1
00:00:04,760 --> 00:00:08,080
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg P and L Podcast. I'm Pim Fox.

2
00:00:08,119 --> 00:00:11,200
Speaker 1: Along with my co host Lisa Abramowitz. Each day we

3
00:00:11,280 --> 00:00:14,480
Speaker 1: bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful interviews for

4
00:00:14,520 --> 00:00:16,880
Speaker 1: you and your money, whether at the grocery store or

5
00:00:16,920 --> 00:00:20,680
Speaker 1: the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg P L Podcast on iTunes,

6
00:00:20,840 --> 00:00:30,480
Speaker 1: SoundCloud and at Bloomberg dot com. The Affordable Care Act, well,

7
00:00:30,600 --> 00:00:35,879
Speaker 1: it is being challenged, at least rhetorically by Republicans in

8
00:00:36,120 --> 00:00:38,720
Speaker 1: the House, the Senate, and soon to be in the

9
00:00:38,760 --> 00:00:41,760
Speaker 1: White House. John Grouber is a professor of economics at

10
00:00:41,880 --> 00:00:44,800
Speaker 1: m I T and many people consider him a key

11
00:00:44,920 --> 00:00:49,040
Speaker 1: architect of the Obamacare program. He joins us now, John Groober,

12
00:00:49,080 --> 00:00:51,640
Speaker 1: thank you, sir, good to be here. Can you explain

13
00:00:51,720 --> 00:00:54,840
Speaker 1: some of the specific elements of the Affordable Care Act

14
00:00:55,200 --> 00:00:59,720
Speaker 1: which you believe need improvement. I think the major issue

15
00:00:59,760 --> 00:01:02,680
Speaker 1: before Portable Care Act that needs improvement is the fact

16
00:01:02,840 --> 00:01:06,280
Speaker 1: that ensure that competition has not been the strongest who

17
00:01:06,360 --> 00:01:09,759
Speaker 1: might have hoped on these exchanges, and that insures, as

18
00:01:09,760 --> 00:01:11,520
Speaker 1: a result of that, to raise premiums more than we

19
00:01:11,600 --> 00:01:14,800
Speaker 1: might have hoped. I think that really, in some sense

20
00:01:14,920 --> 00:01:16,800
Speaker 1: what needs to happen is something. The law needs to

21
00:01:16,840 --> 00:01:18,959
Speaker 1: be implemented the way it was written. I want any

22
00:01:19,000 --> 00:01:21,560
Speaker 1: buy that is. Two things. First of all, the states

23
00:01:21,600 --> 00:01:23,880
Speaker 1: where things are worse are the states have not expanded

24
00:01:23,920 --> 00:01:28,759
Speaker 1: their medicaid programs, leading sick individuals into the exchanges rather

25
00:01:28,840 --> 00:01:32,760
Speaker 1: than being covered by lower cost medicaid. Second of all, um,

26
00:01:33,000 --> 00:01:36,200
Speaker 1: what's happened is in the law there was reinsurance payments

27
00:01:36,520 --> 00:01:39,840
Speaker 1: to insurers that were scheduled paid to help them withstand

28
00:01:39,840 --> 00:01:43,120
Speaker 1: the vicissitudes of entering a new market. Republicans blocked those

29
00:01:43,120 --> 00:01:46,000
Speaker 1: payments and so insure suffered billions of costs they didn't

30
00:01:46,000 --> 00:01:48,720
Speaker 1: plan to when they signed up for the Obamacare exchanges.

31
00:01:49,080 --> 00:01:50,880
Speaker 1: But the law had really has been implemented as planned,

32
00:01:50,880 --> 00:01:52,800
Speaker 1: I think it would have gone a lot better. Okay, well,

33
00:01:52,840 --> 00:01:54,640
Speaker 1: let let's let's just take that first one just so

34
00:01:54,680 --> 00:01:57,680
Speaker 1: we can understand that. You say that people who should

35
00:01:57,760 --> 00:02:01,480
Speaker 1: have gone into the lower cost medic CAD program right

36
00:02:02,160 --> 00:02:07,600
Speaker 1: went into an exchange based program. That's correct. So the

37
00:02:07,600 --> 00:02:10,640
Speaker 1: way Obamacare was set up was individuals below a hundred

38
00:02:10,760 --> 00:02:12,680
Speaker 1: thirty percent of the poverty line or you know, like

39
00:02:12,760 --> 00:02:16,000
Speaker 1: fifteen dollars to an individual, we're supposed to be in

40
00:02:16,120 --> 00:02:18,639
Speaker 1: the government Medicaid program, which pays providers less and is

41
00:02:18,760 --> 00:02:21,280
Speaker 1: sort of a more unit is basically more managed type

42
00:02:21,280 --> 00:02:23,880
Speaker 1: of care. And the drews above that level we're supposed

43
00:02:23,880 --> 00:02:26,360
Speaker 1: to be in the exchanges buying private insurance along with

44
00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:30,080
Speaker 1: people of of hiring income levels. UH. The problem was

45
00:02:30,160 --> 00:02:33,600
Speaker 1: when states chose to turn down the free opportunity to

46
00:02:33,680 --> 00:02:37,399
Speaker 1: cover their uninsured, the really crazy decision to not expand Medicaid,

47
00:02:37,800 --> 00:02:41,320
Speaker 1: people between a hundred and hundred percent of poverty became

48
00:02:41,360 --> 00:02:44,800
Speaker 1: eligible for exchanges. So people who say in California would

49
00:02:44,800 --> 00:02:47,200
Speaker 1: be getting medicaid, people between a hundred and hundred thirty

50
00:02:47,280 --> 00:02:50,560
Speaker 1: percent of poverty will be getting Medicaid in Florida there

51
00:02:50,560 --> 00:02:53,400
Speaker 1: in the exchanges as a result. Actually the state with

52
00:02:53,440 --> 00:02:56,200
Speaker 1: the most people in exchanges in America is Florida, which

53
00:02:56,200 --> 00:03:00,680
Speaker 1: has speciferously fought the Affordable Care Act. Okay, can you

54
00:03:00,760 --> 00:03:04,320
Speaker 1: reconcile that though with the idea that there are people

55
00:03:05,080 --> 00:03:10,000
Speaker 1: many times above the UH the income level in order

56
00:03:10,040 --> 00:03:12,560
Speaker 1: to qualify for medicaid, because it also has to do

