yes that in the 1st place we'll break it down so much to get to today so let's dive right in. and the federal reserve will hold interest rates at their current levels adding it's unlikely we will see another cut this year or actually in the next year after cutting interest rates 3 times in 2019 the central bank decided to keep the target range of 1.5 percent to 1.75 percent that decision was made by a unanimous vote now the 2 days of policy the meetings were the last of the year for the federal open markets committee and in a statement the committee said monetary policy is likely to remain where it is adding the committee judges that the current stance of monetary policy is appropriate to support sustained expansion of economic activity strong labor market conditions and inflation near the committee's symmetric 2 percent objective the fed added they will also continue to monitor global economic conditions as they develop which could alter their plan of action and for more on this we're going to be joined today by richard wolfe professor of economics and host of economic update

press well thank you so much for joining us today. glad to be here no no i want to start with the fetid signaling they don't want to alter rates over the next decade does this point to the central bank thinking we're out of the weeds of this economic downturn or is it more of a fear that low rates may be the new normal or are they just trying to stick to president trump what do you see going on here. i think they're marching along a very narrow law and they are listening to president trump even in ways that most economists think they shouldn't but they're also trying to show that they haven't least a little bit of independence left so they don't just look like a chorus of mr trump's so i think that's what you're seeing it's clear that the american economy doesn't need more cutting of interest rates because of the danger which has always been there that this kind of flooding the economy with cheap money with more money produced always carries the risk that that money will suddenly

start to look to buy goods and services and give us the inflation that could run quickly out of control they're worried about that it's not there yet they worried about it in the past but they're still nervous and i think that's why there is at least a month independence not to cut the rates which mr trump wants only because he needs to goose the economy in preparation for next november's election or professor i also want to get your input on the u.s. in ca which was agreed to on tuesday by members of congress we explained on tuesday that the u.s. in ca it's really not a vastly better deal than nafta listen to this. answer to lucy house democrats have not given us a significantly better deal than nafta and president trump hasn't either and here's the most important reason why because nafta decimated the manufacturing industry in the united states according to commerce secretary wilbur ross the us in ca get this

is expected to create 176000. the new jobs with the possible possible 589000 new jobs created over the next 5 years compare that with nafta which according to the bureau of labor and statistics cost 4500000 u.s. manufacturing jobs. so at the end of the day everybody's patting themselves on the back how proud they are of this new deal and how it's a victory right the democrats are saying it's their victory present terms as his victory but are people ultimately going to be disappointed that the u.s. in ca really doesn't change manufacturing in the u.s. or really across north america for the better. yes let me go out on a limb because i really don't believe in predictions but here i'm so confident i will tell you this agreement will make no significant difference the only reason we have it is the following it's mostly political theater 90 percent theater 10 percent and i'm being generous substance let me explain what mr trump needs and

wants is the theater that he is tearing up old agreements that were good for us and substituting new better ones see he's the champion he's making it better the democrats weren't going to give him that what they were saying was we need more protections for labor for the unions for the working people who were decimated by nafta ok here's what the deal was the democrats wanted to show they're not just impeaching the president they're doing useful things so they finally agreed to the better language for working people than the old one republicans were happy because mr trump can say he got the new agreement the politicians are happy even the unions are happy because they got better language but here's the key thing nothing matters unless it's in force the new language to protect workers has to be enforced and the

enforcement is left to the mexicans who don't do that at all and the i'm. americans under trump who look the other way and that's not going to change so you're not going to see enforcement and the extra language nice as it is is not going to make much of a difference and the continuation of the of manufacturing jobs in america will continue because this is mostly theater and not real professor wolf i don't want to get too grandiose here with you i don't like predictions here but what would have been the proper way to handle this renegotiation of nafta then because we saw everybody was unhappy with nafta and now really everybody appears to be happy with the u.s. m.c.a. so in your opinion maybe one maybe not everybody's and have nobody yet right although there's a lot of that but yeah but what in your opinion would be the way to move this forward and actually make a better deal while still continuing that trade deal with the new north america.

