Skip to main content

tv   Bloomberg Businessweek Debrief A Conversation With Jamie Dimon  Bloomberg  December 25, 2016 3:00pm-4:01pm EST

3:00 pm
megan: nearly a decade after the global financial crisis, j.p. morgan chase chairman and chief executive officer jamie dimon has emerged as one of the more -- most sought after voices on banking and the global economy. i sat down recently with dimon in detroit, michigan, to talk about the motor city's economic recovery, helped in part by j.p. morgan's $100 million investment in the city, to discuss whether strategies used here could be replicated elsewhere. jamie: without a mayor like this, i think it is a waste of time. megan: even though he will not be a member of president-elect trump's cabinet -- jamie: i don't think i am suited to be secretary of the treasury. megan: dimon gave his take on where president trump can affect -- effect real change. jamie: fixing corporate taxes, immigration, trade, all done properly, we will have faster growth in america, and we can fix those problems.
3:01 pm
megan: that's all coming up in this special "bloomberg businessweek debrief, a conversation with jamie dimon." let's talk a little bit about some recent news first. i am sure the audience is as interested as i am. there was a lot of speculation about you potentially going into the administration as treasury secretary. was that a job you were interested in? did you turn that job down? jamie: i have always been public about the fact i'm not suited to be secretary of the treasury. i love what i do. i'm not ready to do something else. i can add value to america doing what i am doing. megan: there we go. that is the answer. as recently as september, when you were talking about what you thought the next administration would be, and this was before we knew the outcome of the election, you said you thought it would be difficult for wall street guys to get confirmed and get in. now we look at the landscape we have. we have several wall street figures, some of who you know
3:02 pm
very well, including gary cohn from goldman sachs, rex tillerson, steven mnuchin, what do you think they will bring to the administration that is different? what is new in terms of experience? is this a good thing? jamie: i was dead wrong that you will not see a wall street person in washington anytime soon, but you had a complete -- -- complete upheaval. the republicans are in charge, and the republicans have not been antibusiness the way you've seen democrats largely the past few years. if you were going to be a president, you should have the best people sitting around the table. i think it is a mistake that working for an oil company makes you bad. you want the best team. i honestly think it is a good thing, because a lot of these people are qualified people who are patriots who want to help their country. they are not going to try to help their former company. that is not what they're going to do. these are people with deep knowledge who hopefully will do a great job. megan: when you look at that
3:03 pm
shift in terms of wall street, this is a reset moment for the industry more broadly in terms of what the american people are expecting or what they are likely to see? jamie: it is a reset moment. arehow businesses rae g -- going to be treated. 145 million people work in america, 125 million for private enterprise, 20 million work in government. we hold them in very high regard, firemen, sanitation, police, teachers. if you didn't have the 125, you couldn't pay the other 20. business is a huge positive element. for years, it's been beaten down as if they're terrible peopole -- people or something like that. i think it is a good reset. detroit is a perfect example of civic society, not for profits, government, business working together to improve the lives of american citizens. so the reset has the chance to do the same thing. if you can duplicate what you are doing in detroit around the
3:04 pm
country, you will have a huge renaissance. megan: let's talk about that. you travel around the country and world. what we are seeing in terms of economic populism, when you look at this, what is your diagnosis from your travels and your experience about what is going on and what is driving this explosion we have seen, this economic angst that people feel, their dislocation from society, what do you diagnose it as? jamie: a lot of people have tried to diagnose why it happen, -- what happened, the populism and all that. if you dig into the numbers, it wasn't anti-immigration per se. it was fear that america was changing too much, but it wasn't anti-immigrant. most of us are the children, grandchildren, greatgrandchildren of immigrants. it wasn't even anti-trade, but i think at the core of the matter it was a frustration and an anger because of two things. middle-class incomes have not grown for 15 years. you look at the facts, they are just dead wrong. people don't analyze them, how things happen, but this happens
3:05 pm
