WEBVTT - Economy Appears to Have At Least 6 More Solid Months: Goldstein

0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:08.720
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg p m L Podcast. I'm Pim Fox.

0:00:08.760 --> 0:00:11.520
<v Speaker 1>Along with my co host Lisa Abramowitz. Each day we

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.120
<v Speaker 1>bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful interviews for

0:00:15.200 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 1>you and your money, whether you're at the grocery store

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.720
<v Speaker 1>or the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg p m L

0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:33.080
<v Speaker 1>Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and Bloomberg dot com. Good

0:00:33.120 --> 0:00:35.879
<v Speaker 1>news from the Conference Board. The Conference Board Leading Economic

0:00:35.920 --> 0:00:38.760
<v Speaker 1>Index for the United States increased in December. Here to

0:00:38.800 --> 0:00:41.559
<v Speaker 1>help us understand the details is Ken Goldstein. He is

0:00:41.560 --> 0:00:43.879
<v Speaker 1>the economist with the Conference Board, and he joins us

0:00:43.880 --> 0:00:46.800
<v Speaker 1>here in our eleven three oh studios. Ken, always a pleasure,

0:00:46.840 --> 0:00:49.360
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for being here. Not only do we have the

0:00:49.400 --> 0:00:52.560
<v Speaker 1>information for December, but we have a number of revisions,

0:00:52.800 --> 0:00:54.920
<v Speaker 1>and I'm wondering if you could just lay out the

0:00:55.520 --> 0:00:58.560
<v Speaker 1>situation for us. Well, I look the revisions and the

0:00:58.600 --> 0:01:03.080
<v Speaker 1>re benchmarking. It's so data cleaning, um, and we didn't

0:01:03.080 --> 0:01:05.959
<v Speaker 1>find out very much that we didn't already know. What

0:01:06.160 --> 0:01:09.280
<v Speaker 1>is interesting I think is that not just this month,

0:01:09.319 --> 0:01:12.520
<v Speaker 1>but the last three months, we've seen this pickup in

0:01:12.520 --> 0:01:15.560
<v Speaker 1>the I S M index for new orders. If you like,

0:01:15.680 --> 0:01:18.759
<v Speaker 1>that's kind of an intention to new order. So even

0:01:18.800 --> 0:01:22.280
<v Speaker 1>though the ordering rate itself hasn't picked up, uh, that

0:01:22.440 --> 0:01:25.000
<v Speaker 1>sort of last you know, leg over the fence, if

0:01:25.040 --> 0:01:27.520
<v Speaker 1>you like, looks like it might be improving. So not

0:01:27.560 --> 0:01:30.440
<v Speaker 1>only is the economy continuing to move along with the

0:01:30.480 --> 0:01:32.679
<v Speaker 1>signal that this is going to continue into the spring,

0:01:33.160 --> 0:01:35.760
<v Speaker 1>but maybe with a little bit more kick, if indeed

0:01:35.800 --> 0:01:38.160
<v Speaker 1>new orders are going to start to give us more strength.

0:01:38.319 --> 0:01:41.240
<v Speaker 1>So ken we know that manufacturing is doing well, we

0:01:41.360 --> 0:01:43.600
<v Speaker 1>know that the stock market is doing well, we know

0:01:43.680 --> 0:01:48.320
<v Speaker 1>that credit markets are really robust. Um, I'm looking at

0:01:48.360 --> 0:01:51.440
<v Speaker 1>these indications. The one thing that we don't know is

0:01:52.000 --> 0:01:55.160
<v Speaker 1>why people aren't getting paid more. And I noticed that

0:01:55.240 --> 0:02:02.440
<v Speaker 1>the one decline in the indicators was for average weekly hours. Yeah,

0:02:02.480 --> 0:02:04.480
<v Speaker 1>that's that's just a bounce. I don't know that there's

0:02:04.480 --> 0:02:08.080
<v Speaker 1>any trend there, but certainly the lack of more pickup

0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:11.760
<v Speaker 1>in wages and therefore more pick up inflation has indeed

0:02:11.800 --> 0:02:14.000
<v Speaker 1>been one of the one of the strange things, one

0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:17.000
<v Speaker 1>of the unanswered questions, not just this month, but really

0:02:17.040 --> 0:02:20.040
<v Speaker 1>for the last two years. We keep saying it's going

0:02:20.080 --> 0:02:23.600
<v Speaker 1>to come. The labor market keeps getting tighter. Um, the

0:02:23.680 --> 0:02:27.080
<v Speaker 1>question is when, and indeed when it does come how much,

0:02:27.120 --> 0:02:31.359
<v Speaker 1>And that's tied two decisions about how much interstrates will

0:02:31.360 --> 0:02:34.880
<v Speaker 1>pick up. Noticed not just that the indicators are also up,

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:37.760
<v Speaker 1>but that long term interest rates both US and now

0:02:37.840 --> 0:02:40.720
<v Speaker 1>Germany are also starting to pick up. That's another sign

0:02:40.720 --> 0:02:42.920
<v Speaker 1>of optimism, not just for the US, but we did

0:02:43.000 --> 0:02:45.920
<v Speaker 1>across the globe can tell us about a commercial and

0:02:46.000 --> 0:02:50.240
<v Speaker 1>industrial loans. I was looking at those results, well, you know,

0:02:50.280 --> 0:02:52.680
<v Speaker 1>the combination and again coming back to what we're just

0:02:52.720 --> 0:02:55.480
<v Speaker 1>talking about. You know, where's the inflation here? And yet

0:02:55.480 --> 0:02:59.200
<v Speaker 1>profits are still good, loan demand has started to pick up.

0:02:59.600 --> 0:03:02.680
<v Speaker 1>It's like it's hard to see any you know, any

0:03:02.760 --> 0:03:06.240
<v Speaker 1>party economy. Uh, that's beginning to stutter a little bit.

0:03:06.280 --> 0:03:09.480
<v Speaker 1>In fact, just the opposite. If anything, there are these

0:03:09.520 --> 0:03:12.919
<v Speaker 1>sort of signs that I'm suggesting that if growth doesn't

0:03:12.919 --> 0:03:15.880
<v Speaker 1>continue at the same pace, it's more likely that will

0:03:15.919 --> 0:03:17.760
<v Speaker 1>be a little bit stronger than a little bit weaker.

