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. Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast.
Speaker 1: I'm Tom Keene with David Gura. Daily we bring you
Speaker 1: insight from the best of economics, finance, investment, and international relations.
Speaker 1: Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: and of course, on the Bloomberg. How about this, David
Speaker 1: gurl great new world. I'm reading it. I don't have
Speaker 1: time to read all the books we get in. I'm
Speaker 1: up through chapter three. This is where Queen Victoria's show
Speaker 1: is up. It's a beautiful international relations overlaid with history, history, history, history.
Speaker 1: It's in English, bonus round, there's no math. Grave New World,
Speaker 1: Stephen King seeming him. Great to have you with us
Speaker 1: here in New York in our Bloombriger eleven three studios.
Speaker 1: Let me start with the news of the day, the
Speaker 1: news of the weekend, this terrorist attack in London. You've
Speaker 1: write a good deal here in this book about technology
Speaker 1: and the dark side. Of technology overlay that if you
Speaker 1: would on on globalization, A lot of people tell us
Speaker 1: that we have a globalized world principally because of technological development.
Speaker 1: There is a dark side to it that you outline
Speaker 1: in this book. There are a lot of dark side
Speaker 1: to the technology story. The first dark side actually a
Speaker 1: social media the way in which you get the herding
Speaker 1: of ideas, and the old days people thought the internet
Speaker 1: would be a kind of bastion of truth, whereas it
Speaker 1: allows you increasingly to find people who agree with you,
Speaker 1: regardless of whether your views are right or wrong. So
Speaker 1: you get this kind of herding which makes it more
Speaker 1: difficult to form you feel like a kind of sovereign
Speaker 1: view in anyone nation about what should be going on. Obviously,
Speaker 1: when it comes to terror is m we know that
Speaker 1: terrorists in part get their information from social media in
Speaker 1: one form or another, sometimes in the dark web, but
Speaker 1: nevertheless it's a way of of connecting people in to
Speaker 1: do dastardly and unpleasant things rather than things that could
Speaker 1: be in any way significantly positive. I think it's also
Speaker 1: worth noting that technology may also have a kind of
Speaker 1: negative long run impact on globalization itself. We think about
Speaker 1: outsourcing about global supply chains and so on. But robotics
Speaker 1: probably will lead eventually to a lot of these jobs
Speaker 1: being coming back home in one since, but coming back
Speaker 1: home to robots rather than to workers, say in China
Speaker 1: or in your or whatever. Then the big questions, well,
Speaker 1: who owns the robots? Who makes the money from that
Speaker 1: in years to come? But I think it's it's worth
Speaker 1: stressing that technology is not something which, if you like,
Speaker 1: guarantees that globalization advances. It can both be positive for globalizations,
Speaker 1: people have argued over the course of the last twenty
Speaker 1: or thirty years, But equally it can be significantly negative,
Speaker 1: And globalization depends ultimately on ideas, institutions, political beliefs, what
Speaker 1: humanity does with technology rather than the technology itself. We
Speaker 1: saw back last year against globalization many corners of this
Speaker 1: country during the last presidential election. It seems like there's
Speaker 1: still a definitional problem with globalization. I think a lot
Speaker 1: of people don't know how to define it. As Tom
Speaker 1: was saying, you trace this back to Christopher Columbus globalist.
Speaker 1: Why do we still have so much trouble defining it
Speaker 1: and highlighting what is in fact beneficial about globalization? Well,
Speaker 1: some people would say it's just a story about multinationals
Speaker 1: becoming ever more powerful and reducing the voice of the
Speaker 1: common person in some way. Others would point to globalization
Speaker 1: being associated with my great reflows. But I would say
Speaker 1: that the broad definition is the idea that the borders
Speaker 1: inhibit human connections come down. And these connections are obviously
Speaker 1: through trade and goods, trading services, movements of capital across borders,
Speaker 1: movements of people across borders. You think about the the
Speaker 1: European Union and it's so called for freedoms that the
Speaker 1: freedom of movements of good services, capital and people. It
Speaker 1: once sense, it's a kind of regionalized version of of
Speaker 1: globalization um. And of course within the EU there are
Speaker 1: those who who very much support that idea, but there
Speaker 1: are those who feel that they've been left behind and
Speaker 1: it's not working for them. Do we need new stimulus
Speaker 1: as a general statement. I mean, I showed you that
Speaker 1: chart earlier, folks. I'll put it out on Twitter. It's
Speaker 1: a killer chart. Thanks zero Hedge for pushing me on it.
