Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Brownwitz Jaily. We bring you
Speaker 1: insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and international relations.
Speaker 1: Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcast, Suncloud, Bloomberg dot com,
Speaker 1: and of course on the Bloomberg terminal. Here's why the
Speaker 1: game is played a long time, and the great Martin
Speaker 1: Feldstein told me this once you try to write op
Speaker 1: eds and they're really hard to write. They're much harder
Speaker 1: to pull off than any of us think. And if
Speaker 1: you're lucky, one out of five, one out of seven.
Speaker 1: As residents. William Dudley of the New York Fat and
Speaker 1: of course all his work at Golden Sachs over the
Speaker 1: year's full disclosure. He was on my book of Ancient
Speaker 1: Time Ago. Bill Dudley has done that. The essay this
Speaker 1: Morning from Dudley is a required read because he lectures
Speaker 1: us on the dynamics of inflation and now it links
Speaker 1: to the real economy. I'll get that out on Twitter.
Speaker 1: It's the essay to throw at somebody mouthing off with
Speaker 1: certitude about inflation. Bill Dudley, congratulations are clearing the air.
Speaker 1: I want to go back to Hella in the sixties,
Speaker 1: and it's real simple, Bill Dudley. You emphasize demand pull
Speaker 1: inflation over cost push inflation. Why is demand of labor
Speaker 1: so important to jump start our fear of inflation? Well, again,
Speaker 1: an ongoing inflation problem, not just the little bubble that
Speaker 1: we're experiencing right now from reopening and lid disruptions. You
Speaker 1: really need to have pressure on resources, and pressure on
Speaker 1: resources starts with labor. It's probably a premature to expect
Speaker 1: a real inflation problem right now because we still have
Speaker 1: a lot of people out of work because of the pandemic.
Speaker 1: You look at the level of payil employment to right
Speaker 1: now compared to where we were in several before the
Speaker 1: endemic started, were still eight million jobs short. And we're
Speaker 1: also not seeing much in the way of wage pressure.
Speaker 1: While wage pressure in the first quarter was a little
Speaker 1: bit firmer on a your over your basis, So wages
Speaker 1: for a private sector workers are only up two percent,
Speaker 1: it's hard to have much of a weight of inflation
Speaker 1: problem with wages are still quite cressive. Dr Dudley, how
Speaker 1: do you overlay this different American economy? Lisa alluded to
Speaker 1: this earlier, but to me, it's simply an exercise and
Speaker 1: technology and an exercise and concentration of jobs growth almost monopximistic.
Speaker 1: How do you overlay technology onto the American fears of
Speaker 1: inflation in two thousand twenty one. Well, to that technology
Speaker 1: is obviously changing work there, habits in quite a way
Speaker 1: allows people to work remotely. Uh, and so we're going
Speaker 1: to see a wholesale change in how people work. I
Speaker 1: think over the next few years you know whether whether
Speaker 1: we how fluch we go back to the predemn endemic
Speaker 1: motive working I think remains to be seen. I think
Speaker 1: the problem right now is that you have a lot
Speaker 1: of people who are not actively seeking work because you know,
Speaker 1: they have child care problems, Uh, they're worried about getting sick,
Speaker 1: or uh, they just may you know, their their businesses
Speaker 1: may not have been reopened yet. But I think as
Speaker 1: the economy reopens, a lot of these eight million workers
Speaker 1: there are still out of work, will will will become
Speaker 1: available again. Bill, how much control does the FED still
Speaker 1: have over inflation? I think they still have control in
Speaker 1: the large in the sense that they can control how
Speaker 1: fast the economy grows, how tight the labor market becomes
Speaker 1: and that ultimately drives inflation. They can on over in
Speaker 1: the small I mean, obviously the supply disruptions that we're
Speaker 1: seeing right now that can't do very much about that,
Speaker 1: the big spiky soft for example, and use car prices.
Speaker 1: You know, that's a confluence of two things, one chip
Speaker 1: disruptions that are limiting new car production and to demand
Speaker 1: for cars by rental companies who are starting to get
Speaker 1: back in business again. But it raises a question for
Speaker 1: the reaction function of the federals serve, in other words,
Speaker 1: how much they can actually effectuate change or some sort
Speaker 1: of decline in these prices. Should it start to tighten policy.
Speaker 1: It perhaps isn't a first step towards tightening policy, but
Speaker 1: the Fed is going to unwind it's nearly fourteen billion
Speaker 1: dollar uh portfolio of corporate debt and corporate debt ETFs.
