Terre hello, this big problems, big thinkers. Im terre blair. In this series, we confront the greatest problems facing the human race and we examine each issue by asking if there is an ethical framework to help us solve them. To do that, well hear from an Extraordinary Group of leaders as they search for answers and perhaps inspire us collectively to take action. In this episode, threats to our economic future. After the world Financial System teetered on the brink of collapse in late 2008, many new policies were put in place. And youll hear about those. But what about other changes, in values, motivations and incentives . After all, markets rise and fall and rise again. But what are the lessons about markets and ourselves that could mitigate the economic pain . So many lessons, but what have we actually learned . Warren the fall of 2008 was different than anything any of us had ever seen. It was even more extreme what was going on immediately demand what had happened in 2000 in 1929 or the subsequent depression in a big way. The train came close to a stop and now it is again regaining speed. So that period was a big lesson to people who operated on leverage and demonstrated the interconnectedness of our system. And it demonstrated the destructive aspect of certain kinds of incentives and that sort of thing. We came to a time where situationally i could if i were , a bank, give a mortgage to somebody that wanted to buy an 850,000 home and show no income. People who shouldve never taken out mortgages, took out mortgages. People who never should have given mortgages, were giving them. People who should have not bundled them into bonds and selling them all over the world, bundled them into bonds and were selling them all over the world. People who were stamping them aaa, even though they were garbage, never should of been stamping them aaa and labeling them that way. They were doing what was legal, ok . And it all blew up. And when it blew up, the Collateral Damage has been devastating. Michael people just didnt want to pay attention. The big mortgage crisis came about when the banks took mortgages, put them together and sold the package. They were sold to professionals, the trustees of pension funds, mutual funds and of corporations. These are sophisticated people, supposedly, and if they are not then they should have never had those jobs. They looked at those and knew exactly what was in these packages. It was all disclosed. They looked at them and said, the ratings are aaa. They are only aaa if everything did not go wrong at the same time. But they bought these things and when they had higher yields, they had to stop and think this must be highyield because it is riskier. But nobody wants to blame themselves, oh i took a risk. The famous Charles Prince quote who is running citibank at the time and he said when the music is playing, you need to get up and dance. So when every other major bank is doing this and earning incredible quarterly profits, that the shareholders are celebrating and the board of directors is applauding, if youre the guy that stands up and says, i will behave sustainably and we will not do that, that becomes professionally risky. We got into a very shortterm loop. There were banks that did the right thing. Thomas jpmorgan did not get anywhere near as caught up as other banks. And at the time, no doubt the beings looked at as stodgy. Could we have foreseen it . Yeah, there were a lot of people that saw it. But who is going to stop making of making too much money and you will collapse. Stop selling your product. Sell your house for a lower price because if you sell at a higher price, the next person has more leverage built in and it is more dangerous. We wanted everybody to have a mortgage, whether they could afford it or not. Michael so freddie mac and sallie mae and Companies Like this the quasigovernment , organizations, they encouraged everybody, encouraged the banks make the loan regardless. If you do not make the loan to people who cannot afford it, you are discriminating against people. And all of us are guilty. We wanted to help everybody. But there are no quick simple answer and we tried to create and you create a bubble and then one. The bubble collapses. We have had bubbles throughout history and they manifest themselves in various ways, whatever it may. Warren and we will have them in the future. Human beings, we get smarter about a lot of things in terms of how to produce things and become more productive. We do not get rid of the basic human emotions. And greed and fear will always operate the same way. Thomas you are dealing with a balance of greed and fear, greed and fear. And every decade or so, greed gets out of context and eventually leads to enough fear and something blows up, and we all say, how could we have been so stupid . To go back and revise history and say i did not know, you are a professional, you should of known. The information was there and common sense says if you are earning more, you are taking more risk. Michael i think if you look back at bob steel and people like that that went to treasury, saved the country because the rewriting of history says you bailednot have failed out the companies. To not bail out the Biggest Companies and banks is ridiculous. You have no choice but to do that. Where they overleveraged . Yes. But everybody