I am a big fan of Montaigne gear. I have these Montaigne prism waterproof gloves. I also use these Montaigne waterproof trousers and more often than not you'll find me in the Montaigne fleece here. I use it in training, I use it for races, I also put it in my backpack as a spare layer. But more often than not I am just simply wearing it during the day because it's so warm, light and comfortable. Affiliate links to all of these products are in the description below. However, despite my reliance on Montaigne for much of my running apparel, my waterproof jacket of choice for the last six years has been the OMM Kamlaika. I've had two iterations of the Kamlaika jacket and it's served me very well, but there has always been a slight question mark about its breathability, particularly when running at higher speeds. See, the faster you run the more you sweat, and if it's raining then it can be quite difficult to work out whether the moisture inside your jacket is sweat that can't get out, or rain that's managed to get in. With a big year of 100 mile races coming up in 2023, I'm hoping to do the Centurion Grand Slam and also the full UTMB race in Chamonix this year, I've been looking to spend a little bit more money on a slightly higher end waterproof jacket, and it just so happens that my search has coincided with the release of the Montaigne Phase Nano waterproof jacket. So I decided to go for it. And here it is. It's certainly not cheap. The Montaigne list price for this jacket is £300, although at the time of recording I think you can get it on Amazon for around $250. It's also not the most expensive jacket you'll find. I think that price goes to the Arcterix hoodie, which retails in the US for around $400. I've been wearing the Phase Nano for a few weeks now, so I wanted to give you my impressions in this short review. So let's look at the overall features first. Montaigne market this jacket as their lightest and most breathable to date. It weighs in at 233 grams or so, which is a smidge lighter than my OMM Kamlaika jacket. One of the reasons they've been able to reduce the weight so much is by using this 13 denier Gore-Tex active shell. You won't find many pairs of tights thinner than that. Now obviously for a waterproof jacket it does have fully taped seams, and the Aquaguard zip has an internal storm flap for that extra bit of protection. Both pockets use the Aquaguard zip as well. The peak cap is stiffened and the hood is fully adjustable so it doesn't blow off in the wind. Moving on to the things I love about this jacket, and first and foremost it has to be the breathability. It is so much better than my Kamlaika, allowing my body to breathe, especially when running at faster speeds. With my Kamlaika jacket often I would find that sweat would pool in the elbows when I was running, and when I strained my arm it would all pour out onto the floor. So far nothing like that has happened with the FaZe Nano, although to be fair maybe I haven't quite pushed the FaZe Nano to its limits just yet, but it certainly feels a lot less clammy. I also love the hood. It fits my head much better and stays on in the wind.  With the FaZe Nano there's a really good balance between protection from the elements but also feeling like you're not constrained or overly covered up. Finally of course it does seem to keep the rain out. I actually had the jacket for quite a long time before I was able to run in some actual rain. It's always difficult where clothing is concerned because there are huge holes in the garments which could potentially allow rain to get in, and manufacturers are constantly having to manage the expectations of customers who are saying your garment isn't 100% waterproof. It can't possibly be 100% waterproof with these huge holes, but that aside the FaZe Nano is excellent at keeping the elements out. Wind protection feels great too. The three layered Gore-Tex does a remarkable job of letting my body breathe out but preventing the wind or rain from getting in. By the way if you're finding this video useful or interesting then please do click the like button and consider subscribing to the channel for more of these kinds of videos. It is free and it does help us to grow the channel and bring you more useful content. There are one or two things I don't like or which are slightly irksome about the FaZe Nano jacket. Firstly thumb holes. On the Camlaker jacket there were thumb holes on the wrist which I could pull down over my gloves and over my hand and provided a bit more of a lockdown against cold weather against the elements. The FaZe Nano doesn't have thumb holes and it doesn't even have adjustable elastic on the wrists so it doesn't feel as protected, it doesn't feel as locked down as my Camlaker jacket. Secondly and this is nitpicking I guess really, but the Aquaguard zip is rather stiff and fiddly. I understand there's a compromise with the added water and rain protection but it might have helped if the zip puller was a bit bigger, a bit easier to grab. In all it just feels a little bit clunky, a bit stiff and a bit awkward. Finally on dislikes well it's got to be the price hasn't it. A lot of you I know are already saying there is no way I am spending £250 to £300 on a waterproof jacket and I hear you, I do. But here's the thing, if you are going to run 100 miles in the mountains, in the Alps, the Pyrenees or even in Scotland or the Lake District here in the UK, you need to have the right equipment for the job. You need something which is going to protect you against the elements but at the same time you are running a race and you want to be as light as possible to move as quickly as possible through that terrain. So you have some choices and there are going to be some compromises you will have to make. The choices are weight, cost and quality. Now you don't really want to compromise too much on quality because you want good gear to do the job so you're left with price and weight. In general the less you spend the heavier your gear is going to be. So if you have a heavy running jacket, heavy waterproof trousers, a heavy backpack, a heavy head torch, heavy trail shoes, all that combined is going to mean you're carrying a significant amount of extra weight and that is undoubtedly going to affect your performance. Now I'm not suggesting you go out tomorrow and spend thousands of pounds on the best running apparel money can buy. However as you become more experienced as a runner and as you run in more challenging terrain you may start to view running performance gear as an investment in your safety rather than just something to comply with mandatory kit or something to get the job done as easily and cheaply as possible. Quite often spending that little bit extra money not only gets you the lightest gear on the market in terms of weight but also the best performing. One final thing on how you prioritize your spending on running apparel. Whatever you do the worst thing you can do is to say what is the minimum I can get away with to pass a mandatory kit check. That is not why mandatory kit lists were created. Always try to consider what is the best piece of kit that I need to keep me moving in this race and what is the best piece of kit that will keep me safe if I can no longer keep moving in a race. That's what you need to consider when thinking about buying your running apparel and then you need to think well what is the compromise that I'm prepared to make between that kit and what I am able to or willing to spend. So all that said if you are willing to spend £250 to £300 on a running waterproof jacket then a link to the Montaigne phase nano is in the description below go check it out now. It is without question one of the best wind and waterproof running jackets on the market today for trail and mountain ultra runners and if you are going to be climbing mountains or doing ultra distance trail running then you might want to check out this review of the Salomon pace running belt which is great for holding your running poles or keeping your phone or your snacks handy. And with all that thank you very much for watching please don't forget to subscribe if you found the content useful or interesting and we'll see you on the start line next time. Take care.


