WEBVTT - Vaccine Is 'Strategic Asset' That Hackers Will Target: Clint Watts

0:00:01.400 --> 0:00:04.120
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney, along

0:00:04.120 --> 0:00:06.240
<v Speaker 1>with my co host of Bonnie Quinn. Every business day

0:00:06.240 --> 0:00:10.400
<v Speaker 1>we bring you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts,

0:00:10.400 --> 0:00:13.600
<v Speaker 1>along with essential market moving news. Find the Bloomberg Markets

0:00:13.600 --> 0:00:17.000
<v Speaker 1>Podcast on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts,

0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:21.240
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com. Just over the last twenty

0:00:21.239 --> 0:00:23.080
<v Speaker 1>four hours, we've had a lot of news, it seems,

0:00:23.079 --> 0:00:25.599
<v Speaker 1>about the hacking of various computer systems. We had the

0:00:25.600 --> 0:00:27.760
<v Speaker 1>Twitter hack where a lot of the big name accounts

0:00:27.800 --> 0:00:31.840
<v Speaker 1>were hacked on Twitter yesterday Today news that the UK,

0:00:32.320 --> 0:00:36.200
<v Speaker 1>US and Canada jointly accusing Russia of cyber tax against

0:00:36.240 --> 0:00:41.479
<v Speaker 1>coronavirus research centers. So again, cybersecurity right back into four

0:00:41.720 --> 0:00:45.479
<v Speaker 1>which we're fortunate now to have Clint Watts joined us

0:00:45.640 --> 0:00:47.839
<v Speaker 1>to talk about this. He's a distinguished Research Fellow with

0:00:47.920 --> 0:00:52.200
<v Speaker 1>the Foreign Policy Research Institute's also senior Fellow the Centator

0:00:52.440 --> 0:00:55.680
<v Speaker 1>for Cyber and Holy and Security at George Washington University. Clint,

0:00:55.920 --> 0:00:57.520
<v Speaker 1>thanks so much for joining us. I think I want

0:00:57.520 --> 0:01:02.480
<v Speaker 1>to start with the potential allegations that the Russians have

0:01:02.520 --> 0:01:06.800
<v Speaker 1>been trying to hack into some of the coronavirus testing sites.

0:01:06.840 --> 0:01:11.760
<v Speaker 1>What do you know about that? Yeah, it's it's not surprising. Um,

0:01:11.800 --> 0:01:14.119
<v Speaker 1>it's a little bit different for them. Traditionally we think

0:01:14.120 --> 0:01:17.319
<v Speaker 1>of the Chinese hacking for intellectual property. That's always been

0:01:17.360 --> 0:01:20.280
<v Speaker 1>a big concern, particularly in the United States. UM. But

0:01:20.720 --> 0:01:23.400
<v Speaker 1>the truth of it is, whoever gets the vaccine first,

0:01:23.480 --> 0:01:26.640
<v Speaker 1>or whoever it can replicate it very cheaply and accelerate

0:01:26.640 --> 0:01:29.160
<v Speaker 1>their ability to get that vaccine, not only are they

0:01:29.160 --> 0:01:31.000
<v Speaker 1>going to be able to protect their own country and

0:01:31.040 --> 0:01:33.039
<v Speaker 1>help their own country, but they will be able to

0:01:33.080 --> 0:01:37.319
<v Speaker 1>really move economically as an exporter. It almost becomes a

0:01:37.440 --> 0:01:40.240
<v Speaker 1>valuable asset for a country if they can gain that.

0:01:40.440 --> 0:01:43.240
<v Speaker 1>So I think any of these countries that are lagging behind,

0:01:43.280 --> 0:01:46.240
<v Speaker 1>that really don't have the ability to develop such a

0:01:46.319 --> 0:01:48.600
<v Speaker 1>vaccine are going to take targets. And one of the

0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:51.279
<v Speaker 1>strategic assets of Russians have we know this from election

0:01:52.120 --> 0:01:56.400
<v Speaker 1>to now is they use hackers prolifically to gain information

0:01:56.440 --> 0:01:59.120
<v Speaker 1>in the UK UH and this at this point not

0:01:59.200 --> 0:02:02.520
<v Speaker 1>just today with the vaccines, but also announcing with their

0:02:02.520 --> 0:02:05.800
<v Speaker 1>parliament UH interpretence from twenty nineteen, it seems to be

0:02:06.200 --> 0:02:08.440
<v Speaker 1>a big target for Russia. It does seem to be

0:02:08.440 --> 0:02:12.000
<v Speaker 1>in the DNA, so to speak. But Clint, isn't there

0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:16.320
<v Speaker 1>an agreement among global superpowers or the ones that months

0:02:16.320 --> 0:02:19.000
<v Speaker 1>were superpowers, that there will be sharing If there is,

0:02:19.160 --> 0:02:22.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, significant breakthroughs when it comes to vaccines and viruses,

0:02:22.160 --> 0:02:26.720
<v Speaker 1>it's in everybody's interest to share this. It is. But

0:02:27.120 --> 0:02:29.639
<v Speaker 1>in this case, and it's interesting because that that was

0:02:29.680 --> 0:02:32.040
<v Speaker 1>really kind of Bill Gates mandate, right. He was taking

0:02:32.040 --> 0:02:34.880
<v Speaker 1>that on to make sure that all these vaccine could

0:02:35.240 --> 0:02:38.359
<v Speaker 1>could be used by everybody. But you have to look

0:02:38.360 --> 0:02:39.839
<v Speaker 1>at it in terms of who's going to be able

0:02:39.840 --> 0:02:42.760
<v Speaker 1>to have the capacity to develop it, who's going to

0:02:42.800 --> 0:02:45.720
<v Speaker 1>have the economic structure and incentives behind it once they

0:02:45.720 --> 0:02:48.600
<v Speaker 1>do develop it and be able to distribute it rapidly

0:02:49.000 --> 0:02:51.520
<v Speaker 1>and all over And whatever country can get out in

0:02:51.520 --> 0:02:53.880
<v Speaker 1>front of that first, he is going to have an advantage.

0:02:53.919 --> 0:02:55.839
<v Speaker 1>You'd just be able to replicate it. You'd be able

0:02:55.880 --> 0:02:58.840
<v Speaker 1>to make more of the vaccine, you be able to

0:02:58.880 --> 0:03:02.600
<v Speaker 1>distribute it quicker, which gives you a leg up geopolitically

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:06.440
<v Speaker 1>across all countries. I do think there will be sharing, um,

0:03:06.600 --> 0:03:09.120
<v Speaker 1>But just imagine the United States right now, what a

0:03:09.160 --> 0:03:11.200
<v Speaker 1>dire need we have for vaccines so that we can

0:03:11.240 --> 0:03:13.560
<v Speaker 1>get back up on our feet, and if we had

0:03:13.600 --> 0:03:16.840
<v Speaker 1>a competitor that could maybe hold that overhead to a

0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:19.560
<v Speaker 1>different degree, it just becomes a strategic asset over time.

