Speaker 1: Runt you by Bank of America Mary Lynch. With virtual reality,
Speaker 1: virtually everything will change. Discover opportunities in a transforming world.
Speaker 1: Be of a mL dot Com, slash VR, Mary Lynch,
Speaker 1: Pierced Fenner and Smith Incorporated. Ye, Welcome to the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene with David Gura. Daily we
Speaker 1: bring you insight from the best of economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg Welcome
Speaker 1: nor Bloomberg eleven three studios. Joe Quinlan, he's the head
Speaker 1: of market and Thematic Strategy at Mary Lynch and US
Speaker 1: Trust and correct me if I'm wrong with There seems
Speaker 1: to be a great deal of anticipation at the volatility
Speaker 1: we might see on through you say, there's so much happening,
Speaker 1: whether whether it's the hearing on Capitol Hill or the
Speaker 1: e c v U. I mean, how do you position
Speaker 1: yourself ahead of an event like those? Well, you know,
Speaker 1: we we don't do a lot of positioning, you know,
Speaker 1: and more investors than traders, but we do have to
Speaker 1: hold the hands of our clients to say, okay, what's
Speaker 1: the risk to the portfolios when it comes to the
Speaker 1: UK election or what's happening in Middle East and Thursday. So,
Speaker 1: but you know, we kind of see through the political noise,
Speaker 1: try to discern what's real what's not and focus on earnings,
Speaker 1: the underlying growth, um, you know with the FED messaging
Speaker 1: when it comes to the balance sheets. So we're trying
Speaker 1: to look beyond some of the noise. But if we
Speaker 1: get some real fireworks or so smoking, you know, fire
Speaker 1: instead of smoke on Thursday, Yeah, you have to start
Speaker 1: thinking about what do we do with the portfolios to
Speaker 1: manage the risk. We just got a sense of how
Speaker 1: you regard Europe at this point. Um, when you look
Speaker 1: at the economy, it seems like it's in decent defined shape. Politically,
Speaker 1: it's still a bit thorny. How how do you navigate
Speaker 1: to I did navigate that right now. Wait, we still
Speaker 1: like these big large cap companies, life science companies out
Speaker 1: of Switzerland, Um, the capitol machinery guys out of German.
Speaker 1: You know, actually we're looking to buy some Spanish Italian
Speaker 1: banks because I think Merkel's more into Europe now that
Speaker 1: ever before, because of the differences with Trump administration. So
Speaker 1: if you've got a Germany acting more European and ready
Speaker 1: to step up and provide some of that capital, I
Speaker 1: think the spreads come in and I think some of
Speaker 1: these weaker banks look very good on the upside. Hey,
Speaker 1: you highlight this in a recent note of coming from
Speaker 1: Uncle and Merkel. We Europeans must take our destiny into
Speaker 1: our own hands. What changed after the French election, or
Speaker 1: after the G seven summit, or after the US with
Speaker 1: three from from from the Paris Agreement. What's what's Europe
Speaker 1: looking like now? Where is it head to do? You thing? Well?
Speaker 1: I think I don't want to see a transatlantic breaker
Speaker 1: divorce in the United States and Europe are the bedrock
Speaker 1: of the global economy. But there's clearly frustration on the
Speaker 1: part of the Europeans, Brussels, France and particularly Mercle that
Speaker 1: the US is going to just go its own way,
Speaker 1: and therefore we've got to just step up and be
Speaker 1: our own, you know, kind of grow up. The question
Speaker 1: is will Germany actually lead in that lecture? So well,
Speaker 1: that's yet to be determined. So we see what's happening
Speaker 1: in the realm of geopolitics. How weird are you about
Speaker 1: the continuity or the strength of the economic relationship between
Speaker 1: the US and Europe at this point. I think it
Speaker 1: will stand the problems we have here in a near
Speaker 1: term with the Trump administration and also the Merkel because
Speaker 1: when you look at the underlying commercial linkage is they're
Speaker 1: very deep, they're very broad, their investment, their trade. Uh
Speaker 1: you know, you've got Deer just announcing they're going to
Speaker 1: buy a German capital goods maker. That's going to continue
Speaker 1: in Ireland is very much and radar screens of a
Speaker 1: lot of US companies related to taxes or not. So Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think business in general continues, but the policy overlay
Speaker 1: could be better. There's no one's talking about t TIP
Speaker 1: anymore because that died on the vine. Joe Quinlin, the
Speaker 1: head of market in Thematic Strategy at Marylynch and US Trust,
Speaker 1: How would you of a risk? Is trade still at
Speaker 1: this point? You mentioned t TIP, that agreement that was
Speaker 1: being hammered out for for a long time between the
Speaker 1: US and Europe. Is it still downside risk that the
Speaker 1: fact that we could see some increased protectionism or some
Speaker 1: changes to trade policy. I think the biggest risk would
Speaker 1: be really local, whether it's between NAFTA UM in the
Speaker 1: United States because it's the global supply Chaine. It's remarkable.
Speaker 1: In the last ten years or so, even the last
Speaker 1: five years, a lot of US companies brought their supply
Speaker 1: chains closer to the U. S vs V, Canada and Mexico,
Speaker 1: you know, away from China after the crisis, and now
Speaker 1: we're ready to the disruptive supply chains. Mexico is very important.
Speaker 1: It's just an extinction of the industrial production network of
Speaker 1: the United States. Good morning everyone, Good morning David. We
Speaker 1: sent way too much time to you think it's three
Speaker 1: days in a row to change Joe Quitlin with this
Speaker 1: Maryland and US trust as well as some good perspective UM.
Speaker 1: One thing we've seen in our trade interviews is the
Speaker 1: idea of process. Industrial process has changed everything. I understand
Speaker 1: that any politician has to go back to residences of
Speaker 1: previous culture and dialogue within America. How do the politicians
Speaker 1: explain the new industrial proper process to beleaguered constituents. Well, Tom,
Speaker 1: I think they gotta listen to the governors. You know,
Speaker 1: if you're the governor of South Carolina or Alabama, you've
Speaker 1: you've been at the table negotiating with these big multinationals
Speaker 1: in terms of tax incentives, But what are we going
Speaker 1: to get in return when it comes to the number
Speaker 1: of employees, How we're going to bring in parts, how
Speaker 1: we're gonna increase our main in America content. So I
Speaker 1: would talk to Kentucky governors, Michigan maybe perhaps, but the
Speaker 1: southeastern part of this country has done a fabulous job
Speaker 1: reinventing itself as a manufacturing powerhouse courtesy of foreign multinationals
Speaker 1: being on the ground. You mentioned how you're able to
Speaker 1: sort of tune out, to try to tune out that
Speaker 1: the political noise. If if I'm the head of a
Speaker 1: multinational German base multinationals, say, how am I supposed to
Speaker 1: navigate what I'm seeing from the President when it comes
Speaker 1: to his focus on the trade deficit side. Well, I
Speaker 1: mean that's very challenging, and there's a lot of anks around,
Speaker 1: you know, the kind of welcoming Matt for here in Washington.
