist attacks now are you concerned about this data collection and its impact on u.s. citizens and businesses well i would hope every american is except i do know there are some who i fully don't understand in our congress who say oh no we must do it this is the way we have safety i mean this is more a principle of an authoritarian dictatorship that they have to know what everybody is doing no i am a strong advocate of privacy i complain so much because our own government is very very secretive in a free society which we had a much better freer society once before we're supposed to know what the government is doing but now all the efforts in washington seems to be to make government very sick. and we're not allowed to know what's going on if somebody tells us the truth

they're charged with treason instead of looking toward to our constitution the fourth amendment protecting our privacy actually when you have n.s.a. they're doing exactly the opposite so our government and by the permission of the people the people have gone along with this because they have been complacent and think maybe they're going to benefit from this in the wrong people get in charge so our government is not acting the way it was intended to and some of us are concerned about it matter fact i'm very optimistic with a lot of young people and there's still a lot of americans who have been complacent but they they don't say oh i want to give up my freedom because government going to take care you care of me quite frankly right now they're starting to realize the government all governments the more authoritarian they are the more inept they are now that's why you see collapses. so many empires around the world and i think right now we're not improving our influence in the world actually we're causing more harm to the

american people. and i want to tell you about this the united states has about five percent of the global population but thirty five percent of the global wealth and this discrepancy appears to be contract and now what should the u.s. do if anything about that contraction. oh. i don't know what you mean by contraction you mean this thirty five percent is going down yes this is oh well you know as i have on the i would measure those statistics i would measure the measurement of freedom a free society that's productive and have property rights and trade they're going to because they produce more they're going to have more wealth that's what a free country does so if there's a discrepancy between the united states and say a country in africa which has no property rights and no freedom and no industrialization what they need is the concept of liberty and free markets and sound money in what property rights meaning contract rights mean so you don't want

to say well there's an imbalance in wealth and therefore we have to redistribute wealth that is not the answer to the problem the answer to the problem is how does wealth get created and we used to know how to do this today we think wealth is created by the federal reserve if people come up short of the government to span the people won something or we want to fight a war we don't have the wealth we're not producing so they think wealth comes from the federal reserve in fall asleep the foreign countries are still take our dollars as learners of foreigners take our dollars we're going to be doing this bad that's going to diminish our wealth so statistically the country is the more wealth there is going to have and they should never be held. down for that they should be criticized for having wealth if they've earned that wealth. time for a very quick break but stick around because when we return we're bringing you park two of my interview with ron paul i asked dr paul how free markets would stimulate a faster american recovery rather than the muddle through economy we have right now

that in today's big deal edward harris and i are talking about a new proposed minimum wage in switzerland the u.s. is talking about ten bucks an hour as well it's more like fourteen bucks an hour to give me that's a light twenty four quite a bit of money and as we go to break here are a look at some of your closing numbers a bell stick around. the world. technology innovation all the list of elements from around russia we've got the future of covered player led police to try to.

play polo going to be. more. like a war it's a story you think everybody please let me. know well. a lot like the lead. let's say the list is late to lead sometimes for nothing actually led this season and it's still. it's not just still easy you'll be shot if you see the stage take the t.v. to sleep but to be telling you all to. play . right to. search tree. and i would think the tree.

on our reporters would. be in the. welcome back now to post crisis the american middle class has taken a hit and the american economy is still strongly down from the hole that it fell into and what's the best way to get out now some people argue for government stimulus while others advocate monetary easing in part two of my interview with ron paul we discuss a libertarian perspective of how america might get onto its feet without relying on uncle sam to give it a hand. dr paul in

a recent study the world bank looked at income increases ranked by global income percentiles over the past twenty years and what they found was income rising by as much as eighty percent in some percentiles but stagnation or actual contraction of incomes for the poorest people those in the seventy fifth the ninetieth percentile globally which also happens to be the middle classes in developed economies like the us now do you think secular stagnation in the us middle class is a real phenomenon. i do but i really am very cautious not to join those who say well what we need is more government to do redistribute the wealth and see what capitalism does this is not free market capitalism this is crony capitalism it's collusion of governments and big business which is a philosophy that all governments indorse around the world right now and this is characteristic if you destroy a currency you can expect the middle class to be diminished since we have the reserve currency of the world and we're printing so much money you can expect our

