Thank you very much. My name is John Hamery. I'm really delighted and honored that you are here. This is a very important moment for me personally. This is, I think, one of the most important projects that we have been working on. I've been here 13 years. There isn't anything that I'm more proud of or excited about than this effort. And I need to explain why that is. You know, this is in a town that has been so preoccupied with partisan battling for the last, well, I don't know how long, certainly last two years, probably the last ten years. This is a completely bipartisan effort to find common ground. Common ground that both conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, business and government, everybody can come together on an agenda. And what is that agenda? It's an agenda to create a better world. That's what development is all about. It's healthier people, healthier societies, healthier communities. And that's an agenda that should unify everyone. That isn't a conservative agenda or liberal agenda or Republican or Democrat agenda. That is a human agenda. And when America was strong, when America was welcome, when America was proud, it embraced this agenda. It was America. We kind of lost our ways over the last 20 years. We've become too bureaucratic. We've had too many battling over whose budget, my budget, I'm in charge, you're in charge, all of that sort of stuff has kind of gotten in the way. So we asked, could we bring together some truly remarkable people to spend some time with us developing a genuine, honest, bipartisan consensus for the development agenda? That's what this is about. A new foundation, a way to think about this that brings everybody together. It doesn't divide Washington or divide the country, it brings everybody together. I hope you're going to see that. It is an inspiring piece. I want to say my sincere thanks to all the commissioners, my sincere thanks to the co-chairs for making it possible. I'm very thankful to Chevron that made it possible to have the resources that we could do this project. Very important to us. We're going to start, and I'm going to turn to Tom Pritzker. He's my boss. He's on my board, so I have to pay attention. But he also is going to be the leading of the co-chairs. He's going to lead the conversation this afternoon. I'll turn to him and then we're going to show a brief video. Tom, please. Thank you all for coming. So thank you very much, John. I'm pleased to be here with you. I wear two hats. I wear my hat as executive chairman of Hyatt, and I wear my hat as a trustee of CSIS where I work for John Hammering. First, let me congratulate the CSIS Executive Council on Development. It's both a very prestigious group that's worked over the past year to develop a set of ideas in ways that the U.S. can better harness the power of the private sector and the energy and dynamism in developing countries. It's also a group that has coalesced around some of the ideas that you read about in the report. From my perspective, it was a remarkable process. The members of our group represent the finest companies, government entities, NGOs, and philanthropic organizations in America. Each person is individually accomplished and committed to development and work in organizations that are committed to improving the lives of people in the world. And as I said, the process was very interesting because we had a group that was very diverse in their experiences, very diverse in their particular jobs, and very passionate about the same topic. And I think that coalescing around that passion is what resulted in what I think is a very good piece of work. We're really pleased to have a number of our members here today and who we'll hear from shortly. Some were unable to join us. I'd like to share with you a video that we want to show you. So thank you and welcome. The developing world today, unlike 10 years ago or 20 years ago, is a very dynamic place. There are a lot of opportunities and the opportunity to leverage commercial involvements, which means jobs and income for American citizens and American workers, is greater than it probably has ever been in any of our lifetimes. We don't want to not take advantage of that opportunity. The developing world holds huge promise for Hyatt. That's where development is going to happen. And so for us, it's not only a source of customers and employees, but it also represents the place that the business world is moving to. So we need to have a presence there, both for our customer base and for our employee base. While the U.S. government has played historically a very important role in development, that role is being questioned. Is it effective? Does the role need to change because the world has changed? Because the private sector, for example, plays a far more effective and a larger role in development than even the government does today. I believe that the best way to sell foreign assistance is to recognize it as preventive diplomacy, to recognize that if we don't address the economic issues, one day we're going to have to address them in a military or in a much more severe state of circumstances. I think the most we can do is to ensure that we create the kind of stability and economic vitality around the world to keep the tension, keep the pressure, keep all of the extraordinary circumstances that develop when that doesn't happen in check. About 87% of the capital flows into the emerging market countries are private sector driven. That means 13% is public sector driven. In terms of development, people typically think companies are only engaged in community activities or what people know as CSR, but it's way beyond that. When we look at local supply chains, we will put billions into the local economies versus millions into what we call CSR. So the supply chain factor is much more significant and much more a contributor to local economies than our community investments. Rather than looking at the people that we work with as recipients of charity, what we're trying to figure out is how to plug them into real economic activity. Expectations have changed. It once was kind of enough to be a good citizen, maybe contribute to the United Way or local charities. Now society expects business to be at the table with the full array of business resources helping solve social problems. The U.S. government and the private sector have been working together for a number of years. And in the future we would hope that they would do more thinking together about what the community, the common good goals are for a country. You begin to look at the education systems, the healthcare systems in a country, the ministries within the government, areas that are both business opportunities but also would help in the development of that country, help the people of the country. What I believe public sector players ought to be doing is looking for ways that they can fit into the for-profit investment strategies of businesses around the world. And many of those businesses I think are very open to working together with public sector players on enhancing the sustainability and the developmental impact of their investments. If we're really going to be serious about using all three sectors to tackle problems, you've got to break down those