wanted them to be overleveraged and congress was as guilty as everybody else. And we live in a world where somebody else has to be guilty, has to be somebody else. So we go after the bankers, which we avoid done. Hardly without sin, the worst thing they did was none of the documentation and those kinds of things. But they were part of something that everybody wanted. We wanted the world to keep expanding and the good times to keep rolling. And until one day they dont. If you look at 2008 and the institutions that failed or came close to failure. If you take aig and citigroup and Washington Mutual and freddie mac and fannie mae, the stockholders of those companies lost hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. Warren citigroup did not go under, but when the stock holders lose 90 of their value, it really does not make much difference if you have 1000 invested and you end up with 100 or not. So there is my view, there has been no moral hazard created for stockholders by the fact that the government came in and rescued those institutions. The moral hazard exists i think with the top executives who walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars and really did not pay the price for the failure. We had bigger and bigger Financial Institutions that had all kinds of activities where their problems became other peoples problems. And then we had improper incentives, we had people running the huge institutions whose upside was lots of money and glory, and the downside was still a lot of money and no glory. One point my teacher makes, when youre in a world that is a flat and technically interconnected, it is also ethically interdependent. Thomas because when greek bankers basically were going nuts, giving mortgages to greeks to build their third Vacation Home or their second swimming pool, whatever theyre doing [chanting] suddenly blew up and you discovered your portfolio was down 5 because people were worried whether greece could default or pay back all of these sovereign debts they had accumulated, you said wait a minute. , im not technically interconnected with them, i am ethically interdependent. That can really affect your 401 k and your happiness, not to mention retirement here. So, we all have to think much more globally. Warren trust makes the world function better. Commerce without trust is very awkward and we saw that in september 2008, 30 million americans in a time of a week lost trust in the money market funds and the government had to guarantee those funds. But if you have 30 million , americans that believe something to be the case in august and in september where their money was, they dont see it anymore, the train comes to a halt pretty darn fast. So a functioning, trustworthy Economic System worldwide is a huge plus and it is even more of a plus for those countries who have not had it. We are used to it in the United States. Terre do you believe that International Financial stability is essential to world peace . Michael we will never have perfect International Financial stability. People will continue to make the mistakes theyve made in the past, small variations. You know what mark twain said, history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. That is a much financial history. Terre as Warren Buffett says, we will never have perfect International Financial stability. That is the history of markets. But can individuals create a financial future that will improve upon that history . Can investors governments and , political leaders transform values to mitigate the pain of future crises . That is next on big problems, big thinkers. Do we really have to pass a law that tells bankers, you cannot give a loan to someone who cannot pay it back . I have 20 iq points over him and he is getting rich and im not. That drives people crazy and it will continue to drive people and 5000 years from now years from now. As soon as you had two cavemen with caves, one of the does is cable look bigger . Why does he have shrubs it, and we dont . I compare you to me. Terre welcome back to big problems, big thinkers. I am terre blair. After the near collapse of global markets, Alan Greenspan said no two crises have anything in common except human nature. And that is where we pick up h pullets are prizewinning journalist thomas , friedman. What part did we as individuals play in what went wrong, what can we do better . Thomas when someone comes to you selling you a Home Mortgage and telling you the only thing they need to do is check if you knife, and not show your income statement, that is a pretty good sign that it sounds too good to be true. It usually is. Also, should we really have to pass a law that tells bankers, you cannot give a loan to someone who cannot pay it back . I mean do we need to pass a law , to do that . Thomas so people were doing such manifestly unsustainable things because they always ipg or ypg,t i call i will be gone or you will gone. I will do this mortgage, because i will be gone. I will package this into 1000 bonds, i will sell it to somebody and i will be gone. They pawn it off to another Investment Bank in france and they will be gone. You cannot pay for your house now that the money is actually due, no problem. Just sell it, because we know that house prices only go up. Then you will be gone. So we are all practicing these values basically. It