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 We're
Speaker 1: gonna rip up the script here right now. We've got
Speaker 1: a wonderful expert, a true expert with ubs on emerging markets.
Speaker 1: But I'm going to go right to China and the
Speaker 1: domestic China Jeff Dennis, that you know, in their predilection
Speaker 1: towards reminiscence of a stock operator, they seem to like
Speaker 1: their investment fads within China, and China has a very
Speaker 1: large bitcoin interest, doesn't. Yes, yes, it does a pretty
Speaker 1: large bitcoin interest. UM. I think the fad with investment
Speaker 1: in China is though fading gradually over time. Your listeners
Speaker 1: will know that pretty much half the economy at one
Speaker 1: stage was investment that is starting to come lower. The
Speaker 1: economy in China is beginning to rebalance there for away
Speaker 1: from investment, back towards consumer I know, back towards towards
Speaker 1: consumer spending, towards services and less manufacturing. And I think
Speaker 1: that's a long term trend. So although they've had this
Speaker 1: love affair with investment, and I'm sure bitcoin is part
Speaker 1: of that. UM, the long term fate, so to speak,
Speaker 1: outlook for the Chinese economy is going to be much
Speaker 1: more driven by the resilience and the growth of consumer
Speaker 1: spending as as Chinese people, as indeed in a lot
Speaker 1: of countries, get wealthier. Jeff, I'm going to take a
Speaker 1: leaf from my colleagues book. Tom is always interested in
Speaker 1: where the money flows, right, where does it go? Because
Speaker 1: there's smart money out there, and it seems as though
Speaker 1: there's a lot of money that's going into Asia, but
Speaker 1: it's not going into Japan and it's not going into
Speaker 1: exchange traded funds. Is that accurate? And what does that
Speaker 1: tell you? Um? I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. First
Speaker 1: of all, of course, the Japanese market has been very
Speaker 1: strong recently, and it's a market that we've we've favored
Speaker 1: our strategies to favor that at the global level. UM.
Speaker 1: And although we've seen tremendous inflow into emerging market funds
Speaker 1: this year over fifty five billion dollars, which is pretty
Speaker 1: much the best year we've ever had except two thousand
Speaker 1: and ten UM. About seventy of that is still gone
Speaker 1: through the e t f UM channel, so to speak.
Speaker 1: So let's call that twelve billion dollars has gone to
Speaker 1: I've gone into active em funds, which is certainly a
Speaker 1: big improvement in recent years. And it's very interesting because
Speaker 1: this year has been so disparate in terms of performance.
Speaker 1: Have you've been long technology and long growth, you've done
Speaker 1: very well. And if you've gone more the value way
Speaker 1: towards the commodity sectors energy and materials and also financials,
Speaker 1: you've done much less well. So it has been a
Speaker 1: good year for active managers. But UM money has gone
Speaker 1: to Asia, has gone to Japan, but above all, in
Speaker 1: my world this year money has gone to Asian technology,
Speaker 1: which is of course blown the doors off in terms
Speaker 1: of price performance. Does that mean that you believe it
Speaker 1: will continue or is it time to rotate financial stocks?
Speaker 1: For example the regulation in the United States. We've got
Speaker 1: an interview with Lloyd blank Find of Golment Sex coming up.
Speaker 1: We we think the story is much more plain villa.
Speaker 1: In terms of financials, we've about over fifty of the
Speaker 1: market in them. The index is financials and Technology so
Speaker 1: you've got to make a relative bet about them. We
Speaker 1: are arguing to our investors now that you should be
Speaker 1: a little bit more careful about being long technology. It's
Speaker 1: not my sively expensive, it's just very, very over owned.
Speaker 1: And we want people to rotate a bit more into financials,
Speaker 1: where you begin to see US colity improvements begin, see
Speaker 1: loans growth cycles beginning to pick up. And indeed, if
Speaker 1: you are going to see a modest rise in bond
Speaker 1: deals around the world in two thousand nineteen, which is
Speaker 1: all cool, you may even have a bit of an
Speaker 1: interest margin story in financials as well. I mean, I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm looking, folks, as the way you do this in
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg you got to w E I go and
Speaker 1: it's got so much wonderful information and then you can
Speaker 1: currency adjust. Let's adjust this. I don't even know what
Speaker 1: this exchange is. The whole cheat men's stock market. I'm
Speaker 1: guessing Vietnam very and you're still using w E I.
