WEBVTT - Nvidia and Geopolitics Impact on Markets 0:00:02.400 --> 0:00:06.760 Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. 0:00:11.920 --> 0:00:16.320 This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays 0:00:16.360 --> 0:00:19.720 at seven am Eastern on Apple car Player, Android Auto 0:00:19.760 --> 0:00:23.080 with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you 0:00:23.120 --> 0:00:26.759 get your podcasts, or watch us live on youtubejacent Draw. 0:00:26.840 --> 0:00:29.520 Joins us right now. He's a the UBS. 0:00:29.720 --> 0:00:34.760 He's out of America's tactical asset worst worst job at UPS. 0:00:34.800 --> 0:00:36.440 It's like being in charge with Frank. 0:00:37.440 --> 0:00:42.120 What are you tactically asset allocating into twenty twenty five? 0:00:42.479 --> 0:00:45.360 With everything that's going on, you just pull aside and 0:00:45.440 --> 0:00:46.200 stay in cash. 0:00:46.920 --> 0:00:49.720 I know, we actually upgraded equities about a month ago, 0:00:49.760 --> 0:00:53.640 make them attractive. Still kind of have confidence in the macro. 0:00:53.880 --> 0:00:55.920 Look at that hasn't changed with the election. It's added 0:00:55.960 --> 0:00:58.800 some volatility the outcome certainly to the potential paths the 0:00:58.840 --> 0:01:01.360 by lunch we think this is bull market in equities 0:01:01.400 --> 0:01:02.120 keep going higher. 0:01:02.680 --> 0:01:05.960 So, I mean, what changed for you a two weeks 0:01:06.000 --> 0:01:08.800 ago election day? Did anything change for you guys as 0:01:08.840 --> 0:01:13.959 you think about allocating assets, stocks, bonds, alternatives, US non US? 0:01:13.959 --> 0:01:15.160 Has anything change for you guys? 0:01:15.360 --> 0:01:17.319 Not fundamentally so the way I would kind of describe 0:01:17.319 --> 0:01:20.280 it is that our expected value stayed the same. The 0:01:20.480 --> 0:01:23.360 variants and distribution probably got wider of different outcomes. So 0:01:23.440 --> 0:01:25.720 certain positions that we've kind of recommended, like gold, which 0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:27.960 has actually pulled back that somebody thought as a hedging, 0:01:28.040 --> 0:01:31.320 that's actually become more attractive since that time. The view 0:01:31.360 --> 0:01:33.680 on rates ultimate kind of drifting lower. That has not 0:01:33.720 --> 0:01:36.160 really changed. I think we probably got a little more 0:01:36.200 --> 0:01:38.800 confidence in certain areas of equities, like financials, you know, 0:01:38.840 --> 0:01:42.520 potentially benefiting from deregulation. But I think overall the core 0:01:42.600 --> 0:01:43.839 thesis has not really changed. 0:01:44.200 --> 0:01:48.320 Did you take your expectation for earnings higher thinking that 0:01:48.400 --> 0:01:52.440 taxes are coming down potentially under a Trump administration. 0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:54.040 We have not adjusted our earnings ultimately. Look, we think 0:01:54.040 --> 0:01:56.920 they'll extend their personal tax cuts. I think anything beyond 0:01:57.200 --> 0:02:00.240 extension of existing tax cuts that seems I would make 0:02:00.280 --> 0:02:01.800 that the base case. You know, just there's not a 0:02:01.840 --> 0:02:05.080 lot of fiscal scope for further expansion for the task cuts. 0:02:05.120 --> 0:02:06.040 That's our view at this point. 0:02:06.080 --> 0:02:08.519 You don't think they'll be further very. 0:02:08.400 --> 0:02:11.480 Like something along the lines of reinstituting the sort of 0:02:11.480 --> 0:02:14.120 accelerated depreciation, you know, things that were actually discussed earlier 0:02:14.160 --> 0:02:15.840 this year and part of the budget deal, but not 0:02:16.040 --> 0:02:18.400 further taking down of tax cuts, not as the base case. 0:02:19.120 --> 0:02:21.840 How do you think about the allocation stocks, bonds, alternatives. 