International economic organisation
POPULARITY
Categories
196 episodes with OECD
72 episodes with OECD
99 episodes with OECD
76 episodes with OECD
42 episodes with OECD
24 episodes with OECD
31 episodes with OECD
29 episodes with OECD
24 episodes with OECD
32 episodes with OECD
18 episodes with OECD
21 episodes with OECD
23 episodes with OECD
29 episodes with OECD
18 episodes with OECD
12 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
![[KBS] ???? ?????](https://ivyfm.s3.amazonaws.com/i320/996250.jpg)
14 episodes with OECD
11 episodes with OECD
13 episodes with OECD
10 episodes with OECD
9 episodes with OECD
9 episodes with OECD
10 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
14 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
20 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
12 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
10 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
12 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
9 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
26 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
14 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
76 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
10 episodes with OECD
2 episodes with OECD
2 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
7 episodes with OECD
8 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
10 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
2 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
2 episodes with OECD
4 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
5 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
6 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
3 episodes with OECD
בישראל, עם שיעור הילודה הגבוה ביותר במדינות ה-OECD, השאלה "מתי תביאו ילדים?" היא כמעט אוטומטית. אבל מה קורה כשהתשובה היא "אני לא בטוחה שאני בכלל רוצה"? הפעם מתארחות חמוטל זימברג ונועה חלפון, עובדות סוציאליות שהקימו את גרופל'ה- בית לקבוצות נשים שמתלבטות לגבי הבחירה באל-הורות. הן חושפות את המורכבות מאחורי בחירה שנחשבת כמעט לטאבו בחברה הישראלית - בין ההשוואה, הלחץ והציפיות החברתיות לבין הרצון לבחירה אישית אמיתית.
A major new report from the OECD has revealed shocking insights into how screen use is shaping children's lives—and not for the better. In this episode, Justin and Kylie Coulson unpack the disturbing statistics, explain the real-world impact of screens on kids’ mental health, relationships, and development, and offer practical, age-specific strategies to help parents take back control. From toddlers to teens, this is the digital wake-up call every parent needs. KEY POINTS Startling Stats: Aussie teens average 7 hours of screen time per day. 12% use screens more than 80 hours per week. 70% of 10-year-olds “own” smartphones. 60% of Australian girls report severe distress from cyberbullying. 4 Uncomfortable Truths for Parents: Real-world problems predict digital problems. Kids in distress offline turn to screens for escape. Most parents are fighting the wrong war. The issue is less about screen time and more about content and connection. It’s a bi-directional trap. Poor mental health drives screen addiction, and screen use worsens mental health. Parental hypocrisy matters. Kids don’t listen if we model the very behaviour we criticise. The Hidden Costs of Screen Use: Depression, anxiety, loneliness, academic decline, sleep issues, and family conflict all rise with excessive and unsupervised screen use. The Real Solution: Strong offline relationships, autonomy-supportive parenting, and a focus on values, not just rules or limits. QUOTE OF THE EPISODE “You can’t lift someone up if you’re underneath them. You’ve got to stand on high ground.” — Justin Coulson RESOURCES MENTIONED OECD Report: How’s Life for Children in the Digital Age? The Parenting Revolution by Justin Coulson Happy Families Webinars and Courses Nonviolent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg Past episodes on sextortion and gaming ACTION STEPS FOR PARENTS For Kids Aged 0–7: Be present during screen time or avoid it altogether. Keep devices out of bedrooms—model this yourself. Avoid gamified apps and addictive content. Prioritise simple, slow-paced shows (e.g., Bluey). For Kids Aged 8–12: Create a co-designed family media plan. Prioritise what they’re consuming, not just how much. Invest in offline activities and friendships—nature, play, and sport are protective. For Teens: Shift from control to collaboration. Support autonomy and solve problems with them. Address root issues—mental health, loneliness, stress—before tackling screen habits. Model healthy screen use. Walk your talk, or your words will fall flat. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
遺產稅、房產贈與、信託到底怎麼搞懂？ 《十樂不設
In this episode of The Research Files podcast, Teacher editor Jo Earp chats to Jenni Ingram, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, about the OECD's Unlocking High-Quality Teaching report. Alongside insights from 150 schools in 50 countries, it explores 20 practices that teachers draw on to achieve 5 key teaching goals. Host: Jo Earp Guest: Professor Jenni Ingram
Rangatahi advocates and mental health workers are calling for urgent action to reduce New Zealand's alarmingly high suicide rates among Maori and Pasifika youth. A just-released UNICEF report ranked New Zealand 32nd out of 36 countries for overall child wellbeing, and 36th out of 36 OECD and EU countries for its suicide rate. Maori News Reporter Emma Andrews has the details.
Absage von Putin und Trump an Teilnahme zu Ukraine-Verhandlungen in Istanbul, NATO-Außenminister treffen sich im türkischen Antalya, Finanzminister Klingbeil erläutert im Bundestag Pläne für Wirtschaftswachstum, Expertenrat für Klimafragen legt Prüfbericht vor, Holocaust-Überlebende Margot Friedländer auf dem jüdischen Friedhof Berlin-Weißensee beigesetzt, OECD untersucht Digitalverhalten von Jugendlichen aus 38 Ländern, Eishockey-WM, Das Wetter Hinweis: Der Beitrag zum Thema Eishockey-WM darf aus rechtlichen Gründen nicht auf tagesschau.de gezeigt werden.
Absage von Putin und Trump an Teilnahme zu Ukraine-Verhandlungen in Istanbul, NATO-Außenminister treffen sich im türkischen Antalya, Finanzminister Klingbeil erläutert im Bundestag Pläne für Wirtschaftswachstum, Expertenrat für Klimafragen legt Prüfbericht vor, Holocaust-Überlebende Margot Friedländer auf dem jüdischen Friedhof Berlin-Weißensee beigesetzt, OECD untersucht Digitalverhalten von Jugendlichen aus 38 Ländern, Eishockey-WM, Das Wetter Hinweis: Der Beitrag zum Thema Eishockey-WM darf aus rechtlichen Gründen nicht auf tagesschau.de gezeigt werden.
Employers are struggling to find skilled workers. How can we fix the job skills gap? Apprenticeships are touted as one possible solution. They combine on-the-job training with classroom learning, allowing employers to recruit and train people to meet their skills needs. According to the OECD, there are huge opportunities for apprenticeships to expand into a wider range of sectors. But many countries are failing to take full advantage of them. In this episode of Top Class, Doug Walton, an Associate at research and consulting firm Abt Global, and Dr. Bryan Coyne from the Faculty of Business & Social Sciences at Atlantic Technological University in Sligo, Ireland, discuss how people and businesses can make the most of apprenticeships. Learn more by reading the latest research shared at the 2025 joint Cedefop-OECD symposium: New fields for apprenticeship: https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/events/2025-joint-cedefop-oecd-symposium-new-fields-apprenticeship
US President Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order aimed at lowering drug prices, demanding that drug companies offer prices for prescription drugs comparable to those in other developed nations.美国总统唐纳德·特朗普周一签署了一项旨在降低药价的行政命令，要求制药公司提供与其他发达国家相当的处方药价格。"The Order instructs the Administration to communicate price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to establish that America, the largest purchaser and funder of prescription drugs in the world, gets the best deal," the order said.该行政令称：“该命令指示政府向制药商传达价格目标，以确保美国作为全球最大的处方药购买国和资助国，获得最优惠的价格。”Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will establish a mechanism through which American patients can buy their drugs directly from manufacturers who sell to Americans at a "Most-Favored-Nation" price, bypassing middlemen, it continued.该命令还表示，美国卫生与公众服务部部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪将建立一种机制，使美国患者可以直接从以“最惠国”价格向美国消费者销售药品的制造商处购买药品，从而绕过中间商。"We are going to pay the lowest price there is in the world. Whoever is paying the lowest price, that's the price that we're going to get," Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday, before departing for the Middle East.“我们将支付世界上最低的价格。谁支付最低的价格，我们就支付谁的价格，”特朗普周一在白宫对记者表示，随后启程前往中东。Trump said drugmakers would have to lower their US prices to the level paid by other developed countries, or could face investigation.特朗普表示，制药商必须将其在美国的药品价格降低到其他发达国家支付的水平，否则可能面临调查。According to recent data, the prices Americans pay for brand-name drugs are more than three times the price other OECD nations pay, even after accounting for discounts manufacturers provide in the United States, the order noted.该命令指出，根据最近的数据，即使考虑到制造商在美国提供的折扣，美国人支付的品牌药价格仍是其他经合组织(OECD)国家支付价格的三倍以上。OECD stands for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, with the majority of its members being developed nations.经合组织(OECD)是经济合作与发展组织的缩写，其大多数成员国是发达国家。The United States has less than five percent of the world's population, yet funds roughly 75 percent of global pharmaceutical profits, according to the order.该命令指出，美国人口不到世界人口的5%，却贡献了全球约75%的制药利润。executive ordern.行政命令；总统令pharmaceutical/ˌfɑːrməˈsuːtɪkl/adj.制药的；药品的most-favored-nation (MFN)最惠国待遇Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)经济合作与发展组织
Ahead of the Budget we got the same message we got from a barefoot, jandal wearing Chippy on day one of his post summer break. More debt. Borrow more and spend more. Name an issue, pick a portfolio, any portfolio, where Labour has not criticised the government for cuts and promised to restore spending to pre-Willis levels. The latest example is pay parity, but that is just the latest in a long and growing list of items on the wishlist. In case they didn't get the memo, Kiwis voted for cuts at the last election. If we're doing our bit, the government ought to do its bit. That's the politics of it. The economics have been up for debate. Net core crown debt has more than doubled on pre-Covid to $182 billion or 42.6% of GDP. Like our tourist arrivals, debt has unfortunately not returned to normal pre-Covid levels. Some of this is inflation but much of it is not. There's spending that went too far and got baked in. A couple of things to note. Yes, government debt is low compared to other OECD countries. But, the credit ratings agencies are telling us we must get back to surplus and start paying it down. If you risk a credit downgrade, then borrowing costs you more. We're already spending more financing debt than we do on defence, Police, Corrections, Justice, and Customs combined. And remember, we're the shakey isles with huge exposure to trade. We need headroom to borrow big if shit hits the fan. Ask any economist or the person who runs your household and they'll tell you borrowing for everyday spending is a bad idea. We've been doing that year, after year, after year, and Willis is actually still doing more of it. If that's enough to convince you on debt, here's the kicker. The real doozy. Private debt. We have student loans and business debt and houses. We love houses. Loads of mortgages, and the problem is how much we owe and who we owe it to. Household debt is 120% of GDP and higher than America, Spain, Germany, Ireland a bunch of other countries. What's worse, much of it is owed to foreign banks. We don't have enough savings to lend to ourselves. This makes us more vulnerable as a country, keeps Reserve Bankers awake at night, explains why Nicola Willis's nickers are always in a twist when it comes to getting the government's debt levels down. Willis could, and many argue, should go harder and faster as she's still spending more than Grant Robertson. But one thing you can be sure of, because it has come from Hipkins mouth repeatedly this week, is that spending and therefore borrowing would be higher right now had they be given a third term.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
For far too long, healthcare performance indicators have centred on inputs—like funding and infrastructure—or processes—like hospital admissions or waiting times—without adequately capturing the experiences and outcomes of the people receiving care. The OECD's PaRIS Survey upends that dynamic, shining a light on how older people with chronic conditions feel about their care, how healthy they really feel, and how their everyday lives are affected. The latest figures are now out: with over 107K patients in over 1800 primary care practices across 19 countries, the survey highlights that living longer doesn't always mean living better, especially if care experiences are poor and chronic conditions aren't managed in a way that reflects patients needs. In this episode of the Behind the Numbers podcast, our host Ashley Ward is joined by OECD Health Economists Frederico Guanais and Michael van den Berg to explore the work behind this innovative survey. Learn how policymakers, healthcare providers, and patients themselves can use these data to drive more people-centred healthcare. Host Ashley Ward, Director's Office Advisor and Communications Manager (OECD Statistics and Data Directorate) Guests Frederico Guanais, Deputy Head of Health Division (OECD Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs) Michael van den Berg, Senior Health Economist (OECD Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs) To learn more about policy area: https://www.oecd.org/en/about/programmes/patient-reported-indicator-surveys-paris.html To learn more about the OECD, our global reach, and how to join us, go to www.oecd.org/en/about.html To keep up with latest at the OECD, visit www.oecd.org/ Get the latest OECD content delivered directly to your inbox! Subscribe to our newsletters: www.oecd.org/en/about/newsletters.html