Speaker 1: You don't do the launch launchpad. You know more than
Speaker 1: I do. But I'm looking at the whole cheatman stock
Speaker 1: market up dollar based. Every single person Jeff Dennis and
Speaker 1: the Jeff Dennis world knows these puppies revert to the mean.
Speaker 1: Is there a trend there that's discernible? Um? I mean,
Speaker 1: first of all, for upside in Vietnam, which is a
Speaker 1: frontier market according to the index provider, is actually not
Speaker 1: wildly out of line. It's not wildly strong. China is
Speaker 1: above the Hong Kong China Enterprise Index, which is the
Speaker 1: way we look at China in terms of foreign investment.
Speaker 1: Career has been very strong. You've seen some tremendous games
Speaker 1: this year. The really important thing has happened in emerging
Speaker 1: markets this year. You've seen a sharp drop in the dollar,
Speaker 1: You've seen a nice rebounded commodity price, you've seen a
Speaker 1: boom in the technology sector. And you've seen a consequence
Speaker 1: of all of that, or or consequence of some of that,
Speaker 1: you've had a really big explosion of earnings growth in them,
Speaker 1: which looks like it's going to be well north of
Speaker 1: growth this year, best year since two thousand and ten.
Speaker 1: So although EM has done very well this year, it
Speaker 1: is not actually got that much more expensive because the
Speaker 1: earning story has been very good. So the issue is
Speaker 1: if EM has got a little richer and the valuations
Speaker 1: are somewhat high, does the cost of capital stay low
Speaker 1: du bon less say low to justify those moves. So
Speaker 1: we're not worried that some of these markets are a
Speaker 1: it's really been broadly justified by a very strong recovery
Speaker 1: and earnings growth. Well, let's pick up on something that
Speaker 1: time focused on, having to do with dollar denominated returns.
Speaker 1: You think the dollar is going to remain weak or
Speaker 1: get weaker. Our view is the dollar will go down
Speaker 1: again in two thousand and eighteen, not as much as
Speaker 1: it's gone down this year. We've got the dollar euro
Speaker 1: ending two thousand and eighteen at one five. It's about
Speaker 1: one eighteen today, so nothing, not as big a move
Speaker 1: as as um as this year. What is interesting is,
Speaker 1: although the dollar has been weak this year, emerging mark
Speaker 1: currencies have not gone up that much against the dollar.
Speaker 1: We've gone up about four percent, whereas dollars gone down
Speaker 1: a long way against the euro. But the bottom line is,
Speaker 1: even if you don't get much translation effect for EM
Speaker 1: returns because the dollar is is that week against some
Speaker 1: of these EM currencies, what you get is when the
Speaker 1: dollar goes down to liquidity comes out of the US
Speaker 1: and chases yield and chases risk overseas so you've got
Speaker 1: a very beneficial uidity effect. And if the dollar goes
Speaker 1: down again next year, which is the U B S cool,
Speaker 1: that liquidity is going to continue at the margin to
Speaker 1: come towards em and it's going to give us a
Speaker 1: decent year again next year. Jeff Dennis with the UBS
Speaker 1: right now on oil, And let me just get this
Speaker 1: out of the way. We're not going to send out
Speaker 1: to you the Short Report, and it's gorgeous venusia on
Speaker 1: veils and pistons and pumps, because we protect the copyright
Speaker 1: of our guests. Contact Mr Short when he's not watching
Speaker 1: the Tenant one Philadelphia Eagles. Stephen, good morning, Good morning.
Speaker 1: What is the distinctive feature here at the top of
Speaker 1: the home on the range. We're right up against the
Speaker 1: range on w T I in Brent. What's the thing
Speaker 1: you're watching as we hit this range peak right now?
Speaker 1: It's that big magical sixty number. There's nothing special about it, Tom,
Speaker 1: It's just the fact that it's a psychological number. The
Speaker 1: next handle in the iteration. But to that point, we're
Speaker 1: getting up and we're pushing up eight dollars. Momentum is
Speaker 1: starting to stall, and in fact, some of the technical indicators,
Speaker 1: momentum oscillators so forth indicate that the market has peaked,
Speaker 1: at least for a short term. That is to say,
Speaker 1: we did get the announcement, Uh not unexpected that we're
Speaker 1: going to get the extension with OPEC and the quotas
Speaker 1: all right now. There really isn't any kind of follow
Speaker 1: through on the NOMI strikes. This question came up like
Speaker 1: four times today. Does Vienna matter to American oil analysis? Uh? No,
Speaker 1: it's actually it's an excellent point. We essentially for the
Speaker 1: past ten years have I had a fiber caded markets
Speaker 1: in that the US now becoming a powerhouse with regard
Speaker 1: to its own entry production and becoming a significant exporter
Speaker 1: on the refined products and a burgeoning exporter in the
Speaker 1: crudel market. Essentially, we're having two different market areas here.
