tv With All Due Respect Bloomberg September 24, 2016 9:00am-10:01am EDT
announcer: "big problems, big thinkers" is brought to you by cisco. there has never been a better time to change the world. ♪ terre: we asked some of the best minds in the world from business, government, the arts, and academia, what are the most urgent problems facing humanity, and how do we solve them? the result is "big problems, big thinkers." ♪ >> what is the number one major problem facing mankind? >> i think it is the lack of education. >> politics has been getting dumber and dumber. >> there is a balance of green spirit. >> if we don't have a more sustainable way -- >> everybody has the capability
of making a difference. >> remember your humanity. and forget the rest. terre: hello, this "big problems, big thinkers." i'm terre blair. in this series, we confront the greatest problems facing the human race and we examine each issue by asking if there is an ethical framework to help us solve them. to do that, we'll hear from an extraordinary group of leaders as they search for answers and perhaps inspire us collectively to take action. in this episode, threats to our economic future. after the world financial system teetered on the brink of collapse in late 2008, many new policies were put in place. and you'll hear about those. but what about other changes, in values, motivations and incentives? after all, markets rise and fall and rise again. but what are the lessons about markets and about ourselves that could mitigate the economic
pain? so many lessons, but what have we actually learned? warren: the fall of 2008 was something different than anything any of us had ever seen. ♪ warren: it was even more extreme what was going on immediately -- extreme what was going on in 1929 or the subsequent depression in a big way. the train came close to a stop and now it is again regaining speed. so that period was a big lesson to people who operated on leverage and demonstrated the interconnectedness of our system. and it demonstrated the destructive aspect of certain kinds of incentives and that sort of thing. >> we came to a period where situationally i could, if i were a bank, give a mortgage to somebody that wanted to buy an
$850,000 home and showing no income statement. people who should've never taken out mortgages, took out mortgages. people who never should have given mortgages, were giving them. people who should have not bundled them into bonds and selling them all over the world, bundled them into bonds and were selling them all over the world. people who were stamping them aaa, even though they were garbage, never should of been stamping them aaa and labeling rating them that way. they were doing what was legal, ok? and it all blew up. and when it blew up, the collateral damage has been devastating. michael: people just didn't want to pay attention. the big mortgage crisis came about when the banks took mortgages, put them all together and sold the package. they were sold to professionals, the trustees of pension funds, the managers of mutual funds and hedge funds, the treasurers of corporations. these are sophisticated people, supposedly, and if they are not
, then they should have never had those jobs. they looked at those and knew exactly what was in these packages. it was all disclosed. they looked at them and said, oh, the ratings are aaa. they are only aaa if everything did not go wrong at the same time. but they bought these things and when they had higher yields, they had to stop and think -- this must be high-yield because it is riskier. but nobody wants to blame themselves for -- oh i took a risk. >> the famous charles prince quote who was running citibank at the time, and he said when the music is playing, you need to get up and dance. so when every other major bank is doing this and earning incredible quarterly profits, that the shareholders are celebrating and the board of directors is applauding, if you're the guy that stands up and says, no, i will behave sustainably and we will not do
that, that becomes professionally risky. we got into a very short-term loop. there were banks that did the right thing. thomas: jpmorgan did not get anywhere near as caught up as other banks. and at the time, no doubt their ceo was looked at as being stodgy. >> could we have foreseen it? yeah, there were a lot of people that saw it. but who is going to stop making money because you're going to make too much money and you will collapse. stop selling your product. sell your house for a lower price because if you sell at a higher price, the next person has more leverage built in and it is more dangerous. we wanted everybody to have a mortgage, whether they could afford it or not. michael: so freddie mac and sallie mae and companies like this, the quasi-government organizations, they encouraged everybody, encouraged the banks -- make the loan, regardless.
the argument was if you do not make the loan to people who cannot afford it, you are discriminating against people. and all of us are guilty. we wanted to help everybody. but there are no quick simple answers and we tried to create one. and you create a bubble and then the bubble collapses. >> we have had bubbles throughout history and they manifest themselves in various ways, whatever it may. and we will have them in the future. human beings, we get smarter about a lot of things in terms of how to produce things and become more productive. we do not get rid of the basic human emotions. and greed and fear will always operate the same way. thomas: you are dealing with a balance of greed and fear, greed and fear, greed and fear. and every decade or so, greed gets out of context and eventually leads to enough fear and something blows up, and we all just say, how could we have been so stupid?