+Hinweis, um Konfusion zu vermeiden: Wir haben nach dem ersten, erfolglosen Wahlgang von Friedrich Merz und vor seinem zweiten, erfolgreichen Anlauf aufgenommen. Außerdem kleine Korrektur: Martynas Verwandter Miguel Messmacher Linartas war stellvertretender Finanzminister von Mexiko+In dieser Folge besprechen wir mit unserem Gast Martyna Linartas ihr neues Buch "Unverdiente Ungleichheit. Wie der Weg aus der Erbengesellschaft gelingen kann." Wir folgen dem Verlauf des Buchs und klappern die Themen Folgen von Ungleichheit und Erbengesellschaft, die Geschichte der Erbschaftsteuer, die Narrative der Wirtschaftseliten und zuletzt die "Wunderwaffe" Grunderbe ab.Anschließend bespricht das Netzwerk-Team den Koalitionsvertrag und das politische Personal und gibt den üblichen Überblick über spannende Neuigkeiten aus den Arbeitsbereichen rund um Steuern und Abgaben auf Löhne, Besteureung von Digitalkonzernen und unsere Bürgerdebatte (www.steuerdebatte.info).(01:57) Buchbesprechung mit Martyna(1:14:19) Koalitionspersonal und der Koalitionsvertrag(1:22:31) OECD vergleicht Steuern und Abgaben auf Löhne(1:28:54) Kampf gegen Steueroasen und Unterbesteuerung von Digitalkonzernen(1:39:25) Update zur Bürgerdebatte gerechte Steuern und FinanzenUnverdiente Ungleichheit. Wie der Weg aus der Erbengesellschaft gelingen kann. Rowohlt 2025: https://www.rowohlt.de/buch/martyna-linartas-unverdiente-ungleichheit-9783498007355Martynas Webseite ungleichheit.info mit tollen Ressourcen und Grafiken zum Thema Ungleichheit.Martynas Doktorarbeit: https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/45276Links und Quellen:Historiker Marc Buggeln im Podcast Steuergerechtigkeit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vpe8I_u8QQ&list=PL7f8-Y_jfAcaffny0yaDKjz4hDy4-7RMo&index=10Unsere Übersicht zum Koalitionsvertrag: www.netzwerk-steuergerechtigkeit.de/koalition2025Der OECD-Vergleich "Taxing Wages": https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/taxing-wages-2025_b3a95829-en.htmlPolitico zum Zaudern der EU bzgl. Mindeststeuern: https://www.politico.eu/article/global-minimum-tax-donald-trump-eu-countries-deal/Ermittlungen wegen Gewinnverschiebungen in eine Gewerbesteueroase: https://www.wiwo.de/unternehmen/banken/steuerhinterziehung-nun-sollen-die-naechsten-steueroasen-profiteure-vor-gericht/100125259.html Hier könnt ihr unseren Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.netzwerk-steuergerechtigkeit.de/mitmachen/newsletter/Und hier geht's zu Spenden und Fördermitgliedschaften: https://www.netzwerk-steuergerechtigkeit.de/unterstuetzen/Wir freuen uns über jegliches Feedback an info@netzwerk-steuergerechtigkeit.de oder per Nachricht an einen unserer Kanäle auf den sozialen Medien: https://linktr.ee/netzwerksteuergerechtigkeitCredit für Musik und Soundeffekte:Intro: Stefan Vidal Schneider, stefanvidalschneider.deOutro: The Pace of Africa von Purple Planet Music
Send us a textTax Notes chief correspondent Stephanie Soong discusses how the Trump administration's tax priorities have been shaping negotiations on the OECD's two-pillar project. Listen to our previous episodes on the two pillars here:Former U.S. OECD Negotiator Talks Trump's Global Tax ImpactMaking Progress: Updates on the OECD Tax Reform PlanAn Update on Pillar 1 Amount BPillar 1 Amount B: Disagreements and DividesFor more coverage, read the following in Tax Notes:EU Tax Observatory Urges More Talks on Pillar 2 Tax IncentivesStakeholders Back Mix of Pillar 2 Tweaks to Reassure the U.S.EU Presidency Lays Out Options to Address U.S. Pillar 2 ConcernsGILTI's Coexistence With OECD Global Minimum Tax Is U.S. PriorityFollow us on X:Stephanie Soong: @StephanieSoongDavid Stewart: @TaxStewTax Notes: @TaxNotes***CreditsHost: David D. StewartExecutive Producers: Jasper B. Smith, Paige JonesProducers: Jordan Parrish, Peyton RhodesAudio Engineers: Jordan Parrish, Peyton Rhodes
Watch the Q&A session here: https://youtu.be/G_SpC_BV4jAIn the late nineteenth century, Joseph Chamberlain transformed Birmingham with municipal enterprise and urban improvement, but in the last few years, local authorities have been facing serious financial difficulties, and some of the largest, such as Birmingham, have faced the equivalent of bankruptcy. This lecture will ask why British cities have lost the confident civic pride of the Victorian era and are now struggling to provide basic services from a limited financial base. Most importantly: What can be done to regenerate British towns and cities? This lecture was recorded by Martin Daunton on 24th April 2025 at Barnard's Inn Hall, London.Professor Martin Daunton is Visiting Gresham Professor of Economic History.He is a British academic and historian. He was Master of Trinity Hall, Cambridge, between 2004 and 2014. He is Emeritus Professor of Economic History at the University of Cambridge.He has written two books on the history of taxation in Britain – Trusting Leviathan and Just Taxes, and co-edited with colleagues in Berlin a volume of essays on the political economy of public finance in leading OECD countries since the 1970s. His book The Economic Government of the World, 1933 to 2023 was published by Allen Lane in 2023.The transcript of the lecture is available from the Gresham College website: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/watch-now/cities-bankruptGresham College has offered free public lectures for over 400 years, thanks to the generosity of our supporters. There are currently over 2,500 lectures free to access. We believe that everyone should have the opportunity to learn from some of the greatest minds. To support Gresham's mission, please consider making a donation: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/get-involved/support-us/make-donation/donate-todayWebsite: https://gresham.ac.ukTwitter: https://twitter.com/greshamcollegeFacebook: https://facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: https://instagram.com/greshamcollegeSupport Us: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/get-involved/support-us/make-donation/donate-todaySupport the show
Pisa-tulosten käyrät osoittavat alaspäin ja julkisen keskustelun perusteella suomalainen koulu on syvässä kriisissä. Vastauksia koulun tilaan ja osaamistason laskuun haetaan esimerkiksi älylaitteiden käytöstä, inkluusiosta, poikien pärjäämisestä, koulujen eriytymisestä ja oppilaiden hyvinvoinnista. Mitä suomalaisissa kouluissa ja yhteiskunnassa on tapahtunut, kun oppimistulokset ovat jatkuvasti laskussa? Miten heikentynyt lukutaito vaikuttaa nuorten tulevaisuuteen? Millainen on koulu, jossa eri taustoista tulevat oppilaat oppisivat tarvittavat taidot ja voisivat hyvin? Keskustelemassa yliopistonlehtori Lauri Hietajärvi ja professori Markku Jahnukainen Helsingin yliopistosta sekä yliopistonlehtori Leea Lakka Turun yliopistosta. Juontajana on MTV Uutisten toimittaja Katariina Kähkönen. Keskustelun aikana näytetyt materiaalit: Video: ”Kuudesluokkalaiset kertovat, mitä muuttaisivat koulussa” https://www.mtv.fi/lyhyet/5b75e0abc5d1313ab764/video-kuudesluokkalaiset-kertovat-mita-muuttaisivat-koulussa Suomen Pisa-tulosten keskiarvot vuosina 2000–2022 (OECD): https://oecdch.art/a40de1dbaf/C096 Tehostettua ja erityistä tukea saaneiden peruskoululaisten osuus kaikista peruskoululaisista 2002–2023 (Tilastokeskus): https://stat.fi/julkaisu/cln0eg9gfoaai0cut0zyvjce5#ingress-cm06d3mf55q0s07vumv5e1pnx Podcast on nauhoitettu Tiedekulmassa Helsingin yliopiston ja MTV Uutisten järjestämässä Mitä suomalaisessa koulussa tapahtuu? -tilaisuudessa 6.5.2025.
Encouraging investment is a top priority in this month's upcoming Budget, according to new reports. Prime Minister Chris Luxon says it'll come from a small number of measures, including more funding for a R&D tax credit. BusinessNZ Advocacy Director Catherine Beard says New Zealand is currently one of the hardest OECD countries to invest in. She says the new agency, Invest New Zealand, is one positive measure. "Much more like a concierge sort of treatment for investors - and they will have the door flung open and the welcome mat put out." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Kia ora,Welcome to Thursday's Economy Watch where we follow the economic events and trends that affect Aotearoa/New Zealand.I'm David Chaston and this is the international edition from Interest.co.nz.And today we lead with news the global economy's track is no clearer today.First up, the US central bank kept it key policy rate unchanged at 4.50% for a third consecutive meeting in line with expectations. They are keeping their wait-and-see approach but watching to see if the tariff taxes drive up inflation and slow economic growth. They say they still see expanded economic activity despite signs net exports are volatile. So far they haven't seen the jobless rate move "and labour market conditions remain solid". But they are seeing elevated inflation, and they foresee risks of higher unemployment and higher inflation.Equity markets dropped on the release, as did benchmark bond yields. The USD hardly moved however.Earlier, it was reported that US mortgage application volumes jumped +11% last week from the previous week, ending the three consecutive slumps from earlier in the month. The rebound came after there was another small drop in benchmark mortgage rates.Across the Pacific, China's FX reserves rose in April to their highest level in more than six months (in USD).And staying in China, their central bank said it will cut the reserve requirement ratio (RRR) by -50 basis points, injecting about ¥1 tln in liquidity into their domestic economy. But the cut won't come until May 15 and will then be the first RRR cut in 2025. They also said they will lower the rate on seven-day reverse repurchase agreements by 10 basis points to 1.40%, effective tomorrow, Thursday, May 8. This is the first cut to this key policy rate since September 2024 and could lead to cuts in market and other regulatory rates.And despite denials on both sides, both China and the US said they will meet in Switzerland to discuss stuff on Saturday. Interestingly, the Chinese side will be represented by their lead person for China-US economic and trade affairs, but the US side won't be led by its USTR, but the more senior Treasury Secretary.In the EU there were no surprises in their March retail sales volume data, holding flat again.However, there was positive data out of Germany, where factory orders rose +3.6% in March from February, well above market expectations of a +1.3% gain and putting behind it February's lackluster result. It was their strongest increase since December, with broad-based gains across sectors.Meanwhile, Poland cut its official interest rate by -50 bps to 5.25%. Falling inflation and weak economic activity prompted the move, but it was unusual because they have elections due on May 18 and they are battling Russian election interference.In Australia, regulator ASIC said it has imposed additional conditions on Macquarie Bank's Australian financial services licence after multiple and significant compliance failures – some going undetected for many years and one for a decade.And it seems Peter Dutton wasn't the only party leader to lose his seat at the weekend election. The Greens leader will too. In fact, like the Liberals, the Greens vote fell rather sharply at that election.Separately, the OECD said the global trade in fake goods reached almost US$½ tln in the latest data they have - which is for 2021, posing risks to consumer safety and compromising intellectual property. The breakdown in trade cooperation since won't have lessened the problem.The UST 10yr yield was at 4.28%, down -3 bps from this time yesterday before the US Fed announcement, then slipped slightly further to 4.27%.The price of gold will start today at US$3384/oz, and down -US30 from yesterday.Oil prices are firmer today, down -50 USc at just on US$58.50/bbl in the US and the international Brent price is now just under US$61.50/bbl.The Kiwi dollar is now at 59.7 USc, down -30 bps from yesterday at this time. Against the Aussie we are unchanged at 92½ AUc. Against the euro we are down -20 bps at 52.6 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today just on 67.8 and down -20 bps.The bitcoin price starts today at US$96,653 and up +2.2% from yesterday. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been modest at +/- 1.6%.You can find links to the articles mentioned today in our show notes.You can get more news affecting the economy in New Zealand from interest.co.nz.Kia ora. I'm David Chaston. And we will do this again tomorrow.
IN THIS EPISODE: In this episode, host Denise Silber sits down with Michaela Horvathova, co-founder of Beyond Education and alumna of Harvard's Graduate School of Education, to explore how building an innovative company demands more than a great product — it requires becoming a thought leader. Michaela's journey is as global as it is inspiring. Despite not fitting into the traditional school system in Slovakia, Michaela earned a tennis scholarship to the U.S., graduated from Harvard, advised the Prime Minister of Slovakia, and co-founded a bold edtech startup helping schools adapt to the age of AI. Her company, Beyond Education, was selected for and completed the Harvard Alumni Entrepreneurs Accelerator — a zero-equity, virtual program supporting high-potential, Harvard alumni-founded companies. You'll hear how Michaela: Pivoted from policymaking to entrepreneurship for greater impact. Built a company focused on digital assessments and teacher development to help schools evolve with technology. Learned why even small startups must embrace thought leadership to shape their market and build demand. Turned her credibility and conviction into invitations to speak at global education events — and even organized her own summit. Whether you're an entrepreneur, investor, or advisor, this episode unpacks why communication and positioning matter just as much as product — especially when your innovation is ahead of its time. Tune in to learn how a tennis champion turned edtech entrepreneur built a mission-driven company from the ground up — and how the HAE Accelerator helped refine their vision and strategy. GUEST BIO: Michaela Horvathova is the co-founder of Beyond Education, a fast-growing edtech startup now active in over 13 countries. She holds a Master's in Education Policy and Management from Harvard University and has over 12 years of experience in global education reform. Before launching Beyond Education, Michaela worked at the OECD, partnered with organizations like IB and UNICEF, and advised ministries of education across the Czech Republic, South Africa, the Netherlands, and Brazil. As an Advisor to the Prime Minister of Slovakia, she helped shape national education strategy, focusing on competency-based learning. A regular speaker at global conferences, Michaela is passionate about reimagining how schools prepare students for the age of AI. A former professional tennis player, she brings resilience, adaptability, and a growth mindset to her work as an entrepreneur.
