As Mike Bloomberg often says, if you can't measure something, you can't manage it. And that applies to companies and it applies to countries. And right now the question of how we're managing the global economy is critically important. It's something we write about a lot of the financial times with our partners at Nikkei. And it's something which is becoming very, very important for policy makers. So we have a fantastic group of people to talk about it. On my opposite me is Doug Peterson, who is President and Chief Executive Officer of S&P Global. Next to him is Mariana Mazzucata, who is Professor of Economics and also author of a book, The Value of Everything, which is exactly about this question of what's wrong with GDP. And on my immediate left, your right is Hezo Takaraka, who was former Finance Minister, Economics Minister in Japan and is now Professor at Keio University. Now the issue of how we look at GDP is particularly relevant because this was basically a 20th century construct. It was created to measure manufacturing industrial processes that dominated the world in the 20th century. But we've moved on. We have digital world, we have the environmental issues, things that really are starting to impinge. So Doug, when you look at this issue as someone who's not an economist, not a policy maker, but in the data business at S&P, what do you think about how we're using GDP today? Well first of all, GDP is so critical for us as a CEO and as executive because we use it to make decisions about where we're going to invest. So when we're looking around the world where we want to invest, where we're going to put our new operations, we look to see where is their growth. So it has consequence for people like me to look at where we're going to be investing. When we talked earlier about the new economy, in the old economy, the old GDP that you just described, not only was it built around a manufacturing economy, a farm-based economy, the way that information is gathered is still antiquated. Can you imagine how much information there is at Amazon and Mastercard and new ways to gather information? We can talk more about that. The other part that's still antiquated is there's many activities that aren't picked up. You don't pick up informal activity, so you don't pick up cash-based activity, which in many economies is large. So the black market basically? Well no, different. Not the black market. The grey market or? The cash market. Let's put a tax evasion and then you've got another market, it's homework, people that work at home and then you have the illegal market. So there's parts of it and some economies that's up to 35% of GDP that's missed. So the illegal market is an issue or the grey market and the informal markets. Informal markets. The digital size is an issue and of course environment too. But Mariana, you wrote an entire book about what's wrong with this. Give us a praisey. So the book wasn't on GDP, it was actually on value and of course what underlies GDP is what we value. So if we're not valuing care and care is often done for free in the home, then it doesn't get measured and that's a huge problem. In fact, if you marry your babysitter, GDP goes down. So don't do it. A service that was being paid for around care all of a sudden may be still being done, simply not being paid for. Anyway, there's lots of weird things like that in GDP. But I think what's interesting is we could actually squeeze so much more out of GDP even as it currently exists. So much interesting things are being said around the world about what to add to it in terms of well-being and happiness. But even with its current state, you could break down GDP in two different ways, either by income or by product. And if you look at income, so profits, wages, rents, do we really understand the difference between profits and rents today? Rent used to be called unearned income to the point that most of the financial sector up until 1970 wasn't even included in GDP because it was basically seen as a transfer just like social security payments. When they did include it, investment banks, the idea was that they're risk-taking, that's the service they're providing. Of course when they went bust, who picked up the risk, the taxpayer anyway. And commercial banks, financial intermediation. But breaking down what actually ended up happening with finance, finance largely ended up financing itself, finance, insurance and real estate, the extent to which we could also start breaking down is it really creating value, is it extracting value, which bits are really creating value and differentiating that. But even just the other way to look at it would be in terms of demand, consumption, investment, government spending and net exports. A country like the UK is currently mainly growing through consumption, not investment. That consumption is being driven by private debt, so the ratio of private debt to disposable income is back at record levels. That you can see with just GDP as it stands without any happiness, but no one's talking about that. It should be in the front pages of the Financial Times. OK, well we're going to come back into what caused the crisis. We're going to come back in a moment and talk about what can be done to fix this. But the idea that once upon a time Wall Street wasn't even measured in GDP might be taken as quite insulting for a lot of the big financial titans, but it also shows the type of problems there are and how statistics just don't keep up with changes in the economy. But I'd like to ask you, you were in charge of the Japanese economy and trying to set policy using the statistics that you had available How good were they? Did you trust them? Well, when I was in the cabinet as a minister for economic fiscal policy, I was asked to rate GDP. You were asked to rate GDP? I was asked by many people to rate GDP. However, how reliable GDP is. Of course we have a lot of problems mentioned by other people. However, it is very important to notice that GDP has a relatively short history. In 1929, we had the Great Depression. At that time, many people understand the importance of the... We need some measure to grasp the situation of the economy comprehensively. At that time, in the 1930s and the 40s, my next-century economists like Simon Kuznet and some others created this system of national account. And since then, so this has GDP statistics that only 80 years history, just like the human being lifespan. So, during this short period, this has been amended a lot. Still, we need at this moment more new type of amendment. We live in a new economy. But in this case, we should understand clearly what is a new economy? What is a new economy? We are smart technology. We live in the forced industrial revolution. So, in this regard, first of all, later on, we will discuss another aspect, the environment and sustainability and inclusiveness issues. But anyway, as far as smart technology age is concerned, while Japan, the Japanese government, changed the system in the way of the calculation of GDP four years ago. And at that time, Japan's GDP increased by 3.5%. To be specific, as you know, the R&D investment was also added to GDP. But R&D investment was added just at the intermediate expense, not the final expense. But maybe you understand, R&D investment is a very important investment to create the stock of knowledge. So, since then, we have been very much to great attention on the importance of intangible asset. R&D is very easy to understand, but very intangible asset we have. Anyway, so, the similar change of calculation of GDP was taken by Korea, Ireland, and these old countries, GDP was increased a little bit. So, it is very important to know the new age, the forced industrial revolution, the role of intangible asset. Well, you make a very good point there. And the case of Japan is very interesting because not only do you have, obviously, an age-shrinking population, and people often say, oh, the Japanese economy is in the doldrums because GDP has not been impressive. But the fact you've brought in the investment into the equation is striking. An intangible issue is striking too. I mean, Doug, how do you think statisticians should be actually trying to capture the intangible element? Oh, absolutely. And when you think about some of the aspects of GDP, the measurement, one is the intangible. In some ways, it's almost about utility as opposed to a cash flow or what was measured that has a monetary value. Another aspect is you're not measuring depletion, either. So, because GDP is a flow and not a stock, you could be creating a very strong GDP but depleting your assets, depleting some of the things we could talk about ESG factors where you're depleting the environment and you're not picking that up. But on the intangible, let me give you an example of what we have today. If you think about when I was growing up, I had to go to the Encyclopedia Britannica to get information. Now I have this little computer in my pocket and I can get information at my fingertip and that's not measured at all in a GDP, the information, the substitution of how I get that value. And I'm not an expert in this but I'm always asking the question, how do you measure utility and value created as opposed to something that is a cash flow or something that's measured in a delivery of cash. One quick example, if I were using a travel agent to purchase a ticket but now there's a new way I do it by using a website, that work didn't go away of booking a ticket. It's no longer being paid for at a travel agent so GDP might have gone down. But the work created, the value created is still there. So this is something I'm trying to figure out. How do you capture value created in utility? So how do you, I mean are there any countries, I mean obviously Japan has taken one step forward by including investment and trying to capture some of the intangibles. But are any countries doing this right? I mean Mariana, you've been looking at these. All the countries that are run by women. I hate to say, I was just thinking, New Zealand, Iceland, Scotland, Finland. Hey, correlation. I mean can I just say something, can we have a bit of time? The issues you mentioned are so crucial. But what you're talking about are drivers of long-term GDP growth. That already becomes another variable. Are we just talking about a little blip in GDP or long-term driver? And you mentioned Cousness. Cousness was so clear, he's like, oh by the way, don't use this to talk about 1.7, 1.78, 1.8% increase in GDP. Remind the audience with Cousness. One of the founders of GDP which he mentioned exactly. He said, use it for kind of a muscle manual kind of a trend, but not as though you're steering a car exactly where to go. And I think what's so interesting in Europe, for example, we look so much at the deficit or the debt. And as soon as you divide the debt by GDP, already it becomes more refined. And so Italy, for example, is always accused that it's spending too much, but it hasn't. Its deficit has been on 2% to 3%, often lower than Germany's. But debt to GDP, very high. Why? Because the long run drivers of GDP, things like productivity, have not grown for almost 20 years in Italy. And so, again, we could actually, with existing measures, say a lot, but we don't talk about this in Europe. We just told Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain, cut, cut, cut, you're spending too much. And the other thing about R&D, that as well we don't really have an understanding of how to make sure that what we're spending on, in terms of public budgets, are in fact more steered towards these long run drivers. So R&D is still, in many countries, just seen as a cost, as opposed to capital expenditure for long run growth. And especially in software, right? Software is definitely booked as a cost, but I think of software as almost like