0:03:18.400 --> 0:03:22.040
<v Speaker 1>I guess I'm struggling with this idea of inflation. I mean,

0:03:22.040 --> 0:03:24.680
<v Speaker 1>this is the big question. This is the reason why

0:03:25.000 --> 0:03:28.639
<v Speaker 1>there is so much disagreement with respect to the sort

0:03:28.639 --> 0:03:31.560
<v Speaker 1>of course of of bonds and where they're headed. I mean,

0:03:31.639 --> 0:03:34.760
<v Speaker 1>right now, we're seeing yields take up, perhaps because of

0:03:34.800 --> 0:03:38.360
<v Speaker 1>Mario Dragon what he said today. But but but but

0:03:38.360 --> 0:03:40.400
<v Speaker 1>by ten, your yields have been taking up. Yes, you're right,

0:03:40.760 --> 0:03:45.280
<v Speaker 1>well before that um still though, I mean, I understand

0:03:45.320 --> 0:03:47.920
<v Speaker 1>that the hourly wages is not a trend. But it's

0:03:47.960 --> 0:03:51.040
<v Speaker 1>concerning that there is no momentum there, certainly no. It's

0:03:51.080 --> 0:03:55.120
<v Speaker 1>concerning that it hasn't started yet, that we keep saying

0:03:55.160 --> 0:03:58.640
<v Speaker 1>it's still coming, and everybody believes it's still coming. That

0:03:58.760 --> 0:04:01.640
<v Speaker 1>as the as the labor market continues to generate more

0:04:01.960 --> 0:04:05.120
<v Speaker 1>than a d and fifty jobs a month, as the

0:04:05.240 --> 0:04:08.880
<v Speaker 1>unemployment rate droughts below four percent, So a tight labor

0:04:08.920 --> 0:04:11.560
<v Speaker 1>market getting even tighter, that's going to drive a wayes

0:04:11.600 --> 0:04:15.040
<v Speaker 1>the question when does that begin to start, how strong

0:04:15.120 --> 0:04:17.200
<v Speaker 1>is it going to be, and when does that trick

0:04:17.360 --> 0:04:20.760
<v Speaker 1>tip off into a pick up in inflation. So that

0:04:20.839 --> 0:04:24.640
<v Speaker 1>Phillips Curve argument, very few people believe it's dead. All

0:04:24.680 --> 0:04:26.960
<v Speaker 1>of us believe it's been asleep and it's about to

0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:29.040
<v Speaker 1>wake up. So, just to be clear to Phillips Curve,

0:04:29.120 --> 0:04:31.880
<v Speaker 1>whenever people say these things, just in case anyone doesn't

0:04:31.880 --> 0:04:34.560
<v Speaker 1>know what that is, it's the idea of an inverse

0:04:34.640 --> 0:04:40.720
<v Speaker 1>correlation between a low jobless rate and inflation. So ideally,

0:04:41.000 --> 0:04:43.599
<v Speaker 1>when the market does get really tight and the jobless

0:04:43.640 --> 0:04:47.200
<v Speaker 1>rate goes very far down, you should see increases in

0:04:47.279 --> 0:04:50.680
<v Speaker 1>wages and increases in inflation. We haven't seen that correlation,

0:04:50.720 --> 0:04:53.279
<v Speaker 1>and people are wondering why and whether it just has

0:04:53.440 --> 0:04:55.960
<v Speaker 1>to yet to start. So I just like to describe

0:04:55.960 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 1>it all. Ken can also help me understand the diffusion

0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:02.839
<v Speaker 1>index and what can we learn from the diffusion index. Well,

0:05:03.080 --> 0:05:06.080
<v Speaker 1>this is really important because as I was just saying before,

0:05:06.279 --> 0:05:08.599
<v Speaker 1>it's like, it's not just the labor market, it's not

0:05:08.680 --> 0:05:12.040
<v Speaker 1>just the financial market, really goes across the board um

0:05:12.080 --> 0:05:15.479
<v Speaker 1>into virtually every segment of the economy. So the fact

0:05:15.560 --> 0:05:18.840
<v Speaker 1>that not only do we have this strong upward momentum

0:05:18.839 --> 0:05:21.480
<v Speaker 1>in the economy, could you know, and we're only talking

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:24.080
<v Speaker 1>about two to an a percent GDP growth, We're not

0:05:24.120 --> 0:05:27.160
<v Speaker 1>talking about more than that, and yet it's that much

0:05:27.360 --> 0:05:29.640
<v Speaker 1>could even take up a little bit higher. But it's

0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:33.000
<v Speaker 1>spread out across the across all the sectors. They diffuse.

0:05:33.240 --> 0:05:36.520
<v Speaker 1>Hence the name of this is not only diffused across industry,

0:05:36.520 --> 0:05:40.039
<v Speaker 1>it's diffuse also across regions. Uh, And so that is

0:05:40.080 --> 0:05:43.040
<v Speaker 1>a further suggestion that this thing is not going to

0:05:43.120 --> 0:05:46.080
<v Speaker 1>fall apart any time real soon. How far out does

0:05:46.120 --> 0:05:50.000
<v Speaker 1>this to the leading economic indicators predict maybe the next

0:05:50.000 --> 0:05:52.440
<v Speaker 1>three to six months? Okay, because this is this is

0:05:52.480 --> 0:05:55.280
<v Speaker 1>helpful to remember, because we're hearing from Davos a lot

0:05:55.360 --> 0:05:58.520
<v Speaker 1>of big thinkers and big investors and big executives say

0:05:58.640 --> 0:06:00.480
<v Speaker 1>they expect the economy in the u US to be

0:06:00.600 --> 0:06:03.520
<v Speaker 1>good and robust for the next twelve months. But this

0:06:03.560 --> 0:06:07.120
<v Speaker 1>tells us nothing about what happens after that, right, This

0:06:07.200 --> 0:06:09.760
<v Speaker 1>doesn't tell us anything about that. But this kind of momentum,

0:06:09.800 --> 0:06:12.320
<v Speaker 1>as I was just suggesting, you know, it's not going

0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:14.920
<v Speaker 1>to fall up the cliff in one day. If it's

0:06:14.960 --> 0:06:18.280
<v Speaker 1>going to start to decline, that's going to happen gradually.

0:06:18.360 --> 0:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>And there's no sign here, not in the indicators, not

0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:24.000
<v Speaker 1>in most of the forecast, not in terms of what

0:06:24.040 --> 0:06:26.960
<v Speaker 1>the bond markets telling us that in the next twelve

0:06:27.000 --> 0:06:29.400
<v Speaker 1>to eighteen months we're going to see any big significant

0:06:29.440 --> 0:06:34.640
<v Speaker 1>drop absent a big economic shock, really quickly ten seconds.

