Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene along
Speaker 2: with Paul Sweeney. Join us each day for insight from
Speaker 2: the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You
Speaker 2: can also watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to see the show weekday
Speaker 2: mornings from seven to ten am Eastern from our global
Speaker 2: headquarters in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen and always I'm Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 3: Paulciana joins us.
Speaker 2: Had his fit technical strategy at Bank of America. Paul,
Speaker 2: you don't mince any words about it. This is a
Speaker 2: two year going well above five percent? How does it
Speaker 2: get there?
Speaker 4: Yes?
Speaker 5: Indeed, so base case technical process says there's something called
Speaker 5: a rising wedge pattered forming and the riding wet term
Speaker 5: chart of two year yield right, which says this cycle
Speaker 5: needs to make another marginal new high this year.
Speaker 3: What is the bet now in the bond market?
Speaker 2: Can it be like an in video where everybody's on
Speaker 2: board an inequity stock in luisja Buscham because there's an
Speaker 2: is there an oomph to the bid?
Speaker 3: Excuse me? Is there an oomp to a lower price
Speaker 3: higher yield on two your.
Speaker 5: I think it's driven by the commodity space. Really, the
Speaker 5: higher commodities.
Speaker 3: You're speaking terms of Francisco Blanche. It's unbelievable, that's breaking news.
Speaker 3: Commodities are driving the two year yield.
Speaker 5: Yes, it's the inflation scare, right. The higher commodity prices go,
Speaker 5: the more markets think about sticky inflation, the risk of
Speaker 5: the Fed staying on hold for longer, potentially pricing outcuts
Speaker 5: the narrative talking about whether or not we get a hike,
Speaker 5: which is unlikely.
Speaker 3: But yeah, I mean the interns today, Paul, and it
Speaker 3: came in. They didn't break brief me on Brent. Brent
Speaker 3: was eighty three, it's now rounded up eighty five dollars
Speaker 3: a barrel. There's that inflation exactly right.
Speaker 4: And Tom, I'm looking at Paul, She's got this is
Speaker 4: research note.
Speaker 6: There's just way too many charts.
Speaker 4: And I mean, he wrote a book.
Speaker 3: He couldn't he had to. He couldn't even get into
Speaker 3: Le cirque Across was right. He had to show his
Speaker 3: idea at le Circa and they didn't even believe his
Speaker 3: id and he had a book out on technical annalysmis.
Speaker 4: He's like seventeen years exactly.
Speaker 6: So, Paul, what do we do here with this ten
Speaker 6: year treasure? It feels like, I don't know, four point
Speaker 6: fifty fourth were kind of feel like we're in a
Speaker 6: kind of a training ranger.
Speaker 3: How do you think about the ten year we do?
Speaker 5: You know, our our medium term view here in the
Speaker 5: ten year yield is you know, we're in this first
Speaker 5: half of twenty twenty four, which we define as counter
Speaker 5: trend to fourth quarter twenty three. Fourth quarter twenty three
Speaker 5: yields fell, first half of this year yields up. I
Speaker 5: think we're nearing the end of that period where we
Speaker 5: should be looking for tops in the ten year yield
Speaker 5: chart or signals that say we peak out by five
Speaker 5: percent and roll over in the second half of the year.
Speaker 2: You take your trend analyis respected John fitzger Old Kennedy.
Speaker 2: What do we learned by taking the ten year trend
Speaker 2: backed in nineteen sixty two sixty three.
Speaker 5: That it went up for fifteen years and about down
Speaker 5: for thirty So that doesn't mean it can't go up
Speaker 5: for fifteen years, right, anything is possible in markets. And
Speaker 5: what I think changed in twenty twenty was the downtrending yields.
Speaker 5: That secular decline clearly ended, right, the downtrend channel that
Speaker 5: everybody loves for so long from the peak in nineteen
Speaker 5: eighty five down to the twenty twenty low, it broke.
Speaker 5: And I think what's even more fantastic from a technical
Speaker 5: lens is that there was a head and shoulders bottom
Speaker 5: in the monthly charts of ten year yields when it
Speaker 5: did in fact change the secular tide. And you know,
Speaker 5: to see that happen, it complements the head and shoulders
Speaker 5: top back in the early nineteen eighties. So these are
Speaker 5: the same technical patterns tom that are formed by different
Speaker 5: investors over different generations, repeating themselves.
