tv The Dylan Ratigan Show MSNBC December 12, 2011 1:00pm-2:00pm PST
thank you so much for watching this afternoon, on this monday. dylan ratigan's here to take us forward. dylan? >> all right. a man among midgets. i'm not sure if it's a compliment or not, but i'll take it, as far as political analysis. >> is that a reference to me or to yourself? >> that was a reference to the president relative to the republicans? >> i think that's a fair judgment. >> i'm not sure it's an achievement to be tall in a room full of midgets, considering our problems. >> but you're pretty tall. >> and you're rather short. so it's easy to misinterpret my comments. >> and the show starts now. and the show starts now. well, good afternoon to you. i am dylan ratigan. and today's big story is the beginning of the end. that's the headline out of iraq. the president meeting with iraqi prime minister -- the iraqi prime minister to reflect on a decade of war by us on them in their country.
>> so this is an historic moment. a war is ending, a new day is upon us, and let us never forget those who gave us this chance. >> certainly a shift in relationship, from wartime enemies in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, reigning hell fire from the sky, even if the weapons weren't really there, to a u.s.-backed government in a foreign war, to now a full-blown democracy. after the final troop withdrawal, some 16,000 americans will still be in the country that borders on iran in varying capacities. what will also remain is a growing power vacuum in iraq, and the continued threat that iran, immediately to their east, will try to exploit that vacuum to accrue more power in the middle east. nbc news chief foreign correspondent richmond engle has been literally on the front lines since that war began. he tweeted today, "getting
chills as i hear these speeches about the end of iraq war. how much has happened since 2003." and richard, your thoughts, emotions, and perspective? >> reporter: well, it's hard to begin to describe how much has happened since 2003. i don't know if you can see my breath, it is a very cold night tonight. and it was a cold night here in baghdad when this war began. i remember listening to president bush's speech, when he said that saddam had 48 hours to leave the country with his sons, or else the war would begin, and he never left. and now, tonight, on a very similar, cold night, i was listening to president obama give a speech, talking about the end of this nearly lives, 30,000 injuries, seen probably more than a million troops deployed to combat zones. so it has been an incredible journey that the united states has gone on. and many iraqis are worried
about the future. they are happy saddam is not here, but they are worried that a sectarian system, a new status quo has been put in place, with shiites dominating this country for the first time in about 1,400 years. >> yep. richard, thank you for staying up and talking to us on this cold night. your perspective is uniquely yours. so richard engel, thank you so much. and joining us now here in the states to talk about the implications of the drawdown, lieutenant colonel anthony schaefer and retired general james marks, the managing director of the opportunities development group. and as i understand it, we're to call you spider, is that correct, sir? >> that is correct. thanks, dylan. >> we will use the term. tony, what does america have today, having spent ten years, having spent all this money, having lost all these soldiers, having been told, i believe i
remember being told that we were going to iraq to protect me and me children from being killed by iraqi weapons of mass destruction, those weapons of mass destruction were not there. have we acquired a meaningful asset on behalf of the american people with ten years worth of resources in this country? >> tbd. we've made a great investment in blood and treasure, dylan, and this is what we need to focus on now. working to make sure that investment, no matter how we got here -- >> i get it. >> yeah, but now the time is we need to move forward with making it better. they have a lot of resources. oil is always an issue. let's be direct here. always is critical to the world economy. and this is something they have. there's a lot of friction right now going on to try to do a deal with exxonmobil, which is creating a lot of havoc. so, frankly, you've got a trilateral situation. you've got the shiite, sunnis, and you've got the kurds in the north all doing different things. the question becomes, can this become a sectarian civil society that goes along democratic lines. the question is, will it sustain
itself. and we just don't know. >> and spider, how much do you think outside forces like the united states or other allies actually have to influence the nature of the return that we all get from the investment made in the battles fought in that country? >> well, it really depends upon the iraqi government and how much they want to be participants in our desire, in our efforts to try to help move them along. the real effort coming forward is the fact that this government needs to have space, it needs to grow, it needs to mature. frankly, we could debate whether they're ready to do that, whether the united states is leaving prematurely, whether the united states -- whether the president, quite frankly, made the decision or was forced into a corner to make that decision. so i think, as tony indicated, the jury's out. but this is a growing and fledgling democracy. let's help them where they want to be helped, to achieve some additional steps in the right direction. >> absolutely.