>> to go back and revise history and say i did not know, you are a professional, you should of known. the information was there and common sense says if you are earning more, you are taking more risk. michael: i think if you look back at bob steel and people like that that went to treasury, saved the country because the rewriting of history says you should not have bailed out the companies. to not bail out the biggest companies and banks is ridiculous. you have no choice but to do that. were they overleveraged? yes. but everybody wanted them to be overleveraged and congress was as guilty as everybody else. and we live in a world where somebody else has to be guilty, it can't be you, it has to be somebody else. so we go after the bankers, which we have always done. hardly without sin, the worst thing they did was none of the documentation and those kinds of things. but they were part of something that everybody wanted. we wanted the world to keep expanding and the good times to keep rolling.
until one day they don't. ♪ >> if you look at 2008 and the institutions that failed or came close to failure. if you take aig and citigroup and washington mutual and freddie mac and fannie mae, the stockholders of those companies lost hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. warren: citigroup did not go under, but when the stock holders lose 90% of their value, it really does not make much difference if you have $1000 invested and you end up with $100 or not. so there in my view, there has been no moral hazard created for stockholders by the fact that the government came in and rescued those institutions. the moral hazard exists i think with the top executives who walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars and really did not pay the price for the ir failure. we had bigger and bigger financial institutions that had all kinds of activities where their problems became other people's problems.
and then we had improper incentives, we had people running the huge institutions whose upside was lots of money and glory, and the downside was still a lot of money and no glory. >> one of the points my teacher makes, when you're in a world that is a flat and technically interconnected, it is also ethically interdependent. thomas: because when greek bankers basically were going nuts, giving mortgages to greeks to build their third vacation home or their second swimming pool, whatever they're doing -- [chanting] thomas: when it suddenly blew up and you discovered your portfolio was down 5% because people were worried whether greece could default or pay back all of these sovereign debts they had accumulated, you said, wait a minute. i'm not technically interconnected with them, i am ethically interdependent. that can really affect your
401(k) and your happiness, not to mention retirement here. so, we all have to think much more globally. warren: trust makes the world function better. commerce without trust is very awkward and we saw that in september 2008, 30 million americans in a time of a week lost trust in the money market funds and the government had to come in and essentially guarantee those funds. but, if you have 30 million americans that believe something to be the case in august and in september where their money was, they don't believe in it anymore, the train comes to a halt pretty darn fast. so a functioning, trustworthy economic system worldwide is a huge plus and it is even more of a plus for those countries who have not had it. we are used to it in the united states. terre: do you believe that international financial
stability is essential to world peace? michael: we will never have perfect international financial stability. people will continue to make the mistakes they've made in the past, with small variations. you know what mark twain said, history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. that is ver much the nature of financial history. terre: as warren buffett says, we will never have perfect international financial stability. that is the history of markets. but can individuals create a financial future that improves on that history? can investors, governments and political leaders transform values to mitigate the pain of future crises? that is next on "big problems, big thinkers." ♪ >> do we really have to pass a law that tells bankers, you cannot give a loan to someone who cannot pay it back? >> i have 20 iq points over him and he is getting rich and i'm not. that drives people crazy and it will continue to drive people crazy 100 years from now and 500
journalist, thomas friedman. what part did we as individuals play in what went wrong, what can we do better? thomas: when someone comes to you, selling you a home mortgage , and telling you the only thing they need to do is check if you can fog up a knife, and not show your income statement, that is a pretty good sign that it sounds too good to be true. it usually is. also, should we really have to pass a law that tells bankers, you cannot give a loan to someone who cannot pay it back? i mean, do we need to pass a law to do that? ♪ thomas: so people were doing such manifestly unsustainable things because they always thought, what i call ipg or ypg, i will be gone or you will gone. i will do this mortgage, because i will be gone. i will package this into 1000 bonds, i will sell it to somebody and i will be gone. they pawn it off to another investment bank in france and they will be gone. you cannot pay for your house ?
