and i guess the people, nothing can justify things, the crime against humanity, all the cards and them. and by this time we, we believe that this month award, i guess i must that. so what i guess about a senior people, as all this is the project for more than 76, use the senior people because literally that is, i really has been going to say, well, the 1st of this i've spent about us, you know, people, oh, good example of any of the senior people, this is the 1st voltage. we heard this from big view. we have the department to know the city options to them the, to uh, possibly be transferred from photo start or b because for we have the option by smugglers. that's the to be settlement to the ladies of the people will never be said of them. so any one on the never leave that on dogs. so we believe that the distaste is okay. and the by the, the,

one of the big issues right now. our piece talks, whether or not they will occur, they're being at disagreements on, at whether that will happen between hum us and israel. are you confident that they will happen soon? you know, actually knows. there's so many, many of those that are trying to bring this uh, this on a good sort of people to, and this edition. but there's a lot of people and i agree that there is a genuine. that's what it's by concerned by user and by other countries to bring this to an end because no one can accept especially after that. so let me the, the security council distributions of c sufficient o a ceasefire and sufficient or addition of goods ability and people. but unfortunately, there's the competing, i know these, what does the fusions, that's why we believe that the wants of the americans wants to process live

a lot. since the know i'm the buying of something basically because of the solution that's gonna happen. all of us you see that there's a is not something due to the, the benefits of the piece for adults or any kind of a piece for the in this conflict by the, by the, the, the, the very waiting on the surfaces to the still solution. we believe that the, this is what i'm done many times with pressure but as a student. so well, thank you so much for coming in the program and that sharing all your views with us today. omar, i would tell a senior and boy in the policy and in foreign ministry, many sites thank you to the us, how slum china, for one thing to do more business with a neighboring country, namely russia, prompting read to us next,

who are the real communist here direct impact gets going in the the, the power body program. note we now post a show every day used to be weekly. now we're doing this daily and we hold no punches as i like to say. so look for a truth from number one. china tells us if it wants to talk free market talk, it needs to also walk the free market walk truth number 2. just how socialist is the us economy. 20 socialist. if you're wealthy, truthful, i'm number 3. i'm speaking of a socialist who set

a fire at bernie sanders office. i'm rights and just and this, this is direct impact. the . so the us treasury secretary goes to china. and what does janet jaelyn do? she lectures the chinese government on how to properly run its own economy can think that they, they, the chinese don't seem to understand the proper principles of free trade or a free market based system. here's just part of yelling like sure that we intend to underscore is indeed for a shift in policy by china. during these talks, building on the po for 2 hours, i spent on this topic with the vice premier last week. this is part of our effort

to advocate for american industries and prevents this significant economic disruptions. we've seen in the past advocate for american industries. they have to shift their policies, which is essentially suggesting when she says the china has to change its policy is the china is making too many products that americans want. and often those products are, are better products, and they're less expensive than what we make ourselves or imports from other western countries. now, if that sounds like the state telling businesses what they can or can't produce or should produce or how they should produce it. by golly, you're right. which is why the chinese premier lee can fired back saying, no. he says it's the west that needs to change its policies and be more

market driven. here's what he actually says. he goes on to say, he says it is hoped that the united states will abide by the basic norms of market economy, including their competition and open cooperation. refrain from turning economic and trade issues into political or security issues, and viewing issue of production capacity objectively. and dialectic late from a market market. busy oriented and global perspective. so wait a or did we just hear a china telling the us it needs to be more pro market part we here in the u. s. supposed to be the beacon of free market thinking. are those folks in china just a bunch of companies? after all, we hear that kind of talk 247 in the western media. we certainly here in congress

and in the senate and from anybody running for president. here's republican tom gotten, for example, questioning this t o a tick tock. now this guy, he's got to be a communist, right. have you ever been a member of the chinese communist party? set it on the same point? no. have you ever been associated or affiliated with the chinese communist party? no center. again, not a single point. all right, that's a republican. here's a democrat who is a member of the china select committee. i never knew there was a trying to select committee. here's the, here's the guy who runs a china select committee, which i guess is there to teach china how to be more like us. what a success look like. to be richard chuck. the mission of this community is to fault . we want to rise above data day politics to chart long term sound strategy for competition with the chinese communist party. there it is, but chinese communist party chinese communist party here that all the time,

strong words threatening, right? in other words, they're communist. they're not, god fearing they're not market driven, they're not freedom loving like us. in fact, heaven forbid that we should fab or become anything like them, right? we renew our resolve, or that america will never be a socialist country. the bear, it is a matter that is president donald trump, during the state of the union speech, delivering the chief m a z live guarantee to get a standing ovation. unfortunately, for people like him, it's too late to say for the wealthy in america, there's plenty of socialism and they get to revolve the benefits of it. but if you're just a working staff, a guy trying to feed your family, then you, my friend,

