The Escalating Battle Between the U.S. and China

Published on
September 4th, 2019
Duration
63 minutes

The Escalating Battle Between the U.S. and China

The Interview ·
Featuring Marko Papic and Mike Green

Published on: September 4th, 2019 • Duration: 63 minutes

Marko Papic, partner and chief strategist at the Clocktower Group, sits down with Mike Green of Thiel Macro to discuss the growing conflict between the U.S. and China. Focusing on the internal incentives driving leaders’ actions, Papic predicts increased financial volatility and geopolitical instability. Papic also talks about the potential for opportunity amid the uncertainty. Filmed on August 27, 2019 in Los Angeles.

Comments

Transcript

  • CD
    Cheryl D.
    23 September 2019 @ 19:47
    a completely outstanding interview!!! Loved it!!! excellent job from both Marko and Mike!!! Can't wait for the next interview!!!
  • JG
    Jonathan G.
    21 September 2019 @ 11:25
    Mike G. excellent interviewer, really digs deeper and engage with his guest. Well done!
  • CG
    Christopher G.
    21 September 2019 @ 03:24
    https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/2018/09/28/china-advertisement-des-moines-register-newspaper-trade-tariffs/1444579002/
  • AI
    Alita I.
    21 September 2019 @ 01:29
    They currently only focused on regional hegemony? They even have US and EU's politicians and CEOs in their pocket. Look at Germany. Listen to Neil Bush and Ray Dalio. That is why the far right of Europe is going to gain traction and wake up
  • AI
    Alita I.
    21 September 2019 @ 01:25
    Has Marko ever lived in China? The people are being told all the wrong things and are not allowed to think, the public can never influence policy.
  • AI
    Alita I.
    21 September 2019 @ 01:05
    Joe Biden will be harsher towards China?? Not when they put money in your family's pocket. Do Marko not know BGY
  • MB
    Mike B.
    16 September 2019 @ 05:00
    This was lively and informative.
  • rs
    richard s.
    15 September 2019 @ 14:29
    What if President Trump strategically decides to give up re-election at the end? He will become aggressive going for Super 301 & sanctions, Democratic issues such as Xingjiang, HK, Christianity in mainland China, and will eventually drag down President XI with him
    • DS
      David S.
      16 September 2019 @ 19:57
      President Trump is tactical not strategic. DLS
  • JK
    Jay K.
    14 September 2019 @ 21:00
    I don't think the trade deal will happen... ever. I think this is the new normal.
  • RS
    Rafal S.
    14 September 2019 @ 03:32
    Fantastic. Do it again soon please!
  • JV
    Jens V.
    11 September 2019 @ 18:49
    Brilliant stuff. Looking fwd to the next interview. Great point about rivals in a multipolar world having to reluctantly cooperate. The point about demographics affecting willingness of parents to send children to war is also good, but read it in one of Edward Luttwak’s books. It certainly matters in free countries, but I wonder how much it matters in authoritarian ones. Maybe also a lot actually, because children are the most precious thing u have no matter what government u happen to have. Sending princelings to war may create a lot of unrest in China. They will most likely continue with “war by other means” as Marko suggests. Interesting take on US politics and the Chinese strategic mistakes assuming that Trump not being reelected will be a huge benefit for them. Globalization going into reverse is a much stronger trend than Trump or not Trump.
    • DS
      David S.
      20 September 2019 @ 17:52
      I think it was the mid-term elections he was discussing. DLS
  • NA
    N A.
    9 September 2019 @ 08:28
    Phenomenal interview, Marko articulates his views exceptionally well.
  • JK
    James K.
    9 September 2019 @ 02:00
    really enjoyed this one. Please have this guy back. Good to see Green as well.
  • GL
    Gregory L.
    9 September 2019 @ 00:40
    Awesome Interview.
  • JT
    Jayne T.
    9 September 2019 @ 00:27
    China has been making strategic investments for years around the world, eg. Africa, South America. Perhaps it doesn’t want hegemony world wide but it certainly seems to want to have influence (and control) in other parts of the world.