now that the money is actually due, no problem. just sell it, because we know that house prices only go up. then you will be gone. so we are all practicing ibg and ybg values basically. it was an epidemic of that. warren: the people that got big institutions into huge trouble, which is sent not ripples, but tsunamis around the world, they got away with a lot of money. that should not have happened. we need a greater balance of incentives. if they are running a bank or some other large institution, so important that the government needs to save it because it needs to save the economy generally, those people in my view should be bankrupt if they screw things up. and that has not happened. ♪ terre: even though we will have bubbles and we have always had bubbles, do you believe people have the ability to transform their values? michael: i would be fairly
pessimistic about people learning to control greed and fear any better in the future than they have in the past, but what gets them in trouble is the fact that a fellow goes home at night and a neighbor is making money easily and his wife reminds him that that man is dumber than he is and he is making more money on dotcom stocks or he has been financing more than he can handle, but nevertheless -- looking at that guy and thinking, i have 20 iq points over him and he is getting richer and i'm not, that drives people crazy and will continue to drive people crazy 100 years from now and 500 years from now. >> i think it will be very difficult to unwind our materialistic impulses, partly because it is tied to something very basic. as soon as you have two cavemen with caves, one of them looked at the other and said, why is his cave bigger? why does he have shrubs and we don't? i look at you and i compare you to me.
>> people who make a lot of money in our country tend to trade in some of their money for other kinds of rewards, including the rewards of honor that come from being recognized as a great philanthropist. but there is a muddle that comes when there is a conflict between doing the thing that will bring you honor and the thing that will bring you money. in many cases. and i have a name for this, the bernie madoff problem. he was an american financer, a man that invest money for other people. and he was incredibly honored and all the time he was cheating people. he was someone that was getting money and honor for doing something profoundly antisocial and dishonorable, then he was caught fortunately. kwame: you want to create a world which encourages people to be successful and do things that are worth doing. and finance is necessary and worth doing.
but you want them to see that money is not the way to measure, measure your life. warren: there is always tension between the market system and unleashing it while at the same time not causing it to go to excess. we learn certain things need to be controlled and we will learn that other systems will unleash potential of humans. and different societies will come at it in different ways. the chinese are coming at it in somewhat differently than the u.s. you will see that around the world. but i think overall, we will learn more from others and their successes as time goes by. and humanity as a whole will be living better 50, 100, 200 years from now. the world is not a zero-sum game. if somebody discovers penicillin in the united kingdom, it
crosses borders and does me some good. so we want the rest of the world to prosper. we should want it anyway as human beings, beyond that there is a utilitarian aspect to wishing the world well. because you do not want the united states to be an island of 300 million people doing magnificently well, 6 billion people are sitting there, envious of us. ♪ >> money is a powerful force. i would argue it is more powerful than nature in some ways, just because of the economic forces. we do a bad job often in attributing an accurate value to something and the economic crisis is a perfect example. somebody created fake value out of something that did not really have value. and eventually it was going to crash, which is what it did. >> the dow had its biggest drop ever, falling a little more than 777 points.