0:06:35.480 --> 0:06:37.359
<v Speaker 1>How long does it take before you start seeing the

0:06:37.400 --> 0:06:40.640
<v Speaker 1>signs in the leading indicators before the downturn actually starts?

0:06:41.120 --> 0:06:44.840
<v Speaker 1>Three to six months? Thank you so much, really helpful

0:06:44.880 --> 0:06:46.599
<v Speaker 1>to have you on and break it down as always.

0:06:46.640 --> 0:06:49.760
<v Speaker 1>Ken Goldstein, who is an economist with the Conference Board,

0:06:49.760 --> 0:06:56.320
<v Speaker 1>talking about the December leading economic indicators showing ongoing strength

0:06:56.720 --> 0:06:59.200
<v Speaker 1>certainly over the next three to six months in the

0:06:59.279 --> 0:07:02.440
<v Speaker 1>United States, an increase of six tents of in December.

0:07:02.560 --> 0:07:18.760
<v Speaker 1>That's right. Well, right now I'm looking at a headline

0:07:18.840 --> 0:07:22.600
<v Speaker 1>that gets me a little bit depressed. The doomsday clock

0:07:22.720 --> 0:07:26.000
<v Speaker 1>just moved. It's now two minutes to midnight, the symbolic

0:07:26.120 --> 0:07:29.360
<v Speaker 1>hour of the apocalypse. This is from the Washington Post.

0:07:29.800 --> 0:07:32.400
<v Speaker 1>Here to put my mind at ease, make me more worried.

0:07:32.840 --> 0:07:36.160
<v Speaker 1>Jack Divine He is founding partner and president of the

0:07:36.280 --> 0:07:38.600
<v Speaker 1>ark And Group, also a member of the Council of

0:07:38.640 --> 0:07:42.000
<v Speaker 1>Foreign Relations UH and he is also the author of

0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:48.200
<v Speaker 1>Good Hunting, a Spymaster's Story. Former acting director of the

0:07:48.360 --> 0:07:54.520
<v Speaker 1>c I A. Jack, I'm having too much fun in

0:07:54.560 --> 0:07:58.200
<v Speaker 1>life to be worried about doomsday, so I'm not miss

0:07:58.280 --> 0:08:01.440
<v Speaker 1>all right, let's talk about North Korea right now. Now,

0:08:01.640 --> 0:08:04.800
<v Speaker 1>now we can shift to doomsday. All right, So where

0:08:04.840 --> 0:08:07.000
<v Speaker 1>are we in this? You know, it's been one year

0:08:07.000 --> 0:08:12.120
<v Speaker 1>into Trump's tenure. We are seeing, uh, not a lot

0:08:12.160 --> 0:08:15.640
<v Speaker 1>of progress. Where's the throat right now? I think he

0:08:15.680 --> 0:08:20.160
<v Speaker 1>actually blinked. Who is he? Kim Jong? I mean, I

0:08:20.200 --> 0:08:23.160
<v Speaker 1>think the first of all, I would say off the right,

0:08:23.200 --> 0:08:26.760
<v Speaker 1>off the top, that I don't see any military resolution

0:08:26.840 --> 0:08:30.600
<v Speaker 1>of this. There is no good way to resolve this militarily.

0:08:30.680 --> 0:08:34.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't see how we could engage take out the site.

0:08:34.880 --> 0:08:37.720
<v Speaker 1>So I've been from the very beginning of the most

0:08:37.760 --> 0:08:43.840
<v Speaker 1>recent flare up in the relationships with with North Korea, UH,

0:08:44.080 --> 0:08:46.360
<v Speaker 1>pushing the thought that we need to return to the table.

0:08:46.600 --> 0:08:50.360
<v Speaker 1>So just the Trump administration adhered to that, do they Well,

0:08:50.400 --> 0:08:52.840
<v Speaker 1>it's it's I think the Trump administration has taken a

0:08:52.880 --> 0:08:57.680
<v Speaker 1>strong line. Uh. Interestingly enough, South Korea the new President

0:08:57.800 --> 0:09:00.959
<v Speaker 1>Moon have sort of tried to war arm up relations

0:09:01.040 --> 0:09:04.240
<v Speaker 1>and the question was whether Kim jongan was going to respond.

0:09:05.280 --> 0:09:08.360
<v Speaker 1>And I find it interesting that he has now going

0:09:08.400 --> 0:09:12.760
<v Speaker 1>to participate with the South Koreans and the Olympics and

0:09:12.760 --> 0:09:15.880
<v Speaker 1>and is talking to them now. I would hope that

0:09:16.440 --> 0:09:19.560
<v Speaker 1>behind closed doors, we're trying to expand those talks into

0:09:19.760 --> 0:09:24.000
<v Speaker 1>the old six parties China, Russia, South Korea ourselves and

0:09:24.520 --> 0:09:28.800
<v Speaker 1>try and come up with a eight some sort of

0:09:28.840 --> 0:09:31.920
<v Speaker 1>temporary solution just slow him down. We're not gonna he's

0:09:31.920 --> 0:09:35.400
<v Speaker 1>not gonna roll back his newclear program, but he's moving

0:09:35.640 --> 0:09:39.079
<v Speaker 1>too fast and we don't have a military solution. So

0:09:39.200 --> 0:09:42.440
<v Speaker 1>I think going back to the table, negotiating some sort

0:09:42.480 --> 0:09:47.120
<v Speaker 1>of temporary arrangement, I think it's our best course of action.

0:09:48.880 --> 0:09:50.720
<v Speaker 1>I was just gonna say on China, I was just

0:09:50.720 --> 0:09:52.920
<v Speaker 1>gonna say one thing in China that you know, the

0:09:52.960 --> 0:09:57.720
<v Speaker 1>Trump administration is putting a lot of it's betting on

0:09:58.000 --> 0:10:02.079
<v Speaker 1>China support. I've been agnostic about that at best all along,

0:10:02.760 --> 0:10:05.800
<v Speaker 1>but I do take some comfort recently if you believe

0:10:06.000 --> 0:10:10.880
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese official statement that they've cut off coal and

0:10:11.120 --> 0:10:14.840
<v Speaker 1>oil supplies, fuel supplies to China. I mean, if they

0:10:15.120 --> 0:10:18.080
<v Speaker 1>actually stay the course and increase the pressure, then there's

0:10:18.160 --> 0:10:22.120
<v Speaker 1>more more incentive to get the North Korea to the table.

