Speaker 1: This is Wall Street Week.
Speaker 2: I'm David Weston bringing you stories of capitalism this week
Speaker 2: from Detroit, the home of Henry Ford, where we travel
Speaker 2: to see firsthand what President Trump's trade policies are doing
Speaker 2: four and two the auto industry, and to talk with
Speaker 2: Ford's CEO Jim Farley about what he calls the essential
Speaker 2: economy that needs our attention. Plus, from Australia, we bring
Speaker 2: you the story of a nation trying to make a
Speaker 2: big transition from natural resources to innovation, and we begin
Speaker 2: a three part series on AI applied to the real world.
Speaker 2: We have covered the excitement about artificial intelligence and the
Speaker 2: massive demands for capital and for power, but where is
Speaker 2: it being used right now in ways that may justify
Speaker 2: the excitement. We turn first to healthcare, where AI is
Speaker 2: already helping our doctors make diagnoses and develop treatments that
Speaker 2: otherwise might be beyond their reach. But we start with
Speaker 2: the jobs market, where soft data are holding the Federal
Speaker 2: Reserve back from cutting rates more and cutting them faster.
Speaker 2: Steve Rattner is chair and CEO will It Advisors, which
Speaker 2: manages the personal and philanthropic money of Michael Bloomberg, our
Speaker 2: founder and majority shareholder. Steve has been watching the US
Speaker 2: economy closely as an investor and gave us his outlook. Steve,
Speaker 2: the labor market is really a top and center. We've
Speaker 2: got a prior problem before we get to the state
Speaker 2: of the labry, which is one are the numbers because
Speaker 2: of the government shutdown. Why are we shutting down the government.
Speaker 3: Whether it's the right strategy or not, I don't know,
Speaker 3: but there's a legitimate purpose in what the Democrats are
Speaker 3: trying to do, which is healthcare. What most people don't
Speaker 3: understand is that in Trump one point zero, Trump tried
Speaker 3: to kill Obamacare overtly through the front door, so to speak,
Speaker 3: and then John McCain famously voted it down. This time around,
Speaker 3: you've not heard them talk about Obamacare or the ACA
Speaker 3: or any of this stuff, But the fact is they've
Speaker 3: been trying to kill healthcare. There's a lot of stuff
Speaker 3: in the One Big, Beautiful Bill, but there's also this
Speaker 3: provision that would expire at the end of the year
Speaker 3: that provides what are called enhanced premium tax credits that
Speaker 3: people making less than one hundred and fifty thousand dollars
Speaker 3: a year, and particularly those making less than sixty five
Speaker 3: thousand dollars a year that are going to expire at
Speaker 3: the end of this year. This would cost millions of
Speaker 3: Americans their healthcare and it would raise premiums by eighteen
Speaker 3: percent for as many as twenty million Americans who buy
Speaker 3: their insurance on the exchanges.
Speaker 2: As soon as you say it was enhanced premium tax credit,
Speaker 2: you sort of lose me because nobody is sort of saying,
Speaker 2: should we do away with Obamacare or not?
Speaker 1: Well, that's exactly their strategy.
Speaker 3: And the Democrats keep saying this is about healthcare, but
Speaker 3: I don't think the average American really understands about healthcare.
Speaker 3: There are twenty some odd million, twenty twenty two million
Speaker 3: Americans who buy their insurance on the exchanges. The insurance
Speaker 3: companies have already filed premium requests for next year. They
Speaker 3: have to do it by October first, and they're asking
Speaker 3: for an average of an eighteen percent increase in premiums
Speaker 3: for people who buy that insurance because they expect so
Speaker 3: many people to drop out because of the loss of
Speaker 3: these credits that they raised. So people are going to
Speaker 3: find this out now. Now you remember that the Medicaid
Speaker 3: cuts don't take effect after the midterms. This takes effect now,
Speaker 3: and so people may not appreciate it today and support
Speaker 3: the Democrats for that reason, but by the end of
Speaker 3: this year, they're going to find out what this all means.
Speaker 2: So let's turn to the question of the labor market overall.
Speaker 2: You follow this closely, where is it? Is it as
Speaker 2: soft as some people think Right now?
Speaker 3: It's a what people call a no hire, no fire
Speaker 3: labor market. It's kind of frozen. We saw in the
Speaker 3: ADP numbers this week, which are one indicator. They only
Speaker 3: show you the private side of the market, but they're
Speaker 3: sophisticated numbers and no reason to doubt them that hiring
Speaker 3: has really really now.
Speaker 1: I think for two reasons.
Speaker 3: One is uncertainty about the economy and tariffs and all
Speaker 3: the things we've been talking about for so long, and
Speaker 3: the other, potentially is AI. We know that AI is
Speaker 3: going to have a major effect. You saw Doug McMillan
Speaker 3: of Walmart this week, for example. He has said privately
Speaker 3: to people that he thinks of his two point one
Speaker 3: or two point two million people, he might have a
Speaker 3: million people working five years down the road or something
Speaker 3: like that. It's going to have a major effect on
Speaker 3: our country. Ultimately, I think for the better, but with
Speaker 3: a lot of disruption along the way. And I think
Speaker 3: we're beginning to see those signs.
Speaker 2: If the labor markets are slowing at whatever rate, what
Speaker 2: does that tell the BED Because given the reasons they're slowing,
Speaker 2: do short term interest rates have any effect on that?
Speaker 1: Well, in theory they do. It takes a while.
Speaker 3: It's not the most direct transmission mechanism, but obviously if
Speaker 3: you lower the cost of capital, business goes out and
Speaker 3: borrows more, spends more. It's good for the stock market.
Speaker 3: As we have seen. That creates a wealth effect. People
Speaker 3: who have stocks spend more, and that's the whole essence
Speaker 3: of monetary policy. I thought you're going to ask me
Speaker 3: if you don't mind my saying, is that, as Powell
Speaker 3: said in his last press conference, the problem he has
Speaker 3: at the moment is he has to worry about both
Speaker 3: sides of his mandate. Usually he has to worry about
Speaker 3: an employment or inflation. Right now he has to worry
Speaker 3: about both. We're not really in stagflation yet, but we
Speaker 3: have bits of that on both sides of the mandate.
Speaker 3: I think the one thing that maybe hiding in all
Speaker 3: this is again AI AI has the potential and Trump,
Speaker 3: of course, did nothing to enhance AI, particularly other than
Speaker 3: doing a lot of press conferences with Sammulten and whatnot.
