Podcasts about economic co

Africa's cities are expanding at an unprecedented rate.A new report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Sahel and West Africa Club says the urban population will double to 1.4 billion by 2050.But are these cities prepared to handle the growing demand for housing, transport and services? And as urban areas evolve, who truly stands to benefit from this transformation?BBC Africa Daily's Alan Kasujja explores this with Patrick Analo Akivaga, Chief Officer for Urban Development in Nairobi as well as Kenyan photographer Mutua Matheka, who documents Nairobi's changing cityscapes and comedian Ty Ngachira, who shares his experience of moving to the capital.

The Bank of England (“BoE”) maintained its base rate at 4.5% last week, prioritising a gradual approach amid persistent inflation and wage pressures. Markets are now assigning a 70% probability of a May rate cut, with only two reductions anticipated this year, fewer than economists forecasted. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) has downgraded UK growth projections for 2025 and 2026, citing global trade risks. Business sentiment remains cautious, with 57% of firms expecting a recession. Manufacturing output has weakened sharply, and insolvencies are rising. Consumer confidence is improving, but investment hesitancy persists due to fiscal uncertainty. Options traders are increasingly betting on more aggressive BoE rate cuts. However, the BoE is facing challenges, balancing weak growth with persistent inflation risks, particularly in the face of global trade tensions...Stocks featured:Compass Group, Kingfisher and PrudentialTo find out more about the investment management services offered by Walker Crips, please visit our website:https://www.walkercrips.co.uk/This podcast is intended to be Walker Crips Investment Management's own commentary on markets. It is not investment research and should not be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy, sell or trade in any of the investments, sectors or asset classes mentioned. The value of any investment and the income arising from it is not guaranteed and can fall as well as rise, so that you may not get back the amount you originally invested. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Movements in exchange rates can have an adverse effect on the value, price or income of any non-sterling denominated investment. Nothing in this podcast constitutes advice to undertake a transaction, and if you require professional advice you should contact your financial adviser or your usual contact at Walker Crips. Walker Crips Investment Management Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN: 226344) and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the fifth and final episode of the Squiggly Career Stage Series – 5 days of podcast episodes and practical tools to help you succeed in your career. We've focused on 5 stages where we know people need some extra squiggly support and in today's episode we're looking at Squiggly Career Continuers, to help people relook at retirement and develop career longevity. Sarah and Helen share their insights on continuing your career into later life and talk to two people to learn from their expertise; Avivah Wittenberg-Cox a thought leader specialising in gender and generational balance and Andrew Aitken, Economist at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. You can download the free Career Stage Guide to support this episode here https://www.amazingif.com/listen/career-continuers For questions about Squiggly Careers or to share feedback, please email helenandsarah@squigglycareers.com More ways to learn about Squiggly Careers:1. Download our free careers tools https://www.amazingif.com/toolkit/ 2. Sign-up for our Squiggly Careers Skills Sprint https://bit.ly/skillssprint20243. Sign up for PodMail, a weekly summary of the latest squiggly career tools: https://bit.ly/sc-podmail4. Read our books ‘The Squiggly Career' and ‘You Coach You' www.amazingif.com/books/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Love is in the air - and crosshairs. Today, Brooke and Jake take a dive into the mailbag, and then discuss Dobson's hateful and unhinged 2004 book "Marriage Under Fire". It's bad, y'all. It is bigoted, dumb, and full of a surprising amount of WWII references for some reason. To quote Lana Ja'Rae, at this point all you can do is laugh.References:Canada Bill C-16 (2016): https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/c-16/royal-assentCanada Bill C-250 (2004): https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/37-3/bill/C-250/royal-assentEtymology of Homophobia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia#EtymologyFulton v. City of Philadelphia: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2020/19-123Lawrence v. Texas: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2002/02-102LGBT Adoption Laws in the US: https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/foster_and_adoption_lawsMatthew Shephard Foundation: https://www.matthewshepard.org/Norway & the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Better Life Index: https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/norway/Norway's parental benefits: https://www.norden.org/en/info-norden/parental-benefit-and-parental-leave-norwayObergefell v. Hodges: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556Sheerin, J. (2018). Matthew Shephard: The murder that changed America. BBC.com. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45968606Yurcaba & Sopelsa (2025): Lawmakers in 9 states propose measures to undermine same-sex marriage rights. NBCNews.com. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/lawmakers-9-states-propose-measures-undermine-sex-marriage-rights-rcna193743Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!):https://uppbeat.io/t/mood-maze/trendsetterLicense code: 9OT2MTBHWWSRZP5S Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this afternoon the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development presented its latest Economic Survey for Ireland. For more on their assessment of how we're doing right now, Chief Economist with the OECD Alvaro Pereira.

If you work across time zones, borders and cultures, this is the show for you. In the Weekly Concept series, Leonardo aims at defining a topic in international business. These are shorter episodes to illustrate key concepts in this discipline.   Today, we talk about the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).   It was established in 1961 to boost the economic growth of Western industrialized countries and to promote global trade. Initially made by 20 founding members, it currently has 38 member countries. Originally the membership was exclusively North American and European, but it then expanded further. Its headquarters is in Paris and employs over 2,300 staff. The organization is founded by its members, and the national contributions are based on each member's economy.   So, what does the OECD really do? At its heart, the organization is all about encouraging policies that drive prosperity, fairness, and well-being for everyone. - Connect with the host ⁠Leonardo Marra on LinkedIn.⁠ ⁠Join Leonardo on Patreon for:⁠ Podcast Archive: 102 episodes (40+ hours). Podcast Bonus Episodes: New exclusive content. Early Access: Upcoming YouTube videos and newsletters. Thinking Process Journal: Insights into Leonardo's content preparation, including a curated reading list and personal reflections. Q&A: Submit questions for future episodes, and receive a shoutout when they are answered. You could also support the podcast by purchasing one of the following books on Amazon using the links provided: - ⁠⁠The Personal MBA⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠HBR's 10 Must Reads 2025⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠The 48 Laws of Power⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠Blue Ocean Strategy

Drinks with toxic ingredients have been linked to deaths and poisonings in Turkey, Laos and India in 2024. Fake alcohol is unrecorded and unregulated alcohol that hasn't been registered in official statistics for sales, production or trade. The range of unrecorded alcohol includes alcohol smuggled across borders, counterfeit alcohol and homemade brew. This week of The Inquiry we look at how toxic and widespread fake alcohol is. What are the health risks of drinking contaminated alcohol? Bootleg alcohol is big business for criminals, are governments doing enough to combat the illicit alcohol trade?Presenter: Charmaine CozierProducer: Vicky Carter Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Toby James Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Dr. Monica Swahn, alcohol epidemiologist and professor at the Wellstar College of Health and Human Services at Kennesaw State University in the USA, currently based in Uganda. Dr Dirk Lachenmeier, food chemist and toxicologist, director of department of plant-based foods at CVUA Karlsruhe, an official control laboratory, Germany. Piotr Stryszowski, senior economist at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and head of the Working Party on Countering Illicit Trade (WP-CIT), France. Jeff Hardy, Director General of Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade, USA.

Did you know that there are scientists who study teamwork? Co-hosts Anne Chappelle, PhD, and David Faulkner, PhD, DABT, speak with Stephen Fiore, PhD, Director, Cognitive Sciences Laboratory, about the art and science of working in teams and what you can do to improve teamwork in your lab, department, etc.About the GuestStephen M. Fiore, PhD, is Director, Cognitive Sciences Laboratory, and Professor with the University of Central Florida's Cognitive Sciences Program in the Department of Philosophy and School of Modeling, Simulation, and Training. He maintains a multidisciplinary research interest that incorporates aspects of the cognitive, social, organizational, and computational sciences in the investigation of learning and performance in individuals and teams. His primary area of research is the interdisciplinary study of complex collaborative cognition and the understanding of how humans interact socially and with technology.Dr. Fiore is Immediate Past President of the International Network for the Science of Team Science, and Past President for the Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research. In 2018, Dr. Fiore was nominated to DARPA's Information Sciences and Technology (ISAT) Study Group to help the Department of Defense examine future areas of technological development potentially influencing national security. He has been a visiting scholar for the study of shared and extended cognition at École Normale Supérieure de Lyon in Lyon, France (2010), and an invited visitor to the internationally renowned interdisciplinary Santa Fe Institute (2013). He was a member of the expert panel for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's 2015 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), which focused on collaborative problem-solving skills. He has contributed to working groups for the National Academies of Sciences in understanding and measuring "21st-Century Skills" and was a committee member of their "Science of Team Science" consensus study, as well as a member of the National Assessment of Educational Progress report on "Collaborative Problem Solving".Dr. Fiore has been awarded the University of Central Florida (UCF) prestigious Research Incentive Award four times to acknowledge his significant accomplishments, and he is recipient of UCF's Luminary Award (2019), as recognition for his work having a significant impact on the world, and UCF's Reach for the Stars Award (2014), as recognition for bringing international prominence to the university. As Principal Investigator and Co-Principal Investigator, Dr. Fiore has helped to secure and manage approximately $35 million in research funding. He is co-author of a book on “Accelerating Expertise” (2013) and is a co-editor of volumes on Shared Cognition (2012), Macrocognition in Teams (2008), Distributed Training (2007), and Team Cognition (2004). Dr. Fiore has also co-authored over 200 scholarly publications in the area of learning, memory, and problem solving in individuals and groups.Send SOT thoughts on the episodes, ideas for future topics, and more.

The UK economy is grappling with challenges as business confidence falters and retail sales dip. The Lloyds Bank business barometer fell to a five-month low of 41%, highlighting economic uncertainty, though firms remain optimistic about their trading prospects. Surveys from the Confederation of British Industry and the Institute of Directors indicate shrinking private sector activity and the lowest business confidence since April 2020. Elevated borrowing costs and higher employment taxes are straining businesses, dampening hiring and investment. Despite these difficulties, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) forecasts stronger growth by 2025, driven by public spending, though inflation is expected to stay above target.Stocks featured:Frasers Group, International Consolidated Airlines Group and Legal & General GroupTo find out more about the investment management services offered by Walker Crips, please visit our website:https://www.walkercrips.co.uk/This podcast is intended to be Walker Crips Investment Management's own commentary on markets. It is not investment research and should not be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy, sell or trade in any of the investments, sectors or asset classes mentioned. The value of any investment and the income arising from it is not guaranteed and can fall as well as rise, so that you may not get back the amount you originally invested. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Movements in exchange rates can have an adverse effect on the value, price or income of any non-sterling denominated investment. Nothing in this podcast constitutes advice to undertake a transaction, and if you require professional advice you should contact your financial adviser or your usual contact at Walker Crips. Walker Crips Investment Management Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN: 226344) and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Back with another special episode on the status of the AI in education, cutting through the hype (again) with the fantastic Charles Fadel. This is quite a deep dive into the topic, so if you're early exploring this topic, check out episodes 107 and 108 with a great selection of reflections on AI in education from young people, teachers, leaders, policy-makers and edtech entrepreneurs.  Charles is a global education thought leader and futurist, author, and inventor, with several active affiliations. His work spans the education continuum of K-12 schools, higher education, and workforce development/lifelong learning. He is the Founder and chairman of the Center for Curriculum Redesign and among many other accolades, he is the author of Education for the Age of AI, with co-authors Alexis Black, Robbie Taylor, Janet Slesinski and Katie Dunn. Center for Curriculum Redesign (CCR): https://curriculumredesign.org/ Four-Dimensional (4D) Competencies Framework: https://curriculumredesign.org/frameworks/competencies-framework/  Tools: https://curriculumredesign.org/tools/  Charles is also: Chair of the Education Committee of the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), nominated by the U.S. Council for International Business (USCIB). He works with several teams at the OECD, most notably Education 2030, PISA, CERI, and the Expert Group on AI Futures. Senior Fellow, Human Capital at The Conference Board Board member at the United States Council Foundation (USCF). Global Education Lead at Cisco Systems for over a decade. Founder of Neurodyne, an ahead-of-its-time startup focused on Neural Networks/Artificial Intelligence. Member of the President's Council of the Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering. Founder and President of the Fondation Helvetica Educatio in Geneva, Switzerland. Fondation Helvetica Educatio focused on global education matters. Product marketing and management in semiconductors for broadband and wireless applications at Analog Devices and M/A-COM. Visiting practitioner at Harvard's Graduate School of Education in the Mind, Brain and Education program. He explored curriculum redesign issues in an age of artificial intelligence and taught the first-ever class on “Human Learning + Machine Learning.” Former Project Director at Harvard's Graduate School of Education in the Laboratory for the Science of the Individual. There he explored “Machine Learning + Human Learning.” Visiting lecturer at MIT's Experimental Study Group (ESG). He taught an innovative “special topics in mathematics” seminar, “Polymathy: The World in 10 Curves.” He then taught the seminar at Harvard's Graduate School of Education for six years to student acclaim. Visiting lecturer at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania in the Chief Learning Officer Program. Senior Fellow at the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Previous books Artificial Intelligence in Education (2018) was translated into Mandarin Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Arabic. His earlier, highly influential book Four-Dimensional Education (2015) was translated into ten languages, while its framework was translated into twenty-three languages. He co-authored best-selling 21st Century Skills (2009, Wiley).

It's Tuesday, November 19th, A.D. 2024. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Kevin Swanson Rwanda eager to tax churches The Christian church faces more challenges in Africa. The Rwandan parliament is considering legislation which could impose taxes upon churches in that African nation. The Rwandan governance board has already shut down 8,000 churches that do not comply with certain standards. 4 Christians killed in Mozambique, Africa In addition, Barnabas Aid reports that four Christians were killed in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique by Islamic State radicals. 3 Nigerian pastors kidnapped by Muslims Plus, at least three pastors have been kidnapped by Muslim militants in Southern Nigeria over the last few weeks. Nigeria remains one of the most dangerous nations in the world for Christians in 2024.  Archbishop of Canterbury resigns over failure to discipline pedophile The top official in the Church of England, Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby has resigned his office. This comes after the release of a report investigating the 50-year abuse record of a church leader by the name of John Smyth. The church failed to discipline Smyth who had continued a pattern of sexual and physical abuse of boys in three different countries over a long period of time. Welby himself called the church's response "a long-maintained conspiracy of silence about the heinous abuses of John Smyth.”  Welby's resignation also comes just a few weeks after he affirmed that homosexual activity was morally acceptable as long as there was what he called a “stable, committed and faithful relationship.” 1 Peter 4:17 states that “The time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the Gospel of God?” Mali, Africa criminalizes homosexual behavior The parliament of the West African country of Mali passed a law banning homosexual behavior on October 31st, joining 30 other African nations taking the same position. African nations towards the south and east of the continent, however, have done just the opposite — with their government legitimizing the practice over the last 10 years. This includes Gabon, Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, and Namibia. Migration up 10% worldwide The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has released the International Migration Outlook Report for 2024.   It documents the highest level of migration from poor countries to rich countries in recorded history.  This accounts for 6.5 million immigrants, not counting the 4.7 million Ukrainian immigrants due to the war. That's a 10% increase year-over-year. Nations reaching record levels of immigrants in 2023 included the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Japan, and Switzerland. Typhoon Man-yi in Philippines has 143 mile-per-hour winds (Sound from Typhoon Man-yi) The Philippines is bearing up under a record sixth typhoon this season. Typhoon Man-yi is equivalent to a Category 3 hurricane, sporting winds up to 143 miles per hour. More than half a million people have evacuated the Bicol region in Luzon to prepare for the storm. Thus far, seven people died in a related landslide, reports the Associated Press. At least 160 Filipinos have died in the previous five storms hitting the island nation this season.  Missouri greenlights abortion up until 21 weeks By a vote of 52% to 48%, Missouri voters have set the course for legislation to allow for abortion in their state up to the point of fetal viability or 21 weeks gestation. Only South Dakota retained a pro-life position in the November election. Florida's vote to liberalize their abortion law failed by a 57-43% margin, just short of the 60% requirement. Florida will retain its position to kill babies up until the sixth week. Nebraska will allow for first trimester abortions, after this year's election. During this election, seven states created a so-called “right to abortion” in their state constitutions including Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, and New York. They join Ohio, Kansas, and Kentucky, the three states which previously approved pro-abortion referendums. Isaiah 1:4-6 says, “Alas, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity.  … The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faints. From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but wounds and bruises and putrefying sores.” Al Mohler opposes Matt Gaetz for Attorney General President-elect Donald Trump's selection for Attorney General is a bridge too far for some Christian leaders. In an interview with World Magazine,  Al Mohler, the President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, called the selection of Matt Getz “shocking.”  As The Worldview documented yesterday, Liberty Counsel President Mat Staver referred to Gaetz as "not qualified,” and believes his nomination is "shocking and disappointing to those who have followed this man and the lurid scandals and serious allegations of sex parties and drugs during his tenure in the U.S. Congress.” Could entire departments be eliminated under Trump? Expect entire federal departments to be eliminated under a Trump presidency.   That's what Vivek Ramaswamy, the appointee for leading the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency told Fox Business Channel on Sunday. Listen. RAMASWAMY: “We expect mass reductions. We expect certain agencies to be deleted outright. We expect mass reductions in force in areas of the federal government that are bloated. We expect massive cuts among federal contractors and others who are overbilling the federal government. So yes, we expect all of the above. And I think people will be surprised by, I think, how quickly we're able to move with some of those changes, given the legal backdrop the Supreme Court has given us.” 72% of Americans oppose gender change for children A recent Rasmussen poll found that 72% of Americans oppose transgender change attempts for children.  That's up 10% since August.   Also, 73% of voters want parents notified should children be looking to change their name or gender. Several months ago, the state of California restricted parental notification concerning gender transition attempts for children.  Earth now has a temporary second moon And finally, scientists have identified a mini-moon orbiting Earth -- our second moon, as it were, reports The Daily Galaxy. The asteroid, which is only 37 feet in diameter, was pulled temporarily into Earth's gravitational pull on September 29th of this year. Dubbed Asteroid 2024 PT5, it will be released at 11:43 am Eastern Time on November 25,, 2024. Close And that's The Worldview on this Tuesday, November 19th, in the year of our Lord 2024. Subscribe by Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

