♪ carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm carol massar. jason: and i'm jason kelly. we are in bloomberg headquarters in new york. carol: the attack on the plant in saudi arabia rattling markets in the exporting region. jason: plus, a look at how trumpcare brought a new era of health insurance that doesn't cover the bills. carol: and we sit down with steve schwarzman, who weighs in

on the u.s. china trade war. steve: they're doing it as they recognize that the short-term in china kind of remains with policy adjustments, but they're borrowing from their future. jason: more on that conversation later on. let's begin with the cover story. it's all about general motors. the ceo is eyeing a tech future, but her most pressing issue right now, she has a lot of workers on strike. carol:. she does and that's one of the deep dives into well-known global companies in this week's issue. here's joel weber. joel: maybe you've heard of them, going through a bit of a labor strike right now, with a

strike for strike in 12 years. but there's a bigger story. that's what our cover story is about. jason: why now? better to be lucky than smart, maybe, but you're very smart to deep dive, but nobody saw this coming. joel: we did a couple weeks ago. but is not about the strike. it provides a convenient news hook. we talk about strategies a lot and this is a strategy, a ceo trying to pivot her business and her business model and staff up with engineers and software people. and pivot away from the sort of traditional auto model into an electrified version of the feature that might also be automated. carol: when she was making those changes, cutting back on brands and saying this is not an easy thing for a ceo to do, she was thinking about what is the gm of tomorrow? joel: that's right. but at the same time you have to deal with today. that's where labor comes in. they are going to be watching the strike unfold further. jason: talk about trumpcare. that is a story hard to read because it's a very human story in a lot of ways. the cost of health care, literally and figuratively. joel: that's right.

one of the things we coined is trumpcare, a coin of obamacare, obviously. what trump has done is gut the aca initiative, that was a flagship of president obama's. one of the things that's happened is a lot of shady insurance brokers have stepped into that void and basically brought to market a lot of policies that look like they do wonders, but the fine print reveals that they actually ensure nothing. and that's left consumers holding the bag, in some cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars, when they find themselves in circumstances they were insured for. carol: i feel like anybody who's got an insurance policy, they've got to be checking it out. joel: read the fine print. that's an incredible story because it digs into a place of reporting that nobody is looking, and consumers are being hurt right here. carol: i want to talk about another big corporate dive, asking the question, why did bayer buy bayer-monsanto? joel: fascinating story. incredibly well known for creating an aspirin long ago, and then monsanto, known for roundup among other things, not beloved in the u.s. and bayer basically acquire them

a year ago. and what we've seen since then is they basically acquired a company that they didn't really know what the legal implications of these ongoing lawsuits were going to be. and we've seen the number of lawsuits skyrocket, and it's left bayer looking at this massive acquisition they didn't do their due diligence on, even though they say they have. the market cap, with the exact price they paid was worth more than monsanto than they acquired it. it shows how much it's hurt that company. within the company, which is revered as a german industrial might, there's been a lot of soul-searching about this and what it might mean for the future.

jason: much more on those stories coming up. first, we turn to a global story, the attack on saudi arabia's oil processing plant, the largest in the world. carol: rattling markets and raising tensions and a key in a key exporting region, and questioning president trump's strategy to weaken iran. here's ben harvey in tel aviv with this week's remarks. ben: as we see in the most recent attack on saudi arabia, what they've done is they've struck at the heart of the global energy structure. this is the world's biggest refiner. when it attacks the aramco site, they managed to knock out half of saudi arabia's production and 5% of global production. >> that was noticed on the global stage. what i think is interesting, though, is how you talk about the pressure, specifically by the united states put on iran, it has certainly created havoc in their economy. but it's put them in a powerful iran, tehran and a powerful position. explain that. ben: yeah, iran's economy is in tremendous stress. but they have invested in nonstate armies around the

region. whereas this is a cost-effective investment for them, they invest in nonstate actors, basically forces of disruption. when it feels pressure, it can activate them. as we saw, create massive damage. carol: you make reference to the art of war, asymmetrical warfare. this is what iran has been doing. ben: that's exactly right. iran's main rival is saudi arabia. they cannot compete on conventional grounds. saudi arabia is the third biggest purchaser of military equipment, after united states. iran can compete with that. what they are doing is investing in asymmetrical warfare. they have small forces that can create havoc, whether it's on global shipping lanes, whether it's in iraq, whether it's on the border of israel, and also now in yemen, where they have gained a foothold in the arabian peninsula, which is saudi arabia's backyard. jason: coming up, one of the best-known names in the world of