0:03:20.400 --> 0:03:24.240
<v Speaker 1>But do we have any idea as to the uh,

0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:28.080
<v Speaker 1>the protections the security that the healthcare sties, big farmer companies,

0:03:28.120 --> 0:03:32.000
<v Speaker 1>biotopic biotech companies have you know, in place right now

0:03:32.040 --> 0:03:36.440
<v Speaker 1>to protect kind of they're testing and the results. This

0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:39.280
<v Speaker 1>is one of those interesting things where sector by sector,

0:03:39.320 --> 0:03:42.280
<v Speaker 1>as a sector you get hit, the cybersecurity of protections

0:03:42.320 --> 0:03:44.720
<v Speaker 1>become better. So the first people who really get hit,

0:03:44.720 --> 0:03:46.880
<v Speaker 1>we're banks and financials, right, and they stood up to it.

0:03:46.960 --> 0:03:50.320
<v Speaker 1>You saw that with manufacturing next, but healthcare and the

0:03:50.320 --> 0:03:53.120
<v Speaker 1>health care sector lagged, and so did research and development

0:03:53.160 --> 0:03:55.760
<v Speaker 1>for a very long time. Many of the big companies

0:03:56.240 --> 0:03:59.600
<v Speaker 1>UM are very good in terms of protecting their their

0:03:59.640 --> 0:04:02.040
<v Speaker 1>I P in their their networks and their systems. However,

0:04:02.400 --> 0:04:06.480
<v Speaker 1>you're talking about a global, you know, a global vaccine

0:04:06.600 --> 0:04:10.680
<v Speaker 1>race where you see many many companies coming online, probably

0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:14.280
<v Speaker 1>companies that weren't traditionally even trying to pursue a vaccine

0:04:14.320 --> 0:04:16.640
<v Speaker 1>that maybe have an ability to jump over trying to

0:04:16.760 --> 0:04:21.279
<v Speaker 1>enter that market, you're probably going to see excessive communication

0:04:21.400 --> 0:04:23.240
<v Speaker 1>and people that are in a rush. When you're in

0:04:23.279 --> 0:04:27.240
<v Speaker 1>a hurry, you're always more vulnerable for cyber incident or

0:04:27.240 --> 0:04:30.240
<v Speaker 1>a cyber attack. It's easier to be socially engineered. And

0:04:30.600 --> 0:04:33.839
<v Speaker 1>so if you put all these circumstances together, people get hasty,

0:04:33.920 --> 0:04:36.400
<v Speaker 1>people are moving very quickly. It's just a lot of

0:04:36.400 --> 0:04:39.880
<v Speaker 1>opportunities there for someone to penetrate in network. So it

0:04:39.960 --> 0:04:44.240
<v Speaker 1>might be a little less you know, disingenuous or or dangerous.

0:04:44.320 --> 0:04:47.680
<v Speaker 1>Let's say, but until we heard about Russia hacking on vaccines, potentially,

0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:52.719
<v Speaker 1>we yesterday got some major accounts hacked at Twitter, and

0:04:52.880 --> 0:04:55.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, bitcoins come going around the likes of Bill Gates,

0:04:55.520 --> 0:04:57.839
<v Speaker 1>Joe Biden, Brock Obama, Jeff Bezos, Warren buff that they

0:04:57.880 --> 0:05:01.880
<v Speaker 1>were all affected. Who might have been behind this? I mean,

0:05:01.880 --> 0:05:04.279
<v Speaker 1>could it have been some kid with not very much

0:05:04.320 --> 0:05:08.280
<v Speaker 1>to to, you know, to prove except that he could

0:05:08.279 --> 0:05:10.320
<v Speaker 1>do this, or could it have been something more sinister?

0:05:11.880 --> 0:05:15.159
<v Speaker 1>I think it's definitely something more sophisticated than one off

0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:18.480
<v Speaker 1>lucky hacker or individual. This seems to be an organized syndicate.

0:05:19.040 --> 0:05:21.680
<v Speaker 1>What strange is that they chose bitcoin or as a

0:05:21.680 --> 0:05:25.320
<v Speaker 1>bitcoin sort of like aggregation operation. Uh, there's a lot

0:05:25.320 --> 0:05:27.279
<v Speaker 1>of different ways to do cyber attacks to make money.

0:05:27.520 --> 0:05:30.520
<v Speaker 1>That's not one that's necessarily the most profitable. But it

0:05:30.600 --> 0:05:34.039
<v Speaker 1>did really illustrate a weakness or of vulnerability, which is

0:05:34.080 --> 0:05:37.520
<v Speaker 1>if you can get inside Twitter systems and you can

0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:41.640
<v Speaker 1>gravitate towards and be able to manipulate accounts with a

0:05:41.760 --> 0:05:43.960
<v Speaker 1>very high following, which is what they did. They really

0:05:43.960 --> 0:05:49.760
<v Speaker 1>focused on outstanding influencers, big companies. Uh, if you have

0:05:49.920 --> 0:05:53.320
<v Speaker 1>that ability, you can broadcast, you can enter into the

0:05:53.360 --> 0:05:57.600
<v Speaker 1>information space in a very dynamic way. And so you know,

0:05:57.880 --> 0:06:00.000
<v Speaker 1>this seems to be a financial scam and I'm sure

0:06:00.120 --> 0:06:02.839
<v Speaker 1>will get more for Twitter, But imagine how to spend

0:06:03.160 --> 0:06:06.800
<v Speaker 1>the day before the election or the day of the election. Um,

0:06:06.880 --> 0:06:10.000
<v Speaker 1>what if they had taken over media accounts like Bloomberg

0:06:10.120 --> 0:06:12.719
<v Speaker 1>or any of the mainstream media outlets right and started

0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:16.160
<v Speaker 1>putting out in authentic results of elections or ballots. It

0:06:16.200 --> 0:06:19.000
<v Speaker 1>would be would cause mass chaos in an election in

0:06:19.000 --> 0:06:20.760
<v Speaker 1>a scenari and way. We are going to have to

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:23.440
<v Speaker 1>continue this conversation. It is a fascinating one and it

0:06:23.440 --> 0:06:25.480
<v Speaker 1>will be with us throughout the election and beyond our

0:06:25.600 --> 0:06:31.520
<v Speaker 1>thanks to you, Clint there for joining us well. Given

0:06:31.560 --> 0:06:33.520
<v Speaker 1>the market action that we've seen over the last couple

0:06:33.560 --> 0:06:35.560
<v Speaker 1>of months that bounce off the bottom, a lot of

0:06:35.560 --> 0:06:38.920
<v Speaker 1>investors are asking themselves, you know, how do I play this?

0:06:38.960 --> 0:06:41.640
<v Speaker 1>Do I get in? Is it too late? Even Bill

0:06:41.760 --> 0:06:45.880
<v Speaker 1>Miller uh said value stocks advantages is probably short lived.

