♪ francine: it is ranked as one of the top companies, its products are used by two billion people every day. in over five years, paul polman has had a positive impact on the environment. in an exclusive interview, i speak with him about sustainability, cop 21 and what it takes to be a good leader. thank you so much for speaking to bloomberg. there is a lot of talk about spend ability. paul: i'm very confident that we

have an agreement, we have 169 targets. in this decade, we have seen a few forces coming together. we see disaster hitting our planets, with scarce resources. we see poverty and migration issues. all these problems are what is being addressed. we will address it in a more sustainable and equitable way. no business is making a case of dealing with out poverty. if the society does not function, it is very difficult for us to function as well. francine: are you confident businesses will translate into the increase? paul: if you go back to the real reason for this, i'm sure there are exceptions. hopefully we will solve some of the problems that are out there. the problems are food security, climate change. although there are challenges,

they are enormous opportunities to invest. technology allows us to do that. funding ultimately has to come from business. business is about 60% of global gdp. 80% of the financial flow. 90% of the job creation these days. so if business does not get involved, i do not think we will achieve these objectives. responsible business people come increasingly realize not only from a moral point of view that this is good for business. if you look at our business, you probably see high volatility and supply. you might not have supply as it moves around the world, that your business model is being

impacted. you can see enormous parts of the world where people are not participating. in these parts of the world you cannot sell your products. businesses increasingly see that it makes sense to be part of the solution. francine: they do see it, the problem is that it is often long term. when you have shareholders, you have pressure and capitalism needs to be inclusive. but, again, is there a certain momentum that you think businesses need now? paul polman often shareholder pressure is confused with the short term. i think we should put these two apart. there was a short-term pressure which certainly isn't healthy. the average length of a company's life is 18 years. a lot of companies run on quarterly profits or guidance they give, and it sometimes results in this functional decisions. if you want to solve food insecurity, climate change, access to water, then obviously it requires long-term goal. this long-term is in the interest of shareholders. provided you are a long-term shareholder.

we make long-term decisions that are effective. in our i.d. systems, we have investments in people. we have an investment in humanity and our planet. increasingly, businesses see good reasons to do that. the technology is there. the financing opportunities are there. actually, the alternatives of not doing it is starting to cost businesses more. when you have parts of the world -- let's take the drugs in sao paulo, not long ago, their water reserves are only one third what they should be. this is not a very good situation. the hydro dams do not give good electricity. people do not have water.

when they do not have water they don't take the showers, they don't wash their hair, their electricity stops a few times during the day, if you have ice cream like us. businesses see the cost of these failures earlier than anyone else. the solution to avoid this is a good business opportunity. the people who go to bed hungry are an opportunity to grow the market for food. we have an enormous opportunity to provide nutrition for these people. these are really business opportunities. francine: in paris, do you think will get an agreement? paul: you will get an agreement in paris. we had good discussions for financial development. in fact, we should not forget that even today, the deadline is the first of october. when these countries can put in their individual contributions. we currently already have 58 countries that have submitted, and of these 58 countries, that is 70% of the carbon emissions. where would it big companies like brazil and india, there is some encouraging noise coming from there. i was in brazil three weeks ago. i was in india a few months ago, so we are waiting for that. what you see in the submissions

that are being done, that we can get to 30% or 40% of what i believe is needed. there has never been an agreement globally. now, we need an agreement for 34%. frankly, that is more than anybody have thought. francine: you would be happy with 30% or 40%? paul: no, that is a starting point. the agreement in paris is for the g7. we need a point that is very important for business. once we have a clear agreement that is rich, physicist and investments accelerate this to a carbon free society. francine: why are you confident we will have agreement? this is taken a seven years. paul: this is a 21, 21 stands for something. suddenly, we have realized it is time to move.

we never thought the effects as much as we are seeing them now. francine: coming up, we continue the conversation on sustainability. i challenge the ceo of unilever over consumer choices responsible purchasing power, and the bottom line. paul: it is our duty as ceos in this world to set an example and be sure we are not doing something that. we are driven by the needs of these consumers. francine: we will be back in a few minutes. ♪

♪ francine: in 2015, unilever was awarded the top ranking prize and the leaders survey for the fifth consecutive year. paul polman speaks exclusively about how this has shaped the market. for example, your customers want a company that is more sustainable. i have always been told that some of your rivals say that everybody would love a shampoo that does good, but when it comes to choosing the shampoo that gives you healthy hair or does good, we always choose the one that gives us glossy hair. paul: i would not disagree with that sentence, but is not the right comparison. obviously, you need a product that performs, you need it at a cost that is affordable. that is the job of any company. once you have done that, consumers differentiate. would you want to buy from the company that has child labor and -- in its value chain? would you want to buy from a company that does not have sustainable practices? would you want to buy from a company that benefits the transparency of the internet are able to separate. we see that in our own company. the expectations also go up.

we moved from basic materials up to 55% of sustainable materials. it is a tremendous improvement, we've done this five times in last five years. francine: why? paul: because we have put a new model together. we put our emphasis in it. we have seen the importance of moving closer in our value chain.

we will ensure a more equal value chain. we have made changes in our business model, but, even though you have done five times more in the last five years than the previous 100 years, the consumer expectations go up again. it is fine that you have better wages in your value chain, or better conditions, but are these conditions good enough? it is a continuous moving playing field. francine: and this is because you think that people share more information? is there an age group that is more obvious in the sustainability goals? paul: if you look at the absence of government, the world has become so interdependent, it is very difficult for government to work under a system. some institutions were designed at the time when 80% of the world was in europe and u.s. now that the world is much of global, we have seen a shift to the south and east. these institutions have not yet really adjusted. it is a challenge for all of us. it is not really to bring the politicians for that.

what you really see is that business needs to step up and the risk of the political process. what you see a citizens in this world, but wealth might be concentrated in a few people. which is not good. 70% of the citizens of this world have access to a mobile phone. over half of them have access to the internet. 50% of the phones are smart phones. increasingly, they realize they are connected. there are enormous movements happening that action drive change. there are many examples of that. the group that really drives at are the millennial. if you now ask them, very few actually want work for a big corporate because of an issue of trust or transparency. the same they would say about government. so people will not be able to attract the talent that they don't make a responsible business bottle. millennials also say it is fine. we have a certain level of well-being, but what i'm looking for is more meaning. a little bit more purpose. they tend to look and seek out

companies that have that purpose. so putting that business model in place, we are the most looked up company after linkedin or google. we get one million people kind of you. then, we look at the people who come in in the engagement scores we get. we see that it is driven by a positive business model. so tracking and energizing the right people are key ingredient for long-term success. there are goals that you share with the society in transparency. what is your water footprint? what is your carbon footprint? that not only makes you more accountable because of that transparency, it also gives more information to the financial markets, in which case there is a lower risk for them. and probably a lower cost of

capital, which results in a higher return as well. francine: not many people understand that. we talk about the purpose of building a business, does this come from you? does it come at a turning point? you realize this has to be done? paul: i always felt that we are not here for ourselves. the role of business is to serve society. in victoria britain, one out of two babies did not make it past the age of one because of issues of hygiene. they're the same issues as africa or sub sahara africa. i think that it is our duty as leaders in this world to set an example and be sure that we are driven just by shareholders, but that we are driven by the needs of consumers, and if we cater to them very well, business will perform. francine: you must be disappointed that not more ceos think like you? paul: you cannot sit here and get frustrated by the attitudes of others or the speed with which things move. you should just continue to

focus on bringing the right people together and moving these barriers. sometimes, you think why can we move faster? why aren't more people doing this? who am i to judge? the better thing to show is that we can have a business model where we do well, but also do good for the shareholders. the more we do that, the more we see other people enroll. one of the reasons that you see short tenure of ceos, which is now 4.5 years for the fortune companies, is really because a lot of the ceos are not equipped for the challenges of today's world. francine: which are what? paul: more complex, faster moving. issues of water, energy, food.

