it's like a person is saying, i give my body for the internet and the medical students to practice on. i'm the come doctors in the future to realize that these bodies using a tank explosion, for example, and understand what damage the explosion made the body. it's just horrible. they can, has been closed since the revelations emerged 2 years ago. the university apologize at the time for families of donors, but the scandal could provoke big changes. hearing problems and government report in due this month is expected to recommend better supervision of the donation of bodies. but that, of course, will be little consolation for the families who have already given their bodies for medical research, schulty b, r t, paris. so that brings you up to date for now. don't forget that we bought a website full of stories. 2 is usually can find that at

r t dot com. oh, i me the i the the, the the

greetings and salutations. welcome one and all. yes, my friends, it feels who feels really good to be back on your television and mo, bile screens and boil boil boy, look at all the fun, frolic mayhem and devastation. i've come back to israel versus palestine. republicans versus democrats. democrats versus progressive is rich versus poor man versus earth from birth vs as well. basic reality. how mean look around the world, we got chemical fires on cargo ships. officer elonka, we got president joe biden promising over $750000000000.00 of the us war machine. and unicef is now reporting that across the world. about 1000000000 children are multi dimensionally poor,

meaning they lack necessities as basic as nutrition or clean water. but despite a world on fire, apparently the real victims in this world are the poor huddled on born masses. no, i'm, i'm not talking about the debate over abortion and roe v wade. no, i'm talking about this article from bloomberg business week, sporting this rather incredible headline asking us to quote, spare a thought for the billions of people who will never exist. yes, peter coy, the economics editor for bloomberg business week is now apparently asking us to consider and more in the plight of human beings who are never, ever going to actually be with human beings in the article coil, immense billions of children are never conceived how real is the loss of

a life that never began? is the re right to exist? is there an ideal size of the world population? these related questions become more pressing as population growth slows. and while the article goes on and on, delving into the deep philosophical battle over how many people should exist at any given moment, it's that last line that i quoted that kind of gives away the gag world, population growth flows. and that my friends is the rub you see is birth rates decline and more and more of my millennial gen and gen the brothers and sisters, they hell no, we won't pro, create. that's got the world, the lead. they're nervous. no new people means no new indentured servants to their economic slavery games because of the new york times reports quote, the strain of longer lives and low fertility leading to fewer workers. and more retirees threatens to up and how societies are organized. because right now,

they're organized around the notion that a surplus of young people will drive economies and help pay for the old boy. but if there's, you know, if there's no new young people that means no one there to pay for the old. and that means my friends, it is time to start watching the hawks. if you want to know what's going on a city and you want to rush, let me show you what you always. the roy throw, strikes, math grade. ha, leave them a deception. manipulate so much. put these weapons. so open up your welcome. everybody to watching the lark. i am die roll. ventura. nice across. yes. back again. back again. hell, no, we won't. pro create is the dryer. the resulting cry from the millennials and jens ears, at least that's what they're accused of. i mean, i think that there is

a really good point to be made. there is one of those millennials. there's no real point in doing it right now. i don't think that telling people that they need to have kids to replace an aging workforce. it's going to get people to have kids who currently their workforce, what workplace instability, there is not enough work from home option. a lot of people are going to have to go back to work within short order, you know, after, because of the cobra restrictions being with it, there is not enough plots for daycare, they cares extremely expensive, child care is expensive. in general. there is no real benefit, it just makes the burden a lot harder for women specifically because this workforce was designed for men. it was not designed for mothers. so i think that it becomes a lot harder for individuals to decide now as a time to do it when we live in a world where being a working mom is extremely difficult and this is driving, this is driving, you know, for lack of a better term this is driving the leads crazy. it's driving the money men. crazy.

that's why you're seeing articles like this and bloomberg because it's like, whoa, wait a minute. we are based on the entire idea. all of our economics, all of our societies, based on that idea of the baby boom generation where there's always going to be a big influx of kids. but now around the world, you're seeing birth rates going down and in new york times and put it back in may that the era of high fertility is ending. as women gain more access to education and contraception and as being varieties, as you mentioned, the associates associate with having children continue to attend by more parents are delaying pregnancy. if you are, babies are being born. the times even goes on to say that historically high birth rates and rapid growth in countries like, you know, you see like mexico and india where you always say ok, rapid birth rates, they're now seeing birth rates falling below the replacement rates of $2.00 kid the family, the whole world is seeing this fall. it's pretty incredible when you, when you see it as a speech, when you think about it in terms of a species, i don't think that anyone saw it. they should have, but i don't think that most nation thought come in, especially in the developed world. because the idea was that women are always going

