WEBVTT - 47: Looking Back on President Trump's First Six Months

0:00:00.240 --> 0:00:02.920
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Benchmark is brought to you by Stage Summit, the

0:00:02.920 --> 0:00:06.760
<v Speaker 1>world's largest gathering of small and medium businesses, featuring Sir

0:00:06.880 --> 0:00:12.040
<v Speaker 1>Richard Branson July in Chicago. Register with promo code business

0:00:12.119 --> 0:00:17.800
<v Speaker 1>at stage summit dot com for just It's July. Today

0:00:18.000 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 1>also happens to be exactly six months since Donald Trump

0:00:21.440 --> 0:00:32.000
<v Speaker 1>took office as forty president of the United States of America. Hello,

0:00:32.080 --> 0:00:35.720
<v Speaker 1>and welcome back to the Bloomberg Benchmark podcast. It's July.

0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:41.720
<v Speaker 1>I'm Scott landman and economics editor at Bloomberg News in Washington,

0:00:41.960 --> 0:00:44.280
<v Speaker 1>and I'm Kate Smith, an editor here with Bloomberg in

0:00:44.360 --> 0:00:47.960
<v Speaker 1>New York. This week, with the Republican Convention going on

0:00:48.040 --> 0:00:51.199
<v Speaker 1>in Cleveland and Donald Trump close with Hillary Clinton in

0:00:51.240 --> 0:00:54.600
<v Speaker 1>the polls, we've decided to ask the question what would

0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:57.920
<v Speaker 1>the U. S economy look like if Trump were elected president?

0:00:58.000 --> 0:01:00.040
<v Speaker 1>And it's a great question. In fact, it's such a

0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:01.760
<v Speaker 1>good question that we don't want to just sit here

0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:04.920
<v Speaker 1>and speculate about what could it be like. No, this

0:01:05.000 --> 0:01:06.840
<v Speaker 1>is going to be a first for us. We are

0:01:06.920 --> 0:01:10.960
<v Speaker 1>actually going to take the Bloomberg time Machine one year

0:01:11.080 --> 0:01:15.320
<v Speaker 1>into the future to July and listen to our show

0:01:15.360 --> 0:01:18.520
<v Speaker 1>about how things have gone during Trump's first six months

0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:22.440
<v Speaker 1>as president. Are you ready, Kate? I am all right,

0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:30.679
<v Speaker 1>here we go. Hello and welcome back to the Bloomberg

0:01:30.720 --> 0:01:37.280
<v Speaker 1>Benchmark Podcast. It's July. I'm Scott Lanman, and economics editor

0:01:37.319 --> 0:01:39.840
<v Speaker 1>at Bloomberg News in Washington, and I'm Kate Smith, an

0:01:39.920 --> 0:01:42.479
<v Speaker 1>editor with Bloomberg News in New York. So, Kate, what's

0:01:42.520 --> 0:01:45.040
<v Speaker 1>new on the Pokemon beat. Well, things have just kept

0:01:45.080 --> 0:01:47.560
<v Speaker 1>getting more and more interesting since I took over the

0:01:47.600 --> 0:01:50.520
<v Speaker 1>Pokemon desk back last fall. So now there are one

0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:54.400
<v Speaker 1>point five billion people playing the game worldwide, and Nintendo's

0:01:54.400 --> 0:01:57.080
<v Speaker 1>market value passed Apple two months ago to become number

0:01:57.120 --> 0:01:59.480
<v Speaker 1>one in the world. So the Group of twenty has

0:01:59.480 --> 0:02:02.200
<v Speaker 1>actually add a Pokemon as an official agenda topic for

0:02:02.280 --> 0:02:05.080
<v Speaker 1>next month's meeting of the Finance ministers in Germany, and

0:02:05.200 --> 0:02:08.680
<v Speaker 1>there's even talk that policymakers planned to urge Nintendo to

0:02:08.680 --> 0:02:12.440
<v Speaker 1>step up its development of Pokemon updates to stimulate global growth.

0:02:12.760 --> 0:02:16.200
<v Speaker 1>It's just fascinating, unbelievable. I can't believe it's been one

0:02:16.280 --> 0:02:19.360
<v Speaker 1>year since this phenomenon took hold and began changing the

0:02:19.360 --> 0:02:22.600
<v Speaker 1>way we go about our daily lives and work. Here

0:02:22.600 --> 0:02:25.519
<v Speaker 1>has really changed since Bloomberg limited our Pokemon playing to

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:28.919
<v Speaker 1>only one hour a day in the office. It's really tough.

0:02:29.400 --> 0:02:31.440
<v Speaker 1>It is tough. But to be honest, you know, in

0:02:31.600 --> 0:02:33.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, speaking to other people, we're the lucky ones

0:02:33.520 --> 0:02:36.080
<v Speaker 1>have heard that a lot of employers have actually limited

0:02:36.080 --> 0:02:38.240
<v Speaker 1>it to thirty minutes of play a day. But you

0:02:38.240 --> 0:02:40.360
<v Speaker 1>know what, anyway, we're here to talk about something way

0:02:40.360 --> 0:02:44.000
<v Speaker 1>more interesting than Pokemon somehow. Today also happens to be

0:02:44.080 --> 0:02:47.360
<v Speaker 1>exactly six months since Donald Trump took office as forty

0:02:47.600 --> 0:02:50.080
<v Speaker 1>president of the United States of America. That's right, and

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:52.560
<v Speaker 1>joining us to talk about it all is Neil Datta,

0:02:52.760 --> 0:02:56.840
<v Speaker 1>head of US economics at Renaissance Macro Research. Neil, thanks

0:02:56.840 --> 0:02:59.320
<v Speaker 1>for being here today, Thanks for having me, all right.