Speaker 1: Was this policy a template for how the Fed will
Speaker 1: handle other additional market situations going forward. I think what
Speaker 1: they're doing with the corporate bond portfolio is pretty unrelated
Speaker 1: to the whole notion of montery policy tightening, because it's
Speaker 1: actually very small portfolio in terms of size, and it's
Speaker 1: not something that they typically own as part of their
Speaker 1: portfolio mix. But I think I would not take that
Speaker 1: decision as implying anything about the timing of paper and
Speaker 1: the timing of actually lifting off raising short community bill
Speaker 1: does does? Does The FED, though, actually really want to
Speaker 1: see that target hit because we get a lot of
Speaker 1: talk out of the FED about how this is transitory.
Speaker 1: There seems to be this general sense here right now
Speaker 1: that if expectations of elves don't rise, you basically don't
Speaker 1: get there. You look at market pricing right now, we're
Speaker 1: somewhere around about two point three percent or so on
Speaker 1: five year five year forwards right now. With regards to
Speaker 1: inflation expectations, that's pretty much in line with what we've
Speaker 1: seen or the last ten twenty thirty years as far
Speaker 1: as averages go. Here, expectations at least among the market
Speaker 1: really hasn't risen despite all of the anecdotal evidence we
Speaker 1: have on the ground that inflation is here and it
Speaker 1: is real. DEFEND is actually happy that inflation expectations have
Speaker 1: risen a bit, because they were actually pretty low going
Speaker 1: into the pandemic, and this is one reason why the
Speaker 1: FIT has changed their long term Terrey policy framework to
Speaker 1: target to percent inflation and average rather than to percent
Speaker 1: inflation at any point in time. They want to keep
Speaker 1: inflation expectations better anchored anchored, and this increase that we've
Speaker 1: seen in inflation expectations, which is pretty modest as better
Speaker 1: anchored inflation expectations around two percent there. So they're pretty
Speaker 1: comfortable with what's happening in that respect. They're probably happy
Speaker 1: about that as opposed to unhappy about that. You're absolutely right,
Speaker 1: though inflation expectations are well behaved, it's really hard to
Speaker 1: get an ongoing inflation problem. So my view of it
Speaker 1: is it's really about the labor market tightness and the
Speaker 1: labor market that driving of wages, wages getting into prices,
Speaker 1: and then do the does the increase in prices start
Speaker 1: to affect inflation expectations. I think that that what we're
Speaker 1: seeing now in inflation is going to turn out to
Speaker 1: be transitory. But I think there could be a longer
Speaker 1: term inflation problem just because the FEDS Monterrey policy regime
Speaker 1: is a different one now where they said that it
Speaker 1: could be very very slow to lift off from zero
Speaker 1: in terms of short term interest rate. I'm curious as
Speaker 1: your thoughts on the wage a situation, the wage inflation situation,
Speaker 1: particularly because we actually saw wages at least as far
Speaker 1: as their historical averages hold up pretty well UH during
Speaker 1: the COVID induced recession. Here the idea here that we
Speaker 1: would see some sort of meaningful appreciation above the whatever
Speaker 1: it is three uh plus rate that we've been at. Here,
Speaker 1: is it even possible, given that we're coming off such
Speaker 1: a relatively high floor UH, that we would see a
Speaker 1: meaningful bump up in wage inflation. I mean, it's possible,
Speaker 1: but it's hard to imagine a big wage inflame Asian
Speaker 1: spiral at this point in time, giving that you still
Speaker 1: have eight million or eight million jobs short of where
Speaker 1: you were going into the pandemic, and the unemployment rate itself,
Speaker 1: even though that doesn't suggest the labor market that's that
Speaker 1: type six point one percent unemployment rates still well above
Speaker 1: the three and a half percent rate that we reached
Speaker 1: in February of two thousand and twenty, the labor market slack.
Speaker 1: Before we let you go, Bill, we're talking about AMC today.
Speaker 1: Is the FED responsible for frothy markets? I think the
Speaker 1: FED is responsible for creating a monterrey policy that's very
Speaker 1: conducive to lifting financial asset prices, but you know, the
Speaker 1: AMC phenomenal. I think it's something that I would not
Speaker 1: lay at the feet of the FED. Well, Bill, we'd
Speaker 1: like to get more of a quote from you than
Speaker 1: that on AMC. Right, Bill, do you think regulations got
Speaker 1: to step in here? I mean this is unusual, to
Speaker 1: say the least. Well, I think you know this is
Speaker 1: a question where you know, I think people need to
Speaker 1: think about what's fundamental value? What's the stockbrights relative value?
