The World and Everything in It: August 28, 2023

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by listeners like us. My name is Jason Kiefer, financial advisor from Ocean City New Jersey, America's greatest family resort. I hope you enjoy today's program.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning!

The Biden administration announced big changes in how the military handles sexual assault claims. You’ll hear from the man in charge of prosecuting those cases for the army.

WELLS: But what I hope to do is establish trust.  If it goes really well, I think there is a restoration of trust by soldiers.

NICK EICHER, HOST: That’s ahead on Legal Docket.

Also today: the Monday Moneybeat. Fed Chairman Jay Powell speaks at the big economic symposium in Jackson Hole. When will interest rates return to normal? And what’s normal, anyway? We’ll talk it over with economist David Bahnsen.

Plus the WORLD History Book. 25 years ago a supplemental restraint system becomes standard on new cars:

COMMERCIAL: I remember the airbag just coming right out at me. A prayer and a Chrysler airbag saved my life

REICHARD: It’s Monday, August 28th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

REICHARD: Time for news now with Kristen Flavin. 

KRISTEN FLAVIN, NEWS ANCHOR: Tropical Storm Idalia » A massive storm is now spinning over the Gulf of Mexico, taking aim at Florida. Tropical Storm Idalia could be Hurricane Idalia when it crashes into the Gulf Coast likely on Wednesday morning.

But Jamie Rhome with the National Hurricane Center warns Floridians:

RHOME: In terms of tropical storm force winds brushing up against the western portion of the Florida Peninsula and around the Tampa area as early as Tuesday.

That means residents in that region need to finish preparing for the storm today.

At the moment, forecasters expect Idalia to roar ashore as a Category-1 storm, packing winds of 90 miles per hour.

Military aircraft crash » Three U.S. Marines were killed and roughly twenty others seriously wounded when a U.S. military Osprey aircraft crashed in Australia over the weekend

The Osprey is a cross between a plane and a helicopter with twin propellers.

Australia’s Northern Territory Chief Minister Natasha Fyles told reporters after the crash:

FYLES: So, what I can say is that there was 23 people on board that aircraft and we are working to get them across to Royal Darwin Hospital to give them the care that they need.

The Osprey crashed on a northern Australian island during a training exercise.

All those aboard the aircraft were American.

GOP candidates » Republican presidential candidates made the rounds on the Sunday talk shows, as each of their campaigns claimed victory in last week’s debate.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley:

HALEY: The first debate’s always the start of the election season. So while everybody wants to assume this race is over, it’s actually just getting started.

And former Vice President Mike Pence told CBS’ Face the Nation:

PENCE: I believe in all humility that I’m the most qualified and the most tested candidate in this race, not only with Vivek, who I’ve known for several years, but for everybody else on the stage.

A Reuters/IPSOS poll of Republicans conducted after Wednesday’s debate places Pence in third place with a one-point edge over businessman Vivek Ramaswammy.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis remained a distant second behind former President Trump, with 13% support.

Jacksonville shooting » DeSantis, meanwhile, remarked Sunday on a racially motivated mass shooting in Jacksonville, Florida.

DESANTIS: We condemn what happened in the strongest possible terms. We’ve offered support to Sheriff Waters and the city of Jacksonville, and we send our condolences to the victims and their families.

A 21-year-old white man gunned down three black people at a Dollar General store. The shooter reportedly made racist remarks before carrying out the murder-suicide.

Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters told reporters:

WATERS: I urge us all not to look for sense in a senseless act of violence. There’s no reason or explanation that will ever account for the shooter’s decisions and actions.

The shooter had been involuntarily committed for a mental health examination in 2017.

Prigozhin » An explosion rang out in the streets of Kupiansk in northeastern Ukraine after Russian shells struck a cafe over the weekend, killing at least two people.

British intelligence officials say the Kremlin’s forces may be planning an assault to recapture the town.

INVESTIGATOR: [Speaking Russian]

A Russian government spokeswoman says genetic testing confirms that mercenary leader Yevgeny Prigozhin did in fact die in a plane crash last week.

U.S. intelligence has concluded that an intentional explosion likely downed the plane. And leaders in Washington believe it’s no coincidence that Prigozhin died not long after challenging Vladimir Putin’s authority.  