to want to be mom. and i think that is been pushed for so long. that is, what makes you a woman that is a part of who you are, that is a part of your contribution to society. so to see women take it into their own hands to basically control their bodies and say, hey, i'm pursuing higher education, i'm pursuing role in employment factors. i am being an entrepreneurial leader, all of these things. but in addition to that, we have to recognize the burden. wonderful as children can be, the cost associated with them is a burden. the fact that women still don't have paid leave that back, that maternity leave. it's hard to get in many places. these things are kind of snowballing into the decisions where thing a lot of younger women make today. well, and you know, i go back a while back when, when paul ryan was with us. how speaker paul ryan, who you know, he warned this of this before where he wrote often to the wisconsin wilderness declaring that this is going to be the new economic challenge for america. people, baby boomers are retiring, i did my part. he had like 5 kids,

but we need to have higher birth rates in this country in order to pay for taxes, basically buying it up. but that really bothers me on a, on a many, many, many, many levels of attitude. so what like a woman supposed to like to lie down and just produce for her country like a lady laid out and have some kids for the guys because we need better. we need more tax money. that's not going to be right. you know, i mean that's a, that's really discuss with a little handmaid stale, like, have more kids, you know, plus, there's also this element too because when you get the philosophical of it, you know, there's people that will argue, well, if you have more kids and a bigger population, there's more chances you'll get more einstein's and you'll get more things like that. but that also means you get more ted cruz and that also means you'll get more jo, exotic. there's no indication system is right now just adding more people to it is not necessarily going to create einstein. thank you. you know, america is nowhere near a presidential campaign. the republicans are already i in 2024,

in addition to party leaders continuing to fight against the 2020 election results . swiftly passing voter restriction and playing to trump obsession with ballot audits. the republican national committee recently made a startling statement. aren't the chair, ronda mcdaniel issued a warning that the r n c would advise future g o p candidate against participating in the commission on presidential debates event unless the changes were made? this is big news because the commission on presidential debates is a non partisan forum that typically enjoy a well reception among both major political parties. but like all things leading the republican party today, the ghost of trump moves heavily. mcdaniels letter to the form was essentially a rundown of complaint. former president trump made during the debates last year. and here are some of the reforms are and see wants to see happen. holding at least one debate before early voting starts limiting board member terms for the commission on presidential debate. beginning commission members from speaking publicly about the candidate the rest,

the also called on the commission on presidential debates to establish trans your criteria for selection of moderators the commission on presidential debates has stage debate since 1988 and has never been accused of unfairness before mcdaniels asked the commission to reply to her request by the end of july. joining me now to discuss this is best selling author. sorry, we are selling out there right now. we love you. i wish i did, but bruce neil, this is interesting because to me, hearing the 2 parties and the republican saying ok, look, we lost last election. it is a little bit like all, we're whining quite a bit because we laws from that we want the rules changed the favorites again. but as a guy who's always, i kind of say, i'm a 3rd party guy. you know, or least i hate the 2 party system to me. it's like, yeah, like like if they want to push back against the the commission, the commission only favors the 2 parties. so there does need to be election reform

. i just disagree with how the republicans are going, and i think that would have been a greater argument and one that people could stand by because of the inter, i'm purposely said that it was the 2 parties because at the end of the day, the 3rd parties have never really been paid much attention by the commission on presidential debates anyway. so if they had an argument, it would be valid because they're typically left out and the, the, the ways and the level for them to get in are so much higher in terms of having to win so many primaries in terms of having to have, you know, donor level that a certain at a certain point it is become extremely difficult and they basically been choked out of these the base even though they can have some really strong ideas. the other issue with this is that the concerns that were raised by rhonda mcdaniel are literally mirroring the exact things that trump had a problem with when he was pushing against the presidential debate last year. literally word for word. everything on that list are things that came out of the horses math and you know, when you look at the list and what you list of off some of the reforms you want to see, okay. who will hold at least one debate before early voting. so, i mean, to me, that's reasonable, just okay before early voting. let's see what you know. let's have

a debate that way before people. can i get that living board member term for commission on the presidential bass? hey, i'm always up for, you know, i'm always up for seeing limited things like limited term limits. manning, commission, members from speaking publicly about candidates can go either way. i mean, you don't want to stroll by, but the one i actually disagree with the most is that they called to have a transparent criteria for selecting moderators. what part of the challenge of running for president is being is being asked questions by everybody. you don't get to pick and choose the softball questions and besides, behind closed doors, they get all the questions ahead of time. anyway, the other issue and that was a really good point. the other issue is that at the end of the day, at least in the past, for the national debate cycle, less than half of america actually even watch the debate really didn't make a huge quake in people's decision making process, whether they would have been before the primary started or at or early voting or after early building, because the majority of america didn't make their decisions based on that. it is

