WEBVTT - Daybreak Weekend: US CPI Preview, Nobel Prizes, Ishiba Agenda

0:00:02.960 --> 0:00:12.039
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. This is Bloomberg day

0:00:12.039 --> 0:00:14.200
<v Speaker 1>Break Weekend, our global look at the top stories in

0:00:14.240 --> 0:00:16.880
<v Speaker 1>the coming week from our Daybreak anchors all around the world.

0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:18.840
<v Speaker 1>It's great ahead on the program, a look at some

0:00:19.040 --> 0:00:22.320
<v Speaker 1>key inflation data in the US and how it may

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:26.239
<v Speaker 1>impact FED policy moving forward. I'm Tom Busby in New York.

0:00:26.480 --> 0:00:28.920
<v Speaker 2>I'm Callin Hetgo in London, where we're delving into the

0:00:29.000 --> 0:00:31.920
<v Speaker 2>universe of the world's most famous prizes.

0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:34.960
<v Speaker 3>I'm Brian Curtis in Hong Kong. We look ahead to

0:00:35.080 --> 0:00:39.760
<v Speaker 3>new Japanese Prime Minister's Shighetto Ishiba's idea of Asian NATO.

0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:48.240
<v Speaker 4>That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend on Bloomberg Eleve,

0:00:48.320 --> 0:00:51.840
<v Speaker 4>The Free Ow, New York, Bloombergen ninety nine to one, Washington, DC,

0:00:52.159 --> 0:00:56.720
<v Speaker 4>Bloomberg ninety two to nine, Boston, Bloomberg nine sixty, San Francisco,

0:00:56.960 --> 0:01:01.520
<v Speaker 4>DAB Digital Radio, London, SIRIS XM one, and around the

0:01:01.520 --> 0:01:04.600
<v Speaker 4>world on Bloomberg Radio dot Com and via the Bloomberg

0:01:04.640 --> 0:01:05.280
<v Speaker 4>Business Channel.

0:01:08.440 --> 0:01:10.720
<v Speaker 1>Good day to you. I'm Tom Busby. We begin today's

0:01:10.760 --> 0:01:14.480
<v Speaker 1>program with US inflation data out this week. September's consumer

0:01:14.520 --> 0:01:17.920
<v Speaker 1>price index out this Thursday. On Friday, the producer price

0:01:17.959 --> 0:01:20.680
<v Speaker 1>index for that same month, with less than a month

0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:24.240
<v Speaker 1>ago before its next policy meeting. How might this impact

0:01:24.280 --> 0:01:27.840
<v Speaker 1>the Fed's monetary policy moving forward? Well for more, we're

0:01:27.920 --> 0:01:31.400
<v Speaker 1>joined by Edwin Harrison, senior editor and the author of

0:01:31.440 --> 0:01:34.880
<v Speaker 1>the Everything Risk newsletter Well Edward. Just last week, FED

0:01:34.959 --> 0:01:38.240
<v Speaker 1>Chair Jern Pal said inflation still easing, moving toward the

0:01:38.280 --> 0:01:41.440
<v Speaker 1>central bank's long held goal of two percent, and despite

0:01:41.480 --> 0:01:43.520
<v Speaker 1>a slight up ticket inflation for August, what are you

0:01:43.560 --> 0:01:46.160
<v Speaker 1>expecting to see this week for September?

0:01:46.920 --> 0:01:51.120
<v Speaker 5>Yes, Tom good to talk to you. We are expecting,

0:01:51.240 --> 0:01:55.880
<v Speaker 5>or at least the market's expecting CPI on the tenth

0:01:55.920 --> 0:01:58.760
<v Speaker 5>to come in at two point three percent. But you know,

0:01:59.000 --> 0:02:01.480
<v Speaker 5>without food and enery, which are the valet items that

0:02:01.520 --> 0:02:03.880
<v Speaker 5>are in there, that number is expected to be at

0:02:03.920 --> 0:02:07.200
<v Speaker 5>three point two percent, which is in line with the

0:02:07.240 --> 0:02:08.040
<v Speaker 5>previous read.

0:02:08.160 --> 0:02:10.360
<v Speaker 6>So three point two percent is pretty high.

0:02:10.960 --> 0:02:13.240
<v Speaker 5>The next day, we're going to get a look at

0:02:13.440 --> 0:02:17.000
<v Speaker 5>producer prices and those are expected to go up slightly

0:02:17.080 --> 0:02:20.640
<v Speaker 5>to two point seven percent, also well above the fed's

0:02:20.680 --> 0:02:23.919
<v Speaker 5>two percent targets. So those numbers, you know, they may

0:02:23.919 --> 0:02:26.240
<v Speaker 5>be coming down, they're still relatively high.

0:02:27.160 --> 0:02:27.320
<v Speaker 6>Well.

0:02:27.360 --> 0:02:30.720
<v Speaker 1>One reason oil and gas prices. You know, they have

0:02:30.919 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 1>been terrific for the consumer for the last few months.

0:02:34.720 --> 0:02:37.840
<v Speaker 1>But wor someing tentions in the Middle East, crude price

0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:41.120
<v Speaker 1>is soaring this past week. That could really impact people's

0:02:41.160 --> 0:02:43.280
<v Speaker 1>wallets and spending. Will that be a big factor, do

0:02:43.360 --> 0:02:46.079
<v Speaker 1>you think? Or not yet in these numbers.

0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:47.680
<v Speaker 6>Not yet.

0:02:47.720 --> 0:02:50.359
<v Speaker 5>In these numbers, Tom, you point out a very good

0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:54.960
<v Speaker 5>thing because when you look at the CPI without food

0:02:54.960 --> 0:02:57.640
<v Speaker 5>and energy, it's at two point three percent. You know,

0:02:57.680 --> 0:02:59.519
<v Speaker 5>you take out food and energy and it's three point

0:02:59.560 --> 0:03:02.600
<v Speaker 5>two percent, so it's higher. You know, the numbers that

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:05.800
<v Speaker 5>you were talking about coming down have actually suppressed the

0:03:05.840 --> 0:03:10.160
<v Speaker 5>CPI over the last year. But with those numbers going

0:03:10.280 --> 0:03:14.960
<v Speaker 5>up recently, it's going to make the overall CPI higher

0:03:15.520 --> 0:03:18.000
<v Speaker 5>than it otherwise would have been. So down the line,

0:03:18.040 --> 0:03:20.920
<v Speaker 5>we could probably expect that two point three number to

0:03:21.000 --> 0:03:21.799
<v Speaker 5>kick up from here.

0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:24.560
<v Speaker 1>That is troubling data. But we have a lot of

0:03:24.560 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 1>good news too. Let's talk about this past Friday's jobs report.

0:03:27.960 --> 0:03:30.799
<v Speaker 1>We're showing a lot more ads than forecasting, unemployment rate

0:03:30.880 --> 0:03:33.920
<v Speaker 1>edging lower. This is good news. A GDP in the

0:03:33.919 --> 0:03:37.040
<v Speaker 1>third quarter two point five percent, That is solid growth.

0:03:37.640 --> 0:03:37.880
<v Speaker 7>Yeah.

0:03:37.920 --> 0:03:40.440
<v Speaker 5>I mean, I have to say, it really does change

0:03:40.440 --> 0:03:45.080
<v Speaker 5>the narrative. Instead of people worrying about a recession, now

0:03:45.160 --> 0:03:48.560
<v Speaker 5>people are almost thinking. I've heard the term no landing,

0:03:48.640 --> 0:03:51.480
<v Speaker 5>as in the economy doesn't land, it doesn't slow down,

0:03:51.480 --> 0:03:52.760
<v Speaker 5>It just keeps on chugging.

0:03:53.040 --> 0:03:54.560
<v Speaker 6>That's how good the numbers were.

0:03:54.840 --> 0:03:56.280
<v Speaker 5>You know, just to break it down for you a

0:03:56.280 --> 0:03:59.120
<v Speaker 5>little bit, the unemployment rate kick down to four point

0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:02.560
<v Speaker 5>one percent. We saw the non farm payrolls at two

0:04:02.640 --> 0:04:06.360
<v Speaker 5>hundred and fifty four thousand, which is well above the

0:04:06.400 --> 0:04:08.600
<v Speaker 5>one hundred and fifty that people thought about. It was

0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:13.480
<v Speaker 5>outside of all estimates. And you know, hourly earnings were

0:04:13.600 --> 0:04:16.080
<v Speaker 5>up four point zero percent year on year.

0:04:16.240 --> 0:04:17.320
<v Speaker 6>That's really good.

0:04:17.960 --> 0:04:21.080
<v Speaker 1>Also good now the Boeing strike that is slogging on,

0:04:21.279 --> 0:04:23.159
<v Speaker 1>but we had a bit of a break in that

0:04:23.240 --> 0:04:27.839
<v Speaker 1>long shortman strike at least until January after the November's election.

0:04:28.279 --> 0:04:30.960
<v Speaker 1>You know, that's easing a lot of worriedes minds right now.

0:04:31.040 --> 0:04:33.240
<v Speaker 1>I think no runs on toilet paper at least for now.