Hi, I'm Zor. Welcome to Indizor Education. Today we will continue talking about Lorentz transformation and its effect on time, which we did discuss before when talking about time measuring lecture just before the Lorentz transformation. But now, equipped with Lorentz transformation, we will try to derive basically the same formula but more mathematically or theoretically whatever you want to call it. Now this lecture is part of the course called Relativity for All, presented on Unizor.com. On the same website you can find two prerequisite courses, math for teens and physics for teens. Now, obviously both mathematical and physical knowledge are mandatory to understand theory of relativity, so either you take those courses or maybe you have already in possession of the proper knowledge of math and physics. But in any case, these are prerequisites which are available on the website. Also every lecture on this website, well including this one of course, have a very detailed textual notes which basically like a textbook. So you have at the same time the video presentation and the part of the textbook if you wish related to this particular lecture. Whatever, maybe I might miss something during the lecture then I'll put it in the notes. But basically they're supposed to be about the same thing obviously. Now also the website contains some educational functionality. For example, you can take exams as many times as you want. There are some problem-solving exercises and also there is a provision for supervisor study. So if you are basically given some kind of an assignment by teacher or supervisor or parent, if it's a self-study for example, then it can be arranged through this function knowledge of the website. And the website is completely free. There are no advertisements, no strings attached. Sign-on is optional and there is no information except maybe the name and the password if you want to, but you can be completely anonymous and take the whole course without any kind of signing in if you don't want to. Signing in is actually necessary for this functional provisions like if you have a supervisor, then you need basically to arrange the relationship between you and supervisor and that's why both have to sign in. But just for self-study without any kind of restrictions you can just go and do whatever is necessary. Okay, back to time. Now let's consider we have two inertial systems. One will be called alpha. I will put only one space coordinate X. Y and Z coordinates will not be important because they will be completely the same in both this system and another system which I call beta. I will use lower cases for beta. And beta is moving with speed V along the X axis of alpha with retaining the parallelism of all the axes. And at time T is equal to 0, alpha coincides with beta completely. So at the moment of time 0 they are exactly overlap each other. But in any case before and after the time 0 beta is moving towards the along the X axis of alpha. At the same time you can say that its alpha is moving along the X axis of beta with the speed minus V. So alpha also moves with the speed minus V relative to beta. So it's all relative, it's all symmetrical so to speak. Now in the lecture which was called time measuring we considered a light clock in the beta system which basically send the light from one particular point up to the mirror and let's say the lengths of these distances are and the mirror is reflecting back and we accept this beam of light at the same point. Now this is all happening in the beta system. So the point is not moving anywhere, the mirror is not moving anywhere, they are stationary in the beta system and the time of this experiment from sending the beam of light up to the mirror and back is a certain duration which we have measured basically as 2R divided by C. That was our timing of the event, 2R because the speed of light is C and the distance is R to the mirror and R back. Everything is stationary so nothing is moving, everything is exactly the same. And that's what we called a timing for the beta observer in the beta system because it's a beta system, it's a lowercase t and it's a beta observer, that's why the beta is here. At the same time we were trying to evaluate time of alpha observer of the same beta event or beta process, beta experiment and we have found this formula where gamma is 1 over square root of 1 minus V squared divided by C squared. V is the speed. Now if you don't remember how we obtained this formula you can obviously go back to this lecture, it's called time measuring and you will see that that's basically the formula which we obtained analyzing how this beam of light is going to the mirror and back from perspective of alpha observer because since beta is moving so with alpha is seeing actually that beam of light goes this and then this since beta is moving. Basically calculating whatever the distances we came up with this formula. Okay, fine. Being as it may, now we are equipped with a little bit more, I would say, mathematical and theoretical tool called Lorentz transformation. So we have come up with the transformation of coordinates between two systems like this, alpha and beta and this transformation looks, that was a previous lecture actually, this transformation looks like this. If we are talking about using alpha coordinates as the base and you would like to find out what's the beta coordinates look like that would be the formula like this. x minus vt divided by square root of 1 minus v square c square and t, so lowercase x and lowercase t are prerogative of beta system uppercase x and uppercase t are the alpha system that would be t minus vx divided by c square divided by the same square root. So this is Lorentz transformation which we have derived in the previous lecture how to obtain the coordinates of something in the beta system if we know the coordinates and time by the way in the alpha system. Time obviously is important because as the time goes by beta system is moving and that's why the same point in alpha for example would have different coordinates in beta as the time goes on, right? Now obviously this e is completely inversible because of this if beta is moving with the speed v relative to alpha alpha is moving with the speed v relative to beta which means we can all reverse this just changing v to minus v and we will have x is equal to lowercase plus in this case v and lowercase t divided by the same square root and capital T is equal to also v changed to minus v that would be 2 t plus sorry lowercase t v lowercase x square divided by the same square root. Okay, so these are mutually symmetrical transformation from space and time coordinates of one system into space and time coordinates of another system. So that's done, this has been covered already and now my purpose is to use this very powerful apparatus to basically evaluate how the time is changing the duration of time is changing from one system into another basically not repeating the same logical well I would say experimental kind of logic which we were using in the lecture time measuring when we came up with this relationship I'm talking about this one. So the duration at alpha system of the event which is happening in beta system would be by gamma where gamma is one over this square root would be greater. By the way this is less than one so one over square root would be greater than one so the gamma is increasing factor so capital T beta would be greater than lowercase the proper time, the time where event actually is happening is always the smallest and in any other frame that would be greater. Okay, so now let's again use this system and again we will consider that there is some experiment actually if you wish doesn't really matter right now we're not talking about light clock or anything like this any kind of a process any kind of an experiment is conducted in the beta system so it's local to beta it's basically everything is at rest in the beta system but the entire beta system is moving relative to alpha so let's consider that at some point at some point let's call it x0 in the beta system it's a fixed point at rest not moving we conduct certain experiment it takes time from T begin to T end so my space coordinate is the same during this experiment I'm just standing at point x0 in conducting experiment which takes some time now my question is if I observe this particular experiment from the alpha system how long will it take? Alright, well we do have basically two different two different co-ordinates x0 and T begin one space time point and another is x0 T end so x0 is x T begin or T end is the T or case T and all I have to do is substitute into these formulas to get correspondingly x0 and T begin I would rather put it x begin because I'm not really sure whether that would be the same and x and T end so from these two I have to convert into these two somehow okay so let's just do the first one and I will use these formulas so x begin equals x0 plus v T begin divided by well if you don't mind