Dr. Tara Shine is a climate change expert with over 20 years of experience in climate science, science communication, and policy. Her work has focused on shaping international and national policy to advance equity, gender equality, inclusion, and environmental protection.A seasoned scientific adviser, Tara has worked with a range of influential organisations, including the Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice, the OECD, The Elders, SIDA (Sweden's development agency), the World Bank, Ireland's Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Environmental Protection Agency.For a decade, Tara served as a climate negotiator at the United Nations and contributed as a reviewer to the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C. She is a guest lecturer on undergraduate and postgraduate programmes across Irish universities and sits on the Board of Trustees of the International Institute for Environment and Development. She is also an alumna of Homeward Bound, the global leadership initiative for women in science.Tara holds a BSc in Environmental Science and a PhD in Geography from the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland. Her work in research, policy, and education has spanned countries across Africa, Asia, and Europe. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Dean Baker co-founded CEPR in 1999. His areas of research include housing and macroeconomics, intellectual property, Social Security, Medicare, and European labor markets. His blog, Beat the Press, provides commentary on economic reporting. His analyses have appeared in many major publications, including The Atlantic, The Washington Post, the Financial Times (London), and the New York Daily News. Dean received his BA from Swarthmore College and his PhD in economics from the University of Michigan. Dean has written several books, including Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better Bargain for Working People (with Jared Bernstein, Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2013); The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive (Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2011); Taking Economics Seriously (MIT Press, 2010), which thinks through what we might gain if we took the ideological blinders off of basic economic principles; and False Profits: Recovering from the Bubble Economy (PoliPoint Press, 2010), about what caused — and how to fix — the 2008–2009 economic crisis. In 2009, he wrote Plunder and Blunder: The Rise and Fall of the Bubble Economy (PoliPoint Press), which chronicled the growth and collapse of the stock and housing bubbles and explained how policy blunders and greed led to catastrophic — but completely predictable — market meltdowns. He also wrote a chapter (“From Financial Crisis to Opportunity”) in Thinking Big: Progressive Ideas for a New Era (Progressive Ideas Network, 2009). His previous books include The United States Since 1980 (Cambridge University Press, 2007), The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer (Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2006), and Social Security: The Phony Crisis (with Mark Weisbrot, University of Chicago Press, 1999). His book Getting Prices Right: The Debate Over the Consumer Price Index (editor, M.E. Sharpe, 1997) was a winner of a Choice Book Award as one of the outstanding academic books of the year. Among his numerous articles are “The Benefits of a Financial Transactions Tax,” Tax Notes 121, no. 4 (2008); “Are Protective Labor Market Institutions at the Root of Unemployment? A Critical Review of the Evidence” (with David R. Howell, Andrew Glyn, and John Schmitt), Capitalism and Society 2, no. 1 (2007); “Asset Returns and Economic Growth,” with Brad DeLong and Paul Krugman, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (2005); “Financing Drug Research: What Are the Issues,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2004); “Medicare Choice Plus: The Solution to the Long-Term Deficit Problem,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2004); “Professional Protectionists: The Gains From Free Trade in Highly Paid Professional Services,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2003); and “The Run-Up in Home Prices: Is It Real or Is It Another Bubble?,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2002). Dean previously worked as a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute and an assistant professor at Bucknell University. He has also worked as a consultant for the World Bank, the Joint Economic Committee of the US Congress, and the OECD's Trade Union Advisory Council. He was the author of the weekly online commentary on economic reporting, the Economic Reporting Review, from 1996 to 2006. Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Bi-Weekly Happy Hour Hangout! Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing
이재명 상고심 선고 / 이재명 “노동시간, OECD 평균 이하로” 공약 / 한덕수, 공직 사퇴·출마 선언 임박 / 국힘 양자 토론회 / 尹 사저 압수수색 / 건진에게 요청하니 尹필승대회 열려 / 경찰, SKT 유심정보 해킹 사건 수사 착수 / skt "전 가입자 정보 유출 가정해 대책 준비" / 한수원, 체코 원전 수주 확정 / 미국 GDP 성장률 -0.3% / 오늘 0시 기준 의대생 무더기 유급 / 지난해 산재승인 사망사고 다시 늘어 / 러 파병 북한군, 사망자 600명 등 4700여명 사상See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Vera Cherepanova is the Executive Director of Boards of the Future, a global non-profit advocating for increased representation of ethics and compliance professionals on corporate boards. She is also the founding partner of Studio Etica, a boutique consultancy advising companies worldwide on corporate ethics and compliance programs. Vera serves on the Advisory Council at Ground Truth Intelligence, a global due diligence platform, and the Steering Committee of ComplianceNet, an interdisciplinary network focused on compliance research. She is the author of Corporate Compliance Program, the first book on compliance in Russian, widely used as a textbook in Russian-speaking countries, as well as a contributor to The Transnationalization of Anti-Corruption Law and other guides on business ethics, compliance, and risk management. A prolific writer and speaker, Vera is a columnist at Corporate Compliance Insights and has been featured in publications like the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, and Law360. She has delivered keynotes, panels, and workshops at leading organizations and events, including The World Bank, OECD, and the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics. Her work has earned her recognition as a thought leader in the fields of ethics, compliance, and corporate governance.Executive Director: Boards of the FutureContact Vera: vera.cherepanova@newboards.orgSponsors: Master Your Podcast Course: MasterYourSwagFree Coaching Session: Master Leadership 360 CoachingSupport Our Show: Click HereLily's Story: My Trust ManifestoSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/masterleadership. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Professor Werbach talks with Ashley Casavan, Managing Director of the AI Governance Center at the IAPP, the global association for privacy professional and related roles. Ashley shares how privacy, data protection, and AI governance are converging, and why professionals must combine technical, policy, and risk expertise. They discuss efforts to build a skills competency framework for AI roles and examine the evolving global regulatory landscape—from the EU's AI Act to U.S. state-level initiatives. Drawing on Ashley's experience in the Canadian government, the episode also explores broader societal challenges, including the need for public dialogue and the hidden impacts of automated decision-making. Ashley Casovan serves as the primary thought leader and public voice for the IAPP on AI governance. She has developed expertise in responsible AI, standards, policy, open government and data governance in the public sector at the municipal and federal levels. As the director of data and digital for the government of Canada, Casovan previously led the development of the world's first national government policy for responsible AI. Casovan served as the Executive Director of the Responsible AI Institute, a member of OECD's AI Policy Observatory Network of Experts, a member of the World Economic Forum's AI Governance Alliance, an Executive Board Member of the International Centre of Expertise in Montréal on Artificial Intelligence and as a member of the IFIP/IP3 Global Industry Council within the UN. Transcript Ashley Casovan IAPP IAPP AI Governance Profession Report 2025 Global AI Law and Policy Tracker Mapping and Understanding the AI Governance Ecosystem
In this episode of the Herbert Smith Freehills Tax Podcast, partner Toby Eggleston and consulting Professor Graham Cooper discuss recent tax policy announcements from both major political parties in light of the upcoming election. They focus on measures affecting large businesses, small businesses, and individuals and on unenacted measures and the implications of these policies for businesses and taxpayers. also touch on the impact of global tax trends, specifically the OECD's pillar one and pillar two frameworks. 00:10 Introduction and Welcome 00:37 Election Cycle Updates 01:50 Tax Proposals for Individuals 08:49 Tax Proposals for Small Businesses 15:15 Venture Capital and Fuel Excise 18:01 Unenacted Measures and Future Proposals 28:47 Conclusion and Final Thoughts
With economic uncertainty, rising debt burdens, and a growing share of the world's poorest people living in fragile contexts, the stakes for the upcoming 4th Financing for Development Conference (FfD4) in Seville have never been higher.According to a recent OECD report, the gap between development financing needs and available resources could reach $6.4 trillion by 2030 if the global financing system isn't significantly overhauled.The conference in June present a pivotal opportunity to ignite reform. It's a vital forum where UN members, international institutions, businesses, and civil society come together at the highest level to rethink how we fund global development.In this episode, we dissect the key questions set to shape discussions at FfD4. How can we mobilise the trillions needed to meet the SDGs? How can the global financial architecture be made more inclusive and responsive? And what bold steps must be taken to unlock investment where it's needed most?Development finance experts share insights on multilateral development bank reform, the role of concessional finance, and opportunities to build a more sustainable, equitable future. GuestsSara Pantuliano (host), Chief Executive, ODI GlobalMónica Colomer, Ambassador at Large for Financing for Development, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation, Spain Alvaro Lario, President, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)Annalisa Prizzon, Principal Research Fellow, ODI Global Related resourcesDevelopment finance needs major overhaul to achieve global goals (OECD report)Financing development at a crossroads: What's at stake and what reforms are needed? (Development Policy Review)ODI Global at the Spring Meetings (resources hub)Are Southern-led MDBs the future of development finance? (Think Change podcast, ODI Global)MDB Insights Spring Meetings 2025 (Newsletter, ODI Global)Unlocking the potential of blended concessional finance: making aid work harder (Event video, ODI Global)Maximising operational effectiveness and impact: key priorities for multilateral development banks (Report, ODI Global)
As a Senior Business PM, she has had the incredible opportunity to reshape education by leading innovative initiatives in AI, Cyber, and CS Skilling across K–12 and Higher Ed, allowing her to impact over 300 million learners and 10 million educators worldwide by significantly improving their digital safety awareness and technical and durable skills. By forging strategic partnerships with UNESCO, OECD, and national and state government agencies, she expanded the reach to more than 10 million educators across K–12 schools.Before her time at Microsoft, she founded the Florida Scholastic Esports League and led the growth of NASEF (Network of Academic and Scholastic Esports Federations), scaling an innovative workforce development pilot of 38 sites to an international consortium of 11,000. Over two years, she built a thriving community that engaged more than 400,000 students, showing her firsthand how gaming can be a powerful tool for learning and collaboration. This experience furthered her passion for using innovative technologies to ignite learners and build teacher capacities in critical new skills.Her earlier experiences at LEGO Education allowed her to drive an impressive 156% increase in engagement through innovative educational solutions across U.S. school systems. Each step along her career path has reinforced her belief that education should be dynamic and accessible—something she strives to achieve every day.Outside of work, she enjoys volunteering her time to mentor young educators on integrating technology into their classrooms effectively. She believes that sharing knowledge is just as important as acquiring it—after all, we're all part of this learning journey together!
bto - beyond the obvious 2.0 - der neue Ökonomie-Podcast von Dr. Daniel Stelter
bto#291 – Hohe Schulden, ungleiche Vermögensverteilung und die Schwierigkeit, einen Ausgleich zwischen den verschiedenen Interessensgruppen zu erzielen, prägten die Zeit vor der Französischen Revolution (1789 – 1799). Während es Großbritannien damals gelang, die hohe Staatsverschuldung ohne Revolution und Staatspleite zu bewältigen, kam es in Frankreich zu Umsturz und Bankrott. Auch heute stehen viele Staaten vor ähnlichen Herausforderungen und es ist nicht klar, ob die Verschuldung in einem geordneten Verfahren gesenkt werden kann. Welche Lehren sind aus der Vergangenheit zu ziehen? Der Historiker Dr. Michael Sonenscher, Professor am King's College in Cambridge und Autor des Buches Before the Deluge: Public Debt, Inequality and the Intellectual Origins of the French Revolution (dt.: Vor der Sintflut: Staatsverschuldung, Ungleichheit und die intellektuellen Ursprünge der Französischen Revolution) beleuchtet im Gespräch mit Daniel Stelter die Parallelen von Geschichte und Gegenwart. HörerserviceDen Global Debt Report der OECD finden Sie hier: https://is.gd/oEpSkx Den Text von David Hume finden Sie hier: https://is.gd/cHE9a6 Neue Analysen, Kommentare und Einschätzungen zur Wirtschafts- und Finanzlage finden Sie unter www.think-bto.com. Den monatlichen bto-Newsletter abonnieren Sie hier.Sie erreichen die Redaktion unter podcast@think-bto.com. Wir freuen uns über Ihre Meinungen, Anregungen und Kritik.ShownotesHandelsblatt – Ein exklusives Angebot für alle „bto – beyond the obvious – featured by Handelsblatt”-Hörer*innen: Testen Sie Handelsblatt Premium 4 Wochen lang für 1 Euro und bleiben Sie zur aktuellen Wirtschafts- und Finanzlage informiert. Mehr: https://handelsblatt.com/mehrperspektiven Oder lesen Sie das Handelsblatt ein Jahr lang mit 30% Rabatt und erhalten Sie tiefgehende Einblicke in Wirtschaft, Politik, Finanzwelt und Technologie. Zum Angebot: handelsblatt.com/bto30Werbepartner – Informationen zu den Angeboten unserer aktuellen Werbepartner finden Sie hier. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
A review of the week's major US international tax-related news. In this edition: US Congress to move on budget reconciliation after recess – IRS withdraws regulations on certain partnership related-party basis-shifting transactions – OECD/G20 IF on BEPS issues statement following meeting, OECD official comments on discussions – UN negotiating committee of Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation releases roadmap and guidelines – US launches investigation into pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.
What happens when we flip the urban planning script — putting people, not cars, at the heart of our cities and regions? In this 15-minute episode, Professor Carlos Moreno - creator of the “15-minute city” and now a leading voice behind the “30-minute region” - joins the OECD's Soo-Jin Kim to explore how we can build more inclusive, connected and resilient places. From the sidewalks of Paris to rural areas reimagining public services, Carlos shares a bold vision of proximity, empowerment, and local opportunity. Tune in to hear how the future of urban and regional development might be just around the corner — literally. Host: Shayne MacLachlan, Public Affairs and Communications Manager at the OECD Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities Guests: Carlos Moreno is a Franco-Colombian researcher and Professor at the University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, internationally recognised for developing the 15-minute city concept. He is currently expanding his work through the “30-minute region,” a model designed to bring proximity and accessibility to entire territories beyond urban centres. Carlos serves as Scientific Director of the ETI Chair (“Entrepreneurship – Territory – Innovation”) and advises cities and international organisations on urban innovation and sustainable planning. Soo-Jin Kim is Head of the Urban Policies and Reviews Unit at the OECD Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities. Her work focuses on helping national and local governments shape more sustainable, inclusive, and resilient cities. She leads cross-country reviews, develops policy guidance, and brings international perspectives to urban development challenges. To learn more about policy area: https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/urban-development.html To learn more about the OECD, our global reach, and how to join us, go to https://www.oecd.org/en/about.html To keep up with latest at the OECD, visit https://www.oecd.org/ Get the latest OECD content delivered directly to your inbox! Subscribe to our newsletters: https://www.oecd.org/en/about/newsletters.html
Today, I have the pleasure of speaking with Volker Then, an independent Senior Impact Analyst who is launching a start-up company on Comprehensive Impact Measurement together with a coalition of impact partners. From 2022 to 2024, Volker was Founding Chief Executive Officer and Member of the Executive Board of Fondazione AIS (Advancing Impact and Sustainability) in Bologna. Earlier in his career, Volker was Executive Director of the Centre for Social Investment at Heidelberg University for 15 years and also served as Director Philanthropy and Foundations at the Bertelsmann Foundation. He is a former member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the OECD's Global Action “Social and Solidarity Economy” and served on the National Advisory Board of the G7-Social Impact Investment Task Force. Impact is a big word nowadays – maybe even a buzzword – and people in our space are using it broadly and frequently. But it's not clear that everyone has a clear shared definition of the term. Volker provides his definition of “impact”, especially as it relates to enterprise families and the objectives they set for themselves with regard to fulfilling the purpose of their wealth and their family capital. One of the greatest challenges, and opportunities, in the world of impact is the measurement of the effectiveness and outcomes of impact initiatives. Volker talks about the latest thinking and work that is being done in this area, especially the thought leadership and development he has been spearheading in his prior role at Fondazione AIS and now in his current venture. Volker offers his tips and suggestions for enterprise families who are just starting or are early in their impact journey, focusing on what he recommends they do to get better educated and equipped to realize their impact ambitions. He then turns to enterprise families who are more advanced and have a developed impact framework and strategy, sharing his advice on what they can do to further the reach and consequence of their impact programs and strategies. Don't miss this enlightening conversation with one of the foremost thought leaders in the realm of impact definition and measurement.