a capital investment, but it doesn't get treated like that. You see, this comes back to the point about if you can't measure it, you can't manage it properly. And this is leading potentially to big policy mistakes. I'm curious, in the case of Japan, there was so much discussion about the lost decade of stagnant growth. Do you think people need to rethink their impression of the Japanese economy if they have a different vision of the Japanese statistics? And I don't mean to pick on Japan, but you are the policymaker on the panel and there's a lot of interest in this. Well, it's a very difficult issue because, well, many people recognise the importance of GDP of course. Because, as I mentioned, it shows the very comprehensive economic activity. However, at the same time, some factors should be added. Well, one is the international asset issue. Another one is environmental issue, for example. So we have been discussing this environmental issue for many, for a long time. As you know, in 1970s, already 1970s, we have discussions. Economic council of the economic planning agency of the Japanese government established a new idea of NANW, a net national welfare. Net national welfare. In this case, the environmental issue was considered into GDP. To be specific, the imputed cost of the environment should be subtracted from GDP. As a result of that, at that time, GDP was reduced by 2%. Some should be reduced. So we have a lot of discussions on that. Still, an important point is, well, we should not depend too much on a single indicator. GDP is a very important indicator. However, for example, please consider my body condition. My weight, height, blood pressure, et cetera, et cetera. We could not depend on a single indicator. But still so, a moderate amendment, moderate improvement of GDP statistics needed. But we should consider some other supplemental indicators. At this moment, I think this is very important. So when you say, I mean, you made an interesting point about the media, that obviously the financial press and the markets tend to hang on these data releases, what do you think people should be talking about on a new basis? I mean, what should we be putting on the front page of the Financial Times or the Nikkei or the Nikkei Asian Review? Our books. Well, I mean, again, if we come back to what we know drives GDP growth, for example, we know that certain types of institutions are fundamentally important. And even just within Europe, we have very different types of institutions. For example, that link or don't link science and industry. The Fraunhofer Institutes, for example, in Germany, they don't necessarily exist in other parts of Europe. And if we think that they're important for having that kind of productivity growth or vocational training, education, or indeed kind of spending, then we would be looking on our dashboard in terms of the health of the country, those kind of indicators, as well as, of course, a more refined analysis recently around well-being of the nation and different types of happiness indicators. But then you could argue that then Europe, for example, when it's giving out bailouts to countries that are having problems, instead of having these conditions that are also just about one number, reduce your deficit. So the IMF conditions or the ECB numbers saying that you have to do X, Y and Z based on debt to GDP or deficit. Yeah, if they want that country to become more competitive, they could actually also be giving more refined advice, not just reduce your deficit, but hey, you really need to start building these institutions, which we know through evidence base, and that's more of a dashboard understanding of competitiveness and health of an economy. Right. And these are really profound policy issues which you were grappling with when you were in office. But can I turn to another question, which is, is there any way to change how we collect data? Because I find it just astonishing that we have these tech giants who have the tools to know what we had for lunch before we even eat it, who can track everything we do all the time and are selling the data to each other or the whole data brokerage industry. And yet we have to wait for an entire month or sometimes a lot longer to get GDP statistics. Is there a better way to start actually collecting data about the economy? Did you ever try and ask any of your tech companies to help you? Well, a big real issue. It's of course very important. Last year Prime Minister Abe appeared here and he made an excellent speech focusing on the importance of the data free-flow with trust. Well, this is a very important topic that has been discussed in this double meeting. But still, for example, where big data, data is important at the same time, well, in order to calculate GDP, various kind of indicators need it. So you mentioned well what kind of statistics we watch. GDP is very important. GDP appears only every quarter, on every quarter, once or three months. So it's very limited. This is still very important. At the same time, we need much more frequent statistics needed. Well, of course, economists have been discussing as you know open statistics or open coefficient like that. Well, very frequent GDP fluctuations should be reflected in the rate of unemployment, etc, etc. So in that sense, well, there are policy makers, policy analysts watching this kind of statistics. So in that sense I'd like to say some kind of dashboard type of indicator. Dashboard type of indicator is needed. For example, World Economic Forum issues the competitiveness ranking. They are combining several, well, 50 or 50 indicators. So the combination, combining these statistics is very important for the viewpoint of policy makers. S&P is in fact scraping data all the time. In trade, I know you've got some extraordinary activities happening. Yes, so in the trade area we have now, we've got access to almost every port and airport in the world, and we extract that data daily unless that port or airport doesn't have it. Then we put it into a database and we can see that we will know sometimes that Apple has changed the battery that they're using or the lens is using before the markets do because we can see the shipments that are going around the world. So my answer to the question is absolutely you could be using new data techniques, machine learning, alternative ways to gather data. An example that's happening right now, every 10 years the United States does a census and this year the census is going to go out and they're going to do it in a way that's electronic. And you can use it on paper, using the internet, you can use it on your phone, you can do it in paper, and they only expect that about 65% of the people are going to do one of those three, which means there's still going to be 35% of the people that they're going to have to go hire 300 to 600,000 people as part-time workers to go finish the census. So in the Department of Commerce is attempting this new approach using the phone and the internet, and I do think that it's a good step that they're trying new about gathering fundamental data but there's so many more ways you could do it. But the keyword is fundamental data and that's different from the speed you know how quick you can get the data. You could also argue that we have information overload, do you really need to know GDP figures every kind of 5 seconds and in fact getting more refined analysis precisely around the digital economy. There's this great book out called Surveillance Capitalism and this notion of the behavioral surplus, this book by Shoshana Zuboff. She says that the people think they're searching Google for free, but actually Google is searching you for free. And so this whole again difference between value creation, value extraction, can we actually start using different types of measures that really tell us the way that we're using the power of the algorithms and new technologies in ways that really contribute to a healthier, more productive capacity in our economy versus a more extractive one. Yes. Dac ar agus ynde? May I raise another important aspect of statistics? Of course of GDP or debt-GDP ratio this is very important. It's also very important to get a quick information about from the from the gather. At the same time by analyzing these indicators we can understand very clearly the strengths and the weakness of this company with this economy. For example in the case of the United Kingdom for example investment is high value, consumption is high value and so on. So in this regard for example I go back to the intangible investment, intangible asset well in the case of Japan intangible investment GDP ratio is about 9%. This is clearly lower than that of the United States in the case of the United States 15% or so maybe, but the contents of the intangible investment is more important issue for Japan for example while around the investment Japanese businesses have been investing for this R&D relatively high this R&D investment GDP ratio in Japan is not relatively high however another kind of intangible investment especially human resource investment and expenditures on organizational reform this is very weak in Japan so by analyzing this intangible asset or intangible investment well we can understand the weakness and the strength of the economy company this kind of function is very important to make use of this kind of statistics this is another important aspect of statistics right I'm aware that there are a lot of people in the room who are experts in this field and have a lot to say so I'm going to turn to the audience of questions in just a moment but before I do Mariana can you give us go back to some of the examples you see which are actually encouraging amongst the countries in dealing with this issue because obviously a lot of the economic reporting in the world tends to be dominated by Europe the Eurozone America, Japan, big countries are there case studies of countries which have been creative and actually doing the kind of things you're talking about well I think what's interesting is the conversations changing from just the measures to well what are we even trying to do so if we have the sustainable development goals which we're signed up to by hundreds of countries what does that then mean for the value, the kind of economies that we're trying to create and what's interesting is that at the microeconomic level that conversation is really having impact on the metrics right whether it's ESG or better types of metrics within companies and whether they're really reaching these targets around those types of social factors and I think what's interesting is can we then link that conversation which is about governance of organizations in business and other to given that then we do aggregate up statistics about companies also to get parts of the figures for GDP what does that then look like at the macroeconomic level and yet the conversations about the environment for example in GDP is not linked up to that governance of the microeconomic unit I mean I'm not the only one who thinks so that there is a bit of washing in terms of talking a lot about the environment and then if you look again at the figures of what's actually happening in finance the top three asset management companies BlackRock, Vanguard and another one that I can't remember saying have actually increased their spending on fossil fuel based companies by 35% since Paris since COPS in 2015 so the talk turning it into a walk will be much easier when these metrics first of all are mandatory but also when the kind of micro and the macro really are more lined up I mean Doug you're trying to bring in these green factors into credit ratings aren't you and you're trying really for the first time to systematically look at these non-traditional economic metrics when you look at companies can that be