1
00:00:01,320 --> 00:00:03,600
Speaker 1: Calls for one of the most talked about recessions in

2
00:00:03,760 --> 00:00:06,720
Speaker 1: history are starting to receive. Bank of America now sees

3
00:00:06,760 --> 00:00:10,280
Speaker 1: that fed's interest rate hike ending in a soft landing

4
00:00:10,320 --> 00:00:10,960
Speaker 1: out You might.

5
00:00:10,880 --> 00:00:13,480
Speaker 2: Have noticed that, after many months of bracing for a

6
00:00:13,600 --> 00:00:18,360
Speaker 2: sharp downturn in the US economy, some prominent economists, CEOs

7
00:00:18,360 --> 00:00:21,520
Speaker 2: and market watchers have begun to sound a bit more

8
00:00:21,600 --> 00:00:25,680
Speaker 2: confident that the US will avoid a recession. But you

9
00:00:25,800 --> 00:00:29,000
Speaker 2: might not want to count on it. Bloomberg's chief US

10
00:00:29,040 --> 00:00:32,320
Speaker 2: economist Anna Wong, along with a team here at Bloomberg,

11
00:00:32,479 --> 00:00:35,920
Speaker 2: crunched all the numbers, and she's here to explain why

12
00:00:35,960 --> 00:00:38,960
Speaker 2: a recession is in fact still likely on the way

13
00:00:39,400 --> 00:00:40,760
Speaker 2: and possibly soon.

14
00:00:41,560 --> 00:00:45,360
Speaker 3: There's always a chance this soft landing will be the reality.

15
00:00:45,479 --> 00:00:48,639
Speaker 3: But I think that hinges on an assumption that this

16
00:00:48,760 --> 00:00:49,680
Speaker 3: time is different.

17
00:00:54,280 --> 00:00:58,000
Speaker 2: I'm Weskasova today on the big take why the landing

18
00:00:58,240 --> 00:01:10,280
Speaker 2: might not be soft and a you and Bloomberg's chief

19
00:01:10,280 --> 00:01:14,040
Speaker 2: economist Tom Orlick right in this new analysis that when

20
00:01:14,120 --> 00:01:18,959
Speaker 2: everyone expects a soft landing, brace for impact, Why do

21
00:01:19,040 --> 00:01:21,120
Speaker 2: you say that, Why do you think that a recession

22
00:01:21,480 --> 00:01:23,319
Speaker 2: is still the most likely outcome?

23
00:01:23,920 --> 00:01:27,039
Speaker 3: It's stumped from this observation where we look at the

24
00:01:27,040 --> 00:01:30,520
Speaker 3: past recessions and found that indeed, media mentions of the

25
00:01:30,560 --> 00:01:34,640
Speaker 3: word soft landing, and even corporate filings and corporate presentations

26
00:01:34,720 --> 00:01:38,800
Speaker 3: research whenever the word soft lending is at a peak

27
00:01:38,959 --> 00:01:42,360
Speaker 3: that actually precedes the two thousand and eight recession, that

28
00:01:42,400 --> 00:01:45,000
Speaker 3: preceded the two thousand two, two thousand and one recession,

29
00:01:45,240 --> 00:01:49,040
Speaker 3: the nineteen ninety recession. There seems to be something there

30
00:01:49,320 --> 00:01:53,160
Speaker 3: that made us to look deeper into why people tend

31
00:01:53,200 --> 00:01:56,680
Speaker 3: to call on a soft lending right before recession, and overall,

32
00:01:56,760 --> 00:01:59,880
Speaker 3: our takeaway from that exercise is that there's more reason

33
00:02:00,360 --> 00:02:03,080
Speaker 3: to think that a recession is more likely than a

34
00:02:03,080 --> 00:02:03,680
Speaker 3: soft lending.

35
00:02:04,400 --> 00:02:08,360
Speaker 2: So let's walk through the data that you compile for

36
00:02:08,720 --> 00:02:12,720
Speaker 2: this article and all the things that went into this conclusion.

37
00:02:13,240 --> 00:02:16,480
Speaker 2: You start the analysis with a quote from someone we're

38
00:02:16,520 --> 00:02:18,079
Speaker 2: all very familiar with.

