. >>> diana and jeremy watch is on wto in sfrcincinnati and andrea johnson on wto in rockfield, illinois. >> they were all winners in the ipad give away. >> all you need is monday's buzz word. be 18 and a legal u.s. resident. >> stand by for the rtm ipad minigiveaway. >> quick survey. would you guys get into a bull ring with a bull? >> no, no. >> wait, wait, a chicago bull. >> hi, dennis rodman. >> that's what these students were tapped with. get in a bull ring with a bull as part of a class experiment. watch how this goes. >> oh, oh, oh. the experiment was set up by the professor, ricardo martinez. his point was that a bull will not attack if not provoked. >> is it a science, biology experiment. >> no real information as to which direction this was going but i think it was a bit of both. >> because of the conversation. he is showing if this bull doesn't attack if it is not attacked. now, are we just baiting the bull into this situation. >> if i was a parent and that was my kid, i would want to know why he is still a professor. >> wait. it is a very effective learning experience. it coul

in short, vietnam's wto membership allowed the communist government -- made it free to jail, tortureo abuse. the pressure was off. why would they not do so again? the communist leadership in hanoi will take our benefits you are our trade benefits, our security commitments, and continue repressing those seeking political reform and universal freedoms. the business of the communist party is staying in power, and repressing those who may challenge their power. they will not embrace human rights improvements or the rule of law unless it is a condition of better relations with the united states. vietnam needs the u.s. markets and security commitment much more than the united states needs vietnam's markets and security cooperation. the administration should demand additional protection for human rights, internet freedom and the rule of law as a condition of u.s. assistance. not doing so is short-sighted, misguided and fails to achieve long-term u.s. interests, and it throws the victims under the bus. one way to send an important message about u.s. policy priors is to pass the vietnam human

if you are excepting wto rules coming in rather than it -- >> you know that. mr. cameron: the bottom line is you have 10% tariffs on your cars, 70% on your be. --beef. >> the mutual interest in the deal -- mr. cameron: i want to make two quick points. the deal is mutual interest. i think we would negotiate very hard. the figures are 44% of all the export goes to them. 8% of their exports come to us. the second point is never forget the importance of services in our economy and financial services. if you lose the -- let me give you one example. >> but the prime minister finish. mr. cameron: a fellow said he thought we would lose 100,000 jobs a month because the passport issue. you lose that aspect of any bank or financial services country instantly set its services. if you say leave our relationship and we will get to wto rules and negotiate with the rest of the world, you face massive terrorists -- tariffs. they could make your economy much worse than the norway deal. >> i think massive tariff is something of an exaggeration. if i can ask you, your handling of the

on wto side, people within the wto said they're still struggling to itmplement the eu 15 which changed0 years ago so they're not even at the point of having full negotiations completed for the eu 28. the idea we could quickly turn around after article 50 was started, an arrangement with the wto is interesting. that leaves other models like the swiss model or canadian model which is fine if you can negotiate a deal as good as the one you're giving up, but, i means, if you take the swiss, for example, yes, the swiss have negotiated a free trade agreement with china. switzerland overnight dropped 80% of its tariffs when that deal came into force. china didn't drop any because it was china versus switzerland and that is the nature of world politics and world economics. i don't see any of the three options that make life look better for us in the options we have at the moment. >> i know we're running out of time. i want to ask about -- i think what we're having difficulty attempting to identify, what are the particular scottish issues when it comes to the remain case were being in the europ

i didn't wto so i didn't. it doesn't bother me one bit. i'm not rattled.e the old adage says, you win some, you l-- excuse me. you l-- sorry. you win some, you l...ose some. close enough. besides, who can remember how many states i've lost in a row? is it two or is it three? i don't know. >> hey, miss clinton. i'm here to fix seven holes in your wall. >> come to think of it, it might have been seven. and that's fantastic. it humanizes me. i'm the underdog now. i'm this election's rudy, and i like that. after all, i don't want to be a big old "b" and win every single state. that's no fun. but enough about the past. it's time to look forward to the future, and right now, my focus is here in new york! [ cheers and applause ] ah, yes. god, i love being back in the

