tv Watching the Hawks RT February 6, 2019 2:30am-3:01am EST
part of the quote forty percent of american households lack a basic level of savings these liquid asset poor households don't have enough savings to make ends meet at the poverty level for three months if their income was interrupted with runs that translates to the sobering fact that today in the supreme supposedly one of the richest greatest countries in the world forty percent of its citizens are just one missed paycheck away from true poverty. that is not a prosperous great nation far from it that is a nation on the brink of collapse whose leaders refuse to take their heads out of the sand and their corporate hands out of our pockets which means it's time for all of us to start watching the hawks. to. get the. real that this was. at the bottom.
of the day like you that i got. that we. would. welcome everyone to watch. the road and then times out of the lot and i like many americans. paycheck away from it's not a joke i mean it really is that we people think that's the you know i guess people who have huge savings accounts and all of this available credit you know just got to go on the i'll be fine kind of don't understand what that means they really don't there's a huge disconnect between the levels of class in this country and i think what the prosperity now report found that's very interesting is that everybody's kind of assumption the middle class was the middle class isn't really true no it's not because what they found is that that those numbers come from the middle class where their middle class just. paycheck away from poverty i mean me that was working
class blue collar was. not changing but then you know it was like you work really hard but being blue collar essentially working class means you know the difference in working class and. middle class is a credit card and one credit card or a savings account with a month's worth of expenses and we're talking massive numbers when you think about forty percent of the country yeah i mean you're talking about we have about three hundred twenty five. almost three hundred twenty six million people hair and the people according to the prosperity of now it's numbers that what that means when you say that forty percent is that one hundred thirty million people are living u.s. citizens are living in a situation or their family is living in a situation where one missed paycheck could mean losing their home not having anything having to go out and look for some kind of charity one page or one
paycheck one page or one bad decision no one won anything one your boss forgot something you know you're out your whatever you want and they sell that they saw that hardcore during the government shutdown recently like gas employees who have you know but all government does produce good study job health insurer you know all of those suddenly they're off limits to paychecks and they're going into food lines they now know how to do all this that's the reality for one hundred thirty million citizens and again like i said that's not a stable country no not in the in the richest country in the world this great the great america that so great got to be greater and there's all this whining there is zero reason in the you're twenty one thousand for the united states of america to have working people be so poor that they cannot afford grocery rug and this isn't the working people's fault this isn't something now it's like oh well they're not trying hard enough and they don't have smart exact makes korean t.v.
they're not being smart with their money you know that this is garbage i mean look you're talking about the urban institute study uncovered recently that four out of ten us of the old so they experience at least one type of material hardship like struggling to pay for groceries or housing in the entire year of twenty seventeen at least once a year that's born to forty percent again same group same group yeah you know and believe me these numbers skew even worse when you're not white working class when you are going to say no board and. black americans the numbers rise even harder yeah this is scary and one of the other thing is that this idea of how credit scores were many most of us who are adults now know that sort of credit scores don't say how good you are with money really it's how much money they can make off of you and what you're looking at now due to everything the credit crisis layoffs everything it comes down to do i feed my kids or do i pay the bill
a lot of people so feed their kids monsters who does that but now you have almost half about forty eight point one percent of americans with credit scores that are below prive meaning they could not get a store credit card they cannot get a loan they cannot get you know things at a rate that is an exorbitant in and oppressive financially so and then you say that nearly twenty percent of households didn't have any mainstream credit in the past twelve months they didn't have a credit card that was usable they didn't have credit. and that's you know likely access and i will say this there's changes being done to credit scores now we're going to be able to look directly at your bank account coming up this year and how many times you've been overdraft and how many times you've been i know that's all going to come together. that's going to it's going to get work hours. apparently if you're looking for someone who doesn't believe that sugar and soda and sugary drinks are unhealthy and contribute to obesity type two diabetes and
heart disease well look no further than the c.d.c. the health policy journal mailbox quarterly published a paper this week that included an analysis of nearly three hundred pages of eighty six e-mails exposing a rather symbiotic relationship between the centers for disease control and prevention and sugar water behemoths coca-cola the most the c.d.c. were directed to dr barbara bowman who at the time was director of c.d.c.'s division for heart disease and stroke prevention coca-cola representative wrote to bowman that quote there are clearly areas where we can work collaboratively collaboratively and share insights to advance the work and prevention of obesity and this is going to inform consumers of choices now realize those choices relate to coca-cola to low calorie or no gallery beverages with coca-cola representatives claiming in e-mails that studies showing associations between diet averages and weight in the mail logical studies is likely the result of reverse causality so
