WEBVTT - Bloomberg Surveillance TV: August 8, 2024 0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:06.800 Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News. 0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.440 This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along 0:00:15.480 --> 0:00:18.680 with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day 0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:22.280 for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics 0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:24.920 from our global headquarters in New York City. We are 0:00:24.920 --> 0:00:27.680 live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine 0:00:27.720 --> 0:00:31.240 am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or 0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:33.960 anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg 0:00:34.040 --> 0:00:37.040 Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app. We begin with our 0:00:37.040 --> 0:00:40.080 top story, start Sliding going into jobless claims at eight 0:00:40.200 --> 0:00:43.159 thirty Eastern times. Sema shaff Princeval Acid Management thinks it 0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:45.440 will take a lot to end this bout of volatility. 0:00:45.880 --> 0:00:49.559 Unfortunately for markets, the negativity of the current narrative implies 0:00:49.600 --> 0:00:53.560 it may take a combination of solid economic data, earnings, 0:00:53.760 --> 0:00:57.840 and reassuring fedspeak to settle nerves. Seema joins us. Now 0:00:57.960 --> 0:00:59.600 for more, Seema, Let's take it from the top then 0:00:59.640 --> 0:01:02.720 and go for it point by point. The feder Reserve, 0:01:02.960 --> 0:01:06.240 the FED speak, the yearnings, and the data. Just where 0:01:06.319 --> 0:01:07.479 are we at the moment? 0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:11.360 We haven't got that much, I'll wuldie there's not much 0:01:11.400 --> 0:01:14.640 Fed speak between now and Jacksonville. I'd expect a couple 0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:16.800 more speakers to be coming out to calm the market. 0:01:17.040 --> 0:01:19.120 The thing is is that, you know, just as we 0:01:19.200 --> 0:01:21.840 are all reacting to the to the economic data as 0:01:21.840 --> 0:01:23.839 it comes out, that is also the case for the Fed. 0:01:24.200 --> 0:01:27.039 So they can tell us that things don't look so bad. 0:01:27.120 --> 0:01:29.520 They can reassure us that the labor market doesn't. You 0:01:29.560 --> 0:01:31.399 know that the payrolls print of last week is just 0:01:31.440 --> 0:01:33.520 one data point. But of course if you were to 0:01:33.520 --> 0:01:36.559 see a continued deterioration in the data, what the FED 0:01:36.600 --> 0:01:38.240 themselves are going to have to respond in kind? 0:01:38.520 --> 0:01:39.720 What is driving things here? 0:01:39.760 --> 0:01:40.080 Seema? 0:01:40.160 --> 0:01:42.400 What's amazing about this shock of the last week, if 0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:44.320 we can call it? That is for many people that 0:01:44.400 --> 0:01:47.120 are still trying to diagnose the origins of it. Is 0:01:47.160 --> 0:01:49.840 this a growth scare board in America or the vicious 0:01:49.880 --> 0:01:52.320 some wind of the carry trade out of Tokyo, Japan. 0:01:52.520 --> 0:01:54.160 Where'd you place the greater emphasis? 0:01:55.520 --> 0:01:57.520 Well, I would say they look for the last six 0:01:57.560 --> 0:02:00.360 weeks to two months, I have seen the number of 0:02:00.360 --> 0:02:05.960 client queries moving towards worrying about actually recession has been 0:02:06.040 --> 0:02:08.880 quite surprising. So we've moved away from wondering, you know, 0:02:08.960 --> 0:02:10.800 is the economy going to continue to accelerate? Is there 0:02:10.800 --> 0:02:14.079 an overheating to people really questioning how weak the economy is. 0:02:14.120 --> 0:02:15.160 So in a way, I do think this is a 0:02:15.200 --> 0:02:16.880 growth scal I don't actually buy into it, but I 0:02:16.919 --> 