you get capitalism and lots of it. let me take you through it by giving you some examples of what happens to that person in your work and do it or a working woman. and you can't pay your bills or pay a loan because you got sick or had a bad month in america. the bank comes after you and they can sometimes even take your house. and if you just for missing a couple of payments, for example, maybe a couple $1000.00 you're done. mean you're, you're in, you're in a bad way. you can end up on the street. but now, you know what happens with that same bank, but just put you on the street, fails in the united states. the government steps in and says, don't worry, we've got to cover after the 2008 meltdown. we're banks got greedy, fat, stupid, and screwed up the entire system. what happened? well, here's what happens with us. government took your money. if you're a taxpayer in the united states, they took your money that you paid taxes and they gave it to them because they're

too big and they're too important. not like you, you're not that big. you're not that import. k are. now, wouldn't you call it corporate welfare? can you say that when the government gives corporations money to run their businesses? that is by definition, socialism with a capital s. perhaps that's what we're told that china does, right? but then what, what we call this us banks get $83000000000.00 a year and subsidies because they're too big to fail and to important that are packed by the federal government. that means no matter how bad they screw up, no matter what they know. we're going to take care of them. you say china, that's the way it's done. china wait. isn't that what we say they do? i'm confused. so, so just to be clear that the guys who run the bags,

they get millions of dollars. the upper management even got a bonus pool of $34000000000.00 a year. you want to know how much a bank teller makes, on average in the united states. $15.00 an hour. you see, a bank teller. he gets the benefits of capitalism. that was talking about cars when the management of general motors was on the brink of letting their company go under the u. s. government step right up. so don't you worry, you know, don't worry, be happy. we make sure that, uh and they did, they made sure the general motors and its owners didn't suffer. they gave him $600000000.00 in bail out money, and then another $500000000.00 and tax breaks. oh, and the ceo who was in charge, who kind of was, did a horrible job. i mean, she screwed up a company right. or where it got screwed up while she was in charge. she got a $22000000.00 severance package. here's $22000000000.00. thank you very much. gong

. you're fired. my god. and what about g? i'm workers, you ask. oh, the workers. that's right. $14000.00 of them were laid off. like go. what was that? again mister president. we renew. i resolved that america will never be a socialist country. now let's talk about form subsidies. you've probably heard of those. few companies in the world are blessed with more of the benefits of socialism. then the agricultural industries that are made up by companies like monsanto and so many others. and they never have to worry about beating the competition and making sure that people buy their products know it's guaranteed they're guaranteed to succeed. because the u. s . government takes care of that for the so i checked and here's what i found over

the past 5 years. if you pay taxes in the united states of america, right. they take your money because it was given according to the. busy the research, we could, they take money that you paid in taxes and they give it to giant agribusiness corporations as a subsidy to make sure that they can succeed. so how much do you, do you think you gave over the past 5 years? $478000000000.00 that you paid in taxes. because apparently they to these other business corporations. they 2 are too big to fail. makes you wonder, doesn't it? all that talk about socialism and communism. and how do we need to make sure we're never like them those chinese, by golly,

me joining us now, sir. i've got the senior asia pacific relations policy expert at the institute of china, american studies with more than 2 decades of experience right here in washington dc . studying this type of thing, i don't know where to start, but, you know, i came to here yelling yesterday or whatever the hell. she said, these things that, oh china, you need to be more like us. you've got to change your ways. by golly, we can show you the promise land. we're the ones who know how to be free market pro market, etc. and you say what to miss yellow mr. group, the is a good to be with you. right? first of all, what i would tell mrs. yelling is that go to china and you will see free market capitalism really taking shape in the country. and that is something which is, which can be learned from china as a country in terms of its market,

does not big when us all protect incumbents. it has very low entry barriers and makes companies mix funds compete ruthlessly with the chinese state does step in is provide infrastructure and in certain new industries as we see in solar electric. but it goes, it helps create markets at scale. but once it does help create that market at scale, it mix them fight like cats and dogs to compete survives and to prosper. and that's why we have chinese companies today and in other sectors. also prospering, not just at home, but internationally. that is what company do, what capitalism is about. it is really having low entry barriers and making the best succeed through a process of grinding competition. and you will see that happen in china. so what

do you, what do you say to all these uh, us politicians. republicans are most noteworthy for doing this because i think they wanna somehow say that their competition, the democrats, or, or joe biden, for example, is really a chinese communist or he's a kid. and the chinese communist we, we keep hearing by the way, they're not the only ones we heard from democrats as well to be fair. but we keep hearing that word all those communist, those come me this, those coming. this is like a buzz word. what do you, what do you think, given what you just said to me when you hear that this was the i think is at this point of time this, they're trying to create a differentiation. you know, like the usual differentiation, the us government always creates the always, from the people of the country, but not for that regime of the country. we have, obviously play as of most times it's directed against the people of that country. and in this case, they wanted to be, they want to say we're not against the chinese people look real against the chinese

