>> from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. charlie: we have the president of uber technology. the transportation and logistics unicorn many investors consider more valuable than ford motor company and fedex. it is valued at $62.5 billion. it has expanded to ride-sharing. a class action lawsuit over the

classification of drivers instead of contractors is ongoing. i am pleased to have travis at this table for the first time. this is fast company innovation. a year ago, $50 billion, a legion of enemies how you plan to keep the magic going admitted you love uber. people seem to love uber. what makes it? travis: well, we didn't realize it, but it is hard to get around. i think a lot of people either get used to waiting for a bus, used to driving a car usually or used to not being able to go somewhere when they want to. it could even be like, you want to get a restaurant and don't know how you are going to get back.

this is about safe, reliable transportation. no matter where you are in the world. charlie: how did you start it? was with my cofounder and we were in paris m we could not get a taxi. anybody who has been out late in paris knows it's very likely you will be walking back to your hotel if you are a visitor or walking back home if you lived there. my co-founder said, i want to push a button and get a ride. and i said that sounds like an amazing thing and went back to san francisco and started working on it. charlie: you had been an entrepreneur before that with success and failure? >> yeah. i have been an entrepreneur since i been out of high school. i have seen the trials and tribulations of an entrepreneur.

my approach is on the failure side, it's like you are going to get knocked down, but you just find a way to keep getting back up. and when you said failure, maybe not. definitely think that people would look at see some failures. but if you keep getting back up and putting your all into it, i found that you eventually found success. charlie: finish this sentence for me, uber could not have happened without -- >> smartphone. a smartphone connected with data. charlie: someone asked the question about lowering prices. very good for the consumer. perhaps not so good for the driver. but there's an answer to that. >> look, what we found is that

when prices go down, a lot more people can use it and becomes a lot more affordable to a lot more people. and you see people using it in places and times that they wouldn't before. what that means is when a driver drops a customer off, he then can get another request much more quickly and so what happens, the trips per hour that that driver can do and the price goes down, volume goes up. what happens is we have gone from, for instance here in new york, we have gone from four years ago, the driver was making about $19 an hour, go all the way up to $32 an hour because everything got more efficient as we moved prices down the driver is making more prices. charlie: how many governments have prevented you? >> in almost city, the industry

attempts to persuade the government to do what we believe is the wrong thing which is not allow competition. we are very pro competition and that's the principles in which we try to engage in a city, but obviously incumbents don't want that. charlie: there are questions about employees versus private contractors. >> the way to think about this, it starts with how the independent contractor thing works not just here in the u.s. but around the world. over 90% of the taxi drivers in the united states are independent contractors today. but those taxi drivers have shifts. a lot of cases, 12-hour shifts. charlie: medical benefits? >> they are independent contractors.

they have shifts and it's not their equipment and not their car. and uber world, there are no shifts, you work when you want and stop working when you want. and and it's your car. it is really your business. we feel like the independence that drivers have on their platform is pretty clear and it's about the political discussion about, you know as a community, making sure that the labor side of the equation is getting a good or fair deal. >> and part of the sharing economy. what else is vulnerable or open or possibly changing because of the sharing economy? >> well, look, i like to think of it at least where the world uber is in is on-demand economy.

you push a button you get a ride. but on the labor side, pushing a button work and starting work and pushing a button and stopping work is the flexibility that is the real break-through in what i call the on-demand economy. charlie: you can shape your own hours. >> you literally have control of your time. there is very little work in the world that allows for that. and that's a true break-through and do it at scale and talk about millions of people who can work on their own time when they choose. charlie: are you in a hurry to do something? people talk about you and they believe that you are trying to rise to higher and higher levels of scale because it means something to you. but you have developed this profile of a young man. >> you know, how should i put it? we look at all of the cities and hundreds of millions and

billions of people that live in cities around the world and we know the transportation systems there are not serving everybody's needs. even here in new york with a great transit system, there are 2.5 million cars going over those bridges. we believe we can help the city do better. i guess most successful entrepreneurs are not waiting for success and not waiting for progress. we are generally a little bit forward leaning when it tries to make progress happen. charlie: you have become, i think, in love with the idea that you have been part of -- and you can't wait to push the edges of what that is. >> for me, it's about problem

solving and loving to solve problems. and so, if you are passionate about solving problems and sometimes i would like to describe this as like, imagine a really great math professor with no problems to solve. a great math professor is someone who wants the hardest problems and loves solving them. and that's kind of how i feel about my work. it's not about a man in a hurry, but more about really interesting problems in the world and how you lean into them and solve things that people think weren't possible to solve. you know, i like problems. i like problems that have -- charlie: consequences. >> certainly that. but i like problems where you can fight for something that matters. where you feel like maybe there is a little bit of justice that is part of solving. charlie: how would you define what matters in your case?

