lottery officials say the single winning tick was sold at a publix supermarket at the tampa suburb. the jack spot the largest in powerball history. thank you so much for watching "state of the union". if you missed think part of today's show, you can find us on itunes. fareed zakaria "gps" is next for our viewers here in the u.s. this is "gps the global public square." welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world, i'm fareed zakaria. we'll start today in washington, d.c. it's the week from hell for the white house with three controversies, all rupting on them. -- all erupting on them. how in the world do you handle so many problems, so much incoming fire at once? we'll talk to a man who would know, former white house chief of staff, ken duberstein. and the amazing shrinking american budget deficit. i'll ask mitt romney's chief economic adviser whether he thinks the problem has gone away. also, as america prepares to

draw down from afghanistan, what can it learn from britain's withdrawal 170 years ago? i'll ask the author of a great new book. next, a look into the crystal ball of technology with google's executive chairman eric schmidt. a sure fire plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. how so? stay tuned. first, here is my take. conservatives are, of course, mad at barack obama. we'll talk about the various scandals in a moment, but they're also mad at a country that isn't mad enough at him. this frustration is now taking over mainstream and intelligent voices within the conservative movement and about broader issues than benghazi. brett stevens, the columnist for "wall street journal" laments that president obama is not paying a price for a foreign policy that he, stevens, describes as isolationist. now, isolationism will come as a surprise to the diplomat

soldiers and intelligence officers working on america's vast foreign policy. washington spends more on defense than the next ten great powers put together and more on intelligence than most nations spend on their entire militaries. we have more than 200,000 troops stationed at dozens of bases abroad from bahrain to germany to south korea to turkey. we have formal commitments to defend dozens of our important allies in europe, middle east and asia. and our vast footprint has been expanded under the obama administration. the white house has extended america's security umbrella to include defending israel and the moderate arab states against the threat posed by iran's possible development and nuclear weapons. it is enlarging the u.s. military presence in asia with a new base in australia to deal with china's rights. to call all this isolationism is to mangle both language and logic.

in fact, president obama's world view is rooted in american exceptionalism. you see, the fundamental pattern of international relations is that as a country becomes powerful, others gang up to bring it down. that's what happened to the habsburg empire, france and germ manny and the soviet union. one great exception to this rule in modern history. the united states. america has risen to global might and has not produced the balancing opposition that many would have predicted. in fact, the astonishing position of being the world's dominant power while many of the world's next most powerful nations, britain, france, germany, japan are all allied with it. the reason surely has something to do with the nature of america after germany. after world war ii we revive our enemy as and turn them into allies. people around the world do see the u.s. as different from other older empires. but it also has something to do with the way the united states

has exercised power. reluctantly. historically, america was not eager to jump into the global arena. it entered world war one at the tail end of the war. it entered world war ii only after japan attacked pearl harbor. it contained soviet aggression in europe, but careful not to push too far in other places. when we did as in vietnam, we paid a price. from dwight eisenhower to robert gates a strand of american thinking, realism that urges america to be disciplined about open-ended military interventions for just this reason. we have just gone through a decade devoted to a very different idea. that american power must be used actively, aggressively, preemptively and in pursuit of expansive goals beyond national interest. the result was thousands of american soldiers dead, hundreds of thousands of iraqi civilians dead, $2 trillion spent and the erosion of american influence and good will across the globe. can we please get a few years of respite to rebuild our economic,

political and moral capital? for more on this, go to cnn.com/fareed for a link to my "time" column. let's get started. eight days after ronald reagan went on tv to admit that his administration had traded arms for hostages in the so-called iran contra scandal ken dubersteen was named chief of staff. shortly after that, it was revealed that nancy ray gn had been using an astrologer to pick auspicious dates for her husband's public appearances. then he got the chief job. knows white house controversy and how to deal with it. ken, thank you so much. >> fareed, it's a pleasure, always, to be with you.

