announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: bill gates and warren buffett are here. gates philanthropy focuses on -- warren buffett is chairman and ceo of berkshire hathaway. the two have famously been friends for more than 25 years. together they started the giving pledge in 2010, they donate it encourages the wealthiest two donate the bulk of their wealth to charitable causes. i am pleased to have both of them back at this table.

welcome. i have to say in the interest of full disclosure, we just did something like this at columbia university with a thousand students. there is something special about the curiosity and interest of young people wanting to know how to they learn from you, wanting to know if you were starting over, what would you do; wanting to know about values, you do a lot of this? >> we met on july 5, 1991 and hit it off immediately. bill was a little reluctant at first, but he got there. if it wasn't for his mother we probably wouldn't know each other and we have had a good time ever since. we come together particularly on the giving things, but other things as well. everything about it has turned out well. charlie: he sits on your board? warren: he sits on the berkshire board.

we have a lot of fun talking about a lot of things. the big thing that came out of discussions was the giving pledge. that has worked out so much better than i ever anticipated, charlie. i thought if i got 30-40 people, i would -- i think we are 100 and 56 or something like that. and the people -- and now going beyond the borders of the united states, which i didn't feel would originally happen. people are learning more -- our members -- learning about things, how people handle within their families, wealthy families, and it has worked out so much better than i would've asked six years ago or seven years ago. charlie: both of you had made the point because of success in technology, there are a lot of people coming into a lot of money much younger. >> it is a great thing that they are doing so well.

i would say it is a particularly philanthropic group. i didn't give huge gifts until i was a 45, some in their 30's are already doing amazing things. charlie: why were you reluctant to give earlier than that? bill: i hadn't taken the time to understand where the huge payoffs were. i was pretty maniacal about microsoft and only in my late 30's with some encouragement from my wife, melinda, did i start to study and talk with her about it. we knew i would do it by the time i was 60, but as we were learning we decided we should accelerate it. with found a lot of ways we could have high impact. charlie: the principal mission call was all lives are equal? bill: that's right. a lot of that going out of the united states has gone to save lives.

and have kids grow up to be healthy. charlie: how did you decide that you'd rather give money to the gates foundation rather than starting at the notion of your own -- starting a foundation of your own? warren: my first wife and i did start a foundation some years ago. we had talked about it since we were in our 20's. i said to her if i compound money like i hope to, there will be really large sums later on. you are good at giving away and i'm good at making it, she thought that was half a copout and have logical. we did something like -- we started over 50 years ago, but i really thought that there would be large sums later on and she was particularly good with empathizing with people, she would be better at giving it away then i would be here and died in 2004, as you know.

then i had to rethink what i was going to do. in 2006, i decided five foundations, the gates foundation being the largest, i looked for people with similar goals than what i had, the idea of every life having equal value is just fundamental to me. charlie: and you do well? warren: he is putting his own money up, which is a big deal, but you had two much younger people, very bright, very hard-working. they were harder than most people do in their jobs and they were on the same track i was on. everything about it made sense. and it is continuing to make sense years later. charlie: talking about melinda's influence, susie was -- charlie: she changed my life.

i was a very lopsided not well-adjusted person and she put me together. it wasn't overnight, but she just had a little sprinkling can -- charlie: a coming together of opposites? warren: no. i wouldn't say that. we were in sync in a big way, but she was very much more mature when we got together. i was like 12 emotionally. she put me together. it changed my life. i would not have been -- had anything like the life i had. charlie: and what did charlie munger add? warren: my partner of 58 years, he is extremely wise.

he is a wonderful friend. he is strong-minded, i am strong-minded. sometimes we disagree, but we have never had an argument in all that time. charlie: you never had an argument? surely you disagree. warren: certainly we do. he says warren, you'll agree with me because i'm smart and -- because you are smart and i am right. i respect him enormous lee. -- him enormously. it's more fun doing things with partners. the most fun obviously is a marriage partner. a marriage partner is the most important relationship, but having a business partner -- if i had done everything i had done, it wouldn't have worked out this way, it would've been more fun with charlie. charlie: who says no to bill gates? bill: melinda.