well let me respond with a little bit of history when nafta was passed it was passed by mr bill clinton as president with the support of the business community and all these glowing reports like you just began this program with we're going to add millions of jobs we're going to do this it's a win win for america for us mexico and canada none of that panned out that was the self congratulations of the people who cut this deal who were answering to a few industries that benefit that's all that has happened again if you really wanted to change the situation for what it's been you would have to sit down and really work with all of the industries all of the labor unions and all of the consumer watchdogs and the ecological none of that was done i don't know if you paid attention the enough to catch the detail i will be caught just now that most

of the specific language still has not been released to the public why not because the people who made this deal don't want us to see how little has changed how many voices were left out of the conversation if you want to make a real agreement you've got to bring all the stakeholders to the table they've never done this and they didn't do it this time either and it is important to remember that as you mentioned this was all run under president clinton but it started under george h. bush it was all kind of drought and together it was a bipartisan debacle before yes like it did the bipartisan debacle again host of economic update professor i'm sure wolf thanks for talking to us but stick around we're going to talk to you is a little bit later in the program on another subject. well the. boeing $737.00 max will not be taking to the skies until at least early 2020

according to federal aviation administrators chief steve dix that the head of the u.s. regulator made the comments ahead of testimony in front of the u.s. house transportation and infrastructure committee on wednesday during the hearings the administrator said the f.a.a. is taking the lead on the issue for the $737.00 max return to service the f.a.a. fully controls the approvals process and is not delegating in anything to boeing we retain authority to issue air we're going to certificates and export certificates of airworthiness for all new 737 max airplanes manufactured since the grounding. in the 737 max was returned to service it will be because the safety issues have been addressed and pilots have received all the training they need to safely operate the aircraft. the 737 max has been ground in since march of this year following 2 deadly crashes in the hearing analysis from the f.a.a. was released showing that after the 1st crash regulators saw

a high likelihood of future crashes but decided to allow the 737 max to continue to fly. well the troubled ministration has issued a new round of sanctions against iran hitting iran's biggest shipping company and largest airline washington claiming that the 2 companies are helping to run develop ballistic missiles in a violation 'd of existing u.s. sanctions secretary of state mike bump a announce those things since on wednesday on the islamic republic of iran shipping lines and on the air says the move will quote put the world on notice that those who engage in illicit transactions with these companies will risk exposure to sanctions for themselves saying quote these most recent sanctions are just the latest move by the trump administration though when a campaign aimed at persuading iran to replace the 2015 nuclear accord which was abandoned by president trump trump says he will have open talks with iran the to run refuses to engage while there are still they are still under sanctions. time now for a quick break behave here because when we return to wild ways c.f.o.

has been held by canadian authorities for months but has now won a court fight to see more documents about why she was arrested in the 1st place we'll break it down and as we go to break here you numbers at the close.

match prizes financial survival guide stacey let's learn a salad fill out let's say i'm looks like it and you're curious on grease on face of the fight wall street fraud thank you for helping. on the story that's true. slavery. a little bit of let me. ask i would name will. pick i could come critic and it could not trouble getting loans to show more than. you love who you know nothing. to do make good to see because the ones who come. to who want to have all of the kook on the scene do it in the out now as you.

know most of the people focus. on you and those 2 moons who moved in with whom much of this news to learn and to for not. who would you hire tied to use into doing. what you. want to meet you has on the net. is you'll be via reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. isolation because you don't see. are you going the right way or are you being that so.

what is true. is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the death. or remain in the shallows. welcome back this next story is bizarre so stay with me here but u.s. lawmakers are pushing ahead of new sanctions intended to block the completion of a new pipeline constructed to carry russian natural gas to germany but meet the baltic sea it's called the nord stream to pipeline it is one of europe's largest energy deals but let's be clear about this because germany and russia have an agreement to buy and sell natural gas to each other right and yet the u.s.

is going to impose sanctions on the companies providing pipe lane services in order to stop the progress of this pipeline and it gets better because this round of sanctions are included in the 738000000000 dollar 2020 national defense authorization act again the claim is that this is a quote geo political gambit by russia to strengthen his grip on european energy markets in quote or so writes the wall street journal. and now ben this is a bizarre story as you said because it for one it seems like you're sanctioning a business for a military defense bill right. but there was actually no military angle to there's no military angle to it i suppose the administration pertaining to its national security but it's not national security look saying sions and i have a lot of issues with how sanctions are used to begin with but sanctions are supposed to be used to deter bad behavior by

a nation state or companies within that nation state right we're talking about like nuclear issues and those kinds of things that's not what's happening here in this case it is as bizarre as to say russia and germany have worked out an economic agreement to provide natural gas germany has actually been contesting this with the us asking them to not impose these sanctions because they want the natural gas russia's trying to provide natural gas but the u.s. is saying because we want to control natural gas we're going to punish this pipeline company in order to deter and stop germany from getting the natural gas because it feels like germany is the one who's hurt the most out of this deal i mean russia feels the economic with gazprom but overall germany is the one who's hurt because they don't get the cheap natural gas they needed they don't get the natural gas a woman again this is an abuse of sanctions so let's go deeper on this and other energy to bring you back and richard wolffe host of the economic update so richard let's be clear about what's happening here sanctions again as i said they're typically used at least that's what we're told right to deter bad behavior by