to be true. the second one is that low-skilled, think unskilled are growing over time. unskilled are having a hard time having a living wage. i think that those two things are true, but you need to diagnose why it happened. it did not happen because business is bad. there are millions of reasons to come up with, technology, etc. there are solutions. there are solutions around training, work skills, expanding the earned income tax credit so $9 an're making $8 or hour, the government will pay $4, think of it as a negative income tax. even if you are single right now, we do it for mothers and babies, but not single men. it gives you a job, a living wage. it helps small businesses. it is not necessarily good for big business. it is a wonderful thing to do for society. there are solutions. i think fixing corporate taxes, immigration, trade, all done properly, we will have faster
3:06 pm
growth in america and help -- and we can fix those problems. they think that by beating up on business, that will make it better, which it is not. megan: you have announced you are taking on two roles. you will be chairman of the business roundtable and on a group advising the president-elect on business policy. when you look at those two roles, which are separate, what are the issues you think he will need to tackle first and what do you hope to advise him on? what do you hope to stear him towards? jamie: anyone who is president, i'm a patriot. i have always offered my help. i did to president obama. i will to president trump. i'm in a group of 15 people that has not met yet, think of ceos and a bunch of other folks, and he wants it to be about jobs and growing the economy. so, it'll be specifically about
3:07 pm
that. hopefully we have good ideas, not just a lot of people yapping. the business roundtable, america, we have the chamber of congress, who advocates on behalf of business large and small with 25,000 members. this is 192 companies, principally representing large companies. take the fortune 500, the s&p 500, half of all capital expenditure is in the united states, and a tremendous amount of growth. i personally think they are fabulous citizens of this country. they are philanthropic. everybody gets medical benefits. we take care of our veterans. we do education. we do schools. we want the country to grow. i think the business roundtable can take a proactive approach to help solve the nation's problems and to be part of the solution. that's why i took on that challenge. but if you're talking very specifically, we need corporate tax reform. we are driving capital overseas every single day. the government made a mistake to act like inversion was the problem. the problem is our tax rate is
3:08 pm
so much higher than the rest of the world, and the rest of the world has been coming down and ours has stayed level. companies are leaving it overseas to reinvest it overseas and buy companies overseas. some of that's permanent. the only question is how much damage will be done before we change it? every study shows that reducing the corporate tax rate helps lower-paid people and wages. to me, we should solve the problem, and i hope the new administration can do that. megan: just ahead, dimon sounds off on populism world wide. jamie: they want a wrecking ball brought to these governments. they want change. megan: and what he expects to see on american immigration policy. jamie: we are not going to kick 11 million people out. ♪
3:09 pm
3:10 pm
megan: you also talked quite vocally about education,
3:11 pm
immigration, and infrastructure, and the parts that those will play and how much you will spearhead those initiatives? jamie: education -- one of the greatest disgraces in this country is the fact that in a lot of these schools that 50% of these kids don't graduate in high school. even those kids who graduate are not necessarily job ready. i look at that and say that is a crime. that is a disgrace. that is america at its absolute worst. we are allowing it to happen. these kids don't have opportunity, and they don't have the opportunity we all had at one point in life, and we have to fix it. what you hear the government say -- talk about make this free. it's not whether it's free, but whether you are properly trained for a job. if you go to germany, for example, 2/3 of the kids go to vocational schools that work with local businses anthey get a certificate that leads to a job. even in new york cit there is a school called aviation high school. i think it graduates 1000 or
3:12 pm
500 kids a year. kids travel from all over the city are trained in how to maintain small aircraft, electronics, hydraulics, and electrical systems. when they graduate, $60,000 a year, everybody gets a job. you can do that in robotics, coding, accounting, a lot of health care fields. there's another 20 i can't even remember to list. that is what we should be doing. it doesn't mean you cannot go to college. it just means you get an education that leads to a job. it has to be done with local business, not a government program. if it works, local businesses will pay for that. i have been at focus hope, that is something we can do that can create jobs for people, and that has a huge amount of social benefit as well. infrastructure, you mentioned it, and immigration, there is a great bill passed by the senate called the schumer-mccain bill, proper border controls, allow educated individuals who went -- who mostly went to american, got advanced degrees in science,
3:13 pm