Speaker 1: But you know, but if you're a CEO, you're spending
Speaker 1: more time out in the states or the local communities
Speaker 1: than you are in Washington. Obviously you've got your big
Speaker 1: lobbyists working the corridors of power. But I think at
Speaker 1: the end of the day. The US economy is still open.
Speaker 1: We've got a very large consumer base, great universities that
Speaker 1: you want to be here. You a lot of just
Speaker 1: many multinationals can't afford not to be here. We're talking
Speaker 1: about European equities, and what you find an attractive there
Speaker 1: is the baskets of the basket of goods, the basket
Speaker 1: of kinds of companies similar in the U S. When
Speaker 1: you're looking at US equities that you like in general,
Speaker 1: whether it's pharmaceuticals, some logistics companies out of the Nordic States.
Speaker 1: But I think the upside, the opportunity could be these
Speaker 1: weaker financial institutions and how do you dare saving Greece, Spain,
Speaker 1: Italy have a Barbell strategy, you have the risk out there.
Speaker 1: You want to own the big, big guys that I
Speaker 1: mean to interrupt, but the theme this morning David Gura
Speaker 1: has been mergers in combinations. That's the only way in
Speaker 1: a subpart nominal GDP is that just what we're gonna see.
Speaker 1: Joe Quitlin is Andrew mellon Redux. I mean, you have
Speaker 1: more more Bolton's. It's it's very hard to drive that
Speaker 1: organic growth and you're gonna you're seeing really transatlantic alliance
Speaker 1: become even more consolidated by industry. I think that's time.
Speaker 1: You know, you gotta buy the market share, and the
Speaker 1: shareholders are okay with us, so the border directors, it's
Speaker 1: just very hard to come out and drive that get
Speaker 1: those new markets. David, I think this is a huge deal.
Speaker 1: I mean, given what we see on the tape with
Speaker 1: futures deteriorating just in the last twenty minutes, yields once
Speaker 1: again coming down Joe Quillan two one. They haven't broken
Speaker 1: through in the two year but you really just wonder
Speaker 1: if rates don't rise, that's got to mean cheap money,
Speaker 1: which means the strongest stronger, right, the strongest stronger they
Speaker 1: can they can take on more risk, leverage up. Not
Speaker 1: not to the point where we're looking at it, but
Speaker 1: I think you know, the m n A, the share
Speaker 1: buy backs, the dividends. Time. You know, it's a it's
Speaker 1: a tired story, but it's it's playing out and you
Speaker 1: don't you don't want to miss it. Given where the
Speaker 1: yields are in the fixed income you have a lot
Speaker 1: of have a lot of people missed it. John Trucker
Speaker 1: Total total no I'm totally on top of it now.
Speaker 1: I think a lot of folks have it, just the
Speaker 1: disbelief of waiting for the turn and it hasn't come yet.
Speaker 1: So we want the dividend payers, the growth players, and
Speaker 1: but you can get some upside when it comes to
Speaker 1: the emerging markets. And I think some of these technology
Speaker 1: companies leverage. Is there a limit to the leanness? How
Speaker 1: lean these companies can can become? That's a good question.
Speaker 1: We're working for a bank, I always think that same thing. Um,
Speaker 1: is there a limit? Yeah, not yet, not that we've seen, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's a remarkable what we get out of
Speaker 1: a workforce being so taunt and tank that it is. So,
Speaker 1: I mean, is there a limit? Sure? But we can
Speaker 1: we can automate. But the question is the consumers when
Speaker 1: we're sitting on a line for like, you know, two
Speaker 1: minutes before we get to a body or that's we
Speaker 1: pay Joe Quinlin with US Maryland, US Trust through these
Speaker 1: with US. Joe in the old days used to say,
Speaker 1: can you withstand a bear market? You know you're go
Speaker 1: into equities, you put risk in hand, and the bearer
Speaker 1: markets define I'll call it eighteen percent. The gloom crew
Speaker 1: would say, it's been so long since we've enjoyed a
Speaker 1: ten percent correction or beer market. Are we ready to
Speaker 1: withstand losses in a constructive fashion? I think constructive. I
Speaker 1: think so yes. But we're not seeing that, Tom, I
Speaker 1: mean we were. We're in the portfolios you managed to risk. Um.
Speaker 1: We do have a lot of people I think well
Speaker 1: positioned because they didn't put all their money into into equity.
Speaker 1: If we've got a lot of folks sitting in fixed
Speaker 1: income yielding virtually nothing, but that that helps them sleep
Speaker 1: at night. So I think we can manage the downside.
Speaker 1: I guess you'd have to tell me how do we
Speaker 1: get to a bear market? One of the conditions the catalysts.
Speaker 1: I don't see any of my experiences when we get
Speaker 1: to a bear market. We get there by not experience,
Speaker 1: by not knowing it's that was like, oh, that was
Speaker 1: harsh that now we see it was to see a
Speaker 1: certain percentage of our younger girl like audience has never
Speaker 1: enjoyed the bearer market. But with Tom, I think what
Speaker 1: I've noticed with some of our clients, many of our
Speaker 1: clients actually coming out of the Great Recession two thousand
Speaker 1: nine two, they really remain cautious. We have we have
Speaker 1: clients still in cash, for instance, or they're buying hard
Speaker 1: assets timber, farmland, um, gold, commercial real estate. So I
Speaker 1: don't see I see a cautious undertone to the investors
Speaker 1: since two thousand and nine, So maybe that minimizes some
Speaker 1: of the risk on the downside. We'll get through the
Speaker 1: Comy polluts of this week and two too next week
Speaker 1: when we have a two day FED meeting. We've heard
Speaker 1: a lot of commentary from Fed policy makers about the
Speaker 1: challenges of the plans for unwinding that massive balance sheet,
Speaker 1: and a lot of the maintaining it's not going to
Speaker 1: have a huge effect on on the market. Least that's
Speaker 1: their their hope. What's your sense of of how that's
Speaker 1: all going to play out. I think it's gonna play
Speaker 1: out very in a very long deliberate ways. I mean,
Speaker 1: very very long term. It's not gonna happen all at once.
