Today, we're going to talk about government policies toward education. That is, of course, one huge area of government intervention in many, many different ways. Governments own and operate public schools at the K through 12 level, state college and university systems. They offer tuition subsidies, some federal, some state, various grants, loan policies. There's research funding from the government that helps support universities and colleges. There are laws like compulsory education, which require every child up to a certain age to be in school for a certain number of days per year. Required curriculums, teacher certification programs, high stakes testing, and much, much, much more. So there's a huge range of intervention. Government is extremely involved in trying to regulate, define, subsidize education. Libertarians oppose much or all of this intervention. There are plausible arguments, at least, for some modest degree of government involvement in education, although their costs even of that, it's a hard question as to whether there should be even this limited involvement, but certainly libertarians will argue against the vast majority of what occurs or for substantially enormously reduced degree of intervention. So I'm going to address these issues in the following way. I'm first going to talk about the question of why should government subsidize education at all? In any way in trying to promote education and then talk about the potential costs of those subsidies. That is looking at the general question of why are we distorting the market at all? Why don't we treat education just like every other good and let supply and demand determine how much is produced of that good? After talking about that and concluding that it's not so clear that we should be subsidizing at all, I'll take the different question of given we're subsidizing, if we are subsidizing, how should we subsidize and argue against the current approach? Go from that to talking about vouchers or tax credits as a way to encourage education to subsidize if government is going to be involved in some way rather than operating public schools. And finally, sort of accept that maybe we're going to have public schools for a long time, but are there ways that we could reduce the negative effects of public schools? Could we make public schools better? Are there some changes in the way those operate and talk about potential, the good ideas for making them better and some bad ways that people are trying to make them better? So the first big question is, why do we treat education differently than all the other things that people buy and sell? We let people make their own decisions about very important life decisions. How many children to have, most of the decisions about how to raise your children, about savings, about whom to marry, about what occupation to go into, about everything. Why isn't education just another thing that people should be able to decide? Do they want it? Is it useful? How much should they get? How much should they get for their children? So there are three standard arguments as to why education should be treated differently than markets for supply and demand, for a toaster ovens, or for all sorts of other standard goods and services. And they're under the labels of externalities, myopia, and credit constraints. And I'll talk about each of these a little bit. The externality argument says that my education has a beneficial effect on you. That means that when I decide whether to get some education, I'm likely to only look at the private benefit and cost to me and not recognize that if I get more educated, I'm helping everybody else that I might work with or interact with or things like that. Now a lot of people have made that argument, including many libertarians like Milton Friedman, and it seems plausible at some level. If everyone reads and writes the same language, potentially they can communicate, they can do business together, and things like that. If everyone knows the same rules of arithmetic or calculus, one can certainly imagine that there are ways in which that's beneficial. So the notion that there are some positive spillovers, from some kinds of education at least, I don't think should be dismissed out of hand. And certainly if we're talking about K through 3 or K through 6 education, everyone getting at least the basics of the 3Rs or something like that may make some sense. Now that doesn't by itself mean we need government to make it happen, but it's not a completely silly argument. A second argument for subsidizing education is that some parents will not make good decisions on behalf of their children. Children of course are not positioned to decide whether or how much education to get. Some parents should be sending their kids to school but won't, will instead let them sit at home or have them work in the fields if it's an agricultural society or have them apprentice in the family business or something like that, and that's not necessarily the right decision for those kids. It's selfish or short-sighted or myopic decision by the parents, and therefore we need to subsidize to encourage such parents to send their kids to school by making it cheaper that might incentivize them to go ahead and let the kids go to school instead of using them to bring the crops in or whatever. A third argument says there's lots of people who know that education is useful, it's beneficial for their children. They would like their kids to have that education, but they can't afford it. Children of course cost money, as we'll discuss it doesn't need to be as expensive as it is, but certainly it costs something. So people with very limited means may want to send their kids to school but have difficulty in doing so because they can't access the money, they can't easily borrow because they're not likely to have enough income to pay back the borrowing that would entail and so on and so forth. So all of these arguments have some element of truth. I wouldn't want to say that they're evilly motivated, they're reasonably motivated, they go to reasonable interest, whether they're large or small is of course a very different question whether they apply to a broad range of education. All kinds of education and so on and so forth is much harder. They give us some basis for thinking that there might be some reason to intervene to subsidize, to encourage people to get more education than they would if it were entirely up to them, entirely in a free market. Yet there are going to be costs of subsidizing education. So most importantly, if government's going to subsidize education, it has to decide what is education. It has to define it. If it were, say, going to give people vouchers to go out and purchase education, it's got to say what those vouchers can be used to purchase. Can those vouchers be used to purchase something that looks like a standard elementary school now? Or can it purchase an education in a ski instruction school or a French immersion school or a science immersion school? Can it purchase having kids be trained just to bring the crops in from the field? What does it go for? And with that means that government has this huge power over the education marketplace because once it's doing the paying, it's going to inevitably have to be doing the defining. Otherwise, the policy just doesn't make any sense. That has the grave danger that it promotes huge standardization. Government officials will get together, there will be committees, there will be studies, and they will say the right kind of education is whatever it is, maybe something that looks like today. And they will not accept that for many kids, the standard education isn't especially effective or at least not by itself. Maybe lots of kids should have half of what they currently get now, but half should be something that's more fun or more interesting, more sports or more science or more language or a whole range of things we haven't even thought of and that bureaucrats won't ever think of, but individual parents might think of and do things that are beneficial to those kids. Now, you might say that's going to be more important when you get to be 13 or 15 or 20 than if you're seven, where pretty much every kid maybe should be mainly learning the three Rs, but still it's going to apply in some measure everywhere. So if we're subsidizing education, if the government is doing it, that's going to mean standardization and there's potential huge loss from matching people with different interests, skills, and needs to different kinds of education. Currently related, government being in this business is going to discourage innovation. If there's a marketplace full of people using their money or possibly as we'll discuss using vouchers to purchase education, then there's an incentive for people who think they have something new to offer, maybe a school for K through six year olds that starts teaching computer science skills along with reading and writing on day one instead of only when you get to junior high school or high school. There could be a strong incentive to innovate and offer that and maybe it will be popular and very useful for a lot of people, but if the government's defining what the subsidy can go for, your incentives to do that are likely to be quite limited. In the worst case of course, if government is defining an education, it has the power to engage in thought control. It's not an accident that virtually all totalitarian regimes have tried to control their education systems as one of their primary goals. Extreme cases like Communist China or Soviet Union, indoctrering everyone to accept the wisdom of the government, the validity of your government, so on. We don't see that in any serious way in places like the United States, Western Europe, modern economies now, but the potential is there. Slopes can be slippery. Even the fact that government is subsidizing education sends a small bit of thought control that says you need the government to have education, but that's not true. You can have education easily without the government. So by getting in that business, the government is already taking a stand that tries to push people to think about education a certain way. Government involvement, government providing a subsidy, also forces it to take a stand on a bunch of messy issues. Should colleges, high schools, whatever, have speech codes? Should they practice affirmative action? Should they have single-sex education and so on? Those have been very controversial issues for decades now. If the government is subsidizing education, it's in at a minimum an awkward position because on the one hand you might think, gee, single-sex education could be a good thing. Maybe it's better for some women to only be with women in college and maybe it's better for some men. Maybe affirmative action in hiring is actually a useful thing for creating a good school and we would want some schools to be able to do it. And yet, those types of actions are sufficiently controversial and may run against into constitutional issues that if the government is providing a subsidy, it's at a minimum awkward and complicated to decide where you draw these lines and what is allowed and what is not. So that's another cost of having the government be involved. And of course, government subsidizing education has the direct cost. We spend tens of billions of dollars on education. So that's part of the cost plus the loss from the distortions caused by the taxation necessary to fund it. So all the subsidy comes