than they should be that's a question i posed to benjamin friedman is a research fellow at the cato institute and here's what he had to say. feeling in the pentagon in the government is that we have to have some sort of policy on paper given all the excitement and hoopla right now about cyber war and cyber attacks and i will say that i don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the policy as outlined yet i'm just worried about what it could be just said under some circumstances we might respond to cyber attacks with military force and to me the trouble with that is just that the vast vast majority of cyber attacks have nothing to do with the military that criminal attacks people trying to steal information or what not and we need to be careful that we don't group that in with the real high and cyber attacks which luckily we have never seen in the united states and which remain largely hypothetical but that's the thing i mean we're not talking about writing a nice little screenplay for a hollywood movie here and you know pentagon policy even if just on paper can have potential severe c

help here to help me answer this question is benjamin friedman he's a research fellow at the cato institute benjamin thank you so much for being here when we talk about this policy i mean i understand that cyber attacks are sort of difficult to get our hands around wrap our heads around but you know when it comes to military prowess and a strong military that's something that the u.s. has plenty of so given the increase in recent attacks that we've seen from lockheed martin to the sony networks to the google hats why not we have a big military why not threaten any potential brawn doers with retaliation on the ground well i think that there's some truth in that in the feeling in the pentagon in the government is that we have to have some sort of policy on paper given all the excitement hoopla right now about cyber war and cyber attacks and i will say that i don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the policy as outlined yet i'm just worried about what it could be the pentagon hasn't announced it's a policy its policy officially yet they certainly have a study thing about w m d whic

professor epstein is a fellow of the cato institute and author of freedoms of law. the impact of these studies are e enormous and voted as one of the most influ enissue modern theorists of all times. >> thank you. i'll try to speak over the fan because technology failed at the cato institution, and to try to talk about hayek in the hayek auditorium is hard. in fact, i do not think of him as a dogmatic market type, but something trying to figure out how to take the native initiatives as a social democrat from austria and apply to them deals with the creation of property rights all the way through the financial markets. in order to do so, i'll pick up on themes mentioned here, and i do so to stress differences rather than similarities for a very simple reason which is the greatness of the work embodied in such ease sates like knowledge in set is induce piewtble, and what i want to do is indicate what i think need to be corrections in the theory. referring to hayek's empathy with respect to natural law and the only way to understand the evolution of social doctrine and

that's why i was pleased to accept this invitation to the cato institute. the two sides have each gotten a hold which a program to be the whole truth. they took the initiative by arguing that the government is a cause of all of our difficulties and the so-called left in so far as it exists has been forced to defend the need for the government services. of that and i'm certainly seeing political bias i recognize the other side is half right in claiming that the government is wasteful and inefficient and ought to function better. but i also continue to claim the other half of the true meaning of the financial markets are inherently unstable and need to be regulated. and above all, i am worried that those who proclaim half truths as the whole truth whether they are from the left for the right. i believe that they would share this concern. the individual liberty of to work together for the standard of the political discourse that used to enable our democracy to function better. thank you. [applause] >> the final speaker is richard epstein professor of law at ne

what they're actually doing and discuss this with me as julian sanchez a research fellow at the cato institute thanks so much for being here tonight are you first started do you any do you have any other details the i may be missing on this story like i said we tried to contact the f.b.i. see if we could find anything out you know they've been pretty tight lipped about this several news reports have suggested who's involved investigation of that group as you mentioned but beyond that we're not sure one of the disturbing things about this though from a first amendment perspective in addition to the concern is that they incidentally ended up taking down a whole bunch of sites including the park service instapaper and. sites that were run by the curb curb network including food sites like either and travel sites that grid skip or so that's really a problem that they essentially blocked access to a bunch of you know publications in effect so i feel like that's becoming a bit of a recurring trend i know this is a different issue but before we. highlighted the case when you know d.h. as the eye has

these changes matter here to discuss this with me is julian sanchez a research fellow at the cato institute thanks so much for being here tonight was a pleasure first starters in the f.b.i. just some of their guidelines about three years ago i mean has there been something drastic that's happened has necessitated them loosening them again no you wouldn't think that was arguably the more substantial revision of the guidelines on your attorney general mukasey. bundled together and we shuffled a bunch of categories of investigation again from eating much more proactive and as they put it it's i'm. enabling you just have greater flexibility and proactively trying to ferret out national security threats and you know this is great we've changed it and. now we have all the flexibility we need to. national security threats before they become a problem now it turns out according to f.b.i. general counsel probably those radically loose rules are now too cumbersome now the idea that they have to open an assessment without any kind of factual basis to make a record in a database in some cases maybe ask

