change it into something that they can control because the french and german finance minister is calling for a debate at the g. twenty summit for regulation a bit coin are they going to try and make it something they can handle they can try but they'll fail because there's no way to stop it it's unstoppable there's nothing they can do to stop the adoption growth acceptance of big oil as a store of value as a currency and as a unit of account that's the history you all right that today thanks for staying with ati to nationalise same to my colleague mickey evan to be here with the very latest news at the top of the hour. apply to many flips over the years so i know the game and so i got. the ball isn't only about what happens on the pitch for the final school it's about the passion from the fans it's the age of the super money. and spending to the twenty million

like. it's an experience like nothing else going to be true so i want to share what i think from what i know about the beautiful. greats of.

hello and welcome to cross talk where all things considered i'm peter lavelle the single most important social equalizer of our time the internet is under grave threat the decision by the federal communications commission essentially gives internet service providers the keys to the internet without net neutrality will be economic opportunity divide only widen for all. talking net neutrality i'm joined by my guess in new york he is the editorial director for reactionary times and a news max columnist and in tampa we have scott rickard he is a former american intelligence linguist right gentlemen cross-like rules and a fact that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate scott

let me go to you first in tampa first i want to kind of express my bewilderment but maybe it should and shouldn't be will be looking at mainstream media covering this story on net neutrality a lot of stories out there but the meaning of it seems rather moot. to me and it's i think it's because so many of these news outlets are owned by internet service providers ok like comcast and others like that here i mean what is the significance of this move. because i think you know an era of the internet and as i said in my introduction i mean one of the great social equalizers of our time is under threat and maybe we'll tell our grandchildren i remember the golden years go ahead scott. well that's interesting i mean it's very multifaceted obviously the media companies i have a very symbiotic relationship with the carriers this this relationship goes a long way they pay a lot of money even for local news you know it's up to like seven dollars charge

just for local news or rebroadcast the cost cable companies so you have a real close symbiotic relationship with individuals who are profiting from a current business so a lot of this really has more to do with the legality of rebroadcast the copyright component and obviously the economics they're trying to transfer of the upgrade of their networks to the economic wages of of the people that's what's really happened here and when they talk about a fast lane versus a slow lane let's be clear here that the r.f.c.'s are written very clearly once you're up on the network the quality of service is actually built in the bandwidth is there you know each strand of fiber will give you ten gigabit they've pulled a lots of multi a modem but mostly single mode fiber around the country this goes well right past everyone's homes and they can install the equipment on the corners that will absolutely handle the quality of service what's interesting is that the companies

that when you're trying to get faster speeds today are actually making you pay for that equipment by charging exorbitant installation fees so that's really what's happened is that technology is very simple to give people a quality service but what they're up against is they're trying to obviously make more money from something that doesn't really need to happen very much like enron very much like ethanol and very much like unfortunately the carbon tax charging for our in the united. it's ok i guess that's how the americans have done this ok we have one and we have julio dissenting and that's what we wanted on this program really let me go to you new york you. know me for weeks and i know that some are we explode here guys hang on you know julio i perfectly understand that i s p's they this is a business and that's serious business and it's an important business for our time my most important concern is to make sure that everyone gets to stay in this platform here and and and this is what a lot of people worried about when it comes to net neutrality we could have people

left behind because there are lots of communities in the united states that don't have the best quality internet and if they're facing higher prices for not an improvement in quality that leaves them out that's my primary concern i have other concerns as well after this long introduction of my part my friend go ahead julio in new york. well you know what that sounds very conspiratorial there was what scott was talking about listen the fact of the matter is the people that are getting hurt are people that are due to that neutrality are people in rural areas people that are in urban areas that are underdeveloped i mean the fact of the matter is we're already paying extra for better levels of service that's already been happening because if you get business class intra you know high speed internet you pay a little extra and you get a little bit better quality service it's not like everybody's getting the same level of service all across the board it hasn't been like that and didn't think about the twenty plus years before two thousand and fifteen when they put in this

additional regulation the internet's arrived it's not like taking it away is going to make the thing explode i mean this is really alarmist nonsense that they're just another reason to attack donald trump saying that he's doing something dangerous it's really there's no there's not going to be any consequence the average person is not going to feel any difference because of this guy i don't see it and i don't see the trump connection here so clearly here and there's a lot of there's a lot of people in red and blue states that are concerned about this here you know scott the argument you know that net neutrality slows down investment i mean if you look at the bottom lines of the major piece i mean look at their stock prices are doing pretty well here and since two thousand and fifteen investment into infrastructure of these grids you know has dipped only a little bit here it is down eighty five percent what it what i would say is that you know not a cent is years of argument since the ruling in two thousand and fifteen things