pretty incredible and i think that's a great point to bring up because look at the end of the day, the only time people really are going to turn into the debates because we've, we've american idolized us elections to such an extent now that it really is it's w w, it's like this guy gets the questions i had a time. this guy gets the questions i had time or this lady, i hope at some point, you know, gives the questions ahead of time. and then they battle it out and pre determined answers that they've like worked to death with their handlers. donald didn't really do that and the republicans didn't really have a platform. so it makes sense that now they're like, well, we're whining we last. so we got to, you know, we need it, we want to change all the rules because we need to better suit us. we're seeing that across the country. we are a because this debate, this last debate season was markedly different from this run in 2016, where he did not have a record to the debate cycle with different in 2020 because they asked him questions based on his policy. they asked him questions based on where america stood. after 4 years of having donald trump, he had a great opportunity in 2016 of not having to have that conversation because he

wasn't president. so it became harder. it's really, it's really incredible watching them just just cry baby, because you know that if the democrats had did this, their last, trump was still president, may be saying like why we got to change with how to jo, lose, you know. so i know like how these 2 parties work if one is doing it today, the other will do it tomorrow and they live because it kind of fall into that light level of, of just idiocy in my mind. but this is ridiculous and there should be pushed back against the republican. like i said, i can understand a few reforms. do these things are good, you know, but at the end of the day they should not be ac. we've that acquiesced to and just given whatever they ask for, just because they last was not how the system works. if i was a betting person, i would say by july, she's not going to get the answer that she expects. all right, everybody, as we go to break, remember that you can also start watching the hawks on demand through the brand new portable tv app, which is available on all platforms will definitely check it out. portable tv is very cool coming up. it appears that here in america, our leaders are willing to do anything to get folks vaccinated,

including offering them trucks, college scholarships, and free guns. yeah, free guns, infectious disease expert dr. bob are not going to discuss that next. so stay tuned to watching the hawks. i me ah, join me every thursday on the alex simon show. when i was reading the gas in the world, the politic sport business. i'm show business. i'll see you then. me this quote, mackenzie works so well. people don't like to use the word inconsistent. they like to say, oh it's, it's amazing or comprehensive oral mysterious,

but i say it can't be quite right. and this is what direct says, this is what i was writing the i don't know, i mean there's some steps in there were rescuing the food that they were not scavenging or were rescuing resources that are still good. this is best by march 21st, which is in 2 days. all these potatoes, holiday, daniels, onions, the hello again. well, we've just interrupted our programming there to go back to the economic form in st . petersburg because the image of kat is nice speaking. so let's listening about

citizens who are in the organizing committee. everything is being done in order to shop before the world cup. he's the best possible level for they show yourself. we are preparing for the event more just off. we believe jones, you caution the item. you sent on us should be no delays in the construction process, we dash confidence that everything will be on the schedule of the november and championship. and all the arab countries will be a very good rehearsal that been damaged, which is raging. course the world did not hit our country alone. we are a little bit late with the construction of some of the sites that doesn't prevent us from holding events. we have the infrastructure,

almost ready. we are definitely going to be ready to host the world's company. and i said to my child, support in 2018 russia or charlotte? jimmy showed that are wonderful here. what was your audio when? hey, self organizing such an event? in fact, it raised the bar for all of us, and we will definitely use that you can experience the best practices that shared with us by russia. we hope will, will help us to organize this, even at a very high level. and never les this ball that was raised, that high will become a motivation for us and we are confident that we will be able to hold it very well . who's moving on to the economic agenda, especially given the facts that present putting as just the 1st string of

know the stream to have been completed that the chancellor, cause we have seen what the us issue with this project has been over the 1st year. there was restrictions and delays. do you think there are still risks the project is not going to be implemented or as a complete or my s areas that once the construction is completed and once the gases in the pipeline, your companies will still be not able to access this installation name and then when it's joe, he's the most gen companies i've taken pod or 10 the project and just to germany, the australia public 9, the number of other european countries have a positive attitude towards the project priests who are interested. and the project

2 teams must also be entities, as you can feel, we convinced that the route the pipeline is designed and the proper way. and we are hoping, just as an australian and other parts of europe, we will be able to get gas via the pipelines because we will be needing a gas supplies and not stream as shown. you have mentioned to them as providing as with a reliable route useful for exporting gas projects should be completed by based on the agreements that have been reached. and as you have mentioned and our view, and we should be optimistic and we hope that the project is going to be completed just as germany hope for its completion. another european countries do. we hope that this is gain to ensure europe and security of europe. and we also hope that