0:02:18.840 do think a lot of it is born of a 0:02:18.880 --> 0:02:21.760 growth skit. And then it's been exacerbated by this very 0:02:21.840 --> 0:02:23.280 very low liquidity. I think the three of you are 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:25.320 the only ones left in New York this week, so 0:02:25.520 --> 0:02:28.480 that hasn't helped. And then of course it's positioning the 0:02:28.520 --> 0:02:30.200 carriage trade. So it's been a bit of a perfect 0:02:30.200 --> 0:02:32.800 storm of events. But I think that the growth skin 0:02:32.919 --> 0:02:35.520 has actually been building up in people's concerns for a while. 0:02:35.919 --> 0:02:38.120 See what does that mean for the data coming in 0:02:38.200 --> 0:02:40.480 not just this week? John went through the calendar PPI, 0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:43.520 CPI and retail sales next week. Are you worried? 0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:46.960 I don't think I'm worried because I think when we 0:02:47.000 --> 0:02:50.480 look at the breadth of the data, we do believe 0:02:50.520 --> 0:02:53.720 that there's still a lot of resilience, particularly in household 0:02:53.760 --> 0:02:56.400 balancees and corporate balancees. And what that should mean is 0:02:56.400 --> 0:02:58.800 that if you were to see a deteriorating labor market, 0:02:58.840 --> 0:03:01.520 it shouldn't then new take into a hard landing. But 0:03:01.600 --> 0:03:04.040 we have to also be aware that job losses can 0:03:04.120 --> 0:03:07.240 be quite self reinforcing. Job losses lead to further job losses. 0:03:08.080 --> 0:03:11.200 At this point that we're not seeing layoffs, and a 0:03:11.240 --> 0:03:13.000 lot of the surveys that we're looking at and just 0:03:13.080 --> 0:03:15.440 kind of watching companies and how they're reporting, you're not 0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:17.880 really hearing news of that. But of course the third 0:03:17.960 --> 0:03:20.880 has to be aware that the labor market deterioration, if 0:03:20.919 --> 0:03:24.440 it continues, well, then that could feed and create it 0:03:24.480 --> 0:03:27.080 down with spiral. I think that the CPI data, for 0:03:27.120 --> 0:03:29.720 the first time in ages, that's not the front and center. 0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:32.280 It's really about the growth data, and in particular about 0:03:32.280 --> 0:03:33.000 the labor market. 0:03:33.120 --> 0:03:35.280 See Michael, let me actually ask that question another way. 0:03:35.560 --> 0:03:38.160 Are you worried about the market reaction? Are you worried 0:03:38.200 --> 0:03:40.160 that this is a market that is putting too much 0:03:40.200 --> 0:03:42.200 weight on the negative data that's been coming in. 0:03:44.120 --> 0:03:45.960 I think I don't know if it's necessarily putting too 0:03:46.040 --> 0:03:48.840 much weight. I think it's a market which is on edge, 0:03:49.320 --> 0:03:52.760 as exacerbated about the fact liquidity is so low. But 0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:55.240 I think that from here the direction is fairly unclear 0:03:55.240 --> 0:03:57.120 of the next through four weeks. It's going to respond 0:03:57.480 --> 0:04:00.400 to how that data comes out. If jobless claims moves 0:04:00.480 --> 0:04:02.920 further up today, then I think, of course you're going 0:04:02.920 --> 0:04:04.920 to see a negative market reaction. If it falls back 0:04:04.960 --> 0:04:06.880 a bit, then the market is going to celebrate, and 0:04:06.920 --> 0:04:10.240 I expect that to be the pattern of market moves 0:04:10.280 --> 0:04:12.040 for the remainder of the month, once until you get 0:04:12.080 --> 0:04:15.800 into September and a certainly post Jackson hule. At that 0:04:15.880 --> 0:04:18.040 point maybe you can see some stabilization in a really 0:04:18.080 --> 0:04:19.400 clear direction for the market. 