39
00:02:18,400 --> 00:02:23,320
Speaker 3: Yes Jennett Yellen. In October two thousand and seven, just

40
00:02:23,480 --> 00:02:27,600
Speaker 3: two months before the Great Recession, she said that the

41
00:02:27,680 --> 00:02:31,280
Speaker 3: most likely outcome is a soft landing. At that time,

42
00:02:31,320 --> 00:02:35,040
Speaker 3: the economics data, very similar to today now points to

43
00:02:35,440 --> 00:02:40,760
Speaker 3: things looking rosier than everybody expected. Economic data we're surprising

44
00:02:40,880 --> 00:02:45,399
Speaker 3: on the upside. PMI was etching back up, which means

45
00:02:45,440 --> 00:02:49,560
Speaker 3: Purchaser's Manager index. That index tends to be one of

46
00:02:49,600 --> 00:02:53,959
Speaker 3: the earliest data that indicate whether the economy accelerating or decelerating.

47
00:02:54,480 --> 00:02:59,000
Speaker 3: So even that PMI survey shows an acceleration on the

48
00:02:59,000 --> 00:03:01,760
Speaker 3: eve of the two thousand and then seven recessions. So

49
00:03:01,800 --> 00:03:04,920
Speaker 3: I think that the confidence one could place on the

50
00:03:05,000 --> 00:03:08,720
Speaker 3: PMI surveys is in terms of predicting the start of

51
00:03:08,720 --> 00:03:13,320
Speaker 3: a recession, should be pretty low. We see a lot

52
00:03:13,320 --> 00:03:17,960
Speaker 3: of similarities today. Our number one reason for why we

53
00:03:18,040 --> 00:03:21,160
Speaker 3: still think of recession is most likely is because in

54
00:03:21,200 --> 00:03:24,600
Speaker 3: the past recessions, the number one culprit for creating that

55
00:03:24,639 --> 00:03:28,240
Speaker 3: recession is the FED, and the FED tends to murder expansions.

56
00:03:28,880 --> 00:03:32,880
Speaker 3: And if you look at the legs of monetary policy,

57
00:03:33,320 --> 00:03:36,560
Speaker 3: what we learned is that even within a tightening cycle,

58
00:03:36,680 --> 00:03:41,360
Speaker 3: there are various length to these lags. So I think

59
00:03:41,560 --> 00:03:45,160
Speaker 3: one reason why the soft lending believers think that the

60
00:03:45,200 --> 00:03:48,880
Speaker 3: tightening effects of monetary policy is over ready is because

61
00:03:48,880 --> 00:03:54,400
Speaker 3: you see this reacceleration in manufacturing financial conditions earlier, when

62
00:03:54,400 --> 00:03:57,600
Speaker 3: the stocks keep on rising, and we also see that

63
00:03:58,040 --> 00:04:01,160
Speaker 3: housing market is starting to turn up. Well, it turns

64
00:04:01,200 --> 00:04:04,120
Speaker 3: out that those places are also where the legs of

65
00:04:04,240 --> 00:04:08,320
Speaker 3: monetary policy are the shortest. The place where monetary policy

66
00:04:08,360 --> 00:04:11,640
Speaker 3: takes the longest to work is the labor market and

67
00:04:11,880 --> 00:04:15,200
Speaker 3: also in the credits market, And there are reasons to

68
00:04:15,280 --> 00:04:18,640
Speaker 3: believe that these two places we have still yet to

69
00:04:18,720 --> 00:04:22,760
Speaker 3: see the majority of the rate hypes effects. And once

70
00:04:22,880 --> 00:04:26,039
Speaker 3: these two places labor market and credit markets start seeing

71
00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:29,520
Speaker 3: those effects, that is when you have this non linear

72
00:04:29,920 --> 00:04:31,839
Speaker 3: downturn that will jump start a recession.

73
00:04:32,560 --> 00:04:34,640
Speaker 2: And another thing you write is that a lot of

74
00:04:34,640 --> 00:04:39,080
Speaker 2: the assumptions underlying projections are that the trends we've been

75
00:04:39,120 --> 00:04:41,680
Speaker 2: seeing are going to continue moving in the same way,

76
00:04:41,720 --> 00:04:43,680
Speaker 2: and that that might not be the case.

77
00:04:44,440 --> 00:04:48,120
Speaker 3: When one think about soft lending, one is implicitly assuming

78
00:04:48,240 --> 00:04:51,760
Speaker 3: that the unemployment rate will continue to stay low. But

79
00:04:51,839 --> 00:04:54,200
Speaker 3: when you look at the lessons of recessions over the

80
00:04:54,240 --> 00:04:57,000
Speaker 3: past fifty years, one thing that jump out at us

81
00:04:57,120 --> 00:05:00,600
Speaker 3: is that usually when this recession begins, you see this

82
00:05:00,839 --> 00:05:05,039
Speaker 3: non leniar jump in unemployment rate. It's very hard to

83
00:05:05,800 --> 00:05:09,360
Speaker 3: forecast this non lenear jump and when this jump will happen.