On Nick Ferrari at Breakfast,Britain experienced the biggest surge in immigration of any rich country last year, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.More than 250 unpaid carers risk prosecution for benefit overpayments. Children as young as nine are being probed by police for classroom 'non-crime hate incidents'.All of this and more on the Nick Ferrari Whole Show Podcast.

Take Charge of Your Future. Imagine Possibilities with Design Thinking - and Test Them. Join our Design Your New Life in Retirement Program - two new groups start in January. Learn more _______________________ Getting older brings questions. Debra Whitman, PhD, the Chief Public Policy Officer for AARP, had questions, too. Her research led her to write the new book "The Second Fifty: Answers to the 7 Big Questions of Midlife and Beyond." You'll benefit from her insights from interviews with experts and takeaways from cutting-edge research across a range of topics including brain health, an older workforce, caregiving and retirement. _______________________ Bio Debra Whitman is the author of The Second Fifty: Answers to the 7 Big Questions of Midlife and Beyond. She is an economist and expert on aging issues with an extensive background in policymaking and research. As EVP and Chief Public Policy Officer for AARP, Debra leads a team of 150 experts in all aspects of policy development, analysis, research, and global thought leadership to produce policy and research insights and solutions that help communities, lawmakers, and the private sector improve our lives as we age. Debra serves as an AARP spokesperson on a diverse set of issues including long-term care and caregiving, financial security, health and longevity, and engaging a multi-generational workforce. She connects with a range of stakeholders such as the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Forbes and the Aspen Institute. Previously, as staff director for the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging, Debra worked across the aisle to increase retirement security, lower health care costs, protect vulnerable seniors, make the pharmaceutical industry more transparent, and improve our long-term care system. Before that, she worked for the Congressional Research Service as a specialist in the economics of aging and  served as a Brookings LEGIS Fellow to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Debra is a public speaker, mom, and an advocate for those whose voices need to be heard. _______________________ For More on Debra Whitman The Second Fifty: Answers to the 7 Big Questions of Midlife and Beyond LinkedIn @policydeb on X _______________________ Podcast Episodes You May Like The Measure of Our Age – MT Connolly Breaking the Age Code – Dr. Becca Levy Ageism Unmasked – Dr. Tracey Gendron Lifestyle and Financial Decisions As We Age – Marjorie Fox, JD, CFP® ________________________ Wise Quotes On the Big Questions of Midlife & Beyond "So I've been working on aging for the last 25 years at the Social Security Administration, running the Senate Aging Committee and then here at AARP, but I realized when I was about to turn 50, I didn't have the information I wanted at my fingertips. I had books like What to Expect When You're Expecting and Social Security for Dummies and lots of other great resources, but nothing that just comprehensively looked at all of the things that I was curious about. And so I wrote down a list of questions, everything from the most basic: How long will I live? Will I be healthy to more practical things like How long will I work or Will I have enough money? And then some tough questions like Will I lose my memory? and How will I die? And so those became the chapters of the book, but one of the things that happened as I was starting to put this together was my husband had a major heart attack at 48. And I'll get a little bit emotional talking about it, but he was hiking by himself and had what they call the Widow Maker, which, being his wife, is not a great term when I heard it. And luckily Boulder Mountain Rescue raced up the mountain and carried him down before his heart stopped. And that experience, Joe, just helped me to think that even though I spent all my...

Is it just me, or is Artificial Intelligence (AI) just omnipresent? It seems that everywhere we turn, we're told an AI ability has been embedded. But when did all that start? And where is it going?? LaylaK and MJ ask industry pioneer and expert Michael Bryan, Partner at Open Environments (and full disclosure - a Georgetown business school classmate) those questions and more. No AI was used to create it this episode, but some human editing was applied! Follow the podcast on Apple Podcast, Spotify, etc to never miss an episode. Fresh ones drop every two weeks. Have an idea for a episode? Guest to recommend? Drop us a comment on X, Instagram, Facebook or here. Because it may not be just you... but it could be! Links: Michael Bryan (LinkedIn, Open Environments) Georgetown McDonough School of Business American Red Cross ChatGPT With AI warning, Nobel winner joins ranks of laureates who've cautioned about the risks of their own work (CNN) Elon Musk among experts urging a halt to AI training (BBC) G7 Hiroshima Process on Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) (OECD - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Governance of Artificial Intelligence (including 12 Challenges) (UK House of Commons) Andrew Ng's Machine Learning Collection (Coursera)  

In today's podcast, we're discussing Fast and Furious. But it's not the movie series starring Vin Diesel. Instead, the catchphrase describes rapidly increasing and somewhat confusing food system environmental impact reporting. Food firms, farmers, and governments all have a clear need for more quantitative environmental impact data in order to measure and understand factors such as carbon footprint, sustainable agricultural practices, and food supply chain processes. But there is no single standard for such reporting and different measurement methodologies make it difficult to assess progress. What's more, greater transparency regarding environmental impacts and food systems will affect trade and supply chains. Our guest today is Koen Deconinck from the Trade and Agricultural Directorate of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or OECD for short. Interview Summary You and your colleagues at the OECD recently published a paper called Fast and Furious: The Rise of Environmental Impact Reporting in Food Systems. Can you tell me a little bit about the paper? Sure. A while ago we were talking to one of the world's experts on sustainability in food systems. He alerted us that there was a major change happening in how people think about sustainability in food systems. He told us in the past, it was thought of almost as a checklist, right? People would say, here's a list of practices that you should or shouldn't use. And then we'll come and confirm whether that's the case on your farm. Then you either get certified or you don't. And he said, you should pay attention because there's a big change underway. We're more and more moving towards actually quantifying things like what is your carbon footprint? What is your water footprint? And so on. He convinced us that this was actually a major change that was happening. Oddly enough, outside of the role of the practitioners, not that many people have been paying attention to it. That is why we wrote this paper. This is a really important shift because just thinking about this in terms of economics, evaluating outputs versus the methods that you get to those outputs can have really significant implications for the various actors involved. So, this seems like a good move, but it seems also kind of complicated. I would love to hear your thoughts about that particular move. Why did you think, or why did you all realize this was a challenge and opportunity at the same? That's a great question. It actually gets to the heart of what we're describing in the paper. Starting with the good news, we do think that this has an enormous potential to improve sustainability in food systems. Because we know from the scientific evidence that there are big differences between different kinds of food products in terms of their average environmental impact. For example, beef tends to have more greenhouse gas emissions per kilogram of products relative to poultry and then definitely relative to plant based alternatives and so on. You can see these kinds of average differences. But then the data also shows that within each kind of product category, there's huge differences between different farmers. And what you can do if you start quantifying those footprints is it actually unlocks different kinds of levers. The first lever, if you think about carbon footprints, which is maybe the most intuitive example. The first lever is people know the carbon footprint of different kinds of food products. They could shift their diets away from the products that have a higher footprint towards products that have a lower footprint. For example, less beef and more towards poultry or towards plant-based alternatives. That's one lever. A second lever is that if you can also start to get even more precise and use data that is specific to each producer, not just an average, then also within each product category, people can start shifting towards the producers that have a lower environmental footprint. So, for example, people will still be drinking milk, but then they can shift towards milk producers that have a lower carbon footprint. And the third interesting lever that you can unlock is if you have that data at a supplier level. Suppliers could then say, well, I changed my practices. I changed my inputs. I've done things differently to reduce my impact. You actually can stimulate innovation by each individual farmer, each individual company in the supply chain to lower that impact. And that is something that you can do if you're quantifying those impacts, and that is very difficult or even impossible to do with this previous checklist-based approach. So that's one of the reasons why we're, we think that this has tremendous potential if we get it right. That's right. Just saying that you're doing sustainable practices isn't sufficient. It's really critical to evaluate what kinds of greenhouse gas emissions or other environmentally problematic outcomes of that producer or firm is what really matters. But I have to ask you just how difficult, how realistic is it to be able to measure the environmental impact of every farm? That's a really good question. And of course, if you think about agriculture compared to other sectors, one of the big challenges for agriculture is indeed that there's just so many producers, right? I talked to people who work in the steel industry, and they say that their industry is complicated, but there's basically only 1000 steel factories around the world. That's not that many. The latest evidence suggests that there's more than 600 million farmers worldwide. So clearly, we're talking about a completely different order of magnitude, order of complexity. And the second difficulty is that when we talk about measurements, for a steel factory, in theory, you could put sensors in the chimney and sort of measure that. For agriculture, that's really not practical. Scientists would sometimes do that because, you know, otherwise it's hard to know what greenhouse gas emissions you have in agriculture. But it's clearly not something that you're going to do on 600 million farms. So, what people do instead is, scientists would do the primary research. There are different ways of doing that, to try and estimate which kinds of practices have which kinds of environmental impacts. If you have a cow and it has this kind of diet, how much methane is it burping and how is it affected by differences in the kinds of feed that you give the animal and whether it's inside or outside and so on. And then based on that very detailed research, that then gets simplified into a simpler model, a simpler tool, so that the farmer can plug in some key performance indicators from their farm. I can say ‘I have these many cows, this is the feed rations that I'm giving to them. These are the kinds of manure management options that I have.' And then that tool is a simplified tool that basically gives you an estimate of those emissions. And once you have a tool like that, of course, the challenge is already a lot easier. Because then, if your tool is user friendly and you can sort of focus on just a couple of key parameters that farmers would know, then, of course, you can scale it up. And there are actual examples like that. In Ireland, there is a scheme called Origin Green, which is an initiative by the Irish government to promote exports of Irish Agri food products. They cover something like 90 percent of all the beef and dairy farms in the country. And as part of the initiative, they do the audits anyway, but as part of that initiative, they also quantify the carbon footprint. They basically have farm level data for 90 percent of the farmers. New Zealand similarly has had a big campaign called Know Your Numbers, where they've convinced farmers to use these kinds of calculation tools to get a good insight on how much the emissions are on their farm. So, it is definitely not straightforward. But at the same time, we do see that it is actually happening. It is actually feasible. Thank you for sharing that. This is really impressive work that's happening in the European context and in New Zealand. I have to ask, how challenging is this for small or medium sized producers? I mean, both in a European or Northern context, but particularly when we start thinking about the fact that Agri food chains are global and, and so there can be production practices in the Southern countries that would be of concern. How do you think about this in this context? It is a really important issue. And actually, we've been here before. If you go back something like 20 years ago, and I think you actually did some research on this yourself back in the days, Norbert. There was a big increase in food safety standards, food quality standards. And these were not necessarily public standards. It was quite often retailers who started to impose that on their suppliers. And we did have all those concerns, right? Because on the one hand, it was making food safer and higher quality for consumers. But on the other hand, there was this risk that it would actually exclude, especially the poor producers, the small and medium sized enterprises from those supply chains. There's been a lot of research about that and it turns out that in the end, it was more nuanced than what people feared initially. But of course, we definitely have the same concern now. And there's a few elements to it. One is simply the difficulty of actually quantifying those things. I mentioned a few of these calculation tools and a few of these initiatives. So far, most of the investment in these things has been in high income countries. And even if you look at the underlying science, most of the research has happened in richer countries. So, if you go to tropical agriculture, we even have less scientific evidence that you would use to build a simplified tool like that. Then there's, of course, the challenge of actually getting farmers to use that. So, governments in developing countries typically don't have the same kind of capacity that the government of New Zealand, or the government of Ireland has to help farmers do that. So, there's definitely a role there for development cooperation, technical assistance, things like that. But there's also another concern, which is that one of the important drivers of the environmental impacts of food products is actually your productivity. There are many parts of the food system where your environmental impacts might be roughly the same, no matter whether you are actually very productive or not. So, if you have the type of variety of rice or wheat that you're using that just has relatively low yields, then, of course, you divide the total environmental impact by a smaller number. So, automatically, your relative impact is bigger. And typically, that is what we find in the Global South. So, typically, the producers there will have much lower productivity levels. And studies do find that they tend to have higher environmental impacts, all else equal. So even if they were able to quantify it, there is actually an additional risk that then they would still get excluded. What that means is that this rise of quantified environmental impact reporting is something that we need to pay close attention to. And development corporation agencies and everybody else should be thinking hard about how we are going to make sure that producers in the Global South are not only able to quantify, but also able to improve those environmental impacts. For example, through sustainable productivity growth. This is really helpful. And thank you for sharing that. And you're right. I did think about these issues. I was influenced rather by the experience of increasing food safety standards. I would say one of the differences that we saw with food safety standards was how safe can food be? I mean, we want our food to be extremely safe, but there are always these tradeoffs. With environmental impacts, I think it feels a little different. And I really appreciate the concern of the difference between these small and medium sized enterprises, particularly out of a developing country context. I've got to ask sort of a broader question. Why is all of this happening now? This increase of environmental sustainability measures, both in terms of the technical work and the demand. I mean, what's bringing all of this together? It is actually a pretty interesting story because it appears that, the way we look at it, there's been some changes on the demand side and on the supply side, so to speak, right? So, there's this growing demand for more information. Consumers are increasingly conscious about these things, even though it's not clear yet if this really translates into their shopping behavior. Civil society organizations, of course, have long been asking for more information on that. Governments, in some cases, are also pushing for that. One clear example there is in the European Union. There is this new rule in the EU. It's called the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. That's quite a mouthful. And one of the things it does is it requires all large companies to report not only their own emissions and the emissions from the energy that they're purchasing, but also their emissions upstream and downstream in their supply chain. People sometimes call this Scope Three Emissions. This has huge ramifications because it means that for the supermarkets, a large part of their Scope Three Emissions are the emissions from food. They would then probably ask the food manufacturers 'well, give us more information on your carbon footprints.' And in turn, for the food manufacturers, a large part of their carbon footprint comes upstream from the agricultural sector. So, everybody would be turning around and asking their supplier and all the way up the supply chain for more information. All the way, not only to the farmer, but even further up to the fertilizer companies and so on. So, there's definitely this push on the demand side. And, I guess governments and citizens and civil society, those are sort of the usual suspects, so to speak. There's also unexpectedly a lot of pressure from investors. We see organizations of investors pushing hard for more transparency. Their logic is that sooner or later, stricter regulations on the environmental side are going to come. For some of the companies that we're currently investing in, we have no idea how hard that would hit them. So, those companies need to disclose more information because we as investors need to know how much money is at risk if we invest in a business that is, for example, linked to deforestation and things like that. So, that's the demand side. But what is really interesting is that at the same time on the supply side, it's also becoming easier to actually provide that information compared to five or 10 years ago. Some of this is because people have been working in obscurity for a long time, trying to develop certain methods and databases. A lot of that work has been coming to fruition in just the last few years. For example, there's been development of new reporting standards, there's been development of new databases, there's been development of new methods, people are now using satellites and so on to try and quantify things like land use change, deforestation impacts and so on. A lot of these things are now converging and blending with each other. We do think that the combination of this greater demand and greater supply that is driving what we're seeing now. And of course, some of these initiatives are still at a relatively early stage. At the same time, I think the direction of travel is clear. So, we think that demand is not going to go down. It will keep getting easier to supply that information. We think that this is what explains this fast increase that we're seeing. This is really intriguing, and it makes me wonder how global value chains are going to be realigned. Going back to this idea of small and medium sized producers who may not be able to have the monitoring, or if you think of even larger firms who feel uncomfortable with having some outside agency evaluating the carbon emissions or other greenhouse gas emissions from their farm. I can imagine that this could realign value chains. Is this a fair assessment? Is this a concern? I agree with you that this is something people should be looking at. At the moment, there's not yet any data on that. I don't think anybody has really researched that. We see in general that many researchers aren't really paying attention to this trend, which was actually one of the reasons we wrote this paper. But what you're describing is exactly one of the questions we have as well. There are a few ways that this could play out. You could imagine that if it's only some markets that are getting very interested in this kind of information, you might have a situation where companies in a producing country decide to just send the sustainable stuff to the countries that care about sustainability. But they keep producing the unsustainable stuff for all the other markets. In that case, the total impact for the environment might actually be limited. But there could also be other cases where companies think, well, since a large part of our customer base is asking for more sustainability, we might as well make everything sustainable just to be on the safe side. You might have other cases where companies start working backwards because they want to make sure that what they are selling is sustainable. So, you might actually have situations where a retailer starts working with suppliers or where a food manufacturer starts working with suppliers to make sure that their production is sustainable. This is again something that we have seen in the wake of these food safety standards about 20 years ago. This was a really surprising development and there was a lot of investment from other companies in the supply chain to help farmers start meeting these stricter food safety standards. So, one possibility is that something like that might happen for environmental sustainability as well. At the moment, these are all really just hypotheses. And so I really hope people will start to investigate this more seriously, because I think it is very important also for policymakers to understand what has happened. I'm really appreciative of you making the point that there is just a great deal of uncertainty in this space and that there is a need for researchers to explore this issue. And I agree the food safety concerns of 20 or so years ago is a good example. But I think there are going to be some differences and I'll be intrigued to see how that plays out. I am interested to understand, are there any risks besides the ones that we've kind of touched on, any other risks or downsides to this movement that we're seeing? Yes, there are actually. Because the story I told so far was maybe a little bit on the optimistic side. I was explaining how it's becoming easier to supply the information in part because we now have better reporting standards. That is one part of the story. That's sort of the glass half full view of it. The glass half empty view is that actually, at the same time, there's also a fragmentation. There are also many different initiatives, and this is why we call it fast and furious. So, there's lots of different initiatives that are competing for attention. And you do end up with situations where you might have different ways of calculating certain environmental impact. Different ways of reporting it. And then it's not necessarily clear when somebody is reporting something what exactly they were using as methods. And so that poses an enormous risk, because if every supermarket or every country starts coming up with its own way of doing things, its own way of reporting, then the end result is just going to be confusion and frustration and transaction costs. And then the benefits for the environment won't even be there. So, it is really important if you want this to go well, that people get together, stakeholders, governments, researchers, to get together and try to align as much as possible on common reporting standards, common methodologies, etc. So that it's clear for everybody that the data that we're looking at is comparable. This is important, and I can imagine if we think about international accords on addressing climate change and how it takes a lot of effort to get agreement on those, you can imagine that when we're talking about these kinds of measures and getting concordance on that, there could be some real challenges. We've already touched on this, but I'm interested to know, are there other policy implications of the work that this paper is doing? Is there something we should be paying attention to? Well, one idea that I hope people would start taking seriously is I want people to start thinking in timelines and cycles. And let me explain what I mean by that. There's a lot of different initiatives out there. And you can even start to see a little bit of a hierarchy, how different things, some of these standards are building on other standards. Some of these databases are then in turn using some of those other standards. There's a kind of a logic that is emerging there. One of the problems that happens now is that it's not really clear when all of these elements are going to get updated. So, suddenly one of those standards might get updated and then now all of these other standards that build on that or those databases that build on that are suddenly no longer consistent with that original standard. And then there's some confusion and then it's not really clear whether the data you are using is actually still consistent with the original standard. One idea that I'm advocating for is that people should all explicitly define a certain iteration cycle where they say, look, every four years, for example, or every three years, every five years, we are going to review the standard. We'll give everybody 12 months of warning, and we'll have a stakeholder process, and we'll have a scientific process behind that so it's clear for everybody what we're changing and why. But this way, you know well in advance when each of these building blocks is going to get updated. Then that would make it a lot easier for everybody to make sure that what they're doing is aligned with those standards. And an additional benefit of doing it like that, I think, is these things are moving so fast and there's still so much new science and new technology coming in, that we have to keep the possibility open to keep improving and updating those methods and those standards as well. If you announce in advance that we'll do this on a three year cycle or a four year cycle or whatever it may be, I think that could help us strike a balance between the need for that flexibility, but at the same time that need for stability. Because of course, if things keep changing all the time, then you're never quite sure whether the numbers you're looking at make sense or can be compared. I think that idea would be very helpful. And that will probably require quite a bit of coordination between all the different stakeholders who work in that space. And I think that would be a very good thing to do. BIO Koen Deconinck is an economist in the Trade and Agriculture Directorate of the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) in Paris. He was lead author of the OECD report “Making Better Policies for Food Systems” (2021) and has worked on market concentration, seed markets, evidence gaps, resilience, and environmental impacts of food systems. He holds a PhD in Economics from the University of Leuven and has published research in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, the European Review of Agricultural Economics, Food Policy, and Business History, among others. He currently works on measurement of carbon footprints and other environmental impacts of food.  