Speaker 1: I think the Fed wants to move next week and
Speaker 1: then kind of step back and reassess how strong is
Speaker 1: the economy, what kind of cute three numbers where we're
Speaker 1: gonna look at, you know, we need the underlying strength
Speaker 1: to unwind the balance sheet, and so so does Europe
Speaker 1: and Japan and everyone else for that matter. So I
Speaker 1: think that's it's unwinding. The balance sheet is an out
Speaker 1: front and center, but when it comes to actually happening,
Speaker 1: you're talking story mark one. In that end sense, it's
Speaker 1: gonna be a long term process. That long. Yes, I
Speaker 1: think it could take that long because you're you're it's
Speaker 1: gonna you're gonna They're not gonna do it all at once.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be well advertised. I think they're gonna go slow. Now,
Speaker 1: another issue could be who's gonna be running the FED
Speaker 1: a year from how or so that's gonna be another
Speaker 1: issue in the composition of the How much thought are
Speaker 1: you giving to that? I mean, how big a difference
Speaker 1: could that make? Names floated now about who might be
Speaker 1: We're just we're just starting to look at that kind
Speaker 1: of I don't think no one radical, but like it
Speaker 1: could be something that could be a variable in terms
Speaker 1: of the timing. I look, Joe at all the discussions
Speaker 1: today people in the markets, and they still go back
Speaker 1: to basic securities research one on one, which is multiples, multiples.
Speaker 1: It's a bit rich right now, Where is the value
Speaker 1: in the market thinking the value in the market. Time.
Speaker 1: I think in certain I think banks are still there's
Speaker 1: some good value at banks, you know, whether it's large banks,
Speaker 1: some regional banks. And is that because you wake up
Speaker 1: January one to know you're gonna get x percent dividend
Speaker 1: dividend growth and in share buy back. UM, that's part
Speaker 1: of it. But I also think the banks are you know,
Speaker 1: many of them are under owned. I think there's summer
Speaker 1: trading at book value. UM. I believe the US economy
Speaker 1: plots ahead, good demographics, household ownership is rising, the household
Speaker 1: in general net worth is at all time highs UM.
Speaker 1: So I think there's some value there and believe it
Speaker 1: or not. Time I think there's value in technology. I
Speaker 1: know that's crazy because I just go back to like
Speaker 1: all the new Internet users are going to have these phones,
Speaker 1: these devices get connected the digital global economy. It's that
Speaker 1: we're only halfway there in terms of overall development. So
Speaker 1: there I see some value there. Hold in on that
Speaker 1: a little bit if you would. I mean, we saw
Speaker 1: what happened with with Snap. Are you interested in the
Speaker 1: hardware side more than the software side? Where where do
Speaker 1: you see that value where that potentially more in the hardware.
Speaker 1: I mean looking at an Apple or even say a Facebook.
Speaker 1: If they can crack India, I come act to Indian
Speaker 1: China because over two billion people in India's behind when
Speaker 1: it comes to the Internet usage. But it's coming. You
Speaker 1: see with the females, the girls. That's gonna be a
Speaker 1: big issue driver for education. So you know Africa's to poor.
Speaker 1: Do we have a smartphone just yet? But that's changing
Speaker 1: rapidly in the big cities. So I think, you know,
Speaker 1: you've got to look at these big US multinationals, look
Speaker 1: at the valuations, how can they drive earnings? And then
Speaker 1: you've got to look at the emerging markets and match
Speaker 1: it up. So very valuable. Thank you so much. With
Speaker 1: Marylynch and US trust. Joseph Quinland with US today. Failure
Speaker 1: to Adjustice a wonderful complete book on trade dynamics. It
Speaker 1: will make you smarter and more cute about our trade.
Speaker 1: Hees with the Council on Foreign Relations and he's gone
Speaker 1: rusvelty And is that how you pronounce it, David girls,
Speaker 1: welty and honest. He sees a new deal in the
Speaker 1: trade world. When you say new deal, Ted Alden Republicans
Speaker 1: turn shades of pink, what is a new deal in trade? No,
Speaker 1: I'm sure, I'm sure they do, referring to a new
Speaker 1: paper I've I've written with my friend Bob Lytton, who's
Speaker 1: a superb economists. We're, you know, we're trying to think
Speaker 1: through the problem of you know, here we are in
Speaker 1: this hyper competitive global economy, and it's not just trade,
Speaker 1: it's technology, and Americans are having trouble responding to that,
Speaker 1: particularly a lot of people who are not getting the
Speaker 1: education the skills they need to thrive in that economy.
Speaker 1: And we argue that we need to think about that, uh, systematically,
Speaker 1: at the federal level, at the state level. And the
Speaker 1: Republicans have a lot of good ideas here in terms
Speaker 1: of of, you know, people taking individual responsibility for their
Speaker 1: career choices. But Democrats also have a lot of good
Speaker 1: ideas in terms of trying to give people a leg up.
Speaker 1: So so we were trying to blend those two in
Speaker 1: this in this new paper we put together and walk
Speaker 1: us through what you're proposing, just in in broad detail.
Speaker 1: One of the as you're you're suggesting, as we need
Speaker 1: kind of a kind of national and elective national service
Speaker 1: mechanism just to get people trained, get people new skills.
Speaker 1: I mean, there are a bunch of different things. On
Speaker 1: the one hand, where we're arguing, you know, let's let's
Speaker 1: eliminate obstacles to people being able to find work. We've
Speaker 1: got licensing restrictions across states that are a huge obstacle.
Speaker 1: You look at land use restrictions make it very difficult
Speaker 1: for people to move to areas where jobs are being created.
Speaker 1: I mean, we call in general for you know, tax
Speaker 1: reform to increase investment. That's all things that the Republicans
Speaker 1: would be very positive about. On the other side, you've
Speaker 1: got to make it possible for people to acquire the
Speaker 1: skills they need to fill the good jobs that are
Speaker 1: being created. So we call, for instance, for for lifetime
Speaker 1: career loans where you know, not just borrowing for college,
Speaker 1: but you could borrow to to train at any point
Speaker 1: in your career, repayable based on future income, which is
Speaker 1: an idea that's been developed in the in the student
Speaker 1: loan area. And then on the service side, particularly for
Speaker 1: young people, expanded opportunities for or National service to work
Speaker 1: with with other people from different backgrounds to develop a
Speaker 1: set of skills to launch them in their careers. It
Speaker 1: sounds positively Australian. With my limited knowledge of the Austrians
Speaker 1: have done well at some of these things, so well,
Speaker 1: I guess I'm gonna learn. Now. Do we have any
Speaker 1: political feasibility on either party to be less American and
Speaker 1: more Australian? I mean, I do think, you know, we're
Speaker 1: in this period where predictions are really hard because the
Speaker 1: Republicans are a divided party. I think some of what
Speaker 1: Trump ran on I think fits very well with this agenda,
Speaker 1: particularly helping you know a lot of the voters from
Speaker 1: the rest belt who put him in the White House.
Speaker 1: But you've got a Republican party that's that's still basically
Speaker 1: a tax cutting party, very allergic to any sort of
Speaker 1: positive role for government. But I do believe there is
Speaker 1: the possibility here for new cross party coalitions. Whether we're
Speaker 1: gonna get there remains to be seen, but I think
Speaker 1: the possibility exists. Ten Alton, this we will continue with
Speaker 1: the console foreign relations. We'll go back to more traditional
Speaker 1: tradegar you want to talk some sugar, you're in charge
Speaker 1: with us. A senior fell at the Council on Form Relations,
Speaker 1: author of the book Failure to Adjust How Americans Got
Speaker 1: Left Behind? In the global economy and going to break
Speaker 1: ted I said, I wanted to talk sugar. Looks like
Speaker 1: we're going to get a press conference this afternoon with
Speaker 1: wilpur Ross, the Secretary of Commerce, on a deal with
Speaker 1: Mexico on sugar. So much of our focus has been
Speaker 1: on NAFTA, the prospect for reforms or changes to NAFTA.