extended to countries as well well I think so and I think but to your point starting at the micro level so to call it the corporate level it's going to be important because that will drive behavior if we start measuring companies we have more standardized approach to measuring ES and G factors right now the S is hard to get there's not a lot out there the social factors it's not very well defined the governance has been around a long time and on the environmental factors it's not consistent it's hard to get the information so at the corporate level right now if we want to get the data and we're actually gathering ourselves it's not audited it's not consistent people don't measure it the same way and in fact one of the really valuable discussions that we've been having this week in Davos is exactly around that question in the international business council of WEF the last few days Brian Moynihan led a group of people that came up with a draft of some pilot questions and pilot statistics that we would endorse that all corporations would start putting together that we can start driving at a corporate level a micro level and have the same dialogue as well at the national level and Takanaka sensei I see you're wearing a wonderful green tie indicating where the world's going so well chosen green GDP yes before we turn to questions do you see areas where Japan could try and do more to measure the impact on the environment or rather the other way around the externalities okay I said I use the term we live in this sustainable and inclusive society in that sense we should consider other factors the GDP or the income for example the environmental issue is a very important issue this is now have been discussed for a long period and we now have some indicators to show the imputed cost of environment and additionally what the income gap income gap, income equality this also should be considered and at the same time nowadays in Japan most attention grabbing discussion is people's health health condition while Japan has the longest lifespan of people in the world this is not reflected in GDP for example so while ministry of economy trade industry commanding some excellent companies for health management etc etc so this should be considered very seriously from here on we are moving toward the ageing society ageing demography so well this would have a good strong impact on the medical cost etc etc so while in my position security and health and environment these are very very attention grabbing issue can I make a comment about this Japan is actually an example of a developed country in this theme of environmental impact it's actually much more positive than the others the energy usage of a per GDP per capita in Japan is about 60% of the US it's about 80% of Europe and it's partially because of city design urban design it's mass use of mass transit it's the subway systems it's the trains people live in smaller homes and so there's a whole footprint an environmental footprint that as we start thinking about other solutions to smart cities and environmentally friendly cities some places we can look to already or we can see practice in Japan well that's fascinating because one of the pole points about the forum and Davos is to try and get that international learnings from each other but on that note let's have some comments from the audience I know the number of you who'd like to speak let me quickly see I can see hands going up already let's start with you it would be courteous but not compulsory to identify yourself and since we have a number of hands already please keep any comments or questions very short absolutely hi my name is Abby I'm a global shaper from London and also the CEO of an early stage tech company thank you very much for the panel my question is mainly for Mariana but please feel free to input in Silicon Valley that government and the public sector is mainly a hindrance which of course is not true it would be great if you could maybe share some of your research and findings on how public spending, government spending has in fact been critical to commercializing many of the technologies that we use today thank you very much so how does statistics show that government is good so the phone that your friend there has is it a smart phone or a stupid phone is it dumb phone well everything that makes her a smart phone I'm sure it's smart it has a little apple thing on it and not stupid was in fact invested by public institutions internet, Siri, touchscreen display, GPS now what's interesting though is that again when these are publicly financed institutions we also don't really have a narrative to talk about this so in economics it's not just the value debate that is so interesting but the way we think of policy is just correcting something so we talk about it as correcting a market failure but actually what public institutions did in Silicon Valley was you know really co-create and co-shape that market and I think this really comes back to this issue of narrative I mean GDP isn't just a number there's narratives around it both in terms of how we talk about it in the media but where we think wealth creation comes from how it can be that I think it was Lloyd Blank Stein or Steen, the head of a Goldman Sachs said in 2009 Goldman Sachs workers are the most productive in the world and then they were bailed out by and billing by the US taxpayer you didn't hear the US taxpayer say we're the most productive in the world and a school teacher doesn't say we're the most productive in the world because in fact with public education when it's free we only know how to measure the cost the salaries not the output we're still not even measuring something as obvious as the value that a public education system provides so we literally can't even account for the productivity because we don't have a price for the output but the big thing about the public sector is that of course we need it but it's not just about kind of war time cold war kinds of technological spending coming back to the SDGs this notion that we really should have mission oriented kind of spending with real kind of public sector guidance of big directional pushes and then crowding in bottom up experimentation also by the business community or mainly to solve these big public goals that's a very different way to structure public private partnership and I would argue that what we need in WEF is to really also have metrics that define an interesting dynamics and biotic public private partnership going for a goal versus the kind of parasitic predator prey kind of public private partnerships we have for example in the health sector wow that's a very good point right question here and then another one next to you and then we'll come around this way thanks very much Jonathan Haskell from Imperial College I'm going to risk unpopularity by defending GDP if I may just for a second and if we just think back so what it is when we teach GDP to the students sorry I'm an economist you don't need to apologise for being an economist I think you're in the majority in the room probably we give them the basic intuition which I think is worth remembering which is if we've got an economy which is producing steel and producing cars the one thing we mustn't do is add the steel and the cars because of course the steel goes into the cars as an intermediate input so part of the reason why GDP is rather complicated and part of the reason why is that it's frustrating surely these big tech companies have got lots of information is they might have information on the various goods but that's not good enough what we need is we need the information to compute the value added on all the various intermediate chains if I could make that one point make a second point briefly if I may which is in the case of steel and cars we know what an intermediate input is the steel used up into the cars as Professor Takanaka rightly points out when we've got intangible inputs like R&D and software we need to deal with those now at that point it seems to me I just want to correct a misapprehension the national accountants who do GDP have been very energetic in attempting to capitalise intangibles it's the company accountants who refuse to count up intangibles so actually okay so it's all your fault Doug we're going to throw rotten tomatoes at GDP can we just keep in mind that it's got that basic intuition which is very helpful there's a bit of progress more to do but there has been some progress those are great points and before we have a response I'm going to take the next question as well because those are indeed very good points and then I'm going to ask Doug to defend corporate accountants and I'm Eric Brinyolff, Professor at MIT and I very much want to build on Jonathan's comments he's much too modest we certainly have a lot of academic curiosity and I'm going to support his view because he's too modest he actually was a person who's done so much work to bring intangibles into into the national accounting and like him I see a lot of virtues with GDP a lot of problems but there is a massive irony in the information age which is that we have less and less information about where real value comes from and that's not necessarily because GDP is flawed it was a 20th century construct great at counting numbers of cars produced or bushels of wheat it's really not designed for a digital age where so many of the things we get on our smartphones are free, the maps or the music or the Wikipedia anything that has a price of zero gets a weight of zero in GDP does that mean it has zero value? No but that's actually what GDP was designed to do and it's not a matter of us changing GDP to fix that Simon Cusnets pointed out at a number of interesting points that do not use GDP as a welfare measure a well-being measure but with the exception of the people here that's what a lot of journalists policy makers and economists are doing what we need is as was mentioned is a dashboard approach GDP is a measure of production let's keep it as a measure of production but we're interested in well-being we need a measure of well-being that is a fundamentally different concept that's how much benefit you get from each thing you pay zero for Wikipedia but you get $100 worth of benefit that's what we want to measure and we have a new measure called GDP the beef for benefit that can be parallel to GDP that captures those benefits and it uses some of the power of the digital age because we can do hundreds of thousands actually millions now of online choice experiments to assess how much people need to be paid to give up different goods and ultimately we will next year have a parallel set of numbers GDPB that focus on the benefits to go along with the production cost GDP and I think then we'll have a piece of the dashboard that Tanakasan and Mariana have all been talking about that's fascinating I'm going to keep going around there's two great contributions to the discussion I think one of the subtexts is if you want to understand this read Mariana's book and click on to GDP and Jonathan's book thank you Mariana and then you get a good picture of it but we had a couple of hands waving over here as well and I want to try and for fairness get one person behind me we haven't got much time left so if you can be short thank you, I'm Pierre Abar I'm with the trade union advisory committee so not an economist not an economist, union guy but one question was precisely isn't it an irony that we need more access to data and we need to tune our measurement but as we can see I can witness it in the discussion at the OECD that there is precisely less and less information because we are facing a kind of privatisation of data with more proprietary and a very very broad understanding of what business confidentiality is so a question is it's what the spectrum between perhaps