So, shall we start just in one minute? We want to put the slides up now rather than waiting until later. I mean, it's just the title. You have it now. Normally essential bank. Yes. I've noticed with the slides that's why I thought maybe. Okay, okay. Yeah, good afternoon. So, Peter, it is a tremendous, tremendous pleasure to welcome you at the ECB, to the ECB. Peter, as you know, is known for laying the foundation of analyzing markets with search frictions, no surprise, for which he received the Nobel Prize in 2010. Peter is also known for his analysis of U.S. social security policy and has advised governments globally on pension reforms, which is the topic of the Jean Monnet lecture on good pension design. This is the topic that you will present now. Now, let me say something more personal about the introduction. I entered the ECB in June 2011, and coincidentally, that was a time where Peter got objections from the U.S. Senate, from one particular group of senators in the Senate. And that was three times, I think that was the third time. You wrote in June when I entered the bank here, in June when I entered the bank, this op-ed in the New York Times, which coincided at four days, the time when I joined the bank. And the title was very nice, because it was, when a Nobel Prize isn't enough to join our community of central banks, because a Nobel Prize is not enough. I never forgot that, Peter. This referred to, of course, the blocking, as I said, from your nomination at the Fed Board by Republican senators. The argument was, and I read it, the argument was too little experience in conducting monetary policy, because it had only done work on pensions and labor market theory, whether it was the argument. And I can assure Peter that we fully agree with the argument you developed on the critical importance for central banking in understanding the functioning of labor market for the conduct of monetary policy. I fully agreed. And in your Nobel acceptance speech, and it was in December 2010, after the Great Recession of 2009, you concluded that structural unemployment issues of mismatch were not important in the slow U.S. recovery and there's not a reason to stop an accommodative monetary policy. And yes, analysis of labor market is central to monetary policy. It's not the only thing, because there isn't the other part which will be the matter of the speech today, which has to do with financial markets and risk sharing, which is another point in which you insisted also, which was the good understanding of the properties of capital markets. How economic risks are and should be shared. This is also very relevant for designing policies to reduce risk to avoid future financial crisis. So that's the topic you entered today, which is the good design of pension. And I'm very pleased, again, to agree to hear. Yes, you will control. Just push on the right one. And if there are trouble, we'll be there. Thank you for reminding me of an interesting time in my past. I think it was in before. You would agree that I said it. I do have to admit that on the op-ed page of the Times, it's the headline writers who picked the headlines. And the authors have no say in that. When I thought about why someone who's basically a public finance economist was invited to talk to an academic conference of monetary and finance people, I thought I should start with some elements of how the basic mindset in public finance is different from the basic mindset in other places. And then sticking with my theme, I'll explain how the basic mindset in pension analysis is different from the basic mindset in public finance, or at least the optimal tax portion of it. And then I'll touch rather briefly on a couple of policy issues in the pension area with a focus on the issues that are most tightly connected to the capital market. So everybody here obviously knows the basic welfare theorem, and we've already in this conference had a number of references to Pagoo taxation. So is this the fundamental welfare theorem for public finance economists? No. This is the fundamental welfare theorem for public finance economists. It says if you don't have distorting taxes, you don't have an optima. And the reason here is you care about income distribution, you've got asymmetric information. There's no way you can address that without distorting taxes. Similarly, if you have asymmetric information around individual uncertainty and insurance, whether it's done by an insurance company or done by a government, you need what are implicit taxes. A further element that comes with this mindset is that it matters a great deal what is happening outside the area you're analyzing. So I will talk about pension systems and pension plans. It's a mistake to do a full-blown analysis of normative issues on a plan without the context of the rest of the system. So as an example of that, if the standard theory and you say, well, if the government's spending more, it's going to raise taxes to cover that, there are going to be more distortions, that's part of the cost of the spending. If, on the other hand, you're financing your government with an optimal income tax, you've done an optimal trade-off between distortions and social welfare, and indeed you normally would have some people having a zero marginal tax rate, so no distortion, but if you've optimized, that's the marginal value of revenue no matter what tax you're changing. Given both distributional concerns and efficiency concerns. So you start in a different place for things, and now let me move on. That's all I wanted to say, not getting into my other hobby horses about what's wrong with monetary theory and finance. That's some other time. So what's obvious, and I don't have to say it, is pensions are very important, and currently in many countries pension changes are very important, because even though aging has been predictable and largely accurately predicted by at least the U.S. Office of the Actuary of Social Security, systems have not been built to adapt to trends. Pension systems also have to adapt to shocks, and we've had some big shocks that have shaken up the whole mix between defined benefit and defined contribution. So pensions matter. Let me start with the basic. Doing pension analysis, the focus is on the people you're financing with it, and I'm not going to look at disability issues. So this is retirement, economic security, and old age. And it's normal to divide the concerns into three pieces. Consumption smoothing means taking consumption away from somebody in some way when they're young and giving it back when they're older, and making that work better. Secondly, an insurance mechanism, recognizing that are annual income tax, annual welfare models, don't deal with all of the insurance issues that you might, and a pension system has in it inherently arguments that are different from those in annual income taxes. Vickery did once argue for lifetime income taxation, but it's never happened anywhere. And poverty relief, there's a general sense that because you're not expecting much labor supply, what you can do in poverty for the elderly is greater than what you do elsewhere. But pension design, I can assure you, is difficult. First of all, it's politically very difficult, but even economic analysis is difficult because of the complexities you're dealing with, and the diversities in the population, and number one, ability to prepare for accumulating the rights that you will finance your retirement, and then the way you use those rights, huge differences in the population and their ability to do that, and therefore huge differences in how the government might address people, but keeping things not too complex means you're designing a system that will work better for some than for others. Family structures matter, that's a concern, and labor market experiences are diverse. I didn't put up explicitly the gender issue, but obviously it touches on each of these. The pension system has both economic and demographic risks, as does the rest of the economy. A lot of focus on the costs of administration of pension systems, in part as with discussions of mutual funds, it's the one thing we really know how to measure well, whereas all of the other items of are you doing a good job on the risk return frontier is inherently much more difficult, and the role of government is vital, and the quality of government is going to tell you what sorts of things are sensible and not sensible, and the political space for government is going to be involved. So now let me make the obvious point about pensions, and this is relative both to basic theory and to optimal tax theory. The central issue is, left to their own devices, a large fraction of the public in most countries would do inadequate savings for what would be sensible for consumption smoothing, sensible for economic security in old age, but that's not the only feature, if that were the only feature you could mandate saving and turn everybody loose in the capital market. That's what Hong Kong has just done, it's a semi-disaster. So what are the other elements that go on? Limited financial understanding, widespread, certainly in the American public, offerings of financial firms are aimed at their market, like offerings in every other consumer retail operation, and annuity markets as we know have a severe selection problem, as well as having even more of a complexity problem than the accumulation phase where you're buying stocks and bonds. Two items I won't touch upon, where pensions can play a role, is spreading capital market risk more widely among people who don't yet have any capital through a pension system, and recognizing labor risk being non-marketable. Again, taxes address that, but the pension system can play a role in that. I won't get to any of that. So let me touch very briefly on some of these pieces. I start with financial literacy. There's a sizable literature asking people questions, finding out what they can do. A sizable literature following up what happens after attempts to improve financial literacy. It doesn't go very far, and it doesn't last very long. It helps some. But here's an example. Basically, people don't understand compound interest, which means if you're accumulating over a 40-year career, this is a rather important fact not to get straight. So what's in the market for these people who don't understand much? This is quite old because I haven't found anything up to date with the same care. What I love is it's focused on just S&P 500 funds because they all tend to track fairly well, and so the difference in fees is the big part of the difference between these, as well as some mild differences in services. So I write checks off my Vanguard mutual funds because they let me do that, and that seems to me much more sensible than having the money in a checking account that pays no interest. So two pictures come out of here. One, on average, the fees are much lower for institutional demanders than it is for individuals, and that hasn't changed. And secondly, there is a huge spread in the S&P 500 charges across these seemingly identical ones. What I do have that's up to date, obviously, first of all, fees in the U.S. capital market have come down steadily all through from that to today, but the spread has not gone away. This doesn't have the cleanness of all these index funds being the same, so there's good reason why there are some differences, but it doesn't spread out over that kind of range sensibly. Another thing that I think is really interesting to look at is the difference between the asset-weighted average fees and the simple average across the different funds. What this is telling you is that people with more money do a better job of investing it for themselves, and the pension system, national pension system, has got to be concerned with the whole population and particularly with the part of the population that won't do an adequate job for themselves. Now, I remember when in the U.S. the case was being made for going to individual accounts rather than our social security system, and I remember over here hearing somebody say, so there'd be a 1% fee, 1%, that's a small number, it's not a big deal. In response to that, I said what happens if you have an annual fee and you have a 40-year career, which social security is built around, and so I took a growth rate of wages that are being taxed and a growth-weight real return and cranked out how much less you have at different fees than if there were no fee, and there's close to a 20 to 1 ratio there because in a 40-year career your typical dollar is there for 20 years. It's not exact on that, but it doesn't give you a bad setting. And what other evidence have I found for the supply of financial assets for accumulation are paying close attention to the understanding of their potential market. Of course, behavioral economics, which has become so hot and which I am a big fan of, is decades behind marketing that was paying attention to all the same factors going back at least to the 20s and probably at an individual basis, not at a written-up basis, centuries earlier than that. So here's a study of the European market and the issue of complexity, the issue of the more there is a hidden risk factor, the more complex is the description. So the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to my mind, has a vital role to play in the U.S. capital market.  