0:10:22.200 --> 0:10:24.320
<v Speaker 1>But they're not a band in the program. The question

0:10:24.400 --> 0:10:26.720
<v Speaker 1>is whether or not we can stabilize it about where

0:10:26.720 --> 0:10:29.400
<v Speaker 1>it is today. Well, since you mentioned China, then I've

0:10:29.400 --> 0:10:33.560
<v Speaker 1>got to ask you about this, uh continuing news story

0:10:33.600 --> 0:10:37.920
<v Speaker 1>about the Jerry should Shingle naturalized US citizen. He now

0:10:37.960 --> 0:10:40.480
<v Speaker 1>lives in Hong Kong. He was taken into custody at

0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:44.760
<v Speaker 1>the JFK Airport former c I a case officer, and

0:10:45.200 --> 0:10:48.400
<v Speaker 1>he's under unrest on charges of illegally retaining highly classified

0:10:48.400 --> 0:10:55.400
<v Speaker 1>information relating to US spy networks in China. Well, first

0:10:55.400 --> 0:10:57.640
<v Speaker 1>of all, let me self reveal again I'm of the

0:10:57.720 --> 0:11:02.600
<v Speaker 1>view that in the intelligence world, we always have a mall,

0:11:03.080 --> 0:11:05.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, if you're the director of CIA, and I've

0:11:05.520 --> 0:11:07.200
<v Speaker 1>talked a lot of them, and so they've gone in.

0:11:08.080 --> 0:11:11.679
<v Speaker 1>I've made the point that there somewhere in the institution

0:11:11.720 --> 0:11:14.920
<v Speaker 1>there's a there's a mall. It's part of the business.

0:11:14.960 --> 0:11:18.360
<v Speaker 1>We have malls within the Russian system, within the Chinese system,

0:11:18.400 --> 0:11:21.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure we have them and and have had for years.

0:11:21.920 --> 0:11:25.920
<v Speaker 1>And they have had ten hours. It's finding those malls

0:11:25.960 --> 0:11:28.400
<v Speaker 1>and finding out how much damage they've done. I was

0:11:28.480 --> 0:11:32.840
<v Speaker 1>very familiar with the Hansen and rick Games cases and

0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:35.280
<v Speaker 1>what was interesting, and this is from the public domain,

0:11:36.280 --> 0:11:38.520
<v Speaker 1>that at the beginning, when they started to lose so

0:11:39.280 --> 0:11:43.600
<v Speaker 1>uh the agency begin lose Chinese assets, it was well,

0:11:43.679 --> 0:11:46.880
<v Speaker 1>it must be bad tradecraft in China, and then it

0:11:46.960 --> 0:11:49.080
<v Speaker 1>was it must have been a communication, it must have

0:11:49.120 --> 0:11:52.080
<v Speaker 1>hacked into something that's very reminiscent of the hunt for

0:11:52.360 --> 0:11:54.760
<v Speaker 1>Rick Games at the beginning, no one could accept the

0:11:54.800 --> 0:11:57.719
<v Speaker 1>fact that you had a trader in your meds who

0:11:57.720 --> 0:12:00.840
<v Speaker 1>could do that, who could be in a be a

0:12:00.880 --> 0:12:05.400
<v Speaker 1>member and be a trader and people should hasten so well,

0:12:05.400 --> 0:12:08.240
<v Speaker 1>why do you think that others betray themselves in our

0:12:08.280 --> 0:12:11.480
<v Speaker 1>work in the system. But eventually it became obvious that

0:12:11.679 --> 0:12:16.240
<v Speaker 1>we had a there was a penetration, and it's part

0:12:16.360 --> 0:12:20.199
<v Speaker 1>of uh part of doing business. But part of doing

0:12:20.240 --> 0:12:24.120
<v Speaker 1>business is also being vigilant on this point. And I

0:12:24.160 --> 0:12:27.600
<v Speaker 1>think I think this is just another reminder too bad,

0:12:27.679 --> 0:12:29.840
<v Speaker 1>is so painful? All right, So I just wanted to

0:12:29.840 --> 0:12:32.960
<v Speaker 1>follow up with this because I'm wondering what your perspective

0:12:33.040 --> 0:12:37.320
<v Speaker 1>is on the president's comments and attitude. It seems to

0:12:37.400 --> 0:12:40.360
<v Speaker 1>be that is sometimes put out in public on Twitter

0:12:41.600 --> 0:12:44.760
<v Speaker 1>characterizing either the FBI but also the CIA and the

0:12:44.920 --> 0:12:48.280
<v Speaker 1>U S Security forces. I think the burden of the

0:12:48.440 --> 0:12:52.000
<v Speaker 1>criticism has been directed more to the FBI and surrounding

0:12:52.080 --> 0:12:56.920
<v Speaker 1>the correct investigation. UM. I think it's worthwhile remembering the

0:12:57.080 --> 0:13:01.600
<v Speaker 1>very first official government act and and visit was to

0:13:01.640 --> 0:13:05.520
<v Speaker 1>the CIA. Okay, I think it's a very good it's

0:13:05.880 --> 0:13:10.439
<v Speaker 1>demonstratively good with the director of of CI A One

0:13:10.480 --> 0:13:14.040
<v Speaker 1>thing about as I reflect on what people in CI

0:13:14.240 --> 0:13:18.959
<v Speaker 1>a military tender like is strong, decisive leadership, and then

0:13:19.040 --> 0:13:23.880
<v Speaker 1>from their flows it's less political after that. Half the

0:13:23.960 --> 0:13:27.520
<v Speaker 1>people in cee I A. I'm sure, sure, I'm inclined

0:13:27.600 --> 0:13:30.760
<v Speaker 1>to believe, vote Democratic Party and the other half vote

0:13:30.760 --> 0:13:33.640
<v Speaker 1>to Republican Party. It's made up pretty much of what

0:13:33.720 --> 0:13:36.040
<v Speaker 1>America is. But there is a common thing, which is

0:13:36.559 --> 0:13:41.079
<v Speaker 1>decisiveness and leadership. So I I question sort of just

0:13:41.200 --> 0:13:46.320
<v Speaker 1>how much um turmoil or is around this issue in

0:13:46.440 --> 0:13:48.600
<v Speaker 1>the CI. The FBI, of course, is going through what

0:13:48.679 --> 0:13:53.400
<v Speaker 1>I think is very horrendous situation. I hope they for

0:13:53.480 --> 0:13:56.240
<v Speaker 1>our country, I hope this passes quickly. For the we

0:13:56.280 --> 0:13:58.720
<v Speaker 1>need the FBI, but there are there are real problems

0:13:58.720 --> 0:14:01.800
<v Speaker 1>that need to be addressed. So with with respect to