>> on the scale of white house scandals, how does this strike you? a lot of people say, well, there is no crime underneath there or it does not appear like watergate. how do you look at it? >> look, i don't think we know the answer to that yet. i think it's premature. every second-term president, certainryly sins /* /- v certainly since eisenhower, has gone in to a ditch. with when you go into a ditch, you stop digging. so far this white house has not stopped digging. on one hand, the president says it's outrageous and then he goes to baltimore on friday and says, well, it's just a washington distraction. this is serious business when you're talking about the irs or perhaps changing talking points. or the ap and wiretapping reporters. let alone secretary sebelius and

hhs basically asking for money from industries that she is regulating. now, people start saying it's a trifecta. it's really a superfecta. the top four. and the confluence of all of them erodes trust in government. it erodes trust in the president. and a time when the president needs to be working on immigration reform, on debt reduction, on the fiscal situation, on all the international issues, this has got to be a major distraction and we don't know yet where things are going to lead. so the irs matter is something that everybody in america can relate to. you know, everybody hates the irs and this just confirms the narrative. the white house just to dismiss it as low-level employees is not really what i think the american people expect. >> so, how would you handle it? surely there is some tradeoff here where you don't want to

feed, you know, enemy fire with every charge and you jump and respond. on the other hand, you do need to deal with this. how do you figure out that balance? you've been there. >> you figure out the balance is the president has to focus on his agenda. but he also has to deal with the people around him so that everybody understands that the arrogance of power has no place in this white house in any white house. that the politics of destruction and demonization that come from a campaign have to stop when you start governing. the president has to set the tone with the american people. not that something is a distraction, but let's take this very seriously and get to the bottom of it. you know, holding the president accountable, not simply cabinet, subcabinet agencies or people at the irs.

but the president saying, i accept responsibility. i am the commander in chief, i am the president. you know, the american people understand and if the president were to stand up and say, look, clearly mistakes were made and it's on my watch and i'm going to fix each and every one of them, that makes a big, big difference. he needs to lose a bunker mentality. right now everybody in the white house seems to be clustered. they need to get out. they need to answer press questions. not necessarily just the president. i mean, everybody. >> do you think he needs new people? >> well, i think always in a second term you need fresh faces and new ideas. look, when president reagan had iran contra he got rid of poindexter and others and appointed myself and frank carlucci and that little known general at the time, colin powell to come in and set his

white house straight under his leadership. i am not saying we're at that point yet. but i'm saying that new blood and fresh ideas are something that are fundamentally important. the other thing that you can fall back on is a reservoir of good will that you developed with the congress and with the media. and one of the things that i think everybody would say is lacking is that the first four years, at least, those trusting relationships on capitol hill on both sides of the aisle fundamentally have not been developed. now, whether it's disdain, whether it's dislike, you always have to develop those kind of trusting relationships and right now the white house is suffering because they did not create those relationships. when all you do at a second term is fundamentally change a congressional liaison to

somebody who nobody has ever heard of on either side of the aisle that, to me, is not beefing up a white house staff and starting out to build some of these trusting relationships. >> ken duberstein, thank you. that is tough love if i ever heard it before for a man who supported the president for his election. have we magically fixed our deficit problem? i have two great experts on the economy. glenn hubbard from columbia and zanny minton beddoes. we'll be right back. ♪ fly me to the moon ♪ let me play among the stars ♪ and let me see what spring is like ♪ ♪ on jupiter and mars ♪ in other words [ male announcer ] the classic is back. ♪ i love [ male announcer ] the all-new chevrolet impala. chevrolet. find new roads. ♪ you

how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed much is the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪ there's a reason no one says "easy like monday morning." sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge. what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure

and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support, your business can shine all week long.

...and we inspected his brakes for free. -free is good. -free is very good. [ male announcer ] now get 50% off brake pads and shoes at meineke. is america's deficit problem so bad? well, not any more at least, not for the next decade. the congressional budget predicts, they did it on tuesday, that in 2015 the deficit will be only 2.1% of gdp, that's down from 4% this year, 7% last year and a high of 10% in 2009. so, should we celebrate? joining me are glenn hubbard, the dean of the columbia business school chief economic adviser to the romney campaign and also the co-author of a fascinating new book "balance the economics of great powers from ancient rome to modern america." and zanny minton beddoes the economic analysis of "the economist."