that's why i supported nafta, i supported the wto. i support the tpp.ecause i'm unconcerned about the effects of trade on the u.s. economy. we need a much more aggressive strategy for dealing with that. but because we are not take more of those risks bypassing this agreement, and we are getting a lot of market access in other countries. gary: president obama is writing the narrative on his legacy. he said he made the decision to push obamacare instead of a infrastructure bill. was that a mistake? >> history will have to be the judge. one of my biggest regrets from that period that the country did not launch a longer and more sustained public investment program. i think we would have a stronger economy if we did that. but i think we have got and lot of economic benefit from what happened in healthcare. the fact that the healthcare cost curve has been bent is a big win for america. gary: more from salt in las vegas after this. >> announcer: some of the greatest minds in the world are meeting in las vegas this week to discuss the greatist issues covering o

if you are excepting wto rules coming in rather than it -- >> you know that. mr. cameron: the bottom line is you have 10% tariffs on your cars, 70% on your be. -- beef. >> the mutual interest in the deal -- mr. cameron: i want to make two quick points. the deal is mutual interest. i think we would negotiate very hard. of all the are 44% export goes to them. 8% of their exports come to us. the second point is never forget the important -- importance of services in our economy and financial services. if you lose the -- let me give you one example. >> but the prime minister finish. said heron: a fellow thought we would lose 100,000 jobs a month because the passport issue. of any bank aspect or financial services country instantly set its services. if you say leave our relationship and we will get to wto rules and negotiate with there's the world, you face massive terrorists -- tariffs. they could make your economy much worse than the norway deal. >> i think massive tariff is something of an exaggeration. handlingask you, your of the government. outside of the special

go to wto rules, negotiate with the rest of the world. you would face massive tariffs and i think huge dislocation for your economy. i think economically it would be much worse. >> wto terms and i think massive tariffs is something of an exaggeration another aunt sal that should be disposed of. outside of the special circumstances of the renegotiation, how much of your time is given to advancing or protecting britain's position within the eu. >>> >> there are a certain number of european summits every year. a certain number of extra ones. -- i would estimate probably 15%. obviously the renegotiation took a lot of time because i visited almost every country sometimes more than once. so that took up a special amount of time. but i would reckon 15%. >> how often are you speaking to the french president and the german chance lo are? >> i would say fortnightly. every two or three weeks probably. >> and -- leaders? >> i would say that i probably speak to the french, german and italian prime ministers probably more than others but it depends. it

to the wto as a violation of our obligations there. but they wouldn't wait the three years for the cases to run. they would retaliate in the meanwhile being fairly confident they would prevail in the case at the end of the day. so, if one means -- if one calls a trade war a retaliation of that type, as journalists frequently do, then, yes, you would have it. what my analysis suggested was two simple things. if you limit imports from a single country like china, those imports are going to be available in most cases from other countries. so, the reduction in u.s. net imports would be very modest. by contrast, the countries that we hit would retaliate against us. they could buy most of those products elsewhere. we would lose much more on the export side than we gained on the import side in the trade imbalance and job terms. so my headline in my piece was trump's trade policy a big loser for the united states. not that we're going to win again. but it would be a big loser for those fairly straightforward reasons. you've had your question.

ul i shere wal of wto did you think it wasoi tres topo >> not at all. i old bosa "you know what? we builtmpat building in one year. how caweeb single family home >> sulli t o reng homes in new yoy he rib of a special housing program llldck >> we've created a power ra >> sullivan: thegr ilon from washington. >>e'urer aid money. e of the program is nyc d k,t' t yme.. line family as told they'd be among the first hey d it back wae ckamerad the couple thede comforted. just t as. >> that's my point. at's wam. (laughter) sn: hi! bue lahe still living with a sh filled with sandy storm water. hiur fish tank. >>vath w from the tidal surge? >> yes. lihiidge water. >> tal pe tank water. , evhit intermingled, because the water actueno p berecoor >> sullivan: the wer cam l the way up here? is faswa ndter. >> sullivan: this used to be your ey? the cameradas were still waiting tiror up and their house elevated. >> we had our television uc lar >>vaike many homeowners, they gambled and dne ine. they were now counti o om iback. >> do u hitem every single thing that i lost? sullivan: diane showed m