84
00:05:09,920 --> 00:05:12,200
Speaker 3: I think the lesson is that when you look at

85
00:05:12,200 --> 00:05:16,120
Speaker 3: all these mean forecasts showing a soft landing showing that

86
00:05:16,240 --> 00:05:18,960
Speaker 3: unemployment rate would day between three point a to four

87
00:05:19,000 --> 00:05:22,440
Speaker 3: point one percent next year. You are not taking into

88
00:05:22,520 --> 00:05:26,800
Speaker 3: account the risks that skewed the distribution of forecasts on

89
00:05:26,839 --> 00:05:30,599
Speaker 3: the upside. So once we put estimate on the risks

90
00:05:30,640 --> 00:05:34,640
Speaker 3: based on historical episodes of recession, it just turns out

91
00:05:34,640 --> 00:05:38,320
Speaker 3: that the upside risk of the unemployment forecast is way

92
00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:41,919
Speaker 3: higher than low side risk to unemployment forecasts.

93
00:05:42,520 --> 00:05:45,920
Speaker 2: And one reason why these trends might not continue is

94
00:05:45,920 --> 00:05:48,280
Speaker 2: that there are so many things that could sort of

95
00:05:48,560 --> 00:05:51,400
Speaker 2: crash into those assumptions that are unpredictable.

96
00:05:52,240 --> 00:05:55,919
Speaker 3: So you're right. Recessions are usually happen not because the

97
00:05:56,000 --> 00:05:59,520
Speaker 3: economy slowly drip drip dripped down to a low growth regime.

98
00:05:59,560 --> 00:06:04,080
Speaker 3: It's due to a sudden confluence of shocks, and in fact,

99
00:06:04,120 --> 00:06:08,880
Speaker 3: we are seeing at least five shocks in the immediate horizon.

100
00:06:09,320 --> 00:06:11,280
Speaker 3: The first one is oil price shocks.

101
00:06:11,680 --> 00:06:14,839
Speaker 4: Oil has resumed a rally after an industry estimate pointed

102
00:06:14,880 --> 00:06:18,200
Speaker 4: to a huge drawdown in US inventries, adding to signals

103
00:06:18,200 --> 00:06:19,400
Speaker 4: that the market is tightening.

104
00:06:19,800 --> 00:06:24,120
Speaker 3: Aside from FED funds rate hikes, The second most popular

105
00:06:24,480 --> 00:06:28,320
Speaker 3: culprit of recession is oil price increase. We have seen

106
00:06:28,640 --> 00:06:31,960
Speaker 3: a twenty five dollars increase in oil price in just

107
00:06:32,000 --> 00:06:34,839
Speaker 3: a matter of a couple months. That would shave off

108
00:06:35,080 --> 00:06:40,200
Speaker 3: growth from consumption spending. Another second shock that we're seeing

109
00:06:40,320 --> 00:06:44,240
Speaker 3: is that people are starting to repay their student loans again.

110
00:06:44,120 --> 00:06:46,880
Speaker 1: Now to federal student loan payments for turning after a

111
00:06:46,960 --> 00:06:49,680
Speaker 1: three year pause, tens of millions of Americans. They are

112
00:06:49,680 --> 00:06:52,279
Speaker 1: back on the hook this morning making those payments again

113
00:06:52,360 --> 00:06:55,360
Speaker 1: amid stubborn inflation and rising interest rates.

114
00:06:55,520 --> 00:06:58,200
Speaker 3: We expect that that will pretty much take off about

115
00:06:58,240 --> 00:07:01,719
Speaker 3: three hundred dollars per household in consumption and money that

116
00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:04,840
Speaker 3: they could put toward consumption. Other than that, we still

117
00:07:04,920 --> 00:07:09,040
Speaker 3: have a government shut down risk. The stop gap bill

118
00:07:09,120 --> 00:07:12,400
Speaker 3: that was passed over the weekend only kicked the can

119
00:07:12,560 --> 00:07:15,840
Speaker 3: down the world to about mid November where there would

120
00:07:15,840 --> 00:07:21,680
Speaker 3: be another shut down negotiations again, So that will potentially

121
00:07:21,920 --> 00:07:26,400
Speaker 3: lead to seven hundred thousand federal workers being furloughed. On

122
00:07:26,440 --> 00:07:30,120
Speaker 3: top of that, you also have the United Autos Workers strike.

