He will vote no. What are the implications of that for the grahamcassidy bill . Mike as you know, this is a very dramatic moment that almost certainly kills the grahamcassidy bill. The bill could not lose another vote. This means it likely will go down. The amazing thing about this is Republican Leaders again got themselves out on this limb. I dont how many times they need to put their hands on the stove to know this will not have a happy ending for them. Senator rand paul, a hard no. Senator Susan Collins likely no. That is enough to kill it. You look at any of the factchecks about this bill, and this was going to be, of all the different versions, this was going to be one of the hardest on end users. It was arguably rewarding blue states rewarding red states at the expense of blue states. The policy was always problematic. And now we see with senator mccain, the politics also problematic. In senator mccains statement, saying he did this with no joy, the line that was memorable and will provoke a lot of conversation and be consequential where our country is now is he thought something this big needed to be done in a bipartisan way. Here is the key line in his statement. The fact that republicans were again going to try to pass something by themselves is what he hung his hat on. There was another huge issue here and a hole i dont think republicans were going to dig themselves out of. That was the jimmy kimmel factor. In the most personal of terms talking about his own child, he said this bill broke a promise to him by republican senators they were going to continue to cover preexisting conditions, even for people whose last names are not kimmel and cannot afford the millions it might cost to have these surgeries. Three nights in a row, yes talked about how Senate Republicans have tried to hurt the American People and not been honest about what is in the bill. This might be the first on a latenight comedy show, putting up the screen showing the Telephone Office numbers of on the fence senators. Republicans did not have a good answer. All the factchecks said jimmy kimmel was right. That is a tough thing to overcome. Charlie saying this bill would not necessarily guarantee preexisting conditions would be covered. If so, premiums would be so high no one could afford them. Mike exactly. You might hit your cap and have to pay outofpocket for some children, including someone who had some of the treatments, that it would be unaffordable for anybody who does not have a latenight comedy show. Charlie what does this mean for obamacare . Mike it remains the law of the land. I think there will continue to be small efforts to fix it. There is no way republicans will be able to say they repealed it. Republicans, whatever they do in the future, they will do it from the back foot as our british friends will say and will have to involve democrats. This is a trend we are going to see. One of the arguments for why President Trump started doing some of the democratic deals with chuck and nancy is because he has to. The math does not work without them. There were a couple more bills where there was the possibility of using reconciliation, the mechanism that will allow you to do with only republican votes. That is running out. The president has no choice but to involve democrats. That is what we will see for anything coming up. Charlie if tax reform is the next order of the day and the president decides to cooperate and negotiate with schumer and pelosi, is there a tax reform bill possible . Mike yes, yes, and yes. The big question is whether it will include democrats. It is possible to do it with only republican votes. Such a treacherous path. The white house is very optimistic about getting some Democratic Senators who are up for reelection in trump states to join with them. That would give them the margin of victory but also allow them to say this was not a republican only bill. You know i have been a bear about the idea that anything substantially was going to happen on tax reform. It is now looking more likely than it was. Some sources on the hill will tell you still less than 50 50 but more likely than before. If we have something, the most likely package is threepronged. There will be cuts in corporate rates. There will be cuts for Small Businesses that file as individuals. And third, there will probably be a tax cut for individuals who make 150,000 or less. The president making sure there is a notable, substantial, measurable tax cut for trump voters. And he will do something for corporations. Not as much as he planned from the beginning. What we are down to is a package of pretty cut and dried tax cuts. None of the systemic reform that so many economists argue this country needs to be competitive in the new world. No tax reform since the reagan years. There is not a single thing about our economy that has not changed since then except the tax code. Again, washington failing to do its job and failing to take advantage of opportunities in the global economy. Charlie the president believes he needs a legislative victory which he has not had except the confirmation of the Supreme Court justice. Mike it is not just the president needing it. As you well know, House Republicans going out for reelection in 2018 need something to hang their hat on. They dont have much of a story to tell at this point. If you are a third of the senate up in 2018, every house member up in 2018, they really need this for that reason. Not only the ability to say washington is not completely broken under the leadership of republicans at both ends of pennsylvania avenue, but quickly this will have psychological and real effects on the economy. That will help the governing party. That by itself could be a huge help towards the president s reelection. That is why many republicans will tell you they wish they had done infrastructure