>> turning ideas into action. the clinton global initiative attracts some of the world's best people. leaders in business, politics, and philanthropy. the goal -- find solutions that promote economic recovery in the united states. on a bloomberg tv special. from this year's meeting in denver, colorado. we sit down with bill clinton. >> we should look at this money as a one-time stimulus. >> and discuss the path forward for american businesses with zillow cofounder, robert rubin, former treasury secretary.

>> the government is not meeting its challenges. i think that is a real threat to our future. >> coming up -- we will hear these newsmakers weigh in on the policy and business challenges of today's economy. what's your sense of what is going on in an economic recovery? it feels very much like we are fumbling along. how would you characterize this economy? is wek what i would say don't have enough internally generated growth. we can't do that unless we unlock investment and direct it to high-growth areas. and we have only two options. one is not favored by the house of representatives. which is to say, we have cut the deficit by more than 50%. we have to get the structural

deficit down. but right now with interest rates lower than inflation this , is the best time we will have to undertake a massive effort to build a 21st-century infrastructure. if we did that, we would have massive internally generated growth. the other option would require less of congress. they would have to put up a little matching money. we could build an infrastructure bank with public and private funds. we can seed it with a negotiated incentive structure. with the big companies that have more than a trillion dollars in cash overseas and would like to repatriate it. to be fair, there is a wariness to do this in both parties. required a big percentage of that money to go into an infrastructure bank with a guaranteed tax-exempt rate of

return, which it would have if the government set it up, i believe we can negotiate an attractive deal. i know that john chambers at cisco has been trying to work with companies like his that have a lot of money overseas. >> is there a right number? is there a right corporate tax rate? >> basically, it it would have fewer deductions and incentives. maybe even have an alternative minimum tax for corporations. let me back up and say i raised the coporate tax rate. to its current level. >> it was a different era then. it, it wasaised exactly in the middle of the oecd countries. i do not believe tax rate is a theology. it is about economics. if the government is going to spend money, you need revenue to cover it. if you ran a multinational company, you would be reluctant to bring the money that you had earned home.

if you had to also pay the difference in what you paid there and what you paid here in a world where now the average corporate tax is 25% or 26%. the way to do it without giving up money is to require those that pay under 20% to pay a little more and to finance the repatriation. we should look at this money as a one-time stimulus for the economy. and require a certain amount of it to be -- they could pay a modest amount in the treasury. the most important thing is the infrastructure, and putting people back to work. if you fund it it that way, then the people who put up the money would invest their pension funds

in the investment bank. that's what i think are two options are. we should try to get a corporate tax reform rate that is competitive internationally. we should do it without giving up money by closing loopholes and requiring everybody with x amount of income to pay a minimum tax. >> coming up next. the former president talks about what really matters to america. immigration policy, income equality. ♪

>> welcome back. we are with former president bill clinton. >> you spent a lifetime believing that policy matters. over and over again, immigration comes up. this is not one that public private partnerships can solve. it needs federal policy. if you are running the show, what would the path to immigration reform look like? >> first of all, i would be sure we had a targeted approach for

skilled immigrant labor that reflects the current demand for the economy. i believe we need a broad-based immigration reform. we need reasonable quotas in the future. that should be coupled with -- most of the anti-immigrant feeling in america ironically is in places without enormous number of immigrants. they are places that feel like they have been left out and left behind. everybody is at the front of the line. and neither party really does much for them. >> you given a good sense on how you would direct some policy. how would you lead us in this political climate? we do have a new house majority leader who has suggested that he

is open to immigration reform and a path toward citizenship. >> you have immigration reform opposed from the right and left. on political and nationalist reasons on the right, and for economic populist reasons. on the left. i think that we need to -- the president has shown he is willing to enforce the laws. he has been attacked repeatedly by the immigrant community for sending too many people back. he has actually changed and modified his position. i support that change. to try to slow that down since no immigration reform has been forthcoming. but this is a really important thing. we live in this interdependent world. one of our big advantages in the world is there is somebody in america from everywhere else. we are four percent of the world's population. we have about, depending on the year and the economy, anywhere

from 21%-23% of the world gdp. au do not have to be mathematical genius to figure out we got to sell something to somebody else if we want to maintain prosperity, you have to have the workforce. it needs to be young. youth matters. demographics matter. we have a lot of work to do on the other side. how do you create jobs and change the job mix to raise the median income within the workforce? i think this immigration reform is really important. >> income inequality -- president obama has called this the defining challenge of our time. i will take a guess that you would agree. what is the single most important thing we can do?

