well it's like the worst periods of american history ready. but if you're a find it more closely the inequality comes from the extreme wealth in a tiny sector the population fraction of one percent. there were periods like the gilded age in the twenty's and the early nineties and so on when a situation will rather 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 cup 110th of a percent are just super wealthy. not only is it extremely unjust in itself. inequality has really negative consequences on the so is a whole. because the very fact of inequality has

a corrosive harmful effect mockers. you open by talk about the american dream or the american dream is closed and bill if it weren't for you work or you get rich it was possible for a worker to get a decent job. get a core of children go to school. to a 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 policy. 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. 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 a deregulation. rules of corporate governance a whole variety of measures political measures designed to increase the

concentration of wealth and power which in turn to 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 776 he read the famous wealth of nations. he says in england the principle architects of policy by 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 greed is 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 told 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'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 a 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 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 you 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 hurried tradition goes back to the 1st major book on political systems aristotle's politics. is. of all of them the best is democracy and it only points out exactly the flaws that medicine put it into. if absent were a democracy for free men the poor would get together and take away the property the

rich. well same dilemma they had opposite solutions or settle for posed what we would nowadays call a welfare state and try to reduce inequality. so the same problem if said solutions one is reduce inequality will have this problem and the other is reduced democracy. if you look at the history of the united states it's a constant struggle between these 2 tendencies democratizing tendencies that's mostly coming from the population pressure from below and you get this constant battle going on periods or gratian periods of progress in 1906 for example were a period of significant democratization.

sectors of the fucking lation 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 activism and so on. they just changed consciousness and always. minority rights. we don't want. women's rights. or.

concern for the. american. position of creation. criticizers. serious of. concern for other people. distribution of wealth the. civilizing effect. that caused great fear.

anticipated the power of a should have but it didn't anticipate the power of the reaction to the civilizing effects of the 60s did not anticipate the strength of the reaction to it. the backlash. ever since the arrival of boris johnson to 10 downing street there's a growing sense of inevitability that brags it will be executed on october 31st with or without a deal i mean we get to this point what lessons have been learned. she

stressed to make sure that the british and the bill of the. job was to you she. pushed quite a shock. which. i know what you mean in a response to trick or for sure you. want to talk to me short of your my it's your bonus for tribute. to mr ellsworth supporter i'm still with. arguable that it's a stupid actually the 1st person to be drunk or should step up and spit it. spiced she.

dares me. leap here. this is a stick from the water bottle found in the stomach of a fish the brand is spawns of the coca-cola company which sells millions of bottles of soda every day the idea was that let's tell consumers there are the bad ones there the litter bugs are throwing us away industry should be blamed for all this waste the company has promised to reuse the plastic. their class to. stay. and you don't know that that's not going to take the funding

you thought that there was a living and i knew that that is the end of it for you to the finale the mountains of waste only grow higher. 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 and 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 democracy. trilateral commission is liberal internationalists there are flavors indicated by the fact that they pretty much staff the corridor ministration.

and they were also call. the democratizing tendencies of the sixty's and so we have to react to that. 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 a city and become the politicized. and they were particularly concerned with what was happening to young people and young people get into free and independent. record. 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 interest they never mention private business and that makes sense they're not special interests they're the national interest kind of by definition so they're ok they're led to you know have be as good by campaign staff the executive make decisions that's fine but it's the rest of the special interest 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 in peril of this was just redesigning the economy.

since the 1907 days 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. 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 bank savings to productive activity and buying our way and had on hand to raise our money. holders to monitor on the back of the reserve bank can. be hiding. money on the anchor of the community by making. money for a manufacturer and i mean i'm going. to unlock and remodel her arm and my money on a 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. you started getting that if you increase in the flows of speculative capital just astronomically increased an 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 the director of

a major american corporation back in the fifty's and sixty's was very likely to be an engineer and 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 complicated ways and it's very unclear that they're doing anything that's of value to the economy. so that's one phenomena let's go financial ization of the economy. going along with the. it 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. it's been particularly striking in the united states but happening worldwide it means that in american workers in competition with a 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 are 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 congress 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 arabs

. robin security 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. now for the masters of mankind that's fine they make their profits but for the population it's devastating. for these 2 processes financial ization and offshoring are part of what led to the vicious cycle of concentration of wealth concentration of power. i.

ready ready ready ready ready need to stop at the to do we need to grow. i just never know very good about the idea of bringing it into the world because i didn't feel like things were in very good shape. life was just going to be a lot of software programs. there's no reason to. take things that are to me. there's no reason to make something. to everybody's scared to talk about it 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. were in trouble

ready. you know so many people reference the marie antoinette let them eat cake and then you know historians have gone back and they said you know it's actually my cake brioche. you know that so i brought in actually oh my god what a mess we brought in actual brioche this is a brioche just a slice there at the touch a story and so this is what she suggested that the peasants should be eating because they run out of d.c. this is a brioche is a slightly nicer version of that there's a few in the cupboard let's throw that to the peasants and maybe that'll shut them up a. little. lead .

lead. lead. player. plays. lead. play. play. live. just split.

playing. and very well might continue watching us in such. you know world of big partisan movies lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the back and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks.

today there are good terrorists and bad debt it is the bad debt and those in yemen who the united states deems to be a threat the looked at those who work in syria the cia and the us military were engaged in covert actions really throughout the world. where they were assassinating populist leaders they were backing up the right way military juntas funding and arming death squads there's no posts anymore because there's always a small people for a really good this is a profit. made

weapons are allegedly ending up in the hands of terrorists in yemen and syria. the u.s. and its allies supporting leaks documents obtained by. right. and think. they are. british prime minister. as lawmakers reject his call for an early general election to prevent a no deal. raising the pressure on europe to uphold.