Speaker 1: Of course, the White House sending it's a letter to
Speaker 1: Congress indicating it plans to renegotiate that deal. What can
Speaker 1: we learn about this administration's trade policy from how they've
Speaker 1: handled the issue of sugar with Mexico. Well, we will
Speaker 1: see what the deal is this afternoon. But I think
Speaker 1: this is actually an encouraging sign. I mean, sugar is
Speaker 1: one of those difficult issues where you've got, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: a very protected market in the United States, sugar producers
Speaker 1: who rely on quotas and other trade barriers. You've got
Speaker 1: a Mexico this pretty efficient in producing sugar, sells a
Speaker 1: lot of it to the United States. And so this
Speaker 1: is just one of those shoes where you've got to
Speaker 1: balance off the interests of Mexico the interests of sugar
Speaker 1: users like candy makers here in the United States. And
Speaker 1: the interests of the sugar producers in Florida and the
Speaker 1: sugar beat producers in Minnesota and other places. And I
Speaker 1: think the fact that they've been able to come away
Speaker 1: with a deal is very encouraging. I mean, you contrast
Speaker 1: that with Canadian lumber, for instance, where we're in the
Speaker 1: middle of of a much more serious trade conflict. I
Speaker 1: think this is a good sign. I think bodes well
Speaker 1: for the NAFTA renegotiation. What if you have observed about
Speaker 1: the interpersonal relationship here between Secretary Ross and his Mexican counterparts,
Speaker 1: when when you look for signs of optimism, does it
Speaker 1: seem like there is a a good basis for conversation
Speaker 1: at the very least between between these officials. I mean,
Speaker 1: I do. I think Ross has emerged as a very
Speaker 1: important figure in this administration on trade. He's very active
Speaker 1: on the subject. He's very engaged both here in the
Speaker 1: United States with the various interests and and with his
Speaker 1: foreign counterparts. I think the fact you've got Bob Leitheizer
Speaker 1: now confirmed as the US trade representative, I think we
Speaker 1: have the makings here of of a serious professional team
Speaker 1: on trade policy. And I think the fact of the
Speaker 1: sugar deal has come together. Here's an indication of that.
Speaker 1: What do we know about Bob Lightheiser helped be different
Speaker 1: from Wilber Rosse's in Paris? As I understand it, this
Speaker 1: week meeting with THEOE see the beginning to travel some.
Speaker 1: Of course, Wilbert Ross has been doing the bulk of
Speaker 1: that while we were waiting for the confirmation of Bob Lightheiser.
Speaker 1: What's he gonna do differently? How's he going to compliment
Speaker 1: Secretary Ross? Well? I think there's clearly some overlap. They
Speaker 1: both have a long history in the steel industry. Ross
Speaker 1: is an investor and Lightheiser as a trade lawyer in
Speaker 1: Washington for steel interests. Um. You know, Lightheiser goes back
Speaker 1: to the Reagan administration, very long history working on these issues.
Speaker 1: I think they they share in common the belief that
Speaker 1: the United States needs to be tougher with its trading
Speaker 1: partners drive better deals. Um. I think they're the difficult
Speaker 1: issues will have to do with the role of trade
Speaker 1: negotiations going forward. I think Lightheiser is more amina boll
Speaker 1: to to doing trade deals of various sorts. I think
Speaker 1: there's a fair bit of resistance from from the White
Speaker 1: House and and from Ross, So we'll see how that
Speaker 1: plays out. How are we staffed to do trade? I
Speaker 1: mean across state, across commerce, etcetera, etcetera. Are we staffed?
Speaker 1: Does anybody called in Ted Alden Well? I mean, no
Speaker 1: part of this government is properly staffed. The Trump administration
Speaker 1: is woefully behind and filling the key positions. It's starting
Speaker 1: to happen slowly. In trade. Um, We've just had a
Speaker 1: deputy U. S. Trade representative announced. There's a uh, you know,
Speaker 1: an international Trade under secretary in place in commerce, but
Speaker 1: it's still a kind of very thin layer at the top,
Speaker 1: and and I think unfortunately it's very imbalanced. You've got
Speaker 1: extraordinary representation from steel and other heavy industries. You know,
Speaker 1: nothing in the senior ranks dealing with the very important
Speaker 1: services part of the economy and financial services or banking, architecture,
Speaker 1: anything else. You've got nothing dealing with intellectual property, industry, treas. Uh.
Speaker 1: The agriculture side is still really weak. So a lot
Speaker 1: of US trade interests are not yet well represented in
Speaker 1: this administration. That's about the climate deal. I remember there
Speaker 1: was some criticism I hope I'm remembering this right, some
Speaker 1: criticism of the Trans Pacific Partnership because it didn't address
Speaker 1: climate head on or in much detail or trade documents.
Speaker 1: Good writers for things like a climate change In the
Speaker 1: light of what we've seen over these last twelve eighteen
Speaker 1: month after this this campaign and the rejection of the
Speaker 1: Trans Pacific Partnership, are they going to become writers for
Speaker 1: for issues like those? Well? Yeah, here's my concern on
Speaker 1: on on Paris. The there's been a trade issue that's
Speaker 1: under underlies all the discussion on on climate, and that is,
Speaker 1: if you have some countries that are using a lot
Speaker 1: of of cheap but dirty energy, are they thereby gaining
Speaker 1: an unfair competitive advantage in global markets? And so you've
Speaker 1: had the Europeans muse, for instance, about charging a carbon
Speaker 1: tax on American exports to offset that advantage. The Canadians
Speaker 1: have sort of mulled over the same idea. It's never
Speaker 1: gotten uh to a point of being a serious threat yet,
Speaker 1: But with the US now having pulled out of the
Speaker 1: Paris Accords, I think that is a more genuine threat.
Speaker 1: The US for a long time was a leader on
Speaker 1: pushing for environmental related provisions in trade agreements. It now
Speaker 1: seems to be on the other side of that issue.