haven't been that bad then you have google and facebook and so on and so on and so forth saying that they're there and they were are worried that the ions piece will not be held to account to you know title two that everyone talks about go ahead scott well i don't deny the fact that there are any issues with a. rural areas not getting speed but let's be clear here that the american government has invested millions and hundreds of millions of dollars in commercial companies the acquisitions have been tremendous you look at small companies like sentry tell that gobbled up quest that gobbled up a lot of x. around the southeast century tel is now one of the largest companies in the country from a telecom perspective obviously john malone and paul allen have done quite well gobbling up some cable companies recently so you have a very serious amount of investment that there's not only coming from the u.s. government but also coming from private investors and this net neutrality thing is absolutely more about the legality of things let's be clear here that you know

they're not able to throttle back the pirate days or the cody's or these types of things that are that are basically bashing into their their income so they're going after the of law in a way to actually throttle these things back and block them out let's be clear as well i cannot find our t.v. on a on a cable network across the united states our t. is not syndicated on the cable networks in the united states let's be clear here as well i can easily get our t.v. i know the guys i ski with these people out in denver helping out the u.s. disabled ski team so these are individuals that are absolutely blocking this type of access for r.t. and this will be another thing this is a freedom of speech issue for me because in the future if they don't want us to get our t. on the internet they can actually throttle that back as well and that's the only place i can get that so that's my biggest fear ok that's a fear of mine and i was actually to get there and everything go in we can go there

right now who you want you know one of the i said my major concern was equal access from a subsidiary concern is you know are we going to see what comcast an a.t.m. t. in brighton what they want us to see and they could give them preference ok because i'm sorry because if comcast likes. wants to support m s n b c i think the whole world is in trouble here the question is can they stick can will they stay focused on business or would they be political ok go ahead julio wallace and there's been a couple of isolated incidents there was the vonage eighty in t. thing that was a google wallet thing yes but to have this net of broad sweeping regulations over everyone in advance listen we have antitrust laws you know we have the f.t.c. which was originally in charge of the internet before fall under the f.t.c. under our the f.c.c. rather under title two you know we don't need another additional layer of

regulation listen there were twenty two s p's that went to go to the to the f.c.c. and they met with. that they have you know smaller customer bases less than a thousand people they can't grow because banks won't loan them money because of the uncertainty that comes along with this so i mean it's hurting america it's hurting jobs it's hurting the level of service every day and do anything positive and listen before we had it we did have these widespread issues of you know i s p's undermining you know their competitors. ok scott you know it but one of the major concerns is that you're going to have the major ions being that you get to force you to buy their products here and they will throttle and disappear oh the competition see this is you know the internet really thrives when there is competition when it's really unlikely forced to buy any no no but if you can't see

that you can you can't see something you can't buy it ok that is the whole problem here is the again every step of the way it's equal access if it's political ideas or products or being able to be on the internet in the first place go ahead scott one minute before we go to the break well when you look at when you look at the failure of the competitive local exchange carriers and they did try this they do regulated in one nine hundred ninety six the americans gave away the keys to the kingdom a lot of foreign countries came in and bought american infrastructure you have foreign intelligence that is manufactured and installed intelligence collection devices on american networks getting data prior to n.s.a. getting it actually so there's a there's a real serious problem from the deregulation from ninety six but at the same time when you look at current competition let's be clear a.o.l. built their networks upon advanced network systems advanced network systems was they were the guys that built arpanet for the folks at both parañaque and newman

and managed it for the guys so this is a this is not a competition environment obviously time warner has some of the best. actual landlines and best actual fiber across the country after buying the arpanet infrastructure certainly these guys sprint have some great infrastructure because their road connections so this is not a competitive environment these are these are individuals who understand in a much higher level i've attended meetings at the national security telecommunications advisory council and so i understand these these types of issues and the most americans they don't understand this so when you talk about competition though there is no. competition there is absolute control and their thing that i find is that these types of individuals that are controlling it can control their access to well let me jump in here way to go to a short break or false no no no you don't have your chance after the short break outdoor show in your discussion on the future of the internet stay on our.

skies or financial survival. when customers go by your. well reduce some lower. that's undercutting but what's good for the market is not good for the global economy. everybody i'm stephen ball.

hollywood guy. proud american first of all i'm just george bush and i heard the news this is my buddy max famous financial guru just a little bit different. with all the drama happening in our country and i'm shooting the road have fun every day americans. and hopefully start to bridge the gap this is the great american. welcome back across the uk where all things are considered on people belcher month we're discussing the state of the internet.