if the new policy or redeploying policies you used during your administration. >> first of all, in the short run, the most important thing is to lift the bottom, the working bottom by raising the minimum wage. you could raise the minimum wage so much -- for example, research indicates that it if you keep the minimum wage, you can get the best of both worlds. you can give people enough money to live on. they don't have enough to say, so they circulated in the economy. it contributes to growth. i think making some adjustments in the tax credits to help working people with families at the lower end of the wage scale is important.

the third thing that will help a lot is it will take us three years, we got to get a medicare expansion. it creates thousands of jobs in every state. it brings money in and rewards working people. over the long run, social mobility may be even more important. we have proved in america that we would accept a slightly higher rate of economic inequality than many of the most wealthy countries in europe in return for more social mobility. we would take in more immigrants and give them a chance to start out low on the totem pole and build a middle-class life. that is not a credible position. we have less social mobility in america than a lot of other countries. >> when we come back, a panel discussion on political gridlock and how american businesses can move forward. ♪

>> welcome back. we continue with the conversation on the u.s. business climate and how to keep america competitive. >> what defines american businesses? >> the united states has tremendous comparative

advantages for the long-term. we have a dynamic and entrepreneurial society. we have flexible labor capital markets. we have vast natural resources. we have the rule of law. and a great deal else. if we are going to realize that potential -- and this is the key, we have to meet a host of policy challenges. they are difficult. they are doable. they are also difficult politically. and we have a political system in gridlock. the key to our future is the reestablishment of a political system in which you have a congress in which there is a willingness of people with different views to engage in compromise. it is only in that manner that our democracy will work, and it's only if that happens that we will meet our policy challenges. i personally think it is likely. we have a dynamic society. it is in gridlock now. there are no guarantees. it will be a long process. >> what's holding back american businesses? what are the key policy issues jackie, whyiments?

don't i start with you? >> there are some fundamental things -- we like a stable tax policy to predict what is going on. even if it is just the passage of extenders. we feel very strongly that we need an immigration policy. as a nation of immigrants we , need workers at all levels of the chain. >> can we be globally competitive if we do not solve our immigration problem? >> i think it is a significant impediment to our country, and, frankly, it is something we want from a workforce perspective. that all businesses want. >> can i ask a question? i have friends in big technology companies who say they are moving operations out of the united states because they cannot bring in people from abroad to fill key roles. the failure in immigration reform is costing us jobs. >> you are having problems with

access to talent? >> we absolutely are. we have a couple of problems. we have an immigration problem. that links to a computer science education problem. the very best jobs in the world -- i have a company called glass door. we are one of the largest job sites. we analyze all kinds of data about the job market. here is where the jobs are in computer science and engineering. there are hundreds of thousands of open, unfulfilled jobs. these don't have american kids applying for them because they do not have an education. only one out of 10 public schools in the united states even teaches computer science. this is really something that we as a society have to change. another part tied to that problem is immigration. because we cannot find all the computer science engineering talent we need in the u.s., we look abroad. we educate a lot of foreigners, non-us residents. they come and we educate them in

computer science. we get them phd's. it's a great revenue stream, and still, we make it hard for those people to stay. the interesting image that everybody can grasp is that every time a phd is handed out in the united states to someone who is not an american. a green card should be stapled to it. there is absolutely no question. >> you are an advocate of putting the right policy in place. are there policies, either new ones, or policies that could be redeployed, that would help us reduce the inequality? >> yes. there is a tendency to conflate income equality and stagnant wages. there are -- they are separate but conflated questions. i think we should focus on , at least in my view, increasing incomes at all levels. president clinton talked about this every day. this was his driving vision, if you will, and i think the kind of fiscal policy i have

mentioned before. all the policies they have been talking about in the education and training area. anything that promotes economic activity will help address those issues. i happen to believe in collective bargaining. i think it is a good idea. unions should work with companies to help make them effective. increased minimum wage. >> where do you weigh in on the minimum wage issue? >> if you have evidence-based policymaking, what you do is on a federal level, you get a bunch of people together, you sit down, try to figure out if increasing the minimum wage would adversely affect jobs. i don't have that kind of analysis available. if i had to make a guess, i would guess $15 on a national level probably would he a good number. >> any other impediments we should talk about. you've got one. [laughter] >> i'm full of them. i could spend all day talking about it. i am a very, very strong supporter of regulatory

protection across a whole range of areas where the private sector by it self does need to function within the framework of a regulatory system. i have the impression that we could do a better job of weighing and balancing the costs and benefits. are not feeling you going to wildly disagree with that. >> infrastructure, different types of regulation, there is always a need for balance. balance between business interests as well as appropriate infrastructure standards, environmental standards. i think this will be a work in progress. i am very optimistic, particularly when i look at the state and local level. we are sitting in a location, colorado, that has had an excellent balance of the needs of energy manufacturing and the environment. it is combined with a good business approach.

>> good policy here in colorado on an issue that i know is near and dear to you -- ride sharing. we had a flareup in seattle. it is a revolutionary, transformative kind of transportation. people originally thought it would take a little bit of market share of taxis. now people are realizing that there are people who are getting rid of their cars. it is more economical to use uber. >> you did that for -- >> i did it for a week as an experiment. in seattle, the seattle city council took a vote to cap the number of uber drivers are allowed to be in seattle. ok, at a very low number, way lowerthat was than what the market was demanding. there was a huge uproar. the people wanted uber. the mayor felt pressure and two or three months later they

reversed a decision. positioneal regulatory on new disruptive companies like uber would be what? >> we need regulators open-minded to progress. we need a government that is open-minded. if you stifle innovation, i can guarantee that you will get stagnation. >> coming up next -- president bill clinton talks about whether hillary clinton will run for the white house. that is next. ♪

>> welcome back to our special report. with more from former president and cgi founder, bill clinton. >> i'm going to do something very different -- i'm not going to ask you about secretary clinton's decision to run for office. if you feel like sharing that, i am sure we would all be happy to hear it. >> i don't know, but i'm for whatever she wants to do. know, this is an immensely rewarding thing. that's the one thing i wanted to say to all of you, that the fundamental fact of power in a highly integrated, interdependent world is that it is more dispersed. the good news is you have more of it. you can come here and form alliances and increase your impact. the bad news is people are trying to have more influence too.

the traditional nationstate all over the world is under stress, which is driving some people to support more authoritarian governments. we don't want that in america. it's not like you can't have a meaningful life. outside of politics, but it is not like politics is not important. it's just for the rest of the life of everybody in this room, you will live in a period where power is more dispersed. the power will go to the people who are most effective in recognizing the new realities, organizing, and deploying for it. whatever she decides to do, she's going to do good. >> what is that mean about you? in other words, you have spent more than a decade out of office devoting your life, creating a foundation for the public good. what would the return to the white house for your family mean

for the foundation for the work you are engaged in? >> i hope that we would be able to continue to do that with what we do. that we would set up certain rules, be totally transparent, so that no one would think that someone was helping the clinton foundation because they wanted an edge with the federal government. when hillary was secretary of state, i cleared every speech i i gavearticularly those to raise money for the foundation. i cleared in advance on what the what the policy would -- i cleared in advance with the policy would be on taking funds from non-american nations. the white house developed a policy that i reported every penny we got. if you made a mistake, someone could see it. i don't think we should shut

down the clinton global initiative. a program that now gives aids medicine to more than 6 million people in the world. more than half a million people in the world get their aids medicine from contracts we negotiated. we should not have to shut it down. if she were to run and become president, the last things she needs is for me -- -- for me to be underfoot. [laughter] she is the ablest public servant i have known. i would help. whatever i was asked to do, i would do. just like a did for president obama. just like i did for president bush. i think that you have been a former president, you need to show up. [laughter] i do. i hope that we can keep this. because this, too, is a part of

advancing the public good in the 21st century. ♪ . . .

>> it's the biggest restaurant chain in the world, feeding 69 million people a day. >> we are a lightning rod. because of our size. >> the food is fast, but what mcdonald's serves up takes years to make. we go inside the golden arches. to find out what is in the secret sauce. and, how a restaurant built on burgers and fries stays competitive in a world of changing appetites. >> two all-beef patties, lettuce, cheese, onions, pickles, on a sesame bun. it is all real food. >> mcdonald's raised its golden