to the. during the great depression which i'm old enough to remember there was and most of my family were unemployed working class there wasn't it was bed you know much worse objectively than today but there was an expectation that things were going to get better. there was a real sense of hopefulness there isn't today. inequality is really unprecedented i'm sure that total inequality it's like the worst periods

in american history. but if you're a find it more closely the inequality comes from the extreme wealth in a tiny sector of the population fraction of one percent. there were periods like the gilded age in the twenty's the early ninety's and so on when a situation developed by the similar to this. now this period 6 trillion because if you look at their wealth distribution the inequality mostly comes from super wealth . literally the top 110th of a percent are just super wealthy. not only is it extremely unjust in itself. inequality has highly negative consequences on the so it is awful. because the very

fact of inequality has a corrosive harmful effect markers that. you opened by talking about the american dream or the american dream is classman dillard it will encourage you or kurt. get rich it was possible for a worker to get a decent job. at a core of children who are school. collapse. imagine yourself in an outside position looking for mars. what do you see.

in the united states when there are professed to like democracy. in a democracy public opinion is going to have some influence on poesy. and then the government carries out actions determined by the population and that's what democracy means. it's important to understand that privileged and powerful sectors have never liked democracy and for very good reasons. democracy puts power into the hands of the general population

and takes it away from them. as kind of the principle of concentration of wealth and power. were. concentration of wealth yields concentration of power particularly so as the cost of elections skyrockets which kind of forces the political parties into the pockets of major corporations. and this political power. translates into legislation that increases the concentration of wealth so fiscal policy like tax policy deregulation. rules of corporate governance a whole variety of measures political measures designed to increase the

concentration of wealth and power which in turn the yield more political power to do the same thing. and that's what we've been seeing. so we have this kind of vicious cycle in progress. you know actually it is so traditional that it was described by adam smith in 1776 he read the famous wealth of nations. he says in england the principal architects of policy are the people on the society in his day merchants and manufacturers. and they make sure that their own interests are very well cared for however grievous the impact on the people of england there are others. now it's not

a merger of manufacturers it's financial institutions and multinational corporations the people who adam smith called the masters of mankind and they're following the vile maxim over our selves and nothing for anyone else. they're just going to pursue policies that benefit them and harm everyone else. and in the absence of a general popular reaction that's pretty much what you'd expect. right through american history there. it's been an ongoing clash between. pressure for more freedom and democracy coming from below and the efforts that elite control and domination coming from above.

because back to the founding of the country. james madison the main framer who was as much of the believer in democracy is anybody in the world that they nevertheless felt that the united states' system should be designed and indeed was his initiative was designed so that power should be in the hands of the wealthy . because the wealthier there are more responsible set of men and therefore the structure of the formal constitutional system placed most power in the hands of the senate or the senate was not elected in those days it was selected from the wealthy men as madison put it had sympathy for property owners in their right. to read the debates at the constitutional convention. madison says the major concern of the society has to be to protect the minority of the opulent against the

majority. and here argument suppose everyone had to vote freely as they will the majority of the poor get together and they would organize to take away the property of the rich and he said that would obviously be unjust so he can't have that so therefore the constitutional system has to be set up to prevent democracy. which is of some interest that this debate has a horror tradition goes back to the 1st major book on political. systems aristotle's politics. he says of all of them the best is democracy and at any point said exactly the flaws that medicine put into.

if athens were a democracy for free men the poor would get together and take away the property the rich. well the same dilemma they had opposite solutions aristotle proposed what we would nowadays call a welfare state as a try to reduce inequality. so the same problem absent solutions one is reduce inequality will have this problem and the other is reduced monikers. if you look at the history of the united states it's a constant struggle between these 2 tendencies democratising tendency that's mostly coming from the population pressure from below and you get these constant battle going on periods or gratian periods of progress in 1906 for example were a period of significant democratization.

sectors of the folk elation that were usually passive and the city became organized active story pressing their demand. and they became more and more involved in decision making and their wisdom and so on. they just changed consciousness in ways. ready minority rights. we don't want our. women's rates. if we force it to

say. in terms of the. american as. they say boring atlantic city you know survival opposition to aggression to those who criticize us. dissent they are serious about lawn on the provider of the vietnamese people black people and people concerned for other people 1. 1000000 poor people in america when you begin. to reason. the system of distribution of wealth. these are all symbolizing to say. that cause great fear.

had. anticipated the power of should have but it didn't then to speak the power of the reaction to the civilizing effects of the sixty's i did not anticipate the strength of the reaction to it was the backlash. but i do. the fishing pilate was an important accomplishment of diplomacy and it's too early. to talk about its demise but unfortunately the europeans have not been able to put their money where their mouth is they have been stating

and to support for the j.c. pure way but they have not been prepared to take the risks to invest in order to maintain a great achievement of diplomacy. i . ready ready ready am sure they need to stop at the continuing to grow. i just never know very good about the idea of bringing children into the world because i didn't feel like things were in very good shape that a life was just going to be a lot of software program. there is no reason the more. you take

things that are to me the. most is a myth something else that. everybody's scared to talk to that is certifiable is really dependent on us addressing this issue and if we can even talk about it if we can even have a conversation of that it then. we're in trouble. and . there.