123
00:07:30,000 --> 00:07:33,480
Speaker 4: In the United Autoworkers' Union, putting more pressure on the

124
00:07:33,480 --> 00:07:38,280
Speaker 4: Big three US carmakers GM four than Silantis. It plans

125
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:40,800
Speaker 4: to expand its strikes if there is no progress in

126
00:07:40,880 --> 00:07:43,880
Speaker 4: contract talks via Friday deadline.

127
00:07:43,920 --> 00:07:46,600
Speaker 3: Even though right now the strikes are pretty narrow that

128
00:07:46,720 --> 00:07:50,640
Speaker 3: affecting only twenty five thousand auto workers, we looked into

129
00:07:50,800 --> 00:07:55,000
Speaker 3: the supply chain relationships of the auto manufacturing sector and

130
00:07:55,040 --> 00:07:57,480
Speaker 3: it turns out that the auto sector has one of

131
00:07:57,480 --> 00:08:01,239
Speaker 3: the longest supply chain in auto sectors. In other words,

132
00:08:01,720 --> 00:08:05,520
Speaker 3: even though the strikes are concentrated in auto plants, because

133
00:08:05,560 --> 00:08:10,320
Speaker 3: it sourced from so many other sectors such as steel, rubber, chemical,

134
00:08:10,400 --> 00:08:15,560
Speaker 3: even service management consultant, when you have a paralysis of

135
00:08:15,640 --> 00:08:18,960
Speaker 3: production in auto, you actually lead to layoff in all

136
00:08:18,960 --> 00:08:22,040
Speaker 3: the other sectors. So we estimate that twenty five thousand

137
00:08:22,120 --> 00:08:25,920
Speaker 3: autoworker strike could ultimately lead to one hundred and thirty

138
00:08:25,960 --> 00:08:30,360
Speaker 3: thousand layoffs across all the other industries. If the UAW

139
00:08:30,440 --> 00:08:33,680
Speaker 3: strikes were too broaden too, the entire membership of the

140
00:08:33,800 --> 00:08:36,480
Speaker 3: United Autos Worker Union, which is about one hundred and

141
00:08:36,480 --> 00:08:40,320
Speaker 3: fifty thousand workers, that could ultimately lead to about seven

142
00:08:40,440 --> 00:08:44,400
Speaker 3: hundred and sixty thousand layoffs across the entire economy. So

143
00:08:44,440 --> 00:08:47,840
Speaker 3: it's actually a pretty substantial threat to economic growth.

144
00:08:47,880 --> 00:08:48,120
Speaker 4: There.

145
00:08:48,720 --> 00:08:52,640
Speaker 3: All these shocks could easily reduce about one percentage point

146
00:08:53,080 --> 00:08:57,160
Speaker 3: off GDP growth in the fourth quarter and raise unemployment

147
00:08:57,280 --> 00:08:59,840
Speaker 3: rate by enough to generate a recession.

148
00:09:02,040 --> 00:09:04,560
Speaker 2: And those are just the different shocks that could happen

149
00:09:04,679 --> 00:09:07,400
Speaker 2: within the US. You also write that the rest of

150
00:09:07,440 --> 00:09:10,360
Speaker 2: the world could wind up dragging the US economy down

151
00:09:10,400 --> 00:09:10,720
Speaker 2: a bit.

152
00:09:11,280 --> 00:09:14,760
Speaker 3: Let's talk about China. China is the second largest economy

153
00:09:14,760 --> 00:09:19,200
Speaker 3: in the world. Especially within China, the property market usually

154
00:09:19,400 --> 00:09:23,160
Speaker 3: is a big factor in generating growth within China. Our

155
00:09:23,200 --> 00:09:25,960
Speaker 3: team members from China are telling us that there is

156
00:09:26,000 --> 00:09:30,080
Speaker 3: a structural weakness in the Chinese economy, some scarring effect

157
00:09:30,320 --> 00:09:34,360
Speaker 3: within households after the pandemic that lead them to revise

158
00:09:34,520 --> 00:09:38,680
Speaker 3: down China's growth through the medium horizon. If China does

159
00:09:38,760 --> 00:09:42,800
Speaker 3: slow more visibly, that would affect commodity prices, that would

160
00:09:42,840 --> 00:09:48,080
Speaker 3: affect the motivation to invest in equipment spending. Usually when

161
00:09:48,080 --> 00:09:50,920
Speaker 3: you see global growth slow down, the first place you

162
00:09:50,960 --> 00:09:54,760
Speaker 3: see in the US economic data is in equipment's investment.

