like a brief pakistani authorities, a still clearing the wreckage of a train collision on monday in which at least $63.00 people died. heavy machinery was brought in to remove the mangled carriages with the military engineers assisting the operation. the accident happened when a passenger train derailed. an offer derailed was struck by a 2nd train the canadian protested, toppled and beheaded a statue of egerton riots. and one of the architects of the countries controversial residential school system. the statue was erected on the university campus that bears his name. the protests was an honor of $215.00 children whose remains were found at the sight of a former residential school for indigenous canadians. several cars were destroyed off of this right here is a larger sink hole opening up in a car park outside a medical center in jerusalem. the hospital chief said nobody was injured and thought excavation work of tunnels at

a nearby motorway may have contributed to the collapse or not the stories still to come here on the international at the beginning of the next program at the top of the our hope you can join us that ah, join me every 1st on the alex simon show and i'll be speaking to guess in the world, the politics sport. business. i'm show business. i'll see you then. me the back guys are, this is the cause a report summer solutions. that's right, we don't look at the problem or look at the solutions. and today we've got the one on the marshall. our bark is the mark, an analyst,

a levy institute researcher and tragic follower of the toronto maple is. but maybe this is they are they want to stanley cup stacy? right marshall. we have some questions for the summer solutions as good talk to you because of course, we interview due for front running and in front mounting. we presented many of the issues that the democrats were arguing in their debates as they were determining who their candidate would be. and as the interesting thing is, like a lot of it was pie in the sky at the time, but it's all coming true. now, post pandemic, but i want to start with a recent article in an american affairs journal titled the brazilian explication of the world compared nations like america to brazil. and they say, quote, hollowed out stake passerby is political confusion, cronyism conspiratorial thinking. and trust deficits have exposed the crumbling legitimacy that now makes rich and powerful states look like banana

republics. are we have banana republic and before us i want to mention that to the audience. there are some like interference from your like old school sort of like interference on television screens or to look on your yeah, i apologize about that actually. blame bill gates. he's. he's probably too preoccupied with other things right now, but yeah, i think that's, that's a problem. and it's not unique to the united states, but the united states is in front of it. i think it's been a problem for years about 12 years ago. i think jamie galbreath wrote a piece book called the credit say, which outlined this brazilian invocation. and i think its continued, it accelerated under trump, but i'm, i'm not sure it will change fundamentally under, by because i just think that there are too many jobs for the boys in constant positions of power and institution. it's very,

very hard to change that we're going to have a few questions along this line, but it seems like the structural situation on the united states is that no matter what you try to do, no matter how good you try to do the trillions, whether it's like all the bail out in 2008, everything has to go through the bangs even the, you know, the p, p. p loans all went through the banks and they scooped up billions and billions of the p. p. p loans. the forgivable p, p, p. bones, it seems like structurally that there are way too many oligarchs, and all of the police between the government and the people, and they take the vast majority of the funds. yeah, i mean, this is, this is nothing new. i mean, eisenhower warned about the influence of the military industrial complex and it's the final state of the union address, 1961. and what i think has happened is that the, the playbook that was adopted by the pentagon to effectively make sure that they've

got a control or substantial amount of fiscal resources has now being replicated by other large sectors of the economy. whether that be big pharma, wall street, silicon valley, and i think everybody uses that model right now. so they're all competing for a chunk of that pie. there's no restraint, but there's no real accountability or transparency as to how it's being spent. right? so all this money print thing that you'd associate with the banana republic and the brazil, the case of an economy, has been masked to some degree for a few years because policymakers simply say, while there's no inflation, in fact there's deflation, but it looks like inflation has come back, why has suddenly come back it? is it transitory? like the central bank is saying or is this more structural marshall? yeah, that's the, that's the $1000000.00 question. or i guess, given were in place that maybe the trial, you know the question right now, but, you know, i think that's the data people are, are predicated on,

