Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane. Daily
Speaker 1: we bring you insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg Even
Speaker 1: Robari has been with this many times with City Group
Speaker 1: and Ahead of Economic Research for them, working with Catherine
Speaker 1: Mann and working with a great team including Edward Morrise
Speaker 1: on petroleum and a hybrid hydrocarbons. Abraham, let me just
Speaker 1: talk about a greater idea of stimulus in endless debt,
Speaker 1: even at a low interest rate. Does that just assume
Speaker 1: currency depreciation or potential devaluation? Tomas and John's great to
Speaker 1: be on once again, and that's a great question, and
Speaker 1: my short answers, no, it does not. And in fact,
Speaker 1: that's the point we've been making for our currency forecasts
Speaker 1: that in many cases it's the ability to stabilize the
Speaker 1: economy through these very aggressive stimulus measures that in fact
Speaker 1: we'll pull in capital inflows and will be a support
Speaker 1: for asset prices and therefore also the exchange rate. So
Speaker 1: I don't think it's generally true that we should assume
Speaker 1: currency depreciation as a result of these massive liquidity injections.
Speaker 1: That being said, I think the aggressive actions by the
Speaker 1: FED have certainly been one major factor that has made
Speaker 1: investors more confident to bet on currencies other than the dollar.
Speaker 1: So I think in the dollar specific case, they've certainly
Speaker 1: contributed to the recent seller on a waiting of the
Speaker 1: mathematics of this lift and gold up twenty three folks
Speaker 1: after March lows, even in Mabari. When you look at gold,
Speaker 1: do you ascribe it simply to these uncommon low real yields?
Speaker 1: Is literally negative real yields across the entire system? Is
Speaker 1: that what's driving gold higher? I think it's certainly a
Speaker 1: very important factor. And and if you look at the charts,
Speaker 1: you see that the correlation with real yields and in
Speaker 1: particular with US real yields continues to be very strong,
Speaker 1: and even most recently, if we look at the last
Speaker 1: few weeks, the latest increasing gold prices has been coming
Speaker 1: alongside a pretty steep decline and real heels as well.
Speaker 1: But we do think that there is a second element,
Speaker 1: which is if you like the quantitative part, so you
Speaker 1: have the price driver which is on the real interest
Speaker 1: right side. But it's a quantitative driver, which is in fact,
Speaker 1: again the massive increase in central bank liquidity, and it
Speaker 1: is associated with the search for alternatives to the conventional currency.
Speaker 1: So we think there's kind of this two pronged uh,
Speaker 1: these two prompt pillars of supports for gold prices very
Speaker 1: low he reels, but also the search for alternatives. And
Speaker 1: I think gold stands out there alongside maybe the end
Speaker 1: in currency space, but also to some degree some of
Speaker 1: the crypt occurrence. What is truly original about this moment
Speaker 1: as well, Abraham, Away from the cryptocurrencies are the extra
Speaker 1: reasons people are looking to shun the dollar in this environment,
Speaker 1: and it's the belief that the US becomes the source
Speaker 1: of instability as the reopening effort starts to stall in
Speaker 1: many states across America. We have had so many guests
Speaker 1: on this program in the last four hours talk up
Speaker 1: a shift away from the United States and towards Europe
Speaker 1: and our swhere because of how badly the reopening process
Speaker 1: is going in America and for that reason, people are
Speaker 1: looking to fade the U. S. Dollar. Does that argument
Speaker 1: resonate with you, Abraham, I would say a version of
Speaker 1: the argument resonates with me, but it's it's probably a
Speaker 1: little more flattering to the US because I think we
Speaker 1: should continue to ascribe a fairly exceptional position to the
Speaker 1: US outlook, and we continue to think that the US
Speaker 1: economy will bounce back earlier and more strongly than much
Speaker 1: of the rest of the world. But what is truth
Speaker 1: from an investment standpoint is that the rest of the
Speaker 1: world is unusually heavily exposed to the US, and US
Speaker 1: s s are unusually expensive relatives to the rector of
Speaker 1: the world, and in an environment where there are a
Speaker 1: couple of clouds on the US horizon, including a fairly
Speaker 1: uncertain election, I do think it makes a great deal
Speaker 1: of sensor investors to diversify a little bit away from
Speaker 1: the US, and I think that's really what we're seeing.
