Good morning. Thank you for the invitation. My presentation was prepared while I was still board member two weeks ago. So I'm a little bit in the grey zone, you know, so in between a little bit, in the decompression I would say, period. So my remarks are based on different work by the ECB staff, Philipp Hartmann and Frank Smetz and also work by the team of Massimo Rostanio, where you're Massimo there. So thank you very much for the abundant literature you gave me. And so I will try also to draw some of, you know, the essence of the remarks also that have been done by Mario. By the way, I broadly agree, Mario, with what you said before. So it's not really a coincidence, I think it's more than a coincidence. So let me go through the very simple outline. The first is section one and two, basically go through the past 20 years. The idea of course is not to rewrite history. So I ask a little bit for your understanding. Sometimes I will be a bit more critical, I think, going through the introductory statements of the ECB over the last 20 years. I will give you some of my reactions on that. But it is not the intention to criticize or to rewrite history with hindsight. It's always easy to do. So I'm not going to do that, but to try to draw some of the lessons of that. The second, the third section that you see here, I think fits very well with actually the concluding remarks of Mario, but also Olivier yesterday evening. It's macroeconomic stabilization beyond monetary policy. Basically is that the ECB cannot and should not be the only game in town in macro stabilization policy. I think that's a very important debate for the future as well, not only for the past. And basically the conclusion is what we know is that we urgently need to complete our institutional framework. Urgently, that's the term and that's what the message of Mario before. Now on the mandate, I think I have 17 slides. I will go relatively quickly on them. No, no, I will go. It's not too difficult. On the mandate, former colleagues, and on the mandate, I think what Mario was saying, I fully agree. It's important to say monetary union was a response to monetary disorders that were threatening the single market. And there were big differences in inflation history across the countries. I think if you look at the first 10 years at least, you don't understand what happened if you start from that and when you see on the left, you see the inflation HICP. You came from an average 4% to below 1% in 1999. But you also see the consensus projections of economists. You also come from a bit above 3% to something slightly below 2%, always through the period. You see that the dotted black lines show a little bit this shift. So we came from this period where there were, of course, inflationary problems in different countries. Price stability has been defined as headline inflation below 2% achieved in the medium term. Mario said that. This means that the central bank can look through supply shocks. I read the introductory statements from 1999 until now, but I was with hindsight sometimes surprised that the extent to which the introductory statements is worried about the second round effects due to higher oil prices. And that when you read the introductory statements, you find the concerns about second round effect up to 2012 even. Within 2011, but also up to 2012. I will comment a little bit later on this. But still you find this old pattern that we had seen before the monetary union where oil shock usually had profound second round effect for which we had in the ECB very much to react very strongly. But that mindset, and this is my point, the mindset went through well into the crisis in 2011. I will illustrate that a bit later. The clarification of the strategy in 2003 followed the end of the dot-com bubble when headline inflation fell to very low levels you see there on the chart. Concerns were expressed regarding the asymmetry of the definition of price stability so it's not new. Each rate between 0 and 2% could be qualified as price stability. So price stability could be 2, could be 0. And what is above 2% would not be compatible with price stability. That's why in that context there was a clarification and it seems that this clarification is not enough because Mario again today clarified again the fact that it's not asymmetrical so that was repeated again and again. But still I mean this is still very present in the minds of market participants in general. The clarification and there was also the issue of the zero lower bound at that time. Otmar you can testify on this. The clarification meant that the objective was an inflation below close to 2% in the medium term. And basically the idea was that if you would define your objective that way the probability of hitting the zero lower bound would be very small which was not of course what happened later but the probability was considered as very small. The other thing was that the relative price adjustment if you would follow that objective would be much easier of course and that would be sufficient for the relative price adjustment within the monetary union. So that's for my first point on the definition. The second point which I found personally very interesting this very simple graph you draw a 2% trend, price level and then you look at consumer prices, headline inflation and compared to the 2% trend and you see that we are more or less up to the sovereign debt crisis not to the global financial crisis but to the sovereign debt crisis you are more or less up to the trend. A little bit above even the trend. Then you have a plateau with the sovereign debt crisis the evolution of the price level and then especially with the very accommodative monetary policy that was followed after 2015 basically you see again a recoupling you know and the trend you get closer to the trend again of 2% but you are below as you know the trend, you are not yet there but you see that over a long period of time you were so that's a first observation. The other point that was in Mario's speech as well is that when you look at the core inflation the core inflation has been trending much weaker than the headline inflation and you see the big gap you know not that you have between core inflation supposed to represent more the underlying price pressures than the headline inflation. The reason of course for that has been that we had energy prices going up as a trend also and you can, here it's not the price level this is the rate of increase of prices and if you see the light curves there you can see the energy inflation and the light blue curve shows the core inflation and what is very remarkable in that sort of graph is that you don't see signs of second round effect if you look at that. So headline inflation can be kept more or less at 2% even a little bit above 2% for a while before the crisis but what you see is that when all prices increased you see sometimes core inflation going down and that was also illustrated in Mario's presentation when you look at the negative correlation actually between headline inflation and core inflation headline inflation goes up because of oil prices and core inflation is pushed down. From that you can of course conclude tentatively that policy has been very successful because basically agents seem to internalize the reaction function of the central bank which was Olivier at that time when you were the wheel and the dog that didn't bark at that time where you see the shift to a more inflation targeting regime brought credibility to the central bank and that was internalized by markets not necessarily the central bank had to act but the markets would internalize that reaction function. So that's one interpretation. I was looking a little bit further I think that's good evidence that this is correct. There is some evidence at some points for example when you see the core goes down when inflation goes up, headline inflation goes up there are other factors like the heart's reform in Germany that could have pushed also the core inflation down via services for example where wages take a very big part. So I think the evidence is probably yes that the reaction function which was quite tough in the definition as was said before but which was necessary given from where we came that the markets start to internalize that in their behavior but I think we should also look at other factors. When I say that is also when you see the light blue line you see of course the fluctuation of the core inflation but you also see a sort of declining trend in the core inflation over the years. So there are cyclical movements more or less in line with oil prices as usual but as a sort of trend down maybe due to China, maybe due to a number of factors are still very difficult to understand today so that's the one. The monetary and now I go into the second pillar Mario you didn't really speak about the second pillar or I didn't yet get it I think. So I think I compliment what Mario was saying. Monetary policy deliberations where and are still informed by two complementary analysis the monetary pillar and the economic pillar. The 2003 clarification gave a prominent role to the economic pillar but still recognizing that a specific focus on money and credit would give additional signals on longer term risk to price stability in the monetary tradition of course. So there were two pillars and this is still the case today where the two information sets are cross checked in the introductory statements for what the signal for price stability. In my conclusion I would say I really think this should be a little bit looked back again about this cross check Mario