technology, math here, to stay. i think we should let them stay and let them build their careers and homes. 40% of the companies in silicon valley are from immigrants, russian, indian, german, and then have some kind of path to citizenship. it is very tough. it takes like 15 years if you are a good law-abiding taxpayer here, but not a documented immigrant, then you have a path to become a citizen behind everybody else, and look, you are not going to kick 11 million people out. i think it is the rational, reasonable, and responsible thing to do. i understand why people want border conol first, and we should do that too. all these things could be done, they just haven't been done, and it is a shame. megan: when you talk about immigration, and you said we will not kick 11 million people out, some of the rhetoric has talked about these types of things. is j.p. morgan -- are you and
3:14 pm
other businesses in the roundtable going to be the voice that says we need a much more pragmatic solution, we need a way to keep the people, particularly for the jobs we need, and frame this as an economic argument, and argument, -- growth argument and jobs argument? jamie: the rhetoric was terrible. i tell people that if you are black, jewish, lgbt, african-american, woman, we will support you in the kind of diversity the way we did before. the rhetoric seems to have gone away, even the rhetoric about immigration. president-elect trump is sounding a lot different than candidate trump, saying if you break the law, we will deport you. they estimated that only 800,000 of the 11 million undocumented broke the law. that is the current policy of the united states. president obama deported 2.8 million people for breaking the law. but absolutely, the business roundtable has already supported immigration for that very reason. it is a pro-jobs and also
3:15 pm
respectful. the fact is that most people who get worried about immigration, it is not that they don't like immigrants. they are more afraid that the american way of life is changing. you could be multicultural, but still support the american way of life. remember abe lincoln, "we are here to rededicate ourselves to this nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the notion that all men are created equal." this is the only nation on the planet that was an idea, a vision, a value. it was not a tribe. a lot of people want to make sure that does not change, and some people are confusing multicultural with somehow we will change, that we won't tolerate different religions, won't tolerate different opinions, free press. you could support that and be multicultural.
3:16 pm
megan: when you travel in sort of europe, where this is also a deep phenomenon, we see it in italy and in germany. we see it in france. we see it in the u.k. to be sure with brexit. do you think this is a temporary phenomenon in terms of how people are feeling? do you think it's a generational phenomenon? do you think it will weed itself out or you think this is a permanent movement of people more focused on redrawing national borders, national identity, regrouping around that in what has in a decade of -- has been a decade of constant disruption across so many stabilizing forces in their lives? jamie: when you look at something like brexit, there were completely different forces for brexit, anti-immigration, open and free trade, all these people voted for different reasons. i think if you go to europe, there is the same frustration on income inequality, growth in wages, lost jobs. if you go to parts of europe, 25%, not the u.k. or germany,
3:17 pm
but 25% of people between 21-35 are not working. is that a sustainable thing if you have another generation of that? i think there is a legitimate frustration. why is that and how did it happen? a lot of it is government policies. a lot of you saw in america and overseas, i want change. they want a wrecking ball brought to these governments. they want change. they were not necessarily voting for what people said. they want something different from what they have seen. a lot of us are sympathetic with that. we want to see something different. we want things to be better. ultimately, you have to have facts, analysis, and real detail to make at happen. populism itself can be very destructive. venezuela, argentina going the other way. the other thing about europe, keep in mind, we talk about all this disruption, europe since world war ii has had peace. they did not have peace for 2000 years before that. so, there are benefits that
3:18 pm
people are reaping. maybe they forget about it, but it is important to have peace in europe. megan: when we come back, a look at detroit's turnaround. jamie: so this has been a train wreck that we all knew was coming for about 20 years. megan: and how the lessons of the motor city can benefit others. ♪
3:19 pm
3:20 pm
megan: we have talked a lot about how getting things done and government policy isn't structured to get things done. let's look at detroit with a $100 million investment over 2 1/2 years. when you talk about this, when the mayor talks about it, it is a lot about nonpartisanship. that is what echoes through. people coming together, that it not be driven by policy differences between people.
