Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
Speaker 2: with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hortern. Join us each day
Speaker 2: for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
Speaker 2: from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
Speaker 2: am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
Speaker 2: anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 3: Distraction's not going away, But one individual that is hyper
Speaker 3: focus on the actual policies that were discussed this week
Speaker 3: is of course the NATO Secretary General Jen Stoltenberg, and
Speaker 3: this was his final NATO summit. You're going to be
Speaker 3: retiring in the fall. You've been at the Helm for
Speaker 3: a decade, so you've seen a lot. We're going to
Speaker 3: get into some of those distractions that were happening at
Speaker 3: the summit, but I want to get into some of
Speaker 3: the policies. We just heard President Biden and they're talking
Speaker 3: about the limits they've placed on Ukraine, about striking deeper
Speaker 3: into Russia. He basically said they don't want to even
Speaker 3: capacity to hit the Kremlin. But Celenzi is asking to
Speaker 3: attack Russian jets on Russian air bases that strike Ukrainian cities.
Speaker 3: Do you get the sense that the US doesn't trust Zelenski.
Speaker 4: Well, First of all, the US and other allies have
Speaker 4: loosened the restrictions that have imposed on the use of
Speaker 4: the weapons that have deniated to Ukraine. So Ukraine is
Speaker 4: now able to also strike against the military targets inside
Speaker 4: the Russia. And we need to remember what this is.
Speaker 4: This is a word of Russian Russia has attacked the Ukraine.
Speaker 4: That's violation in national law. Ukraine has the right, according
Speaker 4: to national law, to defend themselves. That includes also striking
Speaker 4: legitimate military targets inside the territory of Russia and allies.
Speaker 4: Some allies have given them that permission. All the allies
Speaker 4: have some restrictions, but they have been loosened up a bit.
Speaker 3: But of course the most important ally sending them most
Speaker 3: weaponry is the United States, and they've only said you
Speaker 3: can go about forty kilometers. But to really the Lensky's
Speaker 3: point is to really start to push back the Russians
Speaker 3: and be defensive. They need to get on top of it,
Speaker 3: meaning going maybe three hundred kilometers. Do you think I
Speaker 3: mean you were part of these discussions. Do you think
Speaker 3: there's something the new United States? We've seen them before
Speaker 3: drag their feet and then make decisions that the lenscape
Speaker 3: is pushing for. Could you see them coming around to this?
Speaker 4: This was an issue that was discussed at the NATO summit,
Speaker 4: and again some allies have no restrictions on the use
Speaker 4: of their weapons they have delivered. Others have resistions but
Speaker 4: have loosened them. The US is of course important, but
Speaker 4: half of the military support to Ukraine comes from a
Speaker 4: non US allaies comes from Europe and Canada. So when
Speaker 4: it comes to Ukraine and the Europeans have really stepped up,
Speaker 4: and with the decision we made at the NATO summit
Speaker 4: to have a long term pledge and to have a
Speaker 4: formula for burnishing, we will ensure that also in the
Speaker 4: future Europe and I will provide half of the military
Speaker 4: support because they have half of the economic strength of
Speaker 4: the alliance.
Speaker 3: Ukraine didn't get the formal invitation they were helping for,
Speaker 3: so they are still at the gates, knocking on the
Speaker 3: door and they're not let into NATO just yet. While
Speaker 3: they do this, though, it unnerves putin do you think
Speaker 3: they're in a sense almost the worst position, this security
Speaker 3: purgatory because they're still stuck in the middle because they're
Speaker 3: not yet an alliance, but even asking to be an
Speaker 3: alliance really underscores the issue that they're having with their
Speaker 3: neighbor next door.
Speaker 4: At the summit, Allies were very clear that Ukraine will
Speaker 4: become a member. We also stated that this is a
Speaker 4: reversible path towards membership. But actually as important, or perhaps
Speaker 4: even more important than the language in the statement we agreed,
Speaker 4: is that actually we took actions to move Ukraine closer
Speaker 4: to membership. We established a Native Command with seven hundred
Speaker 4: personnel to organize the provisional training and military support to Ukraine.
Speaker 4: We with this long term pledge, and we stepped up
Speaker 4: the work to do what we call interoperability, to ensure
Speaker 4: that Ukrainian forces are fully interoperable with NATAL forces. These
Speaker 4: are concrete actions that actually helps them to prevail, to
Speaker 4: help Ukraine to prevail as a servant independent nation in Europe,
Speaker 4: and all of that moves them closer to membership, and
Speaker 4: then when the time is right, and AWLS agreed they
Speaker 4: will become members straight away.
