Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane. Along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Brownwitz Jailey, we bring you
Speaker 1: insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and international relations.
Speaker 1: Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcast, Suncloud, Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: and of course, on the Bloomberg Terminal. The perfect guest
Speaker 1: to start this week's confer which with Jim Karen of
Speaker 1: Morgan Stanley Investment Management, Fixed income portfolio Manager. Jim first question, sir,
Speaker 1: what are we doing back up near one fifty? Well,
Speaker 1: good morning, thank you for having me on your show. Look,
Speaker 1: I think there's a couple of things that are going on.
Speaker 1: One of them is very technical. One of the reasons
Speaker 1: why yields were so low was because the Treasury General
Speaker 1: account had been drawn down so much. Now that's really
Speaker 1: technical speak for saying that there wasn't a lot of
Speaker 1: net issuance of US treasure reads over the last couple
Speaker 1: of months. In fact, nearly zero net issuance. Today, all
Speaker 1: of that is starting to change a lot of things
Speaker 1: are changing right now that are leading to higher yields.
Speaker 1: Number One, now we're start going to start to get
Speaker 1: net positive supply, so more positive net supply is coming
Speaker 1: to the markets. That and the fact that we're getting
Speaker 1: closer to a deal on the deficit, then the question
Speaker 1: becomes is it going to be I'm sorry, a deal
Speaker 1: on the infrastructure bill? And the question then becomes is
Speaker 1: it going to be deficit financed? So that's another argument
Speaker 1: for higher debt into the future. The third point is tapering.
Speaker 1: The FED is announced pretty aggressively. It seems like at
Speaker 1: the September FOMC last week that probably by December they're
Speaker 1: gonna start tapering. So all of the factors that we're
Speaker 1: keeping yields lower in the second quarter and for part
Speaker 1: of the third quarter are now starting to run in reverse,
Speaker 1: and you're seeing yields start to move higher. Not to
Speaker 1: mention that energy prices are moving up and even some
Speaker 1: of the COVID cases are are on the decline. We
Speaker 1: could be setting ourselves up for a much stronger, much
Speaker 1: awaited for fourth quarter, and all of this is pushing
Speaker 1: treasury yields higher. And it makes sense. Yeah, Jim Carren.
Speaker 1: When you're on the Gorman Gulf Stream, you're flying at
Speaker 1: thirty two thou feet and you're looking down in the
Speaker 1: yield market, What is the ten uere yield where you
Speaker 1: signal shift or you signal trip point. We're in a
Speaker 1: one seven, maybe one fifty, But what's the level where
Speaker 1: you go things have changed. I think we're past that.
Speaker 1: I think it's around one forty. The fact that we've
Speaker 1: gotten a back above one forty is telling us that
Speaker 1: the correction lower in yields is over with. We have
Speaker 1: to start thinking about yields progressing up back towards the
Speaker 1: March thirty one highs around one seventy five, even up
Speaker 1: to one eight percent, and it's even possible that you
Speaker 1: could start to even test two percent by end of
Speaker 1: this year beginning of next year. I think it would
Speaker 1: be hard to get above two percent and stay there,
Speaker 1: but I think that's the trajectory that we're on, and
Speaker 1: the fact that many people have squared up most of
Speaker 1: their positions. I would say the market's not overly short,
Speaker 1: so the technicals are are suggesting that you could actually
Speaker 1: get a push higher. So Tom, I think that we've
Speaker 1: already tripped that switch, and that we're already in the
Speaker 1: mode to get towards higher yields. Plus all the supply
Speaker 1: that's coming. Jim you talked about higher oil prices. We
Speaker 1: also talk about supply chain disruptions. Are these events Are
Speaker 1: these appearances inflationary or disinflationary? Lisa, Absolutely, It's is a
Speaker 1: great it is a great point, and I'm glad we're
Speaker 1: talking about this. This is inflationary. Um, what we're going
Speaker 1: to see our rolling supply shortages and so so yes,
Speaker 1: you know, one day it might be one thing, another
Speaker 1: day it could be natural gas, another day it could
Speaker 1: be oil, and and you're gonna start to see this
Speaker 1: just on a rolling basis going forward as the supply
Speaker 1: chains are getting readjusted, and then when price gets too high,
Speaker 1: demand will fall that ass price will come down and
Speaker 1: it will be another asset, commodity assets turned to start
Speaker 1: to move higher. So I think this is getting embedded
Speaker 1: importantly into the psychology of consumers, that prices are going
Speaker 1: to stay perpetually high. That doesn't mean that we have
Speaker 1: runaway inflation. It just means it's going to be harder
Speaker 1: to get below two percent inflation. So now think about this.
