Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
Speaker 2: with Lisa Bromwitz and Amerie Hordern. Join us each day
Speaker 2: for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
Speaker 2: from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
Speaker 2: am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
Speaker 2: anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: The President saying he plans to announce his selection to
Speaker 1: lead the Federal Reserve early in the new year, possibly
Speaker 1: this giving rise to berts that the Fed is going
Speaker 1: to cut rights rates more aggressively, which is fed into
Speaker 1: this expectation of a bigger deficit and potentially what's going
Speaker 1: to be happening on both the monetary side of things
Speaker 1: and the fiscal side of things, which is the reason
Speaker 1: why we are looking at the fiscal deficit. President Trump
Speaker 1: once again suggesting revenue could replace federal income taxes and
Speaker 1: reduce the national debt. Mayamaguinnis of the Committee for for
Speaker 1: Responsible Federal Budget writing, despite all of the promises made
Speaker 1: on deficit reduction in twenty twenty five, we're heading into
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six with a little to show as far
Speaker 1: as fiscal improvements. MAYA can join us now, Maya thank
Speaker 1: you so much for being with us. I want to
Speaker 1: start with what you make of the recent discussions of
Speaker 1: the AEPA case in front of the Supreme Court of
Speaker 1: potential companies clawing back some of the revenues that they
Speaker 1: paid to the United States.
Speaker 3: Are you taking that seriously.
Speaker 1: As a potential hit to revenues that otherwise have been
Speaker 1: penciled in.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, I think everybody should be taking seriously the potential
Speaker 4: that there's going to be major shifts on what happens
Speaker 4: with the tariff revenue, both going forward and potentially if
Speaker 4: some of that money has to be paid back. Listen,
Speaker 4: I have no legal expertise at all, but having talked
Speaker 4: to many people, I'm less concerned that people are going
Speaker 4: to have to pay it back, which would be immensely
Speaker 4: disruptive to companies and distortive to the sense that you
Speaker 4: can make negotiations on foreign policy and economic policy. But
Speaker 4: I do think it's likely that they will find that
Speaker 4: those tariffs are illegal. In their present structure, the tariffs
Speaker 4: are projected to raise about two and a half trillion
Speaker 4: dollars over the next decade and reduce the debt by
Speaker 4: as much as three trillion because of interest savings. This
Speaker 4: would be a huge hit to the fiscal picture, which
Speaker 4: is already in deep, deep trouble. So I think one
Speaker 4: of the big questions is if we do find that
Speaker 4: that TEARFF revenue doesn't remain in place, and let's be honest,
Speaker 4: it's unlikely to remain in place in the current structure
Speaker 4: no matter what, because the President enjoys changing those tariffs around.
Speaker 4: But if they are pulled back and unable to go
Speaker 4: as planned, we should be thinking about a smarter, more efficient,
Speaker 4: more pro growth revenue approach that would replace them, so
Speaker 4: we wouldn't lose all of that money and make the
Speaker 4: deficit even worse.
Speaker 5: MAYA when it comes to potentially well can get done
Speaker 5: by the end of the year. What are you hearing
Speaker 5: and what do you think it's going to do the
Speaker 5: fiscal picture? If there is an extension of the AMA
Speaker 5: Care health credits enhance this This was.
Speaker 4: A really interesting part of the discussion about how to
Speaker 4: open the government. Which was the big ask was that
Speaker 4: we extend the subsidies for Obama healthcare, and that would
Speaker 4: have all told to cost three hundred and fifty billion dollars.
Speaker 4: You'll notice there was not a single discussion of how
Speaker 4: we might offset those costs. So again, here's another plan
Speaker 4: that would increase the deficit. We're not going to see
Speaker 4: them extended permanently, and so the cost will be less
Speaker 4: because it will only be for a few years. There
Speaker 4: is some chance that this will happen for one or
Speaker 4: two years before the end of this year, but I
Speaker 4: think it's likely. It seems as though the momentum for
Speaker 4: getting this done is starting to slow down. But to
Speaker 4: your point, no matter what happens at the end of
Speaker 4: this year, we'll either see nothing, which will just keep
Speaker 4: a very bad fiscal picture in place, or there is
Speaker 4: a possibility that there'll be a trade and a worsening
Speaker 4: of the fiscal picture. Let's extend those subsidies, and it's
Speaker 4: no comment in the policy. They might be a smart policy, no,
Speaker 4: but he's talking about how to offset them. But there
Speaker 4: might be a trade where you extend them unpaid for
Speaker 4: for other policies that are also unpaid for. Which is
Speaker 4: often what happens in that Christmas tree fiscal rush at
Speaker 4: the end of the calendar year.