Speaker 3: As you know, politics overshadowed this summit. Everyone was talking about,
Speaker 3: if not officially, unofficially President Biden's age as the native
Speaker 3: Secretary General who's worked with both of these US presidents
Speaker 3: who are the candidates for November. Do you see potential
Speaker 3: change in the future US commitment to the alliance?
Speaker 4: I expect that the United States will remain a strong
Speaker 4: NATAL ally also in the future, for at least three reasons.
Speaker 4: One is that this is in the US security and
Speaker 4: interest to have a strong NATO in NATO. The United
Speaker 4: States has something Russia and China doesn't have more than
Speaker 4: thirty different anallies. Second, it's very strong bipartisan support in
Speaker 4: the United States for NATO in the public where have
Speaker 4: seen your opinion polls also confirming that, but also in
Speaker 4: the US Congress. I met congress men from both parties
Speaker 4: and they will express some strong support to NATO. And Thirdly,
Speaker 4: the main criticism from former President Trump and others have
Speaker 4: actually not been against NATO. It has been against NATO
Speaker 4: allies not spending enough on NATO and that has changed
Speaker 4: or just during the last years, we have seen significant
Speaker 4: increase in number of allies spending at least two percent
Speaker 4: of GDP on defense, which is a NATO ADI.
Speaker 3: So is your expectation to ignore potentially your expectations that
Speaker 3: Trump's rhetoric will not match his policies on the ground.
Speaker 4: Well, I worked with him when he was from president
Speaker 4: last and again I expect that the United States will
Speaker 4: remain a strong NATO ally because this also makes the
Speaker 4: United States safer and stronger. The United States is big
Speaker 4: twenty five percent of the world's GDP, but toget with
Speaker 4: NATO allies, we are fifty percent of the world's GDP,
Speaker 4: twice as big, fifty percent of the world's military right,
Speaker 4: and this makes the United States stronger. And the main
Speaker 4: criticism the fact that European allies didn't spend that has
Speaker 4: really changed. Twenty three allies spending two percent, and those
Speaker 4: allies are not yet a two percent have a promise
Speaker 4: to be there soon. So this has really improved, not
Speaker 4: least because the criticism from the United States was valid
Speaker 4: and Europeans have heard the call and have stepped up.
Speaker 3: Yen center Berg, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 3: That was of course John jen Stilterburg, the outgoing Menogy.
Speaker 2: Keith Learner of Truists staying bullish, saying this stocks are
Speaker 2: in a bull market that deserves the benefit of the doubt. Moreover,
Speaker 2: strong first half tend to lead to further gains by
Speaker 2: year end, albeit with normal corrections along the way. Near term,
Speaker 2: we anticipate the stocks will trade in a choppier fashion,
Speaker 2: but still the primary up trend appears intact. Keith's with
Speaker 2: us for more. Keith, I want to build on what
Speaker 2: Lisa has been talking about. I think it's perfect. It's
Speaker 2: the way to think about things. Yesterday we had some
Speaker 2: data the spoke to this goldilocks optimistic, constructive view of things.
Speaker 2: We also had some earnings that said the opposite, and Keith,
Speaker 2: I'm wondering how you view things both on the economic
Speaker 2: data side of things and through the lens of earnings
Speaker 2: in the last twenty four hours.
Speaker 5: Surean great to be with you all. Yeah, yesterday, it
Speaker 5: was an interesting day. We actually downgraded a tech in
Speaker 5: late June after upgrading it in November, and basically our
Speaker 5: view was that after a forty percent gain since we upgraded,
Speaker 5: that things have gone a little bit too stretched. And
Speaker 5: in July we saw the text have to continue to
Speaker 5: kind of grind higher. On the other side, what we
Speaker 5: saw on this kind of mean reversion trade, the road
Speaker 5: bands just got too stretched. The relative performance of small
Speaker 5: caps up until yesterday was at the on a six
Speaker 5: month basis. Was that the greatest underperformance we've seen since
Speaker 5: two thousand is twenty percent underperformance over six months. It's incredible.
Speaker 5: The average stock, the Eco weighted index, also had the
Speaker 5: greatest underperformance on a six month basis since since two thousand.