Speaker 3: But AI has the potential to be a game changer.
Speaker 3: If we can raise our productivity rate by half a
Speaker 3: percentage point or a percentage point, it would have a
Speaker 3: dramatic effect on growth. It would allow for more growth
Speaker 3: without more inflation. I think that if the Fed were
Speaker 3: to follow what Trump and Myron want and cut interest
Speaker 3: rates by two hundred basis points, you'd see a fair
Speaker 3: amount of inflation. And right now we're not even a
Speaker 3: two percent, as we both know.
Speaker 2: Prison Trump came to office promising to help an industry
Speaker 2: you know, well, you helped restructure it under President Obama,
Speaker 2: the auto industry. What has been the net effect of
Speaker 2: the various policies.
Speaker 3: I think if you talk to auto executives, and some
Speaker 3: of them have said this more or less publicly, some
Speaker 3: have said it more privately, I don't think really much
Speaker 3: of anything good has come out of this, and the
Speaker 3: stock market, if you look at the share prices, would
Speaker 3: agree with that much of anything good has come out
Speaker 3: of this.
Speaker 1: For the auto industry.
Speaker 3: I think Mary Barrow of GM has been reasonably candid
Speaker 3: about the challenges opposes for them. As Jim farley Ford
Speaker 3: has pointed out, GM imports more of its cars from
Speaker 3: Mexico and Canada than FOUR does, so that is a
Speaker 3: problem for them. The taxes on the import taxes on
Speaker 3: auto parts is a huge problem for them. But also
Speaker 3: the stop start policies on electrification and cafe standards and
Speaker 3: so on, where you go from one administration to the
Speaker 3: other and you're trying to make five year capital plans
Speaker 3: and product plans and then suddenly there's a u turn
Speaker 3: in policies that's not good for them.
Speaker 2: You pointed outing is really striking. On the one hand,
Speaker 2: the expiration this week, the ev tax credits in another hand,
Speaker 2: the cafe say so sort of giving them the one
Speaker 2: hand and taking away on the other hand. So net
Speaker 2: net is that going to help the auto industry.
Speaker 3: Well, but what those two things do is it drives
Speaker 3: no pun intended the auto industry from producing small electric
Speaker 3: electric or very fuel efficient cars for producing larger cars
Speaker 3: that are less fuel efficient. So then they have to
Speaker 3: retool and reorganize all their production plans. And sure, maybe
Speaker 3: if those policies stay in place indefinitely, it would be
Speaker 3: good for them. Bigger cars tend to have higher profit margins,
Speaker 3: they're easier for us to compete against the foreign cars
Speaker 3: that are where they can make smaller cars more efficiently,
Speaker 3: and so on and so forth. But we will have
Speaker 3: another president in three years and this may all change again,
Speaker 3: and so it's it's not really great for American prosperity
Speaker 3: and capitalism to have these kind of stop start policies.
Speaker 3: I think the government does have an important role in
Speaker 3: policy where they're what they call externalities, where they're effects
Speaker 3: of what a private actor does that aren't captured in
Speaker 3: the price mechanism in the market. And emissions and climate
Speaker 3: are the best example of that that. If you just
Speaker 3: let auto companies make whatever they want, you didn't have
Speaker 3: cafe standards, you didn't have ev tax credits, and so forth,
Speaker 3: we have bigger polluting cars. But if I were a god,
Speaker 3: I would have done this very differently. I would have
Speaker 3: done it using the tax system, big tax on gasoline,
Speaker 3: things like that to incentivize people and companies to move
Speaker 3: in the right direction, not these sort of very Jerry
Speaker 3: rig complicated, on again, off again regulatory policies. Why do
Speaker 3: we do it this way? Because consumers don't see it.
Speaker 3: They don't see the costs of cafe standards. It's not
Speaker 3: part of the American culture.
Speaker 2: To come full circle, what do these policies and policy
Speaker 2: changes mean for employment in the auto industry, including the
Speaker 2: parts business.
Speaker 1: Well, let's just step back.
Speaker 3: I think not just the policies, but the auto industry,
Speaker 3: and I did spend some time in the auto industry.
Speaker 3: The auto industry has some really significant challenges. When you
Speaker 3: look at what the Chinese are doing, and yes, we
Speaker 3: have huge tariffs on their cars, so they don't come
Speaker 3: here at the moment, But when you look at what
Speaker 3: they're able to do and the prices at which they're
Speaker 3: able to produce and sell cars efficiently, and how good
Speaker 3: the cars have become. They didn't have to make cars
Speaker 3: for a long time. We kind of taught them how
Speaker 3: to make cars. At the wage rates we pay. With
Speaker 3: the other cost structure that we have in this country,
Speaker 3: it is going to be it would be very tough
Speaker 3: for us to compete on a completely level playing field.
Speaker 3: So the question then becomes how much protectionism, if you will,
Speaker 3: do you want to afford our auto industry, because we
Speaker 3: think it's important to have an auto industry.
Speaker 2: If you talk to auto executives, as I know you do,
Speaker 2: they say, it's not a completely level playing field. Can
Speaker 2: we out innovate China to be able to overcome whatever
Speaker 2: substances being given.
Speaker 3: I think even if we gave the subsidies, I think
Speaker 3: you'd find that the Chinese can produce better, cheaper cars
Speaker 3: than we can. I think their innovation is exceptional. I
Speaker 3: think their costs of production is exceptional.
Speaker 2: One of the advantages China has is a very large
Speaker 2: domestic market. Are we seeing sort of an epical change actually,
Speaker 2: from a world in which the United States was really
Speaker 2: a leader in auto production to one where we're not
Speaker 2: going to be We're going to be the equivalent of
Speaker 2: a Europe.
Speaker 1: Well, I think we'll be somewhere in between.
Speaker 3: I think Europe's car industry has had many, many struggles,
Speaker 3: and the extent they've been successful, it's heavily been the
Speaker 3: German luxury cars exporting to China. Ironically, but yeah, look,
Speaker 3: China does have, as you say, one point three billion people,
Speaker 3: and they're increasingly prosperous and able to buy cars. You know,
Speaker 3: over fifty percent of the cars sold in China now
Speaker 3: are evs. I mean they are in a whole other
Speaker 3: world compared to us in the transition away from internal
Speaker 3: combustion engines into electrification.
