Speaker 1: Let's go now to London.
Speaker 2: We're JP Morgan, Chairman and CEO. Jamie Diamond joins Bloomberg
Speaker 2: de Lisa Abrahmitz for an exclusive interview. Lisa, Katie, thank
Speaker 2: you so much, really appreciate it. I am here with
Speaker 2: Jamie Diamond at the Tech Stars conference at the Novo
Speaker 2: Hotel in London, and we're going to get into a
Speaker 2: bunch of different things, a lot of the questions that
Speaker 2: people have, but one main question is we're seeing the
Speaker 2: sort of explosion in tech.
Speaker 1: A lot of people are pausing it.
Speaker 2: How are you sort of seeing the advancements that are
Speaker 2: most important so far and going forward? What's most excited?
Speaker 1: What's the most exciting for you? So, first of all,
Speaker 1: welcome everybody, thrilled to be here. You know, first of all,
Speaker 1: you got to look at tech in the big picture.
Speaker 1: It's been changing society for one hundreds of years with
Speaker 1: agriculture and printing and steam engines and electricity and the
Speaker 1: internet and tech rows in itself. You know, the Internet
Speaker 1: caused ABNC semiconductors, and girla glass caused the iPhone, and
Speaker 1: so this is another wave. We're here in London because
Speaker 1: we call it the tech the tech comes here, but
Speaker 1: it's also dasper. Now if you went back ten years,
Speaker 1: it was mostly in the United States and concentrated in
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley, Boston, New York. Now it's everywhere. You know.
Speaker 1: We have a tech center in Berlin, Glasgow, UH, Edinburgh,
Speaker 1: and I whish. I think it is great you have
Speaker 1: more innovation taking place. I think it's really important for Europe. Uh.
Speaker 1: And obviously the thing now is all about AI and
Speaker 1: AI which I think is real and it's gonna change
Speaker 1: an awful lot of things. Can you mention one other things?
Speaker 1: There's always been a fear of tech that's gonna take
Speaker 1: away jobs, but you gotta look at the big picture,
Speaker 1: and sometimes it does. But in the big picture, it
Speaker 1: is why mankind has gotten better and better, lives longer,
Speaker 1: GDPs go up, PRODUCTIVY goes up, health gets better, work
Speaker 1: hours go down. So be able to keep in mind
Speaker 1: the benefits are huge. We probably have to find a
Speaker 1: better way to help the people get hurt by it.
Speaker 2: So you talk about the people who are getting hurt
Speaker 2: by it. And in a previous interview, when you were
Speaker 2: talking about how it's gonna reduce some.
Speaker 1: Jobs and it's gonna create others.
Speaker 2: Which jobs do you expect to get eliminated and which
Speaker 2: jobs do you expect to get created.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we don't really know yet, you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: we shouldn't put our head in the sand. We know
Speaker 1: it can be true. So a lot of jobs. Your
Speaker 1: job will be enhanced. You'll get more research, more questions,
Speaker 1: more he is you'll have like a real super assistant
Speaker 1: chief of staff on your shoulder and you wake up,
Speaker 1: but you're still to be interviewing people. You know, other jobs.
Speaker 1: It will handle you know, error rates or you know,
Speaker 1: it already hedges our trading equity floors and it's already
Speaker 1: been used for risk fraud marketing hasn't really eliminated on jobs,
Speaker 1: but it created effect this in terms of productivity by
Speaker 1: you know, reducing fraud losses and so and then you know,
Speaker 1: if it changes jobs and operations and elsewhere, we'll deal
Speaker 1: with it. You know, we have turnover twenty percent a year.
Speaker 1: We'd love to retrain people, redeploy the re educate them.
Speaker 1: And so I'm not worried about it. And if it
Speaker 1: works with the customer and the client, we can kind
Speaker 1: of do more. That says for successful company, if you're
Speaker 1: growing and expanding, you're actually almost always getting jobs. So
Speaker 1: you know, to me, I want to have a successful
Speaker 1: company and we'll deal with whatever the downside is of AI.
Speaker 2: So I was speaking with another head of a major
Speaker 2: US bank who is saying that hess his bank to
Speaker 2: keep growing in terms of business, in terms of assets,
Speaker 2: but stay the same size when it comes to staff.
Speaker 2: Do you feel the same for JP and Morgan?