0:04:34.279 --> 0:04:37.000
<v Speaker 5>And you know, Tom, you make a good point because

0:04:37.600 --> 0:04:40.560
<v Speaker 5>when you know there's going to be two numbers that

0:04:40.600 --> 0:04:43.880
<v Speaker 5>we get, there was the number that we got on Friday,

0:04:43.920 --> 0:04:45.280
<v Speaker 5>and then there's another one.

0:04:45.200 --> 0:04:49.159
<v Speaker 6>Right before the FED decides in November. And it had been.

0:04:49.040 --> 0:04:51.400
<v Speaker 5>The case that the read that we get in early

0:04:51.480 --> 0:04:54.839
<v Speaker 5>November was going to be sort of sullied by one

0:04:54.880 --> 0:04:56.880
<v Speaker 5>off factors like the long Shortman strike.

0:04:56.960 --> 0:04:59.800
<v Speaker 6>But now we're going to get a good read.

0:05:00.240 --> 0:05:03.200
<v Speaker 5>And when you add in how good this number was,

0:05:03.680 --> 0:05:07.680
<v Speaker 5>with the potential that that's also a potentially good number

0:05:07.680 --> 0:05:11.680
<v Speaker 5>that we can use as a real data point, it

0:05:11.839 --> 0:05:15.000
<v Speaker 5>says that instead of thinking the FED would ease fifty

0:05:15.040 --> 0:05:19.440
<v Speaker 5>basis point potentially, the market could start thinking, wait a minute,

0:05:19.440 --> 0:05:20.200
<v Speaker 5>the Fed's not.

0:05:20.120 --> 0:05:22.680
<v Speaker 6>Going to ease at all at one of these next meetings.

0:05:22.880 --> 0:05:26.120
<v Speaker 1>Oh so there's whispers now not even a twenty five

0:05:26.160 --> 0:05:27.200
<v Speaker 1>basis point cut.

0:05:27.400 --> 0:05:30.800
<v Speaker 5>If the data continue to be as good as they

0:05:30.839 --> 0:05:34.039
<v Speaker 5>are one of these next meetings, not necessarily the one

0:05:34.040 --> 0:05:37.880
<v Speaker 5>in November, but December or January, the market could price

0:05:37.960 --> 0:05:39.800
<v Speaker 5>in no cut for those meetings.

0:05:40.240 --> 0:05:40.480
<v Speaker 6>Wow.

0:05:40.640 --> 0:05:43.359
<v Speaker 1>But we did hear from a chairman pal this past

0:05:43.360 --> 0:05:47.680
<v Speaker 1>week and it sounds like if the economic data remains consistent,

0:05:47.960 --> 0:05:51.080
<v Speaker 1>another cut in November, you know, four weeks from now,

0:05:51.279 --> 0:05:56.000
<v Speaker 1>possibly another small cut in December. So there is a

0:05:56.040 --> 0:05:58.520
<v Speaker 1>lot of hope that that's going to happen. But it's

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:00.760
<v Speaker 1>all as they say, dat it dependent.

0:06:01.320 --> 0:06:02.239
<v Speaker 6>That's very true.

0:06:02.360 --> 0:06:05.600
<v Speaker 5>And so now with the data looking as good as

0:06:05.640 --> 0:06:08.360
<v Speaker 5>it is, I think that we can breathe a sigh

0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:08.960
<v Speaker 5>of relief.

0:06:09.920 --> 0:06:10.960
<v Speaker 6>And I think that will be.

0:06:11.080 --> 0:06:15.719
<v Speaker 5>Very helpful for the equity markets going forward, because ultimately,

0:06:16.120 --> 0:06:19.960
<v Speaker 5>when people are making four percent more in their paychecks,

0:06:19.960 --> 0:06:23.240
<v Speaker 5>they're able to spend more. That's going to support corporate

0:06:23.320 --> 0:06:26.560
<v Speaker 5>earnings and as a result, we should continue to see

0:06:26.560 --> 0:06:28.000
<v Speaker 5>stocks rally from here.

0:06:28.240 --> 0:06:32.479
<v Speaker 1>Well September CPI data out this Thursday, PPI on Friday.

0:06:32.480 --> 0:06:36.080
<v Speaker 1>Our thanks to Edward Harrison, Bloomberg Senior Editor, the author

0:06:36.120 --> 0:06:40.120
<v Speaker 1>of the Everything risk newsletter Time Flies and to prove it.

0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:42.960
<v Speaker 1>A new earning season kicking off this week, two of

0:06:43.000 --> 0:06:45.920
<v Speaker 1>the nation's biggest banks, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo

0:06:45.960 --> 0:06:49.160
<v Speaker 1>will report their third quarter earnings this Friday. What will

0:06:49.200 --> 0:06:51.279
<v Speaker 1>the results tell us about the health of the banking system,

0:06:51.320 --> 0:06:54.520
<v Speaker 1>the US economy and the US consumer? For more, we're

0:06:54.560 --> 0:06:59.039
<v Speaker 1>joined by Alison Williams, Bloomberg Intelligence Senior Analyst, Global Banks

0:06:59.080 --> 0:07:02.560
<v Speaker 1>and Asset Manager. Allison, what are you expecting to see

0:07:02.560 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 1>from JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo later this week.

0:07:06.279 --> 0:07:09.280
<v Speaker 8>So generally expecting solid quarter for the banks. Of course,

0:07:09.320 --> 0:07:11.800
<v Speaker 8>it's all about the outlook and a few things that

0:07:12.040 --> 0:07:16.120
<v Speaker 8>we'll be focusing on. First, the outlook for net interest

0:07:16.200 --> 0:07:20.760
<v Speaker 8>income is certainly top of mind with investors given the

0:07:21.000 --> 0:07:23.840
<v Speaker 8>FED cuts that we saw in September and the implied

0:07:24.520 --> 0:07:28.239
<v Speaker 8>cuts in the months ahead, and our view it's really

0:07:28.440 --> 0:07:31.720
<v Speaker 8>about loan growth and if we can see that loan

0:07:31.760 --> 0:07:35.840
<v Speaker 8>growth to help improve the net interest income. On the

0:07:35.880 --> 0:07:39.920
<v Speaker 8>positive side of things, the beginning of the rate cut

0:07:40.120 --> 0:07:45.240
<v Speaker 8>cycle I think removes some of the concerns around higher

0:07:45.240 --> 0:07:50.160
<v Speaker 8>deposit costs. The banks still have a very big deposit bases,

0:07:51.560 --> 0:07:56.400
<v Speaker 8>core deposits where they're getting free funding and so there's

0:07:56.520 --> 0:08:01.240
<v Speaker 8>less risk to those deposits in that price saying with

0:08:01.360 --> 0:08:05.680
<v Speaker 8>the FED beginning to ease. But again, what's happening with

0:08:05.840 --> 0:08:08.880
<v Speaker 8>loan growth to some extent that also relates to the

0:08:08.920 --> 0:08:13.560
<v Speaker 8>economic outlook. On the capital market side, we expect that

0:08:13.640 --> 0:08:17.440
<v Speaker 8>trading will continue to be resilient at all of the banks,

0:08:17.440 --> 0:08:20.600
<v Speaker 8>and so this is obviously a bigger source of revenue

0:08:20.640 --> 0:08:25.760
<v Speaker 8>for JP Morgan. But Wells Fargo has certainly been making

0:08:25.800 --> 0:08:30.240
<v Speaker 8>strides to invest and improve their business. Equities trading is

0:08:30.240 --> 0:08:35.480
<v Speaker 8>really going to be the highlight. The world's market capitalization

0:08:35.679 --> 0:08:40.480
<v Speaker 8>reached a record high in Bloomberg data in September, and

0:08:41.000 --> 0:08:44.600
<v Speaker 8>we think that the prime brokerage business has certainly gotten

0:08:44.640 --> 0:08:48.679
<v Speaker 8>some help from the stronger equity prices. We expect that

0:08:48.720 --> 0:08:54.760
<v Speaker 8>equities trading will outperform fixed income trading, but that fixed

0:08:54.800 --> 0:08:59.559
<v Speaker 8>income trading will be relatively resilient, helped from the credit

0:08:59.600 --> 0:09:04.079
<v Speaker 8>trading side of things. The fee revenue side is really

0:09:04.160 --> 0:09:07.520
<v Speaker 8>where investors are focusing on in terms of the outlook

0:09:07.559 --> 0:09:11.040
<v Speaker 8>for twenty twenty five. It's a smaller revenue source but

0:09:11.200 --> 0:09:16.080
<v Speaker 8>certainly helps the profitability of the banks M and A,

0:09:16.240 --> 0:09:19.600
<v Speaker 8>which is an area that we think we could see

0:09:19.640 --> 0:09:24.439
<v Speaker 8>a lift next year coming off of some very low levels.