[laughter] warren: i have seen it happen. bill: it's great when somebody knows you might move too fast or be too optimistic. a team comes in planning out things we haven't done or maybe they are not as motivated afterwards, so that they can get me to correct that. i have matured a lot and i give melinda immense credit, she still has work to do, but i think i'm getting there. complementary strengths where you share the same goal is a great thing. i had that with paul allen in the early days, is in steve and microsoft. going on now it's melinda. charlie: how much time do you spend at microsoft? bill: i am there about 15% of the time, and i just get there

on the rmb part. brainstorming with people, how do we take -- r&d part. it is a very exciting time in software. there are five companies in a really strong position. microsoft is leaving in some really cool stuff. the way that a business takes information about customers, communication with customers, looking at data, that mission, really using data and ai, getting productivity up, microsoft is the leader in that. it is a wonderful niche that they are strong in. and they will be innovating along that line more in the next two years than ever in history.

charlie: it is a path to artificial intelligence? bill: the ultimate dream when you start working on software is the deep understanding intelligence that humans have. it has been the holy grail, when the computer learn to play games, when can it learn to read, when can it understand speech. things like speech and vision made such progress in recent years. you have been tracking this and exposing your viewers to this. even for people in the field it is a magical time. charlie: its potential is to do what, change everything? bill: and the first instance to be the best assistant ever, looking your information and help you know in the few minutes between meetings what you should look at, or if you are trying to plan a trip, organize things, to be a much better assistant then it is today.

and then eventually certain mechanical tasks like warehouse work or driving, that it would take that over. but for intellectual work, it will just magnify the creativity and make your time more valuable. charlie: are you interested in technology? warren: i don't think i have a natural bent that way to start with, and i would be so far behind i would never catch up with people. i have been working on it -- it would not be a game i would win. charlie: is a principal criteria for you to understand the business? warren: yes. i have to understand. others are un-understandable, and others have my confidence. i have two circles that have my confidence. there is overlap between them and the important thing is not how -- it is nice to have a huge

circle of competence, much more so than where the limits are of it. you can do very well if you only understand 5% of the businesses in the country. charlie: and find -- find plenty of opportunity. you made a huge purchase in 2016. is it harder and harder to find an acquisition candidate? warren: we have to move the needle on a $400 million market value, it is hard to find -- i would do better percentagewise if i was working with a smaller amount of capital. charlie: how do you find it?

warren: it is interesting. i will get a call, i will be sitting thinking -- in private businesses it's because i get a call from a private seller, but occasionally i just decide to act and we never do anything unfriendly, but in terms of buying whole businesses -- charlie: are people close to you on the lookout for you? warren: not much. surely, we have not bought 12 billion of common stocks since the election. that's in my mind which ones i picked. guys at work with me, the two fellows probably bought a little bit or sold it little bit, too. but those are ideas that come at a different slant -- charlie: our airlines one of

those? warren: it was shown on september 30 that we own some airlines. charlie: why did you do that? warren: that i won't get into, but it was in large part my decision. charlie: the old joke as you know, how do you become a millionaire, be a billionaire and buy an airline. transportation has been something that -- warren: but they are not related. railroads and airlines are different businesses. you cannot move the track. track people, there is a certain romance to it. you can actually go into the business and more than 100 airlines have gone broke. it is a different sort of business. charlie: how has knowing bill influenced or enhanced your

sense of the way the world works? warren: i learned from them. i like to learn from all friends here at bill happens to be a very good source. that is the fun of having friends, charlie. it would be hard for me to be a friend with anybody i don't learn from. and they would probably get bored with me. [laughter] ♪

