tv The Dylan Ratigan Show MSNBC August 16, 2011 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT
politics at this particular time in american history is almost treasonous, in my opinion. >> i want to bring in our meg da panel. msnbc political analyst karen finney, republican strategist susan del percio and washington insider jimmy williams. all msnbc contributors and the first time we've seen each other since i kind of lost it a little bit. got a little upset with you guys and i appreciate you -- i think karen took the most collateral here. concerned about the extraction. speaking of which -- >> we don't want men to think that's how you treat all women. >> or that you bring out that reaction in -- >> unfair to you and me. >> exactly. >> so let's talk about rick perry and the money printing. shall we? >> sure. >> many people believe that our central bank's policy of inventing money at the central bank in order to cover up all the losses and all the screwed
up things and all the systems we talked about, is driving us closer to the rhck of harming our currency, harming our national standing of risking the price of our foods, risking the price of energy. that's the implied risk of money printing. right? if we do this too long, bread's going to be expensive, gas expensive. we'll lose our international power. is rick perry correct in identifying the risk, but is the federal reserve really just a symptom of what he thinks is the problem? >> the federal reserve is doing its job. >> how so? >> they're printing money and when they're not, when they raise interest rates they raise them. when they're not they're not. the federal reserve was created to get us out of the great depression. i'm pretty sure we haven't had a great depression since we started the federal reserve. >> but you're not answering my question. >> are you asking me if rick perry is right or wrong? >> saying that money printing you say they're doing their job -- >> i don't have a problem with
money printing as long as the congress is doing its job, which is telling the government how to spend the money that it's printing. >> all right. >> i have no problem with it. >> the reason i disagree with him on that, let me explain to them. >> all right. >> okay? in the meantime -- >> i have full faith -- >> bringing in help. look to your right. david, ladies and gentlemen. you want to talk money printing. >> okay. >> so welcome, david. >> thank you. >> i was just saying, do you know susan and karen? >> how are you? >> susan, karen, jimmy. he's saying, listen, as long as the federal reserve prints money in a way that congress can spend it correctly, that's okay. is that a fair characterization for you? >> i don't have the problem with the federal reserve -- >> i couldn't disadpree with that more. for the simple reason that allowing the fabrication of money without capital, without capital requirements, without any intrinsic value, releases the natural inhibitor to risktaking.
in other words, the sooner they take the capital out and allow nstead of having to hang allow on a second, kro want to do that, i don't have that natural inhibition, this runaway with risk. is that a fair characterization, david? >> yes. rick perry used the wrong word. he should have said stupid, destructive, another huge windfall for speculators, that will harm the middle class economy, that will punish laborers. >> a bigger point. which is that the federal reserve isn't the problem. the federal reserve is covering up the problem. the problem is, we don't have capital requirements in our banking system. we don't have capital requirements in our insurance market for credit in the swaps market because it's traded off of an exchange. the rating agencies do not do -- they should be the capital requirement, and instead of talking about the capital requirements, like the swaps market that's traded invisibly with no capital or the ratings agencies we got lost in very important issues like the federal reserve, but i still feel they're not the problem.