SOUND: [launch]

SpaceX » A four-person crew has successfully docked at the International Space Station.

SOUND: [Launch]

Sound there of the SpaceX Dragon liftoff from Florida’s Kennedy Space Center.

Among the crew, three astronauts: one American, one Japanese, and one European, as well as a Russian cosmonaut.

Crew members are on a six-month mission, carrying out dozens of science and other experiments.

Bob Barker obit » Bob Barker has died. The longtime gameshow host and face of The Price is Right was 99 years old.

BARKER: I want to thank you very, very much for inviting me into your homes for the last 50 years.

Barker heard there during his final episode of The Price is Right in 2007.

Before hosting the CBS game show, he worked as a radio announcer and later as the host of a game show called “Truth or Consequences.”

He was also the longtime host of the Miss USA Pageant.

I'm Kristen Flavin.

Straight ahead: Changing who prosecutes serious crimes in the military. That’s on Legal Docket. Plus, the history of airbags!

This is The World and Everything in It.

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s Monday morning August 28th and a brand new work week for The World and Everything in It. Good morning! I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. It’s time for Legal Docket.

Last month, President Biden signed an Executive Order that implements changes in the way the military prosecutes sexual assault cases and other serious offenses. Big changes. The Executive Order implemented the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022. The bill had wide bipartisan approval.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby described the changes to PBS News Hour:

JOHN KIRBY: This is the most significant change since the Uniformed Code of Military Justice was put in place in 1950 and to take a whole set of covered crimes and remove them from the commanding officer from the chain of command that has just never been done before. So it is a monumental step. And we certainly believe that it will help us deal better with these sorts of crimes to more properly investigate them, more properly prosecute them.

EICHER: Here to explain the changes and what they mean for the military is WORLD associate correspondent Jeff Palomino.

Jeff has special expertise in military matters. He’s a retired Air Force Judge Advocate. He’s tried more than 75 courts-martial.

He’s worked in legal offices for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Defense Department, and the National Security Council under both Presidents Trump and Biden. He retired as a Colonel and is a 2022 WJI graduate.

REICHARD: Jeff, welcome!

JEFF PALOMINO: Thanks, Mary and Nick.

If there’s been one single military controversy that’s gotten the attention of the civilian world, it’s probably the issue of sexual assault in the military. Ground Zero in the debate has been the role of commanders to decide which sexual assault cases get prosecuted and which don’t.

REICHARD: I take it then that’s changed. So who decides that under the new rules?

PALOMINO: It has changed, and so now who decides is the Lead Special Trial Counsel. That’s what the military calls prosecutors: trial counsel.

Congress recently passed the National Defense Authorization Act, and that removed decision-making authority from commanders and created this new position.

So I interviewed the lawyer assuming this new job, Brigadier General Warren Wells. General Wells is the one who will now decide for the Army which sexual assault cases go to court. His team will also prosecute these cases.

I began by asking General Wells a basic question: what is the military justice system?

WARREN WELLS: The military justice system is a criminal code that applies to soldiers. And so it's a way for commanders and for the military community to ensure that there's discipline, just as you have criminal codes in the civilian world that keep order and discipline. You have the same thing for those who are serving in uniform.

That code applies to all members of the military, not only soldiers. The U.S. military has always had a military justice system. But before World War Two, the different services applied it inconsistently.

So, in 1950 Congress passed the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It gives one set of military justice laws and procedures to all military branches.

So that gives rise to a basic question: why does the Army need military justice?

WELLS: The need for order and discipline, I think, is universal. And in the military, we're often asking young men and women who come from our society, all regions, different backgrounds to do difficult things under stress. And traditionally, a military justice system was needed, to enforce commander's discipline so that when you ask a group of people to go and face danger, there's some force of law behind that, as well.

The uniform code gives commanders a range of discipline options. One of those may be court-martial. The most serious offenses are usually felony-level, and those go to general courts-martial. In those, the maximum punishment is whatever the President sets.

It could include life in prison, but also the death penalty.

There are also special courts-martial where the maximum jail time is only one year.

General and special courts-martial look similar to what you’d see in other places.

WELLS: The military rules of evidence are almost identical word for word. The process: opening statement, presenting evidence, making closing arguments, those would all be the same as if you were in federal court.