Pod koniec zeszłego roku poznaliśmy wyniki kolejnej edycji Programu Międzynarodowej Oceny Umiejętności Uczniów PISA 2022, przeprowadzanej co trzy lata przez OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). Badanie obejmuje piętnastolatków z blisko 80 krajów świata, a jego celem jest porównanie kompetencji uczniów w trzech kluczowych dziedzinach: matematyce, czytaniu ze zrozumieniem i naukach przyrodniczych. Jak w badaniu wypadły kraje azjatyckie, anglojęzyczne, skandynawskie i hiszpańskojęzyczne? Co wyniki raportu mówią o kondycji edukacji w poszczególnych krajach i regionach? Jak postrzegany jest sukces edukacyjny i jak się go mierzy? Jak przebiega proces edukacji w różnych częściach świata i jakie zmiany w nim zachodzą? Co nabiera większego znaczenia – teoria czy praktyka? Jak prezentuje się dostęp do edukacji w wybranych częściach świata i na ile determinuje on osiągnięcie sukcesu na drodze nauki? O tym wszystkim porozmawiają nasi eksperci: sinolog dr hab. Marcin Jacoby, prof. Uniwersytetu SWPS, skandynawistka dr Magdalena Domeradzka i amerykanistka prof. dr hab. Lucyna Aleksandrowicz-Pędich. Spotkanie poprowadzi literaturoznawczyni i tłumaczka, specjalistka w zakresie literatury latynoamerykańskiej – dr Paulina Nalewajko. Strefa Kultur Uniwersytetu SWPS to projekt, w którym wraz z zaproszonymi gośćmi omawiamy różne elementy otaczającej nas kultury, a także przybliżamy realia, zjawiska i obyczaje obecne w innych krajach. Do udziału w tym przedsięwzięciu zaprosiliśmy ekspertów z różnych dziedzin: filologów, językoznawców, kulturoznawców, medioznawców, dziennikarzy, socjologów i politologów. Założeniem projektu jest udostępnienie rzetelnej wiedzy wszystkim zainteresowanym tą tematyką – niezależnie od czasu i miejsca, w jakim się znajdują. Więcej informacji o projekcie: https://web.swps.pl/strefa-kultur/

Calls have been made for an independent review of back to school costs in Clare. It comes as new research from the Children's Right Alliance shows that over 80% of Irish parents want the free school books scheme and hot meals programme to be extended to all primary and second-level students in Budget 2025. A new report from the international Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development meanwhile has found that Ireland spends less on education from early years to third level than all 33 other member states. Clare SVP President Denis Carthy says cost barriers to education in this county must be removed.

This Tax Section Odyssey podcast episode takes a deeper dive into the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) initiative on Base Erosion Profit Sharing (BEPS) 2.0 which sets to reform the internation tax system with Pillar 1 and 2 tax regimes. In addition to the complexity of such international regulations, the political landscape for U.S. implementation is uncertain, and potential action is needed from Congress. Cory Perry, Principal, National Tax — Grant Thorton Advisors, and Vice Chair of the AICPA's International Technical Resource Panel (TRP), highlights that while many U.S. companies may not face larger tax bills if these regimes are adopted in the U.S., the administrative and compliance challenges are significant. The AICPA has submitted comment letters to the OECD, Treasury, and the IRS, focusing on simplification and clarification of rules. AICPA resources OECD BEPS 2.0 - Pillar One and Pillar Two — The OECD BEPS 2.0 sets out to provide a tax reform framework allowing for more transparency in the global tax environment. What you need to know about BEPS 2.0: Pillar One and Pillar Two | Tax Section Odyssey — The OECD BEPS 2.0 project is an international effort to reform the international tax system that addresses transfer pricing, profit allocation and tax avoidance. Advocacy Comments to Treasury on tax issues of OECD Pillar Two, Feb. 14, 2024 Comments to Treasury on Amount B of OECD Pillar One, Dec. 12, 2023  Other resources OECD BEPS — Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Sharing For a full transcript of the episode, see  Tax Section Odyssey on the AICPA & CIMA website. 

In this special episode, we feature highlights from our recent webinar, exploring how we can collectively support more young Australians to achieve success at school and beyond.Currently, one in four young Australians aren't completing year 12 or the equivalent – and the rate is much higher for young people experiencing disadvantage. Yet we know that higher educational attainment is associated with positive social and economic outcomes.This episode includes valuable insights from The Smith Family's Head of Research and Advocacy, Anne Hampshire, on our ongoing research into post-school pathways with over 2,000 young Australians, and a personal story from Cindy, a tertiary student on our Learning for Life program, who offers her perspective on what young people need to make a positive transition from school to further study or work. Plus, you'll hear from our panellists, who share their views on ways to address the recent declines in school completion rates and ensure all young people are ready for a fast-changing labour market:· Professor Jennifer Westacott AO, Chancellor of Western Sydney University;· Christine Cawsey AM, Principal of Rooty Hill High School and a Board member at The Smith Family; and· Dr Anthony Mann, Senior Policy Analyst, Directorate for Education and Skills at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).You can watch the full webinar here.CREDITSHost: Doug Taylor, CEO, The Smith FamilyAudio production: Mylk Media GET IN TOUCHLearn more about The Smith Family: thesmithfamily.com.au Connect with us on:Facebook @TheSmithFamilyAustraliaInstagram @thesmithfamilyausLinkedIn @the-smith-family The Smith Family acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of the Lands on which this podcast is made and their continuing connection to Culture and Country. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Original Release Date August 8, 2024: Our Head of Europe Sustainability Research discusses how rising longevity is revolutionizing our fundamental approach from reactive to proactive treatment.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Canfield, Morgan Stanley's European Head of Sustainability Research. Along with my colleagues, we're bringing you a variety of perspectives; and today we're focusing on a topic that affects everyone – how much does poor health cost us? And how are ageing populations and longer life expectancy driving a fundamental shift in healthcare? It's Thursday, August the 8th, at 4pm in London. As populations age across the developed world, health systems need to help people live both longer and healthier. The current system is typically built around to focus on acute conditions and it's more reactive; so it introduces clinical care or drugs to respond to a condition after it's already arisen, rather than keeping people healthy in the first instance. So increasingly, with the burden of chronic disease becoming by far the greatest health and economic challenge we face, we need to change the structure of the healthcare system. Essentially, the key question is how much is poor health amongst the ageing population really costing society? To get a true sense of that, we need to keep in mind that workers over 50 already earn one out of every three dollars across the G20 regions. By 2035, they're projected to generate nearly 40 per cent of all household income. So with that in mind, preventable conditions amongst those people aged 50-64 at the moment, are already costing G20 economies over $1 trillion annually in productivity loss. And there's one more key number: 19 per cent. That's how much age-diverse workforces can raise GDP per capita over the next thirty years, according to estimates from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD. So clearly, keeping workers healthier for longer underpins a more productive, more efficient, and a profitable global economy. So it's clear that [if] the current healthcare system were to shift from sick from care to prevention, the global gains would be substantial.The BioPharma sector is already contributing some targeted novel treatments in areas like smart chemotherapy and in CRISPR – which is a technology that allows for selective DNA modification. While we can credit BioPharma and MedTech for really powerful innovations in diagnostics, in AI deployment for areas like data science and material science, and in sophisticated telemedicine – all these breakthroughs together give a more personalized, targeted health system; which is a big step in the right direction, but honestly they alone can't solve this much broader longevity challenge we face. Focus on health and prevention, ultimately, could address those underlying causes of ill-health, so that problems don't arise even in the first instance. Governments around the world are obviously realizing the value of preventive care over sick care. And as a strategy, disease prevention fundamentally aims to promote wellness across the board, whether that's in things like mental state, nutrition or even in things like sleep and stress. While it might be easy to kind of conflate that with wellness trends – things like green smoothies or meditation – the underlying benefits of boosting health at the cellular level have much broader and deeper implications. Things like Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, supporting better health across populations can significantly reduce the incidence of a wide range of chronic conditions. It can lower the burden on health systems overall, and actually increase healthy lifespan at the end of the day. BioPharma advances are significant, but addressing longevity will require a much broader alignment across a myriad of elements; everything really from the food system to sanitation to training healthcare professionals. And of course, all of that will require consistent policy support. Regulators and policymakers are paying very close attention to their ageing population – and so are we. We'll continue to bring you updates on this topic, which is so important to all of us.Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please do leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

According to estimates, 2024 marks the point when the absolute size of the working age (20-64) population of OECD, or Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries) begins to shrink. These broad depopulation trends will invariably impact migration patterns both internationally and domestically in India. Join Kripa Koshy (Programme Manager, Takshashila) in conversation with Prof. Chinmay Tumbe, Associate Professor in the Economics Area at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, as they unpack some of these migration considerations in the Indian context.