we have, i think as you know, overall filed, i think, 20 wto enforcement complaints since 2009, the most of any country. and by the way, we've won all of the cases that have been decided. with regard to china specifically, and this is not in steel, but this is more generally, just this past month they signed an agreement ending export subsidies as a result of a challenge we made to those subsidies at the wto. a year ago we won a challenge to compliance on high-tech steel, duties that we had challenged them on. and that had contributed to $250 million annual loss to our exporters. that ended as a result of the enforcement actions that we took. in 2014 there was a finding against china on duties and quotas on rare earths and tong stun. and finally, this, again, was a result of an action we took. and also in 2014 there was a finding of breach regarding duties on cars and suvs, $5.1 billion worth of cars and suvs sold. there, too, we got a decision. so i can't speak to the specific case that you reference, but i can promise you that i'm sure my colleagues are looking at this very carefully.

would like to continue to belong -- the imf, the wto, etc., they are all very good.course, they are composed just of bureaucrats. but they do not have any form of democratic briefing. norman: earlier mario monti said he's not in favor of the european union, now he's talking about the young democracy of the european parliament. we all know what will happen. the european parliament will acquire more and more power. britain has something like 10% of the seats in the european parliament. something like 8% of the votes in the council of ministers. this is moving in the direction of political union, we are a very small part of it. i do not believe that democracy can be exercised over 28 countries. there is not a european people in that sense. there is a french people, there is a british people, there is a german people, there is a swiss people. they speak different languages. a 28-countryve democracy. it simply cannot work. we are getting more and more remote and more and more interventionist. maurice: i want to come back to the economical aspect, because i think that when

and roughly 10 years before were required to one of the wto. the congress wouldn't pass this law. and in argentina. the president of argentina to invoke executive fiat. a short period of time, the idea that the president could dictate laws for executive orders and things like that was considered to be a step backwards in the dictatorship and a way democracy which was fairly new. i was struck at getting the equation of looking at democracy on the one hand and, they are jumping into the price of drugs. and. and the drug generated $47 million. and and the patent rights are exposed by swiss patent company. and if columbia breaks the monopoly of this cancer drug. there are great consequences for the funding of the peace process. when i work on this issue, i do a lot of work, i am not going to go through everything we have been working on. to understand the nature of the power that is involved in trying to deal with the issue of access -- what ralph talked about history with hiv drugs, 9000 people a day dying for lack of access to aids treatment drugs, and somewhere from 10 to 15,000 pe

and the united states wanted it to happen roughly ten years before they were required to under the wto rules. and so the congress wouldn't pass this law because the domestic drug manufacturers were influential in argentina. so the white house was pressing the president of argentina to invoke a patent through a executive fiat. argentina has just been a democracy a short period of time and it was causing a the political crisis in arjtd that. the idea that the president could just dictate laws through executedive orders and things like that was or considered to be a back step. and i was strauk at the time in the equation of looking at democracy on the one hand and on the idea of -- you know, the price of drugs on the other hand, that the u.s. was just donald trumping right into the price of drugs as the more important issue. now if you fast forward that to today right this week there is a dispute we're involved in for columbia. columbia is trying to deal with a very expensive cancer drug for leukemia. it's a swiss drug company. not even an american company. invented on nih and charitable

so a lot of those were not in our control, although the wto agreement was to some extent. on negotiating future trade treedys, we should think about we shouldn't do it overnight, for example. the point was, is not that we have complete control over the way economies integrate, but we can when we decide to open ourselves up, we can think about the trajectory of that as opposed to simply the end point. >> i think another point there is that once you have openness to trade and capital flows, you're then exposed to big shocks that happen in the rest of the world. china was a big shock, so that puts an extra premium on policy planning to aaccount for disruptions that might come down the line, and we were simply remiss in that sort of planning over the last couple of decades. >> i would amplify one thing david said. when we negotiate trade agreements, we do frequently use long phase-in periods for the liberalization in order to ease the transition over time. and in sensitive sectors where there's a lot of domestic concern, that is frequently done. time is sort of the great leave

