Europe and continue on in his breach between asia and the United States as west and east and you know we are loser because you know who us to win is a gross underwears uns happiness of the population so in that case we have to give everybodys of access. To the groups and of course millions or if we dont do is out europe on the rush on the continent and we dont organize this new frame. That is asian of of the trade and business or of course only our friend from china will win because you know 2000000000. 7 the gains in 50 years 8000000 and big media in europe press russia and 6000000 United States so it is young then lets go to paul paul jump in i thing in this context actually action is a no win this everybody will loose one way or the aga touching from this slowing. Global growth. The impact on Business Investment decision and hiring as well as the volatility in the Financial Market so we we in hong kong obviously being found guilty oh we will pay for fee trade multilateralism based so that there is a division of labor and it would supply chain being built up over the world so that we can leverage our respective strength and shared a foot of success isnt really that one of the biggest problems in its highly contentious because its a political issues and ever since the end of the 2nd world war socially to to now its the United States of the washington consensus its called its made the rules its not a clickable it and rules dont work for their advantage and now we have a changing economic global system in the rules hold some people back in from 0 to others it picks winners and i think this is the thing its speech its going to be a very contin a shift political debate because the rules favor some at the expense of others david you know sure i do agree with out there and always theres a sell side economists that also if economies of advertising i went to have it all i would have been to be expected in this panels of the breyer all of someone who represents the usuals of neo liberal views but in fact i would actually think that i think that you know as frank mentioned obviously that in the way back to sort of regionalization it would have been news and you know thats thats something that has been emphasized again but i think it was good with the issue was always that there are distribution consequences right now they were to believe that they would be cardo even if you do believe in the review card or the art was always the one who came up with the idea of comparative advantage there are winners and losers within societies and i think we have Many Companies feel to pull pretty good with that which has led to the issue of massive inequality which. Which happened in the face of a massive decline in clovelly inequality. We have now these particular issues in the western countries to deal with. And i think we disagree a little bit the point that everybody loses its true that it reduces from a global perspective but if you look at it from a distribution of perspective within some countries there may actually be some people who gain and at least in the relative basis and the inequality is about. The perception of will being countries may have a great ability to again regulate the domestic economic systems but then. Again that the station away from individuals back to corporates and again obviously not an interest in educating that but thats thats thats possibly the way its going to its going to go or. Dimitri you know thanks in all my battle big point of view because you know all ideals new paradigm what is new paradigm we have a Global Economy during 5000 euros a goal so really all our life is kind of a little move to Global Economy and production is its not possible to say that Global Economy is absolutely beautiful or protectionism its a kind of evil and it is they gave brutal but there is theres theres issues i mean you know like the trumpet ministration is weaponized the dollar ok i mean that affects everybody in the world the next global trade significantly you can talk about globalization in that sense him and i suppose the entire world will become is always connected but when you have one or 2 countries we can call the shots that can change the oil prices in a heartbeat not based on any economic rationality but because of a political decision to take issued a little bit with this idea that train you know the slowdown in global trade growth is inherently a bad thing might just be a quite a natural phenomenon the trade doesnt grow for ever faster than dent income and i think a lot. Part of the reason why trade growth is slowing is because china is becoming more developed so instead of export of all of its output there are certain theres a growing domestic market you know i think that a part of this story and on the input side in the what previously were imported into china china can now supply itself so theres a vertical integration going on in china and because its so large it affects global trade flows so eventually you probably reach some equilibrium way down the road where where trade and income i. E. G. D. P. Kind of grow at the same levels in terms of the Income Distribution argument which we treat here a lot of winners and losers i think one you know lets think about it this way you think about Income Distribution within countries and think about Income Distribution between countries its hard to argue the fact that global trade the growth of global trade has improved Income Distribution between countries so we have fewer very poor countries so National Income levels rise i think thats been demonstrated china again is probably the best example of that but within countries we can clearly see that Income Distribution is getting worse so thats not an issue for for governments to coordinate with each other its governments need to address these issues on the rome there is a very strong correlation between economies that are open with the exception of hong kong and singapore because theyre very small but more open economies tend to have a larger governments because those governments recognise that there is a redistribution role for governments and im thinking about really western European Countries the nordic countries in particular so there is a redistribution role for government when trade is a large share of g. D. P. Because yes there are winners and losers but if you think trade is advantageous and thats an appropriate role for governments to have we if you look historically if you. The major complex almost every single major conflict in history has a economic trade component to it. And im wondering if with this paradigm shift i love that word. Do we see a potential conflict built into it because you know we have the facilities trap thats what were really essentially talking about here in this paradigm shift you know and when one country is ascending the major power that is the status quo power has options either you allow the rising power to continue their rise even to surpass you you negotiate your decline in the relative rising of your come opponent and then of course there is the 3rd variant and it is called conflict ok and in modern history have seen many many of them ok we can look at the the the competition between Great Britain and germany prior to the 1st world war we can look at the sanctions and say its applied on japan prior to the attack on pearl harbor i mean all these were about trade yes it is the new part of the room we are not to forget scenes did you shouldnt because our little would be and they go formed after the 2nd world war i have math you are central to World Bank Board central bank you have all these big institutions but. Today for the globalization and now is the re read a generalization it is globalization and the bulk of the products in islam i am not sure we have to involve more went to court but youd be going to the past. With these exactly 2 days imagine going trees sometimes our growers you know there are more power voters that in europe you know and then that would does this notion of greeks you know where russia is emerging countries is a joke saw these economies view isnt there i would they did no global. To be modernized to welcome the new and to give everybodys right to world easy global world if not Just Protection of Just Protectionism now pushed by our friend from United States is very negative dont move at the same time zone rules of the game with big problem like you say its always before big conflict into context you see the sanctions we have to stop these sanctions because now we are sanction you know russia. Against russia from United States and europe now we are view around you have jumped on you know indias conflict of sanction to everybody where do we go we have to stop you see to get. This hard to take some from somebody if you know have some to replace. The work to do this interview today do you see the market move in that they take me. 4 years or area. So im going to tell you start selling drugs if well hear some to put the money in it back. Then just me all the way their life is almost invasively mccullers peaceful for a power. To us over its a good many security positions open to that. Jack me again. You see people get other cars and ill see you coming in the herd and this seems like theyll hurry up and run into the house like they dont want to they dont want to talk to your get your mail or anything like that. I just want to go or i dont know why i cant do this. Run just try every day. Its a. People will say sure period that we had is that offer will be a new globalization period that will be a network driven i predict that america will become a Subscription Service like netflix new all subscribe to america and they have to offer you a Value Proposition to keep your subscription alive. But they are owed birdsall and they. Were defeated by such. An arguer. Of it is that people. Just sort of fit into the commercial good. Mother to move. Them in a few fish that old not just before. God since we. Need to learn to meet the needs of the skilled who need. To give the learning. System distinction in. The midst of them run to the. If you look at the trade negotiations between china in the United States. Just over the last few weeks i mean that the western media really gave a very odd skewed interpretation of what happened because essentially what the United States is doing is demanding. Regulatory torrie changes the way china does business i mean outside power dictating the terms and conditions of our you run your economy and of course the chinese said no the thing is what what does sovereignty mean in all of this paradigm shift i think thats the big question right here because we started out you know no one said the word yet but ill say it brags it ok we have a lot of the european parliamentary elections that showed the the the center is collapsing and a lot of it gets down to understanding how this paradigm shift is moving forward and remain maintaining your sovereignty and no one has been able to really figure out how to square that circle when you look at how china responds it has been very measured our self defense and going back to your you know your earlier question about a possible conflict it has always been stated that it is not the ambition of china to claim well number one or to become a supreme power if you look at the batman role you nischelle what just being emphasis is working too bad for military old benefits openness in course if innes and not being a cross pilot crop so the mentality of off of china is really different. When compared to that off the United States lets. Come back to. War and we are starting from. Between missions by the rock. And inside the country and that is so much bigger problems that its a clear signal that. More reach and more satisfied globalization solves. Some was a. Little finland which has absolutely dissatisfied. The. Political system in the us thats the same story in the senate story so maybe this is even bigger problem. So that the real political consequences. Windows and losers insides of countries i just want to say that in the past 30 years up until recently their Global Economy has been living a dream and many new developing countries were integrated into the system they learn to enjoy the fruits of the system of the architecture financial trade legal that was actually created by the western world and now that their roles in their economic power and they basically compete for the same share of the buy with those who created this architecture and and this is a more i would say that this is a and only trade related concept because the paradigm that was created during those 30 years is based upon the supply chain system so that the western countries they used the local markets in the developing world they use their labor costs lower labor cost they shifted their production overseas to maximize their profits and those countries learned a lot from those supply chains integrations and now. They moved to a higher level so valued. They basically compete with those who created the supply chain and so the question of the title of the session is whether this is a paradigm shift the answer to this question is very tricky because a lot depends on how this trade conflict which in substance is not a trade conflict but its purely economic financial and an existential collision how this conflict is managed so that if they do it the soft way and everybody will be fine if they do it the hard way certainly be a disruption to the created supply chains and there will be a firearm shift in the way we treat of interest anyways a country are off to fight for. Us to be but. A country so problem east. Asia not a dozen g. 7 but then you. Would be you know. Everybody to enlarge a dialogue. But anyway to put a new cards. On the new rules of the game because the challenge. With you its very interesting for currency for trade. Sanctions about everything. Chance. They did and always go by the same youre all always agreement of the United States if you but now we. Have you we have everybody so what we have to emphasis is the spirit of. Benefit when you go to our 1st row here since you have a new one again. Thank you peter as being a fascinating discussion. Which covered many topics ive noticed actually peter you have been trying to bring the discussion in to the dominance of United States and reluctance for the u. S. To to to. Give up. The dominance so maybe on that i would like to make some comments and 1st comment is about chinas growth being looted by wont be a panelist i think right now china needs to grow slower not faster thats a very different theme from this conference if china can grow at 4 percent. Actually i would be very happy so to some hans most economists know who. He was born researched years years because a current of growth rate is clearly not sustainable i think everyone knows that in china we cannot increase leverage and we cannot. Have more conflict with the Major Trading partners i think thats very important secondly i think its too early to say this is a paradigm shift cost by trade tensions or trade war because i mean as a financial secretary of on kong has said reactions from china so far have been quite measured i think thats a correct policy response in fact i would i do or kate to think for china one to even get on higher moral ground and to reduce tariffs to help consumers i think this trade war is also a stress test just like Financial Institutions they need a stress test i think trade war itself clearly tallying us Financial Sector reform in china is a severely lacking imagine imagine if we do not have hong kong using you have all this in the background i mean kind of Economic Growth would have been less impressive because were being all sourcing Capital Market function 200 imposter 30 years so i think this is a stress test is a wake up call i think i think really really open up even further. I just want to say on the remaking the world. Takes a lot of courage and a lot of from those who are already in control thats why they have to think about the future. And make these institutions reflect the economic reality that has changed since since the world war 2 you know and whether this is something they can compromise question we dont know that yet and one point on the Financial Sector the Financial Sector is very important but it doesnt exist in the void its primary object is to finance the real sector operations and thats where the trade in goods and Services Come into play and thats where you get all this competition lets take a look at this. Way i mean its all about competition its all about financing the best terms financially and the best products and fortunately if we dont come up with a rules with a rules based system this will go on forever why we have to do that if we come back to this question of will. System i mean its not limited to reaction to the 2nd world war its a reaction to the prelude to the 2nd world war which then which is certainly originated also. Lets say to the trade conflict and the Great Depression which was there no i would say you need so that leaves 3 from these institutions so that they are able to give an answer to the new developments of the new challenges which are there but he tricked you mentioned this before you have to compromise and everybody has to compromise here and if say the the major force which has safeguarded to functioning of these institutions is perhaps no broking is it students or really wanting to compromise on this they certainly would bring us into trouble at the moment i would avoid the war over the world over trade war its a trade conflict because if you look into the preh