3:21 pm
how is that working? how does it work here? was it just that it was in this situation where it could work? do you see that able to be replicated on a national level? jamie: the detroit started when i went to see lee saunders, who was saying bad things about j.p. morgan. i walk in the room and say, what are you saying? he said, i don't know. i don't know why we were saying it. i think you guys are a great company. we hit it off and he started telling me about the problems in detroit. it is the people in this room who did all the heavy lifting. we knew a little bit about the mayor. we had a mayor, door-to-door, a white man in a mostly black community got elected, and he was talking about what you need in detroit. we need the streetlights on. we got them on. all 65,000. i first came here, and 30,000 didn't work. the first city was l.e.d. we need jobs. we need affordable housing. we need housing for commercial markets. we need training, skills. last night, we did a thing for
3:22 pm
the entrepreneurs of color fund. 30 businesses who were helped by this fund, and they are somewhere in this room, and they're doing training. i think one of them worked on your light project here. restaurants. this mayor had this huge set of problems. what's one thing you're going to focus on? he had to focus on all of them. it doesn't work to do one. he had to get hope back, bring businesses back, training, schools, police, sanitation. and with a smile, this man with a smile, set up all these things, the war room for the lights, the war room for the sanitation, constantly tracking it all, and it is working. and it was because of the mayor, and the governor too by the way, a republican and democrat, and i don't give a -- about democrats or republicans, ok, but what is going to work. we were all in. we did not just come here and throw money at it, which is easy
3:23 pm
to do. philanthropy can often be wasteful. the team came up and asked, what do you need? they needed for example to get rid of 70,000 blighted homes. they didn't even know where they were. someone came with this idea and we funded it, take a picture and geo-locate every home. now 10,000 blighted homes have been shut down. they can plan and start selling mes. so, we want to be an accelerant. we want to get things moving so you can build here and get people into it that helps the whole community. if you can start with entrepreneurs, that helps the whole community. we try to do everythin g-- everything -- to think more like venture capital that helps us get going, working with the governor, the mayor, all the civic unions, the non-for profits. there are a lot of things you do on the ground that we could not possibly do, but partnering with you, we also had our people come through, 68 people working
3:24 pm
on projects for 20 non-for -- not-for-profits. we gave them data, analytics, money, advice, consulting, all the things you need to get these things off the ground, so it has been a fabulous effort. honestly without a mayor like this, it would have been a total waste of time. megan: the mayor told me that the 65,000th light is going in tonight, so it is quite an achievement. why is doing something like this good business, a business issue, good business, why is this good business for j.p. morgan and detroit? jamie: it is not that we lack the morale. i would do it for moral reasons alone. we are the largest bank in detroit. we were the national bank for detroit started by general motors in 1934. most of the banks were closing in the depression, general motors needed a bank in detroit,
3:25 pm
then emerged with j.p. morgan chase, so here we are the largest bank in consumers, small business, middle market, all major institutions, hospitals, major companies here, and the government, so it is an important town for us. it's probably one of the only towns in america that did not have a renaissance in the 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, so this has been a train wreck that we knew was coming for 20 years. it shows you the worst part of bad public policy. you can throw money at it, and unfortunately it took a train wreck to happen to bring in the mayor with the skills to get this done. we can help the city, and it helps our business. it could be a shining example of the right way to do things in society, and for us, it was a little bit like if we can do this here, remember, we bank here. we need a healthy, vibrant bank.
3:26 pm
this is an extraordinary effort. we can do it elsewhere too and help these communities, and it is good for business. megan: in terms of when you look at doing projects in detroit, and building this out, the projects have been designed to be jobs and center around economic opportunity, expanding that, revitalization where people can walk to work or they have easier access, starts with families, homes, jobs, is that replicateable on a larger scale? even just the lessons you are taking out of detroit? jamie: if you travel around the world and see all these things, singapore does it. it is a country. when it was formed, it was part of malaysia, but when it was formed, it was partially chinese, malay, partially indian, and the prime minister came in with the vision and strength to get it done. it's gdp is now higher than the gdp of the average american.
3:27 pm
the prime minister made them all learn english. he made sure the streets were clean. they have a lot of affordable housing. but he made sure that you couldn't live, like there wasn't an indian building, chinese building, not just by building, by floor, by apartments, he wanted them to know each other's kids, smell each other's food. i tell people, you put some of my liberal democratic friends in charge of singapore, it would still be a backwater. you can't force people to live where they don't want to live. you can't punish people for spitting on the streets. you can't make people learn english. that is what would happen. you have to make people think about what works and what does not work. same thing for other countries. i just mentioned germany's vocational schools, germany is doing well in europe when most countries aren't. you learn these things when you go around the world, what works and what doesn't. there've been books written about it. venezuela, ecuador, argentina, cuba, north korea, what did they
3:28 pm
do? largely populism. the ones that worked. south korea, no natural resources, unbelievable story. singapore, no natural resources, unbelievable story. i can go on and on about what works and what does not. i worry about bad public policies causing constant damage out there. in america, you keep hearing that productivity is low, it is secular stagnation, it is a new normal, it is just not true. we have had multiple wars. we are not educating our kids. we have government shutdowns, badly spent money, failures in the health system, an extreme amount of regulation, that is why we are going slow. it is not the economic model. people are looking for simple answers, and sometimes there aren't. so all these things are fixable. megan: up next -- jamie: business has to have a seat at the table. megan: dimon's thoughts on the role business can play in the
3:29 pm
push for change. ♪ .megan: in a new administration . . . .