Speaker 1: You know? So so buyer beware. I guess that's why
Speaker 1: Bill Dudley, with advice to Romaine Bostick, will run their
Speaker 1: tap this afternoon. Budley Bloomberg Opinion comments, I can't say
Speaker 1: enough about his essay today. I'll put it out on
Speaker 1: Twitter here in a bit right now, Glenn Hubbard joins us.
Speaker 1: He is, of course the former dean of Columbia Business School,
Speaker 1: which many of our employees have attended, and I must say,
Speaker 1: with his esteem public service to America, Glenn, we're so
Speaker 1: happy to have you with your bachelor's degree of Florida,
Speaker 1: knowing that Bill Dudley will come along with his bachelor's
Speaker 1: degree of Florida. What's in Florida economics. I think it's
Speaker 1: hugely misunderstood in the northeast of the esteemed history of
Speaker 1: Florida economics talked to us about Central Florida. His Bill
Speaker 1: Dudley would talk about the New College. Well, I had
Speaker 1: a great experience. I was an engineering student and then
Speaker 1: any con student. But I thing but great teachers and
Speaker 1: great experiences and a wonderful part of the country. I
Speaker 1: could really say, folks, you know, in all my experience here,
Speaker 1: Florida economics is a general statement, is way way under rated.
Speaker 1: Glenn Hubbard, you are not in inflation East. I want
Speaker 1: you to describe for our audiences fear of inflation and
Speaker 1: what the true inflation eastas have wrong. Well, it really
Speaker 1: gets back to supply and demand, Tom, and it's a
Speaker 1: race between the two. We know the economy is reopening
Speaker 1: and demand is certainly there from very a comminative fiscal
Speaker 1: and monetary policy. Supply has been slower, with bottlenecks and
Speaker 1: some issues in the labor markets like unemployment insurance benefits
Speaker 1: perhaps being too generous. I think, on balance, it's not
Speaker 1: that I think the FED is necessarily wrong, but they're
Speaker 1: not managing risks. Well, I do think there's more of
Speaker 1: a risk of an upside to inflation, and I think
Speaker 1: the FED would be wise to at least acknowledge that
Speaker 1: risk more and begin it's tapering and discussions of tapering.
Speaker 1: You mentioned Florida. I'm from the South. There's an expression
Speaker 1: fixing to do something. Well, if FED needs to stop
Speaker 1: fixing to do something and actually do something. So can
Speaker 1: you draw the distinction between good inflation and bad inflation
Speaker 1: at a time when food prices are searching the most
Speaker 1: in more than a decade. Well, I don't know that
Speaker 1: anything is really good, but the transitory inflation would be
Speaker 1: simply the bottlenecks occur and we have supply chain disruptions
Speaker 1: related to the pandemic. Takes a little while for that
Speaker 1: to work through. Relative prices can change as people's preferences
Speaker 1: change across goods. The real concern is longer term, persistent inflation.
Speaker 1: And I do get a little weary of hearing the
Speaker 1: FEDS say, well, we have all the tools. Of course,
Speaker 1: they have all the tools, but they had all the
Speaker 1: tools in the nine sixties two and and it got
Speaker 1: out of hands. And I think you you really need
Speaker 1: to watch those pressures a little bit more carefully than
Speaker 1: are being watched right now, Professor Hubbard, we're just getting
Speaker 1: a word from political reporting that Biden wants one trillion
Speaker 1: dollars in new spending in the infrastructure bill, countering some
Speaker 1: of the Republican offers that include less than three billion
Speaker 1: dollars in new spending. Why do you think that this
Speaker 1: is excessive given the fact that we still have a
Speaker 1: lot of people unemployed and wages are still a key concern,
Speaker 1: particularly on the lower wage spectrum. Well, I do think
Speaker 1: it's successive. We don't have output gaps. If I can
Speaker 1: use econ speak for a minute, of the size the
Speaker 1: Biden plans identify. I do think we need a real
Speaker 1: infrastructure package, but a lot of what President Biden is
Speaker 1: proposed is really more social spending than infrastructure. And I
Speaker 1: think the economy does need infrastructure, and even the size
Speaker 1: of that could be open to debate. What worries me
Speaker 1: about his physical plans is that if you add them
Speaker 1: all up, from the rescue plan, the job's Plan, the
Speaker 1: Family's plan, they're very, very large and largely unpaid for,
Speaker 1: despite despite the red and they are indeed a transformation
Speaker 1: and away from work and dynamism towards social spending, and
Speaker 1: both of those things worry me, and I think worry
Speaker 1: me in the public. You know, there was a great
Speaker 1: rap video about ten years ago UM that showed Caines
Speaker 1: versus Hyak in a boxing match. But a decade on
Speaker 1: it seems like Cain's one uh in a knockout Hiak.
