businessweek editor chief megan murphy. for story we look at, venezuela. if you went back 10 years ago, it was an emerging market firing on all cylinders. megan: incredibly different story. the thing i like about this piece is exactly that issue you bring up. there is a quote that says they can't picture a country that has fallen so quickly, so fast, not just economically or markets, but the actual impact on people. it is so alarming. the average venezuelan is losing 19 pounds, the struggle to get access to food. oliver: does this signal a change of ideology or regime shift in terms of political ideology within latin america? megan: absolutely. you have hugo chavez of the most prominent example of someone who swept in on this populist hide. latin america was populist long before we were populist. they were traditionally left somewhat alone. venezuela had the advantage of having a huge oil economy that was such a large exporter when we had oil prices where they were at the time above $100. it was an incredible boon to their economy. there was a tremendous amount of investment down there. it was looked at as a darling. there are always infrastructure issues there, getting distribution of wealth, but since over the past decade in terms of the level of corruption in venezuela, the stifling wealth inequality that now exists, every government confronted with massive scandal across core industries, and actually to appoint goon squads with president nicolas maduro taking out opponents, it is a throwback. frankly, i'm not sure the world is watching as much as it should be. oliver: you guys look at something that everyone is focusing on him at which his taxes and what the trump administration will do for companies and individuals. what are the questions you ask? megan: we try to go behind the headlines. yes, everyone is talking about taking the corporate rate down to 15%, looking at the individual brackets, taking that rate down as well, small businesses, llc structured as pass-through entities, then we have this long promised tax repatriation holiday for large corporate's that have so much money offshore because they have lower rates there. what we have focused on is the important question, it is well and good to say you will cut taxes, but look at the businesses it will affect. if you take the rates down, we know from individual earnings that you only get taxed on the money you make, so a lot of the fastest growing companies in america are high-growth startups that don't generate profit, so taking that tax rate down does not matter. what they need is changes to the code, simplification, and investment in industries that would help them grow faster, but i do think when we look at the enormity of the tax package and the three prongs i outlined, the ability to get this to congress is going to be -- we will have to see how much he gets through. carol: cover story, we caught up with justin trudeau and talked about a lot of issues, including trade. megan: i'm sure john will talk about it, but the thing that stands out to me with justin trudeau is when you look at immigration, lgbt rights, trade, is he the last traditional picture of a liberal we think of? he goes into that. my favorite part is why canada has not been subject to this wave of populism. >> justin trudeau is in a strange position. on one hand, he is carefully positioning himself as the anti-trump. he is the last sort of the liberal leader of a country. trump has been useful to him because it has enabled him to slightly put hard lines around his own image which was getting fuzzy. now, he is in the opposite camp then donald trump in a lot of things. on the specifics, donald trump is attacking him about milk subsidies. strangely it could be one where donald trump has a reasonably good point from the point of view of many canadian consumers. if you are a canadian consumer of milk, you pay $500 extra to get this expensive milk. the stuff to do with lumber is more complicated, but trump is upping the pressure on canada in the same way he did on mexico. carol: i feel like any leader you ask about donald trump, they are very cautious. i feel like the prime minister was as well. you get the feeling they have already met. do you get the feeling he understands how president trump operates? >> what is interesting about leaders of the world is there are all learning how to deal with the donald trump. they are learning how to deal with the unpredictable. i think angela merkel, you see the same language from her, a little bit from the chinese. they are all saying we know he goes off the rail every now and again, but there are fundamental interests that bring us together. the difficult thing with the trump method, which is to exaggerate and go for things in a big way, then come back, i don't think donald trump was to have a full-blown trade for with china. he wants to adjust the barometer slightly. there is a certain point at which you push against things which are really difficult for politicians and there comes a point where if justin trudeau does not stand up to donald trump, he looks weak, and that is where the problems come. if you think the problems are difficult in canada, look at china. that is a big issue. there you have president xi jinping, the year when he is maybe deciding whether to stay longer as the countries leader. he cannot afford to look weak against trump, but even justin trudeau faces that. carol: you also talked about the legalization of marijuana. they are working towards