>> from our studios in new york

city, this is "charlie rose." >> george osborne is here. he has britain's chancellor of the exchequer. he and david cameron are the architects of britain's austerity policies. austerity received much criticism at the drive-in economic recovery and growth. recently the economy has started to grow. osborne says that his policies are the reason why. i am pleased to have him back at this table. looking at how fast the economy in britain is growing, more than any other g-7 country, why is that true? take as much credit as you want to. >> i'm not going to take credit myself. there was a lot of hard work by the british people. >> what are the ideas in play? >> you must live within your means as they country. we have a solid economic plan that has been reducing the deficit. you also have to repay your banking system. so that i can lend and support the economy. we have made difficult changes to our banking system, but that has been worked through.

finally, you must have an environment where people feel comfortable investing. britain is making itself super competitive in the world. the big pool of investment, which was the problem in the eurozone, is logistics. those things are coming together. >> so when you come here, you meet people you know, like mayor bloomberg? you also talk to leaders on wall street. what questions are they asking? what is their concern about the british economy? >> at the moment, they are all optimistic. we are attracting an awful lot of investment around the world. we have a very open economy and we're are getting investment from china as well as the united. the question everyone wants to know is with financial regulation, we reach a point where you can say "done"?

what are you going to do about the fact that regulation can get tied up? i think it is incumbent on policy makers on both sides of the atlantic to work through these overlaps another lapse. we must have a global financial system. we need more of a global approach to regulating. >> are you saying that the regulations that are in effect are discussed, whether it has to do with are they more because of differences in circumstances in europe versus the united states? or is there a different philosophy of regulation? >> we're all trying to solve the same problem. we want to have big financial services, but we do not want to bring down the economy when they fail. particularly if you are in a

country like the united kingdom. we have a similar size eating system to the u.s., but a much better economy. it is not just a slogan, it is a central part of economic stability and management. we have taken a slightly different approach. we separate our retail banks from our investment banks. you basically have to within a bank group separate out the retail bank and have a different governance structure with different capital attached to it. the reason being, when someone doing my job faces that impossible choice on a saturday night as my predecessor did and various u.s. treasury secretary state, do you let the big banks fail? you want to give the person doing my job some options. you want to be evil to bail in the creditors, not bail them out with taxpayer money. this is all about repairing what went wrong. it is not something you can do

overnight. these repairs take several years. we're getting there as part of a platform of economic stability and progress. >> do you think dodd frank was right? >> i have a huge respect for paul volcker. that is the approach that he has recommended in the u.s. and the political system has pursued it. we have pursued a different approach, but it is all about the same thing, managing financial risk of the eye wants london to be the preeminent global center, but i want to make sure that we have the benefits of that, but we are not pulled down by it if it goes wrong. >> is that possible? x i think it is. london is great on finance and asset management. we are trying to make ourselves a big center for other markets in the west. it is also about banking.

with those big banks, you have to have in place systems to protect taxpayers. >> some of the criticism that has come out -- if you continue on the current path, national income will reach its lowest level since the 1940's. >> government is getting smaller and needed to get smaller. i am not apologetic about it. i am a conservative and i believe in government doing what it is good at and keeping out of things it is not that. we are reducing the size of government, and whether it reaches the size it was in 1948 that particular measure is about the size of the public services. i would like to great education in britain and i would like to invest in infrastructure. you have to tackle entitlements. if you're not prepared to tackle entitlements, you cut back on discretionary programs, many of

which can support your long-term economic future. that's when you attack entitlements, what do you do? >> you have to get the incentives right so that it pays you when you get things right. we have these high tax rates in the u.s. and the uk. we have these raises and people of low incomes can find themselves facing 100% tax rate in effect for the extra hour they work. if that was a tax rate imposed on wealthy people, there would be an uproar. but it is a silent part of our welfare system. i would say that reform needs to be based around the principles that it pays to work. you need to have a welfare system that is fair to those who pay for as well as those who use it. >> the institute for fiscal

studies says that the deficit reduction is coming partially from spending cuts. >> the numbers move around a little bit. ultimately, the problem in britain and some other countries, but the problem in britain is not that we do not tax enough, our problem is that we spend too much. that is the root of the problem. i have not said, no tax increases as part of this consolidation. that is why i increase the vat rate, the sales tax in the uk. going forward, it can now be done through spending reduction. our plans do not see tax increases. in the end, britain like the states, we are in a global race. there are some very competitive places out there. you do not make yourself competitive by increasing taxes. >> you do not become competitive

