Apparently, it's becoming a tradition that every year at Congress we have at least one talk that gives you nightmares about your cell phone. I think this year it's going to be this one, so please welcome our speakers, Dongkwan and Honggil. Good evening. I'm Honggil Kim from South Korea, that does. So please, please don't ask about our registrar or us. I only know what to know about it. And this is my first time attending Z3, and it's a great pleasure to present our work for this time. And today my colleague Dongkwan and I will talk about dissecting both various vulnerabilities in a new voice technology and LTE networks, and we will show you how to exploit and fix these vulnerabilities in operational LTE networks. So we both are graduate students in the system security lab in KAIST. So my main research interests are cellular network systems, mobile device security, and internal things. So I'm currently working on the security impact on LTE core components against those attacks. I'm Dongkwan Kim, hi, and I'm interested in several fields of security issues. And today in this talk, Honggil will describe the basic concepts, and I will explain the details in the later part. So let's start. Okay, so both which stands for voice over LTE is a new voice technology and LTE network. So in case of traditional 2G and 3G networks, the delivery network for voice and data are separated. However, in LTE, it is implemented into the all IP based network to provide a faster data delivery. Thus both the voice and data in LTE are delivered as a data flow. So for voice implementation, LTE has to replace the previous 3G core solution. So for this, LTE adopted for your IP system, which is widely used in our network. So by adopting both, for LTE users, they can get high voice quality, a faster set of time, and they can save device battery life. And also for operators, they can increase usability, and they can reduce operational costs, and they can also provide rich multimedia services that have not been provided in 3G cores. So let's see more detail about the 3G and 4G networks to understand how the voice technology is changed. In case of 3G, the delivery network for voice and data is separated into two parts, the packet switching and the circuit switching. So the data is delivered by the packet switching core, and the voice is delivered by the packet switching core. So when a 3G user makes a 3G call, then the signal goes to the telephone network through the circuit switching core. On the other hand, in LTE, both the voice and data is implemented into the packet switching core. Therefore, it no longer utilizes the circuit switching core for your IP server implementation. Most of server functionality is implemented inside an IMS, which is sent for IP multimedia subsystem. So let's see more details about how the services are delivered in LTE. So in LTE core, all server services such as data, video, and streaming are delivered as data channels, which is called barriers. The barrier is a virtual connection between the device and the core network to support the specific QoS of each service. As you can see here, 3GPP standards specify several barriers based on the QCI value from one to nine. Depending on the purpose of the service usage, each barrier has different characteristics such as guaranteed or non-guaranteed bid rate, and priority, packet delay, and packet loss rate. So as you can see, there are two barriers for both, and both of them have the highest priority and the lowest packet delay and lowest packet loss rate for barrier performance. So back to the service delivery concept. When a device turned on a certain service, the default barrier between the device and the core network is established with assigned a new IP address. So generally, this default barrier support does not guarantee the bid rate, but it supports best for delivery. So when the service requires a specific QoS, then the dedicated barrier is established within a default barrier. And generally, this dedicated barrier shares the same IP address with the default barrier. Instead, the traffic through this dedicated barrier is filtered by the protocol or code number. So in specific default, two barriers are needed. So one is used for control plane, and the other one is used for data plane. So when a user turns on a fault service, default barrier is established between the device and the core network. And through this default barrier, a device first authenticates itself to the IMS by sending the SIP signaling messages. And after that, when a user makes a call or gets an incoming call, then a dedicated barrier is established within a default barrier. And through this dedicated barrier, the voice data between the caller and caller is transmitted, and it is usually encapsulated into the RTP packet. So since fault is a totally new feature compared to the traditional 3D calls, adapting fault makes a whole satellite infrastructure more complex. It involves not only the implementation of the LTE core, but also device mobile-based support, device hardware interface, and even accounting functions. So if some of these implementations are not carefully considered, it may cause a severe security problems. So we decided to check potential attack factors newly introduced in Vault. And guess what? We found several security issues in each component. Thank you. And these security issues are mainly caused from the two facts in Vault. One is the fault accounting and the voice solution in LTE devices. So I explained the fault accounting first. In case of 3G, the accounting is depending on how the service is delivered in the core network. So since the data is delivered by the packet switching core, it is charged by the byte usage. And voice is charged by the time usage of channel allocation time for calling. So similarly in LTE, as LTE has only the packet switching core, both the voice and data is delivered by the packet switching core. So it's natural to apply the bi-usage for all services. However, most operators still separate the accounting policy for both voice and data. Therefore in LTE, most operators still apply the time usage accounting policy for Vault, even though the Vault is delivered by the packet switching core. So this kind of implementation may cause a very complicated accounting function of LTE. So from this, we might ask, do operators implement this complicated accounting correctly? And for second problem, we need to know the anatomy of smartphones. So generally, smartphone has two processors. One is application processor for running mobile OS such as Android iOS and running user applications on top of OS. And the second one is the communication processor and it is used for modern functionality and hardware specific jobs such as handling digital signal processing. So before explaining the device solution in LTE capable devices, I explained the 3G device solution first for comparison. In case of 3G devices, the voice call signaling procedure is done by hardware in CP. And also most information about the CP's implementation is hidden from the manufacturers such as Samsung, Qualcomm and Huawei. Or even a malicious app which has routed an IP part cannot easily access to the CP part to manipulate the call signaling procedure. Also any app in AP have to use the specified call APIs with a call from permission to make a 3G call. That means that an attacker in 3G phones cannot easily analyze the call signaling and voice implementation in both device and the call network. However in LTE devices, the voice signaling procedure is done by software in AP. Which means a user app can easily access the voice call signaling procedure by utilizing the network's OK for both. So for example in Android system, there are two network interfaces, R&D 0 and R&D 1. And by simply checking the running applications and listening port, we can infer that R&D 0 interface is used for both services since 5060 is a default port for SIP signaling. And also from this, we thought that an app can even make a call without a call from permission. It just needs an internet permission to utilize the network's OK for both. So we have two findings involved. First one is the complex accounting infrastructure. And the second one is delegating voice signaling procedure to AP. So to exploit these facts in operational alternatives, we first analyzed 3GPP standards related with the voice service. However, these standards leave detailed implementations to the entities who have to implement it, such as operators, chiefs, offenders, and so on. So we decided to make a checklist of potential vulnerable points in the voice feature. And it was about 60 items for both control and data plane, like this. And with this, we performed an empirical analysis in five major operational alternatives. This includes two US operators and 3,000 Korean operators. And at this time, we also considered the operators in Europe. However, at the early 2015, the operators in Europe does not provide voice service. But now I heard that some operators in Germany started to launch a voice service. So if you are wondering how secure the German operators' voice service is, then please contact us and let's look into it together with your smartphones. So in summary, this is the summary of our results. We found four free data channels which are mainly caused from the complicated accounting function. And five security issues. So for each issue, my colleague Dong-Kwan will explain that. Hi again, I'm Dong-Kwan Kim. And so let me take over from this part. And so let's start from the free data channels using world protocol first. To utilize such free data channels, first we need to understand how actually work works. So when caller makes a call to callee, caller sends an invite message like this. And this invite message contains the phone numbers of caller and callee. And it is just look like this. You know, to keep my privacy, I removed some of my private information. But as you noticed, this packet is just like HTTP. And the methods section for get or post is changed to invite like this. And, you know, there are many methods in SIP messages here, like here, and also phone numbers of caller and callee are here. So when caller receives this invite message, then the phone starts to ring. And when the user answered the phone by touching the call button, then the callee's phone sends an OK message to the caller. And the dedicated barrier for voice data transmission is established between them. And voice data is transferred through this channel as RTP packets. So how can you utilize this for free data channels? It's really simple. You can just put data into the head or body of the invite message. And note that we replaced the OK message to decline message to receive invite messages over and over. Also, you can think of put data into the RTP payload like