it. >> yes, the law has gone through. it will probably take a couple of years to come through. like many things that justin trudeau is involved in, there is a bold signature statement of policy and the details need to be examined in different ways. one of them is who will make money out of this. is the government going to tax it? how is it going to work? he has definitely jumped over the bridge or the fence many people see in front of pot legalization, the idea, all the health care risks. he has rejected those. he argues passionate that because you don't know what you are buying from an illegal dealer, there is greater risk of damage to your health. they can monitor it and legalize it, and it will be safer come a him long argument from a group of people. the question of how you make money out of it, which is an interesting one, we have not worked out, and he certainly hasn't. oliver: turning justin trudeau into a cover model was the did -- was the job of rob vargas. >> he is naturally photogenic, so we sent a photographer to where he was being interviewed in toronto. he gave us five minutes, but we ended up with a lot of good shots, some where you see him in a way you have not before. oliver: why this one? i know this one is the only one where there is a reflection of him, more thoughtful perhaps. >> when you see world leaders, the portraits seem to be formal and serious. he does have this pensive look, but he is facing a reflection of himself. there is this blur, vignette around the photo, so we thought it was an interesting way to see world leaders. oliver: up next, a border county banking on president trump's immigration plans to spur much-needed job growth. and, the legal battle that could be brewing in the central -- federal government overprotected land in the state of utah. ♪ ♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." in the global economic section, how a border town is swelling its objections to trump's immigration plans in the name of job creation. >> what happened is a unique case on its own. before the policy of the obama administration back in 2015, there was a riot in this immigration prison. the inmates claim the prison was being mismanaged. the toilets were overflowing. they lived in these kevlar tents. one day they came out of their 10th -- trntsd -- tents with knives and spears and took control of the prison. that eventually led to the closing down of the correctional center. this was a 3000 bed facility. it was the largest employer in the taxes county. this is a county that had 20% unemployment in the late 1990's, a very poor community that needed these 400 jobs. those jobs went away, $2.5 million in revenue went away for the county, and then the they sued, a year later they sued the operator, and within months, there was a sale of the facility, and now they are in talks with i.c.e. to actually get back into immigration detention, and the county is hopeful it works out because they need these jobs to come back. they are pretty desperate. oliver: this quickly becomes a an economic story for the county. describe the interplay between these private institutions, private prisons and the county government, because it is seem somewhat complicated. it doesn't seem totally obvious. tell us how they can incentivize the prison to come back to their town, what they have to do differently this time. >> there definitely needs to be some amount of incentives, jobs, some revenue for these communities, but it needs to be enough to compensate for the fact that this is almost a 90% hispanic community. this is south texas. the rio grande valley all voted for hillary clinton in november. they are fiercely opposed to the president's immigration policies, so for this to work out for both parties, there needs to be an incentive for the county. mtc has, as a result, taken the $69 million of debt the county owed to bondholders and in exchange now owns the prison. they own the prison, the debt, and they will offer some amount of tax, property tax revenue to the county, to the city, to the local school district that will amount to $2.5 million, and this will probably increase their budgets by about 33%. it is a big deal for these local communities that have, for the better part of a decade now, been really entrenched and the private prison model, which obviously does work to their benefit. the companies that have facilities in these communities are able to say there is a demand for beds. you guys have them. you guys need jobs and revenue. let's make a deal. oliver: president trump calls for a review of the 1906 monument law, and at stake could be an executive order by president obama. here is editor matt phillips. >> bears ears is a swath of one more than one million acres in southeastern utah, desolate, rugged, beautiful. it is now a national monument. it is one of the last things president obama before leaving office. he designated this part of utah a national monument, which means it is owned by the federal government and you can't commercially mine it or do any development on it in perpetuity. carol: that is it. >> that is it. this is a national monument like yosemite and the grand canyon. that sparked controversy in utah, especially republican leaders saying you did not talk to us, no local input, this deprives us of local revenue. there is debate about how much is down there, but there do seem to be sizable amounts of uranium deposits and oil and gas. the question is whether you can recover it, but they would rather find that out