onathan: coming up "bloomberg best," highlights from coverage of the world economic forum in davos. chaos and trade tensions sparking debates about what is next. >> i think we can get the deal implemented by march 29. >> if we can't get a deal, we have to delay brexit. don't think any one side prevails. jonathan: the imf cuts its growth forecast again. how the world economy looks. >> do i see a recession? no. >> easing is premature. >> i can see people taking a

defensive position. jonathan: plus, conversations with key officials and heads of state. >> we are working hard. this.been clear on >> capitalism is no longer delivering what people expect. jonathan: it is all ahead on the is special edition of "bloomberg best." hello and welcome. i'm jonathan ferro, here in davos at the 2019 world economic forum, where we have been speaking with influential and insightful figures. on this edition of "bloomberg best," we will revisit those conversations. let's start with brexit. theresa may canceled her trip to davos.

there were plenty of people here with thoughts on the negotiations. as the deadline for britain to leave the eu approaches. >> would you be in support of a delay for a couple of months if it puts the u.k. in a better position, or wtr rules? >> if there is a deal because we because we got a deal and want to implement it, that would be one thing. i think we can implement it by march 29. my suspicion is those who want to delay it is because they don't want brexit to happen at all. that would not be true of everybody, but there are those who see a delay as a means of hoping we won't leave. here we are discussing the disconnection between voters and the political class and the role of globalization in that. the biggest risk is when politicians promise something, and then don't deliver.

in the u.k., you have the clearest possible example. we said to the voters, you make up your mind and we will abide by that. then, we had an election, where 80% of the mp's said we will abide by that referendum. wern around now and say decided not to, i think it puts the u.k. in the potential of fracturing its politics, as we have seen in europe and other mature democracies. that is a high price to pay. >> is there a 30% chance we get a new deal brexit? >> i will not put a percentage on it. there is a risk of no deal. that risk is real. people need to remember that. people on the other side need to recognize there is a large body

of opinion in parliament that would seek to avoid no deal at all costs, including putting at risk brexit itself. the right answer is to find a compromise in the middle around the deal which avoids those extremes and allows britain to proceed prosperously to a sensible future relationship with the eu after we have left. >> has the cabinet thought about a second referendum as a plan b? >> there are real problems around a second referendum. there is no majority for that in parliament. we have to focus on ideas that are likely to be supported by a majority in parliament. our judgment is there isn't that majority for the second referendum idea. >> what is there a majority for? >> at the moment, nothing. that is the problem. parliament knows what it is against, but still hasn't worked out what it is for. people are promoting their ideal outcome rather than compromising towards a common ground we can all agree on. >> let me tell you that we need

to avoid such a no deal scenario. it is going to be quite negative. not only for the european union, but especially for the u.k. everyone must be aware of that and work at the table of the negotiations to avoid that. >> what is the likelihood of a no deal? it seems there are a few who , but what is the probability of the next of accidental no deal brexit? >> we remain optimistic. as long as those issues remain on the table and the voting that is expected to occur in the next

week, we will move that from our weight, and it is very important to do that. i attach a very small probability to that. >> is there many countries don't who don't attach probability to it and don't have a plan b? >> we are preparing for that. it will be a shock that is very negative for the economy. taking the necessary measures, preparing to treat the u.k. as a third country, it is hard to face, but we are getting prepared for that. jonathan: would your advice be to the government, and i'm not sure they would listen to it, but to delay article 50, push it back? >> it is not acceptable for my country to leave the european union without a deal. that is a big shock to the u.k. economy and the european economy. it does enormous long-term reputational damage, and it is

not the way an advanced nation should behave. if there is no deal, then we have to delay brexit. jonathan: if you are negotiating with the europeans, is it realistic to take it off the table? >> the negotiations are over. the british government signed a deal in november. you can have any number of leaders come on here in davos and tell you there is no prospect of reopening that talk. her cabinet does not think it. the choice is leave without a deal, or everyone changes their mind on theresa may's deal, or delay brexit and some day a referendum or election, which is an underappreciated outcome. i definitely think there could be an election. >> who will trigger that? >> there will be a confidence vote in parliament, and a conservative number of mp's will

switch sides because they would rather have an election than see our country leave the european union without a deal. jonathan: another topic over , theerest here in davos progress of trade talks between the u.s. and china. among the guests who talked with us, the blackstone ceo steve , steve schwarzman. erik: you have a window into the negotiations with china. how are they going? steve: i would say pretty well compared to all other times. i think you need some perspective. 70 years since we have had a trade agreement with china. that is a lot of failure in a lot of places. we now have certainly what appears to be the head of state of china and the united states who would like to progress.