governments that's clearly not what this is russia is not forcing germany to purchase natural gas and again germany is actively lobbying against this action by the u.s. and on top of all of that as brit pointed out this is part of a national defense bill what say you. well i think this is remarkable because it's a kind of tectonic shift a major shift the republican party and let's remember that what mr trump is the leader of now has traditionally been the against the government interfering in the economy the government is not supposed to pick winners and losers the government is not supposed to levy heavy taxes which is what our of so are there a kind of tax and yet here we see a government of republicans actively using government interference in this case particularly targeting a country that we're not at war with that is an ally of ours germany particularly

targeting a particular company as if it had the right to do that let me make sure that your audience our audience understands in every major european newspaper this is seen as an aggressive act of economic warfare by the united states against germany and russia in this case against argentina and brazil a couple of weeks ago with those tariffs against the chinese as we all know this is the united states no longer playing the role of the leader of a globalized interactive world where business is encouraged this is the united states hunkering down punishing everybody it feels like for reasons that are very hard to understand and looking for all the world as the roles state that is on doing the global economy in the hopeless effort to once again gain some kind of

control they imagine they once had this should concern americans because of the rabid kind of changing mentality of a state that has to. protect itself all the time with these aggressive actions very dangerous yeah and just following up on that so you make a good point about republicans right so president trump talks about not being involved in all these conflicts around the world and yet he is sparking conflicts on the economic front i mean this is really economic totalitarianism right where he essentially is saying in this case it's about you know natural gas and energy but in other cases for the case of japan he's trying to force them to buy their new f. 2 from military contractors that are american military contractors as you pointed out he's punishing argentina and brazil because they're competing on the soybean front it seems like every place there is economic competition this president is attempting to use his power as president and again the national defense bills to

harm other countries economically and it seems like that is a very dangerous position to put the country in. very dangerous it's making us real enemies that video that went viral last week of the leaders of the european nato countries laughing at mr trump that's also a little sign but it's a sign of leaders in the rest of the world beginning to take seriously that the united states from being the leader that they followed being the leader of the free world they like to call it that's over and it's not just mr trump it's not just even the republican party the democratic party is saying very little against all of this they're busy with russian interference in elections they're busy with impeachment but when this kind of aggressive transformation when the world looks to be threatened by the united states economically the democrats who ought to be an

opposition are bizarrely quiet with a few exceptions and i think that makes the rest of the world worry that this kind of a shift runs deeper than mr trump and the republicans and that makes it even more dangerous for them and therefore for us and you're absolutely right because it does feel like the democrats are very quiet especially when we come into sanctions of another country and they're supposed to be be completely against me not supposed to be a complete i guess but they tend to be completely against everything that trump says and that's what they do i want to make a little bit of a transition here to the oil markets now saudi aramco shares surged the maximum permitted 10 percent above their i.p.o. price this week the saudi government is hailing this as a bin to cation of its 2 trillion dollars valuation of the state oil company do you believe that this company is overvalued or is it really the world's most valuable company. while i think what you're seeing here is

a speculation by the people buying into this company for the following reason saudi arabia is such. major player in the world oil market that you're now going to have people owning shares in a company whose decisions will affect the price of oil and therefore the price of these shares all the shareholders are going to want saudi arabia to manipulate the quantity of oil in the world in order to boost its price therefore the company's shares and therefore validate their investment it's as if a company could print its own money and they're gambling that the saudi knows they have to do that otherwise people will sell that those shares they want to see the government taking the power it has to control the price and they're gambling that that's going to happen the rest of the world will have to see whether they tolerate

that because the rest of the world if they act together can only do the power of saudi arabia over all oil will they do it the answer is what will happen to the people hurt by rising oil prices how powerful are they versus the saudis who are going to have every incentive now to jack up the price of oil and for the rest of us we will watch this game without being able to shape it except we'll have to pay the price of oil that is the result and we're short on time i think 30 seconds it's got to be a quick answer here but you know opec is trying to do that richard they are trying to right now work a deal to slash production and lower those numbers but us in the tories up in fact we just got a new reports showing us imagery is actually much higher than had been thought is the u.s. that when a wrench into that opec or opec plus plan very quickly. i think the united states is like every other country there's a interests who want the price down interests who want the price of and that's the