Speaker 1: And I think the Europeans are going to be pushing
Speaker 1: that much more strongly. Something to that to me when
Speaker 1: when Scott Prute was speaking in the Brady Press briefing
Speaker 1: room after the President announced his decision to pull out
Speaker 1: of the Paris Accord, uh, he was talking about going
Speaker 1: back to the table to renegotiate the Paris deal, and
Speaker 1: he said the US will always have a seat at
Speaker 1: the table were the US And I wonder how that
Speaker 1: rings out across Europe and around the world in light
Speaker 1: of what we've seen with Paris, with the G seven,
Speaker 1: with the NATO summit. To to an extent, is is
Speaker 1: this administration overestimating its ability to get back to the
Speaker 1: table to negotiate deals like the Paris Accord? I mean,
Speaker 1: I do, actually, I mean the problem with that, and
Speaker 1: you know, with that idea in the Paris or it
Speaker 1: is that the targets were always voluntary under Paris, So
Speaker 1: you know, the notion that you're going to somehow go
Speaker 1: back and renegotiate it fundamentally, I just think it's kind
Speaker 1: of nonsensical and I don't think the rest of the
Speaker 1: world has any interest. It's extremely hard to put together
Speaker 1: these multi country deals I mean we've seen that in trade.
Speaker 1: We haven't had a successful World trade round now for
Speaker 1: more than two decades because it's so hard to put
Speaker 1: these deals together, you know. I think the same is
Speaker 1: true with the transpecific partnership. I mean, the U S
Speaker 1: if it wanted back in, I think could get back in.
Speaker 1: But the notion that you're gonna redo that whole set
Speaker 1: of negotiations, I don't think there's a lot of appetite
Speaker 1: for that. I think other countries are gonna move forward
Speaker 1: on their own without the United States. I think militarily, clearly,
Speaker 1: the United States is indispensable. In economic terms, not so much.
Speaker 1: Countries have lots of options that don't involve the United States.
Speaker 1: Can a president have power within trade discussions? Is there
Speaker 1: such a thing as an executive order or executive action
Speaker 1: in the ted Alden world. Well, we'll leave it there.
Speaker 1: We've got some difficulties. Our catting folio is at the
Speaker 1: desk trying to figure out what's going. We think ted
Speaker 1: Olden for being with us from our studios in Washington.
Speaker 1: But there seems to me a fat was that you,
Speaker 1: John Tucker, Nobody could understand your question. That's what it was. Okay,
Speaker 1: I think, Dave David, I mean, isn't that a fair question?
Speaker 1: I mean, the President is acted. We had the news
Speaker 1: yesterday that he ripped up the NATO speech in some
Speaker 1: way and acted almost at hock. I mean, can he
Speaker 1: do that in trade? I'm not so sure he can,
Speaker 1: but we are we are seeing h or we have
Speaker 1: seen with counterfailing. Dude, he said this White House was
Speaker 1: approaching things and more piece piece me away, and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I think that as we saw yesterday with
Speaker 1: this letter that the President signed publicly, he is making
Speaker 1: his intentions, knows about what he wants to wants to
Speaker 1: see in a more formal way than his predecessor. Brought
Speaker 1: you by Bank of America, Mary Lynch. With virtual reality,
Speaker 1: virtually everything will change. Discover opportunities in a transforming world.
Speaker 1: Be of a mL dot Com slash VR, Mary Lynch,
Speaker 1: Pierce Fenner and Smith Incorporated. California gowner Jerry Brown signed
Speaker 1: a cooperation agreement with China on climate positive trade and investment.
Speaker 1: That move comes as President Trump announces the US withdraw
Speaker 1: from the Paris Climate Agreement. Governor Brown discussed that initiative
Speaker 1: with the Bloombergs to McKenzie are called Tom mackenzie in Beijing,
Speaker 1: and let's listen to a bit of their conversation. We
Speaker 1: can't reduce our carbon footprint unless we deal with transportation.
Speaker 1: Transportation is of the greenhouse castes. The only way we're
Speaker 1: gonna do that is with clean cars. The clean cars
Speaker 1: are not just gonna come out of California, although that's
Speaker 1: part of it. They're gonna come out of China and
Speaker 1: other parts of the world. But I have to say
Speaker 1: China is a real driver in the money they invest
Speaker 1: in the diligence of their innovation, and I want California
Speaker 1: the partner with China in that endeavor, otherwise we won't
Speaker 1: be able to achieve our climate goals. And you talked
Speaker 1: about innovation there. How much of a threat do you
Speaker 1: think is opposed to US innovation in clean tech green
Speaker 1: tech that they've led in in California but across the US.
Speaker 1: How much of that is under threat now from Trump's
Speaker 1: decision to pull out of the Paris Climate Accord. Well,
Speaker 1: I think the role of America in the world has
Speaker 1: been reduced because of Trump's pullout from the Paris Accord,
Speaker 1: And in general, I'd say the Chinese are on the
Speaker 1: move there are rising power. Writers are noticing how does
Speaker 1: the rising power get along with power that maybe slowing
Speaker 1: down a bit. So I would say that we're definitely
Speaker 1: um facing competitive pressure, and at the same time, we're
Speaker 1: very divided. We have a lot of issues about identity,
Speaker 1: about politics. The Republicans are so divided from the Democrats.
Speaker 1: I think we're gonna have to find more national unity
Speaker 1: if we're gonna be able to maintain our leadership, let
Speaker 1: all our so called dominance. I mean, China has got
Speaker 1: one point three billion and they're investing in America now
Speaker 1: at least of President Trump has his wife is going
Speaker 1: to reduce their health, their medical investments, their energy investments,
Speaker 1: and put most of their investment on on weapons. So
Speaker 1: I would say that's short decided and under the best
Speaker 1: of American leadership, we've got to work cut out for
Speaker 1: us because China is so much bigger, and their command
Speaker 1: economy along with capitalism and the market economy, is a
Speaker 1: very powerful, uh combination that we're gonna have to find
Speaker 1: in our diversity and our entrepreneurial spirit also a greater unity,
Speaker 1: or we're gonna find that we want to lose markets.
Speaker 1: That's California got to Jerry Brown in conversation with our
Speaker 1: colleague Tom mackenzie, who was based in Beijing. Jerry Brown
Speaker 1: in China signing agreement on climate with with the Chinese government.
Speaker 1: Michael McKee are International Politics and Economics correspondent tuning us
Speaker 1: here on Bloomberg eleven three oh Studios Now and Mike
Speaker 1: I was struck just in the days following the US
Speaker 1: decision to withdraw the president decision to withdraw from the
Speaker 1: Paris Climate Agreement. How much of this was couched in
Speaker 1: economic terms? You saw the statement from President Obama, president
Speaker 1: Trump's predecessor, saying that that was what was going to
Speaker 1: be lost largely by this, not really mentioning the environment
Speaker 1: and some to some degree here, but really focusing on
Speaker 1: the economics. Yeah. Well, President Trump made it all about
Speaker 1: economics and the idea that the climate accord would cost
Speaker 1: jobs in extraction industries like coal mining and uh and
Speaker 1: you know other energy production. Uh, it may not really
Speaker 1: do that because other factors are already weighing on those industries.
Speaker 1: The price of natural gas is killing coal at this point.