you squeezable at one-sided pops out the other. the issue of needing to work in partnership is not something that comes so easy to everybody. you need to navigate the field of government and civil society, having a longer-term view when there are lots of pressures on you the pointer to the shorter term. some people have more capability to move these boundaries and overcome that than others. you to help each other. we have a lot of initiatives. francine: next, we continue the conversation with paul polman, the ceo of unilever, about leadership and key values. paul: to me, a leader is not just because i have this job. a leader is somebody who leads from the back like a shepherd with the sheep. francine: more on the interview, next. ♪

♪ francine: welcome back to leaders with me, francine lacqua. unilever is one of the top companies the world work for a -- one of the top companies in the world. this is the final part of my conversation with paul polman, we discuss leadership. paul: leaders are not relegated to a level of the company. for example, the medical community that went to west africa to fight ebola, those are real leaders. i work a lot with the blind and deaf, people who put themselves 24 hours for the availability of people with disabilities.

those are real leaders. often, in fact come the teachers and nurses, these people who are real leaders that positively impact others, are undervalued strangely enough. so, to me a leader is not just because we happen to have a job. i also think that a leader is not necessarily only somebody who leads from the front. a good leader probably leads more from the back than the front, like a shepherd does. ultimately, i hope they say that they do not like me, but i would hope that i could say that there is respect, because ultimately, i think the jobs that we do these are very challenging jobs. it also means some of the decisions are involved in our decisions that are not that easy. otherwise, they would not arrive at you. you tend to not make friends. if you try to make friends, you will not do your job very well. if you want a friend, get a dog. often you make tough decisions. that is why it is so important to be purpose driven. that is probably the only beacon that you can have. your own true north to help you navigate a more volatile environment. francine: how must you think about the world?

about making the world a better place? do you remember at what age you started thinking about that? paul: i had to work very hard, because a lot of things were deprived for my parents. they wanted to help their children and give them a better future. they were tremendously involved in community activities. they met in boy scouts. i have always felt that the purpose is to help each other. i wanted to be a priest or doctor. life sometimes goes in a different direction. i'm in business, but i find that in a company like this i can make a positive influence, and sometimes even more than anything else. so, it is all about leadership. at the end of the day, it is all about positively influencing others. if you can do that, wherever you are, you are a leader. francine: what do you look for in the managers that you bring up? paul: well, there are a number of values that you have. at any level leadership there is a certain level of intelligence you need. in today's world, next to intech or tea other things that you know, i think you want people in this world that have a high level of awareness with issues that are going on. not only a high level of awareness, but to be able to engage themselves. ultimately, that is what counts.

do that with a high level of humanity and humility. i think those will make the better leaders. these are leaders that need to have some new skills like systemic thinking, how do you put this complexity together? tailor it to simplicity and drive into action. leaders that can work in partnership with others.

understand that it is about the common good. leaders that maybe take a longer-term view and our purpose driven. i think there are many of them. as i've said many times, we are short of leaders and trees in the world. the more we can create, the better will be. francine: how do you create? these are things you don't learn in textbook. paul: for example, we have a lot of social entrepreneurs that we attach to our business model. they bring in a fresh way of thinking. we created the unilever young social entrepreneur award. we have 800 or 900 people applying every year. in any the projects that we do we want to work with a partnership. we do not really do anymore small projects. be it the social compliance in your chain, or working with your partners to get a sustainable sourcing, we really try to put

these partnerships in place. with the dutch development agency, organizations like unicef, it keeps us honest, because this is a moving thing. we do not have all the answers. we certainly cannot do it alone. we have to be sure that in the approach of creating value across the total value chain and be sure that everybody's included, they have equitable and sustainable wealth we want to create, that everybody is protected. and i can only be done if everybody works in partnership. francine: is there another ceo or a big influence in your life that you admire? paul: there are many people that you admire. the answer you normally get s look at nelson mandela or rosa parks.

