independence with peace of mind. ask about saving up to $1,500 on your installation. virtual appointments now available. emily: i'm emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." will there be another presidential debate? president trump refuses to go virtual and wants debates pushback, but vice president biden saying, not so fast. we will discuss. less the role of politics and , 60 coin-based

employees are walking off the job after the ceo barred political activism at work. we will have a live report. venture -- a longtime capitalist who just took his company open-door public don't just for look at public and private markets amidst a pandemic and an election. first, stocks climbing on speculation a stimulus plan will get done. doolittle, walk us through the market action today. abigail: something a bit new today, that's the fact that markets were relatively calm, although the word relatively is important. we did have a bullish ending for stocks, the s&p 500 finishing at its best level since early september, and for the most part stocks were higher all day. there was one little wobble late in the morning here on the east coast when speaker of the house nancy pelosi said she won't

accept a skinny deal on the airline stimulus are bailout for the airlines unless it is colluded -- included in a bigger deal. action withe more the dow transport, another .8 percent.about then that headline came out briefly lower, but relative to the huge moves who been seeing, that's nothing as you see the dow transports climbing at the end of the day and the major airlines climbing. that tells you that investors think we're likely to have some sort of stimulus at some point. since july 30 first, the s&p 500 up about 6%. that was when the big stimulus deal was supposed to be put in place. so it tells you traders think it is likely. day, did climb on the little bit of uncertainty even as stocks were climbing but in terms of individual movers, square is interesting.

they did make a $50 million investment in bitcoin, that's about 1% of their total assets. jack dorsey is a fan of cryptocurrency, thinking it could be used more widely in the future. anna covid 19 cocktail anybody drugs,tail of antibody president trump saying he's going to try to make it free for folks at hospitals. that is not backed up by science, but a bit of an advertisement there, so their shares are higher. in supporting the idea that things are calming down a little the fear index for the s&p 500 is well off september highs. perhaps we will go into the election season and things will calm down just a little bit, at least that's the story on the day. knows.well, who

i'm not sure i would bet on it. you will be watching, thank you so much, lou burks abigail doolittle. talks,some of the debate our democratic nominee joe biden, his campaign rejecting a proposal from president trump's camp to push back the second and third presidential debates by a week after the president said he wouldn't participate in a virtual event. biden campaign officials saying trump's erratic behavior does not allow him to rewrite the calendar and pick the date of his choosing. we're joined by our senior national policy correspondent. gregory, will trump and biden have another debate at all? gregory: today it's looking like they're pretty far apart on this. vice president joe biden says the schedule has been locked in since the summer, and the format has been locked in since the early 1990's.

we have three presidential debates. the commission on presidential debate selects the time and place. president trump is not comfortable having a virtual debate. president trump has a lot more to lose by not debating than joe biden does. at this point he's down in the polls and needs to make up ground. like we've seeing with the stimulus talks, president trump pulling out of them, and now trying to look for a deal, i would not be surprised to see president trump coming back in and trying to find a face-saving way to get back into a debate with joe biden, because he needs to make up some ground. emily: speaking about last night's presidential debate, at the start of the debate, looking at twitter, it seems like some of the more snarky commentators were up a little board, and then you see the fly landing on mike pence's head, and then the fireworks on social media. we saw hundreds of accounts

created dedicated just to the fly, in a matter of minutes. tens of thousands of followers, -- endless memes and the biden team starting to sell flyswatter's. will it actually matter in the long run? gregory: i'm kind of a bad person to ask about that because i had my head down listening to the debate for actual substantial policy differences. those are the kinds of things that really sort of penetrate the national consciousness. most people aren't watching debates to do a deep dive on tax policy or that kind of thing. i think the biden camp has handled it pretty well, in addition to selling the flyswatter's, within minutes of the debate they had registered voteomain name "fly will