0:04:19.640 --> 0:04:21.840 We also have the DNC next month, and I bring 0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:24.560 this up because Lri Calvacino is on with Manis and 0:04:24.600 --> 0:04:26.640 on Mondays you put our notes saying that the S 0:04:26.680 --> 0:04:29.120 and P five hunderd has now been positively correlated with 0:04:29.120 --> 0:04:32.680 Trump's betting market odds, which have been deteriorating. Now, Lag Harris, 0:04:32.880 --> 0:04:35.840 could politics be also one of those pillars, one of 0:04:35.880 --> 0:04:39.159 those reasons why we are seeing the market's whipsa and 0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:40.400 we sat that'd sell off on Monday. 0:04:42.040 --> 0:04:44.640 So I think that the political picture actually played out 0:04:44.640 --> 0:04:47.239 maybe about three weeks ago, when you have that huge rotation. 0:04:48.160 --> 0:04:49.720 I do think that the rotation to a small cup 0:04:49.800 --> 0:04:51.920 is a little bit about the Trump trade. Things are 0:04:51.920 --> 0:04:54.160 settled at the moment. But you're right in saying that 0:04:54.160 --> 0:04:57.359 that election story it's coming back. It's not like it's disappeared. 0:04:58.000 --> 0:05:00.600 So come September, I think that it is probably going 0:05:00.640 --> 0:05:03.039 to be again near the front of the new story, 0:05:03.040 --> 0:05:06.039 along with the FED. So we will see that add 0:05:06.080 --> 0:05:08.960 to the volatility and probably impact the market narrative too. 0:05:09.360 --> 0:05:12.400 So of all this about September, should you know, Danny 0:05:12.480 --> 0:05:15.160 John and I the last three people left in New York? 0:05:15.480 --> 0:05:16.760 Is all of this just noise? 0:05:16.800 --> 0:05:20.440 Then in a way it's noise. So I mean the 0:05:20.480 --> 0:05:23.000 thing that we're inviting clients is I look away from 0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:25.760 the near tim headlines. It's fairly shocking. The moves are 0:05:25.839 --> 0:05:28.960 very very significant, but we have to have I think, 0:05:28.960 --> 0:05:30.680 those important things to have an idea of what your 0:05:30.680 --> 0:05:34.520 fundamental picture is. Now. It is still unfolding because you're 0:05:34.520 --> 0:05:37.520 at that cusp where you could be pointing to a 0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:39.920 stable economy. But then, as I said before, if job 0:05:39.920 --> 0:05:42.600 losses really start to mount, then it feeds further weakness. 0:05:42.920 --> 0:05:45.240 So unfortunately the native isn't as clear as it would 0:05:45.240 --> 0:05:47.640 have been. Maybe six months ago. But the key one 0:05:47.760 --> 0:05:50.280 is focus on the fundamentals, because the technicals can really 0:05:50.279 --> 0:05:52.720 whipsaw you around, but it's the fundamentals which you're really 0:05:52.720 --> 0:05:54.960 going to create that clear longer term. 0:05:54.800 --> 0:05:56.600 Trend the same, and that's the story. We've got to 0:05:56.640 --> 0:05:58.400 talk about the price of the story. And in certain 0:05:58.440 --> 0:06:00.400 parts of the market we've had quite a big set. 0:06:00.480 --> 0:06:02.880 We heard from Barclay's yesterday. They were talking about going 0:06:02.920 --> 0:06:07.320 overweight tech, overweight financials, looking at buying opportunities. Seem where 0:06:07.320 --> 0:06:09.080 do you see the opportunities at the moment? Where do 0:06:09.080 --> 0:06:09.479 you want to be? 0:06:11.400 --> 0:06:13.400 So I think the key area is, look, we still 0:06:13.440 --> 0:06:16.760 see defensive quality. We know we're going into an economic 0:06:16.760 --> 0:06:18.279 slow down. We don't think it's going to be recession, 0:06:18.320 --> 0:06:22.400 but it does suggest that you need to have a 0:06:22.480 --> 0:06:25.479 slightly safer element to the portfolio. We do think that 0:06:25.520 --> 0:06:27.719 fixing commandment has really proved its work in the last 0:06:27.760 --> 0:06:31.080 few days with that active correlation returning between equities and bonds, 0:06:31.880 --> 0:06:34.080 and then within you know, we've maintained an over weight 0:06:34.120 --> 0:06:38.119 to large cap tech. We're keeping it at some point, 0:06:38.240 --> 0:06:39.880 probably not yet, but at some point will be a 0:06:39.920 --> 0:06:41.200 buying opportunity as well. 0:06:41.640 --> 0:06:43.920 You saying we're not in recession, but I have to say, 0:06:43.960 --> 0:06:46.000 in certain parts of this economy, it certainly feels like 0:06:46.080 --> 0:06:48.760 we are. If you're a low income consumer right now, 0:06:49.120 --> 0:06:51.880 it looks and sounds like recession. If you're a manufacturing 0:06:51.920 --> 0:06:54.440 based on the m we had, it looks and sounds 0:06:54.560 --> 0:06:57.799 like recession. Parts of this market firmly in recession. 