    • DS
      David S.
      9 September 2019 @ 00:35
      Agreed. Also after raw materials DLS
    • NA
      N A.
      9 September 2019 @ 08:31
      Listen to what Marko says. It's about security, plain and simple. Security includes access to crucial commodities and ensuring safe passage to China. Influence and control may be a result of this but not the motivation, at least not at this stage, imo.
  • DP
    Devraj P.
    8 September 2019 @ 16:17
    Debate is great but guest is unwilling to let host complete his side of view before making counter argument. Listeners will be missing important points and hearing one sided arguments without a stronger understanding.
  • VU
    Vikram U.
    8 September 2019 @ 09:58
    I agree, the cost-benefit of physical army or military makes no sense anymore when cyber offers by an exponential return for minimal cost but you add ML/RL or any other AI to it, negligible cost over time.
  • AW
    Austin W.
    7 September 2019 @ 20:44
    Absolutely love their ability to disagree, but not argue. Great interview, great guest.
  • PP
    Peter P.
    7 September 2019 @ 19:18
    Can I ask / anyone know what are the books on the table ? I can see: How China Sees the World by Friend & Thayer Free Trade Doesn’t Work by Ian Fletcher Cannot identify the other 3 books - thank you
  • HC
    Hakan C.
    7 September 2019 @ 16:37
    Great Video
  • PP
    Peter P.
    7 September 2019 @ 14:32
    Loved the sit-down, thank you both. Had not thought that the de-globalizing 2010s/2020s (or G-Zero as Ian Bremmer calls it) could be studied by reviewing the 1890s - was a great insight including how trade continues until the day (hypothetically) bullets fly. Wish Marko had given Mike a few extra seconds to finish some of his points before interjecting, but Mike Green was a very gracious host and interviewer. BTW the potential of Mike re-interviewing this week's guests in 6- 12 months makes me look forward to Mike Green Week on RV with far more excitement and anticipation than any Shark Week ever could muster.
  • MW
    Marcus W.
    7 September 2019 @ 12:54
    I got a lot from the interviewer
  • DS
    David S.
    7 September 2019 @ 08:19
    Just watched for the second time. Even better than the first. I am sure I will understand even better after watching again. Thanks to both and to the RVTV team. DLS
  • GF
    Guangle F.
    7 September 2019 @ 05:57
    Great guest. With a lot common thoughts I had.
    • DS
      David S.
      7 September 2019 @ 08:09
      CapEx is down partly because of investment risk. Two larger competing uses of corporate funds are debt repayments to escape credit downgrades and corporate stock buybacks. These allocations are reasonable as corporate executives want to increase stock prices and executive pay. DLS
    • DS
      David S.
      7 September 2019 @ 08:16
      The decline in interest rates may not be predicting a recession, just too much money in the world trying to escape negative interest rates. Sometimes it is not too complex. Even at low rates the US is still the safest place. This includes the stock market. Just make sure your stocks have strong balance sheets to be able to keep paying dividends, debt and maintain corporate buybacks. DLS
    • DS
      David S.
      7 September 2019 @ 11:04
      Sorry, I meant these to be new comments. DLS
  • AR
    Andrew R.
    6 September 2019 @ 19:46
    The fist time in a while with many disagreements. Refreshing.
  • Hv
    Hannah v.
    6 September 2019 @ 04:57
    Ed Harris interviews Mike Green please.
  • JP
    Jeffrey P.
    6 September 2019 @ 02:23
    Wow, what an enjoyable hour of my time.
  • SA
    Stephen A.
