of them in the back courtesy of books and books. before you leave please take out your credit card and buy a copy. we are thrilled to welcome important business leader in america but first i should say one of miami beaches most distinguished residents. hochberg. was chairman of the u.s. export import bank for the full tenure of president obama's time in office. his consequence has learned all kinds of lessons he's going to share this tonight. i am personally moved by fred's whole story, the story of his mother, lillian vernon, somebody i worked with for many years. will touch on that when he speaks. and how he helped transform her already incredible company into something much larger and more impactful. but having a mother of that same generation still alive, i am just amazed by that group of women who went off and did extraordinary things. and not having made my way through the first portion of his book, not to steal any of us thunder, but the idea that she bought an advertisement in 17 negative 18 in 191 just moves me deeply. and he may tell you about the impact of the ad itself. so with that please join me in welcoming. hochberg. [applause] >> guest: jonathan thank you i thought this was going to be much more casual with people sitting on the sofa. there are people sitting on the sofa but it's just not me. my book was published about ten days ago, and is mentioned books and books is selling it in the back. it makes a spectacular valentines gift. if you can't find that perfect gift this is it. and i will hopefully convince you of that in the next 15 minutes or so. so let me start with -- i will start with since jonathan heated up in the beginning of the book. i will talk about global trade and going beyond. my mother came to this country, lillian vernon, that was not her birth name. after three divorces she decided enough of changing my name over and over again. i'm going to take the name of my company. so she became lillian vernon after divorce number three. but they left germany in 1933, they move to amsterdam. it was the same year that anne frank left frankfurt. there about the same age. but my grandfather had decided he left his business behind that he was going to -- he knew we had to leave europe. he was a businessman and had some means, they look to palestine, then they looked at havana, and then he came to new york. he and his brother came to new york and summoned my grandmother and two children. my grandmother went to renew the visa and the counselor office was not knowing visas in 1937. but i think if they let you get on the vote you they will let you get off the vote. so they arrived in this country in 1937 when my mother was ten. her brother who is then drafted into the u.s. army and went back to germany to fight, and he died there in 1944 he was 20 years old. when they came to this country they changed his name to. and luckily they called me. as opposed to vic greider anything else. and it's just. thank god and not vic friede. it would not been been enjoyable going to life in high school with a name like that. briefly 30 had got the idea for writing this book is i was the longest-serving chairman of the export import bank. it was started by fdr in 1934. to support more jobs, because he realized during the best latest support jobs was to export more goods. and we needed a bank to do so. so i twisted fate, the first on the bank was chartered was to sell things to russia. the deal fell through so then they rechartered the bank when the very first transaction was actually minting american silver in philadelphia into coins for the government of cuba. of course, since then the export import bank is barred from doing any business with cuba. so it's ironic that the first transaction was with cuba and now that is off limits. that experience of working with him for eight years, and our job was to finance u.s. exports and support the job just like it was a 1934. what occurred to me over that eight year period from 2009 to 2017, what happens to that trade prayed what happens in the conversation about trade. how did trade get to be such a letter word. i was then offered, when i left the administration, to become a fellow at the institute of politics at the university of chicago and to teach a course to students. the students actually interview you to decide if you are going to be interesting enough. and let's be clear, i decided to teach a course on resetting trade agenda, nobody would be in this room let alone the classroom of 20 -year-olds. the history of the history of the export import bank and how would profit them. it would put me to it sleep. so i had to come up with what would be catchy to get a 19 or 20-year-old who might want to take time out of the date to come and make up with this title. i also learned from being a direct marketing business you have to have a really strong beginning. the middle can be okay and then have to have a very strong ending. so i made sure we had a couple great speakers in the very first couple classes that roped them in. so they said you missed a great class last week you have to come this week. so just a few overarching things. the title of the book is trade is not a four letter word. how six everyday products make the case for trade. here's a few products that tell the story of trade and how to import your life. they are important parts of your life but so easily mischaracterize and under misunderstood. and sometimes i think a little bit at our peril. a few of the takeaways, i will give you the takeaways the beginning in case you fall asleep or want to leave early. free trades his losers and politicians