>> and it would seem that the greatest risk to the development of an independent democracy in iraq, tony, is posed by the ambitions to accumulate power from their neighbor to the east in the form of iran. do we have the confidence that the government in iraq is, has enough integrity in its apparatus that it is not ultimately going to become a substate of iran, as they aspire to accumulate more power, obviously, relative to their southern rival, saudi arabia? >> well, that's the key right there, dylan. you hit it right on the the head. you've got two countervailing forces. you've got the sunni and shia. you've got the iranians and the soaudi governments, both pushin on this issue. and this is where we noeed focu, as spyder just said, on the government. one of the things my think tanks is trying to do is focus on the middle. we're doing the iraqi technical training program to create a strong middle class.
frankly, that's one of the things that helps hold pakistan together, as much as that's a basket case. but the idea is let's give these folks an ability to actually have economic development and learn. and i think this is our best step, our best hope of helping to keep this country stay in one piece. >> and spider, if there was one thing you could focus our attention on that we could observe as the canary in the coal mine to know how it's going or to influence from the outside to suggest that it is more difficult for iran or any other foreign nation to try to exploit the power vacuum of the fledgling nature of this government, what would it be? >> well, it really has to be, let's go back to the deal that was struck, at least, initially, with exxon and the kurds. how does that happen in a democracy where you have independent actions, completely dissociated with any decision making that's taking place in baghdad. unless, of course, and i could have this wrong, there might
have been some some agreement that that was okay. i doubt it. so it clearly is the ability to have baghdad to act as a unifying element in order to create degrees of stability across the government. the one thing that you can measure, your canary in the mine, is, what do the border forces look like, what do the security forces look like? do they exist to provide legitimacy and relevance to this government as it grows up? in addition, obviously, the military, but more importantly are those security and border forces. otherwise, we'd just have a major traffic route in between iraq and iran that isn't going to be healthy for anybody. >> yeah. and that's where we'll focus our attention as we go forward. thank you, both, for the perspective. a pleasure to make the acquaintance, major general spider marks and our friend and neighbor, lieutenant colonel anthony shafer.
thanks to you both. coming up here on "the d.r. show," the "d" word, calling our economic state what it really is, a depression, so we can respond to it on a scale that it requires. plus, the thing greedy bastards are doing that's so bad there's no word for it. so we had to come up with one ourselves. and forget two turtle doves and a partridge in a pear tree. we'll tell you about an elvis monkey and a psychedelic gecko. how's that for one upsmanship. we're back after this. the employee of the month isss... the new spark card from capital one. spark miles gives me the most rewards of any small business credit card. the spark card earns double miles... so we really had to up our game. with spark, the boss earns double miles on every purchase, every day. that's setting the bar pretty high. owning my own business has never been more rewarding. coming through! [ male announcer ] introducing spark
the small business credit cards from capital one. get more by choosing unlimited double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase, every day. what's in your wallet? try bayer advanced aspirin. it's not the bayer aspirin you know. it's different. first, it's been re-engineered with micro-particles. second, it enters the bloodstream fast, and rushes relief to the site of your tough pain. the best part? it's proven to relieve pain twice as fast as before. bayer advanced aspirin. test how fast it works for you. love it, or get your money back. ♪test how fast it works for you. like so many great pioneers before me, guided only by a dream. i'm embarking on a journey of epic proportion. i will travel, from sea to shining sea, through amber waves of grain, and i won't stop until i've helped every driver in america save hundreds on car insurance.