0:06:46.080 --> 0:06:48.920
<v Speaker 1>He's counting on a comeback for growth stocks to get

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:51.240
<v Speaker 1>a sense of kind of maybe where we move from here.

0:06:51.560 --> 0:06:54.640
<v Speaker 1>We welcome Barry Ridholts, Bloomberg opinion columnists and host of

0:06:54.720 --> 0:06:57.360
<v Speaker 1>Masters in Business on Bloomberg. Ready is also founder and

0:06:57.440 --> 0:07:00.880
<v Speaker 1>chief investment officer of Ridholt's Wealth Management. Barry, thanks so

0:07:00.960 --> 0:07:04.960
<v Speaker 1>much for joining us here. Bill Miller talking about growth stocks?

0:07:04.960 --> 0:07:08.400
<v Speaker 1>What do you make of that? So Bill nowhere tells

0:07:08.400 --> 0:07:13.480
<v Speaker 1>a fascinating story about his um come to Jesus moment

0:07:13.680 --> 0:07:16.720
<v Speaker 1>after the eighty seven crash. You know, they had put

0:07:16.760 --> 0:07:21.120
<v Speaker 1>together a nice track record, but in eighty nine they

0:07:21.320 --> 0:07:25.400
<v Speaker 1>really were struggling, and he went back and re evaluated,

0:07:26.360 --> 0:07:31.120
<v Speaker 1>under what circumstances does value beat growth and how can

0:07:31.160 --> 0:07:33.760
<v Speaker 1>we better measure value? When they came up with a

0:07:33.800 --> 0:07:38.760
<v Speaker 1>series of um variations that are different than the traditional

0:07:38.920 --> 0:07:43.120
<v Speaker 1>price to earnings ratio one is straight up return on capitol.

0:07:43.800 --> 0:07:47.400
<v Speaker 1>And as soon as they began to implement these, he

0:07:47.520 --> 0:07:51.559
<v Speaker 1>had a spectacular run from one to two thousand and five,

0:07:52.320 --> 0:07:56.520
<v Speaker 1>fifteen consecutive years of a major fund beating the SMP five.

0:07:57.240 --> 0:08:00.280
<v Speaker 1>There's never been another streak like that in his three

0:08:00.360 --> 0:08:03.280
<v Speaker 1>So when when Bill Miller says, hey, coming out of

0:08:03.280 --> 0:08:06.080
<v Speaker 1>a recession, value is cyclical, it tends to be more

0:08:06.120 --> 0:08:09.520
<v Speaker 1>sensitive to interest rates and to inflation, and it tends

0:08:09.600 --> 0:08:13.920
<v Speaker 1>to to do better. But in a very low yield environment,

0:08:14.200 --> 0:08:16.080
<v Speaker 1>growth is going to be advant is going to have

0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:20.560
<v Speaker 1>the advantage. So don't expect the value stops to be

0:08:20.720 --> 0:08:24.040
<v Speaker 1>growth for very much longer. And Barry has now done

0:08:24.200 --> 0:08:27.720
<v Speaker 1>two Masters in Business podcasts with the legendary Bill Miller.

0:08:27.760 --> 0:08:30.400
<v Speaker 1>I can't recommend them enough. Some things that you really

0:08:30.400 --> 0:08:33.640
<v Speaker 1>would not expect to be in there in there, including

0:08:34.480 --> 0:08:38.040
<v Speaker 1>what Barry has just voiced about, you know, a legendary

0:08:38.080 --> 0:08:42.000
<v Speaker 1>value investor talking about growth stocks so much so, Barry,

0:08:42.080 --> 0:08:44.959
<v Speaker 1>what about finings? I mean, are we do for sort

0:08:44.960 --> 0:08:49.720
<v Speaker 1>of a rollover? You know? I keep seeing these comparisons

0:08:49.800 --> 0:08:52.920
<v Speaker 1>between the run up of the fang stock and and

0:08:53.040 --> 0:08:57.760
<v Speaker 1>the dot com collapse in the late everybody wants to

0:08:57.840 --> 0:09:01.360
<v Speaker 1>draw the wrong lesson from from the implosion we saw

0:09:01.559 --> 0:09:04.520
<v Speaker 1>in two thousand and I think there are There are

0:09:04.640 --> 0:09:09.520
<v Speaker 1>several really specific differences that that are important to note.

0:09:10.240 --> 0:09:13.679
<v Speaker 1>The first is in the nineties, the tech stocks had

0:09:13.720 --> 0:09:17.720
<v Speaker 1>a thousand percent appreciation over five years. Over the past

0:09:17.800 --> 0:09:22.280
<v Speaker 1>five years, uh, the big Tex stocks are up about

0:09:22.280 --> 0:09:26.000
<v Speaker 1>a hundred and seventy. That's a huge difference. It's you know,

0:09:26.120 --> 0:09:29.480
<v Speaker 1>it was five times more aggressive back then than than

0:09:29.520 --> 0:09:33.640
<v Speaker 1>it is today. So that's number one. Second, you cannot

0:09:33.640 --> 0:09:37.040
<v Speaker 1>help but look at the big Tex stocks and notice,

0:09:37.760 --> 0:09:42.040
<v Speaker 1>dear lord, these are cash machines. Microsoft and Apple and

0:09:42.160 --> 0:09:45.880
<v Speaker 1>Google and Facebook. They are just printing money. And and

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:50.760
<v Speaker 1>now you throw in Netflix, Amazon another one just gaining

0:09:50.800 --> 0:09:53.720
<v Speaker 1>market share, printing money. And on top of everything else,

0:09:54.000 --> 0:09:58.720
<v Speaker 1>Amazon Cloud Services a big profit engine, so very different

0:09:59.240 --> 0:10:03.079
<v Speaker 1>era today, a with profits, not only revenue, but profits

0:10:03.200 --> 0:10:07.040
<v Speaker 1>versus the nineties. Certainly a big difference. But but I

0:10:07.080 --> 0:10:11.520
<v Speaker 1>think the most the difference that explains why the market

0:10:11.600 --> 0:10:15.200
<v Speaker 1>is confounding people to such a large degree. You know,

0:10:15.320 --> 0:10:17.600
<v Speaker 1>people look around and they see the U. S. Economy

0:10:17.720 --> 0:10:21.720
<v Speaker 1>is not doing great. It's improving, but it's still wildly

0:10:21.800 --> 0:10:24.880
<v Speaker 1>off from where it was in this time last year

0:10:24.960 --> 0:10:29.960
<v Speaker 1>or even you know, January February, and the reopening has

0:10:30.040 --> 0:10:33.880
<v Speaker 1>gone poorly. We've we've bungled the whole COVID nineteen management.