let's go back to you in new york and scott had the last word in the first part of the program and you were dissenting please go well i was just going to say we can't fausto an environment that creates money not police i mean these smaller guys still at least have to have a fighting chance listen there's over four thousand individual i s p's in this country you know obviously we have the big dogs you know and they're the ones that control the majority of it but hollows how are consumers ever going to have a choice you know if these smaller people can even compete in the market and i on the side you know i just wanted to bring up that you know going back to something that scott said earlier isn't it ironic or isn't it really not really that surprising that we would give up you know forgive foreign access to our internet infrastructure in the ninety's under the clintons is not like follow a pattern that we wound up seeing going to she was secretary of you totally

different topic and i'd like it i'd like it that's a good one they're ok all right you know scott you know what doesn't it doesn't. there's always patterns with. people you know scott you know. ok we just heard from the you know there's a lot of very small i a speech but you know what it's really almost a monopoly like environment it's the same thing with facebook at the same thing with google here is another thing i'm concerned is more and more concentration and now it looks like the f.c.c. reports to the i is peace that's what it looks like out for this ruling here it is and you know. shedding responsibility i mean they have to have f.c.c. is supposed to make sure that people have access to broadband ok i mean on the on the on the very top of their responsibilities. you know and so i wonder looking at you know shouldn't they be these big companies be broken up and we had standard oil we had other major companies that were broken up i mean it seems to me there's too

much concentration of power too much concentration of money and it's bad for the marketplace and for consumers go ahead scott. well they've tried that they did break up ma bell bell was broken up and then read. a actually at war divorce they remarried under age n.t. and all the all the bells came back together they also tried that with the seal x. and they a lot of people did make some decent money but obviously those have been all basically gobble back up they did the same thing in the cable industry those all started out very local and you had advance newhouse one of the ones early on here in the florida area but they've also the time warner isn't the individuals that own the backbone impose structure you know it's very similar like you brought up with standard oil they own the railway system that was transporting the oil and that's how they control the industry well the same thing goes for the backbone infrastructure for the internet that is owned by a very small select group of people who are controlling that transport on those

backbone infrastructures and you know that infrastructure is very easily managed you look at the kinds of inner connect that they have you know each single fiber will do ten gigabit of. bandwidth and they have tons of single mode fiber polled where they need it and they can always pull more so there's not a problem with the bandwidth issue i think what it comes down to is like you say with rural areas and individuals i live in a neighborhood for example that hasn't been upgraded for the telecom industry so i can only get seven megabit to my house but on the cable side i can get one hundred megabit to my house which is plenty for these days i mean there's plenty of transport to my home at this point seven megabit i would be challenged i mean obviously i can't stream as well across that is the quality of services good on the streaming that i can get from my my cable provider absolutely not when i go out to cody and other places obviously the origination point and the terminations point

will determine where the band with quality is going to be so i can't get as good a quality but that the way that they buffer and they do their compression i get a pretty decent quality brings. stuff in even from across the planet so it's pretty darn good obviously when you're getting out to rural areas it takes more investment are the companies investing or areas absolutely not they're investing in five g. they're going to make everything wireless they're actually going to put the wires out of business in the neighborhood by basically installing stuff onto our eyes and getting it was moving in a different directly julio i mean we could get kind of an internet apartheid in the us. is this what it's leading to. dawdle think. not of the certainly think it's going to i don't listen i think that now it's going to be a little bit more competitive i think you know the smaller companies or even if they wanted to combine and band together perhaps and you know go and fight the big machine let's say you know like i said it's better to not have an environment where

the monopoly just gets more powerful and that's basically what net neutrality did i mean if you look at it it's in the billions of dollars of lost investment you know and all the studies that came out and granted people you know complained about the studies because they were funded by you know the i s p's but. you know at this point let's talk about what more money see what money can do here scott you know i mean. i looked at some sources you know one hundred one million dollars came from these i is peace lobbying congress i suppose they landed their pen and paper and said don't you worry we'll take care of that bill for you ok i mean i looked at the list of everyone taking money that's remarkably bipartisan probably the only bipartisan thing i've seen lately people taking money from the eye of peace let me go to let me go to scott and they will go to julio go ahead scott well absolutely i mean obviously who you know and who you pay off you know we do live in

a country of the history of the meyer lansky the history of the lucky luciano those just like truman was bought and sold by the mob we have our current real estate mobster in chief who has also been in bed with the mob for several decades that also you know this is a problem in the united states you know buying and selling politicians is not a new game they've been bought in time by different interest groups and obviously that neutrality did not hurt anything from a business perspective it's creating another false business model just like enron and this is what we're up against you know up against individuals. who are you know building and industry based upon not creating anything but going towards a service model bit absolutely charges for something that is unnecessary to charge for who you are dissenting again on the program go ahead. know what i was going to say listen when i before he became you know involved with the f.c.c. he was basically working with

