WEBVTT - Macron Is a Modern Monarch, Fenby Says

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:02.920
<v Speaker 1>Brought you by Bank of America, Mary Lynch. Investing in

0:00:03.000 --> 0:00:07.960
<v Speaker 1>local communities, economies and a sustainable future. That's a power

0:00:08.080 --> 0:00:12.360
<v Speaker 1>of global connections, Mary Lynch, Pierce Fenner and Smith Incorporated

0:00:12.760 --> 0:00:26.400
<v Speaker 1>Member s I p C. Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast.

0:00:26.440 --> 0:00:29.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm Tom Keene with David Gura. Daily we bring you

0:00:29.960 --> 0:00:34.800
<v Speaker 1>insight from the best of economics, finance, investment, and international relations.

0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:40.760
<v Speaker 1>Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot Com,

0:00:40.800 --> 0:00:48.560
<v Speaker 1>and of course on the Bloomberg. This is a real joy,

0:00:48.720 --> 0:00:50.600
<v Speaker 1>really a high point that we planned for this trip.

0:00:50.640 --> 0:00:53.880
<v Speaker 1>A conversation with Sir Howard Davies of RBS and of

0:00:53.920 --> 0:00:57.520
<v Speaker 1>course formerly in Seance PO and LC and Jonathan Fenby

0:00:57.560 --> 0:00:59.880
<v Speaker 1>of T S. Lombard and of course Sir Howard and

0:00:59.880 --> 0:01:03.920
<v Speaker 1>I celebrate his wonderful one volume on Francis. Mr McCraw

0:01:04.040 --> 0:01:07.160
<v Speaker 1>mentioned in your book only briefly at the end, and

0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:08.720
<v Speaker 1>I'm afraid but I hope there'll be a new edition

0:01:08.720 --> 0:01:12.920
<v Speaker 1>out before afterward. Fair enough, he's only just come onto

0:01:12.920 --> 0:01:16.160
<v Speaker 1>the politics got any rapid form? What did you think

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:19.520
<v Speaker 1>of the lou of celebration and that long walk It

0:01:19.800 --> 0:01:22.760
<v Speaker 1>wasn't something I would think John Fenne would approve. Oh

0:01:23.080 --> 0:01:24.959
<v Speaker 1>I did. I thought it was tremendous. I sat there

0:01:24.959 --> 0:01:27.160
<v Speaker 1>watching it on television and I thought, hey, you know

0:01:27.200 --> 0:01:29.399
<v Speaker 1>this guy, he's got the drama right. Whoever? Come on?

0:01:29.480 --> 0:01:32.400
<v Speaker 1>He's walking in the palace, the palace of the sixteenth

0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:35.640
<v Speaker 1>century kings, which you touched on early in your book.

0:01:35.720 --> 0:01:38.080
<v Speaker 1>Was there a symbolism there of a museum that we

0:01:38.120 --> 0:01:40.640
<v Speaker 1>all go to? Or is it the symbolism or royalty

0:01:40.720 --> 0:01:43.440
<v Speaker 1>from another time and place. He's a kind of modern monarch,

0:01:43.520 --> 0:01:44.760
<v Speaker 1>I think, And he was playing that and it was

0:01:44.760 --> 0:01:47.920
<v Speaker 1>wonderful if you looked at it. When the replays the shadow,

0:01:48.080 --> 0:01:50.480
<v Speaker 1>his shadow falling behind on the gateway as he came

0:01:50.520 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 1>through was absolutely out of a first rate film. He

0:01:54.080 --> 0:01:56.280
<v Speaker 1>was looking towards the carouselo as well. I can you

0:01:56.280 --> 0:02:01.240
<v Speaker 1>think about kind of Napoleon and you know it phoneography

0:02:02.960 --> 0:02:06.640
<v Speaker 1>when you think about what happens next. We heard it

0:02:06.680 --> 0:02:10.000
<v Speaker 1>described earlier as a as a four parts store. Absolutely,

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:12.720
<v Speaker 1>and we're through two of them too, are still to come?

0:02:14.560 --> 0:02:17.000
<v Speaker 1>Is the easy bit over for Mr Macrol? Does I

0:02:17.080 --> 0:02:19.639
<v Speaker 1>get harder from here? I think in retrospect, yes, I

0:02:19.639 --> 0:02:22.240
<v Speaker 1>mean it's not never easy to win the presidency of France,

0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:24.400
<v Speaker 1>but he had such a lot of luck with the

0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:26.800
<v Speaker 1>or and other people, with the socialist splitting and so on.

0:02:26.840 --> 0:02:29.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean, you know this was handed to him on

0:02:29.040 --> 0:02:31.160
<v Speaker 1>a silver plate, and anybody up against the Penn in

0:02:31.160 --> 0:02:34.120
<v Speaker 1>the second round was going to win. So yes, but

0:02:34.200 --> 0:02:37.120
<v Speaker 1>actually there's probably five more acts to come. That are

0:02:37.120 --> 0:02:39.919
<v Speaker 1>the two rounds of the parliamentary election on June the

0:02:39.919 --> 0:02:42.799
<v Speaker 1>eleventh and June, and then I would guess there will

0:02:42.840 --> 0:02:46.480
<v Speaker 1>be a lot of street theater after that, from the

0:02:46.520 --> 0:02:50.120
<v Speaker 1>hard left to menon sean people with Lapen approving. So

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:53.000
<v Speaker 1>we're probably into a long running saga. What kind of

0:02:53.040 --> 0:02:55.040
<v Speaker 1>a person? And I mean to get both your take

0:02:55.080 --> 0:02:58.799
<v Speaker 1>on this, does he need to appoint as prime minister? Howard? Well,

0:02:58.840 --> 0:03:00.880
<v Speaker 1>I think it depends on what kind of majority there

0:03:00.960 --> 0:03:04.920
<v Speaker 1>is in parliament. I mean, if there are them before Well,

0:03:05.400 --> 0:03:07.000
<v Speaker 1>I think that there will be an interim there's a

0:03:07.040 --> 0:03:10.720
<v Speaker 1>short term prime minister. Yes, I think that might stay

0:03:10.720 --> 0:03:13.639
<v Speaker 1>on if the unexpected happens and all marsh his party

0:03:13.919 --> 0:03:17.280
<v Speaker 1>gets a majority or close to a working majority in

0:03:17.320 --> 0:03:20.359
<v Speaker 1>the parliamentary election. Sir Howard, I I analyze everything through

0:03:20.440 --> 0:03:23.920
<v Speaker 1>uber drivers. I was going orally into the hotel and

0:03:24.040 --> 0:03:26.400
<v Speaker 1>the uber driver. The first thing he said is Madame

0:03:26.480 --> 0:03:29.839
<v Speaker 1>Legarde should be helping out. Should Christine Lagarde come back

0:03:29.880 --> 0:03:33.880
<v Speaker 1>to France and assist Mr mccron. Well, the difficulty about

0:03:33.960 --> 0:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>Christine Lagard in francis of course that you know that

0:03:36.520 --> 0:03:40.600
<v Speaker 1>there was a legal case which where she was kind

0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:44.520
<v Speaker 1>of convicted but then not sentenced them and so whereas

0:03:44.560 --> 0:03:47.560
<v Speaker 1>that throw the forgotten about in Washington and elsewhere in France,

0:03:47.560 --> 0:03:50.240
<v Speaker 1>I'm afraid that still does resonate. So it's not completely

0:03:50.240 --> 0:03:54.840
<v Speaker 1>straightforward for Christine Lagarde to take a senior position in France.

0:03:54.880 --> 0:03:59.120
<v Speaker 1>How do somebody from that international world more likely to

0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:04.040
<v Speaker 1>come in? Is about me? Yes, yes, much much more

0:04:04.040 --> 0:04:07.400
<v Speaker 1>straightforward person. And of course you know that Madame lepen

0:04:07.480 --> 0:04:11.560
<v Speaker 1>did win the vote saying anti globalization, and there's nobody

0:04:11.600 --> 0:04:14.600
<v Speaker 1>more globalization than Christine Lagarde. So I'm not sure you'd

0:04:14.600 --> 0:04:17.000
<v Speaker 1>want to go there with Macron. Lagarde s let me

0:04:17.000 --> 0:04:19.520
<v Speaker 1>start with you. If we're doing hope in audacity, reducs

0:04:19.520 --> 0:04:21.760
<v Speaker 1>here with Mr mcgrahan, what is the audacity that the

0:04:21.839 --> 0:04:25.680
<v Speaker 1>new president of France needs? Well, I think he does

0:04:25.800 --> 0:04:30.080
<v Speaker 1>need to do some quite symbolic things on labor market reform,

0:04:30.400 --> 0:04:33.080
<v Speaker 1>because otherwise I think the rest of the world will

0:04:33.080 --> 0:04:36.279
<v Speaker 1>not believe that anything's changed in France. Unfortunately, some of

0:04:36.320 --> 0:04:38.120
<v Speaker 1>those things you can argue up in Hill and down

0:04:38.200 --> 0:04:40.240
<v Speaker 1>Dale about thirty five hour week and how significant it

0:04:40.320 --> 0:04:44.840
<v Speaker 1>really is, but internationally it has achieved a totemic status

0:04:44.880 --> 0:04:47.880
<v Speaker 1>and you have to do something about that because otherwise

0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:51.599
<v Speaker 1>I think your rhetoric about reopening France for business and

0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:53.800
<v Speaker 1>attracting it with investment will not work. Aren't you just

0:04:53.880 --> 0:04:56.400
<v Speaker 1>challenging headlong into the unions if you do that? Isn't

0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 1>there a workaround? Isn't there a smarter way of doing it?

0:04:58.920 --> 0:05:01.040
<v Speaker 1>It's not so much question us. I mean, the unions

0:05:01.040 --> 0:05:04.040
<v Speaker 1>are not that significant. Frankly, they don't have very much membership.

0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:07.320
<v Speaker 1>It's more the street union. It's the street and also

0:05:07.360 --> 0:05:09.160
<v Speaker 1>the union is more nuanced so it used to be,

0:05:09.160 --> 0:05:12.240
<v Speaker 1>because the CFDT, which has always been the reformist union,

0:05:12.480 --> 0:05:15.360
<v Speaker 1>now has more members than the hardline CGS. But nevertheless,

0:05:15.400 --> 0:05:17.280
<v Speaker 1>in the point, well, isn't the point still stand that

0:05:17.279 --> 0:05:20.880
<v Speaker 1>that don't work around it, don't work against it. Well,

0:05:20.920 --> 0:05:23.159
<v Speaker 1>this is gonna be difficult. Everything that car would do,

0:05:23.200 --> 0:05:24.839
<v Speaker 1>the kind of thing, how it's talking about on the

0:05:24.880 --> 0:05:27.760
<v Speaker 1>working week, on cutting corporate attacks, which is the highest

0:05:27.800 --> 0:05:31.200
<v Speaker 1>in the EU, which is on exempting investments from the

0:05:31.200 --> 0:05:33.360
<v Speaker 1>wealth tax and sold. All these, of course will be

0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:36.040
<v Speaker 1>seen by the left and by the street as proof

0:05:36.200 --> 0:05:39.360
<v Speaker 1>that yes, indeed, here's the puppet of international globalized finance.