what they're saying is that people who drink diet soda are already are probably already sick with some sort of problem and obesity when they start drinking the diet soda but why would they be putting all of this effort into palin around with boman in the c.d.c. will coca-cola representatives wanted inside information and advice on how to combat the world health organization aries scientifically backed claim that reducing consumption of sugar sweetened beverages would also reduce the risk of childhood obesity boman was so helpful to them that she was forced to resign after the connections between her and top coca-cola executives were revealed in twenty sixteen and while it isn't necessarily wrong for corporations to engage government agencies and dialogue about public health it is wrong for those corporate. to get help the fills their coffers at the expense of public health so hop watchers to are your tax dollars spent cord manning health campaigns and children that were designed to raise the profits of
a nearly four hundred billion dollar us market. no no you don't want to pay for big big sugar to make more money i moves while we pay the health costs again happening over and over and over and over again where you see the corporate boom that's like those kind of blood you know with their greedy little hands clawing and all barbara légion sees like oh they've c.d.c. let's be friends you know what so we can. so how do we yeah i'm such a what they did was they went in there and well that said he showed as they went over all of this information and the paper laid out these three main themes and the correspondence all this. is a metaphor for what they're aiming for is to go to game and expand access obviously they want to lobby and make sure they can get their voice on capitol hill so that regulations things like sugar taxes won't go through and just shift attention the biggest one is this idea of shifting attention and blame
a wave from their product sugary drinks oh remember we broke up again and things like it's a small idea of being part of this behemoths but what they really are doing is just trying to cheat the system if they don't like it and this is what hurts me the most about this is this isn't the f.d.a. where you do your natural your brain goes over food and drug administration ok well magic you know this is the c.d.c. the centers for disease control right that coca-cola is getting her. to areas and which processed sugar has been shown to raise risk heart and stroke humans in the world health organization report that got coca-cola you mentioned the report will that report so what riled up specifically it points to the risk to low income children and adolescents in developing places like china and africa the cocoa. poisoning them doesn't want anyone stopping them essentially from poisoning brown children the world over in poor communities all for a profit that's what got another skin about the world health organization report is
that it showed them for what they are vampires that they don't like because the e.u. and the u.k. has put these taxes on sugary drugs ultimately if you want to go sell your sugar drink all you want go for it one don't lie and say stuff is healthy when we know it's not part of the problem is that congress is way too trimming with with companies like coca-cola and that goes on we've seen coca-cola and all these things to keep go on going and taking water from communities that while gary ross kind of co-director of us right to know which is the organization that originally did the foyer request that got these these e-mails he told salon that congress should investigate what really happened between c.d.c. and coca-cola and whether c.d.c. complied with relevant ethics that c.d.c. is not improperly influenced by corporations that manufacture harmful products i going to guarantee they are there are those that you have to ask that question we don't mean investigation corporations are definitely finitely there i want to get there's a quick we will see this is why the c.d.c. is at the coal framework provides checks and balances needed to keep the agency on
track scientifically and at the clean the c.d.c. provides employees with resources to maintain it at the go inside to work integrity . but the paper did actually look at it against the ethical framework of the d.c. and they in fact still showed a lack of effort on the part of those intended so if the c.b.c. about there to finish reading the paper they might know that they're too busy talking to x. as we go to break our watches don't forget to let us know when you begin to suffer through the cover of facebook and twitter see our poll shows that r.t.g. dot com coming up we build into the at the cold war crisis a big tech companies putting potentially dangerous new technologies into the market conservative commentator steve malzberg joins us to discuss so stay tuned for one.
tax rises financial survival guide stacey let's learn a salad fill out let's say i'm not sure i get any or at least i'm greased on base of the fight wall street spot thank you for helping. destroy that's right. slavery. that's right the stand. over them one has. run out of good armor on our trophy for our brothers and profit off the floor for the america of america.
i'm going to let them but i don't question any. kid and. i don't think is a channel for truffle that it. was then now mind my michelle that also i know it does. but i hate when i do it. because its whole food place choice i knew where you're from and peyote some time in serious is. pretty she ought to have a. model for that in africa will fuck around with mr hates it for jim and then boil for her whole foods are for him and for. me the money.