>> he wrote an article for fortune magazine that i read before i met him that it's not necessarily a good idea to leave large sums to your children. that was pretty fundamental. i remember reading that and i was convinced that was right and now you have to think of how to give it away. i also remember warren showing me his calendar. i had every minute packed and thought it was the only way you could do things. the fact that he is so careful about -- [laughter] bill: he has days -- charlie: that there is nothing on. bill: there is nothing on. be careful, you might not understand.

charlie: this is the week of april of which there are only three entries for a week. warren: there will be four by a april. charlie: not to crowd yourself too much, give yourself time to read and think. warren: you control your time, sitting and thinking may be a much higher priority than a normal ceo who there is all this demand, you feel like you need to see all these people. it is not a proxy of your seriousness that you have filled every minute of your schedule. warren i can buy anything i : want, basically, but i cannot buy time charlie: two have time is the most precious thing you can

have? warren: there is no way i can buy time. charlie: living in omaha makes it easier? warren: yes. for 54 years, i spent five minutes going each way. imagine if that was a half hour each way. i knew the words to a lot more songs. if you're doing an hour coming and going, that is 2.5% of the person's work week. charlie: do you agree politically? bill: on almost everything, a general sense that you have to keep the economy turning up greater output and that you have to allocate it in a fair way. that basic framework we see very much the same. charlie: to both of you believe you can achieve a 4% growth rate? warren: that is pretty high. charlie: i think the last quarter was 1.6 or something.

warren: a 2% growth rate in one generation will add 19,000 per capita, family of four, 76,000 to real gdp. that would be 76,000 more stuff for one family of four. the goose will keep laying golden eggs. we have a wonderful system. charlie: there are things that can get in the way of that? warren: 2%? charlie: 3% would be a miracle, wouldn't? warren: that would be fabulous, but 2% -- that is greater than exists in a whole lot of countries.

that will be added. the question is, what do we do with it? charlie: what you see for the future of china? bill: they have done a great job on some things. they are not in a democracy so it hangs in the balanced how their political system will evolve, but in terms of raising incomes, getting rid of poverty, it is a miracle that their embrace of the market since really just 1990 they have done very well. they are the second biggest economy in the world. they are serious about trade, serious about clean energy. they are super important, the most relationship in the world is the u.s.-china relationship. charlie: clearly, because they are the two biggest economic powers in the world. bill: right. we are strong and are going to stay strong. charlie: what can make us not stay strong? bill: there is a lot of strength we have built up over decades,

the way we do research, universities, the way people take risk. that is why our tech companies are still strong, our biotech companies are still strong your -- are still strong. the education system is one we need to go back and look at. that is one source of inequity, because if you get a good education, the outcome is pretty good. charlie: your experience -- much harder than you imagine. bill: improving the u.s. education system, yes. the dropout rate has gone down a bit, so that is great. but overall reading scores, math scores, and inequality hasn't budged in the last 10 years. one of the goals of our foundation is, working with partners, to change that.

so far, it has proven to be one of the top or once, but -- tougher ones, but we are still committed to it. we still believe it is achievable. charlie: all the talk about immigration, are we still looking at a situation where some of the best and brightest from overseas come here, get an education, and then go back to india or china rather than staying here? bill: a lot do stay and the most important import the u.s. has ever had by far is human talent. a lot of the hardest working, best and brightest from almost every country in the world have wanted to come to the u.s. if you look at university departments or doctors, engineers, people starting up companies, building jobs, it has

been a huge strength of hours. we have always made it super easy for that to work, but it has worked very well. so, the number going back, it is meaningful, but net we are still a huge beneficiary of human talent. charlie: i think -- wrote this, we ought to staple a green card to every diploma? bill: i believe that. i could be biased because i'm from the tech industry. i believe that keeping talent in the country is a great thing. charlie: tell us a story -- you told me, you think the second most important document in america's history after the declaration of independence or perhaps the u.s. constitution is this letter by two immigrants? warren: a letter written by two

the jewish immigrants, it doesn't sound like much. in august of 1939 on a just before germany moved into poland, leo zillard was born in hungary and went to germany. he worked in germany with albert einstein. in 1933, both of them left germany and they came to the united states. they become citizens and they cosign a letter to president roosevelt. he got einstein to sign it because his name had more weight. you can see that letter on the internet. it was not even a half a page. it said germany will get an atom bomb and it may work and we better get to work on that. the manhattan project came out of that.