with a bunch of negatives that need to be considered and compared to the possible benefits from spillovers to other peoples, from one person's education to everyone else's, from helping kids who are born with parents who don't want to send them to school or helping people who can't afford to send their kids to school. So what's the bottom line on that? I'm not going to take a strong, strong bottom line on that except to say the level of subsidy that U.S. and other places currently provide seems grossly excessive. It's way beyond making sure that every eight-year-old gets a chance to learn to read and write. We have government subsidizing college, universities, business schools, dental schools, law schools and so on. All of these issues that might argue for some government subsidy, the beneficial spillovers, the myopia, they don't apply with anything like the same kind of force to a 26-year-old who wants to get an MBA, as they might to a five-year-old who might happen to be born into a family where the parents aren't doing the thing that's in the child's best interest. So at a minimum, I think thoughtful considerations suggest way less subsidy than we currently have. Now, it's of course inevitable that for the foreseeable future, we're going to continue to subsidize probably substantially but certainly to some degree. So then there's a question of if government is going to try to promote more education than would occur otherwise, okay, how should it do so? There are many current approaches now, especially government-owned and operated schools that's very widespread at the K-12 level and it's also widespread at the college level. About three-quarters of enrollments in the U.S. are in public-owned and operated schools. You could also consider things like grants, scholarships, vouchers and tax credit that we'll get to. The key point I want to make is that the subsidy argument, the idea that people are not getting as much education as would be socially desirable on their own, even if it's right, okay, in no way shape or form that government needs to be owning and operating the schools. There's no market failure. There's no, none of these arguments says that no one knows how to create a school, that there are monopoly problems or any sort of externality or inefficiency in building a school and advertising a school and enrolling students in your school and hiring teachers and all of that, okay. So if you want to subsidize education, you don't need to have any government-owned or operated schools. It can all be accomplished by giving purchasing power to the people who are not getting as much education as you think they should be getting for themselves or purchasing for their children. Now, how can you do that? How can you transfer this purchasing power so that people have more ability to purchase education in the marketplace? There are two main ways, vouchers and tax credits. I'm going to talk about vouchers because it's just slightly simpler. I don't have a strong feeling about the two approaches, although I'm mildly favorite vouchers because it helps us avoid making the tax code more complicated. But reasonable people certainly do disagree and can disagree on the exact method. I'm going to talk about vouchers for simplicity. So first, what exactly do vouchers mean? Take an example of sort of K through 12 or K through 8 education. It would mean that every parent of a school-aged child gets a piece of paper that is sort of official and has, you know, registration and stamp and something on it that says legitimate that they can use to go to a private school to purchase education.  And so any parent can use that for each of their children to buy whatever kind of schooling the definition of the voucher allows. Now a crucial issue is we're going to get the benefits of this approach much more if the voucher is defined very, very broadly. And that's one thing that we'll have to talk about. But that means that there is now competition because anybody can start a private school and accept these vouchers. It means there's scope for innovation because someone who wants to start new types of schooling or education can hope to attract these voucher dollars from parents who have them. Using vouchers makes it somewhat easier, not completely simple, but easier to avoid the issues about whether to have single sex schools, speech codes, things like whether to tolerate those because the definition of who can accept the voucher can be very broad. Any school that satisfies very broad criteria can accept them, although the issue still does can come up. One thing that vouchers may or may not do, and it's important to recognize is dramatically raise the amount of education relative to the cost by making the education better. It might be, and probably is the case in a lot of situations, the current public schools are doing an okay job, but they're just doing it much too expensively. What the vouchers do is allow us to first not necessarily pay the teacher union wage premium, and secondly to allow for other kinds of innovation and cost saving that make teaching, excuse me, make education less expensive, whether that allowing the vouchers will lead to dramatic improvements in test scores or kids getting better educated. The evidence isn't quite so compelling that you will see dramatic effects. The evidence is suggestive of some mild effects, and those are of course good, but the best sort of hope is probably vouchers would give us similar results at many fewer dollars, not that it will give us dramatically better results for fewer dollars. Now one possible risk of the voucher approach is that government does now have to say what constitutes a school, what type of entity can receive these vouchers from parents and then get reimbursed for them by the federal government. And some libertarians worry that if you do that, that puts the government in the position of defining all schools and possibly gives it the scope to then impose very heavy regulation on all schools. I think that's not the right way to think about it, and it's not a major risk, but it's worth discussing. So first of all, all of these voucher schools have an incentive to lobby now against those regulations and that standardization, all these rules that limit the types of schools, whereas the public schools don't have that incentive. If you think you have something that's valuable, if you can convince your legislator or some legislatures, you can make a case that says we should define the rules of what constitutes a school more broadly. So private efforts, the lobbying by schools or associations of schools, have some ability to perhaps push back against excessively tight regulation of what constitutes a school. Secondly, whether or not that first thing is true, as long as we have compulsory education, the government's already in the position of defining all schools. And it's the compulsory education law, which is the most fundamentally bad for limiting scope, innovation, variety of different kinds of schools, because if the law says every child has to be in school, you have to define what constitutes a school. A huge example of this has been home schooling. Initially, when some people wanted to engage in home schooling, they had big fights on their hand with the local regulators saying, well, no, staying at home and watching Sesame Street, or even if you're staying at home getting lectures on nuclear physicists from your parents, that's not being in school. Government already had the power to say exactly what constitutes a school, even setting aside home schooling. If you want to send your child to something that's not the public school and it doesn't satisfy a certain state mandated curricula and so on, the state can say you're not complying with compulsory education laws, and therefore it already has the power to limit what constitutes a school. So I don't think that vouchers make that issue worse, but it is something that many libertarians are concerned about. Okay, so the last main point is, say we're stuck with public schools. Can we do something to make them better than they are? And what is it that's wrong with public schools? Well, it depends a lot on which public schools you're talking about. Public schools in middle class and upper-income suburbs in most parts of the country are pretty good. Tons of kids go there, their happy, parents want to live in those neighborhoods, they're happy paying high property taxes to be able to live in those neighborhoods and send their kids to those schools. There's lots of competition between those public school systems in many states because they have small towns and districts that compete with each other. So in many cases public schools are pretty reasonable and certainly not, there's no huge or obvious sort of negatives, but public schools in other cases are quite horrific, they're dangerous, they're violent, there's not much education going on and so on. So one approach that's been discussed and implemented and used quite widely now, both from state actions and more recently from federal policy, under no child left behind, is accountability and high stakes testing. And this is a case that I think is useful for libertarians because it illustrates that you need to be careful of sort of wolf and sheep's clothing. The accountability mantle sounds good to libertarians until you think about the details in this particular application. Libertarians of course like the idea that people who sell things in a marketplace are accountable to their customers, they make a crummy product or too high a price, people don't buy it so that suggests a kind of accountability. The high stakes testing approach in the public school setting said we're going to make everybody, every kid, take these standardized tests and we're going to look at the scores and we'll compare them to other schools, compare them over time and so on and schools that have really low average scores or schools whose scores go down or things like that, we're going to make them accountable by taking away funding, taking away teachers, forcing new practices or curriculum or whatever on them. So at one level it sounds okay, we're trying to give the schools an incentive to behave better, to spend more time teaching and less time doing recess and things like that. The problem is that the accountability high stakes approach clearly changes incentives but it changes a lot of the incentives that the public schools face. One incentive it creates is to do things like calling parents of kids who have low test scores and telling them to stay home, okay, the day of the test because then their test scores won't be in the average. It creates an incentive for teachers to actually cheat, to take the Scantron sheets on which teachers of the kids have filled in their answers to all the questions on the standardized test and the little bubbles and go in and erase them and put in the right answers because that gets that teacher's scores to be higher. It encourages reclassification of students as non-language non-English proficient in language so that their scores might not be counted in the averages for the school. So the accountability approach is sort of a government version of accountability. It's a government approach to bad government to public schools. It has worked quite imperfectly. All of these possibilities I've just mentioned indeed have happened. All these adverse incentives created by the high stakes testing. What libertarians think the right form of accountability is accountability