president, to a president who is fighting every day to make america great again. since the first day of this administration, president donald trump has been working tirelessly to keep the promises that he made to the american people. president trump has been reforming health care. enforcing our laws. ending illegal immigration and rebuilding our military and this president has been rolling babb excessive regulations and unfair trade practices that were stifling american jobs. thanks to president trump's leadership, american businesses are growing again. investing in america again. and they're creating jobs in this country instead of shipping jobs overseas. thanks to president donald trump, america is back. [applause] and just last week, we all witnessed the bold leadership of an american president on the world stage putting america

first. from the middle east to europe as leader of the free world, president trump reaffirmed historic alliances and forged new relationships and called on the wider world to confront the threat of terrorism in new and renewed ways. and by the action the president will announce today the american people and the wider world will see once again our president is choosing to put american jobs and american consumers first. our president is choosing to put american energy and american industry first. and by his action today, president donald trump is choosing to put the forgotten men and women of america first. so with gratitude for his and admiration for his unwavering commitment to the american people, it is now my high honor and distinct privilege to introduce to all of you the president of the united states of america, president donald trump. [applause]

president trump: thank you very much. thank you. i would like to begin by addressing the terrorist attack in manila. we're closely monitoring the situation, and i will continue to give updates, if anything happens during this period of time, but it is really very sad as to what's going on throughout the world with terror. our thoughts and our prayers re with all of those affected. before we discuss the paris

accord, i'd like to begin with an update on our tremendous, absolutely tremendous economic progress since election day on november 8. the economy is starting to come back and very, very rapidly. we've added 3.3 trillion $3.3 trillion in stock market value to our economy and more than a million private sector jobs. eve just returned from a trip overseas where we concluded nearly $350 billion of military and economic development for the united states creating hundreds of thousands of jobs. it was a very, very successful trip. believe me. [applause] thank you. thank you. in my meetings at the g7, we have taken historic steps to demand fair and reciprocal

trade that gives americans a level playing field against other nations. we're also working very hard for peace in the middle east and perhaps even peace between the israelis and the palestinians. our attacks on terrorism are grately stepped up, and you see that. you see it all over. from the previous administration, including getting many other countries to make major contributions to the fight against terror. big, big contributions are being made by countries that weren't doing so much in the form of contribution. one by one, we are keeping the promises i made to the american people during my campaign for president. whether it's cutting job-killing regulations, appointing and confirming a tremendous supreme court justice, putting in place tough new ethics rules, achieving a record reduction in illegal

immigration on our southern border, we're bringing jobs, plants and factories back into the united states at numbers which no one until this point thought even possible. and believe me, we've just begun. the fruits of our labor will be seen very shortly even more so. on these issues, and so many more, we're following through on our commitments and i don't want anything to get in our way. i am fighting every day for the great people of this crinlt. -- country. therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect america and its citizens, the united states will withdraw .rom the paris climate accord

[applause] thank you. thank you. but begin negotiations to re-enter either the paris accord or really entirely new transaction in terms that are fair to the united states, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers. so we're getting out. but we will start to negotiate and we will see if we can make a deal that's fair. and if we can, that's great. and if we can't, that's fine. [applause] as president, i can put no other consideration before the well-being of american citizens

. the paris climate accord is simply the latest example of washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the united states to the exclusive benefit of other countries. leaving american workers who i love and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production. thus as of today, the united states will cease all implementation of the nonbinding paris accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. this includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and very importantly the green climate

fund which is costing the nited states a vast fortune. compliance with the terms of the paris accord and the owner's energy restrictions that it's placed on the united states could cost america as much as $2.7 million lost jobs by 2025 according to the national economic research associates. this includes 440,000 fewer manufacturing jobs, not what we need, believe me. this is not what we need. including automobile jobs and the further decimation of vital american industries on which countless communities rely. they rely for so much and we would be giving them so little.

according to the same study by 2040, compliance with the commitments put into place by the previous administration would cut production for the following sectors. paper, down 12%. cement, down 23%. iron and steel down 38%. coal, and i happen to love the coal miners, down 86%. natural gas, down 31%. the cost to the economy at this time would be close to $3 trillion in lost g.d.p. and $6.5 million -- 6.5 million industrial jobs while households would have $7,000

less income and in many cases much worse than that. not only does this deal subject our citizens to harsh economic restrictions, it fails to live up to our environmental ideals. as someone who cares deeply about the environment, which i do, i cannot in good conscience support a deal that punishes the united states which is what it does. the world's leader in environmental protection, while imposing no meaningful obligations on the world's leading polluters. for example, under the agreement, china will be able increase these emissions by a staggering number of years,

3. they can do whatever they want for 13 years. not us. ndia makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries. there are many other examples. but the bottom line is the paris accord is very unfair, at the highest level, to the united states. further, while the current agreement effectively blocks the development of clean coal in america, which it does, and the mines are starting to open up, we're having a big opening in two weeks. pennsylvania, ohio, west virginia, so many places. a big opening of a brand new mine that's unheard of for many years that's not happened. they asked me if i'll go.

i'm going to try. china will be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants. so we can't build the plants, but they can. according to this agreement. india will be allowed to double its coal production by 2020. think of it. india can double their coal production. we're supposed to get rid of ours. even europe is allowed to continue construction of coal plants. in short, the agreement doesn't eliminate coal jobs. it just transfers those jobs out of america and the united states. and ships them to foreign countries. this agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the united states. the rest of the world applauded when we signed the paris

agreement. they went wild. they were so happy. for the simple reason that it put our country, the united states of america, which we all love, at a very, very big economic disadvantage. a cynic would say the obvious reason for economic competitors and their wish to see us remain in the agreement is so that we continue to suffer the self-inflicted major economic wound. we would find it very hard to compete with other countries from other parts of the world. we have among the most abundant energy reserves in the planet sufficient to lift millions of america's poorest workers out of poverty. yet under this agreement, we are effectively putting these reserves under lock and key.