am i wrong in that, david? >> they're part of the problem, i think. capital is an issue. banks should have far more capital. if we go back to the 1920s, banks had 20% capital. we don't need to be running banks on 5% and 4%, or we don't need to -- >> which is -- this is what karen was asking me about leverage earlier. thinks i've lost my mind. he's saying that banks are $30. borrowing $30, that they're lending, for every dollar they have. corporate raters, crazy pearlman, carl icahn, crazy, come get you with the money. when they're crazy would borrow $8, $9. >> dylan, the problem is when the fed puts the interest rate at zero, overnight rate, and says it will stay there until 2013 midyear -- >> promising free money to banks. >> free money for speculators to basically go short. the overnight money, because the fed has your back until juneç
2013, and -- by and large -- this is rank speculation. >> i know. >> beyond to which -- >> regulate everything so if it all blows up at the end and come 2013 it doesn't really matter because the lav retch, they're too big to fail. >> goes to the currency. >> to the point most of are on the other side of the crisis we were talking about, talking about leverages, in your everyday life, don't you wish we could do that. we can't. we don't have big banks backing us up. >> a deal too good to be true. >> it's not monopoly money. there's not pink, blue, green money. it's money. when you spend it, it's gone the exact he right. >> on wall street. the fed is afraid of the boys and girls on wall street who may have a hissy fit if they don't -- keep covering it up. >> banks are saying, if the federal reserve doesn't keep covers this up. >> right. >> we will burn the place to the ground. that's the implication. you've got wells fargo,
citigroup. jpmorgan and bank of america. those four banks sitting on top with their foot on the throat of all the bond holders at pep c pimco, at fannie and freddie, in the ear of the treasury department, where they sell credit insurance off the exchange which prevents capital requirements. the fact of the matter is, we have a system driving speculation, david, and how can that have investment and jobs in a country that is basically only -- >> you're not going to have it. you're telling the banks load up with the five year, the ten-year bond. don't worry, the price isn't going to fall because the fed is going to do operation twist. adjust another smoke signal to wall street to buy the five-year, the çseven-year, th belly of the curve, as they say and buy it on 98% leverage that costs you seven basis points and you miss profit and that is how the banks are supposed to recover. now, this is what's wrong with the whole system. >> do you understand anything he
just said? >> here what i understand. that the -- there's a whole other system that the banks and money moguls get to operate by that the rest of us don't. and even we get to operate a little better than most americans, particularly if you've been out of work the last two years. >> 100%. >> we don't have that ability to have leverage to raise capital for any kind of safety net. they're not operating way safety net. that's what people are so angry about. >> and that's why the tea party is so angry, because they know the injustice is there. they know the injustice is there. rick perry knows the injustice is there, but instead of seeing this as a cancer that is infested every layer of our society that we have to reckon with and calm down, i should say that myself, and deal with rationally, because what is the danger of a knee-jerk reaction to the realization of how screwed up his system is, david? >> well, i think the longer we
do this, the more we're going to be taken hostage by these very forces. if we have a left wing administration that appoints a secretary of the treasury who's a bad carrier for wall street and always has been, who bailed out the banks last time and then starts, you know, a hissy fit because the s&p finally said the united states a bankrupt, which we are, that's part of the problem. >> at the root of it, mr. williams, you get the lard word in this conversation, and that was wonderful. i thank you. the banks could not have the influence that we all know @r(% exists, you just described it, everybody in this room, everybody at home knows the banks have this power. if it wasn't for the dependency of politicians to raise money to fund campaigns to run for office. is that correct? >> you're not going to hear me arg sgu with that. >> does that mean once again, the only way to solve david stockman's problem, susan del percios problems, karen finney's problem and dylan ratigan's and
everybody's at home, ban money from politics? >> ban money from politics and have congress ban constituents. >> lobbying is not the problem. it's a valuable thing. >> you can't stop lobbying because the first amendment protects it. you can't stop -- >> forget the constitution. it's valuable -- >> but you can stop corruption. you can stop buying members of congress. >> pull the curtain off the whole thing. >> what we're trying to do right now -- >> the hardest part. what elected politician -- >> not just of this country, aligning together to the obvious issue, which is politicians are bought, and we all get together for this presidential election with the constitutional amendment banning money from politics and put it in the face of every person who wants to be the president of this country. >> i agree with that. our political system has been taken hostage by crony capitalism. not just the banks. the pharmaceutical companies, health insurance,en insurance, even agriculture.
>> thank you. >> that's right. >> i'm also a libertarian and know the difference between a free market and a rigged market. >> thank. >> what we have is a rigged market. what we're going to need to do is get money out, free ways to do it. get rid of private contributions. number one, constitutional amendment, fine. campaign, financing the campaign, number two.ç third, a six-year term limit. you're in, you never run again, and you let another citizen take your place. >> but it's -- >> and six-year terms in the house. >> a lot of great ideas. i'm sure you do, and you have a lot of great ideas. i'm sure you have a lot of great ideas. until we admit we have money corrupting all of our legislation and all of us align to get rid of it, only then do we get the david stockmans and karen finneys and susan del percios and jimmy williams and you and me and everybody else in the room trying toing iffer out the best way to do it, because we don't know. but we do know what the problem
is now. and we have a presidential election coming up. i really am appreciative of you having this conversation with me. this is better than phone a friend. talk money -- >> don't get double trouble. at least he knows what the -- >> ever declared bankruptcy? >> political pay per view, the opposite of what we're talking about, speaking of a bought congress. would you believe they're constituents on town hall are being forced to pay a fee to get any face time with their representatives? based on a conversation we just had, you cannot make this up, we just got to get jimmy to write us a constitutional amendment, and we'll take it from there. plus, the battle for world domination away from the corruption of money and politics and in the field of digital communications. google's latest acquisition. not only what does it mean for apple what does it mean for the efforts to dominate your pocket?