to parents. The fact that parents can take their kids and send them to different schools if they don't like what the school is doing they need the purchasing power to do that and that's why the voucher approach has appeal. It allows you to say if you don't like what's going on where you're spending your voucher this year send your kid to a different school next year and you get to take your voucher with you. Now there are some things that might have some some promise in terms of improving the existing public school system. They basically consist of getting rid of regulation and rules that didn't make much sense in the first place that are adding cost without any obvious or tangible improvements in value. So barriers to entry and teaching is an obvious one. To be a public school teacher you need to have gotten various kinds of accreditation in most states taking certain amounts of education degrees credits and so on. There's very little reason to think that those particular requirements make people better teachers. And so that just makes it more expensive to become a teacher and reduce the supply raise the cost. And it may even create an adverse selection of people who want to become teachers because people who are really on the ball don't want to sit through these mushy minded education courses in order to get their teaching certificates. There's lots of regulation of the way that schools operate in terms of say bilingual education. That forces additional classrooms, it forces additional procedures and almost certainly is counterproductive for kids whose first language is not English instead of immersing them as quickly and as much as possible in English which all the data would show in most people's personal experience would show gets kids to learn English really fast especially when they're young. We instead have these redundant and extra classes to try to maintain kids ability to keep learning in their existing language rather than just converting to English as quickly as possible. Teachers unions is of course a huge thing. If you could change the laws in states that allow teachers to unionize and therefore reduce the union wage premium you would save a lot of money. It wouldn't automatically make the quality of the schooling better but it would get you similar quality at lower cost by eliminating the teacher's wage premium. Finally but very very importantly if all regulation of public schools were left purely to states and better yet if states left it to local cities towns etc as opposed to having the federal government involved that has a potential for huge benefit. The federal government role is inevitably going to generate tons of cost clearly has much more potential for thought control and excessive standardization and so on relative to lower level of government involvement education. So repealing no child left behind but also every prior federal government intervention back to the 60s okay would certainly go in the right direction for allowing public schools to do what the local citizens wanted to do with their public schools rather than the federal government. So to sum up there is a plausible case for some subsidy. Assuming that the subsidy were much smaller that none of it was federal that it was controlled purely by local or maybe state levels. I don't think libertarians can assert with 100 percent certainty that the optimal level of subsidy for education is zero okay but it's almost certainly much much smaller than it currently is. There's a very compelling case for eliminating government schools for subsidizing education simply by giving people who should be purchasing more that we think might want to purchase more the purchasing power via vouchers or tax credits rather than doing it by owning and operating the schools. If we're stuck with public schools there are some things that could be done to improve them basically less regulation okay and in particular elimination of the federal role that has the most potential to do great harm relative to all the things that are happening at the state and local level. So education is super important matters to everybody that doesn't mean the government should be involved in a lot that's a crucial thing that you'll hear again and again in these lectures just because something is good doesn't mean the government should subsidize it and just because something is bad doesn't mean the government should try to penalize it to a much greater degree in education and elsewhere we should be letting individuals make their own decisions. Thank you very much


Pay attention closely, this is why you should run from every one of these deliverance ministries or any prophet or apostle. Be free and never return inside of Him in the name of Jesus. Is He your brother? Yes. He's free forever. Jesus says in John 8.36 that whom the Son says free is free indeed. But according to the love of Elias, you are only free if I say you're free, if I blow on you, if I touch my hands on you, if I say that you had a demon cast out and then as He says you are free forever. So He can free you forever, but the Holy Spirit, He can't free you forever.   That is blasphemous and another reason why you should avoid these people.


One afternoon, I just went and sat on a small hill, which was in a town where I grew up. Till that moment, I always thought, this is me and that's somebody else. I had no issue with that somebody else, but that is somebody, this is me. For the first time, I did not know which is me and which is not me. What was me was just spread all over the place. I thought this madness lasted for five, ten minutes, but when I came back to my normal ways of being, four-and-a-half hours had passed. I'm sitting right there, fully conscious, eyes open. I sat there around three o'clock in the afternoon, it's seven thirty in the evening, sun has sat and I thought it's only ten minutes, but four-and-a-half hours had passed. For the first time in my adult life, tears were flowing to a point where my shirt is completely wet. Me and tears were impossible, I'm like this. I've always been happy, that's never been an issue for me. I was successful with what I was doing, I was young and no problems. I was fine, but I'm bursting with another kind of ecstasy which is indescribable. Every cell in my body is just bursting with ecstasy. I had no words. When I shook my head and tried to ask my skeptical mind, okay, what's happening to me?  I didn't care what it was, but I didn't want to lose it because this is the most beautiful thing that I had ever touched. And I had never imagined that a human being could ever feel like this within himself. So when I went to my closest friends and said, see something is happening to me like this, as I'm talking tears would flow and people would say, did you drink something? Did you pop something? What did you do? I knew there was no point in talking to anybody because if I just look at the sky, tears will come. If I look at a tree, tears will come. If I close my eyes, tears will come. I'm just bursting in six weeks' time. Everything about me changed so dramatically. And I just lost the sense of time. The next time this happened was very significant because there were people around me. I went and sat with my family at the dinner table. I actually thought it's two minutes, but seven hours had gone by. I'm sitting right there, fully alert. But I have no sense of time. This happened many times. One day I'm just sitting in my farm and I thought I sat there for about twenty-five-thirty minutes, but I have sat there for thirteen days. By then a crowd has gathered, India being what it is, there are huge garlands all around me. Somebody is asking how to run his business. Somebody wants to know when his daughters will get married. All the nonsense I hated just happening around me. And I actually thought it's only twenty-five-thirty minutes, but these people saying thirteen days he's sitting in Samadhi, he's this, that. I had not even heard these words.  You read that stuff in America? Oh? And being sixties, you know, Beatles and this and that, I grew up like that. Me and spirituality are another world. There's no chance of me going there. So I had none of these vocabulary, Samadhi, this, that stuff in me. People are saying, oh, he's in this kind of Samadhi, he's in that kind of Samadhi. You touch him, this will happen and people are trying to grab me. So the only thing that I could do is leave that place and travel out just to escape this, because I couldn't figure what's happening around me. Why I'm telling you this story is this is possible for every human being. It's my vision, my blessing. This must happen to you. Whether you climb Mount Everest or not, whether you become the richest man on this planet or not, your experience of life on this planet should be pleasant. You must live blissfully and go. That must happen to every human being. Everybody deserves it and everybody's capable of it.


So for every meet up we have a simple goal pop quiz to test your understanding of code. Okay this is the code so the question for today is to find out what's wrong with this. Tell me what's wrong with this code and give me the solution for fixing it. What is it supposed to do? It's supposed to print out values. In order? It's supposed to print out 123. Yeah 123. I think it's going to print out in what number? What number is it? Three. Why? Yeah because it's a concept, it's a closure. I mean you should pass it to the important function. Because the variable, I mean when you compile it, when the whole function will run at a certain time after you complete the loop. We get the current value which actually at the end of the array which is three. So we print three. Okay let's see. Yes so that is correct. This explanation is also sort of on point. Okay why don't you tell me the solution first. Then we can go through the reasoning for this. You can put the value inside the routine. Pass it to the function. Pass it to the function and also it at the bottom. So what do I pass? So what do I pass? Over there and also inside the open-close bracket. That one also. It should be okay. Oh yes. Can you see missing something? Define the type, sorry. It's based in. Sorry I'm a newbie. Correct. Do you want to explain why? For those who may be new to this. So the form, the V variable is actually reused. So which means for every go function it closes over the V variable. After the form, it will be three. Wait but could the go-go routine actually print out one or two? I mean is it undefined or? No it's always three because it's in order. So it always takes the last value that's passed to it in the follow. So the first go routine gets scheduled only after the loop ends. That will have to be true for three to always be printed. Yes, let's see. So I can keep running this and it will keep giving me three. It's very consistent. What are the thousand numbers? Does the first go routine still schedule after the follow ends? Ya, I think so. I mean it shouldn't make a difference whether it's a thousand or whether it's three numbers. I think. Okay because the follow doesn't give up control. The follow doesn't give up control. Ya so whereas if you write it like this you're telling the go function to you're putting the value on the stack so that when the go routine is called it calls the value that's put on the stack. Okay, great. That's all for the simple go-go podcast today. Okay, thank you for coming. Ya, today is a very small group. Usually we have more but thanks for coming. See you at the next meetup.


