i am emily chang in san francisco. trade tensions tighten. china retaliates by vowing to slash tariffs and president trump signals that he's prepared to escalate. we will tell you about u.s. tech stocks taking a hit. plus, vmware has agreed to buy carbon black and pivotal in the largest ever deal. why those deals sent shares

tumbling. and a new u.s. cyber agency says priority number one, countering threats from china. how it plans to keep the tech supply chain safe. first, ramping up the trade war. eared down onmp b china in a series of tweets, writing in part, the vast amounts of money made and stolen by china in the united states for decades will and must stop. our american companies are ordered to start looking for an alternative to china. for more i want to bring in sarah mcgregor, who has been following the back and forth. talk to us about this new round of tariffs, soybeans, cars, oil. who will be hit hardest if these go into effect, and how? >> the fact that china is retaliating -- when the trump

administration announced these new tariffs, china said, we will respond. $75 billion worth of u.s. imports isn't a huge number, but politically sensitive products, things like agriculture, cars, it hit some of those states where they produce these items where trump has his support base. emily: sarah -- hang on a moment. trump just mentioned, said he's going to respond, and he has on twitter. we've got a series of tweets. he said china and many other countries have been taking advantage of the u.s. on trade and much more. our country has been losing hundreds of billions of dollars a year to china. past administrations have allowed china to get so far ahead that it has become a great

burden to the american taxpayer. i can no longer allow this to happen. this very unfair trading relationship. china should not have put new tariffs on u.s. products. starting october 1, the $250 25%ion of good taxed at will be taxed at 30%. taxedmaining goods being from september 1 at 10% will be taxed at 15%. all right. heightening, escalating the tariffs, raising the tariffs on different batches of goods. break that down for us. analystse spoke with today, a lot of them did expect that when trump said he would respond, it would be through higher tariff rates. he's just ordered that.

it is a bit surprising because china has always retaliated. the fact that trump is enraged by the fact that beijing is moving forward to its own response from a provocation by the u.s. is a response itself. where trump didn't go are the more worst-case scenarios, cutting off investment or restricting access to the stock market, or making it harder for u.s. companies to do business in china, so i think there might be a sigh of relief, but still, we've heard time and again, u.s. importers are paying those tariffs. lot of upsetbly a executives. emily: and several u.s. stocks ended the day significantly lower, dropping after china's announcement of the retaliatory tariffs. talk to us about who is going to feel this pain. when you look at the tariffs

coming from china on u.s. goods, you are looking at soybeans, cars, oil, not tech goods. >> it is important from what we've read from the tweets, he didn't mention the second batch of tariffs that is taking effect on september 15, which as we know are those tech goods. apple products and whatnot. it looks like those products might still be spared. but it is a roller coaster from day-to-day. really just constantly escalating this trade war. we had larry kudlow saying they've made progress. d.c.still plan to meet in and have high-level talks. the actions certainly seem to suggest that things are getting worse. emily: you are correct in that. september 1, the batch of goods he says will go from 10% to 15%,

that includes apple air pods, the apple watch, but you have to go all the way to december to get to the iphone. he didn't mention that batch of products. there's four months between now and then. at this point, we are only seeing ratcheting up on both sides. are these talks even going to happen? >> it is really hard, what they are even going to have to talk about. ask, the only one thing it really wants from the u.s., is for the tariffs to go away. neweem to just here announcements of things going up. it is hard to imagine how china is going to feel like it is going to get its end of the bargain met. their expectation was once at least a veneer of a deal, and now they are completely taking

that off the table. perhaps the talks can progress at a snails pace, but it looks like the chances of a deal seem to be further and further apart. emily: what are the messages you are getting from inside the administration? we've historically seen the president the a bit more rash, a bit more extreme, and then his officials try to water down what he has said. here you have essentially a formal announcement that tariffs are going up. is the entire administration on side? >> i think it is the personal role that trump is taking in in that he is tweeting these pronouncements. early in the process, it was led by u.s. pr. official notices would go out. it was a more methodical process. we would hear that companies had

been called ahead of time. tweets like today, that sort of suggests a more rapidfire approach. it seems almost that the trump administration did make this up a bit more on the fly. but the decision really came down to trump and he sent that out in a tweet. emily: and we are going into the weekend now in asia. i also want to bring in peter, our economics editor. you've been following this as well. what is your take on the president announcing new rounds of tariffs in addition to china's retaliatory tariffs announced this morning? retaliate forina the retaliation against the retaliation against the retaliation?

