tv Squawk Alley CNBC January 24, 2017 11:00am-12:01pm EST
they are looking to finalize negotiations. also on the latest face to face encounter with trump yesterday. so lockheed is really considered a bell weather. we have a number of other companies reporting as the week goes on. >> expect a lot of trump talk, that does it for us on "squawk on the street." it is 11:00 a.m. on wall street and "squawk alley" is live.
>> good tuesday morning, welcome to "squawk alley." we're here at post nine of the new york stock exchange. top executives from the big three auto makers meeting with president trump. we're monitoring a number of hearings. the president at this hour also expected to sign new executive orders at this time. phil labeau is in chicago. >> we're expecting to see the president at the top of this hour sign a order related to the keystone pipeline. we just had the auto ceo's mark
fields gave the reporters his reaction to the executive order yesterday on tpp. >> we have been very vocal as a industry and a company. and we repeatedly said the mother of all trade is manipulation. and tpp failed to meaningfully deal with that. >> mitch mckonld said he will be here this afternoon. they are going to meet with the president and talk about a supreme court choice to fill that vacancy. >> thank you for that, speaking of moving parts, what a day in the auto sector today. >> yeah, let's go back to what president trump spoke about
today. he wants u.s. sold vehicles to be built in the u.s., you're looking at 43% of vehicles in the u.s. imported from other countries. they come from mexico, canada, and japan. keep in mind that the current state of capacity is they're close to running at capacity. it costs billions of dollars. they build about 70% of the vehicles here in the united states. it is a substantial improvement. not where we were prerecession, but a substantial improvement. they're higher today even though as we talked about, you're looking at the auto makers likely adding costs to build in
the u.s. >> phil, don't go any where. robert coop is the international corporate strategist, it is good to see all of you. how are you supposed to be thinking about capacity right now in light of what the white house is offering. >> i think they will be able to raise prices on cars, they will not have a lot of capacity. they focus -- >> but you focus on these changes? >> these are real price increases, i'm not sure i would describe is as inflation. >> robert, how about you? >> i'm looking at it from a stand point of china and we don't want any relations. there has been talk and concern
in china that will affect the entire community in both countries. the auto industry in china is doing well. they have major operations there, they're 50% owned by the chinese government entities. i look for the chinese auto sector to be a important driver of china's economy. >> and on these trade questions, you say you can't make for $20 what you can buy for $2 and remain competitive in the long run. translate that as far as what he says he wants to do for all of the cars manufactured in the u.s. >> i think unfortunately he is
focused on imports. i think we we were buying something from mexico, we would not care if they were buying the same amount to us, but what happens is that the flow has to blast, so if you start restricting imports, the mamt of money that is off shore, it will also be restricted. so when you restrict one, you restrict the other. you want to change the mix of money flowing into the u.s. to savings. off shore countries are loaning us money to buying exports. and there are many ways to do that, but our imports will not have much of an effect between savings -- it is a problem that most voters don't see and they don't understand the way that congress -- >> the good that is the most responsible for the trade deficit, it is autos.
interestingly what we have is a surplus in services. we export our mind share. and i'm wondering if you think this shift that our economy has under gone from a manufacturing economy to a services economy, if the balance of that is at risk. >> it is a understanding of how the whole economy works. if we put tariffs on good, it is like subsidizing for few americans. it may be like medicare and other social services. it is a decision the country may make. but it is inefficient for the entire world. so what you're saying between manufactured goods, service goods, and an increasing knowledge based economy where more manufacturing will be robotic anyway, that the broth
industries must be intellectual. that is what we should be focusing on, i believe. for the long future, it is a sub op o opttmaizational plg we can collectively do better in a consonant way than to be disruptive. >> i want to add one point about pricing, which you brought up earlier. will people pay more? think about this, the afternoon transaction price, the average in the u.s., it $34,000. you think someone who is buying a ford fusion is going to pay,
or a ford focus, whatever a small vehicle might , they will be willing to pay 22,000 or $23,000. at some point you get real resistance from the market that is buying the smaller cars. and to be on the lower end of the demographic. so the question becomes "is it worth it? is it worth it to pay a tax if you have to do it conversely or here in the u.s.? >> ed, your thoughts on that? >> i think the automakers would love a tax on imports. they're making 75% on their cars. how much remains to be scene, i think you will see more increase on the high and low end, but they would love taxes on imports. >> finally we talk about cars being made in the u.s., but they may still be built with parts
being outsourced from outside of the u.s. what happens then? >> generally speaking, your supplier goes where the manufacturing is. if you were to theoretically shut down those plants, put them in ohio, michigan, or missouri, or the central parts of the united states, you would see those plants come back to the u.s. t all of tm bua lot of them. they go with the united states. >> thank you, we are just on day two, it will be a lot more, as we go to break we have presession highs here. when we come back, the president is expected to sign more executive orders this morning advancing the keystone pipeline. today, putting the brakes on
brexit for now. we'll break down all of the numbers with ellie wheeler when we come back. ♪ we're drowning in information. where, in all of this, is the stuff that matters? the stakes are so high, your finances, your future. how do you solve this? you don't. you partner with a firm that advises governments and the fortune 500,
and, can deliver insight person to person, on what matters to you. morgan stanley. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage.