never want to acknowledge that. some people and some people lose, and we did a really bad job in this country of taking pair people who lost out people who lives were disrupted, whose sense of self-esteem, their communities were sort of emptied out, and we did not do very good job, we did a bad job of acknowledging that. and i think of many economists said well we are creating a million and a half jobs a year, so some jobs get lost by trade even if it's 20 to 25000, that's nothing compared. that is nothing unless you are one of those 25000 people. a lot of that was concentrated in places like ohio, wisconsin, michigan, and pennsylvania. that's a very smart group. what do those four states have in common every four years? every four years they have something in common. and i think that's part of nafta and trade very much in our american psyche. for such a long time and here we are in miami beach, it is not a surprise that a lot of the cuban population is in miami, and florida, if lord has been the battleground state. in our cuba policy has a lot to do with the geography of cubans in this country. so geography has a lot to do the trade issue and a lot of our politics. many people on both coasts have enjoyed all the benefits of trade. we have not had a firsthand experience of where it has been hurt for the worse. or if hollowed out communities and disrupted family lives. that is one of the things i talk about in the book. i don't want to give you all of the answers because i don't want to ruin the ending. another thing is, we have a lot of talk about trade deals like the transpacific partnership or the usmc a or the china deal. trade deals are really not about jobs. they are about labor rights, they are about intellectual property, they are about dispute resolutions between a cup business and a host country, there'll about a lot of things and not jobs. in the transpacific partnership that was the agreement between the united states had 11 other countries along the pacific, it is a 5000 page document, which i would not recommend, it does not read like a novel. the word jobs appears six times. two of the six times it talks about this trillion in japanese labor department. so there are four references to jobs and 5000 pages. oil has 11 mentions. so just a case in point there's not a lot about jobs. even if you look at what nafta was designed to do in 1994, it was signed by bill clinton, just had nothing to do with it. so trade is about jobs, exports are about jobs. but not trade deals. i think one of the things we're looking at now and i'm happy to address is the q&a, we, the united states we want to work with our partners and actually jon phillips is here. i remember being jon and linda's home in italy and their films shown about world war ii that a number of filmmakers had come and you look at the devastation of world war ii, and the united states took a leadership role in forming things from nato, the organization of economic cooperation and. all these things were to find ways to work together to make sure something as horrible as world war ii never happened again. we are in it. now, where we are pursuing a policy united states and much more unilateral. it's our way or the highway. you take our view or not. it's a very different way than we have operated for close to 70 years. it seems to work with the style of this president but is not the style we have used in the past to get things done. so let me give you a flavor of a couple of products -- i don't know does anybody have one of these iphones? [laughter] use the iphone in this book -- who did their 10000 steps today? [laughter] see i did. and i know judy you did 15. [laughter] hemi subsidy? fifteen. [laughter] so the iphone, the reason i put the iphone is is a talk about bilateral trade deficits. something the president is obsessed with. so the iphone was designed in the united states. the rare minerals that are used for the circuitry come from rwanda in the democratic republic of the congo. the chip that measures judy steps comes from the netherlands. the gyroscope that you can turn the phone this way or sideways in always proper that's from switzerland. the main mechanism of the phone actually comes from samsung, their biggest competitor in korea. the glass, which i frequently cracked, comes from new york. so this would not have existed without global trade. without a sense of trade moving around we would not have an iphone. it is assembled in china. and as a result, this is considered by the world, not just the united states as a chinese imports. so it comes to the united states, apple is very proprietary, big surprise. it costs about $230 for an iphone that comes united states and it sells for about a thousand dollars or $900. at the $230.846 something less than $10 actually goes to china. and yet, the full $230. phone or about 16 to $18 billion of our trade deficit from china is the iphone. and yet very small portion comes from china. so i use that example saying this is not a very good way to look at a bilateral trade deficit. i said the president is obsessed with it. i put in the book, a barber in washington when i lived there for eight years name omar. i took a picture of him and i just put on twitter. i run a substantial trade deficit with omar on an annual basis. he buys nothing for me. i am okay with that and he seems perfectly fine with it as well. we can't get very hung up on the trade deficit. when he go to the gas station you put 20 or $30 of gas in your car, you ran a deficit. yes. you got 20 to $30 of gas in your car. we get a lot of products from china and helps us keep inflation