Speaker 6: So is this kind of a are we Is this
Speaker 6: kind of the new normal here? You know, we got
Speaker 6: a ten year you know four five percent?
Speaker 3: Is that kind of the new normal here?
Speaker 5: I define it as we're now in a secular bear
Speaker 5: market in treasuries, secular overall. Biggest picture, right, people would
Speaker 5: say the equity markets are in a secular bulb, right,
Speaker 5: and treasuries we're in a secular bear, which is rising
Speaker 5: yields for the biggest picture. So this year they come
Speaker 5: back down again, but maybe next year or two they
Speaker 5: go to higher highs.
Speaker 2: If a stock is a moonshot, and we're gonna go
Speaker 2: a little technical here now because Ciana can keep up
Speaker 2: with this if you run a semi logue or slope
Speaker 2: matters percent change, and even if you take Wells Wader
Speaker 2: in nineteen seventy eight and you look at some trend.
Speaker 3: Analysis as well. Can you chart in Vidia? I mean,
Speaker 3: I'm not it's outside your remit to give me buy,
Speaker 3: hold sell on in Vidia? Right?
Speaker 4: True?
Speaker 3: Okay? Can you technically chart a moonshot, whether it's copper
Speaker 3: or in video? Absolutely? Well, what do you see now
Speaker 3: in a moonshot like in video? Well? Is it contained?
Speaker 4: Is in control? Arithmetic scale? Let's Lisa, it's like.
Speaker 3: A whoa whoa, whoa, whoa whoah to any syllables, Lisa,
Speaker 3: can we go arithmetic today? A logarithmic there we got
Speaker 3: to arithmetic, He's a guest.
Speaker 5: Look logarhythmic scale. It's up into the right.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 5: If you look at the dollar since two thousand and eight,
Speaker 5: the dollars up into the right.
Speaker 3: What's your dollar call?
Speaker 5: We're bullish?
Speaker 3: Your bullish?
Speaker 5: Do you think the dollar stays supported this quarter? There's
Speaker 5: potential for a breakout in the Bloomberg Dollar Index, for example,
Speaker 5: to another high for the year before there's any risk
Speaker 5: of it rolling over. Ultimately, the dollar isn't the trade here.
Speaker 5: It's swings three percent either way. It's the currency on
Speaker 5: the other half. Right, So if you want to carry
Speaker 5: because actually portfolios.
Speaker 3: Sess hour hour.
Speaker 2: Only Damien can talk carry here, Paul I, I really
Speaker 2: I got time for one more question. We have James
Speaker 2: kke Lastman coming in later iconic for Dow thirty six thousand.
Speaker 3: It took a while to get there. Can you frame
Speaker 3: out a roaring twenties like Edyard Denny where we're in
Speaker 3: an extended bull market?
Speaker 5: You know what we can frame out in our equity
Speaker 5: technical research is that every cycle that we've pretty much
Speaker 5: looked at for this year is positive and it does
Speaker 5: indicate stronger statistics for the summer rally and stronger statistics
Speaker 5: to your end. So big picture, we do think that
Speaker 5: equity markets are in the secular bull cycle, not as
Speaker 5: secular bear. So yes, it is supportive of that narrative.
Speaker 3: Okay, okay, he knows what he's talking about. He knows
Speaker 3: who the food court is ex.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg now holding court at Bank of America, doing a
Speaker 2: great job there. And I really can't say enough about
Speaker 2: his book.
Speaker 3: It is not dated.
Speaker 2: It is a brilliant book, a little dense. They're a
Speaker 2: pro book on technicals as well. Thank god for Amanda
Speaker 2: Linum of Villanova who hit the pause button in the
Speaker 2: control room and said there that should do it. I
Speaker 2: mean I had that once happened where you know, it's
Speaker 2: like one little button in a studio and boom it's on.
Speaker 3: Thank you Amanda for getting our audio back.
Speaker 2: Joining us some blackrock, Amandelignum right now, we just had
Speaker 2: Pausiana from Bank of America and it's in the zeitgeist
Speaker 2: as non consensus, but with nominal.
Speaker 3: GDP where it is with the spirit of Atlanta GDP. Now,
Speaker 3: what if rates go higher, how does Blackrock and how
Speaker 3: do you, Amanda line them frame out a two year
Speaker 3: or at five point zero five five point one?
