during the miles possible, jose and mills reparation in the south in the city of rough or near the egyptian mode. now working very hard to help the sides reach an agreement, but paved the way to the fire and don't see invasion of israel has been saying a whole week since within days where the 1000000 displays in our house are. and i mean, and i'm going humanitarian crisis agency or but the need to tons of the region to be entered into action territory. that's where the force and danger into security on thursday, the idea of people die and they had of is real security service, travel to cairo. and also that the nation of interest to intelligence officials and businesses as well as the about some whole brands and sons. optimistic messages to the media now have mast examines the jail. one us official earlier is that he's familiar with negotiations that the car into minutes,

almost all the masses demands in both to return the ways route. so it is really official. the whole, there are different towns of cars, and that was the message for israel gives hostage negotiations one last chance. if the reason all the time they move forward with the operation. well, coming your way, next talks on a boy go with the latest episode of well deposit inspection when you join us again for more news in 30 minutes, bye for now. the

or the long welcome to worlds. a part living within your means is consider that furniture in many cultures with one notable exception the united states has public doubt grows roughly by a trillion dollars every $100.00 days. and the past is used to sustain the so called american dream, the amory of the whole world. but the benefits of these swimming weight, unless ballooning a much less apparent nowadays, at least to ordinary people, how much longer would the united states or rather than american the leaves exist on the assumption that the world owes them a living will to discuss that. i'm now joined by michael hudson and the american economist undistinguished research professor of economics at the university of missouri. professor hudson, it's great to talk to thank you very much for being available. that's good to be here. now i know that your academic interest on academic ambition is in exploring

and writing a history of adapt from sumerian times throughout integrity to fuel europe, to the present that i'm sure that must have offered you a unique lance onto the american doubt which has cross 13 for trillion mark recently, do you see that primarily as an economic, as an ideological or perhaps as a psychological issue or do you see it as an issue at all on the surface? it's a, an economic issue. yes. and the logical because of the entire 19th century explained why a death overhead was going to be crushing the economy. uh, already you know, under marks. uh uh and uh, the rest of the last of the 19th century people were saying, finance capital is both an unproductive is an economic bird. but beginning around

the 20th century, there was a hole in the allowed to go claim saying no finance is not a version a the they finance stairs and the bankers earn their money is not on there. and income is not i can economic rent, like adam smith and john stuart mill in the marks and all of the classical economies said that this debt an interest was unproductive of the in the ology. it was that everybody's productive. bowen's heart is productive by providing a service, and john stuart mill said, well, they get this income in their sleep, they don't work for it. so there is no real value. so the whole video and she of economics changed a way from an analysis of that. and if you look at the end, it goes through a ph, d. and that cannot makes, today, in the united states, there's no discussion of that. it was because of the work i did for chase manhattan and realizing that a lot of countries chance pay their debts just like today,

the global south isn't a problem. i work for the united nations for the united nations institute for training and research, saying a 3rd world can pay the deb. nobody wanted to discuss that. but this 3rd, mr. hudson, professor hudson, the united states is not like any other country. the americans believe strongly in the exceptional is meant sometimes the thing american officials don't believe that the rules and regulations or laws of nature doesn't apply to other countries apply to them. what do you think? how do you understand the logic of the success of american administrations, of let seeing the, the data grow so precipitously? why aren't they wore it as much as use them to be? logic is quite simple. the american say yes, we're running out of a for a death, but we're never going to retain that. that if we run spend dollars and other countries, any other country would have to the value or the currency,

or they'd have to raise their interest rates, or they couldn't keep running into that. but america says, as long as we run into dev and provide dollars, these dollars end up in the hands of others central banks. and these are the central bank savings. so we spend dollars, that's their savings. we're right and i are you the i o use and ever going to be cashed. so we don't have to worry about that. because if they wanted to, uh, withdraw from the dollar area, we'll just send them the army and we'll have a regime change until we get a friendly roseann change that just holds all of our desks. so that doesn't matter . that's the attitude of the united states. that's what makes a state exceptional nation. but in the past this, um, we are full per rating, at least serve the american people. there was a believe that in our every successive generation would have a better life than the previous one. other thing nowadays, more and more middle income people are struggling to make ends need. and so for

a while it's to be ignored or it could be sort of marginalized into sort of deplorable complaining. but it's a, it's a major issue and i believe it has to have some structural solutions. what those solutions could be in. well, you've, you've so say that the issue very clearly. that's exactly the issue of the people who are of the teenagers and people in their twenties that i don't have any chance of uh, have of being able to get a house or get a job as easily as i could back in my day 60 years ago and the open president of by and tells people the economy is doing just fine by our young people opposing me. this is why they were opposing them because they, they, it costs $50000.00 a year to go to college and say, and they have so much student that they can't afford to take out a mortgage to buy a house of their own. so they're still living with some parents and the parents so

