first. i am pleased to welcome him to this table. bono.l: a nice quote from charlie: he send me a gmail saying, i was in for a treat. you loved music from the start. bono, what an incredible man he is. he face-timed me while he was heading into the bbc. he said that charlie rose is like a smooth jazz musician, you will have a great conversation. in between promotions and building the record he took that time. charlie: what about the music? michael: live music i got lucky , when i was young. small town, canadian boy. i don't know why, but i have always felt a great love for live music. there was a character in kennett -- canada, a promoter. i would read about him. stole the rolling stones from bill graham presents, which was a legendary steel. he became the first global promoter. sitting in thunder bay and reading back, i just wanted to be michael cole. this idea of the man behind the concert with a real job and pursuit, i was taken. charlie: it was more than just a business, it was a business you loved? michael: i find it rare in the music business, most executives are on the record side and talk about their level for the record. i just love the two hours, the two hours of magic when you are backstage watching the production of u2 or jayz. for a club show and watching the crowd go to life. i took a 16 hour drive to toronto to see my first big show robert plant. ,it touched me early. my passion was this two hours, magic. from there i was going to figure , out, how does one get into the business of live? that was my pursuit from 20 years old. charlie: and live music today is king? michael: who would have thought? live nation, we went public 12 years ago. nobody cared about this 12 years ago. for 30 years the business was about the record. apster and streaming and the consumption around the news media. promoters, you toward to sell records. then, the digital download came along and suddenly tours were to , make money. charlie: it is the principal revenue source for most artists. yes, 90% of the money you make in a year comes from the road. tois not just the best way connect the fans and magical moments, it is paying bills. the art now, the stream has your magic, but the road is where you pay your bills. charlie: someone said to you, will there be enough ask? you said, as long as they have to put food on the table, they will be touring. michael: it is a win all around. andou look at technology what it is done to entertainment and media companies, live concerts are the only art form where technology enhanced it. it did not disrupt it. charlie: it made music sound better? michael: also, it is not duplicatable. on tv and getu2 the goosebumps. charlie: it is spectacular. when you see the artist coming out, right over you. michael: also, when you go and people talk about their kodak moments in life, you remember bringing the girl to the first show. son tok your sons of -- ac/dc. those moments are really magical. they save, they plan, the moments plugged into the memory bank. they cannot watch that on a dvd at home or stream it on youtube. it's where you go to experience it and it comes to life. charlie: who are the five biggest acts? did beyonce have the biggest tour last year? michael: yes, she is a phenomenon. u2 will be the largest grossing tour of the year, with coldplay right behind them. charlie: do they do about the same number of concerts? michael: yes, there has been a big surge in stadium tours. charlie: they told me 2018, it , is going to be stadium tours. michael: five years ago, people would have said, where is the next u2, the next rolling stones? now you have taylor swift, luke bryant doing these stadium tours. we had guns and roses last year. a reunion, it was magnificent. and overall, hip-hop is because on fire. kendrick lamar, jayz, drake, chance the rapper, that is the new rock 'n roll for teenagers. -- for a 19-year-old. that is selling out around the world. charlie: electronic dance music? i would say it had a moment of a boom. i think it is on pause. it was fueling a lot of festival business. we have some wildly successful ones, in some nina -- insomniac and electric daisy. 400,000 people go to it. charlie: what happens at a festival? michael: it was really a european phenomenon for years. in america, you went to that hockey rink or madison square garden to see your show. or maybe an amphitheater. in europe, they had football stadiums. for many years, you created a festival. that was really the way that artists toward in europe for years, as a festival. then they came to america and they played in madison square garden. the coachella company out in california, lollapalooza, austin city limits these big festivals , started to come out. they are phenomenal, obviously. everything you love about those two hours of magic when you are 21 years old, i'm going to give you 72 hours of that. 72 hours of great music. charlie: are you on the road trying to see the tours that live nation handles? michael: yes. the thing that i am the most proud about, 20,000 employees in 40 countries. when we started, we did a few shows. we have the greatest collection of creators, producers and promoters in the world. we have a very talented staff. the dna of where we came from is and where i came from is that we