on analysis with the data, which i would say has a lot of problems in it right now to a lot of it's still distorted by the shut downs and the fact that we were in uncharted territory, really, but a lot of parts of the economy that were literally shut down for over a year. so we, i think it's very hard to make sense of a lot of it to, there's a, there's a big divergence for example, between the b l. s. statistical labor market and continuing claims, which would suggest a much higher level of unemployment. and you don't know how much of that is, is real, how much of the economy is functioning under the table, if you like, where, where people are getting cash payments on the table. you know, so like you might call the pavilion case and you may also called the italian italian implication of the economy. and we will, i think we will start getting a better sense of the real extent of those in place their pressures when you start

seeing more of the wage data. for example, back in april, the 11th, we saw that wage gains for the leisure industry were up 5.2 percent year over year, which is pretty significant. and that's just for me, the data from, you know, march, we haven't even seen what happened in may or june right now to start to accelerate further than i think the inflation will be the dog that finally barks or, you know, the, the inflationary will, will finally be right for once know right. you know this money printing and quantitative a thing and as contribution via the compelling effect to create wealth gaps while the income gaps in credit stand talking mallor said he had the best year ever last year. yeah. he's that direct beneficiary of this, but the policy makers all come back to denying that money printing causes the type of dislocation. and instead they all come back with fiscal policy. right, right now the bite administration saying, well we need some more taxes. we need retroactive taxes,

we need taxes on unrealized capital gains, but they never mentioned the money printing impact or is this? why do they miss the obvious and go with the $2.00? because in the tax game, i know as a stock broker for many years and spot the tax rate, it's the adjusted tax rate. and you know, dealing with a lot of wealthy people, just the tax rate never rises above 15 percent, no matter what the government does. so why don't they just address the real problem? the real problem is, is the reason they don't address it is because it's hard to solve because you've got to take out a lot of powerful people. so that's, that's a short answer question. i mean, but if you, i mean, if you've got an economy, as you pointed out, which is increasingly geared to a smaller and smaller cohort than clearly you're going to have a less efficient economy. and it's not going to grow as fast as it should grow. because if you're directing most of the gains to those with the high savings propensity, and you're going to get less bang for your fiscal bus. and that's going to push more more into detail doing more, more things. and that in turn,

create and political situation where the potential bank say, we've got to offset this dried on the economy by increase monetary stimulus and nobody stops. and because they don't want to tackle structural problems which cause the difficult, the 1st place. and of course, it's much easier to let j, powell take the he's, he's an elected official than having it, having congress being after. all right, so, you know, this can tell effect, we find it very interesting. and we've been reporting on as he says, multi billionaire, sandra miller says, and all those years since 983 when he's never had a down here, this is the best year and he's had to do nothing. we haven't received any of these bite and bucks ourselves, but we've done very well. the theoretically on paper, at least with our house price, constantly going up, right. this has been one of the it's not been since 2004, 2005. don't know how hard of the sub prime mortgage melted before the meltdown that we've seen this. but again, so with us m m t,

the notion of m m t. and i think you know quite a bit about that. like how, how do you stop that? like that, surely the, the house prices gaining somewhere between 14 and 20 percent. like surely, that cost way more than the money that is being sent and enhanced unemployment benefits and stimulus packages like the house, probably rising so fast are probably disenfranchising way more than the stimulus is helping. yeah, that's just a well again, if you don't address the structural issues, then you don't get as much fiscal bang for your buck and therefore these distortions that were already there. they tend to get more they, they increase. and, you know, housing is one thing and the fact that we have a, an overly financial life economy where the where effectively the real economy,

the interest of somebody to those of finance. so these are hard things to address and a few. but if you don't address and then you get these drags and major sectors, the economy, and that is used as a birth by policy makers to do more and more and more. rather the thing you know, the deficits are not being directed in the proper way. and the people that really need to help on getting it to do that we will have to attack the very people who affectively are political paymasters and that. and that's very, very hard to do. yeah. and especially in the fact that you've got very, a very, very tight majoris narrow majority of by the democrats in both the house and the senate. and so everything's gonna be up for play in 2022. so who's got an incentive to take on these people? right now marshall, i watch the twitter handle one of your politicians up in canada, pierre paul of air from carlton who is constantly getting up and,