Speaker 5: Well, when it comes to these enhanced subsidies, this was
Speaker 5: at as you mentioned, the heart of the government shutdown.
Speaker 5: Have you any seen any impact that is going to
Speaker 5: be long term of the government shutdown on the fiscal
Speaker 5: healthy United States?
Speaker 4: The government shutdown itself will not have an overall massive
Speaker 4: fiscal impact. There is a slowing and spending during that
Speaker 4: period and take a small hit on GDP usually which
Speaker 4: is made up in.
Speaker 3: The following months.
Speaker 4: So we usually just see a shift of growth and
Speaker 4: overall effects fysical effects from the shutdown.
Speaker 3: What it does do is causes us to be.
Speaker 4: A laughing stock around the world when our government can't
Speaker 4: keep the lights on. Really, it is a punchline, and
Speaker 4: it is the huge sign of an inability to govern
Speaker 4: at the most basic level, and it presents weaknesses and
Speaker 4: sort of a distraction from the big issues that are
Speaker 4: going on around the globe right now. So I think
Speaker 4: any country that's not aligned with the US looks at
Speaker 4: us and says they can't get their act together, and
Speaker 4: our allies are a little bit concerned too, So I
Speaker 4: would say it has far more of global foreign policy
Speaker 4: ramifications that it does on the actual bottom line, which
Speaker 4: is more of a shift of when money is spent.
Speaker 4: There'll be small savings in the short term, but they'll
Speaker 4: be pushed out into the subsequent months.
Speaker 1: A lot of people have said, look, this could have
Speaker 1: been said for a long time. We've had the irresponsible
Speaker 1: fiscal budget deficit for quite a while. It has gotten worse,
Speaker 1: but right now markets are not freaking out. In fact,
Speaker 1: we have a whole host of different projections for twenty
Speaker 1: twenty six coming out of Wall Street expecting a bias
Speaker 1: to lower yields by the end of next year, even
Speaker 1: on the longer denominations. Why do you think the market
Speaker 1: hasn't been particularly concerned even with everything that you're laying out.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean this is a long term challenge, the
Speaker 4: fiscal situation, because it's not in the US about oh,
Speaker 4: we might have a fiscal crisis in the immediate short term,
Speaker 4: because we are the reserve currency, because countries around the
Speaker 4: world and savors domestically want US treasuries. There are lots
Speaker 4: of reasons that rates don't pop up immediately. What it
Speaker 4: is is a slowing kind of erosion of our role
Speaker 4: in the world and faith in the US, and so
Speaker 4: that when there is kind of a moment of reckoning,
Speaker 4: it will be so much harder to fix. We will
Speaker 4: have ten trillion twenty trillion more in debt than we
Speaker 4: would have if we had gotten ahead of the problem.
Speaker 4: That's one big issue. The second issue I'd say is
Speaker 4: markets aren't the best predictors of when things turn bad.
Speaker 4: There's a lot of kind of frothy optimism that comes
Speaker 4: out of markets momentum that's built in it, and it's
Speaker 4: almost like a bubble.
Speaker 3: Many people understand that.
Speaker 4: Most people understand the fiscal fundamentals of the US are
Speaker 4: nothing short of terrible, but that doesn't mean there isn't
Speaker 4: money to be made in the short term as long
Speaker 4: as things kind of continue with the momentum they currently have.
Speaker 4: And when it comes to time, people don't want to
Speaker 4: pull money out of the market or make abrupt changes
Speaker 4: too quickly.
Speaker 3: So there's a refusal to acknowledge that the fundamentals are
Speaker 3: bad and hope that kind of the top line.
Speaker 4: Numbers will continue to look good for as long as possible.