this, just like normal voice data. And we actually implemented both tunneling methods. But some of you might think that the concept is too simple, but the actual implementation was not. So let me explain the details. The left part is a caller's phone, and the right part is a callee's phone. So we actually implemented, there are two senders and receivers for each tunneling method. And when caller starts to send data, SIP or RTP packets are transferred through IMS. And SI packets are received in AP in the callee's part, but RTP packets are not. This is because this is the difficult part. So because the RTP packets are firstly processed in CP, and only audio data is passed to AP, which means you cannot get the RTP packets in AP with TCP dump. So furthermore, this audio data, the size of this audio data is too small, so we cannot utilize the full bandwidth. So we need to find another way. While searching, while googling, we found there is a diet command. And so what's diet command? Actually, diet is a proprietary protocol by Qualcomm and also introduced by Delugra at 20CCC. And diet command provides several functionalities, such as memory read write or SMS read write or signaling dump. And the signaling dump is one of the main functionalities of diet, because you can dump any signals between your phone and the cell tower. So this is usually used by the operators for performance tests, so-called field tests. You can see the right figure, and that's one example of diagnostic protocol tool. And the software is on the laptop. And to utilize that software, you need a key stored in the USB. And can you imagine the price of this software? It's really expensive. It's over $16,000. So because we are students, we don't have enough money, so we cannot buy that one. So we need to reverse engineer the diet protocol itself. And we found several operational codes as left table. And actually, we found 100 commands, but we only put a part of them here. And there is a load command here. So by using that load command, we could directly catch RTP packets in AP through DIAC device driver in the Linux corner. You can just open the DIAC device driver and send that command. Then you can read RTP packets directly. So we can get the SI packets and RTP packets without any loss. So we can utilize both tunneling methods with this. In case of direct communication, it is much simple. You can just open a socket with the IP address for a vault interface and send data to the internet like this, or others IP addresses for a vault interface like this. You can also think of not only free data channels, you can also think of overlaying other people. So utilize your vault interface, send data to the other data interface like this. But actually, we didn't test this. And another team who are also working on the VoLT, they tested this. But we didn't actually test it this. So maybe you can try this one. So we tested free data channels for five operators, two in the US and three in South Korea. And note that the implementation was different depending on the operator's policy. So SIP tunneling and media tunneling were available for all the operators. And direct communication was somewhat different depending on operator's policy. And note that the KR-1 is the best operator that you can utilize for free data channels. So I guess some of you might wonder using KR-1 later if you travel to Korea. But actually, after we reported this vulnerability to the operators, they were patched like this. So don't be disappointed. And we didn't get any follow-ups from the two US operators. Because we are Korean students, we couldn't actually test those again in the US because it takes too much money for us. So later, if we have some chances, we can test later. We measured the throughput for the direct communication. And it was quite high. And as Hongil described in the previous slides, our vault interface has higher priority than normal data interface. So it is more useful. Thanks. And we also measured the throughput for the media tunneling. But it was quite small because it is limited by the operators. The operators are limiting the bandwidth for media tunneling because they think it's enough to provide high-quality voice service. But later, if they allow more bandwidth, because we can fully utilize bandwidth, I think the performance will be increased, too. And in case of SIP tunneling, we didn't actually measure the performance because it can cause a severe problem to the core network, which means a denial of service will take on the core network. So I will explain this in the later slides. But actually, when we tested on one Korean operator, I sent about 1,000 invite messages within a second. And two or three hours later, we got a call from that operator. So we got in trouble. But it worked out well. We discussed and we patched together. So it was OK. So I introduced four free data centers. And now I will explain the five security issues. First of all, all your voice packets are not encrypted. So only one US operator was encrypting your voice signaling packets. And even in that operator, the voice data was not encrypted, which means all your voice data can be wire tapped. In that US operator, they are using IPsec to encrypt the voice signaling packets like this. I removed the IP addresses for that operator. And the other operators were just using TCP or UDP without encryption. So your voice data is free. So some of you might wonder if wire tapping is really possible. But one example is this. You can think of phantom cells. There are a lot of phantom cells worldwide. And almost all operators are providing phantom cells. And if this phantom cell is compromised, all funds connected to that phantom cell can be affected by this vulnerability. And even more, some operators are providing Wi-Fi calling. And if you utilize this Wi-Fi calling, all your voice packets are transferred through wireless AP through the internet to the core network. And compromising wireless access point is much easier than compromising phantom cell. So in this scenario, all your voice data is also wire tapped. So come back to the first slide. Even though in this situation, the operators are only focusing on encrypting the voice signaling packets, not the voice data. So we suggest that the operators should also focus on encrypting the voice data. The next problem is that even though the SIP servers in IMS should authenticate users and manage the call sessions correctly, there was no authentication and no session management. So you can make a call with fake phone number where you can send multiple invite messages at the same time to several users, then several call sessions can be established. In a normal call, only one user can call to only one person. But because of this vulnerability, you can call to anyone at the same time. So one sender can deploy lots of better resources in the core network. So compared to previous denial of service attacks on the core network, we only need a small number of devices to kill the core network. So that's the reason why the operator called us. Actually, we prepared a demo for the caller spoofing. So this is normal call. When caller calls to cally, then the attacker calls to cally using the caller's phone number. So let's see the demo. The right part is normal caller and cally. And we use our photo. This is Hong Il and this is me. This is just normal call. And they communicate and hang up the phone call. Now the attacker is connected with ADB just for convenience. And we uploaded the call to the attacker's phone and call to cally using caller's phone number. So the call is from the attacker to the cally. And caller didn't know even his phone number is used. And in this demo, we utilize a famous Korean song, Gangnam style, but actually we can send any audio data. So we can change the phone number and send any audio data. So this can be used for voice phishing. Or for example, you can earn some money from your friend by using this vulnerability. And next problem is that as I mentioned before, there is no rule at the gateways. So in a normal situation, all voice packets should pass through IMS. But we found that we can directly send those packets to other phone. So there is no authentication and no session management again, so caller's phishing again. Another interesting problem is that there is a problem on the Android system. So previously, all applications should have call phone permission to make a call. But as Volt is newly adopted, the call procedure is moved from CP to AP. So there was a problem on the Android permission model system. So we can make a call only with the internet permission. The internet permission is a very basic permission. And almost all application installed on your phone has that permission. So almost all apps can perform this kind of attacks. So they can blog your calls or make an expensive video calls to the others to give you expensive bills. And we also prepared demos for the dinner service on calls. So note that the malicious application is running in the background of the victim's phone. And it does not leave any trace so the victim cannot recognize if he is calling. So the app makes a call to the attacker and it blocks the caller's normal call. And when they are on the phone in a normal case, the app can cut off this call. So let's see the demo. This is call blocking demo. See the background app calls to the attacker. This is the lioness business message in Korean. So you can block any call. And this is cut off demo. They are on the phone. This is normal call. And malicious app on the victim's phone can cut off this call by calling to the attacker. So the app only with the internal permission can completely block victims from calling. To summarize, we found these kind of vulnerabilities and four free data channels. And we also suggest several mitigations for them. So because they are not encrypting the voice packets, they should encrypt those voice packets. For example, they can encrypt voice signaling packets with IP seg or TLS. Or they can encrypt the voice data with SRDP. And the problem of authentication comes from the operators because they only authenticate users with the SIP header. Which means because SIP packets are just application layer protocol, so anyone can manipulate those packets. So we suggest to prevent such vulnerabilities. As I mentioned before, every vault interface has its own IP address. So the coordinator can recognize the origin of the packet. So they can check the source IP address as well as the SIP headers like this. And proper session management, and they should set up proper rules at the gateways. And to prevent permission on their mismatch problem, mobile OS developers should strictly bind the sockets to the data interface, not to use the vault interface. The problem in the Android system is that if an