you look at this chart, the deficit essentially goes up a lot during the financial crisis and its aftermath and it's now down essentially to what it was under the bush administration where you were at one point chairman of the council of economic advisors. it would seem to vindicate the people who say, look, the reason the deficit went up a collapse of tax revenues more than anything else and we're back now, now that the economy is growing, down to a completely manageable place. so, all the scare stuff about the debt was unfair. >> well, of course, it is good news that the deficit has fallen, but before we celebrate with champagne, a couple big problems. if you look at the ten-year numbers, they didn't move very much at all. in other words, the deficit gets better in the near term, but continues to get worse. >> that's because medicare more than anything else. >> correct. we still have a long-term entitlement problem that is really a bad. not only raises the deficit, but threatens to crowd out every

kind of spending we do as a country. >> what do you draw from these numbers? >> i think glenn right that the long-term problem is one of medicare spending and that remains a big problem. but i think what you're absolutely right that the increase in the deficit in the wake of the financial crisis was there because of plunging tax revenue and, indeed, because of some stimulus spending but that was entirely appropriate when you had in the aftermath of this huge financial bust, it's appropriate for the public sector to take over for a bid. i'm actually slightly, i wouldn't take these numbers as being all good news, even in the short term because we actually had fairly big tax increases this year and we have the sequester in place and cutting spending in the short term. i don't think that's optimal policy. i would much rather have more of a focus on what glenn is concerned about rightly as being the median and long-term problem which is entitlements, because we would have had a stronger

recovery, if that was the case. >> larger deficits than the 2.1% of gdp right now because it would stimulate more demand. >> the policy is what matters. if the economy is growing stronger than anybody expects and that's where the deficit comes down, then that's great. but in terms of policy, i would rather a policy than the median and long term and not sequester cuts. >> this is right here and in europe. >> are you willing to endorse a big infrastructure spending push? >> i don't think an infrastructure spending push, it takes years for it to happen. there is an argument, it is for long-term capital plan and not stimulus. i agree 100% with zanny, the things like sequester make very little sense. we need to focus on long-term problems and our political process can't seem to do that. >> the other numbers that came out european growth numbers that are looking terrible. this is the flip side of the story. is it fair to say now that the evidence is in and that too much austerity, a lot of cuts in

government spending in countries across europe with the exception of northern europe and germany has produced slower growth. >> well, you're completely right. the european numbers are grim. six consecutive quarters of recession in the euro zone and no sign of things changing. yes, in part, it is an indictment of too much short-term cutting. but i think it's also more than that. it is the failure to deal with the basic problems of the euro zone. and the failure to get credit going again in the periphery of europe. not only huge budget cuts, but very, very tight access to credit and where is the growth they're going to come from? one part of the comparison of the u.s. is, u.s. didn't have so much tightening, fiscal tightening, although now it has more. the u.s. got to grips. it cleaned up the banks and recapitalized them and we kind of got that bit of the crisis out of the way europe hasn't done that. and the fed, those three are different in europe. >> i have to ask you about the irs. the irs commissioner, some people were appointed by bush.

do you know any of them and do you have any thoughts about this >> i don't know the individuals at the irs but it raises an important point that people have gotten and one that they haven't. the one they have gotten any abuse of power needs to be investigated. both sides would agree with that. but the part that is really subtle is the fact that there is actually value in a lot of political competition. i don't happen to be part of the tea party, but i would support any political group that is trying to compete in the marketplace for ideas. i think that frankly the citizens united decision was a big plus. in advancing that competition. that's the big -- >> the part i'm puzzled by. why do people have tax exempt status in the first place? why should you be tax exempt -- >> that's a very big discussion about the whole, the whole breadth of tax exemption and the bigger picture there. the more you have for all kinds of things the higher the tax

rate has to be on the remaining. >> that's true. >> and the more power it gives to the irs. somebody has to determine who is exempt and who's not. okay. what is the big point relating to all this that we should learn from your book? >> well, two points in the book. one, people have a declinist view of the united states and all that's going on and our view in the book, we don't think the u.s. is in decline. but we also believe, though, that the fiscal policy problems the country faces really have that potential and change rules of fiscal policy. it's very hard to see our political process really coming to grips. >> democracies in the united states or europe impose short-term pain for long-term gain? that's what glenn is talking about. >> i think they can when they are forced to and when something precipitates action. i basically agree with your broad analysis, but i worry that you have too much faith perhaps in rules for achieving that.

