c o 2 emissions are certainly when it's off this situation and on the other hand the question of climate change is linked to migration and their knowledge interrelated see that's exploring the problem because you know there are as you pointed out there are forces that want to retreat from internationalization but on the other hand to solve some of these problems it has to be international jumpier you wanted us to try to answer correctly to your question who we knew who was as a former situation was you needed to resume united on his own you know from the united states governing everything and now we completely and we are 1st of comeback of protectionism and we are and all of the worldwide globalization now the new frame easier e. originates asian or does it change you know of asia you of both america and you off china or course if we we are not working together on

europe and continue on in his breach between asia and the united states as west and east and you know we are loser because you know who us to win is a gross underwears un's happiness of the population so in that case we have to give everybody's of access. to the groups and of course millions or if we don't do is out europe on the rush on the continent and we don't organize this new frame. that is asian of of the trade and business or of course only our friend from china will win because you know 2000000000.7 the gains in 50 years 8000000 and big media in europe press russia and 6000000 united states so it is young then let's go to paul paul jump in i thing in this context actually action is a no win this everybody will loose one way or the aga touching from this slowing.

global growth. the impact on business investment decision and hiring as well as the volatility in the financial market so we we in hong kong obviously being found guilty oh we will pay for fee trade multilateralism based so that there is a division of labor and it would supply chain being built up over the world so that we can leverage our respective strength and shared a foot of success isn't really that one of the biggest problems in it's highly contentious because it's a political issues and ever since the end of the 2nd world war socially to to now it's the united states of the washington consensus it's called it's made the rules it's not a clickable it and rules don't work for their advantage and now we have a changing economic global system in the rules hold some people back in from 0 to others it picks winners and i think this is the thing it's speech it's going to be

a very contin a shift political debate because the rules favor some at the expense of others david you know sure i do agree with out there and always there's a sell side economists that also if economies of advertising i went to have it all i would have been to be expected in this panels of the breyer all of someone who represents the usuals of neo liberal views but in fact i would actually think that i think that you know as frank mentioned obviously that in the way back to sort of regionalization it would have been news and you know that's that's something that has been emphasized again but i think it was good with the issue was always that there are distribution consequences right now they were to believe that they would be cardo even if you do believe in the review card or the art was always the one who came up with the idea of comparative advantage there are winners and losers within societies and i think we have many companies feel to pull pretty good with that which has led to the issue of massive inequality which. which happened in the

face of a massive decline in clovelly inequality. we have now these particular issues in the western countries to deal with. and i think we disagree a little bit the point that everybody loses it's true that it reduces from a global perspective but if you look at it from a distribution of perspective within some countries there may actually be some people who gain and at least in the relative basis and the inequality is about. the perception of will being countries may have a great ability to again regulate the domestic economic systems but then. again that the station away from individuals back to corporates and again obviously not an interest in educating that but that's that's that's possibly the way it's going to it's going to go or. dimitri you know thanks in all my battle big point of view because you know all ideals new paradigm what is new paradigm we have a global economy during 5000 euros a goal so really all our life is kind of

a little move to global economy and production is it's not possible to say that global economy is absolutely beautiful or protectionism it's a kind of evil and it is they gave brutal but there is there's there's issues i mean you know like the trumpet ministration is weaponized the dollar ok i mean that affects everybody in the world the next global trade significantly you can talk about globalization in that sense him and i suppose the entire world will become is always connected but when you have one or 2 countries we can call the shots that can change the oil prices in a heartbeat not based on any economic rationality but because of a political decision to take issued a little bit with this idea that train you know the slowdown in global trade growth is inherently a bad thing might just be a quite a natural phenomenon the trade doesn't grow for ever faster than dent income and i think a lot. part of the reason why trade growth is slowing is because china is becoming

more developed so instead of export of all of its output there are certain there's a growing domestic market you know i think that a part of this story and on the input side in the what previously were imported into china china can now supply itself so there's a vertical integration going on in china and because it's so large it affects global trade flows so eventually you probably reach some equilibrium way down the road where where trade and income i.e. g.d.p. kind of grow at the same levels in terms of the income distribution argument which we treat here a lot of winners and losers i think one you know let's think about it this way you think about income distribution within countries and think about income distribution between countries it's hard to argue the fact that global trade the growth of global trade has improved income distribution between countries so we have fewer very poor countries so national income levels rise i think that's been

demonstrated china again is probably the best example of that but within countries we can clearly see that income distribution is getting worse so that's not an issue for for governments to coordinate with each other it's governments need to address these issues on the rome there is a very strong correlation between economies that are open with the exception of hong kong and singapore because they're very small but more open economies tend to have a larger governments because those governments recognise that there is a redistribution role for governments and i'm thinking about really western european countries the nordic countries in particular so there is a redistribution role for government when trade is a large share of g.d.p. because yes there are winners and losers but if you think trade is advantageous and that's an appropriate role for governments to have we if you look historically if you. the major complex almost every single major conflict in history has