Speaker 1: We're seeing some diversification given these kind of unusually high
Speaker 1: valuations in high exposures from the US, and we also
Speaker 1: think that that should give you some further upside, for instance,
Speaker 1: for the euro against the dollar, for a couple of
Speaker 1: the other gn alternative against the dollar. But I don't
Speaker 1: think this is it's equivalent through writing off the US.
Speaker 1: In fact, we think the US kind of growth exceptionalism
Speaker 1: probably still has some legs in it left coming perhaps
Speaker 1: out of the election, but for the next couple of months,
Speaker 1: it does put the US on the back foot, all right, Ebrahim.
Speaker 1: The weakening of the US dollar has been something a
Speaker 1: lot of people are trying to understand in order to
Speaker 1: figure out how long it has to run. You're saying
Speaker 1: that it does have longer versus the Euro. Looking at
Speaker 1: Bank of America Global Research, they came out and they
Speaker 1: said that the FED stimulus, as you were talking about,
Speaker 1: compressing real rates was the main driver of the weakening
Speaker 1: in the dollar, which raises a question how much further
Speaker 1: can the FED and will the FED compress real yields?
Speaker 1: And that that is the key to the dollars trajectory
Speaker 1: in the months to come. So what's the answer, how
Speaker 1: much further can the Fed go? Yes? Very interesting. And
Speaker 1: as for you real yields, I should say we were
Speaker 1: a little bit surprised how much further you really have declined.
Speaker 1: And in particular the declining real yield of late has
Speaker 1: been driven by a pick up and an invasion expectation
Speaker 1: in an environment where I think many of us don't
Speaker 1: really expect instation to pick up so we think the
Speaker 1: driver of the recent decline and real yields is probably
Speaker 1: running a little bit out of steam, and that means
Speaker 1: maybe the nominal side, nominal interest rates have to do
Speaker 1: more of at work. But we do think that the
Speaker 1: bulk of the move has taken place, so when it
Speaker 1: comes to real deals as a driver, there might be
Speaker 1: another ten twenty basis points in there, but we really
Speaker 1: don't expect a lot further in terms of really a downside.
Speaker 1: But it is also not the only driver. So what
Speaker 1: I was just alluding to in terms of drivers of
Speaker 1: the US dollar down, I think there is also a
Speaker 1: shift in terms of expectations of growth, perhaps some optimism
Speaker 1: for EU measures that's coming into play as well. So
Speaker 1: if the dollar sells off, I think it's increasingly has
Speaker 1: to come from some of these other elements rather than
Speaker 1: a further decline. And really even him round Barry with
Speaker 1: us from City Group right now to drive forward the
Speaker 1: discussion and stimulus we have with us a gentleman from
Speaker 1: the town District, North Carolina, and Patrick mckenry joins is
Speaker 1: he has been steeped in Republican politics going back to
Speaker 1: George Bush the younger. He was intimately involved and that's successful.
Speaker 1: Run for president in two thousand, Congress, and thank you
Speaker 1: so much for joining us today. What is the best
Speaker 1: outcome for conservative Republicans in this fiscal trajectory of the
Speaker 1: next six seven in eight weeks, for those that are
Speaker 1: frugal and if frugal constituents, what's the best outcome? Well,
Speaker 1: I mean, ideological concerns are different when you have a
Speaker 1: house fire, and what we have is a is a
Speaker 1: major house fire here, So we've got to get that righted, uh,
Speaker 1: and then get back on a solid footing here. So
Speaker 1: for me, I think the approach is how do you
Speaker 1: how do you get people back in employment in safe
Speaker 1: and effective way? So the first piece there is health safety.
Speaker 1: Without health safety, nothing else matters. So we have to
Speaker 1: have substantial funds so that we can have a pipeline
Speaker 1: of treatment options that have been borne out by scientific proof,
Speaker 1: as well as potentially a vaccine. You get that right,
Speaker 1: that which of course requires a substantial amount of government money. UH.
Speaker 1: With the private sector innovation and then you get to
Speaker 1: the question of a rehiring bonus and tax policy then
Speaker 1: centivizes businesses to get back in the in the risk business,
Speaker 1: to safely reopen to take the proper risks and to
Speaker 1: know that they have a foundation upon which to take
Speaker 1: that risk. So I think that's really important. So rehiring
Speaker 1: bonuses would be substantial and helpful, and and a tapering
Speaker 1: down or elimination of these uh overly generous in major
Speaker 1: parts of the country, federal benefits for unemployment. I think
Speaker 1: the combination of a bonus for rehiring and tapering down
Speaker 1: that unemployment benefit would be smart policy accompressment. Are you
Speaker 1: getting frustrated by the lack of clarity, the lack of
Speaker 1: details that you're getting from this administration in the month
Speaker 1: of July. Yes, Look, we had a great result of
Speaker 1: the Cares Act. We saw Pelosi in the House, Democrats
Speaker 1: produce a partisan bill. They've got no Republican votes. They
Speaker 1: even lost Democrat votes. It was so far to the left.
