bloomberg tv will how full coverage of the press conference at 1:30 p.m. u.k. time. in a few minutes, we will get to davos for the easy money hama with some of the most prominent names in the business world. first, the markets. let's check in with caroline hyde at the touch screen. >> let's check in at where the optimism is. 5.5 hours to go will we get a full scale sovereign bond of buying? could it be up to $1 billion to avoid deflation here in europe? to stimulate the economy? u.k. trading day little higher on the optimism. the honest is if it will be individual to do the buying? will it work? we will speak to chairman at ubs.

he is saying, you need to fix the bank. it cannot be done by only throwing money at the situation. it is opening a flat. let's look at the euro. last time i checked, near an 11 year low. priced in toward quantitative easing by the ecb. down a by 0.25% against the dollar. a look at oil. it has been driven by the collapse in oil prices. prices have been under pressure. we see stimulus across the board. we had a stimulus fest yesterday. china, the central bank has been throwing money at the situation as well. oil is lower by 0.5%. brent is down. clearly, supply is still outstripping overall demand at the moment.

a quick look. not all about central banks that will be driving specific stocks. you have credit squeeze trading higher. they came out saying that massive removal by the central-bank has not hurt our profitability. keep a look at these 2 stocks. back to you. >> caroline, thank you. one of the consequences of qe is overweight equities. the debate will start and that is how we will start of the day. over to francine lacqua will is leading the v panel in -- the panel in davos. >> of joining me to discuss is a cracking panel. direct manager of the imf. president of goldman sachs. founder and chief investment officer of bridgewater.

larry summers, former u.s. treasury secretary. thank you for joining me in this great handle debate. let me start off with the eu. they'll world it needs more easing. how difficult will it be for the fed to raise rates? >> in the fed is probably going to raise rates in this year our expectation is more likely to happen in midyear dandy end of 2015 contrary to what markets expect. the fact the fed is going to do that is good news in and of it self. it shows two things are moving in the right direction. unemployment is down and inflation is hopefully giving little signs of moving up in the right direction. with these two indicators which have been extremely well communicated and identified by janet yellen, who was done an excellent job in communicating

given the right expectation to market operators, it is good news. the consequences of that are going to be a different story. clearly there will be side effects and volatility as a result. unavoidably. in terms of the sheer raising interest it is clearly a good sign and clearly an indication the u.s. is growing. the u.s. is reducing unemployment and expectations are on the upside. >> you disagree. given was we heard -- what we heard, you do not think the fed will raise rates. should we be worried? >> i do not think we should worry. the u.s. is going -- growth. what i am concerned about is the actual ability of u.s. to raise rates with what is going on with the rest of the world.

when you look at the policy measures going on in europe and what does going to go on in your and what is going on in japan and other parts of the world the differential already exist. there's enormous spread between you was positive worries a negative rate around the world. you look at the strength of the dollar today it will only get stronger if we raise rates in the u.s. and that will have a chilling effect. the good news is we are getting back some of the headwind and lower oil price. madame lagarde talked about the unemployment picture. what ever news you want is in the unemployment picture in the u.s. yes, we have very good news. if you start peeling back the unemployment rate, you can find a less good news if you look at the wages not getting wage inflation. last month, we had negative for wages. if you look at the participation

rate, we are not pulling people into the u.s. job market. we can't headline unemployment rate to go down but no one is looking for jobs because they think the jobs out there are low-paying. on at the inflation point, there is no inflation in the united states. we are not close to the said'-- the fed's 2% target and that seems to be everybody's target in the world. i think we are a long way from 2%. >> larry, what did you think the fed should be looking at activity or inflation? >> activity. larry's curve is a change or relationship that does not provide a confident basis for a tightening. the risks are enormously asymmetrical of setting off a spiral towards deflation. if he said should not be