Speaker 1: I mean, there aren't any Austrian economists left, it seems,
Speaker 1: and even the Kynesians are have become conservative and traditional.
Speaker 1: M M T is the new way to think is
Speaker 1: there has there really been a sea change here? Well,
Speaker 1: I'm not so. Strike actually use that video of my
Speaker 1: political economy class to talk about the pandemic. So basically
Speaker 1: the Keynsie response was the big aggregate demand stimulus. But
Speaker 1: a lot of what is going to happen in the
Speaker 1: economy and is interesting in the economy is how we're
Speaker 1: going to adapt, as we received from co Good, that's
Speaker 1: a high ache In story. The way to do that
Speaker 1: is on the ground, high X quote, man on the spot,
Speaker 1: person on the spot of really figuring that out. So
Speaker 1: I think we're gonna need a mixture of the Kynsie
Speaker 1: response and the high achie In response. And I don't
Speaker 1: think we want one without the other. We uh, we
Speaker 1: all love the economics lesson. We saw on Ferris Bueller's
Speaker 1: Day Off where he talks about voodoo economics. UM, top
Speaker 1: down stimulus. What we're looking at right now in Matthew
Speaker 1: Bosler's Great Big Take UM from last week you're quoted
Speaker 1: in that story is an attempt to stimulate the economy
Speaker 1: from the bottom up. Is that, UM a smart way
Speaker 1: to do it? Well, I think we do need measures
Speaker 1: that maintaining incomes. I do think we're calling too much stimulus.
Speaker 1: What the economy really needs right now is a way
Speaker 1: to help people adapt and that support for the jobs
Speaker 1: of the future, for the businesses of the future. And
Speaker 1: it's very different then the kinds of plans that President
Speaker 1: Biden is proposing. Unfortunately, the opposition is not proposing much either,
Speaker 1: but it would really be about jobs in the future.
Speaker 1: Greg Glenn, rather, we're short on time. I want to
Speaker 1: be direct as I can. We're getting new pushback in Congress.
Speaker 1: According to Greg Villier on text increases, can we move
Speaker 1: this forward without text increases or do you just assume
Speaker 1: it's got to happen? Well, this is what you mean
Speaker 1: by this? If you mean a modest infrastructure plan. Probably,
Speaker 1: if it's true infrastructure, you can borrow for much of
Speaker 1: that and use user fees. If you mean the very
Speaker 1: large spending bills the President is proposed, you would need
Speaker 1: taxing pieces. Unfortunately, what you would have to have to
Speaker 1: really pay for that would be something like a value
Speaker 1: added tax, and the President hasn't talked about that. The
Speaker 1: tax increases he's proposing are much too small. Glenn Hubard,
Speaker 1: thank you so much, greatly, greatly appreciate it this morning.
Speaker 1: Right now, we are thrilled to bring on the equity
Speaker 1: market someone who's absolutely nailed at Julian Emmanuel B. T
Speaker 1: i D, Chief Equities and derivative strategist. Julian, good morning.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna cut right to the chase. We've had a rotation.
Speaker 1: One camp says a rotation continues. Another camp says, go
Speaker 1: along the big tech. Which is it? We think the
Speaker 1: rotation continues if you look at it, regardless of what
Speaker 1: the Fed does or does not do. Says there doesn't
Speaker 1: say how many thinking about sweet here. The U. S
Speaker 1: economy is going to grow somewhere six seven eight percent
Speaker 1: this year. It's tracking for ten percent this quarter, and
Speaker 1: that to US means value continues to outperform. We're gonna
Speaker 1: do a headline right now and we'll come back to
Speaker 1: it in a moment with Romayne Boston AMC Entertainment. They
Speaker 1: filed to sell up to twelve million shares that's on
Speaker 1: a float right now. A five million, so you can
Speaker 1: take twelve and divided by five and gives you a
Speaker 1: sense of it. We'll get back to that in a moment.
Speaker 1: On the stock that hasn't a rich little story, Julian Emmanuel,
Speaker 1: what's your original store in this market right now as
Speaker 1: you're right up for the weekend after the jobs report,
Speaker 1: what sectors, what part of the market are you looking at? Well?