Speaker 1: So you have the United States, North America essentially Canada
Speaker 1: and the United States. Unfortunately Mexico, given their infrastructure issues,
Speaker 1: is not part of that. But and then you have,
Speaker 1: of course the global market and the growth with Asian refiners.
Speaker 1: Pim Fox were here by pause a listener in London,
Speaker 1: Brandon emails in wait. The eagles are ten and one
Speaker 1: question mark best Inlite. Question Mark, thank you for listening
Speaker 1: on Radio London this morning. Absolutely, we're here in Philadelphia,
Speaker 1: as shocked as anyone that about anyone that sounds like
Speaker 1: you're from Philadelphia A Steven. I want to put you
Speaker 1: back on track here having to do with oil and
Speaker 1: and perhaps something that I know I missed over the weekend.
Speaker 1: On Sunday, there was a big conclave in Saudi Arabia. UH,
Speaker 1: the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salmon. He brought together forty
Speaker 1: other islam Islamic countries and they are in a agreement
Speaker 1: of a counter terrorism alliance. I'm wondering if you could
Speaker 1: just speak about that and the calls by the Crown
Speaker 1: Prince to introduce what he describes as a more moderate
Speaker 1: form of Islam into Saudi Arabia and whether that will
Speaker 1: in some way change the dynamic of you know, Iran
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia, because we'll get the geopolitics in a second. Yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 1: yeah him, And we essentially saw back when the bear
Speaker 1: market in oil began, it was prompted by Saudi Arabia's
Speaker 1: refusal to take oil off of the market. UH. And
Speaker 1: that had and three Thanksgivings ago when A ministers met
Speaker 1: indianna Um. What was left on set is the previous
Speaker 1: Monday UH back in Vienna, the West sat down with
Speaker 1: Iran with reguards to the nuclear ambitions of Turan, and
Speaker 1: Tahurran got up and walked away from the table. UH.
Speaker 1: That simply, in my estimation, UH prompted Saudi Arabia to
Speaker 1: go into an economic warfare with with Iran, and hence
Speaker 1: we had oil plunge from seventy five dollars down to
Speaker 1: about twenty five dollars a barrel. However, shortly thereafter be
Speaker 1: not exacquiesced and struck a deal with Iran. So that
Speaker 1: kind of put a Saudi Arabia's plans on hold, but
Speaker 1: certainly with the growing tension UH with a Saudi Arabia
Speaker 1: and Guitar essentially pushing potentially Quitar into Iran's arms, right
Speaker 1: because Iran and Qatar were not invited to this summit. Yeah, exactly. So,
Speaker 1: So it's the age old soony shea ripped within Opec UH,
Speaker 1: and that is certainly the black Swan event out there
Speaker 1: for the new year. All right, So if that's the
Speaker 1: black Swan, how would you trade that You're at crewe
Speaker 1: to fifty seven and change right now. Absolutely, I'm yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that we are on the top of the
Speaker 1: range at this point. Uh. This is a level high
Speaker 1: fifties for North American producers, mid sixties, uh, for the
Speaker 1: global producers. Opportunities to hedge. And what what you always
Speaker 1: want to look at, guys, is who's been doing the buying,
Speaker 1: who's been doing the selling? And right now the buyer
Speaker 1: has been a speculator Wall Street very short term view.
Speaker 1: More importantly, it's he's been doing the seller. To keep
Speaker 1: in mind that a crude all producer has to sell.
Speaker 1: He's the only one who has to sell his barrel.