auto executives today and manufacturing ceos yesterday in follows protests of his inauguration over the weekend. wall street also mobilizing in the capital on monday. good to see you. >> thank you, you too. >> you had a busy weekend. now, seeing so many familiar fashions in wall street and the potentially positive forces for wall street. >> we should give the new administration a chance and i'm certainly first up there. i have been watching some meetings as they come out with a fascinating new style of interacting with business and we do want a strong economy. i think right now the focus has
been more on earnings than on what will happen going forward. >> the focus will be on the companies, their cash, if they are repatriating money. >> interest rates are higher. going forward, the key will be are we going to create new jobs. what kind of tariffs will be imposed. i think the ceos that he is meeting with are saying we're all for creating more jobs but we don't want a trade war. >> often times when they race money, the big tech companies are buying other competitor's bonds because they have so few places to get that money to get a -- >> what would it take for them
to bring the money back. what would the most attractive thing, policy wise, be for these companies? >> i think it is important to look at tariffs and regulation and deregulation. deregulation is not necessarily good or bad. there are things to look at on both sides. for example, the regulations in effect, the pharmaceutical market, it means it takes longer for drugs to come into market. in the corporate market, dodd frank creates additional regulations. so i think that will be a real issue. >> when it comes to the women's march, that number of people that turn out, we have not seen that in quite that way for whatever the broad range of reasons turning out.
is that what we should be expecting economically for 2014. >> i don't think it necessarily has an economic impact. i think that saturday was really about the social aspect. it was about human rights for all. it was fascinating to see the signs. not the antitrump signs, but the protecting the rights of women, gays, and muslims. >> so this march as opposed to previous, it wasn't about women's suffrage, it was against a person. you disagree with that? >> i think there was equal numbers there. i will say that i wasn't necessarily supportive of the signs that were against trump. i was there for a positive reason. i was there because as a recognizable woman on wall street, i have a platform and a voice, and i want to be able to
use that in a positive way going forward. >> what exactly are you looking for from the white house that employs women at very high levels? >> kellyanne conway, i wish there was more women in the cabinet so far, but that is what it is. i'm looking for the rights of people based on religion, gender, and race. i think those are the things, starting with the night after the election. not necessarily with trump, we were seeing people vocal about their opposition to people who are different, and that is why i was there. >> there was a piece in the new york times by our former colleague that featured you. they said we don't normally do this. we have never done this before. do you think this protest was a one-off event or will the
feelings keep bubbling up? >> i don't think it was a one-off event. the number of e-mails i got, and people commenting on "what do we do now. i started a facebook group after the election that is based on all of us supporting other groups that feel like they're marginalized. i do think you will see more women running for office nationally and locally. that is certainly a wonderful thing. i was just reading about an article about why another woman marched. when we got to the station, there was a mass of pink hats. >> it is great to have your perspective, you're right in the middle of it all, keep coming back to us to talk about the markets as well. >> still to come, a headache for teresa may after a british court through another speed bump into the brexit plan. watching shares of apple.