0:09:25.200 --> 0:09:29.360
<v Speaker 8>We think that the dialogues have been very active, but

0:09:29.480 --> 0:09:33.240
<v Speaker 8>also to the extent that the FED cuts and the

0:09:33.240 --> 0:09:37.920
<v Speaker 8>FED actions helped to improve CEO confidence, we could get

0:09:37.920 --> 0:09:41.960
<v Speaker 8>an uplift in deals. On the equity underwriting side, we

0:09:42.120 --> 0:09:46.280
<v Speaker 8>have seen some better trends, especially in the US market

0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:51.319
<v Speaker 8>this year, although it was slowed down certainly more than

0:09:51.559 --> 0:09:54.000
<v Speaker 8>investors would have liked to see in September, just given

0:09:54.000 --> 0:09:58.000
<v Speaker 8>some of the volatility, But turning to the debt side,

0:09:58.679 --> 0:10:01.319
<v Speaker 8>very strong activity that to help both for the banks,

0:10:01.880 --> 0:10:06.080
<v Speaker 8>but we want to hear what's on tap for the

0:10:06.120 --> 0:10:10.800
<v Speaker 8>months ahead in the debt market. We do suspect that

0:10:10.840 --> 0:10:13.520
<v Speaker 8>there has been a little bit of pull forward of refinancing,

0:10:13.679 --> 0:10:17.720
<v Speaker 8>just based on some of the experts comments here in

0:10:17.840 --> 0:10:20.520
<v Speaker 8>BI as well as some of the banks, and so

0:10:20.600 --> 0:10:23.320
<v Speaker 8>that I think is a key question for the earnings calls.

0:10:23.920 --> 0:10:27.680
<v Speaker 1>And have banks put aside more money for credit losses

0:10:28.400 --> 0:10:31.000
<v Speaker 1>and some of those commercial real estate losses.

0:10:31.880 --> 0:10:35.360
<v Speaker 8>They have, they've been putting aside money for commercial real

0:10:35.440 --> 0:10:38.160
<v Speaker 8>estate losses, but credit card has really been the area

0:10:38.640 --> 0:10:42.280
<v Speaker 8>where banks have been reserving, and that really relates to

0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:45.080
<v Speaker 8>a lot of the growth. Card is really the area

0:10:45.440 --> 0:10:48.360
<v Speaker 8>that we've continued to see strong growth, especially at the

0:10:48.360 --> 0:10:51.760
<v Speaker 8>big universal banks that I cover, which as you know,

0:10:52.200 --> 0:10:54.880
<v Speaker 8>are over indexed to that product versus some of the

0:10:55.080 --> 0:10:58.040
<v Speaker 8>regional banks, and so a lot of it is just

0:10:58.160 --> 0:11:01.880
<v Speaker 8>the fact that this is a general only higher loss product,

0:11:02.720 --> 0:11:04.839
<v Speaker 8>and so when you get the growth and you're looking

0:11:04.880 --> 0:11:07.320
<v Speaker 8>out over the life of the loan, which is the

0:11:08.000 --> 0:11:11.280
<v Speaker 8>accounting change that we saw back in twenty twenty, that

0:11:11.400 --> 0:11:14.440
<v Speaker 8>does tend to lead to relatively bigger reserves. But I

0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:16.960
<v Speaker 8>think what of users are going to be focusing on

0:11:17.720 --> 0:11:20.320
<v Speaker 8>as well as ourselves are you know, what are the

0:11:20.400 --> 0:11:24.280
<v Speaker 8>trends in charge offs and delinquencies. We did see a

0:11:24.360 --> 0:11:28.360
<v Speaker 8>pickup in the first half, but the seasonal trends generally

0:11:28.400 --> 0:11:32.000
<v Speaker 8>support things improving, and so we'll be looking for evidence

0:11:32.000 --> 0:11:33.000
<v Speaker 8>of that at the banks.

0:11:33.240 --> 0:11:36.160
<v Speaker 1>Now you spoke about an uptick in M and A activity,

0:11:36.200 --> 0:11:39.960
<v Speaker 1>are you also seeing any IPO activity on the horizon

0:11:40.240 --> 0:11:40.800
<v Speaker 1>picking up?

0:11:41.080 --> 0:11:43.560
<v Speaker 8>We have seen some pick up this year. We did

0:11:43.640 --> 0:11:47.280
<v Speaker 8>see a very strong July which was boosted by one

0:11:47.320 --> 0:11:51.600
<v Speaker 8>particular IPO in the US, so that is helpful to fees.

0:11:52.200 --> 0:11:55.440
<v Speaker 8>But I think that is something that we'd like to

0:11:55.480 --> 0:11:59.319
<v Speaker 8>see sort of more of a pickup in the months ahead.

0:12:00.040 --> 0:12:03.320
<v Speaker 8>Certainly with the strength of the equity markets, we would

0:12:03.360 --> 0:12:07.240
<v Speaker 8>expect to see a little bit more strength than we have.

0:12:07.440 --> 0:12:11.040
<v Speaker 8>But I think, you know, that disappointment really relates to

0:12:11.200 --> 0:12:15.000
<v Speaker 8>the fact that a couple of years ago we saw

0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:18.240
<v Speaker 8>some of the valuation rounds for some of the private

0:12:18.280 --> 0:12:24.160
<v Speaker 8>companies come at much higher valuation levels, and so while

0:12:24.240 --> 0:12:28.120
<v Speaker 8>the global equity markets are reaching a new high, that's

0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:30.800
<v Speaker 8>not necessarily true for all companies, and for a lot

0:12:30.840 --> 0:12:34.240
<v Speaker 8>of the companies waiting to go public, they are still

0:12:34.720 --> 0:12:37.200
<v Speaker 8>waiting on a little bit more valuation improvement.

0:12:37.720 --> 0:12:41.480
<v Speaker 1>Oh boy, okay, so trading revenue, net interest income. The

0:12:41.520 --> 0:12:44.000
<v Speaker 1>new earning season kicking off this Friday, a lot to

0:12:44.040 --> 0:12:47.160
<v Speaker 1>look forward to. Our thanks to Alison Williams, Bloomberg Intelligence

0:12:47.280 --> 0:12:51.240
<v Speaker 1>Senior analyst, Global Banks and Asset Managers. Coming up on

0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:53.800
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg day Break Weekend will delve into the universe of

0:12:53.840 --> 0:12:57.640
<v Speaker 1>the world's most famous prizes. I'm Tom Busby and this

0:12:57.840 --> 0:13:12.440
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global

0:13:12.440 --> 0:13:14.600
<v Speaker 1>look ahead at the top stories for investors in the

0:13:14.600 --> 0:13:17.800
<v Speaker 1>coming week. I'm Tom Busby in New York. Up later

0:13:17.920 --> 0:13:21.000
<v Speaker 1>in our program, we'll discuss what's next for Japan after

0:13:21.040 --> 0:13:24.120
<v Speaker 1>selecting a new leader for its ruling party. But first,

0:13:24.320 --> 0:13:27.079
<v Speaker 1>in the coming days, the Nobel Prizes will be handed

0:13:27.120 --> 0:13:31.080
<v Speaker 1>out in chemistry, economics, literature, and more. The Swedish Academy

0:13:31.120 --> 0:13:34.480
<v Speaker 1>recognizing and rewarding an impressive list of industry leaders in

0:13:34.520 --> 0:13:37.320
<v Speaker 1>its one hundred and twenty three years. But what is

0:13:37.360 --> 0:13:40.880
<v Speaker 1>the influence of the awards today? For more, Let's go

0:13:40.880 --> 0:13:44.599
<v Speaker 1>to London and bring in Bloomberg Daybreak Europe anchor Caroline.

0:13:44.080 --> 0:13:49.240
<v Speaker 2>Hepgar tom Before Alfred Nobel, a nineteenth century businessman and chemist,

0:13:49.360 --> 0:13:54.280
<v Speaker 2>created his eponymous awards. He was best known for inventing dynamite.

0:13:54.640 --> 0:13:58.199
<v Speaker 2>The explosives soon became popular in construction and mining, as

0:13:58.240 --> 0:14:01.560
<v Speaker 2>well as in the weapons industry. It made Nobel a

0:14:01.840 --> 0:14:05.000
<v Speaker 2>very rich man. Perhaps it also made him think about

0:14:05.000 --> 0:14:07.880
<v Speaker 2>his legacy, because towards the end of his life he

0:14:07.960 --> 0:14:11.760
<v Speaker 2>decided to use his vast fortune to fund annual prizes

0:14:12.240 --> 0:14:15.920
<v Speaker 2>to those who, during the preceding year have conferred the

0:14:16.040 --> 0:14:20.760
<v Speaker 2>greatest benefit to humankind in the modern world. Some argue

0:14:20.800 --> 0:14:24.520
<v Speaker 2>that the Nobel Prizes project has an aura of being

0:14:24.720 --> 0:14:28.440
<v Speaker 2>above the political fray focus solely on the benefits of humanity,

0:14:29.120 --> 0:14:32.760
<v Speaker 2>but the institution isn't a stranger to controversy. The Peace

0:14:32.880 --> 0:14:36.840
<v Speaker 2>and Literature Awards in particular, are sometimes accused of bias.