well, no matter what you want to call it, there is no doubt that the state of our economy is certainly depressing with record poverty rates, the highest we've seen in the history of the census, and record inequality rates. and today economist paul krugman argued that it is time to stop mincing words and call it what it is, a depression. he writes, "true, it's not a full replay of the great depression," he writes, "but that's cold comfort. high unemployment isn't okay, just because it hasn't hit 1933 levels. ominous political trends shouldn't be dismissed just because there's no hitler in sight." so is it time to start addressing the "d" word or solving problems like we're in one. imogen lloyd webber and sam seder are here. you can get lost in the words from depression to recession to election. i think he makes an interesting point, which is that we have not
responded to the scale of our problems, whether it's the scale of our debt, the scale offer unemployment problem, the scale of our housing problem, the scale of the banking problem, the scale of the health insurance monopolies on a scale that recognizes the magnitude of the problem, and if using the word "depression" somehow magically forces you to think beyond incremental policy and into an actual evaluation of the financial system, et cetera, et cetera, that to me seems like it may have some merit. i know you're nodding. what do you think about that? >> i think politicians generally use scare words and use threats in order to get more power for themselves. i always said, i wanted to write a book called "wolfowitz, paulison, gore, emanuel" about all these guys doing this. that's not the danger right now. it's not the danger that politicians aren't scaring people enough. >> but, here -- well, here's -- the thing is is, it's one thing to scare people, it's another thing to lie to them to tell them that it's not what it is in order to keep your job. the other side of that
narrative, you're saying there's a lack of integrity, but i'm arguing the lack of integrity. i don't disagree with what you just said. but sam, the lack of integrity on this one is for this president and the preceding presidents to acknowledge that you have a corrupt banking system. >> the sbliestablishment in thi country, whether it's the democrats or the republicans or the elite in the media have essentially allowed for a normalization, the new normal, 9% unemployment. when, in fact, also, if you look at the numbers of people who have dropped out of the workforce, it would be closer to 11% -- >> no, no, the number is 20%. >> if you want to talk underemployed, exactly. but we're allowing for this because we're say out of a recession, from a technical standpoint. the way we measure economic success in this country leaves behind the vast majority of people in this country. and that's a problem. >> and that's because imogen, the tools we use to measure our economy, gdp, labor statistics -- >> wall street. >> well, forget wall street for a second. just the actual government statistics are wrong. the person who wrote gdp wrote
it and the first six pages of what he wrote were, please don't use this measurement tool, it's an abomination and i don't really know what i'm doing, and they deleted the first six pages of it, and they're like, looks like we've got a way to measure the economy. and that's really where a lot of this comes in. where the dashboard, the tools that we're looking at to even gauge the economy don't reflect what's actually happening. >> it's not just about national solutions anymore. we live in a globalized economy. it's about global solutions. and actually that piece we were talking about earlier very much is centering on what's going on in europe at the moment. and obviously that's very worrying, there's contagion and so forth. the scary figures that do exist, that i do believe are the youth unemployment rates. when you have a disaffected youth, that's when revolutions occur and riot os cs occur and society in danger. here it's higher since 1948. frightening figures. we need a global solution. >> to her point, maybe it's not
about picking the word, but looking at the data and saying, youth unemployment this, poverty that. >> not just the data. look what's happening right now on the west coast. you have three ports being shut down. 20 people get arrested in new york city today, in occupy protests around the country. that doesn't happen in a vacuum. that is a response to what's actually going on in the country. >> and if nothing else, it's a temperature check on the level of dissatisfaction. go ahead, tim. >> and the temperature check on the level of dissatisfaction tells us a lot. but it does not tell us, conclusively, that we need government to step in and take this action. >> but i don't think -- but you're assuming -- i'm not going there. i'm not saying that. nobody said that. >> well -- >> paul krugman would say it. >> we started with the krugman article, and krugman would say what we need is massive stimulus in the form of -- >> hold on, hold on. tim, i get it, but i'm not going to devote my show to talking about paul krugman's idea that i don't have. the only reason i brought up paul krugman is because i acknowledge paul krugman for trying to define the scale of the problem. if you want to get into how i
would solve it, we're going to do a 30 million jobs tour this winter that will go into releasing public and private investment into energy health and trade. i don't want to waste all your time with that right now. and i get your point. but the only point i'm trying to make in this conversation is just like we need to talk about getting money out of politics with a constitutional amendment, it's a scale issue, the same way we need to talk about 30 million jobs for america, not 2 million jobs, we need to talk about the characteristics of our economy in terms of poverty and unemployment on a scale that actually reflects what they are. >> the problem that tim has, and i don't want to get into tit for tat, but when we say we, many of us are saying government. and tim's ideology is such that he doesn't want that. >> my ideology says that can't work. the most that we can do is try to untangle all the things that cause the problem and wait for the economy to heal. this is a fever --