The pure cases of them are the familiar things, which were the early answers to going there, and now things have gotten much more complex in the mix, and various countries also have a non-contributory pension, a universal basic income for all of the elderly, and that's done with various kinds of removals. So let me focus on what's happened in defined contribution pensions. The turning point in this is what happened in Chile in 1981 under the Pinochet military dictatorship. They had a terrible pension system. They had a white collar system and a blue collar system that basically did redistribution from the blue collar system to the white collar system. They had poor incentives, they had inadequate financing, everything you could think of was wrong, and the government just wiped it out. There was grandfathering of rights in a variety of ways, but they wiped it out and started over with a defined contribution system together with two things. One was there was, first of all, a guaranteed minimum benefit for people who contributed at least 20 years, and secondly, a safety net for the elderly, which was very, very low, but it existed, and it exists in most countries, and I won't mention it again. I'm going to stay focused on the pension system. And that was a pension plan, which to begin with, they thought competition would take care of things, and they turned people loose, and they discovered the typical salesperson was an attractive young woman in a short skirt, and there were kickbacks because they didn't really want to save, and then they'd move from one of these to the other, and the fees were going up because the advertising expenses were big, and Chile put in place a sequence of reforms on the process around the system and on the portfolios being offered that made the thing steadily better. It's still a complaint in Chile that the profitability of the four large funds that now dominate the market is significant, but it's really not very bad anymore, but Chile made it look easy, and the second thing they did was they set aside a significant surplus in the general budget to finance the transition, so they made financing the transition look easy, and as a result, a lot of countries followed the Chilean model, and many of them learned that Chile made it look easy, but it wasn't. Now, the other aspect that's up here is in 1981, Chile had what turned into a good plan. It works well for the set of people that it works well for, but they didn't have a good system because there was a lot of the public for whom it was not a good system, and it took to 2008 the first Michel Bachelet regime to do the major change. They brought in a basic solidarity pension, which was aimed at providing pension either for someone who had nothing or as a top-up from the low-defined contributions aimed at the bottom 60% of the public, and then in 2008 they did the two parts of that, and in the second Bachelet administration, they have just had a commission reviewing all of the public as attitudes toward an experience with the pension system, and they're having an ongoing debate on the next round of legislation. So what happened after Chile in Latin America enthusiastic responses once it was out and mature and looking good? One country I saw literally the law that was passed, they had taken the Chilean law, crossed out the word Chile repeatedly, and wrote in their own name, and that was the law, but the regulatory oversight to run it just wasn't there, and then with the end of communism there was again a bunch of countries, the pension systems that were in place for communist countries were not viable in a market economy, and so my first exposure to that was being invited to do something about the debate as Poland was trying to figure out what to do, and some of the Polish people were arguing for imitating Chile, so in that paper I wrote about Chile, and then something happy to measure in this building, I was invited by Rudy Dornbush and Mario Draghi to write an extensive chapter about Chile for a book that they were, Brookings Volume, that they were editing, and then a number of countries have realized often around the fiscal costs that this wasn't such a good idea. So why the system is extraordinarily unpopular in Chile? The surveys of the public show a huge desire to end the system, and there are two big reasons for that. One reason is this was done by a military dictatorship, it doesn't have democratic standing, and let's just wipe it out as part of continuing to wipe out history. This was heard by the commission repeatedly. Secondly, though, was when this was rolled out, it was rolled out with of course a lot of selling to the public of how good this was going to be, including estimates of what the replacement rates were going to be, given this new system compared to the old system. And it didn't work remotely like that, and the prime reason it didn't work is Chile, like the rest of Latin America, has a large informal sector where there is no contributions being paid, no taxes being collected. So if you're not, the calculations done to begin with were for full career people, and for full career people it's a pretty good system. It accumulates well, the fees has nice diversified portfolios, the fees are actually lower than they are in the private market in Chile, and so it's a pretty good system, but that's a small minority of the Chilean public, and if I had put up the same kind of numbers for other Latin American countries, it doesn't work for any of them. So the thing I want to talk about is what can you do to get a system that works better in advanced countries? The informality just doesn't work with the contributory system, so to address informality you need to decide how much of a non-contributory system you're going to design and how large you're going to make it. So just to pick everyone's favorite example of this, the Netherlands non-contributory benefit goes to everybody over the right age. That age is finally starting to move, and it's above the poverty line. So if you've spent the relevant 50 years in the Netherlands, you're above the poverty line. It's taxable income, but there are no other connections, other places have done different things. But let me focus on this being a finance group, different ways that different countries have done bad things in their defined contribution systems. The stuff I'm talking about now is joint work I'm doing with Nick Barr, we're writing another book on pensions, and good pension design is the planned title, and I sometimes think it ought to be bad pension design as the planned title. So in Australia they put in a mandate, a sizable mandate, but employers pick the financial firm to handle the funds. And each financial firm designs a default for the people who don't pick among the portfolio options. And one of the problems they have in Australia is what are called lost accounts. You move from employer to employer, and then this previous employer has gone out of business. Now where did I have that account? Can I find it? And so that's a, and the kind of thing that the newspapers cover quite widely, but secondly, defined contribution accounts have a large fixed cost element, particularly if you combine some advice to people as they nearing retirement of it. So if you have multiple accounts, it's a lot more expensive system. Australia had done nothing about dealing with this problem, and you can see from that picture that they have a much more expensive system than they need to. And they're currently going through a multi-year sequence of commissions to change things. I just submitted something on the design of the default from it. The issue is what kind of role do you want the government to have in a system like this, given a large fraction of people who don't have any financial sophistication. And the example I want to talk about is Sweden. Sweden did an overhaul in the mid-90s, put in Sweden and Italy simultaneously, economists in both places, invented the idea of a no-show defined contribution system, a brilliant, brilliant idea. It's a defined benefit system in the sense there's a set of rules that determine what you have, and there aren't financial assets that you're holding in your account. But they treat it for communication purposes as if it were defined contribution. So they tell you each year you've deposited so much in the account, and your account has earned this rate of interest. That rate of interest is indexed to wages. And when you hit retirement, we will do an actuarial calculation, and you'll get a benefit coming out of that. So it's a very clever way of dealing with some of the trend issues, dealing with some of the risk issues, very cleverly done. But they also put in a premium pension. And what's interesting here is that they had a cross-party committee that included all but the furthest left and furthest right party. And they decided they didn't want to raise the tax rate. They were just going to divide the tax rate between what the left wanted and what the right wanted. And of course, recognition of the fiscal problems if you're building up asset accumulations, as the premium pension does. So they divided it that way. And politically, the left was free to design its part however it wanted, and the right was free to design its part however it wanted. And there are some interesting things that came out of it. One of them is the annuitization that happens at the end, which I'm going to talk about momentarily. But the left wanted to encourage women to work. There are no survivor benefits for the elderly in the system. There is a transition survivor benefit for three years, that's it. On the right, on the other hand, you can not only buy a joint life annuity rather than a single life annuity. You can transfer your full account to your spouse or cohabiting partner. Very different answers. So what do they do? The ideology on the right says you've got to give people a lot of choice. So they said any mutual fund in the market that meets certain criteria can be part of the options given in the pension system. So right now there are 843 different funds, and each individual can choose up to five of them. Initially, there was a big pressure on people explaining they were supposed to pick their funds. But of course, about a third of people didn't. So of course they designed a default, and being in Sweden they designed a very well-designed default. In fact, it functions very much like a sovereign wealth fund. And it has an equity fund, it has a fixed income fund, and it has a life cycle mix of them for the complete default if you choose nothing. But they'll ask you two questions you can answer or not. Would you like us to target a later retirement than your first eligibility? Yes or no? That will change the mix. And secondly, would you like a somewhat riskier portfolio or a somewhat less risky portfolio? So they got three of them for dealing with that. I was in Sweden when this process was happening and was amused to hear from some Swedish economists that they