0:10:34.280 --> 0:10:36.560
<v Speaker 1>But you look around the rest of the world and

0:10:36.720 --> 0:10:41.400
<v Speaker 1>places like Germany and South Korea and Taiwan and China

0:10:41.440 --> 0:10:44.160
<v Speaker 1>are all doing a better job than than we are.

0:10:44.960 --> 0:10:47.400
<v Speaker 1>And to tie that back to the fangs, to tie

0:10:47.400 --> 0:10:51.280
<v Speaker 1>that back to the big tech companies, these companies derive

0:10:51.480 --> 0:10:56.040
<v Speaker 1>the majority of their revenues from non US sources appled

0:10:56.040 --> 0:11:01.960
<v Speaker 1>most of all, as much as six in some quarters. Uh, Microsoft, Facebook, Google,

0:11:02.040 --> 0:11:05.840
<v Speaker 1>in the you know, about half, maybe a little more Amazon, Netflix,

0:11:05.920 --> 0:11:09.600
<v Speaker 1>also a little more. Amazon is the lagguar because so

0:11:09.679 --> 0:11:12.199
<v Speaker 1>much of the retail sales between whole foods and the

0:11:12.320 --> 0:11:16.160
<v Speaker 1>delivery service is in the US. Um So not only

0:11:16.160 --> 0:11:19.800
<v Speaker 1>are most of the big tech companies getting the majority

0:11:19.800 --> 0:11:23.600
<v Speaker 1>of their revenues from overseas, but overseas is their fastest

0:11:23.640 --> 0:11:27.560
<v Speaker 1>growth markets. Also, it really explains why we could have

0:11:27.640 --> 0:11:31.000
<v Speaker 1>such a mediocre economy in the US and why the

0:11:31.080 --> 0:11:34.600
<v Speaker 1>big text box are doing so well. It's not as

0:11:35.080 --> 0:11:39.800
<v Speaker 1>irrational as it appears. So Barry, I think I know

0:11:39.840 --> 0:11:41.439
<v Speaker 1>a lot of folks would agree with you that the

0:11:41.559 --> 0:11:44.800
<v Speaker 1>US federal governments bungled, to use your term, that the

0:11:44.880 --> 0:11:48.040
<v Speaker 1>response to COVID nineteen. At some point, do the markets

0:11:48.280 --> 0:11:55.040
<v Speaker 1>need to see some significant coordination improvement here to move higher,

0:11:55.040 --> 0:11:57.840
<v Speaker 1>because it seems like despite some of the weaknesses that

0:11:57.840 --> 0:12:01.000
<v Speaker 1>we've seen in key markets at California, Texas, US Florida,

0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:04.720
<v Speaker 1>the market has been generally pretty nonchalant about this flare

0:12:04.800 --> 0:12:08.760
<v Speaker 1>up here. Yeah, so some of that is the improvement overseas.

0:12:08.920 --> 0:12:11.800
<v Speaker 1>Some of that is we were expecting a second wave

0:12:11.880 --> 0:12:15.359
<v Speaker 1>in the fall, and I think some people are incorrectly

0:12:15.520 --> 0:12:18.640
<v Speaker 1>considering this a second wave. This is just an extension

0:12:18.679 --> 0:12:22.120
<v Speaker 1>of the first wave. And I can't help but feel

0:12:22.200 --> 0:12:27.160
<v Speaker 1>that the run of very positive news about UM, the

0:12:27.240 --> 0:12:31.760
<v Speaker 1>various vaccines MODERNA is one and the one out of

0:12:31.760 --> 0:12:35.320
<v Speaker 1>Oxford is the other, and and the improving treatments for

0:12:35.360 --> 0:12:40.920
<v Speaker 1>people even if they do get UM catch coronavirus kind

0:12:40.920 --> 0:12:43.600
<v Speaker 1>of has people looking past this flare up and the

0:12:43.640 --> 0:12:46.840
<v Speaker 1>full flare up to hey, we're very likely to have

0:12:47.200 --> 0:12:49.320
<v Speaker 1>by this time next year, there should be some sort

0:12:49.360 --> 0:12:54.040
<v Speaker 1>of a widespread vaccine. That's a fair guest from a

0:12:54.160 --> 0:12:57.400
<v Speaker 1>non doctor, and I think a lot of the investors

0:12:57.600 --> 0:13:01.079
<v Speaker 1>share my lack of qualifications to open on this, but

0:13:01.400 --> 0:13:05.200
<v Speaker 1>it appears that we're moving in the right direction on

0:13:05.320 --> 0:13:09.599
<v Speaker 1>the medical treatment. Even if we mess up the reopening

0:13:09.720 --> 0:13:13.840
<v Speaker 1>and we mess up the herd immunity, uh, there'll be

0:13:13.880 --> 0:13:17.840
<v Speaker 1>a magic bullet that will allow us to return to

0:13:17.960 --> 0:13:22.199
<v Speaker 1>normal sometime in the future. And and just the market

0:13:22.240 --> 0:13:25.040
<v Speaker 1>seems to be saying, hey, it's a mulligan. Just forget

0:13:25.040 --> 0:13:30.559
<v Speaker 1>about it. Let's look towards Barry, always amazing chatting with you.

0:13:30.720 --> 0:13:32.760
<v Speaker 1>Wanted to talk to you sometimes about Robin Hood as well,

0:13:32.800 --> 0:13:36.400
<v Speaker 1>because apparently yesterday he saw the Robin Hood traders jump

0:13:36.400 --> 0:13:38.800
<v Speaker 1>on the modern A bandwagon as well, and so we'll

0:13:38.800 --> 0:13:40.520
<v Speaker 1>have to see how that plays out. But Barry is

0:13:40.960 --> 0:13:44.439
<v Speaker 1>always full of really down to worth interesting market thoughts.

0:13:44.480 --> 0:13:47.439
<v Speaker 1>He's founder of Riddle's Wealth Management. He's also, of course

0:13:47.520 --> 0:13:51.880
<v Speaker 1>a Bloomberg opinion columnist, and he is also host of

0:13:52.120 --> 0:13:54.439
<v Speaker 1>Masters in Business and do go and have a look

0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:57.199
<v Speaker 1>at those Bill Miller Masters in Business podcasts that he

0:13:57.280 --> 0:13:59.400
<v Speaker 1>put out. One is for a couple of years ago

0:13:59.400 --> 0:14:02.240
<v Speaker 1>and the other is just this week. So really interesting

0:14:02.520 --> 0:14:06.400
<v Speaker 1>stories there from Bill Miller, a legendary investor Barry Rittle's

0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:11.800
<v Speaker 1>thank you. The World Trade Organization has been in existence

0:14:11.840 --> 0:14:14.760
<v Speaker 1>for twenty five years, but it's never been more front

0:14:14.800 --> 0:14:17.040
<v Speaker 1>of mind than in the last couple of years. President

0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:19.480
<v Speaker 1>Trump and Brexit, of course, keeping the w t O

0:14:19.680 --> 0:14:23.880
<v Speaker 1>in the news headlines constantly. Well, the referee at the

0:14:24.000 --> 0:14:26.680
<v Speaker 1>w t O is the apple At Body. Let's welcome

0:14:26.680 --> 0:14:29.080
<v Speaker 1>now the former chairman of the Apple Body of the

0:14:29.240 --> 0:14:32.160
<v Speaker 1>w t O, Jim Bakas Distinguished University Professor of Global

0:14:32.200 --> 0:14:34.960
<v Speaker 1>Affairs at the University of Central Florida and an adjunct

0:14:35.000 --> 0:14:37.960
<v Speaker 1>scholar at the Cato Institute as well. His latest work

0:14:38.080 --> 0:14:42.320
<v Speaker 1>is The Willing World, Shaping and Sharing a sustainable Global Prosperity,

0:14:42.360 --> 0:14:45.840
<v Speaker 1>and that's out from Cambridge University Press. So Mr Bacas,

0:14:45.880 --> 0:14:49.480
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for joining. Where does the apple

0:14:49.480 --> 0:14:52.040
<v Speaker 1>At Body at the w t O stand at the moment?

0:14:52.120 --> 0:14:59.880
<v Speaker 1>In terms of world significance? Of the Apple at bog

0:15:00.080 --> 0:15:05.200
<v Speaker 1>body stands still because under the rules of the w

0:15:05.360 --> 0:15:10.440
<v Speaker 1>t O Treaty UH, the I Thought Body cannot hear

0:15:10.520 --> 0:15:14.200
<v Speaker 1>any new appeals unless it has at least three members.

0:15:14.240 --> 0:15:19.800
<v Speaker 1>It ordinarily has seven, it currently has one and um

0:15:19.800 --> 0:15:24.920
<v Speaker 1>this is entirely because the United States under President Trump

0:15:24.960 --> 0:15:29.280
<v Speaker 1>has refused to join in the needed consensus with other

0:15:29.440 --> 0:15:34.680
<v Speaker 1>WTO members to appoint two judges. The significance of this

0:15:35.120 --> 0:15:41.480
<v Speaker 1>is that it undermines the ability of the w t

0:15:41.640 --> 0:15:47.120
<v Speaker 1>O to make binding and enforceable judgments in inevitable international

0:15:47.160 --> 0:15:50.120
<v Speaker 1>trade disputes, as it is done in hundreds of cases

0:15:50.520 --> 0:15:54.360
<v Speaker 1>vary successfully over the past twenty five years. Were now

0:15:54.440 --> 0:15:57.120
<v Speaker 1>suddenly back to the days before the w t O,

0:15:57.280 --> 0:16:02.520
<v Speaker 1>in which in effect, any one country can block ruling

0:16:02.600 --> 0:16:06.720
<v Speaker 1>against it by a w t O panel. Thus, we're

0:16:06.800 --> 0:16:12.480
<v Speaker 1>heading towards a situation which anything goes, especially for the

0:16:12.600 --> 0:16:17.440
<v Speaker 1>larger company countries that have the political and economic leverage

0:16:17.840 --> 0:16:21.480
<v Speaker 1>to get away with ignoring w t t TOO rulings.

0:16:21.520 --> 0:16:25.320
<v Speaker 1>So far, the US has been one and the only

0:16:25.360 --> 0:16:31.440
<v Speaker 1>one that has tried this approach. So, Jim, give us

0:16:31.440 --> 0:16:33.400
<v Speaker 1>a sense of how you think this might play out

0:16:33.400 --> 0:16:35.240
<v Speaker 1>at the w t O. Again, as vy as mentioning

0:16:35.280 --> 0:16:38.200
<v Speaker 1>it's been in existence for twenty five years, the US

0:16:38.240 --> 0:16:41.360
<v Speaker 1>has been a willing and able participant in the w

0:16:41.560 --> 0:16:44.840
<v Speaker 1>t of the World Trade Organization to the extent we

0:16:44.880 --> 0:16:48.680
<v Speaker 1>get a new administration in a matter of months, will

0:16:48.720 --> 0:16:52.800
<v Speaker 1>that change perhaps the the way the US views it's

0:16:52.880 --> 0:16:58.480
<v Speaker 1>rolled in the w t O. I think it will um.

0:16:58.520 --> 0:17:02.920
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump is not going to chan change, support him

0:17:02.960 --> 0:17:05.440
<v Speaker 1>or oppose him. I think we can all agree on that.

0:17:05.640 --> 0:17:10.520
<v Speaker 1>And if he's reelected, this stalemate is likely to continue

0:17:10.560 --> 0:17:14.399
<v Speaker 1>with previous effects in world trade for the United States

0:17:14.400 --> 0:17:18.680
<v Speaker 1>and for all other countries. If Joe Biden is elected,

0:17:18.720 --> 0:17:22.480
<v Speaker 1>I think we'll see a return by the United States

0:17:22.960 --> 0:17:31.200
<v Speaker 1>to more multilateral approaches that give more emphasis to international cooperation.

0:17:32.040 --> 0:17:34.199
<v Speaker 1>The w t O is one of those places in

0:17:34.240 --> 0:17:38.959
<v Speaker 1>which we uh will see that, I think and I

0:17:39.080 --> 0:17:42.400
<v Speaker 1>predict that one of the first evidences of that new

0:17:42.400 --> 0:17:46.320
<v Speaker 1>approach would be the United States joining with other members

0:17:46.320 --> 0:17:51.320
<v Speaker 1>of the w t O to resume the work of

0:17:51.359 --> 0:17:55.280
<v Speaker 1>the Appellate Body. Mr Backus, I mean, we should remind

0:17:55.320 --> 0:17:57.960
<v Speaker 1>people that one of the reasons why the Appellate Body

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:03.400
<v Speaker 1>is so important is that it protects countries really from

0:18:03.400 --> 0:18:08.159
<v Speaker 1>retaliation against trade partners with you know, without fear of

0:18:09.520 --> 0:18:14.800
<v Speaker 1>expressing their opinion or of you know, not having a

0:18:14.880 --> 0:18:17.600
<v Speaker 1>referee in between the two. So smaller states, you know,

0:18:17.800 --> 0:18:20.080
<v Speaker 1>might be at a disadvantage if it weren't for this

0:18:20.200 --> 0:18:23.000
<v Speaker 1>kind of referee, this global referee. But as we move

0:18:23.040 --> 0:18:25.480
<v Speaker 1>into a period and we've were already in it really

0:18:25.760 --> 0:18:28.880
<v Speaker 1>of countries turning inwards, of you know, states being more

0:18:28.880 --> 0:18:32.639
<v Speaker 1>important again and so on. How can the w t

0:18:32.800 --> 0:18:37.640
<v Speaker 1>O Appellate Body referee in a world like that where

0:18:37.720 --> 0:18:42.160
<v Speaker 1>even trade is almost less important. Well, I don't think

0:18:42.200 --> 0:18:46.879
<v Speaker 1>trade is less important. It's been declining during the pandemic,

0:18:47.000 --> 0:18:49.400
<v Speaker 1>but I think trade links are all the more important

0:18:49.720 --> 0:18:52.159
<v Speaker 1>as they go forward in the world. We have to

0:18:52.240 --> 0:18:54.959
<v Speaker 1>increase global wealth so that we'll be able to address

0:18:55.040 --> 0:18:59.560
<v Speaker 1>all the many problems we have, and we can't increase

0:18:59.640 --> 0:19:06.080
<v Speaker 1>proces verity if we're decreasing trade. As for the Appellate Body, uh,

0:19:06.200 --> 0:19:09.639
<v Speaker 1>it is a panel of jurists. They are independent and

0:19:10.160 --> 0:19:17.280
<v Speaker 1>impartial referee, as you rightly said, and it's important to

0:19:17.359 --> 0:19:21.080
<v Speaker 1>have them there so that we can resolve peacefully and

0:19:21.200 --> 0:19:29.159
<v Speaker 1>positively the trade disputes that inevitably occur in the n

0:19:30.119 --> 0:19:33.880
<v Speaker 1>of all world commerce that it falls within the scope

0:19:34.400 --> 0:19:39.040
<v Speaker 1>of the w q O Treaty. Without an impartial and

0:19:39.119 --> 0:19:44.320
<v Speaker 1>independent judge of these disputes, there is much more danger

0:19:44.840 --> 0:19:48.480
<v Speaker 1>that the disputes could get out of hand, especially in

0:19:48.520 --> 0:19:56.560
<v Speaker 1>today's more precarious and perilous world. Um people forget that

0:19:56.840 --> 0:20:00.199
<v Speaker 1>one of the reasons we invented the trading system in

0:20:00.200 --> 0:20:04.439
<v Speaker 1>the first place, UH after World War two was to

0:20:04.440 --> 0:20:09.399
<v Speaker 1>help prevent World War three, and so far we succeeded

0:20:09.440 --> 0:20:12.760
<v Speaker 1>in that. But in order to continue to see seed

0:20:12.800 --> 0:20:17.639
<v Speaker 1>in that, we need to have a global trading system

0:20:17.680 --> 0:20:21.280
<v Speaker 1>based on agreed rules in which the rules are upheld

0:20:21.320 --> 0:20:24.960
<v Speaker 1>fairly under the rule of law. That's where the impellate

0:20:24.960 --> 0:20:28.440
<v Speaker 1>body comes in. Yeah, it's interesting. We have to play

0:20:28.840 --> 0:20:31.200
<v Speaker 1>continue to follow this, Jim Backus, thanks so much for

0:20:31.280 --> 0:20:33.800
<v Speaker 1>joining us. Jim as a professor of Global affairs at

0:20:33.800 --> 0:20:36.639
<v Speaker 1>the University of Central Florida, Florida and the former chairman

0:20:36.720 --> 0:20:39.639
<v Speaker 1>of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization. I

0:20:39.680 --> 0:20:42.760
<v Speaker 1>think it's a really exesting conversation, Vonnie, to think about

0:20:42.800 --> 0:20:45.840
<v Speaker 1>the future of the World Trade Organization, what role is

0:20:45.880 --> 0:20:48.480
<v Speaker 1>going to play in global trade. As as you mentioned, Vannie,

0:20:48.840 --> 0:20:50.560
<v Speaker 1>a lot of countries, not just the United States, a

0:20:50.600 --> 0:20:53.200
<v Speaker 1>lot of countries are starting to look more inward, perhaps

0:20:53.240 --> 0:20:56.680
<v Speaker 1>a little bit less international, a little bit less global,

0:20:56.880 --> 0:20:58.520
<v Speaker 1>And we'll have to see if that is a trend

0:20:58.720 --> 0:21:01.520
<v Speaker 1>that continues. Certainly in the pandemic will certainly have some

0:21:01.560 --> 0:21:06.240
<v Speaker 1>impact on that. It is time for Bloomberg Opinion. We

0:21:06.280 --> 0:21:10.040
<v Speaker 1>are joined by Bloomberg Opinion columnist Michael Schumann. He's author

0:21:10.560 --> 0:21:14.920
<v Speaker 1>UH and columnist Bloomberg Opinion based in Hong Kong. An interesting,

0:21:15.359 --> 0:21:19.320
<v Speaker 1>really fascinating column out today talking about, you know, amid

0:21:19.359 --> 0:21:22.240
<v Speaker 1>the rising tensions between the U S and China, the

0:21:22.320 --> 0:21:25.840
<v Speaker 1>question is to what extent can US companies really decouple

0:21:26.480 --> 0:21:29.520
<v Speaker 1>from China? Michael, thanks so much for joining us. So

0:21:29.640 --> 0:21:31.639
<v Speaker 1>again let's go to that issue there. What are we

0:21:31.720 --> 0:21:34.960
<v Speaker 1>seeing from corporate Americas it thinks about how to deal

0:21:35.040 --> 0:21:41.160
<v Speaker 1>with China, both as a supplier and as a customer. Well,

0:21:41.200 --> 0:21:43.280
<v Speaker 1>I think what what CEO is have to have to

0:21:43.400 --> 0:21:46.680
<v Speaker 1>kind of weak up to is that, you know, there's

0:21:46.680 --> 0:21:49.040
<v Speaker 1>a lot of debate in the US about well, should

0:21:49.080 --> 0:21:52.040
<v Speaker 1>should the US the couple from China? Shouldn't the US

0:21:53.720 --> 0:21:56.560
<v Speaker 1>the couple? What should the strategy be? The reality on

0:21:56.600 --> 0:21:58.680
<v Speaker 1>the ground is that it's kind of already happening. I mean,

0:21:58.880 --> 0:22:00.399
<v Speaker 1>we don't know how far it's going to go. Are

0:22:00.440 --> 0:22:03.639
<v Speaker 1>these two economies really going to pull totally, totally pull apart?

0:22:04.200 --> 0:22:06.560
<v Speaker 1>Probably not. But I think if you're if you're running

0:22:06.560 --> 0:22:08.240
<v Speaker 1>a company, you have to have in your head that

0:22:08.680 --> 0:22:11.680
<v Speaker 1>the relationship with China is changing going forward, and it's

0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:13.920
<v Speaker 1>it's it doesn't look like it's it's really going to

0:22:14.000 --> 0:22:17.040
<v Speaker 1>reverse back to the way things were. So I don't

0:22:17.160 --> 0:22:19.119
<v Speaker 1>even if you don't wanted the couple, even if you

0:22:19.119 --> 0:22:21.520
<v Speaker 1>don't you don't want to change your your business in China,

0:22:22.000 --> 0:22:23.800
<v Speaker 1>I think you have to be thinking out five ten

0:22:23.880 --> 0:22:26.679
<v Speaker 1>years ahead. Well, what are what are my alternatives? What

0:22:27.640 --> 0:22:30.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, what can I do to either decrease my

0:22:30.400 --> 0:22:34.480
<v Speaker 1>reliance on China to diversify both in terms of where

0:22:34.480 --> 0:22:37.080
<v Speaker 1>I'm making my products, will also where I'm selling my products.

0:22:37.720 --> 0:22:42.399
<v Speaker 1>And Michael, this isn't because solely geopolitical issues are causing,

0:22:42.560 --> 0:22:44.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, a bit of a deterioration in the relationship.

0:22:44.640 --> 0:22:47.439
<v Speaker 1>It's also for very practical reasons. You point out in

0:22:47.480 --> 0:22:51.679
<v Speaker 1>your piece, for example, that it's a more useful consumer

0:22:51.840 --> 0:22:54.439
<v Speaker 1>in Southeast Asia than it is and will be in

0:22:54.600 --> 0:22:58.199
<v Speaker 1>China for some time to come. And also that an

0:22:58.200 --> 0:23:01.560
<v Speaker 1>age in China will lose thirty million people whereas the

0:23:02.760 --> 0:23:06.240
<v Speaker 1>Asian region is going to add forty million working age

0:23:06.240 --> 0:23:12.720
<v Speaker 1>people by well, look, you know you can't replace China

0:23:12.880 --> 0:23:15.000
<v Speaker 1>as a consumer market, right, It's I mean, it's one

0:23:15.040 --> 0:23:18.800
<v Speaker 1>point for billion people and they're getting increasingly wealthy and

0:23:18.800 --> 0:23:21.240
<v Speaker 1>they and they increasingly like to spend more and more money.

0:23:21.280 --> 0:23:24.720
<v Speaker 1>So you know, it's not like O, G. I don't

0:23:24.720 --> 0:23:27.880
<v Speaker 1>need this market. At the same time, you know, if

0:23:27.880 --> 0:23:30.439
<v Speaker 1>you're if you're looking to diversify, you're looking for new

0:23:30.520 --> 0:23:34.200
<v Speaker 1>sources of customers, they are out there. When you look

0:23:34.280 --> 0:23:37.159
<v Speaker 1>at projections, for example, the growth of the middle class

0:23:37.160 --> 0:23:42.200
<v Speaker 1>and in places like India, UH, Southeast Asia as you mentioned, uh,

0:23:42.240 --> 0:23:45.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, there's a tremendous amount of potential growth out there.

0:23:45.840 --> 0:23:47.879
<v Speaker 1>And in some cases you know where where China is

0:23:47.880 --> 0:23:50.520
<v Speaker 1>actually forth aging and the working age populations you said,

0:23:50.520 --> 0:23:53.639
<v Speaker 1>they're shrinking in some of these areas for example, and

0:23:53.720 --> 0:23:59.040
<v Speaker 1>you know in Southeast Asia you have much better demographics.

0:23:59.080 --> 0:24:01.879
<v Speaker 1>You're actually you know, any working age people who are

0:24:01.880 --> 0:24:04.359
<v Speaker 1>going to be you know, earning, earning more and more money.

0:24:04.800 --> 0:24:07.240
<v Speaker 1>So you know, again, you know, I don't think anyone

0:24:07.320 --> 0:24:09.320
<v Speaker 1>wants to pull out of the Chinese market and lose

0:24:09.359 --> 0:24:13.240
<v Speaker 1>all that business. But you know, if you're looking to diversify,

0:24:13.280 --> 0:24:16.159
<v Speaker 1>if you're looking for you know, kind of hedging, hedging

0:24:16.200 --> 0:24:19.120
<v Speaker 1>your bets, you know, there are other places out there

0:24:19.320 --> 0:24:21.480
<v Speaker 1>where there's a lot of potential will make a lot

0:24:21.480 --> 0:24:24.399
<v Speaker 1>of money. So it's entering how much of this do

0:24:24.440 --> 0:24:28.119
<v Speaker 1>you think is a result of President Trump and his

0:24:28.720 --> 0:24:32.399
<v Speaker 1>you know, you know, America First type of policy, and

0:24:32.440 --> 0:24:35.320
<v Speaker 1>that perhaps if we were to get a different administration

0:24:35.400 --> 0:24:39.760
<v Speaker 1>here in several months, a Joe Biden administration, uh, that

0:24:39.840 --> 0:24:45.199
<v Speaker 1>presumably would have more traditional globalist views, internationalist views, that

0:24:45.280 --> 0:24:47.440
<v Speaker 1>this trend may be reversed. How much of it is

0:24:47.480 --> 0:24:53.159
<v Speaker 1>politically driven? Do you think? Well, you know, on on

0:24:53.200 --> 0:24:56.360
<v Speaker 1>the U. S side, Uh, you know, I think what's

0:24:56.400 --> 0:24:59.480
<v Speaker 1>really remarkable what's happened in the last let's say three

0:24:59.480 --> 0:25:02.560
<v Speaker 1>to four years, is how how China has really lost

0:25:02.560 --> 0:25:05.119
<v Speaker 1>its friends in Washington. You know. I I don't see

0:25:05.160 --> 0:25:09.040
<v Speaker 1>the Democrats being particularly software on China at this point

0:25:09.119 --> 0:25:12.560
<v Speaker 1>than than the Trump administration is. I think if there's

0:25:12.560 --> 0:25:14.640
<v Speaker 1>a change, if there is a change in the White House,

0:25:14.680 --> 0:25:17.040
<v Speaker 1>maybe some of the tone will be different, some of

0:25:17.040 --> 0:25:19.800
<v Speaker 1>the policies may be different. But are is China going

0:25:19.840 --> 0:25:23.960
<v Speaker 1>to have a friendlier a White House? Probably not in

0:25:24.040 --> 0:25:26.400
<v Speaker 1>kind of the big picture sense, you know. And then

0:25:26.440 --> 0:25:28.439
<v Speaker 1>on the other side, there's politics, you know, going on

0:25:28.480 --> 0:25:30.480
<v Speaker 1>in China as well, And when you look at what's

0:25:30.480 --> 0:25:34.600
<v Speaker 1>happening with decoupling. You know, the Chinese have actually been

0:25:34.720 --> 0:25:37.800
<v Speaker 1>much more aggressive in this. I think I think Beijing,

0:25:38.400 --> 0:25:42.040
<v Speaker 1>looking out in the future, has already decided that China

0:25:42.119 --> 0:25:45.480
<v Speaker 1>is going to have uh, you know, China is not

0:25:45.520 --> 0:25:48.200
<v Speaker 1>going to have the same relationship with the US going

0:25:48.240 --> 0:25:50.359
<v Speaker 1>forward over forty years that they've had in the past

0:25:50.400 --> 0:25:52.680
<v Speaker 1>forty years. And a lot of Chinese policy, let's say,