0:02:59.400 --> 0:03:03.040
<v Speaker 1>So it's an interesting time so far. In a lot

0:03:03.120 --> 0:03:05.919
<v Speaker 1>of Trump's critics were talking about how he would sink

0:03:05.960 --> 0:03:09.200
<v Speaker 1>the economy, but like most of his predecessors, he's taken

0:03:09.200 --> 0:03:12.560
<v Speaker 1>a more pragmatic stance to achieve some of his goals. Uh,

0:03:12.639 --> 0:03:16.160
<v Speaker 1>immigration is slowing down due to new restrictions, and there's

0:03:16.200 --> 0:03:19.520
<v Speaker 1>some uncertainty over how the rollback of Obamacare is going

0:03:19.560 --> 0:03:22.640
<v Speaker 1>to play out in Congress, and there's some international tension

0:03:22.680 --> 0:03:26.359
<v Speaker 1>over trade as we expected, but President Trump has used

0:03:26.360 --> 0:03:29.520
<v Speaker 1>fiscal policy to add some juice to the economy, and

0:03:29.600 --> 0:03:32.440
<v Speaker 1>with bond yields rising, the Fed has raised interest rates

0:03:32.480 --> 0:03:36.920
<v Speaker 1>for a third time since December. Neil, how surprised are

0:03:36.920 --> 0:03:39.680
<v Speaker 1>you by how things have gone so far? Well, you know,

0:03:39.720 --> 0:03:44.520
<v Speaker 1>I guess I'm not that surprised. Um, going into the year,

0:03:44.600 --> 0:03:47.440
<v Speaker 1>you kind of have to assume that you know, you're

0:03:47.480 --> 0:03:49.640
<v Speaker 1>knowing you didn't want to think that Trump was gonna

0:03:49.680 --> 0:03:51.880
<v Speaker 1>want to get in there and do a bad job. So, UM,

0:03:52.480 --> 0:03:55.720
<v Speaker 1>my sense is that you have stronger fiscal policy that's

0:03:55.760 --> 0:04:01.240
<v Speaker 1>pressuring inflation higher. And you know, I think given that

0:04:01.280 --> 0:04:04.920
<v Speaker 1>the economy had some momentum going into this year, the

0:04:05.640 --> 0:04:11.240
<v Speaker 1>feed is not really um accelerating their path just yet.

0:04:11.400 --> 0:04:13.000
<v Speaker 1>And you know, my sense is that you know, you

0:04:13.000 --> 0:04:16.600
<v Speaker 1>have stronger fiscal policy, um out of the Trump administration.

0:04:16.680 --> 0:04:20.560
<v Speaker 1>You have more restrictive immigration that's putting up with pressure

0:04:20.680 --> 0:04:23.560
<v Speaker 1>on inflation. So I think that would be what I

0:04:23.600 --> 0:04:27.640
<v Speaker 1>would expect economically, um, coming out of a Trump administration.

0:04:28.440 --> 0:04:30.680
<v Speaker 1>So one issue that a lot of people overlooked a

0:04:30.760 --> 0:04:32.800
<v Speaker 1>year ago was when Trump said that quote, we have

0:04:32.880 --> 0:04:35.600
<v Speaker 1>to rebuild the infrastructure in our country. So now he's

0:04:35.640 --> 0:04:37.880
<v Speaker 1>really followed up on that through working with Congress to

0:04:37.920 --> 0:04:41.239
<v Speaker 1>pass a hundred billion dollar plan to kick start roads, bridges,

0:04:41.279 --> 0:04:44.159
<v Speaker 1>and real projects all around the country and really encouraging

0:04:44.200 --> 0:04:47.279
<v Speaker 1>states and cities to take similar action by taking advantage

0:04:47.279 --> 0:04:49.640
<v Speaker 1>of low interest rates through municipal bonds and of course

0:04:49.680 --> 0:04:52.240
<v Speaker 1>those for our listeners who don't know, are the vehicles

0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:54.800
<v Speaker 1>in which state and local governments can issue debt to

0:04:55.040 --> 0:04:58.839
<v Speaker 1>spur the economy and start infrastructure projects. He's also signed

0:04:58.880 --> 0:05:01.880
<v Speaker 1>a defensive re author zation bill that increases spending by

0:05:01.920 --> 0:05:04.680
<v Speaker 1>ten So how much is this going to actually help

0:05:04.720 --> 0:05:08.039
<v Speaker 1>the economy? Well, I guess it will help the economy somewhat.

