Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week. I'm Carol Masser and I'm
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stanibek. We're here every day bringing
Speaker 1: you the latest news from the world of business and finance,
Speaker 1: plus technology, politics, economics, all hartnessing the power of Business
Speaker 1: Week reporters and editors, not to mention our journalists and
Speaker 1: analyst in more than one and twenty countries. You can
Speaker 1: download Bloomberg Business Week and iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot Com.
Speaker 1: You can also listen to our radio show at two
Speaker 1: pm Eastern Time on Bloomberg Radio or watch us on
Speaker 1: YouTube search Bloomberg Global News. Well, I have to say
Speaker 1: we're gonna switch gears talk about a piece that I
Speaker 1: absolutely love and add it to your list of concern
Speaker 1: strategy and outlook thinking and really plays into that headline
Speaker 1: about Hurricane Ian. This story, it's a Bloomberg Opinion column.
Speaker 1: It asks how much more economic growth can the planet sustain?
Speaker 1: And folks, if you thought it was endless, think again.
Speaker 1: The piece by Mark Buchanan, a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion.
Speaker 1: Mark this Afternoon joins us on the phone from France. Mark,
Speaker 1: good to have you with us this afternoon. As you
Speaker 1: write in your piece for Bloomberg Opinion, you are a
Speaker 1: trained scientist, So give us the lens that you're looking
Speaker 1: through right now when it comes to economic growth theory.
Speaker 1: Sure so, so I'm I'm I'm a physicist by training
Speaker 1: natural scientists. And there's a really interesting kind of argument
Speaker 1: that's been going on between natural scientists and economists for
Speaker 1: about fifty years. Um. So economists and and you know,
Speaker 1: everyone knows that we rely on economic growth for our
Speaker 1: societies to function. And economic growth has been a great
Speaker 1: thing in many ways. It listed many people out of poverty,
Speaker 1: gives us lots of interesting gadgets and tools, and makes
Speaker 1: life easier of improved life expectancy. However, at the same time,
Speaker 1: we have lots of negatives. There's pollution, there's lots of
Speaker 1: environmental degradation. Um. And so you know, it's difficult to
Speaker 1: kind of weigh up these two the positives and the negatives.
Speaker 1: And this argument that's been going on for fifty years
Speaker 1: between the econmists who generally say economic growth is great,
Speaker 1: we need more of it, um. We just need need
Speaker 1: to find out how to continually get more growth in
Speaker 1: the future, and the natural scientists, especially environmentalist ecologists, biologists
Speaker 1: who said, look, we have a finite planet. Um, we
Speaker 1: can grow to a certain extent, but the more we grow,
Speaker 1: the more burden we put on the planet in terms
Speaker 1: of pollution, disrupting natural processes on which we we really
Speaker 1: rely in the end, for recycling, clean air, clean water,
Speaker 1: all those things that eventually go into our our productive
Speaker 1: our ability to produce things usefully. So this argument has
Speaker 1: been going on for a long time, and I've been
Speaker 1: I've taken part in this as a natural scientist, and
Speaker 1: I you know, I tend to take the anti economist
Speaker 1: point of view. But I was in a really interesting
Speaker 1: conference recently and I heard the best ever explanation from
Speaker 1: a distinguished economist about why the economists have been so
Speaker 1: convinced that economic growth is this wonderful, great thing. And
Speaker 1: he said, basically, as historical um fact or historical cork
Speaker 1: if you will, so, Um, the growth, the theories of
Speaker 1: growth in economics were developed in the post World War
Speaker 1: two era, not in fifties sixties, when back then, um,
Speaker 1: you know, pollution wasn't too too great, Um, the scope
Speaker 1: of human activities were smaller, and it did seem to
Speaker 1: economists at the time that it was always possible for
Speaker 1: humans to innovate their way out of any particular problem.