if you're failing to meet standards of education, infrastructure, research and development, all of those things which make an economy competitive around the world. that is what you have to be. >> i agree with you 100%. that is where you want to be focusing government resources that you have. your school system, higher education. those are the things i am protecting. i protected the british science budget. there are not those many on the doorsteps with the science budget, but it is incredibly important to protect. i would make the same argument here. what are these advanced western economies going to be good at in the future? they have to be good at innovation, knowledge -- we have to open the world of scientific endeavor. a british scientist won the nobel prize in physics this

month. that is how we are going to earn our way in the world. we must have the infrastructure to do that. something else that is missing in the west is that we need to have the ambition. we need to believe that we can do this. >> do you think we have developed a type of complacency? >> i would say it is defeatism. people look at these incredible asian economies and they say, we cannot keep up. i reject that. i think that we have to safeguard ourselves. we have to be political and we have to have the freedom and the innovation and creativity. look at this incredible city new york. look at what has been created in the past -- we have to have more self-confidence. >> when you say the west, do you mean the united states? >> i think it is the united states, britain, western europe. some countries are not going to keep up in this global race.

some of these western democracies are not going to be able to make the difficult decisions that are needed to make sure government lives within its means. >> there's also the argument about the debt and when the national debt become so detrimental to the economy, when is it manageable? when should the emphasis be on growth more hardly than that? one person who articulates that if larry summers. he said that financial debt is only one type of debt. a deficit in education is a greater impediment to growth. with interest rates so low, there is no better time to borrow and invest. he said that we must create growth. you do not want to take your focus off of the growth. it may come in stimulus from the

government or in other ways. >> i have a huge amount of respect for larry summers, but i would agree with him that we should -- you cannot get rich as a nation by writing checks to yourself. >> you cannot stimulate an economy, can you not? >> they advocate fiscal stimulus in difficult times because the country needs it. then they advocate fiscal stimulus in better times because the country can afford it. they are always for more borrowing and more spending. i do not think this is the problem in the west. our problem is that we need more business investment and leaned to export things that the rest of the world wants to buy. these are our challenges. we need to grow our private sector. i want government to provide education, i want it welfare system that works. i want a great infrastructure,

whether it is broadband, roads, or high-speed railways. i am not someone who says that government should get out of the way. let government do what it is get out. government should not get to a point where it cost so much any debt of the country is growing so high that we have created real economic instability. we do not know when the next shutdown could come. what i do know is that the end of this financial crisis has left western countries at very high debt levels. they are unable to absorb the shocks the way they could 5-6 years ago. i do not want to come here and give lectures to u.s.

policymakers. the american deficit is high and it will be coming down quite sharply. of course, you know better than me that the american political system has made some difficult decisions. there was the sequester and so on. there's probably a more rational approach, but the political system that had to face up to some tough choices i can the uk. >> "the economist" says that britain's recovery starts to show that this is a return to britain's old crisis mode. >> they are being pessimistic. mark carney makes the observation that this is income supported consumption. i am absolutely clear. we need to see the handover now from consumption to business invention -- we have to have that balance model of growth. >> this is politics. there is not a parliament in living memory where we have had a falling living standards like this.

>> i would not say there is a parliament in living memory where we had to recover from such a deep recession. in britain, our gdp shrunk by 7%. we had a bigger bank bailout even bigger than you had here in the states. we were very deeply affected by that. what is good about the british recovery now is that it is creating jobs. it is creating employment. job creation in the uk is running around 60,000 a month. it is a job rich recovery. >> it is more than we have. >> we have to support that. we are cutting taxes and making sure that those jobs are created. what would be a much bigger challenge and recovery would be to have rising unemployment. >> at the same time, as you suggest, the economy is growing, and you are suggesting that we ought to have a balanced budget by 2018. is that possible?

>> that is my ambition to get our budget in the balance. >> by 2018? >> our current forecast is that we can do it. i think it was originally a jfk expression. that homespun logic is that -- when do you repair your public finances? there are those who say borrow in the good years as well as in the bad years. when the good years return, you should be -- the uk will end up at the end of this whole crisis and recovery with a public debt that is too high. you have to start reducing it now. it is an uncomfortable truth. that is how you make sure that we are prepared for whatever comes next. >> when you look at the polls, are you surprised you are not doing better in the polls? you're behind by 8%.