Our Head of Europe Sustainability Research discusses how rising longevity is revolutionizing our fundamental approach from reactive to proactive treatment.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Canfield, Morgan Stanley's European Head of Sustainability Research. Along with my colleagues, we're bringing you a variety of perspectives; and today we're focusing on a topic that affects everyone – how much does poor health cost us? And how are ageing populations and longer life expectancy driving a fundamental shift in healthcare? It's Thursday, August the 8th, at 4pm in London. As populations age across the developed world, health systems need to help people live both longer and healthier. The current system is typically built around to focus on acute conditions and it's more reactive; so it introduces clinical care or drugs to respond to a condition after it's already arisen, rather than keeping people healthy in the first instance. So increasingly, with the burden of chronic disease becoming by far the greatest health and economic challenge we face, we need to change the structure of the healthcare system. Essentially, the key question is how much is poor health amongst the ageing population really costing society? To get a true sense of that, we need to keep in mind that workers over 50 already earn one out of every three dollars across the G20 regions. By 2035, they're projected to generate nearly 40 per cent of all household income. So with that in mind, preventable conditions amongst those people aged 50-64 at the moment, are already costing G20 economies over $1 trillion annually in productivity loss. And there's one more key number: 19 per cent. That's how much age-diverse workforces can raise GDP per capita over the next thirty years, according to estimates from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD. So clearly, keeping workers healthier for longer underpins a more productive, more efficient, and a profitable global economy. So it's clear that [if] the current healthcare system were to shift from sick from care to prevention, the global gains would be substantial.The BioPharma sector is already contributing some targeted novel treatments in areas like smart chemotherapy and in CRISPR – which is a technology that allows for selective DNA modification. While we can credit BioPharma and MedTech for really powerful innovations in diagnostics, in AI deployment for areas like data science and material science, and in sophisticated telemedicine – all these breakthroughs together give a more personalized, targeted health system; which is a big step in the right direction, but honestly they alone can't solve this much broader longevity challenge we face. Focus on health and prevention, ultimately, could address those underlying causes of ill-health, so that problems don't arise even in the first instance. Governments around the world are obviously realizing the value of preventive care over sick care. And as a strategy, disease prevention fundamentally aims to promote wellness across the board, whether that's in things like mental state, nutrition or even in things like sleep and stress. While it might be easy to kind of conflate that with wellness trends – things like green smoothies or meditation – the underlying benefits of boosting health at the cellular level have much broader and deeper implications. Things like Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, supporting better health across populations can significantly reduce the incidence of a wide range of chronic conditions. It can lower the burden on health systems overall, and actually increase healthy lifespan at the end of the day. BioPharma advances are significant, but addressing longevity will require a much broader alignment across a myriad of elements; everything really from the food system to sanitation to training healthcare professionals. And of course, all of that will require consistent policy support. Regulators and policymakers are paying very close attention to their ageing population – and so are we. We'll continue to bring you updates on this topic, which is so important to all of us.Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please do leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis isn't receptive to calls for the establishment of an independent unit to check Treasury's forecasts and ensure Government spending is sustainable. The International Budget Partnership and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are among the organisations that believe New Zealand needs an institution that both costs policies and keeps tabs on the Government's finances. They argue it would provide more accountability and align New Zealand with the 80% of OECD countries that have such institutions. NZ Herald Wellington business editor Jenee Tibshraeny explains why Nicola Willis has her doubts. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this week's episode of The Korea Pro Podcast, co-hosts Jeongmin and John are joined by Korea Pro's news trainee, Lina, for an engaging discussion on various topics. First, the trio delves into President Yoon Suk-yeol's recent visits to Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, where South Korea signed numerous critical minerals and energy agreements. They explore how these deals align with South Korea's strategy to reduce its dependence on China for critical minerals and how the country has been pursuing similar agreements with other regions. Next, they examine South Korea's 11th Basic Plan for Electricity Supply and Demand, which revealed a modest increase in the country's renewable energy target to 21.6% by 2030. The hosts discuss how this target compares to other Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries and the potential long-term trade disadvantages for South Korean businesses. In a bittersweet moment, Lina announces that the following week will be her last as a news trainee at Korea Pro. She reflects on her favorite and most challenging assignments, the valuable lessons she learned during her time with the team and her future plans. Looking ahead, the hosts discuss the ongoing doctors' strike in South Korea, with the Korean Medical Association planning a one-day general strike on Tuesday. They also touch on the government's plan to increase the number of medical professors by 1,000 and the challenges Yoon will face upon his return from Central Asia, including tensions with North Korea. Finally, they mention the upcoming trilateral military exercise, Freedom Edge, between the U.S., South Korea and Japan. About the podcast: The Korea Pro Podcast is a weekly 15-minute conversation hosted by Editorial Director Jeongmin Kim (@jeongminnkim) and Editor John Lee (@koreanforeigner), diving deep into the most pressing stories shaping South Korea — and dissecting the most complicated ones for professionals monitoring ROK politics, diplomacy, culture, society and technology. Uploaded every Friday. This episode was recorded on June 14, 2024  Audio edited by Joe Smith

A taxpayers group is holding the CBC's heels to the fire after the state broadcaster refused to release records of how much money its senior executives made in bonuses. Plus, nearly a quarter of Ontario students over 12 have reported recreational opioid use. And Canada is outpacing other Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development nations when it comes to taxpayers funding foreign aid. Tune into The Daily Brief with Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and Noah Jarvis! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Leah Ambler, then Director of Corruption Prevention at the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity and previously Legal Analyst at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), delves—in her personal capacity—into her excellent chapter on whistleblower protections, emphasizes their importance in reducing corruption and highlights the challenges posed by the lack of comprehensive, harmonized legislation.  Originally posted on Jan. 12, 2022

Join Dr. Austin Tay in Episode 43 of PsychChat to learn about "Happiness at Work." Discover the latest research findings on how employee happiness impacts productivity, engagement, and well-being. Explore key factors like meaningful work, autonomy, and positive relationships, and learn practical strategies for enhancing workplace happiness. Tune in to gain valuable insights on how investing in employee happiness can lead to organizational success.ReferencesAllan, B. A., Dexter, C., Kinsey, R., & Parker, S. (2021). Meaningful work and mental health: Job satisfaction as a mediator. Journal of Career Assessment, 29(1), 82-95.Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273-285.Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2022). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(2), 253-260.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.Dutton, J. E., & Ragins, B. R. (2007). Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Dysvik, A., & Kuvaas, B. (2020). Exploring the relative and combined influence of mastery-approach goals and work intrinsic motivation on employee turnover intention. Personnel Review, 49(2), 483-501.Erdogan, B., Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., & Mansfield, L. R. (2020). Whistle while you work: A review of the life satisfaction literature. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1038-1083.Frijters, P., Clark, A., Krekel, C., & Layard, R. (2019). Happy Choice: Wellbeing as the Goal of Government. IZA Discussion Paper No. 12720.Haar, J. M., Sune, A., Russo, M., & Ollier-Malaterre, A. (2021). A cross-national study on the antecedents of work-life balance from the fit and balance perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 32(3), 502-527.Happy Research Institute: https://www.happinessresearchinstitute.com/waly-reportHarter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268-279.Jiang, L., & Lavaysse, L. M. (2022). Perceived control and employee well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 27(1), 1-18.Kong, F., & You, X. (2013). Loneliness and self-esteem as mediators between social support and life satisfaction in late adolescence. Social Indicators Research, 110 (1), 271-279.OECD (2019). Better Life Index. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Retrieved from: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/Oswald, A. J., Proto, E., & Sgroi, D. (2015). Happiness and productivity. Journal of Labor Economics, 33(4), 789-822.Seligman, M. (2018). PERMA and the building blocks of well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13 (4), 333-335.Schneider, B., Yost, A. B., Kropp, A., Kind, C., & Lam, H. (2021). Workforce engagement: What it is, what drives it, and why it matters for organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(2), 188-206.Siu, O. L., Cheung, F., & Lui, S. (2021). Enhancing work-related well-being among Chinese employees: A comparison between perceived organizational support and psychological capital. Applied Psychology, 63(1), 97-136.Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322-337.

Ep#089 Kshitiz Dahal is an economist at South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Environment with key interests in international trade, development economics, and econometrics. He has worked extensively in Nepal's international trade, trade in digital services, migration and remittances, Nepal's industrial policy, and public debt. He has contributed to the research initiatives of international organizations, including the Asian Development Bank, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Aslesh and Kshitiz discuss Nepal's public debt, exploring its origins, implications, and current scenario. Beginning with an examination of the concept of public debt and historical examples worldwide, they unravel the rising concerns surrounding Nepal's per capita debt. Through an analysis of various indicators and drivers behind the recent surge in public debt, they navigate the intricate landscape of debt financing and its repercussions on the Nepali economy and society. From understanding key lenders to dissecting the explicit and implicit costs associated with debt servicing, we shed light on the multifaceted nature of this economic phenomenon. If you liked the episode, hear more from us through our free newsletter services, PEI Substack: Of Policies and Politics, and click here to support us on Patreon!!   