0:02:22.000 --> 0:02:23.440 I think Tom and I grew up in a sixty 0:02:23.520 --> 0:02:27.320 forty era. You know that's not a thing anymore, is it. 0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:29.440 Well, it's not a bad starting point, you know. The 0:02:29.560 --> 0:02:30.799 question is like, how do you improve on that? And 0:02:30.800 --> 0:02:32.200 I think that the key thing about the sixty to 0:02:32.240 --> 0:02:34.799 forty what works so well for you know, decades, a 0:02:34.840 --> 0:02:37.160 couple of decades for sure, is that stocks and bonds 0:02:37.200 --> 0:02:39.280 had have negative correlation, and that was because I think 0:02:39.320 --> 0:02:42.520 part inflation was contained. When inflation is contained, it can 0:02:42.560 --> 0:02:44.960 sort of have that negative correlation when you're worried about inflation. 0:02:45.080 --> 0:02:47.240 Think about what happened in twenty twenty two, stocks and 0:02:47.280 --> 0:02:50.400 bonds sell off, inflation will be I think upside risks 0:02:50.480 --> 0:02:52.359 kind of going forward. In that case, you need other 0:02:52.360 --> 0:02:54.360 things to diversify your portfolio. So it's like you know, 0:02:54.400 --> 0:02:56.320 the forty thirty thirty. I'm thinking more along the lines 0:02:56.360 --> 0:02:59.720 of adding alternatives, especially for clients who have, like you know, 0:03:00.040 --> 0:03:02.000 larger portfolios can move into those asset classes. 0:03:02.160 --> 0:03:05.400 Jackson Yale University. There's always a fun This is Bob 0:03:05.440 --> 0:03:11.520 Schuler's legacy. There's always a fundamental of finance over your economics. 0:03:11.600 --> 0:03:12.400 The what's the. 0:03:12.440 --> 0:03:17.880 Track record of rebalancing and asset allocation in recent years? 0:03:18.040 --> 0:03:20.840 Granted we've had three once in a lifetime events, but 0:03:20.960 --> 0:03:25.720 do you still have a theoretical confidence in rebalancing or 0:03:25.760 --> 0:03:28.640 do you tilt more to a longer buy an old strategy. 0:03:28.800 --> 0:03:31.240 Well, rebalancing and on a regular basis, that is becomes 0:03:31.240 --> 0:03:33.720 a little bit more systematic. I think that the deity 0:03:33.760 --> 0:03:36.640 would show that actually adds value. There's a rebalancing alpha. 0:03:36.440 --> 0:03:37.040 So to speak. 0:03:37.320 --> 0:03:39.160 I think where the tricky part comes in is that 0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:42.600 markets move very fast, and now they move very quickly. 0:03:42.800 --> 0:03:44.280 I think about what happened in the summer when the 0:03:44.320 --> 0:03:47.400 S and P was down almost ten percent in about 0:03:47.440 --> 0:03:48.960 two and a half weeks, and then it almost fully 0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:51.120 recovered in two weeks. So the question is like do 0:03:51.160 --> 0:03:53.000 you rebalance then and not rebalunance? And that's kind of 0:03:53.000 --> 0:03:56.600 complicated matters, But conception and rebalancing is adds value over time. 0:03:57.000 --> 0:03:59.840 You guys have a S and P price target of 0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:03.440 sixty six hundred. Tom likes these round numbers. By December 0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:07.120 twenty twenty five. Is that earning's driven, multiple driven a 0:04:07.120 --> 0:04:07.760 little bit of both. 0:04:08.560 --> 0:04:10.400 Mostly earning is driven because I think about where we 0:04:10.400 --> 0:04:12.520 are right now, it's roughly six thousand. If we open 0:04:12.600 --> 0:04:15.680 up and where the futures are ten percent upside, we're 0:04:15.720 --> 0:04:18.479 looking at eight nine percent earnings grow, so and the 0:04:18.560 --> 0:04:20.040 risk I th thing is probably that number might get, 0:04:20.080 --> 0:04:22.680 you know, taken higher. Multiple Basically stay is kind of 0:04:22.680 --> 0:04:24.120 constant to give or take a little bit. So it's 0:04:24.120 --> 0:04:26.280 really mostly an orning story for next year. 0:04:26.680 --> 0:04:29.920 Are there sectors that screen better for you? Guys here 0:04:29.960 --> 0:04:31.599 at this point, like a lot of folks are saying, 0:04:32.000 --> 0:04:35.040 if we're going to get some of this proeconomic agenda, 0:04:35.080 --> 0:04:37.360 maybe some deregulation, maybe in taxes, I want to be 0:04:37.400 --> 0:04:39.680 in cyclicals. Do you kind of fall to that camp? 0:04:39.720 --> 0:04:41.960 Are you saying, I'm just sticking with my technology names. 