really it has gotten to the silly stage here where the tit for tat keeps going on and on with no end in sight. that is why i think the markets took it so badly today. even before markets closed in new york. they are probably not going to take it to well. it just adds to the evidence that trump is determined to get the last word. unfortunately so is president xi jinping. emily: what do you imagine, peter, will be the next move by president xi. >> the straightforward thing would be to match. the chinese are not trying to get ahead of the u.s. on tariffs, but to respond in kind. wouldy kept that up, they

slightly notch higher there tariffs they just announced. it could be that they will try something a little different, something to do -- i know your show is about tech. maybe they will find some reprisal against u.s. tech companies equivalent to the u.s. actions against huawei. look forwords, may some other mechanism for retaliating at this stage. emily: it is hard not to think about apple, a company that got 20% of its revenue from china. if you think about it, given the trade deficit, china just can't tax half as many goods as the u.s. can tax coming from china, given how many goods we bring in to this country. correct? mike: correct.

peter: correct. you are hitting the ones that you don't need very much, so you are not going to file a lot of pain from them. the u.s. is basically putting tariffs on almost everything that comes from china. it is hitting things that do hurt the u.s. much more. tim cook met president trump for dinner at his golf course in bedminster saying, you realize this is going to hurt u.s. companies. product will be subject to tariffs and sam sums won't. did seemnk that trump to acknowledge that was an issue, but not just for apple, for a lot of american companies and american consumers. emily: peter and serra, hang on. -- who coversg in

a number of different tech companies, has covered apple for a really long time, and ian king. you have been saying time and again that you didn't think these tariffs would ever hit apple products. would you say the same thing right now? >> plywood. i don't think much has changed. this 5% to 10% that apple products will be tariff, and -- if theook' probability was zero, they would not meet. but it is important to understand the purpose of the tariffs, to have a negative impact on china. in the case of apple, they haven't really scoped out what exact products. products,f on apple that would have a negative impact on the u.s., arguably the

world's greatest company, and a symbol of the strength of the u.s. it seems illogical that that is what the trump would want to do. i think it is still a low probability. i think that line of thinking is going to be a minority because there is so much in motion, so much speculation. i think it is going to be hard for investors to have clearheaded thinking. emily: ian, would you agree? >> i don't think so. in the electronics industry, china is the biggest market. gene is talking about apple. huawei focused on their domestic market and took market share away from everybody else. there's plenty of unintended consequences. you can argue whether one

particular product or component will be the subject or not. the overall impact is undoubtedly negative. that is why you've seen -- emily: even if apple's products aren't tariffed, it will affect apple in your view and mark -- your view? >> the longer this goes on, china has to think about, how can we get by without the u.s., without u.s. phones, u.s. components, screens, whatever is being supplied. e, how do you respond to that? the president did demand that u.s. companies start looking for alternatives to china and apple has a huge supply chain in china and also sells into the china market and may not really have a plan b. >> my first response is they need to clarify that if there

was a prolonged trade dispute, all companies are going to be negatively impacted. i don't think apple products are going to be directly tariffed. the bigger question is, will china create tariffs on its side that impact apple products? that would be, in my opinion, not a politically smart move. i think it would hit at the heart of -- that could cause an overreaction, if possible, from the administration. there is a way to try to see some insight in terms of how the chinese government thinks about this, and this is something we've been monitoring on china online media. the messaging -- i haven't checked as of today, but the messaging has been relatively neutral to slightly supportive of apple. what that tells you is that if there was going to be a move, if