application opens a socket and you set the destination IP address to the SIP server in the IMS, then the Android system automatically routes packets through the vault interface. So that was the problem. And actually, we reported to Google and they patched like this in the early of this November. So they set up some capability flag for IMS. And they check that if an application without system permission makes a call, then they block that application. So it is patched. And to prevent SIP and media tolling, you can perform deep packet inspection. But media tolling is not easy to reserve because you can encode your data just like voice data and put that into RTP payload. So it's not easy to solve. Byte usage or counting might be one solution. But I think the operators will not follow this because they are very sensitive to their profit. And currently, they are using time-based accounting because it's much more expensive than the byte usage accounting. So it depends on the operator's policy, what to choose. And while doing this research, we found that the 3GPP specifications has problem. So the specification was too abstract. And they left the details to the operators. So the operators misunderstood and misimplemented the details. And also, the important security features in the specifications were just recommendation and not requirements. So the operators not follow those security features. They reported these vulnerabilities to US and KR certs and Google in May. And Google replied, moderate. And all two US operators were just act and we didn't get any follow-ups. And only two among three Korean operators were patching with us. And one Korean operator even didn't give us back act. So we don't know about that Korean operator, even though we are Korean. And while doing this, we was quite impressed by the US certs in their way handling the vulnerabilities. They actually set up the vulnerability nodes. And when we sent our report to US certs, they sent our report to all the US operators, as well as Google and Apple. And Apple replied that the iPhone is not vulnerable to this vulnerability. So I guess they are just strictly binding sockets to the data interface. So that's why the iPhone is not vulnerable. And we got a CV list or so. So even though we are young students, even though the level is moderate, it's just third level. But it's a starting point. So we think the problem is still interesting. Thanks. And do you think VUIP system is still secure? Right. Because some people might think that VUIP system is secure enough because the security of VUIP have been studied for several years. But actually, we tested on one VUIP system, and it was vulnerable like this. So we think that if VUIP system is interconnected with VUIP system, then this would be another interesting issue. So to summarize, because of the two findings from the vault interface, we found four free data centers and five security problems. And I think these problems are related to all the parties, such as 3GPP specifications, or telecom companies, and so on. And every new system has vulnerability. And so as vault is newly adopted, we targeted vault to analyze its security. And as more and more systems are adopting cellular technology, before it's wide deployed, holistic re-evaluation of vault should be applied. So thank you for listening. And I will take any question. OK. We have a very large amount of time for Q&A now. So please line up at the microphones. If you feel the sudden urge to leave this room, please either suppress it or leave very quietly because it gets very noisy in here. If lots of people talk and then run away. OK. Microphone number two, please. Hi. This is very interesting. I have a few part question about the spoofing attack. Basically, what you're doing there, you're sending C packets directly to the other phone, right? Right. So the network has no filtering whatsoever, like the first forwarding internet. They have no filtering whatsoever on that. There is no filter. You can just change your phone number to target's phone number, then you can perform the caller spoofing. Have you tried spoofing also your IP address on that interface? Is that possible? You mean IP spoofing? Yes. No, we didn't try IP spoofing. But when we tested it on a few months ago on the Korean operators and US operators were not vulnerable to IP spoofing attacks. Thank you. Oh, just another quick reminder. If you're on the stream right now, you can use ISC or Twitter to ask questions. We have a human computer interface here, just for your convenience. Microphone number three, please. Hi. My question is, does the operator have any incentive to block media tunneling? Like, is it not more expensive to tunnel data through what interface then just use the data services? OK. So for now, since media tunneling, the bandwidth of the media tunneling is very low, so we may think that the operators does not provide that attack. But actually, so maybe operators in the future may increase the bandwidth that bearers the bandwidth because they will start another services that requires us more bandwidth. So in that case, they will private the media tunneling. But it cannot be simple to private the media tunneling method. Microphone number four, please. Hi. Congrats on your findings. I'm guessing that you've looked quite some time into the DIAC interface of Qualcomm. So basically, what you show is there's just a command that you can read and write to any memory address and just do whatever you want. So basically, that gives you RCE. And is this possible on any Qualcomm baseband? The answer is no, because to send DIAC commands directly, your phone should be connected with your laptop or your computer. So you cannot perform any RCE attacks. But if there is a vulnerabilities on that system, then you can locally exploit that. But what I mean is, suppose you have root permissions on your Android phone, you've rooted it, and you want to go deeper into the baseband. You can just send DIAC commands to it, and you could just read and write from any map. Yeah, so actually, we tried, but some of the DIAC commands were blocked. So we couldn't actually change the memory addresses. But there is operational code, but the DIAC system in the CP is currently blocking those commands. OK, thank you. Number two, please. Hi. I did some previous security research on voice over IP. And much of the vulnerabilities you described also apply on traditional voice over IP networks. For voice over IP, there are security standards. It seems to me the providers in Korean and America doesn't have the security guidelines in place to prevent these attacks. Is that correct? Actually, because we are not the operator person, so we don't know the exact thing. But when we tested the vulnerability, it was there. So I'm not sure. So after our responsible disclosure, they are trying to. Yeah, after we reported, they are patching with us, and they are currently making those guidelines. Yeah. OK, thank you. Number one, please. Yes, I was wondering about call session management and how resource-intensive it can be on the server side. Has there been any considerations how to solve it? You mean to solve the session management? On the server side. On the server side. But I think it's quite simple, because if any user makes a call, then the SIP message is you should send the invite message to the SIP server, right? So the SIP server knows which user is now calling. So if you check if the state of the user, then you can just log other invite messages after the first invite message. Then I think that will reserve the problem. Yes, I was just wondering about the resource-intensiveness. Then this is going to be for the operator, handling so many sessions at the same time. But thank you. Number three, please. My other question is, you mentioned you had some efforts on reverse engineering, the DIAC protocol. Were you able to open source your efforts? And if yes, where can we find it? But actually, there are several documents already in the Google. Actually, we got the operational calls by Googling. And we reverse engineered the USB protocol by just snapping all the USB packets. So later, if we fully analyze the systems, then we can disclose those. Signal angel, please. Thank you. Is it possible to not use the operator's IMS at all? So can you configure your own voice over IP network and talk with friends by using direct IP? Can you repeat one more time? Sure. Is it possible to not use the operator's IMS at all, just to set up your own voice over IP application and talk to friends? Yes, you can utilize your own VoIP system. But the fact the operators are providing VoLT system is that they want to provide higher priority services. Because if you utilize your own VoIP system, then you use the data interface. But as I mentioned before, VoLT interface has a higher priority than the data interface. So there is no QoS on the data interface. So that's why the operators are providing those VoLT features now. So the answer is you can implement your own system, but you cannot guarantee your bandwidth or that kind of things. Number four, please. I'm interested in the kind of arguments that you presented to the operators. So they fixed it. Because when we report those kind of vulnerabilities in VoIP and VoLT networks to telcos, they just don't care because the time that they will spend implementing CPS, SRTP, or authentication, they consider it an advantage that they will lose regarding their concurrent. And do you think that going through SRT kind of forced them to act upon the vulnerabilities that you reported? I'm not sure if there is a legal issues that SRTs can force the operators to apply those security mechanisms. But the fact that Korean operators are patching that fastly because there are Korean news systems. So we reported to the news. And because there are several citizens who claim the operators, so they patched that fastly. So the power of citizen maybe help. OK, thank you. Internet, please. Thank you. Question. If you spoof your number, will it also set the P-asserted identity header field, or will that be overwritten? The P-asserted identity header field. Don't shoot the messenger. I don't know what it is. Can you repeat one more time? Sure, sorry. If you spoof your number with your application, will it also set the P-asserted identity header field, or will this be overwritten? The P-asserted identity field? Yes. I'm not sure, but yeah. Because there is only phone numbers in the SIP header, you can just change your phone number to others phone. And you can also change your IP address to others. Then you can just do a color spoofing. Do we have any more questions? There's also microphones back there. I don't know if you noticed, but you have them on top too. So OK, in that case, please once again thank our speakers. Thanks.