0:04:42.040 --> 0:04:44.719 Well, we like technology. We still think that's a secular story, right, 0:04:44.680 --> 0:04:46.520 It's kind of agnostic to some extent of the policy. 0:04:46.520 --> 0:04:49.160 He'll come that's what makes it attractive on the cyclical front. 0:04:49.200 --> 0:04:51.760 I think financials that's one of our attractive sectors. And 0:04:51.800 --> 0:04:53.919 you can kind of kind of multiple reasons why, you know, 0:04:54.040 --> 0:04:56.440 deregulation or less sort of owner's regulation that will kind 0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:59.559 of come down the pipeline, likely pick up in corporate 0:04:59.600 --> 0:05:02.280 activity M and A. I pos against certainly the big 0:05:02.320 --> 0:05:04.880 money center banks. You definitely should benefit from that. And 0:05:04.960 --> 0:05:06.880 ultimately we still think the Fed's going to be cutting rates, 0:05:06.920 --> 0:05:08.800 and you know, as rates comes down, that should benefit 0:05:08.839 --> 0:05:10.880 financials as a kind of curve resteep. And so there's 0:05:11.160 --> 0:05:13.599 cynical drivers, there's structural drivers that I think you know 0:05:13.640 --> 0:05:15.280 financials and among the cyclical space. 0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:15.839 That's what we like. 0:05:15.920 --> 0:05:18.560 Right when you did your PhD at Yale, you did 0:05:18.560 --> 0:05:21.800 it on IPOs. Paul and I were live in lunches. 0:05:22.080 --> 0:05:24.640 There'd be three lunches in one day. There was this 0:05:24.800 --> 0:05:29.760 eff vescence on the street which you wrote about authoritatively. 0:05:29.839 --> 0:05:31.440 It yeah, okay, great. 0:05:31.960 --> 0:05:34.719 Do we want to go back to that millu or 0:05:34.720 --> 0:05:37.200 are we lucky that we're here where Paul's going to 0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:39.040 one lunch every ninety days? 0:05:39.360 --> 0:05:42.039 Well, I can't speak to punch of Paul's lunch preferences. 0:05:42.440 --> 0:05:44.000 While you were at doing the three lunches, I was 0:05:44.000 --> 0:05:47.400 in the bowels of Barneaky Library kind of working the 0:05:47.440 --> 0:05:47.920 matter is. 0:05:47.960 --> 0:05:50.480 And we a guy in from Black Rock celebrity earlier. 0:05:51.160 --> 0:05:53.440 We're now at a point where there's four phone calls 0:05:53.480 --> 0:05:55.279 made on an IPO, do you want it or not? 0:05:55.400 --> 0:05:56.000 Yes or no. 0:05:56.680 --> 0:05:57.880 So I don't think we're going to go back to 0:05:57.920 --> 0:05:59.200 what it was in the nineties. I mean, there's just 0:05:59.200 --> 0:06:02.479 regulation ngels that that will sift you all that. But 0:06:02.520 --> 0:06:04.360 also like you know, sorry benz Oxley, like there's there's 0:06:04.400 --> 0:06:07.240 fewer companies that want to go public. We did see 0:06:07.320 --> 0:06:09.560 frothiness back in the second half of twenty twenty, in 0:06:09.560 --> 0:06:12.160 the first half twenty one the spacmania, So there's definitely 0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:14.680 that is possible to kind of come back. But I 0:06:14.680 --> 0:06:16.839 think the closest we've seen for IPOs is you go 0:06:16.920 --> 0:06:19.320 back pre pandemic when Uber went public. Airbnb there was 0:06:19.360 --> 0:06:21.600 appeared in eighteen nineteen. There's a little bit of that, 0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:23.360 but it was at a much more modest scale. We 0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.120 weren't seeing stock prices go up seven hundred percent on 0:06:26.160 --> 0:06:28.000 the first day. I mean that those days I think 0:06:28.160 --> 0:06:29.960 are gone. We could see them go up sixty percent, 0:06:30.080 --> 0:06:32.640 seventy percent, but not that level of frothiness before. 