michael: we do not want to have banks that are too big to fail. we want gigantic banks, because that is the only way to compete in the world and fund companies that will create the jobs you want and a better life for all americans and people around the world. so instead of keeping the banks from being able to make money and with that money make loans and take risks, what you have to do is find ways to protect the banks from going under. have an insurance policy in case they do. but not keep them, not try to change them so that they can't possibly go under, because then they can't do their function. terre: right. michael: they are a very important part of the function, and unless somebody finances development, there is no development. there is no way to create jobs and wealth and good lives and good education systems and good governments that depend on tax revenue in the future. >> one thing we know about
growth is it is not everything, but it is the source of all good things. in the sense that you have a growing economy, people are more relaxed and open to new ideas and open to cooperation. they are dividing a growing pie. when you do not have growth, people are competing over a shrinking pie. and they will get more snarly, angry and probably racist, more homophobic -- people will use whatever emotional hooks they can to get their piece of a shrinking pie. so growth is very important to the underlying climate of the whole discussion. >> i think we need to think more about growth with equality, rather than the inequality based growth that we have seemed to have been good at creating in the last few years. thinking about anything that makes a radical change in how we
live our lives, faces you with this problem, that there are going to be winners and losers. kwame: and the people that are currently winning risk becoming losers if we change the game. so that they have an interest in keeping things the way they are. >> i am concerned that we are burdening society with so many rules to protect ourselves from every eventuality that it does not work. the real world is full of risk. and if you want to prevent all risk, then you do not have anything. ♪ warren: i send out a letter every two years or so to the managers at berkshires, and i basically say, do what is legal obviously, but also do not do anything you would not be happy to have written on the front page of the newspaper. and i tell them one other thing, look if the reason you are doing
it, if the reason you give me why you are doing it is, everybody else is doing it. that is not good enough. if that is the best you can come up with, there is something wrong with what you are doing. it is not can we do it? it is should we do it? it is important in all aspects of life. i've heard more dumb things rationalized by the fact that the other guy is doing it and i tell them, if it is close to the line, it is over the line. nobody can see the line that well. i'm 80 years old and my eyes are going bad, so do not do anything close to the line. it makes me nervous. terre: the post crisis response has included lines upon lines of new laws and regulations, including increased capital and liquidity positions for financial firms. and yet, the question remains, after the financial equivalent of a near-death experience for global markets, are individuals
♪ francine: welcome to leaders with lacqua with me, francine lacqua. i was sort of again as a insurance company at the date is the second-largest insurer in the uk and one of the biggest provider in europe with around 33 million customers and 319 billion pounds of assets. mark wilson is the ceo. raised and educated in new zealand, spent a good part of his career in asia where he let the pan asian and sure -- insurer aia.
when the parent company collapsed, aia survived with wilson and became the aviva ceo and 2013 as -- and has improved cash flow, could cause come and strengthen the balance sheet. i am delighted and looking forward to hearing your story. you have been any business for a long time, what was the most stressful moment? mark: it does seem like a long time. -- the one that sticks out is the day aig collapsed come in asia, people like you outside the window, cameras in outside -- cr se ews outside. you had regulators, governments, do?omers, what do you francine: what did you do? it was early morning.