fighting against inflation until it -- that is a long way off. in the united states, europe and japan markets are saying not just inflation is below target. not just inflation is low right now but it will be below the 2% target over the next 10 years. there are further questions about slow growth, interest rate environment, where the target should be, and what kind of prospect there should be for catch up. the fed is right to be data dependent. but the data needs to be looking at is inflation and as long as the next pressure is toward deflation they should not be looking tomorrow. i think they need to manage their communications quite carefully. there's not been a moment in my memory when the gap between market expectations as measured

in the marketplace and the fed statements about future as reflected in the dots have been greater. that suggests there needs to be careful attention to communication policy going forward. >> ray what is your take? >> i think we're in a new era in which central banks have lost a their power to ease. they have more power to tighten. if you get a downturn in the economy, the effectiveness will be less. originally monetary policy works by lowering interest rates which lowered -- and produce a wealth effects and stimulation. when interest rates reaches zero and there were large spreads in the market, credit spreads, the

purchases of those financial assets now these spreads. the spreads are a transmission mechanism. when you put liquidity in, people one high returns will buy the assets. the buying of those assets caused those future returns to go down, the yields of bonds a future of equities to go down. producing those assets depreciation which have the wealth effect that we have. we now have a situation in which largely know spreads. as a result, the transmission mechanism will be less effective. this is a big thing. there were all of my life and history, monetary policy was the main tool. i do believe we're entering an eram tge\\ -- era the end of

the debt cycle where lowering interest rate causing higher levels of debt and debt service spending is coming to an end. since 1980, every cyclical peak and drop was lower than the one before it. we have a deflationary set of circumstances with a zero interest rates or negative interest rates. how far will negative interest rates carry? it will call into question what the value of holding money is. what is money? look under the mattress looks good. right? i were be on the downside will come. >> why aren't of banks functioning better? >> it is a very bad idea to have your money under the mattress. [laughter] you should definitely have it in

the bank. having said this -- >> what interested will you offer? >> no, i think the issue of monetary policy is critical but we need to look at this as a four-legged chair. your monetary policy, i think of as qe plus. monetary policy, fiscal policy the demand side, and encouraging europe is doing some and we should do more. structural reforms, of course. and the last is transmission mechanism. we need banks to be lending again. everything has to work together. when you think about growth and jobs and aspect we need to think about is what people and communities are asking of us as business leaders and regulators. education, skills, these kind of

reforms are incredibly important. governments and banks working together to foster employment. a huge disruption and we had an interesting session yesterday because of technology. deflationary pressures. having these forelegs working together, incredibly important. i could elaborate on the lending transmission of the role of bank of the transmission of monetary policy but the global financial stability report which i'm sure madame lagarde knows much more about, i encourage you to read. a sample of 300 banks a lot of these banks are ready to lend. i would not say banks are ready to lend and support qe and jobs and growth, as they report shows certain banks in certain countries are not in that

situation. it is very important that the 4 legs work together and the transmission is critical and more important in europe than any other place. >> gary how concerned are you about the transmission mechanism? what needs to change? >> i think you have to take ana and ray's comments. ray is talk about the new normal and ana is talking about the transmission mechanism and they go together. i do not know what came first. i would say the transmission mechanism being broken which created a new normal which is monetary policy and effectiveness. what i mean by that is historically, if you look back three 2008, the way the system worked is central banks decided

what monetary policy would be in money supply and they were lower interest rate and increase money supply and for low that through the banks. the blanks would flow that through customers all through the world. that works. the central banks were able to control growth and the flow of currency. and it generates spending or withdraw spending. what happened after 2008 in a simplified way of his with the regulation, new regulation, i am not complaining about regulation. what are they have done through regulation now is every time banks find new capital they are told to hold it. you should hold that capital. you should build a more solid bank they you have ever before because we have to make sure you are bulletproof for the 10,000 year flood. i think that is what ana is

talking about. whenever we get capital transmitted through our system, we used to turn it around and give it to clients and help stimulate and grow the economy. now, she is in the position where she is not recirculated that capital she is holding get on the balance sheet. in many respects in europe as we discussed in a meeting earlier this week it seems like that process is starting to get worse not better. >> ana? >> beside from the report, we have done analysis on a smaller sample of european banks. if you take the 40 biggest listed and where they were in 2007 versus today, risk-weighted assets are at the same, capital is more than double. the returns on the banks' equities is around 6%.