,", which is kind of a ripoff of the i will vote website. people were looking for a moment, because this debate did not really provide the fireworks that we saw in that super contentious presidential debate last week. aside from the fly, that is. speaking about what is to come, if there are no more debates, who loses? george: certainly president trump needs to debates far more than joe biden. and it has been that way really since the summer. we started with this time-honored tradition of debating the debates, all the way back in june or july. president trump sort of raising the idea that he would not participate, that he wants to dictate the terms. also he needs the debate as a game changing event. havethan 4 million people

already voted by mail-in voting. many of those ballots by a 3-1 margin are being cast by democrats. president trump needs to make up ground and quickly. we saw that last week with president trump being on the attack, very aggressive, both with his physical presence in trying to interrupt joe biden and knock him off his game. that's why president trump also needs an in person debate. virtual debate, he won't necessarily have the open microphone. he won't be able to interrupt and it will be a lot more scripted and that kind of format goes to biden's advantage. national politics correspondent, gregory, thank you so much for your analysis there. tomorrow, do not miss our balance of powers special, election 2020 swing states. david westin will be taking a look at the voting history and demographics of arizona, north carolina, and ohio, the three

states that could very well decide the presidential election. that is friday at 9:30 new york time. coming up, facebook making some political changes as the election nears, but is it too little, too late? we will talk about that next. this is bloomberg. ♪

days beforejust 26 the u.s. presidential election, facebook is announcing more changes to crack down on

misinformation. it plans to ban political ads and definitely after polls close on november 3. facebook is bracing for a contentious election night that may not end with a definitive winner. to discuss this in more were .oined by natosha lam over the last several weeks, facebook has been making numerous announcements about their voter information center diverting folks to accurate information about voting on facebook. they announced a while ago they would stop new political ads for the election and now this, no political ads after polls close. is it enough? >> i think at this point, the worst is up -- the horse is already out of the barn. it's 30 days before the election, a lot of the damage has already been done in terms of the massive manipulation we've seen on the platform. weekste the company a few

ago along with other concerned investors asking them to ban all political ads at least a month before the election. but that has not been what has come to pass, and even employees at facebook asked them to ban political ads a year before the election because of the issues we saw in 2016. so i really think it is the 11th hour, the changes they have made are necessary, so we can be grateful that there is some change, but i don't think it is sufficient. emily: does that mean that you think on election night, facebook could still be responsible for the election going haywire? natasha: i think that is an unavoidable conclusion that facebook is going to be responsible in this election cycle for misinformation, for hate speech, for fake accounts, and manipulation of the platform.

i think that is already a foregone conclusion. i do think it is important that they are trying to clean up the mess that they have created, putting these guardrails and place again i think is necessary, but not sufficient in .erms of what we would expect we have been pressing the company since 2016 on election interference, on fake news, on content governance, and all these things. the question is, how much pressure does it take for them ask, at a threshold and this 11th hour. there's been a lot of pressure and the really haven't acted in the way we would hope and expect in a proactive way. and unfortunately, these issues are really material to investors. a #stop hateummer for profit campaign where 300 major advertisers pulled out ad

dollars, which is the bread-and-butter of the company. now we are seeing threats of regulation. our hope has always been as investors and activist investors , it is that a company deals with these issues early and often and not with this kind of a band-aid approach. emily: we will get to the regulatory issues in a moment, but what about manning qanon, the conspiracy movement? facebook has taken incremental steps to get them off the platform. now some of the pages are gone for now. will that make a difference? natasha: i'm glad to see facebook follow the lead of other social media companies in banning qanon, but again, they're doing it in these last moments. why wasn't it banned months ago? it feels like a come to jesus moment for the company, but you have to wonder when you have a

hate group that the fbi says is a domestic terrorism group finally being banned after so much pressure, they are just not stepping up. kenosha wisconsin, ,hat happened in this group that put up a call to arms on the platform to bring action to a group of peaceful protesters. times and itd 455 was seen by facebook, and they didn't do anything, and they didn't take it down payment and that group was responsible for the death of two people. so the question is, it's not like really what's happening now, when is the tie going to turn in the company gets proactive and not when it is already too late? that has always been our issue

with the company. next, speaking of what is the house subcommittee dropping a massive report in which they recommend some pretty dramatic remedies to curb the power of big tech, including facebook, and new laws that could pave the way for facebook to be broken up. the claim that instagram would have grown even bigger without facebook, and that facebook considers instagram its biggest competition on social media, which might be the very definition up a monopoly. how big of a risk is this? natasha: i think it is a big risk. wasi think that congress right to point out the overconcentration of power. i think we see that with a lot of -- with a lot of big tech companies. in particular, having facebook called out. you can see why that would happen, that they really haven't effectively managed the platform

