Let us now start discussing one of the most popular areas of mechanism design which is called the mechanism design with transfers. This is a domain restriction as we have discussed in the previous two cases, but this specific domain restriction gives us the opportunity to use something called a transferable utility. So, whenever we call transfers we mean that the utility can be transferred. The way this transfers, the utility can be transferred is what is known as money. And this is the first time we are going to use something like a money which is used to transfer utilities from one player to another. So, let us look at what this social choice function is and how we can design different components of that social choice function. So, the first thing is that the social choice function maps this type profile, the Cartesian product of all these typesets into what is known as script x. So, this is what we are going to call the space of all outcomes. Now, we have deliberately used this uppercase f to denote the social choice functions because we will be using the lowercase f for a different purpose. So, what is this space of all outcomes in this case? The outcome x has two components. The first one is something that we are going to call the allocation and we will denote it by lowercase a generally and the payment vector. So, let us say we are going to define that with pi and this gives a payment for each of these players. And we will shortly discuss examples which will give you an idea of what these payments mean. This is just a real number. So, you can just imagine that each of these agents are given a certain amount of real numbers to pay and that is exactly what these transfers are. This is exactly the meaning of money in this context. So, what are the examples of allocations? So, the allocation could be something like a public decision. So, let us say the municipal corporation is trying to decide whether to build a bridge, a park or a museum. So, in that case, this set capital A. So, we are going to denote the set of all possible allocations in a specific setup, a mechanism design setup with this with the notation capital A. So, all this lowercase a lives in that and this in this example could be park bridge and so on. Similarly, the allocation could be that of a divisible group. So, for instance, spectrum, this is a divisible group and this can be shared among different players. So, if in that case, we define this A as a vector of A1 to An where each of these AIs are nothing but some real number between this interval 0 and 1 and together they make equal to 1. So, that means the spectrum, the entire spectrum is of unit size and each of these agents are getting some fraction of that spectrum that is what an allocation in this case means. Or you can also think about a single indivisible object allocation. So far we have discussed only divisible allocations, the previous example, but let us say it is indivisible. So, either you will have to give the whole object to someone or you cannot give that object at all to an agent. So, in that case, the vector remains the same, the only difference becomes is that this AIs can take integral value, see the 0 or 1. And as usual, the sum of this AIs should be less than or equal to 1. So, which also keeps the opportunity that this item might not be allocated at all. And the fourth example is that you can partition multiple indivisible objects. Instead of a single indivisible object, there could be multiple indivisible objects. So, let us say yes, it is the set of all such objects. So, maybe a phone, a mobile phone, a laptop and so on. All these things are all indivisible objects. Now, you are planning to partition this indivisible objects among n players. So, what will be the set of all alternatives in that case? This will be something like a partition. So, what is a partition? So, let us look at the sets A1 to Am. So, these are the sets, the subset of these indivisible objects that goes to the corresponding player. So, Ai is the subset of these objects that goes to player Ai. Each of these sets are disjoint. So, none of them have any common item among that, among them. That is because the either agent Ai, if agent Ai gets it, then agent J won't be able to get that. So, that is the collection of all such partitions of the whole set is going to constitute the set of all possible allocations in this context. So, you can already see that in different examples or different context, there are different kinds of allocation sets and also the possible allocations. Now, we are going to define the type of an agent Ai with this lowercase theta Ai which belongs to capital theta Ai. So, this is a little more abstract at the current setup, but we are going to discuss what is the meaning of this private information of this type of an agent. So, we are going to assume that this type is a private information and that is something that will bring us to this idea of truthfulness or incentive compatibility that we have discussed. Now, how are we going to define the benefit of an agent? So, here we are trying to design the incentives for this agent. We will have to model that benefit component that if an agent has a specific type and a specific allocation decision has been taken, then how much satisfaction or happiness that this agent gets. And that is captured using something called the valuation function. So, what is this function? So, if you pick a specific alternative, a specific allocation that we have discussed in the previous examples and that agent has a specific type. So, consider Vi takes as an input, the allocation A and the theta Ai of that player, then this particular number is a real number which we are going to call the valuation of that agent for this particular allocation and the type theta Ai. And that is denoting that how much satisfaction or benefit that this agent is getting when this particular allocation is chosen and its type is theta Ai. So, in this case, as we have discussed long before in the beginning of mechanism design that theta Ai, so this valuation is only dependent on the type of that agent alone and not on the types of other agents. And this is exactly what is known as the independent private values and we will be discussing only independent private values in this course. So, let us look at an example. So, to give you a kind of a feeling of what these types mean. So, maybe an agent Ai can be a environment saver. So, let us say it cares about the environment a lot. So, that particular information is its private information and that is captured by this theta Ai environment. So, that is the type of this player. And if the alternatives, the allocations can be either to build a bridge or build a park, then possibly its valuation for bridge is less than the valuation when the park is chosen because park is more environment friendly. So, therefore, that is a better choice for this particular player when its type is theta Ai environment. So, environment saver. But if its type changes to let us say business friendly, so or transportation friendly. So, in that case, depending on its type, maybe now building a bridge is better than building a park. So, that is how we are going to look at it, that is one way of capturing it. Depending on the context, how we are addressing a specific or modeling a mechanism design problem into this mechanism design with transfer setup, the type will change and we will define that accordingly. So, let us now come to the payment part. So, what is payment now? So, we have defined this Pi i's which is the payment for player, payment charge to player i that lives in the real, lives on the real line and the payment vector is given by this Pi 1 to Pi n, the vector of Pi 1 to Pi n. Now, so with this payment as well as the allocation and its player's type, we can define the complete utility of this player i. So, the utility of this player i when its type is theta i and has an outcome. So, remember that this allocation and the payment together constitutes the total outcome. So, e comma Pi is something that we are going to call. So, this is same as x that we have defined in the beginning. So, x belongs to that script x. So, our social choice function was outputting this outcome and that is essentially the allocation and the payment decision. So, utility of player i when this particular outcome is chosen and its type is theta i, it is given by the corresponding two functions. So, we have already defined this valuation function which is just dependent on the first component of that outcome, only