and talking about money printing and how housing is becoming unaffordable. and making some really good points, but he doesn't seem to get much traction up there. do you agree with the kind of point that he's making? he's kind of a well known celebrity politician at that point and or the missing. well, he's, he's not missing a lot. i mean, you know, it's kind of like, but as i say it's, it's where the money is being spent. and i think that that is a fiscal area. it's political at area. but how yeah, housing affordability can be a real, real problem. and in canada, the toronto real estate market where i'm from, with, you know, it's been on fire for the last year or so or even longer. and, but what are you gonna do? i mean, do you start introducing night target taxes to call them the housing market that

doesn't have a lot of play low political saver. and remember that the current administration in canada, the government is a minority government, so it's still reliant on support from them. and some of the other parties like the democrats, that same power. and i think trudeau himself has an economic incentive to stimulate the economy as much as possible so that he can run on a strong economy. later on this year there's been lots of rumors that he wants to have an election later on the try to return his majority company. all right, well we're going to take a break and come back after this with marshall our bach, with our summer solutions elucidating area day as usual. don't go away. the me look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the

orders given by human beings, accept where's the shorter the conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. the point obviously is to great truck rather than fear i will take on various jobs with artificial intelligence. we have so many with demon a robot must protect this phone. existence was the driven by a dreamer shaped me in me dares

thing. we dare to ask me the me welcome back to the kaiser report. imac because are with stay here, but summer solutions as usual, looking at solutions and sort of focusing on the problems we've got. marshall our back where this market analyst from 11 institute researcher tragic follower of the toronto maple leafs, but maybe not this year. ok. so marshall, we found an experiment last year or so with government transfers equalling about 17, our $17.00 an hour in payment across the land. and what happened is now we got millions of jobs unfilled because people just stayed home and said, why would i go to work and get less than what the government's paying in some way

you could say this is a live experiment with universal basic income, which is which is something that i know you've talked about, and we found other gas thomas show talk about like dr. michael hudson. is this a good test or a good experiment to see what you be? i would look like because it does have some interesting impacts and consequences or is it not in one year? what are your thoughts there? yeah, well, it is interesting. i mean, i've always says, you know, preferred the job guaranteed to universal basic income. because i a, i don't like the suffering of benefits to work. and i think also for you construct policy like universal base income, you want to find out how much actual involuntary unemployment there is. and with a job guarantee you can do that. and you can actually structurally improve the condition of the labor market at the same time because you'll have a pool of if you like,

some already labor in the private and public sector working at the symbol tediously . whereas, you know, you be, i think as this current situation shows, may actually provide disincentives to go to work and therefore you get a tighter labor market for the wrong reasons because people just are working. but at the same time, you're getting bottlenecks, appearing potentially in the economy because you're not able to come in for the, the labor to, to alleviate those bottlenecks. so that's a real worry. and that's the kind of thing that creates a really big hyper inflationary problem. i mean, i know i want to get told by barnes and stuff like that. but if you look at the instances of high high inflation or stay place, they are usually caused. not only because you've got people being paid a significant amount or, or being paid on an ongoing basis. but also because you have a productive capacity in the economy being impaired,

whether through supply bottlenecks or just because you know, it's other reasons like for example, of a war that might have taken a large chunk of the economy. so in that situation, if you're continued to offer support payments, then that create the conditions where you could get hyperinflation. and that's really my biggest objection to you be. right? so what you're describing there are sounds like during the depression f, d r introduced the programs for make work programs as they were called essentially u. b, i in the form of jobs, people had jobs and in america there the real need for things like infrastructure rebuilding road. yeah tom, that's right. bridges. but it's contrast greatly with what we hear from people like elizabeth warren and others in washington dc. right now that seem to suggest a different type of u. b i, which is just send people checks. and so if i understand what you're saying there, that in that type of fiscal stimulus would result in runaway inflation. and it's