with 2.7 billion users, and because of that, it sees itself a target, which is unfortunate, and why we want to be -- why we want the company to be more proactive on these issues. if you're really going to deal with overconcentration of power, facebook should be kind of immediately looking internally about the overconcentration of power within its own structure, which i think would assuage some regulators' concerns. because right now they really have a chokehold on the shares, they have super voting shares. other mainstream investors are a minority and just don't have the voice that they do at other companies, similar at google, that same kind of structure. i would like to see more women, more people of color in positions of power at the company. we been asking them to add a

human and civil rights expert to their board to get diversity of thought. and addressing some of the biggest issues they are facing as a company. at the same time, there's work to do internally and also externally. and the way they've handled instagram and whatsapp is incredible. one does need to wonder, having smaller, innovative companies, without help solve some of the problems that social media has created? in fact, that could be a good thing for investors, because -- they're not seeing the growth and innovation that we want to see. emily: some strong words from lamb, always good to

have your perspective here on the show. coming up, dozens of employees are leaving cryptocurrency exchange coinbase over a management mandate with which they disagree. we will find out why, next. ♪

currency crypto exchange coinbase is losing dozens of employees for protesting a management mandate. the ceo said in a blog post that employees had accepted an exit package offered to those who disagreed with the policy. joining us is ed ludlow. this has created a lot of controversy in silicon valley. you have ceos who agree and disagree with this, duking it out on twitter. what do we know about the coinbase employees who have chosen to take this exit package? ed: it's about 60 employees that

have taken the exit package. he warned that the number could rise because talks are ongoing with a number of other employees. a source told bloomberg today that actually the number of employees that had expressed interest in the exit package was actually a little bit higher than that. when ryan armstrong made the original post explaining his rationale behind these policies, basically said that companies throughout silicon valley conduct social activism, but he thought it would damage value in those companies because it is a distraction as well as creating internal divisions if not every employee agrees with the other's point of view. what the source told bloomberg is that employees were shocked by this policy at coinbase. and they didn't agree with the method by which he delivered them. beyond that, they felt that it would prevent conversations that should be taking place in the

workplace. another thing armstrong talked about was that employees came forward and said that the new rules could disproportionately affect employees who were part of a minority or underrepresented group in society. he added in today's blog post that that was not the case, and it wasn't reflected that it had disproportionately impacted minority groups. emily: just to pull some lines from the original post, brian armstrong saying i want coinbase to be laser focused on achieving its mission. will focus on building and being transparent about what our mission is and isn't. we won't take on activism outside our core mission at work. the indication was that employees in the company would still take on activism as it pertains to cryptocurrency in particular. is that correct? correct, he said yes it is ok to be political when it

comes to cryptocurrency. cryptocurrencies were introduced by computer hackers and libertarians opposed to computers. an alternative system to the global financial system. last week the most noticeable of the voices who criticized armstrong was jack dorsey, the twitter ceo, who is himself an advocate of bitcoin and other cryptocurrency. armstrongs rules win against the founding principles of cryptocurrency. investors say what coinbase should be doing is sticking to the core function of its business, allowing cryptocurrency to be a method protecting financial institutions around the world, allowing people to conduct financial transactions. the point armstrong made his blog post is that basically that's what they're trying to do , it just wants to facilitate

payments and that aligns with the mission. cryptocurrencies are inherently political, you have all this attention from congress. when mark zuckerberg went before committees and had to defend facebook, you have the central bank, the bank of england and bank of japan coming together earlier this year and saying they would look at the role of cryptocurrency. it is at the center of what brian armstrong is talking about, but yet you can talk about politics only in the context of how it relates to what they're trying to do as a business and that's what he wants them to focus on. emily: i'm sure this is not the last we will hear about this. we would do what -- we will be watching to see how this plays out. ed ludlow, thank you so much for that update. up, a newly popular route

for tech startups to go public. we will hear from a longtime venture capitalists who recently chose to take his own company public. of text is some names like facebook and spacex. he joins us next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ welcome back to i ammberg technology," emily chang in san francisco. spac, ishnology, billed as a shorter, more predictable route for startups to make their trading day you. open door was the latest top for this route instead of a traditional ipo. joining us now is keith rabois, founder at open-door and ceo at

founders fund. open-door is a fairly young company. why did you decide to go the spac route, and why so fast? keith: there is a premium on speed and to think there is a perception that postelection, volatility in the united states may increase in the markets. who knows the driver, health many,policy changes, so many companies that are ready to be public companies are focused on times and markets. there are advantages as a public company. i'm a big fan of a public company trajectory. i read a chapter in a book that explains all the benefits, and any ceo's are recognizing there are significant benefits, in terms of transparency, accountability and access to capital, in being a public company. emily: how are you advising your companies right now in terms of whether or not to do this?