the allocation component and the second part is just the payment itself. This is the second component of that decision of that outcome. And you can already begin to see that this function, this utility function has a form which we are going to call quasi-linear. So, quasi-linear meaning that it could be, so it could potentially be non-linear in the allocation component. The outcome has two components allocation and payment, it could be possibly non-linear in the allocation component, but it is linear in the payment component and that is why the name quasi-linear comes in. So, notice that even in mechanisms with money, the utility is not necessarily have to be quasi-linear, but quasi-linear is something which is very natural. You can think of it as if you are getting a specific object, let us say you are buying a certain painting or an object, electronic equipment and you have a certain valuation for it. And the payment that you are making that is pi i and the difference is your net utility. And this particular quasi-linear modeling of the utility fits in a lot of examples and that is why this quasi-linear model is quite popular. Now, let us think about, so we are going to talk about mechanism design with transfers and the transfers has this and the utilities are of quasi-linear form. Now, why is this quasi-linear payoff a domain restriction? So, we have already spoken that pi, so in the case of single peak preferences or even in the uniform rule that is task allocation domain, we have talked about why that essentially restricts the domain. Now, we will also have to argue why this is a domain restriction. So, for that let us consider two alternatives. So, let us say a pi and a pi prime and all that changes, so you see that the allocation component does not change in these two alternatives. So, this is let us say x1, first outcome and x2. In both these outcomes, the allocation component remains the same, all that changes is the payment component and for focus on player i and consider that this pi i prime is strictly less than pi i. So, then what you can see automatically is that no matter what kind of utility you choose, so let us say we are choosing a specific utility, the quasi-linear utility where the valuation function, you can choose an arbitrary valuation function, but as soon as you put the corresponding outcome, so utility of at the outcome x1, which is a, pi i is going to be this one according to the quasi-linear payoff. And that in the x2, the outcome x2 will be given by this and we can already see that because this allocation is the same in both these outcomes, the first component of this first component of this utility function remains the same for both these cases. And because pi i prime is strictly less than pi i, so then this inequality will always go. So, player i will always prefer this x2, so let us say, so this was x2, so player i will always prefer x2 over x1. And there is no way, no instance or no choice of valuations where x1 will be more preferred than x2, no matter which ever kind of preference, whichever kind of valuation function that you can choose. So, this is a domain restriction because what we have assumed that in the unrestricted domain that if you give me any two alternatives, I can always come up with a preference ordering where both this x1 above x2 and x2 above x1 is feasible and that is not the case in this domain. No matter whatever way you design the utilities, x1 will always be worse than x2 for player i. And that is certainly a domain restriction. Even though this domain restriction is pretty simple and the point is very subtle, this actually opens up an opportunity for a lot of social choice functions to satisfy interesting properties. And that is what we are going to do in the next few lectures, in fact, till the end of this course.


Since I was fifteen years of age, I've been wanting to go to World Cup football and since then I've always been kind of kept in touch with the World Cup events, the soccer World Cup or the football World Cup events. The last time when it was in Brazil, I even had the tickets but did not make it because I think the finals or semi-finals was on the same day as Guru Purnima and I could not make it. This time it looks like everything arranged itself and the necessary arrangements were made. Our friends in Russia are taking care of everything for tickets and everything else. And here I am, yesterday I watched the first semi-final. It's over forty-five years I've been thinking of making this and here I am, so I took my time. And the game between France and Belgium, I think these two were probably the strongest teams which have made to the semi-finals and strategically very different from each other and of course French managed that single goal which sends them to the final. And today we're traveling from St. Petersburg back to Moscow for the second game between England and Croatia. Probably nobody expected England and Croatia to get to the semi-finals but here they are. This is Russian Raleigh. So all those big reputation teams like Brazil, Argentina, Germany are all gone. Spain is gone. So this is something that everybody has to understand. You don't win anything on your reputation. Repetitions don't win. Repetitions are past records or past history to win a game. To make anything happen right now, it is how incisively we act right now and definitely the French have shown a certain speed and skill and strategy which others have not been able to match. Great players like Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo and Neymar Junior, Salah all have fallen by the wayside. I think these are all club players who have tremendous support in the teams for which they play for. And also in the club games, it is a very professional approach and the national teams are not as professional for more emotional and also could be more injury prone when you play with these kind of players. So that also I think is holding back the stars from really giving themselves the fear of injury because their legs are worth in hundreds of millions of dollars. So on the whole, the atmosphere, the World Cup semi-finals is electric to say the least.  And the more effervescent or violent fans also kept in check so that everybody can enjoy the games. I think it's a phenomenal success for Russia to be able to pull off these games and this level of organization and efficiency that they're showing is truly fantastic. Today I'm off to Moscow to watch England and Croatia fight it out for the finals. How shall I say this? The reason why the entire world sits up and watches World Cup football is the intensity of involvement that people are playing a game just kicking a ball around. But with such skill and such involvement like it's the last thing they're going to do in their life, that's the level of involvement and now it makes half the world sit up and watch this. I think India, if we focus on this, when a country like Iceland can come to World Cup, I think India has to make it. If not the next one in Qatar, we should make it for the 2026 event in United States and they're also expanding the number of teams from 32 to 48. So there is a good chance for India to make it. I request the government and the authorities, the sports authority rather than trying to develop talent across the country with 1.3 billion people, even focusing on one city where our populations are well over a few millions. Very easily picking up boys at the right age. I think with a good coach and exposure, we could build a team which will go to the World Cup winning a World Cup may be still far away, but at least we can enter the 48 nation group to play at least the league matches in World Cup. I think it is very much doable with over a billion people and being such a youthful nation. We have to be at the next 2026 World Cup. I'm sure that India will make it to that tournament and now it's time to leave for Moscow and an hour and a half flight and then the match in the evening. It's been a very long time that I had four or five days like this of doing something of this sort. In between there are a few meetings and interviews of course, but that's okay. Largely this time these four days are dedicated to the games. So wonderful to be here in Russia. The weather is great and the atmosphere is great and tremendous hospitality in the country here. So congratulations and thank you for the Russian government and the people, the generosity and the liveliness with which they are welcoming the guests and doing what they're doing here. This has been great.