cultural silos. You have to teach folks in government what it's like to think from a profit and loss perspective, which of course corporations have to do. You've also got to teach people in the private sector, hey, government is slow often because it doesn't have the ability to convert everything into a bottom line of dollars and cents. It has to take in lots of different stakeholders into account. These procedures are there for fairness. All of us on the council believe the government plays a vital role that the U.S. taxpayer needs to understand the value of that role, but that the U.S. government also has to become much more effective at leveraging what works and in working in particular with the private sector, both NGOs and for-profit to help raise many people out of poverty all over the world. It is good business to address problems in society and if we do so in the right way, there'll be economic development, growth and success, both with regard to the solving the problems that people are facing and the growth of our businesses and making them more competitive. More thoughtful organizations realize that the private sector is actually a critical role player, that there are lessons from the private sector that can be applied, that incentives matter, that people having a job matter and that partnerships with private sector companies trying to solve water and sanitation problems actually are a good thing. Really long-term impact is not about projects, it's about transforming societies. This is in our interest. We're not giving people stuff. We are building partnerships that have a tremendous return on investment. There's a tremendous payoff to us in terms of national security, diplomatic relationships and economic relationships and opportunity. The foreign assistance budget, development assistance, is a relatively inexpensive way of maintaining American involvement and leadership in a rapidly changing world with a lot of threats as well as a lot of opportunities. We're living in a smaller and smaller world that places far from here directly affect our lives and our future. The greatest story in the world today is that we've got millions of everyday hard-working Americans who give their time, treasure and talent to people they've never seen, places they've never been and in many cases couldn't find on the map. It's who we are. Where would you like to sit? I don't know. They didn't tell me where to sit. This will do. Is this working? Can you hear me? Yeah, great. Okay. So let me start first of all by welcoming my fellow chairs and make some introductions. All four of us were very engaged in the development of this report and the deliberations for the past year, year and a half, and so along those lines. First to my right is Carly Fiorina. She served as the CEO of Hewlett Packard and there she pioneered work on bringing technology to the developing countries. It has been very committed to seeing a more robust relationship between companies and government in achieving these development roles has been active here in Washington in pursuing that. So the far right is Tom Daschle who probably needs no introduction in this town. Tom was Senate Majority Leader. He's from South Dakota, an avid believer in development and particularly the role that private and public partnerships can play in enhancing the country's development capabilities. And Vin Weber sitting between Tom and Carly was a member of Congress from Minnesota. He's former chairman of the National Endowment for Democracy. He and Senator Daschle have brought to the group a realistic perspective on Capitol Hill about the environment for development in Congress and congressional constituencies. As you can imagine, if we're actually going to move the needle and move this, translate the report into action, a key element of that is the political process. The person not here is Henrietta Four. Henrietta was administrator of USAID and Deputy Secretary of State. Henrietta was involved all the way through. Henrietta got sick and is suffering with a cold today and didn't want to get on an airplane. And I serve as the Executive Chairman of Hyatt Hotels. Also, as I said, a member of CSIS's board. And I'm here because I believe firmly that we're not doing enough to help countries grow their economies and grow their employment base. And that there's an opportunity to rethink how we're doing things in the United States in a way that can actually make it more efficient and economical in terms of how much we're spending on the effort. And can make it more powerful in terms of serving our own national interests. So let me start and ask the members of the group, why did you join this council? What was it that brought you to a willingness to spend your valuable time in the deliberations and the development of what we did? Let me start with Tom. And as I mentioned in the introduction, during our discussions, Tom particularly emphasized the importance of public-private development. And so maybe you could talk a little bit about that. Well, Tom, thank you for your kind introduction. And let me just say what a pleasure it's been to have the opportunity to serve as a co-chair with my colleagues here on the dais. It's been a real experience, a learning experience for me in particular. I want to thank John and CSIS and the extraordinary staff with whom we've had the opportunity to work. They've just been enormously supportive and extremely dedicated to this project. I've worked on a lot of different things over the years, but none quite as fulfilling as something like this. So I've enjoyed it immensely. I start with the premise that we cannot ignore as a country the importance of international engagement, that the world is getting smaller and more intricately connected. I've made mention of the fact just a couple of minutes ago that we're probably closer digitally to Beijing or to New Delhi than I was to Minneapolis when I was growing up. We always thought of Minnesota as the gateway to South Dakota. But that international engagement really has, in my view, four major components. Obviously, we'll always have a defense component.  Unfortunately today, that international engagement largely requires that we spend more on defense than we do on the other three Ds combined. And when we consider the future prospects of the success of engagement, I don't think that's a sustainable model anymore. I think we've got to look beyond just the first D and really put emphasis, because of this integrated society within which we live globally, on the importance of the other three. And of the three, developmental assistance, in my view, holds the key to our success. And that developmental assistance really has its trisector. It's the government role through policy and diplomacy, democracy and defense. But it's also the private sector in two components, the business community as well as the NGO and nonprofit community. All three have to work together. The problem we have today is that there's so much siloization among those three components, those three sectors. The silos are probably stronger and thicker than they've perhaps ever been before. So successful engagement, successful integration, requires somehow that we tear down those silos.  