what should the numbers and revenue be like? as soon as a company passes $50 million in revenue predictability for future assets in high-growth upside, it should be a public company. emily: that said, the process is shorter, there is not as much due diligence. how do investors know whether they should take a risk on these companies? do they bet on the jockey or horse? keith: i disagree there is less diligence. there is just as much diligence s4 stock processes as one. traditional i don't think the standards are any different. .- traditional s1 i don't think the standards are different. colleaguer long-term and friend peter thiel is one of the founders of palantir and

investors have been frustrated by the process. you think palantir made the right choice? keith: everything from a fixed ipo to a direct listing of the andk are similar processes companies have different needs. some companies are profitable and don't need additional capital, and a direct listing makes sense. some companies have premiums on speed or want to guide more constructively into the future, and stock makes more sense for that type of company. all these are legitimate options. interesting blog post explains all this, the pros and cons of each technique. and i think each board of directors and ceo should evaluate them very carefully. emily: when it comes to palantir, there has been concerned about governance and how much control peter thiel and other cofounders have attained. is that something -- have

retained. is that something investors should be concerned about? keith: without speaking specifically about any one because special rights have been granted to many impanies over the years, but think it should be one share, one vote. but that train has left the station and has nothing to do with palantir. emily: let's talk about market dynamics. we've got a big presidential election coming up, a lot of potential volatility ahead in the middle of this pandemic. is a company founders fund invested in and are looking to go public in december. thehere a risk there, given ipo window has been remarkably , a lote past few weeks

of these tech ipo's have done well, but is december to late? keith: i can't speak to specific companies like airbnb that we at founders fund or i may personally be a shareholder in. but generally speaking, postelection is more treacherous for any company that wants to go public, and public companies as well may see more choppiness in the market. there is a premium on going public in 2020 because if biden is the next president, he will almost surely raise capital gains tax rates. so the net return for people in 2021 may be different that it is in 2020. i would expect a selloff in public equities at the end of 2020 if democrats win, certainly the presidency and the senate. we are in for a tax increase. emily: interesting. so the debate about politics and business has been continuing here in silicon valley, and you don't shy away many debates, and this one. we were just talked about

coin-based ceo brian armstrong banning political activism at work unless it relates to cryptocurrencies. ceo's taken various a stand on both sides of this issue, jack dorsey, your former colleague at square says brian armstrong is going to be on the wrong side of history. what do you think? keith: i think he will be on the right side of history. we saw data today that came out that, even with a very generous offer of six months free money, only 5% of the workforce decided to take the free money. the trouble at work is created by a small minority of employees. and companies have been too afraid to crack down on a small fraction of people. voiding-based employees -- voting is showing the high watermark of employee activism.

facebook has been pretty stringent. a couple of years ago, mark and cheryl basically said there are limits to what you can do at facebook, and if you don't like it, there are plenty of other jobs. more companies need to do that. its not surprising to me that the more a monopoly -- the more a company has a monopoly, the time toloyees have free stir up activism at work. many employees, according to brian' email, have to focus on the company mission or they would be successful. most companies do not have the time and energy to do anything except improve their margins, return, growth, there are so many fundamental challenges in building a real company that monopolists have plenty of time to give their employees 20% off or allow them to create internal wars over various policy issues. emily: used the word monopoly

several times. the house is recommending a dramatic overall to the competition law that could lead to the breakup of facebook, google, amazon, apple. are those companies monopolies and should they be broken up? keith: no. google may have the napoli products or monopoly issues at the absolute -- and the others absolutely do not. report is intellectually bankrupt. it was -- it is one of the dumbest pieces of paper i have read from the government. are afraid of investing in innovation because of the power of these companies. that is false. since 2013, venture capital has been on a tear. there are more venture capitals, more dollars, more companies being funded every year. this is the hottest venture market in my career, literally