0:14:37.320 --> 0:14:41.080
<v Speaker 2>Critics question where the winners are selected because their work

0:14:41.120 --> 0:14:45.040
<v Speaker 2>is truly outstanding or because it aligns with the political

0:14:45.080 --> 0:14:50.680
<v Speaker 2>preferences of the judges. The Norwegian Nobel Committee responsible for

0:14:50.720 --> 0:14:55.000
<v Speaker 2>the Peace Prize insists that it is independent, with the

0:14:55.000 --> 0:14:58.680
<v Speaker 2>sole mission of carrying out the will of Alfred Nobel. However,

0:14:58.880 --> 0:15:02.440
<v Speaker 2>it does have links to Norway's political system. The five

0:15:02.520 --> 0:15:06.520
<v Speaker 2>members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, so the panel's

0:15:06.560 --> 0:15:11.200
<v Speaker 2>composition reflects the power balance in the legislature. The body's

0:15:11.240 --> 0:15:15.560
<v Speaker 2>efforts to remain neutral don't always protect against a backlash either.

0:15:15.960 --> 0:15:20.280
<v Speaker 2>When the imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo won the Peace

0:15:20.360 --> 0:15:24.640
<v Speaker 2>Prize in twenty ten, Beijing responded by freezing trade talks

0:15:24.680 --> 0:15:28.560
<v Speaker 2>with Norway. It took years for Norway China relations to

0:15:28.600 --> 0:15:33.800
<v Speaker 2>be restored. External scrutiny can also become intense when high

0:15:33.880 --> 0:15:37.160
<v Speaker 2>profile winners are involved, such as in two thousand and

0:15:37.280 --> 0:15:41.200
<v Speaker 2>nine when President Barack Obama won the Peace Prize less

0:15:41.240 --> 0:15:45.840
<v Speaker 2>than a year after taking office. But despite the occasional backlash,

0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:50.720
<v Speaker 2>honorees enjoy wide ranging influence after taking home a Nobel.

0:15:50.960 --> 0:15:54.160
<v Speaker 2>Their opinions on the issues of the day often carry

0:15:54.200 --> 0:15:57.680
<v Speaker 2>weight for many. Joseph Stiglitz, the winner of the two

0:15:57.800 --> 0:16:01.680
<v Speaker 2>thousand and one Nobel Prize in Eco Nomics, often shares

0:16:01.720 --> 0:16:06.080
<v Speaker 2>his insights on matters of global importance. Here he is

0:16:06.160 --> 0:16:09.640
<v Speaker 2>discussing the upcoming US presidential election.

0:16:10.520 --> 0:16:15.240
<v Speaker 7>I think both candidates will have policies that recognize that

0:16:15.280 --> 0:16:22.520
<v Speaker 7>we went too far in books sometimes called hyperglobalization, and

0:16:22.640 --> 0:16:26.560
<v Speaker 7>the evidence was that during two thousand, during the pandemic,

0:16:27.000 --> 0:16:30.560
<v Speaker 7>the United States couldn't produce even simple products like face

0:16:30.640 --> 0:16:32.600
<v Speaker 7>masks and protective gear.

0:16:33.440 --> 0:16:34.680
<v Speaker 6>You're let alone ventilators.

0:16:34.720 --> 0:16:38.920
<v Speaker 7>We got to own ventilators or even tests. And Europe

0:16:39.400 --> 0:16:44.120
<v Speaker 7>had become totally dependent on Russian gas. In a book

0:16:44.160 --> 0:16:46.600
<v Speaker 7>at one of the books I wrote was called Making

0:16:46.640 --> 0:16:51.720
<v Speaker 7>Globalization Work. After I wrote this book called Globalization Discontent

0:16:52.200 --> 0:16:54.520
<v Speaker 7>that explained what was wrong, my wife said, you have

0:16:54.600 --> 0:16:57.600
<v Speaker 7>to get the answers. You can't just be a critic.

0:16:58.200 --> 0:17:01.240
<v Speaker 7>So I wrote that book. But in that one of

0:17:01.240 --> 0:17:04.320
<v Speaker 7>the things I said was it is really crazy for

0:17:04.400 --> 0:17:08.960
<v Speaker 7>Germany to be so dependent on Russian gas, and indeed

0:17:08.960 --> 0:17:11.600
<v Speaker 7>it was, and indeed it was. You know, Bush could

0:17:11.680 --> 0:17:14.240
<v Speaker 7>look in the eyes of Putlin said there's somebody I

0:17:14.280 --> 0:17:16.200
<v Speaker 7>could trust. But I think the rest of the world

0:17:16.200 --> 0:17:20.399
<v Speaker 7>didn't feel quite quite so comfortable. So there will be

0:17:20.440 --> 0:17:26.840
<v Speaker 7>an adjustment from hyper globalization in both parties. But the

0:17:26.960 --> 0:17:33.760
<v Speaker 7>difference is one in which I think Harris is committed

0:17:33.880 --> 0:17:39.280
<v Speaker 7>to a global framework working with what she views, you know,

0:17:39.520 --> 0:17:43.320
<v Speaker 7>with our partners, close partners of those you know, like

0:17:43.400 --> 0:17:47.359
<v Speaker 7>our NATO allies, but also our partners in the South,

0:17:47.920 --> 0:17:51.119
<v Speaker 7>and so it's trying to avoid of rupture and doing

0:17:51.160 --> 0:17:55.600
<v Speaker 7>everything we can't as we adjust our economy to embrace

0:17:55.880 --> 0:17:58.199
<v Speaker 7>the rest of the world. But the other one is

0:17:59.119 --> 0:18:02.680
<v Speaker 7>I think the way to understand Trump is his view

0:18:02.720 --> 0:18:05.480
<v Speaker 7>of the world is a zero sum, and that means

0:18:05.920 --> 0:18:09.080
<v Speaker 7>if the US does better, other countries will do worse.

0:18:09.280 --> 0:18:12.280
<v Speaker 7>Other countries do better. You saw the charts about how

0:18:12.359 --> 0:18:16.240
<v Speaker 7>other countries were doing. His view is that's at the

0:18:16.359 --> 0:18:20.760
<v Speaker 7>expense of the United States. And so any of you

0:18:21.000 --> 0:18:26.200
<v Speaker 7>who study at economics know that we believe it's positive sum.

0:18:26.800 --> 0:18:30.320
<v Speaker 7>If the developing countries and emerging markets grow, it's a

0:18:30.359 --> 0:18:35.240
<v Speaker 7>better global world and helps us. So it's not zero sum,

0:18:35.320 --> 0:18:39.480
<v Speaker 7>it's positive some and that is the fundamental philosophical difference

0:18:39.840 --> 0:18:41.160
<v Speaker 7>between the two candidates.

0:18:41.600 --> 0:18:45.359
<v Speaker 2>That was Joseph Stiglitz speaking at the Bloomberg New Economy

0:18:45.440 --> 0:18:48.520
<v Speaker 2>Forum in New York last month. So, as we look

0:18:48.560 --> 0:18:53.040
<v Speaker 2>ahead to upcoming announcements about the twenty twenty four crop

0:18:53.080 --> 0:18:57.159
<v Speaker 2>of Nobel Prize recipients, I've been discussing the history of

0:18:57.200 --> 0:19:02.240
<v Speaker 2>the Nobel Awards, the diplomatic tension and past winners along

0:19:02.280 --> 0:19:06.800
<v Speaker 2>with the current challenges in choosing who to recognize today

0:19:07.280 --> 0:19:11.880
<v Speaker 2>with Bloomberg's Nor Dick Managing editor Katy poian Palo.

0:19:12.119 --> 0:19:16.600
<v Speaker 9>So, we've got six prizes being awarded starting next week,

0:19:17.119 --> 0:19:19.760
<v Speaker 9>and each one of them can be shared by up

0:19:19.800 --> 0:19:23.640
<v Speaker 9>to three persons. With the Peace Prize, it can actually

0:19:23.720 --> 0:19:27.960
<v Speaker 9>also go to an organization. So it's a selection process

0:19:27.960 --> 0:19:31.320
<v Speaker 9>that is shrouded in secrecy. Who is considered for the

0:19:31.400 --> 0:19:36.120
<v Speaker 9>award is not known, and the list of people nominated

0:19:36.520 --> 0:19:40.920
<v Speaker 9>is sealed for fifty years. There's even some people who

0:19:40.920 --> 0:19:44.080
<v Speaker 9>get nominated dozens of times before they end up getting

0:19:44.119 --> 0:19:45.720
<v Speaker 9>the award or or not.

0:19:46.520 --> 0:19:49.200
<v Speaker 2>So remind us of what sort of work has won

0:19:49.280 --> 0:19:52.879
<v Speaker 2>in the past. Then, if the process is so secretive.

0:19:52.720 --> 0:19:56.119
<v Speaker 9>What we've got the science awards, you know, medicine or

0:19:56.160 --> 0:19:59.400
<v Speaker 9>physiologies one of them. We've got physics, we've got chemistry,

0:19:59.800 --> 0:20:02.520
<v Speaker 9>and these ones tend to award a lot of sort

0:20:02.520 --> 0:20:06.880
<v Speaker 9>of scientific work that is foundational science. It's things that

0:20:06.920 --> 0:20:10.320
<v Speaker 9>can underpin other discoveries, things that can be used in

0:20:10.359 --> 0:20:13.600
<v Speaker 9>a number of fields. So as an example, last year,

0:20:14.119 --> 0:20:18.280
<v Speaker 9>the Chemistry prize went to something that was called quantum dots,

0:20:18.480 --> 0:20:22.200
<v Speaker 9>and these are extremely tiny in animal particles that can

0:20:22.240 --> 0:20:25.440
<v Speaker 9>be used on things like TVs and lead lamps, or

0:20:25.480 --> 0:20:29.960
<v Speaker 9>they can guide surgeons when they've removed tumor tissue for example.