believe we work for the artist. that's different than record labels and others. you got to show up on a tuesday night in pittsburgh and see drake. charlie: and be there for the artist. michael: exactly. it is global in terms of phenomenal, but you have to be in pittsburgh -- or even this week, we had drake playing in new zealand, and our office was out there taking care of them. the numbers are staggering, i them, becauseng we started the business at such a small scale. shows aion does 105 day. i'm always planning when i'm traveling, when i can stop to see an artist or a festival, i try to check in. charlie: what does live nation do for the artist? michael: when an artist goes on the road, it's always going to be -- you're always going to look for a risk-reduction strategy. an artist is going to say, who is going to take the risk when i go on the road for the year? over time, they always look at the promoters of the bank. when live nation started consolidating these local businesses and turned it into a global business, the local promoter became the global global promoter. for the u2's of the world, they may have started with promoters one by one. now we can take all 100 of your dates. not only can we execute better and pay you better from a secure stay, we have all of these resources to help price and better, so more tickets drive , sponsorship, understand the data behind the customer, help you drive sponsor activation. we have become a full service platform that says when you go on the road, now you need the intelligence, the sales arm the , sponsors to help make that come to life. we can take that artists put , them on the road, and our job is really simple. we want to sell every ticket, and we want to make the pot as big as we can. most artists do not sell out, 90% do not sell out. and beyonce where it is an easy sale day for us, our real job is to get those extra thousand tickets sold on a tuesday, using our sponsorship team, huge platforms. how do we price them better? how do we get it to sell out on a wednesday in indianapolis? charlie: is it also the reason that rolling stones, and paul mccartney, and others, can play well into their 70's? they have an audience that long -- they have an audience well into their 70's? michael: yes, and first of all, the business is global now. if you are paul mccartney, for 30 or 40 years you are touring , america and europe. that could probably support your costs. today you are waking up and looking at, i can go to south america. coldplay, i just got off the -- u2.and you to i can do 10 dates in south america or asia or australia. the canvas is so wide and the demand so incredible. the demand is far out -- exceeding the capacity to play. until you want to hang up the guitar, there is a stadium or arenas somewhere in the world that wants you to perform. and you probably have not been to half of them. charlie: how long is a tour? michael: when an artist is on a cycle, let's call it, like a taylor swift cycle, they typically will say, we want to do 100 dates. where do we go what is the most , efficient, economical way, and we get a couple weeks. we will give them a global map, tell them you can do 30 dates in america, 10 in canada, ship you -- your production to europe. after those 100 dates -- we start talking about, where is their fan base, looking at their purchase data, pricing data. it is become a real science. how do we most officially get you on the road, best cities to play, how do price the house, and how much of the pot will come home? charlie: is there a correlation between who wins the grammys and who does good on tour? whether they have a record that wins the grammy is another matter? michael: they used to be a better correlation, but it changed over the years. if you look at now who is on the road most of these artists on , the road may not have singles or may not have top 10 hit. urban hip-hop, which will always be at the top of the charts, does not mean -- charlie: is it exceeding it or is it about two? michael: it is about two on a global basis. drake, chance the rapper, the biggest stars in the world now in terms of streamed songs. anyone of those i think drake is three. the number one streamed artist in the world. this week, taylor swift has a new album. she may topic for a day. but there is a complete search on urban -- surge hip-hop music. look at the tours now. a typical madison square garden calendar, you will have half of legendary, iconic artist. we have not had a single in a long time. a bunch of great artists. performers with set lists. wide we like to go live? be with that community. charlie: what about country music? michael: in america it is on fire. charlie: is it gaining an international audience? michael: it is an exception, it has replaced rock in many ways. country has become the storytelling music that rock 'n -- rocket used to be. the challenge with those artists is, luke bryant can sellout 60 stadiums in america. if you bring them to london we might be playing a theater or small arena. it is not translated yet outside -- charlie: you think it might be able to? michael: now that country has become closer to mainstream, it now has a chance to truly become the next kind of rock music for the international listener. ♪ ♪ charlie: when you think of live nation, do you think beyond the business you are in, which is concerts your lifeblood? , does it make sense for you to represent artists? michael: it is something i'm proud about. if you had said to us 12 years ago when we started live nation that we would have an artist management division, i would say that is very unique. today we are the largest artist management company in the world. we have an artist management division of over 300 artists. over 90 managers in a division called artist nation. i am proud of that division. why? because the dna of live nation that says we work for the artist. think about it -- that manager has to say to his artist i'm going to do a deal with rapino at live nation. and the artist will say isn't that the guy that writes the check for the tour? is that a conflict, or is that good for us? and then i get the best deal. manager, when i sit down and explained to him how i can grow his management business, ultimately, that artist has to do the right thing for himself. is thely live nation answer. but if it is a competitor, we will do that also. we started this artist nation artistn with the two mentors in my life, which event bono and jayz. jayz and i started rock nation 10 years ago. watching that grow -- sorlie: why is jayz entrepreneurial? michael: i only get this -- always get these questions about this in business. i always tell people if you look at these artists, they are the greatest ceos i have ever met. you look and make jagger, brands,one of the best es hisishes -- he swish hips. it sells. shawn carter, the businessman, truly has been one of the most. charlie: does the streaming service work well? michael: i think it was a revolutionary idea that the artist would form that relationship. charlie: spotify is not easy. michael: it is not easy to take on apple or spotify. sprint is a great exit. in many ways, he swung, may not have come out the other end on but youhe wanted it, look at the jayz, he is an entrepreneur. he has taken many swings -- his clothing line, his vodkas. the sports agency business. just like that, i want to be in the sports business? michael: next thing i know, he is signing kevin durant. now we have an incredible sports agency. he is a rare exception. he delivers what he says he is going to deliver, which is a great trade of a ceo. charlie: if you do music, could you do sports? we have dabbled in sports. other than with jay-z, most of the sports relations we have are on the ticketmaster side. most of the dealings with the sports leagues and teams are where the owners and the the buildings.th but the irony is, what does every billionaire who owns a sports team want? is to sit down and talk about how they want 10 more shows in their venue. charlie: we have these three dates, what can you fill up a crowd with? owner youe say to an , have your hockey and basketball dates, and i am the third leg. i will bring you 60 dates. the more shows we do, the more relationships we have with the sports owners. contentill stay in the live business for now. charlie: where will live nation be 10 years from now? michael: i think the interesting part about the music business is that the artist has become the center of his wheel. he is now looking at the business very differently. the managers we are dealing with are not the managers of the past. it is about sitting down with kendrick lamar. what will that business be like long-term? how will i distribute that record, use my data from touring and bring this all together? we think this foundation of live nation which spends over $5 billion a year, much like we have expanded into the artist management business, we think it gives us the opportunity to expand in the overall music by -- pie. we've become important in the marketing and all other pieces of the pie. charlie: who else do you go to to talk music? michael: i've read every autobiography from day one when i was growing up. eisner, ovitz, geffen, all of them. i am a student of the game. that is what you are doing when you are in the thunder bay you're trying to figure out the 16 hours. landscape. charlie: and is there a pattern for getting there? everybody would say there is one thing hard work. , michael: i do believe that the canadian in me, we grew up in canada not ever believing we are the greatest country in the world. we grew up hungry for curiosity and figuring out how we are going to get there. for whatever reason, the idea that i love the lives and that passion i found early was 80% of the game. so many people wake up trying to figure out what they want to do. wanting to do what i wanted to do is great. manifesting the outcome is the talent. i sat there at 20 years old at university with one of my mentors now i work with. i said a 40 years old i want to , run the largest live entertainment company in the world. charlie: congratulations. michael: i wrote on a napkin how i would get there. charlie: what was on that napkin? michael: i was thinking thunder bay and the university how i needed to get there, i would need a music education, i would work at a big company, finish my degree, i would have to start my own company, i had a lease paths. charlie: did you touch all the bases? michael: i did. i touched all of them. i worked