activity. getting the credit activity should be an important priority in getting employment growth cleaned up i think we have a couple more questions. >> my question is in the past month, there's been a lot of traction. an openition on a tax program. proposing that this is something all financial markets around the world do to a head risk. this is a crew dent thing right now. >> good idea and will it happen?

flush >> let me say this. pass pass comes back. the u.s. and the u.k. derive from more of their income from the financial industry than the rest of europe or other countries. so, they are getting agreement

on the scale of a global tax. i did not attach feasibility. >> will it happen, a financial transaction tax. >> to not overlook the temptation of a bunch of -- there are a whole bunch of singapore or some financial center.

everyone has to do it together. don't we need a stronger the regulatory environment? this tax is serving as a proxy for don't we need a tighter, more robust oversight. obviously we do. the regulatory oversight has to be done internationally for the same reasons. we have to have tighter and more robust oversight and the

financial system. >> unfortunately, i cannot allow any more questions. however, i would like some concrete predictions. what will be better in 2010? >> the good news is that it is not 2008. it is really about how strong the recovery is versus how strong the collapse. >> it will be a recovery but not another collapse of his >> exactly.

there is too much complacency. there is the prospect of default in the emerging markets. the emerging markets have weathered the storm and this is this perception. i think that many of them might default. >> what is yours? >> each of mine has a twist of

good and bad. there will be no upturn in inflation in 2010. the prediction is that productivity growth will come back down to some normal growth rate.

in the short run, it has a feature of one of the things negatively affecting job growth. >> washington journal taking your calls and emails live

every morning starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> monday on the communicators. rod beckstrom on c-span 2. >> after a while, i really think it's gone. you've lost it. you don't own it anymore. you are trespassing. it hurts. my possessions are now in a storage bin. this week on "q&a." american casino. the award winning documentry on the impact of subprime mortgages on minorities. >> now a look at 2010 hosted by

the economist magazine. we'll show you four parts of this conference. this is just under an hour. [applause] >> sometimes, somebody else's misfortune to lose your benefit i am in the lucky position of being one of those lucky beneficiaries. meanwhile, i did to spend time with four of my heroes. this is going to be a great

treat for me and i hope it will be a great treat for you and the panelists. as we think about 2010, it is great to think about all the innovation that will be happening. these four people are reasons to be optimistic. and dean cain -- it did not come here by segue, but could have if he had been told to. it is amazing how many different things he is grappling with as an inventor.

duane is involved in one of the most innovative creations, which has changed the business world but is also changing the non- profit world through its partnership with the rockefeller formation. lastly, the co-founder of "guitar hero." i've feel that i was born slated to early to really enjoy it. i was actually put -- and playing the wii for the first time. this is clearly not a bigger business than music and films together. i ran into a bunch of hedge funders that have come out with derivatives to fund the new games.

with no further ado, i will ask each of our panelists what they will be doing in terms of innovation next year. >> among the things that we will see over the next few years is biology in our economy. we all rely unclean water and materials from biology. by my rough numbers, genetically modified stuff has already reached 2% of gdp, which is the really big number. it is growing revenues every year. i think we will begin to see more products derived from a

genetically modified systems. in particular, i am interested in the role of scale in biology. the oil industry is enormous because it has to be enormous. it requires large pipes, large ships, a large refining capacity. 95% of the stuff we by every day is derived from petroleum. i just joined the advisory board of a company that will be introducing perfumes and flavorings and other fine chemicals that are derived from waste by using a ecosystems.