This Day in Legal History: The Permanent Court of Arbitration is EstablishedOn this day, February 6, 1900, a pivotal moment in the realm of international law unfolded with the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), marking the inception of the first international tribunal dedicated to resolving disputes among nations. This historic event was precipitated by the ratification of the 1899 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, setting a cornerstone in The Hague, Netherlands. The PCA's creation underscored a global aspiration towards peaceful resolution of conflicts, departing from the traditional reliance on military force and diplomatic pressure.In the years that followed, the PCA's foundational principles and structure were further refined and strengthened by the 1907 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. These conventions collectively laid down the legal framework and procedural norms for international arbitration that continue to guide the PCA's operations.Now, more than a century later, the PCA stands as a testament to the enduring commitment of the international community to the principles of justice, peace, and cooperation. Housed in the iconic Peace Palace in The Hague, the PCA has grown to include 109 member countries, each pledging to resolve their disputes through arbitration rather than warfare.Throughout its history, the PCA has played a crucial role in mediating conflicts that span a wide range of issues, from territorial disputes to environmental concerns, and from maritime law to international investment. Its proceedings and rulings have not only resolved conflicts but have also contributed significantly to the development of international law.Today, as we commemorate the founding of the PCA, it serves as a reminder of the power of diplomacy and the potential for international law to foster a more peaceful and just world. The legacy of the PCA continues to influence contemporary legal thought and practice, reinforcing the importance of dialogue, understanding, and legal arbitration in the international arena.The federal government has notably refrained from commenting on Donald Trump's legal battle to remain on Colorado's 2024 primary ballot, despite previously engaging in Supreme Court cases concerning major political and legal issues. This silence, particularly from the Solicitor General's Office, seems to reflect a cautious approach to avoid involvement in disputes directly affecting presidential election outcomes. Trump's legal team is set to argue that the Colorado Supreme Court incorrectly ruled him disqualified from office due to his actions during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, a decision with significant implications for his eligibility in upcoming primaries.Historically, the federal government's stance in similar high-stakes election cases, such as Bush v. Gore, has been to abstain from taking a position, suggesting a consistent strategy to steer clear of cases with direct political ramifications. Observers and legal experts speculate that the decision to remain silent in Trump's case, like past instances, is driven by the political sensitivity of the matter and the desire to maintain the perception of impartiality in election-related legal challenges. The Solicitor General's role as an educator and policy explainer to the court, coupled with their selective involvement in cases, highlights the nuanced considerations behind the government's engagement in Supreme Court litigation.This careful positioning underscores the complexities of navigating legal disputes that intersect with political dynamics and the constitutional implications of election law. The absence of federal input in Trump's case reflects a broader trend of cautious engagement by the Solicitor General in politically charged cases, emphasizing the delicate balance between legal principles and political considerations in the administration's approach to Supreme Court litigation.US Silence on Trump Ballot Battle Signals Caution Over ElectionThe recent licensing dispute between Universal Music Group and TikTok Inc. highlights the growing complexities introduced by AI-generated music in the music and social media industries. Universal's decision to remove its artists' music from TikTok, citing concerns over AI-generated recordings diluting royalties for human artists, marks a significant standoff that could reshape future negotiations and the use of AI in content creation. This conflict reflects broader industry challenges with AI, mirroring disputes in other creative sectors over copyright infringement and the impact of technology on traditional revenue models.Both Universal and TikTok benefit from their partnership, with TikTok serving as a promotional platform for Universal's artists and music. However, the disagreement over AI-generated music's role and its potential to reduce reliance on licensed content brings to light the strategic and financial implications for both parties. Legal experts and industry observers are closely watching the dispute, recognizing its potential to set precedents for how AI-generated content is managed and compensated across platforms.The public nature of this dispute is unusual in an industry where such negotiations often occur behind closed doors, indicating the high stakes involved. Artists signed with Universal, such as Noah Kahan and Yungblud, have voiced their perspectives, highlighting the personal and professional impacts of the standoff. The debate extends to songwriters and music publishers, who advocate for fair compensation and protections against the devaluation of human creativity by AI.This standoff between Universal and TikTok underscores the ongoing negotiation between leveraging new technologies for innovation and ensuring artists and creators are fairly compensated. As AI continues to evolve, its integration into creative industries will necessitate careful consideration of legal, ethical, and economic factors to balance innovation with the rights and livelihoods of human creators.AI Fight Complicates TikTok, Universal Music Licensing StandoffThe 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that California can continue enforcing its law that mandates background checks for ammunition purchases, temporarily suspending a previous decision by U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez that declared the law unconstitutional. This decision came from a divided panel, with a 2-1 vote in favor of maintaining the law while the state appeals Judge Benitez's ruling, which he argued violated the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Judges Richard Clifton and Holly Thomas, both Democratic appointees, supported the stay, whereas U.S. Circuit Judge Consuelo Callahan, a Republican appointee, dissented.California Attorney General Rob Bonta celebrated the decision, highlighting the importance of the state's ammunition laws in saving lives and ensuring they remain in effect during the ongoing legal defense. The law, which was challenged by individuals including Olympic gold medalist shooter Kim Rhode and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, requires gun owners to undergo background checks to buy ammunition and pay for a four-year ammunition permit. This measure, initially approved by California voters in 2016 and later amended by legislators to require background checks for each ammunition purchase starting in 2019, faces continued opposition from gun rights advocates.The legal battle reflects wider national debates on gun control, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court's June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which recognized an individual's right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense and set a new standard for evaluating firearm laws. Judge Benitez's rejection of California's ammunition background check law cited a lack of historical precedent for such regulations, a point of contention that underscores the ongoing struggle between state efforts to regulate firearms and ammunition and the constitutional protections of the Second Amendment.California ammunition background check law can remain in effect, court rules | ReutersThe U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is poised to implement a new rule requiring proprietary traders and firms frequently dealing in U.S. government bonds to register as broker-dealers, introducing them to a regime of enhanced scrutiny. This initiative is part of a comprehensive strategy aimed at addressing structural deficiencies in the $26 trillion Treasury market, which have been identified as contributing to liquidity issues. By mandating registration for entities trading over $25 billion in Treasuries across a majority of the past six months, the rule intends to impose capital, liquidity, and other regulatory requirements on a sector that has become increasingly vital for market liquidity.Scheduled for a vote by the SEC's commissioners, the rule targets up to 46 proprietary trading firms, seeking to integrate them more closely into the regulatory framework governing Treasury market dealers. Critics, including prominent investors and industry groups, have expressed concerns that the rule's broad criteria may inadvertently ensnare corporations, insurers, and pension funds, potentially exacerbating liquidity challenges rather than alleviating them. Despite these criticisms and calls for moderation in the rule's application, the SEC has highlighted the value of industry feedback without committing to specific adjustments.The adoption of this rule marks a significant step in what is described as the most substantial renovation of the Treasury market in decades, with the potential to alter trading behaviors and the operational landscape for a wide range of market participants. The outcome of the final rule's wording remains closely watched, as it could dictate a pivotal shift in how entities engage with the Treasury market, balancing the push for transparency and stability against the risk of unintended consequences on market liquidity.In other words, in plain English, this new rule is a big deal because it's part of the biggest changes to the Treasury market we've seen in years. It could really change how people trade and work within this market. Everyone is keeping an eye on the exact language of the rule because it will play a key role in shaping the future of trading in government securities. The goal is to make trading more open and stable, but there's a bit of worry about whether this might make it harder to buy and sell quickly, which could shake things up for everyone involved.US SEC set to adopt Treasury market dealer rule as part of market overhaul | ReutersIn my column this week, I explore the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning in enhancing transfer pricing tax transparency. By way of very brief background, transfer pricing refers to the pricing of goods, services, and intellectual property when these are exchanged between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliated companies within the same multinational enterprise. For example, if the Coca-Cola Company owns a subsidiary in Country A that develops the secret recipe for Coca-Cola and another subsidiary in Country B that manufactures the drink, the price set for transferring the recipe (an intangible asset) from Country A to Country B is subject to transfer pricing regulations. This practice is crucial for determining the income and expenses of each entity, thereby affecting the taxable income reported in different countries with different tax rates. Transfer pricing is closely regulated by tax authorities worldwide to prevent tax avoidance, ensuring that transactions between related parties are conducted at arm's length—that is, under conditions and prices that would apply if the entities were unrelated. The complexity of transfer pricing lies in its need for meticulous documentation and compliance with international guidelines, such as those set by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), to justify the prices set for these internal transactions. In other words, using the above Coca-Cola example, ideally acting as Coke I would want to shift income from a high-tax country to a lower-tax country. One way to do that would be to “charge” the subsidiary that manufactures the soda a very high cost for the recipe, assuming I want to move income out of the manufacturing country by way of expensing the cost of the recipe. There are myriad issues to be concerned about when related entities are setting prices for things like intangible assets which are very hard to place a real world market value on–there is always the risk of shenanigans. Transfer pricing, a critical yet contentious aspect of global taxation, is prone to manipulation as multinationals navigate the complexities of international tax law. I argue for the adoption of an open-source, public-facing AI model that can offer consistent and reliable valuations, providing a safe harbor for compliant taxpayers.AI's prowess lies in its ability to simulate market conditions and assign value to transfers between controlled entities, including intangible assets. This technology promises to bridge the gap where no market repository exists, offering a novel approach to assessing arm's-length transactions. The significance of precise valuation is underscored in transfer pricing, where the crux of compliance hinges on mutual understanding between taxpayers and regulators regarding valuation factors.By analyzing vast datasets and applying sophisticated algorithms, AI can deliver precise, consistent valuations with reduced administrative burdens. Such an approach not only fosters transparency but also mitigates the risk of non-compliance and associated penalties. As I emphasize, this is a critical juncture for regulators to incentivize adoption through the provision of benefits, alongside the traditional enforcement measures.The complexity of international transfer pricing regulations has escalated following initiatives like the OECD's base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) project. This backdrop makes the case for AI even stronger, as it aligns with efforts to combat tax avoidance and ensure that income correlates with the economic activities generating it. AI models, if properly developed and utilized, could revolutionize the practice by making compliance more manageable and equitable, particularly for developing countries.Looking ahead, the integration of AI into the tax domain appears inevitable. The challenge lies in who will dominate the development and application of these models. With strategic investment, AI tools could be made universally accessible, dramatically reducing compliance costs and promoting tax justice. This vision for the future leverages AI to encourage transparent compliance, potentially reshaping international trade and taxation for the better.Using AI Would Provide Greater Transfer Pricing Tax Transparency Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Portugal is one of the most vulnerable countries in Europe to climate change. Straddling the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic regions, it's part of a climate change hot spot. Some of the biggest fuels are shrubs. One study found that shrubland covers 1.6 million hectares in Portugal—about 18 percent of the nation's land area. And those shrubs are gaining ground. That's because, for decades, people have been moving out of rural communities such as the one Tommy Ferreira lives in. Most leave to pursue better-paying jobs in the cities or in wealthier European Union countries. Portugal has lost 30 percent of its rural population since 1960. The same trend is occurring across the Mediterranean region. Abandoning these farmlands is increasing wildfire risk, according to an Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development report released last spring. When people who work the land leave it, grazing pastures and farm fields become thick with fuels. But these ancient Maronesa cattle can help solve both of these modern-day problems. It was a solution hiding in plain sight. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Portugal is one of the most vulnerable countries in Europe to climate change. Straddling the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic regions, it's part of a climate change hot spot. Some of the biggest fuels are shrubs. One study found that shrubland covers 1.6 million hectares in Portugal—about 18 percent of the nation's land area. And those shrubs are gaining ground. That's because, for decades, people have been moving out of rural communities such as the one Tommy Ferreira lives in. Most leave to pursue better-paying jobs in the cities or in wealthier European Union countries. Portugal has lost 30 percent of its rural population since 1960. The same trend is occurring across the Mediterranean region. Abandoning these farmlands is increasing wildfire risk, according to an Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development report released last spring. When people who work the land leave it, grazing pastures and farm fields become thick with fuels. But these ancient Maronesa cattle can help solve both of these modern-day problems. It was a solution hiding in plain sight. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Every American has felt the effects of the staggering surge in inflation in the past few years. In the U.S. and other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the rise in inflation strongly relates to increases in transfer payments since 2020, the start of the COVID pandemic.Heritage Distinguished Fellow in Economic Thought Dr. Robert Barro has researched this significant inflation spike, and his conclusions may surprise you. Through a conceptual framework based on the government's intertemporal budget constraint, we can see that the inflation surge is a way to “pay for” part of added government spending by depreciating the real value of public debt. In this framework, more spending triggers more inflation, but higher initial debt and longer debt duration mean lower inflation. This can explain recent inflation rates in 21 economies (20 non-European countries and the Euro area considered as an aggregate). The U.S. is not an outlier, with inflation and the spending surge both moderately above average.The bottom line? Recent inflation surges were triggered by the surges in government spending – i.e., expanded government caused inflation. Learn more about how big government makes your everyday expenses more costly as Dr. Barro joins Heritage Executive Vice President Derrick Morgan. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: International tax policy as a potential cause area, published by Tax Geek on January 24, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. This is more of an exploratory post where I try to share some of my thoughts and experience working in international tax. Thanks in particular to David Nash for his encouragement and help in reviewing my drafts. Summary International tax rules govern how taxing rights are allocated between countries. International tax policy is likely to be an impactful cause area: Not only is there a significant amount of tax revenue at stake, there is a broader indirect impact as international tax rules can constrain domestic tax policies. International tax rules tend to be relatively sticky, persisting for decades. In recent years, as international tax has gotten increasingly political, there may also be broader foreign policy implications. Yet international tax seems to be relatively neglected. Domestic tax issues tend to be more politicised, possibly because they affect voters more directly. International tax can be highly technical and rather opaque. Tractability depends on how you identify the "problem": In my view, a problem is that the development of international tax policy is dominated by relatively wealthy countries (particularly the US), who focus too heavily on their own national interest. While I doubt this broad problem can ever be fully "solved", I believe individuals can still play a significant role in mitigating it. Problem International tax policy plays a key role in determining how much companies are taxed and where. This in turn affects the level of tax revenue different countries get. The development of international tax policy is dominated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which is made up of relatively wealthy countries. The US also plays a key role in international tax policy.[1] I believe that many people currently working in international tax policy focus too heavily on their national interest over the global interest. The problems here are not ones I think we can hope to fully "solve", as the problems stem from the underlying power dynamics between developed and developing countries and the natural incentives for government officials to prioritize their own country. However, international tax policy could still be a worthwhile area to consider working in, because it seems to be a relatively neglected space where individuals can have a surprisingly large impact in mitigating these problems. Background What is international tax policy? In broad terms, international tax policy governs how taxing rights are allocated between countries as well as matters of tax administration such as information sharing and dispute resolution. Countries enter into bilateral tax treaties that aim to prevent double taxation (i.e. when two or more countries try to tax the same income) without creating opportunities for tax avoidance or evasion. In recent years, there has also been a focus on multilateral tax projects, which may or may not result in a formal tax treaty. Bilateral DTAs A bilateral double tax agreement (DTA) is a tax treaty entered into by two countries. When a person/entity resident in one country earns income from another country, both countries may attempt to tax the same income. Such double taxation would inhibit cross-border investment and trade, so countries enter into bilateral DTAs to prevent this. Depending on the circumstances, DTAs will allocate taxing rights over the income to either: the residence country - where the person/entity earning the income lives or is managed; or the source country - where the income is earned. In very broad terms, in a treaty negotiation, developed countries generally want to increase the residence country's taxing rights, because they tend to have wealthy resident...

An Ennis GP believes online health-related misinformation is partly to blame for unhealthy living practices in Ireland. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's 'Health at a Glance' report has found that the Irish life expectancy of 82.4 years is 2.1 above the OECD average. However, room for improvement has been noted in the area "avoidable mortality", with the number of deaths per 100,000 in Ireland found to be above that of many EU nations. Ennis-based general practitioner Dr Maura Finn says when seeking health advice, people should listen to experts instead of relying on potentially inaccurate online information.

