WEBVTT - U.S. Won't Default on Debt, But Expect a Shutdown, Steve Bell Says

0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:08.720
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg p m L Podcast. I'm Pim Fox.

0:00:08.760 --> 0:00:11.520
<v Speaker 1>Along with my co host Lisa Abramowitz. Each day we

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.120
<v Speaker 1>bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful interviews for

0:00:15.200 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 1>you and your money, whether you're at the grocery store

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.720
<v Speaker 1>or the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg p m L

0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:32.239
<v Speaker 1>Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and Bloomberg dot com. Will

0:00:32.280 --> 0:00:36.080
<v Speaker 1>the US government be shut down? While President Donald Trump

0:00:36.120 --> 0:00:38.599
<v Speaker 1>says he's threatening to shut down the government over the

0:00:38.800 --> 0:00:42.040
<v Speaker 1>border wall funding? Here to explain more is Steve Bell.

0:00:42.159 --> 0:00:45.519
<v Speaker 1>He is senior adviser the Bipartisan Policy Center. He's a

0:00:45.560 --> 0:00:50.120
<v Speaker 1>former Senate Budget Committee staff director for Republican Pete Dominici.

0:00:50.159 --> 0:00:55.040
<v Speaker 1>And that was in four eighties six. Steve Bell, Boy,

0:00:55.120 --> 0:00:58.720
<v Speaker 1>that seems like ancient times, doesn't it. Well, it really

0:00:58.720 --> 0:01:03.279
<v Speaker 1>does things. Nothing is golden except in our memories, but

0:01:03.840 --> 0:01:06.800
<v Speaker 1>those were much easier years than now. Explain how the

0:01:06.920 --> 0:01:12.040
<v Speaker 1>contrast has informed your understanding of what President Trump said

0:01:12.600 --> 0:01:16.039
<v Speaker 1>in Phoenix about shutting down the government and connecting that

0:01:16.360 --> 0:01:21.160
<v Speaker 1>to funding for a potential border wall. Well, he said

0:01:21.160 --> 0:01:23.560
<v Speaker 1>it several times now, and so I'm beginning to think

0:01:23.560 --> 0:01:26.880
<v Speaker 1>that he means it quite seriously. Uh, let me just

0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:31.119
<v Speaker 1>distinguish between two things. Shutting Down the government would mean

0:01:31.160 --> 0:01:33.760
<v Speaker 1>that we just didn't pass the twelve spending bills or

0:01:33.800 --> 0:01:38.520
<v Speaker 1>appropriation bills for the upcoming fiscal year by October one.

0:01:38.959 --> 0:01:42.880
<v Speaker 1>That is much different than defaulting on the debt. And

0:01:42.920 --> 0:01:44.720
<v Speaker 1>I just want to make sure everyone understands there are

0:01:44.720 --> 0:01:48.440
<v Speaker 1>two different things. Um, I think the President will if

0:01:48.480 --> 0:01:51.080
<v Speaker 1>he doesn't get a bill that has funding directly for

0:01:51.080 --> 0:01:54.120
<v Speaker 1>the wall, I think he will not sign it. And

0:01:54.240 --> 0:01:57.400
<v Speaker 1>I think that we will have on the twenty nine

0:01:57.920 --> 0:02:00.560
<v Speaker 1>um of September, I think we will have beginning of

0:02:00.560 --> 0:02:04.800
<v Speaker 1>what I believe will be e relatively short government shutdown. So, Steve,

0:02:05.040 --> 0:02:07.680
<v Speaker 1>can you talk about the distinction that you just mentioned,

0:02:07.720 --> 0:02:11.119
<v Speaker 1>because when I look at bond markets, they certainly are

0:02:11.200 --> 0:02:14.120
<v Speaker 1>not expecting any kind of default and they're not frankly

0:02:14.160 --> 0:02:16.520
<v Speaker 1>expecting even a close call. I mean, I'm just looking at,

0:02:16.560 --> 0:02:19.840
<v Speaker 1>for example, three months and six month treasury bills and

0:02:19.880 --> 0:02:22.760
<v Speaker 1>they're not showing any distortions like we've seen in the past.

0:02:23.200 --> 0:02:25.680
<v Speaker 1>So is there a show is explained to us how

0:02:25.720 --> 0:02:29.400
<v Speaker 1>we could see a government shut down but not a default,

0:02:29.520 --> 0:02:31.800
<v Speaker 1>and tell us why you think this would play well

0:02:31.840 --> 0:02:36.840
<v Speaker 1>with President Trump's base, well, at least I think I

0:02:36.880 --> 0:02:40.440
<v Speaker 1>think you saw in Phoenix a couple of nights ago. Uh,

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:43.079
<v Speaker 1>what the president is doing with the base. And if

0:02:43.120 --> 0:02:46.120
<v Speaker 1>he had to shut down spending and shut down the

0:02:46.200 --> 0:02:50.480
<v Speaker 1>government and the the swamp with all the bureaucracy because

0:02:50.520 --> 0:02:52.960
<v Speaker 1>they wouldn't give him a border wall, I think that

0:02:53.000 --> 0:02:55.840
<v Speaker 1>plays very well with his base, and I think it's

0:02:55.840 --> 0:02:59.120
<v Speaker 1>something they'll remember. You can blame it on the Congress

0:02:59.400 --> 0:03:02.400
<v Speaker 1>and um. I think that gets him a pretty much

0:03:02.400 --> 0:03:07.200
<v Speaker 1>a free ride on that. But a different question is

0:03:07.240 --> 0:03:09.600
<v Speaker 1>what happens if we have any kind of default in

0:03:09.639 --> 0:03:12.399
<v Speaker 1>the debt, which I do not believe we will have.

0:03:12.760 --> 0:03:14.920
<v Speaker 1>We will pass a debt extension. It may not be

0:03:15.360 --> 0:03:17.080
<v Speaker 1>for a couple of years, it may only be for

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:20.440
<v Speaker 1>ninety days, but we will pass a debt extension in time.