Speaker 1: So that's not a serious point of discussion. Well, we
Speaker 1: want to hear is that is that agenda set so
Speaker 1: we can have Trump economy too. We just came off
Speaker 1: of the best economy and most of our lifetimes, and
Speaker 1: the policy set that we implemented there gave support to
Speaker 1: what was happening in the private sector and lifted us
Speaker 1: to new heights. Let's put that agenda out, Let's be
Speaker 1: bold about it. Let's hear from the White House on
Speaker 1: the details so that we can go iron out the
Speaker 1: policy on the hill. That's really what I want to hear.
Speaker 1: And it has been frustrating that we haven't had that
Speaker 1: that detail set yet. The Congressman, why are they dragging
Speaker 1: their feet? What's the reason behind it at the moment
Speaker 1: from your standpoint, and if it making it difficult in
Speaker 1: your constituency to talk to your constituents about why they
Speaker 1: were it isn't a plan beyond the month of July. Well, look,
Speaker 1: it's complicated because everything has changed. You got you like
Speaker 1: the best health experts in the world. We're saying that
Speaker 1: summer was gonna sort of take this thing down like
Speaker 1: the flu season, And that was just a couple of
Speaker 1: months ago. We had we had health experts tells not
Speaker 1: to wear masks at the beginning of the year. So
Speaker 1: the idea that you're gonna see two months or three
Speaker 1: months in the future in this environment is is really hard.
Speaker 1: So I think there's some some understanding that we wanted
Speaker 1: to be hesitant to to just lay out a whole
Speaker 1: broad policy path before we actually unders the confines of
Speaker 1: this now we're in July. We need to see that
Speaker 1: clearly from the administration, and we need to see clearly
Speaker 1: from states and localities about school reopening, because that's a
Speaker 1: vital economic set as well. If you can't have childcare,
Speaker 1: it's very difficult. Fore you get back to some semblance
Speaker 1: of normal economic life. Congressman, you're talking about lack of
Speaker 1: cohesion and a lack of certainty around what the policies,
Speaker 1: the specific detailed policies are going to be going forward.
Speaker 1: And yet you're also you've admonished FED Chair J. Powell
Speaker 1: for perhaps blurring the lines between monetary and fiscal policy.
Speaker 1: Some argue that because there hasn't been a faster fiscal policy,
Speaker 1: it is forced the Federal Reserve to act more and
Speaker 1: in more varieties that go closer to fiscal policy to
Speaker 1: make up for that gap. What do you say about that?
Speaker 1: I mean, do you think that you have been too
Speaker 1: slow and forced the FED to act more aggressively? Not yet.
Speaker 1: If we if we screw this up in in late
Speaker 1: July in August, I think that will be the case.
Speaker 1: But I don't see that. What I what I was
Speaker 1: reminding when we have the Secretary of the Treasury before
Speaker 1: my committee and the Secretary I'm sorry, in the Chair
Speaker 1: of the Federal Reserve, I always remind them that there
Speaker 1: is this wall between monetary policy and fiscal policy, and
Speaker 1: the Hill should not get into the weeds of monitor policy,
Speaker 1: nor should the FED chair direct fiscal policy. And I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, j Pal gets high marks UH for
Speaker 1: his fast, fast action UH and being very foresighted. His
Speaker 1: foresight is just absolutely amazing in this environment. And when
Speaker 1: they when they laid out main street lending, it took
Speaker 1: a long time to get that ramped up, but it
Speaker 1: was very clear sign of policymakers on the Hill that
Speaker 1: we've got the lending piece. You guys get in the
Speaker 1: stimulus piece. You guys get people connected with their employment
Speaker 1: and you get people off the unemployment roles or give
Speaker 1: them support so they can get back into the economy.