some of what they tell you is that these are people who are driven by strong sense of purpose. if a person like rosa parks can change the face of racial segregation, then any individual and their own circle can credit difference. what you have to do is encourage it. we have a lot of efforts in place. we work with these foundations. give a lot of people there. it changes the conventional career path. we bring in examples from other companies. there are many others that have shown that, and that gives us courage. alternately, what gives us purpose to do what we do, and it should be true for everybody is that we realize why we do this. ultimately we do this because we belong to a very small percentage of the population. i estimate it to be about 2% that is actually educated. that has a comfortable job. that can do what they want, work in places where they want.

they do not have to about their family. that is not true for the other 98%. i always believed that it is our duty to put ourselves to the service of the other 98%. the moment in life that you really become a leader, wherever you are in the world, whatever function or job is when you discover that it is not about yourself. francine: do you think capitalism as a whole in three years will be more inclusive? paul: i hope so. there's nothing wrong with capitalism. it is just a word. this year, we have a unique opportunity. in fact, with the sustainable developing goals to alleviate poverty. with climate change negotiations in paris to never have to deal anymore with the issue of climate change, if we decide to do so. action, we have the tools to do it in the next 50 years. so, how can we drive the morality. it is not about laws, rules or regulations.

in fact, they probably in most cases do more harm than good. it is about us all rising to a challenge that is bigger than any individual of us. francine: paul polman, thank you so much. paul: thank you. francine: thank you. ♪ sam: every year around november

or december, many journalists will get an assignment that makes them feel -- >> gulp. >> oh boy. sam: a little nervous. >> shoot, man, you are putting me on the spot. sam: they will be asked to write a story about what will happen in the coming year. >> the worst thing journalists can do is try and predict the future. >> i don't think anyone has made an accurate prediction once. >> there is an excellent chance that i am going to be wrong. sam: predicting the future is a tough job, but you know what they say about tough jobs. some schmuck's got to go out and do it. >> i'm standing in front of a jet engine. sam: we thought about the latest stories and developments in medicine, transportation, and energy. stories that we think will have a huge impact in 2016.

so without further ado, i give you the "the year ahead: 2016." i really hope we don't look like idiots a year from now. >> i was driving down the road. i had my arm laid over the window of my automobile. the next thing you know, the state police was pulling me over. they said, we need to see your hand. i said, i am without a hand. i am an amputee. i stuck my hand out and he said, put that gun down. i said, this is not a gun. i said, you can see there are

both hands and i cannot do anything else. i said what it is is that it is a newest thing in prosthetics, an implant. they said, do us a favor and don't put your arm out the window until you get a prosthetic on there. we got more things to do than keep pulling you over. [laughter] ♪ >> i used to be a salesman. in 2005, i was diagnosed with having cancer in my left forearm. it was so aggressive, it just wouldn't even slow down. in 2008, they amputated my arm just above the elbow. i got a second chance at life. you don't think that doesn't make me happy and give me that much more of a drive, yes, it does. >> ready and go. hold it. hold it. hold it. hold it. relax. sam: johnny matheney has become something of a guinea pig for experimental prosthetics. >> hand open. sam: what he is testing here,

here being the johns hopkins applied physics laboratory, is a glimpse into the future of how humans and machines interact. it is a mind-controlled arm that attaches directly to his skeleton. and it is the result of a decade of work and $120 million of military funding. courtney: so, this is the first time that we are attaching a prosthetic device to an implant that protrudes out of his skin and allows the prosthesis to actually be physically attached to his skeleton. >> ok, elbows in. johnny: i had a problem with all the arms that i was working with. i was having skin breakdown on my stump. with osseointegration, you do not have to worry about suction on the stump, it connects directly to the implant. so therefore, you can continue wearing it, no matter what. sam: johnny's implant allows for more strength and mobility. but maybe more impressive is he can control the arm with his thoughts. for this, he had to undergo

another surgery to rearrange the nerves from his missing arm. >> so we will start with new movement. ready? go. dr. chi: we are actually witnessing something that has never been done before. is johnny really controlling that limb by thinking about it with normal, intuitive thought. we are using wireless bio bands to transmit that muscle activity. so now when he thinks about moving his missing limb, it now contracts the newly-integrated muscles. ♪ >> elbow flexion, ready and go. hand open and go. wrist rotated, and go.

ready and go. and go. and go. johnny: it's hard. i've done hundreds of thousands of hours of mental exercises, just trying to do the different grips, bends, rotations, points. so anyone that right after the surgery thinks they can step right back into it, you start working on it and you are in for a rude awakening. it takes a lot of time. >> you want to hand that to me? sam: getting johnny to communicate with the arm is only half the challenge. the ultimate goal is for the arm to talk back to johnny. soon, he will be able to feel how hard or soft something is, and understand its texture, and even its temperature. as he moves forward, johnny represents a future, where robotics goes from being a tool we use to actually becoming a part of us. johnny: i want the ultimate arm, i want to be as near natural as a human arm as possible.

you trust me? >> yeah. johnny: handshake me. how are you doing? >> good. johnny: good to meet you. i am like the model t of cars. or i am the wright brothers of airplane. you know, i am the beginning. as we progress, you will see us finally move up to the maseratis or the supersonic jets. so we are going to say "back to the future" has begun. ♪ >> we are standing here at the largest seawater desalination facility in the western hemisphere. it will produce up to 54 million gallons a day. >> the ocean contains 97% of all water on earth, so it is certainly a reliable, drought proof water source for california. ♪

sam: after a year in which oil prices dominated the news, you might think the same issues will drive next year's energy stories. but if you just focus on oil prices, you will miss the larger picture for 2016. we rely on oil, of course, for

transportation and petrol chemicals, but it is not the only game in town anymore. as our reliance on oil shrinks, we will turn not to just one new source of energy, but several. this is different than what has happened in the past. previously, one form of energy was superseded by another. in the 19th century, our reliance on wood gave way to coal. and in the 20th century, that yielded to oil. but in the 21st century, the next step won't be an orderly progression from one fuel to the next. it will be a free-for-all. so, which source stands the best shot? let's get the easy answer out of the way first. it isn't going to be coal. although japan and china will add coal plants this year, coal's share of u.s. electricity production has gone down 17% since 2005. coal is just too dirty in the face of climate change. nuclear energy isn't doing so hot these days either. since fukushima, several aging u.s. plants have been closed,

and germany, japan, taiwan, and other countries are planning to phase out nuclear energy altogether. from there, though, the energy picture gets a lot sunnier. natural gas is the big success story of the past few years, pouring out of u.s. fracking projects and undercutting coal as a cheap source of electricity. wind power is as cheap as coal in germany and the u.k., and demand for solar is actually the highest it has ever been, which may have to do with the price of solar panels dropping 95% since 2008. in spite of all this upheaval, oil is still king. it's our single largest power source, and that is not going to change in 2016. between high u.s. output, iran probably resuming its exports, and saudi arabia lowballing to maintain market share, oil prices are likely to stay low for a while. which means less incentive to find an alternative. but there is a funny thing about oil you may not have noticed. it does not really compete with the others directly. oil mostly powers cars, ships, and planes, while the others

mostly generate electricity. the wildcard for oil in 2016 and beyond is how fast cars might start to run on electricity instead of gasoline or diesel. if and when we see a big shift, it may signal the true end of the oil age, but it won't be replaced by the "solar age" or the "biofuel age" or the "wind age." it will be replaced by all of them. this is the pacific ocean. as far as oceans are concerned, it is definitely in my top five. you can swim in it, surf on it, or just stare at it and think about your place in the