for a brewery that had the largest promoter. i learned big business, the school discipline of, how do you run a business. i started a concert company in canada, sold it, moved to new york, london. did every course and read every book. followed every mentor. by the timeout was 40 years old i launched live nation, took it over and created the largest concert company in the world. that single-minded determination manifesting my passion was really how i got here. as a canadian, you never really believe until you have got there as i still don't. , so you are hungry and curious everyday to learn and observe. all of these have been inspirational in teaching me something about the game. jimmy is someone on the board i talked to every day or two. continued to stay grounded in terms of, are we doing what we set up to do for you bono? talent theeyond the , artists who have longevity have what? michael: similar to how i got here. you look at incredible artist, they tend to be incredible brand managers. bruce springsteen knows what bruce springsteen stands for. we always have a big debate in the music business about ticket price. business, it is the only business in the world where the minute a goes on sale it is , worth more. there is not another industry in the world. if tesla sold for $20,000, but the minute you bought it you could sell it for $30,000, they would just raise their price to $30,000. there is not another industry in the world. why does springsteen not sell what he could get for the top row? because they are incredible brand managers. they are connecting with their fans, creating great art. they figure out, how to why can i put these fans for a long-term journey? what do i mean to that fan? they manifest it, whether it is the song, the music, the video, the stage, the price of the ticket, what shows they play and do not play. are incredible. charlie: music recovered from the devastation of the digital revolution. it killed it. michael: short-term. charlie: how did it recover? finding new revenue avenues? if you look at the correlation over the 10 years, as the artist contract went down, touring business went up and endorsements went up and facebook went up. if you talk about -- talked to artists during the dip, record labels were panicked. artists were not panicked. they looked at it as an opportunity. the part i said earlier about the artist stepping from behind the platform to the front, that really happened when the internet unlocked. the minute rihanna got 100 million followers, that really -- life changed. for 30 years, if you were an artist, you are at the beck and call of the gatekeeper. you hoped someone signed you, you hoped they put you on mtv, you hoped you got to the radio. you hoped you got on the record store. now, all of the sudden, i hear talking directly, 100 million people. you are mtv. you don't need anyone to tell you how you are going to talk to the fan. you don't need a record label in the sense of, how do i tell them about my tour? that was a revolution where the artist started to be empowered. they solidified their brandon had direct conversations about when they went on tour, what collaborations and what shows they are playing and sponsors. charlie: fashion and everything else. michael: then, they became more liberated. the label, the promoter you had , to start moving behind the platform and say, can i hope you -- help you get on the road and get you 100 dates and sell them out? let me tell you what i can do for you, rihanna, so your business can sell. that is a very different statement. i talked about it 5, 8 years ago . every time i would talk about live nation they would say, streaming is going to win. that is just a distribution discussion. let's talk supply and demand on a demand basis. there are more 19-year-olds waking up today listening to , music than ever before. we do not have a consumer problem. that 19-year-old knows there is a taylor swift album coming out today. you didn't know that 20 years ago. you had to hope all the gatekeepers unlocked it. charlie: great to have you here. michael: thank you. charlie: we will be right back. ♪ charlie: more than $500 billion is expected to poor into the sector over the next 20 years. those gifts will transform significant parts of america civic set your landscape. it jewel fleishman is a professor of law and public policy at duke university. his new book is "putting wealth to work." also, darren walker from the -- the president of the ford foundation. i am pleased to have both of them at the table to talk about philanthropy. and what are the new rules i am -- on foundations. i am pleased to have my friends here to talk about that. themain thesis is that trend of giving while living is endangering the long-term survival of endowed perpetual institutions and that is not good. explain what that means. the reason it is not good, if you look at the american philanthropic landscape and nonprofit organizations, every -- the ones we know working in the environment and civil rights, every one of those organizations has been founded and nurtured by perpetual foundations. if you look at motivates a spend down to give money it -- it is an attempt to replicate a nonprofit in the civic sector what achievements they had. they are