i think we have as i think you know overall filed i think 20 wto enforcement complaints since 2009, the most of any country. and by the way, we've won all of the cases that have been decided. with regard to china specifically, and this is not in steel but this is more generally, just this past month they signed an agreement ending export subsidies as a result of a challenge we made to this the subsidies at the wto. a year ago we won a challenge to compliance on high-tech steel, duties that we had challenged them on. and that had contributed to $250 million annual loss to our exporters, that ended as a result of the enforcement actions that we took. in 2014, there was a finding against china on duties and quotas on rare earths and tungsten, and finally we issued this was, again, as a result of an action that we took. and also in 2014 there was a finding of breach regarding unjustified duties on cars and suvs, $5.1 billion worth of cars and suvs sold, there, too, we got a decision. i can't cite the specific case that you reference but i can promise you i'm sure my colleagues are looking a

that's what i wto hear.on't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... ...and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i accept i don't play quite like i used to. but i'm still bringing my best. and going for eliquis. reduced risk of stroke plus less major bleeding. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you. . >>> political backlash continues over the historic directive from the obama administration, saying that schools must allow transgender students access to such facilities consistent with their gender identity. >>

and with the wto and with tpp they're going to bring those jobs into mexico, build automobiles, assemble automobiles there and ship them into the united states duty-free. china says they plan to put $100 billion worth of auto parts into the u.s. market by 2017. that will be in violation of trade laws. we'll file trade complaints and eventually win them but will have lost the jobs. free trade is only a dream in some academic's mind. all trade is done by rules. >> let me let brian answer you. >> 375,000 net new jobs in indiana since nafta was passed. if we look around the world, the countries that are prosperous are the countries that are open to trade and investment, canadas, new zealands, singapores. it's not the north koreas and venezuelas that restrict freedom. >> i want to let you moderate this because you're sort of in the middle figuratively and literally. this is the argument that people are having, that you do have real human beings who have lost jobs and who are losing livelihoods and losing what they thought was their future in towns where these factories are shuttering and they

whether it's the imf or the world bank or the wto or the u.n. and it's important to understand that these help america. they help us maintain a security for the american people and they strengthen america. so i think that would be my answer to you on that. >> senator, thanks for the question. you know, on this committee, i'd say three things. one is, you know, the coin of the realm are policy ideas and deep exploration then coming forward with concrete approaches and insideas is really importan and this committee is doing this in a variety of places. it's important to close the deal, actually say, all right, we've looked at the problem and have a set of possible recommendations and policy ideas we want to put forward. i think the second is to continue to be out in the field and to travel and to learn what's going on. there's no substitute for that, as you know very well. there's just no substitute for members of this committee going out, seeing what's going on on the ground, getting a feel for the history and dynamics of places around the world.

is this the person you wto be?tt leili said he'd even considered getting a court order to protect him from his wife. >> now, has she ever been violent? >> yeah. i've got pictures of myself with bruises on me. i've got a -- my father is a witness for her throwing a knife at my face. i'm 250 pounds, six foot five. she's 98 pounds soaking wet. i'm being beaten up by my wife. who's going to believe me? >> he's telling you that she's bats? >> that's what he's saying. >> reporter: as for the night nique disappeared -- >> he stated the previous friday that they had actually gone out to eat and then gone to a movie after she got home from work. >> we had a great time. we came home. on the way home i said to her you know, hey, you know -- because i wanted sex, so i said to her you know "hey, you know, how about you put on an outfit?" i think that might have set her off. >> he wanted her to put on a little sexy costume of some kind, huh? >> correct. >> that fear of intimacy that i thought she was working on getting over was