universe. one thing you might not immediately think to do with the pacific is drink out of it. and yet, in the year 2016, that is exactly what the residents of san diego county will be doing. ♪ bob: we are standing here at the site of the carlsbad desalination project, the largest seawater desalination facility in the western hemisphere. it will produce up to 54 million gallons a day. that is enough to fill an olympic-sized swimming pool every 18 minutes. so it is quite a significant, new water supply for our region. sam: everyone knows california is going through a serious drought, and has been since 2013. but in spite of sitting next to 187 quintillion gallons of water in the pacific ocean, desalination has never been an obvious solution. plants of this scale are common

in israel and saudi arabia, but here in the u.s., there has never been anything like it. is it fair to say that southern california now is facing the same kind of challenges that places even like the deserts of the middle east were looking at a few decades ago? >> sure. this is a mediterranean climate. and the way that southern california solved their water resource issue historically was to import water. and that was available at the time and not as reliable now. >> san diego gets about 64% of its water from the colorado river. 11 out of the last 16 years on the colorado river have been drought years. so we like to say the low hanging fruit is gone. sam: you have done all you can do with the existing sources. now, you actually need to create new sources of water? bob: that is correct. sam: so this is where it all happens? jessica: yes. we are in the reverse osmosis building. this is where we actually take

out the salt from the water. sam: this is how every major desalination plant in the world works. you take in seawater, run it through reverse osmosis, and you're left with 50% freshwater and 50% super-salty wastewater, which gets rediluted and dumped back into the ocean. this is also where the whole idea of converting seawater to drinking water starts to run into trouble. >> the reverse osmosis process requires a significant amount of pressure, and that pressure requires energy. >> we consume between 33 and 38 megawatts of power. we are the single largest power user in san diego county. sam: all that power costs money, and this is why seawater desalination has never really worked in the u.s. we have always had cheaper water

sources available. so the developers of the carlsbad plant have spent about $1 billion trying to make it as efficient as it possibly can be. one key part of that efficiency is this room full of orange tubes. jessica: the salty water leaving the plant is still at a very high pressure. we run that through our energy recovery devices. by doing that, we are able to recover about 40% of the energy used in the plant. sam: mitigating the considerable amount of energy that a plant like this does require? jessica: correct. sam: in spite of all this efficiency, desalinating water still costs about 30% more than importing it. which means san diego water bills will go up when the plant comes online. and while generating 54 million gallons of water per day may sound like a lot, that is actually only 10% of san diego's water needs. so if you ask, is desalination the solution to california's water crisis? the answer is, well, no, but it will probably be a part of the

solution. as climate change makes dry places even drier, we are going to reach for whatever new water sources are available, even those that may seem impractical today. the future of california's drought is uncertain, but one thing is for sure, people will keep looking out at those 187 quintillion gallons of water and thinking, that could work. mama, it's me. yeah, i am standing in front of a jet engine. we are testing out how loud it is. ♪

sam: we have lived in the jet age for around 70 years. it is arguably one of the greatest innovations of the past century, linking points and people all around the planet. but the jet engine is not without some drawbacks. jets, while fast, are also loud. they eat up tons of fuel, and they are not so great for the environment. many people have tried to make improvements to the jet engine, but few can claim to have been in it as long as mike mccune. mike is an engineer at pratt and whitney. a pretty good one, actually, with 66 patents to his name. and he has had this one idea they could radically change the jet engine, something incredibly

simple, but fiendishly difficult. he and his colleagues have been at it for 30 years, spending $10 billion in the process, and they think they have finally cracked it. ♪ mike: the problem with a conventional gas turbine engine is the fan that generates thrust on the front of the engine wants to spin slow for efficiency. the turbine driving the fan at the back of the engine wants to spin fast for efficiency. so you attach the turbine directly to the fan, neither is running at the speeded wants for the best efficiency. sam: but you have created something that solves that problem? mike: yes, the way we solve the problem of compromising the fan and turbine was to introduce a gearbox and shaft that reduces the speed of the fan and lets the turbines spin faster.