you realized this was happening. who was the first person you called? mark: the people you trust on your team. the plans you have been running your business with -- there is a british prime minister in the 1950's and 1960's, harold mcmillan, someone asked him a question, they said, prime minister, what blows you off course? events.red, events blow your plans off course. a global statesman, mike tyson and someone asked him, people have a plan to beat you come he said all my opponents have a plan to beat me until it puts them in the mouth -- punch them in the mouth. in the ceo field, you get
punched in the mouth metaphorically a lot, whether industry issues, competitors, you have to adapt. francine: in a financial crisis hardly anyone saw coming, what did it teach you, how could we not have predicted it, that regulators did not know how to grapple with it or the back we are still suffering from eight years on? mark: the markets had over exuberance in the times of good times and they get way too bearish in bad times. convertedthe time we the loss of aia balance sheet into cash. the fundamental aspect is short-term. the markets are short-term and they become short-term for the nano second and there are ceos and leaders and as media and
governments and other stakeholders, we have to think longer term and that is the key. as countries and economies and businesses, we still have to learn. mark: our central banks -- francine: our central banks to short-term? mark: absolutely, when you look at interest rates, there needs to be a much longer-term perspective. francine: that means central banks taking a step back? they say the economy would have been in a real mess had we not stepped in and we speak to ceos and business leaders and they say make a break are not counterproductive, they are crumbling the industry. mark: interest rates and negative interest rates are a key facet. what question they are trying to -- low interest rates are trying to answer, and 2008, you have extended debts ,ny housing market in the u.s. in many countries you do not have those same economic dynamics. i believe in the uk what we need
to stimulate is investment in the economy, things like infrastructure, people would love to invest as long as we have the right environment, the right terms, the right regulations on capital requirements to do it. that is a big step from where we are. francine: why have we not done it, we talk about fiscal, the halo that will face us, we could've done three years ago, four years ago, five years ago? mark: that is the right question and you may have to ask central bankers. we can do a big step forward. pounds in0 billion funds, and appetite to invest more but we need the government to take more construction risks, solvency on capital requirements sorted out to make it more effective and a pipeline of the good infrastructure we can invest in. investors like insurance
companies, pension funds have the longest term assets or liabilities that need to match with assets. if we do that, it is good for all parties. , the uk canexit invest more in infrastructure, a perverse that they about exiting the world stage in some ways? mark: i do not think it is a brexit phenomenon, it is something we had to do, we need more infrastructure. we need more real jobs and investments in the economy. we love the uk, we have been here for 320 years and we want to invest, we just want help. francine: the insurance industry is heard in general by negative rates. aviva less so than rivals? mark: if i talked to many investors, i say you are a large insurance company so obviously rates for hurting you. we took the chance and fix the roof while the sun was shining,
from a weaker balance sheet to a stronger balance sheet in europe and that is helpful. we have also insulated ourselves to a large extent from low interest rates, we do not have guarantees in our products. most investors think large insurance companies have impeccable rates but that is like saying all cars perform the same in wet weather. that is not the case. aviva performs well in wet weather and low interest rates do not have the same impact for us. francine: is that luck or planning? mark: both, we did not have enough capital for a while so we did not have high guarantees and now we have plenty of capital, a wonderful balance sheet that is helpful. we saw solvency, rates which structured our business to be more resilient and we have shown the market, it seems to be reacting well. francine: if you had an elevator
pitch to convince the central banker to help you out or to abandon negative rights, what would it be? not negative breaks, i would say what question are you trying to solve with negative rates or low rates? and how will we invest in the real economy to create real jobs? if you can answer that second question maybe you don't need the first. francine: do we need to change demanded on central banks, they focus on inflation, should we focus on growth, the citizens they represent should they be targeting? mark: the mandates of central banks are fine. if you look at the central bankers around europe, quite impressive individuals. they have the right view on what they are trying to do. they cannot do it by themselves. this is a combination of central bankers and a combination of government policy, and a combination of people like me and our industry and other
francine: since mark wilson took over as aviva ceo of 2013, he has folks on strengthening the balance sheet at is now looking to return his investment growth. yes men a buying spree, last year aviva purchase friends in life group in the biggest insurance deal and 15 years. if you had to build aviva from scratch, what would it look like, or another insurance company? mark: we have this discussion a lot with our internal team, we say if you are in venture