>> see, this is the issue. the idea that we can wait for millions upon millions of americans the to get back to work, it doesn't work that way. it doesn't happen. >> i understand that, but basically, just to finish this, and why i disagree with you and i disagree with paul krugman, and i disagree with the people who say that the government need to spend a bunch of money to solve this, means we've observed the problem and only obvious solution is for the government to print more money, to hire people for no apparent reason, when i would suggest that the only rational solution is to acknowledge that our tax, trade, and banking code are being purchased at auction by people who benefit by manipulating those codes that then deprive our country of public and private investment into health, into education, into energy. and i think that there's an arrogance in suggesting that any centralized group, whether it's the government or a corporation, are going to do that. >> your solutions, though needed, will take too long. you'll have a generation of americans, maybe two generations of americans --
>> i'm going to move on. i'm going to move on. i'll explain to you why that's not true at a later date. but, again -- >> i look ford ward to that. >> absolutely. basically, the only barrier to do it is not doing it. as soon as the president of the united states decide he's not going to get bought at auction, he's going to end the auction, everything will change very quickly. speaking of the president, he spoke this weekend with "60 minutes," interestingly enough, and didn't seem that concerned about things. >> it doesn't really matter who the nominee is going to be. the core philosophy that they're expressing is the same. and the contrast in visions between where i want to take the country and where they say they want to take the cub is going to be stark. >> you know president obama's right on that. it doesn't matter, because as we know, whoever is elected, they'll be purchased at auction by special interests, rigging our tax code trade policies and banking policies, so whether this president's re-elected or
the opponent is re-elected, you can rest assured they'll both be taking a small fortune from special interests to ensure that the investment that i was describing is not unleashed in our country, because they're both bought, whoever they may be. the president did go on to explain why 2012 shouldn't be about how he's performed in the face of a bought government, or a lack thereof. >> i'm being judged against the ide ideal. and you know, joe biden has a good expression. he says, don't judge me againstagainst al mighty, judge me against the alternative. >> in other words, just think how much worse it would be if you had the other guy. what more proof do you need that this is not a political race to solve our country's problems when your president is saying you're going to have to pick me, because the other guy stinks worse. once around the table, it may be great for barack obama to retain power, but i do not see how it is good for america to perpetuate rigged tax, trade,
and banking the way that we have. and i find his posture, quite candidly, rather arrogant, if only i didn't find his opponents to be equally disturbing. quickly, around the horn. >> that's the point, his opponents are equally, and for some of us, even more disturbing. >> but i think the american people are sick of being stuck in this trap, thinking they can jam us in a trap and give us two bad options. >> but the best way to judge obama is against his own promises. and he did over-promise. he said in that interview, he did over-promise. he hasn't gotten us out of gitmo, he hasn't gotten rid of the revolving door. so against his promises, he's a failure. >> it's sad for america that this is going to be a very negative election. and fundamentally, it's about as far from hope and change as you could possibly imagine. it's obama saying, it could have been worse. it might be worse if you have the other guy. it's so sad that jideas have let the table. >> and that concept is so
insulting to a country whose very pride and ego is predicated on its assumption that it can do things well. >> and better than it has already! >> that we don't seek to be not that bad at things in anything. that we are a culture of, whether it is in our entertainment, sorts, media, medical, engineering, cultures that we have this aspiration and our organizations run with this level of demands of each other as colleagues in a work environment, inside of our families, inside of our communities. and that our federal government is saying, well, listen, the other guy sucks worse is just pretty rough. >> but if the constitution works correctly, then we can have mediocre leaders and still have a great country. the problem comes when they get their hands too far in the gears of how the country works. >> or when they get bought by the people who are running everything. which is all the same. >> we will return with the panel. bringing the gavel down on this auction democracy that has put us into this trap. our specialist with ideas on how we can all fix our bought and paid for campaign system. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about fees.
tdd# 1-800-345-2550 there are atm fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and the most dreaded fees of all, hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, you won't pay fees on top of fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no monthly account service fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no hidden fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and we rebate every atm fee. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd# 1-800-345-2550 because when it comes to talking, there is no fee. is the pain reliever orthopedic doctors recommend most for arthritis pain, think again. and take aleve. it's the one doctors recommend most for arthritis pain...