Speaker 1: Back to a comparison of the last decades growth back
Speaker 1: to the nine thirties, I went back to modern economic
Speaker 1: data nine seven. Boy, it's unusual hustle of this growth
Speaker 1: is yes, what do we just simply are we too
Speaker 1: timid in our fiscal stimulus. Well, it's possible that we are,
Speaker 1: although it is worth stressing that countries that have used
Speaker 1: fiscal stimulus in the past to try to kick start
Speaker 1: their economies have often found that the effects have been
Speaker 1: more short lived than they originally expected. In Japan, for example,
Speaker 1: had lots of examples of fiscal stimulus in the nies
Speaker 1: and beyond, and it ended up building sort of bridges
Speaker 1: to nowhere and so much didn't really help with very much.
Speaker 1: Do you think about Spain Before the Global financial crisis,
Speaker 1: Spain had huge amounts of infrastructure spending, which certainly helped
Speaker 1: transforming economy, but also left it with a huge amount
Speaker 1: of debt, which then led to significant struggles thereafter. So
Speaker 1: I think part of the puzzle, one sense, is that
Speaker 1: it's a productivity puzzle. Really, that we've got lots of
Speaker 1: technology coming out all the time. We can observe it
Speaker 1: in our day to day lives, but it isn't having
Speaker 1: the kind of productivity impact in lifting output per our
Speaker 1: output per head and that you might have seen back
Speaker 1: in the fifties. Sixties and seventies. So the danger with
Speaker 1: your chart is that perhaps we're seeing a kind of
Speaker 1: structural slowdown of economic growth. Is not a cyclical story,
Speaker 1: it is a structural story in once it's akin to
Speaker 1: the Japanese experience in the es and beyond. And one
Speaker 1: possible reason for this, and it's only one possible reason
Speaker 1: amongst money, is that Western populations are aging, and as
Speaker 1: they age, they become increasingly risk averse. They want to
Speaker 1: make sure that they have money upfront rather money investing
Speaker 1: for the long run because long ones becoming shorter and
Speaker 1: shorter as the population becomes older. And the consequence is
Speaker 1: that companies are increasingly under pressure to pay out dividends
Speaker 1: or offer share by max than actually to invest for
Speaker 1: the long term in their businesses. So you end up
Speaker 1: with low rates of capital spending, which of course then
Speaker 1: the crates to low rates of GDP growth. Stephen King,
Speaker 1: great to see you. Thank you again for coming in
Speaker 1: here in New York. Steven King got the author of
Speaker 1: Grave New World Way Too Much, Return, Too Much and
Speaker 1: the Return of History. Saw you in London a few
Speaker 1: months back. Right to see you here uh in New
Speaker 1: York to check out the book and Tom, you're gonna
Speaker 1: finish it. Yeah, I know, it's really really What's I mean?
Speaker 1: Lord Stern happens to like the book, and a guy
Speaker 1: named Summers who's going to join us, and a bit
Speaker 1: happens to like. It's an important book is Larry Summers says?
Speaker 1: And it's good again, folks over late where it else?
Speaker 1: Can you hear Thomas Hobbs, then Stephen king Grave New
Speaker 1: World now joining us? A former Secretary of Treasury, Elliott
Speaker 1: Professor Harvard University, Laurence Summers, Larry, wonderful to catch up
Speaker 1: with you again. I featured at the day the essay
Speaker 1: came out. David Frum wrote it up in The Atlantic.
Speaker 1: David Brooks wrote it up in The New York Times.
Speaker 1: And now you crush the concept of global community and arena.