fight that they're having we all live with the consequences and have no real input on to this contest between contesting capitalist interests that's the rock truth of it. professor richard wolfe thank you so much for your time appreciate you doing both segments with us today no problem glad to do it. the chief financial officer for awhile way has won a court battle to see more evidence related to or arrest many $10.00 was arrested and detained in canada a year ago at the request of the united states where she was charged with bank fraud related to wall ways business in iran legal journalist molly barrows contributor with a lawyer has more on what the court decision means for her case molly thank you so much for joining us today let's start off by asking the simple question what are the details of this ruling. well to get into that tale

a bit about the case made of course says she is innocent of these bank fraud charges that her legal team is fighting this extradition from canada on the grounds that the u.s. is using it for economic and political gain she also says canadian authorities unlawfully held searched and interrogated her to collect evidence on behalf of the f.b.i. and that's how we get to this ruling because it really centers around so that evidence in particular maine told canadian police the passwords to her electronic devices like her i phone and her i pad because she says she thought it was part of the border check requirement but canadian police and gave some of that identifying information about her electronics to federal agents in the u.s. and she's like what so to prove her claims making ass canada's attorney general to release more documents related to events leading up to her arrest especially any communications between canadian and u.s. law enforcement so in this ruling a supreme court judge in british columbia agreed with her up to a point said there was evidence to her claims or at least they could see where there was some evidence gaps in that in the documentation so she agreed to let some

of those documents related to her arrest be reviewed and she didn't say all the documents she didn't necessarily address the allegations that canadian authorities abuse the legal process. but she said because there were gaps in that evidence that needed to be considered. canadians' attorney general now needs to review that court decision and to determine which documents fall under the george judge's order to be reviewed and should be released to mainz legal team so that's basically what it is the judge agreed with her yeah you're right there's some sketchy communication between the 2 that's my word not the judge's but yeah you can go ahead take a look at that now it's up to the canadian attorney general to decide which of those documents ball under that ruling that she can look at there's a couple of really interesting things about that including the fact that. originally thought that she was just being asked to go to a secondary screening area and they did not notify her for some time that she was actually going to be arrested or charged with anything so it was really done in a way that would seem to be deceptive and i think there was videotape that indicated that as well but how is her arrest affected what we do business in canada

and the in even in china. well it's interesting because it is such a political lightning rod right now of course as we know while way is a private company but experts say it still plays a crucial role in china's strategic interests overseas and according to canadian news reports a new report shows that a growing number of canadians have soured on the company in china as a result basically because of the tearing relationship between the 2 countries not long after meng's arrest last december china arrested and is still imprisoning 2 canadians for spying while the technology also wants to build a 5 g. mobile network in canada but the majority of people polled think ottawa's shouldn't do it they should reject the company's big keep them out and also a higher number of people so they had a more negative review our view of china in general than in years past you also had prime minister justin trudeau they wanted to take a harder stance on china after he tried to sign a free trade agreement a country that came to an abrupt end so there's just a slew of problems that basically have some canadians going after we don't really

want to keep china at arm's length and even in china is not getting a lot of sympathy she's considered a princess if you will because she's the daughter of the founder of the company which is already being criticized in. china for overworking their employees here she's being held under apartheid house arrest in a $10000000.00 mansion one of 2 that she and mann coover and there's still a controversial case of another former huawei employee in china that's making a lot of headlines there when the company imprisoned him for allegations of extortion so does a lot of unrest in china they're not happy about it her extortion hearing is next month. tribute to america's lawyer thank you so much for your time today and that is it for this time you can catch boom bust on youtube dot com slash boom bust archie see you next time.

that's in the individual i think very much i have to do what i think is right i have to fend to defend my values have to defend my principles and if i feel the state is not doing it according to what i think is the right thing then i have to stand up and say it's not good enough and if i as a humanitarian feel that the next to me is not respected and treated in a dignified way then i have to also stand up in this regard so yes we have to do it despite that it is maybe a very long term fight and we are not necessarily winning this. facebook and google started with a great idea and great ideals unfortunately it was also a very dark so. they are constructing a profile of you and that profile is real it's detailed and it never goes away turns out that google is manipulating your opinions from the very 1st character

that you type into the search bar it will always favor one dog food over another one comparative shopping service over another. and one candidate over another they can suppress certain types of results on what they think you should be seen if they have this kind of power then democracy is an illusion the free and fair election doesn't exist the more we give them the sooner we are all.

pressure expels to german diplomats in a mirror of response to the lid i made a spot. russia could be put on the u.s. list of state sponsors of terrorism that's under a new bill making its way through congress. and the chinese restaurant in new york by a white woman shuts down off the chest 8 months amid a clash of a cultural appropriation once again this is a busybody noir white liberal preoccupation who think they have to police the world and stand up for all the poor suffering minorities out there the problem was that the owner did indulge in a few stereotypes. on time magazine's person of the year in $29000.00 is.