investing, having cofounded blackstone. carol: and he's got a new book out. our conversation with steve schwarzman coming up next. jason: this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪

jason: welcome back to bloomberg businessweek. i'm jason kelly. carol: and carol massar. as every week. you can also catch up on our daily show by listening to our podcast on apple podcast, soundcloud, and bloomberg.com. jason: and you can find us online at businessweek.com and on the mobile app. if you think about the important world of private equity, you're probably thinking of steve schwarzman. he was the cofounder of blackstone back in the mid-1980's, after he had done a very successful stint on wall street already. carol: he writes about what he calls a collection of inflection points that led him to who he is and where he is today. it's in his new book, what it takes in the pursuit of excellence. jason: we caught up with him with the latest edition of businessweek talks.

steve: it's a different wall street, more efficient wall street, a wall street that can mobilize much more capital. it's a world that has printed so much money. not just in the united states, but the deficits that have run, it's easy to aggregate a lot of money to do a lot of things. jason: it feels like so much of what you've become and what you've created really does go back to those early days. first the dlj briefly, and obviously business school, but lehman brothers, that's where you were really forged in a lot of ways. talk to us about that time, the lessons you took from that experience.

steve: lehman was, at that point, fascinating place in the investment banking world. jason: but a difficult place. steve: i would say, my first day of work, somebody walked out of the elevator and walking to me and said you're very lucky to work here because nobody here will ever stab you in the back. actually, just walk right up to you and stab you in the front. carol: there's a line in your book, you write how your exit from lehman had show you wall street at its worst. steve: lehman got into financial trouble and, you know, my own view and everybody at the firm would have a different view, is that grown-ups did not protect the institution. they were too worried that the ceo would got the firm in trouble would fire them if he took them on. as a result, the firm was sort of frozen. we had mark market loss in terms of net worth. we were forced to sell the business because it was discovered that the net worth at sort of gotten close to disappearing. your ratings would go down and then the firm would collapse. so, you know, i looked at that, and it's a firm that, i guess, 150 years old, something like that, and say how could this ever happen? i never wanted anything like that to happen to anybody i was associated with. on the other hand, fascinating place with fascinating people. it was before i joined, before there were any mba classes.

so the people who worked there were ex-cia agents, somebody from the entertainment business, somebody from the oil patch. everybody had a lot of different points of view, and it was fascinating place. that's why i went to work there. jason: and forged incredibly important relationships, not the least of which may be among the most important, if not the important, was peter peterson. it has come out of that scarred in different ways to a large extent. you start having breakfast every morning, trying to figure out what's going to happen next. describe to us, if you will, what was at the crux of your relationship with pete? steve: pete was 21 years older than me. he's known all over the united states, and i was the young guy.

pete was a very structured, suma cum laude type of process thinker, which was great. i was sort of intuitive type thinker, and so when we did things together, he would let me do all the execution because, for a while, he sort of tried to rehearsal what we do and i said don't worry about it. i'll walk in the room. carol: i got this, right? steve: i got this. it'll happen. and it does. so, we were a very good team for a very long time, over 30 years. and sort of incredibly productive, easy to deal with because we each approached the world somewhat differently. carol: except when you guys went out on your own and you were

looking for money. steve: what you find is that the world is not always waiting for you. in fact, sometimes the world doesn't even respond to you. so when we started, we sent out about 500 letters, expecting people to call us and give us an order, and the phone never rang. carol: in your book, you write you can't learn to be a manager. but you can learn to be an entrepreneur. i'm sorry. steve: you can learn to be a manager.

carol: but not to be an entrepreneur. steve: because being an entrepreneur involves seeing a lot of things simultaneously, and have the desire and the ability to just say ok, this is going to work. i'm just going out there to make it happen. there is no fallback. there is no net. you know, when you're up on the high wire. and the only reason you do that is that you are sure. now, the fact that nine out of 10 new businesses fails means that it is a delusional exercise, right? carol: right. steve: so to be that delusional and go out when the percentages are against you takes a certain kind of person who believes they've figured it out. carol: to do it anyway. steve: they don't think they're at risk. people who do these books or whatever, or interview entrepreneurs and talk about,

you really like risk. nobody likes risk. nobody tries to fail. so i've always found that whenever i do anything, whether it's a new charitable thing or its expanding different parts of the firm, i like to be completely convinced that whatever we're doing is going to work, and i usually can explain to anybody why i think what i think, and is rational. but interestingly, hardly anyone ever responds and competes with us when we start because people are comfortable doing what they do. so, you can tell we're doing something else and they go that's interesting. they just go back to what they're doing. it's part of the human condition. jason: coming up, more from steve schwarzman. he hung out for a while. carol: we covered a lot of topics, including populism and the u.s.-china trade war. this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪

jason: welcome back.