were tearing up the form to be mailed into the government because the default was the best thing going, and they knew you couldn't choose the default. Well, the default was such a good thing going that political pressure mounted, and now you can choose the default. So let me look at the system as a whole and then look at the default. So the Swedish government collects all the contributions. The Swedish government does all the record keeping and deals with these 800-odd mutual funds on a net basis, depending on the taxes collected and how they're to be allocated and any changes in portfolio that people have. The administrative cost of that is seven basis points of the now sizable accumulation. It's hard to compare across countries because it's going to look big when you're starting up and comes down as it grows. But that is vastly smaller than almost anything in particular, say Australia. If you want to take your fund from the private market and also have it in the pension system, then because the government is doing the record keeping for you, you've got to give a discount, and the discount is 49 basis points. And then for all of the system, the capital management fee is 23 basis points. That's after the rebates have cut in. They interestingly report the transaction costs. The fee is paid for buying and selling. You don't usually see that. You usually just see the administrative fee. But what about the default fund? Well, the equity fund is 14 basis points. The fixed income is five, and you can see it's way below the average, when the average also includes them. And that's not trivial because 45% of the Swedes with accounts are in the default fund. There was a third originally since then, almost every year. It's been over 90%. The last few years, it's been over 98%. These are mostly young people. They're going into the default. They can go out anytime they want, but the expectation is they won't. So again, relative to standard economics, choice is expensive. Choice by people who don't know what they're doing is expensive. It becomes more expensive when the suppliers are aware of that and are taking advantage of that. So the accumulation message to my mind is quite clear. And the default, Nick Barr and I proposed for Australia, is there should be only one default run by the government. And while you're at it, let the government collect the contributions because they're already collecting taxes. And then, go from there, you'll have record keeping, you'll have lost accounts dealt with. This is the easy part of pension things. The hard part is what do you do if you have a defined contribution system for the way people will spend the money? People want some lump sums to have good expenditures. People will need some lump sums for dealing with expenses that are not fully insured already. People recognize a life expectancy risk, so annuitization is important. And some people care about bequests. So how do you put together a package around that? Very hard to do. What the Swedes have done is on the one hand, the notional defined contribution system is a defined benefit system. And so you get an annuity, full stop. With the premium pension, they decided to mandate annuitization. And even though this was coming from the right and they pushed hard for relying on the private market, they recognized there wasn't enough demand for annuitization for it to make sense. So they did two things. One is they took the standard annuity that was in the market, thinking people would understand it. And that's one option. And you can do it single life or joint life. And you can just leave your money in your account and they will do a calculation to give you an annuity based on realized rates of return and realized life expectancies. Other countries that want to give people choice, and I think having everything annuitized, is not optimal. But of course in Sweden they also have sizable occupational pensions. So this isn't the whole story. So in the UK, they're wrestling with this now. I don't have anything to report on what they've done. But their financial conduct authority took a look at what people did back when partial 70% annuitization was mandatory. They removed that under the rubric pension freedom. And so the financial conduct authority studied to what extent people just took the pension offer of the firm that was handling their accumulation and how many of those were not getting as good a deal as you could find in the market. And as you can see the numbers there, that was large. Chile starting in 2008 with the other reform has been trying to modify two things. One is the nudge to get people to do some annuitization. And the nudge they have is you are limited how much you can take out in any year unless you've bought an annuity that's at least as large as the guaranteed minimum income. So they're protecting the FISC. But then they've set up a website and required people to go through the website to try to educate them. I haven't seen anybody do a study of the extent to which this is succeeding. There is a jump up in the extent of annuitization in Chile, but that is all. One of the complications which there is no literature about is if you have an annuity system, we know you don't want it in nominal terms. What should it be indexed to? And this is something on which I'm not aware of any significant literature. I took a look at John Campbell's textbook on finance, 500 and some odd pages on accumulation, and the word annuity does not appear in the index. I called John. He said, no, it's just not there, not there. So this is an interesting question and something that's hotly debated. For example, right now in the U.S., U.S. Social Security is indexed on the CPI for workers, because that was the only one that existed when Congress set up the system in 1972, which is still in place. The Republican chairman of the Social Security subcommittee of House Ways and Means wants to change to the change CPI, which is estimated to rise about 30 basis points less per year than the standard one. The chained one makes additional adjustments for the ability substitute. The Obama administration was prepared to go along with that on the grounds. It was a more accurate measure. But the question they didn't address is what is it a more accurate measure of? And the leading Democrat on the committee wants to change to an experimental index, which was put together just looking at the expenditure pattern of the elderly and pulling the other numbers from the regular CPI. That actually goes up faster. So I wanted to research this issue, much to my surprise. The future of Social Security has become a hot topic in the U.S. I hadn't paid any attention to it other than mildly staying in touch. But I started receiving requests to come and give talks about Social Security. So I decided I wanted to take a look particularly at this indexing issue. And the U.S. National Academy has put together a very distinguished commission of economists who work with index numbers and fat, fat volume that I dipped into. And the point they're making is first you need to know what the calculation is, and then you need to know what the purpose is that you're using this for as an index. And the calculation, of course, is to leave you on the same indifference curve, given the price changes, assuming your indifference curves are the same in this year as they were last year. One of the things I can assure you about aging beyond 65 is your preferences are changing year by year. And so are your health care expenses. So the issues that they brought up on the difficulty of using it was first of all they collect the data from retailers. Nowadays with online stuff and computerized stuff in stores where people have identified themselves, you can do more than that, but that's not in the CPI. And so what you can't do is say with confidence it's different for the elderly than it is for younger people. I mean we know it is, but we only know it is in a crude sense. And secondly, the CPI is based on total consumption. So it's weighting the views of people with high consumption more than anybody else. Somebody, and I don't remember who did it, cleverly called that a plutocratic index. A democratic index would ask the same question for tranches of the population, percentiles say, and then think what kind of average of these numbers do we want for different people because what they consume is different and particularly how they feel about quality changes is different. So just to give one example, when something that was an option for an automobile becomes standard in the automobile, the price change just adds in the price of the option for the previous year. But some fraction of the people didn't buy it. So this is not an accurate measure for the people who didn't buy it. So the other element is how do you really want to think about quality change? Because some of quality change is improvement for some of the people. Some of it is things that don't matter. It's just built in. Some of it is fashion. The example I like to cite is bestselling novels. The Canadian system, I didn't try to track down the U.S., they just take the average price of this year's bestsellers compared to the average price of last year's bestsellers and it's the right thing to do. But what does the theory tell you to do? The theory says you've had a huge drop in prices for these individual goods. Last year they were sold in bookstores and now they're remainder. They're available for a quarter of the price. And what do you do about the new bestsellers? Well, last year you estimate at what price demand would have been zero. And so we've had a huge fall in prices from that price down to here. They don't do that, but insofar as the latest iPhone is a fashion item, not really doing things for you that you didn't want, then it's like that. It's a different animal and quality adjustments are a big deal and particularly this is viewed as an issue around health care. Or as it's been put, do we want people to live on less because they're going to live longer at the level at which it's being triggered by health care? So what do different countries do? Canada, France and the US, their basic system is indexed by prices. Norway and Sweden use wages minus a constant. And they have different constants. The Sweden one, which is I think 1.6 was an estimate of real wage growth. So they're targeting prices but doing it absorbing some of the wage fluctuation risk. Norway, I think it's 0.75, I have no idea where that came from. Finland and Switzerland do a weighted average of the two. Finland is 80% prices, 20% wages. Switzerland for one piece of the system is 50-50. Countries increasingly are saying there are these risk elements and we're willing to put some of that risk on the elderly. They shouldn't be treated as if they have infinite risk aversion. And so Germany, Spain and Sweden have all done things that put part of it on there. Back to my early slide. This is within the pension community, a famous quote from Bob Merton on how a pension system can do a big improvement in an overlapping generations model where human capital is not marketable. There is a large literature you're relieved to know I won't bore you with. It's a very easy problem to solve in a two-period OLG model with a representative agent. And boy, you can get big improvements and you get the same kind of big improvements doing defined benefit rather than defined contribution, sharing of risks because you're sharing them more widely so you carry more equity. You get into more sophisticated stuff and it gets very complicated. If you'd like to see more of this, as I said, this is worked with Nick Barr. We started working together in 2005 when we were both on a mission for the Chinese government. You can not available in German, but in a number of countries where there was an ongoing serious debate, pension people did the translations to feed it into their debate. And let me finish with something from the forward of the book from Nick Stern, which I think is part of my sense of why this is so important. Thank you, Peter. Not only the older people. No, thank you very much. I will open the floor. I'm listening to you plenty of questions, I must say.