Speaker 7: Oh sure, good morning, and thank you first of all
Speaker 7: for having me. I think, Tom, what you're raising is
Speaker 7: is the reason why we think that there's not really
Speaker 7: a sense of urgency for the FED to normalize policy,
Speaker 7: and even when they do, it's likely to be a
Speaker 7: shallow cutting cycle. So for corporate credit, that means we
Speaker 7: shouldn't be banking on significant near term interest rate relief.
Speaker 7: I think the tail risk that we're watching, and the
Speaker 7: longer that rate cuts get delayed, I think lends more
Speaker 7: credence to this possibility is that of a rate hike.
Speaker 7: And rate hike would not be negative for credit because
Speaker 7: of the incremental twenty five or fifty basis points mathematically,
Speaker 7: it would be more negative for credit because of the
Speaker 7: uncertainty that it would interject related to the forward path
Speaker 7: of monetary policy. That's not a great backdrop for credit.
Speaker 7: That's not a great backdrop for deal making, specifically kind
Speaker 7: of sponsor related m and A. And so that's what
Speaker 7: we're watching for. It's not our base case, but it's
Speaker 7: a concern. And that's that's really the risk.
Speaker 3: Sponsor Sponsor related and A is when the twerp the
Speaker 3: kid asks you if they can go to the third
Speaker 3: lacrosse camp this summer. That's what sponsor really did means.
Speaker 6: So Amanda, he I mean I could sit here to
Speaker 6: your treasury like a lot of investors here and get
Speaker 6: close to five percent.
Speaker 5: That's not a bad trade.
Speaker 6: Or should I take some credit risky things?
Speaker 7: So we like taking credit risk and floating rate exposures,
Speaker 7: So leverage loans, for example, up around three and a
Speaker 7: half percent year to date, outperforming high yield up around
Speaker 7: one point five percent. Total return IG is lagging because
Speaker 7: of the duration exposure. I think importantly, if you're deploying
Speaker 7: money in corporate credit, you need to be deploying for
Speaker 7: income and yield, not for total return. We shouldn't be
Speaker 7: banking on a significant rally in rates to really kind
Speaker 7: of juice those total returns. Nor should we be banking
Speaker 7: on material spread compression, because spreads are already quite tight.
Speaker 7: So really the conversations that we're having in capital deployment
Speaker 7: and corporate credit is really about locking in those yields.
Speaker 3: I'm going to get you in trouble. It's confusing, folks.
Speaker 3: There's black rock, there's blackstone. There's black Rock.
Speaker 2: Which is the building CBS is in over I think
Speaker 2: it's on sixth Avenue.
Speaker 3: A man, I'm going to get you in trouble here.
Speaker 2: If we get a rate regime higher, what does that
Speaker 2: do to private equity and private credit valuations.
Speaker 3: My math doesn't work.
Speaker 7: Yeah, So, somewhat counterintuitively, Tom, against this backdrop of high
Speaker 7: for long, we've seen covenant defaults in one of the
Speaker 7: private credit industries that we track decline for four consecutive quarters,
Speaker 7: which is a bit of a counterintuitive result. It speaks
Speaker 7: to the flexibility that is inherent in this long term
Speaker 7: lender bar relationship. I think the point you're raising is
Speaker 7: also applicable in the public markets, and for a given
Speaker 7: company with a given business model and a given macro
Speaker 7: backdrop of say higher for even longer, they're probably afforded
Speaker 7: more flexibility in the private markets relative to the liquid However,
Speaker 7: I do think that when you're thinking about sponsor related
Speaker 7: m and A, so again not strategic companies buying other companies,
Speaker 7: but more lbo activity, financing is a major component of
Speaker 7: that equation, and so it would likely keep that sort
Speaker 7: of activity well on.
Speaker 2: In Twitter, Yes to this guy, I'm sorry, don't have
Speaker 2: his name in front of it. He's absolutely fabulous. I
Speaker 2: read everything he does. He breaks down all these property
Speaker 2: deals that go bust. And there's a deal that went bust.
Speaker 2: I can't remember the geography it doesn't matter where they
Speaker 2: so the mezzanine financing and equitized it. That's what I
Speaker 2: see coming here with a higher rate regime is somebody
Speaker 2: puts a shotgun too somebody's head and says, all of
Speaker 2: a sudden.