Good morning cyber traders. Happy Thursday everybody on this August 22nd. Good to see you all. Good to see you Mike. Good to see you Karen Keith Grant Bonito Andrea. Good to see you all. All right. Good. Good. Good. Good. All right. So let's get started everybody the beautiful day here in New York affected to be a Not exciting day. I mean as in going into the afternoon and Friday, you know, like I said, there's only two more weeks till summer actually maybe a week a week actually You're going into this weekend. I know everybody's going to be doing as much fun as they can It's going to be beautiful here in a way you are. So let's try to make our money and call it early day But before we do that guys a couple of quick announcements Before we start going through the watch list and because I tell you I got a bunch of nice moving stocks mbio We had this rtrx at tank, but the the mbio Has been great the gme the bj's all that stuff We'll talk about it a minute. But before we do that, we just want to cover all the upcoming events big announcement first of all Today, uh, the phase three class has been completed. It's been archived. So If you are a student cyber tree university, just make sure you check your dashboard. It's it's on your dashboard right now And phase three is going to be starting and with phase three everybody We're going to do something very very new. Remember we changed a lot of the classes around because we want to focus more on the topic of an issue So today, uh, I know uh, josh has got a bunch of things he's going to talk about first of all He's going to covering level three in great detail And he's also going to talk about how market makers position themselves in order to book And how they can manipulate traders. So I know that's going to be a very exciting one He's been working really hard on that to kind of show you that and we see it all the time in class But the um, and the other big news I do want to cover is that the onsite You know the onsite's less than three weeks away. I mean, that's great. And by the way big announcement regarding the onsite We have for the first time benzinga is going to be coming to onsite, which we're really excited about Uh, you could see a lot of you use benzinga. You're in the trading room.  We're gonna have Book map that's going to be there. We're talking about level four So listen, it's going to be a fun event. So you guys still have a lot of uh, Still have a chance to make it. I know we have a few more seats. So if you guys want to come Definitely make it and if you can't make it onsite, you could always do the webcast So talk to the education advisor, but uh, but I'm really excited between level three level four with book map And having benzinga do an exclusive event. Um here at cyber trade university So here's your opportunity to talk to the owners of the company Which is uh, there's the benefits that you get when you hear at cyber trade university Marx's fous I hear that you're also giving away a new Ferrari Yeah, for the guy that the for the first person that can make uh, what a million dollars Listen The big thing about this is you know mark and it's funny you say that but I know there are people out there That want to give it with this away and you know what go out and buy your own Well, but yeah, the whole goal is you know, I'm not a flashy guy.  It's always more. Um, how can I say it? It's always more.  You my father always said something If you want to make something expensive Give it for free And if you know what I'm talking about read between the lines, okay? So once again, if you want to make something very expensive Give it free and those people that do that don't last too long in the business All right Can you love that word free? If it's if it's free, it's not for me. All right, so let's get back to the trading. So, um, once again Big event don't if you can we just got the um, like I said, these are a couple of the benefits that you're gonna getting on site So hopefully you guys are gonna be a chance to be there. All right. Um Now let's go over a couple of things really quick a couple of stocks. Once again yesterday was a pretty decent day I don't think it was the greatest day, but you know, we had a couple of stocks I made some moves, you know, the pdd had some good earnings a little shaky in the morning Got until like a level three level four The pdd right here Got a little nasty sometimes. Uh, let me just change the time frame here You know, I had a nice little pop in the morning You could see how it just went at five o'clock this morning to seven to eight And it literally ran from like 29 to 30. Not not the greatest mover, but I mean, there were a couple of things out there Who's the other one? A lot of them just the only thing that happened yesterday I saw a lot of them just do these big pops and they just tanked on us, right I mean, they were just uh, what was a pcg pcg did that too, right Yeah, pcg had that like really from nowhere. I just took off and then just tanked There was a couple other ones out there too um And rumble top of my head BMP, uh, there's a couple other ones. Anyway, that's the pass Let's focus on the future Which is right now because there's a lot of good ones right now that are moving So let's start banging those out and get ready for the open first. We got the ct The ctx that obviously you could see took a huge hit Start to make a little bit of a comeback. That was one of the stocks. I said, you know, it looks like pretty much a bottom Short squeeze. So that one's looking like it's moving pretty nicely right there the n e t e But this is like second protocol these two stocks I wasn't completely sold. There's four other ones. I really like a lot But this is like second protocol, which made the radar, you know, 69 000 shares up 8% Listen, what we're looking for stocks are up a minimum 5% in pre-market the Wt r H is what I had a little star next to this one Took a major hit from 14 down to about a dollar 50.   We did trade this stock Back in uh, was it uh end of april was may I think you could see it Stock went from five to ten. It was up 100% not including the gap right there, which made about over 300% You know, the stock is moving Almost a half a million shares traded this morning. It's got great volume decent 6% You know a nice little stock Another one. Let me go let me go through the second protocols. I'm going to save the best for last So we got z a g g'd had some pretty good announcements after hours But now she's kind of really flat line. So we'll see if she holds here from yesterday's previous support levels g s X another one I found this morning. Here's another stock up 10 159 thousand shares already traded stock Gapped up from 16 to 18 50 Looks like she's building some support levels here Not a lot of level three quotes out there which runs again We need those orders to kind of tell us where to get in where to get out We saw you probably all heard about the uh dick sporting goods. They had good earnings I don't know what ended up happening, but she all of a sudden started backing down again So that one's not really doing too well j w n Nordstrom's You know good earnings after hours started reversing the stock took a major hit I think I talked about the stock a few times like my wife's favorite store but uh But the other but the other two that I favored this morning And there's no guarantee they're gonna move but these other two the other ones I thought that were right up our alley that I'm moving is number one is game stop now We know game stop got decimated destroyed Well, you know what she started she made a little pop right here She got resistance from after hours from yesterday right around four dollars So she's testing right there 12 of you know 400 000 shares a lot There's a big seller right now. You can see for 20 000 shares 23 000 shares I want to see if these guys get taken out on level three if they do the stock could really Have a nice little run going into the uh Into the open and then last but not least our favorite stock one of my favorite bj's bj's took a major major hit And uh, listen if you love cosco, this is like this is like a baby cosco But not even close but you know, it's pretty good. You know, we we trade on the ipo We did well went on from 20 to 28 Took a big big hit with a little bit of correction here But she's like covering right around these prices but she gapped up pretty nicely So it was a good buy if we saw right around the 21 22 So right now almost at 26 you keep an eye on it the only bad thing about this bj's It's not really a day trading stock Doesn't you know, it's trading a lot of volume shocking That I think is the most I've ever seen in pre-market, but this is pretty much it so um And then the targe I mean we all know about targe yesterday Targe just said that really big gap up once again, you know a lot of these uh Brick and mortar stores coming out with earnings, but you know targe did really well And you know the good thing about targe. She's holding pretty strong.   I rather take the stock option because if they gave me a Gave me a stock option on that one that they're looking pretty damn good right now over the course of the year So let's get target to bring big round of applause So anyway, Ben just made a little bit made about 40 cents on lb right now on the short Yeah, lb just came from nowhere.  It was a le bean. I guess that's probably only brick brick and mortar is not probably doing too well But uh, that one looks like a pretty nice little short trending down breaking lower lows We just bring a one minute chart. You can see it right there And uh, there's a big buyer here in 19. So let's see what happens with that guy and once again Level four also helps. All right.  We got level four. Um, we got the book map that's gonna be coming So it's gonna be a fun event. We got a great dinner at night for you better than ever We ever had before So, uh, look forward to seeing you all guys then so if you want to know more about it Don't forget to just call up and talk to education advice in the meantime everyone Enjoy your class today And uh, we'll see you back in the afternoon for the afternoon meeting. All right. Just take the money and run. Good luck everyone. Happy trading


Welcome to The Commentaries, a podcast series from Tan in which you'll learn how to read and understand history's greatest Catholic works from today's greatest Catholic scholars. In every series of The Commentaries, your expert host will be your personal guide to not just read the book, but to live the book, shining the light of its eternal truths into our modern darkness. Visit tancommentaries.com to get your copy of the book and to subscribe for access to all the great reading plans, new episodes, bonus content and exclusive deals for listeners of The Commentaries. Hello and welcome back. I'm Father Robert Nixon, a Benedictine monk of the Abbey of the Most Holy Trinity in New North, here in Western Australia. This is the commentary series on the imitation of Christ written by the great Thomas the Kempels. Today is Day 14 of our series of podcasts, and we'll be covering today Book 3, chapters 54 to 59, which brings us to the end of Book 3. Before we get into the content which we're offered in these few chapters, let's begin by praying to God that He lends us His aid in our reflections and thoughts on this day. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, amen, enlighten Lord our souls and hearts, and to our minds thy grace impart, lead us by thy gentle hand, teaching us to understand the wisdom of thine only Son, the humble, patient, holy One, help us imitate Christ's ways, and live His gospel, or our day. Chapter 54 of Book 3 is a very interesting one, and it begins by talking about the relationship between grace and nature. It's entitled The Different Motions of Nature and Great, and this is something which people who've studied theology will perhaps have thought about quite a lot, but other people may be not so much, so the idea of this contrast with these two fortresses of nature and grace. So we do certain things by nature, it's within who we are, our created being, but we do things also by grace, which is something which comes from God above. Now in talking about nature and grace, it's important not to make too hard a distinction between the two, because in fact our nature comes from God as well, so it actually is a form of grace. So sometimes nature and grace are in opposition, but at the same time we don't want to draw too strongly a dichotomy between them, which is what the Protestant traditions tend to do, making nature and grace in firm opposition, which of course is not the reality because God has given us our nature in order that we may glorify Him. He does though contrast nature and grace. He says that nature labours for her own interests, and considers what game she may reap from another, but grace considers not what may be advantageous and profitable to herself, but rather what may be profitable to many. Nature willingly receives honour and respect, but grace faithfully attributes all honour and glory to God. Nature is afraid of being put to shame and despised, but grace is glad to suffer reproach for the name of Jesus. Nature loves leisure and bodily rest, but grace cannot be idle and willingly embraces labour. Nature seeks to have things that are curious and fine, and does not care for things that are cheap and coarse, but grace is pleased with that which is plain and humble, and rejects not coarse things, nor refuses to be clad in old clothes. Nature has regard to temporal things, rejoices at earthly gain, is troubled at losses, and is provoked at every slight injurious word. But grace attends to things eternal, and cleaves not to those which pass with time. Neither is she disturbed at the loss of things, nor exasperated with hard words, for she places her treasure and her joy in heaven where nothing is lost. Well, this is a kind of wonderful contrast or comparison between the effects of nature and grace. As I mentioned before, it's important not to imagine that nature and grace are automatically in opposition, that nature is evil and that grace is good, because nature, of course, was created by God, and the things which we read about nature doing, nature labours for her own interests, nature is afraid of being put to shame and despise, nature loves bodily rest, and so forth. These things are part of our nature, of course, and they're not in themselves bad. I mean, each of us is called to work, to support ourselves, to support our family. We're called to work, to take care of ourselves, to protect our health, to protect our own interests, to a certain extent. But grace allows us to go beyond nature. So it's not like grace is coming then to oppose nature, but rather the grace is taking us beyond nature. And it's by the action of grace that we're able to truly please God, because grace, of course, is a motion which comes from God himself, so in acting on this grace, we are ipso facto doing the will of God. The next chapter then talks about the corruption of nature and the efficacy of divine grace. And this, I think, is very important. I mentioned before that nature in itself, of course, is not evil, that it's a work of God. However, it does have this element of corruption in it. And this corruption of nature goes all the way back to Adam and Eve, this kind of primordial fall of humanity, which affected not only humanity, but the entire created world. While creation is overall very good, as God declares it to be, there is this seed of corruption within it. But that's why we need divine grace, which, of course, is efficacious to overcome all the corruptions of nature. And in this we hear the disciples speaking, O Lord my God, who has created me in your image and likeness, grant me this grace, that you have declared to be so great and so necessary to salvation, that I may overcome my corrupt nature, which draws me to sin and perdition, for I perceive in my flesh the law of sin contradicting the law of my mind, and leading me captive to obey sensuality in many things. Neither can I resist the passions thereof, unless assisted by thy most holy grace, infused copiously into my heart. I stand in need of thy grace and of a great grace to overcome nature, which is always prone to evil from her youth. For the first man, Adam, being corrupted by sin, the punishment of his sin has descended upon all mankind, so that nature itself, which by thee was created good and right, is now put for the vice and infirmity of corrupt nature, because the motion thereof left to itself draws to evil and to things below. For the little strength which remains is but like a spark hidden in the ashes. So I think this is a wonderfully rich theological way of putting it, that nature was created as ruined by God, but corrupted by the sin of Adam. And so that our natural tendencies, which are in themselves good, they're there to ensure our survival.  But because of the element of corruption in them, they become misdirected and instead can lead us towards sin, which is contrary to God's will. But by virtue of the gift of grace, we're able to overcome the flaws of nature, not to disregard nature altogether because we can't do that as long as we're living mortal beings, but at the same time to purify that nature and to overcome its sinful impulses, which are always there, even at the best of times. Moving on to our next chapter. Chapter 56, we want to deny ourselves and imitate Christ by the cross. And this is central, the notion of self-denial and the imitation of Christ, and particularly the imitation of Him in His suffering. Now this, of course, is not to say that we need to seek out suffering, because suffering is a part of life regardless of whether or not we seek it. But it's our attitude and disposition towards it, if we can accept it with reverence and in obedience to the will of God. And we hear the disciples speaking, Lord Jesus, for as much as thy way is narrow and despised by the world, grant that I may follow thee and be despised by the world. For the servant is not greater than his Lord, neither is the disciple above his master. Let thy servant meditate on my life, for there is my salvation and true holiness. Whatever I read or hear besides, does not recreate nor fully delight me. And this I think is wonderful that we should reflect and meditate on the life and particularly the sufferings of Christ very often and thinking, well, he went through all of that. We're called to go through our own fair share, but that is something which His grace will help us to tolerate, to sustain, and that it's serving ultimately for our own redemption, because it unites us to Christ in His suffering, in His obedience, in His patience, and consequently will unite us to Him in His glory. And this involves a denial of self, because in striving to be united with Christ, we need to put aside the falseness of self, of the ego, and so forth, which tells us that we can do it all on our own, which is simply not the case. 57, a man should not be too much dejected when he falls into some defects. And this is an encouraging chapter. It begins with Christ talking, son, patience, and humility in adversity are more pleasing to me than much consolation and devotion in prosperity. Why art thou disturbed that a little thing set against thee? If it had been more, thou ought not to have been moved. But now let it pass. It is not the first or anything new, nor will it be the last if you live long. Thou art valiant enough so long as no adversity or opposition comes in thy way. Thou can also give good advice and encourage others with thy words. But when any unexpected trouble comes to knock at thy door, then thy counsel and thy courage fail thee. Well, I think this last insight is psychologically so perspicacious and astute that we can give good advice and encourage others when they're in trouble, but when we're in trouble, do we actually give ourselves the same advice that would give other people? Do we follow that advice? And as a priest, I'm often speaking with people who are encountering troubles or temptations of one kind or another. And I know that giving them sound advice in the context of the great spiritual tradition of the church is something which, you know, which is not all that difficult to do in a lot of cases because we've got people like Thomas the Camper, Saint Augustine, Saint Bernard of Clairvaux who've written volumes and volumes dealing with these issues. We only need to refer to those. But then sometimes if we find ourself in a difficult situation, it can be hard to follow that same advice. And you know, then I sometimes say to people, if your friend told you about this, what advice would you give them? And then follow that advice. So that's basically what Thomas the Camper says saying here. We now move on to our 58th chapter. And this chapter is entitled of not searching into high matters nor into the secret judgment of God. And it begins with Christ speaking. Son, seeing that you do not dispute of high matters nor of the hidden judgments of God, why one man is left thus and another is raised up to so great a grace, why this person is so much afflicted and that another is so highly exalted. For these things are above the reach of man, neither can any reason or discourse penetrate into the judgments of God. Therefore, when the enemy suggests to these such things as these, or you hear curious people inquiring into them, answer with the prophet, you are just, O Lord, and your judgment is right. Well, I think this is a wonderful advice. Often we can be led to try to explain or to understand mysteries which are completely beyond us. And in doing that, we're falling away from humility because humility calls us above all to recognize the transcendence of God that his ways and his thoughts are as far beyond ours as the heavens are beyond the earth. And sometimes people seem to feel called to have an opinion on every possible theological question. For Catholics, we need to defer our own personal judgment to the judgment of the tradition of the church. To give an example of this, if someone might be troubled, is the body and blood of Christ present under the species of just the bread and the wine or do we need to receive both the bread and the wine to receive fully the body and blood of Christ? Well, in such cases, all we need to do is look at what is the actual teaching and tradition of the church as expressed by people like Thomas Aquinas to answer the question. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. And that's, I think, where Catholics above all are greatly privileged that we have this wonderful magisterium of the church and this magisterium, which is a 2,000 year old tradition of continual refinement and so forth. And then with other things, which are not so much theological questions, but practical questions, moral questions and so forth, why things happen the way they do, why are there pandemics, hurricanes, earthquakes, so forth, we need to respond in a position of humility to recognize that we actually don't know the answer, but we trust in God's judgment. And our final chapter for today, and this is the final chapter of book three, is telling us that all hope and confidence is to be fixed in God alone. And this relates to what I just said, our humility in the presence of God, who is all just, all powerful, and all wise. And it begins with the disciple speaking, Lord, what is my confidence, which I have in this life? Or what is my greatest comfort amongst all things that appear under heaven? Is it not thou, my Lord, my God, whose mercies are without number? Where was I ever well without thee? Or where could things go ill with me when thou was present?  I choose rather to sojourn upon earth with you than to possess heaven without you. Wherever you are, there is heaven.  After you, I have a longing desire and therefore must need sigh after you and cry and pray. In fine, I cannot fully trust to anyone to bring me seasonable help in my necessities, but only to you, my God. You are my hope. You are my confidence. You are my comforter and most faithful above all. And here we have some beautiful words expressing the fullness of blessing and consolation, all of our hope, which is to be placed and all of our trust, which is to be placed in God alone. To him be glory forever and ever. And that brings us to the end of book three of the four books of the imitation of Christ and to the end of session 14 in this series of podcasts. Thank you so much for listening and for joining me on this journey into the mysteries of the spiritual life. Next time, we'll be beginning on book four, chapters one through seven. And I will look forward very much to discussing this wonderful section of the book, which deals with the blessed sacrament and the true and substantial presence of Christ with us in that wonderful sacrament of our salvation. Until then, may Almighty God bless you with every blessing. This has been an episode of The Commentaries, a podcast brought to you by Tan. To follow the show, study more of the greatest Catholic classics and to support the commentaries and other great free content from Tan, visit tancommentaries.com to subscribe and use coupon code COM25 to get 25% off your next order, including the imitation of Christ and countless more spiritual works to deepen your interior life and guide you to heaven.


