All right, so we'll go through the platform details here, risk disclaimer, trading equities and futures involves substantial risk of loss, is not suitable for all investors, past performance is not indicative of future results. For you new traders, new to book map that is, find out more information here at bookmap.com. Become a member there, there's a free trial and then you'll have access to a lot of the resources and then reach out to us at support at bookmap.com. So here's bookmap.com, click on explore and I would recommend watching these first three videos here, they're very short, just gives you an overview of what bookmap is and then let's click here to connectivity. You will need, if you're going to use bookmap, you will need a data provider and this is how bookmap connects, stage five, CQG, Rhythmic, gain capital through the API and Ninja Trader API and TT Trader or Trading Technologies, also in the API and Interactive Brokers. All the rest here, we're just like a platform like anyone else, not through any API, just through the data feed. We also have access to US equities through dev experts and NASDAQ. So scroll down a little bit further, here's where you can find bookmap, there's only two versions, the basic and advanced, 49 per month, 99 per month, they're billed quarterly. Now the other two versions that you see over here, they include that DX feed now is for US equities only and it's a package deal. So if you're interested in that, then go for the package deal. You can still get DX feed for US equities for the basic and advanced over here, it just won't be packaged. The difference between the basic and advanced is the ability to trade right from the chart in bookmap and also the add-ons here, large lot tracker, volume and balance, token balance, iceberg detector, so these are indicator add-ons that are much more geared for order flow, not your traditional type of indicator add-ons. So bookmap is a platform, it is not some sort of indicator or derivative of price. Some of these are that derivative of price, time and volume or something else. So those are the two different versions, you get a 14 day trial period for both of them or you choose one and you'll get that 14 day trial period. So you can follow us on Twitter here as well and then you can subscribe to our YouTube channel in any updated or new videos, they'll be uploaded here and you'll have access to all of those. So for those of you who are new, I recommend going through the features and components here, watch the two minute intro videos here and then once you have an understanding of what bookmap is mechanically, what the software package is, then watch just a few of these order flow video snippets, it's really how to use bookmap, what bookmap is showing you, how it is its ability here to transparently see a lot of the market activity and then how to start utilizing that, how to spot it and then how to start utilizing it. So in fact we have two different webinars, this webinar that you're in right now is for everybody, it's open to all. The webinar that we'll have in about 25 minutes is for bookmap users, those that are in trial or those that are current customers and we'll go through much more in those webinars, we go through live order flow advanced analysis and the reason is for those of you who are new here and you want to get a feel for what bookmap is just the software and we're going to go through a little bit of the order flow in the live market but a little bit later. We want to just get through what bookmap is showing you and some of the capabilities and features and components. You can also see we have an educational course and then all of the recorded webinars are here for the platform details. So let's jump into bookmap and we just had the, as you can see here, some volatility in oil, we had the inventories just released here at 1030 and you can see the back and forth here. Now I'll cover this a little bit later here but I'll just say in general, this is the kind of transparency you're going to see in bookmap. This is an economic release at a specific time. Look where the liquidity is. It's really nothing too much of a surprise. Liquidity here at 48, the figure at 48. Look at the liquidity, that's on the offer. Look at where the liquidity is here on the bid. Actually, it's a little higher at 47.55 but also at the half number here at 47.50. Look where the price went on both sides, right to it, right to the liquidity. This is how the markets operate. They need liquidity to trade and they search for it. During these volatile periods, there is a lack of liquidity and the market goes to exactly where that liquidity is because that's where it can trade. And we see a really nice example of it here on both sides. So pretty picture here and I'll get more into the details of this a little bit later but let's start to go through just the basics here and what you're looking at in bookmap. Now we have an indicator panel here and but I'm going to close that and we're just going to go through the basics. So let me start here by putting up a candlestick chart because most of us are very familiar with that and I'm going to take off all of these other layers of data and let's zoom out a little bit. What are we looking at now here in bookmap? We're looking at a five-minute candlestick chart. Between each vertical dotted line here is 15 minutes of data and then each candlestick is five minutes. So one, two, three, that's 15 minutes of data and there you go. So now since we're all very familiar with the candlestick it's open, high, low, closed and you can see you start to understand buying pressure with Wix or speed with some of the bodies etc. Now at best it's really kind of mysterious to understand and it's kind of an art form to to read some of these candles. We're making financial decisions based on open, high, low, closed of a five-minute period and that's it. We really don't have a lot of data to go on. This is a problem with candlestick charts and this is where bookmap solves that issue. So we're going to show you exactly where the volume traded or where it took place and then we're going to show you the auction that it was showing you earlier up at 48 and then that 4750 here. So let's start to add on some of the a little bit more information. Now all I'm adding on now is on top of the behind the candlestick chart here is the historical best bid and offer. That's it. Just best bid and offer. The historical best offer is red and the historical best bid is green. So we're already getting a little more information that the candlestick chart is lacking. We're starting to see within some of these areas some structure, some microstructure in price, this little back and forth here, which is lacking in the candlestick chart. And that's good. We're going to now put volume on here because the candlestick chart doesn't show us the volume. We see a volume in a subchart here and that's good. It's helpful but we don't know where the volume took place on the candlestick. What type of volume it was? Was it aggressive selling or was it aggressive buying? And that's going to give a lot of insight. There's going to be a lot of trap traders in some of these areas and you'll understand that by looking at the traded volume. And then we want to know how much and we'll look at the size of the volume dots here that I'm going to turn on. So let's turn on the volume dots. Now we have an understanding of where the volume took place. So fundamental release here, economic release, very little traded on the way up. Let's just look at this. Spreads widen out and look where first trade that I have took place right around here and then here. And it's just aggressive buying. Who knows where they were? I mean they're getting filled here but they click the buy button down here and they're going to have price move against them. They're going to be paying big spreads but anyway because there's no liquidity people are pulling liquidity. So now we have the understanding and let's look at for example this little area here. This is going to be kind of wild to follow here but we see the aggressive move down here. Look at all the selling here. The red is selling. The green is buying. Let me zoom into this area and show you exactly what I mean because as I zoom in note how we are starting to pull apart not only the timeline but then we're starting to see the details in the trading activity. So that one big dot that was a pie display like this right here is now broken into every single element. We'll continue. I'll show you what I mean. We'll zoom in here and we will watch and we will see how every single we're down at millisecond level here and we can continue further. We can go to nanosecond level if we want. We can see now we're at that microsecond level and we can continue on. And now we're down at nanosecond level. So anyway you can see that it's basically unlimited zoom and we can see this kind of selling activity here that took place on the historical best bid. The red dot is an aggressive market sell. Someone hit the market sell button. They paid up the spread. They crossed the spread here, paid up and they took liquidity off of the best bid. That's an aggressive sell. Now here's your aggressive buying over here. It's a green dot. They paid up the spread. They took liquidity off of the best offer and a green dot and transaction occurred. Nadim let's see here. Do I need a platform to run this like Ninja? No we are a platform you just need a data provider. Good morning Darcy. Good to see you in here Darcy. I like that you are a current bookmap user but you're coming to these to ask questions regarding the platform. So that's excellent. So and then we'll go through the advanced analysis in the webinar coming up in about 15 minutes. Let's see. Nadim let me go through this. Again just click on connectivity here and this is how you connect a bookmap. So you can see the you just need a connection. So you know I don't know who your broker is. Ask if they have Rhythmic, CQG. If you're with stage 5 trading they are a brokerage then they offer all of those as well. You can get CQG, you can get Rhythmic or you can get Gain Capital as well or I believe IQ Feed too. So you know talk to your broker and see how you're connecting. If you are with another broker you know maybe they use only transact data. So it's really really up to you but that's what you need. So you're through thinkorswim. Unfortunately we do not connect through thinkorswim. So you will need a data provider. Probably I would recommend doing a demo maybe with a broker and then call up and see. You can reach out for example to stage 5 and just let them know that you'd like a demo and then just take it from there. You're welcome. So that's why we offer that 14-day trial period. So it's free. You can check it out and see if this is something that works for you. Let's see here. Lots of questions. Good. So let me continue on with the questions here since we're kind of on a roll. Darcy you will need 6.1 if you want to use the DX Feed. Yeah I understand what you're asking or saying there Francisco. You see these trapped traders here and these with this volatility. Scott, good morning Scott. Yeah absolutely you need a data provider. We're not a brokerage. We're not a data provider. We're just a platform. We're a software platform. But you're using Rhythmic aren't you?  Yeah.  