themselves. carol: can presidents just do that? can they just make it a national monument? >> they can. the 1906 antiquities act assigned by theodore roosevelt established that authority, and no president has designated morland as national monument as president obama. the question is that is up for legal debate is we know this gives you the power to bestow status. does it give you the power to rescind it? there is no legal precedent. no president has rescinded national monument status. this goes back to the only time a president tried was fdr in 1938. he sought counsel from his then attorney general and said can i do this? there is a decrepit civil war monument in south carolina. he said you do not have the power to rescind, only to the stove. -- to bestow. him my reading of this law says you don't have the power to resend, so for the last 80 plus years, that is where it set. president trump seems inclined to test that legal theory. oliver: as you point out, there are some who would challenge the veracity of that, saying there are certain grounds by which you can justify going back and rescinding, is it going to become a legal battle? >> president trump signed an executive order this week that was not a full frontal assault. the concern among for environment to list was he would resend national monument status on bears ears. he is telling his department of interior secretary to study this and then to come back and submit on what to do. it doesn't say anything about shrinking, so there is this question shrink by how much? if they take 300,000 acres, does that raise red flags? over the past couple of months, there have been legal efforts on both sides to establish the groundwork for giving the president some sort of cover to do this. john yoo, the author of torture memos who gave the bush administration the rights to use extreme measures and torture penned a memo in march outlining his theory that, yes, the president has constitutional authority to resend this, and their thought was to give trump legal cover to rescind this, which he hasn't done yet. it doesn't mean he won't try though. oliver: a move towards financial deregulation around the globe could get a lot of momentum fast. while investors got giddy after the election, u.s. consumers to not follow suit. we will show you why. that is next on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ ♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am oliver renick. you can also catches us on the radio, sirius xm 119. in the markets and finance section, how washington's efforts to loosen financial regulation could spur a dangerous race around the globe. >> regulators over the last couple of months have looked at at least two big factors that happened last year, the election of donald trump and the vote in britain to leave the european union. regulators have spent the last better part of the decade basically trying to ratchet up rules to prevent banks from taking exceedingly risky bets and to make them safer and prevent the potential for future bailouts, so they are looking at those two factors and are getting wary, thinking about how countries might compete to loosen regulations. oliver: we talk about the folks that are worried about this. let's get a picture of who those institutions or thought leaders are, whether central bankers, politicians, tell us who is giving that view that is of concern. there are a lot of people on the other side who say we need this. who his leading the front to say let's knock it carried away here? >> bank regulators are the ones voicing the strongest concerns about the possibility that they could see a race to the bottom or jurisdictions competing for looser rules to attract business, or some nibbling around the edges that over time might develop into something more than a nibble and to start to concern them, so it is a concern among bank regulators. oliver: what year did these regulators see the most dangerous to tinker with? >> capital levels, tools that regulators have put into place to wind down the bank should get into trouble, so they want consistent rules around the world because all the large banks that could pose a systemic threat are global, so when you start to see different roles in different jurisdictions, bank regulators start to get a little bit concerned. rules will never be perfectly identical, but they wanted to be -- want them to be very similar to have confidence that each day are strong, resilient, and they can trust them. oliver: in the global economic section, with questions mounting over the white house's proposed tax reform and an absence of infrastructure spending, the u.s. economy is still moving slowly. >> you can see an explosion of confidence among consumers and also from the national federation for independent business amongst small businesses. it was almost unprecedented, the wave of optimism about what the trump administration would be able to deliver. oliver: as to whether that optimism translates into real action, one question is what is that transmission mechanism usually look like? what is the timeframe between a pop and capex spending, how long does that take? >> that is a good spending. -- that is a good question. i did not analyze the typical lags, but what we can see it was november obviously, and here we are in april and they have had plenty of time to hire if they were so enthusiastic they were sure there would be a boom in the economy. carol: six months, right? >> five months, they have not done it. the march jobs