down. yes china has not been a good actor, yes they take advantage of the rules, yes they overly subsidize their favorite companies, and we need to address list issues. but they are not really villains, we as the global community, need to find ways to sort of put them in line. but this fixation, this obsession about bilateral trade deficit is wrong. if you look at the china deal that was just touted about in the state of the union we are going to listen to or hear, we are going to hear that this is the best trade deal ever done. the most -- i can't keep up too many superlatives to describe it. it is really a purchase agreement. if the purchase agreement because we got so concerned about the bilateral trade deficit and that's actually what the deal is about. having run the export import bank for obama, i am all for 10d to enter $50 billion of exports. but that's i would trade deal is necessarily about. that's one of the things i'm trying to cover in this book us to sort of give us a better understanding of those kinds of issues. so another example i will share with you, then i will give one more. is the most american car on the road today. it is not a chevrolet, it is not afford, and it is not a general motors. someone in the back of the room knows. it's a honda odyssey. and actually there is a book event a week of publication in washington, and an error instead of setting 75 books they sent 16 books. and that was discovered about five hours or so before the book event. so they said so they called uber and got a new bird driver to take 50 books down to washington and it went in a honda odyssey. that seemed appropriate. [laughter] i put the honda odyssey and to also make the case for what we don't even know it america product is. if you look at the top 20 most american cars on the road, all but three are either made by mercedes, honda, acura, or japanese company. so the chevrolet corvette, we think that's the most iconic american car is about number 1200. we have to reorient what corporate buy in america means. the lease american car you could probably buy as a chevy's part which is 1% us-made. in the first foreign manufacturer set up shop in the united states in a surprisingly research in the book was vw. 1949, four years after world war ii and they had imported a grand total of three vehicles. today, more people are employed by fine marks of automobiles. we have a truly global supply chain. we i visited one company and puebla, mexico where they make a shock absorbent brake pads. it's one of the reasons, from this globalized supply chain that we have saved the american auto industry. i don't know about you, but i remember many a car one is growing up the doors didn't fit well, the windows lease, it used to sputter a little bit after you turn the engine off for a little bit it just kept going on until stopped. as a result we created lemon laws. with the japanese competition in the 80s, we improved the competition made us chain up, get our cars better, and by this century american cars are as good as anything else. it is routine for cars to run over 100,000 miles. that was certainly not the case when many of us were growing up. after three or four years you had to trade in your car. so that is an example of where one globalized supply chain, and the fact that where these cars are made is very different from today. if you look at the ford mustang for example the transmission actually comes from china. the façade is assembled in the philippines is a korean transmission and yet it's in new york. the ford 150 truck the most iconic thing is i'm about 56% american. the rest is the honda odyssey. so plenty of just rethinking of what it means to be an american product. i'll close and then we will open up with one of my favorite products that's in the book is the taco bowl. and i put this in the book because donald trump made that taco bowl so famous. [laughter] when he had it on the cinco de mayo, which is more american holiday than a mexican holiday. the taco bowl, was actually invented at disneyland. i am at sea duel and was in texas and met a mexican immigrant who is living there they made taco pies. and bought the pants and brought it back to disneyland and decided to reshape it into a bowl, and hence the taco bowl was invented at disneyland. many foods chaps who he was invented here cabbage was invented here, many of these products with our foreign were actually invented here. taco bowl is the perfect example of that. you could not have a taco bowl that you could enjoy 365 days out of the year, kelley's be damned in alaska, maine, california for not for global trade. we now import 85% of our avocados because we are now eating so many avocados. we consume more avocados than raspberries or asparagus or anything else. and in fact, for super bowl fans, which is just eight or nine days from now, we will smash 140 million pounds of avocado on that one day alone. [laughter] a lot of guacamole and chips on super bowl sunday. so that we will see. the beef, we consume more beef than we protas. so we import beef. let us, we are familiar with the terrible e. coli epidemic. we had recently almost 99% of the lettuce that comes in this country is from arizona. swivet outbreak like that, it's thankful we have exports and imports so we can balance that need. you don't put in the taco bell, but one of the things i discovered is the blueberry. blueberries used to be in florida eugene enjoyed him in july and august maybe september. now we import half of them come from chile. as a result we consume double the amount of blueberries we did 15 to 20 years ago because we eat them every day. in this case the whole importing actually created a market it did not destroy a market. just like in automobiles the imports of a foreign car and the quality that they brought, actually saved the american auto industry versus left to its own devices. so with that one of my open it up for questions and we can just make this a conversation. >> yes, sir and who are you? >> i'm a lawyer in miami i'm sold on trade but why shouldn't. [inaudible] prioritize? >> guest: and the import export bank is able to do the job it does is because it provides a government guarantee of loans. so we make a loan, we guarantee the loan. so. [inaudible] >> guest: the full faith and credit in the unites his government makes those loans work. otherwise the private sector redo it. 