0:06:32.640 --> 0:06:35.440 All right, the PhD I from economics from Yale. I 0:06:35.440 --> 0:06:37.600 don't know why you would ever do that. The undergraduate 0:06:37.640 --> 0:06:39.960 tom He goes to the University of Manitoba. So I 0:06:40.000 --> 0:06:42.680 have to google maps Manitoba. That's how ignorant I am 0:06:42.760 --> 0:06:46.520 of Canada, the geography of Canada. If you're not in Winnipeg, 0:06:47.480 --> 0:06:50.360 there's nowhere to be in that province. I mean, right, 0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:51.919 I mean it is. I mean I'm looking at this 0:06:52.000 --> 0:06:54.560 map here. If you're not in Winnipeg, where are you. 0:06:54.680 --> 0:06:57.440 Well, Winnipeg is the big city's table city. The next 0:06:57.480 --> 0:06:59.520 biggest city is going to be more like about fifty thousand. 0:07:00.440 --> 0:07:02.040 But it's a lot of beautiful wilderness if you love 0:07:02.080 --> 0:07:05.000 to fish. Fantastic for fishing. Fantastic for lakes. 0:07:04.800 --> 0:07:06.360 Hudson Bay up on the Upper Head. 0:07:06.440 --> 0:07:07.480 How low of cold? 0:07:07.920 --> 0:07:11.000 The record cold I have is twenty one degrees below 0:07:11.080 --> 0:07:12.480 zero Plymouth, New Hampshire. 0:07:12.880 --> 0:07:15.120 How cold did it ever get in Winnipeg where you 0:07:15.160 --> 0:07:15.800 were up there? 0:07:17.160 --> 0:07:20.640 I mean the coldest days will be below minus thirty celsius. 0:07:20.640 --> 0:07:24.800 So look, I'm around minus twenty five with a wind, 0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:25.880 so the windshill is worse. 0:07:26.760 --> 0:07:28.960 Is anybody going to beat the Winnipeg Jets this year? 0:07:29.000 --> 0:07:29.920 That's all we want to know. 0:07:32.080 --> 0:07:35.080 I'm your fingers crossing, looking really good. But there's you know, 0:07:35.120 --> 0:07:37.960 Florida is a tough team. The Rangers are our tough teams. 0:07:38.560 --> 0:07:41.080 The Rangers, we can always lose it. About the third 0:07:41.120 --> 0:07:44.680 week of March to go to like the Maple leaves. 0:07:44.840 --> 0:07:48.080 Tell us still remote from Winnipeg in January, We'll get 0:07:48.120 --> 0:07:48.720 Lisa Matato. 0:07:49.240 --> 0:07:51.120 I will join you if you get that in Winnipeg. 0:07:51.440 --> 0:07:54.440 Promise if we go to Winnipeg, Dreo will be the 0:07:54.840 --> 0:07:58.679 andrel Thank you so much, really important conversation on asset 0:07:58.760 --> 0:08:00.440 allocation and reb Sen. 0:08:00.480 --> 0:08:03.920 There he is with UBS. 0:08:07.200 --> 0:08:11.040 You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live 0:08:11.160 --> 0:08:14.440 weekday afternoons from seven to ten am. Easter Listen on 0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:17.720 Apple car Play and Android Auto with a Bloomberg Business app, 0:08:17.840 --> 0:08:19.600 or watch US live on YouTube. 0:08:19.760 --> 0:08:22.840 Wendy Schiller, as the professor from Brown University, joins us. 0:08:23.720 --> 0:08:26.600 I'm listening to Nicki Haley Wendy Schill yesterday and as 0:08:26.640 --> 0:08:29.080 far as I'm concerned, Lisa, don't let the mess Scarra 0:08:29.200 --> 0:08:34.080 run lissus crying, Professor Schiller. The campaign for twenty twenty 0:08:34.160 --> 0:08:37.160 eight did it start last night? With Nicki Haley going 0:08:37.200 --> 0:08:39.600 after irf K Junior and Tulsi Gabbard. 0:08:40.880 --> 0:08:43.439 Well, it's certainly an indication that she's not going anywhere, 0:08:43.480 --> 0:08:46.760 and that she feels like she got some votes when 0:08:46.800 --> 0:08:50.880 she ran against Trump in the primary. She has a constituency, 0:08:51.440 --> 0:08:54.560 and she's trying to position herself as viable. It's a 0:08:54.559 --> 0:08:57.280 long time to work, you know, the next couple of years. 