this month. it is absolute fiction. it is intellectually fake news put out by the government. it is embarrassing. fake news put out by the government, keith? that is dramatic, even from you. why do you think it is fake news? keith: because the people there are either completely ignorant or intentionally ignorant about business. at the end of the day, they published the stats and anybody who spends five minutes researching it knows that venture capitalism is increasing, innovation and startups is increasing, not decreasing. there is no empirical data that supports the argument in the house report, not a shred of evidence in society that supports that argument. it is manufactured and fabricated. buty: you alluded to this, what is your prediction for the

investing climate in silicon valley in 2021, coming out of a -- pandemice hopefully, out of a presidential election, potentially still being in an economic recession, what is the state of investing and opportunity in silicon valley in that environment? keith: nobody knows. one would have guest post march that we would be investing more lowerously at valuations, given turbulence in the world, issues the world is confronting but public market valuations have been off the charts. and over the summer, private market valuations started catching up with the public comparables. right now could not be a better time for any entrepreneur to raise money at any stage. i suspect some of that does change. there is a delinking between late stage rounds and early investing.

we don't really care what public markets are doing because we are investing five to 15 year i have when this companies are going up, so it would be irrational trying to project with the world is like is 2030. but what we are trained to do is build a company for 2030. the later-stage rounds, the companies are more familiar with, because more consumers use the product, almost by definition there is a relationship between how they are valued and their access to capital and how public markets perform. but those are more tightly linked and somewhat more in jeopardy postelection. 's keithounders fund rabois, we can always rely on you to keep us interested and entertained. tech"n "bloomberg as we take you into a socially distanced operating room.

♪

♪ operating rooms, bustling with surgeons, aides, students, not an ideal social distancing. but avail medsystems is promising a new way to manage this crowding in the age of covid, using mobile, overhead cameras to show live images of the procedure. joining me now is avail cofounder and ceo daniel hawkins . telus other technology works -- tell eyes how the technology us how thell technology works? daniel: surgeries of all types

need outside expertise in the operating room to be able to conduct those surgeries. the way the technology works is, we have a dedicated piece of siphon build hardware that has cameras and image processing equipment in it. and then there is plug-ins for all the things doctors need to be able to conduct surgery. if you think about minimally-invasive surgery using cameras, we have plug-ins for the cameras. we have plug-ins for x-ray machines and the like. ed remotely, what somebody is able to do is participate in the procedure by accessing those ,ideo images in real time everything they see remotely and choose to watch is then displayed directly on the screen inside the operating room. emily: hospitals are notoriously underfunded. what does the cost of the hardware? i now do you make money on this -- and how do you make money on

this? daniel: we placed dedicated hardware into operating rooms without charging for the hard model. are a time-based we charge for access to the hardware in a network of operating rooms across the country. emily: so who is buying? give us names of folks interested in the technology? daniel: we have contracts with over a dozen medical device companies, by those i mean the largest companies in the world that make pacemakers and hip implants and that sort of thing. i'm bound by contract where i can't say the names of most, but one that has given us permission is smith and nephew. they make orthopedic old devices and knee implants. i'm a patient going through surgery, don't want the medical experts by my side? am i losing anything using this technology? daniel: what you want as a

patient is the expertise in the room. as it turns out, they can't always be there, the just ask makes that difficult. if you have two places to be at once, you can't do that. with our technology, one of those experts can be any procedure, finish, go down the hall to another room and to be available in another location. access toy increase expertise that way. emily: has the pandemic boosted your bottom line? has there been increased demand because of the circumstances we are facing? daniel: most certainly. initially, with the pandemic, technologyin our went up dramatically. but that was more about access than anything else. what became obvious to medical device companies is, this is a better way of doing business. fundamentally for the past 40 years, expertise could only be delivered in person. we allow expertise to be

delivered from anywhere to anywhere. that leads to after expertise during a procedure, better outcomes, and ultimately, a lower cost for care delivery, using what we call procedural telemedicine, a mobile version of support like i just described. emily: fascinating technology. we will be watching to see how the company progresses. daniel hawkins, avail medsystems cofounder and ceo. big movecalm, ibm's today. details coming, this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ ibm announced big structural change today, saying it would separate its hybrid cloud and ai business from its services component. today, the ceo get bloomberg's david westin details. with this announcement, ibm

will become over half as a software and solutions company, and a larger number in terms of overall product. the new company is a little over 50%, that is a very attractive company that promises a different valuation than the current structure. so that is a piece of it, but it is more the growth and in market opportunities that i think is driving it. david, you are closer to that audience than i am in terms of how they think and react. david: what would be the relationship between the companies? with a contract with one another and free to contract with one another? >> both. you unlock both for both companies that allow for partnering with companies that may be competitors.