Speaker 1: And we look at the hedging activity, we're looking at
Speaker 1: hedging at an all time high at these levels. Yes, well,
Speaker 1: that's a one way that you're you're predicting lower right, Uh, yeah,
Speaker 1: I think we're at there. I think we are are
Speaker 1: really pushing up against the top of the market, and
Speaker 1: I would expect to see moderation uh into the new year. Okay,
Speaker 1: but why don't we go to Stephen short barrel or
Speaker 1: whatever you're predicting a year ago? I mean, is is
Speaker 1: it just because demand is kicked in to put a
Speaker 1: floor under the range. Yeah, we're essentially you know, we
Speaker 1: we yell yoed in between that that low forty dollar range,
Speaker 1: mid fifty dollar range over the past year. Uh. Certainly
Speaker 1: we've had a significant rally UH in the market or
Speaker 1: fall since post Harvey. Actually uh, and then you had
Speaker 1: to disconnect, um to be expected between the Brent market
Speaker 1: and the oil market given the impact that they had
Speaker 1: on the storms had on logistics in North America. So
Speaker 1: at this point, yes, there there is demand. But let's
Speaker 1: keep in mind also that speculators have certainly come into
Speaker 1: the market recently. For the latest update from the c FPC,
Speaker 1: Wall Street is now sitting on already six week high
Speaker 1: in their long position UH, and they've cut their short
Speaker 1: position to a thirty week glow. So certainly when you're
Speaker 1: cutting your short position, you're buying back the market, and
Speaker 1: that certainly has been in impetus to some of the
Speaker 1: strength in the market. Steven S, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: The short report greatly appreciated. Ashwin Alan Carr joins us.
Speaker 1: He is, of course, said right, Jannis Henderson, Global Asset
Speaker 1: Allocation and Risk Management. And you know Ashwin, Tom during
Speaker 1: the break, we were talking about how fear and emotion
Speaker 1: can change the way you trade risk. And you mentioned
Speaker 1: something earlier that I just want you to maybe expand
Speaker 1: on having to do with people that are not experts
Speaker 1: or veterans of trading risk now participating in this market.
Speaker 1: Could they be the weak link where things go bad?
Speaker 1: I think you're exactly right. I think they because they're
Speaker 1: not experienced. If fear is going to set in, it's
Speaker 1: going to set in first with those who are uncomfortable
Speaker 1: or exploring an unknown territory. And there are many, many investors,
Speaker 1: from very risk averse institutional investors to even retail investors
Speaker 1: who have jumped on this bandwagon of selling volatility, whether
Speaker 1: it be interest rate volatility, whether it be currency volatility,
Speaker 1: whether it be equity volatility, the first sign of stress.
Speaker 1: Who are the first people to jump off the train?
Speaker 1: It's those who are not who are inexperienced, who haven't
Speaker 1: gone through these ebbs and flows before. So that is
Speaker 1: the weak link. UM that link drops, the whole chain
Speaker 1: is going to get impacted. UM. This is not only
Speaker 1: going to impact volatility levels, this will also impact the
Speaker 1: flattening we see in the term structure of interest rates UM.
Speaker 1: So those holders and everyone is moving into the long
Speaker 1: end of the curve um. Risk comes back term premium
Speaker 1: by definition must come back term structure. Stephens. One of
Speaker 1: the biggest crowds today is long the long end of
Speaker 1: the curve um and underweight the short end of the
Speaker 1: What happens when that reverses, We'll have to see. I
Speaker 1: want to rip up the script or ash and I
Speaker 1: don't want to use in trouble with Mr gross or
Speaker 1: with a general council of Janice Anderson. But I've got
Speaker 1: to ask with your mathematics about the auction process, the
Speaker 1: bid asque process of bitcoin. We've all seen this before.
Speaker 1: Market pros are like, how many times have we been
Speaker 1: down this road? And so much of this is not
Speaker 1: only the mystery of who's on the bid and who's
Speaker 1: on the asked, but the small set of people or institutions.
Speaker 1: Do I have that right? Do you exactly have that right?
Speaker 1: That bitcoin? A lot of people, in my opinion, are
Speaker 1: misinterpreting the bitcoin as the block chain. The blockchain has
Speaker 1: tremendous value to it because it's a ledger um. It's
Speaker 1: a real time authentic um apparently bulletproof ledger, distributed ledger.
Speaker 1: It's a distributed ledger um. The bitcoin, however, is just
Speaker 1: one key to that ledger. There are many cryptocurrencies, there's
Speaker 1: many keys to the that that vault that the blockchain provides.
Speaker 1: Um So, Bitcoin by itself, it's not clear what value
Speaker 1: it has. It's very clear the blockchain has tremendous value.
