1
00:00:02,440 --> 00:00:06,399
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio.

2
00:00:06,440 --> 00:00:09,360
Speaker 2: News joining us now to continue this conversation, and police

3
00:00:09,400 --> 00:00:12,559
Speaker 2: are scize. Mohammed al Aaron of Queen's College, Cambridge, Mohamed,

4
00:00:12,680 --> 00:00:14,520
Speaker 2: let's talk about the totality of the data. I'm going

5
00:00:14,560 --> 00:00:16,439
Speaker 2: to sound like a FED official. When you look at

6
00:00:16,480 --> 00:00:19,040
Speaker 2: the totality of the data, are you seeing concrete signs

7
00:00:19,079 --> 00:00:21,920
Speaker 2: of an economic slow down, a loss of momentum? And

8
00:00:21,960 --> 00:00:24,440
Speaker 2: do you think a conversation about reducing interest rates as

9
00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:26,200
Speaker 2: soon as next month is warranted?

10
00:00:26,760 --> 00:00:29,159
Speaker 1: Yes? And yes, John, So if you look at the

11
00:00:29,240 --> 00:00:32,599
Speaker 1: data as a whole, the economy is slowing, and it's

12
00:00:32,640 --> 00:00:37,040
Speaker 1: slowing faster than most economists expect, and certainly more faster

13
00:00:37,120 --> 00:00:40,120
Speaker 1: than what the FED expects. So yes, on the whole,

14
00:00:40,200 --> 00:00:43,479
Speaker 1: the economy is slowing. And let's remember this is an

15
00:00:43,479 --> 00:00:46,919
Speaker 1: economy that has very few buffers. Most of the buffers

16
00:00:46,920 --> 00:00:49,840
Speaker 1: that we've had in terms of personal savings, in terms

17
00:00:49,880 --> 00:00:53,560
Speaker 1: of debt capacity, they've been one down. And that leads

18
00:00:53,600 --> 00:00:57,040
Speaker 1: you to the second question, which is a forward looking

19
00:00:57,120 --> 00:01:01,280
Speaker 1: FED would certainly have the possibility of a July cut

20
00:01:01,320 --> 00:01:01,960
Speaker 1: on the table.

21
00:01:02,480 --> 00:01:04,319
Speaker 2: How much daylight do you think there is between what

22
00:01:04,360 --> 00:01:06,120
Speaker 2: you think they should do and what they will do

23
00:01:07,080 --> 00:01:07,559
Speaker 2: too much.

24
00:01:09,000 --> 00:01:10,880
Speaker 1: You know, if I were them, I would seriously look

25
00:01:10,920 --> 00:01:14,679
Speaker 1: at July as being a live meeting. I don't think

26
00:01:14,680 --> 00:01:16,680
Speaker 1: that's the case. I think that's even a question mark

27
00:01:16,720 --> 00:01:19,440
Speaker 1: in the market. And certainly if you look at what

28
00:01:19,720 --> 00:01:22,800
Speaker 1: the narrative of the last few days by FED official

29
00:01:23,080 --> 00:01:25,600
Speaker 1: as to whether even September is alive right now, the

30
00:01:25,600 --> 00:01:28,920
Speaker 1: market gives less than a fifty percent probability of a

31
00:01:28,959 --> 00:01:32,680
Speaker 1: weight cut in September. So their narrative has been pushing

32
00:01:32,760 --> 00:01:36,400
Speaker 1: back the weight increase towards the end of the year,

33
00:01:37,040 --> 00:01:39,399
Speaker 1: had one or two federal officials would like to keep

34
00:01:39,440 --> 00:01:42,160
Speaker 1: open the possibility of a hike, and I think that

35
00:01:42,280 --> 00:01:46,120
Speaker 1: is a long way from where they should be based

36
00:01:46,120 --> 00:01:49,240
Speaker 1: on what's happening to the economy. But unfortunately, John, that've

37
00:01:49,280 --> 00:01:53,559
Speaker 1: been burnt a couple of times or ready, and let's

38
00:01:53,560 --> 00:01:56,720
Speaker 1: not forget there's still excessively data dependence, so it it

39
00:01:56,720 --> 00:01:59,160
Speaker 1: takes quite a bit of historic data to get them

40
00:01:59,160 --> 00:01:59,800
Speaker 1: to change.