Speaker 2: Coming up, we continue the discussion of how the auto
Speaker 2: industry is varing and what needs to be done to
Speaker 2: ensure the strength of industries like it that make things
Speaker 2: with Jim Farley, President and CEO of the Ford Motor Company.
Speaker 2: Is a story about the essential economy. That's what Ford
Speaker 2: CEO Jim Farley calls the part of the US market
Speaker 2: where things get built, moved, or fixed. This week he
Speaker 2: held a series of meetings at the restored Michigan Central
Speaker 2: Rail station in Detroit, and we traveled there to hear
Speaker 2: directly from him what needs to be done.
Speaker 4: Ninety five million people huge part of our GDP that
Speaker 4: basically build things.
Speaker 5: Think about factory.
Speaker 4: Workers, construction workers, the people who move things, rail workers,
Speaker 4: truck drivers, and the people that fixed things. Think about plumbers, electricians,
Speaker 4: people who are mechanics on your vehicle. That's the economy
Speaker 4: is huge, and we have about a million people shortage today.
Speaker 2: What's going on there? Why do why we short that
Speaker 2: many essential workers.
Speaker 4: It's a combination of things, David, But I think the
Speaker 4: biggest thing is the societal prestige of these jobs has
Speaker 4: changed from our parents and our grandpay parents. You know,
Speaker 4: people all want to go to a four year degree
Speaker 4: and then they want to go into the white collar workforce.
Speaker 5: That's what my grandfather told me. He was a factory worker. Hey, Jim, I.
Speaker 4: Don't want you to have to work this hard, you know,
Speaker 4: go to college. And the irony of the irony is
Speaker 4: we have all these data centers, all this new technology
Speaker 4: or all out still requires electricians, construction workers, you know,
Speaker 4: and we have this huge shortage. The second thing is
Speaker 4: our country has really pulled back on investing in education programs,
Speaker 4: the local college support.
Speaker 5: For these kinds of jobs.
Speaker 4: There's no high schools around vocational programs anymore.
Speaker 5: That's the exception, not the rule anymore.
Speaker 4: I think the last thing is permitting all the regulatory
Speaker 4: requirements on these jobs is really tough, especially for small business,
Speaker 4: and it just makes these jobs hard and complicated.
Speaker 2: How does AI fit with the essential economy?
Speaker 4: Well, I hope that it will be a help, but
Speaker 4: it's hard to say that today we're going to have
Speaker 4: a lot of wins for the essential economy of the I.
Speaker 4: For example, we have to build all these data centers
Speaker 4: all the transmission lines thus can require plumbers, you know, electricians,
Speaker 4: a lot of technical people to do all that construction workers.
Speaker 4: But on the other hand, over the last twenty years,
Speaker 4: the essential economy productivity has actually gone down. Wise, white
Speaker 4: collar productivity has gone up twenty to thirty percent. That's
Speaker 4: like for the average essential worker, that's like thirty thousand
Speaker 4: dollars a year. So we don't have a good track
Speaker 4: wreck here here of applying new technology like AI to
Speaker 4: make these jobs more productive.
Speaker 5: It, you know, automation, things like that.
Speaker 4: Those innovations really took jobs out of the job market
Speaker 4: and out of the essential economy.
Speaker 5: I think we'd have to.
Speaker 4: Twist the technology through the lens of these critical jobs
Speaker 4: for it to be the opposite.
Speaker 2: The government plays a central role in turning around the
Speaker 2: essential economy, with President Trump emphasize manufacturing and the need
Speaker 2: for trade schools. What Farley has yet to see the
Speaker 2: real results, including with those auto tariffs.
Speaker 5: It's too early to tell.
Speaker 4: I haven't seen a lot of new plant announcements of
Speaker 4: my competitors who import. You know, our market is fifty
Speaker 4: percent import So what I was looking for is how
Speaker 4: many of those imported vehicles are now being built in
Speaker 4: the US. We haven't seen too many announcements. What hasn't
Speaker 4: changed is Ford's commitment to the US. We build eighty
Speaker 4: percent of our vehicles here with the largest employer UAW workers,
Speaker 4: and where the largest export are by far from the US.
Speaker 5: I would say it is too early to.
Speaker 4: Tell, but I'm seeing the tone at the top in
Speaker 4: DC be very thoughtful about the parts tariffs, which more
Speaker 4: than twenty percent of our tariff of our profits has
Speaker 4: lost on.
Speaker 5: These parts tariffs.
Speaker 4: So yes, we make in the US, but we import
Speaker 4: parts from all around the world because some of them,
Speaker 4: like wiring looms, we can't even buy in the US.
Speaker 4: The tax the tariffs on those parts, maybe twenty percent
Speaker 4: of your F one fifty is twenty percent of our
Speaker 4: profit gone. And I'm seeing a tone at the top
Speaker 4: in DC where they are listening to us very carefully
Speaker 4: because they understand long term that twenty two billion dollars
Speaker 4: of headwind for US will not be good for the US,
Speaker 4: especially for a company like Ford. I don't know what
Speaker 4: they're going to do, but boy if we had a
Speaker 4: lot of conversations with Commerce and the President about this,
Speaker 4: and I remain very optimistic that they'll make the right adjustments.
Speaker 4: If they make the right adjustments on tariffs, with the
Speaker 4: EPA rule, some of the.
Speaker 5: Tax changes like PTC, I think.
Speaker 4: We will see a much stronger US industry in the
Speaker 4: coming years, and I'm sure hopeful of that.
Speaker 2: When we spoke to Farley a year ago, before President
Speaker 2: Trump's election, the auto industry was working and investing hard
Speaker 2: to meet government targets for electric vehicles. Since then, EB
Speaker 2: policy has been turned on its head, making automakers' lives
Speaker 2: dramatically more complicated. Roger Penske, founder of the Penske Corporation
Speaker 2: and owner of IndyCar, says it's the result of ignoring
Speaker 2: what the customer wants.
Speaker 6: No one asked the customer what they wanted number one
Speaker 6: and number two, we didn't have the infrastructure, and the
Speaker 6: expectation on range wasn't there. So everything came together the
Speaker 6: way they sold electric vehicles with government support. The seventy
Speaker 6: five hundred dollars is going away. When you think about that,
Speaker 6: that's fifty billion that the government is going to be
Speaker 6: able to put, hopefully towards something that's better off for
Speaker 6: our economy and better off for the country. But I
Speaker 6: would say they're going through a transition, all of them,
Speaker 6: said Barry bearra Has Farley has you know, they're moving
Speaker 6: to lower cost EV vehicles.