0:05:08.080 --> 0:05:10.359
<v Speaker 1>The question is that the extent to which you know

0:05:10.440 --> 0:05:15.200
<v Speaker 1>he's willing to offset that what cuts down the road. Um,

0:05:15.240 --> 0:05:17.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, there is a lot of debate about how

0:05:17.080 --> 0:05:20.360
<v Speaker 1>much of a multiplier you'll get from fiscal policy. I

0:05:20.400 --> 0:05:23.400
<v Speaker 1>do think, you know, given how low interest rates still are,

0:05:24.240 --> 0:05:28.039
<v Speaker 1>there's probably very minimal cost to going this route, and

0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:31.400
<v Speaker 1>so I think it's probably a good thing, you know,

0:05:31.480 --> 0:05:34.120
<v Speaker 1>for the economy, have stronger fiscal policy and you don't

0:05:34.120 --> 0:05:37.080
<v Speaker 1>really have much of a monetary offset, and you know,

0:05:37.120 --> 0:05:39.760
<v Speaker 1>if you look at where the bond market is has been,

0:05:40.160 --> 0:05:42.200
<v Speaker 1>it's you know, you can make a very strong case

0:05:42.240 --> 0:05:45.080
<v Speaker 1>that it's screaming for fiscal stimulus. You know, a hundred

0:05:45.120 --> 0:05:48.640
<v Speaker 1>million dollars on roads and bridges isn't really a big deal. Um,

0:05:48.680 --> 0:05:50.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, actually we miss boke there. It should be

0:05:50.760 --> 0:05:54.160
<v Speaker 1>a hundred billion. Yeah, I mean I again, I think,

0:05:54.320 --> 0:05:55.960
<v Speaker 1>you know, one of the one of the points that

0:05:56.000 --> 0:05:59.200
<v Speaker 1>I would make about all this is that when people

0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:03.000
<v Speaker 1>think about for structure, they think about roads and bridges,

0:06:03.040 --> 0:06:05.039
<v Speaker 1>like you just mentioned. You know, these sort of ribbon

0:06:05.080 --> 0:06:09.080
<v Speaker 1>cutting ceremonies where politicians get in front of a red

0:06:09.120 --> 0:06:11.800
<v Speaker 1>tape with a big scissor and a hard hat or

0:06:11.839 --> 0:06:15.680
<v Speaker 1>something like that. And and it's not immediately clear to

0:06:15.800 --> 0:06:19.120
<v Speaker 1>me that we actually need to be spending money on

0:06:19.240 --> 0:06:23.040
<v Speaker 1>roads and bridges, right, I mean, if you look at

0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.919
<v Speaker 1>transportation spending, highway and street spending as a share of GDP,

0:06:27.080 --> 0:06:30.120
<v Speaker 1>it's pretty much higher now than it was on average

0:06:30.120 --> 0:06:32.960
<v Speaker 1>from two thousand two to two thousand and seven. There

0:06:33.000 --> 0:06:36.200
<v Speaker 1>are other areas of infrastructure, you know, that are actually

0:06:36.240 --> 0:06:40.080
<v Speaker 1>less sexy, that probably have more need for spending, you know,

0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:44.360
<v Speaker 1>things like um, you know, government hospital and health facilities.

0:06:45.600 --> 0:06:49.360
<v Speaker 1>Given the fact that we have veterans coming or you know,

0:06:49.640 --> 0:06:55.080
<v Speaker 1>UM veterans coming back from overseas war fighting, UM water

0:06:55.160 --> 0:06:59.240
<v Speaker 1>supply things like pipe fixtures and so forth, we're not

0:06:59.320 --> 0:07:01.720
<v Speaker 1>We're under resting there. It seems to me if you

0:07:01.760 --> 0:07:04.840
<v Speaker 1>look at the data, UM, so you know, roads and

0:07:04.880 --> 0:07:10.520
<v Speaker 1>bridges are nice. UM. Trump has mentioned LaGuardia Airport, you know,

0:07:10.560 --> 0:07:13.960
<v Speaker 1>every other week, and it shouldn't be noted that LaGuardia

0:07:14.040 --> 0:07:18.120
<v Speaker 1>is already getting an infrastructure revamp. UM. But you know,

0:07:18.160 --> 0:07:20.320
<v Speaker 1>the thing that I would just say is that the

0:07:20.320 --> 0:07:24.360
<v Speaker 1>net effect of all of this is inflationary. I mean,

0:07:24.400 --> 0:07:27.000
<v Speaker 1>if you're an investor and you want to play for

0:07:27.800 --> 0:07:32.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, an aggressive fiscal policy stance coupled with restrictive

0:07:32.720 --> 0:07:37.800
<v Speaker 1>immigration laws and anti trade and anti trade agenda, I

0:07:37.800 --> 0:07:42.320
<v Speaker 1>would be UM buying tips and selling treasuries. I want

0:07:42.320 --> 0:07:45.680
<v Speaker 1>to jump in quickly. You mentioned the infrastructure question. I

0:07:45.720 --> 0:07:47.280
<v Speaker 1>want to pose a question for you. Before I took

0:07:47.320 --> 0:07:49.480
<v Speaker 1>over the Pokemon beat, I was a municipal bond reporter,

0:07:49.960 --> 0:07:52.200
<v Speaker 1>and one thing that was really interesting was that even