>> there was a poll today that had is only two points behind. you have to do good economics. if you are chasing the opinion poll, i think that becomes self- defeating. any pollster would tell you that some opinions are not popular, but they are right. we wanted to cut welfare benefit, and we felt that it might be unpopular. you chart your course by doing what you think is the right thing and what will help your economy. we still have 18 months in charge. we are in what you would call the midterms. as the spotlight starts to shine >> when you look at the polls, are you surprised you are not doing better in the polls? you're behind by 8%. >> there was a poll today that had is only two points behind. you have to do good economics. if you are chasing the opinion poll, i think that becomes self- defeating.

any pollster would tell you that some opinions are not popular, but they are right. we wanted to cut welfare benefit, and we felt that it might be unpopular. you chart your course by doing what you think is the right thing and what will help your economy. we still have 18 months in charge. we are in what you would call the midterms. as the spotlight starts to shine on the people who got us into this mess, i think people will be convinced that we are the people to get us out. that's what about china? >> i was there last month and it is an incredible place. it seems bigger. i think there's a lot of interesting -- one of the things that i think we have to understand about china is that

it is no longer just a sweatshop churning out cheap toys. there is an incredible amount of sophistication in the chinese economy. i went to visit the second or third largest internet company in the world. no one in the u.s. or britain would have heard of it. it is such a big company. i think we have got to do business with china and we want chinese investments. we want british and american investments into china. china is connected with the global economic system. they're going to be national security issues. we know about that. but ultimately, the more we bring our economies together, the more it helps the security

issues that arise. china needs to be a big player in the future. it needs to be a positive player. we cannot ignore it. >> what do you fear about the global economy? do you fear a housing bubble that might develop? the banks recently allocated a $60 billion lending program away from housing. >> on housing, the challenge in britain, and obviously you have had your challenges with housing in the u.s. as well, it is a small country, geographically small, and our planning rules are very restrictive. we need to build more houses. we need to find a way to deal with rapid house raise inflation. we should not be saying to families, you cannot own your own home.

it might be for me, but it is not for you. that cap on this aspiration is not something i would ever support. we look at the debt bubbles and risks in a way that people are not doing. >> what about exports? >> exports are ultimately -- you have to make things that people will want to buy. britain -- >> germany figure that out. >> indeed. >> britain was tied to the european continent and the u.s.. we want to do more than trans atlantic. we should be exporting more to the chinas, indias, and brazil's of the world. >> why is that? is it because the market is not there? the government regulation and

the rise of the middle class and those emerging markets? >> we did not have the ambition that germany frankly had to get into these new markets. >> the ambition? >> britain is more of a service advancement market. as china, to take that as an example, matures, they will want pensions and insurance. they will want to fly on airplanes. these are the things that britain is good at producing. >> will china to focus more on that thing is well with the rise of the middle class? will they need a safety net? x think they will develop a more of a safety net. they are going to need more sophisticated financial services. things like a pension, that is

not a safety net. it is a form of providing for your future that does not involve just having a bunch of bills stuck under the mattress. the chinese middle class will want pensions. they will want more specific pharmaceuticals. who is good at that? british pharma. if you see china as a threat, and i am not naïve about the national security issues, if you just see them as a threat, you will miss the big opportunities. when speaking about national security, what happened to your support all -- for the president on syria? >> i was an advocate of taking action. >> were you stunned by that? >> i am in a leadership of the party and i spoke to a lot of members of my party -- first of

all, there were several deserters on the vote. then we saw a lot of fatigue about foreign intervention. the british military has been there alongside the americans in iraq and then for decades. people are skeptical. what is going on in syria is a tragedy for our age. i would like the west to be more engaged. i have to accept that this is not what the british public wants and it is not with the british parliament wants. >> there was some real doubt that if the president had gone to congress he could have gotten it passed. if he understood with the british prime minister

understood. these days, you have to take your policy to congress with you. there is a mystique with the american president. he said he was elected to get americans out of these wars, not into them. >> there has been some question about whether america's commitment has been there. >> we owe a huge debt to the united states on a global security run. we have to make sure that we are negotiating. we have to make sure that people like myself can believe that the west -- there should not be strategic shrinkage. we have to make an argument about our people first. it is in our interest that we shape the world. it is in our national self- interest, as well as being for the greater good of the world. whether it is trying to prevent

