the time now or another of our summer solutions. we look at the solutions and not the problem is not great. well next either we're joined today by dan collins. he is financial analysts,

market analyst with an expertise on china. he's lived there for 20 years as an auto executive and entrepreneur and just pull guy and deadlock to summer solutions. he agreed to be back when i see black america, i seen myself when i was growing up like america spoke to me. when why destroyed you did not, you said like marsh matter is a movement, we are importing from america. no, nothing. if we lived in a world where life lives mattered. and i was not why i like mission. and i wasn't know from black america. i learned how to speak back to why i bridges people are more of them. now we're out more

with statistics. i'm scared that my children are going to grow up in the country. that thing says no racism, but they're more likely to end up in the criminal justice system than their other fellow friends in daycare. mm. the the this is been bus going business, so you can't afford to miss. i'm rachel glover. and i'm bridge born in washington coming up in place. it has continued to rise in the united states at the fastest rate in 13 years. coming up, we'll take a look at the numbers and discuss whether this is transitory as the federal reserve continues to claim. laws tesla, theo you on mark is in court this week,

the funding the makers purchase of solar city will break down the issues at hand. then i told the track accountable is ongoing from the us to europe and beyond. well, discuss why it is taken so long to get to this point and what can be done to stop the most powerful companies in the world. we have a pack shows or dive right in. we'd be in the program with a topic that many of you know all too well. inflation continues to take a toll here at home as consumer prices skyrocketed at their faster pace in nearly 13 years just last month. the latest cpi report knows a 5.4 percent annual jump marking. the fastest increase in the u. s. was on the verge of the 2008 financial crisis. so what does this mean for the country and how is it impacting the ongoing economic recovery journey on this guy is octavio marines, the ceo of optimist. i'll see now octavio. this increase is largely being driven by

the prices of gas, food and cars, which considering that americans are not sitting at home, is to be expected, right? or is there more to it than that? why i think there's certainly a return to a certain level of confidence amongst american consumers. they, they didn't save a lot of money during the pandemic. so the american consumer put a lot of money away. they saved over 20 percent of their income during that period . so this is a lot of cash and the 1st things to spend money on, i suppose all food cars and vacations and holidays and travel and things about. so i think as this recovery carries on, gaining steam cars on when people feel more comfortable, they're more likely to spend more money and take on more debts and spending more. so i think we're going to see a continued increase in demand from the us consumer. and that's going to affect prices right across the board. i don't think the questions are simply a transitory phenomenon. i think is going to be here for a good long time to come. and as us here, if this increases just about americans getting back to normal life after a year of locked down, then it could play into the fed claim that it will be transitory. of course you said right there, you don't believe that. but when comparing today to what we saw in the 2008

financial crisis, is there concern that we could be on the verge of a bubble bursting and creating an economic downturn? well, i certainly think we're in a bubble. so we've seen asset prices all time highs. equity markets are the bond price is a huge home whom prices are enormous. everything seems to be very, very high in terms of pricing. so we're very much nosebleeds level fit. and the question is, is the fed going to prick this bubble and burst it on the way it would prick it is by increasing interest rates. but in terms of being trans tree and the fed trying to sort of talk inflationary expectations down. i think this is something that central banks always do it. i'm not aware of any central bank. simply come out and said, yeah, we call them inflation with, sorry, we'll fix it. it's always, they always sort of claim is transitory. will go away and. and then when they really can't avoid anymore, they try out to sell the suspects and those of foreigners and speculators. so i think as it becomes undeniable, there's really serious inflation, the federal sought to do that and it's not office hedge fund speculation of the

chinese or the russians, or who knows who else likes pickles, good goods from that kind of process here. and octavio i want to follow up on that because i feel like when we talk about the 2008 financial crisis in the realm of what's happening today, it was such a different scenario. this is obviously the inflationary pressures are brought on by a number of factors including a global pandemic, but in 2008, it was about bad loans. was really that the catalyst for what turned out to be that . so how do those 2 play together? well, i think if you go back to 2008, someone remarks back then if you go back even further to sort of 200-2001. when we saw the that nasdaq index crash, some economists said that the fed needs to do not replace them. nasdaq bubble with the housing bubble, and that's in the instance what they did. they pumped a lot of money into the markets again. and a lot of that money found its way into housing, into the housing markets indirectly. and then we started to tighten interest rates again in 20082009, led to