communist sparky. and considering it's communism is the, is a dirty board. that's why you have everything, even the house select committee is call it and of the house, select committee of china. it's on the chinese communist barking and hoping to be in smell of them. what i will let them live that i've been at the end of the day, you can call them whatever you want to call them. but i think though, a lot of practices that i was learning from, from the, from what they are doing at this point of time and money raised. i mean, china is 400 years back is or 7500 years back is what the united states was. i mean, immense capabilities, events, entrepreneurialism and immense competition. i mean, of course, that needs to be placed with a non regulated framework. otherwise, you have things like the great depression, etc, etc. but that's what the chain what the, what, what, what china is today. it is a competitive marketplace in which people strive to succeed. are the communist.

i mean the communist party claims to be communist. and then, you know, the president, she's, she's goes on these big dialect to go lectures about what communism is. but to be frank, you know, when she talks about communism, i order was socialism with communist characteristics. you know, for me i, i find that to be a very big let me, i'm going to come on the left feet out of a clintonian phrase. you know, bill clinton was all good things happen because of me all the bad things. someone else did i, i was no and nobody in order also socialism, good chinese characteristics. all that is good about china and works in china is because of the party and because of socialism, all the things which might be not working that well on the human rights front. let's really not part of what we, what we want. that's not what we did. and so for me, i see communism, we,

it's practiced in china to a great deal. also, at least from a narrative standpoint, from this dialectical standpoint, is just a lot of shoes and frankly, so you can call it what you want. it's just a word, for example, as i just showed in my script, we say we're all free market. the leaders of the world, the beacon of light in the world when it comes to a free market democracy. and yet, when i really got in there and broke it down, we're not that much of a free market democracy. in fact, we have the government, essentially giving an upper hand to its crony is friends in separate industries. and we may be doing that, as you say, more than china does. yeah, we're a capitalist and they're communist. maybe we should just get away from the labels all the gutter. i think you should get to some of the levels. and i think the best example of what you said is, what was also the topic of discussion yelton's secretary ellen's trip,

which was on the electric vehicles. the, as i said, the, the, the chinese side, once crew makes investments to create markets of scale. it provides initial industrial subsidies, it's fairly easy going on the subsidy, top of the early stages. it has many players in the marketplace. it makes them compete seriously. it does not pick when also protecting commons. and from this process of through the process of market discipline, we really have real, real, real contestants. and what the chinese government then does is gradually shut off the subsidy. tough to go because they are, the legal guys will get no money and the weaker guy. so i just left, i'll need to exit the marketplace. you know, even if it's funny, is that about the, these it and i add them up by, pardon me for interrupting. but i remember a time when we 1st started relations with china. and nixon made the trip and everything. and suddenly we realized, oh my god,

we can get all these cool things made there, and their workers, we don't have to pay them all that much. and it will all just be quick and easy, quick, cheap products and we'll flood walmarts with them. now they have become so much more sophisticated and they want to make electric cars. and suddenly, dealing with china or having chinese products doesn't seem like a such a good idea. all of a sudden mel, i, i, there's almost some justice in that and that's kind of what i want to talk about when we come back. all right, so we're talking to professor good, it's so it's such a pleasure to be able to get a different perspective on something like this. we're going to stay on this topic and be right back to discuss the b e v markets. the chinese say, hey, we can make a big cars cheaper. the us says, oh no, no, we don't want them. why not? if it's good for american consumers, we'll be right back. the,

[000:00:00;00] the there's no end in sight over how you're going to continue to destroy the earth. is the case for the med, most of the people. i tried to go to the gym, but i'm certainly not ready to fight russia. this is also of soon. this is the 3rd world lunacy re washing as for so the funder line likes to say we have the tools while we just start with stability and business deal. so let me, let me on my very quick propaganda. you know a price here in your i think we don't know the aftermath any time that you're not allowed to ask questions, you should ask all of the questions. the more questions ask the better the answer is will be

the bed were joined by professor. sure, i'm good, i'm rick sanchez, central being with us. uh, he is a senior agent pacific relations policy export at the institute for china, american studies, and we thank him for joining us and sharing his wisdom with us. tell me if this sounds as curious to you as it does to me, it seems like everything was hunky dory. when china was making tons of products and providing them for the american consumer. so we could have some pretty cheap goods that we would otherwise have to pay a lot of money for. it's like having mexican workers in the united states doing work cheaply. but eventually that goes the other way. and what happens now is when they were making toys in clothing, it was fine. but now all of a sudden they're making phones, computer chips, and now they think they can make even cars, electric cars as good or better,