57
00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:14,960
Speaker 1: with some efforts on part of the government to figure

58
00:03:15,000 --> 00:03:18,880
Speaker 1: out your assets, but that are paying maybe five hundred

59
00:03:19,280 --> 00:03:23,079
Speaker 1: more more dollars a month in premiums for the least

60
00:03:23,160 --> 00:03:27,519
Speaker 1: expensive plan that is on offer on the exchange, and

61
00:03:27,600 --> 00:03:31,680
Speaker 1: yet the deductible is so high that it makes paying

62
00:03:31,800 --> 00:03:37,040
Speaker 1: the premium almost crazy unless you know that you are

63
00:03:37,080 --> 00:03:40,360
Speaker 1: going to use some type of long stay, long term stay,

64
00:03:40,480 --> 00:03:44,120
Speaker 1: or catastrophic element of the plan. So basically, I think

65
00:03:44,120 --> 00:03:46,520
Speaker 1: when you evaluate any law like the Affordable Care Act,

66
00:03:46,600 --> 00:03:48,920
Speaker 1: you have to evaluate it relative not to the world

67
00:03:48,960 --> 00:03:51,840
Speaker 1: we wish existed, but the world that would have existed otherwise.

68
00:03:52,280 --> 00:03:54,560
Speaker 1: The problem you're pointing out is not about the Affordable

69
00:03:54,560 --> 00:03:56,880
Speaker 1: Care Act. It's about the super high cost of healthcare

70
00:03:56,920 --> 00:04:00,640
Speaker 1: in the US. We as a nation are spending seventeen

71
00:04:00,720 --> 00:04:04,120
Speaker 1: percent of our income on healthcare in a world that

72
00:04:04,160 --> 00:04:08,920
Speaker 1: pay income on our healthcare. A high income family paying

73
00:04:08,920 --> 00:04:11,440
Speaker 1: the kind of cost you're laying out is exactly what

74
00:04:11,480 --> 00:04:13,720
Speaker 1: you'd expect, you know, in a high income family is

75
00:04:13,720 --> 00:04:16,479
Speaker 1: gonna have spending ten plus percent. They're in healthcare in

76
00:04:16,480 --> 00:04:18,200
Speaker 1: a world where the nation of the whole is spending

77
00:04:18,200 --> 00:04:23,200
Speaker 1: se So really, that's not about Obamacare. That's about the fundamental,

78
00:04:23,279 --> 00:04:26,719
Speaker 1: long run problem of high costs, which Obamacare has done

79
00:04:26,760 --> 00:04:30,440
Speaker 1: more to address than any legislation US history. If you

80
00:04:30,440 --> 00:04:34,200
Speaker 1: look at the cost employer sponsored insurance since Obamacare has

81
00:04:34,200 --> 00:04:38,200
Speaker 1: been passed, they've fallen by thirty relative to what would

82
00:04:38,200 --> 00:04:41,680
Speaker 1: have happened otherwise. Well, you say relative to what would

83
00:04:41,760 --> 00:04:46,520
Speaker 1: have happened otherwise, but you recognize, I would imagine you

84
00:04:46,520 --> 00:04:49,600
Speaker 1: admit that if you ask people what has happened to

85
00:04:49,640 --> 00:04:52,160
Speaker 1: the premiums of their health insurance that they are either

86
00:04:52,200 --> 00:04:55,479
Speaker 1: paying for themselves or for their employees, you would not

87
00:04:55,520 --> 00:04:57,880
Speaker 1: be surprised if you heard them say it has gone

88
00:04:57,920 --> 00:05:00,600
Speaker 1: up dramatically. Well, you know, I would not be surprised

89
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,040
Speaker 1: at all. And so this is the really difficult problem

90
00:05:04,120 --> 00:05:07,480
Speaker 1: that I think people who developed Obamacare did not appreciate

91
00:05:07,600 --> 00:05:11,120
Speaker 1: enough beforehand, which is that when you reform the system,

92
00:05:11,200 --> 00:05:15,000
Speaker 1: you own the system. And what that means is people

93
00:05:15,080 --> 00:05:19,320
Speaker 1: hold you, really in some sense to not the standard

94
00:05:19,360 --> 00:05:21,120
Speaker 1: of what would have happened otherwise, but the standard of

95
00:05:21,160 --> 00:05:24,479
Speaker 1: everything they don't like is your fault. And essentially we

96
00:05:24,600 --> 00:05:29,240
Speaker 1: have a system that's too expensive. Premiums since Obamacare have risen.

97
00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:31,960
Speaker 1: They have written much more slow than they were rising

98
00:05:32,000 --> 00:05:35,920
Speaker 1: before Obamacare, but they still risen. And the question is

99
00:05:36,080 --> 00:05:39,080
Speaker 1: what Obamacare supporters and that didn't do a good enough

100
00:05:39,160 --> 00:05:41,440
Speaker 1: job doing I don't know how we could have done it,

101
00:05:41,480 --> 00:05:43,960
Speaker 1: but clearly we couldn't do a better job would be

102
00:05:43,960 --> 00:05:47,600
Speaker 1: to explain to people, to set up more realistic expectations,

103
00:05:47,640 --> 00:05:51,479
Speaker 1: that Obamacare was the first step towards address the problems

104
00:05:51,480 --> 00:05:55,320
Speaker 1: to the system, not the solution. Having said that, can

105
00:05:55,360 --> 00:05:58,680
Speaker 1: you also maybe give us your perspective and you say

106
00:05:58,680 --> 00:06:01,200
Speaker 1: that would be the first step up. But knowing the

107
00:06:01,240 --> 00:06:05,240
Speaker 1: way that legislation and the government works, you're only only

108
00:06:05,240 --> 00:06:08,880
Speaker 1: going to get one or two chances during an entire administration.

109
00:06:08,960 --> 00:06:11,600
Speaker 1: So to say that it's the first step implies that

110
00:06:11,640 --> 00:06:14,040
Speaker 1: you're going to be able to roll out these improvements

111
00:06:14,080 --> 00:06:18,440
Speaker 1: on an ongoing basis that really just never happened. But

112
00:06:18,440 --> 00:06:21,400
Speaker 1: but that's actually not true. I mean, take Medicare. That's

113
00:06:21,440 --> 00:06:23,960
Speaker 1: the largest single healthcare program in the country. It's fifty

114
00:06:24,040 --> 00:06:27,160
Speaker 1: years old. We're continually changing it. No, but I'm talking

115
00:06:27,200 --> 00:06:28,960
Speaker 1: about it. I'm talking about a bomb. I'm talking about

116
00:06:28,960 --> 00:06:31,680
Speaker 1: the Affordable Care Act, not Medicare. No, but no. But

117
00:06:31,760 --> 00:06:33,320
Speaker 1: here's the reason I point it. You said we won't

118
00:06:33,320 --> 00:06:35,520
Speaker 1: be able to make those changes. Why not, Well, because

119
00:06:35,560 --> 00:06:38,360
Speaker 1: you can because you have a Republican administration coming in.

120
00:06:38,839 --> 00:06:42,720
Speaker 1: But that's a separate issue. But as political as political

121
00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:45,320
Speaker 1: and policy experts, isn't that one of the most fundamental

122
00:06:45,320 --> 00:06:47,560
Speaker 1: things to take into consideration that you might not be

123
00:06:47,640 --> 00:06:51,440
Speaker 1: around in the next four years to implement whatever improvements

124
00:06:51,440 --> 00:06:53,520
Speaker 1: you think are necessary to make it work for people.

125
00:06:53,920 --> 00:06:56,720
Speaker 1: So what you do in that situation you pass a

126
00:06:56,800 --> 00:07:00,520
Speaker 1: law that has two criteria. It makes to is better

127
00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:03,400
Speaker 1: than if the law did not exist, and be it

128
00:07:03,520 --> 00:07:06,760
Speaker 1: hopefully sets up a flexible enough system that well intentioned

129
00:07:06,760 --> 00:07:10,080
Speaker 1: people can continue to improve it. That's exactly what Obamacare did.

130
00:07:10,360 --> 00:07:13,440
Speaker 1: It made the world better. The healthcare costs are growing

131
00:07:13,440 --> 00:07:16,800
Speaker 1: more slowly, more people have health insurance coverage. They made

132
00:07:16,840 --> 00:07:19,840
Speaker 1: the world better than it was without Obamacare. But it

133
00:07:19,920 --> 00:07:22,440
Speaker 1: was impossible pass a law that literally fixed the system

134
00:07:22,440 --> 00:07:24,800
Speaker 1: because quite frankly, we don't know how. There's still too

135
00:07:24,880 --> 00:07:26,440
Speaker 1: much unknown. So what you do is you make the

136
00:07:26,480 --> 00:07:28,800
Speaker 1: world better and you set up a system where well

137
00:07:28,840 --> 00:07:30,960
Speaker 1: intentioned governments, which doesn't eem like this is gonna be

138
00:07:31,000 --> 00:07:33,960
Speaker 1: one but we're well intentioned governments can continue to improve things.

139
00:07:34,520 --> 00:07:36,640
Speaker 1: That's all you can do. I mean, you can't solve

140
00:07:36,640 --> 00:07:38,480
Speaker 1: all the world's problems in one cell swoop. No piece

141
00:07:38,520 --> 00:07:41,679
Speaker 1: of legislation has ever done that the best legislation moves

142
00:07:41,680 --> 00:07:43,600
Speaker 1: in the right direction sets you up to continue to

143
00:07:43,600 --> 00:07:45,120
Speaker 1: move in that direction when you of government who are

144
00:07:45,120 --> 00:07:48,520
Speaker 1: willing to do so. Well done, Thanks very much, John Groober.

145
00:07:48,600 --> 00:07:51,160
Speaker 1: He is a professor of economics at m I T.

146
00:07:51,680 --> 00:07:55,400
Speaker 1: He is considered a key architect of the Affordable Care

147
00:07:55,440 --> 00:07:58,960
Speaker 1: Act Obamacare. We'll have to wait and see in seventeen

148
00:07:59,480 --> 00:08:02,960
Speaker 1: what President elect Donald Trump and House and Senate Republicans

149
00:08:03,440 --> 00:08:07,960
Speaker 1: have in mind for any changes or repeal of Obamacare.

150
00:08:20,480 --> 00:08:24,600
Speaker 1: US intelligence agencies have concluded that the Kremlin approved the

151
00:08:24,640 --> 00:08:29,920
Speaker 1: attacks on the Democratic and National Committee and other political organizations.

152
00:08:30,840 --> 00:08:35,160
Speaker 1: United States has retaliated, and now President Vladimir Putin of

153
00:08:35,240 --> 00:08:39,040
Speaker 1: Russia says he will not retaliate for President Obama's expulsion

154
00:08:39,440 --> 00:08:43,560
Speaker 1: of thirty five suspected operatives. This comes hours after the

155
00:08:43,640 --> 00:08:48,200
Speaker 1: Russian foreign minister publicly recommended a response. Here to tell

156
00:08:48,280 --> 00:08:50,680
Speaker 1: us what is going on is Nick Wadhams. He is

157
00:08:50,760 --> 00:08:55,400
Speaker 1: our policy foreign policy reporter for Bloomberg, and he joins

158
00:08:55,480 --> 00:08:58,280
Speaker 1: us now from Washington, d C. Home to Bloomberg one

159
00:08:58,320 --> 00:09:01,520
Speaker 1: and one oh five point seven eight d two. Nick,

160
00:09:01,679 --> 00:09:04,920
Speaker 1: give us the latest on this, he said, he said,

161
00:09:05,080 --> 00:09:09,800
Speaker 1: And now you're expelled, you're not expelled, saga. Well, it's

162
00:09:09,800 --> 00:09:13,840
Speaker 1: really interesting. So earlier today, you know that the expectation

163
00:09:14,080 --> 00:09:17,640
Speaker 1: was that Russia would respond in kind. I mean, traditionally

164
00:09:17,640 --> 00:09:21,320
Speaker 1: how these things work, as if the US expels another

165
00:09:21,360 --> 00:09:24,120
Speaker 1: country's diplomats is just sort of pro forma that they

166
00:09:24,200 --> 00:09:29,520
Speaker 1: respond by expelling the same number of American diplomats from

167
00:09:29,559 --> 00:09:32,480
Speaker 1: their country. And indeed that appeared to be what was

168
00:09:32,520 --> 00:09:36,640
Speaker 1: going to happen after the Foreign Ministry recommended that Russia

169
00:09:36,720 --> 00:09:40,320
Speaker 1: do so. Then uh, Putin overturned that and said we're

170
00:09:40,320 --> 00:09:44,120
Speaker 1: not going to Obviously, whether he actually overturned it or

171
00:09:44,120 --> 00:09:48,040
Speaker 1: the whole thing was sort of an orchestrated dance is

172
00:09:48,160 --> 00:09:51,440
Speaker 1: up for debate. But uh, you know he said he

173
00:09:51,559 --> 00:09:54,840
Speaker 1: portrayed is basically taking the high ground as saying we're

174
00:09:54,840 --> 00:09:58,280
Speaker 1: not going to stoop to this sort of kitchen politics,

175
00:09:58,320 --> 00:10:01,760
Speaker 1: as he called it. But really it's it's an acknowledgement

176
00:10:01,880 --> 00:10:05,120
Speaker 1: that that Russia just wants to wait until Donald Trump

177
00:10:05,160 --> 00:10:09,000
Speaker 1: comes to office and test his claim to seek better relations.

178
00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:10,640
Speaker 1: So clearly they just see him as sort of a

179
00:10:10,640 --> 00:10:14,480
Speaker 1: more reliable negotiating partner. Now, nick I got a chance,

180
00:10:14,520 --> 00:10:16,199
Speaker 1: and I mean I guess you can. Anyone can look

181
00:10:16,240 --> 00:10:19,880
Speaker 1: at this, of course, because it is available on the

182
00:10:20,000 --> 00:10:25,880
Speaker 1: Joint Analysis Website of the US Intelligence Department of Homeland

183
00:10:25,920 --> 00:10:29,560
Speaker 1: Security as well as the Federal Viewer of Investigation, and

184
00:10:29,600 --> 00:10:33,320
Speaker 1: it goes into quite a detailed analysis of what is

185
00:10:33,360 --> 00:10:38,600
Speaker 1: called Grizzly Step. This is the Russian malicious cyber activity.

186
00:10:38,640 --> 00:10:42,320
Speaker 1: This has been going on, according to the report since right,

187
00:10:42,400 --> 00:10:45,120
Speaker 1: that's right, and you know this was I think what

188
00:10:45,120 --> 00:10:48,920
Speaker 1: we're seeing is partly an attempt by the Obama administration

189
00:10:48,960 --> 00:10:52,480
Speaker 1: to make the case both to the American public who

190
00:10:52,559 --> 00:10:56,120
Speaker 1: may have been doubtful about the claims against Russia, but

191
00:10:56,240 --> 00:10:58,840
Speaker 1: also to Donald Trump and his own teams. And what

192
00:10:58,880 --> 00:11:01,520
Speaker 1: they've sort of been saying recently is, you know, there's

193
00:11:01,559 --> 00:11:04,640
Speaker 1: not a consensus in the intelligence community. We've had lots

194
00:11:04,679 --> 00:11:09,520
Speaker 1: of um anonymous statements from various members of the intelligence community,

195
00:11:09,520 --> 00:11:12,320
Speaker 1: but no full consensus where everybody says, okay, we are

196
00:11:12,360 --> 00:11:15,400
Speaker 1: all united on what we think is going on. Uh.

197
00:11:15,679 --> 00:11:18,839
Speaker 1: And Trump had actually pointed to the FBI and had said, well,

198
00:11:18,840 --> 00:11:21,480
Speaker 1: where's the FBI in this. We've had the CIA and others,

199
00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:23,840
Speaker 1: but I'm still waiting to hear from the FBI. Well,

200
00:11:23,920 --> 00:11:26,600
Speaker 1: now we've heard from them, uh, and so we're all

201
00:11:26,640 --> 00:11:29,960
Speaker 1: sort of waiting to see how he internalizes and processes

202
00:11:30,040 --> 00:11:33,720
Speaker 1: this information and whether that changes his calculus and brings

203
00:11:33,760 --> 00:11:36,760
Speaker 1: him down a little bit more firmly on the side

204
00:11:36,760 --> 00:11:39,440
Speaker 1: of those who say Russia should be punished now. The

205
00:11:39,559 --> 00:11:45,600
Speaker 1: summary also offers details of the actual hacks, whether it

206
00:11:45,760 --> 00:11:49,240
Speaker 1: is from something called APP twenty nine or APP twenty eight,

207
00:11:49,360 --> 00:11:52,360
Speaker 1: and it talks some tail about remote access tools and

208
00:11:52,400 --> 00:11:58,400
Speaker 1: how they actually gained access to many emails and email

209
00:11:58,440 --> 00:12:01,960
Speaker 1: accounts because in twenty team they started something called a

210
00:12:02,040 --> 00:12:07,240
Speaker 1: spear phishing campaign and that created a link that made

211
00:12:07,240 --> 00:12:10,959
Speaker 1: it possible for them to steal information from the computers

212
00:12:11,040 --> 00:12:16,320
Speaker 1: of the US government as well as political organizations. Well

213
00:12:16,360 --> 00:12:18,920
Speaker 1: that's right. I mean, the thing that's partly so interesting

214
00:12:18,960 --> 00:12:21,880
Speaker 1: about all of this is, for all the discussion about

215
00:12:21,960 --> 00:12:28,640
Speaker 1: technical matters and covert cyber campaigns and classified information, I mean,

216
00:12:28,679 --> 00:12:32,400
Speaker 1: the way that, uh, some of this started was just

217
00:12:32,520 --> 00:12:36,400
Speaker 1: hackers sending a fake email to John Podesta, allegedly or

218
00:12:36,440 --> 00:12:39,440
Speaker 1: purporting to be from Google telling him to change his password.

219
00:12:39,520 --> 00:12:42,760
Speaker 1: So when he clicked on it and changed his password, uh,

220
00:12:43,080 --> 00:12:47,160
Speaker 1: hackers had information had access to his entire Gmail account,

221
00:12:47,200 --> 00:12:48,520
Speaker 1: and that's where he saw a lot of the Wiki

222
00:12:48,600 --> 00:12:52,559
Speaker 1: leaks or all all the Wiki leaks emails come from.

223
00:12:52,640 --> 00:12:57,160
Speaker 1: So it was a very actually simple operation to get

224
00:12:57,679 --> 00:13:01,280
Speaker 1: uh that that email account. But you know, again, what

225
00:13:01,320 --> 00:13:04,680
Speaker 1: we're really seeing is the Obama administration sort of making

226
00:13:04,679 --> 00:13:06,880
Speaker 1: its case and being very explicit about why it thinks

227
00:13:06,960 --> 00:13:09,920
Speaker 1: Russia is involved, and being willing to disclose the evidence

228
00:13:10,160 --> 00:13:13,280
Speaker 1: to back that up. Thank you, Nick wadhams, our foreign

229
00:13:13,320 --> 00:13:29,360
Speaker 1: policy reporter for Bloomberg. The Supreme Court of the United

230
00:13:29,440 --> 00:13:33,400
Speaker 1: States normally consists of the Chief Justice of the United

231
00:13:33,400 --> 00:13:36,800
Speaker 1: States and eight Associate Justices who are nominated by the

232
00:13:36,840 --> 00:13:41,559
Speaker 1: President and then confirmed by the Senate. Well, we only

233
00:13:41,600 --> 00:13:45,199
Speaker 1: have eight right now, and in addition to President elect

234
00:13:45,200 --> 00:13:48,720
Speaker 1: Donald Trump taking the oath of office on January, is

235
00:13:48,760 --> 00:13:52,640
Speaker 1: it possible that there will be another oath administered for

236
00:13:52,880 --> 00:13:57,520
Speaker 1: Supreme Court justice? Let's find out from Kimberly Robinson b N,

237
00:13:57,600 --> 00:14:01,720
Speaker 1: a reporter for Bloomberg. Bloom for the Supreme Court. I

238
00:14:01,720 --> 00:14:04,240
Speaker 1: beg your pardon, Kimberly, thank you very much for for

239
00:14:04,320 --> 00:14:06,679
Speaker 1: being with me today. Um, tell us a little bit

240
00:14:06,679 --> 00:14:10,760
Speaker 1: about what you expect to happen in twenty seventeen, and

241
00:14:10,840 --> 00:14:14,360
Speaker 1: maybe give us some names of individuals who you believe

242
00:14:14,360 --> 00:14:18,480
Speaker 1: are being considered for a place on the Supreme Court. Well,

243
00:14:18,640 --> 00:14:22,000
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign itself actually provided a list of twenty

244
00:14:22,040 --> 00:14:25,800
Speaker 1: one names that are being considered as possible nominees. They

245
00:14:25,800 --> 00:14:29,480
Speaker 1: provided this list before the election, but have since confirmed

246
00:14:29,600 --> 00:14:32,520
Speaker 1: that they will be picking from that list, And in fact,

247
00:14:32,520 --> 00:14:36,240
Speaker 1: on December one, Donald Trump indicated that he would release

248
00:14:36,280 --> 00:14:40,680
Speaker 1: the name very soon, possibly before his inauguration. UM. Of course,

249
00:14:40,680 --> 00:14:44,000
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that we'll have a sitting justice before then. UM.

250
00:14:44,040 --> 00:14:47,640
Speaker 1: Any potential nominee still has to go through confirmation hearings,

251
00:14:47,720 --> 00:14:52,400
Speaker 1: and those could be quite controversial, really, depending on who

252
00:14:52,440 --> 00:14:55,480
Speaker 1: who it is that Donald Trump decides to ultimately nominate.

253
00:14:55,800 --> 00:14:59,560
Speaker 1: So are there some particular individuals I note Bill prior

254
00:14:59,680 --> 00:15:04,960
Speaker 1: form our Alabama Attorney General Thomas Hardeman, he's on the

255
00:15:05,080 --> 00:15:10,320
Speaker 1: Philadelphia Appeals Court. Steve Cullaton the also US Court of

256
00:15:10,320 --> 00:15:14,600
Speaker 1: Appeals from Iowa. Tell us some of the individuals being considered, Right,

257
00:15:14,680 --> 00:15:17,240
Speaker 1: those are three of the five individuals who have really

258
00:15:17,240 --> 00:15:21,120
Speaker 1: come out um as the front runners. Um, And as

259
00:15:21,160 --> 00:15:24,560
Speaker 1: you mentioned, a lot of these individuals are are currently

260
00:15:24,600 --> 00:15:27,360
Speaker 1: federal Appellate Court judges, so that could speed up the

261
00:15:27,400 --> 00:15:30,760
Speaker 1: confirmation process. I think the consensus is that the two

262
00:15:30,840 --> 00:15:34,520
Speaker 1: front runners really are Bill Pryor whom you mentioned, UM

263
00:15:34,600 --> 00:15:37,800
Speaker 1: and Diane Sykes. Now, Donald Trump has said that he

264
00:15:37,880 --> 00:15:41,360
Speaker 1: wants to nominate somebody who's in the mold of Justice Scalia,

265
00:15:41,440 --> 00:15:44,400
Speaker 1: who is responsible for the vacancy on the court. UM.

266
00:15:44,480 --> 00:15:48,720
Speaker 1: Somebody who's tested who wouldn't have any surprises for conservatives UM,

267
00:15:48,760 --> 00:15:52,040
Speaker 1: which has happened for other Republican nominees, And somebody who's

268
00:15:52,160 --> 00:15:57,560
Speaker 1: young enough to really impact the court and judicial uh

269
00:15:57,800 --> 00:16:01,400
Speaker 1: in UM cases for a long time. Now. Both Bill

270
00:16:01,440 --> 00:16:04,800
Speaker 1: Prior and Diane Sykes fit that bill. There the two

271
00:16:04,840 --> 00:16:08,080
Speaker 1: individuals that Donald Trump name dropped back in February when

272
00:16:08,120 --> 00:16:12,040
Speaker 1: Justice Scalia first passed away UH. And you know they're both,

273
00:16:12,080 --> 00:16:15,160
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, long term federal Pellate Court judges who

274
00:16:15,240 --> 00:16:20,240
Speaker 1: have ruled favorably on conservative issues like abortion and the

275
00:16:20,320 --> 00:16:24,360
Speaker 1: Second Amendment. UM. But Bill Prior um is a more

276
00:16:24,440 --> 00:16:28,840
Speaker 1: controversial pick. Now. He has once referred to Row versus Wade,

277
00:16:28,880 --> 00:16:32,600
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court Landmark abortion decision as the worst abomination

278
00:16:32,760 --> 00:16:36,520
Speaker 1: in constitutional legal history. UM. And so if if Donald

279
00:16:36,520 --> 00:16:40,080
Speaker 1: Trump wants to avoid a very tough confirmation fight. He

280
00:16:40,160 --> 00:16:43,080
Speaker 1: may instead go with Diane Sykes. She was a single

281
00:16:43,160 --> 00:16:46,960
Speaker 1: mom who has said that her philosophy is one of

282
00:16:47,040 --> 00:16:50,880
Speaker 1: judicial restraint, so she could be an easier confirmation battle

283
00:16:51,360 --> 00:16:54,760
Speaker 1: for a new administration. What are some of the specific

284
00:16:54,840 --> 00:17:00,480
Speaker 1: cases you believe will be important in the court. Well,

285
00:17:00,600 --> 00:17:03,960
Speaker 1: the specific cases UM that are already at the court

286
00:17:04,200 --> 00:17:09,400
Speaker 1: UM include things on transgender rights UM, and we may

287
00:17:09,400 --> 00:17:12,639
Speaker 1: be seeing issues on immigration coming back to the court,

288
00:17:12,920 --> 00:17:15,360
Speaker 1: and those are things actually some of these judges are

289
00:17:15,400 --> 00:17:18,960
Speaker 1: already dealing with. You know, Diane Sykes, she sits in

290
00:17:19,359 --> 00:17:22,719
Speaker 1: Federal Appellate Court in Chicago and is dealing with transgender

291
00:17:22,840 --> 00:17:26,760
Speaker 1: rights UM out there, and so I think that that's

292
00:17:26,800 --> 00:17:28,880
Speaker 1: an issue that will be closely looked at in their

293
00:17:28,880 --> 00:17:31,960
Speaker 1: confirmation hearings UM and something that we'll be hearing about

294
00:17:31,960 --> 00:17:34,640
Speaker 1: from the Supreme Court UM in the next year. I'm

295
00:17:34,640 --> 00:17:40,000
Speaker 1: glad you mentioned those confirmation hearings. What is the thinking

296
00:17:40,040 --> 00:17:44,520
Speaker 1: on part of the Democrat senators who will have to

297
00:17:44,920 --> 00:17:49,760
Speaker 1: approve or at least not filibuster the nominations. Well, these

298
00:17:49,800 --> 00:17:53,359
Speaker 1: five individuals are not interchangeable. They really are quite different.

299
00:17:53,400 --> 00:17:55,399
Speaker 1: And so uh, as they said in the beginning, It

300
00:17:55,440 --> 00:17:57,880
Speaker 1: really depends on who Donald Trump chooses to pick. As

301
00:17:57,880 --> 00:18:01,600
Speaker 1: I've suggested, Bill Pryor could be a really tough confirmation battle,

302
00:18:01,640 --> 00:18:04,120
Speaker 1: and Democrats may decide to dig in their heels. They

303
00:18:04,160 --> 00:18:07,440
Speaker 1: certainly did that when he was up for nomination for

304
00:18:07,520 --> 00:18:10,480
Speaker 1: the court that he sits on now. Uh. Democrats were

305
00:18:10,480 --> 00:18:13,479
Speaker 1: able to drag his confirmation battle out for two full years.

306
00:18:13,760 --> 00:18:17,600
Speaker 1: But someone like Diane Sykes might be easier for Democrats

307
00:18:17,680 --> 00:18:21,480
Speaker 1: to get behind. And you know, the math for Democrats,

308
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:26,320
Speaker 1: especially Senate Democrats, is pretty difficult. They may not want

309
00:18:26,320 --> 00:18:29,240
Speaker 1: to have a big fight on this first nominee, especially

310
00:18:29,240 --> 00:18:33,080
Speaker 1: considering that there may be some Supreme Court vacancies coming

311
00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:37,000
Speaker 1: up again in the near future. In that context, how

312
00:18:37,040 --> 00:18:39,320
Speaker 1: long do you think it will be before we learn

313
00:18:39,400 --> 00:18:42,400
Speaker 1: the actual name of the nominee. I think it could

314
00:18:42,440 --> 00:18:45,760
Speaker 1: be any time in the next coming days. As I mentioned,

315
00:18:45,800 --> 00:18:48,239
Speaker 1: it was December one when Donald Trump said that he

316
00:18:48,280 --> 00:18:51,200
Speaker 1: would very soon drop the name. UM, so we're about

317
00:18:51,200 --> 00:18:53,159
Speaker 1: a month out from that. UM. I would expect us

318
00:18:53,200 --> 00:18:56,280
Speaker 1: to hear a name sometime very soon. We'll have to

319
00:18:56,320 --> 00:18:57,960
Speaker 1: wait and see. But I want to thank you very

320
00:18:58,000 --> 00:19:01,120
Speaker 1: much for keeping us up today. Kimberly Robinson is our

321
00:19:01,320 --> 00:19:06,359
Speaker 1: Supreme Court reporter for Bloomberg b n A. Wenna have

322
00:19:06,400 --> 00:19:09,840
Speaker 1: to watch closely. And indeed, one of the federal judges

323
00:19:10,400 --> 00:19:13,600
Speaker 1: that the Donald Trump's team has indicated might be a

324
00:19:13,640 --> 00:19:16,119
Speaker 1: possible fit for the Supreme Court. To Diane's Sykes, a

325
00:19:16,160 --> 00:19:18,159
Speaker 1: federal judge of the United States Courts of Appeals for

326
00:19:18,160 --> 00:19:20,680
Speaker 1: the Seventh Circuit. Well, maybe she'll have something to celebrate.

327
00:19:20,720 --> 00:19:24,080
Speaker 1: Her birthday was just on December the twenty three, so

328
00:19:24,119 --> 00:19:38,280
Speaker 1: we wish her the latest happy birthday. Well, we call

329
00:19:38,359 --> 00:19:41,560
Speaker 1: on Chuck Lieberman, the chief investment Officer and managing partner

330
00:19:41,600 --> 00:19:46,280
Speaker 1: at Advisors Capital Management, to help us navigate our investment

331
00:19:46,359 --> 00:19:50,200
Speaker 1: portfolios and strategies. He helps to manage one point three

332
00:19:50,240 --> 00:19:53,760
Speaker 1: billion dollars and he joins us from Ridgewood, New Jersey.

333
00:19:54,160 --> 00:19:56,959
Speaker 1: Chuck Lieberman, thank you for being with me. Give us

334
00:19:57,000 --> 00:20:00,960
Speaker 1: your outlook for twenty seventeen, and maybe you can take

335
00:20:01,000 --> 00:20:03,760
Speaker 1: a look at it in terms of industry groups that

336
00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:08,280
Speaker 1: will fare well and those that will fare poorly. Well,

337
00:20:08,320 --> 00:20:13,960
Speaker 1: we see, uh, some continuing trends from six um. Trump selection,

338
00:20:14,040 --> 00:20:16,439
Speaker 1: I think reinforces a lot of those trends that we

339
00:20:16,480 --> 00:20:19,879
Speaker 1: see in place. So we see policies that are a

340
00:20:19,920 --> 00:20:24,479
Speaker 1: bit more pro growth, whether it's cutting taxes at the

341
00:20:24,520 --> 00:20:28,440
Speaker 1: corporate level or at the individual level, increased government spending,

342
00:20:28,560 --> 00:20:31,040
Speaker 1: the regulation, all of those work in the same direction

343
00:20:31,320 --> 00:20:34,960
Speaker 1: for stronger growth. So that suggests that sectors that are

344
00:20:35,000 --> 00:20:40,720
Speaker 1: more cyclical should benefit, sectors that are less cyclical should

345
00:20:40,720 --> 00:20:43,879
Speaker 1: be hurt, both because of the better economy, but also

346
00:20:43,960 --> 00:20:48,400
Speaker 1: because of upward pressure on inflation and wage rates and

347
00:20:48,400 --> 00:20:52,320
Speaker 1: and interest rates. UM. And that gets back to the

348
00:20:52,359 --> 00:20:54,600
Speaker 1: notion that the truth of the matter is the U

349
00:20:54,680 --> 00:20:58,560
Speaker 1: S economy hasn't feared that badly. The unemployment rate has

350
00:20:58,600 --> 00:21:03,000
Speaker 1: come down pretty dramaticle we're at obviously cyclical lows and

351
00:21:03,000 --> 00:21:06,160
Speaker 1: and even at full employment by the Fed Zone definition,

352
00:21:06,840 --> 00:21:09,760
Speaker 1: although they haven't really reacted much to it yet. But

353
00:21:09,800 --> 00:21:12,480
Speaker 1: if you then get some incremental strength in the economy,

354
00:21:12,520 --> 00:21:16,360
Speaker 1: which everyone seems to think is coming UH, that has

355
00:21:16,400 --> 00:21:20,159
Speaker 1: a pretty negative implication for the bond market UH, and

356
00:21:20,200 --> 00:21:23,840
Speaker 1: therefore also a negative implication for everything in the stock

357
00:21:23,920 --> 00:21:27,679
Speaker 1: market that is very, very interest rate sensitive, notably things

358
00:21:27,760 --> 00:21:33,760
Speaker 1: like real estate investment, trust utilities UH, telephone companies UH,

359
00:21:33,800 --> 00:21:37,200
Speaker 1: and even consumer staples. Well, but I thought that cyclical

360
00:21:37,280 --> 00:21:41,840
Speaker 1: stocks the supercyclical sector includes such things as basic materials

361
00:21:41,880 --> 00:21:46,200
Speaker 1: as well as consumer cyclicals, financial services, and real estate. Well,

362
00:21:46,480 --> 00:21:51,479
Speaker 1: it varies. Uh. If you think about for example, materials, UH.

363
00:21:51,640 --> 00:21:56,280
Speaker 1: Material sector has its own issues, most importantly the deceleration

364
00:21:56,359 --> 00:22:00,280
Speaker 1: and economic growth in China and pretty much the end

365
00:22:00,320 --> 00:22:03,680
Speaker 1: of the huge construction boom in China, both of which

366
00:22:03,720 --> 00:22:09,320
Speaker 1: demanded vast quantities of raw materials. China counted for something

367
00:22:09,359 --> 00:22:14,800
Speaker 1: like plus of the total world's demand for cement some

368
00:22:14,960 --> 00:22:18,200
Speaker 1: years ago, and that's going to a road pretty rapidly. Uh.

369
00:22:18,240 --> 00:22:20,959
Speaker 1: And the same thing follows through for iron ore and

370
00:22:21,119 --> 00:22:25,720
Speaker 1: steel and all of the other industrial medals. And you're

371
00:22:25,720 --> 00:22:29,400
Speaker 1: seeing the fall out of that for companies like Caterpillar

372
00:22:29,680 --> 00:22:33,680
Speaker 1: and mining companies and and so on. So I wouldn't

373
00:22:33,720 --> 00:22:37,400
Speaker 1: look for that to uh have a stronger economy more

374
00:22:37,440 --> 00:22:42,000
Speaker 1: than offset that very very powerful secular trend working against

375
00:22:42,000 --> 00:22:47,080
Speaker 1: those sectors. UM. The others like financial services, absolutely that's

376
00:22:47,080 --> 00:22:49,439
Speaker 1: going to be one of the prime beneficiaries. That sector

377
00:22:49,480 --> 00:22:54,600
Speaker 1: has done very well already up roughly since the election.

378
00:22:55,440 --> 00:22:58,359
Speaker 1: But if you still buy into financials today, yeah, I

379
00:22:58,359 --> 00:23:00,600
Speaker 1: think the valuations are still a tray active and I

380
00:23:00,600 --> 00:23:05,000
Speaker 1: would buy into financials any specifics, whether you're talking regional banks,

381
00:23:05,800 --> 00:23:11,000
Speaker 1: money center banks, or non financial non bank financials. I

382
00:23:11,119 --> 00:23:13,960
Speaker 1: definitely like the money center banks. I think they are

383
00:23:14,000 --> 00:23:19,120
Speaker 1: still pretty inexpensive. UH and deregulation plus lower interest rate

384
00:23:19,280 --> 00:23:24,240
Speaker 1: put plus lower UM plus money I'm sorry, plus a

385
00:23:24,359 --> 00:23:28,680
Speaker 1: widening of interest rate differentials because of rising rates UH

386
00:23:28,840 --> 00:23:31,560
Speaker 1: increasing the rates that they earned versus the rates they pay,

387
00:23:32,000 --> 00:23:35,359
Speaker 1: plus the deregulation. Both of those should work very powerfully

388
00:23:35,400 --> 00:23:37,120
Speaker 1: for them. Well, let me just give you a couple

389
00:23:37,119 --> 00:23:38,919
Speaker 1: and you can just give us a nod almost you know,

390
00:23:39,000 --> 00:23:42,320
Speaker 1: whether it's Bank of America. The yield there one point

391
00:23:42,359 --> 00:23:45,879
Speaker 1: three percent, the stock is up thirty this year. I

392
00:23:46,160 --> 00:23:48,280
Speaker 1: still like it. Okay, how about City Group? Do you

393
00:23:48,320 --> 00:23:51,359
Speaker 1: think they'll benefit? Absolutely? Still like that one as well.

394
00:23:51,480 --> 00:23:55,560
Speaker 1: Any regional banks. We do like some of the regional banks. UM.

395
00:23:55,680 --> 00:23:59,000
Speaker 1: The regional banks should should benefit from the wire eyes

396
00:23:59,040 --> 00:24:02,240
Speaker 1: and interest rates and the same phenomenon of arising in

397
00:24:02,240 --> 00:24:06,760
Speaker 1: that interest margin. UH. Pack West is one that we like.

398
00:24:07,000 --> 00:24:12,520
Speaker 1: P A. C W is another one we like. UM

399
00:24:12,840 --> 00:24:17,440
Speaker 1: Regions Financial in the Southeast another one we like, Bank United,

400
00:24:18,160 --> 00:24:21,520
Speaker 1: also in the Southeast. Now you're not buying these because

401
00:24:21,520 --> 00:24:24,480
Speaker 1: of the dividend yield or are you well? In some

402
00:24:24,520 --> 00:24:26,640
Speaker 1: cases we are and in many cases we're not. We're

403
00:24:26,680 --> 00:24:29,840
Speaker 1: buying them because they're attractive investments, because I'm just looking.

404
00:24:29,880 --> 00:24:34,320
Speaker 1: For example, pack West up UH this year. The yield

405
00:24:34,359 --> 00:24:36,840
Speaker 1: is over three and a half percent. Right, that one

406
00:24:36,880 --> 00:24:40,240
Speaker 1: fits into our income with growth strategy. So there we're

407
00:24:40,280 --> 00:24:42,280
Speaker 1: buying it both for the yield as well as for

408
00:24:42,320 --> 00:24:45,760
Speaker 1: the upside potential. But the city is a holding in

409
00:24:45,920 --> 00:24:49,359
Speaker 1: our growth portfolio. The yield is still low there, but

410
00:24:49,480 --> 00:24:52,600
Speaker 1: they have the ability to raise that dividends substantially over time,

411
00:24:52,640 --> 00:24:55,440
Speaker 1: and until they get approval from the Fed, they continue

412
00:24:55,480 --> 00:24:58,160
Speaker 1: to buy back a lot of stocks. When Chuck Lieberman

413
00:24:58,480 --> 00:25:02,600
Speaker 1: sits down around the New Year's table and someone asks,

414
00:25:02,800 --> 00:25:08,560
Speaker 1: what is your most far fetched investment strategy, meaning the

415
00:25:08,600 --> 00:25:13,280
Speaker 1: one for an individual or an institution that can afford

416
00:25:13,359 --> 00:25:17,480
Speaker 1: some bumps along the way, what does Chuck Lieberman say? Uh.

417
00:25:17,520 --> 00:25:20,719
Speaker 1: One of the areas that I like are some of

418
00:25:20,800 --> 00:25:26,720
Speaker 1: the non bank financials, business development companies, and some of

419
00:25:26,960 --> 00:25:34,320
Speaker 1: the UH private investment companies companies like a black Stone Group. UH,

420
00:25:34,680 --> 00:25:38,160
Speaker 1: those are very interesting. They provide pretty good yields UH,

421
00:25:38,200 --> 00:25:40,880
Speaker 1: and they should benefit from the healthier economy. They can

422
00:25:41,200 --> 00:25:44,399
Speaker 1: sell off some of their investments in the market that

423
00:25:44,480 --> 00:25:47,439
Speaker 1: I think is going to be uh doing fine, so

424
00:25:47,520 --> 00:25:51,359
Speaker 1: they can realize some of those big investment gains. And

425
00:25:51,400 --> 00:25:53,760
Speaker 1: you're putting your money with people like Steven Schwartzman, who

426
00:25:53,760 --> 00:25:56,320
Speaker 1: happens to run the black Stone Group. Right stock down

427
00:25:56,440 --> 00:25:59,480
Speaker 1: eight percent this year with the yield currently of over

428
00:26:00,000 --> 00:26:02,640
Speaker 1: six per cent, But the people have to be mindful

429
00:26:02,720 --> 00:26:05,560
Speaker 1: that that yield can change, and it can change dramatically,

430
00:26:06,000 --> 00:26:10,080
Speaker 1: and it changes all the time. It reflects their ability

431
00:26:10,160 --> 00:26:13,400
Speaker 1: to realize gains. And they've got a core business that's

432
00:26:13,400 --> 00:26:16,399
Speaker 1: sort of recurring, and then there's another business that is

433
00:26:16,520 --> 00:26:20,920
Speaker 1: much more uh episodic, shall we say. So they need

434
00:26:20,960 --> 00:26:23,160
Speaker 1: to be able to sell off assets, but the underlying

435
00:26:23,240 --> 00:26:27,119
Speaker 1: value of that building the business remains very, very attractive,

436
00:26:27,440 --> 00:26:29,920
Speaker 1: and so when you ask for something that's a little

437
00:26:29,960 --> 00:26:33,480
Speaker 1: bit off the mainstream, that's one I want to thank

438
00:26:33,480 --> 00:26:35,800
Speaker 1: you very much for joining me. Chuck Lieberman is the

439
00:26:35,880 --> 00:26:40,879
Speaker 1: chief investment Officer and managing partner for Adviser's Capital Management,

440
00:26:41,119 --> 00:26:45,120
Speaker 1: where he helps manage over one point three billion dollars.

441
00:26:45,200 --> 00:26:54,480
Speaker 1: Joining us from Ridgewood, New Jersey, Thanks for listening to

442
00:26:54,520 --> 00:26:57,560
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg p and l podcast. You can subscribe and

443
00:26:57,600 --> 00:27:02,040
Speaker 1: listen to interviews at iTunes, sound Cloud, or whatever podcast

444
00:27:02,080 --> 00:27:05,119
Speaker 1: platform you prefer. I'm Pim Fox. I'm out there on

445
00:27:05,160 --> 00:27:08,360
Speaker 1: Twitter at pim Fox. I'm out there on Twitter at

446
00:27:08,520 --> 00:27:11,440
Speaker 1: Lisa Abramo. It's one before the podcast. You can always

447
00:27:11,560 --> 00:27:13,680
Speaker 1: catch us worldwide on Bloomberg Radio