a economic trade component to it. and i'm wondering if with this paradigm shift i love that word. do we see a potential conflict built into it because you know we have the facilities trap that's what we're really essentially talking about here in this paradigm shift you know and when one country is ascending the major power that is the status quo power has options either you allow the rising power to continue their rise even to surpass you you negotiate your decline in the relative rising of your come opponent and then of course there is the 3rd variant and it is called conflict ok and in modern history have seen many many of them ok we can look at the the the competition between great britain and germany prior to the 1st world war we can

look at the sanctions and say it's applied on japan prior to the attack on pearl harbor i mean all these were about trade yes it is the new part of the room we are not to forget scenes did you shouldn't because our little would be and they go formed after the 2nd world war i have math you are central to world bank board central bank you have all these big institutions but. today for the globalization and now is the re read a generalization it is globalization and the bulk of the products in islam i am not sure we have to involve more went to court but you'd be going to the past. with these exactly 2 days imagine going trees sometimes our growers you know there are more power voters that in europe you know and then that would does this notion of greeks you know where russia is emerging countries is a joke saw these economies view isn't there i would they did no global.

to be modernized to welcome the new and to give everybody's right to world easy global world if not just protection of just protectionism now pushed by our friend from united states is very negative don't move at the same time zone rules of the game with big problem like you say it's always before big conflict into context you see the sanctions we have to stop these sanctions because now we are sanction you know russia. against russia from united states and europe now we are view around you have jumped on you know india's conflict of sanction to everybody where do we go we have to stop you see to get. this hard to take some from somebody if you know have some to replace. the work to

do this interview today do you see the market move in that they take me. 4 years or area. so i'm going to tell you start selling drugs if we'll hear some to put the money in it back. then just me all the way their life is almost invasively mccullers peaceful for a power. to us over it's a good many security positions open to that. jack me again. you see people get other cars and i'll see you coming in the herd and this seems like they'll hurry up and run into the house like they don't want to they don't want to talk to your get your mail or anything like that. i just want to go or i don't know why i can't do this. run just try every day. it's a. people

will say sure period that we had is that offer will be a new globalization period that will be a network driven i predict that america will become a subscription service like netflix new all subscribe to america and they have to offer you a value proposition to keep your subscription alive. but they are owed birdsall and they. were defeated by such. an arguer. of it is that people. just sort of fit into the commercial good. mother to move. them in a few fish that old not just before. god

since we. need to learn to meet the needs of the skilled who need. to give the learning. system distinction in. the midst of them run to the. if you look at the trade negotiations between china in the united states. just over the last few weeks i mean that the western media really gave a very odd skewed interpretation of what happened because essentially what the united states is doing is demanding. regulatory torrie changes the way china does business i mean outside power dictating the terms and conditions of our you run your economy and of course the chinese said no the thing is what what does

sovereignty mean in all of this paradigm shift i think that's the big question right here because we started out you know no one said the word yet but i'll say it brags it ok we have a lot of the european parliamentary elections that showed the the the center is collapsing and a lot of it gets down to understanding how this paradigm shift is moving forward and remain maintaining your sovereignty and no one has been able to really figure out how to square that circle when you look at how china responds it has been very measured our self defense and going back to your you know your earlier question about a possible conflict it has always been stated that it is not the ambition of china to claim well number one or to become a supreme power if you look at the batman role you nischelle what just being emphasis is working too bad for military old benefits openness in course if innes and not being a cross pilot crop so the mentality of off of china is really different. when

compared to that off the united states let's. come back to. war and we are starting from. between missions by the rock. and inside the country and that is so much bigger problems that it's a clear signal that. more reach and more satisfied globalization solves. some was a. little finland which has absolutely dissatisfied. the. political system in the us that's the same story in the senate story so maybe this is even bigger problem. so that the real political consequences. windows and losers insides of countries i just want to say that in the past 30

years up until recently their global economy has been living a dream and many new developing countries were integrated into the system they learn to enjoy the fruits of the system of the architecture financial trade legal that was actually created by the western world and now that their roles in their economic power and they basically compete for the same share of the buy with those who created this architecture and and this is a more i would say that this is a and only trade related concept because the paradigm that was created during those 30 years is based upon the supply chain system so that the western countries they used the local markets in the developing world they use their labor costs lower labor cost they shifted their production overseas to maximize their profits

and those countries learned a lot from those supply chains integrations and now. they moved to a higher level so valued. they basically compete with those who created the supply chain and so the question of the title of the session is whether this is a paradigm shift the answer to this question is very tricky because a lot depends on how this trade conflict which in substance is not a trade conflict but it's purely economic financial and an existential collision how this conflict is managed so that if they do it the soft way and everybody will be fine if they do it the hard way certainly be a disruption to the created supply chains and there will be a firearm shift in the way we treat of interest anyways a country are off to fight for. us to be but. a country so problem east.