then walter olson from the cato institute and maya rockeymoore talk about house republican efforts to stop the government from requiring school meals that are more nutritional but also more

looking at the scenario here to discuss this with me is david kirby associate policy analyst at the cato institute david thanks so much for being here tonight thanks for having me. what do you say some people are saying that this is the year of the libertarian you've got two of them really you know as presidential candidates yeah that's right i mean nation building has been a complaint of libertarians within the republican party and it seems just transitioning from your previous segment that this idea that nation building is expensive and it doesn't work because but rick perry and slate ron paul have been making an argument like this for many years started to catch on in the political polls and one other example of how libertarianism might be right but at the moment well i think you know one of the things about it too is it's not like i mean democrats used to be here because you could say at one point we were the anti war party but i think that part of the problem is we're not really seeing that from either party anymore and i actually have a clip that i want to play you from barbara boxer and thi

our other guest is a senior fellow at the cato institute. fellow at the manhattan institute in the past and his writings appear regularly in the "new york times" and the "new york post." we are talking about the new campaign by the fda and the choosemyuse called plate.gov. here is a tweet. what do you think about advertising in the schools and some of these commercial endeavors that appeal to the palate of fatty foods and rich foods? guest: i think there is a challenge in advertising to schools and advertising in general and society, whether it be through school programs or online or through television. there is nothing wrong with marketing to children, but when you are marketing bad health to children your marketing the notion that you will be cool if you eat this particular food or beverage. it ends up undermining your health and causing you to die young and have poor health in your lifetime. there is a notion of marketing high calorie, high-fat food to children. host: what you think? guest: i did not blame the commercials when i wound up

our other guest is a senior fellow at the cato institute. a senior fellow at the manhattan institute in the past and his writings appear regularly in the "new york times" and the "new york post." we are talking about the new campaign by the fda and the choosemyuse called plate.gov. here is a tweet. what do you think about advertising in the schools and some of these commercial endeavors that appeal to the palate of fatty foods and rich foods? guest: i think there is a challenge in advertising to schools and advertising in general and society, whether it be through school programs or online or through television. there is nothing wrong with marketing to children, but when you are marketing bad health to children your marketing the notion that you will be cool if you eat this particular food or beverage. it ends up undermining your health and causing you to die young and have poor health in your lifetime. there is a notion of marketing high calorie, high-fat food to children. host: what you think? guest: i did not blame the commercials when i w

you strict of health policy studies at the cato institute, a chief economist with the competitive enterprise institute and also serve on a national advisory council for the agency for health care research and equality so we are very like to welcome tom miller who also was a former broadcast, sports broadcaster with the wildcats. welcome, tom. [applause] >> thank you very much, grace-marie, jim, bob and all the other folks that are respected institutions and harpercollins for making this wonderful book, rocket possible. i'd like to thank the obama administration, the last congress for making this necessary, i don't want to. so let's just continue our collective -- our books written to provide you with a firm foundation understanding of the serious consequences of the unaffordable care act, or a.k.a. tca for americans and injuries slices of life. i think we did it in a clear and accessible manner at least my co-authors did. but there's always a bit of the bill murray groundhog day experience in wondering how we continue repeating the experience of many of the same basic health policy mistakes

the cato institute argues that it is more expensive and does not promote significant will security forhe price. whether or not we will do it is a different question and has to do with how much money we will spend. things are looking very tight and tightly contested. whether or not it would be a good solution, we might have to wait years to find out. host: tim on our line for republicans. caller: thank you for answering my call. host: yeah, go ahead, tim. caller: my question is, i just want to note, the diesel fuel -- to know, the diesel fuel. why is diesel so high? that has an effect on our economy. host: all right, tim, we'll leave it there. guest: great question. that goes to the question of what happens when you turn oil into refined products. you have a very dense compound, oil. you heat it up and subjected to chemical processes. one of the process -- products is diesel, a middle distillate. we use diesel for jets -- for freight. we export a lot of diesel. diesel and middle distillates are much more sought-after. there is greater demand for those. kerosine-type jet fuel. heating oi