capitalists and you came into our executive meeting and said, you have five billion pounds to spend on expenses every year, would you do the same thing? if you wanted to build the best insurance company and the most future proof insurance company in the world, the answer is you would do things differently. i asked the question, what are we doing those things? i would keep a lot of things, the history, you cannot beat 320 years of history. i would keep the brand. a remarkable competitive advantage. the technical expertise through the business. i would modernize it and make it simpler and -- much simpler and much more digital. i would make it much more customer focused going forward. that is what we are trying to do. that is our strategy, focusing on digital. the insurance industry i think globally is in the stone age when it comes to digital. maybe -- maybe we
invented fire, invented the wheel, we have a lot of tools and now we need to see what we can build. francine: how do we choose our insurance? do i go online? a male customer goes online and buys it for the household? do i buy it all at once? mark: that is the key point, eithere last decade, you're a car insurance, house insurer, i believe the next decade is about what i call -- having all of those things together. in the digital world, what the customers are saying they want is simplicity, digital, they want to be rewarded for loyalty, and as an insurer like ours it helps because we can do a cheaper, more effectively, more
capital efficient, being a large insurer with a large customer base gives a strategic advantages. francine: because you have access to data on the customer and therefore you can make an informed decision on whether you want to ensure them or at what price? mark: exactly, if you have the data, we know where you live, the length of your driveway, the pipes in your house, we have all that big data available to us and we can use that in their models. it is also about the brand, capital efficiency. insurance,call an you are more capital efficient, you can put it together and i think the next decade is about insurance globally. francine: what you have to do due to be right in the next decade? , we have about digital started of a digital garage in london, singapore, and other places and are spending a lot of money on it. we are getting guys with ponytails and technical
backgrounds. it is a different way of working, a different culture, to us has become quite iconic. i spent a couple days a week down there dressed in jeans. francine: no ponytail? mark: they would probably throw me out, they would -- they cut it off when i were a tie. an iconic changing colter. francine: do i buy might insurance on mobile, and easier interface, what are you trying to get them to do? mark: you wanted simple, when you have a pigeon with us, you want to know we will give you a discount on home insurance. we can produce our products to existing customers about 30% 30% less cost than to a new customer or what other people could do. advantage gives us a phenomenal strategic position.
we will do a better price, low-cost producer, low-priced -- we are making it simple and we can pre-underwrite. say like a credit card, we you have your pigeon with us you do not need these forms, three clicks to get home insurance. we have a revolution in the insurance, we have all of our systems talking to each other. even though we are 320 years old, all of our system talk to each other. digital is the future. francine: how do you sell digital insurance to the chinese? mark: they are in a string market, they are going to economically tough times. i call it the shanghai sabbatical. china has been going through 20 years of growth, the first 20 years of double-digit, the second 20 years of single digit and slowing each year. i am able on china. -- a bull on china. they need to relearn how to do
business in the low growth environment of 3% to 5%. if they look at that they will come back strong. short-term.latility mark: i think he will have volatility in china until 2019, 2020. it is inevitable. there is a flow -- an impact on asia. strategy aligned with our china strategy is simple, about being disruptive. about the digital play, about doing distribution fundamentally differently, we have a great bread in places like china. about a 10% name recall which is extraordinary in that market. we are about being disruptive. we have the brand, the system, the people, and we want to be disruptive with some of the established players, you have more to protect. francine: are you worried about radiation in china that hurts
the insurance company through l close -- l close? mark: you have to embrace it and for companies like us based in the uk, the uk has conservative regulations and increased regulation in asia is inevitable. opportunity for us as a threat because we are used to working in tighter regulatory environments and i think the chinese regulators have done a good job and they are modernizing their industry long-term i am a china will -- bull. francine: the regulator you get along with most? mark: i will not pick out one. whate them to understand they want, they are on the same site, they want to protect customers and so do we, they want to make a secure and so do we. my view is build a relationship the four you need them. in the global financial crisis, we have been closed to regular for a long time and there are wonderful regulators in asia.
we had some great discussions over that time, when you need them to help you, they were there. francine: what surprised you the most in your business, what surprised me that you have told me in the past, the brits, the uk, that are meant to be very honest, especially if you are a italian, they have the highest number of fraud or insurance in europe, is the right? mark: i will give you stats. , 27 timesrd in the uk higher than france. not agree butld it would appear so from the data. is higher here and that in most parts of asia. i think it is a national disgrace. it has to stop and i applaud the moves by the government to stamp down on whiplash and bodily energy fraud -- bodily injury fraud.