Speaker 1: If one beach became cutted or polluted, you can move
Speaker 1: to a new beach. You can do to to a
Speaker 1: new set of fields to to grow your crops if
Speaker 1: some became you degraded. Um. So it was always possible
Speaker 1: to innovate in a way that would let you continue
Speaker 1: to grow. And this, this guy, this idea of the
Speaker 1: possibility of perpetual innovation was built into the basic mathematics
Speaker 1: of what it's called growth theory, which has been a
Speaker 1: cornerstone of economics for for about fifty years. So this
Speaker 1: lecture by a distinguished the common economists Partha das Gupta
Speaker 1: from Cambridge University in the UK, he was pointing out that, um,
Speaker 1: it's true that that the economists actually made some assumptions
Speaker 1: in those early theories which have gone on to inflict
Speaker 1: you know, serious kind of intellectual um damage on all
Speaker 1: of us um um in the current current era. And
Speaker 1: the reason is that that nature was never really included
Speaker 1: in the growth formulas that economists and governments around the
Speaker 1: world have relied upon. So I won't get into the details,
Speaker 1: but there's a simple formula for growth. And there's a
Speaker 1: bunch of factors that contribute to it, and the biggest
Speaker 1: one is our ability to innovate, have tech, new technology, knowledge,
Speaker 1: learn about the world. Another thing that contributes is you know, resources, minerals, oil,
Speaker 1: that kind of thing, human capital, our ability to find labor, etcetera. UM.
Speaker 1: The one thing that was never really included in the
Speaker 1: growth theories were the way that nature does lots of
Speaker 1: processes that we don't even think about, such as providing um,
Speaker 1: clean clean air, clean clean water, and recycling all the things,
Speaker 1: taking away the lots of you know, uh, detritus that
Speaker 1: we produce in our productive processes, and so Das Gupta
Speaker 1: has has has generalized the prevailing theory in a new
Speaker 1: kind of formulation which shows you how we really do
Speaker 1: depend on nature. And what is essentially proposing is a
Speaker 1: new form of accounting that would include UM that would
Speaker 1: go would go beyond g d P, GPP generally just
Speaker 1: you know, measures the things that economists think about the
Speaker 1: human part of productivity. Yep, just got twenty seconds left.
Speaker 1: I'd let you go because I think it's like you
Speaker 1: have to get into this, but twenty seconds. So take
Speaker 1: away what do we have to do here? Right? So
Speaker 1: the most of the most compelling point is that economics
Speaker 1: has traditionally excluded nature from its accounting systems. We need
Speaker 1: to include nature in our accounting systems. Governments around the
Speaker 1: world need to start doing this um taling up the
Speaker 1: degradation of natural resources and including that next to the
Speaker 1: positives that come out of economic growth. It fits into
Speaker 1: so many of the E. S G conversations we have
Speaker 1: been having. Mark Buchanan Calmness for Bloomberg Opinion. Check it out.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Quick Takes. Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio. I don't know
Speaker 1: if you know all of you and our listeners are
Speaker 1: on Twitter the same way that I am. But something
Speaker 1: crossed this morning that really caught my attention. Ed Young,
Speaker 1: who is a science writer at The Atlantic Um. He
Speaker 1: gave a lot of popularity throughout the pandemic. He tweeted
Speaker 1: this morning that he's taking a six month sabbatical starting
Speaker 1: right now. He said that the three past three years
Speaker 1: have been the most professionally meaningful of my life, but
Speaker 1: they've also deeply broken me. The pandemic is an over.
Speaker 1: But I think after a long time spent staring into
Speaker 1: the sun, I need to blink. This guy won the
Speaker 1: Pulitzer Prize for explanatory journalism. He's got a book out,
Speaker 1: a recent book out. A lot of people turned him
Speaker 1: during the pandemic, and he also covered a lot of
Speaker 1: healthcare workers who burned out during that time as well.
Speaker 1: It's something that he wrote about in his tweet threat
Speaker 1: earlier today. So Mega, Go Go go. Well, this is
Speaker 1: something we want to talk about burnout. And with us
Speaker 1: is Dr Ian LUs Bader. He's back with US, clinical
Speaker 1: professor of Medicine at and Yu Land going on the
Speaker 1: phone in New York City, and uh Dr Lusbader, nice
Speaker 1: to have you back here on Bloomberg. And I know
Speaker 1: you've been looking at some research out of the Mayo Clinic. Um.
Speaker 1: First of all, have you felt burnout over the last
Speaker 1: few years? You know many I see patients with more
Speaker 1: burnout due to COVID and home restriction, the market, gyration's
Speaker 1: work issues, but we're really seeing it in physicians and
Speaker 1: I agree, I definitely all. I experienced some element of that,
Speaker 1: and there are a lot of reasons for doctors obviously
Speaker 1: to stay engaged in enthusiastic. The risk of medical error
Speaker 1: is very important. UH. And there's really a lot of
Speaker 1: reasons that, you know, go into that. Uh. Many of
Speaker 1: them are administrative duties, charting and administrative issues, things that
Speaker 1: don't really focus on patient care. But we're seeing more
Speaker 1: and more doctors with us. And as Tim said, there
Speaker 1: are articles both of the New York Times just yesterday,
Speaker 1: UH from Mayo Clinic of various research that show really
Speaker 1: two thirds of doctors have at least one symptom of Burnett.