was an epidemic of that. The people that got big institutions into huge trouble , which is sent not ripples, but world, theyund the got away with a lot of money. Warren that should not of happened. We need a greater balance of incentives. If they are running a bank or some other large institution, so important that the government needs to save it because it needs to save the economy generally, those people in my view should be bankrupt if they screw things up. And that has not happened. Terre even though we will have bubbles and we have always had bubbles, do you believe people have the ability to transform their values . Michael i would be fairly pessimistic about people learned to control greed and fear any better in the future than they have in the past, but this them in trouble what gets them in trouble is the fact that a fellow goes home at night and a neighbor is making money easily and his wife reminds him that that man is dumber than he is and he is making more money with stocks or he has been financing more than he can handle, but nevertheless looking at that guy and thinking i have 20 iq , points over him and he is getting richer and im not, that drives people crazy and will continue to drive people crazy 500 years from now. I think it will be very wind ourt to un materialistic impulses, partly because it is tied to something very basic. As soon as you have two cavemen with caves, one of them looked at the other and said why is his , cave bigger . Why does he have shrubs and we dont . I look at you and i compare you to me. People who make a lot of money in our country tend to trade in some of their money for other kinds of rewards, including the rewards of honor that come from being recognized as a great philanthropist. A muddle thate is comes when there is a conflict between doing the thing that will bring you honor and the thing that will bring you money. In many cases. And i have a name for this, the Bernie Madoff problem. He was an american financer, a man that invest money for other people. And he was incredibly honored and all the time he was cheating people. He was someone that was getting money and honor for doing something profoundly antisocial and dishonorable, then he was caught fortunately. Kwame you want to create a world which encourages people to be successful and do things that are worth doing. And finance is necessary and worth doing. But you want them to see that money is not the way to measure, measure your life. There is always tension between the market system and unleashing it while at the same time not causing it to go to excess. Warren we learn certain things need to be controlled and we will learn that other systems will unleash potential of humans. And different societies will come at it in different ways. The chinese are coming at it in a different way than the u. S. You will see that around the world. But i think overall we will , learn more from others and their successes as time goes by. Humanity as a whole will be 100, 200 years0, from now. This is not a zerosum game. If somebody discovers penicillin in the United Kingdom it crosses , borders and does some good. So we want the rest of the world to prosper. We should want it anyway as human beings, beyond that there is a utilitarian aspect to wishing the world well. Because you do not want the United States to be an island of 300 Million People doing magnificently well, 6 billion people are sitting there in the envious of us. Money is a powerful force. I would argue it is more powerful than nature in some ways, just because of the economic forces. We do a bad job often in attributing an accurate value to something and the economic crisis is a perfect example. Somebody created fake value out of something that did not really have value. And eventually it was going to crash, which is what it did. The dow had its biggest job drop ever falling a little , more than 777 point. We do not want to have banks that are too big to fail. We want gigantic banks, because that is the only way to compete in the world and Fund Companies that will create the jobs you want and a better life for all americans and people around the world. Michael so instead of keeping the banks from being able to make money and with that money make loans and take risks, what you have to do is find ways to protect the banks from going under. Have an insurance policy in case they do. But not keep them, not try to change them so that they cant possibly go under, because then they cant do their function. Terre right. Michael they are a very important part of the function, and unless somebody finances development, there is no development. There is no way to create jobs and wealth and good lives and good Education Systems and good governments that depend on tax revenue in the future. One thing we know about growth is it is not everything, but it is the source of all good things. In the sense that you have a growing economy people are more , relaxed and open to new ideas and open to cooperation. They are dividing a growing pond. When you do not have growth, people are competing over a shrinking pool. And they will get more snarly, angry and probably racist, more homophobic people will use whatever emotional hooks they can together piece of a shanking shrinking pie. So growth is very important to the underlying climate of the whole discussion. I