US Tariffs could lead to a trade war and a global economic slowdown, according to the OECD. China, Mexico, Canada and the EU have said they will be imposing reciprocal tariffs on America. The UK has yet to react to a “reciprocal” 10% Tariff announced by Donald Trump today in the White House Rose Garden. Prime Minister Sir Kier Starmer said a trade war is in nobody’s interest. Stock markets have been falling around the world putting millions of people’s savings and pension pots at risk of a correction or even a crash. The S&P 500 had its worse quarter since 2022. 3 Steps To Unlocking Financial Freedom! I want to take you to the next level, help you get control of your money, learn how to invest and become financially free. Join me online on my free live money management training Wednesday at 7.00PM. Places are limited, so register now below to avoid disappointment. https://bit.ly/3QPp8IH #FinancialFreedom #WealthBuilding #SaveMoney #InvestWisely #CharlesKellyMoneyTips #PersonalFinance #finance #moneytraining #moneymanagement #wealth #money #debt #financialplanning #moneymanagement #financialfreedom #section24tax #debtcrisis #money #businessnews #china #kierstarmer #USEconomy #GoldenAge #UKEconomy #GlobalMarkets #CharlesKellyMoneyTips #Podcast #FinancialPlanning #Investing #WealthManagement #EconomicTrends #tariffs #trump #tradewar
What happens when First Nations take the lead in shaping the future of clean energy and infrastructure in Indigenous communities? In this episode, we hear from Mark Podlasly, CEO of the First Nations Major Projects Coalition (FNMPC) and member of the Nlaka'pamux Nation in British Columbia. He speaks with Sinead Teevan from the OECD about how the coalition is helping First Nations secure ownership in major energy and infrastructure projects. The FNMPC, now representing 175 communities across Canada, focuses on the economic, environmental, and public policy interests of its members. Together, they explore the power of Indigenous consent, the importance of equitable partnerships, and why integrating Indigenous values into policy and investment decisions isn't just the right thing to do, it's essential for reaching climate goals and long-term prosperity. With real-world examples, from clean energy projects to revenue-sharing agreements, this conversation highlights how economic reconciliation is not only possible, but already underway in Canada. Looking ahead, Mark shares a bold vision: Indigenous communities not only participating in, but leading, global investment through Indigenous-controlled capital. And the world is taking notice. Groups from Australia, New Zealand, the US, and Latin America are reaching out to learn how First Nations in Canada are achieving results. Host: Shayne MacLachlan, Public Affairs and Communications Manager at the OECD Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities Guests: Sinead Teevan is currently working as a Policy Consultant at the OECD, working on regional, rural and urban development. She is Indigenous from Curve Lake First Nation in Ontario, and has gained valuable experience in various roles, including as a Policy Intern at the Ministry of Energy in Ontario. Additionally, she been an active member of the Indigenous Student Association at Western University. Mark Podlasly, a member of the Nlaka'pamux Nation in British Columbia, is CEO of the First Nations Major Projects Coalition (FNMPC) in Canada. FNMPC is a national organization of 175+ Indigenous communities working to ensure environmental and economic values are reflected in major projects on traditional territories. He has global experience leading large-scale energy and infrastructure projects and has delivered strategy programs for companies like Unilever and Goldman Sachs. A frequent contributor on Indigenous-industry economic reconciliation, his work spans ESG, climate policy, and governance. To learn more about policy area: https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/regional-rural-and-urban-development.html To learn more about the OECD, our global reach, and how to join us, go to https://www.oecd.org/en/about.html To keep up with latest at the OECD, visit https://www.oecd.org/ Get the latest OECD content delivered directly to your inbox! Subscribe to our newsletters: https://www.oecd.org/en/about/newsletters.html
According to the U.S. State Department, three-fifths of global GDP, three-quarters of world trade, and 90 percent of official development assistance can be accounted for in 38 countries. Those countries are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development – or OECD. Founded in 1961 and headquartered in Paris, the OECD's goals include stimulating global economic growth by providing a forum for intergovernmental collaboration. It's also the focus of this episode of Stats and Stories with guest Steve MacFeely. Steve MacFeely is, chief statistician at the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development and adjunct professor at University College Cork. MacFeely joined OECD in August of last year as chief statistician and director of statistics and the data directorate. Before joining the organization, MacFeely served as Director of Data and Analytics at the World Health Organization and as Director of Statistics and Information at U-N Trade and Development. He has also served as the Deputy Director-General at the Central Statistics Office (CSO) in Ireland.
In this power-packed episode of The Food Professor Podcast, hosts Michael LeBlanc and Dr. Sylvain Charlebois bring listeners up to speed on one of the most complex and fast-moving stories in the global food and agriculture sector: the unfolding international tariff war. Appropriately titled “The Global Tariff War Edition,” this episode features a timely and incisive interview with Mark Warner, Managing Director at MAAW Law and one of North America's leading experts on trade, investment, and competition law.The conversation kicks off with Michael and Sylvain diving into the latest developments in U.S.–China trade tensions, which have seen tariffs skyrocket to 125% on inbound U.S. goods into China. They explore the ripple effects on key commodities like soybeans and canola, discuss the surprising resilience of commodity markets, and examine why Canada isn't positioned to step in as a major alternative supplier.The hosts also explore cultural signals from the food world, including the increasing trend of Americans packing lunches and the declining use of doggy bags in restaurants—signs Sylvain suggests may point to growing economic insecurity and workplace anxiety.In the second half of the show, Michael and Sylvain sit down with Mark Warner, who brings deep legal and historical context to the tariff debate. Warner unpacks how the Trump administration is using the rarely-invoked International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to sidestep traditional trade channels. He outlines the risks and potential rewards for Canadian agri-food exporters navigating this new landscape, and why subtle diplomacy—not headline-grabbing bravado—may serve Canada better in the long run. From trade agreements and geopolitical strategy to supply management and softwood lumber, Warner's nuanced take is essential listening for anyone working in, or watching, the agri-food space.And there's also a moment of celebration: Dr. Sylvain Charlebois shares his recent honour—receiving the prestigious Charles III Coronation Medal from the Lieutenant Governor of Quebec. In a heartfelt reflection, he dedicates the medal to his wife, Janelle, recognizing her essential support in his research and public policy work. It's a well-deserved acknowledgment of Sylvain's national impact on food policy and scholarship.With sharp insight, humour, and a dash of royal recognition, this episode offers listeners a blend of timely news and expert analysis that defines The Food Professor Podcast.Tune into Bite Sized!Corus Entertainment is excited to add a brand-new topical program to its Talk Radio lineup on April 12called Bite Sized, which explores the business of food in the country. 640 Toronto Saturdays at 2 p.m. ET980 CFPL Sundays at 9 a.m. ET680 CJOB Sundays at 2 p.m. CST770 QR Calgary Sundays at 3 p.m. MST880 CHED Sundays at 3 p.m. MST730 CKNW Sundays at 1 p.m. PSTAbout MarkMark is an Ontario and New York attorney who has practiced trade, investment and competition law in Toronto, New York, Washington, D.C and Brussels and as counsel to the OECD in Paris. He advises natural resource clients through Pilot Law LLP and fintech and financial Services clients through Atlantis International. Mark has also recently been appointed as a Fellow of the US Canada Institute in Washington, D.C.Mark is a former Legal Director of the Ontario Ministries of Economic Development & Trade, Research & Innovation and Consumer Services. He led Ontario's legal team for trade negotiations (including the Canada-EU Trade Agreement and the Canada-U.S. Agreement on Government Procurement), trade disputes (including the Green Energy Act and softwood lumber) and various NAFTA Chapter 11 investor-state disputes and for the insolvency / restructuring of General Motors and Chrysler.Mark was also co-author of the Second Edition of a leading Canadian trade law treatise (with the Hon. William C. Graham and Professors Jean-Gabriel Castel and Armand de Mestral). He has been listed in the Euromoney / International Financial Law Review Guide to the World's Leading Competition lawyers and in 2015 was elected a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.Mark earned a BA (Joint Honours) from McGill, an MA in Economics from the University of Toronto, a JD from Osgoode Hall Law School and an LLM from Georgetown University Law Centre. The Food Professor #podcast is presented by Caddle. About UsDr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Professor in food distribution and policy in the Faculties of Management and Agriculture at Dalhousie University in Halifax. He is also the Senior Director of the Agri-food Analytics Lab, also located at Dalhousie University. Before joining Dalhousie, he was affiliated with the University of Guelph's Arrell Food Institute, which he co-founded. Known as “The Food Professor”, his current research interest lies in the broad area of food distribution, security and safety. Google Scholar ranks him as one of the world's most cited scholars in food supply chain management, food value chains and traceability.He has authored five books on global food systems, his most recent one published in 2017 by Wiley-Blackwell entitled “Food Safety, Risk Intelligence and Benchmarking”. He has also published over 500 peer-reviewed journal articles in several academic publications. Furthermore, his research has been featured in several newspapers and media groups, including The Lancet, The Economist, the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, BBC, NBC, ABC, Fox News, Foreign Affairs, the Globe & Mail, the National Post and the Toronto Star.Dr. Charlebois sits on a few company boards, and supports many organizations as a special advisor, including some publicly traded companies. Charlebois is also a member of the Scientific Council of the Business Scientific Institute, based in Luxemburg. Dr. Charlebois is a member of the Global Food Traceability Centre's Advisory Board based in Washington DC, and a member of the National Scientific Committee of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) in Ottawa. Michael LeBlanc is the president and founder of M.E. LeBlanc & Company Inc, a senior retail advisor, keynote speaker and now, media entrepreneur. He has been on the front lines of retail industry change for his entire career. Michael has delivered keynotes, hosted fire-side discussions and participated worldwide in thought leadership panels, most recently on the main stage in Toronto at Retail Council of Canada's Retail Marketing conference with leaders from Walmart & Google. He brings 25+ years of brand/retail/marketing & eCommerce leadership experience with Levi's, Black & Decker, Hudson's Bay, CanWest Media, Pandora Jewellery, The Shopping Channel and Retail Council of Canada to his advisory, speaking and media practice.Michael produces and hosts a network of leading retail trade podcasts, including the award-winning No.1 independent retail industry podcast in America, Remarkable Retail with his partner, Dallas-based best-selling author Steve Dennis; Canada's top retail industry podcast The Voice of Retail and Canada's top food industry and one of the top Canadian-produced management independent podcasts in the country, The Food Professor with Dr. Sylvain Charlebois from Dalhousie University in Halifax.Rethink Retail has recognized Michael as one of the top global retail experts for the fourth year in a row, Thinkers 360 has named him on of the Top 50 global thought leaders in retail, RTIH has named him a top 100 global though leader in retail technology and Coresight Research has named Michael a Retail AI Influencer. If you are a BBQ fan, you can tune into Michael's cooking show, Last Request BBQ, on YouTube, Instagram, X and yes, TikTok.Michael is available for keynote presentations helping retailers, brands and retail industry insiders explaining the current state and future of the retail industry in North America and around the world.
The Trump administration's massive new tariff pronouncements, on top of its pullback from the OECD's global tax deal, have cast doubt on the future of global tax policy efforts. The two-pillar OECD-led agreement seeks to create a 15% global minimum tax for large multinational corporations and change the way the companies allocate their profits among countries. While the US is still taking part in some negotiations, it has rejected key elements of the deal that it says infringe on US tax sovereignty. The administration has especially taken issue with the deal's undertaxed profits rule, which countries can use to tax companies from other jurisdictions if they aren't paying the minimum tax there. And it has raised objections to countries' imposition of digital services taxes. On Wednesday, President Trump announced a 90-day pause on higher reciprocal tariffs that hit many US trade partners earlier in the day, and raised duties on China to 125%. The conflict could spark a reaction away from global tax policy negotiations and toward more bilateral, one-on-one dealings between countries as nations look to retaliate or cut a deal with the US. On this episode of Talking Tax, reporter Caleb Harshberger talks with PwC global tax policy leader Will Morris and Michael Plowgian, a partner at KPMG and former deputy assistant secretary for international affairs at the Treasury Department. They discuss the current state of negotiations, the complexity of numerous moving parts, and prospects for the US's ongoing role vis à vis the European Union and other nations. Do you have feedback on this episode of Talking Tax? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.
In this episode Harriet and Grahame discuss the interaction of Pillar 2 and the Country by Country Reporting regime. How does CbCR drive Pillar 2 and why is it a vital building block for the OECD's flagship anti-avoidance package?
In this episode of TP Talks, Kristina Novak sits down with Brett York, a Principal in PwC's NTS Mergers and Acquisitions practice and former Deputy Tax Legislative Counsel at the US Treasury Department. Kristina and Brett discuss Brett's experiences at Treasury, the implications of the Trump administration's regulatory freeze, and how political appointments influence tax policy. They explore the tax guidance process, IRS leadership changes, how the US engages in OECD tax negotiations, and what the future may hold for transfer pricing—particularly under a second Trump administration.Support the show
Doug McHoney (PwC's International Tax Services Global Leader) is joined by Dr. Romero Tavares, PwC Brazil's International Tax Leader and a professor of international tax law in São Paulo. Doug and Romero discuss the increasing intersection between Brazil's international tax policy and global trade dynamics, including the effects of recent US executive orders. They cover Brazil's high-tax corporate environment, its historically aggressive CFC-like full inclusion regime, and the country's rapid adoption of a qualified domestic minimum top-up tax (QDMTT). The conversation explores the political and policy rationale behind these moves, the anticipated redesign of Brazil's CFC regime, and the operational challenges multinationals face with the new OECD-aligned transfer pricing rules. Romero also breaks down Brazil's massive indirect tax reform and the country's potential shift to more internationally-aligned tax norms, while questioning the long-term viability of the undertaxed profits rule (UTPR) and Pillar Two's durability under changing geopolitical winds.
Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest-running podcast on compliance. In this episode, Tom is joined by Gerry Zack, CEO and Founder of RiskTrek LLC, to discuss his recent attendance at the OECD Global Anti-Corruption and Integrity Forum in Paris. Gerry provides an in-depth event recap highlighting significant presentations, panel discussions, and key takeaways. Topics covered include the current state of anti-corruption efforts, the international cooperation among governments in combating corruption, and the evolving role of compliance programs amid changes in U.S. enforcement policies. He also shares insights on applying artificial intelligence in compliance, the importance of building trust through compliance programs, and the unique challenges faced in the healthcare and private equity sectors. The episode underscores the forum's overarching theme of innovation and the proactive steps needed to navigate a turbulent compliance landscape. Key highlights: • Structure and Highlights of the OECD Conference • Key Themes: Compliance and Anti-Corruption • Global Collaboration and Government Responses • Incentives and Value of Compliance Programs • Trust and Technology in Compliance • Data Analytics and AI in Compliance Resources: Gerry Zack on LinkedIn Gerry Zack's Email: Gerry@risk-trek.com RiskTrek LLC Tom Fox Instagram Facebook YouTube Twitter LinkedIn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
They do. They work 7% more than single men, but how does that impact their marriages? In this episode, Laura and Crystal discuss how capitalism screws, well, all of us. All genders, in every sphere. Topics We Cover:Married men working more, and why the answer is almost always their wivesOverwork as a tool of oppression—not ambitionThe second shift, the leisure entitlement gap, and who really gets to restWhat Denmark is doing better (spoiler: it's everything)The disillusionment of “equal partnerships” in a broken systemThe lie of corporate loyalty and the emotional fallout of trying to do it allReferenced Research & Sources:Richmond Federal Reserve study on married men's work hoursGender Equity Institute article on overwork and gender gapsOECD stats on Danish work-life balanceWe Grow the World TogetherDiscussions of When We Care, Soul, and Rage Against the Machine (yes, really)Upcoming:Join us Thursday the 27th for Time to Read! We're discussing We Grow the World Together—no reading required to attend, just vibes and snacks.