u.k. supreme court ruling that teresa may must have parliaments approval before brexit can begin. let's speak to paraments lead negotiator. thank you for joining us today, it is a pleasure to have you in new york. you're the chief negotiator, so any deal struck between the government and the european union has to be approved by you, so what do you make of the development and the comments of teresa may in the past couple days on her intention for a hard brexit. >> we were not surprised by the decision of the supreme court
because the supreme court has simply confirmed the first decision of the high court. and that means that the british parliament will be involved before article 50 of the treaty can be triggered by the u.k. authorities. and i think it is a good thing. it is clear now that in the interest of the citizens and the british parliament will be involveme involved. and we are involved based on the treaty we need to approve, or disapprove the final agreement which the u.k. authorities, and we have requested that we should be linked to these negotiations, be present in the negotiations, from day one. as we need to approve the final deal. then, on the issue of mrs. may, she has made clear that britain wants to go out of not only the european union, but also the
single market, the customs union, the european court o justice. so tha iclear-cut from the european union, and that means that yeah, once triggered, article 50, question start negotiations i think in may or initially june. >> while we're talking, the president signed those executive or orders on keystone and dakota access. he says we will renegotiate some of the terms, that was expected, just wanted to keep the viewers honest on that, seima. >> you talk about a rise of populism. how is trump's presidency impacting the political la landscape across europe. >> first of all, i think the national and populist movement has more influence.
trump has influenced these movements in europe because of the origins of these national and populist movements are from a decade ago. it is true that the election of trump makes these movements more credible. and for us, for europe, the election of mr. trump is a wake up call to a faster integration of the european union. we need to make a real union, a real federation, a political union but also the defense community, the defense capacity, because mr. trump is very clear that he doesn't believe any more in the european union. he said i expect other countries to break away from the union. not only great britain. and that is a very, i have to tell you, a very hostile statement towards the european union. since the second world war,
europe has been the best ally of america. and i think mr. trump made a mistake to be hostile to the european union. america can only be great again if there is a ally like the european union who is strong, defends the same values, and has t opinions the same. so it is a wake up call. and that we'll be an encouragement for european leaders to go forward on a fast track with the integration of the european union creating a political union and a defense union, i hope. >> it is not just politicians, though, that are identifying and finding success employing some of this rhetoric, it is corporate leaders, too. just last week, jamie dimon says
the euro zone might not survive if politicians can't get a hold on the discontent that is there. what is your outlook for that? >> what we desperately need, and the reason why i think the analysis is correct, is a new governance for the single currency. until now, the european union is merely a confederation of member states based on unimity. the americans know you need more than that for the confederation to keep a continent together, and you to establish a real federation. you need a treasury, a government, to -- as the basis for a single currency. and we have these ideas welcome the project to establish a new governance for the euro zone is ready. the only thing it lacks is the
political will. but i think that the election of mr. trump will be an encouragement now to realize them. these ideas. >> we will leave the coersation there, the former prime minister of bell yum and the chief brexit negotiator, thank you for your time. guys, all of this coming ahead of teresa may's meeting friday with donald trump. thank you, watching for the european close, we want to bring you up to speed on some of the headlines regarding the checkticheck ti executive orders, the order hi says is subject to terms and conditions. he says they should use american steel, ordering, expediting environmental approvals on high priority infrastructure projects, and going on to say he will announce a supreme court nominee choice next week. i believe john harwood is watching all of these headlines,
john? >> carl, this is a completion of a campaign promise that donald trump made. he said he would approve twhehe two projects, and the pipeline was a political football for the obama administration. the administration leaned towards supporting it. trump make a different cost benefit analysis. one of the questions will be how quickly transcanada resumes that pipeline process, if in fact they do. you know there are various price concerns, the pipeline is good f for north dakota, a state that trump carried handlely in the election, and they would lessen their transportation costs of their oil. as for the supreme court.
this is a vacancy that has existed since the death of antonin scalia. they tried to get merrick garland approved. now donald trump is saying he may have a pick as early as last week. he said it would come in his first couple weeks in office. the question is can he get 60 votes for that nominee because under the current rules, even though cabinet members can be confirmed on a simple majority, the supreme court justices need 60 votes so he needs eight democrats to go along. >> the energy ramifications on important. what are your thoughts? >> as i said before these are two very important projects for the energy industry. let's talk about the keystone
pipeline quickly. when president obama vetoed the prokt, they immediately applied for an appeal. analysts told me they are ready to go and move forward with the project quite quickly. the energy partners have always wanted to move through with this, but on the keystone side, you're bringing that heavier oil down to the u.s. in is not necessarily the kind of oil that we're producing domestically here, and we still import a lot of the oil. so it will not necessarily flood the market right away, but that t produc needed. at the same time, that is a transportation system that will get that oil out of theba balki and do it safely. so you want to watch the
pipeline stops on this. if any, you look at those two stops specifically, they're up more than about 30%. these projects are key with how we move forward in the industry, and there are two split views on this still. pro energy, probusiness, putting us in a situation where they pump more and depress prices. back to you. let's listen to the president. >> this is with regard to the construction of the keystone pipeline. something that has been in dispute and subject to a renegotiation of terms by us. we're going to renegotiate some of the terms and if they would
this is construction of pipelines in this country. we are, and i am, very insistent that if we're going to build pipelines in the united states, the pipes should be made in the united states. so unless there is difficulty with that because companies are going to have to gear up, much pipeline is bought from other countries. from now on we'll start making pipeline in the united states. we build it in the united states, we build the pipelines, we want to build the pipe. going to put a lot of skill workers back to work.
