Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week. I'm Carole Masser and I'm
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stanovk. We're here every day bringing
Speaker 1: you the latest news from the world of business and finance,
Speaker 1: clus technology, politics, economics, all purtnising the power of Business
Speaker 1: Week reporters and editors not to mention our journalists and
Speaker 1: analyst in more than one d and twenty countries. You
Speaker 1: can download Bloomberg Business Week and iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot Com. You can also listen to our radio show
Speaker 1: at two pm Eastern Time on Bloomberg Radio or watch
Speaker 1: us on YouTube search Bloomberg Global News. We know we
Speaker 1: are expected to hear from President Biden in a little
Speaker 1: bit about a couple of hours less than two hours
Speaker 1: actually uh, and that his goal is at all American
Speaker 1: adults to be eligible for a coronavirus vaccine by April nineteen,
Speaker 1: two weeks earlier than he previous than his previous goal.
Speaker 1: He's on a mission to him, Yeah, he is. The
Speaker 1: President Will also announced that one hundred and fifty million
Speaker 1: doses of vaccine were administered within his first seventy five
Speaker 1: days in office. That's keeping pace with his accelerated goal
Speaker 1: of getting two hundred million shots into arms by his
Speaker 1: one hundred day in the office. Uh. Earlier in the show,
Speaker 1: just a few minutes ago, I said that there was
Speaker 1: a hundred and seventy five million. Got my numbers mixed
Speaker 1: up there, but we know that he's expected to announce
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty million doses ahead of schedule. That's
Speaker 1: kind of where he's at. Hey, let's get into it
Speaker 1: with Dr William Hazeltine. He is chairman and president of
Speaker 1: Access Health International, to nonprofit think tank. It's on a
Speaker 1: mission as well to improve access to high quality and
Speaker 1: affordable health care for people everywhere. He's also got several
Speaker 1: books at including a new one called Variance, the Shape
Speaker 1: Shifting Challenge of COVID Night Team. He joins us on
Speaker 1: the phone on this Tuesday, joining us from Connecticut. Dr Hazeltine,
Speaker 1: so nice to have you back with us. How are you.
Speaker 1: I'm very well, Thank you. It's a beautiful day here.
Speaker 1: It is too here in New York, and it feels good.
Speaker 1: It feels like spring. It feels like we're making progress.
Speaker 1: How do you see it as you see the vaccine rollout,
Speaker 1: specifically here in the United States, it's a very complicated
Speaker 1: picture in the United States. Some places are doing extremely well.
Speaker 1: Other police places are doing badly. Some places the variants
Speaker 1: are surging, in other places they're almost not detectable. Uh.
Speaker 1: And it's complicated with the vaccines because some places where
Speaker 1: the vaccine that the disease is surging, for example in Michigan,
Speaker 1: have a pretty good vaccine record. So it's a very
Speaker 1: complicated picture. And I think there's, uh, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of hope, but there's some cause for concerns. So why
Speaker 1: do you think that's happening in places like Michigan right
Speaker 1: now that are actually doing relatively well when it comes
Speaker 1: to the roll out of the vaccine, but still seeing surges.
Speaker 1: I think that it's still pretty cold up there, not
Speaker 1: like it is, and people are going staying inside, and
Speaker 1: they're not following the same careful behavior they did before.
Speaker 1: One thing we now know is that restaurants and bars
Speaker 1: are really dangerous because you're with a lot of people
Speaker 1: and you don't have your mask on. If you're drinking,
Speaker 1: can't drink through your mask, you can't eat through your mask.
Speaker 1: And so it's not too much being outside of crowds
Speaker 1: is being inside and I think that's what could be
Speaker 1: driving in now that isn't the only thing that drives it,
Speaker 1: because we're all surprised last summer when we saw this
Speaker 1: enormous bump in the summer which came from people missing.