Speaker 5: So I think what we're seeing right now what happened yesterday, Jonathan,
Speaker 5: is the road band got two stretched, and basically a
Speaker 5: little bit of good news went a long way for
Speaker 5: the other stocks. We got that broadening that everyone's looking for.
Speaker 5: But that boarding is happening. Those big cap tech stocks
Speaker 5: were came in and the market below the surface was
Speaker 5: strong with the headline index was weak. So it's kind
Speaker 5: of interesting in the way this kind of played out.
Speaker 1: I have this image in my head of kids in
Speaker 1: a rubber band fight, stretching it out and waiting to
Speaker 1: kind of let go. Then letting go yesterday was the
Speaker 1: potential for rate cuts on this sort of Goldilocks like
Speaker 1: kind of environment. At what point do you start to
Speaker 1: get concerned that maybe it's still well, not threading a
Speaker 1: needle perfectly.
Speaker 5: That's some of the guidance that we've.
Speaker 1: Heard from banks, from other companies that have reported earnings
Speaker 1: so far. It is early days signals something else that
Speaker 1: might portend a bit more weakness.
Speaker 5: Well, I do think we are seeing a cooling of
Speaker 5: the economy.
Speaker 6: We wouldn't call.
Speaker 5: It weak, and I expect that, you know, earnings will
Speaker 5: be fine, probably not the blowout that we've seen in
Speaker 5: the past, but enough to continue to move the market
Speaker 5: forward by the end.
Speaker 2: Of the year.
Speaker 5: Forward earning estimates continue to grind higher, and I will say,
Speaker 5: I will you know, I think the one lesson during
Speaker 5: this whole period we've seen the last couple of years
Speaker 5: is don't estimate underestimate corporate corporation's resiliency around profits. Right,
Speaker 5: we had this once in a generation pandemic and inflation backdrop,
Speaker 5: and we've seen corporations handle that, you know, pretty pretty well.
Speaker 5: So again, I do think we'll be a little bit
Speaker 5: more of a choppier fashion here near term. But I
Speaker 5: do think then the line trend for the market is
Speaker 5: still is still higher and the economy is just moving
Speaker 5: more towards a trend growth from this really post pandemic stimulus,
Speaker 5: you know boom that we had that's behind us.
Speaker 1: Now, let's talk about some of the areas where we're
Speaker 1: seeing a broadening. Smaller banks, for example, which has been
Speaker 1: one of the most beaten up areas, and we saw
Speaker 1: some gains yesterday as we get some of the banker
Speaker 1: nings from some of the behemoths Chimping, Morgan, Wells, Fargo,
Speaker 1: and City.
Speaker 5: Is there a takeaway that makes.
Speaker 1: You more positive, more constructive just in general on the
Speaker 1: financial financial sector.
Speaker 5: I think timeframes matter, right, so longer term, we still
Speaker 5: actually like tech on a longer term basis, and we
Speaker 5: think there'll be an opportunity to redeploy there on a
Speaker 5: shorter term basis. I just think that areas like the financials,
Speaker 5: even the smaller financials, along with some of the industrials,
Speaker 5: even places like the reads, will likely to perform because
Speaker 5: expectations are so low. So I think by now I
Speaker 5: think we should be thinking more about how things are
Speaker 5: coming in relative to expectations. I think some of these
Speaker 5: areas that have been being up, where you know, the
Speaker 5: small cap index, some PCE small cap index was actually
Speaker 5: negative for the year up until yesterday, that the expectations
Speaker 5: are low. I think you think about the tech side,
Speaker 5: I think expectations there are a little bit higher. So
Speaker 5: I think I think we're going to have maybe more
Speaker 5: that bifurcation during this earning season.
Speaker 2: Keith, give us some clarity on financial it's not exactly
Speaker 2: left for dead. Bank of America is up twenty four
Speaker 2: percent yet today, Goldman's up twenty four percent, Cities up
Speaker 2: twenty seven, close to twenty eight before today's moves. Granted, Keith,
Speaker 2: are you're talking more specifically about the smaller players, the
Speaker 2: regionals midscise.
Speaker 6: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I'm sorry, Yeah, that's right, Johnthan. I mean, it
Speaker 5: was interesting. It was like yesterday during that big rebound,
Speaker 5: the big banks were actually down because what we've seen
Speaker 5: it wasn't just tech. It was this gravitational towards the
Speaker 5: highest quality companies in the different sectors, so not just tech.