Speaker 1: Even the people say the Fed was hawkish, the median
Speaker 1: dot in was at one point seven five for the
Speaker 1: FED funds rate. But inflation is supposed to is supposed
Speaker 1: to be between two and two and a half percent,
Speaker 1: or at least it's being expected to be between two
Speaker 1: and two and a percent, which means that the real
Speaker 1: Fed funds rate is still going to be minus twenty
Speaker 1: five to minus fifty basis points. This is still very
Speaker 1: accommodative uh FED policy at the current moment. There's nothing
Speaker 1: hawkish about this. So, Jim, let's put all this together.
Speaker 1: When you say it's hand to get below two percent
Speaker 1: on inflation, just explain to us and accountli of lines
Speaker 1: why it's difficult to get up one night s eight
Speaker 1: on a tenure yield. Well, well, for right now, we
Speaker 1: are still doing quantitative easing, so there is still some
Speaker 1: asset purchases that are going through. Bond yields around the world.
Speaker 1: Although they are starting to rise, we're seeing that in
Speaker 1: Europe are still very very low. So I think that
Speaker 1: there is an interest rate differential and then it will
Speaker 1: come back down to the dollar. Dollar appreciation um At
Speaker 1: least in the near term. You could see some dollar
Speaker 1: appreciation that would keep foreign investors interested in the U. S.
Speaker 1: Treasury market, but that I think is a cycle. Tom.
Speaker 1: I'm a long term dollar bear. Eventually, these deficits and
Speaker 1: everything else that's going to catch up to the dollar,
Speaker 1: and that's gonna push it lower. And foreign investors, which
Speaker 1: the US demand you know, relies on heavily for demand,
Speaker 1: is is going to require higher yields to indice entice
Speaker 1: foreign investors to come in and buy US treasuries. Jim,
Speaker 1: thank you, sir as all wise and have a good week.
Speaker 1: Jim Cannon, that of more can standing investment management of
Speaker 1: fixed income pull folio manager. We've got to start with
Speaker 1: a fantastic guest this morning, Jean Parvan, head of the
Speaker 1: black Rock Investment Institute. John, you've got this framework, the
Speaker 1: new nominal, and allow you to explain that in just
Speaker 1: a moment, the conversation we're having once we start raising
Speaker 1: interest rates in America maybe the back end of next year.
Speaker 1: Who knows, Sean, I can't predict next year. How steep
Speaker 1: will that policy path be, How shallow will it be,
Speaker 1: How loose will any potential tiening be? The answer to that, John,
Speaker 1: I think it's gonna be the shallow as we've seen
Speaker 1: in decades. Um. You know, we have to go back
Speaker 1: to maybe the fifties and the sixties to see the
Speaker 1: same kind of shadow pad as I think we're going
Speaker 1: to see so nothing of the you know, recent cycle.
Speaker 1: I think is is a guide much shadower, and I
Speaker 1: think we've seen more, much more, you know, ongoing evidence
Speaker 1: that they are, you know, on the slow path. I
Speaker 1: think they've been very deliberate to try to separate the
Speaker 1: taper discussion last week from from the liftoff and from
Speaker 1: from what it's work. We cannot predict wate, we need two.