Speaker 1: You the blockchain is a game changer, but bitcoin is
Speaker 1: just one key to that chain. Um So, people should
Speaker 1: be wary of bitcoin. I don't believe bitcoin presents systemic
Speaker 1: risk for exactly the reasons you said, Tom right that
Speaker 1: a small group of people who are participating, um so,
Speaker 1: it's not a systemic event. But seeing me is going
Speaker 1: to launch futures on bitcoin. Um as more and more
Speaker 1: people have access to cryptocurrencies, and these people, once again
Speaker 1: are inexperience. They're not technologists, they don't really understand truly
Speaker 1: the intricacies of what a cryptocurrency are. Just like the
Speaker 1: inexperienced people who are selling volatility today. It creates a
Speaker 1: dangerous recipe. This has been hugely valuable actually occur with
Speaker 1: us with Janis Henderson, Thank you so much. The single
Speaker 1: best essay of the day, and Marvin good Friend has
Speaker 1: been Mr Emmons of Intellectists of course for years at
Speaker 1: Pimco as well. Ben, I'm going to go right to
Speaker 1: the punchline, which is, with Mr good Friend coming on,
Speaker 1: it makes the Stanley Fisher's slot, the vice chair slot,
Speaker 1: that much more important. How does it change the who
Speaker 1: of the vice chair? Hi, good morning, Tolum, Thanks for
Speaker 1: having me. Um, Well, it changes because good friends. You know,
Speaker 1: as you've been described montros econumnists, you know that vice
Speaker 1: chair is really the person that brings it all in
Speaker 1: balance right against the others and um, you know sort
Speaker 1: of so that is an important critical boymans. So if
Speaker 1: that would be someone was also a more monitors view
Speaker 1: of fat policy, then we really are shifting next year.
Speaker 1: This is almost like the Supreme Court in that I
Speaker 1: guess if you get five to four monitors versus Keynesian,
Speaker 1: that's a big deal. How close equivalent is the f
Speaker 1: O m C process to a five four Supreme Court?
Speaker 1: Either way? Yeah, I think it's changing. My sense from
Speaker 1: this is that the you know, with power coming on
Speaker 1: this chair, that we are seeing somewhat of a shift
Speaker 1: of the agenda. At least, you know, there's there's a
Speaker 1: focus on growth. I thought that testimony that power was
Speaker 1: emphasizing that this is my interpretation. So I think we
Speaker 1: are you know, as you described the Supreme Court's way,
Speaker 1: like yeah, you get this balance of different people on
Speaker 1: the board. You know, it's just expressing your view about
Speaker 1: the economy in a different way than before. The change
Speaker 1: in view that I think is the f has followed
Speaker 1: the law of the last number of years, maybe shifting.
Speaker 1: It may not be pure monitors, but it's that has
Speaker 1: a certain tone in there. But then I just want
Speaker 1: to follow up on what you said having to do
Speaker 1: with with growth, as if the current makeup of the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve is not focused on growth, it seems to
Speaker 1: be doing everything they can in order to maintain growth,
Speaker 1: whether it's you know, maintaining that nice big balance sheet
Speaker 1: although the runoff is beginning, or accommodative interest rates now
Speaker 1: that's rooping. I mean, it's it's it's it's not like
Speaker 1: they actually are adverse to growth. But I think the
Speaker 1: point about it is more it is is that you know,
Speaker 1: we're a full employment on air and that's sort of
Speaker 1: the conclusion. We know inflation remains on the target, but
Speaker 1: you know what's missing has been growth, really right, I mean,
Speaker 1: we have been you know, two percentage sort of growth,
Speaker 1: so that the way the fat can stimulate that is
Speaker 1: really about this coordination with the government right of what
Speaker 1: the type of reforms need to take place, whether it's
Speaker 1: through regulation or labor market reforms, in order to get
Speaker 1: the growth really back on track. I think that's the
Speaker 1: key critical element which came It was a lot of
Speaker 1: that discussion in the Powell testimony. I think that's that's
Speaker 1: the change here. I mean, obviously, low interest rates have
Speaker 1: stimulated the economy to an extent, but not to degree
Speaker 1: that you would have expected that would have happened normally, right,
Speaker 1: that growth would have rebound aboff trend that only has
Speaker 1: happened temporarily two and two fourteen. So really looking at
Speaker 1: something I think the Feathers focused on working with the
Speaker 1: government on the right amount of reforms in labor market
Speaker 1: and bank regulation. You're bringing a smile to to Tom's
Speaker 1: to Tom's face here, yeah, I'm glad to hear that,
Speaker 1: because you know, it would be great if it actually
Speaker 1: works right And as of course, yeah that actually you know,
Speaker 1: if those those are difficult words when you're talking about
Speaker 1: the future of the economy, I just want to post
Speaker 1: you one one question here having to do with this
Speaker 1: appointment and growth is blowing a hole in the federal deficit?