Speaker 1: You take the arena back to Versailles? How is the
Speaker 1: President's arena like? The horror and the bad decisions made
Speaker 1: it Versailles a lifetime ago. He's abandoned the effort of
Speaker 1: creating a stable, prosperous global system in favor of a
Speaker 1: farm policy based on individual war off deals. That's not
Speaker 1: an approach that's been taken since Versailles. And when it
Speaker 1: was taken in Versailles, it was hardly successful. What followed
Speaker 1: was depression and ultimately the Second World War. Now I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that that's the consequence of his pulling out
Speaker 1: of the Paris Agreement, but I was. I've been troubled
Speaker 1: all along by this administration. But I've been able to
Speaker 1: understand the argument that the bark has been worse than
Speaker 1: the bite, the argument that cong this is going to
Speaker 1: prevent some of the most radical proposals from being enacted,
Speaker 1: and the argument that he has a set of very
Speaker 1: rational and experienced devises in the in the international arena.
Speaker 1: I'm prepared to take those arguments very seriously. When two
Speaker 1: of the advisors, Garry Cohne and General McMaster, who were
Speaker 1: held out as the ones who were experienced and did
Speaker 1: the idea of an international system, take to the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal to proclaim that such thing as a community
Speaker 1: of nations, I mean that idea of a community of nations.
Speaker 1: It's not some progressive google saying it was a staple
Speaker 1: of the rhetoric of Ronald Reagan and Henry Gisson's jambaker
Speaker 1: uh Bush. And when they say that's not part of
Speaker 1: our farm policy anymore. I don't see how the rest
Speaker 1: of the world can react other than to change their
Speaker 1: approach to America. This is miracle. Might or might not
Speaker 1: have been prudent to say what she said about other nations,
Speaker 1: not about not being able to rely on other nations
Speaker 1: the way they had in the past, but I think
Speaker 1: she would have been highly irrational. She hadn't had the thought,
Speaker 1: and that's why I'm worried. Couple that with growing evidence
Speaker 1: that we're in the first UH post rational presidency. Denying
Speaker 1: the evidence on crowd sizes after his aliguration comes from
Speaker 1: clear photographs is kind of a trivial example. A budget
Speaker 1: with a two trillion dollar arithmatic error is a more
Speaker 1: consequentially able, and an unwillingness to acknowledge the preponderance of
Speaker 1: evidence in favor of global climate change is an extraordinarily
Speaker 1: consequential example. So I think these two things have to
Speaker 1: leave one to be extremely worried. And it would be
Speaker 1: worrisome with leadership of that kind of any nation, but
Speaker 1: when it's the United States, it's that much more worry
Speaker 1: generating Professor summaries, how much confidence do you have in
Speaker 1: the business community at this point after the US pulled
Speaker 1: out of the Paris Accord last week. A number of
Speaker 1: executives said they'd continue with the programs they had in
Speaker 1: place to address climate change. Clearly there's a vacuum here
Speaker 1: when it comes to climate, when it comes to the
Speaker 1: global order. Do you have much confidence in businesses to
Speaker 1: to pick up the mantle. I think what all of
Speaker 1: us outside of government do is going to be very important.
Speaker 1: If we take the position that patriotism means supporting and
Speaker 1: standing with our president, I think others will worry much
Speaker 1: more about the United States if we take them. If
Speaker 1: we take the position to patriotism lies in standing with
Speaker 1: enduring American values, they think others will come to this
Speaker 1: is the aberrant period that I hope it will be.
Speaker 1: The submissions Secretary, one more question. You have been a
Speaker 1: Secretary of Treasury, You've had a lot of other positions.
Speaker 1: At six Pennsylvania, a lot of the known world is
Speaker 1: waiting for the quote unquote adults in the room to
Speaker 1: guide the president to a better outcome. You've been in
Speaker 1: those meetings. Do you anticipate that will occur? Look, the
Speaker 1: thing that was most surprising to me in the last
Speaker 1: week was two of the people who are normally again
Speaker 1: to fight, as those adults said, the petulant, petty and
Speaker 1: dangerous thing by condemning the idea of community of nations.