0:07:52.200 --> 0:07:55.240
<v Speaker 1>though you had you know, generational lows for interest rates,

0:07:55.280 --> 0:07:58.720
<v Speaker 1>you saw a huge contraction of the municipal market. Of course,

0:07:58.760 --> 0:08:00.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, for listeners who don't know what the municmal

0:08:00.640 --> 0:08:03.120
<v Speaker 1>market is, this is the vehicle in which states and

0:08:03.240 --> 0:08:07.120
<v Speaker 1>cities finance, road, bridge, all sorts of infrastructure projects. So

0:08:07.200 --> 0:08:09.680
<v Speaker 1>even though rates were at lows, even though you saw

0:08:09.800 --> 0:08:13.120
<v Speaker 1>all these incentives going on to build these things, states

0:08:13.120 --> 0:08:15.280
<v Speaker 1>and cities still didn't want to do it. So, I mean,

0:08:15.400 --> 0:08:18.000
<v Speaker 1>I guess, Neil Scott, what do you guys think of that?

0:08:18.040 --> 0:08:19.880
<v Speaker 1>I mean, what's going on now that we think that's

0:08:19.880 --> 0:08:22.520
<v Speaker 1>actually going to stimulate something that you know obviously couldn't

0:08:22.560 --> 0:08:26.559
<v Speaker 1>happen to three or four years ago. I think one

0:08:27.120 --> 0:08:33.720
<v Speaker 1>issue politically is that you're seeing I mean, basically monetary

0:08:33.760 --> 0:08:37.400
<v Speaker 1>policy doesn't have as much scope to stimulate as it

0:08:37.440 --> 0:08:40.920
<v Speaker 1>did four or five years ago, and so there's an

0:08:40.920 --> 0:08:45.000
<v Speaker 1>additional burden, I guess, or growing burden on fiscal authorities

0:08:45.480 --> 0:08:48.520
<v Speaker 1>to kind of move the needle on the economy. You know,

0:08:48.559 --> 0:08:52.040
<v Speaker 1>you're seeing that clearly in in Japan, You're seeing it

0:08:52.120 --> 0:08:55.880
<v Speaker 1>to some extent in Europe. You've already seen it in

0:08:56.200 --> 0:08:58.880
<v Speaker 1>our neighbors to the north and Canada, where they've announced

0:08:59.120 --> 0:09:02.440
<v Speaker 1>a more aggressive fiscal package with the new government under

0:09:02.480 --> 0:09:05.400
<v Speaker 1>Trudeau coming in this year, and so I think that's

0:09:05.440 --> 0:09:07.679
<v Speaker 1>part of the reason why you're seeing it is because, um,

0:09:07.760 --> 0:09:10.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, typically when we think of sort of cyclical

0:09:10.200 --> 0:09:15.720
<v Speaker 1>demand stabilization, we tend to think of monetary policy. But um,

0:09:15.760 --> 0:09:21.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, given that monetary policy is basically you know,

0:09:21.720 --> 0:09:24.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean at its end, Um, there's more of a

0:09:25.679 --> 0:09:29.320
<v Speaker 1>sort of there's an increasing pressure on fiscal authorities to

0:09:29.360 --> 0:09:33.360
<v Speaker 1>do something. And on top of that, it seems like

0:09:33.400 --> 0:09:36.920
<v Speaker 1>a perfect opportunity because if you look at, um, you know,

0:09:36.960 --> 0:09:41.800
<v Speaker 1>what's sort of on the top of of most people's minds. Um,

0:09:41.840 --> 0:09:43.959
<v Speaker 1>you know, four years ago, Um, you know that I

0:09:43.960 --> 0:09:48.199
<v Speaker 1>would argue that the budget deficit and debt was high

0:09:48.400 --> 0:09:51.480
<v Speaker 1>on the minds of a lot of Americans. Today it's

0:09:51.520 --> 0:09:53.439
<v Speaker 1>near the bottom if you look at in terms of,

0:09:53.640 --> 0:09:56.480
<v Speaker 1>you know what, what issues people care about the most. Um,

0:09:56.559 --> 0:10:00.240
<v Speaker 1>So the political pressure of reducing the budget deficit isn't

0:10:00.240 --> 0:10:02.960
<v Speaker 1>a strong today or as pervasive today as it was

0:10:03.120 --> 0:10:05.360
<v Speaker 1>five years ago. And so you know, I think for

0:10:05.400 --> 0:10:07.960
<v Speaker 1>all these factors, you're seeing more of a push. And

0:10:08.840 --> 0:10:11.839
<v Speaker 1>you have a new government coming in they're gonna want

0:10:11.840 --> 0:10:15.520
<v Speaker 1>to do something. Given given the US election sort of

0:10:15.600 --> 0:10:19.840
<v Speaker 1>cycle and the legislative calendar and this sort of you know,

0:10:19.880 --> 0:10:22.520
<v Speaker 1>twenty four hour news cycle, and I mean basically the

0:10:22.559 --> 0:10:26.240
<v Speaker 1>window for a new government to get something downe feels

0:10:26.280 --> 0:10:29.560
<v Speaker 1>like it gets shorter and shorter with each new government. Yeah,