Hello, and welcome back to the channel. I'm your forever. We're here staring at a M2 sitting at the line of a hill climb We're gonna be taking it up the hill climb, but we are gonna be doing it sideways as M2 is a drift tuned car So we have been working on this car So make sure you guys follow me on all social media all of which found scripture box below if you guys like this Video make sure you share it with a friend. Do appreciate all the support. Let's get to it He's that rev audio a little bit for you guys. So we're staring at a hill climb I have not done this track. So I'm very unsure of what's gonna happen. So we're just gonna go full send with this car Nope, we don't wreck Because I just is a drift tuned car Because we're gonna be doing this sideways. So very narrow. Oh Man, this is gonna be quite complicated. I can tell already. Yeah, this is gonna be quite a narrow hill climb Dipping a toe in the grass. I have not run this track. Oh Run this track. So I have no idea Where I'm going or what the track leads. So this is all just on pure sight Not the best way I would recommend trying to Throw yourself up a hill that grass kind of caught me. Well, we would have already wrecked this car Balls a lot of handbraking. I'm noticing and a very dirty forza handbrake. Oh, this turns into definitely Gradual we're not really doing it sideways. I mean, we're we are sideways We're drifting not as crazy as you would think but this is a very narrow course Actually having a lot of fun doing this though, just a little wall tap nothing major But we're still able to Make it up here. I can't remember if I had tire wear or anything on but this is an M2 I've been working with whoo, and I'm thinking about bringing out public as a street car Got some things happening on channel very shortly, and I feel like you guys are going to enjoy. Oh, that's very narrow. Oh Lost my footing there. I tried to thought I'd left a break there, but it didn't work We just kind of dragging that a Guard rail though. This does not seem like a track where you can get much angle But it's very shallow angles, but somewhat high speeds. That's a guard rail. Oh We to rope that car off right there on that guard rail that turn would have been the end of this M2 if this was in real life You got it. I think I mean apparently that curve we can't go over because we're So low in the front. We managed to get it to smoke and tires up here. Oh, yeah, we can't go over those guard rails Are the curbs guard rails curbs any of them some rough hill climb? We should try and do this in a rally car or come down the other way Like the downhill of this would be much more intense because of speed The guard rail bump is like a never drifted map that I've never touched. So it's definitely very interesting Come out here and Rip a track you've never been on before With no map no knowledge of what the track is gonna do and try and go full send In a drift car and somewhat make it try and look cool. Oh Man, I thought we were gonna lose that front bumper on that rock wall So I'm gonna end this video the same way ended the last video You guys got a lot of people seem to enjoy watching the replay angles So we're gonna end this video with the replay angle of this run and then just enjoy the sights and sound of this run So when we get to the top of this thing, I thought that was gonna be a lot more sharper than it was Not doing half bad if I do say so myself for never being on this track With an SE section Guard rail tapped if you counted how many times I hit guard rails in this episode Let me know down in the comments because we're very curious to see How many times I popped the guard rail Slowly getting the flow. Oh Sparks flying as we careen the front end into a guard rail This is not much wider than a car No practice uphill drift BMW M2 What could be more interesting? Then this you have something more interesting. Maybe a track car combo or something on that nature Let me know down below always up for challenges We have to be coming close to the end of this Maybe not. I don't know how we made that Getting it towards the end though. Oh We kind of bottomed out. Did I blow a tire or did we just bottom out the front? Just roasting the tires uphill We have to be close to the end of this I don't even think we're gonna have time for replay angles for you guys in this episode So you guys want to see a full replay angle video of this? Let me know down in the comments. Maybe I'll throw up the whole replay by itself Maybe some beats in the background. Oh So you guys want to see that let me know down below cuz I don't think We have enough time in today's episode to do all of that. Well, there we go I hope you guys are having a good Monday This track is extremely long and my tires would be toasted already. Oh That's actually the first like major mess up. We've had on this run Either my tires are getting pretty worn. Oh, or I'm just losing focus Could be the tires because I do believe I have damage and tire wear on so I could be running low on tires Because I've noticed a bit of a grip change Here on the this upper section Sesame the longest uphill drift I've ever done. I don't think this road's gonna end This road has to end at some point You wouldn't think this road just would keep going I feel like it's getting narrower though. Oh It was bogged out of that one. He's starting to get even more sharp save it save it Got it. We gotta be getting close to the end of this road Not doing half bad if I do say so for this first attempt at a road that had never been on Up hill in the newer car. Yeah, I am out of tires I'm just lighting these tires up. I think we finally have reached the top No, I thought that was the top Apparently it's not the top You're still going This is insane Kind of just want to be done. How many more turns can this road have? Oh My lord, whoo I've been definitely out of tires as you can tell No tires. It's just I can go up into four that probably makes us in fourth Yep We're out of tires and we still have a road to go This tire drop This is insane. This is the longest uphill. I've ever done I don't think it's gonna end How can one stay focused for so long on this long of an uphill?  I want to finish this road, but man. I Don't think I got much left in the car Or myself No Oh Don't know man. This is all no, I think that'll actually do it. We're stuck We are stuck, maybe oh Maybe not So I think that'll do here for this episode here on a set of Corsa I've absolutely no tires as you can see cars barely moving. We're not gonna be able to make it up and We have some serious suspension damage from the it look how light my wheel is it doesn't want to do anything We don't have much turn or tires left. So I think I'm gonna do it. Look at this I think that'll do it here for this episode here on a set of Corsa the longest uphill I've ever tried to drift and we fail So we're gonna have to come back to this and try another time Make sure you guys found me on all social media all which found in the description box below this wheel Oh, I've broken something seriously in the front Surprise they made it that far up the hill before I broke something So make sure you follow me on all social media all which found in the description box below And as always I think guys are coming back and watching. I'll be more rabbit. I'll see you guys on the track


Bismillahirrahmanirrahim, alhamdulillah, alaminirrahmanirrahim. And I send blessings to our Prophet Muhammad, salamu alayhi salam, before I begin. So this is a difficult topic for some and an easier topic to talk about for others. And I think it's a topic that is important and I'm really grateful that the question is here for me to talk about today. As a believer, I'm an African-American woman and a convert to Islam about 25 years ago. And so the question, you know, is looking at African-American women and facing prejudice and discrimination within and outside of our Islamic community. So there's a few points that I did want to talk about to begin with and one which is the concept of colorblindness. And we talk about that, we talk about that within, even within our own Ummah and colorblindness. I just see you as my Muslim sister and but not necessarily seeing me and my color and where I'm from, nor my lived experiences. One of the things that we have experienced in this country is really looking at what happened in 2019 and 2020. I think that really began to blossom and show the world where some of the things that people of African-American descent and other people from marginalized communities in our country, what we're going through and have been going through that experience of day-to-day racism that I've experienced myself. Now, there's times when I experience this situation, I go to my think to myself, now which box is it? Is it the box of being a woman? Is it the box of being a Muslim? Is it the box of being African-American? Is it the box of being which one is it that I'm discriminated for? Right? And my place of work, my place in the community, walking through the store and sometimes even in my masjid. And so that's something for us to begin to talk about. So let me first explain this idea of colorblindness as a sister and then I'm going to end with where we exist within our holy book, the Qur'an. And in the life of the Prophet Muhammad, huge presence of African and African women that are there in our Islamic movement that helped to change so much and bring so much alive yet is not highlighted. So colorblindness is really defined as refusing to acknowledge the social and legal historical role that plays in our society that relates to racial experiences. It's sort of pretending like it doesn't happen. They were all seen just the same. I've had folks say to me in my place of job to say, why do you refuse to be so different? Why do you wear that? And why don't you just, why can't you be just like me?  