WEBVTT - Bloomberg Surveillance TV: June 6, 2024

0:00:02.440 --> 0:00:06.800
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.440
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along

0:00:15.480 --> 0:00:18.680
<v Speaker 2>with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day

0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:22.280
<v Speaker 2>for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:24.920
<v Speaker 2>from our global headquarters in New York City. We are

0:00:24.920 --> 0:00:27.680
<v Speaker 2>live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine

0:00:27.720 --> 0:00:31.280
<v Speaker 2>am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or

0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:33.920
<v Speaker 2>anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg

0:00:34.040 --> 0:00:36.880
<v Speaker 2>Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App. With us around the

0:00:36.880 --> 0:00:40.239
<v Speaker 2>table Cities Veronica Clark Invesco's Rob Wildner. I am not

0:00:40.280 --> 0:00:42.240
<v Speaker 2>going to bury the lead for Veronica. We're going straight

0:00:42.240 --> 0:00:45.199
<v Speaker 2>to your cool July rate cut. I need to know

0:00:45.240 --> 0:00:47.279
<v Speaker 2>how bad the number needs to be tomorrow to keep

0:00:47.320 --> 0:00:47.800
<v Speaker 2>that in play.

0:00:48.080 --> 0:00:51.000
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, Honestly, I think the bar for bad labor market

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:52.720
<v Speaker 3>data for the fad to be cutting sooner than the

0:00:52.760 --> 0:00:55.600
<v Speaker 3>marketers pricing is pretty low. Tomorrow, we think we're going

0:00:55.640 --> 0:00:57.560
<v Speaker 3>to see one hundred and forty thousand perils, which is

0:00:57.600 --> 0:00:59.960
<v Speaker 3>a further slowing obviously from the slowing we had in April.

0:01:01.000 --> 0:01:03.080
<v Speaker 3>The level of job growth, you know, that's still a

0:01:03.120 --> 0:01:06.560
<v Speaker 3>pretty healthy level. But it's the trend that's concerning. I

0:01:06.640 --> 0:01:08.680
<v Speaker 3>think the unemployment rate can go to four point zero

0:01:08.720 --> 0:01:11.560
<v Speaker 3>percent tomorrow. That's the fads end of year forecast, and

0:01:11.600 --> 0:01:13.360
<v Speaker 3>where we're hitting that sooner than they expected.

0:01:13.640 --> 0:01:16.280
<v Speaker 2>The favorite phrase of every constructive economist on Wall Street

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:20.200
<v Speaker 2>right now, rebounising normalization. You don't share it, you know,

0:01:20.280 --> 0:01:21.000
<v Speaker 2>don't share it.

0:01:21.160 --> 0:01:23.320
<v Speaker 3>No. I think the issue is when you're going from

0:01:23.360 --> 0:01:26.360
<v Speaker 3>a you know, a region where you're running too strong,

0:01:26.440 --> 0:01:28.760
<v Speaker 3>and you're moving to a region where you're running too weak,

0:01:28.800 --> 0:01:30.679
<v Speaker 3>you will have a moment where you look like you're

0:01:30.680 --> 0:01:33.560
<v Speaker 3>in balance. It's the trend that's concerning, and I don't

0:01:33.600 --> 0:01:37.160
<v Speaker 3>see any good reason why this cycle wouldn't follow previous

0:01:37.200 --> 0:01:39.360
<v Speaker 3>cycles where you do get that slow weakening and you

0:01:39.560 --> 0:01:41.480
<v Speaker 3>suddenly get an accelerated weakening.

0:01:41.680 --> 0:01:44.119
<v Speaker 1>So now for the cage fight. Rob Waldner, who has

0:01:44.160 --> 0:01:46.720
<v Speaker 1>completely the opposite view. He doesn't think July is anywhere

0:01:46.720 --> 0:01:49.520
<v Speaker 1>in the cards. You think September probably, I mean, how

0:01:49.600 --> 0:01:51.080
<v Speaker 1>much do you disagree with that approach?

0:01:51.680 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 4>I think the big thing I disagree with is we

0:01:54.120 --> 0:01:56.800
<v Speaker 4>think the growth will continue at a more steady pace

0:01:56.840 --> 0:01:59.400
<v Speaker 4>than I think. Veronica, you laid out, which is, you know,

0:01:59.440 --> 0:02:01.440
<v Speaker 4>we having a me with a lot of momentum to it,

0:02:01.760 --> 0:02:04.840
<v Speaker 4>and so the growth on its own doesn't really justify

0:02:05.000 --> 0:02:08.280
<v Speaker 4>a rate cut, and so the rate cut narrative of

0:02:08.360 --> 0:02:11.000
<v Speaker 4>multiple rate cuts, I think is built on a growth narrative.