>> like in the uber's case, imagine the way in which all people get around their city. what's constrained because somehow or another, it was illegal to have alternatives. and somehow or another, it became illegal for cars to be used for commercial purposes and because of that, everybody for the last 50 years had to buy cars because no cars were allowed to be shared. charlie: the technology wasn't there to be shared. >> not necessarily. the jitney -- there was an uber before there was uber and it was called the jitney and it grew faster than uber has grown. but very quickly, there were regulations put into effect that made it illegal for people to share cars.

charlie: when will you be profitable? >> well, it's interesting. we are like some other tech companies, maybe like an amazon where the profit that come in, you invest in a new thing. for us, we are well over 100 cities that are profitable. but you take those profits and invest in new cities or new technology or new kinds of businesses. i don't want to do too many things. we keep a limited set of things he we can do so we can stay focused. we invest our profits. charlie: uber commute. >> uber commute. uber pool is you push a button, you get in the car and somebody else already in the car. two people taking the same trip at the same time. uber commute.

they are not a commercial driver and they pick you up on the way to work and you happen to be going the same place to the same time. the cost goes down because the person is going where they want to. they are already going to work. the marginal costs go down substantial. charlie: what about the costs? >> i mean, look, something like 30 -- close to a third of all of our trips are in china. that's interesting. charlie: a third of your volume is in china? and what do you think it will be by 2020? >> i have no idea. charlie: you love thinking about it? >> for sure. what i love is solving the problem. charlie: what does solving the problem mean in china's case? china is a different place and

you have to make your way around a different set of rules? >> it's the latter. for instance, we have our existing system, but there are so many things different in china. maps are different, social networks are different, payment systems are different. government and how they work with businesses are different. now you have a whole new problem to solve. sometimes, it's like it's different in that little way, that chinese way of doing things can change everything. and it's interesting for an entrepreneur and problem solver. charlie: how will driverless cars affect your business? >> we see all of the good things that happen were human-driven transportation, what uber does today, people driving cars. when you go in, well, those benefits get bigger in many cases but i think the biggest one is that a million people die

a year in cars and when you go into autonomous cars and google has been working on this, when you go into autonomous cars, a million fewer people dying every year. that's a huge deal. this is like senseless deaths. charlie: how far away is that? >> there's no right answer. nobody really knows because there is still science to be solved and still regulatory to be solved. if you have an autonomous -- if a google is in the desert and no crosswalks and no people, well, they have it now. if there is crosswalks, if there is extreme weather, maybe it isn't functioning quite right. there are's hundreds of these

types of problems that have to be solved one at a time in order for it to work all of the time. charlie: issues of people either a driver being attacked by somebody in the back or a driver acting hysterical in terms of taking off and running stop signs and going too fast. what are you going to do about it? >> you know -- uber's cultural value is to celebrate the city and what that means is everything we do is to make a city better. the first thing we do is we say, what can we do to make the safest way from point a to point b. part two is, that's great, but how can we make the city safer.

no system is going to be perfect. but can you institute technology, rule out technological systems that actually make being in an uber or make uber the safest place in a city. and these are things like of course things you do before the trip even happens, making sure the right drivers get on the road. making sure that any feedback that is happening in a car goes back to a centralized system and you can deal with situations or partners called the driver partners that you know, if there's feedback that needs to get back to them, we do. in an extreme situation, we take them off the system. after the ride, too.