two pills can last all day. ♪ two pills can last all day. over time, my lashes thinned. after 40, i didn't have enough lashes. i'd heard of latisse® but had questions. my doctor said... latisse® is the only fda approved prescription treatment for inadequate or not enough lashes. now with latisse® my lashes are longer, darker, with more than double the fullness in 16 weeks. if you are using or have used, prescription products for eye pressure problems, use latisse® under close doctor care. latisse® use may cause increased brown pigmentation of the colored part of the eye which is likely permanent. eyelid skin darkening may occur which may be reversible. if you experience eye problems or have eye surgery, consult your doctor. common side effects include itchy eyes and eye redness. i trust latisse® and i use it too. my lashes changed as i got older. now i use latisse®. more than double the fullness in 16 weeks. are your lashes thinning as you get older? why wait? ask your doctor about latisse®
we see the results of rig gd auction-based democracy in our country every day. the statistics bear themselves out and we've watched the embarrassing debate about health care and bank reform in this country that was purchased for $600 million each once in '09 and once again in 2010. but the corrupt mechanism is not just in place at the federal government, it also turns out to be going on at a state level. state campaigns are bought as well. let's take new york, for example. considered among the worse of the state auction democracies. in 2008, candidates in this lovely empire state were auctioned off for a grand total or $92.8 million from special interests. what were they paying for? what policies will not get changed to protect their interests? that money, more than half the campaign cash spent in the
state. and numbers like that are sparking a movement in new york to entirely reform the campaign finance. and for that matter, gerrymandered electoral mapping system. can fixing things like this in a great state like new york help to create a model that we could potentially implement nationwide? let's meet at least one person who hopes so. our specialist today, bill samuels, founder of the new roosevelt institute. he's been an active voice and has formed a group to take the great 28 debate not just to the federal government, but to the state capital in albany. and you are here as an optimist. you are here as a man with a plan. so you can see where there's frustration that abounds, but walk us through where you're taking us. >> i think what you see nationally is also true in new york. we have a decent governor, but there's no fire in the belly to go directly to the people and absolutely change albany. now, if you take two examples. let's take redistricting. everybody signed this pledge
that we would have an independent commission. where is the governor calling out these people and putting together a campaign, like he did on marriage equality, to really change it? you can't do it by going into a private room, as he just did on the millionaire's tax, with the two leaders and make a deal. you've got to go to the people. >> tell us about the pledge. educate us a little bit. so you created a pledge that said what? >> the pledge basically said what our constitutional nationally and in new york should say. political gerrymandering for purposes of incumbents should be illegal. period. >> so incumbents auctioning their district to keep their jobs should be illegal. any rational kindergarten should agree with that, though we don't allow for it. folks signed the pledge? >> every single republican signed the pledge. cuomo signed pinpoi eed it. >> that's fantastic. but? >> then they wink at each other. the governor, the decent governor, but without fire for
real change in his belly, has to go in and make deals with the two leaders. so nothing happens. he says he'll veto it, but so did smith, so did roosevelt, and nothing is changed. now, it's not in the league of the change that relates to campaign finance reform. let's just look at our newly elected governor. >> so you're saying the gerrymandering debate is tiddlywinks compared to campaign finance. >> not in the same league. but let's just look at it. the governor was elected and he had his first session in the first six months of the year. he's not exactly running for re-election yet. this is what happened. 245 llcs, all pay-to-play participants, contributed to his election campaign $1.8 million. 185 corporations gave money. 134 people gave $10,000 to $60,000 towards re-election before the committee to save new
york, all -- many of my friends! i want to save new york, don't you? >> we love new york. do you want to save new york, anybody? >> is there a sense that if you can make it here in new york, you can make it anywhere. >> i think that's a good point. new york with the type of people we have, has to rise up. right now the governor asked the mayor of albany to kick out the occupy albany people. you met one of them at a dinner, okay? and we're happy now that this new tax deal, which instead of reducing taxes on the millionaires by $4 billion, we're going to reduce it by 2. and that's considered a victory? >> considered a victory. and the fax rate, the you make $50,000, will now be 6.45. >> so clearly what's missing for you, because you have an apparatus, you have a pledge, you have a whole about to do this. is there's not enough fire in the belly on the streets of the