Speaker 1: But then when it gets too hot, people stay inside
Speaker 1: to stay cool. So it's really our gregarious nature trying
Speaker 1: to get together, loving to be together, sharing foods, sharing conversation,
Speaker 1: which is a big problem for this disease. We know
Speaker 1: a lot more about transmission than we did before. It
Speaker 1: really gets transmitted by aerosol, small particles that hang in
Speaker 1: the air sometimes for quite a while, and these new variants,
Speaker 1: some of them are much more infectious. So um, a
Speaker 1: lot more particles are in the air, and each one
Speaker 1: of those particles is more likely to cause containing. So
Speaker 1: those are all factors. But the vaccines are the positive side.
Speaker 1: And uh, it's, as I say, quite a mixed picture
Speaker 1: right now. Listen, we love talking to you. You know,
Speaker 1: you founded Human genome Sciences. You you were founder of
Speaker 1: Harvard Medical Schools HIV and AIDS research departments. You understand
Speaker 1: this world better than most and so do you. Foresee,
Speaker 1: doctor Haseltine, that we get to a point where it's
Speaker 1: just like the flu and we take a vaccine and
Speaker 1: we go on our merry way. Or is this something different? Well,
Speaker 1: it in one sense it's going to be I think
Speaker 1: like the flu, where every year or every year and
Speaker 1: a half, we take another shot account for variants that
Speaker 1: are coming from somewhere, either our country or elsewhere. But
Speaker 1: in another sense, it's not like the flu, because from
Speaker 1: the get go it's been pretty dangerous. Uh. One two
Speaker 1: hundred people have died from of these variants. Do a
Speaker 1: couple of things that are disturbing. They kill maybe twice
Speaker 1: as many people as they did before. They kill younger
Speaker 1: people than they did before. Uh, and that's pretty worrisome. Uh.
Speaker 1: They're also, as they pointed out, more transmissible and invade
Speaker 1: our vaccines. So I think we may reach a steady state,
Speaker 1: but I hope that the steady state lower than it is.
Speaker 1: A flu that in a good year kills twenty thousand
Speaker 1: of US, a bad year kills sixty thousand of us.
Speaker 1: It could be a lot worse, So we need to
Speaker 1: do better. There is hope, though, because there are drugs
Speaker 1: coming along now that if you think you've been exposed,
Speaker 1: you'll be able. I think in the future, maybe within
Speaker 1: a year or shorter, to take a pill and prevent
Speaker 1: yourself from getting insighted. People should know that there's now
Speaker 1: a pill like that for flu, that if you've been
Speaker 1: exposed to the flu, there's a pill called a Flusa
Speaker 1: that you can take and dramatically reduce your chance. So
Speaker 1: if you're in school or your kid comes home with
Speaker 1: the flu the real fluid uh that you can reduce
Speaker 1: your chance of getting it. And I hope that within
Speaker 1: the relatively your future will have drugs like that for
Speaker 1: COVID two. Tim and I are both jumping because we
Speaker 1: have a million questions for you. Just one quick one
Speaker 1: because then we have to take a break, but in
Speaker 1: forty seconds, so then you know we're finding out madernaur
Speaker 1: fisor how long they these vaccines keep working. But you know,
Speaker 1: I think there's a headline earlier Moderna's COVID ninteen vaccine
Speaker 1: keeps working past six months. I mean knowing this is
Speaker 1: really crucial right now to understand how safe we're going
Speaker 1: to be kept, at least for the time being. And
Speaker 1: just got about thirty seconds. Well, it is very good
Speaker 1: news that those two vaccines you mentioned, Fiser Macderna. It
Speaker 1: seems to be very effective at six months and maybe
Speaker 1: even nine months. I don't think any of us expecting