trade, to recognize it would take many, years to renegotiate all of these treaties including a basic wto really have to years to do that. the critical thing is non-very to trade, making it easier. companies cooperative early middle size companies, are able to export the market of 500 million people using the same minimum the rocker see right across europe. and they will benefit from those nontariff barriers which are subcritical. annamanus: a very good morning o you. manus down in dubai. i understand you have written, laying of the details that brexit, in terms of economic shock would be. a lot of people might think it is all finger in the air in terms of the shock that might come. where do you stand on this? you would say that the brexiteers would be 4% bigger as an economy? how big a shock could it be? what is your estimate? mike: firstly, i'm not expecting any answer. actually, quite a number of the brexiteers are saying there is absolutely no doubt there will be a short term shock. some indicating quite clearly that what they indicate a short-term is roughly 10 years. that is somethi

but was sovereignty it is the way to go to relinquish some sovereignty i know people within the wto said they're still struggling to implement the regulations of what changed 20 years ago but after that was started and there are restrictions that is located is as good as the deal that you give up but take the swiss free-trade agreement with china. switzerland overnight drop 60% of the chair said china did not drop any because it is china against switzerland and that is politics and economics. i know how that makes life look better for us. >> with the sovereignty of trade and that seems to be the case that is coalescing in that seems to be diminishing. but is there anything in particular to reject more enthusiasm and energy. and not to say that is to be so much worse off. we can do we have always done there is no reason why we cannot continue to do that to get that strand of positivity in that geographical distance in with admission of defeat and a half of the commonwealth to be successful. but one thing we tried to avoid doing is that he said/she said but one thing i a binding accusingly

in short vietnam's wto membership allowed the communist government -- made it free to jail, torture and to abuse. the pressure was off. why would they not do so again? the communist leadership in hanoi will take our benefits you are our trade benefits, our security commitments, and continue repressing those seeking political reform and universal freedoms. the business of the communist party is staying in power, and repressing those who may challenge their power. they will not embrace human rights improvements or the rule of law unless it is a condition of better relations with the united states. vietnam needs the u.s. markets and security commitment much more than the united states needs vietnam's markets and security cooperation. administration should demand additional protection for human rights, internet freedom and the rule of law as a condition of u.s. assistances not doing so is short-sighted, misguided and fails to achieve long-term u.s. interests, and it throws the victims under the bus. one way to send an important message about u.s. policy priors is to pass the vietnam human r

forget about the wto. a strong leader like trump can do this. live with that. and i think all these guys, just to back up for a minute, they want party unity and, secondly, the recent polls are huge. look, you just had the reuters poll saying it's even with hillary. before you had that you had the quinnipiac poll, swing states, florida, pennsylvania, ohio even. >> no doubt about that. >> those anti-trump people who are saying trump will cause a landslide against the gop have no evidence. these polls are saying it's going to be a close race, not a land slide and trump is in very good shape. >> that's one thing, larry. but you've been a big backer of ryan for years. so when e.j. writes how can you support trump and call yourself a principled conservative? >> i love e.j. but rarely do i agree with him. he's a very bright guy. low tax rates -- >> you just said free trade doesn't work anymore. >> fairer trade, free but fairer. you've got pockets in this country that have been damaged by some of the free trade deals. pockets. overall i'm a big free tr

no real challenger to us future.foreseeable one of our strengths is the role institutions like imf, wto. these help america. they help us maintain security theyhe american people and strengthen america. i think that would be my answer to you on that. thanks for the question. coming forward with approaching ideas is really important. it's important to close the deal. problem, and at the i think the second is field and to he travel. hold the executive branch's feet to the fire. that.ys to do on the seams of foreign alicy where there seems to be crack. the other is through where here's been a problem to actually do some investigative -- thosecome back with that ie the three things committee.to the well for the united states. >> as a member of the appropriations subcommittee that the state department and foreign aid, i'll just mention senator graham has made a number of public comments. held a hearing on the on the cost of restabilizing countries like syria, iraq and continuing to hold together and ries like nigeria pakistan is going to be substantial. we need to engage in a thoughtful way