looking for a big bang. the problem is you don't get a big bang fast. what we know about the spending of money in a short period of time does not correlate to what you would expect if you put a lot of money and action and work in the short run. charlie: there is an exception to that. the woman who gave money to help develop the hiv virus cocktail. right, irene diamond, that was an unbelievable chance circumstance. she was trying to figure out what she did with the money. her husband had died and the aids epidemic was breaking in 1980. she said, wouldn't it be wonderful if we put a lot of money in this and see what could happen? she founded the new york city aids research center which developed the cocktail for aids which saved millions of lives. , charlie: that is an exception. is the exception. you cannot imagine that happening except for by chance. charlie: you run one of the most well-known foundations in the world. it is a perpetual, sustaining foundation. i you agree with him? darren: agree we have to recalibrate the discourse. it has become unbalanced. it is not an either or. it is a both and. we need perpetual foundations like ford and carnegie and rockefeller. we also need donors who seek to have a significant impact during their lifetime to be able to do that. i think joel's book points out that the conversation in philanthropy has become so distorted towards the notion of a spin down as the only option and i think what his book seeks to do is rebalance the conversation. charlie: do you agree we should rebalance it? joel: i agree with everything he says. it is a question of rebalancing it. i say in the book, both kinds of philanthropy are important. it depends on how much money you have got and what you're trying to do with the money. if it is the problem that can be handled with your money and your time, do it. the problem is, people are trying to tackle big problems that are complex that cannot be solved. like cancer research, has to be repeated. charlie: in today's environment, we have so many people making so much money from silicon valley and technology, big fortunes quickly, that the people who are giving away younger, they are more entrepreneurially oriented and problem-solving oriented and they are more hands-on oriented. joel: they want impact faster. i admire their motivation to do it. the book really tries to add -- explain to them what kind of questions they should ask themselves before they bet the farm. charlie: some say that perpetual foundations run by really smart people like you, that it tends -- you are less risk oriented. no one was more of an entrepreneur than henry ford. or andrew carnegie or don rockefeller. i am not sure i accept the notion that this new generation of businesspeople are any more entrepreneurial than 100 years ago, our iconic names of industry were. i also think that risk is something that we are in the business of taking at a place like the ford foundation. the risk that we take is investing in institutions. joel's point is that certainly doing something in a big way and placing a big bet on something is important, but institutions are what continue to perpetuate the innovation we have in our society. the ideas don't fall from the sky. they are generated in some institutional framework. who builds them and sustains those institutions? i think joel's point is that we need to pay attention to that. charlie: you said an amazing thing about the open society foundation and george soros who just gave $18 billion or more. you said there is no footprint today that is deeper and wider and more impactful than any other social justice foundation that you know of. darren: that is true because george soros is in over 45 countries around the globe. there is no foundation that works in as broad a geography and as a varied a set of investing and grantmaking men soros. even though the ford foundation is known quite widely, i yield to mr. soros and our friends and they are doing amazing social justice philanthropy. charlie: is this timed or is this perpetual? joel: he said he would spend it down. but four years ago he published an article in preface to a book and said he changed his mind. he said the problems were so big that it would be selfish of me to not let this go on. charlie: do you agree with people who say, give it now? when you are still young, rather than waiting, as george has done. warren buffett was going to wait, and then changed his mind. influenced by bill gates and his wife. he finally decided to go ahead and give it to the gates foundation. joel: part of it. that is what warren buffett did. he didn't give the whole gift. his estate is worth two times what he gave to the gates foundation. himself has been quoted as saying, he has cut down on giving to the gates foundation because they cannot find enough things they think are manageable to spend the money on. they are spending $4 billion a year for endowment and they cannot find enough things to do. where they think they can achieve that impact they want. charlie: do you have the same problem? darren: the issue is institutional. this is the challenge for philanthropists. to approach your philanthropy with some humility. the institutions that are necessary to achieve objectives you might wish may not