Speaker 1: But I think it's a eight twenty three story. The
Speaker 1: first rate hike jump a black rock in your team
Speaker 1: unabashedly say your pro risk I mean, you mean snow
Speaker 1: words about it. How do these changes, the worry worry,
Speaker 1: worry out there affect corporate thinking with a higher yield regime,
Speaker 1: with steepening of the curb and on and on, how
Speaker 1: does pro risk come over the corporate action? Yeah, so
Speaker 1: the pet had for for you know, equities and risk
Speaker 1: assess break higher is getting narrower. So I mean, I
Speaker 1: just want I want to college that. And after a streak,
Speaker 1: I mean, you look at the chart of the smps
Speaker 1: you start in general, and you look at it and
Speaker 1: there's no way you can tell them in the pandemic. So,
Speaker 1: I mean this does race question. I think we're gonna
Speaker 1: be an environment where markets will be more primed to
Speaker 1: look at risk and maybe more natility. But in that environment,
Speaker 1: we still think that the fundamentals are constructive for for
Speaker 1: the time being, and as a result, we would you know,
Speaker 1: look through that. That's where the pro risk on a
Speaker 1: bashing version is coming from. How concerned are you about
Speaker 1: what's going on in China with respect to not only
Speaker 1: the scrutiny of the tech companies, but also what some
Speaker 1: people are calling an increasing energy crisis, especially as the
Speaker 1: regulators try to clamp down on fossil fuel usage ahead
Speaker 1: of the Olympics. Yeah, so I think, I mean broader
Speaker 1: story and in China is that you know, the direction
Speaker 1: of travel towards UH, a greater role of social objective
Speaker 1: politics over economics is is unmistakable. Um, it's playing out
Speaker 1: and I think we should we should all acknowledge that
Speaker 1: it changes the lens eens of investment. However, Um, you know,
Speaker 1: we've seen a very steep decline activity throughout the course
Speaker 1: of one I mean, you know from earlier this year
Speaker 1: to queue Ford is going to look so for as
Speaker 1: far as we're concerned. So that's a pretty seem decline,
Speaker 1: and even a country that is, you know, on the
Speaker 1: path to put other objectives in front um, I think
Speaker 1: they cannot ignore this weakening growth. So that makes us
Speaker 1: you know, we've been neutral on Chinese equities for for
Speaker 1: for the last few months, but we start to think
Speaker 1: now that it's time to dip our toe back or
Speaker 1: start to dip our though in the Chinese equities, given
Speaker 1: that you know, we see some easing of the various
Speaker 1: palty tools over the next few months. Can you elaborate
Speaker 1: on dipping your toe back into Chinese equities? Where do
Speaker 1: you see a sort of a safe place to park
Speaker 1: amid still a lot of ongoing on certainty. I should
Speaker 1: I should qualify the back because we've just broken out
Speaker 1: the Chinese equities as a as a stem alone asset
Speaker 1: class for the first time in June or Minion outlooks,
Speaker 1: so I mean, there's no bad aspects. So but we're
Speaker 1: dipping our toes in the sense that you know, you've
Speaker 1: seen on the performance of the Chinese equities over US
Speaker 1: equities for good reasons. That's where we were neutral. But
Speaker 1: at the same time, that's a pretty the gap as
Speaker 1: has been pretty material in terms of the two regions.
Speaker 1: And while there's a lot of uncertainty, I mean that
Speaker 1: means the recipium has increased quite considerably. And now I
Speaker 1: think it's the time to think about opportunities reappearing. I'm
Speaker 1: thinking about the broad market exposures here as opposed to
Speaker 1: specific and um But that broad market explosure, that broad
Speaker 1: market story, I think is a repriced quite a bit.
Speaker 1: John just quickly find a question, how do you reconcile
Speaker 1: your bond market call, your federal reserve call with where
Speaker 1: you want to own in the equity market domestically here
Speaker 1: in America. So we think the bad market call. Just
Speaker 1: to clarify, as we think rates on the way way
Speaker 1: up on the ten uere We've been like increasing our
Speaker 1: underweight US treasuries over the course of the last few months.
Speaker 1: Our conviction has not waned, despite the fact that it
Speaker 1: has been stubbornly low over the course of the last
Speaker 1: few months. But we think that the direction is up.
Speaker 1: That said, it's in the context to go back where
Speaker 1: we started, where we're going to see a very shallow
Speaker 1: normalization of policy rate in the US and as a result,
Speaker 1: and some more inflation coming. But this combination of an
Speaker 1: inflation coming through with very oh rate um, it's it's um.
Speaker 1: It's a real rate environment that's very negative and contin
Speaker 1: used to be and that will be um you know,
Speaker 1: supportive of of equity or risk ascid even the U S.
Speaker 1: We're neutral on US equity though, just to be clear,
Speaker 1: uh and I think that's more coming from this the juncture,
Speaker 1: the fiscal policy landscape on the tax front, that ceiling.