let me just multiply by gamma so it would be where gamma is 1 over this square root same thing as this and T begin that's the time experiment begins I will use this formula which is gamma times T begin plus v x0 divided by c square okay good now let's do conversion of the end of the event in one system into another so we will have x end equals to exactly the same formula x0 we still have plus v T end and T end is equal to gamma or T end plus v x0 divided by c square okay so I have an end I have a begin I have an end I have a begin space coordinates and in time coordinates so what follows is my duration delta T that's the duration of the whole experiment in the alpha system from T end to T begin well obviously this thing will cancel out and I will have gamma T end minus T begin which is equal to gamma delta T where delta T is duration of the event in the beta system and delta T capital is the duration in the alpha system which corresponds completely to this formula so we have derived the same formula this is a good confirmation I mean though if you have derived to the same formula from two different theories that's always good right so we have done that now what's interesting is let's compare the space coordinates you see space coordinates are different now and what's the difference delta x is equal to we will subtract from this this gamma times x0 will cancel out but this one will not it will be gamma times V times T end minus T begin which is delta T so as you see the experiment which is at rest basically at point lowercase x0 in the beta system obviously it's just there we are moving with we are within the beta system and observe this experiment it stands still the time goes by but the location is not but if you view it from the alpha frame that the beginning and the ending of the experiment will be in two different space locations well why? because during the time delta T while experiment is moving will move by V by the speed V so that would be the distance and then there is still this factor gamma which means that there is this is a relativistic effect actually which you know kind of maybe not exactly considered as obvious and it's not obvious so the presence of this denominator is definitely not obvious the achievement of the relativistic theory which basically added this particular factor to make the whole thing much more precise if the speed V is very very low relative to speed of light C then we don't feel this so the gamma would be very very close to 1 and that's why experiments of 19th century didn't really show any kind of problem but more precise experiments proved that this is the right way to do it and so the relativistic approach was many times confirmed experimentally not only through the theory which we kind of built ourselves so that's an interesting point obviously and again as I was saying we were just using the Lorentz transformation to confirm that the time actually is perceived differently by the person which is in the local beta system where experiment is conducted actually and stands still and by the person who is in another inertial time frame system which well you can say moves relative to this one or this more relative to that one doesn't really matter but in any case there is definitely a speed V plus or minus whatever you want to consider it so if there is such a speed that the time is perceived differently and the shortest perceived time is the proper one by the observer which is local to the experiment which we are talking about the timing of which we are measuring well that's it I would suggest you to read the notes for this lecture so you go to unison.com choose the course called Relativity for All and in this course there is like a part called Einstein View and this lecture is in that particular part of the course so thank you very much and good luck


The Anderson family. Mary, you're gonna have to do something about getting rid of this Uncle Oscar. You can't do that, Oliver. After all, he's a relative. I don't seem to place him, though. Probably a renegade. I'm not sleeping on that couch again, Mom. Of course not. Neither am I. All right, all right. There won't be any panic over this.  Well, I like that description. Uh-oh. Here we go again, folks. Now let's visit the Anderson family. Well, this whole thing started when a telegram came to the Anderson's telling of the arrival this evening of Uncle Oscar. Of course, when this thing first happened, Oliver had other things to worry about, as he talked to his boss, Mr. Thompson. Oh, look, Anderson, let's not kid ourselves. Business is lousy. The Ajax people are taking account after account right out from under our noses. Well, uh, yes, I guess they've taken a couple. How about our Mr. Johnson? Our late Mr. Johnson. He's no longer with us. Oh. You mean he's fired? That's right. Torrance and I had a conference last night. We're only going to keep the ones who produce. That's serious, huh? Yes, it's that serious. We have one chance to save our necks. That's where you come in, Anderson. Oh. Yes, Anderson. Johnson had a shot at this Curtis account and muffed it. It's a $150,000 deal. We must get that account. All I do is get that. That's right. Now, Mr. Curtis is a peculiar man. Well, he can afford to be without much money. You're treating this rather lightly for a fellow who has one foot out of the concern already? Well, of course. I'm only a human being. I don't want a human being. I have to have a salesman. Well, I'll do my best, Mr. Thompson. That isn't going to be good enough. But I'm going to give you a good start on this. I've wired Curtis to come this evening. But I haven't been able to find one place for him to stay. That's good. That's good? Yes. Because that gives me an opportunity to have him spend the night at your house, where he'll get to know you better. Spend the night at my house? That's correct. He's afraid of traffic, afraid of violence. All in all, a very peculiar man. Maybe we should get him a room with the sanitary. He's coming to your house. The only other house he knows is mine. But I want him to stay at your house so he'll know you better. Remember, there's a lot at stake here. But of course. I'd have to let Mary know he's coming. Oh, yes, of course. Isn't that good? No, sir. That's bad. I'm just trying to borrow that single bed. Oh, well, how did she know we were going to have company? We got a telegram. How did you know? Mr. Thompson told me. Mom thought you'd hit the ceiling when you heard we were going to have a guest. Well, ordinarily, it wouldn't worry me. But if it's for the best, we'll have to be good sports, I guess. How did Mary take it? Jeez, well, I was surprised, Pop. Of course, there was one thing that worries her. Oh, I don't worry about everything. The only thing we can do is accept it and smile. But she doesn't know who Cousin Oscar is. He's kind of our... Cousin Oscar? Yeah. Here, read the wire. Hmm. I'm with you in thought now. We'll be with you in person tonight, Cousin Oscar. Kind of corny, huh, Pop? Sounds like a close relative of hers, all right. They laugh their way in. Oh, gee, here's Mom now. Oh, Oliver, home so soon, dear. I've just read this moronic telegram, Mary. Yes, it was a telegram. Yes, it was a surprise to try to remember as I will. I don't remember any Oscar in our family. Well, I probably kept him out of sight till he was grown. Oh, now, look, Oliver, I don't want that attitude toward my relatives. I didn't invite him here. Couldn't we wire him that we just had a fire? Wire him where? Oh, yeah, that's right. Well, he's not gonna make me sleep on that couch again. Of course not, neither am I. Oh, be quiet.  He probably found a railroad ticket someplace in some pocket he picked, so he's using it. Oliver, Junior, don't pay any attention to your father. Gee, Mom, after all... That's all right. Of course, it could have been worse. He could have been twins. Gee, it's kind of stuffy in here, Mom. I'm going over to Mr. Meister's where it's quiet. Oh. Look, dear, let's not have these scenes. No ones to blame. I'll find some way to send him on his way. I wish I could believe that. And then we'll be alone, dear. Yeah, well, I... Alone? Wait, Mary, I forgot. Mr. Curtis. Curtis? Who's he? He's a guest. Now, wait, Oliver, let's take this thing calmly. No, that's right. He's an eccentric client who was supposed to give our company an order for $150,000. Well, we can... He can just go to a hotel. But listen, Mary, Johnson got fired because he couldn't sell him. Thompson wants me to give him that homie touch. Why doesn't he go to Thompson's? Because Thompson wants me to get close to him. What's wrong with Mr. Curtis? Oh, he has a phobia for different things. Once he ran all the way from downtown and hid under Mr. Thompson's bed. Goodness, why Thompson's? He feels there's some protection there, I guess. No. You know, when a guy acts that way, there must be a chorus girl somewhere in the background. Well, you work it out. If it's business, we have to put up with it, of course, but... Yeah, but this Oscar business is out. Yes, dear. Now, please relax. I'm going over to Homer's, Mary. Maybe he knows some way to evict this Oscar. He's had a lot of relative trouble himself. Well, now, don't go over there and worry Homer with it. I'm not. There's no need for two of us to worry. Well, uh, oh, nothing in particular, Homer. I just won't annoy you if I step in for a minute, will I? Oh, now, Oliver, I've just gone over the whole thing with Martha. We can't take Oscar in here. Oscar? How do you know? Oh, Junior and Mary told Martha this evening. Oh. I have enough trouble with Martha's tribe without going outside the family. I didn't ask you to take him in, did I? Well, no, no. Think I'd do that to you, Homer? Well, I don't suppose you would. It's different having someone here if you know him. How? Oh, well, you kind of know him, and you like to have him around. Well, well, yes, of course. That makes a difference, all right. And you know how hard it is to get room? Oh, yep, yep, I know. I'll take you. You have that extra bedroom. Well, she's tore up. Tore up? Yep, yep. Getting a new cover on the mattress and getting the springs unsagged.  