Show notes and Transcript At long last it has happened. Andrew Bridgen MP (Reclaim Party) secured a debate on excess deaths in the UK Parliament.  Nearly twenty requests were turned down but Andrew simply would not give up.  His courage and determination to find out the truth won in the end.  Andrew gave a 25 minute presentation of all the data and facts which show a shocking rise in excess deaths since the covid jab rollout.  The fact that many people have died after receiving an injection appears to be the very reason every government wants total silence on this issue.  As you watch Andrew speak, be inspired to speak truth in the circles you find yourself in.  Use the information in the speech to arm yourself with the facts.  We now await a much longer 3 hour debate on excess deaths which Andrew is requesting. *This episode contains a background of the debate, the full speech by Andrew Bridgen MP, his message afterwards to the supporters gathered outside in Parliament Square and Peter catches a few words with the man himself. Andrew Bridgen  Member of Parliament for North West Leicestershire since 2010https://www.reclaimparty.co.uk/andrew-bridgen  Some Key Points Made During the Speech... - Ambulance calls for life-threatening emergencies ranged from a steady 2,000 calls per day until the vaccine rollout, from then it rose to 2,500 daily and calls have stayed at this level since.   - The surveillance systems designed to spot a safety problem have all flashed red, but no one's looking. - Payments for Personal Independent Payments (PIP) for people who have developed a disability and cannot work, have rocketed with the vaccine rollout and have continued to rise ever since. - The trial data showed that one in eight hundred injected people had a serious adverse event, meaning the risk of this was twice as high than the chance of preventing a Covid hospitalisation. - There were just over 14,000 excess deaths in the under 65-year-olds, before vaccination, from April 2020 to the end of March 2021. However, since that time there have been over 21,000 excess deaths in this age group alone. - There were nearly two extra deaths a day in the second half of 2021 among 15 – 19-year-old males,  but potentially even more if those referred to the coroner were fully included. Recorded 20.10.23 *Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast. Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20  To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more... https://heartsofoak.org/connect/ Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... https://heartsofoak.org/shop/ Please subscribe, like and share!   Subscribe now Transcript (Hearts of Oak) Hello, Hearts of Oak. Today we are here with Andrew Bridgen at a debate in Parliament, the first debate in this Parliament, on excess deaths. There's been very little debates, very little discussions on vaccine harms here. Of course, this is the issue that Andrew Bridgen MP was thrown out of the Conservative Party, the Tories, for beginning to raise the issue of vaccine harms and now raising the issue of excess deaths was simply is not discussed in this place. I've seen discussion in other parts of the world, especially Germany, with the AFD. But Andrew Bridgen has made this the hill that he will fight and die on. And he has been thrown out of the Conservative Party. He's lost that position he had for many years. Andrew Bridgen, of course, is one of the original Brexiteers, well known to any of us involved in the Brexit movement, in the UKIP movement. And Andrew has been fearless. He's one of those strange beasts in Westminster. He is led by conviction. He is led by courage and led by a desire to do what is right. And he had no desire to climb up the greasy pole. He's traditionally been a backbencher. So has stood his ground, kept his position as a lowly MP and not wanted to rise to the ministerial level, because that gives him the freedom to discuss what he wants. He's not held, he's not restricted by government restrictions, but he can say what he thinks and do what is right for his constituents, for those who vote for him, and realise that he is the servant of the people and he is not the servant of the government. So today there will be a debate led by Andrew Bridgen, I assume he will be one of maybe very few, one of one, who will actually speak on this. I'm really curious to see. I've seen a couple of Conservative, MPs who have touched on this, who have spoken a little bit about this, sometimes on GB News, but they have not gone as far as Andrew Bridgen. And Andrew Bridgen has gone this far. He has lost his job over it, and he doesn't care, because this is the right thing to do when a jab when an experimental vaccine, so-called vaccine, was rolled out and everyone was coerced and more or less forced to take it. Andrew was in that, he also took it, now regrets that and wants to keep raising the alarm on the ongoing effects of this and of course to challenge this government overreach that wants to force this upon everyone. This of course is a conservative government supposedly that stands up for freedom of speech, personal responsibility, rights, and yet all those traditional understandings of a conservative party have been completely upended and is no longer a party of freedom and liberty but is now a party of coercion and control. A number of MPs I assume will come in and speak after Andrew will present his position on excess deaths and ask the question, why is this? It seems to correlate to the rollout of the jab. You and I know that. We've seen the data. Andrew will be careful in how he puts it forward. He will use parliamentary language. He's skilled enough in this chamber to know what to say, what not to say, what connects with those in the chamber, and to win them over. Because ultimately, politics is about the art of persuasion. It is about winning the public over. And today, it is not necessarily the public is winning over, although you will watch the debate in a few moments, but actually is winning over MPs. And that also is crucial. Whatever you think, we still have 650 individuals and many of us mistrust absolutely, many of us detest. Many of us have had a traditional understanding of politics where there was a level of trust with our institutions and that included those in the building behind me. That is gone. I think for all of us, that is completely gone. And to have an individual who is a champion on the issue of curtailing that government overreach, asking questions, following the money, saying, was this just a push by big pharma for profits? Was this something darker? There are a whole load of areas we can go into, but Andrew has, wisely stayed within the areas he can understand. He has read papers, he has, understood them and he has presented those and I think he has been extremely wise on how far he has gone on this because it is a case of winning people over. That's what we have faced, all of us, over the last three years of winning friends, family, colleagues, connections over to persuade them that this is a dangerous experiment on not only the UK population but on the world population. We have a police car. I hope they don't want to arrest Andrew before his debate. I don't think even our government would do that, would they? Anyway, I will let you watch the debate, watch Andrew speaking, and then after I will try and catch up with a number of the people who have been here to support Andrew. I saw, Mike Yeadon earlier heading into the debate and I saw Matt Le Tissier earlier, I saw Fiona Hines earlier, I saw a big group of people who are here to support Andrew as he speaks truth and to let him know that he is not alone because it must feel very alone in that chamber. No one to back you, no one to support you and you feel as though you are a lonely voice crying out in the wilderness and yet. Many people have come to show Andrew that there are many people behind him who are indebted to him for actually speaking truth in this place and are standing with him shoulder-to-shoulder. So we'll hopefully talk to a few of those people after the debate. (Andrew Bridgen MP) Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. We've experienced more excess deaths since July 2021, than the whole of 2020. Unlike the pandemic, however, these deaths are not disproportionately of the old. In other words, the excessive deaths are striking down people in the prime of life. But no one seems to care. I fear history will not judge this House kindly. Worse still, in a country supposedly committed to free and frank exchange of views, it appears that no one cares that no one cares. Well, I care, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I credit those members here in attendance today who also care. And I'd also like to thank the Honourable Member for Lincoln for his support, and I'm, sorry that he couldn't attend today's debate. It's taken a lot of effort and more than 20 rejections to be allowed to raise this topic, But at last we're here to discuss the number of people dying. Nothing could be more serious. Numerous countries are currently gripped in a period of unexpected mortality, and no one wants to talk about it. It's quite normal for death numbers to fluctuate up and down by chance alone, but what we're seeing here is a pattern, repeated across countries, and the rise has not let up. I'll give way to my Honourable Gentleman.  (Phillip Davies MP) I'm very grateful and can I commend him for the tenacious way he's battled on this particular, issue. I certainly admire him for that. I just wonder where he found the media was in all of this, because of course during the Covid pandemic, every day, the media, particularly the BBC, couldn't wait to tell us how many people had died in that particular day without any context of those figures whatsoever. But they seem to have gone strangely quiet over these excess deaths now. (Andrew Bridgen MP) I thank the gentleman for his intervention. He's absolutely right. The media have let the British public down badly. There will be a full press pack going out to all media outlets following my speech with all the evidence to back up all the claims I'll make in that speech. But I don't doubt there'll be no mention of it in the mainstream media. You might think that a debate about excess deaths is going to be full of numbers. This speech does not have that many numbers because most of the important numbers have been kept hidden. Other data has been oddly presented in a distorted way, and concerned people seeking to highlight important findings and ask questions have found themselves inexplicably under attack. Before debating excess deaths, it's important to understand how excess death is determined. To understand if there is an excess, by definition you need to estimate how many deaths it would have been expected. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development used 2015-2019 as a baseline, and the Government's Office of Health Disparities and Improvement used its 2015-2019 baseline modelled to allow for ageing, and I've used that data here. Unforgivably, the Office of National Statistics have included deaths in 2021 as part of their baseline calculation for expected deaths, as if there was anything normal about the deaths in 2021. Exaggerating the number of deaths expected, the number of excess can be minimized. Why would the ONS want to do that? There's just too much that we don't know and it's not good enough Mr. Deputy Speaker. The ONS published promptly each week the number of deaths that were registered and while this is commendable it's not the data point that really matters. There's a total failure to collect, never mind publish, data on deaths that are referred for investigation to the coroner. Why does this matter? A referral means that it can be many months and, given the backlog, many years before a death is formally registered. Needing to investigate the cause of a death is fair enough. Failing to record when the death happened is not. Because of this problem, we actually have no idea how many people actually died in 2021. Even now, the problem is greatest for the younger age groups, where there's, a higher proportion of deaths are investigated. This date of failure is unacceptable. It must change. There's nothing in a coroner's report that can bring anyone back from the dead and those deaths should be reported. The youngest age groups are important not only because they should have their whole lives ahead of them. If there is a new cause of excess mortality across the board, it would not be noticed so much in the older cohorts because the extra deaths would be drowned out amongst the expected deaths. However, in the youngest cohorts, that is not the case. There were nearly two extra deaths a day in the second half of 2021 among 15 to 19 year old males, but potentially even more if those referred to the coroner were fully included. In a judicial review of the decision to vaccinate yet younger children, the ONS refused in court to give anonymised details about these deaths. They, admitted that the data they were withholding was statistically significant and I quote they said, the ONS recognises that more work could be undertaken to examine the mortality rates of young people in 2021 and intends to do so once more reliable data are available. How many more extra deaths in 15 to 19 year olds would it take to trigger such work? Surely the ONS should be desperately keen to investigate deaths in young men. Why else have an independent body charged with examining mortality data? Surely the ONS has a responsibility to collect data from the coroners to produce timely information? Let's move on to old people, because most deaths in the old are registered promptly and we do have a better feel for how many older people are dying. Deaths from dementia and Alzheimer's show what we ought to expect. There was a period of high mortality coinciding with COVID and lockdowns, but ever since there have been fewer deaths than expected. After a period of high mortality, we expect, and historically have seen, a period of low mortality because those who have sadly died cannot die again. Those whose deaths were slightly premature because of COVID and lockdowns, died earlier than they otherwise would have. This principle should hold true for every cause of death and every age group, but that's not what we're seeing. Even for the over 85-year-olds, according to the Office of Health Improvement and Disparities, there were 8,000 excess deaths, 4% above the expected levels, for the 12 months starting in July 2020. That includes all of the autumn 2020 wave of COVID, when we had tiering, the second lockdown, and it includes all of the first COVID winter. However, for the year starting July 2022, there have been over 18,000 excess deaths in this age group, 9% above expected levels, more than twice as many in a period when there should have been a deficit. And when deaths from diseases previously associated with old age were actually fewer than expected. Mr Deputy Speaker, I have raised my concerns around NG163 and the use of midazolam and morphine, which may have caused and may still be causing premature deaths in the vulnerable, but that is sadly a debate for another day. There were just over 14,000 excess deaths in the under 65-year-olds before vaccination from April 2020 to the end of March 2021. However, since that time there have been over 21,000 excess deaths, ignoring the registration delay problem, the majority, 58% of these deaths, were not attributed to Covid. We turned society upside down before vaccination for fear of excess deaths from Covid. Today we have substantially more excess deaths, and in younger people, and there's complete and eerie silence, Mr Deputy, Speaker. The evidence is unequivocal. There was a clear stepwise increase in mortality following the vaccine rollout. There was a reprieve in the winter of 2021-22 because there were fewer than expected respiratory deaths, but otherwise the excess has been incessantly at this high level. Ambulance data for England provides another clue. Ambulance calls for life-threatening emergencies were running at a steady 2,000 calls per day until the vaccine rollout. From then it rose to 2,500 daily and calls have stayed at this level since. The surveillance systems designed to spot a safety problem have all flashed red but no one's looking. Claims for personal independence payments for people who've developed a disability and cannot work rocketed with the vaccine rollout and it's, continued to rise ever since. The same was seen in the USA, also started with the vaccine rollout, not with Covid. A study to determine the vaccination status of a sample of such claimants, would be relatively quick and inexpensive to perform, yet nobody seems interested in ascertaining this vital information. Officials have chosen to turn a blind eye to this disturbing, irrefutable and frightening data, much like Nelson did, but for far less honourable reasons. He would be ashamed of us, Mr Deputy Speaker. Furthermore, data that has been used to sing the praises of the vaccines is deeply flawed. Only one COVID-related death was prevented in each of the initial major trials that led to authorisation of the vaccines and that is taking their data entirely at face value, whereas a growing number of inconsistencies and anomalies suggest we ought not to do this. Extrapolating from that means that between 15,000 and 20,000 people had to be injected to prevent a single death from COVID. To prevent a single COVID hospitalisation, over 1,500 people needed to be injected. The trial data showed that 1 in 800 injected people had a serious adverse event, meaning they were hospitalised or had a life-changing or life-threatening condition. The risk of this was twice as high as the chance of preventing a COVID hospitalisation. We're harming 1 in 800 people to supposedly save 1 in 20,000. This is madness. The strongest claims have too often been based on modelling carried out on the basis of flawed assumptions. Where observational studies have been carried out, researchers will correct, for age and comorbidities to make the vaccines look better. However, they never correct for socio-economic or ethnic differences that would make the vaccines look worse. This matters. For example, claims of high mortality in less vaccinated regions in the United States, took no account of the fact that this was the case before the vaccines were rolled out. That is why studies that claim to show the vaccines prevented Covid deaths also showed a marked effect of them preventing non-Covid deaths. The prevention of non-Covid deaths is always a statistical illusion and claims of preventing Covid deaths should not be assumed when that illusion has not been corrected for. And when it is corrected for, the claims of efficacy for the vaccines vanish with it. COVID disproportionately killed people from ethnic minorities and lower socioeconomic groups. During the 2020, during the pandemic, the deaths among the most deprived were up by 23%, compared to 17% for the least deprived. However, since 2022, the pattern has reversed, with 5% excess mortality amongst the most deprived, compared to 7% among the least deprived. These deaths are being caused by something different. In 2020, the excess was highest in the oldest cohorts and there were fewer than expected deaths amongst the younger age groups. But since 2022, the 50 to 64 year old cohort has had the highest excess mortality. Even the youngest age groups are now seeing substantial excess, with a 9% excess in the under 50s since 2022 compared to 5% now in the over 75 group. Despite London being a younger region, the excess in London is only 3%, whereas it is higher in every more heavily vaccinated region of the UK. It should be noted that London is famously the least vaccinated region in the UK by some margin. Studies comparing regions on a larger scale show the same thing. There are studies from the Netherlands, Germany and the whole world each showing that the highest mortality after vaccination was seen in the most heavily vaccinated regions. So we need to ask, what are people dying of? Since 2022, there has been 11% excess in ischemic heart disease deaths and a 16% excess in heart failure deaths. In meantime, cancer deaths, only 1% above expected levels, which is further evidence that it is not simply, some other factor that affects deaths across the board, such as a failing to account for an aging population or a failing NHS. In fact, the excess itself has a seasonality with a peak in the winter months. The fact it returns to baseline levels in summer is a further indication that this is not due to some statistical error or an ageing population alone. Dr Clare Craig from the Heart Group first highlighted a stepwise increase in cardiac arrest calls after the vaccine rollout in May 2021 and Heart have repeatedly raised concerns about the increase in cardiac deaths and they have every reason to be concerned. Four participants in the vaccine group of the Pfizer trial died from cardiac arrest compared to only one in the placebo group. Overall there were 21 deaths in the vaccine group up to March 2021 compared to 17 in the placebo group. And there are serious anomalies about the reporting of the deaths within this trial, with the deaths in the vaccine group taking much longer to report than those in the placebo group. And that's highly suggestive, Mr Deputy Speaker, of a significant bias in what was supposed to be a blinded trial. An Israeli study clearly showed an increase in cardiac hospital attendances, among 18 to 39 year olds that correlated with vaccination, not with COVID. There have now been several postmortem studies demonstrating a causal link between vaccination and coronary artery disease leading to death up to four months after the last dose. And we need to remember that the safety trial was cut short to only two months. So there's no evidence of any vaccine safety beyond that point. The decision to unblind the trials after two months and vaccinate the placebo group is nothing less than a public health scandal. Everyone involved failed in their duty to the truth. But no one cares, Mr Deputy Speaker. The one place that can help us understand exactly what caused this is Australia. Australia had almost no Covid when vaccines were first introduced, making them the perfect control group. The state of South Australia had only a thousand cases of Covid across its whole population by December 2021, before Omicron arrived. What was the impact of vaccination there? For 15 to 44 year olds there was historically 1,300 emergency cardiac presentations a month. With vaccine rollout in the under 50s this rocketed to 2,172 cases in November 2021 in this age group alone, a 67% more than usual. Overall there were 17,900 South Australians who had a cardiac emergency in 2021, compared to only 13,250 in 2018, a 35% increase. It is clearly the vaccine that must be the number one suspect in this and it cannot be dismissed as just a coincidence. Australian mortality overall has increased from early 2021 and the increase is due to cardiac deaths. These excess deaths are not due to an ageing population because there are fewer deaths in the diseases of old age. These deaths are not an effect of COVID because they've happened in places where COVID have not reached and they're not due to low statin prescriptions or under-treated hypertension, as Chris Whitty would suggest, because prescriptions did not change and in any effect would have taken many years and been very small. The prime suspect must be something that was introduced to the population as a whole, something novel. The prime hypothesis must be the experimental COVID-19 vaccines. The ONS published a data set of deaths by vaccinated and unvaccinated. At first glance, it appears to show that the vaccines are safe and effective. However, there were several huge problems with how they presented that data. One was that for the first three-week period after injection, the ONS claimed, there were only a tiny number of deaths. The number the ONS would normally predict to occur in a single week. Where were the deaths from the usual causes? When this was raised, the ONS claimed that the sickest people did not get vaccinated, and therefore people who were taking the vaccination were self-selecting for those least likely to die. Not only is this not the case in the real world, with even hospices heavily vaccinating their residents, but the ONS's own data showed that the proportion of sickest people was equal in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. This inevitably raises serious questions about the ONS's data presentation. There were so many problems with the methodology used by the ONS that the Statistics Regulator agreed that the ONS data could not be used to assess vaccine efficacy or safety. That tells you something about the ONS. Consequently, Hart asked the UK Health Security Agency to provide the data they had on people who had died and therefore needed to be removed from their vaccination dataset. This request has been repeatedly refused, with excuses given, including the false claim that anonymising this data will be equivalent to creating it even though there is case law that, anonymization is not considered creation of new data. Mr Deputy Speaker I believe if this data was released it would be damning. That so many lives have been saved by mass vaccination that any amount of harm, suffering and death caused by the vaccines is a price worth paying. They're delusional, Mr Deputy Speaker. The claim of 20 million lives saved is based on now discredited models which assume that Covid waves do not peak without intervention. There have been numerous waves globally that now demonstrate that is not the case, and it was also based on there having been more than half a million lives saved in the UK. That's more than the worst-case scenario predicted at the beginning of the pandemic. For the claim to have been true, the rate at which Covid killed people would have to have taken off dramatically at the beginning of 2021 in the absence of vaccination. This is ludicrous and it bears no relationship to the truth. In the real world, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea had a mortality rate of 400 deaths per million up to the summer of 2022, after they were first hit with Omicron. So how does that compare with the Wuhan strain? France and Europe as a whole had a mortality rate of under 400 deaths per million up to the summer of 2020. Australia, New Zealand and South Korea were all heavily vaccinated before infection. So tell me, where was the benefit? The UK had just over 800 deaths per million up to the summer of 2020. So twice as much. But we know that Omicron is half as deadly as the Wuhan variant. The death rates per million are the same before and after vaccination. So where was the benefits of vaccination? The regulators have failed in their duty to protect the public. They've allowed these novel products to skip crucial safety testing by letting them be described as vaccines. They've failed to insist on safety testing being done in the years since the first temporary emergency authorisation. Even now, no one can tell you how much spike protein is produced on vaccination and for how long. Yet another example of where there is no data for me to share with the House. And when it comes to properly recording deaths due to vaccination, the system's broken. Not a single doctor registered a death from a rare brain clot before doctors in Scandinavia forced the issue and the MHRA acknowledged the problem. Only then did these deaths start to be certified by doctors in the UK. It turns out that doctors were waiting for permission from the regulator and the regulators were waiting to be alerted by the doctors. This is a lethal circularity. Furthermore, coroners have written Regulation 28 reports highlighting deaths from vaccination to prevent further deaths, yet the MHRA said in a response to an FOI that they had not received any of them. The system we have in place is clearly not functioning to protect the public. The regulators also missed the fact that the Pfizer trial, in the Pfizer trial, the vaccine was made for the trial participants in a highly controlled environment, in stark contrast to the manufacturing process used for the public rollout, which was based on a completely different technology. And just over 200 participants were given the same product that was given to the public. But not only was the data from these people never compared to those in the trial for efficacy and safety, But the MHRA have admitted that they dropped the requirement to provide the data. That means there was never a trial on the Pfizer product that was actually rolled out to the public. And that product has never been compared to the product that was actually trialled. The vaccine mass production processes use vats of Escherichia coli and present a risk of contamination with DNA from the bacteria as well as bacterial cell walls which can, cause dangerous reactions. This is not theoretical, Mr Deputy Speaker, this is now sound evidence that has been replicated by several labs across the world, and the mRNA vaccines were contaminated by DNA which far exceeded the usual permissible levels. Given that this DNA is enclosed in the lipid nanoparticle delivery system, it is arguable that even the permissible levels have been far too high. These lipid nanoparticles are known to enter every organ of the body, as well as this potentially causing some of the acute adverse reactions seen, there is a serious risk that this foreign bacterial DNA is inserting itself into human DNA. Will anybody investigate? No, they won't. I'll give way on that point.  (Danny Kruger MP) I am conscious that time is tight. I recognise that the hon. Gentleman is making a very powerful case. Does he agree that the Government should be looking at this properly and should commission of review into the excess deaths, partly so that we can reassure our constituents that the case he's making is not in fact valid and that the vaccines have no cause behind these excess deaths. (Andrew Bridgen MP) I thank the Honourable Gentleman for his support on this topic and of course that is what exactly any responsible government should do. I wrote to the Prime Minister on the 7th August 2023 with all the evidence of this but sadly Mr Deputy Speaker I still await a response. What will it take to stop these products? Their complete failure to stop infection was not enough and we all know plenty of vaccinated people who have caught and spread Covid. The, mutation of the virus to a weaker variant, Omicron, that wasn't enough. The increasing evidence of the serious harms to those of us that were vaccinated. That's not enough. And now the cardiac deaths and the deaths of young people is apparently not enough either. It's high time these experimental vaccines were suspended and a full investigation into the harms they've caused initiated. History will be a harsh judge if we don't start using evidence-based medicine. We need to return to basic science, basic ethics immediately, which means listening to all voices and investigating all concerns. In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, the experimental Covid-19 vaccines are not safe and they're not effective. Despite there only being limited interest in the chamber from colleagues, and I'm very grateful for those who have attended, we can see from the public gallery there is considerable public interest. I would implore all members of the House, present and those not. Support calls for a three-hour debate on this important issue. And Mr Deputy Speaker, this might be the first debate on excess deaths in our Parliament. Indeed, it might be the first debate on excess deaths in the world, but very sadly I promise you won't be the last. (Parliament Square Speech Andrew Bridgen MP) But without further ado let's welcome to the stage Mr Andrew Bridgen. Thank you ladies and gentlemen, thank you for coming down here to support the debate today, and thank you for supporting me and the cause. More? I just spoke for 25 minutes. Blood. It's been quite a week. Start of the week, get attacked from behind by a blunt instrument. But what an ending to this week. We have made history today. Nine months, more than 20 refused attempts to get a debate on excess deaths, the first debate on excess deaths in the UK, Parliament, the first proper debate on excess deaths in the world and I promise you, I absolutely promise you, it won't be the last. We will get a three hour debate in the next few weeks now on excess deaths. We've got two democracies under challenge all over the world. We're hanging over and using what we've got to make sure we get our message out there. On Tuesday next week I'm, I'm bringing in a bill, a ten minute rule motion, a bill called the Sovereignty and Referendums Bill. I'm going to put it to the House. That would stop, if we could bring that in, that would stop the WHO power grab of the people of the UK. I've been invited to speak as well next week on Zoom to some African political leaders, to try and persuade them to resist the WHO power grab, because it doesn't matter where we break this, we can break it in the UK, we can break it anywhere else in the world. This is a worldwide problem, an absolute assault on humanity, and we've all got to stick together. I've been an MP for nearly 14 years. I've given a lot of speeches in that chamber. That I was a bit nervous today because I knew there was never going to be a more important, speech I've ever given. I've never been in a more important speech than the one I was giving today. Can't you hear at the back? Turn up the PA. So, here we go. There was never going to be a more important speech than the one I was giving today, and, even after 14 years as an MP I was a little bit nervous standing up. But what really got me was, OK, there wasn't as many MPs in the chamber as I'd liked, but, the public gallery was full and the support from there was absolutely incredible. And they always say the politicians, that place over there, is in the Westminster bubble. We are going to burst the bubble in Westminster. Absolutely. Ultimately, my message to send you away with is that your determination, your cheerfulness, your resilience will deliver us victory. Thank you very much for coming today. (Hearts of Oak) Andrew, we've just been in on the debate on vaccine harms. Tell us about the process, because it's been a long, hard battle, which you talk about in the chamber. (Andrew Bridgen MP) Yeah, I've been putting in since January every week for a backbench business debate. That was refused. I've put in for a Westminster Hall debate on a weekly basis and I've put in for an adjournment debate. Eventually, after nine months and more than 20 rejections, we had the first debate on excess deaths in the UK Parliament. I think it's the first one in the world, but I promise you it won't be the last. I think the dozen or so MPs who attended today's debate, I'm hoping I'll be able to get a get them to sign up that we can have a three-hour debate well before Christmas and then it's going to grow from there because ultimately the data that I imparted in the chamber today, it's all backed up with the science. Every MP is going to be getting a copy of my Hansard speech and the full data pack of all the evidence that backs up everything I've said. There's no excuses now. So this goes to law because it's a no-brainer really to have these conversations because we've all seen excess deaths across Europe. Ask yourself in a democracy why don't they want to have a conversation about anything? I mean, I'm aware that in the Australian Senate four or five senators asked for a debate on excess deaths they ended up having a debate on whether you should have a debate on excess deaths and the consensus of the Australian Senate was they didn't want to have a debate on excess deaths. Well, I mean that's a red flag straight away, isn't it? (Hearts of Oak) Last question, I assume you believe that there are some MPs that can be won over, that public figures have kept quiet a further reputation, which you don't care about and you've walked away from the party. Tell us about those who you think you can possibly win over and then support you publicly on this. (Andrew Bridgen MP) Well certainly some of the ones that were there today, I know of some who weren't there today who will support calling for a much bigger debate on excess deaths. And ultimately it's the pressure of the electorate, the people, and you could see that although the House wasn't very full of members, the public gallery was full and that shows you that public opinion is they want this issue debated, they want to know what's gone on, and it's their right to have it happen. And that will become an irresistible force for politicians. That's how democracy works. (Hearts of Oak) Well, we've just had the debate in Parliament, a debate that I actually, to be honest, didn't think would happen. I thought that it would be stopped and held off. Only one member of 650 MPs in that place was willing to stand up and have this conversation, on vaccine arms as on excess deaths. He spoke for 24 minutes, presented everything in a measured calm manner, no emotion. One of the many things Andrew is great at, that he just lays it out gently, softly, step by step, that he doesn't raise the hyperball that maybe some others will rise to. And he laid it out in 24 minutes. And of course, the government's response is, Well, excess deaths are other factors, lifestyle factors, like smoking, like cholesterol, even fatty foods. So the government are blaming all the excess deaths over a period of a sudden spike in, smoking and a spike in eating fish and chips. That's what the government. Wow. Like ostriches with their heads in the sand. So Andrew presented his figures. The great thing is that we expect now there to be a much longer debate in Parliament. That was a short motion, a short debate, a 30 minute session. Andrew is hopeful that this can now go to a three hour fuller debate and that will be really interesting to see whether that gets tabled and whether it actually does go ahead and I would like to see other MPs backing Andrew and I think the more he speaks the more courage they will get. Andrew is someone with courage, with conviction, with a backbone, with a determination to speak truth and often, that is a rarity across there, it really is, really people want to, keep their heads down, they want to climb up the greasy pole and attain those higher levels of political achievement. So we obviously will watch this, follow Andrew. He is a hero. There's no one else in that Parliament across the way that's a hero like Andrew. And what else? I mean, it's the hill that he's chosen to die on. It's the hill that he has chosen to fight on. It's the hill that he has lost his career in the Conservative Party. And why? Because people are dying and no one is talking about it. What more important issue is there apart from life and death? And if something has been introduced and it's killing people, you need to look at it, you need to address, you need to understand it, to analyse it and then see what you do with that. So we have won here amongst 650. We will follow this and watch this closely as we see this move towards a fuller debate in Parliament and certainly my hope and prayer is that many other MPs stand up and speak, and that this happens across the world. We've seen a debate happening, I know, in the German Parliament with the AfD. I know we've seen debates happening in the Australian Parliament and the One Nation Party with Pauline and Malcolm are doing a fantastic job there. And here is one individual. Obviously, the Reclaim Party is behind Andrew Bridgen. He's a member of that of Lawrence Fox's party. And Andrew will continue to speak. And as he speaks, I believe that we will see ripple effects across the world because the world watches what happens here. This is called the mother of parliament and I believe that as Andrew continues to speak and continues to speak within this chamber that we will see other parliaments around the world address this issue. But this doesn't affect future debt, I mean, the damage is done, the deaths are happening. But at least you have to hold people to account. And for me, this is about justice. It's about honesty. It's about clarity. It is about truth, which is something that's been in short supply over the last couple of years during the COVID tyranny. So keep an eye on this space for Andrew to continue to push this. And when that longer three hour debate does happen, we will be here reporting on us and reporting on those who have come out to support Andrew today. Matt Le Tissier was here, Le God was in the chamber watching Andrew, Mike Yeadon was here speaking, Fiona Hine has done a great job in pulling people together. There is massive support and I think the parliamentarians in the government want individuals like Andrew Bridgton to feel they are alone, but they are not alone. They are backed by masses of the population and today was a small subset, of that, but Andrew knows he is not alone. Make sure and post this video, let others see what has happened here in the UK Parliament and have hope, because I think often that's also in short supply and I think what has happened today is a day of hope, is a day of reckoning and is a day of moving forward to actually presenting the truth and holding people to account.

