As much as I want this to be real, I'm pretty sure it's fake.
I was incredibly suspicious with the way the man woke up right after the videographer left the frame, extremely suspicious with the man instantly noticing the money and his really odd over reaction about it, but what put me over the edge is the obvious microphone clipped to the man's collar that is completely ignored by the homeless man. That's why the audio is so clear.

Maybe I'm wrong, but this sure SEEMS to be another of the multitude of fake 'social experiments' that's really nothing but a terribly written and acted morality play.

Grossss! Does anyone think a cat is going to like a massive heavy "collar", that makes noise, around their neck?

Something more must have happened to injure the guy. That kick clearly didn't break his collar bone as he can be seen using both arms, even going down into a sort of push up position. Furthermore it didn't land anywhere near his ribs, so I don't see how that could have broken them.
Feel like there must be more to this story.

I think he rigged it up with something like this http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00W6UVROK

Probably just took the shocker out of the collar and attached it to a phone case.

this kind of fall often results in broken wrists and collar bones, or at least a dislocation. Just skin? lucky!

Really? That broke his collar bone?! It seemed like he barely connected, but if he won in court, I'm sure there was medical evidence.
How much did the jury award him? I hope a lot. Not for the kick, but for ramming him when he clearly only noticed the cop at the light, and then he immediately put his blinker on and even gave an "oh crap" head hang right before he stops and gets rammed.
I wonder if the cop even had his lights and siren on before then, since there's no sound we cant tell. He certainly wasn't up close enough to be heard on a loud motorcycle until the end, nor was he making his presence known before then.
Even if the bike wasn't stopping, he wasn't endangering anyone, so there was no reason to hit him, possibly seriously injuring or killing him, in the first place. Speeding is not a capital offence. Intentional vehicular homicide should be, even if you wear blue pants with a racing stripe.

PC correctness stifles free speech.

YES using words as you describe do indeed cause better understanding of the one using those words.

People should be able to use these words. Then get the fuck beat out to them.

The only hate I have is for dumb ass liberals like you who only looks at the world with rose collar glasses.

You know all the racist words you must use them all the time.
Can you tell us a good racist joke? or how about an anti gay joke. Sounds like you can rattle them off with out thought.

FYI some of the Best countries in the world are relatively "socialist"-leaning, and I'm privileged to have been born in one.

- Universal healthcare: ok it's not amazing, but you can get care for free if you're sick. Fuck socialism, right?

- Welfare: some people abuse it. The total loss to "dole-bludgers" who do anything they can to live off the state's teat pales in significance to white-collar cunts who do deals with their rich cunty mates to sell (sometimes public) things for more than they acquired them. Fuck socialism, right?

Fuck caring about anyone but yourself and your immediates, right?

The tags on this are just glorious. Also, the on-screen comments. I am having to explain myself at work, as to why I am laughing so hard.

Also, WOLVES DON'T WEAR COLLARS!

My reaction would be to make the sea lion my new pet.

I would take him home in my car, fill up my bathtub, dump him in, and then go to Petco and buy him some dog food, a sea lion sized collar and a little dog bone shaped tag: printed on their patented pet tag machine!

I would name him after someone funny with a beard but with an ironic or silly prefix -- like Baby Gandalf or Mr. Bob Ross.

"How is my baby Mr. Bob Ross doing today? Aren't you a cute wittle baby Bobby Ross in your wittle bafftub? Oh yes you are!"

It would be so difficult to sleep because I'd be so excited that I have a sea lion for a pet!

I'd wake up SUPER early to see my new baby sea lion on his first night in my bathtub -- only to find him lying dead on the floor. I'll have inadvertently killed the cute litte sea lion -- and all because I wanted a new pet! And then I'd hang myself.

The article linked above mentions Röpke and Eucken as champions of free market capitalism, so to speak. Ironically, Bernie Sanders is quite in line with many of Walter Eucken's core ideas. For instance, Eucken declared legal responsibility to be an absolute necessity for competition within a market economy. Meaning that under Eucken's notion of capitalism, US prisons would be filled to the brim with white collar criminals from Wall Street and just about every multinational corporation, including Volkswagen.

Ludwig Erhard, credited by many to be the main figure behind the German "Wirtschaftswunder" (nothing wonderous about it), postulated real wage growth in line with productivity and target inflation as an imperative for a working social market economy. Again, very much in line with Bernie Sanders. Maybe even to the left of Sanders. A 5% increase in productivity and a target inflation of 2% requires a wage increase of 7%, otherwise your economy will starve itself of the demand it requires to absorb its increased production. You can steal it from foreign countries, like Germany's been doing for more than a decade now, but that kind of parasitic behaviour is generally frowned upon. Minimum wage in the US according to Erhard would be what now, $25-$30? So much for Sanders' $15...

Sennholz further mentions the CDU as a counterweight to the SPD. Well, the CDU's "Ahlener Programm" in 1947 declared that both marxism and capitalism failed the German people. In fact, it put significant blame for Germany's descent into fascism at the feet of the capitalistic system and called for a complete restart with focus NOT on the pursuit of profit and power, but the well-being of the people. They called for socialism with Christian responsibility, later watered down and known as social market economy or Rhine capitalism.

As for the economic policies conducted by the occupation forces: German industry, and large corporations in particular, were shackled for the role they played during the war. If you work tens of thousands of slaves to their death, you lose your right to... well, anything. If they had stripped IG Farben, Krupp and the likes down to the very bone, nobody could have complained. No economic liberties for the suppliers behind a genocide.

Next in line, the comparison with Germany's European neighbours. Sennholz wrote that piece in '55, so you can't really blame him for it. Italy had more growth from '58 onwards, France had more growth than its devastated neighbour from '62 onwards. The third Axis power, Japan, had significantly more growth from '58 onwards.

Why did some European and Asian countries grew much more rapidly than the US? Fair Deal? Nope, Bretton-Woods. Semi-fixed exchange rates caused the Deutsche Mark and the Yen to be ridiculously undervalued compared to the Dollar, thus increasing German and Japanese competitiveness at the cost of the US. Stable trade relations created by the semi-fixed exchange rates plus the highly expansive monetary policy in the US – that's what boosted Germany's economy most of all. Sort of like China over the last two decades, except we were needed as a bulwark against the evil, evil Commies, so the US kept going full throttle.

Our glorious policians tried the same policies (Adenauer/Erhard) in East Germany after reunification, even though global conditions were vastly different, and the result is the mess we now have over there. The entire industry was burned to the ground when they set the exchange rate too high, thus completely destroying what little competitiveness remained. Two trillion DM later, still no improvement. A job well done, truly.

Anyway, if anything, Bernie Sanders' program is closer to post-war German social market economic principles than to the East-German bastard of socialism, state capitalism and planned economy imposed by an autocratic system. However, even that messed up system produced significantly less poverty, both in quality and quantity, than the current US corporatocracy. No homelessness, no starvation, proper healthcare for everyone – reality in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). And despite the fact that they were used as cheap labour for western corporations, no less. My first Ikea shelf was produced by our oppressed brothers and sisters in the East. The Wall "protected" the West from cheap labour while letting goods pass right through – splendid membrane, that one.

PS: Since that article was written in '55, I have to mention one of my city's most famous citizens: Otto Brenner. He was elected head of the IG Metal, this country's most influential trade union, in 1956 after having shared the office since 1952. The policies he fought for, and pushed through, during his 16 years in charge of the union are very much in line with what Sanders is campaigning for.

One of them has blue and one has red tags on their collar. You can see the red one easily and you can see the blue right at the end as it shines in the light. Still hard to tell which is which though. Usually it looks like it's the blue one slipping.

I wish they had different collars, I'm curious if it's the same one in front sliding around the corner each time.

Except that's it's not my assessment, it's the Mexican government's assessment.
EDIT: When the Federall'es (SP? Mexican police) say your cops are out of control, it's time to take another look.

It seemed to me that the guy was a belligerent drunk, who at one moment complies (standing with his hands on head), then turns to argue, tugs on his shirt collar (in a failed attempt to show he's unarmed, or telling the cop to shoot him there?) and shuffles slowly towards the cop. If he was trying to suicide by cop, he did it in a way that made it look totally unthreatening to me. No quick movements, hands on head, no weapon, no threats, no fists...where's the threat in a slow moving unarmed suspect?

I agree, once he was in arms reach and still advancing, he's a threat...but you must completely ignore the cop's ability to move away to make the killing in any way justified. The cop had every opportunity to keep safe distance by simply moving away slowly...why didn't he? Stand Your Ground?
EDIT:Or, the cop had the opportunity to close his car door and lock it, making him 100% safe against the unarmed drunk until backup arrived 20 seconds later.

I didn't see it that way, I (and others, including the officials in the Mexican government) saw a drunk, acting inappropriately, being belligerent when he sees the gun pointed at him and asking the officer "You gonna kill me?", to which the officer replies "no, I'm not going to kill you", then reports on the radio "He's saying 'kill me'". He did not say "Kill me.", he said "Are you GOING to kill me?" as I heard it.
I never saw him reach UNDER his shirt, only tug at the collar of his shirt, and at one point turn around and put his hands behind his back touching his shirt (but NEVER under his shirt). I don't know where that idea came from (except maybe from the cop's statement), please watch again.
I think if an unarmed man slowly advancing on you with hands on his head is a 'deadly threat to the officer's safety', we have HUGE problems, because that theory makes it legal to shoot anyone that comes near them....they don't know if they're armed and attacking, or just passing by, right?
Cops are supposed to de-escalate problems, not exacerbate them.

As for the 'murder' designation...if a citizen shot this man in the exact same circumstances, he should face murder charges. I don't give people a pass on homicide based on their job.