be there. that is the question of the real capacity of a system to absorb billions of dollars and actually execute on that with efficiency and with impact. that is what the gates foundation has found in our area we really focus on humans rights and women's rights issues and racial justice in the , united states. this is an area that is frail. they are not large numbers of organizations in the u.s. working on social justice. there are not large numbers of philanthropy investing in those areas. for us, we are seeking to bring in some of the new donors, and we are seeing that with people who care about those issues and are investing big. charlie: i say give it to brian stephenson myself. joel: i couldn't agree more. i couldn't agree more. he is an amazing person. charlie: the point i wanted to make is, some people say, give it when you're younger because you will be smarter and wiser about how you want to give it. some wait until they are too old. joel: it is not either or. was is the point darren making before. you need to think of this as creating some kind of a plan which takes account of the problems that can be significantly benefited from giving now. to be savedhat need and worked on over the long run. the point that darren is making is very interesting. one of the things we did was we wanted to do something about the problem of mental disability. they said, we want to do something about the problems of mental disability, alzheimer's and things of that nature. they put together a consortium at the san francisco medical center they gave them nearly , $300 million to staff it up and to work at it. it is an example of the kind of things whether it was not the capacity on the ground. that can benefit from short-term dollars. but does bring up an interesting question. one thing congress is talking about doing is putting an excise tax on the wealth of foundations, which they have not had before at the level they are talking about. the other, changing the configuration of the deduction. initial studies are very early. this was all out in the last week. theynitial study showed could give $10 billion or if $15 billion, they put to the kind of change they are talking about. we know that approximately 80% all of the gifts coming to charitable organizations are taken as charitable productions. we know that. the tax records show that. if you start chipping away at it what are you going to do? , where are you going to get the money to devote to the problems that society needs? typically, universities are perpetual foundations. target of to be a congress, talked about putting attacks on university earnings, which has never happened before. charlie: what is the cautionary tale of henry ford ii? the cautionary tale of today ind ii manifests the ford foundation. and that is the impulse to do , good cannot always be predetermined or through a crystal ball. henry ford ii was a complicated man. as i have come to know him through the correspondence between himself and george bundy, he was a model of contradiction. he was a forward looking man, and yet he did not want women on the board of the ford foundation. he was an innovator and talked about equality and yet he was challenged by the foundation's support for the civil rights movement. in part, because of the criticism and brought to the ford motor company. henry ford ultimately, although he initiated the modern ford foundation in 1950 as an independent foundation, from the beginning said it would not be a family foundation and he and his brother were the only two fords ever on the board. he made the decision in 1976 to leave the board because he felt the foundation had drifted and had drifted in ways, women's rights, civil rights issues. it made a running the company problematic. it was difficult for him to wear both hats. charlie: this was an example i always heard. joel: a drift away from donor intent. i do not believe that. i don't think it was a drift away. charlie: the point of is the story illustrates the point. joel: that is correct. joel: the truth of the matter was that he was unhappy because ford was not doing somethings that he wanted to do. we all know that you create a board, as he has created. he had a very good relationships with all of them. but sometimes they did not do the things he wanted. the chairman of the board said i think the foundation is doing great. i wish it had done more to strengthen the system in america. that was the main point he was criticizing. all of the other points -- the notion of a drift away from donor intent is a false charge. because remember, he was on the board of the ford foundation for 40 years. he served as president and chairman. he appointed the committee, he approved every of the officers. oneto say it is a drift away from intent does not make a logical sense. darren: it shows you need to be independent. this is why i think bill gates has separated himself from the company. it is very hard to run an enterprise and at the same time run a philanthropy. that was the challenge for ford, was running the foundation cause -- caused a conflict for him. because he was running ford motor company. i think the cautionary tale is to not try to do both and to decide you're either going to be a businessman and do that and then