WEBVTT - Instant Reaction: Jay Powell on Fed Policy

0:00:02.480 --> 0:00:06.840
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

0:00:13.680 --> 0:00:17.120
<v Speaker 2>An absolutely fascinating news conference with Chairman Powell.

0:00:17.280 --> 0:00:19.000
<v Speaker 3>Where do we start? Where do we end?

0:00:19.040 --> 0:00:21.520
<v Speaker 2>A twenty five basis point reduction for the Federal Reserve

0:00:21.800 --> 0:00:25.160
<v Speaker 2>as anticipated, but some drama over the last forty five

0:00:25.200 --> 0:00:25.840
<v Speaker 2>minutes or so.

0:00:26.200 --> 0:00:28.080
<v Speaker 3>Let's start with the equity market.

0:00:28.280 --> 0:00:29.880
<v Speaker 2>On the S and P five hundred, we look a

0:00:29.880 --> 0:00:31.880
<v Speaker 2>little something like this at all time highs up eight

0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:34.639
<v Speaker 2>tenths of one percent. On the NASDAG we're up by

0:00:34.680 --> 0:00:36.520
<v Speaker 2>one point six at the moment.

0:00:36.560 --> 0:00:37.000
<v Speaker 3>Looking at the.

0:00:37.000 --> 0:00:40.199
<v Speaker 2>Russell, we're up, down by about a tenth of one percent.

0:00:40.479 --> 0:00:42.240
<v Speaker 2>Let's switch it up and get to the bond market

0:00:42.360 --> 0:00:44.560
<v Speaker 2>and we'll go through these yields. Let's look at yields

0:00:44.560 --> 0:00:46.680
<v Speaker 2>at the moment, down six basis points on twoes and

0:00:46.720 --> 0:00:49.279
<v Speaker 2>down about eleven on tens. On a thirty year, we're

0:00:49.320 --> 0:00:52.600
<v Speaker 2>down about eight basis points of the moment. On policy,

0:00:52.880 --> 0:00:56.440
<v Speaker 2>this was really really subtle. Did they drop their easing bias?

0:00:56.800 --> 0:00:59.320
<v Speaker 2>Not quite? Did they find a way to find some

0:00:59.400 --> 0:01:03.400
<v Speaker 2>optionality without a doubt, effectively endorsing a view that we've

0:01:03.400 --> 0:01:05.479
<v Speaker 2>had around this table over the last few hours. As

0:01:05.480 --> 0:01:08.800
<v Speaker 2>times goes by, these decisions get a whole lot harder

0:01:09.200 --> 0:01:13.400
<v Speaker 2>reluctance to endorse the September forecast, acknowledgment that downside risks

0:01:13.400 --> 0:01:17.560
<v Speaker 2>have diminished. Awareness the White House policy could redefine the

0:01:17.640 --> 0:01:20.479
<v Speaker 2>outlook as anticipated. A lot of questions on one thing,

0:01:20.920 --> 0:01:22.639
<v Speaker 2>this week's election. Take a listen.

0:01:23.720 --> 0:01:26.720
<v Speaker 4>In the near term, the election will have no effects

0:01:26.760 --> 0:01:29.840
<v Speaker 4>on our policy decisions. Here, we don't know what the

0:01:29.880 --> 0:01:33.120
<v Speaker 4>timing and substance of any policy changes will be. We

0:01:33.160 --> 0:01:36.400
<v Speaker 4>therefore don't know what the effects on the economy would be, specifically,

0:01:36.760 --> 0:01:39.240
<v Speaker 4>whether and to what extent those policies would matter for

0:01:39.280 --> 0:01:42.600
<v Speaker 4>the achievement of our goal variables maximum employment and price stability.

0:01:44.000 --> 0:01:46.720
<v Speaker 4>We don't guess, we don't speculate, and we don't assume.

0:01:47.760 --> 0:01:49.000
<v Speaker 3>That's the take awaund the election.

0:01:49.880 --> 0:01:52.600
<v Speaker 2>The obvious follow up to that question, are the September

0:01:52.680 --> 0:01:54.160
<v Speaker 2>forecasts still valid?

0:01:54.440 --> 0:01:55.040
<v Speaker 3>Take a listen.

0:01:55.960 --> 0:01:59.400
<v Speaker 4>I think you take away a sense of some of

0:01:59.440 --> 0:02:03.800
<v Speaker 4>the downside risks to economic activity having having been diminished

0:02:04.560 --> 0:02:09.200
<v Speaker 4>with the Nipper revisions in particular, and so overall feeling

0:02:09.240 --> 0:02:13.400
<v Speaker 4>good about economic activity. I think really the question is December,

0:02:13.400 --> 0:02:16.200
<v Speaker 4>and you know by December we'll have we'll have more data.

0:02:16.840 --> 0:02:19.960
<v Speaker 4>I guess one more employment report, two more inflation reports,

0:02:20.000 --> 0:02:21.560
<v Speaker 4>and lots of other data. And you know we'll make

0:02:21.560 --> 0:02:23.679
<v Speaker 4>a decision as we get to December.

0:02:24.080 --> 0:02:27.600
<v Speaker 2>So obviously that decision in December will be totally data dependent.

0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:30.600
<v Speaker 2>But that sounds you heard just the door slowly opening

0:02:30.639 --> 0:02:33.040
<v Speaker 2>to a pause if they need to. Now that's policy.

0:02:33.400 --> 0:02:35.720
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk about leadership. You want some tension in this

0:02:35.800 --> 0:02:39.000
<v Speaker 2>news conference. Take a listen to this exchange from about

0:02:39.000 --> 0:02:40.160
<v Speaker 2>twenty minutes ago.

0:02:41.000 --> 0:02:44.359
<v Speaker 4>Some of the president's alex advisors have suggested that you

0:02:44.480 --> 0:02:45.280
<v Speaker 4>should resign.

0:02:45.880 --> 0:02:48.680
<v Speaker 1>If he asked you to leave, would you go? No?

0:02:50.280 --> 0:02:53.560
<v Speaker 4>Can you follow up on do you think that legally

0:02:54.240 --> 0:02:57.480
<v Speaker 4>you're not required to leave? No?

0:02:57.480 --> 0:03:00.000
<v Speaker 2>No, and then no again, and a follow up question

0:03:00.120 --> 0:03:01.960
<v Speaker 2>a little bit later in the news conference. The answer

0:03:02.040 --> 0:03:05.000
<v Speaker 2>to that follow up Lisa, not permitted under the law.

0:03:05.200 --> 0:03:09.400
<v Speaker 5>Even demotion is not necessarily permitted under law. The interesting

0:03:09.440 --> 0:03:12.600
<v Speaker 5>aspect of this Number one, he was very definitive. Number two,

0:03:12.639 --> 0:03:14.280
<v Speaker 5>he had a clear answer. It was clear that he

0:03:14.360 --> 0:03:16.800
<v Speaker 5>had looked at that law ahead of this meeting and

0:03:16.800 --> 0:03:18.920
<v Speaker 5>that it was fresh on his mind. It seems like

0:03:19.400 --> 0:03:21.600
<v Speaker 5>this is going to be a very interesting transcript that

0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:22.680
<v Speaker 5>we get in five years.

0:03:23.080 --> 0:03:25.919
<v Speaker 6>There's two press conferences today, genis smiled at Colby Smiths

0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:29.200
<v Speaker 6>de Lisman and all asking adult questions about the economics.

0:03:29.400 --> 0:03:31.920
<v Speaker 6>I went to Craig Trres after his question, our great

0:03:32.000 --> 0:03:35.640
<v Speaker 6>historian and economics, and I said, Craig finally, and with

0:03:35.760 --> 0:03:38.800
<v Speaker 6>Craig Trus launching off John, we got into the emotion

0:03:39.080 --> 0:03:43.240
<v Speaker 6>of this election and fed independence into twenty twenty five.

0:03:43.400 --> 0:03:45.800
<v Speaker 2>We've got to separate these two issues, haven't we policy

0:03:45.840 --> 0:03:49.800
<v Speaker 2>for December, which seems highly dependent on recent data and

0:03:49.880 --> 0:03:53.200
<v Speaker 2>incoming data between now and then. Then the projections around

0:03:53.240 --> 0:03:56.080
<v Speaker 2>policy which still feels some way off at the moment.

0:03:56.280 --> 0:03:58.600
<v Speaker 2>There's nothing to model. I think it's basically what Sham

0:03:58.680 --> 0:04:01.040
<v Speaker 2>and Pause said in that news conference. So let's park

0:04:01.040 --> 0:04:03.120
<v Speaker 2>the politics just for a while. Just park the policy

0:04:03.680 --> 0:04:06.240
<v Speaker 2>based on the data we've had since that September meeting

0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 2>and basically depending on the data we get when we.

0:04:09.800 --> 0:04:12.520
<v Speaker 3>Go into December. That sounds like a feder reserve.

0:04:12.520 --> 0:04:14.440
<v Speaker 2>That's t and us up for something that the former

0:04:14.520 --> 0:04:16.720
<v Speaker 2>vice chair Richard Clara talked about in this program before

0:04:16.760 --> 0:04:19.240
<v Speaker 2>that news conference started, that we could see Chair and

0:04:19.240 --> 0:04:22.080
<v Speaker 2>Powell look to find some optionality going into December.

0:04:22.320 --> 0:04:24.640
<v Speaker 5>That is what the market was looking at, and what

0:04:24.680 --> 0:04:27.279
<v Speaker 5>I was looking at was a FED fund's futures, which actually,

0:04:27.360 --> 0:04:30.920
<v Speaker 5>after pricing in a ninety ninety five percent chance of

0:04:30.960 --> 0:04:33.280
<v Speaker 5>a FED rate cut in December as recently as the

0:04:33.360 --> 0:04:36.880
<v Speaker 5>end of October, was pricing in a sixty percent chance

0:04:37.040 --> 0:04:38.240
<v Speaker 5>as recently as a.

0:04:38.160 --> 0:04:40.400
<v Speaker 1>Few minutes ago, as j. Powell was talking.

0:04:40.680 --> 0:04:42.320
<v Speaker 5>Key question is how much does this turn up the

0:04:42.400 --> 0:04:45.159
<v Speaker 5>volume on CPI that we get next Wednesday, especially given

0:04:45.440 --> 0:04:49.200
<v Speaker 5>that he pinpointed just some stickiness in the latest inflation.