Speaker 1: And we're also seeing this in medical students and obviously
Speaker 1: in nurses as well. You guys just all got to
Speaker 1: do what my dentist does. I went to the dentist
Speaker 1: this morning and he wasn't there. I had a different
Speaker 1: dentist and I said, oh, where's where's the dentist And
Speaker 1: he said, Oh, he doesn't work on Fridays. He's plays golf.
Speaker 1: You're exactly A balance is important. I'm not wrong here.
Speaker 1: I'm kind of joking, but I'm not really joking wrong.
Speaker 1: Part of the issue is can you do that? Does
Speaker 1: your employer or does your practice allow you to do that?
Speaker 1: And that's not always the case. So burnout, we really
Speaker 1: think of as emotional physical exhaustion, fatigue, depersonalization, where you
Speaker 1: seem to care less about the job the patients. You
Speaker 1: vent about working conditions, and as a result of that,
Speaker 1: you're a less efficient, less efficacious doctor. You know, you're
Speaker 1: not as focused on making a difference, and as a result,
Speaker 1: there are concerns about safety, you know, testing and so forth,
Speaker 1: and a lot of doctors unfortunately, spend much of their
Speaker 1: time getting approval for testing. You know, you feel the
Speaker 1: patient needs a cat scan, you have to speak to
Speaker 1: the insurance company and get approval for that. So there
Speaker 1: are many obstacles besides dealing with COVID UH in the
Speaker 1: emergency room. You know that intensity of very sick patients
Speaker 1: the i C. You doctors have a very high level
Speaker 1: of burnout with patient mortality that's gone up with Covidfortunately
Speaker 1: those numbers are improving now. Dr Lust, But are a
Speaker 1: lot of the stuff that you describe to me in
Speaker 1: terms of the tasks that doctors have to do that
Speaker 1: they weren't necessarily trained for in medical school, you know,
Speaker 1: ordering things and dealing with insurance. These certain procedures are
Speaker 1: those things that can be disrupted by technology. I mean,
Speaker 1: does technology offer any hope for this. Yes, I do
Speaker 1: think that with AI and UH, with more support, hopefully
Speaker 1: technology will improve a lot of that. Right now, a
Speaker 1: lot of it is physical labor, where you're documenting or
Speaker 1: typing or dictating charts, are being on the phone to
Speaker 1: get things approved. I agree with you. I think technology
Speaker 1: can make a difference, but we need the vendors of
Speaker 1: these electronic medical records to be engaged with it, to say, hey,
Speaker 1: this is one of the needs that we have to address.
Speaker 1: Previously a lot of it was documentation about patient issues,
Speaker 1: and UH, it's important. Technology has helped us. We have
Speaker 1: checklists now in terms of what screening tests need to
Speaker 1: be done, what vaccines need to be done. So the
Speaker 1: dashboard you're looking at it the computer every day is
Speaker 1: it's like a seven forty seven, A lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of data coming at you and you need to
Speaker 1: be sharp to deal with it. Hey, in just about
Speaker 1: thirty seconds left year. So how do we make sure
Speaker 1: that our doctors that we go to and maybe are
Speaker 1: doing procedures for us aren't burned out? Is there a
Speaker 1: question we should ask as a patient? Gosh, you know
Speaker 1: you can ask that that question. Are you taking time
Speaker 1: for yourself. Do you feel that you have a bit
Speaker 1: of balance? Have you had a good night's sleep? Um?
Speaker 1: I think it's nice that shows caring um and hopefully
Speaker 1: the doctor is aware of that and tries to get
Speaker 1: a bit of balance. Do more leadership, get flexible hours.
Speaker 1: Hopefully they can do it. But it's good that to
Speaker 1: make people just more aware of it, including the doctors themselves.
Speaker 1: My dad used to have a check when he's going
Speaker 1: into surgery and being wheeled and he's like, okay, so
Speaker 1: what do we were operating on? Is it? The writer
Speaker 1: like them it before they would go in. Doctor las Beda,
Speaker 1: have a great weekend, Clinical Professor of Medicine at n
Speaker 1: y U Landgoing Medical Center. On the phone in New
Speaker 1: York City, you're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol
Speaker 1: Messer and Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: We're also watching a story that's among the most read
Speaker 1: it's the Bloomberg Big Take, and it also happens to
Speaker 1: be in the new issue of Bloomberg Business Week. It
Speaker 1: was about how the world is fearful when it comes
Speaker 1: to the fate of the all important Brazilian rainforest. As
Speaker 1: those citizens they are getting ready to a to vote
Speaker 1: really over the weekend presidential election. Yeah, we got right
Speaker 1: now joining us Joel Webber, the editor of Bloomberg Business.
Speaker 1: He's with us right now in the Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio.
Speaker 1: Andrew Rosatti is also with us. He's Latin America reporter
Speaker 1: for Bloomberg News. He does join us on the phone
Speaker 1: from Rio Carol. As you mentioned this story. Andrew's story
Speaker 1: featured in the new issue of Business Week magazine, available
Speaker 1: on news stands, on the Bloomberg Terminal and at Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com slash business Week. Joel, we got an election
Speaker 1: coming up in Brazil, big one, big one. Uh. And
Speaker 1: you know, one of the things that we talked about
Speaker 1: who we were framing um this story and how we
Speaker 1: wanted to approach it was there are so many elections
Speaker 1: around the world where you might not know the candidates
Speaker 1: and is in American I'll be honest, like I was, like,
Speaker 1: Liz Trust's who's that, right? And yet here's this the
Speaker 1: only one I definitely knew. Well, I know I know
Speaker 1: who she is now, but uh, you know, here here's Brazil, um. Uh,
Speaker 1: one of the biggest economies in Latin America obviously, UM,
Speaker 1: it has had um this amazing name recognition between these
Speaker 1: two candidates, between Bolsonaro who's the incumbent and Lula who
Speaker 1: was the former president, did some jail time and is
Speaker 1: currently sort of a head in the in the polls,
Speaker 1: and we're gonna see this go down at least for
Speaker 1: the first round this weekend, UM, and all eyes are
Speaker 1: on that. So one of the things we just realized
Speaker 1: here was that there's this international interest in Brazil and
Speaker 1: that made us wonder, you know, why, why is that?
Speaker 1: And part of that, I think is, um the Amazon self, right,
Speaker 1: and so you've got Bolsonaro whose whose policies have been
Speaker 1: basically turning Amazon into farmland, and Lula presents a little
Speaker 1: bit of a counterbalance to that, and the fate of
Speaker 1: the Amazon in in some ways could come down to
Speaker 1: this election. So, so, Andrew, how is this playing out
Speaker 1: inside Brazil? Because it's a little different for Brazilians than
Speaker 1: it is for everybody else who's watching from the from abroad. Right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's correct, I would say for this election is very
Speaker 1: very much what the analysts are saying is and the
Speaker 1: polls are right, it is ultimately could be a rejection
Speaker 1: of Bullsonaro. Lots of Brazilians aren't happy with his treatment
Speaker 1: of the Amazon, that is correct, But on the ground,
Speaker 1: especially in the big cities like Rio Salfaulo and then
Speaker 1: a lot of the countryside, the fear is more pocket issues.
Speaker 1: Inflation is very high, and one of the big themes
Speaker 1: of this election that Lua was really hitting on is
Speaker 1: the issue unger. You know, we're seeing hunger rise two
Speaker 1: levels and then by some studies, more than the biggest
Speaker 1: in a decade and a half, but there's many as
Speaker 1: thirty years and it's really common in tameblell See to
Speaker 1: see Brazilian dummage into the trash panhandling and big cities,
Speaker 1: and then on the countryside to you know, even even
Speaker 1: royal farmers are really struggling to UH ends meet. And
Speaker 1: that's really what the biggest fears in the selection is,
Speaker 1: you know, not just this uh push to get Bolton
Speaker 1: out of power, but how people are going to food
Speaker 1: on the table. Andrew thought it was really interesting in
Speaker 1: the piece, how you write about how the world views
Speaker 1: the Amazon and what the world has been saying for
Speaker 1: the last few years. I mean, even gosh um when
Speaker 1: when I was in grade school, remember we would do
Speaker 1: those things where you'd adopt part of a forest, uh
Speaker 1: in in the Amazon in Brazil, um and and and
Speaker 1: you know it's essentially they're saying, it's you know, it's
Speaker 1: Brazilians are saying, hey, you got I did this to
Speaker 1: your own for us, why can't we do it to ours? Right?
Speaker 1: I am my colleagues that went out to kind of
Speaker 1: the frontier is you know, they really and the people
Speaker 1: they talk to kind of say that they want a
Speaker 1: piece of this, They want the piece of this, and
Speaker 1: they feel this theirs and they can make this. It's
Speaker 1: a profitable farm land, and they feel that they have
Speaker 1: a right, you know, they have a right to. And
Speaker 1: I think under both snaro um gutting out of environmental
Speaker 1: agencies and this reluctance to crack down, it is really
Speaker 1: really you know, given new precedents to this, and I
Speaker 1: think it's especially in these frontier states. He's incredibly popular
Speaker 1: for this reason that it's just kind of you know,
Speaker 1: las fair libertarian and the like it's yours take it,
Speaker 1: you know, we won't stop you. It's the new frontier
Speaker 1: very much so. So okay at this point, and we
Speaker 1: know the importance of the rainforest, and it's not just
Speaker 1: for Brazil, but it's for the world, especially as we
Speaker 1: look at hurricanes and the devastation in terms of climate change.
Speaker 1: Having said that, do we have any idea of who
Speaker 1: might ultimately win when all is said and done and
Speaker 1: just got about thirty seconds. Yeah, all major polls are
Speaker 1: pulled pointing to a Lula victory, which is you know,
Speaker 1: he's leading anywhere from seven to fourteen points depending on
Speaker 1: the pollster. The biggest question is not if he will win.
Speaker 1: I think rather when you will win. And there's a
Speaker 1: real chance that he should win on Sunday outright if
Speaker 1: he gets more than a simple majority of pulling out
Speaker 1: n all and blank votes. You know how it goes down.
Speaker 1: It's like the world, the fate of the world, and
Speaker 1: the balance no pressure in Brazil. We've had such heavy
Speaker 1: climate stuff today this week. Uh, and this is why
Speaker 1: you've got to watch elections around the world and policy
Speaker 1: moves around the world. Um, we gotta leave it there.
Speaker 1: Andrew Rosatti, Bloomberg News Latin American reporter, thank you so
Speaker 1: much joining us on the phone from Rio along with
Speaker 1: the editor of Bloomberg Business Week till Weber that new issue.
Speaker 1: It is out on newsstands, on the Bloomberg again, online
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com, slash business. We check it out.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol
Speaker 1: Messer and Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: Carbly wanna Bloomberg News. She's also produced for our business
Speaker 1: Week team. We love her well. She's reporting out today,
Speaker 1: Tim that the money flowing out of crypto related funds
Speaker 1: in the third quarter has slowed down, a sign that
Speaker 1: many Barrish investors may have already piled out of the
Speaker 1: risky asset class. So just a little bit of context
Speaker 1: in terms of the crypto market. So what does that mean?
Speaker 1: Is that is the floor end? That's that's the question.
Speaker 1: Let's go to Rob Frasca, managing partner Cosimo Ventures. He
Speaker 1: joins us on the phone from Massachusetts this afternoon. Rob,
Speaker 1: how are you. I'm great, How are you hey? We're
Speaker 1: doing well. It's it's good to have you with us.
Speaker 1: Um you really tokenized VC fund. It invests in early
Speaker 1: stage blockchain projects. You're looking around the landscape right now.
Speaker 1: One thing that has actually surprised me, Carol and you
Speaker 1: referred to this is that despite the selling that we've
Speaker 1: seen in the equity market, we haven't seen that in
Speaker 1: the crypto market. Same extent um. Rob lay in on this,
Speaker 1: I mean, do you think we found the floor for crypto?
Speaker 1: The bottom is in? I do. I do. There's some
Speaker 1: really exciting stuff going on in the crypto world, and
Speaker 1: you know a lot of times what happens is it's early, right, So,
Speaker 1: and that's the thing we can't you can't overlook, right,
Speaker 1: is that crypto is is very very early in the cycle.
Speaker 1: And so we saw pretty a pretty bad market downturn
Speaker 1: uh so far this year, and um, you know, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of money sitting on the sidelines, a lot
Speaker 1: of enture money sitting there ready to come into really
Speaker 1: exciting companies and exciting protocols. I kind of think of
Speaker 1: it a lot like you know, the early days of
Speaker 1: the Internet, right, you know, we saw we saw a boom,
Speaker 1: we saw bust, and then we saw incredible boom again.
Speaker 1: So you know, if you really believe in this long
Speaker 1: term focus of what blockchain crypto represents, this is just
Speaker 1: kind of one of those little cycles, if you will,
Speaker 1: in the whole scheme of things and from what I'm understanding,
Speaker 1: you are a bull when it comes to the blockchain.