0:10:29.600 --> 0:10:32.680
<v Speaker 1>central banks are certainly welcoming this push on fiscal policy,

0:10:32.800 --> 0:10:36.040
<v Speaker 1>especially FED Chair Janet Yellen. But as we all know,

0:10:36.200 --> 0:10:39.000
<v Speaker 1>she's not going to be around much longer. Uh, we're

0:10:39.000 --> 0:10:40.840
<v Speaker 1>going to take a break right now, and we'll talk

0:10:40.880 --> 0:10:46.679
<v Speaker 1>more about that right after this message. Ullinberg Benchmark is

0:10:46.720 --> 0:10:49.439
<v Speaker 1>brought to you by Stage Summit, the world's largest gathering

0:10:49.440 --> 0:10:55.280
<v Speaker 1>of small and medium businesses, featuring Sir Richard Branson July Chicago,

0:10:55.760 --> 0:10:58.760
<v Speaker 1>registered with promo code business at stage summit dot com.

0:10:58.800 --> 0:11:06.080
<v Speaker 1>For just as we were just saying, Neil and Kate

0:11:06.120 --> 0:11:10.240
<v Speaker 1>were six months away now from another momentous date, January

0:11:10.320 --> 0:11:14.600
<v Speaker 1>thirty one, that's going to be Janet Yellen's last day

0:11:14.679 --> 0:11:18.280
<v Speaker 1>as Chair of the Federal Reserve. Speculation is growing in

0:11:18.360 --> 0:11:21.280
<v Speaker 1>Washington about who President Trump will pick to lead the

0:11:21.320 --> 0:11:24.280
<v Speaker 1>Central Bank. What will be the main challenges for the

0:11:24.360 --> 0:11:26.720
<v Speaker 1>next FED chair. Well, my view is that the next

0:11:26.720 --> 0:11:30.280
<v Speaker 1>FED chair's biggest problem is going to be higher inflation. Right.

0:11:30.320 --> 0:11:33.400
<v Speaker 1>I mean, for years now, we've been talking about low inflation,

0:11:33.520 --> 0:11:38.720
<v Speaker 1>low inflation, deflation risks, the FED running out of ammunition,

0:11:39.000 --> 0:11:43.360
<v Speaker 1>and the FED continually bending to uh, you know, the

0:11:43.440 --> 0:11:45.959
<v Speaker 1>lower sort of implied rate path that has been put

0:11:46.000 --> 0:11:49.880
<v Speaker 1>out by the market. And you know, I think given

0:11:49.920 --> 0:11:53.319
<v Speaker 1>the confluence of factors that we're assuming here, which is

0:11:53.320 --> 0:12:00.640
<v Speaker 1>a stronger fiscal policy, anti trade, anti immigration, those are

0:12:01.200 --> 0:12:05.800
<v Speaker 1>inflationary policies. I mean, if the biggest secular force for

0:12:05.960 --> 0:12:09.880
<v Speaker 1>disinflation in the last twenty five years has been the

0:12:10.080 --> 0:12:13.720
<v Speaker 1>opening up of the global economy, what does the push

0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:18.120
<v Speaker 1>to protectionism mean. I think it's pretty obvious. So this

0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:20.040
<v Speaker 1>is something that that's going to have to deal with,

0:12:20.760 --> 0:12:25.400
<v Speaker 1>and I would argue that, you know, in some respects,

0:12:25.480 --> 0:12:28.640
<v Speaker 1>you coul can make an argument that Yelling should actually stay. UM.

0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:32.320
<v Speaker 1>If I were actually advising UM the president on who

0:12:32.520 --> 0:12:36.600
<v Speaker 1>who denominate, I'd argue for her to stay because a

0:12:36.640 --> 0:12:39.160
<v Speaker 1>lot of the folks that have been coming up the

0:12:39.240 --> 0:12:42.840
<v Speaker 1>ranks don't even know what high inflation is. They have

0:12:42.960 --> 0:12:47.520
<v Speaker 1>no idea about how to respond in a rising inflationary environment.

0:12:47.840 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 1>So much of what's been going on right now is

0:12:49.760 --> 0:12:52.880
<v Speaker 1>trying to come up with innovative ways of combating disinflation.

0:12:53.679 --> 0:12:56.040
<v Speaker 1>So um to me, that would be the issue for

0:12:56.840 --> 0:12:59.880
<v Speaker 1>the Central Bank at least. I mean. Also one of

0:12:59.880 --> 0:13:03.160
<v Speaker 1>the largest you know items that has happened in coming

0:13:03.160 --> 0:13:06.680
<v Speaker 1>from Washington this year has also been the Transpacific Partnership,

0:13:06.679 --> 0:13:10.360
<v Speaker 1>which has died. So Trump formally notified Mexico and Canada

0:13:10.520 --> 0:13:13.320
<v Speaker 1>that he wants to renegotiate NAPTIS so he can, in

0:13:13.400 --> 0:13:16.280
<v Speaker 1>his own words, of course, bring jobs back to America.

