Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. I'm Tom Keene. Daily
Speaker 1: we bring you insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot com, and of course on the Bloomberg. This
Speaker 1: is an important interview for global Wall Street and frankly
Speaker 1: for those of you who not attached to Wall Street.
Speaker 1: It is of note Jan Hatzi has cut his teeth
Speaker 1: with Bill Dudley Uh years ago at Golden Sachs by
Speaker 1: focusing on the American consumer. He's done that too, great
Speaker 1: acclaim as their chief economists and Haud of Global Economics
Speaker 1: with great, great forecasting skill, always very cautious about the
Speaker 1: dream of higher interest rates, the dream of a greater
Speaker 1: gross domestic product. Dr Hassi has joins us UH this morning. Jan,
Speaker 1: thank you for joining Bloomberg Surveillance. You guys shook the
Speaker 1: world with a markdown yesterday and g d P. If
Speaker 1: we get stimulus from President Biden or a second term
Speaker 1: President Trump in January or February, how will you adjust?
Speaker 1: It's going to be to be with you, and you're
Speaker 1: obviously being way too kind there, but in terms of
Speaker 1: the outlook. We did take down the fourth quarter because
Speaker 1: of the reduced likelihood and very low likelihood now of
Speaker 1: a fiscal deal. We were at six percent quarter on
Speaker 1: quarter annualized. We're now three percent quarter on quarter annualized.
Speaker 1: In fact, a few weeks ago we had considered a
Speaker 1: larger downward revision than this in the event of no
Speaker 1: no deal between Democrats and Republicans, but we ended up
Speaker 1: with a somewhat more moderate downward revision in light of
Speaker 1: the fact that the end of the six hundred dollar
Speaker 1: per week payment to unemployed workers at the end of
Speaker 1: July doesn't seem to have had as large an impact
Speaker 1: on spending as we had we had thought, so it
Speaker 1: seems like the consumer is still holding up reasonably well.
Speaker 1: But nevertheless, a dullwood religion was necessary. Now. If we
Speaker 1: get into two thousand and twenty one and we have
Speaker 1: another fiscal easing under a President Biden with a Senate majority,
Speaker 1: or under under President Trump, then we would we would
Speaker 1: upgrade our numbers, probably because we're not really building in
Speaker 1: a significant amount of stimulus from here. We think there
Speaker 1: are other reasons why the economy may do pretty well
Speaker 1: in two thousand and twenty one, and they related to
Speaker 1: you know, COVID developments and and potentially a vaccine. But
Speaker 1: we're not building the stimulus at the moment, and your
Speaker 1: initial acclaim came off mortgage equity wouldraw and looking at
Speaker 1: the behavior of consumers in the housing boom of OH four,
Speaker 1: oh five and indeed into oh six as well, what
Speaker 1: is the behavior of consumers that you and Goldman Sex
Speaker 1: see right now? I think the main constraint on consumers
Speaker 1: is really the development of the of the pandemic. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's the reason why the economy turned down so sharply
Speaker 1: in March and April. And to the extent that we
Speaker 1: can unwind um these these losses, I think it's going
Speaker 1: to reflect improvements in our ability to cope with the
Speaker 1: with the disease, to reduce infection risk, and ultimately to
Speaker 1: come up with a vaccine. That's at the at the
Speaker 1: top of the list for me. But of course income
Speaker 1: plays an important role as well, and government government programs
Speaker 1: to shore up incomes during the worst part of the pandemic,
Speaker 1: I think we're extremely helpful for me. The most amazing
Speaker 1: statistic of this entire period has been the fact that
Speaker 1: the second quarter saw the biggest decline ever in real
Speaker 1: GDP going back at least two ninety seven, but also
Speaker 1: the biggest increase ever in real household disposible income. That's
Speaker 1: that that was really key, I think in turning around
Speaker 1: the downturn of margin April in subsequent months. But of
Speaker 1: course this story isn't over yet, and right now we've
Speaker 1: seen seen a setback it seems like, and what happens
Speaker 1: to fiscal policy as we go into two thousand twenty
Speaker 1: one is going to be important. Well, yeah, that's the issue.