iran from developing a nuclear weapon, are bringing this civil war in syria to an end, whether it is a concern about what is going on in asia and east china, these are issues that concern our world. they should concern us. >> you think iran is prepared to negotiate on an agreement that will have them engaged in dismantling their nuclear facilities? >> i would say, let's see. let's find out. >> so the interim agreement is a good thing? >> yes. the british government is party to it like the american government. let's test this iranian government. we have a plan for it. it is a six-month program. they are expected to shrink the development of their nuclear

program and we will have limited sanctions relief. this could be easily withdrawn. what is the alternative? iran gets a bomb? no. we have just been talking about the fact that our public is skeptical and needs persuading. i think we should test this iranian government. i would begin with a healthy degree of skepticism about whether we can really land with this iranian government, a long- term thing. i mean healthy skepticism in this sense i am prepared to be convinced otherwise. i put it to the evidence and if they are serious about stopping and in some cases rolling back their program, let us take them up on it full >> thank you for coming.

it is great to have you here. i look forward to seeing you in london. >> thank you very much. ♪

>> jason furman is here. he is the chairman of the council of economic advisers.

the economy is starting to show some signs of improvement. in november, more than 200,000 jobs were created. 7% of employment is at its lowest in everly years. long-term unemployed continue to struggle. the central bank will weigh both the economy's bright spots and shortcomings to decide whether to scale back the bond buying program. i am pleased to have jason furman here. let's start off with the budget deal. ss it for me. >> i think this budget deal is an important step for the economy. it gives us more certainty in our fiscal position than we have had for a while. we should not have any shutdowns or the drama we have had.

that is important. the money is also important. we've managed to buy back 60% of the sequester on the nondefense side. we will be able to spend more money on research, education, everything that is important for long-run growth. we will not be contracting much in the short run, and that will help jobs. >> you think it is the beginning of a serious effort to deal with the crisis we have been having in terms of -- >> the president would have liked to have had business tax reform, more upfront investment in infrastructure. he would've liked it have had more medium and long-term deficit reduction. but we created an important precedent. when it comes to the most immediate thing, what was weighing down our economy, and

what was taking away from the funding we needed for areas like research and education, we set an important precedent. we can undo some of that in the next year or so and paid for it over the next 10 years. we can do that without hitting those third rail entitlement issues. >> we've heard from people in the community about sequestration. how serious was the impact of sequestration on the u.s. economy? >> it was serious. if you look at what the congressional budget office estimated, they said it took away 750,000 jobs this year. that is a big impact to the economy. we are creating jobs, and they are opening at an increasing rate in the last couple of months.

but we would love to get that rate of job creation. sequester was certainly moving us away from that. >> to you in the white house, in terms of continuing negotiations about budget and the debt ceiling and all of that, having your mind what is an appropriate reform of entitlement? that's absolutely. the president put out his idea. it is the same philosophy that he brought with the affordable care act. if you can figure out how to save money with healthcare, then you can save money for the federal government and also strengthen medicare. you can have savings that translate onto seniors. >> what is your economic plan over the next few years for entitlement reform? you are simply saying that you look at the budget and that is

where it is. >> it is important to understand that it is right there with the plan for taxes. these to travel together. we would like to see entitlement root form together. if you cannot do that, focus on the immediate things that the economy needs, which is creating jobs, addressing inequality, increasing mobility, and all of the issues that he has been talking about. >> what is the effect on the economy after prolonged high levels of unemployment? >> it is important to note that unemployment is coming down. if you look again in ointment rate a little more carefully, you see that the short-term unemployment rate is close to where was before the crisis. the whole reason that our unemployment rate remains higher than normal is the long-term unemployment. it is high and that is the thing

that is of the biggest concern to us. the good news there is that anything that helps our economy to create jobs is going to bring that long-term unemployment rate down. that is certainly one of the biggest challenges that we face. >> how do you measure people who have dropped out of the job market? and are not applying for jobs. there are a variety of ways to look at that. when you look at a broader measure of unemployment, it includes people who are working part-time and one a full-time job. those measures of unemployment have come down sharply. you see on across-the-board improvement. it has not improved as much as we would have liked. >> the current average hourly wages represent only eight 3% gain after inflation of where they stood back in 1979. what does that say? >> we have had several decades of two trends that have made