and imagine if you had a system where -- and this is the kind of technology that's interesting, let's say someone is accelerating or decelerating faster than they should, is there a way to detect that, this is the kind of future we are trying to figure out. are there ways to prevent it. there is a system of accountability and technology that makes that system more accountable. charlie: what do you worry about in the middle of the night about uber. disruptive technology that could change the game? >> we basically are about making it more convenient and bringing that convenience at a lower cost and whoever is able to bring the most amount of convenience at the lowest cost is going to be a big winner in bringing transportation to cities.

charlie: why did you change your image and need a new symbol of uber? >> look, when we first came up with the old logo, we were only black hearts. we were high end, a high end service, a luxury service and this was an aspiration and we were trying to show something that looked high end and that could almost look like something that could go on the front of a he very nice car. but we were only one city. and we said look, for now and almost 400 cities, dozens of countries around the world, we wanted to be differential to the places that we serve. that's where the colors and the patterns come in. and you are in different countries, you get a different pattern and color on your icon and then the u, we turned into something more universal. and we wanted to to have

something more approachable and that was the purpose. charlie: great to have you here. ♪

charlie: co-founder and c.e.o. of air bnb to help people book accommodations around the world.

it has connected 80 million guests with hosts in 190 countries and valued at $25 billion. writing in "time" magazine last year, brian's audacity is fabulous and dares to believe we shouldn't be strangers that we can have a sense of true belonging wherever and whenever we travel. i'm pleased to have brian back at this table. i love the quote, too. you two share something. >> we love design. when i was in college, a lot of kids put possible terse of lebron james'. i went to rhode island school of design and i told johnny that.

charlie: he and mark are such close friends. and we did a program together and they were terrific and did things on "60 minutes." remind me again for people and you talked about this before, understanding what air b and b -- airbnb does. >> you can go to airbnb and you can book two million homes in 191 countries, homes, apartments, castles, boats, tree houses. we start with homes and one day someone added a castle. the big idea, though, was we basically provide -- when people travel, if you ask someone like in your own city, if they travel, you ask where did you go, they will mention the tourist districts and why can't you go somewhere and feel like you live in that community and live in a home. so this is the basic idea and

feel like you live in that community. charlie: you started with a website and you and a couple of your friends. >> i couldn't afford to pay rent and we were living in san francisco and we thought, why don't we host some people. we evently, we want to make a big and breakfast. -- we wanted to make a bed and breakfast. and we called it the air bed and breakfast and three air beds would have inspired two million homes. charlie: this is a sector of the economy that has huge promise? >> not even close to be being utilized. you will see a factor of 10. i think the whole economy has a huge explosion of economy. we used to live in a world where there were people and businesses and very clear line. we are living in a world where

people are acting like businesses. i can drive a car on the side and share my home. there are so many opportunities. charlie: you don't think your competition is hotels? >> no. average stay is two nights. average stay at airbnb is five nights. you ask the c.e.o.'s of marriott, they don't think there is an overlap. we are solving a problem. you want to go to a city for a week and be part of a community, there are not a lot of available options. we handle all payments through our platforms and take 14% commission. charlie: that's it? >> that's it. charlie: 85% of the rent? >> yeah. that's how it works. our average host makes close to $8,000 a year.

for most people, money they make it on the side. charlie: most people do it on their mobile device? >> they use the web also. charlie: one of the great stories is paul graham who came here and you had not a great success looking for money. and you went to him. >> it's amazing. originally, another company, michael, one of our first advisers introduced 15 angels and looking to raise $150,000 and sell 10% of the company. i couldn't get people to reapply to our i mails. we were out of money and we had a binder and paul graham told us, he admitted, he thought it was a bad idea and he realized this is an investment and he said we were like cockroaches. we kept doing it.

and that was a complyment. he believes in us. charlie: how do you grow? >> the way you grow is the way that walt disney and steve jobs talked about thousand they grew. when they love it, they tell other people. silicon valley, everyone is focused on growth. i said we should focus on making great trips. they tell other people about it. 70% to 80% comes from word of mouth. and so word of mouth is how we grow. charlie: and you have said, you highlight the word belonging. x when people see airbnb, it's easy to see that we offer homes

and spaces. behind the spaces are people. and we have 1.1 million hosts. it's about the hosts and the hosts welcome you in. they bring you in like family. i have asked many people what word comes to mind. a lot of people brings up the word with friendship. there is a meaningful experience. it doesn't always happen. charlie: it can be a learning experience. >> for example, we launched in cuba last year, we have americans from every state in the united states have visited cuba. it's amazing. we have 3,000 homes and somebody from every state in the country have visited. charlie: people are there to welcome the guests? >> 40% of the time. the rest of the time you have the whole whom to yourself. usually you get to meet the person. they'll meet with you and show you the home.