We've talked about it. I think it's generally shared, but it's the need for innovation to think out of the box and to find ways of which to do things in a much more innovative way. than we have in the past. The second is collaboration. We can't succeed at this international engagement with the 4Ds unless there is far more collaboration among the three sectors than we see today. And finally, engagement, recognizing that we've got to develop partnerships on the ground and with governments and with the private sectors in the countries with which, with whom we are engaging if we're going to be successful. So all of this comes together in this report that I think is just really, I'm very proud of the work product and the sort of the resolution that we have been able to collectively agree to as a result of this concerted effort to find new ways to engage as we go forward. Vin, so you talked a lot about trade and the role trade can play in development and in engagement with other countries. Can you talk a little bit about that? Sure. First of all, I want to echo everybody's remarks about what a delight it's been to work with the professional staff at CSIS and with Carly and Tom Pritzker, as well as with my friend Tom Dashel. I represented the second district of Minnesota at the time that he represented the ninth district of Minnesota. And we were always good friends. I'm going to back up a little bit and then I will get directly to your question, Tom. When John Hamme asked me and the rest of us to join this project, I had just completed eight years as you mentioned as chairman of the National Endowment for Democracy. Which I learned a lot about the link between free economy, economic development, and political development. And I had finished three years as a member of the Secretary of Defense Policy Advisory Board, which was sort of driven into us that we were facing periods of declining or pressured defense budgets and a real need to reconfigure the way that we were thinking about defense spending around the world. And the two thoughts kind of came together in my mind as the budget crisis, which we're still in the middle of really descended on us. And we saw great pressure on development assistance budgets and still see great pressure on development assistance budgets. And as one who believes strongly, the United States can't accept the alternative of simply withdrawing from the world. We have to figure out what are smarter, better, and more effective ways of both leveraging United States interests and helping to reinforce United States values, political values, social values, and economic values around the world. And it's increasingly clear to me that that can be done better more effectively and more efficiently through development strategies, not to just say development assistance, than it can through some of the other programs of government, including military spending that we've been engaged in for certainly all of our lives. And trade in that way is, I think, trade somewhat differently than I used to. I've always taken the view that trade is a good thing, liberal trade is an objective, but trade is really the linchpin of a strategy now. When the United States engages with other countries around the world, particularly in what we now think of as the developing world, trade is the opportunity for us to influence substantially and in a positive way our relationship with those countries and those countries' involvement in the broader world. And it involves United States government assistance, but even more so, as Carly and Tom have taught us, private sector funds and, of course, NGO funds as well. So I think, just to conclude, I began my involvement in this project viewing it as a defensive operation that was not likely to have great success, but maybe would hold back a little bit of the viciousness of the cuts in the budget that I saw coming to some of the programs that I believe in. And I ended the project quite a bit more optimistic, thinking that, yeah, we're still under budget pressure for government programs, but that's just a small piece of a much bigger picture, which is that we are at the moment of great opportunity to do good things for the developing world and in the process for the United States. Carly, you just earlier at lunch articulated sort of captured the overall message of what the report says. Can you capture that for us and talk a little bit about each of the points and why you think those are important? Certainly. And let me just begin by saying that I, like my fellow co-chairs, we're all here because John Hamry told us to be, but beyond that, and we were happy to answer the call, I think we were united in our passion for the cause. The cause being the United States has to engage proactively around the world for good. And we were enthused as well by the people that we were going to get a chance to serve with, not just the co-chairs, but our fantastic council members as well, and an incredibly diverse group of people. We spent a lot of time as a group thinking through everything that has changed in the world, what is going on in the private sector, both in companies and in NGOs, as well as what has changed in the government. And in brief, while the report is a bit thicker than the couple minutes I am going to spend summarizing it, I think we concluded that there are three very important recommendations. The first is that the organizing principle around all of our development engagement as well as around the private sector engagement in the world should be a focus on our shared prosperity, job creation, economic development and growth. That is that the opportunity to lift as many people out of poverty as possible is what will have the biggest impact, both for our own good as well as the benefit of people all around the world. And it is such an obvious thing to say, but I think our belief that shared prosperity, lifting people out of poverty, creating jobs should be at the center of our agenda. That belief was punctuated over and over again as our work progressed. And perhaps the most obvious and recent example of the need for this is to remember that the Arab Spring began when a merchant set themselves on fire in a marketplace in Tunisia. That incredible statement by that individual was a recognition that without the hope of ever being able to create a better life for themselves or their families, their future was hopeless. As a chief executive of a major global company, I think Tom and I and other members of our council have also seen personally how much difference it makes when a community has jobs, how hope is lifted, self respect is lifted and of course standards of living are lifted. And it's true, I think all of us from our various perspectives will agree that it's absolutely true that even in the most desperate of situations the opportunity to earn a living can make all the difference in the world. So we start with a premise that shared prosperity, both ours in this country and everyone else's around the world, are shared prosperity. The desire to lift as many people out of poverty as possible. The desire to create jobs, to grow an economy, must be the centralizing, the central mission of our work together, both as government, as NGOs and private sector. The second principle conclusion