Oh, boy, something terrible. I can't afford to remodel the beds every time somebody wants to come and visit. Yeah, I know.  I am, huh? Yeah. Yeah. See, I'd do anything to help you out. Yep, yep, I guess you would, Oliver. I know you'd do the same for me. Oh, yep, I will. You mean I can have the room, huh? No, no, I mean, I'll show you how to get rid of him. Oh, well, now you're talking. How about Mary? Oh, she don't know nothing about this at all. It's a little trick I used once. Trick? No, boy, it sure works. Okay, how did you do it? Well, well, you make them up a bit on the porch. Porch? Yep, and after the first night, then they suddenly remember they have to be on their way. Ah, but Mary won't go for that.  Sick? That does the trick. How do you mean? Well, you see, it's something it did when Martha's paw lived on us one summer to stay for the season. I just plum-scared him out. Well, now that's more like it. How did you do it? Well, of course, now, I don't want to be blamed for this, Oliver. Blame you? Don't be silly. What do I do? I'm not worried about Martha. I'm invited to go fishing tomorrow with the boss. And with this Oscar here, I'll never get to go. Oh, it's in the bag, Oliver. He's as good as gone, and you're on your way fishing. Now, wait, wait, wait.  No, no, no. That ain't the way it's done. You got to do it legal-like and still be able to live in your own home after he's gone. Yeah, I have to consider that, too. And remember now, act like you're glad to see him. Treat him like one of the family, and if you're put up with him. Now, wait, hold it. Hold it. Now, let me tell you. Now, don't interrupt. Don't interrupt. Or else you've got a border on your hands. I know. Okay, now, hurry up. Now, how do I get rid of this cousin Oscar? Well, look, I've got a small bottle or something, and you shake it up and put the cork on your chest. Make big red blotches. Looks like you're breaking up with something. Now, now, wait a minute. Oh, no, no, I don't hurt a bit. Just makes big red spots, and they go away after a while.  Great. I'll do it, Homer. Of course, it works better right after you eat than they think it's something you eat, too. Well, I'll pull it right in front of him, too. Yeah, then I'll come on over like I'm worried about you. Now, now, how do I do it? Well, here, I'll just put the cork on your neck and chest, and you complain about a fever. Then you discover the red spots and show them to him. It's a deal. I'll get rid of that guy, but good. Has he come yet? He's in the front room. Oscar or Mr. Curtis? Oscar. Hmm. I'll take a peek at him through this door here. Well, hurry. I'm supposed to be getting him some soda and warm water. Psst, look. See the head on him? Mm-hmm. And a slant to the left. You can see your family resemblance there. Now, wait a minute, Oliver. Feet on the coffee table. I'm just about wild. Oliver, you have to do something. Me? I'll bet I'll do something. I'll have him leaving this house so fast his hip pockets will dip sand. Now, Oliver, no violence. I won't have the rest of my family know we treated him that way. Don't worry. Look, look here. See my chest? My neck? See? Oliver, those red blotches. You're ill. I know, but those spots aren't the cause. I put them there. They come right off in four or five hours. Oh, but Oliver, do you think it's fair to frighten him? Either that, or we live in the kitchen. Oh, please be diplomatic, dear, for my son. Don't worry. I'll handle this cookie. Just give him a clear path to the door when he sees these spots. Well, Oscar, Oliver finally came home. Of course, of course. They always do. Did you fly in or take the train? No, no, I took the train. Oh. Why, is there some other way? Oh, no, no. Mary was just wondering if you'd walked in. Uh, me. What a happy family. Yeah. You know, we worried a little when you folks got married. Did you? Yes, but you haven't done too badly. Nope, not too badly. Is that you, Junior? Yeah. And then meet your Uncle Oscar, dear. Gee, Mom. So this is Uncle Oscar. Welcome to our home, Uncle Oscar. Don't make it too strong, Junior. My, my, my. What a fine boy. Simply fine. Has a head shape just like my branch of the family. Now, wait a minute, Oscar. What he meant, dear, was Junior resembles his side. Oh, I thought he said Junior looked like him. Oh, yes. After all these years, you didn't know I worked for the state for four years and seven months now, did you? For the state? Huh? Bum checks? Oh. Um, Oliver, Oscar is probably too tired to laugh. Gee, if we'd known you were coming sooner, we could have, uh, stocked up a bit on groceries, but we're, uh... And notice Oliver's developed a sense of humor? Well, uh, just so he's happy. That's a priceless thing. Uh, uh, how are all your folks, Oscar? Oh, I don't really know. They're such a boorish lot. Isn't it the truth? Oh, I don't think they're any worse than others. Well, now that's kind of you to say, Mary.  Junior. Now, now, Mary, that's a fair question. Kids can't learn if they don't ask questions. Uh, how long are you gonna stay? Well, it all depends. Yes, sir, it all depends. It all depends, Junior, you see? Uh, before Oscar starts talking about your other relatives, you'd better leave the room, son. Oh, come now, come now. I've never met any of Mary's relatives. Never met... What? But, but cousin Oscar? Yeah. My, my, my. You don't remember me, all of them? Uncle Benny, Aunt Lucy, Freddie and his carbuggles? Joe with the ingrown face and Charlie and Bertha and the Pollywogs? Oscar, old man. Gee, I'm glad to see you. Oliver, uh, Oliver, I don't... Junior, this is my cousin Oscar. Come on, shake hands. He's your own uncle. But, Pop, you told me he was... I told you no such thing. Oliver. Huh? Your neck, those blotches. Blotches? Oh, no. Blotches? Oh, yeah, and my fever, too. I gotta get to bed. Oh, this is awful. You're exposed this way. My goodness, my goodness. Small, poor, bubonic plague. Run, Oscar, while there's still time. Me? Run? I should say I won't run. Yeah, but you'll catch it. Oh, come now, you're delirious. I can't catch something I've already had. You've had? You've already had it? Of course, of course.  No, no! Now, back to the Andersons. Oliver was surprised by a visit from some uncle Oscar. After worrying Mary about it for an hour, he finally discovered it was his own cousin. But a Mr. Curtis, a very important client, is supposed to be arriving any minute at Oliver's home, and instead of cousin Oscar being driven from the house, he is now taking charge of the sick room. Now, it's nothing to worry about at all.  Yeah, but Oscar, you shouldn't be exposed this way. Hot, hot, my dear cousin. I'll not leave you. Look, will you leave the room for a minute? I want to say something to Mary. How's the patient, cousin Oscar? You know, Mary, you're treating this very lightly. After all, he is your husband. And you haven't even called the doctor. Well, of course, if you think I should. Great Scott, how callous! His own wife doesn't care whether he lives or dies. Well, I'll get some warm water and please don't excite him. This has gone far enough, Oliver Anderson, when he starts discussing me and accusing me of being a bad wife. Oh, now, Mary, let's calm down. It just didn't work out at all, so I'll have to have a little talk with him. I don't care how you do it.  But Mary, he's my own cousin. Yes, of course, but when you thought he was my relative, you showed some action. Please, Mary. Oliver, someone's coming up the walk. He has a grip. He has? Uh-huh. Mary, that's the client. Get out quick. Keep stalling him till I get dressed. Now, now, just relax, Oliver. Never mind now. I'll have you up and around inside of six months. Oscar, Oscar, hand me my trousers. My shirt, my tie.   You'll not get dressed.  