thank. you if science fiction has taught us anything it's that you can not trust cutting edge potentially dangerous new technology in the hands of megacorporations or omnipotent governments from walen you tommy the cyber dime it never ends well which is why it's not surprising to see that in january more than eighty five human rights groups including the american civil liberties union national lawyers guild chapters and freedom of the press foundation wrote to microsoft google and amazon demanding that they stop selling privacy crushing technology like facial recognition software to governments militaries on law enforcement agencies but apparently the heads of those companies did not see or understand the moral message of the science fiction films we watched we growing up because of the world economic forum in davos this year when business insider asked the president and chief legal officer of microsoft bribed smith about the letter he replied i do not understand an argument that companies should avoid all licensing to any government agency for any purpose whatsoever a sweeping ban on all government use clearly goes too far and risky and cruel and
it's humanitarian the fact joining us now to discuss which is more cruel selling the u.s. government dangerous surveillance technology or not selling u.s. government paper i thought rather than out of this comes out of our they received brag great well you know i just write those phone you know clear of the fluff so when i disagreed they were good like that and i know i didn't really get it i know this is interesting this is a really interesting dilemma the kind of polls before society right now and i want to start as is should companies in your opinion first should companies like microsoft and amazon be allowed to sell potentially dangerous software to the united states government or law enforcement agencies software that you know could be used for nefarious purposes but yes they should be able to and i think it also can be used include and is being used for. good purposes first of all what these agencies want these eighty some odd groups and i'm a fan of every single one of them they want to total blanket ban they don't want to
go into any government any agency anybody just likes frappe it up and throw it away and that's never going to happen once the software is out there it's out there and people are going to get it one way or another but good is being done there the national genome research institute is using it to diagnose a disease called george's syndrome and they use facial recognition could you can tell in the face so that you know and they could prevent it or get it early also it helps find missing children are there some discrepancy there they say oh no it doesn't but in the new delhi one hundred thousand missing kids they found fourteen thousand the media is focusing on the five thousand that haven't been found and their court says well this technology is not working we have to find five thousand but they found fourteen thousand so if it does good can it be used for the faeries purposes yes and microsoft c.e.o. acknowledges that and wants limitations placed when it comes to human rights violation of privacy so i mean i think his intentions are good and i don't agree
with him there be whatever see a human catastrophe to writhe holds technology that can benefit humanity if you will i think that's you know that would be a bad thing. well i think the obvious question is you know it's always you know a wall a facial recognition software these are all things that can be used for a good purpose you know they can be used for humanitarian purposes they can be used you know not evil you know but then when you put them in the hands some of the stuff in the hands of someone like google who has to remind themselves not to be. pointing it out there so what the question then becomes because corporate greed is corporate greed of course you know i should they not make money but then what about supposedly u.s. rivals what happens if they're like well we can sell we can sell this to iran we can solve this through north korea we can solve this to any of these kinds of what happens when that well i think the sanctions that are in place against north korea and against iran would prevent them from doing that or they'd be in serious
violation but it's a legitimate concern you know what it could be an evil doer doesn't have to be a congo a country a government could be an evil doer who gives it to them subsequently so the risk is always out there but once the genie is out of the bottle the genie is out of the bottle so the bad guy it's like to me gun control the bad guys always going to have a gun so withholding it from law abiding citizens puts them at a disadvantage if i could make this analogy so withholding it from you know good doers medical associations and government sort of put it to good use because of the fear that somebody nefarious will get ahold of it they're going to get ahold of it anyway and then the good people won't have it to use it for the betterment of society it's a very very similar on an odd thing is sort of the plastic straw today you take away everybody out there environmental what you're doing is actually making because a lot harder for non ambulatory people who need them then they have to ask and it becomes a very it's interesting because there's a really this is one of those facial recognition software and you know because it was seen over the years and things like that apart from the good that it does it is
still a very big brother kind of orwellian and it's literally everything or yeah you know and since they got it. so that's one of those ones words like you know we need our congress to act of this we need people to come looking like let's put the rules in place now before it gets out of him. but i wonder kind of brings up the bigger question of where should we at the cli draw the line when it comes to what should or shouldn't be for sale to law enforcement or government i mean is there is there a law that we shouldn't cross the business or should say you know we can invent anything but maybe there's a certain point where i'd like to think you're right yeah but you know i'd like to say well maybe they shouldn't be able to look at us through our cameras in our computers when our computers are off but you know what. maybe are true you should be able to spy on those twenty four seven you know what it is so you know i
don't know how you draw the line anymore i'm afraid to say because i think like i said the genie is out of the bottle technology is running so wild that what we have today will seem like not being in five years so i don't know the answer i share your concerns to a certain extent but i certainly don't have the answer i think that's the thing that's so scary is that there's all these great things come out of technology whether it's nuclear power there's a nuclear medicine saves people's lives but then when you think about a nuclear weapon or nuclear power plants or so many things so like i said it's like ok we're going to get the plastics are off your table but now someone else is being you know we're on this thing where there has to be some sort of moral ground of when do our rights of privacy like have we just given up i feel like you know so many of us screamed for so long when everything came out from you know torture to spy to everything so like you said there are computers i mean we're real just a little too quiet and then having never giving up i think the united states
government the congress still hasn't regulated facebook and these other companies like google and the european union they slap a fine on facebook and they call the berg. whatever then bubba but they're still operating freely and there are no restrictions on them right now to be honest with you except from a fine here or find there which of them is you know one nickel here and a quarter there technology is moving at such a extremely fast forward to the you know we might we might we could be developing something wildly barriers that we don't even know we're developing at this point and that's the big concern i mean think about it i mean what happens if if you know what happens if microsoft develops the new killer but like a good we go back to like the one nine hundred fifty s. what happens if like microsoft developed a nuclear bomb before the united states government did you know obviously you know today's restrictions on who could make weapons and things like that but what if you didn't realize it was a weapon until it is used as one of the marketplace is a member you say this point about more ality because you know what you know that we
can question the morality of a nuclear bomb i don't know we should have used it or in our whatever we could do that but what science came out of it but that was a government funded program that was very secretive that was there was meant to be you know kept in the hands of secrecy was somewhere along the line the united states government kept saying well we can let these big corporations develop all this stuff honestly facial recognition should have been developed by dark by everyone else a very long time ago and it shouldn't be in the hands of these corporations so my question to you is at what point does more ality come before profits for a technology company or a company that's like where you like he said like where does the morality where you start to go that are not i don't and i don't know exactly who makes these things but you could read article after article concern have to concern about artificial intelligence and robots now that we're creating that can take us over i mean physically and we all otherwise and it's a real concern to a lot of people that we've gone too far and we're going too far doesn't sit in for
you are you saying you know if i were. in it as i did over and you know what we're . i mean as a person. i think i think we don't do it i think when it comes to that kind of stuff i think you know that i don't i don't like mad scientists dissidents and creating a monster that's going to take over the world and maybe that's exactly what some of them are doing you go look frankenstein i was going to say i thought this is very silly wrote a book. called all of my darling if you know what the thing is and i think that's that's a part that both sides of the aisle should be ok it should be absolutely we can agree on that and we don't really agree because i mean it's like since there's since snowden since the going to say since torture it's very hard for me to put my trust in government and that's something that i can vote and change and control i can't vote can change control a corporation unless i am a majority stockholder makes it even more scary for me with a corporation starts kind of running rampant or saying like no no they need to have
this to be cruel for they didn't you know you couldn't you can say that better both governments have to step up and put some some regulation is that even microsoft says they want they want to know exactly. what is going to hate them either way i'm studio for a chinese revenue. by using a machine algorithm to test the brain scans of one hundred twenty one women and eighty four men who were aged in age from twenty to eighty two scientists found evidence to suggest that women's brains are younger than men in a way see they were trying to calculate metabolic rate ages to determine why women experience cognitive decline at a much lower rate than men do but this isn't a matter of men maturing faster than women it turns out their brains are always metabolically three years older than women starving and adolescents obviously more studies will be need to be done or to confirm the results but it sounds suggest
that there is a difference between male and female brain development and metabolism and these gender differences of our grey matter are less about gender and more about treatment so you know women's brains might hold the key to saving men if you can imagine but be patient because studying the most used or going to human body can be rushed but it's definitely a no brainer for science. i wasn't listening what did you say they obviously weren't using both sides of your brain i wasn't plus the older i forgot i was where am i who am i or you just look at the camera and read the degree of the thing that it's hard it's hard on me right now now that's an amazing study yet that's really neat and because we forget a lot of times because everything is counted in years we think of a new time in years and all that that we forget that there's metabolic time and that is cool but when you really don't like having to figure out why that man actually it's true does require both sides of your brains to work so if you
understand my puns you're like pretty smart science gone that's pretty good all right everybody that is our show for you today and remember everyone in this world we are not told we were loved enough so i tell you all i love you i don't tire well been told in time to have a thought of watching all those hawks out there ever great day and night everybody . i've been saying the numbers mean something they matter the us is over one trillion dollars in debt more than ten like collar crimes happen each day. eighty five percent of global wealth you long for the ultra rich eight point six percent market saw a thirty percent rise last year some with four hundred to five hundred trade per second per second and decline rose to twenty thousand dollars. china's building two point
one billion dollars a i industrial park but don't let the numbers overwhelm. the only numbers you need remembering what one does that shows you know forward to miss the one and only. this means that very. soon or. really care. actually and anyway i. don't know don't you know you not. can if you could quote all of them ok if food. was not going to match the net yeah it will be like the battle they have wait for the last three of a good watch that a little more than
a bit better than that having. people people. give their name not a. what the how do not be a soon i'll show you now not go join me behold i go to far. why did you not let out on a your was so on out in just. swarms of them so my. to build your local was the so. much of those who heard the food you are must never see him with the north we would go. for it. but it's. all show you the look beautiful the
militants can look good. muslim also has the also good view films for a good pool. player to show some of the new assume you believe the short story should go. to starts to. get to me to. it was a little missed they'd say look it is it's. just touched and understand just me it's the mashed on. ice for the president on please introduce washington's to. me of petitions to go in this way to snap them up when you look at those the girls who are with you for your support just to your station shouldn't feel you should cut off with one whose do your business.