electorate to have the politicians scared. >> that's exactly right. >> exactly right. >> at least on the federal level, it's ironic that the house of representatives is less representative than the senate, which was originally supposed to be not representative. why? because there's all these incumbent protection maps. >> with the gerrymandering of the house. >> with the gerrymandering in the house and the state legislatures protect the federal legislatures and also protect themselves. but my question is, with all these different standards, they have to try to say, oh, well we need more minority/majority districts, we need to keep together these, and even some courts have said, protecting incumbents in congress is a legitimate interest, because it preserves the state powers, isn't this a much bigger deal than some -- >> it is, and you're correct. in 1992 and 2002, the courts in new york said political gerrymandering is right. this goes to why you need a debate. >> to help protect new york's point. >> let me just make a point. i'm older than a lot of you here. the number of people on the
streets dwarfed what we have today. we brought major change on this country. the women's movement started, the environmental movement started. we -- at least me -- liberals, didn't realize there were unintended consequences. if i asked you -- you don't have to answer, hubert humphreys, how many primaries did he run in for president to get the nomination? zero. stevenson, zero. we liberals said, power to the people, and it used to be the pros, like in great britain, chose the nominee at the convention. only 20%, only 20% came through the primaries. we changed it, we polflipped it 80/20. and as a result, because we didn't do campaign finance reform in that moment of real revolution, we're paying the price, look at the presidential campaigns. we did it. don't blame the conservatives, don't blame the tea parties. we didn't think it out. the same thing's true, here in
new york, okay? we've had plenty of opportunity to change it. but accept, maybe, and cuomo would be upset with this, spitzer who maybe had the fire in the belly, but didn't have the tactics, we have not gone to the people. and until we do, and dylan's right, and they understand that campaign finances and a word like rruption. and that takes leadership. and we have to demand that cuomo and every one of us in new york say, we've got to be number one. >> well, assuming that it's not going to come from cuomo, who i think has shown sort of where his allegiances lie in terms of money, because i'd put him on the sort of neo liberal spectrum when it comes to that regard. where's the leadership going to come from? >> you know, i think it starts with bringing a lot of younger people into the equation, to realize that being in public service is a wonderful thing to do. it's a long process. we've lost the opportunity in new york, for four years we had democrats all around.
it's not going to happen overnight. but it takes optimism and you have to start, as dylan said, you have to bypass the legislation in congress and go to the people. if you don't have a leader who does it, maybe when cuomo runs for re-election and he wants to be president, he'll have to understand those of us in new york who want new york to be number one are not happy. >> the most interesting thing about the nature of this debate, whether it's talking about the 20th amendment or redistricting or these type of things, is that it takes us away from the race to the bottom of ideas about, you know, a given tax proposal or a given health regulation, where we can all fight with each other, and forces us to look at the actual goldfish bowl and the toxicity in the water that we're all swimming in, regardless of our political point of view. and one of the reasons i was really excited to have you here, bill, was because of your alignment with the principles of justice beyond the politics,
which go to those fairness issues. and i think we are seeing more of that, not less of that, and my hope is that we're going to see more people that are tim and imogen and sam's age and my age who are all coming forward to join a coalition of principle around justice. then we can go back to fighting with each other about the best way to do it. but right now, it's kind of like, what is it, like the sheep dog and the coyote. sometimes we've got to have a beer to work it out to make sure the whole thing still works. sam, a pleasure. tim, thank you. imogen, always a pleasure. bill, i appreciate and admire your efforts tremendously, and i look forward to learning more about specifically the efforts on gerrymandering. bill samuels, guys. next, we'll take a walk on the wild side. as if this wasn't wild enough for you. we've got some newly discovered critters walking among us on this earth. [ male announcer ] what if you have potatoes?