Speaker 5: So what you saw yesterday is the smaller banks actually
Speaker 5: outperformed and the other ones came in a bit. I
Speaker 5: think we'll see more of that just because of that.
Speaker 5: Diverned is again longer term, as we moved past this
Speaker 5: kind of snapping back of the Lurber band, which I
Speaker 5: could I think could last, you know, weeks, if not
Speaker 5: a few months. I think the rotation will go back
Speaker 5: towards these larger quality companies. I just think it got
Speaker 5: overdone as far as just the quality theme on a
Speaker 5: very short trend basis, and we're going to see more
Speaker 5: of that unwine because position it has further to go
Speaker 5: based on our world got it? Keith?
Speaker 2: Thank you, sir, Keith Learner of Truists on the latest
Speaker 2: in this market. So response to the data we just
Speaker 2: got and the data we've had over the last few weeks,
Speaker 2: and really placed to say that a good friend of
Speaker 2: ours on this program joins us now Mohammad al Aaron
Speaker 2: of Bloomberg Opinion and of Queen's College, Cambridge. Mohammed one
Speaker 2: for the went the week with you, sir. Let's just
Speaker 2: work through this economic data we got this morning and
Speaker 2: the data yesterday as well. When you look at the
Speaker 2: totality of the data, what kind of conclusions are you
Speaker 2: drawing currently?
Speaker 7: So I have two conclusions when you look at the
Speaker 7: vitality of the data. One is based mostly on the CPI,
Speaker 7: which is that what we're seeing is demand destruction and
Speaker 7: a loss of pricing power. When Mike Mickey commented on
Speaker 7: it yesterday, he said, it's very.
Speaker 6: Broad based.
Speaker 7: Benign inflation numbers, and you're really starting to see the
Speaker 7: demand destruction and the loss of pricing power. And that's
Speaker 7: consistent with what we've heard from companies, and it will
Speaker 7: be consistent with what we will hear from companies next
Speaker 7: week and the week after. And it is also consistent
Speaker 7: with the macro data that's starting to weaken. So that's
Speaker 7: conclusion number one. Conclusion number two is on the cost side,
Speaker 7: we're living in a global economy that, despite China's deflationary impact,
Speaker 7: is not giving us the sort of deflation that we'd like.
Speaker 7: On the PPI, the supply site simply isn't there to
Speaker 7: help what's happening on the demand destruction, which is going
Speaker 7: to force something that you don't like me talking about,
Speaker 7: but I will that you know, there'll be a lot
Speaker 7: more discussion as to what's the right inflation target given
Speaker 7: the dual mandate. So I expect the FED to focus
Speaker 7: much more going forward on the two side risks, and
Speaker 7: within that much more on the employment side of those risks.
Speaker 2: You brought it up, so let's talk about it, and
Speaker 2: then we can talk about the labor market, Muhammad, the
Speaker 2: right inflation target. The question that the chairman's been asking
Speaker 2: for a while, and he talked about it in his
Speaker 2: testimony twice this week. It's their question, are we on
Speaker 2: a sustainable path back to two percent? Do we need
Speaker 2: more confidence? And he said repeatedly, we need more confidence.
Speaker 2: If some officials start to say that they believe they
Speaker 2: are confident we're on a sustainable path back to two percent,
Speaker 2: not two point something, not two point five, not around three,
Speaker 2: but two percent, why would you caution them? How are
Speaker 2: you thinking about the world differently? Why do you think
Speaker 2: that's going to be so difficult.
Speaker 7: So if they just say we're on the path to
Speaker 7: two percent and leave it wide open as to when
Speaker 7: we're going to get there, Already the chair has said
Speaker 7: we won't get in then twenty four. We probably won't
Speaker 7: get there in twenty five. If they leave it wide open,
Speaker 7: I'm fine with that. If, however, they feel that they
Speaker 7: need to deliver the two percent either this year or
Speaker 7: next year, I would worry as to all the undue
Speaker 7: losses to output. I would worry about the employment side
Speaker 7: as well.
Speaker 6: John.
Speaker 7: The only thing keeping segments of the household sector, the
Speaker 7: lower income one and the small business going. The only
Speaker 7: thing keeping those going is labor income. And if we
Speaker 7: lose labor income, we no longer have the balance sheet
Speaker 7: strengths that we had before, and it will result in
Speaker 7: a much much stronger decline in demand.