growth was under 100,000. i know the numbers bounce around, but even just taking the three-month average, first three months of the year, the average growth was lower than in the previous year before the election. capital spending, if you take out some of the volatile components like defense and aircraft, it was up only up 0.3% in the most recent month over a year earlier. capital spending is what you would do if you are sure this was for real. my article is saying that there is a lot of optimism and hope, but companies, after having been disappointed year after year through the obama years where there were these expectations, yes, now the economy will rally. did not happen. they are suspicious and holding back. they want to see something really happen before they will commit money and hiring. carol: shame on investors, perhaps on getting enthusiastic to quickly. if you're talking about infrastructure spending and changing corporate tax policies, talking about rolling regulations, what have you, these things take time. >> they do take time. the infrastructure spending was never likely to have the economy -- hit the economy in 2017. the earliest that anybody thought when they modeled it out would be 2018, even if it passed in 2017. of course it is being pushed back later than that because it is getting caught up in all the other legislative bottlenecks in washington. oliver: up next, sheryl sandberg on silicon valley's fear of failure. then, china's supersized robots. that is next on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am oliver renick. still ahead in this issue, facebook ceo sheryl sandberg is out with a new book about the importance of emotional honesty at home and in the office. and we will show you how sean hannity has become top dog at fox news, as well as apple getting into its first tv show. all that is still ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ oliver: we are back with editor-in-chief megan murphy to talk about more must reads in the magazine. we are talking robots. tell us what you are looking at. megan: we are talking china. we are talking robots. this is another example of where china has lagged in terms of expansion in robots in its workforce and used by companies, but they are making a massive push to catch up and dominate the robot sector. china has 50 robots for every 10,000 workers, compared to 176 in the u.s., 300 in germany, so they know they do not have enough to be the leader in robot innovation. but they are pouring in a ton of resources. whenever you are talking about china, you're talking about state resources going directly into this and they are encouraging homegrown companies to really push to develop the most sophisticated robots they can export to other countries and take a bigger share in terms of upping their reliance on robots and making them leader of supplying robots to companies around the world. there are few countries in the world a can make these kinds of investments in these industries. we have seen china do it before, and we are seeing them do it right now with robots. carol: let's talk about companies and industries. you guys zero in on rockwell innovation. we hear about companies trying to diversify and not being successful, rockwell is. megan: you know how they have been successful? doing something a few companies have a hard time with, they run courses forex -- for white men, exclusively for white, male managers and said to them that these are the experiences that women go through, these are the experiences that minority and best minorities and people of color go through in the work -- minorities and people of color go through in the work place. this is what is in keeping them from progressing up a manager chain. these are the experiences that you as a white, male manager , which is still predominant in most companies need to grapple , with if you are going to encourage advancement. the story is compelling. the numbers that rockwell is turning out of minority representation in engineers, when you get to 25%, any company in silicon valley would be proud of that number. it would be really pushing that. they acknowledge it is not perfect and there is a lot of work to go, but in terms of running targeted programs, this has proven to be successful. carol: they are holding on to those workers. megan: they are holding on, they retain as well, both on a diversification and retention level is low. oliver: it seems like from the story that it is an education to a large degree, and also from some of the anecdotes, frank discussion to talking about these issues. megan: we are all in the workforce. the challenges different people go through are challenges know else would even anticipate our challenge. getting together and saying this is how this person experiences this that is different than you and focusing on that difference and talking about it has shown to be highly effective. oliver: let's talk about a big story in the features section, facebook's sheryl sandberg. a lot has been written about this woman. she has a new book out, "option b." how do you find a new way to talk about this woman that a lot of you will have been talking about? megan: she has a new book coming out. the author of "lean in," which catapulted her into another level of fame. we wanted to take a look at sheryl sandberg and look at the effect she has had throughout global corporate businesses in terms of that kind of leadership style and management style she has advanced at facebook. we -- facebook. we