when we have in the introductory statement this cross check. We always repeat a little bit a cross check confirms you know the economic analysis. I thought it would maybe the time for Philip you're there it would be maybe the time to reflect a little bit about this because I had a little bit this problem. It doesn't mean there is not useful information don't misunderstand me on this. So here on this cross check for what signals for price stability so in the run up you can see it on the graph to the global financial crisis money and credit signal upside risk upside risk to price stability as did the economic analysis but and that's maybe for you Marcos when you intervene the money and credit view was not conceived as a financial stability pillar you came many years ago already with that point which I think is a very relevant point but what we learned basically from this is the absence of a proper macro potential framework was one of the important weaknesses of the pre-crisis institutional framework and I think that's at least to some extent I mean addressed now it has to be tested for the future but I think there has been a response to that. Over time over time and that's important also the money and credit view increasingly focused on the transmission of monetary policy via the banking sector. Extensive work by the staff I can testify has been done during the financial crisis to understand the path through of non-standard measures via the banking sector to the lending conditions I mean thanks also to the colleagues from the governing council the staff had access to very detailed balance sheets of banks and we can the staff can I mean for me it's the past but the staff can difficult to adjust the staff can trace the money so when you go for a teletros one of the measures you know bank for bank what they did and what is the pricing they apply to the different facilities you do so that's what was extremely important in our deliberation with efficient not efficient we could make for example cluster the banks between vulnerable the banks that came to the teletros the banks with strong capital base you know and the weaker banks and we could see a little bit how the monetary policy transmission was working so that work I think has been extremely important Massimo's team has worked a lot on this and I think this is one of the best I think achievements that we had in terms of understanding the transmission mechanism so the pass through so we could trace the money the next one is well it's getting worse now is a global financial crisis marked a dramatic change of course in the policy environment in the early phase of the crisis it was felt that tensions on the interbanking market and the short term funding markets could largely be addressed with liquidity management tools I think that's something to reflect and to pose a little bit on this the conduct of monetary policy focused on setting policy rates for achieving price stability on one hand and market operation focused on ensuring that market turbulence would not impair the transmission of the policy rates to the economy it was a separation principle where you give liquidity to the banks you facilitate a northerly deleveraging of the banks and they're not forced to sell and by doing that you hope that there will be no real effect on the economy basically that was basically the principle so the stance could continue and those operations acted as a complement to conventionally interest rate policy not as a substitute also during the sovereign debt crisis the sovereign bond purchase program, the SMP was to ensure death and liquidity in the sovereign bond market of distressed countries and restore an appropriate functioning of the monetary transmission mechanism this was not designed to alter the stance of monetary policy and to signal this well, credibly or not but to signal this, the SMP purchases were sterilized so you see that separation principle provided liquidity where the stance can be separated by the issue the tightening of monetary policy in July 2008 and in July 2011 in parallel with continued abundant liquidity provision have been controversial so I will give you a little comment on this I look at in particular to the introductory statements of 2011 and the introductory statement mentioned upside risk to price stability related to the sharp oil price increases and the risk of sovereign bond effect at that time, inflation was 2.7% which increased in July but I think it's important to see that it was in the tradition of when we formed the monetary union we had this experience of sovereign bond effect wages were also increasing at relatively high levels at that time so that was taken into consideration one point, the other point was there was also a reference to liquidity overhang which came from the second pillar information while money supply was found very sharply there was this concept that there was a sort of liquidity overhang that could feed into inflationary pressures and support sort of second round effect on inflation there was also in these introductory statements that the inflation risk related to increases in indirect taxes and administrative prices where material the other point which was the impact the rates that you can see here market rates that you can see because there on the yellow you see the spread government bonds, the weighted average of government bonds compared to the bond that aspect was not balanced to my view Jean-Claude we can discuss that because I don't want to rewrite history but it wants to show it was a little bit lacking the two-handed approach because the impact on financial conditions of that severe tightening on the bond market that you can see from the yellow line in spite of the S&P and Mario you see the vertical dotted line came just after the peak there so that was one of the aspect and the second was also I call it later the sort of catch-22 problem where countries were somehow forced to for austerity to have a tighter budget but on the other hand you also had macro consequences on the economy of this tightening of policy balance to my view was not sufficiently taken into account and so the result of that was basically a severe tightening of financial conditions in general in 11 that was quickly reversed in August 2011 but at that time I think we were a little bit the the other part and especially I thought the fiscal policy I thought about the presentation of Olivier also of yesterday evening the consequence of the financial tightening were not sufficiently taken into account in the picture I think at that time it was quickly reversed one will say but still a new phase of monetary easing as I said started in August 2011 with also additional liquidity provision measures the reactivation of the S&P to include Italian Spain LTRO this was not sufficient to stabilize financial markets a number of member states were caught in an adverse feedback loop risk to human price into government yields of a few countries reflected increasing probabilities that those countries would leave the year as you know now comes the whatever it takes the whatever it takes follows the European summit of June 2012 which decided on a number of institutional reforms to the financial budget economic policy framework of the monetary union and notably the establishment of the main elements of your in banking union making explicit reference to the need for breaking the sovereign bank nexus already before it was agreed to put in place the ESM by October 2012 in July 12 there was the speech of Mario in August 2 you remember Mario when you came back to the ECB and then we had the governing council we announced that it would introduce your empty program as you explain now the impact as you can see in the different graphs and also here was substantial I think it shows you it shows you that you cannot speak about stabilization policy in general or even stopping a panic with the whatever it takes without a strong backing you know from politicians deciding to send signals about what should be done in the unions I was imagining if Mario would have come with whatever it takes with anything about banking union nothing it would have been probably much more difficult it's very speculative but the timing of that communication was key because when you come with these sort of words you have to convince market you have to be credible so when people say you should have come early or you should the timing I think the timing was very well chosen and it was also because you know not many weeks after this summit there was a ground there that the institutional weaknesses would be addressed and there was the right timing with a strong signal that under these conditions you would do whatever it takes and then came the OMT with concrete measures that came after now unfortunately with all these episodes down said risk to price stability were increasingly apparent so here you have information derived from the inflation option prices and this in a context where interest rates were close to zero so this we know so three sets of measures were designed and progressively structured so there was a sequence you start with negative rates and other things I introduced but at some point we started to structured all these different measures in a comprehensive plan we said it's a complex plan a set of measures which are the way we structured is was in order to reach maximum effectiveness so we talked about a complex package of mutually reinforcing measures I can demonstrate that but I know not really time but all these measures were interacting and being amplified so each measure in isolation would have