there is this kind of a connection between the two people. charlie: you had a bad incident in san francisco. what happened and what was the leadership lesson you learned? >> a woman's home was trashed and it was a bit of a wakeup call. i came from the kind of school of thought where you hands off marketplace and i thought the community would manage itself. and then this thing happened and outrage. in the wake of that, we built a trust and safety team. i believe now we have a world class trust and safety team. the most important thing was the offer of the thing called the airbnb guarantee. airbnb offered $5,000 protection. he added a zero at the end. he says, you should make it $50,000.

this was terrifying, because we didn't know if we'd even be able to afford to put this program in place. we had to instill confidence. we had to show people that whether it was a 5,000 protection or 50,000, it didn't make a difference to us, because they were so infrequent, the incidents, that we would be able to afford it. i think the incident, before that, i always thought of myself as a founder of airbnb. before that, i really felt like i was a c.e.o., because i had to lead the company in a moment of crisis. >> you said you were going to do this. a lot of people said you can't do it. >> the other thing, i wrote a public apologize letter to her. a lot of people said that was not a well-advised thing. you're opening yourself up to perhaps extra liability. i said, i have to make a principle decision. that is if you don't know how it's going to end, you feel good about the process. >> there's some countries that don't want uber and some cities that don't want uber. >> we're not in north korea, iran or syria, but the countries we're in, i would say generally

they're all happy to have us in, as far as we know. >> aren't there things like san francisco where they're raising questions? >> new york city is probably raising the most questions. but san francisco is -- >> is it the attorney general or -- >> no. the primary issues are there's, you know, laws that were written before airbnb, you know. >> local zoning laws? >> local zoning, hotel tax issues. we've gone now and we are now collecting hotel taxes in 25 cities in the world, including countries. and country by country, we're able to modernize the laws, in france, in the united kingdom. and the whole message we have is, we want to work with cities. the whole point is we want cities to want us. we want to enrich the cities. i actually am optimistic there will be a solution in new york, a long-term solution. >> when you look at the company, what other areas might you expand to? >> well, i like to joke that,

you know, we have 80 million people who have stayed in homes. but people don't travel to stay in homes. they travel to go somewhere to have an experience. they just happen to sleep in a home at night. so i would like us to move from this space, which is a commodity, towards the business of being in the experience. >> do you think people who are host for airbnb are different from the people who drive for uber? >> they may not be. i think there's probably similarities. i'm a writer of uber and lyft. i'm also obviously a big guest. i think all of them have something in common, which is their pretty hospitable people. on airbnb, the index is really high on the hospitality and the welcoming. >> but do you stay at airbnb whenever you travel? >> i am staying right now. >> what have you learned from your mentors, people like georgetown and warren buffet? you spent four hours with warren buffet. >> unbelievable. i got to fly to omaha, nebraska. >> is this something you reached out to? >> yeah. i met him before and he said sure.

i was very surprised because he usually says no to invitations. it was a life changing experience for me. >> great to have you here. >> thank you very much. >> much success to you! ♪

>> we conclude this evening with more of our conversation with tim cook from 2015, and our ongoing inquiry, what makes apple, apple? >> anybody as big as apple has to live within rules and regulations. and interfaced with the government of the united states. how do you feel about that? >> i -- it's true. we, you know, operate with a group of laws in every country that we're in, not just the u.s., but in every country. we're a global company that is a complex matrix a lot of times. and it's clear to me that we have a responsibility to try to influence legislation where we can that will help our company, our employees, our customers. and we try our best to do that. >> so you've got to engage in

lobbying? >> i don't think of it as lobbying, honestly, because lobbying to me -- i'm serious. lobbying to me is -- >> trying to get the congress -- >> trying to get -- >> no. i mean having a voice in government. and you have people to articulate a point of you that you have. >> and we do that. >> and people who are very skilled at that. >> yes, we definitely do that. we do that principally around the environment and human rights and education. and other things that affect the operations of the company, whether it's regulations -- and we do that around privacy, because we believe that people have a fundamental right to