0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:41.760
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to say this worldwide. You've said it for weeks.

0:05:41.839 --> 0:05:44.640
<v Speaker 1>John Ferby's book, You rush through this history with a

0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:48.240
<v Speaker 1>beautiful writing skill in one of the great enigmas within

0:05:48.240 --> 0:05:51.680
<v Speaker 1>the book has just started to stay Compare McCraw is.

0:05:51.720 --> 0:05:54.320
<v Speaker 1>We heard an interview after an interview with Valories just

0:05:54.360 --> 0:05:57.080
<v Speaker 1>started to staying is that apt? Yes, absolutely, he's He's

0:05:57.080 --> 0:05:58.560
<v Speaker 1>the one I would go back to from that can

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:00.720
<v Speaker 1>including the fact that, of course Scott didn't have a

0:06:00.720 --> 0:06:03.599
<v Speaker 1>parliamentary majority when he started and was dependent on the

0:06:03.640 --> 0:06:06.760
<v Speaker 1>Goal Lists who eventually stabbed him in the back with

0:06:06.880 --> 0:06:08.880
<v Speaker 1>Jack Shark. And you could have the same thing with

0:06:08.960 --> 0:06:12.800
<v Speaker 1>the Republicans being the main force in Parliament after June

0:06:12.839 --> 0:06:15.200
<v Speaker 1>the eighteenth and mac Hale dependent on them. Now, that

0:06:15.240 --> 0:06:17.919
<v Speaker 1>could work because a lot of their ideas are very similar.

0:06:18.120 --> 0:06:20.039
<v Speaker 1>But the Republicans are going to want just like the

0:06:20.040 --> 0:06:22.840
<v Speaker 1>Gold Lists in the seventies to preserve their own identity.

0:06:23.040 --> 0:06:26.359
<v Speaker 1>Sir Howard, does France need a different Euro than Germany?

0:06:26.360 --> 0:06:28.200
<v Speaker 1>And I means separate from the Euro? But what are

0:06:28.200 --> 0:06:31.680
<v Speaker 1>those relative valuations? How far apart is a good Euro

0:06:31.839 --> 0:06:35.200
<v Speaker 1>for Germany from a good Euro for France. I don't

0:06:35.200 --> 0:06:38.599
<v Speaker 1>personally think that there's a much difference between Germany and France.

0:06:38.600 --> 0:06:41.440
<v Speaker 1>There's a different argument if you're talking about Italy, for example,

0:06:41.760 --> 0:06:46.040
<v Speaker 1>But if you look, French productivity has actually matched German

0:06:46.040 --> 0:06:49.880
<v Speaker 1>productivity reasonably well over quite a long period. The French

0:06:49.960 --> 0:06:54.480
<v Speaker 1>problem is more that they do have sclerotic labor markets

0:06:54.520 --> 0:06:58.920
<v Speaker 1>and too high public expenditure and too high taxation. I

0:06:58.960 --> 0:07:02.640
<v Speaker 1>don't think it's a problem of the competitiveness of the

0:07:02.680 --> 0:07:06.080
<v Speaker 1>French trading sector, which is very highly competitive. Me in

0:07:06.080 --> 0:07:08.480
<v Speaker 1>the French produced you know, the almost per hour more

0:07:08.520 --> 0:07:12.000
<v Speaker 1>than we do in the traded sector. So I don't

0:07:12.000 --> 0:07:14.480
<v Speaker 1>think the answer for France is a decline in the

0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:17.000
<v Speaker 1>euro in The answer for France is a rebalancing of

0:07:17.040 --> 0:07:21.560
<v Speaker 1>their economy away from the public sector. Jonathan. As the

0:07:21.640 --> 0:07:26.760
<v Speaker 1>UK leaves, the relationship between Germany and France becomes closer, closer,

0:07:26.880 --> 0:07:30.480
<v Speaker 1>more interesting, and probably in favor of France as a

0:07:30.560 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 1>result of the kind of the three way split changing.

0:07:34.920 --> 0:07:39.200
<v Speaker 1>How does Mr McCraw take Germany along for the ride?

0:07:39.520 --> 0:07:41.360
<v Speaker 1>And and he is he the guy to do it?

0:07:41.480 --> 0:07:44.280
<v Speaker 1>He's very pro Europe. We heard the music, we've heard

0:07:44.360 --> 0:07:47.840
<v Speaker 1>seen the flags. Is he going to be changing Europe

0:07:47.840 --> 0:07:49.600
<v Speaker 1>in a meaningful way? And will the Germans be on

0:07:49.680 --> 0:07:52.000
<v Speaker 1>board with it? I think it's the best chance of

0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:54.640
<v Speaker 1>something meaningful happening over the next couple of years. He's

0:07:54.640 --> 0:07:58.240
<v Speaker 1>already worked with the Germans. He's drawn up various plans

0:07:58.400 --> 0:08:01.480
<v Speaker 1>for going into the fiscal side of the euro with

0:08:01.520 --> 0:08:04.440
<v Speaker 1>the Social Democrats. Submittedly, but I was in Berlin a

0:08:04.480 --> 0:08:06.840
<v Speaker 1>couple of weeks ago, and certainly the people around CDU,

0:08:06.920 --> 0:08:10.040
<v Speaker 1>around Merkel, they're very anxious to work with Machorn and

0:08:10.080 --> 0:08:13.320
<v Speaker 1>I think they may cut him a bit of easy

0:08:13.520 --> 0:08:15.960
<v Speaker 1>ease on the budget and the deficit things over the

0:08:16.040 --> 0:08:17.960
<v Speaker 1>next couple of years. So long as to go back

0:08:17.960 --> 0:08:21.000
<v Speaker 1>to what how it says he delivers some reforms, Sirard.

0:08:21.000 --> 0:08:23.040
<v Speaker 1>A final question to you before you start your day

0:08:23.080 --> 0:08:26.320
<v Speaker 1>for RBS, what do you need from Janet yelling? Right now?

0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:29.080
<v Speaker 1>We have you not talked about the American Central Bank?

0:08:29.400 --> 0:08:32.280
<v Speaker 1>What does cher yelling need to do in the coming weeks. Well,

0:08:32.280 --> 0:08:33.800
<v Speaker 1>I think she needs to do what she said she's

0:08:33.800 --> 0:08:36.080
<v Speaker 1>going to do, and that would be fine, I think.

0:08:36.280 --> 0:08:39.520
<v Speaker 1>And also I think probably the Fed does need some

0:08:39.679 --> 0:08:42.000
<v Speaker 1>greater clarity about how it's going to reduce the size

0:08:42.000 --> 0:08:43.920
<v Speaker 1>of this balance sheet. My own view is the central

0:08:43.920 --> 0:08:45.720
<v Speaker 1>bank balance sheet in the medium term, in the long

0:08:45.840 --> 0:08:47.319
<v Speaker 1>term are going to be bigger than they used to be,

0:08:47.520 --> 0:08:49.240
<v Speaker 1>but not as big as they are now. And I

0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:51.360
<v Speaker 1>think they need to find some way of edging that

0:08:51.400 --> 0:08:54.120
<v Speaker 1>balance sheet down, and that's I think the big conundrum

0:08:54.160 --> 0:08:56.920
<v Speaker 1>that we're looking for. Maybe edging is an uncer Howard

0:08:56.960 --> 0:08:59.360
<v Speaker 1>phrase for tapering as well. Thank you so much for

0:08:59.360 --> 0:09:02.240
<v Speaker 1>a generous set of time this morning, Sir Howard Davis,

0:09:02.240 --> 0:09:17.640
<v Speaker 1>as chairman of our Eric Nielsen joins us from Berlin.

0:09:17.720 --> 0:09:20.200
<v Speaker 1>He's the chief economist with the UniCredit group. And let's

0:09:20.200 --> 0:09:22.360
<v Speaker 1>start with the French election, if we could hear Eric

0:09:22.840 --> 0:09:24.360
<v Speaker 1>and let me just get your sense of of what

0:09:24.480 --> 0:09:27.239
<v Speaker 1>import we can draw from it. Of course there's domestic significance,

0:09:27.240 --> 0:09:30.240
<v Speaker 1>but when you look at its importance to Europe, to

0:09:30.320 --> 0:09:32.560
<v Speaker 1>the euro Zone, give us your sense of of what

0:09:32.559 --> 0:09:36.400
<v Speaker 1>what what we can draw from that. Yeah, I think

0:09:36.400 --> 0:09:40.760
<v Speaker 1>that it's good news on two accounts. First and foremost,

0:09:41.600 --> 0:09:45.880
<v Speaker 1>it sort of brings a French kind of a leadership

0:09:46.000 --> 0:09:49.040
<v Speaker 1>rule back in place as Europe had originally. I thought

0:09:49.080 --> 0:09:52.200
<v Speaker 1>we had been frozen during the Secosi and the Olan period.

0:09:52.280 --> 0:09:55.040
<v Speaker 1>So Germany has been looking for for a good friends

0:09:55.240 --> 0:09:58.440
<v Speaker 1>collection or a French ship partner in a lot of this.

0:09:58.960 --> 0:10:01.079
<v Speaker 1>And if anything, the risk is now that the Friends

0:10:01.080 --> 0:10:03.679
<v Speaker 1>are going to get more euro pro European than than

0:10:03.720 --> 0:10:06.640
<v Speaker 1>the Germans and wanted to do more than the present

0:10:06.640 --> 0:10:08.800
<v Speaker 1>German government want to do. But but certainly it's a

0:10:08.800 --> 0:10:13.120
<v Speaker 1>big move in that direction. Secondly, um, it's a big

0:10:13.200 --> 0:10:16.360
<v Speaker 1>message that they're, through the European politician and other places

0:10:16.360 --> 0:10:20.320
<v Speaker 1>including Italy, that there is a victory to be gained

0:10:20.320 --> 0:10:24.160
<v Speaker 1>by being unashamefully pro European. It's the first time you've

0:10:24.160 --> 0:10:28.720
<v Speaker 1>had a clear choice in a country between somebody really European.