Speaker 1: Tell us you're thinking, whine, How does that translate into
Speaker 1: specific investments? Yeah? So, so ultimately, when you think about blockchain,
Speaker 1: what we're really doing here is we're creating an entire
Speaker 1: new settlement layer for all kinds of transactions, and we're
Speaker 1: doing it in a very decentralized way. Right. So instead
Speaker 1: of having a bank clear the transaction or a brokerage
Speaker 1: firm clayer of transaction, what blockchain does is it uses
Speaker 1: a network and everybody on that network is helping clear
Speaker 1: the transaction. So early on, you know, we were like, man,
Speaker 1: does this really work? Right? Can you do it? And
Speaker 1: do it in a trustful way? And what and what
Speaker 1: bitcoin really showed is, holy cow, we can do this.
Speaker 1: We can move money all over the round, value all
Speaker 1: over the world. And so now I think what's happened
Speaker 1: is all of the bigger institutions, bigger, bigger financial players,
Speaker 1: they're all jumping in saying, wait a minute, I've got
Speaker 1: to use this technology. You know, are our little fun
Speaker 1: We have this little venture fund. It's tokenized. Well, what
Speaker 1: the heck does tokenized? Name? All? It really means is
Speaker 1: is that we have a fund and it's digital shares
Speaker 1: are traded on a blockchain, and so anybody in the
Speaker 1: world can can kind of, you know, trade those funds
Speaker 1: and provide liquidity. Well, now you got right, and you know,
Speaker 1: and I used to go out and talk about this,
Speaker 1: people like what the heck is that? Right? Well, I
Speaker 1: don't know if you guys saw, but kk are just
Speaker 1: announced that they're token izing. They're one of their big
Speaker 1: healthcare funds, right, so so you can see, you know,
Speaker 1: the big institutions now kind of woke up and said, wow, uh,
Speaker 1: this isn't you know? This is key? Right, This is
Speaker 1: a key piece of technology. I gotta tell you, though,
Speaker 1: I still I'm so skeptical. And I remained skeptical of
Speaker 1: this because in my everyday life, despite the fact that
Speaker 1: blockchain technology has been around for what a dozen years,
Speaker 1: we're not interacting with it yet daily, We're not even
Speaker 1: I don't know if I've ever interacted with it. Why
Speaker 1: aren't we That's a good Well, you know, you've got
Speaker 1: to look at it this way, right, So all tech
Speaker 1: markets go through phases. They start off with the visionaries,
Speaker 1: then they moved to kind of the early adopters, and
Speaker 1: then they moved to kind of you know the mass
Speaker 1: market or the you know, the early mass market, and
Speaker 1: then they become mainstream. And you know what's interesting is
Speaker 1: this blockchain is playing out exactly the way the Internet did. Right.
Speaker 1: I'm a dot com guy, right, I I actually started
Speaker 1: the very first financial service on the Internet back in
Speaker 1: and I used to go around and have that same conversation, Man,
Speaker 1: I don't interact with the Internet, and where are we today?
Speaker 1: So it's it's the same kind of mentality. You know. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I have to tell you because Tim does
Speaker 1: so much on the crypto world and whenever you bring
Speaker 1: up blockchain, he like rolls his eyes in the back
Speaker 1: of his head. But we're sitting here saying, why why
Speaker 1: do a digital fun and buy you know, and tokenization
Speaker 1: where you buy you know, an interest in that digital
Speaker 1: fund on the blockchain? Why not just issue it as
Speaker 1: a share and buy a share? Liquidity global liquidity. Right, So,
Speaker 1: now now I'm on a blockchain. Now I have a
Speaker 1: digital share, and now that share can be freely traded
Speaker 1: all over the world through a variety of exchanges and
Speaker 1: venues and and and you know, you know, the traditional
Speaker 1: finance world talks about settlement, right, and you know, you
Speaker 1: know T plus one. Uh, you know, in blockchain you
Speaker 1: talk about you know, T plus second, right, So and
Speaker 1: and and so that's that's what we're you know, that's
Speaker 1: what we're talking about here. But you've got, Rob, you've
Speaker 1: got to get everyone on board with this, including regulators.
Speaker 1: We only have thirty seconds left. How do you do that? Yeah,
Speaker 1: well it's happening now, right, and and and it's happening now.
Speaker 1: Regulators are coming on board. Uh, you know a lot
Speaker 1: of the bigger financial institutions are coming on board. You've
Speaker 1: got you know, major firms like Fidelity, k K are
Speaker 1: tokenizing the fund. Uh. You know, State Street Bank, one
Speaker 1: of the largest custodians in the world. Right, they announced, hey,
Speaker 1: we're going to do digital lastic. So you know we're
Speaker 1: looking at this face right. So I think you know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't happen overnight now, you know all the time, right,
Speaker 1: but it certainly is disrupted. All right, we gotta run. Hey,
Speaker 1: have a good weekend. Rob Presca, managing partner at Cosmo Ventures,
Speaker 1: a tokenized venture capital of fund investing in early stage
Speaker 1: blockchain projects and opportunities. This is Bloomberg. I'm roc journal. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but you let me drive. Oh no, no, no, no, honey, please,
Speaker 1: I'll do the ride revels. I don't want to drive.
Speaker 1: It's good question that drives. This is the drive to
Speaker 1: the clothes. Just think we'll dry up down on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: All Right, just got about nine minutes left in today's
Speaker 1: trading session, getting ready to wrap up Friday. So the day,
Speaker 1: the week, the month, and the third quarter, and we
Speaker 1: see stocks really taking another leg down here, so we're
Speaker 1: probably going to finish at least at this point. It
Speaker 1: looks like at our lows are just off our lows
Speaker 1: for the session. Let's get into it with Lisa Ericson,
Speaker 1: head of the Public Markets group at US Bank Wealth Management.
Speaker 1: Lisa this afternoon, joins us on the phone from Minneapolis, Minnesota. Lisa,
Speaker 1: how are you? I'm great? Thank you, you're you're great.
Speaker 1: Despite the fact that the SNP is down close so
Speaker 1: far this year, well, good point, infinite point to crowd
Speaker 1: today that as soon as I asked that Carol, Carol
Speaker 1: just closed her eyes. She just couldn't believe it was
Speaker 1: coming out of my mouth. I'm sorry, Lisa, no, that
Speaker 1: that was great. Tim but no, you're right. From an
Speaker 1: investment standpoint, it's been really a very tough year, and
Speaker 1: not only have the equities been down, but our traditional diversifier,
Speaker 1: really fixed income, has been difficult as well, and so
Speaker 1: it's really been a double lammy. And as we look
Speaker 1: at the forward outlook, we continue to be cautious. Uh,
Speaker 1: certainly some of those factors that have been driving both
Speaker 1: bonds and stocks to lower levels aren't going to seemingly
Speaker 1: reverse any time year soon. And that is really two factors.
Speaker 1: So one is obviously the price pressures that we've been
Speaker 1: seeing here in the economy, and then secondarily because of
Speaker 1: that inflation, really what's going on with central banks in
Speaker 1: order to try to tamp down those inflationary levels they
Speaker 1: obviously are putting in some monetary headlines. A couple of
Speaker 1: stories I want to bring to your attention, both coming
Speaker 1: from Bank of America on are Joe Wisenhal just tweeting
Speaker 1: out a story by our Jill Shop the FED rate
Speaker 1: hikes are pushing the credit market towards dysfunction, be of
Speaker 1: a saying that the credit stress is nearing a critical zone.
Speaker 1: FED needs to slow down. Pikes are face difficult fixed
Speaker 1: as they say. At the same time, be of A
Speaker 1: strategists are saying that the they see an equity route
Speaker 1: forcing asset liquidation and they're looking at I think that's
Speaker 1: how uh, that nicey composite index. So we're talking stocks
Speaker 1: to pository receipts. Real Estate Investment Trust has broken multiple
Speaker 1: technical support levels, including its two week moving average UM
Speaker 1: and how this is a pretty significant thing. What do
Speaker 1: you think of all? That's pretty negative and a pretty
Speaker 1: pretty unnerving, if you will. When it comes to what
Speaker 1: investors have to think about, there are a lot of
Speaker 1: tough factors in play. And certainly, while we don't give
Speaker 1: up hope that you know, hopefully again we'll see a
Speaker 1: moderation in these factors. Because we do have not only
Speaker 1: the FED but also central banks globally tightening and really
Speaker 1: trying to also tamp down those inflationary pressures and their
Speaker 1: individual economies, that does run the risk of again overtightening,
Speaker 1: simply because monetary policy, while we're already starting to see
Speaker 1: some of the effects of that, does run on a leg.