>> been? were we be spending your time -- b dean, where will you be spending your time? >> we will be building the next generation of dialysis equipment that will be able to use by individuals at home which would be hugely important to them and usually more cost-effective to our burden system there are other things that i cannot talk about it. my day job is still continuing to be there to find my fantasies which are supplying clean water to the developing world and to create a box that can do that for 100 people per box. we are working on the point of

use deployable elected generation system. we have to villages in bangladesh that have operated on them. we are now running one on biological modified bugs and to your point, rather than reach the scale of the oil industry, which requires that scale to work, if you guys will help continue to turn waste food and biomass into a format that will be conducive to being a fuel, we are making units that will make electricity we started to do it for the 4 billion people who don't have it but others may find this more convenient. we do not have to make your fuels. why take a 20th-century -- a

21st century fuel and use it the 19th century methods? my fantasy job is what you wanted to solve the problems that will overwhelm us. 23 companies adopted 23 schools. they have had quite a bit of growth last year. we have 43 cities around the united states that run there and then around march. we did our finals last year.

>> what will you be focused on the? what problems will the be solving next year? >> we are focused on the crisis and the evolving. although it has been in and out over the course of the years, the world is galvanizing around big problems today. corporations need to create jobs. i believe there is an urgency and to say that this is a problem. we are seeing that in no way we have seen before. i think that 2010 is the year when this will happen.

i think we will see a very rapid adoption of innovation, inviting people from all over the world to be involved. i think that is the only way that some of these problems will get attacked. as these processes become adopted on a greater scale, we are seeing big problems. we run problems -- >> someone posted a challenge on your web site. >> we work with organizations

that run the gamut from procter and gamble to the international aids vaccine initiative. there is an art and science to taking a problem and making a well-defined problems out of that. it is kind of that average -- that at age -- that addage. you might have 100 individuals trying to solve the challenge of the same time. we are allowing them to assemble into teens and teens can find each other in aggregate to find better business -- building materials and trying to find a better material to avoid fingerprints on the front of your pga. -- pga -- pda.

we think that is a solution to get 7 billion people working on the problems that matter. >> what is next? for us, 2010 is about going green. the entertainment industry is going through a change. we make a product and put out a disk and put it out in retail. in our case, would provide a peripheral that you have to physically picked up at the store and play. if you look at the games that are being created today and becoming popular, you'll see that games are going on-line. a great example is it -- is that all the games in japan, it is

all about going on line. today, most of the business is still in the packaged goods business. you're starting to see the emergence of face but gaining where you no longer have to go to the store to buy a game. you're seeing games like world war craft with over 11 million people playing and their subscribers to that and there is no physical good that they need to buy to be able to play that game. i think that our businesses have to change. consumer behavior is starting to change. the american consumer is more accustomed to going to the store to buy their games.

we're starting to see that changing we're seeing that accelerate very quickly. you have the shift from packaged to digital almost overnight. i do not know how long it will take for the gaming industry to happen, but i think you will see that evolution of the think it will be allowed to fester than people think. the first thing that we have to do is to get people connected. it is a very basic thing for people who play video consul games. our number one challenge is to get everybody connected. for us, it is about a poll. people have to buy this game

because -- it means they have to go out to buy some kind of equipment that will get my consul connected, but it has to be great game played as exciting enough to get people to play. for us, as an example, guitar hero has been releasing downloadable content for the last two years which are just double the will songs that you can buy to play the game. it is really about trying to figure out how we evolved and how do we get consumers to want to connect online and then once they are there, how can we deliver an experience to them that will have them now pay for that feature. >> i want to stick with what you

were doing. there is this trend throughout history that many new technologies have their adoption driven by fun of and to ask where you see your technology of fun going elsewhere and we look at the week. do you see the potential in socially acceptable areas? >> i do. i am not personally working on any of those, but i am intrigued by those. one of the great things about gaming is that the mechanics of gaming are extremely engaging. you get people who want to come back and play with.

a game like farm bill is on line and it is played on facebook. 40 million people log on to play that game. you look at the type of engagement that these games can bring to people, there is very little bit you can do. you take those mechanics and have the you create things that are engaging. how do you take those gaming mechanics and apply them?