privacy. >> i want to talk about a number of those. first, privacy. where do we stand? because you have been the great exponent of encryption. you've been the great exponent also of the idea that, you know, these other guys are selling information, personal information. we're simply selling products. and we're not interested in releasing your personal information and we're not interested in anybody having access to it, including the government. so we encrypt. others say, in the government, you know what they say. they say it's like saying, you know, you have a search warrant but you can't unlock the trunk. >> yeah. let's talk about what it's really like. here's the situation. on your smartphone today and your iphone, there's likely health information, there's financial information. there are intimate conversations

with your family, coworkers. there's probably business secrets from the work that you're doing. and there's also tracks of what you searched on, lots of information about what you're looking at and writing and maybe your a journalist, maybe even your sources. right? and all of this stuff is incredibly personal. and we believe incredibly private, and you should have the ability to protect it. and the only way we know how to do that is to encrypt it. why is that? it's because if there is a way to get in, then somebody will find the way in. there have been people that suggest that we should have a back door. but the reality is, if you put a back door in, that back door is for everybody, good guys and bad guys. so we don't know of a way, nor have i heard of anybody else that came up with a way, to safeguard your information unless we encrypt it. >> but does the government have a point in which they say, if we have good reason to believe in that information is evidence of

criminal conduct or national security behavior? >> if the government lays a proper warrant on us today and it's through the courts and so forth, the judge has ruled, then we will give the specific information that is requested, because we have to, by law. in the case of encrypted communication, we don't have it to give. and so, like your imessages are encrypted. we don't have access to those. your face time is encrypted. >> help me understand how you get to the government's dilemma. >> well, the problem with that is saying -- i don't believe that the trade-off here is privacy vs. national security. i think that is an overly simplistic view. we're in america. we should have both. we shouldn't give up national security for privacy and we

shouldn't give up our privacy for national security. and i believe strongly we can have both. >> but i don't know how that is. >> well, but think about the guys on the other side, very smart. the guys in the n.s.a., et cetera, very smart. these guys are top-notch. and i can't talk in detail and i'm sure they won't talk in detail, but i think they have lots of ways to gather intelligence information. and this is one way. and the reality is, if we give that one way, we're not giving it to just them, because we just opened it up for the world to have. for anybody, for every hacker, for everybody out there that might want information. and so we must encrypt is the answer. and you find, charlie, it's not just about apple encrypting. everybody will need to encrypt. many companies are already encrypting, because it's the only way to -- i think that most people have come to agree with

sort of the high-level tenets that encryption is a must and that any back door that is not -- that it's not possible to have a back door, without it being for everybody. so i think most people are there on those. i think the f.b.i. would like help in some of their cases. and i think they're probably off, i'm sure, working on alternate forms of intelligence gathering, et cetera. these are very smart people. and so -- but i do believe that everybody is moving toward realizing encryption is not bad, that in fact encryption is good, because it shields you from many crimes that would occur if the information weren't encrypted. >> but you also made a speech in which you talk about the other side of this, which is people who -- information that's too easily accessible.

you know, that in fact those companies will lull you into a kind of complacency about what happens to your information, which is being sent out so other people can monetize it. >> yeah. i think that -- you know, we have this very straightforward business model, that if you decide to buy an iphone, we'll make money. if you decide to buy an ipad, we'll make money. we don't try to build a profile of charlie rose to make money. it's not in our value system to do that. >> but the value question -- >> it's a value question for us. i'm not condemning other people. i'm saying for us, it's a value question. we're fine with people advertising. we advertise. but we don't feel that developing a detail profile of what you search for, reading your e-mails, reading your messages, this doesn't seem like a way to run the company. to me, it's -- >> it smacks of what to you? >> i think privacy is a fundamental personal right. i think over time, what happens