0:06:59.400 --> 0:07:02.480 So you're there are pockets of the economy which are struggling. 0:07:02.520 --> 0:07:04.960 And that makes sense because remember that the FED did 0:07:05.320 --> 0:07:08.240 hike a significant amount in a really really short space 0:07:08.279 --> 0:07:10.480 of time, So there will be pockets which will be struggling. 0:07:10.800 --> 0:07:13.200 Lower income households, the ones that really don't have the savings, 0:07:13.240 --> 0:07:16.600 that haven't benefited from that passive income the rise and 0:07:16.640 --> 0:07:19.520 emputy prices rise and house prices. They're the ones who 0:07:19.600 --> 0:07:22.160 were most leveraged to the interest roid environment, and that's 0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:24.679 where the weakness is. But remember, for the US economy, 0:07:24.720 --> 0:07:27.440 the medium and higher income households are the ones that 0:07:27.480 --> 0:07:31.560 really carry growth. They account for about sixty percent of 0:07:31.680 --> 0:07:34.400 consumer spending. So as long as they are okay, and 0:07:34.440 --> 0:07:37.480 the lower income households and are not really struggling significantly 0:07:37.520 --> 0:07:40.640 with job layoffs, then I think the US economy, it's slowing, 0:07:40.680 --> 0:07:43.040 but we're not heading towards recession. But you're right, there 0:07:43.080 --> 0:07:46.720 is a very very differentiated environment underneath the surface for 0:07:46.760 --> 0:07:47.560 the US economy. 0:07:47.760 --> 0:07:50.000 Well, Siman, just given the noise that's been around this 0:07:50.080 --> 0:07:52.280 earning season, you would assume that it looks pretty bad 0:07:52.320 --> 0:07:54.800 that you've had all these companies from airlines to autos 0:07:54.840 --> 0:07:57.120 talking about how bad things are for the consumer. But 0:07:57.320 --> 0:07:59.840 Deutsche Bank speaking Charger points out that earnings are on 0:07:59.840 --> 0:08:03.000 track to rise the most in eight quarters, at ten 0:08:03.080 --> 0:08:05.840 percent quarter over quarter for this one. 0:08:06.080 --> 0:08:07.520 Do you take comfort in that? 0:08:07.600 --> 0:08:09.920 I mean, are we overlooking what is otherwise a strong 0:08:09.960 --> 0:08:10.680 earning season? 0:08:11.720 --> 0:08:11.880 Yeah? 0:08:11.920 --> 0:08:14.120 I was thinking exactly the same thing today, when when 0:08:14.120 --> 0:08:16.960 you think about the narrative, you'd suggest that maybe earning's 0:08:16.960 --> 0:08:19.880 picture has been horrendous this season. It really hasn't. But 0:08:19.920 --> 0:08:21.280 I think the thing is that we came into the 0:08:21.400 --> 0:08:23.960 earning season with people, as I said, really worried about 0:08:24.000 --> 0:08:27.360 what is happening with growth backdrop, but also looking at 0:08:27.360 --> 0:08:30.080 evaluations some of those big tech firms and starting to 0:08:30.080 --> 0:08:32.280 wonder if they would deliver. So I think that that 0:08:32.320 --> 0:08:35.480 has almost encompassed the entire narrative and hidden the fact 0:08:35.520 --> 0:08:37.880 that actually under the bonnet it doesn't look that bad. 0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:41.559 There has been a broadening out of the stronger earnings 0:08:41.559 --> 0:08:44.920 performance and some other sectors, not just big tech and 0:08:44.960 --> 0:08:46.959 actually the opposite of big tech are really the ones 0:08:46.960 --> 0:08:49.679 who are performing well. And that is a really I 0:08:49.679 --> 0:08:51.679 think encouraging sign. For the remainder of the. 0:08:51.640 --> 