's been maxi up in the taxpayer on the hook? >> guest: and i was there regenerated in profits literally a cash transfer from our checking account to the treasury of $3.8 million that is the excess. >> that's my argument should be a private company. >> we would not be able to do it as a private company. the facts bear able to make loans -- what borrowers need is the backing of the u.s. government. and frequently they trade -- we had a number of real deals and numbers the only in the specifications requires what they call an export credit agency support. if you don't have that backing you are not compliance. let me say this, 98 to 99% of the trade in this country is done by the private sector. this is only dealing with that which the private sector cannot or is unwilling to do. and just to give you that another data point, china has four banks that do the work of our export import bank. and in two years, they generated the amount of loans that it took import export bank 25 years to do. sophie really want to compete with china we want to go toe to toe with china, and even japan, germany and other exporters, that's what's required. you may not like it. in an ideal world you may not need it but i have not found that. >> it were minded me you mentioned in listening you start the china deal. [inaudible] we talked for the trade deal just completed. both administrations were therefore using trade as an instrument of policy. so, if you acknowledge the products are useful thing, and the benefit of globalization as such. what is your take on trade becoming used as a policy tool rather than what you just inserted its real value is? >> guest: i think trade is often been a policy tool. it does bring countries together. i saw this firsthand at the export import bank building things together, building rail systems, transportation systems together with u.s. companies, u.s. workers, and host countries. this created better ties with those countries and others. so certainly trade is important. right now we are also using trade as a weapon. and that is we are threating tariffs in europe unless they sign on with us for iran. that is a different level of trade. in the past it's been used to define things we can do together to find common ground versus as a club to exclude. demoting was unhappy with what happened with malaysian did like the criticism of the muslim and cut it off. trade can be weaponize that way. it's probably not -- i think there are better uses of it. i remember visiting pakistan as a representative the bank and the pakistani and businessman was much more anxious to find ways to do business. in many ways it might take some of the edge off of the two countries if they could find ways to trade. but that seems very far with this point. speak to linda's one of the people in this room who is unhappy with me. she want me to it write a memoir and i broke this book instead. so if you will forgive me. >> would be interesting to hear your view on weiser so much emotion around nafta and wiser so much difference between that and the new trade agreement? >> guest: there is the cartoonist named nick stevens who lived here in miami and sort of helped me. i remember this cartoon he drew in 1994 or 1995. i cut it out and i've always meant to track them down because i love to collect original cartoons. it shows a factory worker on a payphone from 19941995. he says i don't know i was in flint, michigan i heard a giant sucking sound and now i am in mexico. there's a budget cactus in the background. i called the new yorker, nobody answers the phone and tracked him down and said do you own the copyright but we don't own his copyright. i find his website, i find this website i e-mailed and it goes nowhere. i e-mailed a few friends here in miami and it turns out that nick stevens lives about 20 blocks away. [laughter] so we met at a coffee shop and i asked him to redraw the drawing and i paid import about the drawing. and the reason i tied that story is because ross perot using that line, that giant sucking sound, really stuck. nafta was dreamed up by ronald reagan because he was concerned about a united europe becoming much too much of a competition for the united states and was quite concerned you would not be able to compete effectively against the european union. so started by ronald reagan, negotiated by george bush but it falls to president clinton to get through congress. people think of nafta and president clinton. but it has other presidents before him to get there. so i think that image of ross perot captured people because it was a potent term. we had a lot of disruption. we had a lot of innovation and automation that was very disruptive to jobs. it's hard to separate that from trade. but i think the other reason is some of the places that were hit the hardest, without really support to get back on their feet