When goods, services and rights go back and forth within a company, how do you attribute profit or loss to one part of the company versus another? Former OECD head of tax treaties and transfer pricing Mary Bennett and EY's Mike McDonald join this episode of “GILTI Conscience” for a detailed discussion on the attribution of profits to permanent establishments. Skadden tax partners David Farhat and Nate Carden and associate Stefane Victor host the discussion, which explores, among other topics, critical differences between Articles 7 and 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and why these distinctions matter for multinational businesses.
At the heart of unpaid care work in Mexico lies a paradox: The labor sustains the economy, even as it creates barriers to women joining the workforce. All told, the value of uncompensated domestic labor in Mexico amounts to more than 26 percent of GDP, outpacing both the manufacturing sector and trade, according to the country's statistics agency. Yet roughly 20 million Mexican women are not employed because they are busy providing that unpaid labor. Now, a push to build a national care system seeks to recognize and rebalance that work by creating a network of services covering care for children, people with disabilities, the elderly - and the caretakers themselves. President Claudia Sheinbaum, Mexico's first woman head of state, created a Women's Secretariat that, among other tasks, is charged with building the system. And earlier this month, one of the country's main opposition parties said it would introduce an initiative enshrining the right to care in the Constitution. But the devil is in the details, and building a national care system will take time and resources. Can Mexico get there? The effort to recognize "the right to care, to be cared for, and care for oneself" is not new in Latin America. From the 2007 Quito Consensus on through multiple regional women's summits since then, it has been a focus of attention, and several Latin American countries have taken steps to develop care systems. In 2015, Uruguay became the first country in the region to make such a system law, while others - from Costa Rica to Colombia to Chile - are developing national systems with services ranging from early education programs and job training for people with disabilities, to day centers where the aging can get care and socialize. Beyond care delivery, another goal is to close gender gaps: Across the region, women spend almost triple the amount of time that men do on unpaid domestic and care work. Nowhere in Latin America is that gap between men and women bigger than in Mexico, where women devote, on average, 43 hours a week to unpaid labor - the highest in the region. "If we really want to work at guaranteeing substantive equality, we have to make progress in removing the care burdens that still fall on women," says Martha Tagle, a former federal deputy with the Citizen's Movement, or MC, party, in an interview. Those burdens come with an economic cost, creating a stubborn obstacle to getting women into Mexico's workforce. Over the past decade, Mexican women's labor participation grew by just 3 percent to 46 percent, lagging men's participation by 30 points. At that rate, it will take 56 years for the country to catch up to the OECD average of 67 percent when it comes to women in the workforce, according to the Mexican Institute for Competitiveness, or IMCO, think tank. But closing the gap faster would come with a bonus: IMCO estimates that Mexico's GDP would be 3.7 percent higher if it hit the OECD average by 2035. As Mexico faces the headwinds of U.S. tariff threats and stagnant growth, closing the workforce gap represents an economic opportunity. For that reason alone, a care system is "fundamental," says Odracir Barquera, CEO of the Mexican Automotive Industry Association and previously an adviser to a Mexican senator on women's economic inclusion. "The problem is that the proposal has to be accompanied by resources … because one part can be supplied by the employer, but the other part needs to involve state infrastructure." Some steps toward laying the foundation for that infrastructure have been taken. When Sheinbaum was sworn in as president in October 2024, her inauguration speech included a pledge to implement a national care system through existing health and social service agencies, starting with a dozen childcare centers for day workers and factory employees in the border city of Ciudad Juarez starting later this year. The plan is to subsequently expand these centers to other cities. But financing and access remain open qu...
The OECD has said Mexico's economy will shrink due to tariffs imposed by the US. Mexico is now forecast to contract by 1.3% this year and shrink a further 0.6% next year, instead of growing by 1.2% and 1.6% as previously expected. A Peruvian farmer has taken RWE, the German energy giant, to court arguing the company's greenhouse gas emissions are causing glaciers to melt, increasing the flood risk to his home And consumer protection group in Hong Kong has advised people looking for a new mattress to take an in-store nap before buying
The OECD revised down estimates of US growth for this year and next. The OECD does not have any special insight (other than the extraordinary insight of all economists), and market forecasts for growth tend to adjust faster than those of the OECD. The announcement is a reminder of the shift in the narrative about US growth, in the face of erratic policy and rising US consumer taxes.
In this eye-opening episode of Ecosystemic Futures, hosts Marco Annunziata and Vikram Shyam welcome Dr. Giulia Ajmone Marsan, Head of Startups and Inclusion, at the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia. Dr. Marsan challenges conventional wisdom about innovation with complex data. In just 20 years, the global share of patenting activity from OECD countries has dropped dramatically by 20 percentage points, signaling a significant shift in the geography of innovation.The conversation highlights how emerging markets are becoming powerful engines of innovation. Dr. Marsan provides fascinating examples of innovation born from necessity, including Southeast Asian fintech "super apps" that have brought banking to millions of previously unbanked individuals, Estonia's digital government revolution built from scratch after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and Brazil's central bank-led open banking policy that has sparked a fintech transformation.Dr. Marsan explains how the absence of legacy infrastructure often becomes an advantage, allowing emerging economies to leapfrog directly to cutting-edge solutions. She discusses the phenomenon of "Silicon Bali," where digital nomads are transforming tourism-dependent economies into knowledge hubs. She examines how talent mobility, diaspora connections, and targeted visa programs are reshaping global innovation ecosystems. The conversation also addresses the critical balance between opportunity and inequality, exploring how innovation can advance sustainable development goals while requiring thoughtful policy to ensure benefits are widely shared.Highlights• Shifting Innovation Geography: Patent activity from OECD countries dropped 20 percentage points in just two decades, with innovation hotspots emerging across Southeast Asia, India, Brazil, and Africa • Financial Inclusion Revolution: How Southeast Asian super apps evolved from retail platforms to provide e-wallets, microloans, and microinsurance to previously unbanked populations • The Leapfrog Advantage: Countries without legacy infrastructure (like Estonia after the Soviet collapse) can build more innovative systems from scratch • Talent Mobility as Catalyst: The rise of "Silicon Bali" and how entrepreneurship visas and digital nomad programs are reshaping local economies• Digital Public Infrastructure: India's and Brazil's government-led innovation initiatives that created open platforms for entrepreneurial growthGuest: Dr. Giulia Ajmone Marsan, Head of Startups and Inclusion of the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East AsiaHosts: Vikram Shyam, Lead Futurist, NASA Glenn Research CenterMarco Annunziata, Co-Founder, Annunziata + Desai PartnersSeries Hosts: Vikram Shyam, Lead Futurist, NASA Glenn Research CenterDyan Finkhousen, Founder & CEO, Shoshin Works
A major global policy forum, the OECD, has predicted that President Trump's trade tariffs will hit world growth and raise inflation. It has more than halved its growth outlook for Canada.Why does China want people to spend more cash? And Will Bain finds out how an Irish religious holiday has so much impact globally.
Kevin Green joins the Movers show with a preview of this week's trading action. KG looks at the pending retail sales data but also a key international economic report from OECD. The organization cut global expectations for the next 2 years as well as its U.S. GDP growth forecast saying trade tariffs are expected to weigh on economic growth.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about
OECD Secretary General Mathias Hubert Paul Cormann discusses cutting the World Growth forecast, citing fallout from US tariffs. He speaks with Bloomberg's Jonathan Ferro, Lisa Abramowicz, and Annmarie Hordern.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Dr. Gary Null provides a commentary on "Universal Healthcare" Universal Healthcare is the Solution to a Broken Medical System Gary Null, PhD Progressive Radio Network, March 3, 2025 For over 50 years, there has been no concerted or successful effort to bring down medical costs in the American healthcare system. Nor are the federal health agencies making disease prevention a priority. Regardless whether the political left or right sponsors proposals for reform, such measures are repeatedly defeated by both parties in Congress. As a result, the nation's healthcare system remains one of the most expensive and least efficient in the developed world. For the past 30 years, medical bills contributing to personal debt regularly rank among the top three causes of personal bankruptcy. This is a reality that reflects not only the financial strain on ordinary Americans but the systemic failure of the healthcare system itself. The urgent question is: If President Trump and his administration are truly seeking to reduce the nation's $36 trillion deficit, why is there no serious effort to reform the most bloated and corrupt sector of the economy? A key obstacle is the widespread misinformation campaign that falsely claims universal health care would cost an additional $2 trillion annually and further balloon the national debt. However, a more honest assessment reveals the opposite. If the US adopted a universal single-payer system, the nation could actually save up to $20 trillion over the next 10 years rather than add to the deficit. Even with the most ambitious efforts by people like Elon Musk to rein in federal spending or optimize government efficiency, the estimated savings would only amount to $500 billion. This is only a fraction of what could be achieved through comprehensive healthcare reform alone. Healthcare is the largest single expenditure of the federal budget. A careful examination of where the $5 trillion spent annually on healthcare actually goes reveals massive systemic fraud and inefficiency. Aside from emergency medicine, which accounts for only 10-12 percent of total healthcare expenditures, the bulk of this spending does not deliver better health outcomes nor reduce trends in physical and mental illness. Applying Ockham's Razor, the principle that the simplest solution is often the best, the obvious conclusion is that America's astronomical healthcare costs are the direct result of price gouging on an unimaginable scale. For example, in most small businesses, profit margins range between 1.6 and 2.5 percent, such as in grocery retail. Yet the pharmaceutical industrial complex routinely operates on markup rates as high as 150,000 percent for many prescription drugs. The chart below highlights the astronomical gap between the retail price of some top-selling patented pharmaceutical medications and their generic equivalents. Drug Condition Patent Price (per unit) Generic Price Estimated Manufacture Cost Markup Source Insulin (Humalog) Diabetes $300 $30 $3 10,000% Rand (2021) EpiPen Allergic reactions $600 $30 $10 6,000% BMJ (2022) Daraprim Toxoplasmosis $750/pill $2 $0.50 150,000% JAMA (2019) Harvoni Hepatitis C $94,500 (12 weeks) $30,000 $200 47,000% WHO Report (2018) Lipitor Cholesterol $150 $10 $0.50 29,900% Health Affairs (2020) Xarelto Blood Thinner $450 $25 $1.50 30,000% NEJM (2020) Abilify Schizophrenia $800 (30 tablets) $15 $2 39,900% AJMC (2019) Revlimid Cancer $16,000/mo $450 $150 10,500% Kaiser Health News (2021) Humira Arthritis $2,984/dose $400 $50 5,868% Rand (2021) Sovaldi Hepatitis C $1,000/pill $10 $2 49,900% JAMA (2021) Xolair Asthma $2,400/dose $300 $50 4,800% NEJM (2020) Gleevec Leukemia $10,000/mo $350 $200 4,900% Harvard Public Health Review (2020) OxyContin Pain Relief $600 (30 tablets) $15 $0.50 119,900% BMJ (2022) Remdesivir Covid-19 $3,120 (5 doses) N/A $10 31,100% The Lancet (2020) The corruption extends far beyond price gouging. Many pharmaceutical companies convince federal health agencies to fund their basic research and drug development with taxpayer dollars. Yet when these companies bring successful products to market, the profits are kept entirely by the corporations or shared with the agencies or groups of government scientists. On the other hand, the public, who funded the research, receives no financial return. This amounts to a systemic betrayal of the public trust on a scale of hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Another significant contributor to rising healthcare costs is the widespread practice of defensive medicine that is driven by the constant threat of litigation. Over the past 40 years, defensive medicine has become a cottage industry. Physicians order excessive diagnostic tests and unnecessary treatments simply to protect themselves from lawsuits. Study after study has shown that these over-performed procedures not only inflate costs but lead to iatrogenesis or medical injury and death caused by the medical system and practices itself. The solution is simple: adopting no-fault healthcare coverage for everyone where patients receive care without needing to sue and thereby freeing doctors from the burden of excessive malpractice insurance. A single-payer universal healthcare system could fundamentally transform the entire industry by capping profits at every level — from drug manufacturers to hospitals to medical equipment suppliers. The Department of Health and Human Services would have the authority to set profit margins for medical procedures. This would ensure that healthcare is determined by outcomes, not profits. Additionally, the growing influence of private equity firms and vulture capitalists buying up hospitals and medical clinics across America must be reined in. These equity firms prioritize profit extraction over improving the quality of care. They often slash staff, raise prices, and dictate medical procedures based on what will yield the highest returns. Another vital reform would be to provide free medical education for doctors and nurses in exchange for five years of service under the universal system. Medical professionals would earn a realistic salary cap to prevent them from being lured into equity partnerships or charging exorbitant rates. The biggest single expense in the current system, however, is the private health insurance industry, which consumes 33 percent of the $5 trillion healthcare budget. Health insurance CEOs consistently rank among the highest-paid executives in the country. Their companies, who are nothing more than bean counters, decide what procedures and drugs will be covered, partially covered, or denied altogether. This entire industry is designed to place profits above patients' lives. If the US dismantled its existing insurance-based system and replaced it with a fully reformed national healthcare model, the country could save $2.7 trillion annually while simultaneously improving health outcomes. Over the course of 10 years, those savings would amount to $27 trillion. This could wipe out nearly the entire national debt in a short time. This solution has been available for decades but has been systematically blocked by corporate lobbying and bipartisan corruption in Washington. The path forward is clear but only if American citizens demand a system where healthcare is valued as a public service and not a commodity. The national healthcare crisis is not just a fiscal issue. It is a crucial moral failure of the highest order. With the right reforms, the nation could simultaneously restore its financial health and deliver the kind of healthcare system its citizens have long deserved. American Healthcare: Corrupt, Broken and Lethal Richard Gale and Gary Null Progressive Radio Network, March 3, 2025 For a nation that prides itself on being the world's wealthiest, most innovative and technologically advanced, the US' healthcare system is nothing less than a disaster and disgrace. Not only are Americans the least healthy among the most developed nations, but the US' health system ranks dead last among high-income countries. Despite rising costs and our unshakeable faith in American medical exceptionalism, average life expectancy in the US has remained lower than other OECD nations for many years and continues to decline. The United Nations recognizes healthcare as a human right. In 2018, former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon denounced the American healthcare system as "politically and morally wrong." During the pandemic it is estimated that two to three years was lost on average life expectancy. On the other hand, before the Covid-19 pandemic, countries with universal healthcare coverage found their average life expectancy stable or slowly increasing. The fundamental problem in the U.S. is that politics have been far too beholden to the pharmaceutical, HMO and private insurance industries. Neither party has made any concerted effort to reign in the corruption of corporate campaign funding and do what is sensible, financially feasible and morally correct to improve Americans' quality of health and well-being. The fact that our healthcare system is horribly broken is proof that moneyed interests have become so powerful to keep single-payer debate out of the