an impact but putting them together in a certain way would maximize the effect on the financial conditions in general so they are listed there it's basically negative rates and communication about future short-term rates basically forward guidance asset purchases program and forward guidance and the teletro from the I think in what Mario was saying the zero lower bound story when we went negative in June 2014 in June 2014 the governing council thought that it was very important to signal that the lower bound for interest rates was not zero Mario said it I think very nicely in his speech was not zero by keeping the expectation that rates could go further down and this was explicitly said in our guidance you would avoid sort of liquid trap situation if you think about the world being divided in the long-term investors pension funds and others the obliged buyers and the other composed of traders these people would buy bonds at very high prices if they think rates could go even lower so keeping that expectation present was very important to just keep that market alive and pushing the rates down so it was very effective when you look at the curve you know the option implied density is a three month or yes rates in 12 months time and you see before in January 2014 and you see the September 2014 how the curve has moved not only the average the expectation the first moment has moved to the left but the dispersion has been very much concentrated also to the left so that led to a substantial easing of financial conditions in general basically on the short to the medium but not only it's spread even beyond that to the long end of the bond market as you can see the difference between the US long-term rates and the European rates the your area rates after the forward guidance on rates so at the time of the taper tantrum we had a disconnect between the US rates and the European rate which also helped very much in keeping financial conditions very accommodative on the balance sheet the use of the balance sheet capacity and the composition I think we did it in the ECB in a very bold way this was a fundamental change from the way monetary policy was traditionally conducted from demand driven creation of central bank reserves to supply driven in my mind I'm not talking for my colleagues necessarily here but for in my mind what triggered that reflection of using the balance sheet capacity in my mind was when the bank started to reimburse the term equity facilities that we provided the teletro the VLTRO that we provided you can see on the graph the first peak on the balance sheet and then it goes down after 2013 it was typically a case of fallacy of composition because the banks start to reimburse which made sense from a micro point of view so they were reducing the dependence of central bank liquidity at that time but they were doing that basically by cutting on credit and so collectively of course it would have macro impact which was not good of course and so that sort of fallacy of composition and that's where we started to communicate in a careful way I admit in the ECB in the introductory statement about the balance sheet and the words you look at that is very interesting because you know it's slowly balance sheet balance sheet or ECB and at what point it was December 2014 where we said in the introductory statement that we the balance sheet given the the programs we had like the covered bond purchase program and the TELTROs at that time we have a sizable impact of our balance sheet which was intended intended to move towards intended to move towards the dimension it had reached at the beginning of 2012 you can see on the graph where we are today the blue is much higher at that time we communicated that we intended to bring the balance sheet and thus create excess liquidity which put an exerted pressure on the short term curve on the more short to medium term of the curve so that you see you see also the excess liquidity the dark line that you see fell very much when the banks reimbursed the liquidity and that led to some volatility on the short term money market of course and then we send this message and then we start to purchase government bonds this was uncharted territory that's the next point staff work I go back to the staff work was very important in assessing the impact of such program on financial conditions in general so we referred very much Jean Claude and that's also new compared to the previous period very often we mention financial conditions and the financial condition is sort of an aggregate of many market prices including credit premium by the way which we didn't do before in the previous period because credit premium at that time were more considered sort of market discipline signals so we separate very much in the communication the triple A bonds market in you know the risk-free curve while later we start with financial conditions in general which would incorporate many prices in markets including credit premium there so the staff was very the staff work was very important in understanding for example how much duration extraction would be needed for a given impact on the term premium what about the combined effect of QE and forward guidance and interest rate on portfolio rebalancing what impact of signaling good understanding this is an important point good understanding of market sentiment and good communication and disclosure to the markets what I called usually the two-way streets it's not a question of dominance it's a two-way street was essential and that's also very often a discussion are you dominate the we dominate the markets it goes two ways and our program was I think quite successful in a sense in a sense that it created the very easy financial conditions that were needed to bring back inflation to our aim and that you can see the this is a table that is extracted from the Hartman and Smet paper and that you see a table with the description of the instruments and here you see the effectiveness bias on the left the term structure of spot rates you can see the curve of course down and on the right you see the impact of credit easing measures basically the lending conditions from monetary financial institutions and the dispersions within your area and you see this this big reduction of what we call fragmentation although just for financial conditions I mean that's visible now the question is the transmission from financial conditions to wages and prices and from wages to prices to inflation that has been of course as also was said in Mario's presentation Mario's speech that was more difficult but when you look at wage Phillips curve on the left and on the horizontal you take a broad measure of labor market under utilization so that's a sort of U6 measurement like in the US you see and on the vertical you can see compensation per employee growth you see a relationship maybe flat but you see that there's a pass through from financial conditions to the labor market and to the wages what has been more puzzling is the transmission was said before from wages to inflation so we look very much in this with the staff about the what's happening in the service sector and we look at in the services the parts of services which are the most depending of wages most where prices you know content a lot of wages and even there you see that the transmission of wages to selling prices is not very strong for the time being so that's why also we come with patience and persistence in the policy because we see the first stages you know from financial conditions to wages but wages takes time and this is the discussion of course how long will you do that and what will be the side effects of these sort of policies and that's where we are still today now more recently there have been new headwinds related to the external environment and they have led to renewed expectations of monetary accommodation I will not repeat what Mario said just before about this now before concluding it is important to stress this is my almost last slide that macroeconomic stabilization policy cannot and should not be the sole responsibility of the central bank the ECB should not be the only game in town it's also in the Mario speech but I thought this graph quite useful to show is that fiscal policy of a number of countries have been caught in you know sort of catch 22 situation but the result was a significant pro cyclical tightening of the fiscal stance of the union as a whole which made the stance of the central bank very difficult so if you see the quadrant on the top left you can see the pro cyclical tightening 2010-11 and especially 2012-13 and then 14-15 and then the situation normalizes there but that has been as in the Mario speech has been a substantial tightening of fiscal policy at the time let's not forget also that in a lot of this period you had also a very sharp increase of spreads on financial markets in general for a number of countries so that was the situation at the time so I mean we draw the lesson of all this so that's one issue so fiscal policy the second I think is probably one of the for me or the most important is stabilization policy in the monetary union needs to be supported by a strong institution I think also Olivier came yesterday with more labor market sort of institution that was one of the points we have this I think the strong institutional setting for monetary policy but we don't have that for other policies I think that's obvious a lot of progress has to have been achieved during the bank sovereign debt crisis union and crisis management but this is still unfinished work there are very different visions and that's also