Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: The single best idea and going back over two decades,
Speaker 2: today was one of the most extraordinary shows we've ever done.
Speaker 2: I really want to say we try to do a
Speaker 2: different conversation on technology. We are able to execute that today.
Speaker 2: Mark lehmannan from San Francisco definitive with Citizens JMP decades
Speaker 2: of work in the society of San Francisco in Silicon
Speaker 2: Valley and what they're doing. Perfect. To have him in
Speaker 2: today with Facebook Meta and with Microsoft as well. Then
Speaker 2: to have our Ana Agarana and men Deep Singh with
Speaker 2: this was just brilliant. Aul Trump by two vice chairman
Speaker 2: with US today. Lal Brainer will get to in a
Speaker 2: moment at Harvard, but here with Columbia Universe in PIMCO
Speaker 2: is a former vice chairman of the FED. Richard Clarita
Speaker 2: on when you cut rates, do you establish a trend
Speaker 2: or can you do a one off?
Speaker 1: If you go back to when Tom, you and I
Speaker 1: start our careers in the eighties with Vulgar, Vulgar would
Speaker 1: never give you an indication of where rates were going
Speaker 1: to be in years. It was one meeting at a
Speaker 1: time and for the first half of Green span. It
Speaker 1: was one meeting then at a time. This is really important, folks. Well,
Speaker 1: two things happened. The academic literature to which I contributed
Speaker 1: said there can be benefits to providing guidance on their
Speaker 1: rate path, and so I think policymakers fall in love
Speaker 1: with that idea. They doubled down on it when we
Speaker 1: hit the zero lower bound, and it made sense to
Speaker 1: do that. But one of the points I make in
Speaker 1: the paper that you nicely plugged, Tom, is that monetary
Speaker 1: policy is not immune from the laws of economics. There
Speaker 1: are benefits and costs to decisions, and there are benefits
Speaker 1: in cost and diminishing. And I think you raise a
Speaker 1: very good point. We could be in a different world
Speaker 1: if basically the FED and other central banks said, you know,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of uncertain we're gonna do one meeting
Speaker 1: at a time.
Speaker 2: Bottle it. I can't say enough about that answer on this.
Speaker 2: I feel very strongly about this, folks. They are completely
Speaker 2: awetted to the belief. And in physics, if you will,
Speaker 2: an inertial force of starting a trend, either rates higher
Speaker 2: or rates lower doesn't matter, And maybe the efficacy of
Speaker 2: a one off right now would be an interesting idea
Speaker 2: for people like Lyle Brainerd and Richard Claire to the
Speaker 2: others to study at least or ponder as well Richard
Speaker 2: Clare to their PIMCO. The paper he mentioned is just
Speaker 2: out from the National Bureau of Economic Research NBER. I'll
Speaker 2: try to get that this weekend out on Twitter and
Speaker 2: linked in. Low Brainerd with the same exquisite economics as Clarida,
Speaker 2: but different She's at Harvard out of Wesleyan. She had
Speaker 2: an honorary degree from Wesleyan at their commencement in May.
Speaker 2: Lyle Brainerd and here on Trump vessent economics.
Speaker 3: I would say what is clear to me, because I
Speaker 3: have been listening carefully to the Treasury Secretary and the President,
Speaker 3: is that they see tariffs as a way of raising revenues,
Speaker 3: and they have a very aggressive revenue target for tariffs.
Speaker 3: They want to raise hundreds of billions three hundred billion
Speaker 3: dollars a year in tariff revenues, which is an order
Speaker 3: of magnitude larger than what we have seen recently. And
Speaker 3: that means that tariff rates have to be at those
Speaker 3: high smooth Hawley levels with the attendant potential effects on
Speaker 3: the labor market. And we've already seen substantial slowing in
Speaker 3: the second quarter in terms of underlying private domestic final demand.
Speaker 3: Consumers look like they are feeling a little bit cautious.
Speaker 3: We can see that even in today's personal consumption expenditures data,
Speaker 3: which really was very modest growth. So yes, I do
Speaker 3: believe there's some risk that by trying to achieve those
Speaker 3: very aggressive tariff revenue goals, they really are putting a
Speaker 3: big dampener on what could be a very dynamic and
Speaker 3: exciting period in American growth.
Speaker 2: The dynamic and exciting period is maybe the path to
Speaker 2: Jackson Hall, Lisa Branwinson. I will be out there for
Speaker 2: the festivities. Low brainerd is it? Harvard? I can't emphasize
Speaker 2: enough the work that's being done right now on tariffs.
Speaker 2: Whatever your politics, whatever the pro Trump anti prompt is
Speaker 2: that the other thing, this is an absolutely unique time
Speaker 2: for any of us living today. On our podcast on
Speaker 2: Apple Music, on Spotify, on YouTube podcasts, this is a
Speaker 2: single best idea
Speaker 3: Sen