it's very, very hard i think to design rules that are the appropriate rules in advance. and i think we have to in the end have faith that politicians will act in a way when they're pushed to that is the right way. i think the main thing you can expect from fiscal policy is that you have to force things to be as transparent as possible. i think the cbo, for example, the congressional budget office is one of the best things that happened to u.s. fiscal policy ever because it forces people to come to terms with the consequences of what they're doing, but, rules i worry about it is seen as a magic wand. we write a rule, amendment and everything will be fine. >> the transparency is important. if you did something as simple as putting changes in the entitlement for the budget for the congress to have to see and deal with, i think that's critical. >> thank you so much. terrific book. up next, what in the world. why the united states needs to share its secrets with china. it could be the solution to climate change. i'll explain.

does your dog food have? 30? 20? new purina one beyond has 9. the simplified purina one beyond. learn more about these wholesome ingredients at purinaone.com as part of a heart healthy diet. that's true. ...but you still have to go to the gym. ♪ the one and only, cheerios ♪ the one and only, cheerios [ wind howling ] [ engine revving ] ♪

[ electricity crackling ] [ engine revving ] [ electricity crackling ] ♪ [ electricity crackling ]

ó?

now for our "what in the world" segment. tackle one of the great

challenges of our times. cutting carbon emissions to slow down climate change. it would result in the single largest reduction of co2 emissions globally of any feasible idea out there. but there are a couple of hitches, let me explain. here's the idea. it's time to help china master fracking safely. by now it is clear that fracking, the process of extracting shale gas has dramatically lowered america's carbon emissions. according to the u.s. energy information administration? 2006, a fifth of our electricity came from natural gas an 50% came from coal. by 2012, natural gas had increased its share to 30% of our electricity and coal shares have dropped to 37%. the change was because of fracking. over the same period, shale gas production grew 800%.

the reason the shift is important is that coal is the world's dirtiest source of energy. both in its emission of carbon dioxide and particle pollutants. thanks in large part to our reduced dependency on coal, u.s. co2 emissions hit an 18-year low in 2012. u.s. emissions fell over the last five years by more than all of europe's did. so, and this is the first hitch, environmentalists have to understand that whatever our dreams and fantasies, natural gas is in reality producing a dramatic reduction in carbon emissions. but now the second hitch. why is it a good idea to help what some consider our greatest rival, catch up with us. why should we help china copy our winning formula? the answer is simple. it is a win-win scenario. in the past two decades,

despite global investments in solar, wind and nuclear the world energy consumption has gotten cleaner by only 1%. we've essentially made no progress. why? well, in large part it is because of the means by which china and other such countries are powering their super fast growth. iea data shows that if you exclude china, global consumption of coal has increased only slightly in the past decade. china, by comparison, has more than doubled its consumption of coal. it now burns nearly as much coal as the rest of the world put together. and it won't stop there. every week, it opens new coal plants leading to increasingly polluted and hazardous air. this is, of course, not just china's problem, but the whole world's problem. as it turns out, we're not the only ones sitting on top of a shale gold mine. according to our own energy

department, china actually has shale gas reserves that are 50% larger than ours. now, beijing is going to try to mine these reserves in every way it can. but many experts worry that china lacks the experience and the technology to frack effectively. it has no idea how to frack safely. here in the united states, we have environmentalists and free press to push authorities to regulate and monitor this very new industry. china, on the other hand, may not have the same checks and balances. this is why the united states needs to share its expertise and not keep it secret. one of the dilemmas at any climate summit is how to win developing countries off the dirtiest forms of energy. china can understandably argue that its overriding priority is growth. as the last few decades have shown, a fast-growing china

translates to a fast-growing world. a dlaen cleaner china would have a imimpact on the environment. up next, a fascinating account of the first afghan war and the lessons it holds for today's war in afghanistan. he 'tis torian william dowel ripple joins me. in a three-hundred-ton rocket doesn't raise as much as an eyebrow for these veterans of the sky. however, seeing this little beauty over international waters is enough to bring a traveler to tears. we're putting the wonder back into air travel, one innovation at a time. the new american is arriving. we've been bringing people fotogether.5 years today we'd like people to come together on something that concerns all of us...obesity. and as the nations leading beverage company

we can play an important role. that includes continually providing more options. giving people easy ways to help make informed choices. and offering portion controlled versions of our most popular drinks. it also means working with our industry to voluntarily change whats offered in schools. but beating obesity will take continued action by all of us. based on one simple common sense fact, all calories count. and if you eat and drink more calories then you burn off you'll gain weight. that goes for coca cola and everything else with calories. finding a solution will take all of us. but at coca cola we know when people come together good things happen to learn more visit coke.com/comingtogether