Speaker 1: And Bob Prince over a Bridgewater has taught to us
Speaker 1: a couple of times about the duration mismatch. This pandemic
Speaker 1: will go on for a whole lot longer than the
Speaker 1: three month band aid that the fiscal authorities keep applying.
Speaker 1: And I just wanted from your perspective, we managed to
Speaker 1: offset that income crisis, that income shock of six months ago.
Speaker 1: Do you think the nature of the slowdown changes if
Speaker 1: the appetites to apply another fiscal band aid isn't there.
Speaker 1: I do. I think there is a very strong case
Speaker 1: for keeping policies both on the monetary side and on
Speaker 1: the fiscal side, very accommodative. I'm generally lee on the
Speaker 1: more optimistic side of the debate as far as the
Speaker 1: economic outlook is concerned these days, and I do think
Speaker 1: that we're making significant headway, but at the same time,
Speaker 1: we're clearly still very far away from full employment. The
Speaker 1: pandemic is definitely not behind us, and the economy still
Speaker 1: needs a lot of support. So on the monetary side,
Speaker 1: I would say, I'm I'm pretty comforted by global central
Speaker 1: banks willingness to continue to provide support. I think there
Speaker 1: is there's a very strong consensus there that the economy
Speaker 1: is still needed. But on the on the fiscal side,
Speaker 1: of course, it's a more political decision, and especially in
Speaker 1: a hyper politicized environment as as as as what we
Speaker 1: have currently given the impending election, it's much easier to
Speaker 1: see a setback, and clearly we have just seen a setback,
Speaker 1: and I think it would be very helpful if we
Speaker 1: could get another round of support. What's interesting about your
Speaker 1: cold though, Yan, as you cunt growth for the end
Speaker 1: of this year, you boost growth for Q two Q
Speaker 1: four at the back end. There's some people, are there
Speaker 1: some economists who believe that if we don't grow quickly
Speaker 1: enough now, the potential growth in the future has to
Speaker 1: come down as well. What is it that you see
Speaker 1: that makes you think that even if growth has to
Speaker 1: come in in the near term, it can pick up
Speaker 1: in the longer term, or at least the medium term. Well,
Speaker 1: I think that if you're restoring less activity in some
Speaker 1: of the sectors that have been hardest hit the consumer
Speaker 1: services sector, sectors like transportation and restaurants and areas like that,
Speaker 1: that does give you somewhat more upside potential further down
Speaker 1: the road. Eventually, I think these sectors are going to normalize,
Speaker 1: especially in an environment where the pandemic is just less
Speaker 1: of a threat, perhaps because a vaccine is available and
Speaker 1: will have been broadly distributed by the middle of next
Speaker 1: next year. So I think it's it's sort of natural
Speaker 1: to offset at least a part of any near charm
Speaker 1: changes in your in your growth forecast with changes in
Speaker 1: the opposite direction, you know, a few quarters down down
Speaker 1: the road. And I think in this case that strikes
Speaker 1: us as the most likely outcome. I'll go. Of course,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of uncertainty about what happens further down
Speaker 1: the road. And I think also that the idea that
Speaker 1: if you have a larger hit in the in the
Speaker 1: near drama that that can weigh on your ability to
Speaker 1: restore activity much further down the road because of scarring effects.