Speaker 1: So for us, the story has been if you look
Speaker 1: at it, you've got the meme stocks moving, you've got
Speaker 1: this fascination with inflation. But in reality, the SMP five
Speaker 1: hundred index has essentially gone nowhere for the last two months. Now. Normally,
Speaker 1: the wisdom has it you never want to shore a
Speaker 1: dull market. You look at the last three years or so,
Speaker 1: and actually, in fact, when the market gets this quiet,
Speaker 1: basically you know day to day moves in the SMP
Speaker 1: five hundred of three, four or five points on a
Speaker 1: four thousand plus number. Uh, it really says it's time
Speaker 1: to be a little bit more defensive. As I said,
Speaker 1: we like the value stocks. We're tilting more defensively here
Speaker 1: consumer staples with pricing, power, healthcare, and actually reads which
Speaker 1: are going to do well if the environment stays inflationary. Julian,
Speaker 1: are you telling clients to load the boat on AMC.
Speaker 1: That's a much more difficult call, Lisa. I think when
Speaker 1: when you look at it, the options market is telling
Speaker 1: you that the yellow flag is coming out once again.
Speaker 1: We go back to January when you had that first
Speaker 1: top in the meme stocks. We all know the video
Speaker 1: game retailer, their option implied volatility hit a thousand percent.
Speaker 1: That was the top. Worried about six hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: seven percent um in in the movie theater stock today. Uh,
Speaker 1: this is a warning sign. This speculation is intense. Uh.
Speaker 1: And as we set back in January, rocket ships go
Speaker 1: back to their lunch pads. How do you understand the
Speaker 1: trading activity here? Is this Reddit traders sending messages to
Speaker 1: their grandmothers saying load the boat on a m C.
Speaker 1: Or is there another phenomenon happening here that's either more
Speaker 1: tied to the fundamentals or more tied to institutional traders. Well,
Speaker 1: it is a more magnified version again of what happened
Speaker 1: in January. Is that basically, the people gathering on social
Speaker 1: media have plenty money in their accounts, They paid their
Speaker 1: taxes with winnings from last year, and are pushing selected stocks.
Speaker 1: The group is narrowing, um, but it is very much
Speaker 1: a social media phenomenon. But the other thing about it,
Speaker 1: is strangely enough, is that the shorts really haven't learned
Speaker 1: their lessons from January. So if you look at it,
Speaker 1: the short interests continues to rise. It's not what it was,
Speaker 1: but it's still, you know, really too high given the
Speaker 1: price actors dueling quickly here. I don't want to get
Speaker 1: you in trouble with the General Council B T, I G.
Speaker 1: But are you seeking regulation of what we're observing and
Speaker 1: things like AMC. The thing that ties all of this
Speaker 1: together is the fact that margin debt leverage is at
Speaker 1: all time highs. And generally when we see that, obviously
Speaker 1: the indiceason near all time highs. Uh, it's almost inevitable
Speaker 1: that the government will step in at some point. Did
Speaker 1: Julian thank you so much, Julian Emmanuel with b T
Speaker 1: I g less nerdy than me is Jennifer Neusoh at
Speaker 1: John's hop Could Center for Health Security, and she joins
Speaker 1: us right now. Jennifer was talking about this last night
Speaker 1: at the dining room table. We completely have missold the
Speaker 1: triumph of American virology, American microbiology, and our pharmaceutical business.
Speaker 1: It is stunning. As President Biden said, what's occurred. I agree.
Speaker 1: I mean, we are living a much different life now
Speaker 1: than we were a year ago thanks to science, and
Speaker 1: not just thanks to science in the last year, but
Speaker 1: thanks to you more than a decade, several decades where
Speaker 1: the science. This is why we invest, This is why
Speaker 1: we sustain, This is why we do this because one
Speaker 1: day it will be necessary, will be it will be important.
Speaker 1: Dr Nutso, can we codify the scientific advancement in a
Speaker 1: social passport, a vaccine passport that people can use can
Speaker 1: take to go places and say I am not at
Speaker 1: risk of getting COVID or frankly that high risk of
Speaker 1: distributing it either. Yeah, so it's a really tricky question.
Speaker 1: I know people are very eager to do that because
Speaker 1: we're all eager to get back to normal, and for
Speaker 1: those of us who you know, feel like we've done
Speaker 1: our part, We've went out and got vaccinated, we feel
Speaker 1: like we should be entitled UM to gain access to places.