0:03:20.960 --> 0:03:23.600
<v Speaker 1>We will not pass, in my view, any of these

0:03:23.840 --> 0:03:27.040
<v Speaker 1>twelve appropriation bills on time, and it will be something

0:03:27.080 --> 0:03:31.080
<v Speaker 1>we call a big omnibus spending bill that will be

0:03:31.120 --> 0:03:34.160
<v Speaker 1>sent to the president. If it doesn't have roll funding,

0:03:34.360 --> 0:03:37.000
<v Speaker 1>I think it will fail and he will shut down

0:03:37.040 --> 0:03:39.320
<v Speaker 1>the government. Steve, do you believe that there's going to

0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:44.320
<v Speaker 1>be any movement, any activity on tax reform. I think

0:03:44.360 --> 0:03:46.560
<v Speaker 1>it's going to be very, very difficult. I wrote something

0:03:46.640 --> 0:03:53.000
<v Speaker 1>about this yesterday. Um, the challenges ahead are really very

0:03:53.000 --> 0:03:57.640
<v Speaker 1>difficult because you need bipartisan support to get a tax

0:03:57.680 --> 0:04:00.280
<v Speaker 1>bill out, and that means you're going to have to

0:04:00.360 --> 0:04:04.680
<v Speaker 1>move towards whatever Democrats want in their tax bill. Will

0:04:04.760 --> 0:04:09.360
<v Speaker 1>that be higher rates on the top five, Will that

0:04:09.520 --> 0:04:12.800
<v Speaker 1>be an expansion of the earned income tax credit. No

0:04:12.840 --> 0:04:16.000
<v Speaker 1>one really knows what they will demand, but it's pretty

0:04:16.000 --> 0:04:19.799
<v Speaker 1>clear to most of us now that a Republican only

0:04:19.960 --> 0:04:25.080
<v Speaker 1>tax plan cannot pass the Senate under current circumstances, and

0:04:25.160 --> 0:04:28.040
<v Speaker 1>that's going to be I think a big time fight.

0:04:28.120 --> 0:04:31.200
<v Speaker 1>I consider that to be something that might happen in

0:04:31.240 --> 0:04:34.400
<v Speaker 1>the first quarter of two eighteen. But people should understand

0:04:34.760 --> 0:04:38.080
<v Speaker 1>that the legislative process and the Senate on taxes is

0:04:38.320 --> 0:04:42.520
<v Speaker 1>very complex. Uh, Steve, you're talking about the likelihood of

0:04:42.520 --> 0:04:48.240
<v Speaker 1>a government shutdown and the likely unwillingness of Republican senators

0:04:48.360 --> 0:04:53.000
<v Speaker 1>and House representatives to pass a bill that does have

0:04:53.839 --> 0:04:56.960
<v Speaker 1>some kind of provision for the while funding. I'm wondering

0:04:57.240 --> 0:05:00.200
<v Speaker 1>why would a government shut down due for the relation

0:05:00.000 --> 0:05:05.440
<v Speaker 1>s ship between GOP senators and congressmen with President Trump?

0:05:05.520 --> 0:05:10.120
<v Speaker 1>Especially as the evident battle between Mitch McConnell and President

0:05:10.160 --> 0:05:13.520
<v Speaker 1>Trump Piazza up. Well, I think it would have more

0:05:13.520 --> 0:05:16.040
<v Speaker 1>of an impact on the relationship, which is already quite

0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:22.920
<v Speaker 1>poor between the Senate Republican Caucus and the President. Um.

0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:25.440
<v Speaker 1>I think that this will have some impact, but not

0:05:25.520 --> 0:05:30.120
<v Speaker 1>a lot on such things as the tax reform possibility,

0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:34.279
<v Speaker 1>some sort of initiative on infrastructure, those kinds of things,

0:05:34.720 --> 0:05:38.080
<v Speaker 1>but they're going to be delayed anyway. What what bothers

0:05:38.080 --> 0:05:41.240
<v Speaker 1>me more is if what I'm saying comes through, we

0:05:41.279 --> 0:05:44.640
<v Speaker 1>have a government shutdown, the President blames the Congress and

0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:47.280
<v Speaker 1>says it's all over the law, you know, that kind

0:05:47.320 --> 0:05:51.960
<v Speaker 1>of stuff, that it will probably endanger him getting anything

0:05:52.040 --> 0:05:56.760
<v Speaker 1>done that he wants to get done, as far as

0:05:56.800 --> 0:06:01.640
<v Speaker 1>sort of a big infrastructure initiative, spending more for defense,

0:06:01.680 --> 0:06:04.000
<v Speaker 1>which I think already is a steep hield to climb.

0:06:04.760 --> 0:06:07.280
<v Speaker 1>All in all, there are three people you ought not

0:06:07.320 --> 0:06:10.640
<v Speaker 1>to make mad in this town. That's the intelligence community

0:06:10.640 --> 0:06:13.240
<v Speaker 1>and he's done that, And it's the FBI and he's

0:06:13.279 --> 0:06:16.479
<v Speaker 1>done that. And the third one is Mitch McDonald Because

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:20.919
<v Speaker 1>only Mr McConnell's desire to have a tax bill to

0:06:21.000 --> 0:06:24.560
<v Speaker 1>help his senators get reelected next year. Only that one

0:06:24.680 --> 0:06:29.360
<v Speaker 1>fact really helps the possibility of a tax bill passing. Steve,

0:06:29.400 --> 0:06:30.800
<v Speaker 1>I just want to break in and just give you

0:06:30.839 --> 0:06:34.520
<v Speaker 1>everyone this headline from Bloomberg that the smartphone maker HTC

0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:37.719
<v Speaker 1>is said to explore strategic options. We'll get more details

0:06:37.800 --> 0:06:40.520
<v Speaker 1>and pass them along, Steve once you to just continue

0:06:40.520 --> 0:06:44.280
<v Speaker 1>because I'm sure you've got ongoing relationships friendships in d C.

0:06:44.520 --> 0:06:49.080
<v Speaker 1>With lawmakers and staffers. What have you heard in their

0:06:49.120 --> 0:06:52.880
<v Speaker 1>reaction to some of the President's comments about the border

0:06:52.960 --> 0:06:57.800
<v Speaker 1>wall and in general about his relationship with the Republican leadership.

0:06:59.240 --> 0:07:02.599
<v Speaker 1>His relationship with the Republican leadership is quite strained. You

0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:07.160
<v Speaker 1>just don't take on a Jeff Flake Senator Flake uh

0:07:07.200 --> 0:07:09.800
<v Speaker 1>and encourage a person to run against him in the

0:07:09.800 --> 0:07:13.000
<v Speaker 1>primary and have a group associated with you raising money

0:07:13.000 --> 0:07:16.680
<v Speaker 1>against him, and make friends with the Republican Senate caucus.

0:07:16.680 --> 0:07:19.960
<v Speaker 1>And you don't do it with with Mr Heller in Nevada.