    6 September 2019 @ 01:18
    Wow, this is a good one. One of the best interviews on the China-US trade war on this platform (which means anywhere). Any guy that drops in Machiavelli scores points in my book. And Mike Green as always is the best. A couple quick thoughts on some of the topics mentioned. There is no prospect of a real US-China war now or anytime in the near future. The Thucydides Trap is somewhat of an idiotic concept when it comes to the US-China dynamic. China is landlocked country with zero natural resources of military importance. In a war, the US cuts off their oil and China falls on its knees within a month. If anybody has studied WW2 history, most of the movements were to capture oil fields and energy transmission routes. You cut off the oil and the tanks can't move. Yes, China has some missile defense systems but US can bomb them into oblivion with its submarines. Shanghai and all of China's coastal cities can disappear into thin air within a week without the usage of one nuclear weapon. Not to mention China has South Korea and Japan and India and Pakistan as neighbors door and boy are their militaries ready to do some plundering. Not to mention the head choppers in Japan have been itching for a return to China, this time with the US as an ally. Japan didn't have that luxury in the late 30s. By the time a real war against China is finished, US generals will be flying in with a balloon into the middle of Beijing for a cup of coffee with Jinping's ass serving as a table. The other part that gets me somewhat annoyed is the concept that the US has lower pain tolerance than China. I believe it was the US that fought the Cold War against Russia for 50 years and not China. While Trump is a little bit too focused on day-to-day movements in the stock market subsequent US presidents won't be (particularly if Democrats) and the pain on China will rise dramatically. If necessary, the US can mobilize very quickly (see 1940s or 1910s as example). Finally, by now China has spent majority of its geoeconomic firepower against the US. They screwed up soybean harvest of 2019 for the US farmers, guess what? US farmers won't be growing soybeans in 2020. They will be growing corn. China is welcome to nationalize Apple's Foxconn plants, but guess what nobody will be buying that production and 3 million workers will be joining the Hong Kong riots. Fighting this trade war is far from an easy endeavor for the Chinese and the pain they will suffer is far greater than anything the US will experience. The unfortunate thing for our panda friends is that they will have to settle for being less than a regional hegemon and perhaps be a nice, friendly country like the Japanese, Vietnam and everybody else in the region. One way or another, they will end up like Japan, let's hope it's not the way Japan did it. The Chinese Communist Party is going to soon discover that measuring dicks with butchers like the Yankees was a very, very bad idea.
    • AF
      Andre F.
      6 September 2019 @ 02:22
      The neat campaign you describe is impossible. Russia will not sit idly by while the U.S. attempts to militarily defeat China.
    • TR
      Travis R.
      6 September 2019 @ 05:01
      Enjoyed reading this comment as much as watching the interview. An interesting thing was pointed out to me the other day: if the Dems really wanted to easily sink Donald Trump reelection bid in 2020 all they would have to do is broadcast to the CCP that once they win in 2020 they will revert back to pre 2016 relations. In turn the CCP could really play hardball and attempt to sink the world economy for the next 18mos. However as this interview confirms the Dems secretly support the trade war and will be even tougher on China if and when they gain Executive power. All of this also jives with a poll that came out this week showing 67% of Americans support confronting China even though they believe they will personally feel economic pain. After seeing that poll I believe the Chinese will submit to terms.
    • TR
      Travis R.
      6 September 2019 @ 05:02
      Correction 14 months. Link to poll: https://thehill.com/policy/finance/459746-poll-voters-want-us-to-confront-china-over-trade
    • DS
      David S.
      6 September 2019 @ 05:14
      China has about 9,000 miles of coast line. It is not a landlocked country. Second a WWII type war between China and the US is a very low probability. It will be an economic competition. China is already the most powerful country in the Asia. That power will grow each year. Time will tell how Asia develops among China, Japan and India. DLS
    • SA
      Stephen A.
      6 September 2019 @ 09:45
      Andre - I didn't mention Russia, but I should have. The China-Russia "alliance" of the moment is very brittle and mostly driven by the US sanctions around Crimea. China and Russia have been adversaries for a very long time and only the US sanctions which have spread to Europe have forced Russia to explore China as a market for its oil/gas & military exports. The Putin-Jinping friendship is about as fake as it can possibly get. In a real geopolitical conflict, US & Russia will gang up together against China in a nano-second. If there is plundering to do and some land to acquire in China with the help of the Americans, there won't be much thinking over there at the Kremlin. US & Russia already did this exercise in WW2 and will gladly do it again. It certainly worked out great for both parties.
    • SA
      Stephen A.