163
00:09:55,360 --> 00:09:58,200
Speaker 3: So that could further drag down GDP growth.

164
00:09:59,120 --> 00:10:02,960
Speaker 2: When we come back, can consumer spending word offer recession

165
00:10:11,920 --> 00:10:13,840
Speaker 2: and on one of the bright spots in the US

166
00:10:13,880 --> 00:10:17,240
Speaker 2: economy even with the recession fears has been consumer spending

167
00:10:17,559 --> 00:10:20,760
Speaker 2: has remained really strong, and now you're finding that maybe

168
00:10:20,760 --> 00:10:21,920
Speaker 2: that might not last either.

169
00:10:22,679 --> 00:10:26,600
Speaker 3: One of the most popular cited reasons for the soft

170
00:10:26,640 --> 00:10:30,920
Speaker 3: lend is the resiliency of consumption, right, and I would

171
00:10:30,960 --> 00:10:34,640
Speaker 3: say that there are two reasons to doubt why consumption

172
00:10:34,760 --> 00:10:38,920
Speaker 3: should not be a key predictor. Number One. In past recessions,

173
00:10:39,160 --> 00:10:43,719
Speaker 3: services consumption remain resilient even in a recession. I think

174
00:10:43,760 --> 00:10:48,280
Speaker 3: the median American household consumer is not a forelooking person.

175
00:10:48,640 --> 00:10:51,440
Speaker 3: As long as you can borrow, you spend, So this

176
00:10:51,559 --> 00:10:56,679
Speaker 3: is why even in a downturm, people still spend in services. Second,

177
00:10:57,000 --> 00:11:00,800
Speaker 3: if consumption does slow down, that as additional bad news

178
00:11:01,000 --> 00:11:04,600
Speaker 3: on economic growth. And we do see some good reasons

179
00:11:04,640 --> 00:11:08,160
Speaker 3: why it would slow down ultimately, and one of them

180
00:11:08,280 --> 00:11:11,400
Speaker 3: is that I mentioned the resumption of student loan payments.

181
00:11:11,440 --> 00:11:14,440
Speaker 3: We think that that would altogether add up to about

182
00:11:14,480 --> 00:11:18,880
Speaker 3: seventy billion dollars per year spent on paying back student

183
00:11:18,920 --> 00:11:24,000
Speaker 3: loans instead of spending on things and services. Another reason

184
00:11:24,120 --> 00:11:28,120
Speaker 3: is because all these pandemic savings that people had from

185
00:11:28,320 --> 00:11:32,120
Speaker 3: either a paycheck from the government or from forced saving

186
00:11:32,200 --> 00:11:35,200
Speaker 3: because they were not able to spend during the shutdown years,

187
00:11:35,800 --> 00:11:39,120
Speaker 3: those savings are running down for about eighty percent of

188
00:11:39,160 --> 00:11:44,200
Speaker 3: the American households. And finally, this summer, we actually saw

189
00:11:44,240 --> 00:11:48,400
Speaker 3: a once in a blue moon kind of consumption spending splurreed.

190
00:11:48,960 --> 00:11:53,800
Speaker 3: That's due to three cultural phenomena in the US. Number one,

191
00:11:53,880 --> 00:11:58,080
Speaker 3: you have the Barbenheimer movie release that led a lot

192
00:11:58,120 --> 00:12:01,560
Speaker 3: of people to go back to movie theaters. And number two,

193
00:12:01,679 --> 00:12:05,840
Speaker 3: you have Taylor Swift concert tours in the US. On

194
00:12:05,960 --> 00:12:08,559
Speaker 3: top of that, you have Beyonces concert tour in the

195
00:12:08,640 --> 00:12:12,959
Speaker 3: US as well. Imagine this, Each person on average who

196
00:12:13,040 --> 00:12:17,200
Speaker 3: go to a Taylor Swift concert pay fifteen hundred dollars

197
00:12:17,520 --> 00:12:23,880
Speaker 3: for altogether at the concert tickets, hotel fans, memorabilia, airline tickets,

198
00:12:24,520 --> 00:12:28,640
Speaker 3: and for Beyonce, the average concert goer spend even more

199
00:12:28,720 --> 00:12:32,400
Speaker 3: because the typical fan of Beyonce is older than a

200
00:12:32,559 --> 00:12:36,640
Speaker 3: typical person who goes to Taylor Swift concert. So what

201
00:12:36,720 --> 00:12:40,360
Speaker 3: you see is then a Q three Barbenheimer Taylor Swift

202
00:12:40,360 --> 00:12:44,640
Speaker 3: beyond explosion of things that cause people to spend irrationally

203
00:12:44,840 --> 00:12:47,679
Speaker 3: because they just want to go for it. And then

204
00:12:47,720 --> 00:12:50,640
Speaker 3: in Q four you have this nuclear winter of entertainment

205
00:12:50,679 --> 00:12:54,000
Speaker 3: because of Hollywood writer strikes no more Taylor Swift, no

206
00:12:54,040 --> 00:12:57,720
Speaker 3: more Beyonce. So you have this cliff of services spending.