0:07:20.120 --> 0:07:23.440
<v Speaker 1>So he's got about seven or eight people that he's

0:07:23.520 --> 0:07:28.600
<v Speaker 1>directly made mad. The president has and in private, staff

0:07:28.640 --> 0:07:34.000
<v Speaker 1>simply doesn't know how much real effort the President will

0:07:34.040 --> 0:07:38.840
<v Speaker 1>put into a tax plan or into funding the wall

0:07:39.240 --> 0:07:41.480
<v Speaker 1>will it be sort of like it was in healthcare,

0:07:41.520 --> 0:07:44.280
<v Speaker 1>where ever so often he would talk about where we

0:07:44.320 --> 0:07:48.200
<v Speaker 1>need to get the healthcare bill finished. Um, if we're

0:07:48.240 --> 0:07:49.600
<v Speaker 1>going to get a help, if we're going to get

0:07:49.600 --> 0:07:52.840
<v Speaker 1>a tax reform bill passed by the first quarter of

0:07:52.880 --> 0:07:55.880
<v Speaker 1>this coming year, then the President is going to have

0:07:56.040 --> 0:07:59.360
<v Speaker 1>to devote all of his energy and all of his

0:08:00.400 --> 0:08:03.640
<v Speaker 1>remarks towards that goal. Otherwise there just will not be

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:07.440
<v Speaker 1>the momentum in six when we passed the tax bill, Remember,

0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:11.680
<v Speaker 1>we had Reagan a hundred percent behind it, We had

0:08:11.760 --> 0:08:14.080
<v Speaker 1>Congress that have been negotiating behind the scenes for a

0:08:14.120 --> 0:08:17.520
<v Speaker 1>couple of years behind it, and it was still tough

0:08:17.560 --> 0:08:20.280
<v Speaker 1>to do. Steve Bell, thank you so much for joining

0:08:20.360 --> 0:08:22.880
<v Speaker 1>us and for your insights into this. Steve Bell as

0:08:22.920 --> 0:08:26.720
<v Speaker 1>Senior adviser for the Bipartisan Policy Center, also a former

0:08:26.760 --> 0:08:32.920
<v Speaker 1>Senate Budget Committee staff director for Republican Pete Dominici from six.

0:08:46.080 --> 0:08:49.079
<v Speaker 1>There are a couple of new employment laws that are

0:08:49.120 --> 0:08:52.600
<v Speaker 1>set to take effect in New York City later this year,

0:08:52.760 --> 0:08:55.000
<v Speaker 1>and I'm very interested to learn more about them, because

0:08:55.000 --> 0:08:57.800
<v Speaker 1>somehow they totally flew under my radar, and I'm sure

0:08:57.840 --> 0:08:59.199
<v Speaker 1>that they have a lot of other people as well,

0:08:59.400 --> 0:09:01.760
<v Speaker 1>Ronnie has said Home joins us now. She's a managing

0:09:01.840 --> 0:09:04.360
<v Speaker 1>partner at set Home Law Group, which is based in

0:09:04.400 --> 0:09:07.400
<v Speaker 1>New York, and has been tracking these changes which potentially

0:09:07.480 --> 0:09:12.440
<v Speaker 1>could have some significant effects in particular businesses. So Ronnie,

0:09:12.480 --> 0:09:14.440
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for joining us. Can you just

0:09:14.520 --> 0:09:19.320
<v Speaker 1>first lay out what the main rules are employment rules

0:09:19.320 --> 0:09:22.199
<v Speaker 1>that you're tracking, and what the potential consequences in your

0:09:22.280 --> 0:09:26.360
<v Speaker 1>view will be sure so effective. On Halloween, October thirty

0:09:26.400 --> 0:09:30.400
<v Speaker 1>one interesting day to choose, employers will no longer be

0:09:30.480 --> 0:09:34.400
<v Speaker 1>able to ask about salary history. And the theory behind

0:09:34.440 --> 0:09:38.320
<v Speaker 1>this is that by not asking about salary history, women

0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:41.559
<v Speaker 1>and minorities in particular will fare better. Now, as a

0:09:41.600 --> 0:09:43.480
<v Speaker 1>woman who is a minority, I want us to all

0:09:43.520 --> 0:09:45.520
<v Speaker 1>fare better, but I just don't see how this is

0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:49.080
<v Speaker 1>going to to help us. Um wait, wait, just before

0:09:49.080 --> 0:09:50.680
<v Speaker 1>we go on, So in another word, can you just

0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:53.760
<v Speaker 1>elaborate why do you think that that it won't necessarily

0:09:53.760 --> 0:09:56.160
<v Speaker 1>help the situation? Well, I think it's we need to

0:09:56.240 --> 0:10:00.240
<v Speaker 1>change people's thinking and help them understand how benefit show

0:10:00.280 --> 0:10:02.160
<v Speaker 1>it is to have women in the workplace and minorities

0:10:02.160 --> 0:10:05.520
<v Speaker 1>in the workplace, and by simply not asking someone excuse me,

0:10:05.559 --> 0:10:09.000
<v Speaker 1>how much are you currently making? It doesn't help them

0:10:09.040 --> 0:10:10.880
<v Speaker 1>at all. I mean, for example, if you have no

0:10:10.960 --> 0:10:16.240
<v Speaker 1>intention of hiring a female minority person and you're interviewing them.

0:10:16.280 --> 0:10:18.760
<v Speaker 1>In your head, you're saying, Okay, this job, I'm going

0:10:18.840 --> 0:10:20.880
<v Speaker 1>to be able to spend between eighty and a hundred

0:10:20.880 --> 0:10:25.360
<v Speaker 1>and twenty thousand dollars on a salary in walks a

0:10:25.440 --> 0:10:29.359
<v Speaker 1>female and in walks a white male. And you decide

0:10:29.440 --> 0:10:31.960
<v Speaker 1>that you're going to only pay females and minorities the

0:10:32.000 --> 0:10:35.360
<v Speaker 1>eighty thousand, never having asked a question about their previous

0:10:35.520 --> 0:10:37.760
<v Speaker 1>salary history at all, and in your mind you are

0:10:37.760 --> 0:10:40.680
<v Speaker 1>going to offer this white male a hundred and twenty thousand.

0:10:40.840 --> 0:10:42.120
<v Speaker 1>Can you just give us a sense of what the

0:10:42.120 --> 0:10:44.439
<v Speaker 1>other side of that is and why was it implemented?