Speaker 1: Weh but what you're saying is fascinating at a time
Speaker 1: where Steve Shudo yesterday came on of Mizujo and said,
Speaker 1: his fear is, you are seeing companies lose pricing powers.
Speaker 1: We sell from delta and pepsi at the same time
Speaker 1: that that supply side inflation is still present. His worry
Speaker 1: is that leads to margin compression. Now, if the Fed
Speaker 1: cuts rates, they'll be able to pass along those price
Speaker 1: increases to consumers. Inflation will go higher from here. Why
Speaker 1: is that a parferable outcome in your view?
Speaker 7: So I listened to him, and the only question I
Speaker 7: asked myself is what about the lags? What about the lags?
Speaker 7: It's not going to happen instantaneously. In fact, we still
Speaker 7: have the lagged effects of one of the most concentrating
Speaker 7: hiking cycles in history. So the lags right now are
Speaker 7: working the other way. So it doesn't work instantaneously. That's
Speaker 7: not how monetary policy works.
Speaker 1: So when you talk about the labor market, and let's
Speaker 1: go there, because yesterday we got a good sign in
Speaker 1: terms of initial jobless claims and how much they actually
Speaker 1: came down below expectations, why are you looking through that
Speaker 1: as an anomaly, a blip, rather than a sign of
Speaker 1: strength underpinning the economy.
Speaker 7: So you said earlier, you know, how much should we
Speaker 7: conclude from a data that's every month, how about every week?
Speaker 7: The data, the jobless claims data is inherently noisy. If
Speaker 7: you were to take a more the average of three months,
Speaker 7: six months, there is absolutely no doubt that you will
Speaker 7: see that that indicator is not as strong as it
Speaker 7: was before. Now from week to week, it will differ
Speaker 7: enormously because it is noisy data.
Speaker 1: At this point, when you talk about we should really
Speaker 1: be thinking about what the right inflation target is. What's
Speaker 1: the correct balance between inflation target and employment at a
Speaker 1: time when we're talking about something like four point one
Speaker 1: percent on unemployment and you're talking about inflation of two percent.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and it's this notion of undue damage to employment
Speaker 7: and to the economy. There's also a very important distributional
Speaker 7: effect here. So it's pretty easy now because the Fed
Speaker 7: told us that they expect unemployment at four percent. We
Speaker 7: are above that number in June, and we're lucky to
Speaker 7: go even higher than four point one percent. So already
Speaker 7: that part of the mandate is flashing yellow. Meanwhile, the
Speaker 7: other part of the mandate, the even though the Chair
Speaker 7: didn't call it as such this week but did call
Speaker 7: it last week, the disinflation trend is continuing. The big
Speaker 7: question is this inflationary trend to where and at what time.
Speaker 7: I think the Fed will keep this wide open. They'll
Speaker 7: keep on saying two percent is our target. We get there,
Speaker 7: when we get there, They're not gonna sort of be
Speaker 7: very precise as when they're going to get there, and
Speaker 7: they're going to wait and see how the economy economy accommodates.
Speaker 7: And that's the way of doing slightly high inflation targeting
Speaker 7: without calling it that.
Speaker 2: If you are just joining us, welcome to the program.
Speaker 2: Lucky to have with us. Mohammad al Aerial moments after
Speaker 2: we got PPI dight, I want to go through some
Speaker 2: of that data for you, coming in a little bit
Speaker 2: hotter than expected. Going into that print, the rustle of
Speaker 2: small caps was up again by something like one percent,
Speaker 2: faded off the back of it, then started to climb again.
Speaker 2: We're positive again by three quarters of one percent. If
Speaker 2: you switch on the board and turn to the bond
Speaker 2: market going into the number yields will at the front
Speaker 2: end by a couple of basis points. We've erased some
Speaker 2: of that move. We're just about unchanged now on the
Speaker 2: session at about four point fifty eighty two. Not major moves, Mohammad,
Speaker 2: but they're the moves in the last ten minutes or so.