our specialist has the inside info, but, first, wake up and smell the coffee. the ceo of starbucks says no more campaign donations until washington starts working for the american people. i bet he would support our amendment. we'll have to call him and ask him. what would lap if every other fortune 5000c=2ujju$áurá? and they all endorsed our amendment? so they could worry about doing business and we could worry about living life. we're back after this. [ woman ] welcome back, jogging stroller. you've been stuck in the garage, while my sneezing and my itchy eyes took refuge from the dust in here and the pollen outside. but with 24-hour zyrtec®, i get prescription strength relief from my worst allergy symptoms. it's the brand allergists recommend most. ♪ lily and i are back on the road again. where we belong. with zyrtec®, i can love the air®.
excuse me? my grandfather was born in this village. [ automated voice speaks foreign language ] [ male announcer ] in here, everyone speaks the same language. ♪ in here, forklifts drive themselves. no, he doesn't have it. yeah, we'll look on that. [ male announcer ] in here, friends leave you messages written in the air. that's it right there. [ male announcer ] it's the at&t network. and what's possible in here is almost impossible to say.
we've got a lot of work to do the only way it will get done is in democrats and republicans put country ahead of party and generation ahead of the next election.ç >> if they weren't all bought. president obama continuing to chastise congress during his midwest job swing. voft, lots of posturing. interesting posturing, though. the ceo of starbucks coming out telling all of washington, including the president, to wake up and smell the coffee. howard schultz, once fellow ceos and campaign donors to boycott campaign contributions, get this, until the parties actually do something constructive, like pass a constitutional amendment banning money from politics. so that we can have jobs and prosperity back in this country. how much loot are we taking? well, if you consider that just 20 ceos president obama met with a few months ago, that was at our white house -- they've
donated more than $8 million over the past 20 years, which is a lot more than you and i have. you look like that number's wrong. tell me. >> no, no. i just want to make, both political parties. >> thank. clarity is important if we're going to do this. let's bring him back in, former omb director and constitutional conventionist, david stockman. author of the amendment right here jimmy williams and, of course, karen and susan to make sure we haven't all lost our minds. this guy here, howard schultz, is saying the same thing we're saying. right? >> yeah. >> is it a good idea? i mean, is he at least wushing in the right direction? >> he is pushing in the right direction, particularly though, part of our discussion from last week. nobody should be off the hook. it's not just about the president. it's not just about the congress. it's about all of them. no one should be off the çhook >> us. >> we shouldn't let ourselves off the hook. >> a constitutional amendment
from them. >> i always go to, until there's political consequences there's not going to be change. part of the political consequences is we vote differently. we call them and say we're not going to vote for you. that's one. if the big donors say we're not going to give you money until you people show you can sit in a room and get something done, that's another. >> what if again, those same people say we're not going to get involved with you in any way, shape and form until you ban money from politics? what do you think about that. >> that's what they have to do. unless all of them do it, well, i have to cove my -- my competitor hasn't done it. i need lobbying done. >> it's all or none. right, david? why is it important that it's all or none? >> we have to get money out of politic. i agree with that. okay. we also have to get some honesty into our economics. and when the fed tells the congress that you can borrow money for two years at 19 basis points, so small you can't even find the rounding error -- 19
basis points. why are they -- >> that's wall street for free. >> why are they going to fall on the sword and cut spending or reform entitlements or raise taxes or tell the bad news to their constituents? they're not. so we need honest money at the central bank, and we need money out of the process in washington. >> which requires all this media in america to talk about this, and we don't have an honest media, you're not going to have an honest dialogue and and if you don't have an honest dialogue, you won't have shared goals as long as you live. >> there's something wrong, so bought for so many money. >> your krq#, i'm telling you, listen to jon stewart and we'll come back. again, it's -- would you have us, they would have us believe, the world would have us believe that all the politicians are saying the same things and doing the same thing. i would even have you believe that, because i am -- in advancing my own narrative, will
