Yeah. This is Marquez Brownie Acre Amphibia hd, and this is Andrew Manga Nellie. We will introduce you to our podcast way, form the new sedition to the Vocs media podcast network, so I've spent over ten years: reviewing tech products and consumer electronics for millions of people on the income, Fifty Youtube Channel and now on the way forward, cast Andrew, and I use that experience to dig even deeper into latest tech for smartphones too. I max to electric cars, so of your gadget lover or attack head or, if you just want to figure out whether the latest gadget is worth your harder in cash. Give us a lesson say can find formed the empty. If we pass on your favorite Pakistan every Friday see over there, I answer it so so good to see a grey so good to have you here.

Hello welcome to them so that the weeds and plucked media Pied cast network. I met with close. He is here with Sarah Cliff as recline, because I'm good staff would get a good white paper. We're gonna dig into a fifteen year old book that is more of it than ever, but we do want to note file Isabel WAR and, let's not bury the lead gap, but that's that there we got gotta get sick with us. Last Friday we pie cast it. We speculated a little bit about how the shutdown might end and then the shutdown ended. So we just wanted for clarity. Completeness can wrap this up. I mean, as are you, you did great piece about Nancy Policy and how, essentially you know this- is this brought some some indication?

her and had Hetty see that so I don't know about this on the weeds us weak, but before the shut down Dena before all this was it was going to Nancy Blowsy speakership was loaded with closely run thing, not the vote, but within that democratic carcass. There is a real feeling that maybe her time had, ass. Maybe she wasn't the right person for this era. She was too polarizing. She was. It could be a correct answer to Donald Trump Democrats made a promise to be a transitional speaker and then Nancy Policy delivered Trump. His single, most public political humiliation of his entire career and ensure in a couple ways and the reason I actually because important reason- a really firm, propeller Caucasus. She made a couple decisions here that other possible Turning to speakers one and have made one which I think was the real. risk decision in the whole place was to cancelled. The union was tat to defer it, and that was based idea that Donald Trump is weak and would fold and

he's right a lot of petitions in Washington, Big, dodge up his strong. It will never back down and anti policy. I think TAT his measure and was correct that, if she just We never moved if she never moved off of her position that there's gonna be no money for the wall. If she never moved off of the position that now you know, Can I come into my house and give a speech while the rest of the government, or at least part of the rest of the government is shut down, he would actually followed and she's vindicated in that. Among the other thing you have to say, though, here is it, she was really helped in all this by Donald Trump himself, who has it created from the start, an untenable position that his own party did not want to support. He had taken ownership in that meeting with Nancy Policy and Chuck shimmer afore the shut down, he said, I would be proud to own a shut down over border security, so here yet situation where the public didn't want the government shut down. The Democrats didn't want the government shut down. The Republicans didn't want. The government shut down, only Donald Trump was forcing a shut down, and that

supposition aware, because some people kind of think Donald Trump is not subject to laws: output, put God but he, but indeed he is his back- provoke numbers went down. Republicans Matt mentioned on the show last week. Breaking in the Senate of the democratic alternative, got more votes actually in their public and alternative tit to break in the shut them, and he eventually just flatly Hold it right now is saying you know, if there's not in three weeks and a deal that gives him his wall, he's gonna, shut it down again or to declare merchants aiming we'll see what he does. It's very hard for me to believe us, it down again, but Vienna Peace, Donald Trump. You could do it every wants, but that the kind of big outcome of this, which I take matters for basically politics going forward is now The policies position is very firmed up in her caucus and status as sort of the day be antagonist. Trump is very settled now and I'll jumps positions quite weakened here, Paul numbers are down. I'm Republicans field. They got led into a blind alley by him. Either. There's lots of them that's who maybe your once for

raided by plus you been leader, get there not now their lot or hopkins right now, who are very frustrated by trumpet cleat her wits. Interesting, though, is that its both not true the Donald Trump defies the laws of political gravity and nothing matters, but also economic see why people sort of casual politics fans think that it's true,

nothing really visible quite seems to happen. You had this shutdown strategy that most Republican on the hill. As I understand it, were not really on board for the Trump really wanted to do it. They were like ok, let we will go along with, as it failed spectacularly like blew up in his face, and then you wake up the next day, and it's like nothing has changed. Trump is still out there like having his campaign associates, get arrested, do unlike weird stuff about how he's making people signed non disclosure agreements. Might Pence is doing fun razors at Donald Trump Hotel, but like the whole, like orgy of corruption and criminality, just continues to spin forward and it getting continues to be the case that, like not a single republican member of Congress, has ever done anything at all to like impede any of this, no matter how it changes from MIKE from

flying high and if we don't do something to check him, the United States is gonna collapse into dictatorship. They do nothing when trot Riding low and if we don't do something to check this, he's gonna destroy us all in November, like they do. Nothing is like its truly remarkable to me, the like endless depth of indulgence that congressional Republicans have four trump when they don't appear to feel that he has earned it. You take the temperature, the republican caucus people like get like this guy Trump, like he's, got it all figured out, and yet this just incredible amount of deference to him like the seemingly no stop to it, and I want to come back to Pelosi for a second cuz watching the shutdown play out. It really reminded me of like two thousand and nine two thousand and ten Nancy Pelosi and the way She I mean she is someone who had, I think, there's gotta will be lost and kind of this fight over her speakership