You have a judge, possibly a jury, which in the military is called a panel. The lawyers sit at the counsel table, and then there’s the accused. The prosecution also bears the same burden of proof, too: it has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. So that’s the setting.

Now for the specifics of military sexual assault allegations. Complaints come in various ways, but they all funnel into a law enforcement organization who investigates. Once completed, the old process had a senior military commander decide if the case would go to court-martial. Usually that’d be a general or admiral. That commander would get advice from military lawyers. But in the end, it was his (or her) decision.

That’s not how it'll work any more.

WELLS: Instead it would be experienced litigators, designated special trial counsel, in other words, prosecutors, but But prosecutors who have a background in litigating special victim cases would make the decision on whether or not a particular case should go to court martial.

By statute, the Lead Special Trial Counsel, again the top prosecutor, must be a minimum of a one-Star general.

General Wells as the first Lead Special Trial Counsel for the Army will report directly to the secretary of his military department. That reporting chain is the same for his counterparts in the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps.

So I asked: What problems are these changes aimed at solving?

WELLS: Many of these changes were were precipitated by a lack of trust and how the military was dealing with sexual assault. And so it was really to help with this erosion of confidence, that having someone who was independent, who was trained who had been in the courtroom before who had seen cases, would be able to make the right call on whether these cases should go to trial.

It’s not just sexual assault cases, though. The Lead Special Trial Counsel decides whether to move forward with all so-called “covered offenses.” Things like domestic violence, kidnapping, murder, special victim crimes. Right now, the law lists fourteen. Offenses outside this list remain with commanders to decide. But, for covered offenses commanders can only make non-binding recommendations.

In the end, the decision of the Lead Special Trial Counsel is final. General Wells knows this change is hard for some to get used to.

WELLS: From a procedural standpoint, it is in fact a sea change. The fact that since George Washington in 1775, appointed the first Judge Advocate, General William Tudor, to try cases. It's always been commanders who've made that decision on which cases go to trial. In fact, I talked with a commander, not too long ago, three star general. And the three star said, hey, if I don't agree with one of your decisions, what's my recourse? And my answer was, you can certainly raise the issue. But ultimately, my decision trumps your decision or the one star trumps a three star decision for the purpose of whether or not a case goes to trial.

The law goes into effect on December twenty-eighth of this year. General Wells also knows he needs to get the word out. Soldiers and their Commanders need to know changes are coming and he wants them to understand one, simple message.

WELLS: Congress has given us an important responsibility, a weighty responsibility. And we know that the American people and the members of the military are looking to us to make wise, judicious decisions. And so they are ready to do that. We've got well trained people. We've got experienced litigators, who want to do the right thing and regain the trust of the military community and of the American people.

But can they? General Wells thinks so.

WELLS: We're going to look at the evidence and whether or not we believe the evidence is likely to be sufficient to sustain a conviction. And so, you know, a lot of these cases are difficult to try. Sometimes if the facts don't support it, it may not be a case that we're going to send a trial. And we won't make everybody happy.

But If it goes really well, I think there is a restoration of trust by soldiers that their allegations will be taken seriously, that it will be competently investigated. And that they will be prosecuted professionally.

But what if it doesn’t go well?

We’ll talk about that next week, and we’ll hear from the Army’s top defense counsel. And that’s this week’s Legal Docket!

NICK EICHER, HOST: A viral video last year sure made a difference in the life of Kevin Ford this year. Audio from the Today Show.

KEVIN FORD: I didn’t go 27 years without missin’ a day for nothing.

Twenty-seven years, same Burger King. Kind of a high-turnover business, so maybe you can excuse their not knowing how to mark an occasion like this.

In any event, Kevin Ford put a video on social media showing nothing but gratitude for the small goodie bag he got for his long service: a bag of candy, a tumbler, couple rolls of lifesavers, things like that.

So his daughter set up a Go Fund Me to raise a few hundred dollars so Ford could fly to see his grandkids.

FORD: When I finally got to hold them and see them. It was like everything to me.

Meantime, that Go Fund Me kept growing to several hundred thousand dollars. But it doesn’t appear to have changed him.

With the money, he says he’s able to buy groceries for needy people at the store.

FORD: Spreading the love and showing people that that human spirit is still alive and well and that I'm proof of it.