0:10:44.480 --> 0:10:47.400
<v Speaker 1>What was the thinking? Uh? Was it just simply that

0:10:47.920 --> 0:10:50.800
<v Speaker 1>because there would be a sort of range, so that

0:10:50.880 --> 0:10:53.520
<v Speaker 1>if somebody walked in and had been paid less than

0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:57.160
<v Speaker 1>their prior job, which studies have shown that sometimes women

0:10:57.200 --> 0:11:00.480
<v Speaker 1>and minorities have been paid less, that if they come in,

0:11:00.800 --> 0:11:02.640
<v Speaker 1>if you have a range, then you have to stick

0:11:02.679 --> 0:11:06.360
<v Speaker 1>with that range. That's exactly it. It's because when you

0:11:06.400 --> 0:11:08.920
<v Speaker 1>are asked what are you currently making if you're a

0:11:08.960 --> 0:11:11.840
<v Speaker 1>female or a minority, are likely making less. So even

0:11:11.840 --> 0:11:15.720
<v Speaker 1>if you obtain a substantial raise, it's still substantially less

0:11:15.720 --> 0:11:18.880
<v Speaker 1>than you would otherwise earn if you're a white male

0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:22.360
<v Speaker 1>in the same position. But again, it's all about the mindset.

0:11:22.480 --> 0:11:25.600
<v Speaker 1>Why not just not have such a large band? How

0:11:25.640 --> 0:11:27.760
<v Speaker 1>about a band of one ten to one twenty in

0:11:27.840 --> 0:11:30.160
<v Speaker 1>your head? I mean I just hired somebody and my

0:11:30.240 --> 0:11:33.560
<v Speaker 1>band was about five thousand dollars. Well, I think also

0:11:33.600 --> 0:11:35.440
<v Speaker 1>you just want to hire the best person. Well, of

0:11:35.480 --> 0:11:37.559
<v Speaker 1>course you do, of course you do. And I think

0:11:37.559 --> 0:11:41.840
<v Speaker 1>the real messages that females and minorities are just as

0:11:41.840 --> 0:11:44.400
<v Speaker 1>great as others. Yeah, I mean I don't think that.

0:11:44.400 --> 0:11:46.520
<v Speaker 1>I I you don't segregate people when they come in

0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:48.240
<v Speaker 1>the door, you know, you go in one interview room

0:11:48.240 --> 0:11:50.720
<v Speaker 1>in another interview room. Of course not. But I think

0:11:50.760 --> 0:11:54.000
<v Speaker 1>that those individuals who are holding back, you know, minorities

0:11:54.000 --> 0:11:57.080
<v Speaker 1>and females aren't going to be hindered simply because they

0:11:57.120 --> 0:12:00.600
<v Speaker 1>can't ask one question. Instead of doing in posing a

0:12:00.640 --> 0:12:03.760
<v Speaker 1>ban on a question help people think better. Well, hold

0:12:03.840 --> 0:12:05.280
<v Speaker 1>on a second, there are a couple of other rules

0:12:05.280 --> 0:12:08.439
<v Speaker 1>that are going into effect as well, at one effects

0:12:08.480 --> 0:12:12.640
<v Speaker 1>fast food workers basically saying, uh that they need more

0:12:12.679 --> 0:12:16.160
<v Speaker 1>advanced notice about their schedules and things can't just be

0:12:16.200 --> 0:12:18.880
<v Speaker 1>shifted on them at the last minute. Then a similar

0:12:18.960 --> 0:12:21.160
<v Speaker 1>type of thing within retail, and that you had a

0:12:21.200 --> 0:12:24.559
<v Speaker 1>similar complaint in theory, I get you know, you get it,

0:12:24.640 --> 0:12:29.840
<v Speaker 1>but it won't actually have the practical effect that was intended.

0:12:30.200 --> 0:12:31.920
<v Speaker 1>Can I just get ask for a little bit of

0:12:31.960 --> 0:12:35.600
<v Speaker 1>history into why these rules are getting implemented? Now? Who

0:12:35.679 --> 0:12:39.280
<v Speaker 1>is behind them and who is the big lobby behind them?

0:12:39.320 --> 0:12:41.440
<v Speaker 1>I guess is my other question? Well, I think you

0:12:41.480 --> 0:12:44.439
<v Speaker 1>know union groups probably if I had to guess, I

0:12:44.440 --> 0:12:47.360
<v Speaker 1>would say, you know, thirty two b JS is partially

0:12:47.520 --> 0:12:49.920
<v Speaker 1>part of this. I think there's um a lot of

0:12:50.440 --> 0:12:53.800
<v Speaker 1>progressive cooperatives for back of lack of a better term,

0:12:53.880 --> 0:12:56.560
<v Speaker 1>that are behind it. I think the reason behind these

0:12:56.640 --> 0:12:59.600
<v Speaker 1>laws are they're good, they're well intentioned. I just don't

0:12:59.640 --> 0:13:03.480
<v Speaker 1>know if the lawmakers had enough foresight to understand how

0:13:03.520 --> 0:13:07.440
<v Speaker 1>this is practically impacting companies. So, if you are working

0:13:07.440 --> 0:13:10.920
<v Speaker 1>in retail as a salesperson not in the executive office,

0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:13.440
<v Speaker 1>or you're working in a fast food chain in the

0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:16.800
<v Speaker 1>same vein, you know at the store, at the restaurant,

0:13:16.920 --> 0:13:20.640
<v Speaker 1>at the franchise. You're likely a low income wage earner,

0:13:21.120 --> 0:13:23.480
<v Speaker 1>and right now you have no way of knowing how

0:13:23.520 --> 0:13:25.880
<v Speaker 1>much you're going to make in a particular week. You

0:13:25.920 --> 0:13:28.760
<v Speaker 1>could have forty hour shift, you could have a twenty

0:13:28.800 --> 0:13:31.760
<v Speaker 1>hour shift. And of course it's difficult to make ends

0:13:31.800 --> 0:13:35.160
<v Speaker 1>meet when you're living like that, paycheck to paycheck and

0:13:35.240 --> 0:13:37.760
<v Speaker 1>not even knowing how steady it will be. So that's

0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:40.880
<v Speaker 1>the reason. The reason is we want to help these

0:13:41.120 --> 0:13:44.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, workers at least know how much they're going

0:13:44.200 --> 0:13:47.320
<v Speaker 1>to earn, because you can't, you know, force them to

0:13:47.320 --> 0:13:49.720
<v Speaker 1>get paid a certain amount, except with minimum wage, of course,

0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:51.840
<v Speaker 1>but no one is telling you you have to employ

0:13:51.880 --> 0:13:54.640
<v Speaker 1>them for fifty hours a week. The law says, if

0:13:54.679 --> 0:13:57.200
<v Speaker 1>you're in fast food, you have to give someone their

0:13:57.200 --> 0:14:00.520
<v Speaker 1>schedule fourteen days in advance, and if you don't, you

0:14:00.559 --> 0:14:03.120
<v Speaker 1>have to pay a premium. Yeah, I have to wonder.