Speaker 2: You said something interesting, many things in fact, but I
Speaker 2: want to pinpoint just one, and you said the labor
Speaker 2: market was starting to flash yellow. When you hear from
Speaker 2: the FED chair, he describes the labor market as being
Speaker 2: strong and a reason to get this right. You've said
Speaker 2: before that this FED should be thinking about moving in July,
Speaker 2: not waiting until September. What is a couple of months
Speaker 2: between friends? Why do you think it is important to
Speaker 2: start getting going and get a moving earlier and sooner
Speaker 2: rather than later.
Speaker 7: If I was as certain as the market is that
Speaker 7: he was going to move in September, I will tell
Speaker 7: you that a couple of months there wasn't much in it. However,
Speaker 7: you have two factors that may complicate a September cut.
Speaker 6: For this FED, and I want to stress for this FED.
Speaker 7: One is they may get one bad data point and
Speaker 7: then because they're so overly data dependent and they're not
Speaker 7: looking forward enough, that could postpone that the first cut
Speaker 7: to November, and then you're starting to talk about it
Speaker 7: along the lane. The second issue the politics, John, is
Speaker 7: what does the politics look like when we get to
Speaker 7: September and how worried are they that that's going to
Speaker 7: be an inflationary shock coming after the elections due to policies.
Speaker 6: So it's not as.
Speaker 7: Simple as saying, well, the market thinks is over eighty
Speaker 7: percent powability is going to happen because this FED is
Speaker 7: very impacted by high frequency indicators.
Speaker 1: Let's flip this on its head, because a number of
Speaker 1: guests have come on the show and said that the
Speaker 1: big fear for the FED and most the worst case
Speaker 1: outcome would be if they had to reverse course and
Speaker 1: high grates again at some point in response to an
Speaker 1: inflationary shock. Do you think that that isn't that big
Speaker 1: of a risk or it wouldn't be that problematic if
Speaker 1: they had to reverse course, say next year, after starting cutting,
Speaker 1: either in July or September.
Speaker 6: So I do agree with the biggest fear.
Speaker 7: They don't want to be in any way resembled to
Speaker 7: the nineteen seventies, and it is a huge fear. And
Speaker 7: already made two mistakes in the last three years, first
Speaker 7: a transitory call that was horribly wrong, and then secondly,
Speaker 7: at the end of last quarter, they got too excited
Speaker 7: about what was happening on the inflation numbers and they
Speaker 7: had to reverse their view, and we saw the amount
Speaker 7: of pivots. I've never seen so many pivots in forward guidance.
Speaker 7: The whole point of forward guidance is to provide smooth
Speaker 7: market adjustments. Instead, we've had this enormous number of pivots
Speaker 7: in the signals from the fair. So I understand that hesitation,
Speaker 7: and I agree that this will be in the back
Speaker 7: of their mind.
Speaker 6: If they do have to hike next year, I think
Speaker 6: it's a low probability.
Speaker 7: But if they do have to hike, it is because
Speaker 7: something has happened, either externally we've had a major shock
Speaker 7: somewhere or the policies elsewhere fiscal trade have fundamentally changed
Speaker 7: and I think people will understand that and they won't
Speaker 7: blame the FED. They'll see that there's something else that
Speaker 7: has happened else where. No one blamed the Bank of
Speaker 7: England and when it had to respond to the list
Speaker 7: trust moment. I don't want to say we're going to
Speaker 7: have the US is going to have a list trust moment.
Speaker 7: It will not, But people understand the credibility of an
Speaker 7: institution when the shock to inflation is coming from outside.
Speaker 2: Muhammed found a question do you have more confidence more
Speaker 2: faith in Shairman powers for the Reserve or Gareth Southgate's
Speaker 2: England team.
Speaker 7: Wow, that's a really, really tough question, John, And I
Speaker 7: think you know, at every interview you get very close
Speaker 7: to the line as Pau mcculor used to say, that
Speaker 7: setarway his courage from stupidity.
Speaker 6: I think I'm going to stay on the right side
Speaker 6: of that line.
Speaker 2: Mohammed's going to catch up. It's a lot loaded in
Speaker 2: that response. Muhammed al Aarian there the brilliant Mhammad al
Speaker 2: Aarian from Queen's College, Cambridge. This is the Bloom Surveillance
Speaker 2: podcast bringing you the best in markets, economics and geo politics.
Speaker 2: You can watch the show live on Bloomberg TV weekday
Speaker 2: mornings from six am to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to
Speaker 2: the podcast on Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen,
Speaker 2: and as always, on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Business app.