in that kind of environment, charlie, is that you wind up -- something major will occur and everybody will wake up, and say, i didn't know all of that was out there calipari -- out there! and we'll go through this gut-wrenching and some of this stuff will be reeled in. i hope that that doesn't happen, but i think, honestly, that it will. >> we have talked, from the beginning of this conversation, about how rich and big you are. you're the c.e.o., with huge responsibilities, the largest company in the world, by market cap. you have $200 billion in essentially cash. you can do a hell of a lot with $200 billion. and you're in a great place. everybody would love to be where you are. what is the pressure on you? what is the pressure to come out every year with new products wham what is the pressure to make sure that your revenue -- you know, that you satisfy wall

street, to keep this great thing? >> the key for us, on many of these things, is to focus on what we can control. the truth is, i can't control what wall street thinks or what they do. what we can control as a company is, are we making the best products? are we really making great products that enrich people's lives? i believe strongly, that over the long term, if we do that right, the rest of the things will take care of themselves. revenues, profits, market capitalization. >> but you must believe the market expects something from you? >> i think the expectations are always huge, always huge. but my focus is not on that. it's on this thing that we can control. i'm pretty good at tuning out all of the noise out here. and i think we have to be, because we kind of live in a bit

of an aquarium. and you can get carried away with the noise. and if you don't shut it off, it will run your life. and that's a terrible life to have. i don't want to have that life. what i want to do is focus on things i can help on. and i want apple to focus on things apple can do. apple can make incredibly great products. we can't control wall street. right? wall street -- i think very much that if we do this well, this takes care of itself. >> but you're saying i don't feel that pressure, i am just doing the best i can, creating the best products, i'll bring them to market when i think they're ready and no sooner. and you can imagine whatever you want, but i'm telling you that we're listening to our own drummer and coming to market when we're ready to come to market and you can ask all the questions you ask, but we'll make the determination, because what you expect from us are the best products in the world?

>> i'd say it differently than that, but basically -- >> how would you say it? >> i would say we're in this for the long term. we run apple for the long term. we're not running apple on the reporting cycle. today's reporting cycle for every public company is 90 days. this is the most absurd thing in the world. we don't run apple on a 90-day clockful that's not how we think. we're making investments that cover multiple years. you and i just talked about how long it took to develop on iphone, the apple watch. these are multi-year investments. the thousands of people that we will designing silicon, that are the heart and engine of the hardware, these things take many years. and so we don't make decisions on a 90-day clock.

and i refuse to subject apple to be run like that. they need to find somebody else, if they want apple to run like that. and so what we do is make decisions that we believe are in the long-term interests of the company, not on this 90-day clock. and i do believe, however, that over the long term, the market realizes that and they will award the company accordingly. >> that sounds like the amazon philosophy too. >> actually, i think it probably is, in some ways, yeah, that -- i think they're making long-term decisions. and -- but there is a disconnect between this thing called wall street and the way i -- at least i believe companies should be run and the way we run apple. there is a disconnect. and hopefully one day that will be addressed as well.

it's kind of silly, if you came in from mars and looked at this, who would ever have a 90-day reporting clock for a company making multi-year investments? >> people like warren buffet and everybody else. but you also have a lot of money overseas, because of taxes. >> yes. well, let's talk about that for a minute. the reason we have a lot of money -- >> overseas. >> overseas. >> ireland. >> is because 2/3 of our revenues are outside the united states. >> fair enough. but president obama and others have said we wish they'd bring them home and create jobs here and do a whole bunch of stuff that they could do. >> and i want to bring them home as well. but i can't afford to bring them home at a 40% tax rate. this just doesn't make sense. it doesn't make sense. and it's not just me. it doesn't make sense for any company, and it's not good for the united states -- >> at what tax rate would it make sense for you?

>> i don't want to get into negotiating on t.v. and i'm not a negotiator in this anyway. it's what the congress determines. >> what would it take, congress? >> i think both political parties agree that the number needs to be substantially less. >> less than half? >> yes. much less than half, because keep in mind, this money has already been taxed internationally and now what you're doing is paying to bring it back. i think it's fair to pay something to bring it back. >> so you -- it's fair to -- >> fair to pay something to bring it back, because it gives us more flexibility. today we have to borrow to invest in the united states, because we want to invest more than we make in the u.s. between giving money to our shareholders and investigating in the u.s., the only way we can do that is to borrow. >> how does it feel to sit there and have senators call you a tax avoider? >> well, it wasn't true. we are the largest taxpayer in the united states, and in the very top list worldwide.