0:14:03.160 --> 0:14:06.560
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if certain retailers and fast food restaurants will

0:14:07.280 --> 0:14:11.960
<v Speaker 1>cut back on that. Maybe their response, you know, running

0:14:11.960 --> 0:14:13.760
<v Speaker 1>I wo just want to get your the last point here,

0:14:13.760 --> 0:14:17.040
<v Speaker 1>which is the Fair Work Week Act. This is about

0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:20.040
<v Speaker 1>on call scheduling. What is that on call scheduling is

0:14:20.080 --> 0:14:22.440
<v Speaker 1>when you it's in the retail space, you call it

0:14:22.520 --> 0:14:24.840
<v Speaker 1>and you say hi, you know, I'm I'm calling in

0:14:24.840 --> 0:14:27.520
<v Speaker 1>to see if there's a job for me today that's

0:14:27.520 --> 0:14:30.200
<v Speaker 1>on call scheduling. You have to make yourself available. I

0:14:30.240 --> 0:14:32.960
<v Speaker 1>think it's a term that came from the union labor

0:14:33.160 --> 0:14:35.720
<v Speaker 1>field where they used to say you have to be ready, willing,

0:14:35.720 --> 0:14:38.200
<v Speaker 1>and able, and he used to do something called shaping.

0:14:38.400 --> 0:14:40.000
<v Speaker 1>It was the same thing. And this is this is

0:14:40.000 --> 0:14:43.480
<v Speaker 1>going to be bad. Correct, This is the no, no more.

0:14:43.600 --> 0:14:46.840
<v Speaker 1>I need to give you the schedule seventy two hours

0:14:46.840 --> 0:14:49.320
<v Speaker 1>in advance if you're a retail employee. Thank you very

0:14:49.400 --> 0:14:52.600
<v Speaker 1>much for being here and enlightening us. Well done. Set

0:14:52.640 --> 0:14:56.400
<v Speaker 1>Home managing partner of set Home Law Group talking about

0:14:56.760 --> 0:14:59.440
<v Speaker 1>three new laws that are going to be put into

0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:03.560
<v Speaker 1>effect that really change the way employers and employees deal

0:15:03.640 --> 0:15:18.000
<v Speaker 1>with each other. Thank you very much. Here a lot

0:15:18.080 --> 0:15:24.160
<v Speaker 1>about big retailers trying to compete with the albatross of Amazon,

0:15:24.240 --> 0:15:29.160
<v Speaker 1>but Costco is perhaps not playing the same game. Here

0:15:29.200 --> 0:15:32.800
<v Speaker 1>to explain its approach and some of the controversy over

0:15:32.880 --> 0:15:35.760
<v Speaker 1>it is Matt Boyle, us retail reporter for Bloomberg News

0:15:35.800 --> 0:15:38.760
<v Speaker 1>who joins us in our Bloomberg eleven three oh studios. Matt,

0:15:38.920 --> 0:15:40.800
<v Speaker 1>can you give us a little bit of a sense

0:15:41.080 --> 0:15:45.200
<v Speaker 1>of why Costco is opting out of this race to

0:15:45.320 --> 0:15:49.640
<v Speaker 1>online sales and what that has meant for its performance. Well,

0:15:49.680 --> 0:15:51.720
<v Speaker 1>it really gets down to their business model. I mean,

0:15:51.760 --> 0:15:53.800
<v Speaker 1>this is a company we've all I'm sure we've all

0:15:53.840 --> 0:15:56.400
<v Speaker 1>shopped there. You know, you walk in, it's a treasure

0:15:56.440 --> 0:15:59.320
<v Speaker 1>home experience. You've got your you know, your big tubs

0:15:59.320 --> 0:16:02.320
<v Speaker 1>of mayo and your paper towels on the outside, and

0:16:02.360 --> 0:16:04.560
<v Speaker 1>you grab those. But then it's all about the stuff

0:16:04.560 --> 0:16:06.240
<v Speaker 1>you find in the middle of the store. You know,

0:16:06.320 --> 0:16:09.320
<v Speaker 1>you could find a margarita maker, you could find a kayak.

0:16:09.400 --> 0:16:11.520
<v Speaker 1>I mean there's stuff. They change the stuff out all

0:16:11.560 --> 0:16:13.880
<v Speaker 1>the time, and a lot of it is tailor made

0:16:13.920 --> 0:16:16.720
<v Speaker 1>us only available at Costco, So they know that people

0:16:16.760 --> 0:16:18.480
<v Speaker 1>are going to be keep going in there for those

0:16:18.520 --> 0:16:21.440
<v Speaker 1>treasure hunt items as well as the bulk purchases of

0:16:21.560 --> 0:16:23.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, the really big tubs of mayo and the

0:16:24.000 --> 0:16:26.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, forty packs of Gillette razors. But that is

0:16:26.600 --> 0:16:30.320
<v Speaker 1>a business model that is not very conducive to selling online,

0:16:30.320 --> 0:16:33.040
<v Speaker 1>particularly the treasure hunt model where your things are changing

0:16:33.360 --> 0:16:36.640
<v Speaker 1>constantly like that, and so for those reasons, Costco has

0:16:36.680 --> 0:16:39.720
<v Speaker 1>felt that, well, our store real estate is so valuable,

0:16:40.240 --> 0:16:41.920
<v Speaker 1>we have so many more areas that we might be

0:16:41.920 --> 0:16:44.480
<v Speaker 1>able to conquer. For example, they just opened in France,

0:16:44.520 --> 0:16:47.720
<v Speaker 1>they just opened in Iceland. They've decided to too, and

0:16:47.760 --> 0:16:49.920
<v Speaker 1>I think wisely thus far, to spend a lot of

0:16:49.960 --> 0:16:53.480
<v Speaker 1>their capital expenditure on just expanding geographically in the US,

0:16:53.560 --> 0:16:57.120
<v Speaker 1>in North America and also internationally, rather than going you know,

0:16:57.200 --> 0:16:59.840
<v Speaker 1>hog wild on the web like other retailers have done.

0:17:00.080 --> 0:17:01.760
<v Speaker 1>So is this going to benefit them? I mean, you know,

0:17:01.880 --> 0:17:04.480
<v Speaker 1>we're raising the issue because everyone seems to be running

0:17:04.520 --> 0:17:07.200
<v Speaker 1>scared from anything that Amazon touches. You've got to remember him.