Monitoring air quality. Presented by Science at NASA. Air quality is a global issue. Currents of air weft gaseous and particulate pollutants from region to region, country to country, and even continent to continent. Emissions from human activities, sunlight, weather, pollution from far away, wildfires and windblown dust can all affect air quality. And it can change from day to day or even hour to hour. Addressing this global issue requires a global effort, and that effort is in the works. The United States, South Korea and the European Union will each launch geostationary satellite missions from 2018 to 2022 that will become part of a global air quality monitoring system including other satellites, ground networks, air quality models, and airborne sampling. Geostationary satellites stay in place over a single location on the Earth, allowing instruments on board to collect data continuously throughout the day to monitor the ever-changing state of the air over that part of the globe. In May 2016, NASA and the Korean National Institute for Environmental Research began a precursor mission to prepare for this unprecedented global air quality monitoring system. The Korea United States Air Quality Study, or CORUS-AQ, is assessing air quality across South Korea using observations from aircraft, ground sites, ships and satellites. CORUS-AQ is one of several field experiments going on this year that will be monitoring the health of our planet. James Crawford of NASA's Langley Research Center says CORUS-AQ is helping scientists understand the factors that affect air quality, how surface emissions, atmospheric transport and chemical transformations interact, and how they're changing over time. CORUS-AQ prepares us to take advantage of the upcoming global system by exercising all of the observational perspectives, integrating the data, and using them to test our models of air quality. The Korean Peninsula is an excellent locale for studying air quality. The city of Seoul is one of the globe's five most populated metropolitan areas, and local emissions from its vibrant transportation and industry present challenges to air quality similar to those faced by megacities worldwide. Korea's position, downwind of China, also highlights the issue of transported versus local pollution. In addition to pollution from Chinese megacities, plumes of dust from the Gobi Desert can make their way to the Korean Peninsula. This complexity of accounting for local pollution and pollution imported from elsewhere demonstrates the difficulty in devising strategies to improve air quality. Three aircraft are involved in these studies. NASA's DC-8 Flying Laboratory, carrying NASA and South Korean instruments, is directly measuring the composition of the atmosphere over the Korean Peninsula at altitudes approximately 1,000 and 25,000 feet above the ground. A NASA King Air is flying higher, with remote sensing instruments that simulate satellite observations. South Korea is flying its own King Air, which carries South Korean and NASA sensors to directly measure the atmosphere in areas the larger, less nimble DC-8 can't access. In addition, Korean scientists are collecting data from their ground-based air quality monitoring network consisting of more than 300 stations. They are also hosting NASA instruments at some of the ground sites. Together, the South Korean and U.S. researchers are planning and coordinating the flights. They are jointly providing air quality forecasting from an array of model simulations. The course AQ data will provide an important test of these models and their ability to accurately forecast air quality conditions. Improving the models is extremely important, explains Crawford. Confidence in our ability to simulate current air quality allows us to take the next step and predict how air quality would respond to future emission scenarios. Testing how various policies to regulate polluting emissions would improve air quality enables responsible decision-making. People around the world will benefit from this team effort. Atmospheric scientists, using data from course AQ and the future constellations of geostationary air quality satellites will work together to help make those benefits a reality. For everyone who breathes the air, more fresh science news may be found at science.nasa.gov.


Raphael Rowe. Yeah, the guy who does the Netflix documentaries. See, I've got to apologize to this guy, you know. How have you? Yeah, because I fucking, me and my pal served him in Maiston. We attacked him in Maiston because we believed he was guilty of his charges.  What did you get charged with? Oh, I was all sorts of madness. It was, it was murders and all sorts of crazy stuff. But he got acquitted of it. So we can't talk about what he got acquitted from because we reacted because we thought he was guilty and he wasn't guilty, do you know what I mean? And I've watched a couple of things that he's done on the telly now. Seems like he's going. And what I'm saying, he weren't that, he ain't that guy. Like, he ain't me. He ain't another version of me. Whereas when he was away, I don't know why, but I just believed he put his accent on because he's always spoke like pretty calm. Like he's always been a calm guy like the way he presented his shows and stuff. He's like that guy. But I always thought he was an actor. He's a scheming little sky being cunning.  I was like, it's mad. I know that Giza. Cause he's done 12 years for a mother, he doesn't do it. And you know what? He got some ag in there, you know, because I was, I was, I was wild in 94, 95. I like wild, right? And he wasn't received well in Maston. I was amazed with him. And he wasn't received well.  Or I would imagine every time he saw us coming or saw us on the exercise, I'd be thinking, fuck, here we go again. Do you know what I mean? And he hadn't done nothing. So I'd like to apologize to him. And if he contacts me, Marvin at themarvinherbert.com, email me if you can.