erik: are the chinese prepared to make the concessions the trump administration wants? steve: i don't think in any negotiation that one side prevails. i think there will be something much more in the middle than just what the u.s. wants or just what the chinese want. one of the important things that most people don't think about, they talk about the discussions, trade deficits, intellectual property. one of the things that could be a dealbreaker is compliance. the u.s. is very focused on making sure that anything that is agreed upon actually occurs. enforced. steve: so, that enforcement mechanism becomes key. erik: that is an obstacle. steve: it becomes key.

that is not something the chinese are used to. it is something in the west that we are used to. we pass a law, and if you don't comply in the something bad , something bad happens, so a mechanism for this could be setting up a bureau in the office of the vice premier so that if something is not carried out for a company or what ever, whatever, they can bring that to that bureau, and as long as there is a time frame for resolution, it will get resolved one way or another. that type of mechanism is important in the trade. >> how confident are you that a lasting agreement, lasting deal, can be had by this year? >> i think we will have fed deal a deal at the end of the 90-day timeframe, because it has always been in china's interest to have a deal. i realized it is also in the

interest of european countries and east asian companies for these two countries to have a deal. relations are complicated. you can't have a lasting deal anytime soon. it will be an ongoing process. new issues will come out and we would deal with these new issues. jonathan: still ahead as we wrap up the week in davos on "bloomberg best," a conversation with results new president, plus brazil's new president, plus bankers take stock of their industry. next, concern about a synchronized global slowdown. >> slowing, but still growing

. that is the good news. the bad news is that it is a synchronized slowdown. jonathan: from davos, this is bloomberg. ♪

jonathan: this is "bloomberg best." i am jonathan ferro in davos. this week, the imf cut its global growth forecast. we discussed the outlook with several guests at the world economic forum, starting with imf managing director, christine lagarde. today, our forecast is 3.5, 3.6 next year. if you say i see a recession, i say no. if there was to be materialization of the risks we see on the horizon, this horizon is getting closer to what we had in october, that's the reason why we slightly revised our growth forecast. if those risks were to materialize, it would be a different story. if you ask me which risk i rank higher, i would say that the trade tension is unresolved.

the question, my number one risk, brexit uncertainty and the question again that we have on how it will be resolved, the timeframe, the after divorce situation. i would put that is number two, as number two, but probably major impact on the u.k., impact on the eu, risks if the financial sector is not addressed, then i would have as a subset of that first risk -- words, trade tensions continuing to increase -- i would have an accelerated moderation of growth in china. >> we are slowing, but still growing. that is the good news. the bad news is that it is a synchronized slowdown. the world will slow down in a synchronized manner. that makes life more difficult

in every way. the key risk is a policy mistake, or mistakes. i think that is the key to avoid mistakes, a hippocratic oath of economic policymaking, do no harm. >> you talk about a synchronized slowdown, take a look at china. that could be mistakes and policies. mistakes in policies. is china adopting the right policies in managing to slow down in its economy? >> they would try to reinflate the economy. we've will see how that works. they are constrained in what they can do. >> could china be slowing down more than we think? >> absolutely. that is a possibility. some of the stimulus measures will offset other things going on in the world. the fiscal stimulus from the u.s. is easing, slowly is slowly disappearing,

so that's not a net positive. some will be offset by china and europe, but there are limits when you look at global debt levels, there are limits to how much you can do in terms of further stimulus. that is the critical problem here. we are constrained in what we can do and deliver in terms of economic policy. >> why is the china slowdown in 2019 different from 2016, which was deeper and took real estate down? >> last year, the policy, the chinese economy is policy-driven. the policy was debt-contained, containing debt, celeste debt. -- less debt. we always see that. companies that the local level at the local level really feel it. we deal with hundreds and hundreds of companies, and we can see they are bottom-line driven, not spending as much, and especially smaller companies

are having a tough time. that was last year. >> how much of it is an internal slowdown? how much is trade? how much is it hitting consumer sentiment? >> it is a big deal. all eyes are on these trade talks. hopefully, in 90 days, we hear some good news. it is more about confidence the in the numbers. china's exports to the u.s. are 4% of the total gdp, not a big number. if you go down 1%, it is still not a big number for china gdp, but the economy is about confidence. once the confidence is dulled, , itle's decision-making factors into that. >> i am not seeing an economic slowdown, especially in the u.s. small businesses played a big role in this.