0:20:30.560 --> 0:20:34.120
<v Speaker 9>Some of the other discoveries that we have had, for example,

0:20:34.160 --> 0:20:38.840
<v Speaker 9>in medicine in twenty to ten you had individual fertilization.

0:20:39.200 --> 0:20:43.439
<v Speaker 9>When the award discoveries of various viruses such as the HIV,

0:20:44.080 --> 0:20:48.240
<v Speaker 9>the human papilloma viruses. They've also been awarded back in

0:20:48.280 --> 0:20:50.639
<v Speaker 9>the day and one hundred years ago the discovery of

0:20:50.720 --> 0:20:56.520
<v Speaker 9>insulin got the award. Now for physics, you also you

0:20:56.600 --> 0:20:59.639
<v Speaker 9>tend to get a lot of awards for science that

0:20:59.760 --> 0:21:03.600
<v Speaker 9>is indecipherable for a layman. But some years you get

0:21:03.640 --> 0:21:08.280
<v Speaker 9>things like the development of lithium ion batteries or you know,

0:21:08.359 --> 0:21:12.600
<v Speaker 9>some several several decades ago there was an award for

0:21:13.200 --> 0:21:17.600
<v Speaker 9>how to preserve animal fodder, so that keeps over winter.

0:21:18.160 --> 0:21:21.520
<v Speaker 9>For the Peace and the Literature Prize, it can really

0:21:21.600 --> 0:21:26.119
<v Speaker 9>vary what sort of work is awarded, but really really

0:21:26.160 --> 0:21:30.560
<v Speaker 9>it's supposed to award work that have had the greatest

0:21:30.640 --> 0:21:34.480
<v Speaker 9>benefits to humankind, as by the will of Alfred Noble.

0:21:35.000 --> 0:21:38.920
<v Speaker 2>In terms of the issues sometimes around the prize I

0:21:38.960 --> 0:21:44.960
<v Speaker 2>mean Norway has faced backlash for perhaps not the scientific

0:21:45.119 --> 0:21:48.440
<v Speaker 2>names as much, but certainly for the Nobel Peace Prize.

0:21:48.560 --> 0:21:50.159
<v Speaker 2>Is there a risk that there is going to be

0:21:50.240 --> 0:21:52.680
<v Speaker 2>some controversy maybe this year too well.

0:21:52.720 --> 0:21:55.440
<v Speaker 9>Definitely is that risk. So five of the prizes are

0:21:55.440 --> 0:21:58.520
<v Speaker 9>handed out in Sweden and the Peace Prize in Norway,

0:21:58.520 --> 0:22:01.920
<v Speaker 9>and this also according to Alfred Nobel's will that set

0:22:01.960 --> 0:22:05.960
<v Speaker 9>out these awards, and what we've seen in Norway. For example,

0:22:06.000 --> 0:22:10.960
<v Speaker 9>in twenty ten, prize was awarded to Chinese dissident Liu Chielbo,

0:22:11.640 --> 0:22:14.920
<v Speaker 9>and that really ended up straining China's ties with Norway,

0:22:15.680 --> 0:22:18.480
<v Speaker 9>and the Norwegian government had nothing to do with awarding

0:22:18.480 --> 0:22:21.920
<v Speaker 9>this prize, so it's taken years for them to improve

0:22:21.960 --> 0:22:25.760
<v Speaker 9>that relationship between the two countries. And so what tends

0:22:25.760 --> 0:22:29.359
<v Speaker 9>to happen is sometimes the Peace Prize goes to a contemporary,

0:22:29.480 --> 0:22:33.639
<v Speaker 9>a very highly controversial political actor, and in that case

0:22:33.720 --> 0:22:39.160
<v Speaker 9>that can drive a controversy. Or other times you see

0:22:39.480 --> 0:22:44.680
<v Speaker 9>more focus being put on some national conflict, for example,

0:22:44.720 --> 0:22:48.640
<v Speaker 9>and then local authorities interpret that as interference in their

0:22:48.720 --> 0:22:49.600
<v Speaker 9>national matters.

0:22:49.920 --> 0:22:52.080
<v Speaker 2>Who makes up the judging committee then.

0:22:52.680 --> 0:22:56.040
<v Speaker 9>You actually need to talk about a selection process with

0:22:56.080 --> 0:23:01.000
<v Speaker 9>this because it's not a competition as such. Prizes themselves

0:23:01.040 --> 0:23:05.160
<v Speaker 9>are awarded by a number of different institutions in Sweden

0:23:05.240 --> 0:23:08.280
<v Speaker 9>and then also in the Norway, and each of them

0:23:08.359 --> 0:23:11.320
<v Speaker 9>have a handful of voting members who ultimately get to

0:23:11.400 --> 0:23:14.720
<v Speaker 9>choose who it becomes a Nobel Laureate. How they get

0:23:14.760 --> 0:23:20.320
<v Speaker 9>the names though, is they send out requests to qualified

0:23:21.200 --> 0:23:25.680
<v Speaker 9>people who can nominate them. These include previous laureates, people

0:23:25.720 --> 0:23:29.920
<v Speaker 9>who've been awarded in the past, university professors in a

0:23:30.000 --> 0:23:33.040
<v Speaker 9>relevant subject in the Nordic countries for example, and they

0:23:33.040 --> 0:23:36.320
<v Speaker 9>could also just reach out to other scientists who they've

0:23:36.359 --> 0:23:41.440
<v Speaker 9>specifically selected to give their views, and then they draw

0:23:41.520 --> 0:23:45.240
<v Speaker 9>up you know, long list, shortlist, and ultimately there is

0:23:45.280 --> 0:23:45.760
<v Speaker 9>a vote.

0:23:46.240 --> 0:23:50.560
<v Speaker 2>Why do some people think then that the judging, the adjudication,

0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:54.080
<v Speaker 2>the thought around this, especially around the Peace Prize then

0:23:54.440 --> 0:23:59.600
<v Speaker 2>is kind of biased or maybe even influenced in terms

0:23:59.680 --> 0:24:02.240
<v Speaker 2>of the Nobel Prizes. How does that play out?

0:24:02.800 --> 0:24:06.919
<v Speaker 9>Controversies really from the politics surrounding this. So, for example,

0:24:06.920 --> 0:24:09.440
<v Speaker 9>if you look at the Peace Prize, when it gets

0:24:09.560 --> 0:24:14.080
<v Speaker 9>awarded to a dissident in a country, the government of

0:24:14.119 --> 0:24:18.040
<v Speaker 9>that country would likely feel that that is against them

0:24:18.480 --> 0:24:19.800
<v Speaker 9>and call a bias.

0:24:20.080 --> 0:24:23.600
<v Speaker 2>Is the Nobel still relevant? Does its influence on the

0:24:23.640 --> 0:24:24.840
<v Speaker 2>Nobel Prize winners?

0:24:25.240 --> 0:24:28.320
<v Speaker 9>I think many would argue that the Nobels are relevant.

0:24:28.440 --> 0:24:31.840
<v Speaker 9>There is a lot of prestige that comes with the prize,

0:24:32.160 --> 0:24:35.359
<v Speaker 9>and a lot of these laureates can actually, you know,

0:24:35.920 --> 0:24:38.720
<v Speaker 9>they can become superstars of the science world. It can

0:24:38.760 --> 0:24:42.800
<v Speaker 9>tremendously help the universities raise funds for peace laureates. It

0:24:42.880 --> 0:24:46.440
<v Speaker 9>shines a light on the cause that they are advocating for.

0:24:46.840 --> 0:24:50.280
<v Speaker 9>But there are some problems as well, and on the

0:24:50.320 --> 0:24:54.000
<v Speaker 9>science side. Really a big problem is that scientific research

0:24:54.080 --> 0:24:58.159
<v Speaker 9>is increasingly collaborative in nature, and so you don't have

0:24:58.280 --> 0:25:02.040
<v Speaker 9>these loan geniuses anymore. And when you can only give

0:25:02.080 --> 0:25:04.879
<v Speaker 9>the prize to up to three people, what do you

0:25:04.920 --> 0:25:07.280
<v Speaker 9>do in cases where the science is actually the papers

0:25:07.280 --> 0:25:09.919
<v Speaker 9>are written by hundreds, if not even thousands of people,

0:25:10.960 --> 0:25:14.399
<v Speaker 9>so it can feel rather hard to sell, like who's

0:25:14.440 --> 0:25:17.119
<v Speaker 9>the winner, why shouldn't another person get it? And then

0:25:17.280 --> 0:25:21.600
<v Speaker 9>additionally you can see discoveries being made simultaneously by different teams,

0:25:22.280 --> 0:25:25.120
<v Speaker 9>so they can feel unfair. Then also, one more thing

0:25:25.320 --> 0:25:27.240
<v Speaker 9>is that there are a lot of fields where there

0:25:27.280 --> 0:25:32.119
<v Speaker 9>is no Nobel Mathematics, computer science, climate, science. There is

0:25:32.160 --> 0:25:35.040
<v Speaker 9>no Nobel Prize for these because these were not set

0:25:35.080 --> 0:25:37.960
<v Speaker 9>out in the will of Alfred Nobel as the fields

0:25:37.960 --> 0:25:39.720
<v Speaker 9>for which there should be a prize.