>> the military is actually funding the development so that they can encourage and train the next generation of people who will eventually be in the military. it your teaching people what is like to be in certain environments if they are on the battlefield. another example of that is fitness, so that many people have probably heard of wii fit. the fascinating thing about that game is the fact that most people hate fitness. it is just not fun. the majority of people find it not fun. how you create an experience that people actually want to do. -- want to do? it is creating that experience

that is creative and fun and it gets them to do an activity that they normally would not want to do. another interesting example is in the medical field, where doctors are performing surgery by robots and the doctors now control the surgery's through a couple of joysticks. they find that a video game mimics that. it is all about these little meinecke movements the your controlling while watching the screen. they discovered that that is a fantastic way to train doctors to do these types of surgeries. and there is a tremendous amount of applications that we have learned about engaging users.

you have given me and nesting nightmare image of the future of the industrial complex where someone -- all of these things are possible. >> you talk about the innovation process being about to go through a new phase of productivity increase. what is it about next year that makes that a turning point here? is that something you have learned over the past few years? >> there are a few things that have converged. the unable month of the internet to create a way to communicate effectively is incredibly important.

those things have created an in fertile atmosphere. they have become industrial strength solutions. the second is social networking. the trust systems are evolving. the third is a work system that is involved. this is the free agent nation. they create a new kind of innovation. i think that the last is this the emergence -- there is this emergence of a crowd sourcing as

illegitimate government will tool. you have to give people -- good >> the convergence of all of these. forms of sort of group structure and organization make this a possibility now in a way that it never was before. in 2010, they converge. the singular catalyst is the economic crisis. looking through those terms you put earlier. the fact that companies need to continue to inowe vate coming out of the recession or the not for profits still have neglected diseases to treat. a crisis is a terrible thing to waist. i think you see in 2010, a very

different way of thinking about innovation on a go forward basis that shadow the model of the last 100 years. >> we look at this healthcare debate going on at the moment in america. the thing that everyone is really worried about is what we get is further cost escalation without much improvement in health outcomes from a political point of view. when you look at the scientific possibilities, whether it be the use of mobile phone technology were some of the famous that you are talking about, it seems to be a fundamentally different picture that you campaign in terms of better health outcomes. it is this for to start happening? what changes need to be put in place to make this technological

dream a reality? >> i am not an economist or a policy person, but i will tell you that listening to this never-ending debate, it is astounding that one part of all of their brilliant, well thought out analysis, where in that great debate can they so accurately predict we will be in 30 years vista and financial models? >> do they embrace the one part of this human experiment that we are in? i could imagine that if all of these people involved in this debate were having the debate in 1920 about the cost of health care getting out of control,

they would have predicted that we just got through this massive polio academic, but technology got us to where we build these iron lungs. something might have affected the great analysis. they did not know that the vaccination would come about. today, they have this great set of predictions about the crisis and the cost of health care in 20 or 30 years. today, in the united states, 30% of all reimbursement is directly or indirectly to die due this.

people are 17 times more likely to have been blindness or heart disease. right now, it is an epidemic. everything about what we're doing is creating this massive problem. i guess that maybe i am the optimist. it is inconceivable to me that long before 30 years from today , we will watch that one out -- what that one out. all the great debate, today, takes a snapshot of our current tools and where is the debate about foreign research into

wiping out the cancer, alzheimer's and diabetes. >> are you talking about having some kind of manhattan project mentality on these areas? >> when we get serious about solving problems, we solve them. it is time to get serious. the technology is right around the corner it will not only give everybody a way healthy lifestyle, it will give us -- it will be more cost-effective. this is the consequence of wiping out that which we are worried about. >> please, be getting some ideas

to through to our panelists. you talk about the biofuels possibility. we were talking yesterday about the potential for the food crisis to be solved through technology. we rented pad gives the other week about [unintelligible] the basic calculation is that by 2015, the world will have to produce twice as much food. his biology going to be the answer to that crisis? >> if you are asking whether by eligible provide as food, i'll have to say yes. i wodon't know where else we would get it. i think that the answer is

mostly land use is going to play a bigger role. water usage will play a big role. 7% of the world's fresh water resources sees this falling. i am not want to say there are bigger issues -- i am not going to say that there are bigger issues. they have to change the way that they use water in their economy. that holds true in the u.s. as well. we do not as a surly use it as intelligently as we could, -- we do not necessarily use it as intelligently as the could.