Really has a non tariff is true for you guys were you having these memories, because you are covered this debate She was really someone who held her caucus together suit through some like very challenging division. Times, and you know I think, back to the affordable, correct. I think about this press conference. She gay where it really seem like Allah, was not going to pass, and you know she had this speech where she was like. You know. If the gate is locked will find the key can't find the key or jumping over the gate like week or the gable get airplane parachute end like shit. lay down the law with her caucus. At a moment when you knew it was actually pretty similar to kind of the moment, she came into our speakership this time, where you have progressive, saying it's not good enough, and you have you to another. We of her more conservative wing concerned about some of the protections around abortion and she did this kind of remarkable thing of Vienna getting at the very of this. Getting the house to pass the Senate Bell that they didn't really lie. and you know I don't think that is a good that was not,

given? If I ever think back to that era, that there was a pretty decent chance that you could have had a revolt and hocker has in the end you couldn't see and playing out here as well, where you could have seen. The Democrats eventually decided- and you know that we need to do. Something of this is getting terrible that there's a horrific stories are followed workers. I really think it speaks to her kill that we saw about a decade ago, holding or caucus together and that we're seeing on display yeah. You know, through this whole shutdown, Apis analyzer as a minority leader rate. What my nor leaders do primarily is talk, and so prostration would tend to build with policy, because she's not like I'm like a messaging genius right but like what the speaker does is actually hold lines policy right and she's done very well with that. The battle where the wall and the shutdown was phenomena. We not a battle about like talking points and singers, but it was about

Y, all allowing members of the Caucasus to have different points of view on border security funding and the exact nature of structures on the southern border. There was complete unanimity that the shut down had to end and that all conversations about anything else had to take place after the shut down and now was very clever rigged. That's legislatively clever. That was a position and then an ideologically diverse group of Democrats could all hold two while people would have a very different politics and it made it impossible for republicans to pick them apart by playing these games about. Will you voted for the security fence actor? You know you said you wanted to abolish ice. Is that of the other think everybody was saying we have to reopen the government, we can negotiate and supper trap, but we have to reopen the government and, like that's the the essence of that kind of legislative leadership. Right is like water, one of them.

So what is the procedural motions that are gonna happen, because now that the government is not shut down right? The speaker controls the floor agenda so, like members of Congress can say whatever they want about border security and none of its gonna happen. So I want to go back to damage of the permitted and something you said a few minutes ago amount of around five million people have have you yes he's. real estate developer, New York's eager up that you may have heard of him close to the apprentice again. There is a feeling that you know who you wake up and extend nothing's changed, and I want a kind of keep bang the drama that something does I don't it's changing exactly, but it is happening so The December jobs numbers we, the economy added in you know we don't have revisions yet, but before what we know, three hundred and twelve thousand jobs in December, it's a really good jobs report, the unemployment, is three point. Nine percent like these are: these are strong Bruce, and yet there was a pole of head heading just the other day of Donald Trump against basically EC, ever

buddy. The Democrats might run you know like Joe Biden, Kemal Harris Elizabeth WAR and like all of them- and you would see the Democrats gonna move between. You know like fifty three percent and four the seven percent, but Donald Trump, with stock, against every single one of them at forty one and lives another Paul D just came out today. Dishonor sack room asking people it would you vote for. Donald or not. Vote are definitely not vote for Donald Trump. Fifty six percent of Americans, who they would definitely I vote for Donald Trump again, so it is is that, like he gets to wake up and keeping precedent for now, but this is a guy with three point: nine percent unemployment, three hundred and twelve thousand jobs added in December were fifty six percent of the country's is that they will not like under any sir This vote for him again any stuck at forty. One percent against any Democrat you can possibly name really, that is an astonishingly bad performance, and you know my like, thing I would say that like I wish, I could see the economy

stood numbers for Donald Trump like what, if unemployment, six per cent like, where would he bade? The other thing that just want to know about this, because we shut. Is that one lesson of the shutdown and it's not a lesson that I think it like we are surprised by, but I do think it's a lesson, Donald Trump and some Republican so surprised by is it the government matters Donald Trump talked about, about you know the unable to shut undergoes for months or even years he gave a year long shut down and here's a guy. He suddenly or to security, any shut down the Department of Homeland Security, and so his clearly is that, like nobody's gonna, be upset by this I'd, be things it don't do anything. What you need is a wall weather like the Ba Chess is operating in a normal way or the USA is operating in a normal way. Nobody cares and it turns out people care Hence our government is involved in all these different parts of our lives. People don't like it. When the airport stop working. And planes are grounded people don't like it when they can't get caught answered, obviously the federal poised to like it when they don't get paychecks, but you

really do see with ease it extended, shut down some, and not that this is a good way to find this out, and that we should also need this as the reminder by a government matters. Coastal Hospital like oh and stops working Short S, estimate that usually take it, take a break and move on to her our main segment here. Do it. If you like, basically anyone listening to this right now, I'm willing to bet that you are you're dealing with stress Maybe there's a ton of it like an overwhelming amount, or maybe it's more like a low, but steady drumbeat background stress, no matter how you, Spearing stress, it's likely fucking mood you energy and so many other areas of your life. You feel like. This is starting to take over strain your relationships and shorten your temper partly tend to unload and better help is perfect for that better help is customized online therapy that offers videophone and even live chat sessions with your she wrote to see anyone on camera. If you don't want you, it's much more affordable than in person therapy, and you could start communicating with a therapist none forty, eight hours,

a mug distressing. It's an unbiased feedback. You be pretty spies where you can gain for it see if it's for you, the weeds, sponsored by better help and listeners get ten percent off the first month, better help dot com such weeds, that's, b, e t, t e r, H, e L, a p d come slash, weeds. This episode is brought to you by fan: do football is back and the best bet you can make is downloading the fan Dual Sports Bookshop. It doesn't matter. if your new to gambling or an old pro family, has something for everyone and as an official sport, betting partner of the NFL. You know you're bad, you safe, there's, also, four been a better time to use fan because right now, you'll get up to one thousand dollars back. If your first bet doesn't win, you can in turn a small wager into a big pay day with the same game, parlay that just sign up with, I'm a code Spotify to place your first bat risk free on fan, dual sports book Download Vanderpool today,

twenty one plus and present in Pennsylvania. First, online real money wager only refund who does not withdrawal side credit that expires in fourteen days, restrictions apply, see terms at sports booked out fan dual dotcom. Gambling problem call one. hundred gambler with wine is running for presenting the United States, as you have probably heard part about a large field of of Democrats, other one of a smaller number, who has actually announces out campaigning in Iowa and if you, if you know who it was with wine, is you probably know her as one of the most left wing members of the Senate? Sometimes a thorn in embryo bomb aside has been in the news. Lately, wealth tax, co determination proper

Also stuff like that, you know, is with Warren what you propose. Co determination proposes sit back and, if you know her eyes as as right there, the word cloud has as a left with big ideas. Person rest. She has been an interesting evolution throughout her life. She came into electoral politics at a relatively old age for freeing I'd, say, senator and first sort of became a public intellectual about fifteen years ago with a book called to income track, which m she'd been an academic she'd been a professor at a variety of law. Schools had made it too to Harvard law. School was answered, leading figure in bankruptcy law, but, like normal people, don't care about bankruptcy laws.

But she and her daughter tried to write a book for a popular audience. That would speak too, to a broad public about some political and policy issues, also some personal issues that they followed this book up with a personal financed book, which is unusual united lot of presidents, who personal finance bucks. I recently did a close relative of there are book either to income trap in its its fashion. We just You you rarely see a politician who writes a book that isn't like a campaign buck right, like this was a buck book that they wanted to be interesting and sell, copies and change people's minds and was not like designed to win a prize.

Joel action, and it is also interesting because what it says is kind of different from what Warren is campaigning on or or even sort of mainstream democratic politics in part just because it was written a while ago and and the situation is different, but in part because you know there's some. I don't know people have different ideas when they're, not by strictly party politicians By kicking you talk about the framework of the book coming his in oh, for which he has. There is really interesting diagnosis of why the american economy is changing gap that sort of ends up buttressing. I get you do a good job aiding drawing out why the work on bankruptcy reform led to this diagnosed.

Yeah, but but could you should start there without big picture way? So you don't eat this, maybe even harder member, if, if you weren't around but like back in the MID arts, the sort of conventional thing that you heard about America on the right and also in the centre was at the American Middle Class was doing really well. This was before the great recession, which made things actually look worse substantively, but that there was an argument out there almost exclusively on the left, which said wages have been stagnating for general and and the argument you would hear from the right and the centre was no, no, no median household income is way way up. So that was like a big debate that was happening separately. Worn is working and bankruptcy law and there was this debate about why the bankruptcy rate had been rising and one important perspective was it. The bankruptcy rate has been rising because bankruptcy laws to live

tax and that consumers are just kind of like overspending and then declaring bankruptcy to get out of their bells, and we need to tighten up the rules and the credit card industry and some other actors. I'm really pushing for this. They came close to getting a dying in the late Clinton. Administration fell short and then succeeded when bushes president worrying in the realm of bank a law was sort of the leading thing on the opposite side of the saying that liberal access to bankruptcy is an important part of the american economy and that these rising bankruptcy raids did not reflect excessive profligacy. Basically, turn them track was trying to explain how can it be that responsible families are going bankrupt at higher rates, even though median household income is rising right, and so what she says is look hustling them has been rising primarily because you have more married women in the workforce. Right to be more workers? You have more household income, even if wages are growing up.

But then, when she says, is that those families that now have mom and dad both working. They do have higher incomes, but they have less economic stability, and some of that is that, along with that, second income comes a lot of extra fixed costs. You need to pay for child care. You need to pay for the commute into work. Add those sort of accoutrements right then. Another thing that happens is that people just sort of beat up the cost. the sort of basics of life. You know people want to buy a home in a good school district, I'm gonna middle class families do and if everybody gets a second income, that the house's just get more expense fright. So you know, like your locked into this day, care your locked into your new house college. To wishes go up because people are trying to

bid their way into that, and would you essentially have is families that now, because this too people working there's more stuff that can go wrong right, there's two different people who could become sick or disabled? This to different people, We get laid off, there's no extra person who can sort have become the family, extended family care giver, if somebody needs it, there's no mom who isn't working. Who can go to work if the family need some extra money and they have many more financial commitments that it's hard to get out. So you say: okay, we have these assets, but only ass. It is your house that you live in and that's tied do trials education, so you're, obviously very reluctant to give all that up. Would you actually created she says? Is this incredibly it all situation in which families are doing ok until later, if anything goes wrong right, but if one of two people gets laid off, one of two people get sick. If extended, family people develop disabilities

This, like this whole realm of possible bad things that could happen, and we had been implicitly relying on stay at home moms as a kind of all purpose safety net to like catch these problems, and now we ve disarmed ourselves of that and not created a viable economy in which families have this kind of security. And so that's why they're going bankrupt. She says, and now, with this new bankruptcy legislation that had just asked when she's writing we're even taking away the security of the bankruptcy process itself and the aid it one thinks it's interesting about the argument to one things like she has to grapple with the book that you write about, although that in European Matt is how this she does not read her argument as one against women going into the workplace engine. I think, like you, wrote that this book kind of it has a weird alliance with social conservatives, you kind of sea? It is like a case for how we ve structured.

Please and that working really well in a case against this. But can you talk through a little bit kind of like how how she can sick women in the workforce being a good thing, but also this could seems like a hard place to kind of pull everything together I mean, I think they would. I would say is that the book expresses mixed feelings about the swayed that she says that it is good that women have more opportunities to do these things that they want to do this is very good for someone Like Elizabeth Warrant, who is a professor at Harvard LAW School and as a passion, interest in bankruptcy law, Ababa but that also, if you look at it in a sort of cold economic realist, way, that, like the majority of people, do not have super exciting careers right like they are not law, school proof,

sir, and that the majority of women entering the workforce are doing so because you have to read the dislike to to make ends meet families need to order and that the race this has set off, has left families less economically secure than they were before right and if she doesn't want to solve this by by banning women working, and she says I do you couldn't actually do. That anyway, even if, if you wanted to- but I mean I think, that it is Democrats message about cortical. Women's issues is typically crafted by definition by very successful career professionals right by people like Elizabeth Warren. right, like actual United States, senators or three writing policy mix, wait. He will end. This is a book that I think it takes more seriously the perspective of waitresses,

and you know a million other people who have jobs rather than careers and for whom you're not really choices. Court, unquote like at all and who are just dealing with a reality of a changing economy and the reality that the average household is not necessarily better off in two thousand five than they were with the economy of nineteen. Seventy five fright and that's a game eats into recapture the contacts right like today. Would trumpets president, is like everybody, talks about economic anxiety and wage stagnation and and Bobby Bobby but in the mid odds, that was a challenging conversation right, because the ping pong would go someone who says we just have been stagnant. So then somebody else says median incomes are up and then somebody else says well, that's just because women have entered the workforce and then somebody else says what are you saying it's bad that women can

sighed the house now and here's warrant and she saying nothing, it's bad that women can work outside the house, but that gas I am saying that the economic trajectory in which wages have been flat, an all inclusive growth, has come from women going to do paid. Work outside the house has been a bad trend, and that we need to fix the economy not by having women not work, but by having a meaningful change in the structure of the. So I think this is really really important to go back to and I want to frame the context in a slightly different way in a different conversation was playing out at about the same time such a policy. Let us remember that when Barack Obama entered the sea, in two thousand and four here. This really high profile hiring. Where he hired Karen Corn, Budapest policy director Congo is a very well known policy person wash ensue in a programme at the New America Foundation, Initiate Rinaldi's journals,

She was a big deal for a freshman centred and get to be a policy director and part of the reason she is a big deal was that she, is considered one of the real leading people on family policy. She was the people who is saying that, where the Democratic Party needed to go, to recognise that the structure of american families had changed dramatically over the past thirty forty fifty years. I'm you had On the one hand, a lot more to earner families. On the other hand, you had a lot more single families altogether and that american social policy had not changed it nearly enough to absorb how different american families now looked warrens book is very much. A part of that conversation is well warns. Book is really saying that we have a pretty new structure in the american household, and we have a social safety net, we have an economy, we have work expectations by the way, rightly, what corporation to ask of people you know: do you get paid leave,

a world where why there's always like the mom at home, whether not the dad gets, allow. Pay leave like you should, as a matter of fairness to matter decency. But- like a matter of like household survival, in the same way that if you dont have evolved to family, home or a single earner home and there's no pay leave as something that goes wrong with the kid that the pet loses their job or beaten. to find some answer that it is totally unclear for their child and so on, mine is partially in this, and then I think was interesting, we know of? Is he wore now as a critic of the banks and an end this real populist? But these things are pretty connected because one of the ways to think about the the run up in housing dead? Is that the credit markets were used as a like. A secondary social safety system. People are taking out. Second Morgan is on homes they were taking out. You know they are putting more on on the credit card and is long as there is a big credit bubble it papered over

What is going wrong in the fight in the underlying economy as long as people are able to access easy credit whenever they had a problem like that? Can I it filled in the gaps in the system and then the the bubble bursts all these people who have been. You know you doing there during the day bass to end here, take it out second mortgages and like doing everything they can to stay afloat. Who really? the losers, while meanwhile, like the people at the top of the bank's get out five and were and remain rich, and I mean this offends worn in a very deep way in it. It forges alot of politics, but something that I think is this whole thing speaks to. Is that allow of our politics right now are aftermath politics of the financial crisis itself. and they are a little bit about whether or not we did enough to punish banks without we did enough to restructure those parts of the economy. Whether or not corporations have amassed much power and sort of operate in decent

real, lawless, but much more to the point. I think a norm, less space words like they just pay themselves and their their executives and childish whenever they want. They completely forget about their workers up there's. Also, though, I think this thing predating it did, the people need to go back to and think about, which is how would you create a socialist if the system for this era, like what do you need in a world where you have a lot of two or families and a lot of single income families. I'm not just of you don't male breadwinner female, and her mother world, and it would be interesting to see Democrats take that on more directly. Funnily enough, Hillary Clinton always had a lot of ideas about this that you never really pulled together into a mess I remember having discussions with her staff early on we're saying to me that you know what I've been able. What's her Clinton's big idea and they like, turn it. He leave like paint like that this world of making families work is a big idea, but she never really presented it that way, but chooses very influenced by by this

China and I think it'll be entering a sea of worn or any one else, sort of pick us up as a law the discussion. The Democratic party went about cracking down on corporations and about increasing sort of incomes, but not that what about like that? How do you make this life people now, if she leading just easier like? How do you make it more doable say that one of the things I can't strikes me as interesting about this book is where it where it ends a key point, our near essay mad that you point out this really fundamental problem and at this massive study they ve done of thousands of families and how they go bankrupt and it's a huge structural change to how America works, and then it ends at these kind of small boys Apology things like can bank regulations, changing schools, owning works when it actually seems like the type of book Do you know if it were written in today I would like to end with a call for some kind of european ask welfare state that really can provide. You know Dee.

I think you know you mentioned earlier. The thing that the state on parent is providing was essentially an insurance policy against someone getting sick against someone losing their job and what we see Countries is more robust. Insurance policies provided through a safety net where you have set Today's child is that fixed costs goes away. You have a medical system that is not going to leave people saddled with debts. They can't pay of subsidized higher education, you, it seems like a book that call, for that actually rises to meet the moment. Wherein now, when Bernie Sanders is kind of dragging the party towards these ideas, but Edith a book that was written at the moment when, like this is where Democrats and liberals

were add on these particular issues relating to Munich. I think to warns credit, would you see, as you know, she wrote this book? It has this powerful diagnosis. She is a specialist in bankruptcy law right and it proposes some very ambitious changes in the area of policy that she is most personally familiar with, and then some fairly superficial changes in other areas is now over the next fifteen years right as she's gone from being a law professor to a public intellectual, to a politician? She's takes on a broader Roger Suite of topics anything now has a policy agenda that you can think of as being equal to the challenge that she laid out in the look. It was striking to me, though, like just heard discussion of the bankruptcy legislation right, which

today is not like that. Well remembered as as a policy fight right, but she talks about a number of people who are still big players in politics today, and one thing she were counts is how took Sumer sank the initial version of this bankruptcy bill by insisting that it needed to include basically a provision that would make it harder for anti abortion groups to declare bankruptcy. To get out of legal fees that they were owed right that, like she were really like you, basically like it. He went to war on behalf of the pro choice. Lobby till I get a poison pill put into this that led to the bill. scuttled, but then in the next go round right, like the bank's got the pro life groups to give way and like let tumor get his sword

pro abortion thing in there and then she were voted for the Bell right. So it's like both like the Republican Party, was happy to sell out the pro life groups to get this proxy package dine and Chuck humour was willing to like fight tooth and nail on this abortion issue, but, like ultimately, sided with the banks. She talks about Hillary Clinton who, as First lady warrant, had spoken to about the spell, and she expressed a lot of opposition to it and did some stuff that helped scuttle it then later, Hillary Clinton becomes a senator from New York ads and major banking centre. She votes for the bell and she talks extensively about Joe Biden, who is possibly the enemy in the waste and twenty twenty in a sort of metaphorical senses already in the race. She is very displeased with his of activism on behalf of the credit card industry and she rates

she doesn't have some tough words for Biden, but some tough words for progressive groups. She talks about how Biden was being given an award by feminists organization for his work on the violence against women act at the very same time he was put this bankruptcy Bell forward, and she makes the argument that these Benghazi uses an banging views is really disproportionately impact women and that she wants to see a feminist organizations. Think of these economic justice concerns as important women's issues as she talks about the underway C p and other similar rights groups pushing for

thanks to make more credit available to african american communities, but not being nearly is concerned about the impact of predatory lending on those kinds of communities, and it's it's tough. I think, if you're running a presidential primary campaign, you probably end up wishing you haven't said some of that stuff. that major progressive groups. But it also speaks to, I think, a potentially correct, like hath forward in american politics right like there's, been these kind of unless we ll spinning about trump voter is at an end at twenty? Sixteen and twenty twenty and you know, this is war in a number of ways, and this book is speaking very squarely too, like the opposite of the Howard Schulz constituency to like people who have some serious economic Grievances in America and who are necessarily hard core cultural conservatives, but who orient

you, dont strongly identify with progressive cultural politics right like that's, who this book really speaks to? Is two people have progressive economic ideas and moderate to indifferent kind of ideas on and social and cultural war issues and she's critical of progressive groups for over emphasising, basically pure culture. War concerns relative to concrete material interests So here's my question: is it actually true, as you say that the scale of warns ideas now match the diagnosis of the book? I do the scale of warranted is now much much bigger, but they really feel to me to be a package of ideas. It is about responding to the financial crisis and what would I would to determine the crisis of fairness that were in power that war and saw in that warns really running? I think is a critic of capitalism as it exists and in like should have capitals and capitalist power

as it exists in America in the twenty first century, species is co, determination, proposal to put workers on corporate boards. She talked a lot about breaking a bank shit, she's, she's a really interesting raft of ideas, but government corruption. I mean I you're, looking it sort of like how the bankruptcy bill pass like she's, very much on that, but when I think about the underlying analysis of the two and come trap anymore. Hitherto analysis of the way position. All unnecessary goods are eating up. Even the gains grab at bye, bye, bye, dual income, families on healthcare is getting more expense, there have been any good School district college costs, keep going up by child care keeps going up, I think you actually end up somewhere close tat when I think of it. Bernie Sanders policy agenda, which is fundamentally taking healthcare costs college, ass potentially I dont know, if he's actually on a pre, a big sort of Universal Piquet Guy, but I'm sure he's not against it.

You know, he's sort of idea to take a lot of these things for middle class and working class families, basically out of the market and make them things provided by the state on a citing income scale or on knowing scale at all, depending on how on how you think about his different tax ideas. War current platform as a critic and reformer of financial eyes. but all of them seems very responsive to actually in a funny way, Bernie Sanders is critiques of power, Bernie Sanders is actual platform as a social I'm a crowd who wants to build a much more expensive social safety net and pull out of ideas out of the neoliberal. My could play, seemed very responsive to Warren's too. Come trap hypothesis they they almost seem like like candidates whose I know seas and answers are slightly, are slightly miss aligned. I mean, I think it's true, that if you want to like skim, ties, Warren versus Sanders like that's the way to do it.

But like also officially right, like war in his co, sponsor of their Medicare for all bill, she's, a co sponsor of the Free College Bell Rights issues like also for this same expansive. Well a state which would make a huge. I mean particularly the medical care thick right. I mean, if you think, of the bankruptcy issue as fundamentally a risk issue, right, the way in which, in the U S a serious illness can both cost you a lot of money, but also cost you your job, but also losing your job can cost you your health insurance. Is this like real black hole of risk right and if I wanted to make like a strong case for why we actually need the like politically unpalatable big bang transformation that by Bernice talking about. I do think that, like tail risk, part of it that warrant is concerned with is one of the better reasons. Red till I knew

size, the whole system. The other thing I would say is that war in his specifically introduced legislation on the housing shoe, which is adding more sophisticated and further reaching. Then what we see in from other candidate said Harris has a kind of Emily. It's weird, given him race, positioning right, but it's like Harris housing bill is the most like crude left housing proposal that I've seen from Democrats, which is basically like, take a gigantic dumb truck of money and like throw it on housing subsidies Where's warrant has a proposal that its does invest a good deal of money, but its aimed at specifically tackling,

red lining, type problems and communities of color, and you know access to credit where there's too little well, then cracking down on sort of like excessive access to credit work, creates financial instability and then third, on my personal obsession of exclusionary zoning right- and this is back to what she was saying about like it- doesn't help us to all get extra money. If all we do with the extra money is bid against each other for houses and good school districts. So the house's I'll get more expensive and the only person who wins like a home on or from forty years ago an end so gingham? That's the issue where I think Warren is most wearily connecting this concern about, like real middle class living standards with policy, in a way that other Democrats Aren't because that's a very am NEO liberal, coded sort of centrist key concern.

Like she sees a real connection between that and the same, the exact same motivating factors that will drive you to Amerika for all type position. What do you think about twenty twenty, like alleys, whenever I do you look at these candidates you look at this, like being all ream of stuff there talking about any Ike. Ok, but like like what are you actually actually going to do right and then that does become different. Read like it seems, like the one thing, you're sure President wine is gonna. Do is be like the avenging angel of light thanks breaking the law right like that is like within the president's power to do coolly solutions thought about like a lot talks about all the time and that's what's like definitely going happen. whereas Medicare for all is like she cosponsor the bill, and then I don't know I've ever heard her like mention it again unless she's asked direct Quest

but at least like in a theoretical book riding sense like it's really both fanned here break opiates research, the Nairobi. Its mobility research, however, state outbreak. People? Often ask me of prosecuting the mob is like the movies. Well, There is violence, he cracks disguise over their head and a pop. Just like a melancholy. There are heads so wasn't just permission to take a map of permission to take out his own nephew. But after taking Over one hundred mobsters, I can tell you this: the the thing is much more interesting, barely holding former mob prosecutor and host of the new podcast up against a mom. The mob lift the veil on the world's most secretive criminal organization, Cosa Nostra, we'll talk to prosecutor

the former mobsters, an undercover agents and like Hollywood, all these stories are true new up loads drop every Wednesday starting September. Eighth list and follow up against the Bob on Apple Podcast, Spotify or your favorite podcast app, the cat. is a podcast from New York magazine. But it's much more than that, its thirty minutes. Week where we really wrestle with ourselves king societal expectations race, sex, career ambitions and our bodies I just spent Emma Instagram, looking at health, any size. Nutritionist, take talks and unifying I've I'm a factor on the internet. They just come to me baby, the algorithm we're having conversations you'd only have with your most trusted friend, so Gabby. What were the most painful memories?

I'm gonna go listen to the cut on Spotify Apple or your favorite. Podcast app we have a paper Frahm JAMA. The journal, the American Medical Association, is titled association of Pharmaceutical industry, marketing of opium products, with mortality from copyright, related overdoses and the take away. Is there is an association between these two things just to set the groundwork for this? This is Looking at payments that drug makers are making to die, yours and we're not talking about like bags of cash alot times are talking about bringing in tax dumping. breaking your doctors offer Java and about the doctors, your bribes federalism, that's a carries, Rowena Sandwich and inside the city where, but so So what often happens in kind of the drug marketing world is you? Have pharmaceutical companies who swing by drop off

sandwiches lunch, you know for providers Souffre sample some samples, some pamphlets, maybe talk it over their products, can feel something of an innocuous thing. You know we're talking about these payments there, not usually these multi thousand dollar payments a lot of the. of marketing. That happens in the. U S between drug makers, writers. It is providing meals, but what they find as eat a pretty striking and worth paying attention to where they find that marketing or very products to physicians was associated with increased opium. prescribing and with more mortality from overdoses. They find that the marketing was widespread, that nearly Twenty thousand doctors were marketed to biofuel companies from twenty thirteen through twenty. Fifty, but forty million dollars was spent across those people so again like no one's getting like crazy super rich off of this, but it this money is out there and it is, does seem to be pretty significantly influencing prescriber

Savior one of the things they find in this study. That is that for every three additional payments to a doctor per hundred thousand people in their county, you see three additional payments one year and the deaths are eighteen percent higher the year afterwards that the impact of these kind of seemingly smallpox hence it turns out, can be quite large. So I thinking of blue. When I look at his paper, there's two things are going to send out to me about it: what is just the fact that we have this data, which we actually didn't die ago, the reason that this is all public is but tiny part of the affordable care act created. This do debate swear. It is now required that these lunches be made public and filed with the government, where you can actually go and look up any payment that your doktor took from a drug maker device maker for public has done a really nice job

setting up this data, making it searchable, so we weren't even known ass a decade ago. This is only because the affordable care act mandate add that this information be reported. This second does it think it should make us look a lot more critically at these transactions that are happening, the aid that it you know not just for operates, which is one place where you see this terrible increase in mortality, but really any sort of product. I think it is easy for physician, to say. You know it's just a sandwich aids, I'm a medical, professional, I've gone to years of training. I'm not going to be swayed I thus breaking this paper and some other research is pretty good evidence that it does seemed to be doing something related to prescribe we're behaviour in Vienna. We might want to think about policy solutions that are going to not just make this public, but perhaps make it a lot less possible for drug companies to keep bringing lunches into Doctor

says you have to take a bit of an Elizabeth WAR any in view on this I mean I think what this paper dies and it's not a completely new idea by any means, and it's not an uninterrupted idea, but the drug Companies are heavily complicit in the opiate crisis and one way in which it unless it is agreed, simply marketing a highly addictive drug to doctors and and and where possible, even to a to through doctors and and through other means to to the public, and there can be a tendency to look at the opium crisis. I think that compared to Christ does it have not primarily hit white communities. We have been quite compassionate in the way our national narrative run. Opiate addiction has emerged, but his cell narrative of individual choice right. It's an area, is more more gentle innocence of o people very bad, straits and they have lost their jobs, and you know like it's: a, u know, despair. in these communities- and you know they didn't see the future getting better for them. So it is an you know

Has it been sort of a crime and fear and irresponsibility narrative, but it has been a personal narrative and I think what one is what these papers, just as there is really quite structural dimension to this individual people, like some combination of them, are or some sub subgroup them. They will get very very, very addicted to these drugs, and happening. Is somebody was addicted to them to these drugs? They were getting prescribe these drugs by a doctor and their doctor in many cases, was prescribing these drugs at the behest of marketing from pharmaceutical companies and to the idea that what's happening, as you have desperate out of work, ex machina lists in New Hampshire who are just like demanding, Opie oils and on the one hand they should have done that. But on the other hand you know like we know we should be compassionate their situation now I it's certainly not just that. We had a huge effort on the part of drug companies to get more opiates prescribed, end intervene.

Who's got, these alkaloids prescribed, probably thought they were quite safe and they themselves addicted to opium goods and, in some cases later on, overdosing or having a family member overdose from opiates very, very sad story and it unites another one of these things again to take to put on my list. worn out where we, we have not seen people called to account for it. We have not seen any kind of societal reckoning, for it has been done to these communities by people who made a lot of money doing it and like this is a place, where a lot of like like low level jobs, dealers go to jail for four addicting people opiates, but high level drug dealers do not, and so like. There is there is a kind of EU law this at the top there, or at least like normal business. That is disturbing funding. I just as a journalist finally lack of professional ethics in the medical community, a little bit

striking. We would not let for porters just like get tons of free shit secretly from companies that they cover, like us. I how you do things and you you there is so a line. My word like look: if you cover something, you need to get information about the thing to get information about the thing you're covering. It is often helpful to have some access to these principles there. But then you know you have to mediate. Your your lack of you know

centralism access with with being tough. It is also conceivable that somewhere, along the way, you'll be somebody's office and I'll, give you a cup of coffee- and you know who knows maybe a deeply in their debt for further dollar fifty that that would cause you someplace, but like the kind of stuff that happens in the healthcare sector, I used to live by the. What conventions entering in Washington, you would see right like different medical specialities would come and they would have their conference right in the coming years, will be sponsored by pharmaceutical company is, unlike you, can see. It's like their thrown parties for the doctors and this and that, unlike the pole,

purpose of that is to compromise their medical advice and we could have a law against it. I guess, but as long as the view of doctors is that it is good that they should take a bribes from pharmaceutical companies rather than giving people objective medical advice, I don't think there's any law, you're gonna pass, it's gonna! Stop the doctors from finding a loophole in it. It's like they need to decide as a peer group that, like actually really bad for doctors to take bribes, and then, if you say to your friend Le Doktor, oh hey, I just went on this thing with the pharmaceutical company, the other guy's gonna say you shouldn't. Do they like that's like glib? What people are thought up by their peers, like is very important right and like nobody is perfect in life, and no profession has like a totally bullet proof. Code of conduct right but like there are things that doctor

consider to be acceptable that, like they shouldn't, consider acceptable that we would not like us- and I think, if I just you, hey man- I had this great weekend. You know the insurance companies to grow, the Bahamas like you would be like Sarah, like what are you, Doing better, not only went on an insurance company John get to the Bahamas. To go. Do historic, as you can imagine a scenario in which sir comes back with a feature, and it's like this is what the insurance companies plotting do you know this is their political response, the growing democratic interest, but, like you would have to say in the story like that, you went on the thing. We would We like eighty billion conversations with editors about like. Can the company pay for the efforts? It would be a big deal I wish you wouldn't just like go and then not disclose any thing too. body right like I have never had a doctor tell me before they make a recommendation for a treatment about what by industry. Ties are sorry