middle class to get poorer and poorer and the poor get poorer so much poorer so if you look at this distribution of wealth in this country you cannot blame freedom for you cannot blame free markets where you have to blame these collusion of big government and big business and big labor this does not happen when we were a much freer country we had the largest in the richest middle class ever known to man mankind and that is what we need fortunately not only has america slipped away from this i even think since the collapse of the soviet system there's been too much of an endorsement of this that we need we need government and big business working together and i don't like that because if that gets out of hand to be a benz itself toward more of a fascist system and i don't i don't think that's a good way to go now in your opinion one of the most important factors that can give america the best chance for prosperity in the future. well the best chance

is to change people's minds about the necessity to work for free society and this is the reason i spend so much time with young people and my message is well received on a college campuses because they're disillusioned they don't they don't buy into this thing big government going to take care of them they've spent tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars on education and they're not getting any jobs so they know they can't depend on government they're sick and tired of the wars they think there's something very strange about the federal reserve system and just printing money out of thin air so the future comes from a whole generation of individuals who will become those individuals that will influence in teaching and writing in the media and writing books and doing movies and in the last hundred years the influence has always been with big government the government will take care of us and they believed in k.z. in economics in the united states has in many other countries they haven't been

socialist they have been more keynesians where they think that this mixture of big business and big government big labor that will have managers in washington will do it but no we have to get enough people in a class which is would be called to you know the influential people to understand why it's in everybody's best interest to have a free society rather than dependency on government. dr paul women have credit based currency system so there is no limit to how much credit can be manufactured in such a system but how do we ensure that credit is not mal invested and that we sustain growth based on high return investments to prepare the country for the future is absolutely impossible with the governments to distributing you know the the credit . but in a free market you can make sure that it's not mal investment it always will be there will always be mistakes you know for every hundred businesses get started in a free society you might have ninety five who will fail and you'll say well that

was mel invested you know it was but they had to do and they had to suffer the consequences that they didn't anticipate right or made a mistake and if they are successful then they have to be rewarded so it's all sorted out and that's so much different then when a bureaucrat the size and the politicians decide it and special interest decide it and money money people decided by influencing government that is very bad but mistakes will be made but if you want corrections and you want gross and getting rid of the mistakes immediately when the government passes the credit what happens are the bubbles of form the mallet investments form they're guaranteed and they're bailed out and it compounds the problem and then when you need a correction you don't get it in that's why the world is becoming mired in an economic difficulty that will not be reversed until a lot more people understand what i'm talking about. do you think the fed's quantitative easing and zero interest rate policy are having

a distortionary effect that will lead to mal investment in the u.s. economy oh obviously you know our government now our federal reserve owns one point six trillion dollars of bad debt that can't be helpful and the housing market is still is in bad shape there's a there's a lot of distortion it's a little bit different in nature. because it's sort of some cities are worse than others. the malinvestment has just been papered over i just think of the correction that needed to be have a current state of the fed buying one point six trillion dollars and a lot of foreigners still owning owning some of our mortgage debt i mean that's if it's bad data needs why don't those businesses need to go out but you don't need feel any may and freddie macin guarantee the guarantees that nobody fails guarantees that the problems will come and the corrections will be very very difficult now you just mentioned real estate and grow i'm glad that you brought

that up because transcripts from a two thousand and two f o m c meeting show that the greenspan fed was worried about deflation after the technology bubble burst and that that and the bats was a key reason for leaving rates so low then now after the housing bubble burst similar fears that popped up in are responsible for the fed's zero rate interest policy today so mike my question is where do you see this and your opinion destruction of the dollar and they can't keep doing it greenspan had low for too long and everybody acknowledged that they thought the correction was to make them even lower actually they're below one percent the below zero right now they're negative because they're one percent or so but you have an inflation rate much higher than the governments will ever tell us so you have a negative rate and they even want to legalize they are in me and they are negative right so if somebody wants to put money in the bank you put in one hundred dollars in a year later you get ninety eight dollars back well that's that's pure theft when it comes to it when you steal wealth that way so no it's going to destroy the dollar

and the dollars pretty vital it's crucial it won't be an easy transition and you're not going to all of a sudden see another another reserve currency pop up and it be very efficient the market if the market had to choose on this they would pick an asset commodity for money and the one that's been the most popular for six thousand years has been go. second place has been sober and that would restore the confidence and that's why the richard nations who are in better shape financially. and others they're buying gold even india is buying gold so this. there was former congressman and presidential candidate dr ron paul time now for today's big deal. a big deal edward harris and i are discussing a big very big payday in switzerland now