Speaker 1: Whether they did that out of conviction or whether they
Speaker 1: did that because they felt they had to out of loyalty,
Speaker 1: we got the answer to the question. The atavistic, ravantist
Speaker 1: approach manifest in the President's tweets is for now in
Speaker 1: control of your NUE. That's got to be alarming, just
Speaker 1: because because the time, Mr Secretary gonna leave it there.
Speaker 1: Lauren Summers, thank you so much, and of course he
Speaker 1: drives forward the dialect. Whether you agree or disagree. I
Speaker 1: really commend Laurence Summers the f T and in the
Speaker 1: Washington Post today on the global community in the arena
Speaker 1: David Gura, I mean, you know, we we identified this
Speaker 1: the day that the essay came out, and then David
Speaker 1: Frum wrote it up in The Atlantic, then David Brooks
Speaker 1: owed it up and The Times, and now we see
Speaker 1: Secretary of Summer's writing up this, this search for what
Speaker 1: the arena actually means. Yeah. Absolutely powerful words there about
Speaker 1: the community of Nations. Also worth reviewing the piece that
Speaker 1: he wrote about the Anderson Bridge and Cambridge on this day,
Speaker 1: so we get a week focused on infrastructure. Least so
Speaker 1: the White House says, of course, he makes the pilgrimage
Speaker 1: from led Our Hall to the Anderson Bridge in Cambridge's reading.
Speaker 1: Then I'll put it out on Twitter. Okay, put it.
Speaker 1: I missed that, David Cura on the Anderson Bridge. Good morning,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Talbot in Boston. Don't fall into the river. This
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg Runch you by Bank of America Mary Lynch
Speaker 1: with virtual reality, virtually everything will change. Discover opportunities in
Speaker 1: a transforming world VI of a mL dot Com slash VR,
Speaker 1: Mary Lynch, Pierced Fenner and Smith Incorporated. Let's get a
Speaker 1: little insight here and what's going on in Washington this
Speaker 1: week at some congressional recess coming to an end here
Speaker 1: As we push ahead to Thursday again, when the former
Speaker 1: FBI Director James Comby is expected to testify before in
Speaker 1: the Senate Intelligence Committee, Terry Haynes joins us. Now he's
Speaker 1: a senior political strategist, head of political analysis at ever Corps.
Speaker 1: I s I. He joins us on our phone lines. Terry,
Speaker 1: great to have you with us here. We're talking with
Speaker 1: Larry Summers just a few moments ago, the former US
Speaker 1: Treasury secretary about the U s s role in the world.
Speaker 1: We could have talked with him about infrastructure as well.
Speaker 1: The White House trying doggedly here uh to shift focus
Speaker 1: at least members of the administration artist shift focus to
Speaker 1: infrastructure the present. Interceding a bit this morning with some
Speaker 1: tweets about the attacks in London and his travel ban,
Speaker 1: how much traction do you expect this administration to make
Speaker 1: on fiscal spending on infrastructure going forward? Well, fundamentally, And David,
Speaker 1: thank you for having me this morning. You aspire to
Speaker 1: be the guy with the beer. Uh. They're undoubtedly as
Speaker 1: a political aspect to the infrastructure roll out this week,
Speaker 1: But I don't want minimize the need and desire of
Speaker 1: this administration to actually have such an event and the
Speaker 1: and the role is out in a meaningful sense. The
Speaker 1: President talked to Congress at the end of February about
Speaker 1: having a trillion dollar infrastructure plan. Uh. You know, our
Speaker 1: view for some time, for longer than that, has been that, uh,
Speaker 1: there's about three billion dollars over three years available in
Speaker 1: direct federal spending, and that the bulk of this is
Speaker 1: going to have to come therefore from some sort of
Speaker 1: public private partnerships, uh, incentives for private spending. That appears
Speaker 1: to be the direction of the way. That generally the
Speaker 1: way the administration is going. But they need to get
Speaker 1: moving on this. Uh. They need uh not just political accomplishments,
Speaker 1: but the infrastructure idea and spending big on infrastructure was
Speaker 1: at the core of the president's message during the campaign
Speaker 1: and been one of the cores of his appeal, I think,
Speaker 1: and this is something so as a result, this is
Speaker 1: something that they're really going to have to push on hard.