in the peak season we just completed, retail group estimated 5.6% over last year. online retail group, 17%, 18%, so there's still a healthy increase in consumer spending. tom: i want to get to that small company in seattle, but this is really important. we get wrong retail doom and gloom, the world is coming to an end, and you're telling me i'm in retail double digits. >> we continue to see online growing, but for all that come online is 13%, 14% of total retail, so it still has a long ways to go. >> the slowdown has surprised us. we have to be very careful to monitor the data, and we are analyzing the data to understand what is going on. in particular, we have to understand the persistence of the shock to eurozone growth.

>> when you talk about a shock to eurozone growth, how much is trade, and how much is internal slowdown? >> a lot of it is trade. a lot of it comes from the outside. we have said as a governing council that most downside risks which come from the outside, until yesterday we would say risks are balanced and moving to the downside. now, we say they have moved to the downside of it because these risks have not materialized. >> the market is saying they don't believe they will the of see a rate hike by the ecb this year. do you agree with them? >> it will depend on the state of the economy.

we said the risks are on the downside, and you didn't need the ecb to know that the economic risks in the short-term had increased. part of this slowdown is temporary, so the near-term growth will probably be reduced in our forecast published in march. if we look ahead, then medium-term expansion will be supported by financing conditions. we are part of that. by employment and wage gains, and energy prices. >> give me a sense of the linkage between markets, market behavior, and central banks. the central banks follow market behavior? >> the short answer is no. follow our data and the economic data. >> is there a danger the market wants to be spoon fed too much? now that it is off the table, you need to be clear with forward guidance. >> we have been extremely clear about our sequencing. last december, it was an important indication. now, the timing, which is from

the market, will be data dependent. ♪

jonathan: you are watching "bloomberg best." i am jonathan ferro. in world economic forum davos is always a gathering place for political leaders. this year, no donald trump, no theresa may, no xi jinping, but a new player did make an appearance. john micklethwait sat down with the president of brazil. >> we have to do well by brazil. otherwise, the left will get back in.

it could even come close to the venezuelan regime. we have to get away from this left-wing ideology. ,he population didn't want this so they elected a candidate who upheld the truth. >> you have most people saying that is one of the more useless ful trade deals. what can you do to improve it? you've had talks with the eu for 20 years and nothing has come of it. is your strategy to grow it or start again? >> it began well with the labour party getting into power, then trade began to overlook the ideological question. this held brazil back. we started talks with argentina, currently managing it for the first half of this year. begunicially, we have

talks with other countries. we want to modernize it. a country the size of brazil cannot be tied to it for trade. we need to be free to make bilateral agreements. regarding the eu, whatever the agreement, there will be restrictions suggested by france. we have reached an impasse that won't be cleared up quickly. >> there is enthusiasm for your administration because it is pro-business, but you caused problems for business people here, due to the environment, which you have said, and the continuing issue of corruption. on the environment, most business people do not want to be associated with the deforestation. you have talked about calling pulling brazil out of the paris

accord. will you go ahead with that? >> the first question on the environment, brazil is a country that more than many protects its reserves and the environment. it is enshrined in law that a farmer must protect his farm without support from the present government. this has to be respected. any change will be made according to the law. as to the paris agreement, brazil has been playing its part, but we are not getting the financial return, so for now we , we will continue with the paris agreement, but we are a developing country with duties and rights within the agreement that are not being met. jonathan: we have more conversations with heads of state coming up, including the thai prime minister and the south african president. as well as ceos from some of the biggest banks talk about the

state of the economy and the outlook. we speak with david solomon. >> it has declined meaningfully over the last 10 years. jonathan: this is bloomberg. ♪

comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.