      6 September 2019 @ 09:50
      David - India often gets disregarded from the Asian "regional hegemon" discussion but projected demographic growth makes India the new China over the next 30 years. I think you will see India grow in stature quite dramatically in coming years both economically and as a military power. I am not sure that India will let China usurp the "hegemon" title quite as easily as Jinping thinks that will happen. The Indians are coming.
    • dm
      david m.
      6 September 2019 @ 12:48
      @Stephen A. >US & Russia already did this exercise in WW2 and will gladly do it again That was before the Cold War. Fair to say that sentiment has changed a bit since then.
    • DS
      David S.
      6 September 2019 @ 13:18
      India will certainly be in the mix and rightly so. India, however, is more of an investment opportunity. China's government will continue to be focused on its position in the world order. India has plenty of problems ruling India and keeping a distance from Pakistan. DLS
    • MC
      Minum C.
      6 September 2019 @ 14:16
      Hello Stephen, one thing that seems to be very clear with the Chinese is their ability to totally ignore US sanctions placed on Iran. I believe the long term plan for China is to help Iran develop its energy and energy infrastructure. The US cannot "cut off" China's access to Iranian crude oil unless it starts a war, and President Trump does not appear to be as much of a war monger as you are. Your comment is disappointing. Incorrect facts and incorrect assumptions delivered in a rude way. You must be American.
    • DS
      David S.
      7 September 2019 @ 07:16
      Minum C. - I agree with your comments, except I do not think that America holds a monopoly on the negative behaviors you discussed. DLS
    • PP
      Peter P.
      7 September 2019 @ 13:37
      I do not believe it would take a month to end the US-China hard conflict you discuss -> a quick guide & excellent read of a 90%+ casualty rate in the USA without a bullet being fired (other than by Americans at home in self defense) http://tedkoppellightsout.com & not much more difficult to take out all our privately owned communication satellites either.
    • JV
      Jens V.
      11 September 2019 @ 19:09
      Haha great comment. Great point wrt Chinese oil supply. The country will be in full revolt within months if oil is cut off. Also a massive economic issue without a war, due to the sheer amount of imports, constantly growing, and the amount of USD needed to acquire it. I think they will struggle to become a regional hegemon. Read the Rise of China vs the Logic of Strategy by Edward Luttwak. Worried as we may be in Europe or the US about the rise of China, it is nothing compared to the worries in the countries bordering China or nearby. They will all be maneuvering and cooperating to contain China and to eat China’s cake. India was mentioned in another comment, and they even have democracy and openness which means flexibility and a valve for the population to vent frustration. China made the massive mistake of aggressively expanding its military while at the same time growing quickly economically. This is simply unacceptable for every country potentially threatened by China (long list). Imagine if they hadn’t grown their military and hadn’t acted they have they have in the South China Sea, for example, then they could possibly have kept growing economically for another decade without the massive counter-reaction we’re seeing. Instead they are now in a massive PR crisis, trade crisis and confidence crisis. Yes, there is also the trade issues, the tech theft and the human rights issues, but all those factors would possibly be manageable if it wasn’t for the military mobilization on top.
    • JV
      Jens V.
      11 September 2019 @ 19:11
      Luttwak also coins the term Great State Autism, which very much applies to China. They make strategic and diplomatic blunders that smaller nations would never do, because they don’t think of themselves in the same terms.
  • RA
    Robert A.
    6 September 2019 @ 00:19
    Vintage RV—great topic, great guest and an always great interviewer Mike Green. Some commonality and some nuanced divergence on an important topic handled in a Professional “back and forth” format. I don’t want the Guest to take this the wrong way as I VERY much enjoyed his input, but IMO this interview required a strong knowledgeable equally prepared interviewer to keep him “reigned in”....which of course, Mike Green was able to do in a seeming-less manner. This interview was a nice adjunct to some of the Macro Insider discussions between Raoul and Julian, IMO.
    • DS
      David S.
      6 September 2019 @ 05:24
      Great dialogue, not really an interview. Control was not an issue. We learned a lot more as each had equal input. The fact that both men respect each other greatly is apparent. When either did not agree with a statement, both worked to define the difference and find common ground. DLS
    • AR
      Anthony R.