Speaker 1: You look at the Chinese ease. The pollution is so
Speaker 1: bad they're mothballing plants at cold fire plants as fast
Speaker 1: as they can. They set a goal of reducing their
Speaker 1: having their carbon emissions peaked by and it looks like
Speaker 1: they may beat that by ten years. Where we may
Speaker 1: miss out on jobs is in the industries that might
Speaker 1: be supported by federal dollars, you know, research and development
Speaker 1: of clean energy opportunities. And that's what Governor Brown, along
Speaker 1: with the idea of global warming and its impact on
Speaker 1: the environment, that's what he is talking about. He signed
Speaker 1: an agreement today with the Chinese to to work together
Speaker 1: on developing electric vehicles. We forget this, but Governor Brown
Speaker 1: was a driver of Plymouth satellites. He was so conservative
Speaker 1: and he was so cool for school. He drove Plymouth satellites,
Speaker 1: basic frugal cars. Is he a liberal, Oh very much so.
Speaker 1: He's very much a liberal, and he's governed in a
Speaker 1: very liberal state twice. Now. California is so big. It's
Speaker 1: economy is the sixth biggest in the world, in the world,
Speaker 1: and it has long been accused of having its own
Speaker 1: foreign policy, and that is becoming coming into even starker
Speaker 1: relief now with their disagreements from the Trump administration. And
Speaker 1: you see that in this trip to China. All governors
Speaker 1: go to China and pitch their states and come to
Speaker 1: business with US and sign trade deals. But no governors
Speaker 1: that I know of come out and issue foreign policy
Speaker 1: declarations in opposition to the unit. Essentially he did. He
Speaker 1: said that the Trump withdrawal from the Paris Accord will
Speaker 1: be a significant problem for the world and for the
Speaker 1: United States, and he committed California to work with China.
Speaker 1: Are you gonna Are you gonna stay around so we
Speaker 1: can talk predators hockey? We can talk predators hockey and
Speaker 1: those I don't be well, the real question is is
Speaker 1: the bad breath question? You know? Come on, it is
Speaker 1: great hockey, That's what I know. I usually do my
Speaker 1: Book of the year end of June into the fourth
Speaker 1: July weekend. We can't do that because he's in the studio,
Speaker 1: And so when the guest shows up in the studio,
Speaker 1: particularly because he's usually a scon stuff outside Boston lecturing
Speaker 1: at Tufts in the Fletcher School, we will do it. Now.
Speaker 1: It's called the Leader's Bookshelf. It is the most odd
Speaker 1: and twisted book of the year. Take a guy who
Speaker 1: knows what he's doing, who reads a lot, go out
Speaker 1: to fifty of his best friends and say, which fifty
Speaker 1: books would you read? So with the Leader's Bookshelf you
Speaker 1: get about when you get more than fifty, you get
Speaker 1: like seventy or eighty books. Were basically a lot of
Speaker 1: people smarter than you and me say shut up and
Speaker 1: read this, and it's proven very, very successful. James Travisis
Speaker 1: joins his x U S Retired our et period U
Speaker 1: S Navy. Which book did you learn about as you
Speaker 1: put the Leader's Bookshelf together? Which book surprised you? The
Speaker 1: book that really surprised me was Connecticut Yankee in King
Speaker 1: Arthur's Court, which was suggested by my friends. Stay Captain
Speaker 1: Courageous is in there as well. Indeed mine was Connecticut
Speaker 1: Yankee King Arthur's Court, Mark Twain, suggested by General Stan McCrystal.
Speaker 1: It's a book Tom about innovation and leadership. Here's a
Speaker 1: nineteenth century engineer goes back a thousand years in time.
Speaker 1: By definition, he's the smartest person on the planet, but
Speaker 1: he can't get anybody to do anything. He has all
Speaker 1: the right answers, but he has to drive innovation home. Terrific.
Speaker 1: What would President Trump learn from reading Kipling's Captain's courageous.
Speaker 1: He would understand the courage that is needed by men
Speaker 1: and women who go into combat. And I think it
Speaker 1: would weigh heavily on him as he makes some hard
Speaker 1: decisions coming up about, for example, more troops to Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: more troops to Syria. Let's tail this with your your
Speaker 1: new book. Pretty prolific. Anastadis with the new book See Power,
Speaker 1: The History and Geopolitics of the World's Oceans. It's part history,
Speaker 1: part prescription for what should happen when it comes to
Speaker 1: our maritime issues, and also memoir. And you write about
Speaker 1: the first time that you stepped onto vessel sailed across
Speaker 1: the Pacific. When were you reading when we when you
Speaker 1: were in the navy, when when did you find time
Speaker 1: to do it? How important was reading to you as
Speaker 1: you worked your way up? They only worked like a
Speaker 1: three hours. Hey, you know, as mayor may not surprise you.
Speaker 1: Of all the services the navy, officers and men and
Speaker 1: women are sailors are huge readers. Why because it does
Speaker 1: take time to get from San Diego, California, to the
Speaker 1: Arabian Gulf. You're not in danger while you're steam in there.
Speaker 1: You stand watch, you make sure the ocean is not
Speaker 1: gonna take out something on your ship. But at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, you have time to read. So
Speaker 1: many sailors are readers, and I tried to pour all
Speaker 1: that into Sea Power, And that's how the two books
Speaker 1: fit together. How important is our navy right now? When
Speaker 1: you look at all of the conflicts around the world,
Speaker 1: what role is the U. S. Navy play? This is
Speaker 1: the heart of the book. And frankly, it's three things.
Speaker 1: It's trade and making sure that these global commons are
Speaker 1: open as as you all know of the world's trade
Speaker 1: moves by sea. Secondly, it's the alliances and the geopolitics
Speaker 1: because Russia and China are rising in this capability. We
Speaker 1: don't have a free ride. The oceans are not in
Speaker 1: American Lake. We've got to compete. And thirdly, it's the
Speaker 1: environment of the oxygen that we breathe actually comes from
Speaker 1: photosynthesis in the seas. They are crucial for us. There
Speaker 1: are plenty of people you among them, calling for a
Speaker 1: bigger navy, for for more ships. Square that for us.
Speaker 1: We have a huge navy compared to other countries around
Speaker 1: the world. Why does it need to be bigger? Why
Speaker 1: do we need more vessels at this point, let's do
Speaker 1: the numbers. UM. We have two hundred and seventy five
Speaker 1: warships today that are capable of offensive combat operations. Every
Speaker 1: responsible analyst says we need three hundred and fifty, David,
Speaker 1: and that's because of the scope and scale of what
Speaker 1: we need to do. We're in the East durn Met
Speaker 1: jostling with the Russians over Syria. We are in the
Speaker 1: Arabian Gulf trying to keep Guitar and Saudi Arabia from
Speaker 1: blowing up and keeping Iran from closing the Strait of
Speaker 1: hor moves where in the South China Sea where China
Speaker 1: is attempting to take over the entire body. And we're
Speaker 1: in the Arctic plane hunt for Red October. We've got
Speaker 1: a lot of needs for ships. We need to go
Speaker 1: from to seventy five to three fifty. Tim Alex Lacki
Speaker 1: writes it up in Business Insider. It's Lady goulf I,
Speaker 1: think again. We have three aircraft carriers, two cruisers, twelve
Speaker 1: destroyers trying not to run into each other at night
Speaker 1: somewhere in the vicinity of North Korea. Should we how
Speaker 1: should our listeners interpret that animal? Um, it's rare to
Speaker 1: put three aircraft carriers together, but it's not unheard of.