Definitely. And a year later, he STILL hasn’t missed a day of work!

It’s The World and Everything in It.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Coming up next on The World and Everything in It: the Monday Moneybeat.

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s time to talk business, markets, and the economy with financial analyst and adviser David Bahnsen. He’s head of the wealth management firm The Bahnsen Group and he’s here now.

David, good morning!

DAVID BAHNSEN: Good morning, Nick. Good to be with you.

EICHER: All right, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, gave his annual speech at the economic symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. That was on Friday. I realize there was nothing particularly newsworthy or market moving or I guess even mildly surprising. That was undoubtedly Jay Powell’s aim. But there was a part of the speech that did make me take notice, and I’d like to play the portion and get your comment.

By way of setup, Powell is talking about the Fed’s target of 2 percent inflation as measured by an index called Personal Consumption Expenditures, PCEs. A close cousin is the CPI, the consumer price index.

But a goal of the Fed is price stability in the economy and the steering tool the central bank uses is known broadly as “monetary policy,” which we out here feel when the Fed manipulates interest rates.

So back to Powell: He’s saying the Fed’s committed to a “restrictive” stance on monetary policy to slow the economy. Thus, the Fed believes, bringing down inflation. Let’s pick it up there.

JEROME POWELL: It is challenging, of course, to know in real time when such a stance has been achieved. There are some challenges that are common to all tightening cycles. For example, real interest rates are now positive and well above mainstream estimates of the neutral policy rate. We see the current stance of policy as restrictive, putting downward pressure on economic activity, hiring, and inflation. But we cannot identify with certainty the neutral rate of interest, and thus there is always uncertainty about the precise level of monetary policy restraint.

That last sentence: We don’t know the neutral rate of interest. That’s quite an admission. Talk to me about that.

BAHNSEN: The idea is that they are taking a policy view that is meant to be restrictive. So all he's saying is what we would call a tautology: He's just defining the term he is using. We are neutral; we are above the neutral rate. And the neutral rate is where you would have no impact to economic activity. So if you're below it, you're trying to stimulate activity, and if you're above it, you're trying to restrict it.

By being above it, therefore, they obviously have a restrictive policy view. Well, that's all good and fine. But you're very right, Nick, that the second part of the sentence is just is wonderful to hear them admit: That we don't really know what the neutral rate is.

Now, why in the world would I be critical of them not knowing what cannot be known? I would not, I have no problem with them not knowing the neutral rate. That said, I have a very big problem with them building national economic policy around something that they themselves admit is unknowable. The only way in which we know exactly where the cost of capital ought to be is through price discovery—through the ebb and flow of a very large and complicated marketplace of buyers and sellers and borrowers and lenders setting prices. And so for them to come intervene in it is to distort it. And them admitting that it is unknowable is the fatal conceit—to borrow from Friedrich Hayek—of a view of central planning in stewardship of Economic Affairs, and this applies to monetary policy and to central banking. And that's my criticism of current Fed policy.

EICHER: Obviously going into the speech, Fed watchers were looking for signs of when the Fed would turn away from the restrictive policy stance, and we didn’t really get that.

But you have said more than once that you think the CPI is too slow to detect a more accurate reading of the housing market, and your view is the Fed ought by its own standards be loosening policy and letting interest rates fall. So when do you think that’ll happen?

BAHNSEN: I suppose the timing of that might very possibly be right as we go into the election year. Now, I don't know exactly. But do I believe that they know everything I know and then some about the state of housing? Yes, I do. And do I think that the restrictive stance, via the interest rate is justified by the data? I do not.

And so to your point, how do they get out of this? I think that they will get out of it because the lag in the shelter data that we're referring to will slowly be dissipating as we come into the later portion of 2023. And it will provide cover to be more accommodative in monetary policy as we get ready to go into the election year. That is not necessarily what people think it is; when I say that, it is not me saying that the Fed is trying to get an incumbent president reelected. It's to say that the Fed believes right now that they have their finger on the scale the other way. They're hurting the economy. And they'd rather not be hurting it in an election year.