Speaker 3: Its equity.
Speaker 7: And I think with respect to commercial real estate the
Speaker 7: trend that we've seen over the past eighteen months has
Speaker 7: been extending. I think we've underestimated the ability and the
Speaker 7: willingness yeah of lenders to work with their borrowers. And so,
Speaker 7: for example, Real Capital Analytics estimates there was more than
Speaker 7: two hundred billion of CRO debt that was supposed to
Speaker 7: mature in twenty twenty three that did not, so it
Speaker 7: was pushed to twenty twenty four. So now that twenty
Speaker 7: twenty four maturity wall is not six hundred billion, it's
Speaker 7: around eight hundred billion. If we have the environment where
Speaker 7: you interject uncertainty related to monetary policy, I think, but
Speaker 7: there may be a limit to that. I think tom
Speaker 7: is the kind of the tail risk in a higher
Speaker 7: for longer rate environment where importantly there's uncertainty so that
Speaker 7: expectations in that price discovery process can't get met between
Speaker 7: the buyer and the cellar Mandy your.
Speaker 6: Head of macro credit research at Blackrock, How do you
Speaker 6: think about private credit because that's been a business that's
Speaker 6: just exploded in the last ten to fifteen years on
Speaker 6: Wall Street.
Speaker 7: Yeah, we actually have a pretty constructive view on private credit.
Speaker 7: We're expecting it to grow at around a fifteen percent
Speaker 7: compound annual growth rate over the next five years. That's
Speaker 7: actually below the twenty percent compound annual growth rate of
Speaker 7: the past five but we think it's actually a positive
Speaker 7: from the perspective of several years ago, if we were
Speaker 7: having this conversation, a company may have decided between issuing
Speaker 7: a hild bond and a leverage loan in the syndicated market.
Speaker 7: Now there's this third and viable option. Importantly, we also
Speaker 7: see scope for this to grow beyond corporate lending to
Speaker 7: asset based lending. So as banks become more selective with
Speaker 7: their lending, we see actually an opportunity for private credit
Speaker 7: to step in there. So we have a pretty constructiveview
Speaker 7: on it.
Speaker 6: Are you worried at all about the maybe lack of
Speaker 6: regulatory oversight of that market because it doesn't seem like
Speaker 6: it's not an sec type of thing thing.
Speaker 7: There is actually a fair amount of oversight in terms
Speaker 7: of how these companies operate business. I think the one
Speaker 7: stat actually, if I had to pick one that gives
Speaker 7: me comfort, it's that new and this is using data
Speaker 7: from pre quinn New entrance in private credit have raised
Speaker 7: two percent two and a half percent of capital on
Speaker 7: average since twenty twenty two. So it's showing that actually
Speaker 7: the market's being discerning and where it's allocating capital, it's
Speaker 7: valuing expertise, experience, governance.
Speaker 3: Running out of time.
Speaker 2: But a big question, and particularly into the Apple meeting,
Speaker 2: is big tech big tech finally going to grow up
Speaker 2: an issue debt?
Speaker 7: Well, we've seen the capital markets in IG wide open
Speaker 7: books four times over subscribe. I mean, I think if
Speaker 7: I'm a corporate treasurer CFO, especially if I'm in a
Speaker 7: cash rich position, I think I would be I would
Speaker 7: be prudently issuing in the first half of this year.
Speaker 7: There's a fair amount of event risk cutting into the
Speaker 7: second half, where I think whose treasure is to take
Speaker 7: some chips off the table. Specifically, even though the risk
Speaker 7: free rate is elevated, spreads are tight, the tone is good,
Speaker 7: and I think they should probably think about taking that window.
Speaker 3: We got through this without asking her about bitcoin. Yep,
Speaker 3: exactly good. That's good a man, Alinea, This is brilliant.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much. She's with black Rock. Yes, prett
Speaker 3: to digress here right now.
Speaker 2: And it is into the election season and all that
Speaker 2: we have and it is into a taut of two
Speaker 2: hundred and thirty nine page book. It is cheaper, faster, better,
Speaker 2: How will win the Climate War? By a guy who's
Speaker 2: never mailed it in time on the Upper ef.