Speaker 1: Is that a way to do this? Yeah? And so
Speaker 1: there's a point about that that needed that deficits and
Speaker 1: recession or closely closely links, right, I mean that it's
Speaker 1: been the pass like that before. Right. That's that's critical
Speaker 1: of course, Like how can the depth shit that you
Speaker 1: increase really generators growth that avoid the recession? Right? That
Speaker 1: that's what we're going to be challenged with. You know,
Speaker 1: the the yuker flattening that we've had this year could
Speaker 1: be interpreted shot shot that you know, it is not
Speaker 1: a streaming price in the yuker for the deficit rater.
Speaker 1: The market interprets the increases the deficit as a as
Speaker 1: an probability of a recession increasing over the number of
Speaker 1: next number of years. That's an opposing view to the
Speaker 1: point east that we're getting now on the board. Right.
Speaker 1: That's with this more GDP focus, I want to get
Speaker 1: the phrases right here as we go to the nomination process,
Speaker 1: and what I would suggest will be important scrutiny of
Speaker 1: Professor good Friend. You keep using the word monitorius. Marvin
Speaker 1: good Friend is out of Union College connected a good
Speaker 1: morning Mohawk Valley and Brown University, which is the land
Speaker 1: of Bill Pool. I mean huge influence decades ago. The
Speaker 1: former president of the St. Louis FED. Is Marvin good
Speaker 1: Friend a monitoriust like M one, M two, M three
Speaker 1: and Mr Pool? Or is he a deaf kind of
Speaker 1: moderist in a modern age? So I think the monterist
Speaker 1: idea of that is that you and referring to his
Speaker 1: paper at the Kansas Fat where he was focused on,
Speaker 1: you know, taking away the lower zero bounds because that's
Speaker 1: a constraint of multipolicy. Um. You know, that speaks to
Speaker 1: the view about price stability more thans opposed to the
Speaker 1: target right. And I think that idea is about that
Speaker 1: that the ECB that has I think from that perspective
Speaker 1: of monsters view that Monterrey transmission works better on our
Speaker 1: price stability than then this target right because it sets
Speaker 1: too much of a numerical level on inflation as opposed
Speaker 1: to having you know, around about in faction at two
Speaker 1: or two. So I think that's really the idea other
Speaker 1: than they did a freedment view of about mount policy
Speaker 1: as in and and times velocity equals out boot times prices.
Speaker 1: That's not what we're talking about here right now. I
Speaker 1: don't think so. I think it's I think it's important. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I agree to them. I think it's more about I
Speaker 1: think good Friend is more about I want to take
Speaker 1: away the constraint on multi policy on the lower Gero bounce.
Speaker 1: That's that's important. Okay, But Ben, but just because the
Speaker 1: time we're gonna have to run here in one minute,
Speaker 1: the great book by Lawrence Meyer of Washington University of St.
Speaker 1: Louis uh a term at the FED. He got nowhere
Speaker 1: with Alan Greenspan. Why do we think any governor, including
Speaker 1: Professor good Friend, is going to get anywhere with Chairman Powell. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and that that's a fair point. I he will be
Speaker 1: one voice good Friends, one voice on the board. So
Speaker 1: that is the position. So again back to the earlier question,
Speaker 1: who's going to be the appointee of the vice chair
Speaker 1: is critical in that respect. He will have influence. Of course,
Speaker 1: just point out in the note Charles Blosser and and
Speaker 1: and and the als past Fisher back into thousand thirteen
Speaker 1: made it a really strong case to and quee and
Speaker 1: ultimately Bernanke did follow somewhere through on that on their
Speaker 1: arguments right, and so a good friend will make that
Speaker 1: voice too of know how to conduct policy, but the
Speaker 1: vice chair makes a big difference there. So um I
Speaker 1: would agree that he will fully influence the policy by himself.
Speaker 1: Obviously it really heightened the vice chair choice. Uh this morning,
Speaker 1: and I should mentioned Ben Emmon's thank you so much
Speaker 1: I'm short, not his terrific essay for his intellectist partners clients.
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 just worldwide. I'm Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Radio