207
00:12:58,400 --> 00:13:02,240
Speaker 3: So what we're expecting is this big drop off in

208
00:13:02,240 --> 00:13:06,360
Speaker 3: consumption spending will start to become evident in consumption data

209
00:13:06,400 --> 00:13:07,240
Speaker 3: in the coming months.

210
00:13:09,120 --> 00:13:11,920
Speaker 2: And Enna, you actually were able to put a figure

211
00:13:12,000 --> 00:13:16,079
Speaker 2: on just how much all of these cultural events added

212
00:13:16,080 --> 00:13:17,120
Speaker 2: to the US economy.

213
00:13:17,440 --> 00:13:21,360
Speaker 3: Yes, we estimate that those three things together added about

214
00:13:21,360 --> 00:13:24,720
Speaker 3: eight point five billion to the third quarter growth in

215
00:13:24,920 --> 00:13:29,679
Speaker 3: annualized growth domestic product growth terms, that is about zero

216
00:13:29,760 --> 00:13:33,480
Speaker 3: point five percentage point. You added point five percentage point

217
00:13:33,480 --> 00:13:36,319
Speaker 3: to Q three, then you must have point five percentage

218
00:13:36,320 --> 00:13:39,600
Speaker 3: point subtracted off Q four if you'd no longer have

219
00:13:39,679 --> 00:13:40,920
Speaker 3: those growth drivers.

220
00:13:41,480 --> 00:13:45,280
Speaker 2: That's an astonishing figure that those things could have such

221
00:13:45,320 --> 00:13:48,800
Speaker 2: an effect on an economy as large as the US is.

222
00:13:49,440 --> 00:13:51,480
Speaker 3: It's like an Olympic event basically.

223
00:13:52,640 --> 00:13:54,920
Speaker 2: And you said that people will spend as long as

224
00:13:54,920 --> 00:13:57,199
Speaker 2: they're able to borrow. And that's another thing that you

225
00:13:57,360 --> 00:14:01,559
Speaker 2: found in your analysis that banks are starting to become

226
00:14:01,600 --> 00:14:04,320
Speaker 2: a little stingier when it comes to lending out money.

227
00:14:04,360 --> 00:14:08,440
Speaker 3: We were searching for the one indicator which has a

228
00:14:08,480 --> 00:14:11,800
Speaker 3: good track worker of predicting recession, and when I was

229
00:14:11,840 --> 00:14:16,200
Speaker 3: reading the October two thousand and seven, FOMC transcript. I

230
00:14:16,280 --> 00:14:19,280
Speaker 3: note that their staff was talking about all these positive

231
00:14:19,360 --> 00:14:24,000
Speaker 3: economics surprises. Then the one indicator that showed that something

232
00:14:24,080 --> 00:14:28,320
Speaker 3: bad is happening is the FED Senior Loan Officer's Survey

233
00:14:28,880 --> 00:14:33,200
Speaker 3: or short for SLUS. That survey tells you what are

234
00:14:33,240 --> 00:14:37,280
Speaker 3: the plans of banks in lending. And typically when banks

235
00:14:37,320 --> 00:14:42,680
Speaker 3: indicate that they're planning to reduce lending to consumers reduce

236
00:14:42,760 --> 00:14:47,840
Speaker 3: lendings to firms, that has been a very good indicator

237
00:14:48,000 --> 00:14:51,600
Speaker 3: of credit tightening. And when you don't have credit flowing

238
00:14:51,680 --> 00:14:54,960
Speaker 3: freely in the economy, that's when you start to see

239
00:14:55,120 --> 00:14:57,680
Speaker 3: more clearer signs of slow down in growth.