Speaker 1: And I know the markets have been waiting for this
Speaker 1: for quite a while, and so a lot of political people.
Speaker 1: When you talk to clients, I imagine one thing they
Speaker 1: really want to know is what the agenda is shaping
Speaker 1: up to be on Capitol Hill. We're familiar with how
Speaker 1: compressed this congressional calendar is speeding ahead to September thirty.
Speaker 1: There on a whole lot of working days between now
Speaker 1: and then. From the House leadership, from the Senate leadership,
Speaker 1: do you have a clear sense of what they're going
Speaker 1: to prioritize. Uh? Well, I think I do. The The
Speaker 1: marching order here is is pretty much that and you
Speaker 1: know something that Congress and the President have agreed upon
Speaker 1: UH in public, by the way, is that they want
Speaker 1: to finish the fiscal reconciliation instructions on the Affordable Care Act.
Speaker 1: In English, that means getting rid of the UH the
Speaker 1: c A tax structure. That that will then allow Congress
Speaker 1: to roll those savings, which many things could be as
Speaker 1: much as a trillion dollars as the less probably, But
Speaker 1: then you know, think of it that way into the
Speaker 1: CIST reconciliation where where you get a tax for a
Speaker 1: tax reform UH program, and what that ends up doing
Speaker 1: is lowering the budget baseline by about a trillion dollars,
Speaker 1: thereby making tax reform much more aggressive than possible. That
Speaker 1: has to happen. Are my view today is that they've
Speaker 1: got to finish the A c A probably by the
Speaker 1: August recess UH to keep everything on track, and then
Speaker 1: they can turn to tax reform and the fall That
Speaker 1: seems to be the way it's going do. Seems to
Speaker 1: be the priorities. Then you get to your first question,
Speaker 1: which is infrastructure. I mean, infrastructure is a practical matter.
Speaker 1: Then doesn't doesn't really come come until the those two
Speaker 1: things I mentioned plus spending bills in the fall, and
Speaker 1: the debt ceiling, whether it comes before the August recess
Speaker 1: or afterwards, take up much of the rest of the
Speaker 1: congressional calendar this year. So infrastructure, UH, the facto it
Speaker 1: becomes item today epitomizes for me is that you can
Speaker 1: have the best laid plans right now with his administration
Speaker 1: whish Washington, and they can be up ended rather quickly.
Speaker 1: You have Gary Cohen in the newspapers in the media
Speaker 1: over the weekend outlining his expectations for the week, again
Speaker 1: with a focus on infrastructure. Then you get a number
Speaker 1: of tweets from the present this morning, UH, casting light
Speaker 1: in a different direction, looking at this travel ban. He's
Speaker 1: embracing the term travel ban. He's encouraging his Attorney General,
Speaker 1: the Justice Department to defend a water down version of
Speaker 1: it before the Supreme Court. How do you deal with that?
Speaker 1: How do you advise clients to deal with that? The
Speaker 1: fact that you could have what you think is a
Speaker 1: clear sense of what's going to happen in Washington and
Speaker 1: then all of a sudden that changes with just a
Speaker 1: hundred forty characters. I think I urged context David and UH.
Speaker 1: The past few years. I mean this is believing, not
Speaker 1: casting as persions on the the prior administration at all, uh,
Speaker 1: not making this a value judgment. But you had a
Speaker 1: relatively uh stable Washington over the past few years. People
Speaker 1: understood what was going to happen. People understood prayer or
Speaker 1: he's all arrest. Now you get, for the first time
Speaker 1: in eight years, a brand new administration with new priorities.
Speaker 1: So there's you know, things all over the map happened. UH.
Speaker 1: And you know, this is of course a concern demandent's
Speaker 1: because they need to understand what's going on, and there's
Speaker 1: more activities simultaneously than there has been in a lot
Speaker 1: of years. My urging is to essentially, you know, keep
Speaker 1: your focus on the basics, what is actually going on?