Marcos you will come with that but I see very different visions across countries or what a proper institutional setting should be you will come with that and if you ask me I mean what is the most worrisome aspect is indeed that fundamental differences about what is the vision of yes we are ready to you know to address some of the institutional weakness divergence is how to do and what to do and in what time you should do that so in the concluding remarks I must confess I drafted them I think very carefully so I'm out of the ECB but I'm it's two weeks ago so I'm a bit careful so the first point is that monetary policy framework has served as well I think it's true the ECB could I say I'm in between so the monetary policy framework has served as well yeah I think it's true the ECB could act in difficult circumstances against both upside and downside risks and I must say from my experience 8 years in the 20 years I mean the governing council has been a very well functioning body and I always say it's quite normal that you have diversity and it should be of opinions within the governing council and that's one point you decide and that's what the council could do there have been three presidents and there is a lot of continuity in that institution I think that's important to say and to remember all over the 20 years of the period so that's the first remark the second remark clarifying the strategy further because I think Mario did it today also again and again further could support monetary policy making in an environment characterized by a persistently lower natural rate because that's very often the question we get if there is a new shock what do you do, what is your strategy and there are different opinions on this so at some point further clarification I think will be useful the third one is that the quantitative definition of principality was instrumental in establishing credibility in the first decade but its asymmetric formulation may lead to misperception in a low inflation environment and we heard also the president saying about the symmetry around the below but close to 2% which I think is again a message which is important to pass the third one is that with the passage of time the role of the monetary pillar has evolved as it should requiring a clarification of the role of the cross checking I really insist very much on this in policy deliberations this also raises the question of the role of financial stability consideration and the macro potential toolkit because now we have that additional toolbox which is not in the full hands of the central bank we have say in some of the parts of the macro potential tools but how would that articulate with the monetary policy making and I think that's something we should reflect more for the future and I know Marcos you came some years ago already with that but I think that's an important point the last one is an open door maybe but we have to say it European political leaders should urgently address remaining institutional weaknesses etc etc in this respect the role of fiscal policy in macro stabilization has to be enhanced I think that also I agree with the message which was given by the president that I think it's something that we have to the question as and I am finished with that the question is indeed what is a bit very worrisome is a different sort of visions about what is a proper institutional setting in your area and I think that it's about time that we have more clarity but that's for policy makers I mean it's not for the central bank really thank you


Hey, what's going on everyone? It is be Avery here and I want to thank you for tuning in to this episode of just my opinion To where we're going to discuss the box office estimates for the weekend for Deadpool 2 Avengers and Infinity War and solo a Star Wars story now. I'm gonna come back. This is a Monday So happy Memorial Day to everybody and I'm gonna come back tomorrow when they actually have the Actual numbers out instead of the estimated numbers But you know, I said that Disney and 20th Century Fox were done for having all these movies stacked like this Three of the largest films released in one year are being released all in a five-week period So solo a Star Wars story is following below Expectations by a lot only reaching 84 million dollars Deadpool comes in at number two in this second weekend at 43 million dollars in Avengers Age of Ultron comes in at number three is 17 million dollars in my opinion all of these the films are Underperforming as far as the box office is concerned. I am not saying that the milestones they reach is not great I am not saying that it's not good. I am not saying these films are not profitable I'm just saying that they are slightly underperforming what they had the potential of Making if some different factors were played out differently like one example You know them spreading out these releases instead of having them all on top of each other black panther in its 15th week Is number 14 bringing in another four hundred and sixty five thousand dollars? Right right now domestically. It is at six hundred and ninety eight million dollars Six hundred and ninety eight million seven hundred and three thousand two hundred and forty two dollars I am not quite sure it will make seven hundred million. We're just gonna have to see But I am disappointed in Disney and Fox because I think that they are They made a horrible decision releasing all these films at the same time But anyway, I just wanted to make that quick little drop real quick about the box office for Deadpool Just the estimated numbers. I will be back tomorrow for the actual numbers and I will see you guys then So that is just my opinion. Thank you so much for tuning in You can do you agree with me? Do you disagree with me? Let me know down in the comment section below Let's get this conversation going and keep it fun If you liked this video give me that thumbs up if you don't this fine But you can subscribe to my channel follow me on social media and before you go Don't forget that my name is brand keep Avery and that's just my opinion. Peace


Two ways to make your fast fashion last as long as possible. Zip up your zippers. The teeth can snag other fabrics in the washer and lead to tears. For clothing with buttons, do the exact opposite and leave them open. This will help prevent the holes from stretching or ripping. Wash your washing machine. Grime, hardwater deposits, and even mold can spread on tear clothes.


If you go back 10 years, we just had a cow-calf operation and sometimes we had cattle in the feedlot even, fed them corn, fatten them. Since Eli came back from college, we've been trying to add more enterprises to, as they call it, stacked systems. So the first thing we added was some sheep and you don't want to add a new enterprise too quickly because there's a real learning curve to something you've never done before. We'd never had sheep and we've learned a lot about how to handle them and we've got 55 years now and we're probably going to get up to a couple hundred in the next five years. And then the newest thing we added in was some hogs and that was a year ago. We'd like to turn those piggies out in a cornfield and let them eat the corn and graze corn so that they wouldn't be in a feedlot either. So about eight, ten years ago is when we thought we should be doing these rotational grazing and splitting up pastures and such. We really wanted to get cattle integrated into our cropland, putting more into the soil. So the soil will give back to us even more. Our goal is to get to the point where we're not feeding any stored feeds over the wintertime. And last year we got, I think probably we fed for 50 days. And last year was a tough winter. We had some snowfall early and then it melted off and we thought that was great, except that made a layer of ice. And then we got some more and it melted and we got an even thicker layer of ice. And so there are some tricks that you can use in this part of the country to be able to keep your cattle out there for a longer and longer time. So we had about 250 acres of cover crop and I would say half of it we win rowed. We hired a guy to come out with his self-propelled disc bind and he win rowed it. And we wish we would have done all of it like that. After the first frost he came out and did that and it actually turned out to be right before the first snow too. We found that the quality kept in that row and the cows were able to find it through the snow. Up to a certain point we actually had to go out there with a loader tractor and show them where it was at one point. But once they found it they went right up the row. But this year we're doing that again but we'd like to bail some of it up and leave the bales out there because then they'd be able to get to everything. The bale grazing is what they call it. So you give them however many bales they need per day and they should be able to get to everything. Even with the corn stocks we want to try to see if we can maybe go out there with our v-rake, get a win row that we can bale up and it'll just be what they want to eat and leave bales out like that because we didn't get anything out of our corn stocks last year because it was all iced over. My grandpa started farming down here in Casswood area. I'd like to keep it going as long as I can. It's getting tough and so you need to be able to do something new, something original. Every year that we try something new and it works it's like, alright we got it all figured out and then I go to a winter conference and somebody tells me something new and it's like, I think we've got to try that.