3:30 pm
3:31 pm
megan: in a new administration with a cast of characters that is very different to what we have seen in past administrations, is it possible, you believe it is actually possible to unite given this extreme division and particularly on issues like infrastructure that we have tried to get in this country for two decades now on tax reform, talking about regulation as well, do you think you will be able to lead and business will take a bigger role in saying this needs to get done? jamie: business has to have a seat at the table. infrastructure will not be built properly without business having a seat at the table. schooling is not going to happen if businesses don't work with schools about what kind of jobs they really need. so yes, business can be a huge positive in the development of an infrastructure plan.
3:32 pm
what happens in infrastructure, to oversimplify, the democrats, spend money, just spend money, and we do a lot of that. even larry summers wrote about this bridge in cambridge, a little bridge, five years being rebuilt. it is corruption, folks. don't tell me it is not corruption. people are buying up their local mayors, friends, unions. so the democrats are right. we need infrastructure. we don't need it to create jobs. you remember that old milton friedman story? milton friedman was in asia somewhere and they are building a highway and they have big machines and they are all using shovels. he says why are using shovels? he says, mr. freeman, that's a great question, jobs. he said, in that case, why don't you use spoons? [laughter] jamie: that is the democratic mentality. it will create jobs, but if it is a bridge to nowhere, you are wasting your money.
3:33 pm
if it is a bridge to somewhere, not only do you create jobs in the short run, it is conducive to growth in the long run. the republicans are right to question how the money is spent. if they are going to do it, they will want to say, who is doing it, how will it be done, is the money properly spent? this mayor knows how to do it. we don't want washington telling the mayor what he needs. he knows what street lights he needs. there are things to be done, and i think business can bridge that. megan: going back to that milton friedman story, do you think we have done a good enough job explaining to people that part of the fundamental disruption that they are going through and has disrupted your own industry is this move to automation, that some of those jobs, many of those jobs, including detroit and places where we saw a heavy swing in this election, western pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, wisconsin, that those jobs are
3:34 pm
gone and they are likely not coming back, and training people for the kind of jobs, upper skill jobs, next-generation jobs, equipping our next generation, are we doing a good enough job explaining that to people and equipping them to succeed? jamie: we are educating people the wrong way. technology is the greatest thing that happened in mankind. we would still be hunting buffalo and living in tents. agriculture allowed specialization. specialization created a knowledge, knowledge built on top of each other building institutions, and we went from fire to the wheel to steam engines to wonderful phones in our pockets. this is the reason that mankind is living the way it lives today. i'm not going to deny the problems we ha, but we would not be living the way we are today. when my grandfather was born, there were no cars, no planes, no health care.
3:35 pm
you got sick, you died. ok? so now it is 120 years later and it is pretty good over the time, and mankind has gotten better and better. there is a book called the better angels of our nature and it analyzed things like people who were murdered at the hands of other people, and that number has been coming down every single century for the last 20 centuries, including last century, which included world war i and world war ii. i believe this century so far is better than last century, despite what you read in the paper, so mankind is slowly learning how to get better. technology drives it. yes, it is scary. it changes things. it is disruptive. we have done a bad job helping the disrupted. what we need to do is not hold back technology, let's use it to improve mankind. people are worried about autonomous driving. 40,000 people a year die in cars. 40,000 people. when we have autonomous driving, it will probably be 5000 people.