that is why banks are ready to lend a again and that is incredibly important. we raised a large amount of capital, 9 billion u.s. dollars. we said it and we mean it we wanted to grow our lending. we are not going to buy anything. this was discussed. we are growing our balance sheet. we have grown our lending the by 4%. nine out of 10 countries in europe and the americas. we need more bring -- banks growing more lending. so we can help monetary policy work which is what we are trying to do. >> can i say -- it is a case in point. the reason you're been able to race as much capital is caused by the new chair with the 4 legs and spain as a really managed

its confidence in the market because of various things. one is a fiscal discipline applied over time more sensibly and with the determination. the second is and the most important is the structural reforms that spain, in terms of policy decided not only to legislate but implement. and third, the decision by the spanish authorities to get with the banking system to go through all of the spanish banks to see what was under the skin of the balance sheet and to do some cleaning up. not to say all of the nonperforming loans have evaporated. there are still quite a lot of those nonperforming loans. certainly, in a much more identified away. which is why i look back to the structural reforms, if the right

structural reforms are implemented at of the level of bankruptcy reorganization of corporate there is positive feedback that helps from the bank balance sheet point of view which will help at the transmission mechanism we were talking about. everything is linked together. >> overall, the divergence makes it more difficult or reduce the effect? >> i do not know. very divergent views on that. one thing is for sure we're in uncharted territories. we have had the potential in some place at some time from my point of view than others. then you have the entry route taken by the ecb and the continuation route by various others including the bank of japan. whether that is going to be absolutely counterproductive it is going to produce only

negative effects, i am not sure. if there is a enough coordination and liquidity, it might prove helpful to have intrigued by the ecb when there's potential from the fed. final point and i will be quiet. i am struck to hear that the major downside risks in the u.s. is in a bad way. if the u.s. is in a bad way, we are short of any engine at the moment. i hope some of us, some of you are saying they u.s. is under direct. i think they are wrong. >> and just to be clear i think the u.s. is in a good place. i did not mean that. the u.s. and the world are in different places, generally's weekend. -- and generally speaking. when there is no ability to change interest rates particularly when there is no

mechanism, monetary policy to ease is in a bad place. do not have the ease if we needed to ease. the united states is in a good place partially because the quantitative easing it did, 25% of gdp was a quantitative easing. 26% was in the u.k. and in japan, 36% of gdp. in europe, 3% of gdp. when you're in a situation in which credit doesn't is not going to work the same way it did before, we cannot have debt growth of the say what we had before. we cannot look at it the way we did before. the interest rates cannot decline. yet, let's not look at data growth as a solution. that means you can spend with a debt or money. money is more important.

when we see transactions, the ecb policy, it needs to have more molly -- money into the system. it can produce more purchases. it means when the 2 levers interest rates and currency. when the interest rate lever does it work currency becomes more important. we see more volatility in currencies. we much see it depreciate further in the euro. we have not seen it in the yen. the average cost, it must be structural reform structural reforms are important. a southern european after adjusting a worker after adjusting for the amount of time they worked, vacation time, the work week, retirement age, it is about twice of where it is of an

american worker. it is asked is it. either that will have to lead to structural reforms of changing to make that more efficient. there is a lot of potential in europe to make things more efficient and more economic. the currency depreciation is going to have to be a part of it. it is the conversation that is not polite to ask. in other words, we do talk about changing interest rates. policymakers cannot talk about changing the exchange rate. it will be a bigger influence in the years ahead. it will create a dynamic. there is a lot of dollar debt. because it is a lot of dollar denominated debt, there's a lot of promises to deliver dollars at that are more expensive for various entities. there's a short squeeze in emerging similar to 1980-1985. very similar to 1980-1985, falling prices and a relatively