I'm an agile coach with Raleigh. Every two or three times a year all the coaches get together where we share our learning, our knowledge and brainstorm ideas and share problems. Last summer at one of these gatherings one of the coaches was talking about the fact that she was going to have to do and do an introductory to Waterfall, an introduction to Waterfall. She wasn't quite sure how she was going to teach this as an agile coach. And it was lunchtime, we weren't taking it that seriously. And I kind of came up with this great presentation and I suggested all she has to do is stand up in front of the audience and say, no, no. And then we put together a little slide deck which had the word no in lots of different colours and fonts. And then one of my colleagues found this video and said, just play them the video. And that's relevant to this talk because actually the way I think about Kanban is you don't have to say no. The way I'm going to talk about this afternoon is some ways to think about your process so that the choices that you make are just that, their choices. And they're not right choices and they're not wrong choices. And there's no best practice and no dial that you turn up to 11 because that's clearly the right thing to do. They're levers. So this is where the idea and then the title of the talk, leverage points come from. Sometimes you might want to pull the lever back a bit, sometimes you want to push the lever forward a bit. And the combination of levers is what makes the whole thing work. I'm Carl Scotland. As I said, I'm on a coach with Raleigh. This was me a long time ago in a former life. It was about when I was at the BBC. This is a mind about when I started. Getting to grips with Argyll. It was a kind of good playground for me. Got to experiment with different ways of doing things and XP and Scrum and DSDM. And one of the projects, one of the, well it wasn't really a project. It was a product and an ongoing stream of work before I kind of knew that was a good way of doing things. We won a BAFTA. So I'm kind of very proud of that. That's me on that side just in case you couldn't watch that. That was my project manager on this side. So Kanban. Who knows what Kanban means? Soundboard. Literally, correct. Kenji's not in the room, is he? So this was actually written on the back of our Kenji Hiradne's business card. He gave it to me back in 2007 and I've kept it to this day. Partly because it reminded me how to write it.


How do you wipe out the nation's heart disease epidemic? According to the Center for Science and the Public Interest, one of the best approaches for preventing the disease in the first place is the CHIP program, which tells people to eat more whole-plant foods and less meat, dairy, eggs, and processed junk. It's considered to be a premier lifestyle intervention targeting chronic disease that has been offered for more than 25 years, through which more than 50,000 individuals have gone and most CHIP classes are run by volunteers, sourced primarily through the Seventh-day Adventist Church, who had an interest in positively influencing the health of their local community. Why the Adventists? Well, they have a health philosophy built around a biblical notion that the human body should be treated as a temple, and many of the participants of the program are Adventists too. Is that why the program works so well? Because they just have faith you don't know until you put it to the test. The influence of religious affiliation on responsiveness to the Complete Health Improvement Program, they looked at 7,000 participants, even though Adventists make up less than 1% of the US population. About one in five CHIP goers were in the church. How did they do, compared to the non-believers? Substance or reductions in selected risk factors were achieved for both Adventists and non-Adventists, but some of the reductions were actually greater among the non-Adventists, non-SDA. This indicates that Seventh-day Adventists do not have a monopoly on good health. Middle-class educated individuals also disproportionately make up CHIP classes. Would it work as well in poverty-stricken populations? We didn't know until now. How about trying to reduce chronic disease risk factors among individuals living in rural Appalachia, one of the poorest parts of the country? Conventional wisdom has been that you need to have some financial skin in the game to really commit to lifestyle change programs, and so if offered for free to impoverish communities, maybe the results wouldn't be as good. But the overall clinical changes were similar to those found in other four-week CHIP classes throughout the US, suggesting CHIP may benefit across socioeconomic lines and independent of payment source. So, hey, why don't employers offer it free to employees to save on health care costs? CHIP is described as achieving some of the most impressive outcomes published in the medical literature, clinical benefits, and cost effectiveness as well. Lee Memorial, a health care network in Florida, offered it to some of their employees as a pilot program. Sadly, health care workers can be as unhealthy as everyone else. They reported an average 17-pound weight lost 20-point drop in LDL cholesterol and blood pressure normalization in most participants. They invested about $38,000 to make the program happen, but then saved just in that next year $70,000 in reduced health care costs, because they became so much healthier. For a financial return on investment, if like 1.8 times what they put in. But there hasn't been an ROI study published in the peer-reviewed medical literature until Dexter Sherney stepped up to the plate and published this workplace study out of Vanderbilt. Now, there was a high degree of skepticism at the planning stage of the study that active engagement could be realized around a lifestyle program that had its main tenants exercise and a plant-based diet. Vanderbilt is, after all, in Tennessee, smack dab in the middle of the stroke belt and known for their Memphis ribs, yet they got on board enough to improve their blood sugar control and cholesterol, as well as positive changes in self-reported health and well-being. Health care costs were substantially reduced. For example, nearly a quarter were able to eliminate one or more of their medications, and so got about a two-to-one return on investment within just six months, providing evidence that just educating a member population about the benefit of a plant-based whole foods diet is feasible and can reduce health care costs. The largest workplace chip study done to date involved six employee populations, including, ironically, a drug company, a mix of white collar and blue collar, and check out what happened to the worse off. Those starting out with blood pressures up around 170 over 100 fell down to around 140 over 85. Those with the highest LDL cholesterol dropped 60 points, a 300-point drop in triglycerides, 46-point drop in fasting blood sugars. Theoretically, someone coming in with both high blood pressure and high cholesterol might experience a 64 to 96% reduction in overall risk of a heart attack, our number one killer. For the cost of a Humvee, Michael Jacobson from CSBI figured any town could have a chip program of its own, and for the cost of a submarine or a farm subsidy, the entire country could get a chip on its shoulder.