this is going to be beneficial to russia to like us, we pet, you're saying you guys from lee russian market. so do you think that is a risk that the project will be stopped year to the american sanction so that it is going to be impossible to operate due to american sanctions? mister president, i have to say that i said that on many occasions, and i would like to read that this is a purely commercial who can make projects. and those who believe that this is trying to bypass have a transit play as well. so much root there wrong, i guess the rules via the c bad of both receive from russia. we get a minute to germany. college the killing me. as far as the length care which you as concerned as shorter lease, which is simply shorter than if you had to go to europe. ian

countries lag slovakia, ukraine, austria, it's cheaper and it's short to transport gas via for leakage. secondly, there are no political country specific ways, and you don't have to pay for the transit so they can amik and then each project is more reasonable. it's more beneficial. it means the final on the end consumer utility as the citizens, the company will get at a cheapest price. if we had to go through other country is still rough modems. economically, it's just more reasonable. but the propaganda is still raging on trying to feed some live people trying to convince them that there is compose x involved

some trick something. why do you think our partners are fighting this project? and you do think they want to please are simply trying to look after their own national interest. it's pretty simple and i think this project has to be completed because of the especially, i mean, i mean that's the new environment. when the new american administration, the us administration says that at one to build a good relationship, whether it's primary partners in europe and how can you build it with your partners while disregarding their interests such that would be an incentive, especially when you go to someone's more of those gas as the cleaners source of energy in the world. i'll tell you why does it have a blessed, you know, when you can get a fraction is years you going to impress into it, but the 70 percent more than 50 percent of american gas as us to produce via

fracking. whereas gas pro money produces 11 percent when the gas coming for not just stream to does not use any fracking to produce. and from the environmental point of view of tracking as a truly a catastrophic type of production. because you don't, doesn't, he was, and hundreds of tons of chemical substances are pumped into the ground, deal direct damage to the environment. everyone is talking about the economy and the environment. here you have have a good example of how it's happening when tracking is used to sanction jelly curious to world economy because they lead to shrinking on the instead of boosting it the but i'm more of a sanctions also represented a to, for bad faith competition in a week and as far as god goes as a source of fuel for the world economy,

let us keep in mind some of us as the best amazing in demand for day would be for a very long period while transition is being effected towards hidden in the green energy, we're done with that. so we have all hydrocarbon us and gas will stay in the market the longest, i guess, as most environmentally friendly to you. but i think that such project was going to serve fruit, not just our interests, but i was in the interests of our partners in europe, and they have to be completed. and i said the line pipe of the 1st string has been completed. so within a month or 2, i hope the other string is going to be completed july 27. and then what about the supply that?

well, you said, mr. paler as to the opposite of how much he tells me all the tape there are 2 pipe replied close to one another. you've got to raise them a little basket. on the german side, the russian side, you've got to weld these pipes together. it's going to take for stuff come go 10 days of gas from was willing to begin supplies. it's going to be up to the german jake, relates to i know that there has been a delegation of germany to the u. s. i don't know whether the delegation is back on august the has talks on how to, to, to agree with that with american politics on that was because, you know, when there was a gas, american gas is 25 percent more expensive, less than the fact that fraction is used to produce, so if your dilemma, either you buy cleaner gas and cheaper gas from us,

or you buy a product, that is the, is environmentally jovial. right? because you know, sometimes green parties say that you've got to your buy and they've got to take allergy from america. but if they're truly green, if they're true environmentalists, they have to know that those gases produce when they have a fracking and that is environmentally harmful. so let's have an honest look all of this and makes the conclusion at it's more environmentally friendly. it's cleaner, it's cheaper, it's more reliable. the product that we offer, and that's why i choose it. but the thing is, the current pipeline and alteration speaking, how regions of europe recently presents ask you that. do you think we have to feed everyone? do you think we're responsible for that?

because also the president has said that there's going to be no money for the cranium armed forces. if there is no gas, johns is from russia. ukraine, so it's not stream to as complete. do you think the gas distribution network of your question? well, no longer the required, i would like to ask my press secretary because mister best calling to say that. but now that i have this opportunity to say that personally, i will say the following. first, we've got a contract in place and was ukraine on how a gas through leadership because it was and for the coming 5. yes. what gunning? up to 40000000000 cubic meters, i think doing the best. yes. the figure was up to 200 euro where years to export gas to germany, back in 2018. i think we're providing them with more than 200000000 cubic meter. and if we had a normal relations,

then most of our gas would have gone through ukraine, but, but there's the pseudo problems have been created and not the political one. there was more comic once i guess the monopoly to gas transit. then you create an illusion that you can suddenly lose the price to the skies. you get more than use it and that's in and asking for. he's ordered in prices for gas transit, pretty much the same time, the one to decrease the pricing before the gas way, directly from the you know, it's all about monopoly. it's not about politics going way back. we signed a memorandum with ukraine and.