and tax reform earlier to get the boost for the economy. The economy has had a psychological spring in its step because of what it thinks is coming as far as regulations and tax reform. Now if they do tax reform, you have real benefits to the economy. You know, no single better predictor of who will win the upcoming elections. Charlie the president has not been in washington this week. He has been in new york. Mike living in trump tower in his own bed. Charlie and playing havoc with the traffic, as the u. N. Always does during the general assembly, even more so when the president is here. What is the overall judgment of the president s tough speech to the u. N. General assembly, especially as it has to do with north korea, iran, and venezuela . Mike the president in very harsh terms calling out those three governments as rogue governments, calling them out in terms never used during the obama administration. Youre right about calling it a tough speech. Conservatives liked the speech. Israel liked the speech. There were some trumpian touches in the speech that caused a lot of people to look askance. There were pictures of general john kelly with his head in his hands with the photographers trying to match the timestamp on the photos with what the president was saying at that time. One of the photos, supposedly the president called the north korean rocket man, but he also called the North Koreans a band of outlaws. One of the Associated Press timestamps on the photos of general kelly going like this like watching his kid strikeout in Little League was when the president described the North Koreans as a band of outlaws. There are trumpian touches of what he wants to do. But the meat of the speech was what many republicans would have liked to hear, what his staff generally liked. The gossip around the u. N. And around new york, i was at the Bloomberg Business forum. The conversation was they are starting to get used to the president. Trump who was regarded as an alien figure is now less so, now that he has been to summits with top officials. They are just getting used to him. It is a mix of what he actually does in Foreign Policy and National Security policy. It is very much within the 40yardlines of what you would expect a president jeb bush or president marco rubio to do. Charlie there has been an uptick in his ratings. Mike partly because of his handling of the hurricane. Partly because of the publicity he got from the deals with democrats. We are told the president is in a great mood. He loves that all the great leaders at the u. N. Suck up to him as host. He loves the great publicity he is getting. He soaks it all in, this great moment that was reported by the New York Times where the president called chuck and said, are you watching tv . He said on fox news, they are praising you. And on your channel, apparently referring to cnn and msnbc, they are praising me. Theres nothing that makes this president more excited. Charlie he cannot be excited when he goes back to washington and finds out robert mueller, in terms of subpoenas and closer focus on Paul Manafort who used to be his Campaign Manager for a while, and evidently the effort to reach inside the white house with respect to conversations the president had with the Russian Foreign minister and others. Mike you are right, charlie. This is a dark cloud. A fascinating quote appeared in the Washington Post this week that quoted a Government Official as saying there is now an air of inevitability about the mueller prosecution. It is not inevitability of any certain outcome, but it is that it is going to be fullcourt press until the end. That the prosecutor is taking a more expansive view of his role than anybody knew, as you point out, including his investigation of the oval office conversations. We requests for documents and interviews. The prosecutor shows his hand a little bit by saying i want to talk to these six current and former aides, including Reince Priebus and sean spicer. Charlie apparently, they also have wiretaps of Paul Manafort even after he left the Trump Campaign. Apparently, from some reports. And secondly, the request for documents seemed to look deeper into the president s financial background even before he became president. Mike that is exactly right. The watergate aura around this pro became more acute because now we know there are months, perhaps years of tapes. This goes back to before bob mueller was in charge of the investigation. These investigators got a fisa warrant. Difficult to get. They were able to record phone conversations by Paul Manafort when he was in the president s orbit. It is possible the president s voice is on these tapes. There was no wiretapping directly of the president in trump tower. But the fact that Paul Manafort was recorded at the time he was running the Trump Campaign makes it possible and even likely the president is on those tapes. Charlie let me turn to one last issue, which is the whole notion that five of the biggest corporations in america are Tech Companies out of silicon valley. Certainly includes apple, amazon, google. And these companies are under increasing scrutiny because of the centrality of their business into our lives, as well as their huge resources. Mike charlie, that is so right. In washington, there has been a windshear in the sentiment about these companies. Until recently, such a romantic view of these companies. They make so many Amazing Things possible. But now, you have the extremely unusual situation of republicans and democrats agreeing on something. Charlie, im told both republicans and democrats looking into ways they can use legislation to rein in these companies. On the republican side, theyre going to emphasize the National Security and Homeland Security elements of the data that is out there and the efforts by foreign governments to use platforms