Speaker 1: to be effective as long as the polio vaccines for
Speaker 1: many years. But that is very good news. Now, depending
Speaker 1: what vaccine you get, you'll have a different length of
Speaker 1: time the best so far as moderna adviser. Hey, but
Speaker 1: they all are healthy. Let's get right back to Dr
Speaker 1: William Haseltein, chairman and president of Access Health International, also
Speaker 1: the author, among many other things, of my lifelong fight
Speaker 1: against disease from polio and AIDS to COVID nineteen. He
Speaker 1: joins us now again on the phone from Connecticut. Dr Haselteen,
Speaker 1: you said some thing before the break that I wanted
Speaker 1: to make sure I understood. It was with regard to
Speaker 1: variance and vaccine. We continue to get news about the
Speaker 1: durability of this vaccine and also how it does in
Speaker 1: the face of variance. So far as have you seen
Speaker 1: anything that raises any red flags about the mutations of
Speaker 1: the virus being able to get past these vaccines that
Speaker 1: are available for emergence use authorization? Now? Uh, You asked
Speaker 1: the question in very specific ways, so I'll give you
Speaker 1: a specific answer. The ask resentic A vaccine was ten
Speaker 1: percent effective against the South Africans variants in South Africa
Speaker 1: in a real test and means nine percent of the
Speaker 1: time and didn't work. Other vaccines have been much more
Speaker 1: successful against other variants, including the South African variant. I
Speaker 1: think if you really look at it, it depends upon
Speaker 1: how good the initial response is. If the initial response
Speaker 1: is very strong, it will last longer and protect against
Speaker 1: more variants. Over time, it will be crease both in
Speaker 1: its protection against the original variant and increase decrease a
Speaker 1: little bit faster against the other variants. Now, not all
Speaker 1: variants are created equally. Some are more resistant in musialization
Speaker 1: or protection than or others. So and every day goes on,
Speaker 1: we see new variants. She has yesterday they were new
Speaker 1: variants reported out of California that they have originated in India.
Speaker 1: So it's a very complicated picture that I think that
Speaker 1: means that even uh, if we don't have new vaccines
Speaker 1: as likely will be boosted. Within the next year to
Speaker 1: eighteen months. Everybody will be suggested to be boosted to
Speaker 1: protect ourselves against these make sure we have the highest
Speaker 1: possible line of body protection. That is achievable. And so
Speaker 1: I understand this correctly that doctor has latina. As these
Speaker 1: variants come, as long as we just keep tweaking the
Speaker 1: existing vaccine, that they will be able to be tweaked
Speaker 1: pretty quickly so that we can keep up with the variance.
Speaker 1: Is that correct? In my very low tang low science explanation,
Speaker 1: the absolute point, we get a flu vaccine every year
Speaker 1: against variants of flu. It isn't a hundred push on protective,
Speaker 1: but it is good and it protects both against getting
Speaker 1: infected and more importantly, getting sick. And I think most
Speaker 1: of us care about you know, we can put up
Speaker 1: with a cold, we can't put up with being hospitalized.
Speaker 1: And so it's very likely that we'll be able to
Speaker 1: keep abreast of this infection and the variance. But we'll
Speaker 1: have to keep on our tubes, and we have to
Speaker 1: be prepared for some nasty variant to come along that
Speaker 1: we're gonna have to respond to very quickly, but which
Speaker 1: we're not prepared. It's gonna be a very complex feature.
Speaker 1: So does that Does that mean that we are going
Speaker 1: to have some sort of permanent infrastructure in place to
Speaker 1: rapidly deploy shots to large numbers of people it does.
Speaker 1: Uh think that's a very good conclusion. But I'll give
Speaker 1: you one ray of hope, and that is there are
Speaker 1: some gentlemans and vaccines that have developed that might be
Speaker 1: protective against many many variants, not just a few. So
Speaker 1: the third generation of vaccines that are currently in early
Speaker 1: stages of tests may give us some hope. If we
Speaker 1: combine that with the anti viral drugs, we maybe have
Speaker 1: a solution to continue life nearly as normal. And at
Speaker 1: the same time, since this is your world and you
Speaker 1: and you are in touch with these networks of individuals
Speaker 1: and institutions, we need to be also though, getting ready
Speaker 1: for the next virus. Right we've already I you know,
Speaker 1: there's those virus hunters out there that have identified them
Speaker 1: that if we start working on kind of preliminary vaccines,
Speaker 1: will be in much better shape. We need to be
Speaker 1: thinking about that. And just got about forty seconds. I
Speaker 1: think one of the long term benefits of this disaster
Speaker 1: that's befallen us because we all know that it's not
Speaker 1: just a matter of lives that are lost, it's economies
Speaker 1: that are lost to and that means there's everybody got
Speaker 1: to pulled behind trying to understand how to prevent this
Speaker 1: from ever happening again. You know, a lot of us
Speaker 1: have been crying in the dark that we have to
Speaker 1: be prepared, not being listened to. I think from now
Speaker 1: on we're going to be listened to a lot more,
Speaker 1: and we will be prepared more than we were this time.
Speaker 1: Fingers crossed on that, elbows crossed. Everything crossed on that
Speaker 1: because I would like to be. I think the whole
Speaker 1: world hopes to be better prepared. Um. Dr Hazeltine, thank
Speaker 1: you so much. You always find time for us, and
Speaker 1: we really appreciate it. Dr William hazelteen Sherman, President of
Speaker 1: Access Health International. He founded Human Genome Sciences. He's got
Speaker 1: several books out, including My Lifelong Fight against Disease, and
Speaker 1: he's got a new book, ATHLETs about variance, the shape
Speaker 1: shifting challenge of COVID nineteen. Joining us once again here
Speaker 1: from Connecticut. You're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol
Speaker 1: Messer and Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio. Well,
Speaker 1: someone we like to turn to on everything from trade
Speaker 1: and politics to Wall Street, you'making and more is Stephan
Speaker 1: se Lick. He is managing partner at Bridge Park Advisors,
Speaker 1: chairman of Rotor. He's former Undersecretary of Commerce for International
Speaker 1: Trade at the U S Department of Commerce. That was
Speaker 1: during the Obama administration. He is back with us on
Speaker 1: the phone from Long Island. Uh. Stephens, So nice to
Speaker 1: have you here with Tim and myself. How are you great, Carol?
Speaker 1: Thanks for having me back. So you've been busy. Got
Speaker 1: to talk to you about a story on the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: today about Sarkos Robotics planning to go public through a
Speaker 1: reverse merger with a blank check company. I think you're
Speaker 1: familiar with it, Rotor. Uh, your chairman of Rotor. Why
Speaker 1: tell us about this and why? Sarcos so um Rotor
Speaker 1: Acquisition is a company that we formed at the beginning
Speaker 1: of the year. I have two partners, Brian Finn, who's
Speaker 1: the former president of Credit Suite in the US who
Speaker 1: I've known since and John Howard, who's a storied private
Speaker 1: equity investor, was the CEO and founder of the merchant
Speaker 1: banking business at bear Stearns. And we raised two seventy
Speaker 1: six million dollars to do a deal um where for
Speaker 1: a company that was going to be positively impacted by
Speaker 1: innovation and technology to transform what historically had been an
Speaker 1: old economy business, and we identified Sarcos Robotics, which is
Speaker 1: a leader in highly dexterous mobile industrial robotics systems that
Speaker 1: enables the workforce of the future with solutions that enhance
Speaker 1: productivity and reduce operational injuries and equalize employment opportunities for
Speaker 1: jobs around the world that did not otherwise lend themselves automation.