I am being me. Why would I want to be like you? I enjoy and love who I am as a dark-skinned African-American woman. Hamdurilat bilalameen. Allah made me the way that I am. Hamdurilat bilalameen. And that doesn't mean that I have to look like her to be normalized. So in that particular situation, I'd love to share stories. In that particular situation, when I moved into that particular office, I was a supervisor. So it was really hard to have someone that is the same level a little higher than they were professionally and be black. In that institution, that had never happened before. So I was already upsetting the quote unquote status quo. I wasn't meant to be seen as a peer. I was meant to be seen as someone who cleans up, not as someone who can make administrative decisions. And the question was, when I decorated my office, I had my Islamic gear and I had my beautiful African garb up on the walls and they thought, oh my God, what is this? And that's when the question became, why do you dress like that? Because I can. And why are you so different? I reflect the students that are coming into this center. So then I became worried, like if they're treating me this way, then how are they treating our children? How are treating the young girls who are coming into this health space that need help that are girls of color without seeing them for who they are, without seeing this Muslim women, these girls, and these non-Muslims for who they are. So we take a look at it. If one does not see my color and doesn't see where I'm from and my historical legacy, then they don't see me. I am invisible. I'm invisible wherever I go, either with two pieces. Either I'm invisible or I'm hyper-visible. Remember when I asked you about the boxes and things like that? So one day I walk into my office and there's a flyer with pigs on it. And they're having a get-together for all staff, a luncheon. And it had the flying pigs. And at the bottom it said vegetarians aren't welcome. So that was clear. And I was supposed to take it and think, oh, it's just funny, don't know what's not. We're going to ELC and file a formal complaint and make sure that my voice is heard. Because I know that I represent other women that look like me. Remember, being the trailblazer, being the first one and the only one, so many times in my professional career have I been the only one in the room. And I know the weight that that carries for me as a sister and as a Muslima. It means the next time that somebody looks like you that comes in, it becomes my charge to help to pave the way to tell you, no, no, you can take the fire with the pigs on it and talk to the attorney tomorrow. And that is just what happened because attorneys didn't have to talk to them about the flying pigs. And believe it or not, that was the only evidence that I had to prove of racism. It wasn't what was said. It wasn't what was done. It wasn't how it was treated. And it wasn't all these questions about, why do you want to be this way? Why do you, these constant what's called microaggressions? And that's another term for us to understand. What are microaggressions? Microaggressions are slights that happen, cuts that happen to our being and to our soul and ourselves that almost leaves us a question like, was that just the race? Something racist just happened. I'm not sure. It felt really uncomfortable.  I could have chose to do nothing, but I knew that what that meant for me in the status of what I was of being the only one again, an African-American hijabby. So many other pieces was important.  That meant a lot. So that my sisters coming behind me wouldn't have to deal with it as much. But you still do. Let's not be confused about it because it doesn't mean it's going to go away. So when we take a look at that lived reality and going back to this question of colorblindness within our UMA and our community, it's very important for us as sisters to really understand our own history and the space and the place that we live in and understand that the fight of anti-blackness and looking at that becomes incumbent upon us each and every Muslim that's in this room because I am your sister. And if I'm hurting and in pain and being discriminated against, so are you. Even if you are my white sister, I am your sister. We stand side by side for justice. That's our right. And it's very important that we carry that role out. The other piece that's important is for us to begin to look inside of ourselves on something that's race-neutral. That's another term, is race-neutral. And what that means is this concept of let's just neutralize race. Let's not talk about it. Okay, it's there. I'll acknowledge that it's there. But we won't really go into it as much. We'll talk about the parts of us that are alike and that's how we'll communicate with each other is the parts that are alike. And it's almost like trying to neutralize racism, trying to neutralize its existence by focusing on something else. The fact that we both have in common that we're Muslim is. But when we do that, when we neutralize the racism and neutralize the piece that begins to exist within our very community, you're also neutralizing me. It's disregarding my lived experience and lived experience of sisters that looked like me. You pray next to me. You pray for me. I pray for you. And we want that justice to be there for each other. How can we begin to avoid some of these pieces that are happening and even in our own families? We know that there's family members from different cultures that have a term that they use for African American people and Muslimas. I won't use it here. But we know what that term is when calling someone a slave, right? And sometimes it's common vernacular in certain communities and our Muslim communities. We know that. And now that you know, you know better. And then it becomes your responsibility as sisters, as my sister, to communicate within your families to say that's not right. That's a Muslim. That's a Muslima. Their lived experience is extremely difficult and it becomes our responsibility to correct the wrongs that exist even within our own families and even within ourselves. How do we do that? Educating ourselves. Learning more about the very sister that you pray next to. Understanding more about our lived reality or our relived experiences to visibilize us. And that's another term. Visibilization. To visibilize me. As I visibilize you.  That's just what it is. Male patriarchal society. And so I'm far on the end of that. I remember when I was even taking my licensing exam and I had to give myself a brain shift because in the exam there was a question that said vignette. They're vignettes for my licensed exam for mental health. And the vignette said Tyrone and his girlfriend who are black were drug addicts. What would you do to help to create a family system care for this I need you to answer the vignette? Of course I'm triggered because everybody else was relatively healthy with some minor problems until we got to Tyrone which is a historically African-American male name. On the California licensing exam for my license. So we look at it. Even some of the smaller places of racism exists can begin to attack the soul.  You know yourself. Pull yourself together. You know that this is one of the ticklers that's in the exam to make you fail. Move past it. Your people need you. And I prayed. I stopped and prayed. The time is still going on that exam. And I prayed Allah help me through this because I didn't expect to read that on professional licensing exam. So when we look at visualization and hyper visible being hypervisualized. Visualized. So what is it to be hypervisualized? That means I'm seen very broadly for the wrong reasons. Right. Either you don't see me or you see me really loudly. I'll give you know another example. I went to a training on trauma because that's one of my areas of specialization. No one else there were people of color. I was the only one in the room again. Right. And of mostly white women in the room. And I want to ask a trainer question. So I deliberately wore very bright clothing which I do folks who know me. The bottle was like sunshine. It's bright colors all over the place. And I sat in the front of the room as I do with many trains because I'm thinking you're going to see me. Five other people were called before I was and I could hear the audience behind me thinking oh my God oh my God.  He's not calling the only black lady in the room like how can you miss me? Pretty obvious. How did that happen? But I knew what was happening. And I said write it out. Just write it out. And then the whole audience became aware of the racism that was existing there as a Muslim woman. So the last piece that I want to talk about really is our spiritual asset mapping. And that's another term. So asset mapping. And I'd be happy to go over these terms with you and Q&A if you have further questions about them. When you look at what is spiritual asset mapping that doesn't, what is that? Sort of like some things that you can think about that's in your life, in your circle of support, the people, the tools, the supports that are there and you're measuring them out and seeing what's there. But if you don't know me or know sisters that look like me and are lived experiences, how can you know how that can be a benefit to you and how can you be a benefit to her? So you're looking at all of the assets that you have that are in your life that are human people that can be supportive in your spiritual life that can help you and that you can help me. So that's the piece that is really, really important. And then the last part. Problems am I running out of time? I'm good, okay. Is this piece around systemic racism and anti-blackness? And so I talked a little bit about that and like, what does that have to do with Islam? What does systemic racism have to do with Islam? Our Prophet Muhammad SAW did a whole speech on this, right? There's a whole talk about this and about the color question. And here we are, how many centuries later still struggling with this very simple concept and understanding? It means that we have not mastered it yet. And it means that if we don't have the conversations and some uncomfortable conversations, we just won't move beyond this point. It's imperative.   We're depending on you and our lives are depending on it. There's a reason why people of color, particularly the African-American people in this country are at the top of the deaths of COVID, the tops of deaths by other health disease, and other health, what's called autoimmune disorders is higher among women of color, particularly African-American women. First of all, higher among women, period. That's something to be said. And then women of color in African-American women and Muslim women. Why we suffer the most from autoimmune disorders and diseases? Because we think about that daily stress, those microaggressions we talked about, the micro assaults, I didn't mention micro assaults, but micro assaults. All of these lived experiences of being in black skin in the country and the place we're in takes a toll on the mind and the body and the soul, physically on the body. And what happens with autoimmune disorders is that the body begins to turn on itself and thinks that it's attacking itself because it's trying to fight something within itself, physically. And as a layman, the doctor can get a better definition than I can. That's my layman's decision, my layman's description. And so why is that important? Of your taking up the mantle of this charge as well is to help to save your sister's life. It sounds like, oh, come on, Mabalo, it's pretty grand to say no, it's not. And don't quote me on the statistics, but almost out of perhaps maybe five women, African American women, three of them or three and a half of them have some sort of an autoimmune disorder. Or some sort of a health disorder or struggling with the mental health concern. Now does the problem change? It looks different. Now am I visible? And the question asking, better invisible? Is it really? Is it really better to be invisible? No. It becomes our responsibility. And as sisters that love me and I love you and we all love Islam, it's our responsibility as well to make sure that we're changing the tide