china would tariff apple products in china, have a negative impact, if that was going to happen, i think it would be out of the blue at this point, given they've had a direction and a they seem to be more in a neutral direction. ian, you cover chips. chips took a really hard hit today even before the president announced new tariffs on the chinese, taxing soybeans, oil, cars. why is that? >> we are seeing politics as the driving force in the decision-making process. our reporters in washington would back me up on that. what i'm hearing is that it is obvious to them that the implementation methods, the

mechanisms that are being used to implement these tariffs, are somewhat haphazard. there has not been a tremendous amount of forethought. a lot of the companies have been running to washington to say, if you do that, this is going to happen. the problem that everybody is facing is you have these competing things, where everybody needs to get along, versus the political drive to win. mcgregor, what do you make of this idea that , very unlikelys they will ever be tariffed at all? >> i think if you look at the fact that tim cook really has a direct line to trump, he had dinner with trump, and we saw

the conciliatory tweet from , it seems like there's some influence there. company such a large and they have that personal relationship and we know how much trump values a personal relationship from his businessperson past. i think apple does have a chance in that regard. if you just compare that with other countries, some of these smaller companies are feeling the heat from this. they do not have the same sort of lobbying impact and the trump administration does believe china gets hit by these tariffs, not the u.s. importers. time and time again, we've heard from everyone that we are the ones being hit by this. emily: the president made a lot of tim cook just calling him on the phone. first there's dinner and then

there's tim cook picking up the phone. he appreciates that. if you are tim cook, you are probably putting your head in your hands. are you thinking about plan b? >> plan b is complicated. one thing i want to emphasize is it gets overlooked during days like today. china is an opportunity for apple. contemplate plan b, this is 17% of the world's gdp. maybe that declines, maybe it increases. pass, germany, france, right around 5%, pretty big step down. ,ny plan that is in the mix that is one of the things that tim cook has been brilliant at,

this ability to manage the company over a decade, and i think that ultimately that is the plan b, so what does that mean -- i don't think it means a retreat from china. i don't think it could mean some diversification in terms of manufacturing. but i think they will continue to work aggressively to sell products in china. emily: what about the companies that aren't apple, that don't president? with the which companies are they and what are they doing? >> absolutely right. chipmaker.ike the of 5gs an essential part phone networks. government decides to go after that company that makes an essential component,

they have little or no opportunity to have a say in this. companies of that ilk are in a really tough spot. that is what the market is dealing with. emily: huawei is the leader in 5g. if we are not buying parts from huawei and some of these other companies that make 5g products are getting hurt, does that hurt the u.s. ability to become a leader in 5g? arena of we are in the unintended consequences. on the one hand, you want to hold back huawei. on the other hand, you want 5g to flourish. 5gyou are qualcomm, you want to be everywhere in the world. you want people to be using those services. complicatedrmously situation and one that can't really be adjudicated easily by a tweet.

guestsgene, we've asked time and again who wins and who loses in this trade war and something we hear frequently is nobody wins. would you agree in this trade war nobody wins? ultimately that is the case. comparative advantage is something i believe in. i think countries should specialize. ultimately trade is a blunt tool. nobody wins. , in a cased try to for clearheaded thinking, i would try to think about what the purpose of tariffs are. there is a negative impact on the competitor, if you will, in this case, china, and in that case, no one is the winner here, but china probably has more to lose.