if you have high cholesterol, here's some information that may be worth looking into. in a clinical trial versus lipitor, crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol

to a goal of under 100. getting to goal is important, especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors because you could be at increased risk for plaque buildup in your arteries over time. and that's why when diet and exercise alone aren't enough to lower cholesterol i prescribe crestor. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol at goal? ask your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

a check on the top stories right now. a trngd touchs down in central kansas last night durng a string of severe storms. one home was damaged but no one was hurt. bad storms whipped through oklahoma tearing down power lines stop lights. the weather is expected to get worst today. band of severe storms is over the midwest and the plain states. could be hail, strong winds and potentially tornados. in connecticut railroad authorities are removing the broken rail cars from that site of a terrible crash. a commuter train derailed and struck another train in bridgeport two days ago. nine people injured in the accident remain hospitalized. one in critical condition. and reese witherspoon is used to getting a lot of attention but not like this.

her disorderly conduct case is back in court in atlanta this week find out how her pre-trial intervention will work. plus o.j. simpson is trying to get out of jail. his strategy blame his former lawyer. we will get the legal lowdown straight ahead, 2:00 eastern time. now, back to fareed zakaria "gps." the jumbo jet that crashed in afghanistan recently was taking part in an extraordinary effort to pull out all allied supplies before the end of 2014. there are believed to be some 125,000 containers and 80,000 vehicles that need to be withdrawn in addition to about 100,000 troops. a logistical nightmare for sure. i thought all of this as i read about an earlier rush into afghanistan, almost 200 years ago. in 1839 the british invaded and brought with them 2,100 soldiers and 38,000 servants and 30,000 camels.

300 of which were solely for carrying wine. william dalrymple is the author of the great new book that tells this story "return of a king, the battle for afghanistan 1839 to '42." he joins me now. welcome. >> thank you. talk about retreat. what do you think retreat is going to look like based on history? >> well, the british retreat from kabul couldn't have gone worse. there's ever reason to hope this will go a bit better, you'll add transport. in 1841, there was a huge uprising against the british. it began in the south in helmand and spread north and very soon the british were surrounded in the same cities in which the american troops are surrounded

today in kandahar, jalalabad and in kabul. they had stupidly kept their ammunition and food in outlining forts and it was captured by the insurgents very early on. they were given safe passage back. the retreat from kabul that followed began on the 6th of january, 1842 and one of the great imperial disasters. 18,500 men and women and children. only 5,000 were british. the rest from north india and they marched out into the snow. they had no idea how to cope in winter war fare. they weren't equipped or trained for it and six days later, one man made it through to jalalabad. everyone else was either killed, enslaved or taken hostage. >> now, the hostile forces that you describe are in the south of afghanistan, kandahar, this is precisely the same problem that the united states faces. which is the area of afghanistan

that is hostile to america and to karzai and the government we put in place is the pashtun area the heartland and why is it that they don't seem to be the same guys who oppose the british are opposing the u.s.? >> it's history repeating itself very closely. i wish to give a copy of this book ten years ago because, apparently, the british party there was a tradition that you keep well out of afghanistan until even the 1950s when alex douglas hume took over the keys. the old man said, let me give one piece of advice, young man. as long as you don't invade afghanistan, you'll probably do fine. and we kind of wish that wisdom would have lasted another 30 years, 40 years. invade iraq, you can run off with the oil remnants. you invade afghanistan, you just pull money in. a huge economic hole in the

budget and the kind of low-level insurgency which afghans so brilliant at. just a slow attrition of foreign forces and one throws up their hands and says, well, it's just not worth it. >> in the middle of it, harmid karzai, the man we backed for president. one thing i noticed in your book, the man who the british put in place, their karzai, if you will, was so reviled within the country as a kind of foreign puppet that for decades and decades and for centuries in 2001 you would hear afghans say, make sure, you are not a western puppet who has no support domestically. >> in a sense, the main reason for writing this book is that president karzai, amazingly, is the chief of the same tribe. in other words, the west has put the same guy on twice. and he's being brought to justice. brought down by the tribe and today they make up the taliban. so, in many ways what we have is