0:10:28.840 --> 0:10:31.920
<v Speaker 1>Noticed when he walked out in front of the Roue

0:10:31.920 --> 0:10:35.040
<v Speaker 1>War he had did not have the French national anthems

0:10:35.040 --> 0:10:37.720
<v Speaker 1>playing for the European one. This is a big message

0:10:37.800 --> 0:10:40.600
<v Speaker 1>across Europe. I think drew the contrast, if you would,

0:10:40.640 --> 0:10:42.959
<v Speaker 1>between the economy in Germany where you are right now

0:10:43.240 --> 0:10:49.800
<v Speaker 1>in France. How different are these two economies within Europe? Uh? Different,

0:10:49.880 --> 0:10:52.120
<v Speaker 1>but not nearly as different as you think. Let me

0:10:52.160 --> 0:10:57.120
<v Speaker 1>stop by reminding you and the listeners that, since if

0:10:57.160 --> 0:10:59.640
<v Speaker 1>you look at real GDP, France has actually done better

0:10:59.679 --> 0:11:02.880
<v Speaker 1>than many so culatives since they introducted the Euro, the

0:11:02.920 --> 0:11:06.240
<v Speaker 1>French real GDP is up aside a couple of presentative points,

0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:09.320
<v Speaker 1>more than the German. So we get very excited about

0:11:09.360 --> 0:11:11.880
<v Speaker 1>these cycles and swings and and and all the rest

0:11:11.880 --> 0:11:14.760
<v Speaker 1>of it. But these are not that different economies at

0:11:14.760 --> 0:11:16.439
<v Speaker 1>the end of the day, and none of the two

0:11:16.480 --> 0:11:20.600
<v Speaker 1>economies have severe imbalances. If anything, Germany has a two

0:11:20.600 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>big current count surplus, but but not the negative ones

0:11:24.200 --> 0:11:27.960
<v Speaker 1>that that sort of spilled trouble right around the corner. Um.

0:11:28.320 --> 0:11:32.960
<v Speaker 1>That said, the labor market is more rigid, particularly for

0:11:33.040 --> 0:11:35.720
<v Speaker 1>younger people in France. But again, if you look at

0:11:35.720 --> 0:11:39.040
<v Speaker 1>the o c D indicators for rigidities, the two countries

0:11:39.080 --> 0:11:43.640
<v Speaker 1>are quite similar. But but surely there's more rigidities in

0:11:43.679 --> 0:11:47.040
<v Speaker 1>the French economy. That means that it dips less in

0:11:47.160 --> 0:11:51.040
<v Speaker 1>recessions and accelerate less in the recoveries. And that's exactly

0:11:51.040 --> 0:11:53.640
<v Speaker 1>what we've seen, but when you look through it for

0:11:53.640 --> 0:11:59.960
<v Speaker 1>for a decade or so, they perform incredibly uh incredibly alive.

0:12:00.320 --> 0:12:02.160
<v Speaker 1>Eric Nielsen with the UniCredit group with us here on

0:12:02.240 --> 0:12:05.320
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Surveillance from Bloomberg Gritty. You talk about labor market

0:12:05.840 --> 0:12:10.000
<v Speaker 1>rigidityes and this president elect has promised to change some

0:12:10.080 --> 0:12:12.200
<v Speaker 1>of those are less than some of those. What kind

0:12:12.240 --> 0:12:14.679
<v Speaker 1>of difference could that make to the French economy if

0:12:14.679 --> 0:12:17.319
<v Speaker 1>you were to make progress on that? And I use

0:12:17.440 --> 0:12:19.839
<v Speaker 1>the word were there? How difficult and undertaking is this

0:12:19.960 --> 0:12:24.800
<v Speaker 1>going to be? It's difficult. They have unions who are

0:12:24.840 --> 0:12:27.240
<v Speaker 1>already on the streets now. But he has a mandate.

0:12:27.360 --> 0:12:30.040
<v Speaker 1>You could argue, um, and I would suggest that what

0:12:30.120 --> 0:12:32.600
<v Speaker 1>he needs to do and probably want we'll do is

0:12:32.640 --> 0:12:35.800
<v Speaker 1>not a lot you could and he doesn't necessarily have

0:12:35.920 --> 0:12:38.280
<v Speaker 1>to do a whole lot what he I think that

0:12:38.400 --> 0:12:40.959
<v Speaker 1>the most obvious one would be to copy the German

0:12:41.640 --> 0:12:44.800
<v Speaker 1>flexible label laws for the youth unemployed that Germany did

0:12:44.840 --> 0:12:47.600
<v Speaker 1>with the Sword reforms so way back, and a lot

0:12:47.600 --> 0:12:50.960
<v Speaker 1>of these timber employments in Germany have actually been merged

0:12:51.000 --> 0:12:55.559
<v Speaker 1>into permanent employments since so there's certainly a live an

0:12:55.600 --> 0:12:57.760
<v Speaker 1>idea to be lifted there that that could help on

0:12:57.880 --> 0:12:59.960
<v Speaker 1>that side. The other one, which I think is important

0:13:00.160 --> 0:13:02.520
<v Speaker 1>not only in France but throughout Europe and in Italy

0:13:02.559 --> 0:13:06.240
<v Speaker 1>included is to lower the payroll tax. So they so

0:13:06.679 --> 0:13:09.360
<v Speaker 1>it is it is ironic the politicians say they want

0:13:09.360 --> 0:13:12.600
<v Speaker 1>people in employment, and the tax employers who try to

0:13:12.640 --> 0:13:15.840
<v Speaker 1>employ people, and particularly young people who in this world

0:13:15.840 --> 0:13:19.040
<v Speaker 1>economy in Europe struggled to make a return for the

0:13:19.080 --> 0:13:21.920
<v Speaker 1>company they work for that matches the cost of them.

0:13:22.120 --> 0:13:25.440
<v Speaker 1>So why not cut the tax on the payroll So

0:13:25.679 --> 0:13:28.400
<v Speaker 1>and I think that's something he will be doing. President

0:13:28.679 --> 0:13:31.080
<v Speaker 1>spoke with with the President elector of France, Amandel McCown

0:13:31.200 --> 0:13:33.920
<v Speaker 1>yesterday by by fun, I imagine the relationship that we're

0:13:33.960 --> 0:13:36.040
<v Speaker 1>going to be paying The closest attention to though, is

0:13:36.240 --> 0:13:40.640
<v Speaker 1>Mr mccrowen's relationship with Angela Merkel. How well do you

0:13:40.679 --> 0:13:43.640
<v Speaker 1>think they get along? How important is that relationship going

0:13:43.679 --> 0:13:48.240
<v Speaker 1>to be going forward? I think it's gonna be incredibly important.

0:13:48.520 --> 0:13:51.679
<v Speaker 1>Um I would, as I said, the Germans have been

0:13:51.840 --> 0:13:54.320
<v Speaker 1>been longing for a French leader who is willing to

0:13:54.320 --> 0:13:58.240
<v Speaker 1>to pick up joint leadership on issues with relations with

0:13:58.320 --> 0:14:01.120
<v Speaker 1>Russia and Ukraine and out with the US, which is

0:14:01.120 --> 0:14:04.280
<v Speaker 1>a becoming more tricky partner for sure, but to to

0:14:04.520 --> 0:14:07.520
<v Speaker 1>sort of obtaking on the European economic side. I think

0:14:07.559 --> 0:14:10.360
<v Speaker 1>the important thing here is that mccoon needs to do

0:14:10.440 --> 0:14:13.240
<v Speaker 1>something for the Germans. First. He needs to pledge at

0:14:13.240 --> 0:14:15.800
<v Speaker 1>degree of fiscal discipline, so he sort of puts the

0:14:15.840 --> 0:14:19.280
<v Speaker 1>rest is constant German fear that that the French are

0:14:19.360 --> 0:14:21.880
<v Speaker 1>just running away with the Fiskeland ultimately want to be

0:14:21.880 --> 0:14:24.040
<v Speaker 1>paid up by Germans. He needs to make that very

0:14:24.120 --> 0:14:26.080
<v Speaker 1>very clear, and he needs to address some of the

0:14:26.160 --> 0:14:30.080
<v Speaker 1>labor issues we've just talked about. And once he's done that,

0:14:30.120 --> 0:14:33.400
<v Speaker 1>there will be scope, probably only after the election in

0:14:33.440 --> 0:14:38.080
<v Speaker 1>Germany for for further corporation, certainly on security matters, but

0:14:38.480 --> 0:14:41.480
<v Speaker 1>there could also be other issues. The capital markets reform

0:14:41.520 --> 0:14:45.080
<v Speaker 1>could be accelerated, the banking before banking union could be completed,

0:14:45.480 --> 0:14:48.400
<v Speaker 1>and maybe maybe they're certainly talking in Berlin about it,

0:14:48.560 --> 0:14:52.120
<v Speaker 1>an attempt to do something on unemployment benefits. Eric Nielsen

0:14:52.160 --> 0:14:54.080
<v Speaker 1>with US. He's the chief economist at the Union Credit Group.

0:14:54.120 --> 0:14:56.240
<v Speaker 1>My co host Tom Keane has traded the send in

0:14:56.280 --> 0:14:59.160
<v Speaker 1>for the Thames joins us now from our bureau in

0:14:59.240 --> 0:15:02.560
<v Speaker 1>London and Tom I trust the Eurostar wide was uneventful.

0:15:03.000 --> 0:15:05.760
<v Speaker 1>Why can't this be in America? I think it's because

0:15:05.760 --> 0:15:07.760
<v Speaker 1>it's a sinkhole of money. But I'll tell you it

0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:11.360
<v Speaker 1>is a beautiful and very successful training right. Thank you

0:15:11.360 --> 0:15:15.640
<v Speaker 1>yours for your care. Yesterday from London, from New York,

0:15:15.680 --> 0:15:19.800
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Surveillance with it's Eric Nielsen from Berlin. This morning

0:15:19.800 --> 0:15:22.360
<v Speaker 1>he is with Uni Credit. Eric, we talked about this,

0:15:22.440 --> 0:15:24.800
<v Speaker 1>that and the other thing. But it does circle back,

0:15:24.840 --> 0:15:28.560
<v Speaker 1>certainly for our American listeners to the US dollar. What

0:15:28.680 --> 0:15:32.160
<v Speaker 1>is the Uni Credit call on dollars stability or do

0:15:32.240 --> 0:15:37.320
<v Speaker 1>we see a trichet like brutal move in the months ahead. No,

0:15:37.520 --> 0:15:39.000
<v Speaker 1>we don't have. We don't think it's going to be

0:15:39.080 --> 0:15:41.160
<v Speaker 1>a bruder move, Tom. I mean I think the so

0:15:41.240 --> 0:15:44.160
<v Speaker 1>we have we have just revised all your dollar a bit.