Speaker 1: What is what what is you know, what are the priorities? Uh?
Speaker 1: And this administration, of course, I say, we'll have priorities
Speaker 1: across the board, but focus on what's actually happening in
Speaker 1: the timetable and uh, and that will tell you what's
Speaker 1: actually going to happen. Terry, thank you so much. Terry
Speaker 1: Haynes with side this morning with a briefing to David. Really,
Speaker 1: Thursday is the big day. I mean we get the
Speaker 1: UK election, but that's a testimony, right, yeah, absolutely, and
Speaker 1: it's going to be open session in the morning, there'll
Speaker 1: be a close session testimony in the afternoon. And obviously
Speaker 1: a lot of this was hammered out in conversations with
Speaker 1: Robert Mueller, who's now heading up how does an investigation
Speaker 1: what James Commy said he wouldn't testify before consulting with him,
Speaker 1: so you have these dual track investigations. And Mr Commy
Speaker 1: said he wanted to be clear that what he was
Speaker 1: going to say an open session wouldn't be stepping on
Speaker 1: the toast of one Mr Mueller's and investigating. Yes, all
Speaker 1: eyes will be on Washington. Think it's fair to say.
Speaker 1: On on Thursday, I had an email come in which
Speaker 1: which was where's the photo from the president's new Twitter page?
Speaker 1: He changes his photo a lot often. I believe it's Denver.
Speaker 1: I've been going back and forth with Kevin Si really
Speaker 1: trying to figure it out. But he did rally him
Speaker 1: Denver with a humongous number of people. You know, airplane
Speaker 1: hang Yeah, familiar image here with with a pat air
Speaker 1: plane hanger, and there is of course one on the outside.
Speaker 1: The plan has changed but the scene very much the same,
Speaker 1: does he Well, that's that great, Just a moment to
Speaker 1: go to talk to the National Association for Business Economics.
Speaker 1: You gon to talk to somebody else, Tomas membership dues too.
Speaker 1: That's Richard Hass, the president of the Council Right for Relations,
Speaker 1: the author of the book A World in Disarray, American
Speaker 1: Foreign Policy and the Crisis of the Old Order, joining
Speaker 1: us on our phone lines. Richard Hoss, great to speak
Speaker 1: with you once again. Let me start with what the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister said yesterday quote. Our society should continue to
Speaker 1: function in accordance with our values, but when it comes
Speaker 1: to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.
Speaker 1: What what needs to change in London in the West
Speaker 1: in light of what happened over the weekend in London. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's all about the balances and in a democratic society,
Speaker 1: how much surveillance versus how much privacy, how much police presence,
Speaker 1: how well are they how are they to be armed?
Speaker 1: Access to information and free use of the internet versus
Speaker 1: greater degrees of control over certain types of content. And
Speaker 1: that's what Teresa They the Prime Minister, is getting at.
Speaker 1: What I think she suggests thing is that the pendulum
Speaker 1: needs to shift somewhat in the direction of protecting collective
Speaker 1: security and a little bit less of an emphasis on
Speaker 1: individual freedom or privacy. Something else that the Prime Minister
Speaker 1: suggested is the tech companies need to do more. We've
Speaker 1: heard this now time and time again after these attacks.
Speaker 1: How much responsibility does the private sector bear? Do these
Speaker 1: tech companies bear? What should governments be doing to to
Speaker 1: encourage tech companies to do more? Well, again, it's it's
Speaker 1: going to be very difficult because of the balances, and
Speaker 1: it's also just simply hard to keep up. It's quite
Speaker 1: easy for people to innovate with new sites on Twitter
Speaker 1: or Facebook or or some of the fancier UH Telegraph
Speaker 1: and some other sites like that. So sure, the companies
Speaker 1: can do more if they wish to do more, but
Speaker 1: they're also worried that to to intimate a relationship with
Speaker 1: law enforcement and intelligence will lose the trust of their users.
Speaker 1: So this is there's some tough calls for them as well.