0:02:11.440 --> 0:02:14.280
<v Speaker 4>What justifies rate cut in September is kind of the

0:02:14.280 --> 0:02:16.760
<v Speaker 4>way that banker Candida laid it out yesterday, which is, hey,

0:02:16.800 --> 0:02:19.880
<v Speaker 4>the economy might be growing, but inflation is coming down.

0:02:19.960 --> 0:02:23.000
<v Speaker 4>We're in there in continued disinflation, and we just don't

0:02:23.040 --> 0:02:25.320
<v Speaker 4>need as much restriction as we used to have. So

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:27.639
<v Speaker 4>that's a different kind of narrative, and I think one

0:02:27.720 --> 0:02:30.680
<v Speaker 4>where the Fed will be a little bit more cautious

0:02:30.760 --> 0:02:33.760
<v Speaker 4>and will continue to be data dependent, which means, you know,

0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:36.240
<v Speaker 4>they do one in September and then they watch to

0:02:36.280 --> 0:02:39.240
<v Speaker 4>see how things come in. You know, we think probably

0:02:39.400 --> 0:02:41.320
<v Speaker 4>September and December maybe two cuts.

0:02:41.480 --> 0:02:43.440
<v Speaker 2>So pause. The difference between you both is not just

0:02:43.480 --> 0:02:45.800
<v Speaker 2>a few months. You've got a completely different way of

0:02:45.800 --> 0:02:47.600
<v Speaker 2>looking at this economy. How many cuts are you looking

0:02:47.639 --> 0:02:48.760
<v Speaker 2>for in the next twelve months?

0:02:49.480 --> 0:02:51.960
<v Speaker 3>Two hundred basis points total, two hundred basis points touch

0:02:52.440 --> 0:02:53.040
<v Speaker 3>twenty five.

0:02:53.320 --> 0:02:54.680
<v Speaker 2>Okay, you'll know where they're that, are.

0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:56.360
<v Speaker 5>You No, we're not on a base case. We're not

0:02:56.480 --> 0:02:57.639
<v Speaker 5>looking for two hundred basis point.

0:02:57.639 --> 0:02:59.480
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so you can drive a truck to the two

0:02:59.480 --> 0:03:01.239
<v Speaker 2>opinions around this type right now.

0:03:01.160 --> 0:03:02.920
<v Speaker 5>Which is a really well no rate hikes at the table.

0:03:03.600 --> 0:03:05.560
<v Speaker 6>Okay, well there you go. But rob to that point

0:03:05.720 --> 0:03:08.280
<v Speaker 6>just to sort of elaborate the aspect that you disagree

0:03:08.360 --> 0:03:10.960
<v Speaker 6>with that we're hearing from Veronica, this is going to

0:03:10.960 --> 0:03:13.280
<v Speaker 6>be more like a normal cycle or once they embark,

0:03:13.400 --> 0:03:15.160
<v Speaker 6>seeing that weakness is going to accelerate.

0:03:15.400 --> 0:03:17.720
<v Speaker 1>What in the data gives you confidence that's not the case?

0:03:18.360 --> 0:03:20.840
<v Speaker 4>Well, I think what in the data would point the

0:03:20.880 --> 0:03:22.679
<v Speaker 4>other way. We don't see that in the data that

0:03:22.720 --> 0:03:24.280
<v Speaker 4>would point to this weakness. I think there's a lot

0:03:24.280 --> 0:03:26.560
<v Speaker 4>of concentration on this increase in the unemployment rate which

0:03:26.560 --> 0:03:29.600
<v Speaker 4>you talked about, and looking at you know, pass cycles

0:03:29.600 --> 0:03:32.120
<v Speaker 4>as rule other things like this which have pointed to

0:03:32.840 --> 0:03:36.080
<v Speaker 4>you know, recessions following and increase in unemployment. What we

0:03:36.120 --> 0:03:38.960
<v Speaker 4>see in the labor market is that the stress has

0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:42.120
<v Speaker 4>been removed from the labor market, right, That's that's what

0:03:42.520 --> 0:03:45.040
<v Speaker 4>job openings and hires and quits are telling us.

0:03:45.360 --> 0:03:46.640
<v Speaker 5>But still a healthy labor market.

0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:48.640
<v Speaker 4>You know, look at the job as claims number today,

0:03:49.080 --> 0:03:53.400
<v Speaker 4>So we don't see you know, we don't see a big.

0:03:54.680 --> 0:03:56.160
<v Speaker 5>Growing weakness there.

0:03:56.360 --> 0:03:58.320
<v Speaker 1>Veronica, I'm sure that you guys get a lot of pushback.