Speaker 1: So we are extraordinarily excited about this opportunity, um uh,
Speaker 1: and to present it to our share old I mean
Speaker 1: I'm looking at a picture of the Sarcos Robotics Guardian
Speaker 1: Exo Exo skeleton and it looks like an exo skeleton,
Speaker 1: like something out of a superhero movie. Yeah it does.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is something that is designed to help
Speaker 1: people lift heavy objects, right, yes. Um What's important him
Speaker 1: is it's not designed to replace humans like a number
Speaker 1: of the robots you see and in automotive factories and
Speaker 1: in other applications, but rather to augment humans. And as
Speaker 1: a result of that, the technology has been um extraordinarily
Speaker 1: well received by commercial and military customers alike. For some
Speaker 1: of the reasons, I suggested, what is the process of
Speaker 1: identifying a company like Sarcos Robotics when you have this
Speaker 1: criteria that you use for identifying the type of company
Speaker 1: that you want to acquire through a spect Well, you know,
Speaker 1: we came together, the three of us UM with a
Speaker 1: hundred years of law street experience and broad in deep
Speaker 1: relationships and UM. One of those relationships with two of
Speaker 1: my partners was with Sarkos, and frankly, we think that's
Speaker 1: what differentiates some of the SPAC sponsors from others as
Speaker 1: this capital markets tool has continued to evolve, UM and Frankly, UM,
Speaker 1: what we think differentiates us UM is not only our
Speaker 1: ability to UM negotiate attractive acquisitions UM, but to identify
Speaker 1: proprietary opportunities based on that network. Well, and I guess
Speaker 1: you know the question is because and we'll talk a
Speaker 1: bit more broadly about SPACs UM, Stephen, but did you
Speaker 1: guys think about a lot of other companies or look
Speaker 1: at a lot of other companies or I'm just curious
Speaker 1: about the process. Yeah, Well, UM, Sarcos had engaged to
Speaker 1: financial advisors to run a process which roughly coincide with
Speaker 1: when our SPACK was raised, So we were kind of
Speaker 1: thrown into the suit. So to speak UM early UM
Speaker 1: UH in UM in our time frame for identifying a target,
Speaker 1: so UM we had the opportunity to look at UM
Speaker 1: a number of opportunities UM. But once the Sarko opportunity
Speaker 1: became actionable because of their own deliberations and process that
Speaker 1: they're board decided on, we frankly jumped on this is
Speaker 1: I'm just looking at pictures of of what's available on
Speaker 1: the market for this. UM. Just talk briefly about the
Speaker 1: go to market strategy with with how you're thinking about
Speaker 1: getting this to companies. It seems like right now the
Speaker 1: cost is really high. You're going to lease it or
Speaker 1: the company I should say Sarcos Robotics will lease it
Speaker 1: FO dollars a year. Uh, and then eventually the cost
Speaker 1: is going is expected to get lower. Yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: the cost to manufacturer will go down dramatically as we
Speaker 1: start to get to scale. The cost that you're referring
Speaker 1: to tim anw or high only because we're in the
Speaker 1: kind of alpha data UM production stages. So we're doing
Speaker 1: that ourselves as opposed to the global contract manufacturers that
Speaker 1: we will utilize UM once we get the scale. But UM,
Speaker 1: your intuition is actually the opposite of what we believe
Speaker 1: to be the case, which is this will make UM
Speaker 1: production and manufacturing and UM decreased costs for our for
Speaker 1: our customers because it will allow one worker to do
Speaker 1: what to three or four workers can do without this
Speaker 1: UM without this technology, So just think about it. UM,
Speaker 1: A normal worker guidelines are you shouldn't be listening lifting
Speaker 1: stuff that's more than thirty pounds, and when you have
Speaker 1: to list something that's more than more than thirty pounds,
Speaker 1: that means you need to three or four workers. Where
Speaker 1: Here UM you can use the exoskeleton can lift up
Speaker 1: to two hundred pounds and frankly feel like you're lifting
Speaker 1: just five pounds UM. And as a result of that UM,
Speaker 1: the cost benefits to UM, UH, the cost benefits to
Speaker 1: our potential customers are significant. Let alone the benefits around
Speaker 1: worker safety UM. The amount of productivity that is lost
Speaker 1: in the global economy because of workplace injuries are just extraordinary.