taking away the great wealth of our nation. great wealth. phenomenal wealth. not so long ago, we had no idea we had such wealth. and leaving millions and millions of families trapped in poverty and joblessness. the agreement is a massive redistribution of united states wealth to other countries. at 1% growth, renewable sources of energy can meet some of our domestic demand. but at 3% or 4% growth, which i expect, we need all forms of for able american energy our country. [applause]

will be a grave risk of brownouts and other blackout. our businesses will come to a halt in many cases. and the american family will suffer the consequences in the form of lost jobs and a very diminished quality of life. even if the paris agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it 2 uld only produce a . degrees, this much, celsius eduction in global temperature by the year 2100. tiny, tiny amount. in fact, 14 days of carbon emissions from china alone would wipe out the gains from

america and this is incredible statistic, would totally wipe out the gains from america's expected reductions in the year 2030. after we have had to spend billions and billions of dollars, lost jobs, closed factories and suffered much higher energy costs for our usinesses and for our homes. as "the wall street journal" i don't this morning, the reality is that withdrawing is in america's economic interest and won't matter much to the climate. the united states under the trump administration will continue to be the cleanest and most environmentally friendly country on earth. will be the cleanest. we're going to have the cleanest air. we're going to have the

cleanest water. we will be environmentally friendly. but we're not going to put our businesses out of work. and we're not going to lose our jobs. we're going to grow. we're going to grow rapidly. [applause] and i think you just read it just came out minutes ago the small business report, small businesses, as of just now are booming. hiring people, one of the best reports they've seen in many years. i'm willing to immediately work with democratic leadersto either negotiate our way back in to paris, under the terms that are fair to the united states and its workers or to negotiate a new deal that protects our country and its taxpayers. [applause]

so if the obstructionists want to get together with me, let's make them nonobstructionists. we will all sit down and we will get back into the deal and we'll make it good. and we won't be closing up our factories, and we won't be losing our jobs. and we'll sit down with the democrats and all of the people that represent either the paris accord or something that we can do that's much better than the paris accord. and i think the people of our country will be thrilled. and i think then the people of the world will be thrilled. and until we do that we're out of the agreement. i will work to ensure that america remains the world's leader on environmental issues. but under a framework that is fair and where the burdens and responsibilities are equally shared among the many nations all around the world.

no responsible leader can put the workers and the people of their country at this debilitating and tremendous disadvantage. the fact that the paris deal hamstrings the united states while empowering some of the world's top polluting countries should dispel any doubt as to the real reason why foreign lobbyists wish to keep our magnificent country tied up and bound down by this agreement. it's to give their country an economic edge over the united states. that's not going to happen while i'm president. i'm sorry. [applause] my job as president is to do everything within my power to

give america a level playing field. and to create the economic, regulatory, and tax structures that make america the most prosperous and productive country on earth. and with the highest standard of living and the highest standard of environmental protection. our tax bill is moving along in congress. and i believe it's doing very well. i think a lot of people will be very pleasantly surprised. the republicans are working very, very hard. we would love to have support from the democrats. but we may have to go it alone. but it's going very well. the paris agreement handicaps the united states economy in order to win praise from the very foreign capitals and

global activists that have long sought to gain wealth at our country's expense. they don't put america first. i do. and i always will. [applause] the same nations asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries that have collectively cost america trillions of dollars through tough trade practices and in many cases lax contributions to our critical military alliance. you see what's happening. it's pretty obvious to those that want to keep an open mind. at what point does america get demeaned? at what point do they start laughing at us as a country? we want fair treatment for its

citizens. and we want fair treatment for our taxpayers. we don't want other leaders and other countries laughing at us anymore. and they won't be. they won't be. was elected to represent the citizens of pittsburgh, not paris. [applause] i promise i would exit or renegotiate any deal which fails to serve america's interests. many trade deals will soon be under renegotiation. very rarely do we have a deal that works for this country. but they will soon be under renegotiation. the process has begun from day one. but now we're down to business. beyond the severe energy

restrictions inflicted by the paris accord, it includes yet another scheme to redistribute wealth out of the united states through the so-called green climate fund, nice name. which calls for developed untries to send $100 billion to developing countries, all on op of america's existing and massive foreign aid payments. so we're going to be paying billions and billions and billions of dollars. and we're already way ahead of anybody else, many of the other countries haven't spent anything. and many of them will never pay one dime. the green fund would likely obligate the united states to commit potentially tens of billions of dollars of which

the united states has already . nded over $1 billion nobody else is even close. most of them haven't even paid anything. of uding funds raided out america's budget for the war against terrorism. that's where they came. believe me, they didn't come from me. they came just before i came into office. not good. and not good the way they took the money. united nations, departing top climate officials reportedly described the $100 billion per year as peanuts and stated that the $100 billion is dog.ail that was the

in 2015, the green climate fund's executive director reportedly stated that estimated funding needed would increase to $450 billion per year after 2020. and nobody even knows where the money is going to. nobody has been able to say here is it going to? of course the world's top polluters have no affirmative obligations under the green fund. which we terminate. america is $20 trillion in debt . cash-strapped cities cannot hire enough police officers or fix vital infrastructure. millions of our citizens are out of work and yet under the paris accord, billions of dollars that ought to be invested right here in america

will be sent to the very countries that have taken our factories and our jobs away from us. o think of that. there are serious legal and constitutional issues as well. foreign leaders in europe, asia, and across the world should not have more to say with respect to the u.s. economy than our own citizens and their elected representatives. thus our withdrawal from the agreement represents a reassertion of america's sovereignty. [applause] our constitution is unique among all nations of the world.