0:04:49.279 --> 0:04:51.080
<v Speaker 2>This is something you said when the news conference is on.

0:04:51.160 --> 0:04:53.040
<v Speaker 2>Lisa and I were talking about this, and you said,

0:04:53.480 --> 0:04:55.560
<v Speaker 2>this is a Federal Reserve that prepared for this moment.

0:04:56.040 --> 0:04:58.360
<v Speaker 2>The very fact that he responded in this fashion, that

0:04:58.400 --> 0:05:01.440
<v Speaker 2>he responded to the questions in such direct way coming

0:05:01.480 --> 0:05:03.880
<v Speaker 2>into next year, it sets up some real tension for

0:05:03.920 --> 0:05:06.240
<v Speaker 2>twenty twenty five and perhaps even beyond.

0:05:06.080 --> 0:05:08.159
<v Speaker 5>Because this is not a FED that is just being

0:05:08.240 --> 0:05:10.760
<v Speaker 5>passive and hoping people don't ask the questions. This is

0:05:10.800 --> 0:05:12.880
<v Speaker 5>a FED that's very prepared. They were prepared in how

0:05:12.920 --> 0:05:14.760
<v Speaker 5>they were going to answer it. They were prepared even

0:05:14.800 --> 0:05:16.880
<v Speaker 5>for the yield move question, saying that we only take

0:05:16.880 --> 0:05:18.719
<v Speaker 5>it into consideration when it has been that way for

0:05:18.800 --> 0:05:21.600
<v Speaker 5>a prolonged period of time. Again, this is setting up

0:05:21.640 --> 0:05:24.280
<v Speaker 5>tests for the market to take a consideration into consideration

0:05:24.360 --> 0:05:27.400
<v Speaker 5>at a time when they are saying they're opening the

0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:29.800
<v Speaker 5>door to responding by not necessarily cutting.

0:05:29.600 --> 0:05:30.799
<v Speaker 3>Intocember equity markets.

0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:32.840
<v Speaker 2>Right now, session highs, record highs on the S and

0:05:32.880 --> 0:05:35.520
<v Speaker 2>P five hundred up by nine tens of one percent yesterday,

0:05:35.520 --> 0:05:38.760
<v Speaker 2>a big sell off and fixed income TK this afternoon.

0:05:38.880 --> 0:05:41.159
<v Speaker 2>We're seeing a bit of a rally Yield Stowa across the.

0:05:41.160 --> 0:05:42.560
<v Speaker 6>Camp, a bit of a rally. John, Do you have

0:05:42.600 --> 0:05:45.359
<v Speaker 6>your six thousand banner ready? I mean you don't have

0:05:45.400 --> 0:05:47.599
<v Speaker 6>an SBX six thousand bannerred.

0:05:47.160 --> 0:05:50.119
<v Speaker 3>Now TK seventeen points away. Yeah, we're far away.

0:05:50.600 --> 0:05:52.880
<v Speaker 6>We can't do Dow forty four thousand banner, but we

0:05:52.920 --> 0:05:54.239
<v Speaker 6>can do SBX six thousand.

0:05:54.320 --> 0:05:55.240
<v Speaker 3>I'm sure they get that.

0:05:55.320 --> 0:05:57.520
<v Speaker 2>The present elect will be very interested in doing now.

0:05:57.960 --> 0:05:58.919
<v Speaker 2>He wouldn't have one thousand.

0:05:59.000 --> 0:06:00.320
<v Speaker 3>He will be through next time year.

0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:02.839
<v Speaker 2>I said earlier on in the program this morning, it's

0:06:02.839 --> 0:06:05.360
<v Speaker 2>funny you mentioned this. Stewart Kaiser City was sitting right

0:06:05.360 --> 0:06:07.560
<v Speaker 2>there this morning and he said, you know, TK likes

0:06:07.560 --> 0:06:09.279
<v Speaker 2>to down, and I said, I'm trying to change that,

0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:12.880
<v Speaker 2>and going into next year, I'm trying to change President

0:06:12.920 --> 0:06:14.880
<v Speaker 2>elect as well, to make sure that maybe he shifts

0:06:14.880 --> 0:06:16.880
<v Speaker 2>away from that to the S and P five hundred.

0:06:16.920 --> 0:06:18.760
<v Speaker 1>I think that you have an equal chance at both.

0:06:20.440 --> 0:06:20.800
<v Speaker 3>Exactly.

0:06:22.120 --> 0:06:23.120
<v Speaker 6>Here's my response.

0:06:23.560 --> 0:06:26.200
<v Speaker 3>No, but what about him?

0:06:26.560 --> 0:06:30.279
<v Speaker 2>No, And I'm sure the President elect would say the

0:06:30.279 --> 0:06:32.400
<v Speaker 2>same thing. Rick Reader joined us now from black Rot,

0:06:32.480 --> 0:06:34.680
<v Speaker 2>one of the very best in global fixed income and

0:06:34.720 --> 0:06:37.800
<v Speaker 2>cross asset in markets worldwide. Rick, welcome to the program.

0:06:37.839 --> 0:06:39.920
<v Speaker 2>You followed that news conference. Let's just start with your

0:06:39.920 --> 0:06:41.800
<v Speaker 2>first takeaway, Rick, what's your big one?

0:06:43.200 --> 0:06:45.640
<v Speaker 7>So, first of all, say, there's some drama there, and

0:06:45.680 --> 0:06:46.840
<v Speaker 7>I thought that was interesting.

0:06:46.880 --> 0:06:47.159
<v Speaker 8>Listen.

0:06:47.200 --> 0:06:50.479
<v Speaker 7>I think I agree with that comments that they have

0:06:50.560 --> 0:06:53.800
<v Speaker 7>to introduce some balance. I think in December, listen, I

0:06:53.839 --> 0:06:57.440
<v Speaker 7>think the takeaway is they still think readers restrictive. I

0:06:57.520 --> 0:06:59.479
<v Speaker 7>still think you got to get that fronds rate down

0:06:59.760 --> 0:07:02.680
<v Speaker 7>four or ish. I think that you got it. You're

0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:04.480
<v Speaker 7>going to go in December. I think you got to

0:07:04.480 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 7>get the you know, you gotta be really careful about

0:07:06.000 --> 0:07:08.039
<v Speaker 7>the mortgage rate in this country. We could talk about,

0:07:08.880 --> 0:07:10.280
<v Speaker 7>but I think they're going to go in December. I

0:07:10.320 --> 0:07:12.200
<v Speaker 7>think he's got that that that's part of the plan.

0:07:12.320 --> 0:07:15.200
<v Speaker 7>But then as you get into next year, listen, I mean,

0:07:15.200 --> 0:07:17.119
<v Speaker 7>you got it. You've got what could be a pretty

0:07:17.120 --> 0:07:20.960
<v Speaker 7>significant policy change setup policy changes, and I think the

0:07:21.040 --> 0:07:24.000
<v Speaker 7>dots when you go back to the September forecast, I

0:07:24.000 --> 0:07:26.680
<v Speaker 7>think you gotta, you know, really think about that and evaluate.

0:07:26.720 --> 0:07:27.920
<v Speaker 7>I think that's going to be one of the most

0:07:27.920 --> 0:07:31.360
<v Speaker 7>fascinating things going forward is how do they adjust terminal

0:07:31.440 --> 0:07:34.800
<v Speaker 7>rate from here? How do they adjust where they project

0:07:34.840 --> 0:07:36.320
<v Speaker 7>growth to be when you're going to go through it

0:07:36.360 --> 0:07:38.400
<v Speaker 7>could be some pretty significant evolution from here.

0:07:38.520 --> 0:07:40.160
<v Speaker 2>So, Rick, because I go through the cannon drove the

0:07:40.160 --> 0:07:42.840
<v Speaker 2>FEDERASERF there's two dates with some asterisks over the next

0:07:43.040 --> 0:07:45.240
<v Speaker 2>six months or so, and those little stars in the

0:07:45.240 --> 0:07:47.800
<v Speaker 2>corner of those dates mean you get some projections at

0:07:47.800 --> 0:07:50.840
<v Speaker 2>those meetings. So the next one is December eighteenth, and

0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:53.600
<v Speaker 2>then as we work forward into the following year, we're

0:07:53.640 --> 0:07:56.280
<v Speaker 2>going to get a decision from the federaserv in twenty

0:07:56.320 --> 0:07:59.640
<v Speaker 2>twenty five in the spring a March nineteenth, a March

0:07:59.760 --> 0:08:02.720
<v Speaker 2>nineth teenth, Rick, we'll have a new president who may

0:08:02.720 --> 0:08:07.600
<v Speaker 2>be already coming forward with some policies and some big tariffs. Rick,

0:08:07.680 --> 0:08:10.560
<v Speaker 2>do you think it's still too early on March nineteenth

0:08:10.640 --> 0:08:13.440
<v Speaker 2>to expect this veneras f to bank in some policy

0:08:13.520 --> 0:08:16.800
<v Speaker 2>from DJT the former president and President elect Donald Trump.

0:08:17.960 --> 0:08:21.080
<v Speaker 7>Can I can I also say that we'll wait and see.

0:08:21.640 --> 0:08:21.960
<v Speaker 8>Listen.

0:08:22.000 --> 0:08:24.880
<v Speaker 7>I think that. I think that.

0:08:25.400 --> 0:08:25.720
<v Speaker 1>Listen.

0:08:25.720 --> 0:08:28.000
<v Speaker 7>I think you're going to have to evaluate that policy.