jonathan: welcome back to a special edition of "bloomberg best" from the world economic forum in davos, switzerland. i'm jonathan ferro. ubs released earnings, reporting $13 billion in outflows during the fourth quarter after several u.s. banks announced deep on trading losses last week. this was the backdrop as we spoke with several of the world's leading bank executives. let's start with my conversation with goldman sachs ceo, david solomon. whenever we have a bad quarter, i often hear the phrase, "we can't do anything about the weather, we just manage what we have." is it the weather that has changed over q4, or have we seen

over a period of time a climate change to fixed income trading? >> from a big picture perspective, if you look at the evidence -- and i talked about this on the earnings call -- the wallet available has declined meaningfully over the course of the last 10 years. for us, we really like -- there are obviously opportunities for us to continue to grow and expand with certain clients, but our market share from 2006-2007 to today has increased meaningfully. the wallet that has been available for us has decreased significantly. we run that business based on the opportunity we see with clients today. we think we have the best team. when it comes to risk intermediation, we are the best leader in that. i work with clients in fixed income, i get highly complementary comments about our people and our execution in that business. it's a good business, while

still significant, not as big as it was. jonathan: do you see the pie getting bigger anytime soon? a lot of people used to complain about the vol pop, and it still doesn't seem to generate growth. >> i'm not good at predicting those things. the business is the size that it is. we have a good team in place. if there was a bigger opportunity, our leading market position and our team would capture that opportunity, but at the moment, we respond to the needs of our client and operate s and operate our business that way. >> what's the biggest risk to 2019? you mentioned the trade talks between the u.s. and china, brexit -- >> i'm afraid to say it's politics. running a country has become a more challenging job than ever before. there's been a lot of thinking

on how business would be affected by technology, by sector. i've not seen the same level of thinking how politics would be affected by technology, and the examples are many. it's a new world. >> i feel like every january i ask you when we will see the banking consolidation. >> so far, i have been right. >> but, this year, there is no appetite for regulation -- >> i think from everybody in europe, everybody sees that -- people in other parts of the world, maybe it's because of the environmental and structural factors. i believe we -- people see that there are structural impediments

to a better performance of banks in europe, that those are very difficult to address from the notion that banks shouldn't get any bigger. you have to consolidate if you think things are too big. and then there's the regulation, which means you have to consolidate that at the european level. from bankruptcy loans to capital requirements, until we have a more level playing field, it is going to be difficult to have cross-border consolidation. market consolidation remains, i think, unnecessary. >> i think the banking system -- more than likely, there will be another financial crisis, but it will probably occur somewhere else in the financial ecosystem, and the banks will be the buffer as opposed to the cause. >> where do you see the next crisis coming from? what region? >> what i would say is that there's extremely high amount of debt that has been accrued, both in sovereign balance sheets and corporate balance sheets, on the

back of essentially zero risk, free interest rates. i think the banking sector has strengthened its capacity to take on debt on its own balance sheet. taht debt has gone to collateralized loan obligations, they've gone into more investment products that have new members of trudging challenges created 2007. i think the question will be there be some sort of liquidity shock, and if it will pull credit away from the capital market and put issuers under pressure. we saw that in december. there was zero high-yield debt issued in the world in december, and there are a lot of companies that have high-yield bonds that need to roll them over. if that had extended -- if that

had extended into the first quarter, that itself would have created potentially a credit shock. >> i think the economy is slowing globally, slowing in the u.s., slowing in china. that doesn't mean that we are in any sort of crisis type mode that people like to talk themselves into. erik: no one is talking about fed hikes anymore, it's now when there's the fed going to ease. and what on earth is the ecb going to do? because it is still stuck at zero. have we alreay hit the peak? >> i don't think so. erik: really? >> and i think talking of easing is premature. a phenomenal investor was interviewed by you recently, and he said the fed should always try to sneak in interest rate increases when people aren't watching. in other words, when the time is

good, push harder and it gives you monetary flex ability. -- monetary flexibility. in my view, the fed did not do that in 2016 and 2017. the opportunity, 2018, we pushed in four, which was the right thing to do, but it raised the ante too much suddenly too late. the problem was the aggregate increases were high. the market, some people in the market are predicting a rate cut. i don't see that happening, but i don't see three or four increases. my personal prediction is it will be one or two, and currently -- again, the u.s.

economy is doing great, so the fed has this dual mandate of inflation and jobs, and on both of those, it argues for continued increasing, but very modestly. >> there's always great debate of the technical tools and everything, but at the end of the day, if you think about the central bank response 12 years ago, 10 years ago, whatever, when the issue arises, they have to respond. it's the same will of the people that caused the government to respond. we will see what they have, we will see if they come up with ideas none of us have thought of, but you can't sit there and watch an economy without having monetary help if it needs it. the united states right now doesn't need it. jonathan: we've had a series of conversations right here on bloomberg tv and bloomberg radio about the prospect of rate cuts, maybe even a conversation about that at the end of the year. do you think that's too premature? >> i think it probably is. the federal reserve has been clear in the statements and everything, that they're in the neutral range and they will be very careful as the data comes in. right now, you have the data in december strong enough for another rate rise, and that puts them into the neutral range they talked about.