So it is a little less conspiratorial, it may sound, but there's generally no restrictive or accommodative activity and election years: There's generally no activity. And so I think that they will least will have to change the rationale, Nick, if they're going to stay tight. It at least will have to be something different than “we're worried about the CPI number”. Because I do believe that it is incontestable that the reality on the ground is not 8% inflation right now, in rents and housing. It is either flat, or out and out deflation, for everything other than automatic rent escalations that exist in people's lease agreements that are maybe 2-3%. And so other than that, I think we're about flat, and that really puts the CPI number down near 2%, which they state to be their target. So oil prices could move higher.

There's other issues that may play into the inflation rate. But if oil prices move higher, and the headline inflation number shows higher, the Fed has nothing to do with oil prices. They cannot control that. So that shouldn't be the price stability they're targeting anyways, we ought to be targeting price stability in oil and our country through energy independence and taking over our own destiny, the production which we're choosing not to do. That's not a central bank function, though.

EICHER: But it is a policy function and so before we go, I do want to turn to last week’s debate and ask you whether you heard anything on economic policy that you thought was an encouragement that way, either on energy or anything else.

BAHNSEN: At the very beginning of the debate, I really appreciated Governor Haley being one of the first Republicans to call out the trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars of spending excess that has taken place from both parties and both of our most recent presidents. I thought that there was a real objective honesty about what has now been 20 plus years of significant run up of the debt. That is not simply something we're talking about happening all of a sudden in the last 18 months. Why that is important to me is because I don't think we can fix it, unless we're honest about what's going on.

So I appreciated that from former Governor Nikki Haley. There was a lot of really good stuff said about energy from some candidates I like, and from some candidates I don't care for as much but who still had good things to say on energy. That would be nice: If for all the different disagreements, maybe setting the stage for different candidates to have some consensus around the energy issue is good. I do believe that it is both the geopolitical and economic issue of urgency that many of the candidates were making it to be.

I didn't hear anything on entitlement reform. And that bothers me a lot. It's going to need to become something we discuss. And I think that a lot of the candidates are afraid to talk about things like tax cuts and deregulation outside of the energy story, because there's this trend right now that says talking about the old Reagan talking points is not good. We need something new, something more muscular.

I understand in the messaging and challenges of politics, that you always want to have a good, new, fresh message. And, you know, these guys are there to win an election. But from my vantage point—just purely economically—I do think we have to talk about economic growth. And one day I'd love to see someone who talks about it as a moral issue, because it is.

EICHER: Ok, David Bahnsen is founder, managing partner, and chief investment officer of The Bahnsen Group. You can keep up with David at his personal website, Bahnsen.com. His weekly Dividend Cafe is at dividend-cafe.com.

Thank you, David!

BAHNSEN: Thanks so much, Nick.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Monday, August 28th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. Next up: the WORLD History Book. In 1998 airbags become mandatory safety equipment on all new cars.

And, fifty years ago today, the end of a six-day hostage ordeal, where some of the victims grew attached to the perpetrators.

But first, a devastating natural disaster. Here’s WORLD Executive Producer Paul Butler.

PAUL BUTLER, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: One hundred years ago Tokyo, Japan, is fast becoming a world class city…the once secluded region has become the center of political power and influence, boasting a population of more than 2 million people.

On Saturday, September 1st, 1923, the city is slowly waking up, unaware that just 30 miles away, a tectonic plate is about to rupture underwater. At 11:58am local time, the pressure explodes as a 7.9 magnitude earthquake.

One eye witness in the nearby port city of Yokohama says that the air was suddenly filled with dust like heavy smoke as thousands of buildings collapsed. Professor Paul Scott from Kansai Gaidai University:

PAUL SCOTT: And the way a Japanese building is constructed, it's wooden, of course, but the roof is made of tile. You know, the swaying would cause the building to sort of pancake.

Within minutes, a 40-foot tsunami hits the shore—sweeping away thousands of people. Then the fires begin.

They burn with such intensity they spawn a “dragon twist”—a tornado of fire and smoke. Many structures that escape the earthquake and fires are swallowed up by landslides.

In the end, nearly half of Tokyo and 90 percent of Yokohama lie in ruins. Two and a half million people are left homeless. More than 100,000 people are dead.

The shared loss reinforces an emerging national identity. Reconstruction includes more than rebuilding…it also focuses on morality re-education and frugality. Reconstruction soon becomes protectionism and a return to national seclusion—setting the stage for military expansionism a few years later during World War II.