so each component can now spin at an optimum speed for its best efficiency. sam: why would you want the fan to spin slowly? that seems counterintuitive, given that the purpose of a jet is to go really fast. mike: the reason you want a fan to spin slow is when it runs really fast, it will generate shockwaves because the tips are going supersonic. that generates a lot of drag. so by slowing the tips to be subsonic, the fan becomes more efficient. sam: that efficiency translates into a 15% reduction in fuel consumption, which may sound modest but has a very real effect on an airline's bottom line. mike: they will save about $1.5 million per airplane per year. sam: an engine that burns less fuel also emits fewer pollutants. the changes also mean an engine that is much quieter. up to 75% quieter, in fact. mama, it's me. no, no, i'm still in florida.

of a i'm standing in front jet engine. we are testing out how loud it is. oh, yeah, but you can hear me, right? yeah. all right. i love you. bye. ♪ sam: it works. [laughter] pratt & whitney says we might fly on a plane with these engines as soon as the end of the year. currently, they are being tested around the clock for about two months, making sure stuff like wind, hail, or birds won't break them. in an age when new technologies can arrive almost daily, a 30-year project sounds almost insane.

but mccune is betting his breakthrough will pay off for a long, long time. >> are you going to ask me questions or what? ♪ >> the most powerful modern rocket in the world will launch into space for the first time, and it will be built by spacex. >> virtual reality headsets will launch in great abundance and will quickly be relegated to the world of video games. >> i think volkswagen will ditch its diesels and go for the electric engines. >> apple will not come out with a car in 2016, that is for sure. >> 2016 will be either the first or second hottest year on record. >> 2016 will be longer than 2015.

because it's a leap year. >> yoga pants are going to take over the world. peak yoga pants has not been reached yet. >> men will be wearing pink. >> men will be made fun of for wearing shorts in the office. in the summer. when it is 100 degrees out. >> my prediction is that people will stop making predictions, because they will realize they don't usually actually come true. >> how am i going to predict 2016? i cannot even predict what i'm having for lunch today. tom: it is a terrible question. >> totally pointless. >> hell may freeze over. but the euro crisis will not be solved. >> i think the fed will definitely be raising rates. >> the fed will raise rates. >> i don't think that the fed will raise interest rates substantially in 2016. >> starbucks will introduce a new twist on their pumpkin spice latte that will drown out all talk about rates or inflation. >> donald trump will not be

elected president. >> i do not think that donald trump -- >> donald trump will definitely not be president. >> donald trump will actually admit that it is a toupee. >> al gore will not be elected president. i think. >> i think hillary clinton will be elected president. >> hillary clinton will be elected president. >> hillary clinton will win. >> the thing is we keep predicting that hillary clinton will be president, and then she keeps not becoming president. but i am not going to go so far as to say hillary clinton will not be president. because only a fool, at this point, would say that hillary clinton is not going to be president. >> i am generally a pessimistic person. i'm guessing 2016 is going to look a little bit better than 2015. >> i feel very optimistic about next year. >> how can you not be optimistic, right? >> so deeply pessimistic. >> i would say neutral. >> i would like to think it is going to be a good year. >> radiohead will put out a new album and it will be terrific. >> i am sure things will work out just fine. >> i should have done the research before. this is going to tell us so much. ah. the year of the monkey. that's going to be a little

volatile, but it is friendly. yes, yes. ♪

♪ narrator: our world today is wealthier than ever. not everyone shares in this wealth. today's young business leaders are challenging this, changing the way we think about money. its power and its purpose. this is a new generation. this is the new philanthropy. ♪