see what except the mandate of the turkish people will appear to have to keep this foreign policy election run off. it's given in debt to look at the future of turkish diplomacy with government exclusive into, into the, with a smell stuffy and then the of the turkish preston's counseling. but you can watch the full version throughout the day here, and i'll tell you, but for now, here's a preview to kind of what it said. the request of took it to join the european union project dates back to 1960 clinic 70 years early. i took a apply to join the youth, but unfortunately this has not happened to this day. the cost is due to the dental standards and insincerity of european countries on this matter. at 15, both the ticket to enter, the a you for a week of tech, a, a strong, a more prosperous europe was going to be a gains if i had to. they entered the union 30 years back. but at this point in time, to be honest, ikea does not have a need to join such a union. we can say this is clearly as it can be either 10 to 20 years ago. this was a request for the target society,

but states europe is also feeding type within itself. they have certain issues and problems. have many problems. economically they have social problems and refugee problems. in this regard, there isn't much of your it has to offer to kia. but of course, in terms of integration and taking cooperation, much funded within the european union, we have goods on the mass side. we want to continue these efforts after the election, once the new term begins. that wouldn't be much change in this regard. at least from office specs if there's a couple of things for a company who are not the international web back at the top of the uh, with the very latest news update. we'll see you then the hello. i'm manila chan. you're tuned into modus operandi. where is a racket smedley, butler ins and 2 time metal of honor recipients said in his favor speech,

it breaks and billions of dollars hand over fist for the few that. busy is but what about the economics of peace can be more profitable. besides, obviously, being more sustainable tonight will talk with famed economics professor richard wolf, a about the economics of peace. all right, let's get into the m o. the james take what junior was paid a salary package of about $18100000.00 in 2021. that's par for the course in his field of employment. his salary is roughly a $164.00 times relative to the net sales of the company that he runs. that amount, totaling $66000000000.00 in 2022. jim salary is mild and pales in comparison.

james, take what unit and ceo of lockheed martin the head honcho of one of the world leading defense contractors. his company specialty is building jets and bonds and things that destroy human life. and jim is just one of a handful of defense executives who some might. so we know that but more and more on how much money piece brings piece stability, cooperation now has some data behind it. so to help us break down all the dollars and common sense that piece brings prosperity to all, we'll talk to a meritus professor of economics at democracy at work, professor richard wolf. i should also add that the professor now has a radio show program called economic update, very fitting professor was good to see you. thank you so much for joining us. so we

also talked about how much money the us spends on war. the d o d gets nearly a trillion dollars annually. we know this and we'll discuss that later. but what many people don't realize, verity and peace are inextricably tied. so according to a 2020 to study by the world bank and the institute for economics and peace, g d, p growth is steadily higher and more peaceful countries. iceland took home the 2022 prize for the most peaceful country. but the researchers cautioned that this trend is not called peace and economic progress are actually inter wait, can you help explain that for us? sure. it's a truism among economists who have studied economic history that the number the g, d p, the economic output of goods and services per year and an economy on not

by themselves. all that significant in terms of how a society evolves. many, many other things come into play other than the sheer size of output. and so it isn't surprising at all that it might be that if you have an economy that's very large, that it has a disproportionate impact or commitment. if you like to producing military goods and service is a big defense budget, as you quite likely put it, that this may take away from innovation and lots of industries. it may mean that you keep producing a narrow band of goods, airplanes, guns, bullets, and all of that, all kinds of other issues that kind of get less investment or less energy or less research and development focus. so in the end, you might regret that you spend as heavily as the united states does

a military activity because you neglected others that had a bigger rate of growth itself that has happened before in history. and that is happening now to and we could go through if you like, the mechanisms by which there's a norm is impact of spending on military can have very negative effect on your read your whole society. yeah, sure. why don't you give us one example. so us non economists can better understand . okay, so let me give you a stock example. here's the statistic to think about. the more people in the united states died 19 pandemic of the last 3 or 4 years. then died in world war 12, and 3, in terms of american casualties in those wars. in other words,

where we had to have had foresight. we did, and of course, but where we have 4 side, we could have spent a very small amount of the money we spend on military in all those wars sleep 1st rate medical system in this country that could have right away, responded with the ventilator the masks and the blogs and the all of a well known app or writers of a well develop a medical system for the mass of people. we didn't do that, but it would have been a small reduction in our defense, as we call it, for a much better benefit in terms of saving lives, saving illnesses, saving the long, cold in outlays that we're going to be having for years to come,

that are all holding back our economic development, and that's the kind of where you're looking at the quality of the outlays of a society. if you put all that much in defense as people have long understood, that's where the old game that it's bought or, or guns that you invest in. well, it could also be guns versus medical care, having a comprehensive health system everywhere in this country was the we couldn't had it as small caught in the defense outlays would've made that possible. and there are many other examples quite like that. according to the global piece and x 2022 report or rate much faster than they improve. the report also revealed that the global average of peace dropped by point 03 percent in 2022. all right, that may sound tiny, just a fraction of