the cato institute a 10% savings. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr.ulberson: i strike the last word. mr. cull behrson: if i could point out that the harris foundation estimates there will be 22% savings to taxpayers by eliminating the davis-bacon requirement, the beacon hill institute estimates a 0% savings, the -- a 10% savings this whole variety of savings if you line them up, we'll say for the sake of argument that there was about a 10% savings in construction costs. we as a nation, living on borrowed money should not voluntarily, willingly pay 10% more. so the amendment is extraordinarily important. it will save taxpayers significant amount of money on every construction project on average, saving ant 10%. 10% goes a long way on these massive construction projects. the gentleman's teament is vitally important, the adoption of the amendment will increets the number of jobs available, the gentleman's amendment will crees ajobs, save money for taxpayers in an era deficit and record burden we simply cannot pass on to our kids, it's vitally important t

michael canon, director of health policy studies at the cato institute said and i quote -- "nothing presents as great a threat to the federal budget and therefore to economic growth as the persistent and rapid growth of medicare." at a white house summit last year, president obama recognized the unsustainability of entitlement spending. this is a quote from our president -- "almost all of the long-term deficit and debt that we face relates to the exploding costs of medicare and medicaid. almost all of it. that is the single biggest driver of our federal debt, and if we don't get control over that, we can't get control over our federal budget." i am quoting the words of the president of the united states. who now has taken the position that we shouldn't address the medicare problem, and yet as president, he has said almost all of our deficit and debt that we face relates to the exploding costs of these two programs, medicare and medicaid. and he repeats it by saying almost all of it, the single biggest driver of our federal debt. alice rivlin who served as budget director under president bill

members of the subcommittee, i'm associate director of the center for trade policy stulds at the cato institute. since 2009 i have followed closely the auto company bailouts and bankruptcies, and i'm grateful for the opportunity to share my concerns regarding the lasting implications. the views i have today are my own. with help from some pundits and various media outlets, the administration is pitching the narrative that the auto bailouts were successful. the evidence in the support of that conclusion seem to be limited to the fact that gm's been profitable over the last five quarters and that chrysler has repaid much of its debt to the u.s. treasury. but it is to whitewash, one, the deversion of funds from the troubled asset relief program by two administrations for purposes unauthorized by congress, two, the looting and redistribution of claims against gm's and chrysler's assets from shareholders to pensioners, three, the unprecedented encroachment by the executive branch into the finest details of the bankruptcy process to orchestrate what experts describe as sham sales, four, the cost of d

the cato institute argues that it is more expensive and does not promote significant will security for the price. whether or not we will do it is a different question and has to do with how much money we will spend. things are looking very tight and tightly contested. whether or not it would be a good solution, we might have to wait years to find o. host: tim on our line for republicans. caller: thank you for answering my call. host: yeah, go ahead, tim. caller: my questions, i just want to ne, the diesel fuel -- to know, the diesel fuel. why is diesel so high? that has an effect on our economy. host: all right, tim, we'll leave it there. guest: great question. that goes to the question of what happens when you turn oil into refined products. you ve a vy dense compound, il. you heat it up and subjected to chemical processes. one of the process -- products is diesel, a middle distillate. we use diesel for jets -- for freight. we export a lot of diesel. diesel and middle distillates are much more sought-after. there is greater demand for those. kerosine-type jet fuel. heating oiols. -- o

the views expressed today are my honor should not be construed as representing the cato institute. the administration is pitching the narrative the ballots were successful. the evidence in support of the conclusion is limited to the fact that gm has been profitable and that chrysler has repaid much of its debt. calling the bela successful is to whitewash the diversion of funds by two administrations for purposes of an authorized by congress. the luting and redistribution of assets from shareholders and debtholders to pensioners. the unprecedented encroachment by the executive branch into the details of the bankruptcy process to orchestrate a sham sale. the cost of the nine ford and the other more deserving automakers the spoils of competition. the cost of insulating irresponsible actors from the outcomes of a political bankruptcy proceeding. the reduction of market and ferment -- interventions. the lingering uncertainty about the direction of policy that pervades the business environment to this day. if the president wants to take credit for saving the auto industry, he should take