Stay updated with breaking news from Noneconomic. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
hitting $11 billion. ups says its prepared to raise wages but not sure if it could meet the union demands. last time this august it was 1997, one of the big sticking points then was also pay for part-time workers. is everybody expecting a strike here or do they seem like they are ready to make a deal? >> well, both sides are definitely preparing for a strike. ups has been training its nonunion employees to work in the warehouses while the union has been holding practice picket sessions, but the teamster's president said they have 95% of the noneconomic issues done, for example, over the month-long negotiation, they have agreed to
>> well, the reality is the steel industry in the united states has been decimated. period of decades but it's been around the world too. there is more excess capacity in steel, noneconomic excess capacity and steel in china than there is production in places like the united states, europe, japan. so we need those tariffs. the wto case was outrageous but not surprising. we made a clear decision that every country makes its own decision on national security. this is not something where you have these three wise men and they are not the wise men that found christmas by the way, these are not wise men who didn't find christmas. so the notion that you have an arbitration, three people, three bureaucrats in brussels, deciding what's in america's national interest is completely ridiculous. >> laura: bob, it's great to see you. it's been quite a while. thank you so much.
think it's going to be followed by an absolute travesty. >> jeremy, let me read you this reporting on sanctions, the limits of sanctions in dealing with putin. times is reporting putin's decision to press ahead suggest that he has concluded the cost of new sanctions are tolerable despite u.s.' talk of con kwenss. the biden administration might find it has to impose the harshest sanctions, ones that would inflict suffering on many citizens or look for a noneconomic option such as giving military aid. biden said he will not send american troops to defend ukraine. where are we on that continuum and what options remain available for president biden? >> yeah, in my discussions with folks inside the u.s. government, i think all options are on the table short of sending ground combat troops in to face the russians and ukraine. what is on the table is sending
by the supreme court to be very broad to allow for federal regulation of interstate commerce and the growth of the economy in this country. but over time the supreme court has made clear that the commerce clause limits the federal government, that there is limited authority under the commerce clause. the state of the law now is such that the federal government, through the commerce clause, is only permitted to regulate channels of interstate commerce, instrumentality of interstate commerce, and affects interstate commerce. the third category the supreme court has made clear in the lopez case and morrison that noneconomic activities are not
broad to allow for federal regulation of interstate commerce and the growth of the economy in this country. but over time the supreme court has made clear the commerce clause limits the federal government, limited authority under the commerce clause. the state of the law is such that the federal government through the commerce clause is only permitted to regulate channels of interstate commerce, instrumentalities of interstate commerce and activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. with respect to the third category the supreme court has made clear in the lopez case and in morrison that noneconomic activities are not covered and
cold assumptions. so, iwouldn't say that cold war— assumptions. so, i wouldn't say that cold war mentality is necessarily the right— cold war mentality is necessarily the right term here. i know that is what _ the right term here. i know that is what china — the right term here. i know that is what china has dubbed it. i think if we go _ what china has dubbed it. i think if we go back— what china has dubbed it. i think if we go back a little bit to look at how we — we go back a little bit to look at how we have arrived at this point, i think_ how we have arrived at this point, i think the _ how we have arrived at this point, i think the us — how we have arrived at this point, i think the us and europe, followed this policy— think the us and europe, followed this policy of following market reforms — this policy of following market reforms and really engaging china on an economic basis and there is an economic— an economic basis and there is an economic benefit to both sides of this but— economic benefit to both sides of this but i— economic benefit to both sides of this but i think there was a belief held by— this but i think there was a belief held by the us and by europe that if we were _ held by the us and by europe that if we were able to integrate china into the world _ we were able to integrate china into the world economy, then a number of other— the world economy, then a number of other noneconomic beneficial consequences might follow, that markets — consequences might follow, that markets and prosperity could lead to more _ markets and prosperity could lead to more liberty and possibly even democracy but it has been clear for some _ democracy but it has been clear for some time — democracy but it has been clear for some time this isn't happening. authoritarianism is on the rise in china, _ authoritarianism is on the rise in china, it — authoritarianism is on the rise in china, it has— authoritarianism is on the rise in china, it has been putting vast resources _ china, it has been putting vast resources into militarisation. it now— resources into militarisation. it now is— resources into militarisation. it now is one _ resources into militarisation. it now is one of the well's largest naval_ now is one of the well's largest naval powers in a lot of countries in the _ naval powers in a lot of countries in the region are getting nervous. australia — in the region are getting nervous. australia is — in the region are getting nervous. australia is looking to china with
2005. we've seen a lot in mass movement for $15 an hour wage. it's wrong to bail out billionaires and bankers. you run down that issue. a lot of people who speak that profoundly. >> that is left populism. that is the populism of the full dinner pail the cost of gold -- >> jennings -- >> and the temple of our civilization, fdr. there is an aspect seed that's noneconomic. it's about social, radical ethnic, that america is changing dramatically. we're becoming a different country. rooted people all over america are deeply concerned about. remember barack obama talked about these people, their stuck to their guns and hostility. this is an enormous movement. in europe there's a fire all over this movement in every country. in russia -- excuse me and trump has tapped into this. frankly, just like the issue you
movement for $15 an hour wage. it's wrong to bail out billionaires and bankers. you run down that issue. a lot of people who speak that profoundly. >> that is left populism. that is the populism of the full dinner pail the cost of gold -- >> jennings -- >> and the temple of our civilization, fdr. there is an aspect seed that's noneconomic. it's about social, radical ethnic, that america is changing dramatically. we're becoming a different country. rooted people all over america are deeply concerned about. remember barack obama talked about these people, their stuck to their guns and hostility. this is an enormous movement. in europe there's a fire all over this movement in every country. in russia -- excuse me and trump has tapped into this. frankly, just like the issue you had that -- you know, that black lady that was killed, you had --
the jackson family's defense team is this guy's talent and the potential for future earnings and they have put that figure at 1.6 billion with a "b," dollars at the high-end. also yesterday during the closing arguments, they revealed how much they believe michael jackson's three children and mother should receive in noneconomic, so-called personal damages and that figure, according to the attorney, should be 85 million for each of the three jackson children and $35 million to catherine jackson because her life expectancy is shorter. so, you add it all up, you get close to $2 billion. however, if the jackson family is saysful in this lawsuit, the attorney realizes that the jury will most likely find that michael jackson was at least partially responsible for his own death. whatever financial award they decide on would be reduced by
bill. forget cap and trade, a renewal energy bill in it, something with nuclear and natural gas. lastly, deficit reduction. if the president can demonstrate to the american people he's for those things and can move the ball towards deficit reduction, then i think he's a huge winner. he looks like a strong leader, looks like he understands the message and looks like he's pointing the country in the right direction, no ifs, ands or buts about it. >> is charles krauthammer right? >> sure. if the economy really gets geared up, and if it's roaring back by the summer of 2012 and this the reason, yes. the president will worry about whether he can get tax cuts for the rich abolished then. probably not but he won't care because he'll be more popular. i'd like to mention something noneconomic. this posture suits barack obama. he's a judicious and judicial guy. he likes to be the adult in the