Can the Ravens do it? Can they still make it happen? What exactly are we even talking about? Well, we're gonna get into that in a couple of seconds, but before we get into it, I gotta give a special shout out to the newest team keeping, and not just the newest team keeping clean patrons, but the old team keeping clean patrons as well. And anybody who's ever been a team keeping clean patron because that's you showing extra support for the channel, which is something that you don't have to do, but you do it. So we appreciate it a whole lot. And those newest team keeping clean patrons, Kevin, King Terrence, Everett, Joshua A., and Jacob. Appreciate all of y'all very, very much. And then we also gotta give a special shout out to the newest team keeping clean channel member who is Connie Garner. Let me tell you something about Connie. This is how I know Connie is a very, very nice person and a positive person because she became a team keeping clean channel member after the Ravens and Browns game. It was still during the live stream, but she became a member once that game was already over. So despite everything that was going on with the Ravens and it was looking bad and ugly, and we had all gripes about how that game went and the reasons why it went, the way that it went, she was like, you know what? I'm going to be a light in a very dark place for Ravens fans right now. So shout out to Connie. Anyway, can the Ravens do it? Can they make it happen? Can they make what happen? Well, their record. First question came from my guy, Gold Morano. He said, now is the time in Raven. Now is the time to stand pat or join me. If this team wins out, they can achieve the record that you predicted of 12 and five. Do you stand by your prediction of 12 and five or will you now join me in my prediction of 10 and seven? Ooh. So you think out of these last two games? Well, you did say that before. I think you said that from jump in the season. So it wouldn't really be anything changing with your record. Nah, I don't see 10 and seven. For them to go one and two, these last two games, a lot actually depends on if Lamar Jackson plays. I think so much depends on that. If he plays these last three games, I could see the way that this Ravens roster is, the way that this coaching staff is. I can see the Ravens doing like two and one. I think they'll definitely make the playoffs. But I can see them doing two. I can see them doing three and no two. I mean, hopefully they go three and no. That'd be great. Because you got the Falcons. You got the Browns. And you got the, no, you got the Falcons. You got the Bingles in the stealer. Well, Falcons steal his Bingles. So yeah, I could see them doing that. But yeah, we'll see. We'll see how it works itself out. But yeah, so I'm gonna stick with my record. I'm gonna stick with my 12 and five. I'm standing 10 toes down on it. I'm standing whatever my weight is down on it. And my weight is gonna hold it down. It ain't moving nowhere. So yes, I'm sticking with my 12 and five Ravens to finish this season. Three and no to close it out. Yeah, this feels like a dream. Oh, just what I made. You too, team, keep it clean. You see my boy, he like automated, automated. Boy, that's my homie. Ain't that right engraving, right engraving. So team, keep it clean. Welcome to another episode of Questions From Souls where you can ask any question, whether it be about the Ravens or whatever. I know like 99% of them be about the Ravens, which is fine. I appreciate y'all asking y'all questions. I appreciate the fact that y'all look at stuff from all these different point of views and you share how you view those things from those different point of views, which is super cool. If you wanna be a part of it, you can check the description. If you wanna become a team, keep it clean, patron. You can check the description. If you wanna become a team, keep it clean, channel member, you can check the description. If you ever wanna send something to the PO box, you can check the description. The description got like literally everything in there. Now for the patrons, for the patrons, you can send your question directly on Patreon. You don't send your question in an email. Patrons just send it directly on Patreon. That is that special place for you. It's just for you to send the questions on. So always remember that. I love y'all. Next question came from my guy, George K. He said, it's hard to say, but think I am now ready. Let's see what he has to say. Good morning, Raven. I just heard on your last video about the fans that are big time homers and let me say, as hard as it is, I have now come to this point of view, though I like to play devil's advocate a lot to get people thinking about things or a different point of view that they may not realize. I believe it may be time for a new leader.  That's how some people are. They like, hey, everything that my favorite team does is right. Everything that my favorite team does is the right way. They do everything the right way. They don't make no mistakes. You stay in a fan's place and let the GMs, GM, let the coach coach and let the players play. That's why you're in the position that you're in and they're in the position they're in. And that's how some people can be as homeless. But what I was saying is that a lot of people are actually realizing like, wait a minute. Ravens ain't so perfect. And that's fine. That's fine. Again, like I said before too, it does not come, when people say that it does not come from a place of hate, it does not come from a place of negativity, it is okay to give somebody constructive criticism. Not just criticism, when you be like, that's wrong, that's wrong, that's wrong, constructive criticism, you can be like, that's wrong. And you know what? This is how I think you should fix it. This is a better way I think you could go about doing things. This is a different strategy I think you could use in order to do better and be better. But anyway, moving on. He said, I have been, G-Roy got to go for a while, but have been a big supporter of Hobbs and DeCosta. I still support Hobbs, but I have to say, if Roman is allowed to stay on after this Cleveland game, that his little T's are more with his guys than his team. Now, hey, let Bishadi, yeah, probably Bishadi, I don't think EDC really would, but let Bishadi be like, hey, Hobbs, it's either you or Roman. If you gonna ride with him, then you got to go too. Hobbs will kick Roman out quick, man. You give it to him quick.  You don't remember? But anyway, he said, I want to believe Hobbs is still the guy for this team, but I am starting to have my doubts. Ooh, when doubts start creeping in, that could be a scary place. He said, I also truly believe that Lamar has checked out on us as well. That'd be a sad story if that's the case. I don't think it is, especially with the situation that the ratings are in, but I could understand. Because I've been there before, like I told y'all before, there's been times when I've given so much to a job, given so much to a job.  I mean, look, quick side note, we went to the grocery store yesterday and a lot of y'all know the story already about when we got laid off from our last job, but because when we got laid off from our last job, the day that we got laid off, we walked in, we were getting ready to log in and clock in and stuff. And this one guy who was like a trainer, he was like, oh, no, no, no, don't log in. Just go to the office, we were having a meeting over there.  But I actually saw him yesterday at the grocery store. So it's the first time I saw him, well, I have never seen him outside of the company that I used to work for before, but I saw him, I'm thinking like, man, I like that's the guy, that's one of the last staff members of that company that I had a talk to.  So it brought up a lot of memories. It brought up some like good feelings too, because I'm very, very grateful that we got laid off because we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. If we didn't, none of this stuff would be happening if we had not got laid off. So just thank you to them. It just made me really, really happy and really, really grateful and appreciative. And thank you to y'all. Thank you to y'all for supporting what we do on here. It does mean a lot. It means a whole lot. So thank you for that. Much love, man. But what I was saying is that there was a time before at that job, at a previous position, before I got promoted, where I had been given so much to the position. And I'm like, man, I'm all right. And I'm making positive changes, helping the team out and stuff like that. But just not being recognized for it and not being compensated for it. And that hurt, man. That hurt bad. It hurts really, really bad. And I checked out, I told him I don't want to do it anymore. I don't want to do it. Because I had taken on this, this un... What's the best way to explain it? It was an unofficial position. And once they, I had fought for it, it was me and this other girl who was doing the same thing. We had fighting for it. Fighting to make it an actual position, but the company just did not make it a position. We was fighting hay for a raise. We should be compensated extra for it and whatnot. Fighting for it. We had so many meetings with managers, with not the CEO, but whatever's