0:03:58.480 --> 0:04:01.520
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, no, absolutely, but yeah, I would would certainly disagree

0:04:01.520 --> 0:04:03.880
<v Speaker 3>on the signs of weakness. I think we you know,

0:04:03.920 --> 0:04:05.920
<v Speaker 3>in the labor market, what we've seen is you know,

0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:08.480
<v Speaker 3>hiring rates that are at ten year lows, you know,

0:04:08.520 --> 0:04:11.960
<v Speaker 3>part time employment, increasing hours work coming down. It feels

0:04:12.000 --> 0:04:14.440
<v Speaker 3>like all the early signs of businesses looking to cut

0:04:14.520 --> 0:04:16.680
<v Speaker 3>labor costs, and we heard that in the anecdotes of

0:04:16.720 --> 0:04:19.640
<v Speaker 3>the ISM report yesterday. Well we don't see it are

0:04:19.680 --> 0:04:22.280
<v Speaker 3>the layoffs, but that would really be the last step.

0:04:22.960 --> 0:04:25.480
<v Speaker 3>And we have had a worsening of you know, consumer

0:04:25.600 --> 0:04:28.280
<v Speaker 3>sentiment around job prospects, around the labor market in the

0:04:28.320 --> 0:04:30.720
<v Speaker 3>last couple of months, and we've seen that reflected in

0:04:30.760 --> 0:04:34.040
<v Speaker 3>a pullback and spending. We've had real good spending declining

0:04:34.120 --> 0:04:36.839
<v Speaker 3>three or four months of this year, restaurant spending declining.

0:04:37.360 --> 0:04:40.599
<v Speaker 3>It can be that pullback and spending in activity that

0:04:40.680 --> 0:04:43.280
<v Speaker 3>gets businesses finally to to you know, do that last

0:04:43.279 --> 0:04:45.200
<v Speaker 3>step of cutting labor costs, which is layoffs.

0:04:45.240 --> 0:04:47.120
<v Speaker 2>Can we talk a little bit about communication. How do

0:04:47.120 --> 0:04:49.279
<v Speaker 2>you think this sort of plays out on Wednesday?

0:04:49.600 --> 0:04:52.000
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's going to be tricky because we have two

0:04:52.000 --> 0:04:54.840
<v Speaker 3>pretty important reports before then, obviously tomorrow, and then we're

0:04:54.880 --> 0:04:56.960
<v Speaker 3>going to get CPI inflation in the morning of the meeting.

0:04:57.640 --> 0:05:00.240
<v Speaker 3>I do think the report tomorrow, if it is, you know,

0:05:00.279 --> 0:05:02.600
<v Speaker 3>showing like what we expect, slowing in job growth, rise

0:05:02.640 --> 0:05:04.919
<v Speaker 3>in the unemployment rate, this is a FED that is

0:05:04.920 --> 0:05:07.880
<v Speaker 3>going to leave all options on the table. We probably

0:05:07.880 --> 0:05:09.719
<v Speaker 3>do see, you know, the dots come up, you know,

0:05:09.880 --> 0:05:12.160
<v Speaker 3>twenty five basis points showing just fifty basis points of

0:05:12.240 --> 0:05:15.120
<v Speaker 3>cuts for this year. But I think it's really important

0:05:15.160 --> 0:05:17.680
<v Speaker 3>for us to base our FED outlook on where we

0:05:17.720 --> 0:05:20.040
<v Speaker 3>think the data are going, and not FED speak, which

0:05:20.080 --> 0:05:21.760
<v Speaker 3>could sound stale in a couple of months.

0:05:21.800 --> 0:05:24.359
<v Speaker 1>It also depends rob on what the market kind of

0:05:24.440 --> 0:05:27.080
<v Speaker 1>gives them, in the sense that we've already seen suddenly

0:05:27.120 --> 0:05:29.599
<v Speaker 1>more rate cuts baked in. How do they respond to

0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:32.239
<v Speaker 1>this idea that this is a market suddenly more biased

0:05:32.279 --> 0:05:35.000
<v Speaker 1>to seeing weakness and continuing with the goldilocks trends that

0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:37.720
<v Speaker 1>make their job easier to really signal that they're going

0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:39.360
<v Speaker 1>to continue on the same path.

0:05:40.000 --> 0:05:42.120
<v Speaker 4>Well, you know, they've had a there's been a real

0:05:42.200 --> 0:05:44.000
<v Speaker 4>challenge for the FED and for the market, which is

0:05:44.040 --> 0:05:46.719
<v Speaker 4>the narrative has changed so much and what some pricing

0:05:46.720 --> 0:05:48.280
<v Speaker 4>has changed so much over the last year.

0:05:48.279 --> 0:05:50.600
<v Speaker 5>If you just look at the volatility.

0:05:50.240 --> 0:05:52.280
<v Speaker 4>Of expected rate cuts in twenty twenty four, has been

0:05:52.360 --> 0:05:55.799
<v Speaker 4>huge because it's responded to higher for longer than slower

0:05:56.279 --> 0:05:58.480
<v Speaker 4>multiple cuts at the beginning of this year. And they've

0:05:58.480 --> 0:06:00.880
<v Speaker 4>been very steady through the whole thing. You haven't seen

0:06:00.920 --> 0:06:04.240
<v Speaker 4>them react to that. They've been we we think we're

0:06:04.560 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 4>we're we're we have a chance at soft landing. We

0:06:07.480 --> 0:06:10.200
<v Speaker 4>think we're in disinflation. They've been very, very steady, and

0:06:10.240 --> 0:06:12.360
<v Speaker 4>so I think I don't think they're going to respond

0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:14.520
<v Speaker 4>to this change in market narratives. I think we're going

0:06:14.560 --> 0:06:17.560
<v Speaker 4>to get power talking about disinflation continuing.

0:06:17.760 --> 0:06:19.960
<v Speaker 5>There's a lot of contension.

0:06:19.520 --> 0:06:22.680
<v Speaker 4>Around the inflation exact inflation numbers of what they're telling us.

0:06:23.000 --> 0:06:24.800
<v Speaker 5>I think we'll probably see quite a bit of.

0:06:24.720 --> 0:06:27.520
<v Speaker 4>Conversation around that, And you know, I don't know, I

0:06:27.520 --> 0:06:29.400
<v Speaker 4>would be surprised if there's a lot of discussion around

0:06:29.400 --> 0:06:31.080
<v Speaker 4>the labor market, but maybe there will be.

0:06:31.200 --> 0:06:33.240
<v Speaker 2>Let's have a conversation about the bond market, but a

0:06:33.240 --> 0:06:35.960
<v Speaker 2>big move five days thirty basis points a lower on

0:06:36.000 --> 0:06:38.560
<v Speaker 2>a ten year plus more than twenty basis points alow

0:06:38.600 --> 0:06:40.839
<v Speaker 2>at the front end on a two year yield. Leash

0:06:40.880 --> 0:06:42.240
<v Speaker 2>and I were talking about this a little bit earlier.

0:06:42.240 --> 0:06:45.400
<v Speaker 2>We've had tons of conversations about how riscuskewed asymmetrically to

0:06:45.400 --> 0:06:47.760
<v Speaker 2>lower yields going into data points because the FED won't

0:06:47.800 --> 0:06:50.520
<v Speaker 2>respond to strength. Given the move we've had over the

0:06:50.600 --> 0:06:52.400
<v Speaker 2>last week or so, just what is the setup going

0:06:52.440 --> 0:06:54.840
<v Speaker 2>into payrolls, going into CPI next week.

0:06:55.960 --> 0:06:59.719
<v Speaker 4>Well, because the curve is inverted, right, we have negative

0:06:59.720 --> 0:07:02.279
<v Speaker 4>carry the further you go out in the curve, and

0:07:02.360 --> 0:07:04.560
<v Speaker 4>so I think that limits the ability to rally too

0:07:04.640 --> 0:07:06.400
<v Speaker 4>much from here. I mean, so if you get down

0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:09.279
<v Speaker 4>closer to four percent, I think we would be going

0:07:09.520 --> 0:07:11.040
<v Speaker 4>would be going underweight.

0:07:11.360 --> 0:07:11.560
<v Speaker 5>You know.

0:07:11.680 --> 0:07:14.080
<v Speaker 4>And I think that this both the rates market really

0:07:14.160 --> 0:07:15.680
<v Speaker 4>is a range trade here. It has been for quite

0:07:15.720 --> 0:07:18.440
<v Speaker 4>a long time, and we're getting towards the bottom of

0:07:18.480 --> 0:07:19.360
<v Speaker 4>that of that range.

0:07:19.520 --> 0:07:22.320
<v Speaker 2>You don't think we're more sensitive to weak data but

0:07:22.400 --> 0:07:25.120
<v Speaker 2>more sensitive to strong data tomorrow. Is that fair?

0:07:27.920 --> 0:07:30.000
<v Speaker 5>I think that's fair? Yeah, Okay, all right, let's.

0:07:29.800 --> 0:07:30.360
<v Speaker 7>Think about it.

0:07:30.560 --> 0:07:32.200
<v Speaker 2>Maybe it was the way I phrased it, Rob Wildner,

0:07:32.240 --> 0:07:34.920
<v Speaker 2>Evan Vesca, thanks to appreciate it, produca clark A city,

0:07:34.960 --> 0:07:46.680
<v Speaker 2>but quite a cool for July at Mills is whether

0:07:46.680 --> 0:07:49.080
<v Speaker 2>it's around the table Edward Morning's he is, John, Let's

0:07:49.080 --> 0:07:51.240
<v Speaker 2>start there with foreign policy? Where does that rank just

0:07:51.280 --> 0:07:53.960
<v Speaker 2>in terms of voter concerns this year?