call her the queen of sure ability. bringing an openness into the workforce saying don't leave , your life at home, bring it into the workforce, share what is going on. she lost her husband very unexpectedly two years ago, that is a lot of what the book is about, about over coming obstacles, grief, and moving forward. we don't shy away from the fact that this approach -- there are people who say as authentic as this may seem, this is my place of business, where i go to do a job. there are people who think it strikes as always working on some operating level that the personal is sort of a screen for driving their business forward. oliver: we got the details on that story as well in the interview with sheryl sandberg. >> we know sandberg, the author of "lean in," this mix between an emotional and professional person. what we haven't seen so far and what my story is trying to convey is just how much that openness has reflected on her career at facebook and the culture within, and also whether this helps her as a professional. her latest venture into openness, the writing about her husband's death, something no executive to this point has really done shows just how far she is willing to go in order to really connect with people outside of facebook. it seems to be starting this new way of communicating as an executive. she is not really saying it is strategic, but it has helped facebook. facebook is a company in the midst of a lot of image problems more so than financial problems. they are doing great financially, but image wise, this company has had to deal with the fake news debacle, murders being streamed live on their platform, battling regulators in europe and at home. this is a company at odds with donald trump on many issues, and what i have found when i talk with researchers is what people are looking for in their leaders is a little bit of vulnerability, something that makes them real people, and that helps us trust them and helps us forgive them, and sheryl sandberg has been an expert at that. she is like the oprah of corporate america. she is just so good. oliver: it's an interesting point. as you point out some of the things facebook has had to deal with, and incredibly successful company in many respects, but also as we know pushing a lot of boundaries and creating a new type of business, a new type of product, and among that, the headlines for fake news, streaming violence, a lot of stuff, and i guess to a certain extent it makes a sense a new product will breed a new type of whatever you want to call it, pr, corporate management. is that where she evolves from? >> she became an accidental -- when she had her son, she was an executive at google and realized she cannot work from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and she started leaving the office. sneakily nobody told her she , couldn't. she had to see her son before he went to bed, and that continued for years until one day just before facebook's ipo actually, she told a reporter that she leaves the office at 5:30 and headlines blared everywhere and she realized that now she was in a position of power, the stuff she could say and still be considered a respected, high-powered woman, she had almost a responsibility to say it. but then she took me through, i sat down with her at facebook's headquarters, and she took me through a lot of the steps it took for her to get to the point where she was more comfortable, and as you said, facebook's product was a huge part of it. there was one moment in 2011 where facebook said we are opening profiles, setting you up, setting mark up and she , and mark zuckerberg were like no, we don't want to do that. the facebook communications person said you have to. it is your product. they are sort of leading by example. oliver: up next what the fall of , bill o'reilly means for fox news and anchor sean hannity. then, apple gets its toe into hollywood. that is next on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ ♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am oliver renick. in the features section, sean hannity has become one of the biggest winners in cable news. this is thanks to his early backing of president trump and now, the fall of bill o'reilly. >> he is an anchor at fox news. he anchors their 10:00 p.m. our, r, and he is one of the personalities who has been at fox since its launch in 1996. he was there at the beginning. he originally had a show, and it was a left-right crossfire sidle -- style. for the past several years he has been anchoring the 10:00 p.m. hour. he has always been somewhat in the shadows of the top personality of fox news, who was always bill o'reilly. oliver: that is the why now element then. are you choosing to focus on hannity because there is a shift of power here? does it position him differently? >> he is stepping up into a pivotal role at the network during a really difficult time. it has been a tumultuous year for fox news. first they lost roger ailes, the founder, chairman, and ceo of the whole network, then they lost a couple of on-air talents, and now bill o'reilly has left the network. it was such a stable lineup for so long, and all of a sudden they are switching everything around and have new people doing this and that, and hannity has been the bedrock. now more than ever as a force of stabilization in terms of keeping the brand going, it is an important time for hannity and the network. oliver: the bedrock is interesting. he has been there for a long time. there were probably