So you already have your data provider. Okay. Let's see here. Continue on. Market maker I'm going to ask you to please reach out to us at support at bookmap.com regarding your requests there. Okay. Happy to talk to you about that. All right. Does Interactive Brokers give you futures and stock data? It does give you futures data Glenn. But it will not the the equities will it book map will not connect to the equities. Okay it only connects we only connect equities here right now currently with the dev experts DX Feed. Okay and what you're getting there is NASDAQ Total View and NASDAQ Last Sale. Okay and it covers basically all the equities. So and the feed is excellent. It is you know I can show it to you. But it is you know let me let me show you the quality since Darcy was asking as well. Let's take a look at I will take a look at Apple let's say. All right so here in Apple look at the the book here. We have complete depth of market. All of this here is not I mean this is your level two data here but it's all live. All right this is a really nice advantage. It's also you know very very accurate and it is yeah we haven't had any problems whatsoever. It's been been fantastic. Look at how you know have with total depth look how you can see here the liquidity areas that act as targets. Okay that longer term liquidity as soon as 930 open you can see the big traders providing liquidity here. Okay and that's where you can see the market pinged right to those areas. So it's really insightful stuff to see what the equities are I really like it. Anyway let me you know head back here and get a little more we're still just trying to cover the volume here but I haven't gotten to the liquidity yet and then I wanted to try to squeeze in that economic release at 1030 in oil. But you got to finish up here with your questions let's see a person can know yeah Scott so for example Scott's you know saying that you know someone can you can contact someone like AMP or S5 or whomever and open an account for $500 and then use that as your data feed and you can trade through them or you know maybe just you want to use that as your data feed and then you still want to keep money or some of your money at thinkorswim and trade through there. All right so that's a possibility other possibilities is just is just get a data feed you know call up Rhythmic call up CQG or you know another one is IQ feed you can get that they're not a broker at all they're just a data provider IQ feed. Okay let's see could you explain front-running iceberg or spoofing other price manipulations yes absolutely no Darcy if you're using CQG you're fine no no issues you with DX feed you'll have multiple connectivity okay you'll you'll like like I am right now okay I'm connected to Rhythmic for futures as you can see here and then I'm connected to DX feed and you can see my connections here right so I have multiple connectivity I have Rhythmic and I also have DX feed okay all right good okay I think I covered all the questions there except for market makers regarding all the front-running spoofing etc okay that's a little more in depth happy to go through it we go through it in the advanced you know analysis webinar every day showing all that stuff so let me try to get to that market maker let me start here with just the the basics though and then let's move on okay so the volume we can see the volume dots now just like a footprint chart you can understand where the volume took place how much what type but the the beauty here is that it's not aggregated you can see the microstructure that this is what you're going to miss with your footprint chart okay it's just going to go back and forth and aggregate within a time period or you know a candle rotation or you know something like that you're going to miss all the structure okay this is a really big advantage because look this is what we cover in the advanced webinar look at the structure here look how this this area right here let me draw a line is broken okay and once that is broken look where we've been testing and rejecting and you know so far we're trading above all of this area here okay this is your trap volume down here okay we continue to come down into these areas but we we reject all right so you're getting a lot of insight there all right um so that's the traded volume now let's move on to the auction part okay so you know this kind of level of of insight with the volume that alone is is fantastic but now we're going to show you the the other side of order flow and that is the attempt to trade in the auction okay now usually the way we do that is through the dome okay and these columns over here these are are the this is the dome column right here okay the cob column it stands for current order book okay so in this window here this is also current market okay it's just the graphical representation of the current market so you see here best bid and offer currently last traded volume is this number and then you see best bid and offer here in the current order book column okay and then here's our depth on the on the offer and our depth on the bid these are traders lining up with limit orders providing liquidity at these price levels all right so now these numbers you can see that they're changing all the time okay they're adding and pulling liquidity all right and this is it's really insightful for a current in the current market to see these areas you can see the the liquidity wow nice nice move to the upside there okay so I mean you know these guys here are going to be they're going to be covering right where they're going to be covering probably above some of these swings and there we go I would look for a retest of up in this swing as well and maybe we're going to charge up to 48 as well anyway let me continue on here knowing the liquidity is an excellent aspect here in a current order book it's really good to target some of these areas and understand where traders are lining up to trade because as we saw earlier that's exactly where we go is where the liquidity is so we want to we want to understand that in the order book now the problem with the with a dome is that once these numbers change that data is lost it's not recorded okay so that's a problem now you're going to have to remember those areas you're going to have to remember what about the areas around it were they adding and pulling how are they behaving in front of and this gets to your question market maker the areas in front of the high liquidity there okay were they front running it were they starting to add in before it trying to get in before these guys that shows a aggressive action okay in the in the auction and it can be really insightful now let's turn on the heat map because this is where book map solves that issue of recording the data okay so that what we're showing here now is the graphical representation of high liquidity in the limit order book okay so up here 173 contracts up here just below 48 we see 353 contracts okay and these areas are painted bright white okay because they're the highest areas of liquidity so it's a heat map in this live market window here okay we also see high high liquidity starting to come in here around 71 72 okay all right so now we have that insight now where this gets interesting is this graphical representation here in the heat map is recorded and projected onto the chart right so look at these striations here and the liquidity okay now we can use this rollover tool and we we can know exactly what occurred here okay we had 151 contracts 149 then they pulled down to 135 and then added back in back to 153 etc okay you can also hover over the volume dots and you get that information as well you get the date the time what was on the bid and the volume of that specific thought all right so for those that like that numeric output we've got it all there for you all right so now with the heat map though we can understand these areas in the intent to trade in some of these areas okay they were here showing some interest as price is starting to come down okay at 72 here and then or 73 72 and then and then they started to pull away okay and now they're coming back in showing again interest here right so this is interesting to to watch and they want to be buyers okay so the intent to trade in this is it's not the greatest example but we'd like to see you know levels many levels of liquidity here that really shows the intent to trade and then market maker what if they start to show higher liquidity in front of some of these other areas here well that's showing really bullish activity they want to front run that high liquidity they want to make sure that they get in and we're not seeing that right now right and look they're actually pulling to lower levels right now so this is kind of bearish in a sense and it's only one level of price okay so this is what we go over in the advanced analysis and start to understand the intent to trade and putting it together with the transactions that have occurred in the tape as well okay the traded volume and we put these two together and we get a complete picture of that order flow all right okay where do we go here let's just take a look I'm curious yeah okay so we just went above knocked out some of the stops up here as you can see I was alluding to earlier and then we've kind of traded right back down into the range okay all right guys well let's see market maker if you are interested in or any of you interested in some of the more advanced let's see here I'll give you guys a sneak peek on Friday to the advanced webinar else you know continue on here answer your all answer your questions and then we will um if you want to give it a trial a free trial period then I can answer your questions also in the advanced analysis all right so I'm up up to you but I just want to keep it clean I'm not going to go over what I've just covered here and in the advanced analysis we're going to we're going to look at a lot more stuff okay and that's the intent of this to the two webinars okay all right guys let's uh let's call it a day uh and uh we'll catch up with you tomorrow okay bye bye


This algebraic geometry video will be about a sort of bi-rational map called a flop which is sometimes used in classification of varieties of dimension at least three. An early example of this was found by Michael Atia in about 1958 and this is the example we're going to look at. So we start by looking at the hypersurface x, y equals z, t in four-dimensional affine space with coordinates x, y, z, t. And the first thing to do is what this variety looks like and it acts like a cone over p1 times p1. This is because we can also look at the corresponding variety consisting of points in projective space satisfying this condition here because this is a homogeneous equation and this is a quadric in projective space. So the set of points of x, y equals z, t as a quadric in p3 and we saw earlier that that gives us a product of two projective lines. So in projective three space, we get a product of two lines. So in affine four space, this is more or less a cone over a product of two lines. In particular, it's got a singularity at the origin at nought, nought, nought, nought, which is a sort of the singular point of the cone. And we can resolve the singularity by blowing up at the point nought, nought, nought, nought in A4. So to do this, we look at A4 times p3. So the coordinates for A4 are going to be x, y, z, t. And the coordinates for p3, let's use capital letters. So we get x, y, z, t. And the equations satisfied by the resolution, well, first of all, we have x, y equals z, t. And then we have a whole lot of equations relating these like x, y equals y, x, x, z equals z, x and so on. And we take the an image of the non-zero points in A4 under this map and then take the Zariski closure. So we also end up with the equation x, y equals z, t. So what happens is each point in A4 other than the origin corresponds to a unique point in this blow up, whereas the point nought, nought, nought, nought in A4 becomes an entire copy of p1 times p1 because it consists of all the points x, y, z, t satisfying this equation. So the singular point of this variety has now been blown up. We can check that this blow up is non-singular because along, say, x equals 1, it becomes y equals z, t. Here the coordinates are little x, big y, big z, and big t, and this is obviously a non-singular variety. So this resolves the singularity. Now the point is this exceptional variety can be blown down to p1, sorry, it can be mapped to p1 in two different ways. So there's one map to p1 on the first coordinate and one map to p1 on the second coordinate.  