Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays
Speaker 2: at seven am Eastern on Apple car Player, Android Auto
Speaker 2: with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you
Speaker 2: get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 3: A discussion with someone where all of global Wall Street
Speaker 3: loans forward. Ian Lincoln is the demon capital. And of
Speaker 3: course on the bond markets, you got Belski's optimism on equities.
Speaker 3: You know all that Ian lingoln on the percent effect
Speaker 3: right now, Ian, thank you so much for joining. Do
Speaker 3: you have a vector in place as you did six
Speaker 3: months nine months ago, of a ten year yield that
Speaker 3: will slide below four percent?
Speaker 4: Yes, I still see the path of least resistance fourteen
Speaker 4: year yields being lower, not higher. And I think that
Speaker 4: the decision about the Treasury Secretary has been appropriately read
Speaker 4: as a net positive for the bond market. I think
Speaker 4: that this particular move does have a little bit further
Speaker 4: to run. But I don't see tens going to five.
Speaker 4: I see us going below four percent.
Speaker 3: Four point two nine percent right now is a handle
Speaker 3: on ten year yield exactly.
Speaker 5: Tom So in how do you think this fed is
Speaker 5: going to perceive here, proceed here with this December meeting
Speaker 5: coming up here, given some of the economic data that
Speaker 5: we've seen already, we're going to get some PCE data
Speaker 5: later this week on Wednesday. How do you think this
Speaker 5: Fed's going to move here?
Speaker 4: Well, I do think they're going to cut twenty five
Speaker 4: basis points in December. They also going to offer a
Speaker 4: new updated dot plot, and I think that that's the
Speaker 4: biggest risk, and that's because the debate in the market
Speaker 4: at the moment is whether or not terminal should be
Speaker 4: revised higher simply because of the results of the election.
Speaker 4: The FED has told us that it's too soon for
Speaker 4: such a change, and so I suspect that the market
Speaker 4: will get a cut if nothing else.
Speaker 5: How about going forward here? I mean again, as you mentioned,
Speaker 5: the election has had a material impact on this market
Speaker 5: and on the economic outlook of a lot of participants
Speaker 5: in this market. How do you think the election may
Speaker 5: or may not impact kind of where this FED goes?
Speaker 4: Well, at a minimum, the FED has already acknowledged in
Speaker 4: the process of normalizing rates, and there's a very big
Speaker 4: difference from the Fed's perspective between normalizing and easing the
Speaker 4: economic data is unreasonably strong footing, so they don't have
Speaker 4: any urgency to move back to neutral. However, it won't
Speaker 4: be until the second half of next year that any
Speaker 4: potential policy change could come from the FMC based on
Speaker 4: what Trump does early in his presidency. And it is
Speaker 4: worth noting that there's tariffs are one off increases and
Speaker 4: they're not the type of demand inflation that the FED
Speaker 4: worries about.
Speaker 3: Lee In the heartier note, it's the densest node on
Speaker 3: fixed in come on Wall Street to claim by all
Speaker 3: buried in it is looming month, Then bond demand is
Speaker 3: it foreign appetite, is it domestic? Is it Fidelity or
Speaker 3: Blackrock need to touch up their portfolios? What do you
Speaker 3: mean by looming month and demand? Price up, yield down?
Speaker 4: Well, it was a refunding month, and so that means
Speaker 4: that we'll have new bonds being added to the benchmark index,
Speaker 4: which implies that even someone who wants to be neutral
Speaker 4: on duration is going to need to buy in into
Speaker 4: the month. That's true for real money domestic players, and
Speaker 4: that's true for any overseas buyers that are based off
Speaker 4: of a benchmark. As a theme, though we do tend
Speaker 4: to think of looming month and demand being more of
Speaker 4: a domestic affair as opposed to being a strong overseas story.
Speaker 5: So stepping back here, what was your take when you
Speaker 5: see the nomination of a Scott Bessant for treasury secretaries
Speaker 5: is as simple as well, there's an adult in the
Speaker 5: room and maybe take more measured you know, look towards
Speaker 5: Tariff's kind of what do you think the market's discounting here?