of this report is that times have changed and no longer can the US government think of itself as a standalone actor, just as the private sector cannot think of itself as a standalone actor. I can recall being a member of the Defense Business Board and participating with other members of that business board in observing that as our military is investing more and more and going in more and more places around the world, that one of the biggest sources of influence on a government, whether friendly or hostile, happens to be the private sector engagement in that country. And certainly Tom's experiences through high-it, building high-its in places like Iraq and Afghanistan has demonstrated that. As you heard in the video today, the US government, the total amount of spend that's going on across the broad rubric of development, the US government spends about 13% of those total dollars. The private sector broadly defined, whether it's the Catholic Relief Fund or a private company or other NGOs, the private sector spends 87%. And so if we want to be effective in helping to lift people out of poverty and creating shared prosperity, it just makes sense, to the senator's point about collaboration, that we think about that mission and think broadly about leveraging all of the assets that we can bring to bear on the problem, whether those assets are Chevron or USAID or anything in between. Of course we all think a lot these days about China, and I know virtually all of us on this council have seen how effective the government of China is in engaging with its state enterprises and bringing all of its power and money collectively to a country, and that has huge positive impact, not just for that country, but for China as well. So that's our second point, that the private sector broadly defined and the public sector really have to engage together so that in this time of constrained budgets, we are using to the maximum extent every resource that we have as a nation and the resources we have are considerable. Finally, our third point is that frankly we're just not really organized to do this very well today. Many of us, I can recall Farooq Qathwari who's a great member of our council and I being engaged in a philanthropic effort and trying to partner with USAID it's not always so easy for the private sector and the public sector to collaborate effectively. Sometimes that is because of all of these silos that Tom Daschel spoke about, sometimes it's because frankly there is a lack of trust between the public and the private sector. Suffice it to say that in order to collaborate effectively, in order to innovate so that we can truly lift more and more people out of poverty. We need to think differently about how our efforts are organized, how our efforts are rationalized and how our efforts are integrated. That's important in order to do more with less, which goodness knows as the sequester enters day three. We all know our budgets are constrained. One of the things we say in this report is we think it is possible to do more with the same amount of money that we're spending on development or potentially less, but it does mean that we have to leverage more effectively all of our U.S. government capabilities along with those of the private sector. So those are the three big headlines from this report and I think we're delighted that you all have such an interest in them and you'll hear more about them as the afternoon progresses. Great, thank you. So let me talk for a minute about how I came to this effort, other than what Carly said, John called and said you're going to do this. I said yes, sir. So at Hyatt we've done a lot in developing countries and we've been pretty much ahead of our competitive set. So we were very early into China. We were early into India. We were early into the Middle East. And I was the guy at Hyatt who had passion around that. So I spent a lot of time in those various countries and putting some of our strategies together in those countries. And that exposed me to the opportunity, frankly, not only to make a difference for Hyatt but also to make a difference in the communities in which we were doing business. Second experience that formed my views on all of this was over the last 10 years I made several trips both to Iraq and Afghanistan during the wars there. And I saw a similar thing to what I was seeing at Hyatt and that is that prosperity is a big deal anywhere you go. I have to do archeology in very remote areas of the Himalayas and I can go into the smallest village and the local guy there who's illiterate what it's about for him is providing for his family. So from the Iraq and Afghanistan experience what I came out of that with was that peace and prosperity are two sides of the same coin. And as I said before, knowing nothing about how to do peace, I figured prosperity would be an interesting area for me to put some time and energy into. And as I began working with this group and with the members of the council, it sort of began to coalesce. And that is that this issue of prosperity can dovetail nicely with America's own interests if it can bring stability to these various countries.  But there's another aspect to that and that is that addresses just the economic aspect. But in addition to that, if you teach them how to fish, you're going to give them hope. And hope is a critical aspect of social stability. If people believe that their lives are going to be better in the following years and that your children's lives are going to be better, it has an important role to play in the whole issue of peace and prosperity. So coming from the Hyatt experience, coming from the Iraq and Afghanistan experience, I started thinking about this issue of U.S. development efforts. And then, and had talked to John Hamre actually about it to sort of have him as a sounding board to the thoughts I was developing. John then called and asked me whether I would do this and it gave me an opportunity frankly to learn a lot about the issue and about Washington and about some of the challenges in bringing new ideas to Washington. And as I said in my introduction, I think I'm very encouraged and pleasantly surprised by the results of this effort. And of course now the challenge is how do you actually translate that into action? How do we organize differently? And to my way of thinking, what Carly said is the critical element of it. And that is growth and job creation should be the centerpiece of our development assistance. We should be looking through that prism as we think about the various programs that we should implement. And if we make that a major tactic in our foreign policy strategy, I think we could make a difference and leverage the amount of spending that we're putting into this area. Tom mentioned the 4D's defense diplomacy, democracy and development. And I really believe that development if elevated to that level can make a difference in our foreign policy strategy. So let me stop there and just ask Tom and Vin particularly, so what are the problems? How do you sell this to both legislative and executive branch? Where are the challenges? How do we go about this so that this becomes more than just a report? Well Tom, I would start by stating what is probably the obvious. There's a great