0:17:07.200 --> 0:17:09.520
<v Speaker 1>I mean, selling online is very it's very hard to

0:17:09.520 --> 0:17:11.960
<v Speaker 1>be possible. Walmart is doing a lot online, but they're

0:17:12.000 --> 0:17:14.080
<v Speaker 1>not making a heck of a lot of money online

0:17:14.280 --> 0:17:16.680
<v Speaker 1>and they're making a lot of noise. They're buying Jet

0:17:17.160 --> 0:17:19.560
<v Speaker 1>and they're doing you know, easy reorder, and had that

0:17:19.640 --> 0:17:23.159
<v Speaker 1>agreement with Google. That then with Google this week, so

0:17:23.200 --> 0:17:26.320
<v Speaker 1>they're now selling on on Google's online shopping mall. But

0:17:26.400 --> 0:17:29.680
<v Speaker 1>it is still extremely hard to make money on these sales.

0:17:29.720 --> 0:17:32.000
<v Speaker 1>You make a lot more money a lot more profits

0:17:32.160 --> 0:17:34.480
<v Speaker 1>in your store, and Costco knows this well, but I

0:17:34.520 --> 0:17:36.720
<v Speaker 1>think that a lot of the retailers, to be fair,

0:17:36.800 --> 0:17:39.919
<v Speaker 1>the Walmarts and the targets of the world, aren't doing

0:17:39.960 --> 0:17:42.600
<v Speaker 1>this for short term profits. When I say this, I

0:17:42.680 --> 0:17:45.600
<v Speaker 1>mean doing it for long terms, right and for long

0:17:45.680 --> 0:17:48.280
<v Speaker 1>terms of weather. They're beefing up their online presence is

0:17:48.280 --> 0:17:51.320
<v Speaker 1>so that they can be a viable competitor to whatever

0:17:51.400 --> 0:17:55.600
<v Speaker 1>Amazon morphs into. And it's sort of the question mark

0:17:55.640 --> 0:17:59.440
<v Speaker 1>around Costco's model. Perhaps it's working now, perhaps it makes

0:17:59.480 --> 0:18:02.760
<v Speaker 1>sense right now, but what happens when the consumer all

0:18:02.840 --> 0:18:04.960
<v Speaker 1>of a sudden gets used to being able to order

0:18:05.040 --> 0:18:07.040
<v Speaker 1>something and just go to the store and pick it

0:18:07.119 --> 0:18:09.720
<v Speaker 1>up and not spend two hours hunting for treasure. That's

0:18:09.760 --> 0:18:11.439
<v Speaker 1>the question we asked, and that's why we thought it

0:18:11.480 --> 0:18:13.920
<v Speaker 1>was timely to do this story right now, because it's

0:18:13.920 --> 0:18:16.760
<v Speaker 1>a fair question. Analysts are starting to ask it, especially

0:18:16.800 --> 0:18:19.480
<v Speaker 1>in the wake of the Amazon whole food steal, where

0:18:19.520 --> 0:18:23.440
<v Speaker 1>you now have Amazon going heavily into grocery and surveys

0:18:23.440 --> 0:18:25.639
<v Speaker 1>have been done. The reason people go to Costco more

0:18:25.680 --> 0:18:27.639
<v Speaker 1>than anything else. I know. I talked about kayaks and

0:18:27.680 --> 0:18:30.760
<v Speaker 1>margarita machines, but people go to Costco for grocery. I

0:18:30.760 --> 0:18:33.120
<v Speaker 1>mean they go there to buy big cuts of meat,

0:18:33.160 --> 0:18:36.160
<v Speaker 1>They go there to buy produce that's fresh and very good.

0:18:36.200 --> 0:18:38.639
<v Speaker 1>They go there to buy wine and cheese and all that,

0:18:38.760 --> 0:18:42.159
<v Speaker 1>all those great items. And now with Amazon buying whole foods,

0:18:42.359 --> 0:18:44.280
<v Speaker 1>people now have a reason. Wait a minute, do I

0:18:44.359 --> 0:18:47.800
<v Speaker 1>need to go to Costco as often? Maybe not? And

0:18:48.160 --> 0:18:51.119
<v Speaker 1>this is where an online offering would really help. But

0:18:51.440 --> 0:18:53.600
<v Speaker 1>thus far Costco has really just kind of done the

0:18:53.600 --> 0:18:56.840
<v Speaker 1>basics online. I was looking at the basics online and

0:18:56.920 --> 0:18:59.800
<v Speaker 1>things like you can buy a shed from Costco for

0:19:00.080 --> 0:19:02.800
<v Speaker 1>teen hundred bucks, but then you can also buy uh,

0:19:02.840 --> 0:19:07.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, a Lenovo laptop for about a thousand bucks

0:19:07.080 --> 0:19:09.120
<v Speaker 1>and then get a two ll rebate. So I mean

0:19:09.119 --> 0:19:11.840
<v Speaker 1>their prices seem to be pretty comparable to what other

0:19:12.359 --> 0:19:15.720
<v Speaker 1>issue is not. The prices are amazing, you know. That's

0:19:15.760 --> 0:19:18.159
<v Speaker 1>why they are so sick. And they got their private

0:19:18.200 --> 0:19:20.760
<v Speaker 1>label brand, Kirkland. Kirkland is a bona fide brand. I

0:19:20.760 --> 0:19:22.600
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't even call it a private label. It is a

0:19:22.640 --> 0:19:25.160
<v Speaker 1>bona fide brand and you could find it another store.

0:19:25.280 --> 0:19:27.879
<v Speaker 1>K I think Kirkland is you know, a real brand

0:19:27.920 --> 0:19:31.000
<v Speaker 1>like a Nike or Tiffany or something like that. So

0:19:31.040 --> 0:19:33.120
<v Speaker 1>the issue is more about what they need to do

0:19:33.240 --> 0:19:35.359
<v Speaker 1>in the long term. Do they need to be spending

0:19:35.359 --> 0:19:37.159
<v Speaker 1>a little bit more. Do they need to be adding

0:19:37.280 --> 0:19:41.280
<v Speaker 1>let's say, a online order pickup desk. And I asked

0:19:41.320 --> 0:19:43.320
<v Speaker 1>the CFL of Costco this he said, and he's answered

0:19:43.359 --> 0:19:46.240
<v Speaker 1>this question many times. He says, Look, our space in

0:19:46.280 --> 0:19:49.000
<v Speaker 1>the store is so valuable. Whatever we put there is

0:19:49.000 --> 0:19:51.840
<v Speaker 1>going to sell so quickly. I'd rather not sit somebody

0:19:51.880 --> 0:19:55.240
<v Speaker 1>behind a desk and just deliver online orders because somebody

0:19:55.280 --> 0:19:57.280
<v Speaker 1>coming in might just grab whatever they ordered online and

0:19:57.320 --> 0:19:59.600
<v Speaker 1>then walk out. Costco doesn't want you walking out. They

0:19:59.600 --> 0:20:02.840
<v Speaker 1>want you wandering around eating food samples, stuff like that.