nd it is my highest obligation and greatest honor to protect it. and i will. staying in the agreement could also pose serious obstacles for the united states as we begin the process of unlocking the restrictions on america's abundant energy reserves which we have started very strongly. it would once have been unthinkable that an international agreement could prevent the united states from conducting its own domestic economic affairs. but this is the new reality we face if we do not leave the agreement or if we do not negotiate a far better deal. the risks grow as historically -- these agreements only tend to become more and more

ambitious over time. in other words, the paris framework is just the starting point as bad as it is. not an end point. an exiting the agreement protects the united states from future intrusions on the united states' sovereignty. and massive future legal liability. believe me, we have massive legal liability if we stay in. as president, i have one obligation, and that obligation is to the american people. the paris accord would undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our sovereignty, impose unacceptable legal risk and put us at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the

world. it is time to exit the paris accord. [applause] and time to pursue a new deal that protects the environment, our companies, our citizens, and our country. it is time to put youngstown, io, detroit, michigan, and pittsburgh, pennsylvania, along with many, many other locations within our great country before paris, france. it is time to make america great again. thank you. [applause] thank you. thank you very much. [applause] thank you.

thank you very much. thank you very much. very important. i'd like to ask scott pruett who most of you know and respect as i do, just to say a few words. scott, please. scott: thank you, mr. president. your decision today to exit the paris accord reflects your unflinching commitment to put america first. and by exiting, you're fulfilling yet one more campaign promise to the american people. please know that i'm thankful for your fortitude, your courage, and your steadfastness as you serve and lead our country. america finally has a leader who answers only to the people, not to the special interests who had their way for way too long and everything you do, mr. president, you're fighting for the forgotten men and women

across this country. you're our champion for the hard-working citizens all across this land who just want a government that listens to them and represents their interests. you have promised to put america first in all that you do. and you've done that in any number of ways from trade, to national security, to protecting our border, to right sizing washington, d.c. and today, you put america first with regard to international agreements and the environment. this is an historic restoration of american economic independence, one that will benefit the working class, the working poor, and working people of all stripes. with this action, you've declared that the people are rulers of this country once again. and it should be noted that we as a nation do it better than anyone in the world in striking the balance between growing our economy, growing jobs, while also being a good steward of our environment. we owe no apologies to other nations for our environmental stewardship. after all, before the paris accord was ever signed, america

had reduced its co-2 footprint to levels from the early 19 unite's. between the years 2000 and 2014, the united states reduced its carbon emissions by 18% plus. and this was accomplished not through government mandate, but accomplished through innovation and technology of the american private sector. for that reason, mr. president, you have corrected the view that was paramount in paris. that somehow the united states slud penalize its own economy, be apologetic, lead with our chin, while the rest of the world does little. other nations talk a good game. we lead with action. not words. [applause] our efforts, mr. president, as you know should be on exporting our technology, our innovation, to nations who seek to reduce their co-2 footprint to learn from us. that should be our focus. versus agreeing to uneef achievable targets that harm our economy and the american people.

mr. president, it takes courage, it takes commitment to say no to the plaudits of men while doing what's right by the american people. you had that courage. and the american people can take comfort because you have their backs. thank you, mr. president. [applause] scarlet: that was the president concluding his remarks along with the e.p.a. director scott pruett. he -- the gist of his message, 30-minute long speech was that we are getting out of the paris accord, climate accord but we will start to negotiate a deal that is fair. he also says the u.s. withdrawal represents reassertion of u.s. sovereignty and the paris accord was unfair to the united states at the highest levels. but it imposes no meaningful

obligation on the world's leading polluters citing china and india, for instance, as examples. he also added that we need all forms of american energy for economic growth going back to that point that the paris accord hurt u.s. jobs, u.s. industry, and the u.s. economy. let's bring in our roundtable. bloomberg white house reporter shannon pettypiece and bloomberg business reporter eric rosin who wrote the cover story on u.s. climate change for bloomberg businessweek this past week. let me start with you, shannon. this was a 30-minute long speech. in which the president addressed all facets of the paris climate accord. but he did start with the economy. so it was very much geared toward making the point that by staying in the paris climate accord the u.s. economy was hurt. >> yes. and this theme that the forgotten man, that he has not given up on his campaign promise to think of the forgotten man. and that this is putting america first and putting american workers first. it was interesting the examples he cited.

pittsburgh and youngstown. and said something to the effect of i was elected by the people of pittsburgh, not paris. and this is not -- the best interests of detroit and pittsburgh and youngstown. pittsburgh has revitalized itself as a center of green technology. and as has youngstown as it's tried to reinvent its economy past steel and investing in green technology. while he tried to make this about the economy there are going to be many business leaders and many parts of the business community that are saying really there is a very vibrant business case to be made for staying in this agreement. and of meeting these targets versus trying to pull out and get a better deal. which, you know, maybe you can. maybe you can't. >> eric, i want to ask you about his characterization of the deal. the way he made his argument was essentially that this really imposes very little on some major carbon emitters like china and india. that the u.s. is bearing the brunt of the restrictions and that furthermore on top of the

lack of restrictions all these payments that the u.s. is making and talked about this green fund. how would you -- how fair is that characterization of the structure of paris? >> the paris agreement is again, it's a federation of voluntary agreements. and what's interesting about the president's remarks is that 25 years after some of these criticisms of international climate policy were first aired, they're still able to stretch to accommodate and sort of ever widening bucket of phenomenon. so some of the things we heard e -- are fair and historic agreements. pour i'm sorry. criticisms of things like the paris accord. i think that the most concrete thing that you just asked about is the green climate fund. because that is set up really to help poorer countries adapt

to the changing climate. and so there are really concrete implications of that that you can squint and start to see. congress still has -- has a big say in how the united states spends its money. but i would -- i would watch that sort of very -- not very well-known. particularly wonky thing to look for how poorer nations will respond to what the united states did today. julia: we got a lot of response to that point from countries that are expressing in general disappointment at this stage. but i want to get back actually to the point that joe was making there about this idea that there is a cost and negative -- and a relative cost to the united states of signing up for these guidelines. we reiterate the voluntary guideline nature of this accord. how does a revised deal work better for the united states in these guidelines? >> it's -- it's -- the paris

accord was built to be so flexible that countries are encouraged to -- they're encouraged to tighten their national commitments every five years or so. but it's up to individual nations to say what they think they can do. and that -- that means that every nation is and only -- only itself is responsible for what it says it can contribute. there's -- you know, washington decided what we can do and washington as it just did can pull out or make a new plan. julia: to be fair to donald trump that's the criticism at the time this was signed. why should the united states stick to its commitments under these -- under this agreement when other countries can back-- eric: i would press at that a little. china has eight times more solar energy jobs than the united states does.