i'm jason kelly. carol: i'm carol massar. you can listen to us on the radio and in new york and in boston and in washington, d.c. jason: and 960 in the bay area and in london on dab digital radio and on the bloomberg business app. let us continue our conversation with steve schwarzman. carol: the private equity tighten, while one of the closest relationships to beijing out of any executive, is rooted both to business and the founding of schwarzman scholars. jason: he's also a prominent trump advisor. he is now the president a long time and served as an intermediary between the chinese government during this ongoing trade conflict. steve: it's more interesting than two people because china has been the most rapidly

growing country, probably in world history over a 40 year period. and they did that with enormous energy, central planning, and also adopting a lot of things that emerging market countries do, which is hiding behind high tariff walls, closing its markets. and not making them if not closed, not making them as accessible as the developed world does. and doing different things with intellectual property. in the u.s., in the 19th century, sort of did the same thing. we were a poor little country and we found a way to use tariffs to protect ourselves. at a certain point, that creates imbalances around the world. so, now that china has got $3 trillion of reserves, it's the biggest producer of filler of jobs in the world, so jobs have moved from the developed world to china. wealth has moved. and the global financial crisis, basically, created problems for

the developed world. so now we have roughly half of the people, for example, in the united states, who have income insufficiency. they're in a bad way, and that creates populism. and when domestic candidates, for being attacked, don't result in change for the people who are in trouble, they find a foreign devil. and i was pretty sure it was going to be china, for those reasons. so, in effect, china recognizes that the circumstances of the world have changed. but, like all people who have a really good deal, why would you change it? and you only change it because there's pressure, and the change ends up being in their interest. there are people who don't believe that.

remember, people don't like to change. here we have the developed world represented by the united states who wants them to change. so, it's a very interesting thing, for china knows it has to change. the u.s. wants them to change. it should be easy, except it's not easy because people don't like giving up advantage. and on the u.s. side, they would want to accomplish this rebalancing as quickly and as thoroughly as they can. so what's happening over the last two and a half years, roughly, is these two giant countries, which together have somewhere between 35-40% of the world's economy. so this is like the two parents fighting and the children are, like, hiding. and they're upset. that's rest of world, at the slowing trade. but long-term, at the decoupling of these giant countries

actually result in lower growth for everyone. jason: right. and how much do you worry about that? how much do you worry about that decoupling because that seems to be the biggest worry in the world right now is that mom and dad will come together? carol: splitting of the world, essentially. steve: right. partly, that's happening because there hasn't been the over left. and i think, because ultimately, you know, people are rational on a certain level, that as these two countries see that that's not working for them. that they'll come to a table, which is what's happening now for, i guess the third time, and they're doing that not just to be helpful. they're doing that because they recognize the short term china can remain fine with policy

adjustments. but they borrowing're from their future. and if you decouple and have a slower growing world, what's the win in that? that's not a win. jason: and what can you, steve schwarzman, do to help this along? steve: i think there are a lot of countries, and i think it's important that people understand where this is ultimately going, which is not in their interest. and ultimately, i believe, people will act in their self-interest, and there will be an adjustment. no one can predict the way the media wants, what's going to happen in october. it's sort of, i can guess, but no one knows because is really about, primarily it's about

china. they have their hardliners. they have the reformers. what are they actually want to put on the table? carol: and president xi has to balance that right now. steve: somebody has to balance it. and in may, when the trade talks were basically -- i was going to ended, the balance of reformoint versus the harder line position, harder line people who had more influence. now it's becoming more complicated, not just because of trade, other decisions china has made over the last two or three years are creating more complexity there. they have other things going on as well that put pressure on them that they are coming in saying " let's see if we can do something sensible."

you cannot get caught up in two people or any administration, because if we don't solve this problem the attitude of the democrats towards china is, if not identical to the current administration, it is pretty close. thatnk china recognizes this is a structural issue, it is not one u.s. president and so getting something to lower the temperature and helping growth globally is an everybody's interest. cashed our entire conversation with steve swordsmen by checking out our podcast. we talked about a lot of things including the -- steve schwarzman by checking out our podcast. >> it is a fascinating tale. general motors ceo is electrifying the carmakers. but first she has to settle a strike. bayer thinking, we

look back at its purchase of man cento. -- monsanto. ♪

carol: welcome back to bloomberg businessweek. jason: still ahead, trumpcare. the current administration, health insurance that does not cover the bills has flooded the market. carol: the fda gave vaping room to breathe. jason: a top story this week's general motors.

union workers blocked off the construction line and shut down the automaker. carol: workers made concessions -- workers want to see quid pro quo as gm posts record profits for three straight years. jason: here is a look at gm and the ceo mary barra. >> what gm has been doing for the past five years, they were downsizing their core business, they sold european operations and led russia and southeast asian markets. they have downsized by getting rid of certain models and plants in the u.s. that make small cars or thinly profitable models. barra'sis doing, mary strategy is getting out of low-margin or money-losing businesses that other carmakers like gm have participated in for decades because of corporate inertia and car companies thought they had to sell every vehicle to everybody. she is getting out of that and she is putting the money she

saves into electric cars and autonomous vehicles because she sees that as the future of the company. strategically and in terms of capital spending financially transformative for the company if she can pull this off. is to sell cars to individual owners where you make a lot of money. taxis, transportation with a self driving electric taxi at some point. gm will become part manufacturer and part service if all this happens. it will take time but if she succeeds that's what's going on. >> she is throwing a lot of money into gm that she expects to be the gm of the future. you have a company that is making money and workers are saying " we should get some of that as well." >> what i loved about working on this story is that it sort of touches on a point in the

american zeitgeist which is questioning of capitalism has gone too far. when mary barra cuts models or plants because they don't make great money, getting out of low-margin businesses, where she moves a model like the chevy blazer to mexico, suv's make good money you don't need to make them with mexican labor to make profit. youunion reacts by saying " have made record profits for the past three years, the company is guided to match or beat that so the money is coming in, why do you have to keep cutting and sending vehicles to mexico? you need to take care of us." jason: another big story is all er after its purchase of monsanto the german conglomerate pasted -- faced eight attracted legal battle over the u.s. company's roundup weed killer. carol: that has open the door to

countless lawsuits. why did bayer buy monsanto? around the 2015 timeframe bayer was looking to make some sort of a deal. where we goings to continue the evolution they had been on into more health care and pharmaceuticals? or were they going to do something that was a bit more conglomerate like. a company that for generations had been quite conglomerate heavy. most investors thought they would go health care or pharma. now came upayer with this plan to go after my santa and he steered it through. big and it and has been pretty contentious here

in germany and abroad. purchase,y make this how much of the potential legal problem because of monsanto's roundup weed killer were known at that time? it depends who you ask. if you talk to plaintiff attorneys in the u.s. it was all there. the key thing that happened, this was a year prior to bayer's attempt to buy monsanto, in 2015 this organization that was a part of the world health organization and researching what causes cancer, they had identified the key chemical , they identified it as probably carcinogenic to humans. meaning it could cause cancer if you use it. bodies fromatory

the epa and the u.s. to europe, japan and all over have, for years, allowed that chemical to be used and bayer continue to argue that is the winning argument and therefore this was a fine decision to buy monsanto. they claim they did all sorts of due diligence and concluded the legal risk from roundup was low. it was not low, it has an massive. more than 18,000 lawsuits against the company in the u.s.. they have lost three of three jurys to the tune of one awarding $2 billion to plaintiffs. that figure came down a little bit but is big. carol: collateral damage in the trump trade war, our farmers still on his side? at the world of

vaping and how regulatory delay allow the market to take off. ♪

jason: welcome back. carol: join us for bloomberg businessweek every day on the radio starting at 2:00 p.m. wall street time. you can catch up on our daily show by listening to our podcast. jason: you can find us online at businessweek.com. u.s. china trade war has cut off american farmers from one of their most important export markets. the trump solution, $28 billion in aid. is thats -- jason: enough to keep rural voters loyal? >> they are collateral damage in the trade war with china. by the have been harmed decision by china to/u.s. imports. trump is trying to make it up to them, they are getting $28

billion in aid over a two-year period. more than twice what taxpayers paid out for the bailout of the auto industry and does not include the $10.5 billion in federally subsidized crop payments. is projected to reach a record 416 billion in 2019. the trump aid payments may cover more than half of farmers from trade war losses. half of those surveyed expect another round of eight next year. that seems to have kept them on trump's side. 67% of farmers backing the president. from one hot button political economic issue to another, we turn to health care. the trump administration's move to damage the affordable care act has companies cashing in. carol: many americans are learning their new health insurance does not cover the bill.

zeke fox found out how it is impacting one family. >> her husband woke up and could not get out of bed. he asked her to pray with him and instead their son called 911 , the ambulance came, and it turned out he had had a heart attack. he was discharged from the hospital and is doing well now. she thought her bills were covered. she started to get things in the mail saying pay this or pay that. as you know -- >> the insurance company has not caught up yet. figured outy she she owes about $250,000. she called her insurance company and they said that is right, we are not going to pay. carol: how can that be right? she understood she had hospital benefits and coverage. she had a deductible of $7,500. >> she thought the deductible was all she would oh. she had what is known as a

short-term medical plan. policy thatkind of is exempt from the requirements of the affordable care act. her policy had all sorts of limitations that she was not aware of. it covered a maximum of $5,000 for surgeries. anyone who has ever seen a hospital bill knows that -- >> it covers barely anything. for any surgery her family had it was $5,000 max? >> that's what the policy said. the limitations are so weird it is hard to believe. i feel like so many people are listening to this or watching this and saying, " did you read the fine print?" tell us about the process in terms of things in the fine print or maybe something the broker was supposed to tell them that may be they did not.

>> she says the broker told her this was comprehensive insurance and that it was comparable to what she had before. the broker was not willing to speak with me so i don't know what her side of the story is. thatume that she would say she informed her of the limitations. the interesting thing about this is since the affordable care act past people have come to believe that there are a bunch of rules about health insurance and any health insurance policy you buy will meet tons of minimums. it turns out there is this other type of insurance called short-term medical that does not have to follow those rules. people withlude pre-existing conditions and put a cap on how much they will pay. the trump administration is promoting these kinds of policies as a way of giving people more choices and cheaper insurance. carol: from health care to health concerns, this week the cdc launched its emergency

operations center to look into vaping injuries. imposing aate statewide emergency ban on flavored e-cigarettes. is our health reporter in washington on the vaping controversy and why the industry grew so fast. >> it goes back a couple of years when the fda, the commissioner was scott gottlieb and he wanted to do -- implement this strategy that would not only look at e-cigarettes but would look at cigarettes and try to get people off of tobacco altogether. he was looking at this idea where you would reduce the amount of nicotine in cigarettes and at the same time he wanted to give room for e-cigarettes to grow as an alternative while you are getting adults off of smoking you are giving them something to use instead but it has not worked out that way. nothing yet that

has happened officially on the nicotine front and cigarettes. the vaping industry has taken off and you have more kids hooked than ever before. >> what happens next, who has the next move? industries have a big stake in this. the president is weighing in with tweets and public comments, seeming to make it personal in a lot of ways. then you have multiple regulators and departments of the government trying to figure out how to deal with this, who has the next move? next move ise looking like it will come from the fda again. this will be directed by the president and by the hhs secretary who last week said that they were going to look into taking e-cigarettes off the market, flavored ones, anything but tobacco flavor off the they would have to

reapply to the fda to get approval to resume sales again. we are looking at that to be the next policy that comes out that could have a huge effect on the industry. if it happens the way that they said it could happen very quickly. that is something we will have to see what exactly the details are. there has been delay after delay and here we are with a couple of things going on. we have an acting fda commissioner, it will take a wild to get someone confirmed. then you have the elections in 2020 that will keep lawmakers and everyone busy. it is really tough to get major policy proposals through when you have an acting fda

commissioner. it helps to have someone that has been through a confirmation. we are not sure who trump will nominate for the permanent position, whether it is the acting commissioner or someone else. there is a lot of pieces at play that don't indicate a whole lot of backing. jason: michael bloomberg, the founder and majority owner of bloomberg lp announced hundred millionunced a $160 initiative to ban flavored e-cigarettes. virtual-reality dining, this blew my mind. is it art or delicious nonsense? this is bloomberg businessweek.

carol: welcome back. onon: you can listen to us

the radio on sirius xm channel 119. 99.1 fm in washington dc. carol: in london on dab digital and the bloomberg business app. jason: on the radio we cover topics from the magazine and beyond. purchase up in the covering climate now initiative, a collaboration of more than 220 news outlets to highlight climate change and the efforts to combat it led by the columbia journalism school. carol: here is brian in our radio studio with what is behind the biggest climate victory, capitalism. >> the cost of solar panels and wind turbines came down a lot. part of it was there were subsidies from china and the u.s. and there are still subsidies, but we are seeing places like spain, italy, and china where these plants are no longer subsidized.

