isue that in the with many other countries, the distribution is very unequal people at the bottom do not hold very much and people at the top end own a lot. -- one of thelicy mechanisms, to push of asset prices, you will benefit disproportionately the people at the top end. it is also important to point out the policy is not just designed to push of asset prices. it has one effect to push of asset prices and another perfect push-up aren cost, which affect people right through the income distribution. and obviously affects the economy and that is important. one thing the speech actually showed his we have seen an improvement over the last few years. the people at the bottom have compared a little bit to people in the middle. that is because of the economic recovery which is hard was helped by qe. i do not accept qe only goes the wrong way. doubt,s of wealth, no but in terms of the economic recovery and the income, it actually helped people at the bottom tremendously. i am not criticizing the package that was issued his death the beginning of all of this but i think of my constituents w

she is also the author of unequal city: race, schools, and perceptions of injustice. last night a lot of people were waiting for some clarity saying okay, well, the police department would not have said that they will release these things unless the video is on their side. but it wasn't con cluesive. >> i know. we keep asking people to release tapes. but you know that there is something else going on. and this lack of transparency, i think it's probably macking the public much more upset because he showed them a piece of it inselfed-- ksh instead of the full thing. it just muddees the issue even further and i know it makes more people upset. >> sreenivasan: what does it do to the fabric of the community when something like this happens and when there is essentially a heightened tension, especially around race. >> well, i've been studying what i call the-- continueium, the range of contacts that people had with the police from just being stopped and asked questions to being stopped and searched to perhaps a deadly encounter with the police. and the range says wow, my side of the story wasn't tak

unequal. but i said -- i'm up easy when people make that comparison because it's a huge difference and that is thurgood marshall's life was in danger when he went to a southern town to represent someone. my advocaciy was a challenge but my life was never in danger. and another difference is people understood that racial discrimination was odious, but when i started out arguing cases , endeavoring to strike down arbitrary gender lines in the law, the judge assumed i was arguing had a hard time getting it because they thought of themselves as good husbands, good fathers, and they thought that women were on a pedestal. women were sheltered. they were protected. then justice brennan had that wonderful image he used one case -- >> one of your cases. >> yes. all too often the pedestal turns out to be a cage. that is is protects women from achieving whatever they could based on their god-given talents. so getting judges to understand that gender discrimination was bad for society, bad for women, bad for men and bad for children. none of the cases that -- in which i represented a complainant, number o

and when you start looking at unequal incentives of that nature, people are going to err on the side of hold on to it every time. >> so what's the default rule. how do we address the question on those close calls, and you mentioned, ben, a lot of this is hard. how should that default rule be created. >> the executive order gives us the default rule. and it is if ultimately we can't determine whether something should be classified or not, it's not classified. and ultimately if we cannot determine whether it should be classified at a secret level versus a top secret level, it is to be classified at a secret level. someone is privy to some national security secrets from time to time, those releases that you're talking about where something is released and shouldn't have been, those happen. i'm not going to tell you which facts are, but those definitely happen. and many of those people are still employed. i think you're right there is a perception that if something goes out that shouldn't have been there are drastic consequences. it is something that needs to be taken seriously. but the

unequal. the materials, the training for teachers, the pay for teachers, the length of time that people went to schools, the actual school facilities, and that's why it's no surprise that when there is a legal challenge to segregation, that it comes in education. i'm sure most of you are familiar with the brown decision in 1954 which is about education, that the supreme court ruled that segregated educational facilities were inherently unconstitutional. and it was a relatively -- it took a long time, but it was a relatively easy case for groups like the naacp to make because the evidence was kind of overwhelming. the federal government support, there's a variety of reasons for why over time the federal government became more interested in ending this, and i won't go into all that, but certainly by 1954 when the brown decision was handed down, it was a unanimous decision by the supreme court. but even then the court was a little bit unsure how to implement it. the implementation decree of the brown decision said that schools should be desegregated with all deliberate speed, which as you probably

unequal distribution of assets. >> well, my mom used to say, don't lie because they'll find out the truth anyway. so, i want to ask you about this, marlene. even people -- when you get people into a divorce proceeding, you're representing either side, this ashley madison stuff, you could find out about it anyway as an attorney, right? >> exactly. you would find out about it anyway, because it shows up on credit card charges. we may ask them under oath, have you been on match.com, any of the other dating websites? have you been on ashley madison? all of that is going to come utilize that. it might be relevant in custody issues. it might also be relevant for purposes of community waste. has the one spouse spent money for a non-community purpose? which ashley madison would certainly be a non-community purpose. and so we would get that information in the course of a divorce in any event. >> i always thought, this kind of thing -- let's just say everybody, the parties involved in ashley madison who decide to have an affair, it strikes me as reckless beyond the affair part, that you're trusting that this person might not go off the deep end and say i want

people. i do think we have a problem in that there is clearly unequal sacrifice when it comes to military service. i have always favored for most of my life some sort of a universal service requirement supporting -- and have supported various schemes along that line. one of which would be a military option. i think the phrase you here today so often, thank you for your service, that is a telling phrase. to some extent to me it's a little bit of a guilt complex. know if the men on these panel would agree with me or not, but my perception is when we came back from world war ii that phrase would have sounded strange to us. thank you for your service. everybody was in the service of the country in one way or another. quibbled for a while with the term "greatest generation." i wasn't sure that was much more than an excellent marketing slogan for brokaw's book. i have come to terms with it. if we includely the whole country. as you said, the country was unbelievably unified and it happened in an instant, but it stayed right on through the war. again, none of us here in this audience can say today. cert