Speaker 1: I do also wonder to UM stuff and if it
Speaker 1: allows older workers to, you know, maybe take a job
Speaker 1: that they wouldn't normally be able to because they're able
Speaker 1: to tap into this kind of equipment. And just got
Speaker 1: about thirty forty seconds, then we'll come back and talk
Speaker 1: some more. So that's exactly right, Carol. And it's not
Speaker 1: older workers taking these jobs as much as workers being
Speaker 1: able to stay on their jobs and not actually age
Speaker 1: out because of the wear and tear that their bodies
Speaker 1: will take in some of these more demanding jobs, let
Speaker 1: alone having younger people who are going to be attracted
Speaker 1: to these jobs because frankly, they're less dangerous and more
Speaker 1: interesting and more fun um, rather than just sitting in
Speaker 1: front of a screen trying to get right back to
Speaker 1: Stefan see like he is matching partner Bridge Park, Advisor's
Speaker 1: chairman of Road or former Undersecretary of Commerce for International
Speaker 1: Trade at the Commerce Department during the Aboma administration. Still
Speaker 1: with us on the phone in Long Island. Hey, just
Speaker 1: one more question on sarcos um, Stefan. I do wonder
Speaker 1: how much of the business going forward will be reliant
Speaker 1: on government contracts. It's a great question, um, Carol. We
Speaker 1: have very strong relationships with the U. S. Military. However,
Speaker 1: all of our projections that we have shared with investors
Speaker 1: are one dependent on UH commercial relationships, um, and not
Speaker 1: dependent on government contracts because frankly, government contracts are are
Speaker 1: far less certain, um uh and subject to much more variability.
Speaker 1: And so we really built a business plan around commercial applications.
Speaker 1: Although we think there's going to be tons of military
Speaker 1: and other government uses for the products. Well, look forward
Speaker 1: to hearing more in the future too. As you guys
Speaker 1: m continue along, I do have one bigger, broader question
Speaker 1: stuff and when it comes to SPACs, there are so
Speaker 1: many out there. There's a lot um that haven't put
Speaker 1: any money to work or trading for less than the
Speaker 1: cash that they raised in their public offerings. Do you
Speaker 1: think ultimately that there will be many of these SPACs
Speaker 1: that go nowhere that will ultimately be liquidated. Um. You know, Look, Carol,
Speaker 1: I think that's hard to say. On the one hand,
Speaker 1: on the other hand, I think for sure you're going
Speaker 1: to see a continued evolution and maturation in this spack
Speaker 1: market um with you know, more accomplished, more experienced sponsors
Speaker 1: replacing frankly those folks that have been more entrepreneurial historically,
Speaker 1: and frankly a better set of underwriters that are using
Speaker 1: would use more stringent standards to select sponsors to raise
Speaker 1: this capital. I think you've seen that in all kind
Speaker 1: of capital markets innovations over the years, and I wouldn't
Speaker 1: be surprised to see that happening with SPACs on the
Speaker 1: one hand. On the other hand, I don't think this
Speaker 1: capital markets tool is going to go away, and I
Speaker 1: think it will have a permanent place in UM the
Speaker 1: landscape for companies looking to companies at a certain stage
Speaker 1: of their lifestyle looking to raise external capital. Hey, Stephen,
Speaker 1: I want to talk trade with you, because of course
Speaker 1: you were former Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trader
Speaker 1: are former undersecret Commerce for International Trade at the U
Speaker 1: S depart enough Commerce during the Obama administration. We are
Speaker 1: still in a trade war with China right now. I
Speaker 1: think a lot of people forget that. Um, how do
Speaker 1: we get past this and into the what is the
Speaker 1: sort of next relationship or phase of the relationship with
Speaker 1: China look like? You know, I'm not sure Kim, we
Speaker 1: do get past it. Um. I remember telling Carol, Um,
Speaker 1: you know a few months ago that you know, it's
Speaker 1: almost kind of like we're in a challenged marriage with
Speaker 1: China and we're kind of forced to live together because
Speaker 1: of the kids. And I think, frankly that continues to
Speaker 1: be the analogy and our relations you know, I think
Speaker 1: are going to continue to remain fraught. Um, the tone
Speaker 1: may change or will change under the Biden administration and
Speaker 1: clearly will be less belligerent. I think clearly as a
Speaker 1: tactical matter, we're likely to coordinate much more of our
Speaker 1: friends and allies. But I don't think the fundamental underpinning
Speaker 1: of these tensions is going to go away anytime soon.