media spotlight and censored. Poll after poll shows that the American public favors the expansion of public health coverage. Other incremental proposals, including Medicare and Medicaid buy-in plans, are also widely preferred to the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare mess we are currently stuck with. It is not difficult to understand how the dismal state of American medicine is the result of a system that has been sold out to the free-market and the bottom line interests of drug makers and an inflated private insurance industry. How advanced and ethically sound can a healthcare system be if tens of millions of people have no access to medical care because it is financially out of their reach? The figures speak for themselves. The U.S. is burdened with a $41 trillion Medicare liability. The number of uninsured has declined during the past several years but still lingers around 25 million. An additional 30-35 million are underinsured. There are currently 65 million Medicare enrollees and 89 million Medicaid recipients. This is an extremely unhealthy snapshot of the country's ability to provide affordable healthcare and it is certainly unsustainable. The system is a public economic failure, benefiting no one except the large and increasingly consolidated insurance and pharmaceutical firms at the top that supervise the racket. Our political parties have wrestled with single-payer or universal healthcare for decades. Obama ran his first 2008 presidential campaign on a single-payer platform. Since 1985, his campaign health adviser, the late Dr. Quentin Young from the University of Illinois Medical School, was one of the nation's leading voices calling for universal health coverage. During a private conversation with Dr. Young shortly before his passing in 2016, he conveyed his sense of betrayal at the hands of the Obama administration. Dr. Young was in his 80s when he joined the Obama campaign team to help lead the young Senator to victory on a promise that America would finally catch up with other nations. The doctor sounded defeated. He shared how he was manipulated, and that Obama held no sincere intention to make universal healthcare a part of his administration's agenda. During the closed-door negotiations, which spawned the weak and compromised Affordable Care Act, Dr. Young was neither consulted nor invited to participate. In fact, he told us that he never heard from Obama again after his White House victory. Past efforts to even raise the issue have been viciously attacked. A huge army of private interests is determined to keep the public enslaved to private insurers and high medical costs. The failure of our healthcare is in no small measure due to it being a fully for-profit operation. Last year, private health insurance accounted for 65 percent of coverage. Consider that there are over 900 private insurance companies in the US. National Health Expenditures (NHE) grew to $4.5 trillion in 2022, which was 17.3 percent of GDP. Older corporate rank-and-file Democrats and Republicans argue that a single-payer or socialized medical program is unaffordable. However, not only is single-payer affordable, it will end bankruptcies due to unpayable medical debt. In addition, universal healthcare, structured on a preventative model, will reduce disease rates at the outset. Corporate Democrats argue that Obama's Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a positive step inching the country towards complete public coverage. However, aside from providing coverage to the poorest of Americans, Obamacare turned into another financial anchor around the necks of millions more. According to the health policy research group KFF, the average annual health insurance premium for single coverage is $8,400 and almost $24,000 for a family. In addition, patient out-of-pocket costs continue to increase, a 6.6% increase to $471 billion in 2022. Rather than healthcare spending falling, it has exploded, and the Trump and Biden administrations made matters worse. Clearly, a universal healthcare program will require flipping the script on the entire private insurance industry, which employed over half a million people last year. Obviously, the most volatile debate concerning a national universal healthcare system concerns cost. Although there is already a socialized healthcare system in place -- every federal legislator, bureaucrat, government employee and veteran benefits from it -- fiscal Republican conservatives and groups such as the Koch Brothers network are single-mindedly dedicated to preventing the expansion of Medicare and Medicaid. A Koch-funded Mercatus analysis made the outrageous claim that a single-payer system would increase federal health spending by $32 trillion in ten years. However, analyses and reviews by the Congressional Budget Office in the early 1990s concluded that such a system would only increase spending at the start; enormous savings would quickly offset it as the years pass. In one analysis, "the savings in administrative costs [10 percent of health spending] would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage." Defenders of those advocating for funding a National Health Program argue this can primarily be accomplished by raising taxes to levels comparable to other developed nations. This was a platform Senator Bernie Sanders and some of the younger progressive Democrats in the House campaigned on. The strategy was to tax the highest multimillion-dollar earners 60-70 percent. Despite the outrage of its critics, including old rank-and-file multi-millionaire Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, this is still far less than in the past. During the Korean War, the top tax rate was 91 percent; it declined to 70 percent in the late 1960s. Throughout most of the 1970s, those in the lowest income bracket were taxed at 14 percent. We are not advocating for this strategy because it ignores where the funding is going, and the corruption in the system that is contributing to exorbitant waste. But Democratic supporters of the ACA who oppose a universal healthcare plan ignore the additional taxes Obama levied to pay for the program. These included surtaxes on investment income, Medicare taxes from those earning over $200,000, taxes on tanning services, an excise tax on medical equipment, and a 40 percent tax on health coverage for costs over the designated cap that applied to flexible savings and health savings accounts. The entire ACA was reckless, sloppy and unnecessarily complicated from the start. The fact that Obamacare further strengthened the distinctions between two parallel systems -- federal and private -- with entirely different economic structures created a labyrinth of red tape, rules, and wasteful bureaucracy. Since the ACA went into effect, over 150 new boards, agencies and programs have had to be established to monitor its 2,700 pages of gibberish. A federal single-payer system would easily eliminate this bureaucracy and waste. A medical New Deal to establish universal healthcare coverage is a decisive step in the correct direction. But we must look at the crisis holistically and in a systematic way. Simply shuffling private insurance into a federal Medicare-for-all or buy-in program, funded by taxing the wealthiest of citizens, would only temporarily reduce costs. It will neither curtail nor slash escalating disease rates e. Any effective healthcare reform must also tackle the underlying reasons for Americans' poor state of health. We cannot shy away from examining the social illnesses infecting our entire free-market capitalist culture and its addiction to deregulation. A viable healthcare model would have to structurally transform how the medical economy operates. Finally, a successful medical New Deal must honestly evaluate the best and most reliable scientific evidence in order to effectively redirect public health spending. For example, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a former Obama healthcare adviser, observed that AIDS-HIV measures consume the most public health spending, even though the disease "ranked 75th on the list of diseases by personal health expenditures." On the other hand, according to the American Medical Association, a large percentage of the nation's $3.4 trillion healthcare spending goes towards treating preventable diseases, notably diabetes, common forms of heart disease, and back and neck pain conditions. In 2016, these three conditions were the most costly and accounted for approximately $277 billion in spending. Last year, the CDC announced the autism rate is now 1 in 36 children compared to 1 in 44 two years ago. A retracted study by Mark Blaxill, an autism activist at the Holland Center and a friend of the authors, estimates that ASD costs will reach $589 billion annually by 2030. There are no signs that this alarming trend will reverse and decline; and yet, our entire federal health system has failed to conscientiously investigate the underlying causes of this epidemic. All explanations that might interfere with the pharmaceutical industry's unchecked growth, such as over-vaccination, are ignored and viciously discredited without any sound scientific evidence. Therefore, a proper medical New Deal will require a systemic overhaul and reform of our federal health agencies, especially the HHS, CDC and FDA. Only the Robert Kennedy Jr presidential campaign is even addressing the crisis and has an inexpensive and comprehensive plan to deal with it. For any medical revolution to succeed in advancing universal healthcare, the plan must prioritize spending in a manner that serves public health and not private interests. It will also require reshuffling private corporate interests and their lobbyists to the sidelines, away from any strategic planning, in order to break up the private interests' control over federal agencies and its revolving door policies. Aside from those who benefit from this medical corruption, the overwhelming majority of Americans would agree with this criticism. However, there is a complete lack of national trust that our legislators, including the so-called progressives, would be willing to undertake such actions. In addition, America's healthcare system ignores the single most critical initiative to reduce costs - that is, preventative efforts and programs instead of deregulation and closing loopholes designed to protect the drug and insurance industries' bottom line. Prevention can begin with banning toxic chemicals that are proven health hazards associated with current disease epidemics, and it can begin by removing a 1,000-plus toxins already banned in Europe. This should be a no-brainer for any legislator who cares for public health. For example, Stacy Malkan, co-founder of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, notes that "the policy approach in the US and Europe is dramatically different" when it comes to chemical allowances in cosmetic products. Whereas the EU has banned 1,328 toxic substances from the cosmetic industry alone, the US has banned only 11. The US continues to allow carcinogenic formaldehyde, petroleum, forever chemicals, many parabens (an estrogen mimicker and endocrine hormone destroyer), the highly allergenic p-phenylenediamine or PBD, triclosan, which has been associated with the rise in antibiotic resistant bacteria, avobenzone, and many others to be used in cosmetics, sunscreens, shampoo and hair dyes. Next, the food Americans consume can be reevaluated for its health benefits. There should be no hesitation to tax the unhealthiest foods, such as commercial junk food, sodas and candy relying on high fructose corn syrup, products that contain ingredients proven to be toxic, and meat products laden with dangerous chemicals including growth hormones and antibiotics. The scientific evidence that the average American diet is contributing to rising disease trends is indisputable. We could also implement additional taxes on the public advertising of these demonstrably unhealthy products. All such tax revenue would accrue to a national universal health program to offset medical expenditures associated with the very illnesses linked to these products. Although such tax measures would help pay for a new medical New Deal, it may be combined with programs to educate the public about healthy nutrition if it is to produce a reduction in the most common preventable diseases. In fact, comprehensive nutrition courses in medical schools should be mandatory because the average physician receives no education in this crucial subject. In addition, preventative health education should be mandatory throughout public school systems. Private insurers force hospitals, clinics and private physicians into financial corners, and this is contributing to prodigious waste in money and resources. Annually, healthcare spending towards medical liability insurance costs tens of billions of dollars. In particular, this economic burden has taxed small clinics and physicians. It is well past the time that physician liability insurance is replaced with no-fault options. Today's doctors are spending an inordinate amount of money to protect themselves. Legions of liability and trial lawyers seek big paydays for themselves stemming from physician error. This has created a culture of fear among doctors and hospitals, resulting in the overly cautious practice of defensive medicine, driving up costs and insurance premiums just to avoid lawsuits. Doctors are forced to order unnecessary tests and prescribe more medications and medical procedures just to cover their backsides. No-fault insurance is a common-sense plan that enables physicians to pursue their profession in a manner that will reduce iatrogenic injuries and costs. Individual cases requiring additional medical intervention and loss of income would still be compensated. This would generate huge savings. No other nation suffers from the scourge of excessive drug price gouging like the US. After many years of haggling to lower prices and increase access to generic drugs, only a minute amount of progress has been made in recent years. A 60 Minutes feature about the Affordable Care Act reported an "orgy of lobbying and backroom deals in which just about everyone with a stake in the $3-trillion-a-year health industry came out ahead—except the taxpayers.” For example, Life Extension magazine reported that an antiviral cream (acyclovir), which had lost its patent protection, "was being sold to pharmacies for 7,500% over the active ingredient cost. The active ingredient (acyclovir) costs only 8 pennies, yet pharmacies are paying a generic maker $600 for this drug and selling it to consumers for around $700." Other examples include the antibiotic Doxycycline. The price per pill averages 7 cents to $3.36 but has a 5,300 percent markup when it reaches the consumer. The antidepressant Clomipramine is marked up 3,780 percent, and the anti-hypertensive drug Captopril's mark-up is 2,850 percent. And these are generic drugs! Medication costs need to be dramatically cut to allow drug manufacturers a reasonable but not obscene profit margin. By capping profits approximately 100 percent above all costs, we would save our system hundreds of billions of dollars. Such a measure would also extirpate the growing corporate misdemeanors of pricing fraud, which forces patients to pay out-of-pocket in order to make up for the costs insurers are unwilling to pay. Finally, we can acknowledge that our healthcare is fundamentally a despotic rationing system based upon high insurance costs vis-a-vis a toss of the dice to determine where a person sits on the economic ladder. For the past three decades it has contributed to inequality. The present insurance-based economic metrics cast millions of Americans out of coverage because private insurance costs are beyond their means. Uwe Reinhardt, a Princeton University political economist, has called our system "brutal" because it "rations [people] out of the system." He defined rationing as "withholding something from someone that is beneficial." Discriminatory healthcare rationing now affects upwards to 60 million people who have been either priced out of the system or under insured. They make too much to qualify for Medicare under Obamacare, yet earn far too little to afford private insurance costs and premiums. In the final analysis, the entire system is discriminatory and predatory. However, we must be realistic. Almost every member of Congress has benefited from Big Pharma and private insurance lobbyists. The only way to begin to bring our healthcare program up to the level of a truly developed nation is to remove the drug industry's rampant and unnecessary profiteering from the equation. How did Fauci memory-hole a cure for AIDS and get away with it? By Helen Buyniski Over 700,000 Americans have died of AIDS since 1981, with the disease claiming some 42.3 million victims worldwide. While an HIV diagnosis is no longer considered a certain death sentence, the disease looms large in the public imagination and in public health funding, with contemporary treatments running into thousands of dollars per patient annually. But was there a cure for AIDS all this time - an affordable and safe treatment that was ruthlessly suppressed and attacked by the US public health bureaucracy and its agents? Could this have saved millions of lives and billions of dollars spent on AZT, ddI and failed HIV vaccine trials? What could possibly justify the decision to disappear a safe and effective approach down the memory hole? The inventor of the cure, Gary Null, already had several decades of experience creating healing protocols for physicians to help patients not responding well to conventional treatments by the time AIDS was officially defined in 1981. Null, a registered dietitian and board-certified nutritionist with a PhD in human nutrition and public health science, was a senior research fellow and Director of Anti-Aging Medicine at the Institute of Applied Biology for 36 years and has published over 950 papers, conducting groundbreaking experiments in reversing biological aging as confirmed with DNA methylation testing. Additionally, Null is a multi-award-winning documentary filmmaker, bestselling author, and investigative journalist whose work exposing crimes against humanity over the last 50 years has highlighted abuses by Big Pharma, the military-industrial complex, the financial industry, and the permanent government stay-behind networks that have come to be known as the Deep State. Null was contacted in 1974 by Dr. Stephen Caiazza, a