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't really know to tell the truth,
Speaker 1: and I don't like try to predetermine that. So if
Speaker 1: you look what we're doing, we're still opening branches. We're
Speaker 1: still opening branches and cities around the world. We've added
Speaker 1: a thousand people in AI itself. You know, we're adding
Speaker 1: people in data scientists. Journey to the Cloud got forty
Speaker 1: four thousand yeers. So I think we can see is
Speaker 1: some down some up in general. If we're growing company,
Speaker 1: I would expect to go up a little bit in general.
Speaker 2: Typically, the Tech Stars is a conference for a lot
Speaker 2: of founders start to test the waters for IPOs, potentially
Speaker 2: look to go public. There's been a deterrence to really
Speaker 2: going public as quickly as in the past, particularly for
Speaker 2: tech companies, just because there's so much private capital out there.
Speaker 1: Do you still see that.
Speaker 2: Is that a structural change or is that something that's
Speaker 2: cyclical just having.
Speaker 1: To do with race. It's a complicated subject. Yes, there's
Speaker 1: private capital, and I think it's a good thing that
Speaker 1: people can raise money in the private capital markets, you know,
Speaker 1: but it's a little odd that, you know, public markets
Speaker 1: are quite elevated and IPOs haven't come very much yet.
Speaker 1: So but part of it is they have access to capital,
Speaker 1: parts they're waiting. Part of it is they reduced their
Speaker 1: own cash burn they don't need as much cash. So
Speaker 1: it's a whole bunch of reasons why they're not going public.
Speaker 1: But I think eventually you do need healthy public markets
Speaker 1: to have people look with fire their positions, which all
Speaker 1: the venture cabs and lunch with a bunch of venture
Speaker 1: capitals they all are going to want to do is
Speaker 1: actually need to do at one point. So do you
Speaker 1: expect that to pick up in the near future.
Speaker 2: Do you think it's going to remain needed for the frustration.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I honestly don't know. I think it
Speaker 1: may very well stay muted, because you know, markets may
Speaker 1: come down as opposed to just go up endlessly, and
Speaker 1: they may find other sources. So when I speak to
Speaker 1: a lot of private equity and private cap, private venture
Speaker 1: and stuff like that, they tell you they have more
Speaker 1: non public sources. I do think it's very important that
Speaker 1: our policy make us understand, you know, because even here
Speaker 1: in the United States, we've made it hard to go public.
Speaker 1: You know, we've eliminated research on smaller companies. We've you know,
Speaker 1: we've the costs so much higher. Those litigation expensive to higher.
Speaker 1: You know, filing with the SEC is higher. So I
Speaker 1: think it would be really incumbany of us trying to
Speaker 1: make it easier and cheaper to go public, allow more
Speaker 1: of risks to be born in the public markets. And
Speaker 1: we've got to figure out way to do that. We
Speaker 1: actually have ten takeaways from lunch where I want to
Speaker 1: take a good look at it.
Speaker 2: So that raises a question of where people are going public.
Speaker 2: And we're here in London, which has behind a number
Speaker 2: of other areas, particularly New York, and has lost cloud
Speaker 2: in other areas too, especially since Brexit. Do you think
Speaker 2: that this is just a momentary blip or do you
Speaker 2: think that just on a broader level, London is kind
Speaker 2: of losing a bit of its cloud.
Speaker 1: Is a major financial center. So I think Perchull, I
Speaker 1: love the fact if you listen to the current labor government,
Speaker 1: they're talking about growth, investment, markets, capital markets, and they
Speaker 1: do need to do those things to help her recover.
Speaker 1: If they didn't do those things, no, I think it
Speaker 1: will become more permanent. Then you know, a lot of
Speaker 1: people they go to. The United States is more liquid.
Speaker 1: You know, it's easy to do, I mean and so
Speaker 1: or they have a lot of business there, and which
Speaker 1: also making this in a great business environment will also
Speaker 1: help companies going public here. But right now the Nasdaq
Speaker 1: or York Stock has change. They're just more attractive places
Speaker 1: to go, and we'll see how that pans out. I
Speaker 1: think it's important we want to help them do better here,
Speaker 1: and I'm not in favor of just advantage in the
Speaker 1: United States at the expense of Europe. But I do
Speaker 1: think that Europe needs to focus on Mario Drogis report.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of things in there that they
Speaker 1: need to do to get productivity back and growth back
Speaker 1: and markets back. They need to capital markets Union, for example,
Speaker 1: which they've been talking about for years. They actually do
Speaker 1: really need it to foster growth around European countries.
Speaker 2: On a broader level, just aside from the London market.
Speaker 2: What kind of activity do you see in the pipeline
Speaker 2: for fourth quarter? I mean, do you see for luctance
Speaker 2: by companies to really engage with major actions because of
Speaker 2: the election, because of potential volatility, because of geopolitics, or
Speaker 2: do you see it really ramping up?
Speaker 1: Yeah. So I've always you know, we always about back
Speaker 1: and I always told by Opia be careful because backlogs
Speaker 1: tend to grow and expand and stop. There's a pretty
Speaker 1: good backlog growing of IPOs of companies. You know, whether
Speaker 1: it happens or not is a different thing. And M
Speaker 1: and A yes, I do believe I can prove is
Speaker 1: more anecdotal. That is tampered quite a bit by not
Speaker 1: the election, maybe the election, but by rules and regulations.
Speaker 1: And we took to a lot of boards of directors here.
Speaker 1: You know they're talking about is that is the risk
Speaker 1: capital there you can take the risk. They want to
Speaker 1: be very conservative in the United States. It's more about
Speaker 1: you know, can you wait eighteen to twenty four months
Speaker 1: to close a deal? And mean that creates a lot
Speaker 1: of risks for a company, you know, particularly if you
Speaker 1: go to banking. I know a lot of the banks.
Speaker 1: I think they should be allowed to do deals. They're very,
Speaker 1: very reluctant because they can't wait. One of the last
Speaker 1: bank to the necessaries took three years. And I think
Speaker 1: if rem there's a ninety day regulatory requirement, well obviously
Speaker 1: that's not taking place anymore. And we do have to
Speaker 1: fix these things. You want an active, healthy M and
Speaker 1: a market just quickly. Not all bad for competition, even
Speaker 1: though I think it's true in certain cases. But you know,
Speaker 1: we just become like an anti M and a country,
Speaker 1: and that's a bad idea.
Speaker 2: Okay, Just let's say that there's somebody else in charge
Speaker 2: of the FTC and there are some different kinds of
Speaker 2: rules and sticks that people have to advance over. How
Speaker 2: much consolidation do you expect in the banking industry?
Speaker 1: So for the FTC, and I want to make very
Speaker 1: clear about this. You know, say to you know, to hammer,
Speaker 1: everything is in nail. They're a little bit like that.
Speaker 1: But that doesn't mean they aren't right about certain things
Speaker 1: they say. I just want to separate that. Look, I
Speaker 1: think there are four thousand banks the United States. They're
Speaker 1: in a different position. You could be a very profitable
Speaker 1: community bank. So I don't think the idea you have
Speaker 1: to merge is true. But if you're competing in a certain
Speaker 1: business for certain clients and certain sizes, you may need
Speaker 1: kinds of scale, and you know they should determine so
Speaker 1: you do need consolidation. A lot of the mid sized
Speaker 1: banks want to do it. They shouldn't be hampered, you know,
Speaker 1: and they would tell you if I can't do it,
Speaker 1: you're basically seeding the ground to JP Morgan, and I
Speaker 1: think that's unfair. They should be allowed to merge. The
Speaker 1: boards of directors should be allowed to make that decision
Speaker 1: based on what they think is the best interest of
Speaker 1: the shareholders. You know, this notion that government should get
Speaker 1: involved in every single little bank, do you like? He's
Speaker 1: just wrong, And you know they're adding social values to
Speaker 1: everything they do. It should be about safety and soundness,
Speaker 1: and a board of directors that says we need to merge,
Speaker 1: we want to merge, probably means that heading for a
Speaker 1: safe and sounder bank, that's their desire. You can give
Speaker 1: a lot of examples where it doesn't work. It doesn't
Speaker 1: mean it shouldn't be allowed. And I think we've got
Speaker 1: to be a little more open about letting these things
Speaker 1: take place and letting them take place quickly.
Speaker 2: Aside from just some of the regulatory overhang, there is
Speaker 2: this question about how much in general the markets are
Speaker 2: going to open up, and a lot of that has
Speaker 2: to hinges on the hinge on the economy. You mentioned
Speaker 2: earlier that you are more pessimistic about a soft landing.
Speaker 2: I think you gave it a thirty five percent probability
Speaker 2: back in April.
Speaker 1: Do you still think that or do.
Speaker 2: You think that the probability has gone off with some
Speaker 2: of the good data that we've been getting.
Speaker 1: Yeah. No, And the important I'm not talking about forecasting
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, and I just think there's a lot
Speaker 1: of moving parts, a lot of things in the future,
Speaker 1: which inflationary these you know, the most important thing taking
Speaker 1: place of these wars overseas geopolitics, you know, they're terrible,
Speaker 1: humane suffering, you know, but also the the you know,
Speaker 1: a bunch of these countries acting in cahoots against Western interests,
Speaker 1: against Israel, against Ukraine, against the United States, and that's
Speaker 1: really serious. So I can look at a long amount
Speaker 1: of serious things. Soft layings are hard. I hope it happens.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I just wouldn't count my eggs in
Speaker 1: that one. And markets are open. When you say open,
Speaker 1: they're very you know, values are high, they're not low,
Speaker 1: both equities and bonds. You know, credit spreads are very low.
Speaker 1: So they're open, but people are standing. Not open for
Speaker 1: i pos, so some IPOs when we just did one
Speaker 1: of the larger word of the year like last week.
Speaker 1: They're open for those who the market wants to buy today,
Speaker 1: you know, but don't assume that they're not open. And
Speaker 1: you know, sometimes people would go public they don't like
Speaker 1: the price. That's a very different thing, and you should
Speaker 1: think twice about that when you think you know where
Speaker 1: the company's worth much more than the market might know.
Speaker 2: That maybe it's sort of an assessment of what you're
Speaker 2: looking for rather than the actual market being closed. You know,
Speaker 2: you said that there are a lot of inflationary things
Speaker 2: that are coming down the pike. Do you think that
Speaker 2: it was a mistake for the Fed to cut by
Speaker 2: fifty basis points?
Speaker 1: Oh? Actually, I mean you gotta separate the hear and
Speaker 1: now inflation has definitely been coming down. You know, they
Speaker 1: don't wanna go into recession. Unemployed has been going up,
Speaker 1: They raised race, they were late raising rage, but they
Speaker 1: raised it very high, rapidly to five percent of I
Speaker 1: think it is the right thing, and they're right to
Speaker 1: take their foot of the guests in that one. I
Speaker 1: don't think it matters that much fifty to twenty five, honestly,
Speaker 1: but I think that was okay. If inflation comes back,
Speaker 1: I'm looking at future things, the remilitation of the world's inflationary,
Speaker 1: the physcal deficits of the world between United States inflationary,
Speaker 1: the green economies, inflationary, demographics are inflationary. Uh, it's very possible.
Speaker 1: Energy prices down the road. I'm talk about two or
Speaker 1: three years of inflationary those will hit later. You know,
Speaker 1: they should react at that time to those things, but
Speaker 1: they h I don't think you can anticipate that. We
Speaker 1: don't know that that's going to happen. I'm so glad
Speaker 1: you grow up the deficit. I watched the Treasury auctions.
Speaker 1: There's another three year one today.
Speaker 2: I watch them every time, wondering are we going to
Speaker 2: start seeing disruption from some of the concerns that yourself
Speaker 2: that you bring up, but also every single investor who
Speaker 2: I speak to is it's the same thing. Are you
Speaker 2: surprised that the market hasn't priced in a higher structural
Speaker 2: deficit in the way of higher yields or at least
Speaker 2: more volatility, at least at auctions.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I have a lot of comments that one.
Speaker 1: Commodity markets often though, price things in so they actually happen,
Speaker 1: and so it hasn't happened yet, you know, the higher inflation,
Speaker 1: the higher structural stuff. Even though the deficits are there,
Speaker 1: there's also sentiment inventory supplying demand of you know, of
Speaker 1: capital good. So it's very hard to say. But that's
Speaker 1: why I think that longer rates may actually stay here
Speaker 1: and tick up a little bit as opposed to go
Speaker 1: down because of these huge deficits in the United States
Speaker 1: and then the markets reacting with the word you used
Speaker 1: of volatile or something like that. It's not always bad.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think we overreact sometimes to volatile markets,
Speaker 1: but I do think they'll happen again. Your dealer inventories
Speaker 1: are very low. Banks of the big market makers are
Speaker 1: very constrained. Not today, I mean, we have this anomaly
Speaker 1: where j Moore is going to have a trillion dollars
Speaker 1: of cash and unable to intermediate treasury markets to repail
Speaker 1: markets completely conservatively because we're required to hold that cash
Speaker 1: in very you know, like central bank reserves something like that.
Speaker 1: So I think when q E, if I gets to
Speaker 1: a certain point, you will see that I may be wrong.
Speaker 1: And again, if it happens, I don't think it's disaster.
Speaker 1: It's not bad for JP Morgan. I do think policy
Speaker 1: makers will get upset. They don't like seeing that type
Speaker 1: of thing, and I think they're fixes to it, and
Speaker 1: I think there's sharp we're going to fixes today.
Speaker 2: Something that you said about how markets sometimes don't respond
Speaker 2: until an event, is there Commodity markets Commodity markets, well.
Speaker 1: So think of stock markets are forecasting earnings and cash
Speaker 1: out five years and ten years and always adjusting it
Speaker 1: and their buyers and sellers and equity prices adjust. But
Speaker 1: if you look at commodity price action, well, sometimes it's
Speaker 1: forecasting the future. Actually is looking at supplying demand today.
Speaker 1: So the most important is supplying demand today with some sentiment,
Speaker 1: some inventory. How quickly you can replace supplying demand. So
Speaker 1: all commandiers are different. But think of the treasures a
Speaker 1: little bit as a commodity. Well do you.
Speaker 2: Think that treasury is especially if you look at it
Speaker 2: as commodity, which is a wonderful way to look at it,
Speaker 2: that there is sort of a catalyst in the election
Speaker 2: with respect to realizing what the deficit could be.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Look, I people are making charts of what everyone
Speaker 1: said and what it might mean for the deficit, what
Speaker 1: they said and what they actually do and actually have
Speaker 1: their completely different things. I'm not going to worry about that.
Speaker 1: I think you should worry about. The deficit today is
Speaker 1: seven percent of GDP. When Vulgar was around, we had
Speaker 1: very high inflation was three and A hadred percent. The
Speaker 1: debt to GDP thirty five percent back then nineteen eighty two.
Speaker 1: It's one hundred percent today. The deficits say, the biggest
Speaker 1: peacetime deficit we ever ran. Deficits by their nature are inflationary,
Speaker 1: and you know, one point we have to deal with this.
Speaker 1: I mean, I would beg the government to set a
Speaker 1: powerful Simpson Balls type committee authrighted by the Congress up
Speaker 1: or down vote. It's probably the only way to do it.
Speaker 1: The other way to do is wait so it's some
Speaker 1: kind of disaster in the market, and then you're kind
Speaker 1: of forced to do it at the wrong time. And
Speaker 1: I don't know when that might be. I will have
Speaker 1: next year, probably not, But you know, in America four
Speaker 1: one hundred and twenty percent to GDP probably, which we
Speaker 1: wait for that hockey stick to start. I don't think so.
Speaker 1: I think it's just a bad way to run risk.
Speaker 2: So you mentioned government Libby Cantrell at pempcos she runs
Speaker 2: public policy over there. Every time she comes on, she
Speaker 2: tells us that when she talks to clients overseas, she
Speaker 2: has to tell them no, Jamie Diamond still isn't running
Speaker 2: for president?
Speaker 1: You get that question so much? Does it annoy you
Speaker 1: or does it flatter you? It's more annoying than that
Speaker 1: because I can't run for president, you know, and there
Speaker 1: was no opening. I mean there's no way that it
Speaker 1: was even possible. So it's a little flattering. But you know,
Speaker 1: I just want to help our government do the right stuff.
Speaker 1: I think there are a lot of things to do
Speaker 1: to make America far better off. And particularly because I've
Speaker 1: mentioned as many times, a lot of things we've done
Speaker 1: which I think are ad whether you're a Democrat or
Speaker 1: Republican and be is supported there has often done the
Speaker 1: name of good have hurt the lower twenty percent. They're
Speaker 1: dying younger, their income didn't go up for twenty years.
Speaker 1: They're the ones who have more crime in neighborhoods, Their
Speaker 1: schools don't work. You know, we should we should acknowledge
Speaker 1: that as citizens to do something about it. Like I said,
Speaker 1: a lot of you know, policies put in place have
Speaker 1: the exact unintended consequence, and that's where they hurt, like
Speaker 1: for example, growing the economy, well the people who helped
Speaker 1: the most at the lower end. And I think we
Speaker 1: have to be very clear headed about how we can
Speaker 1: accomplish what we want to accomplish to lift up all
Speaker 1: of America.
Speaker 2: You have an endorsement candidate, and I wonder why is
Speaker 2: it because you think as the leader of a big
Speaker 2: company you've got to work with anyone, or is this
Speaker 2: just that you can't decide.
Speaker 1: This particular time around. I will decide, okay, and I
Speaker 1: will vote. I reserve the right to do whatever I want. Okay.
Speaker 1: I'm a citizen. I can vote, I can say what
Speaker 1: I want. And as to that, I've never been in
Speaker 1: the private endorsing candidates, you know, and so but I
Speaker 1: I'm thinking through what I want to say or do
Speaker 1: or something like that.
Speaker 2: In a recent uh Washington Post editorial that you wrote
Speaker 2: you talked about how you think it would be important
Speaker 2: for the next president to have a private sector uh
Speaker 2: individual at the cabinet level to really advise Yeah, half, yeah, Okay,
Speaker 2: which positions do you think should be?
Speaker 1: I mean, I look, I look at the government. You know,
Speaker 1: we need the American public needs and deserves very competent,
Speaker 1: effective government. And if you go around, they don't believe
Speaker 1: that's what they have. And you know, so people of
Speaker 1: all these things that government should do, but a lot
Speaker 1: of the things the government does, it doesn't do particularly well.
Speaker 1: It does some things particularly well. It does a lot
Speaker 1: of things only the government can do. But we we
Speaker 1: have to be again cold blooded, clear headed, pragmatic about
Speaker 1: what works doesn't work, and over time they'd be less
Speaker 1: or less people in government who were in the real world.
Speaker 1: You may think whatever you want about you know, I'm
Speaker 1: not blaming economists or e. C. Y or or teachers
Speaker 1: or stuff like or lifetime politicians. That's not the same thing.
Speaker 1: And and you know it's that's there are lessons in
Speaker 1: the real world. Even FDR when he's getting closer and
Speaker 1: closer to the World War two and needed to start
Speaker 1: building tanks and bridges, he took the people he'd been
Speaker 1: explorating for years, the heads of gm GE DuPont, and
Speaker 1: got them back. I need you to set up these
Speaker 1: production boards and grow, you know, do these things. So
Speaker 1: it's about growing the economy. It's not about putting business
Speaker 1: people there. And also I think we should insult each
Speaker 1: other as citizens, try to understand each other. And I
Speaker 1: think it'd be great the next president they really want
Speaker 1: to that word, they say, unify, put you know, put
Speaker 1: it someone from the other part of your cabinet, you know, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, is what Eisenhower did. And that whole
Speaker 1: op ed kind of came out of Eisenhower. He got
Speaker 1: the right people there, They studied the issues, they got
Speaker 1: the policy right. He never blamed people, he never insulted people.
Speaker 1: He never you know, he was always civil and which
Speaker 1: I think is a better way to be. Didn't denigrate
Speaker 1: the country, didn't denigrate classes of people. And so I
Speaker 1: just think it's a better way to be. And there's
Speaker 1: some more unifying leadership than you know, yelling discream at
Speaker 1: each other.
Speaker 2: If someone theoretically were called upon as a business leader,
Speaker 2: would you suggest that they go?
Speaker 1: It's up to them, you know, I'm wouldn't suggest they
Speaker 1: go and not go. You know, it's their life and
Speaker 1: how these things contribute to stuff like that.
Speaker 2: So a major focus for you in your recent letter
Speaker 2: to investors and just interview suspen GEO politics and the
Speaker 2: situation is pretty dire, and I wonder if what you're
Speaker 2: telling clients, what they're doing, how they're arranging in preparation
Speaker 2: for potential escalations, and a whole bunch of different not spots,
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately, you know, I got a lot of things and
Speaker 1: people like you tell us the positive news. What's the
Speaker 1: good spin out there? I was getting to me. I
Speaker 1: don't do anything like that. You know. The truth is
Speaker 1: the truth is the truth, and the truth stays pretty ugly.
Speaker 1: And you know, we have these war now. You know,
Speaker 1: almost a million the casualties in Ukraine. The Ukrainians say
Speaker 1: that twenty thousand children have been kidnapped and sent to Russia.
Speaker 1: It's quite clear that Russia I ran North Korea acting
Speaker 1: in cahoots, but China isn't kind of part of that
Speaker 1: when they're aiding the bedding Russia. You know, China and
Speaker 1: Russia spoken about dismantling the world order set up by
Speaker 1: America the Allies the after World War Two, which have
Speaker 1: been quite successful in keeping peace. You know, they want
Speaker 1: to do it differently, and that's their right. I don't
Speaker 1: think it's a good idea for the Western world. And
Speaker 1: this and of course the terrorist accident of Israel, Israel's
Speaker 1: being attacked, you know, basically on three or four sides.
Speaker 1: You know, this is tough stuff. American warships are being
Speaker 1: attacked every day in the Red Sea. You know. The
Speaker 1: head of the FBI just said the terrorist threats internally
Speaker 1: and externally to the United States have never been higher.
Speaker 1: I think there was a lesson on when Ukraine was evaded.
Speaker 1: The world isn't a safe place. We've got to get
Speaker 1: rid of the illusion that's safe and somehow pieces at hand.
Speaker 1: So we need a very strong military, which means we
Speaker 1: have to spend more money at least every analysis I
Speaker 1: received for that. We need a very strong economy. We
Speaker 1: have to subordinate some of the stuff we do to
Speaker 1: national security, you know, and we have to engage much
Speaker 1: better to allies and trade, finance, development for answer things
Speaker 1: like that. If you want to hold the world together,
Speaker 1: and so yeah, I think this is the most important
Speaker 1: thing for dwarfs when we have a soft landing or
Speaker 1: modest landing the next twelve months. That to me is
Speaker 1: a business person. Almost all of us in business dealt
Speaker 1: with that many times. That is not a big deal.
Speaker 2: I guess how do you then advise a potential client
Speaker 2: about what national security is? You know, is it a car,
Speaker 2: is it a I mean basically, how do you prepare
Speaker 2: for the changing world.
Speaker 1: That we live in. Yeah, so this is a very
Speaker 1: important question. So first of all, in terms of managing risk,
Speaker 1: when you look at the potential outcomes, I mean all
Speaker 1: business should look at a range of outcomes and try
Speaker 1: to be prepared for whether or not they think that
Speaker 1: to happen, you know. And then you know, could war
Speaker 1: affect the global commany Absolutely, it can cause inflation and
Speaker 1: no growth. It can cause it may have no effect,
Speaker 1: but you got to be prepared for those things. And
Speaker 1: then on strategy specifically, we've actually hired Paul Henley, a
Speaker 1: former US Army national intelligence guy, forming a group working
Speaker 1: with our research people, internal people, what to answer exactly
Speaker 1: those questions, you know, what is national security? You know,
Speaker 1: Jake Salvyn talks about the small garden with high fences,
Speaker 1: what's in the garden, what's related to the garden? How
Speaker 1: would you do that? A lot of companies still look
Speaker 1: at their own supply chains. They would say, no, I
Speaker 1: get these components from Mexico or Vietnam. But inside that
Speaker 1: component is a is a very important one from China.
Speaker 1: So it's gonna take a while. But every country, if
Speaker 1: it's national security, has the right to say this are
Speaker 1: gonna do to protect our national security, and so we
Speaker 1: need work to do. And then then the related you know,
Speaker 1: I call it merket So's behavior. People are getting upset
Speaker 1: at China about EV's and and and lithium and solars.
Speaker 1: If it's unfair competition, that's a different issue, but it
Speaker 1: also needs to be addressed.
Speaker 2: Jamie Diamond unfortunately right at the time. And it's been
Speaker 2: a pleasure to speaking with you.
Speaker 1: Thank you for taking the time with us. And now
Speaker 1: I'm gonna throw it back to you, all right. Lisa
Speaker 1: brom Wins there speaking exclusively with Jamie Dimond. This is
Speaker 1: Bloomberg