0:15:44.280 --> 0:15:47.040
<v Speaker 1>But this is more a euro appreciation story than a

0:15:47.120 --> 0:15:50.480
<v Speaker 1>dollar depreciation story right now. In other words, from an

0:15:50.520 --> 0:15:52.640
<v Speaker 1>American point of view, we think that Trump is going

0:15:52.680 --> 0:15:56.560
<v Speaker 1>to be rather ineffective and sort of talking the dollar weaker.

0:15:57.440 --> 0:15:59.520
<v Speaker 1>But but in trade way to terms, it will be

0:15:59.560 --> 0:16:02.880
<v Speaker 1>a bit because you're seeing quite a bit of interest

0:16:02.920 --> 0:16:05.800
<v Speaker 1>in European ass now that drives the euro stronger obviously,

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:07.800
<v Speaker 1>and and on the trade with the trip that will

0:16:08.200 --> 0:16:10.280
<v Speaker 1>get the dollar a little bit weaker. But we don't know.

0:16:10.320 --> 0:16:14.240
<v Speaker 1>We don't expect very dramatic books. When you when you

0:16:14.320 --> 0:16:17.880
<v Speaker 1>look here at the future of the European project, Russia

0:16:17.920 --> 0:16:20.720
<v Speaker 1>has to loom large. We had Angela Merkel in Russia

0:16:20.800 --> 0:16:24.120
<v Speaker 1>last week meeting with Vladimir Putin. How how much of

0:16:24.600 --> 0:16:27.000
<v Speaker 1>the strength of the European Union right now has to

0:16:27.040 --> 0:16:30.359
<v Speaker 1>do just with the the change in in in political trajectory,

0:16:30.560 --> 0:16:33.560
<v Speaker 1>policy trajectory that we've seen in Russia. Is that is

0:16:33.560 --> 0:16:38.120
<v Speaker 1>that leading to more strength in the European Union? Eric, Yeah,

0:16:38.200 --> 0:16:40.200
<v Speaker 1>without a sount, but it's not the only one, right,

0:16:40.240 --> 0:16:43.520
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I think you contract the European relationship with

0:16:43.640 --> 0:16:47.520
<v Speaker 1>Pruting back to his re emergence as president was in

0:16:47.600 --> 0:16:50.240
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and twelve, right where and and he's handling

0:16:50.240 --> 0:16:53.880
<v Speaker 1>on the demonstrations where people starts a question whether he

0:16:54.040 --> 0:16:55.800
<v Speaker 1>was how much of a democratic it was. Then we

0:16:55.840 --> 0:16:58.400
<v Speaker 1>have this shock of Crimea and Ukraine, we have the

0:16:58.400 --> 0:17:01.120
<v Speaker 1>shock of of Syria and in the shock of the

0:17:01.240 --> 0:17:04.639
<v Speaker 1>apparent as almost proven right interference in the American election

0:17:04.720 --> 0:17:08.239
<v Speaker 1>and messing around in France apparently, so there's so this

0:17:08.320 --> 0:17:11.119
<v Speaker 1>is an interest. But your point is very interesting because

0:17:11.200 --> 0:17:14.160
<v Speaker 1>I think what you have seen from a European perspective

0:17:14.240 --> 0:17:16.960
<v Speaker 1>now is anybody who wanted to flirt with the idea

0:17:17.359 --> 0:17:20.600
<v Speaker 1>of sometimes these same politicians you know, in effective we

0:17:20.640 --> 0:17:22.679
<v Speaker 1>need a strong guy. So I think you look at

0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:24.800
<v Speaker 1>putting little ergon and you look at at least the

0:17:24.840 --> 0:17:28.600
<v Speaker 1>one want to be strong guy Trump and Europeans, the

0:17:28.720 --> 0:17:32.320
<v Speaker 1>vast majority majority of Europeans do not see something they like.

0:17:32.880 --> 0:17:36.320
<v Speaker 1>So you so these events outside Europe have for sure

0:17:37.080 --> 0:17:40.560
<v Speaker 1>is strengthened the ability of things being. Politicians say, this

0:17:40.640 --> 0:17:42.359
<v Speaker 1>is not where we're going, Eric, we gotta leave it there.

0:17:42.440 --> 0:17:51.040
<v Speaker 1>Eric Nielsen, chief economist of the UniCredit Group. Brought you

0:17:51.200 --> 0:17:55.280
<v Speaker 1>by Bank of America. Marylynch dedicated to bringing our clients

0:17:55.400 --> 0:17:59.520
<v Speaker 1>insights and solutions to meet the challenges of a transforming world.

0:18:00.080 --> 0:18:03.920
<v Speaker 1>That's the power of global connections. Mary Lynch, Pierce Federan

0:18:03.960 --> 0:18:13.520
<v Speaker 1>Smith Incorporated, Member s I p C. There's something new

0:18:13.560 --> 0:18:16.919
<v Speaker 1>from Bloomberg. It's called Lens. Starting right now, you can

0:18:17.040 --> 0:18:20.840
<v Speaker 1>use the Bloomberg Io s app off your iPhone or iPad,

0:18:21.440 --> 0:18:25.320
<v Speaker 1>or our new Google Chrome extension to read any news

0:18:25.400 --> 0:18:29.720
<v Speaker 1>story on any website, scan it, and then instantly see

0:18:29.760 --> 0:18:33.840
<v Speaker 1>the news stories relevant market data from Bloomberg. In addition,

0:18:34.200 --> 0:18:37.280
<v Speaker 1>see all the bios of the key people mentioned in

0:18:37.359 --> 0:18:40.399
<v Speaker 1>the story. It's called lens, and it is just that,

0:18:40.720 --> 0:18:43.760
<v Speaker 1>a lens into the people and the data of any

0:18:43.880 --> 0:18:47.720
<v Speaker 1>story you may be reading. Again, Lens brings you the

0:18:47.800 --> 0:18:51.320
<v Speaker 1>power of Bloomberg's news and data. Download or io s

0:18:51.359 --> 0:18:54.639
<v Speaker 1>app or search for the Bloomberg extension at the Chrome

0:18:54.760 --> 0:18:58.200
<v Speaker 1>Store to try lens out. Learn more at Bloomberg dot

0:18:58.240 --> 0:19:06.240
<v Speaker 1>com slash lens. Let's go to Steve Whiting. Now he is,

0:19:06.320 --> 0:19:08.600
<v Speaker 1>as I said, the global Chief Investment Strategic City. I've

0:19:08.600 --> 0:19:10.320
<v Speaker 1>probably been great to have you with us against Steve

0:19:10.520 --> 0:19:13.159
<v Speaker 1>un surveillance. Let's start with that. Your your read of

0:19:13.200 --> 0:19:16.399
<v Speaker 1>what's going on in Washington. The President chalked up a

0:19:16.520 --> 0:19:21.040
<v Speaker 1>legislative victory. Does that give you, as an investor any

0:19:21.160 --> 0:19:23.040
<v Speaker 1>any better sense of what's to come? In other words,

0:19:23.200 --> 0:19:25.320
<v Speaker 1>what did that signify to you? Getting that healthcare vote

0:19:25.359 --> 0:19:28.359
<v Speaker 1>through the House? You know, I tend to have a

0:19:28.440 --> 0:19:31.480
<v Speaker 1>little bit higher confidence that at the end of the day,

0:19:32.240 --> 0:19:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Congressional Republicans and the President will manage to cut taxes,

0:19:36.680 --> 0:19:39.480
<v Speaker 1>whether that will be a full blown reform or not

0:19:39.640 --> 0:19:41.840
<v Speaker 1>as to be seen. But you have to remember that

0:19:42.080 --> 0:19:44.680
<v Speaker 1>with all of the either failed votes or votes that

0:19:44.800 --> 0:19:48.560
<v Speaker 1>don't take place, it will take only one successful vote

0:19:48.760 --> 0:19:51.480
<v Speaker 1>to change the fiscal outlook in two thousand eighteen. As

0:19:51.640 --> 0:19:54.280
<v Speaker 1>late as that may come, um, you know, it could

0:19:54.320 --> 0:19:56.840
<v Speaker 1>come at the end of the August session, it could

0:19:56.880 --> 0:19:59.800
<v Speaker 1>come later. But you know, we think of this as

0:20:00.000 --> 0:20:02.840
<v Speaker 1>mostly a two thousand eighteen effect. And you know this

0:20:03.040 --> 0:20:06.920
<v Speaker 1>is one sign that ultimately they with a majority or

0:20:07.240 --> 0:20:13.119
<v Speaker 1>not in a single party gridlock. I saw Steve Whiting

0:20:14.000 --> 0:20:16.760
<v Speaker 1>once again. Earnings I think did better than good. You

0:20:16.840 --> 0:20:22.200
<v Speaker 1>are wonderfully skilled folding earnings dynamics into the economy. Do

0:20:22.280 --> 0:20:27.120
<v Speaker 1>you just equate over great earnings great g d P. Well,

0:20:27.240 --> 0:20:29.520
<v Speaker 1>I think that there's this translation issue, and you know

0:20:29.600 --> 0:20:32.480
<v Speaker 1>it's worth mentioning. It looks like first quarter EPs for

0:20:32.640 --> 0:20:36.400
<v Speaker 1>large CAPUS companies has grown fifteen percent from a year ago.