240
00:14:58,480 --> 00:15:01,120
Speaker 2: When we come back, what would it take to avoid

241
00:15:01,120 --> 00:15:13,560
Speaker 2: a recession? This is all painting a pretty bracing picture

242
00:15:13,600 --> 00:15:15,880
Speaker 2: of what may be ahead of us. And yet you

243
00:15:15,960 --> 00:15:19,000
Speaker 2: also lay out what you call the arguments for the defense,

244
00:15:19,040 --> 00:15:21,960
Speaker 2: the reason why maybe this won't come to pass and

245
00:15:22,000 --> 00:15:24,280
Speaker 2: we will have a bit of a soft landing. Can

246
00:15:24,320 --> 00:15:25,560
Speaker 2: you tell us what they are?

247
00:15:26,440 --> 00:15:29,680
Speaker 3: The best argument for a defense is if you believe

248
00:15:29,720 --> 00:15:34,680
Speaker 3: that there's a productivity boom underway, possibly from AI. If

249
00:15:34,720 --> 00:15:37,920
Speaker 3: you look at the past fifty years of history, of

250
00:15:38,120 --> 00:15:41,920
Speaker 3: FED hiking cycles and soft landing. There had only been

251
00:15:42,120 --> 00:15:45,720
Speaker 3: one successful case of soft landing, which happened in the

252
00:15:45,720 --> 00:15:50,120
Speaker 3: mid nineteen nineties, and that was because Alan Greenspan decided

253
00:15:50,160 --> 00:15:54,120
Speaker 3: not to further hike interest rates because he'd strongly believed

254
00:15:54,120 --> 00:15:58,920
Speaker 3: that productivity growth is rising. Therefore wage growth could continue

255
00:15:58,920 --> 00:16:03,520
Speaker 3: to increase with that gen inflationary pressure. In this case, lately,

256
00:16:03,560 --> 00:16:05,520
Speaker 3: we have been seeing a lot of labor strikes, right,

257
00:16:05,560 --> 00:16:08,400
Speaker 3: and the settlement of these labor strikes shows that people

258
00:16:08,440 --> 00:16:12,160
Speaker 3: are asking for four or five percent wage growth per year,

259
00:16:12,520 --> 00:16:14,320
Speaker 3: and not only for this year but in the next

260
00:16:14,400 --> 00:16:18,119
Speaker 3: couple of years. In order for that to be consistent

261
00:16:18,160 --> 00:16:21,040
Speaker 3: with the FEDS two percent inflation target, it means that

262
00:16:21,320 --> 00:16:24,720
Speaker 3: productivity growth got to pick up to around two percent

263
00:16:25,040 --> 00:16:27,640
Speaker 3: or even three percent from about one point five percent.

264
00:16:28,200 --> 00:16:32,040
Speaker 3: I believe that the FED believes that trend productivity has

265
00:16:32,120 --> 00:16:35,000
Speaker 3: been running at about one point five percent over the

266
00:16:35,040 --> 00:16:38,320
Speaker 3: last couple of years. So if you do believe in

267
00:16:38,360 --> 00:16:42,240
Speaker 3: that AI boom, the FED would allow this wage growth

268
00:16:42,280 --> 00:16:46,480
Speaker 3: increase to happen and sit back and let productivity do

269
00:16:46,560 --> 00:16:50,720
Speaker 3: its work. But I would say that to have confidence

270
00:16:51,000 --> 00:16:55,720
Speaker 3: about this judgment that productivity is rising is as hard

271
00:16:55,880 --> 00:16:59,200
Speaker 3: as having confidence over what the neutral rate that our

272
00:16:59,320 --> 00:17:02,840
Speaker 3: star is, and I think that Chair Powell will not

273
00:17:03,120 --> 00:17:06,400
Speaker 3: have that kind of conviction, strong enough of a conviction

274
00:17:06,920 --> 00:17:11,320
Speaker 3: of a productivity boom underway before he paused the rate hike.

275
00:17:12,240 --> 00:17:14,200
Speaker 2: And then some of the things that you're watching, which

276
00:17:14,240 --> 00:17:16,919
Speaker 2: could spell bad news you say, could turn around and

277
00:17:16,960 --> 00:17:18,840
Speaker 2: wind up actually being good for the economy.

278
00:17:19,240 --> 00:17:22,880
Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean, it could easily be that the UAW

279
00:17:23,040 --> 00:17:27,840
Speaker 3: strike could end tomorrow and then government shut down could

280
00:17:27,840 --> 00:17:32,919
Speaker 3: be completely averted if Republicans and Democrats decide to work together,

281
00:17:33,520 --> 00:17:36,400
Speaker 3: and all that disruption would just be a rounding error

282
00:17:36,440 --> 00:17:40,440
Speaker 3: for Q four. It could also be that Bidenomics could

283
00:17:40,440 --> 00:17:47,320
Speaker 3: be successful in reversing decades of economist's understanding of industrial policies,

284
00:17:47,359 --> 00:17:52,200
Speaker 3: which is that while government subsidization actually helps spur private

285
00:17:52,320 --> 00:17:56,960
Speaker 3: investment in these selected sectors and as a result, lead

286
00:17:57,040 --> 00:18:01,120
Speaker 3: to an investment boom in the US, if that happens,

287
00:18:01,200 --> 00:18:03,280
Speaker 3: we can totally avert a recession.