think we need to think more about growth with a quality, e quality, rather than the inequality based growth that we have seemed to have been good at creating in the last few years. Thinking about anything that makes a radical change in how we live our lives, faced with this problem, that there are going to be winners and losers. Kwame and the people that are currently winning risk becoming losers if we change the game. So that they have an interest in keeping things the way they are. I am concerned that we are burdening society with so many rules to protect ourselves from every eventuality that it does not work. The real world is full of risk. And if you want to prevent all risk, then you do not have anything. Warren i send out a letter every two years or so to the managers at berkshires, and i basically say, do what is legal obviously, but also do not do anything you would not be happy to have written on the front page of the newspaper. And i tell them one other thing, look if the reason you are doing it, the reason you give me why you are doing it is everybody , else is doing it. That is not good. If that is the best you can come up with, there is something wrong with what you are doing. It is not can we do it . It is should we do it . It is important in all aspects of life. Ive heard more dumb things rationalized by the fact that the other guy is doing it and i tell them, if it is close to the line it is over the line. Nobody can see the line that well. Im 80 years old and my eyes are going bad so do not do anything , close to the line. It makes me nervous. Terre the post Crisis Response has included lines upon lines of new laws and regulations, including increased capital and liquidity positions for financial firms. Yet the question remains, after the financial equivalent of a neardeath experience for global markets, are individuals around the world, enough individuals, close to being able to say when enough is enough . The answer to that question may determine how many are hurt when , not if, the next crisis comes. I am terre blair and thank you for watching. That are Sleeping Giant all over the world. John im john heilemann. Mark and i mark halperin. With all due respect to donald trump, we are getting the impression you are a one trick pony. Donald trump is not a true conservative. Donald trump is not at 50 . For mitt romney. Donald trump shouldnt run. Conservative egghead. Donald trump. A couple of papers. Glenn beck. Lindsey graham. Donald trump strategy doesnt work. Donald trump wants to let japan go nuclear. Donald trump doesnt like nato. Donald trump will never run. I do not know if he will win. He wont do well. He shouldnt be allowed on the debate stage. Donald trump is in christian. Isnt christian. Donald this, donald that. Hillary clinton, donald trump, donald trump. Donald trump. Donald trump. Donald trump will not become the president. Mark on the show tonight, a clinton speech on economic inclusion, and a poll of high income voters. But first, we start with yet another Police Shooting that has captured the nations attention. Protests the rep did yesterday in charlotte, north carolina, after police shot and killed 43yearold keith scott. Police say he emerged from his vehicle with a gun. Scotts family has disputed the accounts, claiming he was unarmed. After that, demonstrations turned violent last night as protesters vandalized businesses, threw rocks at police, and at one point, blocked a highway. All of this happened a day after police in tulsa, oklahoma, released a video showing an officer shooting an unarmed africanamerican man, who appeared to have his hands in the air when he was shot. While campaigning at a church in ohio, Donald Donald trump was asked about the footage. Donald trump to me, it looked like he did everything he was supposed to do. And he looked like a really good man. Maybe i am a little clouded, because i saw his family talking about it after the fact. You get a different image, maybe. But to me, it looked like somebody doing what they were asking him to do. And this young officer, i dont know what she was thinking. I dont know what she was thinking. But im very, very troubled by that. I am very, very troubled. [applause] we have to do we have to be very careful. These things are terrible. That was, in my opinion, that was a terrible situation. And we have seen others. We have seen others. The police are aware of that, too. By the way, the police are troubled by it. They look at it. Did she get scared . Was she choking . What happened . Maybe people like that, people choke, maybe people like that cant be doing what they are doing. Mark Hillary Clinton also commented, she took a moment in her speech in orlando to address the matter as well. Hillary clinton there is still much we dont know about what happened in both incidents, but we do know that we have two more names to add to a list of africanamericans, killed by Police Officers in these encounters. It is unbearable. And it needs to become intolerable. I have spoken to many police chiefs, and other Law Enforcement leaders, who are as deeply concerned as i am, and deeply committed as i am to reform. Why . Because they know it is essential, for the safety of our communities and our officers. Mark how do these latest pair of Police Shootings of africanamerican men seem to be impacting the president