a group that was very anti net neutrality back in twenty fifteen and it was a group made up of the smaller piece you're not really getting that. stuff so much see crushes their competition and they never ask i mean i again i mean we kind of looking at it from different points of view here because i see you know it's not all that can pet a tip here i mean what's competitive is their services and they would compete the have different services and and and content here but i mean we're looking at you know i know there are a lot of biased piece but you know there's a few elephants in the room and everything else is very very marginalized and it seems to me the f.c.c. is again walking back it's going in the wrong direction because i don't see that these smaller guys are going to be protected i mean keep the let it go ok ok well that's good but if they go again going back to the beginning of the program if everybody has access ok and i don't see that happening again i see

a step back where people go to get really crappy service and you have to pay a lot of money for it that's not good again everyone should have access to broadband everybody should have access to water and air to go ahead scott. wall it's a broad based on the want of the smaller i is going to the or it's really not a lot of the smaller b.'s were a lot of the smaller pieces were against net neutrality because it took a lot for them to deploy their infrastructure you know they couldn't keep up and they had to rent space in order to provide the quality of service that people were demanding and they have to rent space from the big guys and it's not cheap i mean they they're renting quality and they're and they're colocation centers and they like to have their own colocation centers and have their own infrastructure and when the smaller guys do get together and i don't blame them they don't want to have the same demands put on them by net neutrality which i understand that they can't afford it and that the same time they're not going to win this game they're

just going to be gobbled up as soon as they get enough customers anyway so the fact is is that this is the status quo in american capitalism that you see and this is how it's always been as i don't think it's going to change much with the f.c.c. ruling i think the most interesting thing here that everybody is missing is that this is a legality issue this is how the speech will legally block content that they don't want on there to let networks they will legally block and throttle back things that they don't want to prioritize on their network. other it's a lot of the supporters of net neutrality say going to go to court what are their chances of winning all right well listen i want to bring that up from the legality issue you know forget that neutrality there was a decision recently between two software companies enigma software and now word by its one of my columns up on newsmax where an interpretation of the communications decency act actually allowed one company legally to engage in

a torturous interference against a competitor malware bytes when after a unfairly and basically it were protected by the communications decency act so whether or not we have net neutrality protecting us or not these i s p. you can go ahead and do that and then just have coverage under that law until it's a piece of legislation that was poorly written there is actually a mistake in the way it was written which i pointed out in my column but they would have protection under the communications decency act even if net neutrality is not there ok well it would do you think that they could they will this will be overturned through the courts ok i want to ask maybe scott real quickly and then maybe scott can finish up what about the quote the in the court. of the court that i don't why do why i don't want neutrality saw i'm fine with this i mean it's going to go back to the way it was and we got last few seconds go ahead scott ok so you've had several judges speak out against it already. in support of the trial of a also you had governors actually supported that neutrality certainly

a good lawyer knows the law but a great lawyer knows the judge so is the relationships with anything that is for the people on fortunately a good and that will be the case of that and there's a huge area and i'm pretty well i guess that's the best ending on this program in a very long time that's all the time we have gentlemen many thanks to my guess in new york and in tampa and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at r.t.c. you next time a member prospect will. join me every thursday on the alex salmond chill and i'll be speaking to guest of the world of politics or business i'm show business i'll see you then.

across europe municipality niggas from elsewhere though they invited private companies to take over the utilities many bought a telescope of a luxury she goes to go on the pier might be cool. been this is a stick with them oh look you. are over somewhere you remember the lift still broader locals are ready to stand up for the basic human right of access to water it's about water but it's also over much more and more it's about the hurt and the redistribution of almost all girls and their debt downwards we want all. the confidence in the system is collapsing and there is no turning back this is the collapse of the nation state and the central bank and the fractional reserve money system big coing is banks what the

printing press was to the catholic church it collapsed it in many ways this is the end of this era this is the new beginning this is about everyone having autonomy and sovereignty with their own money. and the. president trump threatens to cut aid to united nations members who voted against america's decision to recognize jerusalem as its rails council. to these ideas is it dangerous to say here it's ok think you would enjoy. a correspondent reports on the unrest in ramallah as palestinians declare another day of rage against donald trump's jerusalem in. social media giant facebook is accused of

abusing its monopoly in too many and inappropriate collect. shouldn't have used his data. and bloody made putin say is foreign intelligence services are ramping up their activities in russia trying to interfere in the country's internal affairs. i am.