3:36 pm
it will be a good thing, not a bad thing. warren buffett talks about 11 million people working on farms 40 years ago or 50 years ago, and now it is a million. that is a good thing. society moves on. you want people to go back picking corn? is that going to make society better? not real. mankind has gone from seven days a week, six days a week, and five days a week, and i suspect that we are down to four as we speak. we will adjust if we need to adjust. if you and i are running the government and all of a sudden you are going to have 10,000 jobs lost, we would do something, slow down, retrain. this is not about youth. it is about good paying jobs. how do you deal with that? if a trucker loses a job, he doesn't want to go back to earning $7 an hour. he has a family and wants to live with dignity. there you can redevelop, train, and do things to ease that issue
3:37 pm
and make jobs available and stuff like that. i think it is doable. i wouldn't stop it. maybe you might slow it down or modify how it will function if it is causing too much disruption in society. megan: this is why, and i'm glad you brought up trade, people who feel that global trade has hollowed out their community, their manufacturing, their industry in the part of the world where they grew up. it is difficult to explain that globalization generally lifts the boats higher, but may not have lifted your boat. those jobs have gone to more cost-efficient factories in mexico, places where labor is cheaper and making of the product done just as well. that is a message that we see came flying back in this election cycle, everywhere across the world, and people are saying that resisting globalization, that is a trend that if it deepens will ad for business and your business? jamie: there are issues where globalization was unfair. i won't go through, you could say steel or something like
3:38 pm
that. there are issues where we did not deal with disruption properly. hugely beneficial to mankind. hugely beneficial to the united states. you are correct. if it helps 98 people, maybe two people are hurt. but we all get cheaper sneakers, but now someone lost their job. now most manufacturing jobs, everyone estimates automation has generally been a good thing. some of these were very tough jobs. mankind adjusts. i would be in favor of having proper trade, fair trade, that is a legitimate issue to be fair, that helps american net-net-net, but where it is negative, in the tpp, there was a thing called trade adjustment assistance where people can say this hurt my community or my business and they get relocation, redevelopment, retraining, assistance, all those things. the republicans always worry about that.
3:39 pm
the concept is very good. we just need to find a way to broaden it out so people say, fine, i understand society will take care of me too because i am a net loser from this thing. megan: coming up, dimon's take on minimum wage. jamie: raise it. share the wealth, ok? ♪
3:40 pm
3:41 pm
megan: let's talk about regulation, which you have mentioned as one of the policy issues. when i talk to people on the street and regulation in the financial sector in particular and we see the rolling back of certain parts, dodd-frank, other elements brought in since the crisis, and there is concern it will go back to a less regulated, and less regulated means more risky, and that there will be no way to control the more esoteric corners of the world and that risk will migrate there.
3:42 pm
i know you think they have gone too far in certain respects. how do you see that playing out over the next four years? jamie: it is a legitimate thing for people to say that. the morgan did not cause crisis. j.p. morgan did not jeopardize the system. we have three times more capital than we had back then. how much do think we lost in the nine quarters after the lehman crisis? people guess $5 million, $10 million. we made $20 billion. we were not jeopardizing anyone. we helped. we bought wamu. we saved 30,000 jobs, and in doing so, helped governments, cities, schools. i understand the concept. the american public saw a disaster. it wasn't their fault. it was generally wall street and washington. they absolutely have the right to say that we want a safe and sound banking system that does cost me money and does not take down my economy. those are true. mean all these rules
3:43 pm
and regulations are good. they are unrelated. the american public has been told that. what ever the banks want, don't do it. strengthen dodd-frank, that is not accurate. a lot of these things in dodd-frank had nothing to do with the crisis, zero, just the pet peeves of certain democrats who put things in because they felt like it. someone said once if it had the name of a senator on it, that was the bad part. barney frank and i agreed that some of the thing should have been in there. any time you have done major legislation and major regulation, and they are different by the way, it is perfectly reasonable for people to look back, re-analyze, recalibrate, think it through, talk it through, talk about what good it did, what damage it did. folks, we have not solved the housing market with mortgages. because we have not solved that issue among seven agencies, banks and others are afraid to make mortgages to first time buyers, self-employed, and people with a prior bankruptcy.
