So thank you all for coming this afternoon. My name is Jen Copestake. I'm a reporter with the BBC's technology TV program click We're going to be talking today about a what-if scenario. So this is sort of to Project we're actually thinking that this is a scenario where 50% of jobs From today's employment have disappeared. So that's how we're going to try and imagine I know it's a difficult thing to imagine Especially we've seen some reports this week from the World Economic Forum saying that jobs will be lost to artificial intelligence But many more jobs will be replaced. So that's something that we're going to discuss in the panel Like I said, it would be fantastic to get as much audience participation in the discussion as possible We're going to start with a raise of hands vote Talking about universal basic income. So first of all is everybody familiar with universal basic income? I'd imagine that's the case. Yeah, all familiar Here how many people are for the idea of Instuting a policy of universal basic income if we did lose 50% of jobs raise your hands Okay, so say that's about half and half. Maybe what do you think? 50% Oh, sorry, maybe after well the discussion we can't figure that out For universal basic income Yeah, you're going to go here. So, and how many against? me So significantly fewer and how did anybody abstain? They're gonna wait Yeah, not sure so the end of the discussion will see if more people think for or against either one But first I'd like to introduce our panelists. So I have Dr. Hillary cotton who's a social entrepreneur from the UK She's also recently written Excellent book which I've had the pleasure of reading an early copy called radical help. It's about revolutionizing the welfare state To my right is Governor Lee Joi-myung. He's a former mayor of Songnam city where he ran a basic Income experiment in the city in Korea He's now the governor of Jiangji province, which is the most populous province in Korea So thank you for coming We have John Hawksworth who's a chief economist the chief economist at PWC and has recently authored a Very interesting report on AI and jobs in China, which we'll be discussing and of course we have Minister Polson Trolls lung Polson is the Minister of Employment from Denmark. So it's fantastic to have you guys all here welcome And Hillary we'd like to start with you each panelist is going to have five minutes to explain how they see this Discussion going Hillary, please. Okay. So, I mean my perspective is historical Which is that every time we have an industrial revolution? We're on the fourth. Some people say the fifth We have a huge panic about how jobs are going to disappear There's the boys usually is the boys cry robot and everybody panics and actually this very rarely happens However, because we're in a what-if scenario I'm going to take it as read that we are in a what-if scenario and that it is about losing 50% of tasks I think and 5% of jobs and I think what is very different about this fourth industrial revolution is the speed at which Things will change and the collective nature of it and I think that is true And so I suppose the question is if roles are going to change How are we going to manage this transition because I think it's certainly true That with the current forms of support that exist in most countries in the world The transition is going to be bloody at best that it won't work and we need to kind of reinvent Collective forms of support. So I just want to kind of briefly suggest four things that I think we should kind of undertake in this scenario The first is I think we need to reinvent social and labor institutions quite radically This is what happened after the Second World War It's what oiled the wheels of the last industrial production that we had kind of different financial Set-ups we had very agile ways of kind of moving what was then there was a big panic at that time of agrarian migration to the cities in Europe and we kind of invented the welfare state to kind of ease that transition and we need To do the same again, but we need to do it in a much more agile way so that people have passports They can carry different benefits different skills. They can have kind of different Forms of kind of Moving from one job to the other because I think the other thing that's going to happen is it's not going to be a Once-off job loss. It's going to be a continual process of transition and change that's going to be part of this industrial revolution So we need to kind of think about continual change the second thing I think is really important is that we need to emphasize different soft skills So I think that what we're what's going to matter? What increasingly seems to be the case already is that it's not so much your hard skills It's your soft skills because even if the work needs hard skills. You can't deploy them without soft skills by this I mean things like Empathy teamwork and one of the things I've been doing as a social entrepreneur is I've been inventing a new form of support for people Who are out of work in between work who can't progress in the modern economy and what we do is we take apart We don't ask them what their CV looks like we take apart their skills and we kind of rearrange it horizontally and we look for those things that are Parallel that can be applied in different ways and our service costs one fifth of standard approaches and is extremely successful in Supporting people often older people actually whose skills are already redundant But also young people who have got a mismatch and can't start work And so I think we could kind of build on ideas like that about thinking very differently The third thing is I think we need to think about relationships We shouldn't just think economically already eight out of ten jobs are found through who we know in the modern economy And it looks like already with the changes that are happening that this is only going to increase And of course people who are at some distance from the labor market usually have the weakest and the less diverse social ties So we need to think not just about Slotting people into this production line of work, which was the old economy But much kind of more cohesively about this is a big collective problem and how we kind of increase the relationships between people and Then fortunately I want to say that we need to kind of think about data differently So at the moment with the exception of this rather great PWC report that web has commissioned We've only got backwards looking data So we keep counting what's missing and it's very hard to kind of see where the opportunities are opening up And so we need different forms of data collection that focus on what's happening What's opening up and how all of us might connect to it. So I think I don't actually think there'll be a doomsday scenario I think it's possible But I think we have got plausible case for hope But only if we radically restructure the kind of collective social institutions around us that can help us all transition It's not an individual or an individual's problem in this next industrial revolution Do you see a time frame that the critical time frame that we have is this a case of five or ten years ten to twenty years? Well, I I mean of course because I don't think it's actually going to happen And I think the new jobs are going to come along But I do think I think it will be kind of slower than we think and it will be and because I think actually what's going to happen Is that tasks are going to move rather than jobs are going to disappear? Although of course some jobs are going to disappear. This does give greater flexibility for people But but as but if we don't I think what's more important is in a much shorter time frame We rethink our education systems which aren't equipping people for kind of constant movement as some countries are doing in the world But certainly my country is not that agile at and Europe may have challenges with and that we also think as I say that we have We stop trying to kind of fix our out-of-date welfare systems and we kind of radically invent new ones So I would try and focus a time frame on that rather than what's happening with and very quickly your opinion on Universal basic income. Yes or no. No. No, okay Can everybody hear okay, or do we need to speak louder louder? Okay louder. Oh, sorry so thanks very much and Thanks to Hillary for her remarks. I agree with a lot of what Hillary says about this Probably we won't see this kind of doomsday scenario our own analysis suggests that in the UK You might see 20% of jobs displaced over the next 20 years and roughly 20% created so broadly balanced For China in the report we published yesterday actually launched with effort left not commissioned by them I said but launched here We predicted yes more than a quarter of Chinese jobs might be displaced But actually we think that the likelihood is that even more than that more than 30% might be created So the net effect could be positive Having said that you know more than a quarter of Chinese jobs is 200 million people Potentially having to move jobs move careers possibly move locations. So that is a huge disruption even if it's not 50% Secondly when we break the analysis down by sector for example in our UK analysis We find it in areas like transport logistics as autonomous vehicles roll out across the economy You know, you could see 50% or more in that sector in some areas of low-value Manufacturing in China or agriculture. You could see that kind of Displacement so in certain sectors you could see