0:20:03.040 --> 0:20:05.840
<v Speaker 1>So far, does it seem like their sales are accelerating

0:20:05.880 --> 0:20:07.920
<v Speaker 1>or are they starting to see someone? Their sales are

0:20:07.920 --> 0:20:10.119
<v Speaker 1>doing very well. The issue that we've noted and we

0:20:10.119 --> 0:20:12.800
<v Speaker 1>saw in the story is their online sales growth of

0:20:12.840 --> 0:20:17.320
<v Speaker 1>about eleven twelve. It's well beyond Walmart, well beyond Target.

0:20:17.400 --> 0:20:20.920
<v Speaker 1>It's even lower than the broader e commerce market, which

0:20:20.920 --> 0:20:23.359
<v Speaker 1>is growing. And if you can't grow faster than the

0:20:23.400 --> 0:20:25.879
<v Speaker 1>broader market, you know you might need to catch up

0:20:25.920 --> 0:20:28.159
<v Speaker 1>a little bit. But they're in store sales what they

0:20:28.200 --> 0:20:30.320
<v Speaker 1>called the same store sales, which is the key metric

0:20:30.359 --> 0:20:33.879
<v Speaker 1>and retail they're they're doing gangbusters there, you know, five percent,

0:20:34.040 --> 0:20:36.840
<v Speaker 1>six percent, those are numbers that any other retailer would

0:20:36.920 --> 0:20:40.280
<v Speaker 1>kill for right now in the midst of this retail apocalypse. Well,

0:20:40.280 --> 0:20:42.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm just looking at a comparison to Amazon sales, where

0:20:42.680 --> 0:20:45.520
<v Speaker 1>we're talking about about a hundred and fifty billion a

0:20:45.640 --> 0:20:48.040
<v Speaker 1>year right now. The run rate for Costco is about

0:20:48.040 --> 0:20:50.480
<v Speaker 1>a hundred and twenty three billion, So you know there's

0:20:50.520 --> 0:20:54.919
<v Speaker 1>there's some comparable uh business execution. Yeah, they you know,

0:20:55.280 --> 0:20:57.120
<v Speaker 1>they do need to do a little bit more online.

0:20:57.119 --> 0:20:59.080
<v Speaker 1>I think they acknowledge this. I think we'll see more

0:20:59.160 --> 0:21:02.280
<v Speaker 1>from Costco in months ahead online, but you know, culturally,

0:21:02.359 --> 0:21:04.919
<v Speaker 1>it's just something that they're a bit resistant to. Shares

0:21:04.920 --> 0:21:10.080
<v Speaker 1>a Costco excuse me, shares a Costco down stock is

0:21:10.160 --> 0:21:12.400
<v Speaker 1>up three and a quarter percent so far this year.

0:21:12.720 --> 0:21:14.600
<v Speaker 1>Thanks very much for being with us. Always a pleasure,

0:21:14.600 --> 0:21:28.640
<v Speaker 1>Matt Boyle. I want to bring in Stephen Englander, head

0:21:28.640 --> 0:21:32.040
<v Speaker 1>of research and strategy at Rafiki Capital Management. He was

0:21:32.080 --> 0:21:35.960
<v Speaker 1>formerly uh the head of G ten f X strategy

0:21:35.960 --> 0:21:39.440
<v Speaker 1>at City Group, and Stephen joins us now Stephen, what

0:21:39.520 --> 0:21:43.760
<v Speaker 1>do you make of this ongoing trade, especially uh, the

0:21:43.840 --> 0:21:46.960
<v Speaker 1>idea that a lot of hedge funds are doubling down,

0:21:47.240 --> 0:21:51.240
<v Speaker 1>that the US dollar will continue to weaken. Good morning,

0:21:51.320 --> 0:21:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Lisa and Tim. Um. Look, you know, I think that

0:21:55.359 --> 0:21:59.600
<v Speaker 1>a lot of things are changing here. In particular, UM,

0:21:59.640 --> 0:22:04.960
<v Speaker 1>what's different. Setting aside the the you know, Trump election victory, UM,

0:22:05.000 --> 0:22:07.399
<v Speaker 1>which is mostly fated from the market, I think the

0:22:07.720 --> 0:22:11.720
<v Speaker 1>big surprise is how persistent disinflationary shocks are at this

0:22:11.760 --> 0:22:17.240
<v Speaker 1>stage of the business cycle, and the market is really debating, um,

0:22:17.400 --> 0:22:19.760
<v Speaker 1>how much necessity there is of the set to keep

0:22:19.840 --> 0:22:22.480
<v Speaker 1>raising rates and how successful they're going to be at

0:22:22.520 --> 0:22:26.359
<v Speaker 1>hitting their two percent inflation target. I think, by contrast,

0:22:26.480 --> 0:22:29.760
<v Speaker 1>the surprise in Europe is just how well the European economy,

0:22:29.760 --> 0:22:33.200
<v Speaker 1>how fast the unemployment trade is dropping, um, how quickly

0:22:33.240 --> 0:22:36.919
<v Speaker 1>things are improving there. And a lot of European officials,

0:22:36.960 --> 0:22:40.880
<v Speaker 1>not necessarily Mario Draggy, but others on the governing council,

0:22:41.040 --> 0:22:44.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, the the Bundestank representative for example, are looking

0:22:44.680 --> 0:22:47.719
<v Speaker 1>at this and saying, why do we still have um

0:22:48.080 --> 0:22:52.520
<v Speaker 1>monetary policy settings at emergency measures? And it's this big

0:22:52.560 --> 0:22:56.880
<v Speaker 1>long term question mark about US inflation and the beginning

0:22:56.960 --> 0:23:00.200
<v Speaker 1>of this shift in e c B. I think it's

0:23:00.320 --> 0:23:03.359
<v Speaker 1>moving markets more than the Trump trade. Well, you know, Steve,

0:23:03.359 --> 0:23:05.199
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if you could just explain a little bit

0:23:05.240 --> 0:23:08.800
<v Speaker 1>about what the what value you know, comes from let's say,

0:23:08.840 --> 0:23:12.239
<v Speaker 1>these confabs like the Jackson Hall, Wyoming meeting and so on.

0:23:12.280 --> 0:23:15.400
<v Speaker 1>I mean, it seems as though many investors they're looking

0:23:15.400 --> 0:23:17.880
<v Speaker 1>at the details of their investments. They're not necessary they've

0:23:17.880 --> 0:23:21.200
<v Speaker 1>done with this big macro trade because we know what

0:23:21.640 --> 0:23:25.040
<v Speaker 1>the future is. They're gonna unwind the balance sheet, and

0:23:25.080 --> 0:23:26.880
<v Speaker 1>then we wait for Mario drag you to figure out

0:23:26.880 --> 0:23:29.920
<v Speaker 1>when they're going to stop buying bonds. Well, I think

0:23:29.960 --> 0:23:32.800
<v Speaker 1>that they're waiting for to see if there's any big surprise.