Hi everybody, Sean with jaspyscasebrakes.com here doing a 2020 tops museum collection mini box pack break Where at the end of this we're gonna actually be giving away a spot to one customer in our fifth $1,600 hit pack So we get nice product with museum collection Chance at some really nice stuff there and then on top of that somebody's gonna get a free spot in the $1,600 hit draft or hit pack That's coming up On the site jaspyscasebrakes.com so We've got the list of customers here From 1 to 30 from Sean with the first purchase down to Jeremy Port with last spot mojo and the teams From the Arizona Diamondbacks down to the Washington Nationals We're gonna roll a dice here to see five and a five ten times one two three four five six seven eight nine 10th and final time Danny Down to Nancy and now ten times on the teams one two three four five six seven eight nine 10th and final time from the St. Louis Cardinals down to the Colorado Rockies So we'll go through the list real quick so everybody can see who they have It is a mini break, but at the same point obviously this is a nicer product So if anybody would like to they can Do a trade here I'm gonna open up a trade window real quick Some of the key teams in here would be the Chicago White Sox Which is right here with Nancy Big rookie offered Luis Robert there Houston Astros Allen right there Jordan Los Angeles angels Mike trout always a good thing Dodgers there with Gavin Lux Where is Toronto right there? You have Boba Shet Thor Nisen So let's go ahead and sort this by the teams so you can see Chicago White Sox still with Nancy No talk about trades. So it looks like we're good. Go ahead and print this out real quick And then we're gonna figure out which mini box we're gonna do guys So especially pick this box here This is not part of the case that we already did which we're gonna be opening up for pick your team number six Which is coming up right after this. Here we go Last spot mojo on this one was Jeremy Port with Kansas City Royals So we're gonna open this up I'm going to roll a dice to figure out which mini box we're going to be doing So there's no favoritism. It's not like if I feel a heavy one that potentially has the frame in it at all That you know, I would pick that one for here. Even though I do like you guys I like everybody. So I want to make sure that everybody has a fair chance So I'm gonna go ahead and number these one two three and four so what we're gonna do is we're gonna roll a dice an actual physical dice in this case and If it lands on the corresponding number one two three or four, that's the box we're going to do If it lands on five or six, we're just gonna re-roll the same dice until it lands on one of those four numbers and Then that's the box we'll do Good luck everyone You can see over there that is a one so we're gonna do box number one Boxes two three and four will be coming up later on for other fillers potentially for the same product Which is the hit pack or other But we'll see So let's rip it Like I said, pretty cool opportunity here for some really nice stuff on top of that Even cooler opportunity to get a 1600 spot in a hit pack Where you're guaranteed So So we're starting off with Justin Verlander base parallel for the Houston Astros and Allen Base cards Miguel Cabrera Glaver Torres and Trey Turner Tigers Yankees and nationals Our hit is a relic For the Boston Red Sox Jackie Bradley jr 19 of 35 Boston Red Sox that's going to Allen very quick little break there Thank you guys for getting in on it now to the fun part Randomizer time So back to a new list here with the original list of Sean down to the last spout mojo of jeremy port We're gonna roll a new set of dice as far as randomizer And like we said One spot End of the break randomized 30 names top name wins a spot in the 1600 hit pack break So dice roll was a five and a two seven times Good luck everyone One two three four Six and seventh and final time. Good luck everyone so from spots to Thor down to Allen. Thank you guys very much for getting into this Maybe you guys have a better luck next time, but thank you again. And congratulations to Brian cow Ryan you just won yourself a spot in our $1,600 hit pack break, which is very close to breaking guys. So It's not delivery And guys that was 2020 tops museum collection mini box pack break number one random team. I'm Sean with jaspyscasebreaks.com We'll see you next time


The study investigates the potential of botanical extracts enriched with specific polyphenol to reduce neurotoxicity induced by two different chemicals, periquot and rotonin. The results show that extracts enriched with a combination of polyphenol can be used to protect against both types of neurotoxicity. This suggests that these extracts may have potential therapeutic applications for Parkinson's disease. This article was authored by Mitalier-Thombe, Orly DeRuzjacke, Catherine E. Strathen, and others.


Hello, in this video we are going to apply map algebra with boolean rusters to identify the pixels that are true for all the rusters. Therefore we will use the end operator. Go to Raster, Raster Calculator and then add the layers, the boolean layers that you want to check if they are true or false. So the distance from the houses, 150 meter from houses, need to be true. Then we click on End to add the end operator. The distance to roads, 150 meter from roads, need to be true. And then we add the industry. It needs to be further than 300 meter from industry and the wells need to be not deep. If all the raster layers have true, then the results will be true. All other combinations will result in false. Call the result layer accessible wells. When I run it, I get this raster layer, which I can style as a boolean raster with pelleted unique values and I can edit the labels. So in this video you've learned how to apply map algebra on boolean layers using the end operator.


Hello, it's Monday the 17th of October. I'm Michael Walker. I'm James Butler. And you're watching The Fix. We've got a good lineup for you today. We're going to be interviewing Lara McNeil about young Labour. We're also going to talk about the Austrian elections. First off, me and James have both been reading economic reports this weekend. And we've come to the same conclusion, haven't we, James? A specter is haunting Europe. What specter is it? It's the specter of communism. A fully automated luxury communism, no less. And we haven't just been reading the latest blog post from our very own Dr Bostano. This is from the Big Dogs of the Economic Establishment. UCL University, that's my one. And you've been reading economic leftism from an even more surprising source, which is the IMF. Yeah, the International Monetary Fund. I mean, it's worth saying that it's leftism of the most pallid kind. The IMF has been catching on to non-austerity-based thought for some time. The report that's come out is the same report it issues every half a year. It's half yearly fiscal monitor. It's basically dedicated to systematically destroying the idea that taxing the rich is pointless or even destructive to an economy. It's an idea that's been circulating for many years now. And it goes into detail about the policies that can be funded if you were to up the tax rates on the rich. They say that in the front of the report that when inequality gets bad, it can erode social cohesion. It can lead to political polarization and ultimately lower economic growth. So the IMF got woke, I don't know. Well, I don't think you can ever describe the IMF as woke. And you note the third part of the argument there, which is that it's actually economic growth that's set throughout. So that's what they've got in mind. But basically they argue that we need a steeper tax curve for higher earners, so higher marginal rates on the top earners and those have been declining in trend for years and years and years. We should look into different kinds of wealth tax, which we might consider beyond income tax. And that's actually quite important in the UK because we have an enormous amount of land hoarded by the aristocracy and the aristocrats really use a great number of tax loopholes, particularly around inheritance tax. We should look also at taxing capital income, which is really unequally distributed. So these are like profit, interest, capital gains, dividends, stuff like that, which come from having capital in the first place to invest. The moment that's very low, right? It's very, very low. So we should up that. The one bit of income that's not in any way earned. Yeah, absolutely. It just sits there and gives you no money, right? So it also goes into praising the stuff that's been on the left now for a while. But not without criticism, not without pause. It praises it for developing economies. It says in economies where there's a developed and variegated welfare state, maybe it's not going to work so well. It's skeptical about how useful it can be there. And obviously it points out, as we know, that its redistributive impact depends on how it's fine. So it would tie into that question of how you tax people. And the other thing it says is, look, you've really got to spend on health and on education. It points out that the disparities in health outcomes cut across every economy. You look at people, you know, it's particularly true of men. Men who have tertiary education and men who leave education at secondary school have wildly differing life expectancies. And that goes across even nations where you might not think about the case. So there's lots of stuff like that that actually health spending and education spending can really bite into. And obviously this is, you know, positive. The Labour Party which proposes, you know, new 45% and 50% tax bands. I've got three questions for you, James. So this is the IMF. This is the institution that has spent decades forcing governments to take on neoliberal policies, the Washington Consensus, low taxes on the rich because it will destroy growth, cut government spending because it will create inflation. What's caused this turnaround? Have they apologized? And the third question. Are the IMF now to the left of Ed Miliband's 2015 manifesto? Yeah, well, I'm not going to speculate. I mean, it's a very difficult comparison to make on that one. We'll get him on and ask him. Yeah, well, why not? He wants to be a Corbynite now as well. It's very red washing going on here. Look, I mean, there's a long way to go. And there's been a, like, you know, the Washington Consensus has been fragmenting certainly since 2013, maybe even a little earlier. One of the things that one of the guys from the IMF points out is that average top rates of tax across the OECD have declined since 1980 from 62% to 31%. That's an appalling fall. And it's one that we have a long way to go before we were addressed. But in 2013, Olivier Blanchard, who was the chief economist of the IMF at the time, said we've been wrong about Keynesianism. Actually, what we thought Keynesianism did in terms of this technical argument about something called the multiplier, basically the effect that stimulus has on an economy, we've been wrong about that. And then in 2016, this is percolates through the IMF. And in 2016, they come out actually very strongly and say, look, austerity, as it has been applied, just doesn't work. It doesn't do the things that it claims it's done. They defend liberalisation in some way. It's not that they've got really work. It's not that they're not waving the red flag. It's still the IMF. But, you know, they say in dealing with the GFC, the global financial crisis, austerity has been a disaster. There's been a disaster in this country in which it's been implemented, including the UK. So that's what they have to say. It's been going. The consensus has been going for a long time now. And it finally looks like it's really started to crack. This is an important strategic question for the Labour Party, of course. And beyond that, for the left, which is that actually our opponents are going to feel actually very free to move beyond austerity. And so we have to think about how the right is going to try to buy off. It also means we can be bold. We can be bold. So it's fair to say the IMF are not quite woke, but they're just catching up what was already the consensus on among most economists who weren't sort of trapped in that