not really something you would advocate, but you do like the idea of this make work program. is that correct? when i call it a job guarantee rather than make work because make worse megs and sounds like that's not the potential work. whereas i think, as you pointed out, many of the things that f d are introduced during the new deal, it actually create a substantial amount of needed infrastructure in the country and provide an important more people that weren't getting any kind of support. so i think what i want to do is see people being put to work in ways that enhance the productive economy, potential the economy, so that you don't get these in place and pressure. i just don't believe that you're handling out a check for essentially doing nothing. i do believe that there should be a basic minimum standard of living that to which we should aspire that we should provide. but i think we can do that while providing a well paying job with benefits. i don't think she has a here. if you're you be, i do whatever the hell you want, you want to write

a novel. that's great. or if you just want to look out to the kids, that's great too. and that's not diminishing point to things like family childcare . i think that should be considered as an important component of an help helping to enhance productive it potentially economy. but i do think that, you know, you do want people to be paid to work and not simply given money with no conditionality attached to it. right. of course that all came about during the depression after a major financial crash. right. and, and the policies were put in place as a reaction to that crash. and lot of people complain because the president was acting and somewhat of an authoritarian manner. and a lot of people thought, oh no, no, the free market can solve all of this. and he said, no, we need to make government very much involved and all of this. but my question is that right now you don't really have, by all intents and purposes, a huge market problem. you've got stock that all time wise bonds all time highs. you've got billionaires increasing like rabbits. so how did you even sell the need

for any kind of a program? when the mainstream media and the country in many waters have never been richer and the aggregate wealth of america has never ever been higher? so how can you even talk about feeling with a crisis, if that's the fast backdrop of what you're talking about the, all the problems are completely masked. yeah, no, i agree with you. well, i mean, look in the great depression, we were looking at close to 30 percent unemployment weren't even if we can dispute the actual unemployment rate now. but it's certainly not even in double digits. and we do already have a preexisting social welfare net in place. me remember when f d r came to, we didn't have social security, just give you one illustration. now we've got social security, we've got medicare. i'd like to see that expanded somewhat but, but again, those are the types of things that would be very helpful. but as you say,

what seems to be happening now is that every politician that has his particular hobby horse, whether it be the green new deal, or infrastructure or something else, is pinning it onto some sort of program. in some respect that tries to tie, to pandemic mitigation and to the, the, the, the crisis created by cobra, 1900. but as you point out, the conditions are very, very different than they were in, in the 1900 thirty's. and to already a lot has been done and we haven't really interest the structural problems that you highlighted so eloquently today. that's a big problem. ok, so we have compared the situation to the great depression and what f d r did, but you also mentioned sty, playstation, where it talk, you mentioned hyper inflation. we have supply issues. so it's reminding me a lot of the sixties and seventies leading into, you know, as the u. s. had to abandon the gold standard. we had the vietnam war. we had

a lot of civil unrest in america. you know, people act like there's a lot right now there was a lot of sixties and seventies. we had the oil embargoes and iranian revolution and all sorts of stuff like that. but what did you feel like we're kind of part of the problem of getting a finding a solution. it feels like we're in a kind of similar situation of civil strife. a partisanship for sure, between the red team, a blue team and the fact that the victims of you know, that terrific dilemma of having to spend all our manufacturing overseas. especially once we got off the gold standard, it feels like you know, that vast way, like tens of millions of americans are called on international news by our own international media like cnn that they're white supremacist, deplorable. right? so it feels like you're not going to want to find a solution for white supremacy. sorry, you don't, you want them to just like take the opioid overdose and die because that's,

that's the thing. the feels like there is a political, a political problem that there is this strife, no question. it's, it's, i mean it's, it's great to see that a lot of the, a long standing racial problems are being addressed. although, again, you should be addressing these ideally by creating broader coalitions mean martin luther king wanted to create a broader coalition as jesse jackson, when he ran for the president's. he talked to a building a rainbow coalition, and you can't do that. if you atomize every single individual group and divide them on the basis, they're necessity, their gender, how they self identify, it just create much more division and struggle stripe and it will create a backlash. it, at some point, you're starting to see that, you know, i've been watching with great interest the democratic primary from air in new new

york. because i think come, that's going to be an interesting bellwether because in cities like new york and also chicago, for example, crime is, is becoming an increase in the big issue. and i think a lot of whites don't want to conceive that to the pollsters because they procure being called racist or white supremacist as you say. but there is this guy running in new york, eric adams, c for brooklyn presidency, the former copies black. he's running on a strong law and order platform and he's in favor of stop and chris, go, you get a guy like that. it almost liberates white people to vote for someone like that. and he is leaning on some of the poles i've seen. granted, it's a fairly narrow sample, but i wonder whether that is going to start to illustrate a change and suggest that we've, we've reached a political limits as to how far we can take things in the,

in the social director. and you've been discussing, that's going to be an important indicated to me, i think. and, and i said to someone earlier that i thought in many respects the situation is kind of like 968 again, you know, we had nixon and was running on the lawn order platform. granted, we had to be at them war at that time. that was a war against kobe. so, but the republican because they stopped embracing this, you know, acting like a political desco personnel because embracing trump, they actually would have a pretty strong and compelling case to get back in power given all these cross currents and you've got them and them but, but again, if you keep spending all your time obsessing about 2020 election, one of it's fraudulent and then you're losing a great opportunity. much as i think the democrats blew a chance for self replacing and renewing themselves when they focus on rush the gate. for example, in 2016, right, i know we talked about f d r and the fact that it's extraordinary measures some might say unconstitutional

to write the ship that had been horribly crushed during the depression and the clean up of wall street that took place that was necessary due to the accesses of wall street and were at a similar juncture now. and it, we, but i believe you know that it's right for something of an idea log to become president in the united states, more so than what some perceived to have been the leanings of a trump. but somebody who is actually more the more autocratic in nature, but that could take 2 forms. it could be someone like an f d r, who ultimately was successful and rebuilding the country in a way that did build broad coalitions. or it could be somebody who's an outright, you know, autocratic, idealized career make charismatic. nightmare. right?

i mean, isn't my question is by focusing on the atomization of the culture, as you pointed by not for many as coalitions, is the country rolling the dice and taking a gamble unnecessarily that could end up tragically? yes, we can have a real threat as we can have a real autocrat. that was a possibility with trump, but trump himself with too lazy and incompetent. the risk is that next time you get one who embraces his populace platform, but actually has experience and knows how to govern and knows how to use machinery of government. but use that to take the country in a much more autocratic direction. and there are candidates like that out there right now. like florida governor ron defense. this in the temple. all right, very good. marshall are back. thanks spring. i cause a report. my pleasure. could see you guys again. all righty and i was going to do it for this edition of kaiser report with me max kaiser and stacy herbert want to thank our gas marshall or back until next time by the

me i 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 buy march 21st, which is in 2 days. all these potatoes, holiday, daniels, onions, all of these came from westbound sources. this is great for me because i'm always looking for a way to give things away. dr. because the tax laws, you know, definitely do benefit the wealthier people in our society. so that makes sense for them to throw it out right off, rather than give it to somebody who could use it,

then that person is not going to buy it. the headlines here on r t have a look at this. the french president slapped in the face while trying to get up close and personal with a crowd of, well wishers. germany is proper. diplomat accuses so often. countries of holding the easy will hostage in an apparent reference to hunger. he wants to do away with member state power to veto key decision to video of an american father and daughter speaking out against critical race theory, goes viral. 2000000 views on twitter comes amid an ongoing debate in america about the role of c, r t and education done politics. now we treat people with based on me, they are and if they're in tomorrow.