well we never had to pay anything like that. uh and the health care is, uh, so it more expensive than that ever was. so the people, the voters say just what you say. things like going down the hill and mr by and will say it's wonderful for the offer to look at the stock market because of that. right. well the wealthiest 10 percent are doing great, but that for the 90 percent, that's what you described. it's like, uh the situation is getting worse. well, those 90 percent, i tend to be very proud of that democratic system. can they actually change anything about the way the country structure the about the way that our economy is functioning, given that they have elections this year, that nobody was running for president? except i think jo style is a 3rd party and i go is talking about economic policies. they're all talking about military policies or israel and russia. it's uh, take the other many more or less,

but nobody's talking a little economic policy. and certainly not the economist as well. uh, both dishes, uh, i'm very used to deflecting from, you know, real concern. so by projecting, you know, some scares on to other countries. but as you mentioned, the americans are feeling the pinch already. how long do you think they will be able to sort of use foreign policy instead of talking and doing some real policies until other countries such as the brakes plus uh, china, russia, and ryan and the others decide that things don't have to be less white. there is an alternative and they create a whole set of alternative organizations to the united nation standard, national monetary fund world. but there has to be an alternative. and one says, and alternative the whole world will gravitate towards the end of the united states . so isolated itself as thank since isolating, russia, isolating, china,

isolating them. but it's isolated so many people that know it's left all alone. and all the rest of the people have to say is we can make our own world. we know they do well because i'm excited. this is already happening. things to be yours own policy. i mean the policy of trying to function russia or isolated from the rest of the world. i think it's clearly backfired against the united states. and i want to ask you about specifically about the russian in china because you called you been critical of the u. s. foreign policy. and you called the united states, a cares agent. putting aside the moral considerations, what do you think are the downsides of a such a policy for its author as for the united states or the united states as trying to prevent the rest of the world from creating an alternative? the united states is trying to make its own rules. that's what it goes, the role space order. but that's in place. me allows with international law and the united nations of the rollover that international law again. so if the united

states can cite tape, tape, trading case, pay us if not prevent other countries from getting together. at last, the end praising an alternative. most of the chaos is around the countries where the united states was trying to start a colored revolution. and in order to have a regime change to bring a friendlier, more, a pro, your west client oligarchy, into being linked argentina or brazil, or germany. that's the ideal go to a country who they want the leaders of a, another country to be essentially representing us interests, not the interest of the wrong country. and by chaos, you can prevent countries from spelling out oil. what is our own? okay? cannot make themselves a wondrous but this policy clearly is not working with either russia in china. and i think both of these countries are domestically acting themselves very different

different of the united states, and that they are very circumspect about that public, that they are very conscious about montana and you cannot make on social stability about investing into the infrastructure about actually making sure that the people do not suffer and that the living stand, there's a non decreasing precipitous way. i wonder if the united states is running a risk here of not only and not that shipping the, the desired goals, foreign policy goals, but also in and tag. and isaac further antagonizing their own people as well. you can recognize that the united states doesn't the united states as plan a retail other countries what to do, and they obeyed it but, and they don't have a plan b. suppose you worked for the state department, then you just said, uh what you're saying that other countries have their own interest of the, of their bosses would say, well, you're not a team player. if you don't,

we have team a. if you don't think our team a is our plan, a is going to work that not a team player you don't belong in. the american doesn't have a plan be only a plan and the reality is a plan b. but they don't have that there was no room for reality and plan a saying, you know, where is it then? you know they, they essentially ation. we can do whatever we want. but mr. hudson. uh, i think this is something that many people around the world are struggling to understand about the united states. you have so many universities, so many things. tanks about so many, so many research commissions and you know, when you, yourself work on long term historical trans. i'm sure these people in the state department, they, they, they should have access to some of that literature. how call is the baby and they seem to be so ignorant. that's the only read literature that uh, agrees with their position. oh, j a, there are holes, are the head of the fbi i in america called video laundry gold gratification. if

you read the new york times or the washington post or the manger media, there's no discussion of this is $11.00 story and that's it. professor hudson, we have to take a very short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments. stay to the the

double crew up. so that's what i know a lot of the work flowing really some way it was coming and we just wanted to get political just for the 1st stuff which will be officially pretty much the so for what i mean if i was given you know, by emotions so well, obviously if i lived in the middle of just some of which was, which was i still to get the stuff where you all the things you just called the little shop for the service, provide some of the logistics of a total of one of the special good on the bus for post spotted coffee are starting to pay the additional service. i will do this for you and then mosley. this is going to the luxury, the,