emily: sara, we are getting some headlines about how these tariffs will be implemented. tell us what that means. >> this is part of a more formal process that goes back to the so-called 301 investigation, when the u.s. created the justification for putting these china'sin place on accused theft of intellectual property. it looks like they are going to have a public comment and go through procedural steps to make sure they are able to raise these tariffs. we are talking about the business reaction potentially to this. no one really woke up this morning expecting this. it is hard to imagine that it could have just escalated, a company paying a certain tariff that was already causing pain,

is now going to have to think about 30% suddenly, throw out their plans for the weekend so they can redraw their financials. i think the trump administration hasn't necessarily withdrawn from a plan altogether from these public comments. it will be little solace to businesses that really had no idea there would be any escalation of this scale. in washington who covers trade for us, in new york, given the escalation on both sides, how much hope do you have that these talks will actually restart in september? have, thats won't this won't continue to escalate? >> larry kudlow is one of the

doves in the white house. he is the one who wants the talks to happen. he said there was a productive, constructive conference call between deputies this week, and he said the chinese want to come to washington in september for talks that could lead eventually to a meeting of the principles. the chinese may decide that is off the table now just because they don't see a path forward. meeting inre is a september, it wouldn't be -- i doubt it would be trump and xi getting together at this stage. it would take a lot of arrangements between the lower-level people to get anywhere close to having the two heads of state in a room shake hands on a deal.

i think we are a long way from that. emily: we are going to continue to follow the headlines as they come in. sarah mcgregor and peter coy, gene munster, thank you all for joining us again. newident trump announcing rounds of tariffs, one set on october 1, $250 billion worth of u.s. goods, the 25% tariff will 1,e to 30%, and on september $300 billion worth of chinese goods, those tariffs at 10%, that will rise to 15%. coming up, more on trade. we will tell you what it all means, coming up. this is bloomberg. ♪

at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.

emily: this is bloomberg technology. i'm emily chang. in the last half-hour, president trump announced he is raising tariffs further on chinese imports, coming in response to beijing which earlier friday threatened to impose an additional tariff on $75 billion of american goods, causing u.s. stocks to slump. the s&p 500 sank 2.5%, the dow stumbled 700 points. apple, micron, the tech companies hardest hit. joining us to discuss, taylor riggs. these companies are feeling the pain before this new round of

tariffs announced by president trump. what is happening after hours? taylor: we came in this morning and thought jay powell would take the stage. we were upended when china announced their tariffs. in the last hour or so with the trump tweets coming up, an interesting day. we are looking at four straight weeks of losses for the dow, s&p and nasdaq composite. as we take a look at some of the domestically focused companies, we thought for so long the russell 2000 or the companies not having exposure to some of the drama that is happening internationally, that those would outperform. that has not been the case. you can see the opera performance of the small caps relative to the s&p 500, the opera performance has declined wiping out all of the losses going back to 2009. what we keep hearing is some of the small-cap companies do not have the leverage or supply chains that the large-cap

companies have. they have to absorb higher tariffs, higher costs. they don't have the leverage to pass that on to the consumer. some of the small-cap stocks getting hit pretty hard. emily: an interesting friend happening in that chinese tech companies are not necessarily feeling the pain as much as u.s. tech companies. explain that to us. taylor: yes, this is a very interesting phenomenon. usually, when we look at the that trades.s. etf during u.s. hours. relative to the qqq, the u.s. tech focused stocks, usually you see u.s. stocks outperforming chinese tech when you get these trade headlines that have been going on. that has not been the case actually. the opposite has been happening. i'm trying to find the terminal here if you bear with me. you can see in the last two

days, if you come into my terminal, the chinese tech stocks have been outperforming. what we hear is the tariffs today have been one-sided focused. china had retaliated. we don't know the impact yet on the american companies. we are worried that china could hit some of these individual tech companies harder. china'seast for now, tech companies have been outperforming which is a very interesting phenomenon and not something we typically see. there has been a lot of concern within the chipmakers, the boom and bust cycle where you are excited about 5g. and then we have these trade headlines and then you get nervous all over again. emily: casts doubt on something we have been hearing that no one wins in a trade war. you have been looking closely at semiconductors and what has been happening there. qualcomm, amd, micron had a tough day. plenty of chip companies we

rarely talk about. taylor: these are companies that get up to 60% of the revenue from china. certainly, very pressured. we were talking with mike regan, an editor at bloomberg. he was saying there was such a boom and bust cycle, these companies get excited for 5g but in the course of these headlines it erases all of that. all the chipmakers are talking qualcomm, amd, trading with the separate news of the ftc. all of these companies, 70% comes from china. changing the supply chains is not some thing that happens overnight. if you have a president that comes out and orders these companies to move back home, get out of china -- that could take months or quarters to shift those supply chains. for the chipmakers, it is not possible for them to exit china altogether. you are getting the chip sector,

huge moves as they bear the brunt of all these headlines. emily: it is friday afternoon, evening in the u.s. it is the weekend in beijing. what should we be preparing for on monday? taylor: i think over the weekend, see how china takes this news in stride. i'm eager to see 5:00 p.m. sunday night, 7 p.m. sunday night, 9 p.m. sunday night in new york when china trading starts opening i. if it reverberates and starts panicking again through china's opening bell, our sunday night, their monday morning. after days like this, how much of this is a buying opportunity because now 3% cheaper than relatively we were a few hours ago. or if it is a cause for concern because we are one tweet away

from another 3% decline. andink we take a step back wait to see how that asia trading opens up. if the past is any indicator, it likely will not be pretty sunday night in new york. emily: an uneasy weekend for investors. taylor riggs, thank you so much for that update. sticking with the markets, harvard university economist says political turmoil in hong kong could turn out to be a tipping point for the world economy. take a listen. are not segmented regional effects. these have global consequences. what could be a tipping point that could trigger a very significant global slowdown, even a recession. emily: the protests have problems for social media companies as they tackle misinformation on the platforms. google disabled 212 youtube channels involved in coordinated action around the hong kong

protest, days after twitter blocked hundreds of accounts from the chinese government. all three platforms are blocked in mainland china. joining us to discuss danny o'brien and sarah friar and mark bergen. as the trade war rages on, danny, beijing has this situation in hong kong where the protests continue to go on for days and weeks and months, what do you make of the fact the chinese government is devoting some amount of resources to disinformation about those protests on social media platforms that are blocked in mainland china? danny: this is the world we live in right now. all states now practice some level of influencing opinion. i think it is significant that the chinese government is seeking in these interventions to influence world opinion more

than anything else because one of the things you have to bear in mind is one of the consequences of these social media services being blocked in china is that no voice of mainland china is being heard on those systems either. there is already an imbalance. what we see with social media sites intervening in this way is more shifts. it is one of those things where a business decision is going to have geopolitical consequences, but is it writing the scale or shifting it in an unnatural direction? emily: we had a china expert earlier on this week that was surprised the chinese government would spend some time on this. that it was perhaps an admission of some kind of defeat or desperation. sarah, talk to us about the aftermath of these revelations from twitter and facebook and what the companies have been doing, because they are not used to tackling disinformation from

china. russia and iran is a neone thing. sarah: this is the first time we have seen a broad takedown of misinformation coming from china. i think what is really important to keep in mind is what facebook, twitter and google did is it is not the misinformation they are upset with here. it is the chinese government backed these bot accounts, inauthentic behavior as they call it. where people were trying to immerse themselves in conversations pretending to be someone else, not representing themselves as representatives of the chinese government. that's really where the companies get involved. they do not get involved in the government having their say. we reported this week that twitter has been helping chinese officials get verified and promote their messages on twitter to countries outside of mainland china. emily: so many fascinating

dynamics at play. what is interesting about the difference in the response with between google and facebook and twitter is that twitter said they would stop taking ads from state backed media companies, whereas google said they will continue to take the money. mark: i believe facebook as well. google and facebook -- google is obviously in china. facebook has been trying to get back in. the companies have both been operating significant advertising business is where they take money from major chinese companies, huawei, lenovo. they spent outside of china. that has clearly been a growing market. the companies have not talked about it much, especially in google's case with the political toxic relationship with china, they are saying nothing. very bare-bones. we took down these accounts based on patterns we saw that facebook and twitter recognized. emily: how effective are these campaigns by the chinese government? danny: really good question. first of all, campaigns like