Speaker 1: It sends a powerful signal. The first thing any president
Speaker 1: asked as crisis looms is where are the carriers? When
Speaker 1: a president puts three of them together, Secretary Maddis knows
Speaker 1: the impact of this. It's a strong signal to North Korea.
Speaker 1: That's what going on. Do we know where the carriers are?
Speaker 1: Can they be like a submarine where they're sort of
Speaker 1: out there but nobody knows where they are. We know
Speaker 1: where they are always, obviously, but it's hard for others
Speaker 1: to track. These things can move tom at a thousand
Speaker 1: miles a day, So these are big machines of war.
Speaker 1: Seven acre flight deck, eight combat are absolutely deal. Indeed,
Speaker 1: I commanded Enterprise carrier and she could go up towards
Speaker 1: thirty five not she had eight nuclear reactors. Never needed.
Speaker 1: Big misconception that we have about Enterprise or other carriers.
Speaker 1: The public, what's what's the thing we get most wrong?
Speaker 1: I think the public would say, well, these ships must
Speaker 1: be invulnerable. There are a hundred thousand tons. They're just enormous.
Speaker 1: They have all this defensive capability, but unfortunately they are
Speaker 1: vulnerable to see minds, to hypersonic cruise missiles, two submarines,
Speaker 1: so we have to have the destroyers and crew users
Speaker 1: around them to protect them. I think the public doesn't
Speaker 1: appreciate the integrated defense that's required for these beautiful, beautiful carriers.
Speaker 1: We'll come back here in just a minute. But what's
Speaker 1: what's on the horizon when it comes to technology, what
Speaker 1: future ships look like? We hear about the literal combat vehicle,
Speaker 1: all of that. What's what's the ship of the future
Speaker 1: look like. It kind of looks like what you'd picture
Speaker 1: as Batman's destroyer. It's very modernistic, it's got stealth technology,
Speaker 1: it may be able to semi submerge, it'll operate more
Speaker 1: unmanned vehicles often, and above all, it'll be much more
Speaker 1: hardened for cyber conflict, because that's where war is going.
Speaker 1: Come back here with m James Stefred is now the
Speaker 1: Fletchery School of Tough author of See Power, The History
Speaker 1: and Geopolitics of the World's Great Oceans. To Admirals, say
Speaker 1: read it. Mr Mullen, Admiral mccraven is all a captain
Speaker 1: says read it. He would be John McCain of Arizona
Speaker 1: and Robert Gates has read it as well see Power.
Speaker 1: Very thoughtful about is David mentioned the geography of our oceans.
Speaker 1: We're gonna come back with Admiral Stevidus lots to talk about,
Speaker 1: including uh, some of the vignettes from his Leader's Book.
Speaker 1: It is my book of the summer, and we'll do
Speaker 1: a lot with that in the next four or five weeks.
Speaker 1: We're eve gonna try to force Michael bar to read
Speaker 1: it as well. Read Read Leader's Bookshop David Gara and
Speaker 1: Tom Keene in New York. This is Bloomberg Surveillance on
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Radio here with retired Anaeld James to read is
Speaker 1: the author of Sea Power, The History and Geopolitics of
Speaker 1: the World's Oceans. And we were talking yesterday with Larry Summers,
Speaker 1: University professor at Harvard about a piece that was in
Speaker 1: the Wall Street Jurnal not just about a week ago
Speaker 1: by Lieutenant Generally A char McMaster and Gary Khen, the
Speaker 1: Chairman of the National Economic Council at the White House.
Speaker 1: They were laying out their vision or the White House's
Speaker 1: vision here for the USS role in the world. A
Speaker 1: big theme throughout your book, your new book is the
Speaker 1: importance of alliances and Uh, I wonder what you've made
Speaker 1: about that piece in the Wall Street. You know what
Speaker 1: we saw at the G seven, what we saw at
Speaker 1: the Native summit preceding, and how worried you are about
Speaker 1: what the trans atlantic relationship is going to look like,
Speaker 1: what the U. S has role in the world is
Speaker 1: going to be. I talk a lot in Sea Power
Speaker 1: about the way we should think of the oceans. We
Speaker 1: tend to, unfortunately think of them as discreete little lakes.
Speaker 1: The Mediterranean Sea, the Caribbean, the Atlantic. They're all connected.
Speaker 1: So I am very worried that we are. You would
Speaker 1: say in the investment world, we're undervaluing, We're underweight in
Speaker 1: the alliances right now because the White House is not
Speaker 1: making the right moves to reassure allies and get them
Speaker 1: in this case to see with US. NATO has good
Speaker 1: capability in that regard, but we're dismissing it and not
Speaker 1: building the alliance structure we need for maritime operations. When
Speaker 1: you look at the team of advisors that President Trump has,
Speaker 1: and we've talked about how it's smaller than you might expect,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of jobs that haven't been filled
Speaker 1: filled yet. Are you satisfied that there are people. They're
Speaker 1: giving him the right advice or nuanced advice, or the
Speaker 1: kind of information he needs to do his job well.
Speaker 1: Whether or not he accepts that or works off of
Speaker 1: it is another question. But are those people around him?
Speaker 1: Are they there in government right now? He's got the
Speaker 1: right team at the very top, David, But there are
Speaker 1: no deputy secretaries there, or no assistant secretaries the next
Speaker 1: level down. There are no senior executive service. We have
Speaker 1: no secretary of the Navy, and a gaping hole in
Speaker 1: the size of our fleet, as I talked about in
Speaker 1: Sea Power, So that nuanced advice is at the very top,
Speaker 1: and it's not clear to me he's listening or acting
Speaker 1: on it either. I brought it up the day came out.
Speaker 1: Thank you Bodin for giving me the heads up. David
Speaker 1: from Row in The Atlantic, David Brooks in the New
Speaker 1: York Times. Laurence Summers was with us a few days ago,
Speaker 1: all talking about this concept of arena, which to me
Speaker 1: is out of Game of Thrones or an old child
Speaker 1: in Heston movie. How does a grizzled military veteran like
Speaker 1: you look at the comedy of a politician speaking of
Speaker 1: an arena? Arenas as a term and the way we
Speaker 1: ought to think about it is the last resort. We
Speaker 1: don't want to go into an arena anymore than we
Speaker 1: want to go into the thunder dome to go in
Speaker 1: the wrong way to think about it. We need to
Speaker 1: be finding solutions that are collaborative, especially at sea in
Speaker 1: this maritime world. Arena really bad mental map. I want
Speaker 1: to go back to one of the books in my
Speaker 1: my book of the Summer, the Leader's Book of Yours, Admiral,
Speaker 1: and there's those points where you just stopped den your tracks.