      8 September 2019 @ 16:34
      Per DLS comment - yes, more discussions, fewer 'interviews' on RV, pls. The former is probably much more satisfying for the participants and yields deeper/richer content for the rest of us watching.
  • JH
    Joe H.
    5 September 2019 @ 22:29
    Excellent! Mike - 2 requests: (I) please let someone interview you and (II) please interview Chris Cole again. Wish he was on vol week earlier this summer with you. Great work.
  • DS
    David S.
    5 September 2019 @ 19:48
    I think CapEx is reduced by corporate debt, emphasis on corporate buybacks, constand business disruptions, trade wars, politics de jure, and daily policy changes. (Buybacks are the lowest risk.) It is surprising therefore, I am not looking for a US recession but certainly slow growth. With wages increasing, especially on the lower end, I have faith that the US consumer will keep spending enough to offset a manufacturing recession. With all the problems outside the US, funds will keep flowing into short, medium and long-term US treasuries as EM is in trouble. "Waiting for Gadot" may continue in the stock market as the the Algos and option market increase volatility in their zero sum game with deration risk. I am glad that I am not investing other people's money. DLS
    • DS
      David S.
      6 September 2019 @ 08:46
      Sorry duration risk. DLS
  • EK
    Edward K.
    5 September 2019 @ 18:43
    Had discounted China as an investment going forward but this interview has me rethinking. Always thought that EM = China (still do) but world is changing rapidly and time to adapt to new ideas.
  • DS
    David S.
    5 September 2019 @ 17:18
    Excellent dialogue. One of the best. Although it is difficult for me to disagree with Mr. Green, my guess is more in keeping with Mr. Papic. There is nothing simple about China, but I think it will be able to keep growing with or without an immediate trade deal. DLS
  • MC
    Minum C.
    5 September 2019 @ 13:49
    A terrific interview with lots of meat on the bone. One topic that was not discussed was the geopolitical ramifications of China's Belt and Road project. I assume this plays a significant role in China's political and economic ambitions.
  • RS
    Ruben S.
    5 September 2019 @ 12:03
    Great interview ! However Marko, not buying the "trump will eventually make everything to get a deal in order to be re-elected" argument. main reason being: FED is now ready to act on any deterioration of the situation (Trumps sort of insurance policy :-) ) and Trump knows it , so dont really see how he would back down in a political calculation in front of Xi.
    • DS
      David S.
      5 September 2019 @ 17:03
      The Chinese would worry about the US keeping the deal anyway. There have been several deals in final consideration, but backed out of at the last moment by the US. A China deal may not be necessary for President Trump's campaign. DLS
    • TR
      Travis R.
      6 September 2019 @ 05:16
      David S. When talks last broke down it was because the CCP at the last minute withdrew from several key US demands that were previously agreed to prior to signing. "The Chinese would worry about the US keeping the deal anyway".... I think not. The CCP has made a mockery of the WTO; which they happily entered only to shred any notion of fair play. We are still talking about a ruling party that engages in mass brainwashing of their population via state controlled media and internet, has 3 million Muslims locked up in internment camps, is engaged in state sponsored financial fraud and IP theft, just to name a few.
    • DS
      David S.
      6 September 2019 @ 05:37
      Travis R. - I agree that the Chinese will not hold to the agreement in the western style. They want, however, a firm agreement to reestablish trade, but with enough wiggle room to continue as usual. Except for the stock market, I do not think it is in President Trump's interest to have a trade deal before the election - or maybe a few weeks before. Every decision now is political and the economy will have to adjust as best it can. DLS
  • KC
    Klendathu C.
    5 September 2019 @ 12:00
    Fantastic
  • DP
    David P.
    5 September 2019 @ 10:52
    Always a bit wary about that 600 billions trade deficit figure that Mike quoted in the piece. Which part of this is actually US companies using other channels like the Cayman Islands or Ireland to channel profit in a different way. Read a piece a month ago saying that the real number was actually half that. Can't find it unfortunately, There is also the fact that some countries have positive demographics and have a net import of skilled productive young people (US, Canada, Australia). It is a logical consequence for aging countries like Germany or Japan to find a way to get the countries with young people to "pay" for their retirees.
  • PD
    Pat D.
    5 September 2019 @ 09:41
    Mike is simply a superb interviewer. His nuanced yet subtle directing of the conversation seems to get better with every episode I have seen. Can't wait for the next one. Also, would love to have someone interview Mike, but I can't seem to settle on who might be the appropriate person to rise to the occasion.
    • MC
      Minum C.
      5 September 2019 @ 13:37
      Ed
    • DS
      David S.
      5 September 2019 @ 15:58
      Or, Marko Papic. The dialogue was great in this interview. DLS
  • AH
    Ahmed H.
    5 September 2019 @ 09:22
    great stuff! moaaar of this
  • CM
    Carlos M.
    5 September 2019 @ 09:01
    great interview!! though I have to say I agree much more with Marko scenario. Talking about biases!! If Mike Green thinks America will prevail because of its capability to replenish a 20bio war machine or 1 mio army losses, he needs to be reminded that America nuke Japan to end the WW2 when war casualties were less that half a mio. ( true popultaion has tripled since then) but stil I hope at least that common sense will prevail ( or we are all dead) and a more realistic scenario is a more technological warfare as Marko describes, in which I think China has a solid footing. I believe it was in RV( not sure ) were someone was acknowledging that China due in part to its loose privacy practices( more access to data) will be able to surpass US in AI development as early as 2020.
    • FB
      Federico B.
      5 September 2019 @ 12:54
      I found that part of the conversation missed the fact that both nations are nuclear powers, and so a conflict based on conventional warfare is not conceivable in my view.
  • UB
    Umberto B.
    5 September 2019 @ 05:36
    Mike Green n. 1. Never disappoints.
  • DC
    Dave C.
    5 September 2019 @ 02:56
    Thought provoking and good interviewer, enjoyable even though there was lots that I could not agree with. It is surely time to get back Simon Hunt again to hear his views on the trade wars and the Chinese economy in particular.
  • FC
    Fractal C.
    5 September 2019 @ 02:14
    Super!
  • CW
    Christopher W.
    5 September 2019 @ 02:05
    Phenomenal interview, thank you gentlemen. Only thing I didn't quite agree with was Marko's opinion that China was only interested in maintaining regional hegemony. I'd argue their significant forays into Africa and South America show a longer term plan to expand to global hegemony.
    • YX
      Yuankun X.
      5 September 2019 @ 02:48
      I kind of agree with you. President Xi is a BIG MAN with great ambitions. This can be told by the constitutional amendment recently which allows him to be reappointed without limitation. To be more specific, he is a Mao-style leader, who has the will to lead a country to a new era. If he has the power and time to build a global hegemony, he will. However, we should also see that for a very long period China has to deal with its internal inconsistencies, and maybe this will take a lifetime. We are not talking about a president in his prime, but a man who's over 65. For a couple decades at least, regional hegemony is what China is asking for. As for the further? It depends on the successor. And it is not easy to find another BIG MAN.
  • tc
    t c.
    5 September 2019 @ 01:34
    Don't usual comment after first minute but have to say - Marko doesn't know China, maybe he will show more knowledge later but starts off like a fool. A Stratfor alumni- Hmm cia mindset.
    • DS
      David S.
      5 September 2019 @ 16:06
      I thought Mr. Papic was brilliant and able to dialogue well with Mr. Green. What did you think about Mr. Papic at the end. DLS
  • WS
    Will S.
    5 September 2019 @ 00:33
    This was great. Mike Green is one of the best interviewers RV has and Papic was thought provoking.
  • RM
    Ryan M.
    5 September 2019 @ 00:06
    Mike, you've talked about China being past the Lewisian turning point before, but can't purely the structural shift in moving from lower productivity agriculture (~27% of labor force vs say Brazil ~9%) into higher productivity manufacturing, even services say, still continue to boost growth? While I agree that FDI has helped boost productivity within manufacturing/services, I think the structural shift can still provide a tailwind.