and so that is the honest-to-god truth. and so that part didn't feel good. but what i did feel good about was we came with a solution. and i am hoping that people find it to themselves to work with each other, both parties find a way to work with each other, to get something done. >> finally. two questions. >> yes. >> first, you're in a great place. apple is in a great place. everybody recognizes that. there's some vulnerabilities. there's some risks. what do you fear the most? what -- to use the proverbial journalist question, what causes you to lose sleep at night. >> i'm not one to lose sleep at night. i don't get very much but i don't lose it either. >> you get five hours, i hope?

>> i get about that. but truly, i focus on things where i think they're under our control. >> so you're not worried about china? >> there's a whole bunch of things out there that i worry somewhat that i can't control, but i don't spend any time -- i don't put a lot of time in this because i can't change anybody. >> but you're worried enough to call up cnbc, did you not? >> i'm glad you brought this up. >> i hope you're glad i brought everything up. >> i am, actually. i love this. in my view, there was this -- generally in the media, there was a view that there was a meltdown going on in china. >> right. >> i'm sitting there looking at our numbers, every day. you know, i get up at 3:45, i'm looking at how are we doing in all these countries. and honestly, i would not have known anything was going on in china from any numbers i was looking at.

i only knew it from the news. and so i'm looking at -- >> you looked at those figures throughout china? >> on a daily basis. there's a huge disconnect between the thinking and what i'm seeing. now, maybe we're unique but maybe we're not. maybe there is a disconnect. and so i felt a responsibility, because the disconnect was so large, to say something. and so i answered an e-mail. and just -- and i responded. and -- i mean, it was a journalist. so it's fine to talk to -- >> and guess what happened? the market went up? >> i don't know if it's cause and effect or not. i don't know. but what i do know, charlie, was i'm looking at this, and we're not immune from slowdowns. we are not immune. and so i looked at this and said, my god -- >> if people have to cut their budgets, you're not immune from

the fact that people have to cut their consumer budget? >> that's right. if the consumer is hurt in a massive way, we will feel it. what i honestly think is that we're in the u.s., if the market is down a lot, it generally does correlate eventually to consumer spending. china, there's not as many people in the market. and then their penetration of their net worth in the market is generally less, so it doesn't correlate as much. but the western view is very different. and so i came away -- i honestly think china is much stronger than the common -- sort of the regular view. >> the great debate today is what about the middle class? a, because in certain societies, they think they're losing out to where they were. in other societies, the rise of the middle class has created an emerging market, which has created demand for products, which has created, you know, good times for many businesses.

>> i think this is a very serious problem and is one of the biggest problems of our generation. and i think it's not solved. and i don't think there's enough good ideas on it right now. i honestly think that the problem stems from public education. because the truth is, if you look back at you or i, for me, public education was really important. >> me too. >> without public education, i'm not sitting here talking to charlie rose today. and i feel that too many kids, just because of where they're born, they're not getting a good public education, because public education isn't meeting that bar today as a whole. there are teams that are really good but then there are other places where the funding hasn't been appropriate and we've got to fix that. because everybody deserves a chance. and we're not giving people the chance. >> we're not investing in --

>> that is on us. that is on us. >> and for you, and for your company, looking at the future, what is it that gives you the most optimism? >> well, my -- ha! i'm optimistic about america. this country has always been about re-creating itself, reinventing itself. and eventually, despite obstacles appearing so big at different points in our history, we've always been able to scale the wall. and i think we can do that again. and so, you know, that part of me, the idealism, is still there. the idealism that makes me fit here is the same way that i view this country. and i think we've got a great future. but we have to embrace it. and see it for what it is and

then go for it. and i'm convinced that we will. >> thank you. >> thank you. ♪

angie co. it is noon in hong kong -- data frome latest china shows that exports slumped in february, with shipments plunging 25% in dollar terms from a year earlier. it extended the stricken declines for 16 months, falling 14%. trade surplus has $32.6 billion. show contraction was less than expected in china due to a drop in consumer spending. figures also show that growth begin itsthe boj negative for a program designed to increase lending.