Speaker 1: And so while we see sectors, for example now like
Speaker 1: the housing market slowing, you will continue to see some
Speaker 1: of that runoff continue to affect other sectors as we
Speaker 1: go forward, and to your point, that is really now
Speaker 1: affecting market liquided as well. And when we look at
Speaker 1: technical signals we are seeing some of that downward pressure
Speaker 1: and lower sentiment as well. Um, are you seeing you know,
Speaker 1: are you seeing things that tell you that there's financial distress,
Speaker 1: credit market dysfunction, and that's something that could lead to
Speaker 1: some kind of breakdown within the financial markets. So far,
Speaker 1: our signs are really more showing on a technical basis
Speaker 1: just the poor sentiment in terms of actual underlying distress.
Speaker 1: Yet in the credit market, where it would often show
Speaker 1: up first, we are not seeing that. So when we
Speaker 1: look at typical fundamentals, we are still seeing even for
Speaker 1: lower rated bonds what people will often call the high
Speaker 1: yield part of the market. Uh, we're not seeing yet
Speaker 1: again those signs of emerging concern, and most of the
Speaker 1: default forecast are still pretty moderate. So the good news
Speaker 1: then is we're not yet in the danger zone, but
Speaker 1: we want to obviously continue to monitor that because again,
Speaker 1: depending on how quickly inflation comes down, that could have
Speaker 1: more or less impact on ongoing consumer spending and therefore
Speaker 1: corporate margin. How quickly do you think inflation will come down.
Speaker 1: We got some unfortunately stronger than expected numbers this morning.
Speaker 1: You know, it's really hard to say it likely will
Speaker 1: take some time for those inflation numbers to come down,
Speaker 1: but a lot of that rate of decline is going
Speaker 1: to depend on how quickly those supply chains continue to
Speaker 1: bounce back. And while we still see signs that they
Speaker 1: are improving. Um, you know, one of the valid theories
Speaker 1: that is bloating out there is that because really what
Speaker 1: we had in this scenario was not only the pent
Speaker 1: up demand, but also these unusual supply constraints the excent
Speaker 1: we get relief on the supply side that actually could
Speaker 1: bring down inflation. That seems to be happening. I mean, Carol,
Speaker 1: what did Punham say earlier? She said that we're almost
Speaker 1: out of the woods when it comes to some of
Speaker 1: the supply chain constraints on the retailers right, which has
Speaker 1: been a real problem some of you know, certainly our
Speaker 1: macro story when it comes to inflation in absolutely so.
Speaker 1: While you know, so far we're seeing some back and forth.
Speaker 1: Even in today's personal consumption expenditure inflation numbers were actually
Speaker 1: wasn't as positive news where inflation was still running a
Speaker 1: little higher than people expected in this most recent report. Again,
Speaker 1: there is a possibility that we're going to see some
Speaker 1: nice decline over the next few quarters, so we're all
Speaker 1: obviously really going to be watching those numbers, all right,
Speaker 1: So just got about a minute or so left here,
Speaker 1: So thoughts for investors here. We are going to kick
Speaker 1: off the final quarter of the year on Monday. UM.
Speaker 1: Last quarter of the year can often be a good
Speaker 1: one for investors, but it also could be a tricky
Speaker 1: one UM as well. But we also have midterms, So
Speaker 1: what are your thoughts in terms of positioning. We're still cautious,
Speaker 1: so we're advising our clients to be relatively underweight and equities,
Speaker 1: both US and and foreign developed stuff, and relatively overweight
Speaker 1: in short term fixed income and actually another ethnic class
Speaker 1: called global infrastructure. And the reason for the emphasis on
Speaker 1: the latter two areas is really because they tend to
Speaker 1: provide higher levels of income than just straight out equities,
Speaker 1: and when that's obviously a very nice feature in a
Speaker 1: period where there's more economic uncertainty, where you're uncertain about
Speaker 1: the level of growth that may be coming forward, to
Speaker 1: have that income in hand from diversified sources really can
Speaker 1: provide some nice ballast to the portfolio. Alright, we're gonna
Speaker 1: leave it on that note. Lisa, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Have a great weekend. Lisa Ericson, she's head of the
Speaker 1: Public Markets Group at us Bank Wealth Management, on the
Speaker 1: phone for Minneapolis. Thanks for listening to Bloomberg Business Week.
Speaker 1: Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot com,
Speaker 1: and you can also listen to our radio show at
Speaker 1: two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio or watch us on
Speaker 1: YouTube search Bloomberg Global News