were places there were key states, battleground states in presidential elections. so it comes up every four years as a result of that. so that's one reason nafta and trade really did a lot of it comes from that initial trade deal in 1994. >> what about the new agreement. >> guest: the new agreement i'm sorry i am very bullish on the new agreement for a couple reasons. one, 385 members of congress and 89 members of the senate voted for. we have never had such an overwhelming support on both sides of the iowa for trade deal. better never itself, i forget i have trade deals the past by one vote is so divisive and pits people against each other and parties, i don't think that's healthy for us. the fact that this had such overwhelming support is the first trade deal that was supported. that gives a lot of. it changes what will be the base at a minimum for future trade deals. and one of the aspects of it, is that if a company is not allowing workers to organize, and they are found to be in violation, their goods can be stopped at the border. that gives it much more teeth than it has in terms of making labor feel this is a more level playing field. that's the detail. i think the politics of it with such an overwhelming vote on both the house and the senate, is what gives me hope and change about that. and i think, the fact that donald trump is such a protectionist, it gave somewhat of an oddly colored even democrats we have the most part texas president ever. i can't be much more protectionist because he is gone right to the wall on that issue. see had people like cher brown, rosa dilorenzo others who have never trade deal before support this one. and i would say nancy pelosi greatly knew how to navigate this through congress. and make sure she got that support so there would not be so divisive. >> thank you for the idea, my wife is excited already. [laughter] [laughter] speed to said more in the last year in history on the tariffs. a lot of the opinions of who wins and who loses, what happens. could you shed some light on what those issues, who pays it, who collects it, what is the money go? >> guest: and nine part question. a quick history because i had fun with this. the very first bill passed by the continental congress was a tariff. because we had to pay the war debt. so from the founding of this country until 1913 lily actually had an income tax, that's how he funded the government. it was through tariffs. and they can be very distorted. so in some ways we discarded largely the idea that tariffs as a tool of revenue raising or public policy. it is rare in its head, but basically tariffs are somewhat of a discarded 20th century idea. but we have decided to revive and renovate in the 21st century. so there is a chapter in here on nist. we pay the tariff. the chinese do not pay the tariff, we pay the chair when the goods are imported and there is a 10% levy, the importer be at the manufacturer or the retail store or whatever, has to send a check to the internal revenue service, the tax service for 10% up to 25% is what has talked about. so at the very blunt tool, it's very hard to unwind. but we pay it. sometimes he gets indebted in, companies have told me that the tariff is five or even 10%, perhaps we can improve some of our process, may beget the importer to cut some corners and maybe change the quality. could be some products could be changed from glass to plastic or steel the plastic are some ways a shape cost. but we ultimately pay that tariff. i think one example in the book, we felt he had to protect the shoe industry years ago. two there's a tariff that generates about $12 million on primarily children shoes. there's a tariff right now is made you one or 2%. the tariff on shoes can run as high as 67%. children shoes are the one thing you can not hand-me-down. to know it in the shoes would ever think of letting a younger sibling where she is of their older siblings because shoes actually mold to your feet. so we have a tariff now generates $12 billion that's really a tax on parenthood. so why don't we get rid of it? because members of congress and where we can find a $12 million. we will have to raise taxes somewhere else. they don't want to raise taxes anywhere else. so still maintain that tariff and american companies paid overtime. kathleen. >> you just made a very interesting segue into, i think, the next gen argument. there's no question we live in a global economy and to anyone that says were going to cut off trade, we are not. but there are people that say it. there's a lot of criticism about the new agreement that just made it through. no mention of climate change. basically, no real coming to grips that this is a lot of corporate protection. so pharmaceutical companies to get to evergreen their products forever and ever in charge these astronomical high prices on things that really harm the public good. and i have to disagree with you that trade agreements are not trade, but trade agreements are currently negotiated with a lot of corporate power at the table. and without a lot of thought about what is public good. how do you change that? how do you advocate for trade, which i firmly believe is a part of our 21st century commerce, and not buy into these corporate protectionists agreements which lock-in things a lot of us really do want to support. it's the to the democrats i talked to in congress felt -- robert lighthizer did a very good job actively listening to their concerns and addressing a more them and the agreement that in the past. so i agree with you, certainly business interest, corporate interest tend to have an easier time