Speaker 1: And there's something to that as well, But I think
Speaker 1: that's that operates on a somewhat longer horizon. Probably. Yeah,
Speaker 1: let's build on this because when you talk about the
Speaker 1: potential for faster growth in two thousand twenty one, even
Speaker 1: as we see slower growth now, that also flies in
Speaker 1: the face of the market's expectation for inflation, when market
Speaker 1: aspect of this week's action has been a steady drip
Speaker 1: drip lower in five to ten year inflation expectations. Do
Speaker 1: you think that the market is wrong and that the
Speaker 1: FED is right in thinking that they can get two
Speaker 1: percent inflation in the near term. Well, the Fed doesn't
Speaker 1: have two percent inflation for at least the next couple
Speaker 1: of years, so it still takes a while, and I
Speaker 1: would agree with that. I think will be below two
Speaker 1: percent for core PC inflation for the next several years. However,
Speaker 1: right now we're at one point two percent for core
Speaker 1: PC inflation, and I think it's significant. Part of the
Speaker 1: gap between that one point two and two is probably
Speaker 1: related to more temporary factors basically distortions or or disruptions
Speaker 1: rather in the most COVID affected sectors. I think that
Speaker 1: is going to unwind over the next year. I think
Speaker 1: that is going to push inflation higher, but you know,
Speaker 1: maybe to the one and a half to one and
Speaker 1: three quarter percent range. So you're still below where you
Speaker 1: would want to be and what would be needed for
Speaker 1: the FED to even think about hiking rates. But but
Speaker 1: I don't think you're going to be quite as low
Speaker 1: as where all now as far as markets are concerned,
Speaker 1: inflation markets in particular, yes, I mean ten ure CPI
Speaker 1: inflation expectations or break even inflation rates of one point
Speaker 1: six percent. That does strike me as as law, and
Speaker 1: it's moved law, as you say, and so I would
Speaker 1: say I'm disagreeing a little bit more strongly with the
Speaker 1: market pricing on on on these break even rates than
Speaker 1: I than I did, say a couple of weeks ago
Speaker 1: when it was a bit higher. I think I think
Speaker 1: that's the upside there. This is crucial, and this is
Speaker 1: one of the most heated debates on Wall Street and
Speaker 1: Black Rock coming out and sort of speaking to the
Speaker 1: debate that John and Tom are having earlier about the
Speaker 1: rejiggering of supply chains in the wake of the de globalization,
Speaker 1: and have that alone could really increase inflation, perhaps more
Speaker 1: than markets are expecting. Why is that not a thesis
Speaker 1: that you follow based on your expectation to one for
Speaker 1: one and a half to less than two percent in
Speaker 1: the near term for inflation. I think it's a factor.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's it's going to be potentially
Speaker 1: a factor for the good sector of the economy. But
Speaker 1: I also would say that the service sector is significantly
Speaker 1: more important, accounts for you know, sevent of the basket.
Speaker 1: The good sector only accounts for about thirty percent of
Speaker 1: the basket. And also the potential impact of changes in
Speaker 1: supply chains, I think it's going to be spread over
Speaker 1: a period of time. I don't think it's something that's
Speaker 1: going to have, you know, a huge impact in the
Speaker 1: very short term. But what what does have much bigger
Speaker 1: effects in the very short term, I think is these
Speaker 1: distortions or disruptions that we're seeing in COVID effected sectors,
Speaker 1: which are probably going to unwind more more quickly. So,
Speaker 1: you know, I think both of these factors are probably
Speaker 1: reasons to expect somewhat higher inflation. But but I think
Speaker 1: the disruptions are more important. Yeah, and when did you
Speaker 1: last wear a tie? March? I have not worn since March.
Speaker 1: But I am not wearing just that's I think for
Speaker 1: the pandemic of Goldman sacks. Tom, I don't know what
Speaker 1: I think of this, the new trend on on Wall
Speaker 1: Street have no ties. I like to be a little bit.
Speaker 1: I got a lot of people lobby and you know,
Speaker 1: I'm into the stubble. We see what the no taie
Speaker 1: thing looks like. Look at this and by the way,
Speaker 1: it's not a skinny tie. I learned it's a slim
Speaker 1: is a slim tie? Yeah, it's a slim tie. Just
Speaker 1: have you know it doesn't look great. John, now put
Speaker 1: it back on. Oh really, Tom, we're doing that again.
Speaker 1: We're doing his own radio. I think this this might work,
Speaker 1: taking social and radio like Tom without the bow tie.
Speaker 1: I mean I looked at those things with Tom on
Speaker 1: the weekend, and Tom has a bow tie. It works
Speaker 1: to get to those markets. Let's do the markets, those markets, mhm.