Speaker 1: And that's something that we hear clearly. So I think
Speaker 1: they've picked their lane smartly. I think they've stayed in
Speaker 1: their lane smartly. However, really aggressively UM. And over the
Speaker 1: long term, we're gonna have to have these FED programs
Speaker 1: pulled back from the economy. But at this stage, we're
Speaker 1: still trying to put this house fire out. The Congressman,
Speaker 1: we need to get down to Asheville, will du a
Speaker 1: remote down their teams surveillance Asheville, North Carolina. I can
Speaker 1: see it now, Patrick Henry, thank you so much, the
Speaker 1: tenth Congressional District of North Carolina. Right now, without question,
Speaker 1: our interview of the day, if not our interview of
Speaker 1: the week on the social fabric of this nation. It
Speaker 1: would normally be an interview on trade with a former
Speaker 1: ambassador on trade with President Obama, Mr Kirk of Texas,
Speaker 1: but that's not the case. And these times we need
Speaker 1: to talk to run Kirk about the Reagan High School
Speaker 1: in Austin, Texas. We need to talk to him as
Speaker 1: fifty seven mayor of Dallas, Texas and who we need
Speaker 1: to talk to him about the path forward for this nation.
Speaker 1: Ron Kirk, were honored to have you with us. UH
Speaker 1: today we are seeing images of statues torn down. They're
Speaker 1: not going to do that in front of the Alamo,
Speaker 1: but we're seeing images coast to coast of statue is
Speaker 1: being pulled down. How do we resurrect the new statues
Speaker 1: to come? How do we rebuild this nation? With statues
Speaker 1: that our kids can be proud of. Well, Tom, first
Speaker 1: of all, thanks for having me, and we are taking
Speaker 1: a turn that I didn't expect that it's certainly not
Speaker 1: one that I haven't uh spoken to quite a bit
Speaker 1: over the last several months. First of all, Um, Tom,
Speaker 1: if we to me, the more important journey isn't about
Speaker 1: which statutes we replace, what with The bigger journey is
Speaker 1: what's in our hearts and are we gonna really get
Speaker 1: to the systemic um matters that have allowed, for the
Speaker 1: most parts, the overwhelming majority of blacks and Latinos and
Speaker 1: poor people in this country to be locked out of
Speaker 1: the economic system. And while Um and you mentioned ironically,
Speaker 1: I graduated from John H. Reagan High School, another one
Speaker 1: of the a school named for another one of those
Speaker 1: Confederate generals. My concern if we spend more attention on
Speaker 1: taking down the names and the statutes, we don't address
Speaker 1: the systemic problem we have in some of our police
Speaker 1: communities over the sparent treatment of blacks and poor people.
Speaker 1: If we don't address those underlying factors that hold people
Speaker 1: of color black economically, we really will have only just
Speaker 1: put up a new painting pimed some new Draps declared
Speaker 1: victory and moved forward. And I'm much more interested in
Speaker 1: attacking the core issues that have plagued this country for now.
Speaker 1: You know, whether you figur it's the last seventy years
Speaker 1: or two hundred years, but far too long. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be blunt here. You grew up in the pragmatic, toughest
Speaker 1: now's politics of texas As, and Richards gave you guidance.
Speaker 1: You lost to Phil Graham. There's always been a grace
Speaker 1: underneath the toughness of Texas politics. How do we get
Speaker 1: that grace back to Washington after a one term President Trump,
Speaker 1: or indeed after a two term President Trump. How do
Speaker 1: we get the grace back at the federal level? Well,
Speaker 1: I know this this is a business show, not a
Speaker 1: political show. But if nothing else, President Trump has taught
Speaker 1: us all that the tone at the top matters. And
Speaker 1: so if what people are really caring about is the
Speaker 1: restoration of grace and civility and and and that's gonna
Speaker 1: be a long path in and of itself, then you
Speaker 1: have to start with the belief that this has to
Speaker 1: be a one term president. I mean, he just does
Speaker 1: not have it within his d n A to ever
Speaker 1: demonstrate even a modicum amount of empathy or grace or forgiveness,
Speaker 1: our recognition of when he's wrong. Uh. And voters, the
Speaker 1: American people have to recognize Donald Trump didn't start uh
Speaker 1: this degradation of our civility. Uh, he did, I think
Speaker 1: bring to the surface and give cover to a lot
Speaker 1: of Americans who are afraid over our changing demographics. And
Speaker 1: we're seeing that all across the country. All you've got
Speaker 1: to do is look at any of your news feeds
Speaker 1: in it day and see one more incident of a
Speaker 1: black family and Asian family and Hispanic family being attacked.