Let me get dressed. No, you'll not do it. Lie back there. He's here. You can't be disturbed. I don't care who it is. Shhh. Listen. Landle this. You must have it quiet. Come back here, Oscar. I'm... Here, here, here. We have sickness in this house and we can't have this boisterousness. Uh, sickness. Good heavens. I didn't know. I must take the next train back to Blairsville. Yes, yes. You'll have to leave this minute. Well, now, let's get this thing straight. Oliver! Huh?  Go back to your room. Good heavens. Is this the patient? Mr. Curtis, you'll have to excuse me, but I'm... See, see, look. Low those blotches on his neck. Run, man, run. Huh? Let me out of here. Mr. Curtis. Go on. Look, Oscar, that was my client. Now you get out of my house and get out now. Oh, goodness, Mary. This excitement has caused a relapse. We must get this man back to bed. He's delirious.  The phone, Oliver. I'll answer it. You get back to bed. Get out of my way. I still can answer my own phone. Let me answer it, Oliver. You get dressed. Oh, all right. Answer it. Yes? Listen, this is the boss. Has Curtis arrived yet? Yes, he has. Oh, fine. Done any good? I haven't had a chance to talk to him yet, but I will if I can catch him. Oh, that's fine. I'll... Catch him. I can't talk now. I have to go to the station. No, no, no. Wait, Anderson. Don't neglect this man. I'm not. I merely want to talk to him. I'm determined on that point. Oh, good, Oliver. I'd like to see that old fighting spirit. Well, look, boss. I have to run now. I'll see you later. Well, just a word of warning. Get to him till he signs our... Well, you understand. Uh, uh, yeah, yes, of course. So long. The boss, dear. Yeah. Now, now, hurry. The client said he was going to the station, so let's get going.  It's for your own good. Look, Oscar, for your own good, stay out of my way. But those blotches, they're fiery red now. Oh, Oliver, they are. I don't care about that. I've got to get to the station. I can't stand much more of this, Oliver. Well, I can't stand any more of it. If I lose this account, Oscar will have to furnish the groceries. Well, the boss meant it. Well, I hope we aren't too late, dear. We still have seven minutes before the train leaves. But do you think he'll go to the station? Of course. He's an eccentric man. The only thing he knows is the train station My House and Thompson. Well, then, let's get going a little faster. It's three blocks yet. Hurry, dear. There's the train standing there. Do you see him? No, I don't. Maybe he's Oliver. He's talking to that man by the gate. That's Curtis. Uh-huh. Come on, Mary. All right. Hey, see who he's talking to? No. That's Spencer of the Ajax Company. I'm sunk. Well, Mr. Curtis has some paper in his hand. Now, that could be the contract. Mary, I can't lose this account like this. Come on. Uh, Mr. Curtis, wait a minute. I must see you. He sees you. Don't leave, Mr. Curtis. I'm all right. Where's the entrance? I'll catch up to him. He took the paper with him. Good. I'll catch him. Don't see, Mr. Curtis. Well, he's disappeared. Well, Mary, I tried. Well, don't take it too much to heart, dear. You can find something else to do. But, Mary, I don't want to wash cars. It's easier on the nerves. Well, packing apples and stuff like that. Hmm. Huh? What's wrong? Your shirt collar is open and everyone on the street is staring at you. All right, Bob. Take a walk. Go on. Get it. I want to get a hold of that Homer. Oliver, it's those spots. Let's get home. Oscar! Oscar! Oliver, that's not diplomatic. No, but it's effective. If we're going to stop eating, I want to stop eating by myself. Hmm. Oscar! Doesn't answer. That's probably Oscar with the health authorities. It's Homer. Come in. You're not afraid of spots. Me afraid of spots? Ho, ho, ho. Not them kinds of stuff. Sit down, Bob. I want to go over something with you. Well, now, only done what you wanted me to and I even run him away by myself. Run all the way? Why, this Oscar fella, when he told me he'd had this blotchy stuff before, I told him he couldn't have, because if he did, his neck would have fallen off. Oh, no, Homer. Yep, yep. He took out like a finance man was after him. How's that?  Yes, sir, just poked his nose round there all the time. Well, sir, one day I finally got him on the run. You know what it is? What? Oh, me. Went out and got me some turpentines. Yeah, yeah, that's fine. That's fine. Excellent, Homer. That's wonderful. I could almost forgive you for getting rid of Oscar. Well, we done it anyhow. You can say that again. Yep. Homer, this cement work you do, is that tough on the back? Yeah. Well, not if you do it like I do. Just don't do it too steady, is all. Too steady. Why are you asking? Oh, whoa. Nothing. I'm probably going to have to find something more suited to my nerves, shall I say. Well, I tell you, I done what I could, Oliver, and you can't blame a fella for doing the best you can. No, no. Well, he's not blaming you, Homer. Oliver just depends too much on other people. Yep, yep. That's the way I figured. He's doing that all the time. Well, I've got to get me back. Where Martha's kind of suspicious when I'm gone for more than an hour. Suspicious of what?  Yeah, with your new turtleneck sweater. Oh, well, the fella has to keep himself slipped up these days.  Well, good night. Now, good night, Homer. That's life for you. The guy gets himself a turtleneck sweater and his future is complete. Oh, now stop worrying, dear. We'll manage somehow. You see, I never had a chance. But do you think I could explain that to the boss?  Resigned? Are you kidding? I'm fired. Is that you, Junior? Yeah. Where you going? So early? Come in here a minute. I thought you were going to the Gargoyle Club this evening, dear. Yeah, I did go over to the Gargoyle Club, but the kids all left. Left? On account of you? Yeah. Well, I suppose I'll be giving them a leave of absence now. A leave of absence? Why? Oh, nothing. Uh, Junior, come over here in the light. Let me see you. Oh, no, it's nothing, Pop. Junior, your neck. Yeah, yeah, I'm wrong again. What is it? Well, gee, I don't know. I thought if Uncle Oscar saw me with the spots, too, you know, he'd think it was an epidemic. You mean Homer put some on you, too? What? Yeah, sure. Well, I asked him to, Mom. Now, don't get mad at him. Why, Junior Anderson? Gee, when I discovered they wouldn't come off, it was too late. Wouldn't come off? Heck, no. Skin gets burned and they just have to wear off. Wear off? I'm going to have these blotches till they wear off? But I don't know who that is. The boss. Hello, Anderson. This is the boss. Did you land him yet? I'll tell him. Yes? Anderson, this is the boss. Yes, I know. You talked to me during working hours. Oh, come now, Anderson. I don't want any monologue with the departure. No, wait, Anderson. I know you've had a tough time. Yeah. Maybe you'd better take a few days off. A few? Whoa, I don't know how you did it. But Anderson, you're solved with Torrance and Thompson from now on. Oh, I never saw such determination. Such tenacity. Hey, what number are you calling? The way you let me get the credit for the order. Such unselfishness. Credit? Oh, well, of course I... Now, you sold me. Yes, sir, why Curtis came rushing into my house with the contract in his hand. Signed it, tossed it on the table, said he couldn't shake you. Well, you see, I chased him to the station. So I saw him talking to the Ajax man there. I have clever stroke. Show's genius. Curtis told me he was doing business with Ajax when you caught him at the station. Wait a minute. Curtis signed with you? No, no, don't get upset. The order is yours, of course. Anderson, I always knew to follow them till they signed. That's great. Oh, where'll I tell Mary? She should be well proud of you. Well, take a week or two off and then drop in and we'll put Torrance in your office and you use his. Good night now, you old world-beater. I don't get this, Oliver. From your conversation... Look, here's what happened. I scared this Curtis so he ran for Thompson's house just like he did before. He wanted to get out of town so bad he signed the order and kept on running. I can hardly believe it. Well, let's not take too much credit. Homer helped. I really think that Oscar's the one who scared him the most. Oh, yeah. I feel kind of guilty about him. Now, Oliver, you don't mean it. He wasn't such a bad fellow, Mom. No, he wasn't Junior. Poor guy. He was just bewildered. You know very well he was trading on being a relative. Oh, no, he wasn't. And you said his head slanted. Well, it wasn't bad from the left side. But that was before you knew he was your relative. Look, Mary, let's not get on relatives now. Uh-oh, here we go again, folks. The Anderson family is written by Howard Swart, directed by Herb Litten, and features Dick Lane as Oliver, Louise Arthur as Mary, Walter Tetley as Junior, and Herbert Rawlinson as Homer. Others in the cast were Paul Theodore as the boss, Doug Young as Cousin Oscar, and Ray Erlenborn as Mr. Curtis. Music by Gordon Kibbey and your announcer is Ken Peters. The Anderson family is a Hollywood broadcaster's production, transcribed from Hollywood.