Speaker 1: Let's get a conversation started with Amy wou Silverman, obviously
Speaker 1: Capital markets equity derivative strategist joins us right now, Amy,
Speaker 1: fantastic to catch up with you. This market not too
Speaker 1: concerned about October on November, very preoccupied with December. Why Amy,
Speaker 1: Hey guys, good morning. Yeah, I mean December seems to
Speaker 1: be uh the focus. You know. Part of it is
Speaker 1: there is this December four deadline when the state electors
Speaker 1: are supposed to submit their ballots. And obviously the conversation
Speaker 1: has gone on for quite a while that we're going
Speaker 1: to have a contested election election where logistics and mechanics
Speaker 1: matter a lot um. You know, what one nuance I
Speaker 1: would point to is this is very true for SMPN vix,
Speaker 1: which has been pricing a higher for longer elevated volatility.
Speaker 1: This is not true in naztech, and it's not true
Speaker 1: in Russell. The options term structure that we look at
Speaker 1: is actually lower December than in November. It's flipped in
Speaker 1: SMPN mix. And so I actually think that's pretty interesting
Speaker 1: because the market has been so so much driven by
Speaker 1: this you know, tech versus value tree that that is
Speaker 1: not being reflected in those indices. He me, what portion
Speaker 1: of this pullback, this correction is simply due to a
Speaker 1: bet on weaker economic growth? Does that play in big
Speaker 1: or is it just another small factor? You know, you know,
Speaker 1: I think that definitely. You know, we sort of saw
Speaker 1: the market react to some of the data that came
Speaker 1: out as well as pals comments. Uh. If I put
Speaker 1: add a third layer to that, there have obviously been
Speaker 1: substantial option dynamics at play ever since August and even earlier,
Speaker 1: you know, referring to the soft bank trades as well
Speaker 1: as the retail option buying. So you know, the third
Speaker 1: factor that I see in play is also that there
Speaker 1: is this options dynamic we refer to as gamma, where
Speaker 1: you know, it slices both ways. We saw that exacerbate
Speaker 1: the move up and we are seeing it exacerbate the
Speaker 1: move down. Uh. In you know, look in mainly tech names.
Speaker 1: But but as goes tech as goes the market because
Speaker 1: of the heavy weighting that it has had in the market.
Speaker 1: UM in recent times, you talk about tech and you
Speaker 1: talk about how volatility has largely been focused on what
Speaker 1: you call the fang a man stocks. I call them
Speaker 1: the fan mag stocks. Pick your poison. How much risk
Speaker 1: is there too big tech if we do get a
Speaker 1: vaccine in other words, do they potentially suffer losses or
Speaker 1: just underperform? Versus the rest of the index. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: kind of a million dollar question. Um, so far it
Speaker 1: has been very resilient. One keep point that we look
Speaker 1: at the kind of look as a litmus test too
Speaker 1: to that answer is how an options, uh call option
Speaker 1: prices way over put option prices, So those have all
Speaker 1: been inverted through the entire some are meeting people are
Speaker 1: so exuberant on tech. We've actually now started to see
Speaker 1: that the change in particular in in the fangnag names
Speaker 1: or what have you. And so that makes me nervous.
Speaker 1: That makes me think that if there is a reversion,
Speaker 1: it'll come hard. Let's go back to John Maggie one
Speaker 1: oh one, Amy, Well, we're just very simply here are
Speaker 1: we seeing a breakdown of a bull market? Can you
Speaker 1: call intermediate bear? Are you talking out right there? So
Speaker 1: you know, from our perspective, when we look at how
Speaker 1: the options went from complete exuberance and now I would
Speaker 1: say back to average levels, the the investors who are
Speaker 1: expressing their views are starting to show more bare sentiment.
Speaker 1: And then obviously that's sort of on a very short
Speaker 1: term basis. So everything we look at in terms of
Speaker 1: the option prices are always sort of one month to
Speaker 1: three months. But if you look at those, we went
Speaker 1: from peak exuberance to historical relationships we never saw in
Speaker 1: terms of how bullish they were, to now back to
Speaker 1: even slightly varish. And so as we head into an
Speaker 1: election and we get to focus more on index trades
Speaker 1: as opposed to single stock trades, I can see that,
Speaker 1: you know, turning us into an environment where people are
Speaker 1: much more focused on hedging and focus on the downside.