that kind of displacement And it may be very difficult to reskill people to find jobs within that sector So they'll have to move to other parts of the economy where we see job growth in health care and education In technical scientific areas So I think you know while it's it may be around to be unlikely that 50% of this place There is going to be big disruption coming not immediately. We don't think it'll happen over the next few years I think we've got a window of opportunity of maybe five to ten years to get ready for this Before it really starts to happen on a big scale later in the 2020s and into the 2030s as these technologies mature So what could we do to try and if you like Mitigate some of these these costs if it does get anywhere close to this sort of 50% Tuesday scenario Well, I think one thing, you know is that we do have to start investing seriously in lifelong learning And you know, I think if you look at countries that we see as being good at this like Iceland You know that has such a higher employment rate than the UK or any other Oasty country New Zealand also very high. I think some of these countries are trying to invest in this seriously I think you know really do act as best practice in the UK Unfortunately, we've actually been investing less in adult education for ready cash and with your stare at it We've had a lot state years and actually that's been run down and I think in future We're going to have to think about a higher education much differently instead of doing three years of university when you're 18 You might do a one-year intensive course and we're 18 another year when you're 38 and the third year when you're 58 So you have to retrain again. What kind of subjects you think people will be studying in that scenario Well, you know, who knows, you know, it could be some sort of advanced, you know Genomics or something when you're 38 and something out of a science fiction book when you're 58 But so, you know, you have to remain as Hilary said agile and you know It's teaching adaptability to children and teaching the ability to to be adaptable as perhaps as important as Teaching them, you know knowledge that they can, you know, pick up as they go along through their life experience and their work experience I think another important area is is actually that I think that you need to look at competition policy This might not seem obvious, but one of the keys away is this technology benefits society Is it proofs productivity reduced costs and therefore allows lower prices There for consumers have higher real incomes to spend on other things and as they spend them on other things Things like health education other other areas as well That can actually then lead to extra jobs and other types of services And so that's traditionally has been the way of the last 250 years this price mechanism that a lot of these benefits have filtered through to the rest of society And so I think if competition doesn't work Then you might actually get these profits being hoarded by sort of monopolists, you know Whether in the technology sector or whether in other sectors that we're having an effective competition policy Well, we have seen that concentration ratios that you know have increased in economies like the US and UK Recently, it's not just technology. It's also other sectors To some degree That's a natural feature of the technologies that some of them have economies of scale and scope that lends themselves to a few people winning a few winners But I think you do have to make sure that markets are still contestable So new people can come in and challenge them and you also have to make sure that they're not sort of being Compacitive in some way, so I think competition policy try and make sure these benefits are passed on to consumers and the spread Pretty started that way. It's really important. I think a third areas I think you do have to strengthen the social safety net, you know, like Hillary I wouldn't personally go for the universal basic income and its pure form Well, I think it's interesting to see the trials that are going on But I do think something for example like some sort of conditional income support built into current systems that would not just Would not just sort of reward people that are in work on low incomes But it also perhaps will people who you know lost their job and we're trying to retrain or we're doing something socially useful in terms of Looking after grandparents or children or who were volunteering with an approved charity. So somehow contributing to society I think the idea of some sort of income support For people in that category might be more politically acceptable and might be be more affordable So I think you have to sort of rethink to a certain extent the conditionality around these things and try and Provide a stronger social safety net and in places like China. I think maybe part of that is also Reinvesting the proceeds this growth which will boost tax revenues for government in trying to move towards more of a universal free health care Universal free education and then people actually won't have to you know Spend so much of their income as they do in China at the moment on those things which in the UK We might rather take for granted. So I think there's a range of things you can do I wouldn't personally choose universal banking income But I think there's some other things you can do to strengthen the social safety But what I wouldn't do I could mention one thing is put up borders and try and shut out people or trade or ideas I think that that might seem like a solution to some people in the short term But in the long term, it's just a recipe for economic stagnation. I mean all sounds very utopian so far. I have to say universal health care and Fantastic education system. Well, it's something you move to over a period of decades Yeah, look at the 19th century in the UK and the 20th century, you know, we have the same phenomenon We have the industrial revolution that produced massive growth with also massive income inequality Yeah, and Marx was writing about revolutions in 1848 or something and they got round that by introducing things like Gradually introducing universal free education the welfare state in the 20th century things like the NHS in the UK So that way you have a sort of social democratic solution that that narrowed the inequalities Maybe we're into another sort of political inflection point where you have to start looking at that again Maybe I'll come to you Hillary. I just get mr. Paulson's thoughts What do you think about this? It sounds all very good that we're having quite a nice future with our robotic friends That are going to be helping us get universal health care fantastic education. Do you see the same situation in Denmark? Yeah, I'm quite optimistic. I must say in fact agree quite much with Yes, I agree quite much with the remarks from Hillary When we look in the history of Denmark going 50 years back almost 10% of the workforce Were employed in the agricultural business right now? It's below 2% and at that time people also discussed What about all these persons would they have a job in the future and we have managed in fact to create a lot of new Jobs also jobs if you go 50 years back. Nobody knew should be a job in the future So so I'm I'm quite optimistic as I was saying in the beginning. But what if I think we have to Work with the vocational training and also lifelong learning. We have seen that in Denmark. That has been quite successful A year ago. We just managed to make an agreement a three-part tight agreement between the unions the businesses and the government And the focus for for that agreement was how to invest in Upskilling the workers and especially people with low skill or no skills at all So I think that's a crucial part of the future that is to invest and also to create Opportunities for people that will lose jobs to create new jobs and also give them some more advanced possibilities than they have today And universal basic income. Is it something that you could see happening in Denmark? No, not not in the future, but but we have also I must say a quite well-known welfare state system in Denmark So we have social benefits in Denmark, but I'm not in favor of universal basic income and how come Because I think it's a failure to give up people I think we should demand that people are a part of the society and we have seen in Denmark that our employment rate Now is the highest ever. So that's also a quite A quite unique position that even though we have authorization robots and that kind of thing We have the story right now in Denmark that we have so many people employed. It's a highest level ever So governor we've heard three people on our panel saying 30 is all for universal basic income We're discussing beforehand that actually these youth credit that you gave in Songnam 96% of the people who received it thought it was a very positive thing to have received Can you tell us about your experience? I'm sure everybody here would love to hear about this first of all I Think well when you look at our history Well, the world has been changing and it has been Revolutionized well once in the UK Well a long time ago in UK both people they actually destroyed the whole equipment Machinery but well is Inevitable that we are changing our world is changing and it's been revolutionized and automated then then a lot of the countries they are they try to solve this problem by shortening the labor hour so that and the distributing more people to work, but what if in the future in