this are extremely cheap. they use bots, or at least collectively operated accounts. which means you could get into the thousands without really having to lift a finger. it is a bit like spam. as far as the state operation goes, this is not a huge involvement. the next question is how effective are a bunch of people all saying the same thing at exactly the same time? i think it is ineffective in convincing anyone, but it may help disrupt the communications of pro-hong kong voices who, in the same way as any twitter or facebook conversation will suddenly have a bunch of people saying the opposite thing and descent of isaac anybody from taking part. emily: an interesting trend where there has been a conspiracy theory among the mainland chinese that given we are in the middle of a trade war that the u.s. is influencing the

hong kong protests and the hong kong protest movement. do you think we will see more of this kind of disinformation on u.s. platforms by the chinese government? especially on the other side, we are in an overheating trade war. danny: i think this becomes increasingly geopolitical and so does the response. one of the things the social media companies desperately want to keep out of is any kind of political fight or any implication they are one side or the other. it is a trade fight between china, a place that blocks them, and the u.s. which is their home-based. it is inevitable that what they do will be seen through a political lens. emily: all right, danny o'brien of the electronic frontier foundation, thank you for sharing your thoughts. sarah frier, mark bergen, thank you both as well. coming up, china's cyber rich. how a new federal agency is looking to make sure the u.s. is

protected from beijing and says tackling threats from china is their top priority. we will discuss that next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: while the u.s. keeps ratcheting up the heat on china in the trade war, a new u.s. cyber agency is targeting beijing. the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency known as the cisas says china represents the greatest strategic risk to the u.s., therefore the agency's top priority is to guard against tech supply chain risks coming out of china. to discuss, bloomberg cybersecurity reporter william. we also have ryan, the executive vice president of the cyber security firm proof point. what does this mean?

how does this agency intend to protect the u.s. tech supply chain from china's threat? william: we heard from the director yesterday who outlined the agency strategy for the next five years. president trump signed the law that created this agency that sits inside the dhs. it did not really start to get going until february 2019 because of the shutdown. now, they are planning with the agency is going to do. they said china is the top threat. what does that mean? it is hard to know because cisa does not have a lot of power to force anybody to do anything. a collaborative agency where they will help partners communicate and share information and implement best practices. emily: so, ryan, how big a threat -- we have talked about cybersecurity threats from china before, but especially as trade tensions ratchet up. you have this boiling situation

in hong kong. how does that change the threat level coming from china? ryan: it cannot help but to raise it. china has always played a long game when it comes to their cyber capabilities. they are in information warfare now not only in the western world, but also chinese language platforms like wechat. emily: you are saying they are doing the same things they are doing on a smaller scale on facebook and twitter and youtube, but on wechat and other platforms? ryan: exactly. they have been doing it for a long time. strategicenter the influence for china, they do things like support the belt and road initiative and the massive objective for the chinese nation, and use all of their capabilities to bring those things to bear. emily: william, talk to us more about cisa and what else they do because they are not just responsible for combating threats from china and protecting u.s. tech companies,

but power grids, u.s. infrastructure and election systems as we head into a presidential election. william: you are exactly right. when the director presented the strategy for the agency yesterday, he said he spent 50% of his time thinking about election security. they are doing interesting stuff in this area. they are offering audits to companies who make these voting systems to check the security of the voting systems. they are also working with state and local governments to ensure the security of their election system. emily: so, ryan, talk to us about how effective using an agency like this could actually be right now, with all of these geopolitical uncertainties. ryan: it is really tough given they don't have too much official power. you have seen the u.s. government take very different decisions lately. one of which is releasing nationstate malware on a total which is public and the entire