0:25:39.880 --> 0:25:43.520
<v Speaker 2>My warm thanks to Bloomberg's Katty Poyan Paalo speaking to

0:25:43.560 --> 0:25:46.880
<v Speaker 2>me from Norway as we think about the Nobel Prizes

0:25:46.960 --> 0:25:51.159
<v Speaker 2>being awarded this year between the seventh and fourteenth of October.

0:25:51.760 --> 0:25:54.160
<v Speaker 2>I'm Kline Hepke here in London and you can catch

0:25:54.240 --> 0:25:56.840
<v Speaker 2>us every weekday morning for Bloomberg Daybreak you at beginning

0:25:56.840 --> 0:25:59.639
<v Speaker 2>at six am in London. That's one am on Wall Street.

0:25:59.720 --> 0:26:03.119
<v Speaker 1>Tom, Thanks Caroline, And coming up on Bloomberg day Break Weekend,

0:26:03.200 --> 0:26:06.240
<v Speaker 1>Japan's ruling party has a new leader. We'll discuss his

0:26:06.320 --> 0:26:07.760
<v Speaker 1>defense policy approach.

0:26:08.080 --> 0:26:08.439
<v Speaker 6>Next.

0:26:08.760 --> 0:26:22.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm Tom Busby and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg

0:26:22.920 --> 0:26:24.960
<v Speaker 1>day Break Weekend, our global look ahead at the top

0:26:25.000 --> 0:26:27.800
<v Speaker 1>stories for investors in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby

0:26:27.840 --> 0:26:31.639
<v Speaker 1>in New York. Japan's ruling party has pict suregeru Ishiba

0:26:31.800 --> 0:26:34.400
<v Speaker 1>as its new leader in a surprise result. Let's get

0:26:34.400 --> 0:26:37.720
<v Speaker 1>to Bloomberg Daybreak Asia co host Brian Curtis to discuss

0:26:37.760 --> 0:26:40.280
<v Speaker 1>more on Aeshiba's defense policy approach.

0:26:40.720 --> 0:26:44.480
<v Speaker 3>Tom. Japan's new Prime Minister Shigoto Ishiba, floated the idea

0:26:44.640 --> 0:26:49.080
<v Speaker 3>of an Asian NATO security apparatus that could deter aggression

0:26:49.160 --> 0:26:53.119
<v Speaker 3>in the region. In essence, he believes that collective security

0:26:53.160 --> 0:26:57.200
<v Speaker 3>works best when it is obligatory. It's a plan that's

0:26:57.359 --> 0:27:00.879
<v Speaker 3>very much fraught with risk. China, for instance, has blasted

0:27:00.880 --> 0:27:03.880
<v Speaker 3>the idea of such an alliance. The US itself has

0:27:03.920 --> 0:27:07.000
<v Speaker 3>repeatedly said that it's not looking for the creation of

0:27:07.040 --> 0:27:12.200
<v Speaker 3>an Asian NATO, and India's Foreign Minister su Ramanyam Jaishankar

0:27:12.600 --> 0:27:16.600
<v Speaker 3>said that India is not sharing in this vision. So

0:27:16.680 --> 0:27:19.080
<v Speaker 3>the odds might be against the idea in the short term,

0:27:19.080 --> 0:27:22.560
<v Speaker 3>but nonetheless, Shigeto Ishiba has made it a top issue

0:27:22.840 --> 0:27:25.479
<v Speaker 3>and the LDP did elect him to be their leader

0:27:25.760 --> 0:27:28.359
<v Speaker 3>and he wants to explore it. As a result, we

0:27:28.480 --> 0:27:31.320
<v Speaker 3>too would like to examine it more closely and work

0:27:31.400 --> 0:27:34.120
<v Speaker 3>through some of the pros and cons of the framework.

0:27:34.600 --> 0:27:37.400
<v Speaker 3>Joining us now on the program is Bill Ferries, Bloomberg

0:27:37.440 --> 0:27:41.680
<v Speaker 3>Senior editor and Gerode Reedy, Bloomberg opinion columnist. To take

0:27:41.680 --> 0:27:44.800
<v Speaker 3>a closer look, Bill, let me start with you. It's

0:27:44.800 --> 0:27:48.520
<v Speaker 3>one of these ideas that seems perhaps good on paper,

0:27:48.680 --> 0:27:51.680
<v Speaker 3>but might be very difficult to implement.

0:27:52.040 --> 0:27:55.040
<v Speaker 10>If so, why well, I think when you look across Asia,

0:27:55.160 --> 0:27:57.359
<v Speaker 10>I mean, if you're really taking this idea of a

0:27:57.520 --> 0:28:02.399
<v Speaker 10>kind of a pan Asian security alliance seriously in the

0:28:02.400 --> 0:28:05.480
<v Speaker 10>way that you see kind of a traditional NATO concept

0:28:05.480 --> 0:28:09.040
<v Speaker 10>in Europe, there's some pretty big divergences in opinion in

0:28:09.119 --> 0:28:14.960
<v Speaker 10>terms of how to approach China, whether to join these

0:28:15.080 --> 0:28:18.359
<v Speaker 10>kind of blocks that might provoke China or might be

0:28:18.359 --> 0:28:22.200
<v Speaker 10>seen as provoking China versus just trying to ensure your

0:28:22.200 --> 0:28:24.840
<v Speaker 10>own collective defense. So, you know, I think we saw

0:28:24.880 --> 0:28:28.399
<v Speaker 10>that most dramatically, perhaps over the last several years with

0:28:28.480 --> 0:28:33.200
<v Speaker 10>the Philippines, which had a leader Rodrigo de Tte, who

0:28:33.520 --> 0:28:37.040
<v Speaker 10>really kind of started to turn his back on the

0:28:37.080 --> 0:28:41.960
<v Speaker 10>traditional US Philippines military alliance and really tried to work

0:28:41.960 --> 0:28:46.280
<v Speaker 10>a lot more closely with China, including on things like

0:28:46.320 --> 0:28:49.840
<v Speaker 10>the South China Sea. And then you have one election,

0:28:50.120 --> 0:28:54.280
<v Speaker 10>and the Philippines foreign policy and its approach towards China

0:28:54.280 --> 0:28:56.560
<v Speaker 10>and the US really went almost one hundred and eighty

0:28:56.600 --> 0:29:00.920
<v Speaker 10>degrees in the opposite direction, where the US military started

0:29:00.960 --> 0:29:05.680
<v Speaker 10>getting more access to Philippine military facilities, and there was

0:29:05.720 --> 0:29:08.920
<v Speaker 10>a much stronger, tighter alliance. So I think when you

0:29:08.960 --> 0:29:11.760
<v Speaker 10>look across Asia you do see kind of those differences.

0:29:11.840 --> 0:29:15.000
<v Speaker 10>So whereas when you talk about NATO and Europe having

0:29:15.080 --> 0:29:18.720
<v Speaker 10>I think it's thirty two members who are all agreed

0:29:18.760 --> 0:29:21.680
<v Speaker 10>to come to each other's collective defense when attacked, it's

0:29:21.680 --> 0:29:24.160
<v Speaker 10>a lot harder to imagine that kind of a framework

0:29:24.200 --> 0:29:29.360
<v Speaker 10>in Asia. Would South Korea really come to Japan's defensive attacked? Well,

0:29:29.680 --> 0:29:32.800
<v Speaker 10>you know some nations are they really interested in coming

0:29:32.880 --> 0:29:37.840
<v Speaker 10>to Taiwan's defense, particularly if attacked. So that's one reason

0:29:37.880 --> 0:29:41.240
<v Speaker 10>you just don't have more of the uniformity or views

0:29:41.280 --> 0:29:44.000
<v Speaker 10>about the common threat that you do. You did when

0:29:44.040 --> 0:29:47.000
<v Speaker 10>NATO was formed in the Soviet Union was looming over

0:29:47.120 --> 0:29:48.000
<v Speaker 10>much of Europe.

0:29:48.240 --> 0:29:51.280
<v Speaker 3>So Gerod we pose the idea at the beginning that

0:29:51.320 --> 0:29:54.640
<v Speaker 3>this is something that Issiba wants. Why does he want

0:29:54.640 --> 0:29:58.040
<v Speaker 3>it when it seems, as Bill suggested, so difficult to implement.

0:29:58.160 --> 0:29:59.800
<v Speaker 11>I think that's a very good question, and to be honest,

0:30:00.080 --> 0:30:02.600
<v Speaker 11>you know, I don't have a particularly good answer for this.