On October 14th, a group of people marched down Beirut, as happens in many other parts of the world. Suddenly, shots were fired and by the end of the day, seven people had died. This incident has led to a huge increase in tensions in Lebanon, with many even fearing that the sectarian war and conflict of the decades past might resume again. Why were these people marching? What was the nature of the tension? Let's talk about this in this episode of Mapping Fault Lines. We are joined by Prabir Purqaista. Prabir saw this protest of course was conducted by supporters of Hezbollah and Amal. The two parties associated with the Shias, the protest was about the Beirut blast probe. And after the shooting, Hassan Asrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, gave a speech. Now in this speech, he of course was very defiant. He said that, you know, there would be justice for his supporters who were killed. He made statements specifically targeting Sameer Jaja, the leader of the group called Lebanese forces. So there's a lot of history to unpack around here. What has led to these tensions? What is the background? But let's maybe first start with the current situation in Lebanon, which is going through a massive crisis. So could you maybe take us through the main factors or dimensions behind this crisis? As you know, Lebanon has been split around confessional lines as it is called, which is basically each religious identities given a certain number of seats in parliament. So a kind of organized, if you will, state in which different religious identities get different numbers of parliamentary seats and share power in some form or the other. So you have the baronite Christian section. You have the Shia sections. You also have Sunni Arab sections. These are the three major groups which have been there. We know there has earlier been a really civil war virtually between these groups. There's the Cheryl Uneasy peace in which the jockey for powers in the parliament and for president. At the moment, we have Michel Aoun, who is the president of Lebanon. He's a Maronite Christian. But you also have other forces who have been trying to unseat a tacit alliance between Hezbollah and Michel Aoun and other sections. They have come together for trying to give a kind of stability to Lebanon, which is not pro-Israel or pro-United States, which is where the false lines also lie. So there is this uneasy peace seems to have been disturbed by two events. One is, of course, as we know the ammonium nitrate explosion which took place in Beirut port. Now this ammonium nitrate was stored there, very large amount of it for almost seven years. And this is a known hazard. Therefore, given the fact that the Lebanese state was in some sense in the state of decay, the fact that this large explosion took place is not so surprising as it otherwise might be. Why was it stored there for so long? Knowing that it is a huge hazard, destroyed parts of Beirut, killed a number of people. These are questions which is what the judge was probing. But unfortunately, there is also, again, a confessional element to this. Who do you blame? And it seems that the judge, like an earlier judge, was focusing more on Amal's representative in the ministries. And therefore, it appears that Amal and the Shia forces were being targeted. Amal and Hezbollah are in close alliance at the moment. And therefore, it was an indirect attack that could be constituted on Hezbollah itself. So the basic issue was that Amal and Hezbollah felt it was not an independent, impartial probe as it should be. They are much more under American pressure, Israeli pressure and also Syrian pressure, which is the one for the last two to three years, has been destroying the Lebanese state. Now, you know, Lebanon has been for a long time in a state of unstable equilibrium, as you have talked about, had civil wars earlier. But a part of this that everybody felt that we have to let Lebanon work in peace. And let us see how these forces with Lebanon can come and work out a peaceful alliance. Now, that has been disturbed for Israel with the belief that Hezbollah has become too powerful. It poses a certain threat to Israel. They tried to take Hezbollah out earlier occasions. Last one failed miserably. They could not proceed more than two to three kilometers or miles beyond the Israeli border. Given Hezbollah's increased military strength, it does appear that the United States and Israel believe the destruction of Lebanon may be a better alternative. A failed Lebanon might be a better alternative than to have Hezbollah operating within the structure of the Lebanese state. And therefore, the feeling that whether it's the Lebanese banks, whether the Lebanese financial institutions or the judicial institutions, they are actually operating in the behest of other powers. How far this is true? We don't know. But it is also true that Saudi Arabia, United States and of course Israel plays a huge role in Lebanese politics just as Hezbollah also supported by Syria today and Iran play a role in Lebanese politics. So I think this is really the background of not just Lebanese fractures but also the international forces which are in play in Lebanon at the moment. And I think if people don't realize that people don't come together, we might see a repeat of what we saw earlier. And that's the reason Hezbollah has pointed his finger at Samir Jojo who was very much a part of Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon.  So coming to that, in fact it's interesting because Hassan Nasrullah also pointed out that the Lebanese forces led by Samir Jojo according to him they worked with ISIS in Iraq while Hezbollah was the one protecting the Christians. So he was also trying to in some senses diffuse the clear sectarian element to it and also telling the Christian community that Hezbollah looks after your interests as well. But coming back to the point that you were mentioning about the past so to speak where the Lebanese forces for instance were backed by Israel, were backed by other regional powers as well. Could you maybe take us quickly through those time periods and time periods and how they continue to have an implication today? You know the Maronite Christians thought they are superior to the Arab Muslims, both Shias and Sunnis. And part of it was also they considered themselves some way remnants of the Phoenicians who were in this part of the world. They also were very close to the Spanish colonial powers. This is a long history where the what are called the phalangists and this is really political descendants of phalangists in Europe. Nazi forces owed their allegiance to an ideology which was very similar and the belief that they are superior to the rest. And therefore they could in southern Lebanon rest political power militarily and there were international battles, killings. It is not that they were the only ones who were doing the killings. Bashir Jamal of course was the leader of this whole phalangist movement in which of course also we had Georgia also as an important leader. There are the leaders, so they were not the only ones of course but the number of killings that took place were very large. Occupation of southern Lebanon by Israel started in 1985 and continued up to 2000, a 15 year period in which it was backed by southern Lebanese army which was of course a completely fascist formation working with Israeli forces but also what is now called the Lebanese forces but essentially the phalangist movement, phalangist party and that is led by Bashir Jamal as I said committed a huge number of atrocities. Again no issue that it was only one sided, it was not. But nevertheless it was a sectarian battle in which the phalangist and openly fascist force aligned with Israeli armed forces against the Lebanese nation and against its own population. This is the history of Samir Zhozho. Of course there was after the ceasefire, after there was a peace agreement which was brokered partly by the Syrians. They all agreed that all these atrocities would be forgotten. Samir Zhozho was not charged with these atrocities but with planning to kill certain politicians, certain figures in which which was not covered by this amnesty so to say and that's why he served 11 year in jail. But after he came out he also did say that he had repented there were statements he made expressing sorrow about all this internecine battles that had taken place, some kind of peace and reconciliation but those who criticise Zhozho also say that he continues in the phalangist for formation what is called the Lebanese forces, it's not the Lebanese armed forces. This is really an out-shoot of the phalangist parties, fascist group essentially and that therefore he has not changed his basic ideological position. Unlike some of the other Christian leaders who had done so. So therefore there's always been a question about what Samir Zhozho's positions are and in this particular case clearly he wants a downfall of the Michel Aoun presidency he wants the government which has seen Amal and Hezbollah come together to form a ministry this to be dislodged therefore the belief that this particular firing was trying to provoke again an internecine battle between the forces in Lebanon and therefore bringing back a kind of civil war which destroys the Lebanese state and here it is interesting Newland was there in Liberu that day it has been charged that there had been also firing some of the US embassy rooftops no evidence who has done the firing as yet but some indications that it might have been Lebanese forces people because this is an area which has memories and that memories of the bus killings where a number of killings people shears were killed and this led to actually the sectarian war. So given the significance of that this area and the fact that it takes place in an area where Zhozho holds a certain degree of political power the question of course is did he give the green signal or did this happen by forces that we still don't know about or is it like what is called the Maidan firings Asian provocators who want to destroy