WEBVTT - Bloomberg Surveillance TV: July 11, 2024

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:06.800
<v Speaker 1>Boom, Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.440
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along

0:00:15.480 --> 0:00:18.680
<v Speaker 2>with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day

0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:22.280
<v Speaker 2>for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:24.920
<v Speaker 2>from our global headquarters in New York City. We are

0:00:24.920 --> 0:00:27.680
<v Speaker 2>live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine

0:00:27.720 --> 0:00:31.240
<v Speaker 2>am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or

0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:33.920
<v Speaker 2>anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg

0:00:34.040 --> 0:00:37.479
<v Speaker 2>Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app. Sarah Hunt of Alpine

0:00:37.520 --> 0:00:40.560
<v Speaker 2>Saxon Woods, writing this, we still see a land grab

0:00:40.880 --> 0:00:43.960
<v Speaker 2>and a spending boom on the backbone of the AI infrastructure.

0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:46.479
<v Speaker 2>With valuations at high levels, there will need to be

0:00:46.600 --> 0:00:50.680
<v Speaker 2>further evidence that spending does not pause. Sarah joins us

0:00:50.680 --> 0:00:52.479
<v Speaker 2>now for more. Sarah, good morning. It's good to see you.

0:00:52.520 --> 0:00:53.000
<v Speaker 3>Good morning.

0:00:53.120 --> 0:00:54.960
<v Speaker 2>Are you nervous about what we might hear from some

0:00:55.000 --> 0:00:57.080
<v Speaker 2>of their customers later this earning season.

0:00:57.600 --> 0:00:59.200
<v Speaker 4>I think we're still in a player. I mean, it's

0:00:59.200 --> 0:01:01.480
<v Speaker 4>interesting because I saw it. Note that I think Goldman

0:01:01.560 --> 0:01:04.160
<v Speaker 4>put out on the fact that maybe they were spending

0:01:04.200 --> 0:01:05.959
<v Speaker 4>too much and I'm thinking, how do you say that

0:01:06.040 --> 0:01:07.600
<v Speaker 4>right now? It's a little bit early to say you're

0:01:07.600 --> 0:01:09.560
<v Speaker 4>spending too much. It reminds me of, you know, just

0:01:09.600 --> 0:01:12.080
<v Speaker 4>to date myself, the dark fiber discussion in two thousand

0:01:12.080 --> 0:01:13.679
<v Speaker 4>about we're putting in too much dark fiber.

0:01:13.840 --> 0:01:16.000
<v Speaker 5>Well, the Internet absorbed it all. So the question is

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:16.679
<v Speaker 5>what is.

0:01:16.720 --> 0:01:18.600
<v Speaker 4>Enough infrastructure And I don't think we have the answer

0:01:18.680 --> 0:01:20.880
<v Speaker 4>to that yet. It's just a lot of large numbers problem.

0:01:20.760 --> 0:01:23.240
<v Speaker 2>Now to build on that shit. We reward the Apples.

0:01:23.600 --> 0:01:26.280
<v Speaker 2>This was ultimately Golden and Cole for having some big

0:01:26.319 --> 0:01:28.840
<v Speaker 2>stock buy back or reward those that are investing all

0:01:28.880 --> 0:01:31.720
<v Speaker 2>this money in the future, some big, big outlays that

0:01:31.760 --> 0:01:33.840
<v Speaker 2>were seeing of the likes of Mets or other names too.

0:01:34.160 --> 0:01:35.880
<v Speaker 4>I think that's a little bit just trying to split

0:01:35.920 --> 0:01:37.800
<v Speaker 4>the reality of you're rewarding the companies that have a

0:01:37.840 --> 0:01:39.720
<v Speaker 4>lot of cash, what they do with that cash, as

0:01:39.720 --> 0:01:42.920
<v Speaker 4>long as it's not something that seems absolutely ridiculous. Is

0:01:42.959 --> 0:01:44.720
<v Speaker 4>still we have a lot of cash, and that's where

0:01:44.760 --> 0:01:46.520
<v Speaker 4>I want to be. So I think that, you know,

0:01:46.560 --> 0:01:48.480
<v Speaker 4>for Apple, that makes more sense for them right now,

0:01:48.760 --> 0:01:50.400
<v Speaker 4>and for the other companies it makes sense to do

0:01:50.440 --> 0:01:52.360
<v Speaker 4>what they're doing so I don't think unless it's you know,

0:01:52.480 --> 0:01:55.080
<v Speaker 4>it's not some acquisition of something that's making no money

0:01:55.160 --> 0:01:56.600
<v Speaker 4>or something along those lines.

0:01:56.680 --> 0:01:58.640
<v Speaker 1>What do you make of us Constraang his argument that

0:01:58.760 --> 0:02:01.920
<v Speaker 1>essentially there is a very positive story to tell with

0:02:01.960 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 1>a lot of these AI companies and the sort of

0:02:04.080 --> 0:02:08.000
<v Speaker 1>big techniqus, but sentiment has gotten so overinflated and people

0:02:08.040 --> 0:02:11.040
<v Speaker 1>are expecting such big beats that in the near term

0:02:11.120 --> 0:02:14.440
<v Speaker 1>it just seems nearly impossible for them to exceed those

0:02:14.480 --> 0:02:15.600
<v Speaker 1>to the same degree.

0:02:15.840 --> 0:02:16.520
<v Speaker 5>Do you agree.

0:02:16.639 --> 0:02:18.880
<v Speaker 4>I think this is the difficult part right now, because

0:02:18.880 --> 0:02:21.320
<v Speaker 4>there will come a point where all the spending on

0:02:21.400 --> 0:02:24.639
<v Speaker 4>infrastructure will slow down, or the delta will go negative,

0:02:25.000 --> 0:02:27.560
<v Speaker 4>and or you haven't got enough use cases for the

0:02:27.600 --> 0:02:30.400
<v Speaker 4>other companies that are supposed to start getting more profitable

0:02:30.400 --> 0:02:32.720
<v Speaker 4>on the back of AI. And I think when that happens,

0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:34.840
<v Speaker 4>and I think it may happen, then you're going to

0:02:34.840 --> 0:02:37.079
<v Speaker 4>start to see people really worry about valuations. I don't

0:02:37.080 --> 0:02:38.560
<v Speaker 4>think that we're there yet because I think that you're

0:02:38.560 --> 0:02:40.400
<v Speaker 4>still spending a lot of money, but I think that

0:02:40.440 --> 0:02:43.160
<v Speaker 4>the concern will be, Okay, we've built in all this

0:02:43.240 --> 0:02:45.480
<v Speaker 4>infrastructure serve like the dark far argument, we have all

0:02:45.520 --> 0:02:47.440
<v Speaker 4>this stuff, but we can't use it enough yet. But

0:02:47.520 --> 0:02:49.880
<v Speaker 4>it will get used and it will ultimately. I think,

0:02:50.280 --> 0:02:52.200
<v Speaker 4>just not sure the use cases are what we're thinking

0:02:52.200 --> 0:02:52.880
<v Speaker 4>about right now.

0:02:52.960 --> 0:02:55.400
<v Speaker 1>It feels like it's almost easier to speculate on whether

0:02:55.440 --> 0:02:57.240
<v Speaker 1>AI is a bubble or not a bubble and what

0:02:57.280 --> 0:02:59.639
<v Speaker 1>the potential is, rather than talk about the other four

0:02:59.680 --> 0:03:01.960
<v Speaker 1>hundred ninety three names and how hinge they are to

0:03:02.000 --> 0:03:03.800
<v Speaker 1>an economic cycle that's really questionable.

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:06.280
<v Speaker 5>I want to go back to Delta. You mentioned Delta.

0:03:06.560 --> 0:03:08.720
<v Speaker 1>It was supposed to be the darling of a cycle

0:03:08.840 --> 0:03:11.480
<v Speaker 1>that benefited people who have the money to fly around

0:03:11.520 --> 0:03:14.200
<v Speaker 1>the world and are doing so in record numbers. Is

0:03:14.240 --> 0:03:16.600
<v Speaker 1>that sort of a signal to you that there is

0:03:16.639 --> 0:03:20.600
<v Speaker 1>some fundamental problem in consumers that will percolate to a

0:03:20.600 --> 0:03:23.320
<v Speaker 1>broader number of potentially consumer facing companies.

0:03:23.639 --> 0:03:25.079
<v Speaker 4>Well, I'd love to look at the release because I

0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:27.000
<v Speaker 4>didn't get a chance to go through it very carefully.

0:03:27.000 --> 0:03:29.480
<v Speaker 4>But is the problem the revenue line is the problem?

0:03:29.560 --> 0:03:32.160
<v Speaker 4>The cost line you mentioned earlier, the extra costs. This

0:03:32.200 --> 0:03:34.560
<v Speaker 4>has been the question about what happens when inflation comes

0:03:34.560 --> 0:03:36.720
<v Speaker 4>down to margins start to get squeezed. If this is

0:03:36.720 --> 0:03:38.440
<v Speaker 4>more of an issue of margin squeeze, and it's not

0:03:38.480 --> 0:03:40.800
<v Speaker 4>a problem on the economic front. It's more a problem

0:03:40.800 --> 0:03:43.080
<v Speaker 4>on an individual company front because everyone's got to figure

0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:44.840
<v Speaker 4>out how to deal with their costs. A lot of

0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:47.040
<v Speaker 4>cost labor costs went up in the last couple of years.

0:03:47.160 --> 0:03:49.080
<v Speaker 4>Those contracts are only starting to come through. I think

0:03:49.120 --> 0:03:51.440
<v Speaker 4>that's part of it. So they might be blaming it

0:03:51.480 --> 0:03:54.680
<v Speaker 4>on cutting too much capacity, But having flown recently, I

0:03:54.720 --> 0:03:56.600
<v Speaker 4>don't see any excess capacity anywhere.

0:03:56.840 --> 0:03:58.640
<v Speaker 2>Who asks price in power right now?

0:03:58.640 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 3>Why'd you see that? If you can pick it into

0:04:00.040 --> 0:04:00.560
<v Speaker 3>stream right now?

0:04:00.560 --> 0:04:03.480
<v Speaker 2>Who has pricing power? We mentioned Costco earlier today putting

0:04:03.520 --> 0:04:05.840
<v Speaker 2>up membership fees. Where do you see that pricing power?

0:04:06.080 --> 0:04:07.720
<v Speaker 4>I think the pricing power is coming through in the

0:04:07.760 --> 0:04:10.480
<v Speaker 4>technology space. I think that Nvidia is getting better prices

0:04:10.520 --> 0:04:12.040
<v Speaker 4>than they were getting before because they're the.

0:04:12.080 --> 0:04:12.920
<v Speaker 5>Only ones who have it.

0:04:13.160 --> 0:04:15.360
<v Speaker 4>I think any place where something is in short supply,

0:04:15.480 --> 0:04:17.400
<v Speaker 4>you have some pricing power, and I think on the

0:04:17.480 --> 0:04:19.760
<v Speaker 4>technology side you have more pricing power. I would argue

0:04:19.760 --> 0:04:21.839
<v Speaker 4>that the airlines do have pricing power, having paid for

0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:24.279
<v Speaker 4>airline tickets, but I would also say that it depends

0:04:24.320 --> 0:04:26.599
<v Speaker 4>on where you're going, and it depends on the timing

0:04:26.640 --> 0:04:29.160
<v Speaker 4>of that. But I think that in the end, any

0:04:29.240 --> 0:04:31.760
<v Speaker 4>place where there is any kind of capacity constraint, you

0:04:32.360 --> 0:04:33.239
<v Speaker 4>have pricing power.

0:04:33.240 --> 0:04:34.880
<v Speaker 2>What is it about airlines that everyone just left the

0:04:34.920 --> 0:04:36.760
<v Speaker 2>rants about. I mean, I could join you too. It's

0:04:36.800 --> 0:04:39.960
<v Speaker 2>cust a fortune and it's miserable. Why is it always miserable.

0:04:39.960 --> 0:04:41.960
<v Speaker 4>Because we are at a point where so many people

0:04:42.000 --> 0:04:45.040
<v Speaker 4>are flying that even as they're increasing capacity the airlines,

0:04:45.240 --> 0:04:46.680
<v Speaker 4>the airports can't handle it.

0:04:46.760 --> 0:04:48.960
<v Speaker 5>The airlines can't handle it. There's nowhere to sit. It's hot.

0:04:49.000 --> 0:04:50.640
<v Speaker 5>I mean, I can go on and on.

0:04:50.680 --> 0:04:52.800
<v Speaker 1>I remember when I was a KIAUS to go to

0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:55.880
<v Speaker 1>the Midwest frequently because my family lived there. We flew

0:04:55.920 --> 0:04:59.599
<v Speaker 1>on Midwest Express which they had you know, glass little

0:04:59.600 --> 0:05:01.680
<v Speaker 1>salt upper shakers and home baked.

0:05:01.920 --> 0:05:03.000
<v Speaker 6>It was a very nice experience.

0:05:03.000 --> 0:05:04.680
<v Speaker 1>Everything was first class and it went out of business.

0:05:04.680 --> 0:05:07.400
<v Speaker 1>But you raise this question about how much you end

0:05:07.480 --> 0:05:10.279
<v Speaker 1>up with cost structures that are.

0:05:10.080 --> 0:05:11.919
<v Speaker 5>Only now getting bigger.

0:05:12.520 --> 0:05:15.120
<v Speaker 1>Do you think that people are under mess estimating the

0:05:15.160 --> 0:05:18.880
<v Speaker 1>margin compression that we could potentially see this cycle, because yeah,

0:05:18.920 --> 0:05:21.880
<v Speaker 1>the pricing power is in Nvidia, but it's not necessarily

0:05:22.160 --> 0:05:24.640
<v Speaker 1>in Delta. I mean it kind of is, but we

0:05:24.680 --> 0:05:26.520
<v Speaker 1>thought it was, but it isn't. Necessarily it's some of

0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:29.400
<v Speaker 1>these other areas that are also dealing with fundamentally higher

0:05:29.440 --> 0:05:30.719
<v Speaker 1>costs that haven't come down.

0:05:31.040 --> 0:05:33.600
<v Speaker 4>I think that is we were concerned that there was

0:05:33.640 --> 0:05:35.880
<v Speaker 4>going to be a margin compression earlier than there has been,

0:05:36.120 --> 0:05:37.719
<v Speaker 4>So it might just be that there's a lag on

0:05:37.720 --> 0:05:40.479
<v Speaker 4>that margin compression because the costs haven't really caught up yet.

0:05:40.760 --> 0:05:41.240
<v Speaker 5>Everything.

0:05:41.360 --> 0:05:43.600
<v Speaker 4>You know, we're such immediate people the price changes today.

0:05:43.600 --> 0:05:46.640
<v Speaker 4>We can see this today in business cycles, things take longer,

0:05:46.640 --> 0:05:48.680
<v Speaker 4>contracts take longer to play out, It takes longer for

0:05:48.720 --> 0:05:51.200
<v Speaker 4>people to figure out exactly what their cost structure is

0:05:51.200 --> 0:05:52.880
<v Speaker 4>going to look like. Fuel prices have come down, that

0:05:52.880 --> 0:05:54.760
<v Speaker 4>should have been a help to them, but it also

0:05:54.880 --> 0:05:57.279
<v Speaker 4>might be that because they were using fuel that they'd

0:05:57.279 --> 0:05:59.280
<v Speaker 4>bought at higher prices, it won't come down until the

0:05:59.279 --> 0:06:00.920
<v Speaker 4>third quarter. So I think that there's a lot of

0:06:01.320 --> 0:06:04.400
<v Speaker 4>rolling cost situations that we can't see because we're not

0:06:04.480 --> 0:06:07.560
<v Speaker 4>those corporations and we're looking at things from that Wall

0:06:07.560 --> 0:06:09.960
<v Speaker 4>Street immediacy level of I need to know today what's

0:06:09.960 --> 0:06:12.359
<v Speaker 4>happening tomorrow, And I think that that's something that is

0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:14.440
<v Speaker 4>going to have to play out in the next several months,

0:06:14.440 --> 0:06:16.560
<v Speaker 4>and we're starting to see whether or not that's going

0:06:16.600 --> 0:06:18.720
<v Speaker 4>to happen. I don't know if Delta is a bellweather

0:06:18.839 --> 0:06:20.360
<v Speaker 4>or if that's just a one off for them.

0:06:20.440 --> 0:06:22.599
<v Speaker 1>What are you more interested in today, CPI or the

0:06:22.600 --> 0:06:24.320
<v Speaker 1>president's press conference at five point thirty.

0:06:24.920 --> 0:06:29.480
<v Speaker 5>Yes, I think that both of them are important, right.

0:06:29.520 --> 0:06:31.760
<v Speaker 4>I think that you had a guest on earlier today

0:06:31.800 --> 0:06:34.400
<v Speaker 4>who said that one number isn't the most important thing. Well,

0:06:34.400 --> 0:06:36.880
<v Speaker 4>it's not the most important thing unless it goes very

0:06:36.960 --> 0:06:38.880
<v Speaker 4>much in the wrong direction, right, So CPI went very

0:06:38.960 --> 0:06:40.320
<v Speaker 4>much in the wrong direction, it would be the most

0:06:40.360 --> 0:06:42.760
<v Speaker 4>important thing. I think that there has been chaos since

0:06:42.760 --> 0:06:44.800
<v Speaker 4>the original debate, and I don't think that that chaos

0:06:44.839 --> 0:06:45.400
<v Speaker 4>is yet over.

0:06:45.640 --> 0:06:47.680
<v Speaker 5>I think all the discussions you were having earlier.

0:06:47.480 --> 0:06:49.200
<v Speaker 4>I mean, none of what anybody is saying is makes

0:06:49.240 --> 0:06:51.720
<v Speaker 4>sense except tell me something I want to hear, And

0:06:51.800 --> 0:06:53.480
<v Speaker 4>until I hear what I want to hear, I'm not

0:06:53.520 --> 0:06:56.000
<v Speaker 4>believing what you're saying. And so that's where we seem

0:06:56.040 --> 0:06:57.640
<v Speaker 4>to be. I don't know that that's going to make

0:06:57.640 --> 0:06:59.640
<v Speaker 4>the press conference today is going to make that any different.

0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:02.400
<v Speaker 4>I don't think to the extent I mean, it's it's unfortunate,

0:07:02.440 --> 0:07:04.120
<v Speaker 4>But I don't think to the extent that you know,

0:07:04.200 --> 0:07:05.919
<v Speaker 4>it's not wrong that age is not something you.

0:07:05.960 --> 0:07:08.320
<v Speaker 2>Can take away noise or news. Do you think it's

0:07:08.360 --> 0:07:11.440
<v Speaker 2>real news for this market the considerations that are percolating

0:07:11.480 --> 0:07:14.480
<v Speaker 2>over the last few weeks, to the to the.

0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:16.760
<v Speaker 4>Extent that we've seen both of these people as president,

0:07:16.800 --> 0:07:18.640
<v Speaker 4>and the market has reacted well to both. I think

0:07:18.640 --> 0:07:21.640
<v Speaker 4>I understand why people say whoever's president is noise, but

0:07:22.040 --> 0:07:24.680
<v Speaker 4>political chaos is not just noise. And if it gets

0:07:24.680 --> 0:07:27.240
<v Speaker 4>too chaotic, I think that that is going to take

0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:30.040
<v Speaker 4>people's risk appetite down to some degree. But we don't

0:07:30.080 --> 0:07:31.840
<v Speaker 4>know that yet, and we don't know what kind of

0:07:32.000 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 4>you know, decisions people are facing right now.

0:07:34.280 --> 0:07:35.760
<v Speaker 5>We know where one side of the ledger is.

0:07:35.800 --> 0:07:37.120
<v Speaker 4>We don't yet know where the other side of the

0:07:37.160 --> 0:07:39.160
<v Speaker 4>ledger is, even though he keeps saying he is that

0:07:39.200 --> 0:07:40.920
<v Speaker 4>side of the ledger, and nobody seems to believe him.

0:07:40.920 --> 0:07:42.160
<v Speaker 3>We're waiting for him to make a decision.

0:07:42.200 --> 0:07:44.920
<v Speaker 2>Sarah, you know that, Sarah Hunt a vampid snackson words, Sarah,

0:07:44.920 --> 0:07:56.080
<v Speaker 2>It's going to see it. I'm Maris in Washington with

0:07:56.200 --> 0:07:59.640
<v Speaker 2>a special guest, the Democratic congresswoman Haidie Stevens of Michigan.

0:07:59.720 --> 0:08:00.760
<v Speaker 3>I am as I see you.

0:08:01.960 --> 0:08:06.160
<v Speaker 7>Thank you so much, John, and Congresswoman Miss Stevens, you're

0:08:06.160 --> 0:08:09.240
<v Speaker 7>also going to be in Michigan tomorrow with Biden. Yes,

0:08:09.280 --> 0:08:11.480
<v Speaker 7>I am a starch supporter of him, and you're not

0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:12.240
<v Speaker 7>backing down.

0:08:12.760 --> 0:08:13.120
<v Speaker 6>Why.

0:08:13.720 --> 0:08:16.240
<v Speaker 8>I'm really enthusiastic about this campaign and what we've built

0:08:16.280 --> 0:08:19.560
<v Speaker 8>in Michigan. I've been rigorously on it since the beginning

0:08:19.640 --> 0:08:22.480
<v Speaker 8>of the year. Detroit is at its lowest levels of

0:08:22.560 --> 0:08:26.640
<v Speaker 8>unemployment and fifty years we have manufacturing growth. I have

0:08:26.680 --> 0:08:31.280
<v Speaker 8>a really popular governor, Gretchen Whitmer, who's endorsed this president,

0:08:31.360 --> 0:08:34.000
<v Speaker 8>who's a co chair of his campaign, who's met with

0:08:34.120 --> 0:08:37.040
<v Speaker 8>him since some of the debate fallout and is sticking

0:08:37.080 --> 0:08:37.560
<v Speaker 8>by him.

0:08:37.640 --> 0:08:39.280
<v Speaker 3>And the commitment to stand up for.

0:08:39.320 --> 0:08:43.920
<v Speaker 8>Women's reproductive rights, to tackle our gun violence epidemic that

0:08:43.960 --> 0:08:46.480
<v Speaker 8>has hit us pretty hard in Michigan, and.

0:08:46.440 --> 0:08:47.840
<v Speaker 5>There's a team right.

0:08:47.920 --> 0:08:51.880
<v Speaker 8>We have built an incredible ground operation and it's hard

0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:54.200
<v Speaker 8>work with persuasion voters, with turnout.

0:08:54.640 --> 0:08:55.439
<v Speaker 6>I don't want to.

0:08:55.360 --> 0:08:57.680
<v Speaker 8>Turn away from this though now I want to keep going.

0:08:58.120 --> 0:09:01.319
<v Speaker 8>Fifteen some weeks left, bring this over the finish line,

0:09:01.360 --> 0:09:04.680
<v Speaker 8>and I believe and know that the Biden Hearris ticket

0:09:05.080 --> 0:09:06.640
<v Speaker 8>is the one to get this done for us.

0:09:06.840 --> 0:09:09.280
<v Speaker 7>Do you think he's the best candidate though, I do.

0:09:09.400 --> 0:09:13.199
<v Speaker 7>You see the polling today from Washington Post ABC, more

0:09:13.240 --> 0:09:16.920
<v Speaker 7>than fifty six Democrats say six and ten independents that

0:09:17.000 --> 0:09:19.720
<v Speaker 7>he should step beside. Is it that he's the best

0:09:19.760 --> 0:09:23.959
<v Speaker 7>candidate at this moment or there's concern about basically telling

0:09:23.960 --> 0:09:25.640
<v Speaker 7>a sitting president, the leader.

0:09:25.400 --> 0:09:26.800
<v Speaker 5>Of the party, that it's.

0:09:26.640 --> 0:09:27.160
<v Speaker 7>Time to go.

0:09:27.320 --> 0:09:30.600
<v Speaker 8>Look, the stakes are high. The other thing that the

0:09:30.679 --> 0:09:34.760
<v Speaker 8>polling is showing you is that people are freaked out

0:09:35.080 --> 0:09:39.000
<v Speaker 8>about Donald Trump coming back, what that means for young women,

0:09:39.559 --> 0:09:42.640
<v Speaker 8>what that means for our economy that spiraled out of

0:09:42.679 --> 0:09:46.679
<v Speaker 8>control when he was president during a global pandemic that

0:09:46.840 --> 0:09:48.920
<v Speaker 8>was not well handled by him.

0:09:49.559 --> 0:09:54.200
<v Speaker 7>And the polling also shows people think Trump would be

0:09:54.200 --> 0:09:56.520
<v Speaker 7>better when it comes to things like the economy, which

0:09:56.520 --> 0:09:58.520
<v Speaker 7>our polling shows is still the number one issue.

0:09:58.600 --> 0:10:01.360
<v Speaker 8>It is the number one issue, and it's not just

0:10:01.440 --> 0:10:04.440
<v Speaker 8>look at the facts today. Look, pulling is absolutely important.

0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:06.800
<v Speaker 8>I have to look at pulling. And I have had

0:10:06.880 --> 0:10:09.560
<v Speaker 8>polls that have led me down a path of success,

0:10:09.559 --> 0:10:12.440
<v Speaker 8>and I've had polls that have led me wrong before.

0:10:12.520 --> 0:10:16.640
<v Speaker 8>But what I know is that people are concerned about Trump.

0:10:16.800 --> 0:10:19.520
<v Speaker 8>I mean, I hear that on the ground in Oakland County, Michigan.

0:10:19.640 --> 0:10:24.240
<v Speaker 8>It is pulpable. People want to win. These stakes are high. Obviously,

0:10:24.520 --> 0:10:28.400
<v Speaker 8>when President Biden was gathering his delegate votes and campaigning

0:10:28.800 --> 0:10:31.400
<v Speaker 8>in the small primary that he had earlier this year,

0:10:31.679 --> 0:10:34.200
<v Speaker 8>it wasn't one hundred percent clear every step of the

0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:36.719
<v Speaker 8>way that Trump was going to be the nominee. Now

0:10:36.760 --> 0:10:39.439
<v Speaker 8>he's hiding in mar A Lago. We don't see him

0:10:39.480 --> 0:10:43.240
<v Speaker 8>really very much. He's come to Michigan maybe once or twice,

0:10:43.640 --> 0:10:46.960
<v Speaker 8>a few surrogates here and there. Pretty quiet from him.

0:10:47.320 --> 0:10:49.960
<v Speaker 8>And in part we've got a president who's governing, who's

0:10:50.080 --> 0:10:54.320
<v Speaker 8>leading NATO, who's got the backing of international leaders who

0:10:54.360 --> 0:10:57.720
<v Speaker 8>support his plan. We have, by the way, a major

0:10:57.760 --> 0:11:00.640
<v Speaker 8>foreign aid package that got done in a divice government.

0:11:00.880 --> 0:11:02.840
<v Speaker 8>That's exactly what Joe Biden asked.

0:11:03.000 --> 0:11:04.719
<v Speaker 7>I think the concern is not so much can he

0:11:04.880 --> 0:11:07.439
<v Speaker 7>lead right now? It's what does the next four years mean?

0:11:07.480 --> 0:11:10.040
<v Speaker 7>And you mentioned Governor Whitmer. She was on CNN last

0:11:10.080 --> 0:11:12.199
<v Speaker 7>night and she was asked should he take a cognitive test?

0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:15.040
<v Speaker 7>Her answer was it wouldn't hurt, do you agree with

0:11:15.080 --> 0:11:15.520
<v Speaker 7>the governor.

0:11:15.679 --> 0:11:18.800
<v Speaker 8>Yeah, well, Trump joked around about his own cognitive tests

0:11:18.840 --> 0:11:21.280
<v Speaker 8>and you know that he was some super genius and

0:11:21.440 --> 0:11:24.080
<v Speaker 8>was spouting off things. Look, anything the president needs to

0:11:24.120 --> 0:11:28.640
<v Speaker 8>do to reassure people. I have been recently with him

0:11:28.760 --> 0:11:32.400
<v Speaker 8>when he announced tariffs on Chinese evs and critical minerals.

0:11:32.440 --> 0:11:34.280
<v Speaker 8>I was in the Oval office with him for an

0:11:34.280 --> 0:11:37.720
<v Speaker 8>extended period of time. I haven't seen one decision coming

0:11:37.760 --> 0:11:41.840
<v Speaker 8>out of this administration under his leadership that concerns me.

0:11:42.240 --> 0:11:45.520
<v Speaker 8>I also know that we have got a message for

0:11:45.600 --> 0:11:48.880
<v Speaker 8>the next four years. It's clear people are spooked. It's

0:11:48.920 --> 0:11:52.480
<v Speaker 8>also clear, though, people are united to do whatever it

0:11:52.520 --> 0:11:54.880
<v Speaker 8>takes to beat Donald Trump, and we've got the campaign

0:11:54.960 --> 0:11:55.280
<v Speaker 8>to do it.

0:11:55.440 --> 0:11:56.040
<v Speaker 6>We really do.

0:11:56.160 --> 0:11:58.720
<v Speaker 7>You've spent time with him recently, You're going to be

0:11:58.760 --> 0:11:59.720
<v Speaker 7>with him tomorrow.

0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:01.480
<v Speaker 5>You said, there's not a.

0:12:01.400 --> 0:12:05.560
<v Speaker 7>Decision that makes you rethink this that's coming from President Biden.

0:12:05.600 --> 0:12:08.080
<v Speaker 7>Not a decision you see that concerns you. But what

0:12:08.200 --> 0:12:12.560
<v Speaker 7>about his speech, the way he walks actual deterioration is health.

0:12:12.679 --> 0:12:13.720
<v Speaker 3>Have you seen any of that?

0:12:15.080 --> 0:12:15.160
<v Speaker 9>Not?

0:12:15.280 --> 0:12:17.079
<v Speaker 8>Really, to be honest with you, I mean, look, I

0:12:17.440 --> 0:12:19.400
<v Speaker 8>can't tell people to unsee what they saw on the

0:12:19.400 --> 0:12:23.360
<v Speaker 8>debate I thought he answered it. Honestly, Look, it's not

0:12:23.559 --> 0:12:27.440
<v Speaker 8>news that he is the age that he is. I

0:12:27.520 --> 0:12:31.640
<v Speaker 8>look at this and I see flawless execution from this administration,

0:12:32.240 --> 0:12:35.880
<v Speaker 8>COVID relief, infrastructure dollars, not just bills that have gotten passed,

0:12:36.240 --> 0:12:40.080
<v Speaker 8>but things that are being executed flawlessly, like the Chips Act,

0:12:40.080 --> 0:12:43.840
<v Speaker 8>which is so important to our Michigan manufacturing economy. Something

0:12:43.840 --> 0:12:47.840
<v Speaker 8>that President Biden has championed his campaign message is let's

0:12:47.840 --> 0:12:48.640
<v Speaker 8>finish the job.

0:12:48.800 --> 0:12:49.840
<v Speaker 5>There is more to do.

0:12:50.120 --> 0:12:54.000
<v Speaker 8>It's promises made, promise is kept. There are more things

0:12:54.040 --> 0:12:56.800
<v Speaker 8>that we need to accomplish here that are on the horizon.

0:12:57.160 --> 0:13:01.760
<v Speaker 8>Paid leave, funding for our public schools, support for our educators,

0:13:01.800 --> 0:13:05.480
<v Speaker 8>the next generation. This is a real campaign. And look,

0:13:05.520 --> 0:13:08.400
<v Speaker 8>this is a tough moment. It's been quiet. We've had

0:13:08.440 --> 0:13:11.560
<v Speaker 8>twenty four to seven Trump TV and his convictions and

0:13:11.600 --> 0:13:14.439
<v Speaker 8>all that insanity. I don't want to go back to that.

0:13:14.520 --> 0:13:17.000
<v Speaker 8>My voters in Michigan are terrified of going back to that.

0:13:18.040 --> 0:13:22.440
<v Speaker 8>The former president pretends that he supports unions, goes to

0:13:22.520 --> 0:13:26.520
<v Speaker 8>a non union shop. We worked for the UAW, we

0:13:26.600 --> 0:13:30.160
<v Speaker 8>got the UAW endorsement. We've had this whole process here

0:13:30.200 --> 0:13:31.320
<v Speaker 8>where weeks out from.

0:13:31.200 --> 0:13:32.080
<v Speaker 3>Our own convention.

0:13:32.520 --> 0:13:35.040
<v Speaker 8>We got to stand up to this Trump leaders.

0:13:35.040 --> 0:13:37.600
<v Speaker 7>Our concerned Washington Post this morning, there was a behind

0:13:37.600 --> 0:13:41.680
<v Speaker 7>the scenes meeting yesterday Sean Fain. President Biden went and

0:13:41.679 --> 0:13:43.880
<v Speaker 7>stood on a picket line with this man. He is

0:13:43.920 --> 0:13:45.440
<v Speaker 7>now voicing his concerns.

0:13:46.080 --> 0:13:47.960
<v Speaker 5>So when you're in Michigan.

0:13:47.520 --> 0:13:50.160
<v Speaker 7>And you're here from union leaders, Trump is chipping away

0:13:50.160 --> 0:13:55.600
<v Speaker 7>at these people Michigan, potentially Biden can lose. That's what congressman'

0:13:55.600 --> 0:13:57.440
<v Speaker 7>Slockin even said on a recent donor call.

0:13:57.960 --> 0:14:01.839
<v Speaker 8>Yeah, look, we want the win campaign and our union

0:14:01.880 --> 0:14:07.520
<v Speaker 8>leaders they're deploying their members to knockdoors to evangelize this effort.

0:14:07.640 --> 0:14:10.800
<v Speaker 8>And that's what you do in closed door meetings. You

0:14:11.280 --> 0:14:13.240
<v Speaker 8>do say hey, what's our plan, how we're going to

0:14:13.320 --> 0:14:17.760
<v Speaker 8>do this. We're the Democratic Party, you know, differing opinions,

0:14:17.760 --> 0:14:22.040
<v Speaker 8>expression of opinions. I've had four to five Republican members

0:14:22.080 --> 0:14:25.040
<v Speaker 8>of Congress from Michigan who've either left their party, impeached

0:14:25.040 --> 0:14:26.280
<v Speaker 8>the former president, or.

0:14:26.240 --> 0:14:27.160
<v Speaker 5>Got voted out.

0:14:27.480 --> 0:14:30.280
<v Speaker 8>I mean, give me a break, Like, this is how

0:14:30.800 --> 0:14:33.240
<v Speaker 8>it works in our party. It's a good and healthy thing.

0:14:33.280 --> 0:14:35.000
<v Speaker 8>And I'm going to tell you something else that I

0:14:35.040 --> 0:14:38.040
<v Speaker 8>know about Joe Biden. He is the ultimate comeback king.

0:14:38.400 --> 0:14:43.200
<v Speaker 8>He's the most underestimated individual in American politics. He always

0:14:43.240 --> 0:14:46.200
<v Speaker 8>has been. He's got a good north star. He's tapped

0:14:46.200 --> 0:14:49.320
<v Speaker 8>into his faith, He's been through things that have tested

0:14:49.400 --> 0:14:53.560
<v Speaker 8>him for this moment. And yes, he's our older, wiser president.

0:14:53.760 --> 0:14:55.920
<v Speaker 8>He has not steered us wrong, and he has got

0:14:55.960 --> 0:14:59.200
<v Speaker 8>a vision alongside this amazing team that he has to

0:14:59.240 --> 0:15:00.800
<v Speaker 8>continue to win the future for US.

0:15:00.960 --> 0:15:03.600
<v Speaker 7>Commerceman Haley Stevens, thank you so much for your time.

0:15:13.000 --> 0:15:15.000
<v Speaker 2>With us around the table. Steve for Shudo of Missoo,

0:15:15.000 --> 0:15:18.040
<v Speaker 2>I'm still with us. David Kelly of JP Morgan Asset Management.

0:15:18.120 --> 0:15:20.520
<v Speaker 2>David just got this from Neil Data of Renmack. The

0:15:20.560 --> 0:15:23.120
<v Speaker 2>Doves have what they need. It's time to cut get

0:15:23.160 --> 0:15:24.880
<v Speaker 2>on with it. Do you agree?

0:15:25.640 --> 0:15:27.160
<v Speaker 3>No, I think they should go in September.

0:15:27.480 --> 0:15:30.480
<v Speaker 9>I think they just need to be steady as they

0:15:30.520 --> 0:15:33.480
<v Speaker 9>do this because if they rush it, it's going to

0:15:33.480 --> 0:15:36.160
<v Speaker 9>actually look like they're scared about something. And I mean,

0:15:36.160 --> 0:15:37.480
<v Speaker 9>I don't think they should have gone this high in

0:15:37.480 --> 0:15:39.600
<v Speaker 9>the first place, but now they're here, just us take

0:15:39.640 --> 0:15:43.480
<v Speaker 9>it down easily. So I still think September, December, March

0:15:43.600 --> 0:15:47.080
<v Speaker 9>June September December sixth rade cuts one and a half years.

0:15:47.080 --> 0:15:47.920
<v Speaker 3>Think that's what they should do.

0:15:48.000 --> 0:15:50.880
<v Speaker 2>Poulin, Central Portugal sent a strong labor market, gives them

0:15:51.080 --> 0:15:53.160
<v Speaker 2>some time, the luxury of time. Do you think he

0:15:53.200 --> 0:15:54.560
<v Speaker 2>has that time as well?

0:15:55.600 --> 0:15:56.640
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think so.

0:15:56.800 --> 0:16:00.280
<v Speaker 9>I mean there could be some cracks in private that

0:16:00.320 --> 0:16:02.640
<v Speaker 9>could be some craxy and regional banks. I mean, we

0:16:02.680 --> 0:16:04.840
<v Speaker 9>are concerned about things that are not set up for

0:16:04.880 --> 0:16:07.600
<v Speaker 9>normal interest rates. But remember long term interistrates are kind

0:16:07.600 --> 0:16:10.200
<v Speaker 9>of at normal levels here. A normal business ought to

0:16:10.240 --> 0:16:13.600
<v Speaker 9>be able to operate here. So I think it's if

0:16:13.600 --> 0:16:17.920
<v Speaker 9>it's shows the economy a little bit by not accelerating this, okay,

0:16:18.000 --> 0:16:19.920
<v Speaker 9>but I'd rather they take their.

0:16:19.800 --> 0:16:21.960
<v Speaker 3>Time and I'll rush.

0:16:21.720 --> 0:16:25.440
<v Speaker 9>This because once they start rushing rate coats, then it's

0:16:25.440 --> 0:16:26.240
<v Speaker 9>going to scare people.

0:16:26.360 --> 0:16:27.640
<v Speaker 5>See what's your impression.

0:16:27.640 --> 0:16:29.560
<v Speaker 1>I know that you've been on the Maybe they shouldn't

0:16:29.600 --> 0:16:33.000
<v Speaker 1>cut at all. What about given how much inflation has

0:16:33.000 --> 0:16:33.560
<v Speaker 1>come down.

0:16:33.840 --> 0:16:37.240
<v Speaker 10>Again, you've had an inflection point in the economy. We

0:16:37.280 --> 0:16:39.560
<v Speaker 10>went from three point three percent last year with an

0:16:39.560 --> 0:16:42.200
<v Speaker 10>economy that was clearly growing too strong, an inflation was

0:16:42.240 --> 0:16:44.680
<v Speaker 10>not going down. You had to shift to a slower

0:16:44.720 --> 0:16:47.880
<v Speaker 10>growth economy. This year two point two two point three percent.

0:16:48.080 --> 0:16:49.720
<v Speaker 10>You've had some benefits of that in terms of a

0:16:49.760 --> 0:16:52.920
<v Speaker 10>higher unemployment rate, a lower level of inflation. Is the

0:16:52.960 --> 0:16:55.520
<v Speaker 10>economy going to stay a trend or is it going

0:16:55.600 --> 0:16:56.640
<v Speaker 10>beyond that?

0:16:56.640 --> 0:16:58.640
<v Speaker 6>That's now the question they have to answer.

0:16:58.840 --> 0:17:01.040
<v Speaker 10>They also have to worry about the risk because, as

0:17:01.160 --> 0:17:04.280
<v Speaker 10>David mentioned quite clearly, the concern is if they move

0:17:04.359 --> 0:17:07.400
<v Speaker 10>too quickly, the expectational set in the market could get

0:17:07.400 --> 0:17:10.040
<v Speaker 10>ahead of themselves. You know, you've already seen one or

0:17:10.040 --> 0:17:12.560
<v Speaker 10>two of strategists on the streets saying they're going to

0:17:12.640 --> 0:17:15.639
<v Speaker 10>cut rates eight times next year. So you've got this

0:17:15.840 --> 0:17:19.440
<v Speaker 10>environment where if the market goes too far, they then

0:17:19.600 --> 0:17:22.320
<v Speaker 10>have to think about well they then have to reverse policy.

0:17:22.800 --> 0:17:24.600
<v Speaker 10>So the dots have kind of put them in a

0:17:24.640 --> 0:17:26.600
<v Speaker 10>bit of a tricky box for themselves.

0:17:26.880 --> 0:17:30.080
<v Speaker 6>So they really can't do a hawkish cut.

0:17:30.520 --> 0:17:32.479
<v Speaker 10>All they could do here is do a cut that

0:17:32.560 --> 0:17:35.240
<v Speaker 10>fulfills the dots and the markets are likely to go

0:17:35.359 --> 0:17:36.240
<v Speaker 10>well beyond that.

0:17:36.359 --> 0:17:38.960
<v Speaker 1>Okay, pause, this is something that people used to talk about.

0:17:39.080 --> 0:17:41.679
<v Speaker 1>We have just gotten thirty seven record highs on the

0:17:41.800 --> 0:17:42.080
<v Speaker 1>S and.

0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:43.920
<v Speaker 5>P five hundred this year.

0:17:44.400 --> 0:17:48.120
<v Speaker 1>Why is that not potentially problematic enough for them?

0:17:48.640 --> 0:17:49.600
<v Speaker 6>Why is that welcome?

0:17:49.640 --> 0:17:50.399
<v Speaker 5>You think it should be.

0:17:50.520 --> 0:17:53.280
<v Speaker 10>It should be, But this is a different FED. You

0:17:53.359 --> 0:17:55.600
<v Speaker 10>have to take a look at the people at this FED.

0:17:56.160 --> 0:17:59.359
<v Speaker 10>These are a bunch of political economists. They're not the

0:17:59.560 --> 0:18:04.359
<v Speaker 10>old school anti inflation hawks. The political economists want to

0:18:04.359 --> 0:18:07.879
<v Speaker 10>play with the levers. They've written their dissertations on playing

0:18:07.880 --> 0:18:10.400
<v Speaker 10>with the levers. They want to play with the levers.

0:18:10.600 --> 0:18:13.760
<v Speaker 10>They're gonna play with the levers. We're not arguing about

0:18:13.880 --> 0:18:17.200
<v Speaker 10>if we're arguing about when and how the market will

0:18:17.240 --> 0:18:20.359
<v Speaker 10>react to it. They think that they can control the

0:18:20.400 --> 0:18:23.120
<v Speaker 10>market's behavior, and to a certain extent, they've done that,

0:18:23.480 --> 0:18:25.840
<v Speaker 10>and they've gotten a great hand. Let's be honest. They're

0:18:25.880 --> 0:18:28.280
<v Speaker 10>getting everything to want. The economy looks as if it's slowing,

0:18:28.440 --> 0:18:30.520
<v Speaker 10>the labor market looks as if it's coming back to normal.

0:18:30.680 --> 0:18:33.200
<v Speaker 10>Inflation looks as it's coming down. To me, this is

0:18:33.240 --> 0:18:35.200
<v Speaker 10>a winning hand. Why would you toss it out by

0:18:35.240 --> 0:18:36.920
<v Speaker 10>doing something stupid in July?

0:18:37.280 --> 0:18:38.960
<v Speaker 6>They wouldn't. You'd sit back and wait.

0:18:39.160 --> 0:18:40.000
<v Speaker 3>The other thing about it.

0:18:40.040 --> 0:18:42.280
<v Speaker 9>You know, if there are parts of the markets which

0:18:42.359 --> 0:18:44.720
<v Speaker 9>are over exuberant, it is entirely the full to the

0:18:44.720 --> 0:18:47.800
<v Speaker 9>federal reserve for going ten years with raids at zero.

0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:50.440
<v Speaker 9>I mean, if you make the carrying cost of crazy zero,

0:18:51.080 --> 0:18:52.560
<v Speaker 9>then people do crazy things.

0:18:53.000 --> 0:18:54.199
<v Speaker 3>And so we saw that.

0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:57.879
<v Speaker 9>We saw then we've got momentum going in bitcoin and

0:18:57.920 --> 0:18:58.880
<v Speaker 9>meme stalks and.

0:18:58.800 --> 0:19:00.879
<v Speaker 3>Even the mag seven.

0:19:01.320 --> 0:19:03.560
<v Speaker 9>And what's happening now is you've got a stable economy

0:19:03.560 --> 0:19:04.040
<v Speaker 9>and people just.

0:19:03.960 --> 0:19:05.439
<v Speaker 3>Doubling down on the best that have worked.

0:19:05.640 --> 0:19:09.520
<v Speaker 9>But we want to see more fundamental investing rather than

0:19:09.600 --> 0:19:12.879
<v Speaker 9>momentum investing. But they already they've sort of caused this

0:19:12.960 --> 0:19:16.679
<v Speaker 9>momentum investing environment by keeping rate solo so long that

0:19:16.720 --> 0:19:18.480
<v Speaker 9>you could get all these irrational bets going.

0:19:18.600 --> 0:19:19.920
<v Speaker 3>And now the problem is, well, how do you get

0:19:19.920 --> 0:19:20.240
<v Speaker 3>out of that?

0:19:20.280 --> 0:19:23.320
<v Speaker 9>And I think you just returned to rational interest rates,

0:19:23.560 --> 0:19:26.920
<v Speaker 9>which makes sense based on the economic fundamentals, and then

0:19:27.000 --> 0:19:30.360
<v Speaker 9>over time markets can return to that rather than trying

0:19:30.400 --> 0:19:33.879
<v Speaker 9>to manipulate markets by moving industrates too quickly.

0:19:33.920 --> 0:19:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Steve, what do you make of that argument that essentially

0:19:36.040 --> 0:19:37.879
<v Speaker 1>if they adjust policy, that will help some of the

0:19:37.960 --> 0:19:41.359
<v Speaker 1>names that haven't participated in the euphoria we're seeing Russell

0:19:41.400 --> 0:19:44.480
<v Speaker 1>two thousand, which is underperformed, actually outperforming at rate kind

0:19:44.480 --> 0:19:48.320
<v Speaker 1>of expectations, not necessarily in Nvidia, I.

0:19:48.240 --> 0:19:50.720
<v Speaker 10>Think there has been an environment in here in which

0:19:50.800 --> 0:19:54.240
<v Speaker 10>basically the underperformance has been a function of the fact

0:19:54.240 --> 0:19:56.560
<v Speaker 10>that earnings for a lot of these companies haven't been good.

0:19:56.880 --> 0:19:58.680
<v Speaker 10>And the reason why earnings for a lot of these

0:19:58.680 --> 0:20:01.120
<v Speaker 10>companies haven't been good is because their costs have gone up,

0:20:01.520 --> 0:20:03.720
<v Speaker 10>and not only that, because of the discount or the

0:20:03.760 --> 0:20:06.480
<v Speaker 10>slower growth environment that we've seen coming into this year,

0:20:06.800 --> 0:20:09.119
<v Speaker 10>it's harder for them to pass those prices on, so

0:20:09.160 --> 0:20:10.080
<v Speaker 10>they're getting squeezed.

0:20:10.359 --> 0:20:12.560
<v Speaker 6>The question is what is the next reaction to it.

0:20:12.840 --> 0:20:14.800
<v Speaker 10>I think the answer is if the Federal Reserve begins

0:20:14.800 --> 0:20:17.960
<v Speaker 10>to cut interest rates and the market goes very aggressively,

0:20:18.000 --> 0:20:20.720
<v Speaker 10>which I think the market will do. The market will

0:20:20.760 --> 0:20:23.200
<v Speaker 10>overstate what the Fed is going to do because every

0:20:23.200 --> 0:20:25.239
<v Speaker 10>time they cut, they go to zero. I guarantee you

0:20:25.480 --> 0:20:27.480
<v Speaker 10>as soon as they cut, you are going to see

0:20:27.560 --> 0:20:29.520
<v Speaker 10>zero hedge and you're gonna see a lot of news

0:20:29.560 --> 0:20:31.560
<v Speaker 10>stories out there about there must be a collapse in

0:20:31.560 --> 0:20:34.200
<v Speaker 10>the real estate market, there's something going on in the economy.

0:20:34.280 --> 0:20:36.080
<v Speaker 10>The Fed knows something we don't know. We're going to

0:20:36.160 --> 0:20:39.200
<v Speaker 10>be talking about zero levels of interest rates. Once that happens,

0:20:39.480 --> 0:20:41.359
<v Speaker 10>they're going to be faced with a very different situation.

0:20:41.480 --> 0:20:44.000
<v Speaker 10>This is why equity analysts have been unwilling to cut

0:20:44.000 --> 0:20:48.000
<v Speaker 10>their earnings because they know that basically whenever the Fed cuts,

0:20:48.040 --> 0:20:50.200
<v Speaker 10>they go to zero. So we're expecting it to cut.

0:20:50.320 --> 0:20:52.359
<v Speaker 10>We're expecting to go to zero. So why would i

0:20:52.359 --> 0:20:53.960
<v Speaker 10>have cut my earnings numbers. I'm going to have a

0:20:53.960 --> 0:20:54.880
<v Speaker 10>real bullish economy.

0:20:55.200 --> 0:20:57.000
<v Speaker 9>The most data's time for the economy is usually when

0:20:57.000 --> 0:20:58.399
<v Speaker 9>the federal reserve sides are going to help us.

0:20:59.280 --> 0:21:01.119
<v Speaker 2>It's just the point you'll make it just on the

0:21:01.119 --> 0:21:03.280
<v Speaker 2>timing that they wouldn't go in July because it would

0:21:03.280 --> 0:21:03.919
<v Speaker 2>spook people.

0:21:04.560 --> 0:21:06.520
<v Speaker 3>Yes, I mean I think that. I think there is

0:21:06.560 --> 0:21:07.120
<v Speaker 3>a cadence.

0:21:07.440 --> 0:21:09.440
<v Speaker 9>You know, there are four big meetings so they put

0:21:09.440 --> 0:21:11.800
<v Speaker 9>out new sumary of Economic projections and four smaller meetings

0:21:11.800 --> 0:21:15.040
<v Speaker 9>when they don't and I think a cadence of cutting

0:21:15.119 --> 0:21:18.520
<v Speaker 9>rates at every as Summary of Economic Projections meeting, so

0:21:18.520 --> 0:21:19.800
<v Speaker 9>this is September December.

0:21:19.880 --> 0:21:20.959
<v Speaker 3>It makes it predictable.

0:21:21.160 --> 0:21:23.680
<v Speaker 9>And you also get down to look our termal rate

0:21:23.720 --> 0:21:26.720
<v Speaker 9>here is essentially a normal rate of about four percent

0:21:26.800 --> 0:21:28.480
<v Speaker 9>or so in the federal funds rate. That's where we're

0:21:28.480 --> 0:21:31.480
<v Speaker 9>headed until the economy actually need or financial markets in

0:21:31.480 --> 0:21:34.040
<v Speaker 9>the economy need us to do something, but they shouldn't.

0:21:33.720 --> 0:21:35.720
<v Speaker 3>Try and micro manage the economy.

0:21:35.240 --> 0:21:38.840
<v Speaker 9>And because what they end up doing is causing bubbles

0:21:38.840 --> 0:21:40.440
<v Speaker 9>and busts in asset prices.

0:21:40.480 --> 0:21:41.760
<v Speaker 2>I'd like the view from both of you on the

0:21:41.760 --> 0:21:45.840
<v Speaker 2>following question. Are there political considerations at playing hair Do

0:21:45.880 --> 0:21:46.439
<v Speaker 2>you think there are?

0:21:47.160 --> 0:21:51.800
<v Speaker 9>I believe they try very hard not to not to

0:21:52.280 --> 0:21:55.480
<v Speaker 9>interact or make political decisions or virtually political decisions, because

0:21:55.480 --> 0:21:57.119
<v Speaker 9>they don't want to come in back at them. You know,

0:21:57.440 --> 0:22:00.440
<v Speaker 9>deep down, I know they prefer a government that lets

0:22:00.480 --> 0:22:02.800
<v Speaker 9>them do their job because while I don't always agree

0:22:02.800 --> 0:22:04.520
<v Speaker 9>with what they do, I think we would be infinitely

0:22:04.560 --> 0:22:07.040
<v Speaker 9>worse if we had people from the other side of

0:22:07.040 --> 0:22:08.959
<v Speaker 9>Washington telling them what to do. That would only make

0:22:08.960 --> 0:22:11.720
<v Speaker 9>the situation much worse. Side much all the Fed make mistakes,

0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:13.399
<v Speaker 9>but there are all those mistakes they make on their

0:22:13.440 --> 0:22:16.159
<v Speaker 9>road with the best intentions for the country, rather than

0:22:16.240 --> 0:22:19.000
<v Speaker 9>have the other side of Washington make the decisions for them.

0:22:19.160 --> 0:22:21.840
<v Speaker 10>Safe well, I think the answer is they want to

0:22:21.840 --> 0:22:24.280
<v Speaker 10>maximize social welfare. We can argue is to the right

0:22:24.320 --> 0:22:27.000
<v Speaker 10>way to maximize social welfare. The inflation hawks would say

0:22:27.200 --> 0:22:29.520
<v Speaker 10>keep inflation at two percent on a sustained level. Let

0:22:29.560 --> 0:22:32.560
<v Speaker 10>the economy find its own equilibrium on the real growth side.

0:22:32.720 --> 0:22:35.040
<v Speaker 10>This Federal Reserve, on the other hand, wants to maximize

0:22:35.040 --> 0:22:38.399
<v Speaker 10>social welfare by keeping unemployment very, very low. There's a

0:22:38.400 --> 0:22:40.800
<v Speaker 10>big difference in the fundamental profile. And that's the reason

0:22:40.800 --> 0:22:43.360
<v Speaker 10>why I'm sitting here saying it's nuts if they cut

0:22:43.400 --> 0:22:43.880
<v Speaker 10>interest rates.

0:22:43.920 --> 0:22:46.360
<v Speaker 6>They run a lot of risk if they will cut interest.

0:22:46.200 --> 0:22:47.720
<v Speaker 10>Rates, and they may have to reverse it down the

0:22:47.760 --> 0:22:51.480
<v Speaker 10>road because they've created this instinctive response in the marketplace.

0:22:51.880 --> 0:22:53.760
<v Speaker 10>But I also think you have to keep in mind

0:22:53.960 --> 0:22:57.560
<v Speaker 10>this Federal Reserve has been itching to cut rates. I

0:22:57.600 --> 0:23:00.400
<v Speaker 10>think they'd be crazy to go in July and open

0:23:00.440 --> 0:23:03.119
<v Speaker 10>issue as to whether or not we could talk about September.

0:23:03.160 --> 0:23:06.360
<v Speaker 10>It's always been about not if, but when, and we'll

0:23:06.359 --> 0:23:08.280
<v Speaker 10>see what the data shows us between now and then.

0:23:08.560 --> 0:23:11.240
<v Speaker 1>So what you're just saying is that essentially the most

0:23:11.240 --> 0:23:14.159
<v Speaker 1>important number for them is the employment number, not necessarily

0:23:14.200 --> 0:23:15.080
<v Speaker 1>the inflation number.

0:23:15.240 --> 0:23:15.880
<v Speaker 6>Is that correct.

0:23:16.119 --> 0:23:19.280
<v Speaker 10>They don't want to see a rise in unemployment, No,

0:23:19.520 --> 0:23:21.119
<v Speaker 10>they don't want to see it. Keep in mind, the

0:23:21.200 --> 0:23:23.520
<v Speaker 10>rise in unemployment we've had today goes back to something

0:23:23.600 --> 0:23:26.080
<v Speaker 10>David said earlier, which is basically, the household employment is

0:23:26.080 --> 0:23:29.359
<v Speaker 10>dipping and the payroll employment, Oh it isn't. The reality is,

0:23:29.720 --> 0:23:32.920
<v Speaker 10>whenever you re benchmark these two series, guess what, it's

0:23:32.960 --> 0:23:36.200
<v Speaker 10>the household employment that suggested to payroll. So the payroll

0:23:36.240 --> 0:23:39.360
<v Speaker 10>is the better coincident indicator of what's happening. So you've

0:23:39.359 --> 0:23:41.720
<v Speaker 10>had to dip down in household employment, You've had an

0:23:41.760 --> 0:23:44.119
<v Speaker 10>increase in the participation rate, and the unemployment rate has

0:23:44.160 --> 0:23:47.119
<v Speaker 10>gone up. You've had very few layoffs according to that

0:23:47.160 --> 0:23:50.600
<v Speaker 10>same Household survey, so you actually have an environment here

0:23:50.640 --> 0:23:53.159
<v Speaker 10>in which people aren't losing their jobs. So to me,

0:23:53.320 --> 0:23:55.960
<v Speaker 10>the labor market is actually still tighter, and that is

0:23:56.000 --> 0:23:56.919
<v Speaker 10>what they're paying attention.

0:23:57.040 --> 0:23:59.159
<v Speaker 9>Well, I think it's I think it's it's almost like

0:23:59.160 --> 0:24:02.280
<v Speaker 9>we've seen a micro economic change in the labor market

0:24:02.400 --> 0:24:04.760
<v Speaker 9>rather than a macroeconomic change. Because if you go back

0:24:04.800 --> 0:24:06.760
<v Speaker 9>to where we hit a trough back in April of

0:24:07.119 --> 0:24:10.040
<v Speaker 9>twenty three, if you could fog a mirror, you've got

0:24:10.040 --> 0:24:11.800
<v Speaker 9>a job. And frankly, there are a lot of people

0:24:11.800 --> 0:24:14.919
<v Speaker 9>in America who shouldn't be employed. And what's happened is

0:24:14.920 --> 0:24:16.959
<v Speaker 9>if you look at what's actually happened with the unemployment

0:24:17.040 --> 0:24:21.000
<v Speaker 9>numbers from the Household Survey, it's.

0:24:20.800 --> 0:24:24.119
<v Speaker 3>The long term unemployed. They've gone up. And that's really interesting.

0:24:24.160 --> 0:24:25.640
<v Speaker 3>In an economy we've got to eight million.

0:24:25.440 --> 0:24:27.680
<v Speaker 9>Job buildings, there are people who after fifteen weeks, after

0:24:27.680 --> 0:24:31.240
<v Speaker 9>twenty six weeks, cannot find a job. That's not about

0:24:31.240 --> 0:24:34.920
<v Speaker 9>the economy, that's about the you know, are these people employable?

0:24:35.160 --> 0:24:36.600
<v Speaker 9>And so I think what's happened is we've actually I

0:24:36.640 --> 0:24:38.600
<v Speaker 9>think Chairman Pal's right, we have actually returned to a

0:24:38.680 --> 0:24:41.680
<v Speaker 9>kind of normal labor markets. At four point one percent unemployment.

0:24:41.960 --> 0:24:43.320
<v Speaker 9>I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't

0:24:43.320 --> 0:24:45.560
<v Speaker 9>think it's a sign of great macroeconomic weakness. I would

0:24:45.560 --> 0:24:48.320
<v Speaker 9>take issue with one thing, though, I am concerned that

0:24:48.480 --> 0:24:50.920
<v Speaker 9>Payroll Survey may be overestimating things because when I look

0:24:50.960 --> 0:24:55.040
<v Speaker 9>at business formation data, it's suggesting that we're creating all

0:24:55.040 --> 0:24:57.480
<v Speaker 9>these businesses, and if that's feeding into their birth stats model,

0:24:57.840 --> 0:24:59.720
<v Speaker 9>they may be getting a little bit wrong because I

0:24:59.760 --> 0:25:00.760
<v Speaker 9>think I think there's a lot.

0:25:00.640 --> 0:25:01.640
<v Speaker 3>Of churn in businesses.

0:25:01.800 --> 0:25:04.879
<v Speaker 9>I don't think this has a much business new business

0:25:04.920 --> 0:25:06.840
<v Speaker 9>creation as some of the data would suggest.

0:25:07.080 --> 0:25:09.439
<v Speaker 1>Just want to offer this up fed funds futures have

0:25:09.560 --> 0:25:12.320
<v Speaker 1>just readjusted to about eighty five percent chance of September.

0:25:12.400 --> 0:25:14.440
<v Speaker 1>So that sounds like it's a bit more in line

0:25:14.440 --> 0:25:16.919
<v Speaker 1>with what I would expect given what we're seeing.

0:25:17.400 --> 0:25:19.000
<v Speaker 5>I'm curious, Steve, given.

0:25:18.920 --> 0:25:21.119
<v Speaker 1>What you're talking about, how you would see some of

0:25:21.119 --> 0:25:24.080
<v Speaker 1>the earnings that we got today that indicated a real

0:25:24.160 --> 0:25:27.639
<v Speaker 1>reduction in consumer spending and definitely less pricing power.

0:25:27.640 --> 0:25:28.480
<v Speaker 6>More broadly, I.

0:25:28.440 --> 0:25:32.440
<v Speaker 10>Think it indicated more the less broader pricing power environment. Beginning,

0:25:32.440 --> 0:25:34.720
<v Speaker 10>we're still running an inflation rate well above two percent

0:25:34.800 --> 0:25:37.520
<v Speaker 10>even with these numbers, so we're still a percentage point above.

0:25:37.520 --> 0:25:39.320
<v Speaker 10>And if we're going to say, oh gee, the deceleration

0:25:39.359 --> 0:25:41.720
<v Speaker 10>from three percent to two percent is a big movement

0:25:41.720 --> 0:25:44.359
<v Speaker 10>on growth, okay, the movement from three percent to two

0:25:44.400 --> 0:25:46.560
<v Speaker 10>percent on inflation has to be considered a big movement.

0:25:46.640 --> 0:25:49.400
<v Speaker 6>Though, So we're still in that environment.

0:25:49.400 --> 0:25:51.520
<v Speaker 10>So I think that the realities when we balance it

0:25:51.560 --> 0:25:53.879
<v Speaker 10>and we look back at the data in general, we

0:25:53.960 --> 0:25:56.640
<v Speaker 10>take a look, they're still well above their target on inflation,

0:25:56.880 --> 0:25:59.000
<v Speaker 10>and there's still maybe a trend growth.

0:25:59.160 --> 0:26:02.080
<v Speaker 6>Okay, where we go from here? I think the reality

0:26:02.200 --> 0:26:02.879
<v Speaker 6>is that you're.

0:26:02.760 --> 0:26:06.880
<v Speaker 10>Seeing an environment where cost pressures are squeezing companies and

0:26:06.960 --> 0:26:09.760
<v Speaker 10>that's really their problem, and they will if you cut

0:26:09.800 --> 0:26:13.240
<v Speaker 10>interest rates and you have a sharp rebounded economic activity,

0:26:13.560 --> 0:26:17.520
<v Speaker 10>they will pass those price increases along and when that happens,

0:26:17.640 --> 0:26:20.080
<v Speaker 10>then it becomes a problem for them. This is why

0:26:20.200 --> 0:26:23.399
<v Speaker 10>go slow, take your time. You've got a winning hand.

0:26:23.800 --> 0:26:27.679
<v Speaker 10>Why would you do anything today or potentially September to

0:26:27.840 --> 0:26:29.280
<v Speaker 10>destroy that winning hand.

0:26:29.400 --> 0:26:30.919
<v Speaker 6>It makes no sense to me.

0:26:31.119 --> 0:26:33.119
<v Speaker 2>I just wanted to know if FuG and Merits was

0:26:33.160 --> 0:26:34.840
<v Speaker 2>on the job description at JP Morgan.

0:26:34.880 --> 0:26:35.680
<v Speaker 6>That's all I want to know that.

0:26:35.840 --> 0:26:37.359
<v Speaker 5>I wanted to know what he was talking about.

0:26:37.440 --> 0:26:38.720
<v Speaker 1>Is it that you get close to it and.

0:26:38.680 --> 0:26:43.399
<v Speaker 2>Go yeah, yeah, yeah, you're checking.

0:26:44.800 --> 0:26:46.880
<v Speaker 5>Okay, okay, thank you, thank you. I'm just.

0:26:48.600 --> 0:26:48.879
<v Speaker 6>Watching.

0:26:48.920 --> 0:26:51.840
<v Speaker 2>They shout up to David Kelly of JP Morgan to

0:26:51.960 --> 0:26:54.639
<v Speaker 2>both if you, thank you, Jent. It's just fantastic. This

0:26:54.880 --> 0:26:59.359
<v Speaker 2>is the Bloomberg Seventans podcast, bringing you the best in markets, economics,

0:26:59.400 --> 0:27:02.360
<v Speaker 2>anchient pol. You can watch the show live on Bloomberg

0:27:02.400 --> 0:27:05.560
<v Speaker 2>TV weekday mornings from six am to nine am Eastern.

0:27:05.840 --> 0:27:09.200
<v Speaker 2>Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else

0:27:09.240 --> 0:27:11.879
<v Speaker 2>you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg Terminal and

0:27:11.960 --> 0:27:13.160
<v Speaker 2>the Bloomberg Business app.