deal of skepticism on the part of a lot of people about whether we should be engaged. We're concerned about an economy here that is sluggish at best and has been so ably discussed the concerns about budget. And I think I'd add a third element. There's a tremendous amount of fatigue I think as a result of two wars and experiences around the world that have led a lot of the American people to say we've got to start thinking more about what's going on here. And so I think it starts with addressing those very legitimate concerns and skepticisms. I think there's also, as I attempted to describe, a great deal of concern on the part of the private sector that they've tried this. They've tried to find a way to work with the government or the private sector in many dimensions, whether it's business or NGOs, have all been repelled in various ways. They've not been successful. So I think the real question is how do you get over all that bad experience? And it starts with just a real important lesson in good leadership. Somebody's got to take this issue on. And I would hope the President and his cabinet in a new administration recognizing how critical this is that we are successful. I'd love to see a summit or something where he could bring some of the leaders in the NGO community and the business community together to say, look, we all know our history. We all know the problems we've got in budget. We all know the skepticism that exists about international integration. And yet we all know that our future lies and our success at getting over those obstacles and addressing these challenges in a much more effective way. How do we do it? And will you help me? But it really is going to take that engagement, if I can use the word again, on the part of leaders in the private and the public sector. But I think it's incumbent upon all of us. And it starts with maybe a blueprint, and that's what I think the value of this report is. If we're going to do it, does this make sense? I happen to think it makes perfect sense. But if you all agree, I think the real question is how can we collectively put some fire behind this, some energy behind this and really try to energize those who can make a difference, whether it's Congress, the administration, or leadership in the private sector to get us to the next step. That's really, it seems to me, the fundamental question as we consider the challenge ahead of us. I think that that's exactly it. First of all, there are two real obstacles, this sort of broad obstacles that we face in trying to get policy right. And Tom emphasized one of those, which is that the country is not interested in the rest of the world very much right now. Maybe that's a little too strong, but not too much. I mean, the country is war weary and that translates into all sorts of weariness with America's engagement in the world. It's hard to convince people that American leadership in the world is quite apart from military involvement is important. So you have a, and you could almost see it in the last presidential campaign. We went through the election with very little discussion of foreign policy at all. Occasionally we talked about Iran, but other than that, there was very little discussion of it. And it's partly because I think both parties recognize the country doesn't want to hear about it. They just don't want to hear about it. They're blocking it out. That's an obstacle, not an easy one to overcome. I do think that the NGO community and the business community have to help us to overcome that, because on those issues, politicians are followers of public opinion, not leaders. The average member of Congress maybe should go out and tell his voters what they should care about, but he's more likely to talk to them about what they tell him they care about. But the business community can talk to their employees and the communities in which they're involved, as can NGOs, about the importance of American involvement in the world. And have some credibility and start changing opinion a little bit. The second real obstacle, I think, that we face, which we've talked about a good deal, is the budget problem itself. And in that regard, I'm not talking just about the limitations on resources. In fact, that's not really what I'm talking about. But the fact that this ongoing series of crises has paralyzed the policy formation process in Congress. You talk to people, and I don't want to get into the weeds of Congress too much, but you know, you've got the authorizing committees where policy is supposed to be made, and you've got the budget committee and the appropriations committee where the budget's set and the money's actually spent. All of those authorizers are very frustrated people. They haven't been able to do anything for a couple of years. And believe it or not, most of them Republicans and Democrats would really like to do something positive and constructive. That's why they're there. We need to get past obviously the budget problem, but we also need to try to engage policy makers in doing what they want to do. Think about some of the serious challenges the country faces beyond simply the dollars and cents on a budget ledger. Last point I would make to get back to the question that Tom originally asked me here, although the country and this capital particularly are really, as we hear about, Ad infinitum locked in a very polarized partisan environment. We have gotten past that a little bit on one set of issues, and that was trade issues in the last Congress. We managed to do three trade agreements, and that's not nearly as ambitious an agenda as I would like to see in trade, but it says that there is an appetite that extends into both political parties for U.S. and economic engagement in the world, and I would argue as, to get back to your first point, that ought to be where we begin to think about a broader strategy with trade as a linchpin, but certainly not the entirety of it, for changing the way that our government thinks about its economic relationship with the business and NGO community and approach to the developing world. You know, if I could just add, Tom, I think one of the first steps is to talk to the American people in terms of our own self-interest. Example, it's a fact that we lay out in this report, but it is true that I believe it's 20 of our previous aid recipients are now major trading partners. It is true that one of the bright spots in our economy over the last several years has been export-driven manufacturing growth. In other words, the fact that we are trading with the rest of the world, where actually 96% of the consumers are, is helping create jobs here in the world. So I think there is a very strong and real case that needs to be made, that lifting people out of poverty helps people here at home. The second piece of talking to the American people in terms of our own self-interest is to recognize the devastation that's caused when there is 20, 25, 30, 45, 50% unemployment and people living on less than $2 a day. I will tell just a brief story that my co-chairs have heard me tell too many times, but it goes to Tom Pritzker's point about hope and the devastating effect that hopelessness has on societies. Many years ago, not less than 10 years ago, but I was at a regional Davos Forum in Yassar.