of what is happening right now in our communities through education and knowledge and understanding and love. We're doing it from the standpoint of love and joy. So I don't know what my time is, did I go over? Still good? Okay. And so... I'm going to keep you... So there's a piece that I can kind of get into a little bit around some cultural differences. And how much time is it? I want to make sure. I can tell you. And so looking at some of the cultural differences and within our Islamic communities and there's this piece that I talked about here in terms of like a caste-like system. And what that means is that in the system that we live in is that darker people are seen at the bottom and lighter-skinned people are seen at the top or more civilized. And also seen as more important as the scholars. So I think it's really, really important or I know it's really, really important for us to understand the Islamic scholars, Muslim scholars, that are African women who have profound knowledge of the state, profound knowledge of history and that also exist in the time of problem. I'm going to say that with some. Who's Badaka? Someone tell me who Badaka is other than my daughter because her name. Who is Badaka? Yes, ma'am. What did Badaka look like? Just ask me. Say again? What does that look like? Like who? And we think about who the other... Thank you so much, sisters. And so we think about who's Hajj and peace and blessings be upon them. Right? And so we think about who Hajj is, who these women are that are throughout our Islamic history that are black women that are holders of knowledge, of sacred knowledge. And when we go to... But when we're running from Soframar, what are we doing? Right? And so we think about some of these other pieces that exist and then we create this thing that's another term I'm giving up, the like I'm teaching in class, cognitive dissidence. Okay, there's a word with cognitive dissidence. It creates this sense of cognitive dissidence. Did you all talk about that today? Did I miss that one? So cognitive dissidence is something that's sort of like this torn asunder feeling, this feeling inside. Like, well, how can both of these two opposite things be true? Something is not quite right. Something's off kilter here. Something is a miss here. So it creates that stressor of cognitive dissidence within us. Well, I'm told that these people who are darker skin are less than, but in reality, these folks have a tremendous amount of information and knowledge and these sisters are holders of so much sacredness within our community, right? And then it creates that sense of cognitive... How has cognitive... How has cognitive dissidence resolved? Because you can go back and forth in the soul for a long time. Is that information? Is that learning? And that coming to peace with ourselves? If we are the holders of folks that are lighter skin that are benefits from being lighter skin, right? And we look at that oppression. So we look at oppression. We look at these things too. Those are really important and it helps to visualize your sister. So I'll end with that piece around really looking at that visualization of your sister, really looking at spiritual asset mapping and some homework assignments that folks have. Give me homework today, okay? So... And doing some of the homework pieces is really looking at those words, digging into those terms of microaggressions, micro assault, the cognitive dissidence, spiritual conflicts, content neutrality, race neutrality, and spiritual asset mapping. And so these are some things when you're really thinking about and have through your lens is your African-American, your black sister who's from all continents around different places from all over that look like us, that look like me and really working that through. The last basis is looking at the terms racism, systemic racism and marginalization and look at how that, how was that impacted and who benefits from it? Who benefits from systemic racism and who was victimized by it? And what are our roles and responsibilities as Muslimas?  Alhamdulillah ala me. And know that our very lives do depend on that love. That love that I have for you and the love that you have for each other and the love that you have for me and the love mostly that we have for this Dean and for Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wa sallam and the families. Alhamdulillah ala me. Thank you so much. Alhamdulillah ala me. Takbir. Allahu Akbar. Thank you so much. Amazing. Alhamdulillah.


I'm Julian from swivel finance. I'm technically the CEO, but I do a lot over there And today we're generally going to be talking about eth2 and the way that we can really use defy products to kind of amplify both the Securities of the ecosystem generally as well as just the attractiveness of what we can offer in defy itself So to start really what is block space, right? Block space is generally just a reservation of some computation space on the Ethereum network for specifically the mutation of state Right, so generally speaking when you try to submit a transaction It's going to require a certain amount of computation and you then must reserve a certain amount of block space of course to Transfer those funds or whatever you're doing Also generally speaking, right? This is supplied by validators in eth2 supplied by miners traditionally and the demand really then just comes From purely user transactions or arbitrage or whatever it might be right so yeah going towards demand You see that generally speaking it actually is insanely volatile, right? It's very difficult to predict demand there are a number of just confounding factors that continue to screw up any sort of models people have made and Really at the end of the day This volatility is fueled by mutually extractable opportunities, right whenever there is volatility in the market itself There's liquidation opportunities arbitrage opportunities, etc. Whenever there are NF2 drops like that massive one up to 450 gas for an entire day It just screws things up for really how people must price and create instruments around the eth2 market on the other side, right? We see that supply is kind of weird, right? You have an increasing number of validators And this will continue to increase it really hasn't started to plateau in my opinion yet But on the other side of that right the actual block space within a given block is actually static So you really look at this and kind of have to think of it in two ways, right? And and when it comes to The factors of block space, right? You have to look at a number of things that will impact the yields of the validators and how that really Makes the product attractive to them, right? You kind of have to make things financially incentivize So then the question comes right when you're looking at block space and these supply and demand factors How can you actually properly price these right to start? Obviously everyone knows of base rewards Most people actually don't know that this kind of it does shift depending on how much demand there is within a short period Right, so if a block is full there's more rewards than the next block and essentially they just try to to move around on this direction But on the other side of this right what most people are most familiar with is Just purely the fees that you pay right if you want to get a transaction through in a reasonable amount of time You have to pay a fee and I mean the important factor is really that this has been very clearly an Increasingly impactful mechanism over the past few years right you cannot really look at purely any of these base rewards or other factors alone You have to really get abstract with your thinking so on the other side of that right you can also disincentivize negative activity and this really just introduces more risks for validators than Really people recognize at this point in time, right? There's an entire row of of blocks that were entirely completely destroyed in the past and Realistically you end up having to to sorry. I actually did the wrong slide next one You end up getting slashed and and a validator ended up getting slashed. I think on about 20 slots in a row So it's pretty horrible. This happens and there are real risks there that users must kind of accept really at the end of The day as well okay on the demand side or rather the the the APY that you can earn in the yield We're seeing increasing amounts of this not coming from the traditional mem pool tips and etc But large blocks that are proposed by off-chain relays primarily flash bots, right in a row here, right? You have about 20 or no, I think that's about 10 within about a hundred transactions I know actually that's only about 20 blocks And really these transactions allow people to do a lot and particularly right as a validator It's themselves you can begin to actually extract these opportunities from others Interestingly, we haven't seen a lot of malicious validators do this yet, but that also does present a risk, right? And the final factor right when you talk about pricing block space has to be dilution Generally speaking again, I said that this isn't plateauing It's very consistent because there's a certain amount of validators that can actually be introduced per day and at the end of the day We've seen that over the past year Regardless of increases of yield based on you know MVV in the ETH to merge Validated yields have actually just been diluted by 50% if this continues, right? We will see yields crunch, but you need to introduce more incentives for this to continue Right, you need to ensure that the the network is secure and you do that by continuing to introduce incentives for these parties So at the end of the day really what is the massive risk whether there's going to be demand and that and for pretty much every Factor other than slashing demand is just a function for it, right? So then when you actually try to apply this you get this massive formula where effectively you have the base fees the fees themselves MVV and tips and as well with dilution all really kind of dependent on on demand As well as these time factors, right? If you know that six months from now there's going to be a 5% yield Well, you can actually predict things pretty accurately However, if this is going to be massively volatile over that time period You need to actually do some pretty complicated stuff in there, right? So the question becomes why? Right, there's all this math. There's all this honestly is crap involved in trying to do this Why actually create products that can can do it and at the end of the day It's really because you can create validator experiences that honestly exceed anything that is available today So getting into really how you do this, right? What are block space capital markets? At their core block space capital markets allow users to take the future yield that they might generate on some amount of block space that they can commit and sell that to other people to reserve today Whether that's in direct reservations like Eden Network Whether that's through