ial race and how are the candidates , handling the situation . John we talked about this yesterday, before the situation in charlotte. We only knew about the tulsa shooting. This is the second time now in the last couple of months, there have been more than one such Police Shooting, and they have broken through in a significant way. Obviously, this is a huge problem in cities across the country. It is a challenge for both candidates. I thought both donald trump and Hillary Clinton handled it pretty well. Trump taking a different line than he has taken sometimes in the past, a little bit different from what his Campaign Manager and his president ial running mate took, expressing more sympathy for the victim. And of course, Hillary Clinton talks about it with great fluency. I think they are both handling it well. I dont know what the impact will be, but it will continue to be a topic of discussion, so long as these events keep happening. Mark theres no question that trumps remarks were more striking than clintons, not because he spoke with more compassion by any means, but because they were a lot different than the way he has talked about these matters. I think it is great in the face of tragedy for both of them to take time to talk about it, to reflect on it, and to give us a sense of the kind of leaders they would be if they were president , of how they would deal with it. It is pretty clear, although there something of a National Debate about remedies, it is a part of the will be debate for a long time. John one of the questions, as you see what Hillary Clinton does, a lot of suggestions about a systematic problem. One that is related to race and racial bias, it is not a mystery that a lot of the victims have been africanamerican men. In some cases, justified by Police Shootings, and many cases, unjustified or apparently unjustified. Certainly, it qualifies there. Hillary clinton talked about it in a more comprehensive way, and as you point out trump taking a , different tone today, it will be interesting to see where it goes. With fewer than 50 new cycles left before the big day, Hillary Clinton seems to be making a slight shift in her messaging plan. Instead of only trying to disqualify donald trump, she is adding a positive track, talking more about herself, what she has done, and what she would do as president. That is exactly what we saw today with her speech in orlando, florida, the focus of which was helping people with disabilities be a bigger part of the workforce, as an example of her broader goal of what she calls an inclusive economy. Hillary clinton first, we will focus on jobs and incomes. I will fight to get more americans with disabilities the chance to work alongside those without disabilities, and do the same job for the same pay and benefits. [applause] second, we will work with colleges and universities to make them more accessible to students with disabilities. Third, we will partner with businesses and other stakeholders to ensure those living with a disability can get hired and stay hired. As part of that, we will launch a new effort we are calling autism works, to help people with autism succeed in the workplace. [applause] fourth, lets build on the success of the americans with disabilities act, by finally ratifying the United Nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. [applause] john long before that, clinton started her day with an oped in the new york times, framing the president ial race as a choice, between an economy that works for everyone, and an economy that works for a few with the expense of everyone else. We have talked a lot about how clinton has struggled to articulate her own theory of the case of where the American Economy stands and what will happen with it. We are not the only ones that have noticed that. A brandnew National Poll has clinton with a seven point lead among likely voters in a twoway matchup. 48 to 41 . The margin shrinks to six points in a fourway race. But when asked who would be better for the economy, more registered voters said trump over clinton. 46 40 1 . Mark, you were down there in orlando at Hillary Clintons speech. How do you think she did . Mark she did just fine in terms of speaking from her heart, talking about her mothers life, to try to explain to people her perception of the country. She talked a lot about people with disabilities she has known. It was a very moving speech, and in some ways, but it does highlight the fact that she continues to not reach for a way to bring all the strands together, and talk about how she would be a great president. It is a real vulnerability for her. While she spoke from the heart today, and it was a serviceable speech, and she spoke about issues that were important, i still think she is monarch model shes vulnerable. Trump talks a brash game. On jobs right now, voters are looking for brash. John i think there is still work for her to do, and theres no question she will make an , inclusive economy the broad theme under which she wants to flesh out her theory of the case. She has a lot more work to do, because it is a potentially powerful theme, but she has not yet laid it out with the clarity she might. But it is potentially powerful. The problem for donald trump, i agree, he talks tough on jobs, but as you know, many economists think that trump is by far the weaker candidate