Hi guys, what is up? Welcome to my channel. So for today's video, I'm going to be ranking all of the purple and pink palettes that have recently come out. Just with Valentine's Day being here and spring being on the way, a lot of those purpley pinky palettes just seem to have come out. And I get a lot of questions on, do you prefer this palette or this palette? Or should I pick up this palette or this palette? So hopefully this video answers those questions for you guys because I am ranking from the 7 that I have from my least to my most favorite. Let's get into it. Let me start off by saying that every time I go to film these ranking videos, you guys seem to really love them. I'm constantly getting requested to do them and I'm like, yeah, like, why don't I do more? You guys love them. They're really fun and it comes to the point where I actually need to rank them and I'm like, this is why I don't do it. I'm stressed out. These are amongst the most stressful videos for me to film. And you guys know purple eyeshadows in particular are the end all be all for me. Purple and pink eyeshadows are my favorite eyeshadow colors. So this really was a painful thing for me. You're making me pick for my children. But anyways, I have seven palettes. We're going to start off with number seven. My least favorite of the purple and pink palettes I have released. This one was the easiest one because this palette is not good. This is the Melt Cosmetics Millennial Pinks palette. Let me tell you, I was so excited for this palette to come out. It's super cute. I love Melt Cosmetics. I love the whole aesthetic of their brand and I thought this palette was a pink lovers dream. I love the tones. I was very excited for this color story. I thought it was a pretty unique color story and definitely unique to the Melt line and this palette was awful.  I have a whole review kind of trashing it to be honest. The mattes are weird. They don't really build on each other. They over blend and they blend away. The shimmers are even weirder. They are extremely sheer, extremely crumbly. Get all over your eye and once you've put a sticky enough base down to actually get those crumbles to stick to your eyelid. If you take a blending brush over just to blend it into those mattes, it's game over. The entire look is on your face. I would definitely recommend you check out my video where I tried to make this work. If you're considering this palette, I would recommend you check mine out. Kinky Sweats, she came out with an amazing video to really help you if you needed guidance on how to make this work if you did purchase it. I'm gonna be honest. I don't return makeup very often. I made the decision to purchase it. It's such a waste to return makeup because it gets thrown away. But I have kept this palette in my possession to trash it in this video and it is going back to the store because it is $60 and it is not worth $10. So therefore, this guy's going back. Not good. That was the ETS one. All right. Now these next six is when things start to get harder. So this is number six and it hurts me to put it second to last, but I do have my reasons. It's still a good palette. This is the Colourpop Your Acuity palette. I purchased this from Ulta and it's super cute. It got dirty. First of all, I love Colourpop eyeshadows. I think they are amazing for the price. And when I saw they were coming out with this really pretty purpley pink palette, I jumped on it. It is stunning. I went the day after it released to pick it up at Ulta. If you've seen my Pat McGrath concealer review, I am using this palette and created a really pretty pink look. I was actually wearing the sweater, which by the way, I'm wearing the sweater again. I love it. It's because it's pink and it's warm and it's always so cold. So I like filming with sweaters and this is like my new sweater. So I want to wear it again. It's from H&M. I'll link it down below for you guys. I did find it online. But anyways, check out the video. I did a really pretty pink look for every day and then I used it today for this really pretty purple look. I think this is great for the everyday person who's looking to incorporate these types of tones in their routine. The reason why it ranks number six is because of the formula, which it's a good formula, especially for the price. And I think if you're on a budget because the other palettes after this are quite expensive, this is a great pickup, especially if you don't have these tones and wear them a lot. But just from a makeup reviewer perspective, I do find the shimmers to not really adhere to the lid that well and they have a lot of fallout and can kind of blend away. So you do need to put a sticky base underneath or use the eye shadows wet for the price that I pay for this palette. And I did check. I think it's like $12 right now on sale. So pick it up if you are interested for $12. I can justify that this quality is better than the melt. It just needs a little bit of tweaking here and there to make it work. But for the price point that it's at, it's still better quality than what I would expect. And the colors are gorgeous. I also find the mattes to be a little bit more buildable, which is really nice if you're a makeup beginner because they aren't super pigment packed like some of the ones that I'm going to talk about after. But it's really approachable and very easy to build onto that. I don't know, like I really like this palette. It is not a bad palette, but it's not perfect. So that's why it's in six, but it's still really nice. So if you're eyeing this palette, I do give it a thumbs up. Moving on to number five, this may be one of my most used palettes in this video. However, it's not the most exciting, but number five is the Charlotte Tilbury pillow talk instant eye palette. This is extremely luxurious. Definitely up there in price and here are what the shades look like. Now I do have a full review. I love this palette. It is such an approachable everyday palette. It's more of a warm kind of pink based palette, but it is so stunning. You can create easy everyday looks with this palette. I will say it does kind of pool a little bit more peach as a lot of her shadows do, which I think is a bit odd. But all in all, it still is a pink based palette. So that's why it's in this video. This is such an easy everyday palette. The reason why it's ranking where it is ranking is just because it's a little bit boring and these shadows in this video are so fun. I just feel like you can't get a ton of different looks. There's not much room for creativity, which is not a bad thing if you're using this for everyday. And I do find myself reaching for it all the time. The formula is impeccable. It's just all of the tones are kind of the same here. So you can only get so many looks with this. So that is why it is ranking where it's ranking.  