Speaker 2: You at Ford, like the other automakers, have really made
Speaker 2: a lot of capital investment commitments for an EV. What
Speaker 2: happens to those investments?
Speaker 6: Now?
Speaker 4: What's an important question for our country. First of all,
Speaker 4: Ford never talked about an all electric Ford we always
Speaker 4: set a customer choice. We have hybrid the f one
Speaker 4: fifty best selling vehicle in the United States. Almost a
Speaker 4: third is now hybrid. So we never bet the farm
Speaker 4: on electrification, and we were a first mover. We've been
Speaker 4: number two to TESTAF I think for three years now.
Speaker 4: But that is the biggest next up question. How does
Speaker 4: Ford adjustice assets from moving to making large scale battery operations.
Speaker 5: We have three battery.
Speaker 4: Plants in Kentucky and Tennessee, another one here in Michigan
Speaker 4: and Marshall, so four plus two assembly plants dedicated to electrics.
Speaker 5: You know, what do we do with those assets.
Speaker 4: I'm not going to go into the details, but all
Speaker 4: I say is they're some of the best factories we've
Speaker 4: ever built. We've designed them flexibly and we'll make the
Speaker 4: right decision for the company.
Speaker 5: We're not going to allow.
Speaker 4: These to be mothballed, and we have more decisions to
Speaker 4: make on those battery plants and assembly plants in the
Speaker 4: coming months and years with this change, because a year
Speaker 4: ago we didn't see the customer like we do today,
Speaker 4: and boy are we seeing customers by hybrids and partial
Speaker 4: electric solutions. So America is moving more to low co
Speaker 4: two footprint powertrains, but they are not accepting full electrics
Speaker 4: anywhere near what we thought when you.
Speaker 2: Talk about some of the policies coming out of Washington.
Speaker 2: On the one hand, as you mentioned, there's the seventy
Speaker 2: five hundred dollars credit, yeah, the way this way, Yes.
Speaker 2: On the other hand, you've got the cafe Yes. So
Speaker 2: there's some gives and takes on this. How does that
Speaker 2: all come up for the Ford Motor Company.
Speaker 5: Well, it's accelerating this awkward moment.
Speaker 4: Basically, the seventy five hundred dollars, which could be up
Speaker 4: to you know, twenty thirty percent of the purchase price
Speaker 4: is gone and makes evs a lot more expensive.
Speaker 1: But think about Ford.
Speaker 4: As a global company. We're not just the most American company.
Speaker 4: We compete around the globe. And in China.
Speaker 5: Fifty percent of the vehicles are electric. In Europe is
Speaker 5: thirty percent.
Speaker 4: So we have to set up our industrial system to
Speaker 4: compete not just in the four or five percent here
Speaker 4: in America with maybe a higher mix of hybrids or erevs,
Speaker 4: but in China or the rest of the world. We
Speaker 4: still have to make this ev future profitable. To do that,
Speaker 4: we made a big bet four years ago. We did
Speaker 4: in secret. We came up with a small group of
Speaker 4: people on the West Coast and we redesigned the way
Speaker 4: we make and design a vehicle. We call it the
Speaker 4: Universe Electric Vehicles, kind of a model t kind of
Speaker 4: moment for the company. That vehicle will be coming out
Speaker 4: in about a year and a half. That is our
Speaker 4: way of competing with BYD's costs they've been added for
Speaker 4: twenty years. These markets are huge outside the US. We
Speaker 4: still have to be successful globally. We can't just draw
Speaker 4: a big wall around the US and say that's what
Speaker 4: Ford Motor Company is.
Speaker 2: Another subject we discussed a year ago was China, Yes,
Speaker 2: and what's going on? Bring us forward one year? For
Speaker 2: example with BYD.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean a year ago, Tessa was the number
Speaker 4: one seller globally electric vehicles and VW was a top
Speaker 4: rand in China. The world's biggest market is almost twenty
Speaker 4: seven million. The US is sixteen. Maybe on a good
Speaker 4: day you imagine.
Speaker 1: How big that is.
Speaker 5: It's not twice as big, but it's a big market.
Speaker 4: Now BOID is not only out selling Volkswagen, they're now
Speaker 4: the number one electric player in the world. A year later,
Speaker 4: very powerful company, vertically integrated like Henry Ford did in
Speaker 4: the thirties.
Speaker 5: We're very humble, but it's the same token.
Speaker 4: Ford has announced our Universe Electric platform to be built
Speaker 4: in Louisville, Kentucky, and we think it's basically a wash
Speaker 4: with BYD made in Mexico because we've thrown innovation at it.
Speaker 5: So a lot has changed, and we've.
Speaker 4: Seen Europe it's been really the battleground for globally for
Speaker 4: the Chinese. Now it looks like this month, I bet
Speaker 4: you the Chinese will be close to ten percent of
Speaker 4: the European EV market. Many of the brands weren't even
Speaker 4: on sale a year ago, mg G Le others. Now
Speaker 4: they're very successful like BID in Europe. It's really a moment,
Speaker 4: a transitional moment for our industry where everyone used to
Speaker 4: talk about South Korea or Japan. In my eyes as
Speaker 4: the CEO, China is the place where the most fit
Speaker 4: industrial systems are getting created, not just for electric vehicles,
Speaker 4: but for internal combustion vehicles. And without projects like UEV,
Speaker 4: companies will will be under thread of existence.
Speaker 2: You were on the front lines when Japanese manufacturers are
Speaker 2: going to stole market share they I'd say, yes. But
Speaker 2: bringing forward to today, there is a different economic structure in China.
Speaker 1: There is subsidies, yes there is.
Speaker 2: Can the American auto industry outcompete those subsidies, out innovate
Speaker 2: those subsidies.
Speaker 4: That's a very difficult answer to to give you right now.
Speaker 4: I think it's too really to answer your question because
Speaker 4: we're only in the second inning of these pure electric vehicles,
Speaker 4: and the innovation cycles so fast we could be talking
Speaker 4: in a year or two of a whole new battery
Speaker 4: technology that could either change that equation. But I will
Speaker 4: say at this point they have a big lead. When
Speaker 4: you look at a BYD, we think on average four
Speaker 4: to five thousand dollars a vehicle of direct support from
Speaker 4: the Chinese government that's exported to Europe and New Mexico
Speaker 4: and places like that.
Speaker 5: Can we make up for that.