a crash and housing prices and in the market overall. so i think we will look into a similar situation here, but there is a major difference in the sense that a lot of stimulus checks been circulation. and so the monetary policy that is sort of pumping money, direction to people's pockets, and they're spending that money. and as a result, we're seeing more inflation, sort of consumer staples and the consumer every day. good. because if the consumers directed to get that money. so this is really an application of sort of central bank helicopter money theory saying, let's press the money directly into the consumers hands and see what happens. and we can see what happens. prices go up and consumer prices go up. now i know we've been in a time of watching prices go up and up watching the stock market hit record high after record high. but is there any concern for what happens when those prices go back down? i mean, surely it can't just be up it up forever right. way. i mean i have been sort of sequences of several hyperinflation as well. yes, prices keep going up forever and the value of money base goes down to 0. and at which stage central bank says ok,

we're going to start printing money of this right now, and we're going to get back to normal. so i think there's a, there's, there's basically 2 different directions that can go. one is the fed can continue to print money and continue to monetize the us government's debt. it continue to to put money money in, push it, and consumers pockets. or it can sort of prick the bubble that say it, we're going to start interest increase interest rates to get inflation and check and that will lead to a serious correction and the equity markets. and i don't think there's any other alternatives at the moment for the central bank in terms of those 2 extra possibilities. so either on doing what you're doing and risk really serious run or a runaway inflation or increased interest rates and prick the bubbling up the market. so those the 2 exit doors, i think the fed his face with a lift stage. yeah, excellent point to consider here. octavia moran, the an optimist. l l. c. thank you so much for your time. thank you. and mark was in court on monday and tuesday, defending tesla the purchase of solar city. now in order to understand this case,

you have to go back to 2016 when mosque was the chairman of both company and both were essentially unprofitable, must decided or must. that is to say, cited that to save the company, he would combine them into a $2000000000.00 tie up to establish a single, clean energy business. so what's the problem here? well mosque is accused of having combined the companies to benefit only himself and to bail out a home solar company that was about to become and solve it. joining us now to dig deeper on this story as boom bus co host investigative journalists, ben swan, ben who's making this charge against you on mosque and why? yeah, so essentially the plaintiffs are our funds that own capital stock, right. and so what they're saying is that back when the deal was made, as you said, back in 2016, the law must was running to companies running tesla and he's running solar city. and neither of them were profitable. and that in order to save solar city, $112.00,

by the way, only on 22 percent of the time talk the board to be able to purchase solar city for about $2600000000.00 and save the company. you say both of them, the problem is they say it wasn't intentional. the best interest to do this was only to save the other company and that it didn't benefit tesla. ala must is arguing on his end, but actually, no. is it not only say this company, but that solar city was worth a whole lot more than $56.00? and it was, it was worth much more he could have raised the money. otherwise, this was just one of the avenues that he chose to take. interesting, and now we're seeing it all sort of play out in court. but as for the other shareholders here, i mean, their behavior is part of the equation as well because it sounds like they might have had their own conflicts of interest as of the case. that's, that's a believe as if they did a lot of numbers all in both company will also been by the way some people left off my brother was on is on the board of tesla and own stock in the other

company as well. so both of these companies were able to benefit from doing this and the board members were, and by the way, we should mentioned that some of these board members, actually they had a settlement agreement where they agreed for a combined $60000000.00 that was paid out by insurance, essentially, because they were already sued over this, and they said that they had the right to do it. so they've already made payments on it, even though they admitted no wrong doing and doing so. but it's always interesting, whatever. we have a big court case of c, e o. we saw this in the apple versus epic, and google versus epic disputes quite a bit. you always learn something very interesting about the business angles. and one of the most interesting statements made in court by mouth is that he really dislikes running tests. but what about that? yeah, he actually said that it was kind of interesting that he said this, i rather hate it. i would much prefer to spend my time on design and engineering, which intrinsically i like doing it. i think there's not like running tough right now. i don't really necessarily believe that is the case. i might be telling the

