geronimo and osama bin laden, we saw it as a need to respond, but not with a negative vibe, but with postivitythere's that misconception that we spoke about earlier, in the state, native american people don't exist, and we're a monolithic culture, all lumped in together, ig in the past. so we want to take a moment with a callout for all of these diverse places of indian country, they may think your dead, but we're all in this together. and i think there's power in that. there's a strong inherent power of acknowledging each other. >> i know our community is giving pushback: so ripe, now often do you come across this pushback for the kinds of things that you do? do a lot of people find it funny and not offended by it? >> yeah, but we don't really -- you know, as a group, we found this when we first started making videos, and as a group, what we have been able to establish with the people that we have been with on a regular basis, and we have been able to establish those rues. and as a group, more similar to the ones within our communities, with each other. and like we have always said, what we d

i say absolutely, postively, stay as far away from that strategy as you possibly can of the only people whoever come out in those type of strategies are the people that actually promote them. so, your house is sacrosanct. that is part of, one of your most important assets and should not be used to put money at risk in the stock market. if you're doing it, you're making a major mistake. if you haven't, can't remember five to six years ago what happened in the 2008 when the markets and home values and everything dropped at the same time, it's a terrible situation. you need to stay far away from it. gerri: i get your point here, no, no, no, no. that is actually one of our viewers said, no, no, no, no. ed, i turn to you now. one of the arguments in favor of this is diversification. you don't want all of your eggs in the basket of real estate. so take some money out of the house and throw it in the stock market. what do you say, ed? >> yeah, well i continue the no, no, no. don't forget you're using, you're using leverage. you're doing something even worse because you're taking that money and

had we gotten more cut in amount of money printed every month i think market would respond more postively. the market is saying if we don't expand the printing of money as much, if we cut back on the printing, the market goes up. because it's a sign of strength for the economy. we have no inflation. it a sign of strength for economy. get rid of money printing, the market comes up. i'm not all the way with you, steve but, middle of the road. melissa: gerald o'driscoll, let me ask you, is there any sign they think the economy is stronger that they take away that unemployment threshold? or does that tell you they think there is hidden up employment in the system and that is not a decent indicator any longer? >> well i think it is not a decent indicator and that is the best reason for taking it out. but it was boxing them in because when they got to 6 point 5 they would have had to stop tapering. and clear they don't want to do that. melissa: they wouldn't said they would have to stop. they said a was a threshold. they tried to clarify the language. doesn't mean we'll automatically get out at

investors responded, look at this chart, very postively to the company's future growth plans.4% over the past year. wish you got in back then? well i sat down with the company's ceo and president, doug peterson, and talked to him about why new investors should be buying into this stock. >> mcgraw hill financial has repositioned itself as a unique analytics company. it's global. we're positioned with fantastic brands. we have an incredibly strong financial position and we're in growth markets. the brands that we have you know and you use every day. in fact they're ticking across the bottom of the screen all day. the s&p 500. dow jones. we have an index business. we have a ratings business. j.d. power is in the analytic markets for the global automotive sector. all the sectors we're in we repositioned for growth and it is a fantastic company. liz: i know your products and services are not cheap because they're award-winning. then i guess i want to know, since we can get a window into the financial health of some of these customers and clients, how are they doing? are they spendi

and, also he noted that opposition delegation has acted postively and very productive while the other delegation will not and they're not serious about the whole issue. and he asked for the security council to issue a statement or take action in his support. the english, british representative and other representatives prepared a press statement which calls for support of brahimi and calls on the syrian government to accept what his proposal. unfortunately russia blocked issuing the statement. and here we are talking about the press statement. no action. just words. russia block as press statement, what can you expect of any type of action of this council? so the question comes now, where brahimi wants to go? we had a meeting with him yesterday and he was straightforward in saying that he will not, he is for the continuity of the process. he is ready to put all most effort for its success but he can not continue unless the government agrees on discussing both subjecting in the same time. he feels that iran is the main power player so he decided he will go to iran today and he will com

intervening, regulators must understand how new technologies and business models affect consumers, both postively and negativelily. this requires caveful factual and economic analysis. it also serves another check on action for the sake of action. as noted in the ftc at 100 report which i played a large role in, the improvement of consumer welfare is the proper objective of the agency's competition and consumer protection work. our consumer protection laws encourage us to focus on consumer harm whether the cause is pro deception or unfairness. in analyzing a deceptive practice or omission, the ftc asks if the deception is material. that is, absent the deception, would the consumer made a different choice? as explained in our deseparate shun statement, if different choices are likely the deceptive claim is material and injury is likely as well. thus, injury and materiality are different names for the same concept. the ftc's unfairness statement relies even more explicitly on harm. it deeps a practice unfair if it causes substantial harm which is not outweighed by any offsettingconsumer or competit