Speaker 4: Plus their scale, their industrial scale of being ten times
Speaker 4: bigger than the US, I'd say it's pretty difficult at
Speaker 4: this point. I will tell you the level of risk
Speaker 4: that we've had to take on UEV on the execution side,
Speaker 4: large unit castings, building a vehicle in a way we've
Speaker 4: never built before.
Speaker 5: It's not a guaranteed project.
Speaker 4: This is all going to come together just like we thought,
Speaker 4: and so we think we're even with them right now.
Speaker 5: But this bead of innovation we're seeing is very humbling
Speaker 5: for me.
Speaker 4: Even if we have a stable platform on cost today,
Speaker 4: will that platform be competitive in five years when the
Speaker 4: battery tech does another full cycle of innovation.
Speaker 5: Hard to say.
Speaker 4: I'm thinking about twenty thirty two right now. That's to
Speaker 4: answer your question. I'm there. I have to make those
Speaker 4: capital choices now for twenty thirty two. To answer your
Speaker 4: question right now, I think there's a chance. But without
Speaker 4: huge support where it's more of a level of playing field,
Speaker 4: where it isn't in Europe, I think it's gonna be
Speaker 4: really tough, maybe the toughest battle of my career.
Speaker 1: Up next.
Speaker 2: The Australian economy has been powered for three decades by
Speaker 2: its rich natural resources. We travel down Under to see
Speaker 2: firsthand its efforts to diversify into new and more cutting
Speaker 2: edge areas of growth. This is a story about the
Speaker 2: need to be good as well as lucky. Australia has
Speaker 2: been lucky in the natural resources that have been driving
Speaker 2: its uninterrupted growth for three decades, but now it needs
Speaker 2: to be good in innovation and investing to keep that
Speaker 2: growth going. As our colleague Heidie stroud Watt reports from Sydney.
Speaker 7: Australia has long been known as the lucky country, a
Speaker 7: land of sun, surf and abundant resources. For those looking
Speaker 7: to drive its future, fortune has been harder to find.
Speaker 8: We now find ourselves at a place where there is
Speaker 8: basically no interested growth capital in Australia. Our last round,
Speaker 8: which was a world record setting Series B, eighty percent
Speaker 8: of the funds inbound were foreign direct investment. Only three
Speaker 8: out of twenty investors who joined us were from Australia,
Speaker 8: so we are obligated to look outside. It's the lack
Speaker 8: of familiarity.
Speaker 7: Michael Biersuk is a founder and CEO of q Control,
Speaker 7: a quantum tech startup based in Sydney.
Speaker 8: It's not about loyalty to Australia or disloyalty. It's about
Speaker 8: economic opportunity. The US and the UK right now are
Speaker 8: making massive investments from the public sector and of course
Speaker 8: the private sector in advancing this technology for sovereign capability.
Speaker 8: Australia has not yet done that, and we're looking forward to.
Speaker 1: That kind of investment in the future.
Speaker 8: This is a real map of data coming from commercial airplanes.
Speaker 8: At q Control, we focus on this new field of
Speaker 8: quantum technology and our specialty is building new kinds of
Speaker 8: AI that make this emerging technology area actually useful for
Speaker 8: end applications. One of the core areas that we've invested
Speaker 8: in is helping navigate when there is no GPS. Now,
Speaker 8: on a daily basis, GPS completely governs our lives. Unfortunately,
Speaker 8: the reliability of GPS has diminished tremendously just in the
Speaker 8: last year. Since March of twenty twenty four, we've seen
Speaker 8: almost one thousand flights a day commercial aviation flights disrupted
Speaker 8: by deliberate GPS jamming. This is emerging as a major
Speaker 8: threat and it's not just in commercial aviation. Defense sees
Speaker 8: exactly the same challenges. We set out to try and
Speaker 8: fix this through our work in quantum sensing, and we
Speaker 8: built a new technology that lets us navigate with our GPS.
Speaker 7: It's a business of tomorrow, the kind many believes should
Speaker 7: play a far greater role in shaping Australia's economy of tomorrow.
Speaker 9: Well, we've won the risk of falling behind. I mean,
Speaker 9: there's no question about that. You've got you know, you've
Speaker 9: got to stay at the head, at the front of
Speaker 9: the pack. And to do that you have to you know,
Speaker 9: you've got to keep innovating. You've got to keep asking
Speaker 9: every day. Our our policy is working. Complacency is a
Speaker 9: killer in politics and government, as in business.
Speaker 7: But before examining the Australian economy of tomorrow, it's worth
Speaker 7: explaining the economy of today. It was nineteen sixty four
Speaker 7: when the author Donald Horn famously took aim at Australia,
Speaker 7: calling it a lucky country run mainly by second rate
Speaker 7: people who share its luck. It was a job at
Speaker 7: its complacency, a country whose wealth, he argued, came not
Speaker 7: from innovation or ingenuity, but from its abundant natural resources iron, ore, coal, gold.
Speaker 7: The list goes on.
Speaker 10: There's no doubt that the economy has a pretty narrow base.
Speaker 7: Jennifer Westercott is a senior advisor at KPMG and a
Speaker 7: former CEO of the Australian Business Council. She says that
Speaker 7: although the country's economy might not be highly diversified, it's
Speaker 7: proven to be very lucrative so far.
Speaker 10: I think the economy still has incredible kind of foundations
Speaker 10: in mining and resources, and there's still a long long
Speaker 10: way to go in resources.
Speaker 7: Australia ranked second in the world for median wealth per capita,
Speaker 7: but its narrow base is showing fragility. Commodity earnings are
Speaker 7: expected to fall to two hundred than seventy one billion
Speaker 7: US dollars this year about three hundred and eighty five
Speaker 7: billion Australian dollars and continue to drop over the next
Speaker 7: two years on folding prices and an uncertain global economy. Well,
Speaker 7: the Reserve Bank of Australia recently slashed it's forecasts for
Speaker 7: economic growth and productivity.
Speaker 10: So I think you know that the first thing we
Speaker 10: need to do is make sure that we protect and
Speaker 10: strengthen that incredible base that's propped up living standards for many,
Speaker 10: many years and has made the country extremely prosperous and
Speaker 10: so there's lots of ways of diversifying the economy and
Speaker 10: driving greater innovation in the economy. The first is to
Speaker 10: drive higher levels of investment, and investment as a share
Speaker 10: of GDP is around the same level was in the
Speaker 10: nineteen ninety so we need to get investment happening. That's
Speaker 10: about lower taxes or on more competitive tax system. It's
Speaker 10: also about reducing regulation. We've also got to drive more innovation.
Speaker 10: That's about skilling our population, making sure that we draw
Speaker 10: the new skills the future in racing things like AI
Speaker 10: and going with sectors of the economy that are in
Speaker 10: our comparative advantage and things that we can scale on.
Speaker 7: And the economy's fragility places even more importance on setting
Speaker 7: up its future. Australia, for all its wealth, spends just
Speaker 7: one point seven percent of GDP on research and development,
Speaker 7: well below the OECD average of two point seven percent.
Speaker 7: Malcolm Turnbull was the Prime Minister of Australia between twenty
Speaker 7: fifteen and twenty eighteen, and before that ran Goldman Sachs Australia.
Speaker 9: At the level of the economy, the big priority has
Speaker 9: always got to be productivity and that is driven by innovation.
Speaker 9: So you've got to You've got, at one level get
Speaker 9: rid of as much regulation and red tape as you can.
Speaker 9: At the same time you've really got to supercharge innovation.
Speaker 9: This was a really important part of my time as
Speaker 9: PMS by Big first Big Economic Agenda, the National Innovation
Speaker 9: and Science Agenda in twenty fifteen that gave tech, R
Speaker 9: and D, investment, venture capital a huge lift and which
Speaker 9: they're still benefiting from.
Speaker 1: But you've got to do it again.
Speaker 9: You know, you can't just do it once and put
Speaker 9: it aside and say that's it.
Speaker 7: How do you characterize the environment when it comes to
Speaker 7: tech an innovation. Do you think it's not getting as
Speaker 7: much attention or as credit as it should be or
Speaker 7: do you think that progress has stalled?
Speaker 9: Well, look, Australia does not spend enough on research and development. False,
Speaker 9: Australian business doesn't and we're not spending enough in the
Speaker 9: pure research primary research realm of universities and research institutions
Speaker 9: are so that needs more encouragement.
Speaker 7: As a result, Australia's foreign direct investment is still heavily
Speaker 7: skewed towards mining, forcing companies like que Control to look
Speaker 7: overseas for investment.
Speaker 8: We have not seen the same level of major tech successes,
Speaker 8: minting billionaires building generational technology businesses in Australia as we've
Speaker 8: seen in the United States, and as a result, I
Speaker 8: think that lack of familiarity has made people just less
Speaker 8: willing to take some bets. And our objective, frankly, is
Speaker 8: to show by example, whether you're in government or a
Speaker 8: local investor base, that the upsides are enormous and real
Speaker 8: and we're just trying with everything we can to deliver
Speaker 8: on that opportunity.
Speaker 11: Could there be that kind of transformative sort of movement
Speaker 11: in Australia And if so, what are the policy measures,
Speaker 11: what are the things in terms of supporting that possibility
Speaker 11: that you see.
Speaker 8: I think there's no question that the opportunity is there.
Speaker 8: I came to Australia from the United States because the
Speaker 8: research community was so strong when I was an academic
Speaker 8: at the.
Speaker 2: University of Sydney.
Speaker 8: The bigger challenge has been building an industry base around
Speaker 8: the transition from basic science over it to industrial applications
Speaker 8: in Australia has been lagging. That we were the first
Speaker 8: venture back company in the field in Australia. The challenges
Speaker 8: we haven't seen that many more in the last seven years.
Speaker 7: Westerncott, who also serves as Chancellor of Western Sydney University,
Speaker 7: believes Australia should be capitalizing on funding cuts to US
Speaker 7: universities to attract talent and drive innovation.
Speaker 10: I think the first thing that we need to do is,
Speaker 10: of course, continue to invest in our universities, continue to
Speaker 10: invest in research and development. But we also need to
Speaker 10: send very consistent and clear policy signals that we're open
Speaker 10: for international students. Now we have a cap on international
Speaker 10: students at the moment, which is very controversial in Australia.
Speaker 10: We need to send that message that we want international
Speaker 10: students one of our biggest exports. We also need to
Speaker 10: make sure that we are encouraging skilled migration from young people.
Speaker 10: You know, KPMG did a study several years ago which
Speaker 10: showed that we'd add thirty billion dollars to the economy
Speaker 10: by targeting those highly skilled young people. When I run
Speaker 10: the Business Council of Australia, the key message that big
Speaker 10: employers will give to me is that they want more skill,
Speaker 10: very specialized skills. So we should be really targeting those
Speaker 10: young people from the United States, common and even work
Speaker 10: in Australia greatest country on Earth and really targeting those
Speaker 10: super skills. So it's an opportunity, but we can't just
Speaker 10: kind of sit back and expect it to happen. We're
Speaker 10: going to have to have deliberate and purposeful policies and
Speaker 10: actions to encourage those people to come to Australia.
Speaker 9: We have a huge opportunity in terms of talent. And
Speaker 9: while no one, no Australian government wants to go out
Speaker 9: there and say to talented people in other countries, you're
Speaker 9: living in a terrible country, come and live in our house.
Speaker 1: You've got to be tactful about this.
Speaker 9: But let's face it, there is a war for talent
Speaker 9: human talent, and we have some very attractive things going on,
Speaker 9: which is why, by the way, we need to be
Speaker 9: putting more money into research because those scientists and technologists
Speaker 9: will want to come here and work with it. But
Speaker 9: you think about the livability of our cities for example,
Speaker 9: you know we have some of the most livable cities
Speaker 9: in the world.
Speaker 7: Ultimately, lifestyle can only take you so far. If Australia
Speaker 7: wants to remain competitive, it needs to be more than
Speaker 7: just a great place to surf. It needs to be
Speaker 7: a great place to invest. It's luck may not be
Speaker 7: running out entirely, but to get the economy humming and
Speaker 7: needs investment and innovation, it needs to be good as
Speaker 7: well as lucky.
Speaker 9: I think Australia is lucky, but we've made a lot
Speaker 9: of our own luck too, so I'm very optimistic about Australia's.
Speaker 2: Future coming up. AI may already be playing a big
Speaker 2: role in your next visit to the doctor without your
Speaker 2: even knowing about it. We tell the story of artificial
Speaker 2: intelligence in healthcare next. This is not yet another story
Speaker 2: about the promise of artificial intelligence. It's the first in
Speaker 2: a series of stories that go beyond the hope and
Speaker 2: the hype to see where AI is making a real
Speaker 2: difference today. Starting with something important to us. All our
Speaker 2: medical care.
Speaker 4: Yes, yeah, good morning.
Speaker 2: On any given day Tennessee, based on coologists Samyukta Mulanghi
Speaker 2: could see as many as twenty five patients.
Speaker 12: Medical oncologists like me are pressed for time and we're
Speaker 12: overwhelmed with sort of clinical duties, trying to do that
Speaker 12: work of charting in ahead of time, seeing the patient,
Speaker 12: documenting after the fact, and also now trying to squeeze
Speaker 12: in record retrieval in the middle of everything is just
Speaker 12: very impossible, and so you have the concept of pajama
Speaker 12: time where oncologists and other physicians are just sort of
Speaker 12: finishing up their daily work at home after you know,
Speaker 12: the kids are put to bed and after dinner, and
Speaker 12: it just contributes to a lot of provider burnout.
Speaker 2: Doctor Mulongi is not alone. All across the country, doctors
Speaker 2: in all specialties are often stretched thin. The American Medical
Speaker 2: Association found that almost half of US physicians experienced at
Speaker 2: least one symptom of burnout. It's a little wonder that
Speaker 2: our doctors are feeling the burden given the explosion of
Speaker 2: medical research. So Daniel Nadler decided to do something about it.
Speaker 13: The rate of doubling of medical knowledge in nineteen fifty
Speaker 13: was roughly every fifty years. In twenty twenty five, they're
Speaker 13: different estimates and they're different numbers. In a study in
Speaker 13: the British Medical Journal and another study in Nature, they
Speaker 13: found that the rate of doubling of medical knowledge was
Speaker 13: seventy three days.
Speaker 2: Nadler's PhD thesis from Harvard was on analyzing derivatives, which
Speaker 2: he turned into a startup using machine learning for financial analysis.
Speaker 2: After selling that company for half a billion dollars, he
Speaker 2: turned his attention to helping doctors make sense of the
Speaker 2: tsunami of medical research coming their way.
Speaker 13: We looked at this and we did another analysis, and
Speaker 13: we said, let's ignore the doubling for a second and
Speaker 13: just ask the question if you had to read just
Speaker 13: the top third of peer reviewed medical literature just within
Speaker 13: your specialty, which is not ideal. Right, that means no
Speaker 13: cardiologist is reading anything in neurology and vice versa, which
Speaker 13: is not ideal. But even if you just said that,
Speaker 13: how long would it take every day for a specialist
Speaker 13: to just read the top third of peer reviewed medical
Speaker 13: literature just within their specialty? And the answer turned out
Speaker 13: to be something about something like nine hours. So practically
Speaker 13: that's obviously impossible. They would never see patients, or never
Speaker 13: see their family, or they would never sleep.
Speaker 2: And that led Nadler to found Open Evidence in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty two.
Speaker 13: Open Evidence is designed to do for physicians what the
Speaker 13: advent of computer systems, let's call it that on Wall
Speaker 13: Street achieved for Wall Street knowledge workers.
Speaker 2: Evidence is an AI model trained on medical literature, carefully
Speaker 2: curated to ensure high quality results for.
Speaker 13: The first time in the last let's call it three
Speaker 13: four five years maximum, we've reached a point in the
Speaker 13: sophistication of artificial intelligence of computers broadly that they can
Speaker 13: store not just the right letters and the right words
Speaker 13: and the right order, but they can understand the semantic
Speaker 13: meaning of the findings of these studies. So Open Evidence
Speaker 13: is an artificial intelligence. It's a computer system that's able
Speaker 13: to understand the semantic meaning of the findings of these
Speaker 13: studies so that it can act as a brain extender
Speaker 13: to physicians who have even in the best and most
Speaker 13: generous reading of what they have to do as a
Speaker 13: physician in terms of keeping up with the pace of
Speaker 13: medical knowledge, such that they don't have to spend nine
Speaker 13: hours a day just reading the top third of pure
Speaker 13: viewed medical journals.
Speaker 2: Doctors are piling into the platform, which says it has
Speaker 2: signed up around fifty percent of all doctors in America
Speaker 2: and adding sixty five thousand every month. Investors are piling
Speaker 2: in two Its latest funding round valued the company at
Speaker 2: three point five billion dollars. What is it that Open
Speaker 2: Evidence should be relied upon to do and what do
Speaker 2: we still need the physician to do. For example, can
Speaker 2: open evidence diagnose no?
Speaker 13: So the physician is still relied upon to do everything
Speaker 13: that a physician was always relied upon to do. I
Speaker 13: see open evidence as a continuum or a continuation of
Speaker 13: a very traditional technology called search. Right, So historically physicians
Speaker 13: needed to search for findings and medical journals. That's not
Speaker 13: a new behavior. They've been doing that for years and
Speaker 13: years and years. One way to think about this is
Speaker 13: we spend a lot of time as a society celebrating
Speaker 13: the golden age of biotechnology, and we should. Right, every
Speaker 13: metric and proxy you look at in the data shows
Speaker 13: that we are accelerating the rate of drug discovery, including
Speaker 13: using artificial intelligence. We're accelerating the rate of drug development,
Speaker 13: and so we celebrate that we're in this golden age
Speaker 13: and it's amazing, this golden age of biotechnology. But what's
Speaker 13: not talked about a lot or enough is that this
Speaker 13: golden age of biotechnology is really the dark ages for
Speaker 13: physicians in terms of burnout. We expect that almost all
Speaker 13: physicians in the United States will be on the platform
Speaker 13: within the next year.
Speaker 2: Doctor David Reich is President and chief Clinical Officer for
Speaker 2: Mount Sinai Health System in New York. He uses Open Evidence,
Speaker 2: but as part of a larger range of AI models
Speaker 2: they are integrating into their hospitals.
Speaker 14: I have the app on my phone and it's available
Speaker 14: through our medical school library, and people do use it. However,
Speaker 14: we do also work with chat GPT, and they've created
Speaker 14: an environment where we can have our medical students ask
Speaker 14: questions that contain protected health information, and that protected health
Speaker 14: health information stays within the CyberSecure.
Speaker 3: Environment that we work so hard to maintain.
Speaker 14: And so I think cybersecurity remains a key consideration in
Speaker 14: any tools that are a great assistance to us, and
Speaker 14: I'm sure that Open Evidence will work very hard to
Speaker 14: address that along with others.
Speaker 1: But I'm very enthusiastic about it.