0:23:32.960 --> 0:23:36.520
<v Speaker 1>Quite often, what the market reaction that you see after

0:23:36.600 --> 0:23:38.720
<v Speaker 1>these events, you know, and it can be even the

0:23:38.760 --> 0:23:42.439
<v Speaker 1>Neffluence meeting or FOMC minutes is not whether or not

0:23:42.520 --> 0:23:47.000
<v Speaker 1>they surprised, but that investors have been holding back from

0:23:47.000 --> 0:23:49.639
<v Speaker 1>putting on a position or taking off a position because

0:23:49.640 --> 0:23:53.320
<v Speaker 1>they um really, I mean, but Stephen, really, you you

0:23:53.680 --> 0:23:58.120
<v Speaker 1>know investors who will wait based on what they hear

0:23:58.520 --> 0:24:02.239
<v Speaker 1>from a central bank. No, no, but the if you

0:24:02.280 --> 0:24:05.480
<v Speaker 1>think that the uh, there's a lot of uncertainty over

0:24:05.520 --> 0:24:09.000
<v Speaker 1>the next three days. You may ask yourself, why make

0:24:09.040 --> 0:24:11.199
<v Speaker 1>an investment today when I can do it on Monday,

0:24:11.200 --> 0:24:13.760
<v Speaker 1>when this is all passed, and you know, if everything

0:24:13.760 --> 0:24:17.920
<v Speaker 1>goes according to plan perfectly fine. But if they throw

0:24:17.960 --> 0:24:21.159
<v Speaker 1>a wrench into the system, you know I will have

0:24:21.200 --> 0:24:24.680
<v Speaker 1>my powder dry to react accordingly, and many investors behave

0:24:24.760 --> 0:24:28.560
<v Speaker 1>that way, Stephen. I wanted to touch what you were

0:24:29.320 --> 0:24:33.040
<v Speaker 1>talking about, which is that there have been disinflationary surprises

0:24:33.119 --> 0:24:35.880
<v Speaker 1>in the US or the economic data hasn't been as

0:24:35.920 --> 0:24:39.440
<v Speaker 1>good as many people have been expecting, whereas in Europe

0:24:39.440 --> 0:24:43.800
<v Speaker 1>there have been a number of positive surprises. At this point,

0:24:43.840 --> 0:24:46.760
<v Speaker 1>given where earnings have been in the past season, which

0:24:46.760 --> 0:24:50.320
<v Speaker 1>have actually been pretty good. Do you think that the

0:24:50.359 --> 0:24:55.040
<v Speaker 1>bulk of the disinflationary surprises are behind us in the US?

0:24:56.000 --> 0:24:59.160
<v Speaker 1>Not necessarily, you know, one that's it's a very difficult

0:24:59.200 --> 0:25:04.040
<v Speaker 1>question because these are very difficult trends to unravel. But

0:25:04.160 --> 0:25:07.840
<v Speaker 1>I think what we're seeing is that the disinflationary surprises

0:25:07.880 --> 0:25:11.560
<v Speaker 1>are not caused by um the types of demand shocks

0:25:11.600 --> 0:25:13.919
<v Speaker 1>like we have when we have a recession and the

0:25:13.960 --> 0:25:19.120
<v Speaker 1>output falls on unemployment rises Um, they're being caused by

0:25:19.200 --> 0:25:24.080
<v Speaker 1>technological innovation. And the idea that that innovation or the

0:25:24.119 --> 0:25:26.840
<v Speaker 1>impact of that innovation would be concentrated in a three

0:25:26.920 --> 0:25:31.639
<v Speaker 1>or four month period and then stop, I think is unlikely.

0:25:31.800 --> 0:25:33.879
<v Speaker 1>So I think it's quite possible that we're going to

0:25:33.920 --> 0:25:38.680
<v Speaker 1>continue to see these shocks UH related to innovation, largely

0:25:38.800 --> 0:25:44.720
<v Speaker 1>related to our ability to use capital more efficiently. And um,

0:25:44.760 --> 0:25:46.720
<v Speaker 1>it's going to be a battle. The labor market is

0:25:46.720 --> 0:25:49.520
<v Speaker 1>tighter than it used to be. But on the other hand,

0:25:49.560 --> 0:25:51.359
<v Speaker 1>I think that these shocks are are going to be

0:25:51.400 --> 0:25:53.639
<v Speaker 1>with us for some time. All right, So what what

0:25:53.720 --> 0:25:56.119
<v Speaker 1>kinds of shocks are you talking about? What would be

0:25:56.119 --> 0:25:59.760
<v Speaker 1>an example, Well, for example, the if you think of

0:26:00.119 --> 0:26:04.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, the ride sharing, if you think of apartments sharing, UM,

0:26:05.200 --> 0:26:09.480
<v Speaker 1>tremendous economies of scale in all of these adventures, the

0:26:09.480 --> 0:26:14.840
<v Speaker 1>ability to use capital efficiently, and that puts downward pressure

0:26:14.960 --> 0:26:18.160
<v Speaker 1>on you know, these traditional sources you know, to hotels,

0:26:18.160 --> 0:26:21.000
<v Speaker 1>whether taxis and so on, and we're seeing this in

0:26:21.080 --> 0:26:23.760
<v Speaker 1>many areas. All right, we're gonna leave it there, thanks

0:26:23.880 --> 0:26:26.480
<v Speaker 1>very much. As Stephen england Or, he is the head

0:26:26.520 --> 0:26:31.080
<v Speaker 1>of research and Strategy at Rafiki Capital Management, based in

0:26:31.160 --> 0:26:36.639
<v Speaker 1>New York. They are a cross asset hedge fund. Thanks

0:26:36.640 --> 0:26:39.280
<v Speaker 1>for listening to the Bloomberg P and L podcast. You

0:26:39.320 --> 0:26:43.080
<v Speaker 1>can subscribe and listen to interviews at Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:26:43.200 --> 0:26:46.680
<v Speaker 1>or whatever podcast platform you prefer. I'm pim Fox. I'm

0:26:46.720 --> 0:26:50.280
<v Speaker 1>on Twitter at pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at Lisa

0:26:50.280 --> 0:26:53.439
<v Speaker 1>abramowits one before the podcast. You can always catch us

0:26:53.480 --> 0:27:02.000
<v Speaker 1>worldwide on Bloomberg Radio