Welcome back to the eighth edition of the RCA training tip show where every Wednesday Aussie time I'm going to be your YouTube road cycling coach and host of the show, Cam Nichols. This video today is actually part two of a video I published in October last year called the number one mistake cyclists make in criterium racing. So joining me again in this video today is a man that rode professionally overseas for a number of years and a man that became one of the most highly regarded criterium racers in Australia in recent years, Tommy Nancurvis. While the title of this video is a little extreme and bold, I am actually quoting Tommy Nancurvis himself, who has a very strong opinion on this topic. And I think it's fantastic to have someone at his level provide a strong point of view on something that I was personally confused about when I first got into criterium racing many years ago. You see, Tommy has a proper background in cycling. There's a family history there. He started off on the track as a junior and he's been racing overseas professionally and locally in the criterium scene for many, many years. Myself, I started criterium racing in my late 20s after a stint at triathlons. And when I first started crit racing, I knew absolutely nothing. However, I made my way to B grade, which is the equivalent of category two for all my US friends rather quickly. And that was the first time I saw guys wearing the same kit and working for each other. And that was the first time I witnessed what we're going to be talking about today. You see, I wish I'd seen a video like this or spoken to a man like Tommy before I started criterium racing. So I would know whether what you're going to see today was right or wrong. I actually remember in B grade getting into some verbal altercations with some guys on this topic, because to me, it just seemed unfair. However, I didn't know whether I was right or I was wrong. Turns out I was right. Well, you don't get fined or disqualified. And obviously it's hard to prove. Most commissaires absolutely hate it as its negative racing. So before we hear Tommy talk about this topic while watching a Glenvale A grade criterium in Melbourne, Australia, I just wanted to let people know that Tommy and his business partner, Jeremy Hunt, who's an ex-sky rider, have just launched an online training system or platform called Form Finder, which essentially enables road cyclists to get premium one on one coaching for a fraction of the price it would normally cost. Form Finder are also offering the first 30 days for free. So I'll provide a link below. And I'll also provide another link to my free e-book for road cyclists out there looking to take their performance to the next level. So let's get into the video. So can you see him up the road here? Yeah, if that's your group. Yeah, pretty big bunch. What is it, six or seven of them? Yeah, one guy just getting dropped. See, so that's kind of annoying there because you've gone around the corner. There's clearly enough room for both of you to cross over and these two have got a gap. So for whatever reason, someone's let the wheel go.  Yeah, why is that? Oh, you can't get in the way and slow people down. You can sit at the back if you don't want to contribute to a chase. Yeah, sit in the last five wheels. Yeah, OK. Otherwise, it's on you to maintain the momentum of the bunch as we talked about before. Yeah. You just can't. It's just, you know, if Team Sky riding the front with Garant Thomas in the yellow jersey sitting in seventh wheel, do you see anyone from the rival teams come up and ride into fourth wheel and then lose the wheel on a corner and make the last guy's chase? It's just it's just doesn't happen. It's the height of, you know, doping is more ethical than doing that, if you ask me.   Yeah, and that's a fair call.  If someone from my team did it, I'd go have a go at them. Yeah, right. I just hate it. It's just the it's just the worst bad sportsmanship. Yeah, it's so bad. Yeah. So for those people that do have a made up the road or a teammate, like they just go and sit in the back third if they're not going to do it. Exactly. Back third. Yeah. And if like that situation with you before where you were stuck, caught out, yeah, contribute to that kind of closing a gap. Yeah, no worries. That's good. But you still see that a fair bit in crits in the local scene, even in A grade, you know, people jumping on the front and purposely.  It was funny because a couple of years ago at Sandown, these bunch of flogs rocked up and they were doing that. They had one guy in the break of like 11 or 10 after like two laps. And they all went to the front and they started blocking.  And they kept they kept doing it.  And I'm like, whatever, dude, like. You just don't. Yeah. And then then the next lap, his mate get dropped out of the break. So then they've got no one in the break. And then and I'm like, OK, now seeing as you contributed to making that gap bigger than it was, it's time for your team to get on the front and close the break. You know, swearing at me and all this, I'm like, if you don't know how racing goes, don't try and like think I'm proven to understanding races and how racing goes. Like if I usually I'm saying something constructively and if guys want to mark up at me or, you know, just return fire. But if you've got no idea what you're talking about, don't try and tell someone who's experienced how things work.  Or I don't go tell people who are good at other sport. You know, I love playing golf. I don't tell anyone how to do anything in golf. I just ask lots of questions. Yeah. You know, you just got to. So there's a bit of a culture of it, though, isn't there? Yeah, there is. I don't know how when I remember when I first started doing crits, the first year I started like being able to win them and stuff. Yeah. And there was just one team and they used to come down and block.  Like it happens on the odd, did a track races a few years ago and they were doing it on the track as well. I'm like, all right, so it's always sort of been around. Well, yeah, but no, it hasn't always been around because when I started, when everyone used to use 32 spoke wheels, the average speeds were about the same as they are now. Yeah, right. So everyone used to used to go from first wheel, you do your turn and you come back in and about 40th wheel or 50th wheel. Yeah, there might be, you know, five or 10 guys who had who were just, you know, going to count how many minutes they could last in A grade. But then you just, you know, after used to just count how many turns you could do, and that usually decided how long you'd been in the race. So you did three turns and you were in there 15 minutes. Yeah, right. You know, next week, you're going to try and do five turns. And then it means you get like 20 something minutes, you know. And now, like, look at all this equipment, look at all these bikes. Like, everyone is on a bike capable of riding the Tour de France. They've got the best equipment that's getting around. Except Aimo, he's got an LA. Yeah, I'm on a lay as well, but aluminium. And but the speeds, they haven't really gone up that much. You know, I never, I wasn't old enough to have done like the Carnegie handicaps and stuff, but Tiggs and Dino and them, they used to ride around in scratch and they'd get, you know, average 48, 49, 50 Ks an hour for 100 K handicap. Yeah, right. Interesting. There's no way known that the scratch bunch should be able to do that anymore. For starters, they wouldn't be as big a field. But people just don't think let's go as hard as we can until we can't go any further.  But not only does it slow the whole field down and ruin things for everyone else in the race, but the people who are doing the blocking are losing form and condition as well.  But instead of your effort being at 50 Ks an hour, your attempt to slow the field down, you're probably doing the same heart rate, but you're doing it 46 K now. It just makes you sluggish. Yeah. So you're not doing yourself any favours. Yeah. From a personal point. And as well, you just and a sportsmanship. Well, yeah, yeah, I don't think there's a number of factors, but it's good that you raise that point. I think a lot of people that come into criteria in racing and I certainly did when I first started before I got told that it's OK because I see other people do it and they think, oh, I need to get in a team so I can act like that so I can block my mate and let him go up the road. So they just do it. Yeah, what fun is that? Oh, look what I did today. I slowed field down. Yeah. Oh, congratulations on being in A grade. Yeah. And then a bright future and the next stop tour to France. And essentially, they're being educated on what they're saying, right? They're saying something exactly. They're saying some guys in some good looking kits up the front with teams and they think, oh, that's the way you do it. As opposed to really sitting down and speaking with somebody like yourself who's been doing it for a long time and understanding that it's not OK.