well, we do talk about exploring space a lot on the show. richard branson and the whole space ship routine. but there are actually amazing discoveries happening every single day, right here on our very home planet. the world wildlife fund just released a report describing 208 new species found in just the past year, on our earth. in all, they found 145 never before seen plants, seven amphibi amphibians, two mammals, and one bird. and the bird was, indeed, not a partridge in a pear tree. some of our favorite new species, this noseless monkey that scientists nicknamed stubby. he sports an elvis-like pompadour. maybe he'll explain all those
extra sightings of the king. researchers have also found a lizard population made up entirely of females. i know what you're thinking. you need males to get baby lizards. but that is quite simply not the case, as these lady lizards reproduce by cloning themselves. and then there is a vibrantly spotted newt that has nothing to do with the 2012 election. and finally, for all you tree-loving hippies out there, we have a new mascot for you, the psychedelic gecko. i can hear ben & jerry's whipping up an ice cream flavor as we speak. these brightly colored little guys live on massive boulders about 12 miles off the coast of vietnam. pretty colorful, huh? looking at some of these species, it's clear that even mother nature does have a sense of humor. straight ahead, you've heard of capitalism and you've even been told you live in a capitalist country. we'll tear a page out of the "greedy bastard$!" glossary to tell you about one of the
dirtiest tricks in the book. ♪ sen♪ co-signed her credit card - "buy books, not beer!" ♪ ♪ut the second at she shut the door ♪ ♪ girl started blowing up their credit score ♪ ♪ she bought a pizza party for the whole dorm floor ♪ ♪ hundred pounds of makeup at the makeup store ♪ ♪ and a ticket down to spring break in mexico ♪ ♪ but her folks didn't know 'cause her folks didn't go ♪ ♪ to free-credit-score-dot-com hard times for daddy and mom. ♪ v.o.: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com
back into gdp. guys, you can profit by harm, by destruction, by exploitation, and there's no incentive for anybody to do anything but, right? there's very little incentive. >> and why hire somebody to solve your nation's problems when you can simply prosper by extracting from loopholes or benefiting from rig trade or rigged banking policies. the greedy bastards are living large, my friends, while the rest of society deals with the symptoms of their very extraction, low investment in lending and american business. low investment and lending into american infrastructure. record high poverty rates in the history of the census, and massive wealthy inequality, all symptoms of extraction, not capitalism. joining us, leo hindery, former ceo at&t and the yes networks.
at&t is a huge company. at&t broadband, it's a huge company. is it possible to develop that company without investing money to hire people to actually lay out the broadband cable so you can sell it to somebody like me so i have faster internet speed. >> in the earlier segment today when you had the panel on, dylan, and in the lead just a moment ago, it's so clear that g des moines became a discredited measure of anybody's economic vitality when we really had globalization. when we lived on an island surrounded by oceans and we sort of controlled our destiny, as we did pre-war, pre-second world war, it was an okay measure. even then, it was deeply flawed. as one of several measures, it was adequate. beginning in 1980, as globalization and the reagan administration came together at once, you began to see these false concepts come into play. once is that gdp still represented the entirety of the country, and if you and i were
measuring our personal gdp, we would take all of our income and all of our expenses, we would add the two numbers together without any signs in front of them, so if we had $100 of income and $100 of expense, we'd have a $200 gdp, and that makes no sense. >> say that again, though. because people don't -- this is relatively new, certainly thing to talk about on television. and a lot of people want to learn this, but don't understand it. you're saying that my bills for $100 count as positive gdp, as sewer as my earning $100? because if it's just measuring flow of money, it doesn't matter where it's going. >> no pluses or minuses. now let's say you borrow $100, borrow $100 to buy a refrigerator. to buy a refrigerator. junior gdp just went up to $300. because it only adds your income and your spending. so -- >> so the question is, why is that so dangerous? at a time when we need investment to solve problems, why is having a bad instrument panel, which is really what gdp
has become so dangerous. >> well, because it's an aggregate number. it measures without any differentiation of middle class versus upper class, income inequality, which you speak of, virtually every show. it just simply says, against an islanded nation, this is the sum of all the pluses and all the minuses. and obviously, you want it to rise. but it can rise in such now disproportionately devastating fashion. so in the earlier segment, again, you reminded us that we have more income inequality since any time at 1958. we have 20% of american workers with no real rage increases, dylan, since 1967. none of that manifests itself in gdp. what also doesn't manifest itself is this bizarre concept called trickle down. which is you take someone like myself, who's been very blessed in their career, and you keep making me wealthier on this false premise that i trickle it down to the rest of society.
yet if i have every suit of clothing, every refrigerator, every car that i could possibly need, all you've done, in fact, is make me wealthier. but if i give the women and men behind us on your set today income -- >> don't even make it income, make an investment with them to solve a problem, which they have an idea to solve, now you've created a job, solved a problem, and you may get a little return on your money. >> and that's the dirty, dark secret. which is why should i have a higher rate of taxes? because the premise false is that i'm a creator of jobs. very, very, very few wealthy people personally create jobs. companies create jobs. >> and wealthy people can invest to create companies. >> but the company can find its capital structure, irrespective -- >> without rich guys. >> irrespective of this massive income inequality. so you've got this false charade under way, which is somehow making me personally wealthy
creates jobs, it doesn't. by making me wealthier, that i'll trickle down my wealth, which i won't. and we laugh all the way to the bank. which is why we've been on your show and talk about taxing the wealthy. i have a lesser amount of the tax at the beginning of my career than i do at the beginning. i pay a lesser amount of tax than the women and men behind us. it's unethical, it's immoral, but it's also terrible economics. >> terrible economics. so even if you set aside the totality of all the moral outraged, from an analytical standpoint, it's tupd. >> right. so how are we going to get these people reemployed, you've got to back up from these false measures. >> thank you for helping me learn and helping our audience learn more about that, because i think it's only if we understand that the tools we're using to measure the economy are misleading us that we can even begin to have a real conversation. >> and extractionism is a perfect, perfect word for what you've just described. >> i thank you for helping us define it. >> good. >> and i look forward to working
on the 30 million jobs tour with you this week. >> we look forward to your book. >> thank you, lee yo. as we've just posted a new podcast on naked capitalism with yves smith. it is one of our "greedy bastard$!" anecdote podcasts. it's up right now at dylan ratig ratigan.com. try bayer advanced aspirin. it's not the bayer aspirin you know. it's different. first, it's been re-engineered with micro-particles. second, it enters the bloodstream fast, and rushes relief to the site of your tough pain. the best part? it's proven to relieve pain twice as fast as before. bayer advanced aspirin. test how fast it works for you. love it, or get your money back. have given way to sleeping. where sleepless nights yield to restful sleep. and lunesta can help you get there,
like it has for so many people before. when taking lunesta, don't drive or operate machinery until you feel fully awake. walking, eating, driving, or engaging in other activities while asleep, without remembering it the next day, have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations or confusion. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. alcohol may increase these risks. allergic reactions, such as tongue or throat swelling, occur rarely and may be fatal. side effects may include unpleasant taste, headache, dizziness and morning drowsiness. ask your doctor if lunesta is right for you. then get lunesta for $0 at lunesta.com. there's a land of restful sleep. we can help you go there on the wings of lunesta. i'd like a decaf 360 calories please. i'll have a triple iced 410 calories please. you know what... i'll have this instead. [ female announcer ] swap one thing a day
after today's rant. the pennsylvania liquor control board recently put out an ad. the ad put various photos of women under various stages of unaddress with tag lines saying, "she didn't want to do it, but she couldn't say no." though many have done it, i don't have a female single friend who thinks that drinking to the point of blacking out, passing out is a healthy or safe thing to do, for a multitude of reasons. you can stumble into the street or get hit by a car, or pass out in the cold and freeze to death, something that tragically happened to former senator george mcgovern's daughter, teri, but if i add to that list, and you can find yourself at greater risk for sexual assault, some women will express outrage. women have a right to drink. we have a right to drink as much as we want and we have a right to drink as much as we want without being rape d. but why is it that some feminist activists have a tough time warning women that women who
drink, but not to the point of being completely intoxicated will, in fact, be safer from a variety of crimes than women who drink to extremes. what i find particularly irritating about this ad campaign is it may prevent us addressing binge drinking. according to the cdc, binge drinking among young people has reached epidemic proportions, with 200,000 teens a year visiting emergency rooms because of alcohol-related incidents and 1,700 college students dying annually because of them. after tracking hundreds of women through their first year of college, "the journal of studies on alcohol and drugs" found a direct correlation between binge drinking and their likelihood of being victims of sexual assault. let me be clear. there will always be just one person to blame for rape and that's the rapist. but just as we educate people on the dangers of driving drunk, as well as the dangers of getting into a car with a drunk driver, we should be aggressively educating people of both genders, particularly young people, on the other dangers
involved with excessive drinking, including sexual assault. this ad campaign may have visually missed the mark, but its opponents miss the point. dylan? >> this brings up an interesting dynamic in the whole political conversation, beyond what you just mentioned. which is, it seems that there is a faction of folks that have defined the fact that equality means, you get to do whatever you want, no matter what, and that equality is the american way and if new york city's going to get $1 trillion from homeland defense, then, gosh darn it, so too is wyoming, because this is an equal country. and we will not let new york get more money than wyoming when it comes to homeland security. and we apply that same philosophy to basically everything. and this seems to be a classic example, where the suggestion that somebody inhibit their personal behavior is in some way an infringement on their rights as an american. >> and accusatory and wrong, even if it's to make the person safer. >> isn't that