asia not a dozen g. 7 but then you. would be you know. everybody to enlarge a dialogue. but anyway to put a new cards. on the new rules of the game because the challenge. with you it's very interesting for currency for trade. sanctions about everything. chance. they did and always go by the same you're all always agreement of the united states if you but now we. have you we have everybody so what we have to emphasis is the spirit of. benefit when you go to our 1st row here since you have a new one again. thank you peter as being

a fascinating discussion. which covered many topics i've noticed actually peter you have been trying to bring the discussion in to the dominance of united states and reluctance for the u.s. to to to. give up. the dominance so maybe on that i would like to make some comments and 1st comment is about china's growth being looted by won't be a panelist i think right now china needs to grow slower not faster that's a very different theme from this conference if china can grow at 4 percent. actually i would be very happy so to some hans most economists know who. he was born researched years years because a current of growth rate is clearly not sustainable i think everyone knows that in china we cannot increase leverage and we cannot. have more conflict with the

major trading partners i think that's very important secondly i think it's too early to say this is a paradigm shift cost by trade tensions or trade war because i mean as a financial secretary of on kong has said reactions from china so far have been quite measured i think that's a correct policy response in fact i would i do or kate to think for china one to even get on higher moral ground and to reduce tariffs to help consumers i think this trade war is also a stress test just like financial institutions they need a stress test i think trade war itself clearly tallying us financial

sector reform in china is a severely lacking imagine imagine if we do not have hong kong using you have all this in the background i mean kind of economic growth would have been less impressive because we're being all sourcing capital market function 200 imposter 30 years so i think this is a stress test is a wake up call i think i think really really open up even further. i just want to say on the remaking the world. takes a lot of courage and a lot of from those who are already in control that's why they have to think about the future. and make these institutions reflect the economic reality that has changed since since the world war 2 you know and whether this is something they can compromise question we don't know that yet and one point on the financial sector

the financial sector is very important but it doesn't exist in the void its primary object is to finance the real sector operations and that's where the trade in goods and services come into play and that's where you get all this competition let's take a look at this. way i mean it's all about competition it's all about financing the best terms financially and the best products and fortunately if we don't come up with a rules with a rules based system this will go on forever why we have to do that if we come back to this question of will. system i mean it's not limited to reaction to the 2nd world war it's a reaction to the prelude to the 2nd world war which then which is certainly originated also. let's say to the trade conflict and the great depression which was there no i would say you need so that leaves 3 from these institutions so that they

are able to give an answer to the new developments of the new challenges which are there but he tricked you mentioned this before you have to compromise and everybody has to compromise here and if say the the major force which has safeguarded to functioning of these institutions is perhaps no broking is it students or really wanting to compromise on this they certainly would bring us into trouble at the moment i would avoid the war over the world over trade war it's a trade conflict because if you look into the prehistory of the 2nd would there was a really trade war. that's a much more shop than we have it now but certainly we own a very it's a difficult danger. it's possible moment and here i think that political rationality has to prevail ideally i'm sorry of course out there america's under russian parliament i think it's very difficult to predict what will happen in the

world to quantum and world trade and yes because you know not now the meatiness on pictures book and sun futures book at the moment for him and i remember very well and probably. through all sort of remember what. we're discussing here with our american colleagues 10 years ago 20 years ago. i think in the ninety's and in the beginning on. this. 10 year as americans convinced russia to join w tool and actually. they positioned the self like a main get around all the liberal economy although that world and. this is a paradox but not think. the united states. main

threat to this liberal economy how they're built and. they using all the. instruments all the world trade and dolor as as a rope and as in the comic up on against there are a child and not even against mexico so that this is a quite new sedition nobody can predict this 10 years ago so i think. this trade was sanctions contra sanctions. and the this is a lose lose situation for everybody and. i think they're all all the u.s. dollar and if you talk about that they're. a current if you look at the russian currency reserves is change their might to carry and. percentage of the us

dollar us wasn't on to something you know from from a to probe a bit of percent from his identity as a little down to $35.00 so this is a dramatical situation and i think if in the future the united states will use the dollar as a verb that they're all of doro will the decrease will because their might to cricket isn't a global currency it's all about it's not it's value it's value is trust and if you compromise sort of trust then its value is compromised that's and i'm getting out of sort of that it is not a political weapon that is all the time we have i hope you have enjoyed our panel discussion we could have gone on and on but i think we got we got to the main points and i appreciate it thank you thank you thank you thank you my.

join me every thursday on the alex simon show and i'll be speaking to us on the world of politics small business i'm show business i'll see that. you know what. i don't want to talk to a communist news agency forgive me you'll have to find someone to. well with trying to stay with this wants to get me. going to be just like the jews this is.

so i. see into that where. we have to go back 6 2. i think i acknowledge the. fight. it's an indication of how important. so.

let's move towards we are definitively winning it because we have the people they have people in power but we are. this is a stick. found in the stomach of the fish the brand is part of the coca-cola company which sells millions of bottles of soda every day the idea was that let's tell consumers they're the bad ones they're the litter bugs are trying this way industry should be blamed for all this waste the company has long promised to reuse the plastic. on. but for now the mountains of waste only grow higher.

with. a gold medal. response to a question about the potential for russian interference in the 2020 us presidential elections he invited where putin were meeting at the g 20 summit in. control on global security. we have not seen each other since the helsinki meeting with the r.t. if you're working together they gave us a great opportunity to follow up on that. also on the program britain's largest waste management firm is convicted for attempting to send contaminated hard rubbish to china wrongly. on the tell you no thora he's been.