above the manager. I forgot, but we had so many meetings with them too. Over it, but nothing. So it was like, man, all this work that we did, it was for nothing. And then what made it worse? Because I had already kind of checked out, but then what made it worse was the fact that months later, maybe even a year later, some, they finally made it a position, but they had already had the person picked out who they knew it was going to. We all knew who it was going to go to, even though they were like, oh no, no, we want everybody to apply so you can try to get the position. We're going to interview and stuff, but we already knew who it was going to. So I still applied for it. Obviously didn't get it because it went to the girl and not the girl who I was working with to do the position in the first place, but somebody else. So it was just like, and it was somebody who was buddy, buddy with one of the current managers and actually two of the current managers back then. So again, it was sort of like the same situation. Hey, what I say about Hallboy, if Hallboy knows you, he always going to look out for you. And then a lot of times in a lot of places, and I'm sure y'all see this with a lot of companies too, it's not always about what you know. You could have all the skills in the world. You could know how to do this, that and the third. But if you don't know the right people, then it ain't going to work. It's not going to happen. And that's exactly what happened there. We knew the right people, but we weren't buddy, buddy with those people like the girl was and the girl got the position. And that, yeah, that's when I really like checked all the way out, all the way out. Oh, I was so heated.  And then thinking about it, it's like bringing up all these bad memories. And so I was really mad. But yeah, so back to what I say all that to say, if Lamar is checked out, if he was, I don't think he is, but if he was, I could understand why he was. But anyway, he said, I do not believe Lamar will be back, nor do I think this team will ride with Huntley. Oh, he talking about next year. Well, Huntley is, I don't know. I think they would. I think they would keep him. And I think they could draft the quarterback. I think Huntley could be like their safe space to where he could end up being their starter. And if they liked somebody in the draft that they had a opportunity to draft, then they get them. But if not, then they just ride with Huntley for this year. And it was sort of be a wash year. Like, oh, hope for the best. But yeah, you know, it probably will go. And then they really bank on getting the quarterback the following year. So we'll see. But he said, my thoughts on Lamar are a different topic for a different day. Okay, we'll talk about it then. He said, but I know head coaches want their guy at quarterback. So maybe this is the time to flip the script. New head coach and new quarterback. Yeah, and this is why I really do think that, and I've said this before, that if I think the chances of retaining Lamar Jackson could actually increase if the Ravens got a new head coach. Because a new head coach would bring on a new staff. A new head coach could bring on a new vision. A new head coach could bring on the potential, more potential and really unlocking Lamar Jackson, depending on who they got, and depending on the type of staff that that head coach built. So I think the chances could possibly increase. Or Lamar could be like, you know what, I don't want to be here for this experiment. I'm out. So it could go two ways. It could be like Lamar could be like, all right, you know what? Cause they're gonna franchise tag him either way. But Lamar could be like, you know what? Let me hear this out. Let me hear this coach out. See what he talking about. See what he got to say and whatnot. Let me listen to it. Let me see about this guy. And they play on a franchise tag. Or he could be like, you know what? No, I ain't trying to be here for this. Y'all, I gave y'all five years. And this switch note, let me go somewhere else where I'll be more appreciated right away. I'm not here for the experiments anymore. It's been five years of experiments and I want to move forward. So it could go either way. What he said, I do believe the Costa is still the guy to build this roster. And with the Costa, yeah, it would be interesting to see him with somebody else, how he would do it with somebody else. Cause this is obviously, this is a Ravens way. This is a Ravens roster. This is a Ravens philosophy. But this is also, it's a big John Hall ball philosophy. So would a new head coach change the philosophy? I definitely think that they would. Cause the GM, it is the GM's job to build the roster, but they usually build it toward the head coach's likings. So let's see. He said, unlike others, I do not want Sean Payton, though he's a great coach and we would need to trade for him. I will want someone young and hungry. Oh yeah. I think a lot of us, including myself, forget about that part that, if they were to acquire Sean Payton, that he would need to be traded for. So you gotta give up draft picks for a coach. And, but yeah, somebody young and hungry. Maybe D'Amico, anyway. He said, I also think we tag and trade Lamar to get what we can. And if Hall ball has to go, he gets traded as well. Now, that would be interesting if they did that. They traded John Hall ball for draft picks. Cause I never think about that. Cause I forget that like they could, they don't have to fire them. They could trade them like they do players. It's rare that coaches get traded, but it is a possibility. He said, he is well respected. Yes, he is. He sure is. And one of the top coaches in football and they may have just run his course here in Charm City. Right, right. So nobody said, well, actually there's some people that say it, but over here we're not saying that Hall ball sucks that he's terrible that he's just, but it's just time. It could be just time for a fresh start for him, for the Ravens, it could be a fresh start for everybody. And fresh starts are not always bad. They really not. So that could be a positive thing. He said, so why not get all we can from two of our most valuable assets? Ooh, that's sad right there. What's sort of part about getting all they can for Lamar? So that would mean he wouldn't be here next year. But anyway, he said, then we draft the quarterback and another Y receiving the first two. Yeah, they depend on their philosophy. But anyway, in the first two rounds and let the new coach and QB grow and either succeed or fail together. What is the two most important things to a young quarterback? A great defense, which Ravens already have in the works and a dynamic tight end. I think a Y receiver can certainly help a lot. That would make that quarterback's job so much easier. And I think that's what you wanna do. Usually you wanna do that. I know Ravens, we could question the way that they do things a lot of times, but yeah, man, also a run game too. Run game for sure as well. But he said, I believe this would be the best plan of action that we have, so why not? On a side note, he said, on a side note, we need to sign Sammy Watkins, LL. He's our best option at this moment. What would it hurt? Like literally, what would it hurt? What would it hurt? Would he not be one of the best receivers on the team immediately? Like right away? Would he not? Even with what he did or what he didn't do in Green Bay? Wouldn't he be one of the best receivers on the Ravens right now? I wouldn't be surprised if Ravens put that claim in for him or if they let him pass the wave away and they end up signing him as a free agent. Cause I mean, I don't really see anybody putting the claim in for him, but you never know. So we'll see what happens, man. Anyway, he said, I love what you do and thanks, thank you for his platform. No problem, man. This question was so fun to do. I know it took a little while. Had to go through some turns and some corners and go over some speed bumps and whatnot, but we made it. And the last question on the short episode came from my boy, Valley, who's a new patron. Hey, look, you ain't gotta send this via email. Send it directly on Patreon. You did, but I did see it became a patron. Don't worry about sending it via email. Send it right on Patreon. It'll be easier for you. Easy for me too. But anyway, he said, what's up fam? Man, it's so much to say, but first thing is 2023. We have 23 free agents, five starters and arrest our second string players literally and five draft picks. Well, at least for now. For the direction I see the team going, Roman is gone because even John is fed up. Is he? All about fed up? Well, nobody, I wouldn't say that. But anyway, he said, so I think that first and third picture be high profile, why receive as if not free agency or two tall cover corners. Marlin is having a sub great year, but homie can't cover outside as much as we love him. He's a traveling nickel or short yardage outside corner. Really? I disagree with that part. He said, don't need to waste a QB pick, re-sign Huntley and build there even if we can throw 250 to 300 yards a game and we can run ourselves to the playoffs at least, but we must learn from all mistakes. But I believe Huntley is a poor man's Dak Prescott, but can be a playoff