The Tennessee Titans have shocked the world coming into Baltimore and upsetting the number one seed What you did last year doesn't matter. It's a new team. It's a new year Yeah, we have history in our back pocket But it's a matter of this team this year going out and getting better and winning games We know we're gonna have to stretch and fall and fight for everything that we get because it doesn't get easier It gets harder feeling heat That's Tana Hill taking them to school Touchdown Titan The monster Derek Henry gives it inside Montgomery That's an answer with a capital A We want to do we want to do you got to stay locked in on all three faces, bro For me the Tennessee Titans is the team that nobody wants to play


of paris in international development finance but also the historical perspective on the public development banks the ucd the official development assistance so a major thank you um for being with us today let's move on to our very last panel uh of the day um and so i would now like to welcome on stage our panelists for this session who are all working on various pieces of this complex sdg financing puzzle so i would like to invite dr simona marinescu on stage uh simona is the un senior advisor on financing and development for sids at the united nations office for project services i would then want to invite dr salimul huck director for the international center for climate change and development and professor at the independent university of bangladesh and i would also like to invite dr naoko ishii the director for the center for center for global comments at the university of tokyo okay so as i said i think it's a great panel because i think you're all working on different bits and pieces of this agenda maybe just to set the scene and i will not try to summarize what we heard just now it would be too difficult but maybe just maybe five basic observations um to help give some context for the summit in paris starting tomorrow so we heard from jeff and others that clearly the sdgs are vastly off track and um i think this report that we're launching today and the un secretary general also said there's basically less than 20 percent of the target that are currently on track to be achieved and it's even worse for the poorest and the most vulnerable countries in the world that's the first point the second point is the sdgs are largely an investment agenda into physical infrastructure and human capital by many parts of the world like the physical space to invest in the sdgs i think there's right now more than 40 countries in the world that are on the verge of that crisis the third point is the annual sdg investment gap is significant but it's not out of reach now we heard some of the numbers today it's you know depending on the sdgs the imf the wecd we're talking about one to four trillion um usd these are important numbers now in the scale of world global output this is one to four percent of world global output and again global savings is at around i look this morning 27 trillion and rich countries mobilize 17 trillion dollars in post-covid recovery right um fourth the un secretary general called for an sdg stimulus to scale up investment into the sdgs but also for a reform of the global financial architecture to align global financing flows for the um sdgs and fifth we've got a sequence of international summits and events that are coming up one of course is starting tomorrow with this summit for a new global financing pact in paris we'll have a very important g20 summit the new deli in september it's actually quite interesting because four presidencies in a in a row of the g20 from the global south um we've got uh we had indonesia last year india this year brazil and we have me your patch with us today but then uh we're gonna have south africa as well and then um this sdg summit in september has a state level the cop in dubai and the summit of the future in 2024 so that's for the overall context and now i'd like to hear your thoughts on what are your expectations for the summit that is going to start tomorrow for a new global financing pact what should this um summit achieve and i would like to start maybe with you uh salim ul if you could share some of your thoughts on why the summit is is important and what it should achieve thank you very much yeoman good afternoon to everybody uh so let me start by um recollecting the last time i was in paris in 2015 in december at cop 21 where we had a very very big achievement in the paris agreement um which many people didn't think we would get and i must appreciate the government of france for having made that achievement unfortunately we had a good agreement but then eight nine years later we are nowhere near fulfilling what we had said we would do so i am hopeful that this time around in paris in the next two days when we leave we will leave with real commitments to act by the leaders who are here and not just negotiated text i mean one of the problems with the process that we have is we negotiate words until they become meaningless you know i just came from bon a few days ago and they spent 10 days and couldn't come to decisions 10 days of intensive discussions and they couldn't come to decisions that process is dysfunctional not fit for purpose and that's why i hope president macron getting the leaders that he has here and president and prime minister mia motley can actually knock heads together for the decision makers that matter and it doesn't have to be everybody just has to be enough of them to make a decision to actually do whatever it is they decide needs to be done and not look for consensus with the 193 countries that process is just not working thank you samimool now co what do you expect from this summit that's starting tomorrow why is it important i think i have been engaging with our global um uh negotiation for years and i'm a little as maybe a doctor have said i'm fed up with this process the negotiations we really need to go much deeper into the sources of the program and then uh kind of discussion how we can really solve or at least that that uh that the program and just for instance that i have been doing that the leading the gf global environment facility for eight years and during that time it was an interesting time the gf if you have any ideas that for the gf is trying to do is basically to safeguard the global commons it's a global environment not just a local environment but the global commons that is more like a uh that the climate system is one but the nature loss is another the ocean the land and then the fertilizer cycle those are all global commons the current financial system doesn't really address those global commons it's very busy to addressing the national framework a finance coming out of national framework but it's not really addressing that the global commons by the way if it's very much shared by every country and the current program also is that the the global north is quite responsible of a lot of pressure we are having on that then a planetary system but the current system really doesn't have an instrument to let them address that issue or to to pay for that and then also it doesn't really have an system to reward that the global south whether the people who are safeguarding global commons in in the economic way so in many many ways when i see this based on my own experience of global environment facility the current system doesn't have this and that instrument to address the global commons and i hope this discussion for tomorrow can have some kind of understanding of how can we fix the current system fit for purpose for those global common challenge then that they're not in doing that we want to make sure that they are a kind of natural economical transfer system from global north to global south not the handout not the ODA but the current system needs to find a way to actually economically reward the people who are safeguarding global commons that's my hope for the discussion together very interesting and Simona we'd like to have your perspective because you're of course right now senior advisor at UNOBS but you're you were just the former UN resident coordinator for Cook Islands Niue Samoa and Tokolelu so you have a very let's say practical experience of the challenges faced by SIDS so what are your expectations for parents thank you so much Guillaume and allow me to also thank the mayor honorable and Hidalgo for hosting us here and to thank SDSN for giving a voice to small island developing states obviously great expectations this week but as someone mentioned this is not going to be the end of the road we do acknowledge the fact that for the very first time international financial institutions have come together to come up with a fairer system with a less immoral development finance system and let me just stress a little bit the importance of restoring justice into the development system professor Sack spoke about that and many of the speakers refer to that but for small island developing states which are 58 countries around the world out of which 38 are members of the United Nations or 20% of the membership of the United Nations what is important is that not we will not only look into more money but we will focus on justice in access if we only walk away from this process with more money without changing the eligibility criteria to this money countries that are heavily indebted countries that have moved to meet income level will not be able to take full benefit of that so just to impress on the audience that what is critical is that we talk in Paris about a more generous system as discussed more money a much more manageable debt system that management system as well as obviously contingency financing we talked about the sds and how they can support further development but without changing the access criteria the 1969 system that the president of afg spoke about we will not get far enough small island developing states today spent 3000 up to 3000 us dollars per capita public spending i'm talking about public outlays you and this dsn and professor sacks made an analysis and doctor masa who is here in the room made an analysis showing that countries to make progress to the sdgs would need to spend a minimum of 18 000 us dollars public spending again so the component of development finance that is mostly that is highly correlated with sdg progress is public spending so since it spent six times less just to avoid get even more indebted we spoke about the minister from Barbados spoke today about how indebted countries get after each hurricane or cyclone in the pacific we had seven named cyclones every year over the last five years i served as resident coordinator so we need to look into again creating fair access and we work together on the multi-dimensional vulnerability index i can refer briefly to it and very importantly the third component of that is changing the programmatic requirements most of the countries cannot fulfill off all the requirements to be able to properly utilize effectively utilize the green climate fund the gf all those financial instruments that are vital again absence of funds and incapacity of of using development finance for sustainability is an existential threat to many countries but to seeds primarily so the requirements in the current system are impossible to meet by small governments by governments that have very limited capacities so i am happy