okay, we will build our own pipeline, our own pipes. that's what it has to do with, like we used to, in the old days. >> this is about streamlining the incredibly cumbersome long horrible permitting process and reducing regulatory burdens for domestic manufacturers. the meeting we had with yesterday and others, the process is so long and dumb cumbersome they give up before the end. and if it is a no, a quick no, and if it's a yes, let's start
building. the system has become a tangled up mess and very unfair to people. that is a big one. okay. this is the expediting of environmental reviews and approvals for high priority infrastructure projects. we intend to fix our country, our bridges, our roadways. we can't be in an environmental process for 15 years if a bridge will be falling down, or if a highway is crumbling, so we're expediting environmental reviews and approvals.
okay. thank you very much. >> mr. trump, any comments on the standing rock protestors out there? >> thank you, press -- >> we're good, thank you. some time next week i will be making my decision this week we'll be announcing, next week we have outstanding candidates, and we will pick a truly great supreme court justice, i will be announcing some time next week. thank u all vy much. >> thank you. >> that is t president moments ago. two things, the energy sector has waited a very long time for, expediting, environmental restrictions, federal reviews on
new infrastructure in this country. using american steel to build pipes. we will build our own pipes like we used to in the old days, also telling the press core he expects a supreme court nominee. this is the sound of red tape being ripped off. >> yeah, but a little new red tape in the requirement that american steel be used for the project. he did say the approval that he was making for dakota access and keystone were subject to renegotiation. it is not clear what he would like to renegotiate, but the american made steel requirement may be one of them, but we'll have to see how it plays out in practice as they go ahead.
>> shares are relatively flat, i was looking at shares of ufs steal earlier. there has been some discussion about capacity shortages, whether or not it is contractors, labor, plumbers, if and when a wall is built with basic resources, things like medme me metal, copper, steel, and concrete. they are reporting this morning on the track that we're on already on for the economy, slack in the labor market will be rung out in two years. from a standpoint of american workers and union leaders, that is good news because a fighter labor market means higher wages and trump said he wants to deliver higher wages to working class voters.
we have not yet gotten details on the aborter law. yesterday they said we're working with the house on the appropriations process. not sure if that is in fact going to be as ambitious of a project as he signaled in the campaign. we will find out and we will see how quickly transcanada can renegotiate with the administration on terms of keystone and get that project going. one of the thing that's is been a subject of dispute, the president indicated in that signing there would be 28,000 jobs associated with the pipeline. in the debate, they said that when you look at actual new jobs, as opposed to people being redirecting from work they're doing, it was only about 3,000. we'll see how the networking bear up. >> and there are questions about whether or not those are
permanent jobs, or whether or not they will be created for the duration of the construction. we want to go back to the president talking about jobs and signing the executive order on the dakota pipeline just moments ago. >> this is with regard to the construction of the keystone pipeline. something that has been in dispute, and subject to a renegotiation of terms by us. we're going to renegotiate some of the terms and if they would like, we will see if we can get that pipeline built. a lot of jobs, 28,000 jobs. great construction jobs. >> that was president trump just moments ago saying some of the terms are set to be negotiated if they'll do it then we will build our own pipeline using u.s. steel like in the old days.
we talked about the jobs being created earlier, said to be in the thousands, but how many thousands we'll see what the current state of the project demands. what is the sense from the energy industry about where that capacity exists. >> you mentioned that some of these jobs could be temporary, and some will be permanent. that is what happens when you build a infrastructure project. it is not to say the jobs are not valuable, but they're not always permanent and staying jobs. thousands of jobs, certainly very, very acceptable in the terms of projects we're talking about here. when prices got depressed and went down to the $26 level in the last two years, we saw a lot of layoffs in the energy industry and energy patch. this has been a big problem, getting people back to work even on a person rare basis is seen
as a positive thing. you a lot going on on the infrastructure side and the producer side as well. we have been tracking recent acquisitions and key producing regions by some of the big oil names. we have been capping plans as well. saying they're ramping up those efforts, as we see the prices higher, over $50, now we're looking at higher for longer and we're seeing companies reinvest. this is a overall boom to the economy, as you see people come back to work. the risk here that we certainly want to highlight is the fact that these prices are still very temp tempermental. people would like them to stay over 50, but it's not sure they will. do we create a oversupply situation to bring the prices back, or do we have policies in
place to create growth and demand for oil and the producers watch that closely as they start pumping out. i want to talk about some of the numbers in terms of production here to bring it back to keystone, we produce almost 9 million barrels a day, we import 8 million, and we export 1 million. you may see a mix shift as that oil comes in from canada. back to you. >> what a day for the complex, we appreciate that good insight. the market now sitting session highs. senator john thune is joining us this morning, a busy day for that committee as well. thank you for joining us. >> good morning, good to be with you, thanks. >> what will it mean for south dakota and that region? >> we think it is a really good
outcome from south dakota and the region. there are people who have opposed building these pipelines, but it means jobs and investment and tax revenue frankly for school districts. our governor, ligegislature, an local governments believe it has been good for our economy and good for growth. >> another area that people are looking to for growth is the internet. there are concerns among some for what happens with net neutrality with the shift in the fcc. you said you're for an open internet, and also a shift in what the fcc mandate is. what can you say to assure those that are concerned that innovation will be choked off by carriers, by cable and broad band providers, charging for special lanes, what can you say
to assure them that that will not happy and innovation will continue. >> the key is for continue to set rules of the road. we have been trying to do that. last year we worked with some of our democrats to try to get a bipartisan solution to put congressn record. you can go back and forthright now and change the rules. it creates uncertainty and unpredictability. we want to allow technology to drive innovation out there and not have the government decide what goes into place. so i would like to see an opportunity for congress to legislature. we can block and throttle some of the things that people are concerned about, but do it with legislation so it has durability over time. it is just not a good way to
govern the internet. it acts as a hindrance. >> how much of a fight, senator, do you see in a scotus nomination. have you heard one floating to the top, and what are you looking for in a nominee? >> as you said, there is a list out there. i don't think we have any insights at this point who he might name, but the list that he advanced are all conservative people very concerns about the constitutional -- the rule of law, and people who kpeerz y-- exercise judicial restraint. someone that snurges that the
role of the judiciary and the democracy is to interrupt the rules of the country. the question of when that happens, it sounds like it will happen in the next week or two. >> senator, i am wondering further, just a little bit on this net neutrality issue. people talk a lot about the problems with paid priorization, t sometimes i don't get it. for instance right now the rules prohibit companies from paying to allow consumers to get certain content for free over wireless networks. it seems to me the issue might be more competition. if i don't like one provider, and i can switch to another, does it matter as much? the way they increase local competition. >> we think the focus should be
on the service delivered. data, tv, or phone and less about how it is delivered. satellite, wireless, or cable. and congress's role in this to rules. and allow innovation to drive the marketplace out there. i think what happened with the fcc is when they redesigned the internet, basically, under the 1934 act, telecommunications service, they basically subjected it to rate regulation and a whole lot of other things that are very concerning. so what we want to do is create a, you know, environment out there where people want to invest and where technologies are what drives this rather than having the government regulators drive it. i think congress can do that by preventing, blocking, preventing throttling and paid prioritization, those sort of things. what you're seeing is a whole lot of new things happening that are exciting.
the concern i think people have is the fcc, with the powers that they have, under when they decided that basically, under title ii, to reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service, is wide latitude to regulate a market that really, at this point, doesn't need that regulation. we obviously think there need to be some protections against the things i mentioned, but we believe that with clear direction from congress, we can have a telecommunications and information service, internet in the future that is completely driven by technology and the wonderful innovations happening in the marketplace. >> whether it is fcc or dakota and keystone, cabinet nominations, we appreciate you coming on. you have a lot going on. appreciate it, senator. >> good to be with you. >> markets watching all of this, holding on to session highs. the dow is up 58 points. looking for volume, hopefully to pick up. it's been a quiet morning.
s&p 2273. back in a minute. baa baa black sheep, have you any wool? no sir, no sir, some nincompoop stole all my wool sweaters, smart tv and gaming system. luckily, the geico insurance agency recently helped baa baa with renters insurance. everything stolen was replaced. and the hooligan who lives down the lane was caught selling the stolen goods online. visit geico.com and see how easy it is to switch and save on renters insurance.
he served as a commissioner and has been a regular on "squawk alley" before if appointment . he's in favor of cutting the red tape. >> the internet thrived free from government regulation. even if there was a problem, the so-called solution to the fcc adopts, title ii, is not going to work. it is going to inject the fcc into how it works, from the end user relationship to the interconnection. that's not something the fcc is legally empowered to do, i don't believe, and not something we have the expertise to do in a dynamic industry. >> joining the government are julia and ellie. thanks for joining us. i'll start with you. there is a lot of hyperventilating around net neutrality and what it means for technology. when it comes to the types of companies and investment that's really going to be affected, how does this shift the balance of power? >> it is hard to say. i think why people are freaking
out is because what we all hope for, those of us who invest in technology, is for the same opportunity for the next google and the next netflix, right? so the next 20 years, all of those companies that are upstarts are going to have the same access and the same ability to reach the end users in an unobstrued manner, treated equa that ithe concern, theoretically. if we, by taking this away and taking the protections away, make it that much harder for the next wave of innovation. >> julia, i hear a lot of concern from companies like google over this issue, but it seems to me that under the current setup, google has all this fiber that they use to deliver youtube, close to end users who can see it. i mean, it would take billions of dollars for anybody to compete with them in this environment. so is this really bad for the likes of google and the powerful technology companies right now? >> well, interesting, john, you mention google.
google and netflix are always held as the two examples of the types of companies that could really be damaged by the roll back of net neutrality, which pai says he wants to do. because google and netflix are so large, they're probably inflated a bet. netflix' earnings report last week, they said they don't expect to be economically impacted by the roll back of the net neutrality but they believe it is crucial to protect internet companies in general and enable the next generation of innovation and entrepreneurship. i do think these larger companies have built in some protections but we've heard a lot about how net neutrality is so important to enable to next generation of airbnbs or ebays or any of the companies to have access to the resources they need to be able to grow and scale quickly. it is really about -- the real question here, and we heard greg talk about this on "squawk box" today, is whether the changes to the regulation that we're
expecting to see now will allow companies like comcast or at&t or verizon to charge a little bit more for faster access. >> i want to ask you about alibaba, which had strong earnings, a lot driven by the china retail business. are the questions laid aside now to a significant degree about the true nature of alibaba's growth? >> i wouldn't say so. i mean, alibaba, obviously, the metrics are pretty incredible. they had a big beat. they're still riding a wave of more and more mobile users, new consumers coming online, and what they're actually able to do now is prove they can extract more per user. but the overarching themes alibaba is benefitting from are still there. the question is to what degree they will benefit. whether that's just all around consumption or, you know, kind of the merging of online and offline commerce. >> we saw so many retailers here separate the expense of amazon -- i know alibaba isn't a
perfect corollary for amazon in china, but are there retailers that have been trying to build up that will suffer as alibaba gains traction? >> it is more just generally offline needing to evolve. if you walk into a department store today, it looks fairly similar to what it did 20 years ago. it is not -- there's no -- there's not a lot of exclusive products. not a real reason to be in there and consume in there. what you have is a new generation of brands with a more direct to consumer relationship that are able to outcompete. >> if you had to pit besos against ma, being entrepreneurial in scale, who would win? >> they both win. are you kidding? these are two incredible entrepreneurs who built gigantic businesses. hypercompetitive, both wanting to rule the world. their respective geographic
worlds don't overlap much. >> ellie and julia, thank you for being with us. certainly, interesting that president trump talked to jack ma so soon. we'll see where this relationship goes. >> there are no accidents on that front. that's for sure. dow up 63. session highs. let's get to the half. >> welcome to the halftime report. scott is out. i am in. i am brian sullivan. thanks for joining us. your top trade today, what else? trading washington. joining us for the hour, joe, jim, josh brown, steven. also cio of deltic international group. good to see you. by far, the big story, the auto makers. president trump meeting with industry ceos in washington. he is asking, some might say, demanding, they make more cars