life harder for middle-class emily's. the first is the overall growth rate in the economy. it slowed after 1973. the second is income a quality. we start to see an increase starting in the late 1970s. what growth there was was less evenly distributed and not as much of it got to the middle. if you take all of that, you have some very serious challenges over several decades. we are making progress. if you look at the last 12 months, real wages are up 1 percentage point. we see nominal wages strengthening. >> you tell me that your mother watches this show and reported back to you what larry summers said to me. i asked him the same question, what happened to people who no longer have unemployment insurance? they have no job, they have a family -- >> congress can extend

unemployment insurance. we should prevent these after 1.3 million people from being put in that situation that you are describing. >> there's also obama care. what impact will that have on healthcare expenses? what impact will it have on the deficit? what impact will it have on people who have been dependent on the insurance that they have had? that's where the real untold stories in this economy is that the last three years, we have had the slowest growth in per capita health spending in the last 60 years. that is just an extraordinary transformation. it is helping our families with their wages. it is helping to make health insurance more affordable.

there are a lot of reasons that that is happening. one of them is definitely the affordable care act. that is the way in which it is affecting all americans. they may not understand it, and premiums are still rising, but not as quickly as before -- >> what happens if the debt if our economy grows the way it is now for the next 10 years? >> we are seeing that the debt will come down. as an economist, that is what i want to see. i want to see that our fiscal situation is sustainable and whether that debt is shrinking. the president has proposed several things to continue to bring that debt down. we have a physical situation over the next 5-10 years that has greatly improved and where was just a couple years ago.

it is what we have been able to do on revenues from high-income households and getting spending under control. what >> what do you want to do that you are not able to do? >> v up at night is extending unemployment benefits. it seems very common sense and congress passed the 12 times in the last few years. most of that was with strong bipartisan vote. it borders on a no-brainer and we should do it. >> we all know that we live in a global world, a global economy, that is interdependent. clearly what happens in 2008 affected what happened in china and all around the world. we got a lot of blame for that. how do you see the global economy over the next few years? >> there are signs that it is strengthening. the euro zone appears to be coming out of its recession. it appears to have made a lot of

progress in terms of its financial system. there is more strengthen its growth. >> you go back to washington today and the president says, it is the holiday season. come by for a drink. and he says, tell me, what shape is our economy in? what are the problems and what are the opportunities? >> i tell him that we would enter a really terrible time. we are healing. we are making progress well, but there is a lot more we need to do. i also tell them, and these are things he knows very well, that even once we get out of trouble that we had in this economy, we still have those trends that predate this financial crisis. there is a really deep increase in inequality and a slowdown in our growth rate. if you invest in education, that helps mobility, that helps growth, that helps inequality. there are a lot of steps we can take better win-win when it

comes to our big challenges. >> how did you learn to become a juggler? >> a lot of practice. >> i was video. you are pretty good are you? >> i used to perform in washington square park is a kid. bowling balls, torches, knives, all of it. you can see if you get invited to my children' parties. >> what is the hardest thing? is there some notion of focus or concentration? >> you have to practice. there is a lot muscle memory involved too. >> thank you for coming. >> thank you for having me. ♪ >> the great ted williams once said that all he wanted of life is to walk down the street and folks will say, there goes the greatest hitter who ever lived.

that he was. he played for the boston red sox. that mark had never been met. off the baseball diamond, his life was complicated. he had a quick temper. journalist ben bradlee junior spent more than a decade researching the batting legend. his new book is called "the kid: the immortal life of ted williams" and i am pleased to have ben bradlee here. what makes ted williams so interesting? >> i was struck by how much interest there still was in his life. he was a mean the figure to me. -- meaninful figure to me. i grew up outside of boston. as a kid, i saw him play the last 3-4 years of his career. when he died, the boston globe

was filled with letters to the editor from grandfathers to fathers to sons -- he was the glue in the social fabric. he was a meaningful figure to me and in speed reading the earlier books on williams, they were done mostly by adoring sportswriters who focused mostly on his exploits on the field. i thought there was a lot of room to tell other parts -- much less, chronicle other parts of his life. he grew up in san diego in the depression. the fact that he concealed the fact that he was a mexican- american, and -- no one knew that until he died, his service

in two wars, his struggles of anger, i thought it was a rich story. i dove in. >> i asked him why he played baseball, and he said, because i was good at it early. >> he grew up -- he had a playground right next to his house. it had floodlights, which was rare in those days. that was his salvation. his mother was a soldier in the salvation army and she was out in till all hours of the night saving souls. that was her priority. she was never home for ted or his younger brother. he played ball late into the night. >> there's so many places to go, but what makes ted williams an icon? >> he was a rich character. at some point, it takes something more than just talent to become an iconic figure. he made as much news off the

field as on the field. he struggled with anger and he was able to channel it effectively on the ball field. he liked to say that he hit better angry. it caused great problems in his personal life. he was a multidimensional figure. >> you did 600 interviews. when you get the assessment of his talent, what is that? >> is baseball town? >> his hand eye coordination -- >> he would resent it when people would attribute his skills to being a natural. he would say that he would think about hitting and no one has taken more swings than i have. >> of all the people i have interviewed over 25 plus years,

the great ones always say that. they say that if they miss a day of practice, the game is different. there is an obsession with almost perfection. >> he was a perfectionist. that is what he was. he strove for excellence and i think he undertook it. he was good at a lot of things. he was into fishing holes. he was in the military aviation hall of fame. he fought in not one war, but two. he was an elite marine fighter pilot.

he flew with john glenn. i spoke to john glenn and he said he was one of the best pilots he had ever seen. there is this aspect of his death and the freezing stuff. what is that about? >> that was a sad coda to the ted williams tale. what happened is that his son, who he reconnected too late in life, i got interested in something called cryonics. it is not a science as such, but it is a belief system held by maybe a few thousand people who believe that at some point medical science will progress to the point where it will be possible to cure you of whatever it is you died from.

you will somehow be able to be brought back to life. there are a lot of holes in the theory. i have not worked out whether ted would come back as an 83- year-old man or a young stud who could hit. claudia williams, who was the sole surviving child of ted, told me for the first time the back story of how it came to pass that ted was frozen. she said, in november of 2000, 1.5 years before ted died, john henry and claudia went to him before he was going to have a pacemaker installed. a surgery for a man that age is routine. i thought this was the time to approach them and say, dad, we would like to do cryonics and would you do this with us? will you do this for us?

they said they framed it that way, will you do it for us? he agreed. but my conclusion was that if he did, he was probably not of sound mind. i was able to interview at least a dozen more people who said that ted told them after this day that he wanted to be cremated and have his ashes thrown into the florida keys where he lived and fished. >> only one world series. >> yes. he appeared in only one world series when the red sox lost to the cardinals. he had a bad series. that was one of his big regrets. >> bush 41 was delayed so they spent time hanging out and

talking. what did they talk about? he said, you would be amazed. they talked about small points of baseball. it was all about the game. what pitchers gave you trouble? did you ever experiment with different bats? >> i have a separate chapter in the book about the relationship between williams and dimaggio. they had a lifelong rivalry. even after they played. for joe, the rivalry was fierce. for ted, it was friendly. they were opposites in every respect. joe was quiet and stoic. ted was emotional and voluble.

joe would smoke incessantly, even on the dugout. ted never smoked. they age differently. williams mellowed late in life and came out, even started talking to reporters and joe became more reclusive. ted was more generous to joe privately and joe was to ted. joe disparaged ted privately. how many rings did he get? how many championships? joe of course had been there. >> was there a serious disagreement about who is the greatest hitter of all time? >> of course. these are parlor games and debate for pubs and bars. everybody has their candidate. i would assert that no one combines power and average the way williams did. he reached the base one at it every two times.

>> for a statistician, that is good. as his term as a manager in washington, was he a good manager? >> not really. he came back, and he was bored with fishing and it was too early to retire. he was such a personality in the game. it was good for baseball that he came back. but he was a one-dimensional manager. the only part of the game that interest him was hitting. when he was with the red sox, he thought pitchers were stupid. he would go to the pictures and say, you are down. he continued that his manager,

and that is not the way to build relationship. there were parts of the game where they send a runner and they do not interest him much. the book is called "the kid: the immortal life of ted williams". he cared about the way he looked. >> not only did he want to be good, he wanted to look good. as a kid, he always carried a bat with him. when he passed a storefront, he would take a swing in the reflection of the store run. the merchant since i were wondering, who is this being glorious kid outside? >> "the kid: the immortal life of ted williams" by ben junior, thank you. >> thank you. ♪

>> live from pier 3, this is "bloomberg west," where the focus is on innovation, technology, and the future of business. the white house advisory panel calling for a significant limit on government surveillance including stopping the nsa from collecting and storing billions of phone records. talent agency william morris extending its reach in both sports and entertainment. they are buying img worldwide.