So what we can do is we can take this singular point with x, y equals z, t and instead of blowing it up at point zero, we can blow up along the line, y equals t equals zero. So in order to do this, we end up looking inside the variety, a4 times p1 and here we have coordinates x, y, z, t and here we're going to have coordinates x and z in projective space.  But taking the closure of the image of a4 minus zero, we obviously get some extra equations t, z equals y, x because x over z is just t over y, except possibly the origin, so we can also add this equation. So here the blow-up is going to be given by these equations here. Now, if we say we take x equals one as one of the coordinate patches, this becomes y equals t, z and z equals x, z which and x, y equals z, t, which reduces to affine three space so it's non-singular. So in other words, if we blow up this hypersurface along the line, then we again get a non-singular, a non-singular variety. This time, the inverse image, the point zero is blown up to a copy of p1 rather than p1 times p1 as we had earlier. And instead of blowing up along the line y equals z equals nought, we could also blow up along the line x equals z equals nought and we just sort of switch y, t and x, z. So we would find another way of resolving this singularity by blowing up the origin to a line. So let's put everything together and draw a picture of what we get. What we get down here is the hypersurface x, y equals z, t. And I'm going to draw this as a sort of blob and it's got some sort of singular point here, which is the conical point. And then we can blow it up along a point. So here we blow up along nought, nought, nought, nought and what we do, what we get is a copy of p1 times p1.  Here's a sort of p1 times p1. So we can see we've got these raw copies of p1 and these raw copies of p1. And somehow this point has been replaced by this. But we found two other ways of blowing it up, which sort of look like this.  So all these four varieties are the same except they differ in these sort of colored points. So we've got a map here projecting all the blue lines down to points. So maybe I could guess draw points that indicate the blue lines have been contracted and here the red lines have all been contracted. And we've got regular maps going in these directions. Here is the map from here to here. This is the map directional map. And it's a bit of a strange map because it's taking a copy of p1 in this space and somehow mysteriously replacing it by p1 embedded in a subtly different way. So it's sort of changing a co-dimension to sub-variety to a different co-dimension to sub-variety. And it's otherwise an isomorphism. So what's the point of this example? Well, the point of this example is it shows there's no minimal way of resolving singularities in general. So what we would, it would be really nice if when we're given a singularity instead of a variety, so we've got some singularity. What we'd like to have is a sort of minimal resolution of it, a non-singular variety mapping nicely to it such that any non-singular variety can be factored through this. And you can do that to some extent for curves and maybe for surfaces if you're careful. But you can't do it for three files because here we've got the singularity and there are two ways of resolving singularity given by this blow-up and this blow-up, but there's no way of resolving it that these both map through. So there's no sort of minimal best way of resolving this singularity. This means if you want to find some sort of so-called minimal model, in other words, a resolution of singularities that's as small as possible, it turns out the best thing to do is to allow very mild sort of singularities in your minimal model. So instead of eliminating all singularities from your variety, it turns out to be better to allow some very mild sorts of singularities. So you'd allow singularities like this one here, x, y equals z, t. And the exact sort of singularities you allow are called terminal singularities. Okay, the next lecture will move on to discussing singularities in more detail. So for example, I'll actually explain what they are.


We've got Poo Bear behind the camera. Hi guys. We've got another quick kind of abandoned house for you. We was working on our daughter's car and it was there and it's been wide open. But we wanted to wish everybody happy Thanksgiving, a safe Thanksgiving if you're on the road. Watch out for other drivers. Take your time. Leave in plenty of time. Don't get in a hurry and enjoy yourself and be sure to overeat because that's always fun. So from the bears to YouTube we want to wish you happy Thanksgiving. Happy Thanksgiving guys. Alright so enjoy the video and check it out. Alright. Poo Bear out. Hello YouTube. We are going in to, well I don't know how abandoned it is but it is empty. We're going to check this place out. Oh there's a cellar. Graffiti door. It's bigger from the outside. Any vagrants? There's a cellar.  I usually have on the bottom of this thing either. Anyway, yeah but it's empty down there. There's the bathroom so nice big bathroom. Yeah it's bigger than what it looks. Is it? Mm-hmm. Nice big bathroom. And there's the tub clear back there. That's my little house. It can still be fixed up. Look at it. I know it's, huh? It generally is way important to go up on to auction. I noticed back in here somebody took the fuse box out. Probably someone stole the copper. Someone stole the copper at our house. Did they? All of it. We had to replace them all with plastic pipes. Someone was stealing again. Don't fall like mom. You what? I said don't fall like mom. Okay. Yeah let's not forget the faithful day poo went through the floor.  I'm in a little car. YouTube if you don't see this video we died of anthrax poisoning.  Yeah somebody needs to buy and do something with it soon. That's a nice small amount. That's a pike. That's a pose. Michael did you come up there? It's fine. It's fine. Pretty cool. Nice dog. Thanks guys. You guys mind being on YouTube? I'm out here. This is Michael. Hi Michael. This is Sarah. Hi Sarah. Hi. These are my dogs. Your dogs. They're the dogs. Alright man. Okay there's another one. There's poo. Hi poo. Hi. Say bye poo. Bye. Hi Grant. Hi. Say bye Grant. Bye. Alright. And that's the Shae Bear. I'm going.


Hi, I'm Pedro Dacosta, Director of Communications at the Economic Policy Institute. Welcome to the State of Working America podcast, where we seek to elevate workers' voices to ensure they're heard in the economic policy debate here in Washington and beyond. Today, it's my pleasure to be joined by Heidi Schierholz, Director of Policy at EPI, and formerly the Chief Economist at the Labor Department under President Barack Obama. And I'm also pleased to have Rami Jackson as my co-host today. He's our Development Associate at EPI. And we're going to talk about all kinds of good stuff, including inequality, worker power, why it's eroding, and how to rebuild it. So thank you so much for joining me, Heidi. Thanks for having me. And I want to start just by asking you very broadly, EPI has been paying attention to economic inequality and issues like that before it was cool, I would like to say. And well before I joined EPI, so I wanted to ask you about why inequality is suddenly in the headlines, why it's suddenly such a big political issue, and whether it really is such a major problem, whether it's overstated. The main thing I would say to it now becoming something that people are talking about a lot is it's about time. It is an enormous problem, the scale of inequality that we see in our country is just breathtaking. And when you think about inequality today, it's actually useful to sort of step back and see where we came from. And if you look, because it didn't always used to be like this. So if you look at the period just past World War II, up until about the 70s, it was the case that when the overall economy grew, everyone saw gains. People at the low end, people at the middle, people at the top, everyone saw gains as the economy grew. And whenever I talk about that, I feel like I do have to step back and say, I am not trying to claim that everything was perfect in the 50s and 60s. There were huge disparities, particularly by race and gender, disparities that exist to this day. So I'm not at all trying to say we need to get back to where we were in the 50s and 60s. But despite those disparities, one thing really did work, that as the overall economy grew, low and middle income people also saw gains. That really, to a large extent, stopped in about the 70s. Since that time, the economy has continued to grow, but that growth has really been captured by the people at the very top of the distribution. And because I'm an EPI-er, I will throw some numbers on this. So since the late 70s, the inflation-adjusted annual wages of the bottom 90%. So that's, you know, everyone in the economy except for the richest 10%. The annual wages of the bottom 90% grew about 20% since the 70s. That's little more than stagnation. It's about a half a percentage point per year in inflation-adjusted terms. The wages of the top 1% grew more than 150% over that same period. And because the inequality in this country has this sort of fractal quality to it, that the smaller and smaller sliver you are at the top, the more and more growth you have seen. So the wages at the top one-tenth of 1% grew almost 350% over this period. So it's just been a breathtaking expansion of inequality over the last 40 years in this country. So could you talk about the forces behind that? Because there's some sense of inevitability in that that it was maybe just the way that capitalism works and maybe unions weren't that effective. And can you talk about the role of kind of the erosion of worker power over those decades and what happened? Yeah, I think that you touched on something that's so important in this conversation because I think the people who have benefited from the rigged economy that resulted in this increase in inequality, they really want us all to think that what's going on is just the natural outgrowth of a modern economy and there's nothing we would really want or are able to do about it. And that's just, it couldn't be farther from the truth. It was just very deliberate policy choices, either of commission or omission that led to where we are today. It is just, I think the key thing is that it is policy failures over the last 40 years that resulted in the rules that govern work in this country just being rigged against working people from their very first day on the job, the whole sort of legal and political framework favors corporate interests that just want to roll back workers' rights and also to make sure that fewer and fewer workers are actually covered by the worker protections of this country and then those workers who remain covered by those protections are often forced to do things like sign away their rights as a condition of employment through agreements that they're asked to sign like mandatory arbitration agreements. And I just, and then the perhaps the largest thing of them all is just the assault on workers' rights to come together to improve their wages and working conditions and has been probably the key factor that has led to rising inequality if you had to pick one. That's the one that has been the biggest contributor. Just the huge assault that we've seen on unions has played a very outsize role in the dynamics that we've seen over the last 40 years. Hi everyone, Rami Jackson here. Heidi, so EPI is