instances where he saw the future going a different way. there were timeslots taken by megyn kelly, at 9:00 after bill o'reilly, and he stayed in the later part of the night. i remember that was a big deal. how does this position him now? how does he feel about the situation? how does he re-tool his presentation to become the fox news bedrock? >> part of it is fox news is fortunate to have him because he has this incredibly close relationship to donald trump, which goes back to last year. he was one of the first conservative commentators to jump on the trump bandwagon. he was really supportive of trump and gave trump had a lot of air time, had trump town halls, trump basically lived on his show. even when trump was struggling and it looked like trump was going to perhaps lose, hannity never wavered. he really hammered other conservatives who were waffling a little bit about whether they would back trump. i think trump has respected the loyalty and given back to hannity. he gave hannity the first cable news interview after he became president. he has given six of his first tv interviews on fox news. that is great for fox news ratings. hannity is in the middle of that because he is reportedly talking to the president frequently. he has a real line of communication to the white house, which is valuable to the network. oliver: speaking of television, in the companies section, apple is moving into tv shows. here is reporter lucas shaw. >> apple is going to produce as many as 8-10 tv shows or video series for apple music, and it is acquiring projects, different documentaries, a couple of documentaries streaming at the tribeca music festival now. one about bad boy records. puffis peter these -- daddy's record label. the idea is there have been two currents in the media this is over the past few years that apple has had to respond to. one is the rise in streaming music and the connection of music and video best encapsulated in youtube. the other is this growing trend in silicon valley towards an interest in producing their own video series. inspired by the success of netflix and amazon. google, facebook, and twitter have all jumped into this. apple only has apple music, which was supposed to be the competition for spotify and youtube, and now is using it as a testbed for different video projects. this is led by a famous record executive. carol: you write in your article that this is about apple keeping people tethered to apple products and the iphone specifically. >> yeah, apple makes two dollars out of three dollars selling iphones. it is the house that steve jobs built. the best way of keeping people tethered to the iphone is with services they hope that gives people a reason to use the iphone instead of any competing products from samsung, google, and whatnot. you have seen the rise of different apps and services that could cause people to abandon the iphone. or feel that it is less special. the iphone has been presented as a symbol of cool for so long, now most phones look more or less the same, so one way to keep ahead of the competition is having something like apple music, a service people love and can only get on that phone. carol: thanks to netflix and amazon, we have seen nontraditional content companies create content, content people really like and that does really well, so it seems logical to move into this area and be a content creator. >> yeah, look, apple for a long time has avoided going into hollywood because production is low margin, costly, intensive. there are lots of reasons why you don't want to do it. if you are a tech company, you usually want to be a neutral platform. you want to fill everyone's movies, tv shows, music, etc. as there is a growing demand or desire to have a service that can stand out, one way of doing that is by making original programming. whereas you might have been reticent before, you see companies like amazon and netflix succeed and say hey, why can i not do that too. carol: jimmy iovine created interscope records, beats music, now under the apple umbrella. this is a guy well connected in the entertainment industry, and this has to really help him and apple in terms of creating content. >> he is one of the least apple-like executives out there. apple is a cautious company. they test something a million times before they release a new product. he just wants to throw stuff out there and see what works. it is a very hollywood approach. it is an approach that has at times cause problems within -- caused problems within apple, but when it comes to trying to put together, get exclusive music, video series, he is vital. he is part of apple, but running his own company at the same time , trying to have been breathing room to experiment and see what they can come up with. oliver: up next, wolfgang puck downsizes for his latest restaurant in west hollywood with a single table for 10. and one of the pioneers of indoor skydiving. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ ♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am oliver renick. you can also catch us on the radio. in the etc. section, indoor skydiving catching on in popularity. we spoke with the entrepreneurial daredevil behind the trend. >> i got to fly with two of the best coaches in the world, these two brothers from utah. they just did a brief kind of intro, then put on a flight suit and helmet for protection for the wind, sound, and you just come in through a doorway, a cylindrical glass tunnel 14 feet in diameter, 45 feet tall, and you lean into it and it picks you up and you feel a lot of wind, so after doing this for 10 minutes, the next day i was more sore than i had been in a long time because you relax, but when you are learning how to do it, you tense up and feel like you have to fight the wind a little bit. oliver: it is your first time flying. >> first time flying. oliver: it is a cool activity, fun thing, but also a big business. that is why you are writing about it this week. you are profiling a pioneer in terms of bringing skydiving indoors. carol: he is a lawyer who wanted to do this. >> he is a lawyer who less than a month after getting married to his wife who thought she was marrying this nice, stable lawyer, he said i want to go pro in skydiving and want to quit my job and do this full time. there was no money in it at that time, and he did pro skydiving for a number of years, then came across this tunnel. there had been vertical tunnels since the 1940's, but he found a guy in orlando who had patented a new tunnel that had smoother air, less noisy, less dangerous. a lot of the fair ride cushions would spew you out on a pile of cushions. he was so enthusiastic that he started hosting camps, then bought the business, and has now grown it to the point where he has 1000 employees, 60 tunnels worldwide. carol: you talk about the intellectual property in the article. everybody has to pick on that pic of the magazine to read it. but you have to talk about the costs. it's not inexpensive. >> it is not a cheap sport. for an intro package, two minutes of flight time for $90. that is pretty good. at the westchester tunnel where i went, they told me there are a number of guys who will put down $80,000 or $90,000 to buy ours -- hours in bulk because you can get a better rate to come with friends. carol: the cosco rate. buy in bulk. >> exactly. so that is still a lot of money, but they have a lot of startup guys, media types, and also people who completely get addicted to the sport. oliver: it sounds pretty fun. carol: the only problem is the next time you need to take the two of us. >> a cool journalist story. oliver: staying in the etc. section, our reporter got to do a little grocery shopping with none other than wolfgang pok -- puck as he picked out food for his new restaurant. >> i went to the santa monica farmer's market with wolfgang and one of his chefs and we spent an hour looking at produce he wanted to use in the menu of the rogue experience, a restaurant he was opening in west hollywood that night. it is amazing that someone like him who is behind a $400 million restaurant empire is doing produce runs, but he really does get excited about getting out there and seeing what the ingredients are, and meeting the fruit mongers, trying samples, and figuring out what will go on the plate. oliver: what is this rogue experience? wolfgang puck has been around for a long time, but do people still associate him with bustling restaurants? >> they do of associate him with bustling restaurants. his restaurant here, spago, one of his first and one of the most iconic is definitely busy. it's a place where you can find celebrities. he also has cut, a steakhouse with locations all over the country and world, and there are a lot of people going to his restaurants. if you go to any major airport, you are likely to see one of the the war and versions of his empire there, but as he has commercialized, some people say the reputation as a change maker in the food industry may be has suffered a little bit, at least when it comes to the gastronomic things you can do on a plate. at the rogue experience, they really get to do that. they get to create the kind of meals, tasting menus, that push the boundaries of what you are expecting from a restaurant and that are more experimental than the plate of pasta that you might get at spago. oliver: a push back may be against what some of his critics described as an over commercialization of his brand, but you got to see what he was picking out and were there, so give us the details. what are people eating here? >> every night will be something different. every week the team of chefs who are spearheading the menu at the rogue experience changes, so he actually picks chefs from spago, his catering company and puts them in that kitchen at the rogue experience together and has them come up with the menu every night, and every week that team will change. it is hard to say. on the first night, they did a chili dog with this tofu seasoning. that was one of the first bites, and it was delicious. it was really fun it was not , stuffy. they are trying to do fusion, genre bending cuisine that is going to make people feel like this is something i can't get anywhere else. oliver: "bloomberg businessweek" is available on newsstands now and online at bloomberg.com. more bloomberg television starts right now. ♪ >> coming up, canadian prime minister justin trudeau speaks exclusively with bloomberg editor-in-chief john micklethwait on the future of trade. p.m. trudeau: we are in favor of trade deals. we are in favor of progressive trade deals. >> on pathways to growth. p.m. trudeau: we're in favor of investing in things that make a difference in people's lives. >> on controversy. p.m. trudeau: the reason we are looking to legalize marijuana is because the current system is not protecting our kids. >> and on dealing with donald trump. p.m. trudeau: i've learned that he listens. >> it's all straight ahead on a special "bloomberg businessweek debrief."