0:07:54.200 --> 0:07:56.800
<v Speaker 8>I think it's probably one of the biggest dreggs on

0:07:56.960 --> 0:07:59.760
<v Speaker 8>Joe Biden's reelection. If you go back and you look

0:07:59.800 --> 0:08:02.680
<v Speaker 8>at it right track, wrong track of the country, favorable

0:08:02.760 --> 0:08:06.880
<v Speaker 8>unfavorable ratings. When you go to see where it shifted

0:08:06.880 --> 0:08:09.680
<v Speaker 8>from Biden having a net favorable rating to a net

0:08:09.800 --> 0:08:13.440
<v Speaker 8>unfavorable rating, it was back in the awful withdrawal from

0:08:13.480 --> 0:08:17.080
<v Speaker 8>Afghanistan in August of twenty twenty one. He's not recovered since.

0:08:17.520 --> 0:08:19.360
<v Speaker 8>And when you look at Trump voters, one of the

0:08:19.400 --> 0:08:22.360
<v Speaker 8>things that they're saying is that there wasn't the same

0:08:22.480 --> 0:08:27.040
<v Speaker 8>level of geopolitical issues under Trump, and so you know,

0:08:27.200 --> 0:08:30.680
<v Speaker 8>fear or not, that's driving support for Trump, and it

0:08:30.760 --> 0:08:34.640
<v Speaker 8>is pulling down the pulling numbers for Biden, especially among

0:08:34.760 --> 0:08:36.960
<v Speaker 8>key parts of Biden's base, younger voters.

0:08:37.080 --> 0:08:39.880
<v Speaker 2>Do you think his execution or ideology, because what we

0:08:39.920 --> 0:08:44.640
<v Speaker 2>see from Biden is proud of it. He talks about alliances, allies, multilateralism.

0:08:44.679 --> 0:08:47.120
<v Speaker 2>What you hear from the former president is a form

0:08:47.120 --> 0:08:49.840
<v Speaker 2>of isolationism, and that's going right the way through some

0:08:49.960 --> 0:08:52.040
<v Speaker 2>parts of Congress as well. Which one is it?

0:08:52.360 --> 0:08:53.160
<v Speaker 7>I think it's both.

0:08:53.240 --> 0:08:56.640
<v Speaker 8>I mean America first, which is Trump's saying, is something

0:08:56.640 --> 0:08:59.160
<v Speaker 8>that's really popular with his space. It's a part of

0:08:59.200 --> 0:09:03.199
<v Speaker 8>populism politics. That is a core part of kind of

0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:06.160
<v Speaker 8>the ability to appear appeal to a broader swath of

0:09:06.240 --> 0:09:08.600
<v Speaker 8>voters than Republicans have traditionally done.

0:09:08.960 --> 0:09:10.040
<v Speaker 7>There's a big bifurcation.

0:09:10.120 --> 0:09:14.000
<v Speaker 8>You look at the Senate, which is more senior, kind

0:09:14.000 --> 0:09:17.520
<v Speaker 8>of been in DC longer, fully supportive of Ukraine and

0:09:17.720 --> 0:09:19.360
<v Speaker 8>was overwhelming in their support for.

0:09:19.320 --> 0:09:20.520
<v Speaker 7>Their last aid package.

0:09:20.640 --> 0:09:23.480
<v Speaker 8>It was a house of representatives, the newer members to

0:09:23.840 --> 0:09:27.400
<v Speaker 8>d C that are more aligned with President Trunk, more

0:09:27.440 --> 0:09:30.920
<v Speaker 8>aligned with the MAGA movement, and those were the ones

0:09:30.960 --> 0:09:33.320
<v Speaker 8>that really did not want to see kind of the

0:09:33.360 --> 0:09:36.080
<v Speaker 8>funding that went to Ukraine and that got passed a

0:09:36.080 --> 0:09:36.760
<v Speaker 8>couple months ago.

0:09:37.040 --> 0:09:39.760
<v Speaker 1>Tomorrow, President Bien is going to be in France. He's

0:09:39.760 --> 0:09:41.480
<v Speaker 1>going to be there for the head of the G seven,

0:09:41.440 --> 0:09:44.520
<v Speaker 1>and he's going to deliver a speech on the anniversary

0:09:44.720 --> 0:09:48.359
<v Speaker 1>of D Day. I'm curious about this speech.

0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:49.240
<v Speaker 5>On democracy and freedom.

0:09:49.280 --> 0:09:50.719
<v Speaker 1>It will be music to the ears of a lot

0:09:50.720 --> 0:09:53.720
<v Speaker 1>of the European leaders there. How will it be received,

0:09:53.760 --> 0:09:54.920
<v Speaker 1>do you think in the United States?