a referendum on when may eighteenth might put swiss minimum wage at twenty two francs and. twenty two francs is about one thousand euros in about twenty four to twenty five u.s. dollars pretty nice now now this proposal is made by the specific aeration of trade unions and supported by the socialist and green parties a recent opinion poll found that sixty four percent of voters are against the proposal put referendums can have surprising outcomes now cue the arguments about the minimum wage this government argues that it would have it would threaten jobs and make it harder for young people to find a job in the first place now supporters they argue that the wage would help people who work full time live decently and switzerland is of course notoriously an expensive place to live however can you tell me a little bit more about a social and economic position right now and basically what is the unemployment rate in that country there are positions pretty good and. they have been employed

in the three to four percent range we have a graph here that shows their unemployment been coming down. and you know there's been doing so well the fact that their currency has been appreciating to the point where the swiss national bank has had to buy up the currency. by a foreign currency in order to stop their currency from appreciate to switch them to doing pretty well. ok you know when i ask you can you tell me more about this minimum wage itself and how did they come up with the number twenty two friends who they came up with in terms of you know the percentage of. the actual salaries so basically you know four thousand francs a month which would be forty thousand francs a year would be about sixty six percent of the median salary within switzerland which would be about ten percent of the people who are actually below that number so that's where the number really comes from. the question of course is that is

that a really number because when you think about it that's fifty thousand dollars a year as a minimum wage that's a task that's pretty amazing you know switzerland actually has a pretty high standard of living in norway and switzerland have the highest. standard of living in terms of purchasing power parity they're the most expensive countries so really we're only talking about a minimum wage of fourteen dollars a purchasing power parity basis but nonetheless in nominal terms we're talking fifty thousand bucks and a lot of people who work in switzerland especially in industry has to commute from across the border like in italy a lot of italians were in switzerland or here in geneva even the airport is not running for her france and france are going to jump back and forth that would be nice work and so if you work in italy you can go work in switzerland make fifty thousand dollars a year and then come back to italy where the standard of living where the cost of living is a lot lower that's awesome sounds going to me now and here's my follow up on the

wage effect switzerland's job market and basically what sectors of the industry are these jobs in kind of that would be affected most by this minimum wage so we're talking like hotels retail things like you know this goes back to what we were talking about a few days ago which is basically that we've done studies in the united states. so when you look at the aggregate studies from one nine hundred seventy two i think to two thousand and eight basically most of the data shows that minimum wage changes don't have any appreciable impact on employment so if they were to institute this i mean this is a massive hike the question is what kind of impact will we see on the unemployment because obviously you know a company that is employing someone has a small medium sized business and has to have a massive high might go out of business right so when you talk about a hike of this of this magnitude. are you going to get that sort of almost no

effect on unemployment that we've seen from studies in the u.s. or is there going to be an impact now if we're you know this whole minimum wage thing this is a pretty aggressive way for the government to intervene you know just just make a lot of them away never has to the question is is this appropriate do you think i think it really has to do with the social values because basically you know the people on the left there the green party and the socialist they really want to have a social safety net which is very. very strict that means that no one can fall through but at the same time what we're definitely seeing is intervention by government in a way that really. tricks things for specific individual companies and i think that it's that trade off they have to deal with and i think that in the united states we feel comfortable with that kind of trade off with middleweights that we'll talk about this more it's a fun topic and i really like it but that's all the time we have for now you can

see also intervention a show on youtube youtube dot com slash boom bust we also love hearing from you so please check out our facebook page at facebook dot com slash boom bust our teeth you can also tweet us at edward and h. from all of us here and best thanks for watching and see the sun shall. when the unit peen union promise to met ukraine become part of it it clearly contributed to the south abrasion of tensions within ukraine ukraine will not become part of the european union who won't tell tales ukraine absolutely doesn't have the economic level to become part of the e.u. or been. clean more zero casualties war this is the great fantasy of warmongering

politicians. capturing people is this see what do you do if the innocent killing them easy we reserve the right to kill any person anywhere any time. you go to the surgeon for the counter drugs to muslim aids these things are virgin politicians. a new kind of power via this technology. is very tempting. i asked. in december two thousand and ten. more likely to be raped in college and in the real world. i don't think people did that to each other when they knew

each other i thought rape was a stranger in the bushes. girl complaining about the son of an alumni gives millions of dollars to the school why listen to somebody who's going to lose money at the school if schools that make money based decisions are much more common than they would ever admit publicly. the interview.

waters. come to me because. i saw you spread all over norway is the most toxic food you have in the whole world. such drama zones in the fischel inquiry further more restrictions. really knows what's.

sunday shoes a new round of ass strikes in northern. we report. by washington's foreign policy. ukraine. russian gas for running through its transit pipeline. international when it comes as a warning signal for europe. and the ukrainian army to take back restive cities in the east street by street brick by brick. he is on the border trying to get into ukraine but. very different. from the war in gaza.