Speaker 3: You went to Yale and you could have been a flunky,
Speaker 3: and you were absolutely nailed it in economics. Where did
Speaker 3: you know?
Speaker 2: Everybody knows you had to drive in investment capital goldmen
Speaker 2: Sex Morgan stantly blah blah blah. Where did you get
Speaker 2: the drive the first day at Yale University to not
Speaker 2: be another spoiled brat exit?
Speaker 3: Where did that come from? Well?
Speaker 1: I guess you never met my mom.
Speaker 3: You know, it's so funny slave it on maham right.
Speaker 1: Well, I give her an enormous amount of credit because
Speaker 1: she's one of the most down to earth people I've
Speaker 1: met in my whole life.
Speaker 3: Okay, she was you.
Speaker 1: She ran school of volunteer programs all over New York.
Speaker 3: She worked at the House of Detention. Is that right.
Speaker 1: She worked at the Brooklyn House, she rode her bike
Speaker 1: all over the city. She was she accepted herself, and
Speaker 1: that meant she could accept everybody else in society, from
Speaker 1: the fanciest to the least fancy, and look at him
Speaker 1: in the eyes an equal. And that's how I was
Speaker 1: brought up. And that's what I believe.
Speaker 3: The last chapter of Cheaper, Faster, Better is the heart
Speaker 3: of the matter.
Speaker 2: You're widely perceived as a Democrat with Mondel and all
Speaker 2: of your work over the years, but you have to
Speaker 2: speak to a doubting America on climate change. When the
Speaker 2: conservatives read this book, what do you want them to
Speaker 2: get out of it?
Speaker 1: What I want him to think is that this is
Speaker 1: an American a potential American success story, one that we
Speaker 1: are going to win. But we're going to win it together.
Speaker 1: I mean, the book is called Cheaper, Faster, Better, How
Speaker 1: We'll win the climate War, which means we're going to
Speaker 1: win it in the marketplace.
Speaker 3: We're going to win it with.
Speaker 1: The cheapest, best products in the world, and that's actually
Speaker 1: how we're going to solve this crisis. But also how
Speaker 1: we're going to have another American century, how we're going
Speaker 1: to come together as a people. We shouldn't be divided
Speaker 1: on this, we should be together.
Speaker 3: Paul and I are in London.
Speaker 2: Climate change green is you're steeped in it, particularly in
Speaker 2: the continent of Europe as well. Is the reason America's
Speaker 2: behind is some Lockean individualistic ethos from eighteen twenty or
Speaker 2: for the Better seventeen twenty.
Speaker 1: Well, let me say this, Tom, there is a lot
Speaker 1: of talk in the US, but let's look at what's
Speaker 1: actually happening in the US. I mean in one of
Speaker 1: the states where the talk is strongest against the sort
Speaker 1: of clean tech revolution, which would be Texas. They've tripled
Speaker 1: their solar in the last three years and it's going
Speaker 1: to go up another thirty five percent years.
Speaker 3: I saw this week paw An article. Texas is the
Speaker 3: most green state right now, exactly my point.
Speaker 1: So they can talk and talk and talk, but my
Speaker 1: point is we win in the marketplace. Texas produces by
Speaker 1: far the most wind energy of any state by far.
Speaker 1: Why are they doing it to be nice to be woke.
Speaker 1: I think they're doing it because it's cheap and it's
Speaker 1: a good deal. And that's my point is for whatever reason,
Speaker 1: people do it. We need to come together on this
Speaker 1: and win. It's important for us economically, it's important for
Speaker 1: us as a people. And by the way, we look
Speaker 1: at what's happening in Texas, look at what's happening in
Speaker 1: the southern United States right now in terms of storms,
Speaker 1: in terms of a heat dome, in terms of people dying.
Speaker 1: That's what's actually going on, and the people in Texas
Speaker 1: know it. And the question is why don't we accept
Speaker 1: each other, accept each other's motives. We're good people across
Speaker 1: this country. We share an awful lot, we're all patriotic.
Speaker 1: Why don't we go and win together in the way
Speaker 1: that the United States is built to do.
Speaker 6: You take a look at I think if you talk
Speaker 6: to the average personal industry, one of the.
Speaker 3: Things they think about, and I think.
Speaker 6: By clean energy, would be electric vehicles. And we had
Speaker 6: a nice initial surge and we have this great Tesla's
Speaker 6: success story, which is phenomenal. But what we've seen over
Speaker 6: the last year, year and a half, two years is
Speaker 6: pulling back a little bit from the auto industry. It
Speaker 6: seems like maybe the first adopters for evs they're already satiated.
Speaker 6: Where's a demand going to be. That's been a concern.
Speaker 6: Now I read an article in the Journal about maybe
Speaker 6: this whole evy thing's becoming politicized, the people that believe
Speaker 6: in climate change versus the people that don't believe in
Speaker 6: climate change.
Speaker 1: How do you bring those so lot together? Paul, let
Speaker 1: me just tell you a story. So, probably seven years ago,
Speaker 1: one of my very best friends in the world, who
Speaker 1: I would describe as a business Republican, somebody who believes
Speaker 1: that the economy drives success, that business drives the economy.
Speaker 1: That you know, a traditional concert you know, moderate conservative,
Speaker 1: but a really smart guy. He bought a Tesla and
Speaker 1: he's a car guy. He's from California. When I met
Speaker 1: him at eighteen, he took me out in his car
Speaker 1: and took it up to one hundred miles an hour
Speaker 1: to show me how fast it could go. He bought
Speaker 1: a Tesla seven years ago. I said, Matthew, you know,
Speaker 1: you know, are you out to change save the world here?
Speaker 1: He's like, absolutely not. This car goes zero to sixty
Speaker 1: so fast you can't believe it. It handles better than
Speaker 1: the European sports car. I love this car. So in fact, cheaper, faster, better.
Speaker 1: Americans are going to buy the cars that they enjoy,
Speaker 1: the ride they believe in, and you know whether that's
Speaker 1: going to be Yeah, they had a bad first quarter.
Speaker 1: I think a lot of it has to do with
Speaker 1: the product offering, whether there are new products. You know,
Speaker 1: where everybody's talking about the thirteen thousand dollars by D
Speaker 1: car that goes twelve hundred miles. Now it's a plug
Speaker 1: in hybrid. But my point is this is going to
Speaker 1: be product driven. It's gonna be people rievs.
Speaker 2: If they're so far ahead of us and delivering that
Speaker 2: twelve thousand dollars vehicle. Should President Biden's second term, you'll
Speaker 2: probably be in the cabinet.
Speaker 3: Should he should he should? He? Should he let the
Speaker 3: Chinese evs into the country.
Speaker 1: Look, I'm gonna give you the argument that I'm gonna
Speaker 1: give my answer if that's okay, Tom, Look, China is
Speaker 1: trying is the country that emits by far the most,
Speaker 1: but they're doing everything they can to win industrially in
Speaker 1: terms of you know, the clean energy. They're trying to do,
Speaker 1: all the solar panels, all the evs, and they're basically
Speaker 1: you know, dumping into the United States.
Speaker 3: And the question is when.
Speaker 1: People offer you really good product, really cheap. Should you
Speaker 1: allow them in hurts jobs helps. By the way, you
Speaker 1: guys keep talking about inflation, Oh my god, the bond market.
Speaker 1: What do you think was keeping inflation down all these years?
Speaker 1: It was cheap products from overseas forcing you know, prices
Speaker 1: there affair. So when I look at that, I go, okay,
Speaker 1: environmentally good, consumer based good, inflation based good. But it
Speaker 1: goes after American jobs. We have to win in the
Speaker 1: market fairly on our own.
Speaker 2: Guy, one time for one more question. Pharaoh on Capital
Speaker 2: twenty twenty five. There's a forty page memo in front
Speaker 2: of Styre and it says, why don't we have EV
Speaker 2: charging stations on the upper east side? What a scandal
Speaker 2: that we can't build zillions of charging stations?
Speaker 4: Whose fault is it?
Speaker 1: Look, as far as I'm concerned, if people will pay
Speaker 1: for charging stations, charging stations will get built. The US
Speaker 1: has gotten Look, we have not been great about infrastructure
Speaker 1: period time. If you look about how are we doing
Speaker 1: in terms of build things? Physical things in this world
Speaker 1: were kind of caught up in our underpants. And I
Speaker 1: think that in this case, this is a question where
Speaker 1: we have to respond as a society, and I think
Speaker 1: from a central place, we have to say the perfect
Speaker 1: is the enemy of the good. Here, we need to
Speaker 1: win here, we need to solve this crisis, and we
Speaker 1: need top down saying we got to cut through the
Speaker 1: red tape. And that's true, you know in virtually every
Speaker 1: part of this country.