Speaker 1: I fully expect that private businesses are going to require
Speaker 1: UM vaccine proof, provided their governors don't prevent them from
Speaker 1: doing that, but that they will, UM you know, at
Speaker 1: some point start requiring vaccine proof to allow people to
Speaker 1: you know, go to concerts and things like that. But
Speaker 1: it is a bit tricky because there are people out
Speaker 1: there who are hesitant, and their their hesitancy is not
Speaker 1: without reason. There this is a new vaccine UM. You know,
Speaker 1: they maybe don't have the luxury of spending all day
Speaker 1: like I do thinking about these things, and so they
Speaker 1: still need to you know, be convinced of the benefits
Speaker 1: of vaccinations. And you know, I do worry about prematurely
Speaker 1: rolling those things out before we've had really a fair
Speaker 1: chance at winning the hearts and minds of people and
Speaker 1: showing them why these vaccines are so liberating and hopefully
Speaker 1: tools that they will willingly accept wait to be cually
Speaker 1: more in favor of parents than sticks UM, and so
Speaker 1: you know, I expect that will probably be there at
Speaker 1: some point, but I do worry that rolling them out
Speaker 1: too quickly could create a culture war which will entrench
Speaker 1: people in their opposition to it. So are you saying
Speaker 1: that the main reason against the main argument against vaccine
Speaker 1: passports is an emotional one. Is basically that you need
Speaker 1: to cater to the way that people feel about the
Speaker 1: vaccine first and then deal with the mandates later. No,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's an emotional one. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: first of all, people's hesitancy is not purely about emotion.
Speaker 1: It is also just that, you know, we haven't fully
Speaker 1: approved a number of vaccines. I expect that that's going
Speaker 1: to come soon, but you know, there still needs to
Speaker 1: be an educational component to it. It's more really about pragmatism. Um. That.
Speaker 1: So there's also some access issues, and UM, we know
Speaker 1: that many of the people who haven't yet been vaccinated,
Speaker 1: it's not because they don't want to, it's just that
Speaker 1: they haven't been able to, and in part because it's
Speaker 1: harder for them to get they may not have time
Speaker 1: off from work. That maybe, UM, not as many options
Speaker 1: in all places where people live. And so you know,
Speaker 1: we also have to be worried about what we restrict
Speaker 1: people from doing if they haven't been vaccinated, and whether
Speaker 1: that's worth it in the long run. I don't care
Speaker 1: about the emotions as much as the pragmatism, and I
Speaker 1: worry that if we create a culture war or roll
Speaker 1: these things out too quickly dot that we could actually
Speaker 1: damp an enthusiasm for vaccines. Doctor, what what danger do
Speaker 1: the anti vaxxers present? I mean, if you end up
Speaker 1: in a situation where sixty sev of the US population
Speaker 1: is vaccinated, are they threatened? Is that majority threatened by
Speaker 1: a minority that refuses to get the shots? Sure? So
Speaker 1: so far, the answer is they are dangerous to themselves.
Speaker 1: The people who have not gone vaccinated are dangerous to
Speaker 1: themselves because they risk getting vaccinated. And so interested in
Speaker 1: reaching those folks and convincing them of the benefits of
Speaker 1: vaccines because I don't want there to be any additional
Speaker 1: loss of life. Of course, you know, down the road
Speaker 1: we very much worry about. You know, as long as
Speaker 1: this virus continues to circulate at high levels, that there
Speaker 1: is the potential for mutations that could overcome vaccines. But
Speaker 1: so far we haven't seen that. So right now, at
Speaker 1: least in the United states. That is less of my
Speaker 1: concern because our case numbers are falling. My main concern
Speaker 1: right now is making sure we protect people so that
Speaker 1: we don't see additional loss of lives, so we don't
Speaker 1: see schools closed in places where schools had been open. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, it's it's about getting back to normal. I'm
Speaker 1: not giving up on people. I still think we can
Speaker 1: reach them. Jennifer News, So thank you so much, greatly
Speaker 1: appreciate it. With JOHNS Hopkins this morning on this story
Speaker 1: unfolding and you heard the President there, it was great
Speaker 1: optimism about the summer. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening. Join us live weekdays from seven to
Speaker 1: ten am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio and on Bloomberg Television
Speaker 1: each day from six to nine am for insight from
Speaker 1: the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. And
Speaker 1: subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com, and of course on the terminal. I'm Tom
Speaker 1: Keene and this is Bloomberg