bubble of financiers. Pushing the economic debate forward this week, or released last week, is a report from UCL which is proposing universal basic services. This is pitched slightly in opposition to universal basic income, or as an alternative to universal basic income. And the idea is that to improve our society so that everyone can participate fully in the economy, what we should be proposing is to expand the principles that undergird the NHS and housing to all the areas, or most of the areas, that are essential to participate in life, to lead a good life. So that includes housing, communication, the internet, food, and shut- oh, I've already said housing. Housing, the internet. Food. Transport. That's the fourth one. We're actually going to get them all up now. Let's get all those details up now. So we'll get what they proposed for housing first. So for housing, they are proposing doubling the existing social housing stock by funding the building of 1.5 million new social houses. The new units would be offered on a needs basis at zero rent with utilities provided at zero charge. This will cost six billion a year, rising to 13 billion within seven years. That's a very ambitious proposal. The call for council homes is getting, ah, the call for council homes is getting more and more popular, more and more hegemonic, but no one's quite talked about making them free yet. I mean, free rent. That would not just improve the quality of people's lives, but it would turbocharge the economy. Imagine you're not spending £600 a week on rent. What are you going to do with that money? Some of it you're going to save. A lot of it you're going to spend in the local economy. That's going to be massive. The next one is food. We're going to go to food. Food, another obvious essential in life. We're going to provide one third of meals for the 2.2 million households experiencing food insecurity, and this is going to cost £4 billion per year. I'm not sure if I did say how much it's going to cost last time. We're going to get on to costs in a second. This is something we, again, we don't really talk about free food. It makes a lot of sense in a period where we've got millions of families relying on food banks. Why doesn't the state just provide that? And a massive problem with child nutrition as well, right? There's a real, real concern about children who go home from school and in the school holidays have massive, massive food poverty and it has a real developmental effect. And so this is one of the great social evils that we should be thinking of just as we did after the war. Next one, transport. So we're going to extend freedom passes for bus services to all. And if bus use increases by 260%, this will cost £5 billion a year. Bargain, IMO. So this is the freedom passes that currently you get if you're over 60. That means you can get on any bus for free. My parents both have it. They absolutely love it. I saw my dad on the night bus the other day. He was on the bus for free. I was paying however much it cost on an oyster, £1.50. How unjust is that? Not any longer under this proposal. And finally, potentially most ambitious is information. So they're going to provide everyone with a basic phone, TV license and internet which is going to cost £20 billion a year. That's quite a lot. I love this proposal. I think it's exactly the kind of ambitious, radical social democracy we should be talking about. It's taking the essentials of life out of commodity circulation. This would presumably be democratically controlled and it really gives us freedom to live a decent life experiment. I was looking on Twitter about people commenting on American healthcare and one point they were making is imagine if we have free healthcare. Imagine how much more freedom you have to challenge your boss when your health insurance isn't connected to your work. Imagine if we have housing and food provided. Imagine how much we can demand in the workplace. Imagine how ambitious we can be. In that sense it's a classic bridging demand but it allows that it actually has positive outcomes that go beyond it. Like you, I think it's a really ambitious and important report. I think it does something very important which is think about the way in which societies cohere. One of my favourite lines comes from a sociologist called Titmus, R.H. Titmus, who makes the point and it's a very obvious point in some ways that actually unless you have a system in which the rich or even the well-off are committed to something like society, so they're not incentivised to avoid tax because it will always be cheaper for them to find a way to privately provide for themselves rather than paying to society. So that sense is really, really important and it can really be done by these kind of universal things. The two things that I think are really striking is the transport thing, because like you my parents both have freedom passes and they love it, and the digital thing which I think is also really, really ambitious. One of the things the report says it's quite relaxed about provision. It says it can come from the private sector, it can come from sort of public expenditure, or it can come from voluntary organisations but these need to be democratically controlled. I think provision is an important question, actually that can have a real impact on cost, it can have a real impact on actually what kind of services these are and what kind of houses these are. If you're building 1.5 million new houses for zero rent, I mean that's got to be done by this day, I can't really see how anyone else is going to provide that unless we have a terrible sort of rebirth of PFI but I don't think anyone's particularly in the mood to do that. What about, so the Left has been talking over the last seven years, many about defending current services from austerity and universal basic income. Do you prefer this to UBI? Yeah, I absolutely do. I think it does something really important which uncouples this stuff from a monetary relation. And so basically, you're not being given money which can go then into the hand of rentiers so it can go into the hands of your landlord or it can go into the hands of a monopolist. And these are people who will raise the prices according to universal basic income. So I've always been very skeptical about in our current economy, in our current political economic setup introducing basically a chunk of cash that can then go into the hands of people who run the world. This is much, much better and actually provides the sense that it's something you can move beyond as well. The question for me though is about infrastructure. So it's really, really important for us to get a sense that you don't just have free buses but you have buses that run more than once a day. You don't just have the ability to access transport but you have transport more equally distributed. Massive spend on transport in London and that is understandable but the spend across the rest of the UK is really, really poor. Our examples for what happens when you make something universal and free are quite good. NHS provision is pretty good. It's not like because it's free it got worse. I prefer it to UBI. I think my critique of UBI can be expressed in the same way as the right wing one which is that money is going to get wasted but for me it's not going to get wasted because of booze and gambling. It's going to get wasted because that goes straight into the pocket of an ordinary person and then at the beginning of the month it goes straight into the pocket of a landlord and that's just the state subsidizing people who are milking us all. So let's move to UBI but first of all let's expropriate the rentiers, build a social housing so we can actually spend the UBI on booze and not gambling but booze and books and cinema and rents already sorted. Cinema I feel like I'm sort of learning French or something. You need a nice black sweater. How are they going to pay for it? We'll do this very quickly but in total everything they suggest is going to come to £42 billion per year. It sounds like a lot. It's only 2.3% of GDP which for what you're getting that seems like bang for your buck. We've already discussed about how this itself would promote growth more money in people's pockets. It means more money circulating, more jobs, more taxes. They're going to fund it, well they've suggested funding it by lowering the personal tax allowance which means you pay tax from a lower threshold than you currently do. They're saying about four and a half K. That covers the whole of it. You might argue that we should pay for it by just taxing the rich. I think their argument is this makes it politically easier, easier to collect if you've got a broader tax base and also by their sums this still works out incredibly progressive. So it's going to increase the incomes, the weekly incomes of people at the bottom by £80 a week is what they're saying. I don't think you should give up on the idea of taking quite a substantial chunk of this from those who have profited for years over the fact that there isn't sufficient social housing provision. We can figure out where to tax it from but at the same time how much time do we want to think about taxing landlords and how much time do we want to think about taking away the institutional power they have. That's sort of really the priority, isn't it? Is it fully automated luxury communism? No, but it might be a step on the way there. It's a start, right? We're going to move on to the Austrian elections in the land of... I'm not sure what we were watching there. In the land of the Donald Duck. In the land of... That Scrooge McDuck. Oh, Scrooge. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, my popular culture. So in the world of economic reports the left is doing quite well. The left is hegemonic. In the world of actually existing elections in Europe there is another specter haunting us. There is indeed. And unfortunately it's the specter of the right and the far right. And what I'm obviously talking about here is the election in Austria over the weekend which brought out this Patrick Bateman looking guy who is now Jesus Christ. The images came a little bit before the punchline. So this is Sebastian Kurz who looks like Patrick Bateman. That's why you were just showing that video. He really looks like Patrick Bateman. He is the leader of the Austrian People's Party and he will very shortly be the Austrian Chancellor. The People's Party is the traditional conservative Christian Democratic Party very fusty very kind of old school conservative. He's brightened up a bit. He's changed their logo to Turquoise brought in some non-political people which may sound familiar from Monsieur Macron and also sort of very personally branded it which is also a common right wing tactic. With his young dashing good looks and his young young millennial now in power hates migrants. Here's one secret trick. Millennial xenophobes. Part of this is the failure of right wing social democracy and the Social Democrats have been in a grand coalition in Austria and they have been basically given their imprint to technocratic right wing rule and has tainted them in an electoral it's his political background that worries me. I am very worried about Sebastian Kurz. While he was a minister he promoted very very strong xenophobic policies he said to send all refugees back harden all European borders even further than they already are. He has supported a full ban on the Burka calling it not a religious symbol but a symbol for a counter society and he's made much of his rather inflated role in bringing the migrant route in the West Balkans so that the entry point quite dangerous entry point in fact taken into Europe.  The context is basically there was a populist right wing party that was doing Poland's dust for freedom party. Freedom party and he's taken on quite a lot of their tracks. It's again quite common stories about the institutional party police officers. Now no one in Austria can find a police officer or a judge who has worn a headscarf but you know so this guy is going to have an impact. There's been a very dirty campaign in which social democrats have really covered themselves in Mark. They probably funded this site this website smearing him in an anti-Semitic way at the same time he's been really profiting on just out and out racism so yeah this is bad it's going to it's likely that on a European level we'll see him join Orban in Hungary the law and justice party in Poland. These are kind of quite extreme xenophobic right wing parties demand much much harsher treatment of migrants than already is the case in Europe and you know this party itself has profited on a kind of very very right wing so it won't be afraid to attack Brussels as it needs to. It's likely it will join the what's sometimes group as coalition of kind of central European countries Poland, Czech Republic Slovakia, Hungary who have been a very very strong regressive voice Do you have an explanation for that bunching of authoritarian populism? Yeah well look I think in Central Europe I think the long term story here is one of massive injustice within the EU in which these are all countries that were brought very quickly into the EU quite rightly many of them look suspiciously at Germany as profiting off the way in which they accession the EU so Germany's kind of use of guest workers and things like that they were also promised quite a large amount of kind of structural funding from the EU not all of which has arrived some of it has but not all of it has so there's a sense that they're very much a kind of second tier within the EU sort of Franco-German members club it's important to note I guess that this party, the far right party the freedom party is the party of York Haider who some viewers may remember in 2000 he was brought into governing coalition and there were diplomatic sanctions against Austria across Europe that isn't going to happen now because this is the new face of Europe The new normal thing is that the social democratic party dropped their anti-semitic campaigns and take on something that looks a bit like Corbinism but I don't think we know enough about Austrian politics to say whether or not that's going to happen we're now going to have a break when I come back I'm going to be interviewing Lara McNeil about yesterday's or the weekend's young Labour conference see you in two minutes self hey Paul things have really changed but for all the darkness every cause has an effect for all the talk of change the present moment is really one of crisis a crisis of democratic representation of identity a climate crisis of a failing economic model which isn't working for most people but it's beholden to advertisers or the political ambitions of oligarchs which is why in 2013 we founded Navara Media online corporate media we are funded by our subscribers there's no tax avoiders, there's no oil money and there's no lords what we're creating is media for you which quite simply you make possible looking to raise £40,000 that will allow us to not only keep on paying our contributors but give them a little bit more as well as keep our studio and take a look at the fantastic Navara events nationwide to help us get there go to support.navaramedia.com and give a one-off donation or even better sign up for a subscription we've already achieved so much but the truth is we've barely started welcome back we've been planning to update that advert for a while you've been watching it for a few months it's very important for us one because we need your kind donations to continue this operation and two because it gives us two minutes to shuffle the chairs that's what was going on then I'm delighted to be joined by Lara McNeil welcome to the show Lara, you are vice chair of Labour students and on the London Young Labour Committee of course you're here because Young Labour, the UK-wide one, had their conference this weekend and it's made the news because it had some rather bold policies get passed so we had capital controls we had leaving NATO we had nationalising the banks it's a pivot for Young Labour, isn't it? Yeah, I think it's exciting I think a lot of it was in the... young people always seemed to be maybe more left-wing in the Labour Party or in general and I think after called being in power in the Labour Party for the last two years maybe we're starting to see some of that actually translate into policy, into motions and I'm really impressed that Young Labour are leading the way on some serious issues so it's like when we actually get into power we've got some policy which we've recommended to the National Policy Forum that's the process Oh so that's how this works this goes to the National Policy Forum proposed by Young Labour I think a lot of people maybe think that so we have conferences where we can pass policy this is specifically MPF recommendations from Young Labour essentially trying to represent what Young Labour wants so that the Labour Party listen to us in the manifesto and we're leading the way on some of these more radical things but they're going to be very important when we actually get into power Let's go through those three big ones and so leaving NATO what's the argument? So I honestly didn't know too much about it and I walked in that conference room not going to lie that's international affairs has never been my strong point in politics however there were some really strong arguments from I think everyone who spoke on that debate about four rounds of speeches were all first time delegates which was really exciting because they were really sort of intellectual speeches about essentially how NATO has been an excuse or been associated with American imperialism and there were arguments against and I think I felt that they did kind of reminisce a little bit back to the another Europe as possible with the scope on the campaign about being inside NATO being able to remain in reform exactly so I think the points made for were very sort of strong and gave very examples there's actually kind of an emotional debate talking about some of the things that the West have done and how we need to think seriously about that and not play into sort of rhetoric around how sort of excusing America for its actions so it was a good debate on both sides but I'm happy with it we'll move to capital controls and nationalising the banks roll them into one capital controls I saw I read the motions it was mentioning a lot about Syriza so this is people really learning from left wing attempts at government around Europe and learning from them what were the arguments for capital controls and for nationalising the banks again I think it was like learning from us I think a lot of what the Tories throw at us is oh look at these socialist countries or these socialist experiments that haven't worked I think we can't afford to be a social experiment that doesn't work it's about looking through and how we're actually going to implement our manifesto when we get into power nationalising the banks had some very strong arguments behind it after the financial crash and I think yeah it's just strong left wing economic policy which is ultimately what we're going to have to do when we get into an inevitably international capital doesn't like it so the more controversial than what was passed was perhaps what wasn't passed so there were two controversies misunderstood or otherwise that can be for you to explain one that young Labour voted against a motion which was for a two state solution in Israel and Palestine and the other which was that they voted against defending freedom of movement can we start with the two state solution what went on there the controversial one because I think it probably got misconstrued a little bit especially the media we don't have any policy on Israel Palestine as young Labour the Labour Party's policy is a two state solution and that is essentially by definition what young Labour sort of go with and I think a two state solution a better motion would have probably passed what was wrong with the motion so essentially the TUC in general so obviously at this conference I don't think they felt like they could vote for it because groups it was mentioning in the motion aren't supportive of BDS policy some unions don't take as bigger stance on that but the TUC essentially have a version of they want to disinvest from companies boycott companies that profit out of this illegal settlements in Israel and I think they didn't feel like they thought it was sort of saying this is what we should do when Palestinian trade unions Palestinian people are calling for this so it was sort of ignoring those wishes and instead of mentioning groups that trade unions are already working with on this it mentioned some more fringe groups which so they didn't feel like the motion was that it didn't address it properly and because it was a little bit we already have a two state solution policy in the Labour Party having a motion that was sort of similar but a little bit more confused that it would confuse the policy so yeah as I say we don't actually have a policy on it as young Labour so I think it was unfair to say that young Labour disagreed two state solution because I honestly don't think that would be true like I certainly wouldn't go against that looking at that motion it did seem like a slightly bizarre motion that referenced specific groups which is a bit uncommon for that kind of thing the motion which I read which did seem more like it was a position which was genuinely opposed by young Labour was defending freedom of movement that was rejected outright can you explain what went on there? Yeah so the free movement motion it didn't really mention I know you had this discussion on the fix a few episodes back and I think that was really good because you actually talked about how you would deal with the current system like not to look at it like everything's fine because honestly trade unions don't think that workers don't think that everything's fine right now I think we needed to talk more about the motion didn't mention anything about closed shops anything about how we're going to deal with sort of undermining collective bargaining that happens how we're actually going to address the problem so basically we're saying capitalism is a problem not immigrants but it didn't have any steps on how to actually solve the problem and we passed some really good policy as well at this conference we're selecting Muggent Rights and things like that and people speaking against the motion were not saying they don't want high immigration they want high levels of immigration they just don't want to discriminate against people who aren't from the EU and unions in general were speaking about how it's used by capitalists essentially to undermine collective bargaining to cover up sort of the skill shortages in this country by employing lots of nurses and things from the EU we're not we're covering up some of the problems that we have in educating British workers so there were strong arguments for and against and I think it's really difficult not to get caught up in you want to be careful you do not want to like migrate about or anything like that and because you want high levels of immigration I think it was really difficult we had a good debate on trying to separate those the criticism would be that it buys into some common misconceptions about immigration that migration from the EU significantly reduces wages which it doesn't it doesn't seem to be a huge barrier to union organisation that would be much more to do with the trade union act or other laws which limit the ability to function as a trade union so the question would be why not just focus on those and take a bold stand about freedom of movement in terms of whether or not there was enough in the policy so this was from Northwest Unite members in their Twitter so it says there's no freedom with free movement does that statement sum up how you feel about it? I'm not united so I can't say obviously what they're thinking specifically on that in that tweet I think possibly what they're trying to get at is we are in a capitalist system and a lot of migrants come here to work here for a better life but they're not free and they are exploited by their employers still and often it uses a threat against workers already in this country to say you can employ these workers on less money and things like that so I think it's probably talking about the system in general is not working and going back to the motion it was saying defend and extend free movement so it was defending the current system which is used by capitalists I'm not sure I'd say that would sum up my view on it but I know a lot of strong feelings by unions that are organising migrant workers so it's not about British workers versus migrant workers the people coming up to speak on it were saying how this affects migrant workers as well and their rights and people spent so much time organising these workers as well and yes we did pass pro-migrant policy along with that and so that would be my view on it Final question we'll move away from the policies one of the most important constitutional roles young labour has within the Labour Party in a position on the NEC I think that comes up for election next year I know there's been some controversies about how democracy functions within young labour whether there's some fiddling from above I know there was a conference where labour students were given that was this conference so it was surprising how the results turned out because a third of those are delegates so you were expecting that to be watered down yeah but in your overall assessment of how organised how it's going as an institution does it have a bright future or are there still challenges to making this an organisation where members really have a voice so yeah it's got like 95,000 members now it's a huge organisation it's tripled in membership and we're having this democracy view in the Labour Party and we hope that will cover young labour but yeah we have one rep on the NEC we have the National Youth Officer but they're not elected so we have elected members of staff which often leads to conflict between the political waves of the elected committee staff and things like that and I think this conference was decided the location and the timing and the delegate make up was all decided by the NEC which has two young members on it one of which is the youth rep, one of which is the CLP rep rear so everything is dictated over the current committee who are elected by the young members and I think the democracy view is going to be good if it covers us but it's a shame that had to come from above that had to come from Jeremy, that had to come from democratisation of the party rather than what we want as young members and have been calling for a long long long time and it's a shame that the Labour Party but in general like you are sort of patronised as a movement I mean are they worried that we are going to be too radical what are they worried about and it's like you should trust young workers you might have stoked that fear a little bit this weekend well I'm not sure but I think there's a lot of frustration and they should trust the youth movement to be autonomous like they only just got their own bank account for young people like it's moving slowly but I hope it will be in the right direction it's unfortunate it has to come from sort of a democracy view from above though isn't it really alright we're going to have to end it there Lauren and Neil thank you so much for joining us I'm sure we'll have you back on to talk about the future of young Labour or the whole Labour Party this was The Fix see you in a week


What's happening guys? It's Shane here, your friendly success satellite based radio navigation system with another video. This time we're going to be talking about is a finance degree worth it. We're going to go over the degree itself, what it entails, how much you get paid for jobs that you might get after getting the degree, what the job market's like, what your job satisfaction is going to be like, and all those related things that you're going to want to know about. At the end of this video, you're going to have a much better understanding of whether this degree is worth it for you or not. Now, if you've seen my video titled is an accounting degree worth it, you might be wondering, what is the difference between an accounting and a finance degree? I get this question in the comments all the time. Accounting focuses more on the daily management of records and reports in order to measure the company's performance. In finance, you're going to be using a lot of the same information, but you're going to use it in order to forecast future performance and future growth. Now, of course, this information could be used for a lot of different things, but mainly it's going to be focused on planning company strategy and growth. Simply put, accounting is more backward looking, whereas finance is more forward looking. And now that we have that comparison out of the way, let's proceed to the comparison between clicking the like button now and clicking it later. There's really not that much difference. So go ahead and just click it now. So you can make my financial advisor stop telling me to tell you to click the like button. So first, we're going to start off with salary, and I'm going to be grading each one of these from one to 10. So we're going to be going over four main things in this video that are very important when it comes to evaluating degrees. First of all, we're going to be talking about salary of different jobs that you might get after graduating with this degree. We're also going to go over the satisfaction that you might have in these different jobs. Then we're going to go on to the demand. And then lastly, we're going to talk about certain x factors that might make it better or worse. So first, let's talk about salary. Now, very similar to accounting, you do have a lot of flexibility when it comes to what types of jobs and careers that you can go into after you get your degree. Now some of the common careers that you're going to see over and over again when you do research are going to be personal financial advisor, financial manager, and then also financial analyst. Now just overall with finance as a degree, one would expect to make around $55,000 a year in the first five years after graduating and then nearly 100,000 about $98,600 a year after 10 years or more on average. But that's just in general what people who graduate with a finance degree reported. There's going to be a huge variation depending on what career that you go into. So financial analysts, for instance, are going to make $81,000 a year. There's 487,000 jobs available and it's growing at 5%. For personal financial advisors, they're going to make $87,000 a year. There are a lot of things that aren't mentioned when it comes to these majors. A lot of the time you're going to be getting bonuses, sometimes you might even be getting stock options. On top of this, you could work with a company or you could start your own business where you'd make quite a bit more. Because of the commission based structure in these careers, the money that you earn is going to depend quite a bit on how much you work and how hard you work. Now out of the common jobs that you're going to see people with finance majors get, the highest paying one is definitely going to be a financial manager. They make around $129,000 a year. Now, another thing, and this is something that I talked about in the video where I talked about the careers that make the most millionaires, finance related careers made up a significant portion of both the top 10% of earners as well as the top 1% of earners. And beyond that, they made up a significant portion of the top .99.5th percentile of earners. So the top, top, top earners in the United States of America. So this is what you would call a high risk, high reward degree and the careers that you go into with this degree, a lot of the time are going to be the same. Now, one thing I always like to mention is people who get business degrees and get some experience in the business world are going to be much more likely to be successful as entrepreneurs. I did a video on the degrees that create the most millionaires. And in that video, finance was one of the top 10 degrees. And a lot of the time it's not just because of the fact that you can get really good jobs, but it's also because of the fact that it teaches you how to invest at a young age. And later on, you're much more likely to become an entrepreneur, which is going to give you a much better chance of becoming a millionaire. So for all these reasons, I'm going to go ahead and give finance a 9.5 out of 10 rating when it comes to salary. Next, let's go ahead and talk about satisfaction. No, not that type of satisfaction. That's not what I'm talking about. With satisfaction, what I mean is the percentage of employees that are satisfied with their job, of course. And also, I like to add in there the percentage of employees that think that their job has a lot of meaning, aka it gives a lot of value to the world. A high paying career doesn't necessarily mean you're going to be satisfied with your job. It also doesn't mean you're going to have much value in your job just because of the fact that you earn a lot. Now, according to payscale.com, jobs related to finance like personal financial advisor, financial manager, etc, are going to have a average or below average score when it comes to meaning personal financial planning, aka personal financial advisor is going to have the highest meaning score when it comes to all the finance related careers. However, as you can see, most of them have a score of 50% or even below 50%. This is really low when you compare it to healthcare related degrees or education degrees. However, meaning isn't the end all be all. Everybody's different and meaning and job satisfaction are going to be different for everyone out there. There are many careers out there that are extremely meaningful. For instance, medical doctors, for instance, where there's a lot of people who are absolutely miserable doing it just because they're not a good fit for the job. So that's why we don't just look at meaning. We also want to look at overall job satisfaction out of the three careers that we mentioned, a higher than average percentage of them would say that they're overall satisfied with their job. Now, this could be because a bunch of different reasons, but one of them, for instance, would be that the high salary sometimes can compensate for the lack of meaning in someone's career. It could also mean that although the career itself doesn't have very much meaning, they enjoy doing the job. And this makes sense. I mean, if somebody paid me to play video games all day long, I would really enjoy doing it even though I wouldn't necessarily be helping the rest of the world. So for some, it might not be enough to say that their job's perfect, but it's one that they can overall be happy with. With a lot of finance related careers, you're going to be in a very competitive environment and you're going to be working extremely long hours.  Again, this one is a high risk, high reward career. A lot of it is going to be commission or incentive based. So people who are really competitive and they're extremely driven are going to probably excel. So overall, I'm going to go ahead and give this one a seven for satisfaction. Next, we're going to go ahead and talk about demand. So we found out that it's possible for the right person to be extremely happy with finance related careers, but is there enough happiness to go around? Or will you need to look all over the country just to be able to find your first job? Now, finance does have one of the lowest unemployment rates out of all the different degrees. And so you're probably going to be able to find a job pretty much wherever you live. Now, talking more specifically about some of the common careers that you would get with the finance degree that we were discussing before, for financial analysts, there's going to be around 487,000 jobs available. And the average growth rate for this occupation is 5%, which is faster than average over the next 10 years. For personal financial advisor, there's 263,000 jobs available. And it's growing at 4%, which is about average. So there's less than half the amount of jobs available compared to the financial analyst. And it's growing a little bit slower. However, for financial managers, there's 697,000 jobs available. And it's growing at a ridiculous 15%, which is much faster than average. Now, when it comes to finance, if you're going to aim, make sure you aim high. Now, to become a financial manager, you would only need a bachelor degree. However, some say that getting a master's is going to improve your chances. Now, business degrees in general are pretty great because of the fact that they're extremely flexible. So just because you get a degree in finance doesn't necessarily mean you have to work in one of these three careers. There's actually a ton of options out there for you. You can work in any number of other positions within a company. For instance, you could be a product manager. For certain people, moving up a ladder in a company, trying to get to those executive positions like vice president, president, CEO, CFO, etc., is what's going to make them happy. Now, on top of that, I've mentioned this before, but business degrees are much more likely to be successful when it comes to opening their own business later on down the line. So there's a ton of flexibility here. It really doesn't matter what industry you go into or what business you try to work for. Pretty much everyone is going to be hiring business majors and pretty much everyone is going to be hiring people who have finance skills. So overall, it might be a little bit difficult for you to get your very first job. That's always the toughest part.  After that, it's going to be relatively smooth sailing, but I would give this one an overall score of eight for demand. Now let's talk about X factors. Now, having a degree in finance, working in finance in general can come with a lot of financial freedom. First of all, if you major in finance, you're very likely going to be someone who is going to be investing at a young age. Most people don't start investing until their 30s, sometimes even 40s. They don't even start thinking about retirement and thinking about saving their money and investing it instead of just spending it. So if you start investing in your 20s, you're way, way, way ahead of the curve. On top of this, you're going to be looking at financial markets all the time. And so there's a very good chance that you're going to recognize certain opportunities and that might lead you to starting a business or just getting a job in a certain industry that you think is going to do really well. So the diversity of knowledge and expertise is one of the things that makes this degree very interesting. You see all these different investing and finance related channels popping up on YouTube. And so a lot more people are getting interested in this subject. You're probably not going to become the super cool, super rich Jordan Belfort, Wolf of Wall Street, making it rain $10 million a day. So before you go diving right in, if you don't have a passion for some of these subjects like personal finance investing, you definitely don't want to go into this one just for the money. You're going to get worked super hard. It's going to be an extremely competitive environment. You probably are not going to have a life, especially when you're starting off at the beginning. When it comes to working in an investment banking, for instance, a lot of people say that they're basically just selling their 20s. You're going to be working around the clock in your 20s, and then in your 30s, you might move into a position where you can have a more normal life, or you might have made enough money by then that you could actually just retire. With a lot of the other stuff, it's relatively objective. I'm giving you the stats and the figures. But when it comes to X factors, it is just my opinion. So keep that in mind. The finance industry in general, I think is a very, very good industry to get into. It's my favorite industry other than technology. And I talk about this a lot on the channel. If you're a salesman or a saleswoman, for instance, you don't want to work in a dying industry. If you're in sales, you want to work in technology, finance, you want to be selling maybe life insurance, something along those lines, because there's just so much more opportunity and industries that are booming. If you go into a dying industry, just about everything is going to be worse. Your salary is going to be lower. You're going to be worked really hard, and you're not going to be properly compensated for it. Your job satisfaction is also going to be very low just because of the fact that the company is constantly going to be trying to find ways to cut money. So overall, going into the finance industry is fantastic. So that's going to factor into this score a little bit. Another thing I always like to think about is whether something is future proof or not. So everybody knows AI is coming, automation is coming, streamlining of processes in general that are getting rid of jobs left and right is coming. You really want to think about what degrees, what skills, what careers are going to be future proof when this inevitably happens. Now business related degrees, in my opinion, are one of the most future proof degrees. The reason for this is because it really doesn't matter how many individual jobs get automated, you're always going to have to have people with business skills, people who make decisions and companies, people who look at the numbers, people who analyze the data, etc. And as I mentioned before, business related degrees are extremely flexible. In fact, I'd say they're probably the most flexible out of all the different types of degrees. So if by chance, your job does end up getting automated, there's a very good chance that the skills that you learned from that job will be able to transfer over to another job that maybe doesn't even exist right now. I also mentioned before how finance was one of the degrees that created the most millionaires. And that could be for so many different reasons, and it could have happened in so many different ways. But that's kind of the point when it comes to finance, it could have been that they got a really good high paying job, like they became an executive, for instance, it could have been that they ended up starting their own business. It also could have been that they were just extremely smart when it comes to investing, they started investing at a young age. And so therefore, they were easily able to become a millionaire. So overall, I'm going to go ahead and give finance a 10 for X factor. So I'm going to go over the pros and cons really quickly. So some of the pros, there's a ton of money when it comes to finance, they make high salaries in general, and there's an opportunity to make ridiculously high salaries if you're an extremely competitive, kind of a type personality who can make it that far. It's just a fact you make a lot of money when it comes to dealing with matters that are related to money. Then after you acquire more experience, and you get a few years under your belt, you might find yourself making even more money than that. This is one of those rare careers that's incentive based. And so you're not really exchanging your time for money, you're actually exchanging your work for money. So the harder you work, in some cases, probably the luckier you get, the more money you can make. The second thing is flexibility. I talked about this before an extremely flexible degree, so many different career paths you can take, so many industries you can work in, so many different occupations you can go into, and a lot of them are going to be high paying and in demand. Another thing is the demand. There's pretty high demand for this degree. There's going to be a lot of opportunities out there. And unlike a lot of degrees out there, you're probably not going to even have to leave your own city. Although if you want to go for the really high paying jobs, you're probably going to have to move to somewhere like New York. And the projected growth for finance related careers is either as fast as average or at the very least average. Now the cons, there's going to be a really big one and that is going to be stress. I was looking this up online and as you guys know, I've done hundreds of hundreds, if not thousands of hours of research by now on different careers and different degrees. And I always look on different forums, for instance, just to see what people are saying. And I noticed that out of a lot of careers and a lot of degrees I look at, this is one of the more stressful ones. A lot of the time you're going to be working like 80 hours a week, you're not going to have a life, especially if you're going for the really high paying jobs. So if you're someone who wants more of a work-life balance, which is totally okay, I'm somebody who likes having a work-life balance, for instance, I would much rather have that than make like twice as much. If you're in that category, finance might not be the best degree for you, although there are some careers out there in finance that aren't as heavy when it comes to the workload. Another con here is there's going to be years of continuing education depending on what career you go into. So for instance, if you're going for a CFA, this is a really difficult exam that a lot of people have to go into if they're financial analysts. People are going to dedicate hundreds and hundreds of hours in order to pass this exam. It's extremely difficult. And once you pass the exams, guess what? There's going to be a lot more continuing education and a lot more things that you have to learn. The learning is never going to end. The market is always going to be changing continuously. And so you are going to have to change with the market itself. You're going to have to be very adaptable and willing to learn new skills. Now this might be positive for some and negative for others. Definitely negative for me. That's why I put in the negative column, right? Don't get me wrong. I like learning new stuff, but I don't want to be forced into a situation where I have to constantly be studying and not be getting paid for that studying in my hours that I have off. I want that to be an option, not something that I have to do. Now, considering everything that I said in this video, adding all of the scores up and dividing by four, I would give finance an overall score of about 8.6 out of 10. It's a lot of advantages to getting a degree in finance. It's not always going to be an easy road. Everything is subjective for some people. This might be like a one out of 10.  And for some people, this might be like an 11 out of 10 best career ever. You love that super competitive environment where you get to work 80 to 100 hours a week. That's why it's so important that you always do your research, look into it for yourself. If you're interested in a certain career, for instance, I would really recommend contacting people who are currently doing that career. You can do that on Facebook, LinkedIn, you can reach out through your own personal network. You can even cold call people, just open up your local phone book. Always be really nice. Always be very respectful of their time because everybody's really busy, especially people who went into the finance industry. Not everybody is going to want to talk to, but if you do enough, you're going to find somebody who will talk to you and you will be able to get a really good idea of what the career is like and they'll be able to give you good advice. Then at that point, you can reverse engineer it and figure out what steps that you would have to take in order to get to that career. Sometimes that will involve getting a finance degree. Sometimes it will involve getting a finance degree and then maybe an MBA. Sometimes it will involve going to a certain school instead of another school. There's a lot of different variations there and that's why it's so important that you do your research up front. So consider the pros and cons that I mentioned. Think about other things that I talked about in the video. Do your own research and then figure out whether it's a good fit for you or not. As always, don't forget to smash the like button, hit the subscribe button, ring the notification bell, comment down below any thoughts, comments, criticisms, et cetera that you have on the video. And before you go, make sure to check out my other videos right here. I made them just for you.


something happens that doesn't fit into your reality picture and you're like wow I guess I didn't know what reality really was I thought I knew but here's something that happened and if you have the courage to to accept that and not toss it into the garbage bin of anomaly or I can't explain that or that didn't happen then you know and you're able to take it in then an expansion is possible or an initiation into a larger reality than you had known