What's happening guys? It's Shane here. I Wanted to try shorts out And I also had a big announcement, so I figured I would just do both at once Basically, there's gonna be two really big changes to the channel It's gonna be really hard for me to announce this. I've been thinking about it for a really long time but You know, everybody knows Kind of what the channel is about I talk about College degrees careers, you know as somebody who came from a poor background. Most of you guys know that I Kind of give practical advice on you know college degrees and careers that you should get I talk about the financial side of things as well something that almost nobody ever talks about but over the last few months I read a lot of comments from the comments section of some of my videos and realized that I was just completely wrong about college degrees and careers and I've done a lot of soul-searching and thinking about you know, what I want to do with my life and I've realized that I'm actually going to go back to school and I'm gonna get a PhD and specifically in the past I've kind of poked fun at certain majors like video game studies and gender studies among many others as well general studies etc and After doing some soul-searching and reading some of the comments. I've realized that I Was just completely wrong and I'm gonna go and probably take about 10 years To get my gender studies PhD and I'm also going to try to double major and get video game studies as well So that's the first major life update and as you can imagine I'm gonna have to delete all the videos on this channel And the channel is gonna take a completely new direction and that is the second major update Which is I'm actually gonna be switching the channel to an NFT channel, right? So NFTs revolutionary technology On the channel before I've talked about many different things, you know, I'm pretty conservative investor I usually I just recommend, you know index funds for most people If you're really good, maybe you can you know try to pick some individual stocks or get into cryptocurrency But for most people index funds are great. It's super easy But I've realized that that also was a terrible suggestion after looking into NFTs Realizing how much money I could make and and you as well could make on them I've decided to completely switch the channel's direction and make it all about NFTs and specifically I'm gonna be making about NFTs that have to do with video game studies and gender studies as a way for me to Apologize and give back to the community and and right all the wrongs that I've done by poking fun at those degrees so Thanks for all your support. I really appreciate it. I really hope you understand as well and You can also check out my first ever NFT collection. I'm gonna leave it linked. It'll be the only Link down in the description below and I'll also put it in the pen to comment I really appreciate you guys. It's been a really hard life decision for me I've decided, you know, I haven't been happy in life and I'm just gonna follow my my life passion. So Please respect that. Thank you so much guys and I'll see you next time


they need for example investment in their IT or the digital well there might be scoop to do that more effectively and certainly the Scottish Government's been working on on our own shared services even within the Scottish Government you know making sure that you have one system for for all for all parts of the Scottish Government so I think there's a lot of scope but we will need to do it carefully and obviously we'll we'll report the initial conclusions in the upcoming budget okay thank you very much okay thank you very much Douglas to be followed by Daniel thank you hi cabinet secretary um first question I had was around local government finance and it probably comes as no surprise um so it seems to be a real term cut of like seven percent over the next four years so is that not really passing the buck on to the local government to really give huge increases to to council tax going forward no it's not but as I've said already across the public sector I think it's a very difficult outlook and from a local government perspective we obviously need to do this hand in hand with the work on the on the fiscal framework and also recognising that this is not a budget so I would well imagine that in future budgets they will see for example a significant uplift through the education and social security lines as a bare minimum but you also spoke about things like digitisation and reducing the state do you not accept that many local authorities have already been doing that over the last four years so for that to be given as a way that they can save money is actually quite insulting to those bodies because they've been doing that already yeah and I'm not sure unless you're quoting something I've said earlier um that I'm advising that or advocating that what we are saying from a local government perspective is here's the spending parameters over the next few years and that allows you to plan but it won't replace annual budgets so it gives them the as I said the parameters but it doesn't give all the details and I think you know future budgets will need to update on those details incidentally I think there's a lot that we can learn from local government too the way that local government works together the way that COSLA facilitates a lot of that sharing of best practice so I think you're right in saying that there's much for us to learn but certainly local government is to all extents and purposes fairly autonomous we spend the scent we set the spending parameters but ultimately it's for them to determine how they spend that money but you're also given targets about public sector headcount for example you know reducing by 30 000 we think over the next few years so that's going to feed back to local government as well isn't it well they have choices to make on within the spending parameters that they have so I certainly don't dictate to local government as to how they use their funding that's for local government to determine and all I can do through the resource spending review is set out the spending parameters it's for them to decide what what they do with that that core budget obviously there is additional funding on top of that for education and social security which we do have more of an influence over but in terms of the the core spending parameters it's for local government to determine how they spend that but if we think back to the reduction in headcount you know 30 000 has been mentioned 15 000 of the additional 30 000 pre-covid level was NHS and I think you've already said that probably won't be affected much so then the figures the reduction has to come from other places and one of those places could well be local government and all decisions around how local government spends its money is for local government to make it's I do not as you will well know I do not tell local government how to spend their core budget it's entirely up to them but you've been suggested in the headcount reduction of 30 000 across the public sector so that is really and I've got a figure on it that figures your figure or other people's figure but what I've suggested is that we need to get back to pre-covid levels but if you take local government one area let's say ELC expansion that's in a workforce expansion within local government I'm not suggesting that that is that it's something that needs to to continue but inevitably there will be other areas I'm assuming of the public sector and it's for local government to answer this question not for me to answer this question where there might have seen us an increase as a result of Covid that they may no longer need but there might be other parts of local government the same way that there are other parts of the public sector that need to see see see increases as we come out of the pandemic which is why we're being very flexible but I think local government's quite unique in all of this discussion around public sector efficiency because ultimately it's local government that makes the decisions not me I set the spending parameters I don't dictate to local government how they spend that money but I'm struggling to see where this headcount okay we don't call it reduction efficiencies are gonna gonna come from if it's not going to come from NHS it's we've already said that ELC has expanded so there's new nursery teachers there that will you know we can't get rid of them suddenly so where you know where is the axe going to fall I'm struggling to to see it cabinet secretary yeah and we'll work with public sector employers what I've been at pains not to do is to a set an arbitrary target on figures although it's dominated the the press and secondly dictate to specific public bodies what they need to do we will engage with them and most importantly with trade unions over the next few months in advance of the sub coming budget in terms of where the workforce needs to reset and it's you know it's based on a freezing of pay bill that doesn't equate a freezing of pay levels so that's why that's what's driving the need for reform but I hope you'd accept that there's a fundamental difference in my relationship with for example a public body like transport Scotland and my relationship with local government yeah but I'm struggling to unders yes you're you're not dictating the