Hello and welcome to Davos and to this special debate brought to you in cooperation with the World Economic Forum. In this session we're debating a topic that goes straight to the heart of Europe's ability to compete. Whether you like it or not, Europe's fortunes are closely linked to those of its banks. And even though things seem to be improving in the European banking sector, there are signs that all is not well. Technical lending to businesses has been shrinking and some companies say it's hurting their growth. All the while Europe is trying to build a banking union, but will that be a help or a hindrance? And to debate how European banks are actually doing and the European Banking Union, we have an all-star cast with us from your right, Wolfgang Schäuble, who is the German Finance Minister, Oli Rehn, the European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, Federico Gazzoni, the Chief Executive of Unicredit, Italy's biggest bank by assets. Jeroen Deiselblum is the Dutch Finance Minister, head of the Eurogroup, the now 18 countries that make up the Eurozone. Anshu Jain is the Co-Chief Executive Officer of Deutsche Banker Germany's biggest lender. And last but not least, Lorde de Aetana, Senior Fellow at the Institute of New Economic Thinking in the UK. He was also Chairman of the Financial Services Authority. I want to start by taking a look at the status quo in the European banking sector. There is a general consensus that I think in the analyst community that the European banking sector is doing a lot better now than it was a few years ago. Still though, I want to gauge your mood of where the European banking sector is. And if I can first get your thoughts on that, Anshu Jain. I think we need to take a step back only because it's impossible to discuss where we are today without paying some heed to the fact that a mere 18 months ago, the probability of Italian default was at 40%. The world was stepping away from funding European banks. Cost of equity for European banks was spiraling. Cost of debt likewise. And there was widespread talk about a possible failure of the Eurozone. So we've come an enormous distance in a very short period of time. And frankly, we first have to begin by paying a real tribute to France and Germany, whose leadership, the ECB, the finance ministers, the central bank governors, where frankly it took a lot of audacity, skill, and real discipline to get us to where we are now. So tail risk has now been taken away. So from a macro standpoint, there isn't much debate anymore. But, is there a but? There is a but. So yes, the sovereign picture looks a lot better. As you correctly pointed out, unfortunately, unemployment has actually spiraled. Bank lending is down. European banks are in much better shape today than they were even a year ago. And I don't say that subjectively. The numbers tell the story.  The banking sector is in better shape. Nonetheless, a lot remains to be done. And I think the preconditions are now being put in place. The single supervisory mechanism is a step in the right direction. The asset quality review, which is about to come. And we don't know the full details yet. I think it's going to be a huge step forward in terms of establishing transparency and creating trust. But we still aren't where we should be. Three quarters of credit formation in Europe happens via banks, not capital markets. And the banks are not in a position to create capital at the pace where they were. I'll pause here because I know there's more to... Exactly. We're going to come back to those issues for sure, both the stress test by the European Central Bank and the construction of a European banking union. Let's get the view from Italy and from UNI credits. Federico Gazzoni, what do you make of the health of the banking sector? I tend to agree with Anshu about the general picture. If we look at Italy, I would say that overall as well, we have an healthier banking sector because also in Italy, we have seen capital ratios going up. We have seen the liquidity improving significantly. We have seen the leverage is already a very low level and so forth. What are the negative side or the problem to be addressed? Now I would say we have a problem of quality of the asset because it's obvious that due to the recession, the quality of the asset has been deteriorating. So there is indirectly maybe an issue of improving coverage. And what is for me the real challenge for the Italian banking sector is to recover profitability because you can manage, I think, the balance sheet right now because the capital is good but looking forward, restoring profitability is indispensable in order to create capital and to be in the position then to support the development of the economy through lending. So I hope that for Italian banks, asset quality review will be really an opportunity to fix what is left. We have seen yesterday an interesting move, a mid-sized bank that is moving under the European supervision as decided for a quite significant right issue and quite significant increase of coverage in the last quarter. Yes, this is the way to go. So I think that the system is prepared to go through this difficult but positive exercise that is the asset quality review. Commissioner Wren, I suppose you have the European perspective. What's your take of where the European banking sector is heading? I think it's essential that we look at the issue of rebuilding banking in Europe in the broader context of the economic recovery, which is currently going on in Europe. And here there are some important issues that we have to take into account. Of course, first, as Anshut Zain said, the existential threat to the euro is over. And in fact, we have not fewer members in the eurozone but we have more members in the eurozone as of 1st of January this year as Latvia joined. And we are now 18 members in the eurozone. Overall, the economic climate in Europe has changed in the past, I would say, 18 months to two years quite significantly. And in retrospect, I would say that the year 2012 was in many ways a turning point. We had, first of all, an improved enhanced credibility of fiscal policy of the euro area member states. Second, the ECB took decisive action with its LTA roles and the O&T decision. And third, we had by then reformed and reinforced the economic governance of the European Union, especially of the eurozone. All these factors together enhanced stabilization. And last year, we saw the start of the recovery. And this year, our challenge is indeed to strengthen the economic recovery. And in this context, the completion of the financial repair is indeed an essential task. I might add that one factor which makes a difference between the US and Europe is that the United States completed its financial repair much earlier than Europe did. And that is, to my mind, a critical reason why the economic recovery and growth is for the moment stronger in the US than in Europe. Lothana. Well, I think as many of the other speakers have said, the story of the last two years has been a very significant turnaround in the market perceptions of risk in the European banking system, which you can see in CDS, in the funding cost of banks, as Anshu says, in the cost of equity of banks, et cetera. And that is all a very good story. I think what is interesting is that that is not converting into increased levels of lending. We are still seeing lending to the business sector declining and lending to the household mortgage sector very low. Now, I think we've got to be careful of assuming that if we simply have one more heave and we have the asset quality review and the stress test, that suddenly that will unleash more lending. Because I think we have to realize there's something going on on the demand for loans as well as the supply of loans. We've had this proposition for some time that if we just shift the banking system, everything will be fine. I think it's very important to repair the banking system. I think the AQR and the stress test are going to be important next step. But I'd just be wary of assuming that it's somehow going to magically unleash lending if that hasn't already been unleashed by the very significant falls in bank funding costs that have occurred. I think the other thing to say, however, is that the medium term is very important. Important steps have been taken on the banking union, starting really back from the Finance Minister's conference. And I guess it was June 2012 where the major statements were made. But I personally believe it will have to go deeper. I mean, I fundamentally believe that for the Eurozone to work, it has to go to a fairly deep level of federalization, which will require a treaty specific to the Eurozone. I'm slightly out of line with most British opinion on that. And I think many of the steps that are being taken are the correct steps. But I think we'll have to go further in terms of a mutualization of the guarantee scheme. I think if you think about how does a single banking market work in America, there is no way that it would make sense in America for an Illinois state bank to hold its liquid assets in an undiversified portfolio of Illinois state bonds and for its depositors to be dependent on an Illinois state deposit insurance company. If you said that's how I'm going to organize the US banking system, people would think you're mad. That's how we organized the single banking system within the Eurozone. So we've got more to go in terms of reform there. Minister Scholder, let me ask you this question in a slightly different way. Do you have faith in the European banking sector at the moment? Opinion polls suggest that the public, the European public doesn't have much faith in the European banking sector. But do you, the German government, do you have faith? I have faith in the European banking sector. All of us, the European central euro is much houses and it used to be years ago. Of course we have a very different situation in the United States, but it's always a pleasure for me to listen to British speakers to tell the European we must do the same as the United States of America. We are not, we are not. We are not the United States of America. We are not the United States of Europe. We are the European Union. Quite complicated, but we are also successful. Now we, of course, not all problems rely on the banking sector to be very frank. And we couldn't, we wouldn't have to get so much success if we would only have relied on banking sector and monetary policy. We have to serve the problems by fiscal discipline and by structural reforms. And we did it in all countries. And now we are building a banking union to get the same what we need in, since Europe is totally different to other continents. We are several nation states, very different. It's remaining sovereign, sovereign tier. And we have to find solution for this. We do. And we will build this banking union. We have, we have a European banking supervision. It's in the way to be constructed. We have president for this. We will have a vice president. We will have support. So this bank, this supervision will take in, it will take office in the last quarter of this year. We will have an asset credit review in the coming months that we will have a stress test. And then we have a European banking supervision by the ECB. And then we have, we have, and we have rules for restructuring rules for all 28 European members that because it's a matter of single market. We have it already done, the solution directive. We have mechanisms for, we have harmonized rules for deficit scheme guarantees. And we have, we have agreed on a political way in the European, in the ecofin in December, late December on a single resolution mechanism. That have to be approved by European Parliament in the European way of legislation. That is always complicated, but we will get it. I'm quite sure. Mr. Deisselblum, I haven't forgotten about you. I want to ask you about the, the AQR, the asset quality review. Another lovely Eurozone acronym. Another one of many. They're also known as stress tests, the European Central Bank's stress test to the common man. Are you worried that they will unveil something rather unpleasant in the European banking sector? Actually, I rather hope that it's going to unveil some unpleasantness because that would give me a good feeling that it's been done properly. And I think this is key. We're not doing this to cover up and at the end of the day say, oh, everything's fine now. We're doing this to find out what problems remain and then to deal with them. It's going to be a three-fold process. First of all, we're going to look at where the risks are, in what portfolios of different banks, then the asset quality review will do an in-depth survey of those portfolios. And then on top of that, we will stress them, stress the banks on the basis of also their context where necessary, et cetera. The ECB must be absolutely transparent on how they're going to do that. And that's also part of the credibility of the process and it has to be firm and tough. So the answer to your question is, yes, I hope that some bad news will come out of that and that will give me a good feeling. We've done it properly this time. I picked up on one sentence you said there. We must stress the banks. I'm wondering whether or not that makes the banking executives on this panel sweat a little bit. Whether, well, is that what you want to hear, Federico Gazzani? Well, I agree that the stress test and the asset quality review must be tough. And I agree that it would not be acceptable by the market unless we have some evidence of some problems to be addressed. I hope that we're not part of the problem. You too want the AQR to find something that's... Perhaps something... No, really, there is still a clear lack of trust, partial trust from the market versus the European banking system. So this has to be dissipated thanks to this exercise. And I think it's the last step before really we can claim to have a new banking system ready to take the competition from other banking system. Because one of the problems and one of the opportunities that I see here is that having the banking union, having done the asset quality and the stress test, we can finally move to the next challenges, that are business challenges. So the European banks have to compete in the market, they have to improve the service model to customers, have to be ready to compete also globally. Europe is becoming more and more an export-driven region. So we have to catch the business also outside Europe. So let's do this last step. Has to be, as we're again convincing, has to be tough, serious, done with homogeneous rules. This is indispensable in order to have a transparent process. And let's move on. This is what I hope. Lotana, do you think the stress test will be credible? Well, I hope it will and I think it will. I think we all recognize that after the very significant success of the US stress tests in 2009, we did a first round of stress tests. I'm now trying to remember it. I think it was probably 2010 when we first did them. And I remember going through the debates and that at the European Systemic Risk Board. And there was a perception in the market that they weren't tough enough. Now, it has to say that one of the biggest problems we had at that stage was how were we going to treat sovereign debt? Because the market was looking there saying, well, this sovereign debt is underwater. As Anshu said, the CDS was suggesting a 40% or whatever it was default in Italy. But we had a position where we couldn't possibly stress test the sovereign debt. First of all, because it was seen that that was a signal of a lack of confidence. And secondly, actually, some banks would have been deeply underwater if we'd marked to market the sovereign debt at that stage. That was a very particular problem, which I think we are beyond. I think it's very important to have an appropriate treatment of sovereign debt. But in relation to the rest of the portfolio, I think it will be tough. The stress test element is crucial. I think sometimes people assume that you can do an asset quality review, and it tells you definitively the quality of the loan portfolio. I mean, the crucial thing about banking is the quality of the loan portfolio keeps on changing with the economic environment. And that's why you have enough capital to deal with an environment which is inherently unknowable and uncertain. That's what bank capital is there for. And that's why I think the stress test element is almost as important, indeed, in a sense, more important than the AQR. Anshu, Jane, do you think that the rules or the requirements set up by the European Central Bank, will they be clear? Will they be transparent? I suppose that's an issue for you. Well, first of all, let's not create this magic bullet panacea. I totally agree with the Lord Turner. We're making things impossible for the ECB in terms of setting those expectations. The landscape is very complex. Any time you talk about the European banking state of affairs, there were four questions. The feedback loop between sovereign bonds and bank health. Lord Turner talked about that. That's a conditioned precedent. And again, my compliments to the finance ministers and the powers that be, that issue isn't resolved, but it's been largely tackled. That was out of control for us. You've given us that gift. Thank you. Secondly, our capital, our leverage, our business models needed refinement. And again, the point that's been made. The US partially through the forced recapitalization, partially through a very different business environment, got to it sooner. Good news is European banks are now right in the throes of it. And I agree with what Federico said earlier. Enormous progress has been made. And that's demonstrable. So those are two ticks, both of which are positive. Yet interbank lending is not where it ought to be, even within Europe. And of course, the world's willingness to lend to European banks is also not back to where it used to be. That's where the stress test comes in and plays a very important role. There has been this slight miasma hanging over the European banking landscape that, oh, somehow there's stuff happening in those balance sheets that we don't know much about. And I totally agree with the point which has been made by many of the speakers. I personally would much rather take the penalty of a stiff stress test, which has been done to international standards, which, A, makes banks in Spain comparable to banks in Italy, to banks in Germany. That'll be the first time that'll happen. And secondly, done to standards, which are of international quality. So yes, it has an important role to play. And then the fourth and final piece, which we haven't talked about, is completing the regulatory process. So Europe has taken a bit longer there, candidly. Regulation was required. I, for one, believe that the regulation which has come has made our industry safer, fitter, better. But we do need to complete the process. The US now looks like it's, again, one step ahead in terms of there's greater certainty. We need that as well. Get those four things in place. We're in a good place. Let's not create unhealthy expectations for what just the AQR can do on its own. We will certainly come back to that regulation point. But let me just ask, also, what will happen after the stress test? And let me ask that to Minister Shobla, the European Central Bank's president, Mario Draghi. He has said here in Davos that banks that are found to be unsound should be shut down. Do you agree with that? If we will have a European banking supervision and if we will have, since we will have restructuring roles in the resolution mechanisms, of course, this will happen. This would happen if it is needed. That's quite clear. Do you expect it to happen? I think Finance Minister must not speculate. It makes no sense. We do whatever we are prepared, whatever will happen. We will, we have a solution with this fund which has to be built up for restructuring. That is clear. It has to be financed in the interim time until he is fully paid in. We have already agreed on a solution for this. It's not, as always in Europe, it's not very easy. It's complicated, but it will work. As always in Europe, it's complicated and it works nevertheless. And that is the message. Okay, Wolfgang Shobla, he said that the finance ministers shouldn't speculate. What about European commissioners? What happens if a bank fails this restructuring? Should it be shut down? In fact, I can concur with the finance minister with Wolfgang Shobla on this. Neither should a European commissioner speculate. But I would actually like to add that we have now clear rules in place, as Wolfgang said. And we know that we know what will happen in case there is a bank that fails in the stress test. And we have rules that protect European taxpayers and facilitate an orderly bail-in of a failing bank. I think that's very important to enhance confidence into the European economy. I would like to add to what Lord Turner said about the difference between the 2010 stress test and the current exercise. There's another very fundamental difference, which is that in 2010, we had in fact the national supervisors who did the test and there was only a very loose coordination of this exercise. That led to, I would say, perverse incentives so that the national supervisors had an incentive to hide problems. And that explains why, for instance, Ireland and Spain did not fail more banks which only became revealed later on. That was kind of financial nationalism in play at the time. Today, this year's exercise will be led by the European Central Bank. Essentially, it's a supervising arm and now the incentive is very clear for the ECB Governor-Council, for the ECB Executive Board, for the supervisor for Mario Draghi. It's essential that once these banks pass the entry exam to the Eurozone supervisor through the asset quality review and stress test, they are indeed in good order. And I'm sure that Mario does not want to have a big chunk of impaired banks in his hands. I could use a verse of it, but I don't want to use any impoverished words here. I'm sure Mario doesn't. Please remain in your seats, gentlemen, and the audience. We're going to take a short break now for programming reasons. We'll be right back after this. Stay with us here at Falkirk. NFL football game where you get timeouts, which are purely commercial timeouts. This will allow you to have a little bit of a breathe. They're taking a lot of sip of water, and we're going to set off basically in 30 seconds. Is the pace about what you want it to be? Yeah, we're going to have to speed up a little bit. Well, now it's up to you, so you can mix it up. Turn up the heat. We've had our opening salvos. Immediately continue. Crazy, crazy. Good strength. Gentlemen, can I just ask you to take off your badges as well? As if by magic, they'll be gone after the advertising break. You'll have almost somebody who saw the lack of continuity. I have. Never.  It's really interesting. So IMDB, there's a fabulous website. If you're a movie producer, you can call IMDB. In IMDB, they'll take great movies that they make, and then there is a lack of continuity, which is fascinating. The hand has shifted from the left to the right. Of course, then you've got the ones where the mold shifts from the left to the right. I'm really worried about that. Let's get ready. Let's get set. Second, second, second part. Welcome back to Davos and to this special debate that we're bringing to you from the World Economic Forum here. We're currently debating Europe's banking sector, where it is, and where it is heading. I want to turn to you, Lord Turner. How important do you think banking reform is for the eurozone economy as a whole? Well, I think it is. And then I'll transition into that. This question of what happens after the stress test, because I think it illustrates the importance of banking reform. I mean, I take Minister Schobler's comment earlier. We shouldn't assume that the U.S. gets everything right or it's all transferable, but there are things to learn. And the crucial lesson of the 2009 stress test in the U.S. is that the U.S. had a very clear answer to what was going to happen in the case of failure. And the answer was that if you failed the stress test, you were going to be told you had a certain number of months to raise the money privately. And if you couldn't raise the money privately, there would be a public recapitalization. That's how the U.S. got going again with its banking system in 2009. And going back to the 2010, I remember now the other key problem we had in 2010 with the European stress test is we couldn't give the answer. Well, what's going to happen if countries fail? Now, I think the good news now is that the likelihood of failures of really large banks is much, much lower than it was before.  So you've got to have an answer to the question, what happens if, despite all your measures, you have an undercapitalized, you know, really large bank? You want lots of equity, so that's unlikely. You want bailable, inelible debt, so that's your next line of defense. But beyond that, you've got to be able to put in public capital. And that's the resolution fund. And I think the big danger for the eurozone over the next 10 years is until that fund is in place, we're still running a risk. If things went bad again, if the sovereign debt went back in the other direction, if we were back in a 2011-type situation without the resolution fund already in place, we would be taking very major risks. And that is one of the elements which is required for a working banking union. And until we're there, there is a risk in the eurozone economy. Lord Turner, you're obviously being quite provocative, because I'm seeing the ministers and the commissioner waving profusely here. Let me ask you, you're on Dice Album, what's your reaction to what you just had? Well, Lord Turner is saying that it's all very unclear, but it's not unclear. What we will do is in the main headlines, the same as what's been done in the States, at the end of the process of the AQR and the stress sets, the banks will be given some time to go to markets, to restructure, in other words, to deal with their own problems. If they can't deal with that, I'm putting aside, of course, a category that simply isn't viable. And some of them will simply have to close down. They will be given time to deal with their own problems, etc. Then they will come back to the governments and say, well, I need more money. There is only one rule, really, and that is that the state aid rules will apply. So there will be a minimum required level of bail-in to be put in place once that's been done. Then government money can be put in. If governments are unable to do so, because it's a very large bank or the government's debt position is already critical, then the ESM can step in with the banking program or direct recap of banks from the ESM. That instrument we will finalise in March, so that will also be available on strict conditions on the outcome of the asset quality review, which is at the end of this year. And we will deal with all of these issues, but the instruments are there. That's my main point. Including direct recapitalisation from the ESM, is that clearly agreed? We have agreed already in June on the main headlines of that political agreement. We are now working on the guidelines and we will come back to that in March. That's my planning, we'll be on the agenda of the Eurogroup. It's been agreed that it's part of the package. It'll be on strict conditionalities. It was agreed back in June 2012 and then it's taken a long time to get there. No, but we actually in June 2013 reached quite a detailed agreement on what that would look like and we're now putting that into guidelines. So understanding, these conditionalities are quite strict. One of them is that the deeper bail-in rules will be applied directly. The rules which are part of the BRRD will start, will be general practice as of 2016, but if before 2016 a bank would apply for direct recap, there would be a deep bail-in to be applied first. Andrew Jane, do you think that the rules of the European Banking Union and what you just heard there from Minister Dyselblum is that straightforward to you? It is and I think more importantly actually, let's not forget, this is not going to be a digital event. Recovery resolution exercises have been carried on consistently now over the last couple of years and that's the pace at which we will go. In the event, don't forget, every bank has been forced to stress test itself. Its national regulators have been stress testing as well. So it's not as if we're starting from scratch. In the event, and this will only come about if there is a profound disagreement over valuation. So the way a bank has been valuing its own assets in compliance with national regulators winds up being done very differently under the aegis of an ECB-sponsored stressor. Now walk through it. You'll first go through recovery, then you go through resolution. As you've said, in Europe we finally have credible institutions which we didn't have five or six years ago and the ESM is definitely part of that. The only thing which we're saying which is the difference between the US and Europe, this will not be a pan-European response, it will be a national response. And we already don't forget by addressing the sovereign debt problem, the issue about a country not being able to handle it, there are stress tests for national balance sheets as well. I have confidence when you take all that together, we have what it takes. Wolfgang Schäuble, I want to ask you, is there a clear line of command in the European Banking Union as we look ahead? Is there a clear line of command? And when I say that, I mean, the relationship between the national regulator and the European regulator and the European Central Bank, is there that clear line of command in your view? That is clear. There's a clear line and I think it will work. There are some concerns though that there could be conflicts between national regulators and the European regulator. It's always the same if you make something new. I was a lot of concerns. And it has to be a little bit complicated in Europe because we are one currency, one central bank and several different nation states, member states. It makes things a little bit more difficult. Some don't like to join us.  Yes, I know. It works, but in the beginning there are always concerns. Of course, we have always to have in mind that we avoid disincentives. Therefore, we have to make clear who takes responsibility for what. As long as we don't have the structuring fund paid in, fully paid in, and we all agree on a levy that has to be paid by bank, but as long as it's not... Who can guarantee that the levy will be paid by bank? It's only the member state. Therefore, we cannot allow to leave the member state aside as long as it's not paid in. That makes it a little bit complicated, but it will work, I bet it. It will work, it's decided. We have agreed on all instruments with some bail in rules. Of course, because everyone agrees it's not only the taxpayer takes the final risk. It's quite clear, but it will work and therefore, if there is a need for additional capital, we have solutions that this capital will be raised. Federico Gazzoni, you hear the message today that it will work. Do you think it will work? I'm very happy to understand that the Finance Minister is very committed to the point, so it would be really tragedy if instead of having one regulator, we would have one more regulator. Do you think that's the clear risk of that? I think, I agree. They believe that we will have one regulator, we will have one resolution mechanism, and one day we will have one fund as well. Obviously, it's working in progress, but it's very important in this phase to have the way it's well defined, the way to get there, and it's very important to have this strong political agreement at European level. This is what makes the difference compared to the past. So, I believe that soon we will have a supervision, we will have one regulator, and the banking sector will benefit for all of this, becoming at the end more competitive and more sound. Can I say something about the governance issue? Sure. There have been talks about, for one resolution decision, you would need 120 people and nine institutions to be involved. I would all invite you to... I mean, that's legal text, you don't want to read it, but you might want to look at it, and you'll see that there is going to be... There's going to be an executive board on the resolution authority with five independent members. They call in the national authorities, depending on what bank they're dealing with, and they will set a deadline, and if the deadline expires, then the five independent members can take the decision by simple majority. I mean, that's as basic as you can get, and only in big, big decisions where you need a lot of money out of the fund, then you need approval of the plenary session, the plenary board. It's not that complicated. Five independent members will, if necessary, within a set timeline, take a decision by simple majority. That's the way we're going to do it. Do you agree, Mr. Jayne? If I may, there have been a discussion on the involvement of the council, and I think it's wrong. If, like Tatlum just says, if the board takes the decision, it's done. Of course, we have the Moroni judgment in Europe that needs, that requests a decision by a European institution with the council as the board is not. Therefore, we have agreed on the solution. If commission does not agree, commission can ask the council for a decision. I bet this will never happen because the commission will always be involved in the decision of the board. And if the commission agrees, it's needed for all the decisions. I want to pick up on a point that Federico Guzzoni made before. He said that there needs to be clear political unity when it comes to the banking union. Let me ask you, Wally Rin, there are concerns, there are rumours, that perhaps the commission isn't on the same page as the German finance minister in Germany when it comes to the banking union. Are there those disagreements? In fact, it's quite normal in the European Union decision making that the commission with its right of initiative tries to achieve a, say, first best solution for the whole Europe, while then during the process of decision making, both in the council with the member states and in the parliament, there will be some other concerns at play. And in the end of the day, nevertheless, we get decisions and we stay united behind those decisions and they also become European law and we work according to these final decisions. As to this question on the single resolution mechanism and the resolution fund and the related governance arrangements, I believe that the outcome is certainly defendable. It is much less complex than often portrayed in the Anglo-American financial media. I agree with Jeroen on this, but of course it may be still improved and that's something that in the coming two months, the council and the parliament will need to look into it, but it's essential that we conclude the legislative process by the end of March before the European Parliament leaves for its electoral recess. I just want to talk about the rescue fund as well. It's been criticised for being too small. 55 billion euros eventually in about 10 years' time. Is it too small, Wolfgang Schreiber? We discussed for a long time and I was in favour of a higher figure and others were in favour of lower figures, but we have agreed on a common solution and look, everyone is convinced that he has the best solution and the most pro-European. As a member of the German government, I always convince that government has the best opinion and if parliament disagrees, we have to convince parliament. It's the same with commissions. We have always the best solution and council and parliament have second best solution. That is the way of thinking of governments and commissions, but it's not the way of thinking of democracy. We have found a common solution, but of course in Europe we are bound to stay on the given treaty. It's a legal basis for all European institutions. Parliament, commission, council is the given treaty. The given treaty is not sufficient. As Dr. Neutron just said, we need treaty changes. In some ways it's difficult to get, but as long as we don't get, we have to work on this basis because it's the only basis. If you will impose a bank levy amounting to 55 billion, it will be a question by court and if the legal basis is not sound, what will happen? In court it will be destroyed and that is not for the stability of financial markets. Therefore, we are in favour of a sound legal basis in line with a complicated legal basis. That is exactly the problem we had tackled. We find a good solution and I'm convinced it will work. Okay, time is running. You have to look at the size of the resolution fund also in the light of the new legislation on the bank resolution and recovery, which means that there is more rigorous rules for bail-in which will reduce the need for bail-out and thus it will not lead to such great problems as regards the size of the bank. The Spanish banking bail-out costs, I believe around about 40 billion euros and that was just one country. You have actually three lines of defence and this is related to what we discussed earlier. You have first the private solutions so that in case you need to recapitalise, you go for capital markets and private investors and the European banks have been doing that. In two years 80 billion euros have been raised new bank capital by European banks. The second line of defence, national resolution funds or national backstops, fiscal backstops based on the state-aid rules so that the equity shareholders and junior debt holders would be bailed in according to those rules. And then third, a European line of defence which might in the near future be based on the Spanish model where the ESM played its role with clear policy conditionality, which by the way succeeded. Spain left its banking sector reform programme last year. 41 billion euros were spent, not 100 billion which was the maximum and now the Spanish banking sector is clearly much more healthy and resilient and able to do its basic job. Okay, time is running away from us. We could add if European banks want to pay a higher levy we are ready to think about it. That's a good idea. Maybe a gallop here. We're going to let the audience members in at this stage. I'd like to sort of bring in some questions from the audience. Let me first turn to the lady in the second row. There we go, the lady in black. Please once again keep your questions to questions and keep them brief. I have two questions. I'm Tonya Mastrobuoni for the Italian newspaper La Stampa. The first question is on something that was said here in Davos yesterday by the French finance minister. Mr Moscovici said that the bank resolution mechanism can be improved. So I wonder, I'm asking Mr Schäuble which red lines are there for the Germans and he seems to agree with the parliament that wants to change the mechanism still. And the second question is to Mr Gizoni. Yesterday the governor of Bank of Italy said that the RQR and the stress test might lead the Italian banks to merger and so I was wondering what you think about this. Okay, let's start with the question to Wolfgang Schäuble. Look, there's nothing in the world which cannot be improved. Obviously I agree with Mr Moscovici. We together found Mr Dysenbaum-Pierre and Fabrizio Saccumani, we found the solution. We agreed in December. Of course now we are in three-log with parliament. I have discussed with members of the ECON in Mondi. This week also Mondi to explain and to listen to their position and there we will find the common solution. But once again, the limit is the given legal basis. We cannot go beyond the given legal basis. That's the problem and that makes it a little bit complicated. Alright, the question to Federico Gizoni once again was whether or not the stress test will lead to banking mergers in Italy. Very quickly because the governor knows better than me so I think that some banks will have the need to increase capital overall and they can do in two ways. One is to go directly to the market or to find alternative solution and merger is one. So I think that especially at the level of mid-sized banks this may happen. Okay, next question. Yes, gentleman at the front there. Hi, Davide Cera from Algebra's Investments. I'd like to ask a question to the bankers and to the finance minister. It's very easy for politicians to blame the problem six years after the financial crisis only on the bankers. The reality is one of the reasons why banks are not lending because lots of businesses are not investing and hence they're not asking loans because the liquidity is there in BCB. BCB said, I have a trillion for everyone, a 25 basis point. No one is borrowing. The reason is no entrepreneurs feel comfortable and here's an issue of a politician not have addressed in many countries the supply side. So I'd like to understand from a commission of a politician which pressure you put in, for example, on Italy and other countries may be France yet part of the review process to improve the labour market reform to make it more competitive. The second question on the bankers side, assuming you pass the EQR, both of you here. Next year, are you going to lend more money? Do you believe your customer wants more money or in reality you cannot because there is no good demand? Okay, let's start with a question to Commissioner Ray and I believe. Would you like to pick up on that? I can take that question certainly. In the past, Italy and France, both countries, according to our analysis, have lost market share over the past ten year period gradually and there is a clear need of reform, of strengthening, improving competitiveness which requires a reform of intensification of the reform of the labour market and which also calls for the reduction of unit labour costs in fact in both countries. Now in France there are both plans and we are now waiting for these plans to be concretised, that's very important and I'm looking forward to Italy using its, let's say, recently born stronger political stability to launch a bold reform process which would include, for instance, privatisation and further improvements in the labour market. I believe that in a way Spain and Ireland, also Portugal, they have done a lot to reform their labour markets, their economic structures. They have regained economic competitiveness. They are seeing exports grow and they are now seeing economic growth. Now it's the turn of France and Italy to follow suit and take a determined action to reform their economies and economic structures. Okay, the second question was an excellent one, whether or not or the two bankers on the panel, let's turn to Andrew Jane when it comes to that one. If you do pass the stress test, do you think that you'll step up lending and do you think that European banks overall will step up lending to businesses? Davide, I think your point applies to SMEs more than it does to blue chip, is that right? I just want to make sure that's the case. Now, that being the case, I think we have to clarify that the status of SME, so I also agree with the point and I think that I made it earlier, that there's a demand side problem here as well. It's not just a supply side problem. Now let's go country by country. Germany is in a very fortunate position. The Middle-Stan have come out of the crisis actually strengthened. They've done really well and not just the demand but the supply side is working really well as well. This is not the time for me to give bilateral advertisements. You've got me short but Deutsche Bank has been and other German banks have really stepped into the breach and partly the reason we have 5% unemployment and a strong growing economy is because 60 to 70% of job creation happens through SMEs who are both demanding and getting adequate credit in Germany. That's not the problem. The problem lies in the rest of Europe and I will go back to my earlier four-point issue which is a number of things have to exist. I dare say for Italians, Spanish SMEs to both demand and get the supply of credit which they want. We haven't spent enough time on regulation. I think it's important to note that issues like the definition of leverage ratios in Europe are still not clear. How do we consider a line of credit? The treatment of a revolver. Very fundamental questions are being debated and I would just encourage. We've made great progress on the sovereign debt side. We understand the need for regulation. I will use this opportunity to ask for clarity and speed now because once we have it, I'm confident of a day. Post the AQR, it's good business. SME lending is happening on good terms in most countries. It's technical factors which are constraining the supply. Can I ask you to react to what you just had? I think it's absolutely true that part of the credit drop also in my country was supply and demand side and I think it's been quite a short drop. I hear now from my banks that the giving up credit to SMEs is picking up already. As the economy is picking up, immediately also the quality of the demand for credit is returning and that allows banks also to give out new credit because companies are repaying their loans. The portfolio of non-performing loans is also manageable, becoming more manageable. So it's part of the combination of getting the banks back into shape and the economy back into shape and that I think will be very helpful in bringing both demand and supply side on credits back together. Okay, this debate has passed very, very quickly indeed. I just want to ask you, gentlemen, for your final thoughts of what you think we should take away from this debate and this session here in Davos, if I may start with Minister Scheuble there. I think in all economic discussions we must not rely too much on monetary policy because it's always a wrong incentive and not to do what is needed structural reforms. If we want to have sustainable growth, we have to fight for structural reforms again and again because the world is changing very fast and by the way if we want to work for sustainability we have to work, we have also to have in mind that we have to avoid too much inequality, otherwise we will fail because in this world of communication everyone sees what in formal times not everyone saw and that makes the sustainability of the political framework much more fragile if we fail. Lotana? I think what we've learned from the last few years and reinforced by this debate is the reason why we had this extraordinary knock-on crisis in the Eurozone in 2010 onwards after the 2008 financial crisis was essentially because of an incomplete currency union. We've woken up and realised that a currency union will, among other things, need a banking union. I think very significant progress has been made. Let me be clear, in my earlier assertions that it needs to go further, I'm not at all denying the very significant progress that has been made but it is crucial. This system of a single currency union will not work with a fairly deep form of banking union and my personal belief is it will have to go further still and it probably will because I think this is, as Wolfgang Schöbel has stressed, this is work in progress in an inherently complicated political environment but I think one ought to be aware that by doing it without treaty change a set of compromises have been made and life is not perfect but it's worthwhile keeping pointing out that we could do with getting a bit closer to perfection still. Gerand, I said a lot. I think the lesson learned from the process of the banking union is that political urgency needs to be maintained. We've come from a situation out of the crisis where the sense of urgency was quite strong and we politicians were able to put the building blocks of the banking union in place in quite a short time. My main ambition now is to keep that sense of urgency in putting structural reforms in place, making sure that Europe becomes more competitive and finalizing the financial sector on regulation, the asset quality review, etc. We're not done yet there but we need to keep that sense of urgency to push forward. We can't be complacent with a growth percentage of 1%. It's not enough and we can do better. Oli Uren, very briefly for us. In fact, I was listening to Tim Geithner, the ex Treasury Secretary of the United States the other night and Tim warned us about excessive, warned against excessive optimism and I think Tim, who is almost an honorary European because he supported our fight against the Eurozone crisis very determinedly over the last couple of years may have taken the bad European habit of falling into excessive pessimism instead. So I believe that things are not as bad as they looked then at the time and they are not as good as they might look for some people. So we have to avoid any complacency and we have to stay the course of economic reform both in the member states to have more entrepreneurial dynamism in our economies and at the European level by completing the reform of the Economic and Monetary Union. And finally, in the very short term we have to really look into the problem of lending to SMEs especially in southern Europe which is a very serious bottleneck to economic growth because economic history does not really know a situation where you have economic growth without credit growth. Alright, unfortunately gentlemen we have run out of time I already have a producer shouting in my ear. I want to thank you for being part of this panel it's been a pleasure to hear from you all and I want to thank you in the audience as well for being here also last but certainly not least thank you to you at home for watching. Frans van Keert, do stay with us.


What's up you guys, it's Shane. So this is a question that's been coming up a lot lately and to be honest with you, it's kind of a confusing question and it's not sort of like a one size fits all sort of answer. So I thought I'd make this video to break down, you know, step by step, which one is better to invest in out of the Roth IRA and the 401K and then break it down even further and figure out which one is gonna be better for your specific situation and which one is gonna end up making you the most money in the long run. And seriously, if you're at all confused about which one would be better for your specific situation or which one would be better for you to invest in in the long run, it's your lucky day. Because just by watching this video until the end and understanding a few of these simple concepts will make it to where I can pretty much guarantee you that you will save tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in the long run.  And I know that guaranteeing anything is a very bold claim to make, but I can pretty much guarantee you that if you pay attention, you watch the video till the very end and you smash that like button because this video took forever to make, then you'll understand exactly why and that will help you to make a good decision for you. And in turn, you will save a ton of money.   So it's basically pre-tax, pre-paycheck money. Now a lot of the time different employers will offer some sort of matching program where they'll basically match the amount of money that you put into your 401k. So maybe up to 5% of your paycheck, they will match dollar for dollar. And so if you're making $50,000, they will match you as long as you put up to 2,500, they'll match you an additional 2,500. And if your employer offers this, you pretty much have to take it. I mean, it is basically free money. Like if your employer offers that, definitely, definitely go for that up to the point where they stop matching. Now, another thing about the 401k is it has a $19,000 contribution limit as of 2019. And that's a lot more than what the IRA offers. So you can put quite a bit of money into your 401k every single year. Another great thing about the 401k is you can use it as a bit of a tax write-off. So any amount of money that you put into the 401k doesn't get taxed that year. So if you're in a slightly higher tax bracket, you could put a certain amount of money into your 401k and get yourself down to a lower tax bracket by doing that. So as an example, if you make $50,000 a year and you put $5,000 into your 401k, you would only get taxed $45,000 a year. Pretty simple. To take this a step further, let's say you're making $50,000 a year and you put $11,000 into your 401k, so therefore your profit is showing as $39,000 a year, well, you'd go into a lower tax bracket. You could potentially pay 10% less on the profit that you make because you're in a lower tax bracket. Now, this is all kind of complicated and you do have to basically talk to a professional that's in your state because different things can make it more complicated. I'm simplifying things quite a bit here. So you do need to look into your specific situation, speak with a licensed CPA that is familiar with your state. And then another advantage of the 401k is you're not taxed now, you're taxed later when you pull it out. So if you're planning on not making as much money later on in life, for instance, if you're retired, then this is perfect for you because you wouldn't have to pay as much in taxes later on in life. That's actually one of the cons of doing the 401k as well. Because if you do end up making more money later on in life, you're going to end up paying even more in taxes than if you would have just paid taxes at the very beginning when you were first contributing to your 401k. And another thing is you can only keep your 401k until you're 70 and a half years old. At that age, you are forced to withdraw it. And the problem with that is, the market could be down at that time, like let's say the market crashes right when you turn 70 and it hasn't recovered by the time you're 70 and a half. Well, you're kind of going to be SOL.  Now another problem with the 401k is in the event that taxes get higher in the future, which there is a very good chance that taxes will get higher in the future, like a very good chance. Just look at the US debt right now. I mean, we are so far in debt. How do you think the US is going to pay off that interest to other countries in the future? They're going to have to tax us more. So I would say that there is a very good chance that taxes are actually going to be higher in the future than they are right now. And if that happens, you will actually end up paying more for taxes than if you were to have just paid taxes now. And another con for the 401k is your employer has a lot of control over your investment.  Your employer does have some control and some say over what your investments are. And the last thing is, is there's a lot of hidden fees with the 401k that you have to pay people to manage your account. Whereas if you were to just put your money in an IRA, you could pay very, very low fees if you want, if you just invested your money into index funds, they have like 0.03% fees for handling your money. Now the Roth IRA on the other hand is a special retirement account that you fund with what's known as post tax income. And that basically just means you can't deduct those contributions on your taxes. And this allows you to have tax-free compounding which is even better than normal compounding. And normal compounding has been said to be the eighth wonder of the world. So that's pretty good. So one of the biggest pros to having an IRA is that you don't have to pay taxes on the money that you earn in that account in the future. This means that, let's say you're paying 25% in taxes right now and when you're 60 years old, you're paying, let's say 50% in taxes, well, you wouldn't have to pay that 50% and you would end up saving 30% in taxes or more. So this is especially good if you're young and you're in like a lower tax bracket right now. This is especially good for you because you're not making that much money and therefore you're not paying that much in taxes. Now, you can pull out your contributions to the account anytime you want. And what I mean by that is, let's say you put 20,000 into an account and through the magic of compound interest, it goes to 30,000, you can pull that 20,000 that you put in anytime you want without getting taxed or without getting penalized. However, if you try to pull the additional 10,000 out, you will get taxed on it and you're going to get penalized on it. So you really do not want to do that. And another great thing about the Roth IRA is you have pretty much complete control over your investments. If you wanna go really aggressive and you really believe in one company, you can do that. Or if you wanna be really safe and conservative, which I recommend and just go into an index fund, you can also do that. Now, one of the bad things about a Roth IRA is you do have to wait until you're 59 and a half before you can pull that money out. This is why it's considered to be a retirement account. And like I said earlier, if you try to pull the interest out before that age, 59 and a half, having the account five years or more, you are going to get taxed and penalized 10%. And then another bad thing that kind of sucks about the Roth IRA is you can only put $6,000 in every single year. And if you take any money out, it doesn't matter. You can't put it back in. So if you put 6,000 in and then take 6,000 out, well, you already put 6,000 in, you can't put anything more in until the next year. And then another thing is there's a lot of income limits with the Roth IRA. At the time of recording this video, if you're single, the income limit is $135,000 a year and it changes every couple of years. So you definitely want to look into that if you're watching this and you're looking into a Roth IRA. So now that you know the pros and cons of both, now let's go ahead and get into which one is a better option for your specific situation. Now, if you're young and you're not making a lot of money and you're in a low tax bracket, the Roth IRA is probably going to be better for you. So let's say like a theoretical scenario, you're in high school or college and you're making about 20,000 a year from your part-time job and your side hustles, you definitely would want to be putting at least, maxing it out, putting $6,000 a year into your Roth IRA. However, if you're in a very high tax bracket and you're making a lot of money every year, the Roth IRA may not be the best option for you. For instance, let's say you are currently running a business making $500,000 a year and you don't think this business is gonna last very long. Let's say you opened up like a bunch of avocado toast shops and five years from now you think avocado toast isn't gonna be popular anymore and you'd only expect to be making, let's say $100,000 a year when you retire. Well, in that case, then the 401k would likely be a better option for you.  Now, most people are going to be in a lower tax bracket when they retire and the reason for that is because they've already bought their house so they don't have to pay rent, they don't have a lot of overhead expenses and they're pretty much just living off of their savings. Now, the other big problem with the 401k like I mentioned before is that you have no idea what the tax situation is going to be like in the future. So with all that being said, here is my personal recommendation on what I would do. But before I say that, I just want to quickly tell you that I am not a finance professional. I do this for educational and entertainment purposes only. You know, this is just my opinion and you need to do your own research. So in my opinion, if your employer offers matching 401k, you should absolutely do both. They are both really, really good options but if you're young and you're not making much money then you should prioritize the Roth IRA. So let's go over a theoretical example so you can kind of get an idea of what I'm talking about. So let's say that you're 18 and you just got a really good job, an entry level job making, let's just say $50,000 a year because you watched my videos and you followed my recommendations and you did your research. Well, the Roth IRA would probably be better for you at this time because you're likely going to be making less money now than you are in the future because you will probably be making six figures at some point. However, if your employer offers matching then you absolutely should take advantage of it. So again, let's just say out of the $50,000 you make every year, you can only invest 10,000 every year and your employer offers 5% matching. You would want to put all 5% of that matching into your 401k, which would be 2,500 and then your company would match you dollar for dollar. So you'd be putting $5,000 a year into your 401k. Then out of the 7,500 that's left, you would put 6,000 of that into your Roth IRA and then you would have about 1,500 left over to either put into an index fund, you know, invest in real estate or whatever you want to do with it. And assuming you withdraw all of it at 65 years old with a 7% return on investment, adjusted for inflation, then you would actually end up pulling over $2 million out of both the Roth IRA and the 401k. And then after taxes, you'd have a little bit less than $4 million total. And if you put that on the stock market and you got again, 7% returns, you would be getting basically almost $300,000 a year you could easily live off in your retirement. And that means you could retire on almost $300,000 a year and you wouldn't even be touching the principal. You would just be living off of the interest. And that's really not too bad considering you would probably have at least one house, if not several houses that are already paid off and you would have a very, very low cost of living. All right, that's it. So if you made it to the end, I really appreciate you watching. Please, if you haven't already done so, go ahead and smash the like button, hit the subscribe button, hit the notification bell and go ahead and comment below as well. I really appreciate everybody that watches and comments and I respond to every single comment. So thank you again for watching and until next time.


You know, I didn't really realize it until recently, but the developers for Demon Slayer of the Hinokami Chronicles are unfortunately killing the game. The last couple of Demon DLC characters they released were over two months ago now, and they haven't exactly dropped the game-changing update either, so naturally the player numbers are gonna go down. Why then am I saying that the game is being killed instead of the game is already dead, like my boy Afro did with his video? Well, I think we have to account for one factor. Pengan. Seriously though, we've known that the sound Hashira is coming to the game ever since the game first released, and now it's just been a matter of waiting for the character to actually drop. Do you know how hard it was watching the final episodes of Demon Slayer Season 2, and watching Tengen just absolutely pop off and not being able to play as him in the game? I've read the entire manga for this series, and Tengen is still like top two characters for me. Anyway, what I'm saying is if they drop Tengen, they'll get their player base back, at least for a couple weeks to a month. At least I'll be back anyway. Which is why I wanted to be in top form for when this character drops, so I am back to check out the online ranked matches for Hinokami Chronicles, see how everything's going, see if we can find any players online, and most importantly, see if I can still play this game. All right, it's good to be back though. Oh, I should have just gone for the full Thunder Clap and Flash Count. Hold on, you know I still got Perfect Blocks all these years later.  I actually had a lot more combos on there. I'm gonna see if I just can't do it. One, two. All right, I'll wait a little while longer. I'll wait a little while longer. I'll throw an assist behind. Oh, I forgot Tanjiro. Tanjiro is just so good in this game. No. Also, I forgot that everyone's gonna bully the way I say that name. Wake up, Mash. Push away, Guard. All right, this guy knows how to play. All right, get Inosuke off of us. We don't need that. Ooh. Now we're good. There we go. That's what I want to see. That's what I want to see. I'm just gonna push him away and go for the special at the end. Right here. Add a little bit of extra damage. And then let's see if he can keep up with the speed. First of all, perfect parry that. He's got a switch block. I'm gonna call in this. Go for the guaranteed grab. It didn't work. All right, we're going for my ultimate strat. Speed. Speed Part 2. Oh, he's got a block. You can't try to hit me. I'm too fast. Zenitsu is too fast. I'm gonna do it again. Round start.  Oh, you can't dodge me. Water wheel. All right, it looks like we both called our own assist. Damn, I tried to perfect guard him again. Damn, he'd be doing some damage, though. Damn, he'd be doing some damage, though. Did I just get reset?  All right, he's got to escape. Oh, he can't escape. All right, then I'm taking it. I'm taking the most I can. Standard route, but you know what? It is what it is. We're just gonna take the damage. Guard walk, guard walk, guard walk. Oh, he fell for the oldest trick in the book, the guard walk. You let it look like your stand is lower. He doesn't want to waste his sub. Oh, he should have wasted his sub. Now, I can't as well. All right, he wants this. He wants this bad. Do we go for the assist? There we go. Oh, he actually called the assist. And now we have a three bar ultimate. We could just use that and win, probably. But that's not what I'm gonna. I think we all know what I'm gonna do. Maximum speed dash. What's it gonna do? Assist to cover me? Nah, we're back in there. And now that I have no bar, first. Damn, damn, damn, save myself. No, Ineskay, he's laughing up a storm. He's stopping me from doing my tactic. Ineskay, please. I'm getting waterfall basin right now. I can't do my technique. Help. All right, I'm doing it. You know, a lot of people, I don't think they would have gone for the win here. But I'm going for it. Damage. Oh, damage. Damage, I'm just going for it. I'm spending all my resources. First form. Thunder clap and flash. Six fold. Not God speed, but we'll have to take what we can get. Now, what's his plan? Grab, he couldn't even see me coming. Ah, that was sick, the undodgeable grab. I had him in the assist stun. Hey, I was sleeping. What happened? That was sick. See, this is why this game needs Tengan, dude. Dude, I want to play as the sound hush, you're so bad. That was, imagine a team of Zenitsu and Tengan. Oh my goodness. The hearing on that team would be, you would be able to hear your opponent's fear. We actually did get the rematch, which I'm excited about, because this, we actually had pretty good connection. Oh, nice. We got through, launch him up, be able to continue the combo, get him back down on the ground so we could stuff him into it. Oh, that actually counted as a slight reset. No, no, no, we know about that. We know about that. Damn, I didn't block it. All right, get me out of there. Grab, oh, I just snuck in there, canceled the dash and grabbed them.  I can't get over how good like, you know, when it comes to arena fighting, anime arena fighting games like this, Storm is always like my go-to example of like, yeah, I think that's a lot of fun. But this game is just as, for some reason I forgot about that whirlpool move. Rookie mistake. Oh, I didn't block, I'm dodging. Well, a little early on his part, we don't get hit by E and a skate, so we get to play the game a little bit.  If we hit him, we do go into ultimate here. Oh, no, we're dead, we're dead, we're dead, we're dead. E and a skate, you gotta be careful what that assists. That's fine. Oh, he knows how to guard walk too. Well, then let me show you the ultimate form of guard walking. Ha, you haven't even begun to master the arc, did grab. Allow me to show you what true skill looks like. I took a vacation from the game. The game to me wasn't dying, bro, I was just taking a little break. Get off him. Strike right through. Okay, should keep attacking after that. Nice. That was a really good guard. He's come to play as well. He's down some to say I should be, I should really be guarding right now just in case he tries that. Yeah, there he goes. Oh, he had his back turned. You turning your back to me, come here. I can't allow this disrespect. I didn't mean to get saved there. Oh, I didn't even, I should have just heard E and a skate. He might go for the ultimate here to win. No, he's being, he's being, he's being cool and confident. He's saving it. I should have altered right there. That would have made me invincible. Now we're down to our last life and he has three ultimate gauges. All right, it's fine. We'll just have to get into waste them. Don't get grabbed again. All right, cook them up. Try not to get hit with the whirlpool move. That move is killing us. What? All right, we used our, I actually don't agree with what I did there. Oh, but I do agree with just swinging. I'm giving them both a little beat down they can remember. Yes, that should kill him. This is ultimate our level three. Thunder breathing, first form. Thunder clapping, flash. Let's go. God speed at the end, let's go. Just enough, we got him to waste two of his bars. I'll take that trade any day of the week. All right, we're back up around speed. Speed, go faster, go faster. He tricked me. He's never jumped at the end before. He's wide open. He tried the whirlpool, but I was ready. We're not getting hit by that move anymore. I am so done getting hit by that move. We're learning. All right, he's got Enosuke assist. So we're just gonna let him waste that real quick. Nice. Nice. Don't give him an inch. Don't give him an inch. Standard stuff. I'm saving my assist bar as well. Here comes Enosuke. Nah, he didn't even use Enosuke. He's gotta use him here. He's gotta use him here, otherwise he's gonna lose. Is he okay with losing this round? There he goes. He jumped again. All right, this is what the escape was for. He did the whirlpool. All right, I don't wanna lose. How was Enosuke right? Oh, you can do it with only one bar. Oh no. No, no, no, no, no. Oh, we got so lucky. I don't know if the burst actually moved us or if I just willed that to happen. Oh, my luck stat is high right now. That was sick. I cut him from midair. I'm getting hit by Enosuke, man. Oh, you can't, you can't mass there. No, no, it's too late for us to be, it's used his assist. Oh, we got him. We actually got him to bite. Finally, he opens up that defense. I need to see you up close. Okay, we're a little close for my liking. Enosuke is gonna come out. Oh, don't let him get close. He bit again. He bit again. That should be it. Go, go all before he gets his thing back. Yes! That should be it. That should be the game. He couldn't get his Enosuke up in time. Level two ultimate. Shh. Not speed. That was sick. That was, oh, dude. That was so sick. I forgot how good this game is. Where am I? Who am I? Who are you? Three wins and 15 disconnects? All right, bro. I'm giving you a chance to prove me wrong here.  You know, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt because you know what? I also have one disconnect, but I would never rage quit, bro. They just gave that to me. Like the game crashed for some reason and they gave me a rage quit. So you know what? I believe in this guy. But that doesn't mean I'm not gonna give him the hands, though, as a competitor, the best way you can respect the competition is by playing against them like you would anybody else. So that's exactly what I'm gonna do. It's under clap and flash. Ooh, now wake up. I got another treat for you. It's called water wheel. Oh my God, look at that range. I forgot how good this game. The first two demons, they're still demons I haven't played, huh? The second release of demons, you know, I feel like they could have used a bit more spice, but still, oh, I'm playing like trash right now. Ooh, sphere of webs. I might have tried something there. There we go, that should be game. That should be round one going to us. We didn't sweat the small details there. We started getting a bit lax towards the end, but now I'm gonna really turn up the heat. Now the heat is going to max. Do I dash at me? No, then get grabbed. I don't know what you're standing around for. Trying to parry me? Nah, parry this. Go ahead, parry this. Parry this. I'm in there. Parry this. Oh, I was gonna hit him with the grab. Damn, I couldn't back dash. I wanna hit him with the armored move. Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ah. All right, so you got some webs on you, bro. But you can't outdash me. I'm just going right at him. I'm keeping it real basic, too. Oh, there's no way. That was hot. I don't wanna waste my bar, so I'm gonna let you escape. Why did I not get my charge attack? Oh, the armored attack there would have been game. See, you're not gonna ult me. I guess he doesn't wanna waste the bar either. Oh, no, I should have just gone for it. Okay, we have three bars. He awakened to get some demon health back. I kinda forgot. Okay, well, I'm not gonna lose another round. I'm gonna promise that right now. What are you just swinging to yourself over here? That wasn't a perfect dodge. That's on me, but I'm not falling for that. I can just honestly dash at him. It looks like he's just leaving me a lot of opportunity to dash through his attacks, which if that's what you wanna do, I'm definitely down. Oh, he just walked into that one. He wanted to see what it was all about. All right, let's go to next game. I got three bars. I'm not getting any younger. This is probably gonna be scaled, but you know, maybe he might still kill, actually. I'm going to game two. Damn, no, that scales heavily. Wow, felt for the oldest trick in the book. He wanted a perfect parry of his own. Well, I ain't gonna give it to him. All right, now I'm gonna cook you up a devastating round here, if you don't mind. There he goes. He actually did it that time. He did, he waited, he waited, he waited. Dude, I'm testing his patience. You know what? I don't see a rage quitter in him, though. I really gotta hold that. I gotta hold that, uh-oh. If we lose this round and he doesn't use any bar, we are in a bad way. Why, I'm mashing, I'm mashing, I'm mashing. I'm bad at the game. Oh God, just get me out of there. No, no, don't go back in, there's any, oh, he has three bars. Even if he was a rage quitter, I wouldn't know. No, I have to test him. I have to test him. I promised I would be the one to test him. I'm the one that gave him the benefit of the doubt. I gotta see what he's all about. This has gotta be frustrating to go. This has gotta be, ha-ha-ha-ha. All right, if he is a rage quitter, he's gotta be feeling it now. Oh, I gave up, I gave up. I stopped blocking.   Oh God. Okay, he's gonna, ultimate level three meter, he's gonna scale. That's fine, I guess. Oh God, it's gonna scale. Oh, I'm just trying, I wanna win this so bad. I gotta see if he's a rage quitter. If he wins, then there's nothing to test. Come here. I'm gonna see about you, bro. Hey, look, you've got plenty of time to rage quit if that's what you're about. But I don't think that's you, you wouldn't do that. I'm glad, I was right about him. I was right, he wouldn't rage quit. I could see it in his eyes. Sadly, it doesn't change the outcome. Slice. Ha-ha-ha-ha. Oh, unless he thinks he could take me around too. He might think he could take me around too. Wait a minute, wait a minute. Does he think he could take me around too? Hold on, no, no, no, I just don't think he would rage quit. All right, we're back with what is probably going to be the final match on the dodge walk. Oh, I perfect guarded Nezuko though. I perfect guarded Nezuko, I just didn't get the, wait, that was the assist? That was, no, wait, that was the main character, he just switched. I got mixed out of my shoes right there.  I was doing my own combo. That is what we like to call over committing. Damn, nice switch. So we actually used the switch mechanic. I didn't, I didn't play around long enough to see if the switch mechanic was something I should use. But it doesn't look bad. We switched into a grab that was sick. This guy's got mixed. This guy's good, all right. I canceled my dash, but I didn't do anything afterwards. This guy's got moves, all right, all right. Hold on, hold the phone, hold the phone. We're gonna have to really play. All right, I did not mean to awaken, that is fine. I got countered, I got countered. I am playing like a fool, I'm just mashing buttons. All right, hold on, let me just, oh my God, you have to jump that. I have to actually keep my eyes open for the grab. Okay, got him. We're back down. Sweet electricity effects and everything, yep. There we go, nice. Nice raw super damage. I didn't get my charge attack. Oh, it wasn't even that bad until I failed. It wasn't that bad until I failed. There we go, oh, that was sick. Zenitsu's rage is crazy. Oh, do the charge attack, Zenitsu. Do the charge attack, Zenitsu, please. All right, come back, time begins now. Oh, I dodged it. I actually did dodge it. We got it. I backstepped. Oh, we snuck behind him. Now we're actually using some movement. Nice, we love to see some movement. Sadly, it was mostly random, I'm not going to lie to you. Oh my God, Nezuko, stop. Nezuko, please, test me. You know I got it like that. Don't test me, we're playing neutral now. We're playing neutral. Right spot in between, that's gonna be a round going to us for once. All right, we got a round, we got a round. That's all we needed. I just needed to see one round to get my confidence back. He does have a level three, but that's okay. I couldn't get it, I couldn't get my ultimate. I mean my shielded attack. I got to stop swinging randomly. I got to pick my spots a little better here. Oh, so much damage. Oh, he's just swinging.  This man said dead calm, and I just punched him right in the stomach. All right, if we can get to three bars, we might have a chance here. What's he doing, dude? Oh, I just got my ultimate art.  I was playing, I didn't want to use my burst to get my sub back, because I wanted to play for the raw ultimate art, but clearly it was a mistake. Now we got a rematch. That guy was good. The disconnects are random in this game, I guess. Unless he's, I don't know who he would disconnect against. I feel like you don't get that good disconnecting, but maybe I'm wrong.  Boom, give me that. All right, I'm built different this round. What? Oh, he switched. That's how he did that. All right, well, this damage is almost done, so I'm not subbing out of this. I'm not subbing out of this, bro. You gotta be crazy if you think I'm getting out of that. Anyway, we're about to trade right now for even damage. Come here. Come here, come talk to me about...  Damn, the switch into dash is good, especially if you're staying on the offensive, which he is. He wanted to grab right there bad. No, don't run, don't run, don't run. Not letting him run. Grab him again. I'ma grab you as many times as I need to get you to stop doing that. There he goes. Now he's starting to swing a little bit. Okay, well, it didn't matter. He swung on me. It didn't matter, he swung on me. Bro, you lucky tangin' on the gate. Nezuko, please. We actually, that was just lucky. We just swung through Nezuko that time. Not something I would rely on, definitely not, but... All right, I accidentally did a level two there, but it's the only thing I could've done to save me, so I'm not even gonna complain. Let's get a win up on the board, shall we? Let's get a win up on the board. That's decent damage right there. I'm gonna play safe, though, for the rest of this. Woo! No! Oh, he's guard. You're guard lookin' a little weak there. You're guard lookin' a little weak there. I saw him from across the room. You know I had to introduce myself. Speed dating with the guard. I had to see what that guard was all about. Damn, that guard was lookin' weak. I had to stop it. He just, he just crashed into me. Oh, he dodged it that time. Now he's lookin' out for my grabs. Use the armor as any two, please. Do I just land in mash here? Nice, we got behind him. Put some damage up on the board. He's got three, so we just have to save our, get out our sub-bar. I didn't save it, but it ended up being the only thing that could save me. All right, get the knockdown. No, no. Couldn't get out of that situation. Nezuko locked me down for good. Oh, no. No! No! Oh, that didn't hit him. Damn it. He's gonna try to grab me.  We actually cut him in twain.  No! Oh, please, that is to just kill. I was, I was throwing, I was throwing. Wait, who won? No! I was throwing that whole round, bro. Oh, I'm getting, oh no, I'm not. Bro, it's so weird when they just keep running at you like that. I'm not subbing out. I'll take the grab. I guess I could've jumped. Damn, there's no need to take the grab. Don't try to parry me. All right, start to come back slow. This is the kind of game where you gotta think about every move. I wanna see some meter being used before I leave. I gotta see some meter being used before I go anywhere. The grabs are so fat. Nezuko just demands too much attention from the eyes. I couldn't see, dude. I couldn't see. Well, we're gonna leave it off there. Hopefully you enjoy. We couldn't get it done in the last set. But still, this game was a lot of fun. As soon as they add a 10-gen, it's gonna be crazy, dude. Hopefully they add them soon. Let me know down below which character you would like to see get added to this game. Because I still think this game has a lot of potential if they start selling DLC. Other than that, click on some of the other videos, check those out. I have been out of do it, and I will see you in the next one.


I have told many people, including my own pastors. Pastor Throp, I have told many people including my own pastors. You wear a tie here. When you are on the pulpit, for five minutes people are not listening to you, they are actually looking at what? Your tie.  It doesn't go like that. I mean, some of us were taught professional aid, a bit of it in the law school before we came out and it does sound. I have very many issues that you tell. I can't move out of... Is Moses here? I can't move out of my house if my wife doesn't approve.  You remember the muse with the socks? Those kind of things. It's important that you look who you are as a professional. Sometimes you find people going professional. I'm sure that you are in a casual place.  That one you should not wear any time anyway. The other thing I saw and I have seen, the coat labels, you are both a suit. For the rest of the life of that suit, your label is on. That was a very nice question. I acknowledge the seat of your email. I will respond shortly. That's yes. That's yes and it helps. No, I didn't come here to respond. That's one of Lynette. I have two questions and I have requested for permission to respond to them because I'm rushing for another appointment. In a word, what is the difference between a bribe and a tip? What is the difference between a bribe and a tip? You know what we are talking about, isn't it? What do they call them? Filis. I mean, some offices, they have in some organizations, they have something how they appreciate their word. They are clients. I can't remember the appropriate term. You've got to be extremely, extremely careful about what you give as a gift or what. When I was in the office as CJ, everything I was given, I had, if it was more than 20,000 shillings, I had to surrender it. Whether it is a tip or what, I actually went to some country I don't want to name and I was given a very beautiful watch. Later on I was told that it was more than 500,000. I surrendered it to the judiciary. I surrendered it.  Of a tip. Or when you want to bribe somebody and you are going in the name of a tip, many people will differentiate and will be able to understand what that means. In reality, what does it mean to stand up for what is right? What challenges have you faced? I faced many challenges. Some of them are common knowledge. I had budget cuts and things like those. I had, I was, is there an insult which was not how I get me? Those kind of things you have got to do that. One of the greatest challenges I have had, you saw a clip doing the rounds where I spoke somewhere and I said, what is my price? And people didn't take it kindly. I went to an international conference. I don't want to say where. And the message I got from that conference is that I projected myself as being holier than thou. And that is the last thing I had in my mind. So, I mean, I have kept, thereafter I've been asked about that and I've kept emphasizing and saying that for me to bribe me is it meaning to me. It is the meaning. It's like you can buy me. And I said I have no price. You can't buy me. You cannot buy me and those kind of challenges. To take care when you have somebody say, but this is a comment. This is a comment you can say. Truth is truth. And I should note, it should not be personal. Free will was afforded as recorded by the keynote speaker. Sin truthfully, there is no life in choosing sin. Is in God at serving dictator. That I think is a comment. How can you handle indecision in a career? After canvas is still undecided on what career path to follow. Even in the current position. Extremely, extremely difficult. Very, very dangerous in my view. Indecision. Indecision. One of the leadership books I read, and I'm not an expert in that, you listen to the experts, is that a decision, even a bad decision is better than indecision. Because when you are undecided, it creates a lot of problems. Of course you want to make a good decision. You want to decide, you want to get enough time and material to make a decision. You need to do that. But as an executive and as a person in irresponsible position, where your word will give direction, you need to be very, very quick in answering or in making decisions. I think those were the questions. One other thing, Lynette, I got or I picked from your presentation. My names are, yes, there is another one which come. I'm Siche Maraga. I'm professor so and so. I'm doctor so and so. Aye. Unless it is important that people know who you are. But to go addressing or introducing yourself that I am professor so and so, it sounds very, very arrogant. Thank you very much.


This long weekend many Victorians will be hitting the roads. We know that with long weekends there are often serious motor vehicle collisions. Last Labor Day weekend CFA responded to more motor vehicle accidents than any other type of incident. CFA volunteers often respond to motor vehicle collisions on rural roads and in rural communities and see firsthand the serious trauma and pain that comes with those collisions. So before you get behind the wheel this long weekend think of your safety and the safety of all those around you for your sake and ours.


If I was going to have to go to war, I wouldn't know how to fight, and the Marines knew how to fight. The war was over in 1945, and the association was formed in 1949. When I retired, I joined the Second Marine Division Association as a retired Marine, simply because I just wanted to participate and belong to it. The Marine Corps itself has the premise not only of having courageous young men and women being part of it. The Second Marine Division is a premier division. I'm impressed with what I see with the young Marines. They're smarter than we were, certainly better educated than we were. And they've got, I was telling Sergeant Major today, I said, this stuff that I see is so awesome. Going through the memorial service, you saw what the Second Marine Division did at Taro. I interact with a lot of young Marines, younger Marines. Last couple was couple sergeants. I always take the opportunity to talk to them. Their heart beats the same Marine Corps, but mine did when I was a second lieutenant. There's some things that just don't change. The ethos that we have is unique to the Marine Corps.