0:09:56.000 --> 0:09:58.360
<v Speaker 8>So, I think it's important to remind the world of

0:09:58.440 --> 0:10:01.000
<v Speaker 8>America's power. I think it's import to remind the world

0:10:01.040 --> 0:10:04.400
<v Speaker 8>of the accomplishment that occurred eighty years ago. I'm also

0:10:04.480 --> 0:10:06.679
<v Speaker 8>looking at the fact that we are going to commemorate

0:10:06.720 --> 0:10:09.600
<v Speaker 8>and celebrate the seventy fifth anniversary of the NATO Alliance,

0:10:10.440 --> 0:10:13.160
<v Speaker 8>and so in an American audience, I still think that

0:10:13.240 --> 0:10:17.440
<v Speaker 8>American leadership is important. But there's also kind of it's

0:10:17.480 --> 0:10:21.120
<v Speaker 8>the economy, it's the inflation, it's the day to day,

0:10:21.559 --> 0:10:25.800
<v Speaker 8>harder kind of existence. As voters that look at this

0:10:26.000 --> 0:10:29.120
<v Speaker 8>more as a nice to have than a necessary because

0:10:29.120 --> 0:10:31.959
<v Speaker 8>we have not had that same level of threat that

0:10:32.000 --> 0:10:35.160
<v Speaker 8>we felt in the immediate aftermath of World War Two.

0:10:35.559 --> 0:10:37.160
<v Speaker 8>One of the questions I get a lot at Raymond

0:10:37.200 --> 0:10:39.800
<v Speaker 8>James is, you know, we're celebrating the seventy fifth anniversary

0:10:39.800 --> 0:10:42.960
<v Speaker 8>of NATO. Are we going to celebrate an eightieth especially

0:10:43.000 --> 0:10:44.640
<v Speaker 8>if there is a second Trump presidency.

0:10:44.880 --> 0:10:47.040
<v Speaker 7>What I tell them is that something.

0:10:46.760 --> 0:10:49.199
<v Speaker 8>That was under the radar in the Defense Authorization Bill

0:10:49.280 --> 0:10:52.280
<v Speaker 8>last year was Congress try to future proof this. Congress

0:10:52.360 --> 0:10:55.600
<v Speaker 8>is concerned about the NATO alliance and strip the president

0:10:55.679 --> 0:10:59.680
<v Speaker 8>of the power of unilaterally withdrawing from NATO. So Congress

0:10:59.720 --> 0:11:02.640
<v Speaker 8>here's about this, probably more so than the average voter.

0:11:03.040 --> 0:11:05.839
<v Speaker 1>But there isn't going to necessarily be a galvanizing kind

0:11:05.960 --> 0:11:09.640
<v Speaker 1>of impetus from the idea of talking about democracy and freedom.

0:11:09.880 --> 0:11:11.520
<v Speaker 1>And this is I think a big divergence from the

0:11:11.600 --> 0:11:15.840
<v Speaker 1>last Trump Biden mix up, where basically you had the

0:11:15.880 --> 0:11:19.240
<v Speaker 1>threat of losing democracy as somehow galvanizing voters to get

0:11:19.280 --> 0:11:21.200
<v Speaker 1>to the voter booth. Is it going to have the

0:11:21.240 --> 0:11:23.000
<v Speaker 1>same appeal this time around?

0:11:23.160 --> 0:11:26.640
<v Speaker 8>So I think there's probably going to depend on how

0:11:26.720 --> 0:11:29.920
<v Speaker 8>much the Biden campaign tries to execute on this strategy.

0:11:30.080 --> 0:11:33.760
<v Speaker 7>And I'd also say how much Trump talks about.

0:11:33.480 --> 0:11:36.560
<v Speaker 8>It to the extent that he is tweeting out in

0:11:37.559 --> 0:11:41.560
<v Speaker 8>raising kind of real awareness with January sixth, that was

0:11:41.600 --> 0:11:43.719
<v Speaker 8>something that helped out Democrats in the lead up to

0:11:43.760 --> 0:11:48.080
<v Speaker 8>the midterm elections. The Biden focus on democracy didn't rank

0:11:48.200 --> 0:11:51.760
<v Speaker 8>high with voters, but on the margin, and this election

0:11:51.840 --> 0:11:56.360
<v Speaker 8>is going to be decided very very small margins. Biden

0:11:56.440 --> 0:11:58.520
<v Speaker 8>is going to try to shift the attention to Trump,

0:11:58.800 --> 0:12:01.000
<v Speaker 8>shift that attention to what we were talking about as

0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:04.040
<v Speaker 8>it relates to the temperament during crisis leadership of the

0:12:04.120 --> 0:12:07.440
<v Speaker 8>United States and saying for the next four years, who

0:12:07.440 --> 0:12:11.040
<v Speaker 8>do you trust more? You might not really have liked

0:12:11.040 --> 0:12:13.960
<v Speaker 8>the geopolitical risks that have existed over the last several years,

0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:16.800
<v Speaker 8>but going into the future, the next crisis we hit,

0:12:17.080 --> 0:12:18.640
<v Speaker 8>who do you want in the oval office?

0:12:18.840 --> 0:12:20.720
<v Speaker 7>Biden is going to make the case that it should

0:12:20.720 --> 0:12:21.000
<v Speaker 7>be him.

0:12:21.120 --> 0:12:23.000
<v Speaker 2>Could we just tase out your thoughts on Night's just

0:12:23.200 --> 0:12:24.959
<v Speaker 2>a little bit more if we've had the Dutch Prime

0:12:25.000 --> 0:12:27.480
<v Speaker 2>Minister on this program with this Mark Ritza, and ritz

0:12:27.480 --> 0:12:29.520
<v Speaker 2>has made the point that the former president was right,

0:12:29.600 --> 0:12:31.400
<v Speaker 2>and I'd love your perspective on this. Do you think

0:12:31.400 --> 0:12:33.600
<v Speaker 2>he undermined the Alliance so reinforced it?

0:12:34.360 --> 0:12:37.959
<v Speaker 8>John's a great question, because what Donald Trump's number one

0:12:38.120 --> 0:12:42.480
<v Speaker 8>issue with the Alliance was the members of the Alliance

0:12:42.600 --> 0:12:46.480
<v Speaker 8>not paying their fear share, And over the course of

0:12:46.480 --> 0:12:50.920
<v Speaker 8>the last six plus years, you've seen a dramatic increase

0:12:51.360 --> 0:12:54.000
<v Speaker 8>in the kind of other members besides the United States

0:12:54.480 --> 0:12:56.160
<v Speaker 8>increasing their dollar amounts.

0:12:56.240 --> 0:12:58.200
<v Speaker 7>And so one of the questions going.

0:12:58.000 --> 0:13:00.880
<v Speaker 8>Forward is how much does a threat to the alliance

0:13:01.040 --> 0:13:04.600
<v Speaker 8>really come down to a transactional discussion. And if you

0:13:04.679 --> 0:13:08.199
<v Speaker 8>get up to that two percent and maybe look at

0:13:08.280 --> 0:13:10.400
<v Speaker 8>kind of the two percent that was not spent over

0:13:10.440 --> 0:13:13.320
<v Speaker 8>the last several decades, that shifting.

0:13:12.880 --> 0:13:13.920
<v Speaker 7>That dollar burden.

0:13:14.160 --> 0:13:16.720
<v Speaker 8>And it goes back to that conversation of a lot

0:13:16.760 --> 0:13:20.040
<v Speaker 8>of Americans SUPPORTINATO. A lot of Americans want to be

0:13:20.080 --> 0:13:22.880
<v Speaker 8>the world superpower. I just don't think they want to

0:13:22.920 --> 0:13:24.400
<v Speaker 8>be the only ones paying for it.

0:13:24.720 --> 0:13:26.880
<v Speaker 2>A well said it's going to see you as always

0:13:27.120 --> 0:13:40.719
<v Speaker 2>knows that as Raymond James. Let's get to Vassiliosakis of

0:13:40.760 --> 0:13:43.680
<v Speaker 2>Aviva Investors, who joined just now. Vassilios, how can we

0:13:43.720 --> 0:13:46.320
<v Speaker 2>have a statement that shows a right cut and at

0:13:46.360 --> 0:13:49.080
<v Speaker 2>the same time inflation above target well into next year?

0:13:49.240 --> 0:13:50.160
<v Speaker 2>Makes sense of it for us? O?

0:13:52.800 --> 0:13:53.560
<v Speaker 5>Thank he doesn't.

0:13:53.600 --> 0:14:00.880
<v Speaker 9>Actually so, I think what's happening here is that went

0:14:00.960 --> 0:14:06.040
<v Speaker 9>into the previous meeting having a very very high degree

0:14:06.040 --> 0:14:08.680
<v Speaker 9>of confidence, over confidence that the data.

0:14:08.920 --> 0:14:09.920
<v Speaker 5>Is going to cooperate.

0:14:09.960 --> 0:14:14.439
<v Speaker 9>It made all that noise about the importance of negotiated

0:14:15.320 --> 0:14:19.560
<v Speaker 9>wages for Q one that they became available in May.

0:14:20.640 --> 0:14:23.640
<v Speaker 9>In the end, pretty much all the data have surprise

0:14:23.720 --> 0:14:27.400
<v Speaker 9>on the upside. Us so in the updated projections, which

0:14:27.520 --> 0:14:30.320
<v Speaker 9>I thought there were actually more hawkys than I expected them.

0:14:30.600 --> 0:14:33.000
<v Speaker 9>We went for this year's growth rate from zero one

0:14:33.080 --> 0:14:36.760
<v Speaker 9>six percent zero point nine percent and inflation from two

0:14:36.800 --> 0:14:41.000
<v Speaker 9>point three to zero point five percent, and all that

0:14:41.080 --> 0:14:44.880
<v Speaker 9>within the context of data dependence and conditional guidance, and

0:14:44.960 --> 0:14:46.760
<v Speaker 9>yet we had an.

0:14:46.600 --> 0:14:49.320
<v Speaker 5>Interest rate cut being delivered today.