the welcome back towards the ports with my co hudson and american economist, undistinguished research, professor of economics at the university of missouri. now before the break, we talked about washington beginning of a flight with russia in china. and i opened here, here in the russia and increasingly saw in china that washington is waging a battle, not just with them, but with histories such that it's, it is trying to sort of, uh, turn the top and turn back bit tied of history, which is objectively moving away from the unipolar world, i wonder, what do you think about that? that is not working. the united states tried to impose sanctions on russia. that's the best thing the, the could have happened to russia because the sanctions on russia,

against agriculture, against the other items mo, made russia fetus produce a phone food as on agriculture. and now, and so the major grain export or it's, it's no longer dependent on the united states in europe, for manufacturers, for consumer goods. it's making its own. so the buy is set telling the rest of the world don't trade with russia, adult trade with china. they force these countries to save, all right, we won't depend on the united states. we're going to stop ex, importing from them. and you just have a, the german foreign minister go to china. and so by one china, by uh, the more goods from europe today, you're exporting to us more than we're exporting to you. and china said, well, so you, you follow the american sanctions. you won't export computer trips, stores, you won't export computer chip making machinery to us. you want to explore the nice

thing that the united states says can help warp woke feeding. people can help the. the feed sauntered. so yeah, you're, you're euro bang. the united states sanctions and you will trade with us. so there's, there's nothing they that american, your american bosses will let you export to a. so that's a new problem to take it up with your bobby, with united states, not with us. so actually russia. yeah. in china, over in the driver's seat. no, they can say it'd be one sections against the. then we would just not go to train with you about m k, but at all, and america as completely dependent on russia and china, for many roller carols, even for the engines, fresh rockets that go to the moon is dependent on russia. all the rest your has to say of either of all or nothing. you know, we're happy to send you what you need, if you will give us what we need by figuring out what i need to do that they have other people to trade with that, but i think it's not only china or russia,

i think the majority of the world wants to, you know, develop it's economy productively, wants to be respected, wants to be treated fairly in economy and politics. why is it so difficult for, for the west to understand that, i mean, it's not in the economic issue anymore. it seems to be like some defeated, psychological question that for some reason the decision makers in the west cannot understand. like you need to talk to people with respect so that they tribute in the same way that the americans understand that very well. they understand what the rest of the world wants. they don't want that. they says they want other countries to be dependent. and one of the ways they hold other countries then dependency and prevent of attempt rates from doing what they want is there's in the norm, us, us dollar debt owned by the global cells invite other countries in the united

states. then the via the international monetary fund can keep saying, well, we will create a currency crisis for you. it would be uh, out of the, of the dollar to the, in order for other countries to do what they want. they have to withdraw from the us or but, and that means we're not paying the us dollar debt. this dollar, that was almost an act of war. it was an act of financial war against them by lending the money for the i am of really only to their plans. oh my god keeps lending the money. and that the on the condition that they privatize and sell off their public domain, their basic infrastructure, their uh, oil and mining rights, their lam, america wants to take their wells fargo and donald trump made of declare. he said in any deal we make with any country america as to when they're going to be of the losers. that's almost verbatim what he said. then the other

countries don't want that deal where they're going to be the losers. then they're going to have to group together and just say the though it wasn't his, we're not gonna pay in the dollar depths. we're not going to export what you tell us to export. we're going to grow our own so that we're going to follow the chinese and russian computer system. so we don't have to be part of the, of the computer systems and chip chips and the media that the, the us has all of us 5 we're in. we can go our own way that the world is breaking apart into 2 into 2 sections. and the united states doesn't want to say it, because i've had the same type of realize of going down the hill and a parent exploited this and says they want to keep the game going of taking and taking as long as they can as well. but sooner or later reality, we'll check on them. and as you said, it seems to be a pretty broad trend of countries choosing to you know, side way or,

or sideline american regulations. not because they, you know, prioritize, rush or china. but because they prioritize that own national interest. now if that trend growth, what alternatives would the west have? i mean, can the west sustain itself within its own can, doesn't have enough resources, doesn't have enough infrastructure enough capital enough acu man. and that's the strategy to exist within its own bubble, no cap, because the united states, as the industrialized has moved all of its industry to foreign countries, is dependent on role materials from other countries is there is such a high debt overhead in the united states, the incident depend on itself, you'd have many of the corporations and the bank go insolvent and bankrupt. so no the, the west tab except that the united states and just one of the big war that's taken 3 years. it's one the war against europe in germany. it's made germany in europe