Speaker 1: Here wonder woman got a huge box office switched in
Speaker 1: eighteen years ago, the bureaucratic entrepreneur got just as large
Speaker 1: a box office. Confused the bureaucratic entrepreneur, how to be
Speaker 1: effective in an unruly organization, Ambassador, if you were writing
Speaker 1: your Brookings book there of ages ago about this Trump
Speaker 1: administration administration, how would you be effective in an unruly organization? Well,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure you really can be. Uh. There was
Speaker 1: a story in Politico in the last few hours that
Speaker 1: when the President gave a speech to europe TOMP that
Speaker 1: the final draft had him specifically endorsing Article five, the
Speaker 1: attack on one as an attack on all a statement.
Speaker 1: And then somehow between that and when the President gave
Speaker 1: the speech, gremlin's got into the Oval Office, probably in
Speaker 1: the form of Steve Mannon, and took it out. That's
Speaker 1: a degree of unruly nous that is downright dangerous. And
Speaker 1: if you're the if you're the National secret Advisor or
Speaker 1: the Secretary of State of Events, I would say it's untenable.
Speaker 1: So I would basically tell the President, if you want
Speaker 1: us to serve here, there have got to be certain
Speaker 1: commitments and guidelines, or we cannot serve you. And now, folks,
Speaker 1: we get another opinion on the the most important issue
Speaker 1: at the moment. David Frum wrote it up in The Atlantic,
Speaker 1: David Brooks in the New York Times. We just had
Speaker 1: the honor of Secretary Summers being with us on the arena.
Speaker 1: Ambassador Hasson and McMaster cone. Essay, there was President Trump
Speaker 1: and an arena. What's the arena? Your guess is as
Speaker 1: good as mine. But I think what they're getting at
Speaker 1: is this kind of hobbsy and view of the world
Speaker 1: on which the United States has no relationships worth preserving.
Speaker 1: There's no institutions worth buttressing. Everything is a one off,
Speaker 1: Everything is uh in isolation. And that is simply an
Speaker 1: untenable way to do foreign policy and ignores the extraordinary
Speaker 1: inheritance that has been painstakingly developed over the last sixty
Speaker 1: or seventy years. And that is our second homes reference
Speaker 1: of the morning here. It's very happy that Richard had
Speaker 1: let me. Let me have you look ahead to Hamburg
Speaker 1: to the G twenty this summer. We saw the report
Speaker 1: in Spiegel over the weekend about the tension at the
Speaker 1: G seven meeting just over a week ago. What's your
Speaker 1: outlook for that meeting as we see the US backing
Speaker 1: out of this traditional transatlantic relationship. What what do you
Speaker 1: expect is going to transpire at that meeting in Hamburg? Well,
Speaker 1: what we saw at the G seven holds where effectively
Speaker 1: it became a G six, and the G twenty becomes
Speaker 1: something of a G nineteen, and you can't deal effectively,
Speaker 1: say with issues like trade. You can't deal effectively with
Speaker 1: issues like climate. United States all one an emphasis on terrorism,
Speaker 1: possibly on dealing with North Korean proliferation. So what what
Speaker 1: this group will be in the formal collective sense now
Speaker 1: is increasingly how would I call it a group of
Speaker 1: narrow casting? And the idea that would do broadcasting and
Speaker 1: deal with global issues were at large, that that era
Speaker 1: is temporarily suspended, you know us. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: He's a president counsel on formulations and I should say, ambassador,
Speaker 1: what a joy to speak to Robert Kaplan at see
Speaker 1: if are here the other day, Dallas fed President. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen
Speaker 1: to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform
Speaker 1: you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keene. David Gura
Speaker 1: is at David Gura. Before the podcast, you can always
Speaker 1: catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio. Runch you by Bank
Speaker 1: of America Mary Lynch with virtual reality virtually everything will change.
Speaker 1: Discover opportunities in a transforming world. B of A m
Speaker 1: L dot Com slash v R, Mary Lynch, Pierced Fenner
Speaker 1: and Smith Incorporated,