0:14:02.320 --> 0:14:06.120
<v Speaker 1>UH President Trump, he's been in office a year, do

0:14:06.200 --> 0:14:09.080
<v Speaker 1>you think that the U. S Is in a more

0:14:09.160 --> 0:14:13.719
<v Speaker 1>dangerous spot because of our perhaps less robust relationships with

0:14:13.800 --> 0:14:17.720
<v Speaker 1>some of our allies like Canada. One of the things

0:14:17.720 --> 0:14:20.680
<v Speaker 1>that I think it always struck me through the years

0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:25.200
<v Speaker 1>is the public and private behavior of foreign governments, perhaps

0:14:25.280 --> 0:14:28.600
<v Speaker 1>even our own, and that is you might have public outcries,

0:14:28.680 --> 0:14:30.840
<v Speaker 1>but I will tell you in the back rooms around

0:14:30.840 --> 0:14:33.960
<v Speaker 1>the world. It's still the predominance of how do you

0:14:33.960 --> 0:14:36.320
<v Speaker 1>get along with the US governed. It's so important to

0:14:36.400 --> 0:14:41.440
<v Speaker 1>the lives of everybody in every country that most most

0:14:41.560 --> 0:14:45.400
<v Speaker 1>of our major allies are looking for ways to deal

0:14:45.440 --> 0:14:47.640
<v Speaker 1>with us. In Davos, it's gonna be very interesting the

0:14:47.680 --> 0:14:51.680
<v Speaker 1>sidebar discussions. So I think what they're not used to

0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:57.880
<v Speaker 1>right now the foreign government is that the president is exerting, uh,

0:14:58.360 --> 0:15:03.000
<v Speaker 1>pretty a very strong position that's not sort of consensus driven.

0:15:03.120 --> 0:15:06.760
<v Speaker 1>And I think they're making adjustments. But um, I don't

0:15:06.760 --> 0:15:10.440
<v Speaker 1>think any of the alliances are are at risk. It's

0:15:10.520 --> 0:15:12.720
<v Speaker 1>just they need to figure out how to deal with

0:15:12.760 --> 0:15:16.640
<v Speaker 1>the new president the United States. Jack Devine, thank you

0:15:16.760 --> 0:15:19.760
<v Speaker 1>very much. Please come back and spend more time with us.

0:15:19.800 --> 0:15:23.520
<v Speaker 1>We've barely touched on a variety of topics that, of

0:15:23.560 --> 0:15:26.760
<v Speaker 1>course are interesting to our listeners and around the world.

0:15:26.920 --> 0:15:29.080
<v Speaker 1>Jack Divine is the founding partner and president of the

0:15:29.200 --> 0:15:32.520
<v Speaker 1>ark And Group, and he is the author of Good Hunting,

0:15:32.720 --> 0:15:36.320
<v Speaker 1>a Spy Master's Story. And he of course is also

0:15:36.360 --> 0:15:39.760
<v Speaker 1>a former acting head of an associate director of the

0:15:39.760 --> 0:15:57.920
<v Speaker 1>CIA Central Intelligence Agency. Right now, I want to turn

0:15:57.920 --> 0:16:00.280
<v Speaker 1>our attention to airlines we talked about them a little

0:16:00.280 --> 0:16:04.680
<v Speaker 1>bit earlier. United shares down wow, oh my goodness, in

0:16:04.720 --> 0:16:08.400
<v Speaker 1>the past two days, down more than fourteen per cent,

0:16:08.840 --> 0:16:13.640
<v Speaker 1>the most for two days going back to June. Here

0:16:13.640 --> 0:16:16.720
<v Speaker 1>to talk about it is George Ferguson, Bloomberg Senior Aerospace,

0:16:16.760 --> 0:16:21.760
<v Speaker 1>Defense and Airline analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. Uh, George, what

0:16:21.920 --> 0:16:23.360
<v Speaker 1>happened here? Can you just give us a lay of

0:16:23.400 --> 0:16:27.640
<v Speaker 1>the land? Yeah? So, investors very focused right now on

0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:30.520
<v Speaker 1>the amount of capacity coming to the airline market, especially

0:16:31.040 --> 0:16:35.160
<v Speaker 1>the domestic US market. Uh. And uh, you know, United

0:16:35.360 --> 0:16:38.320
<v Speaker 1>a big participant in that market, and so anything that

0:16:38.400 --> 0:16:41.680
<v Speaker 1>was well above GDP was going to concern investors that

0:16:41.840 --> 0:16:45.720
<v Speaker 1>they were going to dilute fairs, push push fairs, just

0:16:45.800 --> 0:16:47.880
<v Speaker 1>to be clear about what capacity is. In other words,

0:16:48.160 --> 0:16:52.280
<v Speaker 1>they are expanding the locations that they're serving. Correct. Oh, yeah, Well,

0:16:52.320 --> 0:16:55.520
<v Speaker 1>so United is trying to serve their hubs better. United

0:16:55.520 --> 0:16:57.680
<v Speaker 1>has a lot of great hubs in the US and

0:16:57.720 --> 0:16:59.880
<v Speaker 1>they want more frequency. They want more flights in and

0:17:00.000 --> 0:17:03.960
<v Speaker 1>out of those hubs, um so that they can. They've

0:17:04.000 --> 0:17:06.439
<v Speaker 1>basically had peeled back some of that service over the

0:17:06.520 --> 0:17:09.240
<v Speaker 1>last decade or so, and so they want they want

0:17:09.240 --> 0:17:11.400
<v Speaker 1>to expand that service. They want more of a domestic

0:17:11.520 --> 0:17:14.399
<v Speaker 1>US footprint. I think it's what it all boils down to.