to share that the multi-dimensional vulnerability index that adds to the gni per capita a measurement of issues that countries have many inherited that cannot change with policy is now before the general assembly it will soon be discussed again this year this very eventful year for development cooperation and that based on that we will be able to see countries regardless of the level of income per capita based on their vulnerabilities access more financing so our expectation this week since i represent the united nations is that we keep the enthusiasm high the commitment high to bring again justice to the development finance system and acknowledge that more money without access criteria changes and without programmatic requirements that could be met by countries will not resolve the problem thank you great thank you simona there was already a lot in your response let me pick up on what you just said right now so you are of course working on this measurement of vulnerabilities and just a few numbers i mean we heard earlier today the gdp drop in 2020 for mildeeves was minus 33.5 percent saint lucía minus 24.4 percent the bahamas minus 23.8 percent these are it's double digits that start with the two right and so i'd like to hear from you if we just go a little bit more into the depth of this can you say a few words about some of the instruments that can help here and in particular on the imf the special drawing rights but also other tools for financing sdgs in the long run in in sids we heard many time the bridge town initiative being mentioned can you talk a little bit about some of the instruments that you believe are the most promising sure thank you so much so first of all the bridge town initiative is fully reflected into the sdg stimulus of the secretary general so we do not talk about different frameworks the whole language is built around ensuring that there is a different policy for that restructuring that again we restore justice into that restructuring so if you're highly indebted you're less likely to be able to secure any financing so what's the morality of that so a new policy on that restructuring and is primarily looking into deferring that repayment to a later stage to allow countries to be able to recover from covid and then repay the debt into their means the second important component is obviously the contingency financing that we discussed about here which is more release of sdrs but very importantly is actually re-channeling the dormant sdrs that sit with developed countries and are not being used through multilateral development banks to allow the development banks to release more instruments at the lower cost to countries that are in need and of course we talk about additional funding development financing for all countries in need which means that we talk about up to 1.2 trillion private financing that is supporting of course the net zero agenda we also talk about pumping another 130 billion oda so additional oda through development banks to allow them to multiply this into 5 billion more lending to countries again at the price that they can afford so that's practically where we are so that restructuring more financing and contingency financing which looks into the reuse of the sdrs a little bit of more sdrs would also be welcome so hopefully that will happen as well for small island states for instance what is important is that sdrs first of all they need more sdrs could also buy some disaster insurance some parametric insurance that is so costly if you have three four events every year and possibly support be channeled through development banks so there is a promise when the IMF adopted the resilience sustainability trust there's a promise there that there will be a really evaluation of the prescribed holders of sdrs to allow more development banks to come in such as regional development banks in the caribbean one of the speakers tomorrow in our session at 4 30 is the caribbean development bank president who made that very clear that a little bit of sdrs channeled through regional banks would allow regional banks to support better not only seeds but other countries as well so those are practically the instruments we are looking into of course there are other topics but just to conclude on the seeds what is expected is that short-term financing would need to be parametric insurance it's critical as we move into mid-term we look into debt relief debt restructuring that swaps state contingent debt instruments to allow them to get a little bit of fresh air and for long term as professor sacks mentioned using the integrated national financing framework of the united nations we're looking to zg bonds we're looking to resilience bonds we're looking to loss and damage funding arrangements we're looking to low low carbon growth fund resources so the instruments that would allow countries to have that 2030 year development vision without which we won't get too far thank you thank you so much simona it was actually quite interesting to hear from honorable minister from barbados earlier today that he sees potential in sustainability themed bonds for instance so that was that was interesting so let me turn over to you sally mul i believe some of you know you as one of the cop veterans the rumor says you you did not miss a single cup since berlin germany in march 1995 you've also been a long time advisor of the ldc group in the un f triple c before we just dive into the the instruments and the mechanisms and so on could you just give us a historical perspective on the evolution of the discourse and the narrative around this term loss and damages i mean both adaptation but more specifically this loss and damage term sure so let me hark back to my mention of being in paris in 2015 with the historic paris agreement one of the clear outcomes very positive outcomes from the developing countries perspective was a promise by the developed countries to provide a hundred billion dollars a year to support mitigation and adaptation starting from 2020 not 2015 so they gave themselves five years from now we will provide a hundred billion a year now 2020 is now three years ago and they haven't done it all right they might do it this year i hope maybe in the next 48 hours they'll announce they've reached a hundred billion for 2023 but they haven't done it yet all right so promises made and promises not kept is also very much detrimental to any kind of meeting and discussion but now we have a new kid on the block in paris we didn't talk about loss and damage finance the money was just mitigation and adaptation because that was what was needed then but now in 2023 we have already entered the era of impacts attributable to human induced climate change that are causing losses and damages that people are suffering and just to give you an example i flew a few days ago from Dhaka Bangladesh where we've had two successive heat waves now Bangladesh is very good at adapting to cyclones and floods which we get a lot of but heat waves is new for us temperature went over 42 degrees people students in school were collapsing and we just don't know how to deal with it and so we now have losses and damages from human induced climate change as in my view the number one issue that we need to address now we don't need trillions right now but we do need tens of millions and hundreds of millions that the leaders who are going to arrive in paris in the next 24 hours can write a check for while they're here and i expect them to do that thank you yeah so let's talk checks let's talk financing mechanisms um you've of course been vocal i believe at club club classical 2021 about what you call the globe's climate finance scandal so the lack of delivery of this us 100 billion tell me sarimur what do you see as the most promising mechanisms to finance those loss and damage there's of course you know that relief and you dedicated fund fiscal policy fiscal policy the taxation on aviation i believe you commented on what france is doing not long ago what are in your view the most um promising mechanisms so one of the issues that even developing countries have um struggled with in asking for more funding for loss and damage which fortunately we did get an agreement on in sharma shake last year in cop 27 is that it should not cannibalize funds that are supposed to be coming for adaptation and in my view in order for that to not happen we need to be looking at innovative sources of finance from wherever we can taxing polluters taxing the financial system a maritime levy and something i'm very keen to promote is an air passenger levy which the french government has done for number of years it works the the airlines collected from the passengers passengers don't even know they're paying for it anymore they collect 200 million a year over the last 10 years that's 2 billion euros which they give to the health fund why not germany why not europe european countries why not the middle east the europe united arab Emirates impose it on their own airlines this is a decision any government can make to tax their own airlines doesn't need a required agreement across everybody put a few dollars tax and put the money into a loss and damage fund so if the european union were to do it country by country we're talking 100 million a year which would be available for a new loss and damage fund and air passengers i would argue are actually more responsible for pollution they are polluters and should pay for the loss and damage fund rather than pay for the hiv aids which is not really something that they are responsible for is that french government have just decided that's what they're going to use the money for but i think we need to be doing much more in terms of innovative sources of finance and doing them quickly that really is the key because we don't have time to waste good now co can you tell us a bit about your work at the cgc the center for global commons but also about a specific paper that you're working on and i believe will be published in july on on options for financing um the protection the restoration of the global commons and in particular i think you've been quite vocal on the importance of costing natural capital yeah thank you um as i just said my person which came from that my gf time is to how to create the community global community to safeguard the global commons and that person i inherited and when i joined the university of tokyo we created the center for global commons and that's the history um then the work which uh we are doing together with the international partners including sdsn but also wri the peak and the systemic and others are trying to come up with this framework today we hear a lot about framework that how we can set the framework and then identify the targets and the sorry targets but also instruments how to achieve it so that is the essence so that uh we had a little bit of this modeling exercise too how to shift the system uh to achieve the or safeguard the global commons so we took a little bit of this maybe uh short term long term the money side but then our work is mostly focusing on the system transformation side uh as many of the institutions are doing we have chosen that of course energy transition but also food system transformation sustainable cities transition and the circular economy kind of thing so how we can really trigger those transformational system change to safeguard the