competitors in the aggregate feel reluctant to partner deeply with them. that gets unlocked. no constraints on that side. that said, i think it is likely that each other's biggest customers on day one. they purchase a lot of hardware and software from ibm. fromurchases services companies are two going to have a deep, strategic relationship, but that won't constrain them for partnering as they want to. david: what can you tell us about leadership going forward? who can you tell us about the leaders of the two companies? and what role will jim met red hat going forward? >> jim and myself remain with ibm. a lot of leadership who runs the business is at ibm is going to stay at ibm. the leadership that runs structural services goes with

newco. the old, governing structure of ibm stays in place because the company is staying in place. in newco, we have to create a new board. once the new board is formed, they will select a management team. we expect it will select many people from the current management team, but as that goes forward, the new board will select overall leadership. but in terms of day-to-day operations, a lot of the people are in place around infrastructure services today and they will continue to do that. , you clearly want to gain growth by freeing up hybrid services and the ai part of the company. you run the risk of losing some because of cross-selling by customers on both sides of your business? is a risk that can be managed. i don't have any concerns about it. i've got to have lots of work around it, so i am going to

mitigate any of that risk in terms of i we work. and there are common plans across both sides of the business. we intend to contract separately with different parts of the is this already, so we have to manage that risk. the two businesses will have deep, strategic relationships with each other and that will help mitigate that part of the risk. so i think this will unlock growth and i think the risk on the aspect you mentioned can be mitigated. david: this is a very big initiative of ibm. it will take a while, i'm sure, to put it all together. when you expect spinoff to be effectuated? andnd: based on history other similar spinoffs, it takes about a year to get done, your modest a few months. that takes us into laughter 2021 -- into the latter part of 2021. we have to get it to the structure of the new company, filed to the sec, we expect that

will happen in the early to middle part of next year. you have to get through those approvals, you have to get through a final board approval, and that then allows us to impact all this. but i think 12 months, plus or minus some number of months is a good timeline. emily: -- david: you and i both understand that when you have a major consumesl change, it executive bandwidth. it probably means you will be looking at other acquisitions over the 12 months. do you see other structural changes coming up at ibm to pursue that relentless desire for growth you described? arvind: i absolutely expect to be completely focused on acquisitions, organic our end e and our organic ecosystems. will ignorek we them during this time. we are not planning anything else that is significant. this will take time, you are right, it is major at will take

a whole set of people to get this done. but in the meantime, the focus of going both those companies, if they take appropriate actions , whether it is organic or inorganic investments, meaning acquisitions, we fully expect to down that path that for speed. ibm ceo arvind krishnan krishna witharvind my colleague david westin. multiyearnder a agreement will use microsoft cloud services to handle finance, inventory and e-commerce. the retailer will also offer xbox all access, a monthly service for the xbox console. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." daybreak australia"

is next. i'm emily chang in san francisco. this is bloomberg. ♪ so you're a small business,

or a big one. you were thriving, but then... oh. ah. okay. plan, pivot. how do you bounce back? you don't, you bounce forward, with serious and reliable internet. powered by the largest gig speed network in america. but is it secure? sure it's secure. and even if the power goes down, your connection doesn't. so how do i do this? you don't do this. we do this, together. bounce forward, with comcast business. more voluminous hair instantly. all it takes is just one session at hairclub. introducing xtrands. xtrands adds hundreds or even thousands of hair strands to your existing hair at the root. they're personalized to match your own natural hair color

and texture, so they'll blend right in for a natural, effortless look. call in the next five minutes and when you buy 500 strands, you get 500 strands free. call right now. (upbeat music) ♪ haidi: good morning. welcome to "daybreak australia." we are counting you to major market opens. shery: good evening from bloomberg headquarters in new york. stories this hour, wall street climbs to five-week highs, traders betting lawmakers will hammer out stimulus deal and central banks will stay supportive. early talks remain gridlocked in