when it comes to economics. Voters do not. So the question is whether hillary can build her own argument, and lay there the weaknesses in his economics arguments, that a lot of professional economists see. Mark i have been watching her since the early 90s. This is her last event before mondays debate. At least as of now. I think reading her body language and her presentation, i think her head is in a very good place. I think she feels she has a pretty good balance between talking about herself, and her own vision for the country, and also trying to take down donald trump. So if i were her, i would be encouraged from what today suggested about the debate. August fundraising numbers are out. The headlines are many. It was the best month yet for both Hillary Clinton and donald trump. Clinton raised 58 million in august. Donald trump raised 41 million. Remarkable, given that it was summertime, when people are not necessarily attending fundraisers. There was a pretty wide spending disparity. Clinton outspent trump nearly 21. Clinton also has twice as much cash on hand, although team trump is doing a victory lap, because they raised 12 million in small donations. And that is 4 million more than clinton raised with under 200 donations. By comparison, barack obama raised much more. Bad news for trump, Sheldon Adelson has given money, but most of it not to trump. His cash is being directed almost entirely towards helping other republican candidates. A little bit went to a Group Supporting trump. So john, on all these bullet points, which one do you think will have the most implications for election day . John there are two links once. Linked ones. The one to me that matters the most always is cash on hand. The fact that clinton has not just more cash, but substantially more, puts them in a better place. Obviously, the Sheldon Adelson news will make the most headlines, because thats a big and flashy name. As you said, the Trump Campaign spent a lot of time courting him, but that is not going to be supplementing trumps relatively meager cash holdings. That is a problem for him going forward. Mark when we get down to it, if it is a close race, the battleground states, the question will be, can the combined forces of the Trump Campaign, which has less than the Clinton Campaign and the , rnc, produce a competitive grant game based on a doozy of and efficiency . They say there are confident they will be super competitive. You hear that in other battleground states. But it is an open question. The proof will be on election day. Are they technically efficient enough, wellfunded to be competitive with clinton . John a huge question. We will know in fewer than 50 days. [laughter] when we come back, Campaign Managers and the art of dodging questions, after these words from our sponsors. John like a lot of news programs, we have extended an open invitation to president ial candidates who want to come on the program. Hillary, donald, there is always a chair waiting for you. More often, we get to ask our pent up questions to strategists and surrogates. Here is the problem. When it comes to policy questions, we dont always get a clear answer. Take the Clinton Campaign chief on morning joe today, was asked about his bosss policy on syria. It was a mistake to draw the redline, if the president was not willing to do something about it when it was crossed. As you pointed out, the decision regarding that was made after she was out of office, so i think you would have to ask disappointed when the president did not act when the line was crossed . You would have to ask her that question. You are here to speak for her. You have not discussed that . You can go on the website and read the full plan. I think you will have to ask her that question, about her policy. Im going to let her statements speak for themselves. Arent you here representing her point of view . I am indeed and i will let her language speak for itself. John that was not great, but it is not just robbie mook who has problems. Listen to Kellyanne Conway on sunday, when she was asking asked about her boss being a birther. How and when did donald trump conclude that the president was not born in the United States . You have to ask him that. He advocated something for five years that was a lie. Why did he do that . You are going to have to ask him. John today, after that interview, clintons Campaign Manager got a little assist from the guy who had worked with president obama. Not to make new policy. Know the difference. My question for you my friend, is whether david is right or wrong . Mark he is one quarter right. Its true, these are political operatives, not policy people. But they constantly come on these programs and say why are , you obsessed with politics . If they can only answer political questions, then they should expect political questions. They should also answer questions that people are interested in. It includes matters of controversy. I find it ridiculous that someone with a title Campaign Manager would take the position ask mr. Trump, unless shes willing to produce him. I think it is a bit of a charade. I get it, but they are going to have to accept the fact that if they are political people, they should expect political questions and not criticize us for asking policy questions. John i think they should answer policy questions and political