0:13:16.480 --> 0:13:19.720
<v Speaker 1>And trade with China has really started to plunge after

0:13:19.760 --> 0:13:24.000
<v Speaker 1>Trump announced that teriff on all Chinese goods. China's retaliated

0:13:24.120 --> 0:13:26.960
<v Speaker 1>with similar levies and US exports, and the Chinese are

0:13:26.960 --> 0:13:30.400
<v Speaker 1>also very unhappy with being labeled as currency manipulators. I've

0:13:30.440 --> 0:13:33.040
<v Speaker 1>canceled the strategic and economic dialogue that took place over

0:13:33.080 --> 0:13:35.360
<v Speaker 1>the at last eight years, although Trump said he wasn't

0:13:35.400 --> 0:13:38.079
<v Speaker 1>unplanning on doing it anyway. So, Scott Neil, is this

0:13:38.320 --> 0:13:41.199
<v Speaker 1>debt negative for the US in the world? I mean,

0:13:41.240 --> 0:13:45.360
<v Speaker 1>I think so, you know, I think it's uh. I

0:13:45.360 --> 0:13:47.880
<v Speaker 1>mean again, I mean, you know, now you're you're we're

0:13:47.880 --> 0:13:50.080
<v Speaker 1>sort of talking about a different situation, and it would

0:13:50.120 --> 0:13:51.720
<v Speaker 1>be it's not clear to me exactly how the feder

0:13:51.720 --> 0:13:53.880
<v Speaker 1>would respond. I mean, you're you know, you're talking about

0:13:54.360 --> 0:13:58.640
<v Speaker 1>collapse in global trade brought about by political events that

0:13:58.679 --> 0:14:02.480
<v Speaker 1>would have repercussions to US growth, which the FED may

0:14:02.559 --> 0:14:05.800
<v Speaker 1>have to actually use policy in front of. So you know, look,

0:14:05.800 --> 0:14:08.600
<v Speaker 1>I mean there's a couple of things here. I think first,

0:14:09.080 --> 0:14:12.079
<v Speaker 1>globalization in the main is is a good thing. I mean,

0:14:12.120 --> 0:14:13.840
<v Speaker 1>but I mean what I mean by that is, you know,

0:14:13.880 --> 0:14:18.960
<v Speaker 1>the opening up of markets, trading, this sort of specialization

0:14:19.000 --> 0:14:22.080
<v Speaker 1>that you see across economies. UM. You know, I think

0:14:22.080 --> 0:14:26.160
<v Speaker 1>those rules, UM, you know that that still applies. At

0:14:26.240 --> 0:14:28.840
<v Speaker 1>the same time, it should also be noted that there's

0:14:28.880 --> 0:14:31.160
<v Speaker 1>no law that says trade has to grow at some

0:14:31.240 --> 0:14:34.720
<v Speaker 1>sort of exponential rate relative to GDP. I mean, you're

0:14:34.760 --> 0:14:37.600
<v Speaker 1>already starting to see a slowing and global trade. Um.

0:14:37.640 --> 0:14:41.240
<v Speaker 1>That's pretty much been the case since A lot of

0:14:41.280 --> 0:14:45.160
<v Speaker 1>that has to do with the fact that, you know,

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:49.000
<v Speaker 1>there hasn't been a big policy UM announcement, right, I mean,

0:14:49.040 --> 0:14:51.320
<v Speaker 1>so much of the I mean, if you know, in

0:14:51.320 --> 0:14:53.640
<v Speaker 1>the nineties and even early you know, to mid two

0:14:53.680 --> 0:14:56.160
<v Speaker 1>thousand's a very reliable rule of thumb that we would

0:14:56.240 --> 0:14:59.360
<v Speaker 1>use is that for every one unit increase in global production,

0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:02.320
<v Speaker 1>trade would row by two units. Today the relationship is

0:15:02.400 --> 0:15:05.560
<v Speaker 1>one for one. And um, you know, a lot of

0:15:05.600 --> 0:15:07.880
<v Speaker 1>that has to do with the sort of the fact

0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:11.160
<v Speaker 1>that we haven't had a big we sort of we

0:15:11.200 --> 0:15:13.160
<v Speaker 1>had the one time opening up at the global economy

0:15:13.200 --> 0:15:15.920
<v Speaker 1>and the games that have been sort of exhausted. You've

0:15:15.920 --> 0:15:18.000
<v Speaker 1>had a lot of emerging markets going to different sort

0:15:18.000 --> 0:15:21.320
<v Speaker 1>of growth strategies and that's put pressure on trade again.

0:15:21.520 --> 0:15:24.800
<v Speaker 1>You've had you've had sort of in sourcing back to

0:15:24.880 --> 0:15:28.720
<v Speaker 1>the home market given the depreciation in the dollar that

0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:32.200
<v Speaker 1>we've seen. So so while I think, you know, sort

0:15:32.240 --> 0:15:35.120
<v Speaker 1>of a protectionist stances is a bad thing, I would

0:15:35.160 --> 0:15:38.920
<v Speaker 1>just say that, you know, trade activity has not been

0:15:38.960 --> 0:15:41.840
<v Speaker 1>as elastic as it used to be. Um. So again,

0:15:42.000 --> 0:15:45.000
<v Speaker 1>this could be just a case of politicians kind of

0:15:45.040 --> 0:15:48.800
<v Speaker 1>top ticking the trade of the trade story. Yeah, and