0:17:15.119 --> 0:17:18.600
<v Speaker 1>Because domestic US yields, which is the price of a

0:17:18.600 --> 0:17:21.880
<v Speaker 1>customer pace per mile they're flown, are higher than any

0:17:21.880 --> 0:17:25.679
<v Speaker 1>other market in the world. Uniteds are lower in the

0:17:25.800 --> 0:17:29.959
<v Speaker 1>US and their peers over at Delta, and so they

0:17:30.000 --> 0:17:31.760
<v Speaker 1>want to change that. They want to get yields from

0:17:31.800 --> 0:17:34.400
<v Speaker 1>the US that are as good as Delta, and they

0:17:34.400 --> 0:17:37.000
<v Speaker 1>see that as their avenue to getting profitability as good

0:17:37.000 --> 0:17:41.399
<v Speaker 1>as Delta. So they're expanding capacity into their hubs. Hey, George,

0:17:41.600 --> 0:17:43.760
<v Speaker 1>do the airlines have a mismatch when it comes to

0:17:43.760 --> 0:17:46.480
<v Speaker 1>the actual equipment the aircraft that they're using on the

0:17:46.560 --> 0:17:49.720
<v Speaker 1>roots that they want to expand? Uh, you know, I

0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:53.520
<v Speaker 1>don't know. I don't know if they have a mismatch,

0:17:53.560 --> 0:17:54.960
<v Speaker 1>you know. I think one of the interesting things about

0:17:55.080 --> 0:17:56.919
<v Speaker 1>United is if you look at some of their service

0:17:56.960 --> 0:18:00.199
<v Speaker 1>in the United States as part of this expansion for

0:18:01.000 --> 0:18:04.440
<v Speaker 1>more US market share, you'll see them flying triple sevens

0:18:04.480 --> 0:18:06.760
<v Speaker 1>coast to coast into l A and things like that.

0:18:07.400 --> 0:18:11.360
<v Speaker 1>You don't see that out of their competitors. I mean,

0:18:11.359 --> 0:18:13.480
<v Speaker 1>I think, you know, United is flying a lot of

0:18:13.520 --> 0:18:16.920
<v Speaker 1>business between their major hubs, and there's a lot of

0:18:17.040 --> 0:18:19.920
<v Speaker 1>traffic back and forth between places like Newark and l

0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:22.560
<v Speaker 1>a UM Actually LA is not their hubs, or in

0:18:22.560 --> 0:18:27.160
<v Speaker 1>Newark and San Francisco, h Newark in Chicago and and

0:18:27.160 --> 0:18:29.600
<v Speaker 1>and into Houston. So they're flying some bigger gauges and

0:18:29.600 --> 0:18:32.200
<v Speaker 1>I think that's part of the problem as United wants

0:18:32.240 --> 0:18:35.320
<v Speaker 1>to be servicing some of the smaller markets. You know,

0:18:35.560 --> 0:18:37.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't know right well, that's where I was going

0:18:37.520 --> 0:18:40.120
<v Speaker 1>because I mean, I was listening to comments from the

0:18:40.400 --> 0:18:45.560
<v Speaker 1>business from the commercial jet head of embra Air, and

0:18:45.600 --> 0:18:47.760
<v Speaker 1>I know embra Air and Boeing, you know, they're talking

0:18:47.760 --> 0:18:50.160
<v Speaker 1>about some kind of type. But they were saying that

0:18:50.200 --> 0:18:54.080
<v Speaker 1>the reason that Boeing is interested in Embra Air is

0:18:54.119 --> 0:18:58.280
<v Speaker 1>because Boeing and air Bus have more difficulty shrinking the

0:18:58.400 --> 0:19:01.960
<v Speaker 1>size of their equi in order to meet the right

0:19:02.040 --> 0:19:05.960
<v Speaker 1>size demand, and it's better to actually focus on smaller

0:19:06.000 --> 0:19:09.520
<v Speaker 1>aircraft that might have to be expanded. And that depends

0:19:09.520 --> 0:19:11.320
<v Speaker 1>what market you're going into. So as I was about

0:19:11.320 --> 0:19:13.600
<v Speaker 1>to say, if you're going into Rochester, Minnesota, which I

0:19:13.600 --> 0:19:16.280
<v Speaker 1>think is one of the examples we heard the other day, yeah,

0:19:16.320 --> 0:19:18.720
<v Speaker 1>you might want a hundred seeds or a hundred thirty

0:19:18.760 --> 0:19:23.159
<v Speaker 1>seed and that looks like an Umbrera, that looks like

0:19:23.280 --> 0:19:26.320
<v Speaker 1>a Bombardier C series. We heard in the jet Blue

0:19:26.359 --> 0:19:29.960
<v Speaker 1>call today. Jet Blue said they're sort of rethinking their

0:19:30.040 --> 0:19:36.080
<v Speaker 1>embraer onet and given the Airbus and Bombardier joint venture

0:19:36.119 --> 0:19:39.240
<v Speaker 1>with C series, they see new opportunities. They are very

0:19:39.280 --> 0:19:42.840
<v Speaker 1>air Bus focus shop. So that's an example where you

0:19:42.880 --> 0:19:44.800
<v Speaker 1>know an airline is looking for the right gauge to

0:19:44.840 --> 0:19:48.440
<v Speaker 1>get into those smaller markets, the right side. What's the

0:19:48.520 --> 0:19:52.399
<v Speaker 1>rational of United and why do they think it's going

0:19:52.440 --> 0:19:54.199
<v Speaker 1>to be good for their business and why is it

0:19:54.200 --> 0:19:58.000
<v Speaker 1>being taken exactly the opposite by the market. Yeah, so

0:19:58.480 --> 0:20:00.680
<v Speaker 1>you know they're they're adding a lot of capa looking

0:20:00.720 --> 0:20:03.280
<v Speaker 1>at four to six percent more capacity this year, which

0:20:03.320 --> 0:20:07.280
<v Speaker 1>is well above GDP growth, which is typically dilete of affairs.

0:20:07.880 --> 0:20:10.680
<v Speaker 1>And what they want to do is they they're trying

0:20:10.680 --> 0:20:12.919
<v Speaker 1>to go after these better fairs that they see in

0:20:12.920 --> 0:20:16.440
<v Speaker 1>the US at Delta an American have captured over the

0:20:16.520 --> 0:20:20.000
<v Speaker 1>last decade or so, going into those smaller markets like

0:20:20.160 --> 0:20:23.760
<v Speaker 1>Rochester and connecting Rochester into a major hub. Because if

0:20:23.800 --> 0:20:27.000
<v Speaker 1>you're if your service, you know there's one or two

0:20:27.040 --> 0:20:31.479
<v Speaker 1>airlines servicing a small market, there's less competition for that flyer.

0:20:31.560 --> 0:20:35.240
<v Speaker 1>That flyer pays more money. United let that go to

0:20:35.280 --> 0:20:38.960
<v Speaker 1>their competitors, and now they want it back because US

0:20:39.119 --> 0:20:41.400
<v Speaker 1>fairs are better than the rest of the world. That's

0:20:41.400 --> 0:20:43.840
<v Speaker 1>going to create a market share battle that's going to

0:20:43.960 --> 0:20:47.679
<v Speaker 1>cost everybody. Uh, you know the fair price. You have

0:20:47.720 --> 0:20:50.520
<v Speaker 1>to push the fair price lower to fill those airplanes.