Speaker 1: There's a boldness there that I don't think people would
Speaker 1: have demonstrated if they weren't getting now very overt direction
Speaker 1: from the White House. But the other thing I've told people,
Speaker 1: we're responsible for that. If you want more civility, if
Speaker 1: you want political leaders who are willing to find the
Speaker 1: common ground, stop voting for all of these jerks who
Speaker 1: go to Washington refused to compromise, see one another's as
Speaker 1: enemy combatants, uh, versus all of us who care about
Speaker 1: and love this country wanted to live up to our
Speaker 1: ideals and are willing to fight passionately forward that so
Speaker 1: it starts with the power of that vote. And I
Speaker 1: challenged the American people vote for vote for the kind
Speaker 1: of politicians you say in your heart you want to
Speaker 1: see representing us. But then don't stop there. Examine your
Speaker 1: own behavior in the workplace and in corporate America and
Speaker 1: see whether or not we're living up to those ideals. Ambassador,
Speaker 1: Since this is a business show, I do want to
Speaker 1: just get a quick question in here. Given the fact
Speaker 1: that we've got so much emphasis on rejiggering supply chains
Speaker 1: in the wake of the pandemic, do you think that
Speaker 1: we do need a different trade policy with this in
Speaker 1: mind in order to bring medical supply production and other
Speaker 1: essential services back to the United States. Well, sure, and
Speaker 1: I know initially we we're going to talk about the
Speaker 1: visited of President Lopez opera over the door from Mexico
Speaker 1: to the US. But this is where trade policy does matter.
Speaker 1: And while the new uh NAFTA, the United States Mexico
Speaker 1: Canada Agreement is an improvement on it, but it's taken
Speaker 1: the old car in the garage that your parents gave you,
Speaker 1: putting a new engine in it, putting new bells and whistles,
Speaker 1: versus having a new architecture like the Trump administration threw
Speaker 1: away with the Transpacific Partnership, that will allow us to
Speaker 1: have access to whether it's medical supplies or technology or
Speaker 1: raw materials that we need to drive our economy and
Speaker 1: more importantly, give us free access to these new emerging
Speaker 1: markets that desperately want to grow using the best of
Speaker 1: what we make in America. But this pandemic has demonstrated
Speaker 1: the folly of having a terror policy that ends up
Speaker 1: compromising our ability to access the very things we need
Speaker 1: to fight this horrific the disease. These are many conversations,
Speaker 1: and we need longer conversations. Ryan Kirk, We've got to
Speaker 1: get you back on again soon. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for joining us today. He's a former mayor of Dallas,
Speaker 1: Austin Gulsby at the University of Chicago. That was pretty good.
Speaker 1: How he did that, Austin? How I got rock? You
Speaker 1: did and you didn't even know, y gua. John and
Speaker 1: I are teaching a class together right now on policy
Speaker 1: and an unweld. We're going to rip up the script
Speaker 1: right now, because folks, this is serious stuff. The third
Speaker 1: Pillar was my book of the summer last year. It's
Speaker 1: on community. A primal screen by Professor Rodging about how
Speaker 1: we have to change how we adapt at a macro
Speaker 1: basis and also at the micro basis the community. And
Speaker 1: Austin Goulsby is one of the few guys I know
Speaker 1: that actually practices this within his academics, as he did
Speaker 1: with President. Awesome, you're in the room with Ragu and
Speaker 1: you're talking to third pillar. How's America doing the answers?
Speaker 1: Not very well right now? Yeah, it's Look, it's a
Speaker 1: tough moment. We're in the we're in the zoom room.
Speaker 1: We don't we're not. We're still socially distanced from one another.
Speaker 1: But look, I don't know how. I don't quite know
Speaker 1: how we got to where we are on the economy,
Speaker 1: not not just the health side, but on the economy.
Speaker 1: Because even though there's no vaccine, you've got most of
Speaker 1: the advanced countries of the world have got it fairly contained.
Speaker 1: They've got a handle on it. They can start coming back.