i think we will have these drug into corn forests and change the route system of corn. the amount of resources does not really concern me so much. whether we are a bit more clever, if we had all the available, and we're still relying on oil for heating and transportation and if you believe that carbon is important in warming, if we have all that food available and we're still producing lots of energy and materials from oil, very rapidly, our kropp goes to

hell -- our crop goes to hell. >> to raise an interesting thought for me. i come from britain where there has still been been as successful trial of a genetically modified crop because the protesters have trashed the field every time. will this go to china were indifferent -- where a different the approach would play out? >> of want to be able to follow what is going on. we can read and write dna with increasing ease. the feature of that is that now,

students participating in a competition the design new organisms and try to pull pieces of the shelf to snap together. i am fortunate to be a judge for this. i am amazed every year of what the students come up with. the last four years for cambridge, the year before the it was in beijing pennsylvania was the year before that. -- was in beijing, and sylvania was the year before that. the natural question is if they can build pathogens?

the answer that usually give is that, yes, you should be worried, but there is nothing you can do about it. we also have to be paying attention to who is using and how they are using it. as is naturally the response in this town in particular, they want to regulate that technology. they will derive that by 2020.

the world has changed and innovation has changed. the sickbed of biology, playing with these genes has created an incentive to design dna sequences from scratch. that is the world that we leave it -- that we live them. -- that we leap -- that we live in. >> i want to say that i am a great fan. i read a piece that said that was the city was the mother of invention. actually, it is the opposite. i want to ask the panel if you agree with that. has that equation shifted?

>> you first. >> no, i want to prevent a gasbag answer. is the question is should we be focusing on anything other than the critical technologies that relate to whether it is food and water and energy around the world? was up the question? -- was that the question? >> not necessarily. >> if the question is -- i think what the world is finally coming to deal with the fact that we are in a race between catastrophe on a global scale in many dimensions we're in a race

between catastrophe in an education in general. if it can continue to stay one step ahead of catastrophe, it will move. the result was a dark side. the first guy that figured out how to make a flame was popular but in a bird bath house. it could be used as a weapon. around the world, whether we like it or not, be -- we are reducing the size and scale of an organization that needs to be put together to have a dramatic impact on the world. a few kids in a basement

somewhere to make this pathogen. so, we are in a race that requires that we develop better techn/@@@ @ @ @ @ @ a)@ @ ,r@ @ >> you only needed a few people educated. a few leaders and worker bees. now to have a meaningful career and society. everybody has to participate in creating wealth. 7 million people can't be recipients. they have to be part of a solution. they have to be part of the development to be doe ployed. that requires education. >> have we another question down here. when other people come to answer later on. you can touch earlier questions as well. .

. intellectual rights regime is going to help us with innovation? at its worst, it to be a the keeper -- it can be a gate keeper. is ipr or to help us for will be a hindrance? >> i am certainly looking at the u.s.. i did not think it is on -- any other statement that it is broken in dated at the very least. my view is that the system this setup today, we are probably a sign up to protect industries

that made massive capital investments, but as it was said, we have too much work to do i do not know how many people noticed, but if for some sign of all patents will fail. you put in place a system that does not accelerate innovation. maybe it did 50 years ago, but today, it dramatically dampens innovation in favor of business models that are protected more than they should be use. >> i am partial responsible for him, giving the term open source biology. -- for promulgating the term

open source biology. there is a lot about software that makes open source work. my company was started in my garage to test the idea that i could order jeans over the internet and still innovate on a small scale in my house. this is possible in my house. the patent that i applied for in order to engage in any kind of market as cost several times what the actual inhalation cost. buying molecules and moving them around really does not add up to much. it is all up paying for the

patent. that is a huge barrier to tried to engage in the marketplace. mashal -- the challenge in biotech is that each team has a patent on it. it could be something that they actually invented. there were bits and pieces of many different genes. it is still incredibly expensive. if i had 10 of those semi product, it would be 10 times more. this is already standing in the way of innovation for me or anybody who wants to play with jeans -- jeans -- genes.