SOUND: [DOGS AND PEOPLE LEAVING THE BANK]

Next, August 28th, 1973, 50 years ago today. A hostage situation concludes without the loss of life in Stockholm, Sweden.

The situation started a week earlier when convict Jan-Erik Olsson walked into the Kreditbanken wearing a wig, makeup, and toy glasses. He was there to rob the bank. Not just a hold-up and dash, but he takes hostages for ransom. Olsson ties up three bank employees and demands three million Swedish kronor and a get-away vehicle.

Newscast audio here from the Criminal podcast:

NEWSCAST: He is equipped with a machine gun and he has several people as ransom in there.

Olsson also demands police bring his incarcerated friend Clark Olofsson to the scene.

Over the next six days, Olsson and Olafsson earn the trust of their hostages with kindness. The bank employees come to believe that they are more likely to die from police intervention, than at the hands of their captors. One hostage even pleads with the Prime Minister by phone to stop gambling with her life and let her escape with the captors. She wants to go with them. But the Prime Minister and police refuse.

NEWSCAST: He has already shot one policeman in the hand while the policeman tried to overtake him. They have policemen in the localities and they are trying to get hold to shoot at him.

Officials hope to end the standoff by drilling through the concrete bank vault ceiling and filling it with tear gas.

Olsson threatens to kill everyone if they do, even putting nooses around each hostage’s neck so if they pass out, they will die by strangulation. But negotiators believe Olsson is bluffing. The drills whine for hours. Water begins pooling in the vault. Then one drill cuts power to the lights. When police begin filling the vault with tear gas, Olsson surrenders without harming the hostages.

The victims undergo extensive psychiatric treatment afterward. They frequently defend their captors, refusing to testify in court against them. One hostage even goes on to have a relationship with Clark Olafsson. Their surprising attachment to their captors soon becomes known as “Stockholm Syndrome,” though it is more of an explanation than an official diagnosis.

And finally this morning, after nearly 14 years of legislative debate, hearings, and incremental laws as of September 1st, 1998, all U.S. car manufacturers have to include airbag safety systems in their automobiles.

AIRBAG COMMERCIAL: I remember the airbag coming out right at me. A prayer and a Chrysler airbag saved my life.

Airbags had been around since the 1950s but industry and consumer buy-in was slow. The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard act of 1984 called for auto companies to equip all new cars with the so-called driver-side passive restraint system within five years.

HEARING: We're here this morning to receive testimony and S 591 highway fatality and injury Reduction Act.

In the 90’s, injuries caused by both faulty technology and improper use leads the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to pass new automotive standards and mandatory compliance for both driver-side and passenger airbags beginning in 1998.

PRESS CONFERENCE: The top priority is the safety of the motoring public.

Government data reports a 30 percent reduction in traffic fatalities since airbags became standard equipment in cars and trucks…

CBS NEWS: Tonight, CBS News is investigating one of the largest auto recalls in history.

Over the last 25 years, there have been dozens of national airbag recalls. The most common injuries include concussions, broken bones, traumatic brain injury, and even death.

[AIRBAG COMMERCIAL]

It appears that airbags are here to stay. In fact, many modern cars have nine or more airbag systems spread around the interior and exterior of the vehicle. And its use extends far beyond just automobiles. Similar technology is being tested in clothing to protect cyclists, skiers, and even seniors at risk of falling…

MYTHBUSTERS: So Buster's dead, falling wrapped in bubble pack. Where does that leave us? Well, I can't help but think that with enough of this stuff, sooner or later you'd be safe.

As this classic Mythbusters episode about jumping from a three story building while wrapped in bubble packing demonstrates airbags may be helpful, but that doesn’t mean we should increase risky behavior because we think we’re protected by a cushion of air.

That’s this week’s WORLD History Book. I’m Paul Butler

NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: India landed on the moon after Russia’s attempt crashed. We’ll talk about it with a space lawyer. (Specialized field)

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Wearing space suits to court!

EICHER: And, praying for prodigals. That and more tomorrow.

I’m Nick Eicher.

REICHARD: And I’m Mary Reichard.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

Jesus said: “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” Luke chapter 18, verses 16 and 17.

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.