WEBVTT - Bloomberg Talks: Bloomberg Opinion Columnist Mohamed El-Erian Talks US Economy Slowdown

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:02.120
<v Speaker 1>Let's start with the price section, and then we can

0:00:02.120 --> 0:00:05.000
<v Speaker 1>turn to the estimates. The price section negative it continues

0:00:05.040 --> 0:00:06.920
<v Speaker 1>on the S and P five hundred. We're down across

0:00:06.920 --> 0:00:09.320
<v Speaker 1>the board, down by more than one four percentage point

0:00:09.360 --> 0:00:12.040
<v Speaker 1>on the SMP, on the NASDAG, down by one point six,

0:00:12.160 --> 0:00:14.120
<v Speaker 1>on a RUSS or of small caves, down by one

0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:16.319
<v Speaker 1>point nine. At the bond market, the rally continues for

0:00:16.360 --> 0:00:20.239
<v Speaker 1>a seventh consecutive session. Yields lower over that period by

0:00:20.239 --> 0:00:23.520
<v Speaker 1>more than thirty basis points on a ten year maturity,

0:00:23.560 --> 0:00:26.599
<v Speaker 1>the two year drop fifty in the month of July alone.

0:00:26.960 --> 0:00:29.200
<v Speaker 1>That move continues, yields lower at the front end by

0:00:29.200 --> 0:00:31.440
<v Speaker 1>three basis points four to twelve on ten to break

0:00:31.440 --> 0:00:33.400
<v Speaker 1>of four percent in the last twenty four hours your

0:00:33.440 --> 0:00:36.479
<v Speaker 1>ten year three ninety four. I promise you the estimates

0:00:36.479 --> 0:00:38.920
<v Speaker 1>so here they are gone into payrolls. Just around a corner.

0:00:39.159 --> 0:00:42.640
<v Speaker 1>One seventy five is the median estimate in our survey

0:00:42.960 --> 0:00:46.520
<v Speaker 1>on unemployment four point one percent. The question, particularly after

0:00:46.560 --> 0:00:50.680
<v Speaker 1>the weakness of yesterday m manufacturing jobless claims, is this

0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:53.560
<v Speaker 1>a head fake or the real deal? With us around

0:00:53.560 --> 0:00:56.080
<v Speaker 1>a table, the real deal, Mohammed el errand a Queen's College,

0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:58.160
<v Speaker 1>Cambridge with us for the next two hours alongside Am Marie,

0:00:58.160 --> 0:00:59.760
<v Speaker 1>I'm Jonathan Farroh Mhammad. We've got to go to you

0:01:00.640 --> 0:01:02.280
<v Speaker 1>headfake or the real deal?

0:01:02.400 --> 0:01:05.560
<v Speaker 2>What is this? I think the US economy is slowing

0:01:05.920 --> 0:01:09.600
<v Speaker 2>faster and in a broader sense than most people anticipated,

0:01:09.640 --> 0:01:12.039
<v Speaker 2>including the FED. And I think that the market is

0:01:12.080 --> 0:01:15.640
<v Speaker 2>catching up to that possibility, which has become a probability.

0:01:15.840 --> 0:01:19.840
<v Speaker 1>So I've said repeatedly, I've asked repeatedly, welcome cooling or

0:01:19.920 --> 0:01:23.160
<v Speaker 1>unwelcome desiation? Is this starting to sound more like the

0:01:23.240 --> 0:01:24.360
<v Speaker 1>latter than the former?

0:01:25.120 --> 0:01:27.440
<v Speaker 2>It is the latter. There's no need for us to

0:01:27.560 --> 0:01:31.560
<v Speaker 2>have an excessive slowing in the economy. This remains quite

0:01:31.560 --> 0:01:35.120
<v Speaker 2>a robust economy. And if we do get it, it

0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:38.360
<v Speaker 2>is because the FED was late in recognizing that the

0:01:38.360 --> 0:01:40.680
<v Speaker 2>economy is slowing. Now there's a debate if the FED

0:01:40.760 --> 0:01:43.920
<v Speaker 2>needs to cut deeper when they go in September. Do

0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:46.160
<v Speaker 2>you think that they should in September go to fifty

0:01:46.160 --> 0:01:49.000
<v Speaker 2>basis points instead of twenty five? I think they go

0:01:49.040 --> 0:01:51.800
<v Speaker 2>to I mean, I'm laughing because so many people now

0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:54.600
<v Speaker 2>are suddenly say fifty basis points to start with the

0:01:54.640 --> 0:01:57.120
<v Speaker 2>fifty basis points cut means we've made a policy mistake.