a percent. but that actually marked the 11th drops in 14 years. is that reflected in what appears to be the state of the world economy right now, which you've explained to me just a few months ago. that we are now beyond the inflation phase and we're now instead of how i would put it. i think i, i want to say yes, but i want to be clear about what i'm saying. yes to here. we are now in a situation where a rich things to district about how the world has developed over the last, let's say 20 years. just to pick a round number that's statistic. the most impressive one for many of us is the level of any quality. in other words, to put it bluntly, the rich have gotten richer and the poor have not. and the gap between the rich, let's call it the top 5 present. the top 10 present of you want has gotten wider by,

but that's the way as evolve both here in the united states and pretty much everywhere else in the world. some more extreme than others, but the trend towards greater in the quality seems to be built in to the capital a system. there's a famous name, thomas, to get a written, a very important books over the last few years. and he works it all out. how that in a quality tendency is built into the system. why do i stress that? because if we know anything about the history of the world, the more on the equal societies are 2 things happen. the mass of people who get poor become upset, angry about what's happening to them. at the other half of the other side, the ridge by the very distance between themselves and the mass of people become

more anxious about their security. more aware people don't have what they have and are looking enviously in their direction. so they want more police protection. they want more military protection. they are more suspicious. anxious, worried? well, this is a tender box. it just then takes a little match thrown by whoever might be inclined to do so, and these situations explode. and when they do, you have civil wars. you have social divisions, you know what you have. you have what you see in the united states more each week, whether it's individualize in shootings or it's more social, is a political dialogue which seems to be a dialogue of the deaf. and you have a tensions exploding around the world. i would argue that we are having less and

less peace and more and more violence and conflict because we are basing our sales on an economic system that produces the in the quality to live that leads to those coming up next for many outside of the united states, america is the land of peace and opportunity. but according to the latest piece, index research, where the old usa rakes might actually shock you, we'll discuss it when we return with professor richard waltz. the type, the the

what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy from foundation. let it be an arms race is on all sides. very dramatic. the only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very unclear to get a time time to sit down and talk back to the m o. i am manila chad hollywood movies, paint for us as the land of milk and honey. and while it retains its 1st world

status, the level of peace, its citizens actually experience tells a different story that with us to discuss the image of the us versus the reality on the ground. so professor, be global peace in that's ranked the us at number 129 on their list. we're dar places like young men and syria rank below the us on the piece index. now, this may not make a lot of sense to some of the international viewers who may think of the us as it's depicted in these movies. while we may not high, the us is an extremely violent society, which has a direct impact on our domestic economy. and if you look at where our tax dollars are going, $858000000000.00 just this year to the pentagon. that is up a $100000000000.00 more than last year's budget. according to uh,

they say the individual average american tax payer paid $929.00 towards pentagon contractors in 2021, which funds them for a whopping 18 days. but only a $171.00. dollars of our taxes went to pay through $12.00 education, then 62 dollars dollars towards and tie homelessness programs. how do you read our economic investment so far? well, you know, the distribution of our tax dollars, like the distribution of the income, all of us get as human beings living here is affected by all kinds of issues. the fears about the future worries a savings, put your kids through college, be able to afford a better home, a better car. money is shaped by many, many things. and every capitalist enterprise has long ago understood

this and realized that if it's going to succeed, it has to create a solid basis in the population of people who want to buy whatever that particular company is, what it's selling. and that's why, for example, we have an enormous industry called advertising where a company pays its picture, its products stuck in our faces, wherever we turn all day every day to keep us connected to them. well, there are no different from the industry, the programs, the people who put ships and tanks and planes and missiles, they need to keep it up by your, of what they sell glue to them. well, doesn't make much sense to put the missile out there on the tv screen. most people

wouldn't know what to do and it's not part of their daily life, or is the government. nobody else is allowed to even own most of those things level owned by them. so the government has to be willing to let itself be approached by the defense called their wares. but that looks a little dicey too. so long ago the defense producers understood they have to go behind the politician. they have to go to the mass of people to give them the feeling that you'd better support the government, buying all the guns and missiles and keeping all those troops in all those bases in all those contain a sense and there's no way of a beating around the bush here, you have to create a sense of being at risk of being in danger. for most of the 20th century,

we were all told that the danger is socialism. when the soviet union collapsed, we had to find a new one, and we did terrorism and terrorist, and we declared and gloves war on terrorism, with the same language that we had early you use to declare and blows war against socialism. and when terrorism faded away, food and then russia coming back for a 2nd run and we have is using pain in china and the china thread. this is a country that has felt the need to produce in itself a notion of at risk getting this from violent external forces. because whatever else you think about it, it is a wonderful way to keep the people will just as you laid it out on defense in a way that almost no other every one of