Lebanon actually firing from the rooftops so this is the really the question mark that remains today. Prebrenan finally a question you basically touched upon also in the first answer which is the regional significance of Lebanon so we know like you mentioned Hezbollah key player in the region an ally of Iran as well vital in saving Syria from and Iraq for that matter from IS forces but Lebanon is also used in a very strategic way by Israel in violations of international law so could you talk a bit about that as well? That's an interesting question you raised because Lebanon is getting increasingly drawn into what Israel perceives as a battle between Israel, US supported countries and of course Iran and allies of Iran so this has been the way it has framed itself and given that Lebanon was earlier an easy target but now that Hezbollah has a lot of rockets in its arsenal and it seems to be quite sophisticated in the way it can use it a direct attack on Lebanon is no longer feasible what has happened is that Syrian war gives it a pretext of trying to hit at Iran's what it considers assets in Syria but essentially to destabilize Syria itself and bombard Assad and his forces the idea is that if Syria can be kept boiling in a state of civil war that weakens a possible alliance against Israel which might encompass now Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and this all of these countries have passed to different phases of war they are now battle hardened like the forces that Israel faced earlier wars against the Arab countries so given this this is seen to be Israel a threat and therefore the need to keep Syria under attack and this is why what you talked about if you see therefore the map in which you can see the attacks that have been launched against Syria you will see they have been largely launched from Lebanese air force air spaces that is a very simple reason if Israel launches for an airspace then Syria gets reason to retaliate against Israel if we launch it from Lebanese airspace who has launched it of course everybody knows it is Israel but what does Syria then do and it also makes it much closer to Syria than if we launch it from Israel so for both these reasons you will see number of airstrikes have been launched from Lebanon to Syria now this this part of it is what of course is also destabilizing the region but Syria now armed with anti-aircraft batteries of different kinds is able to take out a lot of those missiles in fact in the last salvo that was fired from Lebanese airspace most of them seem to have been taken out by the whatever batteries now the Russians have given to the Syrians and most of these missiles could not hit so there is some equality being established there as well which way it will go is not clear but it is in Israel's interest to see that Syria is kept destabilized and that's what we see in the way they want to play Lebanon seems to be the short-term target is destroy Lebanon internally destroy its economy keep get back into our unstable equilibrium in which you have sectarian battles and in Syria keep the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad defensive with certain some these kind of airstrikes that seems to be the Israel policy and of course we know the United States fully backing these policies again the question mark can this kind of the attempts to keep people divided keep people fighting each other survive that is a long-term question I don't believe this this kind of policies destructive policies help anybody it can destroy certain countries but at the same time it does not bring back peace or security for Israel as well Thank you Prabir that's all we have time for today keep watching news click as well as mapping fault lines where we will be covering geopolitical issues from across the world


Hi. Well, come in and get wired for sound. Oh, OK. It's time to see if we can do this without missing it up, right? Tell me how you're doing. I'm OK, Larry. You ain't seen nothing yet. It has emerged as the slogan of your campaign. What are we going to see? What do you mean by that? Well, I think we're going to continue on the course that we charted from the beginning, which is one of trying to bring about an ongoing and growth without inflation. It'll provide the jobs that our people need and that will at the same time build greater revenues for government through that economic growth than without adding to the individual tax rates. And thus get at the deficit. And it's all of that, plus some of the overall reforms that we still want to get, the balanced budget amendment, the line item veto, some things of that kind. Are we going to see the pragmatic Reagan, or are we going to see the ideological Reagan in a second term? Well, the only thing I've ever been felt that I am pragmatic about is I recognize in the process my view, and maybe I'm straining at this, purely the ideologue is one who, if he can't get everything he asks for, he'll jump off the cliff with the flag flying. And no, I've always believed you try to get 100% of what you think would be beneficial. And if you have to settle for 80, all right. Settle for 80 and then come back sometime and keep trying to get the other 20. If there's been a substantive issue in this campaign, it's been taxes. What mandate do you think you have from the voters on taxes?  And what our dream is and what we would hope we could accomplish, but I have not interfered over Treasury for the study that's been going on, and I know how hard they've been working to try and come up with a goal of a simplification and a broadening of the base. Now when I say broadening of the base, I mean we estimate that about $100 billion is not being collected from people who legitimately owe that tax. And if we can simplify and at the same time broaden to where we get that, to the point that maybe even you could further lower than the individual rates for everybody if you've got more people that its tax has spread over. So this is what we're hoping for. Simplification has got to be very important because the tax process, when it's gotten to the place that even the government has to warn the tax payers that the agents, IRS agents out there in the various IRS offices, it cannot be taken for granted that they understand the tax. Who are the people that owe this $100 billion in taxes? Where is that? Well there's a, well some of it of course, and I don't, this would be, there's a whole different problem, some of it we know is the so-called underground or criminal. Economy? Element and economy. But there is an, as your taxes get more and more oppressive, you find more and more people seeking ways, and this comes down to bartering, and people who find out that they can exchange with someone else, and you know, somebody builds a porch, and the father builds a porch that doesn't charge, but his kid gets braces for his teeth. Sounds kind of good to me, actually. I want to make sure I understood you, Mr. President. I think you were saying, would I, please correct me if I'm wrong, do you feel like the tax simplification is an acceptable vehicle to you for helping to reduce the budget deficit by broadening the tax base? That doesn't do violence to your, no, no, that is acceptable, but the main thing that is going to get the deficit is the growth in the economy. Then the government's revenues go up without the tax rates going up. They go up through the greater prosperity, more people paying the taxes, for example, the very fact of these six million more people that have gone to work these last 21 months and these new jobs. Well, that's six million people that weren't paying taxes, that are going to be paying taxes, and maybe some of those six million people were actually a drain on the government that they might have been wards of the government being supported by government before they became employed. Doesn't the growth rate tapering off now? What kind of growth rate would you have to have to sustain the kind of increases in revenue that you would like? Well, that has been figured out for us. If we could have a consistent 4% growth rate, that would increase the revenues by $400 billion. And you think that's realistic? And if you had a rate of increase in government reduced to about 5% in government spending, reduced to about 5%, that could bring the present deficits by itself down to around $30 or $40 billion, and we already have the rate of increase in government spending down to around six, a little over 6% from the previous 17. Can we talk a little bit more about government spending, Mr. President? As all of us know, so much of the federal budget is tied up, locked up in entitlement programs. Aren't these programs, as a practical matter, going to have to be cut if you have really any hope of bringing the deficit completely under control? Well, I know that a number of things are called entitlements, but I know that the one that everyone points to is social security. And right now, just as they dishonestly used it in the 1982 campaign with pure demagoguery, and they were lying in their teeth with what they said about the program, now they've tried to make it in this one. You've heard the charges that I've got some secret plan. Well, good Lord, we just had a bipartisan commission that rescued Social Security from the bankruptcy that we said it was facing, and which they denied until the 82 election was over. Take that program, that doesn't have to do with the deficit at all. Social Security is totally supported by a payroll tax. And if you did do something to try and reduce the expenditure of Social Security, that money would just revert to the Social Security Trust Fund, or if they chose to reduce the payroll tax. So in other words, you can't tie Social Security into the deficit. It's totally funded by an earmarked tax. But other than Social Security, Mr. President, are there any other entitlement programs that are off limits to you or into your budget cutter? The thing that you have to look at, and if you can do it without the demagogues jumping all over you, is to look not at whether someone should be denied what they need