alonepact on uk consumers is about 50 pounds per motor insurance policy per year. it does impact us, as she does not impact us come we will get every pound back to consumers. this is good for consumers, good for the industry, good for the uk and i applaud the government. francine: thank you so much, we will talk about you next with almost 30,000 employees, we asked mark wilson about his leadership style next on leaders with lacqua. ♪
francine: welcome back with leaders with lacqua. one of the most -- running one of the most recognized insurers, he knows the issues facing the world and for him climate change is a top concern. he wrote a book about this issue. this is one of your big passions. you spoke at the u.n.. you instill that passion
via climate change or anything else to your employees? mark: it is a concern, sustainability is a key part. i call it enlightened self interest where a investor in a business that has liabilities of 30 and 50 and 50 years. if we do not do it, it would be a dereliction of duty. sustainability, if we do not get it right will be the biggest contemporary market failure of all time. business is not just about making money, no business survives just on making money. it must have a social purpose. i believe the answer to sustainability in the global goals, business is the answer. francine: have you always felt this way? mark: it was part of my up -- of bringing in new england where the air is clear and green, that probably influenced my believe.
we have to have an impact on the step as leaders and the short-term that is the disease that pervades business globally has got to be stamped out. capitalism has to begin for everyone. i lived in asia for 14 years and i saw the unacceptable face of capitalism and that it could bring hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. and businesses like us can make a difference. francine: what kind of leader are you? mark: easy to work for, no doubt about it. demanding, when i have a look at it, there is a world from new zealand called mana, about being a leader that does the right thing. does the right thing for the group with a conscience that has respect for those they are working with and that is probably me. i look for people i work with, i have two key attributes i look for, not in order, experience is
secondary to me, the first two are about if you have a complex issue, give it to a smart person and they will sort it out. and values, not in the traditional word about honesty and integrity, of course you have to have that, i mean values to the business. legacy, the a good ancestor, think long-term, eating just buy history at sometime. the next is never rest, always be unhappy. unhappy with the status quo, look to improve, have a business culture that means you are very best is not quite good enough. the third one is care more, do the right thing. the last one is complexity, make it simple. francine: is there a piece of advice you would give your self to your 18-year-old self? mark: a few years ago to be fair. judgmentsy trust your
and learn more. i have always been impatient and perhaps i should have more patience. just enjoy it as you go along. i enjoy what i do, i love the industry, i love business, it is what i wake up thinking about, what i go to bed thinking about. francine: what don't you like? mark: i do not like arrogance and the confidence tied together. francine: quite a combination. mark: in crisis, i do not like consensus, crisis and consensus are two words that do not go together. andmuch in business politics we strive for consensus and that is not always the best outcome. francine: is there someone you admire, or that you look up to? specific individuals but organizations, i think business and religion and sports have a lot in common. it would not surprise you to know that i admire the all
the things they have together, they have icons, believe systems, values, and rituals. , the jerseys, rituals belief value setters that they can never lose. in religion and business, it has those three things. francine: it is a great analogy. where are you in five years? mark: we have not done the transform phase, we have so much work to do. i enjoyed this industry and i enjoy the impact we have on the uk and on some global economies. francine: do you love london? mark: i do and brexit does not change that, i like living here, to invest here, most people do not realize that the culture of new zealand and london are similar. francine: is it? mark: most people think kiwis cannot fly but they can in business arts and sport. the cultures are remarkably
>> with all due respect donald trump, we are getting the impression you are a one trick pony. >> here is jeb bush, donald trump is not a true conservative. charles krauthammer, donald trump is not at 50%. poor mitt romney, donald trump should not run. donald trump. glenn beck. donald trump. lindsey graham. donald trump's strategy does not work. donald trump wants to let give and go nuclear donald trump does not like nato. he will not do well here he does not know foreign policy.