people are saying, ok, that this level of accommodation, it's neutral, and the decision -- >> what has been quite important to observe, not only in q4, but in correlation, so many asset classes underperforming, which is not surprising. it was de facto a story were asset classes were expensive. i mentioned in the past that people count on liquidity to be there, and it's a little like .ater, particularly in davos if you leave it outside the window overnight, it's going to freeze. so, liquidity can disappear very quickly. >> is that your main concern? let's leave the outside politics. >> no, my concern is that

there's -- last year there were positives. year, there's negatives. -- this year, there's negatives. it takes investors and people and politicians -- they're measured on if they lose money or make mistakes, and in this kind of environment, i can see people taking a different view of the world. it's up to us to try to compensate with new initiatives. it's not an excuse to stay still. ♪

jonathan: this is "bloomberg best." i'm jonathan ferro at the world economic forum in davos. political turbulence was the center of much conversation, and we spoke with many political leaders about how they are handling risk and potential flashpoints. let's start with the italian prime minister with questions about the stability of his government. he discussed it with francine lacqua. francine: can this government hold, or will we see fresh elections? >> we have a strong coalition, and there are a lot of problems with stability. we're working very hard. there's unity, and i'm very confident that we can last for five years. francine: we've heard from both

salvini and dimaio that they are unhappy with things in france and things in germany. what do you agree with them on? >> there's a public debate, and i think that we have to talk about that. there are a lot of things that are not working well, and every politician, every government, every member state can discuss about that. francine: do these verbal attacks hurt the relationship between italy and france, and italy and germany? >> i mean, there's a traditional friendship between italy and france, and between italy and germany. we disagree on a few issues, but that doesn't compromise our friendship. you've made some waves

in the last couple hours in davos, and i think you know you have. comments about the italians being let off the hook by europeans -- >> i'm very franco on it. jonathan: build on that more. what are you angry about? >> we can make progress on climate change, progress on the markets like digital and services, but there are two big problems. one has to do with migration and the other is -- at this moment, there's a lack of trust in europe between the north and south. the european commission has a task to forcibly do more, to bring its state finances in order. all of us have to make sure our own house is cleaned up, working well, and then collectively we can make sure we are more competitive. but they have not done so and they have not the filter task to

to upholdk the treaty. >> we recognize the independence of the central bank, and i've been very clear on this that the independence of the central bank is sacrosanct. it's embedded in the constitution and should not be touched. however, the constitutional so also says that there does -- as we give the central bank the independence, that linkage between the central bank and the ministry of finance needs to continue where we are able to see a good balance between monetary policy and fiscal policy. jonathan: how does that work in practice? how can you simultaneously say i respect central bank independence and followed up by

it up by saying that the central bank needs to work with the finance minister? >> no, no, that's the reality of our situation, that's what happens. in the end, the central bank is on record as saying what you desire as an aspirational thing, that we should take into account in parliament. the central bank says that's exactly what we do. we take into account the impact of our policies, unemployment -- and this is not unique in for south africa, by the way, it happens all over the world. central banks will tell you as they cross the monetary policy positions, they do also look on unemployment. that is precisely what my party is saying. there's nothing wrong in a political party expressing an aspirational point. jonathan: you can see how the optics of this will not look good for investors looking at south africa. >> we have -- i have been very clear on this as president of the country. the independence is sacrosanct and must be respected. as the central bank does its all

monetary policy positions, obviously, they should do what central banks do. >> the danger of populism is extremely high in europe and in ukraine as a part of europe. we have extremely irresponsible politicians who can make just a promise. adding to that, we have a russian influence on the election, when pressure use the democratic instrument to make influence on democratic countries. jonathan: are you worried about that happening this year? >> definitely we try to undertake the necessary effort to minimize or to stop this russian influence. and do you know what is the best solution? count on the responsible voting of the people, the same way the europeans demonstrating in 2016 and 2017, when everyone said --

in france and germany that populists will win. keep our fingers crossed this has not happened in many european countries. this is not happening in ukraine. this is not happening in the election of the european parliament. >> everybody is aware, even here in davos, that capitalism now is no longer delivering what people expect. people expect more justice. they want to have less differences between the highest wages and the lowest ones. we need to fight against inequalities. we need more transparency. we need what we call common decency. i will appeal here in davos for, decency from all the ceos, from all the private companies.