0:25:52.680 --> 0:25:56.280
<v Speaker 1>on on technology, you know, has really been designed to

0:25:56.480 --> 0:26:01.520
<v Speaker 1>decrease Chinese reliance on on the US. So, you know,

0:26:02.040 --> 0:26:04.159
<v Speaker 1>whatever is happening with US politics, you also have to

0:26:04.200 --> 0:26:07.040
<v Speaker 1>look at what's happening in China, Chinese where Chinese policy

0:26:07.119 --> 0:26:09.920
<v Speaker 1>is going in and Chinese policy is also kind of

0:26:10.520 --> 0:26:13.520
<v Speaker 1>heading in the direction we are looking at decreasing their

0:26:13.560 --> 0:26:17.399
<v Speaker 1>relationship in the United States. So incremental moves like, for example,

0:26:17.440 --> 0:26:21.280
<v Speaker 1>the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo talking about restricting visas

0:26:21.320 --> 0:26:26.240
<v Speaker 1>for some Quawei workers yesterday, and the substantially greater move

0:26:26.359 --> 0:26:30.320
<v Speaker 1>by the UK to actually restrict the use of Huawei

0:26:30.480 --> 0:26:36.040
<v Speaker 1>elements in in in teleconstructure and infrastructure over there. How

0:26:36.080 --> 0:26:39.320
<v Speaker 1>does that impact China? Does it cause China to make

0:26:39.440 --> 0:26:42.000
<v Speaker 1>a sort of a proactive decision about these countries or

0:26:42.200 --> 0:26:48.720
<v Speaker 1>can China afford to ignore those kinds of soft power moves. Well,

0:26:48.800 --> 0:26:51.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think what's really interesting about what's going

0:26:51.560 --> 0:26:55.520
<v Speaker 1>on now is I think you're seeing more and more

0:26:55.640 --> 0:26:58.960
<v Speaker 1>governments around the world. You know, you mentioned the UK

0:26:59.080 --> 0:27:01.520
<v Speaker 1>decision on away. I mean, I think you're seeing more

0:27:01.560 --> 0:27:05.240
<v Speaker 1>and more governments around the world reacting very negatively the

0:27:05.400 --> 0:27:08.680
<v Speaker 1>Chinese policy right now, both economic policy would also in

0:27:08.800 --> 0:27:12.639
<v Speaker 1>terms of Hong Kong and and other matters. Uh. And

0:27:12.760 --> 0:27:16.280
<v Speaker 1>you know is the Chinese obviously feels strong enough at

0:27:16.320 --> 0:27:18.360
<v Speaker 1>this moment that they feel that they can do this

0:27:18.440 --> 0:27:22.000
<v Speaker 1>and and uh. But you know, looking at it from

0:27:22.040 --> 0:27:25.560
<v Speaker 1>a pure economic standpoint, Uh, you know, this is still

0:27:25.600 --> 0:27:29.159
<v Speaker 1>an emerging economy. It's it's it's still relatively poor, it

0:27:29.240 --> 0:27:31.600
<v Speaker 1>still needs technology from the rest of the world. And

0:27:31.760 --> 0:27:36.000
<v Speaker 1>China also has huge ambitions to be a technology leader. Uh.

0:27:36.000 --> 0:27:39.040
<v Speaker 1>And if it's going to see doors closing uh to

0:27:39.280 --> 0:27:42.760
<v Speaker 1>it and its companies and its technology around the world,

0:27:42.800 --> 0:27:45.840
<v Speaker 1>you know, that's that's really really negative for China, China's

0:27:45.880 --> 0:27:48.520
<v Speaker 1>economic future. So I I mean, I would hope in

0:27:48.640 --> 0:27:51.280
<v Speaker 1>Beijing that there's a rethink of some of the things

0:27:51.359 --> 0:27:53.639
<v Speaker 1>that they're doing they're doing there does not seem to

0:27:53.680 --> 0:27:56.840
<v Speaker 1>be one at this point. But you know, this is

0:27:56.840 --> 0:28:02.879
<v Speaker 1>not an economic vehicle that that can continue in isolation. Alright,

0:28:02.920 --> 0:28:05.920
<v Speaker 1>Michael's thank you. Fascinating conversations there, and Michael of course

0:28:05.960 --> 0:28:08.679
<v Speaker 1>joining us from Hong Kong. We'll have to ask him

0:28:08.720 --> 0:28:10.919
<v Speaker 1>about the situation on the ground next time he's on.

0:28:11.000 --> 0:28:14.920
<v Speaker 1>Michael Schuman's author Bloomberg opinion columnist and his latest book,

0:28:14.960 --> 0:28:19.360
<v Speaker 1>author of Superpower interrupted the Chinese History of the World,

0:28:19.840 --> 0:28:23.680
<v Speaker 1>and it is fascinating bold because to certain extent, China

0:28:23.840 --> 0:28:27.160
<v Speaker 1>is already well beyond the US in terms of infrastructure,

0:28:27.200 --> 0:28:30.240
<v Speaker 1>in terms of its major cities, and it was maybe

0:28:30.320 --> 0:28:33.040
<v Speaker 1>supposed to be the promised land for American business, as

0:28:33.040 --> 0:28:35.679
<v Speaker 1>Michael Schuman said, but calls are growing louder and louder

0:28:35.680 --> 0:28:38.440
<v Speaker 1>for the two economies to the couplic can be. Yeah,

0:28:38.480 --> 0:28:40.160
<v Speaker 1>that's gonna be really interesting to see, if you know,

0:28:40.200 --> 0:28:43.640
<v Speaker 1>from a supply chain perspective, so much of the product

0:28:43.760 --> 0:28:45.880
<v Speaker 1>we have here in the US comes from China. And

0:28:45.920 --> 0:28:47.560
<v Speaker 1>then of course on the other end, Vannie, you know,

0:28:48.000 --> 0:28:50.400
<v Speaker 1>it's such a big market for so many US companies

0:28:50.440 --> 0:28:52.400
<v Speaker 1>and Western companies in general. So I'll have to see

0:28:52.400 --> 0:28:55.760
<v Speaker 1>how this plays opp it fascinating. Thanks for listening to

0:28:55.760 --> 0:28:59.080
<v Speaker 1>the Boomberg Markets podcast. You can subscribe and listen to

0:28:59.160 --> 0:29:02.440
<v Speaker 1>interviews at Apple, Old Podcasts, or whatever a podcast platform

0:29:02.520 --> 0:29:05.960
<v Speaker 1>you prefer. I'm Bonnie Quinn, I'm on Twitter at Bonnie Quinn,

0:29:06.080 --> 0:29:08.480
<v Speaker 1>and I'm Paul Sweeney. I'm on Twitter at pt Sweeney.

0:29:08.520 --> 0:29:11.200
<v Speaker 1>Before the podcast, you can always catch us worldwide at

0:29:11.200 --> 0:29:12.000
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Radio