41
00:02:00,040 --> 00:02:01,640
Speaker 3: So I'm not going to sound like John here. Let's

42
00:02:01,680 --> 00:02:03,560
Speaker 3: not talk about the totality of the data or a

43
00:02:03,600 --> 00:02:04,200
Speaker 3: FED official.

44
00:02:04,360 --> 00:02:05,040
Speaker 4: Let's cherry pick.

45
00:02:05,120 --> 00:02:07,480
Speaker 3: Let's talk about some very specific numbers. I want to

46
00:02:07,520 --> 00:02:10,440
Speaker 3: cherry pick personal income coming at zero point five percent

47
00:02:10,560 --> 00:02:13,480
Speaker 3: versus the expectation of zero point four percent, that is

48
00:02:13,680 --> 00:02:17,040
Speaker 3: up from zero point three percent in the prior month, Mohammed,

49
00:02:17,120 --> 00:02:19,440
Speaker 3: just looking at personal income and the fact that it's

50
00:02:19,560 --> 00:02:23,880
Speaker 3: increasing even as personal spending declines, does that give you

51
00:02:23,880 --> 00:02:26,160
Speaker 3: a sense if we just wanted to terry pick that number,

52
00:02:26,360 --> 00:02:29,160
Speaker 3: understanding the totality of the data is different, that maybe

53
00:02:29,200 --> 00:02:31,920
Speaker 3: people are actually in a better place and have a

54
00:02:31,960 --> 00:02:36,200
Speaker 3: greater ammunition and set of financial tools to keep spending

55
00:02:36,240 --> 00:02:37,360
Speaker 3: at a pretty robust pace.

56
00:02:37,840 --> 00:02:40,520
Speaker 1: Lisa, I'd love to be where you are, okay, But

57
00:02:40,720 --> 00:02:43,080
Speaker 1: there's a problem even if we cherry pick, and even

58
00:02:43,120 --> 00:02:45,680
Speaker 1: if we say one month, data has a ton of

59
00:02:45,720 --> 00:02:49,600
Speaker 1: information content. So these are big, two big assumptions. I

60
00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:54,240
Speaker 1: wouldn't know if the increased savings that comes from income

61
00:02:54,320 --> 00:02:57,320
Speaker 1: going more than spending is it voluntary or is it

62
00:02:57,400 --> 00:03:01,959
Speaker 1: forced people voluntarily saving more or people do people feel

63
00:03:02,040 --> 00:03:04,840
Speaker 1: forced to save more. So as much as I would

64
00:03:04,880 --> 00:03:07,040
Speaker 1: like to go to where you are in terms of

65
00:03:07,080 --> 00:03:10,160
Speaker 1: that number, I hesitate because you first you have to

66
00:03:10,200 --> 00:03:14,200
Speaker 1: assume away some pretty important things. But secondly, we don't

67
00:03:14,240 --> 00:03:16,320
Speaker 1: know whether it's voluntary or forced that's.

68
00:03:16,200 --> 00:03:18,880
Speaker 3: A fascinating point. I'm sitting here thinking about that at

69
00:03:18,880 --> 00:03:20,760
Speaker 3: a time. What other people might say, the reason why

70
00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:22,679
Speaker 3: they're not spending is because they're not buying homes and

71
00:03:22,720 --> 00:03:24,840
Speaker 3: they're not feeling like they have the capacity and the

72
00:03:24,880 --> 00:03:27,680
Speaker 3: mobility to do so. One argument that some of the

73
00:03:27,800 --> 00:03:30,800
Speaker 3: more inflationistas out there have made is that if the

74
00:03:30,800 --> 00:03:33,959
Speaker 3: FED were to cut rates by twenty twenty five basis

75
00:03:33,960 --> 00:03:37,440
Speaker 3: points next month, that would reignite a surge of interest

76
00:03:37,480 --> 00:03:39,360
Speaker 3: in the housing market, and then you could see actually

77
00:03:39,400 --> 00:03:42,640
Speaker 3: prices climb much more substantially as a result. Do you

78
00:03:42,680 --> 00:03:46,080
Speaker 3: believe that to be the case, and if not, why so.