Speaker 14: I think it's a great tool.
Speaker 2: One of the reasons Open Evidence has become so popular
Speaker 2: with doctors so quickly is that it licenses the best
Speaker 2: medical literature from trusted sources, and it's free to doctors,
Speaker 2: relying on advertising for its revenue.
Speaker 13: We write from the start licensed content, licensed journals, licensed information,
Speaker 13: medical information from the relevant copyright holders. So we have
Speaker 13: a agreement with the Massachusetts Medical Society, which owns the
Speaker 13: new maudral Medicine. It's a nonprofit. We have a licensing
Speaker 13: agreement with the American Medicalists Asociation. Again it's a nonprofit,
Speaker 13: but it owns the journal of the American Medical Association
Speaker 13: as well as all the specialty journals JAMMA Oncology, JAMMA Neurology,
Speaker 13: and so on and so on and so on, not
Speaker 13: just those. So we took a very different approach to copyright,
Speaker 13: to licensing, to all of this, and we're extremely proud
Speaker 13: of the fact that we're probably the only PUREI company
Speaker 13: in America that is not currently being sued for copyright violations.
Speaker 13: Our business model is the exact same as Google, which
Speaker 13: is I think it's public. Google is one of our
Speaker 13: largest investors and has been an enormous patron to the
Speaker 13: company in many ways. So you can build very successful
Speaker 13: software's of service companies, and there are many examples of
Speaker 13: ten twenty thirty forty fifty one hundred billion dollars market
Speaker 13: cap software's to service companies. But once you start getting
Speaker 13: into the rare air of multi trillion market cap companies,
Speaker 13: it's notable that they are that almost all of them,
Speaker 13: again excepting Nvidia and Apple, are either primarily the advertising
Speaker 13: business models or have advertising as a significant component of
Speaker 13: what they do. And I think the explanation there is
Speaker 13: it is the business model that most aligns the incentives
Speaker 13: of the platform and the users to make sure you're
Speaker 13: delivering to your users the highest quality product possible, because
Speaker 13: your incentive is not reducing cost. Your incentive is attracting
Speaker 13: more users and increasing your engagement.
Speaker 2: AI tools like open Evidence are already providing much needed
Speaker 2: help to physicians who must focus on their patients even
Speaker 2: as they need to keep up with the deluge of
Speaker 2: new research. But for AI to realize it's full potential
Speaker 2: in healthcare, doctor Reich says it needs to become fully
Speaker 2: integrated into the workflow.
Speaker 14: But Mount Sinai is doing the genetic information analysis on
Speaker 14: up to a million patients in partnership with Regeneron, and
Speaker 14: we're several hundred thousand patients into this, and we have
Speaker 14: a vast trove of information on patient medical images. We
Speaker 14: have incredible information in our electronic health record. Now, when
Speaker 14: we start to marry all of those data sources together
Speaker 14: and follow the promise of AI in the not too
Speaker 14: distant future, I should be able to say to you
Speaker 14: when you come in not only did I screen you
Speaker 14: and I found particular risks.
Speaker 1: Not only do I have.
Speaker 14: Care pathways which suggest how I should go forward, but
Speaker 14: it's specific to you, to your family history, to your
Speaker 14: genetic markers, and hopefully the giving you the best and
Speaker 14: safest possible experience. So think of the future as being
Speaker 14: much more personalized. And the advance of technology is so
Speaker 14: inspiring right now that I think that what I've witnessed
Speaker 14: over several decades of medicine could vastly change in the
Speaker 14: next several years, as long as we learn the lessons
Speaker 14: of past mistakes of being maybe too exuberant about technology
Speaker 14: and making sure that people who are truly in touch
Speaker 14: with that social contract between patients in this nation and
Speaker 14: the payers and the government and the providers, that we
Speaker 14: actually find really good solutions.
Speaker 2: Where doctor Reich emphasizes the integration of all the data
Speaker 2: into a single workflow, Daniel Nadler envisions a world connecting
Speaker 2: physicians with others around the world who are working on
Speaker 2: the same clinical challenges.
Speaker 13: As open evidence develops. If we go back to my
Speaker 13: metaphor of the sort of nineteen forties World War two
Speaker 13: telephone operator who's routing and connecting a human to another
Speaker 13: human on a battlefield. In this case, it might actually
Speaker 13: end up in a world where the AI is the
Speaker 13: least interesting part of the technology, and what's really happening
Speaker 13: is the AI is serving as connective tissue between a
Speaker 13: human and a human, between a human physician presenting some
Speaker 13: atypical combination of symptoms and another human somewhere in the
Speaker 13: country that is an expert on that and where the
Speaker 13: job of the AI is as far as possible from
Speaker 13: answering the question and as much more about getting out
Speaker 13: of the way as quickly as possible and connecting that
Speaker 13: one human to another human. And that's a very wonderful
Speaker 13: and sort of optimistic vision for what the future of
Speaker 13: AI can be. You know, most scenarios for the future
Speaker 13: of AI, or many are very dystopian. I can't common
Speaker 13: on what happens outside of medicine, but in medicine, I
Speaker 13: think you have a very beautiful possibility where the technology
Speaker 13: ends up serving as connective tissue between a human and
Speaker 13: a human.
Speaker 2: But whether it's connecting the doctor with the data or
Speaker 2: the human with the human. Right now, AI products like
Speaker 2: open Evidence are providing much needed relief for practicing physicians
Speaker 2: like Sam Mulanghi.
Speaker 12: I would say that for me, open evidence solves like
Speaker 12: two rather unrelated but maybe orthogonal problems. One is that
Speaker 12: actually open evidence taps into the entire medical corpus of
Speaker 12: academic literature, which actually, for the most part, tends to
Speaker 12: be paywalled. The second thing that it does, I think
Speaker 12: is just sort of marrying the best of current AI
Speaker 12: capabilities around natural language processing and reasoning to try and
Speaker 12: interpret my requests and retrieve records easily in a very
Speaker 12: time efficient manner. So having sort of smart AI tooling
Speaker 12: that is able to provide fast queries has just been
Speaker 12: really been a game changer for me, and that is.
Speaker 2: One application of artificial intelligence that is making a real
Speaker 2: difference in the here and now. Next week will continue
Speaker 2: our exploration of where AI is already being put to
Speaker 2: good use, this time when it comes to education that
Speaker 2: does it for us Here at Wall Street Week, I'm
Speaker 2: David Weston. See you next week for more stories of capitalism.