Speaker 3: Cheaper, faster better.
Speaker 2: Tom Steyer here with a primal scream about the view
Speaker 2: forward on climate change. Paul from the Mail, I get
Speaker 2: hugely controversial.
Speaker 4: Your dad, look at the front pages, Lisa.
Speaker 3: What do you got?
Speaker 8: How did I miss the Danaife story?
Speaker 3: And you can't miss it once you.
Speaker 4: See it is all right.
Speaker 8: Well, we're gonna start with the Wall Street Journal. This
Speaker 8: is about companies four O one K match. They're saying
Speaker 8: that it doesn't provide a secure retirement for all Americans,
Speaker 8: so not everyone is the same. It's the study by Vanguard.
Speaker 8: It says that that perk mainly benefits high earners. So
Speaker 8: it shows nearly half of two hundred billion dollar companies
Speaker 8: contribute to workers for one k. It goes to that
Speaker 8: top twenty percent, and the lowest earning workers get six
Speaker 8: percent of the money. So researchers are saying that new
Speaker 8: formulas for company matches. They really need to be curiated
Speaker 8: to kind of ensure that better benefit for everybody.
Speaker 2: I skim the article. I take immense issue with it.
Speaker 2: And Peter Orzag is expert on this. Or Zeg when
Speaker 2: he was at Brookings invented this. The reason it's so
Speaker 2: skewed is the fancy people put more money into their
Speaker 2: four O one K so they get more of a match.
Speaker 2: And yes, there should be if we agree that the
Speaker 2: retirement program is a disaster, which I feel strongly, we
Speaker 2: have to come up with legislation to allow people that
Speaker 2: don't have disposable income to get a bigger four one
Speaker 2: K and to get some form of match. But I
Speaker 2: just thought the article piled on the halves who have
Speaker 2: the cash flow to put aside and take advantage of
Speaker 2: the match and social security.
Speaker 6: You can't depend upon social security.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I had the privilege once to talking to Alan Greenspan
Speaker 2: about this, and I believe it was nineteen eighty six
Speaker 2: was the last time they really walked through it.
Speaker 3: And all this is going to come to an ed. Lisa,
Speaker 3: it's really really, really serious. It's it's it's really front
Speaker 3: and center. It's something Paul and I are devoted to folks.
Speaker 3: We're going to try to do more in retirement planning
Speaker 3: here going forward, because it's a train wreck. It's tough
Speaker 3: out there, we el and.
Speaker 8: That article really really gets into the potatoes of it. Okay,
Speaker 8: orange juice prices, we know they're soaring, right, so the
Speaker 8: Financial Times they didn't know then, Yes, yes, because you
Speaker 8: have problem. You had bad weather diseases in Brazil and
Speaker 8: that's like the world's largest exporter, and then you had
Speaker 8: the crop problems in Florida to on top of it.
Speaker 8: So that's why the orange juice prices are soaring. But
Speaker 8: the Financial Times is saying that it's pushing manufacturers to
Speaker 8: think of alternative fruits. So what do you think about
Speaker 8: mandarin juice?
Speaker 1: Sure, I like.
Speaker 3: There's like a mixture thing. It's I'm fascinated by this.
Speaker 3: Where you grew up, what kind of orange juice? Did
Speaker 3: you hit?
Speaker 8: Tropicana?
Speaker 3: Yes, you had this tropicano in a paper thing, right,
Speaker 3: I grew up where it was un American. If orange
Speaker 3: juice wasn't a lump like a hockey puck rosy in
Speaker 3: the freezer, and your mother would go say, go make
Speaker 3: the orange juice, and then you stirred around hoping it
Speaker 3: would defrost over six hours. And then there's other people.
Speaker 3: If it's not in a bottle, they won't drink it.
Speaker 3: What is this about? But I don't buy much orange juice.
Speaker 3: It's gotten expensive.
Speaker 8: I don't either, but because there's just so much sugar contented.
Speaker 8: But it's happening, right.
Speaker 1: So what do you water?
Speaker 6: Water time? We're not going to her house?