Speaker 1: Rusk Am he grant to catch up as old whites,
Speaker 1: especially this morning Amy with Silvan that of obviously Jim
Speaker 1: Paulson has huge advantage. He's not in the three zip
Speaker 1: codes of Wall Street, of the city in London, Jim
Speaker 1: Paulson in Minnesota with the Loo loose old group. Jim,
Speaker 1: how have you changed your opinion in the last two
Speaker 1: weeks and this this chaos we're in, Well, I I guess,
Speaker 1: you know, I kind of look at it. You know,
Speaker 1: with the ferociousness of the rally off the march los,
Speaker 1: you knew that we're going to get correction at some
Speaker 1: point and um and generally corrections do their job. They
Speaker 1: scare you a lot. And uh, I agree this this
Speaker 1: could have further to go. I really don't know, um,
Speaker 1: but UM, I mean, it wouldn't surprise me if we,
Speaker 1: you know, we do fall from high to some point.
Speaker 1: It doesn't have to, but it certainly could. But I
Speaker 1: guess for me, I think there's quite a bit of
Speaker 1: fundamental economic momentum here coming into this, and I think
Speaker 1: it's likely to continue to carry into the fourth quarter
Speaker 1: and beyond UM and I think that's gonna that's gonna
Speaker 1: eventually turn this correction a little bit. And we're growing
Speaker 1: north in the current quarter in real GDP, maybe the
Speaker 1: fastest quarterly growth grade ever and UM expectations right now
Speaker 1: private sector economists for the fourth quarter for red off
Speaker 1: Bloomberg or five, which is really strong. I think it
Speaker 1: might even come in stronger than that if you just
Speaker 1: look at look at housing yesterday, look at the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: consumer Comfort index that came out yesterday. Um. That is
Speaker 1: it's interesting that Bloomberg consumer comfort is in the upper
Speaker 1: courttile of its history right now. But John Ferrell, this
Speaker 1: is Jim is so good to bring this up as well.
Speaker 1: You know what, John, I don't see up thirty in
Speaker 1: the streets of New York. Do you see it on
Speaker 1: the streets of London. Not really, but there is a
Speaker 1: mechanical point to be my head tell him you go
Speaker 1: from shutdown to reopening the light selfie, switch it back
Speaker 1: on again. There's a mechanical improvement. It's just there. It's
Speaker 1: just basic maths. And I just want to Jim, what
Speaker 1: are you saying that's mechanical just to bounce back from
Speaker 1: being shut down to reopening and what are you saying
Speaker 1: that it's self sustaining. You use the word momentum where
Speaker 1: you expecting the momentum to come from. I totally agree
Speaker 1: with you, Tom, there's a big chunk of this, you know,
Speaker 1: bounce that we've had was just turning the switch off
Speaker 1: and then back on. There's no doubt of that. But
Speaker 1: I do think that turn switch back on creates a
Speaker 1: two momentum. I mean, we had a lot more fear
Speaker 1: when we had to switch off among consumers, among businesses, um,
Speaker 1: and that fear caused them to pull in, spending even more,
Speaker 1: costs even harder. That fear is less now, in part
Speaker 1: because we allowed some things to come back on, so
Speaker 1: there's greater confidence. You know, we still have an eight
Speaker 1: savings rate among the household sector. Let's say they bring
Speaker 1: that back down to to twelve per cent or something
Speaker 1: over over the next few quarters or something like that.
Speaker 1: If they do that, that would be that would equate
Speaker 1: to dramatic growth in personal consumption expentures just that alone,
Speaker 1: and all you really need to do that is just
Speaker 1: to generate some confidence. The other thing I'd like to
Speaker 1: point out is we've already dumped a lot of stimulus
Speaker 1: on this thing, and most of that really hasn't started
Speaker 1: to help yet, because it takes about a year historically
Speaker 1: before it starts to really show benefits in the economy.
Speaker 1: But as we go into the fourth quarter into the
Speaker 1: first quarter, that one year leg is going to be
Speaker 1: mad and I think that will we'll start to improve
Speaker 1: economic conditions. Look at the impact that a lower mortgage
Speaker 1: rate has had on housing activity and auto sales in
Speaker 1: this country. Imagine what the impact of money growth fifteen
Speaker 1: fiscal spending, which I don't even think showed up yet,
Speaker 1: might have starting in the fourth, first and second quarter
Speaker 1: of the coming year. Jim, perhaps the phrase of the
Speaker 1: week is a healthy correction. Pretty Much almost every note
Speaker 1: that I've read has somewhere around healthy correction in it.
Speaker 1: Yours included and you also say it won't be the last,
Speaker 1: and you reiterate the idea that we're in this bull market.
Speaker 1: You did say, however, say we are refreshing valuations. What
Speaker 1: does that mean? Yeah, you know, at leasta, I concur
Speaker 1: a little bit with your healthy correction. That's why I
Speaker 1: think maybe we have to have a moment deeper correction yet,
Speaker 1: because even myself, I'm just not scared enough yet. So
Speaker 1: maybe maybe it has to further, and maybe guys like
Speaker 1: Meal quit say a healthy correction by the time it
Speaker 1: actually is getting closer to the end. I kind of
Speaker 1: concurred with that. You know what, I think there's a
Speaker 1: What I mean by refreshing regulations UM is that that
Speaker 1: we're bringing down the price of the market UM at
Speaker 1: the same time that we're starting to bring back up earnings.
Speaker 1: I mean, earnings estimates are climbing UM nearly everywhere, nearly
Speaker 1: crossed all sectors UM. And right now you've got uh
Speaker 1: SMP roughly and you've got one one year forward earnings
Speaker 1: estimate from the street right now. You know, that puts
Speaker 1: it back down I think around two times or something.
Speaker 1: It was a lot higher not that long ago. So
Speaker 1: we are we aren't doing some damage evaluations and as
Speaker 1: we as we go along further, I suspect those earnings
Speaker 1: estiments are going to come up even more. So the
Speaker 1: market might look even cheaper by the end of this year,
Speaker 1: even if it goes higher in the media. In the
Speaker 1: Jim right a half of me said Jim Paulson of
Speaker 1: Luthlthwayden right now on our politics, it is good to
Speaker 1: go abroad to get a different view. Julie Norman is
Speaker 1: at the University College London, or political science professor with
Speaker 1: wonderful credit on the Levant and the Palestinian and Israeli experience,
Speaker 1: but she joins us now on the Battle Royal in Washington.
Speaker 1: Julie Norman calculate this weekend is the two candidates adapt
Speaker 1: and adjust to a debate four days away right on.
Speaker 1: So there's obviously a lot that's going to be going
Speaker 1: on this weekend. We expect that tomorrow that Trump's will
Speaker 1: announce the next Supreme Court nominee and that will of
Speaker 1: course just set off a really quite part is in
Speaker 1: Battle in Washington moving into the week of the debate,
Speaker 1: with really both parties trying to double down on a
Speaker 1: lot of the key issues that will resonate for their voters.
Speaker 1: A lot of that, of course, coming on the backdrop
Speaker 1: of Trump's recent comments this week about the potential non
Speaker 1: peaceful transport of power after the election. So all that's
Speaker 1: going to be on the table going into the debate. Wait,
Speaker 1: going after the undecided, forget about changing somebody's vote, just
Speaker 1: going after the undecided versus getting the turnout of your base.