blend people together that, perhaps, don't always deserve it. however, there is one politician who stands out from all of them on these issues. take a listen. >> you're not forgetting, i don't know, anyone say an ytologic ytologically-term -- isn't anyone giving that gentleman. >> rick santorum who did surprisingly well for the amount of money and resources he had. >> rick sar torehsantorum didn' half of what ron paul got. he lost so bad to the guy who lost so bad he dropped out of the race. what's wrong with, he is tea party vere oh, all that small government grass roots business herbs plantsed that grass. these other folks are moral majorities in a tricornered hat. ron paul is the real deal. >> he is the real deal. he's been the only honest
republican for 30 years. i was a member of the house with him. the bailout of chrysler, the first time happened in 1979. i was from michigan and voted against it. everybody walked up to me, is there something wrong with me? ron paul walked up to me and said that's the right way to go. i got a bigger majority the next time. the point is, good ideas will lead to good voting, will lead to good representation, but as long as we have so much money in politics we're never going to have is a majority of ron pauls. that's why we've got to change the system. how people are elected and the money that goes in. >> how soon can we get that amendment? >> well, according toç the current republican house of representatives you can pass the balance the budget amendment. >> if you don't do it by december, i'm saying, according to some in congress, they think three, four months. sorry. not possible. as i've said, we amended the constitution, the united states constitution, on liquor, alcohol, twice. but never -- >> can't be that hard. if you can outlaw drinking and
re-introduce it -- changed our minds. you can drink -- how hard can it be to pass a constitutional amendment if we can pass one that says you can't drink and change your minds and say, have a beer after all. >> when you create a black market, it tends to come back. it takes a long time to do that. we couldn't even get -- we still can't get an amendment to the constitution saying women are equal to men. how in god's name are we going to get one that says you can't pay off politicians? >> because everybody in america agrees that you can't pay off politicians and here's -- >> i agree with that. >> the cold, hard truth. everybody in america agrees that our politicians are bought. not everybody in america agrees that every person in america is equal. so the quest for equality, whether it's racial equality or gender equality, is a never-ending battle that requires daily vigilance in our personal lives, because there's widespread disagreement about that equality. however, we all already agree
that we must get money out of politics. so for me, as hard as gender equality is to pull off -- >> will corporate america agree? >> corporate america -- 100 million or 200 million americans get together behind this amendment, corporate america doesn't have a voice. >> here's the point. right? until everybody ceases -- a little like the nuclear arms race argument. and i as a democrat i believe this. if my republican opponent is going to be doing it, i'm going to do it, too, because i am not going to be outgunned. until we goç to the status quo for everybody, corporation corporations, people -- >> everybody's -- >> we need reform to get honesty. before then we need honest politicians. if the republicans are going to say the problem is not taxes too low, but spending too high, then name the spending you're going to cut. they had the ryan bill. they didn't cut wan dime in social security for ten years.
didn't cut one dime from medicare for ten years. >> forget the bills. that's the point. the ryan bill is an example that ideas can be generated. without a goal, and without a system with integrity to debate those ideas, i could give you stacks of ideas. >> sure. >> i got people every day. i'll show you my e-mail box of more ideas than you know what to do with, but if we don't have a shared idea ar goals to solve as a group with wide interest, the best ideas in the world aren't going to solve the problem. >> call out the bad ideas. call out the fakery. >> i agree 100%. i'm saying without the goals. last and then we go. >> apparently now unless you pay you actually can't go share your idea. >> that's the last thing they're making people pay for these town halls. i want discuss the story. make it up in your head, look it up on the internet and you'll feel disgusted. banning money from politics, jimly do for us and we'll all do together. you read a hosh thing.