a replay of existing tribal rivalries. slightly different flags. he's trying to make sure people don't think he's -- >> he is a more cultured man than people make out. he read this book when it was published in india within a week and i got called to kabul and i spent 90 minutes with him. discussing this book. he really knows his history. not like bush or blare or any other players that are wandering ignorantly. like we all are. i am not like any of the other players ignorantly as we all are. he is terrified that he will be remembered, which is why he makes these outrageous statements. soldiers are dying in helmand throwing bundles of cash at him

and he saying i'm gg to join the taliban. he makes these crazy statements. what he has to do, he's an elected, democratic and it is curtains for him. he said to me personally. he said, so-called allies, they treat me as they used to treat him. i'm determined that no one will ever mistake me for him. i'm an independent ruler and i'm going to rule my people myself. i'm never going to be remembered as a puppet. and i will continue to speak out like this. >> one of the great lessons i drew from some of this history is that at the end of the day, doesn't even quite understand why the british were in afghanistan. there was this rumor of russian involvement. will we look back on this and to a certain extent we understand why we went in because of al qaeda, but vast expenditure and the enormous time frame, will we have much to show for it? >> i think in a sense the chinese have played the trump card. they didn't send in a single

soldier or aid or development. and they've got the largest reserve in the world. they bought lithium and they're not building a road network and railway network to extract it. any foreign power in its early days, if any foreign power manages to manage afghanistan it may be the china than will do it by doing business with them. >> pleasure to have you on. terrific book. >> thank you. google's eric schmidt on the future of technology. fascinating tour. ke monday morn" sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge. what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support, your business can shine all week long.

the last two decades have seen an explosion of technological advances and it is all getting faster, smarter and smaller. what are the next set of advances and who's going to win? i had a fascinating conversation recently with two people in the know. eric sh mid, the executive chairman of google and the director of google ideas. together they have written a new book "the new digital age, reshaping the future of people, nations and business." listen in. thank you for joining us. so, when people talk about the

future of technology, everyone has their favorite trend they talk about, it's the rise of super computing, the cloud, big data. i figure you are the guy that asks what is the single -- what is the big friend technology that excites you? >>. >> our industry goes through transformations. we went through the pc, internet, web browsing phase. the phase we are now going in is the mobile first page. it is fundamentally about mobile phones and tablets. you see in the transition from pcs to tablets and phones which is going on in the industry today but it is not just the phone, it is a phone connected by a 3g, 4 g or wi-fi network. it is the sum of those that will define i.t., computing and media the next five to ten years. >> in is sense the phone is the computer. once you have text kifty and it can process date data there's no distinction between the phone

and the computer. >> the most bizarre thing about the phone is people never use the phones to talk on anymore but they use them for everything else. we have seen an explosion in growth rates in mobile computing, mobile applications. if you go to startups in our industry, the startups are building applications for iphone and android phones, those are the big two and releasing on them first. i the phones know where they are and highly personalized and with opt in they can help you out, make suggestions, where should i go, what should i do? what should i learn? how long will it take for me to get home? will there be a traffic jam this afternoon because of the baseball game? these are useful things in our world. >> what does it mean for a company like intel whose chips have been dominant in pcs or a company like apple which has used a closed, very elegant system? how do you think the landscape

effects them? >> with intel, they are a great player with the pcs but also have mobile chips now that are appearing in phones that you will be purchasing at the local store. that's their strategy and it seems to be working. with apple, steve brilliantly drove the model from the traditional mac an their issue, of course, is their system is completely closed in the sense that they curate it. they make sure it is a certain size. the android marketplace and this is what google does is much, much larger. to give you an example of the scale of android, more than 750 million android phones in use today, and we activate more than 1.5 million phones per day. those prices, by the way, are coming down. today they're in the couple hundred dollars and coming down to 100 and eventually over some number of years to $50, $30 and i would expect, the combination of all of that means android will be the primary mechanism by which the average person uses the internet because the average person is not going to have an

pc. they're going to have an android-based phone somewhere in the developing world. >> do you think what you're seeing is an explosion of entrepreneurship and invention because it, the costs, the barrier to entry to come up with some nifty little product seems to be so low now. >> what is extraordinary is when you go to a place like pakistan or different parts of africa or countries where smartphones are truly nee and where people's first experience connecting to the internet is not on a pc, its oron a phone, what they're doing is exporting enormous amounts of creativity and ideas back to the communities and environments that helped build these product. there's a nice partnership between the developed and developing world where yes, the beautiful products will always be developed by companies in the western europe and the united states and parts of asia, but the most creative ways to use those products will always come from the parts of the world that are ridden with the greatest number of challenges. that's the next 5 billion.