  • RM
    Ryan M.
    4 September 2019 @ 23:54
    I'm digging the Ian Fletcher book
  • KW
    K W.
    4 September 2019 @ 21:19
    The Chinese do want regional hegemony--true. Once they have it; then will go for rest of the world. If anyone thinks its ok for China to hold power regionally is out of their mind.
    • DS
      David S.
      7 September 2019 @ 11:11
      Without a war, how would you stop them? DLS
    • AR
      Anthony R.
      8 September 2019 @ 16:43
      Papic did point out the importance of 'time horizons'.
    • KW
      K W.
      9 September 2019 @ 04:42
      Not sure about war. Skirmishes or battle in SE China is a possibility. I doubt US will be the one fire first. If I were Chinese, I'll pick on smaller guys first to test battle readiness before hitting US.
  • AD
    Abhijit D.
    4 September 2019 @ 21:03
    Boy is Mike a great interviewer! Alongwith Ed, he is the best of the best! Marko is a pleasure to hear. Great interview
  • AD
    Adrian D.
    4 September 2019 @ 20:24
    This was an excellent interview! Would love to see more segments geopolitics.
    • AR
      Anthony R.
      8 September 2019 @ 16:46
      This interview highlights the importance of studying the humanities and history - not just math, math, math or, for that matter, STEM, STEM, STEM - not only for successful investing, but making decisions in any industry. Great discussion for both quantitative and qualitative analysis.
  • VS
    Victor S. | Contributor
    4 September 2019 @ 20:04
    Great talk gents - Mr Green your the best in many dimensions! Thank you both.
  • RE
    Richard E. | Contributor
    4 September 2019 @ 19:46
    Outstanding. Expected nothing less. One pushback to Marko on whether the next administration will be tougher on China than Trump might be this - players such as Biden and McConnell both have family members who do a great deal of business with China and they are not the only ones. This might be one of the reasons D.C. players always talked tough on China for their constituency but never really did anything important.
  • dm
    david m.
    4 September 2019 @ 19:32
    Respectfully, more of Mike Green please. Also, 50b.
  • DF
    David F.
    4 September 2019 @ 19:29
    Great interview. Any book on what Marko discusses around 23'-24' regarding the comercial relationship between countries right until they went to war in the 10s?
    • RM
      Ryan M.
      5 September 2019 @ 01:03
      Not what you're looking for, but the concept reminded me of the balance of power narrative that Kissinger talks about in his book "Diplomacy"
  • JA
    Johan A.
    4 September 2019 @ 17:42
    Brilliant!
  • PG
    Philippe G.
    4 September 2019 @ 17:41
    Excellent conversation! Loved it!
  • TE
    Tito E.
    4 September 2019 @ 16:43
    Excellent conversation. The constraints view is a great heuristic. (btw the Trump wrestling thing is closer to the truth than you can imagine. I only saw this recently, but just vid search 'Trump shaves Vince')
    • TE
      Tito E.
      4 September 2019 @ 16:45
      Trump shaves Xi would be so good
  • YL
    Young L.
    4 September 2019 @ 15:32
    that was great. thank you Mike. while I'd love to see more interviews done by you, isn't time for you, Mike, to be interviewed to update us on your current views...
  • SS
    Steve S.
    4 September 2019 @ 15:24
    I just love Mike Green. Such a smart guy and the GOAT interviewer. Great interview.
    • AB
      Anne-Marie B.
      4 September 2019 @ 17:51
      Totally agree....
  • MC
    Marc C.
    4 September 2019 @ 14:37
    Marko's nuanced perspective and views unfold an actionable roadmap. A must watch.
  • NA
    N A.
    4 September 2019 @ 13:45
    Great interview, thank you Mike.
  • JR
    J R.
    4 September 2019 @ 09:21
    What's Marko's Twitter handle? Great conversation!
    • MN
      Maverick N.
      4 September 2019 @ 15:14
      Thought the same thing... couldn't find his own but BCA research @bcaresearch is a good way to find his latest and greatest work.