0:30:02.720 --> 0:30:06.160
<v Speaker 11>Ishiba is to my knowledge, the only you know, major

0:30:06.200 --> 0:30:09.440
<v Speaker 11>politician in Japan who is promoting this, and this is

0:30:09.480 --> 0:30:12.400
<v Speaker 11>one of you know, one of his you know, policies

0:30:12.440 --> 0:30:15.840
<v Speaker 11>that he has suggested. He's I mean, he outlined a

0:30:15.880 --> 0:30:18.200
<v Speaker 11>long time ago as well as over a decade that

0:30:18.280 --> 0:30:21.800
<v Speaker 11>he first sort of introduced the idea. But like a

0:30:21.840 --> 0:30:26.360
<v Speaker 11>lot of Ishiba's policies, obviously, most people were not expecting

0:30:26.440 --> 0:30:30.360
<v Speaker 11>him to win the election and become Prime minister, so

0:30:30.400 --> 0:30:32.760
<v Speaker 11>a lot of people are having to deal with and suddenly,

0:30:32.800 --> 0:30:35.240
<v Speaker 11>you know, look up what his policies actually are. And

0:30:35.280 --> 0:30:37.920
<v Speaker 11>I think what a lot of people are finding, including myself,

0:30:38.440 --> 0:30:41.640
<v Speaker 11>is that he has these ideas, but they aren't really

0:30:42.160 --> 0:30:45.600
<v Speaker 11>fleshed out. There isn't a lot of substance to them.

0:30:45.640 --> 0:30:48.040
<v Speaker 11>He talks about things like, you know, in terms of

0:30:48.080 --> 0:30:51.120
<v Speaker 11>his domestic policy, you know, he talks about you know,

0:30:51.480 --> 0:30:54.640
<v Speaker 11>revitalizing the regions. Okay, great idea, how do you go

0:30:54.680 --> 0:30:57.080
<v Speaker 11>about that? He hasn't said how he's going to do that.

0:30:57.520 --> 0:31:00.400
<v Speaker 11>In foreign policy, he talks about you know, Asian He

0:31:00.440 --> 0:31:04.680
<v Speaker 11>also talks about you know, reviewing the you know, the

0:31:05.360 --> 0:31:08.560
<v Speaker 11>security alliance with the US to make Japan a more

0:31:08.600 --> 0:31:12.400
<v Speaker 11>equal partner. Ye again, fine idea, how are you actually

0:31:12.440 --> 0:31:14.400
<v Speaker 11>going to go about that in practice? And I think,

0:31:14.440 --> 0:31:16.560
<v Speaker 11>you know, when it comes to Asian NATO is like,

0:31:16.720 --> 0:31:19.480
<v Speaker 11>assuming you did want to set this up, obviously, the

0:31:19.480 --> 0:31:21.360
<v Speaker 11>first thing that you need is the involvement and the

0:31:21.400 --> 0:31:23.720
<v Speaker 11>sign off of the United States, And when I thought,

0:31:23.840 --> 0:31:25.120
<v Speaker 11>it's not really going anywhere.

0:31:25.600 --> 0:31:27.920
<v Speaker 3>So it's difficult to get a real clear picture of

0:31:27.960 --> 0:31:30.120
<v Speaker 3>exactly who he is and what he wants. He seems

0:31:30.160 --> 0:31:33.000
<v Speaker 3>like an opposite, a polar opposite to the former Prime

0:31:33.040 --> 0:31:36.040
<v Speaker 3>Minister Shinzo Abe, who is pretty successful. One of the

0:31:36.040 --> 0:31:38.680
<v Speaker 3>things that Abbe really wanted was a strong Japan. It

0:31:38.800 --> 0:31:42.120
<v Speaker 3>seems that Ishiba does not have that same ambition. Is

0:31:42.160 --> 0:31:45.080
<v Speaker 3>that right? And how does that kind of figure into

0:31:45.280 --> 0:31:48.840
<v Speaker 3>wanting some sort of formalized security alliance if you're not

0:31:48.920 --> 0:31:52.040
<v Speaker 3>necessarily pushing for a very strong Japan itself.

0:31:52.240 --> 0:31:55.560
<v Speaker 11>I think the difference between Ishuba and Abbe is that, Yeah,

0:31:55.640 --> 0:32:00.520
<v Speaker 11>Abbe wanted a strong Japan that you know, projected. It's

0:32:00.600 --> 0:32:03.960
<v Speaker 11>that are that had the ability to project its force,

0:32:04.160 --> 0:32:06.880
<v Speaker 11>you know, so in line with what a large you know,

0:32:06.920 --> 0:32:09.480
<v Speaker 11>what a large country and what a large economy it is.

0:32:09.720 --> 0:32:14.000
<v Speaker 11>Ishiba seems a little bit more isolationist. Would would be

0:32:14.040 --> 0:32:17.120
<v Speaker 11>taking it too far, but I do think he wants

0:32:17.600 --> 0:32:22.600
<v Speaker 11>stability rather than you know, necessarily a Japan that can

0:32:22.720 --> 0:32:26.200
<v Speaker 11>exert its influence further in the region. And I guess

0:32:26.280 --> 0:32:28.840
<v Speaker 11>this is maybe where he has approached the idea of

0:32:29.000 --> 0:32:32.680
<v Speaker 11>Asian NATO from in that he's not incorrect to point

0:32:32.720 --> 0:32:34.800
<v Speaker 11>out that, you know, the reason that, you know, one

0:32:34.840 --> 0:32:36.760
<v Speaker 11>of the reasons that the Ukraine was invaded in other

0:32:36.800 --> 0:32:39.200
<v Speaker 11>countries haven't been invaded is because it wasn't a member

0:32:39.240 --> 0:32:42.360
<v Speaker 11>of NATO and didn't have those security guarantees. So I

0:32:42.400 --> 0:32:45.080
<v Speaker 11>think he is sort of a more like a safety

0:32:45.120 --> 0:32:49.520
<v Speaker 11>first kind of approach, certainly compared to Abbe. And you know,

0:32:49.960 --> 0:32:51.720
<v Speaker 11>as I say, like it is a fine idea to

0:32:51.760 --> 0:32:55.120
<v Speaker 11>say collective self defense would decrease the risk of any

0:32:55.200 --> 0:32:58.680
<v Speaker 11>one partner being involved. That's not an incorrect take to have,

0:32:59.080 --> 0:33:02.200
<v Speaker 11>It's just how how do you get there? I don't

0:33:02.200 --> 0:33:05.320
<v Speaker 11>believe he has articulated that within his own head, has

0:33:05.360 --> 0:33:06.200
<v Speaker 11>he decided.

0:33:05.840 --> 0:33:09.200
<v Speaker 3>That bill If he continues to talk about it, how

0:33:09.280 --> 0:33:12.760
<v Speaker 3>much would this increase tensions with the United States? And

0:33:13.400 --> 0:33:15.840
<v Speaker 3>I guess also part of that question is why would

0:33:15.880 --> 0:33:17.200
<v Speaker 3>the US oppose it.

0:33:17.200 --> 0:33:20.440
<v Speaker 10>It's interesting to have a leader in Japan who's espousing

0:33:20.480 --> 0:33:23.160
<v Speaker 10>these views now because I will say it, in some

0:33:23.240 --> 0:33:27.080
<v Speaker 10>ways it does dovetail with some of the trends that

0:33:27.120 --> 0:33:31.240
<v Speaker 10>we've seen in terms of, you know, the geopolitics of

0:33:31.280 --> 0:33:34.160
<v Speaker 10>the region. I mean, you've seen this trend over years

0:33:34.200 --> 0:33:37.480
<v Speaker 10>of Japan seeming to be a little bit more comfortable

0:33:37.800 --> 0:33:42.680
<v Speaker 10>promoting its own military kinds of missions, its military undertakes.

0:33:42.920 --> 0:33:45.440
<v Speaker 10>I mean, we just saw, you know, a Japanese ship

0:33:45.520 --> 0:33:49.760
<v Speaker 10>sailing through the Strait of Taiwan for the first time.

0:33:50.200 --> 0:33:54.600
<v Speaker 10>We have seen this bigger embrace with the US. You know,

0:33:54.920 --> 0:33:58.520
<v Speaker 10>Japan is now talking about improving some of its shipbuilding

0:33:58.640 --> 0:34:03.000
<v Speaker 10>ship repair facility for visiting US Navy ships. So I

0:34:03.040 --> 0:34:05.440
<v Speaker 10>think actually some of this, or quite a bit of

0:34:05.480 --> 0:34:08.920
<v Speaker 10>it might dovetail quite well if you're sitting in Washington

0:34:09.120 --> 0:34:12.960
<v Speaker 10>thinking about national security issues in Asia. I mean, you

0:34:14.760 --> 0:34:18.280
<v Speaker 10>want to have more partners in the region doing more

0:34:18.800 --> 0:34:22.719
<v Speaker 10>on defense, and frankly, it kind of dovetails well with

0:34:22.920 --> 0:34:25.279
<v Speaker 10>talking about the US election. Whoever wins. I mean, I

0:34:25.320 --> 0:34:29.399
<v Speaker 10>think there's been this Trumpification of foreign policy where there

0:34:29.440 --> 0:34:32.200
<v Speaker 10>was a lot of questions about whether the US under

0:34:32.280 --> 0:34:35.560
<v Speaker 10>Trump would really stand by some of these alliances. So

0:34:35.920 --> 0:34:39.240
<v Speaker 10>I think what we have in Japan now is talk about, well, listen,

0:34:39.280 --> 0:34:41.439
<v Speaker 10>we need to be able to do more on our own.