where government, utilities, or corporations look for new power sources they look for wind and solar. >> what could trip this up? >> this has ultimately turned into something of a political issue, maybe it is always been a political issue. the whole idea of coal powered jobs was a key part of the constituency in 2016 for president trump, do politics enter into this? >> it might come of the administration has tried to find ways to prop up struggling: nuclear plants. some states have done -- struggling coal and nuclear plants. is an you said there impact on our utility infrastructure, coal has been a big part of it. these are changing dynamics for these industries and companies. brian: in parts of the midwest, pennsylvania, and ohio there sitting on a lot of the gas reserves.

a lot of coal is being replaced by gas. will we see renewables replace the gas soon or in 40 or 50 years? carol: renewables -- jason: renewables disrupting how we get our power. carol: the sharing economy turning every industry on its head. jason: visiting the startup that is going to rent you a lawyer. , if youwitch founder are on the older millennial side you may remember him as the reality tv star of justin.tv, an early web thing. he put a camera on his head and walked around san francisco doing 20-year-old coders stuff. it was not a huge hit but he is back with a new company called aetrium which is trying to bring the sharing economy to legal services to replace your corporate lawyer with a $500 month prescription. this eventually martin

tinted twitch which did become a big deal. kind ofh also sounded crazy because who wants to watch other people play video games? it turns out lots of people. twitch helped create the notion of e-sports and sold itself to amazon for $1 billion. it is now part of this vibrant growing industry. was an investor for a while and as he explained in an interview with me he started wondering why he was spending so much money on legal services. he realized he spent $2 million over the previous decade and he did not feel like he was getting enough for it. carol: tell me how this works. it is pretty similar to we work. access to anget hour a month of general legal advice. you have a normal corporate

lawyer who comes from a big corporate law firm and gets fade -- paid a very high hourly wage. then you get this software platform which supposedly is going to automate a lot of these functions. they walked me through an offer letter where you type in the employee's name, check a few boxes, and out comes a legal document. the idea is that will expand to include lots of stuff. in the long run, a lot of legal services will be handled by software by a computer. your corporate lawyer will spend way fewer hours doing general lawyer stuff. we talk about legal work and getting a mortgage, so much of it is formulaic that there is no reason why you cannot involve some type of technology or computer system to walk us through it. >> we have seen this on the personal and of legal services, legalzoom has been around for a while. there is an interesting startup

that is doing this in small claims court called do not pay. atrium is interesting because it is going after the core of the legal industry, these big corporate law firms that generate enormous amounts of revenue and pay these very well educated lawyers in some cases millions of dollars a year. jason: it's all about food. carol: a new trend of vr dining, eating while wearing a virtual-reality headset. >> vr dining is something we looked at skeptically. it has been really slow to take hold like dining in the dark. it is not fun. don't do it. >> where is my food? >> as you are spilling it down your front. vr dining is starting to catch on.

it was a big deal at a food conference in south korea this year and now it is coming to new york. there is a company that is theging a situation to james beard house which is right here in new york city and from 100 $25 you can put on a virtual-reality headset and have five courses. it will be like fast and furious but you might be looking at a bar and tasting cheese. >> that's what i was trying to get my head around, you are not looking at what you are eating you are looking at something else so you are so informed your senses are informed by what you are experiencing through your necessarily what you would be experiencing if you are looking at the food. >> you're not looking at the ohtani ideal of a cal marching through a field -- platonic ideal of a cow marching through a field. whether you buy into it or not remains to be seen.

i have not done it, i did a version of it and i am not a fan because i think of eating as the best social experience and a good way to have a conversation. if you are arrested -- if you have this arresting image in front of you -- carol: sometimes simple is nice. jason: it would the weird if we went out to dinner and put on masks. it is interesting that the james beard foundation is getting involved. >> it is smart for them. they are sitting on pricey real estate in greenwich village and they had this floor that was unoccupied. they can trick it out and move forward into the 21st century. i think it is a smart idea and gail simmons a top chef judge is narrating the experience. i think people should try it. jason: bloomberg businessweek is available on newsstands now. carol: also online. our daily business

week podcast that is available on apple podcasts, soundcloud, or bloomberg.com. carol: more bloomberg television starts now. ♪

beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.

who lot of young lawyers are not happy to practice law -- >> you said players have depression and melancholy. >> they are no more immune from mental illness than any other sector of our society. you encourage players to be involved in social media. >> these are multidimensional people. >> would you fix your type please? -- tie please? >> people wouldn't recognize me if my tie was fixed.

da