strong economy with falling inflation. back then, we can lower interest rates. we cannot lower interest rates now. it is a similar dynamic. i agree with larry in that. you have to wait until you see the whites of the eyes of inflation. in 1980 if we do not lower inflation even though it was strong, it is analogous to that today. >> is qe in europe going to work? >> i am all for european qe. the risks of doing too little far exceed the risks of doing too much. deflation and secular stagnation are the macroeconomic threats of our times. that said i think it is a mistake to suppose that qe is a

panacea in europe or it will be sufficient. there are several differences that are worth noting with the u.s. experience. the u.s. qe was most effective at the very beginning when markets were functioning less well than they are in europe today. qe function well in the u.s. started with long-term interest rates in the 3% range not with long-term interest rates starting in the 40 basis point range. qe worked best in the united states when it was unexpected rather than when it had been widely predicted. qe worked best in the united states because it were to three capital market channel and a large part of lending in europe takes place through a banking channel that is clocked -- clogged with regulatory

processes. every reason to expect that qe will be less impactful in a context like of the present then it was in the context of the united states. i think the story in the united states is a more complex one then sometimes told. everyone at davos a year ago was not in doubt that with the tapered comment and the u.s. expansion accelerating that the 10 year treasury was in danger of rising sharply from its level of 3%. a small minority, which included ray that a sought the deeper issues went to the emergence of deflation have proved to be

correct. i would remain everybody -- remind everybody in the united states where policy has to be biased. if you look at the postwar period first of all, no one has ever predicted, no institution nobody has predicted any other recessions a year in advance. never. yet recessions and do sometimes come. fact one. fact 2. when it happens on average every 70 years, the fed have to cut interest rates by 3%-4% to combat that recession. are we anywhere near getting ourselves to a place where there is going to be 3%-4% points to cut the next time the problem happens? i do not think so.

if you look the forward curve, the market doesn't think so either. we have to recognize that in the era can be the world's growth strategy is coming to an end. we have to move to broader range of strategies, some of it goes to banking policy. some of it goes to structural reform although a lot a structural reform is on the supply side and much of the problem is on the demand side. the strategic about it. there's also a crucial role for direct support in both the public and private sectors. >> ana? >> i think the central bond that we are trying to address is growth, broad-based growth and creating jobs. macro policies are critical, the

4 legs of my chair we were discussing. one of those, going to larry's point is we need to generate confidence. anybody what are the biggest risks in the commandeers? most was a political and certainties -- most would say the political uncertainties. how we achieve confidence is critical. a combination of all of these macro reforms is very important. what of the reasons we're in a secular, lower growth time is because of disruptions in technology. less people needed to do the same things. we need not just macro policies but the micro policies. micro policies with a private and public sectors working together. we had a discussion yesterday when many of the leading

companies and institutions where doing a huge amount of programs in education. in our case last year we invested $180 million in education and skills. the partnership is something we need to do more about. otherwise, a macro policy on their own we need the qe, structural reforms, fiscal policies, and banks able to lend again. we need to go is still further otherwise we will not create the jobs we are looking for. >> emerging markets did not like said qe, will they like ecb qe? >> i think this is a good thing and we needed and will partly compensate what the fed is not doing. it's another balance sheet. i do not know what to be size will be. in latin america, certain countries are in a very

different situation than they were in the 1990's a previous crisis. company -- countries like chile brazil peru will be less effective because they have better policies and high level of reserves. this time, it will be different for certain countries. >> to move a little bit away from latin america, there are emerging markets in europe. for these, it will have beneficial effects. if there is some worry and coloring of inflation and the euro area, those european markets, those emerging markets, which are packed to the euro will have the benefit to that. those at the moment that are importing inflation from the euro area will benefit. and more growth, more jobs in the euro area. the emerging markets in europe will benefit. half of their trade goes to the