Speaker 2: Stay with US. Mulpleinpeg Savanna's coming.
Speaker 3: Up off to this.
Speaker 1: Here's a view from Wall Street. Stocks inching higher as
Speaker 1: risk sentiment appears to be improving. Dana Dioria of Investment
Speaker 1: Solutions writing, the current bout of market difficulty doesn't presage
Speaker 1: a bear market. It's better to see wild buying tamed
Speaker 1: now than to witness a major bubble. Developed data joins
Speaker 1: us now from more Dana, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: being with us. This to me really is the question,
Speaker 1: is this a healthy sell off or is this a sign,
Speaker 1: especially with what we're seeing, for example, coming out of
Speaker 1: Oracle CDs, a sign that there really are some significant
Speaker 1: worries that are developing.
Speaker 3: Well, I think there've always been significant worries.
Speaker 6: I think the market has, you know, kind of plowed
Speaker 6: ahead throughout the course of the year in spite of
Speaker 6: what we all know.
Speaker 3: One of the main head winds, of course, being just
Speaker 3: valuations being so high.
Speaker 6: Another major head wind being that it's a pretty narrow
Speaker 6: story that's kind of driving all of this, right, It's
Speaker 6: this AI story, and narrow and only in the sense
Speaker 6: that we don't know yet when AI is going to
Speaker 6: pay off. We don't really know yet other than paying
Speaker 6: off for the NVIDIAs of the world, and kind of
Speaker 6: the producers if you will, but when will it actually
Speaker 6: pay off for the rest of the economy. And so
Speaker 6: you know, transformative technologies that of course are good bets
Speaker 6: in a long term sense, don't necessarily pay off in
Speaker 6: the short term at all, and it's really hard to
Speaker 6: see how that's going to disperse throughout the economy. So
Speaker 6: all being said, I think the market has kind of
Speaker 6: gone through all of that and pushed hard ahead throughout
Speaker 6: the course of the air in spite of some of
Speaker 6: these existing concerns, and so yes, to see a little
Speaker 6: bit of a pullback, to see some consideration around Hey,
Speaker 6: there's a lot of concentration here. This whole capex AI
Speaker 6: you know cycle is sort of a little bit circuitous,
Speaker 6: and you know, maybe we should back off a little
Speaker 6: I think is normal and you know, kind of to
Speaker 6: be expected and maybe probably even a little on what
Speaker 6: it could be.
Speaker 1: So Dana, going forward, what's going to get people to
Speaker 1: reverse that skepticism to actually come in and buy again.
Speaker 1: Even the valuations, yes, they've come off, still are pretty elevated.
Speaker 3: Well, certainly you've got the FED rate cut.
Speaker 6: I mean, I think everybody you know what you're seeing,
Speaker 6: even in the market is now a little bit of
Speaker 6: you know, TechEd kind of recovery.
Speaker 3: A little is based on that, right, It's.
Speaker 6: Based on the bad news is good news kind of
Speaker 6: storyline where we're still going to see some softness and employment.
Speaker 6: That softness and employment will be enough that the FED
Speaker 6: will actually cut rates in December as expected.
Speaker 3: My view is and has been that.
Speaker 6: They will cut, regardless of kind of some of the
Speaker 6: rhetoric and ups and downs that we've seen in the
Speaker 6: futures market.
Speaker 3: I think a cut is coming.
Speaker 6: I think there's enough concern about the soft patch in
Speaker 6: the economy that.
Speaker 3: They will do that.
Speaker 6: I think some of what they've said is an assertion
Speaker 6: of independence and you know, don't get ahead of yourselves
Speaker 6: kind of thing.
Speaker 3: But at the end of the day, they will cut, and.
Speaker 6: So I think that will be good, and I think
Speaker 6: it will be good for areas of the market that
Speaker 6: we want to see, you know, kind of do better,
Speaker 6: such as small caps, you know, more straight sensitive areas
Speaker 6: in the market where if you want breadth in the market,
Speaker 6: which we do, right, we want to get beyond this
Speaker 6: large cap tech only type of a trade. We want
Speaker 6: to see those areas of the market that maybe are
Speaker 6: more reliant on capital markets be able to come back more. So,
Speaker 6: you know, I think a FED rate cut is the
Speaker 6: right thing, and I think we'll get it, and I
Speaker 6: think that that is what the market is seeing right now.
Speaker 5: Is it cut in December enough though, for that burdening
Speaker 5: out you're talking about, or is it that going to
Speaker 5: have to continue this into twenty twenty six?
Speaker 3: You know, I do think you're right.
Speaker 6: I think the cutton December, of course will make everyone happy.
Speaker 6: Perhaps we'll have our Santa Claus rally, but you're absolutely right.
Speaker 6: I think we will need to continue to see at
Speaker 6: least some cutting in the new year. I also think
Speaker 6: though you know, twenty twenty six, I don't have a
Speaker 6: negative outlook, right. I mean, as we go into the
Speaker 6: next year, I think we do have a.
Speaker 3: Situation where you've got stimulus coming.
Speaker 6: You still do have what I think is a good
Speaker 6: storyline around AI and Capex.
Speaker 3: I don't think it's going anywhere.
Speaker 6: I mean, look at the bond markets and the interests
Speaker 6: that these companies have, and you know, getting credit for
Speaker 6: some of these purchases. There's credit a wash for their needs,
Speaker 6: and so I think there's a lot still there.
Speaker 3: I don't think we're ready to sort of back off.
Speaker 6: On where the market can be in twenty twenty six,
Speaker 6: but I think we just want to see more breadth.
Speaker 5: We're going to get ADP report today, We're going to
Speaker 5: get PCs very stale on Friday. We're not getting jobs
Speaker 5: data from the US government until after the FED meets.
Speaker 5: Does it unnerve you that we're going into the end
Speaker 5: of the year with really a fog out of the
Speaker 5: data story?
Speaker 3: For sure?
Speaker 6: And I think it unnerves the FED, And I think
Speaker 6: that's why you're seeing such pushback we have And really
Speaker 6: what's going on with the FED that's super interesting, of course,
Speaker 6: is that you're getting a lot of different types of feedback.
Speaker 3: You know that you're not seeing go to this monolith
Speaker 3: and how they talk about things.
Speaker 6: Different FED governors have very different viewpoints, and it tells
Speaker 6: you something, right, It tells you they're not kidding when
Speaker 6: they say that very FED or the excuse me, they're
Speaker 6: very data dependent. The FED is very data dependent, and
Speaker 6: they look to that data and they really make their decisions,
Speaker 6: and they try to make the decisions notwithstanding all the
Speaker 6: politics surrounding it. I really do think they try to
Speaker 6: make those decisions as dispassionately as they can.
Speaker 3: And so when the data is.
Speaker 6: Missing, which to your point very much is and has
Speaker 6: been now for a bit, it makes it harder for
Speaker 6: them to do their jobs. It makes it harder for
Speaker 6: them to feel confident, because of course, what happens, right
Speaker 6: if we do lower rates too quickly and there is
Speaker 6: a rebound in inflation, I mean nothing would sort of
Speaker 6: be a worse occurrence.
Speaker 3: I think for this FED in particular, given the.
Speaker 6: Nine percent inflation that we got to a couple of
Speaker 6: years ago, for the FED to let inflation rebound in
Speaker 6: any kind of big way would be a huge fail.
Speaker 6: And so I think it's real the concerns and consideration.
Speaker 6: Like I say, Net and Net, I think we will
Speaker 6: get it. But I do think it's problematic to not
Speaker 6: have the data to support what you're trying to do.
Speaker 6: I mean, you're running an entire economy here, right, You're
Speaker 6: running interest rates and monetary policy for you just the
Speaker 6: benefit not only of people in the stock market, but
Speaker 6: of everybody sort of living with affordability issues.
Speaker 3: And everything else that we've been talking about. So not
Speaker 3: having data is a serious issue.
Speaker 2: Stay with us. Mulplinpex Savanas coming up off to this.
Speaker 3: I guess the potential FED chair is here too.
Speaker 4: I don't know we shall allowed to say.
Speaker 7: That potential is a respected person that I can tell you,
Speaker 7: Thank you Kevin.
Speaker 1: The presidential praise only boosting bets that White House a
Speaker 1: NEC director Kevin Hassett will be the next Federal Reserve chair.
Speaker 1: Former Kansas City FED President Thomas ohneg joins us. Now
Speaker 1: for more, Thomas, what do you think of this sort
Speaker 1: of bachelor style a race for the next FED chair?
Speaker 1: Do you think that it has framed it correctly in
Speaker 1: terms of what's at stake?
Speaker 7: Well, I think it's been framed well as far as
Speaker 7: this is a big deal and they better picked well
Speaker 7: the and the five mandidates they originally had. We're all
Speaker 7: qualified as it is coming out as the top runner.
Speaker 7: But I don't know if that's a trial balloon they
Speaker 7: want to test it or not. That's all has to
Speaker 7: be decided. Kevin certainly qualified, and if he were chosen,
Speaker 7: I can tell you the world will be watching his
Speaker 7: or whomever has chosen his first speech with great intensity
Speaker 7: because there's so much at stake going forward, with the
Speaker 7: FED changing, lots of call for reform. Who's going to
Speaker 7: lead that it's going to be on everyone's mind, so
Speaker 7: it's a big deal.
Speaker 1: A big question is not just how much influence the
Speaker 1: FED has over the front end of the yield curve,
Speaker 1: but really what they can do for the tenure in
Speaker 1: the thirty year Given the fact that there has been
Speaker 1: a focus on home affordability and mortgage rates, what are
Speaker 1: you watching for to understand what tools they could potentially
Speaker 1: deploy to lower ten year yields, not just the very
Speaker 1: front end.
Speaker 7: Well if they, I mean, they always have the choice
Speaker 7: of trying to manage the yield curve through their monetary
Speaker 7: operations by which government securities they buy and the pressure
Speaker 7: they put on there. However, one of the issues is
Speaker 7: should they be doing that, should they be pulling away
Speaker 7: let the market take it. They do monetary policy and
Speaker 7: focus on the short end treasure yields and let the
Speaker 7: market take care of itself. That'll be a big debate
Speaker 7: I think within the FED, whomever the new chairman is,
Speaker 7: because it is so important financial conditions overall are easing.
Speaker 7: The fedest part of that, and that will be as
Speaker 7: much influence on the tenure as trying to manage that
Speaker 7: you occur, which I think will create uncertainty as much
Speaker 7: as it will help help mortgages, so they have some
Speaker 7: big choices to make ahead.
Speaker 1: Has monetary policy ever been as confusing during your tenure
Speaker 1: in terms of both the dual mandate of FED in
Speaker 1: terms of inflation as well as the labor market and
Speaker 1: also the transmission mechanism. Are financial conditions easy or are
Speaker 1: they tight?
Speaker 7: Well? Things are confusing, and you can see that within
Speaker 7: the debate within the FMC itself. Doves hawks seeming to
Speaker 7: be really at odds right now. So now, I haven't
Speaker 7: seen it like that before. I've seen it similar to
Speaker 7: that before, and it is tough, and they've got this
Speaker 7: new mandate and they're going to argue about it. But
Speaker 7: I know inflation is three percent, that's way above their target.
Speaker 7: But they're worried about employment, and I've heard and you
Speaker 7: they will say it. I'm just as sure as I'm
Speaker 7: sitting here.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 7: Should we make this cut as an insurance policy to
Speaker 7: make sure the economy moves forward. That's all going to
Speaker 7: be in next week's meeting. I'm confident of that.
Speaker 5: When it comes to potentially a Kevin Hassett chair, do
Speaker 5: you think it would harden the views of the Hawks
Speaker 5: and the committee because he is so close to the president.
Speaker 7: Not well, maybe give given the diversity on that committee
Speaker 7: right now, they could harden, but I think I think
Speaker 7: basically they want to get the right the right balance
Speaker 7: in the in the policy academ so they'll be willing
Speaker 7: to discuss it and I think come to conclusions. I
Speaker 7: think it will really depend on how whoever leads, if Kevin,
Speaker 7: how careful they are in terms of making their points,
Speaker 7: how they lead the system words consensus. That is an art,
Speaker 7: and if he's good at it, they'll come to consensus.