oh, yeah, where's jimmy on that amendment? we'll stay on it. we'll stay on him. david stockman, thank you so much. appreciate it. karen, susan, thank you very emergency, and mr. williams, you and i will be talking. send me a bill. two bills. a bill for the bill. you know what i'm saying? anyway, up next -- an amendment i suppose, and this would bed people's amendment. brilliant. anyway, google, apple, the battle for world domination of every pocket after this.ç have i got a surprise for you!
a mouthwatering combination of ingredients... i know you're gonna love. [ barks ] yes, it's new beneful healthy fiesta. made with wholesome grains, real chicken, even accents of tomato and avocado. yeah! come on! [ barking ] gotta love the protein for muscles-- whoo-hoo! and omega-rich nutrition for that shiny coat. ever think healthy could taste so good? [ woman announcing ] new beneful healthy fiesta. another healthful, flavorful beneful. helps defends against occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas and bloating. with three strains of good bacteria to help balance your colon. you had me at "probiotic." [ female announcer ] phillips' colon health.
we all know that. does this move set them up in theç battle for world dominati of every pocket and in every pair of pants in the world? let's ask today's specialist. the anger of "in the plex" steven levy. first, that levy, levy, i mess it up and feel bad. got it right. >> perfect. >> if you look at what going's gets, really, because google's buying something, right. >> right. >> what does google get that let's them do something to apple they couldn't do before that we care about? >> first thing they get is protection. right now google has the best selling phone in the world. they're android phone sells more than's iphone. but it was under buyer, because they didn't have the patents to protect other claim. apple was suing them, microsoft suing them. >> everyone's suing google for their phone? >> yeah, suing them because the way patents work, a messed up system.
patents work, you can't make a phone without having thousands of patents on there, and someone sues you and the way you respond is, i'm going to sue you back. mutual suing destruction. >> sounds like our political system. >> well, yeah. google, a new company, didn't have the patents. they bought motorola to get out of this mess where they had no patents and couldn't fight back, because their phones would cost twice as much. >> basically buying motorola is the equivalent of a russian billionaire buying a sports team so he gets famous and no one will kill him? >> yeah. concerned about the -- >> concerned about the lawsuits. >> right. >> afraid they'll get taken out and buy motorola to protect themselves. >> yeah. a sports team with ak 47s, because they have a huge pass portfolio. it costs so much more -- susan care? >> so much more. they also bought this company.
google's almost doubling in size and now google is a hardware company. they're going to make phones. >> right. >>y know google, they're not the kind of company that will buy a business already established and do the same thing. everything they do they want to disrupt. disrupt everyone else. so they've got something in mind. they're going to come up with something in mind, which is going to be different. >> is it going to be good or bad, though? >> right. >> you know what it might be -- i wouldn't be surprised, for instance, if the phones google winds up making at motorola are free. give them away. >> why would they do that? educate us? >> for the same reason -- >> because they're making phones in china with trade free trade? tell the truth. where does motorola -- >> they're all made in china. >> there. go on. >> had to get in china somehow. >> google to china by way of motorola. >> give away search, they make a
lot of money or ad. an ad system that makes more money than on any economic period. those phones for google, they give away the phones right now to companies like motorola, samsung, because they're trojan horses for the google products in there. if you have a phone with google search built in, google maim built in. >> going after google customers. they're going to take over -- is that good for -- that's good for google, but is that good for susan? >> it will be good for susan, because by disrupting the business model, everyone else has to respond to paying less. google doesn't like systems -- >> i'm a little bit of a cynic. where's it going to get me? there's got to be a bust. >> if the only place you'll be able to go to get information and content in the world is a google screen. they wantç -- a monopoly of information market, net neutrality, that's your end game. right? >> the -- if you're worried about a lot of information about you in one place, then this is
going to accelerate that, because google has a lot of information. they want your phone also to be your wallet. literally they feel you're not going to carry around a wallet, all your credit cards and everything in the phone. you walk in, won't have to swipe it. they'll know you're there. buy something, walk out with it. they'll be chips in the clothes you wear and you just walk out and it will bill you later on. >> sounds a lot like essentially has apple is trying to do with the iphone? right? in terms of you buy your itunes -- >> the apple charges. premium price for its products. apple, beautiful designs, we know. we love it, lust over them. >> does that mean my iphone will be free at some point? >> i don't know. thank you, karen. and going many gives it away, ap hall to come down in price. that's the thing. that's why apple -- apple already ats google. get that out there. >> yes, they do. >> because they were once partners together and all of these things, steve jobs had a
good relationship with the google fonders. >> these guys hate each other. this is just a bunch of guys that hate each other? >> a bonus. >> yeah. that's why -- >> it beefed up trade when google came up with its phone. >> sounds like you're going to have two different monopolies and we're going to have to figure it out. >> that's the thing. monopoly -- the biggest concern, and we saw this in the net neutrality base, with the capable sdrishgs debaistributio debate, the question, concern, whether it's google, apple, web providers, comcast, time warner, the people who control the pipes or the people who control screens, google, apple, facebook, will they then be able to control which content i can see and effectively shrinkç th whole internet into a walled garden, where instead of this huge ocean that's the internet where i can go anywhere and find out anything from sri lanka to paris, whatever the best thing is, it just emerging magically
from the ether what our fantasy is, creating these shrinking wall of gardens that i'm really just what this group of people think, which is actually as we know from what we watch what we all watch people's thoughts in ourselves and other people, crazy. we need a lot -- >> historically google's left wall, with other companies. they support an open internet. the thing we have maybe iphones, all of these apps. hundreds of thousands of apps. google has apps, too, but i think google would not like to see apps. they prefer the people write things for the web and you use it, and there be no filter at all. >> just their platform? >> well, you would get through their platform. >> now, i want to remind everyone of the neat teeny, teeny company everyone bitched and complained about because no one could live without them. remember the company microsoft? >> who? >> can you snapell that? >> yeah.
right. >> the rate of change, gets higher and higher. it's crazy to watch. >> microsoft wants to be number three. >> right. >> you're correct. number three. >> one last question for you before we go, and my producer's going to kill me, but jummy's writing a constitutional amendment banning money from politics. not kidding. weren't of the top lobbyists in america. >> right with him. >> would you support that? >> right with him. >> wonderful. thank you very much. another signature. appreciate that. >> thank you, we're going to need that thing, okay? >> i'm going to right it. >> not kidding. i'll write it. >> more patriotic to write a constitutional amendment onç t island, in the system while you're -- >> all right, all right. >> right now they want to get rid of the anchor who won't shut up system in the control room. up next, my apology to all of you. my doctor told me calcium
is best absorbed in small continuous amounts. only one calcium supplement does that in one daily dose. new citracal slow release... continuously releases calcium plus d for the efficient absorption my body needs. citracal. matter which position i am in i wake up feeling good. it fits you so perfectly... it fits you. you wake up and you're revived and rejuvenated. it's just like wow! tempur-pedic the most highly recommended bed in america. tempur-pedic is rated #1 in
comfort. sleep satisfaction. and back support. it fits the curvature of your body but you don't sink in and it is firm. proprietary tempur material suppresses motion transfer. this means that when you get in or out of bed, you won't disturb your partner. that's amazing. that's amazing. tempur-pedic, the most highly recommended bed in america. call the number on your screen. when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything. in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare,
call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you up to thousands of dollars. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans... exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, i can keep my own doctor and choose my own hospital. and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. as with all medicare supplement plans, and help pay for what medicare doesn't. call this toll-free number now...
so you want to hear me say this much, but i am sorry over the past 40 minutes of watching this crazy television show you have been taken, or you had taken from you 15 minutes of your life.ç at least that's according to a new study out of australia. researchers down under say if you're over the age of 25, which many of us are, watching just one hour of tv will shorten your life by 22 minutes. no joke. they call each hour of tv watching the equivalent of smoking two cigarettes. so to put it into perspective, you, our loyal viewers, and this important conversation, are losing two hours of life span every week just by watching. but have no fear. here at the d.r. show we're all about finding solutions and i have a remedy that will actually
add careers when we net it all out. i can actually add years now. for the rest of the show, if you simply do some jumping jacks maybe push-up, a sit-up or two, maybe run in place, i don't care, you'll be just fine. there's another study finds just 15 minutes of moderate exercise every day can add three years to all of our lives. so take that, australia. still ahead a perfect example of why free trade simply doesn't mean fair trade. all part of our collaboration with the huffington post in the series trading our future. we've got an in-depth look at three pending trade deals at dylanratigan.com, every last one bought by special interests. this entire series of reports grouped in one place on our home page @dylanratigan.com. find us on facebook and twitter @dylan ratigan. north america's natural gas producers are committed to safely and responsibly providing decades of cleaner burning energy for our country,
drilling thousands of feet below fresh water sources within self contained well systems and using state of the art monitoring technologies, rigorous practices help ensure our operations are safe and clean for our communities and the environment we are america's natural gas. an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual insurance, if your car's totaled, we give you the money to buy a car that's one model-year newer... with 15,000 fewer miles on it. there's no other auto insurance product like it. better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual.