winner. Look, I love Tyler Huntley. Super cool. He's from South Florida too. So what's that love about him? But what about Tyler Huntley's game makes you think he would be a playoff winner? Not saying he can't be, but I'm just, I'm just wanting to know what about his game makes you think he could be. Just a question. Anyway, he said, as I watch around the league, even the bottom five teams have a good wide receiver court except the exempt detections, but if we just had what the Bears, Colts, Broncos, Cardinals had with our defense, it would cause huge problems, but they all drafted and traded. Built an identity. What type of offense would you like to see be ran next year? An offense that can easily turn on the passing game and has the options and weapons to be able to do it and has the mindset to be able to do it as well. Again, nobody's ever saying that the Raven should not have a run game, but having a passing game would be nice too, a consistent one as well. He said, me personally, I love Detroit. Chargers and Vikings play calling his fast pace, stretch the field, running back receivers, LOL are involved and can put up 30 to 35 points any week and still be very much balanced. So if my real life was mad, and this is who I will pick up in free agency. All right, here we go. QB would be Huntley and bring back Flacco, cheap position. Whoa, that would be cheap because Huntley would be a restricted free agent and Flacco would be cheap, but running back, Drake, Jericho O, Jedrick McKinnon, another cheap position. Oh, so you'll bring back Drake from Y receivers, Noah Brown from the Cowboys, Marvin Jones, Cam Sims, gonna have to go out and gonna have to outbub, maybe Roman must be going in a new coach signed in negotiations. Oh, okay. For D-Line, bring it back Justin Houston one more year. He said his energy is crazy. JPP, if he's having a good season. Dalvin Tomlinson, he's a big body with Michael Pierce.  And for Linebacker, he will bring in Anthony Barr. Will still have Roquan Smith and Queen. For Cornerback, he will bring in Kyle Fuller since he lost, he got lost for the season week one. He'll bring in Patrick Peterson. He still plays with pride. Oh, and Cam Sutton is a dog. I like Cam Sutton. He, does he still play for the Steelers? I think he does, but yeah, I like him. For safety, Jimmy Ward is a dog with great instincts and Taylor Rapp, he plays for the Rams I think. For safeties, I mean, I don't think they will come to the Ravens being backups. Cause you will have Marcus Williams and Kyle Hamilton. Would they start Kyle Hamilton at that point? I think so. Anyway, he said, I say these players cause when I watched them play, they play hungry and don't take plays off which the Ravens are known for. He said, and they all come from a good structure, winning teams and their price tag wouldn't be much other than Roquan, Jones and Ward and Sutton. But if we're going to lose Lamar, I'd rather gain great reinforcements. And I say Flacco because apparently it was to get hurt. Joe's a great thaw and would strike fear and teams to strike fear and teams. Now, hey, look, man, I be wanting Joe to play for the Jets, man. When Zach Wilson got hurt, I was hoping, hey, go start Flacco, but anyway. But the whole striking fear, I don't know. But anyway, he said it will strike fear and teams to adjust because he's borderline third ballot hall of fame, proving he can throw deep and accurate and look at what he did to us week one. And we now have a better line than we had when he was a starter back then. Just some thoughts. Let's win and reclaim the division. And last question, do you think we can explode for 30 at home against Atlanta to give us momentum? Well, that depends on if Lamar comes back. Yeah, this feels like a dream. Oh, just what I mean. You two team, keep it clean. You see my boy, he like, automated. Well, that's my homie, ain't that right engraving? Right engraving. Shout out to engraving.


Zoom in, do you want to zoom? Do you want to zoom in? Zoom in, get in there. The glasses match. So, kid, tell me this. What is one thing, you don't get along your list, you only get one thing, of what is one thing that drives you absolutely crazy, makes you want to strangle people in our industry? Settling for boring, safe frames with no color, no style, no passion. Yes. And that's what LaBuck in York is about. We are about the passion. We're about the people. Yes. And the product. Yes. Well, and you know, what's great about this is my follow-up question is typically, what are you doing about it? But I'm pretty sure we can see what he's doing about the lack of color in our industry, because this is the most fabulous thing. Tell me about this jacket. Could you buy it this way? I could have sold this jacket, I don't know how many times. One of our clients who just bought three more autois, I saw this in her living room, and she was not painting it, but the fabric. Yes. Yeah. Yeah, it's like a fabric type. Yeah, and I saw the sleeve and I said, I want, that's my, that's my, that is my Vision Explore outfit. Yes. And she said, OK, I'll finish it for you. And I said, no, no, no. Don't finish it. It makes it better. And then I just happened to show up, and they just brought these from Sulfania, and they matched. Zoom in, do you want to zoom? Do you want to zoom in? Zoom in, get in there. The glasses match. There you go. Yeah, perfect. Yeah, so you got to have the passion. I love this industry. The guys we work for are awesome. Yeah, and the new slogan for Live Back in York is going to be the eyewear you deserve, something like that. I like it. No, stick with it. It's on video now, we're going to stick with it. I don't like those on you.


All set, ready to go? I'm very pleased to be here at CFA headquarters here in Tallyhoe to make a significant pre-budget announcement. And this is a real boost for the CFA, it's a real boost for community protection and it's a real boost for the protection of our volunteers. The CFA is one of those fantastic organisations and the work that they did over the summer season was absolutely outstanding. The work they did down at Hazelwood and you look at places like Kilmore, Hullscap and in the Far East Gippsland, the work and the contribution of the CFA and the CFA volunteers was absolutely outstanding. So today I'm very proud to announce that it's a pre-budget announcement that we'll be putting in an extra $17 million into CFA trucks. Now that's an addition to what's already going to be announced in the budget next Tuesday. So in total there will be a $29 million investment into 78 CFA trucks. The 78 CFA trucks will be 74 medium tankers and four prototypes. This will be a significant boost for the CFA fleet. The CFA protect 3.3 million Victorians and over one million properties across Victoria. The volunteers and the CFA expect that the government support them. The Naphthine government is very proud to make this significant investment. I want to thank the CFA, I want to thank the CFA volunteers and I also want to thank Andrew Ford and Hans from the volunteer organisation for their strong commitment to ensure that the CFA trucks are kept up to date and as modern as possible. I'll hand over to you in. Thanks Minister and I'd like to acknowledge and thank the government for the additional $17 million which have been announced today. These will significantly add to the firefighting fleet of frontline appliances in CFA. The medium tanker brings new technology and new engineering to our fleet. It means that our firefighters will be more effective on the fire ground, they will be safer and of course more effective firefighting means that they can return to their families and their employers more quickly. This is a significant boost to the CFA capability. CFA welcomes it and appreciates the support of the government. I think it's also important to recognise that it's a signal of support particularly to CFA volunteers. The 74 medium tankers, one of which stands behind me, will be going into CFA volunteer fire stations. It's a frontline appliance for our rural fire stations throughout Victoria. We've been manufacturing this vehicle now for two years so it's well proven and a number of the new technologies have added great efficiency to the time and the efficiency of firefighting. The funding announcement today also allows us to build four prototype appliances. So this is a symbol of CFA and the government moving forward to the future, developing new appliances for the next generation of firefighters and again we value the commitment of government to CFA and our volunteers and our members for these new prototype appliances. It's a very exciting time in CFA and again I want to reinforce that firefighting trucks are one part of our capability mix and we always want to acknowledge the hard work by all of our members, frontline and also behind the frontline. We've seen over the last six months a very long and tough fire season. We've seen a fantastic outcome for the state of Victoria. Tragically one life was lost in the Northern Grampians fire but we think that the final wash up of the operations of the fire agencies over this fire season will show that we've done a great job and this announcement today will help ensure that in future fire seasons we can better protect Victorians. Thank you very much.