3:44 pm
people have a prior bankruptcy, 80% of the time it is legitimate. there is nothing wrong with them. it was usually due to death, divorce, disease, loss of job, not in one case was it a bad person. they deserve a second chance. we have not fixed that. i would look at some of the the rules and regulation reducing credit available in the system, but do not create more safety. i don't want to bore you with the details of that. dodd-frank is not the bible. to me, even chuck schumer said to me, when we look at it, recalibrate it, reduce the negative parts, while still accomplishing the ultimate goal, so it's perfectly reasonable to look at these things and think about what you can do better. as opposed to the knee-jerk reaction. megan: do you think the days where the industry essentially has a scarlet letter on its back from the crisis are over or at least fading? bade: the industry got a scarlet letter. the second tarp happened, and
3:45 pm
that was a scarlet letter. not every bank needed it, but the rhetoric was the banks were all bailed out. they were not all bailed out. that part was not true. no one ever asked that question, but that became a scarlet letter, and i don't think that will go away anytime soon. i think you have to earn your stripes every single day with every single client in every single city around the world, and that is my job. i am very proud of j.p. morgan chase. i am a proud of what we have accomplished. we help society. when we do make mistakes, we admit it and try to fix them. megan: as we approach the end of the president's eight years and -- in office and look at what he has accomplished and his relationship with business. you have had an up-and-down relationship with the administration. if you are being candid, what grade letter would you give him on what he has done for business? jimmy: i am not going to do that. [laughter] jamie: i wish they had spent more time having conversations about what works and what
3:46 pm
doesn't work, and working with business, and not acting like business was the opposite. democrats often, i'm going to take care of you, you, you. i'm going to give you free education, and it is almost like the person they're going to take care of you from is us. i just think it is wrong. i think that whole attitude is misguided. sounds good, but misguided. i listen to bernie sanders speak sometimes. he wants insurance for everybody, pension benefits for everybody, good paying jobs for everybody, education for everybody. the minimum wage is $15 for a teller. we train them. we put $200 million into them. we pay people well. everybody who works in jp chase gets medical insurance. so that person making $15 an hour makes $33,000 per year and get insurance worth $10,000, and a pension and a 401(k) match. we do all those things.
3:47 pm
we train our people. we take care of our people. we take care of our communities. we are doing exactly what you want a good company to do. sometimes bernie and i are together on that. [laughter] megan: i'm sure bernie will love that when he sees this. let's talk about minimum wage. jamie: here in the american press, no one asked bernie sanders or a supporter, what is socialism? and how is it done elsewhere? there are two answers. it is never done well elsewhere. it has been a disaster. and socialism is when the state owns all private enterprise. that is what it is. you think someone would ask, do you think people would have voted for that? megan: next time i see him. but talking about minimum wage, that has been one of your big pushes. you believe it is vital to growth as well.
3:48 pm
you have moved up at j.p. morgan. we now have a nominee for labor secretary who has been one of the most open advocates against raising the minimum wage and has been firm about that. jamie: i don't think so. what i read, what he said is that the government should be careful about raising its minimum wage too high. it should be a decision made at the local level. a lot of businesses, california and new york can afford $15, but upstate new york probably can't. i think he was saying he's not against the state raising it thoughtfully. i am in favor of that. i would not be in favor of the federal government doing it and imposing hardships. i save you can afford it, raise it. share the wealth a little bit. we are more worried about the pay of our lower paid people down our higher paid people. the other thing is to help with tax credit. my example is, that will help
3:49 pm
small business. so if you are a small business and need wages at $10 an hour to get by, then this will help you. you can attract better people. they will be paid more. you have less attrition. it could afford more benefits over time. there are solutions to this. up raising is a tiny piece of it. i want to make the place better and i will give it everything i have got as long as i am here. megan: a peek into the future as jamie dimon talks about his legacy and j.p. morgan chase. that is up next. ♪
3:50 pm
3:51 pm
megan: when you look at the world as it is shaping up right now and when you look at this administration, what are the things that concern you and the possible black swan events that could be truly disruptive? jamie: if you look at the geopolitical trends, and we made at a list of all the big one since world war ii, korea,
3:52 pm
vietnam, afghanistan, iran, iraq, china had a border skirmish with russia, india, pakistan, vietnam, i am missing a bunch, only one derailed the global economy. the others had an effect. vietnam had a huge effect, but only one, and it was the 1973 middle east crisis derailed the economy. geopolitics is always noisy, but with little effect. from normal friction, it is it better or worse? it's probably worse. we have a lot of wars in the middle east. uncertainty around the nuclear risk, iran, russia, north korea. north korea has a bomb and will soon be able to deliver it to california. that is not my assessment. that is the assessment of top people in the government, two years or so. that is a serious issue for the world, but i worry obviously about that, and peace in the
3:53 pm
middle east. but in reality, what i worry about the most is bad policy, us doing things that makes it worse, government shutdowns, not fixing the school system. if you want populism and want to get worse, don't fix the school system, grow the economy slower. that will be worse for the world than anything else, and the world needs a strong america. i remind people, our military might, and if you have served in the military, god bless you for doing it. it is unbelievable. it is directly related to our economic might, so we better be careful about the vibrancy of the economy and make sure we have that. that is the solution to a lot of these geopolitical issues too. megan: if the world needs a strong america, does the world need an america closer to russia? jamie: geopolitics is different than friendship. when you say that, it's like we will go hug russia. there are serious issues with russia. they should be dealt with seriously. i think they are kind of resolvable. i don't know that.