0:08:57.320 --> 0:08:59.920 But you know the first eight months of this administration 0:09:00.240 --> 0:09:03.680 may be successful and accomplishing some of the President elect's 0:09:03.720 --> 0:09:07.400 stated goals, but after that, you know, parties fall apart 0:09:07.400 --> 0:09:07.840 a little bit. 0:09:07.920 --> 0:09:08.720 Majority is of hert. 0:09:08.640 --> 0:09:11.560 To sustain and so she's positioning herself with somebody who 0:09:11.640 --> 0:09:13.000 looks viable very early on. 0:09:13.280 --> 0:09:16.960 So DNI is intelligence and this is the former governor 0:09:17.000 --> 0:09:20.840 of the Carolinas. Quote d and I is not a 0:09:20.920 --> 0:09:26.480 place for a Russian, Iranian, Syrian, Chinese sympathizer when they 0:09:26.480 --> 0:09:29.120 get in front of the Senate or the House, or 0:09:29.240 --> 0:09:33.160 just they're working in the machinery. Wendy Schiller of your Washington, 0:09:33.600 --> 0:09:36.120 how's that going to play with the middle of the 0:09:36.240 --> 0:09:37.359 Road America. 0:09:38.720 --> 0:09:41.640 Well, I mean, I think the calculation that Republican senators 0:09:41.679 --> 0:09:44.440 have to make is which of these nominees and their 0:09:44.520 --> 0:09:45.600 issues and. 0:09:45.520 --> 0:09:48.000 We know we have sexual assault allegations. 0:09:48.040 --> 0:09:50.920 You know, we have child sex trafficking, drug use, we 0:09:51.000 --> 0:09:53.559 have sympathizing with her on in Russia. We have a 0:09:53.600 --> 0:09:57.160 whole list of things which will catch fire, which will 0:09:57.160 --> 0:10:01.120 actually resonate in their voting constituents community. You know, which 0:10:01.120 --> 0:10:03.760 will voters care about right now? Voters sent a signal 0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:07.160 saying fix inflation, you know, fix our cost of living 0:10:07.559 --> 0:10:09.400 and make sure that we have a future in. 0:10:09.440 --> 0:10:12.360 Terms of economic growth. That's what they've said. Will they 0:10:12.440 --> 0:10:14.520 care about this now? Probably not? 0:10:14.960 --> 0:10:18.360 Could they care about it later if these people get confirmed. 0:10:18.640 --> 0:10:22.000 Possibly surveillance correction, it's an important one. 0:10:22.120 --> 0:10:25.439 It's tassa gabbert o gabert I'm mispronounced it because I'm 0:10:25.440 --> 0:10:28.640 an idiot. I wasn't trying to be Snyder or something. 0:10:28.880 --> 0:10:30.720 I don't want people to read anything in them. 0:10:30.840 --> 0:10:33.560 Not excuse me, yelled at me. 0:10:33.720 --> 0:10:34.040 She did. 0:10:34.080 --> 0:10:37.080 Well, she's she's on top of these things. So, Professor 0:10:37.080 --> 0:10:40.160 Schiller here, give us a sense of how you think 0:10:40.280 --> 0:10:43.040 this Republican Senate is going to view some of these 0:10:43.080 --> 0:10:45.120 nominations here, particularly some of the ones that have been 0:10:45.360 --> 0:10:48.440 flagged as maybe troublesome, such as you know, mister Gates 0:10:48.440 --> 0:10:50.360 and uh, miss Gabbard. 0:10:52.120 --> 0:10:55.240 Well, we're obviously seeing some attempts by the you know, 0:10:55.280 --> 0:10:59.520 the administration elect to you know, get Gates through. It's 0:10:59.559 --> 0:11:03.440 typical to have nominees meet with senators. I'm just looking 0:11:03.800 --> 0:11:07.600 you know, for Lisa Rakowski, Susan Collins, you know, particularly 0:11:07.600 --> 0:11:08.960 for Headset and Gates. 0:11:09.120 --> 0:11:11.319 You know, what happens? Do they vote for them? 0:11:11.600 --> 0:11:13.640 And if there are cracks in the coalition and they 0:11:13.640 --> 0:11:17.040 get through, will those cracks grow as each nominee is 0:11:17.120 --> 0:11:20.000 voted on? So which of the most problematic nominees do 0:11:20.040 --> 0:11:20.800 you put first? 