that include facebook to influence elections. Democrats more concerned about the monopolistic elements of it. Republicans very unhappy with these companies because of cultural differences. They see them as being for open borders and liberal social policies. Charlie, you recognize the great irony of this on two fronts. One, the president himself has said he might not be president without twitter. That the connection he had with voters is very important. Second, more evidence all the time, including facebook saying it will turn over ads purchased by russian operatives, that maybe facebook helped the president. Irony one, republicans mad at the companies that helped trump become president. But second, that the groups and lawmakers pushing this have spent their careers and raised a lot of money being against government but they are for reining in these companies. Democrats, the first specific move taken on capitol hill was by senator mark warner of virginia and senator klobuchar who sent around a twopage letter looking for cosponsors for a bill that would look at some of the promises facebook made about increased transparency and regulation of political advertising. This is a big fight. You and i were talking before we went on the air about the david brooks column this week saying this could become a defining issue in american politics. We have a war on business coming that is a sign that trump is not necessarily a oneoff. That the strain of public sentiment behind trump could fuel this continued effort to rein in these big companies. I know you have lots of conversations with silicon valley, as i do. This has been eyeopening for the leaders out there. But they know that they are now in the barrel. Charlie david brooks column also suggests the populism of brexit and the election of donald trump began some time ago. And what has emerged is the conflict between elites on both coasts and everywhere and average working men and women in america. This has been a forward progression of a big idea coming to fruition with the trump election and might extend beyond donald trump, and a central focus of it would antibusiness. Mike that is right. This brings together so many issues that fueled the trump phenomena. If you look at income inequality, the great wealth amassed in certain places, the huge amounts of data these companies have amassed about us, the ability of foreign governments to interfere in our elections, so you have the perfect storm of fake news, trump, hillary clinton, because we also learned this week that one hot focus of muellers investigation is how the social platforms were used in the election. The parties are coming together. The Great Stories of the year are coming together with the Tech Companies as the focus. That aint where you want to be. Charlie mike, thank you so much. Mike allen from washington. We will be right back. Stay with us. Charlie ray dalio is here, the founder and cochairman of bridgewater associates. He created the firm in 1975. Today, it is the Largest Hedge Fund in the world with assets of around 160 billion under management. Fortune has called bridgewater the fifth most important private company in the u. S. The firms success is anchored in its unconventional culture that emphasizes values like radical transparency and truth. He expands on those ideas and more. I am pleased to have him back at this table. Welcome. Tell me the motivating reason to put this together for you. Why did you want to write this . To help others make decisions better and be more successful. I was originally very reluctant to share some of these principles. They were internal. Charlie because you thought they led you to enormous achievement in the investment world, and perhaps personally as well, and therefore you did not want your competition i dont like public attention. I would rather have privacy. But when we made when we were successful anticipating the financial crisis, we received a lot of attention. Because we operated with such different principles and had a unique culture, it became somewhat distorted. I put those principles we had at the time out on our website. They were downloaded 3. 5 million times. I received a lot of thank you notes because it helped people a lot. And so, i accumulated more. And now i am at a stage in my life where i am transitioning from what i call the second stage of my life to the third stage of my life. The first stage of ones life is when one is dependent on others. The second stage is when we are working and others are dependent on us. The third stage is when they all do well without me or without us. So my objective is to try to help others be successful without me. This is my year of transition from that stage, the second stage to the third stage, and i want to put everything i had of value in that one book. It is a series of recipes essentially of what i have used. I also hope it will encourage other people to write principles. You know i have been trying to get you to write your principles. I think if we can have principledlevel thinking, when something comes along, what do we do about that . How do you handle that reality . And we are clear on our principles. I think that would be important. I think it is particularly important at this time. Charlie i want to talk about your principles. Born in queens. Your father was a jazz musician. Mother . Stayathome mom. Went to Long Island University and onto Harvard Business school. Was a caddie and made a little money and invested successfully on a small scale. But it gave you some great desire . I got hooked on playing the game. Charlie that is right. The game was what . The markets . When i was 12, i was caddying for money and the stock market was hot. I took my money and thought i would buy stocks. The First Company i bought was the only company i had heard of selling for less than 5 a share. Tha