They have, and we should say some of these rules have got and tighter pedigree in certain states. In recent years there have been efforts to begin cracking down there s an but but the opera there should be more. I think there's always been a very good question about whether you should just like have pharmaceutical advertising in the ways we currently think of it at. all whether not like fascistic practically like direct consumer, but just like in general, like. I think this is a different class of product that has different risks. You know drugs or different re like tree trunks differently. All the time and there's a lot of stuff is a lot less powerful, then oxy content, That is not allowed. A while whatsoever in any state, much has to be advertised, actors at any one else. I don't wanna go too hard against the ethics of the medical fashion, because I do think that individual people do different things and and and different rules exist in different places. But I do think that this should be a period of reckoning and reflect.

and a lot of very powerful institutions and industries were complicit in creating a massive terrible public health crisis. It is killed tens of thousands of people, the question of how to make sure that never happens again. Is it good, then a hard one. I'm not saying that what they thought they were doing was doing that right. Obviously not you know, and even the doctors who do go on these things. I think if they thought likely to appear to be killing your patience, they would have thought twice yes, but even so terrible, terrible, terrible, stakes were made and I don't know like I don't know the just like moving on is the right thing. Yet. I honestly, I think, come to believe is that a role Congress should play is to have many are things that are on the level of sort of like, like the night, Levin Commission arouse forget the name of the commission in the aftermath of the great depression, but there is one that was pretty important, then too, There is an effort to do in the financial crisis from by feelings leaders, but I do think that it would be good to have more periods

two should understand what happened and call people, at least to public account, not not even as they did to exact retribution, but to just make sure that that these things really happen that way, just sort of like move on without learning the lessons- and I think here like this paper again, it's not shock paper more opium marketing leads to more opiate desolate sharp, like I was a pretty good that Coralie and two, but it is a paper that big say like another way of putting it is that pharmaceuticals, but he's were spending money and Doc as were taken the results of that spending and patients suffered, trim, to say now, maybe some also I mean some people do benefit from up here. So it may not be perfectly clear, but but They want really wrong here, decrease,

you saying you know edges, none that the story, but a journalist accounted they came out recently read was inside the pharmaceutical company with a guy who, I think it was the inventor of oxy, cotton or something was was like warning. The people higher up in the chain of command like this, a super addictive and like somebody else can now, with America's as great we're. Gonna sell a ton of these As you know, I mean needs it to your point as already me, not just about like the specifics of the marketing right, but like of like the whole thing where did like. Where is there the inquiry deleting to both just like facts and also like shame right like something that happens when there are like these big things and end ghetto informers.

Comes out? People are T tv, and you remember the tobacco executives in the nineties on him to be up there and like talking about like why did they lighter people about the effectiveness of nicotine and stuff is like it? Changes the acceptability of certain kinds of behaviour like you, run a pharmaceutical company without recruiting a lot of very skilled and well trained scientists. To like do this, work, crate, and so a question fathers come. It is like is being a pharmaceutical research, her, so it seems like a good and worthwhile thing to do with your life that you'll be proud to tell people of like I am working to develop new medicines and healthcare people or it doesn't seem like a likes gummy, low, rent profession, where you're like trying to get people hooked on medicine it that kills them rights alike. Companies have good reason to care about their public image and if there was empty, this on finding these c mere side of it like that, becomes a reason for executives to not do bad things and to focus

It is always very useful work right, like it's important that we have pharmaceutical research. The end like these companies have like a good story to tell about themselves, but like there's, also a lot of bad stories and like they need to decide what the balances one need only think about policy solutions that, as one things they point out in the paper, is that New Jersey recently passed a law that CAP Sam for suitable payments to physicians are ten thousand dollars annually. Its They are taken issue, but it feels like a very weird statements of policy that, like it's, ok, to take money, but once you get to ten thousand, like they're gonna, be to its into acknowledge that these payments are a problem, but it acknowledges the huge power that farmer has the lobbying and says: ok like to end. It really doesn't get Anita wanna things a result in this paper. They expect that to be very influential because Ike

takes a lot of lunch is to get too like ten thousand dollars. You could probably be bought lunch most days of the week and that's what most these transactions are like most, these transactions are, not you know their deadly. Our cases of doctors, you become consultants for the industry, are getting big speaking fees for speaking on behalf of our Masood Uncle companies, but it doesn't seem like you know, that is quite going to be the type of law that it's a us. This problem, a seller, any large sandwiches, her ten thousand dollars per hour. I want something selling to consider our, but will you ponder your lunch? However? Else you you listen, depart casts so thanks to everybody out, there are four for listening. You know hop into the weeds Facebook group. Of course, if you have some suggestions, fair, perhaps a more reasonable dollar women hit bribes that you he became too

actors went. Arouse beg you to our producer, Jeffrey Gallop and return, the cut is applied cast from New York magazine, but it's much more than that. Its thirty minutes week where we really wrestle with ourselves, societal expectations, race sex. career ambitions and our bodies. I just said Taiwan, Instagram, looking at health, any size nutritionist take talks and you know the I've I'm a factor on the internet. They just come to me baby, the algorithm we're having conversations you'd only have with your most trusted friend, so Gabby. What were the most painful memories?

I'm gonna go era, listen to the cut on Spotify Apple or your favorite podcast, app