peer-to-peer transactions directly like alchemy or whether that's through larger validator pools and everything like Lido And etc through the stack of swivel And on our end, I think that some something is very important to note, right? We split up the components into yield tokens and principal tokens, so if you took a deposit on Lido and you instead immediately gave it to us We would take that deposit we would split it into those two components the yield tokens representing the yield that would actually be generated and the principal tokens representing your actual deposit itself and Allow you to actually trade those right so the most common use case there is then well I want to trade away my yield tokens that future yield to somebody else and the result really is that as a staker You then are completely insulated from any slashing risks any dilution risks any volatility and on the other side The party is effectively leveraging massively on the rate, right? You can either hedge your costs if you are a validator yourself You can hedge variability or I mean at this point in time Rate the gas prices literally on a regular basis down to two You could speculate that it will increase over the next year, right? These are very very important dynamics that are standard honestly in almost any commodity But for some reason right now they aren't really an ETH But then okay, there are multiple designs to do something like this and The question really becomes what can we do with these designs, right? You have a base layer of staking to then and continue to increase the capabilities of your validators And in doing so increase the safety of your network and The question then comes in okay, what are the things you are looking for and really at the end of the day? It's composability you have the ability with these sorts of Matureable instruments that are designed to bound around block space to create composable instruments that are continuously Rehypothecated the first examples being just composable principal tokens, right? I mentioned that this mechanism creates principal tokens that are redeemable one for one This is extremely important because this is a mechanism that is shared by about 10 protocols This then introduced the ability for hyper composability across a number of different yield generation sources Ensuring that there is liquidity for these markets, and they can continue to be built upon So let's say they can be really then looking back at the two different models, okay? Well, how can you continue to build on top of them? Alchemia is a very popular project that is working in this direction They take individual validators, and they ensure that those validators can find counterparties to purchase effectively those yield tokens These these agreements are again individual validators, and they all have unique maturities Which effectively means that they are completely non-fungible. They cannot be Rehypothecated generally and you cannot really trade them on secondary markets the upside being of Alchemia I don't want to just crap on them You know you can address this market of individual validators, and there are a lot of bespoke validators out there However, right if you want to build a more composable product You can combine these sorts of things with Lido with rocket pool and instead of having an agreement that goes directly from Validator to a contract buyer you route that liquidity through a third-party validator that is composable like Lido like rocket pool and then through them you actually create this contract and And by doing that right you then start to have the ability to create more and more interesting instruments The first example. This is a friend of my protocols They they let people take those principal tokens and borrow against them at extremely high LTVs around 90 to 95 percent In context that represents the ability to leverage on the stake deal way for way more than anyone really ever would It allows you to continue to hedge in many directions and at the end of the day It continues to provide utility to these stake yield products that allow you to make more composable interesting things This is probably my most exciting slide or one I like most There are really a ton of advantages native to D5 for fixed maturity instruments that are not replicatable in traditional finance primarily the ability to like I've said rehypothecate atomically and In the context of these maturing instruments a principal token Let's say you have in this case a hundred thousand principal tokens maturing on December 31st And then potentially be used as collateral to underwrite options Right in this case again, you take that principal token You know it's maturing on December 31st and you would find a counterparty that would accept that Knowing that they would also have that face value at December 31st as well Again, this is a completely unique Market for D5 right try going to a bank with your bonds or with your T bills that you've bought this year at 4% Right that everyone's bragging about and asking them if you can underwrite some puts or anything with it right you will find that they will laugh you up the door and It's like it's just kind of a joke to them Again, I think this is probably one of the more exciting things going on right now The ability to take these assets that really are only traditionally used in one way and to combine them into these these Structured products that allow you to utilize them further in this case specifically you have the ability to lend a stake yield Right, you're capturing the base yield the MEV the tips You're capturing it just everything from EIP 559 when 500 if that was happening You're capturing a lending yield on another protocol and then in addition to all that you can capture in options yield and going further down that rabbit hole Right. Here's another protocol. That is another friend of ours where they effectively create expirable futures products It's honestly kind of complicated how they do it, right? But the bottom line is they they use fixed rate markets that themselves can be backed by ETH consensus to create these expirable futures And in context it's actually very interesting because the most common use case of expirable futures is hedging options So at the end of the day you actually are already seeing this this symbiotic ecosystem where users are able to hedge Regular just trading markets in both directions while getting additional yield and all of these list liquidity is then routed through the base ETH consensus layer that's that's the big conclusion I'm trying to push right is that at the end of the day Composability is the king thing or the largest thing that you can do to ensure that the ETH consensus is secure and Beyond that ensure that users are continuously attracted towards these products, right? I think that we have an extreme opportunity to at this point capture The attraction of people that really at the end of the day are more oriented to Treadfy The big statement that is always said is that you need to create a user experience that is ten times better to onboard them from one platform to another and Really only these DeFi unique products will be able to do that So yeah, that's really the point at the end of the day every derivative instrument in DeFi Every really pretty much everything other than perps will be being routed through ETH 2 And at the end of the day as well. This will all be being routed through these fixed-rate instruments I'm I'm Julian. I'm the founder of swivel finance So feel free to reach out follow me and or join our discord at Discord.gg slash swivel file just swivel Yeah, that's it any questions right in the right in the beginning you were talking about Validator supplying block space. Yeah But the block space remains constant throughout like you said, so would they I mean So how do you define as I'm supplying it as opposed to like them constraining it or selling it the end of the day? While the block space from the demand point of view is static The suppliers are still competing to be the one that actually provides it if that makes sense, right? So when looking at pricing this future yield It'd be ideal to just have exact metrics for block space directly in a given block But you really have to be looking at heuristics, right gas price and all these things and you know in context It's just about you know a kind of trying to get anything you can to just derive the the base block space Right or like something that you should try to price and sell your yield at so you mentioned block space and Those markets, how does the fungibility of blocks block space make pricing harder? It's extremely difficult to honestly create any markets without fungibility honestly We were looking at creating swivel initially with a sort of non fungible agreement similar to alchemy But when you start to do this you silo off liquidity and users are no longer able to compare Kind of what one other person would do for it, right at the end of the day Most pricing is actually rather subjective and you need contextual markets in order to price things, right? I Talk about this a lot more in reference to just the fixed rate space in general It's extremely important to ensure that maturities themselves are fungible for even these sorts of these sorts of similar activities the distinction that you you've noticed which is that for these kind of like splitting and like Rehypothecating future staking yields Kind of requires going through, you know central ish validator of some kind generally speaking Is there any way around that like is there a world in which we can create? Fungible claims to like individual home stakers a I need to hope that honestly alchemy is working further in this direction It's more difficult than one would think I'm sure right because you actually then have to actually you have to create the infrastructure between a Validator client and some DAP and honestly, I don't think anyone is doing that whatsoever yet Really it's going to be a difficult problem for them to solve I think they can you know create more fungible markets is kind of the way I'd put it by by forcing people to use a certain maturity And only trading within that right But at the at the end of the day, I think it's more of a technical problem than than a market design one probably With the return profile and the volatility of the split out Yield aspect of it not just mirror aetherium anyway It would yes, that's the point and when you if you split away your aetherium You're not it's not going to do anything what you need to do is find a counterparty to buy the yield token They split away yield that you're going to be earning over some future date, right? And that's why again, it's very important to try to create these markets that are fungible and liquid Otherwise, it's it becomes increasingly difficult to actually find these counterparties and then as well Right if you don't have a secondary market for anyone to sell anything on it's impossible, right? So you really need it really answering your question You just you're selling you're selling those yield tokens to another counterparty and that person is going to be the beneficiary of Whatever eat the staking and etc. Yeah