0:08:54.160 Year, it's going to catch up. As always, semis Shout, 0:08:54.360 --> 0:09:07.080 Principal Asset Management, talking about what's under the bonnet. The 0:09:07.120 --> 0:09:09.599 Harris Watz ticket is heading to Phoenix, Arizona for the 0:09:09.600 --> 0:09:12.520 next stump of their swing state tour. Jendie Vance shadowing 0:09:12.559 --> 0:09:15.679 the campaign with his own rallies to undercut recent momentum 0:09:15.720 --> 0:09:18.960 behind the Harris campaign. Tobin Marcus of Wolf Research rights this, 0:09:19.080 --> 0:09:22.920 we still think it's premature to consider Harris an outright favorite, 0:09:23.120 --> 0:09:26.120 which still give a slight edge to Trump. Tober Marcus 0:09:26.200 --> 0:09:28.120 joins us now for more, tyb. Been great to catch 0:09:28.160 --> 0:09:31.200 up with you, sir, as always seen just a full 0:09:31.600 --> 0:09:34.960 full aircraft hanker and it just reminded me of like 0:09:35.000 --> 0:09:37.880 twenty sixteen and Donald Trump. They seem to be taking 0:09:37.920 --> 0:09:41.280 a leaf out of his playbook from eight years ago. Tobin, 0:09:41.320 --> 0:09:43.360 and it looks to be highly effective. They look like 0:09:43.400 --> 0:09:46.400 they have some real momentum in the Harris campaign. Yet 0:09:46.480 --> 0:09:50.200 jd Vance is right, we haven't heard Harris answer any 0:09:50.280 --> 0:09:52.680 questions at all, with the exception of standing on the 0:09:52.720 --> 0:09:55.719 tarmac following a prisoner exchange and Tobin. I wonder if 0:09:55.720 --> 0:09:58.760 that's going to change at all anytime soon, whether actually 0:09:59.000 --> 0:09:59.600 it needs to. 0:10:01.160 --> 0:10:03.960 So right now, I think they are trying not to 0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:06.120 mess with the good thing. It's been a very very 0:10:06.240 --> 0:10:08.400 very good two and a half week run for Harris, 0:10:08.480 --> 0:10:10.080 and she took over the top of the ticket, and 0:10:10.120 --> 0:10:11.880 I think that they are reveling in the momentum that 0:10:11.880 --> 0:10:14.600 they're seeing out there and sort of not feeling the 0:10:14.679 --> 0:10:19.160 need to take you any unprompted questions if they're getting 0:10:19.160 --> 0:10:21.319 their menswers to right, the point of the campaign is 0:10:21.360 --> 0:10:23.480 to deliver their message. They feel like they're doing that. 0:10:24.080 --> 0:10:26.840 They're getting tons of earned media, most of it positive, 0:10:26.840 --> 0:10:29.160 but certainly there's no lack of attention, so I think 0:10:29.160 --> 0:10:31.839 they are not going to feel immediately compelled to change 0:10:31.880 --> 0:10:35.720 their media strategy, although you know, as the campaign goes on, 0:10:36.360 --> 0:10:39.080 I do think that we're going to have to see 0:10:39.080 --> 0:10:42.360 a little more kind of unprompted answering of questions. But 0:10:42.400 --> 0:10:45.720 I mean, frankly, both Harris and Trump are not taking 0:10:45.720 --> 0:10:48.679 a sort of press conference forward approach. We're seeing a 0:10:48.720 --> 0:10:52.480 lot of appearances on alternative media, Trump going on I 0:10:52.480 --> 0:10:55.080 guess Kick was the streaming platform he was on the 0:10:55.120 --> 0:10:57.400 other week, which is sort of similarly as an unorthodox 0:10:57.440 --> 0:10:58.640 media strategy. 0:10:58.760 --> 0:11:02.120 Right, But he also did just down with our colleagues 0:11:02.160 --> 0:11:05.000 at BusinessWeek to talk about a slew a number of 0:11:05.080 --> 0:11:08.360 policy something we haven't seen from Kamala Harris. At what 0:11:08.440 --> 0:11:10.800 point do you think they'll actually come up with an 0:11:10.800 --> 0:11:14.240 agenda for what their policy plans would be if they 0:11:14.280 --> 0:11:15.079 win the White House. 