there has been an enormous concentrated coordinated business offensive beginning in the seventy's to try to beat back the egalitarian efforts that went right through the nixon years and you see it in many respects and over on the right you see it in things like the famous pell memorandum. sent to the chamber of commerce major business lobby the later supreme court justice powell warning them that business is losing control over the society. and something has to be done to counter these forces course it puts it in terms of the defense defending

ourselves against outside powers. if you look at it it's a call for business to use its control over resources to carry out a major offensive to beat back this democratizing wave. over on the liberal side something exactly similar to the 1st. major report of the a trilateral commission is concerned with this. called the crisis of democracies. trilateral commission is liberal internationalists in their flavors indicated by the fact that they pretty much staff the corridor ministration. they were also told that democratizing tendencies of the sixty's and so we have to

react to it. they were concerned that there was an excess of to not proceed developing. previously passive and obedient parts of the population or sometimes called the special interests who were beginning to organize and try to enter the political arena and they said that imposes too much pressure on the state can't deal with all these pressures so therefore they have to return to passivity and become the politicised. and they were particularly concerned with what was happening to young people young people get into free and independent. in the way they put it there's a failure on the part of the schools the universities churches the institutions responsible for the indoctrination of the young there for it is not mine.

if you look at their study there's one interesting never mention private business and that makes sense they're not special interest they're the national interest kind of by definition so they're ok they're allowed to you know flub is said by campaign staff the executive make decisions that's fine but it's the rest the special interests the general population who have to be subdued. when that's the specter it's the kind of ideological level of the backlash but the major backlash. which was unparalleled this. was just redesigning the economy.

since the 1970 is there's been a concerted effort on the part of the masters of mankind the owners of the society to shift the economy in 2 crucial respects one to increase the role of financial institutions banks investment firms and so on insurance companies. but a 2007 break before the latest crash they had literally 40 percent of corporate profits. far beyond anything in the past. back in the 1950 s. and as for many years before the united states economy was based largely on production. in the united states as the great manufacturing center of the world.

financial institutions used to be a relatively small part of the economy and their task was to distribute unused assets like a bank savings to productive activity buying our way to hide on. money. holders to monitor on the back of the reserve bank. going to hide providing an. outing money. to the community by making. money for a manufacturer to meet a fire ongoing high coming. to unlock some remodel her car. her money on a good reason why people are always needing more and i have immediately available. that's a contribution to the economy. regulatory system was established banks were regulated the commercial investment banks were separated cut back or risk investment

practices that could harm private people. there had been remember no financial crashes during the period of regulation by the 1970 s. that changed. the sort of getting to shoot increase in the flows of speculative capital just astronomically increased and enormous changes in the financial sector from traditional banks to risky investments. complex financial instruments money manipulations and so on increasingly the business of the country isn't production at least not here. the primary business here is business. you can even see it in the choice of directors so a director of

a major american corporation back in the fifty's in the sixty's was very likely to be an engineer as somebody who graduated from a place like mit maybe industrial management more recently the directorship in the top managerial positions or people who came out of business schools learned financial trickery of various kinds and so on. by the 1970 s. say general electric can make more profit playing games with money than you could buy producing in the united states. you have to remember that general electric is substantially a financial institution today it makes half its profits just by moving money around in a complicated ways. and it's very unclear that they're doing anything that sort of value to the economy. so that's one phenomena let's go financial ization of the economy. going along with that is the oil sure into production.

the trade system was reconstructed with a very explicit design of putting working people in competition with one another all over the world. and what it's led to is a reduction in the share of income on the part of working people. spend particularly striking in the united states but happening worldwide it means that an american workers in competition with super exploited worker in china. meanwhile highly paid professionals are protected they're not placed in competition with the rest of the world far from it and of course a capitalist free to move

a workers aren't free to move labor can't move but capital can well again going back to the classics like adam smith as he pointed out the free circulation of labor is the foundation of any free trade system but workers are pretty much stuck the wealthy in the privileged are protected so you get obvious consequences and they're recognized in fact praised. policy is designed to increase in security. alan greenspan and when he testified to conquers he explained his success in running the economy as based on what he called. greater worker insecurity. a typical restraint on compensation increases has been evident for a few years but as i outlined in some detail in testimony last month i believe that job insecurity has played the dominant role workers and secured are going to be

under control. they're not going to ask for say decent wages were a decent working conditions or the opportunity to free association meaning unions. for the masters of mankind that's fine they made their profits but for the population it's devastating. for these 2 processes financial ization i'm sure are part of what led to the vicious cycle of concentration of wealth concentration of power.

live. lists

lists lists. leaked. and a very warm welcome to you you're watching us in such. said she stressed to make sure that the british and the bill of voted out that it will set up. shop question was to you she then taste a taste that is she's a c.e.o. which quite a lot. to which she never happened and now look what you've seen in investments to check or a woman in there for sure and. want to go to the show through my if you're going to

be. there mr ellsworth supporter. put them to the spirit of earth or does it seem to be arguable that it's a studio actually the person who personally don't come or should stop them spinning . expressed. well you know the fire thing we've kind of adopted because we were called pirates for so long. i mean they're in this small ball of snakes you know harpoon ships and it's standing. up in. the limo self to beak cold fish already 90 percent of the dot and it won't encounter. a concept 15 scoops 75 tons true and they do it several times a day with

a big fleet oh you get an idea of why ocean fish. we have to understand we can all still use to just. be witness of the new deal going to the hours. i'm doing this because i want the future world to the future generations to have and enjoy the ocean we have. and in.

the midst of a sham of protests ruling party rebellion and threats of a snap election a blockbuster brags that showdown gets underway u.k. parliament return from the summer recess. us media outlets claims moscow's been interfering abroad for a whole said sure a week but the weather the russian meddling could have been used for events even a 1000 years ago. pushing the boundaries between religious freedoms and animal welfare a region kosher and slaughter methods will be debating this issue of life itself.