we need to reduce the level of inequality, which is unfair and inefficient. francine but, have you do that? you do that? is it breaking up the big companies? >> for instance, we should have more transparency. this is one solution we will put on the table. we have introduced transparency in france. we'll try to highlight also at the european level a clear transparency between the highest wages and the lowest ones. we'll also put the emphasis on the question of international taxation, because justice, new international taxation, would be fair. >> in australia, the economy continues to furlough in the 28th year of continuous growth. we've looked back at 2.9% growth, about 3% growth per

moving forward. the unemployment rate has come down, and wages are starting to pick up. i'm broadly optimistic, but mindful of the economic headwinds. >> probably optimistic, but there are risks. take a look at consumption, 50% of gdp. that's truly are concern. >> there's always downside risks, and clearly people are very mindful of the geopolitical downside risks and trade issues and brexit and u.s.china trade -china trade tensions, which we would like to see resolved in an orderly fashion as soon as possible. there are always a range of downside risk, but if you look -- there are always a range of downside risks, but if you look at the downsides, we are in our 20th year of continuous growth, . >> what will you do to boost consumption? would that involves a cut in income tax, for instance?

>> we have passed legislation in to reduce personal income taxes . we have a budget coming up in australia, and i think australia would be surprised almost delivering the budget. >> huge spending plans with a it comes to the government, but is it being derailed? >> not at all. we have midterm plans in vision 2030, where we have serious reserves, we have diversified our income, revenues are increasing, 300% in the last four or five years. reforming the subsidies. there's a plan that is going to support the growth in days to come. >> and what oil price would you be concerned? at what oil price would it impact government spending? >> well, oil price has been volatile for the past 57 years, so we are prepared for all eventualities. the plan is to continue regardless of the oil price. we're very comfortable with the numbers that are published. we're a major player in the oil market, so we don't disclose the numbers we budget for, but we're reasonably comfortable. ♪

jonathan: let's wrap up this special edition of "bloomberg best" from the world economic forum in davos with perspective from bill gates, who is focusing on the bill and melinda gates foundation, one of the world's largest philanthropic organizations. he spoke with us about the need for funds to keep up a fight against diseases that kill millions annually. >> our foundation has put over $10 billion into those efforts. overall, most of the money has come from the foreign aid budgets. as you said, a lot of what we are seeing here at davos -- let's look at the track record, and the learning that has taken place, and despite all these distractions, let's maintain that commitment, because we could get even further. replenishments are coming up over the next year. the first one is in october in france. anytime somebody looks at this, particularly when they go to see

the work, i think we'll avoid the fact that it's far away, the fact that there are other things getting overlooked. francine: is there a worry that gets overlooked in how do you switch investors? if you have innovation, this is what can help the poor. innovation through medicine what . what kind of advice would you give to investors? how do they do good without losing money? >> well, and a lot of these cases, these are grants. you are not going to get a direct return. the economic benefit, because you have kids surviving, participating in the economy,

having them be healthy, the returns overall are fantastic. we had some people going to look at it over a 20:1 return. but, that's not coming back in the form of the dividend, it's taking countries that are not stable, where lots of kids, up to 15% of kids, die before the age of five, and you are helping lift them up so, over time, like india or indonesia or vietnam, they gradually participate in the world economy, and you get the stability, that means you will not have to go spend defense resources, you will not have a pandemic because they can stop it before it spreads. with the right perspective, which is a long-term perspective, these are very impactful. with all the dollars the government spends, i'd say you will not be saving lives for less than $1000 per life except in this area. jonathan: that was bill gates alongside francine. that's all for this edition of "bloomberg best."

thise you have enjoyed review at the world economic forum. you can find more of our coverage from davos on bloomberg.com, along with all the latest business news and analysis, 24 hours a day. i'm jonathan ferro. so long from davos. this is bloomberg. ♪

carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i am carol massar. jason: and i'm jason kelly. in this week'srol: issue, iconic companies tackling our global macro concerns. we have the ceo on combating global warming.