they have two thirds of the world total solar jobs. so if you're interested in jobs, and you're not talking about renewable energy, you're leaving something out. scarlet: let me go back to shannon who is at the white house. shannon, there was obviously quite a debate within the west wing over whether the president should withdraw the united states from the paris accord. we know that in one side, there was ivanka trump and gary kohn who are -- cohn who are pushing for the accord to make changes and steve bannon the strategic advisor. what does it say about the power dynamics in the white house? is bannon up and gary cohn is down in terms of whose influence is stronger? shannon: well, it was interesting, bannon was seated next to gary cohn in the rose garden and i was watching their body language and bannon with his arms crossed and cohn the other way. i saw some. stay camp's influence in this speech. certainly to the effect of oh, we're pulling out but we'll get a better deal and negotiate a better deal. and i feel like i was left with

the impression, the president didn't come out and make clear what his position on climate change is. but he was certainly talking about pollution and how this deal doesn't go far enough. something that bernie sanders had said. and talking about wanting to get a better deal that possibly even lowers emissions more. and that is a big reversal to comments that trump was making just two years ago when he was talking about ice caps at record levels. about so-called climate change. about how cold it is in new york this june. what happened to climate change? those very skeptical remarks. and of course having his e.p.a. chief, scott pruett, another big skeptic. so i feel like there was a shift in tone toward maybe acknowledging that carbon emissions, reducing those is a good thing to work toward and maybe not through this deal but another deal. scarlet: maybe evolution in that deal. bloomberg's white house reporter shannon peteypiece and bloomberg "business week's" eric roston who wrote the cover story. it is on newsstands tomorrow. or i should say right now. eric, congratulations.

julia: we were talking about the international response to this decision. brake obama nt has made a statement. and the nation that is reap the benefits in jobs and industries created. i believe the united states of america should be at the front of the pack. but even in the absence of american leadership, even if this administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future. now, it depends on definitions of course. but there were two countries that didn't sign up. syria and nicaragua. nicaragua because they wanted more stringent controls. scarlet: they thought it didn't go far enough. julia: so donald trump in a bucket with syria. president assad. joe: and we had -- telvesa c.e.o. elon musk tweeting right after the announcement. i'm departing presidential council climate change is real leaving paris is not good for america or the world. he had worned that he would do

this previously when reports first surfaced that donald trump was inclined to pull out. and his -- his participation in the panel was always sort of controversial. and he's always had this awkward relationship given how the nature of his businesses. but now he's making it official. scarlet: and elon musk not the only business leader saying anything. amazon also continues to support the paris climate pact according to an amazon spokeswoman. zwhr -- julia: we heard from tim cook and i wonder what all those guys will say at this stage. billionaire climate activist tom steyer the founder of next gen climate. and he joins us now from san francisco. sir, thank you so much for joining us. i just want to get your instant response here to this decision. and just how you believe other corporate c.e.o.'s are going to react now. tom: i think that this decision and this speech was dishonest, destructive, and entirely inconsistent. and i think that the american

business community has already started to speak and spoke out before the speech requesting the president not withdraw from paris. but i think if you look at that speech, it was a very dishonest statement of either we can have jobs or we can protect our environment. and have a healthy future. and that is a contrast and a distinction that has been laid to rest long ago. that is an absolute lie. we can have a vibrant jobs economy. we can create millions of net new jobs out of clean energy. and protect our environment at the same time. joe: tom, what specifically was the most in your view dishonest thing president trump said there? tom: i think that there were three basic lies that he went with. we've done a study with mike bloomberg, and hank paulsen of the impact of moving to a clean economy and it creates net millions of new jobs, higher incomes, and lower costs for americans. so that's the first big lie. the second is he is abandoning american global leadership.

when he said people around the world may start to laugh at us. if you listen, they started to laugh at us about this. angela merkel said we're giving up on american leadership. and the third thing that i thought was extremely uncloor was he said -- unclear was he said it saves only 1.7 cellsius and we should do more. it was very inconsistent in i don't want to do this because it would create jobs and only do it if we reduce the climate more. even so i looked at this as an absolutely dishonest and destructive act against the american people. because moving to clean energy is going to create millions of good-paying jobs and secure our health in the future. julia: tom, you've made it about far more than climate change and about the credibility of this administration and their path forward. but i guess what i want to ask you here is whether actually signing up to this accord matches the corporate -- you have to make these investment

decisions on cleaner energy anyhow. will they still continue to make decisions and push toward a cleaner future irrespective of what this administration doesn't save? tom: i think that what we're seeing in the marketplace is the cost of generating electricity and storing it through clean renewable methods is coming down dramatically. and has crossed fossil fuels. i think that the president's attempt to prop up the fossil fuel industry is something that's not going to work. and what he should be turning his attention to is how we're going to create the most good jobs and lead the world in clean energy. and make sure that any workers that are displaced are retrained in and taken care of by the government. what he's doing is absolutely a slap in the face to american workers and to our future. scarlet: tom, do you take any solace in saying the u.s. would look to renegotiate the paris climate accord or perhaps pursuing new agreement in which the u.s. doesn't stand to lose

as much at the expense of other countries or would benefit more than it currently does under the paris climate accord? tom: well, one of the old sayings on wall streelt is that people are not allowed to sell you blue sky. that they can't make promises about the blue sky that's to come and have people rely on them. and that is a promise of blue sky that has nothing behind it. as far as i'm concerned. joe: tom, how do you counter trump's argument that the climate agreement really doesn't put much of a restriction on some of the biggest polluters in the world such as china and india? tom: look, when you look at this agreement, it is a voluntary agreement with transparency. in every country basically came they table and said what thought they could do, but there is absolutely no punishment for not doing it. so really what happened is 194 countries, most countries in the history of the they thought planet, came together and said we have a