0:11:16.200 --> 0:11:18.960 Well, they have to put out a platform for the 0:11:19.000 --> 0:11:23.360 Democratic National Convention, which is in two weeks, so we'll 0:11:23.360 --> 0:11:26.640 see something before too long that sort of purports to 0:11:26.640 --> 0:11:29.000 be the official agenda of the Democratic Party, and those 0:11:29.040 --> 0:11:33.040 platforms generally are not that informative about what anyone is 0:11:33.080 --> 0:11:35.160 planning to do. They're a little bit of an interest 0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:38.960 group management exercise, particularly on the Democratic side. Trump took 0:11:39.000 --> 0:11:42.240 a more active role in setting the RNC agenda this year, 0:11:42.280 --> 0:11:44.200 and frankly, I think it would be wise for Harris 0:11:44.240 --> 0:11:46.760 to sort of similarly lay out something that's kind of 0:11:46.760 --> 0:11:51.079 streamlined and reflects what she personally wants to prioritize, rather 0:11:51.160 --> 0:11:56.480 than some incredibly detailed fourteen point plan on every single 0:11:56.480 --> 0:11:59.760 policy issue under the sun. So you know, before too 0:11:59.800 --> 0:12:02.360 long we should see her put out something. But you know, 0:12:02.360 --> 0:12:04.360 it's a short campaign. But short of the campaign is 0:12:05.160 --> 0:12:07.800 the less I think she's going to have to answer 0:12:07.840 --> 0:12:10.079 all these tough questions about exactly what's your agenda on 0:12:11.120 --> 0:12:14.120 Peede family leaves you talk about that. I think probably 0:12:14.160 --> 0:12:16.720 she can just sort of state a priority for the 0:12:16.760 --> 0:12:18.800 issue that she wants to focus on and leave some 0:12:18.800 --> 0:12:20.160 of these details for after the election. 0:12:20.520 --> 0:12:22.960 The short campaign works for her, and Washington Post had 0:12:22.960 --> 0:12:26.720 a story where the former president Don Trump apparently said 0:12:26.720 --> 0:12:29.520 to someone, I already beat Biden. Now I have to 0:12:29.600 --> 0:12:32.840 go out and prove myself against her. How should the 0:12:32.880 --> 0:12:35.559 Trump campaign be dealing with this? Because we just showed 0:12:35.559 --> 0:12:38.200 pictures of her rallies. She's getting a lot of people, 0:12:38.480 --> 0:12:40.920 and there's a lot of excitement around her and her 0:12:40.960 --> 0:12:42.719 new VP pick, Governor wald. 0:12:44.000 --> 0:12:44.320 Well. 0:12:44.640 --> 0:12:47.520 Their strategy, I think has always been to portray her 0:12:47.559 --> 0:12:49.800 as kind of dangerously liberal and out of stept The 0:12:49.800 --> 0:12:52.800 American people based on her as positions that she took 0:12:52.840 --> 0:12:55.360 in the twenty nineteen twenty primary. She committed to various 0:12:55.400 --> 0:12:57.920 different things that I think are problematic. One of the 0:12:57.920 --> 0:13:00.720 reasons why I don't yet consider her her favorite, even 0:13:00.720 --> 0:13:03.440 though the polling has looked very strong for her, along 0:13:03.440 --> 0:13:06.080 with that enthusiasm on the ground, is that we haven't 0:13:06.200 --> 0:13:07.839 really had a chance to see whether or not those 0:13:07.840 --> 0:13:10.560 attacks are sticking yet. They have not been delivered in 0:13:10.600 --> 0:13:12.800 the most disciplined way, I would say from the Trump side. 0:13:13.440 --> 0:13:16.000 And I think the way that they're intending to tap 0:13:16.200 --> 0:13:19.880 walls onto that sort of attacking Nice Minnesota as a 0:13:19.920 --> 0:13:23.079 socialist healthscape seems a little bit challenging. But there is 0:13:23.160 --> 0:13:25.520 plenty of ammunition they have to go after Harris, and 0:13:25.559 --> 0:13:28.600 we've only started to see that that effort come together. 0:13:28.760 --> 0:13:30.680 So and that's the content of what they're saying. I 0:13:30.679 --> 0:13:32.520 want to ask you about how they're saying it. We 0:13:32.640 --> 0:13:35.240 haven't seen Trump at a rally since Saturday when he 0:13:35.320 --> 0:13:37.760 was in Georgia. Instead, it's been Jade Vance who's been 0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:39.760 out throughout the Midwest. What do you make of that 0:13:40.000 --> 0:13:42.520 tactic that they're basically sending him out to appeal to 0:13:42.559 --> 0:13:43.120 these voters. 0:13:44.880 --> 0:13:48.439 Well, look, I mean, Jade Vance is from the Midwest. 