we have wto trading about $50 a barrel. we're watching the energy sector. retailers also in focus. number of them out with earnings and of course we saw strong resultswith dollar tree, dollar general but disappointing numbers from costco and weak guidance from williams sonoma. guess and abercrombie and fitch reporting results below estimates and weak guidance and we're watching the tech sectors, hp's results and netapp was under pressure and is expected to be under pressure today. >> thank you very much, mary thompson. let's head to the bond pits and join rick santelli at the cme group in chicago. rick. >> david, markets are pretty smart which mean there aren't really a market personality, it's all of the traders involved. look at the intra day of ten-year note yields. granted, the headline data today up 3.4 on durables preliminary april read was really good. but the market saw past that and concentrated on the fact that aircraft was up almost 65%. now, what that left you would, that aircraft, transportation, was up .4, which is sill better than we're anticipating. there's quite a

they had already agreed to put into effect a system by the transition period within the wto agreement. so in a way, the ballots was already over. argentina as india and other countries had agreed that they would start granting patents which created a monopoly on pharmaceutical drugs. it was just a question of when that would take place. and so the -- the congress wouldn't pass this law, because the domestic drug manufacturers were influencing it, so the white house was pressing the president of argentina to invoke a patent law through an executi executive fundamental iat. it was causing -- the idea that a president could dictate laws through executive orders and things like that was considered to be a step backwards in a dib at that timership, away from the democracy which is fairly new. i was struck at the time of the equation of democracy on the one hand and on the idea of, you know, the price of drugs on the other hand that the u.s. was jumping right the dispute we're involved in for columbia. tries to deal with an expensive drug for leukemia, general rated by $47 billion. not even

on the wto site. they are struggling to implement the arrangements that changed 20 years ago and so they are not even at the plaintif point of hg formed the negotiations so the idea that we could quickly turn around. even then there are some restrictions on the use of the state agency and others that have come up in the referendum. and that is the other model which is fine if you can negotiate a deal as one you are giving up. overnight switzerland dropped their taxes into china didn't drop any because that is the nature of the world politics and economics. i don't see any of the options that make life better for us in the options we have at the moment. >> we have a difficulty in the case and the big debates that we have a further sovereignty and trade it seems to be the case that seems to be diminishing and it is already an emotional case. is there anything in particular that they could inject for some more enthusiasm in scotland? >> the one that our focus has been on its trade in the economy and that

saying, and it's what other presidents have done, i'm going to sit down and i'm going to throw the wto because it doesn't work, right? i'm going to have bilateral negotiations with china, japan, and elsewhere. and i'm going to make tougher deals. and if i can't make tougher deals, i may have to use tariffs. i don't like to -- i've suggested something else. i believe you should sit down. if you can't make a deal, then you employ sanctions, particularly on specific companies. >> specific companies. >> which i don't like but are less harmful to the economy at large. look, we've had obama and w had 100% tariffs on steel. my guy, ronald reagan, 100%terrives on cap knees tvs, computers and what not. as a negotiating tool. one last point. i don't want to monopolize. we can change our policies. if we make america as competitive as possible and you know what i'm going to say, slash the business tax rates. slash regulations and we need a g-20 deal on currency stability. because begger thy neighbor currency wars are very bad. we should take that out. so there is an agenda here that we could use.

in short, vietnam's wto membership allowed the communist government free, made it free, to jail, torture and to abuse. the pressure was off. why would they not do so again? the communist leadership in hanoi will take our benefits, our trade benefits, our security commitments and continue repressing those seeking political reform and universal freedoms. the business of the communist party of staying in power and repressing those who may challenge their power. they will not embrace human rights improvements or the rule of law unless it is a condition of better relations with the united states. vietnam needs the u.s. markets and security commitments much more than the united states needs vietnam's markets and security cooperation. the administration should demand additional protections for human rights, internet freedom and a rule of law as a condition of u.s. assistance. not doing so is shortsighted, misguided and fails to achieve long-term u.s. interests. and it throws the victims under the bus. one way to send an important message about u.s. policy priorities is to pass the vietnam human