>> when you ask, if you look back historically, many of those things have not happened. you know, the '50s, people thought we were going to have jettison like cars that would fly. >> we'll still have those, just 50 years later. >> why do you think this is different? why do you think these things are different? >> the claims we're making are straight forward extrapolations of work that is going on now in labs. educated guesses based on trends that have continued for a very long time. if you go back to 10 to 15 years ago, the predictions about the arrival of the internet, the impact of personal information and so forth have all, in fact, come through. >> is the united states the center of the world for this stuff? >> for the moment. there's evidence that asia will get there. the number of engineers being produced in asia and the commitment of education in asia the connectivity in asia are all catching up, and eventually it's a numbers game and there are

more incredibly smart indians and chinese just numerically than americans. this is the other aspect of our industry which is we focus on the globalized competition and the need for education reform so that we can remain competitive as a nation. >> eric schmidt, jared cohen, pleasure to have you on. up next, the link between money and happiness. does more money make us more happy? how happy are americans? the answers will surprise you. you've known? dn we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed much is the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪

help the gulf recover, andnt to learn from what happenedg goals: so we could be a better, safer energy company. i've been with bp for 24 years. i was part of the team that helped deliver on our commitments to the gulf - and i can tell you, safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge safety equipment and technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all our drilling activity, twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. safety is a vital part of bp's commitment to america - and to the nearly 250,000 people who work with us here. we invest more in the u.s. than anywhere else in the world. over fifty-five billion dollars here in the last five years - making bp america's largest energy investor. our commitment has never been stronger. ♪ fly me to the moon

♪ let me play among the stars ♪ and let me see what spring is like ♪ ♪ on jupiter and mars ♪ in other words [ male announcer ] the classic is back. ♪ i love [ male announcer ] the all-new chevrolet impala. chevrolet. find new roads. ♪ you hodoes your dog food have?s find new roads. 30? 20? new purina one beyond has 9. the simplified purina one beyond. learn more about these wholesome ingredients at purinaone.com

iran is getting ready for presidential elections next month. the incumbent mahmoud ahmadinejad is not allowed to contest because he already served two terms.

i found it interesting to see that iran's voting age is 18 because only a few years ago it had the world's lowest voting age, 15. that brings me to my question of the week. what is the world's highest national voting age? a, 18. b, 20, c, 21. or d, 30? bonus points if you can name the country, as well. stay tuned and we'll tell you the correct answer. go to cnn.com/fareed for more insight and analysis and follow us on twitter and facebook and all that stuff. if you missed one of our shows, remember you can go to itunes.com/fareed. this week's book is "return of a king." his fascinating history of the first afghan war reads like a novel. it's a great and beautifully written yarn and it also has some important lessons for the president. >> now to the last look.

economists have always been fascinated by the looing between income and happiness. in the 1970s, we learned of the easterlin paradox. the economist argued that more money doesn't always lead to more happiness. instead, more money often means more demands and desires. well, a new paper by "the economist" turns that thesis on its head. look at this graph plotting satisfaction against income. if you were in a relatively poor country like china, india or iran, more money meant more satisfaction. even if you were in a rich country and this is what is new, the results hold up. look at france, germany or the u.s. on this chart. what i also found interesting was that americans hit the highest levels of satisfaction among the 25 most populous countries in the world. ♪ i can't get no satisfaction

>> but i guess you can get satisfaction as long as you can pay for it. the correct answer to our gps question is "c," 21 years. a number of countries require you to be 21 to vote including kuwait, lebanon, saudi arabia, oman. singapore, mulish las vegasa, and a few others. thanks for being part of my program this week. i'll see you next week. hello, everyone. i'm fredricka whitfield. a look at the top stories this hour. the midwest is bracing for a second day of nasty storms, tornadoes touched down in some areas yesterday. and another string of severe weather is moving in today with hail, flooding, and more twisters. the forecast, next. >> and someone won the biggest power ball jackpot ever. in last night's