the figures in terms of headcount but you are holding the purse strings in terms of the amount to spend on pay so you are really dictating the headcount that's that's going to be in all areas well I've been I've been quite open and honest about the need to freeze pay bill but not pay levels I don't think there's anyone that doesn't accept that over the last two very difficult years there's been a lot of change in the public sector and inevitably some areas have had to see significant and rapid increases that are no longer required because of Covid and indeed because of brexit you know initial teething challenges around around brexit saw spikes and so it's about a general reset rather than setting arbitrary targets which is what the UK government has done but your questions really are stemming from local government perspective and what I'm saying very loudly very clearly here is that I don't tell local government what to do nor should I in the way that I can more effectively work with other public sector employers so so in the figures that's shown a seven percent reduction real terms is that are you saying then that it's not going to be as bad as that for local local government I'm saying that this is not a budget and we have used probably you know we've used what the sfc I think called reasonable assumptions to set our budget but if you think about it we're setting our budget on predominantly a UK government spending review of autumn last year which is completely out date hasn't been updated to accept inflation so do I think the numbers are going to fluctuate further yes I do think the numbers are going to fluctuate further so it might not be as bad as they expect them well I would sincerely hope that our budget is not as as bad as I fear but ultimately the only way for that to change is for the UK government to increase the the funding pot and to take into account the huge increases in inflation okay moving on to something you said earlier about enterprise that you weren't cutting the budget there it was your cutting duplication instead so can you give us some examples of where there is duplication within the enterprise budget yeah and just to clarify what I was saying is that within that finance and economy portfolio you will see some areas going up but not all areas can go up so for example training and employability are going up so I think one of the the two examples I would give is the national strategy for economic transformation calls on all parts of the enterprise and skills landscape to focus on fewer objectives and to do those really well so for example on productivity to really focus on productivity to focus on some of the new markets to focus on entrepreneurship and I would like to think that in focusing on those key objectives they align all their spend and they align their workforce to achieving those objectives that ultimately will mean that looking across the board there will be areas that some public bodies are better at than others so for example I think that Scottish National Investment Bank has a really important role to play in scalups now Scottish Enterprise have a great track record when it comes to startups so actually between the two of them Scottish Enterprise focusing on startups Scottish National Investment Bank focusing on scalups and both of them trying to ensure that they're not just duplicating each other's efforts would be an example I think where aligned to inset and also aligned to where they have a track record of success is you know and Scottish Enterprise has generated significant revenues for the public purse as a result of very effective investments so that would be one example the second example I would make is the one I've already talked about which is a recurring theme when it comes to business grants if you're a business where do you go first for grant support do you go to business gateway do you go to se do you go to high do you go to visit Scotland perhaps if you're in the tourism community do you go to the Scottish government so I think right now it's quite a confusing for businesses but in each of those organisations there will be teams doing very similar things so actually through you know collaboration discussion how do we make that more effective a more effective relationship for business and I think there's good there's good practice already and the enterprise agencies are completely on board and I've already started some of that work so do you see some of those agencies potentially going then no no I don't no I think they all have just people within them going I guess no I think they have all have an important role to play but I think they need to make sure that they are as efficient as possible and focused on the core objectives that we've set and they're you know certainly based on my extensive conversations with the enterprise agencies of Visit Scotland they are on board with that and they get that they're on board with a reduction in their budget that would be unusual for our organisation this is the fundamental challenge I think with some of this discussion is if we are more effective at serving the citizen by extension you will have a more efficient public body and what's not to appreciate about improving outcomes for citizens improving outcomes for businesses making sure that every penny of resource that we spend is actually delivering our objectives well I guess that ties me back to the other thing because you know from the the medium-term financial strategy there's little mention of the national performance framework really is that really truly embedded right through this document would you say I would say that yep it certainly it's embedded through the resource spending review the medium-term financial strategy focuses a lot more on the funding we have available and the resource spending review focuses a lot on the how we're going to actually spend it so I would make that distinction between the two documents but yeah I'll go back to identifying what the four objectives are tackling child poverty it's completely in line with national performance framework transitioning to net zero completely in line with national performance framework economic recovery completely in line and resilient public services I would say that this resource spending review is far more focused on outcomes than perhaps many things are so okay you mentioned tackling child poverty but what about preventing child poverty I think that's difficult when you have cuts to the local government budget you have cuts to the university budget you have cuts to the enterprise budget sure that that's the areas where we should be investing so to you know to prevent child poverty as opposed to trying to tackle child poverty I think that the greatest contributor to child poverty over the last 10 years has been UK Government austerity as backed up by the University of Glasgow's report most recently and we will do all that we can to mitigate but we are limited in what we can do when it comes to mitigation we will continue to invest our money through a different approach to social security but ultimately much of what we spend is mitigation and if you fix that at source we could probably redeploy that funding elsewhere but this government always talks about you know early intervention prevention and a lot of these areas that you're cutting would be tackling early intervention things like local government you know they can tackle this the source before it's a problem and that's why I'm sort of slightly confused with some of the things you've said today and some of the things I see in this in this report we're spending £1.8 billion in Scottish child payment which will go up to £25 per week which will just about mitigate the cut to universal credit of £20 per week but you're making cuts in areas that could prevent child poverty so that's my point I'm making last thing I wanted to talk about is tax so you mentioned you know you go on the the sfc forecast so the sfc forecast in that in terms of the higher rate threshold would remain frozen as part of the forecast baseline so will that is that something you do see frozen which means you know it says here higher rate taxpayers pay an extra 653 income tax in 23 24 and that would rise to 1317 in 26 27 so do you think that's something that you will so we will update all tax policy in advance of every budget and i'm not won't be drawn today on setting tax plans for subsequent budgets but we will set out those tax plans in advance of every budget obviously the sfc have to go in the basis of assumptions and the intention here was certainly not to determine tax policy for future years okay thanks okay thank you Daniel to be followed by Ross thank you convener um I just want to go back to the points around public sector head count so the the aim is to return to pre-covid levels and I accept that you're saying that that will be done essentially through capping the total payroll at value but not in terms of levels and I understand that but there is a certain arithmetical kind of outcome from from that and first of all if you're going to do that as John Mason was pointing at half of that 30 000 isn't the NHS that's not going to be reduced so in essence in the remaining remaining areas they've got two options either reducing people's pay levels or reducing those head counts and if you're going to maintain NHS headcount at what it