Speaker 1: So let me ask you. I love that, I do
Speaker 1: remember that. I think it made us chuckle when you
Speaker 1: said it. But this whole idea of being forced to
Speaker 1: live live together because of the kids, who's going to
Speaker 1: have the better house, China or the United States? I
Speaker 1: asked that because of the infrastructure spend that President Biden
Speaker 1: is now trying to do. Stephan, we had a great
Speaker 1: conversation with our Andy Brown of Bloomberg New Economy that
Speaker 1: the whole idea of you can't fight, you know, the
Speaker 1: way we used to fight with our with maybe our foes,
Speaker 1: that modern weapons weaponry now is really about um improving,
Speaker 1: you know, your economy. That's how you fight kind of
Speaker 1: in the in the strongest way, and doing that is
Speaker 1: by building up your infrastructure. So I wonder your thoughts
Speaker 1: on that. So I guess Caroline made there was two
Speaker 1: points to that interesting question. The first is which side
Speaker 1: do you want to take? And frankly, I don't want
Speaker 1: to um uh sound Pollyannish, but you know you have
Speaker 1: to bet on the US. We have the strongest economy,
Speaker 1: the most innovative economy, We have rule of law, we
Speaker 1: have the broadest and deepest capital markets, we are energy
Speaker 1: self sufficient, we have um an extraordinary workforce. We have
Speaker 1: the best secondary education university education system in the world.
Speaker 1: And you know, those are all things that are the
Speaker 1: envy of the world. As I went around, not just
Speaker 1: as under under secretary, but as a banker for many years,
Speaker 1: people want to do business with American companies and want
Speaker 1: to do business in America, and that's not going to change.
Speaker 1: Um uh. That's not going to change anytime soon. To
Speaker 1: your second point about security, um uh. And this is
Speaker 1: something that is highly topical because there are there is
Speaker 1: a lot of conversation about whether or not we should
Speaker 1: separate trade issues from broader security and human rights issues,
Speaker 1: and a number of leading companies have suggested that we should.
Speaker 1: I take the exact opposite view, because I believe economic
Speaker 1: security is national security. To your point, which is which
Speaker 1: is the stronger our economy, the stronger our workforce, the
Speaker 1: better position we are going to be to advance our
Speaker 1: national interest. For Okay, so very briefly, we might be
Speaker 1: the envy of the world as you as you found
Speaker 1: when you were traveling, But we still have two political
Speaker 1: parties that basically cannot agree on anything. So how does
Speaker 1: anything happen when it comes to infrastructure? Republicans are unwilling
Speaker 1: to to budge and Democrats it seems to be the same.
Speaker 1: And Stephan, don't kill us. But you out like thirty seconds.
Speaker 1: You know, well that's that gives me a lot of
Speaker 1: time to answer that. You know, Look, you know, how
Speaker 1: we get from the ear to there is hard I
Speaker 1: think both sides. There is a recognition that we have
Speaker 1: wildly underspent in terms of infrastructure. The question is going
Speaker 1: to be how do we define what that infrastructure spending
Speaker 1: is for, how much it is for, and importantly what's
Speaker 1: going to be to pay for? And the tax policy implications,
Speaker 1: which you know have been all over the press for
Speaker 1: the last couple of days. Yeah, absolutely, listen stuff And
Speaker 1: I always come in with a list of things I
Speaker 1: want to talk with you, because I can talk to
Speaker 1: you for hours. Thank you so much. Be well and
Speaker 1: stay safe. Stephan see like at Bridge Park Advisors. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to Bloomberg Business Week. Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: or Bloomberg dot com, and you can also listen to
Speaker 1: our radio show at two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio
Speaker 1: or watch us on YouTube search Bloomberg Global News