Speaker 1: Uh and and we're gonna we're gonna hear more this week.
Speaker 1: We want to just right there, just I want to
Speaker 1: make that clear. You care about the dead ceiling. We
Speaker 1: think there's headline restaurant the dead ceiling. Ultimately, we put
Speaker 1: out a note last week where we say, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: there's gonna be noise. The market is prone to be
Speaker 1: reacting to noise and this juncture, like we said, but
Speaker 1: we will advise looking through. But the headline risk is there.
Speaker 1: But again we haven't certainly around the how big this
Speaker 1: package will be. As a result, we haven't certainly around
Speaker 1: corporate taxes and the like. And that's a neutral the
Speaker 1: neutral sense on US equity. Joan, thank you, Jean Bavan.
Speaker 1: There of blank Rock the Investment Institute had right now
Speaker 1: joining us on a political moment and what it means
Speaker 1: for economics financial investment. Gregory Vellier joins us with a
Speaker 1: g F Investments always a stude on the moment a hand, Greg,
Speaker 1: I am dumbfounded by Democrats taking a victory now like
Speaker 1: it was sixty four sixty five and the resounding win
Speaker 1: of L. B. J Lyndon Baines Johnson off of the
Speaker 1: assassination of JFK took sixtent of the vote. Biden took
Speaker 1: fifty one point three percent of the vote. How much
Speaker 1: of a majority does the president have to ram through
Speaker 1: this set of legislative pieces. He doesn't have much, Tom.
Speaker 1: I think that that is one of the big realizations
Speaker 1: over the last weekend. Nancy Pelosi, of all people, said
Speaker 1: that we're not going to be at three point five trillion.
Speaker 1: That was a big concession in my opinion. And then
Speaker 1: she threw out another concession, Tom, and that is that
Speaker 1: we're not going to have a government shutdown. At the
Speaker 1: end of this week. They'll do an extension. So those
Speaker 1: two thinks make me a little more up to stick.
Speaker 1: And I'm not euphoric, but I think the chances of
Speaker 1: a major crisis are still remote. And then one final point,
Speaker 1: I urge everyone to read the Wall Street Journal piece
Speaker 1: on the Fed's tools. If we were to have a
Speaker 1: debt real debt crisis and a default crisis, the FED
Speaker 1: has options. They can sell some of their treasuries, they
Speaker 1: can buy defaulting treasuries. So this this is a serious story,
Speaker 1: but it's not an apocalyptic story. Greg, very importantly, do
Speaker 1: you sense negotiations that are normal, that they have a
Speaker 1: give and take and a back and forth among well
Speaker 1: meaning politicians. No, I don't see it yet. I think
Speaker 1: that there's a lot of anger at Mitch McConnell because
Speaker 1: the Republicans spent like drunken sailors for four years with
Speaker 1: tax cuts and a lot of spending. I think there's
Speaker 1: a lot of resentment toward him right now. Frankly, I
Speaker 1: think the negotiations that really matter are among Democrats. You
Speaker 1: still got to get a full of very important moderates
Speaker 1: on board. That's coming, But I think a deal with
Speaker 1: Republicans comes later in the fall. Greg, you mentioned this
Speaker 1: Nick Timorrow story in the Walster Tournal. Let's go there.
Speaker 1: This idea that the FED could be thrust once again,
Speaker 1: it's the political spotlight actually taking a role in trying
Speaker 1: to stave off a political default. How much is this
Speaker 1: a risk for the Federal Reserve that when Congress stalls
Speaker 1: out and can't get stuff done, the Federal Reserve has
Speaker 1: to sort of be left holding the bag and takes
Speaker 1: a lot of heat as a result on all sides. Yeah, Lisa,
Speaker 1: it's a good point. They dread this. They don't want
Speaker 1: to get an image of being the you know, the
Speaker 1: lender of last resort. Uh And I think they would
Speaker 1: make it clear this is an exception. But you read
Speaker 1: the piece that they've been there before, they've considered these options.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of controversy with them, including some of
Speaker 1: the active traders at the FED, and now there's going
Speaker 1: to be controversy over this. Well, you know, that's just
Speaker 1: the way things are right now. It's a very controversial,
Speaker 1: dysfunctional period and w it's the way things are, especially
Speaker 1: at a time when FED Chair J. Powell is up
Speaker 1: for the potential renomination by Jerome by President Biden. There's
Speaker 1: a question though here how much inflation is starting to
Speaker 1: concern Democrats more than it had previously, and perhaps this
Speaker 1: is one of the reasons for some of the concessions
Speaker 1: the Nancy Pelosi made. Do you really feel like that's
Speaker 1: the case? Yeah, I think that more and more voters
Speaker 1: around the country are linking together higher prices and big spending.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure the correlation is there, but the voters
Speaker 1: believe that, and as long as they do, I think
Speaker 1: at price tag like three point five trillion is just
Speaker 1: too rich. Greg I was looking at ed case of Hawaii.