the near future if we lay labor on the 50% of the people lose their job. I think what people would go very violent So I think we should Be well-addressed to the problem that human cost So well some in the policy wise well some countries they Shorten the Labor hour, but in some other countries they also come out with the other policies But when you look at the social changes that our world is changing is being automated So 20 or 30 years from now So robots or AI would replace a lot of our work But I think I think it should be dealt in a policy wise because People have their own individual desires and then they have they so and then it's the world is very competitive and Well in some case the winners well we say that winners take all So I think that we in this case so that the government should play some Initiative we should they balance the things up so that so if the some people the minority people take too much Of the wealth then the government should take the initiative to well they have more tax to them or so that to reduce distribute the the values or the Revenues to the whole people so that's why So well in this world of force industrial evolution I think that universal basic income is an inevitable part of our life It is an inevitable path that we should go for so we have seen a lot of welfare policies and Well, well the welfare policies that we have until now well They are kind of they minimize the well-safety net so because we do not offer the Universal benefit so it's like it's more like selective so those who are given the welfare benefits well, it's well Sometimes it's sanitize those people all because I'm poor because I am not good enough That's why I am receiving this kind of benefit. So it's and then well for some people If they receive those say subsidies then well for some people they do not wish to work anymore. So So if we can provide the entire people the basic income and then if we Levy more tax to those people who are more money Then well then those people who do not pay much tax Then they would work harder and then also for those who are a lot of money But at the same time that receive the basic income, but at but at the same time they will be levied a lot of tax so well up until now we have dealt with this some the unemployment issue by providing well shortening the labor hour but but but if we like shorten the labor hour and then well in that case, but though if well that have that would maybe there would That people work and then in somehow increase the productivity But if we like provide a universal income then we can both people can spend some of their time Well to do to do to re-skill themselves to upgrade their skills or to invest themselves in more cultural aspects and others So I think that the economy should go virtual cycle So what I what they say this capital is capital world is facing is that I think I we should the kind of we should use the new revenues re Resources and then we try to find out the ways to redistribute them to the entire people and For some people and the world would wonder why do we have to distribute then the common wealths or the wealths That's some people. Well, some people will say that I earn more then that's why I want to have more Then why do I have to share this with some poor people? Some people would say something like this, but But some when you think about they look at a lot of the many sectors there are un-earned incomes So let's say let's take an example of Alaska. So some people would Use the fuel oil fuel, but that's an un-earned income. That's the kind of work The kind of income does not really come from work. It's just a it's for just from the common property and also The technology let's say some a person there was a one or inventor one person Invented something and then it's the technology has been distributed. Well, and that is used by so many people I think that that kind of thing can also be the common wealth and also the Infrastructure that we all have and that if we get some kind of like revenues from those like common wealth Common infrastructure then well if we can levy the tax on them And also I think that everyone has owns a right to the common property When you look at the case of the Alaska and the Mambia They test it on the The basic income policy and then the according to the one report They say that those countries they have seen the reduced unemployment rate and the reduced poverty rate and etc So some people may say that Some wonder that what if we do not we feed off or universal In of the basic income then people would not have to work some people will Do not find the needed to work But if you just pay them the minimum amount then well we can encourage them or motivate them to work and That because we are just me offering them the minimum basic income so that well if they want to earn more if they want to upgrade their life then I think they would work more. Well Well, it was not provided to everyone. It was actually was an experiment we Offered about So 860 USD So it's a slightly less than or $1,000. It's was off. I was offered to the people of 24 years old so All ages across all income brackets and being successful So because we have limited resources so we cannot we cannot really offer the universal income so that but In our province we are trying to increase the amount and then also the the many we are trying to expand it to many different age groups and because we have the very limited amount but with both since but But based on what I have experienced of a lot of people found a very satisfactory and then it was yeah Lots of different experiments that you go through in your book. Yeah in in some of these areas I I personally thought that you would be for this Kind of experiment, but why are you against it? Can I just say one thing built on before I go? Earlier which is that I don't think we should think that the kind of welfare state is going to be expensive that we're the future welfare state The current might be but of course technology also helps us to deliver services in a completely different way So future health future health care could be delivered remotely through tell well Yes, and that we can kind of think about different ways about supporting people with different conditions and so on so actually Technology is a kind of can be a benefit and we can have much better cheaper welfare states It's not just on the negative side, but anyway to come to well one thing I'm realizing from listening to governor Lee is that the language of universal basic income is being used for many Sure, yeah, so I think the idea of a youth credit is incredibly powerful and very interesting I think that's different from what we call in the UK universal basic income which basically means that everybody in the in the nation will get a benefit and Even those who are most in favor of a universal basic income policy in the UK who's modeled it show a level of income That would be very low. So there would be no fear of people not working. Everybody would have to work It would just give you a benefit so my concern is that That we cannot have a Society where we accept that technology will just have winners and losers and we'll give the losers an income that this is going to We're talking about giving everybody an income Yeah, but the thing is is that everybody will have the income But those people without jobs will have an income that they can barely survive on because it's so low But in the same way as Minister Paulson said it sort of allows society to think oh well It's fine because we've given people an income So that's that's for me a very big argument Which is that we need to you know after the Second World War people didn't say oh there's going to be winners and losers They said look we're having an industrial revolution We're going to think about how we build societies and how we build welfare states that spread the gains and that's what I'm Interested in and I don't think universal basic income will deliver that but I do think the idea of a youth credit is very interesting But to go to the experiments in my book for instance one of them is that I work with families who are dependent on multiple levels of welfare that have up to 73 professionals in their lives and and Or that would be a very good example many of those families of course are part of illegal economies So they're earning six times any universal basic income It's not going to help them but more importantly for me is that they suffer from multiple disadvantage health mental health violence abuse and These are complex problems which again are not going to be solved just by giving those families some kind of income and then pretending It's solved by technology do you think? Well, one of the things so if I can give you an example just very concretely is that when I work ethnographically in British public services I see that 80% of all the resource available is spent on bureaucracy is spent on filling out forms and kind of very complex industrial systems 80% So what we do is that we kind of use technology to actually take all of that burden off front line workers Which means that the sort of admin side takes 20% of time which frees up people to work in a completely different way Lower cost bringing humans back into the equation and those families lives are transformed They do move out of the welfare state They move into work their children flourish But that's about human relationships and putting in new technology platforms to free up those human relationships It's not about basic income families then and their own income stand on their own feet Participate in society and feel a lot better So just to clarify Governor Lee Do you you've experimented with the youth credit? Could you see a scenario in Korea where you would have a Universal basic income where everybody in the state is given a certain amount of money if we see 50% of jobs lost because of advances in technology 50% Well, if that really happens if like 50% of jobs really lost then I think well the country Will be one of the well everyone would go crazy and it will be very violent They can't join We have seen situations in London. I know this is not the same situation, but we've seen riots in London We see that I have to say there's a there's a desperate inequality in the UK that Surely will only get worse when we have scenarios like this in the future if more jobs and more jobs are being automated Do you really think John that we're going to have time to reskill people? Well, I think there's certainly no time to be lost, you know, I don't think this will happen overnight You know at the moment our employment rate is at the record high The problem is lack of productivity not employment Which is what I think the government precisely what you want to use these new technologies to boost productivity Because it's only if you can boost productivity But you can increase average earnings levels and try and make up for the sort of re-learning squeeze that we've seen over the last 10 years So I think this is sort of key to addressing the problem I mean in terms of yes, of course if you were to have 50% unemployment sort of very quickly That would that would completely have all sorts of social implications and but I don't think there's I'd say I think you know that just giving people a basic income wouldn't really solve those You know, you would need to find some way to get get people to actually do something I mean, you know, I think I think what you could I don't think that's going to happen nationally You know you can see the scenario, but let's say it could happen in a certain region for example We've seen examples of this before when when you've had steel industries Collins breaking down And now I think you know, I think one of the lessons in the 1980s in the UK Is that if you just let those market forces to try to revive those communities, it doesn't really work And then market forces will not automatically bring in new investments and the government has to play a sort of facilitating role working with local business and Others to try to support that and you know, there are lots of areas where we need a lot more work done For example house building in the UK. We have a huge housing crisis I think maybe and we need hugely more homes to be built and that's still I think well the summer automation possible this doesn't be quite a labor-intensive process and Actually, it's the secret to making housing more affordable and beaming to sort of bridge some of the huge wealth inequalities Which are which are linked to this housing crisis So I think in those sort of areas, you know There are certain areas where the government can sort of pump prime that kind of activity Who's some sort of public private partnership to try to to work with private house publics to actually build affordable housing And you know, you can also do that in in areas that can help to create great growth So so I think you know similarly with transport infrastructure, which in the UK is sorely lacking if you compare it to China now So I mean, I think there is there are ways in which government in that sort of scenario could try to respond If unemployment in the particular area went to a high level But I think you know one has to sort of You know put this in the context and I think that sort of the governor as he says saying that in practice You can't pay universal basic income to everyone. They're just not affordable letter I think he said that it would be necessary if there was a 50% But but I still don't think that they would address the kind of social unrest that you have just doing that I think you would have to find some way to if you like give people a purpose in life Yeah, I mean this is something to do and just simply handing out income In a relatively small way because if unemployment was that high then tax revenues would also be collapsing businesses will be collapsing Yeah, government wouldn't have money to hand out in the first place. Well, this is the thing And so I think there would be all sorts of old problems So but but if we think of it as a more sort of a focus problem in a certain area that you have to deal with And I think you could try and think about these kind of Solutions of focused investments to try to to pump pump prime and kickstart economic activity You know as well as trying to Use government investment as a catalyst to get private investment also to be be brought into areas that might otherwise be You know be depressed, but I think that's more likely to be a localized problem rather than a national problem I mean you mentioned what it means to be human Do you think this sort of scenario would change fundamentally the way that we spend our leisure time or the way that you know? Hillary we've discussed this as well Do you think this is something that we have to think about carefully? Maybe even restructuring our economies our societies? Well, I think it would be really important to kind of have as John was suggesting actually an education system Which is much more flexible and also focuses on? On on leisure time and how we might use our leisure time I mean the 21st century wealth I say I propose is one built around kind of functional and foundational capabilities and That's a much broader view of what it means to flourish which means that we have good work We have you know good lives, but also we do have time time to care time to pursue other interests I think that that would also be important It would be wonderful if that was delivered But in my lifetime there's also been a lot of promises of that that haven't come But I think it would be really important actually to think about how we Educate young people to for that that for mental health and everything else as well as enjoyment of life That that's a part once again an integrated part of life I mean who's paying for all of this these processes is it up to the individual to take initiative and Decide that they need to reskill because they see that their job is going Minister, is this something that the government needs to step in and do yeah I think the government should should play a role. We have seen that in Denmark We have created the Nordic welfare model you can say and and the success of that model is that government businesses and unions are sitting together Also making agreements about the future that has been a huge success in Denmark for many years for decades in fact And I think that'll be one answer in the future. I recall that That's easier to say than to deliver because we have a different tradition on how to to govern Just looking around in Europe. There's a great difference between the northern part of Europe and the southern part of Europe But I think that people will demand in the future that politicians would take the necessary decisions also to do to create growth and Deliver education and lifelong learning, but of course as as individual you just you should also invest in your own Life and you should also invest in your own education That's also a part of the the future if I just look 10 or 15 years ahead I mean just out of curiosity in the room how many people here think and we'll get to some questions Which is great. How many people here think that their current position is under threat from automation? Is there anybody in this room that thinks that I mean I think potentially my job is under threat one maybe and Does anybody what about re-skilling is everybody thinking that they need to re-skill and invest more in their educations hands up? Yeah, so Hillary. Yeah, that's interesting Yeah, so we have some questions gentlemen in the back here if we have a microphone and If you don't mind sir saying your name and where you're from Kumar KS Kumar From from New York and the question is basically as per the statistics of the WHO by 2050 the world's population will be less by two billion people and most of Europe and most of Japan for example in other countries across the world has an aging population of more than 20% yeah, which is about people above six years of age so I'm saying if you just look at the entire global population as a whole and This whole thing around 50% jobs being lost and therefore almost about 30 40 percent of people are getting old Anyway, and we'll be out of jobs. Yes, so we'll have just enough people across the world If you look at it, of course, they may be in the wrong countries Just to have enough people who are required to do the jobs these 50% jobs are lost. Yeah, so more movement between countries. Yes Yes questions over here sir my name is Katsuya Baba from Tokyo and I'm very impressed by the optimism of the board People here because what I see in Japan is where they used to be seen as a very equal society the difference between the rich and poor is definitely Taking place in a very significant manner and There are people the good jobs are getting less and there's a huge demand for the jobs They people don't want to do like a construction jobs huge demand, but less if three more jobs per demand and applicants for example and the more jobs for the long-distance Drivers yes, and the nursing and all you know all people care Those are the jobs that are required, but it's not, you know It's a cheap job at the same time in some cases and I just wonder how and also I've been feeling that it is Very difficult to avoid competition yes, and Taking place and just as you mentioned and we have more and more winners taking more Yes, and hard to tax how to get them redistribute and So I just feeling that it is not quite easy for us to imagine that although the good measures for the retraining will be taking place, but it takes time and people are not good at Emotional jobs if they are pretty much geek and doing Games yeah, well exactly. I mean do you think people can change themselves too quick Do you think there's a difference in the viewpoints between people coming from maybe Japan or Korea where there's huge? Technology industries compared to maybe some European countries Do you think there's some kind of disconnect between the points of view the optimism from Europe and maybe more realism from Japan or I Can't be simplistic like that because I'm based on my observation and my view could be limited But I have a more pessimistic feeling and which I can't you know have quite good answer yet Yes, interesting. I'll um I could take that round if you want this lady at the back there. Oh Both of you ladies. Yeah You know after having worked and as a doctor in the United States for 20 years Yeah during the recession a lot of my patients lost their jobs and The problem is once they lose jobs and start collecting welfare that they become very comfortable Yes, and it actually becomes very demotivating for the people that are still working and When you see these jobs are going to be lost. I don't think it's going to be overnight It's going to be slow and I think it's really important As a society to look at what the upward mobility jobs are going to be and to you know Look at our education system critically and prepare people and bring in the type of jobs That'll allow them to continue working Other ways, you know, what's happiness, you know, not working just collecting money and That's good point this lady here, Nadine Nadine Cousin from Brussels global shipper So actually I had a question I'm more like to ask for an opinion to all the speakers because we've talked about Income but the wef was has been working on a With a group on a topic of universal rights to learn so this idea of giving Tokens to people so that they could take time off of their work later in their career and work Oh, sorry and learn So I wanted to have an opinion on what do you think as that as an alternative great? I might take actually what time is it? I don't have it watch 15 minutes what I might do is just take a few more questions and make some notes and then we'll put those questions to the panel So yes one more this gentleman had his hand up and then Just gonna stand here and see who's gonna answer. Hello. My name is Danny. I'm from Turkey I Have a more optimistic, but Totally radical Idea on that matter I believe we Value a life of human by the job that they complete and money they earn Mm-hmm, and I believe that in midterm future it will change to What that human finds meaningful and how they fulfill their meaning making and that change will Come with the idea that not everyone wants to make money and If not everyone wants to make money we can contribute With values to community and not everyone if we have a very healthy community in maybe a much more distant future Not only when we lose half of the jobs But when we have a new mindset that we can contribute not only by completing tests as Penalistic stated but also by giving back in some other way. So in that community, I believe Standard income will be Great solution for everyone to contribute in the way that they want to contribute We may fundamentally change how we view rules and I'm gonna come around Yes Hi, I'm potion low I'm with the young scientist group over here at the web and I'm a mathematician at Carnegie Mellon University So I actually want to do a mathematical calculation Which is that if you take the global GDP of the entire world and you divide it by the number of people in the entire world The answer is approximately 10,000 US dollars per capita most of us would consider in Yearly the annual per capita income per person on earth If you take if you just take GDP divide by human population the answer is approximately 10,000 US dollars So now when we're talking about social safety nets actually I want to ask a very hard question Which is in some sense almost all the people in this room are the haves because most of us live in countries for which $10,000 per person per year Would be kind of difficult to get a flat in London very difficult So now what I'm asking is of all of these social safety nets to what extent do we have a Responsibility to use our wealth to expand that to extend that to the billions of people who are not in this room Great. Thank you Question about responsibility just two more questions over here. Yes this lady or three more, sir also global shaper from Los Angeles I Had a quick question regarding the universal income actually instead of focusing on the problem And the solution of what's going on I actually thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on Completely redoing the current education system because the education system is old and broken and there's lack of Adaptability quotient and curiosity quotient that is being incorporated in current education system So I'm going to address this question specifically to Governor Lee's in the government yet because the the suicide rate in South Korea is extremely high Yeah, and the fact that universal basic income rolled out in South Korea has reduced the number of suicide I'm really curious to see how the government is going to intervene in specifically Korean education, which is extremely specifically focused on skills and academic focus and how the government could actually intervene in Changing that bureaucracy and system. Great. Thank you. I will put that to the governor and I'm just hi I'm Teijun. I'm from Japan. Um, but I'm doing micro financing for countries The the point I would like to ask you of is a corporate social responsibility Because the job is not gone like magic It is the result of our collective decision to cut the job And I think many of the people sitting in this room are the business leaders like me So I think now we may need to redefine the role of corporations I personally feel like one of the most important social responsibilities for corporations is to maintain the job So I would like to hear your voice. Great. Thank you And one more question at the back here, and then we'll have to bring it back to the panel Hi, I'm Adith. I'm from New York My question is also about the quality of jobs that the 50% that would have currently wages on growing and there has been a new influx of Jobs where there's less security zero contracts gig economy jobs So I just wanted to know what the panel thought about the actual quality of the jobs that people are going to have in the future Yeah Thank you very much. Thank you Okay, so quite a lot there So what humans will find meaningful. We have also ideas about universal education tokens There's some pessimism in the audience which is quite interesting I think it might reflect the vote at the beginning which was quite high for universal basic income compared to the panel The responsibility of the haves which I suppose reflects most of us in the room the gentleman's question Redoing the whole education system. We've got the question from Korea and also the quality of jobs So where should we start governor? Would you start with the question about the Korean education system? Well, you asked two questions. One was The universal the income basic income also about universal basic income well Well, it's well as I mentioned earlier is we are still in the experimental the process But when so we cannot we do not know the outcome yet but when you look at the Alaska's the case that If we do initiate to the basic income policy, then well the it somehow stabilize the the people's well-being and then so and that it's since it changes the people's mindset and that it would somehow the reduce the suicide rate and The Korea Well, we do have some like ineffective like policy. So in terms of the policy and also education I think we need to do a lot of the resurfacing redesigning The universal 아까 교육 Could you explain again? Nadine, sorry, you were talking about the universal education token. Can you hear me? Yeah, the idea was instead of having universal basic income is to have tokens on education so that you could Virtually continue learning and taking time off your work I think what they can be one part of the welfare the policy because when we say the Welfare then well, that's that one thing very important is that we want to we need to educate or training Train those individuals so that they fit the label market so that they reskill themselves to follow the trend of the future I think it is very important. So I think that's very one of the very good welfare policy Jobs would somebody like to answer what they see is the quality of the jobs that the 50% would have in the future I mean, I think that this is more of a concern to me than the number of jobs really I mean, I think the number of jobs I feel jobs will be created but the It's linked to the point about income inequality, you know The danger is you get what in you came I might call an upstairs downstairs society where you have an elite Very wealthy and then we go back to the sort of you know Environment that we used to have in the 18th 19th century where you have a lot of sort of people almost like You know paid servants the elite doing their gardening and looking after their pets Yeah, maybe not driving them because they'd have driverless cars But you know doing other kinds of household services and personal services and so we gather sort of a two-tier society Rather like we used to have in the UK before the First World War. So do the people sitting in this room have a responsibility? Well, I think there's certain issues I mean going back to the point on corporate social responsibility certainly in PwC The people are allowed to take a certain number of days off To work for charities to work on a pro bono basis on some sort of social Enterprise thing or or to do other things and people are encouraged to do that and that's seen as a positive thing when it comes to Year-end assessments and we also you know try to encourage social mobility Both through working with young people in particular described areas in the city areas But also through trying to take on more people School leavers without graduate degrees than perhaps we used to do Offering more sort of professional apprenticeships for people who perhaps, you know Haven't had the family background and so that makes it easy to go to university But may still have the capabilities to be very successful in their careers. So yes, I think you know both companies and individuals have responsibility But ultimately, you know, there's a limit to how far that will solve the problem if the government doesn't provide the overall Framework that sort of pushes people in that direction. I think as far as retraining is concerned also I think companies, you know in some areas have a responsibility for retraining You know where they can just sort of reskill someone. So the truck driver who's replaced by driverless vehicle You know, maybe he could get a job repairing their vehicle. Maybe he could sit in a control room, you know I think like an air traffic controller But some people, you know, when there won't be enough of those jobs to totally replace all the truck drivers gone So maybe you need to have, you know, therefore at that point You can't just put it on individual company And it may be that there's some sort of industry sector solution in some cases where industry sectors are whole, you know But what are the gentleman's idea from Turkey? He was saying that basically we need to make more meaningful jobs or free time I think that would be great But you know it sort of reminds me of what Keane sort of said in about 1930s Where he said, you know, we're going to be eight times richer in the hundred years time and we'll have to therefore work a lot less And he was about right about being eight times richer in GDP per capita That's but but but but we work less until the late 70s and then since then in the UK We seem to be working more particularly actually better off people seem to be working more So I don't know somehow we've lost that sort of life of leisure That seemed to be you know on the horizon when I was a teenager and somehow we're all working even harder So maybe we need someone to sort of switch us away from this workaholic mentality Yeah, but it seems to it seems to afflict the better off people As much as anyone so how you switch that I don't know, you know have compulsory Buddhism as a religion or something I don't know, but it's it that really does take you into more utopian area. Maybe Hillary Well, I want to answer all the questions. They were so great and I know there's not time Yeah, I think that one of the things is that you know from a historical perspective is that the reason That kind of new forms of organization were created after Second World War was because otherwise the industrial revolution would misfire So to the question here about mathematics I mean, I think that if we don't create consumers for the next industrial revolution that you know It's not just altruism. We really really need to think about how we link jobs And so that's why I'm kind of very taken with the Danish idea of you know, modern forms of union They're not adversarial They give a role to corporations that are way beyond people giving just a few days of their time Which is just not enough. They think about how in a kind of multi-stakeholder way We genuinely do work to kind of ease this transition, but maybe I can Talk about the oh the optimism question since I am one of the optimist But I just want to say that the aging is great because that's a whole new care economy that again is kind of new work It could also be taken over by robots. We've seen that well No, because empathy people don't want robots But that will be a question about income as whether you get a human or a robot, but that's nothing But I think about optimism is look I I think that this is we are facing a Dramatic choice and the reason that I kind of work on welfare reform and I've written the book is because I think we are at a moment of decision really and So it's not that I kind of assume that everything is going to be okay far from it But I do think we do actually have a choice and we do actually have the possibility to build new forms of institution new cultures new ways of working that can Support from where we are now into a better future that can spread the gains because actually the possibilities of future technology for us in Our lives are immense for rich lives if we kind of think about how we do it So I think we have an actual choice and we have to grasp that choice and work on it Thank you Minister, how do you feel after hearing the questions from the audience a little bit more pessimistic or optimistic still? No, I'm still optimistic, but I'll say it's very difficult difficult questions very difficult Yeah, yeah, and it respects also reflects I think Where people has has their home and grown up because we have different societies around the world I think that that's also necessary to say here in this discussion in Denmark. It's for free to take a University degree You have you don't have to pay for that and in other parts of the world you have to pay a lot of that and then that's That's a great obstacle for for many people If they don't have the money to go to university, but but that's also the model that you have created so it depends on the politicians that are in Government in your country because even in the European Union, there's a great difference between the countries and then going around in the world I don't think we can fix that here today I Think we have a have to have a more time to deal with that But but I think that the future would Would give us more possibilities than the past. I think Technology would would give more growth around in the world And I think that we should of course discuss how to spend these These growth issues or how to how to define the money that has been Given to people who should then have different benefits and that's that's a crucial question Great and think so we're running out of time now. We're just wrapping up Show of hands after hearing the panelists discuss this. Are you for a universal basic income now? Yes or no. Yes first Yes, okay, and no One two, okay, I think he got a few more nose. Yeah, and any any abstentions still undecided Still undecided. Okay. Well. Thank you guys so much for listening and joining in the discussion. Thank you to the panel


Hey, my name is Jonathan from AJ & Smart and it's 2019 so the design sprint is probably dead right? Well today we're going to find out. So the design sprint has been around for about three years and the trend has been building and building and building. Today in 2019 it's as strong as ever and more and more companies are figuring out what the design sprint is but the question is, is it just a trend? I have an idea. How about I take my camera here and I'm going to go around the AJ & Smart office and see who will talk to me about if the design sprint is a trend? How about, will I try that? Alright, I'll be back in literally like five minutes. Okay? Let's go ask everyone. Miho, is the design sprint a trend? No, it's been a laugh forever. Yeah! Let's go, Calla. Alright, let's see if we can bug these guys. Hey Tim! Oops! Is the design sprint just a fancy trend? No, it's not. Why? Because it actually works and I think that's also the reason why more and more companies are committed to doing design sprints or having people learn design sprints to apply them internally because it leads to better results in a shorter amount of time and that's why I think it's not a trend. It's not trendy. There is a trend but it's for a good reason. Would you also say that things that are trends are generally like almost like get rich quick schemes and the design sprint is actually difficult and not, you know what I mean? It's not something that's just, oh it's really quick, it's actually also difficult. Yeah, I mean the thing with trends is I think often it's about buzzwords and I think the nice thing about design sprints is that it takes something as fuzzy and undefined as design thinking and packages it into this really applicable method and people immediately see the outcome and how good it is after one week and that's I think the reason why more and more people are interested in them. Thank you Tim! Bye guys! Bye! Alright, that's it. Britt, I'm sorry but I forgot to hit record when I was doing your one. Maybe I didn't record the first ones. I hope I didn't hit record, I hope so. Can I ask you again? It doesn't matter, you can think of a different... How about sit down next to me? Hey Brittney, our design sprints are just a trend. Just a trend? Who's saying that? Okay, so design sprints. I think that they are definitely trendy, however I think that the idea of using processes and actually kind of breaking things down to work more efficiently together as a team is not a trend and that's something that will kind of definitely continue to evolve. So even if the design sprint in ten years, people aren't still doing something called a design sprint, I think they'll be doing other things that are quite similar. What do you think it will be called in ten years? Do I have to say it? Say something. Design Sprint Extreme! Design Sprint Extreme, you heard it here first. We're copyrighting it! Thanks Brittney. Thanks! Is there anyone new? Okay. Brittney, is the design sprint a trend? No, of course not. But if it is, it's hot! It's a hot trend! We're loving it. But I think it's all evolutionary. One thing leads to another in a really progressive and logical way. So yeah, no, it's not a trend. It sounds like a trend to me. Why? That's so cool. Thanks, Brittney. No worries. Hey, Jonas. It is. It's cute. What are you doing there? That looks fun. Do you think the design sprint is just a trend? If it's a trend, it shouldn't be a trend. Or if it's not a trend, it's not a trend. If it's a trend, it shouldn't be it. No, but seriously, I don't think the design sprint is a trend because it's just a very, very great process to improve products and build them faster. And if it's a trend, it should be replaced by a better process which is not the design sprint 3.0 in three days. Okay, so design sprint 7.0 coming up everybody. Who else is here? Let's see. Is the design sprint a trend? No. Why not? I think it started off as a trend, but I think now it's kind of holding its weight within the industry as being something that's quite credible. And I think because people or clients or industries are able to kind of see results really, really quickly, this kind of dilutes the fact that a trend is happening. This means that actually something is achievable really quickly. That's a good one. That's such great answers. Let's get Runa. You might want to do that as like a super fast cut. Is the design sprint, is it a trend? Yeah, for sure. It's dead. Super dead. It's dead. It's over. Super not. I like it. I like it. Let's leave it though. It's good. It's funny. What is second? Callum is the design sprint a trend? What's the design sprint? So there you have it. A couple of answers from around the AJ and SMART office and obviously just a little bit of tongue and cheek. But if you're here for a serious answer, I'm going to give you one. I think that the design sprint, I think that like a lot of things like that I'm always very suspicious about when like a new system comes out, when like a new design buzzword comes out. I'm always like, ah, I don't really know if this is going to be the thing that we're going to go all in on. And one of the reasons we went all in on design sprints in 2016 was because we just saw that it actually worked and it wasn't just something that was working well within design agencies. It was also working well within the corporate environment or even within the startup environment. And that for me already gave me the feeling like, okay, this is a really great evolution or really great application with what we've been trying with design thinking and sort of this user-centered design approach. It's almost like a very pragmatic application of it. So my prediction with the design sprint is that it's going to be around for a very long time, much like design thinking. And I do believe they're very sticky. I think a lot of other systems will come and go, but the design sprint will stick around much like design thinking has for the last two billion years. Because it's something that is just sticky, something that seems to work for enough people that it reaches this sort of critical mass. And yeah, I think we'll be standing here in 2021, hopefully with a different shirt and asking the same question, are design sprints a trend? And I think the answer is no. So if you liked this video, give it a like, leave a comment down below if you have any questions about design sprint. Listen to the Product Breakfast Club podcast every Monday. It's all about design sprints, product strategy, all of that kind of stuff. And have a great week. Goodbye. You can turn it off now. That's it. All right, let's go back to the filming stick. It was also working well within the corporate environment. Design sprint version 12. Rob is 15. Anyone who's seen you with the beard in the videos is going to be like, who the f**k is that?


Hello and welcome to this session. This is Professor Farhad in which we would look at legal issues relating to cost and cost of sales. Simply put, those legal issues will be legal terms that relate to cost accounting. These topics will also be covered on the CPA PEC exam section. As always, I'm gonna remind you to connect with me on LinkedIn and subscribe to my YouTube where I have over 1,800 plus accounting, auditing, tax, finance, as well as Excel tutorials. If you like my lectures, please like them and share them. If they benefit you, it means they might benefit other people, connect with me on Instagram and Facebook. On my website, farhadclutchers.com, you will find additional resources to complement and supplement this course, as well as your CPA preparation, other accounting courses. And here are the five terms we're gonna be going over that deals with cost and sales price if you are taken a cost accounting course. And sometimes if you are, these topics are covered in a macro or a microeconomics. And those are predatory pricing, dumping price discrimination, peak load pricing and price fixing. And obviously I'm gonna go over each one of them separately starting with predatory pricing. Predatory pricing is basically setting a selling price below cost with the intent to harm competition by driving competitors out of the market or by creating a barrier for them to enter into the market. Well, hold on a second, what does that mean? Simply put, you are selling at a loss. So you are selling below your cost, you are selling at a loss. What is the purpose of this? Why would you do something like this? Well, two reasons. First, you wanna take the market from your competition. So that's what you would do. If you sell below cost, everybody will buy from you, they will not buy from them. Or two, you don't want another competitor to enter the market. So you make it cost prohibitive for them. You make it unprofitable for them to enter the market. It is this practice is considered anti-competitive and illegal and under antitrust laws. In the US we have antitrust laws, it's illegal under antitrust laws. Now, how do you prove? Like for example, how do you show that one company is committing predatory pricing? We'll use the marginal cost or the average variable cost. We use it as a floor for this predatory pricing. What does that mean? Let's look at an example. Let's assume we have two companies, P and C. We have a predator company and a competitor company. They produce a similar product while employing similar technologies. The variable cost should be about $5.10. Now, the company C adopt an industry practice. So the industry practice is to add 10% to your variable cost. So simply put, you end up selling the product at $5.61, that's the industry practice. In order to dominate the market, the company P, what they did is they're selling it at $5.00. What does that mean? It means company P, they are losing 10 cent per unit. Well, what is that going to do? Well, that's good for the customers. If you are the customer, you're like, that's great. This company is selling it for $5.00. So attract customers, old and new. And what's gonna happen, you will drive C out of the market because C cannot sell if they cannot sell, they cannot produce revenue. Why are they in business if they cannot sell? Because you're in the business to sell and make a profit. Eventually, company P then raises the price to $6.63 once they put you out of business. Now they put you out of business, they have a monopoly, they will start selling at $6.30, a markup of 30%, recouping all the losses. And that's why in the US, that's illegal because it's not in the best interest of consumer in the long run. You don't want to have competition. You don't want to have monopolies. You want to have competition. You want to have a healthy market. Another term we need to be familiar with is dumping. And what is dumping? Dumping occurs when a company export its product to a consumer in another country. You're dumping it into another country at an export price below its domestic price. Here kind of sounds like price, predatory pricing, but it's not, it's you export and you sell it below what you're selling it in your home country. Okay, for example, an electronic company in a foreign country sells its product in the US. Let's assume a Taiwanese company sells its product in the US. For example, they sell it in Taiwan for $15 apiece. They would sell it in the US for $10. Means they're dumping their product in the domestic market, okay? Dumping benefit consumer as well in the short term at the expense of the producers in the importing country. So for example, as a US consumer, you're going to be happy that they're selling it to you at a cheaper rate. Then what happened? The US companies that are producing those units, those electronics units, they will usually seek protection in a form of tariffs. They will lobby the government. Could you please place taxes on the Taiwanese import? This way their prices are at par with our prices so we can compete. So this way they will level the playing field. So everyone is selling using the same rules. Okay, policymakers disagree on the merit of prohibiting dumping. I mean, because think about it, it's good for the consumer, not good for the industry. So who should you protect as a government? Should you protect the consumer or should you protect the industry? So protection of the domestic industries for national security reasons versus practice of free trade and free market. So you have to choose. Do I want to, am I a protectionist? Do I want to protect my industries? Or do I want to believe in free trade and let my citizen enjoy free trade, which is lower prices for a product? That's a decision policymakers will have to make. It depends on many factors. Again, this is beyond the scope of this course. This is not public policy course, but the point you need to know is what is dumping. Price discrimination is another term you need to be familiar with, is the practice of selling identical goods or services to different customers at different prices. So you're selling the same thing, but for different people with different prices. Now, why would you do that? When is that legal and when is that illegal? Well, price discrimination required market segmentation. So if you can segment your market, what does that mean? Let's assume a movie theater. They might sell the tickets for students for $7 and non-students for 14. This makes sense because they want to attract students. Students don't have a lot of money. So they want to encourage them. They want them to get used to going to the theater. Maybe after they become students, once they are used to this culture, they will keep on going to the theater. So that's why you would lure them by selling them the ticket for $7 and non-students for 14. That's fine. You segmented the market. You did not discriminate. In a sense, discriminate based on gender, color, race, religion or anything like that. So price discrimination benefit companies because it can enable them to sell product to customers who may not otherwise purchase them. So if you have the movie theater at $14, maybe a lot of students can't afford to do that but at $7, they will. And eventually they will buy them at $14 later on. For example, if an airline company has empty seats, it would rather sell those seats at a discount than not at all. So for example, if you bought your ticket two months ago, maybe you paid $600. Or now, somebody next to you might be able to buy the ticket for $400 because the plane is empty and the company discounted the tickets. Well, they're sitting next to you but they paid $400. Well, it is price discrimination but it's basically because supply and demand. It's not because of any other reason. So however, again, price discrimination basis on race, religion, disability, gender, or any other similar factors is illegal. But for market segmentation, if you segment your market, that's fine. Peak loading pricing is the practice of setting prices highest when the quantity demanded for the product approach, its physical capacity to produce it. Simply put, when you have high demand, you might raise your prices. When you have low demand for your product, you may lower your prices. Who's known for this? Utility companies and travel providers. Try to travel now obviously because of the coronavirus, but usually when you want to travel on August, if you're going on vacation June, July, August, prices are higher. It's as simple as that. Even within, if you travel on the weekend, the prices are different than you travel during the work week for airlines. Why? Because it's a peak load pricing. So they engage in peak load pricing when facing high demand levels. For example, a warm weather geographical location. Peak loads for electricity occur in the late afternoon hours when the temperature is the highest. This is where they charge you the most. Travel services, again, airlines during certain season. Christmas, Thanksgiving is notorious for that. All the prices are high. So this is peak load pricing. So they increase their prices. Price fixing is the agreement among business competitor to set a price for a particular level. This is where you're talking to your competitor. Let's talk, let's see if we can set one price. Generally, the idea to fix a price at a level higher than the equilibrium. If we all agree to sell it higher than the equilibrium, then we all benefit, but we are benefiting on the expense of the consumer here, price fixing. So price fixing is a particularly legal and ethical problem because it's not universally illegal. In the US, it's illegal. In other countries, it may not be illegal. So price discrimination benefit to the company because it enabled them to sell the product to customers who may not otherwise purchase them at that cost. So it will benefit them because you're charging a premium. Managers must be careful to price fixing because the activities of law enforcement officials regarded as illegal include even informal or unspoken agreement to fix prices. Sometime you may fix prices without even having in quote agreement. Implicitly, you have to be very careful. This appeared to be the case for a company called Dynamic Random Access Memory DRAM. Companies from Germany, South Korea and Japan were charged with price fixing their product in the US kind of implicitly. If you're interested, you can Google the case, but basically it doesn't have to be in writing to be in agreement because we said it's an agreement. It doesn't have to be explicitly spelled out to be in writing. If it's implicit, it appears to be price fixing. It might be price fixing. At the end of the day, a judge or the US Treasury or the US Department of Commerce will determine that. Anyhow, in the next session, we'll start to look at more differential analysis and specifically, I will be working most likely on make or buy decision, make or buy decision. As always, I'm gonna ask you to like this recording, share it, put it in playlist, and don't forget to visit my website for additional resources for hatlectures.com. Good luck, study hard and stay safe.


You've clicked on this video because you're trying to figure out how to get a Pikachu in Let's Go Eevee and how to get a Eevee in Let's Go Pikachu. I think I said that right. Like me, I bought Let's Go Eevee so my first goal was I want to get a Pikachu in the game and of course some people may think you may not be able to get a Pikachu or an Eevee depending on the version they get but you actually can and in fact they're available in both so without further let's get into this tutorial on where to catch wild Pikachu and Eevee. All right so I boot up my Pokedex and I checked out the habitat of Pikachu because I already encountered Pikachu before making this video and Pikachu is located in Viridian Forest which is right before the first gym so you'll be able to have a Pikachu before then. Now Pikachu isn't as common but Pikachu's do show up. I popped the lure here because I was getting annoyed of trying to find Pikachu but Pikachu does show up pretty much in the first patch of grass. Now as a Let's Go Eevee player I desperately needed a Pikachu to feel that balance of not having Let's Go Pikachu and having a Pikachu on my shoulder. So here we go. Here's the encounter with Pikachu. It's pretty simple not hard. I'm using an Ultra Ball but obviously when you start the game you'll be using some Pokeballs. Pikachu might break out one or two Pokeballs but you should be able to nail Pikachu down if you throw it right in the first five Pokeballs. Next up we're going to check out Eevee. Now Eevee is located a little further in the game so you won't be able to get Eevee right away in the beginning if you have Let's Go Pikachu.  Now it's on Route 17 which is located between Celadon City and also Fushishia City. I cannot pronounce that. I'm probably pronouncing it wrong. Anyway so I checked the bottom patch of grass located close to Fushishia City Fushia City Fuchia City and there was nothing really popping up right away just Rapid Ashes and Ponytas so I popped open my Max Lore to try to draw out more Pokemon and unfortunately to my luck nothing really showed up here as much either so I made my way all the way up past a few patches of grass got nothing over there some Pidgeys kept going nothing in that middle patch Ponytas and Rapid Ashes so if you're looking for those that's definitely there uh walked around this grass a little bit this is my first patch actually I found it well before making this tutorial so I think this is the lucky patch of grass and right before you will soon hear an Eevee sound and go for it. I suggest turning on the volume when you're playing because Eevee is pretty tiny and it's not as easy to see an Eevee but yeah once you get Eevee you can throw your Pokeball at it you'll catch it and obviously you can chain them to get a shiny after that but we can maybe talk about that in another video so that's pretty much it so there you guys go that's how you catch Pikachu and Eevee in the wild and both let's go Pikachu and let's go Eevee if you enjoyed this video please like subscribe for more videos like this and if you want you can follow me on twitter for some updates on pokemons and instagram and and other fancy stuff my name is philly beats you and thanks again for watching and I'll see you guys in the next video peace