if sars 2.0 show is up, there is still no vaccine for it. -- shows up, there is still no vaccine for it. when it shows up, what is the innovation structured or to look like to build a vaccine for the bug, given that the thing that we have already face has yet to have a vaccine ready for it. we're in the middle of the crisis, it will be hard to fix that innovation structure on the fly. we need to be thinking ahead much more that we are today. >> several of the founding fathers were opposed --

>> what would help us respond quickly? >> the question is, the reason for it that ms. to guarantee investment. why would i build something new of someone in china can make it better, faster and cheaper ones i have done the work and -- but that idea of protecting some sort of property right is widespread. we could decide that we protected dna with something other than patents. i would think a fantastic policy in the session.

in the end, i would say that i would find out. i do not have a great answer for that. >> does anybody have a solution to the problem? >> talk about a complex topic, i think that patents are too long. there should be an ocean of the frivolous patent. i'll also say that if you're going to apply for a patent, particularly in the area of public health, it should be -- it should expire. there is a vehicle for taking open source ideas and making the available so that they can be used, but that whole area is just now being developed. . .

this could not have been in the minds of the founding fathers when they rose a single sentence that exclusive rights to the inventors and authors. never has the world in in more need of desperate innovation. this whole stimulus package is nothing compared to the people

being incentivized to solve problems. there needs to be big changes. my fear is that in the process of trying to change this for the convenience of some currently powerful industries, the unintended consequence of what is now being viewed as a reform of the patent system could lead it neutered and it would be a terrible thing to remove the incentive. a terrible thing that he will not see until the next generation goes through. >> i could listen to you with the rest of the day, the rest of the week. need to ask each of you for your prediction and hopefully it is

an optimistic. >> we have a temporary reprieve from the high food prices that we have seen from 2006-2007 because the economy has backed off. we have some space between it resource production and resources . the consensus seems to be here that economic growth will come back next year, maybe slowly but it will be there. my prediction is that we will see a return to higher prices because we will run up against our production limits very soon. food prices, the oil prices,

etc.. >> thanks for that. >> i'm not sure that i can do 10 words but my theme is still education, particularly about innovation. i will give you a quote from a political leader. i think that i will get the whole thing right but all of those that have meditated on the art of governing mankind and the fate of empires depends on education. was that obama? was that bush, was that clinton? it was aristotle. there is not a lot of new news

here,'s. -- there's not a lot of news. we need to get the government understanding that technology. >> what is the prediction? >> my prediction is that the public is becoming more empowered and more educated. innovation would become faster and more easily acceptable because of the crisis that we have and that is a good thing. my prediction is that things will get better. >> i think there has been a national and global debate for years and it has been a slightly ta different debate about the

innovation strategies and policies. too many people are out of work today. i think that there are too many diseases than me to be cured. in 2010, one or more countries start driving a real reform and the technology policy that addresses jobs, technology, education. >> one country will start to lead? >> someone has to. >> this is serious stuff and all i do is play games. there is a transformation from a packaged goods business to a digital business. if you look at what is happening onside of our direct area where if you look at asia where this model has already happened and they will never move back into the type of

business that we see here today and in europe. if you look at iphone gaming, this is the number one category of applications on the iphone and the most of them are free. we have seen an evolution from purchasing games at a high premium and then it moves in to where it is free. you get the user to pay for some engage but that they want to pay. as the game industry transforms from packaged to digital coming gaming will eventually go free. >>