completely independent then, so it's going to depend on your opinion. purchases of the arms through nato. european purchases of american gas and other german firms are moving to the united states where they can get an expensive energy, some firms and moving to china. but europe is a dense on your end. it's all going to look like land, fia, and the bowls and countries declining population declining industrialization, but all of this, so they're all of this decline of your will be a flow individual. westover news though, is very strong now because the, the money is leading europe. so the united states, so it's not a go for a while. it can always go on longer than yes. i know, professor hudson, i know that you have served as a consultant to many governments and international organizations. if i were to ask

you to give some advice to, let's say, developing nations on how to talk to the united states. because the american style of negotiating can be very intimidating. but as you pointed out, you know, those countries also have some leverage right now. they have some alternatives. how would you advise them to conduct the, you know, relations with the united states in a fair manner and not in an adversarial manner, but then the self serving and fair manner will realize in the 1st place that america is a paper tiger. and if you look at on america waged on economic war against russia since 2020, to look at how it strengthens russia. look at the americas war against china, our strength and of china. yes. ok to be america's enemy. just don't try to be as friend. you can both say it in the american orbit and with a new civilization was 85 percent of the world's population showing that 85 percent and worked together. there was no way you can work in the united states without the

united states trying to exploit, you know, now we have only a few minutes left them in this time i want to ask you about what's going on in gaza. you recently rolled up some 50 years ago when you were working with the hudson institute. there were some number some, most of the agents who were being trained with you. and you suggested that one of them currently serves as the main advisor through the is rarely prime minister benjamin. that's now court and you know, who is the run? yeah. and he suggested that's what is happening in the region right now. you're heard being discussed the half a century ago. what exactly was it? all of this is plan to be at the end and the israel was supposed to play the role of leading local revolutions. they at that time and they didn't have isis. and the terrorist groups, the funk, they thought that the front of the yeah, the enemy of the chaos and them may was going to be but lucas down. so and so be

getting at that time the ca begin to move. it's the agents in the loop to stem hoping that that would work against the ram. but now that you advise us, you have a israel playing. the role is managing isis, and it's working is america's foreign legion. so america is recruiting these uh well, hobby. uh, sort of crazies and they're staring them against syria. they're steering them against russia and all along its borders. well, what's happening and goes, that's up. it's been already, it's very unpopular in america. most americans are against the war. and you can, there's a huge propaganda of that for the universities are expelling. i still have them send professors to say that does the palestinians are human beings, obviously president by and knows that he cannot be re elected file of waging a genocide in palestine. now the question is in the newspapers says buy it and

those towing and then yeah, hope don't attack around. but most of the say most of the national security council has wanted to attack a ram for the last 10 years. that's always been the plan. so the question is, is by and saying all of this, so to me for a show to make it up here is this america won't help is real if there was a fight or is america trying to tell me nothing. yeah. ok. you know, between us, go ahead and do it and then we'll come and then we'll have the final fight against the ram. that's that nobody, no. so what's the rest of the house? and the one thing that i'm sure you, you may know is whether america or israel for that matter, have resources for that kind of 5. because it's one thing to sound the and you know, some military aid to ukraine or even to israel, but to wage a war against a major country that has powerful allies not only in the region,

but also around the world. that's quite a different that they taking they may want. oh they want, but do they have the resources to carry it out? that's the whole point. the resources are m, i 6 in england and the say i know the american. all right, so uh the thing is they do attack around you can be absolutely certain united states us behind the 100 percent that is have and that's why i around says we understand that the united states as the enemy, the israel, of course, israel's, if it attacks us is the and i'm a but we're going to retaliate against the united states themselves into waves. number one against the american troops. it occupied erac, the syria number 2, setting a ship in the state of remote. this is what we were talking about. 60 years ago, if you have a site that shift in our, most of the oil, from a 70 or 80, it cannot be export and you will have an oil prices store. so you can imagine that

this is good news for russia out of all this. and that's, that's really the question or ran doesn't really have to fight back is real america . that's all it has to do a 2nd ship and to remove this. and uh, there goes uh, the price structure and the inflation in the united states in europe. well, i assume she can a sooner or later come home to roost. and that may be the outcome of the policy that the united states has perceived pursuit for so many think it, we have to leave it there. professor hudson, thank you very much for your time. perfect traveling, man. and thank you for watching cultures here again on the world's a part of the or the

world's largest food and beverage company is baffling of scandal. the allegations it's selling healthy baby food to west and nations applying developing countries with alternative pact with sugar. audi speaks with an african physician who's accused the company of negligence because a lot of health education, negative health institutions. when the children, the french president, stays europe in danger unless not active in us is also the same week as the us secretary of state spoke full the you about his relations with china and during his trip today. james and so 1000000000 times with boeing is a tile phones off one of its jetson john. his book is the latest safety scanner for

the seemingly.