strongly backed efforts to raise the federal minimum wage but is that enough? Are we too focused on that? Do we ignore larger structural issues when we do focus on raising the minimum wage? That's a really good question and I would say it's super, super important to focus on the minimum wage but we shouldn't just focus on that. So you make a very good point and just to underscore just how important it is to focus on the minimum wage. It has the real inflation-adjusted value of the minimum wage has eroded dramatically since its peak in the late 60s. It's now more than 25% below in real terms where it was at that time. There's a bill out there that would raise the minimum wage to $15 in 2024 which just so because everyone might not have inflation projections in their mind, that's roughly $13 in today's dollars. So the bill is sort of a $13 minimum wage in some important sense. We estimate that if the minimum wage were increased to $13 an hour, $15 in 2024, that would give over 30 million workers a raise. So it matters. It would get a lot of people, a lot of money in the pockets of people who really need it and are working very hard. But it's not enough. As we discussed, one key factor that led to this rising inequality we've seen over the last 40 years has been the erosion of unions. And so putting policies in place that would boost unionization, which we absolutely could do, would be a really important step that we also need to take. And then there's just a laundry list to undo some of the other factors that have contributed to rising inequality. I sort of mentioned this, but the fact that many more workers are now required to sign mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition of employment, which basically says that if I'm an employer, I'm asking a worker to sign when they walk in the door, if I violate your workplace rights, for example, if I don't pay you what you're owed or I don't give you the overtime when you work more than 40 hours a week, if you are a worker that's eligible for overtime protection, you're not going to take me to court. Instead, we have to deal with that dispute in a system of private arbitration that really favors me as the employer. So that's the kind of thing we could ban on and on and on. There's many levers we could pull to sort of set us on the right track. And you're giving a fairly tame example of the kinds of transgressions that, I mean, we're talking about even sexual harassment might come into the picture and the person might, any kind of abuse, any kind of workplace abuse, they might lose their right to a day in court, right? That's absolutely right. And can you talk a little bit about some of the calculations that you've done just about how many workers are affected by this? I don't think most people even know that they're signing the dotted line when they agree to these things. Yeah, that's a really good point. One of the ways this happens is people, after they have accepted a job, they'll come to their first day of the job when they're signing a whole bunch of forms. At that point, you have very little bargaining power. You've already said no to any other job opportunities you have. You've made a commitment to everything's in place. And at that point, the employer gives you papers and says, by the way, we're asking you right now. We didn't tell you before, but right now we're asking you to sign away your rights to ever take us to court if your rights are violated. This is becoming a more and more common practice. So we did a commission to survey in 2017 that found that more than half of private sector non-unionized workers are subject to mandatory arbitration agreements. And then you can look at where those numbers were 10 years ago, 20 years ago. And if you just do the extrapolation, I project that by 2024, more than 80% of private sector non-union workers will be subject to mandatory arbitration agreement. It's growing that fast. So it's almost everybody. It's getting to almost everybody really soon. So I wanted to ask you a couple more things to unpack the things that you said in your previous answer. One, to Rami's point about structural issues, can you talk a little bit about the profile of people who do earn the minimum wage? Because sometimes there are misconceptions about, you know, people think of a minimum wage worker as a college student who's kind of working a part-time job. But that's not necessarily the case. Yeah, no, and not even in some cases a college student, a high school student working like an after-school job for extra spending money is the kind of thing we hear all the time when people think about who gets a minimum wage increase. It could not be farther from the truth. I don't know if it ever was true, but it's certainly not true today. And we have these great data sets that allow us to really dig in and look at who, you can look at what people are making now and then look at a proposed minimum wage increase and see, okay, if that person, you can look at the demographic characteristics of those people who would get a raise if the minimum wage were increased. And so when you do that, for example, for the $15 in 2024, you find this remarkable profile of somebody who would see a raise. Far from being a teenager, the average age of somebody who would get a raise if the minimum wage were raised to $15 in 2024 is something like 35 years old. It's disproportionately women. It's disproportionately compared to their proportion in the larger workforce. It's disproportionately people of color. It's quite well targeted. There's many, many parents who would see an increase. It really is getting at people who depend on these earnings to make ends meet. So it's far from being, far from having a minimum wage increase go to people who are, they just need extra spending money. It's not important to their families. The majority of minimum wage workers who would, majority of workers who would see a raise if the minimum wage were increased, their families depend on those earnings to make ends meet. Wow, it's really powerful, Heidi. And going back to your previous point about the structural policy decisions being made to basically keep us where we are today. Could you talk about some of the worst examples being made by this current administration that has been pushing against workers and workers' rights? Every single decision President Trump has made essentially has been made with the interest of corporate executives and shareholders in mind, not workers. And the list is very long. One that's gotten a lot of attention has been the tax cuts that went, the vast, vast majority of spending from those tax cuts went to the very wealthy. But there's been a ton of other action in the regulatory space. So for example, the Obama administration passed this rule that would increase the level below which workers are eligible for overtime pay. They increased that threshold. The Trump administration abandoned the 2016 rule that would have increased the threshold and just published a rule that dramatically lowered that threshold. I estimate using the department's own model, I estimate that 8.2 million workers are left behind by that rule who would have gotten new or strengthened protections under the 2016 rule. And just to put another number on it to show that those 8.2 million workers are losing out, the wage gains under the Trump rule are $1.4 billion less annually than they would have been under the Trump rule. So that, then they would have been under the Obama rule. So the new rule by this administration really does, it takes $1.4 billion out of the pockets of workers in 2020. And just sort of the cherry on top, they did not have that rule do automatic indexing going forward. And so that $1.4 billion that's taken out of workers' pockets as a result of this rule just grows and grows over time. So that's one rule. Another big one was the abandoning of the conflict, another big one was the abandoning of the fiduciary rule, what is known as the fiduciary rule. It sounds like a wonky word, but really all it means is that your financial advisor, your retirement advisor would be required just like your doctor, your lawyer are already required to do. Your financial advisor would be required to act in your best interest and wouldn't be able to do things like steer you towards investments that give them a high commission but give you a lower rate of return. That sort of stuff is very commonplace. The rule under the, that the Obama administration put through would have made that illegal. The Trump administration has abandoned that rule and that will cost retirement savers billions. And the list goes on and on. I could just say a couple more that we just dealt with recently. Like it's enormous, but one thing that happened within the last couple of weeks is the USDA finalized a rule related to hog slaughter plants that will reduce the number of government food safety inspectors from hog slaughter plants by 40%. And it removes any limits on how fast the hog slaughter line speeds can go. They already go at breathtaking speeds. It's an extremely dangerous industry and they're just taking the lid off of how fast that can go. That rule will hurt consumers. It will hurt animals and it will certainly hurt workers. And I'll just, I'll just list one more. I really could go on a great length about all these examples, but one more that also just happened. The NLRB just proposed a rule that would say, if it were finalized, that would say that graduate students and undergraduate student teachers and research assistants are not employees of the university where they work. And so that would mean that they would not be able to do things like unionize. So it just is, there's just example after example of this administration choosing to pass proactively do things that hurt workers. So I want to ask you about what seems like the icing on the cake of this anti-worker agenda, which is the nomination of Eugene Scalia to your former employer, the Labor Department. I wanted to ask you just if you could give us a little bit, given your insights of having worked there for, I think, three years, right? Yeah, two and a half. Two and a half years. So give us a sense of the institution, what it's supposed to stand for, and what it means to have someone with a corporate legal background like Eugene Scalia leading that department. Yeah, the phrase that comes to mind when you think of Eugene Scalia as being the Secretary of Labor is just fox guarding the henhouse. That is the situation that we're in with him. Working men and women deserve somebody at the Department of Labor who will actually look out for their interests and protect them from unscrupulous employers, will set strong health and safety standards, will safeguard their retirement security, but Eugene Scalia is not that person. He has built his career representing corporations, not workers, representing financial institutions, representing other business organizations, and he spent his career fighting worker protections like health and safety regulations. He was a big player in fighting that fiduciary rule that we talked about earlier. He's just, it is a real disaster for the working people. I want to get into some specifics because I think you're pretty amazing, right? This gentleman argued that ergonomics was kind of quack science and therefore people who have workplace injuries related to repetitive stress shouldn't really be paid back. I think he was the lawyer for Walmart on a case. Do you remember the specifics of that case? I don't remember the specifics of that one. He was a big lawyer for Walmart and he was also involved with the SeaWorld lawsuit. So the list really goes on and it's fairly egregious. It's colorful. Yeah, it really is. He absolutely has a track record.  