0:20:51.000 --> 0:20:54.200
<v Speaker 1>Thanks very much, George Ferguson, our senior aerospace, defense and

0:20:54.280 --> 0:21:12.280
<v Speaker 1>airlines analysts for Bloomberg Intelligence. It's a big day to day. Uh.

0:21:12.359 --> 0:21:16.000
<v Speaker 1>In currency markets, I'm looking at the dollar spot right

0:21:16.040 --> 0:21:21.480
<v Speaker 1>now at the weakest level since December fourteen, the euro

0:21:21.760 --> 0:21:26.040
<v Speaker 1>strengthening against the US dollar that has reached the strongest

0:21:26.240 --> 0:21:31.240
<v Speaker 1>levels since twent sixteen. Have we reached a tipping point?

0:21:31.680 --> 0:21:34.119
<v Speaker 1>Steve England are joins us now. He is head of

0:21:34.160 --> 0:21:37.680
<v Speaker 1>research and strategy at Raffiki Capital Management. He is also

0:21:38.200 --> 0:21:42.359
<v Speaker 1>a Bloomberg profit Stephen, thank you so much for being

0:21:42.520 --> 0:21:45.040
<v Speaker 1>with us. So are we are we at some kind

0:21:45.200 --> 0:21:49.119
<v Speaker 1>of threshold of a bigger move? Is this a capitulation?

0:21:49.440 --> 0:21:53.040
<v Speaker 1>Is this sort of the calm before a bigger storm? Look,

0:21:53.400 --> 0:21:57.199
<v Speaker 1>the euro has moved the dollars moved a certain amount,

0:21:57.520 --> 0:22:00.159
<v Speaker 1>and I think to some degree, the questions go to

0:22:00.240 --> 0:22:04.200
<v Speaker 1>be how the FED responds to this. Um. I think

0:22:04.240 --> 0:22:07.760
<v Speaker 1>if they show any kind of tolerance for inflation drifting

0:22:07.840 --> 0:22:10.840
<v Speaker 1>and you know, staying temporarily above two percent, the dollars

0:22:10.880 --> 0:22:14.280
<v Speaker 1>got much further to go. Um. You already see that

0:22:14.480 --> 0:22:17.399
<v Speaker 1>in that US real interest rates haven't gone up despite

0:22:17.440 --> 0:22:20.480
<v Speaker 1>the upward movement inflation expectations, so the market doesn't really

0:22:20.480 --> 0:22:23.919
<v Speaker 1>see that much hawkishness there. Um. You know, if they

0:22:24.000 --> 0:22:26.000
<v Speaker 1>come up and they say, look, two percent is two percent,

0:22:26.119 --> 0:22:28.879
<v Speaker 1>and that's our target, then then what probably see the

0:22:28.920 --> 0:22:31.240
<v Speaker 1>dollars stabilized within a couple of percent of where we

0:22:31.280 --> 0:22:35.639
<v Speaker 1>are right now. Stephen England, could you comment on China,

0:22:35.840 --> 0:22:41.240
<v Speaker 1>It's US treasury holdings and what you see for the future. Yeah, look,

0:22:41.280 --> 0:22:45.919
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think that the UM. I think conventional

0:22:45.960 --> 0:22:48.080
<v Speaker 1>thinking is that they have the US over a barrel

0:22:48.119 --> 0:22:51.440
<v Speaker 1>because they hold so many treasuries. Um. You know, I

0:22:51.800 --> 0:22:54.200
<v Speaker 1>think correct thinking is that their U S has them

0:22:54.200 --> 0:22:56.439
<v Speaker 1>over a barrel. Both ways. One is that they're very

0:22:56.520 --> 0:22:59.160
<v Speaker 1>much dependent on trade with the US. Obviously they ship

0:22:59.680 --> 0:23:01.840
<v Speaker 1>a lot more to the U S and the U

0:23:01.880 --> 0:23:04.000
<v Speaker 1>S ships to them. So if there's a full fledged

0:23:04.000 --> 0:23:06.440
<v Speaker 1>trade ward, there's a lot more Chinese factories and jobs

0:23:06.440 --> 0:23:08.879
<v Speaker 1>are going to be lost in US jobs. And the

0:23:08.960 --> 0:23:11.520
<v Speaker 1>second is that, yeah, they can fire a cannonball through

0:23:11.520 --> 0:23:13.760
<v Speaker 1>the U. S. Treasury market, but that cannonball is going

0:23:13.800 --> 0:23:16.119
<v Speaker 1>to do a boomerang and go right through them because

0:23:16.119 --> 0:23:17.880
<v Speaker 1>they own so many of it and it's really hard

0:23:17.920 --> 0:23:20.640
<v Speaker 1>to sell. So I think that right now they would

0:23:20.640 --> 0:23:22.600
<v Speaker 1>love to be in a different position, but they're they're

0:23:22.600 --> 0:23:25.120
<v Speaker 1>actually kind of on the weaker side. I think of

0:23:25.160 --> 0:23:28.199
<v Speaker 1>these uh, you know, trade issues. Okay, So having said that,

0:23:28.400 --> 0:23:31.400
<v Speaker 1>why is it that you continue that that it's possible

0:23:31.440 --> 0:23:34.679
<v Speaker 1>to find, you know, very smart people who give you

0:23:34.720 --> 0:23:37.040
<v Speaker 1>the opposite version. I mean, clearly they don't pay. They've

0:23:37.080 --> 0:23:41.800
<v Speaker 1>never played poker with some of that owes the money. Um. Yeah, look,

0:23:42.119 --> 0:23:45.160
<v Speaker 1>I I think, you know, it's hard to explain things

0:23:45.200 --> 0:23:47.159
<v Speaker 1>two people that you know to to make a market.

0:23:47.200 --> 0:23:49.239
<v Speaker 1>But there are different ways of approaching gets. And they

0:23:49.240 --> 0:23:51.760
<v Speaker 1>would say that the one advantage of China has not

0:23:51.800 --> 0:23:55.040
<v Speaker 1>all the stickering is that, um, they can pull together

0:23:55.240 --> 0:23:58.440
<v Speaker 1>an army of formal and informal lobbyists to argue their

0:23:58.480 --> 0:24:02.159
<v Speaker 1>case in Washington. Um, you know, it's much harder for

0:24:02.160 --> 0:24:05.320
<v Speaker 1>the US do that to do that in Beijing. So, um,

0:24:05.400 --> 0:24:08.600
<v Speaker 1>they may not have the best position, but they probably

0:24:08.800 --> 0:24:12.399
<v Speaker 1>can handle their position better than the US can, at

0:24:12.480 --> 0:24:17.000
<v Speaker 1>least in you know, the public sphere. So Stephen uh

0:24:17.359 --> 0:24:21.040
<v Speaker 1>Leaving China aside, the US Treasury Department is going to

0:24:21.119 --> 0:24:26.280
<v Speaker 1>sell treasuries in larger chunks throughout the year. This year.