Speaker 1: And it may be in April Harriman, who served for years,
Speaker 1: or John hay Of of hundred and fifty years ago,
Speaker 1: Lincoln secretary who worked with Roosevelt. There's a point in
Speaker 1: the end of Eric Larrabie's book on f DR where
Speaker 1: James Longstreet's wife, his young wife is a riveter in
Speaker 1: a World War Two factory in Georgia. Who was the
Speaker 1: oldest general or type you worked with? You were out
Speaker 1: n nobody wanted to join the navy you did. Who
Speaker 1: was the elder that you saw within your career? Um
Speaker 1: The admiral who most impressed me in terms of longevity
Speaker 1: was Admiral Verne Clark, who was a chief in naval operations,
Speaker 1: and he was came out of the mold of Admiral
Speaker 1: Lee Burke. He was a destroyer officer. He operated high
Speaker 1: speed at sea, but deep and thoughtful when he came
Speaker 1: ashore in the Pentagon. Those kind of figures for all
Speaker 1: of us who pull us along in our lives, are
Speaker 1: crucial you Right as I said, the book is part memoir,
Speaker 1: and each of these chapters is divided by a different ocean.
Speaker 1: You start with the Pacific, there's the Atlantic, Mediterranean, Arctic. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's the experience of going to those places for the
Speaker 1: for the first time. In the romance associated with that,
Speaker 1: you say that your dad was not one who was
Speaker 1: fond of being on the sea. You you end up
Speaker 1: joining the the Navy. When you look at recruitment today,
Speaker 1: young people who are weighing whether or not to join
Speaker 1: the service, how do you how do you what's your
Speaker 1: sense of how how likely they are to do that?
Speaker 1: What is the Navy need to do more to recruit
Speaker 1: people to following your footsteps to join the Navy. Well,
Speaker 1: and first of all, that's essentially why I wrote the
Speaker 1: book to talk to the next generation of sailors coming along.
Speaker 1: And uh uh in part what I had learned, which
Speaker 1: was simply a pass through of what others had taught me.
Speaker 1: David Um the Navy needs to help identify that to
Speaker 1: be on a ship at sea is is being part
Speaker 1: of a long continuous line that goes back thousands of years,
Speaker 1: That it's in office with the best view in the world.
Speaker 1: That you bond with your shipmates in a way you
Speaker 1: can't in any other profession, and that you live a
Speaker 1: life of adventure and travel. Not a bad package if
Speaker 1: you think about it. Mother of all oceans, the cradle
Speaker 1: of colonization, the future see the Mediterranean rewar at sea began,
Speaker 1: the likely zone of conflict installed in the past, Caribbean
Speaker 1: promise in peril up north and is Admiral Stevida's mentioned
Speaker 1: the outlaw sea oceans as crime scenes. The new book
Speaker 1: is Sea Power, History and Geopolitics of the World's Oceans. Uh,
Speaker 1: we will take a close look at that. Just it
Speaker 1: just outright like the movie right today today today today,
Speaker 1: if the movie rights, did you force everybody it toughs
Speaker 1: to buy this? I did. And also also they've already
Speaker 1: cast me in the movie. It's gonna be Danny DeVito.
Speaker 1: George Clooney inexplicably turned the part see power with Danny
Speaker 1: DeVito looked for that Memorial Day, fourth of July two thousand,
Speaker 1: nineteen April James de Vitus of Tufts and Fletcher School
Speaker 1: as well. I think he did listen to me. He
Speaker 1: didn't decide what I wanted him to decide, and I
Speaker 1: think he decided wrong. I think it's not good, not
Speaker 1: in the best interest in the United States what he decided.
Speaker 1: And uh so. But but in terms of you know,
Speaker 1: the way that I look at this thing, and do
Speaker 1: you do you interact with politicians or do you not? Um?
Speaker 1: My view is that first and foremost things are about
Speaker 1: can you help your country? And if you can help
Speaker 1: your country and you do that about interacting, then you
Speaker 1: do it. You have other people that are leaving the table, though,
Speaker 1: like Bob Eiger, like Elon Musk is the President jeopardizing
Speaker 1: his relationship with one of his key constituencies. That would
Speaker 1: differentiate leaving a council and advising in a way that
Speaker 1: you think can help our country. And I think the
Speaker 1: first one is a judgment call that people make. Uh
Speaker 1: I didn't join a council. And so it's not a
Speaker 1: decision I had to make. But but I understand both
Speaker 1: sides of that. Uh. But but advising on something that
Speaker 1: you believe will help America, I think is a is
Speaker 1: a is a requirement as a as A as a CEO,
Speaker 1: you you definitely do that. And you know, if, honestly,
Speaker 1: if I get the chance to, uh go pitch the
Speaker 1: Paris Agreement again, I'm gonna do it again because I
Speaker 1: think it's very important that we engage to fight climate
Speaker 1: change on a on a global basis. This isn't something
Speaker 1: where you can solve it country by country. It requires
Speaker 1: a global action. You know, omissions created in one country
Speaker 1: affect another. And uh so you know, it's something that
Speaker 1: we feel very strongly about. And uh I wanted to
Speaker 1: do every single thing that we could do to um
Speaker 1: to tell how important it was to to stay in
Speaker 1: the agreement. Why didn't you join a council? Why didn't I? Because?
Speaker 1: Uh two reasons. One, my primary job is being the
Speaker 1: CEO of the company, and I spend the bulk of
Speaker 1: my waking hours doing that, and and I do so
Speaker 1: willingly because I of the company and the people in it,
Speaker 1: and so traveling back East isn't something that I that
Speaker 1: I look forward to doing except when I need to do. Secondly,
Speaker 1: I don't find these councils in general and committees to
Speaker 1: be terribly productive. And uh, but but it it wasn't
Speaker 1: about not wanting to advise on something where I thought that, um,
Speaker 1: you know, we could help or we had a point
Speaker 1: of view that should be heard. And so I'm doing
Speaker 1: the ladder. I can't imagine a situation where I wouldn't
Speaker 1: do the ladder because I think it's in the best
Speaker 1: transience of America to do it, and I am first
Speaker 1: and foremost in America. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Savannahs podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Tom Keene. David Gura is at David Gura. Before the podcast,
Speaker 1: you could always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio runt
Speaker 1: you by Bank of America Mary Lynch. With virtual reality,
Speaker 1: virtually everything will change. Discover opportunities in a transforming world,
Speaker 1: be of a mL dot Com, slash VR, Mary Lynch,
Speaker 1: Pierced Fenner and Smith Incorporated,