who knows what would've happened in world war ii if a -- it was anti-semetic. if we didn't have great scientists and secondly if those two didn't come to the united states. it welcomed them and they may have saved the country. charlie: germany did not get it and we did. charted itwe had three years later, who knows what would have happened? charlie: you sent me a note saying you're not worried about the american economy, what i worry about is somehow and some way we will make a mistake in terms of the employment of the nuclear weapon or some bad character will buy them or steal them. warren: weapons of mass destruction.

it is a tiny probability any given day, but there are people who wish us ill, that would like to kill millions of americans. there is psychotic, megalomaniacs, the world has a certain number of them and if they have the knowledge and ability, there are people who would like to kill millions of americans and the weapons are there to do it. einstein said shortly after the launch of the atomic bomb, i know not with which weapons world war iii will be fought, but world war iv will be fought with sticks and stones. that probability exists, and it's the number one job of the president of the united states, to the extent possible, protect us from weapons of mass

destruction. you don't worry too much about intent with organizations and other nations, it is the only real cloud on america over time. we will solve the economic problems, but that is number one. charlie: you agree? bill: i agree. it is not just nuclear weapons, but bioterrorism is also quite daunting. charlie: what is bioterrorism? bill: in an extreme case, somebody would reconstruct, say, the smallpox and it could kill millions or potentially billions. warren: there was an oped and the "new york times" and i said something to bill -- he said it sounds feasible. it was basically about reconstituting smallpox. there are people in the world,

may be organizations, who would love the idea of creating a smallpox epidemic. charlie: how do you prevent that? bill: you want to have warren: there was an oped and the new york times and i said something to bill and he said it sounds reasonable. there are people in the world, may be organizations, who would love the idea of creating a smallpox epidemic. charlie: how do you prevent that? bill: you want to have surveillance to catch it as soon as you can. you want to have medical tools where you can create a vaccine and protect people. science is working on the defense part of this at the same time it is making the offense slightly easier. so if we are vigilant, there are a lot of steps we can take to make the risk lower just like minimizing access to materials meaningfully reduces the chance of a nuclear weapon.

charlie: there are some who argue that the next war will not be a nuclear war, but perhaps not even bioterrorism. it will be a cyber war. bill: that is a third area. i personally, there is only the three, but not much comfort. yes. a modern society depends on electricity and communications, and information flow. if you can, for a substantial period of time, disrupt that, then a lot of systems depending on how a hospital organizes itself or how food gets moved around, or an airline decides what to do, or bank accounts, you know, what was that big account supposed to be? a lot of experts in government and companies now are spending time thinking about that, how do you minimize that, how do you have duplicates, backup?

a lot of sophistication going into that. charlie: can the united states risk a trade war with china or with mexico? will it have a significant -- warren: it is not a good idea. the problem of trade is that the benefits are diffused and invisible. so, you don't walk in and buy a pair of shoes or underwear and it says you just saved 12% because this was purchased someplace. so 320 million people are buying things cheaper than they would otherwise, but the harmful effects taking somebody out of a job they have had for 25 years when it is too late to train them for anything, are specific and terrible.