is currently and it's half that means those other areas will need to reduce their head counts by double the amount that they've increased by just to highlight that in the civil service that's 4 000 is the increase local government 7 000 the increase and I'm going quote 4 2019 to quote 4 2021 here and finally public corporations 5 000 now you've refused to be drawn on local government but you do have control over civil service headcount so are we going to see a reduction of 8 000 civil servants in the Scottish government what we're going to see over the next four years and it's important that it's understood that this is over the longer term because it's not it's not over a one year period is yes a reduction in workforce and in headcount to pre-pandemic levels and there's a number of different ways that you can do that so you can do that through effective vacancy and recruitment management you can do that through redeploying staff all of it has to be done in collaboration with trade unions and through discussion with trade unions to do this importantly we have a policy of no compulsory redundancies we'll update public sector pay policy in advance of every budget but I think the key here is that with a resource spending review you're not trying to drive reform over the space of 12 months you're trying to drive reform over the space of four years and so by 2026 2027 we want to see the total size of the devolved public sector workforce at at pre-covid levels you know what even within the health force we know that for a national care service which was an example I used earlier there's a lot of people already working in care so you know you have to take that into account it's about effective management across the board rather than setting arbitrary targets over a very short period of time I don't think I was either suggesting arbitrary targets or that the time frame was 12 months I appreciate that the time frame is you know four to five years but nonetheless you might not want to put a number on it but if we are going to essentially maintain health service headcount in broad terms albeit with some change if you have that macro figure and you're going to protect half of the increase the other areas are going to have to increase by more than the figure that they have gone up by that's just an arithmetic necessity is it not so therefore now you don't necessarily need to put a figure on it the headcount reduction of civil service will need to be more than the 3800 it went up by in the Covid period is that not just an arithmetical necessity I mean some of that will be in the health service so in terms of civil service but I think I mean I'm not disputing the sentiment behind your question which is that I have gone out and said we need to reset the size of the workforce we will freeze pay bill and ultimately we want to see a return to pre-covid levels now the public sector is as large I think it's a approximately about 470 k in terms of FTE and we will need to see that return to pre-pandemic levels that will need to be managed across the board and I think that's where my concern with your arbitrary figures even the 15k in the health service is putting arbitrary figures on the other side of that okay well let me avoid the figures all together if if the aggregate point is going to come out at at 29 500 and some areas are not going to have to to return to pre-covid levels then other areas are going to have to go further is that not just a statement of fact I think that is a statement of fact yet thank you one of the areas that I think you you disputed at the statement last week was around the overall position in terms of productivity growth and wage growth in Scotland now the the Scottish fiscal commission is pretty clear in paragraph 3.39 it states productivity growth has stalled in Scotland since 2015 I mean likewise if we look at income tax receipts and their projections again that the the the Scottish fiscal commission are clear that that wage growth in Scotland is slower than the UK average and that is a trend which if you look at when s figures actually goes back to 2016 where not a single Scottish region has outperformed the UK average in that period and prior to 2016 Scotland had typically outperformed the UK average and I'm not talking about the higher performing areas of the UK the UK average I mean you do accept that that's a fact and do you think there's sufficient focus on driving up jobs and wages and because ultimately that's what we need to do to increase the amount of money that we have to spend on the public service as well as being good in and of itself yeah no and I think you know there's a more balanced answer to that and hopefully a more balanced question too behind it than necessarily in the chamber because we accepted I accepted in the national strategy for economic transformation that increasing productivity is one of the most important objectives that we can have as a government as a society as an economy so if we take that as red that increasing productivity matters and we need to up our game when it comes to increasing productivity I think that you still have to accept that between 2007 and 2019 we did see significant growth in productivity now why is that important it's not to with with productivity in Scotland growing by 10.7 compared with 5.2 percent for the rest of the UK why is that important I think it goes back to the question of you know what do you need to stop doing which is perhaps dragging productivity what do you need to keep doing that might be boosting productivity and that's what the national strategy tries to get underneath so you know our economy is recovering right now we have the unique circumstance of record low unemployment of 3.2 percent there's not much more we can do around labour force if unemployment is at 3.2 percent with the exception of the point I mentioned earlier around trying to work with those that are classified as economically inactive to get them into into the labour market there's obviously work that you can do on on migration but I think I didn't catch all that the sfc said but they were also quite clear that Scotland is exposed to an aging demographic and it's also exposed on the basis that when it comes to earnings to the oil and gas industry so where financial services down south has seen a significant increase I think about 16 percent if I remember correctly I need to double check my my figure is about 16 percent there's obviously been a challenging time for for the oil and gas industry in Scotland which has had an impact on earnings so where you see so I don't think you can I think you have to distinguish a little bit between wage and productivity they're linked but I think there's two different answers to two different questions I mean they are inextricably linked and at ultimately if you want to drive one you have to deliver on the other I mean the one thing I would just sort of take I mean the demographics is definitely an issue for Scotland but in terms of the fiscal framework obviously that is to to a degree index so I mean I think that that looking at average earnings growth is is the fundamental but just coming back to the point around productivity and I don't disagree and I and I and I think that the end set does a good job of narrating the issue I would still take issues to whether or not it has sufficient focus on solutions and if we listen to what Professor Oaf was just saying earlier on in our session there is a particular issue that Scotland has around labour market participation and by his own remission you're not going to clear what that is but the way he put it was that the overall labour force is probably of the correct size but it's not necessarily in the right places now that's just me that we need interventions to redeploy people reskill people and ensure that people are maximising wages now that's not just about people who are out of the the labour market altogether although it is in part but it does strikes me that if that is the case I wonder about the priorities in the spending review because while you've highlighted employability fund that is not the entirety of skills spent there's a significant proportion within the Scottish fiscal commission a sort of Scottish funding again my sfc's mixed up apologies Scottish funding councils budget which is goes to colleges but that's flat cash throughout the spending review period 8 cut likewise universities have a significant contribution to play to skills and indeed the sds's budget is within those budget lines as well and it is flat cash 8 so there are at least four budget lines four areas of spend which contribute to that skills making sure that people are as professor will put it in the right places in the labour market only one of them is going up all the other three are being cut is that the right priority cabinet secretary well I do think that prioritising employability and training within finance and economy portfolio is the right call now that means if you have one area going up obviously you have you can't maintain that increase across the board but you know and that requirement just now needs to be a very flexible training offer so universities and colleges have an important role to play and they do need to adapt and you know be cognisant of what the future skills demand are going to be but in terms of employability training which as I said is one of the the very few lines that is going up significantly that is endeavouring to try and provide a more flexible retraining reskilling offer to individuals that need to retrain and reskill having said all that I go back to the light that my starting position here which is a very difficult outlook based on the funding we have available and I imagine that around this room and across the chamber there will be different asks for where I should be spending more I've already heard some of them today around local government universities employability and if I could spend significantly more on every line then you know of course every finance secretary would want to do that I can't I am constrained by a funding envelope and what I have sought to do is to be fair across the board now why it's even more challenging is because our spending power is decreased in terms of inflation you can't get away from that so what you are counting as real terms cuts is is higher because I have less spending power because of inflation so we have tried to protect but if you want to see any line go up I'm afraid on this resource spending view which is different from a budget I don't really have anywhere to go but but even employability is really only in the last year that it goes up by any significant amount at all so then you therefore have four budget lines which are certainly in the early years are all probably experiencing significant real terms cuts is that not so is that almost certainly on aggregate across the five years skill spending has an aggregate cut and if you're wanting to drive up average earnings is that not inconsistent and Gary might want to come in a little bit more widely on earnings but I go back to my fundamental point here which is I cannot overspend by a penny I can only spend what the SFC think is reasonable for me to receive and therefore if you want any part of that resource spending review to increase it has to come from elsewhere in the pot because my spending assumptions and my funding assumptions have got to be based on as much fact as possible which is what they are but if you drive up earnings faster than the UK now you can't do that in the short term but in the medium term it's not an unreasonable ambition you can improve the amount of money you have to spend certainly within a five year time period is that unreasonable to expect you that but you certainly can't do that if you cut skills funding it's a very very reasonable assumption to make my question to you would be that if I had done that in terms of significant increases on the four lines you're asking me for you'd be here asking me a question about four other lines that had been severely cut I'm really trying to clarify the choices you've made and this is clearly one of them and the choice I've made here is to see employability and skills increase and other budget lines protected I'll leave it there okay thank you Ross convener just to return to downsline a question around productivity and wage growth and this is something that I asked the sfc but by that point you were outside the door so you probably will will have missed that and their assumptions around increase in productivity are based on more people getting into the right jobs i more productive higher paid jobs given what's just been discussed about the fact that you know the workforce is not going to increase that means either low wage sectors becoming higher wage so wages in areas like retail hospitality tourism et cetera going up or a continued exodus from those sectors into to higher wage sectors in terms of the government's overall strategic priorities for the economy what is the what balance of those two trends would you like to see given that we've we do already have acute labour shortages in these sectors usually tied to issues of wages in those sectors is it the government strategic is it a more of a priority to grow high wage sectors or to try and raise wages in these existing sectors where we're seeing shortages because of those issues i would say that our immediate priority is to embed fair work so it goes back to all the questions we've talked about around poverty it's gone back to questions around productivity if you have fairer work conditions if people are in secure well paid employment and get paid a reasonable wage then that delivers multiple benefits both for our economy but also for the overall cost of the of the public sector and i would say that our primary focus right now is on embedding fair work principles it's certainly where we've seen employers also wanting to focus because at a time of high high demand and lower supply they've got to distinguish themselves having said that we are particularly exposed when it by the fact that a lot of the highest earners are in very few industries so that means when there is a downturn in oil and gas that has a disproportionately large impact on both our tax revenues and on our economic outlook so i think there's an argument there too to try and make sure that we are where we diversify but also taking into account the impact that has so if that's the case then would it be fair to say that the priority say for Scottish Enterprise fixed budget the grants that they're issuing the strategic priority for them is far more aligned with targeting low wage sectors for offers of grants but with attached fair work conditions rather than issuing grants to businesses that are already a high wage sector well the way that we're doing the former is through embedding conditionality so you shouldn't be able to access grant support for example without signing up to fair work principles so in a sense it shouldn't even necessarily be a particular focus it should be the status quo it should be the norm that you can only access government support if you add to your to fair work principles and i don't think it's an easy either or because we also know that from the the inset work that was done that where scotland has some of the greatest potential is in some of the high growth sectors so for example in technology for example in renewables in these areas so i don't think you can neglect for example some of your core industries who should expect only to receive support if they meet those conditions but in terms of future growth ambitions which i know is where we maybe have a slight difference of opinion just on how to define growth not on the principle of growth at all in terms of those growth ambitions we we do want to see far greater rates of successful scale-ups knowing that that's where a lot of jobs are created and just one final question given you know as you've pointed at the single biggest factor affecting so many discussions we've had this morning is the current rate of inflation what discussions have you had with the treasury about the impact of inflation on the budget and the potential of inflation proofing the Scottish budget yeah we have had discussions and i'm actually seeing the chief secretary's treasury next week and we'll continue these discussions i'm sure on on the fact that our current assumptions around block grant is based largely on an out-of-date spending review that doesn't take into account inflation and i will continue to make those points to them i certainly would like to see at the very least some of the review of the fiscal framework taking into account what role what impact inflation has on our spending power but also on the way that certain elements keep track with inflation so those conversations will continue their conversations and i'm generally an optimistic person but i've been having those conversations for a very long time thanks very much thank you thank you very much and just one final question for me and it is i hope on an optimistic note i mean in section 2.4 of the document stronger fairer green economies a lot of really positives in there you talk about again the national strategy for economic transformation stimulating entrepreneurship building new markets increasing productivity developing skills embedding entrepreneurship you talk about an investor panel inward investment plan export growth plan and i think these are all very positive what kind of impact do you believe that'll have by the end of the of the period actually that we've been discussing up to 26 27 in terms of increasing investment jobs job retention in fact because many businesses sometimes we get to a certain level move outside scotland so what impact do you think that new kind of cultural change will actually have on scotland and under revenue base if we get it right it will have a huge impact it will have a hugely positive impact the reserve spending review covers the period that's just short of halfway to the national strategy for economic transformation outcomes which are over 10 years but if we get this right if we invest our funding in achieving outcomes and objectives not in maintaining the status quo then we can shift the dial on these things if we just defend the status quo then we'll get the same outcomes and i think all of us have an aspiration and an ambition to actually deliver what the resource spending review sets out in terms of economic growth in terms of tackling child poverty and resilient public services okay well thank you very much cabinet secretary for spending so much time of your morning in responding to our questions that ends today's deliberations so call us meeting to an end