Moving on to number four. We have the Natasha Denona Love Story palette. Now I love this palette. I think it is a really stunning palette. It is a very inspiring and different palette. Just for me, the color story is why it is ranking where it's ranking. And it's still like top four, but it's not my most favorite because I feel like it's a very red palette. I don't really like how red my looks come out when I use this palette. Now, of course, there are other tones that you can use, which is a great thing about this palette that there are so many other tones can get really pretty purple eye looks. But it's odd because it's wearable, but it's also not the most wearable. Just for me, I don't find myself reaching for the tones a lot in this palette, though it is a stunning and inspiring palette with a fabulous formula. It's not an everyday grab for me, but I do really like it. And if this does contain colors that you think you are going to use a lot, fabulous pickup. You will love it. I just think on the eye for me, it pulls to like hot pink or red and I don't really like that color on me. Alright, moving on to number three. I know I'm going to get some hate comments, but I would be lying if I didn't say. This palette impressed me beyond belief and that is the Jeffree Star Bloodlust palette. I know controversial topic, but I want you to go check out my review if you have not because I created some of the most stunning looks with this. The formulation was really incredible and it's just a really gorgeous purple palette.  I tried to put this in my makeup drawers and it is just so obnoxiously awkward and large. Super annoying, but as far as the formulation goes, like first of all, this is not really a wearable palette at all, which normally would push it to the back of my rankings videos, but I just feel so extremely inspired by this palette. I think it is a very complete purple palette. It has so many of the purples that you need to create a full purple look. It plays with other complementary colors that just you wouldn't expect them to go, but they do. So this palette has shades of purple and just other unique shades that I don't have in my collection. First of all, so it has very unique shades in here and I don't have a purple palette that creates these types of tones on my eyes. So it's a unique palette in my collection. The layout of it makes sense to me. The formulation is great and I feel extremely inspired to create so many different looks with this palette. So that is why it's ranking so high. It's just a really great inspiring palette with a really good formula. I think you did a fabulous job with this palette. It's probably one of my favorites in his line. The looks I created, you guys seem to love and I can tell you that I love them. So if you are looking to create very vibrant, unique purple looks, look this way towards this palette. If you're looking to incorporate wearable purple looks into your everyday routine, pass on this one. But it also, but definitely just kind of looking at what we have here. This is the most unique palette in this video. Moving on to number two, we have the Pat McGrath Divine Rose Palette. In the Pat McGrath line, you guys know I'm a Diet Hard Pat McGrath fan, but within the line, this one isn't my favorite. But the more I've had this, the more I find myself reaching for these colors. So if you're looking for more cool tone, mauvey everyday looks, this is the palette for you. The formulation is stunning. You get so many different dimensions with the textures in this palette. Wearable, it's blendable. You can also amp it up for deeper smoky eyes. I just think as far as everyday, I really like it. And then you can also turn it very glam. This is much more mauvey, topi based, so it's so much more wearable than the other palettes, but I really enjoy it. It's a very soft romantic palette and it is going to be restocked March 6th. So make sure you turn on my post notifications because I will update you on my community tab because I know a lot of you are dying to get your hands on this palette and it really is gorgeous. So I really love this. I have a review from a few months ago when this released and I know this palette in particular is the oldest. It's not very new. It came out a couple of months ago, but it was like one very small release and then she finally just did a really big release. So most of you are picking this palette up for the first time recently and also I've just had so many questions comparing this to the other new palettes. So this rings at number two and looking at the other palettes, this one has so much more soft and toned down compared to these other ones. And now we're moving on to number one and honestly, I'm surprised at how high this ranks, but oh my gosh, I love this little guy. This is the Vizier Art Paris Edit Palettes and it like perfectly matches my sweater. Okay, this palette in particular is extremely close to Divine Rose. I've gotten a lot of questions about the two. I swatched them side by side. There definitely are a lot of shades that are almost stupes of each other, but as a whole just kind of side by side comparing, I would say they're sisters, they're not twins. So there's not a lot of shade for shade dupes, but definitely if these were combined into one palette, it would make sense. The Pat McGrath is definitely a little bit more deeper, a little bit more brown based, whereas this one is a little bit more light and airy and pink. So this one is probably the most wearable of the two. The metallics in here are incredible and I just overall really love this palette. These are my type of everyday tones. Just this Couton Piqui Mavie Topi. I absolutely love this palette. I think that the formulation is incredible and it's just an easy everyday palette. This is the way that I like to incorporate pinks and mobs into my everyday routine. The formula is not going to let you down and it also is a very affordable option as far as Vizier Art goes. It is really tiny. You can take it everywhere. Just everything about this palette is what is pushing it to the top for me. I wouldn't necessarily say this is the prettiest palette out of all of these palettes because it's not, but it's just between formulation, price, wearability, inspiration, all of that combined like this definitely scores the highest. It hits so many marks for me. If you are interested in it, definitely check out my review. This has impressed me beyond belief and I think if you are considering it, definitely dive in and get it because it is an amazing palette. Those are all of the purple and pink palettes that have come out recently that I have had the ability to pick up and that is me ranking them, kind of telling you my thoughts on each individual palette and I hope you guys found this helpful. The point of these ranking videos more so is just to help you guys out and I kind of lay out the pros and cons of each palette. So hopefully I helped somebody out. If I did, let me know. So I'll continue making these because they stress me out. Let me tell you. But anyways, thank you guys so much for watching this video. I hope you found it helpful. Let me know your thoughts down below. If you have multiple of these palettes, can you rank them for me? I'm very curious how yours compare to mine. Yeah, that's all we have for today. If you guys are not yet subscribed to my channel, make sure you take the time to do so and hopefully I can get more of these ranking videos out for you and I will see you guys in the next one. Bye guys. Have a good one.