Speaker 1: It's a hugely democratic state, and he is clearly a
Speaker 1: moderate Democrat as well. What does Speaker Pelosi have to
Speaker 1: offer moderates blue dogs like Ed case of Hawaii, Well,
Speaker 1: not a lot to on That's that's one of the
Speaker 1: problems here. Maybe she's gonna for him a better chance
Speaker 1: of getting reelected. An awful lot of Democrats I talked to,
Speaker 1: or their staffs anyway, are saying they're scared about. The
Speaker 1: issue is not will the Republicans win the House? The
Speaker 1: issue is by how much? Will they win the House
Speaker 1: by ten, twelve, fifteen, twenty seats. When you start talking
Speaker 1: about numbers like that, a lot of people, like the
Speaker 1: gentleman from Hawaii run for cover. So just before we
Speaker 1: let you go, you said that three and a half
Speaker 1: trillion dollar plan is a pipe geam. Even Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: said that what are you seeing in terms of what
Speaker 1: the likely bill will look like in terms of size
Speaker 1: and in terms of taxes, well under two. But there's
Speaker 1: so many gimmicks. Some of these programs are five years,
Speaker 1: some or seven, some of ten. Some will expire and
Speaker 1: then get shoved shoved off to the States. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of gimmickry. But I think that let's say something
Speaker 1: more around two is far more likely, and it's not
Speaker 1: him if investments. Gregg, thank you on the week ahead
Speaker 1: and beyond. We have a rare treat right now. We'll
Speaker 1: get right to a Lloyd Miner is one of the
Speaker 1: most different physicians I know out there. He has someone
Speaker 1: with world class first order research on the balance of
Speaker 1: the ear. He has taken that over to medicine and
Speaker 1: the management of hospitals and all among other things that
Speaker 1: Johns Hopkins a residency at Duke a few years ago
Speaker 1: in olds Court and Palo Alto. Right now, what's your
Speaker 1: biggest headache right now? Dean? I think our biggest concern
Speaker 1: right now is to make sure that we continue to
Speaker 1: provide outstanding healthcare, that we take care of our students
Speaker 1: eighteen thousand students back on our campus, and that we
Speaker 1: comply with the federal mandate that the Biden administration is
Speaker 1: issued with regard to the vaccine mandate. What is your
Speaker 1: strategy with your unvaccinated staff. Well, first time we have
Speaker 1: a highly vaccinated it's between within your hospitals, within our hospitals, yes,
Speaker 1: and and around the university. It's similar. I mean, we're
Speaker 1: still gathering that information. We want to make sure that
Speaker 1: that we're providing those who wish to apply for a
Speaker 1: religious or medical exemption, that we provide the avenue to
Speaker 1: you know, issue that application and have it reviewed. But
Speaker 1: we know that these vaccinations are among the safest and
Speaker 1: most effective vaccinations ever developed. We want to make sure
Speaker 1: that we answer any questions people have and ultimately get
Speaker 1: a fully vaccinated workforce. Meanwhile, Dr Minor over in New
Speaker 1: York State, there is a mandate that healthcare workers get
Speaker 1: vaccinated and actually the governor and Kathy Hokel has said
Speaker 1: that she may bring in the National Guard to fill
Speaker 1: empty healthcare rules once this mandate goes into effect, which
Speaker 1: is this week. What do you make of all this?