what, did you invent this or something? well, my team did. i'm dr. eric first, from bayer. wow. look. it has microparticles. it enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief right to the site of pain. better? great! thanks. [ male announcer ] new bayer advanced aspirin. extra strength pain relief. twice as fast. test our fast relief. love it, or get your money back. well, we're back with the latest installment of trading our future series. perhaps no set of agreements more bought than our trade agreements as we've learned from china, but not alone. today we focus on one of the three trade deals in congress being pushed by our president. >> i want to sell goods all over the world that are standing for three words, made in america. >> that sounds good, right?
too bad it's not true.ç look at some of the numbers. panama's economy, buying all of those made in usa products we're going to sell to them is 2/10 of 1% of the size of the american economy. making any effect on demand for so-called made in america goods minuscule if not insulting. oh, yeah, that's going to get us jobs. thank you. but where panama is huge, in the business of providing massive offshore tax havens used by the very financial institutions corrupting our government, printing our money and bankrupting our currency. to the free trade agreement, it's an easy way for american corporations to keep their extracted cash and tax dollars out of our country under the veil of so-called free trade being sold to us by our own president. and if you doubt me, which i
invite you to. you should be skeptical of statements like this. all it takes is a quick search on google to find scores of companies willing to help you set up an offshore account in panama. that is exactly what "huffington post" reporter zach carter set out to do. take a look. >> i don't have to worry about the, you know, some legal things changing the bank laws are the same and everything. okay. right, and tax data. we're tax-free here. right? >> yes. >> nothing like stealing a bunch of money and then hiding it tax-free. zach carter, you are an american extractionist extraordinaire. tell us, if you wouldç, just h disastrous the ability to not only allow the extraction of our systems to continue is, but the ability to allow those that are stealing our wealth to then
harbor it and why this panama deal is so instrumental in helping advance that cause? >> well, it's very easy to set up an offshore corporation and bank account in panama, whether you're an american corporation or a person with a lot of money. it only cost about $2,000 and takes three or four days for the entire process to be complete. once that happen, panama's got some of the most secretive and bank xris e laws in the world and a corporate system which allows you to hide any activity of the corporation from other authorities in other countries a and they have a long history for refusing to cooperate with tax authorities in the united states. it's perplexing if you want to engage the country in a trade deal to begin with. what we found is this is a problem people raised. so the united states tried to have tax exchange agreement with the country, and this agreement really doesn't do much of anything. it's baised on a very old model similar to canada allowing every single transation between the bank to be reported to the
internal revenue service. >> sounds pretty good. now you got me. they fixed it. >> but nothing like that occurs under the panama agreement. >> what do you mean? >> in order to get information about these offshore corporations in panama, the u.s. actually have to already have that information and frent to the panamanian government. >> you're confusing me. listen, the internal revenue service is going to expect this, they fixed it, we're good to go? >> in no way deals with the central problem at all? >> why not? >> if the irs -- the whole point, the problem, the irs doesn't know who's stashing money in panama. >> let me be the guy stashing money. i'm stashing money in panama, doingç the good old-fashioned american rich guy thing and rocking this thing. obama, got us panama free trade, hooked me up. why is it that the irs can't get me with a rule of shared visibility? >> they have to already know you're stashing money there to ask the panamanian government any questions about you. they can't just say, the irs can't just go panama and say
give me a list of americans stashing money in panama. the panamanian government doesn't have to comply with that request. they have to already know you're doing it. >> whoenl i'm busted like bernie madoff after the fact, then i can go to panama and see if i had money there? the last yes is, a great way to take money, dude. this is sweet. if you were to look, though, at this why does the free trade deal affect that? in other words, do i need the panama free tad trade deal to do this? >> already happened. the free trade decements that i u.s. law. we try to change the tax status in panama, make it easier to crack down will be in violation of the trade agreement and subject to international sanctions. >> this gives -- the free trade agreement gives the greedy