and what they're entitled to, but what about the administrative overhead? What about the laxness in many of these that finds people? Well, for example, in all of the studies of Social Security, to have found how many people were collecting Social Security and they're in prison. Well, now, the taxpayers are taken care of, will hold their needs, everyone that you can think of, food, shelter, medical expenses, and so forth. And you said, wait a minute. Now, I'm talking about people like Son of Sam. The killer was in prison for life. Well, a psychiatrist had ruled before he was ever found to be a criminal that he was unable psychologically to hold a job. So he was collecting Social Security disability after he killed, what, 35 people? And I think that some things like that, when we found, as we did, we found in one investigation, without going nationwide, how far to go, found almost 10,000 people who had been dead an average of seven years and were collecting straight Social Security. Well, now there's nothing wrong with cleaning up things of that kind. Yeah, I still think if you clean up those things, that that only is just a drop in the bucket. Well, it may be, but there are legitimate needs that the program or that the government must meet. And as we've always talked about, the safety net, we have no desire to do away with that. And I have to say this, that our opponents in this campaign, again, have been absolutely dishonest in charges that we have vastly reduced lunches for children in schools and we're spending more money on things of that kind than has ever been spent by any administration in history. And yet, we've brought the increase in spending from 17% down to 6%. But yet you've already suggested that Medicare is something that you're going to have to take a look at in a second term because that's an entitlement program that's somewhat out of control. It isn't facing the same crisis Social Security was within a second four-year term. It's several years down the road, but looking and projecting the demographics and all, you can say, yes, something has to be done. And we have been looking at and making proposals and have instituted some of these already that are aimed more at curbing the cost than in inflicting any restriction on the person who needs it. And this has to be looked at, but this is simply a fiscal situation that must be corrected to make the program sound.  Well, Tip O'Neill, when he was beating up on me, and I first came to Washington, and I thought we'd established a pretty good relationship. And Tip O'Neill said to me when I called him one day and said, I thought we had a good relationship and this charge that you've made. And he said, well, buddy, that's just politics. After six o'clock, we're friends. So I try not to say too many harsh things before six o'clock. Do you really think you can do the sorts of things you want to do next year, Mr. President, without some major bipartisan help from the Democrats? Well, we have to have bipartisan help. And we had it, or we wouldn't have the program we have now. Now, we didn't get all we wanted. And I've often wondered right now what this recovery, booming the way it is, what have we gotten all that we asked for? How much further along would we be? If you remember the tax cuts, 30% we asked, 10% a year for three years. And the first 10% was to be retroactive to January 1st of 1981, where what we got was 5% that wasn't effective until October, which meant it was a tax cut of one and a quarter percent for the 1981 year. And the same thing was true of many of the reductions in expenditures. But let me if I could just add one other figure that's kind of significant as an example of what is out there in overhead. We took, I think it was 52, categorical grant programs and put them into 10 block grants. Well, having been a governor, I know of the waste and extravagance in getting a federal program for your state and they tell you right down to the last detail how every penny must be spent. And you say, wait a minute, this doesn't fit our particular situation. Well, we reduced the number of pages of regulations by switching to block grant from 885 pages of regulations down to 30. We eliminated or put down, came down at our level from 3,000 employees administering this to 600. Now, how many other areas are there that way? If we could just switch gears here a minute. Let's say arms control, arms control is your number one priority. And yet some of your closest aides say that the problem with getting an agreement with the Soviets lies more with your own warring defense establishment than it is with the Soviets. But you can't get your secretary of defense say to agree with your secretary of state on a common approach. How are you gonna resolve that? I have to tell you, that's not true. I've read that and it's very disturbing. Sure we, that's why we have a debt cabinet system of government. We all get around there and I hear all sides and sometimes it's a legitimate objection to some department that says, wait a minute, there's a flaw where we're concerned this or that. But no, we're all united on the whole basic thing about arms reductions and the need for them. There hasn't been anything of that kind. Our problem is the Soviet Union, they walked away and we're going to do our best to get them back to the table. With all due respect, Mr. President, some of your aides politely dispute that and they say that you're sufficiently concerned that you have been considering naming arms controls czar of some sort to help resolve these sorts of intramural disputes that may get in the way. That has come out of just general discussions that we've had without ever arriving at any decision cause we don't even know where the Russians would go along. General discussion about should we try to find, just as we did in the Middle East, should we try to find someone and set them up and would the Russians do the same thing and would they, would that be a way of on this kind of informal basis of finding areas where then we could, the negotiators could get together? Whether on arms or anything, any other contact with them? Well is that an idea that you're comfortable with that the Soviets think that it has some merit? Yes, and I think we all feel, but we want to know. Is this going to work or would we be setting someone up that he'd just be talking and nothing would happen? The Soviets would have to name a person on an equal level. You wouldn't be satisfied if this American dealt with an existing Soviet official? No, whether they, whatever they want to do and it would be reciprocal so that it would carry some weight with both of us on both sides. But it's a little bit like the rumors about the walk in the woods, so forth. Well, we didn't walk away from the walk in the woods. The Soviets disavowed it and said that their man was not entitled to talk. Mr. President, you said that the problem here was the Soviets, not intramural problems. Do you think the Russians have resolved their own internal leadership problems to the point where meaningful progress is possible next year? This, I don't know. And what example do I go by? All of this thing about my opponent is talking about not having meetings or summits and so forth. You know that in 48 years of eight presidents, they only had to deal with three secretary generals over that 48-year period and eight of our presidents. And I've had three secretary generals in my first three years, and two of those were mortally ill and literally out of communication. In fact, you didn't know one of them whether he was dead or alive for several months. What do you think the odds are for a Soviet summit next year? That's a question. I think much better than they were in this first term. And, but again, you know, you keep hearing conflicting rumors regarding the health of an individual and speculation as to whether he really can speak alone or whether it's kind of a collective now. But no, we're willing. And one of the things that I proposed in my speech to the UN, and that is a kind of an umbrella type get together. Let's, I have a summit where we can find out how do we get down to negotiating specific things like arms reductions? What are the suspicions on either in both sides that we need to erase? Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. And congratulations. Well, I think they're in order. I'm not getting knowledge yet. I'm going to wait. I want it to be formal. Yeah, but that's not what you're being told, Mr. President. You're being told it looks awfully good, though. Yes, but it's also the long time of the polls closed. Well, I don't know, these Mondale people can still be out there. I prefer being super quick. Oh, okay. You know, as a sports announcer, I broadcast it, I broadcast a couple of games more than a couple where pitchers pitch to no hitter. They please. Well, there's a dugout, there's a superstition that you never mention that he's pitching a no hitter because that'll jinx it. Well, I even carried it to the press box. I felt if I say this on the areas pitching a no hitter, I may jinx it. So I never opened my mouth until finally with that blast out said, hey, it's a no hitter. Well, congratulations anyway. Thanks again, Mr. President. See you later. Thank you. It's nice to see you. Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We'll do this. That doesn't, we've done it. That'd be it. Yes, sir. As I mentioned, you'll be showing up here in just a few minutes with some draft remarks. I'll just give them to you in a minute. Okay. All right. All right. I think I wouldn't want to stand up and do that. Yeah. I agree. And that's it. Oh, but you must look at it. Isn't it? Yes. Yay. This is one thing you don't have to do. This is one thing you don't have to do. I can't go. I can't go. I'm about to go. All right. We do need a man. Washington. The audience. Right. He's going to be talking about groups. Yeah, yeah. That's right. I think you're going to be talking to Paul. I'm going to have members out there on that project. Well, I just bring them in. All right. Well, thank you all, гоji You're welcome.