0:11:21.240 --> 0:11:21.959 That's going to be. 0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:25.200 John Thune's problem, right and his challenge which one does 0:11:25.200 --> 0:11:27.920 he get through first? If the most problematic one gets 0:11:27.920 --> 0:11:30.400 through first, then you don't have a lot of big problems. 0:11:30.640 --> 0:11:32.000 But you know, I'm going to be looking at those 0:11:32.000 --> 0:11:33.920 two senators and senators who are. 0:11:33.720 --> 0:11:35.880 Thinking of running for reelection in twenty twenty six. 0:11:36.200 --> 0:11:38.800 And because Kamala Hawers lost, there seems to be some 0:11:38.840 --> 0:11:42.000 impression that the female vote isn't going to respond to 0:11:42.040 --> 0:11:43.040 these kinds of things. 0:11:43.320 --> 0:11:46.480 No, women are like everybody else. They prioritize what they 0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:49.520 worry about. In this case, it was budgets. It was schooling. 0:11:49.760 --> 0:11:51.679 It was all sorts of things that hit close to home, 0:11:51.960 --> 0:11:55.480 but behavior still might matter. And so this is the 0:11:55.520 --> 0:11:58.120 calculation that Republican senators have to make, which are thin 0:11:58.200 --> 0:12:00.920 on some of these nominations. Telsey gab You know, Nikki 0:12:00.960 --> 0:12:03.560 Haley was former ambassador of the UN. She does know 0:12:03.640 --> 0:12:07.439 the international community, and I think if she's raising alarms, 0:12:07.520 --> 0:12:09.440 then I think some Republican senators. 0:12:09.120 --> 0:12:09.720 May be listening. 0:12:10.880 --> 0:12:14.680 Professor Schiller is just all this a precursor for every 0:12:14.720 --> 0:12:18.840 single Minutia decision, not Minuchin Minusia decision. 0:12:19.040 --> 0:12:21.440 Like it's Latin. You gotta do that with your Brown University. 0:12:22.000 --> 0:12:25.199 Every single minusia decision, Wendy's going to be made out 0:12:25.200 --> 0:12:27.160 of sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue. 0:12:28.640 --> 0:12:29.800 Oh, it's very difficult to do. 0:12:29.920 --> 0:12:33.000 I keep reciting this with you about Ronald Reagan, right 0:12:33.040 --> 0:12:35.439 he said, I would you know, issue a decision or 0:12:35.679 --> 0:12:37.280 a request. It would take a week to get a 0:12:37.320 --> 0:12:40.320 response in the White House. The federal government is massive, 0:12:40.679 --> 0:12:44.080 you know, to move it quickly is very difficult to do, 0:12:44.280 --> 0:12:47.280 even for the Trump administration. But the question of Congress, 0:12:47.440 --> 0:12:50.240 with that very slim majority in the House, we have 0:12:50.320 --> 0:12:53.199 to see what happens when they start really making cuts 0:12:53.559 --> 0:12:57.320 to programs and people that are in Republican districts. And 0:12:57.360 --> 0:12:59.480 there are a lot of federal employees who live in 0:12:59.520 --> 0:13:02.720 Republican dominated districts and Republican states, and if they have 0:13:02.800 --> 0:13:06.000 a life change or their their job goes, then you know, 0:13:06.160 --> 0:13:07.240 Trump will hear about it. 0:13:07.559 --> 0:13:09.320 How that DAMA plays out, We're going to see it 0:13:09.320 --> 0:13:10.080 probably in the summer. 0:13:10.160 --> 0:13:13.640 Philip Bump killing it in the post yesterday. On the mandate, 0:13:14.200 --> 0:13:18.720 I went nuts yesterday with David Melpass, professor Schiller, Trumps supporter, 0:13:19.080 --> 0:13:20.040 when he said this was. 0:13:19.960 --> 0:13:21.080 A mandate election. 0:13:21.760 --> 0:13:25.920 You're expert at this, back to eighteen eighty three, if 0:13:25.960 --> 0:13:27.800 not back to Adams Jefferson. 0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:32.520 Was that a mandate election? Professor, Well, it's tough. 