0:20:36.960 --> 0:20:39.280
<v Speaker 1>I have to remember g d p s typically not

0:20:39.440 --> 0:20:41.399
<v Speaker 1>in the United States reported on a year at a

0:20:41.480 --> 0:20:45.560
<v Speaker 1>year basis. Uh it's inflation adjusted, so reduced by the

0:20:45.720 --> 0:20:49.000
<v Speaker 1>rise of inflation, and we did have an excessive two

0:20:49.080 --> 0:20:52.639
<v Speaker 1>percent headline inflation in the first quarter, so it's not

0:20:52.760 --> 0:20:54.960
<v Speaker 1>a nominal figure. So you have to adjust for all

0:20:55.000 --> 0:20:57.640
<v Speaker 1>of those things. And you have to remember that profits

0:20:57.680 --> 0:21:00.639
<v Speaker 1>are just more cyclical than the economy. You know, they

0:21:00.720 --> 0:21:04.879
<v Speaker 1>boom and bust around a relatively steady, steady economy. You know,

0:21:05.080 --> 0:21:08.480
<v Speaker 1>laundromats and hair salons are in GDP, but not in

0:21:08.680 --> 0:21:11.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, S and P profits. See, we just had

0:21:11.640 --> 0:21:13.119
<v Speaker 1>actual work on the show a few minutes ago and

0:21:13.160 --> 0:21:15.600
<v Speaker 1>Tom asked him how he plays Asia. How do you

0:21:15.680 --> 0:21:17.600
<v Speaker 1>regard or look at Asia right now? Where is the

0:21:17.640 --> 0:21:22.680
<v Speaker 1>opportunity in Asia? Well, we've upgraded our view of emerging

0:21:22.760 --> 0:21:26.359
<v Speaker 1>Asia in particular, and you know, I would note that,

0:21:26.600 --> 0:21:31.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, we have seen uh decreased sensitivity in Asia

0:21:31.720 --> 0:21:35.000
<v Speaker 1>to rising US rates. Now you can couple that with

0:21:35.480 --> 0:21:39.399
<v Speaker 1>at least the feds U forecasts that it's tightening cycle

0:21:39.520 --> 0:21:42.320
<v Speaker 1>this time around in real terms is likely to be

0:21:42.440 --> 0:21:46.960
<v Speaker 1>only about half the average tightening cycle you have. Obviously,

0:21:47.040 --> 0:21:48.840
<v Speaker 1>they are all these questions, you know, what's sort of

0:21:48.960 --> 0:21:52.000
<v Speaker 1>dead is there in China? Questions all the time, But

0:21:52.240 --> 0:21:55.520
<v Speaker 1>so many investors just ignore the assets side of the

0:21:55.560 --> 0:21:59.000
<v Speaker 1>balance sheet in China. And so you couple this all together,

0:21:59.200 --> 0:22:02.000
<v Speaker 1>and if the US is not disrupting the world with

0:22:02.160 --> 0:22:06.320
<v Speaker 1>tremendously high interest rates UM or or trade disruptions of

0:22:06.359 --> 0:22:09.520
<v Speaker 1>any sort. Uh, then Asia should thrive. And I would

0:22:09.520 --> 0:22:12.600
<v Speaker 1>say that the export picture has actually been a real

0:22:13.200 --> 0:22:18.480
<v Speaker 1>new positive surprise there within the positive surprise is what

0:22:19.520 --> 0:22:22.800
<v Speaker 1>Schure yelling will do. And President drog and the rest.

0:22:23.119 --> 0:22:25.960
<v Speaker 1>Are they just behind? Is it just simple to say that,

0:22:26.119 --> 0:22:29.359
<v Speaker 1>given better economies and the micro news that David and

0:22:29.480 --> 0:22:33.400
<v Speaker 1>I hear every day, there are central banks are behind? Well,

0:22:33.440 --> 0:22:36.239
<v Speaker 1>I think there's um two ways to look at this. Um.

0:22:36.600 --> 0:22:38.480
<v Speaker 1>First of all, they would not tell you there behind.

0:22:38.720 --> 0:22:41.920
<v Speaker 1>I would say, to a certain extent, they've changed the game.

0:22:42.440 --> 0:22:46.040
<v Speaker 1>If you think about the United States, you know since uh,

0:22:46.600 --> 0:22:49.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, the nineteen seventies, most of that time it

0:22:49.720 --> 0:22:52.760
<v Speaker 1>was trying to force down the inflation rate, lock in

0:22:52.920 --> 0:22:56.720
<v Speaker 1>in ever lower inflation trend, use every recession as a

0:22:56.880 --> 0:23:01.639
<v Speaker 1>chance to make the inflation rate lower towards price stability. Uh.

0:23:01.760 --> 0:23:03.879
<v Speaker 1>And you know from most of this cycle the Federal

0:23:03.920 --> 0:23:07.320
<v Speaker 1>Reserve is argued that the trend inflation rate is too low. Um.

0:23:07.440 --> 0:23:09.920
<v Speaker 1>They think that they might overshoot if they don't tighten

0:23:10.000 --> 0:23:13.040
<v Speaker 1>to some extent. But again, the game has changed from

0:23:13.119 --> 0:23:16.600
<v Speaker 1>from that one, so naturally they go in a more

0:23:16.680 --> 0:23:19.480
<v Speaker 1>mild way. I do think that balance sheet adjustment on

0:23:19.560 --> 0:23:21.200
<v Speaker 1>the part of the Fed, the idea that they won't

0:23:21.240 --> 0:23:24.680
<v Speaker 1>hold more bonds than they need to to conduct monetary

0:23:24.760 --> 0:23:28.159
<v Speaker 1>policy the way they want. Uh, that is going to

0:23:28.240 --> 0:23:30.880
<v Speaker 1>be a volable event. And uh, you know it has

0:23:30.960 --> 0:23:33.320
<v Speaker 1>been over the last eight years at times when the

0:23:33.359 --> 0:23:37.080
<v Speaker 1>Federal Reserves balance sheet has shrunk pot passively when they

0:23:37.119 --> 0:23:39.520
<v Speaker 1>have not had a new quee program. There's been some

0:23:39.680 --> 0:23:42.280
<v Speaker 1>volatility around that. But I think that they will come

0:23:42.359 --> 0:23:45.399
<v Speaker 1>back and and look at that financial market impact and

0:23:45.520 --> 0:23:48.200
<v Speaker 1>say we are not going to allow, you know, balance

0:23:48.240 --> 0:23:51.480
<v Speaker 1>sheet normalization of this desire to have fewer bonds, you know,

0:23:51.720 --> 0:23:54.880
<v Speaker 1>to override you know, where they want to set financial

0:23:54.920 --> 0:23:57.399
<v Speaker 1>conditions and set monetary policy. So in the end, I

0:23:57.440 --> 0:23:59.600
<v Speaker 1>don't think the balance sheet will shrink very much. By

0:23:59.640 --> 0:24:01.880
<v Speaker 1>the way, thy Ben Bernanke has bitten written very well

0:24:01.920 --> 0:24:04.359
<v Speaker 1>about this recently. Yeah, and I certainly talked with Tom

0:24:04.359 --> 0:24:06.000
<v Speaker 1>a little about that as well, not just last week.

0:24:06.080 --> 0:24:07.720
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk more about the FED here and just woman

0:24:07.840 --> 0:24:10.080
<v Speaker 1>we'll come back with Steve White's the global chief Strategic

0:24:10.160 --> 0:24:12.520
<v Speaker 1>City Private Bank. So much to talk about when it

0:24:12.560 --> 0:24:15.440
<v Speaker 1>comes to the FED, also to the geopolitical landscape in

0:24:15.560 --> 0:24:18.160
<v Speaker 1>Europe as we look ahead to uh, the snap election

0:24:18.200 --> 0:24:20.640
<v Speaker 1>where you are Tom in one a month's time. Yeah,

0:24:20.720 --> 0:24:22.800
<v Speaker 1>we've really turned to it with a vengeance today and

0:24:23.200 --> 0:24:26.119
<v Speaker 1>it's certainly front and center all the newspapers. Guy Johnson

0:24:26.280 --> 0:24:30.920
<v Speaker 1>was translating the Labor Party festivities in Manchester today. Manchester.

0:24:31.080 --> 0:24:34.120
<v Speaker 1>David is a city. It's outside of London. Yes, home

0:24:34.200 --> 0:24:36.560
<v Speaker 1>to the home to the Guardian newspaper. If I'm not mistaken,

0:24:36.640 --> 0:24:39.680
<v Speaker 1>or it was Stephen. Wherever I go, wherever David goes.

0:24:40.320 --> 0:24:43.440
<v Speaker 1>It's all about the dearth of investment. I know you

0:24:43.560 --> 0:24:46.960
<v Speaker 1>thought hard about this. Is it possible that the new

0:24:47.040 --> 0:24:52.920
<v Speaker 1>investment is a global investment that we can't even observe? Well, look,

0:24:53.080 --> 0:24:58.320
<v Speaker 1>I think we take a peek within most developed markets

0:24:58.920 --> 0:25:02.200
<v Speaker 1>where the data are fine, the investment trend has been

0:25:02.840 --> 0:25:06.320
<v Speaker 1>very modest um. You know, I think people say there's

0:25:06.320 --> 0:25:09.520
<v Speaker 1>been no investment, no investment, only consumption. Really don't have

0:25:09.640 --> 0:25:12.399
<v Speaker 1>that right. You know, in the US we had a

0:25:12.520 --> 0:25:15.359
<v Speaker 1>massive investment in the energy sector. Here we are now

0:25:15.640 --> 0:25:19.320
<v Speaker 1>mid forties on oil, not in the hundred and fifteen range.

0:25:20.240 --> 0:25:23.639
<v Speaker 1>Other investment has been there, but it hasn't been powerful.

0:25:24.240 --> 0:25:26.840
<v Speaker 1>And if we take a look, you know, country by country,

0:25:26.880 --> 0:25:30.399
<v Speaker 1>there are areas where they're imbalances. China's had in some

0:25:30.560 --> 0:25:32.760
<v Speaker 1>cases probably the only country in the world with too

0:25:32.880 --> 0:25:37.280
<v Speaker 1>much infrastructure investment UM. So there are some imbalances between countries.

0:25:37.359 --> 0:25:39.800
<v Speaker 1>But I don't think that it's some some missing quotient

0:25:39.880 --> 0:25:43.400
<v Speaker 1>doubt there. What's your your sense? We talked about taxi

0:25:43.480 --> 0:25:44.840
<v Speaker 1>form at the top of the interview with you, and

0:25:45.240 --> 0:25:47.920
<v Speaker 1>you express your optimism. We'll see some how about for

0:25:48.200 --> 0:25:50.840
<v Speaker 1>for the kind of fiscal package that President Trump talked

0:25:50.880 --> 0:25:52.800
<v Speaker 1>about when he was a Canada Do you think we're

0:25:52.800 --> 0:25:56.240
<v Speaker 1>going to get anything from from the Congress this year? Well?

0:25:56.359 --> 0:25:59.080
<v Speaker 1>I think we will, I think, but there's so many questions.

0:25:59.400 --> 0:26:03.400
<v Speaker 1>How will it be financed? Does it need to be financed? Uh?

0:26:03.560 --> 0:26:06.480
<v Speaker 1>You know, is this something that is is really going

0:26:06.560 --> 0:26:11.000
<v Speaker 1>to be an effort to uh provide permanent tax reform

0:26:11.560 --> 0:26:15.959
<v Speaker 1>UM deficit neutral because it has to live beyond uh

0:26:16.080 --> 0:26:19.840
<v Speaker 1>ten years or you know, do quite practically what was

0:26:19.920 --> 0:26:22.960
<v Speaker 1>done in the early two thousand's and try something out

0:26:23.000 --> 0:26:26.119
<v Speaker 1>for ten years. If it's good and it helps, you

0:26:26.200 --> 0:26:29.520
<v Speaker 1>can extend it or or let it go. So all

0:26:29.560 --> 0:26:33.040
<v Speaker 1>of those questions haven't been answered, and there's this opening

0:26:33.119 --> 0:26:35.359
<v Speaker 1>position of the different parties and that will be worked

0:26:35.400 --> 0:26:38.960
<v Speaker 1>out until until something's agreed upon. But I do think

0:26:39.040 --> 0:26:43.360
<v Speaker 1>that you know, the potential to get taxes cut uh,

0:26:43.560 --> 0:26:46.720
<v Speaker 1>And some of these issues are really low franging hanging fruit,

0:26:46.920 --> 0:26:50.320
<v Speaker 1>like uh, the ability to bring profits that have never

0:26:50.400 --> 0:26:55.080
<v Speaker 1>been taxed at all at at some rate repatriating those

0:26:55.160 --> 0:26:58.200
<v Speaker 1>sorts of things can be done. Let me ask you

0:26:58.200 --> 0:27:00.280
<v Speaker 1>about political risk in Europe. We've just been through the

0:27:00.320 --> 0:27:02.960
<v Speaker 1>second round of the French election Thomas in London. Of course,

0:27:03.000 --> 0:27:05.400
<v Speaker 1>we have a snap election in London on the eighth

0:27:05.480 --> 0:27:08.560
<v Speaker 1>of June. Are we at a point where we're moving

0:27:08.640 --> 0:27:12.320
<v Speaker 1>past the preponderance of political risk? Are things less risky

0:27:12.359 --> 0:27:14.200
<v Speaker 1>when you look at politics than there were a couple

0:27:14.240 --> 0:27:17.840
<v Speaker 1>of months ago. Well, yes, we've just passed through a

0:27:18.040 --> 0:27:21.560
<v Speaker 1>potential shock and it hasn't occurred. And that's sort of

0:27:21.680 --> 0:27:23.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, the story and markets and the reason why

0:27:23.760 --> 0:27:26.159
<v Speaker 1>things are going well. There's been uh So, as we

0:27:26.240 --> 0:27:29.520
<v Speaker 1>mentioned before, no stimulus so far out of the United States,

0:27:29.920 --> 0:27:33.320
<v Speaker 1>but no disruptions and no shocks. Uh. In the case

0:27:33.400 --> 0:27:37.720
<v Speaker 1>of the near term in Europe, France was looming large.

0:27:37.760 --> 0:27:40.240
<v Speaker 1>You had a candidate who wanted to pull France out

0:27:40.320 --> 0:27:42.560
<v Speaker 1>of the Eurozone. Now, whether she would succeed or not,

0:27:42.760 --> 0:27:45.960
<v Speaker 1>that risk alone would threaten the periphery, and that risk

0:27:46.080 --> 0:27:48.040
<v Speaker 1>is off the table for the near term. Now, whether

0:27:48.119 --> 0:27:50.840
<v Speaker 1>it resumes, you have to consider the fact that Italy's

0:27:50.880 --> 0:27:53.119
<v Speaker 1>economy is the same size it was in two thousand

0:27:53.240 --> 0:27:57.960
<v Speaker 1>four and has a population that's uh, you know, feeling

0:27:58.000 --> 0:28:00.320
<v Speaker 1>like it doesn't benefit quite as much. And at the

0:28:00.359 --> 0:28:02.680
<v Speaker 1>time we've got left with you, let's drift over to

0:28:02.760 --> 0:28:06.760
<v Speaker 1>the investment world. Twenty one twelve, futures up three the

0:28:06.920 --> 0:28:12.359
<v Speaker 1>vix a Whiting like nine point six zero. How do

0:28:12.480 --> 0:28:19.520
<v Speaker 1>you stay invested? If I got pe multinationals? Is that

0:28:19.720 --> 0:28:23.640
<v Speaker 1>nifty fifty too, Stephen Whiting? Look, I think it's hard

0:28:23.720 --> 0:28:26.960
<v Speaker 1>for many investors. They're the ones that have not invested

0:28:27.119 --> 0:28:30.719
<v Speaker 1>or having a hard time committing H two markets at

0:28:30.720 --> 0:28:33.160
<v Speaker 1>these levels. I would tell them if they've been home

0:28:33.280 --> 0:28:36.399
<v Speaker 1>biased US dollar based investors, as we recommended for the

0:28:36.520 --> 0:28:40.560
<v Speaker 1>last few years, to start looking internationally. Consider that, you know,

0:28:40.640 --> 0:28:46.400
<v Speaker 1>global emerging markets equities are below their long term average valuation,

0:28:46.520 --> 0:28:51.160
<v Speaker 1>not relative but their own history. They're below average valuation.

0:28:51.320 --> 0:28:53.360
<v Speaker 1>There are plenty of warriors and risks, but that's why

0:28:53.440 --> 0:28:55.680
<v Speaker 1>there's going to be some future return. And in the

0:28:55.800 --> 0:28:59.440
<v Speaker 1>United States, Uh, if you have earnings going up as

0:28:59.480 --> 0:29:00.840
<v Speaker 1>much as they have, and I think they won't go

0:29:00.920 --> 0:29:05.000
<v Speaker 1>up fifteen percent to every quarter forever, but I certainly

0:29:05.040 --> 0:29:07.400
<v Speaker 1>think that this is not the valuation environment that we

0:29:07.480 --> 0:29:10.120
<v Speaker 1>were in the late nineteen nineties at all. Uh. This

0:29:10.320 --> 0:29:13.240
<v Speaker 1>is not even close to that kind of evaluation problem.

0:29:13.520 --> 0:29:16.160
<v Speaker 1>So the direction of earnings will set the direction of

0:29:16.240 --> 0:29:18.440
<v Speaker 1>markets for the most part. Do you sympathize with what

0:29:18.480 --> 0:29:21.480
<v Speaker 1>axel Work was saying about investors reluctance to hold on

0:29:21.600 --> 0:29:23.600
<v Speaker 1>to cash at this point? Do you think that the

0:29:23.680 --> 0:29:26.880
<v Speaker 1>investors should be holding onto more cash? Well, look, I

0:29:26.960 --> 0:29:30.640
<v Speaker 1>think investors have held on the cash. You know, there's been, um,

0:29:30.960 --> 0:29:33.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, a low volume, low confidence recovery since the

0:29:33.680 --> 0:29:38.480
<v Speaker 1>financial crisis, and cash has been you know, a tremendous overweight,

0:29:38.640 --> 0:29:43.760
<v Speaker 1>even in investment portfolios that are dedicated investment portfolios. UM. So,

0:29:44.160 --> 0:29:46.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, would we have a little dry powder in

0:29:46.560 --> 0:29:48.800
<v Speaker 1>the summer months is the time when we have frequent

0:29:48.960 --> 0:29:52.240
<v Speaker 1>corrections that are temporary. Um, would we want to be

0:29:52.320 --> 0:29:55.600
<v Speaker 1>able to allocate more with some cash, Yes, but I

0:29:55.680 --> 0:29:58.880
<v Speaker 1>think for the most part, investors didn't have confidence that

0:29:59.720 --> 0:30:02.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, we weren't doomed, and they've held on a

0:30:02.320 --> 0:30:04.200
<v Speaker 1>good proportion of them have held onto that view since

0:30:04.240 --> 0:30:06.040
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and eight. That's a quick last question here

0:30:06.040 --> 0:30:08.280
<v Speaker 1>about Latin America and what you're looking at there. I

0:30:08.320 --> 0:30:13.560
<v Speaker 1>look at dollar Mexico here amid still the rhetoric here

0:30:13.560 --> 0:30:15.840
<v Speaker 1>in the US about building a wall and how long

0:30:15.920 --> 0:30:18.240
<v Speaker 1>it will be. In all of that, where's the opportunity

0:30:18.240 --> 0:30:19.959
<v Speaker 1>in Latin America? Are you looking at sovereigns? Are you're

0:30:20.000 --> 0:30:23.360
<v Speaker 1>looking at corporate bonds? What's attractive to you? Well, what's

0:30:23.400 --> 0:30:25.280
<v Speaker 1>really fascinating is that if you just take again look

0:30:25.280 --> 0:30:29.760
<v Speaker 1>at emerging markets, sovereign bonds, most of which are investment grade. Uh,

0:30:29.920 --> 0:30:32.920
<v Speaker 1>you could get in the neighborhood of seven times the

0:30:33.040 --> 0:30:36.040
<v Speaker 1>yield out of government bonds and emerging markets and local currencies.

0:30:36.040 --> 0:30:39.240
<v Speaker 1>Then you could out of corporate bonds in the Eurozone

0:30:39.280 --> 0:30:43.280
<v Speaker 1>taking Euro risk. So uh. You know, Mexico, for example,

0:30:43.800 --> 0:30:46.560
<v Speaker 1>has seen its currency plunge and then get almost all

0:30:46.600 --> 0:30:49.400
<v Speaker 1>of it back, but it's bond market is hovering at

0:30:49.440 --> 0:30:52.960
<v Speaker 1>a seven percent local yield. So in Latin America. We

0:30:53.040 --> 0:30:55.880
<v Speaker 1>think that there are a good fixed income opportunities in particular,

0:30:55.960 --> 0:31:00.080
<v Speaker 1>but like as always, equities would follow. Steve Finning to

0:31:00.120 --> 0:31:02.160
<v Speaker 1>speak with you as all most winning with the City

0:31:02.160 --> 0:31:04.320
<v Speaker 1>Private Bank joining us here on Bloomberg Surveillance. He is

0:31:04.800 --> 0:31:07.720
<v Speaker 1>the global chief Investment Strategy Static City, a private bank.

0:31:20.000 --> 0:31:22.160
<v Speaker 1>David Gura in New York, Tom Keene in London. This

0:31:22.240 --> 0:31:24.680
<v Speaker 1>week this is Bloomberg Surveillance on Bloomberg Grady. The big

0:31:24.760 --> 0:31:27.440
<v Speaker 1>news out of the day in Korea today Moon jay

0:31:27.640 --> 0:31:30.800
<v Speaker 1>In poised to take power in South Korea according to

0:31:30.840 --> 0:31:33.040
<v Speaker 1>a leading exit poll as voter Sutton and a nine

0:31:33.120 --> 0:31:35.640
<v Speaker 1>year a conservative rule there in that country. Scott Snyder

0:31:35.720 --> 0:31:37.440
<v Speaker 1>joins us now. He is a Senior Fellow for Korea

0:31:37.480 --> 0:31:39.920
<v Speaker 1>Studies and director of the Program on US Korea Policy

0:31:39.960 --> 0:31:42.760
<v Speaker 1>at the Council on Foreign Relations. He joins us it Scott,

0:31:42.760 --> 0:31:44.160
<v Speaker 1>great to have you with us. Let's start with this

0:31:44.240 --> 0:31:46.960
<v Speaker 1>Candida who apparently is in the lead again by exit polls,

0:31:47.000 --> 0:31:48.920
<v Speaker 1>Moon jay And what can you tell us about him

0:31:48.960 --> 0:31:52.160
<v Speaker 1>and his party here the more liberal of the two parties.

0:31:54.440 --> 0:31:57.360
<v Speaker 1>That's right, he is what they call progressive Canada and

0:31:57.440 --> 0:32:01.200
<v Speaker 1>South Korea. It's a liberal plot form that has been

0:32:01.320 --> 0:32:06.680
<v Speaker 1>in opposition to the conservative leadership four nine years. Moon

0:32:06.800 --> 0:32:09.360
<v Speaker 1>does have experience with leadership as a former chief of

0:32:09.440 --> 0:32:14.440
<v Speaker 1>staff to then liberal President No Mu chan Uh in

0:32:14.520 --> 0:32:17.960
<v Speaker 1>the mid two thousands. A lot of his policy platforms

0:32:18.880 --> 0:32:23.640
<v Speaker 1>actually draw directly from that era. He is going to

0:32:23.720 --> 0:32:27.840
<v Speaker 1>be more favorable towards trying to have dialogue with North Korea.

0:32:28.720 --> 0:32:32.760
<v Speaker 1>He wants to have greater economic cooperation with North Korea

0:32:32.760 --> 0:32:35.480
<v Speaker 1>as a way of trying to change that country and

0:32:35.800 --> 0:32:39.640
<v Speaker 1>trying trying to ease the attention and conflict with the

0:32:39.760 --> 0:32:44.000
<v Speaker 1>North uh And he's also been h somebody who has

0:32:44.120 --> 0:32:48.880
<v Speaker 1>raised questions about the UHUM missile defense system that the

0:32:49.000 --> 0:32:52.440
<v Speaker 1>US has recently installed in South Korea. He's called for

0:32:52.680 --> 0:32:55.840
<v Speaker 1>view of that decision, but it doesn't necessarily mean that

0:32:55.880 --> 0:32:59.440
<v Speaker 1>he's gonna return it at this point because South Korean

0:32:59.440 --> 0:33:02.000
<v Speaker 1>public units largely in favor of it. I think a

0:33:02.080 --> 0:33:04.760
<v Speaker 1>departure would that be to have more engagement with North Korea.

0:33:04.800 --> 0:33:07.120
<v Speaker 1>What's the what's the status of dialogue between these two

0:33:07.240 --> 0:33:11.080
<v Speaker 1>nations at this point? But really nothing has been going

0:33:11.160 --> 0:33:13.600
<v Speaker 1>on in terms of dialogue for the past few years.

0:33:14.200 --> 0:33:19.720
<v Speaker 1>The progressive blame it on conservative efforts to squeeze North Korea,

0:33:20.560 --> 0:33:24.160
<v Speaker 1>UH and really to induce some kind of regime change.

0:33:25.320 --> 0:33:29.040
<v Speaker 1>But the North Korea's also are not configured to have

0:33:29.280 --> 0:33:33.280
<v Speaker 1>dialogue with the South. The leading individuals who had been

0:33:33.360 --> 0:33:36.200
<v Speaker 1>involved in inter Korean dialogue in the past are no

0:33:36.320 --> 0:33:39.760
<v Speaker 1>longer there, and at least as of now, Ki junglen

0:33:39.920 --> 0:33:43.280
<v Speaker 1>has a general who is in charge of trying to

0:33:43.400 --> 0:33:46.120
<v Speaker 1>support South Korea in charge of his South Korea policy.

0:33:46.760 --> 0:33:51.320
<v Speaker 1>Help us in all of our listeners with our coverage

0:33:51.360 --> 0:33:53.320
<v Speaker 1>of the Korea, as you are truly one of the

0:33:53.440 --> 0:33:57.400
<v Speaker 1>nations experts on all of this, when you hear what

0:33:57.600 --> 0:34:01.720
<v Speaker 1>I perceive is relatively simply us to coverage of North

0:34:01.880 --> 0:34:05.280
<v Speaker 1>and South Korea and the new South Korea, the new

0:34:05.360 --> 0:34:08.160
<v Speaker 1>government as well. What do we most get wrong in

0:34:08.239 --> 0:34:14.319
<v Speaker 1>our coverage? Scott Well? A lot of times the headlines

0:34:14.840 --> 0:34:20.720
<v Speaker 1>UH sees upon things that are a little bit more sensationalistic,

0:34:20.840 --> 0:34:24.160
<v Speaker 1>but when you start to dig in us it seems

0:34:24.200 --> 0:34:28.520
<v Speaker 1>like things are not as dramatic. Certainly on the North

0:34:28.640 --> 0:34:34.240
<v Speaker 1>Korean front. Kim Jong un is portrayed as a stereotypical

0:34:34.800 --> 0:34:39.480
<v Speaker 1>UM kind of joke, but it's a deadly serious joke

0:34:39.600 --> 0:34:43.600
<v Speaker 1>in terms of the nature of his leadership and the

0:34:43.719 --> 0:34:47.400
<v Speaker 1>nature of the threat that he poses in South Korea.

0:34:47.560 --> 0:34:49.919
<v Speaker 1>You've got a kind of you know, black and white

0:34:50.000 --> 0:34:56.320
<v Speaker 1>contrast between choices where you know, really South Korea is

0:34:56.360 --> 0:34:58.040
<v Speaker 1>going to be is going to continue to be an

0:34:58.040 --> 0:35:00.839
<v Speaker 1>ally of the United States, and it really a much

0:35:00.880 --> 0:35:05.680
<v Speaker 1>more constrained choice. Does our president understand the brilliance at

0:35:05.719 --> 0:35:12.640
<v Speaker 1>Scott Snyder just gave us, UM, Well, we'll see the

0:35:12.840 --> 0:35:18.440
<v Speaker 1>right strategy, the right strategy in dealing with a progressive

0:35:18.920 --> 0:35:25.000
<v Speaker 1>leader in South Korea. Uh, he's getting advice from different sources.

0:35:25.560 --> 0:35:28.200
<v Speaker 1>Some of them are pro Alliance and some of them

0:35:28.239 --> 0:35:30.719
<v Speaker 1>wanted distance from the United States. And so the key

0:35:30.840 --> 0:35:35.120
<v Speaker 1>to success is to cultivate the pro Alliance people in

0:35:35.239 --> 0:35:40.160
<v Speaker 1>the new administration and actually to welcome and um um

0:35:40.680 --> 0:35:45.799
<v Speaker 1>to bring bring along Moon as a leader, rather than

0:35:45.880 --> 0:35:49.959
<v Speaker 1>do things like um threatened to make South Korea paid

0:35:50.040 --> 0:35:53.520
<v Speaker 1>for a missile defense system that um it was understood

0:35:53.560 --> 0:35:55.520
<v Speaker 1>the US was going to pay for all along. What

0:35:55.640 --> 0:35:58.320
<v Speaker 1>are the dynamics like right now in in South Korea

0:35:58.400 --> 0:36:01.560
<v Speaker 1>between the presidency and the legislative branch. We talked about

0:36:01.560 --> 0:36:03.320
<v Speaker 1>that in the context of France. Her most most recently,

0:36:03.320 --> 0:36:06.400
<v Speaker 1>the challenges to the Manimu McColl face in France. In Korea,

0:36:06.480 --> 0:36:09.520
<v Speaker 1>is it the same situation? How how much how much

0:36:09.560 --> 0:36:11.120
<v Speaker 1>good faith is he going to get from the parliament

0:36:11.160 --> 0:36:15.320
<v Speaker 1>when he's inaugurated. Yeah, that's a great question, because you know,

0:36:15.440 --> 0:36:19.880
<v Speaker 1>South Korea really has a system that allows the winner

0:36:19.960 --> 0:36:23.839
<v Speaker 1>of the plurality to become the president. Uh. Frankly, if

0:36:23.960 --> 0:36:26.319
<v Speaker 1>the South Korean's had the French system, I'm not sure

0:36:26.360 --> 0:36:31.400
<v Speaker 1>whether Moon would be the next president because his party

0:36:31.560 --> 0:36:35.279
<v Speaker 1>holds a minority in the legislature. And frankly, it's a

0:36:35.400 --> 0:36:38.120
<v Speaker 1>system right now with four or five different parties that

0:36:38.600 --> 0:36:41.480
<v Speaker 1>is designed for gridlock. So he's going to have an

0:36:41.680 --> 0:36:46.960
<v Speaker 1>enormous leadership challenge simply trying to get supporting legislation for

0:36:47.239 --> 0:36:50.719
<v Speaker 1>the agenda that he brings um, you know, through the

0:36:51.040 --> 0:36:54.240
<v Speaker 1>National Assembly. David Guraa in New York, Tom Keene in London.

0:36:54.320 --> 0:36:56.719
<v Speaker 1>This week, this is Bloomberg Surveillance on Bloomberg Rady. We're

0:36:56.719 --> 0:36:59.880
<v Speaker 1>watching the election results come in in South Korea today.

0:37:00.200 --> 0:37:03.320
<v Speaker 1>A Moon j In poised to take power in South Korea.

0:37:03.880 --> 0:37:07.759
<v Speaker 1>He's leading his conservative opponent by forty four percent to

0:37:08.120 --> 0:37:11.000
<v Speaker 1>three point. Scott Snyder is with US he's director of

0:37:11.000 --> 0:37:12.880
<v Speaker 1>the program in U S Korea Policy at the Council

0:37:13.200 --> 0:37:14.919
<v Speaker 1>on Formulation. Scott, let me just ask you to remind

0:37:15.000 --> 0:37:17.800
<v Speaker 1>us how we got to where we are today. We

0:37:18.280 --> 0:37:21.360
<v Speaker 1>hear having this election earlier than expected. What led to

0:37:21.480 --> 0:37:25.120
<v Speaker 1>this moment? Yeah, that's very important because it really also

0:37:25.239 --> 0:37:30.719
<v Speaker 1>has shaped the election outcome. Essentially, the former president Uh,

0:37:30.840 --> 0:37:36.120
<v Speaker 1>it was discovered, was linked to corruption and bribery scheme

0:37:37.239 --> 0:37:41.160
<v Speaker 1>that was really led by her very close UM, lifelong

0:37:41.320 --> 0:37:45.880
<v Speaker 1>friend Uh and involved extortion of some of the major

0:37:47.160 --> 0:37:51.279
<v Speaker 1>business conglomerates in South Korea. When that became public as

0:37:51.280 --> 0:37:56.840
<v Speaker 1>a result of information being discovered on the discarded laptop,

0:37:58.000 --> 0:38:02.640
<v Speaker 1>everything kind of unraveled. You saw public protests UM every

0:38:02.719 --> 0:38:05.600
<v Speaker 1>weekend through the end of last year, and then a

0:38:05.680 --> 0:38:09.719
<v Speaker 1>formal motion of impeachment against the president Um that was

0:38:09.800 --> 0:38:13.960
<v Speaker 1>held up in the Constitutional Court on March tent and

0:38:14.040 --> 0:38:17.879
<v Speaker 1>that triggered a sixty day period during which South Korea

0:38:17.920 --> 0:38:19.880
<v Speaker 1>had to elect a new president. As you've been listening

0:38:19.960 --> 0:38:22.080
<v Speaker 1>to the rhetoric on the campaign trail ahead of the

0:38:22.160 --> 0:38:24.920
<v Speaker 1>vote today, how much of it has centered on that scandal?

0:38:24.960 --> 0:38:27.080
<v Speaker 1>In other words, how much of the platforms of these

0:38:27.120 --> 0:38:30.880
<v Speaker 1>two leading candidates centered on reform to the economic system

0:38:31.120 --> 0:38:37.320
<v Speaker 1>in South Korea. UM. Well, certainly each candidate had his

0:38:37.520 --> 0:38:43.240
<v Speaker 1>own or her own um policies for trying to improve

0:38:43.320 --> 0:38:47.160
<v Speaker 1>the economy and address corruption. But the main advantage that

0:38:47.320 --> 0:38:51.200
<v Speaker 1>Moon had was not in the candidate debates, where the

0:38:51.400 --> 0:38:54.680
<v Speaker 1>various differences among candidates were featured, but really in the

0:38:54.800 --> 0:38:58.279
<v Speaker 1>fact that his face had been in front a lot

0:38:58.440 --> 0:39:01.160
<v Speaker 1>of a lot of these citizen proch pests that had

0:39:01.200 --> 0:39:05.200
<v Speaker 1>occurred earlier in the year. Uh and I think that

0:39:05.360 --> 0:39:10.960
<v Speaker 1>he's basically written the frankly public anger with this to victory.

0:39:11.480 --> 0:39:14.080
<v Speaker 1>We talked about North Korean China. Scott, what is the

0:39:14.200 --> 0:39:19.520
<v Speaker 1>relationship of South Korea and Beijing. It's a very interesting

0:39:19.640 --> 0:39:24.759
<v Speaker 1>question because China has really been imposing pretty much comprehensive

0:39:24.800 --> 0:39:31.040
<v Speaker 1>economic retaliation in cultural um and consumer products against South

0:39:31.120 --> 0:39:36.040
<v Speaker 1>Korean retaliation for South Korea's decision to accept this MUSA

0:39:36.200 --> 0:39:40.640
<v Speaker 1>missile defense system that the US is deploying in South Korea,

0:39:41.239 --> 0:39:43.680
<v Speaker 1>and so that really has had a major impact on

0:39:44.160 --> 0:39:48.040
<v Speaker 1>South Korean views of China. We've seen about a twenty

0:39:48.120 --> 0:39:51.760
<v Speaker 1>or thirty point shift in Korean public opinion from positive

0:39:51.800 --> 0:39:55.960
<v Speaker 1>to negative. UH and UH. That's an area actually where

0:39:55.960 --> 0:39:58.799
<v Speaker 1>a new administration can try to pick up and get

0:39:58.880 --> 0:40:01.680
<v Speaker 1>things on the right track. But it's going to have

0:40:01.800 --> 0:40:05.400
<v Speaker 1>to be under conditions where uh, the new leader doesn't

0:40:05.760 --> 0:40:11.000
<v Speaker 1>succumb to China's rather brazen efforts to interfere with national

0:40:11.080 --> 0:40:14.520
<v Speaker 1>security decisions that have been made in South Korea. How

0:40:14.520 --> 0:40:17.480
<v Speaker 1>do you explain the way these these family run conglomerates

0:40:17.520 --> 0:40:21.239
<v Speaker 1>work to those who who don't know of them. How

0:40:21.320 --> 0:40:28.000
<v Speaker 1>do they work? It's incredibly difficult thing to explain because, uh,

0:40:28.280 --> 0:40:31.600
<v Speaker 1>you usually when specialists start to put up charts that

0:40:31.760 --> 0:40:37.160
<v Speaker 1>show the various cross shareholding arrangements that are used in

0:40:37.360 --> 0:40:40.800
<v Speaker 1>order to allow families to be able to maintain control

0:40:40.800 --> 0:40:45.160
<v Speaker 1>of the conglomerates, Uh, it involves a page full of

0:40:46.440 --> 0:40:51.279
<v Speaker 1>arrows from one intant to another that is truly mind boggling. UM.

0:40:51.600 --> 0:40:55.520
<v Speaker 1>But essentially, UM, you know, it's about kind of um

0:40:55.760 --> 0:41:02.040
<v Speaker 1>controlling holding companies that in combination, uh, have allowed the

0:41:02.200 --> 0:41:07.080
<v Speaker 1>family to still maintain control over these businesses that really

0:41:07.160 --> 0:41:11.080
<v Speaker 1>have grown to mammoth proportions compared to where they started.

0:41:11.920 --> 0:41:15.000
<v Speaker 1>What is that? What is President Trump's policy position toward

0:41:15.080 --> 0:41:16.560
<v Speaker 1>North Korea? At this point, we have a good sense

0:41:16.600 --> 0:41:18.839
<v Speaker 1>of it We've had his Secretary of State go through

0:41:18.840 --> 0:41:21.759
<v Speaker 1>the region of Secretary commerce. Do we know what it is?

0:41:21.840 --> 0:41:26.839
<v Speaker 1>Is it any sing in fifty words or less? Um?

0:41:27.520 --> 0:41:32.000
<v Speaker 1>The tagline is massive pressure, pressure, and engagement. But it's

0:41:32.040 --> 0:41:36.200
<v Speaker 1>been confusing because on the one hand he signaled willingness

0:41:36.320 --> 0:41:40.000
<v Speaker 1>to potentially use the military. At the same time he

0:41:40.120 --> 0:41:42.359
<v Speaker 1>called Kim Jong on a smart cookie and says he's

0:41:42.360 --> 0:41:47.000
<v Speaker 1>willing to sit down. Basically, it's pressuring North Korea into dialogue,

0:41:47.040 --> 0:41:49.920
<v Speaker 1>I think is really what they have in mind. Scott,

0:41:50.040 --> 0:41:54.960
<v Speaker 1>we killed thirty three thousand, sixty two is one count

0:41:55.760 --> 0:41:59.880
<v Speaker 1>in the Korean War. When you hear the president established

0:42:00.160 --> 0:42:03.800
<v Speaker 1>his foreign policy and maybe it's a foreign policy away

0:42:03.880 --> 0:42:08.080
<v Speaker 1>from Secretary Tillerson, is there any awareness of a sacrifice

0:42:08.120 --> 0:42:16.320
<v Speaker 1>Americans have made on this important peninsula? Um? Well, the

0:42:16.440 --> 0:42:19.320
<v Speaker 1>main thing that the administration needs to understand, and I

0:42:19.440 --> 0:42:23.880
<v Speaker 1>think the advisors understand, but it's not necessarily fully clear

0:42:24.640 --> 0:42:28.279
<v Speaker 1>the extent to which President Trump has absorbed it yet

0:42:28.400 --> 0:42:32.680
<v Speaker 1>because of his tension for maximizing uncertainty, you know, And

0:42:32.880 --> 0:42:35.960
<v Speaker 1>that's basically that you can say all options are on

0:42:36.040 --> 0:42:39.800
<v Speaker 1>the table, but given the consequences of military action on

0:42:39.840 --> 0:42:44.680
<v Speaker 1>the peninsula, all options are not feasible. Uh. And therefore,

0:42:45.640 --> 0:42:48.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, threatening to use the military option can come

0:42:48.560 --> 0:42:50.920
<v Speaker 1>off as a bluff or a false threat. But then

0:42:50.960 --> 0:42:53.880
<v Speaker 1>circle back to your original observation, which is the stability

0:42:53.960 --> 0:42:57.440
<v Speaker 1>of a leader of North Korea. UM, I mean we well,

0:42:57.600 --> 0:42:59.440
<v Speaker 1>we you know it's it's it's part of a Saturday

0:42:59.520 --> 0:43:04.200
<v Speaker 1>night life. Get this isn't funny, is it? No, it's not.

0:43:04.400 --> 0:43:08.919
<v Speaker 1>We're about to cross a threshold with regard to North

0:43:09.000 --> 0:43:12.960
<v Speaker 1>Korea's development of an I C B M. Given the

0:43:14.160 --> 0:43:19.560
<v Speaker 1>perception of the leader, even if he's rational, most Americans

0:43:20.280 --> 0:43:24.080
<v Speaker 1>would not want to be vulnerable to the possible use

0:43:24.160 --> 0:43:28.320
<v Speaker 1>of nuclear weapons by this leader, even if he's trying

0:43:28.400 --> 0:43:32.160
<v Speaker 1>to gain them and even the score with the UUs

0:43:32.520 --> 0:43:36.719
<v Speaker 1>UH and strengthen his own um ability to survive. I

0:43:36.920 --> 0:43:41.400
<v Speaker 1>urge all of you. Scott Snyder the Council on Foreign Relations,

0:43:41.480 --> 0:43:45.320
<v Speaker 1>and he is dedicated out of Rice University. His work

0:43:45.640 --> 0:43:49.680
<v Speaker 1>on Korea is just definitive. The backgrounders that you can

0:43:49.719 --> 0:43:52.719
<v Speaker 1>see at the sea if our site are just really

0:43:52.840 --> 0:44:05.560
<v Speaker 1>quite wonderful. YEA. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast.

0:44:06.040 --> 0:44:11.200
<v Speaker 1>Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple podcasts, SoundCloud, or

0:44:11.360 --> 0:44:15.600
<v Speaker 1>whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keene.

0:44:15.760 --> 0:44:20.080
<v Speaker 1>David Gura is at David Gura. Before the podcast, you

0:44:20.120 --> 0:44:34.480
<v Speaker 1>can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio, brought you

0:44:34.640 --> 0:44:38.239
<v Speaker 1>by Bank of America Mary Lynch. Dedicated to bringing our

0:44:38.320 --> 0:44:41.880
<v Speaker 1>clients insights and solutions to meet the challenges of a

0:44:41.960 --> 0:44:46.359
<v Speaker 1>transforming world. That's the power of global connections. Mary Lynch,

0:44:46.520 --> 0:44:50.800
<v Speaker 1>Pierce Fetter and Smith Incorporated Member s I p C.