truth that he prefers to do design of the creative work. but the truth is, what he probably saying is responding to a question. because the argument that the plaintiffs have to make here is that you must force this cell even though must only had 22 percent of the socket tesla. so he couldn't do it by vote. and then instead he use something, what they call the force of will, but he used the force of his, of his will and his ability to influence the board to get them to make this purchase. that was not in the best interest, the tesla, so to counter about, he's like, why would i do that? i'm not using force and will over tesla. i don't even like running test, essentially what he said, oh, interesting to hear that one of the richest men in the world is now saying that he's not happy with his main company that he's got a lot of fame for. okay, so ultimately what could happen in this case? well, couple of things could happen. one is if the judge in this case, and by the way there's no jury, it's just a judge who's looking at it. if the judge in this case says, look, tesla made this purchase, it didn't harm tough lead to do so. and this company was,

as almost as arguing worth more than what mosque was saying, right? been no harm, no foul, it's all fine. and the, the plaintiff is eventually going to not be able to go anywhere with it. if the judge looks at, it says, well, actually test i shouldn't have made this purchase. eli must then influence board members who also had a conflict of interest. it wasn't in the best interest of shareholders, and they didn't this essentially, to bail him out so that they could save this other company. and the company was pretty much worthless at the time. if that is what the judge decides, then ultimately you must himself may have to basically pay back the entire purchase price of what to place your about $2600000000.00. i think he has it bad. i'm pretty sure of it. boom. why that you so much for follow the story? they said and sign up for a quick break, but when we come back, global regulators have had their eyes set on big hack and reap it month. we'll dig into what is happened and the world of anti trust is gonna break here. the numbers

at the close. the news, the news join me every thursday on the alex simon show. and i'll be speaking to guess in the world, the politics, sport, business and show business. i'll see you then. me remember the great 964, a film doctor. strange love. you remember the subtitle of the film was how i learned to stop worrying and love the bomb. well, i have a 2021 updated subtitle. when it comes to the surveillance state, how i learned to stop worrying and love be in. tell community folks today are not

feared there at doors. the welcome back girl was just hit with a 593000000 dollar fine in france because the countries anti trust watchdog says it did not follow through on orders to go sheet with news publishers. now back in april 2020, the tech giant was ordered to carry out negotiations with french news outlets in order to follow the latest copyright directed from the european union. while google did reach agreements with certain publishers, it did not agree to a page deal with a f p. google has agreed to pay the charge, but in a statement i spoke 1st and said quote, we have acted in good faith throughout the entire process. the fine ignores our efforts to reach an agreement and the reality of how news works on our platforms.

so to go further on, this was bringing eleanor fox, professor of law at new york university. now, professor this fight to force tech giants to come to an agreement with news publishers is one that we have seen from europe all the way to australia. so how does this fall under the anti trust umbrella, so to speak, when it comes to sites like google and facebook? hi, rachel, nice to be here. the big tech companies are exploiting the news company. they're just, in effect, you could say they're feeling their news. they're appropriating in them, but not paying for it. that might not be illegal. this is the problem. australia is now making it illegal and friends has made it illegal, is simply another string in the bow of trying to call the tech to help for exploiting wherever it can. and now we've recently really seen the fight to enforce

anti trust laws heating up in recent years. but given that the top tech giant have spent over a decade, skyrocketing and growth is even possible. the rain them in at this point, or is it just too late? it's not too late. the companies can still be brought to account. the law is very slow. the u. s. law especially is very, very slow. many of the things they do that most of the people of the world think are very abusive. that companies have some kind of claim that are conservative law, less than do it. so it's really falls to the trust agencies and especially the federal trade commission to make rules. we know what they're doing. we know how they are abusing and there have to be rules that say they cannot do x, y, and z, and they cannot acquire their competitors and their potential competitors. yeah, yeah, okay, well,

and it all comes back to those laws that are actually on the books and we did see president biden also just signed an executive order aimed at big tech mergers and acquisitions such as facebook purchase of instagram and what's up. so is there any teeth to this order and does it stand to have an impact on those check giant? this order is really amazing. it is very important. the president has just come out with national policy. he calls it doing a whole government attempt to put competition back into our system. he looks at virtually every area like regulation that keep your your friends, i'm sorry, i'm hearing aids off over the counter market. an occupational licensee that requires licensing of people. but in skills don't need the licensing. there are so many barriers across the economy that keep people down and,

and keep corporate power in. and he's made a special effort to address the federal trade commission and the justice department to call for a stronger boost rained in big tech. and you know, nothing good can happen without something a little bad. because here in the united states, we've seen tech giants like amazon, they've hired hundreds of former government employees, including several former anti trust attorneys, straight from the justice department. is there concern about a sort of government to tech pipeline? because these people know the inner workings, they know how to get around this, and they're going to know how to fight this if congress moves, or even the regulator start to move. so this is the green, loving your problem. it's always been a problem. it does make you question the commitment to some people, to the issues, the things they, they're really committed to and they were a government agent. however, there is still very great people in the country who have not on the side of

representing big corporate. and we have a lot of talent, so i'm not worried. well, great insight, as always, and we will keep calling this one, professor elinor fox, thank you so much for your time today. thank you. and meanwhile, there was an under reported aspect of president biden sweeping executive order aimed at anti competitive practice. and that's the right to repair for years advocate. the bright to repair, have called on tech companies to release schematics and sell parts to repair shops or even straight to the consumer. so they can repair items like cell phones, tablets, laptops, the bite administrations order addresses. the issue thing quote, tech and other companies impose restrictions on self and 3rd party repairs, making repairs more costly and time consuming, such as by restricting the distribution of parts, diagnostics and repair tools. the order also calls on the f t c to quote, issue rules against anti competitive restrictions on using independent repair.

shops are doing the repairs of your own devices and equipment. for more on this, let's bring in tile we. he's a right to repair, advocate and ceo of i fix it a company where you can actually get those tools to be able to open up items and things like that. so called doing great work. now i want to start with this is part of the anti trust executive order. what's happening with the lack of right to repair is actually the definition of anti competitive practice. is it not interesting that way to me. i mean, we have products where used to be able to fix it. now you've got local businesses going out, going out of business, west and right. manufacturers are abusing their monopoly position of being the one who made the products. they can control the entire lifespan. what happens after it? now i do want to clarify one point because i mean, let's say that i need a battery or a screen replacement from my iphone and i take it to a local repair shop. what is currently the risk where i mean,

is it going to take it out of warranty? j won't take it out of warranty. your warranty is actually protected by something called the magnus, a mosque warranty act that says that you can do anything you want with your product as long as you have damage it. it doesn't for the warranty. but what can happen if you put new, say, battery in your iphone, the i phone will show a warning saying that it was that 3rd party battery that may damage your device. it's kinda like having your oil, your car change, the jiffy lube, and they can't reset the check oil light after doing more and more anti competitive breath like that, push people toward their repair shops. and how important is some sort of right to repair legislation as a whole for small businesses because they thrive on things together. like you said, you're seeing them go out of business more and more. and for that matter, how is this going to help the consumer? you know, we used to have camera stores in every neighborhood in the country. you could go down, you can, you can buy a new camera, you can get your loans fixed, and mercy. shops had gone away and they kind of disappeared with it, with

a whimper, not with the bank. and i am afraid that we'll see that happen as well with our computer and cell phone repair shops. it's critically important to sustain just to make sure that these businesses can continue to exist and thrive and be part of our communities we protect. we have legislation on the books that protect our local mechanics. that's why if you have a brand new ford explorer, you can think of your local mechanic and fix it. we don't have those protections for other industries and it's high time we get going on. yeah, we know that all of the small businesses are incredibly important, and i want to bring up a comment from the other side of the spectrum here we heard from apple co founder, steve wozniak recently, and he made comments in support of right to repair, saying in a cameo video quote, we wouldn't have an apple had i not grown up in a very open technology world. now obviously was hasn't been with apple for decades, but with apple being one of the biggest offenders, how important is him weighing in on the situation?

this is so important, i'm an engineer and i got into this, i got passionate about because i like taking things apart. i've got this is inside of a samsung device. it's fun taking these, seeing how they work and use the lenses on the camera. that's how we're going to fire the next generation of engineers. so we want to be a culture that inspires the next generation is acknowledges. we want to increase, we want engineers, we need to make sure that they can exist open world where we can see inside our things and understand how they work. otherwise, as, as was said, we're going to be on the past or people that just just don't have the skills and the motivation to develop the next way. the technology. and i think there's something that i don't believe the by an executive order. it addresses at all, and that's a way to explain to us how this will help with the weights and how big of a problem it's going to be. kyle. it takes an absolute, huge amount of raw material dug out of the ground and make a fall on like this. it can be $250.00 pounds of raw material elements in it.

everything from the into the new any of the magnets in the speakers. so they're not recoverable and recycling and you see that the toxic waste trailer around the world . this is a huge environmental problem, and it's not just just the waste itself. it's also the carbon impact if you, if we could extend the lifespan of every phone in america by just the year, it would be the problem 260-0000 cars. so there's an environmental imperative to making these products last longer. and at the same time, we have to build our local and how our advocates like yourself going to keep pressure to make sure something actually happens on this. the next step is for the fcc that they got next week. they had scheduled a meeting where they're going to vote in a policy on rates repair and then we're looking forward to the f b c. following up on the, by the administration, asking the executive order, which is to do a rule making and make it to the race repair is the law right, to repair your car when thank you so much. thanks for having me. and finally, the federal aviation administration said monday and approved

a license for jeff basis is blue origin to send humans to space of the amazon founder and 3 other passengers will had to the edge of space on the 20th of july, or the company's new shepherd. rocket, the license will be good through august approval, blue origin to take off from its launch site, one location in texas. now of course, the upcoming launch remains in the shadow of fellow billionaire richard branson in virgin galactic, which completed their 1st space tourism flight on sunday with branson himself on board. now i know there is a lot of criticism in these billionaires in space, but we also have to remember just how incredible this innovation is. i mean, over the last few decades we've seen people kind of get bored with nasa and everything that they've done and everything that they've accomplished. well, now the idea of being able to go into space yourself truly is incredible. and yes, it's starting out at a price tag like $250000.00, but the hope is that it will keep going down as we go along. well, and yeah,

and if you remember, when governments were doing this, when this whole started, especially here in the united states, i mean, we've seen the movies, we've seen the documentaries about everything. they were doing it without even calculators. they were doing math by hand with technology that are cell phones dwarf today, and they got to space and we're able to do that it's, it's quite amazing and look, i mean those innovations are going to continue it and we're going to see it. and we've seen technology over, over the last 3040 years, really, really expand. so it's something we're going to need to keep an eye on it. and i for one, i think it's fascinating to watch them do this thing. and that's it for this time. you can catch boom bus on demand on the portable tv app available on smartphones, tablets, google play in the apple app store by searching for portable tv. portable tv can also be downloaded on samsung, smart tv, and roku devices, or simply check it out. portable tv. well see you next time. mm. ah

ah, ah ah ah. ah, financial guy, i don't buy a i by mom, a teacher's that's almost a friday. that's the last time i buy it from the future. so for i can watch kaiser and she want to hold simply real thing a little slow. letting me go by susan. well, come

a little to go see me when you switch to a human meeting in the room, initial pathetic steamy. i'm go, i'm going to build on the one, let me know which was going to work. 2 for me, you would you wish nicholas you soon this new i just was looking here. when you mentioned that came quickly elude initially of, of things going on on the, on the financial, young, moody, an illusion that you lose could, you could shoot it to the lower the, with the, the injecting

pressure to inoculate against covey to governments and companies around the world air, controversial ads on vaccines as unlocking normal life. but could it split society down the middle? we debate the issue. you're going to create a society. they just choose not to have it. they're creating their own apartheid need. those who need the back seat and so you should be happy to say it, but if solely that it is not working. if there is $11.00 word that can explain it, it's greed, world health organization slam as well as the states for hiking global, that vaccine disparity and abs producers to raise supplies to developing nation becomes a big new regulator still hasn't approved as presented. shops made in india us.