3:54 pm
i'm not an expert in that. we obviously do business there, but i would put that on the list of things that should be done. my own view, we should have a very strong relationship with nato. nato has been dramatically weakened all these years, dramatically. and american troops should be side-by-side in the middle east and if anything takes place in europe to defend europe side-by-side with the british, french, german, italian troops, not just american boys out there. ok? by the way, that is exactly what donald trump is talking about if you listen to him. that group, the transatlantic group, should offset putin. all that means is that he can't go anywhere that is in the eu, -- in the e.u. and my own view and i've listened to henry kissinger, you can have a negotiated settlement of ukraine, and it is probably doable at one point. after that, i don't think putin wants to pick a fight. i think he want's to get rid of the sanctions, become important in the world, and be an excepted
3:55 pm
accepted -- accepted leader around the world, so we will see what happens with russia, but i think it is a serious issue now. megan: there has been a lot of reshuffling in the banking industry even in recent weeks. you are not going to be the treasury secretary now. when you think of your own legacy in looking forward, with detroit very much part of it as well, what is it that you want to be remembered for? what is it you want to have achieved? jamie: when i was a young ceo, the former ceo of the company came to me and said leave your legacy, do one big thing. i said, what you're talking about? he said build international, whatever, and i think if a ceo talks about one thing, sell the stock, all right? we have to do it all right. deflect the mayor is doing. the mayor is i have to do it right in every country. i have got to get the whole mosaic right or i fail. the one thing i want them to say
3:56 pm
is, "we are going to miss that son of a --." hopefully the world is better off for him and he made the world a better place. that's it. i'm not looking for any thing else. i am so proud of my company. i want you to know that. i am proud of our people and what we do every day. it has unbelievable capabilities. i want to make sure this is still one of the best banks in the world in 20 years, so i am proud to be part of the place. megan: is there going to be a second act when you leave? any hints? jamie: one of my great friends and partners said to me one day, you can do one last thing. i said, like what? i said, are you kidding me? i live and breath j.p. morgan chase. i wear this jersey. i tell this to the board. you say, don't tell the board that, but i really mean it. it makes no difference to me. i want to make this place better and will give it everything i have got while i am here.
3:57 pm
when i'm no longer here or if i cannot give it what i have got, then i should move on. i can help do stuff but i should not be the ceo. if you're going to be the quarterback or head coach, you have to give it your all. there is nothing else you can do. and so when i leave here, no, i will probably teach a little i may write a book. i have a lot to share. [laughter] jamie: get involved in business. i have been on boards. i'm not on any boards for a public company board that i like, the people, the product. i'm lazy, so i probably will go to new york city. i will have a gas. i will do a lot of stuff. i will not run another major big country. megan: one last question then, if donald trump did call you up in a year or two years and we did see the economy teetering a bit and felt like things were slipping back into recession, would you take that call? jamie: i would never not take a call from the president of the united states. i would consider what he has to say. again, i don't think i am suited for it.
3:58 pm
if you convince me i am the only one that can do something like that, i would consider it a patriotic duty. i doubt that will be the case. megan: but you are open to it? jamie: i would take the call. again, i don't think it would happen. ♪
3:59 pm
4:00 pm
carol: welcome. in this special issue, poland offers donald trump a blueprint for how not to drain the so-called swamp. let's and why it is always funny for goldman sachs, especially in the donald trump era. carol: and wikipedia wants to become the gold standard for diversity in the workplace. >> all of that is ahead for "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ carol: we are here with the editor-in-chief megan murphy.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on