Speaker 3: Like, no, but fresh fruit is what you eat, except
Speaker 3: it's expensive.
Speaker 8: Yes, but the fresh fruit you have to make sure
Speaker 8: to keep the pulp in it so you get the
Speaker 8: fiber too.
Speaker 4: No, no, you don't like a minimum pulp person.
Speaker 8: You have to get the pulpe in.
Speaker 3: There are the orange skin.
Speaker 8: You gotta do the pulpe that's where the fiber is.
Speaker 8: Come on, ball, No, all right, let's turn. Let's turn
Speaker 8: to the olympase.
Speaker 3: Yes, oh, let's turn to something health.
Speaker 8: Yes, we'll go to French fries. Okay, So the New
Speaker 8: York Times is saying French fries will not be on
Speaker 8: the menu for the athletes of the games in France. Now,
Speaker 8: it has nothing to do with the health reasons because
Speaker 8: they're fried or anything. It has to do with the environment.
Speaker 8: So This is at the Olympic Village, which is the
Speaker 8: dining hall. They serve about forty five thousand meals. They're
Speaker 8: going to twenty four to seven. The chefs fay say
Speaker 8: that the French fries are too risky because of fire
Speaker 8: hazard concerns over those deep fat friars. Okay, they're also
Speaker 8: they're also not serving foie gras because of concerns of
Speaker 8: animal will be and avocados. On top of it, you
Speaker 8: cannot get those things. Avocados because they're imported from a
Speaker 8: great distance and also they consume a lot of water,
Speaker 8: so that's why you can't get what you can have.
Speaker 8: You can have French cheeses, you can have veal and
Speaker 8: like a light sauce, not a heavy buttery, you know. Okay,
Speaker 8: and baguettes, yes, but there's gonna be over five hundred meals.
Speaker 6: But no freez okay, but yes, no.
Speaker 8: No French fries. You cannot have them at the Olympics.
Speaker 2: We saw a TV twenty four I actually watched the
Speaker 2: whole YouTube video will they swim in the river sind
Speaker 2: And the guy, mister environmentalist, he said right now he
Speaker 2: wouldn't swim in the scent.
Speaker 3: But the opening Games.
Speaker 2: I believe I read the Opening Games are not going
Speaker 2: to be a huge arena.
Speaker 3: It's gonna be along the river like a boat for
Speaker 3: the opening of opening, which is very cassome. I mean,
Speaker 3: this is gonna be.
Speaker 6: This has the potential to be just an extraordinary Olympics with.
Speaker 3: You and me Hotel sure by the shore, bring Francine
Speaker 3: along to help us. You gad.
Speaker 4: Yes, it's like it's like.
Speaker 3: A no brand. I mean, it was destined to happen.
Speaker 3: You know, what else do you happen?
Speaker 8: Lastly, Chipotle, I always thought that they piled on exactly,
Speaker 8: but actually there's a lot of people who are posting
Speaker 8: to social media. They're filming the workers who are dishing
Speaker 8: out the food, and they're saying that they're skimping out
Speaker 8: on the protein portions. They're giving smaller amounts of the
Speaker 8: steak and the chicken, and so now they're posting these
Speaker 8: videos to kind of give pressure to Chipotle to.
Speaker 6: Say, hey, people on Third Avenue, they just do a
Speaker 6: good job.
Speaker 8: Yeah, there's one in my town. They pile it on.
Speaker 3: Can I give you the best chicken in Paris? Yes?
Speaker 2: The cocoa fee up by Ma Mantra, little tiny restaurant.
Speaker 2: You sit at the table with other people that you
Speaker 2: don't know, and it's like real rotisserie. And the secret
Speaker 2: is they use big birds.
Speaker 3: The secret and not big bird, not bid use. They
Speaker 3: use a bigger chicken than most people, a bigger chat.
Speaker 3: You got to get a reservation, like through that really
Speaker 3: red and they serve French fries. They when when.
Speaker 6: So I see going through the menu.
Speaker 3: Thank you for the newspapers today.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast, bringing you the best
Speaker 2: in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You can also
Speaker 2: watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the Bloomberg Podcast
Speaker 2: channel on YouTube to see the show weekday mornings from
Speaker 2: seven to ten a m. Eastern from our global headquarters
Speaker 2: in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen, and always on Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app.