Speaker 4: I think that that was the knee jerk response, and
Speaker 4: the perception is that he will be a more balanced, methodical,
Speaker 4: thoughtful Treasury secretary then might have otherwise been at risk.
Speaker 4: And there's also this observation that he's already made about
Speaker 4: taking a gradual approach on the tearff side, and if
Speaker 4: he's successful in being able to orchestrate that, that could
Speaker 4: take a lot of the shock and a lot of
Speaker 4: the tension out of the process as we recalibrate on
Speaker 4: the global trade stage.
Speaker 3: Link your tone of price up yield down with Belski's
Speaker 3: tone of a solid equity market. Is it just ian
Speaker 3: our underestimation of continue to ample real GDP and surprisingly
Speaker 3: good animal spirits is signaled by nominal GDP.
Speaker 4: Well, I think that the case for outperformance of the
Speaker 4: equity market can be made, and I'm on board with
Speaker 4: Belski's expectations. If we're going to be moving to a
Speaker 4: familiar doesn't have to be particularly lower rate environment. But
Speaker 4: if we don't have a spike in ten and thirty
Speaker 4: year rates, then equities can can continue to grind higher
Speaker 4: from here. My biggest worry for risk assets is that
Speaker 4: we do see a spike in term premium, a spike
Speaker 4: in break evens and more reflationary anks. That gets us
Speaker 4: to an October twenty twenty three moment where we saw
Speaker 4: that correction lower in stock.
Speaker 3: See how Ian did that? I mean Brian, you know,
Speaker 3: for next year he's only going to be called Belski.
Speaker 3: It's like share exactly. It's just like Belski. Yep. It's
Speaker 3: just one one word iling and thank you so much.
Speaker 3: What a team it is at being capital markets and
Speaker 3: there are many different parts the Bank of Montreal cours
Speaker 3: Pemo capital market.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live
Speaker 2: weekday afternoons from seven to ten am. Easter Listen on
Speaker 2: Applecarplay and Android Auto with a Bloomberg Business app, or
Speaker 2: watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 3: I love doing seminars with Francis Donald of the Royal
Speaker 3: Bank of Canada. She writes a very terse note, always
Speaker 3: wrapped around the core function Y equal C plus I
Speaker 3: plus G plus export import dynamic. She darkens the door
Speaker 3: today visiting us from Montreal as well. Nominal GDP to me,
Speaker 3: has been the great miss call this year. Can you,
Speaker 3: with your K shape theme, with American exceptionalism, with the
Speaker 3: bascent Treasury Secretary celebration, can you model nominal GDP about
Speaker 3: five percent twelve months forward?
Speaker 6: Oh well, that'll depend on the size, scope, timing and
Speaker 6: sequencing of a whole lot of policies that are going
Speaker 6: to come down delight or the ability be delayed. And
Speaker 6: you know, in my almost two decades of doing this,
Speaker 6: I know that I can't rely on Washington probabilities to
Speaker 6: dictate my economic forecast. What we do know is the
Speaker 6: direction of a lot of policies that are going to
Speaker 6: come in and maybe skew our forecasts. And problematically, tom
Speaker 6: some of them are growth positive deregulation, corporate tax cuts,
Speaker 6: and some of them are growth negative things like tariffs
Speaker 6: or even and we don't talk about it enough immigration
Speaker 6: policies and the risks to lower labor supply. So at
Speaker 6: the end of twenty twenty five, depending on the sequencing,
Speaker 6: we could very much have an economy that's doing quite well,
Speaker 6: the where animal spirits have helped lift confidence in small
Speaker 6: business confidence which I'm acutely focusing on, and the FED
Speaker 6: we'll have to be thinking about hikes not cuts. The
Speaker 6: flip side of that is, if the sequencing is different,
Speaker 6: we could see us trip this soft landing and have
Speaker 6: a FED that continues to focus on cuts. And that's
Speaker 6: not me not having conviction in a forecast refusing to
Speaker 6: make a call. It's me acknowledging that the tails around
Speaker 6: our calls are much fatter, and every corporate, every household,
Speaker 6: every market participant has to take a look at a
Speaker 6: broader set of scenarios now than they were a couple
Speaker 6: of months ago.
Speaker 5: What's some hindsight here to the labor data. What has
Speaker 5: the migrant influx of people into this country over the
Speaker 5: last several years. What does it meant for the labor
Speaker 5: market and our economy, because now it's front and center
Speaker 5: yet again, but maybe on the other side.
Speaker 6: This is such an important question, and thank you for
Speaker 6: asking it. Because I'm frankly more focused on immigration policy
Speaker 6: than i am on tariffs. Okay, tariffs are a price
Speaker 6: level shock. We got a playbook for tariffs. We generally
Speaker 6: know what happened. Every economist with their salt knows a
Speaker 6: ton about washing machines from twenty eighteen. But that's not
Speaker 6: what's going to keep an economistep at night. That's a
Speaker 6: one time in fla shock. What worries us is labor
Speaker 6: supply shortages and persistent wage growth. That's the type of
Speaker 6: more nefarious inflation that creeps in and requires much higher
Speaker 6: interest rates. And we are heading into a period where
Speaker 6: we expect to see well, no, we've already seen record retirements,
Speaker 6: record retire We have three retirees for every one new
Speaker 6: entrant looking for work in the United States. It is
Speaker 6: really sweat.
Speaker 3: Why it is that? What's the why on? It's stunning statistics.
Speaker 6: It's just demographics, Tom, People get older and they retire.
Speaker 3: They do.
Speaker 6: Really, that's what happens. It's hard for us to accept,
Speaker 6: but no, it's demographics. And we you know, my whole life.
Speaker 6: Demographics is something that we thought about as being relevant
Speaker 6: over a five, ten, twenty year horizon. It is relevant
Speaker 6: in twenty twenty five. It's also why that unemployment rate
Speaker 6: is staying very low. It's mechanically pushing down and it
Speaker 6: puts pressure on the Fed.
Speaker 3: Paul Dow up four hundred and fifty points, Nasdick up,
Speaker 3: rather SPX up seven tents of a percent. Just Apple
Speaker 3: is one model up two and a half dollars. We
Speaker 3: call that two and five eights.
Speaker 5: Okay, and talk to us about this K shaped economy.
Speaker 5: What does it mean to you and how problematic is
Speaker 5: it for the broader economy out there?
Speaker 6: Well, it depends who you are. But one of the
Speaker 6: big challenges over the past year is if you were
Speaker 6: running any type of model based off of a data
Speaker 6: point like the ism or consumer confidence, which waits every
Speaker 6: participant in that survey equally, you and I get the
Speaker 6: same weight, it looked recessionary. And that's because small businesses
Speaker 6: and low income households have been in a very real recession.
Speaker 6: It's not just sentiment. It's not just that they have
Speaker 6: bad expectations. But any data point that actually captured the
Speaker 6: economy as a whole, that was in real dollars looked
Speaker 6: just fine. And the trap was focusing on those standard
Speaker 6: indicators that weighted everybody equally, because high income households and
Speaker 6: large corporations, they are the drivers of what happens next.
Speaker 6: If you're the FED, this is a problem though, because
Speaker 6: you really would need two monetary policies to help those
Speaker 6: who are struggling and require much lower rates. And then
Speaker 6: the resilient CEOs, the large households. They actually are large companies,
Speaker 6: they actually could probably merit rates around four percent or above.
Speaker 6: So if that's going to have to make a choice,
Speaker 6: does it target the aggregate of the economy and let
Speaker 6: one element lag behind more significantly than it has in
Speaker 6: the past, or does it say we actually need to
Speaker 6: be a little bit quote unquote fairer in the way
Speaker 6: that we look at this. I think the challenge is
Speaker 6: that inflation runs off of the aggregate, not the individual.
Speaker 6: This is going to continue to muck up a lot
Speaker 6: of our statistics and a lot of our models, But
Speaker 6: at least now there's more of a general realization of
Speaker 6: why standard economic models hasn't worked for us in the
Speaker 6: past year or two.
Speaker 5: Scott Bessant, nominated to be Treasury Secretary, that the markets
Speaker 5: seem to like it this morning. As an economist, do
Speaker 5: you read anything into it. Are you kind of thinking
Speaker 5: more just bigger picture?
Speaker 6: All I want is less uncertainty. We are still in
Speaker 6: a massive uncertainty shock. Even though we know the outcome
Speaker 6: of the election, we still don't have a good sense
Speaker 6: of what the next one to two years is going
Speaker 6: to look like. So this is one of these weeks
Speaker 6: We're getting a huge amount of economic data and I
Speaker 6: almost don't care because I'm looking for clarity. Oh whoa, whoah, whah, whoah.
Speaker 3: Don't say that we need people to tune in at
Speaker 3: least through Wednesday.
Speaker 6: Go you don't care, well, listen, I care about PC.
Speaker 6: I care about where are we stating right now, because
Speaker 6: we do want to know is inflation already too hot?
Speaker 6: That'll be really key for the Federal Reserve. But broadly,
Speaker 6: the focus now turns towards what is the path for
Speaker 6: the next one to two years. I did not anticipate
Speaker 6: a few months ago that we would be talking on
Speaker 6: our teams about twenty twenty five rate hikes. That is
Speaker 6: not our base case, but we are now having to discuss.
Speaker 6: We've got, you know, a vision for what rate cuts
Speaker 6: could look like and a vision for rate hikes at
Speaker 6: the same time. Two sided risk to a lot of
Speaker 6: economic forecasts right now. So any clarity I get is
Speaker 6: welcome clarity, and I think clarity for markets as well.
Speaker 3: Help me here with the Canadian elections. I don't want
Speaker 3: to get you in trouble with the General Counsel of OURBC,
Speaker 3: but is there a Trump valent and the Conservative to
Speaker 3: go after the Trudeau politics of Canada.
Speaker 6: Well, there is an anticipation that there will be a
Speaker 6: new election in Canada at some point, so it hasn't
Speaker 6: been called yet, it has not been called.
Speaker 3: There's crazy British yep.
Speaker 6: Exactly, but at any point, again, we're looking for more
Speaker 6: certainty for what will happen next. And just a reminder,
Speaker 6: Canada is not in the same shape as the United States.
Speaker 6: Productivity is really severe, they've cut immigration. We're actually going
Speaker 6: to see population declines in Canada in the next few years.
Speaker 6: That is a very weak economy on the prespit of
Speaker 6: recession and a big Canada that's probably heading down to
Speaker 6: two percent. So those factors are going to be the
Speaker 6: dominant stories in Canada. Election are no election, just keep winning. Well,
Speaker 6: there's some good things going on.
Speaker 3: You're right, that's right. Is tell me about like Vancouver
Speaker 3: in British Columbia. I mean you fly out there, what
Speaker 3: every second week or so?
Speaker 6: Well, here's something. Taylor Swift is ending her concert tour,
Speaker 6: the Heiress Tour, in Vancouver, also known as the Emerald City,
Speaker 6: so they'll get a little bit of a boosting. Me too.
Speaker 6: I got to experience it in Toronto. But we're proudly
Speaker 6: Canadian getting the last Taylor Swift airs tour.
Speaker 3: And now, folks with Francis Donald and Lisa Matteo, we
Speaker 3: brief you on Wednesdays, mowana too, Are you going to
Speaker 3: are you taking the offspring? To?
Speaker 6: No question? Why not have children except to bring them
Speaker 6: to the movies you really want to see but can't
Speaker 6: go alone to Ye?
Speaker 3: Okay, you think so, Lisa.
Speaker 1: She makes up a great point because you don't want
Speaker 1: to go by yourself and just say like, hey, I'm
Speaker 1: watching an animated movie. Your kids are the excuse.
Speaker 6: Really, I didn't know that.
Speaker 3: You know how far back I go? Like Cinderella. Oh yeah,
Speaker 3: it's like ancient street They did it by hand. Now
Speaker 3: it's all raze, kung fu pan.
Speaker 5: You're not taking a soldier of the guy, are you?
Speaker 7: You're not gonna.
Speaker 3: Can't get them, Francis Donald, thank you so much with
Speaker 3: RBC Capital Markets.
Speaker 2: These Here's the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday
Speaker 2: starting at seven am Eastern on applecar Play and Android
Speaker 2: Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen
Speaker 2: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station
Speaker 2: Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 3: Joining us now William Lee Chi for Kindamist Milkin Institute. Bill.
Speaker 3: This could be a three hour conversation. Let's cut it short.
Speaker 3: What do Trump tariffs mean for Beijing?
Speaker 8: Oh, it's going to mean a change of life from
Speaker 8: where it was for the last four years. One of
Speaker 8: the things we have to remember, Tom, is that the
Speaker 8: make America Great objective has really one ultimate objective of
Speaker 8: maximized domestic employment and income.
Speaker 7: Right.
Speaker 8: That is the feature that we have to keep in mind,
Speaker 8: and Beijing really realizes that. Up till now, President Biden
Speaker 8: has been emphasizing getting everybody together in trade packs, multi
Speaker 8: level trade packs.
Speaker 7: Some difficulties negotiating them.
Speaker 8: But Donald Trump is a deal maker and he goes
Speaker 8: for not only bilateral deals with countries, he goes for
Speaker 8: bilottle deals with companies. So I think Beijing is preparing
Speaker 8: himself for a whole bunch of company specific deals, sector
Speaker 8: specific deals, and I think that gives him flexibility. You
Speaker 8: can read tailor you know that same industry. You can
Speaker 8: negotiate with the Korea and you negotiate with Taiwan on
Speaker 8: semiconductors and have two different deals that try to benefit right. So,
Speaker 8: I just came back from a meeting in South Korea
Speaker 8: not so long ago, and they were really excited about
Speaker 8: having more and more US trying to trade tensions because they.
Speaker 7: Trade with both sides. Okay, let them do that.
Speaker 3: You're on the IMF desk as you were for years.
Speaker 3: What about magnitude Lightheiser and Trump want magnitude large tariffs?
Speaker 3: The Treasury Secretary designate does not. Does it make a
Speaker 3: difference if if Billy gets a marginal or a massive
Speaker 3: tariff regime?
Speaker 8: Well, tom As you know, as a deal maker, the
Speaker 8: one thing you never negotiate is your final position, and
Speaker 8: right now the opening round is massive prohibitive tariffs. In fact,
Speaker 8: we had heard him say if it takes one hundred percent, great,
Speaker 8: If it takes two hundred percent, I'm going to put
Speaker 8: them in.
Speaker 7: But that the.
Speaker 8: Negotiating open employ and what the objectives had said before
Speaker 8: is the restructured trade routes, restructured trade packs, and restructure
Speaker 8: the US manufacturing base in a way that replicates more
Speaker 8: supply chains domestically and French shoring.
Speaker 7: And these tariffs are one way of negotiating that.
Speaker 8: Remember, Tom, restructuring America is both the democratic and Republican
Speaker 8: objective right to maximize domestic income and employment. And I
Speaker 8: think President Trump is going to be using trade policy
Speaker 8: as a tool. As you know, Tom, I come from
Speaker 8: the tradition of Bob Mundell and Carlos from Vegas, and
Speaker 8: you know Mo Calvo where in a distorted world and
Speaker 8: Kelvin Lancaster's world the second best where you don't have
Speaker 8: free trade, putting on tariffs or negotiating industrial policy can
Speaker 8: make countries better off. Because we come in a distorted
Speaker 8: world where there is no free trade, there is no
Speaker 8: perfect competition.
Speaker 5: So where is the concept of free trade? What was
Speaker 5: it ever a reality? And is it now gone for
Speaker 5: the foreseeable future?
Speaker 8: If you go back to days at Alexander Hamilton, right,
Speaker 8: he already put the stake in the heart of free
Speaker 8: trade when he said we've got to build up US industries.
Speaker 8: We cannot depend on the UK for manufactured goods. That alone,
Speaker 8: I think goes to show that we never had that
Speaker 8: world of free trade. It was only taught by people
Speaker 8: like me when in international economics and undergrads to give
Speaker 8: you a baseline model for where it is that we
Speaker 8: can dry for. But I think the minute you hit
Speaker 8: graduate school, you learn about the world at the second
Speaker 8: best where in a world's distortions, adding on at the
Speaker 8: story can actually make the world better off than before.
Speaker 8: And I think Donald Trump has been saying that all along,
Speaker 8: and President Biden has been on too, the Chips.
Speaker 7: Act and the.
Speaker 8: Subseas that we've been giving to build plants in Arizona
Speaker 8: for TSMC to come here was the lesson that we
Speaker 8: learned from COVID that we cannot depend on one source
Speaker 8: of supply chains. My former boss, Jane Alexander Jane Fraser
Speaker 8: said at a military meeting, you know, the problem with
Speaker 8: ESG is that we're missing some essays. We need some
Speaker 8: stability and safety and soundness to our supply chain. And
Speaker 8: I think that's something the hard the message of the
Speaker 8: heart of the message that President Trump is also trying
Speaker 8: to emphasize.
Speaker 5: Is there, how valid is the argument that tariffs are
Speaker 5: inflationary on the US consumer?
Speaker 8: Well, Paul, I guess I hate to be the e
Speaker 8: contectory again. But a tariff, even with retaliations, the step
Speaker 8: wise increase in price levels right in order to get
Speaker 8: inflation would need continuous increases in the price level. And
Speaker 8: so we can have higher prices but not higher inflation
Speaker 8: due to tariffs unless we have repeated rounds of retaliation.
Speaker 3: Doctor Lee. And I'm gonna get a little nerdy here, folks.
Speaker 3: The people that invented this again out of Columbia was Borrow,
Speaker 3: Professor Barrow and a guy named Xavier sally E. Martin,
Speaker 3: who were the bright you know, Lis or Dan Ives
Speaker 3: got the sport code. Thing though, is the sport codes
Speaker 3: of sally E Martin and their work. Is that in
Speaker 3: America the people hammer by trade converge towards where the
Speaker 3: better part of America is. Now we have a trump
Speaker 3: of grievance, a trump of so many people in America
Speaker 3: have missed the boat on free trade. Is that academics
Speaker 3: Bill Lee still in place or is it a new
Speaker 3: regime after Barrows silt E Martin.
Speaker 8: I think we combine both of those elements, because one
Speaker 8: thing that we also have to remember is there's technological
Speaker 8: change and shaping technological change is one way of converging
Speaker 8: trade theory and growth theory. Technology gives us the opportunity
Speaker 8: to produce. As Mike Milkon once told me, you know,
Speaker 8: bill is cheaper to produce sneakers in Atlanta than it
Speaker 8: is in China if you have the right technology in place.
Speaker 8: And so I think one of the things that we're
Speaker 8: going to see is the use of technology to drive
Speaker 8: a lot of the industrial policy that both President Biden
Speaker 8: and President Trump want to do, which is to say,
Speaker 8: reshaped supply routes don't depend on single sources where they're
Speaker 8: their efficiency comes at a cost, and at a cost
Speaker 8: not just the US, but to Europe as well. And
Speaker 8: I think Europe and the United States are trying to
Speaker 8: replicate the supply chains. If I were China, I'd be
Speaker 8: more afraid of the European tariffs that they're gonna be
Speaker 8: putting in to protect their auto industries and their industrial base,
Speaker 8: their pharmaceuticals than the United States tariffs, because I think
Speaker 8: President Trump is much more willing to negotiate. You bring
Speaker 8: jobs in the United States. You invest the United States
Speaker 8: and you can circumvent our tariffs. If you don't do
Speaker 8: that and try to insist on competing with our strategic industries,
Speaker 8: you'terated with not just fifty but one hundred percent tariffs.
Speaker 3: We went too long, Billy, don't be a stranger. We'll
Speaker 3: do this again soon with the milk in the institute.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday
Speaker 2: starting at seven am Eastern on Applecarplay and Android Auto
Speaker 2: with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us
Speaker 2: live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal.
Speaker 3: They look at the front pages of Lisa Matteo our Lisa,
Speaker 3: what do you have?
Speaker 1: Okay? It was a little bit of slow day today.
Speaker 1: I was struggling, but I did find some good ones.
Speaker 1: This is in the Wall Street Journal. It's a growing
Speaker 1: trend among couples. They're buying the house now and they're
Speaker 1: getting married later. So that is the recent trend. Twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three, five hundred and fifty five thousand unmarried couples
Speaker 1: said they bought their home in the previous year, and
Speaker 1: that's up forty six percent from ten years earlier, so
Speaker 1: more people doing it.
Speaker 5: But yes, there's the risk.
Speaker 1: What if you break up? You know, what if something
Speaker 1: happens to the other partner. So family law attorneys, they
Speaker 1: are busy, they're getting all these questions about it. You know,
Speaker 1: prenup cohabitation agreements can cost like three grand. So they're saying,
Speaker 1: people surely have to.
Speaker 3: Consider this is the question you sell the house before
Speaker 3: you get divorced.
Speaker 1: See, those are questions you.
Speaker 5: Have to ask, you know, Like I think the big
Speaker 5: issues I don't know how young people afford Yeah, I
Speaker 5: mean home affordabilities out of control. The prices are high,
Speaker 5: interest rates, mortgan rates are high. You know, I never
Speaker 5: saw I haven't seen a correction in the housing market.
Speaker 5: I'm not sure where.
Speaker 1: And that's why they're going for the home instead of
Speaker 1: paying for the wedding. Like what goes first the wedding
Speaker 1: or the homes?
Speaker 3: And then there's a destination. He does a great cartoon.
Speaker 1: This, Oh oh yes.
Speaker 3: About the destination wedding. Oh, I've had a couple recently,
Speaker 3: and you gotta be kidding me.
Speaker 1: It's tough because you as the guests, have to fork
Speaker 1: about this.
Speaker 3: Money for people who got kids is sort of. You know,
Speaker 3: one guy wanted to have it intuition it's a city
Speaker 3: in Southeast Asia or so next.
Speaker 1: Oh, yes, we talked about it. Wicked, Gladiator too. Write
Speaker 1: the box office? How much it did? One hundred and
Speaker 1: seventy million between both of them. Okay, not close to
Speaker 1: the two forty five that you know, the Barbenheimer brought in,
Speaker 1: but it's still brought in a significant amount. But what
Speaker 1: the New York Times was interesting is that they talked
Speaker 1: about the money behind it, like the big marketing cost,
Speaker 1: how much Wicked's universal one of the largest marketing campaigns
Speaker 1: in Hollywood history. I mean they started back in February
Speaker 1: at the Super Bowl, and you're going to see more
Speaker 1: Wicked at the Thanksgiving Day Brandon Macy's on others, you know,
Speaker 1: so brand partnerships. I mean you saw the Wicked dolls,
Speaker 1: the drinks at Starbucks, the Wicked lego sets, Wicked Cardigan's
Speaker 1: at Target. I mean, it's unbelievable. Even Gladiator too, they
Speaker 1: put a lot of partners.
Speaker 3: Miss Russell Crowe cut to the chick.
Speaker 1: Oh I did, I did? The new guy was good though.
Speaker 1: The new guy Mescal I think is his last name,
Speaker 1: but he was really good. Yes, he was really good,
Speaker 1: and Denzel was phenomenal.
Speaker 5: Wicked Part two is scheduled for release next year. So excited.
Speaker 3: This is like I can't remember Game of Zones or whatever.
Speaker 3: They make two of the movies at the same time.
Speaker 5: Is that what they did here?
Speaker 3: I think that's what they do, so they.
Speaker 5: Can probably save the Sunny Man. Yeah, yeah, but that's
Speaker 5: a bunch.
Speaker 3: It's huge.
Speaker 5: Gladiator too, cost at least three hundred and fifty million
Speaker 5: dollar to make and market, so that's that's a big note.
Speaker 3: How do we count for one hundred million dollars of
Speaker 3: Areaana grande, you know exactly? Prancing around?
Speaker 5: Don't know?
Speaker 3: I mean, this is an expense deduction.
Speaker 5: I don't know. One of the questions I have is
Speaker 5: how are these things going to play in China, if
Speaker 5: at all? Because that had become a market right in
Speaker 5: line with the size of the US market, and Hollywood
Speaker 5: made a lot of money over the last twenty years
Speaker 5: in China. I'm not sure if that's still the case
Speaker 5: next it's a big thing.
Speaker 1: It's okay, so you mentioned China, Yeah, well, so we'll
Speaker 1: switch there. China no longer made source of US imports,
Speaker 1: but tariffs really haven't slowed America's demand for foreign goods.
Speaker 1: I mean this was really in the Wall Street Journal too.
Speaker 1: Mexico took the top spot last year. And it's a
Speaker 1: shift started in twenty eighteen, Like we saw it starting
Speaker 1: to change there with then president President Trump and now
Speaker 1: with his promise to impose another round of tariffs. What
Speaker 1: type of goods are we talking about? Smartphones one of
Speaker 1: the big things South Korea, India, of Vietnam forty two
Speaker 1: percent increase from six years earlier. Then the value of
Speaker 1: laptops tablets imported from Vietnam Taiwan, that's also on the
Speaker 1: rise too.
Speaker 3: John Micklethwaite with his interview with the President elect Trump
Speaker 3: in Chicago before the election, and Trump talked about the
Speaker 3: magnitude of tarriffs to force jobs to America. But Paul,
Speaker 3: that's not what we're hearing from Secretary of Biscent. According
Speaker 3: to Henrietta Trace, he wants tenC ween see terriff increases.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's interesting. I mean, the debate and the numbers
Speaker 5: don't lie. Last year, products coming from China made up
Speaker 5: fourteen percent of all important goods. That's the lowest share
Speaker 5: in nearly those A few decades. I mean, but many
Speaker 5: of the goods arriving from factories in Mexico and Vietnam,
Speaker 5: they still include components that originate in China.
Speaker 3: Exactly. How is like twenty five percent of what they
Speaker 3: output comes to America? Now, yep, it's it's complex, would
Speaker 3: be my answer, folks, do you have anything else?
Speaker 4: I do?
Speaker 5: I do your gi answer?
Speaker 3: Bark play of the eagles?
Speaker 6: So please?
Speaker 1: That was very sad okay Chinese fash fashion retailer in
Speaker 1: the spotlight. So parents, are you know if you're getting
Speaker 1: stuff for your kids? A lot of sometimes they turn
Speaker 1: to these cheap retailers like Tamu, like I'll express like shean.
Speaker 1: But the government of South Korea putting out this warning, Hey,
Speaker 1: these clothes can have toxic substances. So this is what
Speaker 1: they're putting out the warning work They tested twenty six
Speaker 1: pieces of children's winter wear. Yeah, and seven of them
Speaker 1: contain these toxic substances. But they're saying one of them,
Speaker 1: I mean, there was this jacket from Tamu six d
Speaker 1: and twenty two times I legal limit of toxics?
Speaker 3: Can I do this with fend?
Speaker 5: Can you tell that it's not gonna work?
Speaker 1: Not gonna work.
Speaker 3: Well, Lisa Mateo, thank you so much for the newspaper Sick.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday,
Speaker 2: seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 2: iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You
Speaker 2: can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and
Speaker 2: always on the Bloomberg terminal