physician working with a subculture of gay men in New York living the so-called “fast track” lifestyle, an extreme manifestation of the gay liberation movement that began with the Stonewall riots. Defined by rampant sexual promiscuity and copious use of illegal and prescription drugs, including heavy antibiotic use for a cornucopia of sexually-transmitted diseases, the fast-track never included more than about two percent of gay men, though these dominated many of the bathhouses and clubs that defined gay nightlife in the era. These patients had become seriously ill as a result of their indulgence, generally arriving at the clinic with multiple STDs including cytomegalovirus and several types of herpes and hepatitis, along with candida overgrowth, nutritional deficiencies, gut issues, and recurring pneumonia. Every week for the next 10 years, Null would counsel two or three of these men - a total of 800 patients - on how to detoxify their bodies and de-stress their lives, tracking their progress with Caiazza and the other providers at weekly feedback meetings that he credits with allowing the team to quickly evaluate which treatments were most effective. He observed that it only took about two years on the “fast track” for a healthy young person to begin seeing muscle loss and the recurrent, lingering opportunistic infections that would later come to be associated with AIDS - while those willing to commit to a healthier lifestyle could regain their health in about a year. It was with this background that Null established the Tri-State Healing Center in Manhattan in 1980, staffing the facility with what would eventually run to 22 certified health professionals to offer safe, natural, and effective low- and no-cost treatments to thousands of patients with HIV and AIDS-defining conditions. Null and his staff used variations of the protocols he had perfected with Caiazza's patients, a multifactorial patient-tailored approach that included high-dose vitamin C drips, intravenous ozone therapy, juicing and nutritional improvements and supplementation, aspects of homeopathy and naturopathy with some Traditional Chinese Medicine and Ayurvedic practices. Additional services offered on-site included acupuncture and holistic dentistry, while peer support groups were also held at the facility so that patients could find community and a positive environment, healing their minds and spirits while they healed their bodies. “Instead of trying to kill the virus with antiretroviral pharmaceuticals designed to stop viral replication before it kills patients, we focused on what benefits could be gained by building up the patients' natural immunity and restoring biochemical integrity so the body could fight for itself,” Null wrote in a 2014 article describing the philosophy behind the Center's approach, which was wholly at odds with the pharmaceutical model.1 Patients were comprehensively tested every week, with any “recovery” defined solely by the labs, which documented AIDS patient after patient - 1,200 of them - returning to good health and reversing their debilitating conditions. Null claims to have never lost an AIDS patient in the Center's care, even as the death toll for the disease - and its pharmaceutical standard of care AZT - reached an all-time high in the early 1990s. Eight patients who had opted for a more intensive course of treatment - visiting the Center six days a week rather than one - actually sero-deconverted, with repeated subsequent testing showing no trace of HIV in their bodies. As an experienced clinical researcher himself, Null recognized that any claims made by the Center would be massively scrutinized, challenging as they did the prevailing scientific consensus that AIDS was an incurable, terminal illness. He freely gave his protocols to any medical practitioner who asked, understanding that his own work could be considered scientifically valid only if others could replicate it under the same conditions. After weeks of daily observational visits to the Center, Dr. Robert Cathcart took the protocols back to San Francisco, where he excitedly reported that patients were no longer dying in his care. Null's own colleague at the Institute of Applied Biology, senior research fellow Elana Avram, set up IV drip rooms at the Institute and used his intensive protocols to sero-deconvert 10 patients over a two-year period. While the experiment had been conducted in secret, as the Institute had been funded by Big Pharma since its inception half a century earlier, Avram had hoped she would be able to publish a journal article to further publicize Null's protocols and potentially help AIDS patients, who were still dying at incredibly high rates thanks to Burroughs Wellcome's noxious but profitable AZT. But as she would later explain in a 2019 letter to Null, their groundbreaking research never made it into print - despite meticulous documentation of their successes - because the Institute's director and board feared their pharmaceutical benefactors would withdraw the funding on which they depended, given that Null's protocols did not involve any patentable or otherwise profitable drugs. When Avram approached them about publication, the board vetoed the idea, arguing that it would “draw negative attention because [the work] was contrary to standard drug treatments.” With no real point in continuing experiments along those lines without institutional support and no hope of obtaining funding from elsewhere, the department she had created specifically for these experiments shut down after a two-year followup with her test subjects - all of whom remained alive and healthy - was completed.2 While the Center was receiving regular visits by this time from medical professionals and, increasingly, black celebrities like Stokely Carmichael and Isaac Hayes, who would occasionally perform for the patients, the news was spreading by word of mouth alone - not a single media outlet had dared to document the clinic that was curing AIDS patients for free. Instead, they gave airtime to Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, who had for years been spreading baseless, hysteria-fueling claims about HIV and AIDS to any news outlet that would put him on. His claim that children could contract the virus from “ordinary household conduct” with an infected relative proved so outrageous he had to walk it back,3 and he never really stopped insisting the deadly plague associated with gays and drug users was about to explode like a nuclear bomb among the law-abiding heterosexual population. Fauci by this time controlled all government science funding through NIAID, and his zero-tolerance approach to dissent on the HIV/AIDS front had already seen prominent scientists like virologist Peter Duesberg stripped of the resources they needed for their work because they had dared to question his commandment: There is no cause of AIDS but HIV, and AZT is its treatment. Even the AIDS activist groups, which by then had been coopted by Big Pharma and essentially reduced to astroturfing for the toxic failed chemotherapy drug AZT backed by the institutional might of Fauci's NIAID,4 didn't seem to want to hear that there was a cure. Unconcerned with the irrationality of denouncing the man touting his free AIDS cure as an “AIDS denier,” they warned journalists that platforming Null or anyone else rejecting the mainstream medical line would be met with organized demands for their firing. Determined to breach the institutional iron curtain and get his message to the masses, Null and his team staged a press conference in New York, inviting scientists and doctors from around the world to share their research on alternative approaches to HIV and AIDS in 1993. To emphasize the sound scientific basis of the Center's protocols and encourage guests to adopt them into their own practices, Null printed out thousands of abstracts in support of each nutrient and treatment being used. However, despite over 7,000 invitations sent three times to major media, government figures, scientists, and activists, almost none of the intended audience members showed up. Over 100 AIDS patients and their doctors, whose charts exhaustively documented their improvements using natural and nontoxic modalities over the preceding 12 months, gave filmed testimonials, declaring that the feared disease was no longer a death sentence, but the conference had effectively been silenced. Bill Tatum, publisher of the Amsterdam News, suggested Null and his patients would find a more welcoming audience in his home neighborhood of Harlem - specifically, its iconic Apollo Theatre. For three nights, the theater was packed to capacity. Hit especially hard by the epidemic and distrustful of a medical system that had only recently stopped being openly racist (the Tuskegee syphilis experiment only ended in 1972), black Americans, at least, did not seem to care what Anthony Fauci would do if he found out they were investigating alternatives to AZT and death. PBS journalist Tony Brown, having obtained a copy of the video of patient testimonials from the failed press conference, was among a handful of black journalists who began visiting the Center to investigate the legitimacy of Null's claims. Satisfied they had something significant to offer his audience, Brown invited eight patients - along with Null himself - onto his program over the course of several episodes to discuss the work. It was the first time these protocols had received any attention in the media, despite Null having released nearly two dozen articles and multiple documentaries on the subject by that time. A typical patient on one program, Al, a recovered IV drug user who was diagnosed with AIDS at age 32, described how he “panicked,” saw a doctor and started taking AZT despite his misgivings - only to be forced to discontinue the drug after just a few weeks due to his condition deteriorating rapidly. Researching alternatives brought him to Null, and after six months of “detoxing [his] lifestyle,” he observed his initial symptoms - swollen lymph nodes and weight loss - begin to reverse, culminating with sero-deconversion. On Bill McCreary's Channel 5 program, a married couple diagnosed with HIV described how they watched their T-cell counts increase as they cut out sugar, caffeine, smoking, and drinking and began eating a healthy diet. They also saw the virus leave their bodies. For HIV-positive viewers surrounded by fear and negativity, watching healthy-looking, cheerful “AIDS patients” detail their recovery while Null backed up their claims with charts must have been balm for the soul. But the TV programs were also a form of outreach to the medical community, with patients' charts always on hand to convince skeptics the cure was scientifically valid. Null brought patients' charts to every program, urging them to keep an open mind: “Other physicians and public health officials should know that there's good science in the alternative perspective. It may not be a therapy that they're familiar with, because they're just not trained in it, but if the results are positive, and you can document them…” He challenged doubters to send in charts from their own sero-deconverted patients on AZT, and volunteered to debate proponents of the orthodox treatment paradigm - though the NIH and WHO both refused to participate in such a debate on Tony Brown's Journal, following Fauci's directive prohibiting engagement with forbidden ideas. Aside from those few TV programs and Null's own films, suppression of Null's AIDS cure beyond word of mouth was total. The 2021 documentary The Cost of Denial, produced by the Society for Independent Journalists, tells the story of the Tri-State Healing Center and the medical paradigm that sought to destroy it, lamenting the loss of the lives that might have been saved in a more enlightened society. Nurse practitioner Luanne Pennesi, who treated many of the AIDS patients at the Center, speculated in the film that the refusal by the scientific establishment and AIDS activists to accept their successes was financially motivated. “It was as if they didn't want this information to get out. Understand that our healthcare system as we know it is a corporation, it's a corporate model, and it's about generating revenue. My concern was that maybe they couldn't generate enough revenue from these natural approaches.”5 Funding was certainly the main disciplinary tool Fauci's NIAID used to keep the scientific community in line. Despite the massive community interest in the work being done at the Center, no foundation or institution would defy Fauci and risk getting itself blacklisted, leaving Null to continue funding the operation out of his pocket with the profits from book sales. After 15 years, he left the Center in 1995, convinced the mainstream model had so thoroughly been institutionalized that there was no chance of overthrowing it. He has continued to counsel patients and advocate for a reappraisal of the HIV=AIDS hypothesis and its pharmaceutical treatments, highlighting the deeply flawed science underpinning the model of the disease espoused by the scientific establishment in 39 articles, six documentaries and a 700-page textbook on AIDS, but the Center's achievements have been effectively memory-holed by Fauci's multi-billion-dollar propaganda apparatus. FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE To understand just how much of a threat Null's work was to the HIV/AIDS establishment, it is instructive to revisit the 1984 paper, published by Dr. Robert Gallo of the National Cancer Institute, that established HIV as the sole cause of AIDS. The CDC's official recognition of AIDS in 1981 had done little to quell the mounting public panic over the mysterious illness afflicting gay men in the US, as the agency had effectively admitted it had no idea what was causing them to sicken and die. As years passed with no progress determining the causative agent of the plague, activist groups like Gay Men's Health Crisis disrupted public events and threatened further mass civil disobedience as they excoriated the NIH for its sluggish allocation of government science funding to uncovering the cause of the “gay cancer.”6 When Gallo published his paper declaring that the retrovirus we now know as HIV was the sole “probable” cause of AIDS, its simple, single-factor hypothesis was the answer to the scientific establishment's prayers. This was particularly true for Fauci, as the NIAID chief was able to claim the hot new disease as his agency's own domain in what has been described as a “dramatic confrontation” with his rival Sam Broder at the National Cancer Institute. After all, Fauci pointed out, Gallo's findings - presented by Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler as if they were gospel truth before any other scientists had had a chance to inspect them, never mind conduct a full peer review - clearly classified AIDS as an infectious disease, and not a cancer like the Kaposi's sarcoma which was at the time its most visible manifestation. Money and media attention began pouring in, even as funding for the investigation of other potential causes of AIDS dried up. Having already patented a diagnostic test for “his” retrovirus before introducing it to the world, Gallo was poised for a financial windfall, while Fauci was busily leveraging the discovery into full bureaucratic empire of the US scientific apparatus. While it would serve as the sole basis for all US government-backed AIDS research to follow - quickly turning Gallo into the most-cited scientist in the world during the 1980s,7 Gallo's “discovery” of HIV was deeply problematic. The sample that yielded the momentous discovery actually belonged to Prof. Luc Montagnier of the French Institut Pasteur, a fact Gallo finally admitted in 1991, four years after a lawsuit from the French government challenged his patent on the HIV antibody test, forcing the US government to negotiate a hasty profit-sharing agreement between Gallo's and Montagnier's labs. That lawsuit triggered a cascade of official investigations into scientific misconduct by Gallo, and evidence submitted during one of these probes, unearthed in 2008 by journalist Janine Roberts, revealed a much deeper problem with the seminal “discovery.” While Gallo's co-author, Mikulas Popovic, had concluded after numerous experiments with the French samples that the virus they contained was not the cause of AIDS, Gallo had drastically altered the paper's conclusion, scribbling his notes in the margins, and submitted it for publication to the journal Science without informing his co-author. After Roberts shared her discovery with contacts in the scientific community, 37 scientific experts wrote to the journal demanding that Gallo's career-defining HIV paper be retracted from Science for lacking scientific integrity.8 Their call, backed by an endorsement from the 2,600-member scientific organization Rethinking AIDS, was ignored by the publication and by the rest of mainstream science despite - or perhaps because of - its profound implications. That 2008 letter, addressed to Science editor-in-chief Bruce Alberts and copied to American Association for the Advancement of Science CEO Alan Leshner, is worth reproducing here in its entirety, as it utterly dismantles Gallo's hypothesis - and with them the entire HIV is the sole cause of AIDS dogma upon which the contemporary medical model of the disease rests: On May 4, 1984 your journal published four papers by a group led by Dr. Robert Gallo. We are writing to express our serious concerns with regard to the integrity and veracity of the lead paper among these four of which Dr. Mikulas Popovic is the lead author.[1] The other three are also of concern because they rely upon the conclusions of the lead paper .[2][3][4] In the early 1990s, several highly critical reports on the research underlying these papers were produced as a result of governmental inquiries working under the supervision of scientists nominated by the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine. The Office of Research Integrity of the US Department of Health and Human Services concluded that the lead paper was “fraught with false and erroneous statements,” and that the “ORI believes that the careless and unacceptable keeping of research records...reflects irresponsible laboratory management that has permanently impaired the ability to retrace the important steps taken.”[5] Further, a Congressional Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations led by US Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan produced a staff report on the papers which contains scathing criticisms of their integrity.