global commons that's a kind of framework we are thinking of and then that um that creates a very interesting uh results uh so far and uh and as one of the um okay let me just now step back a little bit why we are focusing with the system change because that is the fundamental sources of the program we we do have now that all the issues like climate change and nature laws that then a pollution uh thing why that the hydrological cycle and the fertilized cycle is basically the collision between current human economic and social system with the capacity of the planetary earth so without really shifting our economic system we continue to have the same program for years so that's why that our personal is how we can really shift or transform the current economic system that was the our mission uh of of the center so that then under there are several instruments where it's a modeling uh today we talk a little bit about scenario how much energy transition we need how much food system transformation for the role of cities so it's a more like a system analysis or the scenario analysis but also we also come up with a dashboard of the index of that which country is responsible for the program and how much and that is the global commons that the stewardship index which we are doing together with sdsn and under the your leadership and that we ranked that and scored the performance of 150 countries and to and not only climate system but also the nature laws that the biodiversity and the land and water and those kind of important indicators and i just want to share with two very interesting outcome one it's not just global north but the entire g20 big economies are also responsible for environmental pressure so that then so we need to be very mindful it's not just the north south but it's also the huge responsibility of the g20 as a big production but also consumption countries the second outcome uh from that research is that those impacts are kind of transnational trans border for instance we japan imported more than 60 percent of the food and through that importation that then we actually create a push a lot of pressure put a lot of pressure by deforestation down forest countries and then putting a lot of using a lot of water when that another producing country grow the vegetable we use a lot of fertilizer that the through those importations so that the we the consuming country are quite responsible for the environmental pressure in the outside our national boundaries but the current system doesn't really capture it and this is basically only focusing on the production within the border but the most of the problem actually coming from outside the border that we have to find a way to how to capture them and how to price them because that the under the current system as i said at the beginning doesn't really appreciate the cost or the value of the natural capital and without really adequately valuing the natural capital we continue to have the same problem so that's why we were very keen to see not only just to take the natural capital as a risk point of view which we are doing a lot but how we can really create a system to value that the natural capital not only just uh you know emotional thing but as a monetary value of the natural capital if we were able to do it we will be able to actually to reward yeah transfer the resources to the global south and reward those that the people who are safeguarding global commons be it the smallholder farmers in the global south fisheries community forest community and those people who are doing safeguarding natural capital for the planet if the economic system can reward them it's going to be much more lasting much more sustainable and uh uh the economic and financial system which we are trying to aim at and that is one of the proposal i was doing paper to write to ask the bird i i just wanted to say that now attached on a very important point we we talk at the united nations about beyond the gdp agenda so that's precisely the point so you mentioned the gdp per capita growth rate in countries after the crisis so this is a measurement of the flow is the performance of the economy on an annual basis but countries also have stock which is the national wealth out of which natural capital is the most important by not evaluating the national cap the natural capital countries cannot improve their borrowing position to be very honest because those are assets that have market value that would strengthen their position when they start borrowing extremely important as now co mentioned this is a source of potential source of resources on one hand you're stronger when you borrow on the other hand is should that be adopted um as a measurement of fairness if you wish recognition that resources of other countries produce the food you are consuming with you know affecting their quality of life in the long term that would be an interesting step forward let me just say that the loss and damage has not been was not on the agenda at the paris agreement because at the time we didn't want to shame and blame anyone so it was a reunion of friends so we thought that we would do mitigation and adaptation together and we will not need to shame or blame anyone so that world has gone so seeds can no longer wait for that kind of solidarity to be restored so that's why we talk about loss and damage some more and now co mentioned sources of course we talk about levies on on fossil fuel with on the extraction itself on air we talk about levy on international shipping we talk about the windfall taxation for companies fossil fuel companies who speculate you know energy crisis and make huge profits we also talk about financing transaction costs a tax story as well as a little bit of new taxes on stock buyback when companies are buying back their shares to to control and raise if you wish the the price of the shares in the market so there are some ideas on the table but the IMF has promised the carbon pricing floor we discussed about that two years in a row so that's a very interesting idea so whoever is flaring carbon india would need to pay a tax that is a pricing floor that would mean to grow from let's say a few dollars per ton of carbon to 75 dollars by 2030 that would be a great incentive for the economies to green so hopefully that will happen otherwise we will stick with those innovative ideas that may not raise enough funds for what is required thank you thank you so much Simona and we're gonna have to end this this panel fairly soon but i just i just wanted to build on what you were saying and now co you mentioned and it has been mentioned today a number of times the role of the G20 you mentioned also that a country like Japan is generating quite a lot of those external negative spillovers on the rest of the world can you say a few words about Japan specifically and its its its leadership within the G20 but also right now as the president Japan has the presidency of the G7 how do you perceive the leadership of Japan on on those issues yeah actually as a president of the G7 one thing which i'm not okay which i'm kind of proud of is that at least at the G7 that in the community we present this TNFD it is natural capital as a quite important point forward so that the the TNFD still in my understanding to take the natural capital more on the risk side but if we are able to make it a positive as actually that the stock for for investment then the world will change so that is a homework for G7 how to change the perspective from that the risk to us that the potential asset the sources of the target of the investment that's one another good thing about G7 is just another perspective inviting global south to be a part of our partner that's another good avenue to move forward because it's not just that G7 you know trying to address this but then it is really the global agenda and where that the global south really have a great opportunity responsibility and partnership so that then from that point of view if we are able to you know broaden this dialogue towards the global south i think that then we will achieve a lot of the you know sustainable and equitable prosperous future for well we will end on those very nice words thank you so much simona naoko salimul for being on this panel today and please join me with a round of applause for our panelists today thank you so we will now close the panel but not only the panel the event as a as a whole for today and so there were supposed to be some closing remarks from Mayor Hidalgo but unfortunately there's a fire going on in Paris so Mayor Hidalgo had to leave let me just take a moment to thank all of our speakers today the Mérite Paris and the team that worked so hard for making this event possible Paul David, Thomas, Grégoire, Orion and many others the interpreters the film crew all the technical staff that's been involved today and finally the whole SDSN team who worked really hard on the report but also to make this event possible of course our President Jeffrey Sykes but also my colleagues and in particular I would like to thank Eamon Drum and Grayson Fuller for the hard work these past couple of weeks the Sustainable Development Report 2023 is available and we look forward to continuing this conversation with all of you over the next two days at the summit we wish you all a very fruitful summit and thank you so much for joining us today. Au revoir! Merci!


Hey, it's getting hot out there and it's time to enjoy the summer heat by the pool or at the beach or on the boat. We want to keep you safe and keep you from getting arrested and ended up spending your summer nights in the slammer. So listen up for five helpful tips to avoid a DUI arrest this summer. Number one, be prepared.   You have things right there ready to hand tab. Number two, be smart. You would be shocked at how many people have drawn attention to themselves.  Oftentimes people who are intoxicated don't make the best decisions. So be smart. Try not to draw the attention of law enforcement officers because you're only asking for trouble. Number three, know your limits. If you plan to go out and overindulge and have 25 beers, then plan for a ride home. Get a designated driver. Call an Uber. Call a Lyft. I guarantee you your Uber ticket will be a lot cheaper than hiring us. Number four, limit your contact with law enforcement officers. If you get pulled over for a lawful stop, answer their questions politely and succinctly.  Keep it succinct. Yes, sir. No, sir. They don't need to know that you were just drinking off your heartbreak over getting dumped by your girlfriend. Tell them what they need to know and get out of there. Number five, think about what you say. Everything you say when you interact with law enforcement officers is being recorded and even though you haven't been read Miranda rights at a traffic stop, those statements can and will be used against you. So you don't need to tell the officer that you just hammered five beers back to back at your friend's house.  And keep in mind that everything you say can and will be used against you. We hope you have a great summer. And again, here's five tips to help keep you from getting arrested for a DUI. One, be prepared. Two, be smart. Three, know your limits. Four, limit your interaction with law enforcement officers. And five, think about what you say. Carlson Meisner Hart and Hazelett, protecting your rights since 1971.