euro area. emerging markets if qe in europe will work. you can say it is already worked. when you look at the currency variation you cannot deny there's expectation and it will be a. and will be significant. >> i want to point out on the question of the united states. you can do an attribution of the two countries. and i think the vitality that is

existing in the united states. >> that means the two words that will characterize what is good for europe are structural reform

and money. if you have more money, monetary policy, quantitative easing together with important structural reforms and that means currency changes. that will be an effective force. i agree with and about the political issue. if the moderates of europe cannot get together and change in a meaningful well -- meaningful way there is a risk that the political extremists will be the biggest threat to the euro. in italy and spain, youthful unemployment is 50%. you would be a lost generation. there needs to be forceful action and otherwise there will be political extremism.

>> how worried are you? >> i think the greek elections are a straw in the wind. there are multiple possibilities. it gets very complicated. in each of the major countries, in spain it is a political extreme party. it would be -- it would undermine productivity. and when we look at other countries, there are such issues. i think the characterization of europe over the next year will be one of the effectiveness of monetary policy.

and how patients are the electorates. toward more political extremism. >> are we looking at currency wars? we are in currency wars. >> with always been in it? >> are done no flu always been.

>> we are happy to have them on that side of the ledger. we are in a big global economy and i do not disagree with this. the prevailing view is one of the easier ways to stimulate economic growth to have a low currency and hopefully create imports. it makes sense.

>> how many are the main risks we have to deal with? we can emphasize what everybody is clear on. it is a strategy of austerity

and grudging acceptance of accommodation. in the hope it will be a driver of structural reform. it is proven itself to be substantially counterproductive and it is bringing radicals to the floor and most of the places where it is being applied. the situation it is not yet in hand. and the movements, it is not been desirable. i do not -- i agree with christine that qe has already had a significant impact and that is why i am were read. with had a set of positive developments and the economic forecasts are pretty dismal from here. and the kind of policy that are

seeing are built into the forecasts. i do not think we should make the mistake of supposing that the situation, it is not in hand. i am for structural reform, too. i want everybody to think about what i think is the most surprising global economic facts when i look at it. it is quite different than the conventional wisdom. take men between the age of 25 and 54, there's a strong expectation in most societies and they will be working. ask yourself about the nonemployment rate of men, 25 and 54. in the flexible, dynamic u.s. it is several percentage points higher than none employment rate then it is in france.

with all of friends bank -- france's risks, it tells us something about the human capital issues that the united states faces and it tells me that we can not, it tells something about the consequences because of the coming of technology is probably more advanced in the united states. and it tells me, we cannot be completely serene that if we just have flexible reform, all will be well which is why i come back to the central importance of demand. i would suggest that it is a very basic idea that has largely eluded europe's largest economic power. and that is what they called the

fallacy of composition which i would explain this way. if anybody in this audience stands up, they will see better. if everybody in this audience stands up, nobody will see better and everybody will be less comfortable. [laughter] if any one country sayings more or any one bank hoards capital, it will strengthen its position. if all countries save more there will be less spending which will mean a less income, which will mean a less spending and the situation will not get better. if all bank simultaneously cut back on their lending, the result will be an across-the-board reduction in asset prices and ironically, they will all end up with less capital not more once it works

through. it is the failure to recognize that a one off that worked to produce export led growth for germany in the early part of the decade when applied collectively is like everybody stands up. and it leads to an outcome that is worse for everyone. it is the failure of generalization and the error of assuming that the strategy for the work for one when applied universally will work. that is the central error that is driving much a european economics and as long as the teams to drive in european economic thought, the prospects of economic success in europe will be very limited. >> i would like to get christine