Speaker 7: If not, you'll see this split continuing because I think
Speaker 7: the difference between inflationary goals and the employment goals will
Speaker 7: continue to haunt them going forward.
Speaker 5: Do you think it's peculiar that current Fed chair J.
Speaker 5: Powell hasn't announced whether or not he's going to give
Speaker 5: up his governorship when he leads the leaves the chair post.
Speaker 7: I think, yeah, I would be surprised if he stayed on.
Speaker 7: It's possible, but it would be surprised. But it wouldn't
Speaker 7: be his advantage to announce one way or the other.
Speaker 7: So he's just keeping his mouth quiet because it would
Speaker 7: do nothing. But I think confusings even further. So he's
Speaker 7: playing out his term as chairman. That's what matters to him,
Speaker 7: and he'll make that decision whether to stay on much later.
Speaker 7: But I would be very surprised if he stayed on.
Speaker 1: We've been talking all morning about potential cost of living
Speaker 1: concerns and fiscal stimulus that could be coming from the
Speaker 1: White House earlier next year, and I just wonder how
Speaker 1: that factors into any potential to decision by the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 1: Would that be something that could be inflationary or would
Speaker 1: that be so small as to be negligible to those discussions.
Speaker 7: Well, I think the Fed should be looking ahead to
Speaker 7: that issue because it's small in some ways, but the
Speaker 7: national spending of over seven trallion versus the revenues coming
Speaker 7: in just over five trade and that's a huge deficit.
Speaker 7: That's a huge new issuance of debt to fund that,
Speaker 7: and you know that's going to affect the economy, and
Speaker 7: it's going to affect how monetary policy, how effective it
Speaker 7: is going forward, and they're going to be under a
Speaker 7: lot of pressures to make sure that the interest rates
Speaker 7: don't rise if the debt continues amount and there's not
Speaker 7: the demand for it that they would otherwise want. So
Speaker 7: that's going to be facing the FED. I'm a little
Speaker 7: disappointed that at least the FED itself isn't publicly recognizing
Speaker 7: that as a challenge that they have to be ready for,
Speaker 7: because it will be a big challenge going forward.
Speaker 1: Do you think that the reason why they're not is
Speaker 1: because there has been this political pressure, sure, and this
Speaker 1: would only reignite some of that pressure and potential accusations
Speaker 1: of being politically motivated.
Speaker 7: I think political pressure is part of it. You know,
Speaker 7: why engage in a fight if you can avoid it.
Speaker 7: But at the same time, they're going to have to
Speaker 7: face it at some point because the data is continuing
Speaker 7: to grow. It is a challenge that the FED will
Speaker 7: have to have to deal with. And remember they're in
Speaker 7: the middle of the past, the middle now of changing
Speaker 7: policy frameworks to this ample reserve system and they try
Speaker 7: and figure out what is the right number for ample reserves? Uh,
Speaker 7: they got that going on, there will be pressure to
Speaker 7: bring that ample reserve number up. So there confusing times,
Speaker 7: but difficult times for sure for the FORMC.
Speaker 5: Do you think there has been a weakness in terms
Speaker 5: of FED independence, You know, like if they're not willing
Speaker 5: to come out and say something that you think is
Speaker 5: so obvious because of political pressure, does that show that
Speaker 5: on the margins at minimum there has been some weakness.
Speaker 7: Weakness is sensitivity is the right word, because look at
Speaker 7: the FED has been under political pressure almost since the start.
Speaker 7: But in modern times we all know the history of
Speaker 7: the FEDS. UH, Nixon years, Johnson efforts and so forth.
Speaker 7: That's that hasn't changed. And so they're trying to be careful.
Speaker 7: They don't want to get into a fight before they
Speaker 7: need to uh. And I think that's part of it.
Speaker 7: Although political pressure is part of their thinking, there's no
Speaker 7: question about that. It has to be. They are They
Speaker 7: are in the middle of a political series here and there.
Speaker 7: They have to play in that in that arena.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveandmons podcast, bringing you the best
Speaker 2: in markets, economics, antient politics. You can watch the show
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to
Speaker 2: nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen, and as always on the
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.