288
00:18:05,080 --> 00:18:06,960
Speaker 2: But I think we can all hear the skepticism in

289
00:18:06,960 --> 00:18:09,120
Speaker 2: your voice. You don't really think that that's likely.

290
00:18:10,040 --> 00:18:13,399
Speaker 3: I think it really stems from our exercise in this

291
00:18:13,480 --> 00:18:16,680
Speaker 3: piece of article, which is we go back to history

292
00:18:17,119 --> 00:18:21,760
Speaker 3: and look at the probability of what is the most

293
00:18:21,800 --> 00:18:25,520
Speaker 3: likely outcome, and yes, there's always a chance this soft

294
00:18:25,640 --> 00:18:29,560
Speaker 3: landing will be the reality. But I think that hinges

295
00:18:29,680 --> 00:18:33,000
Speaker 3: on an assumption that this time is different, and I

296
00:18:33,040 --> 00:18:36,560
Speaker 3: just feel like it's such a hard argument to make

297
00:18:36,600 --> 00:18:38,920
Speaker 3: that this time is different that I would still say

298
00:18:38,960 --> 00:18:40,440
Speaker 3: our base case is a recession.

299
00:18:41,240 --> 00:18:44,320
Speaker 2: Enna if a recession does come to pass, is there

300
00:18:44,359 --> 00:18:47,639
Speaker 2: any way of telling from all of these numbers that

301
00:18:47,680 --> 00:18:50,560
Speaker 2: you're looking at how deep it will be and how

302
00:18:50,600 --> 00:18:51,520
Speaker 2: long it might last.

303
00:18:52,359 --> 00:18:55,560
Speaker 3: Our base case is for a short and shallow recession.

304
00:18:56,000 --> 00:18:59,800
Speaker 3: But it is a very low conviction call because you

305
00:19:00,359 --> 00:19:03,639
Speaker 3: when a recession happens, it's because all shocks hit the

306
00:19:03,680 --> 00:19:06,200
Speaker 3: economy at the same time and some kind of non

307
00:19:06,320 --> 00:19:10,080
Speaker 3: linearity effect is happening. It's kind of like somebody in

308
00:19:10,119 --> 00:19:13,480
Speaker 3: the movie theater is shouting fire and everybody rushes out

309
00:19:13,520 --> 00:19:16,520
Speaker 3: of exit. It's usually a kind of like a freak

310
00:19:16,560 --> 00:19:19,480
Speaker 3: out moment. It's hard to tell how severe it would

311
00:19:19,520 --> 00:19:21,280
Speaker 3: be once those dynamics kick off.

312
00:19:22,560 --> 00:19:25,800
Speaker 2: Anna, thanks so much for giving us a look at

313
00:19:25,840 --> 00:19:29,600
Speaker 2: what's to come. Thanks thanks for listening to us here

314
00:19:29,640 --> 00:19:32,120
Speaker 2: at the Big Take it's a daily podcast from Bloomberg

315
00:19:32,160 --> 00:19:36,160
Speaker 2: and iHeartRadio. For more shows from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,

316
00:19:36,320 --> 00:19:39,320
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen. And we'd love to

317
00:19:39,359 --> 00:19:42,200
Speaker 2: hear from you. Email us questions or comments to Big

318
00:19:42,240 --> 00:19:45,679
Speaker 2: Take at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising producer of The

319
00:19:45,680 --> 00:19:49,440
Speaker 2: Big Take is Vicky Vergolina. Our senior producer is Catherine Fink.

320
00:19:49,720 --> 00:19:55,359
Speaker 2: Frederica Romanello is our producer. Our associate producer is Zeneb Sidiki. RAPHAELM.

321
00:19:55,440 --> 00:19:58,679
Speaker 2: Seeley is our engineer. Our original music was composed by

322
00:19:58,760 --> 00:20:02,320
Speaker 2: Leo Sidrin west Casova. We'll be back on Monday with

323
00:20:02,440 --> 00:20:04,520
Speaker 2: another Big Take epper great weekend