. larry did not answer my bank question. are there lessons to be learned from last week? if you are a central bank are around the world a look at what happened last week -- >> i am not a central bank so i can speak to that. i think it was very difficult for the swiss central bank to do in communication. it was impossible to do that. equally, i am assuming and i hope there was at least a teeny tiny bit of communication among some central bankers sold the surprise was needed the day after was tempered by positive feedback from other authorities in the eurozone in particular. can i come back to larry? great. everything larry said about sitting and standing and i was confused about who was standing and sitting. some reference to germany during

the course of this conversation -- [laughter] what i would like to do is ask larry if what i am assuming is correct and given we are in a low-low, high-high, and given the fact that structural reform is fine but takes a long time and deals with the supply side and what we need most is demand. i would agree with that. i would insist that structural demand is in order and must be conducted. if not, we will live with those issues for a long time. the fact you can stimulate demand by monetary policy which we just agreed was maybe the end of its course or by fiscal

expansion not many have space to do that. one or two countries and the eurozone that can do it, a big one. do you believe that will be enough to pull the euro out of his current high-high, low-low? >> i believe europe has substantial fiscal space. i believe the decision to have a common currency taken without the decision to be prepared to use common space is an irresponsible decision. [laughter] and i believe therefore taken a decision to have a common currency if that currency is not to be a brittle failure, there is no alternative to finding mechanisms to support fiscal

expansions on a common basis. i also think there is a failure to think in a fully realistic way about liabilities. when you defer maintenance, when you underfund a pension, you are placing a liability on the future. when you sell a building and you sell a building you on and you commit to rent it back or rent a building for the next 30 years, you're not really change your financial position. you may have reduce your debt but you have an obligation to pay rent for 30 years. a great deal of what is happening in europe is what i would call repressed a budget deficits. an analogy to repressed

inflation where you are by taking these steps to fetishize debt, in fact placing large burdens on the future and in fact upsetting the long run of fiscal arithmetic. i think there is a failure to appreciate that kinds of borrowing that are unaffordable and traditional interest rates become vastly more affordable and interest rates that are negative in real terms. so, no, i do not accept the judgment there is limited capacity for europe to engage in enhanced borrowing. there is limited imagination at present about the possible mechanisms through which a that could take place.

there is no limit, very substantial moral and i believe -- room and without finding ways to mobilize lending and borrowing and that means through the public sector and as ana emphasize, finding ways for institutions to lend more, the money will kyle up. -- pile up, but you would not see the desired results. let me ask the people on the panel, is there anybody that believes even if qe takes place in a robust a way that the situation is satisfactorily in hand in europe and as europe will have a basis for growth if the growth strategy consists of qe and asking the south to do more structural reform? >> is that the question or can

we afford not to have qe in europe? >> where all four qe in europe. it is necessary but not sufficient. -- >> we are all four qe in europe. >> argues that we are less imaginative than the u.s.? i am kidding. i think america is an emerging market and since of growth and has strong institutions and that is unbeatable. i am lot less negative on europe than most americans. again, i will use this as an example. we raised $9 billion and a lot of that came from a very smart money. we have seen a lot of investment in europe and i recognize the challenges. the biggest of all is unemployment and getting the recovery to be broad-based. when we do structural reforms,

spain has made big structural reforms, created 300,000 jobs over the past 12 months. growth has been up to .5% -- 2.5%. it is very world that we need complementary economies, we cannot do the same. at the micro level, talking to some of my customers, i make loans to companies that create jobs, they have a robust automated -- automatic industry -- automotive industry. they set the most productive factories in europe are in spain. we how more productive factories of the same companies in spain than in germany. i do not think all is lost. we need to do more. i am confident that europe can a make it. let's look at the positives. where were we in the last crisis

and where are we today? how long did it take the u.s. to get the u.s. dollar in the country working together as one and how long is it taking europe? it has only been 50 years. give us a chance. we are making progress. we have the mechanisms in europe we do not have. we would do qe. a few years ago, it was quite difficult. we have a lot of work but we are doing hopefully we are moving faster. we are doing what it takes. >> christine, do you agree? is there a difference between the way europeans see themselves or the americans or groups of people? >> i think it's a general expectation we all make the same as the to compare the united states' economy as a euro area

economy. sometimes the european union and it is not the reality except at currency level. yes, there is a euro which is the common currency. there is a monetary policy. there's a much more euro supervision of the institutions. to say there's a euro fiscal policy? no. it is not that the europeans are short of imagination, they have plenty of it. they are not at the stage where they cannot have a fiscal policy in place. i understand larry's argument. when you look at the euro area balance sheet, it looks better it looks a lot better than the u.s.. it is not tradable yet. there is no yet fiscal policy that is common to all and they are not determined to use the balance sheet to grow into bench of drawing -- a borrowing. it is a question of process, massive progress has been made

in the past five years thanks to the crisis. i hope it will not take another crisis to make more progress. more progress has to be made in terms of fiscal union's pursuant to banking the unions and how the qe is structured and whether that is confirmed we are moving in that direction. there is huge potential in this part of the world. to think of as one single economy unfortunately, that is not yet the case. quick suggest to larry's point, well fiscal policy will be more important in years to climb on you cannot look at fiscal policy without thinking about what is the income that could be debt is to borrow money in order to have more fiscal stimulus. it they cannot let the debt rise relative to the income level. that must reduce productive in a

serve as the debt. there are limitations on that. it is not a panacea. it must be used with monetary policy if monetary policy helps to fund the deficits. that can be a lot of progress. monetary policy and monetization is a path. it is a path to consider. i think in terms of the structural reforms i am more optimistic on larry do structural reforms. i think spain is done a wonderful job in his almost a model. -- and it is almost a model. if you look at the countries that have grown the fastest in history, they are not the most efficient countries. the country said that have big barriers. china is the best example, a closed economy.

it eliminated barriers. there are plenty of barriers in europe that stand in the way of efficiency. if those berries are removed there's a lot of potential. the european, southern europeans are having to do with cultural questions, quality of life as they define it, vitality. i wouldn't say efficient seat -- would say, efficiency is a key element. >> we literally only how 4 minutes. i want 40 seconds on each hole need to pull their weight more -- regulators, business, central banks? >> oh -- [laughter] i -- it is hard to separate it. at the end of the day, business needs to pull their ways. if your niece to grow, business has to grow. if you look at the united states

and what it has going, we had cheap energy a low interest rates, and a very competitive currency to crate adjust. can europe created jobs? business has to create jobs. look at what we did in silicon valley and the technology world. the millions of jobs we created in the last 5-10 years. >> all because of they all need to pull their weight. 2015 is a critical year for all the reasons we discussed and big trade deals on the table that need to be wrapped up. there is a big climate deal coming up. also a lot of opportunities development objectives. three key agenda items in the world the central bankers, regulators policymakers business have to rally around those jobs and growth objectives is a contest of the big deal.

all of them. it is absolutely necessary. we have not talked about geopolitical issues. they need collective support. >> larry? >> all of the above. central-bank is doing its part and as much as the politics will allow. business leaders like ana are primed and ready to go. whether there will be a political leadership to put a dynamic framework that has the demand and supply elements in place for growth. >> if you only had to choose one? >> i do not agree. all of them. >> you have to choose one that makes it more exciting. >> i want to. >> i will be brave and say banks

are prepared to lend and we are essential part of the equation l and where the transmission to the real economy businesses and people want to buy a home and get a mortgage. we need a balanced approach that takes the broader public issues. >> this is one of the things that fuel of much of the debate for this year, the banks. thank you so much for joining us. it was a great pleasure. thank you. [applause] ♪ >> your been listening to the bloomberg debate in davos. led by francine lacqua. some really interesting thoughts generated from that debate. it goes to the heart of what

everybody is talking about today. an event that will take place in frankfurt and that is the ecb. welcome back to normal programming. this is "the pulse." that is the story, the countdown to qe. the spotlight moves from the world economic forum to frankfurt, where mario draghi is expected to announce a massive bond buying program later today. not everyone is convinced. the former bundesbank boss making sure that everyone knows he is skeptical. he told bloomberg the priority is to fix the banks. >> europe is not in an existential crisis. it is in an identity crisis. some countries, like germany, want long-term reforms. >> he is not the