It's just, it's just many examples of a track record that just puts the interests of bosses over those of workers. And that is not the mission of the Department of Labor. Well, are you encouraged in any way by the upcoming, well, I guess, Democratic candidates supporting workers' rights? Because it seems like the party has been slacking on that for quite a while until relatively recently. Yeah, it's really exciting. It is, you know, it is about time that the inequality has been rising for 40 years. But we really are seeing candidates get out in front of really talking a lot and specifically about what's going on with dynamics of inequality in this country and specifically what we need to do to fix it. And a lot of candidates are putting out really bold proposals, stuff that's doable, but that we haven't seen before to boost labor standards, to boost unionization. I mean, on the union front, we are seeing candidates not just talk about the importance of unions, but actually getting out on picket lines and striking with striking workers. It's just, it's a huge shift. It's really important. I think it is a big, bright spot in where we are right now. And so what are some of the vibrant spots of labor activism that you've been really paying attention to? What really gets you excited? So the teacher strikes of last spring, that felt like a real turning point for me. It was just the energy that those teacher strikes happened really organically. There was a ton of energy, a ton of support for them. They were incredibly courageous and it started in West Virginia, but their courage just bled everywhere and it happened in many more places. They were really, really smart about what they were doing and they really were striking. They care about their own wages. They need higher wages, but not just for their wages, for the common good, for the quality of education, for the kids that they are teaching. Parents were supportive of it. It just was a really exciting time. And just going off of that, I know you can't support specific candidates, but is there any policy or idea that you're seeing related to labor coming from just the variety of different proposals being shot out there that you're really excited about? So one of the things that many of the candidates are now talking about is something that is getting more conversation. It hasn't been really pinned down exactly how this would work, but implementing some mechanism that would help us move from a system of enterprise bargaining, which is where a union organizes individual workplaces to more of a system of sectoral bargaining, where you could have bargaining at the level of the whole industry. Which happens in other countries? Totally happens in other countries, very successfully. It's not something that we've done here, but it is something that candidates are seeing, all right, this is maybe it's time here. So there's a lot of really great discussions about that sort of thing. It's just really exciting. Sorry, what about the notion of workplace democracy? And I've even seen proposals, I can't recall quite from whom, about the notion of rather than having to opt into a union that workers might automatically be unionized. That sounds like fairly far away from where we are now. It certainly is. But how do you view the concept of workplace democracy? Just the idea. Where we are right now is so, so far from that. Where we have good survey data that shows workers who, and we can look at it over time, non-union workers who say that they would vote for a union in their workplace if there was an election tomorrow. And the numbers are huge. They're really high. Workers know that unions would be really important to them sort of getting their fair share of economic growth. But they're thwarted in many ways. When there is an organizing drive at a workplace, employers now typically hire a union avoidance firm, a union busting firm, consulting firm, that just has tried and true playbook for how to keep this from happening. And they throw everything at the organizers to try to thwart the drive. And they have been very successful. And then there's also the case where even when a union does have a successful drive, then employers will drag their feet into being able to actually get to a collective bargaining agreement so workers will actually be able to see the benefit of that union. So just at every turn, democracy in the workplace is not where it should be. So there's many, many policies that we can put in place to reverse some of those trends and get us back to a place where workers really have a legitimate voice at work. So one of the exciting things recently is that we're not just seeing movement as far as activism from unions themselves, but if you think about it, 5 for 15, it became a union movement, but it originally came from non-unionized workers. You have Uber workers organizing, and you even have white-collar Google tech workers organizing. Could you talk about that in the context of API's research on the benefits of unions beyond the people who are actually union members? Yeah, that's really important. So there's two things there that we are seeing in many ways, not just in unions, workers coming together to improve their wages and working conditions. Through Fight for 15, through Google workers walking out because they were not okay with the environment of sexual harassment at the company, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. There's just a lot of vibrant stuff going on right now. The data are really clear about the sort of spillover effects from unions, and it's in some ways a little bit separate from this issue of workers organizing around other issues. This spillover effect from unions is also talking about the fact that when there's a sector or a place that's highly unionized, non-union workers also benefit because the union then kind of sets the standard in that sector or in that area. So, for example, if I'm an employer and I'm not unionized, but I know that there's a union shop around the block and in order to be able to get and keep the workers that I need, I have to actually pay decent wages, benefits in order to keep my workers from going around the corner to that union shop to get the benefits of unionization. And that effect, that spillover effect, that ripple effect from unions is a really large effect, and it really does underscore the... unions are actually good for all workers, union workers and non-union workers alike. Wonderful. Thank you so much, Heidi. I really appreciate you taking the time. This is the State of Working America podcast. You can tune in on YouTube, on iTunes, Spotify, wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you for joining us. See you next time.


Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, fellow leaders, for all the immediate challenges that we gather to address this week, terrorism, instability, inequality, disease, there's one issue that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other. And that is the urgent and growing threat of a changing climate. Five years have passed since many of us met in Copenhagen. And since then, our understanding of climate change has advanced. Both in the deepening science that says this once distant threat has moved firmly into the present, and into the sting of more frequent extreme weather events that show us exactly what these changes may mean for future generations. Frequent extreme weather events. This is extreme weather alarmism, and it's nothing to do with climate, because climate is weather over a very long time, and in a minimum point on a graph of 30 years. So what we're going to do now is expose how they're using extreme weather alarmism to scare people. No nation is immune. In America, the past decade has been our hottest on record. Well, until 1999, according to official USA government records, the 1930s were the hottest time on record. That was the time of the Dust Bowl, of course. And they changed the data historically to lower it, and also they increased current temperatures on their adjustments. But the historic evidence for the 1930s Dust Bowl is overwhelming. It's where millions had to leave huge areas of central USA. There is a huge amount of evidence that this drought was worldwide. How Obama can claim that this generation are experiencing weather extremes just to suit his CO2 propaganda defies belief. Along our eastern coast, the city of Miami now floods at high tide. I will just have him repeat that. Along our eastern coast, the city of Miami now floods at high tide. The city of Miami floods at high tide. How it's actually there this year in 2020. And I can promise you, it does not flood at high tide. Here is an aerial shot of how Miami is at the moment. And you can see the inland waterway there on the inside. And you can see the sea on the other side. And you can see how low-lying it all is. Yes, it is low-lying. And really, all the hotels on the beach are still there and not flooding. What it is, is that some of the sinkholes and some of the water abstraction in the area of Miami has caused the land to sink a bit because it's basically sucking out the water from underneath. And as we know, the whole of Florida is full of sinkholes. A lot is built on reclaimed swamps. But there's nothing to do whatsoever with rising sea levels. It is still OK to go to Miami for a holiday. I promise you, not much has changed. In our West, wildfire season now stretches most of the year. But nothing like they did in the past, Mr. Obama. Here is a graph of the wildfires in America going back to the beginning of the 1900s. And you can see the remarkable decrease that has been in wildfires in America. Same for Australia, by the way. The exact opposite of the truth and the alarm that is being peddled. In our heartland, farms have been parched by the worst drought in generations and drenched by the wettest spring in our history. This graph shows in brown all the drought periods, the dry periods in American history, from official government figures, I would add. And you can see that the 1930s were far worse than today. Underneath that are the wet periods. They're shown in green. And you can see that there is not much difference between the past and now. And for the record, the most destructive flooding in USA history was the Mississippi flooding in 1927, well before man-made CO2 could have had any influence on the climate. And about 10 years later, in 1937, the Ohio flood made a million people homeless. You cannot use extreme weather events to show a change in climate. You have to have a pattern of them over a long time. A hurricane left parts of this great city, dark and underwater. And hurricanes always have, Mr. Obama. But more importantly, there were more of them and greater intensity in the past. This graph, if anything, of hurricane frequency and amount shows a decline in hurricanes. Four out of the five deadliest hurricanes in US history occurred in 1893, which had two. 1900 and 1928, well before CO2 from man had any effect. You are just fear mongering, Mr. Obama, not going on facts, not going on science, just pure fear. As one of America's governors has said, we are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last generation that can do something about it. Let's just hear those few words again. We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change. We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change. We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change. Tell the people in Galveston in the year 1900 who felt that hurricane. Tell the 8,000 to 12,000 people who died in that hurricane. And while you're at it, Mr. Obama, tell it to the victims of the Mississippi flood in 1927, where over 10,000 people lost their homes and were displaced. We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change. Over the past eight years, the United States has reduced our total carbon pollution by more than any other nation on earth. Wow, a long-lasting truth. That is absolutely true. But the reason is fracking. Fracking is a cleaner gas than the alternative fossil fuels that were being burned. And therefore, the USA did reduce its amount to CO2. But not because of any particular measures by Mr. Obama, but because the USA allowed fracking. Thank you very much. We all know exactly what is needed to make a good deal here in Paris. We need a deal that keeps two degrees alive. So David Cameron here is claiming we have a thermostatic control knob that can control the amount of CO2, and thereby control the weather and the temperature of the earth. All the ice ages, all the huge fluctuations in the Earth's history has got nothing to do with it. No, we rely on this pure little knob that we turn up and turn down, the arrogance of man. This isn't a question of the rich West saying, well, we've managed to grow. We've put all this carbon up in the atmosphere, and you're now going to have to pay the price for our growth. That mustn't happen. And we have to be much more permissive with the developing world and the poorer countries of the world who need to develop. So we've got to help them develop in a low carbon way. That means transferring the technology we have about wind power and wave power and other renewable technologies. It means having a proper price for carbon in our own economy and eventually throughout the world economy. And it means actually making sure that they can develop in a way that is far more fuel efficient and carbon efficient for themselves.  The fact is that the CO2 curve has just grown and grown and grown. Here it is with all the different conferences on. It makes no difference at all. Why? Because coal plants in India and in China are being installed at an incredible pace. The output is increasing tremendously. So the Paris conference limits the West, limits industry in the West, whilst at the same time allowing tremendous growth in CO2 output from the rest of the world, in particular India and China. I mean, if the whole of Wales in the UK, for example, disappeared from the face of the Earth as you got CO2, output zero, India alone would make up the CO2 we've just dropped in four or five days of growth. That's how insignificant we are. The whole of the UK outputs about 1.3% of the world's CO2. 1.3%. You do not have to accept my word for all this. You just have to look at the CO2 growth in the world that carries on unabated despite any of the conferences. It's all just hot air. It has no effect other than to depress industry in the West and hand business to the East. Let's now look at Al Gore. The fearmaster whose every prediction has been wrong. Another new study to be presented by US Navy researchers later this week warns it could happen in as little as seven years, seven years from now. But the fact is it didn't happen in 2014, 15, 16, 17, 18, or even today in 2020. Well, the same forecast, actually forecast, that the UK would be in the grip of Siberian weather on a permanent basis by 2020. It's hard to capture the astonishment that the experts in the science of ice felt when they saw this minimum in 2005, which meant that the amount of ice that had melted, it's been roughly the size of the continental United States minus an area roughly the size of Arizona, nothing against Arizona. But the amount that melted in 2005 was equivalent to an area covering everything east of the Mississippi River in the United States. Well, Al Gore repeats his message of 2007 and 2009, and it's still wrong. Let's look at actually what is happening in the Arctic. Here is a graph from the Tony Heller website. And as I said before, that's easily the best site to do with climate change on the internet. What it shows over the years is the cyclical nature of the Arctic sea ice. It responds to all sorts of things, but what is clear, it does not respond to the continuing growth of CO2. Otherwise, you'd just see a gradual melting right through the century. All the alarmist graphs start at 1979. And here you can see why, because from 1979 onwards, there's a fall in sea ice, but it totally ignores the previous history, absolutely ignores it. And this is a standard trick of the alarmist. They choose the starting date to show a distorted picture of the truth. So what this cycle shows is the natural decrease early on in the last century from the little ice age as the ice melted. And we have less than we have then, yes. But if you look at 1955, we had far less ice than we have now. So since 1955, the ice overall has grown. Now armed with that knowledge, let's look at what Al Gore has to say, and what he's doing is using those details since 1979 to show the little dips and how alarming they are, but not putting anything into the context of the history of the ice sheet in the Arctic. Then, when the real shock to the scientists came was in 2007, when this happened, and their phrase was it fell off a cliff. And then the extra amount that melted was this much. And some of the models suggest to Dr. Mazlowski that there is a 75% chance that the entire North Polar Ice Cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years. Saying that in 2009, he's predicting a 75% chance of the ice cap disappearing in the summer months from 2014 to 2016. And it's now 2020 and it's still there today. I'll end over now to somebody else to critique what Al Gore has just said. Or even tomorrow morning. I mean, say it ain't so, though. I mean, say it ain't so. Living God, Al Gore, is wrong on something. Actually, he's wrong on lots of things, but on this one, he predicted, as you heard there, that the Arctic ice cap would have vanished by now, really. Satellite images, oh dear, they show this. It's got thicker. A bit, Larry Goldstein, isn't surprised. I shouldn't say this about Al Gore, but he just sounds as though he has no idea what he's ever talking about. But people always assume that this is a great truth, a great slice of wisdom being offered to the people. Well, he's not a climate scientist. He's a popularizer of climate science, but he's generally a popularizer of, I wouldn't say bad climate science, but I would say what he does, his whole gig is that he takes the most extreme example and says that's the expectation. You know, he was careful to say one study. Well, yeah, but one- We put you two there, actually. Yeah, well, one for 2020 and one for, well, I'm sorry, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change doesn't have anything that dramatic. And look, there's always a grain of truth in what people like Mr. Gore say. The Arctic ice cap has been declining. It reached a record low in 2012. Now it's recovering. As you said, the ice is thicker and there's more of it. It's about 1.7 million square kilometers more roughly the size of Alaska. So you had a low and in terms of what is obviously, one would think, natural variation, ocean currents, those kinds of things, there is a recovery. We will now quickly deal with more of Al Gore's predictions. Michael Schellenberger has been a leading environmentalist for decades. He has spoken in front of the US Congress and is listened to by many people throughout the world. But recently he published a book, Apocalypse Never, and he's basically spilled the beans. He over time became disgusted with what was going on around him. And even the White House had to discredit a friend of his. These are his words. By the way, Michael has now been shunned by that movement and has been heavily attacked. And this alongside with other leading left-wing environmentalists, if you like, also beginning to desert the movement. There is maybe some hope for the future. The climate change movement today is not science. It is an alarmist left-wing agenda. I'm now going to leave you with Michael's own words spoken by him. Michael Schellenberger, thanks so much for joining us.  Well, I've been working on environmental issues for a really long time. 33 years as an environmental activist. I've been a climate activist for 20 years. I've seen a lot by now, and I know the science well enough to know that climate change is not a catastrophic threat. I kept waiting for climate scientists to speak out against the alarmism, these apocalyptic, the world's going to end, buildings will die, all that stuff last year. Nobody did. I think it's actually quite irresponsible that nobody did. And I've got a 14-year-old daughter. And while she's fine, because I talked to her about the science and I explained science to her, her friends are very alarmed and very anxious, and they've been misinformed. And, you know, adolescents these days, they have a lot of things to worry about. Anxiety and depression are rising among everybody, really, but certainly among adolescents. And I thought it was not right to be terrorizing, you know, schoolchildren and giving them false information. I felt like somebody needed to separate out science from science fiction. Yeah, to make it very clear here, you're certainly not a climate denier. You're certainly not talking down the issues of climate change and global warming and the fact that you want to see action. But it's that alarmism, that catastrophism that you're railing against. That's right. I mean, I'm quite proud of the fact that I'm asked to testify before a number of different governments had testified in front of the Congress in January. I was invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to become an invited expert reviewer late last year. And I know for a fact that there are people that are involved in IPCC who are also bothered by the alarmism and wanted to see some pushback to that and some better communications of this. And so I felt emboldened that I needed to speak out. And I think that the majority of scientists are not activists. There's actually just a handful of scientists that feel the need to terrify people. And I go into sort of what are their motivations in the book as well. Well, do you think that the whole global climate change movement, the global campaign, if you like, has turned its back on rational thought and logical debate and has gravitated towards a motive posturing? Well, it's a question of whether there was ever something called the environmental movement that was rational. I mean, there was something we called a conservation movement which was focused on protecting wildlife and the habitats that they occupy that existed up until about 1970, at which point this anti-human Malthusian tradition took over. And it really is the paranoid side of environmentalism. It's this neurotic concern with having your body being poisoned. It really had more to do with fear of nuclear weapons. But it also had to do with some kind of first world problems of neurosis and paranoia and really radical left thinking. I think everybody kind of knows what we're talking about here. And that really took over the conservation movement, which was a very humanistic and rational movement up until around 1970. So for me, I don't think this is really that complicated. I think we need to lift everybody out of poverty and we need to do our best to protect natural places. And things have just spiraled out of control. I mean, this climate change thing, it just got too crazy. And somebody had to say something. And I just was at this point in my career, I was like, if I don't do it, I just know that nobody else is going to do it. So much.


John Elliott has been on the water for most of his 91 years. In all three theaters during World War II, as a merchant seaman, and for the last 70 years, sailing out of Rockaway Point. When a failing heart valve left John short of breath, he thought his sailing days were over. But thanks to NYU Winthrop Hospital and a minimally invasive valve replacement procedure called TAVR, John is back where he belongs. For me, sailing is living. NYU Winthrop gave me my life back. For more information, call 1-866-WINTHRUP.