0:08:28.080 --> 0:08:30.640
<v Speaker 7>I mean, we're going to get more data on tariffs,

0:08:30.640 --> 0:08:32.560
<v Speaker 7>We're going to get more data on how we deal

0:08:32.600 --> 0:08:36.120
<v Speaker 7>with spending deficits. Listen. I think there are some extremes

0:08:36.120 --> 0:08:39.040
<v Speaker 7>that gets said in a when you go through an

0:08:39.040 --> 0:08:42.600
<v Speaker 7>election campaign like this, how aggressive will be on tariffs,

0:08:42.640 --> 0:08:45.800
<v Speaker 7>how aggressive will be uncutting spending? And then I think

0:08:45.840 --> 0:08:47.840
<v Speaker 7>you're going to start to see some clarity. You're going

0:08:47.840 --> 0:08:49.679
<v Speaker 7>to see by the way, and you're going to see

0:08:49.679 --> 0:08:51.240
<v Speaker 7>what a cabinet looks like. You're going to see who

0:08:51.280 --> 0:08:53.400
<v Speaker 7>the people are. You're going to have a sense for

0:08:53.480 --> 0:08:57.040
<v Speaker 7>those personalities and they you know what their disposition is

0:08:57.040 --> 0:08:59.200
<v Speaker 7>with regard to policy. So yes, I think in March

0:08:59.679 --> 0:09:01.840
<v Speaker 7>then you are going to have you're going to have

0:09:01.880 --> 0:09:03.960
<v Speaker 7>to evaluate that and nine and have to evaluate what

0:09:04.000 --> 0:09:06.920
<v Speaker 7>it means for the forward growth forecast that's Edrica.

0:09:07.040 --> 0:09:09.080
<v Speaker 5>One thing really stood out to me in the press conference,

0:09:09.120 --> 0:09:12.320
<v Speaker 5>and yes, it was the no and the preparation for

0:09:12.400 --> 0:09:15.920
<v Speaker 5>that question, but also this focus on inflation being a

0:09:15.920 --> 0:09:19.480
<v Speaker 5>little bit stickier than in prior readings, and to me

0:09:19.559 --> 0:09:21.559
<v Speaker 5>that was notable because it seemed like they had left

0:09:21.720 --> 0:09:22.800
<v Speaker 5>inflation for dead.

0:09:22.880 --> 0:09:24.280
<v Speaker 1>That wasn't even part of the mandate.

0:09:24.320 --> 0:09:27.520
<v Speaker 5>It was, you know, sort of autopilot cutting until you

0:09:27.600 --> 0:09:29.160
<v Speaker 5>sort of get to a certain place and then you

0:09:29.200 --> 0:09:31.720
<v Speaker 5>wait and see how much does this turn the volume

0:09:31.800 --> 0:09:33.840
<v Speaker 5>up on CPI that comes out on Wednesday?

0:09:35.360 --> 0:09:35.800
<v Speaker 1>It does.

0:09:35.880 --> 0:09:39.120
<v Speaker 7>I mean, it's gonna listen, I think one man's opinion

0:09:39.480 --> 0:09:42.559
<v Speaker 7>or more our team's forecast. Listen, we think most of

0:09:42.600 --> 0:09:45.320
<v Speaker 7>the descent and inflation has happened. You know, we think

0:09:45.360 --> 0:09:48.720
<v Speaker 7>you've got tremendous goods deflation. Now you've got base effects

0:09:48.720 --> 0:09:52.320
<v Speaker 7>that aren't a tailwind going forward. What does service inflation

0:09:52.480 --> 0:09:55.520
<v Speaker 7>do from here? I mentioned it earlier. I think shelters

0:09:55.559 --> 0:09:57.280
<v Speaker 7>a really big deal and part of why I think

0:09:57.320 --> 0:09:59.440
<v Speaker 7>you got to get that rate down. You know, you

0:09:59.520 --> 0:10:01.080
<v Speaker 7>have you see you know what you've seen over the

0:10:01.120 --> 0:10:03.360
<v Speaker 7>last month. You look at housing affordability still a problem.

0:10:03.360 --> 0:10:06.400
<v Speaker 7>Housing starts are low, building permits are low, existing home

0:10:06.440 --> 0:10:09.760
<v Speaker 7>sales are low. You have a problem today, chilters. You're

0:10:09.760 --> 0:10:11.320
<v Speaker 7>not getting enough home building. You look at all the

0:10:11.320 --> 0:10:15.040
<v Speaker 7>home builder earnings, you know, pretty rough because they're subsidizing

0:10:15.559 --> 0:10:20.720
<v Speaker 7>mortgages or subsidizing houses through through their bottom line. Listen,

0:10:20.760 --> 0:10:22.040
<v Speaker 7>I think you're going to get the rate down. You

0:10:22.120 --> 0:10:25.560
<v Speaker 7>got to get housing moving more efficiently, and that, by

0:10:25.559 --> 0:10:27.800
<v Speaker 7>the way, that'll bring shelter inflation down. But that's been

0:10:27.840 --> 0:10:30.120
<v Speaker 7>the thing that's sticky. But yeah, I think we're going

0:10:30.160 --> 0:10:32.840
<v Speaker 7>to focus on what these in particularly I focus on

0:10:32.920 --> 0:10:35.160
<v Speaker 7>service inflation. Where are we going to be over the

0:10:35.200 --> 0:10:36.600
<v Speaker 7>next couple of months, And I think it's going to

0:10:36.600 --> 0:10:38.679
<v Speaker 7>be pretty important. I think most of the benefit you've

0:10:38.720 --> 0:10:39.760
<v Speaker 7>seen it play out already.

0:10:40.000 --> 0:10:42.200
<v Speaker 6>Rick, it's away from your rema. I was talking with

0:10:42.240 --> 0:10:46.800
<v Speaker 6>Derek Belchunis are et face BlackRock's got an interesting bitcoin

0:10:47.200 --> 0:10:52.960
<v Speaker 6>moments from printing seventy seven thousand, equities are moving, bonds

0:10:52.960 --> 0:10:56.160
<v Speaker 6>are moving in the way we've discussed what does bitcoin

0:10:56.200 --> 0:11:00.960
<v Speaker 6>at seventy seven thousand signal to fixed income into equities

0:11:01.080 --> 0:11:02.520
<v Speaker 6>and for that matter, to the dollar.

0:11:04.840 --> 0:11:06.559
<v Speaker 7>These are good questions, hard questions.

0:11:06.880 --> 0:11:07.160
<v Speaker 8>Listen.

0:11:07.200 --> 0:11:09.960
<v Speaker 7>I will say one thing. I mean, obviously, what bitcoing

0:11:10.000 --> 0:11:14.360
<v Speaker 7>is reflecting is a change, potential change in policy and

0:11:14.440 --> 0:11:17.720
<v Speaker 7>a more favorable disposition towards crypto. I think that's point

0:11:17.720 --> 0:11:20.800
<v Speaker 7>one and that's clearly the big driver. Second one that

0:11:20.840 --> 0:11:24.400
<v Speaker 7>I'll throw out there that I think is robust. Listen,

0:11:24.440 --> 0:11:27.160
<v Speaker 7>we got to deal with debt and deficits and what

0:11:27.160 --> 0:11:30.320
<v Speaker 7>does it mean for currency going forward? And listen, I

0:11:30.360 --> 0:11:32.680
<v Speaker 7>mean it's a scarce asset. It's becoming more scarce. And

0:11:32.720 --> 0:11:34.559
<v Speaker 7>I think, and I will tell you from doing a

0:11:34.640 --> 0:11:37.840
<v Speaker 7>lot of client meetings, people more and more thinking about

0:11:37.880 --> 0:11:41.280
<v Speaker 7>real assets. People are thinking about, gosh in a different world.

0:11:41.760 --> 0:11:43.040
<v Speaker 7>You know, what does it mean? You know, we got

0:11:43.040 --> 0:11:45.320
<v Speaker 7>to get our spending down because our debt is too large.

0:11:45.920 --> 0:11:49.480
<v Speaker 7>Do I own some scarce assets, some harp some real assets?

0:11:49.880 --> 0:11:52.600
<v Speaker 7>And I think that's playing through obviously, alongside the bigger

0:11:52.600 --> 0:11:56.679
<v Speaker 7>one being a more favorable disposition from policy in terms

0:11:56.720 --> 0:11:58.920
<v Speaker 7>of where that is. But Gosh, I hear more and

0:11:59.000 --> 0:12:01.280
<v Speaker 7>more about real assets. It's not just crypto, but in

0:12:01.280 --> 0:12:01.880
<v Speaker 7>other places.

0:12:02.040 --> 0:12:03.120
<v Speaker 3>Rick, I've got to follow on that.

0:12:03.559 --> 0:12:05.559
<v Speaker 2>I really want to understand from your perspective, whether you

0:12:05.600 --> 0:12:07.720
<v Speaker 2>see signs at the moment of people pushing back because

0:12:07.720 --> 0:12:10.880
<v Speaker 2>of the deficits. So let's take yesterday's price action as

0:12:10.920 --> 0:12:13.360
<v Speaker 2>just a snapshot of where things are out. So we

0:12:13.440 --> 0:12:16.720
<v Speaker 2>saw a big self and fixed income. And typically if

0:12:16.720 --> 0:12:19.440
<v Speaker 2>this was EMSA and we saw moves like that and

0:12:19.480 --> 0:12:22.440
<v Speaker 2>I was worried about the fiscal position of that country,

0:12:22.559 --> 0:12:23.920
<v Speaker 2>we'd see the currency weakness too.

0:12:24.280 --> 0:12:26.000
<v Speaker 3>But you didn't see that yesterday. You saw a lot

0:12:26.000 --> 0:12:26.680
<v Speaker 3>of dollar strength.

0:12:26.960 --> 0:12:29.120
<v Speaker 2>So I'm wondering, from your perspective outside of that, whether

0:12:29.120 --> 0:12:32.080
<v Speaker 2>you are already seeing signs of pushback and whether you'd

0:12:32.080 --> 0:12:33.800
<v Speaker 2>expect to see it pop up in the US dollar

0:12:33.840 --> 0:12:34.560
<v Speaker 2>anytime soon.

0:12:34.720 --> 0:12:35.520
<v Speaker 3>If it's all.

0:12:37.120 --> 0:12:39.240
<v Speaker 7>So, I think the first thing people react to is

0:12:39.240 --> 0:12:43.800
<v Speaker 7>you got a change in policy, tariffs, stronger dollar generally,

0:12:43.840 --> 0:12:45.920
<v Speaker 7>and I think that's a market tends to knee jerk market.

0:12:45.920 --> 0:12:47.680
<v Speaker 7>You usually can only focus on one thing at a time,

0:12:47.960 --> 0:12:50.640
<v Speaker 7>and I think it was focused on that. I don't

0:12:50.640 --> 0:12:52.839
<v Speaker 7>do a client meeting today. We're not The first or

0:12:52.880 --> 0:12:54.880
<v Speaker 7>second question is about the debt. It isn't about the

0:12:54.880 --> 0:12:58.040
<v Speaker 7>debt of the country. The deficits were running. I think

0:12:58.080 --> 0:13:00.880
<v Speaker 7>this administration is going to have to this Congress is

0:13:00.920 --> 0:13:03.160
<v Speaker 7>going to have to address there's too much debt coming do.

0:13:03.200 --> 0:13:05.720
<v Speaker 7>If you said to me next year, like Lisa said,

0:13:05.720 --> 0:13:08.880
<v Speaker 7>We're going to be laser focused on inflation. We're also

0:13:08.880 --> 0:13:11.960
<v Speaker 7>going to be laser focused on auctions because we're issuing

0:13:12.040 --> 0:13:16.280
<v Speaker 7>so much debt every single week. Every client wants to

0:13:16.280 --> 0:13:18.000
<v Speaker 7>know and I think gets to that question of why

0:13:18.000 --> 0:13:19.920
<v Speaker 7>people are buying real assets. How the thing about, by

0:13:19.920 --> 0:13:23.960
<v Speaker 7>the way, equities are an operating leverage machine on GDP

0:13:24.640 --> 0:13:27.480
<v Speaker 7>and car fank you think about what does well in

0:13:27.520 --> 0:13:31.200
<v Speaker 7>this environment. Equities still do well. But I gosh, every

0:13:31.280 --> 0:13:33.480
<v Speaker 7>client meeting I go to, people want to talk about

0:13:33.480 --> 0:13:35.559
<v Speaker 7>the debt. And I think it is definitely going to

0:13:35.640 --> 0:13:40.360
<v Speaker 7>become much much more of the regular dialogue in everything

0:13:40.400 --> 0:13:43.280
<v Speaker 7>we do. Investor, by the way, not just financial investors,

0:13:43.640 --> 0:13:46.920
<v Speaker 7>corporate CEOs, CFOs, how they think about cap x, R

0:13:47.000 --> 0:13:48.559
<v Speaker 7>and D. I think it's going to be a big

0:13:48.559 --> 0:13:49.440
<v Speaker 7>deal going forward.

0:13:49.640 --> 0:13:52.080
<v Speaker 5>Can you just elaborate on that in terms of when

0:13:52.120 --> 0:13:55.200
<v Speaker 5>we'll actually see it in a more dramatic fashion, because

0:13:55.240 --> 0:13:57.079
<v Speaker 5>you can make a lot of arguments for why yilts

0:13:57.120 --> 0:13:58.240
<v Speaker 5>have gone up, and frankly J.

0:13:58.360 --> 0:14:00.800
<v Speaker 1>Powell said, I'm not going to parse out.

0:14:00.679 --> 0:14:02.680
<v Speaker 5>What's what, but some of it could be deficits, some

0:14:02.720 --> 0:14:04.560
<v Speaker 5>of it could be the political regime, some of it

0:14:04.559 --> 0:14:06.480
<v Speaker 5>could be better than expected growth. I don't even know.

0:14:06.559 --> 0:14:08.719
<v Speaker 5>I don't care it's going to stop anyway. At what

0:14:08.760 --> 0:14:11.320
<v Speaker 5>point do you say this is real and this is

0:14:11.400 --> 0:14:13.920
<v Speaker 5>actually a risk premium that's being put on for the

0:14:13.960 --> 0:14:14.520
<v Speaker 5>first time.

0:14:14.400 --> 0:14:15.120
<v Speaker 1>In a long time.

0:14:16.000 --> 0:14:19.000
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, you know, we'd say a couple of things that,

0:14:19.080 --> 0:14:22.080
<v Speaker 7>you know, Listen, it's hard to parse any individual movement

0:14:22.480 --> 0:14:25.840
<v Speaker 7>that takes place in markets. But I think more and more,

0:14:25.920 --> 0:14:27.400
<v Speaker 7>you know, by the way you look at what's happened

0:14:27.400 --> 0:14:30.400
<v Speaker 7>to the credit markets. Spreads keep tightening, spreads keep tightening.

0:14:30.960 --> 0:14:33.040
<v Speaker 7>You know, I've said this before. If you go through

0:14:33.120 --> 0:14:35.720
<v Speaker 7>some of the companies today, high free cash flow, don't

0:14:35.720 --> 0:14:38.400
<v Speaker 7>borrow on the front end of the curve, don't have

0:14:38.480 --> 0:14:40.800
<v Speaker 7>any financing, don't have a maturity wall. I then think

0:14:40.800 --> 0:14:43.280
<v Speaker 7>about the US government. We threaten a default every couple

0:14:43.280 --> 0:14:45.160
<v Speaker 7>of years. We borrow at the front end. And the

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:50.480
<v Speaker 7>immense size of bill COUPONSI bill auctions we do every week,

0:14:50.640 --> 0:14:53.560
<v Speaker 7>coupon auctions we do every week. Listen, I think it

0:14:53.600 --> 0:14:56.200
<v Speaker 7>is you know, it's part of why every auction you

0:14:56.280 --> 0:14:58.320
<v Speaker 7>got to watch, you know, is the particularly in the

0:14:58.360 --> 0:15:00.240
<v Speaker 7>back end of the curve. Listen, I think there's going

0:15:00.280 --> 0:15:03.320
<v Speaker 7>to continue to be a strong bid to you know.

0:15:03.360 --> 0:15:05.400
<v Speaker 7>And by the way, part of why I like portfolios

0:15:05.680 --> 0:15:07.240
<v Speaker 7>clip a lot of yield in the front end. Just

0:15:07.320 --> 0:15:09.960
<v Speaker 7>keep clipping that yield, clipping that yield, you know, the

0:15:10.000 --> 0:15:11.360
<v Speaker 7>back end. I think it's going to be a big

0:15:11.400 --> 0:15:14.200
<v Speaker 7>focus going forward. Like you said, you know, we've never

0:15:14.280 --> 0:15:17.080
<v Speaker 7>had I would argue in the US, it's not just

0:15:17.120 --> 0:15:19.640
<v Speaker 7>the amount of debt, it's the debt service. We're talking

0:15:19.640 --> 0:15:23.000
<v Speaker 7>about interest rates. We used to print treasury bills at

0:15:23.080 --> 0:15:26.320
<v Speaker 7>zero percent, one percent, you know. Now we're printing huge

0:15:26.360 --> 0:15:28.920
<v Speaker 7>size treasury bills every week at high level. So it's

0:15:28.920 --> 0:15:31.280
<v Speaker 7>going to be it's going to be a big focus.

0:15:31.360 --> 0:15:33.920
<v Speaker 7>And you know, is there one event listen, I think

0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:35.840
<v Speaker 7>auctions are going to be are going to be worth watching,

0:15:35.880 --> 0:15:37.800
<v Speaker 7>and I listen to the shape of the curve, you

0:15:37.840 --> 0:15:39.840
<v Speaker 7>know what. I would say one last thing, and I

0:15:39.880 --> 0:15:42.440
<v Speaker 7>think JPO was very clear and right. In this markets

0:15:42.440 --> 0:15:44.520
<v Speaker 7>can be wrong a lot. You know, we had we

0:15:44.600 --> 0:15:47.160
<v Speaker 7>priced two hard landings already this year. Markets can get

0:15:47.200 --> 0:15:49.440
<v Speaker 7>crazy extreme one way or the other. But I think

0:15:49.440 --> 0:15:52.480
<v Speaker 7>you've got to watch over time the premium we're paying

0:15:52.480 --> 0:15:54.720
<v Speaker 7>in this country for the amount of debt that we're

0:15:54.720 --> 0:15:56.240
<v Speaker 7>going to issue, what it means for the currency, and

0:15:56.240 --> 0:15:58.720
<v Speaker 7>what it means, you know, for how much how much

0:15:58.720 --> 0:16:01.360
<v Speaker 7>will people absorb, not justically but internationally.

0:16:01.600 --> 0:16:03.440
<v Speaker 2>Rick, I've had a couple of whispers, and I'd love

0:16:03.480 --> 0:16:06.440
<v Speaker 2>your response to this. From a couple of banks, they're

0:16:06.440 --> 0:16:10.720
<v Speaker 2>anticipated that maybe credit trades through treasuries, investment grade US

0:16:10.720 --> 0:16:14.600
<v Speaker 2>corporate credit trading through treasuries. I'd love your view on that.

0:16:15.080 --> 0:16:18.120
<v Speaker 2>Is that possible because for some companies, we're not that

0:16:18.240 --> 0:16:20.240
<v Speaker 2>far away. Do you think we could see that in

0:16:20.240 --> 0:16:21.400
<v Speaker 2>the next twelve months.

0:16:23.320 --> 0:16:25.080
<v Speaker 7>Sir Jonathan, I never thought if you go back a

0:16:25.120 --> 0:16:26.960
<v Speaker 7>few years ago, I never thought. We've talked about it

0:16:27.040 --> 0:16:29.720
<v Speaker 7>years ago. Remember we were funding companies a negative yield,

0:16:29.800 --> 0:16:31.320
<v Speaker 7>Like I never thought that would happen. Do you remember that

0:16:31.320 --> 0:16:33.600
<v Speaker 7>in Europe? Like we're lending company and I remember it

0:16:33.600 --> 0:16:35.160
<v Speaker 7>explaining to my kids, like I'm lending money to the

0:16:35.160 --> 0:16:37.120
<v Speaker 7>companies that negative I'm paying them to take my money.

0:16:37.120 --> 0:16:39.000
<v Speaker 7>But then, you know, explaining why bons where they are

0:16:39.120 --> 0:16:42.240
<v Speaker 7>starting to hard to explain anyway. So is it possible.

0:16:42.280 --> 0:16:45.400
<v Speaker 7>It's definitely possible. You know, the supply demand dynamics are

0:16:45.480 --> 0:16:48.240
<v Speaker 7>quite different, and it's definitely possible. I mean the spread

0:16:48.240 --> 0:16:52.040
<v Speaker 7>tightening you're seeing across the board is pretty powerful. Listen,

0:16:53.040 --> 0:16:55.960
<v Speaker 7>one thing, ultimately, taxing authority is a really big deal.