now what you want to do is figure out a way to keep the societal benefits and take care of the people who are the roadkill in this. there will be roadkill. there is no sense kidding yourself. we started with textile at berkshire, half of our workers only spoke portuguese. they worked in hot and allowed conditions and spent 25 years on looms. when textiles moved elsewhere, their economic lives were ruined. happen.going to that is part of trade, and the benefits, if somebody buys whatever textiles we were turning out, they buy them a little cheaper. we have to keep the trade .enefits as a society it's everybody, us and them. as a society, it penalizes

certain people terribly. and we have to take care of the people that are getting hurt. charlie: take care means what? warren: you will have to have some kind of, you have to have retraining when it is feasible, but it isn't feasible and you speak portuguese and our 55, you have to make sure that person has an income that is commensurate. we can do it as a society. we don't want to say because to everybody's benefit, to help with this guy. we can afford it and we should do it. that is how we will get a good trade policy. charlie: did you appreciate the economic inequality that was out there that donald trump tapped into? bill: i am not an expert on political sentiment. i was no better at seeing those trends than other people. charlie: what about brexit and in britain? bill: again, i was surprised by the brexit vote.

charlie: and the notion of the populist uprising taking place that is feeding off of that? bill: there is no doubt that younger people and urban people in terms of social mores and being seen to benefit relatively more from new technology and things out there, there is somewhat of a divide there. the fact that it would lead to these political results is a wake-up call saying what is in terms of economic or social issues, can we by improving medicine, improving education system, can we take what the negative views are there and engage and uplift their views in the future. to me the greatest surprise is not how people voted, because i didn't think about myself as

having expertise on that, but this general question, will you think your children will be better off? i think they well, but the fact they don't feel that way, the improvements in health and the new products that will be available to them -- charlie: and what technology enables them to do? bill: right. that is a concern. if people don't see the arrow of time pointing toward greater things come the idea of doubling research, getting the best education and spreading that around, it creates a sense of malaise saying some things are working, let's do more of those things. ♪

charlie: if you look today, we have the those military, the best economy, best universities, best talent, and we have the best spirit of innovation and creativity. could we lose that? bill: i don't think we will. warren: no. i think the odds are very, charlie: this is what you call the special sauce? warren: we still have the special sauce. if the rest of the world learns from that special sauce, it is not a zero-sum game. that's terrific. it won't deprive us. overall in aggregate, our

society will be richer and if you take in aggregate, our children will live better. the real question is will it continue to leave lots of people behind. a specialized market system will leave people behind. there is, if somebody is, however you want to measure it, 10% below average, their opportunities in this world today have not improved at all from 30 or 40 years ago. the classic situation is you take the forbes 400 in 1982, number one guy was dan ludwick, he had $2 billion. now it would be 30 or 40 times that. and this more highly specialized economy year after year, different from the agrarian

economy from 200 years ago, it's going to be more and more people at the top winning big time. and it won't do much for the person that really doesn't have any special skills for the market. the average person or slightly below average person in terms of market talents is not going to do very well unless we have policies to make sure they participate in some way. and the guys at the top will keep doing better. the market system is a traffic cop. it directs resources and brains, and it does a great job. but it also directs winnings, it will continually favor more people at the top. government came in with social security. government redirects the winning so it isn't totally the market system that delivers the

winnings, but i don't want to kill the market system in terms of producing at all. we want more and more stuff, but there will be more and more people falling relatively behind and that is not a good result. we can do better. charlie: i am sure you saw this. there was a report last week as suggested it took a alien heirs -- eight billionaires and said they have more wealth than the bottom half of the population in the world? warren: yeah. in the forbes four in 1982, they had 25 times as much as 35 years ago, and believe me that does not strike somebody that is working 40 hours a week and trying to support a couple of kids on it. charlie: and their incomes remain the same or become less, or they are threatened by forces they can't -- warren: the market system pays more and more. say you are a middleweight