0:15:49.120 --> 0:15:52.160
<v Speaker 1>the IMF has really been on the case, just sounding

0:15:52.160 --> 0:15:55.200
<v Speaker 1>the alarm about possible to decline in global treat growth

0:15:55.240 --> 0:15:59.520
<v Speaker 1>this year. They they just issued their revised forecast for

0:15:59.640 --> 0:16:03.440
<v Speaker 1>twenty seventeen and um, they're talking about how growth is

0:16:03.440 --> 0:16:05.680
<v Speaker 1>going to be flat for a third year, still one

0:16:05.680 --> 0:16:08.160
<v Speaker 1>of the lowest rates since the global financial crisis, So

0:16:08.560 --> 0:16:13.280
<v Speaker 1>this trade tension really isn't helping that that much in

0:16:13.360 --> 0:16:15.640
<v Speaker 1>terms of global growth. You know, the situation might be

0:16:15.640 --> 0:16:18.000
<v Speaker 1>slightly different in America where we're getting that boost from

0:16:18.400 --> 0:16:23.120
<v Speaker 1>fiscal policy. But you know, Christine Leguard, she's just been really,

0:16:23.160 --> 0:16:26.080
<v Speaker 1>really vocal in every appearance I've seen her lately talking

0:16:26.120 --> 0:16:29.960
<v Speaker 1>about this and you know, venturing into the political in

0:16:30.000 --> 0:16:32.080
<v Speaker 1>some ways. Neil, I want to jump in and ask

0:16:32.120 --> 0:16:33.840
<v Speaker 1>you one question. We've been kind of talking about this

0:16:33.880 --> 0:16:36.480
<v Speaker 1>a little bit high level about what we do with

0:16:36.520 --> 0:16:40.160
<v Speaker 1>fiscal policy and monetary policy in regards to kind of

0:16:40.200 --> 0:16:42.960
<v Speaker 1>more protectionist stance on trading. But how about for the

0:16:42.960 --> 0:16:45.120
<v Speaker 1>average American? I mean, are we going to start to

0:16:45.160 --> 0:16:48.760
<v Speaker 1>see the price of goods rising? You know the iPhones

0:16:48.840 --> 0:16:51.480
<v Speaker 1>that you know, we're so ubiquitous throughout all of America

0:16:51.560 --> 0:16:56.440
<v Speaker 1>really and across all incomes. Really everyone has an iPhone? Right, Um?

0:16:56.480 --> 0:16:57.880
<v Speaker 1>I mean, are we going to start to see that,

0:16:58.040 --> 0:17:01.479
<v Speaker 1>you know, kind of the quality of life and consumerism

0:17:01.520 --> 0:17:03.960
<v Speaker 1>that we've kind of gotten so used to. Are we

0:17:04.040 --> 0:17:06.520
<v Speaker 1>going to see a clamp on that if we indeed

0:17:06.560 --> 0:17:09.440
<v Speaker 1>go through with all of these protections theories? I mean,

0:17:09.480 --> 0:17:11.760
<v Speaker 1>I I would think so I would think. So, I mean,

0:17:12.200 --> 0:17:13.719
<v Speaker 1>let's look at what's we're gonna have to go back

0:17:13.720 --> 0:17:15.960
<v Speaker 1>to flip phones. Well, I don't think that that would.

0:17:16.040 --> 0:17:17.879
<v Speaker 1>We would see like a you know, an arrest in

0:17:17.960 --> 0:17:22.240
<v Speaker 1>terms of the technological advancement, but in terms of the

0:17:22.280 --> 0:17:25.960
<v Speaker 1>price for goods, it would go up. I mean, think

0:17:26.000 --> 0:17:28.639
<v Speaker 1>about it, right, I mean, I mean, the the issue,

0:17:28.640 --> 0:17:32.080
<v Speaker 1>the bigger issue here is that the benefits of trade

0:17:32.080 --> 0:17:37.239
<v Speaker 1>are widespread, the costs are centralized. It's very easy for

0:17:37.280 --> 0:17:39.240
<v Speaker 1>a politician to get in front of a bunch of

0:17:39.240 --> 0:17:43.520
<v Speaker 1>steel workers and say I saved their jobs. What's unseen

0:17:43.640 --> 0:17:45.560
<v Speaker 1>is the fact that, you know, the prices for your

0:17:45.560 --> 0:17:48.080
<v Speaker 1>cars may be higher. You know, I'm not the first

0:17:48.080 --> 0:17:50.040
<v Speaker 1>person to say something like that. I mean, you know,

0:17:50.080 --> 0:17:52.760
<v Speaker 1>to me, it's pretty obvious. Look at look at the

0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:56.359
<v Speaker 1>inflation data that we've seen. Even in the last few years,

0:17:57.200 --> 0:18:01.040
<v Speaker 1>apparel prices, for example, had been falling year after year

0:18:01.160 --> 0:18:07.200
<v Speaker 1>after year after year. More recently that's basically stopped. I mean,

0:18:07.200 --> 0:18:10.800
<v Speaker 1>apparel prices have stopped falling. And I think again it

0:18:10.840 --> 0:18:14.800
<v Speaker 1>goes back to our earlier discussion about we're no longer

0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:18.800
<v Speaker 1>seeing a widening out of the global trade um story

0:18:18.920 --> 0:18:20.800
<v Speaker 1>so this whole idea about the world is flat, Well,

0:18:20.840 --> 0:18:23.719
<v Speaker 1>the world is no longer flattening, I guess, is what

0:18:23.760 --> 0:18:25.880
<v Speaker 1>you could say. And some of the policies that are

0:18:25.880 --> 0:18:31.400
<v Speaker 1>being um advocated would actually go in the opposite direction.