questions. They are missing a person or one of the two senior people on the campaign and they have spent a lot of time with their candidates. They are asking, what do the candidates take about x . David mischaracterized it and said, it is not their job to make a new policy. It is not new policy. Hillary clinton wrote about what she thought about the redline in her book. Has he read the book . He should be able to say what her point of view was. In Kellyanne Conways place, she spent all last week talking about the birther comments. She must have some idea about what his thinking was. Mark and lets be realistic. They often almost always say the same answer, when they dont want to answer a tough question. John correct. Exactly. That is their chosen form of obfuscation. They should stop doing that. Up next, we will talk more about what Hillary Clinton and donald trump said on the campaign trail today, with two esteemed, amazing, incredible political journalists. We will be right back. Mark the best political reporters in america join us right now. Both from washington dc. Thank you for being here. Dan, start with you. We will ask the same question. How do you think, based on the performance of the candidates at this week, and into the debate monday, how do you think they look in terms of fighting for the showdown . I think they both need a lot of work and practice in the next few days. Hillary clinton will be down much of that time, between now and the debate, going through rigorous practice, and probably a series of mock debates. Donald trump will do it his own way, which will be, i wont call it relaxed, but it will be different. He will not cram himself full of facts and figures, but he will have a sense of the strategy he wants to take into the debate. I think both of them have to be a little bit nervous, because this is a more unpredictable environment. The topics are very broad that lester holt has laid out. And we dont quite know what donald trump will be like. So i think there has to be nervousness on both sides. Mark margaret, how do you think they are headed, trajectory wise toward monday . I think what we are seeing with clinton this week is she is certainly trying to project a really sort of calm, prepared, paced approach. Sticking to the facts. Her appearance at the u. N. , showing off her state like credentials. She wants to try to remain unflappable, just as much to convince herself she can do that on monday, if anything else. If she can keep that up, and go in there as, im not going to take the bait kind of mode i , think that is what she wants. Thats the reason why everyone in the world is going to tune in, to see if she can pull it off. John in terms of what you know about how they are dealing with debate prep, how do you think shes actually, technically speaking, going about the process of trying to get ready for the unpredictability of donald trump . In many ways, i will give educated guesses. We know a lot more about what shes not doing, than what she actually is doing. They have been careful about not sprinkling in as many details as we want. But we know shes not off at a resort outside of las vegas in debate camp. We know shes trying to avoid president obamas ritual, and some of his mistakes from 2012. And we know that the way she has traditionally done debate prep is to go through everything. She knows what her own policies are, to review her own work to review what her opponent has said and done in the past, and to be prepared not only to defend her own positions, but to be able to check him and cost cross him if either she says something he knows is not true, or the debate moderator fails to go in that direction. I would love to tell you if she has some room in her house, and shes watching videos, or in the kitchen, we dont know a lot of those details. The campaign is holding that really tight. John dan, you made a comment, you said something saying that , donald trump might be handling his prep in a relaxed fashion. So what do you think the dangers , and the strengths are of going about debate prep the way trump seems to be, in a much more, not nearly as rigorous, or shark shirt structured a way as Hillary Clinton usually does . Lets start with the positive. He is very good in live tv settings. He demonstrated that in the republican debates. He is comfortable in that environment. He knows how to make a quip. He knows how to put somebody off balance. He enjoys doing that. In the performance sense, it it with as to naturalness that maybe she does not. He likes and enjoys that environment. The challenges, or the risk, is this is 90 minutes. There is no break. It can be very substantive. Depending on how the flow of the debate goes, he will have to produce deeper or more complex answers about some of his policies, or more consistent or coherent statements. He will have a greater difficulty skating across the topics, as opposed to what he was able to do with four or five people in the republican debates. So i think that is the bigger risk for him. Mark that is it for tonight. Thank you for watching. Sayonara. Is thursday, the 22nd of september. This is trending business. We will be live in sydney, singapore, and beijing this hour. First, asiapacific markets extending after the fed lowers the outlook for rate hikes. The dollar had its worst day in two weeks. Hanjin soaring