0:13:32.520 --> 0:13:35.480 I mean, I think by my calculations, he's just under 0:13:35.520 --> 0:13:37.920 fifty percent. That's what I think we have right now 0:13:37.960 --> 0:13:41.079 in terms of the vote tallies. So under fifty percent 0:13:41.240 --> 0:13:43.480 is typically not thought to be a mandate. It would 0:13:43.480 --> 0:13:46.679 have been a stronger argument had the House Republicans picked 0:13:46.760 --> 0:13:49.280 up any number of seats, but it looks like they'll 0:13:49.280 --> 0:13:52.000 have the same exact vote majority that they had in 0:13:52.080 --> 0:13:55.280 last session. That does not suggest, as I thought earlier 0:13:55.280 --> 0:13:57.560 that Trump's cotails would be long and strong. 0:13:57.720 --> 0:14:00.720 I'm wrong about that. They were not that long and strong. 0:14:01.040 --> 0:14:03.760 And that's the big tests usually with a mandate. 0:14:04.040 --> 0:14:06.240 And then you know, getting people back in the office 0:14:06.320 --> 0:14:08.720 is something private sector has been wanting to do. It 0:14:08.800 --> 0:14:10.480 is true that, you know, you could have expected Trump 0:14:10.480 --> 0:14:13.440 to say everybody come back to work. That's something the musk, 0:14:13.720 --> 0:14:16.040 you know musk, they're they're right about that in the 0:14:16.080 --> 0:14:18.960 sense of that was always going to happen. And so 0:14:19.160 --> 0:14:21.400 I think that's something that will be really interesting to 0:14:21.440 --> 0:14:23.680 see and its impact on DC, by. 0:14:23.520 --> 0:14:24.400 The way, as a city. 0:14:24.720 --> 0:14:27.400 The irony is that it could resurrect downtown d C, 0:14:27.680 --> 0:14:29.720 which would be something I think most people would agree 0:14:29.920 --> 0:14:30.480 is a good thing. 0:14:30.560 --> 0:14:32.680 Yeah, it feels like it the thing they proposed. 0:14:32.800 --> 0:14:35.440 Not everything they proposed will be met with opposition, and 0:14:35.520 --> 0:14:37.720 not everything will be successful or a failure. 0:14:37.880 --> 0:14:41.160 Twenty seconds. Professor Schiller is a Talban center at Brown, 0:14:41.240 --> 0:14:43.520 going to five days a week in the office. 0:14:45.960 --> 0:14:47.000 We are excited. 0:14:47.320 --> 0:14:49.680 We're launching a school public policy ju Live for us, 0:14:49.680 --> 0:14:52.440 so we are excited to really be all of us 0:14:52.480 --> 0:14:53.120 on our game. 0:14:53.240 --> 0:14:53.920 That's my answer. 0:14:53.920 --> 0:14:54.160 There. 0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:57.240 There was a sophisticate the General Counsel pass that at 0:14:57.720 --> 0:15:00.640 Brown University. Wendy Shower, thank you so much, particularly those 0:15:00.680 --> 0:15:05.000 comments on our constitution and our civics that is out there. 0:15:05.360 --> 0:15:09.680 This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday 0:15:09.760 --> 0:15:12.960 starting at seven am Eastern on applecar Play and Android 0:15:12.960 --> 0:15:15.840 Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen 0:15:15.960 --> 0:15:19.040 live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station 0:15:19.440 --> 0:15:23.000 Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty joining us. 0:15:22.920 --> 0:15:25.960 Now the conversation of the day and technology. We had 0:15:26.000 --> 0:15:28.800 Dan Ey's earlier with us from his Sikorski Gene Munster 0:15:29.840 --> 0:15:33.480 joins us now really pleased with that of course, with Deepwater. 0:15:33.040 --> 0:15:36.200 Asset management, Jane, What is the moment we're in? 0:15:36.320 --> 0:15:40.680 Paul Swede and I did important AI seminars for aniog 0:15:40.720 --> 0:15:44.800 Run and Man Deep sing yesterday with Adobe with Salesforce, 0:15:45.280 --> 0:15:49.280 there's Nvidia earnings in the rest. You've been doing this forever. 0:15:49.840 --> 0:15:53.360 What moment are we in in the next year in 0:15:53.480 --> 0:15:54.880 American technology? 0:15:57.160 --> 0:16:00.760 We're in what is going to be the more I 0:16:00.760 --> 0:16:04.600 think exciting year and innovation over the last fifty years. 0:16:04.880 --> 0:16:08.480 And it's hard to really put a language on it 0:16:08.520 --> 0:16:14.560 to capture what the concept of infinite intelligence or close 0:16:14.600 --> 0:16:18.800 to infinite intelligence at almost no cost means for humanity. 0:16:19.320 --> 0:16:22.200 And so as someone who has been around for the 0:16:22.320 --> 0:16:26.200 Internet and saw the boom and bust of that, I 0:16:26.240 --> 0:16:29.600 think this is going to be more significant. And I 0:16:29.640 --> 0:16:32.400 think that next year, if you think about the markets, 0:16:33.240 --> 0:16:36.040 I've been talking about this three to five year bull market, 0:16:36.160 --> 0:16:38.720 and so I started talking about that about a year ago, 0:16:39.000 --> 0:16:40.840 So we're going to say we got a two to. 0:16:40.840 --> 0:16:41.680 Four more years. 0:16:41.680 --> 0:16:45.160 It's going to end in a spectacular bursting of the bubble. 0:16:45.240 --> 0:16:49.000 But I think next year, from just a broader market perspective, 0:16:49.000 --> 0:16:51.560 I think we're going to see another incredible year. And 0:16:51.640 --> 0:16:55.840 I think that it's driven by substance around AI going 0:16:55.920 --> 0:16:59.480 from a build out to starting to move to more 0:16:59.520 --> 0:17:01.240 application since we saw a little bit of that with 0:17:01.240 --> 0:17:04.720 Snowflake today. Of course we've seen most of the excitement 0:17:04.800 --> 0:17:07.919 around the hardware, including Nvidia, but I think we're going 0:17:07.960 --> 0:17:10.960 to start to shift to slowly see more performance in 0:17:11.080 --> 0:17:16.199 software specifically. But just I'm just really excited to be 0:17:16.359 --> 0:17:17.920 alive at this time in life. 0:17:17.920 --> 0:17:19.560 It's just a really special moment. 0:17:19.760 --> 0:17:22.440 Hey, Gene, When I talk to people about AI, I 0:17:22.480 --> 0:17:24.600 often quote you because I remember talking to you maybe 0:17:24.640 --> 0:17:27.359 eighteen months ago on this program, and you put into 0:17:27.440 --> 0:17:30.600 content into a kind of a framework of a companium 0:17:30.640 --> 0:17:33.720 of kind of where you view AI relative to, say, 0:17:33.840 --> 0:17:37.240 the Internet to electricity. Can you just review that for us, 0:17:37.280 --> 0:17:40.440 because it's so powerful to give people a sense of 0:17:40.480 --> 0:17:43.720 how you view the potential impact of AI. 0:17:45.280 --> 0:17:48.960 So it's a zero to one hundred scale, and one 0:17:49.040 --> 0:17:54.000 hundred is the most impactful, most transformative. But at twenty five, 0:17:54.040 --> 0:17:58.399 I would put mobile at about thirty five forty. I 0:17:58.440 --> 0:18:01.720 would have the PC the Internet at fifty. And obviously 0:18:01.760 --> 0:18:03.760 these all build on themselves, but if you look at 0:18:03.760 --> 0:18:06.879 them as a standalone, So the Internet is fifty, I 0:18:06.920 --> 0:18:11.679 think AI is probably ninety and electricity would be one hundred. 0:18:12.080 --> 0:18:15.080 And I think AI would be greater than electricity if 0:18:15.119 --> 0:18:17.720 not for the fact that you need electricity to run 0:18:17.760 --> 0:18:20.960 these machines. Of course, But this is a big deal, Paul, 0:18:21.160 --> 0:18:23.480 And you know there's that's a lot of hype. 0:18:23.480 --> 0:18:24.320 There's a lot of hype in that. 0:18:24.400 --> 0:18:26.479 I think the substance will exceed that hype. 0:18:26.960 --> 0:18:30.400 Yeah, but you're gene when someone like you makes that analysis. 0:18:30.560 --> 0:18:32.920 A lot of people like myself, we pay attention here 0:18:33.040 --> 0:18:35.800 as we try to get our minds around AI. What's 0:18:35.840 --> 0:18:38.320 the next step here? At it feels like we're we're 0:18:38.440 --> 0:18:40.960 so early innings on this, but it feels like we're 0:18:40.960 --> 0:18:42.520 now at the discussion point where. 0:18:42.440 --> 0:18:45.000 The next step is one of your kids needs in Mac. 0:18:45.320 --> 0:18:48.000 It's a new left, new laptop with the AX just 0:18:48.080 --> 0:18:52.240 so you know, that's the next steps this weekend exactly, Geene, 0:18:52.440 --> 0:18:53.919