0:24:26.320 --> 0:24:28.679
<v Speaker 1>That is the expectation of a lot of people. The

0:24:28.760 --> 0:24:31.320
<v Speaker 1>US has to fund a deficit that is widely expected

0:24:31.359 --> 0:24:34.240
<v Speaker 1>to increase by a trillion dollars or more over the

0:24:34.280 --> 0:24:39.080
<v Speaker 1>next decade. Um. I'm looking at a ten year treasury

0:24:39.160 --> 0:24:42.400
<v Speaker 1>yield that is the highest in a very long time.

0:24:42.440 --> 0:24:45.320
<v Speaker 1>I'm looking at a German tenure yield also breaching the

0:24:45.400 --> 0:24:48.600
<v Speaker 1>highest levels and years. How high are we headed with

0:24:48.680 --> 0:24:51.920
<v Speaker 1>the US tenure yield? And what's going to be sort

0:24:51.960 --> 0:24:55.080
<v Speaker 1>of the trajectory here? Is it going to be at

0:24:55.119 --> 0:24:58.680
<v Speaker 1>some point a steady upward climb or are we going

0:24:58.720 --> 0:25:02.119
<v Speaker 1>to see kind of a choppy give some takes, some

0:25:02.240 --> 0:25:07.000
<v Speaker 1>give some takes. Well, look, you know, in wallets in motion,

0:25:07.040 --> 0:25:09.800
<v Speaker 1>it's always choppy in retrospect. You know, you can look

0:25:09.800 --> 0:25:11.600
<v Speaker 1>on the chart and state that was a pretty straight line.

0:25:12.520 --> 0:25:15.040
<v Speaker 1>The U S nominal GDP growth is going to be

0:25:15.119 --> 0:25:18.280
<v Speaker 1>somewhere between four and a half and five percent UH

0:25:18.320 --> 0:25:22.639
<v Speaker 1>this year. Treasuries running to sixty five by historical metrics

0:25:22.680 --> 0:25:26.879
<v Speaker 1>are are pretty low. And we've spent the last you know,

0:25:27.080 --> 0:25:30.080
<v Speaker 1>six or seven years telling ourselves that we're in a

0:25:30.119 --> 0:25:32.399
<v Speaker 1>different world that you know, the the the phrase the

0:25:32.600 --> 0:25:36.400
<v Speaker 1>FED talks about our star real insuri strate equity real

0:25:36.440 --> 0:25:40.000
<v Speaker 1>in strates or zero UM. Now it looks as if

0:25:40.040 --> 0:25:42.120
<v Speaker 1>we're kind of getting back into a world that we're

0:25:42.119 --> 0:25:45.359
<v Speaker 1>familiar with, where you know, we've become slightly more worried

0:25:45.359 --> 0:25:49.840
<v Speaker 1>about inflations and disinflation, and where um confidence that investment

0:25:49.920 --> 0:25:52.200
<v Speaker 1>is going to pick up housing is relatively strong. That's

0:25:52.240 --> 0:25:54.639
<v Speaker 1>back there. So yeah, upward pressure on rates, I think

0:25:54.680 --> 0:25:56.800
<v Speaker 1>it is still going to be there. To six five

0:25:57.320 --> 0:25:59.960
<v Speaker 1>is not that high relative to where we are. Steve

0:26:00.000 --> 0:26:03.200
<v Speaker 1>in Englander just quickly, do you think that a falling

0:26:03.680 --> 0:26:05.639
<v Speaker 1>the fallen value of the US dollar is going to

0:26:05.680 --> 0:26:09.639
<v Speaker 1>help the US economy marginally? I I look, you know,

0:26:09.680 --> 0:26:12.440
<v Speaker 1>the sad fact of the last ten years or twenty

0:26:12.480 --> 0:26:14.639
<v Speaker 1>years is that everybody talks about the currency, but the

0:26:14.680 --> 0:26:19.320
<v Speaker 1>actual impact on activity is low. Impact on earnings is

0:26:19.400 --> 0:26:22.720
<v Speaker 1>much higher because of translation effects. But how many jobs

0:26:22.720 --> 0:26:25.639
<v Speaker 1>a week er dollar creates I say it's pretty minimal,

0:26:26.080 --> 0:26:28.959
<v Speaker 1>So no effect in terms of things. Also, like trade policy,

0:26:29.000 --> 0:26:32.119
<v Speaker 1>you think that's going to help the economy, No small effect, right,

0:26:32.200 --> 0:26:34.800
<v Speaker 1>the you know ten percent appreciations with dollars, like you

0:26:34.880 --> 0:26:38.920
<v Speaker 1>put a ten percent subsidy to exports, ten percent tariffy

0:26:38.920 --> 0:26:41.880
<v Speaker 1>and imports. It matters, but it just doesn't matter that much,

0:26:42.119 --> 0:26:44.399
<v Speaker 1>all right. Thanks very much for helping us understand that.

0:26:44.440 --> 0:26:46.840
<v Speaker 1>Steve england Or is the head of research and Strategy

0:26:46.880 --> 0:26:51.720
<v Speaker 1>at Rafiki Capital. He is also a Bloomberg profit. In Bloomberg,

0:26:51.760 --> 0:26:56.280
<v Speaker 1>profits are professionals offering actionable insights on markets, the economy,

0:26:56.320 --> 0:26:59.760
<v Speaker 1>and monetary policy, and contributors may have a stake in

0:26:59.840 --> 0:27:06.840
<v Speaker 1>the areas about which they write. Thanks for listening to

0:27:06.880 --> 0:27:09.760
<v Speaker 1>the Bloomberg p m L podcast. You can subscribe and

0:27:09.800 --> 0:27:13.760
<v Speaker 1>listen to interviews at Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whatever podcast

0:27:13.840 --> 0:27:17.320
<v Speaker 1>platform you prefer. I'm pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at

0:27:17.480 --> 0:27:20.840
<v Speaker 1>pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at Lisa Abramo. It's one

0:27:21.080 --> 0:27:23.800
<v Speaker 1>before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide on

0:27:23.840 --> 0:27:24.680
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Radio.