i don't know. >> i don't know. >> is laurie ferber? don't know. >> the scope of mf global, there is sure a lot you guys don't know. >> is there anything else that you might know the might want to share with us to give us more insight? >> i'm happy to address every question. that is extraordinarily broad. >> take a shot at it. >> where to start? we were talking about what happened over a very -- a few days that were handled by professionals, professionals, -- deeply within the finance and treasury operations groups in chicago. i share your frustration in what happened, but again, we learned about this hours before the bankruptcy filing. you may have more information than we do. i share that frustration. as i have done for my entire career, i wanted to dive in from the first moment of learning there was a problem and understand it and do everything i could. but we have been cut off from that information. >> were any of you contacted by the cftc during the investigation? >> there were some meetings i attended with the department of justic

pierce. >> miss ferber, i heard -- client for robb. is that inappropriate term? >> i -- >> yes or no. >> i think it is -- i don't know how to describe it. [talking over each other] >> the money is not there. they put the money there and they can't get it back. does that fit the definition of stolen or robbed? this is magnificent. one of the highest paid lawyers in the country. bonnie and clyde were chumps. they drove around the use gas money. you guys have people send things electronically to you and nobody is responsible and you can't even declared that it was robbed or stolen from. what jumps the old-style bandits were. miss serwinski, you seem alarmed when you came back to the office that these funds were taken. why were you alarmed? we have gone through the 24 hours leaguer to wednesday, it didn't reconcile and why were you alarmed? you with distressed? >> when -- >> press the mike. >> i was not alarmed -- >> you said you were distressed. you wouldn't have done it. why would you not have done that? why would you not approve that? >> based on the previous day'

that you can do your taxes in five minutes and for those of us using tax preparing software like ferber tax instead of an accountant should we be free from iras penalties and the buffett rule for a vote in the senate today but is the idea of taxing the rich going to go away if it fails to get ready for your monday hangover. particularly. all right here to discuss with me is matt welch editor in chief of reason magazine and eric thompson senior editor at the atlantic. hello gentlemen thank you for joining me. this is so much fun everybody let's talk about taxes right you actually posted some stats today decided to read for the audience there. the tax code and just about how miserable and complicated this is the tax code is now three point eight million words long for everybody you know over the last ten years they have made about four thousand four hundred twenty eight changes to the tax code which equals out to about more than one a day and the results are some seven point six four billion hours of paperwork for americans so. why is there a tax code in our tax system so complicated our

with up in the morning, switch on the radio, you're something has happened then think, what would ferberthink about this. it is like a mantra inside your head. a prison. you look at the world through rupert's eyes. do you see the point? >> i understand what you are saying. but, i think it is nonsense and i think you should take in the context of mr. yellen's autobiography. he said he was drunk all the time. we did not notice. when you said if you want to judge my thinking, look at the sun caught the sun knows you're thinking because you told them or because the editors ran on the thought process we see .oming from mr. yellen's peace >> i do not flinch from my responsibilities. and, i certainly do take part in the policy decisions. that is my job. >> i am not saying is not. is that if you want to judge my thinking, look at the sun. are there any two way is the editors could logically know you're thinking? >> i was not talking about the editors. i was talking about the politicians. >> you were talking about -- on page 36 of the transcript, line 1516. look at the sun. if you want to judge m