0:16:56.320 --> 0:16:58.760
<v Speaker 7>And there's one thing that I think is usually important

0:16:58.760 --> 0:17:02.160
<v Speaker 7>for the next couple of years. There's been a massive

0:17:02.160 --> 0:17:04.280
<v Speaker 7>transfer of money from the public sector of the private Chector.

0:17:04.359 --> 0:17:06.199
<v Speaker 7>The private sector has got I think the numbers two

0:17:06.280 --> 0:17:10.080
<v Speaker 7>hundred and twenty trillion of net worth. The asset coverage

0:17:10.119 --> 0:17:12.480
<v Speaker 7>in the United States is pretty darn good. How do

0:17:12.560 --> 0:17:14.480
<v Speaker 7>you get at that asset coverage? How do you get

0:17:14.480 --> 0:17:16.919
<v Speaker 7>at that net worth to send some of that money

0:17:16.960 --> 0:17:19.280
<v Speaker 7>back to the government versus what they've transferred to the

0:17:19.280 --> 0:17:21.560
<v Speaker 7>private sector. And that's going to be the evolution that

0:17:21.600 --> 0:17:23.680
<v Speaker 7>I think this administration is going to have to navigate.

0:17:23.720 --> 0:17:27.080
<v Speaker 6>John, your insight there is critical. At least thirty five

0:17:27.160 --> 0:17:29.800
<v Speaker 6>years ago, I had the privilege of hearing John Templeton

0:17:30.359 --> 0:17:34.240
<v Speaker 6>say the same idea the credit would trade through full

0:17:34.240 --> 0:17:38.560
<v Speaker 6>faith and credit. Then it was unbelievable. Now it's unbelievable,

0:17:38.680 --> 0:17:40.120
<v Speaker 6>but it's a critical insight.

0:17:40.240 --> 0:17:41.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, but you heard what Rick said there, and it's

0:17:41.880 --> 0:17:45.560
<v Speaker 2>really important. Through the pandemic, there was a massive transfer

0:17:45.920 --> 0:17:47.960
<v Speaker 2>of money top and it was from the self righn

0:17:48.359 --> 0:17:51.600
<v Speaker 2>to corporate America to individuals, the households, Which is why

0:17:51.640 --> 0:17:54.399
<v Speaker 2>what we've seen ultimately because of policy coming out of

0:17:54.400 --> 0:17:56.880
<v Speaker 2>the pandemic is the balance sheets the corporates are better.

0:17:57.359 --> 0:18:00.600
<v Speaker 2>Balance sheets from households were rock solid. And what got weaker?

0:18:00.680 --> 0:18:03.960
<v Speaker 2>Where is the leverage the sovereign? Now, Rick, you followed

0:18:03.960 --> 0:18:06.320
<v Speaker 2>that up and said that ultimately that's going to have

0:18:06.359 --> 0:18:07.440
<v Speaker 2>to be a source of revenue.

0:18:07.480 --> 0:18:09.000
<v Speaker 3>But that's not the policy proposal.

0:18:09.520 --> 0:18:11.800
<v Speaker 2>The policy proposal, as you know, is to drop corporate

0:18:11.840 --> 0:18:14.360
<v Speaker 2>tax rates from twenty one to fifteen with conditions, which

0:18:14.480 --> 0:18:17.320
<v Speaker 2>is domestic manufacturing. I get all of that, Rick, Are

0:18:17.359 --> 0:18:18.960
<v Speaker 2>you basically saying that at some point we need to

0:18:19.040 --> 0:18:21.040
<v Speaker 2>understand that that's what we need to do, even if

0:18:21.040 --> 0:18:23.080
<v Speaker 2>it's not what we want to do. And Rick, for

0:18:23.119 --> 0:18:25.800
<v Speaker 2>that to happen, you need guardrails, You need constraining forces,

0:18:25.840 --> 0:18:27.240
<v Speaker 2>and I don't see any sign of that from many

0:18:27.240 --> 0:18:30.040
<v Speaker 2>policy makers in Washington. And ultimately, it means it needs

0:18:30.040 --> 0:18:32.080
<v Speaker 2>to come from the market. And the question is, Rick,

0:18:32.080 --> 0:18:34.320
<v Speaker 2>it's the question we've asked for a decade plus. Will

0:18:34.320 --> 0:18:38.159
<v Speaker 2>the market actually provide those forces? Will they constrain the

0:18:38.320 --> 0:18:43.080
<v Speaker 2>hopes of fiscal policy? Makers the tax cut hopes from campaigning.

0:18:43.240 --> 0:18:45.040
<v Speaker 2>Do you think the market will be a constraining factor

0:18:45.119 --> 0:18:45.320
<v Speaker 2>or not?

0:18:48.000 --> 0:18:52.480
<v Speaker 7>The answer is yes. Listen, I think policy generally doesn't react.

0:18:52.600 --> 0:18:54.640
<v Speaker 7>You know, hopefully I'm wrong in this case, but generally

0:18:54.640 --> 0:18:57.160
<v Speaker 7>policy doesn't react to the sharks right next to the boat.

0:18:57.640 --> 0:18:57.840
<v Speaker 8>Yeah.

0:18:57.840 --> 0:19:00.159
<v Speaker 7>And I think you know, the markets will usually and

0:19:00.200 --> 0:19:02.600
<v Speaker 7>to anticipate things, and by the way, I often anticipate

0:19:02.600 --> 0:19:06.720
<v Speaker 7>them too early or wrong. But I think the markets

0:19:06.760 --> 0:19:10.200
<v Speaker 7>are going to be a great barometer for what policy

0:19:10.240 --> 0:19:12.800
<v Speaker 7>needs to adjust to. So you know, I'm hoping it's

0:19:12.800 --> 0:19:15.000
<v Speaker 7>not egregious in terms of how that manifests itself. And

0:19:15.000 --> 0:19:17.080
<v Speaker 7>I will say one thing and we get debate tax policy,

0:19:17.160 --> 0:19:21.000
<v Speaker 7>marginal tax rates. Listen, I think the US economy, there's

0:19:21.000 --> 0:19:23.000
<v Speaker 7>only one way that you bring the debt down. You

0:19:23.040 --> 0:19:26.200
<v Speaker 7>got to outrun it and nominal GDP. We have to grow.

0:19:26.680 --> 0:19:29.240
<v Speaker 7>Economy's got to grow. There's a series of initiatives you

0:19:29.280 --> 0:19:31.240
<v Speaker 7>can have. You can have fiscal spend as long as

0:19:31.240 --> 0:19:34.280
<v Speaker 7>it's got velocity to it and that the economy is growing.

0:19:34.520 --> 0:19:36.280
<v Speaker 7>And then the cost of the debt has to come down,

0:19:36.320 --> 0:19:38.000
<v Speaker 7>and the shear size of the debt has to come down.

0:19:38.320 --> 0:19:41.840
<v Speaker 7>And then we slowly bring the debt problem down in

0:19:41.880 --> 0:19:43.679
<v Speaker 7>this country. But I think it has to be a

0:19:43.680 --> 0:19:47.159
<v Speaker 7>whole series of initiatives and quite frankly, policy needs to

0:19:47.200 --> 0:19:52.120
<v Speaker 7>create confidence of investors of the general populace that they're

0:19:52.160 --> 0:19:54.760
<v Speaker 7>moving the boat in that direction. And by the way,

0:19:54.920 --> 0:19:58.200
<v Speaker 7>confidence is hugely powerful. You can do a tremendous amount.

0:19:58.240 --> 0:20:01.160
<v Speaker 7>Your comment or it's comment about emerging markets the one

0:20:01.160 --> 0:20:03.280
<v Speaker 7>thing US has, and you look at the faith in

0:20:03.320 --> 0:20:05.359
<v Speaker 7>the fat and the faith in the in the confidence

0:20:05.720 --> 0:20:08.440
<v Speaker 7>that will ultimately do the right thing. But I think

0:20:08.480 --> 0:20:10.679
<v Speaker 7>you think that's going to be really critical going forward.

0:20:10.880 --> 0:20:13.080
<v Speaker 2>Rick, you're a money manager. Can we finish there on

0:20:13.119 --> 0:20:15.160
<v Speaker 2>what you've been doing? Were selling bonds yesterday?

0:20:17.000 --> 0:20:21.320
<v Speaker 7>No? The uh no, not yesterday. But you listen to me,

0:20:21.600 --> 0:20:25.000
<v Speaker 7>you know, I would just say, if you know, listen

0:20:25.040 --> 0:20:27.680
<v Speaker 7>there without getting specific in terms of things we're doing.

0:20:27.960 --> 0:20:29.840
<v Speaker 7>You know, I think there was regulatory change, or I

0:20:29.840 --> 0:20:33.080
<v Speaker 7>think there's potential regulatory change. The financials are interesting. I

0:20:33.080 --> 0:20:37.080
<v Speaker 7>think fixed income products like mortgages are interesting. When you

0:20:37.240 --> 0:20:40.359
<v Speaker 7>change the regulatory dynamic around banks and their ability to

0:20:40.359 --> 0:20:43.080
<v Speaker 7>buy different things, so you know, those assets have become

0:20:43.359 --> 0:20:47.240
<v Speaker 7>more interesting. Listen, I think equities are rightly moving in

0:20:47.280 --> 0:20:49.879
<v Speaker 7>the direction they should move with with a series of

0:20:49.920 --> 0:20:54.639
<v Speaker 7>initiatives that could stimulate growth here going forward. So you know,

0:20:54.680 --> 0:20:57.560
<v Speaker 7>I like, I like parts of the equity market, and

0:20:57.600 --> 0:20:59.240
<v Speaker 7>that's so that's been And then you know the other

0:20:59.280 --> 0:21:00.640
<v Speaker 7>side of it is that you know something that I'm

0:21:00.680 --> 0:21:03.760
<v Speaker 7>just going to keep persisting on the front to the

0:21:03.760 --> 0:21:09.320
<v Speaker 7>belly of the curve, yielding assets, credit, securitized assets Europe

0:21:09.640 --> 0:21:12.080
<v Speaker 7>where you buy credit, et cetera. Like, if you just

0:21:12.160 --> 0:21:14.960
<v Speaker 7>keep clipping this yield it is I mean, even if

0:21:15.080 --> 0:21:17.879
<v Speaker 7>rates move up somewhat, you're still able to build portfolios.

0:21:17.880 --> 0:21:20.320
<v Speaker 7>We have the CTF bink you're still able to create

0:21:20.320 --> 0:21:24.360
<v Speaker 7>this portfolio six and a half percent yield. That's pretty spectacular.

0:21:24.400 --> 0:21:27.399
<v Speaker 7>With inflation running at two you can be two point

0:21:27.440 --> 0:21:30.560
<v Speaker 7>three percent. So that's my key is like, just let's

0:21:30.600 --> 0:21:32.480
<v Speaker 7>keep buying this yield and hold this yield in the

0:21:32.480 --> 0:21:34.520
<v Speaker 7>front of the belly and then let people take the

0:21:34.600 --> 0:21:35.920
<v Speaker 7>risk further out the yield curve.

0:21:36.320 --> 0:21:37.320
<v Speaker 3>Rick, this was awesome.

0:21:37.359 --> 0:21:39.439
<v Speaker 2>It's going to catch have this appreciate it, Rick Rater

0:21:39.520 --> 0:21:42.160
<v Speaker 2>with black Rock, when do you begin with that conversation?

0:21:42.320 --> 0:21:43.120
<v Speaker 3>So let's at chew over.

0:21:43.359 --> 0:21:45.520
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, Well, First of all, he was talking about inflation

0:21:45.600 --> 0:21:50.080
<v Speaker 5>possibly being sticky even before what it transpired in Washington, DC.

0:21:50.640 --> 0:21:54.000
<v Speaker 5>I love his response to you about were you selling bonds?

0:21:55.280 --> 0:21:57.040
<v Speaker 3>We like Morgatis well on banks.

0:21:57.200 --> 0:21:58.880
<v Speaker 1>We like banks, we like stocks.

0:21:58.960 --> 0:22:00.680
<v Speaker 5>But this to me is really the key to pay,

0:22:00.960 --> 0:22:03.400
<v Speaker 5>which is how much can you buy the front end

0:22:03.560 --> 0:22:06.120
<v Speaker 5>clip the coupon? Is this making cash great again essentially

0:22:06.119 --> 0:22:08.680
<v Speaker 5>for people who want to sort of get some income

0:22:09.040 --> 0:22:11.560
<v Speaker 5>on their margins but then go into asset classes that

0:22:11.600 --> 0:22:14.600
<v Speaker 5>are going to be less vulnerable to a potential inflationary shops.

0:22:14.640 --> 0:22:16.840
<v Speaker 2>Just a guess, and I haven't hunt directly. I'm not

0:22:16.880 --> 0:22:18.920
<v Speaker 2>sure if the Trump administration is looking to make cash

0:22:18.920 --> 0:22:20.240
<v Speaker 2>great again, but we'll see.

0:22:20.240 --> 0:22:21.200
<v Speaker 3>I guess maybe that is a go.

0:22:21.440 --> 0:22:23.600
<v Speaker 5>Well, maybe it's make crypto gritty, And actually I think

0:22:23.600 --> 0:22:26.280
<v Speaker 5>that it's make dollar less great so that it's weaker,

0:22:26.480 --> 0:22:28.720
<v Speaker 5>although it seems like that's somewhat contradictor.

0:22:28.440 --> 0:22:29.199
<v Speaker 3>Let's get to Mima kay.

0:22:29.320 --> 0:22:31.440
<v Speaker 2>My mckaby was in that room in that news conference,

0:22:31.440 --> 0:22:33.879
<v Speaker 2>and Mike McKay at some point there was some tension

0:22:33.920 --> 0:22:34.600
<v Speaker 2>with Sham and Pow.

0:22:34.640 --> 0:22:38.400
<v Speaker 9>Were you surprised, No, I don't think anybody was surprised

0:22:38.760 --> 0:22:40.520
<v Speaker 9>we got about as much out of him as we

0:22:40.560 --> 0:22:43.200
<v Speaker 9>thought we would get. On the issue of Donald Trump

0:22:43.240 --> 0:22:46.240
<v Speaker 9>and the elections, he just answered with one word and

0:22:46.560 --> 0:22:50.120
<v Speaker 9>then one sentence. No, he's not going to resign if asked,

0:22:50.200 --> 0:22:55.240
<v Speaker 9>and it's not permitted by law for the president to

0:22:55.280 --> 0:22:59.000
<v Speaker 9>demote anybody on the FED. And there wasn't as many

0:22:59.080 --> 0:23:01.760
<v Speaker 9>questions along those lines as maybe we thought there would

0:23:01.760 --> 0:23:05.200
<v Speaker 9>be because he was so definitive on those two answers.

0:23:05.320 --> 0:23:08.960
<v Speaker 9>I think what you got today was two different news

0:23:09.000 --> 0:23:12.200
<v Speaker 9>conference messages. One was to the people inside the beltwigh

0:23:12.359 --> 0:23:16.359
<v Speaker 9>here in Washington about his relationship with Donald Trump, and

0:23:16.440 --> 0:23:18.560
<v Speaker 9>the other is to the markets. And that Rick picked

0:23:18.640 --> 0:23:21.439
<v Speaker 9>up on this very well. The FED does not know

0:23:21.480 --> 0:23:23.000
<v Speaker 9>what it's going to do. There are a lot of

0:23:23.040 --> 0:23:25.320
<v Speaker 9>cross currents coming in twenty twenty five.

0:23:25.640 --> 0:23:28.520
<v Speaker 3>So if you think that the FED.

0:23:28.440 --> 0:23:30.439
<v Speaker 9>Is on some sort of path because of the last

0:23:30.480 --> 0:23:33.320
<v Speaker 9>sep in the last dot plot, you're going to probably

0:23:33.440 --> 0:23:35.560
<v Speaker 9>be wrong. The FED has a lot to keep an

0:23:35.600 --> 0:23:38.320
<v Speaker 9>eye on, not just with the president, but with everything

0:23:38.359 --> 0:23:39.600
<v Speaker 9>else going on in the world.

0:23:39.800 --> 0:23:42.280
<v Speaker 5>With respect to the message to the market, he was

0:23:42.359 --> 0:23:44.720
<v Speaker 5>asked about the fact that the Federal moved the reference

0:23:44.760 --> 0:23:47.520
<v Speaker 5>to gaining confidence on inflation, and he basically said, there's

0:23:47.520 --> 0:23:50.000
<v Speaker 5>nothing to see here. It was just a semantic issue

0:23:50.359 --> 0:23:52.040
<v Speaker 5>that we already said that and we're not going to

0:23:52.080 --> 0:23:52.680
<v Speaker 5>repeat it.

0:23:52.760 --> 0:23:53.320
<v Speaker 1>Do you buy that?

0:23:54.720 --> 0:23:55.040
<v Speaker 3>I do?

0:23:55.160 --> 0:23:57.640
<v Speaker 9>And that was the conclusion that not only I came

0:23:57.640 --> 0:23:59.760
<v Speaker 9>to when I read this statement in the lock up,

0:23:59.800 --> 0:24:02.760
<v Speaker 9>but all the other reporters basically came to as well,

0:24:02.920 --> 0:24:06.120
<v Speaker 9>We've seen this before. When they start changing policy, they

0:24:06.119 --> 0:24:09.000
<v Speaker 9>give a rationale for that, we're moving in the direction

0:24:09.080 --> 0:24:10.800
<v Speaker 9>or we're getting close to where we need to be,

0:24:11.119 --> 0:24:13.480
<v Speaker 9>and then after that they're already there, so they don't

0:24:13.560 --> 0:24:16.680
<v Speaker 9>need to keep repeating that. They just took it out,

0:24:16.760 --> 0:24:18.480
<v Speaker 9>as he said, for clarity.

0:24:18.960 --> 0:24:21.159
<v Speaker 2>Mike McKay, I'm the latest in that news conference. Might

0:24:21.200 --> 0:24:23.680
<v Speaker 2>we'll have a longer conversation tomorrow when you get back

0:24:23.720 --> 0:24:26.720
<v Speaker 2>to New York City. What a news conference with chem

0:24:26.760 --> 0:24:28.919
<v Speaker 2>and Pound, Tom Constant with us now of Miszoo.

0:24:29.119 --> 0:24:30.119
<v Speaker 3>Tom, welcome to the program.

0:24:30.119 --> 0:24:32.000
<v Speaker 2>We'll just give you the opportunity to share your initial

0:24:32.040 --> 0:24:33.919
<v Speaker 2>takes from that news conference and then we'll get into it.

0:24:33.960 --> 0:24:34.760
<v Speaker 3>What's that for you?

0:24:36.400 --> 0:24:38.800
<v Speaker 10>It was pretty much as expected in the sense that

0:24:39.600 --> 0:24:42.359
<v Speaker 10>he's still committing to the easing cycle. I think this

0:24:42.520 --> 0:24:46.280
<v Speaker 10>sort of new news might be, where might they pause

0:24:46.600 --> 0:24:49.280
<v Speaker 10>in the context of the new policy regime that we'll

0:24:49.320 --> 0:24:51.199
<v Speaker 10>be getting with a change in the administration.

0:24:51.560 --> 0:24:52.840
<v Speaker 8>But the idea is, I think.

0:24:52.680 --> 0:24:55.360
<v Speaker 10>There are you know, are subjects of the data really shocking.

0:24:55.520 --> 0:24:57.639
<v Speaker 10>They're kind of on an auto pilot to get rates

0:24:57.680 --> 0:24:59.840
<v Speaker 10>down to around four percent and the early part of

0:24:59.880 --> 0:25:01.760
<v Speaker 10>that next year, and then we take it from there.

0:25:01.880 --> 0:25:04.720
<v Speaker 10>If they have to respond to policies that adjust the

0:25:04.840 --> 0:25:07.720
<v Speaker 10>balance of risks, for example, then you know they'll.

0:25:07.560 --> 0:25:08.920
<v Speaker 8>They'll they'll figure that out then.

0:25:09.160 --> 0:25:12.440
<v Speaker 10>But the election itself isn't really affecting what we thought

0:25:12.480 --> 0:25:13.760
<v Speaker 10>any way they were going to do.

0:25:13.760 --> 0:25:17.440
<v Speaker 6>Donickive's the theme of a Trump administration has growth at

0:25:17.480 --> 0:25:20.760
<v Speaker 6>any cost, pushing against all this is going to be

0:25:20.800 --> 0:25:24.520
<v Speaker 6>a nominal GDP left When you sum things together with

0:25:24.600 --> 0:25:28.160
<v Speaker 6>Steve Rashudo, do you just assume a run rate five

0:25:28.280 --> 0:25:31.520
<v Speaker 6>percent nominal GDP or can I even look for an

0:25:31.520 --> 0:25:34.040
<v Speaker 6>animal spirit towards six percent?

0:25:35.400 --> 0:25:37.639
<v Speaker 10>Well, I definitely think there's a there's an animal spirit

0:25:37.680 --> 0:25:40.840
<v Speaker 10>sing out there. That's pretty interesting. I Mean, the the

0:25:40.840 --> 0:25:44.480
<v Speaker 10>only caveat is when we went through tarifs before, you know,

0:25:44.480 --> 0:25:46.399
<v Speaker 10>when they started to sort of hit it wasn't clear

0:25:46.600 --> 0:25:49.600
<v Speaker 10>in twenty nineteen that the animal spirits were exactly kicking in,

0:25:49.800 --> 0:25:51.920
<v Speaker 10>and the fact had to get into extra easing mode

0:25:52.000 --> 0:25:54.320
<v Speaker 10>by then. So I think there is certainly some definitely

0:25:54.359 --> 0:25:57.439
<v Speaker 10>uncertainty around the whole thing right now. Though you know

0:25:57.480 --> 0:26:00.000
<v Speaker 10>the issue is a lad market. You know it's not great.

0:26:00.160 --> 0:26:03.600
<v Speaker 10>I mean, employment growth is sort of stagnating. I would

0:26:03.600 --> 0:26:07.040
<v Speaker 10>say the economy has been bifurcated. You've had some very

0:26:07.040 --> 0:26:09.919
<v Speaker 10>strong sectors, some weak sectors, and you know, if it

0:26:10.000 --> 0:26:13.640
<v Speaker 10>wasn't for the latest, you know that the election, we'd

0:26:13.680 --> 0:26:15.440
<v Speaker 10>still be in the mode whereby the FED would be

0:26:15.560 --> 0:26:19.480
<v Speaker 10>preemptively trying to cut rates quite quickly to stop unemployment

0:26:19.480 --> 0:26:21.919
<v Speaker 10>going up. So we can't forget that, and we're going

0:26:22.000 --> 0:26:24.439
<v Speaker 10>to have a few more months whereby, if animal spirits

0:26:24.480 --> 0:26:28.400
<v Speaker 10>don't kick up, you might still well see unemployment rising

0:26:29.160 --> 0:26:32.479
<v Speaker 10>above where the FED expects it to be. And therefore,

0:26:32.520 --> 0:26:34.800
<v Speaker 10>you know, some disappointment. I mean, growth itself is a

0:26:34.800 --> 0:26:37.600
<v Speaker 10>bit of a lagging indicator, and it really reflects the

0:26:37.640 --> 0:26:40.439
<v Speaker 10>average of the economy, doesn't reflect the underlying weaknesses and

0:26:40.480 --> 0:26:41.320
<v Speaker 10>some of the sectors.

0:26:41.359 --> 0:26:44.120
<v Speaker 6>If we expect the unexpected is a year go through

0:26:44.160 --> 0:26:46.800
<v Speaker 6>parody or dare I say one on three maybe and

0:26:46.880 --> 0:26:50.199
<v Speaker 6>you answer one sixty will signal a new resilient and

0:26:50.280 --> 0:26:51.119
<v Speaker 6>stronger dollar.

0:26:52.400 --> 0:26:53.840
<v Speaker 8>Well, I mean it really should do.

0:26:53.960 --> 0:26:55.760
<v Speaker 10>I mean, you know, if, especially if you're going to

0:26:55.760 --> 0:26:58.400
<v Speaker 10>start pricing for the tariff. So again, what we don't

0:26:58.440 --> 0:27:00.800
<v Speaker 10>know is whether the tariff threat it's just a threat,

0:27:00.920 --> 0:27:02.439
<v Speaker 10>whether it's going to be enacted. If you are going

0:27:02.480 --> 0:27:04.680
<v Speaker 10>to enact taris, then you know there is obviously the

0:27:04.760 --> 0:27:07.440
<v Speaker 10>risk the dollar is going to basically go up, and

0:27:07.720 --> 0:27:10.440
<v Speaker 10>that's a big part of that. And then you get

0:27:10.440 --> 0:27:12.600
<v Speaker 10>into the you know, the instance of the tariff is

0:27:12.600 --> 0:27:16.399
<v Speaker 10>obviously falling onto the exporters. The consumer is going to

0:27:16.440 --> 0:27:18.600
<v Speaker 10>be somewhat protected. You know, that's where we might end

0:27:18.680 --> 0:27:21.199
<v Speaker 10>up getting. But you know, Trump is Trump, and so

0:27:21.560 --> 0:27:23.680
<v Speaker 10>you know it could well be just a big bargaining

0:27:23.720 --> 0:27:25.320
<v Speaker 10>chip and we might not get the full force of

0:27:25.359 --> 0:27:27.280
<v Speaker 10>the tariffs. I would say one thing about tarast so

0:27:27.560 --> 0:27:29.720
<v Speaker 10>is we do actually need them if he's genuine about

0:27:29.760 --> 0:27:34.000
<v Speaker 10>his tax cuts and the modification to the tax law,

0:27:34.240 --> 0:27:36.280
<v Speaker 10>and next year, you do need the tariffs to actually

0:27:36.320 --> 0:27:38.879
<v Speaker 10>pay for that. So you know, I'm guessing we're going

0:27:38.920 --> 0:27:39.720
<v Speaker 10>to get the tariffs in the.

0:27:39.800 --> 0:27:42.159
<v Speaker 5>End, I'm just putting the policy aside. And there have

0:27:42.200 --> 0:27:44.760
<v Speaker 5>been other changes that have happened in the past three

0:27:44.920 --> 0:27:48.080
<v Speaker 5>four weeks that also were addressed here. Yields have gone

0:27:48.119 --> 0:27:51.359
<v Speaker 5>up because of economic surprises to the upside, Inflation on

0:27:51.440 --> 0:27:54.359
<v Speaker 5>the margins has been slightly stickier. There have been questions

0:27:54.359 --> 0:27:57.080
<v Speaker 5>about why long term yals are so high, and frankly,

0:27:57.359 --> 0:28:00.320
<v Speaker 5>my risk assets don't care because there are basically treating

0:28:00.320 --> 0:28:04.000
<v Speaker 5>it like it's for the right reason. At what point

0:28:04.200 --> 0:28:06.679
<v Speaker 5>do these yields force the FED to take notice in

0:28:06.680 --> 0:28:08.800
<v Speaker 5>a way that they don't have to now they can

0:28:08.880 --> 0:28:10.680
<v Speaker 5>just dismiss it as a blit.

0:28:10.800 --> 0:28:12.720
<v Speaker 1>Potentially, well, I.

0:28:12.680 --> 0:28:15.400
<v Speaker 10>Do think a lot of the moving yields is obviously

0:28:15.520 --> 0:28:17.960
<v Speaker 10>being driven by term premium, what we call term premium,

0:28:18.119 --> 0:28:21.359
<v Speaker 10>and they're good reasons for why term premium is rising.

0:28:21.400 --> 0:28:24.119
<v Speaker 10>One of them is taris, but another one is obviously

0:28:24.119 --> 0:28:26.399
<v Speaker 10>the fiscal supply, So that means you kind of get

0:28:26.440 --> 0:28:30.480
<v Speaker 10>this sort of steepening pressure through the yield market, and

0:28:30.520 --> 0:28:34.680
<v Speaker 10>it's obviously consistent with the deficit concerns that are being

0:28:35.480 --> 0:28:40.600
<v Speaker 10>coming out of the new policy regime forthcoming. In terms

0:28:40.640 --> 0:28:43.600
<v Speaker 10>of how that affects risk ass is really a balancing act.

0:28:43.840 --> 0:28:47.160
<v Speaker 10>If you have term premium going up normally, all else equal,

0:28:47.360 --> 0:28:50.280
<v Speaker 10>risk ass would suffer. However, if on the other side

0:28:50.320 --> 0:28:52.760
<v Speaker 10>of that, you're getting a sort of higher level of growth,

0:28:52.880 --> 0:28:56.320
<v Speaker 10>let's say because of the fiscal stimulus coming through, then

0:28:56.360 --> 0:28:59.320
<v Speaker 10>that really does kind of easily overwhelm the impact of

0:28:59.400 --> 0:29:02.200
<v Speaker 10>term premium. So premium has been very low, so to

0:29:02.280 --> 0:29:04.600
<v Speaker 10>expect it to sort of go up is not unreasonable.

0:29:04.920 --> 0:29:07.920
<v Speaker 10>It's almost if you like normalizing by some models we

0:29:07.960 --> 0:29:10.000
<v Speaker 10>look at, and if you can take a quid pro

0:29:10.080 --> 0:29:12.760
<v Speaker 10>quo and say, well, look, we're going to have higher

0:29:12.920 --> 0:29:15.040
<v Speaker 10>growth coming out of all of this, then there's no

0:29:15.160 --> 0:29:18.440
<v Speaker 10>reason for risk asses to perform badly. And I think

0:29:18.440 --> 0:29:19.920
<v Speaker 10>that's kind of where we are. So we're in the

0:29:19.920 --> 0:29:22.000
<v Speaker 10>sort of, you know, best of all possible worlds in

0:29:22.040 --> 0:29:24.120
<v Speaker 10>the sense where risk acids are okay.

0:29:24.440 --> 0:29:26.120
<v Speaker 8>And yes, long term yields are.

0:29:26.160 --> 0:29:29.240
<v Speaker 10>Rising, but they're not rising so much that they're going

0:29:29.280 --> 0:29:32.600
<v Speaker 10>to unravel the story for riskases. And bear in mind

0:29:32.640 --> 0:29:36.040
<v Speaker 10>the FED is in restrictive mode, so by the fact

0:29:36.080 --> 0:29:38.600
<v Speaker 10>that they can reduce their short term rates, it will

0:29:38.600 --> 0:29:41.120
<v Speaker 10>help anchor the curve lower. So you may well have

0:29:41.200 --> 0:29:43.520
<v Speaker 10>higher term premium, but if short rates are still falling

0:29:43.560 --> 0:29:45.640
<v Speaker 10>at the other end, then the whole curve is somewhat

0:29:45.640 --> 0:29:49.040
<v Speaker 10>getting anchored, which is actually quite good news, and it

0:29:49.080 --> 0:29:50.120
<v Speaker 10>does avoid one.

0:29:49.960 --> 0:29:51.280
<v Speaker 8>Of the problems we had last year.

0:29:51.320 --> 0:29:53.200
<v Speaker 10>If you recall, I used to I call it the

0:29:53.200 --> 0:29:56.360
<v Speaker 10>Liz Trust moment, where when if the FED threatens higher

0:29:56.440 --> 0:29:58.640
<v Speaker 10>yields at the front end and you have a term

0:29:58.680 --> 0:30:01.680
<v Speaker 10>premium a rising in terms of hurting the long end,

0:30:01.800 --> 0:30:04.360
<v Speaker 10>that's really bad news for risk assets because that kind

0:30:04.360 --> 0:30:07.560
<v Speaker 10>of unravels, you know, both sides of the equation, so

0:30:07.640 --> 0:30:08.040
<v Speaker 10>to speak.

0:30:08.120 --> 0:30:10.400
<v Speaker 5>You said a number of things there, or one aspect

0:30:10.400 --> 0:30:13.560
<v Speaker 5>as you said that the FED is clearly in restrictive

0:30:13.760 --> 0:30:17.040
<v Speaker 5>territory at this point and it will be easing J.

0:30:17.240 --> 0:30:17.480
<v Speaker 10>Tup.

0:30:17.480 --> 0:30:21.240
<v Speaker 5>Powell actually maybe casts a little bit of question around

0:30:21.320 --> 0:30:24.080
<v Speaker 5>just how restrictive they were, saying that they're trying to

0:30:24.160 --> 0:30:25.920
<v Speaker 5>get down to a place and then adjust that they

0:30:25.960 --> 0:30:28.600
<v Speaker 5>can figure out what that neutral rate is. Do you

0:30:28.680 --> 0:30:31.400
<v Speaker 5>think that he was opening the door to pausing in

0:30:31.480 --> 0:30:34.240
<v Speaker 5>December to not necessarily cutting more for the rest of

0:30:34.280 --> 0:30:34.680
<v Speaker 5>this year.

0:30:35.960 --> 0:30:38.040
<v Speaker 10>I for a feel that they're pretty much an auto

0:30:38.120 --> 0:30:40.920
<v Speaker 10>pilot for a December cut. I definitely think he's opening

0:30:40.960 --> 0:30:43.560
<v Speaker 10>the door to a pause, let's say within the next

0:30:43.880 --> 0:30:45.719
<v Speaker 10>six months. So they're not going to sort of run

0:30:45.760 --> 0:30:47.480
<v Speaker 10>all the way down to three percent, which is where

0:30:47.520 --> 0:30:50.240
<v Speaker 10>they have that neutral rate, but they could definitely pause

0:30:50.240 --> 0:30:52.280
<v Speaker 10>around four percent. Pausing around four and a half is

0:30:52.320 --> 0:30:55.520
<v Speaker 10>a little premature, particularly since they haven't even seen wouldn't

0:30:55.560 --> 0:30:58.440
<v Speaker 10>have seen the new administration come in, So you know,

0:30:58.560 --> 0:31:00.920
<v Speaker 10>to my mind, you know, not yes is the pause,

0:31:01.320 --> 0:31:03.800
<v Speaker 10>and therefore they can sort of plow through, you know,

0:31:03.840 --> 0:31:06.320
<v Speaker 10>into a Q one easing and then pause, pause. Then

0:31:06.640 --> 0:31:08.840
<v Speaker 10>in terms of neutral and where it is, obviously no

0:31:08.840 --> 0:31:11.280
<v Speaker 10>one really knows where it is, but you know, we've

0:31:11.280 --> 0:31:14.360
<v Speaker 10>done some interesting work to suggest that if interest rates

0:31:14.400 --> 0:31:17.800
<v Speaker 10>don't come down, employment in certain sectors will continue to

0:31:17.880 --> 0:31:21.200
<v Speaker 10>slow and go negative. And that's this kind of preemptive

0:31:21.240 --> 0:31:24.040
<v Speaker 10>aspect of why they want to bring down rates, and

0:31:24.080 --> 0:31:26.160
<v Speaker 10>that's kind of where, you know, why I feel that

0:31:26.280 --> 0:31:28.959
<v Speaker 10>neutral is not here. It's probably not a four percent

0:31:29.120 --> 0:31:31.800
<v Speaker 10>and it's probably close to three percent, but we'll see

0:31:31.840 --> 0:31:32.280
<v Speaker 10>in the end.

0:31:32.440 --> 0:31:32.880
<v Speaker 8>So what a.

0:31:32.880 --> 0:31:35.560
<v Speaker 6>Constant and Rashido say about a run rate of non

0:31:35.640 --> 0:31:38.440
<v Speaker 6>firm payrolls? I mean, can you get non firm payrolls

0:31:38.880 --> 0:31:41.280
<v Speaker 6>permanent under one hundred thousand, or can you even go

0:31:41.320 --> 0:31:42.440
<v Speaker 6>to a negative statistic?

0:31:43.320 --> 0:31:46.120
<v Speaker 10>Well, I think, I mean clearly you can, and I

0:31:46.120 --> 0:31:48.600
<v Speaker 10>think that's that's the problem. I mean, Powell himself said,

0:31:48.840 --> 0:31:51.240
<v Speaker 10>the lad market has eased enough, you can't. You don't

0:31:51.280 --> 0:31:54.719
<v Speaker 10>really want to have payrolls running one hundred thousand or so.

0:31:54.920 --> 0:31:57.960
<v Speaker 10>And the reason or less the reason is because layoffs

0:31:58.440 --> 0:32:00.959
<v Speaker 10>are still very low. The layoff rate is still running

0:32:01.040 --> 0:32:04.960
<v Speaker 10>below one point two percent of the employed workforce, the idea.

0:32:05.320 --> 0:32:07.680
<v Speaker 10>Before COVID, the layoff rate was in a range of

0:32:07.720 --> 0:32:10.480
<v Speaker 10>one point two to one point four percent. So adjusting

0:32:10.600 --> 0:32:13.120
<v Speaker 10>layoffs higher, which will be reflected, for example, in the

0:32:13.200 --> 0:32:16.800
<v Speaker 10>claims data going higher and normalizing if you like, with

0:32:16.880 --> 0:32:19.800
<v Speaker 10>employment growth down in around one hundred thousand or so,

0:32:20.040 --> 0:32:24.120
<v Speaker 10>you will see unemployment rate rising well above the FED forecast.

0:32:24.240 --> 0:32:28.040
<v Speaker 10>So you have to have basically pay rolls accelerating or

0:32:28.120 --> 0:32:32.120
<v Speaker 10>somehow cross your fingers and hope layoffs never actually go up.

0:32:32.280 --> 0:32:34.400
<v Speaker 8>And we're in a new world where companies just won't

0:32:34.800 --> 0:32:35.480
<v Speaker 8>fire people.

0:32:35.800 --> 0:32:38.600
<v Speaker 10>And in a way, that comes back to the animal spirits,

0:32:38.640 --> 0:32:41.760
<v Speaker 10>animal spirits to either not lay off or animal spirits

0:32:41.760 --> 0:32:45.320
<v Speaker 10>to hire more people and get pay rolls accelerating. Just

0:32:45.400 --> 0:32:48.080
<v Speaker 10>keep the unemployment rates where it is in line with

0:32:48.120 --> 0:32:49.920
<v Speaker 10>where the FED would like to see it in the

0:32:50.040 --> 0:32:50.560
<v Speaker 10>medium term.

0:32:50.760 --> 0:32:52.600
<v Speaker 2>Heydan, this was great. It's going to hear from you, sir.

0:32:52.640 --> 0:32:55.280
<v Speaker 2>It's been too long. Don constant there of miszoo on

0:32:55.320 --> 0:32:57.840
<v Speaker 2>a federal reserve. We'll do this all over again in December.

0:32:58.040 --> 0:32:59.640
<v Speaker 2>But the key one, I think circle it on the

0:32:59.640 --> 0:33:03.640
<v Speaker 2>calendar for twenty twenty five March nineteenth March nineteenth, Spring

0:33:03.640 --> 0:33:05.840
<v Speaker 2>of twenty twenty five when they have to produce some

0:33:05.920 --> 0:33:08.360
<v Speaker 2>new forecasts with some new policies in mind.

0:33:08.160 --> 0:33:11.280
<v Speaker 5>Maybe especially as the third finishes out the first one

0:33:11.360 --> 0:33:13.840
<v Speaker 5>hundred DS. It raises this real question how many of

0:33:13.840 --> 0:33:18.000
<v Speaker 5>the policy implementations have really affected the trajectory of the economy.

0:33:18.320 --> 0:33:20.280
<v Speaker 5>And they can't use this as a punt. We'll see

0:33:20.320 --> 0:33:22.640
<v Speaker 5>what we see, they'll have seen, and they'll have to react.

0:33:22.720 --> 0:33:26.680
<v Speaker 2>The Fed is reactionary, The market is anticipatory. The Fed

0:33:26.760 --> 0:33:29.680
<v Speaker 2>is reacting to the data. This market is anticipating changes

0:33:29.760 --> 0:33:32.120
<v Speaker 2>to policy, and a lot of that right now hinges

0:33:32.120 --> 0:33:34.280
<v Speaker 2>on what happens with the House and whether we get

0:33:34.480 --> 0:33:36.800
<v Speaker 2>this GOP suite from New York City that does it

0:33:36.880 --> 0:33:39.160
<v Speaker 2>for us. Thank you very much, reducing Bloomberg TV and

0:33:39.280 --> 0:33:42.240
<v Speaker 2>radio