. >>> tesla plans to sell $2 billion wto overstock to ramp up its model 3.old by elon musk to cover his tax obligations. it l it be enough to give tesla enough of a cushion in the next year or so? axiom's gordon johnson is here with us, so is drew cupps who is a share holder in the shares. thanks for being with us. >> thank you. >> drew, gordon thinks the company will need $11 billion. >> yeah, i feel pretty good that this is going to get them a long way, whether they raise some money at some point in the future, i think that very well could happen but i don't think it's going to be for at least a couple of years and there's going to be a lot of proven success on the record before they would do so. >> you're not mad about being die lut dlu diluted? >> 5% dilution, i'd take that any day. >> gordon, on the spectrum, you're way off the charts at $11 billion. how do you get that number? that seems outlandish to the bulls. >> right. so i think the issue here is let's look at the giga factor. they raised $2 billion initially to ramp up the giga factory. we know th

trade agreement and they already agreed to put into effect a system of patterns on the drugs by the wto agreement so in a way that battle is already over. they agreed they would start granting patents for the pharmaceutical drugs. drugs. it is just a question of when that would take place and the united states wante wanted to ho happen roughly ten years before they were required under the wto rules. so the congress wouldn't pass the law because the domestic drug manufacturers were influential in argentina said the white house was pressing the president of argentina to invoke. argentina had just been a democracy a short period of time and it was causing a political crisis because the idea that they could dictate walls through executive orders and things like that was considered a step backwards in a dictatorship for democracy and i was struck at the time in the equation of looking at the democracy on the one hand and a pid of the price of drugs on the other hand the u.s. was jumping right in. now if you fast-forward that through today, right now, just this week there is a dispute we are

a wto type relationship for the financial sector.a financial stability perspective, it is not clear to thehat that changes severity of the risk to financial stability and would realistically, the level of activity, in financial services in this country, but that is a different issue, and i will leave it at that. >> thank you very much. this is bloomberg go. wrapping up the news conference over on the bank of england, with a packed press gallants -- gallery, dominated by the elephant in the room, the brexit debate. let's get you up to speed on where we are for sterling assets, u.k. financial markets. euro sterling, the stronger pound down about a third of 1%. switch up the board quickly, 11t yields rising a touch, straight days, 1.4 percentage yield on the 10 year, up about a basis point. the headline that a lot of news organizations will run away with, a prospect if there is an exit, u.k. decides to leave the european union, the prospect of a technical recession. he will talk about that, next with but now let's cross over to matt mil

are our leadership role in these international institutions, whether it's the imf or world bank or wto or the u.n. it's important to understand that these help america. they help us maintain security for the american people and strengthen america. so i think that would be my answer to you on that. >> senator, thanks for the question. on this committee, i would say three things. one is, you know, the coin offal realm -- or policy ideasings right? i think a steep exploration, and then coming forward with concrete approaches and ideas is really important. i think this committee is doing that in a variety of places. it's important to close the deal, right? we looked at the problem and now have a set of possible recommendations and policy ideas that we want to put forward. i think the second is to continue to be in the field, to travel, to learn what's going on. there's no substitute for that, frankly, as you know very well. and the third is, and secretary baker, as i am a -- hold the executive bramplg's feet to the fire. one is to press off seams of foreperson policy problems, where there

do you know since 2003 to 2014 the chinese has been posed antidumping in the rest of the wto than werkable. maria: you have the foreign problem and the americans need to follow the law and then you the technology problem. >> absolutely. maria: robotics. that's taking jobs as well. >> no question. and you're not going to stop that, guys, i mean, but we have to work hard and we have a wonderful workforce. don't turn your back on them. they want to be part. dagen: you're not a protectionist, you're a great american. >> well, i love america. maria: john, great to have you on the show. thank you so much. john bassett the third. how about the facebook, more adults thanever are chose to go keep mom and dad as roommates. stay with us tokyo-style ramen noodles. when you cook with incredible ingredients... you make incredible meals. fresh ingredients, step-by-step recipies, delivered to your door for less than nine dollars a meal. get your first two meals free at blueapron.com/cook . .. maria: good wednesday morning from everybody. it is wednesday, may 25th. 7:30 a.m. on the east coast. chaos