0:13:48.600 --> 0:13:51.959 His electoral track record is not particularly impressive in the Midwest, 0:13:52.000 --> 0:13:53.880 so I don't know how he's going to do as 0:13:53.920 --> 0:13:56.760 a voter. You know, in Ohio he ran behind Trump, 0:13:56.800 --> 0:14:00.640 and he ran way, way way behind the governor governor 0:14:00.679 --> 0:14:04.440 who is sort of potentially more popular figure. So he 0:14:04.520 --> 0:14:06.520 has some affinity I think, for that part of the 0:14:06.559 --> 0:14:09.240 electoral map, but it remains to be seen how effective 0:14:09.280 --> 0:14:14.200 he is as a as a messenger. You know, Trump's 0:14:14.200 --> 0:14:17.839 not been running the most sort of vigorous campaign, more 0:14:18.920 --> 0:14:21.000 so than in Biden back when he was on the ticket. 0:14:21.000 --> 0:14:23.520 But I think on both sides we do have guys 0:14:23.560 --> 0:14:27.040 who are a little bit kind of probably past the 0:14:27.240 --> 0:14:29.520 peak of their powers in terms of their ability to 0:14:29.560 --> 0:14:32.480 just sort of run a really, really, really aggressive campaign 0:14:32.600 --> 0:14:35.960 five days a week. So you know, if they want 0:14:35.960 --> 0:14:37.720 those to tax to stick, I think they are ultimately 0:14:37.720 --> 0:14:40.400 going to have to get Trump more out there rather 0:14:40.440 --> 0:14:42.480 than just posting about her untrue social so but. 0:14:42.480 --> 0:14:43.760 It just feels like he's trying to be a man 0:14:43.800 --> 0:14:46.240 who's already beaten. He's still trying to beat Joe Biden, 0:14:46.880 --> 0:14:48.960 and so I wonder why he's finding it so difficult 0:14:49.040 --> 0:14:51.600 to pivot. We talked about these pivots in the campaign, 0:14:51.880 --> 0:14:54.160 cuding the Democratic ticket had to pivot. It's done a 0:14:54.160 --> 0:14:56.200 great job of doing so. You can see the enthusiasm 0:14:56.200 --> 0:14:58.480 in the Partsy can see that reflected in the polls. 0:14:58.680 --> 0:15:01.160 Why do you think this campaign is struggling so hard 0:15:01.560 --> 0:15:02.120 to pivot? 0:15:03.640 --> 0:15:07.840 Yeah, so the campaign organization, I think is pivoting reasonably well. 0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:10.080 I think if you look at Trump's kind of campaign leadership, 0:15:10.080 --> 0:15:14.760 they're not feeling too wrong footed by the need to 0:15:14.760 --> 0:15:16.400 go after Harris. They feel like they have plenty to 0:15:16.400 --> 0:15:19.640 say about her, even though again that message has not 0:15:19.720 --> 0:15:21.920 yet come across, and time will tell whether or not 0:15:21.920 --> 0:15:24.600 they succeed in getting this sort of negative attempt to 0:15:24.600 --> 0:15:27.440 define her across. But Trump himself, Yeah, really does seem 0:15:27.520 --> 0:15:29.360 to be struggling. I guess there's been a lot of 0:15:29.640 --> 0:15:32.360 intrigue in DC about what exactly is meant by this 0:15:32.960 --> 0:15:34.720 coma blah nickname that he. 0:15:34.720 --> 0:15:35.200 Tries to be. 0:15:36.160 --> 0:15:39.800 He seems to be trying to roll out. So it 0:15:39.800 --> 0:15:42.080 does feel like he personally is sort of throwing some 0:15:42.120 --> 0:15:45.000 things at the wall and seeing what will stick. Again, 0:15:45.320 --> 0:15:47.280 you have ninety days left in the campaign, so we 0:15:47.280 --> 0:15:50.560 have some time to see if he can make it happen, 0:15:50.600 --> 0:15:54.840 but for now not the most effective effort from him. 0:15:54.840 --> 0:15:56.280 Time and this was great. It's going to hear from you, 0:15:56.320 --> 0:16:09.000 sir as always Tybermarcus therefore fresearch to look at the 0:16:09.000 --> 0:16:11.400 totality of the data. Joining us now is David Rosenberg 0:16:11.640 --> 0:16:14.400 of Rosenberg Research. David, we've been looking forward to catching 0:16:14.480 --> 0:16:16.520 up with you, sir. Let's just take a step back. 0:16:16.720 --> 0:16:18.760 Totality the data is a fed would like to say, 0:16:18.760 --> 0:16:23.680 what's your assessment of where we are, David at the moment, Well, I. 0:16:23.600 --> 0:16:30.920 Still think that we're either intercession or about to confront one. 0:16:31.200 --> 0:16:34.440 And you know, I know everybody's on tenor books because 0:16:34.480 --> 0:16:38.920 of weekly jobas claims numbers which can quite often contain 0:16:39.040 --> 0:16:41.720 quite a bit of noise in coming off or could 0:16:41.720 --> 0:16:46.720 have been a hurricane distortion from the previous week. However, 0:16:47.720 --> 0:16:51.760 I would say that what's tried, tested and true is 0:16:51.800 --> 0:16:56.240 the unemployment rate, and the unemployment rate is up nine 0:16:56.280 --> 0:16:59.240 tenths of a percentage point over the past fifteen months, 0:17:00.120 --> 0:17:03.240 and the data going back to nineteen forty eight show 0:17:03.360 --> 0:17:06.920 that we had twelve recessions. And when you're up ninety 0:17:06.960 --> 0:17:10.199 bases points or more in the unemployment rate from the 0:17:10.240 --> 0:17:12.919 cyclow You go on a recession one hundred percent of 0:17:12.960 --> 0:17:16.440 the time, So I am definitely not one of those 0:17:16.440 --> 0:17:18.840 people that would say to you it's different this time. 0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:20.760 I don't think that it is. In today's job is 0:17:20.800 --> 0:17:24.040 Glam's numbers. We'll get a fresh patch a week today. 0:17:25.160 --> 0:17:26.080 Doesn't change my view. 0:17:26.200 --> 0:17:26.440 David. 0:17:26.440 --> 0:17:28.360 I'm going to push you on this, and I'm sure 0:17:28.359 --> 0:17:30.760 it's something that you have heard multiple times, So give 0:17:30.760 --> 0:17:32.480 you the opportunity to tell me why I am wrong. 0:17:32.800 --> 0:17:35.159 The argument of you being wrong goes something like this, 0:17:35.359 --> 0:17:38.800 that the uptrend is about immigration. Torson's lack of Apollo 0:17:38.840 --> 0:17:41.000 out with a note just moments ago saying that more 0:17:41.080 --> 0:17:43.760 visas are getting accepted, that there's been a COVID backlog, 0:17:43.800 --> 0:17:46.320 and that just adds again to the evidence that there's 0:17:46.359 --> 0:17:49.640 growth in the labor supply, hence the uptrend in unemployment. 0:17:49.720 --> 0:17:51.000 Why is that argument not right? 0:17:52.720 --> 0:17:58.399 Well, the argument is partially right, but the reality is 0:17:58.480 --> 0:18:01.560 just to go back, the unemployment comes from the household survey, 0:18:01.640 --> 0:18:05.800 not the payroll survey. But the reality is that there's 0:18:05.840 --> 0:18:09.840 been no growth in job creation in the household survey 0:18:09.840 --> 0:18:13.879 over the past twelve months. What the data show is 0:18:13.880 --> 0:18:19.200 that ninety six percent of those people, and I'm sure 0:18:19.240 --> 0:18:22.280 a lot of them are immigrants, ninety six percent of 0:18:22.280 --> 0:18:24.919 the people that entered the labor force in the past 0:18:25.080 --> 0:18:29.040 year have not found a job. Now, I would pose 0:18:29.080 --> 0:18:31.240 the question back to you, does that sound like a 0:18:31.240 --> 0:18:35.760 buoyant labor market as far as you're concerned. This time 0:18:35.840 --> 0:18:39.879 last year, ninety six percent of labor force entrants we're 0:18:39.920 --> 0:18:43.440 finding a job. Only four percent now are finding a job. 0:18:44.720 --> 0:18:48.199 So it's not just about labor supply, and it's not 0:18:48.320 --> 0:18:52.320 just about firing your layoffs which remain very low. Companies 0:18:52.359 --> 0:18:55.240 are still hoarding labor. But what are they doing. They're 0:18:55.240 --> 0:19:00.000 cutting the workweek and they're furloing workers from full time 0:19:00.160 --> 0:19:02.640 part time. Well, you get from full time to part time, 0:19:02.680 --> 0:19:04.880 it's not a job loss, so you don't you don't 0:19:04.880 --> 0:19:10.080 collect an unemployment insurance check. But there are decisive shifts 0:19:10.080 --> 0:19:14.080 taking place in the labor market right now. So there's 0:19:14.080 --> 0:19:16.960 been no growth in household employment. And in fact, if 0:19:17.000 --> 0:19:18.680 you look at household if you look at the full 0:19:18.720 --> 0:19:22.000