and perhaps even less expensive than the ones that are made here in the united states and may buy tesla, etc, etc. so now all of a sudden, i'm saying there's this resistance, this push back out there, you make those products. those are reserved for us. come countries like cars. um, something seems a skew in that argument. am i reading it wrong to your framing and exactly the way the americans are and the american politicians, particularly in the best way of framing the argument that these are sectors which are very, you should not be entering. you stick to do the things which you used to do and make our lives more efficient. but when we come to a higher value added products, i still don't think it's a that's, that's, that's not where you belong. but i mean, that's not an argument that you can make to anybody. they allude, anybody and everybody, whether it's a honda or a chinese or brazilian has the right to produce an electric vehicle if they produce the most efficient electric cycle in the world. and that's what they've gone to,

and this has come out of, she also promote realism. i'll, i mean, a lot of this is they needed to play catch up. so they had really dedicated folks who and entrepreneurs who said we need to do catch up. let's try to do it a little differently. government was 8 of the process initially. i know we have, i mean, it's an antique of also about this. you know, they've been invite of the tests. leslie at that point this time in the late late 20 times because they really wanted to benchmark their rice and competitors with the, the best competitor in the market. and they said now go compete with the tesla and try to do the best. and this is exactly the reason the ease the market will feel in the us, because the us is keeping out the best. and the most efficient competitor us will have its own market and it will have the gm's will have the great market share at home. but solves the allied friends like you and i'm not inside product central,

but you will never break into the international marketplace. what the, what these, what the installation reduction next, e d tax credit to do is not create manufacturing competitiveness. it will create manufacturing employment up to a point from the short medium to buy, but not create competitiveness, which is the basis of long term and employment. so. so in this, in the chinese of very good this uh, television sets, uh, the telephones. uh, obviously cell phones, computer chips, my gosh, we thought we own that industry and nobody could touch us. and now it appears part of the reason we hate china or are supposed to hate china is because they've gotten really good at some of that stuff, especially the chips they have. we have and you know, there is a place in, in, in, in domestic and international policy making for industrial policy. it does sound very socialist. it's hendricks. there is

a space for the industrial policy. but industrial policy does not mean just seamlessly throwing money and throwing subsidies and hoping great things will happen there after you have to be intelligent about the process, somebody's before site them of the process. and the whole purpose of the industrial policy is to then facilitate market competition. and that's why i keep repeating not to pick winners onto the incumbents. into that before we go, we're down to like a minute and a half. and i have 2 more questions and a story left for you, but 1st of all, give me a yes or no. they only succeed and a really good at that stuff is because they cheat and steal our ideas. true or false is not complete. false. the ease uh, i mean they are they, they have so many new innovations and they usually just need to be in lots of, i mean, completely false and it's not about stealing. finally, one final note, i thought it would be fitting to mention the storage there before we close that, or bernie sanders, a man who knows a thing or 2 about socialism,

had somebody attack is office by setting it on fire. police say a person named shap showed the ammonium got into sanders building and went up to the 3rd. busy floor where he is seen spring, so i'm kind of liquid on the door and then said, i get off fire the man is under arrest. it's not known why he did it, but we do know that just last week, senator sanders publicly called out as really prime minister benjamin netanyahu urging him to stop killing innocence. he also suggested that the us should give his real, not a penny more. nope, still we don't know what caused any comment. what do you, what do you think of that? i know you're not are bernie sanders expert. but isn't that weird? i mean, c o 2 is like things are spilling out beyond normal politics. i mean, politics. wireless is becoming part of the language of politics and that's becoming very dangerous. and i think much worse things can happen in the. ready family traumatic way, i mean the candidates being assassinated, okay. sort of things. you just don't want to go there. and these things need to be

nipped in the bud. i think there's no, no, no tolerance for this sort of nonsense. so i've got to, it's always a pleasure having you on thank you for joining me, my friend. before we go, i want to remind you of our mission. simple. really what we do here is we de, silo the world, or at least try to, you know, we've got to stop living in these little boxes where we only believe what we believe and what our friends believe. troops don't live in boxes, a nation, neither should we. we don't, i'm rick sanchez will be looking for you again. right here i'm director of the water is a part of the the employee would post good. isn't the, the place you of us input in the word part?

is it something deeper, more complex might be present? let's stop without cases. let's go out of the headline story. this our fall, michelle revelations, from russia's investigative committee. it's name a hunter by googling the premium company sponsored terror attacks in russia. a criminal probe against us, the nature of officials, has not been opened. the case has been launched as the russians. they do not officially calls for an investigation into a long list of terrorist attacks. how did i apply you prayed since the break, all that comes in other use permit and denies allegations of facilitating a genocide in gaza by arming israel. it's what nick, a rock you is accusing of germany all about the international court of justice