WEBVTT - Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman Talks China's Economy

0:00:02.440 --> 0:00:06.800
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:07.040 --> 0:00:09.479
<v Speaker 2>Let's bring our first guest on The Asia Trade. Paul

0:00:09.520 --> 0:00:12.559
<v Speaker 2>Kriegman is, of course, Nobel laureate and professor of economics

0:00:12.560 --> 0:00:15.520
<v Speaker 2>at City University of New York. Professor Krieman, it's a

0:00:15.520 --> 0:00:18.600
<v Speaker 2>pleasure to have you with us on this first episode

0:00:18.680 --> 0:00:20.680
<v Speaker 2>of The Asia Trade. I wanted to start off with

0:00:20.760 --> 0:00:23.400
<v Speaker 2>the US economic outlook because I know recently you've written

0:00:23.440 --> 0:00:27.720
<v Speaker 2>about this idea of inflation brain right, the idea that

0:00:27.840 --> 0:00:31.760
<v Speaker 2>you know, perhaps price pressures are the scapegoat for all

0:00:31.760 --> 0:00:35.479
<v Speaker 2>economic afflictions in the US. The balance of risks for

0:00:35.520 --> 0:00:38.839
<v Speaker 2>the FED and a lot of other central banks, including

0:00:38.880 --> 0:00:41.919
<v Speaker 2>the RBA for example, the RBNZ seems so fine at

0:00:41.920 --> 0:00:44.120
<v Speaker 2>the moment. What would make you suggest that they should

0:00:44.159 --> 0:00:46.559
<v Speaker 2>go for a small cut in June.

0:00:47.120 --> 0:00:51.280
<v Speaker 1>Okay, the first thing to say is that we are

0:00:51.320 --> 0:00:55.680
<v Speaker 1>pretty sure the recent inflation data have been you know,

0:00:55.720 --> 0:01:00.880
<v Speaker 1>there's noise, there's probably some funny stuff with season, but

0:01:00.960 --> 0:01:04.640
<v Speaker 1>it basically inflation has been beaten. You know, we're we're

0:01:04.760 --> 0:01:07.760
<v Speaker 1>arguing over whether underlying inflation is two point six or

0:01:07.760 --> 0:01:10.959
<v Speaker 1>two point one percent. We're not that the range of

0:01:11.000 --> 0:01:14.600
<v Speaker 1>disagreement there is fundamental disagreement is really small.

0:01:14.600 --> 0:01:16.160
<v Speaker 3>We're basically there.

0:01:16.280 --> 0:01:20.679
<v Speaker 1>And the the big uncertainty is how long can the

0:01:20.760 --> 0:01:22.840
<v Speaker 1>economy continue to you.

0:01:22.800 --> 0:01:25.600
<v Speaker 3>Know, power along with rates this high.

0:01:25.680 --> 0:01:29.240
<v Speaker 1>And we're at this point now where they're just you know,

0:01:29.520 --> 0:01:35.400
<v Speaker 1>faint hints soft data suggesting that we're starting to lose steam,

0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:39.280
<v Speaker 1>that consumers are starting to falter. It's nothing drastic, but

0:01:39.319 --> 0:01:40.919
<v Speaker 1>then it never is at this point.

0:01:40.959 --> 0:01:43.440
<v Speaker 3>And if you're beginning a downturn.

0:01:43.400 --> 0:01:49.760
<v Speaker 1>So it's the chance of reaccelerating inflation looks very small.

0:01:49.800 --> 0:01:53.000
<v Speaker 1>If the Fed cuts rates, the chance that they will

0:01:53.040 --> 0:01:55.800
<v Speaker 1>look back and say, my god, why didn't we take

0:01:55.840 --> 0:01:59.640
<v Speaker 1>at least a little bit of precautionary action against the

0:01:59.680 --> 0:02:02.360
<v Speaker 1>looming downturn looks very much larger. So I would I

0:02:02.360 --> 0:02:05.000
<v Speaker 1>would go for the rate cut, if only to signal, hey,

0:02:05.000 --> 0:02:07.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, we're we're not asleep here. We're not going

0:02:07.240 --> 0:02:10.240
<v Speaker 1>to be obsessed with inflation until that's so far in

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:12.000
<v Speaker 1>the rear view mirror that we really should have been

0:02:12.000 --> 0:02:14.320
<v Speaker 1>focusing on the on the car wreck in front of us.

0:02:15.680 --> 0:02:18.320
<v Speaker 2>Right, So, like a protective cut, and I think we've

0:02:18.360 --> 0:02:20.360
<v Speaker 2>kind of talked about that a little bit with regard

0:02:20.400 --> 0:02:24.160
<v Speaker 2>to other economies, as well. Do you worry about the

0:02:24.200 --> 0:02:28.080
<v Speaker 2>potential for fiscal to undermine the monetary at this point?

0:02:29.520 --> 0:02:33.440
<v Speaker 1>Well, actually, you know not in the United States. Everything

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:37.400
<v Speaker 1>everything is up in the air because of the election.

0:02:38.320 --> 0:02:42.280
<v Speaker 1>I don't worry about fiscal being as serious in the US.

0:02:43.000 --> 0:02:44.720
<v Speaker 3>You know, we have not gotten our house in order.

0:02:44.800 --> 0:02:47.840
<v Speaker 1>But the in terms of there being a significant fiscal

0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:50.840
<v Speaker 1>boost if Biden is re elected not going to happen

0:02:51.280 --> 0:02:55.919
<v Speaker 1>as where we've sort of done that. If Trump wins,

0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:59.280
<v Speaker 1>then all bets are off. I mean his he's made

0:02:59.320 --> 0:03:02.239
<v Speaker 1>it clear that he doesn't want the FED to retain

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:06.400
<v Speaker 1>its independence. He's shown in the past a clear inclination

0:03:06.560 --> 0:03:10.880
<v Speaker 1>towards kind of a Turkey style, you know, print money

0:03:10.880 --> 0:03:11.960
<v Speaker 1>to help me politically.

0:03:12.880 --> 0:03:15.679
<v Speaker 3>The it is talking about.

0:03:15.520 --> 0:03:19.680
<v Speaker 1>Unfunded tax cuts, but also tariffs that are directly inflationary.

0:03:20.040 --> 0:03:23.040
<v Speaker 1>So no, if I mean, I have to say, markets

0:03:23.120 --> 0:03:25.840
<v Speaker 1>are way too calm given that this is a toss

0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:28.760
<v Speaker 1>up election. And then what the side would represent the

0:03:28.840 --> 0:03:31.600
<v Speaker 1>huge departure on policy of every kind.

0:03:34.400 --> 0:03:38.400
<v Speaker 4>Especially with risks around trade tariffs also increasing. What is

0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:42.040
<v Speaker 4>the view when it comes to geopolitical tensions arising that

0:03:42.120 --> 0:03:45.080
<v Speaker 4>could further the real risk assets not to mention global

0:03:45.120 --> 0:03:48.760
<v Speaker 4>economies that really have close training partnerships with the US.

0:03:50.240 --> 0:03:51.240
<v Speaker 3>Oh, if this is huge.

0:03:51.280 --> 0:03:55.680
<v Speaker 1>I mean we are very much regardless of who wins,

0:03:55.680 --> 0:03:57.840
<v Speaker 1>we are at the end of an era. I mean,

0:03:58.440 --> 0:04:02.600
<v Speaker 1>my political science friends talk about hegemonic stability.

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:05.920
<v Speaker 3>Which was that we had a long era of pretty

0:04:05.920 --> 0:04:07.120
<v Speaker 3>smooth globalization.

0:04:07.400 --> 0:04:11.119
<v Speaker 1>You know, the things worked because the US was number one,

0:04:11.240 --> 0:04:14.560
<v Speaker 1>and the US kind of believed in a rules based

0:04:14.680 --> 0:04:17.960
<v Speaker 1>order and all of that, and it was always kind

0:04:17.960 --> 0:04:20.680
<v Speaker 1>of hypothetical, what would happen if we no longer had that.

0:04:20.720 --> 0:04:22.760
<v Speaker 3>Well it's gone right now we have.

0:04:24.520 --> 0:04:25.839
<v Speaker 1>You know, as long as it was the US and

0:04:25.880 --> 0:04:30.359
<v Speaker 1>the Euro Area, then well we share a lot of views,

0:04:30.400 --> 0:04:32.159
<v Speaker 1>share a lot of values. But with the US and

0:04:32.279 --> 0:04:35.040
<v Speaker 1>China now is the two big players on the block,

0:04:36.880 --> 0:04:41.400
<v Speaker 1>everything's wide open and the you know, it doesn't necessarily

0:04:41.480 --> 0:04:45.000
<v Speaker 1>mean that we descend into a collapse of world trade

0:04:45.120 --> 0:04:48.520
<v Speaker 1>right away, but it does mean that nothing, none of

0:04:48.560 --> 0:04:51.240
<v Speaker 1>the ground rules that everybody counted on for the past

0:04:51.320 --> 0:04:54.039
<v Speaker 1>several decades can be counted on anymore.

0:04:57.279 --> 0:04:59.400
<v Speaker 4>And here in the Asia and the columnies really watching

0:04:59.440 --> 0:05:02.080
<v Speaker 4>this on I'm hearing in Japan now, and what and

0:05:02.120 --> 0:05:05.479
<v Speaker 4>for the writering being is not. Actually, Japan has benefited

0:05:05.520 --> 0:05:08.479
<v Speaker 4>a lot from the tensions between China and the United

0:05:08.520 --> 0:05:10.960
<v Speaker 4>States that a lot of these businesses are now veering

0:05:11.279 --> 0:05:15.640
<v Speaker 4>towards setting up more connections with Japan. Are you seeing

0:05:15.760 --> 0:05:20.280
<v Speaker 4>a meaningful demand driven sort of inflationary pressure that can

0:05:20.320 --> 0:05:25.040
<v Speaker 4>be sustainable finally in this country, it's very.

0:05:25.760 --> 0:05:28.160
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I've been worried about Japan for a long time,

0:05:28.200 --> 0:05:30.640
<v Speaker 1>and I have to admit that I worried about LESCA.

0:05:30.640 --> 0:05:32.960
<v Speaker 1>I said, worried about lots of other things, including my

0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:33.640
<v Speaker 1>own country.

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:38.080
<v Speaker 3>I'm not, I hope, So I'm not convinced.

0:05:38.200 --> 0:05:41.200
<v Speaker 1>When I try to look at the Japanese data, I

0:05:41.240 --> 0:05:46.080
<v Speaker 1>still don't see the kind of you know, fundamental strength.

0:05:46.320 --> 0:05:49.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, a lot of Japan's long term weakness has

0:05:49.839 --> 0:05:52.640
<v Speaker 1>to do with demography, has to do with extremely low

0:05:52.680 --> 0:05:56.280
<v Speaker 1>fertility that hasn't changed. Although Japan is at least more

0:05:56.320 --> 0:05:58.000
<v Speaker 1>open to immigration than it used.

0:05:57.800 --> 0:06:01.000
<v Speaker 3>To be, it's it's a long way. I mean, I

0:06:01.000 --> 0:06:04.360
<v Speaker 3>would say that the talk about.

0:06:05.960 --> 0:06:09.440
<v Speaker 1>Exiting zero rates, I understand why Japan really wants to

0:06:09.480 --> 0:06:12.159
<v Speaker 1>be able to declare that we've ended that period, but

0:06:12.200 --> 0:06:14.400
<v Speaker 1>it's not all clear in the data that it really has.

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:20.640
<v Speaker 4>And yet what choice do Japanese policy makers have when

0:06:20.640 --> 0:06:23.600
<v Speaker 4>you have this immense pressure on the Japanese yen, Are

0:06:23.640 --> 0:06:26.680
<v Speaker 4>you saying that this could potentially be another falls down

0:06:26.839 --> 0:06:29.039
<v Speaker 4>when it comes to bog policy normalization?

0:06:29.960 --> 0:06:32.080
<v Speaker 3>It could well be. I mean, will you know, we'll see.

0:06:32.080 --> 0:06:36.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean it's you know, the bo j U leadership

0:06:36.720 --> 0:06:38.320
<v Speaker 1>is not stupid to say the least.

0:06:38.480 --> 0:06:40.200
<v Speaker 3>Uh, they're they're watching this.

0:06:40.440 --> 0:06:43.120
<v Speaker 1>But I have to say what puzzles me is why

0:06:43.240 --> 0:06:46.960
<v Speaker 1>Japan is so worried about the following yen? Uh, you know,

0:06:47.000 --> 0:06:50.080
<v Speaker 1>it's it's uh, it's not as if I mean, yes,

0:06:50.120 --> 0:06:53.000
<v Speaker 1>that does hurt consumer prices some.

0:06:53.600 --> 0:06:55.280
<v Speaker 3>But Japan, as we say, it's been a.

0:06:55.200 --> 0:06:59.640
<v Speaker 1>Country that has long had a problem in convincingly exiting

0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:04.240
<v Speaker 1>defl and a weaker yen after a little, you know,

0:07:04.279 --> 0:07:07.120
<v Speaker 1>give it a bit of a lag that's actually positive

0:07:07.160 --> 0:07:09.880
<v Speaker 1>for demand for Japanese goods and services.

0:07:09.920 --> 0:07:12.200
<v Speaker 3>So the thing that I find.

0:07:11.960 --> 0:07:14.760
<v Speaker 1>Puzzling is why the weaker yen is inspiring as much

0:07:14.760 --> 0:07:15.880
<v Speaker 1>panic as it seems to be.

0:07:18.280 --> 0:07:20.360
<v Speaker 2>Does it make more sense if you think about the

0:07:20.720 --> 0:07:24.800
<v Speaker 2>sort of geostrategic tensions, right? Does it create more panic

0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:26.320
<v Speaker 2>for Beijing for example?

0:07:27.200 --> 0:07:30.600
<v Speaker 3>Oh? For sure. I mean, look, I mean, China is

0:07:30.640 --> 0:07:33.480
<v Speaker 3>in much worse shape. I mean a fundamental sense.

0:07:33.600 --> 0:07:38.400
<v Speaker 1>China has a whole economic model that is not sustainable.

0:07:39.200 --> 0:07:44.440
<v Speaker 1>It has vastly inadequate domestic spending, vastly inadequate consumer demand,

0:07:45.200 --> 0:07:48.640
<v Speaker 1>has run out of sufficient investment opportunities to keep the

0:07:48.720 --> 0:07:56.160
<v Speaker 1>economy rolling, and but seems bizarrely unable to change its

0:07:56.200 --> 0:07:59.560
<v Speaker 1>operating you know, to do even modest steps towards a

0:07:59.640 --> 0:08:04.400
<v Speaker 1>refundocusing on domestic demand, and China sort of kind of

0:08:05.040 --> 0:08:08.679
<v Speaker 1>it's still seems inclined to try to export its way out,

0:08:09.040 --> 0:08:10.720
<v Speaker 1>which is not going to happen. The world is not

0:08:10.760 --> 0:08:13.720
<v Speaker 1>going to accept it. And a following end, if you like,

0:08:13.800 --> 0:08:17.720
<v Speaker 1>adds to that unacceptability, because if there's one thing that

0:08:18.040 --> 0:08:20.040
<v Speaker 1>we can be sure, it's that the rest of the

0:08:20.040 --> 0:08:24.360
<v Speaker 1>world is not going to accept a simultaneous Japanese and

0:08:24.520 --> 0:08:29.120
<v Speaker 1>Chinese exports surge on the scale that could what happened

0:08:29.120 --> 0:08:30.600
<v Speaker 1>without some kind of action.

0:08:30.960 --> 0:08:32.840
<v Speaker 2>Professor Krugman, it's really great to have you with us.

0:08:32.840 --> 0:08:35.800
<v Speaker 2>We appreciate your time, and we could continue this conversation

0:08:36.160 --> 0:08:38.280
<v Speaker 2>and hopefully you'll join us again soon. That's a noble

0:08:38.320 --> 0:08:41.800
<v Speaker 2>laureate and City University of New York professor Paul Krugman.

0:08:41.880 --> 0:08:42.120
<v Speaker 3>There