critical problem that we're going to solve together voluntarily. so actually what we're seeing is other countries moving way ahead of their promises. he loves to bash china. china tried to move way ahead of their promises because they see that leading the world in energy generation and clean tech is the biggest opportunity that they're ever going to have as a country to lead economically. so for us, to shoot ourselves in the foot, and get rid of the -- all the opportunities to lead in terms of innovation, job creation, business creation, is one of the dumbest things and most destructive things i can imagine. julia: tom, the other thing president donald trump said there was it unfairly penalizes the united states in terms of financial costs as well. he talked about ending the green fund as well. does he have a point there? is another situation where there's unfair bias on the united states in terms of the financials. tom: one of the things that was very clear from this speech, but has been clear in every

budget proposal and every speech, is the idea that for some reason, the united states will work in conflict and in competition with other nations of the world. we don't have any partners. we don't have any allies. we don't have anyone we trust. and no one trusts us. well, my long-term experience of 30 years in the private sector says actually, the best way to work is with trusted partners who support each other and you all do better. it's not a zero sum game. he's looking at the world and saying, everything they get, we lose. actually, in the real world, if we support each other, we all do better. if you look back to the marshall plan we supported europe because we thought it was in our interests. here we are facing a critical world problem that we need to solve together. and he's saying oh, no. i don't trust anyone. no one should trust me. it's all about me beating you. that is an absolutely foolish and destructive opinion. and it's absolutely anti-american. and it goes back on hundreds of

years of the united states having high ideals and living them out and leading the world forward. scarlet: there's a lot of identity politics wrapped up in there as well. inglis a. former republican congressman was telling us earlier that the reason why the right is so resistant to environmental reform is because the left seems to require full government support for protection policies. whereas the right is looking for a solution that doesn't expand the government. that doesn't require taxing or regulating more. and reduces what they call personal liberty. where is the common ground here for a bipartisan solution to address climate change? tom: let me point out how ironic and untrue that argument is. what i'm talking about is american industry leading the world in innovation and technology in new industries. what the trump administration is trying to do is not just pick winners and losers, they are trying to make winners out of losers. they are trying to take the

fossil fuel industries that are in decline and pretend that they're not being superseded by american innovation, american research, american business know-how. and absolutely ridiculous to me that anyone could put forth an idea that the idea that we won't lead the world that we're going to give away leadership in some. biggest industries in the world for the rest of the world and somehow in our interests. that's just plain dumb. scarlet: a very feared up tom steyer founder of nextgen climate joining us from san francisco with his unvarnished take. thank you very much. tom: thank you very much. scarlet: let's go to corey johnson and you'll be speaking to a guest with a very unique take. >> yeah. maybe almost as fired up as tom steyer is. richard branson, chairman of the virgin group. all kinds of businesses. and one of the 30 c.e.o.'s signed a letter today urging president trump not to take this stance to pull out of the paris climate accord and now that he's done this. richard, what do you think? >> well, it's a very sad day. i think it's a sad day for

americans. it's a sad day for the world. and a sad day for our grandchildren. and obviously we have to pick ourselves up on a global basis and just get on and try to sort the problem out ourselves with the other 193 countries around the world. and still try to drive toward a carbon-free world in 2050. reporter: specifically the business impact i think is so important. so important to our viewers of bloomberg. but i think important to you as well. talk to me about why climate change is so important and fighting climate change is so important to you and your businesses? >> fighting climate change is important to me as an individual. as a father and a grandfather of four lovely children, in the same way when the whole world got together to fight c.f.c. gases they all signed an accord together and got on top of the problem of c.f.c. gases, and this is the first time since

then that the world has got together to sign up for something which is really important for our children and grandchildren. and for the world we live in. and it's just makes me want to cry that a great country like america is abandoning its duty. this was a voluntary agreement. it wasn't an agreement that was going to number america with vast expense. the fact -- the fact is that clean energy is now cheaper than coal:and with the support of government, clean energy can power america by 2050. and then that same clean energy can power for centuries and centuries just from the sun and from wind. it's -- it's blind beingly obvious that the world needs to be run in a way that is clean, that is cheap, and this was the way forward. and just sad that america is abandoning it, its contribution to this.

and leaving europe and china and other countries to romp ahead but the reason i'm sad is an 400 years ago no man is island and the carbon emissions from america, there's nothing to stop them going around the rest of the world. and we do need america to be part of this. reporter: so says a man who is on an island at this very moment, of course. i wonder, too, if that affects your thinking that sort of things that you do around the world, that are often -- so often in the water and you see this change. where have you seen personally the effects of climate change that have struck you? >> well, i've been to the ant arctic and to the arctic. i live on an island. and the effects are just beginning. and you can just see it in slightly higher tides. slightly less -- well, quite a lot less ice in the arctic.

glacierers moving backward. just the start. and that's what's so sad. trump says that we're only going to reduce it by a tiny bit if we all do this together. that's not the case. if we move quickly and drmedly, we can protect our grandchildren from the effects of climate change. and we can have a wonderful environment that we live in in our 60's, clean environment. where people are not going to get ill from pollution. we can have fuel that is -- that we're not in danger of suddenly spiking at $150 a barrel again. it will forever be under $30 a barrel. i just come from aruba where we set up -- the biggest solar power and less than 10 cents per kilowatt and four times cheaper as oil was only two or

three years ago. and the price is coming down and down and down. so it's just incomprehensible that america has a president that is lying basically. it's too sad for words. reporter: it's interesting, though, that we have these sort of -- this nationalist movement. not just in the u.s. but in the u.k. as well. the entire brexit campaign also seems to be focused on looking inwardly. and i wonder, your notions of brexit right here, how does brexit affect both climate and your business interests there? >> look, i think that -- i personally believe that what happened with brexit perhaps from the reaction against both will be so strong. and we're beginning to see it in france, and i think we'll see it in germany. that the world will come back to a much more sensible way of