a famous fit testing that's been true for at least half a century. the united states, as a nation, spends more on military defense, then the 9 other countries that are in the top 10 combined. let me say it again. we as a nation, spend more on the military then the next 9, the 2nd, the 3rd, the 4th, all the way down to the 10th country in terms of the total outlay. and let me be clear, those countries added up, have many more people to defend. then there are american citizens, china and countries. indeed china and russia are in the 9 below us. all the rest of those countries are allies of the united states. so the over whelming military dominance of the united states, it was offset less that make americans say,

well let's take it easy we, we have more than the other 9 combined. why don't we so worry that, oh no, no, we keep up the sense of endangerment it. no other society does. and we the f i fund and keep going. the military enterprises of the country round university is costa for project highlights how these war contractors in the us managed to keep their backing from lawmakers big contractors like lockheed martin raytheon based systems. and a lot of others. they've read their sub contracting and supply chains all over the country, which they then out as creating jobs in that state. but as the brown university researchers discovered of the 20 states with economies most depend, terry manufacturing, 14 of the 20 states experienced poverty rates at on par with,

or in many cases, even higher rates than the national average. so what does that do is actually good for the economy? it's a challenge to that argument. and as all of many other challenges to that argue that, let me expand a little bit on it. we know from studying the military expenditure at over the lam, a remarkable reality for every dollar spent on the military producers less in the way of new jobs. then it did 5 years ago. even less than 10 years ago. in other words, the labor component of outlays on defense has been shrinking and nobody should be much surprised. that's mainly because our military is more and more mechanized, more and more computerized more. i'm you don't generate the kinds of job numbers you did baby in the 1950s, sixties, or seventies. you don't do that any more,

which helps explain why on employment and so on in the high military spending. but there's a deeper problem here, which is very illogical and comes down almost to a question of economic literacy. if you ask the question of a worker or a vote in the street, and you say, are you concerned that if the military budget is reduced, less money will come? but no one in their right mind has ever suggested that you cut the military budget and don't do anything else. the whole point of saving money on the military, spending less on military activity is to spend that money on something else more valuable to the people of the country. whether that be

in improving our schools, improving our hospitals, improving our fill in the blanks, dealing with our lax infrastructure as were slowly trying to do, perhaps relieving the young people of the depths that they have that hobble their future. the whole point would be to compare how many jobs would be lost if the military cut back versus how many jobs would be created with fee alternative investments that could be made with the money not spend on the military. that would be the only honest way to talk about this. unfortunately, the military corporations, the employers of the capital as well, makes the guns that turn the plains, the missiles, they don't want this to happen. they don't want to lose the money flowing into

their profits in order to build up schools, hospitals, other things that will be money made by others. they are not interested in that. so they have been very interested in keeping the question absurdly narrow. do you want defense, department money coming into your district or not, as everybody else is out of the predictable way, but you can't use that as a basis for arguing that the people want it. it's because you've posed the question in an unfair biased way to get the answer. you're looking for professor richard wall. thank you so much. always a pleasure to speak with you and you can hear more from the professor at democracy at work dot info. okay, there you have it, but i think you already knew we don't need a ph. d. and anything to know that with piece comes prosperity. but corporate greed

from the merchants of death are willing to give up their profits without a fight. so the question becomes, how to fight for peace peacefully. i'll let you ponder that one that's going to do it for this episode at modus operandi the show that dig deep into foreign policy. i'm your host manila chan. thank you for tuning it. we'll see you again next week to figure out to m o. in the the which was that there were some openings to students that will go slow, that are still just kind of a mass collection. they point is going to look. you agree, miss stella to post this on the

at the is that i, that's a get a minute come other students need which is easy to so on the screen. so of course i just want to know which is the model i'm willing to identify july. the again, as ordered by mitchell scroll well in the middle of something that we did present in the beginning of the results between you and the to the portal. and we'll just do that for for sure. and i'm comfortable to which, which, which insidiously suitcase process the interim. those of, we always believe that license a full suckers, that all of is ups and downs india. before the british was that it just nation with the highest gdp in the word. and why did the 100

years of british truly bring it to this low off some 50? it's an acting not late. so to get back to you and give us no deeper party. they had no right to take my property. my idols, my god, they ran to all about big spaces i was see, could spaces off temper the wireless, you pointed out the spaces inside. the wood lute also is like in the wood, which is now closer to the english, the big city. so quite selling lead, even the heating, the word has been looted into the english lexicon. the headlines on all the international distressing images of 7 civilians,

including 2 children, a wounded as ukrainian forces show residential areas in washington. so next we're probably going to maybe find a deal to deploy no strategic russian nuclear office to better ways to combat the growing slides from nature. 12 applicants, president of the lines because in salt warranty and position of known alignment with the west african celebrate the source and success in finding colonialism and palletized.