0:18:31.680 --> 0:18:34.959
<v Speaker 1>I think it's definitely possible that that you get an

0:18:34.960 --> 0:18:40.040
<v Speaker 1>inflationary response over time if economies become more inward, and

0:18:40.080 --> 0:18:42.560
<v Speaker 1>I think that that brings costs to the very people

0:18:42.920 --> 0:18:46.560
<v Speaker 1>that that think they're going to be helped by more protectionism,

0:18:46.760 --> 0:18:48.080
<v Speaker 1>And a lot of the research that I've seen are

0:18:48.119 --> 0:18:51.560
<v Speaker 1>shown that protectionism actually hurts those at the lower rent.

0:18:52.040 --> 0:18:55.719
<v Speaker 1>That's right. You've seen these prices rising, and it's not

0:18:55.760 --> 0:18:57.560
<v Speaker 1>clear if the jobs are going to come back or

0:18:57.600 --> 0:19:00.000
<v Speaker 1>if the wages are actually going to rise to support

0:19:00.000 --> 0:19:02.440
<v Speaker 1>with that. But anyway, UM, well, we'll leave it there.

0:19:02.800 --> 0:19:06.439
<v Speaker 1>It's been a fascinating six months so far. Surely the

0:19:06.480 --> 0:19:08.720
<v Speaker 1>next three and a half years at least will be

0:19:09.240 --> 0:19:12.760
<v Speaker 1>even more interesting. Neil, thanks so much for joining us today.

0:19:12.760 --> 0:19:21.920
<v Speaker 1>Thank you. Wow, that was really cool. Yeah. I can't

0:19:21.960 --> 0:19:24.240
<v Speaker 1>believe how crazy Pokemon gets in the future, and I

0:19:24.240 --> 0:19:25.600
<v Speaker 1>can't believe I'm going to be the editor of the

0:19:25.600 --> 0:19:28.200
<v Speaker 1>Pokemon Beat. I know what did you think of how

0:19:28.280 --> 0:19:30.159
<v Speaker 1>things turn out a year from now. You know what,

0:19:30.359 --> 0:19:31.919
<v Speaker 1>I don't think it's I don't think the world is

0:19:31.920 --> 0:19:35.040
<v Speaker 1>going to end, which is which is a net plus, right.

0:19:35.280 --> 0:19:37.840
<v Speaker 1>It seems a little bit more levelheaded than maybe everyone's

0:19:37.840 --> 0:19:40.520
<v Speaker 1>screaming about what do you think? I don't know? I mean,

0:19:41.000 --> 0:19:42.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, this is definitely a lot better than I

0:19:42.640 --> 0:19:45.520
<v Speaker 1>thought things were turned out. After having a coup of

0:19:45.840 --> 0:19:49.000
<v Speaker 1>all this craziness over the last few months and seeing

0:19:49.040 --> 0:19:52.679
<v Speaker 1>how the election campaigns have turned out, you know, we

0:19:52.720 --> 0:19:54.919
<v Speaker 1>can only hope that this is our one of our

0:19:54.960 --> 0:19:57.720
<v Speaker 1>best case scenarios right here. I hope so, I certainly

0:19:57.720 --> 0:20:01.920
<v Speaker 1>hope so Benchmark We'll be back next week, and until then,

0:20:01.960 --> 0:20:04.400
<v Speaker 1>you can find us on the Bloomberg terminal at Bloomberg

0:20:04.440 --> 0:20:07.800
<v Speaker 1>dot com, as well as on iTunes, pocketcasts, and Stitcher.

0:20:08.240 --> 0:20:10.119
<v Speaker 1>And while you're there, take a minute to rate and

0:20:10.200 --> 0:20:12.920
<v Speaker 1>review the show. Some more listeners can find us and

0:20:13.000 --> 0:20:14.399
<v Speaker 1>let us know what you thought of the show. You

0:20:14.440 --> 0:20:16.359
<v Speaker 1>can talk to us and follow us on Twitter. You

0:20:16.400 --> 0:20:18.720
<v Speaker 1>can find Scott at Scott Landman, and you can find

0:20:18.720 --> 0:20:20.680
<v Speaker 1>me at by Kate Smith. I'll see you next week.

0:20:23.880 --> 0:20:26.600
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Benchmark is brought to you by stage Summit the

0:20:26.600 --> 0:20:30.440
<v Speaker 1>world's largest gathering of small and medium businesses, featuring Sir

0:20:30.560 --> 0:20:35.720
<v Speaker 1>Richard Branson July in Chicago. Register with promo code business

0:20:35.800 --> 0:20:38.320
<v Speaker 1>at stage summit dot com for just nine dollars