Speaker 1: And there are only a few exceptions. The US is
Speaker 1: one and Sweden's another where they kind of let the
Speaker 1: virus get out of control in the name of helping
Speaker 1: their economy. But actually, you see it, actual we hurt
Speaker 1: their economy, that the economies in the US and Sweden
Speaker 1: are going to have a hard time coming back if
Speaker 1: we don't contain the virus Austin just yeah, it's it's
Speaker 1: just h I was just gonna say, Tommy know, earlier,
Speaker 1: we had Matt Winkler on Austin. He's a founder of
Speaker 1: Bloomberg News Me has a wonderful column out this morning,
Speaker 1: and Tom and I were speaking with him, and he
Speaker 1: just kind of pointed out something that you were just saying,
Speaker 1: which is the US has really done a poor job
Speaker 1: relative to a lot of other countries around the world
Speaker 1: when you look at some of the data. What do
Speaker 1: you what do you think the solution is from here,
Speaker 1: because it doesn't appear to be a federal effort to
Speaker 1: combat this virus and the economic impact. Yeah, look that
Speaker 1: that's the problem. The optimistic thing is if we don't
Speaker 1: dawdle forever, we're not that far from getting on the
Speaker 1: road that everybody else is on. Um. But if there's
Speaker 1: not gonna be a big federal push, which I agree
Speaker 1: with you it seems like there's not, then I think
Speaker 1: it's gonna move back to the States and you're gonna
Speaker 1: find this weird differential where you've got a few states
Speaker 1: where they're just gonna basically ignore the the evidence or
Speaker 1: the experience of other places, and those of in not
Speaker 1: very short order, those economies are gonna start to suffer again.
Speaker 1: And then in places where they're being judicious, um, they
Speaker 1: can get out of this. And that thing is if
Speaker 1: you look at these countries in Europe, in Asia, Australia,
Speaker 1: New Zealand, it's not just that they're getting out of lockdown.
Speaker 1: Their kids are going back to school. They in Norway,
Speaker 1: they go there back in the gym's and they said
Speaker 1: they haven't had any cases of transmission in the gyms
Speaker 1: because they've got the they've got a handle on the
Speaker 1: spread of the virus. The thing is, look, nobody, everybody
Speaker 1: knows we want to get out of of this withdrawn period,
Speaker 1: and we're all going stair crazy. But if you do
Speaker 1: it too early, you set yourself back to square zero.
Speaker 1: If you don't like being mostly in your house, don't
Speaker 1: you go to get everybody to go to a bar.
Speaker 1: Because you're gonna have to go. Everybody's gonna have to
Speaker 1: go back into their house. So I mean, I guess
Speaker 1: this kind of goes back, and there's something Tom and
Speaker 1: I've been talking about before, states rights versus you know,
Speaker 1: the heavy hand of the federal government here. Um, where
Speaker 1: do we go from here? I mean, is this simply
Speaker 1: states having to come, you know, come to Jesus type
Speaker 1: of moment where they get where maybe New York and
Speaker 1: New Jersey were several months ago. Yeah, I think that's
Speaker 1: exactly what it is. You know, as I always say,
Speaker 1: the virus is the boss. And I got this research
Speaker 1: that I did with the with Chad Steverson where we
Speaker 1: got a lot of data on people's consumer uh activity
Speaker 1: from their phones. We have it from the from the
Speaker 1: businesses perspective, so how many people customers walk through the
Speaker 1: door at two point three million different businesses around the country.
Speaker 1: And in that data, it shows very clearly it's not
Speaker 1: policy that determines economic activity. So if you go to
Speaker 1: cities like the quad Cities on the border of Illinois
Speaker 1: and Iowa, where there's a shelter in place order in
Speaker 1: Illinois and there's no shelter in place order in Iowa,
Speaker 1: you would think that everybody be going to get their
Speaker 1: hair cut in Iowa and not in Illinois. And so
Speaker 1: it would show that the policy makes a big difference.
Speaker 1: Only it's not true. People stop getting their haircut on
Speaker 1: both sides of that border. Even though they're allowed to
Speaker 1: go to the barber, they don't because they're afraid, and
Speaker 1: that idea that effectively what's happening is people are trying
Speaker 1: to feel safe, and until we get a handle on
Speaker 1: the virus, people are not going to feel safe. And
Speaker 1: so it moved it back. Every state has got to
Speaker 1: get control of the spread of the virus, and if
Speaker 1: you do that, the economy wants to come back. It's
Speaker 1: just that if you go pull out the stops and
Speaker 1: get the virus spreading again, the economy is gonna take
Speaker 1: again because people are gonna say, whoa wait a minute,
Speaker 1: I want to go out there and get sick. Awesome,
Speaker 1: Gotta leave it there. Austin Goals, We thank you so
Speaker 1: much for the Blue School. Chicago greatly greatly appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and
Speaker 1: listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast
Speaker 1: platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keane Before
Speaker 1: the podcast, you can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Radio