legitimate business confidentiality requirements and the need for more granular and in the end access to data second question is I understand the idea of a dashboard having multiple indicators but from a political economy perspective what often happens is that decision makers they need one indicator not two, three, four so the question is should we move towards a dashboard or should we actually replace GDP with a composite, right I'm going to take one last question if I do want to be fair to the room make sure I get both right and left like I'm doing a disservice to your neck muscles no no no John Alexander I'm more a sort of social scientist than an economist that side of the softer side of social science should we say I'm really interested in this thing about measures of carriers of narrative and particularly with GDP what seems to happen as a sole measure is it then drives what all the other measures that are talked about are and so one of the things I'm particularly interested in is on the news what you see reported that the public face then becomes particularly the consumer confidence index is something that seems to be a disproportionate level of cover in a world where we are not just consumers and we're actually the identity construct of a consumer has there's a fairly good set of evidence that it's restrictive and maybe prioritises consumption as a strategy for governments but also that consumers tend to care less about the environment and one another I'm interested in whether there's a feeling that things like consumer confidence ought to be at the focus of more conversation rather than just GDP whether that sort of narrative function should be more of a discussion So narrative economics I think we have my calculation you have about a minute and a half each to deal with those massive existential questions Doug do you want to defend corporate accountants and private data What I will defend is first of all to start off I do think GDP is still critical we have a time series it's been around a long time and it is the foundation of so many decisions and it's also used by political world the financial world and the question we had here today is how can we make it better and I think we've heard that the second point I want to make is that there is a massive amount of data available to make it better or to find new measurements whether it's how we think about well-being how we think about the education system how we think about the healthcare system and I will tell you in our own case both in the ratings business or index business etc we incorporate that kind of information into choosing and making a decision about rating or choosing assets which be included in index it's not just a simple GDP metric and then finally we're in a world where data is now massive it's everywhere and every single organization is either struggling with or embracing a new strategy and I think is part of our discussion here everybody has to have a data strategy and how they're going to use new machine learning new approaches to managing large volume of data and we need to incorporate that back into how we think about GDP Mariana So that question which was fantastic actually all the questions were it really is about the ownership and the governance of the data and who it benefits and you know data or is benefiting from big data in ways that for example the welfare state hasn't yet and that's one of the biggest questions how can we actually reinvent the welfare state instead of decimating it as has been happening in many countries and really allow it for example what they're doing in Barcelona every time you click on city map you're generating data right data isn't static it's being generated now with people on their phones and they've been thinking about the new kinds of institutions for example public repository of the data which you know that would come from citizens engaging with phones across the city which then would benefit immediately public transport and the transport infrastructure and ideas about mobility but really kind of benefiting citizens but that just requires a whole other conversation which is about democracy and again the commons and the data commons and it's just that we shouldn't assume that because there's so much data out there and we just need to get access to it a quick thing on consumption just in case it wasn't clear it's not a good thing when you're growing just by buying things especially if wages haven't been rising that mean what's been happening in the UK and you can see this in the GDP data that's why I would defend GDP on so many levels we're just not using it for that what you can see in the UK is that private debt to disposable income is back at record levels that is what caused the crisis the FT but no other papers talking about it and you actually can see that with the GDP data and the blood growth fueled by private debt and that's the problem that's what causes bubbles to burst okay let me focus on one point dashboard or GDP it's a very challenging question but my personal proposal is the moderate amendment of GDP is needed especially considering the importance of intangible asset but my policy suggestion is sometimes criticized as too radical but I do not recommend radical amendment of GDP this time for the reason needs still you understand quite well we have so many difficulties in measuring intangible asset for example well how can get the real value real value, nominal value, real value well it's a very tough task but so we should consider the environmental issue and also we should consider intangible asset but some moderate amendment is needed at the same time well dashboard type of indicator we should focus more so GDP or dashboard this is both are needed my recommendation is very moderate steady amendment of GDP is needed and this kind of effort has been accumulated by many economists here and also finally dashboard type of indicator we should focus more from here well thank you well I must say I find this a fascinating discussion thank you to all three of you and also the audience and I take away three main points one is that clearly there are big challenges right now about how we look at the world around us and measure it and this has big policy implications what is encouraging is that there is now a debate about what is going on what is perhaps even more encouraging is that groups like the World Economic Forum are trying to bring people together to talk about this but it is not going to be easy to fix and easy to come to any kind of new path so there is a lot of work to be done so on that note I would like to finish by asking Zahid Yesahidi who is the managing director of the World Economic Forum to talk about what you are doing on this front and bring this discussion fascinating discussion to a close so give us the answers be careful last for you know you are at the 50th anniversary but 40 years ago our founder started the global dictatorship report which was a novel idea that let's take a look at the factors that feed into medium to long term productivity and looked at human capital looked at the institutions etc along the way we added things like our global gender gap index we added earlier this week our social mobility index looking at human capital in the future of jobs and the idea now is inspired by the work we've been able to do in the last six months with our international business council on having some convergence around ESG metrics could we try to help create that dashboard around GDP so today's conversation has been fascinating for anybody who would like to be involved in that effort over this coming year please do talk to me or my team that is here thank you so much so watch this space, thank you all


Alrighty, absolutely fantastic. Once again, welcome back. You're still hanging out with us right here on the hashtag, which is Y in the morning, and this is the last interview of the day. But before that, you can always interact with us on our social media, and that includes eggs, Facebook, and Instagram, including threads, at 1-2-4-4 channel, and mine is at Brian's cell call 1-1, via the hashtag Y in the morning.  Start sending them questions, I'll be sampling them right here on my phone as we continue their conversation. Now the guest who is live with us in the studio, you might remember her from a syndicated TV magazine dubbed NTV Teen Republic, from radio to TV.   Not only is she just charming, she's beautiful, and powerful, and a legend in the making. Ladies and gentlemen, guess who? Miss Tracy 1-0. Good morning, Tracy. Brian, that was a really amazing introduction. I've actually never had anyone introduce me like that. I heard that and I was like, yeah, that's me. That's me. That's me, yeah. Look at me. Yeah, but we're going to have to write that next time, so that even when I go do some things, I'm like, yeah. So I'm, you know, a legend in the making. Absolutely. No, that's great. I love that. Thank you so much for having me, Brian. And welcome. We are so elated and so excited to have you. And first of all, to meet you in person, apart from reading about you, watching you on TV, listening to you on radio. And talking on the phone. Yes, and talking on the phone, a new friend. So how do you do all of this before we get to even know who you are and how you started? How do you just balance all that? I feel like especially being in the industry that we're in, it's really easy to sort of like balance because you're not really having like a nine to five or, you know, an eight to four kind of sort of like engagement, right? So it's easier to manage because you understand what's going on throughout your days. So you have like a five hour work window, or sometimes you don't even have a five hour work window, you know? So it becomes really easy to juggle because you realize the days that I have worked are some things that I'm going to have to let go. There are things that maybe I could do. So for me it's sort of been really about balancing. It's just looking at my days and seeing, what can I do, what can I not do? And one thing that I came to realize is that you can't have, for example, five priorities. You have just, you can only just have one priority, right? So for example, Brian, today you have to host a Y2 for show, or you have to go get your hair done. You can't say both of them are your priorities. This one that's the bigger priority. So which one is it? It's you coming for the show. So that's how I look at things in life. I can't do everything in one day, but I could figure out this is my priority for the day, and that's what I'm going to do. So it's more about being productive than being busy. Right, because a lot of people would prefer to be busy because sometimes the people think the more busy you are, the more fulfilled and productive you are. But it's really not. It's really not. You end up being burnt out, and you look at the gains and you're like, no, I really didn't gain as much as I should have. So find that priority for your day and maximize on that. It could be even just reading a book, you know? Absolutely, right. There's a notification that's coming. Is she Kenyan? Definitely she's here. She's going to tell us if she's Kenyan or not, but let's backtrack a little bit. Where did you grow up? Where were you born? And are you really Kenyan like she's saying right here? Yes, so I am born and raised Kenyan. My mother is Kenyan. My dad is not Kenyan, right? So he's South Korean, but I grew up with my mother. She was a single mom. And yeah, it's been quite the journey. So I don't remember this, but my mom, when she came to Nairobi, she tells me that she had given birth in that area, in Dandora area. And then from there, we moved to South V, then from South V, moved to Zimmerman from Zimmerman. Now moved on to other places in life. But the core places that I do remember of my life is now Zimmerman, because that's where I remember a lot of the things that shaped exactly childhood memories. I remember your homegirls, homeboys. You know, the tomboy things that we used to do, you know, riding bikes. You were a tomboy? Yes, I feel like we just did a lot of tomboy stuff because, you know, either playing football, you know, riding the bike. You played football. Yeah. So we used to do this thing where we'd ride the bike from Zimmerman to Ghidorai, because it's not too far, right? Yeah.  So Zimmerman really holds a lot of the memories that I have exactly of my childhood. What about your high school before you get to uni and then media? High school was also very, it was very convoluted in the sense that I really changed schools a lot in the four-year season, because, you know, it's just four years. But in four years I'd gone to three schools. Yeah. Why was happening in between? So the first school that I went to, I experienced a lot of bullying. All right. So I just couldn't stay there for too long. The bullying was too excessive and it got to a point where if I was going to have a good mental well-being, or even physical, because it even got to a point where my physical well-being was being threatened. So sorry for that. So yeah, I couldn't do that. And then now move to the other school. Was it because of skin color? I believe it did have a role to play in that, because I was one of the only light-skinned girls there. Right. So it did play a role. Like you received a lot of negative attention. A lot of negative attention. And it's really hard because that's not what you want. You know, you're just there. Like you're enjoying life as everyone else. You're going to school just like everyone else. But the attention being drawn to you is negative when you're not even, that's not your intention, you know. Right. So yeah, then move to another school. Three of them. Now, no, the second one. The second one. And then was there for a year, because my mother felt like I needed more competition or whatever, then I'll move to my last school, which is where I graduated from. Are you able to shout them out and mention them? Yes. So I finished my fourth year of high school in Rihara Springs High School. Right. That was a cool kid's school. Yeah, it was.  You know, because my first school was a public school. So you know how Pabo ate? Ooh, been there.  Like it's freestyle.  And it's freestyle. Aye. My God, it was really difficult. The second school was, you know, okay. But now going to Rihara, I was like, oh my goodness. You're like, this is in Kenya? People are actually beautiful like this. You know, even the dorms. Public school, you understand how the dorms look like. Right. And also even the health. There are like a million in the whole. The healthcare facility as well. Exactly. Everything in Rihara Springs High School was just fantastic for me. It really felt like a vacation. Yeah. I wish most of us would have such sweet experiences. Yeah, I love that. I love that place for me. Right. And then Rihara is still a group of schools because they have a uni. Yes, they still have the university. But around that time, I had already decided to do something else. So it wasn't the best fit for me. But here we are. Finally, graduated by the way. Probably it was low, right? Sorry? You like gravitated towards low, tried it and then. Tried it, didn't work. Didn't work. Tried communications, didn't work. Communication didn't work at first? Yes. But not because I think I didn't want it as bad as I thought I did. But then also now I just graduated with a bachelor's in international relations. Yeah, but congratulations. Thank you. I was to say that. Thank you so much. Bachelor's degree in international relations. And honestly. At USIU. Co-Kids still. Co-Kids. I don't know what people talk about, but yeah, I guess. I see, yeah. It was, it's been a long time coming, but this is where I feel like my heart needed to be and where I needed to be. Because I'm really passionate about global issues. I'm really passionate about women and children. So when you understand international relations, and you know, especially because I, I concentrated in peace and conflict studies, you look at women and children and how they're affected in situations where there's conflict. And really that's where my heart is, and that's where I'd want to make an impact. Yeah, and now with Ukraine and Palestine, Hamas, Russia. Yeah, a lot of the disturbing footage that we're seeing online is, you know, women, children, you know. And even when you look at international humanitarian law, they're vulnerable persons because unfortunately in the event of a conflict like what we have, they're the ones that suffer the most, right? Not to also, not to say that, you know, the men and older people are not, but it's extremely, extremely hard for the kids. You've seen some of those videos, god-wrenching. Yeah, really heart-breaking. God-wrenching. Yeah, heart-breaking. How do they make you feel when you see that now that you've graduated and your passion is there?  Do you have an initiative that you've already said? Yesterday I was at the gym and I saw a video and I literally just started crying. But you know, it also just makes me think about, as Tracy, what's the change that I can make, you know. And sometimes you can maybe do much for, you know, the children, the women there. But here at home, there are people also going through a lot of hard times. How can I be that change for them? You know, how can I help them? And I believe that's what my degree now showed me. Because honestly, before, I was just doing the degree just to do the degree. And then I started learning things and I'm like, oh my goodness, we actually have a role to play. Right. Yeah. Absolutely. Now that you mentioned that media, before we talk about motherhood and the hiatus you took, so when did you officially start, you know, media? Your first gig, what are the memories? What happened? Did you in town? Did you go to auditions? Take us to that journey. Before you become the Tracy of NTV, talk about Larry Maddow, your friends, Mina Abdi-Rabbar and the rest. So my journey started in 2015 and it was a very, very, honestly, it was just, we can just say it's God, because this is nothing that I had planned. Nogod Mazir. Nogod Mazir. So I hadn't planned on being on TV because when I finished high school, my plan, like I said, was to go to law school. That didn't work. And then I quickly realized that I needed money to stay afloat. And you know, I did a couple of things and I was just like, you know what, man, I just hope one day that I could get something to do. Because a lot of the jobs me and my friends were doing were like, you know, go to the clubs, you know, sell appearances. No, no, no, just give brochures or, you know, bottle service kind of, you know, work. And, you know, for a long, you do that for a while and it's like, okay, this is not what I want to do for a long time, right? So one time me and my friends had gone for a gig, which was supposed to be an advertising job. But we ended up not getting the gig. Where was the gig? It was at the airport. So when we were in the van, you know how when the crew and all of you guys are just sitting in the van trying to make your way from one, we're trying to make our way from one terminal to the other? And Martin Kemati was actually there. And he was like, who became your co-host? Who became my co-host. So he saw me and my friends and was like, by the way, and if he's looking for a co-host for the show that I host, exactly, a female co-host, I think you guys should come through. And we're like, yeah, we're looking for money. We'd love to come through, you know, at that point you're just exactly at that point, you're just doing it for the money. So a month came by and then the day of the auditions came. So me and my friends were like, okay, now let's go. We need to go and try our luck. So the auditions were actually at the flyover just down the road here at Nairobi Uni, the flyover that connects from the Central Police Station to the other side. So that's where the audition was. We did the audition, didn't get feedback for like three months. So of course me and my friends were just like, we didn't get the job, you know, yet you've even forgotten about it. And three months is long. And three months is a long time, exactly, because we did the interview, we did the audition in November and they didn't get back to us until like end January. The following year, which year? Exactly, so that's 2015. And we did the audition end of 2014. So now that night, me and my friends had gone for one of those gigs that I'm telling you about, you know, make sure that people are seated well, make sure that people are eating, drinking, having a good time, you know. And I received a call and I didn't know who the call was from. So I'm like, hey, what's up? They're like, oh yeah, you got the job. I'm like, what job? They're like, you got the job for the TV show. I'm like, what TV show? You know, because I completely forgot about it. You had forgotten about it. And he was like, yeah, you remember you did this audition? I'm like, oh my goodness. I didn't, I couldn't even believe. Was it a male caller or a female? It was a male caller, right. And anyway, that's, that happened. And now it was, we had to go for training and all that stuff. So that's how my journey started. Right. And now looking back, I again, negate to. Exactly. And how was your first time, your first time appearance?  It's really daunting to be honest. Yeah. And I made a lot of mistakes. Looking back, I made a lot of mistakes on air. But I think that's really just part of the journey. You just have to be okay with making mistakes. You know, sometimes you say something and you're like, oh my God, what did I say? I shouldn't have said it that way. Or maybe I should have delivered the message a bit differently for the audience.  And I'm happy that I went through that process. Right. And I'm also grateful for the training process. I remember my first live show, however, was a big, I don't remember the name of the concert, but it was a concert. And I was just there attending. And then all of a sudden we were told, you have to do the live coverage. Right. And that just threw me in the dip end. But also what I've come to realize is that you really just need to believe in yourself. Even if you don't feel well equipped, the confidence will make up for at least 70% of that. And then the 30% just try and, you know, do a little bit here and there. But you just showing up for yourself and feeling confident and knowing that you've got it is half of the job. And you looked the part. You exactly looked the part. And you guys had amazing chemistry. Martin came up to a point, you know, we thought you guys were dating. Oh my God. But how is that feedback and that energy? People thinking that you guys are. You know what? Martin and I used to fight a lot actually. That was the contrary. Martin and I, we used to fight a lot. Yeah.  Exactly. So you guys are fighting over the weirdest things. But also at the same time, it's because you love each other so much and you're protective of each other. Exactly. So, you know, I gained a brother from Martin and he's still a brother until now, you know. My family loves him. You know, his family loves me. And, you know, that's just kind of, that's just the fact, that the kind of relationship that we have. Right. And how has he experienced at nation? Because sometimes you pop in a lot on the trend. But you also had a chance to co-host on the trend even when the door was there. Yes. And met that community of friends with Kina Mina Biroba and Anita Ndero as well, who is a good friend of yours. How's that friendship and that networking and meeting them on the show?  Right. Because we're different people, have different experiences, you know, have different outlooks in life. And that's why I love the job that I have, is because you get to meet people and really just see them for who they are, you know, love them for who they are, and really appreciate them for who they are. So you get to, you get to learn a lot from all these experiences. And that's what I love about our work because you, you just learn a lot by the interactions. Wow. How has experience working with Larry Mador now that he's at CNN? I know he's a good friend of yours. He's a very hard-working man. Additionally, he's also very passionate about his work. And I think when you have those two combined, you have an unstoppable person. Passion and diligence, I mean, unstoppable. That's what Larry is. Right, and he's actually admirable to me. Very admirable, right? Exactly. Do you talk? We occasionally, occasionally, but not as much. But occasionally, he's a very busy man. I know. And how was your stint at nation? How many years in terms of period? So that was 2015 to, so that was five years. Five good years. That was five good years. Half a decade. Which went by so fast.  Exactly. So did the contracts end or you guys resigned? Because all of a sudden we saw, I think you came, you came in after Ani Tenderu and Antonia Sol. Yes. They were actually like the fast, fast, fast hosts. And then you guys came in and Martin. And then we had Aziz Hashim and Joseph Trends. And then you left. But then sometimes you do make appearances. What happened in between? So what had happened was in 2021, no, in 2020, yeah.  Surprise, surprise. Surprise, surprise. So when I found out that, you know, I was going to be a mother soon, I decided that that's not something that I wanted to do, moving forward. So it was just me saying, you know what, it's time for me to embrace my new season. And my new season is now motherhood. So that's why I said goodbye to 10 Republic. Stature was a warm transition. It was a warm transition. I think it was, it was now difficult for Martin now to move forward because we already had such a chemistry, a great chemistry, you know, like we literally had a really strong bond as brother and sister. So, you know, moving forward was definitely different. And I also believe, you know, they also wanted a new direction for the show, which they got in very good, they got really good presenters, Aziza and Joseph Trends. So, and now, of course, this exactly, exactly now moving forward to now, maybe the new set of hosts that they're going to have.  One season is done. Anita season was done. My season was done. You know, Aziza season was done. And now let's see who the new cats are. Right, so still good readings and still allies through the station. 100 percent, yes. All right, now, thank you so much for sharing about that. Now, your transition now to motherhood, you're taking a social media hiatus and then making a radio comeback on Capitol. When did that happen and how was it? Please tell us. I decided to take the hiatus because motherhood is not as easy as people have made it to look. And that's just my experience. Because before getting into motherhood, I thought it was going to be the easiest thing. And shout out to our mothers because our mothers made motherhood look like the easiest thing. Like when you see a mother going through motherhood, you don't think about how hard it is. You think about how strong this woman is, how strong this, you know, this woman is facing the challenges. You don't really see the nitty gritties of the everyday today life of a mother. And it's very, very difficult. So when I was hit by that, I was like, oh my goodness, I cannot do anything else because I was a full-time mother. And you loved it. And I loved it. And I loved it. With its challenges, I absolutely loved it. Is there something that changed, by the way? Is there some things that changed about... There's a lot of things. Sorry, Danita. Bestie Manenos. The Tracy on TV and the Tracy on Mom. Is there a difference between the two? I would say, yes. In the sense that Tracy, now me, inherently, I'm a very conservative person and that has also just transcended in how I do my parenting.  Bubbly. Not saying that, you know, at home I'm just like... Gangster mom. No, but it's just how I look at life. I wouldn't say there are two very different people, but I feel like, inherently, I'm a very introverted, very conservative person, so there's that. And that's, like I said, transcended in how I've done my motherhood. Right, and you were talking about battles that mothers go through. Is there at a point when postpartum kicked in and how did you battle it out if it happened? Right, so that's one thing that I believe every single mother needs to be prepared for, and that is what they call the fourth trimester. So the fourth trimester is just the period that the three months after you've just given birth, that is what the fourth trimester is. And that is something that I did not prepare for, because like I said, our mothers have done it so effortlessly and you think it's just that easy. Right, so then you get into your fourth trimester and you're like, oh my god, you want to tell me I can survive on one hour of sleep? You know, so it's a sleepless night. It's the constant exhaustion. Your body is in pain because you did give birth to a human being. So there's all these changes that you're not properly prepared for. So what I would say is that you should definitely prepare because I was not prepared. Another thing is acknowledging the season that you're in. So one of the biggest triggers for my postpartum, I would say, so I did this test. It's called a BDI test. So that's Bex Depression Index. Bex Depression Index. So what it does, it gives you a list of questions and you're supposed to put your points. And after you've cumulatively collected or added your points, then you get to see, do you have mild depression? Do you have severe depression? It's like an up. No, it's not really, I'll show you actually. It's like, for example, what I would equate it with is not equated really, but just give you an example. It's like, for example, the earthquakes. You have the Richter scale. It gives you the strongest number. The magnitude as well. The magnitude exactly. And then you have the least. Exactly. So it's the same thing as the Bex Depression Index. Wow, that's new. So I did that. That's new. I did that and I realized that I did have some sort of postpartum depression, which was a mild postpartum depression. How did you kick it? The thing is acknowledging what you're going through because I really wanted to go back to the Tracy that was before Mother Earth. You know, doing the things that I wanted to do, freedom, because also when you become a mother, you can't just leave the house. You have to figure out, okay. You are grounded. You really are grounded. You have to figure out, okay, if I leave at this time, what will this mean for my child? What will, you know, all that stuff. So I really wanted to go back to Tracy pre or rather, yeah, pre-motherhood and that was not possible. So acknowledge that you're in a new season and embrace the challenges of that season. Did you feel stuck? It's not going to be easy. Yeah. Did you feel stuck? And that's the problem because you feel so stuck. You're doing the same thing every single day. Right? Like you're waking up the same time. You're feeding the child at the same time. You're putting them to sleep. You're trying to, you're trying to give them a shower. You're trying to burp them. You're trying, all every single day for a good year.  But that is your normal for that season. And that's something I wish I knew earlier, because I would have taken it so much easier on myself. So acknowledge your season, love your season because it is just a season. And you're doing it so well, but you know, we don't know the name of the child or the kid, the bouncing baby. And we'll never know, like he's saying. Is it a boy or a girl? Never know. Sour, too. And then you've also kept it private, no photo, no sneak peek, no hand, no leg. But why is it necessary, by the way, to have that kind of privacy? Even not just for your kid, but even for the rest of the family and anyone else who is in the public domain and an intense space like media, where it's all about attention, you know, cameras, people talking, people gossiping, sometimes things are written and you're like, damn, is that even me? I don't know that version of me, though. How do you, what is the importance of actually doing that? I believe it's so important, especially when you have a child, because you want to protect this child from the things that they wouldn't be able to grasp so easily.   And they have no right of defense. Exactly. They have no right of defense.  So you really just need to protect that innocence. And for me, one thing that I wanted to do is make sure that my child remains a child for the period that they need to become a child. And then when they move to a season where they're no longer a child, then they can do other things at that time. Because also a big issue that we're starting to see now is identity issues. Crisis, yeah. Right? So I don't want to have my child really seek their identity from a place that should not give them identity. And that's why I did not want to introduce them to social media or even, you know, give them my phone to do things on social media. I don't, I don't want that. So at what point will you allow them to have social media and maybe have an iPhone? Probably when they're like 21. Hi, 21 is too, you're too grown. Honestly, I would say, realistically speaking, I would say around 16 years. Yeah, 16 is good. I would say 16. What if the school, you'll take your kid to, they have gadgets and what. You know what, I'm actually really considering homeschooling. I'm really. To just protect your kid from that. So what is your advice also to celebrities who have their kids? All out there. The likes of, I don't know, let's stop, name dropping. Let's not name them. Yes. That's to have kids all over. I feel like once they're there, it's really hard to really give them advice. Just to each their own. You know, if you feel like that's good for you and your family, then do it. Absolutely. You know, but if it's like for me and my family, that's not something that we want to do.  I want to protect my partner. I want to protect our home. It is actually a sanctity. People expected less. We'll likely see rings, legs, our shoulder, legs, shoes, but nothing.  You know, I want to protect them and I love what we have. Yeah. Do you think most media personalities have that skill that you have of just like keeping it under wraps? I don't know if it's a skill. No signal. I don't know. But I feel like right now though, it's really hard for people to be very discreet because the more you share, the more interesting you are. I don't know if you've noticed that. Like the more you're talking about something, the more you're sharing about who you've slept with, you know, what you've done. That's, people want to see that. So you kind of like, exactly. But if you're just there, no one wants to know what's going on. So the more you put out, the more people want to know and you get into that cycle of I need to give more. I need to give more. So, and that's something that I never wanted for me or my family. I don't, I really don't need to give more. Like what you see is just what you get. What you get, absolutely. And it should be like that. We have like four minutes with you before we play the game. There's somebody here who's saying ask her if she has siblings and then what scares her now that she was on TV for so long. Yes, she was on TV for a very long time. What scares you and before we play the game? So I do not have any siblings. I'm the only child. Right. She's the only child. But as far as what scares me the most, I would say what scares me the most is not realizing my purpose because you always be constantly trying to figure out what to do. So, and that's something that I also want to to, that's something I really pray for my child as well, that they don't have to battle finding their identity or finding their purpose, you know, that they they're able to find it early enough so that they can really just focus on that. So that's my, that's my biggest fear, not finding my purpose.  As we go, maybe what are some of the projects that we should expect from you? What is your advice to any young and upcoming media personality that looks up to you? Of course, they know your name out there. If they're looking up to you, what should they, what should they actually expect as well? And there may be a license of land that you love to give them any tools that you have for them. This is your camera before you tell us your social media and when your radio show airs on Capitol. Okay. So I will be back on TV very soon, actually very, very soon. So stay tuned for that because I will be sharing with you the new project that we're working on.  And that really just changes the dynamics of the communities that we live in. So mothers, there is something coming for you and also children. So stay tuned for that. Additionally, you could follow me and also show media pages that is at Tracy when you're underscore. I'm just to keep up with a lot of things that maybe I may just one day just wake up and say, aha, I'm launching this. But so far, those are the two projects that I'm really, really keen on launching very soon. So look forward for that. And for every single girl, boy who's looking at me and wants to really join the media fraternity or start this journey, believe in yourself. Like you've actually got everything in you to make it happen, to become as big as Larry, or even bigger than Larry. That's a big thing. You have it in you. All you need to do is just believe in yourself, put in the work, trust the process, as much as the process can really suck. Trust it because it really is, all this really contribute to the person that you will become. So you've got this, believe in yourself. And thank you so much. I forgot to ask you, when did you become friends with Trace Songs? But we'll talk about that. I think that's the time I also met Trace Songs, but from a very far. But anyways, thank you so much, Tracy, for dressing us. I wish you had more time. I'm being rushed in my ear that like, we are cutting you off air. We need to cut. Okay, okay, we need to go. Yeah, so thank you so much for coming through. And nice to meet you in person. We wish you the best of luck in everything you do. Thank you so much for watching. It's been such a pleasure being here with wine. All right, we see you next time, right here on Wine the Morning.


Also, it's a free translation. It's a free translation. Don't really have many colloquial terms to be honest. Colloquial? Grow up. You don't know what that means. Too intelligent for me. Am pure done in. Am pure done in.   I do say this all the time though. Hark it. I know what that means. What does it mean? Like rubbish. No good. Crap. Brutus.  Can you? That's perfect. That's what he's saying. Has he got that? Yeah, that's a point. Half. This is what you'll be doing on the podcast later. I'm bledder. Talking nonsense. There's plenty of that going on.  That's good. Really? I just said this before. Come on. Hodge your waist. Say it again. Hodge your waist. You know what I've got no idea. No, really? How do you spell that? Is that one word? No, no. It's like three words. But it's like they're not proper words. So what's the first word? Hodge. Hodge. Hodge your waist. Weast. I'm guessing it's waist. Nah. It might be quite. Be quiet. Hodge your waist. Please stop talking ASAP is what they are for you. Hodge your waist is please stop talking ASAP. I've never heard that one. I've never heard that one. I said it just before we come in. It's a good one to know that. I wonder what that is. What's on there? What's that? Beon. Child, like a kid. I've got two beons. I've got two beons. Are we beons? Is that one thing as well? Do you say it as well? You'd probably say it a way. I would say a way. I've heard that as well. I would say a way. You know what that means, if I'm saying you give me the book.    You give me the book. That's another point. I don't know where the point sits. Anyone adding this up? Oh, you didn't get one of mine. I didn't get that silly one of ours. What? Hodge your waist? So I'm winning then. O'ch ae ddyn nhw I know that's a very popular saying O'ch ae ddyn nhw The new is like now So o'ch ae Yes I O'ch ae ddyn nhw O'ch ae ddyn nhw O'ch ae ddyn nhw Seen like a really roundabout way of saying Yeah Nonsence So you're giving them that one O'ch ae ddyn nhw Never get that one I mean when we got left You don't want to win Jamie you've scrolled down to my How many words are on there Have your own dictionary on that I'll be there I've got wifi yet I don't I used to get colour salt and I was good Tennis ball head Right cut that I keep that neck Egy Egy Egy Egy Egy Egy Do different Bonnie Bonnie Little Bonnie Bonnie Again that's not really Scottish My daughter's Bonnie It's got Bonnie Guit laldy That's a good one Guit laldy Guit laldy to the fans Guit it big ones Guit it Guit laldy Guit it Give it a hand Give it your best what they've got rolled down But I'd say it's more like Guit it laldy Have you ever used that expression Not properly When do you think you've become less Scottish When you live down here You do We do use these ones But normally None of my mates use these ones I'd say Guit laldy Would you hear You don't know You don't know That's who I'd explain it Guit laldy You only like family Christmas words But then Christmas craft You only said that about you When you were around your dad and uncle That you became more Scottish When I go home I do speak Gash it When I go home I do Cos when I come down I slow it down To be respectful to people like you Forget you from Scotland Lived in South Wales for a few years And I've developed that side as well I think you're cool I think you're cool I think you're cool Guit me Skunnaw Skunnaw Make it Skuddi Skunnaw Skunnaw Skunnaw Pure dead Skunnaw You see I'm Skunnaw after that Now you're going to have to translate Skunnaw How are you spelling Skunnaw Skunnaw I'm sure I'm Skunnaw It says board fed up It's like S-U-N-M-E-R-T Skunnaw There's a T on there You'll know that Patch So sick of it Rubbering the coffee club Would you say that? I think we're running out of ones A job in your ars Big turd Big turd You can't put that in though Bleke it Bleke it I've not heard of Bleke it I would never say that Banksy's Bleke it I've got a list of words You could be calling Banksy Any one of a number of things Go on guess one of them Horrible Stupid Bleke it Bleke it I'm a pure Nick I'm a pure Nick Jamie probably says it a lot in the morning It's where he comes in The absolute Nick I'm no looking at my best I'm in some Nick You got that quite well Last one for you You used to make me laugh when I was in Scotland It's like old food and that Haggis niche and peas A roll A macaroni pie Macaroni cheese In a pie In a sandwich Don't forget the butter But even after a night out Deep fried pizza Half pizza You like taggis mate Half pizza Half pizza and chips Half pizza and chips He loves it He loves it Reminds me at home You think he's from London mate He used to stop by all the bottles when the recipe changed No, what I used to do when I was very young was I go down to the spa and get a £2 bottle I don't think it was a pound at the time I drink that I drink that and then you go back to the spa and you take back the cap I probably have like 150 on me I get the money back from the cap and buy a can of iron bro I them bro How much do you get from the cap? You got like 30p back from the cap Ha ha ha ha Jamie are you having that? Do you know what this means?  Who's Ken? Would you say that back in the day? I'll say I didn't know Would you never say Ken now? That's like Glasgow Dundee used to be quite strong Dundee had some bad words I used to catch the accent when I was there It's very different The way you would say it That's not a bonk machine That's not a bonk machine


Item number SCP-637 Object Class Safe Special Containment Procedures When inactive, SCP-637 is contained entirely within the consciousness of SCP-637-2. SCP-637-2 is to be held at Site-17 in a low-security room. Being at request is to be given, as long as it does not violate standard procedures. However, any requests for pencils, pens, sketch pads, or any marking implement are to be denied and reported to Dr. ██████████. The issue has been raised that if SCP-637-2 wanted marking devices, it could use a bluish as the blood or urine, but the subject is not displayed on marked interest in drawing. It is agreed, however, that it is wise not to tempt fate. Subject is to be fed three times per day, and whenever it requests food. Description SCP-637-2 is an elderly Caucasian woman of approximately 65 years of age who calls herself Margie. Margie has been described by staff as polite and old ladyish if a little confused. She spends much of her time in a semi-catatonic state, with occasional lapses of lucidity. SCP-637-2 is the host of SCP-637, a psychic organism which assists entirely in SCP-637-2's mind. SCP-637 is described by its host as, quote, a little black cat, skinny fellow, real easy-going, unquote. Although the creature normally resides in a blank space, in a subject's mind, it is capable of residing for several minutes of the drawn item on paper, wood, or other substance. If any sapient organism not previously carried in SCP-637 sees the reproduction, the image will vanish, and SCP-637 will take up residence in the new subject's mind. Based on information gathered from SCP-637-2 and D-67308-C Document 637-8, the organism behaves exactly as a normal cat, and its host is always capable of describing what it is currently doing and where it is within their head. SCP-637-2 shows affection for the theoretical creature. SCP-637-2 did not recall where she saw SCP-637 originally, so it is assumed that it has been living in her mind for some time. Addendum Dr. ████████ believes the creature could be useful, including the possibility of mass producing the cat and adapting it for use in psychic warfare as a means of crippling the subject, and plans to continue testing on other subjects. If no uses are found for SCP-637, then it is believed that it will die when its host does. Unless further experimentation is warranted, it is recommended that we prevent SCP-637-2 from releasing SCP-637 on the paper in order to maintain the good mental condition of our agents. Document 637-8, Test Subject D-67308 was exposed to an image of the organism drawn by SCP-637-2. Subject gained a disheveled appearance and made several comments like, quote, nothing works, isn't working, want the cat out, nice kitty, unquote. When the subject was informed that it would be placed in quarantine for 24 additional hours, it reacted violently and swore at the guards for several minutes before lapsing into a semi-catatonic state. The subject's behavior was deemed non-harmful, and the subject would move to a low-security dormitory on the site. After 12 hours, the subject unexpectedly self-terminated, using the broken edge of a ceramic dish provided with its meal. The subject was observed making several loud remarks such as, quote, get the cat out, I want the cat out, leave me alone, unquote, and commenting that the organism was a, quote, brain-sucking parasite, unquote, before death. It is worth noting that at approximately the same time as D-67308's termination, SCP-637-2, who had been sleeping at the time, sat straight up and exclaimed, quote, kitty's back, unquote.


Interrupting Interrupting politely Excuse me. Excuse me. Pardon me. Pardon me. Sorry to interrupt. Sorry to interrupt. May I interrupt for a minute? May I interrupt for a minute? Can I add something here? I don't mean to intrude, but... Could I inject something here? Do you mind if I jump in here? Getting back to the topic. Anyway... Now, where was I? Where were we? What were you saying? You were saying... To get back to...


It's a rights-based organisation. We started in 1987 as sex workers to manage our own response, really, to pressures related to the police, the law, HIV and AIDS. We support sex workers and advocate for them and their jobs and make sure that they've got a safe place where they can come to and just talk about how their day's been, you know, what it's like putting up with the clients, putting on condoms, exiting the sex industry, what to do when you want to leave the sex industry. What do you think about this debate on the language? Like, what's worse, do you use sex worker or prostitution? Does it have any significance? You know, language comes and goes.   Do you have any estimates on how many people work in this sex industry? The last time there was done a count of the number of sex workers, it was around about 3,500. 80% of sex work takes place in brothels, indoors. Around about 17% of sex work takes place on the streets. Of those working indoors, two-thirds work in brothels and one-third work privately for themselves. What was the situation before the new regulation was adopted in New Zealand? Okay. Prior to decriminalisation in 2003, it was illegal to receive money for sex. You could be a sex worker, but you couldn't get paid for it. It was illegal to solicit. It was illegal to keep our owner brothel.  We used to be arrested, taken to court, charged and convicted. Our name would be in the paper. It would mean that our name would be attached forever to prostitution. So if we were looking for alternate work, it would sometimes pop up as part of our police record. What about a new legislation? How does it regulate the industry?  So brothel keeping disappeared. Living off the earnings disappeared. Procuring disappeared and soliciting disappeared. So nobody can be charged with any of those anymore. Righted at the heart of the law, it talks about protecting the rights of sex workers. You are protected by labour law and that's very important.  So occupational, safety and health legislation, the human rights legislation, all these sorts of laws are available. Standard laws in relation to employment laws, employment contracts, all that came into effect. And most sex workers who are working for brothel may have some form of employment contract. Some city councils make district plans to control where bars can be, for example. And these same things are used to control the location of brothels. You're allowed legally to be a brothel operator. You must have a brothel operator certificate and you file that with the court. A number of sex workers work by themselves. Some of them will work in small collectives of sex workers with maybe two or three other people working with them. They are just in charge of themselves. They just share the expenses for advertising, the expenses for the apartment. Nobody's taking any money off them. In relation to police, our relationship with the police is very good. We discuss, we network with the police on the policy level as well as on the front-line level as well.  And governments say, okay, we'll tolerate a certain kind of sex work. And usually they do what we refer to as a legalised model, where they say, we will licence. They say, okay, we'll do that. And they say, okay, we'll do that. We'll do a legalised model where they say, we will licence.  In New Zealand, we rejected that model completely and utterly.  If they want to work together, that's fine as equals. If they want to work in a managed brothel, that's fine. That's okay. If they want to be street-based sex workers, that's also okay. So that model of having a third party take charge or control sex workers was rejected. Is there any evaluation of the decriminalisation law in New Zealand? The law was evaluated properly in 2007, 2008. The results of that evaluation were published by the Constitutional Law Review Committee, by the Christchurch School of Medicine and by the Crime and Justice Research Centre at Victoria University.  They found, doing a comparison between the old law and the new law, that private sex workers are far more able to refuse a client than they were before.  The sex worker rang the police. The client had to get the money out of the ATM machine, pay the sex worker. So these are the positive things.  I've given it to the receptionist and I feel that you're sexually harassing me as a brothel operator and I have rights and she lodged a complaint with the Human Rights Commission and they awarded her $25,000 in damages for sexual harassment inside the brothel and they said to the brothel operator, okay, you clearly don't know what sexual harassment is and you need to have some training. You can still be a brothel operator but you just need to train and you need to pay her $25,000. Are there many complaints from sex workers for working brothels on, like, exploitation? Because the law changed. It doesn't mean exploitation stops in a workplace if it's being exploited. Some sex workers say, look, I want to make a stand or I want to stop this practice and I have rights and I'm going to do it and they do it whereas others might just say, oh, it's easier to just change workplaces. Yes, there is still some forms of violence against sex work but lifting a law does not prevent violence from happening. Putting a law into place does not prevent violence from happening. The thing is sex workers can now complain to the police if violence doesn't happen and as a result it gets reported more and as a result the police are able to take more details and arrest the person who is ultimately responsible for that violence.  What do you think about this?  The law tends people into victims if it's illegal. You know, there are sex workers who are certainly in situations that are not good, that are dangerous and could be improved on but even so they may not say that it's sex work that is creating their situation of hardship. They'd say that perhaps it's sex work that's alleviating the hardship for them. 773 sex workers were interviewed in New Zealand and it was found that a tiny percentage said that they had been released. There are claims about trafficking and everything like that but the New Zealand Immigration Service goes through brothels on a regular basis looking for people who are trafficked. They have never found a person who has been trafficked ever since decriminalisation came into effect. That's 10 years ago last year. The New Zealand police have never found any evidence of trafficking within the sex industry. They are more likely to find evidence of forced employment or coercive employment in fisheries and in agriculture, viticulture, than they are within the sex industry.  Very much.  So that measure was put in place at the time by the immigration minister who said it was an effective way to stop trafficking and what has happened is that we have a population of sex workers who are migrants, who are working illegally and that makes it difficult for them. It means that they could be deported. So really migration laws should apply to sex workers in the same way because the very reason that part of the law was put there was to stop trafficking and yet we would say it actually helps people end up in exploitative positions because they can't speak out because they're illegal. So it's a contradiction. What do you think about this so-called Swedish model which is more and more popular in Europe that's there punishing the clients of sex workers? We're really pleased it hasn't made its way to the Pacific. I think it's an appalling situation for sex workers. I remember working illegally as a young woman and we'd do anything to get our clients. Just shift the law on to them. Look, we would have to duck and hide and go into places that we'd prefer not to define them. I think it's not a good situation for sex workers. I think it's really harmful and if these governments are considering prosecuting the client's thought about why they're doing this that really they should be looking to protect and assist and support sex workers and not to make their situation more precarious.