deal we'll be talking about at the meeting today, a trade facilitation agreement that came through the wtoakes to move goods around the world. we have beat the dickens out of the nafta agreement, but the fact is it's created all kinds of jobs here in the united states. the real issue that most people don't focus on is that what happened in the manufacturing industry all around the world and in this country as well is we have taken 40% of the jobs out of the process. information technology, robotics, process engineering, supply-chain management, and people see the result of that and think it comes from trade agreements. it doesn't. it comes from us trying to become more efficient so that we can compete with people all over the world. 95% of the people we want to sell something to don't live in america, and if we don't get more competitive, somebody else will sell it to them. >> i know. you can -- the chamber of commerce in watching the bernie sanders phenomenon, watching the donald trump phenomenon, the only thing is, the only reason i was telling you these things is that, you know, i see -

they were pushing nafta, the wto, pushing for intervention in bosn bosnia.hem every step of the way on the issues and yet we figured out a way to synthesize the two sides. for the most part, 95% of the time, it seemed like we got -- we were able to come together. but over the past 20 to 25 years, there has been a deep denial of the strong populist strain that sent people like me to washington, d.c., in '94, 2010, and 2014. it's exploded in 2016, hasn't it? >> look, the republican party, joe, has become increasingly reliant on high school-educated, white men that we haven't had policies to address the collapse of the american middle class. the effects of globalization, the offshoring of the formerly middle class jobs that gave a middle class lifestyle to the american men and women that made things with their hands. that worked on the assembly line. when we look back at the beginning of the campaign, we saw the trump number, the carson number, the ted cruz number, we saw 40 plus percent of the party is in open rebellion against the washington establishment. th

wanted it to happen 10 years before they were acquired -- required according to wto rules. the congress wouldn't pass the law, because the domestic drug manufacturers were influential in argentina. the white house was pressing the president of argentina to invoke anatent law through executive order. argentina had just been a democracy a short time. politicalsing a crisis in argentina, because the idea that the president could just dictate laws through executive orders and things like that was considered to be a step backwards, a dictatorship, away from the democracy which was new. i was struck at the time, just in the equation of looking at democracy on the one hand, and of the price of drugs on the other hand, the u.s. was jumping right into the price of drugs but there was a more important issue. fast-forward to today. week,now, this week, last there was a dispute we were involved in in columbia. they are trying to deal with a very expensive cancer -- cancer drugs for leukemia that has generated $47 billion through a swiss drug company. drug invented on charitable grants

basically you have to bring countries like china and emoerging markets into the wto and make them play think donald trump is hitting on is a sense on main street that the rules of the game for trade really haven't benefitted a lot of people. an important point. >> look what hillary clinton proposed on her economic plan. she says she is willing to raise the minimum wage tos 12ds, maybe even above to $15. tighten the tax code, close tax loopholes. make tax incentives to encourage training corporate profit sharing at a point where wall street regulators and prosecute firms that play outside of the lines. what do you see here? >> so hillary clinton is right to be focusing on the tax code where a lot of action is creating incentives for the financial system, for wages, for companies to do the right thing and take long-term positions. i think probably get criticism from trump around wall street still. she is somebody that wants to work within the existing dodd-frank, strerngthen it. i think trump will try and run to the left of her economically in some ways. >> is that right? >> a sort of a

to the wto as a violation of our obligations there. but they wouldn't wait the three years for the cases to run. they would retaliate in the meanwhile being fairly confident they would prevail in the case at the end of the day. so, if one means -- if one calls a trade war a retaliation of that type, as journalists frequently do, then, yes, you would have it. what my analysis suggested was two simple things. if you limit imports from a single country like china, those imports are going to be available in most cases from other countries. so, the reduction in u.s. net imports would be very modest. by contrast, the countries that we hit would retaliate against us. they could buy most of those products elsewhere. we would lose much more on the export side than we gained on the import side in the trade imbalance and job terms. so my headline in my piece was trump's trade policy a big loser for the united states. not that we're going to win again. but it would be a big loser for those fairly straightforward reasons. you've had your question.