Hey, y'all welcome to what Chelsea eats. Thanks so much for joining me I just wanted to say a quick word on the coronavirus how you can keep yourself protected from the Coronavirus first of all, please pay attention to the social distancing guidelines that are being displayed in your area I think that that is going to help tremendously one of the things I want to remind you of is all the foods that I teach you to eat on a regular basis are Going to build your immune system up so that you don't get sick or that your body has a harder time getting sick Your immune system having a healthy immune system is going to take you a long way With fighting against conditions like coronavirus So if I'm you and I'm trying to keep my immune system up I'm drinking big green smoothies lots of greens because lots of greens and fruits like blueberries strawberries In my smoothies because they are loaded with lots of Antioxidants put things like hemp seeds and chia seeds in your smoothies because they are going to help protect your immunity Also, a lot of people have been emailing me saying that they can't find the foods that I recommend in the stores because of people cleaning off the shelves in the grocery stores and I have to say I haven't had that problem as a matter of fact the only thing that I'm really seeing in the store is The fruits and vegetables. I mean, there's some fruits and vegetables that are out But like I have not had any problem finding finding kale spinach collards Romaine lettuce Mixed greens like I haven't had any trouble finding any of those Pro any of that produce and I haven't had trouble finding frozen fruit like berries Strawberries pineapple like mangoes. I've been able to find everything and Don't get me wrong. There are some stores that are cleaned out of things So you might have to be resourceful and go around to a few different grocery stores to gather your Your resources, but let me tell you if you're determined to eat healthy food There is healthy food out there now. I'm not saying that there aren't any remote areas of this country the United States I can't speak for the other parts of the world But in the United States that there that it's scarce I can't say that it's not scarce But in bigger cities where there's a lot of people there's food There's leafy greens you can find food You might not find the quality of food that you might like to have all the time, but you can find Healthy fruits and vegetables So if I'm you I would be stalking up on things to make green smoothies with because they're easy to make and you don't have To spend a lot of time doing them and they're cheap. It's not expensive to make green smoothies You can even make fruit smoothies if you want But the greens in the smoothies is the thing that is going to help bolster your immune system The other thing that I would do if I'm trying to stock up on food is I would try to go to the grocery store and find the Fruits and vegetables that don't need to be refrigerated like oranges apples. You don't need to refrigerate grapes Things like bananas Like squashes Zucchini things like that. You don't need to refrigerate all of those things so you can keep those in your home You can also buy things that like dry beans and a lot of the stores I mean they are out of a lot of that But if you can find it you can you can you can buy dry beans I already happened to have had a pantry full of those types of staples in my Cabinet so I really didn't run into like running out of food that so to speak because my pantry is stocked So when this epidemic is over Maybe what you can do is focus on getting your pantry stocked with things that are non perishable So that if something else happens you can have food on hand right now as far as I can tell you can get food The thing that I don't want you to fall into is just because we're in this quote-unquote Pandemic and it is bad. Don't get me wrong. I don't mean to make light of it But since you're in this well since we're in this pandemic Don't go buy junk and eat junk because when you do that you're low you're weakening your immune system So if you've already fallen into that trap where you've decided that oh my goodness I can't find any food and like I'm just gonna eat whatever I can find Make a decision that you're gonna pull yourself out of that and start making some healthier choices So that you can keep your immune system up drink things like coconut water You can even if it comes down to it You can drink pasteurized organic, you know great juice if you need to if you need to pick me up I'm not saying to drink, you know to make a diet out of drinking pasteurized juice but like you can buy canuts and or I Think this one called Santa Cruz or something like that that you can find in some stores They're a little bit expensive, but you can drink those types of things if you're in a pinch So don't make excuses for yourself Find all of the reasons why you can make good choices with your food during this time Because if you want to do it, you can figure it out Alright y'all. Thanks so much for watching and I will talk to you all soon. I hope this has been helpful. Take care


Soldiers, assigned to the 25th Infantry Division, prepare to ship MH-60 Medevac Blackhawks on Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam. The helicopters are participating in Cobra Gold 23, the largest theater security cooperation, in the Indo-Pacific region and an integral part of the U.S. commitment to strengthen engagement in the region.


A trio of Harvard studies that followed more than 100,000 women for more than a decade found that those consuming the most anthocyanins, the brightly colored pigments found in berries like blueberries and strawberries, had an 8% reduction in risk of developing high blood pressure. And the group consuming the most every day were only eating about six strawberries worth, or even just 11 blueberries, a tenth of a cup. But maybe the biggest berry eaters just happened to have other healthy habits, and that's the real reason they did better. I mean, after all, you're probably more likely to sprinkle blueberries on an oatmeal than bacon and eggs. But they controlled for whole grain intake and fiber and salt and smoking and exercise and a bunch of other things, and the berry benefits still remained. But you don't know for sure until you put it to the test. A randomized double blind placebo-controlled clinical trial and the title gives away the thrilling conclusion, daily blueberry consumption improves blood pressure. How can you do a double blind trial, though, with a food?  They used whole blueberries, about a cup's worth, but powdered them versus a look like placebo powder, which had the same amount of sugar and calories as the real blueberries, but without actual blueberries. Those in the placebo control group, no real change over the eight-week study. They started out 138 over 79 and ended up 139 over 80, whereas the real blueberry group fell from 138 over 80 to 131 over 75, a significant drop. Now, 131 is still too high. I mean, you'd like to see at least down to 120 or even 110, so blueberries alone may not cure you. However, the fact that you could get a clinically significant improvement in a killer disease by just adding a single thing to your diet is pretty impressive. Is more better? What about twice the dose? More like two cups of fresh blueberries a day. Same kind of significant drop, but didn't seem to work any better, so one cup may do it, even less may work. It's never been tested. Overall, there's been five interventional studies to date on the effects of blueberry supplementation on blood pressure. Put all the studies together, and the results do not show any clinical efficacy. Wait, what? I just showed you two studies where there was this gorgeous effect. I mean, have I been cherry picking studies, or rather berry picking studies? Well, if you look closely at the studies, the blueberries in the two studies I showed you that detected a significant effect were prepared with water, and they just mixed the blueberry powder with water. However, the blueberries in the non-significant effect studies were prepared with yogurt or skim milk-based smoothies. If you remember my blast from the past video from like eight years ago, the absorption of berry nutrients can be blocked by dairy. Mix strawberries with water, and you get a nice peak in strawberry-fighted nutrients in your bloodstream within hours of consumption. But if you instead go for strawberries with cream, mixing the same amount of strawberries with milk instead, significantly less makes it into your system. The inhibitory effects of milk are thought to be due to the interaction between the berry pigments and the milk proteins. Yeah, but does the same thing happen with blueberries? Let's find out. Hard to maintain the suspense when the title just gives it away. But indeed, the antioxidant activity of blueberries is impaired by milk. Volunteers ate a cup and a half of blueberries with water or with milk, and the milk blocked the absorption of some-fighted nutrients, but not others. So did it really matter that much, though? Here's the spice in the bloodstream after blueberries with water, and here's how much is absorbed with milk. Okay, so less, but check out what happened to the total antioxidant capacity of your bloodstream. Eat blueberries alone with water, and the antioxidant power of your bloodstream shoots up within an hour and remains elevated five hours later. Okay, so with milk you'd be thinking, there'd maybe be less of a bump, right? You can say that again, not just less, but less than when you started from. You just ate a whole bowl of blueberries and ended up with less antioxidant capacity in your body because you ate them with milk. No wonder mixing blueberries with yogurt or milk may abolish the blood pressure lowering benefits. Interestingly, full-fat milk may inhibit nutrient absorption the most, similar to what one finds adding milk to tea. Twice the reduction in in vitro antioxidant values with whole milk compared to skim milk, which is weird, because we always thought it was the milk protein that was the culprit. This suggests that there may be some nutrient-blocking involvement from the dairy fat as well.


$17.19 is what it costs to make the blue-collar belly warmer. Let's get started. Start out with one container of mashed potatoes. We're gonna cover the bottom with the mashed potatoes. That was $4.49. Now you need $5.49 of A20 beef.  About 50 cents worth. We're adding one can of beefy mushrooms. Fair that in together. Add you another 50 cents worth of Dano's. Now we go in with our beef mix. Get that spread around. 99 cent can of corn. And a 99 cent can of sweet peas. Now you need two dollars and 25 cent can of biscuits. Just a little bit more Dano's. And two dollars worth of some shredded cheese. And into our 400 degree oven we go. 25 minutes later. See, I'll be you the man. That's the bomb.