Hey guys, welcome to SSUnity at Susiliside and today we are going to see about the Rank Transformation in Azure Data Factory. So what is Rank Transformation? Use the Rank Transformation to generate an ordered ranking based upon sort condition specified by the user. So this is basically the same thing we have seen in the SQL server Where we are going to generate the rank of any table So the same thing we can see here as well. So that is the rank transformation Next we can use the case sensitive or case insensitive option If sort column is of the type of string on that case, it will be factored into the ranking So basically we could say that if you are going to use the string function in the sort Where you can use the case sensitive or insensitive option. So don't worry for now. We will see that in practical Next option is the dense After that we can see the rank column. So in case of the dense rank, so this will be the same thing If you are going to enable the dense rank by clicking on the checkbox So that we will see The rank column will be the dense ranked Each rank count will be a consecutive number And rank value would not be skipped after a time In case of the rank column It will be going to generate the rank value and the column will be the type of long Then we can see the sort condition So where we can choose the sort condition by which we want to do the sorting So all these we are going to see in the practical. So go to on the Browser and we'll try to implement that So first we can see this employee data new file So this is under the azure blob storage under the input folder So here it is having the data for the employee id employee name salary and department So what we want to do So we just want to create a one more column here and that column will be going to generate the rank So and we want to do the order by On the salary. So for example, if we can See the salary like 5000 is coming one and then we can see the 5000 is coming for the HR department Two times 5000 is coming So on that column we just want to generate the ranking So 5000 is the tie breaker we can say so it will be going to 11 and then next will be the 6000 So 6000 is john So in case of rank that will be three and in case of the dense rank that will be two By which we can calculate the first salary Or the second highest salary. So that we can calculate So go to the azure data factory and we'll try to implement that in practical So here let me go and try to create a new data flow here So under this data flow, let me click on add source and under this We have already created one of the source So we can select that one Employee data So if we can open this and here it is going to point the same location under the ssu testing Then we can see the input folder and the file which is the employee data new.csu file So this is having the same data set now Here we can go in the source option now we can go in the projection So under the projection we can see the employee idea as strings. So this would not be string. This would be integer And the salary salary should be integer as well Now we can go in the data preview and try to refresh it So we will see the data that is available in the source table So here we can see all the data for the it and hr department Next we just want to use the rank so we can click on this plus symbol and after that we can Select the rank here So under this rank here we can see the option For the case insensitive then the dense and the rank column that we were discussing over slide First of all we are going to do the sorting on the basis of Salary so salary is not the string type column So case sensitive or insensitive will not work on that case So here we can see the sort condition. So let me try to select the salary here And we want to do the sorting on the ascending order that is okay After that now we want to create a new rank. We can write the column that is a rank Now go to the data preview and try to refresh it So on that case we will be going to see the rank there directly. So here as we can see the rank So it is going to sort on the basis of salary So here we can see the type record is 5000 and 5000 So rank is one and one for these two and after that we can see the 6000 6000 So this will be going to have three and three So one number is going to skip here because we are using the rank function So this is the property of the rank. So it is going to have the one one And two will be skipped then three three Then four will be skipped then we can see the five six seven seven So this is the rank now we can go in the rank setting And here let me try to select this on dense rank So on that case it will be going to have one one then two two then three So it will not gonna skip any number So that is the property of the dense rank. So here we can see one one then two two then five five five four three So this is basically we can say like If we can sort on this then it will be going to have the same values like one one two two then three four five and five So if you want to see the highest salary on that case On the salary we can do the descending order here And go back to the data preview and try to refresh that So here we will see Which employee is going to get the highest salary? So the rank of that employee will be one And the second highest salary that rank will be two and going forward. So here We can see this one. So the highest salary is nine thousand. So nine thousand salary is getting two employees Tom and Ken. So here we can see the rank one. So we can directly do the filter On this rank. So that will be going to filter if we want to see the second highest salary Then we can fit out by using this rank column with two Going forward for three four and five. So we can do the filter Now let me try to Load this in the sink location. So here we can see the sink. So let me go here Now let me try to use the inline dataset And here we want to load that into the related text file And after that, let me select the link service from here Now go to the Settings and here we need to select the folder by which we want to keep the file So file should be on the output folder And after that first row as header. So we can select that one Then we can see the file name option. So the file name option should be output to single file and the name of the file will be Rank data Now we can go inside the Optimize and need to select the single partition here. Now we can directly publish this So Data flow one will be going to publish In between let me try to create a new pipeline here So this pipeline will be going to execute and Your data flow will be executed So we can use the data flow activity for execution of the data flow that we have created Here we can go in the setting and try to select the Data flow that we have created like data flow one Now let me try to debug it. So go to the output folder of This container So as of now in the output folder, we can see only these two. So one file should be here After executing of this data flow activity under the pipeline So now that is in progress we can see that We can refresh. So here we can see the rank data So under the rank data We could verify that so go to the edit And here we can see like we are having all the ranks As we have seen there. So this is all about the rank transformation. So thank you so much for watching this video See you in the next video