Tau muaj ib cov kev teeb txheeb tshiab qhia tias Australia yog lub teb chaws zum 4 uas nplua nuj tshaj plaws hauv ntiaj teb, tej neeg nplua nuj tseem khwv tau nyiaj ntau tshaj tej neeg khwv tau nyiaj tsawg tshaj plaws txog 4 npaug, thiab tej neeg tau txais nyiaj pab cuam ntawm tsoom fwv (Income support payment) tseem yog cov txom nyem tshaj plaws ntawm cov teb chaws koom tes lagluam thiab txhim kho (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - OECD). Tej koom haum pab cuam tej neeg txom nyem thiaj nqua hu kom tsoom fwv Albanese pab tej nyiaj no kom ntau tuaj ntxiv rau tej neeg txom nyem rau nws tsoom fwv tej nyiaj puag xyoo tom ntej no.

On the latest episode of Weaver: Beyond the Numbers, host Vince Houk, Partner-in-Charge of International Tax Services at Weaver, sits down with guest Josh Finfrock, Director of Transfer Pricing Services at Weaver. The two examined the impacts and implications of Brazil's recent legislative change on businesses engaged in cross-border activities. Key Points: Brazil recently adopted the OECD principles for transfer pricing, aligning their regulations with international standards. The new transfer pricing rules in Brazil will be mandatory in 2024 but can be opted into for 2023 if companies choose to do so. The new rules will allow companies to have a uniform method for transfer pricing globally, eliminating mismatches and potential double taxation. The essential shift in international taxation has emerged with Brazil's adoption of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) principles for transfer pricing. Historically, Brazil has stuck to a unique, formulaic approach to transfer pricing, often resulting in double taxation or exposure. However, with the adoption of OECD guidelines, the landscape is rapidly changing. This transition marks one of the most significant changes in the world of transfer pricing in years and holds the potential to reshape cross-border transaction dynamics. How does Brazil's alignment with OECD principles affect businesses? What should companies do to prepare for these changes and make the most of the new landscape? Some main points from the episode included: Understanding the switch from Brazil's unique formulaic approach to transfer pricing to the OECD's arm's length principle. The need for businesses to familiarize themselves with the new rules and implications for their tax preparations and economic analyses. The potential benefits of the new regulations, such as improved alignment with global transfer pricing arrangements and alleviation of double taxation. “The benefit of this is going to be companies can ideally have a uniform method with the rest of their global transfer pricing arrangements, right, where they may not have been able to deduct royalties or service expenses. These kinds of things had mismatches with customs and income tax in Brazil locally. Hopefully, this will allow them to align that better. Those are the kind of things that we need to be thinking about with our clients as well as the operational side of it,” said Finfrock. Josh Finfrock is a seasoned expert in Transfer Pricing, leading the practice at Weaver. His insights are grounded in years of experience navigating the complexities of international tax laws and regulations. Subscribe and listen to future episodes of Beyond the Numbers on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. ©2023

In much of the developed world, waste is out of sight and out of mind. The world generates around 2 billion tons of municipal solid waste annually, with at least 33% of it not managed in an environmentally safe manner, according to a 2018 World Bank report. Though high-income countries only account for 16% of the world's population, they generate about 34% of the world's waste each year. A third of all food produced is wasted and ends up in the garbage can. Plastic waste is another mounting issue: Across the globe, less than 10% of it is recycled, according to the most recent data from 2018 published by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Plastic waste has more than doubled globally since 2000. In our latest, we talk with journalist, and author of "Wasteland: The Dirty Truth About What We Throw Away, Where It Goes, And Why It Matters," Oliver Franklin-Wallis (@olifranklin) and take a deep dive into the global waste crisis. Bio// Oliver Franklin-Wallis is an award-winning magazine journalist, whose writing has appeared in WIRED (where he is a contributing editor), British GQ, The Guardian, The New York Times, The Times Magazine, The Sunday Times Magazine, 1843, and many other publications. He's also the author of "Wasteland: The Dirty Truth About What We Throw Away, Where It Goes, And Why It Matters." ----------------------------------------------------------------- Outro- "The Garbage Man" by Harlem Hamfats Links// + Oliver's website: https://oliverfranklinwallis.com/ Follow Green and Red// +G&R Linktree: ⁠https://linktr.ee/greenandredpodcast⁠ +Our rad website: ⁠https://greenandredpodcast.org/⁠ Support the Green and Red Podcast// +Become a Patron at ⁠https://www.patreon.com/greenredpodcast⁠ +Or make a one time donation here: ⁠https://bit.ly/DonateGandR⁠ This is a Green and Red Podcast (@PodcastGreenRed) production. Produced by Bob (@bobbuzzanco) and Scott (@sparki1969). “Green and Red Blues" by Moody. Editing by Isaac.

Welcome to 2ZQ Hot takes, where we discuss issues both big and small; I am your host TVHTim Kirk and today I'll be talking about AI.2 More about Ai abnd the 'cusp' of global cultural change.The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) said the occupations at highest risk from AI-driven automation were highly skilled jobs and represented about 27% of employment across its 38 member countries, which include the UK, Japan, Germany, the US, Australia and Canada and that highly skilled occupations were most exposed to AI-powered automation, such as workers in the fields of law, culture, science, engineering and business.The OECD also outlined risks associated with the likelihood of AI's growing influence over the workplace. Oh. Goodie. Get bonus content on Patreon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Titus 3:1-2 The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has 38 member countries. It regularly runs surveys to discover the level of trust that people have in their government. In the UK, that level is about 40 per cent, lower than in the majority of countries. This result is not that surprising. People are endlessly critical of our political leaders and deeply cynical about the political process. However, I am sure that when Paul wrote to Titus, the situation in Crete was a great deal worse. And, to add to that, Cretans were notoriously turbulent and quarrelsome, inclined to challenge every kind of authority. So Paul's words would have come as a huge challenge to them. In Romans 13:1-7, Paul gave his fundamental reason for encouraging obedience to the government. He believed that their authority came from God and, so, rebelling against the government was a form of rebellion against God himself. Paul reasoned that the authorities were feared by people who were doing wrong, not those who were doing right, so believers should have no reason to be afraid of them. Indeed, he argued that if the people did what was right, the authorities would honour them. The authorities, he said, were God's servants and sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do wrong. For all of these reasons, Paul was convinced Christians should live as good, responsible citizens and pay their taxes willingly. These challenging words should cause us to reflect on our own relationship with the authorities in our own society. Paul would certainly urge us to live as good citizens and to give thanks for those who give us security and an ordered society. I don't believe that Paul was suggesting we should simply accept everything the government does but, as good and responsible citizens, we should find ways of encouraging and supporting those who bear such heavy responsibilities. QUESTION In what ways should we show our support for our government? PRAYER Father God, I pray for those who govern our country. Grant them your wisdom and peace, and help me always to serve you well as a citizen. Amen

From the BBC World Service: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development says that whilst there are threats from Artificial Intelligence, Governments around the world are acting fast. Plus, BBC’s Luke Wilson reports on drinks giant Diageo’s split with Sean Coombes – aka Diddy. And finally, is the cost of travelling stopping some Muslims travel to Mecca? We hear from the BBC correspondent in Cairo, Sally Nabil.