Hi, I'm Rusty Komori, and this is Beyond the Lines. We are broadcasting live from the beautiful Think Tech Hawaii TV studio in the Pioneer Plaza in downtown Honolulu. This show is based on my book, also titled Beyond the Lines, and it's about leadership, creating a superior culture of excellence and finding greatness. Today's special guest is a former Miss Hawaii USA, the former TV host and producer of the very popular Living 808 TV show on K-Chon2 and the president and CEO of Make-A-Wish Hawaii. She is Trini Kaupuiki, and today we are going Beyond Wishes. Hey, Trini. Great having you here. Thank you. Congratulations to you on this very successful show and your book, of course. Oh, thank you. You know, how is it being on the other side now that I'm interviewing and you're being interviewed? I got to tell you, I don't like it. I would much rather be over there. It does feel weird to be on this side of things. But that is my world now, right? I am no longer the interviewer. I am typically the interviewee, so I have to get used to it. Well, Trini, let's go back to the beginning. Can you tell me about what schools and activities you did in your youth? Sure. I grew up on Maui, a country Maui. I attended St. Joseph's School, and then for Intermediate School, I went over to Kalama Intermediate, and then I graduated from St. Anthony Junior Senior High School in Wailuku. And I was very active in school. My mother used to... I used to drive her crazy because whenever something came up, I'm like, I have to do that. I have to join that. But I was active in sports, basketball, volleyball, track. In high school, I was a cheerleader, very active in student government. I was class president for a few years, and my senior year, I was student body president. So, yeah, very active. I loved being involved. And then what college did you end up going to? So I went to Loyola, Marymount University, my freshman year, and then I transferred to the University of Hawaii, where I majored in journalism. Yeah, professional student. I was in college for a long time, but we don't have to talk about that. Oh, you're very educated. I wish that that would be the result of being in college for a long time, but, you know, I was also a professional hula dancer. Oh, yeah. And so whenever a trip came up, I used to dance with Hawaii Visitors and Convention Bureau at the time. And so whenever a long trip came up, I would take the semester off from school because I couldn't just take a month off right from classes. So that's why it took me longer than the normal student. Yes, but I did finish. Trini, your husband, Sean, and your kids, Malie and Kala, tell me about them. Yes, they're wonderful. I hit the jackpot with my husband, Sean.  You know, when you marry somebody, you hope for the best. But at the time, you know, I didn't have kids. I didn't have a super demanding career. You know, things change right when you're after you're married. But he's wonderful. He's a wonderful man. He's an attorney, very smart. But, you know, my job has changed over the years. I've had a very demanding schedule, you know, for more than 10 years. I worked early mornings at KH1.  It's a really wonderful, wonderful man. He's super dad. I am very, very grateful and appreciative. My son is 11 years old now. He's a fifth grader. My daughter is 14 and is in eighth grade. So I'll just leave it at that. You can imagine what that is like having a teenage daughter. But yeah, just, you know, normal family active. I'm a chauffeur, you know, every afternoon, driving them around to their activities. But, yeah. No, you have a beautiful family, Trini. Thank you. Thank you. And Trini, let's go back in time. So in 1991, you were 18 years old and you entered the Ms. Hawaii Teen USA pageant. Why did you enter that pageant? Yes. You know, I entered because there was a winner from Maui who had competed and entered. And she was a personal friend of mine. We had modeled together for a few years. And that's the first I even heard of the pageant. And I thought, how incredible is it that someone from Maui, a neighbor island girl, you know, competed and won. And I saw how it had changed her life. So that's originally what got me into that pageant, you know, that what inspired me to compete in the first place. And you won. Yes, you won the pageant. I did not win the first time, though. I won the second time that I competed. And, you know, it was a wonderful experience. You know, keep in mind, I grew up on a farm in upcountry Maui. So this whole pageant world was super different.  And, but it opened up doors for me. It was a wonderful opportunity. Do you think pageants are a good thing for girls to do? I don't think pageants are for all girls to do. I can only speak for myself and my personal experience.  You know, like I said, it exposed me to a whole new world. As Miss Hawaii USA, I was able to travel the world promoting Hawaii. And, you know, just what you learn by having those opportunities, you know, it's opened up doors. A lot of girls will compete in pageants because of the scholarships that they receive.  So there are a lot of benefits for sure. So in 1999, you're 26 years old, and you won the Miss Hawaii USA pageant.  And what do you think you learned about yourself through that experience? Yes. Of course I've had insecurities. Who doesn't have some level of insecurity? I don't remember what my insecurities were at that particular time. But I do know, you know, again, just being from a neighbor island, and this was something I think I felt too with my first pageant is, you know, you're competing against city girls, right? And you kind of assume, I think there was some level of intimidation, by being from small town. But, and I remember too, when I was competing in pageants, there's a saying, there will always be someone prettier than you. There will always be someone more talented than you. There will always be someone smarter than you. Just hope that that person is not on stage standing next to you. So, you know, you always have that in the back of your mind, which I thought was funny. But, you know, I think you just get through it, you know. And that's one of the benefits of pageants too, is, you know, it allows you to be your best self. You gain self-esteem and confidence. And at the end of the day, you just be the best that you can be, you know. And even when you don't win, I mean, there's a lot more failures, right? Losses than winning. But those experiences are so worthwhile. It makes you tough. It does. And you're tough, Trini. Thank you very much. You've got to have thick skin in the news business, for sure. Trini, I want to ask you, what was your first ever job that you had? Oh, gosh. My first job, believe it or not, was I was a maid at a hotel. Really? Yes. I was, I think, 14 at the time. And my friend on Maui, his mom, worked at a hotel. And I can't even remember the name of the hotel. But it was out by Kana Pali area. And, you know, we wanted to make money. We wanted to figure out a way we could make money. And we had these dreams.  But in reality, when we went and applied, you can't have 13, 14-year-olds serving cocktails by the pool, right? So I think the only job that we could do was in the housekeeping department. So that was my first job. And full disclosure, I think I only lasted maybe one or two months. It was a hard job. I have so much appreciation for people, you know, who do that. But I don't think we lasted very long. But I would try. And that was my first job. That's interesting and such a great experience to appreciate all the house, you know, what housekeepers do. But you know what? I will tell you that I still fix my bed the way I learned back then. You know, when the sheets are on really tight and you fold it a certain way, the creases, I still fix my bed that way. Well, you got to give me some tips about how to do that then. I can do that. Yes. So Trini, how did you first get into TV? So when I transferred to the University of Hawaii, I majored in journalism. I loved my journalism classes. I had great instructors. And so I was already a journalism major when I got a call. At the time, I was dancing at a show in Waikiki. I was a hula dancer and also did different dance, disciplines, modern dance, and so forth. And I remember getting a message one night from Ron Mizutani, who was working at KH1 too. And he knew that I was a journalism major. He knew that I had already had experience on TV, hosting shows and modeling and doing commercials and so forth. So he left a message about a possible opportunity. KH1, for the first time ever, was looking at hiring their first weather anchor. That was a good thing. It was a good thing. I was like, oh my gosh. So I went in, had an interview, had a screen test, and the rest is history. Yeah. And you're living 808 TV show that you did. You and John Venari made such a great team. Yes. What did you like most about doing that show? There was a lot of things I loved about working on that show. I mean, that really was a dream job for sure. I remember traveling with my girlfriends years before, and we all went around the circle and we said, what is your dream job? What is your dream job? And mine was the host of my own show. And living 808 was that for me. Working with John is where John and I have been friends for many, many years, way before living 808. We went to college together. I joke and call him my work husband. But it was a fun show and it was special because it allowed local businesses and nonprofits to share their story. In news, it's a different game. And I had been in news for, well, I've been with K-1 for 19 years, but at that time, 15 years in news doing weather as a reporter. So this was something different and it was fun. We traveled. We had Singapore week on the show. We had Seattle week, Los Angeles week. So these are all the fun things that you're not really, you know, you don't get to do in news. So there were a lot of things that I loved. I love interviewing people. I got to interview you. I had a great time on your show. No, it was great. I mean, it was, there were so many things about it that I loved. Yeah, now Trini, so you were the TV host and the producer of Living 808. Now, I know that you don't like to be complacent. How would you try to keep making things better and greater for your show? Yeah, it was challenging because a lot of people don't realize this. Five people, five of us put on Living 808. So, you know, it's an hour show five days a week and five of us worked on it. So it's a big job. We all had to do a lot. There were a lot of long hours. So I would say the biggest challenge is just, you know, the resources, right? I would have loved to have one or five more people on our team. But I think it's just, you know, being able to collaborate with the people you work with, bouncing ideas off of folks. There's a lot of stories to tell in Hawaii. There's a lot of companies that you can highlight and feature.  What would the viewers like to learn about, you know, highlighting new restaurants or different new services? You know, that was our responsibility is to share you know, what the viewers would like to know. Yeah, it's a big responsibility. That makes sense. And Trini, before we go to break, I want to ask you about Oprah. You know, Oprah. My bad. Yeah, I heard she really had a great time meeting you. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure she did. How was that experience? That was amazing. What Rusty is referring to is I was, I was privileged enough to introduce Oprah on Maui when she spoke as part of HMSA's share care event. And when I got the call asking me if I would be available, I'm like, I don't care if I'm on another planet. I will make my way back to Hawaii to Maui for that opportunity. I mean, that's somebody I looked up to my whole life. For sure. So it was a huge honor. And what's funny is, you know, I think only about 20, maybe up to 20 people were allowed to meet her backstage and take pictures with her. And she was standing by herself. And it was my turn to take a picture. So I went up there and I remember her looking at me and she said, I love your show. Oh, wow. And I don't know. She may not have known. She may have just been being polite. But I remember I was like, I had that weird look on my face.  But I turned into that person. I was speechless.  It's hilarious. Look, there it is. There it is. It's like the cheese. It's a happy look. It's a cheesy grin because I just, I don't know. The smile can't get any bigger. No, it is so funny. But it was an honor meeting her. And she is just as fabulous in real life as she was on her show. So it was such an honor. Yeah. Well, Trini, we're going to take a quick break. And when we come back, we're going to talk about your amazing Make-A-Wish Hawaii Foundation. Okay. Sounds good. You're watching Beyond the Lines on Think Tech Hawaii with my special guest, Trini Kalpawiki. We will be back in 60 seconds. Aloha. This is Winston Welch. I am your host of Out and About, where every other week, Mondays at 3, we explore a variety of topics in our city, state, nation, and world, and events, organizations, the people that fuel them. It's a really interesting show. We welcome you to tune in and we welcome your suggestions for shows. You got a lot of them out there. And we have an awesome studio here where we can get your ideas out as well. So I look forward to you tuning in every other week where we've got some great guests and great topics. You're going to learn a lot. You're going to come away inspired like I do. So I'll see you every other week here at 3 o'clock on Monday afternoon. Aloha. Aloha. I'm Wendy Lo and I'm coming to you every other Tuesday at 2 o'clock live from Think Tech Hawaii. And on our show, we talk about taking your health back. And what does that mean? It means mind, body, and soul. Anything you can do that makes your body healthier and happier is what we're going to be talking about. Whether it's spiritual health, mental health, fascia health, beautiful smile health, whatever it means, let's take healthy back. Aloha. Welcome back to Beyond the Lines on Think Tech Hawaii. My special guest today is the president and CEO of Make-A-Wish Hawaii. She is Trini Kaupuiki-Clark and today we are going Beyond Wishes. Trini, why did you end up leaving TV to be CEO of Make-A-Wish Hawaii? Yeah. That's a great question. Rusty, I've had 19 wonderful years at K-Chuen and I am so, so grateful for my time there and the experiences, opportunities I've had, but I was just ready for something else. And Make-A-Wish is an amazing organization. As a journalist, I was able to interview the wish children and their families and saw the kind of impact it had in our community. I've always been active with philanthropy. In fact, over the last 11 years, I spearheaded K-Chuen's Laulima Giving Program. So when people think, how do you go from TV to Make-A-Wish? When you know my background and understand it a little better, you see that it's not that crazy of a stretch. I've always been involved with different nonprofits close to my heart and Make-A-Wish is one of them. So when the opportunity came about, I just thought it was a no-brainer for me because I love what they do. It's meaningful work. They've got a great team. And I just feel so blessed now to be a part of it, that I can now focus on one thing and that is granting wishes to children who are critically ill. And our mission is to grant life-changing wishes to every eligible child. So to be able to focus on that one mission is very special and important to me. Well, they're brilliant to hire you as the CEO and president. I think it's an absolutely perfect fit. No, no, thank you very much. I mean, everyone's excited. I mean, I know people that are on the board that are so excited to have you there. Thank you. So now you're granting wishes and Bethany Hamilton, you guys just did one with her. Yes. Can you tell me about that? Yes. So that's a partnership that has been going on for like six or seven years, where children from the mainland or here locally, their wish is to serve with Bethany Hamilton. So about one or two weeks after I officially started, and I should tell you, Rusty, this week is my six-week anniversary. I'd make a wish. So I'm still learning. You know, there's so much to learn and do. But in week two, I believe, I went over to Kauai with four wish families and I was able to witness firsthand the kind of impact, you know, granting a wish has on these families, the whole community.  I wish the weather was a little bit better. It was cloudy, but they don't care. I mean, they were so happy to be out there.  It was all volunteer, volunteer surf instructors. You know, they provided lunch for all of us. It was so special, you know. But also speaking of make-a-wish, a week after I started, there was something called Grand Rounds that happened at Kapilani Medical Center. And it's something that they do every week, but for the first time ever, they presented make-a-wish. So I was there in the audience and doctors went up and talked about the power of a wish. So these are people with a science background, right? These are doctors. And they talked about how, you know, they can give someone medicine, they can treat them, but they can never give them what make-a-wish has been able to give them. And it was so powerful.  There was not a dry eye in the room. Oh, I'm sure.  But, you know, I just left that day and every day feeling so good about the decision I made, about the work that I'm doing, the impact that I can have in the community, you know, so really, they may be happy to have me, but I feel blessed. Yeah. That goes both ways. It does. And Trini, you have an amazing group of people that you're working with. And what do you think is like the biggest challenge for you guys right now? Yeah. Oh, I have a wonderful team that I'm so blessed to be surrounding myself with. But I think the biggest challenge is, you know, there are a lot of really great, worthy non-profits out there, right? And, you know, we don't get any state or federal funds or grants. So it's important for us to fundraise. And so we are competing with all of these other really wonderful non-profit organizations, right? It's hard. There's a lot of non-profits in Hawaii for what our population is. So that's, I think, the biggest challenge, right, is just, you know, my goal as CEO is to raise awareness, making sure that people understand the power of a wish and what we do and that it's not just for terminally ill children, it's for life-threatening illnesses or critically ill children. So it's raising that awareness, letting people know how they can get involved. You know, we have so many volunteers that help us do what we do. We have different fundraisers, galas that people can support and be a part of. But really, it's, you know, just that's the biggest challenge is raising funds so that we can continue to do what we do. Our mission is to grant life-changing wishes to every eligible child. And to do that, we need businesses support. We get a lot of in-kind donations that help us do what we do and then, of course, raising funds. Well, Trini, that's why you're on this show because you individually, I mean, you go beyond the lines and your whole team go beyond the lines. I know you read my book last year. Yes. Did you like the book? Of course I did. What's not to like? I loved the book and I remember at the time, because it was so long ago, I have to read it again, but I remember feeling inspired by it. At the time, I was going through something with my daughter and I remember reading it and applying what I was learning to her and what she was going through. I would love to, and I will, reread the book now in my new role at Make a Wish because being the CEO and having, you know, my great team, I know that if I reread it now, I'll be taking different lessons from it. But really, I think everybody, everybody should read it because it's like a roadmap for success and for being a leader. And I remember, you have something in there that leaders are, you learn how to be a leader. Leaders are made. Leaders are made, yes. For sure. Speaking of leaders, you know, we've both been on teams before, whether it be in sports or business. And so we know what good leaders do and what bad leaders have done. What do you think the best leaders do? I think the best leaders inspire their team. You know, they walk the walk, right? They're not just telling people what to do, but they are walking, you know, they are walking the walk. So I think that's important. That's what I'm trying to do for my new team is, you know, I don't know if you've heard of organizational health, but that is important to me. And on my very first day at Make-A-Wish, we had a staff meeting and I talked about that. You know, yes, we need to raise funds. Yes, we need to be out in the community and we have to make sure things are running well and efficiently. But just as important, you know, you've got your staff. I want, you know, minimal politics. I want high morale, low turnover. So these are all things that I'm trying to incorporate with my team, you know, at Make-A-Wish. And you know, it's, there are challenges, of course, but you know, I feel like a good leader is someone who listens. Yeah. Not just talks. Exactly.  But these are all things that, you know, I feel so blessed that I can now be the boss or manager that I've always wanted. Right? You know, there are some great managers that I've had and I'm like pulling different things from each of them and I'm now trying my best to be what I wish I had or what, you know what I mean? What I think they need and want.  You're coaching. Yeah. And you know, before we wrap up, I want to ask you one more thing.  You had a successful TV career. You are CEO of Make-A-Wish Hawaii now. Why are you successful? Why am I successful? Why do you think you are successful? I think I have a good attitude. Yeah. That's God. That's a tough question. Let's see. Attitude and mindset. Oh, yeah. Very, very important. You know, when I look back at my life, I've surrounded myself with good people who love me, keep me in line. So thank you for thinking that I'm successful. But I think that it's a combination of all of those things. I surround myself with smart, good people. No drama, you know. I'm grateful for every day for every opportunity. And it's the journey, right? Even when things are not going my way. I believe everything happens for a reason. There are always lessons to be learned. Sure. So I think all of those things have kind of contributed. You know, you're completely right, but I know why. I know why. Please tell me. I have no idea. Cal, I'll tell you why. Because you have great character, you have great integrity, and you have such positive energy. And obviously your mindset and your perspective is awesome. So that's why. And Trini, I really appreciate you taking time in your schedule to be on the lines today. My pleasure. Thank you for having me. It's a lot of fun with you. I'll come back again. Okay. Anytime. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Trini. And thank you for watching Beyond the Lines on Think Tech Cloy and a special thank you to my clothing sponsor Ilani Incorporated For more information, please visit RustyKamori.com and my book is available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all Costco stores in Hawaii. I hope that Trini and I will inspire you to create your own superior culture of excellence and to find your greatness and help others find theirs. Aloha.