0:34:41.480 --> 0:34:43.640
<v Speaker 10>We need to be stronger at home, and a lot

0:34:43.680 --> 0:34:46.480
<v Speaker 10>of these policies, like building up the military budget, the

0:34:46.520 --> 0:34:49.759
<v Speaker 10>defense budget, that plays into that. It also plays well

0:34:49.800 --> 0:34:53.960
<v Speaker 10>into a more traditional foreign policy stance of the US

0:34:54.040 --> 0:34:56.399
<v Speaker 10>wants to work with partners in Asia. So I think

0:34:56.400 --> 0:34:58.400
<v Speaker 10>it's going to work pretty well with We're kind of

0:34:58.400 --> 0:34:59.920
<v Speaker 10>regardless of who's in the White House.

0:35:01.040 --> 0:35:03.920
<v Speaker 3>If there was some sort of security apparatus like this,

0:35:04.480 --> 0:35:06.839
<v Speaker 3>it would reduce the cost of the United States bill

0:35:07.040 --> 0:35:09.640
<v Speaker 3>in Asia, which might be seen as a good thing

0:35:09.719 --> 0:35:13.879
<v Speaker 3>by some Republicans, I guess because Trump has been big

0:35:13.920 --> 0:35:17.040
<v Speaker 3>on this. But would it diminish the influence of the

0:35:17.160 --> 0:35:19.399
<v Speaker 3>United States in the region. Is that one reason why

0:35:19.440 --> 0:35:22.839
<v Speaker 3>the US would be kind of careful about it.

0:35:23.320 --> 0:35:26.759
<v Speaker 10>Well, yeah, I think. I mean it's a little bit

0:35:26.760 --> 0:35:29.880
<v Speaker 10>of a hedge, I think on Japan's part, depending on

0:35:29.960 --> 0:35:32.759
<v Speaker 10>you know, we've seen US policies. I talked about how

0:35:32.800 --> 0:35:36.319
<v Speaker 10>the Philippines changed policy was with respect to China early on.

0:35:36.520 --> 0:35:38.640
<v Speaker 10>I mean, we've seen, you know, the US drastically go

0:35:38.719 --> 0:35:42.759
<v Speaker 10>in different directions in terms of how it approaches alliances.

0:35:42.840 --> 0:35:44.640
<v Speaker 10>And you know, Donald Trump spent a lot of time

0:35:44.719 --> 0:35:49.680
<v Speaker 10>saying Japan and South Korea just weren't spending enough on

0:35:49.760 --> 0:35:53.120
<v Speaker 10>their collective defense. They weren't paying enough for US troops.

0:35:53.880 --> 0:35:56.560
<v Speaker 10>So this is I think this approach we're seeing in

0:35:56.640 --> 0:35:59.120
<v Speaker 10>Japan is a little bit of an insurance policy to

0:35:59.280 --> 0:36:01.960
<v Speaker 10>kind of protect against that kind of a scenario.

0:36:02.080 --> 0:36:06.239
<v Speaker 3>Gerod, you say that the LDP had to skew radical

0:36:06.960 --> 0:36:09.680
<v Speaker 3>with this choice, and it did so, and you mentioned

0:36:09.719 --> 0:36:11.400
<v Speaker 3>that you know, this is a bit of a surprise,

0:36:12.080 --> 0:36:14.880
<v Speaker 3>So I guess it's kind of a radical idea to

0:36:14.960 --> 0:36:20.000
<v Speaker 3>pick shigetto Ishiba. What else about him kind of tilts

0:36:20.040 --> 0:36:20.640
<v Speaker 3>to radical.

0:36:20.880 --> 0:36:22.600
<v Speaker 11>I think he nailed it kind of earlier in the

0:36:22.600 --> 0:36:25.440
<v Speaker 11>conversation when you said that he's almost the anti Abbe

0:36:25.840 --> 0:36:29.040
<v Speaker 11>so within the party for close to a decade now,

0:36:29.120 --> 0:36:33.560
<v Speaker 11>he has been on the outskirts. Abbe famously defeated him

0:36:33.960 --> 0:36:37.800
<v Speaker 11>in twenty twelve to become the leader of the LDP

0:36:37.920 --> 0:36:40.400
<v Speaker 11>for the second time, and then shortly after that Abbe

0:36:40.440 --> 0:36:42.520
<v Speaker 11>became Prime minister when they.

0:36:42.440 --> 0:36:43.040
<v Speaker 6>Had the election.

0:36:43.239 --> 0:36:46.760
<v Speaker 11>Ishiba initially was kind of like welcomed in to Abbe's cabinet,

0:36:46.800 --> 0:36:49.640
<v Speaker 11>but he was always a sort of critical voice within it,

0:36:50.080 --> 0:36:53.160
<v Speaker 11>and then since around twenty fifteen, or twenty sixteen, I

0:36:53.160 --> 0:36:55.319
<v Speaker 11>can't remember exactly which. He has just been on the

0:36:55.360 --> 0:36:57.760
<v Speaker 11>outside and not involved in power.

0:36:57.880 --> 0:36:58.080
<v Speaker 6>You know.

0:36:58.120 --> 0:36:59.680
<v Speaker 11>As a result of this, he has just become sort

0:36:59.719 --> 0:37:02.680
<v Speaker 11>of more or a more critical voice within the LDP.

0:37:02.840 --> 0:37:05.200
<v Speaker 11>There are many people within the LDP who consider him

0:37:05.239 --> 0:37:08.640
<v Speaker 11>to be a traitor, not just for you know, being critical,

0:37:08.719 --> 0:37:11.080
<v Speaker 11>but you know he left the party once in the

0:37:11.120 --> 0:37:14.600
<v Speaker 11>nineteen nineties, only to come back to it later. I

0:37:14.640 --> 0:37:17.080
<v Speaker 11>do think that in a different, you know, a more

0:37:17.200 --> 0:37:19.960
<v Speaker 11>shall we say, a more normal leadership election, he would

0:37:20.000 --> 0:37:23.120
<v Speaker 11>not have had a chance to win. It was only

0:37:23.200 --> 0:37:27.520
<v Speaker 11>because the LDP is in such a bind between the

0:37:27.560 --> 0:37:33.520
<v Speaker 11>slush fund scandal, unification church issue, and Keishida's own lack

0:37:33.560 --> 0:37:37.440
<v Speaker 11>of popularity that they turned to someone like Ishiba, who is,

0:37:37.520 --> 0:37:41.560
<v Speaker 11>as I say, represents completely different wing of the LDP

0:37:42.080 --> 0:37:45.759
<v Speaker 11>to those that have dominated power for the last you know,

0:37:46.520 --> 0:37:50.480
<v Speaker 11>over a decade. Obviously, Abbe came from the right, Kishita

0:37:50.600 --> 0:37:54.560
<v Speaker 11>was more of a centrist, but without let's say, it's

0:37:54.560 --> 0:37:57.160
<v Speaker 11>sort of like a strong vision. Ishiba's election very much

0:37:57.160 --> 0:37:59.959
<v Speaker 11>turns the party to more of its you know, again,

0:38:00.160 --> 0:38:04.560
<v Speaker 11>the more lift leaning side. Obviously, he's still a conservative

0:38:04.560 --> 0:38:07.520
<v Speaker 11>politician and it's still a conservative party, but he represents

0:38:07.560 --> 0:38:09.799
<v Speaker 11>a very very different side from what people might be.

0:38:09.840 --> 0:38:12.279
<v Speaker 3>Us to grow. Thank you so much, Bill, You two,

0:38:12.480 --> 0:38:16.239
<v Speaker 3>Gerode Reedy. There Bloomberg opinion columnists with us along with

0:38:16.239 --> 0:38:19.880
<v Speaker 3>Bill Ferries, Bloomberg Senior Editor. I'm Brian Curtis, along with

0:38:19.960 --> 0:38:22.960
<v Speaker 3>Doug Krisner. You can catch us every weekday here for

0:38:23.000 --> 0:38:26.360
<v Speaker 3>Bloomberg Daybreak Asia, beginning at eight am in Hong Kong

0:38:26.440 --> 0:38:29.239
<v Speaker 3>and eight pm on Wall Street. Tom.

0:38:29.560 --> 0:38:31.839
<v Speaker 1>Thank you, Brian, and that does it for this edition

0:38:31.880 --> 0:38:34.759
<v Speaker 1>of Bloomberg day Break Weekend. Join us again Monday morning

0:38:34.760 --> 0:38:36.680
<v Speaker 1>at five am Wall Street time for the latest on

0:38:36.840 --> 0:38:39.680
<v Speaker 1>markets overseas and the news you need to start your day.

0:38:40.160 --> 0:38:43.280
<v Speaker 1>I'm Tom Busby. Stay with us. Top stories and global

0:38:43.320 --> 0:38:45.480
<v Speaker 1>business headlines are coming up right now.