From the BBC World Service: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development says that whilst there are threats from Artificial Intelligence, Governments around the world are acting fast. Plus, BBC’s Luke Wilson reports on drinks giant Diageo’s split with Sean Coombes – aka Diddy. And finally, is the cost of travelling stopping some Muslims travel to Mecca? We hear from the BBC correspondent in Cairo, Sally Nabil.

On this day, June 22nd, in legal history, the Supreme Court handed down their decision in Escobedo v. Illinois, which held that suspects have the right to an attorney when they are questioned by the police.The decision established that defendants have the right to counsel even before they are formally charged with a crime. The impact of the Escobedo decision was overshadowed by the subsequent Miranda decision two years later. Although later court decisions limited the application of Escobedo, the Supreme Court never directly overruled it.The case involved Danny Escobedo, who was initially arrested for the murder of his brother-in-law but released after consulting his lawyer. When he was rearrested ten days later, his repeated requests to contact his attorney were denied. Escobedo's lawyer arrived at the police station and requested to see him but was refused permission. The police informed Escobedo that his alleged co-conspirator had confessed and implicated him. Escobedo demanded to confront his co-conspirator and, in that confrontation, made an incriminating statement. Based on this admission, the police obtained a written confession, leading to Escobedo's conviction for murder.The Supreme Court's decision in Escobedo came shortly after the Massiah v. United States case, which ruled that the right to counsel attaches once an individual has been indicted. In Escobedo, the Court reached a similar result with a 5-4 decision. Justice Arthur Goldberg, writing for the majority, stated that Escobedo's right to counsel did not depend on a formal indictment. The Court overturned Escobedo's conviction, declaring that his right to counsel had been violated. Goldberg laid out several benchmarks for determining when a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated.Many believed that the Escobedo decision would establish a broad right to counsel whenever a suspect is in police custody. However, two years later, the Supreme Court shifted direction in Miranda v. Arizona. The Miranda decision utilized the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and held that statements obtained during incommunicado interrogation without full warning of constitutional rights were inadmissible. Miranda focused on whether a defendant was in custody or significantly deprived of freedom, rather than the "focus of investigation" test used in Escobedo.Perkins Coie, a law firm based in Seattle, is postponing the start dates for some of its first-year associates to January 2024, following a trend among law firms facing a slowdown in demand. In a memo from managing partner Bill Malley, the firm explained that the move is a response to challenging market conditions affecting various areas of legal practice. The deferred associates, with the exception of those in the intellectual property practice, will now begin on January 16, 2024. Those joining the intellectual property group will start on September 18, 2023. To assist the deferred associates, Perkins Coie is providing a $15,000 stipend to cover their living expenses. Other law firms, such as Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, Cooley LLP, and Fenwick & West, have also delayed the start dates for their incoming associates due to the sluggish demand for legal services. Some firms have implemented cost-cutting measures, including layoffs of attorneys and staff. The legal industry as a whole is navigating through the challenges posed by reduced dealmaking and a slowdown in the demand for legal work.Perkins Coie Delays Starts for Some First-Year Associates (1)A new analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation suggests that the United States could face significant revenue losses if it does not enact a 15% global minimum tax alongside the rest of the world. A global minimum tax is a proposal aimed at imposing a minimum tax rate on corporate income worldwide through international agreement. In October 2021, 136 countries and jurisdictions endorsed a proposal by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for a two-pillar solution to address tax avoidance practices and the digitalization of the global economy. The first pillar would redistribute over $125 billion in corporate profits annually for taxation in jurisdictions where the profits were earned, while the second pillar would generate an estimated $150 billion by applying a 15% minimum tax rate to corporate income. Implementation of the global corporate minimum tax requires each country to incorporate the rate and rules into its tax system. The United States, as a party to the agreement, needs to adopt the two-pillar plan and impose a 15% minimum corporate tax that aligns with the OECD model. The recently enacted Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 in the US introduced a 15% alternative minimum corporate tax, which brings the US closer to the OECD tax structure. However, further amendments may be required to ensure conformity with the OECD tax rules. If the US corporate minimum tax does not meet the standards of the global corporate minimum tax, Congress would need to pass amendments to the Internal Revenue Code, and bilateral and international tax treaties would also require modifications. Treaties in the US necessitate approval by the Senate and the president.If the US fails to act while other countries implement the minimum tax in 2025, tax revenue in the US could decline by $122 billion over the next decade. On the other hand, if the US does enact the tax, its tax revenue could still decline by $56.5 billion. These estimates are based on a comparison with a baseline scenario where neither the US nor the rest of the world enacts the minimum tax. The analysis predicts that the US would lose revenue when other countries tax the foreign-source income of controlled foreign corporations and when other countries tax US income. However, depending on how companies respond to the new tax regimes and shift their profits, there are scenarios where the US could gain as much as $224 billion in revenue over the next decade. Conversely, the US could lose up to $174.5 billion if multinational corporations allocate their low-taxed profits to jurisdictions applying domestic minimum top-up taxes. The report emphasizes the level of uncertainty in predicting the outcomes and does not represent a likely outcome. The analysis was requested by Senate Finance Committee ranking member Mike Crapo and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, who criticized the Biden administration's handling of the global minimum tax negotiations. The report comes as Republicans remain skeptical of the international agreement signed by nearly 140 countries to establish a minimum tax rate of 15% for multinationals worldwide. In response, the Ways and Means Committee introduced a bill to impose retaliatory taxes on the US income of foreign investors and businesses in countries that impose minimum tax rules on US multinationals.US Could Lose Billions Under Global Minimum Tax, JCT Report SaysJCT: U.S. Stands to Lose Revenue Under OECD Tax DealLegislation that would ban employee noncompete agreements in New York is heading to Governor Kathy Hochul's desk for review. The measure, similar to a recent law enacted in Minnesota, would apply to contracts signed or modified after it becomes effective. Noncompete agreements, which currently cover about one-fifth of the US workforce, have faced criticism from federal and state policymakers. The Federal Trade Commission is in the process of finalizing a nationwide ban on such contracts, and the National Labor Relations Board's general counsel has stated that noncompetes violate federal labor law in most situations. While business groups argue that noncompetes are necessary to protect trade secrets, policymakers and worker rights advocates argue that they are often misused and hinder low-wage workers from seeking better job opportunities. The New York legislation would still allow employment contracts that protect trade secrets and confidential client information, as long as they don't unreasonably restrict competition. The bill has already passed the state Senate and Assembly.New York Ban on Employee Noncompetes Heads to Hochul's DeskThe U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is set to argue in federal court for a preliminary injunction to temporarily block Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard, the videogame maker. The FTC wants the deal to be put on hold until its in-house court rules on whether the merger would harm competition in the video game industry. The agency is concerned that without intervention, the combined company could alter Activision's operations and give Microsoft access to sensitive business information. The administrative hearing within the FTC is scheduled to begin on August 2. Microsoft has asserted that a temporary block could jeopardize the deal, but courts typically do not consider real-world consequences in their decisions.FTC to argue Microsoft's deal to buy Activision should be paused | ReutersA group of Credit Suisse AT1 bondholders has filed a class action lawsuit accusing three former CEOs of the Swiss bank, Thomas Gottstein, Tidjane Thiam, and Brady Dougan, along with other executives, of being responsible for the bank's collapse. The lawsuit, filed in a New York court, alleges that the executives engaged in excessively risky trades to achieve short-term returns and bonuses, disregarding sound risk management and compliance with the law. The collapse of Credit Suisse led to the decision by Switzerland's regulator to render around $18 billion of the bank's Additional Tier 1 (AT1) debt worthless, which sparked numerous lawsuits. The class action suit highlights the loss of trust in the bank and the culture of prioritizing profits and self-dealing over responsible risk management.Three former Credit Suisse CEOs accused of excessive risk-taking -court filing | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Teresa Kittridge has spent much of her life serving rural people across the country as a leader in the private, public and nonprofit sectors as well as serving in elected office in Minnesota. She founded the nonprofit organization 100 Rural Women to inspire leadership and create connections among rural women. We talk with Teresa about the organization; what has changed in rural policy work; the definition of rural; and what she heard from women in all 87 counties of Minnesota. About Teresa Teresa Kittridge, founder of 100 Rural Women, lives in Marcell Township in Northern Minnesota.  She has spent much of her life serving rural people across the country, with a career that includes executive level leadership in the private, public and nonprofit sectors as well as serving in elected office. 100 Rural Women models her life's work, by serving women in rural places to inspire leadership, create connections, networks, support civic engagement and encourage leadership. The first twenty years of her career were spent serving as an officer of the Minnesota House of Representatives. Following her time in the legislature, she built the Washington D.C. office of RUPRI (Rural Policy Research Institute) and served as Director of National Policy Programs. She has over a decade of experience in leading and building national and international businesses, as a publishing executive for MN based Coughlan Companies and then as founder and president of MNREM (Minnesota Renewable Energy Marketplace)  a non-profit organization. Kittridge returned to RUPRI in 2014 as Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. She is currently building the national non-partisan organization, 100 Rural Women. Teresa is an active civic and community volunteer. She is an elected Trustee and Secretary of the Board for the Bigfork Valley Hospital Northern Itasca Hospital District, serves on Marcell Township Business Loan committee and on committees of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Rural Innovation.  Kittridge served as Board Chair and as a Director on the Waconia School Board. She holds a M.A. in Organizational Leadership and a B.A. in Business Administration.

Welcome to The Times of Israel's Daily Briefing, your 15-minute audio update on what's happening in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world, from Sunday through Thursday. Environment reporter Sue Surkes and culture editor Jessica Steinberg join host Jacob Magid for Monday's podcast. Some 300,000 Israelis lost power Friday at the peak of a heatwave that reached over 40°C (104°F) in many parts of the country. Surkes discusses how the outages exposed Israel's ill-preparedness for extreme weather caused by climate change. Relatedly, she shares the bleak findings of a recent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report that found Israel faired very poorly on a range of environmental issues compared to other countries in the 38-member bloc. Surkes discusses how Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government is working to close those gaps, comparing its performance to that of the previous unity government. Steinberg provides an update on the concert schedule for the summer in Israel while also recapping last week's performance from British pop star Robbie Williams. She shares which artists have come under pressure from the anti-Israel Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement to cancel their scheduled appearances and why some have been unmoved by the noise. To close, Steinberg reviews “My Happy Ending,” an Israeli-written new film featuring Andie MacDowell. The Hollywood star plays actress Julia Roth, who strides into a small oncology day clinic outside London for chemotherapy, and while seeking privacy and anonymity given her familiar face, ends up meeting fellow patients who make her rethink her own life goals. Discussed articles include: Power outages spark heated accusations as grid fails to meet sweltering demand Government greenlights 2 gas-fired power stations to meet electricity demands OECD slaps Israel with poor marks on environmental performance in new report Robbie Williams at Tel Aviv show: ‘You have something incredibly f*cking special here' Robbie Williams bonds with Noga Erez ahead of Tel Aviv show Andie MacDowell stars in Israeli film about life choices, based on Cameri play Subscribe to The Times of Israel Daily Briefing on iTunes, Spotify, PlayerFM, Google Play, or wherever you get your podcasts. IMAGE: Firefighting trucks near the scene of a blaze in central Israel on June 2, 2023. (Fire and Rescue Service)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stephen Sackur is in Berlin for a special interview with Niels Annen, Germany's State Secretary for Economic Co-operation. For decades Germany built its economic power on Russian energy and trade with China – that has left Germany looking vulnerable. So what is the new strategy? (Photo: Niels Annen, State Secretary for Economic Co-operation)

This week on The Learning Curve, Gerard and guest cohost Dr. Jay Greene interview Andreas Schleicher, Director for Education and Skills, and Special Advisor on Education Policy to the Secretary-General at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in Paris, on understanding the links among education, skills, and innovation for students worldwide. Mr. Schleicher […]

Children aren't cheap. The cost of living crisis is pushing parents to the edge of their finances, worrying about paying for essentials like food, clothing and, for many, childcare. We'll take a look at Chile, which according to data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), is one of the lowest ranking when it comes to public spending on early childhood education. Natalia Aránguiz lives in Chile and has two children- she speaks to Leanna Byrne about her rising costs. Ann Hedgepeth, chief of policy and advocacy at non-profit organisation Child Care Aware of America, says the national average price of childcare was around $10,600 per year. She says one of the main factors is getting the right staff. Seven thousand miles away in Kampala in Uganda, one childcare business owner is facing the same issues. Manuela Mulondo is chief executive and founder of Cradle, a childcare, lactation and education centre. She says people never think about childcare companies when they are talking about price rises, but says it's very expensive to look after children. Presenter/producer: Leanna Byrne (Image: Child and parent. Credit: PA)

➡️ Like The Podcast? Leave A Rating: https://ratethispodcast.com/successstory   ➡️ About The Guest⁣ Julia Boorstin is CNBC's Senior Media & Tech Correspondent based at the network's Los Angeles Bureau.  She covers media with a special focus on the intersection of media and technology. Boorstin also plays a key role in CNBC's bi-coastal tech-focused program “TechCheck” (M-F, 11AM-12PM ET/8AM-9AM PT) delivering reporting, analysis, and interviews around streaming, social, and the convergence of media and technology.  She joined CNBC in May 2006 as a general assignment reporter and in 2007 moved to Los Angeles to cover media. In 2013, Boorstin created and launched the CNBC Disruptor 50, an annual list she oversees, highlighting the private companies transforming the economy and challenging companies in established industries. Additionally, she reported a documentary on the future of television for the network, “Stay Tuned…The Future of TV.” She also helped launch CNBC's ‘Closing the Gap' initiative covering the people and companies closing gender gaps, and leads CNBC's coverage of studies on this topic. Her book called, “WHEN WOMEN LEAD: What they achieve, Why they succeed, and How we can learn from them,” is a groundbreaking, deeply reported work from CNBC's Julia Boorstin that reveals the key commonalities and characteristics that help top female leaders thrive as they innovate, grow businesses, and navigate crises—an essential resource for anyone in the workplace. Boorstin joined CNBC from Fortune magazine where she was a business writer and reporter since 2000. During that time, she was also a contributor to “Street Life,” a live market wrap-up segment on CNN Headline News. In 2003, 2004, and 2006, The Journalist and Financial Reporting newsletter named Boorstin to the “TJFR 30 under 30” list of the most promising business journalists under 30 years old. She has also worked for the State Department's delegation to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and for Vice President Gore's domestic policy office. ➡️ Show Links https://www.instagram.com/juliaboorstin/  https://twitter.com/JBoorstin/  https://www.linkedin.com/in/juliaboorstin/   ➡️ Podcast Sponsors HUBSPOT - https://hubspot.com/ ➡️ Talking Points⁣ 00:00 - Intro 03:44 - Julia Boorstin's career, upbringing, and other factors which affected and motivated her to write her book 08:55 - Where are we standing today in terms of equity? 12:13 - Unpacking why some women received VC funding and others don't 17:45 - Julia Boorstin's thoughts on having more female-founded VC funds 19:13 - How to be successful raising capital 22:03 - Interesting success stories that Julia has covered over her career 27:45 - Leadership lessons and strategies 35:22 - Community building & examples from Julia's book 40:00 - How do we move towards equity within the next few years? 50:34 - Where can people connect with Julia Boorstin? 51:58 - The biggest challenge Julia has overcome in her personal life 53:23 - What keeps Julia Boorstin up at night? 53:55 - The most impactful person in Julia Boorstin's life 55:15 - Julia Boorstin's book or podcast recommendations 56:04 - What would Julia Boorstin tell her 20-year-old self? 57:00 - What does success mean to Julia Boorstin? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices