Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots Podcast.
Speaker 2: I'm Tracy Alloway and I'm Joey.
Speaker 3: Isnt thal Joe.
Speaker 2: It's that time of year again, Jackson Hole. It's my
Speaker 2: favorite time of year.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, it's a great time year anyway, but
Speaker 4: in Jackson HALLWI only come.
Speaker 2: On for many reasons. Okay, So this is the Kansas
Speaker 2: City Fed's annual Economic Symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, and
Speaker 2: they basically get together a bunch of different you know,
Speaker 2: FED presidents, a bunch of different speakers on economic policy,
Speaker 2: and then everyone geeks out while looking at mountains.
Speaker 4: Basically, it's really extraordinary. So this will be the third
Speaker 4: year that will have been there. We're recording this August eighteenth,
Speaker 4: but by the time people are listening to this, the
Speaker 4: event will have just will be kicking off. It really
Speaker 4: is extraordinary because you really have the top minds and
Speaker 4: this stuff from truly all around the world. But also
Speaker 4: it's late summer. People chill, people hike, people recognize that
Speaker 4: they're in an amazing location and they would be wasting
Speaker 4: their time if they just spent the whole time inside
Speaker 4: talking monetary pole.
Speaker 2: This is true, but I think part of the planning
Speaker 2: of this event is this idea of, Okay, you get
Speaker 2: everyone out in this really nice place in the wilderness,
Speaker 2: and people are maybe a little bit more forthcoming or
Speaker 2: maybe a little bit more open to having creative discussions
Speaker 2: about policy. And it's interesting, you know, you mentioned people
Speaker 2: talking about like this year's theme. I have a pop
Speaker 2: quiz for you, which is do you remember the themes
Speaker 2: from the last two Jackson Holes that we went to?
Speaker 2: We've been to this will be our third.
Speaker 4: I'm a little embarrassed. Is monetary policy at a changing world?
Speaker 5: No?
Speaker 4: I Actually, here's a good question.
Speaker 2: You're not that far off. Actually, so last year it
Speaker 2: was reassessing the effectiveness and transmission of monetary policy. The
Speaker 2: first Jackson Hole we went to in twenty twenty three,
Speaker 2: that was structural shifts in the global economy. That one,
Speaker 2: I got to say a little I could forgive you
Speaker 2: for oh forgetting that one. But this year's theme, it
Speaker 2: just came out, you know, just got announced. So this
Speaker 2: theme is labor markets in transition, demographics, productivity, and macroeconomic policy.
Speaker 2: It's a good topic for many reasons. So obviously, you know,
Speaker 2: the future of AI and its impact on the labor
Speaker 2: force will certainly fit under that particular thematic umbrella. But
Speaker 2: also it goes straight into the heart of what a
Speaker 2: lot of FED policy makers seem to be discussing right
Speaker 2: now and arguing right.
Speaker 4: All kinds of things, immigration, aging, et cetera. How does
Speaker 4: that bear on the data that we're seeing right now.
Speaker 4: It's a great topic for both the short term and
Speaker 4: the long term of monetary policy, so it should be
Speaker 4: a fascinating conference.
Speaker 2: Right and so on that note, I'm very happy to
Speaker 2: say we do, in fact have the perfect guest. We
Speaker 2: are going to be speaking with Jeff Schmidt. He is,
Speaker 2: of course the president of the Kansas City FED and
Speaker 2: responsible for putting on this event every year. So Jeff,
Speaker 2: thank you so much for coming on. Odd thoughts.
Speaker 5: Oh, it's my pleasure.
Speaker 6: It's great to finally meet both of you officially, and
Speaker 6: we follow you quite intently, so it's really great to
Speaker 6: be on We're.
Speaker 2: Leaving that in that's right. Well, I mean it is
Speaker 2: mutual to be fair because we follow you quite intently.
Speaker 2: So first of all, let me just extend a personal
Speaker 2: thanks for putting on an event which allows Joe and
Speaker 2: I to go to one of the most beautiful places
Speaker 2: on earth every year that is truly wonderful for both
Speaker 2: of us. And then I just going back to the
Speaker 2: theme for a second. How do you come up with
Speaker 2: the themes for these events every year? Is there like
Speaker 2: a brainstorming session and everyone goes into a room and
Speaker 2: twelve hours later you emerge with some sort of consensus,
Speaker 2: much like an FMC meeting, I suppose.
Speaker 6: But yeah, it's a great behind baseball question. And as
Speaker 6: you can imagine, you know, we're in our forty eighth years.
Speaker 6: So every year, you know, immediately after it's over, we
Speaker 6: get in a room and we talk about what went well,
Speaker 6: what can we make better? And I really give credit
Speaker 6: to Joe Gruber, I ri chief economists in his team.
Speaker 6: It's probably the most nerve wracking decision that has to
Speaker 6: be made, because you know, Jackson will get over in
Speaker 6: late August, and then probably by sometime early the fourth quarter,
Speaker 6: you're starting to talk about what should we create a
Speaker 6: theme around for the following year, and so they actually
Speaker 6: end up deciding on that by the end of the year.
Speaker 6: And it's nerve wracking because you hope that all the
Speaker 6: research you've asked these brilliant people to do and present
Speaker 6: is applicable by August because you know how fast things
Speaker 6: move in the business and economic world, and boy, they
Speaker 6: are so good at it. And they do think forward
Speaker 6: about some of the emerging issues that are going to
Speaker 6: be dealt with, but whether it be with the Central
Speaker 6: Bank or with the global economy. And I tell you what,
Speaker 6: they hit a home run this year because I'm actually,
Speaker 6: as a you know, economist and FED president, I'm very
Speaker 6: interested in the dynamic of demographics, not just nationally but internationally.
Speaker 6: There's things going on that you'll hear and we'll be
Speaker 6: presented on Friday and Saturday that I think are going
Speaker 6: to really spur a lot of thinking and a lot
Speaker 6: of conversation about how demographic behaviors and movements move the
Speaker 6: workforce and labor force in the US and abroad. So
Speaker 6: so it is it's a tenuous eight months because you've
Speaker 6: got you know, novel level economists doing the research and
Speaker 6: preparing these papers around a topic.
Speaker 5: And I think this one is really going to hit
Speaker 5: a really good court.
Speaker 4: It is definitely a great topic for right now because
Speaker 4: of you know, there's all the questions at least you know,
Speaker 4: and here is just I'm talking to us specifically, but
Speaker 4: as you mentioned, it is a global story because there
Speaker 4: is aging and the effect that that's going to have
Speaker 4: on the workforce, and especially in many advanced economies and
Speaker 4: non advanced economies frankly, and then obviously AI is a
Speaker 4: huge one. And then in the US specifically changing immigration
Speaker 4: policy and so forth. Just on the inside baseball part
Speaker 4: a little bit more. Okay, establish the team establishes the theme,
Speaker 4: how do you then like figure out it's probably almost
Speaker 4: anyone I assume would say yes to an invite to
Speaker 4: present to Jackson Hole, But how what is that actual
Speaker 4: process like where you identify the presenters that you're looking for?
Speaker 6: Yeah, so here again, as you can imagine, there's a
Speaker 6: community of economists and researchers both nationally and abroad. While
Speaker 6: it's a big community, it's pretty connected. And so the
Speaker 6: team's going to get together and they're going to do
Speaker 6: a couple of things. One is they're going to try
Speaker 6: to break down maybe inside the topic, what are some
Speaker 6: of the nuances of because I think we have four
Speaker 6: papers that will be released on Friday and Saturday, and
Speaker 6: so within that topic there's subtopics and so you're going
Speaker 6: to have researchers in university settings, you're going to have
Speaker 6: researchers inside of central.
Speaker 5: Banks, and a lot of that community is going to kind.
Speaker 6: Of focus itself on certain micro and macro topics. So
Speaker 6: that are really good inventory of experts that they'll reach
Speaker 6: out to.
Speaker 5: And I would say, you're right.
Speaker 6: I mean, I think in most cases the researchers would
Speaker 6: really covet the opportunity to do this research and submit
Speaker 6: the paper, but they're also very thoughtful about it. You know,
Speaker 6: some will just maybe not take the engagement just because
Speaker 6: it's not well aligned to the research that they're either
Speaker 6: doing or they feel their experts out But by and large,
Speaker 6: it's really a great honor and we tip typically have
Speaker 6: a very positive response. The challenge is time. You know
Speaker 6: a lot of these things might take a year or
Speaker 6: two to research, but they have a very tight window
Speaker 6: once they're asked and they agree, you know, they might
Speaker 6: have to submit within four or five months. And sometimes
Speaker 6: when you're talking about a very macro topic, that can
Speaker 6: be a super big challenge for a researcher.
Speaker 2: So, speaking of challenges, why don't we get right into
Speaker 2: more of that theme. The idea of labor markets in transition,
Speaker 2: Why don't you go ahead and give us your sort
Speaker 2: of a high level interest in this particular topic. I guess,
Speaker 2: how does something like AI, How does something like aging demographics,
Speaker 2: lower birth rates actually complicate the task of setting monetary policy,
Speaker 2: especially when you think about things like the neutral rate
Speaker 2: of interest. Our star, you know, our star is a
Speaker 2: nebulous concept at the best of times. I can only
Speaker 2: imagine what it's like trying to estimate our star at
Speaker 2: a time when we're also talking about, you know, AI
Speaker 2: potentially transforming the way everyone on Earth is working.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so let me kind of set the stage for this, because,
Speaker 6: first of all, my backgrounds, I'm a little bit of
Speaker 6: a hybrid FED president. So you're going to typically have
Speaker 6: maybe FED presidents that are in two different camps. One
Speaker 6: is going to be a traditional camp of economist PhD researcher, scholar,
Speaker 6: really focusing attention on the monetary policy discussions, relating their
Speaker 6: background to making good decisions at the policy table with FOMC.
Speaker 5: The second is going to be more in my camp.
Speaker 6: I'm much more of a practitioner, not a professor of economics.
Speaker 6: I mean, I've run banks, I've been a bank supervisor
Speaker 6: with the FDIC early in my career. I've done a
Speaker 6: little bit of leadership teaching at SMU the last couple
Speaker 6: of years, but I'll take my banker experiences through my
Speaker 6: thirty plus years of building banks. The most important part
Speaker 6: of that is really the workforce of people that you
Speaker 6: put together and through that thirty years to your points,
Speaker 6: There's really two big drivers on the demographic end that
Speaker 6: are of interest to me. One is just the behavioral
Speaker 6: nature of the labor force generationally, how they're changing, how
Speaker 6: they use technology. I'm a baby boomer. The twenty to
Speaker 6: thirty something coming in has a different sense of what
Speaker 6: the job is and how they're going to be successful
Speaker 6: at that work. The second thing is just and there's
Speaker 6: a very compelling paper that's going to be released on
Speaker 6: the addresses things like fertility rates and so that's not
Speaker 6: only a national but that's an international phenomenon. Is does
Speaker 6: how does the labor force migrate, Let's say in the
Speaker 6: US state to state, what drives that migration of labor force,
Speaker 6: and then what's happening in other large labor centric countries
Speaker 6: where the fertility rates are actually affecting the workforce Going forward?
Speaker 6: I mean, China is a really stark example, Japan. India
Speaker 6: is something a country I think everybody's really watching relative
Speaker 6: to how their labor force is maturing, educating, growing. I
Speaker 6: think all those dynamics are going to play a really
Speaker 6: important piece to the puzzle of where are things going
Speaker 6: to be made and how are economies going to grow
Speaker 6: because most economists and people in the markets would argue,
Speaker 6: you've got to have a growing labor force for your
Speaker 6: economy to grow. And that probably gets to the next
Speaker 6: observation you made, I think, Tracy, and that's how does technology,
Speaker 6: maybe specifically artificial intelligence weave its way into this conversation
Speaker 6: and you'll see some really good arguments about maybe the
Speaker 6: advent of AI is going to be perfectly timed for
Speaker 6: the nature of the labor force and how it's shifting.
Speaker 6: Because overall, when you add fertility rates and you add
Speaker 6: labor market at large, it's pretty static. It's not growing
Speaker 6: in a big way. Probably the only areas that are
Speaker 6: growing significantly would be India and maybe the African continent.
Speaker 6: Though all those things are going to play into this
Speaker 6: mix of both national and global labor force.
Speaker 4: So speak of technology. A couple weeks ago, we interviewed,
Speaker 4: said President Mary Day. She was talking about the iPhone
Speaker 4: and for example, that the current iPhone can do so
Speaker 4: much more than the first iPhone. You know, however many
Speaker 4: years that go. And then I thought of a follow
Speaker 4: up question to that, but I forgot to ask her.
Speaker 4: So I'm like, Okay, I'm just going to ask the
Speaker 4: next FED president. So I'm asking you the question that
Speaker 4: I actually should be asking very daily. I apologize for
Speaker 4: the unfairness, but I think this could inform the AI discussion,
Speaker 4: which is that we have seen already sitting aside AI,
Speaker 4: these incredible tech advances, undeniable that have changed the world, right,
Speaker 4: no one would deny that, and yet measured productivity gains
Speaker 4: have not been particularly extraordinary. So if you look at
Speaker 4: like since the first iPhone or the from the pre
Speaker 4: iPhone era to now, the world's changed dramatically on account
Speaker 4: to the technology changes, and yet productivity nothing particularly special,
Speaker 4: at least in the data. And I'm curious, like, when
Speaker 4: you think about the effect of AI, do you have
Speaker 4: any sort of theory for why that is or why
Speaker 4: it is that these obvious technolog breakthroughs haven't actually moved
Speaker 4: the dial in some of these important measures.
Speaker 6: Well, I have some personal thoughts, maybe some observations within
Speaker 6: the FED itself, at least with the Kansas City FED.
Speaker 6: One is just be patient. A lot of things are happening.
Speaker 6: I think a lot of this technology is emerging now.
Speaker 6: Now granted it'll go fast, but the adoption, I mean,
Speaker 6: even I think about the Kanasity FED itself, you know,
Speaker 6: getting comfortable with what's kind of embedded inside let's.
Speaker 5: Say, the AI technology.
Speaker 6: You know, the thing I worry a lot about is
Speaker 6: just things like copyright laws. You know that we're sensitive
Speaker 6: to using that technology and is it safe for us
Speaker 6: to use as we try to figure out ways to
Speaker 6: be more productive inside our bank. From a more macro standpoint,
Speaker 6: I think everybody's trying to figure out. I would kind
Speaker 6: of categorize the AI phenomena today as kind of a
Speaker 6: low fruit to high fruit process. So what everybody's trying
Speaker 6: to do is say, what are the what's the nature
Speaker 6: job of things? Inside my job? They actually can make
Speaker 6: me more productive, just inherently more productive, whether it be
Speaker 6: narrative in a legal brief or let's say taking a
Speaker 6: bank examination report and trying to download things that would
Speaker 6: normally take you hours or days to populate an examination
Speaker 6: report with. I think we're at that kind of cross
Speaker 6: roads where we're trying to figure out what's the easy
Speaker 6: low fruit, and then I think over time, I don't
Speaker 6: know if you're going to get this blast of productivity
Speaker 6: that all of a sudden it's this moment of epiphany.
Speaker 5: I think you're going to.
Speaker 6: I think it's actually perfectly time, because over time, I
Speaker 6: think you're going to be able to integrate this technology
Speaker 6: and you're going to figure out where it's best used. Now, granted,
Speaker 6: and people are doing studies on this, there are some
Speaker 6: jobs that I think I'll give Mary Daily credit coined
Speaker 6: the phrase soul sucking jobs. What are the things that
Speaker 6: people are let's say, more monotonous or boring, or things
Speaker 6: that just don't move needles, that aren't like super interesting
Speaker 6: and challenging. And I think you're going to see that's
Speaker 6: going to be the part of the low fruit process.
Speaker 6: The upper half of the tree. I think you might
Speaker 6: see some real productivity gains.
Speaker 5: But in the end, when.
Speaker 6: You see shifts in like immigration policy, and you see
Speaker 6: workforce is not growing, you're actually going to need to
Speaker 6: integrate that technology to keep a balance in the supply
Speaker 6: and demand. I think jer Paul mentioned this in his
Speaker 6: last conference after the FOMC when he was addressing some
Speaker 6: of the data that came out in the workforce in
Speaker 6: the summer, in some of the adjustments that while it
Speaker 6: was a little bit eye opening, we feel like there's
Speaker 6: a balancing and supplying demand of the labor force today,
Speaker 6: and it's probably why you're not seeing, at least today
Speaker 6: a major uptick in the unemployment rate. It's kind of
Speaker 6: rebalancing itself going into the next couple quarters.
Speaker 2: This was going to be exactly my next question. Since
Speaker 2: you brought up immigration, why don't you go ahead and
Speaker 2: tell us what you're seeing in the labor market right now,
Speaker 2: because the debate that seems to be emerging is that, yes,
Speaker 2: we've seen these big revisions to pay rolls recently, but
Speaker 2: on the other hand, if we have a lot of
Speaker 2: people exiting the workforce because they're aging out of it
Speaker 2: or because of new immigration policies, then maybe that break
Speaker 2: even labor rate doesn't really matter as much anymore, and
Speaker 2: we can tolerate it as long as the employment rate
Speaker 2: stays pretty strong and we are pretty close to full
Speaker 2: employment levels still. So what are you seeing now, how
Speaker 2: would you characterize it?
Speaker 6: So, Tracy, I would say that there was a bit
Speaker 6: of a convergence of things in the first and second quarter.
Speaker 6: So when we talk about being data depend that there's
Speaker 6: two buckets of data that I really focus on. One
Speaker 6: is the kind of a hard data that's issued by
Speaker 6: third parties or internally by government agencies, things that would
Speaker 6: that they track and have tracked for a long long time.
Speaker 6: That emerged with things like unemployment rates. The second bucket
Speaker 6: is really my travels in and around the tenth district.
Speaker 6: Were seven states, twenty million people in businesses trying to
Speaker 6: get four cornered in the district to try to get
Speaker 6: as much real time information. And so the convergence, the
Speaker 6: way I see it, I think a couple things were
Speaker 6: at odds in some of the information and data that
Speaker 6: was that emerged here in the last month or two.
Speaker 6: The first is that there was a lot you know,
Speaker 6: we could hear the word uncertainty everywhere we went. You
Speaker 6: got to change it administrations, you got some big policy rocks,
Speaker 6: you had a budget that was being debated. All those
Speaker 6: things create uncertainty in a business person's mind.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 6: The second thing was a major change in immigration policy,
Speaker 6: and so that created its own set of uncertainties and dynamics.
Speaker 6: And I think what we're finding, at least what we're
Speaker 6: seeing in the tenth district is a lot of those
Speaker 6: things converged over a very short period of time. And
Speaker 6: what normally will happen, and this kind of gets me
Speaker 6: back to my banker days, is businesses will actually they'll
Speaker 6: slow their decisioning down, they'll let's say, freeze hiring for
Speaker 6: a time, They'll be a little bit more conservative what
Speaker 6: they're spend on certain things. And so I actually think
Speaker 6: that affected some of the labor numbers that came out
Speaker 6: in the most recent tabletops we've done with businesses, they
Speaker 6: seem to be digesting a lot of that change and
Speaker 6: those changes. In the last couple of weeks, I've seen
Speaker 6: a level of confidence back in both the business sectors
Speaker 6: and some of the discussions about labor and workforce. So
Speaker 6: we'll see I mean, I would expect maybe a bit
Speaker 6: of a rebound in some of the labor statistics, but
Speaker 6: at the end of the day, it really is about
Speaker 6: balancing the supply and demand of the labor force. What
Speaker 6: emergence from that over the next I'd say a couple
Speaker 6: of quarters.
Speaker 2: It's interesting you talk about maybe people feeling slightly more comfortable,
Speaker 2: at least relatively compared to the beginning of the year recently,
Speaker 2: because I've seen some chatter about maybe an economic reacceleration
Speaker 2: right now. You know, some of the tariffs have now
Speaker 2: been finalized. It looks so far like we haven't had
Speaker 2: that huge inflationary uptick, although, of course producer prices that
Speaker 2: we saw last week maybe tell a slightly different story.
Speaker 2: We did have that retail spending report out on Friday
Speaker 2: that showed people were still spending or quite a lot
Speaker 2: of money. Yeah, do you see signs of a sort
Speaker 2: of like recovery or reacceleration at the moment?
Speaker 5: I don't know.
Speaker 6: I mean, we got good GDP numbers, kind of a
Speaker 6: bit of a rebound sling back in the second quarter
Speaker 6: from the first quarter's weakness, and that had a lot
Speaker 6: of noise in at the first quarter. I think, I
Speaker 6: don't know if I necessarily categorize it as a rebound.
Speaker 6: I think that they're just there's a lot of things
Speaker 6: that are kind of working themselves through. I mean, you've
Speaker 6: got a major major cycle change with a new administration,
Speaker 6: with a lot of really very interesting macro ideas that
Speaker 6: they're putting in place, and you know, I think you
Speaker 6: could make a fair argument that a lot of those
Speaker 6: are pro growth types of policies and processes and programs.
Speaker 6: So I think the nature of what we see in
Speaker 6: both the labor data and the inflation data are going
Speaker 6: to be pretty interesting. And there's a lot yet to
Speaker 6: emerge between even this week and our September FMC meeting,
Speaker 6: But I think the nature of how people are thinking
Speaker 6: about the economy, what the markets are, how they're performing,
Speaker 6: there is an optimism I think shift from it wasn't
Speaker 6: that they were down in the first couple quarters, They
Speaker 6: just weren't sure, and so there was some pausing happening,
Speaker 6: And then I think we're sensing that the nature of
Speaker 6: the next couple cycles as we get into the holiday
Speaker 6: seasons toward the end of the year, there just seems
Speaker 6: to be a pretty good optimism about what's going to
Speaker 6: happen in the next couple quarters.
Speaker 4: Let me us a good question about the latest jobs
Speaker 4: report that actually sort of ties near term cyclical story
Speaker 4: with the broader term theme of the conference, which is
Speaker 4: that the two sectors that basically in the most recent
Speaker 4: jobs report, the two sectors that basically added all of
Speaker 4: the jobs were healthcare and social assistance. And these sectors
Speaker 4: basically add employment virtually every month without fail. And it's
Speaker 4: very easy to connect that to aging, because people who
Speaker 4: are elderly are retired and you need a certain type
Speaker 4: of you know, nurses and so to take care of them.
Speaker 4: But these aren't considered to be particularly high productivity jobs.
Speaker 4: Looking in the medium term, do you worry about this,
Speaker 4: like how much of the productive labor force will be
Speaker 4: necessary to essentially take care of old people and what
Speaker 4: that means for productivity overall.
Speaker 6: So when we kind of interview a lot of our
Speaker 6: healthcare professionals in the district, there is still a huge
Speaker 6: demand need in that sector, and so I think there's
Speaker 6: a big up potential specifically in the healthcare industry. And
Speaker 6: here again, I'm a baby boomer, so I'm using more
Speaker 6: of those services. And as you do experience that, you
Speaker 6: do see that there's a real demand need for healthcare
Speaker 6: professionals in kind of all spectrums of that industry. And
Speaker 6: so I do think that there are pockets by industry
Speaker 6: that could still use a lot.
Speaker 5: Of labor talent.
Speaker 6: I'd say healthcare, certain agricultural industries in the tenth district.
Speaker 6: There's certainly some technology and manufacturing that I think could
Speaker 6: you could see a bit of nice growth in over
Speaker 6: the next several quarters. So I think what's going to
Speaker 6: be interesting, and kind of getting a little bit back
Speaker 6: to the AI conversation, is I think the nature of
Speaker 6: jobs insight industries is going to change. So we talk
Speaker 6: a little bit about this in the Reserve Bank is
Speaker 6: we just launched a new five year strategic plan, and
Speaker 6: embedded in the plan is really to re explore the
Speaker 6: skill sets that are necessary to make this plan happen.
Speaker 6: And I think the things that we used to be
Speaker 6: doing the last five or ten years need to be
Speaker 6: shifted to something else to stay a high performing reserve bank.
Speaker 6: So I do believe in a lot of these industry areas,
Speaker 6: with I think healthcare being at the top of the list,
Speaker 6: I think you're going to see a reskilling in a
Speaker 6: lot of these job areas as some of the jobs
Speaker 6: that can be done by a more artificial intelligence technology
Speaker 6: are going to shift to much more let's say intellectual
Speaker 6: or behavioral based job skills going forward. So I think
Speaker 6: here again, I think that's The message I give to
Speaker 6: our business associates in the tenth district is tell us
Speaker 6: how you're reskilling your workforce.
Speaker 5: Because I think that's where AI is.
Speaker 6: Going to really play a big role. You can't be
Speaker 6: static in the job you're doing. You have to reimagine
Speaker 6: that job with new technologies.
Speaker 2: You know, you mentioned markets earlier, and clearly there's a
Speaker 2: lot of enthusiasm about AI still in the markets, and
Speaker 2: that's one of the reasons we've seen stocks, you know,
Speaker 2: hovering around all time highs and credit spreads are now
Speaker 2: at what like a thirty year low. Basically, talk to
Speaker 2: us about where you see rates at the moment in
Speaker 2: terms of their restrictiveness, because some of your fellow FED
Speaker 2: presidents will say that they think rates are still restrictive.
Speaker 2: And then when I look at something like credit spreads
Speaker 2: at you know, a three decade low, I think, actually,
Speaker 2: this doesn't look that restrictive to me.
Speaker 4: And with inflation right, and with inflation.
Speaker 2: Still above target, how restrictive are rates at the moment.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's a it's a great question, and I've been
Speaker 6: very public I believe there. I would call them modestly restrictive.
Speaker 6: They're not overly restrictive, and I think that what we
Speaker 6: have to be careful of is kind of rebasing our
Speaker 6: decisioning on rates. And I think the markets do this
Speaker 6: because look, I'm a former banker. Bankers and bank clients
Speaker 6: they love low credit rates. They like lower rates because
Speaker 6: they can perform better on their capital base. So I
Speaker 6: understand that piece. But I think we talk about being
Speaker 6: range bound to a degree. I like to think about
Speaker 6: you know, I love the nineties, right, so if you
Speaker 6: think about how hard the eighties were. As we emerged
Speaker 6: into the nineties, we had a technology surge, and if
Speaker 6: you watched or looked at the nature of the economy,
Speaker 6: it performed early well, but there were monetary policy was
Speaker 6: became a bit of a wave. So you would start
Speaker 6: to make decisions where if you saw things happening in
Speaker 6: either the you know, your dual mandate, you're you know,
Speaker 6: keeping stable prices and full employment, you would adjust that
Speaker 6: policy rate. And when things got maybe a little bit hotter,
Speaker 6: and then as they cooled, you bring them down.
Speaker 5: But it was a nice range bound process for me.
Speaker 6: The experience of the last let's say two or three shocks,
Speaker 6: so you had theight shock, you had the twenty twenty
Speaker 6: pandemic shock. You know, you're pushing rates down to deminimous levels.
Speaker 6: You probably don't want rates down there that low because
Speaker 6: if they're down there that low, you're trying to pick
Speaker 6: something off its back, and so you're trying to create
Speaker 6: a rate environment that creates stimulus.
Speaker 5: So I think right now we seem to be in
Speaker 5: a really good place.
Speaker 6: And so you know, it almost becomes more difficult in
Speaker 6: the debate on rates whether they should be higher or
Speaker 6: lower when you're at the margin versus when you're trying
Speaker 6: to use a monetary policy as more of a blunt
Speaker 6: force instrument to try to pound a high inflation rate
Speaker 6: down like.
Speaker 5: We did in the twenty twenty three cycles.
Speaker 6: So it's actually going from kind of a blunt force
Speaker 6: tool to actually more surgical And then the debate gets
Speaker 6: very interesting about where that you should turn those dials
Speaker 6: relative to the data that you're seeing. So it actually
Speaker 6: becomes more difficult when you get on the margin in
Speaker 6: that range bound area versus when you're trying to really
Speaker 6: sledge the economy on the inflation side down.
Speaker 4: So Tracy mentioned that estimating the neutral rate of interest
Speaker 4: is a sort of difficult concept in any period. But
Speaker 4: there is this view that the neutral rate of interest
Speaker 4: today in twenty twenty five is significantly higher than it
Speaker 4: was in twenty nineteen, And probably some of the best
Speaker 4: evidence for that is the fact that even though the
Speaker 4: market is anticipating rate cuts in the short term over
Speaker 4: the next couple of years, that the long term rates
Speaker 4: still fairly elevated. Curves deepen higher rates for longer.
Speaker 2: What changed.
Speaker 4: What's the difference between twenty twenty five and twenty nineteen.
Speaker 4: It looks like the neutral rate of interest is so
Speaker 4: much durably higher.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Joey, this is really interesting science. With the policy
Speaker 6: side of our mandate, we have some some influence on
Speaker 6: the short end of the curve, right so, but so
Speaker 6: taking the long end, the whole concept of the long rate,
Speaker 6: it has what we call term premiums in it, right,
Speaker 6: you know, And you have to kind of Subka doesn't.
Speaker 2: Believe in the term premium, but I do.
Speaker 5: I do, Sure, I don't.
Speaker 6: I don't know if I believe in it, but I
Speaker 6: think there are pieces of a long rate that have
Speaker 6: sections of it that the market is going to try
Speaker 6: to digest.
Speaker 4: Can I just say crazy things that I have a
Speaker 4: complete crank. But every once in a while we get
Speaker 4: a guest who's like, no, there's something to Joey ski.
Speaker 3: No, no, no.
Speaker 2: Ever, once we get a guest who will say, you know,
Speaker 2: it's a nuanced thing, which it is.
Speaker 3: We all agree, keep going, keep going, okay.
Speaker 6: So so that so what I I try, what I'm
Speaker 6: trying to do with Let's say the concept of the
Speaker 6: long end of the curve is you've got issues of Okay,
Speaker 6: some of the market's going to say they're going to
Speaker 6: be influenced by the prospect of inflation because you have
Speaker 6: to build a price into the long rate for inflation.
Speaker 6: Some of them are going to say, it's a demand
Speaker 6: and supply issue with the debt that's trying to be financed,
Speaker 6: both government and private debt. The nature of that long rate,
Speaker 6: there's pieces of it that are going to influence it.
Speaker 6: It's interesting, you know, I talk about the Fed balance
Speaker 6: sheet quite a bit. It's hard to second guess what
Speaker 6: we did in the eight and twenty twenty cycle with
Speaker 6: our balance sheet relative to trying to keep the long
Speaker 6: rate somewhat in submission. So actually the duration of our
Speaker 6: balance sheet is influencing the long rate to some extent,
Speaker 6: which I think is in a positive way. So when
Speaker 6: you think about it, the treasury duration is about four
Speaker 6: or five years. Are balance sheets about a little over
Speaker 6: eight years in duration. So that's that quantitative twisting that
Speaker 6: people talk about. So we're actually influencing the long rite
Speaker 6: a little bit in our balance sheet in a positive way.
Speaker 6: But I think over time, as long as the market
Speaker 6: believes that debt.
Speaker 5: Can be financed and there's not a lot of.
Speaker 6: Inflation expectation, you're seeing a long end of the curve
Speaker 6: drift of downboard.
Speaker 4: So I'm going to go to what I think, you know,
Speaker 4: what is maybe the hot button topic of the moment.
Speaker 4: The formal theme of this year's Jackson Hole is of
Speaker 4: course about the labor market and various trends. The subtext theme,
Speaker 4: and I think this is going to be a lot
Speaker 4: of interest, is the attacks on the FED and concerns
Speaker 4: about central bank independent Just to your point about what's
Speaker 4: driving that long end of the curve. If there are
Speaker 4: concerns that the political will is no longer there to
Speaker 4: keep an independent central bank, if there are concerns that
Speaker 4: in the future that the FED will more be at
Speaker 4: the beck and call of elected officials. Could that also
Speaker 4: be a factor in driving up the long end of
Speaker 4: the curve, as investors may rationally presume that a future
Speaker 4: FED may not be as committed to stable prices as
Speaker 4: the current FED.
Speaker 5: Wow, that's Joe, Actually, there's so much. There's such an onion,
Speaker 5: and what I know.
Speaker 4: I know, but I try, but so strip away all
Speaker 4: of my throat clearing, which I felt was necessary. If
Speaker 4: there is concern that there is no longer the political
Speaker 4: will to maintain an independent central bank, that there is
Speaker 4: concern that a future FED may not be as committed
Speaker 4: to inflation fighting as it ought to be to keep
Speaker 4: that two percent goal, could that be a factor driving
Speaker 4: up rates at the long end?
Speaker 2: Peel the onion for us?
Speaker 6: We have time, Okay, So the quick answer is, I
Speaker 6: don't know. I guess I wouldn't. I don't see or
Speaker 6: hear that acknowledge the debank eight Joe, and I believe. Look,
Speaker 6: our country is going to be two hundred and fifty
Speaker 6: years old next year. It's still the great experiment. It's
Speaker 6: built on legislation. And what's fascinating to me is the
Speaker 6: issue of FED independence. It's codified, right, so you know,
Speaker 6: we have a mandate. It's legislative that legislative authority can
Speaker 6: shift and change. But it's hard to argue the efficacy
Speaker 6: of the independence piece. I mean, I think there's a
Speaker 6: bit of perfection in me being able to go to
Speaker 6: a table with eighteen other really committed and bright people
Speaker 6: to try to keep this economy on a level rail.
Speaker 6: I talk to people about the economy being this big,
Speaker 6: very massive train, the largest most powerful train economic train
Speaker 6: in the world, thirty trillion dollars, and you've got administration
Speaker 6: and in Congress that really is running the train were
Speaker 6: the American people are are riding on that train. Now,
Speaker 6: for the FED, the FED is not the train. The
Speaker 6: FED is actually the rails. It simplifies that to me
Speaker 6: to think about the two rails being you know, stable
Speaker 6: prices in full employment, and for us, it's really it
Speaker 6: helps us not to have to worry about the market
Speaker 6: or the politic of things, to try to keep the
Speaker 6: rails steady and level so that train can go fast.
Speaker 6: And so the nature of what we do in those
Speaker 6: two rails and the decisioning we do is really more
Speaker 6: balancing than it is trying to shoot towards some predetermined place.
Speaker 6: We know two percent is a good place to be
Speaker 6: for inflation. I think time has tested that we know
Speaker 6: full employment is a really very positive friction to the
Speaker 6: stable price mandate. So kind of getting back to the
Speaker 6: independence thing, healthy friction in a conversation just makes the
Speaker 6: Republic stronger in my opinion. So I'm happy with the debate.
Speaker 6: I'm happy to express it, but frankly, it's it's less
Speaker 6: important that I express it as what you and your
Speaker 6: listeners believe that independence does this to the decisioning of
Speaker 6: that massive economy.
Speaker 5: I think it works.
Speaker 6: I think you see other countries that disentangle it to
Speaker 6: the body politic, and I think it's very difficult to
Speaker 6: keep economies level set when you don't have that independence piece.
Speaker 2: Well, on this topic, let me ask I guess a
Speaker 2: blunter independence question, because Joe's right that this is, you know,
Speaker 2: this is the unofficial theme of the conference. I think
Speaker 2: and you yourself have previously stressed the importance of FED independence.
Speaker 2: So are there steps that the FED should be taking
Speaker 2: in order to, you know, not necessarily improve its independence
Speaker 2: or even protect its independence, but to convince people like
Speaker 2: us and the markets that it is truly making decisions independently.
Speaker 5: So the proof is.
Speaker 6: In the putting about you know, how is our policy
Speaker 6: action affecting the level setting of those rails. And so look,
Speaker 6: we should be held to task that are we making
Speaker 6: decisions that are rationalized on sound data and that they
Speaker 6: are in compliance with the congressional mandates that we have,
Speaker 6: and so we are kind of duty bound to that framework.
Speaker 6: And so I would say there's a measure of perfection
Speaker 6: in the fact that even in the FED structure, where
Speaker 6: you've got seven Board of governors and twelve reserve bank presidents,
Speaker 6: where the nature of just how those individuals are seeded
Speaker 6: with let's say Senate confirmation, a White House nomination for
Speaker 6: the Board of Governors, and then the twelve reserve banks
Speaker 6: having their own in mark get in district boards, that
Speaker 6: really kind of act as a ballast to the whole
Speaker 6: independence architecture. So I actually think that the nature of
Speaker 6: how was structured in nineteen thirteen is still effective today.
Speaker 6: We're just continuing to learn about how to make policy
Speaker 6: better relative to what to the cycles in the economy.
Speaker 6: Think about the twenties and thirties, think about the nineteen
Speaker 6: seventies and eighties cycle. We're still learning as a body
Speaker 6: to get this right, because we've got this amazing economy
Speaker 6: thirty trillion of one hundred trillion, and if we're healthy,
Speaker 6: the globe can be healthy. And that's the way I
Speaker 6: see our role, and that's why I think independence matters.
Speaker 3: All Right.
Speaker 4: I have another question that I forgot to ask Mary
Speaker 4: daily and now it's and I've been thinking about it,
Speaker 4: and I was like, Okay, now you're here at the
Speaker 4: most recent FED decision through two descents, which is not
Speaker 4: crazy to have descents happened, but they're like fairly rare,
Speaker 4: et cetera. Why are descents rare? How would you articulate
Speaker 4: why descents are rare? Because I think this again could
Speaker 4: be relevant in the future depending on who the next
Speaker 4: FED chair is. Are they rare because generally speaking, you
Speaker 4: and your colleagues roughly arrive at the same view of
Speaker 4: what's appropriate policy. Or are they rare because historically, when
Speaker 4: there is some marginal difference, the regional FED presidents and
Speaker 4: the other governors tend to defer to the judgment of
Speaker 4: the chair.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's I love that that question, and so I'd
Speaker 6: maybe frame it in a couple of ways. One is,
Speaker 6: I think in a lot of ways the cents are healthy.
Speaker 6: I think there are times when we get kind of
Speaker 6: criticized as being kind of fed speak.
Speaker 5: You know that they're always aligned.
Speaker 4: Two is rare, sometimes there's one frequently is there? So
Speaker 4: what's the reason why generally speaking they are pretty rare.
Speaker 6: So so here again, we're at the margin on things
Speaker 6: like the policy rate today, So the data could shift
Speaker 6: people's opinions one way or the other on the dual
Speaker 6: mandate relative to their vote on dissent or not. So
Speaker 6: I think the two descents were fairly rational public statements
Speaker 6: about concern about the the labor market and the labor force.
Speaker 6: There was great debate, and so you're trying to figure
Speaker 6: out where do you settle on the debate. The other
Speaker 6: influence really is the chair. I've worked with Jerome Powell
Speaker 6: for a couple of years now. He's a principled he's committed.
Speaker 6: I think he appreciates in his background and experience trying
Speaker 6: to collaborate with people at the table to get a
Speaker 6: sense of where they are in their opinions of where
Speaker 6: the economy is and where the policy rate should be.
Speaker 6: And I've really enjoyed working with them, and we don't
Speaker 6: always agree, but at the nature of once you get
Speaker 6: to the table, you've got to make a decision. And
Speaker 6: I think that you just have to have good data,
Speaker 6: good back ground, good discussions in your district about where
Speaker 6: do you think that the policy rate should go?
Speaker 5: And so I think it really does.
Speaker 6: It's healthy discussion and at times, I suppose it's going
Speaker 6: to be a votive dissent a time or two. But
Speaker 6: we're in the margin play now relative to where that
Speaker 6: policy rate should be.
Speaker 2: Okay, So speaking of where the policy rate should go
Speaker 2: and healthy discussion, obviously there's a lot of stuff happening
Speaker 2: between now and the September meeting. We have the Jackson
Speaker 2: Hole Economic Symposium itself. We have a couple more big
Speaker 2: data points. What specific data or developments would signal to
Speaker 2: you that perhaps it is time to start really thinking
Speaker 2: or advocating for that rate cut. What are you watching
Speaker 2: out for?
Speaker 6: Yeah, so i'd be watching what a lot of us watch,
Speaker 6: you know, some of the inflation data. There's quite a
Speaker 6: bit of it going to come out in the next
Speaker 6: four or five weeks. Certainly we're going to be very
Speaker 6: determined to network are inside the tenth district about what's
Speaker 6: happening inside labor and the workforce, just try to get
Speaker 6: a better be on where unemployment is and supply and
Speaker 6: demand where that is. So I think those are the
Speaker 6: principal data points. Then I think that that's what's beautiful
Speaker 6: about the Jackson Hole timing. I think there's going to
Speaker 6: be a lot of discussion, not just domestically but internationally.
Speaker 6: I mean, we've got one hundred and fifty people experts
Speaker 6: in their own rights, central bankers, some of those most
Speaker 6: amazing economists on the globe, all four corners, just to
Speaker 6: get a calibration of where everybody is just globally, and
Speaker 6: I think we'll be able to emerge with solid decisioning
Speaker 6: in September. We'll see where that goes. Like I said,
Speaker 6: when I put everything in the basket, it just seems
Speaker 6: like we're in a pretty good place right now, but
Speaker 6: look that data can shift and change, and we're in
Speaker 6: kind of, as I mentioned, kind of the nuance of
Speaker 6: the range of where we want to be with policy rate,
Speaker 6: and we'll see where it goes in September.
Speaker 4: My last question is, and it's basically just a restatement
Speaker 4: of Tracy's earlier question, but I'm still trying to wrap
Speaker 4: my head around this. You know, Americans have experienced years
Speaker 4: of above target inflation. It's still running a little warm.
Speaker 4: As Tracy mentioned, stock markets at all time high, credit
Speaker 4: spreads very low, and again inflation still warm. And you
Speaker 4: also say that you think the labor market is all right,
Speaker 4: it's fine, that maybe businesses have a little confidence just
Speaker 4: articulate what is it therefore that's restrictive or even even
Speaker 4: modestly restrictive about the current stance. Well, so you're how
Speaker 4: do you demonstrate that it's restrictive.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, So look, there's a lot of market opinion
Speaker 6: about kind of the nature of where the policy rate
Speaker 6: is to say, let's say where the two year treasury is,
Speaker 6: and just that you know, everybody has kind of that
Speaker 6: they go back to this whole neutral rate conversation, which
Speaker 6: I think has some value. I mean, the are star
Speaker 6: processes of value. There's going to be some really interesting
Speaker 6: discussion on the tailor rule.
Speaker 5: I mean, some of the tailor rule.
Speaker 6: Data today would suggest that maybe rates ought to be
Speaker 6: a little higher. So we're gonna, I think we're going
Speaker 6: to really bear down on the nature of how restrictive
Speaker 6: things might be. And to your point, Joe, with all
Speaker 6: the data sets that you just espoused, along with the
Speaker 6: dual mandate data sets. It just seems like we're in
Speaker 6: a pretty good place. I don't think we should not
Speaker 6: talk about it. Would there be a scenario where rates
Speaker 6: could go higher. On the policy side, the PPI was
Speaker 6: a bit eye opening.
Speaker 5: We'll see where the CPE comes.
Speaker 6: In and later here in August and September. Not that
Speaker 6: that necessarily it needs to go higher, but you have
Speaker 6: to be willing to anchor yourself in side those mandates.
Speaker 6: So if in fact you see something that needs more restriction,
Speaker 6: you should shouldn't be unafraid to act. That's our job.
Speaker 6: So we'll see. But right now, it seems like we're
Speaker 6: in a good place. By the way, we brought that
Speaker 6: policy right down one hundred basis points since a year ago,
Speaker 6: so it's.
Speaker 5: Not like we haven't moved it.
Speaker 6: And the yield curve seems to be in a pretty
Speaker 6: good place too, And so I don't know. I like
Speaker 6: what I'm seeing right now, with a bit of caution on,
Speaker 6: let's just keep our eye on this inflation number as
Speaker 6: they emerge.
Speaker 2: So I have one more question, because I realized it
Speaker 2: would be bad if we had you on and we
Speaker 2: didn't ask you at least one banking question given your
Speaker 2: previous career history. But the other forgotten theme of our
Speaker 2: macroeconomic policy moment is quantitative tightening, right QT is still
Speaker 2: going on in the background, and recently we've seen use
Speaker 2: of our the REPO facility going to less than fifty billion,
Speaker 2: and so people are talking again about are we getting
Speaker 2: to a point where we are going to see bank
Speaker 2: preserves start to drop and maybe they will become scarce.
Speaker 2: I know the FED has been watching this. Is funding
Speaker 2: on your radar at the moment? Is there a possibility
Speaker 2: that we do start to see some signs of additional
Speaker 2: stress in the funding market?
Speaker 5: Okay?
Speaker 6: So I would say that right now there's a I
Speaker 6: think a general consensus that we are in an abundant
Speaker 6: reserves policy framework. But there's also debate on both the
Speaker 6: size of the FED balance sheet and the size of
Speaker 6: the reserves in the system. There's actually actually very good
Speaker 6: debate relative to the cost or non cost of ample
Speaker 6: or abundant reserves in the system. Does it create an inefficiency?
Speaker 6: Does it create too much of a footprint of the
Speaker 6: FED into the markets? I will say that I'm encouraged
Speaker 6: that we're in a project now that's I think, going
Speaker 6: to modernize the discount window process. So I think there's
Speaker 6: an opportunity where the FED, as the nation central bank,
Speaker 6: can make the activities inside the discount window much more
Speaker 6: fungible and much easier for banks to access. And I
Speaker 6: think you could start to see the in future years
Speaker 6: where reserves and discount window act or react in a
Speaker 6: positive way, where you can actually see a smaller footprint
Speaker 6: of reserves, where banks are much more comfortable having the
Speaker 6: backstop and having a much much easier way to access
Speaker 6: reserves through the discount window and other tools as a
Speaker 6: way to make the market comfortable that there's plenty of
Speaker 6: liquidity in the system.
Speaker 5: So I'm excited about that.
Speaker 6: It's very timely that we do that because here again,
Speaker 6: two years ago we launched FED now. So I think,
Speaker 6: what's the other fascinating thing about the ecosystem of banking
Speaker 6: is we are moving to an instant payment economy. I mean,
Speaker 6: you're starting to see even businesses start to think about
Speaker 6: paying people every day, you know, and just the nature
Speaker 6: of how we move money instantly seven days a week,
Speaker 6: twenty four hours a day, the nature of that is
Speaker 6: really going to be a very interesting dynamic, and it's
Speaker 6: going to be necessary for the Central Bank to be
Speaker 6: accommodative to the immediacy of that money movement, and so
Speaker 6: I'm excited about some of the conversations we're having to
Speaker 6: make that to make our system a money movement movement.
Speaker 5: Much more modern.
Speaker 2: All right, well, Jeff, we're going to have to end
Speaker 2: it there. We could go on forever, but we'll save
Speaker 2: some of it for in person at Jackson Hall.
Speaker 5: I so sorry, thank you, so look forward to that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, thank you so much, so much for coming on
Speaker 2: and giving us a preview, and we'll see.
Speaker 3: You in Wyoming. Very welcome to see that, Joe.
Speaker 2: There was a lot to pick out of that conversation,
Speaker 2: and it was a really good preview of I think
Speaker 2: what's going to be like hot button topics. Yeah, at
Speaker 2: the event itself, but one sentence kind of jumped out
Speaker 2: at both of us, I think, which is the idea that, well,
Speaker 2: you know, there are scenarios where interest rates you could
Speaker 2: argue interest rates should be higher here.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that was a little bit interesting, and he phrased
Speaker 4: it in an interesting way. And I have to go
Speaker 4: back to the tape because it was like I think
Speaker 4: a double negative in there. But I mean, look, you
Speaker 4: said it stock share record high credits for is a
Speaker 4: record low. He characterized, maybe we've already seen the worst
Speaker 4: of the labor market for ventum for twenty twenty five,
Speaker 4: with the unemployment rates still in the low fours and
Speaker 4: inflation is still warm.
Speaker 3: Well, I know.
Speaker 2: He also he pushed back on the specific use of
Speaker 2: re economic reacceleration that word, but it is true we
Speaker 2: have seen, in addition to some of the data like
Speaker 2: turning negative or showing a slow down, we have seen
Speaker 2: some of the data start to tick up at least
Speaker 2: compared to like recent months.
Speaker 4: So this is an interesting thing. We got that recent
Speaker 4: jobs report and you say, oh, we're like slowing down.
Speaker 4: But when we did our recent episode with Scanda, he
Speaker 4: made the good point like, well, actually, maybe that data
Speaker 4: was weak because that was the immediate post Terra volatility
Speaker 4: and you slammed the brakes on the hiring and so forth.
Speaker 4: And assuming that the uncertainty measures have come down certainly
Speaker 4: since the middle of April, it is plausible that we've
Speaker 4: already seen the softest labor market of twenty twenty five. Anyway,
Speaker 4: lots are interesting there and I think like it's a
Speaker 4: really good theme. I mean too, it's a good theme
Speaker 4: for this year's conference because it does feel like some
Speaker 4: of the things that are happening immediately right now also
Speaker 4: intersect with long term definitely, and so there's a lot
Speaker 4: of moving parts.
Speaker 2: It's one of those conference themes that is not just
Speaker 2: like theoretical, you know, ten or twenty years in the distance.
Speaker 2: It's sort of like, yeah, it's very much now. And
Speaker 2: on that note, you know, we're going to have some
Speaker 2: good episodes that we record with people who are presenting
Speaker 2: papers almost time, very.
Speaker 4: Excited, So listeners should be prepared for most Jackson a
Speaker 4: Hole content to come.
Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, shall we leave it there.
Speaker 4: Let's leave it there.
Speaker 2: This has been another episode of the Odd Loots podcast.
Speaker 2: I'm Tracy Alloway. You can follow me at Tracy Alloway.
Speaker 4: And I'm Jill Wisenthal. You can follow me at the Stalwart.
Speaker 4: Follow our producers Kerman Rodriguez at Kerman armand dash Ol
Speaker 4: Bennett a Dashbod, Kile Brooks and Kilbrooks. For more Odd
Speaker 4: Logs content, go to Bloomberg dot com slash odd lotch
Speaker 4: We're the daily newsletter and all of our episodes and
Speaker 4: you can chat about all of these topics twenty four
Speaker 4: seven in our discord discord do gg Slash outline.
Speaker 2: And if you enjoy Odd Lots, if you like it
Speaker 2: when we go to Jackson Hole, then please leave us
Speaker 2: a positive review on your favorite podcast platform. And remember,
Speaker 2: if you are a Bloomberg subscriber, you can listen to
Speaker 2: all of our episodes.
Speaker 3: Absolutely add free.
Speaker 2: All you have to do is find the Bloomberg channel
Speaker 2: on Apple Podcasts and follow the instructions there. Thanks for
Speaker 2: listening
Speaker 6: In