0:14:49.560 --> 0:14:52.640
<v Speaker 9>I think that was almost exclusively driven by the fact

0:14:52.640 --> 0:14:55.080
<v Speaker 9>that it would have been far too embarrassing for the

0:14:55.120 --> 0:14:58.720
<v Speaker 9>Governing Council to back pedle or on his previous pre commitment.

0:14:58.760 --> 0:15:02.000
<v Speaker 5>But I think going forward, I.

0:15:02.160 --> 0:15:07.840
<v Speaker 9>Hope in terms of credibility with the CBS going to

0:15:07.920 --> 0:15:11.880
<v Speaker 9>maintain a very very neutral stance, and definitely going forward,

0:15:11.960 --> 0:15:15.320
<v Speaker 9>I think the bar for gaining more confidence has.

0:15:15.240 --> 0:15:17.760
<v Speaker 1>Increased, which is interesting, especially at a time where you

0:15:17.760 --> 0:15:20.280
<v Speaker 1>do see inflation expectations over the next five to ten

0:15:20.360 --> 0:15:22.800
<v Speaker 1>years in Germany start to tick up just a bit

0:15:23.080 --> 0:15:26.080
<v Speaker 1>on the heels of this report, I am curious what

0:15:26.120 --> 0:15:29.160
<v Speaker 1>you make of this. Ian Shepherdson talking now before this,

0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:32.000
<v Speaker 1>before this release, he expects the FED to end up

0:15:32.120 --> 0:15:35.160
<v Speaker 1>cutting rates more than the ECB. That is counterintuitive against

0:15:35.280 --> 0:15:36.600
<v Speaker 1>what a lot of people thought at the beginning of

0:15:36.640 --> 0:15:38.520
<v Speaker 1>this year. Are you on that page now?

0:15:40.720 --> 0:15:43.600
<v Speaker 9>I think you're given where the data sound right now,

0:15:43.680 --> 0:15:48.800
<v Speaker 9>it doesn't seem likely. That's not our house view. Equally,

0:15:48.800 --> 0:15:50.720
<v Speaker 9>at the same time, we have to point out that

0:15:50.920 --> 0:15:52.720
<v Speaker 9>where the FED stands right now, it's one hundred and

0:15:52.760 --> 0:15:55.560
<v Speaker 9>fifty base points higher well, sorry, one hundred and seventy

0:15:55.560 --> 0:16:00.840
<v Speaker 9>five points higher now compared to the FED. It would

0:16:00.920 --> 0:16:06.239
<v Speaker 9>take a significant acceleration for the US economy and significant resilience,

0:16:06.320 --> 0:16:10.280
<v Speaker 9>ongoing resilience. Look, I think I've been on the camp

0:16:10.280 --> 0:16:14.720
<v Speaker 9>that the Eurozone growth has been surprise on the upside.

0:16:15.160 --> 0:16:18.400
<v Speaker 9>But nonetheless, in order for such a scenario, which for

0:16:18.480 --> 0:16:22.160
<v Speaker 9>sees ICB cutting by less compared to the FED, you

0:16:22.280 --> 0:16:26.120
<v Speaker 9>would need to see a significant two things happening.

0:16:26.160 --> 0:16:27.760
<v Speaker 5>Basically, you would need.

0:16:27.640 --> 0:16:30.280
<v Speaker 9>To see further fiscal expansion in the eurisone, which.

0:16:30.120 --> 0:16:31.240
<v Speaker 5>I don't think it's likely.

0:16:31.240 --> 0:16:34.560
<v Speaker 9>And you would need to see Chinese growth surprisingly materially

0:16:34.640 --> 0:16:37.400
<v Speaker 9>on the upside, which again I don't think it's likely.

0:16:37.520 --> 0:16:40.760
<v Speaker 9>So I wouldn't say that now we're actually in this

0:16:40.880 --> 0:16:42.080
<v Speaker 9>comp that personally I am in this.

0:16:42.160 --> 0:16:46.720
<v Speaker 2>Car batch Roselipraci vassili Astnak Is there a avia investors

0:16:46.760 --> 0:16:47.760
<v Speaker 2>responding to that?

0:16:47.840 --> 0:16:48.080
<v Speaker 5>Easy?

0:16:48.160 --> 0:16:52.040
<v Speaker 2>Be right, caut This is the Bloomberg Seventans podcast, bringing

0:16:52.080 --> 0:16:55.680
<v Speaker 2>you the best in markets, economics, anngio politics. You can

0:16:55.720 --> 0:16:58.480
<v Speaker 2>watch the show live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from

0:16:58.520 --> 0:17:01.800
<v Speaker 2>six am to nine am Easton. Subscribe to the podcast

0:17:01.840 --> 0:17:05.040
<v Speaker 2>on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen, and as

0:17:05.040 --> 0:17:07.760
<v Speaker 2>always on the bloom Blog Terminal and the Bloomberg Business

0:17:07.760 --> 0:17:07.920
<v Speaker 2>out

0:17:11.880 --> 0:17:12.400
<v Speaker 1>Mm hmm