security community can draw from to protect against the. they released north korean malware earlier this week. we have seen the aperture opened in terms of what the u.s. government thinks is acceptable. all the election security front, a lot of the systems that we work formerly assured were not connected to the internet do in fact appear to be connected to the internet. that is a sort of thing an agency like this could help states fix. emily: how do you think u.s. cyber defense and offense compares to china? cyber defense and offense. ryan: i think we are still number one in the world in that department, but a lot less is published about u.s. capabilities given that cybersecurity vendors are based in the u.s. and do not write about u.s. government tooling. classically. is concern but is following the rule of law. we have lawyers, processes. cyber command has changed the

guidelines in the trump administration but it is a profound difference from how other nations are allowed to operate. emily: we can imagine there is a lot of activity on cyberspace now. ryan kalember and william turton, thank you. president trump says he is raising tariffs further on chinese imports in response to beijing's retaliation earlier. we will continue this conversation on what this means for u.s. tech, next. ♪

emily: the u.s. is turning up the heat on china again. president from announcing that duties on $250 billion on imports will rise to 30% from 25% on october 1. he said the remaining $300 billion in chinese imports will be taxed at 15% instead of 10% which will take effect september 1. joining us now is a senior fellow with the asia society,

isaac stone fish. what is your reaction? isaac: wow. my reaction is wow. i don't think many people were expecting this escalation. i certainly wasn't. i think it is forcing us to think more creatively about what could happen in the future. it does seem increasingly like this is not going to be settled really any time in the next couple months, perhaps not even before the election. i think trump is really taking the madman theory to heart and showing there is a lot on the table that he is willing to push on. emily: you studied the relationship between the u.s. and china for a very long time. there certainly has not been this kind of disruption in that relationship for decades. how do you think what is happening right now would historically be viewed in terms of u.s.-china relations? isaac: great question.

it is hard to know what the effect of this is going to be. impossible to know. i think the view now -- the view before today, because today does feel quite extreme, is that people don't appreciate the method by which trump is pushing china but they do appreciate he is breaking out of the box that passed u.s. presidents have kept the u.s.-china relationship. i think the worry we have today increasingly is that trump is not thinking this through at all, and is acting quite impulsively and is really opening the floodgates to things getting much worse. i think just ordering u.s. companies to leave china is a pretty striking remark, to say the least. emily: ordering them to find an alternative. he is also putting his presidential candidates in an interesting position, forcing them to inevitably take a position on china as this

campaign draws out. what do they do and that pigment -- in that predicament? isaac: perhaps we should give him credit for the strategic nature of that. before, it felt like democratic presidential candidates had to be more prolabor and tougher on china and doing more to say at least that they are bringing jobs back to the united states. but it is really hard to be more extreme than this and maintain a sense of credibility about one's trade and economic policies. i think you will have a lot of late-night brainstorming sessions among the advisors of some of the democratic candidates as they try to figure out how do you critique a policy like this? emily: what is happening in beijing right now? isaac: probably similar to what is happening right now. shock, bemusement, perhaps a

little bit of fear. theyld be surprised if were less surprised than i am. tweets,ell, in four president from announcing two new rounds of tariffs on chinese goods, this after the chinese government retaliated on u.s. tariffs with another round of tariffs earlier this morning on u.s. goods. it will be a long weekend. isaac stone fish, senior fellow at the asia society, thank you for calling in. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. we are livestreaming on twitter. check us out. follow or global breaking news network, tictoc, on twitter as well. it is friday. enjoy your weekend. keep watching the news. we will be back here on monday. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪

from the 5am wakers, to the 6am sleepers. everyone uses their phone differently and in different places. that's why xfinity mobile created a wireless network that auto connects you to millions of secure wifi hot spots. and the best lte everywhere else. xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. click, call or visit a store today.

david: so you started your own company at what age? john: i was 24. david: where did you get the money to capitalize it? john: my mom gave me everything she had that was liquid. my dad gave what he thought he could afford to lose. david: one of the boards you are on is mcdonald's and it is said you eat mcdonald's every day. is that true? john: just about every day. david: in chicago, did you ever play basketball with barack obama? john: several times. david: is he that good a player? john: he's a very good player.