Speaker 1: Wait that balance right now? Yeah, So this is going
Speaker 1: to be a challenge for both parties right now Trump's
Speaker 1: and continuously Trump has had a very strong following of
Speaker 1: his base, but trying to get other people beyond that
Speaker 1: into his coalition has been a challenge. But again, the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court not donation might open up a possibility there
Speaker 1: there are a lot of conservatives moderates who maybe don't
Speaker 1: like Trump personally but are still pretty committed to conservative
Speaker 1: policies and values to the Supreme Court nomination will help
Speaker 1: bring in some of those undecided voters. For Republicans for sure,
Speaker 1: and the Democratic side, it's a bit more complicated for Biden,
Speaker 1: really trying to straddle a very wide range of opinions
Speaker 1: within his own party from very strong special it's very
Speaker 1: strong moderate and given them on both sides of that spectrum,
Speaker 1: who may still be unsure about how enthusiastic they offer
Speaker 1: about Biden. Julie, We're focused on the presidential aspect of
Speaker 1: the election. However, a lot of people in the markets
Speaker 1: are saying, possibly the more consequential election is for the Senate.
Speaker 1: Where are we in terms of a blue wave or
Speaker 1: a blue sweep come November. Well, that's certainly is where
Speaker 1: a lot of the focus and emphasis will start being
Speaker 1: as we get closer to November. Um there are a
Speaker 1: number of key seats that are up for grabs. Democrats
Speaker 1: are of course really trying to emphasize this point again
Speaker 1: with a Supreme Court nomination, to suggest that if they
Speaker 1: retook the Senate, they would be open to pushing for
Speaker 1: some witting here took for fairly progressive or you know,
Speaker 1: not a mainstream policies such as increasing the number of
Speaker 1: justices on the Court, um increasing term or implementing um
Speaker 1: term limitations, or going over over other policies that Democrats
Speaker 1: have been pushing for more of the progressive ways, such
Speaker 1: as ending the shillibusters. So Democrats are really pushing hard
Speaker 1: for this sense of can we take back can they
Speaker 1: exact the Senate, and if so, will they be able
Speaker 1: to really leverage that into some different kinds of political power.
Speaker 1: And there's also a question pairing that with the fiscal debate,
Speaker 1: how much would the Democrats passed in terms of a
Speaker 1: fiscal stimulus, a true stimulus once the pandemic is over,
Speaker 1: versus the Republicans. Is there really that much daylight between
Speaker 1: the two plans? I mean, or is what we're seeing
Speaker 1: right now political scilly season, and there's actually our convergence
Speaker 1: between Republicans and Democrats on the fiscal support side than
Speaker 1: it may seem. I think we're going to be moving
Speaker 1: towards more convergence. Of course, there's been a bit of
Speaker 1: a stalemate since the end of August with the last
Speaker 1: reel meaningful negotiations. But you know, I think after this
Speaker 1: week's um comments that we heard from Jerome Powell and
Speaker 1: other Federal Reserve officials to Congress really underscoring the need
Speaker 1: for fiscal stimulants, we do see both parties coming back
Speaker 1: to the table now, Pelosi being open to, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe massaging some of her initial numbers just to get
Speaker 1: some kind of deal moving forward that's necessary for the
Speaker 1: economy and those parties also realize that it's necessary for
Speaker 1: the election as well for some of their their Keith
Speaker 1: seats that are ups for robs. Julie John emails in
Speaker 1: from Coventry and asked, tell us about the campuses. Tell
Speaker 1: us about you know, in the United States, we have
Speaker 1: a struggle here. I mean the news today is packed
Speaker 1: and football, peck twelve football, whatever it is, they're going
Speaker 1: to start to play football again. Yet campuses here are
Speaker 1: an absolute mess. Is it the same thing in urban
Speaker 1: United Kingdom? Well, that's a good question. We are actually
Speaker 1: just going back to our classes next week, so our
Speaker 1: students are actually just coming back right now. I think
Speaker 1: the UK is dealing with a lot of the same
Speaker 1: questions as the US right now. Is how much face
Speaker 1: to face to have, how you know, big of groups
Speaker 1: to allow students to gather in um It is a
Speaker 1: big question mark here too, But we do have students
Speaker 1: coming back to campus and everyone just trying to do
Speaker 1: their best to make the best year possible for them.
Speaker 1: Sounds a good question. Great Knowabiles Jitty. Thank you Jenny
Speaker 1: Norman the Unsty College London. Thanks for listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Tom Keane before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide.
Speaker 1: I'm Bloomberg Radio s