finding how to communicate their -- there's no consumer advocates that have a constituency or an interest group. so that is certainly a challenge. the reason i think to give it's good is it did get people on board and got a much higher vote than we've ever seen before. but on the climate issue, i've heard in the negotiations that a lot of the environmental community wanted in the agreement that u.s. would be committed by law to rejoin. and i was told that was not going to get through congress. so part of it is also, this is a trade agreement, the usmc a that was negotiated by president trump and the republican administration. it's only going to go so far. it was not negotiated by president obama or someone who -- or more progressive person who would have a stronger interest in addressing those issues. i think it's the best we could get done at this time. i think there is a genuine concern of no agreement. i don't think it was real, but with president trump that is always a possibility. one thing about president trump, he makes sure he always has an exit ramp. and nobody else does. he always has an exit ramp for any policy or position he takes. it makes it much more difficult for other countries are the parties to have that same exit ramp. bonnie. >> could you spend a little time on intellectual property rights? as they pertain to the intelligence industry? >> guest: sure absolutely. thank you for that question because there is a chapter in here on the entertainment industry. there's a whole chapter on "game of thrones". the entertainment industry generates about $770 billion. it's one of the largest industries. about $200 billion in exports, one of our largest exports. one of the things that concerns about the trade debate that we are still talking about cars and trucks and airplanes. always are important, but we should be tagamet entertainment. we should be talking about education, we should be talking about legal services, financial services. a lot of the things that aren't -- we really excel at we never talk about those when it comes to the trade agreements. we seem to be less on the side their own devices so to speak. the movies we see, have very much a foreign market in mind when they are created because it's such a giant court part of that revenue comes from overseas. and in china it is very difficult to protect those copyrights. so -- one of the major issues that is left undone by the china's deal is how we are going to really enforce intellectual property. how are we going to enforce what we do the best at for designing and entertainment and making sure they don't get stolen. what they call technology transfer. technology transfer is things companies would not sell, that the chinese had taken. for example you cannot buy a coca-cola formula. it's not for sale. there are things the companies have that you cannot buy. and that's what china by forcing equity partners and partnerships they're able to extract those values of the companies. that is really what we have to address. and thirdly with china with tech transfer in the amount of subsidies they provide to our state on enterprises. i have a whole section of the book on glossaries you talk about ethel lees which is a state on enterprise. and it makes it very hard for u.s. companies to compete. certainly in china but even in the rest of the world. how to compete with that because they have a full forced from china. and while one of those examples. >> guest: that's organist cn phase two. the chinese have talked about greater respect for intellectual property because they are beginning to design their own products and they want protection for that. but we aren't going to really know that for a few years. i think we're going to have to wait and see. it really does -- it would help enormously if we could get the europeans and the japanese, and elster aliens and other trading partners to align with us. but we have not -- that's the problem when this aren't the beginning if we act unilaterally it's hard to narrow down. when i was in london, not that long ago to do some work on the book, in london there's a museum on the ground where winston churchill conducted world war ii. there's bunkers and everything else. there's a lot of churchill quotes. i stumbled on one i took a picture of it and churchill said the only thing worse than working with allies is working without allies. you know it's difficult, when you work with allies, think about working with your family just to go to dinner. you're lucky if you can decide on your own. you just might have to see other people are not happy. but finding a place that everybody can agree on, a time and everybody can agree on anna cuisine. it's challenging. at the same thing internationally. trying to get the europeans, the japanese, and everybody else have an agreement, is hard. but it's more resilient if you do that. >> a lot of negotiations that go on trade agreements, whether it's partnerships or. [inaudible] are about making things efficient. with products being sold between companies you have your own safety standard requirements here in america. you have different ones overseas. how do we come up with common standards? it's efficient, prices lower or is it a matter agriculture exports and imports have to have certain standards of quality. everybody benefits from that. but we do know, take nafta for example, labor crops are just lower. four dollars an hour $5 an hour, $20 an hour, labor costs bring things down as we get more recognition. when is it ever appropriate for our congress for our country to say look what we can obtain in ten years, we are going to lose