-- normal way of thinking again. and a thinking where nations will work together again in everybody's interests. i mean, this whole thing about -- let's just fight for our country and nobody else's country. let's just fight for our people and nobody else's people. it's horrible. it's -- we ought to be a united world. that works together and fights for all our interests. and i really do think that there would be a massive rejection of the kinds of policies that are emanating out of america. and i think you'll find that the way the election is going in england, the party that was for brexit, that had a massive lead, that lead has almost disappeared. and you have -- you have a party that was almost -- left f communism having a chance of

maybe even -- so i think it's -- we're an in interesting consolidation. but business leaders. vuft like to end on this. the thousand business leaders that are the main companies in america and around the world, we all know the climate change and all want to work with it. and oil companies, as well as power companies as well as airlines, you know, we all want to fix it. for the sake of our grandchildren and we'll get on and do the absolute utmost to get it fixed. even if the american government doesn't support it. reporter: richard branson joining us from the british virgin islands. scarlet: corey johnson, editor at large joining us from san francisco. coming up, peter henry, the dean of n.y.u. school of business will be joining us next. he'll talk about coordinating global policy and the wake of the u.s.'s departure from the paris accord. this is bloomberg.

♪

marc: time for first word news. reaction is coming in following president trump's decision to withdraw the united states from the paris climate accord. norm president barack obama says that the trump administration is joining "a small handful of nations that reject the future by withdrawing from the agreement." mr. obama said today the countries that stay in the paris deal will reap the benefits of job and industries created. he says the u.s. should be at the front of the pack. house speaker paul ryan commended president trump and called the paris accord "simply a raw deal for america." the european commissioner on

climate action said that the world "can continue to count on europe as a climate leader" and belgium's prime minister called the u.s. decision quoting here a brutal act. the philippines police chief says there's no evidence that an attack at the resorts world hotel and casino in manila is terrorism. and that there's no confirmed reports of gunshot wounds. the authorities say they're still looking for an assailant in the building. however, according to sight intelligence group which monitors extremist activity, an islamic state operative indicated responsibility for the attack. the complex was placed on lockdown. a spokesman for the philippine red cross told the manila times that at least 25 people were injured and have been taken to various hospitals. the trump administration added fresh sanctions for individuals and companies with ties to north korea. the list includes three individuals, six entities, moscow-based for being involved

with the country's weapons program. north decree ja's president kim jong un has continued to sign u.n. resolutions launching tests and the u.s. tested its missile defense shield this week. former vice president joe biden has launched a political action committee ramping up speculation about a presidential run in 2020. declaring this is the time for big dreams and unveiled the american possibilities pact which allows him to raise money for candidates and maintain relationships with long-time donors. the move comes as the democrat search for new leadership in the wake of hillary clinton's loss to donald trump. global news 24 hours a day powered by more than 2,600 journalists and analysts in hover 120 countries. i'm mark crumpton. -- marc crumpton. joe: let's get a recap of today's market action and so much news happening we want to hit some of the stuff going on in markets. a green day all around.

new highs with some of the major indices. dow jones up .6. s&p up .76. naz up a little higher and not on the board but i want to mention real quickly, the small caps, s&p 600 small cap index up 1.7%. so major outperformance today for the small caps. julia: and a look at the retailers now. specifically lululemon and hoping for a positive retail story and a nice pop in after hours trade. if we show you this earnings, better than expected in terms of the numbers. that's two cents a share. beating analyst forecasts of 28 cents. also better than expected on the net revenue line, $520 million ahead of the $530 million estimates and also announced a corporate restructuring. aveva the active wear brand for girls will go primarily online. so 40 out of 55 stores are going to be closing. costs associated with that anticipated to be $50 million to $60 million during the fiscal year.

that should complete by the third quarter of 2017. so investors liking what they're hearing on that front. scarlet: nice pop on lululemon shares. third world countries determined to boost growth could learn from china, india and brazil. according to peter henry of stern school of business and stepping down at year end in order to reengage in the development of global policy. serves on the boards of general electric, citigroup and kraft foods and is the author of turnaround, third world lessons for first world growth and joinses now. great to see you. peter: nice to see you. scarlet: we need to start with the paris accord and the u.s. to withdraw from that agreement. ostensibly as the president said to protect u.s. jobs industry and the economy. if you look at the business reaction, though, companies are pushing back. g.e.'s c.e.o. jeff immelt just tweeting that he is disappointed with the decision. and he says industry must now lead and not depend on government. what does all this tell you? peter: well, i think the road to prosperity in the united states just got a lot steeper. and the road to prosperity in

developing countries also got a lot steeper. and it's not surprising just two days ago the secretary general from the u.n., gave a speech about climate change. and i think he chose the business school at n.y.u. for a reason. this agreement is about business. and jobs are critical part of this. if you just look at what's going on, in the last year, 50% of -- a 50% increase in solar power generation. led by the united states and china. over half of the new power generation around the world is in the renewable space. in europe that number is 90%. and you look at job creation, job creation in the renewable energy sector, last year, outstripped job creation in the oil and gas sector. so we're talking about jobs. and over the next -- in the coming decades, it's estimated this $37 trillion infrastructure investment opportunity in energy. so retreating from a climate

agreement is retreating from prosperity. scarlet: how does the u.s. pulling out of the paris agreement set the scene for what kind of license it gives developing countries, that china, indias of the world to fulfill their growth objectives? because it gives them more room to do what they need to do, for instance. they don't need to look at the moral leadership of the united states. peter: well, i think the critical thing here is that the united states is ceding leadership on a very important front. and the developing countries of the world have seen it as being in their own interests and frankly 193 other countries in the world being in their interests to think about growth as a positive sum rather than a zero sum outcome. that's the big lesson we learn over the last 30 years. if you look at the last three decades, global growth has been higher, putting aside the financial crisis over the last three decades almost any period in history, and most of that groth is driven by almost twice

as fast of growth in the emerging economies as they experienced in the first 15 years of that 30-year period. but over the entire 30-year period, growth accelerated in emerging economies it did not decelerate in the advanced countries. in other words, faster growth in the rest of the world does not mean slower growth for advanced economies. and when we get sucked into zero sum thinking we are in real danger of generating poor outcomes for our future. julia: when he said -- donald trump said that it puts the united states at a disadvantage, whether he was talking financially in terms of the contributions and he's pulled them out for the united states, out of the green fund and ending it. is there -- different ways to look at this. we can look at the financial costs of not investing. but do you think it will have implications for inward investment into the united states? if you look at u.s. companies, because on the one hand you got c.e.o.'s saying look, we're still going to go it alone in a sense. and we're going to fulfill our commitments as far as our shareholders are concerned to green energy. do you think it has an

investment impact the statement this makes? peter: number one, business clearly -- u.s. businesses are clearly going to have to play a big role in pushing in the absence of leadership on the part of government. but i think it does as i said before, make the road to innovation and creating great jobs and new opportunities in the united states a lot more difficult. julia: why? peter: well, because leadership matters. and the tone in the country matters. and the perspective -- companies have to lead. but they lead in the context that governments create. and if the u.s. government is saying that we don't think that climate change is a priority, that will have an impact on our ability to lead and create the jobs of the future. julia: so you're saying this is about way more than just climate change. this is about a lack of leadership at the highest level in the country. peter: it is shortsighted leadership. and not seeing the long-term opportunities that lie in store for not just the united states but a very important for the

united states for the whole world. in generating new jobs, new industries, and a healthier future. joe: climate change aside, i remember when obama was president and business leaders were always complaining about uncertainty as a reason why they weren't investing more. donald trump has a very different leadership style. clearly than president obama. much less inclined to listen to elite opinion or even major c.e.o.'s in this country as this shows. what is trump's decision making style and his general approach even forgetting paris for the moment do for the general business environment in this country? peter: i would say the sense right now is that there's a lack of clarity about what the priorities are. and there's been a lot of volatility in terms of where we're going. i think you saw initially in the early days, an expectation that there would be pro-growth

policies. i think that's becoming less clear. whether we will actually get pro-growth policies. and i think we're seeing a tempering of expectations in markets and otherwise. in response to that. scarlet: in your book turnaround how third world countries should employ the attributes that developing nations use. discipline. clarity. trust. you mentioned clarity earlier. where is the discipline and the trust that we can glean from countries like china, like brazil, that first world companies can extract? peter: the clear lesson right now is that big problems that was put on the table. climate change. in order to move forward you need trust. and you need the discipline to adopt long-term thinking. and the discipline frankly in leadership to say, the things -- not what you want to hear but what people need to hear in terms of our need to invest in the future. d that's -- that's a major challenge. because as we have seen in the

past, countries are actually able to engage in policies that are disciplined, expressing them clearly, and win being the trust of the people. that's when you see the kind of turnaround in economic growth that the emerging markets experience. in the early 1990's when they increased their growth rate from 3.5% per year in the previous decade and a half to 5.5% per year a 2% increase in the growth of the g.d.p. we could have used that kind of an increase in growth right now. julia: we need to see policy in order for that to happen. peter: we need to see policies that are disciplined. clearly articulated. and then you'll get the trust of the people. in business in particular to drive change that's going to be good not only for businesses but for workers and ordinary citizens. joe: the idea on this show we're always talking about monetary policy and fiscal policy, infrastructure, all this stuff. is the essential idea that you're pointing out that these mechanical things aren't as important per se to growth over the long term as credible,

transparent, noncorrupt decision making? peter: that's right. so monetary policy has done its job over the last almost a decade now. since the financial crisis. our monetary policy officials have created a more stable environment. monetary policy has really run the urse in terms of ability of the fed, the e.c.b., to continue to generate growth. what we need to see now are just leadership, policies that will drive the ability of the flows across bor and capital and flows across border in goods. migration of people is critical to economic growth. because in the advanced countries we're actually seeing a declining labor force growth. and so you need to have people, capital, ideas, moving across and generate higher growth rates. julia: everything we're hearing pushed back on. scarlet. going to say something there. scarlet: yeah. absolutely. dean henry you are stepping down as the dean of the n.y.u. stern school of business at the end of the year.

you're going to be reengaging and recommitting your lifelong interest in the linkage between advanced and developing economies. did anything that president trump say push you in any direction to take that first step? what's the most effective way of doing that? peter: the most important thing that needs to be heard right now is that growth in the united states and growth in developing countries are not in pop sigs to one another. in fact, growth in the developing world is good for growth in the united states. what we have not seen in the last decade now, is even the sheer growth within the united states. and that is not a problem of trade. that is a problem of a lack of access to education. there are thousands, thousands of jobs right now that cannot be filled by u.s. employers because they cannot find qualified employees to take those jobs. so part of that is obviously higher education. but it's not just going to

university. it's going to trade school. finding ways to demonstrate that you're qualified to do the jobs in the new economy. and so we absolutely have to articulate that trade is not the enemy. migration is not the enemy. globalization is good for growth. but we need our leaders to start saying that very clearly and doing what needs to be done to educate the u.s. population to take advantage of the jobs of the future. whether they be green jobs or jobs in high-tech or other kinds of services. scarlet: peter henry dean of n.y.u. school of business. author of turnaround, third world lessons for first world growth. julia: green light capital president david even horn joins us for an exclusive interview tomorrow at 9 ofment 40 a.m. eastern time on daybreak america. as he'll discuss his ongoing battle with g.m. don't miss that tomorrow morning. from new york. this is bloomberg.

♪

scarlet: let's get back to our top story today. president trump's decision to withdraw the united states from the paris climate accord. the head of u.s. practice helping businesses understand the impact of changes on business vati. jon, you heard speech in which the president, he gave lots of reasons mainly economic saying that the u.s. needed to protect its jobs, its economy, industry. how much of what he said made sense? was credible? jon: i think this move about trump's base and america's first about his campaign slogan and something that republicans had promised for quite some time. joe: are there industries that will materially benefit from this? you hear coal isn't come back

anyway or criticisms that outdated and are there specific industries that you think will get a boost from this? jon: i look at this less being about industry specific and more about giving the e.p.a. administrator scott pruett some leeway to do some things he probably couldn't have done otherwise or things that may have resulted in a lawsuit. had he gone ahead with them under the paris agreement. so there's a couple of environmental rollbacks they wanted to do and put some more energy into hydraulic fracking and do things that are going to get more carbon fuels out of the ground. and with paris around they were concerned that the lawsuits would slow them down. julia: is the united states better off? even in the short term here? can say say that? jon: trump's base is happy about it and republicans are happy it and their view a job-killing treaty that president obama went around congress on. it wasn't binding to the u.s. and was never ratified. so to their view this is something that this is a huge positive and been promising for a long time. scarlet: does it boost the economy or increase jobs?

does it mean that the united states saves more money by not having to pay into this climate fund? jon: we haven't seen any evidence of any job loss coming out of this agreement so far. and i think that over time that evidence may amount. but probably not. the economic significance of this is pretty muted thanks to the surge in natural gas at the expense of coal right now. joe: one of the criticisms of this decision is that they say oh, the u. is ceding leadership to the rest of the world and china is going to step up. i don't really know what that means to be honest. what specifically does that mean that now china is stepping up and leading on this issue? jon: right. you're going to see a lot of bilateral engagement between china and the -- and countries who will benefit from investing in green technology and selling those all over the world. this has been a strategy the chinese have pursued for quite some time. there's a huge demand for renewables and other parts of the world. a huge demand for renewables here as well. but i think i agree. i'm not really sure that this is exactly a sop to the chinese by walking out of this deal. julia: in technology leadership

is it a step back for the united states? jon: the united states will produce what's economically viable and profitable. and if renewable energy is viable and profitable then they're going to do that. the united states has a lot of coal. and the united states has a lot of natural gas and the united states has a lot of oil in the ground as well. so carbon fuels are an important part of the mix and that this step upon the margins makes it a little easier to burn them. julia: moving on moment for you? jon: from the paris deal? julia: yeah. jon: i'm ready to move on from it. the reality is with the swings in u.s. politics, another president could bring us right back into it. so i don't think this is the end of the paris agreement. i don't think this is the end of u.s. involvement in these climate actions. julia: willing to negotiate. scarlet: thank you so much. ohn john head of -- jon lieber ahead of eurasha policy group. julia: bloomberg television will break down the numbers with bill gross of janus capital and mohammed el-erian. and programming note from new york.

this is bloomberg. ♪

joe: what did you miss? stocks trade near record highs, how should investors hedge themselves? i want to bring in meb faber, co-founder and chief investment officer of cambria investment management and joins us from los angeles. thanks for coming back. so people have been buying protection on anticipation that eventually volatility is going to come. but it's been costly. volatility has been very muted. correct strategy at this point in the cycle? meb: you know, we've been talking about the same sort of thing, you and i last three years on this show. which is we've been in one regime which is u.s. stocks going up, outperforming the rest of the world. in foreign stocks underperforming.

so u.s. stocks have continued to get more expensive. while foreign stocks have really languished. so the good news is that message was really hard to give on this show for a number of years. until about a year ago. really 2015, 2016, when foreign stocks really started to outperform again. so you've had a world now where everything is going up. and the equity space. but we think you want to still be tilting away from the u.s., moving toward foreign markets, particularly last year you had the really cheap stuff going up. so the brazils and the russia of the world. were up 50%. this year, it's rotating more into europe. o a lot of the traditional piigs, portugal, italy, spain, greece, are the ones that are really outperforming a lot of those up 20%. but they're still at roughly half or even a third of the valuations of the u.s. and there's a lot more room to run there. joe: it's funny because you have been telling -- making the case for foreign stocks for a long time. now we can't find anyone who

actually supports u.s. stocks over the rest of the world. so you're certainly ahead of the curve there. you like greek stocks. which is not a stock market that we talk about that much. that greece? meb: well, you interesting -- we used to talk about it all the time when greek stocks were down 60%, 70%, 80% and greece is in the headlines every day. and that's sort of what happens. that's the way markets get cheap. headline news. terrible geopolitical news. terrible earnings. terrible economy. stock market goes down a ton. but that's what sets the stage for the next bull market. and we were early in the greek stocks. we were totally wrong. we were buying them in 2014. 2015. 2016. in some of these years they didn't go anywhere. hopefully knock on wood, good to see them starting to appreciate this year having a great year. we think there's a lot of room for them to run. now that the story is largely forgotten about. so while everyone is starting to move to the european story, we think the greece is still one of those but a lot of like the east german and emerging

europe has -- could easily end up this year, 30%, 50% up. joe: have to wrap it there and got a little squeezed. but love your contrarian views and we'll have you back soon. meb faber, co-founder and chief investment officer of cambria investment management. thank you very much. and what you need to know for tomorrow's trading day. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet: what did you miss. the dow jones industrial average closing at a record high. more headline interviews from the conference tomorrow we have russian energy minister alexander novak and the chairman of the state bank of india on bloomberg television. joe: best day of the month. jobs in america. that number will be out at 8:30 a.m. eastern. julia: and wal-mart holds its annual general meeting tomorrow. scarlet: that does it for what you missed. julia: bloomberg technology up next. joe: have a great evening. this is bloomberg. ♪

alisa: i'm alisa parenti from washington, and you are watching "bloomberg technology." let's start with a check of your "first word news." several world leaders are reacting to president trump's

decision to withdraw the u.s. from the european climate accord. to countld can continue on europe as a climate leader." belgium's prime minister called the decision "a brutal act." germany's foreign minister says the u.s. harms itself and the world by withdrawing. house speaker paul ryan commended president trump and called the present -- the paris accord simply a raw deal for america. president obama is also reacting. he says the trump administration handful of quote, "a nations that reject the future." mr. obama says he is confident states, cities, and businesses will step up. james comey will testify before the senate intelligence committee on june 8. comey will discuss the circumstances that led to his firing on may 9. the committee