[6] Despite the publically available record of challenges to their veracity, these papers have remained uncorrected and continue to be part of the scientific record. What prompts our communication today is the recent revelation of an astonishing number of previously unreported deletions and unjustified alterations made by Gallo to the lead paper. There are several documents originating from Gallo's laboratory that, while available for some time, have only recently been fully analyzed. These include a draft of the lead paper typewritten by Popovic which contains handwritten changes made to it by Gallo.[7] This draft was the key evidence used in the above described inquiries to establish that Gallo had concealed his laboratory's use of a cell culture sample (known as LAV) which it received from the Institut Pasteur. These earlier inquiries verified that the typed manuscript draft was produced by Popovic who had carried out the recorded experiment while his laboratory chief, Gallo, was in Europe and that, upon his return, Gallo changed the document by hand a few days before it was submitted to Science on March 30, 1984. According to the ORI investigation, “Dr. Gallo systematically rewrote the manuscript for what would become a renowned LTCB [Gallo's laboratory at the National Cancer Institute] paper.”[5] This document provided the important evidence that established the basis for awarding Dr. Luc Montagnier and Dr. Francoise Barré-Sinoussi the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine for the discovery of the AIDS virus by proving it was their samples of LAV that Popovic used in his key experiment. The draft reveals that Popovic had forthrightly admitted using the French samples of LAV renamed as Gallo's virus, HTLV-III, and that Gallo had deleted this admission, concealing their use of LAV. However, it has not been previously reported that on page three of this same document Gallo had also deleted Popovic's unambiguous statement that, "Despite intensive research efforts, the causative agent of AIDS has not yet been identified,” replacing it in the published paper with a statement that said practically the opposite, namely, “That a retrovirus of the HTLV family might be an etiologic agent of AIDS was suggested by the findings.” It is clear that the rest of Popovic's typed paper is entirely consistent with his statement that the cause of AIDS had not been found, despite his use of the French LAV. Popovic's final conclusion was that the culture he produced “provides the possibility” for detailed studies. He claimed to have achieved nothing more. At no point in his paper did Popovic attempt to prove that any virus caused AIDS, and it is evident that Gallo concealed these key elements in Popovic's experimental findings. It is astonishing now to discover these unreported changes to such a seminal document. We can only assume that Gallo's alterations of Popovic's conclusions were not highlighted by earlier inquiries because the focus at the time was on establishing that the sample used by Gallo's lab came from Montagnier and was not independently collected by Gallo. In fact, the only attention paid to the deletions made by Gallo pertains to his effort to hide the identity of the sample. The questions of whether Gallo and Popovic's research proved that LAV or any other virus was the cause of AIDS were clearly not considered. Related to these questions are other long overlooked documents that merit your attention. One of these is a letter from Dr. Matthew A. Gonda, then Head of the Electron Microscopy Laboratory at the National Cancer Institute, which is addressed to Popovic, copied to Gallo and dated just four days prior to Gallo's submission to Science.[8] In this letter, Gonda remarks on samples he had been sent for imaging because “Dr Gallo wanted these micrographs for publication because they contain HTLV.” He states, “I do not believe any of the particles photographed are of HTLV-I, II or III.” According to Gonda, one sample contained cellular debris, while another had no particles near the size of a retrovirus. Despite Gonda's clearly worded statement, Science published on May 4, 1984 papers attributed to Gallo et al with micrographs attributed to Gonda and described unequivocally as HTLV-III. In another letter by Gallo, dated one day before he submitted his papers to Science, Gallo states, “It's extremely rare to find fresh cells [from AIDS patients] expressing the virus... cell culture seems to be necessary to induce virus,” a statement which raises the possibility he was working with a laboratory artifact. [9] Included here are copies of these documents and links to the same. The very serious flaws they reveal in the preparation of the lead paper published in your journal in 1984 prompts our request that this paper be withdrawn. It appears that key experimental findings have been concealed. We further request that the three associated papers published on the same date also be withdrawn as they depend on the accuracy of this paper. For the scientific record to be reliable, it is vital that papers shown to be flawed, or falsified be retracted. Because a very public record now exists showing that the Gallo papers drew unjustified conclusions, their withdrawal from Science is all the more important to maintain integrity. Future researchers must also understand they cannot rely on the 1984 Gallo papers for statements about HIV and AIDS, and all authors of papers that previously relied on this set of four papers should have the opportunity to consider whether their own conclusions are weakened by these revelations. Gallo's handwritten revision, submitted without his colleague's knowledge despite multiple experiments that failed to support the new conclusion, was the sole foundation for the HIV=AIDS hypothesis. Had Science published the manuscript the way Popovic had typed it, there would be no AIDS “pandemic” - merely small clusters of people with AIDS. Without a viral hypothesis backing the development of expensive and deadly pharmaceuticals, would Fauci have allowed these patients to learn about the cure that existed all along? Faced with a potential rebellion, Fauci marshaled the full resources under his control to squelch the publication of the investigations into Gallo and restrict any discussion of competing hypotheses in the scientific and mainstream press, which had been running virus-scare stories full-time since 1984. The effect was total, according to biochemist Dr. Kary Mullis, inventor of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedure. In a 2009 interview, Mullis recalled his own shock when he attempted to unearth the experimental basis for the HIV=AIDS hypothesis. Despite his extensive inquiry into the literature, “there wasn't a scientific reference…[that] said ‘here's how come we know that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.' There was nothing out there like that.”9 This yawning void at the core of HIV/AIDS “science" turned him into a strident critic of AIDS dogma - and those views made him persona non grata where the scientific press was concerned, suddenly unable to publish a single paper despite having won the Nobel Prize for his invention of the PCR test just weeks before. 10 DISSENT BECOMES “DENIAL” While many of those who dissent from the orthodox HIV=AIDS view believe HIV plays a role in the development of AIDS, they point to lifestyle and other co-factors as being equally if not more important. Individuals who test positive for HIV can live for decades in perfect health - so long as they don't take AZT or the other toxic antivirals fast-tracked by Fauci's NIAID - but those who developed full-blown AIDS generally engaged in highly risky behaviors like extreme promiscuity and prodigious drug abuse, contracting STDs they took large quantities of antibiotics to treat, further running down their immune systems. While AIDS was largely portrayed as a “gay disease,” it was only the “fast track” gays, hooking up with dozens of partners nightly in sex marathons fueled by “poppers” (nitrate inhalants notorious for their own devastating effects on the immune system), who became sick. Kaposi's sarcoma, one of the original AIDS-defining conditions, was widespread among poppers-using gay men, but never appeared among IV drug users or hemophiliacs, the other two main risk groups during the early years of the epidemic. Even Robert Gallo himself, at a 1994 conference on poppers held by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, would admit that the previously-rare form of skin cancer surging among gay men was not primarily caused by HIV - and that it was immune stimulation, rather than suppression, that was likely responsible.11 Similarly, IV drug users are often riddled with opportunistic infections as their habit depresses the immune system and their focus on maintaining their addiction means that healthier habits - like good nutrition and even basic hygiene - fall by the wayside. Supporting the call for revising the HIV=AIDS hypothesis to include co-factors is the fact that the mass heterosexual outbreaks long predicted by Fauci and his ilk in seemingly every country on Earth have failed to materialize, except - supposedly - in Africa, where the diagnostic standard for AIDS differs dramatically from those of the West. Given the prohibitively high cost of HIV testing for poor African nations, the WHO in 1985 crafted a diagnostic loophole that became known as the “Bangui definition,” allowing medical professionals to diagnose AIDS in the absence of a test using just clinical symptoms: high fever, persistent cough, at least 30 days of diarrhea, and the loss of 10% of one's body weight within two months. Often suffering from malnutrition and without access to clean drinking water, many of the inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa fit the bill, especially when the WHO added tuberculosis to the list of AIDS-defining illnesses in 1993 - a move which may be responsible for as many as one half of African “AIDS” cases, according to journalist Christine Johnson. The WHO's former Chief of Global HIV Surveillance, James Chin, acknowledged their manipulation of statistics, but stressed that it was the entire AIDS industry - not just his organization - perpetrating the fraud. “There's the saying that, if you knew what sausages are made of, most people would hesitate to sort of eat them, because they wouldn't like what's in it. And if you knew how HIV/AIDS numbers are cooked, or made up, you would use them with extreme caution,” Chin told an interviewer in 2009.12 With infected numbers stubbornly remaining constant in the US despite Fauci's fearmongering projections of the looming heterosexually-transmitted plague, the CDC in 1993 broadened its definition of AIDS to include asymptomatic (that is, healthy) HIV-positive people with low T-cell counts - an absurd criteria given that an individual's T-cell count can fluctuate by hundreds within a single day. As a result, the number of “AIDS cases” in the US immediately doubled. Supervised by Fauci, the NIAID had been quietly piling on diseases into the “AIDS-related” category for years, bloating the list from just two conditions - pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and Kaposi's sarcoma - to 30 so fast it raised eyebrows among some of science's leading lights. Deeming the entire process “bizarre” and unprecedented, Kary Mullis wondered aloud why no one had called the AIDS establishment out: “There's something wrong here. And it's got to be financial.”13 Indeed, an early CDC public relations campaign was exposed by the Wall Street Journal in 1987 as having deliberately mischaracterized AIDS as a threat to the entire population so as to garner increased public and private funding for what was very much a niche issue, with the risk to average heterosexuals from a single act of sex “smaller than the risk of ever getting hit by lightning.” Ironically, the ads, which sought to humanize AIDS patients in an era when few Americans knew anyone with the disease and more than half the adult population thought infected people should be forced to carry cards warning of their status, could be seen as a reaction to the fear tactics deployed by Fauci early on.14 It's hard to tell where fraud ends and incompetence begins with Gallo's HIV antibody test. Much like Covid-19 would become a “pandemic of testing,” with murder victims and motorcycle crashes lumped into “Covid deaths” thanks to over-sensitized PCR tests that yielded as many as 90% false positives,15 HIV testing is fraught with false positives - and unlike with Covid-19, most people who hear they are HIV-positive still believe they are receiving a death sentence. Due to the difficulty of isolating HIV itself from human samples, the most common diagnostic tests, ELISA and the Western Blot, are designed to detect not the virus but antibodies to it, upending the traditional medical understanding that the presence of antibodies indicates only exposure - and often that the body has actually vanquished the pathogen. Patients are known to test positive for HIV antibodies in the absence of the virus due to at least 70 other conditions, including hepatitis, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, syphilis, recent vaccination or even pregnancy. (https://www.chcfl.org/diseases-that-can-cause-a-false-positive-hiv-test/) Positive results are often followed up with a PCR “viral load” test, even though the inventor of the PCR technique Kary Mullis famously condemned its misuse as a tool for diagnosing infection. Packaging inserts for all three tests warn the user that they cannot be reliably used to diagnose HIV.16 The ELISA HIV antibody test explicitly states: “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence and absence of HIV antibody in human blood.”17 That the public remains largely unaware of these and other massive holes in the supposedly airtight HIV=AIDS=DEATH paradigm is a testament to Fauci's multi-layered control of the press. Like the writers of the Great Barrington Declaration and other Covid-19 dissidents, scientists who question HIV/AIDS dogma have been brutally punished for their heresy, no matter how prestigious their prior standing in the field and no matter how much evidence they have for their own claims. In 1987, the year the FDA's approval of AZT made AIDS the most profitable epidemic yet (a dubious designation Covid-19 has since surpassed), Fauci made it clearer than ever that scientific inquiry and debate - the basis of the scientific method - would no longer be welcome in the American public health sector, eliminating retrovirologist Peter Duesberg, then one of the most prominent opponents of the HIV=AIDS hypothesis, from the scientific conversation with a professional disemboweling that would make a cartel hitman blush. Duesberg had just eviscerated Gallo's 1984 HIV paper with an article of his own in the journal Cancer Research, pointing out that retroviruses had never before been found to cause a single disease in humans - let alone 30 AIDS-defining diseases. Rather than allow Gallo or any of the other scientists in his camp to respond to the challenge, Fauci waged a scorched-earth campaign against Duesberg, who had until then been one of the most highly regarded researchers in his field. Every research grant he requested was denied; every media appearance was canceled or preempted. The University of California at Berkeley, unable to fully fire him due to tenure, took away his lab, his graduate students, and the rest of his funding. The few colleagues who dared speak up for him in public were also attacked, while enemies and opportunists were encouraged to slander Duesberg at the conferences he was barred from attending and in the journals that would no longer publish his replies. When Duesberg was summoned to the White House later that year by then-President Ronald Reagan to debate Fauci on the origins of AIDS, Fauci convinced the president to cancel, allegedly pulling rank on the Commander-in-Chief with an accusation that the “White House was interfering in scientific matters that belonged to the NIH and the Office of Science and Technology Assessment.” After seven years of this treatment, Duesberg was contacted by NIH official Stephen O'Brien and offered an escape from professional purgatory. He could have “everything back,” he was told, and shown a manuscript of a scientific paper - apparently commissioned by the editor of the journal Nature - “HIV Causes AIDS: Koch's Postulates Fulfilled” with his own name listed alongside O'Brien's as an author.18 His refusal to take the bribe effectively guaranteed the epithet “AIDS denier” will appear on his tombstone. The character assassination of Duesberg became a template that would be deployed to great effectiveness wherever Fauci encountered dissent - never debate, only demonize, deplatform and destroy. Even Luc Montagnier, the real discoverer of HIV, soon found himself on the wrong side of the Fauci machine. With his 1990 declaration that “the HIV virus [by itself] is harmless and passive, a benign virus,” Montagnier began distancing himself from Gallo's fraud, effectively placing a target on his own back. In a 1995 interview, he elaborated: “four factors that have come together to account for the sudden epidemic [of AIDS]: HIV presence, immune hyper-activation, increased sexually transmitted disease incidence, sexual behavior changes and other behavioral changes” such as drug use, poor nutrition and stress - all of which he said had to occur “essentially simultaneously” for HIV to be transmitted, creating the modern epidemic. Like the professionals at the Tri-State Healing Center, Montagnier advocated for the use of antioxidants like vitamin C and N-acetyl cysteine, naming oxidative stress as a critical factor in the progression from HIV to AIDS.19 When Montagnier died in 2022, Fauci's media mouthpieces sneered that the scientist (who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2008 for his discovery of HIV, despite his flagging faith in that discovery's significance) “started espousing views devoid of a scientific basis” in the late 2000s, leading him to be “shunned by the scientific community.”20 In a particularly egregious jab, the Washington Post's obit sings the praises of Robert Gallo, implying it was the American scientist who really should have won the Nobel for HIV, while dismissing as “
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