Speaker 1: It's really important that our healthcare organizations, hospitals, clinics be
Speaker 1: able to continue to provide outstanding care. You know, the
Speaker 1: real tragedy early on in the pandemic was in places
Speaker 1: like New York where the healthcare workforce became overwhelmed. We
Speaker 1: had too many patients overwhelming our facilities and our workforce.
Speaker 1: So I think having skilled, trained healthcare personnel, and if
Speaker 1: that's the National Guard, uh, then then perhaps that's appropriately
Speaker 1: making sure we continue to provide care to patients when
Speaker 1: they need it by skilled personnel is going to be
Speaker 1: really important. Dr Dr Miner. If there are people who
Speaker 1: doubt the efficacy or doubt the potential risks of the vaccine,
Speaker 1: what does it send them in terms of messaging that
Speaker 1: a lot of healthcare workers are not getting vaccinated themselves.
Speaker 1: I think it's a difficult message and uh and one
Speaker 1: that concerns me a lot. We we have a highly
Speaker 1: vaccinated healthcare workforce where we are, and I think that's
Speaker 1: true across most areas of the country. It's the pandemic
Speaker 1: has been overwhelming and overwhelming experience for all of us.
Speaker 1: But I think the steps at the FDA, the c
Speaker 1: d C have taken to ensure the safety and efficacy
Speaker 1: of these vaccines are remarkable, and we need to do
Speaker 1: the best job we can in healthcare to communicate that
Speaker 1: message so that more people feel reassured and get vaccinated.
Speaker 1: Our listeners are viewers have to be confused by the
Speaker 1: cacophony of politics. F D a federal this maybe world
Speaker 1: health organization, but certainly c DC. What's your desire for
Speaker 1: c DC and Washington officials to get on the same page, Tom,
Speaker 1: I think it's really important that that federal agencies UH
Speaker 1: and the FDA and CDC in particular are aligned, and
Speaker 1: I think Dr Willinsky. Director Willinsky of course ultimately issued
Speaker 1: a ruling aligning the CDC recommendations pretty much with the
Speaker 1: FDA recommendations. But there was, as you described, there was
Speaker 1: a lot of back and forth with the advisory committee.
Speaker 1: It's important to have advisory committees. They represent a diversity
Speaker 1: of opinions and areas of expertise. But at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, it's up to the leaders to make
Speaker 1: sure the alignments. There is this one off like is
Speaker 1: this something new for you with all of your decades
Speaker 1: of experience, or is this sort of the way the
Speaker 1: sausage is made within the vaccine bacteria community. Well, COVID
Speaker 1: is certainly one off for all of us. But and
Speaker 1: I think ordinarily Tom these disagreements do exist in a
Speaker 1: healthy way between regulatory agencies. But we're in the midst
Speaker 1: of a huge crisis, and so alignment and coordination is
Speaker 1: particularly important getting us through this crisis. Dr Monner, there
Speaker 1: was a study that came out of Oxford University that
Speaker 1: came out this morning that said that American men lost
Speaker 1: more than two years of lifespan as a result of
Speaker 1: the COVID pandemic. When we look back on this period,
Speaker 1: what will be the healthcare legacy of the COVID pandemic. Well,
Speaker 1: I hope the legacy will be how we responded as
Speaker 1: a as a nation and how we responded as a
Speaker 1: healthcare community. Certainly, there are many aspects of that response
Speaker 1: that we wish were different, but I think we've all
Speaker 1: learned a lot and are learning a lot. I am
Speaker 1: just so proud every day to work with an amazing
Speaker 1: group of dedicated healthcare professionals where I am at Stanford,
Speaker 1: and I would say that about really healthcare workers around
Speaker 1: the country and supporting our healthcare workforce during these trying
Speaker 1: times is going to be particularly important as we all
Speaker 1: get through this together. Just a Miner, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for joining Bloomberg today, and you're greatly greatly appreciate
Speaker 1: that Lloyd Miner has been with us many many times
Speaker 1: year across the arc of this pandemic. And we look
Speaker 1: for further conversations of course Stanford University School of Medicine,
Speaker 1: Diana as well. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening. Join us live weekdays from seven to ten
Speaker 1: am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio and on Bloomberg Television each
Speaker 1: day from six to nine am for insight from the
Speaker 1: best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. And subscribe
Speaker 1: to the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot com,
Speaker 1: and of course on the terminal. I'm Tom keene In.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomer