1
00:00:00,280 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

2
00:00:08,039 --> 00:00:09,920
Speaker 2: Here's the big call of the last twenty four hours,

3
00:00:09,960 --> 00:00:13,760
Speaker 2: Former New York Fed President Bill Dudley saying this, officials

4
00:00:13,840 --> 00:00:16,480
Speaker 2: must cut, and they must do it now. Dudley writing

5
00:00:16,480 --> 00:00:19,480
Speaker 2: and Bloomberg Opinion the following. The facts have changed, so

6
00:00:19,520 --> 00:00:22,680
Speaker 2: I've changed my mind. The Fed should cut, preferably at

7
00:00:22,760 --> 00:00:26,480
Speaker 2: next week's policymaking meeting. Although it might already be too

8
00:00:26,520 --> 00:00:28,880
Speaker 2: late to fend off a recession by cunning interest rates,

9
00:00:28,960 --> 00:00:33,760
Speaker 2: dawdling now unnecessarily increases the risk. Bill joins us for more. Bill,

10
00:00:33,840 --> 00:00:36,600
Speaker 2: wonderful to go on this kind of journey with interest

11
00:00:36,680 --> 00:00:39,400
Speaker 2: rates with you, because I remember at the very start

12
00:00:39,400 --> 00:00:42,320
Speaker 2: of the conversation, coming out of the pandemic, you were

13
00:00:42,600 --> 00:00:45,479
Speaker 2: one together with the likes of Muhammad Aaleri and Larry Summers,

14
00:00:45,479 --> 00:00:47,519
Speaker 2: warning that there were going to be inflation pressures and

15
00:00:47,560 --> 00:00:50,600
Speaker 2: this Federal Reserve needs to hike. You've changed your mind, Bill,

16
00:00:50,640 --> 00:00:53,239
Speaker 2: And in the piece there are several points you've made

17
00:00:53,280 --> 00:00:55,120
Speaker 2: as to why you've changed your mind. I want to

18
00:00:55,160 --> 00:00:57,360
Speaker 2: pick up on what I think was the third one,

19
00:00:57,720 --> 00:01:01,600
Speaker 2: the labor market Bill. What's happening there that's guiding this Coal.

20
00:01:03,240 --> 00:01:06,880
Speaker 3: I think you can see labor market is slowing, especially

21
00:01:07,000 --> 00:01:10,959
Speaker 3: evident in the household employment survey, which is much weaker

22
00:01:11,000 --> 00:01:13,800
Speaker 3: than what we've seen in terms of payroll employment. Over

23
00:01:13,840 --> 00:01:16,360
Speaker 3: the last year, household employments increased by less than two

24
00:01:16,440 --> 00:01:19,800
Speaker 3: hundred thousand. I think the labor market, and the second

25
00:01:19,800 --> 00:01:21,560
Speaker 3: part of the labor market story is, of course, the

26
00:01:21,600 --> 00:01:24,119
Speaker 3: rise in the unemploying rate. We were at three point

27
00:01:24,160 --> 00:01:26,080
Speaker 3: six percent a year ago, now we're at four point

28
00:01:26,160 --> 00:01:28,920
Speaker 3: one percent. And these kind of rises in the unemploying

29
00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:32,000
Speaker 3: rate are essentially warning signs. Every time the unemploying rate

30
00:01:32,040 --> 00:01:33,679
Speaker 3: has gone up by more than a half a percent

31
00:01:33,760 --> 00:01:36,560
Speaker 3: on a three month moving average basis, the US has

32
00:01:36,600 --> 00:01:38,560
Speaker 3: had a recession. This is a so called SAM roll

33
00:01:39,240 --> 00:01:41,600
Speaker 3: right now on the sum rule basis, smoothing it three

34
00:01:41,640 --> 00:01:44,280
Speaker 3: months moving average zero point four to three percent increase.

35
00:01:44,640 --> 00:01:46,920
Speaker 3: So we're getting very very close to training the SAM rule.

36
00:01:47,160 --> 00:01:49,840
Speaker 3: You know, Cherry Pollo himself has pointed out the risks

37
00:01:49,840 --> 00:01:52,560
Speaker 3: now are very much two sided, not one sided. Inflation

38
00:01:52,680 --> 00:01:55,960
Speaker 3: is much more benign two point six percent for the

39
00:01:55,960 --> 00:01:57,840
Speaker 3: core PC to flater a year over year, and we'll

40
00:01:57,840 --> 00:02:01,440
Speaker 3: probably get another good reading on Friday. So I think

41
00:02:01,480 --> 00:02:03,440
Speaker 3: it's time to start to focus on the risk of

42
00:02:03,640 --> 00:02:06,520
Speaker 3: the economy, the risk of the labor market, to minimize

43
00:02:06,520 --> 00:02:09,080
Speaker 3: the risk of recession, which always occurs when the unemployer

44
00:02:09,120 --> 00:02:11,120
Speaker 3: rate goes up by more than zero point five percent

45
00:02:11,160 --> 00:02:13,040
Speaker 3: of three month week average basis.

46
00:02:13,120 --> 00:02:15,560
Speaker 2: Well, let's talk about timing. Then. This was Chairman Poal

47
00:02:15,639 --> 00:02:18,399
Speaker 2: in Centro Portugal, so not even a month ago. He said,

48
00:02:18,440 --> 00:02:20,399
Speaker 2: we have the ability to take our time and get

49
00:02:20,400 --> 00:02:22,840
Speaker 2: this right because the US economy is strong and the

50
00:02:22,919 --> 00:02:26,160
Speaker 2: labor market is strong. Based on your piece, just on

51
00:02:26,240 --> 00:02:29,640
Speaker 2: the timing, they might already be too late to fend

52
00:02:29,639 --> 00:02:33,040
Speaker 2: off a recession. Why are they miscalculating how much time

53
00:02:33,080 --> 00:02:35,359
Speaker 2: they have, in your opinion, even though they have acknowledged

54
00:02:35,360 --> 00:02:37,320
Speaker 2: what's developing in the labor market.

55
00:02:38,280 --> 00:02:40,440
Speaker 3: Well, I think they put not very much weight on

56
00:02:40,800 --> 00:02:44,040
Speaker 3: the some rule, some rules, perfect perfect track records since

57
00:02:44,080 --> 00:02:47,480
Speaker 3: World War two thirteen and zero. But the interview is

58
00:02:47,480 --> 00:02:49,560
Speaker 3: that the reason why the unemployer rate's going up is

59
00:02:49,600 --> 00:02:52,520
Speaker 3: because labor force is growing rapidly, So that's not as

60
00:02:52,560 --> 00:02:55,320
Speaker 3: disturbing as if the unemployer rate was going up because

61
00:02:55,360 --> 00:02:58,440
Speaker 3: people are being laid off. The problem with that story

62
00:02:58,520 --> 00:03:00,680
Speaker 3: is that in the nineteen seventies, we had labor force

63
00:03:00,680 --> 00:03:03,880
Speaker 3: growth is also extremely rapid som roll held. So I

64
00:03:03,919 --> 00:03:05,519
Speaker 3: think you said you want to stick with the Sam

65
00:03:05,600 --> 00:03:07,240
Speaker 3: rule until it's disproved that.

66
00:03:07,280 --> 00:03:10,400
Speaker 1: Said Klaudiassam of the Sum role has actually come on

67
00:03:10,440 --> 00:03:12,720
Speaker 1: and said people put too much emphasis on my son

68
00:03:12,880 --> 00:03:15,359
Speaker 1: role and actually backed away from using that as one

69
00:03:15,480 --> 00:03:19,079
Speaker 1: indicator to really end all be all. Is there anything

70
00:03:19,200 --> 00:03:22,200
Speaker 1: other than that that creates new urgency for.

71
00:03:22,200 --> 00:03:23,120
Speaker 2: This sudden pivot?

72
00:03:23,639 --> 00:03:26,280
Speaker 1: Really a week before the Fed's meeting.

73
00:03:27,600 --> 00:03:30,560
Speaker 3: Well, you know, if the FED doesn't cut in July

74
00:03:30,880 --> 00:03:32,960
Speaker 3: and waste of September, it's not going to have a

75
00:03:33,040 --> 00:03:36,040
Speaker 3: huge effect on the communist ditrectory, except the fact that

76
00:03:36,080 --> 00:03:39,200
Speaker 3: when the unemployment rates starts to deteriorate, the team seem

77
00:03:39,280 --> 00:03:43,440
Speaker 3: to be a reinforcing negative feedback loop. Job jobs are lost,

78
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:46,800
Speaker 3: people pull back on spending. That leads to cuts in

79
00:03:47,000 --> 00:03:52,120
Speaker 3: further cuts in the employment and investment. So the striking

80
00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:54,200
Speaker 3: thing about the Sum rule is not just a zero

81
00:03:54,280 --> 00:03:56,760
Speaker 3: point five percent threshold, is the fact that every time

82
00:03:56,760 --> 00:03:59,480
Speaker 3: you've gone through that threshold, the unmployer rate's gone up

83
00:03:59,520 --> 00:04:02,240
Speaker 3: a lot. The smallest increase beyond when you go beyond

84
00:04:02,320 --> 00:04:05,320
Speaker 3: zero point five percent is almost two percentage points. So

85
00:04:05,320 --> 00:04:07,240
Speaker 3: that just tells you that once things get start to

86
00:04:07,320 --> 00:04:10,119
Speaker 3: unwind in a negative direction, it tends to keep going.

87
00:04:10,160 --> 00:04:13,400
Speaker 3: And that's why the risk here is significant.

88
00:04:13,720 --> 00:04:15,800
Speaker 1: Bill, your colin got a lot of attention, and in

89
00:04:15,880 --> 00:04:18,400
Speaker 1: large part because you were on the forefront as John

90
00:04:18,520 --> 00:04:20,400
Speaker 1: was mentioning of this idea that the FED would have

91
00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:22,720
Speaker 1: to raise rates much beyond what people currently thought at

92
00:04:22,760 --> 00:04:26,479
Speaker 1: the time, and that maybe even the neutral rate was

93
00:04:26,520 --> 00:04:28,880
Speaker 1: going to be higher than what it was in the

94
00:04:28,920 --> 00:04:32,080
Speaker 1: past based on the weakening that you've seen. Are you

95
00:04:32,160 --> 00:04:35,880
Speaker 1: rethinking that concept that inflation is going to be structurally

96
00:04:36,000 --> 00:04:37,359
Speaker 1: higher and that the FED is going to have a

97
00:04:37,400 --> 00:04:39,760
Speaker 1: harder time combating it in the future.

98
00:04:41,440 --> 00:04:43,880
Speaker 3: Well, if the economy slows and the unemployed right rises,

99
00:04:43,960 --> 00:04:47,000
Speaker 3: then the downward pressures on inflation are going to persist.

100
00:04:48,000 --> 00:04:49,880
Speaker 3: You know, two point six percent is really not that

101
00:04:49,960 --> 00:04:53,560
Speaker 3: far away from the Fed's two percent inflation objection objective,

102
00:04:53,560 --> 00:04:57,320
Speaker 3: and in my mind that difference is not a sufficient

103
00:04:57,360 --> 00:05:00,960
Speaker 3: to take a big risk of reces. So I think

104
00:05:01,000 --> 00:05:02,640
Speaker 3: it's time to the FED to focus on the other

105
00:05:02,680 --> 00:05:05,080
Speaker 3: side of its dual mandate, which is the employment side.

106
00:05:05,440 --> 00:05:07,520
Speaker 3: Paul has talked about the fact that the FED has

107
00:05:07,880 --> 00:05:10,760
Speaker 3: two objectives, inflation and employment, and I just feel like

108
00:05:10,800 --> 00:05:12,680
Speaker 3: the risks on the employment side are increasing to the

109
00:05:12,720 --> 00:05:15,000
Speaker 3: points that you want to put more weight on that.

110
00:05:15,720 --> 00:05:17,400
Speaker 2: But a lot of the things you can say as

111
00:05:17,400 --> 00:05:19,880
Speaker 2: a form of FED official that you can't say as

112
00:05:19,880 --> 00:05:22,560
Speaker 2: a current FED official. I'm just interested in the communication

113
00:05:22,640 --> 00:05:25,080
Speaker 2: of this. You can speak your mind now freely with us.

114
00:05:25,120 --> 00:05:27,400
Speaker 2: You can write the piece on Bloomberg Opinion. Can you

115
00:05:27,480 --> 00:05:30,159
Speaker 2: imagine what the fallout would be if we had the

116
00:05:30,200 --> 00:05:32,600
Speaker 2: current New York FED President or the chairman of the

117
00:05:32,600 --> 00:05:35,000
Speaker 2: Federal Reserve saying the things that you're saying right now

118
00:05:35,440 --> 00:05:37,520
Speaker 2: at the July FED meeting. Do you think they can

119
00:05:37,560 --> 00:05:41,040
Speaker 2: even do that even if they thought it well.

120
00:05:41,080 --> 00:05:43,000
Speaker 3: I think if chir Paul was of the view that

121
00:05:44,640 --> 00:05:47,000
Speaker 3: shared the same view as many, I think he would

122
00:05:47,040 --> 00:05:51,200
Speaker 3: probably talk to the officials and develop a consensus to

123
00:05:51,320 --> 00:05:52,560
Speaker 3: move in in July. I mean, I think one of

124
00:05:52,600 --> 00:05:56,000
Speaker 3: the interesting sort of quandaries of the fetis and right

125
00:05:56,040 --> 00:05:58,359
Speaker 3: now they've telegraphed it pretty clearly that they're going to

126
00:05:58,360 --> 00:06:00,320
Speaker 3: move in September, and it's sort of basic question. It

127
00:06:00,440 --> 00:06:02,359
Speaker 3: was so obvious that you need to move in September,

128
00:06:02,400 --> 00:06:04,599
Speaker 3: then what are you waiting for? Why not just moving July?

129
00:06:05,200 --> 00:06:07,200
Speaker 1: At this point, there are a lot of people who

130
00:06:07,400 --> 00:06:11,640
Speaker 1: are associating political reasons for why someone might want to

131
00:06:11,680 --> 00:06:13,719
Speaker 1: come out and say that now is the right time

132
00:06:13,760 --> 00:06:17,240
Speaker 1: to cut since the data hasn't weakened that dramatically in

133
00:06:17,279 --> 00:06:19,719
Speaker 1: the past couple of weeks, we have seen an ongoing

134
00:06:19,760 --> 00:06:23,719
Speaker 1: deterioration that seems consistent with a normalization bill.

135
00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:25,159
Speaker 2: How do you counter.

136
00:06:24,960 --> 00:06:27,960
Speaker 1: Those accusations that this is being done ahead of an

137
00:06:27,960 --> 00:06:32,480
Speaker 1: election highly contested where if the economy can keep doing okay,

138
00:06:33,000 --> 00:06:35,960
Speaker 1: typically the incumbent or the incumbent party does better.

139
00:06:37,560 --> 00:06:39,840
Speaker 3: Well. I think my experience, and I think this is

140
00:06:39,880 --> 00:06:42,520
Speaker 3: borne out by the Federal over Market Committee transcripts over

141
00:06:42,600 --> 00:06:44,920
Speaker 3: many many years, is the FED doesn't take politics and

142
00:06:45,000 --> 00:06:48,080
Speaker 3: consideration at all, and in terms of this timing of monetary policy,

143
00:06:48,320 --> 00:06:53,159
Speaker 3: ratiing cases or rate cuts, and I think that's appropriate

144
00:06:53,200 --> 00:06:55,040
Speaker 3: behavior by the Fed. They need to be independent, they

145
00:06:55,040 --> 00:06:57,640
Speaker 3: don't want it. They shouldn't be taking the election cycle

146
00:06:57,680 --> 00:07:00,640
Speaker 3: into consideration, and I don't think the Fed is doing

147
00:07:00,680 --> 00:07:03,240
Speaker 3: that here. I think the reason why the Fed is

148
00:07:03,240 --> 00:07:07,400
Speaker 3: delaying is I think they were surprise last year when

149
00:07:07,640 --> 00:07:09,880
Speaker 3: they thought inflation was coming down and it turned out

150
00:07:09,920 --> 00:07:13,600
Speaker 3: we got a number of disappointing reasonings readings on inflation.

151
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:16,600
Speaker 3: I think they're also probably waiting because Paul probably wants

152
00:07:16,640 --> 00:07:18,960
Speaker 3: to achieve a full consensus, you know. I think he'd

153
00:07:19,000 --> 00:07:21,760
Speaker 3: like to see a unanimous boat in favor of easing.

154
00:07:22,000 --> 00:07:23,600
Speaker 3: And the hawks maybe, you know, there may be some

155
00:07:23,640 --> 00:07:26,120
Speaker 3: people were hawkish on the nefom seed. They are still

156
00:07:26,480 --> 00:07:29,840
Speaker 3: a bit reluctant. I think ray cuts are definitely coming.

157
00:07:29,880 --> 00:07:32,720
Speaker 3: I just think that at this point there's not a

158
00:07:32,760 --> 00:07:34,040
Speaker 3: really strong case for waiting.

159
00:07:34,320 --> 00:07:36,560
Speaker 2: Hi, Bill, it's quite to catch up with this. Appreciate

160
00:07:36,600 --> 00:07:39,400
Speaker 2: the insight. This piece yesterday and Bloomberg Opinion got a

161
00:07:39,480 --> 00:07:42,280
Speaker 2: ton of attention. They form a New York Fed President

162
00:07:42,560 --> 00:07:45,600
Speaker 2: and Bloomberg Opinion columnist Bill Dumpley that on his cove

163
00:07:45,680 --> 00:07:46,920
Speaker 2: to start counting interest rights