boxer. in the 1930's, you wouldn't even get on the undercard at madison square garden. then television comes along, cable, pay-per-view, then tens of millions of dollars. at the top, it is terrific. but are you, if you are the 45th, it was pretty much the same as it used to be in the 1930's, so the spread gets wider. like frank sinatra when he first played on television. if you have a good idea you can make ilion's just on the idea, make billions just on the idea. it is just tougher, where as you go back to 1800 and you were reasonably strong and willing to work hard, you were worth 90% on a farm as much as the best guy. and it will keep widening. the market system will push it

in that direction come but government is there to -- charlie: what would you change? warren: i would change the earned income tax credit, big-time. i am where i am not by myself at all. there are millions of americans out there and a lot of crosses at normandy. it just, i benefit enormously by having come along when i came along and where i come along, and some people did and some people didn't. there is nothing wrong with the market system that makes life better for millions of people, they ought to get rewarded, but you have to take care of the people that just don't fit well in that. if this country paid off based on athletic ability, i could study eight hours a day and i'm still going to, i will get the ring or something like that and 10 minutes later i'm on my back. the talents that get rewarded in the market system are important because they bring us

more of the goods and services that the country wants and they make improvements in how we live, but they leave people in people behind. it won't be solved simply by education. charlie: is it the responsibility of government to do something about it? warren: sure it is. bill: but the government also has to keep business in shape. striking that balance should be at the heart of political dialogue. warren: you could have the barest island in the world and two guys living on it and deciding how they can divide up the palm tree, the only thing on the island, but it won't ache any difference. charlie: beyond national security, when you, what do we have to be fearful of in the future? we have talked about some people

believe that there is artificial intelligent risk, you have spoken to that and other people have. what is around the corner that will both benefit us, artificial intelligence is clearly one of those things, too, but also offers a scary world, whether gene editing or that kind of, what do you think about these things? bill: gene editing is a good one where the promise of helping with disease, making plans that -- plants that are more productive, gene editing is playing with the software of life. and yet, deciding exactly how it should be used, if you can make sure your child was thin or attractive or had other characteristics, is that an appropriate use of technology.

charlie: how do you answer that question? how do you decide that? some balance between freedom and security, it came up in terms of hitting inside of a -- getting inside of a phone in which a terrorist might have left future possible terrorist acts. bill: that is another one where, making sure the government isn't completely blind to what goes on, financial transactions, communications, because you trust that the appropriate policies for when and how government's ability to see, information is used. that is another one. there will be a big debate about, some extremists might say government shouldn't see anything, others will say government should say everything, but i think there is

the potential for the best of both worlds approach. charlie: if in fact there is some appropriate procedure. bill: right. we have had procedures. some people think that even so things went on, so there are voices out there that tend toward let's not let government see things. that is the question, how much of a gene editing, how much governmental ability, we need politicians who draw in great opinions. running a health care system and deciding when people are inventing super expensive treatments, should health care demand so much of the economy that investing in education and social services and those things, that will be another huge problem that will be debated in the political arena.

charlie: as health care right in your judgment? bill: the european countries. charlie: scandinavian or. bill: the u.k. spends about half of much of the gdp as the u.s. does. it is hard to express what a mammoth difference that is. you're talking about almost 9% of gdp difference. that is one out of 11 people who go to work every day are the extra health care activity here in the united states. i am not saying we should host sale just adopt their system. there are other systems which are not single-payer, wholesale adopt their system which is single-payer, there are other systems that are great. access to medical care is one of the few things we do quite a bit worse than other rich countries.

there are some like education that a lot of rich countries don't do a very good job on. this one is where we are uniquely bad. charlie: health care and education, we don't do as well as other industrialized nations? bill: most rich countries don't do that well on education. there are cases where we are the best in the world by a lot, so that one, we are more middle of pack in terms of our achievement. health care access where we look particularly bad. charlie: is there a ticking clock on global warning? bill: yes. fortunately, it is not overnight. the really big impacts are in negative the 30 to 70 year time frame, although, it has already increased the chance of drought and storms. we are seeing that. charlie: you can see direct causation there? bill: yes. the heating effect is already

there. overlaid with that is pacific oscillation and normal weather things, so exactly how much is the heating signal versus other things, you can get reasonable disagreement, but there is no from ahat that is there global average temperature is rising, particularly in the middle east or parts of africa, we are already seeing some of that and over time it gets worse. changing the energy system which has a long lead time of invention and deployment, i feel this is one of the most urgent problems. charlie: is the answer finding alternative sources of energy?

bill: finding that magic three characteristics, reliable, clean, and low-cost. there are many paths to get there. we have to encourage innovators trying different things. if you can take some and turn it directly into, sun and turn it directly into gasoline, that would be an approach. there are approaches that take nuclear to a new level of safety and a lower level of cost so that that would be a key part. we need to find a lot of innovative ideas, both government and private sector. charlie: is your life today more intellectually challenging than when you were running microsoft? bill: i am on a steep learning curve in both cases. i love the fact that i get to meet great people. i get to see things work, see things that fail. for this stage of my life, i am in a perfect position. i couldn't be happier. charlie: do you have an

influence on microsoft? not just being a shareholder. bill: yeah. i get to keep up-to-date. we are using digital enablement things to get financial services for people all over the world or to look at medical data. staying up-to-date on the digital piece helps me to my foundation work. charlie: you said something akin to this, the average person lives better than john d. rockefeller did. warren: that's true. you live better and terms of your entertainment choices, travel choices, john d rockefeller could not buy them. that is in one lifetime. it is amazing. charlie: what brings you the most satisfaction beyond family? warren: my greatest satisfaction is staying in good health.

when you're 86, you look at this a little differently. charlie: what do you enjoy? warren: i enjoy running berkshire. it has been my painting for 50 some years. i get to paint what i want. i don't have to follow what wall street is telling me to do in that quarter or something like that. i own the brush. i own the canvas, and the canvas is unlimited. it is a pretty nice game and i get to do it every day with people i like. i don't have to associate with anyone that causes my stomach to churn. if i was in politics i would have to smile at people i wanted to hit. i've got a good deal and i'm hanging on to it. charlie: i often repeat this story, one person said to me i spent too much of my life were in about what people think of

me, but now i only worry about what i think of them. warren: my business is, i am lucky that way. business is so much easier than philanthropy. philanthropy may be a lot more important, but in business, you are looking for easy choices, for people you like to associate with and to an extent i can create the world around me. charlie: are you saying to me that if someone walked in your door and they wanted you to buy their company, and you saw it as a golden goose. warren: with the farmer i did not like? i would say no. marrying for money is already a bad idea under any circumstances, but if you are already rich, it does not make any sense at all. charlie: the satisfaction, what is the metric of satisfaction? warren: doing a decent job of

running a place that gets harder to do because of the size of it over time, that it is working with a lot of people. it is like gene mccarthy said about being a football coach, just difficult enough to be interesting, but it really isn't that hard. [laughter] warren: he had a way of getting people irritated sometimes. charlie: what brings you the most joy? bill: learning things and making breakthroughs. after all the great family stuff from that is a lot of fun. every once in a while if something really makes sense and you can teach people about it, share and insight, i also think that is very satisfying. when i sit down with melinda and write the annual letter, the idea that i have had a chance to see things, what can i share that is releases sink that might people, that is

hard, and it doesn't happen all the time, but between my learning and being able to share where i see this is what i thought it was, that gives me great satisfaction. ♪

♪ >> you are watching "bloomberg technology." let's start with a check of your bloomberg "first word news." the mayor of charleston, south carolina says that the hostage situation is over. the gunman was shot by police and is in critical condition. the restaurant employee shot by the gunman has died. police say all the hostages have been rescued. the white house press secretary sarah sanders fired back today at tennessee senator bob corker, question president trump's competency last week. >> i think it is a ridiculous and outrageous claim and does not dignify a response from this podium. nabila: the national hurricane center says that harvey has