decide you are going to be a philanthropist that you can't at the same time lead both of those enterprises. joel: the expression of that discontent came from many of the ford car dealers. they were the ones who were complaining about these modern things that the ford foundation was doing. charlie: you would assume that as a foundation, it looks at new problems, and therefore its original intent would evolve. and it does. joel: in terms of the mission that was written by the committee that henry ford ii created, everything ford is doing now is right in line with that mission. there is not a single example that i know of that is not. charlie: from texas to the university to rockefeller to forward -- ford. foundations do create a system to judge performance so they can make wise decisions about how they spend their money? darren: you have to understand that there is no single way to judge performance for much of what needs to happen in the world. we can do randomized controlled trials on a micro finance program or on a condition of cash transfer program. how do we create a randomized controlled trial to know if we are making progress on racial justice in america? how do we know that we are in -- imbuing in our culture the kinds of values that make us a more democratic society? how do we evaluate that? there are ways and there are qualitative, what the experts call mixed methodologies, that allow us to understand progress. the risk is as einstein reminded us, there are many things that are important in the world that cannot be measured, but we must invest in them nonetheless. the point is, if we only invested in things for which there were quantifiable, randomized controlled trials and interventions, we would not have seen the progress we have seen in the humanities, for example, or in the arts, or in many creative advancements. the rockefeller foundation is best known for what they did for the green revolution. joel: got the nobel prize. charlie: what is the ford foundation's best success? joel: -- darren: the ford foundation was their partner and the ford foundation invested more in the green revolution than the rockefeller foundation did. it is something we are very proud of. the ford foundation is known most because we have been at the forefront of human achievement for the last 60 years, particularly social progress and particularly around issues that are difficult and are at the heart of the american narrative and the global narrative and the fight for justice. at ford, we don't just talk about generosity, we talk about justice, because there is a difference. generosity as a philanthropist in some ways makes us comfortable, and we know from the research makes us feel good. we feel good when we give money away. justice actually makes us uncomfortable when we think about it because when we see a homeless person with mental illness on the street, we do not think this is a sad situation that something has happened to this person. there is something unjust in the richest society in the world have homeless people with mental illness on our streets. we ask the question, how do we have not just more generosity but more justice in our society? joel: i would add that ford has not failed to try to measure these things. some of the best organizations in the field was started by ford and is still supported by ford 40 years later. this is the organization that did the randomized controlled trials that ended up persuading congress to change the welfare program. charlie: i think the green revolution -- i think there are done thatings to be make a difference in justice and in the sheer survivability of human beings and that comes because somebody, somewhere put some money in a foundation, and somebody said, there is a need where we can make a difference. the question is, how we can make a difference, not how we can make a profit, but how we can make a difference. those examples are the best reason for philanthropy. it is like in the federal budget for me in a sense. i have sat at this table for 25 years and listened to people. they are concerned those who , worry about what we have done done, is not about whether we have done it, but whether we have done it well. foundations of gone into a space where no one was there and they made a difference. joel: if one believes that changing federal program supporting poor people from welfare to work is a step forward, but the fact of the matter is that is what the ford foundation research supported. charlie: the book is called "putting wealth to work: philanthropy for today or investing for tomorrow?" thank you. ♪ is this a phone? or a little internet machine? it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com. alisa: i am alisa parenti in new york and you are watching "bloomberg technology." house republicans passed their version of legislation to overhaul the u.s. tax code, by slashing the corporate tax rate, lowering tax burdens for most individuals, and adding one point four dollars trillion to the annual deficit over the next decade. the senate continues its debate for a separate plan. it is not clear if the chamber will have enough votes to tax -- the passive. briberyrobert menendez' trial has ended. they were deadlocked. the panel told the judge monday th