0:01:57.600 --> 0:01:59.560
<v Speaker 2>And this is a FED that surprised a lot of

0:01:59.600 --> 0:02:02.080
<v Speaker 2>people by having to hike four times in a row

0:02:02.120 --> 0:02:05.360
<v Speaker 2>by seventy five basis points, so they were late starting,

0:02:05.680 --> 0:02:08.040
<v Speaker 2>and if they cut by fifty, there will signal that

0:02:08.080 --> 0:02:11.280
<v Speaker 2>they're late starting to cut. I think it will be

0:02:11.320 --> 0:02:13.720
<v Speaker 2>a mistake to cut by fifty, But the fact that

0:02:13.720 --> 0:02:16.240
<v Speaker 2>some people are talking about it, I think is where

0:02:16.320 --> 0:02:17.519
<v Speaker 2>the information of content is.

0:02:17.600 --> 0:02:19.400
<v Speaker 1>Right now, We've got lots of time with you this morning.

0:02:19.440 --> 0:02:21.320
<v Speaker 1>You'll be with us through the seven o'clock car into

0:02:21.320 --> 0:02:23.200
<v Speaker 1>the eight o'clock will go through the jobs numbers together.

0:02:23.520 --> 0:02:24.919
<v Speaker 1>I just want to sit on what I think has

0:02:24.960 --> 0:02:27.520
<v Speaker 1>been the biggest piece of your call, which is listen

0:02:27.680 --> 0:02:30.640
<v Speaker 1>to Corporate America. It worked the first time, it seems

0:02:30.680 --> 0:02:32.840
<v Speaker 1>to be working the second time. What did you make

0:02:32.840 --> 0:02:34.840
<v Speaker 1>of the tone of that news conference with Chairman Powell

0:02:34.880 --> 0:02:37.920
<v Speaker 1>earlier this week where he appeared to dismiss any evidence,

0:02:37.960 --> 0:02:39.600
<v Speaker 1>any signs of weakness.

0:02:40.000 --> 0:02:43.359
<v Speaker 2>So I think he was trying to strike that delicate

0:02:43.400 --> 0:02:46.800
<v Speaker 2>balance first explaining why it is that in cut, but

0:02:46.960 --> 0:02:50.520
<v Speaker 2>signaling that they're likely to cut, and on the whole

0:02:50.560 --> 0:02:54.160
<v Speaker 2>Actually he struck it quite well. He did come across

0:02:54.200 --> 0:02:56.680
<v Speaker 2>more dubbish than the statement, and you saw the market

0:02:56.720 --> 0:02:59.679
<v Speaker 2>react in that way yet again, and that is his

0:03:00.040 --> 0:03:02.960
<v Speaker 2>bit of coming across more dubbish. But I understand. You know,

0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:04.959
<v Speaker 2>it's not like the Bank of England. The Bank of

0:03:05.000 --> 0:03:07.400
<v Speaker 2>Englian is very clear. Five people voted four, four people

0:03:07.480 --> 0:03:08.079
<v Speaker 2>voted against.

0:03:08.200 --> 0:03:09.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you know, it's.

0:03:09.120 --> 0:03:11.760
<v Speaker 2>Very He responded by saying, oh, no, it's really good

0:03:11.760 --> 0:03:13.760
<v Speaker 2>that everybody votes the same way. Actually, it's not good

0:03:13.800 --> 0:03:15.440
<v Speaker 2>that everybody votes the same way because you don't get

0:03:15.440 --> 0:03:18.480
<v Speaker 2>a sense of how difficult this judgment call is.

0:03:18.560 --> 0:03:19.920
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if we get a sense of that in

0:03:19.960 --> 0:03:22.760
<v Speaker 1>these speeches over the next few weeks from FED officials.