bastards the leverage to make sure this is never taken away? >> yes. >> and the opportunity to take away that leverage -- >> now in an opportunity to prevent the greedy bastards for from being able to screw us later? is that correct? >> that's light. >> is the reason this trade agreement is built with a way for the greedy bastards with a way to make sure we can never get out of this agreement, the reason it's written this way is because there's money in politics, where again politicians are taking money from bank executives or others who benefit from this law? is that affecting the legislation? >> well, as with the other two trade agreements currently pending before congress, large corporations headquartered in the u.s. it's not clear about the workers in these deals. to oorg argue money -- >> we're sold a trade deal we're being told by our president is going to create jobs for us in
panama where they have an economy 2/10 the size ours? correct? >> correct. >> but there's a side benefit with panama, if you're a rich guy where you can hide money and nobody can ever find out about it ask is that correct? >> that's correct. >> that exists with or without this trade deal? people are already doing it? >> correct. >> so the only benefit of this side deal, it basically makes it very difficult to take that special treatment from the greedy bastards away? >> correct. he don't even have a central bank. it's the panama canal and the trade agreement locks us out of that a. genius detail. the panama canal, which is the only major economic engine that goes to an otherwise very small nation is one we're exempted from in the deal? >> that's right. >> so i've got a question for you and then i'll let you know. thir going to kill me. i'm doing a constitutional amendment to ban money in
harley-davidson goatee and the wisconsin legendary motorcycle company. i looked around and it become so clare my wife in washington, d.c. or yourself, dylan, back in new york city, for that matter is so far away from what my formerç neighbors in wisconsin and all the upper midwest are experiencing right now. used to be wisconsin is where the world would go for prevision machine tool manufacturing. people could get decent paying jobs. the campuses investing in research and development used that land grant public status to help businesses and offering world class educations to kids all over the state. today had i go home, i see the jamesville gm plant, built cars for 100 years all boarded up. i see gas stations with plywood over the windows. i overhear conversations, i heard one woman tell her friend that she hasn't been able to see her family because she's working two minnesota wage jobs and can't afford the time or the gas to drive to see their kids.
people back home are proud, but a quiet desperation in their eyes you just didn't see before. this political circus we talk about it takes people's legitimate fears and blows them up into cartoon caricatures. the tea party zealots or party organizers. i'm seeing what people want is so simple, dylan pap job, a house, education and job for their kids. maybe they want to watch the packers or go hunting on weekends and that's about it. they don't care if gay people get married. the national labor board votes one way or the other. they just want a peaceful life without fear of losing everything. what hit me most was here in d.c. it's easy to lose sight of just how scared most people are right now. fear. it's the worst human emotion. everything wrong in history has been done out of fear, i believe. i'm a policy walk. right? of course i can see the duz'ses of things i'd like to see done right now to allay the fears of my friends back in the midwest.
if china keeps devaluing ourç currency and exports, stick it to them. no u.s. access to markets, and take every defense contractor and subcontractor and put them to work building renewable energy systems and jack up taxes for every job they send overseas. all of these things have worked in other countries. but there i go. talking like d.c. talks, spewing policy proposals. to that woman i overheard saying she hasn't seen her family i might as well just said, blah, blah, blah-ty-blah, blah. i just wish i had some great idea. raise money to start a company, went back to wisconsin and found that woman so i could say, hey, you want a job? she would understand that for sure. >> a beautiful comment, david. the root of this is money and politic. would you support and amendment were we to draft such a thing? >> absolutely. the supreme court is reading the first amendment all wrong. >> we're working on it. wonderfully said. that does it for us. i'm dylan ratigan, and "hardb