x number of manufacturing jobs. if we don't do something to deal with the balance of cost. let's protect this industry. when is it appropriate to do that? the goal should be no tariffs but. [inaudible] >> guest: sometimes we need a real crisis to make that change. i want to say two things the transpacific partnership and the transatlantic trade and investment partnership. you notice free trade has been left out and has been expunged because of bad board as well. it's a four letter word. and jon is absolutely right. the idea of trying to harmonize those agreements, whether it's for auto parts, a big issue in every trade deal is chicken. we as farmers we made the chicken and chlorine to safeguard to make it healthy. the europeans feel that allows for shoddy environmental conditions at the different farms. said they refuse to accept those chickens. the incidence and salmonella is far less in our country that it is in europe. but frequently there are traditions and standards and interest groups, we have in our own country and not there and it makes it much more difficult to harmonize the system. so we could have a common standard ready for cars, chickens, or -- the real frontier is behind the whole visual area. jonathan never trying with this earlier today, the united states and china seem to be going their separate ways on how we are going to deal digital and the idea of having two separate systems globally, one that may be with a lot of authoritarian government and one more free-market and liberal democracy is not a good prospect for the next ten or 15 years. i'm with you, we have to find a way. we have to be tough with china but we have to find a way to work with them. because that's not a good path for us to go down. it's going to make things much more difficult. we have this horrible virus outbreak in china right now. we have to find a better way to work together versus finding ways to keep separating ourselves from other parts of the world. >> despite this vote we just had an overwhelming majority from both parties, the trade is still a four letter word. and we have had officials on both parties that when talking about free trade, they are very anti- free trade. it's really hard to make the case, even though in looking on the merits it seems pretty clear. going forward, what is your advice to elected leaders and those trying to make a case for free trade, so we can see more agreements. >> guest: i think the disruption to people's lives and communities that trade -- partners done by trade somebody needs to be blamed. we are going to see this not much geographically concentrated when it comes artificial intelligent and greater automation. so we need is a country to find a way we are going to make sure -- i met someone when i researched the book, robert holloman who worked at the united states trade center said we needs lifelong readiness. lifelong learning, most people still to this day, they finish school they are 18 or 22 and they go i am done. and she said to me. you need to go back to school for a year end learn japanese or chinese or german or something. i said is there plan b? [laughter] but life long readiness you have to be prepared for a hurricane, a have to be prepared when things come your way. so to talk to people about being lifelong ready, how are you keeping yourself, your skills up, your ability to change jobs, change careers, and making that part of our dna. how we think about ourselves. is one way of trying to rebut that. we have a problem with the term social safety net in this country. the problem is the first word. [laughter] that is another four letter word. i could do a whole series of words on four letter words. so we need to sort of -- what my blame is pay have to be honest with it. people did get hurt, if we said they going to get hurt him here some things we can do to help you and support you, but to say trades away and when nobody gets hurt. they sat on the what these people are talking about. that makes me angry because they are actually denying that i lost my job or my community got devastated. therefore the schools laid off people therefore the fire department didn't have income in the police department. if we can be honest about it and then say it's a support system. that changes it. and i think that is what we need to be looking at. because the changes that are happening are faster and faster. one hundred years ago, 75% of americans were in agricultural. it took in a long time to be below 5%. and that's in a hundred years. things are changing down five years. has her time i've no idea. >> host: you're doing great. >> guest: alright thank you, thanks for coming and thanks for the discussion. [applause] >> here are some of the current best-selling books according to newsmax. topping the list in 100 bible verses that made america, robert morgan argues that the bible played an important role in america's founding. after that, his npr host steve in perfect union, dual biography of 19th century political power coupled jesse and jon fremont's. that's followed by scott mcewan and hoffman williams novel the trigger mechanism. then, pastor and former southern baptist convention james merritt offers his thoughts on the importance of character over reputation and character still counts. and wrapping up our look at some of the best-selling books according to newsmax, is james manz look at the relationship between colin powell and dick cheney and the great rift. some of these authors have appeared on book tv. and you can watch them online @booktv.org. see. >> book tv recently the home of psychotherapist jeannie saver and richard