79
00:03:46,120 --> 00:03:47,800
Speaker 1: I don't think twenty five basis points are going to

80
00:03:47,800 --> 00:03:49,600
Speaker 1: make that much of a difference to the housing market.

81
00:03:50,560 --> 00:03:52,800
Speaker 1: That's the first issue. I think you'd need a lot

82
00:03:52,840 --> 00:03:55,040
Speaker 1: more than twenty five basis points. Don't forget how much

83
00:03:55,080 --> 00:03:58,440
Speaker 1: we've moved the other way. That's the first point. And second,

84
00:03:59,040 --> 00:04:02,520
Speaker 1: on housing, it gets even more complicated because supply has

85
00:04:02,560 --> 00:04:05,960
Speaker 1: been impacted in a way that most people didn't expect.

86
00:04:06,000 --> 00:04:08,680
Speaker 1: So most people thought that the demand for housing would

87
00:04:08,720 --> 00:04:11,880
Speaker 1: come down as rates went up. What they didn't realize

88
00:04:11,920 --> 00:04:13,920
Speaker 1: is that the supply of housing would also come down

89
00:04:14,240 --> 00:04:17,960
Speaker 1: as people hesitated from going from a very low weight

90
00:04:18,240 --> 00:04:23,040
Speaker 1: mortgage to a current mortgage. So you know, again that

91
00:04:23,120 --> 00:04:27,920
Speaker 1: market has been distorted by what happened during this long

92
00:04:28,080 --> 00:04:32,159
Speaker 1: period of rock bottom rates, and we must not forget

93
00:04:32,680 --> 00:04:37,440
Speaker 1: that a lot of distortions occurred, and in slower moving

94
00:04:37,480 --> 00:04:39,880
Speaker 1: asset classes like housing, it takes time to get these

95
00:04:39,920 --> 00:04:41,600
Speaker 1: distortions out of the system.

96
00:04:41,720 --> 00:04:44,479
Speaker 3: I'm just wondering if twenty five basis points wouldn't necessarily

97
00:04:44,480 --> 00:04:48,920
Speaker 3: reignite the housing market, is there still a reverse argument

98
00:04:49,080 --> 00:04:51,640
Speaker 3: that if they don't cut by twenty five basis points

99
00:04:51,680 --> 00:04:54,599
Speaker 3: next month, that they could be accelerating a tipping point

100
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:56,560
Speaker 3: that the US labor market is already reaching.

101
00:04:56,960 --> 00:04:58,960
Speaker 1: So that's where I am. I think if you look

102
00:04:59,080 --> 00:05:01,800
Speaker 1: at the tails of the distribution, or if you look

103
00:05:01,880 --> 00:05:05,720
Speaker 1: at type one error, type two error right now, the

104
00:05:05,760 --> 00:05:09,400
Speaker 1: one that scares me more is that they are too slow.

105
00:05:10,120 --> 00:05:13,120
Speaker 1: They are too high for too long, and that economy

106
00:05:13,279 --> 00:05:16,480
Speaker 1: slows in such an extent that two things happen. First,

107
00:05:16,640 --> 00:05:20,440
Speaker 1: they can't moderate the slowing, and second they end up

108
00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:23,160
Speaker 1: by having to cut weights much more than they would

109
00:05:23,160 --> 00:05:26,320
Speaker 1: have otherwise, just like they ended up by hiking weights

110
00:05:26,520 --> 00:05:29,080
Speaker 1: much more than they would have had otherwise because they

111
00:05:29,080 --> 00:05:30,880
Speaker 1: were so late. So when I look at the tails

112
00:05:30,880 --> 00:05:33,679
Speaker 1: of the distribution, and remember I put on the table

113
00:05:34,040 --> 00:05:37,599
Speaker 1: the notion that a soft landing is fifty percent thirty

114
00:05:37,640 --> 00:05:40,560
Speaker 1: five percent, is that we end up in recession because

115
00:05:40,600 --> 00:05:44,160
Speaker 1: the FED doesn't react quickly enough, and fifteen percent is

116
00:05:44,160 --> 00:05:46,599
Speaker 1: the bigger but not hotter that you get a supply

117
00:05:46,880 --> 00:05:49,080
Speaker 1: a positive supply shot something like that. When I look

118
00:05:49,120 --> 00:05:51,800
Speaker 1: at that distribution, yeah, I do worry. I do worry

119
00:05:51,839 --> 00:05:54,479
Speaker 1: that the more likely error right now is that the

120
00:05:54,520 --> 00:05:57,760
Speaker 1: FED will not start cutting early enough, and then we'll

121
00:05:57,800 --> 00:06:01,680
Speaker 1: be forced into cutting a aggressively, but it's not going

122
00:06:01,760 --> 00:06:05,760
Speaker 1: to have the impact in terms of slowing or moderating

123
00:06:05,760 --> 00:06:08,039
Speaker 1: the slowdown, and then we'll overshoot on the way down

124
00:06:08,120 --> 00:06:09,039
Speaker 1: yet again, maham.

125
00:06:09,040 --> 00:06:11,719
Speaker 2: And there's a new wrinkle. How independent is all of

126
00:06:11,760 --> 00:06:15,599
Speaker 2: this from policy out of the White House in twenty

127
00:06:15,640 --> 00:06:16,200
Speaker 2: twenty five?

128
00:06:16,720 --> 00:06:19,240
Speaker 1: So, John, I've been fascinated by the discussion you've had

129
00:06:19,360 --> 00:06:24,320
Speaker 1: as to why are markets so calm about US politics?

130
00:06:24,400 --> 00:06:26,280
Speaker 1: Why are so market calm when the yen is at

131
00:06:26,279 --> 00:06:28,920
Speaker 1: one sixty? Why are so markets calm when French Germany

132
00:06:29,240 --> 00:06:31,719
Speaker 1: the spread is at eighty four basis points, and the

133
00:06:31,760 --> 00:06:34,680
Speaker 1: list goes on and on. Why are they so calm

134
00:06:34,720 --> 00:06:38,680
Speaker 1: on the Middle East conflict can intensify? And I think

135
00:06:38,680 --> 00:06:41,920
Speaker 1: the reason is because we here in the US have

136
00:06:42,040 --> 00:06:44,640
Speaker 1: three things going for us. One is it belief in

137
00:06:44,720 --> 00:06:49,560
Speaker 1: economic exceptionalism that we can soft land the economy or

138
00:06:49,600 --> 00:06:53,200
Speaker 1: even no land at all. That's still actually the central

139
00:06:53,240 --> 00:06:56,200
Speaker 1: scenario for a lot of people. That's number one. Two,

140
00:06:56,320 --> 00:07:00,120
Speaker 1: that we ultimately believe the FED will cut and we

141
00:07:01,000 --> 00:07:06,160
Speaker 1: believe that in Nvidia and the AI revolution is such

142
00:07:06,240 --> 00:07:08,520
Speaker 1: a positive supply shock that it's going to keep on

143
00:07:08,560 --> 00:07:11,680
Speaker 1: giving and giving and giving. You know. On the three,

144
00:07:11,720 --> 00:07:16,040
Speaker 1: I worry most about the economic assumption. And that's why

145
00:07:16,080 --> 00:07:20,239
Speaker 1: if that economic assumption is tested in the months ahead,

146
00:07:20,880 --> 00:07:25,360
Speaker 1: then the politics what's happening around the world, suddenly all

147
00:07:25,400 --> 00:07:29,240
Speaker 1: these things will become will capture much more attention in

148
00:07:29,280 --> 00:07:30,640
Speaker 1: the marketplace than they have so far.

149
00:07:31,000 --> 00:07:32,960
Speaker 4: Muhammad, that we're waking up after a moment where the

150
00:07:33,000 --> 00:07:36,280
Speaker 4: sitting president had what everyone is calling a disastrous debate.

151
00:07:37,000 --> 00:07:40,120
Speaker 4: Obama's former campaign manager went on MSNBC and called it

152
00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:43,840
Speaker 4: def Con one. Alarm bells are ringing. What would be

153
00:07:43,960 --> 00:07:47,120
Speaker 4: enough between now and November, or potentially what political movement

154
00:07:47,280 --> 00:07:49,560
Speaker 4: could move the markets between now and November.

155
00:07:50,080 --> 00:07:53,120
Speaker 1: This is your world and very much more than mine.

156
00:07:53,520 --> 00:07:56,360
Speaker 1: I think the market truly believes, despite what they hear

157
00:07:56,360 --> 00:07:59,680
Speaker 1: from some economists, that when push comes to shove, whether

158
00:07:59,680 --> 00:08:03,120
Speaker 1: it's as in Biden re elected or whether as President

159
00:08:03,160 --> 00:08:05,920
Speaker 1: Trump comes back into the White House, the degrees of

160
00:08:06,000 --> 00:08:08,840
Speaker 1: freedom is not going to be as much the degree

161
00:08:08,840 --> 00:08:11,800
Speaker 1: of freedom what there will be maybe on tariffs, but

162
00:08:11,880 --> 00:08:14,720
Speaker 1: we've seen that both of them actually are very similar

163
00:08:14,800 --> 00:08:18,400
Speaker 1: in what they end up doing. So the market i

164
00:08:18,440 --> 00:08:22,240
Speaker 1: think senses that, despite what the economs are telling them

165
00:08:22,400 --> 00:08:27,680
Speaker 1: about fiscal policy, tariffs, everything else, that when push comes

166
00:08:27,720 --> 00:08:33,000
Speaker 1: to shove, these two individuals when in power, will be

167
00:08:33,120 --> 00:08:38,480
Speaker 1: relatively similar in economic policies. Why because we've had four

168
00:08:38,600 --> 00:08:41,440
Speaker 1: years of each and the market has been able to

169
00:08:41,480 --> 00:08:46,680
Speaker 1: observe what they've done. Now bring in the possibility of

170
00:08:46,720 --> 00:08:51,240
Speaker 1: someone new, and that suddenly changes that whole construct. So

171
00:08:51,920 --> 00:08:54,400
Speaker 1: responding to your question, you know, that's the big question

172
00:08:54,520 --> 00:08:56,920
Speaker 1: is that if you bring someone new into the equation,

173
00:08:57,520 --> 00:09:00,000
Speaker 1: how will the market evaluate and what degree of confident

174
00:09:00,040 --> 00:09:03,320
Speaker 1: as will markets have. It really helps the market that

175
00:09:03,320 --> 00:09:05,600
Speaker 1: they saw both individuals in the White House.

176
00:09:06,240 --> 00:09:08,000
Speaker 2: Maham gonna just want to finish on this and get

177
00:09:08,000 --> 00:09:11,800
Speaker 2: you to elaborate on a final detail. In the UK,

178
00:09:11,920 --> 00:09:15,640
Speaker 2: the guilt market has been a constraining regulating force on

179
00:09:15,800 --> 00:09:18,120
Speaker 2: all kinds of policies coming out of either party in

180
00:09:18,120 --> 00:09:20,160
Speaker 2: this election race, and you can see that in the

181
00:09:20,200 --> 00:09:23,600
Speaker 2: nervousness they have talking about the deficit. You're seeing a

182
00:09:23,640 --> 00:09:26,120
Speaker 2: similar thing take place in France right now. Do you

183
00:09:26,120 --> 00:09:29,800
Speaker 2: think this treasury market could become a regulating force over

184
00:09:29,800 --> 00:09:33,280
Speaker 2: the next administration in this country in the United States?

185
00:09:33,400 --> 00:09:36,400
Speaker 2: Or will we retain that unique privilege to do other things?

186
00:09:36,800 --> 00:09:39,640
Speaker 1: We will unique that we will retain that unique privilege, John,

187
00:09:39,640 --> 00:09:42,120
Speaker 1: because the rest of the world is so messy. So

188
00:09:42,240 --> 00:09:45,320
Speaker 1: I think of it very simply. Whether it's France, whether

189
00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:49,200
Speaker 1: it's the UK, they solve in absolute space. If there

190
00:09:49,360 --> 00:09:54,760
Speaker 1: is physical irresponsibility, then they will feel it, regardless of

191
00:09:54,760 --> 00:09:59,000
Speaker 1: what's happening elsewhere. The US solves, the US bond market

192
00:09:59,040 --> 00:10:03,520
Speaker 1: solves any relatives. So as long as other countries are

193
00:10:03,559 --> 00:10:08,319
Speaker 1: more irresponsible than us, then we can continue being irresponsible.

194
00:10:08,679 --> 00:10:11,160
Speaker 2: Muhammed is one of the best Muhammad I'll air in

195
00:10:11,200 --> 00:10:11,360
Speaker 2: there